Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
09-10-1990 Council Packet
mm V PUBLIC ATTENDANCE I I ffni\j(y meeting dateCITYOFORONO PLEASE FIIX OUT THE INFORT-IATION REQUESTED BELOW FOR OUR CITY RECORDS. NAME OR NUMBER NAME (please print; 1 U l-\ r rn jL \r^I rXC "A( f-----------------— iU^-lllU A1-' I^A- 3. ■^c" lov^JiAfAit--- A 'P’/yG IC/> 'IdxN ^ V /7 ir /i. ti 7 fl Q 1 n 11 1 7 1 7 1 A 1 q 1 q 1 7 1 fl 1 Q 20. . _ AGENDA FOR COUNCIL MEETING SET FOR MONDAY, SEPTEMBER 10, 1990, 7:00 P*M, (*) Asterisk items are considered to be routine items to be enacted upon by one motion by the City Council under the Consent Item* on the agenda. Discussion will be held upon request. Memos regarding each of the Agenda items are available in the Public Packet which may be obtained upon request from the Recorder. COUNCIL roll call SEP 10 1990 1. AGENUA* CITY OF ORONOAPPROVAL OF MINUTES * 2. Regular Meeting of August 27, 1990 PLANNING COMMISSION COMMENTS - Sara Moos Representative PUBLIC COMMENTS - (Limit 5 Minutes Per Person) ZONING ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT **APPLICANTS** Immediately after the Council has reviewed your application please sign the three (3) original resolutions at the Recorder's desk. Applicants need not execute resolutions for subdivisions, vacations and denials. 3. #1334. Rebers Construction - Sugarwoods Plat - Reconsideration of Conditions of PRD Approval - Resolution * 4. #1476 David Prass, 1063 Linden Lane - Resolution 5. #1493 Chuck Downey, 2665 Casco Point Road - Variance - Resolution * 6. #1550 Gerald Nelson, 1629 Bohns Point Road - Variance - Resolution 7. #1561 Christine Beck, 3820 Cherry Avenue - Variance - Resolution 8. 1572 Guenther and Gertrud Noelting, 1060 Tonkawa Road - Conditional Use Permit/Variance - Resolution 9. #1573 Carol Kelly/James Massey, 3020/3030 Casco Point Road - Preliminary Subdivision 10. #1575 Judson Dayton, 1111 Tamarack Drive - Conditional Use Permit - Resolution 11. #1577 Norman Torrison, 2250 Longview Circle - Variance - Resolution 12. #1578 A1 and Libbie Hopwood, 1205 Lakeview Avenue - After the Fact Variance - Resolution 13. #1580 Patty Plant, 2245 Watertown Road - Variance - Resolution 14. #1581 Robert Koehnen, 537 Hanlon Avenue - Variance - Resolution 15. Special Driveway Permit, 265 Brown Road South 15a. #1516 Whitney MacMillan, 1560 Fox Street - Private Road Easement MAYOR/COUNCIL REPORT ENGINEER'S REPORT 15b. Change Order #2 Well #3 AGENDA FOR COUNCIL MEETING SET FOR MONDAY, SEPTEMBER 10, 1.190, 7:00 P.M. CITY ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT 16. Flexible Benefits 17. Highway 12 Corridor Study 18. Lake Use and Management 19. On Site Septic Manager Position 20. 1991 Budget/Work Session 21. Assessing Service 22. Lake Minnetonka Cable Communications Commission Budget - Resolution * 23. Fall Clean-Up Date * 24. John Sass Resolution * 25. Fence Purchase - Navarre Playground * 26. Employment - Golf Course * 27. Administrator's Information Dakota Rail Goal Setting July Receipts & Disbursements Wire Transfers CITY ATTORNEY'S REPORT LICENSES (28*) BILLS (29*) UPCOMING ISSUES AND EVENTS 09/10 - Council Meeting 09/11 - Last Day (4:30 P.M.) for Candidates to File for City Council 09/11 - State Primary Election Day 09/17 - Planning Commission Meeting 09/24 - Council Meeting COUNCIL MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD AUGUST 27, 1990 SEP 10 1990 ATTENDANCE 7:00 P.M. The Council met on the above date with the following present: Mayor James Grabek, Councilmembers Allan Nettles, Barbara Peterson and Edward Callahan. Councilmember Goatten was absent. The following represented the City staff: Acting City Administrator Gerhardson, Building & Zoning Administrator Mabusth, City Engineer Cook, City Attorney Barrett, and City Recorder Scheffler. CONSENT AGENDA* Nettles asked that item #26 be Agenda. removed from the Consent Peterson asked to have item #31 removed from the Consent Agenda. It was moved by Nettles, seconded by Callahan, to approve the Consent Agenda, with the exception of items #26 and #31, which were removed and discussed in the order appearing on the Agenda, Motion, Ayes-4, Nays*0, Motion passed. APPROVAL OF MINUTES* It was moved by Nettles, seconded by Callahan, to approve the Minutes of the Regular Council Meeting held August 13, 1990. Motion, Ayes-4. Nays-0. Motion passed. LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT REPORT: LMCD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN REVISION/1991 LMCD BUDGET LMCD Representative. JoEllen Hurr was present, as was Mr. Gene Strommen, Executive Director. Hurr said, "After discussions with the City Administrator, we felt it would be best to allov/ Council additional time to review the Comprehensive Plan. \7e would discuss the plan at the September 10, 1990 Council Meeting." Mayor Grabek asked v;hether the plan presented was revised in accordance to the comments presented by Orono and other cities. Hurr replied, "That is correct, but I have not yet had an opportunity to review it. I do have a copy of Mr. Arndorfer's specific responses to our comments." Mayor Grabek asked Hurr whether she believes the Advisory Committee Orono. is seriously considering the comments presented by Hurr replied, "They are listening to a certain degree." With regard to the 1991 LMCD budget coricerns of the City. - 1 - ORONO REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING HELD AUGUST 27, 1990 LMCD REPORT CONTINUED Hurr said, "The administrative technician that we have hired will relieve some of the need for the Milfoil consultant for the next year. The Milfoil project is decided year by year. This person would alleviate the need to hire a specific consultant to deal with Milfoil.” Nettles asked whether the LMCD is making any progress in eradicating the Milfoil weed from Lake Minnetonka. Hurr replied, "We are jrst keeping up." Mayor Grabek said, "Norm Paurus was quoted as saying that one-third of the Lake's recreational surface has been affected by Eurasian Milfoil. That is a large area." Mr. Strommen responded. "It all depends on how you look at it. V^e have approximately 5,500 acres of area that is 15' of water depth or less where the weed grows. Roughly 3,500 (60%) of those acres are fairly well infested with Milfoil. Probably one-half of that area is heavily matted to the point where a boat could not go through. That is where v/e are concentrating our harvesting efforts and where our 1,500 acre permit is applied. V7e are not harvesting all of the heavily matted areas (such as Smith's Bay) because the benefit of clearing the v/eed is not equal to the cost. VJe are trying to keep the navigational channels open to the docks that are in an area such as Smith Bay to enable boaters to move in and out. There is still a lot of lake area that can be used and enjoyed." Callahan asked Mr. Strommen how the harvesting machines have been performing. Mr. Strommen replied, "We discovered in the last three weeks that there is a design problem with the hydraulic system. A local hydraulics firm helped us identify the problem and it has been solved. We are still not satisfied with the amount of power we are getting. The machines are running at five miles per hour and we were hoping for seven or eight miles per hour. The machines are new and sophisticated and we have had our share of learning experiences and v;ear and tear. The manufacturer is working with us to solve and improve on the components that are not holding up. We are in the process of completing a warranty resolution that will reimburse us for approximately $10,('00.00 for labor and materials that have been used to keep the machines functioning." Hurr noted that the LMCD intends to continue cutting the weed until the first week in September. Mayor Grabek asked if it was not beneficial September and October. to cut in - 2 - j ORONO REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING HELD AUGUST 27, 1990 LMCD REPORT CONTINUED Hurr replied, "Cur funds are limited and we would prefer to save them until June and July when people are boating." Strommen added, "The weeds die back in the winter fnd though it would reduce the amount of nutrients in the water by harvesting, our efforts would reap minimal benefits for the cost." Mr. Strommen asked whether Council wished to discuss the budget at the September 10th meeting. Callahan replied, "I believe there is some correlation between the Flan and the budget. I would like the opportunity to review the Plan before making any comments on the budget." Mr. Strommen said, "With regard to your concern about the role of the administrative technician, I can assure you that the position will have nothing to do with the Shoreland Regulations, at least in the near term. That person was brought in to help us enforce and better handle multiple dock licenses. That position has taken over two part-time positions. Vie incorporated savings into that position and picked up about half of the cost as new expenses toward the position. We have now been able to spend time with marina owners personally, rather than sending letters. We hope this will generate a greater degree of cooperation and less time in court." Callahan said, "I'm sure that none of us here are objecting to the LMCD Plan based on thoughts that the individual Board members are not giving their all." NORTH TONKA CRIME PREVEOTION COALITION Mayor Grabek introduced Ms. Gretchen Menzel, President of the Ilorf'i Tonka Crime Prevention Coalition and asked her to present her report. Ms. Menzel said, "The North Tonka Crime Prevention Coalition was started in 1983. It was temporarily phased out, but has begun operating again this year. We cover the areas of Minnetonka Beach, Spring Park, Orono and Long Lake. The Coalition has a Board of Directors. Anyone that is interested in establishing a neighborhood crime watch is encouraged to contact us. Members of the Coalition will assist you. The Coalition not only works with residential areas, but also helps business owners." Mayor Grabek asked Ms.Menzel how many years she has participated in this program. Ms. Menzel replied, "I started a crime watch in my neighborhood in 1986." - 3 - ORONO REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING HELD AUGUST 27, 1990 NORTH TONKA CRIME PREVENTION COALITION CONTINUED Mayor Grabek said. "The crime watch program is very successful in decreasing crime. This is another example of hov/ volunteers help make our community a better place to live. It not only reduces crime, but also helps to keep taxes down. The Coalition helps create a safe environment v/ithout the need for extra police protection. We appreciate the Coalition's efforts." Peterson advised that the Lake Minnetonka Cable Comiaission had taped a crime prevention meeting. Mayor Grabek asked Ms. Menzel if she was aware of the date the program would be shown. Ms. Menzel stated that she did not know at this time as the program was just taped and would require some editing. PUBLIC COIU4ENTS; There were no public comments. ZONING ADMINISTRATOR’S REPORT: #1476 DAVID PRASS 1065 LINDEN LANE VARIANCE Mr. and Mrs. Prass were present. Acting City Administrator Gerhardson provided Council with a brief summary of the past and current proposals pertaining to the pool on the Prass property (see Jeanne Mabusth's memo dated August 23, 1990). Mr. Prass said, "It seemed that a key element of this matter was establishing a specific date for constructing a principal structure. We would like to propose that a building be constructed in 1992. Building plans would be submitted In 1991. In addition to leaving the fence around the pool as is, we would add a commercial pool cover." Mayor Grabek asked Mr. Prass to describe the pool cover he intends to use. Mr, Prass provided a copy of an article pertaining to the pool Cw ^er. Nettles asked how the cover is anchored to the deck. Mr. Prass replied, "There are several spring tension locking devices that must be opened with a key." Callahan noted that Council had previously required that the pool cover be satisfactory to City staff. He asked whether staff - 4 - ORONO REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING HELL' AUGUST 27, 1990 ZONING FILE #1476~PRASS CONTINUED approved of the cover proposed. Wabusth replied, "Staff has not had an opportunity to review the information relating to the cover." Mayor Grabek said, "I want to provide staff with the opportunity to thoroughly review the pool cover proposed. If staff determines that the cover is not safe, then the pool will either have to be filled or covered as staff first suggested." Nettles asked how long it would take for the pool to be covered once approval is given. Mrs. Prass replied, "The cover has to be custom made. It is my understanding that it will take 30 days to arrive from the date it is ordered." Callahan suggested that staff review the pool cover, taking into consideration the change in temperature and the ability for it to be cut or torn. Mayor Grabek added. "The review should include whether the cover will function properly for two years." It was moved by Mayor Grabek, seconded by Nettles, to table this application until September 10. 1990, to allow staff the opportunity to review the cover proposed. Further, the deadline for covering the pool will be extended to a date determined by staff to be appropriate. Motion, Ayes-I, Nays-0. Motion passed. #1497 TOBERMAN MANAGEMENT 1960 SHORELINE DRIVE REFER TO PLANNING COMMISSION FOR FURTHER REVIEW Mr. Toberman and his attorney, Jim Gilbert, were present. Mr. Gilbert asked Council to reconsider the action taken April 9, 1990. He said, "The corporation that owns these properties is in bankruptcy. V7e have a hearing next week in bankruptcy court. The vendor of the Contract for Deed is moving to lift the State's foreclosure on the main marina property. They have a buyer for the marina property and 19G0 Shoreline Drive (transmission shop). The transmission shop is an integral part of the new buyer's plans for the marina. He wants to conduct nautical sales and marina business from that facility. One of the conditions that has been mentioned is the City's position on the property. We think the property sh^'.-ld be zoned for commercial use. The Council ruled that there has been a lapse of use and that the property should now be residential. I don't believe that is fair or realistic. I don't think the facts support that kind of use. The property has been used commercially since 1963 and is taxed as commercial property. To - 5 - ORONO REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING HELD AUGUST 27, 1990 ZONING FILE #1497-TOBERMAN CONTINUED say that the property must be residential renders it useless. The ty has some options in that regard and could opt to condemn it. The Planning Commission voted unanimously to have the use granted in 1987 continue. I researched the history on the property to try to determine why this matter was before the City. The 1987 Conditional Use Permit v/as still in effect as far as we were concerned. My client informed me that the City staff advised him that the permit needed to be renewed. The allegations are that there has been a lapse in use for one continuous year. That means that for 365 days there was no use of this property for marina-related purposes, boat or nautical sales. There are no facts in the record to support those allegations. The facts will support that there is a decreased use which was due to the low lake level. There was nominal use of the property. My client has had a phone and phone number for that site since he has owned the property. He has conducted his marina business from the property and has held meetings there, Mr. Toberman has improved the property and did remove the gas tanks and gas lines. I am asking the Council to reverse its previous decision and grant my client continued use of the property for marina-related purposes." Mayor Grabek asked Mr. Gilbert who the party is that wishes to purchase the marina property. Mr. Gilbert replied. "Morrie Wagner made a very substantial offer, over $1,500,000.00. The lake levels are up and he is willing to take a chance with the property. However, he does \;ant 1960 Shoreline Drive included in the deal." Nettles asked how Mr. Wagner intends to use the transmission shop. Mr. Gilbert replied. "He would use it for marina-related business. He would conduct sales from the premises. He would have staff there and would sell boats and nautical equipment." Nettles said. "I am interested in the representations that the property has been used. I live close to that property and have talked with neighbors that would not share that opinion. I know that there has been no activity there until the City took action this past spring. I would like Mr. Toberman to tell us when the meetings took place wlio attended and what business was being conducted." Hr. Gilbert replied, "Mr. Toberman is prepared to do that, but I do not believe that is a standard we have to meet. v;e do - 6 - tl ORONO REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING HELD AUGUST 27, 1990 ZONING FILE 11497-TOBERMAN CONTINUED not need to show a continuous use- There has to be a lapse of use for one year. If there was one or five days of commercial use during that one year, there is no lapse." Mr. Dan Crear. 1900 Spates Avenue, said, "I had called the City Administrator to find out if there had been new developments regarding this property. There are jet skis on the property, cars have been coming and going, and there have been people in the building. Up to that point, I have not seen the property used at all. If you look back in the records you will see that when the use changed from the transmission shop to the sail boat sales, the Council never granted a Conditional Use Permit. The matter was tabled, pending a decision as to what use the building would have. If Mr. Toberman has been operating a business from that property. as his lawyer has indicated, then he is in violation of the City codes. The place is not being used for storage at this point. There have been people in the building on Saturdays and Sundays and I am sure they are running a jet ski business.” Nettles asked Mr. Crear whether he has seen business activities carried on in the building at any time during the past 2H years. Mr. Crear replied, "The activity has just begun recenti.y. When dock slips were being leased, that \/as done from the garage across the street. There were paint and supplies kept in the transmission shop, but the leasing phone operation v/as done in the garage. I belie'^e that was because they had no approval to operate the business from the transmission shop." Mayor Grabek asked staff if Mr. Toberman v/as given permission to operate his marina business from the transmission shop. Mabusth replied "Mr. Toberman was never given any authority to operate any business connected with the marina in the transmission shop. That wafi to be strictly boat sales. The use was to be separate from tne marina. We have never given the owner the idea that we would approve such a use. The City did not want a connection between the two properties. and historically there never has been." Mr. Arc Tourangcau, 2060 Spate.s Avenue, stated that he agreed v/ith most of the things Mr. Crear and Councilmember Nettles had said. He said, "I can see that property from my kitchen window. Up until the City denied the Conditional Use Permit, there was no acvivity in that building. Since that time, jet Tl.is have been moved in. Business was always conducted across the street. That transmission shop property has always been separate ^rom the marJna." - 7 - ORONO REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING HELD AUGUST 27, 1990 ZONING FILE #1497-TOBERMAN CONTINUED Nettles said, "I went to the transmission shop property one evening and talked with two young men that indicated they are running a jet ski business from that location on weekends.” Mayor Grabek asked fir. Toberman if that indeed is true. Mr. Toberman replied, "They are not dealing v;ith jet skis, they are wave runners. There is a difference.” Mayor Grabek asked Barrett whether it is legal for Mr. Toberman to be operating such a business from the transmission shop. Barrett replied, "It would seem to me that in order to operate such a business, it would be necessary for Mr. Toberman to have a Conditional Use Permit.” Mayor Grabek asked Mr. Toberman if he misunderstood the City's requirement for a Conditional Use Permit. Mr. Toberman replied, "We were under the impression that we could use the property for boat sales. I don't consider the jet ski a boat, but wave runners are classified as boats by the State and the LMCD. Up until a month or so ago, the lake level was only tv/o feet- We could not put boats in there.” Mayor Grabek asked whether the City has provided Mr. Toberman v/ith \/ritten information regarding the use of the property. Mabusth stated that the City provided Mr. Toberman with an explanation of the action taken by Council in April, 1990. Callahan recollected that discussions had occurred at previous Council meetings regarding the permitted use of the property.” Mayor Grabek asked Mr. Gilbert if he is aware of the terms of the 1987 Conditional Use Permit and whether the property is being correctly utilized in that regard. Mr. Gilbert indicated that he is av/are of the 1907 Conditional Use Permit. He added, "I don't believe that the v;ave runner business is taking place in the transmission shop. They may be storing the units there, but the business is transacted across the street.” Nettles said. "I believe the units are stored in the transmission shop. If there is a renter for one of the units, it is carried across the street and launched on the ramp. I do not know where the rental transaction occurs." - 8 - ORONO REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING HELD AUGUST 27, 1990 ZONING FILE 11497-TOBERMAN CONTINUED Mayor Grabek asked Mr. Gilbert if in his opinion, the 1987 Conditional Use Permit gives Mr. Toberman the legal right to use the property as he is currently doing. Mr. Gilbert replied, '•! believe that it does." Callahan said, "In 1987 the Conditional Use Permit was granted, allov/ing Mr. Toberman to use the property specifically for the purpose of selling sail boats. That use has lapsed." Mr. Gilbert said, "The use was not limited to sail boats." Mabusth stated that she v/ould review the 1987 Conditional Use Permit to determine the specific use approved. Mayor Grabek stated that Council is being asked to reconsider their decision to allow the Conditional Use to continue. Hetties read a portion of Mr. Toberman's letter to the City. The letter stated that following tne withdrawal of the offer by Sailor's V7orld to purchase the property, it sat empty because Mr. Toberman was not in the retail boat sales business. Nettles said, "That supports my observations and the points made by Mr. Crear and Mr. Tourangeau. This has been a discontinued Conditional Use. It seems to me that we gave Mr. Toberman an extended period of time beyond the one year lapse period. I don't agree that the property has been used. I am opposed to reconsideration." Callahan stated that it is not necessary for the two pieces of property to be owned by the same party. He noted that in the past, there v;ere separate owners of the property until Mr. Toberman asked to purchase the transmission shop. Peterson stated that she concurred with the comments of Callahan and Nettles. She said,•"We denied the continuation in April and I have not changed my position." Mr. Gilbert stated that denial of the Conditional Use of this property will force the City into condemnation. Mayor Grabek asked Barrett what ramifications, if any, may result from the denial of the Conditional Use. Barrett replied, "The issue of condemnation is one the Courts reach last. The property does have a residential zoning characterization. It may be that residential use of the property will require variances, but there is nothing to state that the property must be condemned if that use is to continue." - 9 - ORONO REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING HELD AUGUST 21, 1990 ZONING FILE |1497-TOBERr4AN CONTINUED It was moved by Nettles, seconded by Peterson, to deny Mr. Toberman’s request to have Council reconsider its denial of the continuation of the Conditional Use. Motion. Ayes-4| Nays-0. Motion passed. #1509 EARL FREEMAN 4505 WATERTOWN ROAD VARIANCE* It was me ed by Nettles, seconded by Callahan, to accept the information presented in Jeanne Mabusth's letter to Mr. Freeman dated August 22, 1990. Motion, Ayes-1, Nays-0. Motion passed. #1554 TIN GRAI4ENTZ 4680 NORTH ARM DRIVE VARIANCE RESOLUTION #2857 Mr. George Jones was present on behalf of the applicant. Gerhardson summarized the request by Mr. Gramentz, noting that the Planning Commission had recommended approval. It was moved by Nettles, seconded by Mayor Grabek, to adopt Resolution #2857, granting a side setback variance to construct a second story over an existing garage at 4680 North Arm Drive. Motion, Ayes-4, Nays-0. Motion passed. #1556 GERALD NELSON 1629 BOHNS POINT ROAD VARIANCE Mr. Nalson was present. Gerhardson stated that Mr. Nelson v/as requesting re-consideration. He reviewed the previous action taken by Council on this application. Gerhardson noted that Mr. Nelson has revised his proposal. Mr. Nelson said, "I should have agreed to remove v/hatever hardcover percentage was necessary to have no net increase. It is possible to remove hardcover from the drive\/ay.” Mabusth confirmed that it is possible for a portion of the driveway to be removed. Mr. Nelson said. "In addition, we have decided we would prefer to have the closet, rather than the landscaping on the north side of the house. There is porous fiber under the plantings that we would be willing to remove." Callahan said, "I have spoken with Mr. Nelson since th<=. last Council Meeting- In light of Mr. Nelson's proposal to remove hardcover, and his further explanation to me regarding the need - 10 - ORONO REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING HELD AUGUST 27, 1990 ZONING FILE #1556-GERALD NELSON CONTINUED for the closet, I am in favor of reconsidering this matter." It was moved by Callahan, seconded by Nettles, to reconsider the previous action taken on this application. Peterson stated that she concurred with Callahan's reasons for re-considering. Motion, Ayes-4, Nays-0. Motion passed. moved by Callahan, seconded by Peterson, to approve Mr. Nelson's request for a hardcover Motion, Aves-4, Nays-0. Motion It was conceptually variance to construct a closet, passed. #1559 JOHN AND ROBERTA i>^NRICH 4125 HIGHWOOD ROAD VARIANCE RESOLUTION #2858 Mr. and Mrs. Henrich were present. Acting City Administrator Gerhardson provided a brief summary of the Henrich's application, noting that the Planning Commission had recommended approval. It was moved by Mayor Grabek, seconded by Peterson, to adopt Resolution #2858. granting hardcover and average setback variances to construct additions to the property at 4125 Highwood Road. Nettles asked if the garage will be the same height as the house due to revising th? pitch of the garage roof. Mabusth stated that is correct. Motion, Ayes-4, Nays-0. Motion passed. #1571 GRIMES/HOFFMAN 4720/4730 NORTH ARM DRIVE WEST EASEMENT VACATION RESOLUTION #2859 Ms. JoAnn Grimes was present. Gerhardson stated that the vacation application includes the establishment of new drainage and utility easements over the new lot line. He also stated that the Planning Commission had recommended approval. It was moved by Callahan, seconded by Nettles, to adopt Resolution #2859, vacating unused portions of drainage and utility €' aments within the Plat of McHaney Addition. Motion, Ayes-4, Nays-0. Motion passed. #1574 JIM AND SUSAN RONALD 2565 DUNWOODY AVENUE VARIANCE RESOLUTION #2860 Mr. and Mrs. Ronald were present. - 11 - ORONO REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING HELD AUGUST 27, 1990 ZONING FILE #1574-RONALD CONTINUED Gerhardson provided a brief summary of the Ronald's application and noted that the Planning Commission had recommended approval. Callahan asked the applicants when they intend to construvct the pool. Mrs. Ronald replied, "Either this fall or next spring." It was moved by Mayor Grabek, seconded by Peterson, to adopt Resolution #2860, granting hardcover and setback variances to construct room additions and a pool. Motion, Ayes-4, Nays-0. Motion passed. #1576 JOHN AND KIT WOJCIK 3310 BAYSIDE ROAD VARIANCE RESOLUTION #2861 Mr. and Mrs. Wojcik were present. Gerhardson stated that the Planning Commission had recommended approval of the side setback variance requested by the Wojciks to construct additions to their home. It was moved by Callahan, seconded by Peterson, to adopt Resolution #2861, granting the side setback variance to construct additions to an existing residence and advising future owners of this property of a potential need for a holding tank. Motion, Ayes-4, Nays-0. Motion passed. #1582 CAROL BURGESS 2800 PHEASANT ROAD VARIANCE RESOLUTION #2862 Ms. Burgess was present. Acting City Administrator Gerhardson reviewed Ms. Burgess's application, noting that the Planning Commission recommended approval. It was moved by Peterson, seconded by Callahan, to adopt Resolution #2862, granting hardcover and average setback variance to construct deck and porch additions to the existing residence at 2800 Pheasant Road. Motion. Ayes-4, Nays-0. Motion passed. #1568 JAMES PIERPONT 1801 WEST FARM ROAD CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT City Attorney Barrett presented Council with information pertaining to the last portion of the negotiations between the Pierponts and the City. Barrett asked for the opportunity to - 12 - ORONO REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING HELD AUGUST 27, 1990 ZONING FILE #1568-PIERPONT CONTINUED , ^ discuss the recent developments. He said, "At their last meeting. Council approved the Conditional Use Permit, separation setback, street and side yard setback variances. The question raised pertained to the septic system located on the lot adjacent which Mr, Pierpont is purchasing on a Contract for Deed. The ordinances revealed that under these circumstances, there could be no further development on Lot 15. Mr. Pierpont discussed the situation with the various sellers and mortgagor of his property and the holder of the Contract for Deed. They agreed on negotiations to allow combination. All I am proposing, as shown on page three of si., of the Resolution, is that you add paragraph two requiring a legal combination of the lots by February 28, 1991, or all use of the property has to be abandoned." Mr. Pierpont reviewed the paragraph to referred and stated that he had no objections. which Barrett It was moved by Callahan, seconded by Peterson, to amend Resolution #2854 by adding paragraph two as presented by the City Attorney. Motion, Ayes-4, Nays-0. Motion passed. CITY ENGINEER'S REPORT: PAYMENT REQUEST 11-HIGHWAY 12 RESTORATION* It was moved by Nettles, seconded by Callahan, to approve pay request #1 to Otten Bros, in the amount of $14,684.80 for wok completed to date for the Highway 12 Sewer and Water project. Motion, Ayes-4, Nays-0. Motion passed. PAYMENT REQUEST fl-LIFT STATION #43 City Engineer Cook asked Council to approve pay request #1 for the work done to Lift Stations #10 and #43. Gerhardson confirmed that the work has been completed. It was moved by Mayor Grabek, seconded by Nettles, to approve pay request #1 to LaTour Construction Company in the amount of $61,241.78 for work completed to date on Lift Stations #10 and #43 bypass project. Motion, Ayes-4, Nays-0. Motion passed. MAYOR/COUNCIL REPORT: HIGHWAY 12 CITIZEN GROUP INTERVIEWS Mayor Grabek stated that the Citizens Committee is scheduled to meet on September 13, 1990. He asked Council whether wished to proceed with the appointments this evening or table until the September 10 Council Meeting. Grabek stated that he would prefer to give the new committee members ample time to prepare for the September 13 meeting. He asked George Johnson to introduce himself. - 13 - ORONO REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING HELD AUGUST 27, 1990 HIGHWAY 12 CITIZEN GROUP INTERVIEWS CONTINUED Mr. Johnson stated that he would prefer to have Council ask questions of him. Nettles asked Mr. Johnson for his ideas on the placement of Highway 12. Mr. Johnson replied, "I have an open mind about the location of Highway 12. The longer we wait, the more difficult it will be to find a suitable location as development continues in this area. I do know that I want the safest possible road and would prefer to see a freeway rather than expressway.” Mayor Grabek asked Mr. Johnson to explain the difference. Mr. Johnson replied, "A freeway has entrance/exits every 1/2 mile. An expressway could have entrance/exists every 1/4 mile. The new 3S4 is a freeway. I have talked to the people further west of Orono. There is a lot of push for this project. We need to organize politically to get our funds. The first objective is defining the corridor and the specifications. Then we need to obtain funding. We will need funding assistance from here to the border.” Mayor Grabek called on John Massopust. Mr. Massopust said, "I can't answer any questions as to where I think the road should go. I am not very informed about the issues. I am interested in serving on this committee because I feel this issue will be emotionally charged. I think it is important to keep the lines of communication open to the people in all areas and respond to their questions. I participated in a similar situation when the City put sewer through my neighborhood. I believe that I had a part in the resolution of that issue.” Mayor Grabek asked Mrs. Winston to introduce herself. Mrs. Winston stated that she had lived in Orono all her life. She said, "I am convinced that there has to be a corridor but am concerned about maintaining the present character of Orono. I want to see the environment (wetlands and open spaces) protected. I would like to see the corridor located where it will have the least impact on those resources. I remember 20 years ago when this same discussion was taking place. A suitable location was agreed on back then, hopefully this will finally be settled.” Mayor Grabek moved to appoint Eleanor Winston to the Highway 12 Citizens Task force. He said, "My motion is based on the involvement with Highway 12 that Mrs. Winston has had in the past. She has lived in the City all of her life and would be a - 14 - ORONO REGULAR COUNCIL HEFTING HELD AUGUST 27, 1990 HIGHWAY 12 CITIZEN GROUP INTERVIEWS CONTINUED benefit to the City." Nettles seconded the motion for the purpose of discussion. Callahan concurred with Mayor Grabek. Nettles stated that though he agrees with the Mayor regarding Mrs. VUnston's qualifications, he would prefer to see George Johnson and John Massopust because of his familiarity with their previous efforts. Mayor Grabek agreed that he would nominate George Johnson for the second position, flayor Grabek believed it is important to have the different viewpoints that would be provided by having a man and a woman representing the City. Peterson stated that she would also like to see George Johnson on the committee because of his involvement with Highway 12 in the past. She said that Mr. Massopust would be her first choice. Callahan agreed also that George Johnson would be an excellent choice in addition to Mrs. V?inston. Motion, Ayes-2, Peterson, Nettles, Nay. Motion failed. It was moved by Mayor Grabek, seconded by Nettles, to appoint Mrs. VJinston and Mr. Johnson as the committee members and that Mr. Massopust be an alternate. Mr. Massopust is to be kept abreast of the information and events pertaining to this issue. Motion, Ayes-4, Nays-0. Motion passed. CITY ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT: LIVINGSTON AVENUE DRAINAGE Mark and Karen Cuff were present. Gerhardson reported that thi* matter has been before the Council on several occasions. He said. "V7e have done a feasibility study and met with property owners to solve the problem with an underground piping system. The Cuffs have obtained a 35% petition of the property owners involved. They are requesting that the City proceed with a storm sewer project." Mayor Grabek asked if the 35% has been verified. Gerhardson replied, "Yes". Mr. Harvey Reder, 3596 Livingston Avenue, stated that Donna Banchie listed first on the petition, has moved away since she signed the petition. Mr. Reder stated that his name is not on the petition because he is not in favor paying for the project. Mr. Reder also indicated that the signature third from last is not readable. Ms. Cuff replied, "That is the signature of David Reinhold and I confirmed with him that this is how he signs his name." Mr. Reder said, "I am in favor of getting the problem resolved. I sent the City a letter two weeks ago reiterating the chain of events leading up to this circumstance and the amount of - 15 - ORONO REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING HELD AUGUST 27, 1990 LIVINGSTON AVENUE DRAINAGE CONTINUED money the City received when they sold the lot to Cuffs. I would like to the City use that money directed toward solving this problem by re-purchasing the lot to allow surface draining. If that is not possible, then the City should pay for the underground system." take. Mayor Grabek asked what the next step is for the City to Gerhardson replied, "The City needs to direct the City Engineer to prepare the plans and specifications." Cook said. "That would cost the City approximately 10% of the project cost, plus whatever was spent on the feasibility study." Gerhardson estimated the cost of that phase to be $2,500.00. Cook stated that the approximate cost of the project, based on 1989 figures, will be $30,000.00. Callahan suggested holding the Public Hearing in advance of the plans and specs being prepared. Nettles asked if the lack of Ms. Banchie's signature on the petition will affect the needed 35%. Gerhardson stated that Ms. Cuff secured extra signatures to compensate. Mayor Grabek stated, in response to Callahan's suggestion, that if the remaining 65% of the area residents were in favor of the project, they would have signed the petition. Cook stated that he agreed with Callahan that the Public Hearing be held first to inform all of the neighbors about the cost. Mayor Grabek also agreed. He added that immediately following the Public Hearing it may be possible to make a decision about proceeding with the project. It was moved by Mayor Grabek, seconded by Nettles, to direct staff to schedule a Public Hearing and notify all of the residents. Callahan suggested including the cost of the project in the Public Hearing notice. Peterson noted Gerhardson's comments pertaining to the feasibility of surface drainage to solve the problem. Gerhardson stated that such a project could be done, but would interfere with the Cuffs' plans to expand their property. Motion, Ayes-4, Nays-0. Motion passed. - 16 - ORONO REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING HELD AUGUST 21, 1990 STREET LIGHTS - LIVINGSTON AND LYRIC AVENUE Gerhardson reviewed the information in his memo dated August 23, 1990. Mayor Grabek asked whether the City has paid for street lights from the general fund in the past. Gerhardson replied, "Not that I can recall. We do have street lights that are paid from the general fund because of a change in the law. The law used to allow the City to hold one Public Hearing to forever assess the cost thereafter. now states that a Public Hearing must be held every year." Mr. Theran Hokanson, 3695 Lyric Avenue, said, "The lights were on at the time we purchased our property. We came back from vacation and they were off. We call.ed Northern States Power and they said the lights were not pc-.id for. That is when we contacted the City. We have submitted a petition of the area residents that wish to have the lights on. There are lights on the corner Lyric and Blaine which are paid for by the City. We assumed that was the case with the lights in our neighborhood. The lights would cost approximately $27.00 per month.” Mayor Grabek questioned whether approving this request would set a precedent. He said, "On the other hand there is just the cost of $27.00 per month, which will not have a financial impact on the City." Mr. Terry Beich, 3697 Lyric Avenue, said, "That area has become a good party spot. I believe that turning the lights on will put an end to the congregating and partying that is taking place. It will make the neighborhood safe again." Mayor Grabek asked who is responsible for maintaining the street lights. Gerhardson replied, "NSP is responsible for maintenance." Mayor Grabek asked staff if they are aware of any other locations where this same situation may exist. Gerhardson replied, "This situation could occur anywhere in the City." Callahan asked Gerhardson to explain the City’s expenditure of $8,000 to $10,000 for lighting referred to in his memo. Gerhardson replied, "That covers all of the street lights that have either been placed publicly or are paid for publicly. The lights on County Road 15, the lights in the Navarre parking lot and lights around a traffic semaphore are examples. It includes the other 67 lights that are in residential areas - 17 - ORONO REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING HELD AUGUST 27, 1990 STREET LIGHTS LIVINGSTON AND LYRIC AVENUE CONTINUED throughout the City." Nettles asked Mr. Hokanson how many houses will benefit from the street lighting. Mr. Hokansen replied, "There are approximately 20 units." Mayor Grabek said. "I would like to ask staff to take this under advisement and give Council some information regarding any future ramifications should we approve this request. It was moved by Mayor Grabek, seconded by Nettles, to table this matter pending staff's evaluation and recommendation regarding this matter. Motion. Ayes-4, Nays-0. Motion passed. TRANSIENT MERCHANT - ORDINANCE AMENDMENT 88 SECOND SERIES Gerhardson stated that the Ordinance Amendment presented this evening incorporates the concerns which arose at the August 13, 1990 Council Meeting. It was moved by Mayor Grabek, seconded by Peterson, to adopt Ordinance #88, Second Series, as amended, relating to transient merchant activities. Motion, Ayes-4, Nays-0. Motion passed. 1991 BUDGET AND PUBLIC HEARING DATES PROPOSED MAXIMUM TAX LEVY RESOLUTION #2863 It was moved by Mayor Grabek, seconded by Nettles, to adopt Resolution #2863. approving the proposed maximum 1990 tax levy collectible in 1991 of $1,853,541; and to establish the maximum proposed 1991 General Fund expenditure budget in the amount of $3,040,260; and to set 7:00 p.m., December 3, 1990 as the original public budget hearing date and time, and 7:00 p.m., December 18, 1990 as the reconvened public budget hearing date and time, if required. Callahan noted that part of the maximum levy involves bond funding for the purpose of City financing. He suggested that when budget discussions begin that the City Administrator prepare a 5 year projection of what they believe will occur relative to operating costs and bond funds. Motion, Ayes-4, Nays-0. Motion passed. 1991 POLICE CAR ACQUISITION Nettles said, "I thought we were going to proceed with this because were under some time constraint." Gerhardson said, "That is correct, there is a certain date. Council is committing to a purchase order for the three squads. However, if funding is not available the order can be canceled." It was moved by Peterson, seconded by Mayor Grabek, to approve the purchase of three squad cars as budgeted. Bid award - 18 - irii ORONO REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING HELD AUGUST 27, 1990 1991 POLICE CAR CONTINUED under Hennepin County Contract 157410-232 is to Hastings Auto with a total purchase price not to exceed $39,213 less $11,150 estimated trade-in. Motion, Ayes-4. Nays-0. Motion passed. ASSOCIATION OF METROPOLITAN MUNICIPALITIES 1991 BUDGET It was moved by Mayor Grabek, seconded by Peterson, to support the increase proposed by AMM. Motion, Ayes-4 Nays-0. Motion passed. NAVARRE REDEVELOPMENT It was moved by Mayor Grabek, seconded by Nettles, to accept the information presented regarding Navarre Redevelopment and to table this matter until the September 24, 1990 Council Meeting. Motion, Ayes-4, Nays-0. Motion, Ayes-4. Nays-0. Motion passed. FLEXIBLE BENEFITS This item was removed from the Consent Agenda by Councilmembe:: Nettles. Nettles said, "I was asked by an Orono citizen whether the City would be losing or saving money by changing to a flexible benefit program. I believe that it is appropriate to publicly say that it appears that this program will save the City some money." It was moved by Nettles, seconded by Mayor Grabek, to table this issue untiJ ‘-.he September 10, 1990 Council Meeting. Motion. Ayes-4, Nays-0. Motion passed. JOHN SASS RESIGNATION* It was moved by Nettles, seconded by Callahan, to accept John's resignation and wish him well on his retirement effective September 18, 1990. Motion.- Ayes-4. Nays-0. Motion passed. SALARY ADJUSTMENT PUBLIC WORKS SUPERVISOR-LEVEL II* It was moved by Nettles, seconded by Callahan, to adjust Jack Brinkhaus’ salary to Level 10, Step IV, which is $18,304 per hour effective August 29, 1990. Motion, Ayes-4, Nays-0. Motion passed. SALARY ADJUSTMENT-JAMIE BOSMA* It was moved by Nettles, seconded by Callahan, to approve a salary adjustment for Jamie Bosma from Level 2, 95% of- Step 2 at $8,721 per hour, to Level 2. 100% of Step 2 at $9,182 per hour, effective July 1, 1990. This being the maximum for the number of hours she currently v/orks in her part-time position in accordance with the compensation plan. Motion, Ayes-4, Nays-0. Motion passed UPDATE PROGRAM FOR DEFERMENT OF SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS RESOLUTION #2864* It was moved by Nettles, seconded by Callahan, to adopt Resolution #2864, amending the program for deferment of special - 19 - ORONO REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING HELD AUGUST 27, 1990 DEFERMENT OF SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS CONTINUED assessments for persons 65 years of age or older and approve the updated special assessments deferral application. Motion, Ayes-4r Nays-0. Motion passed. ASSESSING SERVICE Peterson stated that she did not believe this item should have been on the Consent Agenda. She said, "I believe that $66,000 is a bit excessive for the City Assessor's salary. The $66,000 represents a 12.5% increase over last year and a 35% increase from 1988. I also do not agree that this amount will be 15% to 20% lower than an in-house assessor." Mayor Grabek responded, "I believe that Mr. Erickson has a good grasp of this area and has done an excellent job for the last 4 or 5 years that I have been here. I know that one of his problems was that he could not hire enough good employees to assist him. The job became too much to handle." Peterson agreed that Erickson is a quality assessor, but felt that the salary proposed was a bit high. Mayor Grabek questioned whether there was any room for negotiations in this regard. Gerhardson stated that he would have to refer the comments and concerns to the City Administrator. He suggested tabling this matter until September 10th. It was moved by Nettles, seconded by Mayor Grabek, to table this matter until September 10, 1990. Motion, Ayes-4, Nays-0. Motion passed. TEMPORARY EMPLOYMENT-GOLF COURSE* It was moved by Nettles, seconded by Callahan, to approve the employment of John Ross as temporary counter helper effective August 28, 1990 at an hourly rate of $5.00. It is also approved to employ a temporary groundskeeper helper upon completion of interviews at an hourly rate of $5.00. Motion, Ayes-4, Nays-0. Motion passed. DISPOSAL OF CITY PROPERTY* It was moved by Nettles, seconded by Callahan, to approve designating one 1980 Ford LTD and 14 bicycles as Surplus property and that the 1980 Ford be sold to the highest bidder and to destroy the 14 bicycles. Motion, Ayes-4, Nays-0. Motion passed. ADMINISTRATOR * S INFORMATION* It was moved by Nettles, seconded by Callahan, to accept the City Administrator's Information regarding: Highway 12, Reservist Status, Septic Position and Long Lake's Goals. Motion, Ayes-4, Nays-0, Motion passed. - 20 - ORONO REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING HELD AUGUST 27, 1990CITY ATTORNEY'S REPORT:City Attorney Barrett had nothing to report. LICENSES* It was moved by Nettles, seconded by Callahan, to approve the follov/ing license(s): Cigarette: Solicitors: Set-Up Permit: (one day) VJilliam V)ear Orono Self Service 2160 Wayzata Blvd. Fabian Seafood Sell at 2160 Wayzata Blvd. Smith College Club Art Center of Minnesota Motion, Ayes-4. Nays-0, Motion passed, BILLS* It was moved by Nettles, seconded by Callahan, to approve payment of the All Funds Account. Motion, Ayes-4, Nays-0, Motion passed. EXECUTIVE SESSION 9:15 P.M. City Attorney Barrett requested that Council hold an Executive Session for the purpose of discussing pending litigation. ADJOURNMENT 9:26 P.M. It was moved by Nettles, seconded by Mayor Grabek. to adjourn the Regular Council Meeting at 9:26 p.m. Motion, Ayes-4, Nays-0, Motion passed. James R. Grabek, Mayor ATTEST: Dorothy M. Hallin, City Clerk - 21 - Prom: Date: GOfJHCiL'ta/or Grabek & Orono Council Members SEP 101990 City Administrator Bernhardson CITY OF ORONO Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building & Zoning Administrator August 9, 1990 Subject: #1334 Rebers' Construction - Sugarwoods Plat - Reconsideration of Conditions of PRD Approval List of Exhibits Exhibit A - Exhibit B - Exhibit C - Exhibit D - Exhibit E - Exhibit F - Exhibit G - Exhibit H - Exhibit I - Exhibit J - Staff Memo to Planning Commission Planning Commission Action Notice 5/31/90 Lot Area Map - Sugarwoods Topographic Map BRW Table of Building Pad Areas Resolution #2652 - CUP Approving PRD Planning Commission Minutes 5/21/90 Olson/Cook Memo Engineer's Driveway Illustrations Proposed Resolution Amending Resolution #2652 3 Review of Issues - At their April 23rd meeting of this year. Council directed staff to present to the Planning Commission the issue of allowing additional paving improvements outside the approved single access drive at a maximum width of 20' within the front street setback areas of the Sugarwoods plat. The issue arises whenever specific site conditions require placement of either the entire house or portions of a house at the 50' setback line. If houses are placed at the front setback line, portions of backout drive and turnaround improvements (backout aprons, loop drives, Ys or Ts) must encroach the setback area. In preparation for the Planning Commission's review, staff and applicant's consultants met to discuss the various site conditions that would necessitate the placement of the house at the front street setback line and to develop standards to limit these improvements within the setback area (i.e. size or area of improvement would be dependent upon area of front street setback yard, amount of lineal footage adjacent to roadway, limits on improvement based on 50' of distance from garage to street). Council members may wish to review the staff memo presented for the Planning Commission's review (Exhibit A). Zoning File #1334 August 9, 1990 Page 2 of 4 As for the specific site conditions that would create the need for placement of a house at the street setback line, the following have been developed and agreed upon by both staff and applicant's consultar*-; 1. Limiting site characteristics of building envelopes, such as shape and limited area. 2. Unique or mature trees within the building envelope and the desire of the future owner to preserve a unique specimen. 3. Topography. 4. Placement of house may be done so as to minimize impact on adjacent properties, specifically, the case of a corner lot where the rear of the house may be placed against the side yard of the adjacent: property such as the case of Let 2, Block 1 that Council reviewed earlier this year Please review Exhibit G for background on the Planning Commission discussions. The concensus of the Planning Commission was that each individual case should be reviewed individually. If special standards and a review process are created, this would encourage encroachment when not needed. Although the Planning Commission referred to the encroachment of the front street setback yard as a variance, it is technically not a variance and if we are to present these matters before the Planning Commission, a public hearing need not be scheduled. A special request can be set before t. le Planning Commission an^ immediately presented for Council's review at the next meeting so as to speed the review process. It should also be noted that the Planning Commission did not wish to deter the developer from working with staff to develop appropriate standards for such encroachments nor the criteria to determine when such encroachments are required. Staff would concur with the P"* inning Commission's findings that to develop tables on allowed i.ardcover encroachments cf the front street setback area or other general tables for use would tend to encourage these encroachments of the protected area. Zoning File #1334 Augti 9, 1990 Pac 4 .ously, the procedure recominended by the Planning CommiS4Sj.on is viewed as a major obstacle to the processing of building permits by the developer and the developer asks Council for special consideration. In an attempt to present a compromise position for Council's consideration, staff has asked the City Engineer to develop design criteria for driveways and backout aprons within the 50' front street setback yard designed to minimize impact on the setback area. Please review Exhibits H and I, the illustrations I-l through 1-4 depict drives and backout aprons for three car garages (Sugarwoods covenants requires 3 car garages). Note that the drives have been adopted to fit the two typical designs for three car garage openings. I-l represents a minimum turning movement required for a car parked in front of a garage stall to backup, turn and drive forward onto the street. 1-2 through 1-4 are interchangeable designs and may be reversed without affecting the layout. Note the engineer has also provided the amount of area needed for these improvements; 1-2 at 1,618.64 s.f.; 1-3 at 1,590.46 s.f.; and 1-4 at 1,508.21 s.f. It would be staff's recommendation that if a builder provides satisfactory evidence to the reviewing staff that specific site conditions necessitate house at setback line that either one of the design presented by the Engineer will be acceptable without further review by the Planning Commission or Council. If the builder wishes to provide other improvements outside those allowed within the approved illustrations, than they must appeal their position to the Planning Commission and Council. The builder would also be given a right of appeal if staff found that the specific site conditions did not warrant the placement of the house at the setback line. Staff sent this memo to both the Chairman and Co-Chairman of the Planning Commission. Staff will ask for their comments prior to the meeting. Co-chair Bellows will be the Planning Commission representative at your meeting and will be available for comment. ^Zoning File #1334 August 9, 1990 Page 4 of 4 Options of Action - Adopt the procedure recommended by the Planning Commission requiring individual review of each request that does not meet the standards set forth in Resolution #2652. Provide for an abbreviated review process whereby the staff may approve additional encroachment of the front street setback area (outside of the allowed single drive at a 20' width) upon satisfaction that certain site conditions exist for a property. Such encroachments would be limited to those improv cement s set forth in the Engineer's illustrations. All other improvements (i.e. expanded backout aprons, loop roads, "T"s or "Y"s, etc.) of the front street setback yard shall be approved by both Planning Commission and Council. Staff Recommendation - To accept Option B and to adopt staff resolution. Exhibit J. A RESOLUTION AMENDING RESOLUTION #2652, A CONDITIONAL USB PERMIT APPROVING A PLANNED RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT KNOffN 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) aiid the setback areas defined withi. each building lot .thin those areas no future owner will be allowed tv. emove trees in excess of 2" in diameter at 4' above grade. No grading is allowed within the protected areas. However, each residential lot may include one driveway HE 20* vKdej^ leading to the loo£ road. This driveway may be graded and trees of any size may ^ removed to build it. 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 is not practical nor workable when one or more of the following site conditions requires placement of a portion or the entire house at the front street setback line: Page 1 of 7 M - The shape or limited area of a building envelope. - Unique or mature trees within a building envelope and the desire of an owner to preserve a unique specimen. - The topography of a building envelope. - Placement of house so to minimize impact on adjacent properties. Specifically in cases of corner lots where the rear of the house may be placed adjacent to a side yard of an abutting property. NOW, THBREPORB BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of Orono shall allow additional encroachment of a front street yard within the Sugarwoods plat upon satisfaction that one or more of the above site conditions exist for a property and to direct the Orono staff to present the owner's or builder's written request before the Planning Commission at their earliest upcoming meeting (third Monday of the month) for immediate review and action by the Council at the following Monday meeting (fourth Monday of the month). Such written requests shall include the following information: 1. Survey/site plan designating drive(s) and type of backout improvement ("Y"s, "T''s, loops, etc.). 2. Amount of hardcover within front setback area - these areas to be shown on site plan. 3. Topographic mapping of property if topography is site characteristic under consideration. 4. Location of mature, unique tree specimens. 5. Other unique physical characteristics of property that require special placement on site. Page 2 of 7 NOW, THEREFORE BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Council will allow the Orono staff to approve without further review and approval by the Planning Commission and Council additional encroachment of the front street setback area if such improvements are limited to either one of the illustrations included in this resolution as Pages 5, 6, and 7, and upon satisfaction by the staff that one ^r more of the above noted site conditions exist for the pro y. The design standards used in these illustrations are ta..en from the "Architectural Graphics Standards, 7th Edition" by Ramsey/Sleeper, pages 48 through 52 for Group IV - large cars. The design standards and specifications employed represent minimum turning movements required for a car parked in front of a garage stall to backup, turn and drive forward onto the street within the 50* front yard. The Orono staff is responsible for reviewing such requests and the review shall consist of a representative of the Public Works and Building and Zoning staffs. All written requirements must be submitted to the Zoning Department and shall include all pertinent information listed above. Owners/builders may appeal all decisions of the Orono staff to the Planning Commission and Council. Page 3 of 7 I Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota, this 10th day of September, 1990. James R. Grabek, Mayor ATTEST: Dorothy M. Hallin, City Clerk STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this 10th day of September, 1990, by James R. Grabek & 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 4 of 7 Page 5 of 7 I I I I ===^ SETBACK LINE 8.DO q CM 1l). 2.00i 1-—^\1 X K —\ \ 31.0.WH \ \ 1 i 11 1 /_L. .. 1 ! 1 1» 1 1 1 1 1 1 fr ;cAt', 1''=^I0' (9 k-c^ '-O idi Banmttroo fk}MBne AndBrUk& Ataociatas KnBlnmmn AArehllacls ^ 81. Paui MliMiMeta f Date:■; A Comm. V j Rg. No. R)uv' K:\ 139\ 139GEN\3CAR3 Paae 7 of 7 17.^ Mayor Grabek & Orono Council Members Planning Commission Chairman Kelley Orono Planning Commission Members City Administrator Bernhardson Date: Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building & Zoning Administrator May 16, 1990 Subject: Sugarwoods Plat - Request to amend Resolution #2652 - Section that limits structural and nonstructura 1 improvements within Front Street setback area List of Exhibits Exhibit A - Exhibit B - Exhibit Exhibit Exhibit Exhibit Exhibit Staff Memo to Council Site Plan Approved with Building Permit for Lot 2, Block 2 Sugar Woods Plat Topography Map Attorney's Letter/Sample Turnarounds Staff Sketches-Turnaround, Backout Apron Table of Front Street Setback Areas for 25 Lots within Sugarwoods Resolution #2652 - Condition 1 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 will be allowed to remove trees in excess of 2" in diameter at 4' above grade. ^ grading is a 1 lowed within the protected areas, however, each resFdential lot may include one driveway up to 20* wide leading the loop road. This driveway may be graded and trees of any size may be removed to build it. The Subdivider's Agreement should also define the protected areas such as the setback area of each lot and the private open space outlets. This specific condition was an attempt to minimize the impact on the existing tree growth by limiting access drives to one at a maximum width of 20*. The question of interpretation of this section arose at the time of the issuance of the building permit for Lot 2, Block 2 to Steiner and Koppelman (Review Exhibit B). Based on the location of this house in relation to the Front Street setback area, portions of the backout apron and turnaround must encroach the front street setback area. Specific site conditions for this lot required that a corner of the house be placed at the 50' setback line. This will also be the case for other lots within the plat where the desire will be IV Sugarwoods Plat May 16, 1990 Page 2 of 4 to minimize the impact on trees , locate house on gentler elevations or take advantage of other natural topographic features. In reviewing this issue with the Public Works Director, he advised that with the recent amendment to Chapter 6 that provided standards for driveway approaches to both private and public roads. Properties are limited to one driveway approach and loop roads were to be discouraged. This ordinance was approved in 1988. Gerhardson notes that in reviewing requests for loop roads since the passagae of that ordinance the following criteria have been used in such considerations; 1. Amount of frontage along the private or public road 2. Unique physical conditions within yard such as topography and placement of trees 3. Type of roadway to be accessed - M.S.A. classified, heavily trafficed public roadway, private road. Chief Kilbo has advised the City against allowing a property to be newly developed where only a backing out onto a roadway is permitted. He cautions that a driver is in violation of State law if the driver does not back out into the direction of the flow of traffic. At the April 23rd meeting of the Council, Council accepted the staff findings and further directed staff to work with the developer and contractors to develop standards or criteria for the "necessary" encroachment of nonstructural improvements within front street setback area facilitating a backing out maneuver and access from and to the site. Please note these special standards are to be employed by both developer and the reviewing staff when clearly defined site conditions necessitate placement of the house near or adjacent to the front Ssreet setback line. In early discussions, staff attempted to control improvements within front street setback yards by placing limits on size, width and length (i.e., backout apron from qarage limited to a depth of 20'; a turnaround backout apron limited to 15*, loop drives limited to 12* widths, etc.). Refer to Exhibit A and F. Staff also noted that a loop road would not be allowed on lots that had less than 200 of frontage on Sugarwoods Drive. This would qualify 7 of the 25 lots for loop drives. In addition, if such lots are on curves and there are safety concerns that turnarounds would have to be provided within interior of lot. (V Sugarwoods Plat May 16r 1990 Page 3 of 4 As you may recall, development within this project is limited to no more than 80% of the defined building pad being covered with hardcover improvements. The normal lakeshore hardcover regulations do not apply. In review of the most recent application for Lot 2, Block 2, the smallest of the building pads, it would appear that the 80% hardcover allowance is not a problem, that is if additional turnaround Improvements were required for this site. There is an additional 3400 s.f. of additional hardcover available for the improvement of Lot 2. In no case can the total improvement of any of the pads within the Sugarwoods plat exceed the 80% allowance. Since the Council meeting of April 23rd, staff held a meeting with consultants, the developer and contractors within the Sugarwoods plat. It became apparent that the first attempt at a control on limiting such improvements to a specific size would not be functional nor realistic. The developer's engineer plans to develop various site plans for specific pads with various alternatives providing interior cul-de-sac turnarounds, turnaround aprons and loop road configurations. It was the consensus of this group that should the need arise that each pad be allowed a percentage of hardcover within the front street setback area to insure minimum encroachment. (Lots 100'-180* allowed 20%, Lots 181'-200* allowed 15%) Staff conceptually developed a table for hardcover allowances by grouping lots based on frontage widths (i.e. 90'-119' allowed 30%, 120'-139' allowed 25%, etc.) and soon realized that this would not be workable. It may be more appropriate to develop a table defining allowed hardcover for each of the 25 lots based on a specific amount of hardcover rather than on a blanket percentage. Review the table of Front Street Setback Areas for each lot. Review of Previous Considerations Staff's first attempt at presenting the issue to Council dealt with setting limitations on backout improvements (turnaround apron, interior cul-de-sac or loop road) and driveway widths within each front street setback area. Since the Council meeting, staff has met with agents of the developer and staff consultants. It was determined that possibly a hardcover limitation wuuld be more appropriate as it was obvious you could not set limits on the sizing of turnaround improvements that would respond to each individual lot's final development needs. Sugarwoods Plat May 16, 1990 Page 4 of 4 Staff has explored the idea of limiting such improvements to a specific hardcover percentage based on frontage area of each lot but this method may not provide staff with adequate control. Staff has yet to receive site plans developed by developer's planner providing graphic examples of such improvements to determine if the hardcover control would work. Council has asked for direction from the Planning Commission to determine if members have any comments concerning issues raised by staff and developer. Is hardcover control a valid method? Do Planning Commission members have other suggestions or ideas? In consideration of the extremes in area from the smallest lot frontage at 99* to the largest at 349', staff feels each individual lot should have a specific hardcover allowance if indeed hardcover is the agreed upon method of control. I have created a listing of front setback areas of each of the individual 25 lots in Sugarwoods for your consideration. Please let me know prior to the meeting if you would like other exhibits or information prepared to assist in our discussion. Planning Comailssion Action To provide further direction to ;.taff on the following issues to assist staff in preparing final amendment for Council's review and action: A. Define site conditions that would suggest need to locate home at front street setback line. Do you agree tree location, topography or other unique physical conditions are acceptable? B. Method(s) to control amount of encroachment 1. A minimum of 10-20' is needed to back out of garage 2. A minimum of 15' is needed for turnaround apron CITY OF OROMO P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN NOTICE OP PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION 55323 473-7357 Date of Notice: 5/31/90 TO:Sid Rebers 3525 Webster Avenue St. Louis Park, MN 55416 COPIES TO:Bob Kost BRW 700 South 3rd St Minneapolis, MN 55415 Stephen Pflaum Leonard, Street & Dienard 150 S 5th St, #2300 Minneapolis, MN 55402 TYPE OF APPLICATION:Reconsideration of Specific Condition of Approval of PRD for Sugar Woods DATE OF MEETING:5/21/90 VOTE: 6 For 0 Against NOTES AND SPECIAL CONDITIONS: The Planning Commission woted unanimously to recommend to Council that each specific request to expand on the allowed 20' single drive through front street setback area must be reviewed individually by Planning Commission and Council. It was also noted that this would not be a formal variance review and public hearing notices would not be required. A request could be placed c: the Planning Commission agenda and placed immediately on the next week « Council agenda. Planning Commission concurred with staff's comments that it was difficult to establish a table of hardcover limitations for each lot as it would appear that the City would be encouraging the encroachment of the front street setback area even when conditions on the site would not call for such encroachment. Per our recent conversation, T will reschedule the application before the Council at their July 9, 1990 meeting. If your consultants wish to provide additional information in response to the Planning Commission's recommendation, please see that they submit the additional information by the deadline of June 29, 1990. >'/. viN V, / O l 2 r-u;r--2/^‘ /- / > A ^ y-' / ' r^'~"~\ 1 ■ 'f\v'""'V 'f7\iiLi-u—M, V 1 i V \ \ Jj \ \ ■to \ I r1 '-r / ^ i /1 \^ i_* ( I iV^—^ ^ I V tl'' I r \ \ / \ » - T^ I ^ low^.y-S AREA CALCULATIONS FOR DETERMININr HARDCOVER AT SUGARWOODS PRO, ORONO»MN SQUARE FEET SQUARE FEET OF FRONT YARD OF BUILDING PAD SETBACK LOT BLOCK AREA AREA 1 1 14,900 14,240 2 1 19,$35 13,260 3 1 16,555 12,605 4 1 14»710 6,955 5 1 27,720 5,950 6 1 12,407 8,735 1 2 12,510 8,007 2 2 10,650 15,065 3 2 12,790 8,520 4 2 11,700 7,875 5 2 10,724 7,980 6 2 10,245 15,250 1 3 8,910 14,205 2 3 11,130 8,080 3 3 9,130 7,796 4 3 11,773 7,836 5 3 11,240 15,475 1 4 11,190 8,118 2 4 23,130 5,242 3 4 18,830 5,851 4 4 13,570 8,:08 5 4 13,005 7,78C 6 4 11,825 8,405 7 4 9,980 8,610 8 4 12.445 9,337 2'd •>II Mde ?2.0T 06/ 02 d3S p CITY OF ORONO Citv of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 2652_ _ _ _ _ A RESOLOTIOII GBAITPIHG A COHDITIOIIXL USB PBRHIT I« MOTICIPAL ZOaiMG CODE SSCTIOB 10.20« SUBD. 3<M) - File Ho. 1334 WHEREAS/ Sidney Rebers and Barbara ReberS/ husband and wife and Rsbera Construction Co. (hereinafter "the applicant ) Is cne owner of the property located within the City of Orono (hereinafter "the City") and legally described as follows: Exhibit A/ attached copy from plat (hereinafter "property"), and WHEREAS, the Rebers Construction Co. has applied to the City for a Conditional Use Permit for a Planned Residential Development pursuant to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.20, Subdivision 3(H). NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono, Minnesota: Findings 1. The application was reviewed as Zoning Pile No. 1334 2. The property is located in the R-IA Zoning District. Page 1 of 8 CITY OF ORONO City of ORO>fO REIJLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 2652 3. On September 19, 1988 and October 17, 1988 the Orono Planning Commission reviewed the application as proposed and recommended approval. 4. The City Council has considered this application including the findings and recommendations of the Planning Coiwnission, reports by staff and comments of the applicant and the effect of the proposed use on the health, safety and welfare of the community. 5. The City Council finds that granting a Conditional Use Permit to allow a planned residential development will not be detrimental to the health, safety and 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 keer'’^'^^ with the intent and objectives of the Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan of the City. 6. The City Council finds that the applicant has proposed a planned residential development plan for development of the property based on one or more of the following findings noted by professional representatives of the applicant: A. The topographical and physical characteristics of the property suggest a need for special design considerations. Variations in topography range from 1,044 CITY OF ORONO City of OROrs'O RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 2652 feet at Its highest point to 994 feet at its lowest, resulting in over 50 feet of grade differential. B* On the site there are mature maple and other deciduous trees. There is a densely populated forest of maple trees in the west portion of the property and in the east portion of the property there are young to mature nursery stock of evergreen trees and other deciduous trees C. There is a need for an open space buffer along the lot lines of surrounding rural residential properties, especially to the north and west. Paqe 3 of 8 City of OROiNO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. -^652_________ CoaclttSioiis* Order and Conditions ^Tsed upon the above findings, the Orono City Council hereby grants a Conditional Use Permit per Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.20, Subdivision 3<H) to permit the use of a planned residential development, subject to the following conditions: 1. All provisions of the subdivision regulations have been followed under the planned residential format as follows: A. Outlets define the commercial corridors not considered under this current subdivision plan. These are Outlets Ds E and F in the final plat. B. The road servinq the residential lots will be designated as a separate outlet, namely Outlet C in the final plat. The open space areas surrounding the residential lots will be Outlets A and B in the final slat C. A separate outlet will define the portion of the future east/west road access located within the southern portion of the property (commercial corridor). This is Outlet D in the final plat. D. Each residential unit will be defined as a lot on the final plat survey (average lot size of each unit - 41,000 5.f.>. These are Lots 1 through 6 of Block 1, Lots 1 through o of Block 2, Lots 1 through 5 of Block 3 and Lots 1 through 8 of Block 4. Page 4 of 8 City of OROIVO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 2652_________ E. The actual building pad defined by the required setbacks of each lot cannot be shown on the final plat, but are shown on the Preliminary Development Plan last revised January 24, 1989. 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 will be allowed to remove trees in excess of 2 inches in diameter at four feet above grade. No grading is allowed within the protected areas. However, each residential lot may include one driveway up to 20 feet wide leading to the loop road. This driveway may be graded and trees of any size may be removed to build it. The subdivider’s Agreement should also define the protected areas such as the setback area of each lot and the private open space outlets. G. Each building pad (defined by the setbacks for each lot) is limited to 80% hardcover improvements as defined in the declaration covenants. Such improvements will include the access road through the portion of the property located within the front street setback area. H. In a preliminary report, the City Engineer Glenn Cook has confirmed that there is adequate sewer capacity Pago 5 of 8 CITY OF ORONO City of OROrVO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 2652 _ _ ter through Long Lake by the Joint Powers Agreement or by constructing a new interceptor along the Highway 12 Corridor. I. Applicant has submitted a Storm Water Management Plan to the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District and has received preliminary approval. The applicant will be required to install a detention pond within Outlot F. J. All lots shall be served by a private loop road with a single, divided ingress/egress access at Brown Road. NO additional curb cuts will be approved for this property at this time. Curb cuts to serve outlets B and F will be considered when those outlets are developed. The City may petition for a curb cut to serve the City s lift station and the subdivider and its assigns agree not to contest such a petition. K. The recorded plat of Sugar woods conforms to all requirements of the Subdivision Code, Chapter 11. 2. Both the private covenants and the Subdivider’s Agreement should include the restrictions set forth in paragraph l.F and l.G of this resolution, 3. Entrance monuments have been approved by the City staff. Any changes to monuments will require staff approval. 4. NO changes shall be made in those provisions of the Declaration of Covenants, Conditions Restrictions and Easements for Page 6 of 8 CITY OF ORONO City of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 2652_ Meyers Woods required by this C.U.P. unless the City Council agrees to the amendments by amending this Conditional Use Permit. 5. Violation of or nonconipliance with any of the terms and conditions of this resolution shall constitute a violation of the Zoning Code, and the City shall have all enforcement procedures granted by law, and shall be punishable as a misdemeanor. 6. The undersigned owner has read, understood and hereby agrees to the terms of this resolution and on behalf of himself, his heirs, successors and assigns, hereby agrees to the recording of this resolution in the chain of title of the property. Adopted by the Orono City Council on this_i£i^L day of July , _. Spouse/ Page 7 of 8 CITY OF ORONO City of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. __2652___ STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this 10th day of July, 1989, by James R. Grabek & 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. STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) On this /day of <'7 ^mES before me a Notary Public within and for said county, personally appeared j*'!y _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 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. , V Ki. — minnfsOIAi Mt-.NtPiN couNnr » 'n April 21, I99C (2 NOTARY PUBLIC STATE OF MINNESOTA ) }ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) On this S day of /fff _______________ _ ___________y ta^, before me a Notary Public wi,thin and for said Countyr 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. J£aN L. .::r\.MoACHER ,“71 iS 'll — V ...,;iN fQoNlY a A 21. I99L NOTARY PUBLIC Page 8 of 8 ' ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD MAX 21, 1990 "on "4tt;"°LTr'!'Tundson would provide a survey snowing exactir «here^ the fence is to be located, he »ay loo. favorably upon his request. Mr. Amundson said that the survey would cost more than the fencing. Kelley asked Mr. Amundson if it would be possible to reduce the size of the kennel. Mr. Amundson replied that "sa*id’'^2hlt o^hlrwisr^te "og""vroufd^o?"detect anyone trespassing on the property. Kelley polled the Planning Commission for regar^ng "approval of the kennel.^ "^JohLon^f^Sanlon.'^'M^s and B^??ows lndrcate°d that they;'would' look upon the request more favorably if a survey were suomitted. .--...a “ .."’So" applies for a variance. Kelley asked Mr. Amundson whether he would like the Planning Commission to table this matter. „r. Amundson stated that he would have a survey prepared for the Planning Commission to review. It was moved by Kelley, seconded by “ ^^^f^tion! A^e^^ir^^:ys-0?’^^iheHbst^?ier"^ot“:n passed. (Cohen departed at this time, 9:50) #1334 REBERS CONSTRUCTION, SUGAR ^OODS P^T RECONSIDERATION OF ALLOWED HARDCOVER WITHI FRONT/STREET SETBACK AREA ^ matter.Mr. Robert Kost was present for uhis matter. Mabusth reviewed the information contained in her memo dated May 16, 1990. Kelley stated th^t he would prefer^to^ have^each lot ^tha^ =^SieLuaTry! ra^lTer th^"only encourage encroachment when not ne .aed.. Mabusth noted that it may be a hardship on a builder if he - 17 - ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD MAY 21, 1990 -• ,oKiTHr PILE *1334-REBERS CONSTRUCTION CONTINUED -a for the Planning Commission to meet before obtains, permit. Mr. Kost said ^hatJie ^ ""wo^V^rolith\he establish obDective sai ig acceptable. He stated thit^it is dtmciJt to establish a basic criteria because of the that It xs —+-uor- f;»r***ors uniQue to each lot.location of trees and other factors unique Kelley believed that ^ecause^^each ^ j.ot^^ is^. proposal should be revie P ^nmnromised auite a bit when change the “rules of the game" at this point. with the'stand“d's""estabh w?trLbdTvis!on \"proval'° = fhP Citv and the Developer have Mr. Kost said that the C particularly in interpreted some of tne tLt the standards do not regard to the driveways. r'l*- for the driveway. Kt. specify that there be only it is likely K^t said that '' "l!?that the house will be placea ^g-back line, only a 20 dri:La" wfll be "allow^'d." A 2o"' driveway will not adequately serve a three-car garage. .„„s;r»”avr consideration. as , a Mr- Knst if he woulc like to continue to v;ork with s^ffto^preVre criteria that will mutually satisfactory. aohnson questioned whether force the builcer additional driveway area. He suggL4"d\“hat"ma“y\ave more of a negative impact on the lot, than allowing a loop driveway. Bellows said that is f ””\"h/t°%hl’''dlve\oper'!s :sfentL^\y varfa^%e%\%“^h:*’o%^gin^l standar^ds and that variaLes require Planning Commission review. It was the consensus °f the Planning^Co^i^^^^^^^^ be no amendment to Resoluti -nmnlv with the standards set forth!^^^^^^^^ commission. - 18 - DRAFT COPY DESIGN MEMORANDUM TO: eanne Mabusth, Planning and Zoning Administrator FROM: JCO/GRC SUBJECT: Driveway Standards, Sugar Hills DATE; August 1, 1990 OBJECTIVE; Develope driveway standards for Sugar Hills that minimize both intrusion into setback areas and amount of hard surface cover- DESIGN CRITERIA; Driveway width at property line — 16 feet Minimum setback from property line — 50 feet Garage size - 3 Car/3 stall Design vehicle - Passenger car (Group IV-Large Car) DISCUSSION: Passenger 'Architectural car design data for this analysis was taken fr*'m the Graphics Standards, 7th Edition" by Ramsey/Sleeper, pages 48 through 52- Copies of these pages have been included with this draft for your information and review. Considering the type of development for which these are being developed. Group IV — Large Cars was selected as the design vehicle (see copy of page 48). The width of the driveway at the face of the garage is somewhat dependant on the garage and the type of door opening. There are three options available for garage doors - 1) wide single door for all three stalls; 2) a double door and a single door; and 3) three single doors. The large single door for all three stalls is not considered practical because of the large span for a header over the door and the difficulty of operating such a large door structure. We have chosen to consider options 2) and 3). Sketches of the three options for garage doo-^s are enclosed for your consideration. (See copy of page 50 for additional comments on garages). There is very little information available in the transportation manuals regarding turning templates for passenger cars because they generally do not govern the geometries of design for roadway facilities. Therefore, we have developed our own turning templates for a large passenger car (Group VI). This is shown on Fitv -he. Figure No. One represents the minimum tu< trem''nts required for a car parked in front of a garage stall to bac>% turn and drive forward onto the street. The edges of the driveway are one foot wider than the edge of the vehicle's path while making this maneuver. Please note the wide swing of the right—front corner of the vehicle while backing. Figure No. Two represents the driveway required -for a three stall garage with individual doors, with a right hand turning bay. The 16 ^oot section o-f the driveway near the property line can be located at any position within the 34 foot section near the garage. It is shown centered on the middle garage bay. The layout is also based on the assumption that the driver will not have to "jockey around" within the driveway area by making several back and forth movements to get his vehicle turned around. If this were permitted, the size of the driveway layout could be reduced. Figure No. Three indicates a different arrangement whereby the right hand parking stall would back to the left in the same but opposite manner as the left hand stall shown on the drawing. Figure No. Four is a variation on Figure No. Two. It is shown with the turning bay to the left. Please note that any of the arrangements shown can be reversed without affecting the layout. Please review the enclosed information and determine where we go from here. We can prepare, if you wish, some additional drawings illustrating various alternatives to the layouts shown on the enclosed plates. The information presented is in draft form for your review. Upon completion of Staff review, we will complete the detail plates and resubmit. jz: - / ' V vi/'A^ ' 1^1.~ jjiI Bon«atroo S=M Ros«n« Andmrilk A AMOClatM Er«lnM.« 4ArBHII*el« 8L PMii MImwm** Date: Comrr*Rg. Np.On€. JT- > K-.xciocx v'se/Aiii 1/1 Bonastroo Roaana Andarlik & Aaaoclataa £f«in««r* &Archit*oU 8t. P«4 MinnMola Date: Comm.Fig. No.|VvC?f K:\ 1 39\ 1 39\GEN\3CAR2 K:\139\139GEN\3CAR3 Mayor Grabek & Orono Council Members Planning Commission Chairman Kelley Orono Planning Commission Members City Administrator Bernhardson StP 10 19S0 ^'TY OF omo CJ Froa: Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building & Zoning Administrator Date: September 5, 1990 Subject: 1476 David and Suzanne Prass - 1065 Linden Lane - Request to retain accessory structure, swimming pool, on property without principal structure - Resolution Review of Current Application - At your last meeting Council directed the City Engineer to review the commercial pool cover submitted by applicant for Council's consideration. Glenn Cook has reviewed the LOOP-LOC, safety solar swimming pool cover, and reports that it will serve as a temporary solution for the concern of the public safety and protection. The canvas cover will allow run-off to drain into the basin of the pool. Cook recommends that on a monthly schedule applicant should use a bilge pump to remove the water that collects. Cook also recommends that during the interim period where the property does not sustain a principal residence that the snow fencing be maintained. Staff would also add that in that same period the applicant provide proof of updated and current liability insurance. It would be staff's recommendation to Council that applicant be responsible for providing a schedule of monthly inspections of the pool site to insure water is removed that collects within the retention area, snow fencing is in good condition and that pool covering has not been tampered with and continues to be anchored at grade level with spring locks. The enclosed resolution has been drafted allowing the applicant to retain the pool subject to the monthly maintenance schedule noted above to last until a Certificate of Occupancy is issued for a residential structure by December 1, 1992. It was also agreed that a deadline for the issuance of building permit for a residential structure is October 1, 1991. A RESOLUTION ALLOWING A SWIMMING POOL TO TEMPORARILY REMAIN ON THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 1065 LINDEN LANE WITHOUT A PRINCIPAL RESIDENCE PILE 1476 WHEREAS, the City of Orono is a municipal corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of Minnesota; and WHEREAS, pursuant to State Statute 412 et. seq. and 462 et. seq., the City Council of the City of Orono has adopted a community management plan and zoning regulations for the protection of the public health, safety and general welfare; and WHEREAS, David and Suzanne Prass (hereinafter "the applicants") are the owners of the property located at 1065 Linden Lane within the City of Orono (hereinafter "the City") and legally described as follows; Exhibit A, attached (hereinafter "the property"); and WHERESA, the applicants have applied to the City of Orono for special consideration that would allow a swimming pool to remain on a property that does not sustain a principal residence. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of Orono, Minnesota; FINDINGS 1. This application was reviewed as Zoning File 1476. 2. The property is located in the LR-IB Single Family Lakeshore Residential Zoning District requiring 1 acre in area. The property consists of 1.4 acres. 3. In October of 1988, the former residence on the property was demolished as a result of a Hazardous Building Action commenced by the City of Orono. The pool has remained on the property unattended without a safety cover. Page 1 of 5 4. An older established residential neighborhood surrounds the property. 5. The City has found the pool in it*s present condition to be a potential hazard to the immediate neighborhood and general public. 6. The property exceeds the required 1 acre in area and 140' width required of LR-IC zoning standards and can legally sustain a principal residence without the need for further variances. The City Council has considered the applicants special request including the findings and recommendations of the Planning Commission, reports by City staff, comments by the applicants, and based upon one or more of the findings noted above, the Orono City Council hereby agrees to allow the swimming pool to remain on the property without a principal residence subject to the following conditions: 1. Applicant shall install a safety swimming pool cover by October 30, 1990, namely the LOOP-LOC safety solar swimming pool cover system and such system has been approved by the City Engineer. 2. Applicant shall obtain a building permit for construction of a principal residence on the property by October 1, 1991 and to complete construction and obtain a Certificate of Occupancy by December 1, 1992. From the present until a Certificate of Occupancy is issued for a principal residence, the applicant shall agree to do the following: a. Provide proof of current insurance coverage for the City of Orono's official records. b. Maintain snow fencing around pool area and maintain pool cover to provide necessary protection. c. Applicant to remove water that collects in pool basin on a monthly basis or at greater intervals depending on amount of rainfall. Page 2 of 5 d. Applicant shall provide to the City written confirmation, preferably within the first week of each month, that pool is being maintained in a safe manner as recommended above. Adopted by the Orono City Council of the City of Orono on this 10th day of September, 1990. ATTEST; Dorothy M. Hallin, City Clerk James R. Grabek, Mayor Property Owner(s) STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) SS. COUNTY OP HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this 10th day of September 1990, by James R. Grabek & 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 My Commission Expires Page 3 of 5 STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OP HENNEPIN ) On this day of 199 before me a Notary Public within and for said countyr personally appeared _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ___ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ known to me to be the person(s) described in and who executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that he (they) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed. NOTARY PUBLIC MY COMMISSION EXPIRES STATE OF MINNESOTA ) )ss. COUNTY OP HENNEPIN ) On this day of ______________________, 199_, before me a Notary Public within and for said County, persona'” ’ appeared known to me be -he person(s) described in and who executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that he (they) executed the s/irae as his (their) free act and deed. NOTARY PUBLIC MY COMMISSION EXPIRES Page 4 of 5 -4 City of OROIXO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL "no. . EXHIBIT A LEGAL DESCRIPTION: That part of Lots Ten (10), Eleven (11) and Twelve (12), "Linden Beach," described as follows; Beginning at the Southwest corner of said Lot Ten (10); thence East along the South line of said lot, a distance of Eighty-four (84) feet; thence Northwesterly along a line, which would intersect the North line of Lot Twelve (12) at a point One Hundred Eighty-five (185) feet East of the Northwest corner of said Lot Twelve (12), to a point in said Northwesterly line, which is fifty-two (52) feet Southeasterly measured along said line from the North line of Lot Twelve (12); thence West parallel with the North line of.Lot Twelye (12) to the West line of said Lot; thence Southeasterly along the Westerly line of Lots 12, 11 and 10 to the point of beginning, including one-half’ (1/2) of Linden Lane, vacated, adjoining said lots; according to the plat thereof on file and of record in the office of the Register of Deeds in and for Heimepin County, Minnesota.ALSO Lots Si.x (6), Seven (7), Eight (8), and Nine (9), Linden Beacn, according to the plat thereof on file and of record in the office of the Register of Deeds in and for llonnepin County, Minnesota. Page 5 of 5 Stpiorao CITY OF ORONO To: Mayor Grabek & Orono Council Members Planning Commission Chairman Kelley Planning Commission Members City Administrator Bernhardson Frcoi: Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building & Zoning Administrator Date: September 6.. 1990 Subject: 1493 Chuck Downey, 2665 Casco Point Road Variance - Resolution List of i&xhibits Exhibit A - Exhibit B - Exhibit C - Exhibit D - Exhibit E - Exhibit F - Exhibit G - Exhibit H - Exhibit I - Exhibit J - Exhibit K - Exhibit L - Exhibit M - Application Plat Map Property Owners List Council Minutes 10/13/82 Survey 5/16/90, Revised 7/26/90 Hardcover Fact Sheet Existing 0-75’ Setback Area Hardcover Fact Sheet Proposed 0-75' Setback Area Hardcover Fact Sheet Existing 75-250' Setback Area Hardcover Fact Sh-jt Proposed 75-250' Setback Area Council Minutes 4/9/90 1 through 2 Letters Adjacent Neighbors Floor Plan Elevation/Street Please also review Pla^^ning Commission i.inutes of August 20,1990 enclosed in ytur Council packets for background informi tion. Status of Application 1493 - At the April 9, 1990 meeting of the Council, applicant advised of future plans to perform certain land alterations and installation of retaining walls within his lakeshore yard t correct certain erosion problems. Council advised applicant that prior to acting on the current hardcover variance appl ca-ion, that applicant file a conditional use permit application to allow a comprehensive review of the entire improvement plan. At that same meeting. Council also advised applicant that they wish the Planning Commission to further address the issue of the deck constructed without the benefit of building permit review and Zoning File 1493 September 6, 1990 Page 2 obviously placed in front of an average lakeshore setback line. Council stated a revised updated survey would be required before Council would act on the improvement plan. The applicant has filed a land alteration conditional use permit with the City ( 15/0). Review Exhibit E. An updated survey has been submitted. The applicant proposes three tiers of retaining walls and extensive cutting into the existing lakeshore banks to solve erosion problems within the lakeshore yard. Planning Commission tabled all action on this phase of the application based on the magnitude of the proposal and the fact that the improvement would be in complete conflict with previous actions of the City. In fact, Planning Commission pointed out specific areaoi where erosion was found and advised applicant to amend th^* proposal under the guidance of the Orono staff. Planning Commission further directed that the variance phase of the application could be acted on as there appeared to be no connection between the entry addition and the proposed land alterations within the lakeshore yard. The variance application is presented for Council's consideration and action. 1. Section 10.22, Subdivision 1 - After-the-fact average lakeshore setback variance for second story deck constructed sometime in 1982. Note the entire second story deck is located in front of the average lakeshore setback line. Planning Commission recommended approval of the after-the- fact variance. 2. Section 10.22, Subdivision 2 - Hardcover var unce review required because there already exists excessive amounts of hardcover over the allowed 25%. 75-250' Setback Aiea = 8,325 £ Existing Hardcover = 3,76 ’. or 45% per 1982 survey Existing Hardcover - 4,990.. .f. or 59.94% per 1990 survey (refer to Exhibits E & H) Proposed Herdcover * 3,979.3 s.f. or 47.7% (refer to Exhibit I) Removal of 1,. s.f. and addition of 30 s.f. (entry addition) Zoning File 1493 September 6, 1990 Page 3 Review of Hardcover Variance Application and After-the-Pact LaJceshore Setback Variance The applicant proposes construction of an entry addition to the street side of the existing structure requiring no setback variance. The entry addition consists of a 7' 11" x 6' porch with roof and an enclosed entry room 11' x 6 The entry structure will be placed over 84 s.f. of existing non-structural hardcover for a net increase of 30 s.f. of total hardcover within the 75-250' setback area. The updated survey, Exhibit E, shows existing hardcover at 4,990.1 s.f. or 59.94%. The applicant proposes removal of existing landscape areas underlain with plastic underliner and a gravel parking area adjacent to the street lot line resulting in total hardcover of 3,979.3 s.f. or 47.7%. Although the Planning Commission's original recommendation required removal of hardcover up to the allowed amount of an earlier 1982 review at 45%, it was noted that surveys of hardcover in that year did not include landscape areas underlain with plastic. Sta t has. already confirmed that in the 1982 review the expanded gravel area was approved by Council to assist in the backing out maneuver but Cook at your April meeting confirmed that based on the location of the garage, the grave.' area could not serve as a turnaround area but that the right-of-way of Casco Point Road was used. The gravel area serves as only additional parking space. The Planning Commission has recommended that this be removed as a condition of the variance approval. Planning Commission recommended ap;..vi>val of the after-the- '"act average lakeshore setback variance for the lakeshore deck consructed without a building perm.lt sometime in 1982. They based their findings as follows: 1. Recent letters submitted by adjacent and most affected neighbors site no problem with location of existing deck. Review Exhibit K 1-2. 2. Second story j«rk does not interfere with the site line views of the lake because of the sloping topographies within the lakeshore yards. Zoning File 1493 September 6, 1990 Page 4 Planning Conmission Recommendation . jdcover Variance The Planning Commission recommended unanimous approval of e proposed entry addition subject to the removal of existing .ardcover resulting in a total hardcover within the 75-25"“ setback area at 3,979.3 s.f. or 47.7% After-the-Pact The Planning Commission recommended approval of the ?»fter- the-fact variance on a 3 to 2 vote. The two denial voters did not support the motion as it included a condition that would require applicant pay a double fee with building permit. The minority Opinion felt that because of the lapse in time it was not appropriate to charge the penalty fee. The enclosed resolution has been drafted per the Planning Commission's approval recommen lation for Council's review and action. Please note that the after-the-fact phase of the application has been conditioned on the penalty fee payment. If Council wiwhjs to amend the majority action of the Planning Commission, the reoolution can be amended accordingly. Isv A RESOLUTION GRANTING VARIANCES TO HUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 10.22, SUBDIVISIONS 1 & 2 PILE 1493 WHEREAS, Chuck Downey (hereinafter "the applicant") is the owner of the property located at 2665 Casco Point Road within the City of Orono (hereinafter "City") and legally described as Lot 136, Spring Park, Hennepin County, Minnesota (hereinafter "the property"); and WHEREAS, the applicant has applied to the City for an after-the-fact variance to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.22, Subdivision 1 to permit a deck constructed in front of the average lakeshore setback line where no encroachment is allowed and per Section 10.22, Subdivision 2 seeks approval of hardcover variances within the 75-250' setback area for a proposed 19' x 6' entry addition resulting in 114 s.f. of structural hardcover where theje already exists 4,990.1 s.f. or 59.94% of hardcover within the 75-250' setback area where only 25% is allowed. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono, Minnesota: FINDINGS 1. This application was reviewed as Zoning File 1493. 2. The property is located in the LR-IC Single Family Lakeshore Residential Zoning District requiring 21,780 s.f. or 1/2 acre in area. The property consists of 12,850 s.f. or .29 acres. 3. The Orono Planning Commission reviewed this application on August 20, 1990 and recommended approval of the proposed variances based upon the following findings: Hardcover 75-250' A) Excessive hardcover results from landscaped areas underlain with plastic that was not considered hardcover at the time a 1982 survey was completed. Page 1 of 6 B) Applicant was advised in an earlier 1982 variance review to maintain gravel off-street parking area as to assist in on-site turnaround for maneuvering out of garage. After-the-Fact Average Lakeshore Setback Variance A) Current neighbors on adjacent properties have submitted letters noting no problem with location of second story existing lakeshore deck. B) Second story deck provides no visual impact or interference with lakeshore views for residences on either side because of sloping lakeshore topographies. 4. 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. 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 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. CONCLUSIONS, ORDER AND CONDITIONS Based upon one or more of the findings noted above, the Orono City Council hereby grants an after-the-fact variance to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.22, Subdivision 1 and per Section 10.22, Subdivision 2 grants aproval of a hardcover variance to permit an entry addition adding 114 s.f. of structural hardcover within the 75-250' setback area that already contains excessive amounts of hardcover. Approval is subject to the following conditions: Page 2 of 6 i. 1. All hardcover removals in the 75-250' setback area are to be completed prior to footing inspection by the Orono Building D'partment for new construction. Existing hardcove eas scheduled for removal are shown on survey and attai.:*. d rs Pagt- 6 of this resolution. The hardcover removals as follows: a. 361.8 s.f. of landscaped area underlain with plastic to east side or street side of house. b. 200 s.f. of landscaped area underlain with plastic on south side of house. c. 480 s.f. of gravel off-street parking area adjacent to Casco Point Road. 2. Applicant to file for an after-the-fact/penalty building permit for second story lakeside deck constructed sometime in 1982. The City will require penalty fee payment upon issuahce of building permit. 3. Authorities granted by this resolution run with the property not with the applicant, but are permissive only and must be exercised by application for a building permit within one year of the date of Council approval, or this variance will expire on that date (September 10, 1991). 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 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 6 Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota at a regular meeting held on the 10th day of September, 1990. ATTEST: Dorothy M. Hallin, City Clerk James R. Grabek, Mayor Property Owner(s) STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) ,The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this lOth^day of September, 1990 by James R. Grabek & 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 My Commission Expires Page 4 of 6 STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) On this day of 199 before me a Notary Public within and for said county, personally appeared _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ ___ _ _ _ _ ___ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ known to me 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. NOTA.;f PUBLIC .V MY COMMISSION EXPIRES STATE OF MINNESOTA ) )ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) On this day of _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _r 199_, before me a Notary Public within and for said County, personally appeareo known to me to be the person(s) described in and who executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that he (they) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed. NOTARY PUBLIC MY COMMISSION EXPIRES Page 6 of 6 — O OJ >» c c c c ^ ^ I- o» o c — c 41 Ol —e o#x u>s «»- o >s O ? « o u c 3 « C C W O ♦-• .C VI i. M - 01> r> 3 U i/t O U 4- 3 Of •• VI u o c t3 0# W C L. O *" 3 01 VI /;?r c z 2 V .:Nli -I >1 . 41> « I/I VI 01 o c o» c c id « C ^ X 3 VI Of i. M Of m c ^ ^ — COmi •ISi I nl ll f^Xi-srfjAi^ //aAo cot/«'e.> Pv-o (e&ao j tSJ^^ '^Oy - 3'T7?,3 ^ «- c/7.^ ■=1--------^ — *1 c//f3 — Of Of I ^ ^m - ^ u • O « « ^NBfl i « c c rs O O * 1 i- *-. 91 — VI 5. M) Is fsi ll Paqe 6 of 6 j .. \i ”* i I- .C i" ; '1 ■ :;i 1 iiv II ■f.- .'•J ?»II ' V I' CITY 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) PROPERTY LOCATION Site Address (^(r ^ f‘u^ rr ^ K A-_ _ _ _ _ _ _ #1^1 Property Identification Number (P. I. D.) P 1 ~7 3 C 0 «^/ J~oi~ 13)6 At'K Attach legal description to application if not included on required survey. , 01/26/90 CITY OF QRm cm APPLICANT Naune . Phone (home ) ^ ^ >j Phone (work) H'0¥ C< fy Address:City: />fh _ zip: / OWNER (if different than applicant) Naune .______________ Phone (home) Phone (work) Address:'City:,Zips, Date Property Acquired (month/year) I (do) Cdo not!) also own the adjacent parcels of land PRESENT USE OF PROPERTY Present Zoning District _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ Present Use of Property _ _ _ _’—" _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __Residential Other (specify) DESCRIPTION OP REQUEST Estimated Construction Cost $ / ^ Describe request in detail: £«^nVi^yPg^ct4-^_ _ _ ___ _ _ VARIANCES REQUIRED _ _ _ Lot Area Setback Variances ( Other Lot Width Front X Hardcover Side Rear) HARDSHIP Describe undue hardship or practical difficulty resulting from strict enforcement of zoning regulations; xs «. |J«p-eo LJIifrJO tr Yc? P/ltnny\ UJa^t'ci(St^ DESCRIPTION OP UNUSUTIL PROPERTY CONDITIONS Describe unusual property conditions preventing compliance with Zoning Code Requirements cf=~ L^r Oc)«*S ^<r>r r^cLoco _ _ _ REQUIRED SUBMITTALS 1. Completed Application Form 2. Certified Property Owners List of owners within 150' (you must obtain " this list from Ilernepin County Department of Finance A-603 Govt Center 348-3271). 3. Plat Map (obtained with property owners list). 4. Certificate of survey (signed by a licensed surveyor) to include hardcover calculations as required. 5. Topographic survey (existing and proposed elevations) if any changes in existing grade are proposed. 6. Sketches or plans of floor and elevation views. 7. As an addendum to this application, please attach a separate list of any other persons you wish notified of this application. 8. Additional items as may be requested by City staff. 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 variance application is not complete if the £d>ove information has not been included. Certification by Clerical Department that Variance Application is complete Initialed by 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 consultant expenses incurred in review of this application, and certifies that the infoimation supplied is true and correct to the best of his/her knowledge. Applicant's Signature^^^w Date /”■ '-^OoOWNERS SIGNATURE The owner hereby ackowledges and agrees to this application and further authorizes reasonabl.. entry onto the property by City staff, consultants, agents. Commission members, and Council members for purposes of investiga tion and verification of this request. Owner's Signature Date Applicant must have all submittals into the City offices 25 days before the Planning Commission Meeting. Planning Commission Meetings are held on the third Monday of each month. Applicants must be present at all scheduled review meetings of the Planning Commission and Council. If an applicant is unable to attend a scheduled meeting, please make arrangements to have an authorized agent attend in your place and to advise the Building & Zoning Office of this change prior to the meeting. ffr.Gut.AR MFrn:J(5 of the owono . October 13* ^FARf^'iCt ^J€A5 C r BC* Point Rood ^h«rloo Ooofioy •to AMARD •2-1 ft R2-2 RCSCCUTtON |14?< Nodiand Associates t2-l Casco Point Road* for - varlanco to eonotfuct a gara |«. Mr. Cowney was prosont to discuss Ms varlanco .application. Discussion Included hardcover and t'jr»r aund in addition to the Actin'! Mayar But'ar oovad* Mure aacondod* ta iporn/e Charles Oo»#ney*s, 24«5 Caaco Point Road, har l:.»ver inJ straot* front, and alda aatbaek variances to permit the construction of a noo d*ti"rJv*l aara^c as follows: 1, Hardcover varlanco for additional hardcover of n or sq. ft, 2. A aide netback of l,S*. 1. Frjnt/street setback to be determined by staff. Buildlnq Xnapector has confirmed a setback of 1’ from o«k traa. yo*ion. Ayes {3) - Mays (fl)» Ci ty Enq Ineer Cov,k reviewed ulth the City the bid tabulations for the S2-X R"^.*^** inprnv-nvcnt projects ststln? that Nodiand «*r^> th. l,wbl*l,r for th, »«,r ,nd Wit-f ptoj-rct »na th,t V«u,y MV to, 1, bidder for the street project, tnqlneer Cook ilso explained the necessity of an addendum II for the sewer and water project. Murr noved, Fraho seconded, to adopt Resolution 3H2dp A Resolution Accepting Bid And Ordarinj improvenent, Navarre Sower ft weter Improvements Project to Nodiand Aasoelatei, to Include A Mindum II, with the option of the -n not award th® contract If he deemt It not .idvisable. Motion, Ayes C3) - Hays (•), HARDCOVER CALCUWTIOfI WORKSHEET ^ Sc..'BACK ZONE: (circle cne ) Co-'j^ 75-250' 250-500' 5C0-1CC0' Existing Hardcover in Zone A. H ouse Z2.Z LENGTH /2.3 #■* * / s.F. 70 I S.F. 3. Garage c. D riveway s.F. s.F. s.F. D..,Sidewalk _X 2.^ y s,s X ________ S.F. s.F. 9 i\ S _____________ s.F. E. /7. / D eck ^ ^ tj X y S. 3 3 F . La )ID^A?E 2 X /• S'X t. S T^dA4>tioP '//fXXCa^f V X 2 Ias Vic IHEETING X UN^RLAIN AR U B _____________ S.F. € /(^9:3 s.F. V* ^ s.F. S.F. 2. 2- s.F. CPA^e, CctrrfA / 9 G. Other ________ X /. r Total Hardcover in Zone Total Property Area in Zone 7//. 7 -^[Tl 2?. 5 S.F. S.F. y^2>.y s.F. ViV^S.F.B X 100 /3.97 % C. HARDCOVER CALCUUTIOtl WORKSHEET ?"?c- SETBACK zone: (CIRCLE ctiE)Co^ 75-250' 250-500' 500-1000' Existing Hardcover in Zone A, Z 2 s2.X /2.3 =277. /s.F. LENGTH X WIDTH s S.F. X / S.F. X S.F. X s S.. . G aragc X S.F. r. H r[VPWAY X s:S.F. X =S.F. n. ^rnPWAi ^ ' Z V X 2^0 s S.F. / 2 7 V s.s ■?y. = i X 3 S.F. X 3 S.F. ^ E. 2'A'T+o//c-V*r /7. /y X S, 3 2 ss .3 — \ o S.F. c^A^c rc^a f- p.l AVjn«;rAPP 2 X /. 5 “ >^ /. 5*s V.P u.nSrlai»Vx 2 2 2. 2. ;r S.F.' IZas Vic- -SHEETING X rs . S.F. X _S.F. Cc4rrfA / 9 /. 5*j=2 2.5 G. O ther X = _. S.F. fKC>^ i^‘\ Total H ardcover in Zone Total Property Area in Zone HSoo '7l2-.'7 s.F. WSao s.F.B 7//-7 4 B X 100 - ^ - / s'. C. aocuA^eYHARDCOVER CALCULATION WORKSHEET SETBACK zone: (CIRCU c:iE) 0-75' (^^^250 250-500- 500-1000' Existing Hardcover in Zone X J<f- ^ = /y.Tv. y s.F, e-f-'iji:4 ft A. H ouse LENGTH WIDTH Pl57^ •X a S.F. X .S.F. q. fiAPAr,?Z€. 2 X 2y. 2.a S.F. C. ^lACkrcP fjP f VPWAY X a 22s S.F. X a S.F. D..:S tDEWALis ‘/?X 7.5 a <.'3 S.F. . m /at 7. S'? yj. s 0 ?ft X 2.^a /oe. y S.F. y c U»JiLL X /a /3o S.F. E.^ATIO/HO y /Ho 3eck X =3 .3i5 S.F. />(=^CK . -S2.5 p 1 <?«P X A /=S 9<. 9 S.F. AREAS zc s UN DERUGIN qv X a 20 0 S.F. PLASTIC SHEETING X a S.F. V C/. 5“r H3 X a S.F. c////y x> (r 7. 9 y /. 7 -(T. C 6. 1DtHPR ca4,c.7 X / c ** _jr 6 S.F. Total Hardcover IH Zone 9?9o./S.F, Total P roperty Area ih Zone 73 2 5 S.F. a / .•#R yjzs-X 100= -s-7>. B HARDCOVER CALCULATION WORKSHEET C. OOCu,\yfY SETBACK ZC.-,E= (CIRCLE ONE) 0-75' (glD 250-500' 500-1000 Existing Hardcover in Zone X c-r-tiz ^ 4- A. House 3S.I - /»■$• V.y S.F. LENGTH (ff y. Uif*nWIDTH V ^ -30 ^^ S.F. 3. Garage ^lACkr JRIVEWAY ^^ACk rtf^ c. Dr X 2y. X __________ Da S idewalk /C?f X V 3.S 7. 5- 2. ^ C ^ ^cck u^ALt ^ / y (} X E. P atio / V ^ / Deck /^Ar/s>____________________A --------- C / F.Landscape areas UNDERLAIN 3Y I . PLASTIC SHEETING A ( 2 S V _ _ X c/. r c////MA^(r G. Other <*‘*-'<1 j>. 9 X /• 7 7 V___ X A < Total Hardcover in Zone M 3 /I Total P roperty A rea in Zone 5=1-7?.T).^ 5.F.// /, ^ ^ 63 o_ S.F. S.F. >0 *V 6'i S.F. S.F. Aiis.F. f3 o 3i5 SZ5 9 A ? ZC 5 Zoo S.F. S.F. S . F .\ >« ^ S.F."^ S.F. S.F. (T. ^ S.F. y ^90. / S.F. 73 2 5 S.F.B ^31^ X100 = _-s'^- T’.i::— % '^777. / minutes of ORONO council meeting held APRIL 9. 1990 #1493 CHUCK DOWNEY 2665 CASCO POINT ROA VARIANCE RESOLOTWN^^^n^y was present for the review of his variance application. Bernhardson pro'.ded a brief history of this property, as well la information rjgcrdinq what is currently proposed. Mr Downey comme.’ted that though he had agreed to the Planning c™sion-s^^r,uO^^^^^^^^^ tiJd“x^^m aTal guy” because hardcover on my property Th*. sidewalk leading to the house was put in at the same time the garage was constructed. The City Building “g® the% and%aw%hat I was doing. There was a survey the benefits of having a driveway versus an ent.y addition. Mabusth stated that staff ^ad suggested to Mr. Downey th^ ^^c^l^d^^n u-dat^fruU “/^«Vbustr:ot^^^^^ ”ori dech tLt was constructed without a '>°®® appear on the survey submitted with the application. Mr Downey stated that if there was a 4% or 5% difference in the amount of existing hardcover, it should not matter. Mabusth indicated that 4% or 5% would make a significant difference. Councilmember Goetten indicated that an updated survey is ^fk:r;7. D^°:nerif-^h^d f:1a%”t Int^u^t^eV the second story deck with no permit. Mabusth stated that Mr. Downey ^ad indicated that the second storv deck was included in the application to 9 . MabuLh informed the Council that she had reviewed that application and it applied only to the garage. Mr. Downey added that it was his understanding that his - 4 - MINUTES OF ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD APRIL 9, 1990ZONING FILE #1493-DOWNEY CONTINUED contractor had obtained all of the necessary permits to construct the garage and the deck. Mabusth asked City Engineer Cook if the gravel area on the property would provide a sufficient turn around. Cook indicated that the turn around would almost have to be on Casco Point Road to be effective. Mabusth noted that the addition of the entry would only increase hardcover 30 s.f. because it is placed over existing sidewalk and a step area. It was moved by CounciImember Goetten to approve the hardcover variance in accordance with Planning Commission recommendation to maintain hardcover at 45%. Also, the boathouse is a non-conforming building and is subject to all pertinent ordinances. There was no second. Councilmember Nettles asked staff if they were satisfied with the present status of the second story deck, or would they prefer to explore that further. Mabusth replied that staff would proceed in accordance with Council direction. She commented that it is always difficult for staff to accurately evaluate an application without an updated survey. Mabusth suggested amending the Resolution to advise the applicant bhat an updated survey will be required for any future improvements to this property. Mr. Downey stated that he would be coming back to the City in one month to apply for a permit for retaining walls. Mr. Downey said that due to the improvements to the neighboring property, he now has serious erosion problems. Mabusth asked Mr. Downey if he would be willing to combine the retaining wall application with this variance application. Mr. Downey stated that originally he had intended to do that. In order that he might proceed as quickly as possible with the entryway project, staff advised him to submit separate applications. Mabusth suggested that this application be tabled and allow the applicant to submit a fully amended application including a conditional use permit for land alterations. She asked Mr. Downey to submit a fully updated survey with that application. Callahan noted that in light of adding the conditional use permit, the application would have to be reviewed by the Planning Commission. - 5 - J MINUTES OF ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD '^’RIL 9, 1990 rr ZONIMG FILE #1493-DOWNEY CONTINUED It was moved by Councilmember Nettles, seconded by Councilmember Peterson, to refer this matter back to the Planning Commission pending the receipt of a comprehensive application with an updated survey. Hanson noted that the Planning Commission would approve of the recommendation. Bernhardson stated that staff would review the second story deck issue and that the fee for the revised application would be calculated as though Mr. Downey had originally submitted a comprehensive application. Motion, Ayes-5, Nays-0, Motion passed. #1494 FRANCIS S. LIGHTLY 3585 FREDERICK STREET VARIANCES Mr. and Mrs. Lightly were present for this matter. Bernhardson briefly explained the applicants' original and revised proposal to construct an addition, a pool and patio. Mr. Lightly explained the two lines that have been drawn to depict the average lakeshore setback. Mayor Grabek asked if the neighbors (Braaten and McLeod, 3565 Frederick Street) were still objecting to the Lightlys' proposal. Mr. 'Lightly replied, "We discussed our original plan with them and' had reached an agreement with them. If we placed landscaping along the lot line, we coulc* overc: Me their objection to seeing the structure itself. We have since revised our plan so that the structure is setback an additional 13 feet." Mayor Grabek asked if the neighbors were aware of the revised plan. Mr. Lightly stated that the neighbors have not seen the revised plan. Mabusth noted that only the pool and patio would encroach into the average lakeshore setback area. Goetten stated that the purpose of the average lakeshore setback Ordinance is to prevent structure from obstructing the views of adjacent neighbors. She said that a pool would not obstruct any views of the lake. It was moved by Councilmember Goetten, seconded by Councilmember Nettles, to give conceptual approval to allow 42.5% hardcover to exist in the 75-250' setback area and to approve the average lakeshore setback variance, per staff recommendation. Motion Ayes-5, Nays-0, Motion passed. - 6 - DATE: 08/19/90 TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN: IT WAS BROUGHT TO MY ATTENTION, THAT THERE MAY BE CONCERN REGARDING THE SETBACK OF CHUCK DOWNEY'S DECK. I WOULD LIKE TO INFORM YOU THAT WE HAVE NO CONCERN ABOUT THE PRESENT STRUCTURE. IN ADDITION, THE DECK IS NOT RESTRICTING TO OUR VIEW AND WE HAVE NO PROBLEM WITH THE LOCATION OF THE DECK. IF YOU NEED FURTHER INFORMATION OR HAVE ANY QUESTIONS PLEASE CALL. SINCERELY, TY-BHeB’ . J J Vt • . Vf.^'4 ,.......................•, .* • ,■■■*«•-•“ * ' ‘ . •*.• . * *.• •yx." y.,> ;.v ‘''‘ir* -'> ■11*• -.. - ' / “ ■• • ' ^' -■-.'•■ ■" -- . . . * *' ’ *.. .. }r> • ’T. ■ ■•■ : • • • . • * .«■•V • • *•.■“, vS'JMXiSffi! ‘ • ■ . .... '>• ,•■ ' .J •v..;. •'v;;r;.^^.v;',:^-.r j ■ ' .'... -.■ . -. • . • .•«..->.•■■..■■ ... • • ■ .' ••.. ■ ■ - .: ■ ', *, .' ’• . * , V'._ V . . .•■ .■■ ■ ■•. ■' ■••<. j«•*.■.<'iv.X" <1 . .'■ ....................■ —‘. ■ * •: i I 4 \ \ ''I ■ / ‘ I y\i I -j n S •o •I .1 5 ul \) Proa: Date: Subject: • i<avi Mayor Grabek & Orono Council Members 1 fM Planning Commission Chairman Kelley 'i ^ ‘ Orono Planning Commission Members City Administrator Bernhardson Ljjy OF OfiQfjQ Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building & Zoning Administrator September 4, 1990 1556 Gerald Nelson, 1629 Bohn’s Point Road - Variance - Resolution At the August 27th Council meeting, members accepted applicant’s amended proposal that proposes removal of approximately 60 s.f. of existing paved hardcover within the driveway area and the removal of approximately 200 s.f. of landscape area underlain with porous fabric in exchange for approximately 65 s.f. of new structural hardcover to be placed over existing non-structura1 hardcover. Council members accepted the hardships set forth by the applicant in his letter of August 21, 1990. Council conceptually approved the variance application and directed staff to draft the appropriate resolution for action at their September 10th meeting. The enclosed resolution is presented for Council's review and action. A RBSOLDTION GRANTING A VARIANCE TO MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 10.22, SUBDIVISION 2 PILE 1556 WHEREAS, Gerald and Barbara Nelson (hereinafter "the applicants") are owners of the property located at 1629 Bohn's Point Road within the City of Orono (hereinafter "City") and legally described as follows: Tract A, Registered Land Survey 565, Hennepin County, Minnesota (hereinafter "the property"); and WHEREAS, the applicants have applied to the City for a variance to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.22, Subdivision 2 to permit construction of a closet that would add approximately 65 s.f. of structural hardcover within the 75-250' setbacJc area where 5,776 s.f. or 30.6% non-structura1 and structural hardcover exists. The proposed closet addition will be placed over existing non-structura1 hardcover resulting in no overall increases in hardcover within the 75-250' setback area. Minnesota : NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono, FINDINGS 1. This application was reviewed as Zoning File 1556. 2. The property is located in the LR-lB Single Family Lakeshore Residential Zoning District. 3. The Orono Council reviewed the applicants amended proposal on August 27, 1990, and recommended conceptual approval of the proposed variance based upon the following findings and hardships: a) There is no basement or second floor for this residence and storage space is at a premium. b) The exterior door that will be removed to accomodate the closet appears to serve no real exit function in the context of this single level residence. Page 1 of 5 c) A closet addition will be placed over existing non- structural hardcover resulting in no overall increase in hardcover within the 75-250* setback area. 4. 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. 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 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. CONCLOSIONS, ORDEP AND CONDITIONS Based upon one or more of the above findings, the Orono City Council hereby grants a variance to the Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.22, Subdivision 2 to permit the construction of a closet addition at approximately 65 s.f. in area subject to the following conditions: 1. Applicant shall remove approximately 60 s.f. of existing paved hardcover from the driveway and approximately 200 s.f. of landscaped area underlain with porous fabric as shown on Page 5 of this resolution. Existing hardcover within the 75-250* setback area would be reduced to 5,716 s.f. or 30.2% for an overall reduction of .4%. 2. Authorities granted by this variance run with the property not with the applicant, but are permissive only and must be exercised by application for a building permit within one year of the date of Council approval, or this variance will expire on that date (September 10, 1991). Page 2 of 5 3. Violation of or non-compliance with any of the terms and conditions of this variance shall constitute a violation of the zoning code, shall automatically terminate any authority granted herein, and shall be punishable as a misdemeanor. 4.The undersigned applicant has read, understood and hereby agrees to the terms of this resolution and on behalf of himself, his heirs, successors and assigns, hereby agrees to the recording of this reso3ution in the chain of title of the property. Adopted by the Orono City Council on this 10th day of September, 1990. ATTEST: Dorothy M. Hallin, City Clerk James R. Grabek, Mayor Property Owner(s) STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) SS. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this 10th day of September, 1990, by James R. Grabek & 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 My Commission Expires Page 3 of 5 STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) SS. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) On this day of 199 before me a Notary Public within and for said county, personally appeared _ __ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ known to me to be the person(s) described Tn and who executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that he (they) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed. NOTARY PUBLIC MY COMMISSION EXPIRES STATE OF MINNESOTA ) )SS. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) On this _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ day of _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ r 199 , before me a Notary Public within and for said County, personaTly appeared _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ known to me to be the person(s) described in and who executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that he (they) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed. NOTARY PUBLIC MY COMMISSION EXPIRES Page 4 of 5 •• :'o ri^mjm^g is:&rfdi ^ !;^ ' - ^““Hen • ^ * ---Tr. ... • ' .* - » . ‘•*“^.« "NoXvj;l: • *-.••• •• .'"*■ • *. ■ ‘ ■:VZ - f — •• •—*---- - . ^... , ................................. - ____ £_L. _ (y\^ ■7 y/z-°/ <>ji ■(sVTivs-/^0Cou«ft- \ Y ^ . •=• ~S7 7&‘<^ ^ o' \ ^ I ## ^4 ■' ^/ ••■'■ di 1'^c 3 01o|>0'I«o /yA^feO Ci'0(/««K^ T^U 77^ 4^w;su^ ?J^.-i7 ofo^'oo /Y/fftO ci-0(/««K^ T^U : ^ Y ^0X7 • - ^ 7 ^_3£^;;? P ’ 'i ■ ■. •• irker :a Level COFFI Engin Long - nj.- ..‘^ :.— -■’■rPcu^jT^rJs ‘ • ^* • ■-_ _ •.*• ■•« •» _u ■.------- , - . 1111 ai MB.* .»- • • -"i.-'r*: f ^ ' Mayor Grabek & Crone Council Members Planning Commission Chairman Kelley Orono Planning Commission Members City Administrator Bernhardson mmSEP 10 1990 '7 / CITY OF ORONO ProBs Jeanne A. Mabusth» Building & Zoning Administrator Date: July 12, 1990 Subject: 11561 Christine Beck, 3820 Cherry Avenue - Variances - Public Hearing Soning District - LR-IC Total Area * 30,540 s.f. or .7 acres Required * 21,780 s.f. Pertinent Ordinances - Section 10.22, Subdivision 1 - Lakeshore setback for proposed deck extension within 75* of the lakeshore protected area. Existing - 27* (stairs leading from lakeshore deck approved variance #1172, 9/14/87) Existing - 37*4" (existing 5* overhang along lakeside of house) Existing Cantilevered Lakeside Addn * 39*8" Proposed Deck Extension * 37* (deck addn will extend ^ 4" b^'yond 5* overhang) Setback Variance * 38' or 50.6% Existing Variance Approved for Deck/Stai 48 or b4% Section 10.22, Subdivision 2 - Lakeshore hardcover within 0- 75'.0-75* Setback Area » 11,250 s.f. Original Hardcover Approved with Variance Application #1172 - 1,751.5 s.f. or 15.5% Adjusted Hardcover Level Based on Overhang Width at 5* Rather than 4* as Originally Measured *= 1,774 s.f. or 15.7% (increase of 22.5 s.f.) Proposed Hardcover * 1,804.4 s.f. or 16% (includes deck area not included beneath existing 5* overhang - 23.5* of addn deck at 4** and 1* extension of deck as it extends to the edge of house increase in hardcover of 30.4 s.f.) Zoning File #1561 July 12, 1990 Page 2 of 3 List of Exhibits Exhibit A - Exhibit B - Exhibit C - Exhibit D Exhibit E Exhibit F Exhibit G Exhibit H Exhibit I Exhibit J Exhibit K Application Property Owners List Plat Map Deck/Stair Plan Approved #1172 Planning Commission Minutes 8/17/87 Council Minutes 9/14/87 Site Plan Section/Existing/Cantilevered Lakeside Addition Plus Overhang Section/Proposed/Dec.' with Overhang Survey Staff Sketch Review of Application #1172 - Ajplicant received approval for a lakeside deck and stair structure within the 0-75' setback area resulting in a total reduction of 55.1 s.f. of hardcover. The majority of the deck was placed over existing hardcover improvements such as the foundations of a former attached structure and a patio area and the removal of a storage structure consisting of 242 s.f. of hardcover located within 15' of the lakeshore. Staff can confirm that all necessary hardcover removals have been completed. Review of Current Application - As noted above, hardcover calculations within 0-75' setback area have been adjusted as it was determined that the total overhang along the lakeside of the house is at a 5' width rather than 4'. The applicant now proposes the removal of a 2'8"x22.5' cantilevered lakeside addition and the extension of the 5'4" deck along the complete lakeside of the house (5'4"x23'6"). Total increase of hardcover within the 0-75' setback area with the installation of the deck will be 30.4 s.f. as deck will extend 4" beyond existing 5' overhang and will extend 23H* rather than the existing 22h'. The setback of the deck will be now at 37' where the existing overhang was 37'4". The proposed deck extension will continue to have the 5' overhang (review Exhibit I). Options of Action - Denial. If the application is to be denied, please refer to the necessary findings in the variance sections of the code; or Zoning File #1561 July 12, 1990 Page 3 of 3 Approval. Staff has noted the following findings for consideration in your recommendation: 1. The deck extension along the front of the house will provide less of a visual impact and will be less intense in structure than the existing structure. Expansion will result in minima? I hardcover increases and encroachment into the lakeshore protected area. 2. The applicant's son has advised that the existing deck has served his elderly mother, but askes for the extension to provide a shaded deck area as existing deck remains in the sun throughout the majority' of the day. Mr. Beck has also provided photographs o a portion of the structure under consideration for review j members at your meeting. Staff would suggest the following conditions for consideration: 1. Removal of 30.4 s.f. of existing hardcover to offset new aditional hardcover from proposed deck expansion. 2. Applicant is placed on notice that no further structural improvements to the structure located within the 75' setback area is allowed without Council approval. Additional Cownents and Planning Comniission Recommendation - August 30, 1990 The application involves approval of a 4" extension into the lakeshore yard for an extension of the lakeside of the existing deck. The deck expansion will replace the cantilevered addition of the existing residence. This section will be removed and a new outer wall replaced and a deck extended along the front of the house. In consideration of the condition to remove the boat house of some 240 s.f. within her lakeshore yard with an earlier land use application in 1987, staff felt it appropriate to not require the removal of approximately 30 s.f. of existing hardcover to allow for the increase of hardcover within the 0- 75'. The applicant had suggested removal of an existing paved area. In light of the age of the applicant who uses this side walk, staff strongly recommended that no existing hardcover be removed and to approve the additional 30 s.f. of hardcover. The Planning Commission accepted the staff recommendation. The enclosed resolution has been drafted for Council's review and action. A RBSOLDTION GRANTING VARIANCES TO MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 10.22, SUBDIVISIONS 1 PILE #1561 & 2 WHEREAS, Christine Beck (hereinafter "the applicant") is the owner of the property located at 3820 Cherry Avenue within the City of Orono (hereinafter "City") and legally described as Lots 3, 4, and 5, Block 3, Crystal Bay View, Hennepin County, Minnesota (hereinafter "the property"); and WHEREAS, the applicant has applied to the City for variances to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.22, Subdivisions 1 and 2 to permit an expansion of a lakeside deck that will extend 37' from the shoreline instead of the reouired 75' resulting in 30 square feet of additional hardcover, resulting in a total of 1,804.4 square feet or 16% of hardcover within the 0-75' setback area where none is allowed. MOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono, Minnesota: FINDINGS 1. This application was reviewed as Zoning File #1561. 2. The property is located in the LR-IC Single Family Lakeshore Residential Zoning District requiring 1/2 acre in area. The property consists of 30,540 s.f. or .7 acres. 3. The Orono Planning Commission reviewed this application on August 20, 1990 and recommended approval of the proposed variance based upon the following findings: A) The deck extension along the front of the house will provide less of a visual impact and is less intense in structure than the portion of the existing structure to be removed. B) Expansion will result in minimal hardcover increases (30 s.f.) and encroachment into the lakeshore protected area (4"). Page 1 of 3 1 4. The City Council has considered this application including the findings and recommendations of the Planning Commissionr reports by City staff, comments by the applicant and the effect of the proposed variance 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 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. CONCLUSIONS, 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, Subdivisions 1 and 2 to permit lakeside expansion along the front line of the house of an existing deck that will encroach 4" into the lakeshore setback area and result in an increase of 30.4 square feet of additional hardcover. This approval is subject to the following conditions; 1. Authorities granted by this resolution run with the property not with ti.a applicant, but are permissive only and must be exercised by application for a building permit within one year of the date of Council approval, or this variance will expire on that date (September 10, 1990). 2. Violation of or non-compliance with any of the terms and conditions of this variance shall constitute a violation of the zoning code, shall automatically terminate any authority granted herein, and shall be punishable as a misdemeanor. 3. The undersigned applicant has read, understood and hereby agrees to the terms of this resolution and on behalf of herself, her heirs, successors and assigns, hereby agrees to the recording of this resolution in the chain of title of the property. Page 2 of 3 Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota at a regular me2ting held on the 10th day of September, 1990. ATTEST: Dorothy M. Hallin, City Clerk James R. Grabek, Mayor Property Owner(s) STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) SS. COUNTY OP HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this 10th day of September 1990, by James R. Grabek & 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. STATE OP 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 scime as his (their) free act and deed. Notary Public Page 3 of 3 -f ^ ^CITY OF ORONO - VARIANCE APPLICATION | ^ | Initial Application Fee $175.00 ($50.00 per each additional variance) Renewal Variance Fee $100.00 (no change from original application) After-the-Fact Fees (Double application fee) PROPERTY LOCATION Site Address ^ Av^ Property Identification Number (P.I.D.)_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ m' Attach legal description to application if not included on required survey. ______________________ APPLICANT Phone (home) 4~ll~74CiL) Name CUgivrirte. C^-/-t. Phone (work)____-------------------- Address; *7 City; HCXTlO_________ Zip; tltflO------------ OWNER (if different than applicant) Phone (home) ______ Name T L-t(?^ __________________ P^one (work)___^----------------- Address; -ry7/0 rAi^tL City; _______Zip; hia^a --------- Date Property Acquired 1 ^4(.y_ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ (month/year) I (do) (do not) also own the adjacent parcels of land. PRESENT USE OF PROPERTY Present Zoning District __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ___ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ Present Use of Property _ _ _ ___ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _^Reeid^tial^ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Other (specify) _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST Estimated Construction Cost $ ? ’SoP. _ Describe request in detail; P(Fn/^L>£. hUiSL (X,^eA4AciL, LgAcg fikpa 1 h F,n/t^k*q Qgcg, UKCSL Ssiny ^>£. CnOtO- ^rxs^ VARIANCES REQUIRED _ _ _ Lot Area _ _ _ Lot Width Hardcover Setback Variances ( ^ Front _ _ _ Side _ _ _ Rear) Other _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ___ _ _ _ _ _ _—- - - - - — I ■ . » ■ARDSHXP Describe undue hardship or practical difficulty resulting from strict enforcement of zoning regulations; At-g.gAQv:"m^ <>m40^ Oz/:^ AflgA QtV^.TC^c^gl_______________________________________________—------- DESCRIPTION OF UNUSUAL PROPKRTY CONDITIONS Describe unusual property conditions preventing compliance with Zoning Code Requirements; Tw6. 5ot Al-ts Amq (Ah O 6^** A.P7*3rj> REQUIRED SUBMITTALS 1. Completed Application Form 2. Certified Property Owners List of owners within 150* (you must obtain this list from Hennepin County Department of Finance A-603 Govt Center 348-3271). 3. Plat Map (obtained with property owners list). 4. Certificate of survey (signed by a licensed surveyor) to include hardcover calculations as required. 5. Topographic survey (existing and proposed elevations) if any changes in existing grade are proposed. 6. Sketches or plans of floor and elevation views. 7. As an addendum to this application, please attach a separate list of any other persons you wish notified of this application. 8. Additional items as may be requested by City staff. YOU ARB REQUIRED TO SUPPLY 30 COPIES OP LARGE DOCUMENTS OR_ _ A NORXING COPY (ll* X 17* OR SMALLER) FOR ALL DOCUMENTS SUBMITTED. The Applicant and Property Owner must sign this application. Please remember that voor variance application is not complete if the_above infomation has not been included. Certification by Clerical Department that Variance Application is complete. Initialed by Clerical Staff _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Date_ __ _ _ _ _ _ APPLICANT'S SIGNATURE . . ^ j ^The applicant hereby agrees to provide all information required or requested by the Zoning Administrator, agrees to pay additional fees (staff time not covered by original fee payment) and/or consultant expenses incurred in review of this application, and certifies that the information supplied is true and correct to the best of his/her knowledge. Applicant's Signature _ _ _ _ _ _ _Data —- - - -- ONNBRS SIGNATURE The owner hereby ackowledges and agrees to this application and further authorizes reasonable entry onto the property by City staff, consultants, agents. Commission members, and Council members for purposes of investiga tion and verification of this request. Owner's Signature ^ ___________________ Date _______^ Applicant must have all submittals into the City offices 25 days before the Planning Commission Meeting. Planning Commission Meetings are held on the third Monday of each month. Applicants must be present at all scheduled review meetings of the Planning Commission and Council. If an applicant is unable to attend a scheduled meeting, please make arrangements to have an authorized agent attend in your place and to advise the Building & Zoning Office of this change prior to the meeting. s I i hEs» m :S 5: r £ lu . t* 2212*S 2H==3, i 225*•S-Si j8 s5::s^ #Xl72 s •« »,«s III *!t 2 8 S 5 1 •i ll ?! 2i =. »* |*t 25 SjS i2*5 » *;r!.| s255§$ 25s"5, i=h;| filial ii?-5 iiHH8 • B a 8 B i • 5 is.lifa ;!lssi•< a _ — a•is*"! • 8 8 ,.l 2« _ •5 S ■»« «< • 'Is::* 25 L--3. J *e!* ®5"s^3• a •* t 65 s = " iSH25 5 55 • 9 2a?-i. llA\lrirA^ 2af«5i T -.Ji SaaS^a 5 - = - Ss5,*?si ?,!:!! ^ • • « - ? 8 2 B 4 8 fi L5!h hU: -zzi:- S • .» 5 ! i *4 U. i sil? s 1 ^UU i!ei = s--° ' »:j§h t 5 2 iia ! |M itllA 5i im i !s• rs* = 5I = ,: =518= =:ii 8 ib"a S .2.'.i f!:5 * - »»X s m ' ISii I > llli I’-!|1'25 *2“=-2 _ • • — - 8 • c a ^ B Ihl L.i- e t -I r r:' w o % Vi •’t •1 ^MSC 2 L-_ i « M'MUTits or TVS PLAimxiic coMussioH murrmo uiu> iuicus? 19I7 • lO&i UAMSO« COUTlMJn Carol laiQuayt 2010 North Shoro Drive, owner of property ebuttinq the Meneon property, voiced concern that the Hanaon/Colden lot line redefinition altered her property line accordinq the Molas Knutaon aurvey aha received. Chalraan Pel ley adviaed Na. LaQuay to contact the aurveyora and attorneya involved if ahe felt there was a problea with her property line Iccation. haalatant Zoninq Adainiatrator Caftron explained to Me. LaQuay the Maneon/Colden lot line redefinition in which he felt did not affect the LaQuay property line in any way. heqaxdinq the proposed location of the qaraqe. Bellows stated that althouqh there are alternative locations, ahe felt the propoaed location waa the easiest and beat alternative notinq that the propoaed qaraqe did not abut another structure nor waa a fire hatard. Johnson concurred with Bellows findinq that the proposed location of qaraqe causeo lo liqht enfrinqeeent on Mrs. Golden's garden due to the i.xe of lota. Planning Connissioners Hanson and Cohen felt the 10* Bneback should be aaintained due to the opposition by Mrs. Golden. There were no other cooBcnts fro* the public. Xt was noved by Cohan, seconded by Planning Coaaisaioner Hanson, to deny the variance recoausendinq that the 10' Bide setback be aaintained per ataff recouendation. Motion, Ayes 2, Nays 4. Bellows, Johnson, Kelley, and Brown voted nay. Motion denied. It was Boved by Johnson, seconded by Chair«an Kelley, to reconnend approval of the variance of a side setback variance 9 ’ no less than i.4‘ as proposed findinq no light enfr 'gseent upon the Golden property. Motion, Ayes 4. May* 1. Cohen and Hanson voted nay. Motion carried. • 1172 CCBISTIMB BKK 3820 CUfeJtBy AVnUB VABIABCKS CONTINUATIOM OP PUBLIC BBABIBC 7:92-7158 Christine Beck and her this natter. 1 son, Janes Beck, were present for Zoning Adninistrator M.busth explained the request to construct a deck consisting of 454.4 a.f. of area. or r» eo«..„.o. „„ IU72 MKCB COMTIMUBO s*oi- .?.v.--o OHSH-•* ~1 lnd*.idu.U, ohich r,pXae,.Vli Ad p.“o*‘* •»'>•'»V «?t.*t7nd* "h.'At3!c‘Ait7n ‘,*JAm -------- r.eoo,.«d.tton? SotVoo.'ly.*'’:, • 1174 OUUC I.-------- SBOOIID MVXM Cc.i, Andorton .«. pr..«„t for thi. wittot. revimd Bkmtch «PPlleant andnesroU ?ra'' v;;« p “ :V‘?A;,".;^'„“rrdf!:; «-tAff. t.co.M«i«i lot "lAttor. cotr ro from tho public rooordinp thlo tccnnicAlly «•• uj'^Jho f.A create two flaq Ic • X ,irh * ifi ^ **••* Pi»"nin9 to She felt the io^ o TnnJ** Preaant nany i»roble«a. but would not autp " •“ **fwoi aupp.. ...a two flag lot aubdlvlaon. In response to tl.o . • configuration can Caffron stated ^ • subdivided It lef;.‘ . : .on of how this parcel of land'a Assistant Zoning Adalnlatrator when t.ia entire parcel waa .J back lot with two rectangular I miiims or M60UUI ORONO COO»«t. MBITIM 14* tM7 fiOSt <^U72) rMwv* th« drrinflria •«d/ot e«rr«ct th« ••ii*. S“24*{:: •.US.’"*** tMrraR9«*«nt. notion# Ayo4 5* ***y* ® niT^ODUSraR hiVtaBmt ir- umumm I2as)Chrlntlno Rock and hor ton, Jaood 9uck, ooro proaont far this Bottar. CUy Ad»l.l..r«.r USTt.'S hardcovar raduction of 5S.I ataira aay ba aneroachaant * Cou«ll~-b.r 0.-.t.» •-'* X*„'US w!a araat coneaaaion on tna applicant a par* thia varlanca. ;;;•.• 5:5,"t:-.‘.K:-K:2s“ •i'-Si'Sinconvanlant for hla aldarly aothar. variance aa propotad. Notion, hf— 5» n«y» tV*» ,«■■'• , ** ’ V '• ccv" . i •* * M- - ■ •w*' • rr \0 S^4w£.^ :zr I ’ rt^Co8u88g« 2§§§§S° "s-.-SS *2 111 I h : ■? ii ‘lif ■» s ‘-Mi|!i - j 2 i i-'^l ■Hi IJN r:?: r 3 2 Ii i 8 1 2 8 f J 8 ii e I I t 5 i % I I 5 I E r :• i ! i #1561 Mayor Grabek & Orono Council Members Planning Commission Chairman Kelley Orono Planning Commission Members City Administrator Bernhardson /o Proa: Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building & Zoning Administrator SEP 10 1990 Date: August 16, 1989 Subject: #1572 Guenther & Gertrud Noelting, 1060 Tonkawa Oh ORONO Variances - Public Hearing List of Exhibits Exhibit A - Application Exhibit B - Property Owners List Exhibit C - Plat Map Exhibit D - Survey Exhibit E - Resolution Approving Conditional Use Permit/ Variances Application #1131 Exhibit F - Section, Plan, Photo (existing dock section) Exhibit G - Detail on Section Pertinent Ordinance - Section 10.03, Subdivision 19 - Conditional use permit required for specific excavation work. Section 10.22, Subdivision 2 - Variance approval required for excavations and structure (tie phase within bank) proposed within 75' of the shoreline. Section 10.55, Subdivision 8 and 9(A)5 - Excavation or structures within 75' of the lake are not permitted except for seasonal docks. Review of Previous Application - Application #1131 was approved by Council in May 1987. The conditional use permit and variance application allowed the applicant to install a permanent dock section approximately 20'xll ’6'* cantilevered over the lakeshore supported by 3-2«* length ties to be installed within the lakeshore bank. The applicants chose this method as a permanent dock with pilings installed in 1984 was completely destroyed with the ice break of 1986. Refer to Exhibit D, unfortunately, the dock section was installed over the lot line of the adjacent property to the south. The owner has asked the Noeltings to remove the dock so that it conforms to all required setbacks. The current application involves the Noeltings request to install a new dock that now meets all required setbacks from the extension of the side lot lines. Note that the permanent dock section has been reduced to 6'xl2' no longer requiring a variance to the LMCD code, whereby a dock may exceed 6' excluding posts in either its length or width, but not both. Zoning File #1572 August 16, 1990 Page 2 of 2 The current amended application does require approval of the above referenced pertinent ordinances. In reviewing the existing dock section, staff's only comment would be that we would strongly recommend that the permanent dock section be installed such that the support beams be installed at a lower elevation within the lakeshore bank so that it appears to be a dock section rather than a deck section. Technically, because of the dimensions now proposed by the applicants, this structure can now be classified as a dock section. Once again, in the process of installing new access stairs, such stairs must be limited to the allowed 4' width. Options of Action - If approved, Planning Commission members may adopt the pertinent findings and conditions set forth in the approval resolution of 1987 (Exhibit E). If denied, please refer to the necessary findings in the conditional use permit and variance sections of your zoning code. Zoning File 1572 August 16, 1990 Page 2 of 2 The current amended application does require approval of the above referenced pertinent ordinances. In reviewing the existing dock section, staff's only comment would be that we would strongly recommend tha*^ the p^.rm^’^ent dock section be installed such that the support b* ms he installed at a lower elevation within the lakeshore bank so th=^t it appears to be a dock section rather than a deck section. Technically, because of the dimensions now proposed by the applicants, this structure can now be classified as a dock section. Once again, in the process of installing new access stairs, such stairs must be limited to the allowed 4' width. Options of Action - If approved. Planning Commission members may adopt the pertinent findings and conditions set forth in the approval resolution of 1987 (Exhibit E). If denied, please refer to the necessary findings in the conditional use permit and variance sections of your zoning code. Additional Cosnents and Planning Covaission Recoi September 4, 1990 mdation Please review the Planning Commission minutes of August 20, 1990 for background information on this review. Planning Commission members appeared receptive to the amended plans for the relocated permanent dock within the lakeshore of the property. Members concurred with staff's opinion that the existing permanent dock section appeared more as a deck rather than dock and asked that the new permanent dock section be installed at a lower elevation so as to conform with the section of the dock that extends lakeward. In addition, the Planning Commission advised that the new steps to be installed within the lakeshore bank are to meet the 4' wide standards recommended by the City. The Planning Commission recommended that the permanent dock section be installed at or below the 932.4 elevation (3 feet higher than OHM 929.4). The applicant's architect confirmed that this would be feasible. The Planning Commission recommended unanimous approval of the conditional use permit and variance application of the applicants. The enclosed resolution has been drafted per the Planning Commission's approval recommendation for Council's review and action. A RBSOLOTION GRANTING A CONDTIONAL USB PBRMIT PBR MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 10.03, SUBDIVISION 19 AND SECTION 10.55, SUBDIVISION 9 (B) (3) AND VARIANCES TO MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 10.22, SUBDIVISION 2 AND SECTION 10.55, SUBDIVISION 8 FILE 1572 WHEREAS, Guenther and Gertrud Noelting (hereinafter "the applicants) are the owners of the property located at 1060 Ton)cawa Road within the City of Orono (hereinafter "City") and legally described as Lot 1, Block 1, Ryanwood, Hennepin County, Minnesota (hereinafter "property"); and WHEREAS, the applicants have made application to the City of Orono to permit the installation of a permanent dock per Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.03, Subdivision 19 and Section 10.55, Subdivision 9 (B) (3) and variances to Section 10.22, Subdivision 2 and Section 10.55, Subdivision 8 to allow excavation of the lakeshore to permit the installation of support ties to maintain 6' x 12' dock section cantilevered from lakeshore bank; Minnesota: NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono, FINDINGS 1. This application was reviewed as Zoning File 1572. 2. The property is located in the LR-lB Single Family Lakeshore Residential Zoning District requiring 1 acre in area. The property consists of approximately 1 acre in area. 3. The Orono Planning Commission reviewed this application on August 20, 1990, and recommended approval of the proposed variances and conditional use permit as proposed based on the following findings and hardship: a. The applicants propose no change in exi^^ing bank elevations or with existing drainage patterns. Page 1 of 5 b. No permanent hardcover is proposed within the lakeshore protected area. c. The substructure/underground support ties are 5' to 6' below finished grade providing adequate treatment area for surface run-off. d. A permanent dock with pilings had been installed in 1984 and was destroyed in 1986 by the unuri u a 1 pressure/shifting of the ice along this portion of shoreline on Maxwell Bay. e. The applicant had received approval for a similar permanent dock section in 1987. The current proposal proposes a less intense and greatly reduced permanent dock section. 4. The City Council finds that the conditions existing on this property are peculiar to it and do not apply generally to other property in this zoning district; that granting the variance would not adversely affect traffic conditions, light, air nor pose a fire hazard or other danger to neighboring properties; 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 appli cant; and would be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan of the City. 5. The City Council finds that granting a conditional use permit to allow the installation of a permanent dock will not be detrimental to the health, safety or general welfare of the public, would not adversely affect light, air nor pose a fire hazard or other danger to neighboring properties, nor will it depreciate surrounding property values and that the proposed level of use of the property will be in keeping with the intent and objectives of the Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan of the City. COMCLOSIONS, ORDER AND CONDITIONS Based upon one or more of the above findings, the Orono City Council hereby grants variances to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.22, Subdivision 2 and Section 10.55, Subdivision 8 to allow the temporary alteration of land within the lakeshore protected area and Pr e 2 of 5 grants a conditional use permit for the installation of a permanent dock per Section 10.03, Subdivision 19 and Section 10.55, Subdivision 9 (B) (3), subject to the following conditions: 1. Permanent dock section to be installed such that it does not exceed a height of 932.4', 3' above the OHM elevation of Lake Minnetonka at 929.4', and access stairs extending to permanent dock section shall not exceed the allowed 4' in width. 2. Area of excavation to be backfilled with granular/sandy loam soils. City to approve the type of soils to be used in filling. 3. Authorities granted by this resolution run with the property not with the applicant, but are permissive only and must be exercised by application for a building permit within one year of the date of Council approval, or the special conditions of this resolution will expire on that date (September 10, 1991). 4. Violation of or non-compliance with any of the terms and conditions of this resolution shall constitute a violation of the zoning code, shall automatically terminate any authority granted herein, and shall be punishable as a misdemeanor. 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. Page 3 of 5 Adopted by the Orono City Council on this 10. h day of September, 1990. ATTEST: Dorothy M. Hallin, City Clerk James R. Grabek, Mayor Property Owner(s) STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) SS. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this 10th day of September, 1990, by James R. Grabek & 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 My Commission Expires Page 4 of 5 CITY OP ORONO - GENERAL LAND USE APPLI PROPERTY LOCATION Site Address i n^n Rn^ii_ _ _ - - - - -1-- - - Property Identification Number (P.I.D.) ^R-OR-l l 7 nm q ■■_-rrv nc OFFICE 10C02COOOO_ Please attach legal description to application if not ircluded 01 c-tA' on requiJ -d survey. . . . . APPLICANT Name m 708:4. Neil Weber Address 5111 Windsoi Road Phone (h jme) U7^-TTifi7 __Phone (work) 926-1156 __ City Mc’ind _____ Zip ^ s 364 OWNER (if different than applicant) Name Guenther & Gertr id Noeltine Address 1060 Tonkava Road_ _ _ _ _ Phone (home) Phone ^71-0221 City Orono Zip 5 5156 Date Property Acquired (month/year) I (do) (do not) also own the adjacent parcels of land. FEES - CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS - Renewal Fee - 1/2 Current Fee After-the-Fact Fee - Double Current Application Fee _ _ _ _ $ 50.00 For each varianro request with CUP application $125.00 Residential accessory Us. _ _ _ _ $150.00 Institutional (church, school, etc.) _ _ $150.00 Guest House/Guest Apartmencs _ _ _ _ $150.00 Duplex Credit/Bldg _ _ _ $250.00 Commercial/Indust.ri ’ Use __ _ _ $200.00 Land Alteration Grading and fillin’ Grading and fill''E'*/ Grading, seawall ;t -land or floodplain . .r more \s within 75' of laJteshore PRD/^ - see fee sche OTHER APPLIGATIONi _ _ _ _ $200.00 Commercial Site Plan Review (+ consultant fees) _ _ _ _ V 0.00 Vacation _ _ _ _ $175.00 Easement /acation $ 50.00 Easement Vacation with Subdivision _ _ _ _ $250.00 Rezening (PUD ~ refer to fee icheduie) _ _ _ _ $100.00 Appeals _ _ Other - see fee schedule PRBSSlfT OSB OF PROPERTY Present Zoning District Present Use of Property R 1 R 1 J J ^ >** *■\fr Residential Other (specify)_ DBSCRIPTIOH OP REQUEST Describe request ir detail: Amend previously granted conditional peffflit foL ’ dccJc ^.FlaLfoi. REQUIRED SUBMITTALS 1. Completed Application Form. . 2. Certified Property Owners List of owners within 350' (you can obtain this list from Tennepin County Department of Finance A-603 Government Center 34< 3. Plat Map. 4. Certificate of survey (signed by a licensed surveyor). 5. Topographic survey (existing and proposed contours) if land alterations involve changes in elevation (grades). 6. Construction plan, if applicable (see staff for requirements). 7. As an addendum to this application, please attach a separate list of any other persons you wish notified of this application. YOU ARB REQUIRED TO SUPPLY 30 COPIES OP LARGE DOCUMENTS OR A WORKING COPY (ll* X 17* OR SMALLER) FOR ALL DOCUMENTS SUBMITTED. The applicant and Property Owner must sign this application. Please remember that your application is not complete if the above information has not been included. Certification by Clerical Department that Land Use Application is complete. Initials of Clerical Staff:__________________________________ Date-------------------------- APPLICANT'S SIGNATURE Th, applicant hereby requested by the Zonir time not covered by c in review of this appl is true and correct to Applicant's signature -rees provide all information required or ist or, agrees to pay additional fees (staff fee payment) and/or unusual expenses incurred and certifies that the information supplied jest of higher )cnow''edge. Date July D/. ^ Date OWNERS SIGNATURE , ^ ^ ^ ,.u - The owner hereby ac)cnowledges and agrees to this application and further authorized reasonable entry onto the property by City staff, consultants, agents, commission members, and Council members for purposes of investigation and verif_ic^^on of^his request. Owner's signature ^__________ Applicant must have all submittals into the City c ces 25 days before the Planning Commission Meeting. Planning Commissir -etings are held on the third Monday of each month. Applicants must I .©sent at all scheduled review meetings of the Planning Commission and Cuaiicil. If an appl-cant is unable to attend a scheduled meeting, please maJce arrangements tc have an authorized agent attend in your place and advise the Building & Zoning Office of this change prior to the meeting. ‘•J'- r i = 5-8S8-1-3 sh U ^ 3 ^a aw “sS:s |8 znzv f- 5 ui 7 a "* o i o o “» fc ^-S-pil mu o a a S S zt> ui “2 - S ^ a iX :si5 a ~|iSS 2s*!ms'-is-is sa If) a aS“ m o u -J If) C9 a csi 2 < o 6 u •-> -i s ^ j; s-alg- ? iiMK a a lit 7 *-“55 Sw5*^-^ ailili a UI »S2 S -|- esw 3 a a M ^ N ^ lit UJ w W K O It iS•H K M M ^ 7 *=*=5 a o a S a If)ill O -I Si! a w < w®s = |axS K) 3 < u _XtZU^rs*is ®s IEI b o a a w z SSSSS3 z zUi lu ►”N a a S SS s O Q a :\iiU SinSJsJ'"-' a iH 3 3 o BK) O O a rH -J w ji T Z (S uj wsals - Mxx a55^ to or q: S rlgaai*r-gsg^OOH-l lo ^ .J If) U aSSSSSm a u u <H ^ .» - 3 3 w CM a IH 9 lu a a 3 a o 5^S?K 3 M ^!^li § a 5^ a a •-< « a►O O _J -I iH a $ o o 3 a o Q Z Ui < < > N a < UI g«§:5 a a a 3 "S"M UJ Z CM a 3 rlSi•H 3 O a s I- w a If) 2Imln 3 M M Ui NX -t u o M 3 -i -i >»C\J ^ M M )- a M I- -> -s 5 a Si M > >• a o a a w ° a 3 3 K) MM'"syagM 3 a a _ B a a 3 ^ K ^ Ui Mi M zzS{38 0 8 -:01020 DOUGLAS DOUGLAS 3100 NOi MPLS W38 0 8 -;01070 THOMAS 1 THOMAS J 1060 TOI LONG LAI00038HftRVIMARVI1800MPLSa ^ a a 3 a a a z Ui 3 3 > N UI a SSaS UI 0£ ii£l “* or i ^a 3 UIl|ll tt < Uio. LU a r g|52 a o *- a 3 Ui a. Ui a X 0 2x3 S bS- S a a 3 O UI Ui U)o a u. u. Ki a u. u. u) 3 UI Ui u) N 3 Q O O ifsii* •3 )> 3 a ^ UI 7 -.aSS a If) 3 !jIf)PO a a gsi! a 3 a a Z u 3 a 3 Uiiiii Q. O I- It I • K- 8i h »* r./City of ORONO \ - M: • RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. ________________ L-ii A RESOLOTION GmVHTING A CONDITIONAL USB PERMIT TO MUNICIPAL lONING CODB SECTION 10.03r SUBDIVISION 19 AND SECTION 10.55, SUBDIVISION 9 (B) (3) AND VARIANCES TO MUNICIPAL BONING CODB SECTION 10.22, SUBDIVISION 2 AND SECTION 10.55, SUBDIVISIOM • • FILE #1131 NBERBAS, Guenth«r and Gertrud Noelting (hereinafter "the applicants") are the owners of the property located at 1060 Ton)cawa Road within the City of Orono (hereinafter "City") and legally described as Lot 1, Blocic 1, Ryanwood, Hennepin County, Minnesota (hereinafter property ); and NBERBAS, the applicants have made application to the City of Orono to permit the installation of a permanent dock per Section 10.03, Subdivision 19 and Section 10.55, Subdivision 9 (B)(3) and variances to Section 10.22, Subdivision 2 and Section 10.55, Subdivision 8 to allow the excavation of the lakeshore to permit the construction of the support/foundation structure. Minnesota: BOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono, FINDINGS 1. This application was reviewed as Zoning Pile #1131. 2. The property is located in the LR-lB Single Family La)ceshore Residential Zoning District. 3. The property is approximately 1.00 acre in area. 4. The Orono Planning Commission reviewed this application on 20, 1987, and recommended approval of the proposed variances to permit excavation within the laJteshore protected area where per Zoning Code Section 10.22, Subdivision 2 and Section 10*55, (B)(3) to allow the installation of a permanent dock based on the following findings: A) The applicants propose no change in existing elevations or drainage. Page 1 of 4 1-II5 City of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ B) No permanent hardcover is proposed within the lakeshore protected area. C) The substructure is 5* to 6* below finished grade providing adequate area for treatment of surface runoff. D) A permanent dock with pilings had been installed in 1984 and was destroyed within 2 years by the unusual pressure/shifting of the ice along this portion of shoreline on Maicwell Bay. 5. The City Council finds that the conditions existing on this pro perty are peculiar to it and do not apply generally to other property in this soning district; that granting the variances 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 demon strable 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. 6. The City Council finds that granting a conditional use permit to allow the installation of a permanent dock wxll not be detrimental to the health, safety or general welfare of the public, would not adversely affect light, air nor pose a fire hazard or other danger to neighboring properties, nor will it depreciate surrounding property values and chat the proposed level o. 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 variances per Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.22, Subdivision 2 and Section 10.55, Subdivision 8 to allow the alteration of lands within the lakeshore protected area and grants a conditional use permit for the installation of a permanent dock per Section 10.03, Subdivision 19 and Section 10.55, Subdivision 9 (B)(3), subject to the following conditions: 1. Dock length sections shall not exceed 6 feet in width when extended from bank or constructed over lake area. 2. Access stairs shall not exceed 4 feet in width. 3. Area of excavation to be backfilled with granular/sandy loam soils. The City must approve the type of soils to be used in filling. Page 2 of 4 \ * * tSKfliif, City of OROINO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 4. Authorities granted by this resolution run with the property not with the owners* but are permissive only and must be exercised by application for a building permit within one year of the date of Council approval* or the special coditions of this resolution will expire on that date (May 11* 1988). 5. Violation of or non-compliance with any of the terms and condi tions of this resolution shall constitute a violation of the soning code* shall automatically terminate any authority granted herein* and shall be punishable as a misdemeanor. 6. 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 agrees to the recording of this resolution in the chain of title of the property. Adopted by the Orono City Cou.ncil on this 11th day of May* 1987. ATTEST: Dorothy M. Hallin* City Clerk James R. Grabek* Mayor Property OvmerCs) Page 3 of 4 Tos Frca: Date: Subject: Mayor Grabek & Orono Council Members Planning Commission Chairman Kelley Orono Planning Commission Members City Administrator Bernhardson '-'.-TO, Sh“ 10 i--j f Of OROfiu Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building & Zoning Administrator August 14, 1990 #1573 Carol Kelly/James Massey, 3020, 3030 Casco Point Rd. Preliminary Subdivision - Public Hearing Zoning District: LR-IC Total Area - 80,700 s.f. or 1.8 acres On June 11, 1990, the Council approved Carol Kelly's subdivision of a two lot plat, one riparian and one non-riparian. Since that approval. Miss Kelly and her immediate neighbor to the east have joined properties in a new subdivision application that will involve the creation of one new riparian lot. The following ordinances are pertinent to this review; 1. Chapter 11, Class III Subdivision 2. Definitions from Chapter 10 and 11 Chapter 10 Definition 43; Lot width - maximum horizontal distance between the side lot line of a lot measured parallel to the front lot line and at the rear of the required front yard. Definition 78; Yard lakeshore - Yard lying between the natural ordinary high water mark on the lakeshore and the required lakeshore setback line for the full width of the lot. Definition 79; Yard rear - Yard line between tt- required rear yard setback line and rear line of the lot f« ''e f ' 1 width of the lot. On a lakeshore lot, the rear sha^l be the yard which fronts on the street lying between the street line of the lot and the required rear yard setback line. Chapter 11 Definition 24; Lot area - minimum Definition 28; Lot width; also Section 11.31 Lot Improvements Zoning File #1573 August 15» 1990 Page 2 3.Section 10.22, Subdivision 2 - Hardcover developed lots and for proposed new lot. - Allowed for existing 1 * 24,100 s.f. or .55 acres 75-250' Setback Area « 17,900 s.f Existing Hardcover « 4,735 s.f. or 26.4% Hardcover to be Removed * 275 s.f. (Area only included within boundaries of property and does not include areas within defined right-of-way of Casco Point Road) Proposed Hardcover * 4,460 s.f. or 24.9% Lot 2 - 25,500 s.f. Allowed Hardcover Within 75-250 or 25% Setback Area » 4,400 s.f. 4. Lot 3 * 31,100 s.f. or .71 acres 75-250* Setback Area * 21,500 s.f. Proposed Hardcover » 4,463 s.f. or 20.7% (includes gravel drive and turnaround) Section 10.55, Subdivision 15 (A-2) 1/2 acre of dry contiguous lands required for the building envelope Dry Contiguoug Building Envelope Proposed at 21,725 s.f. (See Exhibit E) R^uired * 21,780 s.f. List of Exhibits Exhibit A - Exhibit B - Exhibit C - Exhibit D - Exhibit E - Exhibit F - Application Property Owners List Plat Map Resolution #2816 Staff Sketch Preliminary Plat Review of Current Application - The applicants propose the division of their homestead properties to create an additional riparian lot. Please review Staff Sketch Exhibit E. The hatched area cannot be included as a dry coi;Liguous area for Lot 2. The envelope is shy of approximately 55 s.f. The lot lines must be adjusted between 1 and 2 to provide for the additional 55 s.f. Hardcover within Lot 1 shall be maintained at or below the 25% allowance. The applicant proposes the removal of 275 s.f. of bituminous drive within defined boundaries of the private property and does not include the area within the right-of-way. Note the gravel drive that serves Lot 3 is now located within the boundaries of Lot 3. Existing hardcover is at a 20.7% allowed level. Zoning File #1573 August 15, 1990 Page 3 Review Definition Sections noted above. To be consistent with the procedures for requiring lot width at setback lines (i.e. required setback to rear of front setback line), the Code lacking clear direction as to the required width for a lot at the lakeshore has followed the same procedure for required lot widths for non-riparian lots. For consistency, lacking clear direction from the Code, the lot width (Lot 2) of 100' is met at the 75' setback mark. The existing irregular shoreline is approximately 75-85'. The Code does not require 100' at shoreline but would require the lot width at the lakeshore setback line. Please review the Staff Sketch Exhibit E. Kgte that the lot width to the rear of the proposed residence structure on Lot 2 is only 97'. Staff would ask for a realignment of the lot line so that a 100' width is maintained for the depth of the proposed building envelope, although the average setback line would define auilding envelope northwar- to the average lakeshore setback line. Note that your Code does .lOt provide directives that would require a specific width for the depth of a building envelope. We have a clear need for a zoning amendment to provide clear guidelines for building envelopes. Staff would encourage members to review the lot staiidards for tho specific zoning district and all pertinent sections of both ChaptecrlO and 11 as noted above to confirm staff's findings. In the original two-lot subdivision, staff requested that the drainage ditch be realigned along the shared lot lines of the lot to the immediate east. Applicant has realigned the drainageway along the shared lines up to the existing drainageway that now intersects the building envelope of Lot 2. Rather than require the realignment of the drainageway along the newly proposed shared lot lines of 2 and 3 requiring a separate conditional use permit and variance review, staff would recommend to the applicant and applicant's surveyor that the drainageway within Lot 2 remain as proposed and to require a lot line change between 1 and 2 to assure the 1/2 acre dry contiguous is satisfied. Options of Action Denial - If Planning Commission proposes denial, please refer to the necessary findings set forth in Chapter 11. Approval - If approved, the following findings may be considered: 1. The proposed division satisfied lot standards of the LR-IC zoning district. 2. This subdivision has been found to meet all pertinent standards of the subdivision regulations. 3. There is adequate sewer and water to serve the newly proposed lot. Zoning File #1573 August 15» 1990 Page 4 Approval is subject to the following conditions: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Upon application for a building permit for new construction on Lot 2, the future owner shall pay the following sewer and water fees: Sewer Unit Charge of $1,513.86 Water Unit Charge of $1,691.78 It should also be noted that this rate is based on the 1990 fee schedule and will be adjusted based on the inflationary rate in the 1991 fee schedule. Prior to scheduling the application before the Council, applicant's surveyor to provide an amended survey designating the following: a.Realign lot lines between Lots 1 and 2 so that there is a confirmation that a 1/2 acre dry contiguous envelope exists west of the proposed drainageway within Lot 2. b.Based on required lot line changes applicant's surveyor to provide amended hardcover facts for Lots 1 and 3. ^is may be an optional condition and not based on requests of ordinances but does Planning Commission recommend that the lot lines be adjusted so that there is a 100' width at the north edge of the defined building envelope -- or to average lakeshore setback line as depicted on Staff Sketch. Future owner of Lot 2 is hereby advised that hardcover within the 75-250' setback area is to be limited to 25%. Future dock to serve the newly created riparian Lot 2, shall meet the pertinent LMCD standards that determine the allow-^'d boat density units at the dock based on 75-85' of lii 1 footage of shoreline. Zoning File #1573 September 6, 1990 Page 5 Additional Comnents and Planning Ccnnission Recomnendation - Additional Exhibits ~ Exhibit G - Revised Preliminary Plan Review of Revised Preliminary Plan - Prior to scheduling the preliminary subdivision application before Council, applicant was required to submit an amended plan that showed Lot 2's building envelope at 1/2 acre dry contiguous west of the drainageway (review Exhibit E). Lot 1 * 23,620 s.f. or .54 acres 75-250' Setback Area * 17,420 s.f. Total Hardcover Allowed = 4,355 s.f. or 25% Existing Hardcover = 4,735 s.f. or 27.18% Total Hardcover to be Removed = 398 s.f. Proposed on Current Plan = 330 s.f. Applicant shall be required to designate 68 s.f. of additional existing hardcover to be removed. Lot 2 = 26,830 s.f. or .62 acres 75-250' Setback Area * 18,930 s.f. 'Total Hardcover Allowed 4,732 s.f. or 25% 'Dry Contiguous Buildable Area West of Drainageway Confirmed at 21,800 s.f. Lot 3 * 29,770 s.f. or .71 acres 75-250' Setback Area * 20,170 s.f. Existing Hardcover =* 4,463 s.f. or 22.1% The applicant has submitted a revised plur- that satisfies all directives of the Planning Commission except that hardcover scheduled for removal does not meet the 398 s.f. amount. Applicant must designate 68 s.f. of additional existing hardcover area to be removed. Applicant shall be required to provide an updated survey of Lot 1 showing all scheduled har ;cover to be remov' ' and completed prior to final pl&t approval. J Zoning File #1573 September 6, 1990 Page 6 The Planning Commission reaffirmed staff's findings regarding the issue of required lot width at specific setback areas. The Code specifically asks thit the required lot width be met at the rear of the front yard setback line and at the 75' setback mark, but does not state that this width must be maintained throughout the entire building envelope. As proposed. Lot 2 does not meet the required 100' width throughout the entire b ding envelope (from 75' to rear of front yard setback line) th. - no side setback variances will be granted at a future date. The new subdivision filed as of July 26, 1990 is subject to the reo ’ii^'ements of the new Park Dedicaiiion Fee Ordinance. Mr. Smi.r be asked to provide an estimate of the fair market vaJ m acre of land within this area so that a park dedi fee can be determined and approved by the Park Commi* The enclosed resolution has been drafted approving the three lot subdivision that would create a new riparian lot, subject tc the findings and conditions recommended by the Planning Commission. .V j A RESOLUTION GRANTING PRELIMINARY APPROVAL OF A PLAT AT 3020/3030 CASCO POINT ROAD PILE NO. 1573 WHEREAS, Carol J. Kelly and James Massey on July 26, 1990 filed a formal subdivision application with the City for approval of a 3-lot residential plat of property legally described as follows: Tract T and Tract U, Registered Land Survey #461, Files of the Registrar of Titles, Hennepin County, Minnesota, (hereinafter "the property") and; WHEREAS, after due published and mailed notice in accordance with Minnesota Statues 462.358 et. seq. and the City of Orono Zoning and Platting Codes, the Orono Planning Commission held a public hearing on August 20, 1990 at which times <11 persons desiring to be heard concerning this application were given the opportunity to speak thereon; and 'WHEREAS, at their regular meeting held on September 10, 1990 the Orono City Council considered the subdivision application of Carol J. Kelly and James Massey (hereinafter "the subdividers"), noting the following findings of fact; 1. The property is located within the LR-IC Single Family Lakeshore Residential Zoning District requiring a minimum of 1/2 acre of contiguous dry buildable land within each newly created lot. 2. The property contains a total of approximately 1.87 acres. Portions of the property are intersected by a public drainageway, yet all lots are able to be platted such that each lot maintains 1/2 acre dry contiguous building envelope. 3. Each lot meets the required lot width to the rear of the front yard setback line and at the 75' lakeshore setback lino measured from the 929.4 elevation. 4. Lots 1 and 3 can continue to be residential ly developed without the need for variances to the LR-IC zoning standards. Lot 2, the undeveloped lot, can be residentially developed without the need for variances to the LR-IC standards. Page 1 of 4 5. The existing structural improvements on Lots 1 and 3 meet the required setback from the newly proposed division lines. 6. Existing hardcover on Lots 1 and 2 shall be maintained at either 25% or less. Lot 2 shall be allowed 4,732 s.f. or 25% hardcover v;ithin the 75-250' setback area. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that based upon one or more of the findings noted above, the City Council of the City of Orono hereby approves the preliminary plat application of Carol J. Kelly and James Massey for the properties located at 3020/3030 Casco Point Road per the survey originally dated May 21, 1990, most recently revised September 4, 1990 by Pete J. Knabb of Ron Krueger & Associates Inc., subject to the following conditions: 1. The following improvements must be completed prior to final plat approval: A) Realignment of drainage ditch as shown on survey noted above. 'B) Removal of 398 s.f. of existing hardcover on proposed Lot 1 as shown on the survey noted above (revise date 9/4/90). Prior to final plat approval, applicant's surveyor to submit a revised plan showing existing hardcover removals at 398 s.f., the current plan shows 330 s.f. 2. Upon application for a building permit for new construction on Lot 2, the future owner shall pay the following sewer and water fees: Sewer Unit Charge Water Unit Charge $1,513.86 1,691.78 It should also be noted that this rate is based on the 1990 Fee Schedule and will be adjusted based on the inflationary rate for each annual fee schedule. Page 2 of 4 3. Current and future owner of Lot 1 is hereby advised that hardcover within the 75-250' setback area is at a maximum allowed level at 25%. Any additional improvements to this prope- ♦'.es'ulting in increases in hardcover must be approve by the City of Orono and may result in equal or greatri* -emo/al or existing hardcover. 4. Riparian/dock rights. The current owner of Lot 3 is hereby advised that present dock location will have to be altered next season to meet the required setback from final approved lot lines. The future dock to serve newly created riparian Lot 2 shall meet the pertinent LMCD standards that determine the allowed boat density units at the dock based on 75-85' of lineal footage of shoreline. Applicant is further advised that in consideration of the marsh-like lands adjacent to the potential dock site, that no structure or improvements may be placed or installed above the 929.4 elevation without appropriate variance approvals from the City. 5. 'City Assessor to determine fair market value of 1 acre of 'land in order to assist the Park Commission in determining Park Fee for newly created lot 2. FINAL PLAT SUBMITTALS The following list of final submittals must be submitted to the Zoning Administrator two weeks prior to the regularly scheduled Council meeting on the second and fourth Mondays of the month. The subdivider is hereby advised that a preliminary will expire one year from the date of Council's approval of the preliminary plat (September 10, 1991). A. RECORD PLAT drawings in the form of two (2) mylar copies and one (1) copy reduced to ]"*200'. Drawing to include: a) Lot lines, platted per preliminary survey by Peter J. Knabb of Ron Krueger & Associates, Inc., revised dace September 4, 1990. b) Dedication of "drainage and utility easements" 10' wide along all perimeter property lines and 5' each side of internal property lines - omit at lakeshore. Page 3 of 4 c) Designation and dedication of a drainage easement within Lot 2 and Lot 3 as shown on the plat drawings. Drainage easement to be shown 5' either side of drain age ditch as it approaches the shared lot lines of Lots 2 and 3 can be incorporated within drainage a* d utility easements and should be designated no less than 10' as it extends lakeward through the remaining portion of Lot 2. d) Designation and dedication of right-of-way of Casco Point Road. e) Name plat. B. LEGAL DOCUMENTS required: a) Title opinion addressed to the City. All owners, mortgage holders or others with property interest indicated therein shall sign the plat and all other .documents affected by such interest. C. .V b) The applicant must provide certified copies of all recorded easements currently affecting the property. FEES TO BE PAID: a) Final plat fee Total Due $300.00* * $150.00 b) Legal review and filing fees of $150.00 *c) Park fee to be determined by the City Assessor at a later date, to be paid prior to Jinal plat approval. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota at a regvxar meeting held this 10th day of September, 1990. James R. Grabek, Mayor ATTEST: Dorothy M. Hallin, City Clerk Page 4 of 4 CITY OF ORONO - SUBDIVISION APPLICATION ^ PROPERTY LOCATION Site Address fe. —*^**^< ■-■■ •% " y ^ n4 “=•< Property Identification Number (P.I.D.) ~?8'• IH ' ‘ 5APOt«3 4"je- zo • in •!.? • 4-3 eoo I Please check one - Property V abstract or - - - torrens? 7 Attach legal description to application Phone (home)f!f/n^Casco lUfUfoyvafo 7^ H,m« ^ ' Phone (work) syp — Address Citv;zip; ^213^4/ OWNER (if different than applicant) XlamA A . Phone (home) Phone (work) — &/^/^T*ea!a •Citv;71 n- cn rcFOitiM) Zip- i V (attach list if more than one' 1 JlMnilk^ Ul I AU-l. EXISTING LAND USE Number of_Tax Parcels Development Size’ Present Use (check) cm: ?i 250.00 RECEin-lW^K rQU ii 19^320 coot m 711:43 07/26/90 Acres Dry Land Acres Wet Land Acres Total, all parcels Residential; no. of units Other (specify)_ _ _ _ _ _ __ Present Zoning District __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ PROPOSAL ^ Division for Tax Purposes Lot Line Rearrangement Only (no new building sites) Subdivision for New Building Sites Number of Building Sites; Proposed Gross Density; Minimum Lot Size; Proposed Use; (check) T Existing Units New Units Total Units i. S Units per _ _ Acres Sq Feet Dry Buildable Land Residential Other (specify). JMINIMUM MATERIAL NECESSARY FOR COMPLETE PRELIMINARY APPLICATION1. Completed Application FormPreliminary Plat information on Certificate of Survey. Certified Property Owners List of owners within 350' (you must obtain this list from Hennepin County Department of Finance A-603 Govt Center 348-3271). As an addendum to this application, please attach a separate list of any other persons you wish notified of this application. 2. 3. 4. Certification by Zoning Department that Preliminary Plat Application is complete. Zoning Official's Signature_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _Date_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 1. Payment of fees (park fees, filing fee, sewer and water assessments). 2. Signed certificate of survey or m^lar copies of formal plat. 3. Title opinion. 4. Easements, Covenants, etc. 5. Developers Agreement and Letttr of Credit. Certification by Zoning Department that Final Plat Application is complete. Zoning Official's Signature_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _Date_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ FEES _ _ _ Sketch Plan Review (Class I, II & III) _ _ _ Subdivision of a Lot Line Rearrangement _ _ _ Preliminary Review (Class I & II Subdivision) _ _ _ Prelimina^ry Review (Class III and all non-residential) _ _ _ Final Pi/' ^pview (Class III) ♦(Plus any 1. _al or engineering charges) The applicant hereby agrees to provide all information required or requested by the Zoning Administrator, City Engineer, City Attorney, Planning Commission and Council necessary to process this application and further agrees to pay all additional fees established by ordinance. $150.00 250.00 250.00 300.00 + 20.00/Lot 150.00* Applicant's Signature Date Owner's Signature Date Applicant must have all submittals into the City offices 25 days before the Planning Commission Meeting. Planning Commission Meetings are held --n the third Monday of each month. Applicants must be present at all scheduled review meetings of the Planning Commission and Council. If an applicant is unable to attend a scheduled meeting, please make arrangements to have an authorized agent attend in your place and to advise the Building & Zoning Office of this change prior to the meeting. K) N Mh sfO K» Oo M ff» •• <0K) O O O UJ ^ S M tn “ o z o o ^ S?g a M z ^ iC u u O X X 5 “ z z S^!^i!:iS^ M —I -J ^a2i2|3 M o a a o N u a. rl2--OZ 3“gg«* i SS2? N O X X <$zzSgCO CM ff- < M O U U CM Z kSI a in X ^ O S 4 O ^ U 2 X K M < 3 9^ O K K O O Z Ui X K ;Jg^2^S u z M in M O N K O S2|ila m o -1 -J o CM U U. 0^ K 4 S O O Z 3^20^= •J'SSS;,K 4 UJ UI O Z •HU o £ K T “> o _ 1 Z 4 4 O KOOK~a£|»a O 0 O M > O M Z O 4 M O K K M Z 38 20-03095CURTISCURTIS3095 CAHAYZ4TAsss \ et Vi )£ I a g 8s-S§>l.SS?oz■H u ui < U £ i-c H V)t </) a < < o < X u »-CM m )£ CO M d 4M O X X CC1 Z X tn ^ ysO < «J >» > sS. si: ss as“ g3 M o 5 > o CM U < X I W X -I ^ ^ N 4 0 Ul O Z ■HU ^ U £ V “-.IS.* O X O H; “S£^o?5 a n u h\ X u! a“i s ! °5--®S”°iiis M O M M 3 7«SS“- rw 4 u -i o Z Ih “ u u y ^ S 0 X X ^ < > uj uj CO N•Sss^g K. O X X CM z O Vi H O X X aiz^ss ____iH Ifl M O 0 M O HDsozrml O OK O" 4 X K >- O ui ui wnn U X X M 4 4 O 0 X X K Vi §|SS 3 M oe cx til ^ K»IUKK_' CM X 4 4 Z ig “"l iH 4 4 4 U »H o CM 0 0 0 a044(MK M O -) “) <H 0 a o O Ko z 4 O H. a ^ 1 O K I U Ui Vi ss 4 Ui Ui O Z M ^ u £ CM K _ ^ O " w §?!S4 4 « U K lO .H _■ 4 ■H «• N O X X Kk Z UJ Ui O UJ O •H X o X a •H X Ui 4 O I- Ui -> O O Z ~> X K M O ”* ** *^vy K 4 <H U UJ iH a o ' “ .O Ui K _ . CM 0 n X 4 •O UI 0 N si^iai O ' ui O4 a 4 Ui 4 O Z u UJ u £ a o o X 4 4 U K OX Vi o iH M 4 OK Z O O Z -I Z X K •_• 4 UJ O' ^ o K a K •O X UJ Z 0 u )H m MOO oCM U IH V X k!SS0OZ 3“^4y= I < <o a a o H “siiaSRsggaj «sssoJ ^ KM 4 0 “a2>sa K 4 U O O Z ~2‘=““oS » 4 ^ > ii X - “ 9OZ^4 in X °5 m X >- >■ ^ o X X M in M O X X O CM U UJ UJ X K 4 “* “■ O Z iH u X X o £ 'r V- 4 4 O X X U K K S 5 in SO-UJUiK^ O CM i- I- O' 4 M O O (/. CM Z g$«i a Z UJ 4 4 > S X 4 U &Six| X 0 K <rS Kl X M O K 4 UJ I X N K O » 4 (0 CM M O K o 5 SJ X O M O X in Sk^" O X 4 O Z ujy' “5_ K IM K CM z Ui Xll:l ■".5$111! X O K X § O K CM X -i O 4 S^4 o < ro a ^ M O IH CM U X I </. 4 K 4 O K O S O U ^ O 5S"' C9 X S iX (9 O I 4 4 O O K U K CM in X X 4 CM 4 UJ in N OZOCMV O M o o O 4 M O Z X M Z UJ X gixS QZ-< X 4 UJlll X O K O X s;►c O O'^SSoSS M O CM 5 K CM U K _J XI in o a _ _ -2“SS5 7 *^24 O 4 4 U K ~ssis5 O M -J -J O 4 M O O O M Z X g oz£S 4 > % X 4 UJ %|%|£52^ K X O K X O Z UJ IH K 3;gi M O X CM U O I O K K 4 IH 7 2 CM K o 4 HI O X “s K M 51S g X O Z yy* 4 4 4ZUK a K N K M Z sl.igz^< X 4 UJSill H sSI I I aUi 'J ?1) ■ o U 01 Ui Ot UJ §!i UJ k- M »- < »- < O ^ §J2^ Z M « < o: UI UJ 2 a K a of< a a. a u. Ui H og M iiSl UI a O as UJ M a: K a U.1 4 Ui Ui(A r o M i:gU O > Ui 2S5- u.“Si Z U. U <o _ K Z M U <00.0 X M W Ui-51- M Ui Ui I' = /■ I S’ City of OROINO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 2816 _________ A RESOLUTION GRANTING PRELIMINARY APPROVAL OP A PLAT AT 3020 CASCO POINT ROAD FILE NO. 1531 WHEREAS, Carol J. Kelly on April 27, 1990 filed a formal subdivision application with the City for approval of a 2- lot residential plat of property legally described as Tract T, Registered Land Survey #461, Files of the Registrar of Titles, Hennepin Countv. Minnesota, (hereinafter "the property") and; WHEREAS, after due published and mailed notice in accordance with Minnesota Statues 462.358 et. seg. and the City of Orono Zoning and Platting Codes, the Orono Planning Commission held a public hearing on May 21, 1990 at which times all persons desiring to be heard concerning this application were given the opportunity to speak thereon; and WHEREAS, at their regular meeting held on June 11, 1990 the Orono City Council considered the subdivision application of the Carol!'J. Kelly (hereinafter the "subdivider"), noting the following findings of fact: 1. The property is located within the LR-IC Single Family Lakeshore Residential Zoning District requiring a minimum of 1/2 acre of contiguous dry buildable land within each newly created lot. 2. The property contains a total of approximately 1.09 acres, all of which is considered dry buildable land. 3. The proposed plat contains 2 lots meeting the required 1/2 acre dry contiguous lot area requirement. 4. Each lot meets the required lot width to the rear of the front yard setback line at 30': Lot 1 - the only legally recognized riparian lot meets the required lot width of 100' at the 75' lakeshore setback line. 5. Each lot can be residentially developed without the need for variances to the LR-IC standards. 6. Tb? existing structural improvements on Lot 1 meet the required ••etback from the newly proposed division line. Page 1 of 4 ORONO City of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. ___2816 ____ NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that based upon one or more of the findings noted above, the City Council of the City of Orono hereby approves the preliminary plat for Carol J. Kelly at the property located at 3020 Casco Point Road per the survey originally dated 5/21/90, revised 6/4/90 by Pete J. Knabb of Ron Krueger & Associates, Inc., subject to the following conditions: 1. The following improvements must be completed prior to final plat approval: a) Realignment of drainage ditch as shown on survey noted above. b) Removal of 923 square feet of existing hardcover on proposed Lot 1 as shown on the survey noted above (revised date 6/4/90). 2. Upon application for a building permit for new construction on Lot 2, the future owner shall pay the following sewer and water fees: ■Sewer unit charge Water unit charge $1,513.86 1,691.78 It should also be noted that this rate is based on the 1990 fee schedule and will be adjusted based on the inflationary rate for each annual fee schedule. 3. The subdivider shall execute a restrictive covenant to be drafted by the City to be filed against the chain of titles of Lots 1 and 2 denying all riparian access and use of the lake via Lot 1 by Lot 2 of this subdivision. 4. Current and future owner of Lot 1 is hereby advised that hardcover within the 75-250' setback area is at maximum allowed level at 25%. Any additional improvements to this property resulting in increases in hardcover must be approved by the City of Orono and may result in equal or greater removal of existing hardcover. Page 2 of 4 City of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 2816________ FINAL PLAT SUBMITTALS The following list of final submittals must be submitted to the Zoning Administrator two weeks prior to the regularly scheduled Council meeting on the second and fourth Mondays of the month. The subdivider is hereby advised that preliminary approval will expire one year from the date of Council's approval of the preliminary plat (June 11, 1991). A. RECORD PLAT drawings in the form of two (2) mylar copies and one (1) copy reduced to 1"«200’. Drawing to include: a) Lot lines platted per preliminary survey by Peter J. Knabb of Ron Krueger & Associates, Inc. revised date 6/4/90. b) Dedication of "drainage and utility easements" 10' wide along all perimeter property lines and 5' each side of internal property lines. *c) Designation and dedication of a drainage easement ‘'Within. Lot 2 as shown on the plat drawings. Drainage easement to be shown 5' either side of drainage ditch. d) Designation and dedication of right-of-way of Casco Point Poad. e) Name plat. B. LEGAL DOCUMENTS required: a) Title opinion addressed to the City. All owners, mortgage holders or others with property interest indicated therein shall sign the plat and all other documents affected by such interest. b) The subdivider must provide certified copies of all recorded easements currently affecting the property. c) Signed and executed restrictive covenant prohibiting riparian use of lake by Lot 2 via Lot 1. City to provide restrictive covenant for execution by subdivider. Page 3 of 4 rvCity of OROIVO CITY OF ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. ____2816 C. FEES TO BE PAID: Total Due $740.00 a) Park dedication fee per current schedule: Lot 2 (a $440.00 b) Final plat fee - $150.00 c) Legal review and filing fees of $150.00 Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota at a regular meeting held this 11th of June, 1990. / A __________ toiothy iallin. City Clerk)o'iothy M^ STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) ss. ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this 11th day of June, 1990, by James R. Grabek & Dorothy M. Hallin, Mayor & City Clerk of the City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the Ciry. THERESA L NAAS mtNKI inJMJO • MINNESOTA HENNEPIN COUNTY 1% soMNlMlon a>p«rM M-M Notary Public Page 4 of 4 ' ■ .1 .um U H'ilJTo: Mayor Grabek & Orono Council Members Planning Commission Chairman Kelley Orono Planning Commission Members City Administrator Bernhardson From: Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building & Zoning Administrator Date: August 16, 1990 Subject: #1575 Judson M. Dayton, 1111 Tamarack Drive - Conditional Use Permit - Public Hearing Pertinent Ordinance - Section 10.28, Subdivision 3 - Cciiditional use permit required for a preschool/kindergarten for Waldorf Day- School. List of Exhibits Exhibit A - Exhibit A-1 Exhibit B - Exhibit C - Exhibit D - Exhibit E - Exhibit F - Exhibit G - Exhibit H - Exhibit I - Exhibit J - Exhibit K - Application - Applicant's Addendum Propert’' Owners List Plat Map Survey Existing Floor Plan Proposed Plan for Pre-school/Kindergarten Elevations East/West Proposed Calendar 1991 Schedule Information on Waldorf School Curriculum Articles on Waldorf Method/Approach to Education Review of Application - The applicant, Judd Dayton, seeks a conditional use permit for a pre-school/kindergarten program consisting of approximately 12 to 15 students with 2 full-time instructors. The school will operate Monday through Friday in the mornings for 2k hour sessions. The location of the pre-school will be in an existing residential structure located on Lot 1, Block 1, Underhill Farms. Access to the site is via a long, platted corridor off of Tamarack Drive. Please review the proposed floor plan (Exhibit F). The applicant proposes no interior remodeling for classroom use. Two teachers will park within the attached garage providing open park vj and turnaround area for the drop off of students. The existing pool on the site will be altered providing a permanent deck covering over the existing water surface and a sump pump to remove all drainage that collects beneath the deck covering. All alterations are subject to the requirement of the building code. Zoning File #1575 August 16, 1990 Page 2 of 3 As already noted in an earlier review involving a conditional use permit for a pre-school use (Trinity Pre-school), the State licensing will not require an outdoor play area as classes will not extend beyond three hours. This specific property is isolated and several feet from a public roadway. The lot is located within an established rural, 2 acre, residential neighborhood. It may be appropriate that applicant provide a fenced or secured area for play so as not to impact the existing residential neighborhood. This request may not be so much for safety, although this certainly is an issue for the applicant, but rather for the protection/preservation of the rural residential neighborhood. It should also be noted that the City has not received negative comments from the neighbors notified of this public hearing. As the total number of participants in the pre-school program is under 28, theie is no need to address the needs for a fire suppression system. Applicant should be advised that if the pre-school program exceeds the total 28 level, that a fire suppression system will be required. In fact any increases or changes in hours of pre-school/kindergarten proposed will require a new conditional use permit. For example, if classes were to be expanded beyond 3 hours or if student and teacher enrollment were to expand beyond the 28 participant lev il. Options of. Action - Denial. If denied, please refer to the necessary findings in the conditional use p-'rmit sections of your code. Approval. If approved, the following recommendation with findings and conditions may be considered: To grant approval of a conditional use permit for the Waldorf Pre-school/Kindergarten to be located at 1111 Tamarack Drive for applicant, Judson Dayton, finding all pertinent sections of the code have been satisfied by the applicant. Such approval is subject to the following conditions: 1. Prior to opening: A) The Orono Building Inspector shall review the facility to determine need for interior signage for "fire exits" in cases of emergencies. The Building Inspector shall evaluate the building to determine if there is a need for any other improvement prior to use by young children. Zoning File 1575 August 16, 1990 Page 3 of 3 B) Existing pool to be covered with permanent wooden deck covering and appropriate methods for relieving surface runoff that collects within base of pool. 2. Planning Commission to make a recommendation concerning fenced/de*"ined outdoor play area for students. Applicant should be asked to comment on this issue. Additional Cooments and Planning Commission Recommendation September 6, 1990 Additional Exhibits Exhibit L - Dayton Letter of August 30, 1990 Exhibit M - Minnesota Statutes 245A.14, Subdivision 1 The three neighbors in attendance at the meeting objected to the proposed use and questioned if there was not other suitable area more appropriate for a pre-school operation. Planning Commission members advised neighbors that the proposed use was a permitted use in a residential zone. It was at that point in the discussion'when the applicant advised all present that Minnesota Statues would allow a pre-school/day care operation up to 14 without the need of local zoning approval (review Exhibits L and M). Staff has asked the City Attorney to review the statutes and to determine impact on local zoning. Suesan Pace-Shapiro has confirmed that the applicant could operate a pre school/kindergarten program up to 14 students without seeking approval from the local authority. The applicant has advised that he would not attempt to proceed to operate without City approval. He proposes a pre school at an 18 student level, thereby requiring formal conditional use permit approval of the City. He is willing to cooperate with the neighbors to provide visual and sound barriers for the students outdoor play activities that would be limited to 20 to 30 minutes per day. In an attempt to meet the concerns of the adjacent neighbors, the Planning Commission has asked for the following controls on the proposed use: 1. Student level approved at a maximum 18. 2. In order to meet the potential visual and noise concerns, applicant may either install a privacy fence around an outdoor play area or cyclone type fencing with 4 to 5' high evergreen type shrubs to the exterior side of the fence. Based on the requirements of the Municipal Ordinances, such outdoor play area for 18 students would require 900 s.f. of outdoor play area. Zoning File 1575 September 6, 1990 Page 4 3. It was also recommended that this conditional use permit be reviewed at the close of the upcoming school year, June, 1991 to determine if there is negative impact on the surrounding adjacent neighborhood. The majority vote of 3 to 2 recommended approval of the conditional use permit subject to the conditions recommended above and the staff's recommendations on Page 2 and 3 of this memo. The enclosed approval resolution has been drafted per the Planning Commission's recommendation for Council's review and action. A RESOLUTION GRANTING A CONDTIONAL USB PERMIT PER MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 10.28, SUBDIVISION 3 PILE 1575 WHEREAS, Judson M. Dayton (hereinafter "the applicant") is the owner of property located at 1111 Tamarack Drive located within the City of Orono (hereinafter "City") and legally described as Lot 1, Block 1, Underhill Farms, Hennepin County, Minnesota (hereinafter "property"), and WHEREAS, the applicant has applied to the City of Orono for a Conditional Use Permit to permit a pre-school/kindergarten use to be named the Waldorf Day School per Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.28, Subdivision 3 (B). NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by ^he City Council of Orono, Minnesota:' FINDINGS 1. This application was reviewed as Zoning File 1575. 2. The property is located in the RR-IB, Rural Residential Zoning District requiring 2 acres of dry buildable area. The subject property consists of 2-r acres. 3. On August 20, 1990, the Orono Planning Commission reviewed the application as proposed and recommended approval based upon the following findings: a) The existing septic system that serves the four bedroom home is found to be in good condition and adequate to serve the limited day care program for a 2 1/2 to 3 hour program 5 days a week, 9 months out of the year. b) There is adequate area within the surrounding 2 acre minimum lot neighborhood to find adequate setbacks and area for visual and sound buffers. c) The existing parking and paved turnaround area has been found adequate to serve the parking and traffic flow needs of the day care at the proposed 18 member level. Page 1 of 5 J 4, The City Council has considered this application including the findings and recommendations of the Planning Commission, reqports by staff and comments of the applicant and the affect of the proposed use on the health, safety, and welfare of the community. 5. The City Council finds that granting a conditional use permit to allow a pre-school/kindergarten will not be detrimental to the health, safety or general welfare of the public, would not adversely affect light, air nor pose a fire hazard or other danger to neighboring properties, nor will its use depreciate surrounding property values and that the proposed level of use of the property will be in keeping with the intent and objectives of the Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan of the City. CONCLUSIONS, ORDER AND CONDITIONS Based upon one or more of the above findings, the Orono City Council hereby grants a Cone' tional Use Permit per Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.28, Subdivisions 3 (B) to permit Judson M. Dayton to operate a pre-school/kindergarten program known as the Waldorf Day School subject to the following conditions: 1. The day school shall be limited to an 18 student enrollment and shall operate in the mornings, five days a week providing 2 1/2 to 3 hour classes. 2. Applicant shall provide an outdoor play area at a minimum 900 s.f. to be defined either by a privacy fence or a cyclone type fence with 4' to 5' high evergreen plantings a?ong the exterior of the fenced area. If privacy fencing at 5 to 6 feet height is proposed, plantings would not be required. Such fencing is proposed to minimize visual and sound impact upon the immediate surrounding residential neighborhood. Outdoor play area should be located at a minimum 50' from all adjacent lot lines and not within the front/street yard. 3. Applicant's contractor shall complete the permanent deck cover over pool and installation of sump pump to relieve surface run-off that collects in basin of pool. Page 2 of 5 4. Prior to opening, applicant shall arrange for the Orono Building Inspector to review the facility to determine the need for interior signage for fire exits in case of emergencies. The Building Inspector shall also evaluate the building to determine if there is a need for any other improvement prior to use by young children. 5. The City staff shall review the conditional use permit for a pre-school/kindergarten operation ut the end of the academic year, June of 1991, to determine if there is a need for further review by the City Council or this coi ditional use permit may be reviewed at any time upon petition oi the surrounding property owners. 6. Authorities granted by this resolution run with the property not with the owner, but are permissive only and must be either exercised or installed within one year of the date of Council approval or the special conditions of this resolution will expire on that date (September 10, 1991). 7. Violation of or non-compliance with any of the terms and conditions of this resolution shall constitute a violation of the Zoning Code, shall automatically terminate any authority granted herein, and shall be punishable as a misdemeanor. 8. The undersigned owner has read, understood and hereby agrees to the terms of this resolution and on behalf of himself, the Waldorf Day School, its, successors and assigns, hereby agrees to the recording of this resolution in the chain of title of the property. Page 3 of 5 Adopted by the Orcno City Council on this 10th day of September, 1990. ATTEST; Dorothy M. Hallin, City Cleric James R. Grabek, Mayor Property Owner(s) STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF NENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this 10th day September, 1990, by James R. Grabek & 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 My Commission Expires Page 4 of 5 J /b/b CITY OF ORONO - GENERAL LAND OSE APPLI PROPERTY LOCATION Site Address III/ DPh.'B- 1 " ■* ./ .- - -■D oeofOD Property Identification Number (P.I.O.) ^(o 11 OOP 7 Please attach legal description to application if not included APPLICANT Name /^- T)A'f7t>rj Phone (home) ^7/-7V^9 Phone (work) Address /ioSS citv Zip OWNER (if different than applicant)Phone (home) Name Phone Address Citv Zip Date Property Acauired “llsohjo (month/year) I (do) (do noQ also own the Adjacent parcels of land. PEES - CONDITIONAL OSE 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/Eldg $250.00 Commercial/Industrial Use $200.00 Land Alteration Grading and filling - designated wetland or floodplain Grading and filling - 101 cu. yd. or more Grading, seawall, retaining walls within 75' of lakeshore PRD/PID - see fee schedule OTHER APPLICATIONS _ _ _ _ $200.00 Commercial Site Plan Review (+ consultant fees) _ _ _ _ $250.00 Vacation _ _ _ _ $175.00 Easement Vacation $ 50.00 Easement Vacation With Subdivision ' $250.00 Rezoning (PUD - refer to fee schedule) _ _ _ _ $100.00 Appeals __ _ _ Other - see fee schedule PRESENT USB OP PROPERTYPresent Zoning District Present Use of Property (^sidential3 Other (specify) detail: Tn hB L'<.ecs />< DftlOofiP PRF-:^l>C.L. antt, f'lAit.jzfir-APryPni - ennAf/^v s.-n>f>^^rs. Tr>T/^/~ ^ £xT5fJi>i^n r^A^/S. If= D^/TJArJj u:fi REQUIRED SUBMITTALS \\ Certif i^d Owners List of owners within 350' (you can obtain this list from Hennepin County Department of Finance A-603 Government Center 348-3271). 3. Plat Map. , . ^ i4. Certificate of survey (signed by a licensed surveyor). » .^ i a 5. Topographic survey (existing and proposed contours) it lan alterations involve changes in elevation (grades). 6. Construction plan, if applicable (see staff for requirements). 7. As an addendum to this application, please attach a separate list ot any other persons you wish notified of this application. YOU ARE REQUIRED TO SUPPLY 30 COPIES OP 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:_ _ _ _ ___ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _; 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 best of his/her knowledge. Applicant's signature '/f). _ _ _ _ _ _Date - - - -'7^/''^u/.9^1.- - - OWNERS SIGNATURE ^ The owner hereby acknowledges and agrees to this application and authorized reasonable entry onto the property by . agents, commission members, and Council members for pu p 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 t^e third Monday of each month. Applicants must be present at all scheduled review meetings of the Planning Commission and Council. If ^ unable to attend a scheduled meeting, please make arrangements authorized agent attend in your place and advise the Building & Zoning Office of this change prior to the meeting. /I-/Judson M. Dayton TCF Tbwer. Suite 860 121 South Eighth Street Minneapolis, Minnesota 55402 July 26, 1990 rr j j K.J City of Orono P. 0. Box 66 Crystal Day, Minnesota 55323 To Whom it May Concern: Enclosed please find a completed conditional use permit for 1111 Tamarack Drive, Orono. We propose to run a Waldorf Pre-School and Kindergarden on site. Currently we are estimating roughly twelve to fifteen total students with two teachers, one for pre-school and one for kindergarden. Enclosed with the application is background information on Waldcrf education and a school year calendar. Currently there is a swimming pool at 1111 Tamarack. We plan to drain it completely and install a sump pump or other suitable device to remove any runoff that accumulates in the pool. We also plan to build a permanent, strong and safe deck over the entire pool. Our contractor has recently done other work in Orono and will work closely with your inspector in order to surpass any requirements the city has. We are even more concerned about safety and upkeep than you. The structure at 1111 Tamarack has a two-car garage where the teachers will park. There is ample room for children drop-off in front of che house. Several of the families involved in the school have more than one child attending so the number of cars dropping off children, especially with some car pooling, should be very small — six to eight cars. On days when additional parking is required, we plan to park parallel to the long straight driveway. There is ample flat smooth cut grass to park on along the driveway, all fenced in. Also enclosed with the application is a current structure layout and a proposed school layout. No food service will be provided, children will bring their own snacks each day. A-i City of Orono July 26. 1990 Page 2 tr All licensing with county and state organizations is in process. I hope 1 have answered most of your questions. In talking to most of the neighbors, all are extremely excited about Waldorf. Some want more information and may send their children. We think we are bringing a sound, wonderful educational program to Orono. Sincerely. Judson M. Dayton Enclosures IJ H Mh ss tn at ui a gzI £ uj (/I < Z CO < CO ae K ^ H -i 111 < UJ V -‘S5S >0 a < ^ :aiis^K» O T T »H -i £, 2 S323SS X# U t in ill o in M tU M at in inim O O ,3iS I CO in f4 < oe a oe ^ A CO ui cS A w A 0 ^ -j m «S§8Sg m o u u m £ Z (>A ¥# §M § z -1 81::sS j ”z55® UJ CM ^ = Z A Z • X A A > £ A M A A 4 MASS A A A a A Zo-38 26-101300 JOHN R S JOHN R S 13U0-6TH LONG LAKs z ”855518 m uj I- H B CM « > > Z sMSgj •-C Z Z M '® 5 5 “CM A 9 Z M M A m o > ae tl a at 0 o ”Sg K> q: Q CM < <l>iS ^ H »-•^ UJ 1 a (M m -i M> a2- M O A A A a SS5 zl§ a A (9 A A z I- o B A <-C A sO A A 0 Q HI rC ^ A A A A '^S^88“K> OS A A _ i|3SS* 1 £sl!CM O' -J «J£55S:ji A •-< I- I- o B M O A A <-1 A A .1 a Z A < < > NA < A A Z 4 Z A O t- 11 A % CM A Z ZHi mm 0 A X X A S8 m5“*5! m Z A A 4 A »a A A «• •• K A -1 a A A HI M . S A O ^ US O A ArM A A A AA ^ ♦ftA o a A A £ ?“>-s3 A A A Hf A A A O A K A n O o a o r«. 2 A HI A o BA O '? O Hi A 4 A 0 Z A 4 A 4 ^ A A A A O ♦ A A ^ ^ A A i§88®"'‘ H« 4 A A A V AAA M> > > 4 S A A A A A A A O 8 8 2 a A O U U A £ A A A S38823 A^ S a 4 A o a z A 4 4 >• V A 4 A A A |S5S A 4 A a A A £ A i 4 Z A B H SPRING HILL WALDORF SCHOOL Calendar 1990/91 School Year Sept. 4 (Tues) Sept. 28 (Fri) Oct. 18-19 (Thu & Fri) Oct. 31 (Wed) Nov. 11 (Sun) Nov. 22-23 (Thu & Fri) Dec. 2 (Sun) Dec. 6 (Thu) Dec. 21 (Fri) Dec. 24-Jan 4 Jan. 7 (Mon) Feb. 2 (Sat) Feb. 14 (ThiX) Feb. 18-22 (Mon-Fri) Mar. 28 (Thu) Mar. 29-April 5 (Fri-Fri) April 8 (Mon) May 1 (Wed) May 19 (Sun) May 27 (Mon) June 7 (Fri) First Day of School MICHAELMAS FALL FESTIVAL Teachers' Conference (No School) Halloween (in-class celebration) Martinmas (in-class celebration Fri Nov. 9) Thanksgiving (in-class celebration Wed Nov. 21) ADVENT GARDEN St. Nicholas Day (in-class celebration) WINTER FESTIVAL Winter Break (No School) School Resumes Candlemas (in-class celebration Fri Feb. 1) Valentine's Day (in-class celebration) Teachers' Conference (No School) SPRING FESTIVAL Spring Break (No School) School Resumes May Day Whitsunday Memorial Day (No School) SUMMER FESTIVAL (Last day of school) #1 o •.'I * ! OuBOlf VMLDORF CITY SCHOOL 927-0506 THE WALDORF APPROACH TO EDUCATION Rene M. Querido Our educational nethods today are very deeply influenced by the picture of Hian that we carry in our minds. Some views attempt to convince us that the human being is hardly more than an animal; others deal with the child as if he were merely a highly sophisticated machine. Waldorf education stresses the dignity and individuality of the growing child. Through Rudolf Stainerfs impulse, education becomes art, the curriculum being adapted to the various phases of the growing child's development from kindergarten to high school. Practice in. the classroom is based on the con viction that a truly wholistic pedagogy should encompass the education of hea^, hand and mind. The children in a Waldorf school are led during the seven or eight years of elementary education by the same class teacher who brings to them the wonders of nature, which later develop into the sciences, and the achievements of humanity through the march of time, which nourish and stimulate the unfolding of consciousness in the awakening human being. other teachers help in this process: music, eurythmy, handwork, gymnastics, foreign languages, etc. are taught from the early years; later woodwork, gardening, etc. a^e added. Zn the high school, specialists - through a balanced curriculum of the sciences and the humanities - bring to the students in a lively way a deeply integrating experience of the personality. Zn the years following puberty, the unfolding of true freedom on the basis of responsibility is the goal. In an age of growing specialization, the human being can perhaps only survive if in childhood the dormant forces of the fullness of his individuality have been awakened. The many Waldorf schools - tome 175 to-date* - all over the free world have arisen out of the burning needs of parents who harbor a real concern for the future of their children. The Waldorf School Movement was initiated by Rudolf Steiner (1861-1925), a universal humanist and scientist, who gave invaluable indications for the renewal of mankind - not only in education, but also in medicine, agriculture, the arts, and the sciences. The true meaning of education is "to bring forth* rather than *to put in*. Waldorf education is dedicatad towards the awakening of the faculties that lie within the child. Over and above preparing the student for life, our hope and concern is to contribute towards the unfolding of young people who out of themselves will find the strength to change what is harmful and unhealthy in our civilization. The true dignity of the human being is at stake. (Article from Program of the Marin Waldorf School Benefit Concert, Spring 1978) •about 350 in 1985. THE MAIN LESSON CURRICULUM Language arts, hislor;, math and science are taught in blocks of 3-5 weeks during the morning main lesson hours. wh< the children are freshes, for academic work. The class teacher, who presents these subjects, remains with the same cl<a throughout the elementary years, enabling close, secure relationships with each child and an appreciation of individual necc PRIMARY GRADES 1-3 MIDDLE GRADES 4-6 UPPER GRADES 7-8 Pictorial introduction to the alphabet, writing, reading, spelling, poetry and drama. Folk and fairy tales, fables, legends, Old Testament stories. Numbers, basic mathematical processes of addition, subtraction, multiplication ^d division. Nature stories, housebuilding, farming and trades. Writing, reading, spelling, grammar, syntax, poetry and drama. Norse sagas, history and stories of ancient civilizations, culminating in Greek and Roman history. Review of the four mathematical processes, fractions (common and decimal), percentage, geometry. Local and world geography, comparative zoology, botany and elementary physics. Creative writing, reading, spelling, grammar, poetry and drama. Medieval history, Renaissance. Age of Discovery, American History, biography. Algebra, geometry, business math, graphing, ratio and proportion, number bases. Geography, phy.- :s, chemistry, astronomy, physiology, geology and mineralogy. THE SPECIAL SUBJECT CURRICULUM The children are also taught by special subject teachers; classes such as music and foreign languages follow the morning rr lesson part of the day. In the afternoon the more active classes such as handwork, physical education and dance-movement taught. Most special subjects begin in kindergarten, with appropriate material and skill development for each grade. • Music: vocal, recorder, violin, siring and wind ensembles. • Foreign languages: French .& German • Art: watercolor painting, form drawing, beeswax and clay modeling, charcoal drawing, perspective, etc. • Handwork: knitting, crochet, sewing, loymaking, woodworking. • Movement: games, eurythmy, gymnastics, physical education, sports. (Outline from Shining Mountain Waldorf School brochure, Boulder, Colorado ■K ^ iailll(lini'rCMAS»CNG Lessons mW)nder Waldorf schools emphasize what others don't — the fairy-tale magic of being a child. When you walk mto one of the kindergarten class- school for the employees’ children. C urrcntly there ______:_______^1_____jf lM«r Waldort schools m 27 countriesrooms, it’s like entermg a fairy-tale wonderland. The walL radiate with per -h-toned pastels applied armdcally in swirls. The tireplace. skylights, and kirchen nook ail have a storybook lcx>k about them. The teacher assembles the children by sweetly singing their names (“Na-than!"), then leads them in simple movement acQviaes where they become, for the moment, giants, pixies, and gnomes. During playtime, the children create fan- II .-.yp ■ 1 .a . - V TV WddoifphilosopkY in action: Learning is aajuiml not only though sound and sight but also imagination, touch, movement, and feeing. tasy worlds from tree stumps, brightly colored scarves, and homemade dolls shaped to look like little elves, fierce dragons, and brave knights. This is a Waldorf classroom, the settmg for one of the most unusual approaches to childhood edu cation in practice today. Created more than 60 years ago by Rudolf Steiner, an Austrian philoso pher. the method was named (iromcally) after the Waldorf-Astoria agarette faaory in Siuttgart. Ger many. where, in 1919, Dr. Steiner developed a are at least 400 Waldorf schools in 27 countries throughout the world (including 100 in the United States and Canada). Programs range from simple kindergartens to full-scale K-12 facilmes. The Waldorf movement is soil small, yet its philosophy IS in harmony with some of the latest ideas in education. For example. Wildorf teachers share prominent educators’ increasmg alarm at the tendency m many schools to push young children to learn reading and other abstract skills before they’re ready. A recent re port issued jomdy by the Naaonal Assoaaoon tor the Educanon of Young Children and the Naaonal Assooanon of Elementary School Pruiapals urges preschools to reduce the heavy emphasis on aca demic learning. While be ginning reading is taught at many preschool*. Waldort kindergarmers — even the early readers among them — leave their books at home. Reading isn’t intro duced until the end of first grade. “By not teaching reading, but instead giving them puppetry, stones, poems, verses, smging games, movement, and gesnire. we’re building a strong inner reservoir that children can later draw upon when they do learn to read, says Ann Pratt, founder of Pine Hill Waldorf School in Wilton, New Hampshire, and coordinator of the Antioch- Waldorf teacher-training center there. Hond^On Culture If early readmg isn't stressed, cultural literacy is a key concern throughout a Waldorf program — and here Waldorf educators arc also in accord with other experts in their field. Bestsellers such as The Pmintinc Vi Closh^ of tht Amerkan Mind and Cuiturai Uteracy have pointed to the lack of mean ingful content in Amencan school cumc- ula and to the students' seemmg ignorance of history, literature, and other important components of the legacy of avilizaoon. By contrast, Waldorf schools make the study of human culture their central focus: Frcm kindergarten through high school students learn (and often memo rize) poems, stories, and historical and cultural informaaon from all over the world. Wark sheets and textbooks are eschewed in favor t^direa study of Greek and Babylonian myths. Aesop’s fables, Shakespeare, the Renais sance, botany, Arthurian legends, Hindu epic po etry and the discovery of the New World, among a wealth of other subjects. The guiding premise is summed up by M.C. Richards, author of Toward Wholeness: Rudolf Steiner Edsuation in Amer ica: “Childhood is the tune to store the memory with cultural riches, which later can be con ceptualized and subjected to independent judgment and criticism. ” The Wddorf approach to the basics is also in keeping wi^ current theory that early learning should be muldsensory, ac quired not only through sound and sight but also through imagination, touch, movement, and feeling. All the senses ate engaged to teach the three R's. Color plays a nujor role, and children do most academic writing with brightly hued pen cils and crayons. Movement activities are integrated with mathematics and reading: To learn multiples for the times ubles, students march around the room dapping and counting out loud, and they aa out the week’s reading in skits. Vivid images are used to teach the alphabet — for exam ple, the letter s might be introduced through the metaphor of a snake. The children might hear a story about a snake, put on a play about it, paint a picture of it, or mold a snake out of beeswax — and in the process they yrauld see that a snake can assume the shape of an r and that it also makes a similar sound. OmiiAtVIfeifcl This integrated approach seems to pay off Despite some parents ’ fears that Wal dorf programs spend too much time AugustI98B md images are used to introduce the alphabet The letters might be taught through the metaphor of a snake. teachmg the arts, students' standardized test scores for academic achievement compare favorably with the rudonal aver age. And a study conducted in Europe showed that IXbldorf students also score above average on verbal and nonverbal creativity tests. The Waldorf education picture, though, is not entirely peachy. Draw backs for many parents include the cost (which ranges ^m SI,-400 to S6,500 per year, depending on grade level and loca tion) and a lack of em phasis on individuality (cnocs complain, for in stance, that children’s artwork on the walls all looks the same). Waldorf children switching over to a pub lic school may at first have trouble adapting to the emphasis on skills and the more com petitive environment — especially if they're in the primary grades. Still, Waldorf schools in the United States have doubled m number in the past de cade, with supply failing behmd die demand: One Waldorf pro gram in Sanu Rosa, California, reports a waiting list of 90 new applicants for the coming school year, most of whom will be turned away for lack of space. And more than 100 Waldorf teaching positions nadonw'de remain unfilled due to a short age of tramed Waldorf teachers. Appar ently many parents are discovering that Waldorf fills a need for a creative, ardsric approach to learning that is hard to find elsewhere. In a society that may be nudg ing its children prematurely into adulthood, Waldorf schools try to pre serve the magic and fairy-tale wonder of being a child. For more informadon about Waldorf educadon or for a list of Waldorf schools in the United Sutes, write to the Assoda- don of Waldorf Schools of North Amer ica, 17 Hemlock Hill Road, Great Bar rington, MA 01230. To obtain a free catalog of Waldorf-oriented books, toys, art supplies, games, musical instruments, and other resources, wnte to Hearth- Song, P.O. Box B-4, Sebastopol, CA 95472. □ Thomas Armstrong is the author of In Their Own Way: Discovering and Encouraging Your Child’s Personal Lea-ming Style. PARENTING Magazine August, 1988 For further information please contact: {i An Idea Ahead of its Time: Steiner’s Visionary Waldorf Schools Recent brain research shows what Rudolf Steiner, the Auathan philosopher and mystic, knew intuitively: Uic whole person must be touched by the educolional process. From tl^e very bc^'inning. when Steiner's Waldorf Schools began in Germany in 1919. he turned toward holistic methods. seekinK an archetypal inlcrcon- ncc ng ground for the teaching of 0*^. icicnce and religion. Steiner liCtieved that a sense of individual totality, based on personal free* dom and unpossessive love, could enhance perception. Dy weaving these into teaching methods. Steiner hoped to create a seminal model of education so powerful that there would soon be no con tinuing need fur the prototype Waldorf Schools. How did these schools differ iTom others? Primarily in their emphasis on the arts and the inner life. Said Steiner simply: "Waldorf School Education is not a pedagogical system but an Art — the Art of awakening what is actually there within tlic humon being." Steiner understood the prob lems of our strong intellectual bias and of parental cxpecta- tiona of luccess in money, power ond social adoplation. To override such repressive pressures, he felt an overarching view was neces sary — one that took into account the purpose of man's develop ment Steiner had such a view: he called it Anthropoaophy and he slresaed the idea of growth and change, believing that a new kind of education could pave the way for man's next evolutionary stage. What makes Steiner's work valuable today? First of all. it asks the question, "What is a human being?" His answer, which includes reverence for life — se taught in every class — expreases the (rue connections between nature, person and society. It is dedicated to inner dcvelupmcnl. to the education of spiritual qualities, ego strength, differentiation, will, thinking, feeling, movement — and even breathing. For instance, in Steiner's curriculum, science is taught with a concern for human values; rcUaion ia not thu only r(»'ilc to our .sense of meaning and of belonging; art is n route that helps reveal nature's secrets. And individual school.s lake on the character of different creative personalities, free of institutional rigidity and state control. Steiner advised against a merely intellectual .school day, firmly believing in the seriousness of play: all main lessons have recreational aspects. Students document their ideas by writing and drawing in special notebooks. Art is taught not to make children into artists, but to expose them to the healing influence of color, to exercise their creative wills, and to counteract the tendency of our time to act the imagination opart from learning. Music is also tended as a bnniu component of learning. Life, said Steiner, is intrinsically musical. Interval, tone, polyphony — all affect our thinking and «»rdoring of experience. Thus in Waldorf e<lu- cation, music may be interwoven with botany, geometry, astronomy. Dance ia Inughl as a combination of sound, motion and lant>uat{c — and expressed in a unique form call eurhythmy. (As with most Waldorf lessons, this multiple-skill exercise appeors to synchronize several different sectors of the brnin.) Steiner also encouraged his teachers to include thu do* mcnls of humor and surprise. Sixty years after the first Waldorf School was established there still remains a need for this spcciol typo of education — and its whole systems approach U» human ciipohilitiew Keseurclu-rs as divcr.se as Howurri Gardner, Rcuven b'cucrstcin and Hob Samples arc now calling for multiple approaches the reach ini ' the whole brain and echo Steiner comprehensive vision. Meanwhil our most imp<irtant social critic s are pointing to the kind of literal logical thinking which Steiner saw as one-sided, egoistic, and responsible for the most pressing problems of our time. M. C. Richards, a poet, potter and teacher trained in the Stcine methods asks. "If we arc all so smart and creative rnd highly cdocatud, why are our schools characterized by confusion, ill- will, violence and sterility?" Richards points to the rage thnt’^ hied by our current authoritarian system. Archetypal psychologist Jame Hillman underscores Steiner’s emphasis on the arts and the i.magination ns u form of cultural tlicrnpy and a necessary aspect o sclf-heuling — and asks why thes arc the very things wc nre denied "Do we know whnl idea of the human undorlics the school.** to which our children arc sent?" Hillman cautions us against tacitly accepting the rational model — which blocks us from our full humanity. The whole . Steiner pre.scription — feeling, imagination, music, ort ond move ment — is necessary for a bal anced view of life. Otherwise we become trapped, says Hillman, by rational ny.slcma that lead to irra tional nets, from domestic violenct to global conflicL Through crea tivity, the unconscious can he pos itively channelled and expressed. Otherwise, warns Hillmun, we ore controlled by our own weapons: "Idoos wo don’t know wo have, have us." — Carolyn Reynolds W THETA^RYTOWN LETTl For further information contact; nTTnoT e* c'prT»Tr*o r*r>T t ,1 ^ # -. /X7 DATA PRIVACY ADVISORY In accordance with M.S. 15.165, "Rights of subjects of data", we would like to inform you that your request for a permit or license from the City of Orono or any of its departments may require you to furnish certain private or confidential inform ation . You are notified that: 1. The information you furnish will be used to determine your qualification for the permit or license requested. 2. You may refuse to supply data, but refusal may require that the City deny the permit or license. 3. The information may be shared with other local, state or federal agencies to the extent necessary to process the permit or license. 4. If your requested permit or license reqires council action to approve, some information may become public. 5. You have certian rights under M.S. 15.165 to review private data on yourself. 6. Your full name, and date of birth are required to process this application or permit. or b TynAidld_______D/iVrViV_ Fir-St Mi^le Last _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ■■ - Address . /Ylti). _ _ _ _ _ ___ _ _ Date* of' birth (does not apply to buildihg/general permits) Phone I understand my rights as stated above X ;%nature ' 513 04 EIGHTS OF SUBJECTS OF DATA ' subdivision L of data. TJe ^ stored or to be stored shall be as set forth in this .e^^on. Subd. 2. Information r«3uired to be of: (a) the supoly private or confident!^ ^ta . within the collecting state age*icy, puVpose"^ and intended use of the requ^ed he m^v refie or is legally poUtical subdivision, or statewide consequence arising from his required to supply the requested dat^ J i-nfidential data; wd (d) the identity of supplying or refusing to supply «tate or federal law to receive the data. This, other persons or entities j, asked to suooly investigative data, The eommisioner of revenue mav place the msieaa'oi .nhdivisisrsrthe mcivioual income lax or pro^^v -ax reiuno_ms.----------------------- on those lorms. - Subd. 3. Access to data by he^is°Sie^^bj?ct of stored ^ta onauthority, an individual sh^ be ii^ormedjhe^^^ confidential. Upon his individuals, and whether it is sto-ed private or public data on further request, an individual who i^.^*!® to him and, if he desires, shall individuals shall be shown the ^ta f ^?Jer an\dividual has been 6e informed of ‘he content and ^ <E,elosed to shown the private datt “><J *nfo. mad of itt pu.^uant to this section is him for six months thereafter .. . .■ ^ Peen collected or created. The pending or additional data on the n-ivate or puSUc data uoon request hyresponsible authority shaH pro«dec^ies of th j. t a'lithority may reqmre the .--1 r3?4;'^r.“\y;^‘S‘2^; ""..TrSK made pursuant to this subdivision, o. jf immediate compliance is not excluding Saturdsv-s, Sunoays ^tWn that time, he shall so inform the request, excluding Saturdays, Sundays and legal holidays.requesx, exciucung ------------- Subd. 4. Procedure when deU is " ^?i’co«e^fwmtSf.'"Tocontest the accuracy or compl^eneB of public or pr t^ responsible authority exercise this right, an individual shall notJy 30 describing the nature of ‘he disa^eement. The re^iaib . ^ attempt to ^‘’ftalf ^sp^Si ’e s^allMos^e^* rd^vi’^TuaFs statement of disagreement is included with the disclosed data. mav be aooealed pursuant to theThe determination of the responsible authority may M P ^ provisions of the administrative procedure act relating to contested eas V i I ■ :A JUDSON M. D ayton TCF TOWFR. SLUE 8M • 121 SOLTI I EIGHTH ^ITIEET MFNNEAPOUS, MINNESOTA 55402 1990 August 30, 1990 Mayor and City Council Members City of Orono P. 0. Box 66 Crystal Bay, Minnesota 55323 Gentlemen and Ladies: As you are aware, at Orono's request, we are currently requesting a Conditional Use Permit for running a Waldorf Preschool and Kindergarten, a group family day care facility, at 1111 Tamarack Drive, Orono. We have already received approval from the Planning Commission at their August 20 meeting. On Monday, August 27, we met with Zigrida Krake from the Hennepin County .Community Services Department to arrange for our license, a group family day care facility license under Minnesota Statutes, Section 245A.14, subdivision 1, and under Minnesota Rules, parts 9502.0315 to 9502.0445, to serve 14 or fewer children at any one time. At our Monday meetit. > with the licensing agent we were informed that the use we intend uno* r the above-mentioned license, under State law, requires no Conditional Use Permit and no City approval because such use is a permitted single-family residential use of property for the purposes of zoning and other land use regulations. It is my understanding that with the license we have applied for through Hennepin County, our use cannot be restricted. Being a resident of Orono and one who respects the system, I am willing to continue with the Conditional Use Permit application process. The issue is on the agenda for the September 10 Council meeting. Enclosed with this letter is the above-mentioned statute. I hope you will grant a Conditional Use Permit, even though Minnesota law does not require one. My desire has been to work closely with the City of Orono to insure our stated objective. Sincerely, Judson M. Dayton Enclosure Mf>qiIST tCMNI-IM .ttlZ4 P04 78th LEGISLATURE piCfi FBOai THE COMMI8- ivenhip or managing agent A® court The i®aoiv9r^ fee is »w> otfioi®! opaaity fo> injury tM program—Th« w tad intai»U®naI Mtti ip tormin&tet 36 months after aignated by the court or when program’s license application lag in the residential program or I from the petition filed under I Dctition, or from testimony of that there is probable cause to rram, the court shall issue a five davB after receipt of the idendaf prograi ig individuals to accept service im administrator within fiv< ^nys a: ter notice is mtt to a idUt date. After-the temporary order, tioner of human services may te medical asiistance pngnun deficiendea documented by the ices. If the commissioner of ished under section 256B.501 is dencift or needs; and ual hours by type of employee, •e-airs, or capital assets neces- w V. ittei under subdivision 7. ^ment rate. The commissioner mtial program coat report, to orrected or met by reallocating ces including any investmenta, determines that any deficiency payment rate currently being a adjuatment by divimng the ler’s review by the residential !ik*audited cost report or the od. The payment rate adjust- a 9653.0010 to 9658.0080, and ' until another data set by the .' the reeidential program, the yment rate adjustments under s amount to the commissioner transferee of the obligation to le seller to the commissioner njssloner may use the medical nd accounting pumoses! 1S90 REGULAR SESSION Q .. C**- 568 funds that ITl '’"T ’*” * j" (h‘r ’ casn il'ow’‘^rMcoun£”/''^SS /subdi»l,l6n I. PERMmED^s^4« FAMn ‘ubdivision 1.1, «men<l«d to roai fam'ly dov dare fariiitv «f,12 or fewer penoiu and a <rrmm sme 14 or feweV ,.LI,i.:.TL-|| h!" 96C2.MIS t. forof toning and cUit ^ multifamily residential use of pTOperty for considered a permitted county zoning authority mav r?qu^e a ^ or assure proper maintenanceto program must ;iot^ be mo« imposed ndi-Suo'n^,i„" rosidenUari^i'-. ™Po»«l 0, am«ded“u,"“dr’"“ «“Wl.n.enL aection 245A.16. aubdivUion 1. i. cles and privau »S«ncta*thM Site'^feen'S^^^ TO AGENCIES. (al County ajen- ^tinctions and activities und^section*^2^A commissioner toapplicanU under section 245A.05, to ^ocommend denial of fines under section 245A.06. or m correction orders and recommend probationary under section 245A07 Xu commmioner governing those functions and wVJhis'^wtlo™ ^* directives of the legislature wg^ding^e recommendations to the In developing* the ^ecommenda^ors^ agencies, courjty agencies, and Iicens;d Ltar hom^p"^^^^^^^^^ {i?ss7i?^a SEf"101^90To: Mayor Grabek and Orono Council Members City Administrator Bernhardson Ftob: Michael P. Gaffron, Asst Planning & Zoning Administrator D?te: August 24, 1990 Subject: #1577 Norman Torrison, 2250 Longview Circle - Variance - Resolution Zoning District - RR-IB, Single family rural residential, 2 acre, unsewered Application - Request for side setback variance to construct tennis court. /./ List of Exhibits Exhibit A - Exhibit B - Exhibit C - Discussion Resolut Lc Notice of Planning Commission Action 8/24/90 Memo & Exhibits of 8/15/90 Please review the memo of August 15, 1990. Briefly, the applicant is proposing a variance to allow a 5' side setback for a tennis court where 30' setback would normally be required. Due to the existence of a 10' wide rainage and utility easement, the Public Works Director has recommended a minimum 10' setback to the north lot line. Planning Condssion Recomnendation At their August 20, 1990 meeting. Planning Commission vc id 3 to 2 to recommend approval of a ’''' se back to the north lot line with the hardships being topography of the site and the necessary orientation of the tennis court. Planning Commission conditioned their recommendation that there be no lighting of the tennis court area. Planning Commission also discussed whether screening of the fences along the north and east lot line was necessary but did not include a recommendacion for screening in their motion. The minority opinion was varied. Commissioner Jeff Johnson felt that there was no hardship and that the tennis court could be oriented some other way to meet the 30' setback. The applicant noted that the standard orientation is north/south, and a 30' setback would require additional grading and tree removal. Commissioner Candy Rowlette voted against the recommendation because she felt that the City should require screening of the tennis court fences if the 10' setback is allowed. Staff Revconendation Given the nature of the site and the relationship of the tennis court location to the location of neighboring houses, staff feels there will, be little visual encroachment and little environmental impact of the tennis court proposed 10' from the lot line. Per the majority Planning Commission recommendation, staff recommends approval per the attached resol’*'„ ;n. A RESOLDTION GRANTING A VARIANCE TO MONICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 10.03, SUBDIVISION 14 (D) FILE #1577 WHEREAS, Norman Torrison (hereinafter "the applicant") is owner of the property located at 2250 Longview Circle within the City of Orono (hereinafter "City") and legally described as follows: Lot 4, Block 1, Longview, Hennepin County, Minnesota (hereinafter "the property")? and WHEREAS, the applicant has applied to the City of Orono for a variance to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.03, Subdivision 14 (D) to permit the construction of a tennis court to be located less than the required 30' setback from the side lot line. Minnesota : NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono, FINDINGS 1. This application was reviewed as Zoning File #1577. 2. The property is located in the RR-lB Single Family Rural Residential Zoning District. 3. The Orono Planning Commission reviewed this application on August 20, 1990 and recommended approval of t e proposed variance on a vote of 3 to 2 based upon the following findings: a. The proposed clay tennis court is proposed at th<^ normal tennis court orientation of north/south. Topograp' j the site is such that as the tennis court moves further from the side lot line, the topography steepens so that additional grading would be necessary and many additional trees would have to be destroyed to accomodate the tennis court. b. Tennis court is proposed to be located 90' or more from the nearest neighboring residence structure. c. If the tennis court is not provided with lighting, it will have little impact on neighboring properties. Page 1 of 4 4. 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. 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 variance would not adversely affect traffic conditions, l:ght, 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. 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 10.03, Subdivision 14 (D) to permit the construction of a tennis court to be located 10' from the side lot line where a 30' side setback is normally required, subject to the following conditions: 1. The tennis court may never oe provided with lighting. 2. Applicant shall adhere to the site plan attached to this resolution as Exhibit A. 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 year of the date of Council approval, or this variance will expire on that date (September 10, 1991). 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 here^.n, 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. Page 2 of 4 Adopted by the Orono City Council on this 10th day of September» 1990. ATTEST: Dorothy M. Hallin, City clerk James R. Grabekr Mayor Property Owner(s) STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this 10th day of September, 1990, by James R. Grabek & Dorothy M. Hallin, Mayor & City Clerk of the City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City. Notary Public Page 3 of 4 Proa: Date: Planning Commission Chairman Kelley Orono Planning Commission Members City Administrator Bernhardson Michael P. Gaffron, Asst Planning & Zoning Administrator August 15, 1990 Subject: #1577 Norman Torrison, 2250 Longview Circle - Variance ~ Public Hearing Zoning District - RR-lB, Single family rural residential, 2 acre, unsewered Application - Request for side setback variance to construct tennis court. List of Exhibits Exhibit A - Application Exhibit B - Plat Map Exhibit C - Property Owners List Exhibit D - Survey Exhibit E - Plat with Topographic Overlay Exhibit F - Air Photo Exhibit G - Neighbor Acknowledgement Form Pertinent Pacts - 1. Applicant proposes to construct a 60' x 120' tennis court, 5' from his north side lot line where a 30' setback would normally be required. 2. The variance is requested due to topography of the site. Applicant requests a 5* lot line setback to keep the bulk of the proposed clay tennis court on the most level area of the lot. (See topographic survey). 3. The existing drainage and utility easement is 1J0| either side of the north lot line, hence a 5’ setback would encroach 5* into that easement. 4- There is a designated wetland at the very southeast corner of the lot. The proposed tennis court location is in excess of 60' from the wetland. Meeting the required north lot line setback would force the tennis court to within about 35' of the wetland, and result in the need for significant additional grading and the use of retaining walls. 5. The existing septic system is directly south of the house, with the alternate drainfield site just east of that. The tennis court as proposed will have no impact on either the existing or future drainfield sites. Zoning File #1577 August 15, 1990 Page 2 Discussion The standard tennis court orientation is north/south, hence the slopes on this lot tend to limit the reasonable locations for the standard 60 x 120' tennis court. The proposed location, 5* from the north lot line, is about 60' from the east lot line or 90'+ from the resident structure to the east. The residence to the north is approximately 150' from the tennis court. The applicant has discussed the setback proposal with the property owner to the north, and staff has discussed the plan with the property owner to the east, neither of which has s':ated any specific objections to the project. The neighbor to the east was pleased that the tennis court is proposed to be 60' from their lot line rather than the 30' minimum. Staff would recommend that drainage from the tennis court be directed to the south rather than the east, eliminating the possiblity for any drainage to the neighboring property to the east. The City's current standard for drainage and utility easements along interior lot lines of plats is 5' either side of the line. This plat was done before that standard took effect. However, in discussing this specific easement with the Public Works Director, he feels that there is some potential for future need of the entire 10' easement within applicant's property, for utility purposes, based on the location of the house to the east. His recommendation therefore is to allow a 10' setback from the lot line, but not a 5' setback. Further, the Public Works Director suggested that the City ask for a "Hold-Harmless Agreement" for the entire 30' setback e ;ea, anticipating that if the City needed to install utilities at some future date, the tennis court would possibly encroach into the needed temporary construction easement. The other side of that coin is that we would allow an accessory garage or other accessory structure of normal size, to be located up to 10' from the lot line without such a Hold-Harmless Agreement, hence one could argue that the need for such an Agreement is excessive. Applicant has stock-piled the bags of clay for the clay court, on the cul-de-sac. While the court could be constructed without a variance, that will result in the need for significant retaining walls and additional grading work on the site. Staff Recomnendation Based on the Public Works Director's review of the easement, staff would recommend approval of a 10' minimum setback to the north lot line (with the optional condition for a Hold-Harmless Agreement for portions of the tennis court less than 30' from the lot line). If Zoning File #1577 August 15, 1990 Page 3 Planning Commission feels justified in making the following findings, then a recommendation for approval would be appropriate; 1. No neighboring properties will be adversely affected by the tennis court located 10* from the north lot line. 2. Forcing the tennis court to meet the required 30' north side setback would result in the need for additional grading work near a wetland area, and a significant increase in necessary tree removal on the property. 3. The topography and the necessary north/south orientation for the tennis court limit the potential possible sites for a tennis court on the property. o / / CITY OP ORONO - VARIANCE APPLICATION #Initial Application Fee $175.00^ ($50.00 per each add^ional-vafiance) Renewal Variance Fee $100.00 (no change from original application) After-the-Fact Fees (Double application fee) J_ ^ ^ PROPERTY LOCATION Site Address CITY Cf FfNlisCt CFFICE 135020m- FJL 1(D,00 Q/£Q.c <F Property Identification Number (P.I.D.)07/27/9 Attach legal description to application if not included on required survey. APPLICANT Name lO^I^ 'SCaJ Phone (home; ^7 _ _ Phone (work) ^&/^c Address; ^ City;^^^*:^ Zip; OWNER (if different than applicant) Name Phone (home) Phone (work) Address;City;Zip; Date Property Acquired seFT n^3 (month/year) I Oahcrf (do not) also own the adjacent parcels of land PRESENT USE OP PROPERTY Present Zoning District _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Present Use of Property _ _ ___ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Residential Other (specify) DESCRIPTION OP REQUEST Estimated Construction Cost $ a Describe request in detail; S'5 S'cT_ VARIANCES REQUIRED Lot Area Setback Variances (^ Other Lot Width Front _ _ _ Hardcover Side _ _ _ Rear) BMROSHXP uisV hJT,A. T af -r£.eFrs.. _ _ _ __ __ _ _ _ _ DBSCRIFTIOH OF OHOSOAL PROPERTX COMDITIONS Describe unusual property conditions preventing compliance witn zoi'.ing Code Requirements: S f T>^SCtiP^ /l_f_ _S Spfh^t JJ S_f IS . tuotfr.9 ntsa /teQu7/i? <lc/rr>A'/( -------— aaQDIRED SUBMITTALS 1,~ ^Completed Application Form T^ACertlfied Property Owners List of owners within 150' (you must obtain __'this list from Hennepin County Department of Finance A-603 Govt Center ^ 348-3271). O Plat Map (obtained with property owners lis' . . ^ j Xm^ Certificate of survey (signed by a licensed surveyor) to include sT^ TopographTc^surv^^^Sisting^and^^^Pj^sed elevations) if any changes in existing arade are proposed. - - -^ 6^ Sketches or p±ans of floor and elevation views. As an addendum to this appli^a^ionp—please attach a separate list of —any other persons you wish notified of this application. 8. Additional items as may be requested by City staff. YOU ARB REQUIRED TO SUPPLY 30 COPIES OP 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 voor variance application is not coaplete_if—the—above information has not been included. _ _ _ _ _ _ Certification by Clerical Department that Variance Application is complete. Initialed by Clerical Staff:_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ___ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ APPLICANT'S SIGNATURE ^ jThe a plicant hereby agrees to provide all information required or requested by the Zoning Administrator, agrees to pay additional fees (staff time not covered by oriqln)hl fee payment) and/or consultant expenses incurred in review of th^ gi^lic^io^, and certifies that the information supplied is true and co^^eox to tl^ his/her knowledge^^ . Applicant's Signature Date ^- - - -- OWNERS SIGNATURE ^ The owner hereby ackp%rledges and agrees to this authorizes reasonable ^try onto the property by City staff, agents, Commissioa^empers,^^etnri?ouncil members for purposes of investiga tion and verificatioybf this ^^quee^:- -^ / Ownei 'a Signature y _ _ _ _ Date _ _ Applicant must hi^e all submittals into the City offices 25 days before the Planning Commission Meeting. Planning Commission Meetings are held on the third Monday of each month. Applicants must be present at all scheduled review meetings of the Planning Commission and Council. If an applicant is unable to attend a scheduled meeting, please make arrangements to have an authorized agent attend in your place and to advise the Building & Zoning Office of this change prior to the meeting. pHLs h i - 3 § S a ^ ee N a u M Z •• M I ^ (9 N. o Z^ U M l-« —I 5 O U) Ui ^0•-4 a. «0 N MOT ! [ IS M iS ifi < IH Ul Isi i^d ® %M J f \aiiKi o oe z O M Q O u M CM Z S CMlUg tr- ^ > r), * o o •• m M U. CO CM M O Z UJ vO -i U) Z^S 5 M u) OT U is iss I ' ? iT* TI# S oe luO M -i U1 JCSSfeS" M ^ UJ UJ O UJ j: ah (0 CM o O M O M O U U CM -i g>. El 0 UJ X1 ^k5J M Z _l _J (J M CM O UJ > Mla M oe •( ui ci.SS^^5z • W >-l M < M os Z H- CM M UI UI >• <0 CM OS O < M O U. U. M X ui E«. s -I X 0 u <-« < Z CM —I ••M Z CM M ^ 1 > UJ Cv UJ M fH a u. *H K I K M <o ^ z CM U. CO CM M O Z U UI M Z UI tU UI UJ U. M UJ ils 2 UI g ^ CM 2 H CM o X CM -J N O N. II §S “y s 00<O^M CM Z O Z M U| CM UJ «t UM •• Z CM ^ N O M ^ ^ 2 J >-• 3 X ^ X cil E oino Si* “gu. *83 Z wJ «aj -.-|s§ M O </) U) CM ^ <-t O M> g ^ S u to ^J < 10 CM_I M Z ^ 4 < 2!sisfi UI 2 ^OU-M^ I O T UJ 4 M a -J O UI 4 UJ M> U UI C9 CO Si Z CM o M O CO CO CM -J 5 UI a CM Z Z O M 4 O U X CM Z 4 In M er *3 _ ► .» z uUJ II Z M _ CM g «• Z * Z ssg'iu, ? g“sS M 4 V- -i ^ O UI z z O' UJ UI u CM u o O' z CO CM O CM o JO O Z Z CM -I <n cn K gg O > -I -I Elll UIJO o CM Z W M g aM 4 UJ UJ 2 _ iH _J _l M Z -J -J o Z UJ w 4 Si^^^gz UI S COCM^^^Sl JO o z a CM o UJ (/) UI UI M fill N O 4 UI a J- UJ 'T I M O M Z UI 0) X •H 4 I- -I O O iH _J O l-l I -I UJ X z M UJ X Z O O 4 > UJ O UI Z Z I- O (/) »H u X M O _J CO CM M UI 3 O Z JO O Z Z V) «-• Z a 4 M 8 UJ z e M z X JH U Tglu^ 3 UJ z f* M UI CM (O U. -J a M M ^ 4 Z Z M UJ jii isg! O CO M M JO -J -J UI C9 JO O Z Z CM -J S^S!? Z 4 UJ z r o O 4 Z Oo2^4 K 4 UJ O' W 4 ox ut >o O 4 X X -I UI O Z OC K U JO “ 2 M 3 JO UJ UJ UJ Z _ ‘I'ggsgiK Q X £ >b z X s ^z O 4M _J ^ 3UI JmI •■* 4 rM Z Z I lu JO M O CO > ^ CO O O O JO o JO O -I -J CM -J g Z gUI < >• N III. N Z O M O U X ^ 5 o >• SI X JO > X X UI tt O > U O X 0 4 3 X°*ss>aCM Z CM UJ gS^'gg o S“ S ^ ^ S Q o 2 _ 422 z z 1 M X X jM X IH JH 4 Z Z i£sg:;ii£ K X u o r4 < UJ 2 UJ «H Q J^ * 0X0 z33 Z □. -J * fO z z • Z _J JO 0X00 3S T B-aa M Z 1- 4 -J O X CO Z CM JO 4 CO CM JO O X J- CM OX JO z X m •• •• CO CM JO o a Q a (Si O Z X X CM CO m o z CO CM O CM oJO O K z CM z UI z z z O a 4 z a a z UJ 4 4 > \ Z 4 WIIP UJ Z Z <3123 z 4 ^ i,I s SI .. • -I (A•r 0/ — •2 9^' ft t± 0 0 (0, k '.'4 \ '6^^ I \ 4^ 9 '• \ <. \ \ UA \ \ ^ \ \ \ \ OJ-*- 01--^ U- -I2sC' S' fei y '«J •■ 'fv*.Ss=|-a *1 2| ST ® ? I---------1-t r- f:‘ :?oc JO Ql^j jO out/ ^ 8 O>n o in H-uu Ui .J •Ioto • .'jUk-ll'Puo’j Ajuno , utaouuj^jJ y V//.; W. ^oc; yo - «-V /<' v..</.ri.v I (we) Adjacent Property Oimers* Acknowledgement Form v<«.c. V\ ^ —-_ _ _ _ _ _ of Lo^CfVne^yjJ Cigccg [print address][print name(s)J have reviewed the plans for the proposed improvement or proposed use of the property located at_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _also referred to as Land Use Application No. _ _ _. I (we) understand that in executing this acknowledgement, I (we) am (are) not asked to declare approval or disapproval of the property or use but merely to confirm for the City Council that I (we) am (are) aware of the improvement plans and that the proposed neighbor's project or use requires Council approval. Property Owner Date 7 - 90 Property Owner Date If you have any Information that may assist the City in the review of this Land Use Application, please submit your comments to the Building & Zoning Office at least 10 days prior to the scheduled meeting date. #1 ___'i 7 I From: Date: Subject: rfr Q i-90 Mayor Grabek & Orono Council Members C: ty Ad..inistrator ^ernhardson Michael P. Gaffron, \yst Planning & Zoning Administrator August 24, 1990 1578 A1 and Libbie Hopwood, 1205 Lakeview Avenue - After-the-Fact Variance/Resolution Zoning District - RR-IB, Single Family Rural Fasidential, 2 acre, sewered Application - Request for front and side street setback variances to construct a deck/walkway on the northwest side of the house. List of Ex' itii Exhibit A - Resolution Exhibit B - Notice of Planning Commission Action Exhibit C - Memo & Exhibits of August 17, 1990 Discussion Please review the memo and exhibits of August 17th. Briefly, applicants obtained a permit before constructing their detached garage, but failed to obtain a permit for the deck in the front yard. Deck construction was stopped by the inspector shortly after it egan, hence the project is not complete. Applicants propose an 8' x 4V deck, which, due to the orientation of the house or the lot, is less t .an and side street lot lines. Applicants me r-quosti'a approval to finis' that deck, which will be high enough above grade to need railin^a on all three sides, and will extend 27' from the street lot ::r the north and 23' from the street '-»t lime on the west. Planning Commission Recommendation Planning Commission reviewed this application it their August 20, 1990 meeting, and on a vote of deck as proposed, finding that on the house is a hc-rdship. Planni"* problem with the lattice work project .^ould be a positive impi to 0 recommended ^ roval of the corner ’ ot- the . .rlentation of • ’caced they had no id felt that this jperty. At the Planning Commit- it was noted that the bas-cment in the tuck under gaw.'ro ^. ‘4 beer: remodeled. Star verilied that ^ ’-ermit was issi ' t * •■is voik 2 7 1984- Statf Recommen;i-*,;tion Star recommends approval per the Planning recommendation. A resolution for approval is attached. Comm i i>s ion A RESOLUTION GRANTING A VARIANCE TO MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 10.28, SUBDIVISION 5 (B) FILE 1578 WHEREAS, A1 and Libbie Hopwood (hereinafter "the applicants") are owners of the property located at 1205 Lakeview Avenue within the City of Orono (hereinafter "City") and legally described as follows: Lots 12 and 13, Block 1, Maxwell's Addition to Crystal Bay, Lake Minnetonka, Hennepin County, Minnesota (hereinafter "the propertv"); and WHEREAS, the applicants have applied to the City for a variance to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.28, Subdi'^iaion 5 (B) to permit the construction of a deck to be located 27' from the street lot line and 23' from the side street lot line v;here a l»( ' setback is required from both lot lines. Minnesota : NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono, I'^NDINGS 1. This applies 2, The propert Residential Zonii •».s . ewed as Zoning File 1578. .ocated in the RR-lB Single Family Rural strict. 3. The Orono Planning Commission reviewed this application on August 20, 1990, and on a vote of 5 to 0 recommended approval of the proposed variance based upon the foll;i.<'.ng findings: a) The orientation of the house on this corner lot and the size of the lot are hardi.>ips to the property which would limit construction within the area of the house proposed for the deck. b) No neighboring properties w construction of the proposed deck witn work below extending to grade. Page 1 of 4 I be impacted by iling and lattice m c) The proposed deck will be a positive improvement to the property. 4. 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. 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 variance would not adversely affect traffic conditions, light, air nor pose a fire haz\rd 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; necessary to preserve a substantial property right of t •>,€ applicant; and would be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan of the City. CONCLUSIONS, ORDER AND CONDITIONS Based upon the above findings, the Orono City Council hereby grants a variance to the Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.28, Subdivision 5 (B) to permit the construction of an 8' x 41' deck with railings, located 27* from the north street lot line and 23* from the west street lot line where 50* setbacks are normally required, subject to the following conditions: 1. Applicant shall obtain an after-the-fact building permit prior to continuing construction of this deck. 2. Authorities granted by this variance run with the property not with the applicant, but are permissive only and must be exercised by application for a b‘ -Iding permit within one year of the date of Council approval, or this variance will expire on that date (September 10, 1991). 3. Violation of or non-compliance with any of the terms and conditions of this variance shall constitute a violation of the zoning code, snail automatically terminate any authority granted herein, and ihall be punishable as a misdemeanor. Page 2 of 4 4. The undersigned applicant has read, understood and hereby agrees to the terms of this resolution and on behalf of himself, his heirs, successors and assigns, hereby agrees to the recording of this resolution in the chain of title of the property. Adopted by the Orono City Council on this 10th day of September, 1990. ATTEST: Dorothy M. h^lin. City Clerk James R. Grabek, Mayor Property Owner(s) STATE OP MINNESOTA ) ) SS. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this 10th day of September, 1990, by James R. Grabek & 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 My Commission Expires Page 3 of 4 Ik* . I STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) On this _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ day of _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __f before me a Notary Public within and for said county, personally appeared known to me to be the person(s) described in and who* executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that he (they) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed. NOTARY PUBLIC CITY OF OROHO ZOHIHG FILE #1578 F, O* Box 66 _ _ Crystal Bay, MN 55323 HOTICR OF PLAIIBIHG COMMISSIOH ACTION 473-7357 Date of Notice: 08/24/90 TO: Al 6 Libby Hopwood COPIES TO: 1205 Lakeview Avenue Wayzata, MN 55391 TYPE OF APPLICATION: Variance DATE OF MEETING: 8-20-90 VOTE: 5 For 0 Against Planning Coasd.8sioii recoBBiends the following: Approval as submitted NOTES AMD SPECIAL CONDITIONS: Applicant's next scheduled meeting Is confirmed as: City Council Monday, September 10, 1990; meeting starts at 7:00p.m. If you desire certified copies of the official Planning Commission minutes, they ere available from the City Clerk after review and approval by the Planning Commission. Planning Commission Chairman Kelley Orono Planning Commission Members City Administrator Bernhardson Fron: Michael P. Gaffron, Asst Planning & Zoning Administrator D'jte: August 17, 1990 Subject: #1578 A1 & Libby Hopwood, 1205 Lakeview Avenue - After-the-fact Variance - Public Hearing Soning District - RR-IB, Single feimily rural residential, 2 acre, sewered Application - Request for front and side street setback variances to construct a deck/walkway on the northwest side of the house. List of Exhibits Exhibit A - Application Exhibit B - Plat Map Exhibit C - Property Owners List Exhibit D - Survey Exhibit E - Staff Letter to Applicants 6/28/90 Exhibit F - Construction Plans Pertinent Pacts - 1. Applicants recently constructed a detached garage, and during that construction started to construct a d ck on the street side of the house to expand their front stoop area. Staff advised them of the need for a permit and it was determined that a variance is necessary, because the complete proposal includes decks substantially above grade which must meet principal structure front yard setbacks. 2. Setbacks are as follows: Front Setback (N) Side Street Setback (W) Existing House 29.2* 28.3' Proposed Deck 27' 23' Required 50' 50' 3. Proposed lot coverage including the existing house, the 22'x30' garage, the 12'xl2' chicken coop, and the 8'x41' deck, is 12.9%, meeting the 15% limit. Discussion - The proposed deck will extend along the entire length of the house. Portions of the proposed deck near the front entry might meet the 30" or lower height requirement in order to not need a railing. However, applicants note they wish to extend the deck over the tuckunder garage area and definitely want to have a railing around the entire deck for safety purposes. Zoning File #1578 August 17r 1990 Page 2 of 2 Visually, the deck will appear as an extension of structure closer to the road. Due to the corner lot nature of this property, the extent of the visual encroachment created by the decks may be minimal in the context of the neighborhood, especially if the deck is not enclosed above or below it. However, the applicants' plan shows lattice to completely visually enclose the areas beneath the deck, which acts to make this appear as a significant extension of the house. On the other hand, this lattice might provide some screening for apparently much needed storage on the property. Staff has received no comments from the neighbors regarding this specific deck proposal. The applicants just recently constructed a garage on the property to create additional interior storage areas. This property has a long history of exterior storage violations and neighborhood complaints, which staff hopes will be minimized in the future now that the garage has been completed. One issue dating to 1984 or previously, is the keeping of chickens on the property, which is not allowed on any property less than 3 acres in area, especially in a neighborhood of 1/4 to 1/2 acre lots. Applicants have discussed this with Building Inspector Bruce Vang, and have agreed to get rid of the chickens. Staff RecoBmendatioii - Planning Commission must determine whether the proposed 8*x41' deck with lattice areas between the posts is a visual and physical encroachment towards the street lot lines that is appropriate in the context of this neighborhood. If approval is recommended. Planning Commission may wish to consider specific conditions regarding enclosure above or below the deck. P> f? I t-'J 7 <2 3 CITY OP ORONO - VARIANCE APPLICATION Initial Application Fee ($50.00 per each additioTTaT’^variance) a / Renewal Variance Fee $100.00 ~Fr y * J (no change from original application) ^ '7 n ^ After-the-Fact Fees (Double application fe#)# Jc^ {J \ .-7 PROPERTY LOCATION Site Address ^^ ^ \ J^iVE__ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Property Identification Number (P.I.D.) /IH FiNfifx'il 0Fi-lC£ 13502000CO # 01 GDf 175^.00 Attach legal description to application if not included on /yn,/^ required survey. _____________________________J£X-1A APPLICANT Phone (home) Name 4-k^i hVf«g- _ _ _ _ _ _ Phone (work) Address; \ l\ IaWiP City; r^inOrOQ Zip; "353f{ / OWNER (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. PRESENT USE OP PROPERTY Present Zoning District ______1^"^^ \ £>__________________ ^ Present Use of Property ________________________________Reside. ^ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Other (specify) _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ DESCRIPTION OP REQUEST Estimated Construction Cost $ 1~^W0 Describe request in detail __ _ _ _ _ _ VARIANCES REQUIRED _ _ _ Lot Area _ _ _ Lot Width _ _ _ Hardcover Setback Variances ( V Front _ _ _ Side _ _ _ Rear) Other_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _' HARDSHIP , . ^ ^ ^ 1.Describe undue hardship or practical difficulty resulting from strict DESCRIPTION OF DNUSDAL PROPERTY CONDITIONS Describe Code ibe unusual property conditions preventing compliance with Zoning _ _Requirements *4i^ r* O r)f^nx2-f^_\ rr^ \ 1 "^LOCVjI^ _ _ _ _ _i_ _ _ _ _^ within (l50^ (you mnct obtain 8. HIRED SUBMITTALS Completed Application Form Certified' Property Owners List of owners - - - - . this list from Hennepin County Department of Finantr^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. Topographic survey (existing and proposed elevations) if any changes in existing grade are proposed. Sketches or plans of floor and elevation views. , . ^ ^ As an addendum to this application, please attach a separate list of any other persons you wish notified of this application. Additional items as may be requested by City staff. YOU ARE REQUIRED TO SUPPLY 30 COPIES OF LARGE DOCUMENTS OR_ A WORKING COPY (11" X 17" OR SMALLER) FOR ALL DOCUMENTS SUBMITTED. Please the aU^oveThe Applicant and Property Owner must sign this application. variance application is not complete ifremember that your ______________ information has not been included. Certification by Clerical Department that Variance Application is complete. Initialed by Clerical Staff_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ incurred in review of this appli^tion, and certifies that the information supplied is true and corr^^ to thh best o^his/her knowledge. Applicant’s —LQ1L> ?r^„er‘T^y ackow: edges Vf°" —authorizes reasonable entry onto the property by City stafr. agents. Commission members, an( tion and verification/ofi^is ncil memb< St. consultants, for purposes of investiga- Owner's Signatu^ ^ unable to attend a scheduled meeting, please make arrangements to ha e an authorized agent attend in your place and to advise the Building s Zoning Office of this change prior to the meeting. (14) 1/ / m rr ivtjOHSKT (93)r8 P-7 CO " V (’.4) A%otMT B ■ Twts 'V OISTWiff 9«OJ ' SE TO TXIJ WP<T UI^HET0NKA_ AVf^ c% ____ '• (40) ^ 9 » ^ u“ eaism' *"» a or _ tt•aJ ’’ '^a V 7 (12) S aa: _ wyC a or ■< fj -.40 a (18) 3 _ J 2;X31) ^ 1a s £t ** (37) ^ " - '‘fs a a ‘ i (W a e "-Oo »* sri6) ..• 5 '•“'c...)(34j..fl a 3>i ^ '*a»» <40 v '' • '^a(151 9 $ AVF 64 15 12 (11 : _______ aP^TS) •M 15 I (22) (10) (29).Na/,^gT(24) J5 18 a , -/ ’ ^ (26) M4 8 JTIOT B IW^ (17)(1^\ - k 58) I ' (57)51 8 “fHTS ! iti ;• 1 V) ponSPrCT AVE 1 a?((51) r”,7 I 3 (52) ^ 3 2.' <5-)s I (45) 3 1 (47) '55_ ^::ciTrrrr ^ORONCr CITYofORONO Post Office Box 66* Crystal Bay, Minnesou 55323 • Muivcv' JfRcea On the North Shore of Lake Minnetonka June 28, 1990 A1 & Libby Hopwood 1205 Lake view ;../enue Wayzata, MN 55391 Dear Mr. & Mrs. Hopwood: The Building & Zoning Department is in receipt of your application for a building permit, which was received by thi- office on June 21, 1990. A review of the application finds that this deck with railing is considered as an encroachment into the required 50' front yard, and therefore cannot be permitted unless a variance is granted. Also, because a 50' setback is also required from your north lot line along Lakeview Avenue, it appears that no portion of the deck can be approved without a variance. Because the deck has already been partially constructed, would be as follows; your options 1. Remove the deck in its entirety. OR 2. Remove all portions of the deck that have platform height more than 30" above grade and remove railings from the portion that remains or lower the deck so that it doesn't need a railing. A platform deck which does not extend above the main floor level and which does . ot need railings, would not have to meet setbacks. This would eliminate the portion over your old garage, but might allow some deck to remain near the front entry area. 3. Apply for a front and side street setback variance. The cost of variance application is $175.00, and your application and the required subm’ttals would have to be in by 12:00 noon, ?*• ...day, July 27th to meev ' next Planning Commission deadline. A building permit cannot be issued for the structure and you must cease work on it until this matter is resolved. Please feel free to contact me at 473-7357 so that we can meet to discuss your options. Sincere flichaexlichaex P. G^k<^on, Asst Planning & Zoning Administrator MPG/tln Enclosure - variance application cc; Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building & Zoning Administrator Lyle Oman, Senior Building Inspector ^ , PLBLIC - 473-7359 VSSESSI.NG fax - 473-0510 T V- I I I I I I rl ; I 1 'MlM !!: t ‘ lilt Jii . i I---1-1 4- 4 -i- Jj I,- T"9. ji \ ll-;- yi!_;------ ■jii 4 i U- -I C.. :st. -■ o M 1 r- i c! i!> ^ 1ij i i -' - ^lo T' =^5 oi f U.iv_^ 1- t "-F .■:■ > 5J.3WC * oNA«v »•«-. ®/€ ! •'• OA«ar JO . ^ ^ M ill 'Hi • ' “ -S ^—51T —S—:rx«if '►^•y>-U.5»4 TA»»-rH»y >x*-^ p- ' ,-t --------- r* '*”4 • "~~' -V ^ 77#*A«wA tjm) ^ A^JAaW^AMVy. N as«d^9 ar/rtoy. ---------------T-lT*rf '^'^U A'if 9;«l iQ^' ’ Tos Mayor Grabek & Orono Council MembersPlanning Commission Chairman Kelley ''EP 10 Orono Planning Commission Members City Administrator Bernhardson f'lJY (Jp CP^^Q Proa: Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building & Zoning Administrator Date: August 15, 1990 Subject: #1580 Patricia Plant, 2245 Watertown Road - Variance - Public Hearing Pertinent Ordinance - Section 10.28, Subdivision 5 (B) - Front street setback variance required for proposed 1/2 bath and closet addition to west side of existing residence. Required = 50' Existing = 26' Proposed = 30' Variance « 20' or 40% List of Exhibits Exhibit A - Application Exhibit A-1 - Applicant's Addendum Exhibit B - Plat Map Exhibit C - Property Owners List Exhibit D - Floor Plan Exhibit E - Elevation Exhibit F « Septic Map Exhibit G - Survey Review of Application - Please review Exhibit A-1, the applicant's addendum which reviews the unique history of the house, the needs for the addition and the hardships. The property consists of a total of 4.3 acres with a wetland area just under 2 acres. The house was placed on the property prior to current zoning. Although the property line runs to the center of Watertown Road, th<“ 33' of right-of-way places the existing house (northeast addition) approximately 26' from the dedicated right- of-way and approximately 36' from the traveled roadway of Watertown Road. The west side addition at it's widest point is located approximately 30' from the front street lot line and as it moves westward it decreases to approximately 34'. The addition will have no impact on the existing drainfield that serves the residence nor will the bathroom require an upgrade of the existing septic system. The hardships listed in the applicant's addendum are as follows: 1. House placed on property prior to current zoning standards. House placed on property in 1870. i Zoning File #1580 August 15, 1990 Page 2 2. There is approximately 10* of additional unused area between the traveled roadway of Watertown Road and the front street lot line. 3. There is a 20* high buckhorn hedge obscuring the view of the r. nrosed addition from the roadway. 4. rho existing house meets all required side setbacks in it*s prs.-^nt location and so will the proposed addition. 5, The property consists of 4.3 acres of land. 6. None of the neighbors notified for this variance application have submitted negative comments to the City. Options of Action Approve 1 - If approved, the Planning Commission may consider the findings and hardships noted above. Denial - If denied, please refer to the necessary findings in Section 10.28, Subdivision 3 (A). Zoning File #1580 August 31, 1990 Page 3 Additional Coaments and Planning ConiBission RecoBBiendation - There was little discussion concerning the review of this application. The Planning Commission recommended unanimous approval and accepted the applicant's hardships and findings as noted in her addendum (Exhibit A-1). The enclosed resolution has been drafted per the Planning Commission's recommendation and is presented for Council's review and action. A RESOLUTION GRANTING A VARIANCE TO MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 10.28, SUBDIVISION 5 FILE «1S80 WHEREAS, Patricia G. Plant (hereinafter "the applicant") is the owner of the property located at 2245 Watertown Road within the City of Orono (hereinafter "City") and legally described as follows: See Exhibit A attached, (hereinafter "the property"); and WHEREAS, the applicant has applied to the City for a variance to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.28, Subdivision 5 (B) to permit the construct*-<n of a half bath and closet addition to the northwest side of existing residence, proposed approximately 30' from the north front street lot line instead of the required 50' setback. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono, Minnesota: FINDINGS 1. This application was reviewed as Zoning File #1580. 2. The property is located in the RR-IB Single Family Rural Residential Zoning District requiring 2 acres dry contiguous land within building envelope. The subject property consists of 4.3 acres of which 3 dry acres are contiguous. 3. The Orono Planning Commission reviewed this application on August 20, 1990 and recommended approval of the proposed variance based upon the following findings and hardships: A) The house was placed on the property in approximately 1870, prior to current zoning standards. B) There is approximately 10' of additional unused area between the traveled roadway of Watertown Road and the front street lot line, placing the new addition approximately 40' from the actual traveled roadway. C) There is a 20' high buckhorn hedge and other mature plantings that obscure the view of the proposed addition from the roadway. Page 1 of 3 D) The existing house and proposed addition meets all required side setbacks in its present location. E) The property consists of 4.3 acres of land. F) None of the neighbors notified for this variance application have submitted negative comments to the City. 4. The City Council has considered this application including the findings and recommendations of the Planning Commissionr reports by City staff, comments by the applicant and the effect of the proposed variance 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 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. CONCLUSIONS, ORDER AND CONDITIONS Based upon one or more of the findings noted above, the Orono City Council hereby grants a variance to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.28, Subdivision 5 (B) to permit the construction of a half bath/closet addition to the existing residence to be placed approximately 30' from the front street setback line instead of the required 50'. This approval is subject to the following conditions; 1. Authorities granted by this resolution run with the property not with the applicant, but are permissive only and must be exercised by application for a building permit within one year of the date of Council approval, or this variance will expire on that date (September 10, 1991). 2. Violation of or non-compliance with any of the terms and conditions of this variance shall constitute a violation of the zoning cede, shall automatically terminate any authority granted herein, and shall be punishable as a misdemeanor. Page 2 of 3 3. The undersigned applicant has read, understood and hereby agrees to the terms of this resolution and on behalf of herself, her heirs, successors and assigns, hereby agrees to the recording of this resolution in the chain of title of the property. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota at a regular meeting held on the 10th day of September, 1990. ATTEST: Dorothy M. Hallin, City Clerk James R. Grabek, Mayor Property Owner(s) STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this 10th day of September, 1990, by James R. Grabek & Dorothy H. Hallin, Mayor & City Clerk of the City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City. STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) Notary Public On this _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ day of_ _ _ _ _ _ _ before me a Notary Public within and for said county, personally appeared_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _——^— known to me to be the person(s) described in and who executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that he (they) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed. Notary Public Page 3 of 3 EXHIBIT A Minh9.ota aeBorlb^ M ^ lh» South«eflterly line of Outlet .A. nna the B«((lntiln<f «t the Interaect HennoPln County. Mlnneaots, north line of Lot; 1. Block ^ "rwUtnrty alon« the north lino 'ocooraiw to the recorrt plat thcieofi - ^ ,gujnarly aloiy? .;of «ld tot 1 “Horth Une or nuUot A. TJW -WY. Hennepin Mi^sotn to the record plat thereof arvl Ito easterly ex- • County. salt north line a«) Uc extonoion to the "^erlyMln* of.Outlot D of anlt t^.Ko^huost^^^JHe ^.°^Lco^Bo^«t.t.^Y ^^on,.:,-. i tM»a^!iot?hw.stiffly.a^W o«ter thence Sortheasteiiy alo«5 -hxtwelon extension of the Southeiterly line of . .. a-".. „ Of h«tinnl.« ■^uhjeet jlo;‘M«J»io'fixi3^.of Betertown Hoad ^1 i CITY OP ORONO - VARIANCE APPLICATION Initial Application Fee (^75.00 j L- ($50.00 per each addl tfona^ variafli^ Renewal Variance Fee $100.00 (no change from original application) After-the-Fact Fees (Double application fee) PROPEliTY LOCATION 2'2HS WAT^RroWNSite Address Property Identification Number (P.I.D.l A ■O M.nr OF GW OFFICEi3C02uO^ 175.00175.0001 OSi Vu liECEIPr-THm YOU ^185160 cool m T10H4 07/27/90 Attach legal description to application if not included on required survey. APPLICANT Phone (home) H73— Name Mfx-rJfyVRL Phone (work) ■ - Address; 37i^City: LaWeL. Zip; OWNER (if different than applicant)Phone (home) Name N L * l//V^ P > Phone (work) l?g city;____________ Date Property Acquired J U^/_ _ _D O_ _ _ _ _ _ Zips. (month/year) I (do) (dn~nm) also own the adjacent parcels of land PRESENT USE OP PROPERTY Present Zoning District ^ fi _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ Present Use of Property i 0 ^ kCTI A Residential Other (specify) DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST Estimated Construction Cost $^ Describe request in detail; _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ___ _ _ _ VARIANCES REQUIRED Lot Area Lot Width Setback Variances ( Front Othef _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Hardcover Side _ _ _ Rear) HARDSHIP Describe undue hardship or practical difficulty resulting from strict enforcement of zoning regulations; 7^ f d tpi’cr;!^ _ c L(Ai5 St/AfRC , T ^ 0 V A'M/y IPL^^.p, uescr: toh op unusual property conditions 1. ,,.,ribe unusual property conditions preventing compliance with Zoning Code Requirements_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ___ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _!- - - - - - - - - - - - REQUIRED SUBMITTALS Completed Application Form ^ ^ j z. Certified Property Owners List of owners within 150' (you must obtain this list from Hennepin County Department of Finance A-603 Govt Center 5f Fiat' Hap (obtained with property owners list). Certificate of survey (signed by a licensed surveyor) to include hardcover calculations as required. Topographic survey (existing and proposed elevations) if any changes in existing grade are proposed. Sketches or plans of floor and elevation views. As an addendum to this application, please attach a separate list of any other persons you wish notified of this application. Additional items as may be requested by City staff. 3. 4. X 6. 7. 8. YOU ARB REQUIRED TO SUPPLY 30 COPIES OP LARGE DOCUMENTS OR A WORKING COPY (ll* X 17" OR SMALLER) FOR ALL DOCUMENTS SUBMITTED. The Applicant and Property Owner must sign this application. Please remember that your variamce application is not complete if the above information has not been included. Certification by Clerical Department that Variance Application is complete. Initialed by 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 consultant expenses incurred in review of this application, and certifies that the information supplied is true and correct to the best of his/her knowledge. Applicant's Signature Date OWNERS SIGNATURE ^ ^ The owner hereby ackowledges and agrees to this application and further authorizes reasonable entry onto the property by City staff, consultants, agents. Commission members, and Council members for purposes of investiga tion and verification of this request. ^0)(ruCUc (tc _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Date _ _ _ _ _Owner's signature Applicant must have all submittals into the City offices 25 days before the Planning Commission Meeting. Planning- Commission Meetings are held on the third Monday of each month. Applicants must be present at all scheduled review meetings of the Planning Commission and Council. If an applicant is unable to attend a f=»cheduled meeting, please make arrangements to have an authorized agenu attend in your place and to advise the Building & Zoning Office of this change prior to the meeting. wji* pntbab€w i-v'HiSi- vMcRju'-lfiaj.i ^ -ftu,'Sc bui* a.5 ti-C|c^ > tcnAiiP- -H.tc AV<£ti.3oc1 oS-H,.- W U a. attj i Maples J ?»/J!Oe. b'?-' p<lJ£5iertx>Ji-Tvt^Li?(ii^ Irl^XS^ M^uX^ ClAdoAcj +202? ^cunl^ ua. I <7Ti'Titc5<?o‘f;^ CUu) CL 2-<:?'xZw'^itcA\o 0v\ T'3'7^ ov)+^/i;L/'/i>a'Hn ^-asT 6 ’\clc te T^ 'L^Iiub'Ec KHC fo "'^06^ <5?- cji^^ /^OtlfCi «Uvj ScgCdr ^(^fxu| p2)pCLthfUld^^ Vh -^^uioi:•Xyuuit.u^? ’otu.s Ho ,aiu> fTTcPf . / / /f\ - /1I “5 // O I UAf^OCO'''-'^ ' 12?''^^'' r'’ V /6'f • i , hi It' CiAcii^C'-W' “"I «' im^ aw; /^&(ip.cn4.^0»d‘^ (''S'' <5^ JW U>«.kn^^^ ®=F=^ 5i- ^ U. b u^cfaie b^tlt(fs w^); At cJj^ . rvxb c<mth -f- b f-X ?V" bt 11.'^'V A b" w i<u^^<w, 0^-1 X-;,' &fl^u p^ 1 1 ^ '^. V.T.K bt av?t -W W vvuuu^p- ' • - Ojvd •''■ V'^ ’^P ^•huivc-’t^"<-•«:. #.:"^) w (3 f4 O A O S ®z55 a MO P §*55 aZ M M AM Z M M A~eg? aA A A A A A 1- H A eg Z A^SSSoA A J A A ^ eg A -J A _ Z1 h* 0 W A _iS-i*3 8 0 3 - 10 2 1 6 5J E F F R E YJ E F F R E Y3 3 0 S H AN A Y Z A T A3 8 0 3 - 10 2 3 2 5 K E L L E Y A K E L L E Y < S N A T E R T L O N G L A K K» O ID ac in UJ Ul fo a ae O I- \ o 80 o n OC U) a vOa o in O UJ ”lisz M « W * X _ eg UJ < < O Z ^ X < n u UJ « UJ X ^K >0 «• < O' Z >0 O <g ■> u O" 2 tg eg M <g o r» o X X eg -i S“ s°S gs? »0 ^ lU u g ?i*=§5 CO < < < M •-) Z Q! UJ f-i a o < ^ I ae « z < ^ in u. S Q >0 u. u. 2 u O M M 2 «g o -j -j in o r» o u u •« -J rg § g> §!55i« m oe 2 2 Svs..32 •H X UJ UJ I- UJ "SSSjja <g eg o o O r' o u u eg -I X </) s h O «-J u d UJ & Ul Z ws; M -I eg in < 0 m g> §1 “ oS ro UJ -I -J X _eg g a a ^ Z rL a (9 0 oe i-i < UJ Ul •H < < P ^ 1 M M <0 < < M u u r«> X -J O a M M M to ac at in u o o < < g N om o a a 2 eg -I (A in a a z ^ u u 0 (A S|..3 UJ 0 0 Z a o o MO O M UJ -j .j > ^ M HI UJ < M Z Z O -I eg a a z O eg eg oro o A ffi eg _j a % eg (/ o (/ ^ MM K> Kl 0 A A in AAA A Kl Ul UJ UJ eg ex M M A ^ o A A w S < a. A 2 X V > > 3^ < ^ UJ UJ M HI A A A A < M u. u. N O IH U. O > A o UJ UJ m < K| O -) -) M X O' o a 0 O A A o m Z -I A A A Z < A A M A “ 5 5 7S;gg§2 A < < < A M z I- I- Ul Ul M AAKJX o a z □ A O A A eg eg O O eg o r» o z z eg _i A a O A -J A O < A A 5 UJ A A O _ A A A 5 ssp I a 7 isi a A A A4 A A21 M X A o z z eg -j g A O O A ^ O A 4 A A O A A A A h. < 0 0 A * M I ^ A A 7 M M « < S A u u X -J O A M M A.msnA o a A m <g -J A A AX O o 2 A asEsS fc“* _j A A _ A eg < z A 2sn:z* MO M Ul 7 Sogg^-* O A A O 0 eg o o o Z 0 eg Ul A eg O A O 0 0 eg _j A $ gsis3 < > N. A < A & X < z a A A A M W A <g in «g <n > ^ A A O Sgljs; QZ rlgSo i* A >> U S A O <0 A M A _ S:!?x5Ssggsias A^ g O « A O OZUJ< A < A Op iS§= sa *iz I I- A < A XSSzggA s;pSg*-' <Nj eg M eg O K o r r CM ^ sS.oz. A <III A O I- M A S“ A 0 S a A M o O ® aS^S z 7S2S:ei M Z P O 5 A : “*i! eg o < o O rs. o A A A A A U g|AS02a< m4 L £ oe S M ina u Ki V O a (/) ^ ^{“■SSss o < lU o oe £ K o u. u. •-< ^ N sOo oe u in oo< g ^ Cl»- in M O lU <3 ^ 2 S a Z CO W lU i Q ^ •H X » Q Ui r ooS5 M < < £5 ”1 ~iss*l N. O > > K ^ 35^ ^ >o in ui in ^ lu in M § < N ^ K» uj ui a 5 <Si *J UJ O M rH M ac 111 X Ui p4 ui UJ ^ I bu O -I < o ^ oc ^ SNO UJ N. 8o CO 0 m .j ) p •> \1 c: UJ X > S! ;5: s o iU o So 8- *lsgaM a .< .j S N UJ < < 8 ZI b- I- »- I- Z O < O O or >-• X ;c: u w «5§lsiK O A CD M .4 in a Inat in sip 2glS5 ac < UJ at at ^ o « S o a 0 ^iSM 0»; w 0 0 • 00 Ui (K •• «025S-^ iis*“i 0 < UJ ga < 0 os*s? 0 < UJ - V • •• : ? . *- r,v ■ ■ • - .• . ' r «... •• ..A..V';* •• '* . v;; .• ■ •..- •• •>.: * •: -s.*•• "i**. . ■■ ;•••'' ■ -.•• - -• i:,:" A•^ -J-.r::: : - ................................ >.» .-I - .*. •■ . ■ ■ . - . . w. ' ■: ■. . . . ' • ; .1 ‘ '• ■' 1 ■ ■ -' ■: •'■ Jv*-^ • • -ii “ r*. r..»- V,T‘*:. -.H- •. .1 -•• - ■■' v*'.‘ ■ J * ........ '• .r ,.r . -^ . "- . v • / l.*.' .*■• V; .•'••■r.*.. . * ■ - • ' •'•’• -••■'*-■ tiv' V'-1 •?:»=:: • • %; • ‘ ■.>•■ •".f-T-■ \ :' ■..••' • . .• t. .• • * . • * * • . -jO > u ipi K a ’ vS Ss S3« vr1*1 > j 10 11 t ’•r . /. /• "V .t • s •' •' •-* pyw 0* \ * ' • ■ ^ "* * . •• ; • - ; — . V ■• '^y.': u- ■.-• r ■>-V* *<.-.|•.■.■ . .•--••"■ *: -.T-'- . - 4V> ’ ’ / ~ . * C. t ■ ' '. *•'■'- r.-S-yr ^'.V- v ‘ ••: • . Mayor Grabek & Orono Council Members City Administrator Bernhardson (i?£sri?issF.Piown c!Ty OF mm 4 Fron: Michael P. Gaffron, Asst Planning & Zoning Administrator Date: August 24, 1990 Subject: 1581 Robert Koehnen, 537 Hanlon Avenue - Variance - Resolution Zoning District - RR-IB, Single Family Rural Residential, 2 acre, unsewered Application - Request for front setback variance to construct attached deck and gazebo List of Exhibits Exhibit A - Exhibit B - Exhibit C - Discussion Resolution Planning Commission Action Notice Memo & Exhibits of August 14, 1990 Please review the memo and exhibits of August 14, 1990. Briefly, the applicant is proposing to construct a deck and a gazebo on the south (left) side of his house, which is less than the rr^juired 50' setback from the street. The house is 22.1' from the street. The proposed deck will be 17' from the street. The proposed gazebo will be 33' from the street. Lot coverage on this 0.44 acre lot will end up at 15.35%, about 70 s.f. over the 15% lot coverage limitation. Planning ComuLssion Recommendation At their August 20th meeting. Planning Commission voted 5 to 0 to recommend approval of the setback variances for the deck and gazebo finding that these improvements will not be out of character with the rest of the neighborhood and will have no significant impact on the visual density of the neighborhood. Further, Planning Commission unanimously recommended approval of the .35% lot coverage variance, finding that the magnitude of the variance is minimal but that requiring applicant to reduce the size of the deck would decrease the functional use of the deck area. Staff Recommendation Staff recommends approval per the Planning Commission recommendation. A resolution for approval is attached. A RESOLUTION GRANTING A VARIANCE TO MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTIONS 10.28, SUBDIVISION AND 10.03, SUBDIVISION 14 FILE 1581 5 (B) (C) WHEREAS, Robert Foehnen (hereinafter "the applicant") is the owner of the property located at 537 Hanlon Avenue within the City of Orono (hereinafter "City") and legally described as follows: Lots 4, 5 and 6, Bloc)c 14, Minnetonka Bluffs, Hennepin County, Minnesota (hereinafter "the property"); and WHEREAS, the applicant has applied to the City for a variance to Municipal Zoning Code Sections 10.28, Subdivision 5 (B) and 10.03, Subdivision 14 (C) to permit the construction of deck and a gazebo, such improvements being located less than the required 50' setback from the front street lot line, and such improvements increasing lot coverage ahcve the 15% lot coverage limit normally required. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono, Minnesota; FINDINGS 1. This application was reviewed as Zoning File 1581. 2. The property is located in the RR-IB Single Family Rural Residential Zoning District. 3. The Orono Planning Commission reviewed this application on August 20, 1990, and recommended approval of the proposed variance based upon the following findings; a) The deck and gazebo locations will not tend to be ouu of character with this neighborhood of small lots, and will be essentially in line with the front line of the existing house. Page 1 of 4 b) The proposed deck and gazebo will not have an impact on the visual density of the neighborhood, therefore approval of the lot coverage variance is appropriate, the hardship being the size of the lot. 4. 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. 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 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 a. d Comprehensive Plan of the City. CONCLUSIONS, ORDER AND CONDITIONS Based upon the above findings, the Orono City Council hereby grants a variance to Municipal Zoning Code Sections 10.28, Subdivision 5 (B) and 10.03, Subdivision 14 (C) to permit the construction of a deck located 17' from the street lot line and a gazebo located 33' from the street lot line, where a 50' street lot line setback is normally required, and which improvements will increase lot coverage to 15.35% of the property where only 15% lot coverage is normally allowed, subject to the following conditions: 1. Authorities granted by this variance run with the property not with the applicant, but are permissive only and must be exercised by application for a building permit within one year of the date of Council approval, or this variance will expire on that date (September 10, 1991). 2. Violation of or non-compliance with any of the terms and conditions of this variance shall constitute a violation of the zoning code, shall automatically terminate any authority granted herein, and shall be punishable as a misdemeanor. Page 2 of 4 3. The undersigned applicant has read, understood and hereby agrees to the terms of this resolution and on behalf of himself, his heirs, successors and assigns, hereby agrees to the recording of this resolution in the chain of title of the property. Adopted by the Orono City Council on this 10th day of September, 1990. ATTEST: Dorothy M. Hallin, City Clerk James R. Grabek, Mayor Property Owner(s) STATE OF :4INNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this 10th day of September, 1990, by James R. Grabek & 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 My Commission Expires Page 3 of 4 Planning Commission Chairman Kelley Orono planning Commission Members City Administrator Bernhardson Michael P. Gaffron, Asst Planning & Zoning Administrator August 14, 1990 #1581 Robert Koehn*»n, 537 Hanlon Avenue - Variance - Public Hearing Zoning District - RR-IB, Single family rural residential, 2 acre, unsewered Application - Request for front setback variance to construct attached deck and gazebo. List of Exhibits Exhibit A - Application Exhibit B - Plat Map Exhibit C - Property Owners List Exhibit D - Survey Exhibit E - Plan View Exhibit F - Front Elevation View Exhibit G “ Lot Coverage Calculation Pertinent Pacts - 1. Applicant proposes to construct a deck and gazebo on the south side of his house. The existing house is 22.1' from the street lot line, where a 50' front setback is normally required. The proposed deck will be constructed at the main floor level of the house, which, due to topography, becomes an upper level deck as it gets further from the house. Because the deck needs railings for its entire length and width, it is subject to the setback requirements. 2. Existing house setback to street = 22.1' Proposed deck to street setback = 17' Proposed gazebo to street setback = 33' 3. Including the house, two garages, and the gazebo and deck portions with railings exceeding 6' above grade, proposed lot coverage is 15.35%, about 70 square feet over the 15% lot coverage limitation. Discussion ** The applicants have made a number of improvements to this property over the last 5 years, including construction of a detached storage garage and addition to the existing residence. The current proposal is to construct a deck at the south end of the house with a free standing gazebo located on top of the deck. Zoning File #1581 August 14, 1990 Page 2 of 2 This house is slightly angled on the lot, such that additions in line with the existing house heading southward tend to get closer to the front lot line. Also, the proposed deck on the street side is a walkway from the main front door to get to the deck as the grade drops. A variance was granted in 1987 for the existing room addition at the south end of the house. Save for the 4 walkway, the proposed decks and gazebo just extend that house further to the south. This residence is at the end of the paved area of Hanlon Avenue. The proposed deck and gazebo should have a slight impact on the perception of density in the neighborhood. The request for the small lot coverage variance is, of course, related to the size of the lot. To avoid a variance, applicants would have to redesign the proposed deck to eliminate 70 s.f. While this might be possible, it *?^9ht result in a totAly revised configuration to still accommodate the gazebo and stairway to the rear. Staff Recommendation - It >>lanning Commission feels that the proposed front setback variance will not tend to be out of character the neighborhood, a recommendation for approval could ^®^‘>®sed on the hardship of the location of the existing house. *'°te that even decks to the rear of the house would require a front setback variance, because the rear of the house is less than 50 from the Street. Likewise, if Planning Commission feels that the proposed deck and gazebo will not have an impact on the visual density of the neighborhood, then a lot coverage setback variance approval recommendation would be in order. f i CITY OF ORONO - VARIANCE APPLICATION Initial Application Fee $175.00 ($50.00 per each additional variance) Renewal Variance Fee $100.00 (no change from original application) After-the-Fact Fees (Double application fee) # ti O -9o. PROPERTY LOCATION Site Address 537 llJcU^Z/tTtL ________ Property Identification Number (P.I.D.) ^ ^3f ~ ^ ;rr CITY OF OROi^d FiY^AHCE OFFICE 1350200000 # 01 CTH 175,00 RECEIFT-lFIOiK YOU ff!S5470 cool mi T10:21 07/27M Attach legal description to application if not included on required survey. APPLICANT Name Phone (home) H13 '^5^3 Phone (v/ork)X Address; 5^1 hiAtJLCJV City; Zip; 333^ /_ OWNER (if different than applicant) Name _ _ _ Phone (home) Phone (work) Address;City;Zip; Date Property Acquired (month/year) I (do) (do not) also own the adjacent parcels of land. PRESENT USE OF PROPERTY Present Zoning District _ _ _ / ' r /Present Use of Property wt /fA\(Ua*/Resi<^ential Other (specify) DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST Estimated Construction Cost $ '7^000 Describe request in detail; VARIANCES REQUIRED _ _ _ Lot Area ________ Lot Width Setback Variances ( >/ Front _ _ Hardcover Side Rear) Other HARDSHIPDescribe undue hardship or practical difficulty resulting from strict enforcement of zoning regulations: kftO dludZLKC.i:kj IfMiXZ JA- - n _ __ __ _ DESCRIPTION OP DNUSDAL PROPERTY CONDITIONS Describe unusual property conditions prev^ti^g compliant wit Zoning Code Requirements: Cl/f/v t.n jt7<//) (IAA jL' ~~ - ZkL<*->J _ _ _ _— REQUIRED SUBMITTALS 1. Completed Application Form ^ w*. ^2. 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). 3. Plat Map (obtained with property owners list). . , ^ 4. Certificate of survey (signed by a licensed surveyor) to include hardcover calculations as required. 5. Topographic survey (existing and proposed elevations) if any changes in existing grade are proposed. 6. Sketches or plans of floor and elevation views. 7. As an addendum to this application, please attach a separate list of any other persons you wish notified of this application. 8. Additional items as may be requested by City staff. YOU ARE REQUIRED TO SUPPLY 30 COPIES OP LARGE DOCUMENTS OR A WORKING COPY (ll* X 17" OR SMALLER) FOR ALL DOCUMENTS SUBMITTED. The Applicant and Property Owner must sign this application. Please remember that your variance application is not coanplete_if_the—above information has not been included. Certification by Clerical Department that Variance Application is complete. Initialed by 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 (sta_t time not covered by original fee payment) and/or consultant expenses incurred in review of this application, and certifies that the information supplied is true and correct to the best of his/her knowledge. Applicant's Signature . _ _ _ _ _ _ Date "7 - - - - -— OWNERS SIGNATURE ,^ , . . . The owner hereby ackowledges and agrees to this application and turtner authorizes reasonable entry onto the property by City staff, consultants, agents. Commission members, and Council members for purposes of investiga tion and verification of this request. Owner's Signature fj).«il/dt _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Date _ __ _ Applicant must have all submittals into the City offices 25 days before the Planning Commission Meeting. Planning Commission Meetings are held on tne third Monday of each month. Applicants must be present at all scheduled review meetings of the Planning Commission and Council. If an applicant is unable to attend a scheduled meeting, please make arrangements to have an authorized agent attend in your place and to advise the Building & Zoning Office of this change prior to the meeting. • V Ki m a . UJSi I a “S!*a-| MOW CVI -J O A3“ fH X lU o r«> •• S >a o M o oe I ^ a-I in W W to u < ^S5M W -52 eo N- >isi s o M tf» < CVI O N O«H U. OO^ M •« COm o (X O' < Kl o to M to X «-- V) 2 «§<— u. — * o 2 o > '■J 5a M u. eg < SSJ"* ^< £Q O' "c=is3M lU M U. <<g a u. — < < n ^ Z M flo a ui 2 ft u. £ X I u. a < eg <a«x — O O n UJ A < 'f _ a N ui £ < o >- « o X si- < M o o a to X 'jT’ L/® t£ — S m (O w tu !o bO u. u. z A M til o o o eg X -I _i o rlgttSx r4 < UJ lU ^ £ 7 “®y< s«ay“t: M X X to N o a Q ifi > <0 o UJ UJ eg < M o u u •-• X o S X % »aM in H Si M UJ __________ eg X M o u to — o *** •• 2 rg < ^ 2 _ 7 o X O E eg o cjo A «a o a M o >1- z O < UJ M S AO X O Q M o — — eg 2 _ X S > «-• UJX-I<I' m A X — A <o ' u X M A UJ UJ A !;;gg z z^ St;; § “ X - M W •• K eg < r^-aS^wZ a M «o ^ 27 i£y< eg u < A — <g u. _> O' > X 2A § P 1 M O -J •H «c — z o M UJ 5 ^ M O X X W eg -J UJ UJ — = 7 M A g 2 — A S M A A °iss _i-e MM z > X eg u. eg < O UJ -> o > < AM > M M £ < M UJ M U. eg X u. rl5:id‘^zz 7*SS“|; 1 O UJ UJ X 4 N O N N — X .iSS^Cj UJ X X X W >- o Z X M 4 X X A M U U Kl A 3“£iS* eg A A > 5 —38 02-00038 GAIL L GAIL L <i820 H ST LOUI1 U. X 4 eg 4X4M O O -> UJ A 4 >T X N A £ 4 O > AO X O- 4 Kl O O O A X38 000521RICKRICKKATHR521 HHAVZAA §t, 2 M < w uj > A A A < egtesggI lu a « r** LU UJ ui A< 0 0 4 M 4 < O' A_ A X X M _J AO eg a M o o O A £ A eg O UJ A o w > A M 4 X ** »ssi|£m-h ^ A 4X0 2 w4 X 4 UJ iw M 4 M eg n O' S o UJ Kl fH X M UJ S <e A eg A 1 sa 4 A MO Kl A — M N °s 1 a ®sal a O Kl A A A A “i I 0 4 4 — A Z > M 5 X A O A 5! M 4 X Kl Kl ^ U A ki5S2§J “‘ eg _i 4 w 4 1 ‘ZU O O £ UJ X 4 O M N M 4 M Kl Kl X > A KlS||^“‘ eg _j A n 4 iis-5i M L3 O -1 • UJ Z 4 eg _i M 4 h O A X X 4<o -J u. rg 02-117-23 31 00 FOX ST TE LAND DEPT PER H t HOLLY BARRETT AVE ZATA MNM O Kl A — — A X X X Kl UJ UJ UJ Ul egxAA| K O A A O ^-*55- 1 -1 -1 z eg UJ O A UJ UJ u M UJ Kl A — AO AX Z Ul Kl UJ UJ Q O UJegxoguo — O A X •• M M 4 Z O AM 4 UJ 1 w u. O ^ eg O 4 A A A UJ Z 1 Kl M — M O M 4 UJ Kl Kl M A «.5 £S“eg -J 4 ima 2 0 0-1 X 4 Kl _i ig A •• Z O > AO 4 0 4 Kl O M O A Z Am-JA> A O 4 M .O 4 Kl O U Z A Z 38013STAORA5<*0HAYO 4 4 n A O M — A Kl O A A 4 O 4 — 4 M A O M M X 1 Kl o A U A eg A •• -lo rn o z A tn ^ X ^ A 0 4X0 A Z UJ 4 4 > N. X 4 UJHP « o > \ X 4 UJ II UJ X X £ A 0 4X0 O Z UJ 4 -.Si gS2- X X o > N X o X 4 UJ a UJ X £ X i 4 Z X o — UJ X X £ O 0 4X0 o2 w4 X 4 UJllli a O ^ n 5^M h 8! S h CL UJ < a' lu o 5tr M < W oe UJ X > Ui « H X“a.... M oe o o "t'^ssS»0 UJ M U. < iil^Cz diz^oS« O K <M o a a ui z g K O UJ < > N I P'I I# Prepared for: CERTIFICATE OF SURVEY Rc ■ ert KuoluHMi e, c: I -a I' o -~j s LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Lots 4, 5 and 6, block 14, MINNKTONKA m.UKFS, according to the recorded plat thereof, Hennepin County, Minneiiota. il035 GENERAL NOTES o Denotes iron monument Denotes cross chiseled in concrete Denotes existing spot elevation Denotes proposed spot elevotion <---------Denotes surface drainage Dashed contour lines denotes proposed features Solid contour lines denotes existing features * 939.7nm Proposed top o' foundation elevation Proposed basement floor elevation • Proposed garage floor elevation = BENCHMARK: ALL-METRO LAND SURVEYORS 2340 Daniels Street Long Loke, Minnesota 55356 Ph: 475-1433 1 hartby catlify Ihol iriit aurvay, plon or rapcrt was praporad 1^ me or undar my diraci superviiiort and that I am a duly Rogisterad Land Surveyor under the Iowa ol the Stale of Minnesota DATE.REG. NO.. SCALE 1" ay BOOK 5 PAGE FILE NO fiCll 1. i/-A ‘ i I • I ' I -T—;- - - —FT i__ I I „ L !—'r- i i ::. i ! I ‘ I I .... : -r- i I ’ ! ! ! t --r— I I ' ‘1 *^v I f> : i ! : 4 ?, .. — I ! : I I ' i gT ;-;• ;\ ! I ! i I I ! ‘ i I • 3 1 i - 1 !_ r~“1 1 ir|- 1r' 1! 1 i 1 1 i i I i \ • ! : i ' •* i -• l.__i j li ..t. ! r i ' I ! i •! — h' . i B:i I Om Cl iL t ! ! 'T I I I I :;i I !-4 ! I I ■} i I •« j 1 • J -J It: < I t .1 :T CO'M:Mayor Grabek & Orono Council Members Planning Commission Chairman Kelley Orono Planning Commission Members City Administrator Bernhardson SbP 10 1990 OF CffoijQ Froms Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building & Zoning Administrator Date: September 6, 1990 Subject: Request by owner of Byfield Plat to amend original final subdivision approval that would require shared access by both Lots 1 and 2 - 255/255 Brown Road South List of Exhibits Exhibit A - Exhibit B - Exhibit C - Exhibit D - Resolution Plat of Byfield Staff Memos to Planning Commission & Council Hennepin County Letter of August 9, 1990 Review of Request - The owners no longer propose to build a new home on Lot 1 and have offered the property for sale. A perspective buyer seeks separate access rather than a shared one with Lot 2. In reviewing the staff memos and the application file» Exhibit C,‘there is no record of a report from Hennepin County requiring'a shared access. It would appear that the developer had preliminary discussions with the Ccunty concarning the use of a shared access because of their concern with the potential hazards posed in use of the existing access serving their residence. As the future residents of Lot 1» they would have had no problem in the installation and use of a shared access. In a recent letter from the County (Exhibit D), the County staff advised that it is a matter really for the City to decide if a shared access will be required as the existing house already has an approved curb cut/access. The report also identifies specific sighting problems of existing access. Staff has reviewed the access on site. We are concerned with visibility of the access from the County road and the sighting problems that result with exiting property from the vegetation that has grown out into the right-of-way of the County road. Upon preliminary review staff would recommend that the shrubs be trimmed back in line with telephone poles and that stopping area adjacent to the street right-of-way be raised so that cars traveling north at 40 MPH can see a car waiting to approach the public road. Prior to the Council meeting, staff will ask Glenn Cook to review the existing access within Lot 2 to determine if there may be other ways to make the existing approach safer. Byfield Plat September 6, 1990 Page 2 As for the City staff (Public Works Director and Zoning Administrator), we see no problem with separate accesses for both sites. There is 509 lineal feet of frontage along County road right-of-way. The subdivision did not involve lot width variances. There is already an existing driveway access approved by the County. Safe access to Lot 1 will be no problem as sighting becomes easier as you move northward towards the Luce Line. Staff would recommend approval of the owners request for single separate accesses to Lots 1 and 2 subject to the current owner completing specific improvements to the existing access within Let 2 to improve sighting. Council Action To provide staff with conceptual direction so that an appropriate resolution can be presented to Council for formal action at their upcoming meeting. This resolution would amend the original resolution that approved the plat of Byfield (Resolution 1985). r,■ Of ORONO resolution of t;-i£ city council NO. ___1985 k A IBSOLOTIOM APPBCVUIC T*» FLAT OF BYFISLD FILE ao.sst Council h«a consldorod tho • ubdlvision by Mnuroon i. lollows«tli« WEI1IA8, Application for a aubdividari and atandar/S. boon found to Boot oil oWj: ;:*2 *“ o*v.iop.d Without thi ci th. pi.r.'^^.v.YAio.i^V'/tr. ^r.,:Tnirjsin*,i‘ Or.ln.,. ..d utility iioJi'V.'*<i‘rty“ oVd' f«V '‘’-‘-o'—y . public ro*l 3. Dedication to tha City of a Ploi^aga and Conaarvation fJd/nr"^^ providing for liaitationa on tha uaa of watlanda tha raviaw and filing of SlSO.Oo! ' ««Bcmenta and covananta in tha aoount of th- rit« WniFOWI BE IT BUOLWp that tha City Council of Orono hereby approvea tha plat of Bvfiald B-nn-nin county. Hinncaota, aubject Vo the fonoEJjg t^diLonB/ ■ u-vb-. \fuiimmmsi 'ICITY I OF 1 ORONO ■ City of OROIVO resolution of TM6 CITY COUNCIL I ;bsr"’“ »Sli; ■•‘"SE"--™" -™. ;w: City of OroDo •v.nt, it .ill b. n.cV.,* rv to »P«<;Ui.d .boy., i„ City ot Orono for bubdivKion rmvleJ, ‘‘ ‘PP^^'^lon «itn th« ATWSTi D.t.d thi, 26th doy of *tol, 1S66. AtUSc/^h /ttTty cl.rV ' • I * * s.:-\ •V.n ,-t- BY FIELD IM I »«t . IM** ».t» MM •• tk f«» »■•••• ■•• U VIIMM M«> tk»M MMI 1*1 t**'l<> V l*M Stall M •i*Mk. twall «' ai**!' %f <»*Mt> t *• I k«rt»> tMtIli Sl*l II • IMM. « IMI . I*M •< *M l•r•*lll| •• SUM «• aiMU. CMtll l< •IMII Sf ■•>• k *>••! Mitt. ■IMIktM tkll >111 I' •Mll'l l»l»t*f •I IM C<Mltll. Mrlto U Mr . Iltidii. Cit.t »(«*l«r< I *•>•.! •«II4 ■’ ............................ * r~rj rvtrriM A lUKiMacjni. iMcr a~-«p*—• h ’i'-- i -JMS MS' I »• ri... MAMS SOM* MV ASSMMS coTFiM a oaoNScao. imc. Stsht* rwcMCua. lAMO mMyrnws. auumms ilMBlAH^MMMCWtA I .at*. • <•HM >aA*%*. :'>r ■fs 'S 1 Total Araa • 7.09 acres Contiguous Dry Bulldabla ■ 4.22 acres Proposed Lot ”A* • 2.17 acres Proposed Lot *B* ■ 2.05 acres (with existing house) The applicants are planning to construct their new hcae on the northerly portion of this property in approxieately the location of the existing shed. They plan to retain the house and property of Lot 1 and rent out that house for a period of years to help financo the now construction, then desK>lish the old house. Because Orono Code generally does not allow a rental house on the satae lot as the principal structure, a subdivision is in order. Applicant notes that she is proposing to use a shared driveway and has discussed with the County the possibility of moving the existing driveway access further north where the grade will be flatter for a safer access point. You may recall that 7* of right-of'way be dedicated on the Krogness Plat in 1982| Planning Commission at that time denied, classified in the Community Management Plan that the existing 66* width was appropriate. Since the County currently has no plans to expand Drown Road according to Lee Weigelt of, the Planning Office, a 33* dedication is appropriate. m You will note that thu proposed divieion line contains a nuadber of angles in order to accomodate the 30* side setback required while maintaining primary and alternate drainf ield sites for both lota, and ■ -I, • I Zoning Fll« *998 Doceabor 6, 1985 12 .oil., r««i torin^.“‘’*th. v.t.«* V.rlfl.d th.t ch. w.tl.nd. MP i. i„co?r.«! up h.v. ;:aSL%HSi;SF£«^^^Saa,T;;.r.-r.r.S™™ .„,::;:'.i:vf.r;,' ss",vvi‘,s?.,v "■• -•• •“ ill i«Kck^ ho,. acc«'.ory ‘*.irictlrw on r‘* \ ii'.t Mat! .tnndard. o( the RR-U toning di.tr .-t. \ prior‘’i.o‘“;io«“on‘’Vh." d%";e*;ay"!"^'r.'^ t"r”b:‘’*."I driveway, .ervlng both lot.. l. to b, « .lurwl / ilowi'Ri^d!*"" " “■ rl,ht-ot-w.y for Mt ^Rtk Oedlc.tion Pee of S200 for the 4.9R acre newly created ?r- 4;;' ,1*®^ V, i ../'* X r.6^-c>■M ■:?!5 TOs City Council PBOMs Michael P. Csffron OATXs January 7, 1986 SUBJa •998 - Maureen S. Bellows Soal»9 District - BJt-lB - 2 Acre Applicstion - 2 Lot Assidsntlsl SuUJjvision List of Bsliibitsi A - AppHcstlon B - Plst M«p C - Property Owners List 0 - Survey B - Air Photo with Xotlsnds. Dt^-^ignation Total Ares - 7.09 seres Contiguous Dry Bulldsble - 4.22 scr^s Proposed Lot "A" - 2.17 seres ITopowd Lot -B- - 2.0i (w.Lh C.i.t.n, hou.e) wm«^V"A"rt ‘oVo('’*t";‘;?oo° "«>•• on th.of th. «ii;tln9 rh°.l Th.v Tn ‘octlon oar:-- eschalot contiguous dry bulldsble Isnd for zt • 'iT*.m » -4 ' Zoning film 199$ January 7, 19$6 Pago 2 •rao of Hanoi aoila. acTHli *’* Indlcato a ooaonhat laViij contour «p n.». v.,u:«j .hnt thc’-^^a'nj'iV U*\“nc;rV.« *'‘* ** City Enginw^ciSnS Cook haV^ ‘*»fough tho proportv -atorahod to dotor.i^. revi«wod tho proloct^^an^T :.\-4-f^VnoV A*':nSH£“v£,:?A:~*dry buUdnbl. line. " <=»«our. wn.ch clo.oly coinJid..* !t"h\^ tho atandards of tho RR>in On-sito Codo and Sin* configuration thut"2i'/i*SVi^^' *!."** •*®** ^ot 1«alngle family roaidence without tV conatruction of a -b 4PPCOV41 u .o‘lir,^;?e.:-‘‘co“d!L'o^V.^ v.rtnni:.: dr.inn,. a„d utility eouenunts *"5 dVdic“ tnd°tJ thu^uM ** drain.,, rbr:’ti:n“'“'"‘ *“> d‘ov.;.'uX7VnV«ro:i r“\'* on bot I ,u,t *’ Applicant must obta i n ‘*‘*‘*’Act. County prior tu relocatSoS th h . P**’"^*'* ^^oai Hennopin ' «ay for Brown'^Road/'** “* ‘‘ for right-of- created^”lot!‘*^‘^*^^®” *"®® *o*- tho 4.9$ aero nowly recomiii«nda\/^n.“‘'‘’'‘'‘^ ^*’^^**^ pr*^-i imxnary approval per tho abovo 5^1 m .ya D 111 HENNE DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS Operations Division 320 Washington Ave. South Hopkins, Minnesota 55343-8468 Phone:(612)935-3381 August 9, 1990 Maureen Bellows 265 South Brown Road Long Lake, MN 55356 Re: Access to CSAH 146 Maureen: As we discussed, driveway access is assured to the vacant parcel at 233 South Brown Road (CSAH 146). Access to any County State Aid Highway (CSAH) cannot be denied unless the right of access has been purchased or alternate access, such as a city street or private road, is available. We do try'to limit .county road access in the interest of safety and efficienty, and in this case would strongly encourage eliminating the existing driveway at 265 due to the limited sight distance, and having a shared entrance with 255. These driveways would split at the common property corner so no encroachment would occur, therefore relieving any easement requirement. However, since the properties are already split, only the City of Orono can make this requirement; Hennepin County can only recommend. Please call with any further questions. Sincerely, David K. Zetterstrom Entrance Permit Coordinator OKZrmvr CSAH146 cc: Jeanne Mabusth, City of Orono HENNEPIN COUNTY an equol opportunity employer OO jUU rE-j ins / ^ ^ Sf:" 101990 CITY OF OROSOTO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Mark E. Bernhardson, City Administrator DATS: September 7, 1990 SUBJECT: #1516 Whitney MacMillan, 1560 Fox Street - Private Poad Easement Because of the unique situation of the private road in this location we are recomme* iing the additional consideration in the attachment easement. Inis requires notice and a 4/5's majority vote for the :’ty to make this a public road. ROAD AND UnUTIES EASEMENT THIS INDENTURE, tr,*de this____day of j 1990 by and between WHITNEY MacMILLAN and ELIZABETH S. MacMILLAN, husband and wife LONGRIDGE ASSOCIATES, a partnership formed under the hCniwsota Unifonn Partnership Act, and CARGILL MacMILLAN, JR., WHITNEY MacMILLAN and PAULDSiE M. KEINATH, as Trustees of that certain trust created by a trust asreement dated December 30,1968 between Pauline W. MacMillan, as Donor, and Careill MacMillan, Jr., Whitney MacMillan and Pauline M. Keinath, as Trustees, herdnafter referred to as "Grantors", and the Oty of Orono, a municipal corporation, under the laws of the State of MinnesoU, hereinafter referred to as -Grantee". WITNESSETH, that Grantors, in consideration of the sum of One Dollar ($1.00) and for other good ano valuable consideration given by Grantee, the receipt of which is acknowledged by Grantors, do hereby grant, bargain, sell and convey to Grantee, its successors and assigns, an easement for public ingress, egress, access, road and utilities purposes and uses, on, across and under the land in the County of Hdmepin and State of Minnesota, as follows: OUTLOT C, MacMILLAN ADDITION, according to the recorded plat thereof; including, but not by way of limitation, a fuU and free right and authority to enter upon said land to construct. Install, maintain, operate, and repair a sanitary sewer interceptor, lift station, main or line, a water main or Une, giavel or paved road and any and all appurtenances including drainage control structures, incidental and related thereto, (such are hereafter collectively referred to as the Improvement), and the Grantee shall have the right to make such use of said land as is reasonably j\0C^5ary and advisable to the construction Installation, mai enance, operation and repair of the Improvement. In addition to any other remedy the Grantee may have, the vO^»«»wwit3 and restrictions contained herein may be enforced by injunction. Notwithstanding anvthln 5 forth in this Road and Utilities Easement it is the understanding and iiitent of the Graiitcrs in granting the above described rights and privileges to the City of Orono, a MinnesoU municipal corporation (the "Oty"), as follows: 1. That the City will respect the intent of the Grantors as set forth in the Declaration of Private Road Easement and Eteclaration for Maintenance of Same (the "Declaration") executed and delivered to the Qty respecting OUTLOT C, MacMILLAN ADDITION, to keep and maintain said OUTLOT C as a private road subject to the maintenance and control of those persons named in such Declaration, until there should Paragraph 4.C below. Grantors do not intend by the execution and d^vt^ of this Easement Agreement, that the general pubUc ^uld have wy right to the use and enjoyment of said OUTLOT C, unless and until e Dedication Event shall have occurred. •Huj Qty, until the occurrence of such Full Dedication Event, agrees to use said OUTLOT C only for emergency vehicle and access purposes. Including and not Umited to healdi and emergency care, Uw enforcement. Inspection, investigation and patrol should the City for Sy reason detern^e that the City rights under the Declaration are not sufficient for such purposes. The Grantors recognize and understand that It is now the City's intwt and understanding In accepting this Agreement, that the Qty h^ the rieht in the future under this Agreement to exerdsc m full aU the riSits of pubUc dedication in OUTLOT C granted by the protons of this Agreement, and being unlimited by any restrictions set fo^ln Paragraphs 1,2 and 3 above, but only after the occurrence of the Full .'Dedication Event preceded by the notices, consultations and ' determinations hereinafter set forth: A event, series of events, or set of circumstances has occurred causing the officials of the Qty and/or the members of its then governing body to reconsider the question of whether or not Outlet C should remain a private road under the Declaration, m any such event, events or circumstances the City shall give written notice thereof to Grantors, or their successors in interest In '/{acMILLAN ADDITION as disclosed by the then current records of the Hennepin County Auditor, shall thereafter give such Grantors and/or their successors in interest a reasonable penod of time (not to exceed 30 days) to investigate the event, events or circumstances, and shall thereafter consult with the Grantors and/or their successors In interest, and/or their representatives and give said persons an opportunity to deUver information as well as alternative proposals to Qty officials, and to appear and w heard by the governing body of the Qty before the vote desm^ in Paragraph 4.C below occurs. The City agre» that no vote will be taken by the then governing body of the Gty which might constitute a Full Dedication Event until at least 90 days after notice has been yven to the Grantors and/or their successors in interest pursuant W this Paragrapgh 4.A. B. If the event, events or circumstances causing the Gty to consider making Outlot C fully public Involve the comparative cost of making Outlot C and adjacent private roads fully pubUc as opposed to making some odter reasonably suitable access way to land in the vidnlty of Outlot C fully public, or, as opposed to acquiring other reasonably suitable access by condemnation, the Oty agrees that it %irill accept financial assistance from Grantors and/or their successors in Interest if such financial assistance will enable the Gty to obtain reasonably equal or better access to the particular area in question over an access way completely different from Outlot C and adjacent private roads, and will also permit Outlot C and adjacent roads to retain their character as private roads. C The Gty agrees that any vote of its governing body In order to constitute a Full Dedication Event causing Outlot C to become fully public as provided for in this Road and Utilities Agreement, must be a vote of four/fifths of the members of such governing body voting In favor of the proposal to cause Outlot C to become fully public 5. Any notice required or permitted hereunder shall be in writing and shall be deemed g^ven when personally delivered by prepaid courier or messenger or when mailed by United Sutes Mail, postage prepaid, re^tcred or certified, to the addresses of each of the parties executing this Agreement, as set forth below, or at such other address given in the same manner as a notice by any such party or their successors, heirs and assigns to any other such party for the purpose of notice. Likewi^, any notice shall be deemed given hereunder when serv^ in the manner provided for the service of a summons in any dvil action in District Court In Hennepin County, Minnesota. The addresses of the parties to this Road and Utilities Easement are as follows; Whitney MacMillan and Elizabeth S. MacMillan c/o Wayorosse, Inc. By Mail: P.O. Box 9300 Dept 28 Minneapolis, MN 55440 By Courier: 15616 McGinty Road, Wayzau, MN 55391 Longridge Assodites: CARGILL Mad^LAN, JR, WHITNEY Mac Millan and PAULINE M. KEINATH, as Tmstees of that certain tnist oeated by a trust agreement dated December 30,1968 between Pauline W. MacMillan, a.< Donor, and Cargill MacMillan, Jr., Whitney MacMillan and Pauline M. Keinath, as Trustees, c/o Waycrosse, Inc. By Mail: P.O. Box 9300 Dept . 28 Minneapolis, MN 55440 By Courier. 15616 McGinty Road, Wayzata, MN 5S391 c/o Waycrosse, Inc. By Mail: P.O. Box 9300 Dept. 28 Minneapolis, MN 55440 By Courier 15616 McGinty Road Wayzata, MN 55391 WHITNEY MacMILLAN and PAUUNE M. KEINATH, as Trustees of that certain trust created by a trust agreement dated December 30,1968 between Pauline W. MacMillan, as Donor, and Cargill MacMillan, Jr., Whitney MacMillan and Pauline M. Keinath, as Trustees, City of Orono By Mail: P.O. Box 9300 Dept 28 Minneapolis, MN 5S440 By Courier: 15616 McGinty Road Wayzata, MN 55391 1335 South Brown Road Wayzata MN 55391 TO HAVE AND TO HOLD said easement unto said Grantee, its successors and assigns, permanently. The Grantors herein certify that the lands herein described are free and clear of all encumbrances except: Rights of ingress and egress as to parts thereof as set forth in Document Nos. 1579568, 3386682, and 4539257 on file and of record in the office of the County Recorder, Hennepin County, Minnesota. WHITNEY MacMIL’uAN, Individually EUZABETH S. MacMILLAN, Individually STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN )ss. S. SIUlLAN, husband and wife. (Notarial Seal)Notary Public, Hennepin County, Minnesota My commission expires ,— --------------——■ r-j.. .-uu .j j or<.c* *-»c »c OHM IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Grantor has hereto executed this easement and covenant at of the day and year first above written. LONGRIDGE ASSOCIATES a partnership formed und^ the Minnesota Uniform Partnership Act W. DUNCAN MacMILLAN Managing Partner STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) )ss. ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of 1990, by W. DUNCAN MacMILLAN as Managing Partner of LONGRIDGE ASSOCIATES, a partnership formed under the Minnesota Uniform Partnership Act, on behalf of said partnership. Q^otarial Seal)Notary Public, Hennepin "county, Minnesota My commission expires_________________ •■rtp. • STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) )ss. ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me, this____day of __________, 1990, by CARGILL MacMILLAN, JR., WHITNEY MacMILLAN and PAULINE M. KEINATH, the trustees of that certain trust created by a trust agreement dated December 30, 1968 between PauHne W. MacMillan, as Donor, and Cargill MacMillan, Jr. Whitney MacMillan and Pauline M. Keinath, as Trustees. (Notarial Seal) This instrument was drafted by DORSEY AND WHITNEY ( JJT ) 2200 First Bank Place East Minneapolis, MN. 55402 Notary Public, Hennepin County, Minnesota My commission expires________________ 8 I 10 • 39t)d SldW >1IbH WtiHdOd WOdd 82:Sl 06. 16 SHd :V. ./• V. ' >.«• ^•v< V - ,••". •"c-v' •ivi' .•*>'.• r \, .> tv*. ’ ‘ V. .' - .."-v IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Grantors have hereto executed this easement and covenant as of the day and year first abov#' written CARGILL MacMILLAN, JR.WHITNEY MacMILLAN PAULINE M. KEINATH As Trustees of that certain trust aeated by a trust agreement dated December 30,1968 between Pauline W. MacMillan as Donor and Cargill MacMillan, Jr., Whil3\ey MacMillan and Pauline M. Keinath, as Trustees. STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) )ss. ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me, this____day of , 1990, by CARGILL MacMILLAN, JR., WHITNEY MacMILLAN and PAULINE M. KEINATH, the trustees of that certain trust created by a trust agreement dated December 30, 1968 between Pauline W. MacMillan, as Donor, and Cargill MacMillan, Jr. Whitney MacMillan and Pauline M. Keinath, as Trustees. (Notarial Seal) This instrument was drafted by DORSEY AND WHITNEY (JJT ) 2200 First Bank Place East Minneapolis, MN. 55402 Notary Public, Hennepin County, Minnesota My commission expires _________________ 8 f Bonestroo Rosene Anderlik & Associates Engineers & Architects September 6, 1990 City of Orono Lojk ^6 Crystal Bey, MN 55323 Attn« Ml. John Gerhardson Re: Veil No. 3 O.'ono, NN File No. 13949 Otto G aonettioo PE Booen * PE jowof C Anaertiit, PE M^rxnr) L SofvaU. PE PitnaRj E Tufnff P£ jam« C Otior pE Gie^i g Cook. PE Tho«»Mt E NoyP\ PE ItoOfft G StruncTM. PE SoM«' M EOWI C P A KMn A Go<oor PE Kicnna '* foiwf PE OonM C BuiQJidL PE .(«ftv A Bouroon PE Mare A Manvxt PE tW < PE Mcnae* r Rautmann. PE tooeft a P<pt»tfie PE DavKj O U3UVU. PE thomai Pftffvxi. PE ^fccfar C Lyncn PE jamn a Maiarx]. pe Kennetn P Anaenor PE Mart R floPi PE ■doott C Ruun. AIA E Anguv PE Hotwanj A SaotoitJ PE Daniel i Eogetton. PE Mart A S«i PE Ptukp J Catwe« “E i«na« Maitmn. PE Mare □ VUMv PE Thomai R Anoffwn. A IA Gary F Rytancm. PE Mae* B Jenten. PE L Pnoip Gfavei « PE tent C Ptumaii AiA Agnes M R>r>g. A IC P Jetty O Rwtaen. PE CetiAo Or«v«t PE CFianei a Encuon Leo M Pawersky Manan M Oryx’ V WiU l.r J SS^UO’-rJ CITY tif (tROND w~ ,'S Dear Jonn: This letter is to provide a report on the current status of the construction of Veil No. 3. Based on data from test pumping the well, it appears that the cavity in the JordEux sandstone has not stabilized and the veil in its present condition''vill pump sand each time it is started at rates as low as 500 gpm. Enclosed is a sketch of the well tor discussion purposes. Approximately 350 cu. yds. of sandstone was removed by pressurizing and airlifting. Pressurizing is intended to loosen soft material to allow its removal. Pressurization and boiling cycles are continued until little material is drawn into the cavity. These pressurization cycles were completed on the well prior to installing the test pump. Testing of the well was started at a low rate and increased in steps as the sand content at each rate decreased. The pumpage rate was then reduced to determine the sand free capacity of the well. It was desired to develop well No. 3 at 1000 gpm cmd tested at rates up to 1600 gpm. Generally wells of this type pump sand free at rates of 1200-1400 gpm and are operated at the lover 1000 gpm. However, Well No. 3 when pumped continuously was not sand free until the rate was dropped to 500-600 gpm. Because the permanent pump will be started and stopped in response to pressure in the hydropnematic tank, the test pump was cycled at 500 gpm. This test shoved that the well would pump sand at each start, and therefore cause substantial maintenance problems in the pumping facility and distribution system. 2335 West Highway 36 • St. Paul, Minnesota 55113 • 612-636-4600 City of Orono Attnt John Gerhardson Page 2 September 6, 1990 Previous televising showed the well consists of a round drill hole from the bottom of the casing at 312 feet to approximately 360-363 feet where the cavity begins. Prior to test pumping the bottom of the well was approximately 376 feet and after test pumping the well filled to 366 feet. Because the fine sand is only 3-6 below the bore hole, it is probably being picked up when the well is pumped. In our opinion the well is not usable as a reliable supply in its present condition. We recommend that further development and bailing be undertaken to enlarge and stabilize the sandstone cavity. It is not unusual that wells in loosely cemented, fine sandstone require additional development during construction or at a future date. Well No. 3 is in this type of material. Approximately $71,500 has been spent on the project of which $37,000 was for development. It is estimate I that additional development costs could run as high as $30,500. A change order for that amount is enclosed for your consideration. Yours very, truly, .'*r BONESTROtf. ROSENE, ANDERLIK & ASSOCIATES, INC. ■.Uchard W. Foster KWF:lk ltr3 . 5TATU6-sEpr H,mo ^\Li No. CHANGE ORDER DATEt PLACE: PROJECT: CONTRACTOR: BOND CO.: CHANGE ORDER NO.: SepteiBber 6, 1990 Orono, Minnesota Municipal Well No. 3 - 16* Production Well Keys Well Drilling, 413 N Lexington Pkwy, St. Paul. MN 55104 (Capitol Indemnity) W.A. Lang Co., Attn: Joan R. Lehmann, 2 PO Box 64215, St. Paul. MN 55164 FILE NO: 13949 DESCRIPTION OF WORK: Provide additional development vork on the veil to Increase capacity for the following estimated quantities of vork: Unit Esfd Total Chanae Order Item Unit Price Quantity Amount DEVELOPMENT WORK TO INCREASE CAPACITY 1 Furnish & Install air compression equipment L.S.$1,000.00 1 $1,000.00 2 Surge & bail veil Hour 100.00 180 18.000.00 3 Install test pump L.S.2,500.00 1 2.500.00 4 Test pumping Hour 90.00 100 9.000.00 TOTAL CHANGE ORDER NO. 2 - ADD $30,500.00 ORIGINAL CONTRACT AMOUNT $70.155.00 PREVIOUS CHANGE ORDERS 975.00 THIS CHANGE ORDER'NO. 2 - ADD 30,500.00 REVISED CONTRACT AMOUNT $101,630.00 Recommended for Approval by: BONESTROO. RubENE. ANDERLIK 4 ASSOCIATES, INC. Approved by: XEfS WELL DRILLING CO. By_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Approved by: CITY OF ORONO, MN By_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Date: Mayor . Cler? Distribution 1 - City 1 - Bonding Co. 1 - Contractor 1 - BRA 13949CO 9490.3 TO: PBOH: DATS: SUBJECT: Flexible Benefits 4 •*/ ... Mayor and City Council '' f ^ 1 0 ^ 3Mark E. Bernhardson, City Administrator ’ September 4, 1990 ^ Cu / h Attachments: A. Flexible Benefits Memo Dated 8/21/90 B. Updated Table ISSUE 1, Determination if Council desires to undertake the benefits se Lection program. 2. Selection of a vendor to design the prcgran-; INTRODUCTION - The information in Attachme.nt A was presented to Council at the August 27, 1990 Council meeting. DISCUSSION - Attachment B of that memo has been updated to reflect additional vendor information. The City's estimatca savings above expenses will be about $2-2,500/year. ALTERNATIVES 1. Undertake design of a flexible benefits program. 2. Table. 3. Select a vendor for development. 4. Select a vendor for develf:,^ • ent at;c administration. 5. Table for furtner discussion. 6. Take no action. RECOMMENDATION - It is as the vendor for the • anticipated that pro. or month and a half Vf Council in Novemb*^. estimated costs ar*» u. •'••mended **''a' .3a: ^ Benefits be selected "■i«> hent.iits program. It is be during the next month for approval of the plan to I i.. the first of January. The Initial Plan set up and Coimnun i ca t i'^ns Enrollment Legal Review (Pophara Haik) Initial Ongoing (Estimates) $600.00 Administration $1,350 (Depends on number of enrollees.) $980 $300.00 $500-1,OOC Enrollment $ 300 $500-1,900 developed and reviewed it will be submitted to Council fo' approval. PROPOSED MOTION - Moved by _, seconded by _, Council directs staff to work with Safe Benefits to develop a flexible benefits program which will be submitted to Council for approval. Ayes _, Nays _. ^ / \ 1 6t isoi ,v/. «ayor and city Council Mark E. Bernhardson, citv Ad • \l August 21. 1990 ""^“^"latratorl yieai,,. Benefits 1 ^rr^C'//^^ez.T // '• '"5oir v2/„ P;o9°"""‘“ “ '"".OU J..„„ „ ^ ‘res to undertake a t-, Selection of a vendo. benefits'• Of a vendor. ^^^ISODUCTXp^tl - a, approxiiBatelv s^^nnn ion . ® Income. it allowing «3timated sU'i °° “ i'^ar less the®cit^‘ *ati„ate| PISCPS.crTn^ « ^ ^^ected staff Issue #1 Vendorg « Whii the employee's tlJl ®‘15^'=ion couid^ „ ^'^on Partii.^ Products. y a s time while they ar» substintiV' in B?rr¥ - The thr». "" asalth Premf..,____ ^ ^®r premiums for those!®'^ ;-v - .%•’■ Health Care Reimbursement - This is an account where persons set aside money to pay for health care expenses that are not normally covered by the insurance plan. This could Include co-pays, dental expenses and etc. Dependent Care — This would allow the employee to defer up to $5,000 to pay for the cost of dependent care as a pre-tax item. Each of the vendors offer the basic programs with some slight variations. ^ Vendor Services - Plan Development - In each case the vendors are taking their standard plan and adopting it to the City's. As noted in Attachment B this ranges from $500 to $2,700. ^ Review - This is offered by one of the plans in their plan development fee while others have had them reviewed by prominent legal firms in the area, the City could either rely on such legal representations or choose to have their own legal review. A separate legal review by Popham Haik is estimated to be about $400- 1,200. (Some of the plans have not been reviewed Ic ally as best as we can determine.) Administration - Once the program is up and running it can either be self administered by the City or it can be administered through a third party. Quotations for these expenses and the basis for these differ by type of plan. It should be noted that the City would feel it prudent to have a third party administrator as employees may be reluctant to participate in a program if they know their fellow employees are reviewing reimbursements for particularly health related items. Additionally the types of administration do differ, some handle the accounting and transmit to the City for writing all the checks. Others handle all the check writing directly from their office. RECOMMENDATION - It is recommended that the Council indicate any questions or issues they would like to address and request tabling until the September 10, 1990 Council meeting. PROPOSED MOITON - Moved by _, seconded by _, Council table the issue until September 10, 1990. Ayes _, Nays _. cc; Department Heads 5290.2 TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Mark E. Bernhardson, City Administrate DATS: May 2, 1990 SUBJECT: Flexible Benefit Plan Attachment:A. Flexible Benefit Plan (Cover Memo Only) Memo Dated 4/20/90 TSSDE - Dete-mine If Council will authorize the City to tocIc with iPstaSton to develop a flexible benefits plan for City employees . INTRODUCTION - At the Council's April 23, Attachrae^^^^ A was preTented for Council consider ition and tabling it until the 5/14/90 meeting. ALTERNATIVES 1. Approve 2. Modify and approve 3. Take no action 4. Accent the legal review of DCA's master oocuments s! Table to 5/28/90 meeting RECOMMENDATION - It is recommended that the City work with DCA Stanton to: A. Develop a flexible benefits plan in an amount not to exceed $4,000 for plan design and communication and accept the legal review by DCA's legal firm. B. Develop the plan to be administered by DCA Stanton for approximately $1,700/year. flexible benefits plan in an amount not to exceed ^ liHgn a^r communication. Additionally the Plan is to be administered by DCA Stanton for approximately $l,700/year. y __. Nays __. 4::5C.i N TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Mark E. Bernhardson, City Administrato^ DATE: April 20, 1990 SUBJECT: Flexible Benefit Plan Attachment: A. DCA Flexible Benefit Outline ISSUE - Presentation of information to Council regarding the basics of flexible benefit plan. INTRODUCTION - Over the past couple years staff has discussed with Council the undertaking of flexible spending accounts in conjunction with the pre-tax provisions allowed by IRS Section 125. Under this, it allows an employee to deduct from pre-tax dollars certain amounts for child care, health premiums, health and dental expenses and other types of qualified plans together with coordinating that plan wirh their deferred compensation. Even though this has been a longterm goal to present to the Council for some time. Section 39, that was a discrimintation test, made certain elements and design of the plan more expensive. This has subsequently been repealed by the Congress. (I would like to thank Councilmembers who pursuaded staff to wait on going through and doing a Section 89 compliance in January of *89 since the repeal made it no longer necessary.) DISCUSSION - Flexible pre-tax benefit progrsuns are provided by a number of organization^ to their employees in both public and private sectors in the metro area. The DCA Stanton group has done it in most municipalities who havwe adopted such programs. Subsequent to indicating that the cost of the plan would be about $1,500 to design it in our January 16, 1990 memo I have done further exploration amd the total cost at this point looks to be about $2,250 for plan design and $1,700 for plan communciations and introduction. (We budgeted about $7,500 for both IRS 125 and 87 for 1990.) The information is presented to Council at this time so that you may peruse the information to see what questions or issues you have prior to a decision as to whether staff should initiate the work with DCA Stanton. While the City could solicite alternate quotations from other areas, it is not required nor felt that the expense involved would net a substantial savings, particularily since DCA will be working from plans developed for the municipalities. (The only unknown expense at this point is the legal review. DCA's master documents have been reviewed by the Gray, Plant law firm. These cost factors will be presented at the next meeting.) In addition to the initial outlay expense there is the administrative cost of the program. While it can be done inhouse, the approximately $1,700 per year that DCA would charge for administration of the program would do a much better job than we would be able to do and would probably make the program much more widely used. (Therw has been a reluctance to participate by certain employees in organizations that used their own inhouse administration, of people submitting bills for particularly health related matters. Ones that have shifted from an inhouse to a contract administrator have seen their participation rates go up. (This is because a number of people are concerned that people in their own orgainization are reviewing bills for health matters that they consider to be personal.) ALTSRNATr/ES 1. Accept the information. 2. Ask any question you may have at this point or over the next three weeks. 3. Table until subsequent meeting. RECOMMENDATION - It is recommended that Council accept the information and ask any questions they may have between now and the next meeting and that the matter be tabled until May 14, 1990. / PROPOSED MOTION - Moved by _, seconded by _, that Council accept the information and ask any questions they may have between and now and the next meeting and that the matter be tabled until May 14, 1990. Ayes _, Nays _. cc: Janet McCune, DCA All Department Heads ( •w e «“ •iS2 SiS 1 2 O.S» C O ^C « S2^ S 3 » 0 •< • < «Mc e■ <<4 ^ ■ * -o M •4 • ■ 44 a 2 £ £ a 3 (4 44 M «M f • *»l : to m U44 ■ a «4-H n a 9 sstt I js tr o r» f* *•» 44 c ^ rM ** o m P ■•4 M o o o r> ,fi O rr a e I I I I I <5^'«k44444Mk«9«aaaaaa >4 44 a a a a a 22<^44<oT3££ 44 44 a e tK 44 44 %1r ^ w • 2*^a«a,cac*o w a a a a a 0 K.4 a-«4004BDaoct4 44 a44'4prT-Sa'-i'S JSJ;=i 5.5 £ £ o a e:;:3 z 2Snl 2 •H o -4 -4a. u c < (N -» a V> “ c a< £ XI a ■•4 CD 44 a a • c >4 S jK a a a 44 D "> * £ 4< a 9 a a 4« I a a ■c a 44 a a a a -S 44 a 0 a a M £ a. X 9 44 4 p4» a c b s B S 9> I •H X 44 D -4a » a 44 a a -H i £ u 9 0 e • ja w 0 *4 o 44 -w a D a <>4 c a £ >44 a B 44 D a 0 >H o M D c a. 8 c a 9 a a D C ►£ C a c b a i4 a >4 0 a 0 o 44 a. u u ai )M (o D M.s.IZ IZSa u £ D a a a £ 44 u ? 8 -4g.2;;;S 22 W aB < 2>, £2 o ^ c2 ■-• c ja a a 0 D e O -4 -H B SS M M 2t ^ 9 5 . 9 44a « o a 41 44 C 22 e M 22 §gu u in i-i I ^ o o — in a v> *- »4 C 2S >1-4 '^-4 o O in u c4» a ls° -H c C -4 0 u a > o -4 e X -4 a o a -H C <H a. -I O 44 -4 a > -4 a -4 B D a 4» a bD _ a U 0 9 a 8 > D D 44 a a a c «a £ -4 £ 9 > u u a> > o 44 aQ o a a u -4 £•J a. K 2 a u u 44 M 2 44 •S2Sa -4 a lu C 44 BOM a -4 M a 44 o a£ a O ) 44 u 0 g *n C S 44 X 0) 3 ai a e c M M a a a 2S'g^ c M a 44 M l4 C -4 9 a £ a £ D 44 o 8 c —I —< ^ a a D a a a a X a to X a I I I -4 » 44 a a a -4 9 o > 44 a -4 a a a c X m > 9 0 8-4 -H c -4 E a 2 2 ^ (5 ?44 X a Z •M M P-l <M n 44 U a -4 M 44 22 C — M 0-4 o a a C 8 44 £ -4 D I C 44 o < o a o o ni a 0-4 fH 9590.2 . TOi Mayor and City Council FROM: Mark E. Bernhardson, City Administrato DATE: September 5, 1990 SUBJECT: Highway 12 Corridor Study Attachment: A. Highway 12 Information B. Draft List of Issues ISSUE - 1. Presentation of information to Council from the Highway 12 Task Force. 2. List of draft issues for possible submission at the next Policy Committee meeting. 3. Proposal for utilization of outside expertise to assist the City during the process. INTRODUCTION - Attachment A is the most recent information presented to the Council regarding the Highway 12 Corridor Study. It had been requested that issues be prepared by the City for submission to the next Policy Committee meeting with Attachment A representing an initial list. DISCUSSION - Issue #2 - Draft Issues - This is initial list prepared by staff as to possible issues and objectives the City would like to have achieved during the study process. This does not mean necessarily that they could or would be achieved but at least would be the City ’s initial input on this. This initial submission does not forestall either the City or the Task Force from developing other goals as the process progresses. Issue #3 - Expert Assistance - While initially looking at the uti 1 izatior. of a strictly transportation consultant the scope of the work appears to involve a wider range of issues as noted in the list of issues above. These issues are broader than transportation and include land use, environmental sensitive areas, urban and rural interface together with a transportation component. In order to blend both of these it would be perhaps better to utilize someone familiar with the land use issues and have a transportation expert available through them when it would be appropriate. Given this line of reasoning it is proposed that the City utilize John Shardlow as the principal expert in developing the issues and assisting the City in that matter and utilizing on an as needed basis a transportation engineering firm wht has worded as part of MnDOT and as a contractor to MnDOT on significant broiects. 10 ^'ITY OF PSfj^Q It should be mentioned that during the review of the expert transportation people in the area who bring the kind of credentials that would be most valuable they are also the ones who work with the Minnesota Department of Transportation and their acting as a principle advocate for the City may put them in a difficult position with MnDOT in other areas. If however, they are in a background role providing technical expertise to an expert that may be a position that would most appropriate. Given the unknown initial scope of the work it is estimated that the City would work with a $5,000 budget and work to develop a work program in light of the current schedule presented by the consultant from thit work projects for the transportation component would be oetermined. ALTERwNATIVES - Issue |i - Accept the information. Issue #2 - 1. Make any comments on the proposal. 2. Adopt draft as initial submission. *3. Table for further discussion. 4. Schedule a workshop meeting on these issues. Issue £3 2 Expert Assistance 1. Engage Dahlgren Shardlow & Uban as the outside assistant and utilize a transportation consultant on an as needed basis 2. Engage separate land use and transportation consultants. 3. Select eithet transportation or land use consultant 4. Table for further discussion. 5. Take no action. RECOMMENDATION - It is recommended that the City work to develop with Dahlgren Shardlow 4 Uban a work program with an initial budget not to exceed $5,000. Any increase over this would be brought back for Council review and authorization. Once the work program has been developed it will be brought back to Council for their concurrence. PROPOSED MOTION - Moved by _j seconded by _, Council direct staff to work with Dahlgren Shardlow fc Uban regarding work program for expertise on the Highway 12 Corridor together as needed use a transportation subcontractor in an amount not to exceed $5,000. Ayes _, Nays _. Til 12 Corridor Study Policy Committee Minutes * July 25, 1990 Maple Plain City Hall Approved August 22, 1990 Members Present: Alternates Present: Others Present; G. Wetter, M. Johnson, A. Kunze, M. Alger, G. Acromite, D. Lorsung, R. Bauman, T. Humbert K, Gabriel, M. Bemhardson S. Hay, L. Dallam, R. Harris, R. Scheuer, P. Swanson, A. Vande Vegte, G. Johnson S. Hay called the meeting to order shortly after 5:00 p.m There were no changes made to the agenda. Hay discussed roles and membership of the three TH 12 Committees and their continued evolution. He also discussed an approach to conduct future meetings that would focus primary interaction with committee members seated at the table, with input from their alternates sealed in the audience. Others (citizens, technical committee rr.embers, etc.) attending the meeting would be able to have issues/concerns addressed at the "Other Business" item of the agenda. Ensuing discussion; - Process to be used to ensure that compromises made by committee members will be equitably treated? - Who has authority to select corridors? Hay stated that the purpose behind the scoping process was to narrow the range of possible corridors, from input by all project participants, to a manageable and feasible number. L. Dallam added that these feasible comdors would be addressed in an environmental impact statement (EIS), along with the issues, concerns and impacts identified in the scoping process. Dallam then presented the schedule of activities. He said it woulj b ielpful if a preferred corridor was selected by July 1991 so that the corridor could be piotected and uncertainty in the community removed. He said it would also be helpful to discuss the project with key people in each city - and requested each member tc 'm1 or phone a list to him as soon as possible. Questions followed, addre^^ed by Hay and D - G. Acromite asced whether the schedule ot awuvities was for the Policy Committee or the entire study. Reply : Entire study. A. Kunze asked whose goa,!s/issues/concems would govern the process and how each would be rated to determine importance. Reply: Three segments may be individually studied to concentrate ^r'o-Mudies” within the project between neighboring communities. All eva-iiaaon criteria would receive equal weight. TIk sooner the key individuals, issues, goals, and concerns are identified, the sooner the consultant can begin to evaluate. An informal list of these items was requested. Kunze asked about funding for the (preliminary engineering), who would proceed with EIS after HNTB completed the list of activities, and the State ’s priority for this project. Reply: Hay explained the process for the project budget and that an additional funding request was made for the consultant to complete the EIS (to provide short-term supplemental stafO, and that this project is Mn/DOT’s number two priority in the Golden Valley office. Kunze also asked about estimated costs per mile of freeway vs. expressway and when costs (for the project’s construction) wil' be known. Reply: Project costs depend on the design, number of interchanges, grade separated crossings, frontage road needs, etc., and that the freeway to expressway juncture, when known, will assist in defining costs. Acromite asked whether the Policy Committee would have input in redefining, as necessary, the 500 foot corridor width. Reply: If agreed upon, yes; but depends on issues and concerns identified in the scoping process. M. Johnson asked what the ordinary width of a freeway is (for future protection and preservation mapping purposes), and if frontage roads must be parallel to the corridor. Reply: A roadway may require 300 feet of wi^ih, depending on whether it is an expressway or freeway section, and irontage roads are not necessarily parallel. Acromite asked ior a clarification between "comdor" and "nght-of-way", and whether Mn/DOT wanted form^i documentation of goals, issues, and concerns from each representing jurisdiction for the next policy committee meeting. Reply: "Corridor" ’»*nlies planning/search area, while "right-of-way" ccwcems land acquired fot uu: actual operation of a roa<iway. No formal documentatiem of goals, issues, and concerns is necessary; but a list is neekd f(» consultant to stay on schedule, by the next meeting i<»r sooner). Other Business Hay opened the meeting for questions from the audience. - G. Johnson asked if the uncertainty on the design of the highway (expressway vs. freeway) means that Mn/DOT has ruled out the option of toll road financing. Reply: No. However, there has been no decision to study this option for the TH 12 project, and in all likelihood, it will not be studied. The primaiy focus is upon the selection of a corridor with minimal adverse impact on each city. - R. Scheuer discussed Commissioner Levine’s 1989 announcement for a 1-year funding project and how it affects the current project s hedule; requested an elaboration on obtaining funds for the consultant to complete the EIS; and asked about the impact to the project if mutual agreements aie not possible between the panicipaiing juri.‘-'<ictions (at the end of the scoping process). Reply: The funds for the scoping prtject have been allocated. Even though ncuract execution took six months, a new schedule will not limit what will be accomplished in the study. T. Hi mbert explained how Mn/DO’? r^*tains and uses funds to hire consultants. Hay stated that Mn/DOT seeks City Council approval on final design plans and geemetnes, and that if continued support tor the project • cannot oe generated, it may choose to either by-pass the local governments / involved (case of extreme need) or place the project on a lower priority, which would indefinitely jeopardize its completion. Humbert added that Mn/DOT does not want to waste exocn^^d scoping/EIS efforts, and therefore seeks to obtain as mudi cooperation from affected jurisd etions as possible throughout the study to ensure a project’s comoletion. Next Meeting August 22, 1990, 5:30 p.m.. Maple Plain City Hall (all Policy Committee meetings ‘ .'1 be he' the fourth Wednesday of each month). Meeting adjournmeiit - 6: .30 p m. RDH/mst TH 12 CORRIDOR COMMITTEES MAILING LIST AGENDA . MEETING NOTICES FOR ALL TH 12 CORRIDOR COMMITTEES (Technical, Policy and Citizen) TO BE SENT AT THE SAME TIME AS COMMITTEE MEMBER MAILINGS TO: City of Delano 205 Bridge Avenue East Delano, Minnesota 55328 City of Independence 1790 County Road 90 Independence, Minnesota 55359 City of Long Lake P. O. Box 606 Long Lake, .Minnesota 55356 City of Orono Box 66 Crystal Bay, Minnesota 55323 City of Medina 2052 County Road 24 Hamel, Minnesota 55340 City of Maple Plain Maple Plain, Minnesota 55359 Franklin Township c/o Norma Chadwick, Township Clerk Route 1, Box 85 Delano, Minnesota 55328 l4I^VTHlX:(anm.L« 'I T.H. 12 CORRIDOR STUDY T.H. 101 - T.H. 25 PROJECT GOALS/ISSUES/CONCERNS Mn /DOT Coal 1. Accommodate through tnps by auto and trucks at a high level of service along T.K 12. Goal 2. Provide for the safe movement of vehicles along T.H. 12. Goal 3. Enhance the economic vitality of the State of Minnesota. Goal 4. Preserve the quality of the natural environment along T.H. IZ Issues: • obtaining political consensus on preferred corridor • availability and source of funding for design and construction • characteristics of new roadway (freeway vs. e.xpressway) • access to T.H. 12 (type and spacing) f^ong Lake Goal 5. Provide a high quality of life for Long Lake residents. Concerns: impacts on local businesses and tax base. ^ ^ impacts an the natural environment (lakes, water quality, wetlands). Qrona Goal d Provide a high quality of life for Orono residents. Concerns: • w. - .impacts on residential property impacts on natural environment_______ We, efficient movement of traffic impacts on local businesses and tax base 1 Medina Goal 7. Provide a hi^h quality of life for Medina residents. Concerns: • impacts on adjacent property (economic, access to T.H. 12, relocation costs, noise, visual) • mitigation of impacts on adjacent property • impact on local roads (cost to City of upgrading, relocation) • characteristics of upgraded T.H. 12 (freeway vs. e.xpressway) Maple Plain Goal 8. Provide a high quality ’ of life for Maple Plain residents. Concerns: • impacts on local businesses (loss of highway traffic/sales if bypassed ~ quantity and convenience of access — adequate visibility and signing for the City.) • safe and e.xpeditious movement of local traffic within the City • improved accessibility to Twin Cities Metropolitan Area Independence Goal 9. Provide a high quality of life for Independence residents on large lots in a rural setting. Concerns: impacts on residential property local road continuity (upgraded T.H. 12 could be a barrier and divide the City) impact on CR 6 (in tenns of existing conflict of through traffic with local traffic) * «w impacts on City Hall (historic site) impact on "big woods" remnant community provisions in T.R 12 R/W for future mass transit ........ Delano Goal 10. Maintain a small-town-urban quality of life for Delano residents. Goal 11. Enhance the City of Delano as a service center for surrounding areas. Concerns: • conflicts beuveen local and through traffic on T.H. 12 (ability to cross T.H. 12 in peak periods) • impact on residential ta.x base • improved accessibility to Twin Cities Metropolitan Area • impacts on existing businesses and industrial development riia: Ml'n-ll-OIV'Comiar.^ad * MnDOT/HIGHWAY 12 STUDY INITIAL LIST/POTENTIAL GOALS FOR ORONO Objectives for Process A. ) Select a corridor that can be done without significant delays and provide a cost effective facility B. ) At the point of 3-6 corridor options - have agencies take a tour (cities, MnDOT, DNR, EPA, Metropolitan Council, Fish/Wildlife, Corps of Engineers, etc.) C. ) Serious consideration to the present corridors and variations close to it D. ) Development of an Issues Map showing key physical lissues (wetlands, cemetaries, etc.) E. ) Determine if there is any cooperative activities with Burlington Northern to assist in ROW/Highway development Objectiver for Corridor Selected Upgrade Highway 12 to a 4 lane capacity to safely handle anticipated traffic and improve the traffic level of service Pre&erve/protect significant natural amenities such as lakes, wetlands, Wolsfeld Woods, Luce Line, etc. Develop corridor that ties in and does not disrupt current transportation patterns and infrastructure Avoid severely isolating sections of the community from others Compatibility of alignment with appropriate land use - Minimize intrusion into area outside the MUSA line - Compliment land use and development plans - Limit the disruption caused to and impacts of traffic on single family residential areas - Provide approrpiate access in areas where development is desired Compatiabi1ity with the Metropolitan Council Transportation framework as appropriate to the situation Use right-of-way acquisition to improve blighted areas Trade offs available for economic losses to communities where significant existing tax base is removed Minimize the increase in noise and air pollution levels in comparison to existing levels Page 2 of 2 MnDOT/HIGHWAY 12 STUDY INITIAL LIST/POTENTIAL GOALS FOR ORONO Objectives for Corridor Selected Provide safe and convenient accomodations across and parallel to corridor for pedestrians and bicycles where feasible For Orono - Effectively and safely handle traffic (Not necessarily a freeway) - Establish corridor to plan around - Minimize time length for property owners caused by uncertainty as to highway location - Develop corridor as close to present as possible - Limit residential impacts - Protect the natural environment 9490.1 TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Mark E. Bernhardson, City Administrator DATE: September 4, 1990 SUBJECT: LMCD Longterm Management Program Attachment; '' / St:'10 ('ITY OF A. LMCD Longterm Management Program (Revised Dated 9/90 Previously Presented) B. LMCD Response Comments to City of Orono*s Comments Dated 8/15/90 (Previously Transmitted) C. 1991 LMCD Budget Memo Dated 8/14/90 (Memo Only) D. Draft Access Growth Chart ISSUE - 1. Determine comments, if any, Councilmembers desire to give LMCD Representative. 2. Determine desired direction they would like to give the LMCD Representative for the pending vote on the Plan. 3. Determination of action the Council desires to take regarding the 1991 LMCD Budget. INTRODUCTION - Attachm^'nts A, B and C were presented to the Council as part of their packet for the August 27, 1990 meeting. As noted in Attachment B, changes were made to the Public Draft that primarily relate to clarifying roles on; Shoreline regulations role for LMCD Revisions as to funding Modification as to promotion of access for 700 parking slots The revised draft is to be considered by the full Board at the LMCD meeting on September 26, 1990. DISCUSSION - The changes incorporated in the draft to a degree address issues raised by the City of Orono and other cities during the review process. The following represent a summary of changes and issues not addressed in that draft: Plan Review and Revision - The plan does make some nirnor “fevTsTons to a citation together with indicating that Metro Council's role is by virtue of the State Executive Council's request that they be involved. The plan despite encouragement by Orono does not contain specific sections although the comments do address part of them. The following could be addressed in the plan itself. Actual Role of Metro Council - Incorporation of page 2 and 3 of the comments to clarify the actual authority would be helpful in defining in the plan Metro Council's role. Threshold for Change - It does not stipulate at what point a change in the plan in future years would require any review and comment by any other agencies including Metro Council. Conf1ict Between Plan and LMCD Actions - The plan does not address how conf 1 lets “tliat may arise between the LMCD's actual actions and the proposed work plan will be resolved. This could be the source of legal confrontations and expenses in the future. (The analogy is that by State law for cities for zoning ordinance take pre-emenance over Comprehensive Plan.) Shoreland Requlation - The plan does modify language indicaFTng that it is not LMCD's intent to usurp any local authority. On page 46 of the current new draft they dedicate a new paragraph stating that they shall request to determine if the District may participate as an interested party and also indicate that they would request to be part of the Metro Council's review ^process. They do however later on in #3 indicate that 'LMCD shall develop agreements with local communities to review variance applications. While verbally stating that this was voluntary given that it would be through agreements the word "shall" gives the import that it is mandatory that an agreement be developed with such city. (In addition it should be remembered that the work for the shoreland regulations whether the City works through the LMCD or Department of Natural Resources directly that there may need to be, because of the change in local ordinances, for a possible review of the City's Comprehensive Plans by Metro Council. To date this issue has not been addressed as to whether this would be required and would be a consideration for the City in determining what it desires to do regarding shoreline regulations.) Access - While the language in a couple instances has EeerTrabdified with changes by changing the language to the thrust for assuring 700 parking slots "rather than" to establish a policy that recognizes the need. (It should be remembered that in the discussion of access the original draft also indicated that the 700 slots included both public and private ramped access.) Restriction by Use - The access control does address methods for catagorization of use during peak usage under the density 6.0 - 6.5 by imposing restrictions between 10:00 a.ra. and 6:00 p.ra. weekends and holidays. At other densities it has added stronger language about additional patrol hours which is in addition to language on page viii that state that unless 3,000 additional patrol hours are available by the 7.0 density, no further access growth will allowed. Revised draft still does not accomplish the following: Density Monitoring - The plan does not specify the methodology or tHe frequency for determining density as part of the body of the agreement or reference to another document that would contain it. Access Control Mode l - While the document does address both storage potential and actual access use they have not pulled the two together nor predict as part of their model potential growth from any particular access growth. (Attachment D is an attempt at that, to see if that is helpful.) It is interesting to note, based on the very rudimentari- information that generally based on use during survey densities to storage counts are roughly: Public ramped access is 1-1 to 1-2 (350 or 700 , slots) *; Marinas - 1 used for every 5 slips Lakeshore owners - 1 used for every 10 boats stored Assuming little or no growth in marinas/yacht clubs, municipal access or homeowners association, the growth potential is primarily from ramp access and single family homeowners. For homeowners it*s a growth either: a. ) further subdivisions b. ) more boats/limit (current about 2/lot) c. ) "increase" in the ration of storage to use from 10-1 to 8-1 etc. (The categories used were in the definitions section which were from a DNR study and the ratios reflect the use to the storage count.) Public Safety - They modified language to indicating that they presently do not have their own police force, but may do so in the future. Additionally they referred to the communications problems as a technical issue. The problem with radio communications between the surrounding cities and the Water Patrol is an issue of policy of the Sheriff's department rather than technology, although technology could possibly resolve it. Additionally they still do not address the enforcement at the shoreline and this will continue to be a problem of cities being able to enforce infractions on the lake that are seen from the shoreline because the LMCD has not contracted with the cities. The contracting mechanism could strictly limit the amount of enforcement by city police departments but this plan does not allow for any of that. Management Structure - The modifications in this area are primarily in funding with an entire new paragraph on page 67 on future managment structure and funding together with selected additions starting on page 69 under the Objectives. The thrust is to put more of an emphasis on users rather than tax base for funding the programs • As for the structure of the Board, the addition of the 4 regional members is predicated on regional funding being instituted. (The four besides the current 14 are Metro Council, Hennepin County, Hennepin Parks and Minnehaha Creek Watershed District.) ALTERNATIVES 1. Determine comments Council may want to make regarding this. 2. Give any preliminary direction. 3. Table for further discussion. 4. Take no action. RECOMMENDATION - In response to Orono and other cities* comments changes have Been made in the plan. Orono's desire to have the plan rectify the current problems before they allow additional growth however have not been fully realized, although the addition of further increases in patrol hours at levels 5.0 and 6.0 attempts to get at this. The City's LMCD Representative will be available at the September 10, 1990 meeting to discuss this further. Issue #3 1991 Budget - It is recommended that the Council give any furtherifssues that they may have regarding the 1991 Budget to the LMCD Representative and any direction they would desire for a vote on that budget. PROPOSED MOTION - Moved by seconded by that Council having given comments table this until the September 24, 1990 Council meeting for any additional comments. Ayes _, Nays _. CCS JoEllen Hurr, LMCD Representative, 930 Partenwood Road Eugene R. Strommen, LMCD, 403 East Lake Street, Wayzata Cabfiel Jabbour, 985 T^^nkawa Road, Long Lake 55356 81490. /jrr7)(i//^e?ur- G TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Mark E. Bernhardson, City Administrato DATS: August 14, 1990 SUBJECT: LMCD Budget Attachment: A. Proposed Draft Letter to LMCD Regarding the Budget B. 1991 LMCD Budget Dated 7/27/90 ISSUE - 1. Presentation to Council of a draft letter outlining Council's objection to the projected increase. 2. Determination by Council as to whether they desire to transmit such. INTRODUCTION - The LMCD's 1991 Budget was included as part of the 1991 budget process packet for the July 23rd meeting and placed on the agenda for the August 13, 1990 meeting. At that meeting reservations regarding the increase primarily as it focuses on additional personnel to carry out the LMCD's plan was questioned. Staff was directed, in conjunction with the Lake Use Committee, to draft a letter for Council's consideration at the August 27, 1990 meeting. DISUCSSION - As noted on Attachment B the City, except through the persuation of its representative, has no direct veto of the LMCD's budget. (There is also a question of the timeing and a definitative response limit.) Concern relating to the budget is the 19% increase primarily which goes to expanding staff in order to carry out the proposed Comprehensive Management Plan. The City of Orono has proposed several changes to that draft and the outcome of that draft may indicate: A. What additional personnel are needed. B. Determination as to whether Council desires to support that plan. It has been staff's understanding, at this point, that Council does not object to continuing operations plus some monies tor milfoil, but only tfe«increments 1 portion for assistance in implementing the new Comprehensive Plan, alternative obviously may be that by not stre. .then its staff role it may compromise their ability to affecc •’y deal with other agencies who may also desire to have a role on the lake. In a discussion with JoEllen Hurr she indicated the addition was primarily for: a. ) Freeing the Executive Director to spend more efforts managir^ the milfoil program and thereby reduce the cost of contract supervisor. b. ) Allow the district to do more work in areas of current responsibility that they have not been able to adequately accomplish. ALTERNATIVES 1. Adopt draft letter for transmittal. 2. Amend and adopt. 3. Table pending review and revision of plan. 4. Take no action. RECOMMENDATION - It is recommended that the Council amend the letter as they choose and transmit the letter as proposed. PROPOSED'MOTION - Moved by , seconded by _, Council indicate its objections to the proposeH^ LMCD budget by transmittal of its attached letter to its representative and LMCD. Ayes , Nays 1 4 August 23/ 1990 Board of Diroctoro Lako Minnetonka Conservation District 402 East Lake Street Waysata/ Minnesota 55391 Ret 1991 LMCD Budget Gentlemen and Ladiesi % The City Council of the City of Orono objects to the proposed 1991 LMCO budget and the increase in real property taxes envisioned in Lt, As a general proposition, an increase of the magnitude proposed/ coming on top of substantial percentage increases in years immediately past, is unwarranted, particularly in view of the fact that the milfoil problem is not the cause of the increase. Zn particular, it appears that a substantial portion of this increase is for additional staff (a) to permit the LMCD to assist the DNR in implementing DNR ahoroland management regulation among the 14 communities; (b) to assist the LM;.D in implementing its own shoreland regulation objectives such as reviewing land use applications covered by them and, presui-ably, (c) to assist the LMCD in other programs related to lako use or changes in the governing structure or taxing authority of the District set forth in the proposed Comprehensive Management Plan Lak« Minnetonka Concervation Oictrict August 23, 1990 Page 2 Since the plan is still under revision, it is possible that either the plan will be rejected by the 14 cities or modified so as to make additional personnel unnecessary. But, the City disagrees with the current proposed plan about most, if not all, of those goals; we object strongly to a budget increase designed in any way to assist the District to reach them. Finally, to the extent the budget reflects the receipt of moneys from the ONR to help with its own shoreline managomont objectives and the use of LNCO staff for that purpose, we believe activities by LMCD which tend to enhance the DNR control of the lake and its environs, and tend to make ONR money and District personnel devoted to DNR projecus a factor in the functioning of the LMCD, are extremely undesirable. Once begun, they may well come to dominate LMCD affairs and cause a serious conflict of interest between LMCD government and its LMCD purposes. [Notes We do understand that the $45,000 item is presented as a "pass through" of moneys from the DNR to the Cities if they agree to certain procedures.] Wo request that consideration be given to these comments and that budget increases, if any, be limited only to expected cost Increases for current activities. And we will encourage our representative to vote against the present proposal. Sincerely, CITY OF ORONO Mayor 1643Y QC ! 9590.1 TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Mark E. Bernhardson, City Administrator DATS: September 5, 1990 SUBJECT: On Site Septic Inspector Position a i ITy fit-' Attachment: A. Mike Gaffron Memo on Orono's Septic System Management Program Dated 8/24/90 ISSUE - 1. Determine Council interest in the proposed position of an on site septic inspector. 2. Determination whether the current temporary position may be continued . INTRODUCTION - Over the past several years the City has used a summertime inspector to do the necessary septic inspections. In an average summer they have been able to do approximately 4-500 of the current 1,100 systems. While the program has functioned acceptably in conducting the inspections there is a concern as to the amount of follow up to ensure repair orders are accomplished to preserve systems is limited and that construction of new systems, particularly as septic sites become more difficult to develop on more marginal properties, will need to be strengthened . Since 1980 despite the sewering of selected areas in the community the overall number has grown from 860 to 1,100 with expected growth at current zoning standards to approximately 1,500 to 1,600. Additionally in that time the number of zoning reviews has increased from 70 in 1985 to 122 in 1989, a 75% increase. 1990 is expected to be over 140, a 100% increase. The City has not added any new positions since 1986 when one police officer was added to the base police contract and 1 and a half police officers to contract cities. This is the first addition of a full time person to the Building and Zoning staff since 1978 when there were two zoning personnel, one who functioned primarily as the Village Planner and Administrative Assistant, one full time inspector and a septic managur person. In 1986 because of the increase in land use applications a realignment of duties resulted in the person who was also the septic manager doing substantial building and zoning, with the transformation a part time building inspector/maintenance person to full time inspector and some septic inspection work. Attachment A outlines the statu> of the current program in addition work in other areas of juilding and zoning have not received the time and attention ^hat they could including sewer area studies, comprehensive plan updates, lake and marina issues, zoning amendment updates, etc. The solution presented is the addition of an on-site septic person which would more fully handle the program together with freeing up current people to concentrate in other building and zoning areas. The proposed program cost and revenues are listed below. Estimated Cost C3onpensation (Level 6) Related Personnel Costs Current Cost/Sumner Net Cost Increase 1991 $24,700 5.500 30,200 4.500 $25,700 Top Step (1991 Rates) $29,000 6,800 35,500 - 4,500 $31,000 Revenue Estimate 1990 $22,000 1991 $28,000 1992 $33,000 The other build., ig and zoning revenues of $205,000 (89) covered a substantial part of the other persons currently on the staff 1989 departmental budget of $246,000. The proposal also includes an increase from $20.00 which was reduced from *-he original $25.00 in 1980 which would generate about $28,000 in 1991 and increase to $30.00 which would generate about $33,000 at the current level in 1992. (The consumer price index during the 10 year period from 1980 to 1990 has increase over 60%.) In addition to the proposed fee being on par or below that when it was originally initiated the new position would also provide increased service to those systems. It is estimated the cost of the temporary position for the final 3 months of the year is about $4,000- $4,500. ALTERNATIVES 1. Employ a person full time as a septic inspector for the balance of the year. 2. Employ a person in the septic inspector position starting in 1991. 3. Extend the current temporary position through the end of the year given the budgetary timetable. 4. Table. 5. Conclude this temporary position when funds are depleted in the middle of October. RECOMMENDATION - It is recommended that the temporary person be continued through the end of the year with the person being able to update further inspections to the balance of the year plus the ssr necessary paper work and some follow up on repair for the last two to three years. In addition it is requested that the Council give comments as to their interest in establishing the position for 1991. As presented in the budget, staff Is recommending that the new position be created for 1991. seconded by the CouncilPROPOSED MOTION - Moved by _ _ _ indicates their willingness to continue the program through the end of the year and will table the balance of the discussion until the budget discussions later this year. Ayes __, Nays __. To: From: Date: ■77y9QA^j9(<rzy^/[ Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building & Zoning Administrator Michael P. Gaffron, Asst Planning & Zoning Administrator August 24r 1990 Subject: Review of Orono's Septic System Management Program Summary - 1. Since inception of Orono's Septic System Management Program in 1978, the number of staff hours devoted to the septic program has shown a general decline. 2. This has resulted in the following concerns: A) The number and frequency of existing system inspections has been inadequate compared to the levels anticipated in the 1978 Septic Systems Ordinance. B) The level of effectiveness of Code requirement enforcement for new installations and repairs has been inconsistent due to the lack of a single individual over seeing the entire design/installation/ma ‘Jtenance process. C) Follow-up of system failures encountered during the last 4 inspection seasons has been virtually non-existent. Records indicate approximately 70 of the 1,100 existing systems have experienced some degree of system failure that has not been repaired. 3. Meanwhile, financing of municipal sewers is becoming nearly impossible without general taxpayer support, and the City is experiencing continuing development of highly constrained parcels of land. These two factors lead to the conclusion that a strong septic system management program is more critical than ever if the City intends to accomplish its Comprehensive Plan objective of not sewering the rural areas of the City. 4. It is recommended that a full time septic program inspector/administrator be hired, as was done in 1978. Septic System Management Program August 24, 1990 Page 2 of 16 History of Orono's On-Site Sewage Treatment Inspection Program In the early 1970's, the City Council determined that the most effective way to preserve and enhance the water quality of Lake Minnetonka would be to limit the density of development within the watershed. They recognized that installation of municipal sewers has historically resulted in developer demands for smaller lot sizes for cost effectiveness. The Council therefore determined that municipal sewers would not be provided to the undeveloped rural areas of Orono and adopted 2-acre minimum lot size requirements for these unsewered areas, to provide adequate room for permanent use of septic systems, thereby avoiding (or at least postponing) high-density development . In February 1978, a full-time On-site Systems Inspection Program Manager was hired to review, inspect and approve all new septic system installations, inspect all existing septic systems on a regular basis, and create and administer septic system record keeping ■'nd homeowner education programs. A $20.00 per year program service charge was instituted in 1979, billed yearly to all septic system owners. Because many existing systems had never been documented as to design or location, it took 5 years to complete the initial round of system inspections, identifying and recording tank/drainfield locations and following up on repairs. While the new on-site system ordinance adopted in 1978 anticipated inspection of each existing system at least once every 2 yenrs, most systems were only inspected once within the first 5 year time period. Initial inspection efforts were also slowed by assignment of the inspector's time to related projects including documentation and follow-up on the Minnetonka Bluffs/West Ferndale sewer project. Septic System Management Program August 24, 1990 Page 3 of 16 During inspection seasons 1981 through 1983, inspections of existing systems were done by Mike Gaffron on a part-time consultant basis, devoting approximately 750 hours per year to the program. In 1984, Lyle Oman performed summer inspections along with duties in the Building Inspection and Street Departments. In 1985, Lyle's duties in the Building Department increased and the number of existing system inspections decreased. For inspection seasons 1986, 1987 and 1988, a summer inspector was hired for the sole purpose of inspecting existing systems. The summer inspector in 1987 also assisted with some zoning applications, hence the inspections were somewhat less than years 1986 and 1988. In 1989, no summer inspector was hired and the remaining full-time staff were able to devote no significant time to inspecting existing systems. The only such inspections completed in 1989 resulted from requests by homeowners or realtors for refinancing or mortgage purposes. In June 1990 a summer inspector was again hired for existing system inspections. It is expected that approximately 550 systems will be inspected in 1990. Review of new system plans and inspection of new installations has continued to be done by full time Building and Zoning Department staff, as has the review of site evaluations for proposed subdivisions. -J Septic System Management Program August 24, 1990 Page 4 of 16 Intended Goals and Objectives of On-Site Program On On-site Sewage Treatment Code (Section 12.30) lists the following purposes: A) To provide minimum standards and criteria for the design, location, construction, use and maintenance of all on-site sewage troatment systems within the City. b) To protect the l<:nd, water and other natural resources from pollution, impairment or destruction. C) To protect the public health, safety and general welfare of the residents and citizens of the City. D) To prevent the discharge of inadequately treated sewage to ground or surface waters. E) ,To prevent the flooding of or flood damage to operating systems. F) To prevent the premature extension of costly municipal sewer and water services consistent with the adopted Comprehensive Land Use Plan of the City. The Code goes on to provide for review, approval and inspection of all new septic system installations and repairs, as well as requiring proof of sewage treatment capabilities for all new rural lots created in the City. Additionally, while placing the responsibility for system operation, use and maintenance on each individual homeowner, the Code requires that "conforming systems shall be inspected by the City at least once every 2 years", and "substandard systems shall be inspected by the City at least once each year". City staff is given the authority to order system repairs or replacement where systems are found to be failing. Septic System Management Program August 24, 1990 Page 5 of 16 The Orono Comprehensive Land Use Management Plan is keyed toward preservation of Lake Minnetonka by allowing only low density development in the areas away from the Lake. To a great extent, the success of that Land Use Plan relies on the ability of the City to avoid installation of municipal sewers. The City's committment to protection and preservation of Orono's unique natural resources, coupled with land use, utility, and transportation policies geared toward low density development, all rely to a great degree on treatment and disposal of sewage on individual properties without the need for municipal sewers. If septic systems in rural Orono don't work, the City will be forced to install municipal sewers, which will ultimately lead to the higher density development which the City is attempting to avoid. Metropolitan Council Requirements The Metropolitan Council recently amended its guidelines for reviewing local comprehensive plans and plan amendments. Those guidelines require local controls including biennial inspection and maintenance of existing systems. While Orono's code would appear to generally meet the Metropolitan Council criteria, in actual practice the requirements of the code have not been effectively carried out. Perceived Problems with Current Program Status In order to provide a better perspective on the current status of the program, I would make the following comments; 1. Record keeping, requiring approximately 1 hour per new system (to assemble data to create inventory cards, mail out inspection reports, etc.) has been in a "catch-up'* mode for the last 5 years. Because of this, records have been lest in a few cases. Translation of information has often been inconsistent and less than thorough due to multiple staff member involvement in the plan approval/inspection/ record keeping process. Septic System Management Program August 24, 1990 Page 6 of 16 2. Regular existing system inspections have been sporadic and inconsistent from year to year. It takes 3-4 weeks of the typical 12 week inspection season for the temporary college students who have been hired to get "up to speed" With a new person each year, the annual inspection process barely gets started before it ends. The summer interns certainly can't become septic experts in the short time available, hence the quality and consistency of verbal information given to homeowners is lacking. Availability of full time staff to train new interns is also limited, since the beginning of the inspection season (June) coincides with the normal peak of the construction season. 3. Due to the need for tactful homeowner contact throughout the entire system repair process when such work is needed, summer inspectors have not been asked to do the follow-up work for needed repairs. Homeowners expect to deal with a knowledgeable staff person who can provide consistent and reliable answers throughout the repair process. As a result, many repairs have not been followed up because no individual full time staff person has had the time available to do so. Currently, Orono has a number of systems which were found to be failing as long ago as 1984, but which have never been followed up. With neither the homeowner anxious to spend significant amounts of money nor the neighbors making any complaints, such follow-ups must ultimately rely on staff members to push for any repair activity to occur. 4. There is a disparity between the kind of protection that residents expect based upon the tenets of the septic ordinance and the actual ability of a limited staff to provide the degree of service expected: Septic System Management Program August 24, 1990 Page 7 of 16 a) Residents expect soil testing/system design that meets City Code standards. Although not strictly a factor that can be changed by the City, there is a distinct lack of qualified and competent site evaluators. There are currently just a few site evaluators in the area whose work has been consistently of high quality. At least 3 or 4 other good ones have left the business within the last 5 years (Gary Rathbun of Hakanson, Anderson Asssociates; Tom Smith; Dave Ross from Schoell & Madson). There are an additional 3 or 4 who have exhibited poor methodology, poor reporting, or outright incompetence including actual deceitful practices (i.e. submitting reports for work that was never done, and completely ignoring obvious soil/site factors in order to allow a trench system where one shouldn't have been). /The point of this is that an incompetent site evaluator takes up significant amounts of staff time and investigative effort. We have been fortunate in being able to steer developers away from some of the worst offenders, but we can't totally eliminate them from the business, hence when they show up we have no choice but to devote the necessary time and effort to closely monitor their work. b) Residents expect installations .hat meet City Code. Installers generally have become much more skilled, experienced and competent since 1978, in part due to good training programs at the State level. However, the State voluntary certification program currently has no "teeth", and a lot of less-than-competent installers have managed to obtain State Certification while there is currently no mechanism for revocation of same. Septic System Management Program August 24, 1990 Page 8 of 16 In the case where an installer commits errors, there are some mistakes that can't be rectified, hence a strong septic program must have as a goal, to work with installers every step of the way, requiring pre construction meetings on the site, inspections at each stage of construction (without relying only on the contractor to call for inspections), and providing a level of inspection service to the residents that our Comprehensive Plan goals demand. This service cannot be adequately provided by part-time temporary staff nor by full time staff devoted primarily to duties other than the septic program. c) Residents expect record keeping that is up to date, clear, accurate, consistent and readily available. As noted before, our record keeping is in arrears, and with a new inspector each year, accuracy is suspect /while consistent interpretation of system conditions - and site capabilities is lacking. Record availability is at least good, but the card file system is becoming outmoded and unwieldy. Computerization of these records would be a long-term goal. d) Residents expect existing system inspections on a regular basis, a consistent staff person each time the system is inspected, a year-to-year redundancy that provides at least a minimal comfort level that the system has been "OK'd* and isn't causing any discernible pollution or health problems. Regular inspections by the same person each time will result in a better analysis of changing system conditions through the years. Our inspections have been irregularly spaced at best. With a stated goal of visiting each system at least once every 2 years, we have failed to come even close. In the 12 inspection seasons since the program started, a majority of pre existing systems have been inspected 3 times, many 4 times but few more than 5 times. Septic System Management Program August 24, 1990 Page 9 of 16 The only way we can currently legitimately claim to be "catching problems before they occur" is by relying on the homeowner to read and heed the information flyer that is mailed with the yearly billing, and by keeping in close contact with pumpers as to actual conditions of systems they encounter. However, 3 inspections in 12 years is not nearly often enough to preempt problems in a given system. Annual or biennial inspections might catch problems early, but once every 3-4 years is doubtful. And, many times problems are not "catchable" before they occur, but may be related to abruptly changed water use habits, seasonal water table conditions, or any number of other unknown and uncontrollable variables. Also, a full-time inspector who is constantly updating the septic cards as pumping information arrives, will see patterns occvring and investigate the problems /before they worsen. Code Update is Needed Orono's Septic Code was adopted in 1978, slightly pre-dating the MPCA's adoption of recommended regulations for local sewage treatment ordinances. Orono staff worked closely with University and MPCA representatives to ensure that Orono's code would be similar to the proposed MPCA regulations, which became known as WPC-40. Through the last 10 years, the MPCA, University Extension Service staff, and the MPCA's Individual Sewage Treatment Systems Advisory Committee, have worked to refine the codes and update them on a regular basis. WPC-40 has been redesignated as Minnesota Rules Chapter 7080, Individual Sewage Treatment Systems Standards. Septic System Management Program August 24, 1990 Page 10 of 16 These rules underwent a major revision in 1989, for which Mike Gaffron attended and testified at an administrative hearing in St. Paul regarding certain elements of those revisions, specifically on the issue of allowing mounds on steep slopes. This effort was partially successful in that the MPCA revised their rules to require a 25% increase in a’ '^rption area for mounds located on slopes exceeding 12%. The rtaearch used by the PCA to justify mounds on steep slopes was based on a narrow range of soil types, and it is arguable that the research basis for allowing mounds on steep slopes was lacking. Orono's current septic code was last revised in 1979, and underwent no significant changes during the 1984 municipal code recodification. A number of design criteria changes for mound systems have occurred in the last 10 years, and, although staff has in e^^ery respect required designers and installers to meet the minimum standard.'j of Chapter 7080 as those changes occurred, none of those revisions were ever formally adopted by the City of Orono. The specific design criteria referred to, would mainly require major amendments to Orono Resolution #894, ivhich is the document known as the City of Orono On-Site Sewage Treatment System Design Manual. Chapter 12 of the Municipal Code contains Orono's septic system ordinances, which generally define the goals and objectives of the septic program, define specific terminologies, provide generally that sewage treatment is required, that where sewe»* is available it must be used, that standards systems are generally required, provides a procedure for variances, and requires septic system analysis for building permits and subdivision applications. The ordinance adopts by reference the Design Manual (Resolution #894) and its amendment (Resolution #983), and goes on to require site evaluations, system designs, and inspection of both new and existing systems. This code provides special consideration for properties on Minnetonka Islands, and contains provisions for administration and enforcer ant, while also authorizing the annual service charge. Septic System Management Program August 24, 1990 Page 11 of 16 Only minor changes will have to be made to the actual ordinance, which is Section 12.30 of the Municipal Code. Major changes will have to be made in the Design Manual, Resolution #894. These are long overdue and staff has been discussing them for at least 3 years now. Data This section is intended to provide a number of tables, graphs, and lists, indicating levels of activity in the various facets of the septic system management program over the years. These exhibits appear as follows: A - Number of existing systems and approximate program fees received 1978-1*^89. B - Staff hours devoted to septic program (includes full time and part-time staff), 1978-1989. C - Staff hours devoted vs. number of existing system inspections. D - New system permits issued 1975-1989. E - Repair permits issued 1975-1989, related to numbers of failing systems encountered. F - Number of repair permits issued related to staff hours 1978-1989. G - Number of reported pump-outs vs. number of existing system inspections. Septic System Management Program August 24, 1990 Page 12 of 16 Exhibit A indicates the number of existing septic systems in use in Orono each year since 1978. Note that the septic program was funded by a federal grant in 1978, and the first service charge billing occurred in 1979 in the amount of $20.00 per system. That fee increased to $25.00 in 1980 but was reverted back to $20.00 in 1981 and has remained at $20.00 ever since. The number of systems being billed on a yearly basis has increased at a slower rate than the number of new rural homes constructed, due to new connections to City sewers which have been constructed in the last 10-15 years. Note for the record that program fee income has been lumped into the general Building & Zoning budget each year, and has never been devoted strictly to the septic program. This policy should be reviewed. Exhibit B indicates staff hours devoted to the septic program each year, including full-time and part-time staff hours. The bar diagram indicates two distinct facts: - Total staff hours devoted to the septic program have generally decreased since the beginning of the program; and - In the years 1984 through 1989 where staff time sheets show a distinction between administration time and inspection time, the hours devoted to program administration have declined to a level of 3-4 hours per week. Exhibit C indicates staff time spent on the overall septic program vs. the number of existing system inspections completed. The number of inspections in the first tt. ^e years was relatively low due to the need to locate lost systems and create septic cards, etc. Since then, the years with the higher number of existing system inspections occur mainly in those years in which a part-time inspector devoted his or her efforts exclusively tc the septic program without other responsibilities. Septic System Management Program August 24, 1990 Page 13 of 16 Exhibit D indicates the number of septic system permits issued for construction of new residences each year since 1975. A moratorium was in effect for parts of 1974 and 1975 with an increase in new construction activity in the latter half of the 1970s. New home starts were relatively low in 1980 through 1983, then increased dramatically in 1984 and remained relatively high through 1989. Exhibit E indicates the relationships between the number of septic system repair permits issued, the number of failed systems encountered, and the number of system inspections made. Predictably, repair permits were at a high level during the first 5 years of the septic program (1978“1982), due not only to a significant number of failing systems encountered during the initial inspections, but often due to individual property owners initiative and heightened concern and awareness in the City generally about septic systems. Repair permits dropped «significantly in 1983, partially due to a n,w requirement for 1 testing for repair work. This became policy because pric. to that time, staff encounte ed a number of repairs which did not yield functional systems ..ue to poor design based on lack of soil information. Note also that the number of repairs from 1983 through 1989 was low relative to the first 5 years, even though in 1987-1989 many existing system inspections were made. Since the level of system failures encountered has ranged from 5-10% of the systems inspected in any given year, it is likely that relatively low numbers of repair permits during years of numerous existing system inspections, indicates a lack of repair order compliance rather than a lack of failing systems. In the period 1986 through 1988, while 79 systems were found to be failing, only 61 were repaired. This indicates an overall compliance rate of 77% for those years, meaning one-fourth of the failing systems weren't repaired. This recent lack of compliance appears to be somewhat directly related to the decreasing amount of program administration and follow-up hours, illustrated in Exhibit F. Septic System Management Program August 24, 1990 Page 14 of 16 Exhibit G illustrates the number of pump-outs reported by pump-out contractors versus the number of existing system inspections. The number of reported pump-outs generally is higher when many inspections are being done. This is predictable. An interesting fact to note is that in no year were more than one-fifth of the existing systems pumped out. The average yearly number of pump-outs since 1978 is 125, or approximately 1 system in 8. This indicates that the typical system is pumped out once every 8 years rather than once every 3 years, as the code requires. This again can be related partially to the low rate of existing system inspections, as well as to the lack of staff time devoted to education of the public regarding the need to pump septic systems. Analysis Some general conclusions can be reached by analyzing the above charts and graphs. First, while the septic system program fee has not increased since 1980, total income to the City from the annual program service charge billing has increased at an average rate of 1.5% per year since 1979, equivalent to the rate of increase of homes in the City which use septic systems. At the same time, staff hours devoted to the septic system program have generally decreased to less than half the hours devoted at the beginning of the program. Staff hours were at a high of 1600 hours in 1978, dropping to a low of 295 hours in 1989. The degree of septic system maintenance (pumpout) activity in the City tends to vary directly with the level of existing system inspections. However, the number of existing system repairs completed appears to relate more directly to the actual number of staff hours devoted, rather than to the degree of existing system inspections. Clearly, the presence of a summer inspector results in residents maintaining their septic systems, but system repair order compliance tends to increase significantly during times of aggressive followup efforts. Septic System Management Program August 24, 1990 Page 15 of 16 Septic Systems as "Second Piddle" Most developers and many residents of Orono believe that septic systems are a "second class citizen", and that ultimately the City of Orono will be sewered. There are certainly a number of people who take the opposite view, that the City's stated intent to "never sewer rural Orono", is a realistic, viable goal. Given the tenor of the courts in limiting special assessments to the equivalent increases in property value, it seems unlikely that city sewer- will run rampant through our hills and valleys for many year come. Developers and home owners tend to place septic systems low on a list of priorities, hence other factors in development of a property are often given precedence. This often results in less than perfect conditions for designing/locating/constructing septic systems, and in probably 1/3 of the residential construction projects, the need for a strong presence by City staff is critical in ensuring that septic needs are properly met. The amount of staff time required to "ride herd" on a project from beginning to completion, has generally exceeded that available, ever since the point at which the City no longer had a staff person devoted full time to the septic program. Conclusion^ 1. Not enough time is being spent on followups to make sure all failing systems get repaired. 2. Residents are not receiving the level of existing system inspections that was originally anticipated and which is required in order to limit the incidence of tailed systems. 3. Septic system plan review, construction, inspection, and followup documentation is receiving fragmented attention from multiple staff members, with no one person comprehensively overseeing the entire process. This leads to a much higher potential that something can go wror 4. Record keeping has been inadequate due to a lack c time devoted to same. Septic System Management Program August 24, 1990 Page 16 of 16 5.Installation of municipal sewers remains a high cost alternative with environmental ramifications perceived by the City to be more detrimental than those associated with septic systems. Therefore, it is in the City ’s best interest to make the strongest effort possible towards the successful long-term use of septic systems. lendation Based on the above conclusions, staff recommends that a septic system program manager be hired, to provide a comprehensive direction and oversight of all phases of septic system design, location, construction, use and maintenance. This position would be responsible for all facets of the program, including subdivision septic review, new system plan review and approval, inspection of new system construction, inspection of existing systems, followup on all necessary repair work, updating of codes as necessary, and public education regarding septic systems. / This would be intended as a full time permanent position within the Building & Zoning Department. Exhibit A Year Number of Existing Systems Annual Program Fees Collected (Approx.)Annual Fee Per System 1978 950 (Est.)—(Not Chi 1979 950 (Est.)$ 19,000 $ 20 1980 960 (Est.)24,000 25 1981 970 (Est.)19,400 20 1982 980 (Est.)19,600 20 1983 990 19,800 20 1984 1006 20,120 20 1985 1040 20,800 20 1986 i<)69 21,380 20 1987 1062 21,240 20 1988 1075 21,500 20 1989 1102 22,040 20 1990 1143 22,860 20 $251,740 M CQ H E Xu co •H 4J u 4J i/1 •H C •H (0 Os: (0 V4 (TJ Xi jj *H I I—)aw (0 c o •H 4J 0 0) a U) IS (0 u0 -H •H 4J 4J a Ou (U 0) 03 03 1 1 mi mi U (U E D- •H K a 0) U] C O' •H o c 0) 4-> 0) 0) 5 0) ■P(1) to i3 0) g C -H O •H ■P Oc •H 4J (0 •H o • 2 C •H •• 6P t3 «J OJ Xi T3 TJ C •H ftj iHo 03 (0 U 3 O XJ o 0^ VO o iH OV CO <y> f-i I CO r-a\ fH (0 p 3 0 E 1co (0 p 0)a d o eST 1 1 ZIZ 1 1 zzz 165 IPZ 1 ozz 1 SIZ ZOL LLV t^30I 8Z.Z. 869 (T> 00 00 00 00 VO 00 m 00 00 n 00 (N 00 < U SSt^I 009T o 00 <T\ 00 r' r* VOr- in o o o (N O O m o o c o o m SHnOH i'i • \ os 3<3Vt^ Jo Jt e s ^ --W...._ ____CQ____ ! '■- Cv . ■: L.|--t1 I I "Oa/> ____ n: - i4 s 1 * v» 5 a.itlLZl^ I, 0 "-v^ir-”:—---------■®- c' "......■ <dr I V ___6III- m III -i4S- 4t^ s:-i:|,. s s ! ! __5-^-- ‘s-:r_-||ifc W ri,O vj V -S r> 1^. n rr\ (p *c!i:»a I £■ • I I t a % c wiWfctf ■sUd'-^s .'Sar U(v|/f S3<y S<yvt4& I »■■?/»✓: 0 u r*''=^sagg»^ r V\ 5::CQ T r^ O «o r i % < 1 1/1 > \A 2 I V( l^.'v. •^'^'>r*-^ .-«,;■> ••■s>/v^sS- • »• * «,_ -•- V > •-' ' •”• •%< t- ^.*r^ ,* >r^v58E •«. 'i»\ >-,< %•«' \n ? <3- ^i (O CCv ^ 2:i ^ T i (A 3“ f^ ® «- >a xS ^ 1 > ‘ • '• > v.-4>COC 11111«: l8S4fiiSSifiR?«ii^^ s i <» CV'V c? f'J <A <C a cCr- r-r- 3r- r o^r cm /V <? vrjo.j'r^CO rvu^fV • T>Uc/=^^^ ^ M •P •H A •H ‘.1 **ijL**»y jyi.v*.* it • rM*". - y<Mfd>9<nfj sLLriBT HO _Lr\xais ^w-5a...,.»».-•,#. •. *f -'t tl •." / ■ t ft 'i.' If . .. •" •• • ■.• ■, ' ■ ,. . »;-• Vv ’» - ;•» -o»^yi4V — I I. w 1, ,-_aiL ■.4 ' ! i '1^., —,—. _. I -. •. • • t •LfJ r.\ cv] GQ f cDr VI ■N. I" O < cvi 1 V I ^ I.S' _l. <. D- ::. r. rj ! i .1 * I --■- r. ?s i . : ! ; Wr- -------- ^ 1 :•■♦ ^ nt -4-4 -f -i §. ; ! ' tit i '. O a L-J_ i .^t^XT/ aiW7(i»y><+5^33f L J...i 4T -1^ t i^-^!r -\i f -*■- I * . 'I 9490.4 TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Mark E. Bernhardson, City Administratol DATE: September A, 1990 SUBJECT: 1991 Budget/Work Session TO 01993 1 -mOFo’HOm Attachment: A. October anu 'November 1990 Calendar ISSUE “ Selection of a work session date to review the budget prior to the public hearing dates that have been set at the August 27, 1990 meeting. INTRODUCTION - In years past in advance of the budget hearings the Council has had a session to sit down anr> -eview the overall revenue picture together with departmental vmditures and any other related policy matters to the budget. Attachment A represents potential dates and it is recommended that if the budget review is to be done it be sometime the latter part of October or fore part of November. Possible dates include October 25 or 26, October 29 through November 2nd, or October 5 through the 8th. Additionally the time for a meeting could be either 5 of 6 o'clock with sandwiches or a traditional 7 o'clock meeting. ALTERNATIVES - 1. Select a date and time. 2. Table for further discussion. 3. Choose not to have a meeting in advance of the December 3rd budget hearing. RECOMMENDATION - It is recommended that the Council set 6 o'clock on Thursday, October 25, 1990 as a work session to review the budget. PROPOSED MOTION - Moved by seconded by that Council set Thursday, October 25, 1990 at 6 o'clock as the date and time for the work session to review the 1991 budget. Ayes __, *'ays __. i? n nID 10z 2 ggz r> I (D ;-S 01 T“ ID 0c 0 £a .1 CD CO 2027LO CM O)CD « CM nOIfre fc 5a "1 «s iZ T-CX)ID 1 ----CM S - s -~"'S RS i £ 5 * " s a RUJ § ^ = as s 1 ■ s 3o CO 2 5 1 •Rsa TO z " z «S CO O h-.,— !CM CO § ^a>5i j _o reI CM CD 1 1 CO CM 30'J % ' CO s 1-^ “If C>1 = 1.h 1 - o 152229- « -?RR Q - r>« ® ? J ^ C R £ '-r-SC *" £ Z R 1 ? I CM CO CM i •-“ t'“4* '-■% T.-:iS »;"• i«l *<«!■* ■itta r. W! tj «<>^ •. *.. .-.v 1 *;*• JV • •.-' ■<' « t • ■' % - • •r/ ■' -r 7^’ V-':-' " .V ■ 'V • '•» M •■■• •V— ••»■ nI lu 0 Il<p a B5u 3 0 D NI 01010 0 I I II \L s g. / I'tll it V—^ViCM 2 1z CM O)D CO o fc CM 1 « S 5/5 11 s U. o w j 00 LO CM Gi 9^ ^CM sf e> 1 S* o1 h-T-00 CM CM CD CO ,O r^ y—J C J CMOa \^r oIVpc3 LO CM (0)D - “SRS T“CM ,^ = SR I ® = 0 tn ^ ^ 1 • : SS ° " EiSS ‘^"'ERR ei c)ao d CO LO “er;; 0? ?CM l-r-sQ g " E E R S wo £ g ~ » E R S -"ERR cn !i 3o 7. ^ — «c > • • •'■ imsm Wli--i- •^'• , r.-:r-'; •v~‘ 1 ^r -;: mmm ^ »* -V 9490.5 cPl TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Mark E. Bernhardson, City Administrato^W DATE: September 4, 1990 SUBJECT: Assessing Contract 1 0 jgcQ ' 0R0.^q Attachments; A. Assessing Contract Memo Dated 8/22/90 ISSUE - Determine if Council wants to enter into a contract with Rolf Erickson for the assessing year ending August 31, 1991. INTRODUCTION - At the Council's August 27, 1990 meeting after discussion of this they requested tabling this item to the September 10, 1990 meeting. While the cost proposed represents a significant increase over the current year it is felt that the known quality of the service is worth the additional expenditure. As for the past personnel situation, that has been rectified because of a change in the type of business arrangement under which Mr. Erickson operated. In the future his assistants will be as employees of his rather than primarily being parteners. ALTERNATIVES 1. Accept and direct the contract be entered into. 2. Table. 3. Direct alternatives be sought. RECOMMENDATION - It is recommended that staff and Mayor be directed to undertake the contract on the same conditions as the current contract with Mr. Erickson in the amount of $66,000 for the assessment year ending August 31, 1991. PROPOSED MOTION - Moved by _, seconded by _, that Council authorizes establishment of a contract in the amount of $66,000 with Rolf Erickson for the next assessing year ending August 31, 1991. Ayes _, Nays _. 81490.6 Mayor and City Council Mark E. Bernhardson, City Adrainistrato^^' TO: FROM: DATS: August 22, 1990 SUBJECT: Assessing Contract Attachment; A. Assessing Contract Memo Dated 8/8/90 ISSUE - Determine if Council wants to enter into a contract with the past assessor for the assessing year ending August 31, 1991. INTRODUCTION - As noted in Attachment A Rolf Erickson has again expressed Tnterest in the contract and has proposed a cost of $66,000. The current budget does have enough in it in order to handle this. While higher than in the past his excellent experience would merit a contract of greater value than someone who is new to it. Contract prices for the assessing year regardless of when he starts reflects the total assessing product prepared rather than the number of months worked. If this is an acceptable avenue, staff will work with the current assessor and Mr. Erickson to establish a trade-off time prior to the requested 10/31 date, however, it is anticipated that the current assessor would expect to be paid through the end of October. The advantage to having Mr. Erickson start earlier would be more time to do a better assessment. ALTERNATIVES - 1. Accept and direct the contract be entered into. 2. Table. 3. Direct alternatives be sought. RECOMMENDATION - It is recommended that the staff and Mayor be directed to undertake a contract under the same conditions as the current contract with Mr. Erickson in the amount of $66,000 for the assessment year ending August 31, 1991. PROPOSED MOTION - Moved by _, seconded by _, Council authorize the establishment of a contract with Rolf Erickson for the next assessing year. Ayes _, Nays _. - - i •/ '1 /^* 72690.: / i:FROM: Mayor and city Council , J Mark E. Bernhardson, city Ad:,i„istrato#U l\rTl\Cim^ ^ AuOMcr*- O r y ----- oernna ; \ August 8, 1990 \ SOBJECTr Assessing Contract Termination - ^. /r ■ Attachment; A. Notice of Termfn,^- - - termination DatedISSUE « ^ 7/31/90 tlieir acceptance.regarding notice of termi termination for 2- Presentation to Council of direction fo pTRODorTTnM _ The City ’s A assessing services. l||o_®*®rcised his option aVio°n ^ - The City ’s opt- itys options for new service would he.A.) In-house Assessor 'POIIOW.,' «neMcting*„Vth“’tha°ci®ty*u’/™p"^’«°*4tesse^ ftss.ssoc, prop".Vi%',"‘5 ri"“f' '»• mV," ;; v.-viCvrv"t”- alternative *? 1. Concur with the termination. r Ta^V" —-• Table for further discussion. .SgCOMMENDATTnisT - t*. terrain at ion;:—Tt iJ' J'f. ^recommended tha^ Augu^A-:^32_ recoraraeLertoV the proposed UnTToIp*— concur in the term^^ seconded by m consideration to that thevt^i CouncilNays _. t° the August 27, 1950 Council Ayef A 'f Hark Barnhardson City Administrator City of Orono P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN. 55323 July 30, 1990 ^MSoVillU) vWv AUG 1 1880 R.E. Article # 8 of the aaaeaament agreement Dear Hark, X would like to exercise my rights to terminate the assessment agreement in accordance with Article 8 (effective date of agreement and term). This notice will serve as the required written notification and run from August 1,1990 thru October 31, 1990 in compliance with the 90 days. Respectfully, I - - Vi Paul J. Smith i' i 9490.2 f.f£iV7»J0 TO: FROM: DATS: SUBJECT: SEP 10 I95QMayor and City Council Mark E. Bernhardson, City Adrainistrato^^®"^ September 4, 1990 Lake Minnetonka Cable Communications Commission Budget OF ORdfiG Attachment:A. LMCCC Budget Dated 8/21/90 B. Draft Resolution ISSUE - Determination whether the Council desires to approve the budget for the Cable Commission for 1991. INTRODUCTION - Annually the Council needs to determine whether they will recommend apporval or denial of the Cable Commission budget. The budget was approved uninimously by those present of the Executive Board at their August 21, 1990 meeting. The budget represents a 5.4% total increase in operations and does not require any funding from the City apart from the monies generated by the cable franchise. ALTERNATIVES 1. Adopt. 2. Not apporve. 3. Table. 4. Take no action. RECOMMENDATION - It is recommended that the budget be adopted^ as presented and that any other comments be given to Council’s Cable Commission representatives for use at the budget adoption meeting. PROPOSED MOTION - Moved by __, seconded by __, Council adopts Resolution # directing approval of the Lake Minnetonka Cable Commission bu3get for 1991. Ayes __, Nays __. Lake Minnetonka Cable Communications 443 OAK STREET • EXCELSIOR, MINNESOTA 55331 • 1612)474- 28 Aug 1990 Mark Bernhardson, City Administrator City of Orono Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 Dear Mark: AUG 3 0 1990 At the August 21st meeting of the full Commission, the Budget Planning Committee presented its proposal for the 1991 LMCCC budget. To summarize the Committee's remarks on the drafting of this budget, it projected the following: 1) Franchise fees approximately 5% above 1909 (fees are received from the cable operator prior to the end of the first quarter of each year); 2) 4% increase in salary and related taxes; 3) Half of secretarial costs coming in-house; 4) An increase in travel expenses associated with attending educational conferences; 5) An increase in NATOA and MACTA membership dues; 6) The addition of a two-line phone system; and, 7) A decrease in the interest earned as a result of reserve funds being used for the approved expansion proposals for both the office and access equipment inventory. With a quorum present, the Commission voted unanimously to adoot the attached budget for 1991. They also voted unanimously to adopt the long-range goals included with this budget. Our Joint Powers agreement calls for this budget to be presented to the member cities fifteen (15) days after adoption for review and approval. The budget shall be effective only if approved by a majority of our members within thirty (30) days after receiving it. In the event it is not, the Commission "shall promptly adopt a revised budget and submit it to each member for review and approval." The Commission is seeking your approval of its 1991 budget. If you or members of your city council have questions regarding the proposed budget that cannot be answered by your city's Commission representative, please call me. I look forward to hearing from your community soon. ^ennifep Watts /administrator Enclosure LAKE MINNETONKA CABLE COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION 1991 PROPOSED BUDGET SUBMITTED AUGUST 21, 1990 INCOME Triax Franchise Fees Interest Carryover (from 1989) APPROVED REVISED 1990 d 84,773.79 4,000.00 16.628.82 d 105,402.61 PROPOSED 1991 & 89,000.00 3,000.00 _ _ _ _ _0.00 4 92,000.00 OPERATING EXPENSES Cable Administrator Access Employees Secretarial Services Ps. oil Taxes Employee Mileage Medical Insurance Legal Fees Insurance/Bonds Financial Review/LMCCC Conferences/Schools Office Supplies Dues/Subscriptions Telephone Postage Miscellaneousdnc. bank chrgs) Advertising/Promotions Office Equipment Office Space OPERATING BUDGET TOTAL SPECIAL FUND APPROPRIATIONS Technical Audit - Triax Financial Review - Triax Studio Equipment Legal fund Office Equipment Fund Access Equipment Contingency FUND TOTAL BUDGET TOTAL 28,000.00 20,000.00 2,000.00 7.000. 00 500.00 2.830.00 2,0J0.00 3.500.00 2.300.00 5.000. 00 2.000. 00 1,000.00 1,000.00 650.00 450.00 750.00 1,000.00 6.000.00 a 86,830.00 1,000.00 1,000.00 1,000.00 5,000.00 7,000.00 3.572.61 0 18,572.61 a 105,402.61 a 30,000.00 22,000.00 1,000.00 7.200.00 600.00 2.880.00 2,000.00 3.800.00 2.300.00 6,000.00 2,000.00 1.300.00 1.600.00 650.00 450.00 750.00 1,000.00 6.000.00 a 91,530.00 0.00 0.00 100.00 150.00 0.00 220.00 _ _ _ _ _0.00 a 470.00 a 92,000.00 Lake Minnetonka Cable Communications Commission 443 OAK STREET • EXCELSIOR. MINNESOTA 55331 • (612) 474-5539 LONG RANGE PLANNING PROPOSAL GOALS 1. Complete a needs assesf’ment tor channel expansion. 2. Improve efforts to inform the public that the commission is there to assist them. 3. Explore consumer protection regulation. 4. Improve facilities and equipment. 5. Establish a format to collect data for an annual review of the system. CITY OF OROHO COUNTY OF HENNEPIN STATE OF MINNESOTA A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE 1991 BUDGET FOR THE LAKE MINNETONKA CABLE COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION NHBRBAS, the Commission was issued a Regular Certificate of Confirmation by the Minnesota Cable Commission Board relative to the Cable Communications Franchise; WHEREAS/ the City of Orono is an existing member of the Commission; WHEREAS, said joint and cooperative effort is authorized by Minnesota Statutes Section 238.08, Subd. 5; WHEREAS, the existing joint powers agreement provides that the member cities of Commission shall review and approve the Commission budget; WHEREAS, the Ci’y has reviewed the 1991 budget of the Commission and believes it to be proper; NOW, THEREFORE, be it resolved, that the City Council of the City of Orono approved the 1991 budget of the Lake Minnetonka Cable Communications Commission. The above listed resolution was moved by and duly seconded by __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ “”1 ” The following Council Members voted in the affirmative; The following Council Members voted in the negative; 1990. The above resolution was duly adopted on September 10, ATTEST;James R. Grabek, Mayor Dorothy M. Hallln, City Clerk TO: John R. Gerhardson, Public Works Coordinator FROM: Jack Brinkhaus, Street Department Foreman DATE: August 29, 1990 SUBJ: Fall Clean-up Day - October 20, -'J'S.W.U i .«a J S£" 10 19rJ riif fif vmm The City of Orono Public Works Department is planning fall clean up day on Saturday, October 20, 1990 from 8:00 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. The collection point will be behind the long, gold equipment shed at Brown Road South and Spates Avenue in Crystal Bay, next to the Administration Building. The following items will NOT be ac'::epted: garbage trees brush chemicals truck loads barrels, drums, chemical containers, petroleum products or containers Leaves and grass will have to be debagged into our large container.* We will not accept leaf and grass bags. Newspapers and all paper products must be tied securely. Appliances will be set aside and will be picked up by an agency that disassembles and recycles applicances. There is a fee to have them picked up, but we are not recommending charging a fee to the residents at this time. We will also accept tires. A private company will be here to accept them for a fee. The residents will be required to pay about $1.50 per car tire. ORONO RESIDENTS ONLYl PROPOSED MOTION: Moved by , seconded by _ _, to designate October 20, 1990 as Orono FallTciean-Up Day. Ayes_ _, nays_ _. Tto: Mayor Grabek & Orono Council Members From: Mark E. Bernhardson, City Administrator Forwarded recommending approval. 'y SEP 10 1990 OF ORQ uq i To: Mark E. Bernhardson, City Administrator FroB: John R. Gerhardson, Public Works Director Date: September 1, 1990 Subject: Resolution of Recognition - John Sass On September 19r 1990 John Sass, light equipment operator in the Public Works Department will retire. John has been an excellent employee in that he has continually maintained an excellent attitude and an exceptional worker. It is appropriate that we recognize John Sass with a resolution of appreciation for his years of service to the City. RecoBBendation To approve resolution recognizing John Sass's years of service to the community and to present the resolution at the regular Orono Council meeting on September 24, 1990. Proposed Notion:Moved 2nd to approve resolution recognizing John Sass's years of service to the community and to present the resolution to John Sass at the regular Orono Council i.eeting on September 24, 1990. To: Mayor Grabek & Orono Council Members Froa: Mark E. Bernhardson, City Administrator Forwarded recommending approval. A RESOLUTION OF APPRECIATION TO JOBM SASS LIGHT EQUIPMENT OPERATOR WHEREAS, the City of Orono is a municipal corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of Minnesota; and WHEREAS, John Sass began employment for the City of Orono on July 16, 1979; and WHEREAS, John Sass served as a light equipment operator in the Public Works Department during that time; and WHEREAS, John Sass has been a willing and hard worker and a steadying influence in the Public Works Department; and WHEREAS, John Sass retired on September 19, 1990. 'now, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Orono City Council, £he Orono staff and the citizens of Orono v/ish to. thank John Sass for over eleven years of service to the community and to wish him well in his retirement. Adopted by the City Council of the City Df Orono this 10th day of September, 1990. ATTEST: Dorothy M. Hallin, City Clerk James R. Gr’»b.5k, Mayor STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instr.-..ent was acknowledged before me on this 10th day of September, 1990, by James R. Grabek & 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 To: Mark E. Bernhardson, City Administrator From: John R. Gerhardson, Public Works Director Date: August 30r 1990 Subject: Fence Installation - Navarre Playground o4? St.'ioigjG I'JY OF ORUfiO In the mid 1980's during the development of the Navarre Playground, it was determined to fence two sides of the playground for safety reasons. Recently we have received complaints from the neighbors to the west of pedestrian traffic crossing their yard to enter and exit the playground. There is a pedest.rian access but users of the park choose to enter the park fro!:i the neighbors yard. Recommendation To install fencino ^ .eng the west boundary of the havarre Playground at a cost of $800.00 and to pay for the fencing from the Park Dedication 5'und. Proposed Notion:Moved 2nd to approve the installation of fencing along the west boundary of tha Navarre Playgound at a cost of $800.00 and to pay for the fanning from the Park Dedication Fund. To: Mayor Grabek & Orono Council Members From: Mark E. ?eLnhar .-son , Cit’ Administrator Forwarded reconjrending apprc /al. To: Mark E. Bernhardson, City Administrator From: John R. Gerhardson, Public Works Director Date: Sept^nbor 1, 1990 SE: I Q fOoj OF Subject: Employment Confirmation Groundskeeper Helper Orono Golf Course On August 27, 1990 t.ie Orono Council authorized the employment of a person to be later named to fill the position of groundskeeper helper at the Orono Golf Course. Recommendation To confirm the employment of Aaron Burdick as a temporary groundskeeper helper at the Orono Golf Course effective August 28, 1990 at $5.00 per hour. Proposed Motion Moved 2nd to confirm the employment of Aaron Burdich as a temporary groundskeeper helper at the Orono Golf Course effective August 28. 1990 at $5.00 per hour. To: ^Mayor Grabek & Orono CouncM Members From: 'Mark E. Bernhardson, City Administrator Forwarded recommending approval. 9590.3 <51 TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Mark E. Bernhardson, City Administrator DATE: September 5, 1990 SUBJECT: Administrator’s Information SEri0i95G CITY OF CRO^O DAKOTA RAIL - As you may have heard, representatives from Dakota Rail late last week contacted selected property owners who have access over the rail together with the City regarding whether they have easements for utilization of that access together with proposed billing of various users for lease and/or repair issues. There are approximately seven crossings of which 4 are City streets and two County Highways. Legal research will be needed to be done to determine whether various easements or City rights of way exist. In two cases they are private crossings, one for Woodhill and one for residents off of County 15 next to Hanlon Avenue. While alt native accesses are available, both of these may not be the most ideal remedy to the problem. The City will be reviewing the status of this with thu Attorney to determine what direction would be appropriate t> undertake. GOAL SETTING - See Attachment JULY RECEIPTS AND DISBURSEMENTS - See Attachment WIRE TRANSFERS - See Attachment '•i i ' ^ V ^ ^ ^*: r V.' rl t> i t g lg I ? •o4 •» |fl u iJ s! 'Sfi ol O 'in §I I*w I ^ o o!I s t w i?a•w£ wI I §I >11 & •H 2 I I ■8 UI |, as 01 SIss •H iJ in liSi «J «J iJ AJ s B zmSG4i» ?■ a < S >I § I s p. g ^ ^ fl ?S 2 'Il|5if l|i II ps >I 1141III!1 i o.S'^1 til nil.8 *£ nil 1 mi r: fill eiii Icsss • • • •1 iH » s j «J -5 I s 2 !? |i S •H L>’ f 'c. * I s^ I" o « tv I!!I1 9; §5 5- \ ^ |§|2g8« g.8^ |«| a -a 2 n4J 0 IH U B £ 01^ ^ [H B ^ ,q ls§-"5l| i7)T!g||! §Sfl§8| (T> 0\ s §•H f*^ <I ss e I |•■32 asf III tu <y oui g S’Sg *J 3 4J ||| ?as O' uI Iu >.s U) ira •f4 W2 6*.:3S g| P"^s: S'PI s C U 3 13 \n m •8 ^tl8 li 8* ►-4 & <13 t/) SIs I w/ I 0> s S' ■28§mftl? ? >,6 4J ••H ?'4 8m 1-4 iJ §8 i|If 3 8 .3 §2 |S§t I f-4s V) I n* 1 s > I V3.S S'® I o 8 ^ •Ha u &gS Is to1 a t;2OJ ji «w tM pit ‘r^ <M 3 8 y .ni| is I s| SS 8? ll p la if |t |l »S p s s ^§ ii 00 a> 00 CD c c.u c» I I s•o I 3 S 1 s,p f I s 1 s 2 s |a s O' s S-;j 3 W 5¥ Q« Qj Ou O ll1.1 3§3 0) (0 S|8 S >1 s°§ |1 .p 3& 6 %I I & 1 1 5 § 2?s5 il g r* CO o 00 03 CD ! ^c I §S o c I 1 cn 00 |i n 0 •gS sa It fs «s S| *n 1 1 BS Is III S ^ i 28 S CQ sassss s & I S 55 ? 5 is. « C 01 *0 V >#-« >w .MI«I r ^ - g CQ GO '"• o o o o o O O 0 t.J O I I & 8 § 8a •8 o '<3 S s ■s u o o 0 8 #H a •scn 1 Wl fH••-( U ^ S I ^ I s s s s a ^ 5 o ^ ^ 04 a> cs f-4 O r-4 s 4J i s 4 n8 « 8-^8ttl > T) »H « l 3 0 s g. •§ ■S’1 I I ^I 3 0) a p< «•fn 5^s •n I 3| a o> a> H l§ f-4 XiP IIS 1t s L g: ‘I S’ S 1M 03 5^ ^ 5 ^ 6 D 8 o o o o © o o o o ss M ws § I •iS •o I S Sa rH §1 <M5 5o £s g*s Ss I I I 0) 8 I |S I 8 la 9) V ! t c ^ 2 S3 6 n si M tA 0) (M sa a U it §1I |l |S • ; o in r>»%o o O'o r—i 00 6^zDO CM o\ rH O in CM oo fH o>o\ CO 0) <0 n 0) AC 10 AC C«c(0 c 10n jj (0 r-l AJm iH AC C <0n 0) AJ AJ 0) 9 CT u <0 (0 rH 04s AC c (0 03 JJ to <u »0 w AJ (U - (0 06 H U*inz g Eh UA 0> to to (0 *D ^ *0 O O 0) 0) U u U 9 9 O CU a J U OJ <0 04 oc: z to U 04 c to •o AA (0 O 0) cn AJ cu o o O4 <u u >0 0) a O C AA u u o to u mh O4 CQ Z < O 0 01 o <T\ A4 Eh< Q 00o CM CO o 00o oin VOr> CM 00 CM to (U AC <0 ij AC c 10 n AA to iH <U a :u 10 OQ •-H 10 •r4 AA c 0) TJ9 U O4 Eh <kl U U to 9 « *»H OJ CM Eh A AA AC UA E *9zAJC> <0 C 0 c c M c k4 Z A A S A 0 £< 0)Eh W k- Eh £ E C 0)»9 'O to in z <u in 0 »9 0 0 OJ AJ b 0 D QiOJ b Wi c >kl 9 to *9 9 0) z E Ov E 0 <0 C s t!E H z 0 <0 u a : (0 0 *0 >1 0 M u U V £A •o to e »o o V CQ 0)u c o (0u O 04 ij to V 9 aa to to to 0> M kl c z M lii oov CM COo UA O iH cn Qj in kl 0) >ir-l AA AA >H 10 M O O <0 rH *0 •r4 H C 4A >1 O *r4 »0 AA CQ aa 0) fO u 6 kl to 0) (U O 9 Cli to O 0) AA <D (0 >D (0 kl A= UH 0) £ Eh U 0 06 u '-'•O W 9 to 0) D O4 •O AA iH 0)«rl 3 UA c3 0) to *0 O O O O 0) Oi O O4AQ AA 9 u o> U 0) O 04 Q cn z u AC c•o «c V CQ u 9 AA AJ *rA e « *9 U £ V 10 u b to U *o *9 C £ *9 0) O u 0) b CQ <0 m b >0 UA AC JS O c*9 u A 0) U to O b 9 *9 Oi A AJ UA V •n O 09 O »9 *9 o 0) AJ c: kl u (U O b U Z CQ o ov o as as CM 00o o\ as o Jkoii i . * Vi n ;.'^7.;arrT= C‘ ' LIST OF LICENSES FOR COUNCIL APPRO\.£0!,'^i;,-^ FOR MEETING OF September 10, 1990 SEP 10 mo ciiy 0? mom No licenses !ii i • 1 • •Ji: 09/02/90 PR CB PRREaOR ShP10I99Q CITY OF GROfiO :t •1 NAME DPT ABRAHAMSON. FREDERIC 93 ANDERSON. BRUCE L 31 BERNHARDSON. MARK E 12 BERNHARDSON. MARK E 12 BOBZIEN. SUE A 31 BOSMA. JAMIE L 12 BOWMAN. ERIK A 61 BRAUN. ROBERT R 93 BRINKHAUS. JOHN F 42 BURDICK. AARON W 93 CHESWICK. GARY B 31 CHRISTIANSON. SALLY 31 CORNICK. JAMES L 31 DEMBOUSKI. JAY C 31 ENGLISH III. IRVING 31 ERICKSON. DOUGLAS J 93 ERICKSON. KURT R 31 FISCHENICH. DAN T 31 FRITZLER. JOHN M 31 FRITZLER. JOHN M 31 GAFFRON. MICHAEL P 33 GERHARDSON. JOHN R 42 GREGORY. JAMES D 42 HALLIN. DOROTHY M 12 HANSEN. STEVEN C 42 HANSING. CAROL J 31 JOHNSON. BRADLEY P 31 JOSTROM. FOREST J 93 KARNITZ. RICKY D 31 KILBO. MELVIN H 31 KNUTSON. CHARLOTTE A 15 KUEHN. THOMAS M 15 LINDSTROM. DAVID J 93 MABUSTH. JEANNE A 33 MILLS JR. WALTER H 93 MORAN. MARK F 31 MOROWCZYNSKI. JAKES 31 NAAB. THERESA L 12 NELSON. DAVID D 35 OAS. DANIEL 0 93 OBRIEN. RANDY L 92 OMAN. LYLE E 33 PALMER. GREGORY A 42 QUAST. WAYNE A 92 RATHBUN. BARRY J 92 SASS. JOHN J 42 SKREEN. DALE S 42 STEFFENHAGEN. RONALD STEVENS. BETTY G THOMTON. MARK R TOMCHECK. LAWRENCE F TOMCZYK. MARK W VANG, BRUCE L VEE. LINDA S WALSH. KEVIN L WALTERS. LINDA G WECKMAN. STEPHEN J YEAGER. DONALD C 93 93 31 31 31 33 12 35 15 33 .04 .15 . 16 .85 .76 ,35 YTO GROSS 1230.27 30510.07 39550.73 41772.09 16826.02 10928.44 3256.00 1472 54 25760.33 150.00 26795.59 3898 29262 10742 31285 396 26338 26210.18 25220.90 26625.74 24071.25 31660.69 24018.16 20734.01 19681.81 9636 27799 1607 4980 35321 18563 33639.51 441.75 30144 41 1417.50 24572.53 31787.34 16730.96 841.50 1241.64 18885.68 21738.40 7231.72 24109.51 19425.64 18955.61 19428 31 20761.35 1872 75 ?'709.04 : '78.98 26080.54 18096.40 7466.28 3665.64 16094.06 3666.00 1139.28 CURRENT ; GROSS 22 . 16 .90 .03 .44 . 87 228. 1660. 350. 2221. 921. 852. 560. 76 . 1413. 150. 1468. 79 . 1757. 958. 1537. 100. 1530. 1470. 129. 1404. 1338. 1760. 1316. 1153. 1008. 509. 1512. 197 . 473 1964 921 1870 42 1676 180 1337 1626 947 122 84 1113 1271 962 1179 1106 1003 1144 00 47 00 36 84 24 00 00 08 00 00 68 .70 .08 .49 .63 .09 .59 .02 .84 .73 .80 .67 .12 .85 .34 .48 .13 .54 .40 . 84 .88 .75 .49 .00 .28 .04 .77 .40 .00 .72 .77 .14 .29 .70 .20 28 64 75 1154 189 1485.68 1485.68 1530 1095 805 168.26 935.04 640.00 31.50 ’56*216.52 09 52 64 6, 09/30/90 PR: CM PRREGOR 66 Cl* PAYI NAME CALLAHAN. EDWARD J QOETTEN. J.DIANN GRABEK. JAMES NETTLES. ALAN R PETERSON. BARBARA A DPT YTD GROSS 11 2175.03 11 2175.03 11 2700.00 11 2175.03 11 2175.03 CURRENT GROSS 241.67241.67 300.00 241.67 241.67 1,266.68 'Trrr.zyr^y^rn: 3 A J J J 3 2i UJ O<a. < z< O a. >z oo oz z 3ouu< ooo 0 a* fM 1 p»o CM CM CM q:o t/t ^ 8 Ou. oz <cr LU Q. ZoCO CO o< Q£ < oc Uia. L oo ooo o o» r«. CO OQ Z •-< UI Z X «««m V eo oo OO OO in in coco coco oo cocn CM CM <<OO mm •OOO coco cno 00 oo t—OO CM CMz• • o <<• A r <r\i < i ~ r O O o O at O)at O)o •>*\•V 'MzinmmmoOooOee.UI •M.\ \ O )—O)at at O)<O o O OJu.aO >-6 t—z t-iu z in CO c*.ooo—H -4 —<—4oUIf».C4.f«.a>X OO eo oo 00 at o O O O O X X X X <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<< ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ IlliSSISISilSSISI -HCMro<in^»—*-^*H-HomcM»^-<<Mro -H^-^^-^^rorococoforo<CDOC7)C7) I I I I I I I • I I I I I ■ ■ • •oo>oo>o»o>—«in-H«o<ino)00)o»o (\iro"<TLncDa>-^-<(MCMt^oo<c7>'»iDa> oooooo —^-^-^“^-^'^cMCMinmin I I I I • I I I I I I I I I I I • CMCMCMCMCMCMCMCMCMCMCMCMCMCMCMCMCM I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I ' I OOOOOOOOOOOOOOr-i^r*. ooooooooooooooooo o)a>o>o>c7>o>o)0>o>a>o>o>o>o>0)0>o> I I I I I I I I I I I I I I )) I inint/unmuominimnc/tiointnininm I I I I • I I I I I I I I I )) Iooeeooeoeoeoeeeoeoeocoeoeoeoeoeoeo oooooooouooouoooo UUU.U.U.U.U.UUUUUU.UU.UU. ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ l/iioMt/jc^coc^cococ/iwcow CO—*uo- CM ooooooooooooooooo 00>0>0000)0cf>0>0>0)0)0)00)0> inuoifii/iuotninLOuouoiru/oiruommuoooooooooooooooooo Cn 0> 0> 0> 0> 0> 0> CT> 0)0)0)01 O) O) O) O) O)ooooooooooooooooo ooooooooooooooooo CM<MfM(MCM«NHM(M<MCMrMCMCM<MtM(MCM oouoSouoooooooouo O) CM CM r)< UIa< oocMc»>ir»coc*-cMooD«Dmni/)"^cf<cocM Or^CMCooOoeocn-c-^^f^OHfHfl'*^ <OcncMf^cM<-<<OC7)r)cof^co<Dinoo CM<*HCO-C0)0*^01 < < —< CM*HCM <oz lit: millflflS —t^ry O) CM oa. z U O)o UIo< oo oo OO oo oo mm oo m m CM CM oo *M-C CM CM m m COM in o t-'! CM<*xioc~-^—<-<—in •H«^—4»H-^rocic*>c*).'on I I I I I I I I i • I c7)00)0)CD-^m-cco<in m<iocoo)—<*^<MCMr^oo 00000*^<^”^—c —C”^ I I I I I I I • I ) I CMCMCMCMCMCMCMCMCMCMCM I I • I I I I I I I • ooooooooooo CMCMCMCMCMCMCMCMCMCMCM I I I I I I I I • t I aoaoaooeooeoooeoeoeooQ OOOUCJOUOOCJO *-H»—II—<>—IK-O-O-tt—• U.U.U.UUUU.UUUU. zzzzzzzzzzz cn^coinwcn^wtncotn —4—<Or-io —looiaionn i^mocMO<o<co*Mcn O) OO CO 0> CM O 00 CO CM CM -4 CO*Hr^«M CO-<-M n CM -c in OOOOOOOOOOO 0)C7>0>0)0)0)0)0)CI)0)0> ininmininminmimnin OOOOOOOOOOO 0)0)0)0l0)00)0)0)<l)0) OOOOOOOOOOO intnintnininininminm CMCMCMCMCMCMCMCMCMCMCM eoaeoocoooooeoooooeooa OOOOOOOOOOO < 3 Z<z 00 ^ -J 0 < 1 3 « Z «/> o c oz z 3oou< (M-<—((Niro «<oo>a>a> • I I I Ia>aa>a>o «o>«r (oo) <M CM lo ir> in I I I I I (M CM CM CM CM at (O 0 1 (O in n -^-CCMCO^ OOf^f«»r>» o o 0 1 o o 0 1 CM CO CM o o 0 a a 1 CM CO (M ■ r.- rr oooz ZZI-C 33»- U. u. < croOOu4 1-4 zza. h-O O.o I-H Z<4Ui oc u.Oococcnzu. lu LU ex; </> CM<NJCMCM<V4 o 0.0. 3 lU 1 1 1 1 1 o Ul LU -lOOO ^ CO OO 00 QO 00 o o < O<< < acocac X <<<<<o H-►-UJLUUJU.ui o u o u a u.to tCJ O O o ui< uiO *-• U.U.U.U.U.z Q.Q.a3coo Mi' ? ►-*C- ec Ooz > zzzzz cn c/> 00 c/j cn (n >- 00 Oa. CO<z ►-to Oa. <<<< oooo 0003 -J zzzz < 3 §< «c m « oomioooocn OO OO mm nt^nto o» o> o> m OO OO OO C*0)-«P1 CO in o o) OO CO OO OO C1CTI C«COCD«in -<OCOCM-«CO OO CM CM COf*.OCn •i^ lO-C CM OBO CM -H V CM o •H «i^ •H 0 ozo oe O u.o <o yc u I o ooooo o> o> o> o> o m in in in in ooooo o> O) O) oi O) ooooo in m m m m CM CM CM CM CM <Q OO OO QO CO OOOCJO XIXII in o m O CO CM at CM O CO 0 Ui O UJ < O </) < (/) a. Lu r o « a>•o o (/> o to 5t:u w> bCo </> o v' ^ Ofto >z (MV CM V m —< CM CM CM «>4 00 CD CM^in-«r>cM (Min n 0)—t 0)0) t 1 -t^^CMCMCM V 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 O) 1 cn 0000 0 o> 0-1 O) O) C7) 0> V V C7)o>o>0)0 1 t 1 1 1 1 0 O) 0 O) ^ 0 1 1 1 1 o) O) o) 0 1 0 1 0 0> O)(MintocMr^i** V CM 0 —*nin(o CM D (D(M C7>0 o>z in m 000 —c —c -g CM 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 m 1 1 0)0)000 ■ A i ft A • oo^in 0 m 1—O-H 0000000 0 cn 00 1 1 1 1 1 1 OOOOOO IIII 0000 1 1 CMz—< 0 •H —t —t ^ ^ ^ ^CM CM CM WWW CM CM CM CM (O 0o(MOO CM CM CM CM CM (M CM 0 0 COCO CM CM CM CM CM CM cnmcno CM 000 0 V V 1 1 W W W V 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 W 1 1 WWW 1 1 1 I 1 1 ^ ^ ^ ^ liltC3V V ^ ^ ^ ^ —g CM CM CM .g _< —I _ —« —t ^ ^<0000000 0 (».(*.OOOOOO OOOr^0 zo ►1 I- Q. t-t tt.o to UJo 0(0zuj UJ UJ Q. ►- to cot/) to to to UJ UJ UJ UJ UI UI I—< *—I >—< »—« 1—1 »-4 a. a. a. ql UI (L CL 0.0.0.0.2 0.0. tot/' otoooioto < UI UI UI UI o UI UIooo oo II-0-M-) UI l-l •-< U U U U___I u u U. U. U. U. >H U u. OOOOluOO UIUI UIUIu u. Z2 UIUIoo<< oo Z2 << 0.0. to to to to to to to to to to to to UI UJ UI UJ UJ UIoooooooooooo q : o: q : o; q : CK Q. CL CL Q. CL Q. U UI tc yao UI Xo oooo oooo oo oiq : 0.0. 0:0:<< ooooooo 0000000 oc ac o: oc Q£ oc o: a. CL CL CL CL CL CL to to to to to to to Z2Z222Z to to to to to to to 00 00 oo CO CQ CD 00 to to CO to to to to UI UI UI UI UI UI UI 3333233 OCDOOOOO X UI OE 1-►-(/)0>UI zz CO _l << UJ coco0uoczzz<<< Ht I—00 CO h1»-l 1-oco:•a _l UIUIt-_l XX< <<< rxzxzz UJ UI UJ UI UJ UI to to to to to t/> oooooo UU U.UU.U. ZZZZZ2 h-l l-l >-« >-l •-< KH iiii 0000 < CL QCo Xuz< CO 00 CM toor^ CM-HCO «■«c «C « CMO-tmOCMOO nr)00 mom ^ ^ ^ 0^^0 _o t*. to 0 00 (0(0 (M(M CMCMCMr^VCMCMCM 00 o)oor^00 00 00 m 00 00 0 in in 00 o)(MfM 0)0) ooooooovooooco •H -H 00 OOOQ)00 onooio 00 in 00 —< CM mm—< -g CO CM CM CM CM O)oor«-CM(M(MnfM<Mn —< CM 0)0)nn 0)0) 00 O) CD 0 wzCO to 0a:UI 0 )—CD CD<00u0 0 >d1-z JHu JC in in 0 00 0 UI 00 O)X CM CM O)0 in in —t CM CM 0000000 O) O) CJ) CD O) O) CD to to to CO to to to 0000000 O) 0> 0> O) O O) <7> 0000000 to to to to to to CO 0000000 0000000 OfOOOOOO lO lO m iTu/1 tr» m CM CM CM (M CM CM rg o OD 00 0)0) CO to 00 <7) O) 00 00 rjcM 00 CM cn com CM CM oooooo C7) C7) O) C7) O) C7) to O CO CO to to O 30000 0 0)0)0)0)0) oooooo ooooooCM O CM (M CM (~)oooooo CM CM (M CM CM CM i/> cD I/un in in CM CM CM CM CM CM 0000 0 0 O) CD CD <7)O)CD ■V CO <0 (O CO to CO 0000 0 0w \\ CD CD CD CD CD CD 0000 0 0 CM CM CM CM 0000 CM CM CM CMin m m in CM CM CM CM G vn Ui a<ou o o> Uio< CO CO o o CO o CO o </0 o oz CM CO <7)0) I I a>o (OO) m CO I I CM CM in in CO ^ r^t>~ CO o> CM CM CM CM CM OOQOOO I I I 'T ^ 'T CO CO CO I I I oo a>o> CT> OO 05 CO CO CO I • mat atat 00 1 I •H —4 COCO (M CM • I —4 -H OO CM CM VC3» t I C» C7> ^CO (M UO > I OO CM CM CM CM M' TT I I —< (O Of*. O at in CM—<—«-^CMCO Tf CO CO CO cn oo I I I I I I at at a> at at o ^CMCMCMCOCJO CM —< —< —c UO m I I I I I I -4 CO CO (O —t —4 CM^^^CMCM CM CO CO CO CM C'i I I I I I I —4 —4 —4 —4 CO *9 oooof**r>» UiUiUi cjoa ee UJ o z to zzzoUJ<«t< 1—»1-4 OOO (Jt--J zo.CL CL CL CL l: t-t (O CL OOO oc oe.1-O oco: CL <u UJ to CL 0.0.£L to VUA to 1 1 I UJ zz _l ooc^UJat-t l-l z <lu UJ UJ oooOOO<T.H-1 —J-1-4 UI UJ 0.0.H-o to to to -1»—UJ UJ o UJ zzz 4-4 1-4 toco m Z ►4 l-l 1-4 z »UJUJUI 0.0.•ouuocoe►4 1-0-4 OO >>>ocococ UJ UI UJUIUJ z U.U.to to to X ►-4 t-4 o_I_J to to to CO n Z to toco 'v.oc _l _J oc UJUJUI zO<<O zzz oCD►4 t-4 u.I-4I-4I-4 tozOO»-4 o to to to oz ZD Vi>•o ZDZDZ3 oacaoQ oomca<<<aoo uicn »-Q. S=*30 3 *-iOOco OO OO oo *-4 t-4oo qeq: UJ UJ X I 0.0. oo OO oz>< z> •o z=> »o cn UJ 3o tK<o lu OO to tototnz zzzcr occro: O OOOu. c/o (/) u. Li_ u. ►4(3 01 </> to to </) CO to 1 ■ I 111 1 1 r 1 1 111 1 11 1 oooooo a: q: Q£ ce a: Q£ l» I ................I I. I I. I(/> to (o to u) tn oooooo Xo o <>-o Q. to>a. a.< X «■«■«««■«44 oo mm oooo oo omm mom oo 1 moooooin OOmoor)oo com oooo mm tono»norg oo cnmmmcocMCM oo 00 eom CNJOJ oooo focn eocMO 0(0(0 oo oooo^o>m n nommO) O) ^ «-4 mmmm CM CM CM CM —4 -4 CM CM I4.CMO -4 00 0)00 CO *^oo cocor-r*. CM CM ^ oooooo CO O) CM CJ -4 Ozoo: O u. O o o oo o O OOO O oo oo o oooooo Oc»cn at <n 0> O) o>tn cr> CD at at at o) o> o> o) <n <3>atV.■v.'McocoCDCO(0(0(0 CO COCO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO <o O O OOO o oo OO o oooooo o V.'V.w w V.V. w atat at O)O O) <7)a>cj)o>0)0>CD <7) (7) (7) O) 0> C7>C7>OO o o OOO o oo oo O oooooo O coc-» in m CM CM CO CO CO CM CM CM CO CO CO in m m CM CM CM oo oo mm CMCJ con mm CM CM CD CO lO CO CM CM ron mm CM CM CO CMn m CM CM CM CM CM CJ CM CM CJ CM CM CM CM nnnnnn m m m m m m CM C4 CM CM CM CM 0 UJo<o. oo> CO o </> o CO o —< COro —• I I 0)0 <M OO -<o I I <M OO CO ro ■ I 0)0)coco OO I i OO o> Csl m—<co(V4 —«rocoo> I I I I O) O) ^ o> <D(Mr»(D O —< -H in I I I I •—< —I •—4 —4 OO OO OO OO CO Co ro CO I I I I -4 —< —• CO OOOt^ rococo -H —4 ro I • I 0)O*» ro^r^ OO-H I I I (MfSIfM Csl CM (SI rococo ooo O) <M O CM 0)<3) ^«o CM in I I coco —4 CO Ol^ o oc UJ<lU O u.m CM oca ad O.Z o> Ui41 1xa:-JO o O OCMoCKO a:UJ CD <0® ><>•<< -j UJ-Io0.0 OO*-)(/>»o I-I4-I CO CO COooo I </)►- <u. Q£ Ui w- p.Q. OO U.U. U. tl. >-4 t-4 a: a: XXtoco zz z z tu LU X X (/TCO OO Q£Oe zzrz UJUJ OCQC 4-4 4-4 l-H- UJUi ocoe OO 1-4 4-1 U.oc zo 4-4- z (/untoc/)z 1-4 <<<<•{(UI >rzzz o oooo OC.OCOC UI CK UI XXXX UJU."JJ o.o X ►- 4-4- 4-<u. 1 1 1 I 1 <<<o z o zzzz _J-J-I CO UJ CD XXXX a UJUJ UJUJoooo UJUJUJ XXX z<< )-4-l-_j -J UJUJ << OOzz OO U.U. OO t-l- 4-4 4-4 OO mm 040(0 CMC4^OO 40 40 Or**r*»—4 UI CO OO (0(0 eoo)i».-400 fsjCM <0(0 « m O «oo>oo CM Csl 0)CJ)-4 CM -4 CM CM moootn OO <D ro m in r-. Or~ oooo r-. ^ -4 CM c- O —4 cn <0-4 40 0 in in OO 0)0) r— r~- -4 —4 OO OO OO OO CM CM 4f 4# eoN> <oo -4I«. Ozo oe Ui O I- < U. Q O >- O I- z 4-4 O bC O O UI (» X O) o OO OO O OOOO ooo o>o>0)0)o>(7) m o) O)C) o o> 's. iO <D (0(0 (O (0(0 40 40 CD (D (D OO OO o OOOO ooo w cn CT>0X7)O)O) O) O) (7)OOO OO OO o OOOO ooo n «OO OO «OOo«OO c coco cn «cn rn m com cn •cn cn m coco m «in m mm CM «CM CM m CM CM (O CO o) o) cn 47) ro ro ro ro ro ro ro to in in m in CM CM r-J CM OOO 4» 4T »TCO coco in in in CMCMCI O —4 a OO 0)0) (0(0 OO O) 47) OO COCO COCO min CM CM © cr> O O O z 3 Oou< oe Ooz Ul> r» o r> oooo oo o OT COo at CM CM x» O o> CD CM in iCo CM CM (O CO coco cncnoo COCOCOCOCD—trOCMCM—cOOOOOO-H —c —<—tnc^Tj-rrr^OOOOOOoo I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I ■ I 00000(D^C7icno^^cncor~.—‘cn oooooooooo(Mf~-^*»^CMtnLnincficon OOOOO"H-<CMCM00^^^^^«*^ I I I I I I ) I I I I I I I I I I •-C CM ro n ro n cn n n n cn oj o> o> O) O) co 000000000000>CT>CnCJ5C7)0 c*>coococnoocnnc*»c*)cncnroc*>cnc*i I • I I I I I I I I I I I I • I I OOOOOOOOOOCMCMCMCMCMCMr~ _!•-> Z»-«o -jui _i_»xx »->COOZ OOCO Z O ►-3 o:»- o:o Uiz-Jt- Z U —>UJ ►HUlOZlTlOOOtt- < CO CO OC0(0Z(0_l>t0C0C0C0t0C0 l-OZCO-tZZZ 1 Q.<ZZZZZZ UJoeOO-iOOcoUQ-ZOOOOOO OCO-O-c-lCJU —uo< oooooo <<<<<<<<Q<CO<<<<<<ooaoaooozo oaaooo I............ I !■ I I. II ■ 11 1 11. 1 «f I. I 3 — li I Ul lii UJ LU CiJ oouuyoaooyooyoyuoOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOC lOCOCO</)COC/)COCOC/)COtO(/)C/)C/)COC/JC/l COCOC/1COC/1C/)C/)COC/)OOCOC/)COCOCOC/)CO •a *d *d •« >4 •«-a *4 >4 *4 *a •« *4 V) *4 *9 *4 rxxxxxxxxrzxxxrzr<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<< a.a.a.a.a.a.CLa.a.a.a.a.Q.a.a.a.a.OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOQ.OLa.a.Q.a.a-0-a.ti.Q.Q.Q.ci.a-a.a. OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO <7>0)0>0)C7)0>0)0>000)0>0>0)0>CJ3Cn (O(D(O<O<O(D<^(OiDQ0<O<O<O<O<O(O<O OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO C7>C7)C7J<31Cn0>0)C7)C71<73C71Cn01CT)cnc7)<7> OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO 00 00 00 0000 00 00 00 00030000000} oil cc; \ CMCMCMCMCMCMCMf'jCMC'iCMCMCMCMCMCMCM (0(0(0(^CDU3COCOCDCOU3<OCOCA(^tO<0 ncnnmnnnnnonnnnnnn ifimiruomincrti/iinimninincoinirtin CMCMCMCMCMCMCMCMCMCMCMCMCMCMCMrjCM oxcomoooioOf*>-oooo-^r>in< ^OOCMOOOOOOCMOO—linOOacDCC3t~-tD «rcMr^noooooor~aiLncoooo—<OiT)C7) 0<<co«H-coo«tf-«m<oooooo<ncMirti/> -H •-< «T pinn n CM n Q UJ in o in u cMcnci-HCM -<-*cno»c7) I I I I t m Oi ^ cn oi cncop-9co oc —• m in I I I I I 00 QOO n n 'o n ro II II —< —< —^ 'M C^ 0001 -r<« zzzzz l-< t-H t—< KH •—I<l<l< oaaoa 1.1ii^ iiI ii I iiI teaeacoea: XXIII in in in in in uuuuu CO CO on/) COxxxxx liI 111llIl«l111 cocoonoco tninininin <<<<< OQQQQ *-i »-•»—t i-i *—< 11 11 111 11 1 ■ 11 1 1 ocxocococ oo OO oo o> 0)0 04 mm oo a>a>00 00 00 O) 00 oo 0>0>0><0<NO) CM CM •-4 ^-4 ^ CM CM o o o o o 03 lA O) O) O C0 CO CO C0 CO ooooo 0) 0) 03 0) 0)ooooo <<<«» (O CO lO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO nrofonr} m in in lo in CM CM CM CM CM e UJ . UlU < O (O < to a. UJr to o t/j o to o n o>o > Z (NICO »-• -HO z 3 Ouo< o> V cor- O-H I I <0(0 00 coco 1 I -H -H oo t- cgwm-HcocM-HCsiroro >H-(—(ooHjcncDcncn I I I I I oaiooj^aiojoioo coin<o(Mf-.v^(ocno> ooo—(^(MinimniT) I I I I I I I I I Ioooooooooo (M<M(N<M(M(M<M(\JCM<N( O CO o o o o o o o o I I I I I I I I I I OOOOOOt—c-r-r- o> ir> I (M CO tsj »t I CM r— m (O I/O <30 <o O CO a.</) ►H z CO oe UJ Q.u <to W(/»0 UJ 00 >-•n. 0 t— 1—q:-J to Ul UJ q:T (—(/>0 UJ OO H-Ul int-00 <l-t t-t ►H <<OQ 0 > 111 III i« I li I ii I It I ii I ii 1111zzzzzzzzzooooooooo Q.Q.CLQ.Q.Q.Q.a.Q. IiI Ii I IIIIi I II III I Ii I I, I Ii I tiJ LlJ 111 111 111 111 111 III ll I O 0 oc < 1 oo CO (3) Q. Z Oz >-o UJ a: 0 • Ul Q£Q£ QC UJIU —1 —1 U.lu to U U.U.0UJLULUo:z ZZ 0 < 0 (JO 0 3 q:to to to < 0 QC _i 0 UJ t-H UJzZ0H- LU UJIU 0 <>1—11—1 »-H >r a:Q£UJ 0 l-H 30 ec <1-<<►—QC —I _i _j in H-3 rxrzzzrrr: ► OOOOOOOOC OOOOOOOOOO </J</)tOtOlOtOtOtH/)tO Ii I li I III Ii I II I Ii I li I Ii I li I Ii I (OlOCOtOtOtOtOtOtOtO oz oo (O to UJ> =>a. go oz o>-o O. lUzz UJz zz>o T.< ««€«««ff «« 000 lOin (D<D 00 (D(Dr><n<o<omr^^Oo (0(0 CMf'l mm 00 000 OO)•H (MCM oomo)OOoomn^o «» 'T 000 00 mm r-ro.00 00 00 00 000 (M (M coco C^JCM —< -H inuo mm CO oo V. 00 0 0 0 0)0)at at at0w.v,•-Vz<DO>(O (O <0 0 0 0 0 QC UJ \•>- 0 1—OO)O)at o><00 0 o o0 >•>- *-Hu 3C mu €0 «at « 0 00 on H.«r-■(7) 0 UJ <0 U)N «r-«r- at z nr)«CO «n at <J mm «.«m «in —H <vj rj «*• .«(M •(M OOOOOOOOOO O O C71 C7) t7> C7) (73 CD CD Oi (0(0(0(0(0(0(0(0(01 O' OOOOOOOOOO 0>0)0)0>C7)CF)0)0(7)0>OOOOOOOOOO inioinioirtirunijoioin -4^-4iH-H>l_l.-«.-4>H oooocooooooooooooooo ooi^connroroc^o miruomu-iimriuoirtin (MfSI(M<M(Mrsl(M<M<M(M o o> (Oo o w <0o ato o m CM (/> o Uio< a.n o>o oz z 3ouu< —4 If) at c-> CD CM -H O ►-< Ul tfl 8 CO o <£> to tii Io 3 O Q. Zo >z UJ Q CMlf)-<CO(M-^ (M —« n fO ^ <7) CD I I I * I I I 0)0) o>o> o> ri«DCMr».^^«o o O —«CMlD If) 1)11)11 OOOOOOO -< n —* CO CO CO CO CO po ro I I I • I I I ^ < CM CO OOOOOc^r^ zzzsirsrs: Q£ OC (K cr OC Q£ 0£oocaaoao zzzzzzz )-l >-l l-M-t <<<<<<< zzxzzrz xxxxxxx <<<<<<< U. U. U. U. ti. U. li. ooo CO 3Q <a.X O) CM <oo CO O) O) CM Ioo O) 00 Ulu.oe Ul CDo H- CJo zo <zoc:) O) CM CM >>o < < z »-l->ZZi-l OOOu.u.< > OS a.-iuiOOuj ►i<oezza. 0»— i-ii-iO Q 0>-iuj>—)— ZuiO.X<ui 3 *tOococtn u<4(Jaeuiuia: a. a. 0.3 -luioXOOO <>Z)-) o KOO QCQ£ uioe -iXujuiu. Z Q.)-) o; I-3 _i UJ Z 3Ui<UiO O*-*0QQ-300a Xo UJ Xo oo IM oz< O <zzoa OOOOOOOzzzzzzz ►-11-4 )-l )-« )-«)-) )-< UJ Ul UJ UJ UJ )«J Uloooc:iooo )—4 »-t »-l >—I )—I )-l )—4 OOOOOOO oe (Tik; a: o: o: OOOOOOO 3333333 oe Of oc oe oc oe oe UJ UJ UJ UJ UJ UJ UJ )—4 )-4 4-4 »—4 )-4 »-4 4—4 ZZZZZZZ < a. X oo z X at:<a. 00< 3 O K Xo00 ozo 0£o ozo _J -H If) ^ CM n «r O—•-^C'JC'C'C- oggoooo UUUUU.U.U ««««m «m 41 ■ oooo OO 00 oo oo mif) CMoonoono Tf «o —4 —4 in m oooo OOoo OOoo oooo If) If) H-76.76.no 4—4 —40 ^ O) CM 338338oo If) If)9595CsJ(M 00 00 oo If) If)n n oooo CM CM CM CM -4 CM tJ)^ COO) If) co-ccDC-cncoo oor^oo^co^ CM-4 If) O) CM CO om«f ifi-4CMO O) —4 CM CM to CO .» • o z o Oco u -K o OOOOOOO 0 0)0)0)0)0)0) CD CO CD CO CO CD CO OOOOOOO 0 0)0)0)0)0)0) OOOOOOO OOOOOOO o o o o o o o cDoooocno If) If) If) If) If) If) If) CM CM CM CM CM CM CM CO O CDo o o o G if 1 ^ iTi 10 1990 on'«f««B n' . _ ffi MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD AUGUST 20, 1990 ATTENDANCE 7:00 P.M. The Orono Planning Commission met on the above date with the following members present: Planning CommissiDn Vice Chair Maureen Bellowsr and Planning Commission Members Jeffrey Johnson, Jim Hanson, Candace Rowlette and Sara Moos, The following represented the City Staff: Building and Zoning Administrator Mabusth, Assistant Planning and Zoning Administrator Gaffron, and City Recorder Scheffler. Council Representative Peterson was also present. #1573 CAROL KELLY/JAMES MASSEY 3020/3030 CASCO POINT ROAD PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION PUBLIC BEARING 7:00 P.M. TO 7:15 P.M. The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing were duly noted. Ms. Kelly, Mr. Bill Clark. Realtor, and Mr. Bob Smith, Surveyor, were present. Zoning Administrator Mabusth noted that Planning Commission had previously reviewed an application for this property. She said, "The same issues exist in this application, except that now the subdivision involves a riparian lot and an average lakeshore setback line must now be considered. The drainageway will now be realigned along the shared lot line. The City is asking that the drainage ditch within the 0-75' setback area remain as is, rather than being adjusted. Major excavation would be required to relocate the drainageway and we would prefer that not occur. City Staff is asking the applicant to confirm that everything to the west of the drainageway is a dry, contiguous building envelope. The applicant has maintained 100' width at the 75' setback line and to the rear of the front yard setback line." Bellows asked what criteria is used by the LMCD for dock approval. Mabusth replied, "The LMCD uses lineal footage per slip. Lot 2 will have approximately 75 to 85 lineal feet of shoreline. Based on LMCD standards, one boat slip would probably be allowed." Bellows said, "The shoreline area for Lot 2 appears more like a marsh. I am concerned about creating and selling that lot as a lakeshore lot. The property owner may request an extended walkway to access the dock." Mabusth replied. "During tho dry .^pell, there was very little riparian use of properties on Casco Cove. There was a major dredging project approved for Casco Cove." - 1 - ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD AUGUST 20, 1990 ZONING FILE #1573-KELLY/MASSEY CONTINUED Ms. Kelly added, "This year the residents were able to put their docks in, last year we could not." Bellows suggested that something be filed in the chain of title stating that it may not be possible to attain the proper variances to utilize the riparian rights of Lot 2. She said, "There has been an increase in the number of applicants that purchased property in Orono, not realizing the limitations. If someone purchases Lot 2 as a riparian lot, they will feel they have the ’-ight to do whatever is necessary to access the lake. Can the Planning Commission recommend to Council, should they approve this subdivision, that they incorporate such a notice in a resolution?" Mabusth appropriate. advised that such a recommendation would be Ms. Kelly asked whether such a notice would affect her property and her ability to put in her dock. Bellows replied, "This would only apply to Lot 2 and would not limit your use of your property. The notice does not mean that a variance could not be granted, it is merely a warning that a variance is required." Mabusth noted that Lot 3 will have to meet the new setbacks from the newly defined lot line when installing a dock next year. It was observed that the current dock on the Hoffman property appear close to the new lot line. Johnson asked, "Staff is recommending that the lot line be rearranged to provide adequate dry, contiguous land?" Mabusth replied, "That is correct. It does not matter where the lot lines are adjusted as long as the 100’ width is maintained at the rear of the front yard setback line and the 75’ setback line for all lots." There were no comments from the public regarding this application and the Public Hearing was closed. It was moved by Johnson, seconded by Moos, to recommend approval of application #1573, for a preliminary subdivision, in accordance with staff recommendations 1 to 5, and that a notice to future owners of Lot 2 is included in the resolution regarding the need for a variance for any structure that would be used to access the dock. Mr. Smith asked whether the Planning Commission accepted the applicant's proposal for lot width. Johnson said, "My motion accepts tne lot configuration as presented." Mabusth stated that condition #3 would be excluded. Johnson amended his motion to include staff recommendations 1, 2, 4, and 5. Moos - 2 - .i I ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD AUGUST 20, 1990 ZONING FILE #1573-KELLY/MASSEY CONTINUED seconded. Mabusth advised Ms. Kelly that this subdivision would be subject to the new park dedication fees. Motion, Ayes-5, Nays”0. Motion carried. #1571 JOANN GRIMES/JAMES HOFFMAN 4720 NORTH ARM DRIVE WEST VACATION OF DRAINAGE AND UTILITY EASEMENTS PUBLIC HEARING 7:35 P.M. TO 7:37 P.M. The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing were duly noted. Ms. Grimes was present. Gaffron stated that the vacation of draincige and utility easements is necessary due to the recently approved lot line rearrangement. Hanson asked, "Is the City still unaware of any existing utilities within the existing easement?" Gaffron replied, "That is correct." It was moved by Hanson, seconded by Moos, to recommend approval of application #1571, vacation of drainage and utility easements at 4720/4730 North r.rm Drive West. Motion, Ayes-5, Nays-0. Motion carried. #1493 CHUCK DOWNEY 2665 CASCO POINT ROAD VARIANCES REFERRAL FROM COUNCIL AND #1570 CHUCK DOWNEY CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT/VARIANCE PUBLIC HEARING 7:38 P.M. TO 7:57 P.M. Mr. Downey was present. Mabusth provided a review of this application, and the action previously taken by the Planning Commission and Council (see Jeanne Mabusth's memo dated August 15, 1990). She said, "The applicant is asking for your special consideration to allow him to have 48% hardcover, rather than 45% as previously approved." She asked Mr. Downey to provide staff with a sketch showing the area of hardcover that he intends to remove. Bellows noted that the after-the-fact deck must also be addressed. Mabusth said, "Staff was asked to determine where the average lakeshore setback line. We have no record of a building permit for the deck in 1982. Mr. Downey assumed that his - 3 - OROMO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD AUGUST 20, 1990 ZONING FILE #1493/#1570-DOWNEY CONTINUED contractor had included the deck in the permit for the garage, which was constructed at the same time. The deck is in fact in front of the average lakeshore setback line." Bellows added, "Portions of the principal structure are located in front of the average lakeshore setback line." Mr. Dovmey stated that he has letters from the neighbors on both sides of his property indicating that they have no objections. Hanson said, "It appears to me that the deck does not obscure the neighbors' views. The standard issues that we address when looking at the average lakeshore setback, in this case are almost irrelevant." Bellows concurred with Hanson but stated that there are many other aspects of this property that must also be addressed. She asked Mabusth to proceed with the review of application #1570. The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing were duly noted. Mabusth reviewed the history of this property relating to the cause of Mr. Downey's drainage problems (see Jeanne Mabusth's memo dated August 15, 1990). She said, "I have no indication of what resulted from the litigation that occurred. The City Engineer and I looked at the property and did not see signs of 30Y0rQ erosion, which one would expect due to the steep slopes. Mabusth displayed the sketch showing the three-tier plan Mr. Downey is proposing. She said, "I believe that very little fill would be brought in based on the proposed elevations." Mr. Downey said, "My landscape architect has indicated to me that 40 yards of fill will be needed." Johnson asked Mabusth to show where the cuts are to be made. Mabusth indicated where cuts will be made and said, "There are already severe, exposed cuts behind the boat house that will require a retaining wall." Downey referred to the conditions and provisions set forth in Resolution #1079 (Holzer application-property to immediate south). He said, "That appears to be the final plan and it shows where drainage is supposed to go. If you look at the recent survey, you can see that is not occurring." Bellows Sc id, "In my opinion, the condition created by the projecL next door should be corrected. There is no other place - 4 - ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD AUGUST 20, 1990 ZONING FILE #1473/|1570-DOWNEY CONTINUED for runoff to go other than Mr. Downey's property." Mabusth replied, "Water has always drained down to Mr. Downey's property." Mr. Downey disagreed. He said, "The neighbor brought in a tremendous amount of fill. There was drainage onto my property, but it was not as severe as it is now since the retaining walls were removed. I know Maureen was out to look at the property. Does the Planning Commission believe there is drainage coming from the neighbor’s property?" Rowlette replied, "There is no doubt about it. You can see evidence of where the water is draining and there are exposed tree roots." The other Planning Commission members concurred. Bellows said, "I am concerned about Mr. Downey's proposal to resolve the problem. I do not see that what is proposed will fix the area that has had the most severe erosion. The area by the stone path, as you are approaching the deck, is very unstable. I agree that something needs to be done, but this plan will not accomplish what you are trying to achieve." Bellows referred to th^ letter from the City Engineer. She said, "It is Glenn Cook's c;..j.nion that the retaining wall planned is in excess of what is necessary for bank stabilization. He is calling for a retaining wall along the east side of the boat house. However, he is not in favor of the other walls as shown." Mr. Downey replied, "I am trying to save as much money as possible and am, therefore, receptive to the City Engineer’s comments. I would be happy to cut back the size of the wall. My biggest concern is the boat house. I'm afraid that erosion will move the boat house out of its present location." Bellows asked Mr. Downey how the boat house is currently being used. Mr. Downey replied, "It is being used as a recreational area for my children and for a place to store water skis, etc." Hanson said, "I am in agreement that some form of retaining walls are necessary to deal with erosion, particularly at the east wall of the boat house. I concur with Maureen that the area near the deck needs attention. However, I also agree with the comments from the City Engineer. I v/ould suggest that Mr. Downey get another assessment for resolving the problem from another source. VJe could table this application for another month." - 5 - ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD AUGUST 20, 1990 ZONING FILE #1473/#1570-DOWNEY CONTINUED Mr. Downey said, "I was hoping to have been able to start the house remodeling by now. I would like to solve the drainage problem, but that could wait until spring. Council asked to see the conditional use permit before they would approve the front entry proposal." Rowlette asked whether the applications could be separated. Mabusth suggested that the Planning Commission make a strong recommendation to Council that they act separately on the variance phase of the application. She said, "The Planning Commission could provide the reasons for delaying a recommendation on the conditional use permit. There is really no connection between the two applications. I v/ould suggest to Mr. Downey that he have his landscape architect meet with City staff to receive some direction. Perhaps the Planning Commission can also provide some direction as to what they would like to see." There were no comments from the public pertaining to this application and the Public Hearing was continued. It was moved by Hanson, seconded by Bellows, to recommend approval of the applicant's proposal for 48% hardcover. Hanson stated that 48% is reasonable based on the fact that the landscaping was not included in the 1982 survey by Mr. Downey's Gontrav: ,:i.s. Motion. Ayes-5 . Nays-0. Motion carried. It was moved by Hanson, seconded by Moos, to recommend approval of the after-the-fact average lakeshore setback variance for a second story deck, conditioned on the applicant paying a double fee for the permit. Hanson based his recommendation on the fact that the second story deck does not interfere with the sight-line views of the lake for the properties on either side. Johnson believed that in light of the time that has elapsed it is appropriate to waive the double fee. Rowlette concurred. Motion. Ayes-3, Rowlette, Johnson, Nay. Motion carried. It was moved by Bellows, seconded by Hanson, to table application #1570, to allow time for Mr. Downey to work with City staff and his contractor to design a minimal retaining wall system that will address the primary areas of concern. Those areas include the boat house, and the stone walk near the deck. Bellows noted that Mr. Downey will require approval to have the lakeshore stairs repaired and that should be included in his application. Johnson stated that he could not see how the three- tier plan would work and suggested that Mr. Downey may v/ish to re evaluate that aspect of the plan as well. Motion, Ayes-5, Nays-0. Motion carried. - 6 - ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD AUGUST 20, 1990 #1554 TIMOTHY GRAMENTZ 4680 NORTH ARM DRIVE VARIANCE CONTINUATION OF PUBLIC HEARING 7:23 P.M. TO 7:25 P.M. Mr. George Jones was present on behalf of Mr, Gramentz. Gaffron provided a suromary of the major issues involved in this application (see Michael Gaffron's memo dated July 1, 1990). Johnson said, "I went to the site and looked at the footprint of the structure. It lends itself well to having a second story above the garage." Hanson said, "It does not appear that this will have any impact on the neighbors." Bellows and Rowlette concurred with Hanson. Mr. Jones said, "This proposal will enhance the property. The single story garage was awkward in appearance." There were no comments from the public regarding this application and the Public Hearing was closed. It was moved by Hanson, seconded by Moos, to recommend approval of application #1554, a side setback variance to construct a second story over an existing garage. Motion. Ayes-5, Nays-0. Motion carried. #1555 LANDSTAR. INC. 2501 OLD BEACH ROAD PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION CONTINUATION OF PUBLIC HEARING 7:27 TO 7:34 P.M. Bellows stated that the Army Corp of Engineers has requested additional time to review this application. She said. In light of this, the Planning Commission will take comments from anyone present this evening. We have learned that inaccurate information was distributed to area neighbors regarding this subdivision." Mr. Drew Gesell, 2755 Kelly Avenue, said, "I attended the previous meeting when this was discussed. I expressed concerns at that time about the impact this development will have on the wetlands. Those concerns still exist. It is difficult to imagine houses in portions of this property. Years ago, that lake was much larger than it is now. It is hard to say what will happen in the future if the property is developed." Mr. James MacKinnon, Attorney for Landstar, Inc., asked Mabusth if she could provide him v/ith the information she had learned just prior to this meeting. - 7 - ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD AUGUST 20, 1990 ZONING FILE 11555-LANDSTAR CONTINUED Mabusth said, "Actually, staff is not waiting for any additional information from the Corp of Engineers, but rather your client’s representative to provide direction to the surveyor to make changes to preliminary plan that reflects the Corp of Engineer's findings. Also, fill is no longer proposed in the lot on the lakeshore. There will be no need for compensatory excavation. The other issue raised by the Corp involves the wetland within the City of Orono. They feel the wetland should be designated at a higher elevation. This could have a major impact on the subdivision. It was originally designated at 931.5, and the City considered it at 934. It now the responsibility of the City Engineer to determine the appropriate elevation." Bellows asked whether the DNR will review this. Mabusth replied, "The DNR will review this in addition to the Corp of Engineers, the Wild Life Agency, the EPA, and other agencies." Rowlette asked, "VJhat was the outcome from the Minnetonka Beach meeting?" Mabusth replied, "The applicant did not proceed to the Minnetonka Beach Council meeting. I believe the matter was tabled." Mr. MacKinnon referred to a letter he had from the Corp of Engineers. He said, "The letter states that the subdivision, as proposed meets all of their requirements. In doing the site, they are hoping that they will get some cooperation from the developer to restrict any grading or fill in that certain area right next to the high water mark. The letter says that they do not require any change in the elevation or the high water mark. V7e would really like to proceed with this matter this evening." Bellows replied, "I'm afraid at this point in time that is not possible." Bellows asked whether all neighbors would be notified again of the meeting when this matter would be discussed. Mabusth stated that would be appropriate in light of the interest in this matter, and the incorrect information that has been circulated. There was no action taken on this matter. - 8 - ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD AUGUST 20, 1990 #1560 JOHN AND ROBERTA HENRICH 4125 HIGHHOOD ROAD CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT CONTINUATION OF PUBLIC HEARING 8:07 P.M. TO 8:20 P.M. Mr. and Mrs. Henrich \/ere present. Gaffron stated that at the last Planning Commission review, the City Engineer had requested additional information. He said, "The City Engineer has been to the site to evaluate the Henrich's proposal." Gaffron summarized the information in his memo dated August 17, 1990, regarding the City Engineer's recommendation. He stated that, as with the Downey application, the Engineer believes the retaining walls proposed are excessive. Bellows said, "I had a discussion with firs. Henrich regarding the condition of the existing stone wall. The wall is an eye sore and because of its location, screening is not possible. There are several pieces of stone projecting from the wall which pose a safety hazard." Mr. Henrich replied, "There were comments at the last review about screening the wall and the walls appearing in a hodge podge manner. We are trying to improve the appetxrance of the property. We intend to remove the red rock and will try to make the view from the lake aesthetically pleasing. It is nearly impossible to do anything about the stone wall. It provides stability for the hill and actually is preventing the entire house from shifting." Bellows and Hanson indicated that they too agreed with the City Engineer's comments regarding the excessive nature of the proposed retaining walls. Johnson asked whether the Henrichs intended to remove rock and plastic in the area of the proposed wall to reduce hardcover percentages. Mrs. Henrich replied, "Even with the rock and plastic, the hostas that are planted used to be located nearer to the steps. They have moved approximately a one and a half feet from that location. If we remove the rock and plastic, we believe that erosion in that area would be as bad as it is on the east side beyond the stairway." Johnson stated that he too believes that what the Henrichs have presented will not solve their problems. Bellows asked the Henrichs whether they would prefer to have this matter tabled or action taken this evening. She said, "You have heard that three of us do not agree with what you are proposing." - 9 - ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD AUGUST 20, 1990 ZONING FILE 11560-HENRICH CONTINUED Mr. Henrich replied. "We have two applications before the City. We are more interested in proceeding with application #1559 than we are #1560." Bellows stated that #1559 was not on the Planning Commission agenda. Gaffron explained.- "The Planning Commission recommended approval of application #1559 at the last meeting." Bellows said, "1559 is a separate issue." Gaffron said, "The reason application #1559 was not scheduled for the last Council meeting is that we prefer to have Council see both applications at the same time." Mr. Henrich indicated that he v/ould like application #1560 tabled, but that he would like #1559 to proceed to Council, Mrs. Henrich asked the direction for application #1560 Planning Commission for some Hanson said, "I do not believe that the proposed retaining v/alls will provide the stabilization that you need and aesthetic issues have"not been considered. I’m inclined to advise you to talk to an engineer and review you proposal with the City Engineer You have a problem with a method for tying this all together." Bellows added. "It is also important that you address the issue of screening that existing stone wall." Hanson added, "There may also be safety hazards that need to be addressed with the existing v/all." Rowiette said, "I believe that the old walls and new walls need to be combined into one plan." There were no comments from the public at this time and the Public Hearing v/as continued. It was moved by Bellows, seconded by Hanson, to table application #1560. Johnson questioned whether the Henrich's in fact wanted the application tabled. He stated that it seemed that what had been proposed was what they wanted to do. He said, "There has been no change from what was tabled at the last meeting." Mr. Henrich explained that the lines of communication had been crossed in that he had understood that the City Engineer would contact him to discuss the proposal. He said, "Ive d.\d not hear from the City Engineer prior to his visit to our property. Consequently, no one was home to meet with him and we v/ere not - 10 - ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD AUGUST 20, 1990 ZONING FILE #1560-HENRICH CONTINUED aware of his visit or recommendation. Bellows suggested that the Henrichs work with City staff to schedule a meeting with the City Engineer. Motion. Ayes-5, Nays-0. Motion carried. #1561 CHRISTINE BECK 3820 CHERRY AVENUE VARIANCE CONTINUATION OF PUBLIC HEARING 8:23 P.M. TO 8:26 P.M. Mrs. Beck and Jim Beck, her son, were present for this Public Hearing. Mabusth reviewed Mrs. Beck’s proposal for a deck and the variances required. She noted that the overhang will remain. There were no comments from the public regarding this application and the Public Hearing was closed. It was moved by Hanson, seconded by Moos, to recommend approval of the lakeshore setback and hardcover variance to construct a deck, conditioned on the removal of 30 s.f. of hardcover from the property. The applicant should be placed on notice that no additional structural improvements can be made within the 75' setback without Council approval. Johnson asked whether the applicants were comfortable with the condition to remove 30 s.f. of hardcover. Mr. Beck stated that it would be necessary to remove the sidewalk on the side of the house. Mabusth suggested that there be no recommendation to remove hardcover, because the sidewalks are used by Mrs. Beck. She noted that Mrs. Beck had previously removed a large boat house structure. Hanson amended his motion to exclude the condition of removing hardcover. Moos seconded. Motion, Ayes-5.- Nays-0. Motion carried. #1565 LEESA AND RICHARD ANDERSON 3205 CRYSTAL BAY ROAD AFTER-THE-FACT VARIA14CE CONTINUATION OF PUBLIC HEAT MG 8:28 P.M. TO 8:45 P.M. Mr. Anderson was present. Gaffron said, "When this was last reviewed, the Planning Commission asked staff to determine the pre-existing hardcover percent, as well as other information. The existing deck covers a pre-existing concrete patio that was 8' wide. There were patio blocks behind the rear door that were removed. Pre-existing hardcover was approximately 47.9%, and 47.3% now exists. The applicant is suggesting that a new landscape plan, combined with v;hat now exists, would result in a net reduction of hardcover to 31.7%. Staff has not yet received any plans for a retaining wall system or the future three season porch or decks. The applicant is requesting that the Planning Commission set some limitation on the hardcover percent so that he can bring that percent back to - 11 - ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD AUGUST 20, 1990 ZONING FILE #1565-RICHARD ANDERSON CONTINUED his landscape architect to complete the plan." Bellows asked Gaffron whether staff is content to only have one of the four items of information requested. Gaffron stated that only two of the four items have not been received. He said, "One of the other information items requested involved Mr. Anderson's proposal to bring the side deck into conformance. Mr. Anderson has indicated that he will lo\/er the appropriate portion of deck so that a railing will not be required and that it may exist within 2' of the property line. This would create a two level deck." Bellows said, "There is an after-the-fact condition that exists. I am concerned about recommending approval to address the deck v/ithout having a firm master plan. My recommendation for this matter this evening would be to discuss some acceptable levels of hardcover for this property, but then table the application." Mr. Anderson said, "It was my understanding that dealing with the deck and providing the pre-existing hardcover percent were the two important requests. I have provided that information. I v/ould now like to have the Planning Commission provide me with a hardcover percent that will be acceptable and then I can work with that number in developing my master plan. The master plan will include details of the sunroom and the screen porch." Bellows asked Mr. Anderson if he could in fact achieve 31.7% as he had first indicated with the master plan. Mr. Anderson replied, "The master plan does not include retaining walls, which I believe are necessary. I don't think I can achieve 31.7%." Hanson suggested that 36% would be a compromise between the pre-existing 48% and the desired 25%. Mr. Anderson said, "I would like a number that will give me some flexibility." Bellows said, "You are coming up against what is our real problem. You are supposed to come before the Planning Commission with a plan that you wish to have approved, which includes an accurate hardcover percentage. I believe that you have been given sufficient direction from us. I am reluctant to hold you to a hardcover number that comes from nothing. I will ask the Planning Commission to give their opinions on what they believe should be the maximum percent for hardcover." - 12 - ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD AUGUST 20, 1990 ZONING FILE #1565-RICHARD ANDERSON CONTINUED Bellows asked Gaffron to estimate the walls that may be needed. size of retaining Gaffron replied, ”1 would estimate that there may need to be two retaining walls one foot wide by 50 to 75 feet long. That would 150 s.f., which would add two to five percent. Mr. Anderson said, "If the City can live with the deck as it is until I can provide a master plan, 1 have no problem with that. I assumed that the City would like to have the deck corrected." Bellows said, "We are asking you to correct the deck and come up with a specific plan." Johnson said, "I think that 31.7% is very appealing, but I don't know how realistic it is. The plan that has been presented this evening is the same plan presented at the last meeting. I don't understand what the applicant wants us to do. The applicant stated that the plan is very preliminary." Mr , Anderson asked what step he is to take next if he is to proceed with this plan. Hanson replied, "You need to provide a plan showing exactly what you intend to do." Bellows said, "I believe that has been made very clear to the applicant. The only reason we are polling the Planning Commission for hardcover numbers is to provide some reasonable number. We don't want Mr. Anderson to think that we are going to allow 48% of hardcover to exist." Moos stated that she would agree to split the difference between pre-existing and desired as proposed by Hanson. She said, "I don't want to say a specific number because I would like to see what the applicant needs to accomplish his plan." Rowlette concurred with Moos. Hanson replied, "We are talking off the top of our heads as to what may be needed. I too would like to see a final master plan. There were no comments from the public regarding this application and the Publio Hearing was continued. It was moved by Hanson, seconded by Hanson, to table application #1565 until such time that the applicant presents his landscape plan to the City and meets information requirements 1 through 4 as discussed. Johnson stated that he would prefer to - 13 - ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD AUGUST 20, 1990 ZONING FILE #I565-RICnARD ANDERSON CONTINUED have action taken on the deck at this time. Bellows stated that a recommendation cannot be made for the deck until Mr. Anderson presents a plan showin9 specifically how he intends to bring it into conformance. Rowlette agreed with Johnson in that it could take Mr. Anderson years to provide a master plan and correct the deck. Hanson amended his motion to include a condition that the deck must be corrected by August 30, 1990. Moos seconded. Gaffron asked whether the intent of the amendment is to approve hardcover variances. Hanson replied, "No, my intent is to reri\ove a safety hazard." Johnson b ''eved that sufficient information existed to approve a hardccv.-..- percent for the deck. Motion, Ayes-4, Johnson, Nay. Motion carried. #1572 GUENTHER AND GERTRUD NOELTING 1060 TONKAWA ROAD CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT/VARIANCE PUBLIC HEARING 8:47 P.M. TO 8:48 P.M. The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of .Mailing v/ere duly noted. Mr. and Mrs. Noel ting were present. Woelf.ng's Architect, was also present. Mabusth summarized the information presented in her memo dated August 16, 1990. Mabusth said, "I have explained the City's position regarding the height of the dock. At its present height it appears more as a deck than a dock. The dock should be lowered to conform more to the height of the dock sections extending into the lake." Mr. Viaber stated that lowering the dock will pose no problem. Bellows asked whether it would be appropriate for the Planning Commission to specify an elevation for the dock level. Mabusth replied, "I don't believe we have adequate information to indicate a specific elevation- The ordinary high water mark is 929.4'. We could ask Mr. Weber for his opinion." . Neil Weber, the Mr. Weber suggested 3' above the high water mark. He said, "That would be higher than most docks, but would allow some flexibility. If there is an ice movement, that additional foot or so would make a difference. I would say that is not likely to occur, but it can happen." There were no comments from the public regarding this application and the Public Hearing was closed. It was moved by Hanson, seconded by Moos, to recommend approval of variances and conditional use permit for construction - 14 - ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD AUGUST 20, 1990 ZONING FILE f1572-NOELTING CONTINUED of a dock anchoring system that is to have a *^eight that does not exceed 932.4' (3’ above 929.4') and that access stairs must be limited to a 4' width. Motion, Ayes-5, Nays-0. Motion carried. #1574 JIM AND SUSAN RONALD 2565 DUNIVOODY AVENUE VARIANCES PUBLIC HEARING 8:49 P.M. TO 9:00 P.M. The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing were duly noted. Mr. and Mrs. Ronald were present. Gaftron provided a summary of the major issues noted in his memo dated August 17, 1990. Hanson asked whether staff has received any calls or letters from the adjacent neighbors. Gaffron stated that he had heard from one neighbor but not the other. Mr. Mike Kaatz. 2560 Dunv;oody Avenue, stated that he lives across the street from the Ronalds. He said, "My concern is that I can see the lake from the top level of my house. If the Ronald house is raised, I would lose that view." Gaffron replied, "The height of the Ronald house will be less than the maximum allowed 30'. The City does not have any codes that protect a view over the top of a structure. Our code only addresses views from structure extending from the side." Bellows stated that the sketch plan does not provide real specific information regarding the cantilever portion of the structure. She asked the contractor, David Nygren, how far above the final grade will the cantilever be. Mr. Nygren replied, "There is a drainage swale between the two lots. It will be a minimum of 9" to 12". Mrs. I'onald presented pictures showing that views from the adjacent neighbors will not be obstructed. Rowlette added, "There is quite a bit of screening from the plantings between the two houses. However, I would like to see the pool located behind the 75' setback line." Mrs. Ronald stated that the pool will be designed to meet the 10' setback from the deck and the 75' setback from tae lakeshore. She said, "If we can't meet those setbacks, we won't construct the pool." - 15 - ORONO PLANNING COMFIISSION MEETING HELD AUGUST 20, 1990 ZONING FILE #1574-RONALD CONTINUED Bellows asked whether meeting the 10' setback from the deck overhang will affect hardcover percentages. Gaftron replied. "Hardcover may increase slightly, but there are adequate areas for additional removal." Bellov/s asked what the revisions to the garage entail. Mrs. Ronald stated that only interior work is being done to the garage. She said. "We are reducing the length of the stalls to provide dining room area." Bellov/s said "I don't want to see the applicant come back to us with a request for additional garage area. Consider yourself notified of a potential problem you may have should you find that a certain vehicle will not fit in the garage." There were no further comments from the public pertaining to this application and the Public Hearing was closed. It vvas moved by Johnson, seconded by Moos, to recommend approval of the hardcover and setback variances needed to construct a room addition and pool. Hardcover shall not exceed 35.6% and the pool must be located behind the 75' setback line. Gaffron noted that the pool may encroach 71' into the average lakeshore setback area, but will meet the 75' setback. Motion, Ayes-5, Nays-0. Motion carried. (The Planning Commission took a short recess from 8:57 p.m. to 9:02 p.m.) #1575 JUDSON DAYTON 1111 TAMARACK DRIVE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT PUBLIC HEARING 9:02 P.M. TO 9:39 P.M. The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing were duly noted. Mr. Dayton was present. Mabusth reviewed the information and details relating to Mr. Dayton's request to operate pre-schooi/kindergarten (see Jeanne Mabusth's memo dated August 16. 1990.) She asked the Planning Commission to view Exhibit C, showing the location of Hr. Dayton's property in relation to other developments. Mabusth noted that she had not received any comments from the neighbors. She noted that there is a pool on the property. Bellows stated that the pool has been very adequately covered. She said, "The equipment has been boxed in and the pool is decked over." - 16 - ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD AUGUST 20, 1990 ZONING FILE #1575-DAYTON CONTINUED Mabusth asked whether permits were taken out for the pool covering. Mr. Dayton replied, "My contractor should have taken care of that." Mabusth asked, "Do you know how drainage is being handled?" Mr. Dayton replied, "My contractor has indicated that there is adequate drainage. If that proves to be otherwise, a sump pump will be used." Mabusth stated that very little modification will occur to the structure. She said, "The only comment I would have is that this is in a residential zone. I would ask the Planning Commission to consider whether fencing around the play area is appropriate." Mr. Dayton said, "This will be a minimal use. There will only be 12 to 15 students and schedules will be staggered. Only on rare occasions will all 15 students be on the premises at one time. On an average there will be 6 to 8 students at the same time and some of the children will be from the same family. Numbers of cars coming and going will be minimal." Mr. John Sheehan, 1300 Sixth Avnue North, Ms. Susan Bohach and Mr. V7al2 Dohach, 1330 Sixth Avenue North, stated that they opposed the location of a pre-school/kindergarten in a residential area. Bellows asked Ms. Bohach if she could be more specific in regard to her opposition. Ms. Bohach said, "I am opposed to this use in a residential area, especially when there are other facilities available for such a use." Mr. Bohach asked whether 15 represents the maximum number of students. Mr. Dayton replied, "We anticipate that we will have a license which will allow no more than 14. If we decide to have more than 14, we would need to go through a licensing process with the State." Bellows added, "If this use is intensified, the City will also have requirements that must be met." Mr. Dayton said, "If we decided to expand to the point where the additional City criteria becomes necessary, we would relocate to a larger facility." - 17 - ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD AUGUST 20, 1990 ZONING FILE #1575-DAYTON CONTINUED Mr. Bohach asked whether the school would operate only during the day. Mr. Dayton replied, "That is correct, we would operate from 9:30 a.m. to 12:30 p.m. each day. We will not exceed three hours per day, Monday through Friday. There will be no operation during the summer." Mr. Bohach asked whether there are any plans for an outdoor recreation area. Mr. Dayton replied, "Any recreation area would be very simple and natural. It would not promote loud, typical playground activities." Mr. Bohach said, "Due to the topography of the area, it is easy to hear normal tones of conversation throughout the neighborhood. Noise would pose a problem." Mr. Dayton replied, "The school will operate mainly during winter months for three hours per day. More than likely 2H hours will be spent indoors and there will minimal outdoor activities." Bellows noted that outdoor recreation is not a requirement of programs as short as Mr. Dayton is proposing. She questioned whether it would be appropriate to restrict outdoor activity to address the concerns of the neighbor. tir. nayton replied, "We would like the ability to go outside for a short break." Mr. Bohach questioned whether the residential structure will have adequate septic system capacity for this use. Mr. Dayton replied, "It is my understanding that the septic system is fairly new. There are three bathrooms In the facility. It is my understanding that the septic system will easily handle three hours per day." Gaffron confirmed Mr. Dayton's comments. He said, "The system is two years old. This is the second system for this property and we have not looked for a third site. There was originally a trench system on the property that never functioned properly." Ms. Bohach stated that she did not want to be responsible for other people’s children. Bellows stated that Ms. Bohach's comments raise the issue of whether fencing is appropriate. - 18 - ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD AUGUST 20, 1990 ZONING F’LE #1575-DAYTON CONTINUED Mabusth replied, "We have heard concerns about the need for a noise barrier. Fencing may be appropriate. She noted that schools are a permitted use in residential areas, but believed that fencing may be necessary." Bellows questioned whether the conditional use permit could be renewed on an annual basis. Mabusth stated that such a condition could be included. It was the consensus of the Planning Commission that fencing would be appropriate in this case. Mr. Dayton asked to have the opportunity to work with staff determine the most appropriate location for the fence. Rowlette asked Mr. Dayton whether if he had looked at other locations for this use. She indicated that she did not approve of the pre-school being located in this residential area. Mr. Dayton replied, "We did look at other facilities to find something that would provide the right environment. This location in our mind was most suitable. V7e did consider a few other sites that were eliminated due to various circumstances." There were no further comments from the public and the Public Hearing was closed. It was moved by Bellows, seconded by Johnson, to recommend approval of the conditional use permit for a pre-school/kindergarten, contingent on the applicant working with staff to define an adequate play a*“ea that will provide security to keep the children in and a certain degree of acoustical control. Staff may also determine whether plantings are appropriate in addition to fencing. Prior to opening, the Orono building inspector shall review the facility to determine the need for interior signage for fire exits. The building inspector shall also evaluate the building to determine if there is need for any other improvements prior to use by young children. Mr. Dayton interjected that they have a schedule with the Hennepin County Fire Marshall to come to the facility. Mabusth added that it would be helpful if the building inspector could be present at the time the Fire Marshall visits the site. Bellows asked that decals be placed on the sliding glass doors. Further that staff determine that the appropriate permits were obtained for the pool covering and that the City standards have been met, particularly for drainage. The conditional use permit is to be reviewed at the end of the academic year. Mr. Da ’on noted that the Gregories are in favor of this proposal. n asked whether a maximum should be put on the number o:' nts that may be enrolled. Bellows amended her motion to re the number of - 19 - ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD AUGUST 20, 1990 ZONING FILE 11575-DAYTON CONTINUED students to a maximum of 18 on the premises at any one time. Johnson seconded. Motion, Ayes-3, Hanson, Rowlette, Nay. Hanson was receptive to the concerns of the neighbor and the potential growth of the school. Rowlette objected to the location of the school. Motion carried. #1576 JOHN AND KIT WOJCIK 3310 BAYSIDE ROAD VARIANCE PUBLIC HEARING 9:40 P.M. TO 9:45 P.M. The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing were duly noted. Mr. and Mrs. Wojcik were present. Gaffron summarized the information in his August 13, 1990, memo pertaining to the Wojcik's application for a side setback variance. He stated that Mr. John Monson, the adjacent property owner to the right, has no objections. Gaffron also referred to a letter received from Dale J. Nyhammer and Susan G. Olsen, the neighbors to the east. Bellows read the August 20, 1990, letter from Mr. Nyhammer and Ms. Olsen. There were no further comments from the public regarding this matter and the Public Hearing was closed. It was moved by Hanson, seconded by Moos, to recommend approval of application #1576, a side setback variance to construct additions to an existing residence. The hardship is the location of the existing house. Bellows asked whether the septic system issue needed to be addressed. Gaffron stated that the Council has already reviewed the septic system issue. Motion, Ayes-5, Nays-0. Motion carried. #1577 NORMAN TORRISON 2250 LONGVIEW CIRCLE VARIANCE PUBLIC HEARING 9:47 P.M. TO 9:56 P.M. The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing were duly noted. Mr. Torrison was present. Gaffron reviewed the major issues involved with Mr. Torrison's request for a side setback variance to construct a tennis court (see Michael Gaffron's memo dated August 15, 1990). Gaffron said, "I did hear from the neighbor to the east. Their feeling was that the further the tennis court is located from their property line, the better. Mr. Torrison had discussed the - 20 - ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD AUGUST 20, 1990 ZONING FILE #1577-TORRISON CONTINUED possibility of a lot line rearrangement with the neighbor to the north. However- it was determined that the neighbor to the north would not maintain a minimum of two acres." Bellows asked whether the neighbors to the north had requested screening. Gaffron replied, "No, they did not make any specific requests." He stated that staff is concerned about drainage. He said, "We need to be sure that drainage flows downhill, rather than across to the neighboring property to the east." Mr Torrison said. "The tennis court will be clay/crushed stone which drains straight through. Drainage should not be an issue. Moving the tennis court closer to the north lot line will provide a better orientation because of the topography. I would prefer to be 5' from the north lot line, but I can live with lO . Every foot that we come south, I have to cut down 100 s.f. of crees." Bellows asked Gaffron for his opinion regarding the existing drainage and utility easement. Gaffron replied, "In my opinion, if we are going to encroach into the easement, we should notify the utility companies that may v/ish to use the easement. I agree with the Public l7orks Director regarding encroachment into the easement. However, I do not believe that a hold harmless agreement is necessary." Rowlette asked whether there will be lights for the tennis court. Mr. Torrison replied, "No, there will be no lights." Gaffron asked Mr. Torrison if the neighbor to the north objected to the tennis court location in relation to his property line. Mr. Torrison replied, "The neighbor to the north will see less of the end of the tennis court the further north it is located." Johnson said, "I am concerned about the tennis court location relative to the property lines. Mr. Torrison has 3.2 acres." Mr. Torrison replied, "That is the only location on the lot that is suitable for building the tennis court. Placing the court anywhere else would require more tree removal and would not provide the right orientation." - 21 - ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD AUGUST 20, 1990 ZONING FILE #1577-TORRISON CONTINUED Bellows said. "I am concerned about the neighbors. However, I believe that the topography and trees present a hardship for locating the tennis court elsewhere. The Planning Commission may wish to recommend restrictions, such as no lighting. Ue should also consider screening for the benefit of the neighbors on the north and east." Johnson asked Gaffron to explain his notation regarding the topography being slightly off. Gaffron replied, "Having walked the property, my feeling was that there was more flat area than the topographical map shows." There were no other comments from the public than those noted by staff and the Public Hearing was closed. It was moved by Hanson, seconded by Bellows, to recommend approval of application #1577, for a side setback variance to construct a tennis court. The tennis court shall not encroach more than 10' toward the north property line and lighting is not allowed. The hardship is the topography and the necessary north/south orientation. Motion, Ayes-3, Johnson and Rowlette, Nay. Motion carried. Johnson believed that the 30’ setback could be met and that a 10' fence around the court has a major visual impact. Rowlette was concerned about the need for screening for the neighbors. Bellows suggested that the Planning Commission include a recommendation to Council to direct staff to work with Mr. Torrison upon con.pletion of the tennis court to assure that adequate screening is orovided. #1578 AL AND LIBBIE HOPWOOD 1205 LAKEVIEW AVENUE AFTER-THE-FACT VARIANCES PUBLIC HEARING 10:00 P.M. TO 10:02 P.M. The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing were duly noted. Mr. and Mrs. Hopwood were present. Gaffron reviewed the information presented in his memo dated August 17, 1990. Hanson said, "In my opinion, the orientation of the house presents a hardship. This is a corner lot with a non-standard orientation." Bellows asked whether the applicants intend to continue to use the tuck-under garage. Mr. Hopwood replied. "No, we intend to convert the garage into a bedroom." - 22 - I ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD AUGUST 20, 1990 ZONING FILE #1578-HOPWOOD CONTINUED Bellows advised the Hopwoods to consult v/ith City staff prior to the remodeling because of the need for bedroom windov/s to be a certain size for egress. Bellows added that the lattice board, in her opinion, is an improvement. There were no public comments pertaining to this application, and the Public Hearing was closed. It was moved by Hanson, seconded by Moos, to recommend approval of the front and side street setback variances to construct a deck/walkway. The hardship is the unusual orientation of the house on the lot. Motion, Ayes-5 Nays~0. Motion carried. #1579 GARRY EVERSON 4755 NORTH SHORE DRIVE AFTER-THE-FACT VARIANCES PUBLIC HEARING 10:05 P.H. TO 10:25 P.M. The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing v/ere duly noted. Mr. and Mrs. Everson were present for this Public Hearing. Gaffron provided a summary of the issues involved with the application (see Michael Gaffron's memo dated August 17, 1990). Gaffron noted that there is a new six to seven foot fence on the property that should be a minimum of ten feet from the lot line. Gaffron compared certain aspects of this property to Mr. and Mrs. Krahl's property. He said, "There are steep slopes that may create the n*^ed to retain areas of rock and plastic to assist with drainage." Hanson said, "I looked at the property first thinking that portions of the driveway could be removed to reduce hardcover. However, that is not possible because the driveway is shared." Mr. Everson referred to one of the rock gardens on the property. He said, "That garden was there when I purchased the property. If there is plastic beneath the rock, it is not working. There are heavy weeds growing in there and I have no standing water." Mrs. Everson said, "The fence that Mike referred to as new has been there for twenty years. Also, the portion of fencing that encroaches onto the Krahl's property is there for garbage cans. Since the deck has been constructed, there has not been as much dirt accumulating on the driveway. The curb installed by Hennepin County helped that situation somewhat, and the deck has helped further." Mr. Everson said, "There was always a deck in that location. - 23 - ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD AUGUST 20, 1990 ZONING FILE #1579-EVERSON CONTINUED The initial intent v;as to replace the decking only. As I began removing the decking I saw that the super structure and the posts were also rotted." Mrs. Everson added. "My high heels went through the existing planking." Bellows asked the applicants what purpose the trench that has recently been dug is to serve. Mr. Everson replied. "The trench was dug for the retaining wall I am constructing to keep the dirt from coming in toward the house. Only planking was used to retain the dirt wall." Hanson stated that it would be appropriate for the Eversons to remove enough hardcover to keep the percent that existed with the old deck. He asked the Eversons if they have a written acknowledgment from their neighbors regarding the garbage can structure. Mrs. Everson replied, "We don't have anything at this time, but we can obtain a letter." Bellows noted that the Eversons were first cited for working without a permit in 1980. She asked what took them so long to submit an application. She said. "We have the chronological data from the staff, but would like your explanation." Mrs. Everson said, "The tickets were issued in the wrong name. We went to Ridgedale Courthouse three times to try to clear that up. Each time we were told there v/as nothing on record. v;e learned later that the ticket was in the name of Iverson, rather than Everson." Gaffron said, "It takes the Courts and City Attorneys some time to get matters moving. \Jh-en a fine is issued, it doesn't mean anything in relation to getting the problem corrected. Shortly after we notified the Ever-ons, they did apply for a building permit. We determined that a survey was needed. When the survey finally came in, it was determined that a variance application was needed." Mrs. Everson stated that she had kept a file and recorded all of the events that occurred. Mr. Everson stated that they did not intentionally drag the process out. There were no comments from the public and the Public Hearing was closed. 24 - ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD AUGUST 20, 1990 ZONING FILE #1579-EVERSON CONTINUED It was moved by Bellows, seconded by Hanson, to recommend denial of the after-the-fact variances for the deck and require that the portion of the deck extending over the property line be removed in its entirety, as well as removing other portions of the deck in order to recreate the deck that previously existed. Motion, Ayes-4, Rowlette, Nay. Motion carried. Rowlette stated that she agreed to removal of the deck portion extending beyond the property line. She disagreed with the removal of additional deck portions. #1580 PATTY PLANT 2245 WATERTOV/N ROAD VARIANCE PUBLIC HEARING 10:25 P.M. TO 10:27 P.M. The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing were duly noted. Mabusth stated that Mrs. Plant is elderly and may not be able to attend this meeting. She said, "The application is straight forward, there should be no problem acting without the applicant's presence." Mabusth reviewed Mrs. Plant’s application (see Jeanne Mabusth's memo dated August 15, 1990). She noted that ..ne had not received any negative comments from neighboring property owners. There ware no comments from the public regarding this application and the Public Hearing was closed. It was moved by Bellows, seconded by Moos- to recommend approval of the front street setback variance required for a 1/2 bath and closet addition. The hardship is the need for Mrs. Plant to have a closet and bathroom on the main level of her home. Motion, Ayes-5, Nays-0. Motion carried. #1581 ROBERT KOEHNEN 537 HANLON AVENUE VARIANCE PUBLIC HEARING 10:27 P.M. TO 10:30 P.M. The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing v/ere duly noted. Mr. and Mrs. Koehnen v/ere present. Gaffron provided a brief summary of his memo dated August 14. 1990. Mr. Koehnen stated that they failed to shov/ a deck on their building plans. He said, "However, we did show doors leading from the house with an 8' drop to the ground. We assumed that it - 25 - ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD AUGUST 20, 1990 ZONING FILE #1581-KOEHNEN CONTINUED would be obvious that something would have to be constructed there." Bellows asked whether it would be possible for the applicants to reduce the size of the proposed structure by 70 s.f. and still achieve the same result. Mrs. Koehnen stated that they have cut back the project considerably. She said, "The house windows crank open over the deck and we need the extra area to compensate." Rowlette noted that there is an existing patio in the back yard that appears to serve no purpose. Gaffron explained that removal of the patio would not help in this case because lot coverage was being considered, rather than hardcover. Hanson stated that he is content with the 15.35%. Bellows and Rowlette concurred. There were no comments from the public application and the Public Hearing was closed. regarding this It was moved by Bellows, seconded by Moos, to recommend approval of the front setback and lot coverage variances needed to construct an attached deck and gazebo. The hardship is the placement of the existing house on the lot and that the variance is consistent with other construction in the neighborhcou. Motion, Ayes-5, Nays-0. Motion carried. S1582 CAROL BURGESS 2800 PHEASANT ROAD VARIANCES PUBLIC HEARING 10:32 P.M. TO 10:35 P.M. ^ The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate Oj. Mailing wer duly noted. Ms. Burgess was present. 1990). U a Buraess if she would be willing to renove Hardc'ert: Keep^ hardcover at its present level. - 26 - ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD AUGUST 20, 1990 ZONING FILE #1582-BURGESS CONTINUED Bellows asked Gaffron for the square footage of the landscaping areas. Gaffron replied, "The area is approximately 114 s.f." Ms. Burgess commented, "There is only 13% hardcover on the entire lot is you do not consider the setbacks. If the lagoon did not exist, there would only be 19% in the 75-250' zone. I did have a circle driveway which I removed seven years ago." Bellows said, "For sake of consistency, the Planning Commission should recommend removal of hardcover to keep the percent the same." There v/ere no comments from the public regarding this application and the Public Hearing was closed. It was moved by Bellows, seconded by Hanson, to recommend approval of the hardcover and average lakeshore setback variances, contingent on the applicant working with staff to have no net increase in hardcover. Motion, Ayes-5, Nays-0. Motion carried. #1558 RICHARD ZUCKMAN 3995 NORTH SHORE DRIVE SKETCH PLAN OF PRD/SUBDIVISION Mr. Zuckman v/as present. Mabusth displayed the sketch plans and explained Mr. Zuckman's proposal (see Jeanne Mabusth's memo dated August 17, 1990). She stated that the proposed density ratio per unit will be .33 rather than .5. Bellows asked, "Are you providing parking for 12 cars?" Mr. Zuckman replied, "I believe there are nine parking spots outside and four garage stalls per unit. The two center units have a two car garage, plus a two car garage further out." Bellows said, "I question the need for so many parking spaces for this development. It is not sometliing that the City requires. I do not want to see overflow parking on County Road 19, but I question whether this is excessive. I also believe that the structure can be located out of the 0-75' setback zone." Mr. Zuckman agreed that *5tructure can be moved back. He said, "I plan on living in structure and I have several cars." Bellows said, "The excessive pavement gives the structure more of a commercial appearance than we would like to see in this - 27 - ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD AUGUST 20, 1990 ZONING FILE 11558-ZUCKMAN CONTINUED area.'' Mr. Zuckman said, "We designed the structure in ■’ horseshoe to allow the parking areas to be hidden behind. The structure will also appear as one, large single family unit." Bellows said, "Conceptually, I have no problem with this. I would like to see the property developed other than what exists. I would just like to see the development be more consistent with the notion of a residential approach. I would suggest that parking be reduced." Mr. Zuckman said, "The idea behind the four-stall garages was to provide storage area for boats and water toys." Hanson concurred with Bellows. He said, "I v^ould prefer to see a little less garage structure and pavement areas." Johnson asked Mr. Zuckman whether he has approached the LMCD rt^qarding boat slips. He said, "I believe the LMCD was considering a moratorium for multiple docks." Mabusth said, "I am not aware of that. There has been a joint use dock license for seven slips for this property. The applicant has sufficient lineal footage to support three slips. If the City recommends the density‘proposed, Mr. Zuckman will ask for four slips." Mabusth suggested that the Planning Commission address the issues listed in her memo. Bellows asked the Planning Commission whether they felt a four unit attached dwelling is appropriate. Moos asked for the square footage of each unit. Mr. Zuckman replied, "The typical living space, without the garage is approximately 2,500 s.f." Bellows asked if the units will have three bedrooms. Mr. Zuckman replied, "Yes." Bellows asked the Planning Commission about the density variance for .33 acres per unit. Mabusth noted that it would be necessary to grant such a variance for three units. Rowlette said, "I would prefer o see single family housing in this location. What Mr. Zuckman ‘ proposing is too much. - 28 - ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD AUGUST 20, 1990 ZONING FILE #1558-ZUCKMAN CONTINUED This is definitely an improvement." Johnson said, "I would be interested to see what the public has to say about this proposal. I believe that something like this would do very well in this location." Bellows id, "I would like to see the intensity of this developme-’t r.e' rease. I do not object to the proposal for four units, but H - --tion whether reducing the size of the units would be an appropriate trade-off." Rowlette stated that she would be more receptive to the proposal if the units were scaled dov/n. Hanson said, "I agree th/vt the units need to be scaled down. I am impressed with the fac* ‘^•*t Mr. Zuckman intends to reside on the property." Mabusth stated that ir will be necessary to grant a hardcover variance in the 75-250' setback area for this development. She noted that there will be no hardcover in the 0- 75' setback area and major reductions within the 250-500' area. Bellows said, "I believe we are willing to look at hardcover from an overall aspect, rather than concentrating on each setback area." Mr. Zuckman said, "Access to the property will add quite a bit of hardcover. I want the access point to be as far from the curve as possible." Mabusth stated that the County will have tc review the access. As a .ast directive, the Planning Commission reminded Mr. Zuckman that he will need to wot.; with the LMCD regarding boat slips. #1583 MARCO FRANKLIN BALDUR PARK ROAD SKETCH PLAN OF PRD/SUBDIVISION Marco Franklin was present for this review. Mabusth provided the Planning Cc..jnission with a summary of the major issues involved with this application (see Jeanne Mabusth's memo dated August 16, 1990). Mabusth said, "There is an existing house on Baldur Park. The individual residing in that house has informed the City that his property is excluded from this subdivision. Also, with respect t hardcover, the need for an access road v/ill require hardccvv..r within the 0-75' setback area, no matter what the final approved density allowed." - 29 - ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD AUGUST 20, 1990 ZONING FILE #1583-FRANKLIN CONTINUED Bellows said, "Before we proceed much further with this, we need to address the road issue." Mabusth said. "The City would have to proceed with condemnation. We would first ask im,. . Franklin to contact the existing three property owners on Baldur Park Road. If they indicate that they will not give Mr. Franklin an easement, the City will have to condemn." Mr. Franklin said, "There are currently power lines out on Baldur Park. I know that there is a problem with the septic system for Lot 30. The system is heaved out of the ground on one sice. I have gone to great lengths to scale down my proposal. We have designed a catch basin and gone so far as to consider the direct runoff from roof tops. We intend to provide a cul-de-sac. At this tiiuc, it would be impossible for a fire truck or snow plow to turn around at the end of the point." Hanson asked for the radius of the cul-de-sac. Mabusth replied that it must be at least 40 feet paved and 50 feet for right-of-way. Hanson said, "I am impressed with this proposal, like the flood plain issue addre‘=sed." I v/ould Mabusth said, "This application v;ould be reviewed by other agencies. It would be necessary to provide compensatory filling for any excavation work do'n below the 931.5 elevation. Mr. Franklin is proposing to 1 ..I below the 931.5 elevation, but the..e will be no structures located v/ithin the flood plain." Mr. Franklin's associate said, "The basements of these units will be two feet above flood level." Mabusth stated that hardcover is the main issue. She said, "V7hen the Planning Con'mission reviewed Mr. Franklin's previous proposal, you ind:.:*ited that you would not grant any variances within the 75-250' setback area. This property is very unique with many hardr.hip:^. There is a very small building envelope and variances will be ne :csr,ary. " Johnson asked Mr. Franklin if ne had attempted to acquire Lot 30? Mr. Franklin replied, "I have spoken to him several times. Each time I talk to him the price of his property increases." Johnson asked whether there would be a commons area owned by a homeowner's association. - 30 - OROi^O PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD AUGUST 20, 1990 ZONING FILE #1583-FRANKLIN CONTINUED Mr. Franklin replied, "I would prefer to have the area privately owned." With respect to the road, Mabusth asked, "Would the Planning Commission prefer to see this private drive as an outlot within an outlot?" Hanson stated that he would prefer to see a public road, rather than private. Mabusth stated that the City will only condemn up to the property boundary and that the cul-de-sac would be public. Bellows said, "There will be four units on this private road. Will it be necessary to have the road 24' wide?" Mabusth replied, "That has not been determined yet. V7e can estimate that the road will be 22' to 24' wide with an 80' diameter cul-de-sac. V.’e will need an opinion from the City Engineer." Bellows said, "I am impressed also with this proposal. It has come a long way. Ho\/ever, I am still concerned about Baldur Park Road, which is sub-standard and unsafe. I have a hard time supporting any intensification unless the City takes responsibility for the road. I feel that the road issue presents an unfair circumstance for Mr. Franklin." Mabusth said, "I believe that if a formal proposal for development is presented to the City, it will have to take a serious look at the road." Johnson asked ab Jt meeting setbacks and establishing lot lines. Mr^busth replied, "Bui'v.lna pads will be created and they will be called lots. Ther • wiv1 be built-in setbacks and defined lots for each house. Everything around the pad will be an open space outlot. Your consensus is that you want the road that leads from the cul-de-sac to also be defined as an outlot." Bellows said, "The sites v/ould be sold as pre-constructed units." Mabusth said, "That is correct. The individual will buy what is defined as a lot, a footprint, and a share of the open space commons area." Bellows said, "Whether the individual purchases the footprint prior to or after construction, it is a unit he buys. It is not his option to design a building for that lot." - 31 - ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD AUGUST 20, 1990 ZONING FILE #1583“FRANKLIN CONTINUED Mabusth said, "That is correct, designed within that pad." it will have to all be Johnson asked Mr. Franklin whether he was aware of that condition. Mr. Franklin replied, "Two of these will have to be pre-sold before I begin construction." Johnson asked individual docks. whether there will be a joint dock or *I would prefer to have private.i^r. Franklin replied, individual docks." Bellows asked Mr. Franklin if he had received adequate direction. Mr. Franklin stated that yes, he had sufficient direction. He noted that there will be minimal disturbance of the existing trees and that they will maintain the wilderness, cat-tail area around the peninsula. He said, "That should alleviate the possibility of anyone using chemicals to control that area." Mabusth informed Mr. Franklin that the center island in the cul-de-sac will have to be removed. COMMENTS FROM PLANNING COMMISSION REP RE: COUNCIL MEETING OF AUGUST 13, 1990 Bellows said, "The Council agreed with all of our recommendations. In July there were several issues where our recommendation was over-turned. I do not feel that Council has to agree with us all the time. At the August meeting, it v/as always made known to the public what the Planning Commission vote had been. I thought that was great." Mabusth asked the Planning Commission to provide a list of the specific applications that were over-turned by Council. Bellows said, "Mr. Stubbs' application, the Peterson application, and the McCourtney application." APPROVAL OF MINUTES-JULY 16, 1990 PLANNING COMMISSIOil MEETING A motion was made by Bellows, seconded by Johnson, to approve the minutes of the July 16, 1990 Planning Commission meeting. Motion, Ayes-5, Nays-0. Motion carried. PLANNING COMMISSION REPRESENTATIVE It v/as agreed that Sara Moos would attend the September 10, 1990 Council meeting as a Planning Commission Representative. - 32 - ORONO PLANNING COtUllSSION MEETING HELD AUGUS'^ 20, 1990 AOJOUR»l£liT A motion was made by Bellows, seconded by Hoos to adjourn the meeting. Motion, Ayes-5, Nays-0. Motion carried and at 11:27 p.m. the meeting adjourned. - 33 - TOs All City Employees FROI: The Entertainment Committee DATS: August 31, 1990 Subject: Retirement Party for John Sass Light Equipment Operator John Sass will be retiring on September 19, 1990. There will be a get together at Billy's Light House (downstairs) right after work on September 19, 1990. It will be a cash bar and menu. LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT 473-7033L.M.C.D. MEETING SCHEDULE September 1990 iSQo Monday Labor Day Holiday, DICD office closeo Saturday Water Structures & Environment Committee 7i30 a.m. Shorewood City Hall 5755 Country Club Road Monday Lake Use Committee 4:30 p.m. Shorewood City Hall 5755 Country Club Road Thursday ■■ ■ V Wednesday Eurasian Water Milfoil Task Force 8:30 a.m. Freshwater Voundation Navarre LMCD Board of Directors' Regular Meeting 7:30 p *3. Tonka Bay City Hall 8-30-90 LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT WATER STRUCTURES & ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE AGENDA 7:30 a.m., Saturday, September 8, 1990 Shorewood City Hall 5755 Country Club Road 1. Commercial Marina code amendment to clarify the code definition of a consnercial marina. 2. Chapman Place Marina operators agreement and an£.lysis of 1990 changes for compIl.‘*nce with license order per LeFevere correspondence of 7/16/90. (Licensee Rooert Cuthill requested to meet with committee to review the changes and their effect on the marina's commercial operation.) 3. Amenity study comparison with proposed code amendment as it would have affected special density allowances for licenses granted in the past three years. 4. Lake Virginia control strucutre and staff analysis of options under consideration, LMCD response to MN DNR pending committee and Board recom mendation . 5. Interagency Agreement on Dredging status, following agency review of 7/23/90, pending a MN DNR report expected the week of September 4. “ % * 6. Wayzata Yacht Club communication on Site 2. 7. Staff report. Administrative Technician Rachel Thibault: a. Multiple dock inspection progress b. Complaints processed and resolved 8. Additional business recommended by the committee. ENVIRONMENT, Chair Reese 1. Eurasian water milfoil weed harvest progress report through 8/24/90 with update through 9/7 to be provided at the meeting. 2. Preliminary financial analysis through 8/31. 3. Projection for season close, equipment maintenance and storage. 4. Forecast for 1991 preliminary projections. 5. Building height analysis of new bank building in Wayzata as governed by the city's shoreland building-height regulations. 6. Additional business suggested by the committee. 8-30-90 Race Schedules LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT 473-7033 events schedule September 1990 Sep 1 Sat 10:00 am Lower Lake Burton Cup 10:30 am Lower Lake Burton Cup 2:00 pm Upper Lake:Burton Cup/Lower Sep 2 Sun 10:00 am Lower Lake 10:30 am Upper Lake 1:30 pm Lower Lake Sep 3 Mon 10:00 am Lower Lake 10:30 am Upper Lake Sep 4 Tues 6:00 pm Lower Lake Sep 7 Frl 10:00 am Lower Lake Catamaran 10,000 1:00 pm tl1 3:00 pm t11 Sep 8 Sat 10:00 am Lower Lake Catamaran 10,000 : 1:00 pm 111 2:00 pm Upper Lake 10,000 :•. •3:00 pm Lower Lake Catamaran Sep 9 Sun 10:00 am Lower Lake Catamaran 10,000 : 10:30 am Upper Lake 1:30 pm Lower Lake Sep 15 Sat 10:00 am Lower Lake 2:00 pm Upper Lake 2:00 pm Lower Lake Fall Color Regatt. Sep 16 Sun 9:30 am Lower Lake Shoot Out Regatta 10:30 am Upp-Lake 11:30 am Lower Lake Shoot Out Regatta 1:30 pm M It II II If Sep 22 Sat 10:00 am Lower Lake 2:00 pm Upper Lake and Lower Lake Sep 23 Sun 10:00 am Lower Lake 10:30 am Upper Lake Sep 29 Sat 10:00 am Lower Lake 2:00 pm Upper Lake Sep 30 Sun 11:00 am Lower Lake 8-29-90 ! NEWSLETTER ORONO INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 278 Nlif- ''Jl f Nc f . 'N'.i I A k F MAPl.f MPPINA MtNNF U )NK A HF Ai H ( .-.Hs H P ' f^>Sr AL BA'* MOAP lONniAKt MINNESOTA SSJS6 ORONO SCHOOL BOARD David McKown. Chairman 479-1692 Don Anderson. Vice Chairman 479-1810 473-1189 478- 6037 479- 2130 475-3197 Lucie Taylor, Treasurer Kitty Crosby, Clerk Jim Franklin. Director John Maresh, Director SEPTEMBER. 1990 ISSUE NO. 1 Supcrnihiidcnt's Notes It is a bittersweet time of the year. Summer has slipped by all too quickly, but there is the usual excitement about the start of a new school year. Back-to-school sales, the Minnesota State Fair, and that certain touch of Fall that creeps into the night air are all certain signs that school is about to begin. A school year is’ much like an essay. Both have an introduction, the body content, and a conclusion. And just as a well writtea introduction is important to an essay, a good start to a new school year is equally important. The beginning is a special time of emphasis. It is the time to encourage our students, to help them set realistic goals, to demonstrate how much we value education and, especially, how much we care for them. A good preparation for the start of the new school year can do much to promote the achievement and happiness we want for our students. It is a rather simple formula that works for most students, i.e., for most people, success breeds success. Success is a motivating factor and the accumulation of successes or achievements promotes a healthy self-concept. While there is excitement about the onset of the school year, it is important that we take advantage of this special time to encourage our students and reinforce their efforts. Best wishes to all of our students - to the nearly two hundred Kindergartners beginning their school careers, to the High School Seniors in the final year for the Qass of 1991 and to all of our 2200 students - may this be the best school year ever. Dr. Thomas B. Mich Superintendent of Schools BUS SCHEDULES WILL BE MAILED TO HOMES BY AUGUST 28TH Child Care Available Beginning the first day of school, September 4th, there wiM be a School Age Child Care Program available for all residents of the Orono School District. The site will be at Orono Community Church, across the street from Schumann Elementary. As soon as the new building is completed, the child care program will be housed there. This program which is being run through Orono Community Education is dedicated to providing a quality based program that meets the needs of working parents, of their children and the community. This is a program that provides a wide range of activities in an environment that encourages and supports families and their growth. through learning, recreation, and experience. The Center is staffed by professionally trained, caring and creative individuals wi»h years of experience in teaching children. The staff/child ratio is 1:12 kindergarten and 1:15 school age. All school age children are invited to enroll. The site will be open at 6:45a.m. and close promptly at 6:(X) p.m. Families may choose the most convenient location. To register for the program contact the Community Education office at 473-4879. SENIOR GRADUATION PARTY Parents of 1991 graduating seniors are requested to attend a planning meeting for the all-night party which will follow the graduation ceremony, June 6, 1991. The meeting will be held Mon., Sept. 17th in the Orono H.S. Cafe, at 7:45pm after homecoming coronation. If you are unable to attend the meeting, but would like to be involved in the planning, please call Jean Dettloff, 473-3525, or Barb Dugan, 479-2849. We need everyone’s help to make this party a success. Guidance at a Glance First Fall Collgye Entrance Test Dates: ACT: 0:L 27,1990 Registration Deadline 9/28/90 SA’n Nov. 3,1990 Registration Deadline 9/28/90 Next TMt Dates: ACT: Decembers 1990 Registration Deadline 11/9/90 SA*n December 1,1990 Registration Deadline 10/26/90 SAT & ACT Test Preparation Orono High School students who plan to take the SAT or the ACT Test have several opportunities to prepare for these tests using resources available at the high school. Test Dates and application deadlines are posted in the giiidanre office. Ample supplies of application packets are available. There are preparation manuals available for use by students. In addition, the high school has software for their micro-computers that help students prepare for taking the SAT and include numerous sample tests. The guidance office also can act as a clearing house to inform students about resources outside of our school district that nught help in preparing for college entrance examinations. There are a number of non-profit as well as profit making organizations that provide resources of this nature. Freshman and New Student Orientation % Ail new students'and incoming ninth graders are invited to an orientation session to be held in the high school 'auditorium Thursday, August 30,1990 at lKX)pm- All new students to the high school will be introduced to faculty and administration and will be given information that will help get the school year off to a positive start. This will include information about classes, how the mod schedule works, discipline policies, location of rooms and offices in the high school, and how to read your fall schedule of classes. Senior Parent Night Parents of senior students are invited to an informational meeting on Thursday, September 20, at 7:00 pm in the high school auditorium- Topics covered will include general information you need in preparing to send your son or daughter off to college or other post secondary institution. Information regarding school selection, various deadlines, resource information, entrant testing, and financial aid will be discussed. High School Counselors 473-5472 CALL WITH YOUR QUESTIONS Ms. Woyteke - all students with last names A-K Mn Wasbotten - all students with last names L*Z Senior College VisitsSeniors should be aware that a pre-visit form needs to be obtained from the Guidance Office and filled out priQ£ to making a college visit during school hours. Failure to complete this form will result in an unexcused absence. College Fair The 1990 Annual National College Fair is scheduled to be held this year at the Minneapolis Convention Center. The dates are Tuesday, September 18, 9:00 - 2:00 pm and 5:30 - 9:30 pm and Wednesday, September 19, 9:00 - 2:00 pm. High school students have an opportunity to visit with representatives and gather literature from over 350 schools located throughout the counter. College Testing and Financial Aid workshops will also be presented. i IPS NOT TOO LATE TO JOIN PARENT COMMUNICATION NETWORK , Over 550 families formed a Parent < Communication Network (PCN) at Orono last year. It is not too late to make your g commitment and be listed with the others in the 1990-91 Student Directory. Parents who would X like to join PCN may still do so, even though the stated deadline was June 30. A signed V permission slip is necessary for your name to be J J ^ indicated in the student directory as a PCN O member. Additional slips are available in tne school offices. Call Julie Palmer 475-3220 for more information. The Orono PCN is an organization of concerned parents designed to foster communication and support parents in their efforts to ensure a healthy environment in V which children can achieve their maximum potential. Each participant is designated in the school-wide Student Directory. Any families who joined PCN last year will again be so indicated in the school directory this year, i whether or not they returned a form this year; JiJ the form they completed last year stated that once you join PCN you do not need to "re-join" \ | f every year. While a "reaffirmation of |ij ]"[ commitment to PCN" for the 1990-1991 school year is recommended, it is not necessary. ScCCCOC^DCCCCCCCCCCC^^ i District Asbestos Activity SummaryI am pleased to inform you that the district has continu^ to respond to the asbestos in schools issue in a cautious and pro-active manner. The District will continue with the ongoing asbestos operations and maintenance program including periodic surveillance to be conducted every six months for the following schools: Orono Primary School Schumann Elementary School Orono Middle School Orono High School With the implementation of the District s Asbestos Management Plan on July 9, 1989 we also conducted asbestos abatement activity in the following buildings: Bldg. Response Actions Response Actions Completed Scheduled -1990-91 OPS Periodic surveillanceRepair of thermal insulation in boiler room and minor repairs throughout building OMS Removal of thermal Periodic Surveillance pipe insulation in tunnels and fan ixxjms, and rep>air of thermal ppe insulation SE Minor repairs to diermal Periodic Surveillance insulation in boiler room Please rest assured that the District's ongoing efforts related to the management and control of asbestos-containing materials is geared angularly toward providing a safe and healthy environment for students, employees, and occupants. If you have any questions, or would likr to .eview the management plara and update materials, please feel free to contact the District’s asbestos program manager, A1 Ho^dns at 473-7313, ext 369. Parent Notice Parents and/or legal guardians are entitled to restrict the rdease of "directory information" on their child. Directory information as defined by School Board policy is: Student's: •Name •Address •Phone number •Date & place of birth • Major field of study •Participation in officially recognized activities and sports •Weight and height of members of athletic teams • E>ates of attendance •Degrees and awards received •The most previous educational agency or institution attended by the student Cont. r^ext column Parents and/or legal guardians who do not want all or part of this information released need to infonn their student's school in writing no later than Septeirdjer 14. In )X)ur letter indicate your child's name and birthdate, your name, address, and phone number and your relationship to the child. Indicate what information you do not want released. Sign the letter. Letters should be addressed to the Principal of your child's school Student Directory In an effort to provide students and parents with a handy reference to other Orono students and parents, the district has published a Student Directory for a number of years. Last year the directory was an all district directory and most everyone found it helpful and useful for addresses and phone numbers of Orono families. In June a permission form was mailed out with the student report cards. We thank you for the number of returns we have received. It's not too lake to get your infoimation to us. According to the School Board policy names, addresses and phone numbers are public information and can be used for a school directory unless you as a parent or guardian inform your child's school that you DO NOT want this information published. Having you return the permission slip is a help for us because we can be sure that information we have is accurate and up to date. The directories should be ready, for pick-up at the individual school open houses thi*« fall Don't miss out! Be sure to get yours. If you have questions or concerns please call Kathy at 476-6920 before &ptember 5th. Learning Disabilities The West Suburban Chapter of Learning Disabilities of Minnesota will be holding a general information meeting on Wednesday, September 12, in the Wayzata Senior High small cafeteria at 730 pm. Featured speaker will be Barb Sorum, Parent Advisor for LDM, who will be presenting "lEP = Informed Effective Parents". Learning Disabilities of Minnesota (formerly MACLD) is an organization of parents and professionals and other interested persons in the state. LDM is affiliated with the Learning Disabilities Association of American (formerly National ACLD). LDM's Mission Statement: To meet the special needs of persons with learning disabilities throughout their lives. This mission is accomplished by creating public awareness and developrrwnt of high quality, comprehensive programs offering information, support, service and systems advocacy for learning disabled persons. For additional information, please call Penny Henderson at 545-5529. Hoard Review 'vr.!'iWMr>fjja:nr.TJ3 Approved the appointn « Bruce as a part-time science teachc. j-.' school for the 1990-91 school year. Approved the appointment of Donald Krubsack as music teacher at the high school for the 1990-91 school year. Approved the appointment of Lynn Middleton- Koller as English teacher at the high school for the 1990-91 school year. Accepted the resignation of John Julsrud, middle school math teacher, effective at the close of the 1989-90 schoc’ >ear. Adopted a resolution regarding the termination of a School District employee. ^giilar Mp<»timr of Mav 29. 1990 Approved the Media Learner Outcomes for the Orono Schools. Adopted a policy regarding recognition for teacher supervision of the Wolfridge activity. Approved the staff development plan presented. Adopted the following prices for the lunch program for 1990-91: primary/elementary $1.40, middle school $1.50, high school $1.65, adults $2.25. Gave final approval to the 1989-90 budget and preliminary/ipproval to the 1990-91 budget. Approved Ae contractual agreement with the Superintendent. LPgulnr MppHng of .Ttinp 11.1990 Approved the appointment of Sarah Dahlgren as social studies teacher at the high school for the 1990-91 school year. Approved the appointment of Maureen Gibbon as English teacher at the high school for the 1990-91 school year. Approved the appointment of J. Darren Wolf as mathematics teacher at the middle school for the 1990-91 school year. Approved the appointment of Pamela Brinkhaus as science teacher at the middle school for the 1990-91 school year. Approved the appointment of Ruth Larson as mathematics teacher at the middle school for the 1990-91 school year. Agreed to participate in Chapter I. Approved the listing of seniors, as presented by Orono High School administration, for graduation. Approved the recommendation as set forth by the Middle School Study Committee. Approved the 1990-91 Community Education Budget as presented. Called for bids on milk and related dairy products for the 1990-91 school year. Approved the Improvement Goals for 1990-91. Approved the contractual agreement with the Assistant to the Superintendent. • Approved the appointment of Mrs. Maijorie Gasch to serve a two year term on the Intermediate District #287 Board of Education as the representative from the Or mo Schools. Snfrifli Mpfftinr f^^i^*^***^ • Accepted the resignation of Shannon Wiseman, speech pathologist at the Orono Primary School, effective at the close of her 1989-90 contract • Approved the principals’ negotiated agreement • Authorized William A1 Fenholt to execute and deliver a lease purchase agreement with JLC Financial, a Division of Jostens Learning Corp., on behalf of the school district. MOMS Meet Orono MOMS will have their September get together on Friday, September 21 from 1:00 - 3:00 p.m. at Trinity Lutheran Church, 2060 County Road 6, Long Lake. MOM’S is an informal, social gathering of District 278 moms. All are welcome, but we especially encourage and invite moms new to the Ore ' School District. Coffee and treats will be served. I ise bring a friend. Call Kathy Wenger at 479-6244 witi. questions. Thank You to Lunds! The Orono School District has received a total of 7 Apple KGS computers from Lunds at a cost of $1500 each. Our hats are off to Lunds for their generosity. Our hats are also off to all of you who faithfully >ur Lund’s receipts and sent the iij: schools. Thank you for this trei '!( support. Orono Students, Faculty & AdmimstrA •"4 SCHOOL SUPPLIES - SCHUMANN ELEMENTARY SCHOOL 1990 • 1991 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. PLEASE PUT NAMRS OV Af .T. m^MS KINDERCARTEN School bag with name Old socks Tennis Shoes 1 large box of tissues Name on outer clothing GRADE 1 1 piece of oil cloth (18" x 24") 1 small box of tissues Tennis shoes for use Paint shirt - an old shirt with sleeves cut short - name across shoulder 10 No. 2 pencils (only send 2 at a time) Crayons 1 covered plastic container - pint size for clay 1 - 8oz. bottle of white glue School box - dgar box size - plastic if possible 2 pocket folders (NO TRAPPERS) 1 old T-shirt with name in large letters on front & back (for gym & music teacher to learn names) Magic markers - WATER SOLUBLE ONLY - optional 1 old sock (to use as an eraser) 1 glue stick Scissor - pointed 2 sticks of nnodeling clay 1 box 1/2" paper fasteners 1 spiral noteb(X>k - wide rul< Hi 1 ball of knitted worsted yam - any color 1 school bag or back pack Grade 2 Crayons - 24 count Sci^r - pointed 10 No. 2 pencils 1 roll scotch tape 2 soft erasers 3 spiral notebooks-wide ruled (NO TRAPPERS) Box of tissues 1 - 6" ruler 1 glue stick 2 red felt tip pens School box - sturdy one please Tennis shoes for gym use 4 folders with pockets 1 - 4oz. bottle of white glue Old T-shirt w'? --tc in large letters on front & back for^.! ‘ 1 button-!'' .fve shirt with name on back, for art 1 set markers - iR SOLUBLE ONLY Simple hand held calculator with four functions 2 old clean white socks Grade 3 10 No. 2 pwndls 1 red pendl, 1 blue pen Soft erasers 3 ringed wide-lined paper 5 pocket folders Teimis shoes for gym use Paint shurt with name written aa ss back shoulder Plastic zipper pocket for pen & pencils 1 - 4oz bottle of white glue Crayons - 24 count Sciswr - pointed 1 spiral iU)tebook for Journal Writing Colored pendb Magic markers - WATER SOLUBLE ONLY - optional Old T-shirt with name in large letters on front &: back (for gym & music teacher to learn names) 1 ruler NO TRAPPERS OR RINGED NOTEBOOKS (These are too large to keep in desks or lockers' GRADE 4 3-ring birder with wide lined paper 5 folders with pockets &c 3 hole punched 12 No. 2 pendls labeled with your name La»ge box of tissue 12 colored pendls/markers Tennis shoes for gym use only Erasers (not art gum) 4 oz. bottle of glue Paint shirt with ra» ,* across shoulders 12 inch ruler (incl* centimeter) 3 Spiral rotebool ’Atide lined 3-ring zippered p .1 ca. ? Old T-shirt with 1 ..e in large letters on front & back (for gym) Please do not bring: narrow ruled paper, trapper keeper, tablet, permanent markers or school box. UNGRADED Name on each individual item Large durable plastic school box 2 p^et folders to carry papers 10 No. 2 pencils in Sept, k January 1 large box of tissues for classroom use 1 - 4oz. bottle of white glue Erasers Tennis shoes for gym use Crayons Markere - WATER SOLUBLE ONLY - Sept, k Jan. V>^de-lined spiral notebook - CR. 1 after Winter Break 2 wide-lined spiral notebooks - GR 2 3 wide-lined spiral notebooks - GR 3 1 red felt tip pen Sdssor - pointed 2old socks-GRl&2 Art shirt with name across back shoulder in marker Old T-shirt with name in large letters on front k back ( for gym k music) 1 three subject notebook - GR 3 for Health, SdeiKre k Social Studies Please check %Wth your child *nid-year about their supplies. Activity Cnlcttilijr 8/27-8/31 All teacher workshop 9/4 Classes begin 9/10 School Bofl^ meeting................................."/:00pm 9/11 Primary Election 9/15 ECFE Super Saturday at C?S..................10:00am 9/18 Orono Basketball Boosters Mtg. HS Cafe..8:00pm 9/19 Continuing Ed. Mtg, Rm 106 HS................3:20pm 9/24 School Board meeting..................................7:00pm 9/26 Orono Community Bloodmobile at SE .....2-30Dm 9/28 Yom Kippur 9/30 Rosh Hashanah FT.RMFNTARY AmVTTTFS 8/28 Elem. PTA Bd. Mtg. SE Library.................7;15pm 8/31 Kindergarten Visitation Day School Age Child Care Open House 9/6 Wolf Ridge Parent Orientation at SE........7:00pm 9/17 SE Know Your School Night ......................7:00pm 9/18 Girl Scout Recruitment Night SE & OP Sept BD Party 9/20 OPS Know Your School Night.....................7:00 jm 9/22 ECFE Kid’s Clothing Sale at SE................9:00am 9/26 SE & OP Camera Art Day Mmm.R jgrwnr^T, AnrvTTTFS 9/13 MS Back to School Night............................7:15pm 9/18 MS Camera Art Day HIGH SCHOOf. AmVTTTRS 9/1 Boys Soccer - fiemi^ji.................................10:00ara 9/4 Volleyball - Elk River ....................................7:30pm Boys Soccer at Breck ...................................7:00pm Girls Soccer at St. Bernards.......................4:00pm Girls Tennis at Mahtomedi..........................4:00pm 9/6 Volleyball at Lester Prairie..........................7:30pm Boys Soccer - Blake......................................7:00pm Girls Soccer at Blake....................................4:00pm Girls Tennis - host Breck..............................4:00pm Cross Country - Monticello .......................4:00pm 9/7 Football - host Brooklyn Center.................7:30pm 9/8 Cross Country at Mound Boys Soccer at Minnehaha.......................11:00am Girls Soccer at Holy Angels........................1 %m Girls Tennis at Breck................................. m 9/10 Volleyball - Minnehaha.................................... 9/11 Boys Soccer at Mahtomedi..........................a:00pm Girls Soccer at Irondale...............................4:0<)pm Girls Tennis at Minnehaha Academy.........4:00pm 9/13 Volleyball at St Bernards...........................7.30pm Cross Country at Como Boys Soccer - Chaska............................... 7:00pm Girls Soccer at Minnehaha.........................4:00pm Girls Tennis - DeLaSalle.............................4:00pm 9/14 Football at Farmington..............................7:30pm 9/15 Volleyball at Bloomington..........................7:30pm Boys Soccer at St. Johns '^••«mament Girls Soccer - Mound..................................1:00 pm 9/17 Boys Soccer - DeLaSalle..............................7:C0pm Girls Soccer - Mahtomedi............................4;00pm 6 9/17 Homecoming Week Homecoming Coronation in Gym................7:00pm Senior Graduation Party Mtg. HS Cafe....7:45um 9/18 HS College Fair Volleyball - Mahtomedi................................7:30pm Boys Soccer at St. Agnes..............................4:00pm Girls Soccer at Breck.....................................7:00pm Girls Tennis - Cross Over Match................4:00pm 9/19 HS College Fair 9/20 Sr. Parent Collie Night in Aud..................7:00pm Cross Country at Lakeville ..........................4:00pm 9/21 Football - St Anthony..................................7:30pm Boys Soccer at Fargo/Moorhead Homecoming Dance 9/22 Volleyball at St Agnes...............................12:30pm Girls Soccer - St. Bernards.........................11:00am Girls Tetmis - Orono Invitational ...............9:00am 9/24 HS Back to School Night..............................7:00pm 9/25 Volleyball - St. Anthony...............................7:30pm Boys Soccer - Delano....................................7:00pm Girls Soccer - Blake......................................4:00pm Girls Tennis - Tri Metro Conf......................9:00am 9/26 Girls Tennis - Tri Metro Conf.......................3:00pm 9/27 Football - St Bernards.................................7:30pm Cross Country - Shakopee Invitational Boys Soccer at St Bernards.........................7:00pm Girls Soccer at Wayzata...............................4:00pm 9/29 Boys Soccer - Mound.....................................7:00pm B^'^odmobile The Orono Comr . blood Donor Club will have a bloodmobile at Schumann Elementary on Wed. Sept 26,1990. The time schedule will be 2:30pm to 7:00pm. Blood is voluntarily donated by healthy individuals. Every blood bank must carefully check all prospective donors to protect both the person who donated blood and the patient who receives it Dot.ors are carefully screened to be sure they are in good health. Prior to donation each volunteer donor must answer questions about his or her health history. These questions are designed to identify and eliminate prospective donors who may be at great risk of transmitting infectious diseases. Blood is collected by a sterile method into disposable bags and is carefully stored before use. The basic requirements ^or donating blood are: • You must be in good health • You must be between the ages of 17 and 75 • You must eat a good meal prior to your blood donation • You must weigh at least 110 lbs. If you are interest^ in being a member of the Orono Community Blood Donor Club please cal! JoAnn Ree at 473-5472 Ext. 227. Please consider donating blood at the above place and time. If there are any medical questions please contact your doctor or the Memorial Blood Center of Minneapolis at 871-3300. School Lunch Prices 1990-1991 The following schedule of lunch prices has been approved by the School Board for the 1990-1991 school year. Grades 1-4.............................................$14.(X) Grades 5-8............................................415.00 Grades 9 12...........................................416.50 Adults..................................................42250 Student Mill,. hocolate & white............$.25 Malts .........................................................$35 Reduced price tKk?*s (all grades) $.40 Kinder-.nrtcn - mi'k and/or juice & snack $20 year or SIC a s emester Because of; .creased costs, it is no longer possible to give a price break for 5 or 10 meal tickets over the single ticket. A so a second lunch purchased by a student is at $.20 extra cost, the same as last year, because we do not receive the State and federal a'linbursement for the second lunch. At Orono Primary and fkrhumann Elcm. all students are served the type A lunch cafeteria style. At the Middle School additional offer'.igs will ii'clude hamburgers, malts, sandwich/soup alfcn>. •. , ..nd a limited ala carte selection. The H.S. c.i.c’ctm wi!i have a new salad bar area. There will also be increased nutritional ala carte items such as cold sandwiches, nachos cr pretzels with cheese and a fruit juice di ponser. The type A lunch will offer a more varied selection of entree items. Ala carte items will be priced to encourage students to select the full nutritional components of the type A meal. A special invitation is extended to senior citizens 'o participate in the lunch program at any time. If there j t to be more than six in a group, a reservation should made in .advance/Please call either Gertie Corpe, K Service Director (473-7513 Ext. 210) or the head cook at the s'hool you wi«ih to % .iit. 1990-1991 Free or V jced Price Meals Th { -! ,io chooi L’istr • I as announced its Policy for Fixt ind Reduced Price . vils for children unable to pav the full price of meals served under the National School Liir.ch Program. The following hous‘ *^oId size and U ^ determining eligibility: Household size 1 2 3 4 s J .ace * Price Mealj ' '^m."old c.'ze 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Ye^irly Monthly Weekly $681 $157 913 211 13.7:-1,144 264 16511 1576 318 •9,292 1,608 371 ,074 1540 425 ^4,856 2,072 478 27,638 2504 532 1 household member add: +2,782 +232 +54 Yearly Morj^+’v Weekly $11,618 $9fyy $224 15577 U99 300 19536 1,628 376 23,495 1,958 452 27,454 2588 528 31,4U 2,618 605 35,372 2,948 681 39,331 3578 757 For each additional household member add; +3,959 +3')0 +77 Children from households that meet federal guidelines arc eligible ior free or reduced price meals. App'-Vaiion forms are attached. To apply for free o reduc. a price benefits, households must complete the irolication as soon as possible, sign it, and return it to the idpals office in each school marked: ATTENTION .riE CORPE. Households should answer all applicable questions on the form. An application which docs not contain all the required information cannot be processed and approved by the school. The required information is: mOD STAMP/AFPC HOUSEHOLDS: If a household currently receives Food Stamps or "Aid to Families with Dependent Children" (AFDC) for their child, they need only to list » .e child's name and Food Stamp or AFDC case number, and sign the application. ALL OTHER HOUSEHOLDS: If a household's income is at or below the level shown on the income scale, children are eligible for either free or reduced price meals. Households must provide the following information: 1) the names of all household members; 2) the Social Security number of each adult household member ige 21 or older, or the word "none" if an adult does not have a Social Security number; 3) total monthly household injome AND the amount ar ' source of income received by each household member (such as wages, child support, etc.); and 4) the signature of an adult household member, information on applications for free or reduced price • will be used for the purpose of determining ;ty and may be verified by school or other officials lime during the school year. .icomc information is provided and children are approved for meal benefits, households must tell the school when eir household income increases by $50 or more per mouth ($600 per year) or when their house size decrease.'.. If a Food Stamp or AFDC case number was listed, the household must tell the school when they no longer receive Food Stamps or AFDC for their child. Households may apply for b» u.-hts at any time during the school year. If a household is not eligible now but has a decrease in household income, an increase in household size, or a household member become unemployed, the household should fill out an application at that time. In certain cases foster children are eligible for meal benefits regardless of the household income. If a household has foster children living with them and they wish to apply for meal benefits for the household they should follow the directions provided on the application. Under the provisions of the Policy, Mrs. Gertie Corpe will review applications and determine eligibility. Households dissatisfied with the ruling of the official may wish tr. discuss it with the school. Households also have the right to a fair hearing. This can be done by calling or writing the following official: Mr. William Fenholt, 685 Old Crystal Bay Road, Long Lake, MN 55356 (612)473-7313. In the operation of our child feeding programs no child will be discriminated against on the basis of race, color, national oripn, age, sex, or handicap. If you believe you have been discriminated against, write immed'iteiy to the Secretary of Agriculture, Washington, D.C. 20250. M Memorial Blood Center to be in Orono Community on Wednesday, September 26,1990 The Orono Community Bloodmobile will be held at Schumann Elementary on Wednesday, September 26,1990. The time schedule will be 2:30 to 7:00 p.m. This bloodmobile is sponsored by the Memorial Blood Center of Minneapolis. You are eligible to donate if you are 17 years of age and may continue to donate to your 73rd birthday. Prior to donating you will be asked about your general health and medical history by a trained interviewer. Your temperature, blood pressure, pulse and hemoglobin will be determin^ at this time. The purpose of this examination is: To be sure you are not likely to be harmed by giving b' and to be sure your blood is unlikely to harm the patient who receives it If you think that there is -iry risk that your blood couM cause harm to a recipient because of AIDS or any disease carried by the blood, such as hepatitis, malaria or syphilis, please voluntarily defer yourself from donating blood. Remember all information is CONFIDENTIAL, All members who have not donated for 3 years are asked to donate or obtain someone in their place. Should you need more information about donating or becoming a member please call Jo.\nn Ree, Orono School Nurse at 473-5472 Ext. 227. Should you have a specific question regarding your health it is always good to call your doctor or the Memorial Blood Center at 871-3300. If you wish to discontinue, become a new member or update your enrollment, pipag e fill out the .slip below and send it to loAnn Ree, Orono High School, Old Crystal Bay Road, Long Lake, MN 55356. Name Address Phone I wish to become a member of the Orono Conununity Blood Donor Club which entitles my family to transfusion coverage. I v/ish to continue to be a member, what my status? I wish to have my name removed from the Orono Commumty Donor Club. Member list dei .lents (if single, you may list parents). O S O S C H O O685 Old Cr> sial Bay Road Long Lake. Minnesota 55356 (612) 473-7313 Fax (612) 473-1477 Independent School District 278 William A. Fenholt Ass't to the Superintendent Dear Parent or Guardian: Orono Independent School District #278 participates in the NaHonal School Lunch Program. Nutritious meals are served every school day. Students may buy lunch for $1.40 at the Primary and Elementary School, $150 at the Middle School, and $1.65 at the High School. Children from households that meet federal income ^idelines are eligible for free meals or reduced price meals at $.40 for lunch (see reduced price income eligibility guidelines listed below). Household Yeu Month Week Size Month W££k $11,618 $ 969 $224 5 $27,454 $2588 $528 15577 1,299 300 6 31,413 2,618 605 19536 1,628 376 7 35572 2,948 757 23,495 1,958 452 8 39531 3578 757 itional household member add:+3,959 +330 +77 Household 1 2 3 4 To apply for free or reduced price meals, complete ‘he enclosed application as soon as possible. Sign it and return it to the schwi. FOOD STAMP/AFDC HOUSEHOLDS: If you currently receive Food Stamps or "Aid to Families with Dependent Children" lAFDC) for your child or children; you only have to list their name (s) and Food Stamp for AFDC case number (s), and sign the application. ALL OTHER HOUSEHOLDS: If your household income is at or below the level shown on the income scale above, your child is eligible for either free or reduced price meals. To apply for meal benefits, you must provide the following information or your application cannot be approved. • HOUSEHOLD MEMBERS: List the names of everyone who lives in your household. Include parents, grandparents, all children, other relatives and unrelated people who live in your household. • SOQAL SECURITY NUMBERS: List the Social Security number of the parent or guardian who is the primary wage earner or the Social Security number of the adult signing the application or the word "none" if neither have a number. • MONTHLY INCOME: List the total amount of income (before deductions for taxes, Soaal Security, etc.) each person in the household received month and where it was from, such as wages, retirement, or welfare. If other than monthly income is listed, indicate the frequency with which each household member received the income, such as w--kly, every two weeks, bi-monthly, etc. If you have a household member for whom last month’s income was higher Ilf lower than usual, list that person’s expect^ average monthly income. • SIGNATURE: An aduit household member must sign the application. Continued on page 10 Serving . . . Independence-Long Lake-.Maple Plain-Medina-Minnetonka Beach-Orono An Equal Opportunity Employer • VERIFICATION: The information on the application may be verified by the school or other officials at any time during the school year. • REPORTTi>;G CHANGES: If you list income information and your child is approved for meal benefits, you must tell the school when your household income increases by more than $50 or more per month ($600 per year) or when your household size decreases. If you list a Food Stamp or AFDC case number, you must tell the school when you no longer receive Food Stamps or AFDC for your child or cWldren. • POSTER CHILD: Your foster child may be eligible for meal benefits regardless of your household income. If you wish to apply for nteal benefits for a foster child, complete the foster child section of the application following directions given on the back of the application. You mr3t complete a separate application for each foster child. • NONDISCRIMINATION: Children who receive free or reduced price meal benefits are treated the same as children who pay for their meals. In the operation of child feeding programs, no child will be discriminated against because of race, color, national origin, age, sex, or handicap. If you believe you have been discriminated against, write immediately to the Secretary of Agriculture, Washington, D.C. 20250. • FAIR HEARING: If you do not agree with the school's decision regarding your application or the result from verification, you may wish to discuss it with the school. You also have the right to a fair hearing. This can be done by calling or writing .ne following official: William A. Fenholt, 685 Old Crystal Bay Rd. N., Long Lake, MN 55356, 473- 7313. • CONFIDENTIALITY: The iitformation you provide will be treated confidentially and will be used only for eligibility determinations and verification of data. • APPLICATION AT A LATER DATE: You may apply for benefits at any time during the school year. If you are not now eligible but have a decrease in household irtcome, become unemploy^, or have an increase in household size, fill out an application at that time. • HELP WITH APPLICATION: If you have any questions or need help in filling out the application, please contact Gertie Corpe, Food Service Director at 473-7313, Ext. 210. You will be notified when the application is approved or denied. Sincerely, William A. Fenholt Ass t to the Supt. Library Volunteers The libraries at Schumann Elementary and Orono Primary Schools are in need of volunttx'rs for the coming ■<chool year. The only requirement for being a volunteer is willingness. Volunteer duties include checking in books, shelving books, assisting students with library projects, and helping students with Bookmate (sharing) activities. Training is provided during die first week of school. Each volunteer is asked to devote one morning (9:00- 12:30) or one afternoon (12:30-3:30) each week to the project. If you can help, please call Pam Henjum at 479- 3552 or leave a message with the office at 473-7317 for Schumann Elementary. Oono Primary School parents should call Debbie Haney at 471-8291 or Sally Brooks at 475-8214 or leave a message with the office at 479-1530. We welcome and encourage senior citizen participation. Chemical Use Among Athletes An important meeting is being planned by members of the Athletic Department and our school Chemical Dependency Coordinator. We are asking Tom O'Reily of Community Intervention and Dwayne Hackbart from Golden Valley Health Center to come and share their thoughts with us that evening on the rising use of alcohol among the young people of this community. Hopefully we can, through dialogue, coordinate the efforts of school, community, athletes and parents to address the problem. We are asking all coaches to try to coordinate this night with their regular pre-season meeting. Wednesday night, August 22nd at 7M pan. at Orono High School has been set aside for this important activity. Please mark it on your calendar now and plan to join us. Gymnastics/Aerobics Registration North Shore Gymnastics Association of Long Lake will begin registration and testing for Fall I program on Thurs., Aug. 16, 6-8pm, Friday, Aug. 17,l-3pm, Tuesday, Aug. 21, 6^pm and Wednesday, Aug. 22, l-3pm. The Association is a non-profit, parent directed organization. Gasses are offered weekday mornings, afternoons, evenings, and Saturdays. The 1990 Fall I schedule will begin on September 3rd and ran through November 3rd. For more information, and a Fall I registration form and schedule, please contact the NSGA office at 473-5514. Boy Scouts of America Scouting programs are available for today's youth: Tiger Cubs (boys grade 1); Cub Scouts (boys grade 2-5); Boy Scouts (boys in grades 6,7, & 8). The Exploring program offers a careers based program for young men and women age 14-20. For placement in the program nearest you, call BOY SCOUTS at 5454550, ext 42. Substitute Teachers Needed The Orono Schools need substitute teachers of all grade levels. The availability of the substitute can either be every day or certain days per week. Anyone interested should contact Evy Zacher, Per.'sonnel Office. 474-7313, ext. 203, for application and additional information. Kids' Qolhing and Etc Sale* 9 A.M. - 2 P.M. Saturday, September 22 Schumann Elementary School Gyrni 765 Old Crystal Bay Road, Long Lake Infant through teen size clothing, maternity clothes, toys, and baby equipment! Plan to be a seller. Earn 85% on sold items. Register at Schumann Elem. Sept. 5, 4-6 p.m. or call 479-3648 for more information. T)T5NAT10NS ARE WELCOME! PLEASE DELIVER ITEMS TO THE SCHUMANN ELEMENTARY SCHOOL OFFICE OR ORONO PRIMARY SCHOOL OFHCE BY SEPTEMBER 18TH. THANK YOU! This fundraiser/service project is sponsored by the Early Childhood Family Education Advisory Board Where the Wild Things Are... "Super Saturday" Preschoolers and their families are invited to attend the Early Childhood Family Education fall kickoff event, Saturday, Sept. 15, 10-11:30 a.m. at Orono Primary School. See the Minnesota Zoo Ark and more. It’s free! Call 479-3648 for more information. Delta Dental Plan If anyone is interest in enrolling a student in the Delta Dental Plan, please contact any school office for an enrollment form. 1st PTC| maating qug. 2fi, 7:lSpm Schumann Elamantary c|ll parants coalcoma fco attend. ODa appreciate interest and attendance. Equipment Needed Industrial Technology Education Department is looking for donated electronics equipment to be used as workable items or components. Items that can be used are stereo systems, speakers, T.V., VCR, computers, radios, cameras, or tri|X>ds. You will receive a letter of proof of donation for tax purposes. (Contact Dave Sohn or Bruce Frahm) Buildings Available Orono Industrial Technology Education Department construction course will be taking order requests for 8' X 12' utility buildings that will be built for thv listrict home owner for cost of materials. If you are interested call the Orono High School, 473-5472 and ask for Dave Sohn or leave your number. Notc^ frofti the Sthoof High School Parents Group An official parent group was formed at the last Parent Forum in May. The group is to be called Spartan Parent Association. The following parents agreed to act as officers: Renee Olsten Gail (Sabbert Sharon Griffiths Carol Roland Marianne Dudley Kathy Wenger Kathy Hayes Teacher Representative: Jeff Brown Co-Chairperson(s) Secretary Treasurer Membership There will be further information available on the next meeting in the October Newsletter. ORONO BASKETBALL BOOSTERS RRST MEETING OF THE YEAR: Tuesday, September 18 8:00 p.m. Orono High School Cafeteria . 'c—i r Administration of Medication to Students in School In order to have your child receive medication during school hours, we will need to have a WRITTEN order by a licensed physician, and WRITTEN permission from the parent giving us authorization to give the child medication. The medication to be administered must be brought to school in a container appropriately labeled by the the pharmacy or physician. The bottle that you receive from the pharmacy containing the medication is adequate. Medication must be brought into the nurses office. This policy does not apply to over the counter medication, aspirin or Tylenol. If you need to send this type of medication to school with your child, bring it in the original container and tell us when the child should have it and the reason why he/she needs to take it Any medication brought in a unidentified container will not be administered. You may use the form below if your child needs to take medication while in school. Have the physician fill out the upper part of the form. The parent fills in the lower part. If you choose not to use this form the same information needs to be written by the doctor and the parent on a fo.m of your choice. Call JoAnn Ree, Orono School Nurse, 473-5472, Ext. 227 with any questions. Independent School District 278 Long Lake, Minnesota AUTHORIZATION FOR GIVING MEDICATION IN SCHOOLS Name of Student Address____L- Birthdate. Parent or Guardian’s Name. . Telephone Number______ School___________Room TO BE HLLED IN BY PHYSICIAN Diagnosis of child’s illness: Type, dosage, purpose of drug:. Physician's signature_______. Telephone Number 1. I request medication be given at school as prescribed by a physician. 2. I release the school personnel from liability in the event any reactions results from the medication. Signature of Parent or Guardian-Date. Note: Medication to be supplied in original prescription bottle. Ask for the medication to be divided in two bottles each labded - one for home one for school. 1990 -1991 ORONO SCHOOL CALENDAR AVGUST MON TUE WED THUR FRI 12 3 6 7 8 9 10 13 14 15 16 17 20 21 22 23 24B3 EH E] Em ED NOVEMBER f MON TUE WED Tf RJR FRI 1 2 7 8 9 14 15 16 21 © © 28 29 30 5 12! I 19 % 26 6 13 20 27 'hm FEBRUARY ^ MON TUE WED THUR FRI 1 4 I ” s ® 5 12 19 26 6 13 20 27 7 14 21 28 8 15 22 * MAY MON TUE WED THUR ETU SEPTEMBER MON TUE WED THUR FW 5 10 n 12 17 18 19 24 25 26 6 7 13 14 20 21 27 28 DECEMBER MON TUE WED THUR FRI 3 4 5 6 7 10 11 12 13 14 17 18 19 20 21© © © © © MARCH I MON TUE WED DIUR FRI 4 5 6 11 12 13 18 19 20I © © © © © JUNE MON TUE WED THUR FRI L 4 5 10 11 12 17 18 19 24 25 26 OCTOBER MON TUE WED THUR FRI 1 2 3 4 6 8 9 10 JU 12 15 16 17 ® ® E9 23 24 25 26 29 30 31 JANUARY MON TUE WEDTHUR FRI , f>‘?f ^ 14 15 16 17 18 I 21 22 23 24 28 29 30 31 APRIL MON TUE WEDTHUR FRI 1 2 3 4 5 10 17 24 11 12 18 EO 25 26 TEACHER WORKSHOPS INSERVICE/CURRICULUM SCHOOL ’‘"vriN SESSION OPENING AND CLOSING DAYS’ .END OF SEMESTER NO CLASSES DATE................................................ACTIVITY B/2T-8/31...........................All Teacher Workshop 9/3.........................................................Labor Day 9/4...........................................CLASSES BEGIN 10/18-19...............................................MEA/MFT 10/22......................................Teacher Workshop 11A9,20 & 21*___________Conf. All Schools il/22-23..............................Thanksgiving Break 12/24-U4.........................................Winter Break 1/7................................................Classes Resume 1/25....................Semester ends-Teacher WTcshp 2/18.....................................Presidents’ Birthday 3/6, 7 & 8*__________Conf. O.P. - SJE. - M.S. 3/25-29...........................................Spring Break 4/19................................................Teacher Wkshp 5/27.................................................Memorial Day 6/6..........................................Last Day of Classes 6/7..............................................Teacher Workday * Detailed conference schedules available at individual school offices. Calling all Pasta Lovers!Come and eat your fill at the 4th Annual North Shore Gymnastics Spaghetti Dinner Thursday, September 27,1990 5:00 - 7:30 pm - before the Orono vs. SL Bernards Football game Orono High School Cafeteria $4.00 - tickets available from any NSGA team member or at the door Stay after and cheer our Spartans on to a great season!! First Football Gome R reminder thet the first football game of the 1990 Fell Season mill be held on Thursday, Rugust 30th JU Ooihe at 5:00 pm UarsHy at 7:30 pm Orono mill be hosting Nem Ulml Come end cheer on the Spartans PER Citizen's Committee The State of Minnesota in 1976 passed legislation entitled, "Planning Evaluating, Reporting." PER is a process for curriculum evaluation and planning for continued improvement of the ed itional program for all public school children. This is an invitation to community members who would like to serve on this committee. Its responsibilities are to review the process used in Orono, review the results of the questionaim, and to provide advice there from. If you are interested in serving on this committee for three years (five to six meetings per year), please call Connie Fladeland at 479-1530. Transportation Reimbursement for Non-Public School Students Parents of non-public students who reside in the School District may make application for reimbursement of within District transportation costs. The Orono District Office administers the program and all payments are made directly to the school attended. The non-public school uses the funds either to defray bus tran^rtation costs or reimburse parents for car expense. All applications are nruide through the non-public school on forms provided by the District Office. Any family having students attending a non-public school for the first time this year or additional students to be transported, should notify their school officials. RtuOtNl COU^X- 1990-1991 School Day Schedule Grades Starting Time Ending Time Length of Day HS. (9-12) MS. (5S) Elem. (2^) 730 8:07 9.-05 2:05 2:45 3:25 6hrs. +35 min 6 hrs. + 38 min 6 hrs. + 20 min 6 hours V—//n 12:45-3:15 g NEWSLETTER AOMiNimunoN oerici •M qACf«MST%LMXM>AO NOKTN LONdtiRpMIlSlEt^A Non-^rs<ii 0>9 U » KJSIAGl PAID Loriq Lake. PtiMir KK) 17 City of Orono f* . 0 . Bo '; C»-v=trfl Bay, MN 553a,3 r Lake Minnetonka Cable Communications Commission 443 OAK STREET • EXCELSIOR. MINNESOTA 55331 • (612)474-5539 .1,1= ii I. II. III. IV. V. VI. LAKE MINNETONKA CABLE COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE MEETING TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 18, 1990, StOO P. EXCELSIOR COMMUNITY TV STUDIO EXCELSIOR COMMUNITY CENTER 443 OAK STREET, EXCELSIOR Ifni sisao^llJj 1 0 1880 AGENDA Call to Order Approval of August minutes Reports 4 a) b) c) Officers Administrator Triax Unfinished Business 1) Approval regarding cable system changes (motion 6.21.90.8) 2) Approval regarding channel alignment (motion 8.21.90.3) 3) Late fee regulation issue New Business 1) Request to sponsor attendance to MACTA conference Adjournment MINUTES LAKE MINNETONKA CABLE COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION FULL COMMISSION MEETING TUESDAY, AUGUST 21, 1990, 5:00 P.M. EXCELSIOR CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS (LOCATED ABOVE THE FIRE STATION) 339 THIRD ST., EXCELSIOR I. CALL.m-ORDER Chairman Anderson called the mee'w^ng to order at 5:10 P.M. He then made the following ani«,iidments to the agenda: y Unfinished Business: a) New Business:a) b) c) PI RECXPR^PREAEJNT Bobbl Abdo/Mtka. Beach Tom Anderson/Medina Howard Bennls/Deephaven Barb Brancel/Shorewood Lesley Hughes-Seamans/ Tonka Bay Barbara Peterson/Orono Jim Swartwood/Long Lake Otto Wllczek/Mlnnetrlsta Jimmie Wright/Greenwood Request to approve Trlax System Changes Request to approve Channel Alignment Late Fees NATOA's By-laws Changes qxher^present Jennifer Watts/Admin. Kathe Ehlert/Adm.Asst Jim Schindler/Pr.Coor Ric Hanson/Tr^nx Paul Nazarow/Tr ix 11. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Anderson asked for discussion of the minutes from the July meeting or a motion to approve. Motion 8.21.90.1: Brancel moved to approve the July minutes; Wright seconded. The motion passed unanimously. III. REPPRTS Tjrj#asursr__«i_^epoj^^ Commissioner Wilczek present*. . the Just Claims for August (attachment 1). Anderson asked for comments or a motion t approve. h n 8^21.90.2: Wilczek moved to approve the Just Claims for t. riod 7/17/90 through 8/21/90; Brancel seconded. The. motion pasA . unanimously. AdmlDiAtratp.rls_Repp.rt: Administrator Watt^ reported both the House and Senate have moved bills from committee to the floor; however, it was not known whim those bills will come up for vote. A summary of the changes to those bills could bo found in the Miller & Holbrooke handout. Watts reported that MACTA administrators met: in Washington with Minnesota legislators and were told it was the first time the legislators had heard from local regulatory LMCCC August Minutes Page Three would be producing a ser?^es on the history of Excelsior. Jim said he was gearing up for fall workshops In the Excelsior and Orono studios. TRIAX REPORT Rlc Hanson Introduced Paul 7. Nazarow as the new Regional Manager for Trlax and said Paul would be attending Commission meetings in the future. Rlc had been promoted to Director of Operations for the company. Ric reported that Trlax would be going ahead with the Installation of Fiber Optic equlpmei'it on August 27, thus eliminating the Excelsior eadend located In the Excelsior Community Center basement. He noted the benefits of this upgrade would be that: 1) Adding channels to become more efficient 2) Fiber Improves slgnal-to-nolse ratio 3) Signal could be extended much farther through fiber Rlc said that the work would be done by engineers hired by Trlax« and the lines would be connected on NSP poles from Mound to Excelsior. There would be no lines to subscribers homes/ and the Interference on channels 2/4 and 5 would be eliminated. Rlc also stated the equipment would be activated within 30 days of hanging the lines and the project would be completed before winter. Paul Nazarow presented the monthly Trlax report! Homes Passed Basic iSubs Total Pay Units Total A/O's Total Remotes 11/770 5/845 3/787 3/452 2/597 Hanson p/> v.inted a letter to tha Commission explaining the changes Ir channel line-up and pricing that are scheduled to take place on October 1/ 1990 (see attachments). He said a letter would also be going out to the mayors of all the cities In the service area/ as well as to all subscribers/ explaining the changes. A rate card and channel line-up card would be be enclosed with the notice. Administrator Watts asked how Triax would respond to sub scribers when they asked why they would now be paying 42.00 more for the same services they had been getting/ and what would happen to the service of subscribers who didn't notify Trlax prior to October 1 or October 15 regarding the tiering process. Hanson explained the rate 1 .crease reflected Increases In operating expenses and programm.^ *'i costS/ as well as Insurance premiums for employees. Hanson replied that subscribers who did not contact Trlax to request a change in LMCCC August Minutes Page Five Long“Range. _Goa_ls_ WilczeJc presented the long-range goals, which he requested be submitted for approval and then attached to the budget proposal sent to the member cities. Goals identified weret Complete a needs assessment for channel expansion. Improve efforts to inform the public that the Commission is there to assist them. Explore consumer protection regulation. Improve facilities and equipment. Establish a format to collect data for an annual review of the system. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Wilczek and Swartwood wolunteered to serve as a committee to help staff design a system for Identifying and collecting data for an annual review of the system. Wilczen. noted the goals had not been assigned priorities. Mptipn_.8,2.1 Wilczek moved to approve the Long-Range ^oals; Brancel seconded. The motion passed unanimously. V.PRODUCTION_EQU.IPMENT_ PROPOSAL Administrator Watts submitted the equipment proposal to the Commission (attachment 3) and reminded them of Triax's responsibility to repair and replace existing equipment, and to provide for future growth. The Commission also had made a commitment to access by establishing the access equipment fund. The production equipment proposal would not change the production format currently ?n use by the studia, but would be S-VHS capable if expansion to that format were tc occur in the future. She noted funding w-uld o--- from the access and studio equipment funds, along with capita "jnds for year seven. Motion„0.2ii90.i7_5-_ Wright moved to approve the Producticn Equipment Proposal; Brancel seconded. The motion passed unanimously. Chairman Anderson noted that due to the lateness of the hour, many of those present would need to leave eoon to attend city council meetings and a quorum would no longer be present. Ha asked if there war any other business that required the imm'?diate attention of th.v Commission. Watts requested Sion address the item on prop.-'sed system changes. VI. C.H.ANG.ES_.IJ!l_5ABkE.SYSTEM: Watts informed Anderson that since T its installation of fiber to occur che follow! notice to the Commission, she recommended the Commission grant tern! ' ' approval c.f the proposed char to the system, which invox. the elimination ui the Excelsior headend through the IX had schedul week without LMCCC JUST CLAIMS 7/18/90 TO 8/21/90 CHECK# 2155 10235 10236 10237 2156 2157 2158 2159 2160 2161 2162 2163 2164 2165 2166 10238 10239 10240 10241 2167 2168 2169 2170 2171 2172 2173 DATE PAYABLE 7/24 Jim Schindler 7/31 Aaron Blechert 7/31 Jim Schindler 7/31 Jennifer Watta 7/31 JMH Software 7/31 PERA 7/31 Paychex 7/31 U.S. West 7/31 Norwest Banks 7/31 U.S. Poatmaster 8/9 Nat'l League of 8/14 PERA 8/14 Nat'l League of 8/14 Petty Cash 8/14 Jennifer Watts 8/15 Aaron Blechert 8/15 Jim Schindler 8/15 Jennifer Watts 8/15 Kathe Ehlert 8/15 Skads Travel 8/15 PERA 8/15 U.S. Postmaster 8/15 Aaron Blechert 8/21 Shereff Systems 8/21 Gopher Stage and 8/2Ti Wagers TOTAL CLAIMS BANK EXCELSIOR Beginning Balance Claims Interest Studio Shoot Service Charge ENDING BALANCE a 48,364.73 (6,346.16) 217.91 25.00 (12.20) 42^249.28 ACCOUNT Conf/School 7/31 Payroll 7/31 Payroll 7/31 Payroll Office Supp PERA Benefts Sec'y Serv. Telephone Fed w/h Postage Conf/Schools PERA Life Member/subs Various Mlg/Hlth ins 8/15 Payroll 8/15 Payroll 8/15 payroll 8/15 Payroll Conf/Schools PERA Benefts Postage Mileage Misc. Video Studio Eqpt Office Supp SCCU ACCOUNTS Balance Share Acct. Balance Preferred Acct. Certificates of Deposit a 1,849.28 1,273.93 (9/10) 26,000.00 (9/23) 20,000.00 (9/23) 10.000.00 ENDING BALANCE TOTAL FUNDS 59,123.21 101,372.49 LAKE MINNETONKA CABLE COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION1991PROPOSED BUDGETSUBMITTED AUGUST 21,1990 APPROVED INCOME REVISED 1990 PROPOSED 1991 Trlax Franchise Fees $84,773.79 0 89,000.00 Interest 4,000.00 3,000.00 Carryover (from 1989)16.628.82 0.00 0 105,402.61 0 92,000.00 OPERATING EXPENSES Cable Administrator d 28,800.00 0 30,000.00 Access Employees 20,000.00 22,000.00 Secretarial Services 2,000.00 1,000.00 Payroll Taxes 7,000.00 7,200.00 Employee Mileage 500.00 600.00 Medical Insurance 2,880.00 2,880.00 Legal Fees 2,000.00 2,000.00 Insurance/Bonds 3,500.00 3,800.00 Financial Reviow/LMCCC 2,300.00 2,300.00 Conferences/Schools 5,000.00 6,‘^00.00 Office Supplies 2,000.00 2,000.00 Dues/Subscriptions 1,000.00 1,300.00 Telephone-1,000.00 1,600.00 Postage '/650.00 650.00 Miscellaneous(inc. bank chrgs)450.00 450.00 Advertising/Promotions 750.00 750.00 Office Equipment 1,000.00 1,000.00 Office Space 6.000.00 6.000.00 OPERATING BUDGET TOTAL $86,830.00 0 91,530.00 SPECIAL FUND APPROPRIATIONS Technical Audit - Triax 0 0.00 Financial Review - Triax 1,000.00 0.00 Studio Equipment 1,000.00 100.00 Legal fund 1,000.00 150.00 Office Equipment Fund 5,000.00 0.00 Access Equipment 7,000.00 220.00 Contingency 3.572.61 0.00 FUND TOTAL d 18,572.61 0 470.00 BUDGET TOTAL 0 105,402.61 0 92,000.00 LMCCC A(;ENDA_. ITEM_ ny_. PRODUCTION EQUIPMENT EXPANSION PROPOSAL Recommend approval for the purchase of the following equipment, subject to availability' *>.nd prices noted, from the appropriate funding budge*: sourr.,- .0 1590, noting that any equipment purchased with capita’ fur-ds anf» miscellaneous video funds are insured and maintair.s.^ oy the cable company, while those items purchased with Special Fund Appropriations are our responsibility: 1990 EXPANSION PROPOSAL Panasonic WVD5100 portable cameras (2) w/batteries, adaptor, lens, cable Panasonic AG7400 VCR Bogen Tripods (fluid head) 9 $196 9 $2171.37 04342.74 1860.S5 392.00 TOTAL CAPITAL FUNDS(TRIAX) MISC. VIDEO FUNDS(TRIAX) Balance 06615.29 05000.00 1725.50 0 llb.21^ Panasonic AG-450 (2) 9 01458 Additipinal Batteries Hand-h^ld mica Shelving/Storage/Cases Bogen Tripods (2) 9 0196 04374.00 550.00 120.00 500.00 392.00 TOTAL ACCESS EQUIPMENT FUNDS Balance 05986.00 07000.00 01064.00^ Sony ECM-44B mics(2) Backdrops & props Light scoops Barndoors Backdrops & props 0 398.00 50U.00 600.00 180.00 500.00 TOTAL STUDIO EQUIPMENT FUNDS Balance 02180.00 05267.00 03087.00^ EQUIPMENT CURRENTLY AVAILABLE FOR USE PORTABLE C^ERA - JVC SINGLE TUBE GSX 700 U CAMERA - JVC SINGLE TUBE GSX 700 U CAMCORDER - PANASONIC AG-450 CONDITION Poor color repro Tube damaged Good EQUIPMENT PROPOSAL Page Two RECORDER/VCR - JVC BR6200U Good RECORDER/VCR - JVC BR1600U Fair TRIPOD - BOGEN FLUID HEAD 3063 Good TRIPOD - QUICKSET SPRING RELEASE Poor PORTABLE STUDIO - JVC SWITCHER Good MONITORS Good AUDIO MIXER Good MICROPHONES Good PORTABLE HEADSET SYSTEM (AC ONLY) Good PORTABLE LOWELL LIGHTING SYSTEM Good EDITING/STUDIO (Our system is racked to Incorporate certain features of the studio switcher with the editor; when the editor is in use, the studio cannot be used and vice versa.) PLAYER - JVC BP 5300U RECORDER/EDITOR - JVC BR 8600U EDITOR CONTROLLER - JVC RM 06U SWITCHER “ JVC KM 2000 WAVERFORM MONITOR AND VECTORSCOPE CAMERA - JVC 3-TUBE BY 110 CAMERA - JVC 3-TUBE BY 110 GRID LIGHTING - 6 ALTMAN FRESNELS MICROPHONES - 5 SONY LAVALIER MICS HEADSETS - 6 PHONE SYSTEM COMPUTER/GRAPHICS - AMIGA. DPIll. JMH Fair Fair Good Good Good Fair, needs repair Fair, needs repair Good Good Good Good Most of the equipment is provided and owned by the cable company, with the exception of the camcorder and some miscellaneous items, and it is their responsibility to repair and replace the equipment per the franchise agreement. Again, most of our equipment has been in use since either 1985 or 1986. with many in need of repair or overhaul. ir^4 rND STREET SE PO BOX 110 WASECA. MN 56093 507,035 5975 FAX NUMBER 507.015 4f57 I MI>^X CABLEVISON Lake Minnetonka Cable Conununications Commission ^^3 Oak Street Excelsior, MN 55331 Dear Cable Commission Members: Triax Cablevision will introduce several new monthly rates for basic and premium cable TV services, effective October 1, 1990. The new rate adjustments are a direct result of increases associated to operating expenses, the addition of new satellite channels, channel realignments, and spiraling orogram costs. BASIC cable service will be adjusted to $19>^9 per month and referenced as "EXPANDED BASIC There will be a total of 39 channels of programming, which includes the addition of a new comedy satellite cnannel—"HA!". "HA!", theV’television comedy network launched in April, 1990, features the best television comedy of the past ^0 years— Love American Style, Saturday Night Live, The Best of Groucho, Candid Camera, Mork and Mindy, Rhoda, TV Bloopers and Practical Jokes. With a programming mix like this, "HA!" appeals to every age group. A new 1^ channel "BASIC" service will be introduced simultaneously for $12.99 per month. This economy service consists of broadcast networks, public broadcast stations, independent networks. Super stations, local and public access channels, C-Span, and Home Shopping Network. Premium services are being adjusted as follows: HBO HOME BOX OFFICE from $9.95 to ♦10.95 SHO SHOWTIME Remains the same at $9-95 MAX,CINEMAX from $9-95 to ♦6.95 DIS THE DISNEY CHANNEL from $9.95 to ♦'1.95 Movie channels can be packaged to obtain additlona] discounts as follows: HBO & MAX HBO & MAX & DIS $15-90 per month $19.85 per month I Page 2 Trlax cable TV subscribers will receive a letter by September 1, 1990, which highlights the upcoming adjustments including a revised rate schedule, a new channel brochure, and a new channel line-up card which distinguishes the difference between "BASIC" and "EXPANDED BASIC" cable services. Subscribers will receive a new monthly cable bill on October 1. 1990, reflecting the new rates ior the cable services they have at that time. Additionally, all subscribers will be given the opportunity to change their -ervices at no additional charge, through October 15, 1990. Please feel free to call me personally, at 1-800-332-0245 in Waseca, MN., should you have any questions regarding these changes. ectrully yours. 6Paul^. Nazarow Regional Manager TRIAX CABLEVISION 7 Enclosures (3)i Subscriber notification letter Revised channel line-up card October 1, 1990 rate schedule 1 0 isdoSeptember 7, 1990 Honorable Mayor Gr^bek City of Orono Orono, MN Dear Mayor Grabek: My wife an I reside at 1205 Tamarack Drive, Long Lake. While most of our land is in Medina, we do have one-third of an acre in Orono, along our South line. I believe this land to be within 350 feet of the proposed child day care center (Application #1575). For some reason, we were never notified of the proposed usage. Therefore, we believe that regardless of any cut off date, our views should be conveyed to the Council. Those views are that we can see no positive long-term benefits to the urrounding residential areas by allowing a commercial operation to put its foot in the doorl Whether it comes as a day care center for preschoolers or not. We urge the Council to reject the proposal. Very Truly Your Mr. & Mrs. J^n Schuett 1205 Tamaracx Drive Long Lake, MN 55356 ... ... J < i ^.'1 <rw^ne. JUDSON M. DAVTON TCf TOWER. 9UTE •*» • Ul J3CKTH STBFFT MINNEAPOtlS. MINNESOTA 55402 September 10, 1990 Mayor and City Council Members City of Orono p. 0. Box 66 Crystal Bay, Minnesota 55323 Gentlemen and Ladles! As you are aware, I have applied for a conditional use permit to run a Waldorf kindergarten and preschool at 1111 Tamarack Drive, Orono. When I originally applied for the conditional use permit we were anticipating more than 14 students, which would have required state licensing and the Orono permit* We now have fewer than 14 students at one time and will receive a license through Hennepin County. As I explained In my letter of August 30 to the City Council, with the Hennepin County license we are operating a permitted use and need no city approval. At this time 1 would like to withdraw my application for a conditional use permit. We will strictly obey the requirements of our llcenee under Minnesota Statutes Section 245A.14, Sub division 1 and under Minnesota Rules, parts 9502.0315 to 9502.0445. Thank you fot ^our consideration. Sincerely, /udson M. Dayton Lake Minnetonka Cable Communications Commission 443 OAK STREET • EXCELSIOR. MINNESOTA 55331 • (612)474-5539 LAKE MINNETONKA CABLE COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE MEETING TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 18, 1990, StOO P. EXCELSIOR COMMUNITY TV STUDIO EXCELSIOR COMMUNITY CENTER 443 OAK STREET, EXCELSIOR IfniaisiMo^UJI SfP 1 0 189) I. II . III. IV. A££M.A Call to Order Approval of Auguat minutes Reports a) V ■/ c) Officers Administrator Triax V. Unfinished Business 1) Approval regarding cable system changes (motion 8.21.90.8) 2) Approval regarding channel alignment (motion 8.21.90.3) 3) Late fee regulation issue New Business 1) Request to sponsor attendance to MACTA conference VI. Adjournment MINUTES LAKE MINNETONKA CABLE COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION FULL COMMISSION MEETING ^^/ESDAY, AUGUST 21, 1990, 5t00 P.M. EXCELSIOR CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS (LOCATED ABOVE THE FIRE STATION) 339 THIRD ST., EXCELSIOR I.CALL.XQ_ORD.ER Chairman Anderaon called the meeting to order at 5*10 P.M. Ho then made the following amendments to the agenda* Unfinished Business* a) Request to approve Triax System Changes New Business* a) Request to approve Channel Alignment b) Late Fees c) NATOA's By-laws Changes PI RECXPRS_PRES.E_NX Bobbi Abdo/Mtka. Beach Tom Anderson/Medina Howard Bennis/Doephaven Barb Brancel/Shorewood Lesley Hughes-Seamans/ Tonka Bay Barbara Peterson/Orono Jim Swartwood/Long Lake Otto Wilczek/Minnetriata Jimmie Wright/Groenwood qxher^present Jennifer Watts/Admin. Kathe Ehlert/Adm.Asst Jim bchindler/Pr.Coor Ric Hanson/Triax Paul Nazarow/Triax II.APPROVAL OF MINUTES Anderson asked for discussion of the minutes from the July meeting or a motion to approve. Mptlon_ 8 ^2X*_90_.X.L Brancel moved to approve the July minutes; Wright seconded. The motion passed unanimously. Ill.REP.ORTS TrjBOiLr9.rXJ!_R.«POJLt Commissioner Wilczek presented the Just Claims for August (attachment 1). Anderson asked for comments or a motion to approve. Motion 6121.90.2* Wilczek moved to approve the Just Claims for the period 7/17/90 through 8/21/90; Brancel seconded. The motion passed unanimously. Administrator^s.Report Administrator Watts reported both the House and Senate have moved bills from committee to the floor; however, it was not known when those bills will come up for vote. A summary of the changes to those bills could bo found in the Miller & Holbrooke handout. Watts reported that MACTA administrators met in Washington with Minnesota legislators and wore told it was the first time the logislatohs n«d hear4 local regulatory I LMCCC August Minutes Psge Three would be producing a series on the history of Excelsior. Jim said he was gearing up for fall workshops in the Excelsior and Orono studios. TM_A_X_gfiPPRX ' . « . , Ric Hanson introduced Paul J. Natarow as the new Regional Manager for Triax and said Paul would be attending Commission meetings in the future. Uic had boon promoted to Director of Operations for the company. Ric reported that Triax would be going ahead with the installation of Fiber Optic equipment on August 27, thus eliminating the Excelsior hoadend located in the Excelsior Community Center basement. noted the benefits of this upgrade would be that: 1) Adding channels to become more efficient 2) Fiber improves signal-to-noise ratio 3) Signal could be extended much farther through fiber Ric said that the work would be done by engineers hired by Triax, and the lines would bo connected on NSP poles from Mound to Excelsior. There would be no linos to subscribers homes, and the intArforonce on channels 2,4 and 5 would be eliminated. Ric also stated the equipment would be activated within 30 days of hanging the linos and the project would bo completed before winter. Paul Nazarcw presented the monthly Triax report: Homes Passed Basic Subs Total Pay Units Total A/O's Total Remotes 11,770 5,045 3,707 3,452 2,597 Hanson presented a letter to the Commission explaining the changes in channel line-up and pricing that are scheduled to take place on October 1, 1990 (see attachments). He • letter would also be going out to the mayors of all the cities in the service area, as well as to all subscribers, explaining the changes. A rate card and channel line-up card would be be enclosed with the notice. Administrator Watts asked how Triax would respond scribers when they asked why they would now be paying *2.00 more for the same services they had been getting, and would happen to the service of subscribers who didn't notify Triax prior to October ’ or October 15 regarding the tiering process. Hanson explained :tfte increase reflected increases in operating expenses and prog., j.?-costa, as well as insurance premiums for employees. ,i?r.>'on replied that subscribers who did not contact Triax t''. request a change in LMCCC August Minutes Page Five Long- Rang e_ _G o_a_l s Wilczek presented the long-range goals, which he requested be submitted for approval and then attached to the budget proposal sent to the member cities. Goals identified weres 1. Complete a needs assessment for channel expansion. 2. Improve efforts to Inform the public that the Commission is there to assist them. 3. Explore consumer protection regulation. 4. Improve facilities and equipment. 5. Establish a format to collect data for an annual review of the system. Wilczek and Swartwood wolunteered to serve as a committee to help staff design a system for identifying and collecting data for an annual review of the system. Wilczek noted the goals had not been assigned priorities. Mptipn_8 j 2A.*_9_0 Wilczek moved to approve the Long-Range Goals; Br'ancel seconded. The motion passed unanimously. V.PRODUCTION. EpU.IPMENT _PROPOSAL ' Administrator Watts submitted the equipment proposal to the Commission (attachment 3) and reminded them of Triax's responsibility to repair and replace existing equipment, and to provide for future growth. The Commission also had made a commitment to access by establishing the access equipment fund. The production equipment proposal would not change the production format currently in use by the studio, but would be S-VHS capable if expansion to that format were :o occur in the future. She noted funding would come from the access and studio equipment funds, along with capital funds for year seven. Motion 8.21.90.7: Wright moved to approve the Production Equipment Proposal; Brancel seconded. The motion passed unanimously. Chairman Anderson noted that due to the lateness of the hour, many of those present would need to leave soon to attend city council meetings and a quorum would no longer be present. He asked if there was any other business that required the immediate attention of the Commission. Watts requested the Commission address the item on proposed system changes. VI . g.HAI<GE5_JJi_CABLE_SVSTEM : Watts informed Anderson that since Triax had scheduled its installation of fiber to occur the following week without notice to the Commission, she recommended the Commission grant temporary approval of the proposed change to the system, which involved the elimination of the Excelsior headend through the LMCCC JUST CLAIMS 7/10/90 TO 8/21/90 CHECK#DATE 2155 7/24 10235 7/31 10236 7/31 10237 7/31 2156 7/31 2157 7/31 2158 7/31 2159 7/31 2160 7/31 2161 7/31 2162 0/9 2163 0/14 2164 0/14 2165 0/14 2166 8/14 10238 8/15 10239 0/15 10240 0/15 10241 8/15 2167 0/15 2168 8/15 2 » 69 8/15 2170 0/15 2171 0/2r 2172 8/21 2173 e/aTi PAYABLE Jxm Schindler Aaron Blechert Jim Schindler Jennifer Watta JMH Software PERA Paychex U.S. West Norwest Banks U.S. Postmaster Nat'l League of Cities PERA Nat'l League of Cities Petty Cash Jennifer Watts Aaron Blechert Jim Schindler Jennifer Watts Kathe Ehlert Skads Travel PERA U.S. Postmaster Aaron Plechert Shereff Systems Gopher Stage and Light|^< Wagers _ jf TOTAL CLAIMS BANK EXCELSIOR Beginning Balance Claims Interest Studio Shoot Service Charge ENDING BALANCE AMOUNT ACCOUNT 3 100.00 Coni/School 171.71 7/31 Payroll 499.37 7/31 Payroll 799.15 7/31 Payroll 12.95 Office Supp 1C4.87 PERA Benefts 39.40 Sec'y Serv. 67.21 Telephone 1,100.39.Fed w/h 50.00 Postage 275.00 Conf/Schools 9.00 PERA Life 125.00 Member/subs 74.71 Various 179.27 Mlg/Hlth ins 149.04 0/15 Payroll 493.75 8/15 Payroll 799.15 0/15 payroll 96.97 0/15 Payroll 260.00 Conf/Schools A 169.90 PKRA benefts i 68.40 Postage 23.40 Mileage ' 133.50 Misc. Video 241.20 Studio Eqpt 244.02 ^6,346.16 Office Supp 3 48,364.73 (6,346.16) 217.91 25.00 (12.20) 42,249.28 SCCU ACCOUNTS Balance Share Acct. Balance Preferred Acct. Certificates of Deposit S 1,849.28 1,273.93 (9/10) 26,000.00 (9/23) 20,000.00 (9^23) 10.000.00 ENDING BALANCE TOTAL FUNDS 59,123.21 101.372.49 LAKE MINNETONKA CABLE COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSIOjL 1991 PROPOSED BUDGET SUBMITTED AUGUST 21, 1990 INCOME Trlax Franchise Fees Interest Carryover (from 1989) APPROVED REVISED 1990 d 84,773.79 4,000.00 16.628.82 0 105,402.61 PROPOSED 1991 0 89,000.00 3,000.00 _ _ _ _ _0.00 0 92,000.00 OPERATING EXPENSES Cable Administrator Access Employees Secretarial Services Payroll Taxes Employee Mileage Medical Insurance Legal Fees Insurance/Bonds Financial Review/LMCCC Conferences/Schools Office Supplies Dues/Subscriptions Telephone- Postage Miscellaneous(inc. bank chrgs) Advertising/Promotions Office Equipment Office Space OPERATING BUDGET TOTAL SPECIAL FUND APPROPRIATIONS. Technical Audit - Triax Financial Review - Triax Studio Equipment Legal fund Office Equipment Fund Access Equipment Contingency FUND TOTAL BUDGET TOTAL 0 28,800.00 20,000.00 2,000.00 7.000. 00 500.00 2,860.00 2.000. 00 3.500.00 2.300.00 5,000.00 2,000.00 1,000.00 1,000.00 650.00 450.00 750.00 1,000.00 6.000.00 0 86,830.00 1,000.00 1,000.00 1,000.00 5,000.00 7,000.00 3.572.61 0 18,572.61 0 105,402.61 0 30,000.00 22,000.00 1,000.00 7.200.00 600.00 2.880.00 2,000.00 3,800.00 2.300.00 6,000.00 2,000.00 1.300.00 1.600.00 650.00 450.00 750.00 1,000.00 6.000.00 0 91,530.00 0.00 0.00 100.00 150.00 0.00 220.00 _ _ _ _ _0.00 0 470.00 0 92,000.00 LMCCC AC.ENDA IT,«♦ V„. PRODUCTION EUUIPMENT EXPANSION PROPOSAL Reconmend approval for the purchase of the followlnq equipment# subject to availability and prices noted# from the appropriate funding budget sources in 1990# noting that any equipment purchased with capital funds and miscellaneous video funds are insured and maintained by the cable company# while those items purchased with Special Fund Appropriations are our responsibility: 1990 EXPANSION PROPOSAL Panasonic WVD5100 portable cameras (2) 9 $2171.37 $4342.74 w/batteries# adaptor# lens# cable Panasonic AG7400 VCR 1880.S5 Bogen Tripods (fluid head) © $196 392.00 TOTAL $6615.29 CAPITAL FUNDS(TRIAX) $5000.00 MISC. VIDEO FUNDSCTRIAX) 1725.50 Balance $ 110.21^ Panasonic AG-450 (2) © $1458 Additito^al Batteries Hand-hjSld mica Shelving/Storage/Cases Bogen Tripods (2) © $196 TOTAL ACCESS EQUIPMENT FUNDS Balance $4374.00 550.00 120.00 500.00 392.00 $5986.00 $7000.00 $1064.00^ Sony ECM-44B mica(2) Backdrops & props Light scoops Barndoors Backdrops & props TOTAL STUDIO EQUIPMENT FUNDS Balance $ 398.00 500.00 600.00 180.00 500.00 $2180.00 $5267.00 $3087.00^ EQUIPMENT CURRENTLY AVAILABLE FOR USE PORTABLE CAMERA - JVC SINGLE TUBE GSX 700 U CAMERA - JVC SINGLE TUBE GSX 700 U CAMCORDER - PANASONIC AG-450 CONDITION Poor color repro Tube damaged Good EQUIPMENT PROPOSAL Page Two RECORDER/VCR - JVC BR6200U RECORDER/VCR - JVC BR1600U TRIPOD - BOGEN FLUID HEAD 3063 TRIPOD - QUICKSET SPRING RELEASE PORTABLE STUDIO - JVC SWITCHER MONITORS AUDIO MIXER MICROPHONES PORTABLE HEADSET SYSTEM (AC ONLY) PORTABLE LOWELL LIGHTING SYSTEM Good Fair Good Poor Good Good Good Good Good Good EDITING/STUDIO (Our system is racked to incorporate certain features of the studio switcher with the editor; when the editor is in use, the studio cannot be used and vice versa.) PLAYER - JVC BP 5300U RECORDER/EDITOR - JVC BR 8600U EDITOR CONTROLLER - JVC RM 06U SWITCHER - JVC KM 2000 WAVERFORM MONITOR AND VECTORSCOPE CAMERA - JVC 3-TUBE BY 110 Camera - JVC 3-TUBE BY 110 GRID LIGHTING - 6 ALTMAN FRESNELS MICROPHONES - 5 SONY LAVALIER MICS HEADSETS - 6 PHONE SYSTEM COMPUTER/GRAPHICS - AMIGA, DPIII, JMH Fair Fair Good Good Good Fair, needs repair Fair, needs repair Good Good Good Good Moat of the equipment is provided and owned by the cable company, with the exception of the camcorder and some miscellaneous items, and it is their responsibility to repair and replace the equipment per the franchise agreement. Again, most of our equipment has been in use since either 1985 or 1.86, with many in need of repair or overhaul. 2fJD STREET SE PO BOX nn WASECA, MN 5600:» S07/83S 5075 TAX NUMBER 507 B35 4f5T TF{\AX CABLEVISION Lake Minnetonka Cable Conununications Commission ^43 Oak Street Excelsior, MN 55331 Dear Cable Commission Members: Triax Cablevision will introduce several new monthly rates for basic and premium cable TV services, effective October 1, 1990. The new rate adjustments are a direct result of increases associated to operating expenses, the addition of new satellite channels, channel realignments, and spiraling program costs. BASIC cable service will be adjusted to $19»99 per month and referenced as "EXPANDED BASIC". There will be a total of 3± channels of programming, which includes the addition of a new comedy satellite channel—"HA!". "HA!", theV’television comedy network launched in April, 1990, features the best television comedy of the past 40 years Love American Style, Saturday Night Live, The Best of Groucho, Candid Camera, Mork and Mindy, Rhoda, TV Bloopers and Practical Jokes. With a programming mix like this, "HA!" appeals to every age group. A new 19 channel "BASIC" service will be Introduced simultaneously for $12.99 per month. This economy service consists of broadcast networks, public broadcast stations, independent networks. Super- stations, local and public access channels, C-Span, and Home Shopping Network. Premium services are being adjusted as follows: HBO HOME BOX OFFICE from $9.95 to $10.95 SHO SHOWTIME Remains the same at $9-95 MAX,CINEMAX from $9.95 to $6.95 DIS THE DISNEY CHANNEL from $9.95 to $4.95 Movie channels can be packaged to obtain additional discounts as follows: HBO & MAX HBO & MAX & DIS $15.90 per month $19.85 per month Page 2 Triax cable TV subscribers will receive a letter by September 1, 1990, which highlights the upcoming adjustments including a revised rate schedule, a new channel brochure, and a new channel line-up card which distinguishes the difference between "BASIC" and "EXPANDED BASIC" cable services. Subscribers will receive a new monthly cable bill on October 1, 1990, reflecting the new rates for the cable services they have at that time. Additionally, all subscribers will be given the opportunity to change their services at no additional charge, through October 15, 1990. Please feel free to call me personally, at 1-800-332-02^5 in Waseca, MN., should you have any questions regarding these changes. ectfully yours. 6Paul^. Nazarow Regional Manager TRIAX CABLEVISION «>' Enclosures (3):Subscriber notification letter Revised channel line-up card October 1, 1990 rate schedule wsm r.H ; James P. Miller, City Manager FRJM I Ann Perry, Director of Planning DATE ; September 10, 1990 SUBJECT : Pinal Draft of the Lake Minnetonka Conservation District (LMCD) Long Term Management Program for Lake Minnetonka At the June 8th Council Work Session, the City Council reviewed the staff comments regarding the preliminary draft of the LMCD Long Terra Management Program. Significant concerns were rjaised at that time regarding the program’s major policy objectives. First, the City suggested that it would be more appropriat-e for the lake to be managed from a regional standpoint as suggjested by the Citizen’s League report regarding the responsibili^ for managing metropolitan lakes with implementation by the [LMCD. This would require, however, that a regional agency such as the Metropolitan Council establish a management plan for all metropolitan lakes to ensure equitable treatment. The second major issue was related to fiscal accountability. The LMCD proposed to expand their funding sources which includes a Hennepin County wide tax to support LMCD projects and operation. Based upon the objectives in the plan, it appeared that the budget would become Increasingly larger in the coming years. This was a concern because the LMCD Board would not be elected and no accountability of decisions was reflected in the draft plan. The last area of concern centered on the proposal of the LMiCD to oversee the adoption of the Department of Natural Resources (DNR) shoreland regulations by the lakeshore communities. The City felt that it would be inappropriate to end up in a situation where one of the lakes in Minnetonka would be trjeated differently than the other lakes where shoreland ordinances apply. Further, the City already has a shoreland ordinance and it would be repetitive to spend an exorbitant amount of time meeting with the 13 other cities to develop a common ordinance. As noted in the summary of the new plan, none of the corrments made by Minnetonka are reflected in the final draft of the plan. While the plan clarifies several points in the previous draft, it also does not appear that many of the lakeshore commuriitiee comments have been adopted. In an attempt to resolve these concerns, staff and Councilmember DeGhetto met with Dave Cochran, with the LMCD Board and Tom Maple from the Minrehaha Creek Watershed District following the preparation of the final draft. Based upon thdt meeting, it does not appear that th^ LMCD Board would be willing to make anymore changes to the plan. Page 1 Council Work SessionSept efp.be r 10» 1990 It is unclear if the management plan will need approval by any of the State agencies. The LMCD staff has Indicated that the management plan will be considered by the LMCD Soared on September 26th. If adopted by the Board, the implementation portion of the plan will be analyzed by the LMCD staff. Subseque clyr a budget outline will be prepared based upon the implementation program. The LMCD staff has stated that tnd plan will be reviewed by the DNR and the Metropolitan Council, jit is anticipated that the LMCD will prepare funding proposals for consideration by legislature will Board. the State also need legislature in 1991 or '^92!. The to approve any change in che LMCD Staff is frustrated by the approach that the LMCD Board is taking and we suggest that a letter be sent to the MetropopLitan Council, the DNR, and our legislative representatives expressing our displeasure. It is staff’s suggestion that the following recommendations be included in this letter. ' That take a regional agency such as the Metropolitan Council the initiative to prepare an overall management; plan for metropolitan lakes ard water resources. As noted in the previous report# it is ^ur recommendation that all classes of lakes be treated in an equl**able manner from a environmental and management standpoint. The implementing agencies can be organizations such as the LMCD. However, a metropolitan plan needs to be prepared before adoption of the piCD program. It "may be appropriate to designate lakes and water resources as another metropolitan system. Agencies like the LMCD can then prepare local plana that respond to the metropolitan plan. This would be a similar procedure: that was required by cities, counties, townships and school districts in response to the Metropolitan Plannlngi Act. This would also allow for coordination of watershed district and city plans from a regional and (Local perspective. Each entity would have the authority to comment on the plan with final approval by a regional agency. The LMCD plan is too broad and it extends beyond the [scope of its traditional authority. The LMCD proposes to act as an overseer to ensure that the cities and watershed districts adopt plans to govern land use and |/ater resources. It is our opinion that the cities and the watershed district are in a better position to regulate these areas than the LMCD. The cities and watershed district have more expertise with land use environmental Issues and have demonstrated implementation and enforcement capabilities. Further , the citiep and Page 2 V 3, 4. Council Work Session September 10# 1990watershed district do not need to be told by the LMCD to adopt plans that already have or are in the process of being prepared* Further# as evidenced by the ImDlementation aection of the plan, a substantial increase in ata^f and funding will be needed if the LMCD is to proceed with the recommendations in the plan to coordinate and oversee numerous planning efforts. The management plan should concentrate on past efforjts of the LMCD and manners in which these efforts ca^n ‘be Improved. It is recommended that the scope be narrowed to only lake issues such as law enforcement, lake use{, and lake environmental Issues. Additional funding should not be granted to the LMCD until such time a plan for accountability is developed. Staff strongly opposes the proposal to expand the taxing authority of the LMCD. if the current system remains and the taxing authority of the LMCD is expanded, the cities will continue to receive reaction from the public regarding dissatisfaction with LMCD programs and decisions. It Seems that it would be more responsible for the LMCD to establish their own tax collection system such as is done by the watershed districts if they want to pursue this course of action. j i The \ LMCD should look within its own organization to detCTmine their effectiveness. In reviewing the plan and the' operation of the LMCD for the past several years, it is evident that the LMCD Board has become somewhat parochial. This is not because of specific individuals but because of the number of representatives and the manner in jtfhlch appointments occur. Perhaps it would be more prudent for the LMCD Board to be smaller and yet obtain representation from a regional standpoint. At a minimum, one of the Implementation policies of the plan should investlgata the— -- --- - - -- —*sloneffectiveness of the Board in implementing past dec and developing programs. In conclusion, while staff applauds the LMCD inltiati preparing an overall management plan, we feel that 1 misdirected and extremely broad. It is recommended that the Council direct staff to write a strong letter to the LMCp other agencies noting the City of Minnetonka»s displeasure the plan and request that the Board not approve the plan. ve in is City and with Pagi 3 V / m •-.. > . m t-- ^.ii V- . . - ;•■'m-4 ■ ■ y: i-;i / r X ilk / r y r// ./ 7^ ‘••X '/■ ,' w EtlsHnt '$V „ 7 / / B-'v y y '■•- ii I II ■6- ■ I 4SSit5S Legal Description Lot 136, Spring Park Date : 9-7-82,5-16-90 rev. r-a-r. 4^ Scale: 1". 20- ' • : iron marker found 0 : Iron marker set Bearings shown are to an assumed datum. -~»V<—; tuir^inj e»»4m0^ ^a4mm • mtma rtm tnat ehah-. This survey shows the location of all existing buildings and visible hardcover" in relation to the boundaries of the above described property. It does not purport to show any other improvements or encroachments. I hereby certify that this survey was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly regist ered land surveyor under the laws of the State of Minnesota . COFFIN 6 6R0NBERG. INC. fHi*k SI bronoerg mn. l'-- - -Derg mn. L'lc. No. ^ A: X fi. m^r. la'-:-'.;,::.-,. A' .V - . ‘ ./^/5'7a V.* .■ ;• .• •■t" •• . ?* :-ESl^i^.iVr ■ '• ■ i-i i*^- •-■•i:2'' I ■*' * :* ■•■.»-> V- f 'ii^f-.:. ' •.. •' ' ' .• .>4.*r,'.'. e : ^ •■•;• f .. .•■ •V-J.*,,'.V, ,r V--;' .‘<^- •. - • •• : - "K. V;T^.-0^'^- r...v-'r--||v^-^*^' ' ^esnca Sii®: I liff IT f r ■ ■■ '■ V / %te-:;-P;.■ • V. ’ 'Ji / .0-A''" s -A f/zo/f^ A A fiStW I V\ClKJl'fY ^^^P ^';>--r! SURVEYOIV ENGINEER: TRACTT Carol. Kelly 3020 Casco Point Road Orono, Minnesota 55324 (612)471-7528 Ron Krueger and Associates. Inc. 8080 Wallace Road Eden Prairie. Minnesota 55344 (612) 934-4242 Jamas Massey 3030 Casco Point Road Orono. Minnesota 55324 iT-J ■■■ • . •. oDENOm nON MONUMENT LECAJ. OESCRMnONt Tract T * Tract U. R.L.S. No. 411 Rles 01 the Registrar ol Titles Hennepin County. Minnesota TB i-'.tOSACRES TRAC ru-0.78 ACBF'- DEVELOPMENT data Ut 1 Total Area: 23.620 S.F.. 0.54 Ac. 75'-250’Area: 17.420 S.F. Total Hard surtace 4.735 S.F.-27.18 % Hard surface Removed 398 S.F. Remaining Hard surface 4.337 S.F.-25.0 % Lot 2 Total Arsa: 26.830 S F.- 0.62 Ac. 75'-250’ArBa: 18.930 S.F. Possible Hard surface 4.732 S.F.-25.0 % Buildabis area 21.800S.F . .50 Ac .vy contigous) Lot 3 Total Area: 29.770 S.F.- 0.71 Ac. 75'-250'Area: 20.170 S.F. Total Hard surface 4.463 S.F.- 22.1 % (including gravel drive and turnaround) ,.iUV4-Vt]4-2-90 Wy'-' -i liiii "iifc ik-- - :m.;' '' : • ■ ■> ---mm. 1 m ii fiii ’! i; mms ■ ■