Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
03-11-1996 Council Packet
AGE?0)A FOR COUNCIL MEETING SET FOR MONDAY, MARCH 11, 1996, 7:00 P.M. ORONO COUNCIL CHAMBERS, 2780 KELLElf PARKWAY, ORONO, MINNESOTA (*) Asterisiv items are considered to be routine items to be enacted upon by one motion by the City Council under the Consent Item* on the agenda. Memos regarding each of the Agenda items are available in the Public Packet which may be obtained upon request from the Recorder. / 'Op. O^O/Vo ROLL CALL I. 7:00 p.m. PUBLIC HEARING Allocation of CDBG Funds - Resolution * 2. CONSENT AGENDA APPROVAL OF MINUTES * 3. Regular Meeting of February 26, 1996 PARK COi\LMISSION COMMENTS PLANNING CO.MMISSION COMMENTS - No Representative Selected PUBLIC COM.MENTS - (Limit 5 Minutes Per Person) ZONING ADMINISTR.\TOR’S REPORT 4. /i^l958 Louis Oberhauser, 2405 Dunwoody Avenue, 3865 and 3877 Shoreline Drive - Preliminary' Subdivision - Resolution * 5. ff2099 Loren Brueggemann/Dean Maeser, 372 Westlake Street - Denial Resolution 5^6. /5^2105 John and Sally Mitchell Lebedoff, 1101 West Femdale Road - Renewal Variances - Resolution * 7. ffllOl Erwin Smith and John M. O’Sullivan, 3340 Shoreline Drive - Request by Applicant to Refer Back to Planning Commission for Further Review ^ 8. /5^2109 Todd Smith, 1380 Arbor Street - Variances - Resolution Jf9. ^2110 Robert & Joan Dayton, 2465 French Lake Road - Variances - Resolution ^10. Alan G. Carlson, 3140 Watertown Road - Request to Extend Preliminary Subdivision Approval - Resolution II. Zoning Amendment, Section 10.20 Subd 3 - Ordinance * 12. Joint Use Dock Licenses MAYOR/COL^’CIL REPORT ENGINEER REPORT CITY .ADMESTSTRATOR’S REPORT 17 . Orono Baseball Association Request for Expanded Use of Bederwood Baseball Field 14. Part-Time Police Oflicer Appointment 15. Police Records System Replacement lo Use *4' Recycling Commission Budget Reserves 17. Equipment Purchase Public Works Department 18. Public Works Computer Link 19. Park and Lawn Maintenance 1996 and 1997 * 20. Resolution Approving Allocation of Damages and Authorizing Payment Thereof 21. Approval of Police Security System and Grant AGENDA FOR COUNCIL MEETING SET FOR MONDAY, MARCH 11, 1996, 7:00 P.M. ORONO COUNCIL CHAMBERS, 2780 KELLEY PARKWAY, ORONO, MINNESOTA CITY ATTORNEY’S REPORT (*22.) LICENSES (♦23.) BELLS UPCOMING ISSUES AND EVENTS 03/11 03/12 03/18 03/18 03/25 04/01 04/08 04/09 04/15 04/22 04/23 04/24 Council meeting 7:00 p.m. School Board Orono School Clerical Staff 8-11:00 a.m. Planning Commission meeting 7:00 p.m. Council meeting 7:00 p.m. Park Commission 7:15 p.m. Council meeting 7:00 p.m. School Board Planning Commission 7:00 p.m. Council meeting 7:00 p.m. School Board Board of Review 7:00 p.m. J Public A tteatdance llh’iiOM H i |99 (oMeeting D ate ^ C ouncil □ Planning C ommission □ Park C ommission □ Other Please fill out the information REQUESTED BELOW FOR OUR CITY RECORDS. NAME (please print)ADDRESS PRESENT FOR (from agenda) NAME OR NUMBER 1 ■ K1 k 1 lOeCAl^ 'Hoc iyiwipA Mouru o 2.. I P^.^T'JjnkU' i7Y‘Ti.''JiU)^ 0-^- s. "/ct>T>> T a/ / 5 y^O ST ^ /cy^^»4"* 'ib ^in 8.. 9. 10.. 11.. 12.. 13.. 14. 15. 09U9S.4 I COUNCIL MEETINQ MAR 11 1996 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION GffvoroncMO DATE: March 7, 1996 ITEM NO.: / Department Approval: Name John R. Gerhardson Title Public Works Director Administrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: Public Works Item Description: Public Hearing Communiiy Development Block Grant For 1996 the City will receive $22,177 from HUD through the Community Development Block Grant Program (CDBG). A requirement for receiving the ainds is to conduct a public hearing to receive citizen input for allocation of the monies. In our public hearing notice the following proposed eligible activities were published: 1. WeCan Operations 2. Westonka Intervention 3. Interfaith Outreach Community Partners 4. Rehabilitation of Private Property - Single Family $ 1,466 $ 1,466 $ 1,466 $17,779 Since the public hearing notice, we have been advised that Interfaith Outreach Commimity Partners has not spent their allocations from 1994 and 1995. Hennepin County Planning and Development has advised us that we cannot allocate monies from CDBG to Interfaith Outreach unless the funds will be used. It is stalls recommendation that the $1,466 originally proposed to be allocated to Interfaith Outreach be reallocated :miong the remaining three activities so that WeCan and Westonka Inten^ention each receive $1,500 and Housing Rehabilitation is allocated $19,177. A resolution reflecting this revised allocation is attached. COU.NCIL .ACTION REQUESTED: Motion to adopt a resolution approving the following projects for funding in the 1996 CDBG program: WeCan $1,500; Westonka Intervention $1,500; Housing Rehabilitation $19,177. : "ijvJ M CITY of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. _________________ RESOLUTION APPROVING PROJECTED USE OF FUNDS FOR I?''' ’^RBAN HENNEPIN COUNTY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT PROGRAM AND AUTHORIZING SIGNATURE OF SUBRECIPIENT AGREEMENT WITH HENNEPIN COUNTY AND ANY THIRD PARTY AGREEMENTS WHEREAS, the City of Orono, through execution of a Joint Cooperation Agreement with Hennepin County, is cooperating in the Urban Hennepin County Community Development Block Grant Program; and WHEREAS, the City of Orono developed a proposal for the use of Urban Hennepin County CDBG funds made available to it, and held a public hearing on March 11, 1996 to obtain the views of citizens on local and Urban Hennepin County housing and community development needs and priorities the City's proposed use of $22,177 from the 1996 Urban Hennepin County Community Development Block Grant. BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of Orono approves the following projects for funding from the Urban Hennepin County Community Development Block Grant Program and authorizes submittal of the proposal to Hennepin County for review and inclusion in the 1996 Urban Hennepin County Community Development Block Grant Program. Project WeCan Westonka Intervention Rehabilitation of Private Property Single Family $1,500 1,500 19,177 BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the City Council hereby authorizes and directs the Acting Mayor and its City Clerk to execute the Subrecipient Agreement and any required Third Party Agreement on behalf of the City. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota at a regular meeting held this 1 1th day of March, 1996. ATTEST: Dorothy M. Hallin, City Clerk Gabriel Jabbour, Acting Mayor Xfl O) C Q. <D X 52 B 2» (D o ®w <0z <0 III z < IL •t i ^ -S 12^1^4. ^|| •a Soe •y a 5 .11111?^ 3 ^ .aIS M111s « ^ ’c -S c o ^ 5 •*; ^ 11^ 2^ -I ail =mmrii^l “si ^il 5 u. = t/i ’iini *1(5! ley s ss IISJ s-ll }lgllilll S isii5=ii la It till cj n: i £ i s i i-2|'s| IIII|5 s.f a.s S'; “TS li ■S .S itil|5 iiilli iillit#iiir r*** t/5!2 a 2 2I ill! ijNi “•S g-S.Sas 1 S e .!2 “! .5 -2 5 " ills i|||^ itlii llliit1.N| |?i 0) 3 Oo i}f«12 S i o S 1= s <»g«§ li!i llf^ 111 a » §.s II ^ atii § 3s s ^ tr e3 0 I i !liri.lli“° liiltPin M! (/) tf) "■ifi c-2.gzl<IS IS111 o .5 aI 11Js s| .1 illllllsl Mi I 5|ii||flllil 1 litji. lisSl ii«iiHit lip illz 2 §4 n siS^n111 I HUH IfiilJJ} •g •3 •o a J2 S' —I i I s e 1.1^ tl^s e-s ^ ^ ^-11 ..iiilir^ 1 = I s f iinS s-g^ Sd ;ga o ®°-g a vV fiifii 21 ill i-| iim -I -= ^lls>-:?y "“1 if 5 e-S a-s llrlr 1 !li|i y. s!|ll l|llt Ill ll!l| I = Ml l| 2 M g.iti-Jlllis I'MJfi Wi:UAN HHUV 1 CMSEMERGENCYEMERGENCYASSISTANCEMEALS ON VVHEELS HOUSEHOLDS NUMBER OF MEALS DELIVERED FOOD & NUTRITION HOUSEHOLDS JOBS&TRAININGHOUSEHOLDS2 FAMILYSUPPORTSERVICES1 PUBLICASSISTANCEHOUSEHOLDS COUNSELINGHOUSEHOLDS ^UNSELINOHOURS TOTALNUMBE^J^HousiiioLosASSISTANCEHOUSEHOLDS$$ ISSUEDGREENFIELD1200.00 405 ---------3INDEPENDENCE1$250.00 4 6 LORETTO 1 $350.00 1 1 3 MAPLE PLAIN 14 $4,111.00 12 2,278 1 7 2 5 1 20 42 MTKA.BEACH MINNETRISTA 4 $1,399.00 5 297 2 5 4 20 MOUND 7S %16,463.00 42 5,898 20 62 26 86 15 137.5 329 ORONO 7 $1,340.00 6 446 10 4 1 10 28 ROCKFORD 23 $7,280.00 9 11 43 SPRING PARK 23 $5,657.00 26 2,823 1 15 3 9 1 16 76 8T. BONIFACIU:17 $3,843.00 7 7 3 8 2 4 20 36 TONKA BAY 4 $1,060.00 2 1 7 OTHER CITIES ANNANDALE 1 1 ANOKA 1 1 BRKLYN.CNTR.1 1 BUFFALO 1 1 CHANHASSEN 1 1 2 CHA3KA 1 1 COKATO 1 3 1 CRYSTAL 1 1 2 DELANO 1 1 EAGAN i 1 EXCELSIOR 1 1 HAMEL 4 4 HOMELESS 2 $93.00 1 3 HOPKINS 3 1 4 LONG LAKE . 6 2 6 MAPLE GROVE 1 1 MEDINA 3 1 4 MINNEAPOLIS 2 2 MINNETONKA 2 2 PLYMOUTH 25 1 1 27 RICHFIELD 1 1 SHOREWOOO 2 1 1 4 WATERTOWN 2 2 WAVERLY 1 $200.00 1 WAYZATA 9 2 ___ 11 TOTALS 176 $44,246.00 97 12,154 ______33 181 69 113 23 206.6 682 INFORMAIION & REFERRALS 676—. ---- .....Itotal 1,267 // / /,/ aOEMERGENCY ASSISTANCE —1/------------------------TV—cmr HHS A c SR M F FHH RACE INCOM SOURCE RENT DATE ASST GIVEN ASST. ORONO 4 4 2 2 3W/1B $550 EMPLOYED $250 Apr-95 $100.00 R........... ORONO 1 1 1 W $536 UNEMPCOMP $735 Jan-95 $230.00 R.F^....... ORONO 1 1 i W $300 RELATIVES $450 Mar-95 $30.00 F ORONO 3 1 ~2 i 2 1 B $785 AFDC $470 bec-95 $225.00 R.F ORONO 2 i i 2 W $700 EMPLOYED $400 Apr-95 $225.00 U.F ORONO 1 1 i W $ i.ooo EMPLOYED $500 Sep-95 $250.00 U ORONO 2 1 ”1 1 1 W $400 EMPLOYED OWN Jun-95 $280.00 U.F.G 14 10 4 0 9 5 1 $1,340.00 Page 1 SheetlJOBS PROGRAM jCITYHHSACSRMFFHHRACEINCOME {SOURCE RENT DATE REFERRAL TRNGORONO211111W1793iEMP&SUPPORT 440 { Dec-95 JOB MCK ORONO 1 1 1 W 598 UEMP 737 Jan-95 VETS ORONO 2 2 1 w 3335 EMP 840 Apr-95 JOBS ORONO 1 .... i i 1 w 500 Jan-95 JOBS JOB ORONO 1 1 w 1200 295 Jan-95 JOBS ORONO 1 1 1 1 w WORKS WORKS 697 Jan-95 JOBS ORONO 3 2 1 2 w 500 260 Apr-95 JOBS ORONO “ ■ i 1 1 w 0 0 Mar-95 {JOBS ORONO 2 1 2 w 400 Apr-95 JOBS ORONO 1 _ _ 1 w 950 JOB 520 Aug-95 BETTERJOB JTPA ' Page 1 1995 WeCAN MEALS ON WHEELSMEALS ON WHEELSCITYHHSIZE ADULT SENIORS MALE FEMALE F.HH ^CE LowiNC.It of MO WORONO1111W48ORONO32112w89 ORONO 1 1 1 1 w 102 ORONO 1 1 1 w 184 ORONO 1 1 1 1 w 21 ORONO 1 i 1 1 “w'2 8 2 5 2 ^6 3 0 446 r: Page 1 SheetlCOUNSELINGI I !I IICITY ORONO HH« 5 A 2 C 3 SR M 3 F FHHIRACE 2\ iw INCOME SOURCE 3,000 EMPLOYED jRENT I DATE ^HOURS 2,3,4 PYMf. 10 INSURAN Page 1 Sheet 1ECONOMIC ASSISTANCE RENTNAMECITYHHSACSMFFHHRACEINCOMESOURCE DATE ; 1fiii=ORONO 1 1 0 0 1 1 W 0 AFDCAPP 0 Jan-95 ORONO 1 1 0 0 1 1 W 0 LIVES W/PARENT 0 Jan-95 ORONO 1 1 0 0 1 1 w 1000 EARNED 0 Feb-95 ORONO 3 1 2 1 2 1 w 1100 EARNED 490 Sep-95 AFUU GRAND TOTALS 6 4 2 0 1 5 2 Page 1 Affidavit of Pubiication ^ State of Minnesota, County of Hennepin. Bill Holm, being duly sworn on oath, says that he is an authorized agent and employee of the publisher of the newspaper known as THE LAKER, Mound, Minnesota, and has full knowledge of the facts which are stated below: CITY OF ORt-lO NOTICE OF PUBL'C HEARING 1996 URBAN HENNEPIN COUNTY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT PROGRAM Nolic* is hereby given that the City ol Orotw in cooperation with Hennepin County, pursuant to Title I ol the Housing and Community Development Act ol 1974. as amended, is holding a public hearing on March 11. 1996. at 7.00 p.m. in the Orono Council Chambers. 2780 Kelley Parkway. Ororo. Minnesota. The public heanng is on the housing and conununity development needs, pnonties of the and Urban Hennepin County and the City's proposed use ol the 1996 Urban Hennepin County Community Development Block Grant Program proposed planning allocallon ol S22.177. In addition, dunng the July 1.1996 to June 30. 1997 program year, it is estimated that no additional program income Irom locally funded CDBG activities w« be avarfable to the City. The City ol Orono is proposed to undertake the loilowing activities with 1996 Urban Hennepin County CDBG lunds starling on or abouiJuly 1.1996. Aaivrtv Budget WeCAN S 1.466 Westonka Intervention 1.466 Intertaith Outreach Community Partners 1.466 Rehabilitation ol Private Property-Single Family 17.779 For additional inlormation on the priorities, proposed activities, level ol lundmg and pri .”*1 perlormance, contact the City ol On ' 4 73-7357 or the Hennepin County OIIh - ol Planning & Development at 541- 7080. ~he public hearing is being held pursuant to MS 471.59. By Order ol the Oty Courxai /s.' Dorwhy M. HaJUn, City Oerk (Published in The Laker and Pioneer. Feb. 24. 1996) A.) The newspaper has complied with all the requirements constituting qualifications as - qualified newspaper, as provided by Minnesota Statute 331 A.02, 331 A.07, and other applicable laws, as amended. B.) The printed 'uMlh ka'dI'Ji CXhH Hm/url which is attached was'cut from the columns of said newspaper, and w^ printed and published once each week for ___t successive weeks: It was first published Monday, the. and was thereafter printed anc;^published every Monday, to and including Monday, AuThorized Agent Subscribed and sworn to me on this (1) Lowest classified rate paid by commercial users for comparable space; Si 2.20 per inch. (2) Maximum rate allowed by law lor above matter: Si2.20. (3) Rate actually charged for above matter: $7.00 per inch. Each additional successive week; S5.05. ORONO aXY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES FOR FEBRUARY 26. 1996 OOUNCI.IIEEnNQ MAR--11 1996 ROLL CffYOFORQNO The Council met on the above mentioned date with the following members present: Mayor Edward Callahan, Jr. and Council Members J. Diann Goetten and Gabriel Jabbour Council Members, Charles Kelley and JoElIen Hurr, were absent. Representing Staff were City Administrator Ron Moorse, City Attorney Tom Barrett, Building and Zoning Administrator Jeanne Mabustb, Assistant Planning and Zoning Administrator Michael Gaffron, Public Works Director John Gerhardson, City Engineer Glenn Cook, and Recorder Sherry Frost. Mayor Callahan called the meeting to order at 7;00 p m (*#1) CONSENT AGENDA Items #4, 5, and 6 were added to the Conseni .Agenda. Goetten moved, Jabbour seconded, *o app'^ove the Consent Agenda as amended. Vote: Ayes 3, Nays 0. APPROVAL OF MINUTES (*#2) REGULAR MEETING OF FEBRUARY 12,1996 Goetten moved, Jabbour seconded, to approv e the Minutes of the Regular City Council Meeting of February 12, 1996. Vote; Ayes 3, Nays 0. PARK COMMISSION COMMENTS Park Commissioner McDarmott reported that the Commission was working on revising the master park plan He noted, with Council's approval, a student intern would assist with the park descriptions McDermott said the Commission would like to consider taking land instead of the Park Dedication Fee on the Johnson application requesting the land to be taken abut the Saga Hill property. PLANNING COMMISSION COMMENTS Hawn was present but had no report PUBLIC COMMENTS There w’erc no public comments. C^-THSi! minutes OF THE REGULAR ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD ON FEBRUARY 26.1996 ZONING ADMINISTRATOR’S REPORT cioio^yTO (#3) OBERHAUSER- STATUS REPORT OF REMOVAL OF BOARDED UP STRUCTURES Mabusth submitted a written status report on the Oberhauser property. Oberhauser’s secretary informed Mabusth that a 2 week notice was needed for the bum and, therefore, it is now scheduled for March 2. The secretary said arrangements have been made with the Valek Company to remov e all debris from the bum. If the bum does not take place, Oberhauser will be requested to attend the March 1 1 meeting of the Council. Attorney Barrett was requested to begin legal action if the structures were not burned on the scheduled date and to update the Council at the March 11 meeting. Goetten asked to be notified of the outcome of the bum date. (*#4) #2104 B. SCOTT BALL, 1065 WEST FERNDALE ROAD - VARUNCE - RESOLUTION #3683 Goetten moved, Jabbour seconded, to adopt Resolution #3683, grantir lot area, lot width, and average lakeshore setback variances to B Scott Ball of 1066 West Femdale Road tor construction ot a new single tamily residence to replace the existing residence structure. Vote. Ayes 3, Nays 0. (*#5) #2106 WILLIAM AND LAURA STODDARD, 2605 KELLY AVENUE - VARIANCE - RESOLUTION #3684 Goetten moved, Jabbour seconded, to adopt Resolution #3684 Vote: Ayes 3, Nays 0. (*#6) #2111 T. J. BIEKER, 2440 OLD BEACH ROAD - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT - RESOLUTION #3685 Goetten moved. Jabbour seconded, to adopt Resolution #3685. Vote; Ayes 3, Nays 0. (#7) ZONING AMENDMENT, SECTION 10.20, SI BD. 3 Gatfron reported that the City has determined that the indoor ice arena use does not fit in the current conditional uses allowed within the residential zoning districts but would be appropriate in the residential code as a conditional use permit under the school use. The Planning Commission and Staff reviewed the options for an ice arena as a separate use under the school use They propose an amendment to the R1A residential district conditional use section of the "school" use to allow an ice arena on property owned by the school, to be listed under the conditional use section as an accessory use to the school use. The proposed arena is being considered for a property leased from the school. MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD ON FEBRUARY 26, 1996 (#7 Zoning Amendment - Continued) Gaffron said the Planning Commission feels performance standards should be attached to the ice arena use. Staff recommended standards be established in order to control any adverse impact on the adjoining residential property. The Planning Commission agreed that the ice arena use should be considered an accessory use to the school. It was recommended that the amendment be confined to just the ice arena and that this use require a conditional use permit. The Planning Commission did not feel it was critical that the arena be on the same tax parcel as the school but only on property owned by the school. Staffs recommendation was that the arena should be located on the same tax parcel as the principal high school use Gaffron continued explaining that the Staff proposal for setbacks would not allow a building to be less than 100' from an abutting residential lot line. The standard for the school use is now 50 ’ from any residential lot line. The existing code under the condit ’orJ use section lists a category including clubs and camps that has a 100' setback for any structures. Given the different types of uses. Staff recommended a 100 setback guideline with the provision that if the Council should find conditions allowing a lesser setback that this be allowed via a variance. Ciattron noted it is ditticult to ask a developer to maintain a stricter guideline than is called for in the code. Another addition to the proposal was that all facilities should be owned or operated by the school or under a land lease arrangement between the school and a non-profit organization with final review and approval by the Planning Commission and Council. Staff questioned whether the Council would want final approval of the lease as recommended by the Planning Commission. The notation was added by Staff, but not reviewed by the Planning Commission, that the facility could not be separated from the school itself by any public roadway, but must be accessible to and on the same property as the school. Callahan asked whether the provision that the facility be located on the same tax parcel has the same effect as not allowing any public road between the school and facility Gaffron said the concern was that the County tax office had the ability to combine parcels across public roads and could negate that restriction Mark Engebretson of the Orono Hockey Boosters Association commented that the Planning Commission recommended that no setback be listed in the amendment but elected to make the setback a pan of the performance standards, which his organization preferred. MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO CTfY COUNCIL MEETING HELD ON FEBRUARY 26, 1996 (#7 Zoning Amendment - Continued) Callahan asked that the performance standards note that the Council would not need to have final approval of the lease but have the ability to look into the financial circumstances surrounding the lease. Barrett said it would be difficult under the conditional use because an applicant would either be allowed the use or not allowed the use. He noted that the CUP could be revoked if the entity could not operate under the lease agreement. Barrett also noted, that although financial conditions could be reviewed, financial conditions do change. Jabbour commented that it would be unrealistic to remove a conditional use permit after a building is constructed. Callahan said he did not wish to see a building only partially built due to financial problems and asked if the review or issue of the CUP could be tied into the non-profit organization obtaining a certain percentage of the necessary funds upfront so as to eliminate a large debt being inherited once the building was complete When asked if financial requirements could be part of the performance standards, Barrett said performance bonds could be required as part of the CUP to demonstrate in a measurable way that a developer would complete the construction of a building. Jabbour commented that although the City was considering a certain proposal, the drafted ordinance amendment could accommodate other organizations, and he sees the need to require 75-80% of the funds be raised prior to the issuance of the CUP. Gaffion said this could be accomplished through the conditional use application review. Jabbour noted that restrictions being proposed were more restrictive than is currently allowed on the specific school property. Jabbour preferred a 50' setback requirement and to treat the accessory use similar to a commercial site with buftering and landscaping. With reference to the particular proposal, Jabbour did not feel the requirement should be twice as .estrictive considering the soils on the property, such a restriction could result in placing an undue burden on the building location Callahan commented on the Hockey Association application being suspended due to the need to amend the current code Mabusth said it had been conceptually reviewed by the Planning Commission Callahan said the proposed ice arena should be on the particular school site proposed and not on any other site as has been previously discussed He, therefore, said the amendment should note the particular location and add the stipulation that no public road separate the facilities As to the section regarding profit or non-profit organization, Callahan said the proposal was being considered by a non-profit group to free itself from paying arn real estate taxes and shoiiTd be left as written. Jabbour said it should be noted that the City has been associated with many non-profit organizations and has benefited greatly from these relationships. MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD ON FEBRUARY 26,1996 Zoning Amendment - Continued) Callahan moved, Goctten seconded, to amend the zoning code Section 10.20. Subd. 3(A) Schools in line with Staff recommendations with the cxceotion that a nerformance standard require that SO^'o of funds be raised prior to the issuance of the conditional use permit and require a 50’ setback from any abuting residential lot line. An application can be discussed at the Planning Commission but funds must be shown to be available before an aoplication can ro before the Council. The ordinance will be brought before the Council in its final form Vote; Ayes 3, Nays 0 MAYOR/COUNCIL REPORT Callahan commented on the receipt of a letter from Long Lake to the Metropolitan Council reuardintt the reauest bv Orono for the amendn.ent to the comnrehensive plan for extending the MUSA Moorse said the Met Council’s only issue in their feedback, which requires a response, relates to sewer capacity. They are concerned whether there is sufficient capacity as some of Orono’s sewer flows through the trunk lines of Long Lake and on to the metro lift station. Jabbour said he could not understand Long Lake's response as the areas proposed for sewer protect Long Lake. He also questioned why an amended transportation plan involving Hwy 12 would be a stipulation of gaining additional sewer units. Moorse said a meeting is scheduled with the City Administrator of Long Lake on February 27. Jabbour asked Barrett to research the ability and authority of the City to contribute monies from the tax lew for athletic croups and other croups, such as the LMCD. or if this was outside the parameters of the tax levy Barrett will foward a letter responding to this request. ENGINEER REPORT CHANGE ORDERS Moorse outlined the change orders resulting in additional costs to the MSA projects in 1995, specifically, the North Brown Road reconstruction and the Watertown culvert replacement. A memo from Moorse lists the specific costs and explanations, along with a list of measures to be taken on future projects to enable the City to identify all potential costs as part of the process to avoid overruns. It any additional charges do anse, the procedure would require the Council’s immediate attention. MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO CITY COUNOL MEETING HELD ON FEBRUARY 26,1996 (#8 Change Orders - Continued) Cook explained that the cost overruns resulted from easement acquisitions and were not construction related. Callahan informed Cook that money was spent without the proper authority to do so Cook agreed. He pointed out the good history of cost control in construction related costs by Bonestroo as well as the initial feasibility study noting the possibility of easement costs Goelten said her concern was that the additional cost was nev'er shown tor approval or disapproval. Callahan said the contract calls for approval of any changes to the contract. Cook emphasized that there was no attempt to hide any costs and the easements costs were the reason for the overrun. Cook aitreed that aonroval shov.id have been obtained Cook noted the success of the two projects He said he had no problem with the orooosal from Moorse or the need to aain aoDrovals. He added that the easement costs were negotiated in good faith for the City. Callahan agreed but noted the overpayment in Change Order No 2 did not result from easement costs. Jabbour said when changes in cost occur, they should then be brought up at a work session, if it occurs between Council meetings, and before the money is actually spent. Callahan moved, Jabbour seconded, to approve Change Orders I and 2 to the Brown Road Reconstruction - S\P 152-107-01 and Watertown Road Culvert - SAP 152-103- 01 Projects, in the amounts of S"7,842 00 and $44,041.65 respectively. Vote: Ayes 3. Navs 0. (#9) HIGHWAY 12 TRAFFIC SIGNAL AGREEMENT AND PAYMENT Moorse reported that this agenda item consists of two items relating to the semaphore at Hwy 12 and Willow Drive and the safety improvement to Hwy 12. The final cost for the semaphore, which is being recommended for payment, is $37,576. The safety improvement cost is $143,874 based on an estimate bv Mn/'DOT, which is close to, but not the final cost of the project Mn/DOT is requesting that this amount be paid. Staff recommends payment of $135,000, which was the amount agreed upon as the City of Orono's cost amount. Callalian moved, Goetten seconded, to approve payments to Mn/DOT in the amounts of $37,542.90 for the Willow and 12 semaphore and $135,049,58 for the Hiehwav 12 safen- improvements; to be funded from the .MSA fund in the amount of $148,942.54, and from the PIR fund in the amount of $23,650. Vote: Ayes 3, Nays 0. MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETLNG HELD ON FEBRU.\RY 26, 1996 CITY ADMINISTRATOR’S REPORT (#10) VALEK PROPERTY PARK ACCESS RIGHT-OF-WAY Moorse reported that the discussion relates to the 9-1/2 acre tax forfeit parcel The Valek's requested that a 1/2 acre be added to their property, which the Council had indicated agreement to, with the condition that the City retain and relocate a piece of ri«ht of wav throush their property to uain access to the tax forteit parcel. Moorse said the Valek's ask that the right of w ay not be retained Mr. Valek said he has never been interested in seeing an access go through his property to the park land. He believes the right of way to be a utility easement, and was told so by Jeanne Mabusth as w »11 as being so designated on his abstract. Now he is concerned that the rinht of wav is beina shown as a bike trail Callahan asked Valek why he should be given the property without compensation. Valek said he had shown his hardship and would be willinc to oav the S% park dedication fee and pay for the land. Callahan said he had no objection to the land being acquired from the County by Va!ek but the City was not in the position to act on the property at this time. Callahan said he would need to have proof of an adequate access to the park land before any further decisions are made. Jabbour w as informed by Gaffron that the 10' right of way was a dedicated public right of way, which was donated and dedicated as an alley in 1891, and which has not been vacated. Jabbour agreed with Callahan that an access must be maintained to the park land A potential optional access has recently been proposed by the Fairview Church through its property It has not yet been determined if adequate access is available or if arrangements are feasible. Gaffron noted this would require an easement from the church Mr Valek said the County has told him the 1/2 acre has no ties to the park property disposition Mrs Valek asked if the Citv obtained reasonable access, would the council be willing to split off the 1/2 acre parcel Callahan said it was possible if agreement could be made between the County and City and the Valeks He asked the Valek's to continue working with Staff, adding that consideration would be given to releasing the 1/2 acre when access to the park land has been gained; but where that access will come from has not yet been determined. Callahan reitereated that the City is awaiting the County's decision on the disposition of the tax forteit parcel. I MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD ON FEBRUARY 26,1996 (#10 Valek Property Park Access Right of Way - Continued) Jabbour reminded the Valek's that even when the access has been determined or any aooroval has been made to erant the Valek's the 1/2 acre, all codes still need to be adhered to in order to subdivide the 1/2 acre from the rest of the parcel. Valek said he would prefer the City gain access through the church property Dallas Jenson, representing church pastor, Dennis Poole, was present. He presented a letter from Fairview Church formally noting their willingness to discuss a possible easement. Jenson said the church had related questions as to who would pay for the survey and other costs involved Mrs. Valek commented that Staffs request for 20' of their land was land not on th.'ir principal lot but an additional lot with a separate sewer stub. She was concerned that an easement would affect the status of that lot Mr Valek noted that discussions are movine in the riuht direction (#11) VOLUNTEER COMxMlSSlON APPOINTMENTS Moorse outlined the recent and upcoming expiration dates of the terms of several Park and Planning Commissioners The first step in the process to fill any vacancies is to identify any reappointments and then advertise those needing to be filled. Callahan asked Moorse to contact the Commissioners affected to determine their continued interest in serving. The Council agreed that the Planning Commission vacancy should be advertised immediately to alleviate the problem of achieving a quorum at their meetings. Jabbour also suggested that the Planning Commission be considered for two meetings a month, esoeciallv in February, March, and .April, to eliminate anv undue hardship on applicants. This would also even out the number of zoning applications on the Council's agenda. Callahan noted the importance of a system being in place in order to ensure the City’s conformance with the 60-dav rule, and asked that Staff check if the format was being properly handled. If extensions are required, it was reported that they need to be in writing The Citv .Attomev aereed to develop a proper form for such extensions. (#12) SAGA HILL TAX FORFEIT PARCEL UPDATE Moorse reported that the City is meeting with the County staff on February 29 to confirm the City's interest in obtaining the full tax fotteit parcel and to relay the concerns that have been voiced He noted the receipt of a letter from the Saga Hill Preservation Society requesting a resolution be adopted and taken to that meeting to reconfirm their interest in preserving the area as open space. WONUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD ON FEBRUARY 26,1996 (#12 Saga Kill Tax Forfeit Parcel Update - Continued) Patti Affeldt said the group would like to see tw o changes made to the original resolution. It was their reauest that the Citv Staff and the Citv Attomev both work to obtain the conveyance of the property to the City of Orono and asked that the Saga Hill Preservation Society be included in all discussions. The Council members voiced their disapproval of these changes. Jabbour noted the diflRculty in coming to decisions with a third party being involved. Goetten added that if the Council is in need of the City Attorney s advisement, they will ask for it. Callahan said he was opposed to passing a resolution but was interested in bringing the matter to a head. He noted that he would like to see progress made on the negotiations but is not willing to pay for the property. Callahan said the Council does not wish the matter to go on indefinitely and are asking Staff to reach some conclusion with the County at the upcoming meeting. Moorse commented that the County funds their tax forfeit department through these parcels. Jabbour reported that the mechanics are in place for the County to give land to a public entity if they so desire. Jabbour asked the City Attorney if the City had any rights towards the parcel. Barrett suid the statute states that when a property goes tax forfeit, it reverts to State ownership. 1 he County handles the administration for the distribution of the land and determines the best use of the land, whether public or private. It can be sold private on a first come, first serve basis, or conveyed by deed to a government emity for authorized public use. The County Board makes a recomenriation, along with input from the City, to the Commissioner of Revenue, who makes the ultimate decision on the disposition of the property. Barrett said when he spoke with the County, they requested a progress report on the Saga Hill Preservation Society ’s fund raising. He asked if there was any update. Jabbour noted that these were separate pieces of land. Callahan said it was his view that the tax forfeit land be obtained at no cost to the City. The City did apply for a separate grant to aid the Saga Hill group in raising funds to obtain the adjacent and contiguous piece of property Jabbour said the City would look most favorably into receiving the tax forfeit land if the Saga Hill group were successful in their attempt to acquire the adjoining parcel for open space. Patti Affeldt reported that the group is confident that they will succeed. She noted their recent alliance wiili the .American Swedish Institute in assisting their fund raising efforts. A couple of grants were said to have been leceived by the group. Irene Silber said the group preferred not to disclose details of their fund raising at this time. Jabbour said it was impossible to make plans without knowing the status of their fund raising efforts. MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD ON FEBRUARY 26,1996 CITY ATTORNEY'S REPORT City Attorney Barrett requested an Executive Session to discuss pending litigation. (•#13) UCi-NSES There were no license applications under consideration (•#14) BILLS J Goctten moved, Jabbour seconded, to approve payment of the All Funds Account. Vote: Ayes 3, Nays 0. ADJOURNMENT Mayor Callahan adjourned the meeting at 8;32 p m. Edward J Callahan, Jr, Mayor ATTEST: Dorothy M. Hallin, City Clerk 11 • f < 5 a*II I I£ ip III-g I t*i tn « O 'jl|3|lMl5 <2 w £ o °l?il ! I s'|‘ g'^lsl ^So^=3 d ii . Is § II sl- I giiiiJ *'53 '2^ “2(3^S ’'’ “«|gB^ -S^iQa as ^Pii ^ £ 52 S! ^ ^ 5^ I I"od t'.’ oddd t: f S ^ K i -a mun ^ O Oi a. (/I Ce: H w u ^ N ^ H M ll I) "■ "' 6! ◄f is eili ifisi 51 Io OOUCLMEETMQ REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION DATE: 3/6/96 ITEM NO.: MAR 11 1996 OTYOFORONO Department Approval: Name Jeanne A. Mabusih Title Building & Zoning Administrator Administrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: Zoning Item Description: #1958 Louis Oberhauser, 2405 Dunwoody Avenue, 3865/38755 Shoreline Drive - Preliminary Subdivision - Variances - Resolution List of Exhibits A1-2 - Hardcover Facts Lot 1 Bl-3 - Hardcover Facts Lot 2 C - Amended Plan Status of Application At the January 8, 1996 meeting of the Council, members voted to table all action on the preliminar>’ subdivision application until the two boarded structures that encroached the proposed division line were removed. Oberhauser advised at that time that he was unable to provide the necessary security to accompany an executed devel* uer's agreement. Applicant did advise that he had been discussing the removal of the structure with both the Mound Fire Department and a contractor with his hope that the structures would be either burned or removed before the end of January. Council advised the applicant u.at they would delay all action on the preliminary subdivision until the structures were removed. The two structures were burned on March 3, 1996. As of a staff site inspection on March 4th, the debris from the bum had not been removed and there were signs of smoke from the bum of the day before. Staff will advise of the status of tlie removal of the debris at your March 11th meeting. The applicant has also agreed to remove the existing residence stmcture, detached garage, west curb cut or drive and retaining wall located within right-of-w ay of County Road before seeking approval of the final plat. He advised of the need to provide adequate notice to the renter and wanted to allow him to remain until spring. Review' of Amended Application At the December 11th meeting of the Council, members conceptually approved the preliminary subdivision application and variances for proposed Lots 1 and 2 if all existing and proposed hardcover improvements shown in the 0-75' setback area w'ere removed. Council members also Dtr* 3, M .rjknKO Request for Council Action continued March 6, 1996 Zoning File #1958 Louis Oberhauser, 2405 Dunwoody Avenue, 3865/3877 Shoreline Drive wished to have confirmation of the exact variances to be granted at the time of final plat approval. The amended plan has been submitted by applicant. Exhibit C. Both existing and proposed improv^ements within the 0-75’ setback area have been removed. The shared lot line has been relocated along Shoreline Drive. The County has approved the proposed location of the shared drive. Lot I's area has been reduced from 16,500 s.f. to 14,370 s.f. as a result of the rearrangement although lot width has been increased. Note Lot 2 no longer needs an area variance and will require only a width variance and hardcover variance of 6.9% within the 75-250' setback area. The variances are reviewed as follows: A. Section 10.25, Subdivision 6 (B) 1. Street setback variance for Lot 1 Required = 30' Existing = -6' Proposed = 5' Variance = 25’ or 83% 2. Area variance for Lot I. Required = 21,780 s.f Proposed = 14,370 s.f Variance = 7,410 s.f or 34% 3. Lot width variance for Lot I. Required = 100' Proposed at OHWL = 55' Proposed at 75' setback = 81' Variance = 45' or 45% 4. Width variance for Lot 2. Required = 100' Proposed at OHWL = 65’ Proposed at 75' setback = 75' Variance = 35' or 35% B. Section 10.56, Subd. 16 (L) - Hardcover variances within 75-250' setback area. Request for Council Action continued Page 3 March 6. 1996 Zoning File #1958 Loui:* Oberhauser, 2405 Dunwoody Avenue, 3865/3877 Shoreline Drive 1. Loti. 75-250' setback area = 9,080 s.f. Allowed = 2,2' or 25% Existing = 6,70s ..t. or 73.8% Proposed = 4,400 s.f. or 48.46% Variance = 2,130 s.f. or 23.4% Total hardcover reduction = 2,304 s.f. or 25.3% 2. Lot 2. 75-250' setback area = 15,260 s.f. Allowed = 3,815 s.f. or 25% Existing = 4,729 s.f. or 30.9% Proposed = 4.880 s.f. or 31.9% Variance = 1,065 s.f. or 6.9% Hardcover increase =151 s.f or 0.9% C. Section 10.03, Subd. 14 (C) - Lot coverage variance for Lot 1. Total area = 14.370 s.f Allowed = 2,155.5 s.f or 15% Proposed = 2.642.8 s.f. or 18.3% Variance = 487.3 s.f. or 3.3% Staff recommends approval of the preliminary subdivision of the replat of tlie three substandard parcels and conceptual approval of the variances listed above. The vari^ces to be fominlly acted on at the time of final plat approval. Approval is based on the unique finding s and hardships set forth in the enclosed resolution and the conditions of that approval. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: To either appro\e or amend the enclosed approval resolution. A RESOLUTION GRANTING PRELIMINARY PLAT APPROVAL OF A LOT LINE REARRANGEMENT OF PROPERTIES LOCATED AT 2405 DUNWOODY AVENUE, 3865/3877 SHORELINE DRIVE FILE NO. 1958 WHEREAS, Louis B. Oberhauser (hereinafter the "subdivider") on October 24, 1995, filed a formal subdivision application with the City for approval of a lot line rearrangement of a residential plat of property legally described as: Lots 1 and 2, Block 2, Townslte of Langdon Park, Hennepin County, Minnesota (hereinafter "the property"); and WHEREAS, after due published and mailed notice in accordance with Minnesota Statutes 462.358 et. seq. and the City of Orono's Zoning and Platting Codes, the Orono Planning Commission held a public hearing on November 20, 1995 at which time all persons desiring to be heard concerning this application were given the opportumty to speak thereon, and WHEREAS, at regular meetings held on December 11, 1995, January 8, 1996 and March 11, 1996, the Orono City Council considered the subdivision application of Louis B. Oberhauser, noting the following findings of fact: 1.llie property is located within the LR-IC Single Family Lakeshore Residential Zoning District requiring a minimum of 21,780 s.f. or one-half acre of area and lot width of 100 ’ at OHWL and 75’ setbacks. The property consists of three substandard lots. Lot area and lot widths aie as follows: Parcel A (western lot) Lot area = 7.600± s.f. Lot width = 35' at OHWL. 49' at 75' setback Parcel B (middle lot) Lot area = 16,900± s.f. Lot width = 34' at OHWL, 63' at 75' setback Page 1 of 6 Parcel C (most eastern lot) Lot area = 12,000± s.f. Lot width = 50' at OHWL. 50’ at 75' setback 3. The area and lot widths of the two residential lots as a result of the proposed lot line rearrangement are as follows: Lot 1 Lot 2 Lot area = 14,370 s.f. Lot width = 55’ at OKWL, 81' at 75' setback Lot area = 21,910 s.f. Lot width = 65 ’ at OHWL, 75' at 75' setback 4. The property has been assessed for sewer and water and there is adequate capacity in each line to serve the two new residential structures. 5. Access to the two proposed residential sites shall be via a shared curb cut at Shoreline Drive. Both the Hennepin County Department of Transportation and the City Engineer, Shawn Gustafson, have recommended approval of a shared access at Shoreline Drive. 6. Three substandard parcels have contained four independent residential units. Two of the structures remain uninhabited and are boarded up because of their hazardous condition. One of the residential structures serves as a rental unit and the fourth has been demolished. 7. The applicant has submitted development plans for the new residential construction on newly defined lots. 8. On March 3, 1996 the two boarded residences that encroached the proposed division line were demolished. Page 2 of 6 Council conceptually approves variances for the new construction on proposed Lots 1 and 2 as follows: A. Section 10.25, Subdivision 6 (B) 1) Street setback variance for Lot 1. Required = 30' Existing = -6' Proposed = 5' Variance = 25' or 83% 2) Area variance for Lot 1. Required = 21.780 s.f. Proposed = 14.370 s.f. Variance = 7,410 s.f. or 34% 3) Lot width variance for Lot 1. Required = 100' Proposed at OHWL = 55' Proposed at 75' setback = 81' Variance = 45' or 45% 4) Width variance for Lot 2. Required = 100' Proposed at OHWL = 65' Proposed at 75’ setback = 75' Variance = 35 ’ or 35% B. Section 10.56, Subdivision 16 (L) - Hardcover variances within 75-250' setback area. 1) Lot 1 75-250’ setback area = 9.080 s.f. Allowed = 2,270 s.f or 25% Existing = 6,704 s.f or 73.8% Proposed = 4.400 s.f or 48.46% Variance = 2.130 s.f or 23.4% Total hardcover reduction = 2,304 s.f or 25.3% Page 3 of 6 2) Lot 2 75-250' setback area = 15,260 s.f. Allowed = 3,815 s.f. or 25% Existing = 4,729 s.f. or 30.9% Proposed = 4.880 s.f. or 31.9% Variance = 1.065 s.f. or 6.9% Hardcover increase =151 s.f. or 0.9% C. Section 10.03, Subdivision 14 (C) - Lot coverage variance for Lot 1. Total area = 14,370 s.f. Allowed = 2,155.5 s.f. or 15% Proposed = 2,642.8 s.f or 18.3% Variance = 487.3 s.f or 3.3% 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 Louis B. Oberhauser of a lot line rearrangement per the survey dated October 9. 1990, most revised date January' 3, 1996 by Mark S. Gronberg of Coffin and Gronberg, Inc., subject to the following conditions: 1. .Applicant shall be responsible for the removal of all debris resulting from the burning of "boarded up" residences as required by City under authority of demolition permit. 2. The remaining residence, detached garage, western access at County Road 15 or Shoreline Drive and retaining walls within County Road right-ol-way shall be removed, disturbed areas restored and seeded before the City shall grant final approval of the replat of the property. 3. .Applicant shall obtain a pennit from Hennepin County Department of Transportation for all work within the County right-ol-way. 4. Dedication of a 20' utility easement over the municipal sewer line that encroaches the property along the lake and west side ot Lot 1. Page 4 of 6 5. Applicant to provide confirmation that former 'veils on site have been legally abandoned. 6. All existing hardcover improvements located within the 0-75' setback area shall be removed before a building permit is issued for cither Lot 1 or Lot 2. 7. Council conceptually approves the variances as set forth in the findings of fact noted above and will formally act on granting approval of the variances at the time of final plat approval. 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 each month. 1. 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 to reflect realignment of lot line for shared access at Shoreline Dri\ e per drawing by Mark Gronberg of Coffin and Gronberg, Inc. dated October 9. 1995. most revised date Januar>' 3, 1996. B. Dedication of "drainage and utility easements" along exterior lot lines and 5' along shared lot hues. Drainage and utility easements need not be shown along lakeshore. C. Designation and dedication ot a 20' utility easement over the existing sewer line. D. Naming of plat. Page 5 of 6 Legal documents required: A. Title opinion addressed to the City. All owners, mortgage holders or others with property interest indicated therein shall sign the plat and all other documents affected by such interest. B. The applicant must provide certified copies of all recorded easements currently affecting the property. C. Signed and executed access and utility easement over the sewer line within the property. Fees to be paid: Total due: S20Q.00 (based on 1996 Fee Schedule) Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota at a regular meeting held this 11th day of March. 1996. ATTEST: Gabriel Jabbour, Acting MayorDorothy M. Hallin. City Clerk STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged betore me on this 11th day ot March. 1996 b\ Gabriel Jabbour & Dorothy M. Hallin. Acting Mayor & City Clerk of the City of Orono. a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the Citv. Notary Public Page 6 of6 hardcover CALLULAHUM wUKK:ini:<iLi ACK ZONE: (CIRCLE ONE) ^75*^ 75-250’ 250-500* .500-1000’ EXISTING HARDCQ\TR IN ZONE A. House ________ ■_ Length.WidUl B. Garage C. Driveway D. Sidewalk E. Paiio/Deck F. Landscape Underlain By Plas.tic Or Fabric G. Other TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE A _ _ _ _ _ _ __ - B . PROPOSED HARDCOVER IN ZONE A. House _ _ _ _ _ _ _ X Length B. Garage C. Driveway D. Sidewalk E. Paiio/Deck F. Landscape Underlain Bv Plastic Or Fabric G. Other X 100 Width S.F. S.F. ■ S.F. • S.F. S F. S.F. S F. .; S.F. F. S F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. F. * S F. A '•S.F. ' B- ’ To S.F... S F. ti F.'- vF. ^ F. S F. S F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S F. S.F. S.F. TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY .AREA IN ZONE _ • A O ^ B Si *> O X 100 _________ S.F;. O S.F, K2.<) O . S.F.', O A n . -7 c PROPOSED HARDCOVER FN ZONE A. House ______________ Lcnj'Ji Width B. Garage C. Driveway D. Sidewalk E. Paiio/Deck F. Landscape Underlain By Plastic Or Fabric G. Other 2 7 00 SF. SF. S.F. S.F... S.F;; /7 OO S F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. ■S.F. TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE A ^ B .9 09 0 % 100 - 9VOO s.i Q__ S.F. .'■i A B HARDCOVER CALCUL AilU>x w uKiy^niLiLA AGKZONE: (CIRCLE ONE) 0-75’ C^S-26^ 250-500’ r ^07*2. EXISTING HARDCQ\TR IN ZONE A. House > ............................ •' — Lenfth Widih B. Garage C. Driveway D. Sidewalk E. Paiio/Dcck F. Landscape Underlain By PlaKic Or Fabric G. Other TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE A ^ ^ ^ PROPOSED HAJ^DCOVER IN ZONE A. House _ _ _ _^ Lcngih B. Garage C. Driveway D. Sidewalk E. Patio/Deck F. Landscape Underlain _ By Plastic _ Or Fabric G. Other X 100 Width 500-1000 ’/2-7 9 .9^ S.F. SF. S.F. : S.F. S.F. ..s f; S.F. . ■* F- S F. I S F. .S.F. ■ .S F. ■ S.F. : • :• _ S F. _ S F. '■ A B s F. S.F. S.F. S.F. • i «? S.F. /^9o SF. . S.F. S.F. S.F. 's.F. S.F. S F. S.F. S.F. s.F. TOTAL HARD.COVER IN ZONE . TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE .A - B /S 2^0 xloo SF. S.F./S, Z SO A B ^ 9 ^ CERTIFICATE OF SURVEY FOR LOUIS B. OBERHAUSER IN BLOCK 8. TOWNSITE OF LANGDON PARK HENNEPIN COUNTY. MINNESOTA Lot 2: thonea on »n assunod LearliK of Heat aloni the North line of aald LoJ® ‘ ^ Lttlice of 73 01 feet- thence South 2» de- beltnnlng of the property to be deecrlked; thence conllnulng on a bearing of Heat a dlatj^e of 73.01 fee^ thence w « elnulee £.0“to the el»re of Lake MlnnetojAa; th.n^ eoutheaeterly “Jong ‘.Id to anj^ er.^lon^ul^ bearing South 37 degrees 0< elnutee Host froe the point of beginning; thence North 37 degrees Og ilnutee gaal to ne po B ?^l'^? of Lots 1 and 2. Block 8, Township of Langdon Park. deecrlW a. followe: /^^^L^erW s’STfwt'ti’' Um ^said Lot 2 distant 5.00 feet eoutheasterly fr«» th« Northeast comer HM*^rLld lirS a distal of 1B3.00 the Northeeet corner of said Lot 2; thence on an as.u»ed bearing of Heat along Lid eh^lo an in- foet. thence south 37 degrees 04 ainutee Went to the shore of Lake m^tonka. the^e ij„ of said Lot 2; tereiction with a line running eouthweetorly fro. the point of beginning and parallel with the Southeasterly line C iJ;:rLrt'’of*"l*2!’'B?«"kL!ll^u“:i JLlSd^n pl^k^J^LMb^*« loliows: Beginning at a po^ In the Nor^ehsterl, 'Ana of said Lot 2 distant 5.00 foot eoutheasterly fro. the Northeast comer of eald l^t 2; LutheasterW ^LthLstLly line of said Lot 2 to tbs shore of l^e Hlnnetonka; thence said Ut ~rth- llns of aald Lot 2: thence northeasterly along said Southeasterly line to the W)st Easterly westerly along the Horth<»aterly line of said Lot 2 to the po»nt of beginning, denotes Iron marker set : ' ' ■ *: denotes Iron.aiker found • • . , • Bearings shuan are based upon.an assumed datum . , This survey Intends to show tlig boundaries of the above described property. It does not purport to showThis survey Intends to show the boundarli any other Inprovemcnts or encroachments'. CriFnNl &GR0NBERG. lNC.'Cl. Ill' ................ •t> II I I • • - r-K H1.11 •-% I • • HEQITST FOR COl’>'CIL ACTIO MAR 1 1 199« DATE: ITEM NO.: Apprwvwt Hmam M dkmi P OalfipoR Tint Ami Ptamnat Jt Zmm% A4ramtsrMor Atelaistnitor Rc%irMed:Afv«da SeclKMi: 7o«unf l^ai Dctcriptiaa: /<2099 Lomi BmefgemamDeaii Maescr. 372 Westlake Street - Subdivision u a Lot Line Rearrangement - DennJ Resolution Uu ol E&li^its A - Resolution B - Notice of Council Actitm 2/13 ^>6 C - Council Minutes 2 12 % On Febman 12lh Cmincil voted 44) to deny the request for subdivision of a lot line rearrangement with variances, and directed statT to draft a resolution of denial for adoption. Such a resolution is attached. Staff Recommendattoa StalT recommends adoption of the attached denial resolution. COl NCIL ACTION RFOI FSTFD: Proposed \lotioB: Moved by . seconded by . to adopt Resolution No. . 2nd senes, denying vanances to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.28. Subdivision .5 tB) and Section 11.30. Subdivisum 5 (C) and denying a request for subdivision of the property located at 372 Westlake Street. Vote: ______ayes.______nays. 1 €^*> jyO A RESOUTHK^ ^XSMSC VARIANCES TO MVMCIPAL ZONLNG CODE SECTION lO.a, SIBDIVISION 5 (B) AND SECTION II.JO. SI BDIVISION 5 (C) AND DENYING AN APPLICATION FOR SUIDIVISION OF PROPERTY LOCATED AT 372 WESTLAKE STREET FILE #2009 WHEREAS, the of Orona is a municipal coipt>ranon orginized and existing under the laws of the Su» of Miraiesou. and WHEREAS, pursuant to State Statutes 412 et. seq and 462 ct. seq , the City Council of the City of Oron»> has adopted zoning regulations for the protectuin of the public health, safety and general welfare; and WHEREAS, Loren Brueggemann (hercinafler "the applicant") has an interest in, aiKl Dean Macser ilurreinafter "the owner") is owner of !ie property located at 372 Westlake Street within the City of Orono (hereinafter ‘the City") and legally described as follows Lots 10, 11 and 12. Block 1. Hillside Park, Hennepin County, Minnesou (hereinafter "the property"); and WHEREAS, the applicant and owner have applied to the City of Orono for variances to the lot area, lot width and side street setback requirements of Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.28, Subdivision 5 (B), and variances to the lot area and setback requirements of Municipal Zoning Code Section 11 30. Subdivision 5 (C). to allow the rcplal subdivision of the three lots which constitute the property, to result in two buildable lots; and \V HLRF.VS, the City Council has reviewed the application, the recommendations of the City staff and the Planning Commission, and the comments and written statements submitted by the applicant, owner, and their consultants NOW, THEREFORE. BE IT RESOLVED that the Ci^y Council of Orono, Minnesota hereby denies the requested variances as described above and furthei denies the requested subdivision based on one or more of the following findings of fact concerning this property Page 1 of 9 FINDI>(;S The propeity is loaded in the LR 1 A. Sii^te Family Ukc^lH>rc Residential Zoning Distfict and comists of three individual adjacem ux parcels toulmg 1 9*> acre in «ea Existir^ Lot 10 is 0 62 acre in area, cxislu^ U>t 11 in 0 85 acre in area, and existing U>t 12 is 0 52 acre m area The property conuim tour buildings. comiNiing of the owners reMdcrKe. an old Twitie" used only for storage, and two rcnul cabins Lot 10 conuins the majority of driveway serving the property arkl iwo-thirds of the owner s residence smxtiae. Lot 11 conuins onc-third of the owner s rcsklencc structure, the house used for storage, and small comers of the two renul cabins Lot 12 conuins the majority of the two rcnul cabin structures The three properties have been commonly owned by Mr Maeser or his ptedecessor for more than twenty years, and have been used as a single homestead with two rcnul cabins for many years As part of the 1992 Stubbs Bay Sewer Project, the property was assessed one sewer unit to serve the owner's residence structure. Due to the non-contbrming structure and non conforming use sums of the rental cabins, those cabins were not provided with sewer nor assessed sewer units, nor was die storage building. On March 13. 1995, the owner appeared before the City Council regarding the status of the renul cabins The City Council on a vote of 5-0 required that the sewer connection to the owner's residence be connected within ninety days; that the cabins could continue to be rented for such time as the Code allows the septic system to remain until it is required to he upgraded; that upgrading of the septic svstem will not be allowed, that the cabins must be removed at the time septic system upgrading is required, that the owner must combine the three parcels into one ux parcel, and that an agreement between the owner and the City will be drafted by the owner's attorney in conjunction with the City's attorney in order to ensure the owner will abide by these conditions. The owner and applicant propose to replat this property from three tax parcels mio two ia,\ parcels, ea^h of which would constitute a separai' building site. T e Page 2 of 9 proposed sii^iliv»k)fi configuration creates a "front lot* and a "hack lot" per the tkfotttiom in the Subdivision Coik (Ordirunce No 122. Second Series), and the newly created kHs are subject to the kM area, tot width and structural setback standards of Subdivision Code SeetK^n 11 30. Subdivision (O This section would require the platting of an "access outlot" as a separate ux parcel adiaccm to the "front k«" kadii^ to the "back lot" Section 11.30, Subdivish^n 5 (C) requires that the "access ouiltH" be 30 m width That same Code scctKvn requires that the hack lot" conuin 150% of the minimum zof^ district rtt^ircd ka area The LR 1A Zoning District required lot area is 2 0 acres Under the proposed configuration inca^qx^rating the required 30' wide "access outlot". proposed Lot I (the "front lot ) would conuin 0 76 acres where a 2.0 acre tot area ts required, and profKvsed Lot 2 (the "back lot") would contain 109 acres in area where 150% of the two acre standard, or 3 0 acres, is required. Proposed Lots 1 and 2 meet the 200' required lot width at all required locations with the exception that propivsed Ix>t 2 is only 190' in width at the street setback where a 200' width is normally required The property is within the Shoreland Overlay District and is subject to hardcover limiutions The prt^)scd "access outlot" is in the 75-250* /one where only 25% hardcover is normally allowed Hardcover in the "access outlot " as proposed would be 35 0% . a 10% hardcover variance The proposed construction on Lots I and 2 would not incorpivrate any hardcover into the 0-75' setback zone w here no hardcover is normally allowed, but a variance for 78 hardcover where 25% hardcover is allowed would be necessary tor the proposed construction on proposed Lot 1 The proposed subdiv isi»m w(’»uld cieaie two exireinely substandard lots from three existing record lots which individually are currently unbmidable without many vanarKes. The three existing lots have historically been used as a single property There are a number of non-conformities attributable to the existing lots: a Each of the three existing lots is less than the required two acre minimum lot area requirement (Section 10 23, Subdivision 6 (B)( Page 3 of 9 Each of the three ’ois is kss than the ret^ired 2tX)' mmimum width as mearared it the appn^pcunc points iScctioo 10.23, Subdivision 6 (B) and Dcfimlkm of Lot Widihl The house on la>t 10 docs not meet the required 30' side setbacks (Section 10 3. Subdivision 6 (B)( and encroaches the required side yards (Section 10,03. Subdivision 15] The house 10 encroaches into Lot 1 1 to a significant degree (Section 10 03. Subdivision 15) The accessory building on Lot 11 is rnn suN>rdinate to any principal structure existing on LiH 11 . since the principal residence structure is primarily on Lot 10 (Section 10 U3. Subdivision 9 (A)( The septic system which serves both the house on Lot 10 aixl the cabins on Lot i: IS Uxated on Lots 11 and 12 (Section 12.30. Subdivision 5(. The septic system is within 75 ’ of the lake (JJection 10.56, Subdivision 16 (C)I The septic system is non-conforming due to lack of 3' separation above seasonal samralion zones (Section 12.30]. Two cabins ("dwelling units") exist on Lot 12 although only one dwelling unit per property is allowed [Section 10.03, Subdivision 7] These two cabins are less than the required 75 ’ from the lake [Seetion 10.55, Subdivision 8. 10 56. Subdivision 16 (C); and 10.22. Subdivision 1] The two cabins on Lot 12 each encroach over the lot line into Lot 11 ISeeiion 10.03. Subdivision 15). If the larger cabin is considered the principal structure on Lot 12. then the accessory building (i e. the other cabin) cannot be used as a dwelling, since no accessory building can be used as a dwelling (Section 10.03, Subdivision 11]. Page 4 of 9 The ^iwiKOfiftMTTirtin and the histone i»c o( the property as one site, as well fts the rnwMnnit cmncfship which supfKxts the use as a single site. leads Council to the foilowuig condusK>fi a. Each of Low !0, 11 and 12 is an existing lot of record None of Lots 10, 11 or 12 art conforming in kn w idth or area to the zoning requirements and ntw meet the ('*nc acre KK)' wHlth standard in Section 10 03. Subdivision 6 (A-2) required for buildabiliiy of existing sewered lots of record m zonii^ districts of one acre or greater b None of Lots 10. 11 or 12 could be built on without many other variances even if lot area and w idth variances were granted c. Any lot line rearrangement proposed to realign these three parcels into two parcels will result in the final lots not meeting the area standards of the Zoning CcxJe Therefore such lot line rearrangement is not exempt from subdivision, but is classified as a Class II subdivision (Section 11.03, Subdivision 2 65. 2 66) which requires a plat d All plats arc required to meet existing zoning regulations at the time of plat approval Subdivisions may nxH increase the overall subdivision density above the minimum zoning K>t area requirements [Section 11.10, Subdivision 14 j e. As compared to other properties which have been allowed to replal at densities higher than those allowed, other cases involved clear and distinct use of each of the pre-exi.sting properties as separate from the others In the current case, however, m such distinction exists because buildings are over lot lines, buildings on separate lots have made use ol shared sewer and water facilities, the three lots have been used and maintained as a single property, and the three lots have shared a single driveway The fact that the three lots have been kept as three separate tax parcels does not result in an inherent right of the property owner to have three building sites, or even two. A subdivision with significant variances is required to make the property marginally feasible for two building sites. The proposed subdivision results in lots that do not meet required lot stanu i.a Page 5 of 9 12. The property o^»ncr has conchideJ th?» !he market value of the property as a single hutldii^ Site docs not provide him auv’^uaie compensation \shen selling the property, and reqiicsts approval for two building sites Zoning C^xle Section 10.06, Subdivision 3 (A-4i states that "economic consideratwns alone shall not constitute an undue hardship it reasonable use f».'r the propertv exists under the terms of this Chapter" Reasonable uses for the property include use as a single building site, which use w^^uld be allowed by the Zoning Chapter 13 While the average developed lot size in the Hillside Park subdivision is approximately one acre in the two minimum LR-IA zone, existing properties to the sf.Hith. west, and iuMth of this subdivision have substantially larger acreages. Although the zi>ning district Kvundary between the LR-IB one acre and LR-IA two acre zones is near the property, the property does not abut the one acre zone, and iiKlividually would not be a reasonable cxiemion of that zone without including adjacent properties on the west side of Westlake Street 14 Two existing lakcshore lots on Westlake Street were recently combined to create a I 4 acre building site In the future, additional properties along this shoreline could be purchased together and combined to create more useable building sites. It w(vuld be consistent if Lots 10, 11 and 12 were combined mio one building site. 15 The Stubbs Bay area including Lots 10. 11 and 12 was not zoned by the town of Orono until July 10, 1950 at which time the "Stubbs Bay District" was created with required minimum building lot area of one acre. The City Assessor s records indicate the resideiKe structure on Lot 10 was built in 1951. The City has no apparent record of w hen the cabins were constructed In 1967. while the property was zoned one acre, a prior owner proposed a subdivision very similar to that proposed now, resulting in two lots of approximately one acre each. That subdivision was tabled bv the City Council and no final action to approve such subdivis- i ever occurred. In 1975 as part of the City-w ide rezoning, the propeny (and much of the Stubbs Bay area) was rezoned LR-L\ Single Family Lakeshore Residential, two acre minimum lot size, which zoning is currently in etteci. 16 Approval of this subdivision with the required lot area variances would set a negative precedent and could result m pressures for higher density development in Orono s two acre zone. Page 6 of 9 The Orono Ptanmng Commission reviewed this application on January 16, 1996, and on a vote of 4-0 rccommended denial of the ret^iested subdivision because the hardships presented do not justify the variances required for said subdiv ision Approval of the requested v ariances associated with this subdivision is not justified based on the necessary findings of fact which must be made for subdivision variance approval per Municipal Subdivision Code Section 11 02. Subdivision 10, as follows A No unusual hardo.Hip on the land exists. B The conditions upon which the request for variance arc ..*d are not unique to the property and arc generally applicable to other property. C Applicant has failed to demonstrate that the particular physical surroundings, shape or topographical condition of the la.id involved constitutes an unusual hardship to the land. D Variance from the strict requirements of this Chapter would result in a development density that the City would consider env ironmentally unsound. E Approval of the variance request would not be in keeping with the provisions of the Orono Comprehensive Land Use Plan. F. Aj he variances would vary the minimum area requirements for a loi . ♦ :orth in the Zoning Chapter of the City Code as applied to the entire subdivision. The granting of the required variances would not be in keeping with the requirements of Zoning Code Section 10.08. Subdivision 3 (A) in that undue hardship has not been demonstrated because: A. e essential character of the neighborhood will be altered if the proposed variances are granted, by creating additional density not consistent with the LR-IA Zoning District. Page 7 of 9 ■: ' B. The property in question can indeed be put to reasonable use if used under condiiions allowed by official controls. The property contains a single family residence which can continue to be used, and the adjacent land can continue to be used as yard area ir? ^pport of that residence. C. The plight of the applicant would appear to have been created totally by the applicant and not by circumstances unique to his property nor out of the applicant's control. D. Granting of the proposed mces would appear to serve as a convenience to the applicant and r, and the applicant and owner have not adequately demonstr ' reasonable hardship or practical difficulty. E. The conditions and Zonii.g Code limitations imposed and existing on this property generally apply to all other land and sificrmres in the zoning district in which this pr '-iierty is located. F. The granting of this i^jpUcation is not necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of substantial property right of the applicant. Denial a subdivision to create substandard building lots is not considered by Couiicd to be denial of a substantial property right. 20. In review of the factual findings noted above, the Counen rinds tha^ granting of the proposed lot area. lot width, setback and hardcover variances to allow the creation of tw’o new substandard building lots w^yuid be in complete conflict with the environmental standards for lakeshore development within the City and would be der-menial to the public health, safety and v'f*’^'’ie. The City looks to the broader environmental principle' and goals set forth in its Community Management Plan and the intent of he specific zoning distiict when dealing with matters of the public health, safety and welfare. Issues involving public health, safety and welfare are not only resolved by securing the obvious traffic and drainage concerns, but the City also feels obligated to provide the citizens with a designated and opt*mum level )f density, open space and quality of life. Pa}: i S of 9 m Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono on this 1 1th day of March, 1996. ATTEST: Dorothy M. Halliii, Cir/ Cl** ’Gabriel Jabbour, Acting Mayor STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) ss. The fc ^T'g instrument was acknowledged before me on this 1 1th day of March, I ^96 by Gabriel Jabbour & Dorothy M. Hallin, Acting Mayor & City Clerk of the City of Orono, vtinncsota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City. Notary Public Page 9 of 9 r.: CTTYOFORONO P.O.B«i66 CryftalB«y,MN 5S323 473-7357 APPLICATION NO. #2099 NOTICE OF COUNCIL ACTION itt of Notice: February 13,1996 TO: Loren Bnieggemann 2125 West Highway 13 Burnsville, MN 55337 COPIES:Dean Maeser 372 Westlake Street Orono, MN 55356 TYPE OF APPLICATION: Subdiv ision DATE O • MEETING: 02/12/%VOTE:4 FOR 0 AGAINST COUNCIL ACTION Council voted unanimously to deny your application for subdivision and variances for reasons presented and discussed at the Council meeting. Those reasons will be restated in a written resolution of denial to be ratified by the Council st their regular meeting on February 26,1996. State law allows the City to extend an applicable 60 day deadline for this application by providing written notice of the extension to the applicant. The City hereby extends the deadline by sixty (<W) days. Please treat this memorandum as notice to you of the extension. The extension is made for this reason: the Council and staff need to review ar.d approve written findings in this matter. If you desire certified copies of the official Council minutes, they are available from the City Clerk after review and approval by the City Council. s? i MnnriES of the meeting held on FEBRUARY 12,1996 («6S) »209S^HEN M. ENGLUND. 2855 CHEKKi a VENUE - RENLWAl, VARIANCE ^ftESOLXmON #3^72 Kdl.,«av«lG^«cond«i..o«loptResolution#3672. Vo^3.N.y»0. R£ARRANGE>I£NT - RE^LUnON #36/3 / Ke0eynK^ed.Goe«enseconded\adoptReso!u^«673. Vote: Ayes 3. Nays 0. (#7) #2097 PATRICIA GUTTORMsblSfj^lS CRYSTAL BAY ROAD VARIANCE - RESOLUTION #3674 /v Patricia Gunormson was present. Mabusth repon. . uKat there w^o rhT7?;ora„T.ffi^ the 75 ■’Sff setbacK^ea will be reduced from 26% to 22%. This “*1*°. lo Jo^Lg S due to the improvements. Mabusth reponed th^Hhe Planrung Commission^ommended unanimous approval. \ Goetten evented that she understood the area was difficult to apprepi^ the reductions made in hardcover, while stiU gaming the needs of apf^ant. ^etten moved. KeUey seconded, to approve Resolution #3674. Vote. Ayes 3. Nays laxi 42099 LOREN BRUEGGE.MANN/DEAN .MAESER, 372 WEST^^ STREET - SUBDIVISION OF A LOT LINE REARRANGEMENT - REPLAT Wim VARIANCES This aoplication was tabled to a later tune in the agenda due to the lack of applicant representation. The property owner airived shonly after the stan of the report on application. Gaffron reponed that the owner of the property was Dean Maeser, 372 Westl^e Strert. The proper consists of 3 parcels with three separate tax statements consisting ot Lots 10, 11, ^d^2, delineated by a long narrow lot totalling 1.99 acres m the . acre zoning district- J * V (#8 - #2099 Brue^emann/Maeser • Continued) Gaffitm Oyy J5rue^(eniuiviviaa«i - ------ v*B«. cooiinued thtf tfat «P P»y . '^^'onUa 10 ind ■u..«n>»n..m mp^ »k1 two «nUl cabins. Two .^of in size. This results in substandard variances for Lots 1 and .. Gaf&on repotted that the front and back lot appUes. The 30 ’ with 150*/. required for back/front J? .. „velope. In Lot 1. based on the access outlet still required lea^ng a sm ^ leaving a building envelope of firont/back configuration, a 50 side setb ^ -<,55 are required for Lots 1 and 2. only 10 ’ wide, which is not suiiab e. ° ^ setback where 200* is necessary. Lot 1 Lot 2 requires a 10* width v^ance house, which is proposed at i?J !»»in j; «•''• hardcover is aUowed Lot 2 does meet the hardcover stan acceptable hardships. „ .0,0..h. ‘s stub The sewering was pan of the Stubbs Bay proje many years They are located = „ ,,hich does not meet the 3' there are three The septic system needs to be removed, separation and is located m w„s„ was given two years by the Council in May of Gafiron reminded th-t co'nnected to the sewer. This has 1995 to remove t e ca signed Brueegemann has proposed to Tur^Se p"rope^'o bmld 2 houses on The less than 2 acre parcel where 5 acres are required. (#f - #2099 Brue^einMn^****®’ * Continued) \ \ be able to buy another home. the 1 acre zoning district. lots and could be used for one site. and would need to deny the appUcation. There were no public comments. s"SSSS5.=S“" (#9) #2100 RQPERT AM) DEBRA EDML-NDS, 1030 TO?jKXWA ROAD - V.^NCE^gis^ON #3675 The applicants were by an architecturaj.4«sentative. t. I 56'aifes in ar»d!'M structures on the property will be The property tn all setbacks, will be constructed, removed, and a A ^ adStan filed included a request for a condioonal Mabusth reported that the fi,,. Mabusth sard the applicant's use permit for the borrovnng o^O c^K yar®^ architect, Blake Bichamch, , stonT^^ zarage. In this case, the code would be is required. A lot rS^^ce is required as the lot iSrm the 75' l.e, wherTf^Si;^ l: REQUESTFORCOUNCILACTION 199$ DATE: 3/1 9^oFORONO ITEM NO,■r Dcpartamit Apprwml: Nmm Mamie A. Mabusth Title Building A Zoning Administrator AdninUtniter Reviewed:Agenda Section: Zoning Itett Description: #2105 Jon Lebedoff and Sally Mitchell Lebedoff, 1101 West Femdale Road Renewal Variance - Resolution Zoning District: LR-IA Brief Review of Application Applicants have filed a renewal variance application for lakeshore, side and rear/street setback variances, hardcover and lot coverage variances to permit construction of a new residence in conjunction with the complete removal of the existing residence. The multiple variance application was approved in March of 1995 and will expire as of March 13, 1996. Refer to the enclosed staff memo dated February 8, 1996 for more detail on the variances to be granted. The four member Planning Commission recommended unanimous approval for the renewal variance application subject to the findings and conditions set forth in the original resolution. Exhibit D. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: To either approve or amend the enclosed approval resolution. ^ -1 VTO A RESOLUTION GRANTING V ARIANCES TO MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 10.03, SUBDIVISION 14 (C), SECTION 10.22, SUBDIVISIONS 1 (B) AND 2 AND SECTION 10.23, SUBDIVISION 6 (B) FILE NO. 2105 WHEREAS, Jon Lebedoffand Sally Mitchell LebedotT(hereinafter "the applicants") have an interest in the property located at 1101 Femdale Road West within the City of Orono and legally described as follows; Tract B, Registered Land Survey No. 902, Files of the Registrar of Titles, County of Hennepin, Minnesota (hereinafter "the property"); and WHEREAS, the applicants have applied to the City for variances to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.03, Subdivision 14 (C), Section 10.22, Subdivision 1 (B) and 2 and Section 10.23, Subdivision 6 (B) to permit construction of a new residence on a property that is 8,481 s.f. in area where 87,120 s.f. or two acres is required, on a lot that measures 58’ at the 75’ setback and 72 ’ measured in a straight line at the shoreline where a 200' width is required. The structure is to be located 1' from the west side lot line where a 30 ’ setback is required and 11.7 ’ from the east side lot line where a 30 ’ setback is required. The structure will be located 42.5 ’ from the street lot line where a 50 ’ setback is required. Per Section 10.22. Subdivision 1 (B), the residence structure will be located 20 ’ from the main lake where a 75’ setback is required but will maintain a 75' setback from the lagoon at the north side of the property'. Per Section 10.22, Subdivision 2, hardcover within the 0-75 ’ setback area is proposed at 3,800.2 s.f or 52.6% where none is allowed and within the 75-250 ’ setback area, hardcover is proposed at 861.3 s.f or 67.8% where 25% is allowed and where 100% exists. Per Section 10.03, Subdivision 14 (C), the new construction will require a structural coverage variance proposed at 2,345 s.f or 27.6% where 1.500 s.f or 17.6% would be allowed. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono. Minnesota: FINDINGS Page 1 of 6 1. This renewal variance application was reviewed as Zoning File #2105. 2. Tlw City approved > ariances noted above m an earlier variance application review based on the unique findings and hardships set forth in Resolution #3540 of the City of Orono. 3. The property is located in the LR-1A Lakeshore Residential Zoning District requiring two acres in area. The property consists of 8,481 s.f or . 194 acres. 4. The Orono Planning Commission reviewed this renewal variance application on February 20, 1996 and recommended unanimous approval of the variances as proposed, based upon the following unique findings and hardships: A. The property is . 19 acres and subject to 2 acre setback standards. ^ The substandard parcel is subject to restrictive lakeshore setbacks at both the north and south sides of the property. C. The property is served and connected to municipal sewer. D. The building/structural footprint has been reduced by 168.8 s.f. or 2% and total hardcover on the property has been reduced from 69% to 54.9%. E. The structure cannot be moved closer to east lot line because of the location and impact of the 931 .5 flood plain contour. The Orono Code does not allow excavations or filling within the flood plain. F. The proposed improvement would be consistent with the recent improvements of older properties within the West Femdale neighborhood. G. Per Ceil Strauss' letter of March 20, 1995, the DNR will allow a 20' setback from the main lake for new construction because of the drainage pattern of the property that drains over the grassed gravel yaid area to the rear or lagoon area. Ms. Strauss has reconfirmed via the phone that she will not change her position with the renewal variance application. Page 2 of 6 4. The City Council finds that the conditions existing on this propertv' are peculiar to it and do not apply generally to other property in this zoning district; that granting the variances would not adversely affect traffic conditions, light, air nor pose a fire hazard or ether 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 necessaiy- to preserve a substantial property right of the applicants; and would be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan of the City. 5. The City Council has considered this application including the findings and recommendations of the Planning Commission, reports by City staff, comments by the applicants and the effect of the proposed variance on the health, safety and welfare of the community. CONCLUSIONS, ORDER AND CONDITIONS Based upon one or more of the above findings, the Orono City Council hereby grants variances to the Municipal Zoning Code Sections listed above to permit the construction of a 38.6 ’ X 60 ’ two story residence and grants approval ot a 78,639 s.f. or 90.2% area variance, a lot width variance of 142’ or 71% and 128 ’ or 64%, west side lot line variance of 9' or 90%, an east side lot line variance of 18.3 ’ or 61%, lakeshore rctback variance at the main lake of 55’ or 73.3%, hardcover variance within the 0-75’ setback area of 3,800.2 s.f or 52.6%, a hardcover variance within the 75- 250' setback area of 544 s.f or 42.8% and a stnictural coverage variance of 845 s.f or 9.9% subject to the following conditions: 1. Upon application for a building permit, applicant shall provide final survey locating the approved structure at approved setbacks. Plans shall include a detailed grading and drainage plan to ensure no impact upon the flood plain of Lake Minnetonka (931.5 elevation). Erosion control shall be maintained on the property until ail disturbed areas are restored to natural groundcover. 2. All hardcover improvements scheduled for removal as shown on page 6 of this olulion shall be completed prior to the tooting inspection for the new construction. This shall include the patio areas that extend from the lake side of the existing residence and gravel drive areas located within both the 0-75’ and 75-250 setback areas. Page 3 of 6 3 Authorities granted by this variance run wth the property not with the applicants, but are permissive only and must be exercised by applicants presenting a complete application for a building permit within one year of the date of Council approval, or this variance will expire on that date (March 11, 1997). 4. Violation of oi non-compliance with any of the terms and conditions of this variance shall constitute a violation of the zoning code, shall automatically terminate any authority granted herein, and shall be punishable as a misdemeanor. 5. The undersigned applicants have read, understood and hereby agree to the terms of this resolution and on behalf of themselves, their heirs, successors and assigns, hereby agree 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 11 th day of March, 1996. ATTEST: Dorothy M. Hallin, City Clerk Gabr. hour. Acting Mayor Property Owner (s) STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this 11 th day of March, 1996 by Gabriel Jabbour and Dorothy M. Hallin, Acting Mayor and City Clerk of the City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City. Notary Public Page 4 of 6 >4 STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) On this____day of____, 199_before me a Notary Public within and for said county, personally appeared known to me to be the person(s) described in and who executed the foregoing instrumcnt.and acknowledged that he (they) executed the same as las (their) free act and deed. NOTARY PUB! ’C STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) On this __day of and for said county, personally appeared , 199_before me a Notar> Ttiblic within known to me to be the person(s) described ir who executed the foregoing instrument,and acknowledged that he (the>) executed the saniw* as his (their) free act and deed. NOTARY PUBLIC STATE OF MINM-OTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) On this____day of____, 199 before me a Nrt?»iy Public within and for said county, personally appeared known to me to be the person(s) described in a-^d who executed the foregoing instrument,and acknowledged that he (they) executed the same as his (their) fre^ act arJ deed. NOTARY PUBLIC Page 5 of 6 ■M r ill 'W'/ J.Chair Peterson and Orono Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator From: Date: Subject: Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building & Zoning Administrator February 8,1996 #2105 Jon and Sally Mitchell Lebedoff, 1101 West Femdale Road - Renewal Variance - Public Hearing Zoning District: LR-IA Application: Applicants have filed a renewal variance seeking approval of multiple variances to permit construction of a new residence and the total removal of the existing residence. The original variance will expire on March 13, 1996. Brief Review Application Please refer to Exhibit H for the current application. The following variances are required: 1.Section 10.23, Subdivision 6 (B) A. Area variance. Required = 87,120 s.f Existing = 8,481 s.f. Variance = 78,639 s.f. or 90.2% B.Lot width Required = 200' At the 75' setback = 58' Variance = 142' or 71 % At the lakeshore measured in a straight line = 72' Variance = 128' or 64% C.West side lot line Required = 30' Existing = O' Proposed = 1' Variance = 29' or 96.6% East side lot lint Required = 30' Existing = 11.7' Proposed = 11.7' Variance = 18.3' or 61% Zoning File #2105 Fel v^^ / 8. 1096 Page j E.Street setback Required = 50' Existing = 46’ Proposed = 43' Variance = 7' or 15% 2. Section 10.25, Subdivision 1 (B) A. Lakeshore setback from main lake Required = 75' Existing = 17' Proposed = 20' (31' for lakeside steps) Variance = 55' or 73.3% B. Setback from lagoon Existing = 75+’ Proposed = 75+' No variance required. Review Exhibit U (Application #1997 exhibit), the proposed structure shall not encroach average lokeshore setback line. 3. Section 10.22, Subdivision 2 A. 0-75 ’ setback area = 7,211.6 s.f. Allowed = 0 s.f. Existing = 4,585.4 s.f. or 63.58% Proposed = 3,800.2 s.f. or 52.6% B. C. 75-250' setback area = 1,269.3 s.f. Allowed = 317.33 s.f. or 25% Existing = 1,269.3 s.f. or 100% Proposed = 861.3 s.f. or 67.86% Variance = 544 s.f. or 42.8% Review of total hardcover on property Total area = 8,481 s.f. Existing = 5,854.7 s.f. or 69% Proposed = 4,661.5 s.t. or 54.9% Section 10.03. Subdivision 14 (C) - Review of structural coverage. Total lot area = 8,481 s.f. Allowed = 1,500 s.f. or 17.6% Existing = 2,513.8 s.f. or 29.6% Proposed = 2,345 s.f. or 27.6% Zoning File ~2105 February 8, 1996 Page 3 List of Exhibits for Current Application A - Application A-1 Addendum B - Plat Map C - Certificate of Mailing and Property OwTiers' List D - Resolution No. 3540 E - Orono Planning Commission Meeting Minutes 2/22/995 F - Orono Council Meeting Minutes 3/13/95 G - DNR Letter 3/20/95 H - Reduced Surv ey Not to Scale Exhibits from Application #1997 D - Description of Request E - Hardcover Statement F - Unique Property Conditions I - Adjacent Neighbors' Acknowledgement Forms J - Hardcover 0-75' K - Hardcover 75-250' N - Comparison of E.xisting and Proposed Building Envelopes O - Floor Plans P - Elevations T - Analysis of Areas of First and Second Floors U - Average Lakeshore Setback Line Description of Request Applicants seek approval of the same development plan submitted for the 1995 review.^ The application involves the removal of the existing residence and the construction of a new 38' x 60 two-story residence structure. Review Exhibit P of the Exhibits from Application #1997, the maximum height of the structure to the top or peak of the roof wall be 32'. The legal height based on the Orono Code is measured to the mean distance to peak of roof and is shown at 26+' (allowed 30'). The existing structure is 17' from the shoreline and the proposed structure will be 20. The oriuinal footprint of the existing structure is 2.513.8 s.t. The proposed structure is 2.345 s.L The property is subject to a lakeshore setback fronTtHe lagoon to the north and main lake to the south. The structure will meet the required setback from the lagoon shoreline. I he propertv is serv'ed with sewer and an on-site well located to the northeast side of residence. Access to the property is achieved via an easement through the property to the immediate north and east. Review Fixhibit B. During the earlier review, the DNR had requested a minimum setback from the main lake of 25 . Revie. f-xhibit G, Ceil Strauss has approved the 20' setback based on the drainage pattern of the property. Ms. Strauss advises that she will not change her position trom the original review of 1995 k Zoning File #2105 February 8,1996 Page 4 and recommends approval of the application as proposed. Re^ew Exhibit H, note the entire structure will be located out of the flood plain at 931.5 elevation. The new structure will be located 1 • from the west side lot line and 11 .T from the east side lot line. The improvement will result in a 2% reduction in structural coverage. Hardship Statement Review applicants' hardship statement within Exhibits E and F of original Application #1997 and Resolution No. 3540, Exhibit D. They are reviewed as follows: The property is .19 acres and subject to two acre zoning standards. The property is subject to lakeshore setbacks at both the north and south sides. The property is served with sewer. Total hardcover on the property has been reduced form 69% to 54.9% and the structural footprint has been reduced 168.8 s.f. or 2%. The property is airther restricted by the location of the flood plain contour at 93 T5 and limits the placement of the new residence to a more central location on the property. The improvement will be consistent with recent improvements of older properties within the West Femdale neighborhood. Per Ceil Strauss letter of March 20, 1995, the DNR will allow a 20' setback from the main lake for new strucmre as majoritv’ of drainage from the developed site will dram to the north where structure will meet the 75' setback. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. Options of Action To either deny, approve or amend the renewal variance application. Any recommendation approval must include the following conditions: 1 Upon application for a building permit, applicant shall provide final suivey locating the approved structure at approved setbacks. The plans shah include a detailed crading and drainage plan to ensure no impact upon the flood plai" Lake Minnetonka. Erosion control shall be maintained on the property until all distur areas are restored to natural groundcover. T All hardcover scheduled for removal shall be eomplcted prior to the footing inspection for the new construction. This will include the patio areas ‘hat extend from the lakeside of the existing residence and gravel drive areas located within both the 0-75' and 75-250' setback areas. Application it O Date Received / Amount Paid CITY OF ORONO - VARIANCE APPLICATION n I Initial Application Fee S220.00 ^ (S50.00 per each additional variance) ■#/ ^ Renewal Variance Fee S 120.00 •; (no change from original application) g / -i *v Variance for non-conforming structures S220.00 ^ After-the-Fact Fees (Double application fee) PROPERTY INFORMATION mm c-aoi o;..Address V^est Ferndale Road , Wayzata, MN 5o39j^ p"opt^ Identification Number (P:r5j 02-117-23-43-0020 Attach legal description to application if not included on required survey. Date Property Acquired_ December 19^jjaie rropeny ----------------------—-—— I (do) (do not) also ovvn the adjacent parcels of land. Present use of propert>’: _X_residemial ------^other (specify) Zoning District: __________________________________ _(month/year) APPLICANTn Mitchell Lebedoff pLn,.itnrk-? (612) 348-1970_ A^rL'^ngls Irving Ave ■ So. City:_Minneapolis , MN_ Zip:_5Ai03---- Phone (home) (612) 473 1042 Phone(work)_ (612) 371-3262OWNER (if different than applicant) Ff^rate of Robert G. Mitchell------- -------^ " mxt Robert G. Mitchell, Jr^ity: Minneapo lis, MN Zip._55.102 Lindquist & Vennum, 4 200~IDS Center DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST Estiniated Construction Cost S 300,000 ------- Describe request in detail: ------------------------------------------------------- (attach additional sheets if necessary) VARIANCES REQUIRED X Lot Area X Lot Width Setback:Front Side X Hardcover Rear Lot Coverage Average Lakeshore Other (specify) compliance with Zoning Code requirements;. --------- ^ 1. 2. 3. REQUIRED SUBMITTALS All nf the follmvino informatinn must he suhmittcd hy the npplication,dcndlinc,dntUa order for vour npplication to he considered complete. Completed Application Form Certified Property 0%vners List of otvners within 150’, labels and plat map (you must obtain this list, labels and map from Hennepin County Department of Finance, A-603, Govt Center, 34S-3271). Certificate of Survey (signed by a licensed surveyor) and include hardcover calculations as required. In addition, provide one (1) copy S'/r x 11 for reproduction. . • Topocraphic survey (existing and proposed elevations) if any changes in existing grade'are proposed. In addition, provide one (1) copy 8'A" x 11" for reproduction. Sketches or plans of floor & elevation views (provide one (1) copy S'/i" x 11"). List of the legal names (include marital status) of all persons with an interest in the property. This would include name(s) of applicant(s) if not current o%vner(s). As an addendum to this application, please attach a separate list of any other persons you wish notified of this application. Additional items as may be requested by City staff. The Applicant and Property Owner must sign this application. Please remember that youi: vnrinnee anpUrnHnn not comnicte if the above information has not been included^ APPLICANT’S SIGNATURE ^ u u 7 • 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 t e information supplied is ^ue^and comect^^^^^ ^ knowledge. 5. 6. 7. 8. Date Jonathan G. Lebedoff Applicant's Signature OWNER’S SIGNATLT-jul ^ The ovvner hereby acknovVledges and agrees to this application and further authonzes reasonable enuy onto the property by City staff, consultants, agents. Commission members, and Council members for purposes of investiaation and verification of this request. O.W. TrnLW:->?i£nfp- 0.,. Rooert G. Mitchell, Jr. a r Applicant must havrairsUnfinSrfnlo" ^“city offices 25 days before the Pitting Commission Meetinc. 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 m«nng p ease 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. LINDQUIST &VENNUM p.l.lp. 4200 IDS CiNTiii 80 South Emktn SnoT iMkMAPau*. MNMaon S5402-220S TeUPH0«: 612-371-3211 Fax ; 612-371-3207 taOfiownL—OUT.VtoWUM SCHTPMII H.UUF. 600 17th Sthot, Sun 2125 OCNVCH. CotONAOO 80202-5401 TiUPM0*«: 303-573-5900 A ttoi»«y»A tLaw Robot G.Miididl.Jr^Eai^ (612)371-3262 f\- January 16, 1:»96 1996 I ■ •SM * - Vu Ms. Jeanne Mabusth City of Orono P. O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323-0066 Re: Variance Extension 1101 West Femdale Road Dear Jeanne ; Enclosed is a signed Variance Extension Application regarding the Mitchell house at 1101 West Femdale Road. Please note that the extension of time is for vertices applied for and received in 1995. The reason for the new extension is that the Lebedoffs were unable to commence constmction of their new house at 1101 West Femdale Road because they did not sell their existing house in Minneapolis They hope to sell their existmg house m fA^eapohs m spring of 1996 and commence construction of the house at 1101 West Femd^e Road m the summer of 1996, all pursuant to the variances granted by Orono to them m l 995^ Thus, this i extension of time rather than a different application. Please let me know what further we need to do. Thank you. Very truly yours, LINDQUIST & VENNUM P.L.L.P. Robert G. Mitchell, Jr. RGM/djh Enclosure cc: Mr. and Mrs. Jonathan G. Lebedoff ED01;8697n_l (BRO^VNS ( 1980 PHoro) oi-r<7 Z5-H3 GOVT LOT 2 CERTIFICATE OF MAILING STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) ss. CITY OF ORONO I, Jamie Bosma, of the City of Orono, Hennepin County, Minnesota, do hereby certify that a Notice of Public Hearing concerning the matter of #2105, was mailed to the attached list of property owners. In Witness Whereof, I have hereunto set my h.=und and seal this 2nd day of February, 1996. Jamiey Bosma H RUM DATE 01/11/9BM BATCH B06; ! • y'!:• , ; i ; SB 02-117-23 93 0016X] ii PROP' ADOR , ; ■ 01105 FERNOALE RO H . OHNER NAME. RALPH C BAGLEY M;mV. .TAXPAYER. ! ■; RALPH C BAGLEY 4 rljfi. NAHE/AOOR 1105 FERNOALE RD H . ..-r , ^ iS8 ' 02-117-23 93 0023 ■■ i j'! PROP >ODR =01095 ' FERNOALE RO W OHNER NAME B.A K FOX TAXPAYER B C A K/kTHERINE M FOX NAME/AOOR . 1095 H FERNOALE RO '^»«^ZATA MN 55391 *iiii ■' ■ mS-m \ iSSffi; ■■ ■ HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORMATION SYSTEM PROPERTY OWNERS LIST38 02-117-23 93 0019 00038 AODRESS UNASSIGNEO RALPH C BAGLEY RALPH C BAGLEY 1105 FERNOALE RD H HAYZATA m 553n REPORT NO. PI935901 : PAGE 17,38 02-117-23 93 002001101 FERNOALE RD H ROBERT G MITCHELL ROBERT G MITCHELL 1101 H FERNOALE RD HAYZATA MN 55391 TOTAL BATCH 506 00009 ! •: - 1 k;k- '-.r- , i.;' I CERTIFY THAT THE FACTS REPRESENTED ARE AN ACCURATE AND TRUE . .. ... ^ , REPRESENTATION OF INFORMATION AS IT APPEARS THIS DATE ON THE RECORDS ,. - .V'.‘Vv' ^ V;' .1 ^ - . v OF THE HEtlNEPlN COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF PROPERTY TAXATION, TO THE BEST : ■’. i'>^; V.,!^ ‘ij OF MY KNOHLEDGE AND BELIEF - DATE Mzjg.v '"■oirk:; uCITY of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL \n 3 540 X resolution granting a variances TO MUr- :CIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 10.03, SUBDIVISION 14 (C), SECTION 10.22, SUBDIVISIONS 1 (B) AND 2 AND SECTION 10.23, SUBDIVISION 6 (B) FILE NO. 1997 tviiirnirvs Jon 1 ebedoff and Sallv Mitchell Lebedoff (hereinafter "the “W, « IK piOKiiy « i '»■ F'““" "»■' of Orono and legally described as follows: Tract B. Registered Land Survey No. 902, Files of the Registrar of Titles, County of Hennepin, Minnesota (hereinafter "the property ), and VVHFREAS the applicants have applied to the City for variances to Municipal zoning code section proposed at g where 25% is allowed and where 100% exists; ’::'r"s:c.u7ir03 S dIvisL 14 (C) the new construction will require a structural ove aJe ti nce proposed at 2.345 s.f. or 27.6% where 1.500 s.f. ,s allowed. Minnesota: 1. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono, FINDINGS This application was reviewed as Zoning File #1997. Page 1 of 6 2. 3. CITY of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO 8 540—^ i^equiriTl'^ icr« mL'a" ‘ m of S^sTs' f^o^! w'^acres' The Orono Planning Commission reviewed this application on February 22. 1995 and recommended approval of the variances as amended, based upon the following unique findings and hardships A. The property is . 19 acres and subject to 2 acre setback standards. B. The substandard parcel is subject to restrictive lakeshore setbacks at both the north and south sides. c. The property has been approved for sewer and assessed one sewer unit. D. The building/structiral footprint has been reduced 168.8 s.fi and total hardcover on the property has been reduced from 69% to 52%. E The structure cannot be moved closer to east lot line because of the 931.5 flood plain cotitour. The Orono Code does not allow e.xcavations or filling within the flood plain. V The proposed improvement would be consistent with the recent improvements of older pn)perties within the West Ferndale neighborhood. G Per Ceil Strauss* letter of March 20, 1995, the DNR will allow a 20 ’ setback from the main lake for new construction because of the drainage pattern of the property. The Citv Council finds that the conditions e.xisting on this pioperty are lo it anil do not apply generally to other property in this zoning disinct. t i.i '’laiuinu the variances would not adversely alfect traffie conditions, hu U. an m pose a fire hazard or other danger lo neighboring properly; would ■ serve as a convenience to the applicant, but is neeessaiy to demonstrable hardship or difficulty; is necessary to preserve a sucstantial > righ' of the applicant; and would be in keeping witn the spirit and intent Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan of the City. Page 2 of 6 CITY of ORONO RESOLimOiM OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 3 5 4.()i —^ 5 The unclersioncd applicants have read, understood and hereby agree to the ter.ns o( this resolution and on behall of themselves their '.'eirs. successor hereby agree lo the recording of this resolution in the Cham of Title ot the properly. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono. Minnesota at a regular meeting held on the 13th day of M. - h. 1995. /Dorothy M.|lTal I’n/fic/ly oVner (s) Estate of ^Fooert G, Mitciieli, Jr. Personal Representative S I Ai r. Ob' MINNESOTA ) COUN I Y OI* niZNNhlMN ) ) ss. The foreuoing instrutuent was acknowledged before n.e on this 13th day of March 1995 bv Edward J. Callahan. Jr. and Dorothy M. Hallin, Mayor and Oiono.' ;i Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed City. Notary Public Page 4 of 6 fwmVOi M CITY of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) Public Wilhin and lor said county. ^Sing instmtuenl. anlTcknowledged that he (they) e.xecuted tl.. sa.ne as lus (then) Iree act and deed. f ^ day of , 199 5 before me a Notary ROOERTaMTCHEa.Ja| MTMrrPlMJC-MMNKOTA ‘ HENNEPtN COUNTY 11^ riiinmiiHr^iB m r r- NOTARY PUBLIC £AJrii- S TATE OF' MINNESOTA ) ) ss. CIXJN'TY OF HENNEPIN ) On this !3 day of . 199^^__before me a Notary ......................... irarnmo*. «td7ok,»>.W.rf ««i k l««» s»« <> act and deed. _ _______^ *Personal Representative of the behalf of the Estate, M#«vk>eN>v. MARY S. WILSON % fWTARY public • MINNESOTA % HENNEPIN COUNTY $ Uy CamrrassMB £xsw« .'J.1 Jl. *000 }l lHll't'l'ni--------- * ORONO PLAiWTNG COM>nSSION MEETING minutes for FEBRUARY 22, 1995 the Cit\'. Perl also has outside storage problems. p„, UO. ». did ™ .h. «dd»"" some of the property clean up. ,• tn cp'ver as there i: an increase in bedroom use.Mabusth also noted the need for applicant to connect to se.ver The.^e were m: ^Oinments from the public. Peri confirmed that he does not operate a business out of his home. N„l.„ ..«d .b« ,h, dd,«5 . S”rr.s S” property to a conforming location. suggested a board be used to close off the second floor patio door. Nolan noted the extensive exterior storage on the property and felt it was a problem. Aves 4 nays 1 Nolan objected to the sliding glass door on tne secona tiou.. ... .. pruning Crmmission had reviewed this application prior to construction, it would not have approved with a sliding glass door. ("71 #1997 SALLY AND JONATH.AN LEBEDOFF - 1101 FERNDALE ROAD WEST - VARIANCES - PUBLIC HEARING - 9:06-9:35 P.M. Mr. and .Mrs. Lebedoff were present. .Anoraey Bob Mitchell represented their application. Mihusth explained the applicants were seeking several variances to allow the °^s new two sto.7 residence. Applicant have ^r7r.Sk"arein the 75-..0 sema residence is at I / ORONO planning CONCVnSSION MEETING MINUTES FOR FEBRUARY 22, 1995 If ihe simcmre is moved beck lo'd very somU and asked >0 eonsrder-if,be deposed residence w„ ,00 ambrdoos forrbe lor, Nolan asked svhar die Proposrfji^g ^ace “^u^be^^^^ atoposed'^iesidence r^as too u- • u ci^oiiv like startin<J over, even though there are major reductions KdrvSth“n'n; se'e'Ld ovedy ambidoo.-fo, .U. small b. bmiddde lo, Mi,ehe. enplamed .bar rbis borne .« “‘/tTbelfaSS'.otl'!r.?Sf. f. « S, Sally and Jon Lebedoff are his sister and including the earage and furnace fotS— S: SoenTb-e. -re' designed w„b d,e esi.rin, re.den.e m place. Mabusth stated the City would ||’® priofto^ht CouncTLewing. Mabusth asked agreed but added that he might talk with Ceil S'^= ^ lot line as only V if the applicants would . n ^ t[,ev did not want to do that because it would :sr Sr.r. “o rb^SSSS ;!^5.ii .ood,e„ .SPOS.,. ,0 ,be kbeben smith commented that the applicants had done a good Job of bringing the residence in and up although she would like to see a smaller footprint. There were no comments from the public. Peterson commented that the fire department would have accessibility and did not see a problem with the location of the residence. It was moved bv Schroeder, seconded by Peterson, to approve SnTiniS'Sst nS; felt the footprint of the residence was too ambitious for the lot. I I II iMM 1_______________TTHTTcontinuea; s:srs/s5n^s^ ' ...,.„ ,™vM *.=p.v«i f. of the Council. Staff^U ^ K“-BBSOLimOt. .3M« r=po..d from the main eke wn« ,,,b3ck is at 1 1-’’-f-- ° eie’/adon (#10 - #1997 Sally and jonainaii The requirement of ^ DNR mw 2" from the west lot line md r— ,ropot«.. »-dd...» hardcover in the 75-250 ’. q.„rne2Mi.ene«nddd„.C,dS.»..^^^^^^^^ reviewal of the drawyigs. back and holds to the rear of the “/£fmpreS.;Sr*. horde,.., h, s f. Mitchell explained that ;o'1^1ilowel from 'he neighbor, not impact the neianbors. If the structure if repairs are DNR on their agreement to the 20' lake setback. Nays 0. (#11) #1998 CRAIG WICKLUND, 3780 BAYSIDE ROAB - VARIANCES - resolution S3S41 Mr. & Mrs, Wicklund were present. r.rfrft'rSmT:rirr;;= wXT'The 50 front/rear and 30 requir^ side setbacks would be m«. damaging this area, which is located withm his property and not within tne The Planning Commission recommended approval. The new cuA ‘ ^ problems w4 the neighbors propeny. Both wiU use the dnve to achieve access. The appUcant is satisfied with the recommendation of the Planning Commission. Goeuen moved, Kelley seconded, to adopt Resolution #3541 based on the findings and (XjndinonsofthePlarming Commission recommenaatioiL Ayes4.iNays . 1^ STATE OF M[?5fls§®‘irzs\ PHONE NO. '_j1 ^DEPARTMENT OF NAT'JRAL RESOURCES - 1200 WARNER ROAD, ST. PAUL, MN 551p(J^|^QMETRO WATERS 772-7910 March 20, 1995 Ms. Jeanne Mabusth City of Orono P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, Minnesota MAR Z 2 1995 55323 RE: MITCHELL VARIANCE APPLICATION (CITY #1997), LAKE MINNETONKA - BROWNS BAY (27-133-28), CITY OF ORONO, HENNEPIN COUNTY Dear Ms. Mabusth: I am responding to Bob Mitchell's March 14, 1995 letter (which you w©r© copied on) and Mr. Mitchell's March 10, 1995 letter to the City Council. You and I discussed the original proposal for this site in a telephone conversation. At that time I noted that the existing nonconformities should be reduced. I specifically suggested that the house meet at least a 25 foot setback since it would then at least be out of the minimum "shore impact zone" required by the State. I also saw opportunities to replace portions of the existing gravel driveway area with a grass or vegetated strip. In addition, I agreed that some type of variance would be required to allow for a reasonable use of the property. After meeting with Mr. Bob Mitchell on 3/10/95 and learning more about the features of the site in question and neighboring properties, I can elaborate on my earlier verbal comments. The main DNR concern is that whatever the city approves involves an improvement over the existing situation and that the existing non conformities be reduced, i.e. that the house be set back more than the existing 17.5 feet and that the impervious surface be reduced. Since the city's structure setback requirement is 75 feet, the shore impact zone would be the area within 37.5 feet of the lake. Therefore, it is really the 37.5 foot setback that is at issue here rather than the State's 25 foot minimum. I agree that the house could not meet a 37.5 foot setback on this lot. While I prefer to see the house meet the State's 25 foot minimum setback (for lots of record that have adjoining lots with average setbacks of 25 feet or less), it is not essential since it is the city's shore impact zone of 37.5 feet that is the distance of concern. We will not object to a main lake setback that is increased to at least 20 to 25 feet, as long as the City Council finds that shifting the proposed house a few feet back towards the main lake would best meet the intent of the city's regulations. In particular, we understand that the main lake setback must be balanced with the lot line setback concerns and staying out of the floodplain. AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER Ms. Jeanne Mabusth Mitchell Variance (#1997) March 20, 1995 Page 2 In regards to the impervious surface issue, I understand that the current proposal involves some conversion of the gravel area to grass. I also understand that the drainage from the gravel area goes to a grassy low area off the property and infiltrates, and that it does not drain directly to the lagoon. In summary, the DNR will not object to the city granting variances for this site as long as the main lake setback is increased, the percentage of impervious surface is decreased and the other variance requests are addressed in a balanced fashion. In addition, I suggest the city consider a condition for the variance approval that requires appropriate coloring of the proposed house, and landscaping, to help the house blend in with the natural surroundings when viewed from Brown's Bay. Please contact me at 772-7910 should you have any questions regarding these comments. Sincerely, Ceil Strauss Area Hydrologist CCS c: Bob Mitchell Lake Minnetonka file 27-133-28 U Description of Request Demolish existing house and build new two-story dwelling on existing foundation, except as noted on the survey. The variances applied for are necessary to build the new house requested by the Applicants. The proposed new house hardcover is 2369.5 square feet vs. 2513.8 square feet hardcover for the existing house (including canopy over front porch). The hardcover reduction for the new house is 144.3 feet (-5.7%). The roof line or canopy of the new house is 3.2 feet further back from Lake Minnetonka and the house remains more than 75 feet from the lagoon. There is a slight foundation line change on the driveway side for the garage. Two foundation jogs on the sides are being removed, in effect increasing the side lot setbacks. There will be removal of existing hardcover including portions of gravel driveway, sidewalk, front canopy, wood steps and patio block. The proposed new house is a two-story house to replace a one-story house to have adequate space for a family of two adults and tv'o children (ages 11 and 14). The height of the house is 7’9" under the Orono height limit of 30 feet for a pitched roof, being 22’3" at the measuring point. In 1989, while Mr. Mitchell was living, a similar proposal was made. At that time, Ralph Bagley, the neighbor to the west, requested that some additional landscaping be done between the two houses. That additional landscaping was installed. In addition, the overhead power lines were placed underground to each of the two houses. The applicants know of no issues pending regarding any other neighbors. The hardship is as stated beiow. jages) The existing a one car ce the existing 4800.5 uare feet of gin gravel rly sides of me front ,rs along this . lous changes, liveability. It is test applied :uired , square foot sting side Unusual Property Conditions small, old lots. rrounds Bagley and Mitchell houses virtually on 3 sides, low lying, sewered. New water well. jhborhood houses have been gradually upgraded over the years by use having been improved similarly. This is the last house in the ite area to need improvement. ii ;«p Ylf cnvoF Ifn J U ORONO J Jur?'^—r #TT !.♦: 3 .*. V ^ 4 ■‘ :/ Adjacent Property OwtSlckiJledgeroenf I W Ralph C. Bagley [prini nimc(s)] 1105 Ferndale Rd W/ Wayzafca, MN 5539_ [print address] ° K „n, for th- oroposed improvement or proposed use of the propeny located , ,„i ....«.«.»« «■ Z St,? declare approval or oisapproval o. ...t plans and that the proposed neighoor s CouncU that I C«s!a am woei avare ot the unprovem-..t P- project or use requires Council approval. ZIZ 2b /9fS Date Property Owne: Date r'TvcF r-SNO _# 1 Q 9 ‘ Adjacent Property On-ne^'J^o-^dgement Form —- .Aui R.C. & Kai-^^«^rine M. Fo^ IAN 3 0 I99y rnrint D.img(s)] nf 1095 W Ferndale Rd, Wayzata , m 55391 [prin: address]- - [print Damc(s)] at nm w Pefr^f^aTe Hd _ mc.ica iw1^-LL/X L -esi-A w ----- s,.,, p, ™ er“‘“r^*r.o”S “ i-ai;ss, rSpr»<sr.-! »■='-'»=■ project or use requires Council approval. Property Ov-Tier b.C. Fox Date Property Owner Katherine M. Fox Dato^/ i ; / Le&6.pc>fif ’■ I P^yy^-»0*O HARDCOVER CALCULATION WORKSHEET (qj 7^ 75-250'SETBACK ZONE: (CIRCLE ONE) EXISTING Hardcover in zone A. House 7 _______ Length ___ & B. Garage C. Dnveway D. Sidewalk ^Tori6. E. -Pattej^Bcck- 2.7 3.L fcafidscapc Uaderteir By-Phtstic <r./ / Width s.l Z4-.^ 2i Z Z4^.Z /4-. 4- G. Other ^JA TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE A B _?2//, L X 100 proposed HARDCO^T:R IN ZONE A. House Length B. Garage _____ C. Driveway ______ D. Sidewalk _____ ird»Je _____ E. Pfttiej'Dcr^^ F. Landscape Underlain By Plastic G. Other Width 7.C7 / ii- total HARDCOVER IN ZONE total PROPERTi' .\RE-'^ LN ZONE A - B -■7ZJ/. ^ X 100 -?-/<•-?j- ‘’*^‘'■•''^•'^'’13 =/<«•. 3 S.F. ss //<£.. ^S.F. =.. ir^. 0 S.F. =i^9,Z S.F. S.F. n-ic?S.F. -S.F. foZ./ S3 S.F. S .'Z ep S.F. 27^.3 S.F. =S ^4. /S.F. S.F. =S /3!i3.o S.F. =3 S.F. S=3a-.-7 S.F. S.F. 7tf/£^S.F. -(h3.% !54^.S S.F. S.F. -3!o S.F. -S.F. S.F. =-t^sr- Cl6>S.F. _Z24.. ^_ S.F. '^4 S.F. _S.F. S.F. _S.F. _S.F. S.F. S.F. 7Zlf ,6^S.F. =% Cr^S.6 500-1000 ’ A B JT 7L/ IT' 5-y. 3S'(5t3*^ UARDCOVER CALCULATION WORKSHEET SETBACK ZONE: (CmCLE ONE) 0-75’ EXISTING HARDCOVER IN ZONE A. House X Leogth y^OOD B. Garage C. Driveway D. Sidewalk z.y t,-c ba^fo ^ E. PatifiZDc*^ datlfi^sjeu F. Laodsoop# U u Je» Ey Pittjug G. Other 5Z. 3.J TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE PROPOSED HARDCONER IN ZONE A. House ^0/2. Lecgth z B. Garage C. driveway D. Sidewalk E. Pauo/Deck F. Lacdscape Underlain By Plastic G, Other total PROPERTY ARE.-^ IN ZONE (ts^ Widdi 5^.g 3.^f Tt H.Z //■ 6" //.5 25-500 ’ B X 100 Widih Z.Z7 total hardcover in zone B • 3 X 100 500-1000 ’ 34-3 -3 S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. /4/.7____S.F. a. 6 S.F. Z3,0 S.F. S.F. 5-4. <*• S.F. ^3. g S.F. S.F. S.F. /ZZ,9-3 S.F. ^ S.F. _____% 5.5 44 47rZ) S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S6>1.3 S.F. /2A«7.^ _ S.F. 'V i’/ . ‘♦.31 A B •t“vj V— 'Ss- 4- /i -6 - Vf-4' i—a^-3 < ©_pp.^MT wnoown OW»«N prtOJCCT AUunaM T flO* «oi •Ol mmv rcooM •«apx oniM BJlOSrar^ si^i,r.s*iur"^ ,tOT mLOCH tM|VWtX1P»»W4T Ol* <5- e Kl^HT V)€st ■APT OTIWm LunDGi^cn PHONC161214r>-lSl ow»n ToTA-u a J I V 111 LlVl N ^4=^ - 45C7 lsilT<£^El^“2<?S - 244 t=.jjVei^ - ne> M£^\4/€?IZ^ 40^ MJP 42 ^U?^7.'2’‘=I He^-^^4 <^7TH£(2, ^Jri:^c\4 2.\S> ri>T4>.i^ TOTA!^- \A(£P^-f* VV<bT PC 4-70 1-40 W a>4 pn2- 2 IcA H t~4 •2.4 4? 2<p4 U5?5rf|AKL 24ft tsA. ii-> &ATH gpO • 4C7MP iJU-H-l />U 1»'2. 24 1&<^ 'I'l a'ft 29? ■^431 /<?9? 2I8> 2-I& ■ill^rcT/4c ¥-36" X.0H0 ! 7 OOUNOLMEEim REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION •*'AR 11. 1996 DATE: 3/6/96 CSffYOFOROND ITEM NO.: Department Approval: Name Jeanne A. Mabusth Title Building & Zoning Administrator Administrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: Zoning Item Description: #2107 Erwin Smith/John M. O’Sullivan, 3340 Shoreline Drive Applicants request being rescheuuled before the Planning Commission at their March 18, 1996 meeting. Please refer to fax from John O'Sullivan of March 6, 1996 attached to the statf memo. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: To refer application #2107 to the Planning Commission for further review at their March 18, 1996 meeting at the request of applicants. Application shall be rescheduled before the Council at their March 25, 1996 meeting. ♦f ir'' ,, MfiR-06-1996 US23 FROM O’SULLIURNS 612 471 9644 4730510 P.01 l CO ’SuUimm^ V LAK6 MIMNCTONKA y -«^GMllto#KdS 15 & 19 • P.O. Box 65 • Navarre. MN 55392 • (612) 471-0725 Itevtrrt Auto Ropair • (612) 471-7554 /-ksus:rf4 ^'fe4- 2S'. /? ,v /■ i-- TOTfiL P.01 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MAR 11 1996 DATE: 3/I/«|V0F0KN0 ITEM NO.: ^ Department Approval: Name Jeanne A. Mabusdi Title Building & Zoning Administrator Administrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: Zoning Item Description: #2109 Todd Smith, 1380 Arbor Street - Variances - Resolution Zoning District: LR-IB Brief Review of Application Applicant has filed a side, rear and lot coverage variance application to allow applicant to complete the construction of a 10'xl4’ enclosed three season porch. The building staff had posted a stop work order and advised the applicant of a need to file the variance. A roofed grade level patio existed within the same footprint as the proposed three season porch. The roofed patio is basically open on three sides. The new structure will be totally enclosed and cement floor patio will remain as the floor of the new structure. Review Exhibit H, approximate! \ hree-quarters of the roof of the house extended over the patio and plastic panels were added to cow r the remainder of the grade level patio. The four member Planning Commission recommended unanimous approval of the variances as proposed based on the hardship statemem provided by applicant. Exhibit E. Planning Commission members recommended that approval include a condition that would place both current and future owners on notice that any future requests to add new structural improvements to the residence must be matched with either equal or greater removals of existing structure. Please review the enclosed staff memo dated 2/12/96 that provides more detail on the issues of this review. The enclosed approval resolution has been drafted per the findings and conditions of the Planning Commission recommendation. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED; To either deny, approve or amend the enclosed approval resolution. A RESOLUTION GRANTING VARIANCES TO MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTIONS 10.03, SUBDIVISION 14 (C) AND SECTION 10.28, SUBDIVISION 5 (B) FILE #2109 WHEREAS, Todd Smith (hereinafter "the applicant") is the owner of the property located at 1380 Arbor Street within the City of Orono (hereinafter "City") and legally described as follows: Lot 4, Block 1, Markville, Hennepin County, Minnesota (hereinafter "the property"); and WHEREAS, the applicant has applied to the City for variances to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.03, Subdivision 14 (C) and Section 10.28, Subdivision 5 (B) to permit construction of a 10'xl4' three season porch to be located 12.3' from the north side lot line where a 30' setback is required and 10' from the east rear lot line where a 50' setback is required. The proposed structural improvement will result in total lot coverage of 32% or 1,763 s.f. where the code would have allowed 1,500 s.f. or 27.2% and where 32% exists. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono, Miniiesota: FINDINGS 1. This application was reviewed as Zoning File #2109. 2. The property is located in the RR-IB, Rural Residential Zoning District requiring 2 acres in area. The property consists of 5,506.2 s.f. or .126 acres. 3. The Orono Planning Commission reviewed this application on February 20, 1996, and recommended approval of the variances as proposed based upon the following unique findings and hardships: Page 1 of 5 r7-.:pW^< A. Lot is .126 acres in area and subject to 2 acres zoning standards. B. Lot was created and residence constructed prior to zoning requirements. C. There are no adjacent lands available to combine with substandard property. D. A large open space park e.xists to the immediate north of property. E. The residence is served with sewer. F. New three season porch will be constructed within the exact building footprint of the previous roofed patio area at 10'xl4'. 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 subs^tial property right of the applicant; and would be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan of the City. The City Council has considered this application including the findings and recommendations of the Planning Commission, reports by City staff, comments by the applicant and the effect of the proposed variance on the health, safety and welfare of the community. CONCLUSIONS, ORDER AND CONDITIONS Based upon one or more of the above findings, the Orono City Council hereby grants variances to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.03, Subdivision 14 (C) and Section 10.28, Subdivision 5 (B) to permit construction of a 10'xl4 ’ three season porch and grants a north side setback variance of 17.7' or 59% and rear setback variance of 40' or 80% and grants a lot coverage e.xcess of 263 s.f. or 4.7%, subject to the following conditions: 5. Page 2 of 5 W':-^ 1:i- ■■■ "f 1. Applicant to obtain a penalty building permit before work can commence on reconstruction of three season porch. 2. Applicant and future owners are hereby advised that any future requests to add structural improvements to the existing residence where 32% of structural coverage exists must be matched with either equal or greater removals of existing structure. 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 (March 1 1, 1997). 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 11th day of March, 1996. ATTEST: Dorothy M. Hallin, City Clerk Gabriel Jabbour, Acting Mayor Property Owner(s) STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) ss. The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this 11th day of March, 1996, by Gabrield Jabbour, Jr. & Dorothy M. Hallin, Acting Mayor & City Clerk of the City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City. Notary Public Page 4 of 5 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 ir and who executed the foregoing nsmmeta, andacknowledged that he (they) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed NOTARY PUBUC STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) day of , 199 __before me a NotaryOn this_______________ Public within and for said county, personally appeared-------------------^---- ----------- known to me to be the person(s) descnbed m and who executed the foregoing instrument, andTcknowledged that he (they) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed. NOTARY PUBUC Page 5 of 5 TO:Chair Peterson and Orono Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator FROM: Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building & Zoning Administrator DATE: February 12,1996 SUBJEC f: #2109 Todd Smith, 1380 Arbor Street - Variances - Public Hearing Zoning District: RR-IB Application: Applicant seeks approval of side, rear and lot coverage variances to allow applicant to proceed with completing 10'xl4’ enclosed three season porch. A stop work order was posted when the building inspector discovered the reconstruction in process. Tlie following ordinances are pertinent for this review: 1. Section 10.28, Subd. 5(B) A. Side setback variance Required = 30' Proposed = 12.3' Variance = 17.7' or 59% B. Rear setback variance Required = 50' Proposed = 10' Variance = 40’ or 80%. 2. Section 10.03, Subd. 14(C) - Review of structural coverage. Total lot area = approximately 5,506.2 s.f Allowed = 1,500 s.f. or 27.2% E.xisting = 1,763 s.f or 32% Proposed = 1,763 s.f. or 32% (49 s.f. of area that extends beyond original roof line of residence) List of Exhibits A - Application B - Plat Map C - Property OwTiers List D - Addendum E - Hardcover Statement F - Neighbor's Acknowledgment Form G - Surv’ey for Application #681, 1982 Van i oe Review H - Elevations I - Current Survey Zoning File #2109 February 12,1996 Page 2 Description of Request As part of the major renovation of the older residence, the applicant wishes to enclose a former roofed patio that wbs partially framed. Applicant has provided a photo of the original structure for Planning Commission's review. Portions of the patio that was not covered by the original roof line approximately 3 l/2'xl4' was roofed with a translucent plastic panel. The applicant plans to reconstruct a three season porch within the exact area. The porch will icmain at 10x14. The original cement slab will be enclosed. There is no change in the lot coverage facts as the roofed patio area has also been included in the structural inventor}'. Review Exhibit G, in 1982 the former owner received approval of front, side and rear setback variances that allowed a 10'x30’ addition to the south side of the existing residence providing additional bedroom and living room area. The main issue for that review was that the property was still served by an on-site septic system. The property is now served by sewer. Note the survey ot 1982 does no: show the roofed patio area. The improvement was made some time after 1982. Applicant's addendum. Exhibit D, confirms that structure was in place at the time of their purchase five years ago. As already noted, we have photos of the former roofed patio. Issues for Consideration The code does not distinguish between a roofed patio or three season porch as it relates to structural coverage and setback controls. What of the intensification of the mass of structure or me visual impact on adjacent properties? The three season porch now becomes part of the principal struclure. Should the porch area be trimmed back to the area beneath the original roof line (6 l/2'xl4')7 Will the deck have to be altered again to provide access to the well? How is access to be achieved when the next well problem arises? 1. 2. 3. 4.Other issues raised by the Planning Commission. Hardship Statement - refer to Exhibit E They are reviewed as follows: The lot is 5,506 ? s.f and subject to 2 acre zoning standards. The lot was created and residence constructed prior to zoning requirements. 3. There is no adjacent lands available to combine with property. 1. 2. »-■ Zoning File #2109 February 12,1996 Pages 4. The residence is served with sewer. 5. A large open space park exists to the immediate north of property. Options of Action To either deny, approve or amend the current proposal. V\Application if Q.! 0^ a Date Received ^ I/Xu Amount Paid ^ ^ CITY OF ORONO - VARIANCE APPLICATION Initial Application Fee $220.00 ($50.00 per each additional variance) Renewal Variance Fee $120.00 (no change from original application) Variance for non-conforming structures $220.0' Afrer-iie-Fact Fees (Double application fee) IS ?.-! PROPERTY INFORMATION SiteAddress WPfl^L? g7 Property Identification Number ... I 1___1 nnnlimtiori 1ASe“;.L; .0 appucauon Date Property Acquired, ~ tZ. ---------uaie rrupcii/ k ---------------------; - . I (do) (do not) also own the adjacent patcc s of tod. Present use of property > _tesidential -----mother (specify; Zoning District;-------------------------—--------------- APPLZC.ANT Name r iThL Addre-.s: / i&Q Phone Oinme^ ^lLSS~fS'------ Phone (work) Ci.7:.Zip:_£SIi2-Z. OWNER (if different ji applicant) Name______________________ Phone (home). Phone (work)_ Address;.City:.Zip:. description of request Describe request in detail; _^&s Estimated Construction Cost $________ ■' (attach additional sheets if necessary) VARIANCES required Lot Area y Setback; ____Lot V^id:^ Front ^ Side Hardcover X Rear r Lot Coverage Average Lakeshore Other (specify) compUa.ice with Zoning Cnde requirements;__-------------------------" (attac;* c ■,al sheets if necei.i.-y) J ISP* REQUIRED SUBMITTALS All «f «h. foii«w4.« fafermation -■■■t h. submitted hv tht «ppli{«tion dffldlint order for vo<. ^ypligation to be considered coinDkt€I 1. 2. 3. 8. cSedpijS O^eR™ St of owners within 150', labels and plat map (>ou must obtain this list, labels and map from Hennepin County Department of Finance, A-603, Govt Center, 348-3271). Certificate of Survey (signed by a licensed surveyor, and mclu^ hardcover calculations as required. In addition, provide one (1) copy 8'A k 11 for ——.yiiir T------ and proposed elevations) if any changes in existing ^de are proposX In addition, provide one (1) copy 8'/." x 11" for reproduction. Sketches or plans of floor & elevation views (provide one (1) copy 8/: x 11 ). List of the legal names (include marital status) of all persons with an interest m the property. This would include name(s) of applicant(s) if not current owner(s). As an addendum to this application, please attach a separate list of any other persons you wish notified of this application. Additional items as may be requested by City staff. Applicant and Property Owner must sign this application. Please rememter that ysUL variante anplifarinn is not complete »hp above inform"tion has llPt bt^ll mcluded. APPLICANT’S SIGNATURE ^ u u ^ The applicant hereby agrees to provide all information required or requested by the Zomng Administrator, agrees to pay additional fees (staff time not covered by 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 13ate ^ ^ ^f 6 The owner hereby acknowledges and agrees to this application and further authorizes re^onable entrv onto the propertv by City staff, consultants, agents, Commisston members, and Council members for purposes of investigation and verification of this request. Owner's Signature Date /- z ? — Anolicant must have all submittals into the City offices 25 days before the Pitting Commission Meeting. Planning Commission 1 --tings ^ held on month Applicants must be J .^sent at aU scheduled review meetings of the Planning Commission and Council. If applicant is .mable to attend a scheduled meeting plegse make arrangements to have an autfiorized agent attend in your place and to advise the Buildmg & Zoning Office of this change prior to the meeting. / .._J MU^Ninii aui. Bc csMrr iwiwrr mmvay mm \rtm vnnm MMMT MB.BMI 1 ■t 4 TMBAYU M M-1I?-M n MM •&m. ^MBw m % 9 r,« i'‘ UfY MtUf» V funmnmk m «cs«i M^k*^17-U II •IMC Mmm ST J I SUrMKM.«Ni S J aUMXQN j t aimiBLaNi 4MI HUM ST C MKISUUNIW BS»« m i*>U7-n SI siBi suit MOMN m s CITY m mam cm m mamMK 44 orrsTU bay iw usts M M-U7-tS It BBMt •U7S BMMI MB SJ ( fotatstm • B 4 mm• • r»iCKST4B t B 4 NBB«ur% mam m tMBYttTB m SHYt M l•-ll7-ts n BOBS BISBB MBnB ST S C MTtKSai 4 J N MTtBSON ■M9CMY 1 JULIANM PCTtMSON ms rnmaa sr MYZ4T4 Nt Bust 14 10-U7-tS It BBSS • ISBS MBOB ST t A LIBATIBUI IT Ai N7i 1ST CNBIGUC tXBATlBUI BOK ISS ISBS ARBOM ST rSYSTAl SAY MM S51J U tB-ll7-tl It B8A«SIMB ARBOR STT M 4 R S SMITHrOBB M 4 KRISTIN S SMITHlIBB ARBOR STMATZATA IB* MB71 SB lO-UT-tS SI MSS OISBO BRIAR ST R BCMMN 4 B BONHAM RAM. 4 BARBARA BCAtlAN BABB NMTN SNQRf DR HATZATA Ml BSS41 IB tB>U7-tl It BBB4 OZlAQ NORTN SNORI DR DORIS 1 IISfNRRAIKR DORIS I IISiNRRAMIR ZIAO NORTH SHORI DR NAYZATA IB* BSSTl G tH Cv> •Nt? 1 TOTAL BATCH DBt DBBID I CIRTI7Y THAT THf TACTS RfRRCSENTEO ARE AN ACCURATE AMO TRUE RERRtSENTATION 07 IM70RMATI0N AS XT ARREARS THIS DATE ON THE RECORDS 07 Tm HCNNIRIN COUNTY DERARTMIMT Of RRORERTY TAXATION, TO THE BEST 07 MY KNONLEDOE AND BEL1E7. DATE CA. 'llft ■I" tw «y. ■f ti; -I*-f O'■v,'0' ------------------------- U . . . /.--/^ .C» T'hlL<.----<*^1:^—------------- - - _:c^L.U_ife— -4n —gr.^O -y- ------l'oe*._^«—4i£-+C'a'----- .. I? /„ /5<>€.l^^*' /?6> ■ -...............................- - ---------------- ----‘ y. JJ , /t^ ^rJ U':'J1^__ ' < _ . /■ J'f , 2:^ ^ ^C. S.'^C^^/1^ —fr'?: a^'^Us-.n^thdii-s—■f<eie:—'d=d^-<dyyxls.—2!1- y j7^ /Vgj-g^ 1 lo^esfiry^-A^ 45**/V/__----------------------------------------------------------------------- i V. u Adjacent Property earners''Acknowledgement Form I (we) ^A/y\ ^ po~vc\^riVf) of [print name(s)][print address] have reviewed the plans for the proposed improvement or proposed use of the property located 2^^ also referred to as Land Use Application No.-------------. I (we) understand that in executing this acknowledgement, I (we) am (are) not ^ked to project or use requires Council approval. I • Mi ^ ^ 4’.-' Property Owner zs -'t C Date A /V Mi hZ-H- 9<S- Property Owner A )Vv-< Wa.nl [print name(s)] I (we)print address] have reviewed the plans for the proposed improvement or proposed use of the property located j /"5 9 o___________also referred to as Land Use Application No.--------------■ I (we) understand that in executing this acknowledgement, 1 (we) am (^e) not asked declare approval or disapproval of the property or use but merel^y to confirm for Council that I (we) am (are) aware of the improvement plans and that the proposed neighb project or use requires Council approval. Propert>' Owner Date Property Owner Date If you have any information that may assist the City in the reviw of this Land Use Application, please submit your comments to the Building & Zoning Office at least 10 d y prior to the scheduled meeting date. #6 81 it* i EXHiiSJT - (^ ^Vj of Turvcy Tor P*j. I'caa, Tn»*. In unx, 4, K-irr/l'Io Honnoolr. Cn-.nty, Klrr:«=f^^ f ft "*€*,^.^,4 . fiiO ► ■r-i I MMSBB -teoEMo 7¥. 99 £mtsri4¥9 :<s ttoySt u *;<' c. :V // Mr: ,r >V‘V“-’- pr.:.'i,^: >;:•;• ?r„:.'^; 4^1. i... Cril". I*, i, _,(*♦ l>»»o ; 4.-7-^? o i Iron rarkur M. Cntrif. K./r^T^^cJ^Z .urvyiT :>r i i'lnr.n»«r l«u<i-, Klnr.naptn >yS, - - - -•'. . ■ V.- V* . -■•• •(■; ■♦ . -i •. H^iPi r*:‘ TODD SMITH IN U)T 4, BUOCK X MARKVILLE HENNEPIN COUNTY. MINNESOTA J . along ihe North line of said lot to a point equidistant from the North.-/est and Northeast corners of said Lot 4; thence Southwesterly to a point in the South line of said Lot 4 equidistant from the Southwest and Southeast corners of said lot; thence West along the South line of said Lot 4 to the Southwest corner of said lot; thence North along the West line of said Lot 4 to the point of beginning. ... o; denotes iron marker Bearings shown are based upon an assumed datum. Date of the original survey was ^-7-82. Additional field work was done on 1-11.-i96. This sur''('y intends to show Ltio boundaries o. the above described property, and the location of an existing house th.ereon. It does not purport to show any other improvements or encroachments. !l v\ COUNOLMEETINQ REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MAH 1 1 1996 DATE: VimOnoeOHOtO ITEM NO.: Department Approval: Nanc Jeume A. Mabusth Title Building St Zoning Administrator Administrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: Zoning Item Description: #2110 Robert and Joan Dayton, 2465 French Lake Road - Variances Resolution Zoning District: RR-IB (The property is located within the shoreland area of a Natural Environment I^ke, French Lake South Basin.) Area Each of the three lots owned by the Daytons were platted at 2+ acres. Total area of pi >[)erty = 6.8± acres. Pertinent Ordinances 1. Section 10.56, Subdivision 16 (C) • Variance'setback irom Natural Enviro»m lake Required = 150’ Exist’nc = 71.6’ Proposed family room ac = 88’ Proposed three season porcu a6±' Varianc’* = 64' or 42.6% Brief Review of Applica. Please refer to the enclosed suff memo dated Feb;*'jary 14, 1996 for more detail and background on this review. Applicants seek approval of lakeshore setback variances for additions to the south or lake side of the existing residence. French Lake South Basin is a natural environment lake requiring a 150’ setback forall structures from the 930 OHWL. Review Exhibit K, the residence constructed in 1983 through 1984 is located between the 75-150’ setback from the lake. The entire 6 f44 s.f. of residence struemre is now nonconforming as a result of the Shoreland Regulatioius adopted by the City in 1992 Any additions to this residence would require variance approval. Request for Council action continued Zoning File #2110______________ The additions involve an expansion of a family room area and a new three season porch at the scHitheast comer of the residence. The additions will result in M6 s.f. of new structural improvements withm the required setback area. The additions will be placed over an existing deck and will not extend beyond the existing three season porch lake side addition (review Exhibit F). Prior to the Shoreland Regulations of 1992, the required lakeshore setback for all structures was 75*. There was no defined OHWL for French Lake. Surveyors would merely measure back from the existing water line of the lake. Tliere is approximately 37.5 s.f. of principal structure and 4H s.f. of the lake side deck located within the 0-75’ ^^erback area. All nonstructural improvemci such as grade level patios, landscaping with plastic, paving for driveways, etc. would be allowed in the 75-150* setback area. Applicants were asked to resolve two major concerns that arose during the review of this variance application. As lots are not legally combined, staff cons-, v»ed only the area of Lot 2 in deterauning the hardcover facts as follows: Area within 75-2 ju setback = 64.985 s.f. Allowed = 16,246.25 s.f. or 25% Existing and proposed = 18,975 s.f. or 29.1% Excess hardcover = 2,728.75 s.f. or 4.1% Mr. Dayton has advised that he wouiu legally combine Lots 1 and 2 to offset the hardcover excess ■ M Hardcover facts are amended to read as follows: Lots 1 and 2 75-250* setback ai ‘a = 141,072 s.f. Allowed =3 ',268 s.f. or 25% Existing = 18 975 s.f. or ! • 4% Proposed 1= 18.275 s.t or l3.4% Another issue was the detached garage that encroaches the ' *'ared lot lines of Lots 2 and 3. A building permit was never issued for the garage Mr. Da>ion has obtained building permit and subdivision applications in order to proceed with a lot line rearrangement. The purpose of the subdivision of a lot line rearrangement v ill be to bring the detached garage within the boundaries of the homestead parcel. Lot 2. The garage structure must also meet the required side setback ot 10’ from the newly proposed lot line. Applicants’ survevor is in the process of preparing c. the filing of the subdivision and mtends to meet the Anr^ agenda of the Planning C 'inmission. Request for Council action continued page 3 of 3 March 7, 1996 Zoning File #2110 ______________ Planning Commission Recommendation The Planning Commission recommended unanimous approval of the setback variance for structural improvements to the south or lake side of the existing residence based on the hardships set forth in applicants’ hardship statement. Exhibit E. Members conditioned approval on applicants legally combining one or more of the parcels with the homestead parcel to offset 4.1% excess of hardcover and applicants were to advise staff prior to the Council meeting ol March 11th whether they would proceed with the legal combination of Lots 2 and 3 or file a subdivision of a lot line rearrangement. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: To either amend or adopt the enclosed approval resolution. >»A RESOLLTION GRANTING VARIANCES TO MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 10.56, SUBDIVISION 16 (C) FILE #2110 WHEREAS, Robert J. Dayton and Joan L. Da\lon (hereinafter "the applicants") arc owners of the property located at 2465 French Lake Road within the City of Orono (hereinafter "Cit>'") and legally described as follows: Lots I and 2, Block I, and Outlot A. Johnstons French Lake Second Addition, Hennepin County, Minnesota (hereinafter "the property"); and WHEREAS, the applicants have applied to the City for variances to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.56, Subdivision 16 (C) to permit the construction of two additions to the south or lake side of the existing residence totalling approximately 346 s.f. of new principal structure. The 7.8 ’xl2' family room expansion will be located 88' from the shoreline where a 150’ setback is required and the approximate 23'xl2 ’ three season porch will be located 86'± from the shoreline where 150' setback is required. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono, Minnesota: FINDINGS I. This application was reviewed as Zoning File #2ll0. The property is located in the RR-IB. Single Family Rural Residential Zoning District requiring 2 acres in area. The property is also located within the shoreland area of a Natural Environment Lake and subject to additional Shoreland Regulations. Page I of 5 *4 r The Orono Planning Commission re\ie\ved this application on February 20. 1996, and recommended unanimous approval of the proposed variance based upon the following unique findings and hardships: A. The home was built prior to the Shoreland Regulations approvea by the City in 1992. The structure vvas built in 1983 through 1984. B. The original residence structure conformed to all pertinent Shoreland Regulations at that time. C. The entire residence structure is located within the 75-150 ’ setback area where no structural improvements are allowed. The entire structure is nonconforming D. Based on peninsula shape of the Dav ton property and as a result of the new Shoreland Regulations that redefined what was once a wetland to a Natural Environment Lake, the majority of dry building area is unbuildable. E. The improvements will not result in new hardcover as all additions or expansions will be placed over existing structure or deck. F. Applicants have legally combined Lots 1 and 2 to offset any hardcover excess within the 75-250' setback area. G. Hardcover within the 75-250' setback of combined Lots 1 and 2 is 18,975 s.f or 13.4%. The proposed improvement will not result in an increase in hardcover within the 75-250' setback area. H. The applicant.> cannot e.xpand upon their residence without first obtaining a variance as a result of the new Shoreland Regulations. Page 2 of 5 % (.J- ' |v: •The property is unique based on the irregular or peninsula shape and the fact that a recent ordinance amendment has reclassified 6,444 s.f. of residence structure nonconforming requiring special consideration. 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 applicants, 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. 5.The City Council has considered this application including the findings and recommendations of the Planning Conunission, reports by City staff, comments by the applicants and the effect of the proposed variance on the health, safety and welfare of the community. CONCLUSIONS, ORDER AND CONDITIONS Based upon one or more of the above findings, the Orono City Council hereby grants a variance to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.56, Subdivision 16 (C) to permit construction of a family room addition granting a 62 ’ or 41.3% sef»* k variance and a three season porch addition granting a 64' or 42.6% setback variance, subject to the following conditions: Applicants shall file a lot line rearrangement of the shared lot line between Lots 2 and 3 so that detached garage shall be totally located within Lot 2 and that structure will meet required side yard setback of 10'. Applicants shall also obtain a penalty building permit for detached garage. Authorities granted by this resolution run with the property not with the applicants, but are permissive only and must be exercised by application for a building permit within one year of the date of Council approval, or this variance will expire on that date (March II, 1997). Page 3 of 5 i 3. 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. 4. The undersigned applicants have read, understood and hereby agree to the terms of this resolution and on behalf of themselves, their heirs, successors and assigns, hereby agree to the recording of this resolution in the chain of title of the property. Adopted by the Orono City Council on this llth day of March, 1996. ATTEST: Dorothy M. Hallin, City Clerk Gabriel Jabbour, Acting Mayor Property Owner(s) STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) ss. The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this llth day of March. 1996. by Gabriel Jabbour & Dorothy M. Hallin. Acting Mayor & City Clerk of the City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City. Notary Public Page 4 of 5 'r'. STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) On this day of , 199 __before me a Notary Public within and for said county, personally appeared ----------------------------------------------- known to me to be the person(s) described in and who executed the foregoing insmupem, aiidlclcnowledged that he (they) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed. NOTARY PUBUC STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) On this day of , 199 __before me a Notary Public within and for said county, personally appeared _______________________________ known to me to be the person(s) described in and who executed the foregoing instrument, andlcknowledged that he (they) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed. NOTARY PUBUC Page 5 of 5 Xoj Chair 1 eterson and Orono Planning Commission Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator From: Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building & Zoning Administrator Date: February 14,1996 Subject: #2110 Joan Dayton, 2465 French Lake Road - Variances - Public Hearing Zoning District; RR-IB (The property is located within the shoreland of a Natural Environment lake, French Lake South Basin.) Application: Applicant seeks approval of additions to the south or lakeside of the existing residence requiring lakeshore setback variances from French Lake. The entire structure is located within 1 50' from the Natural Environment lake. The OHWL of French Lake South Basin is at 930. Additions involve an expansion of a family room area and a new three season porch at the southeast comer of the residence. The new structural improvements total approximately 346 s.f The following ordinances are pertinent to this review. Pertinent Ordinances 1 Section 10.56, Subdivision 7 (A) - Natural Environment lake. French Lake South Basin at 930 elevation. Both the sewage lagoon and North Basin of French Lake have been reclassified as wetland areas. The entire north shoreline of this property is subject to only a 26' setback and not a 150' setback as shown by applicant's surveyor. 2. Section 10.56, Subdivision 16 (C) - The required structural setback for a Natural Environment lake is 150'. Existing = 7 1'/:’* Proposed family room addition = 88' Proposed three season porch = 86±' Variance = 64’ or 42.6% ♦In 1983 at the time of the construction of the residence, there was no established OHWL for French Lake South Basin. Setbacks were merely staked from waterline by surveyors. It wasn't until 1992 with the adoption of the Shoreland Regulations that an O; IWL was established for French Lake South Basin. 3. Section 10.56, Subdivision 16 (L) - Hardcover review. A. 0-75’ setback area = 149,406 s.f. Allowed = 0 Existing - 2,447.5 s.f. or 1.6%* ♦Hardcover facts have been determined by including the 0-75’ setback area of the three properties owned by Mr. Dayton. The lots are not legally combined under one homestead. Zoning File #2110 February 14,1996 Page 2 A-1. 0-75' setback area of homestead parcel (Lot 2). Area = 26,290 s.f. Existing and proposed hardcover = 2,447.5 s.f. or 9.3% B. B-1. 75-250' setback area = 146,612 s.f.* Allowed = 36,653 s.f. or 25% Existing = 18,975 s.f. or 12.94% Proposed = 18,975 s.f. or 12.94% No change proposed.* ' *This includes the areas in the 75-250' setback area of Lots 1, 2 and 3. **'346 s.f. of hardcover now changes from deck hardcover to enclosed principal structure additions. Hardcover review for Lot 2 only. Area = 64,985 s.f. Allowed = 16,246.25 s.f. or 25% Existing and proposed = 18,975 s.f. or 29.1% Variance = 2,728.75 s.f. or 4.1% List of Exhibits A - Application B - Addendum C - Plat Map D - Property Owners ’ List E-1 Hardcover Inventory, 0-75' E-2 Hardcover Inventory, 75-250' F - Hardcover Plan G - Existing Plan H - South Elevation/Section I - Floor Plan J - Modification for Three Season Porch K - Survey L - Landscape Plan M - Septic Map N - Permit Record O - Permit Application for Deck P - Deck Plan Q - Map Locating Defined Wetland (original North Basin of French Lake) Zoning File #2110 February 14, 1996 Page 3 Review of AppUcotion Applicant seeks approval of lakeshore setback variances and technically hardcover variances for structural additions to be installed between the 75' and 150' setback area of French Lake, South Basin. At the time of the construction of the residence in 1983, the 75' setback from French Lake was the required setback. Note the entire structure is located within the 75-150’ setback area resulting in approximately 6,444 s.f of non-conforming structural hardcover. The proposed improvement will result in structural additions of 346 s.f placed over an existing deck, review Exhibits K and P. As entire structure is located within the 75-150' setback area, any addition proposed for this residence would require both setback and hardcover approvals. Please note all non-structural improvements, such as grade-level patios, landscaping with plastic, paving for roadway, etc., would be allowed in the 75-150’ setback area. Once again review Exhibit K and now Q. Applicant's surveyor originally designated 150’ setback from the north shoreline of the North Basin of French Lake. Members may remember the amendment that reclassified French Lake North Basin to a wetland now requiring only a 26' setback from the 930.5 elevation. Applicant ’s hardcover and legal building envelopes should be redefined. Note applicant's hardcover facts reveal that the area of both Lots I, 2 and 3 have been considered. Tlie properties are not legally combined. It is not clear what applicant's intention is for the use of the property in the future. Note that there is 29.1% hardcover in the 75-250’ zone if Lot 2 or applicant's homestead parcel is only considered. A 41% excess of hardcover exists in the 75-150’ setback area of Lot 2. Review Exhibits K and N. the City has no record of issuing a permit for the detached garage that encroaches within both Lots 2 and 3. Applicant ’s architect advised that he determined the structure was probably built soon after the residence in 1983. Note the slight encroachment of the existing residence and portions of deck. In 1983 and 1986, the 75’ seihtjck unuld have been determined from the actual water level of the South Basin as the OHWX was not established at that lime. There is approximately 37.5 s.f of principal structure and 40 s. f of the lakeside deck within the 0-75’ setback area. Tlie additions will have no impact on adjacent residences but will provide applicant with expansion room for the family room and dining area. The additions will not extend beyond the existing three season porch lakeside addition. Review of Hardship.s Please refer to Exhibit B. The hardships are reviewed as follows: Zoning File #2110 February 14,1996 Page 4 1.The home was built prior to the Shoreland Regulations approved by the City in 1 992. The structure was built in 1983/1984. The original residence structure conformed to all pertinent Shoreland Regulations at that time. 3.The entire residence structure is located within the 75-150' setback area where no structural hardcover is allowed. The entire structure is non-conforming. 4.Based on the peninsular shape of the Dayton property and as a result of the new Shoreland Regulations that redefined what 'vas once a wetland to a Natural Environment lake, the majority of dry buildable area is unbuildable. 5.The improvements will not result in new structural hardcover as all additions or expansions will be placed <'ver existing structure or deck. The applicants cannot expand upon their residence without obtaining a variance as a result of the new Shoreland Regulations. 7.The property is unique based on the irreguic-r or peninsular shape and for the fact that a recent ordinance amendment reclassified 6,444 s.f of residence structure non- conforming requiring special consideration. Issues for Consideration How shall the City and applicant resolve issue of detached garage constructed without a building permit that encroaches within Lot 3? Applicant may apply for the legal combination of Lots 2 and 3 or consider a subdivision of a lot line rearrangement. Once the land use matter is resolved, applicant should obtain an after-the-fact building permit. How shall applicant's property be recognized ... as Lot 2 or combined Lots I and 2 or 'ombined Lots 2 and 3'^ Applicant's hardcover facts should be amended to include the ' generous 75-250' setback area along north shore line and to decide what lots shall make up Ok ’ omcsiead parcel. If applicant chooses to maintain Lot 2 as single homestead, should additional hardcover improvemems ‘oe removed within the 75-250' setback area where a 4.1% excess exists. Other issues raised by Planning Commission. Options of Action To either deny, approve or amend the current proposal. Isv I ApplicadoQ # / / ^ Date Received l/'Z^ /y k. ^ Amount Paid a *7^• ^_ j\ CITY OF ORONO - VARIANCE APPLICATION Initial Application Fee $220.00 ($50.00 per each additional variance) Renewal Variance Fee $120.00 (no change from original application) Variance for non-conforming structures S220. After-the-Fact Fees (Double application fee) if^nm included on required survey. Date Property Acquired-------‘ ^ Present use of property: Zoning District: applicant Narne , ^%>s OWNER (if different than applicant) Maine i?A*^Tocj------------- Address:_L_P?5iiSy — City:. Phone (home)_^3^2.^^5J------- Phone (work)________________ C,g.o>^o _________Zip:./gg^:lL City:. Phone (home)_^3:V.±^£J ------ Phone (work)-------------------------- _________Zip:, description of request °“;yj:r;rr "tl; Esnmated Construction Cost S P>o,.oo c.e.n-B<e.^ New—--------- (attach additional sheets if necessary) \oo di ___Setback:Front Side X Hardcover X Rear Lot Coverage Average Lakeshore ___Other (specifv-)------------------------------------ HAMSHIP/OESCIUmON OF IMSIM 'Joii.lou prevramj (auach additional sheets if necessary) REQUIRED SUBMITTALS All of the following informarion must he submitted bv the applicatio n deadline date in order for vour application to be considered complete: 1. 2. 3. 5. 6. 7. 8. Completed Application Form Certified Property Owners List of owners within 150', labels and plat map (you must obtain this list, labels and map from Hennepin County Department of Finance, A-603, Govt Center, 348-3271). Certificate of Survey (signed by a licensed sur/t^ ,'r) and include hardcover calculations as required. In addition, provide on. (1) copy 8I/2" x 11" for reproduction. Topographic survey (existing and proposed elevations) if any changes in existing grade are proposed. In addition, provide one (1) copy 8V2" x 11" for reproduction. Sketches or plans of floor & elevation views (provide one (1) copy S'/z" x 11"). List of the legal names (include marital status) of all persons with an interest in the property. This would include name(s) of applicant(s) if not current owner(s). As an addendum to this application, please attach a separate list of any other persons you wish notified of this application. Additional item.s as may be requested by City staff. The Applicant and Property Owner must sign this application. Please remember that y^uj; variance application Ls not complete if the above information has not been included. APPLICANT'S SIGNATURE The applicant hereby agrees to provide all information required or requested by the Zoning Administrator, agrees to pay additional fees (staff time not ^'^vered by original fee payment) and/or consultant expenses incurred in review of this application, and certifies that the information supplied is true and correct to the best of his/her knowledge. Date -uApplicant's Sianature ^ A^OjA.iTYV._______ OWNER'S SIGNATURE The owner hereby acknowledges and agrees to this application and further authorizes reasonable entry onto the property by '^■'y staff, consultants, agents, Commission members, and Council members for purposes of investigation and verification of this request. Owner's Signature ifW\ I ■Date Applicant must have'll! submittals into the City offices 25 days before the Planning Commission Meeting. Planning Commission Meetings are held on the third Monday of each month. A^pIicants 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. I 8 1-26-96 IL :0 -1 •'i- 'J f » MS8cR Meyer. Scherer & Rockcastle, Ltd. Architecture, Interior Design and Urban Design 119 North and Street Minneapolis MN 55401.1420 612 37!) 3336 phone 612 342.2216 fax Dear City Of Orono: Our clients Robert and Joan Dayton are applying for a Shoreland setback variance for their residence at One French Lake Road, Orono. The purpose of this letter is to provide a history of the property and to establish a case for hardship that will allow the City to grant their request. The home was built in 1984. At that time the structure conformed to the 75’ wetland setback. In 1992 French Lake was reclassified as a "Natural Environment Lake ’ which increased the setback to 150 ’. This adjustment placed the entire home within the 150 ’ setback. The entire home is now a nonconforming structure. Also due to the peninsula shape of the Dayton ’s property less than 5% of the original 5.2 acres is now buildable as a result of the zoning reclassification. The expansion planned by the Dayton ’s is quite modest. They would like to change the existing screen porch to a year round room (no floor area added) . add a new screen porch along the south side of the existing garage (140 sf of new area) and to expand their family room (100 sf of new area). None of these changes push the house closer to the lake. No hard cover is added to t -ite, because the expanded rooms are replacing decks, patios or planted garden.s witn plastic liners. The Dayton ’s feel this request is very reasonable and causes no additional burden to the environment: The case for hard ship is in fact the ordinance itself. The reclassification has deemed the property virtually unbui.dable and allows the Daytons no expansion opportunities /vithout a variance.'Ordinances traditionally work best when they pre date construction and when the geography is very predictable and regular. Ordinances are problematic when they post-date construction and tiie land shapes are highly irregular. As we all know the Dayton predicament is a classic case when a well intended mandated ordinance cannot account for all the nuances encountered in the real world, thus we entrust our city governments to provide a common sense resolution. Sincerely Garth Rockcastle Ei^ual Opportunity Employer fMlii‘OMNER NMi -‘txpKftn-.r V ---NAHE/AOM : ORA IiMIOP MVVfR V.i ,, MR NAHi ;.; CXT1j TAXPAYER ; /CXTV! NAHE/ADDR SSS P.7-lS 55 0001 iOORESS U4ASSXGNED •PORFEZTEO LANDA COHSERVATIOM 17-85 11 0007 ADDRES5 UNASSIGNED iORONO 55525 PROPERTY OltCRS LIST. I.-' ril PROP AODR 0»MER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/ADW i||;UROP AOOR lOMCRNAHE [TAXPAYER : ijj NAME/AOOR:f * ^ ^5 ' ' 1^': PROP AOOR ONNER NAHE ; ! TAXPAYER V 'i NAHE/AODR 4|:v : PROP AOOR . tf i tOHNER NAHE ; t‘ TAXPAYER f., NAHE/AODR wiv ■ ■ '■ 'I .P • SO;'|lO-117-25 22 0002 00M5- AtHILL0H DR S M5'$‘.NUL0N DR . NAYZATA;»M 55591 50'10-117-25 22 0011 02205.-'FRENCH UKE RO ■ R H LANOZS ATE LANDIS RZCNARO H LANDIS : 2205 -FRENCH LAKE NAYZATAm 55591 50 10-117-25 22 0015 00050 ADDRESS LTIASSIGNEO R H LANDIS ATE LANDIS RICHARD H LANDIS 2205 FRENCH LAKE HAYZATA HN 55591 -fi ■sif TOTAL OATCH if; 507 00015 50 04-117-25 44 0004 02A01 RAINEY RO 'RAINEY HANNAH A»«ERSON RAINEY HANNAH ANDERSON ■:150 GROVELAND TER HPLS m 55405 ^ ■!;' ■ : . .i? 50 09-117-25 14 0001/ 01100 OLD CRYSTAL DAY RO S R J CUttaT A F H 6RAHAH R obert guout /frances grahah 1100 OLD CRYSTAL BAY RO S HAYZATA m 55591 50 10-117-25220009 02405 FRENCH LAKE RD ROBERT J A JOAN L DAYTON ROBERT J A JOAN L DAYTON 1 FRENCH LAKE RD HAYZATA FM 55591 SO 10-117-25 22 0015 00050 ADDRESS UNASSIGNEO ROBERT J A JOAN L DAYTON ROBERT J A JOAN L DAYTON 1 FRENCH LAKE RD HAYZATA W 55391 30 10-117-25 22 0017 00030 ADDRESS UNASSIGNEDRAJ Dayton ROBERT J A JOAN L DAYTON 1 FREFK:H LAKE RD HAYZATA FM 55391 REPORT NO. P14554C1 page 5450 09-117-25 11 0004 02465 FRENCH LAKE RD RAJ DAYTON ROBERT *J A JOAN L DAYTON1 FRENCH Lake rdHAYZATA HN 55391 50 09-117-25 14 0004 00030 ADDRESS UNASSIGNEO R J A J L DAYTON ROBERT J DAYTON 1 FRENCH LAKE RD HAYZATA m 55591 SO 10-117-25 22 0010 02355 FRENCH LAKE RD RAJ DAYTON ROBERT J A JOAN L DAYTON 1 FRENCH LAKE RD HAYZATA HN 55391 30 10-117-25 22 0014 00030 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED RAJ DAYTON ROBERT J A J0A14 L DAYTON 1 FRENCH LAKE RO HAYZATA HN 55391 30 10-117-23 23 0005 00030 ADDRESS UNASSlGFtED L H HILSON A E ADAMS WILSON L H HILSON A E ADAMS HILSON 1209 FREFICH CREEK DR mAyZATA HN 55391 f;,.. m ■m:m^ 'if- ■if ■, ■ 'JP:#r -:€r feiillli Ilfe'S'iiiillg- |11l-(i ^s -iv 'Mi 4i:vv,:^v;;;v|p liPiC;. I:": "'fK-:/' *fe !■''': .t jh: ft- ■' . Ill ■: •’ it •-.'. HENNEPIN COWITY PROPERTV XNFORNATioN SYSTEH PROPERTY 0»#IE|» LXST v^^i /REPORT NO. PX^SSROl PAGE SB4;V ■ ;t V .; i ^ :f ■ • • ■ 1^0 . 1 s i • ■ v." ■¥■r . ■ 4,, '■> . • 1 CERTIFY THAT THE FACTS REPRESENTED ARE AH ACCURATE AND TRUE REPRESENTATION OF INFORMATION AS IT APPEARS THIS DATE ON THE RECORDS OF THE HEM4EPIN COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF PROPERTY TAXATION, TO THE BEST OF MY KNOHLEDGE AND BELIEF. DA^ CiG?) PP- i’' -a'' ..fL# .. ■■■'Sllst 'A ■ii#'- pir ■i|r m HARDCOVER CALCULATION WORKSHEET SETBACK ZONE: (CIRCLE ONE) (f^ EXISTING HARDCOVER IN ZONE 75-250'250-500'500-1000' A. House Length Width B. C. Garage Driveway D. Sidewalk E. Paiio/Deck F. Landscape Underlain By Plastic G. Other J » TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE X 100 PROPOSED hardcover IN ZONE A. House 4^0^ Length Width B. C. Garage Driveway D. Sidewalk E. Patio/Deck F. Landscape Underlain By Plastic G. Other TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE -r B S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. 1 % O B .X 100 US' S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. A S.F. B % MO n« ... /f\ ^ lARDCOVERfcAtCULATION WORKSHEET J t '4_ %J^ SETBACK ZONE: ce®CLE ONE) 0-7S- Qs-MO’) 250-500' F.yiSTfNC HARDCOVER TN ZONE A. House Length Width B. C. Garage Driveway D. Sidewalk E. Patio/Deck F. Landscape Underlain By Plastic G. Other TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE PROPOSED HARDCOVER IN ZONE A. House ^APPlTto,*)Length [t- B )d>I^ X 100 6___ I " 66“^ Widtha B. C. Garage Driveway D. Sidewalk E. Patio/Deck F. Landscape Underlain By Plastic G. Other TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE * •<» 500-1000' S.F. S.F. S.F. J ^e> V4G>. ^11^ 444^ 4-Vi^ A:\tV <?7^0 S.F. 4i» S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. % A B S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. ToTA u S.F. -SE S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. 6>a>i- S.F. ^fz-epo6*o) S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. l»T. S.F. 14G , S.F. 1^44 % A B <\V^ \ X 1sti£l S 8j“Em; fcoi UJ QC M o " 3 ^ Iw . HI ^K b3 5z z e £ z S S e * !!i * o I 5* it oZg IhMg it Ulflc w M i|IL $o S 0 iiJiill fii fl i :§ilsS S 'S I ^ I ill"' Q(S«2S>§ 02 09 96 09:53 FAX 91 612 342 2216 U S & R ^iini um -cT -m v<> total. A^e.A /,v ^AiaK'Oso ^r.zh [ f 3 '..f*. OJ6NF. Dayton Residence Remodel MS&R Architects Scheme O Option January 3, 1996 pea ‘9,I |bs|Igii e9-‘ §«« s| IiI;lil in iUifhiililH r I i-ii'm’ N '! ',• t- INSPECTION RECORD PUMPOUT RECORD locationSKETCH 1 \I Ci • ■ ; - i' : .• ■ ' ■ ■ * •'V 'r ''4 «.•• *'J .V <-ti r? ■MUiIm. »««Mt «miCMiM ». ^t«r c«UnU(tJ!? . itiM *“*** *'•• • *•«' ». rufsiak t^i,ii« aaiHira a teai».---------j a»iwr» • toaiv*. -: j ••• I** ***? *• 1.1 i Mt fw MMm t«MM •» alt* 'Irai ri««.( |.laa. aral fo.Miatla« pu«. n«<ai*»aa lal all aia,i, i: iit; !‘rr' • KU£-, A / f . l/LfJh/7L co**a use OATS ____ LOTAfcCA _ . 2- v^OTH OimM ►•OAOSiO SETSACK& ACAA LblOS y 1 (r^ •*- WAAS WSlLAMaS -70 ACCESS *’•• ACnCTi city Cty StAt* Ayyao’/Aj. OAreisi • ralatl/.^ ti ,A SITS Aoowtsii '2-^/<.«. H»0»iHTV lOcNTlf iCATlON MO iHOl LOT— SUILDLH EtWw»g,^ ISai.l. ■V ^".AM((iaawa M<iM ri , U*aa*lt AMM Q11......... ^ ■' ----------------r IIII 1 1 n .... OTBV ••** □ “••A rj *OiW .>• OTfaQi/t a M •*"■• Dn ^CtaMt Ml M «.,»*»••M**..... ri «.■«*% Ml atiaMa.1 »-« D ...... . '^3 ; ..>,1 » • v.r*» '-..rzc4 •. •• ' v' ' * .Tv* - • ■ pr.-_. -•.?: • -i ::: / %i|p»4 r': * .' w request for coupccil action DATE: 3/4/96 MAR 11. 19M crwononb ”ITEM NO.! AdMiaiilntM- Reviewed: Msm JcMiit a . Mataiili TM« Bttiltot A Zoainf AdministnMr Aguida ScctioB: Zoninf ItcM DfifrilrtiiHV Alan Carlson. 3140 Watertown Road. Request for Fifth Extension of Preliminary Subdivision ApjMOval PcrtiBCBt OrdiaaBcc Section 11.10, Subd. 15, Refer to E.xhibit C Lut of Exliibits A - Applicant's Request B - Crystal Creek Plat C-Section 11.10. Subd. 15 o D - Resolution #3536 Approving Fourth Year Extension of Preliminary Subdivision Approval (Extension Date 4/8/96) Discussion The 12 lot plat of Crystal Creek received preliminary approval from the City of Orono on April 8, 1991 In early 1992 Mn/DOT developed corridor alternatives for an expanded 394 roadway that remove the southern corridor from its study but the most recently amended plan shov^ a ^o lane road at the northern boundaries of the property. Applicant now seeks a fifth extension of preliminary subdivision approval as there is yet no resolve of this matter. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: To either approve or deny the enclosed resolution granting a fifth extension of ' subdivision approval now extending the effective date of preliminary subdivision to Apnl 8, ivv.. Council may either deny, adopt or amend the enclosed approval resolution. L.. r--i L...... A RESOLUTION GRANTING AN EXTENSION OF THE EFFECTIVE PERIOD OF PRELIMINARY PLAT APPROVAL FOR THE PLAT, CRYSTAL CREEK • FILE NO. liM (1457) WHEREAS, on March 13, 1995, the City Council of the City of Orono adopted Resolution No. 3536 granting an extension of preliminary approval of a plat proposed by applicant, Ahm G. Carlson, involving the property located at 3140 Watertown Road; and WHEREAS, the effective period of preliminary plat extension expires on April 8, 19%; and WHEREAS, the applicant has advised Council that he is unable to fulfill the conditions of preliminary plat approval until the Minnesota Department of Transportation has made its final recommendation for a plan of improvement of Highway 12; and WHEREAS, applicant has demonstrated a substantial financial commitment during the review of the preliminary subdivision application. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Orono that the effective period of preliminary plat approval for Alan G. Carlson's proposed plat known as Ciy stal Creek involving the property located at 3140 Watertown Road and as originally approved per the conditions of Resolution No. 2948, adopted April 8. 1991, is hereby extended to April 8, 1997. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono. Minnesota at a regular meeting held this 11th day of March. 1996. ATTEST: Dorothy .M. Hallin, City Clerk Gabriel Jabbour, Acting Mayor Page I of 2 1 STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) COLTNTY OF HENNEPIN ) ss. The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this 11th day of March. 1996. by Gabriel Jabbour & Dorothy M. Hallin. Acting ' layor & City Clerk of the City of Orono. a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behaL of the City. Notar\’ Public Page 2 of2 4 MERCHANT & GOULD wM. MU, I4MI, IMmt * ictaMt ProfMMMMi AsMCtatiM Patent. tya4»nark A Cawrn«At Lawyers 11M Nerwest Cc»er M Swrth SeeenUi Street ttinneapeiis. Mtnneeeta ■i54«2 41SI I’ 8 A. PHONE S12/JS2 S3W DfSJLCTDtAL: fct2/3?fe-*633 FAl «12/8SSmi Jekn D G mM Kebert T EAeil Pant A Keitee Cecit C. SH um* JnliB S. Snniners Alan 6 Carisen Carl D letUnn CAaries t. Geila DM^aa J. WiUiasa Dongtas A. Strawbn4«c Albert L. Underhill D Randall King Michael B Lasky Curtis B Ramre Michael D Schumann Michael L Man John A Clifford Mark J DiPietm Timothy B Conrad AlanW Kowakhyk Daniel « McDonald Bandall A. Hillson John P Sumner Wendy M McDonald Linda M. Byrne Mark D Schuman Alhin J Nelson Brian I Batsli Darid K. Tellekson John J Oresens John L. Beard Phili|i P Caaners Doudlas P Mueller Ronald A Daianault Rohert 4 Crawford «*• Robert C Beck Michael R Cohen Paul E Lacy Gregory A. Sebald Karen 0 McDaniel Cole M Fauver Kristine M Strodthoff Steven C Brues* Andrew D. Sorensen J. Derek Vandenburgh Mark A. Krull Jerome R. Smith Dawn M. Larsen Rathenne M. Kowalchyh Dennis R Daley David W' Lynch Alan G Gorman Joseph M Kastelic Theodore R Plunkett John C Reich Thomas E. Bejin Mark A Hollingsworth Denise M Kettelberger M'llliam D. Miller Scott A Stinebruner Charles G Carter Leslie K. Dalglish Paul H Beattie Steven J Pollinger David G. Srhmalti Valeric L Callaway James R Chiapetta Sandra J. Epp Ryan Julie R. Daulten Michael A Dryja Scott W Johnston MarySusan H Gabilan latent .tpenf Thomas A Hassing Shawn B. Dempster Not Admitted in Minnesota FEB 2'6 February 23, 1996 Jeanne A. Mabusth Building & Zoning Administrator CITY OF ORONO P. O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, Minnesota 55323 RE: Indian Creek (Now Crv stal Creek) Subdivision Dear Jeanne, In accordance with Section 11.10. subd. 15,1 request an extension of the effective period of the preliminarv plat approval, file number 1457, for one year. Would you please place the matter on the agenda of the next Council meeting. The situation has not changed since the first extension was granted. I first appeared before the Council in 1991, after MnDot proposed the southern corridor which traverses the heart of the propem. The Council acknowledged that the Highway 12 corridor study had effecti\ ely li'ozen my properv for development purposes. Subsequent extensions were granted because there had been no resolution of the highway issue and the picture remained as cloudy as ever. Each year we noted that even another one-year extension will likely prove indadquate. That has proven to be the case. 1 understand that MnDot may remove the south corridor from its study this year. However, it appears that another plan w ould place a iwo-lane road at the northerly edge of the property. The indecision about highway plans has been very harmful to Orono residents with propertv along the proposed corridors. 1 encourage the Orono Council members to do their utmost to resolve the situation as soon as possible. 1 would be happy to appear before the Council to answer any questions. 1 hank you for your consideration. Very^ly yours. Alan G. Carlson Miniii^apolts Saint Paul Los .Angeles S 11.10 SubQ. 14. Special Requirements For Plats. A. Zoning Regulations. Every plat shall conform to existing zoning regulations and subdivision regulations applicable at the time of Final Flat approval. Variances shall not be approved to increase the overall subdivision density above the minimum lot area requirements of the applicable zoning district and this Chapter. B. Public Improvements. The Planning Commission may recommend that all public improvements be installed and dedicated prior to the signing of the Final Plat by the City. If the Planning Commission does not recommend that all public imorovements be installed and dedicated prior to signing of the Filial Plat by the City, the amount of the bond : hall be established by the Zoning Administrator based upon the recommendation of the city Engineer, which bond shall be submitted by the subdivider at the time of application for Final Plat approval. The Planning Commission shall require the subdivider to indicate on the plat all private and public improvements, which shall be required to be established or extended and any other special requirements deemed necessary by the Planning Commission in order to conform the plat to the Comprehensive Municipal Plan and this Chapter. C. Grading of Site Prior to Final Approval. Subsequent to Preliminary Plat approval' by^ the Council, the subdivider may apply for a land alteration permit from the City and upon receipt of such permit may commen construction to the grades and elevations required by plans approve., by the City. D, Referral to Other Government Agencies or Jurisdictions. Following action by the Council on the Preliminary Plat, the Zoning Administrator will refer the Preliminary Plat and the Council's action to other government agencies or jurisdictions for their review and action as may be appropriate prior to Council action on the Final Plat. _ Subd. 15. Effective Period of Preliminary Subdivision Review. Planning Commission recommendations concerning any Class I Subdivision and the Council resolution concerning any Class xl and Class III Preliminary Plat shall remain effective for one year. • Failure to file a complete Final Subdivision application within ; this time period shall be construed as formal withdrawal of the proposed subdivision. For one year following preliminary approval, . unless the subdivider and the City ag-ee otherwise, no amendment to ^ a comprehensive plan or official control shall apply to or affect . the use, development density, lot size, lot layout, or dedication or platting required or permitted by the approved application. Thereafter, pursuant to its regulations, the City may extend tne period by agreement with the subdivider and subject to aix applicable performance conditions and requirements, of it niay require submission of a new application unless su’ostantial physical^ ORONO CC 436 (4-1-34) § 11.10 activity and investment has occurred in reasonable reliance on the approved application and the subdivider will suffer substantial financial damage as a consequence of a requirement to submit a new application. Subd. 16. Final Subdivisions. A. Purpose. Final Subdivision review is the third stage of the subdivision review process. The legal documents, including subdivision drawings are reviewed for completeness and conformity with the intent and requirements of the preliminary approval. B. Requirements. The subdivider is required to furnish completed survjying, engineering and legal documents suitable for recording in the Hennepin County Recorders Office^ incorporating all the information and/or changes required as par u of the preliminary subdivision review and resolution subdivision approval. All documents and requirements shall be completed by the subdivider, reviewed by the City staff and and approved by the Council prior to the Mayors and City Clerks certifying approval of the Final Subdivision. C. Prerequisite. A preliminary subdivision of substantially the same proposal shall have Council within one year of the filing of any Final aoplication. The Zoning Administrator shall review each Final Subdivision application to insure sr stantial requirements and representations on tae preliminary subdivision. D. Substantial Change From Preliminary The Zoning Administrator may refuse to accept for filing ^' Council may refuse to rev! ./ any Final Subdivision which is substantially different from the approved subdivision, or which discloses possible misrepresentations on tne preliminary subcivision. In the case of such a refusal, the Zoning Administrator or Council may require the subdivider proposal for Planni-g Commission reconsideration, and may the subdivider iubmit or resubmit any and docume information required for preliminary .subdivision review. 9 Commission reconsideration may include a new public he g reauir-id by the Planning Commission or Zoning ^ .hie subdividec shai: pay a fee equal to one-half (1/2) preliminary subdivision review fee for required f^^j^arv any proposal occurring within one year of the original p subdivision approval date. Subd. 17. Final Subdivision Application. A. All Subdivisions. Complete applications shall include one or all of the follow g determined by the Zoning Administrator: ORONO CC 437 (4-1-84) CITY of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL 1^0. 8 5^6____ . file no. 1457 %VHEREAS. on March a plai propoccd by RcWon N.^ 33M ^ ,.c.,cn . 3140 Warcoow. Road: applicant. Alan G. canson, ^ 8, 1995; and a G. Carlson, involving uic 0» o»"= X- "• co.h,o„oPp=i.“RSS"^^Highway 12 improvement is resolved, ana hVHIREAS, appbcan. Mr dcn,on.,r.,». ■ Alply .he City council of the City of Orono, Minnesota at a regular meeting held this 13th day of March, 199d. Pase 1 of 2 CITY of ORONO RESOLUTION OEJHE CITY COUNCIL S53 6NO. ATTEST: Doro^yl^Tl^n, City Ue« Edward J. Callahar/Jr., Mayor / STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) idcnowledged before me on this 13th day of March,The foregoing instrumem was acimo ^ ^ ^ of “ ““" “ City. / UNQAS.VHNoufrrnjBuc4iM€Som v.™.«w H0WEPW COUNTY ___ MyConTiTWSionEipiraJ»i.31.20()0 'XZt Notary Public Page 2 of 2 N»UntM»T. i REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION // COUNCLMEETINQ mar 11 1996 DATE: February 28, 1996 CfTYOFOnONO ITEM NO.: Department Approval: Name Michael P. Gaffron Title Assistant Planning & Zoning Administrator Administrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: Zoning Item Description: Ordinance Amendment - Section 10.20, Subd. 3 (A) - Indoor Ice Arenas as a Conditional Use Accessory to a High School Use Discussion At the February 26 meeting. Council directed staff to revise the language of the proposed amendment as follows: 1. Revise the 100' setback requirement to 50'. 2. Add language requiring the developer to show financial capability. These two changes have been made in t’. ' 'ached ordinance which is in a format for adoption. The financial capability language is as follows. "The developer of such a facility, prior to final conditional use permit approval by the City Council, shall demonstrate financial capability to complete construction of said facility, by providing suitable documentation that at least eighty percent (80%) of the estimated project costs are in the control of the school district or non-profit lessee." COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Adopt the attached ordinance to amend Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.20, Subd. 3 (A). PROPOSED MOTION: Moved by_____, seconded by_____, to adopt Ordinance No. Second Series, amending Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.20, Subd. 3 (A) by establishing indoor ice arenas as a conditional use accessory to a high school in tlie "schools" conditional use within the R-l.A One Family Residential District. Vote:____ayes.____nays. Isv ORDINANCE NO.SECOND SERIES AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND MUNICIPAL C/OH . -U " ZONING CODE SECTION 10.20, SUBDIVISION 3(A) THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL HEREBY ORDAINS: SECTION 1. Municipal Zoning Code Section 10 20, Subdivision 3(A) is hereby deleted and the following language substituted in its place: Subd. 3. Conditional Uses. Within any "R-IA" One Family Residential District, no structure or land shall be used for the following uses except by conditional use permit; A Schools. Public schools and parochial or private schools which teach a curriculum similar to a public school provided no building shall be located within fifty feet of any lot line of an abutting lot in an "R" District and that a fence be erected fifteen feet or more from all street lot lines where the abutting use is for open play, and nursery schools providing fifty square feet of playground space per pupil 1. Uses Accessory To A High School. The following uses are accessory to a High School use and require a separate conditional use permit; a. Indoor Ice Arenas. All such facilities and structures shall be located on the same tax parcel as the principal High School Use to which they are accessory No such structures shall be located less than 50 feet from any lot line of an abutting lot in an "R" District. Sucn facilities shall not be separated from the principal High School use by a public road. All such facilities shall be owned and operated by the school district, or by a non-profit organization under a land lease arrangement with the school district. The developer of such a facility, prior to final Conditional Use Permit approval by the City Council, shall demonstrate financial capability to complete construction of said facility, by providing suitable documentation that at least eighty percent (80%) of the estimated project costs are in the control of the school district or non-profit lessee SECTION 2. This Ordinance shall be effective immediately upon its passage and publication according to law Adopted by the City Council of Orono on this 1 Ith day of March, 1996, by a vote of__ayes and navs ATTEST Dorothy M Hallin, City Clerk Edward J. Callahan, Mayor : I A REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION DATE: Marc ITEM NO OOgNCtt. MEETING mar 11 envoFOWHOJTS, 1996 Department Approval: Name Michael p, Gaffron Title Asst. Planning & Zoning Administrator Administrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: Zoning Item Description: Joint Use Dock Licenses: Fox Hill Homeowners Association Forest Arms Homeowners Associu.ion Walters Port Association Victoria Estates Homeowners Association Navarre Cove Homeowners Association Minnetonka Power Squadron Pheasant Lawn Homeowners Association Sandy Beach Place Big Island Inc. Cai.4.on/Gage/Nelson List of Exhibits (For Each Application) A - License Resolution B - Application These ten renewal joint use dock license applications each exhibit no changes from previous licenses. The City has received no complaints on any of these ten joint use dock operations. Staff recommends approval of 1996 joint use dock licenses for each of the ten applicants. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Adopt the ten attached resolutions granting joint use dock licenses for 1996 to each of the applicants. seconded by , to adopt ResolutionsProposed .Motion: Moved by---------------------------------. ---------------- through_____. directing staff to issue joint use dock licenses to Fox Hill Homeowners Association, Forest Arms Countiy Club Addition Homeowners Association Inc.. Walters Port Maintenance and Improvement Association, Victoria Estates Homeowners Association, Navarre Cove Homeowners Association, Minnetonka Power Squadron, Pheasant Lawn Homeowners Association. Sandy Beach Place, Big Island Inc., and Carlson/Gage/Nelson for the period of January 1. 1996 to December 31. 1996. Vote: _______ayes,______nays. ■ -Ji.-■ v' yj;j ®"»»10Y7>0 RESOLUTION DIRECTING STAFF TO ISSUE A JOINT USE DOCK LICENSE TO FOXHILL HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS NOTED HEREIN FOR THE PERIOD OF JANUARY 1,1996 TO DECEMBER 31,1996 WHEREAS, the City of Orono. hereinafter "City" is a municipal corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of Minnesota and has the authority and responsibility under Minnesota Statutes. State Stamte 412. et. seq. and State Statute 462. et. seq.. to protect the health, safety, and general welfare of the citizens of the City and other members of the public within the City; and WHEREAS, the City shares concurrent jurisdiction over the primary harbor limit of the City of Orono with the Lake Minnetonka Conservation Disuict and the Department of Natural Resources of the State of Minnesota; and WHEREAS, the regulation of the navigable waters involves an exercise of police power of the State, LMCD, and the City of Orono, all of which have adopted rules to ensure to all equal enjoyment of the public rights and equal protection from activity on or near the public waters and on the land within the City which, if unregulated, may be detrimental to the public health, safety and general welfare; and WHEREAS, the regulations of the DNR, LMCD, and the City of Orono regulate the property rights of the riparian owners both as to residential owners and the commercial marina owners to the extent prohibiting any interference with the public waters adjoining their property. The LMCD, DNR and City of Orono must fulfill their trusteeship over the public waters by protecting against interference by anyone, including those who assert the commonlaw rights of riparian owners, whether or not they be commercial marinas or residential owners; WHEREAS, as to Lake Minnetonka, a mutual right of enjoyment exists between and is shared by riparian owners and the public generally, no one riparian owner has exclusive privileges over Lake Minnetonka. The only additional private right that any riparian owner may have over the public generally is to construct one dock » . the navigable depth of the public waters. There can be no dispute but that the public generally and each riparian owner to Lake Minnetonka has the right to use the entire surface area of Lake Minnetonka for all suitable purposes in common with all other riparian owners. This right is a right not only to members of the public but the right to each riparian owner. nils mumal right of enjovment which is shared by riparian owners and the public generally includes the recreational benefits of the lake such as boating and fishing therein; the riparian owner has no exclusive privileges to these rights; and Page 1 of 2 WHEREAS, Lake Minnetonka is capable of substantial beneficial p .ic use only as long as all riparian users of the lake are regulated in such a way as to ensure there is no abuse of the limited riparian rights; and WHEREAS, the City has adopted reasonable regulations regarding the construction and use of lakeshore and dock facilities when such facil?^' are used and maintained by three or more families, which regulations include the annual licensing of Joint Use Docks pursuant to Section 5.42 of the Orono Municipal Code; and WHEREAS, the purpose of this Resolution is to set forth the above noted general conditions and concerns and the following special conditions as they relate to an application for an annual Joint Use Dock License described on Exhibit A attached, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Orono hereby directs the Staff to issue a Joint Use Dock License according to the facts and conditions noted on E.xhibit A attached. of March, 1996. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono at their meeting on the 11th day ATTEST: Dorothy M. Hallin, City Clerk STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. Gabriel Jabbour, Acting Mayor COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foresoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this 11th day of March, 1996 by Gabriel Jabbour & Dorothy M. Hallin, Acting 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 2 of 2 i; CITY OF ORONO EXfflBIT A RESOLUTION NO.__ CONDITIONS OF ISSUANCE FOR ANNUAL JOINT USE DOCK UCEN§E I.LICENSEE: Foxhill Homeowners Association Dock Address: 1801 Shoreline Drive Agent: RayZitzloff Address: 1160 Heritage Lane, Wayzata, MN 55391 Licensee is: ____ unincorporated homeowner's group X incorporated homeowner's association unincorporated club or recreation group incorporated club or recreation group other _______________________ License Period - January 1, 1996 to December 31, 1996 II. BOAT DENSITY The number of in-place boat slips, lifts and buoys shall not exceed the number shown cn the attached plan. Exhibits B-1 thru B-3, and in accordance with Resolution 938, in no case shall the number of authorized boat slips, lifts, or buoys exceed the number permitted in the prior year's license. Authorized Boat Density per attached plan: Bay Transient (Day use only) Slips Permanent Moorage Slips Boat Lifts Sub-Total: Slips at Dock Offshore Buoys Maximum Boats in Water Maximum Boats per prior license MAXIMUM BOAT DENSITY Smith's =L 13 Exhibit A Resolution No., Page 2 Exceeding this maximum boat density, or exceeding the number of permitted slips, lifts or buoys is a violation of this license subject to revocation and/or prosecution for violation of Section 5.42 Subdivision 2 of the Orono Municipal Code. III. DOCK LAYOUT The dock structure or layout authorized by this license shall be as shown on attached Exhibit B-1 and B-2. Any changes in this layout shall be subject to prior review and approval of the City Council. IV. SPECIAL CONDITIONS required for compliance with the ordinance of the City and/or the LMCD. The issuance of this license is subject to full compliance with these conditions. Failure to comply with these conditions is cause for license revocation and/or prosecution by the City. 1. The maximum number of slips or moorings to be licensed in the future shall not exceed 16 provided that for any given year, the license shall be issued for no more than 1 boat per residence in the Foxhill Subdivision according to the findings set forth in the Resolution 1042 adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono on the 12th day of June, 1979. 2. Winter storage of dock parts and sections shall be permitted on Outlot #1 between the time the dock is removed from the lake in the fall and June 1st of the following year. V. Nothing in this license shall confer upon any person for the benefit of any property any vested right to use Lake Minnetonka or the premises in a manner permitted by this resolution, but the use of Lake Minnetonka and the premises shall remain subject to such regulations and ordinances as the City and other competent regulatory authorities shall deem necessary from time to time in the public interest. 21.4» . ro9 0i*’li'.32'county k ‘j I ‘ *•, g>.274.07 . J3.90 it‘••A"*'•j.LM. 2/or .. I, Ot. /I.O.IJ. I V. ____1 \‘-.33V ,1.-3 I . I i<\< T*|\ *•, P>.V<.07 . n • :\ va.3‘io*3*r l«q2.d» *■' V \ L*ta4 2 C 02.Q6 , >4. \o..-! I •». \ . • * -------------- —^ /‘(fiKuintir 0L5J —I cbc»<(r9 ttoa - - V._ ’• 5.62 1 >TCJ ’ * 1 • a>di- s-E. O rtesou,^. tr\ > It- Cr- Xlv-» c. -J H No -£ •5 HJ r 'ixI itezj - uXI-i V V. r- Granting ®^^^to*t°is*^<3o'= tTturT ider a t ion FOXHILI-: subject to Variance Order or 9/28/7 4 o CITY OF OROKO P.O. BOX 66 CRYSTAL BAY, iMN 55323 473-7357 LICENSE YEAR 19_ 96_ W-. ^ ANNITAI. .tOlNT USE DOPf T.irKNSE APPLICATtQN Pursuant to Orono Municipal Code Section 5.42 Date Form Sent by City Staff------------ FEB .6 1996 I # • ^ Taniiarv26. 1996 Date Application P .^turned to City —--------- Fee Received S ,________By Employee 3*^^ from ihe City. PLEASE COMPLETE ALL ITEMS AND SUBMIT SIGN’ -/' APPLICATION, ^0 ^ ATTACHMENTS, .‘\ND LICENSE APPLICATION FEE TO THE CITY CLERK BY FE 20 OF THE LICENSE YEAR. AccoriATTON INTORMATION 1. ----/>v A,2/ 2. Lake ~ /-19 ______________Bay ^ ---------------------------------- Person responsible for this application; Name >0/4 v. ^.i-2Lc Fr-_______Phone... v 7 3 ~ Mailing Address ____--------------------- Relationship to association p O C l< /77 . ? ^ / ^/Z. 4.Association is (check applicable items): ____ unincorporated homeowner's group. X incorporated Homeowner's Association. ____ unincorporated club or recreation group. incorporated club or recreation group. Page 1 of 5 5.Principal purpose of joint use dock is (check appUcable items): provide boat coring and lake access for residential property. _____ provide swimming access, beach, or offshore dock. _____ provide a club or association gathermg place for activities. Dock is located on (check applicable item): V one member’s private property. easement or outlot owned in common, property leased by the group/association, property owned by the group/association. List Dock location and ownership information: Street address ------O iS^2lL-------------- Legal property description PID# _____________ T ^ I r L Listed property owner(s) Fo x /i U A r O C ! i- 7> C ^ 8. Names of abutting lakeshore property owners: nslorthAVest^ skint Uja-v.ST.J'y (Name + Address) rSnuth/East^ ' l~?fC S^J^/ (Name + Address) Names of other affected property owners: (Name + Address) (attach sheet if necessary) Insurance Coverage - The jointly used dock is insured by one of the following. _____ property owner's homeowner's policy. X separate group/association owned policy. List the following information: Name of insured A-^ u n^u±, ^ — Name of insurance carrier Name of insurance agency rz. t.i i # j - h _ _£1£— - --—- - - Policy No. ^ 9 Effective date of coverage _ -/-f / '' Amount of coverage; Public liability, per person, per occurrence A ----- Public liability, per occurrence Page 2 of 5 Security and poUcing of the jointly used dock and property is provided by (check applicable items): fencing __security lighting — contract security service ____other (specify) property owner’s presence norK INFORMATION 11. List Dock Use Area Specifications; 12. 13. 14. 15. Width of sho-hnu; Length of main doc^from shore: Dock setback*; from side property lines at shore. ------ ft- ----tLk Dock Construction (check appUcable items); X seasonal dock (relocated or replaced each year) permanent piling with seasonal deck ____ permanent piling and decking ft. ft. y wooden decking metal decking List Dock Accessories; Number of fire extinguishers available at the dock Number of life preservers available at the dock /3. r_ j List number of slips in each category ("slips" includes boat lifts): Transient (day use only) slips Transient (day use) off-shore buoys Permanent moorage slips___Permanent moorage off-shore buoys Maximum number of boats at the dock _2.Dry storage (rack) slips __________ List number of off-street parking spaces available for users of the joint use dock. Parking, if provided must not be separated from the dock by any public road. -------Cl----- spaces. rnnsiON AND SEDIMENTATION CONTROL 16 Shoreline is protected by (check applicable items); y stone rip rap ___ wood seawall ___ metal seawall concrete seawall grass and vegeMtion only ____ other (specify) Depth of water at shoreline: ft; at 50 ft. out: at 100 ft. out: ..1 Page 3 of 5 REQUIRED ATTACHMENTS The following must accompany this application: A. B. C. pOCK M T \ho3^^e shoreline width of this property, the side property Adockpl^ dra dimensions of aU docks. sUps and buoys. If off-street p“4S d^^storage or ’other on-land functions are intended, these also should be shown on the plan. users. 2.A certmed copy folloiving s—: "TOs Applicant's initials A statement as to the total number of members in the club or association, members and/or by-laws as ongmally made or last amended in -------------t y City." Applicant's initials AT^nvniAl, LirFN.SE FEE - Al.I. application ^ Joint Use Dock License Application Fee according to the current City Fee Schedule initial application fee renewal joint use fee , per year PT ITS ST TP FEE for each permanent moorage slip, lift, dry stack, or buoy 4 slips @ 2.00 each TOTAL DUE THIS APPLICATION 20 00 Page 4 of 5 ..J LATE FEE - Renewals /pplica^ is accompanied bv a late fee of S25 00. REVTEW PROCEDURE When a complete application is received, the application be reviewed by *e City Council^d. ^e case of new or unusual appUcations also by the Planning Commission and Manna Committee. The Council will pass upon the application after complete review. THE SUBJECT DOCK MAY BE INSTALLED AND/OR OPENED FOR USE ONLY UPON APPROVAL OF THE LICENSE BY THE CITY COUNCIL. Pursuant to Section 5.42 ofthe Orono Municipal Code, the applic^t hereby requests the Ororo City Council to review this Joint Use Dock License Application, and agrees and authorizes the Cty Sono and the City's employees and agents to em- upon me property at any reasonable time to perform safety and code compliance inspections. Signed Date City of Orono P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay. M SS323 (612)473-7357 02/06/% 13:r/:26 LICENSE - OTIO BUS.1 9 38.00 38.00 FGXHTLi HOC (MBS DOCK LIC 1 9 0.00 0.00 SUBTQTPL TAX TOTAL SALE RECEIVED CHANGE CLERKt03 TRA« 38.00 0.00 38.00 38.00 0.00 848 Page 5 of 5 RESOLUTION DIRECTING STAFF TO ISSUE A JOINT USE DOCK LICENSE TO FOREST ARMS COUNTRY CLUB ADDITION HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION, INC. SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS NOTED HEREIN FOR THE PERIOD OF JANUARY 1, 1996 TO DECEMBER 31,1996 WHEREAS, the City of Orono, hereinafter "City" is a municipal corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of Minnesota and has the authority and responsibility under Minnesota Statutes, State Statute 412, et. seq. and State Statute 462. et. seq., to protect the health, safety, and general welfare of the citizens ot the City and other members of the public within the City; and WHEREAS, the City shares concurrent jurisdiction over the primary harbor limit of the City of Orono with the Lake Minnetonka Conser\-ation District and the Department of Natural Resources of the State of Minnesota; and WHEREAS, the regulation of the navigable waters involves an exercise of police power of the State, LMCD, and the City of Orono, all of which have adopted rules to ensure to all equal enjoyment of the public rights and equal protection from activity on or near the public waters and on the land within the City which, if unregulated, may be detrimental to the public health, safety and general welfare; and WHEREAS, the regulations of the DNR. LMCD, and the City of Orono regulate the property rights of the riparian owners both as to residential owners and the commercial marina owners to the extent prohibiting any interference with the public waters adjoining their property. The LMCD, DNR and City of Orono must fulfill their trusteeship over the public waters by protecting against interference by anyone, including those who assert the commonlaw rights of riparian owners, whether or not they be commercial marinas or residential owners; WHEREAS, as to Lake Minnetonka, a mutual right of enjoyment exists between and is shared by riparian owners and the public generally, no one riparian owner has exclusive privileges over Lake Minnetonka. The onb' additional private right that any riparian owner may have over the public generally is to construct oi, dock to the navigable depth of the public waters. There can be no dispute but that the public generally and each riparian owner to Lake Minnetonka has the right to use the entire surface area of Lake Minnetonka for all suitable purposes in common with all other riparian owners. This right is a right not only to members of the public but the right to each riparian ow'iicr. This mutual right of enjoyment w hich is shared by riparian ow ners and the public generally includes the recreational benefits of the lake such as boating and tls’ iniz therein; the riparian ow ner has no exclusive privileges to these rights; and Page 1 of2 mf WHEREAS, Lake Minnetonka is capable of substantial beneficial public use only as long as all riparian users of the lake are regulated in such a way as to ensure there is no abuse of the limited riparian rights; and WHEREAS, the City has adopted reasonable regulations regarding the construction and use of lakeshore and dock facilities when such facilities are used and maintained by three or more families, which regulations include the annual licensing of Joint Use Docks pursuant to Section 5.42 of the Orono Municipal Code; and WHEREAS, the purpose of this Resolution is to set forth the above noted general conditions and concerns and the following special conditions as they relate to an application for an annual Joint Use Dock License described on Exhibit A attached, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Orono hereby directs the Staff to issue a Joint Use Dock License according to the faets and conditions noted on Exhibit A attached. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Oron.’ at their meeting on the 1 1th day of March, 1996. Gabriel Jabbour, Acting Mayor ATTEST: Dorothy M. Hallin, City Clerk STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foresoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this 1 1th day of March, 1996 by Gabriel Jabboin & Dorothy M. Hallin. Acting Mayor & City Clerk of the City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrumeni was executed on behalf of the City. Notar>' Public Page 2 of2 CITY OF ORONO EXHIBIT A RESOLUTION NO.__ CONDITIONS OF ISSl lANCE FOR ANNUAL JOINT USE POCK LICENSE I. LICENSEE: Forest Arms Country Club Addition Homeowners Association, Inc. Dock /.udress: 4245 Forest Lake Drive Agent: Jerry LeMire Address: 4205 Forest Lake Drive, Mound, MN 55364 Licensee is: ___ unincorporated homeowner’s group X incorporated homeowner's association ____ unincorporated club or recreation group ___ incorporated club or recreation group other ________________________ License Period - January 1, 1996 to December 31, 1996 II. BOAT DENSITY The number of in-place boat slips, lifts and buoys shall not exceed the number shown on the attached plan. Exhibits B and C, and in accordance with Resolution 938, in no case shall the number of authorized boat slips, lifts, or buoys exceed the number permitted m the prior year's license. Authorized Boat Density per attached plan: Bay Transient (Day use only) Slips Permanent Moorage Slips Boat Lifts Sub-Total: Slips at Dock Offshore Buoys Vlaximum Boats in Water Maximum Boats per prior license MAXIMUM BOAT DENSITY Forest Lake same Exhibit A Resolution No._ Page 2 Exceeding this maximum boat density, or exceeding the number of permitted slips, lifts or buoys is a violation of this license subject to revocation and/or prosecution for violation of Section 5.42 Subdivision 2 of the Orono Municipal Code. III. DOCK LAYOUT The dock structure or layout authonzed by this license shall be as shown on attached Exhibits B ^d C. Any changes in this layout shall be subject to prior review and approval of the City Council. IV. SPECIAL CONDITIONS required for compliance with the ordinance of the City and'or the LMCD. Tlie issuance of this license is subject to full compliance with these conditions. Failure to comply with these conditions is cause for license revocation and/or prosecution by the City. 1, The Purchase Agreement by and between the City of Orono and the Forest Arms Country Club Addition Homeowners Association, Inc. will permit a maximum of 14 slips. Tlie City will approve 14 slips for this license year based on the number of developed interior lots within the subject plat. V Nothing in this license shall confer upon any pers. .or the benefit of at >ei^ m vested right to use Lake Minnetonka or the premises in a manner perr. -c. by this resolution, but the use of I .ike Minnetonka and the premises shall remain subject to such regulat oi.s and ordinances City and other competent regulatory authoriUes shall deem necesscuy from time to tim» “ public interest. CITY OF ORONO P.O. BOX 66 CRYSTAL BAY, MN 55323 473-7357 license year 19_96. FEB 1 4 1995 ^NNTTAt, .iniNT IjSE nOCK LICENSE APPLICATION Pursuant to Orono Municipal Code Section 5.42 Date Form Sent by City Staff.Taniiarv26. 199^ Date Application Returned to City —----------- Fee Received S ----------- By Employee,#/^ ^ • c AO C 9 T TCENSE REQUIRED - It is unlawful for any (group or association from the City. 20 OF THE LICENSE YEAR. A^ssoriATiON information 1. 2.r__________ Bay ---------------------------------------Lake 3.Person responsible for this application: Le|/\Atifi.-c Phone L\ 2^ T~ _ Name 4. Mailing Address Relationship to association hoeJA .Association is (check applicable items): unincorporated homeowner’s group, incorporated Homeowner^s Association, unincorporated club or recreation group, incorporated club or recreation group. Page 1 of 5 7. Principal purpose of joint use dock is (check applicable items). ^ provid* r . u mooring and lake access for residential property. _____provid f', d imming access, beach, or offshore dock. _____provide a club or association gathering place for activities. laa Dock is located on (check applicable item): _____ one member's private property. _____ easement or outlot owned in common. property leased by the group/association. property owned by the group/association. List Dock location and ownership information: Street address __________ Legal property description PID# ______________ Listed property owner(s) / t u. Names of abutting lakeshore property owners: ^ ^ (NnrthAVest> ^ (Name + Address) . rSouth/East)______ (Name + Address) Names of other affected property owners: (Name + Address) (attach sheet if necessary) Insurance Coverage - The jointly used dock is insured by one of the following: property owner's homeowner's policy. separate group/association owned policy. List the following information: Name of insured Name of insurance carrier T Name of insurance agency PoheyNo. ‘^b’/ Effective date of coverage Amount of coverage: Public liability, per person, per occurrence $. Public liability, per occurrence Page 2 of 5 . • •• . V'-. ...s.. .*':*• .. >' >■10. Security and poUcing of the jointly used dock and properly is provided by (check applicable items): fencing V security lighting property owner's presence _____ contract security service ____ other (specify) ------------------------------------- POCK INTORMATTON 11. List Dock Use Area Specifications: Width of shoreline; 33 12. 13. 14. ft. Length of main dock fi-om shore: Dock setbacks from side property lines at shore; -------. ft- --------------------- Dock Construction (check applicable items): '/C seasonal dock (relocated or replaced each year) _____ permanent piling with seasonal deck ____ permanent piling and decking wooden decking ____ metal decking List Dock Accessories: Number of fire extinguishers available at the dock Number of life preservers available at the dock_ ft. ft. &r\AA 15. List number of slips in each category ("slips ” includes boat lifts): Transient (day use only) slips ______ Transient (day use) off-shore buoys ---------- Permanent moorage slips / ^) Permanent moorage off-shore buoys --------- Dry storage (rack) slips ___________ Maximum number of boats at the dock------- List number of off-street parking spaces available for users of the joint use dock. Parking, if provided must not be separated from the dock by any public road. __©------- spaces. ANTI SF.nrVlENT.\TION CONTROL 16. Shoreline is protected by (check applicable items): stone rip rap wood seawall metal seawall ^ grass and vegetation only ____ other (specify) Depth of water at shoreline: i=> ^ft; at 50 ft. out: ___ concrete seawall g^< 3%.at 100 ft. out Page 3 of 5 REQUIRED ATTACHMENTS A The following must accompany this application: B. C. D. DOCK PT.AN - ALL APPLICATIONS A dock plan, drawn to scale, showing the shoreline width of this property, the side property lines and the location, layout and dimensions of all docks, slips and buoys. If off-street parking, dry storage or other on-land functions are intended, these also should be shown on the plan. UNINCORPORATED GROUPS OR ASSOCIATIONS 1. A list of the names and mailing addresses of all members and/or slip users. 2. A certified copy of the by-laws or agreement for joint use. Note; This copy is not required if the applicant initials and certifies the following statement: "This is a renewal application and our joint use dock is to be operated under the same by-laws or agreement originally made in_______(state year) and on file with the City." ________________Applicant's initials INCORPORATED CLUBS OR ASSOCIATIONS 1 . A list of the names, mailing addresses and titles of all corporation officers. 2. A statement as to the total number of members in the club or association. / Q members 3.A certified copy of the articles of incorporation and by-laws of the corporation. Note: These copies are not required if the applicant initials and certifies the following statement: "This is a renewal application and our joint use dock is to be operated under the same articles of incorporation and/or by-laws as originally made or last amended ii / 9?^ (state year) and on file with the City." Applicant's initials ANNUAL LICENSE FEE - ALL APPLICATIONS Joint Use Dock License Application Fee according to the current City Fee Schedule INITIAL APPLICATION FEE RENEWAL JOINT USE FEE, per year PLUS SLIP FEE for each permanent moorage slip, lift, dry stack, or buoy / y slips % 2.00 each TOTAL DUE THIS APPLICATION 20,00 Page 4 of 5 :.. ;. 'Hvy LATE FEE - Renewals Application for renewal of licenses shall be made no later than March I of the license year. The £ity ghall not accept renewal license applications received after Febmarv 70 unless the annliVa^i^ IS, accompanied bv a late fee of S25 00 ^ ^ REVIEW PRorEmrRF TOen a complete application is received, the application will be reviewed by the City Council and m the case of new or unusual applications, also by the Planning Commission and Marina Committee ’ The Council will pass upon the application after complete review. THE SUBJECT DOCK MAY BE INSTALLED AND/OR OPENED FOR USE ONLY UPON APPROVAL OF THE LICENSE BY THE CITY COUNCIL. Pursuant to Section 5.42 of the Orono Municipal Code, the applicant hereby requests the Orono City Council to review this Joint Use Dock License Application, and agrees and authorizes the City of Orono and the City’s employees and agents to enter upon the property at any reasonable time to perform safety and code compliance inspections. Signed Date i^ City of Orono P.O. Box 66 02/14/96 11:24:04 LICENSE - OTICR BUS. 1 9 0.00 0.00 Jt Use Dock License-Forest fir* 1 e 48.00 48.00 SUBTOTAL TAX TOTAL SAIL RECEIVED CHANGE CLEAKI 02 TRANSI 48.00 0.00 48.00 48.00 0.00 893 Page 5 of 5 ^^\^OTZc^ . .■_ixQRE5rSRffi355IC3Car: r?a*/ (10) U' 1C 32' Slips 2-U (4) U'-X 21' Slips 1. 12-lA APR 2 7 1993 L-.r/l-C.D. —_fel. RESOLUTION DIRECTING STAFF TO ISSUE A JOINT USE DOCK LICENSE TO WALTER'S PORT MAINTENANCE & IMPROVEMENT ASSOCIATION SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS NOTED HEREIN FOR THE PERIOD OF JANUARY 1, 1996 TO DECEMBER 31,1996 WHEREAS, the City of Orono, hereinafter "City" is a municipal corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of Minnesota and has the authority and responsibility under Minnesota Statutes. State Statute 412, et. seq. and State Statute 462, et. seq., to protect the health, safety, and general welfare of the citizens of the City and other members of the public within the City; and WHEREAS, the City shares concurrent jurisdiction over the primary harbor limit of the City of Orono with the Lake Minnetonka Conser. ation District and the Department of Natural Resources of the State of Minnesota; and WHEREAS, the regulation of the navigable waters involves an exercise of police power of the State, LMCD, and the City of Orono, all of which have adopted rules to ensure to all equal enjoyment of the public rights and equal protection from activity on or near the public waters and on the land within the City which, if unregulated, may be detrimental to the public health, safety and general welfare; and WHEREAS, the regulations of the DNR. LMCD, and the City of Orono regulate the property rights of the riparian owners both as to residential owmers and the commercial marina owners to the extent prohibiting any interference with the public waters adjoining their property. The LMCD, DNR and City of Orono must fulfill their trusteeship over the public waters by protecting against interference by anyone, including those who assert the commonlaw rights ot riparian owners, whether or not they be commercial marinas or residential owners; WHEREAS, as to Lake Minnetonka, a mutual right of enjoyment exists between and is shared bv riparian owners and the public generally, no one riparian owner has exclusive privileges over Lake Minnetonka. The only additional pri\ ate right that any riparian owner may have over the public generallv is to construct one dock to the navigable depth of the public waters. 1 here can be no dispute but that the public generally and each riparian owner to Lake Minnetonka has the right to use the entire surface area of Lake Minnetonka for all suitable purposes in common with all other riparian owners. This right is a right not only to members of tire public but the right to each riparian owner. 'Iliis mutual right of enjoyment which is shared by ripanan owners and the public generally includes the recreational benefits of the lake such as boating and fishing therein; the riparian owner has no exclusive privileges to these rights; and Page 1 of2 WHEREAS, Lake Minnetonka is capable of substantial beneficial public use only as long as all riparian users of the lake are regulated in such a way as to ensure there is no abuse of the limited riparian rights; and WHEREAS the City has adopted reasonable regulations regarding the construction and use of lakeshore and dock facilities when such facilities are used and maintained by toee or more families, which regulations include the annual licensing of Joint Use Docks pursuant to Section 5.42 of the Orono Municipal Code; and WHEREAS, the purpose of this Resolution is to set forth the above noted general conditions and concerns and the following special conditions as they relate to an application for an annual Joint Use Dock License described on Exhibit A attached, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Orono hereby directs the Staff to issue a Joint Use Dock License according to the facts and conditions noted on Exhibit A attached. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono at their meeting on the 11th day of March, 1996. Gabriel Jabbour, Acting Mayor ATTEST: Dorothy M. Hallin, City Clerk STATE OF MINN ESC i A ) ) ss. COUNTY OF instrument was acknowledged before me on this 11th day of March. 1996 by Gabriel Jabbour & Dorothy M. Hallin. Acting Mayor & City Clerk of the City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City. Notar>' Public Page 2 of2 CITY OF ORONO EXHIBIT A RESOLUTION NO.__ CONDITIONS OF ISSIJANCR FOR ANNUAL JOINT USE DOCK LICENSE I. LICENSEE: Walter's Port Maintenance & Improvement Association Dock Address: 2699/2701 Kelly Avenue Agent: Ted Storlie Address: 2701 Kelly Avenue, Excelsior. MN 55331 Licensee is: XX unincorporated homeowner's group ____ incorporated homeowner's association unincorporated club or recreation group incorporated club or recreation group other _____________________ II. License Period - January 1, 1996 to December 31, 1996 BOAT DENSITY The number of in-place boat slips, lifts and buoys shall not exceed the number shown on the attached plan. Exhibit B, and in accordance with Resolution 938, in no case shall the number of authorized boat slips, lifts, or buoys exceed the number permitted in the prior year's license. Authorized Boat Density per attached plan: Bay Transient (Day use only) Slips Permanent Moorage Slips Boat Lifts Su. f nal: Slips at Dock Offshc.;e Buoys Maximum Boats ii» Water Maximum Boats per prior license M/VXIMUM BOAT DENSITY Carman Exhibit A Resolution No._ Page 2 Exceeding this maximum boat density, or exceeding the number of permitted slips, lifts or buoys is a violation of this license subject to revocation and/or prosecution for violation of Section 5.42 Subdivision 2 of the Orono Municipal Code. III. DOCK LAYOUT The dock stricture or layout authorized by this license shall be as shown on attached Exhibit B. Any changes in this layout shall be subject to prior review and approval of the City Council. IV. SPECIAL CONDITIONS required for compliance with the ordinance of the City and/or the LMCD. The issuance of this license is subject to full compliance with these conditions. Failure to comply with these conditions is cause for license revocation and/or prosecution by the City. 1.Variances granted for 1996: a) West property line (extension ol west line of Lot 2, Block 2, Walter’s Port) - 10 ’ required, zero setback proposed Southeast property line (extension of southeast line of Outlot 2, Walter's Port) - 1 O' required, zero setback proposed 2.The five slips are approved for use by the following properties located in the plat of Walter's Port: Slip 1 - Lot 2, Block 2 Slip 2 - Lot 2, Block 2 Slip 3 - Lot 1, Block 2 Slip 4 - Lot 1, Block 1 Slip 5 - Lot 5, Block 3 (part of Lot 1, Carman Bay Heights) 3. City must be notified immediately of any change in use or configuration of the dock. 4. All boats permanently moored at this joint use dock must be registered to the applicant property owners. 5. Lot 5. Block 3 (part of Lot 1, Carman Bay Heights) is allowed four boats maximum (1 of lagoon, 3 at outer lakeshore). V.Nothing in this license shall confer upon any person for the benefit of any property any vested right to use Lake Minnetonka or the premises in a manner permitted by this resolution, but the use of Lake Minnetonka and the premises shall remain subject to such regulations and ordinances as the City and other competent regulatory authorities shall deem necessary’ from time to time in the public interest. CITY OF ORONO P.O. BOX 66 CRYSTAL BAY, MN 55323 473-7357 LICENSE YEAR 19 96 . 1 * ANfJTTAI. .IQTNT USE DQf'K l.TrT:NSF, APPLICATION Pursuant to Orono Municipal Code Section 5.42 Date Form Sent by City Staff-----Tnrmarv 26. 1996 .->2-76Date Application Returned to City Fee Received S 3.0 ~------------ By Employee Section 5 42 Subdivision 2. T tPFM.SE REQUIRED - It is unlatvfiil for any (group or association of persons or families, more than two in number, whether incorporated or not) to e"g*8® pLbcipate in... joint use (of any lakeshore property) without first having obtained a license therefor from the City. complete all items and submit signed application , required UCENSE application FEE TO THE CITY CLERK BY FEBRUARY 20 OF THE LICENSE YEAR. CTATTON INFORMATION It ul Association title or name (if any) T alcp /l^ C ^ /y_ Person responsible foyius.application: it'll i C CTI >.Urr,. ~feJ Phone__V / /-'7C rJ( irPr I f \ rnone___^ i i > ----------------------------— , ‘iS3i iship to association ----------------------------------------------- Mailing Relationship to association Association is (check applicable items) )tQ unincorporated homeo^vner's group. incorporated Homeowner's Association, unincorporated club or recreation group. _____ h corporated club or recreation group. Page 1 of 5 5. 8. Principal purpose of joint use dock is (check applicable items). ^ provide boat n^ooring and lake access for residential property. _____ provide swuiuning access, beach, or offshore dock. _____ provide a club or association gathering place.for activities. Dock is located on (check applicable item): one member's private property, easement or outlot owned in common, property leased by the group/association. _____ property owned by the group/association. List Dock location and ownership information: Street address Legal ';ioperty description PID# Listed property owner(s) Names of abutting lakeshore prop —■ ^ (Nan^e + J*l (<;niith/EasO Names of other affected property owners; / ------- (Name + Addres"s) (attach sheet if necessary) Insurance Coverage - The jointly used dock is insured by one of the following: ^ property owner ’s homeowner's policy, separate group/association owned policy. List the following informatiom^^ Name of insured ( '< Name of insurance carrier Name of insurance agency Policy No. ____________ yyc< Effective date of coverage Amount of coverage: PubUc Uability, per person, per occurrence $. Public liability, per occurrence S. Page 2 of 5 1^ L 10. Security and policing of the jointly used dock and property is provided by (check applicable items): fencing ^ security lighting property owner’s presence contract security service other (specify) 4^DOCK INFORMATION 11. List Dock Use Area Specifications: Width of shoreline: _______ft. Length of main dock fi-om shore: ft. andDock setbacks from side property lines at shore: 12. Dock Construction (check applicable items): ft. ft. seasonal dock (relocated or replaced each year) permanent piling with seasonal deck permanent piling and decking wooden decking ____ metal decking 13. List Dock Accessories: Number of fire extinguishers available at the dock Number of life preservers available at the dock List number of slips in each category ("slips" includes boat lifts): Transient (day use only) slips Transient (day use) ofif-shore buoys Permanent moorage slips J Dry storage (rack) slips _____ Permanent moorage off-shore buoys Ma.\imum number of boats at the dock 15. List number of off-street parking spaces available for users of the joint use dock. Parking, if provided must not be separated from the dock by any public road. _________ spaces. FROSTON AND SEDIMENTATION CONTROL 16. Shoreline is protected by (check applicable items): yC stone rip rap ___ wood seawall X- metal seawall concrete seawall grass and vegetation only other (specify) 17.Depth of water at shoreline: .2L ft; at 50 ft. out: Ar ; at 100 ft. out: , Page 3 of 5 REQUIRED ATTACHMENTS Tlie following must accompany this application: A DOCK PLAN - ALL APPLICATIONS A dock plan, drawn to scale, showing the shoreline width of this property, the side property lines and the location, layout and dimensions of all docks, slips and buoys. If off-street parking, dry storage or other on-land functions are intended, these also should be shown on the plan. ^ . B. UNINCORPORATED GROUPS OR ASSOCIATIONS 1. A list of the names and mailing addresses of all members and/or slip ^ 2. A certified copy of the by-laws or agreement for joint use. Note* This copy is not required if the applicant initial.s and certifies the following statement. This is a renewal applicauon and our joint use dock is to be operated under the same by-laws or agreement origi^lv made in (state year) and on file with the City." c. Applicant's initials INCORPORATED CLUBS OR ASSOCIATIONS A list of the names, mailing addresses and titles of all corporation officers.1. 2. 3. A statement as to the total number of members in the club or association. ____ members A certified copy of the articles of incorporation and by-laws of the corporation.^ Note; These copies are not required if the applicant mitials and certifies the following statement: "This is a renewal applicauon and our jomt use dock is to be operated under the same articles of incorporation and/or by-laws as ongmally made or lost amended in _________(state year) and on file with the City" ___________ Applicant's initials ANNUAL LICENSE FEE - .\LL .APPLICATIONS Joint Use Dock License Application Fee according to the current City Fee Schedule INITIAL APPLICATION FEE RENEW.AL joint use fee, per year PT T IS SLIP FEE for each permanent moorage slip, lift, dry stack, or buoy _____slips 2.00 each total due this APPLICATION s 20.00 s A. s -s o . Page 4 of 5 TATE FEE - Renewals is accompanied bv a late pf S25.0Q^ REVTEW PROCEDURE 1 * k received the application will be reviewed by the City Council and,rrr7Js:~r. .7*. p,™« c.™..».m™ The CouncU wiU pass upon the application after complete review. the subject dock may be installed and/or opened for use only upon ^rova Tof the license by the city council . sr:'i:5 ,.»»«.«..«p™-p."y — » perform safety and code compliayee inspections. ^ r\ r I / -—ir-'X f Q\ rZ - C Siened Date City of Orono P.O. Box 66 02/12/96 15:49:55 LICENSE - OTlCfi BUS. uu rltu. 30.00Walters Port Hoaeowners Dock 1 B 0.00 0.00 SUBTOTAL TAX TOTAL SALE RECEIVED CHANGE CLERK! 03 TRANS! 878 30.00 0.00 30.00 30.00 0.00 Page 5 of 5 r'________....."J " L-i-h / Lh ! <si L Lh s c/y Af I /g^ 2- '•_____P./f-<V;iL—----------------------------■“ ■■ - ■ ________yj±VJ^ 2. 7(/( /wA/y /^-2- -----^ X Cltli'''^'‘'S 6A<^A ■ 2A W7/a^T9 A 2.7(11. VZ' 27,0 y7/ -<37fo. /A£>vc l: I RESOLUTION DIRECTING STAFF TO ISSUE A JOINT USE DOCK LICENSE TO VICTORIA ESTATES HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS NOTED HEREIN FOR THE PERIOD OF JANUARY 1,1996 TO DECEMBER 31,1996 WHEREAS, the City of Orono, hereinafter "City" is a municipal corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of Minnesota and has the authority and responsibility under Minnesota Statutes, State Statute 412. et. seq. and State Statute 462, et. seq., to protect the health, safety, and general welfare of the citizens of the City and other members of the public within the City; and WHEREAS, the City shares concurrent jurisdiction over the primary harbor limit of the City of Orono with the Lake Minnetonka Conservation District and the Department of Natural Resources of the State of Minnesota; and WHEREAS, the regulation of the navigable waters involves an exercise of police power of the State, LMCD, and the City of Orono, all of which have adopted rules to ens^ to all equal enjoyment of the public rights and equal protection from activity on or near the public waters and on the land within the City which, if unregulated, may be detrimental to the public health, safety and general welfare; and WHEREAS, the regulations of the DNR, LMCD, and the City of Orono regulate the property rights of th . riparian owners both as to residential owners and the commercial marina owners to the extent prohibiting any interference with the public waters adjoining their property. The LMCD, DNR and City of Orono must fulfill their trusteeship over the public waters by protecting against interference by anyone, including those who assert the commonlaw rights of riparian owners, whether or not they be commercial marinas or residential owners; WHEREAS, as to Lake Minnetonka, a mutual right of enjoyment exists between and is shared by riparian owners and the public generally, no one riparian owner has exclusive privileges over Lake Minnetonka. The only additional private right that any riparian owner may have over the public generally is to construct one dock to the navigable depth of the public waters. There can be no dispute but that the public generally and each riparian owner to Lake Minnetonka has the right to use the entire surface area of Lake Minnetonka for all suitable purposes in common with all other riparian owners. This right is a right not only to members of the public but the righ o each riparian owner. This mutual right of enjoyment w hich is shared by riparian owners and the public generally includes the recreational benefits of the lake such as boating and fishing therein; the riparian owner has no exclusive privileges to these rights; and Page 1 of2 f:. WHEREAS, Lake Minnetonka is capable of substantial beneficial public use only as long as all riparian users of the lake are regulated in such a way as to ensure there is no abuse of the limited riparian rights; and WHEREAS, the City has adopted reasonable regulations regarding the construction and use of lakeshore and dock facilities when such facilities are used and maintained by three or more families, which regulauons include the annual licensing of Joint Use Docks pursuant to Section 5.42 of the Orono Municinal Code; and WHEREAS, the purpose of this Resolution is to set forth the above noted general conditions and concerns and the following special conditions as they relate to an application for an annual Joint Use Dock License described on Exhibit A attached, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Orono hereby directs the Staff to issue a Joint Use Dock License according to the facts and conditions noted on Exhibit A attached. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono at their meeting on the 11th day of March, 1996. ATTEST: Gabriel Jabbour, Acting Mayor Dorothy M. Hallin, City Clerk STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this 11th day of March, 1996 by Gabriel Jabbour & Dorothy M. Hallin, Acting 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 2 of2 CITY OF ORONO EXHIBIT A RESOLUTION NO.__ rONDITTONS OF TSSUANCE FOR ANNUAL JOrNT USE DOCK LICENSE I. LICENSEE: Victoria Estates Homeowners Association Dock Address: 540 North Arm Drive Agent: Rene' Stemau Address: 440 North Arm Drive. Mound, MN 55364 Licensee is: ___ unincorporated homeowner's group X incorporated homeowmer's association unincorporated club or recreation group ___ incorporated club or recreation group other ________________________ License Period - January 1, 1996 to December 31, 1996 II. BOAT DENSITY The number of in-place boat slips, lifts and buoys shall not exceed the number shown on Ae attached plan, Exhibit B , and in accordance with Resolution 938, in no case shall the number of authonzed boat slips, lifts, or buoys exceed the number permitted in the prior years license. Authorized Boat Density per attached plan: Bay Transient (Day use only) Slips Permanent Moorage Slips Boat Lifts Sub-Total: Slips at Dock Offshore Buoys Maximum Boats in Water Maximum Boats per prior license M,AX1MUM BOAT DENSITY North Arm 6 Exhibit A Resolution No.. Page 2 Exceeding this maximum boat density, or exceeding the number of permitted slips, lifts or buoys is a violation of this license subject to revocation and/or prosecution tor violation of Section 5.42 Subdivision 2 of the Orono Municipal Code. III. DOCK LAYOUT The dock structure or layout authorized by this license shall be as shovm on attached Exhibit B. Any changes in this layout shall be subject to prior review and approval of the City Council. IV. SPECIAL CONDITIONS required for compliance with tlie ordinance of the City and/or the LMCD. The issuance of this license is subject to full compliance with these conditions. Failure to comply with these conditions is cause for license revocation and/or prosecution by the City. 1.Six slips are approved for Victoria Estates Homeowners Association for 1996 subject to the stipulations set forth in Resolution #962 dated December 18, 1978. 2.All boats permanently moored at this Joint Use Dock must be registered to the applicant property owners. V.Nothing in this license shall confer upon any person for the benefit of any property any vested right to use Lake Minnetonka or the premises in a manner permitted by this resolution, but the use of Lake Minnetonka and the premises shall remain subject to such regulations and ordinances as the City and other competent regulatory autliorities shall deem necessary' from time to time in the public interest. I CITY OF ORONO P.O. BOX 66 CRYSTAL BAY, MN 55323 473-7357 ^g^ICENSE YEAR 19. . Af. .lOTNT U^F ROCK LlCEJiSEAmJCAIlOM Pursuant to Orono Municipal Code Section 5.42 Tnnuarv 26. 1996,Date Form Sent by City Stafif------------------------------ ^ D ue Application Returned to City _-71-9 Fee Received S -o..? c’U------------ By Employee -------------------------- S««o„ 5 41 Subd^o. 2. from the City. 20 OF THE LICENSE YEAR. 1 Association title or name (if a^ .j j ^—*1 ---------------------------------- R,v ik>-' 2. 3 li 4. Lake____ Person responsible for this application. -S....r<bPi.4>^ ^ Miiig A» VVg iJ^ekU flf..-' i\r. ------- Relationship to association \ / -------------------------— Association is (check applicable items) unincorporated homeowner's group. y incorporated Homeowner ’s Association, unincorporated dub or recreation group, incorporated club or recreation group. Page 1 of 5 5. 7. Principal purpose of joint use dock is (check applicable items): V provide boat mooring and lake access for residential property. _____provide swimming access, beach, or offshore dock. _____ provide a club or association gathering place for activities. Dock is located on (check applicable item): ____ one member's private property. yC easement or outlot owned in common. ____ property leased by the group/association. _____ property owned by the group/association. List Dock location and ownership information: Street address Legal property description __ p ID # OyA'Icrf fe )n and ownership information: / m LA P,K I Csiftics. Listed property owner(s)(ou *3^ I Names ofabuttinglakeshore property owners: . , /\ A/l / rf/f / .... r...A~A ^J^rk f- Names of other affected property owners: ^ n /; t/\ ft....Xi....... tt. 0. liL.Jrk, (Name^+ Address) (attach sheet if necessary) Insurance Coverage - The jointly used dock is insured by one of the following: __ property owner's homeowner ’s policy. y separate group/association owned policy. List the following information: . Name of insured 1/^. <-• ■'i Name of insurance carrier Name of insurance agency ----- Policy No. ~ Effective date of coverage __ Amount of coverage; Public liability, per person, per occurrence S_ C£±— Public liability, per occurrence S—---- Page 2 of 5 Security and poUcing of the jointly used dock and property is provided by (check applicable items): fencing ____security lighting property owner's presence contract security service other (specify) 12. Dock Construction (check applicable items). seasonal dock (relocated or replaced each year) permanent piling with seasonal deck _J_ permanent piling and decking ____ wooden decking _____ metal decking 13. List Dock Accessories; Number of fire extinguishers available at the dock -----Q)----------------------------- Number of life preservers available at the dock O------------------------------ List number of slips in each category ("sUps" includes boat lifts): Transient (day use only) slips ______ Transient (day use) off-shore buoys ---------- Permanent moorage slips 6 ____ Permanent moorage off-shore buoys -------- Dry storage (rack) slips___________Maximum number of boats at the dock Ja_ 15, List number of off-street parking spaces available for users of the joint use dock. Parking, if provided must not be separated from the dock by any public road. JVp/^------ spaces. i-pratinN ANn srniMENTATlON CONTROL 16. Shoreline is protected by (check applicable items): wood seawall metal seawallstone np rap concrete seawall grass J»nd vegetation only other (specify) Depth ot'wa.e. at shoreline: ivl ft; at 50 ft. out: at 100 ft. out: Jlh Page 3 of 5 REQUIRED ATTACHMENTS The following must accompany this application: A. DOCK PLAN - AT T. APPLICATIONS .j, ^ u j A dock plan, drawn to scale, showing the shoreline width of this proper^, the side proper./ Iine.s nnd the location, layout and dimensions of all docks, slips and buoys^ If ofif-street parking, dry storage or other on-land functions are intended, these also should be shown on the plan. B. C. D. YJNTNCORPORATED GROUPS OR ASvSOCIATIONS 1 A list of the name'' ^nH mailing addresses of all members and/or slip users. 2 A certified copy ur the by-laws or agreement for joint use. Note- Tt'i. !■= not reouired if the applicanl iiuuals and cemfies the foltovmg slatement: This is a renewal appUcation and our joint use dock is to be operated under the same by-laws or agreement originally made in (stale year) and on file with the City." Applicant's initials TNrORPORATED CLUBS OR ASSOCIATIONS 1 A list of the names, mailing addresses and titles of all corporation officers. 2. A statement as to the total number of members in the club or association. ^ members 3 A certified copy of the articles of incorporation and by-laws of the corporation. Note: These copies are not required if the applicant initials and certifies the following statement: This is a renewal application and our joint use dock is to be operated^der the same :: ucles of and/or by-laws as ongmally made or last amended m___7±__ (state year) and on file with the City.’ Applicant's initials ANTNTJAL LICENSE FEE - ALL APPLICATIONS Joint Use Dock License Application Fee according to the current City Fee Schedule INITIAL APPLICATION FEE S — renewal joint use fee, per year S — PT US SLIP FEE for each permanent moorage slip, lift, dry stack, or buoy ii? slips @ 2.00 each S — total due TfflS APPLICATION S — 2u 00 / L.c\ Page 4 of 5 LATE FEE - Renewals Application for renewai cf licenses shaU be made no later than March 1 of the license ye^. Dis r;„, .I..II ,rrpn. renewal licens- .nnlirations received after Febtvary 20 unless the application is accompanied bv a late fee of S25.00, REVIEW PROCEDURE When a complete application is received, the application will be reviewed by the City Council and. in the case of new or unusual appUcations, also by the Planning Commission and Manna Committee. The Council will pass upon the application after complete review. THE SUBJECT DOCK MAY BE INSTALLED AND/OR OPENED FOR USE ONLY UPON APPROVAL OF THE LICENSE BY THE CITY COUNCIL. Pursuant to Section 5.42 of the Orono Municipal Code, the applicant hereby requests the Orono City Council to review this Joint Use Dock License Application, and agrees and authonzes the City of Orono and the City's employees and agents to enter upon the property at any reasonable time to perform safety and code com.pliance inspections. Signed Date City of Orono P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, W 55323 (612)473-7^ 02/27/% 12;32:45 LICENSE - OTICR BUS.I 9 32.00 SUBTOTAL TAXTOTAL SALE RECEIVED CHANGE CL£RKt02 TRANS! 1000 32.00 32.00 0.00 32.00 32.00 0.00 Page 5 of 5 Outlot C I EXISTING CHANNEL 180* 24 ’ Cruiser vu- / 14 ’ Sunfish>^ A IT—^—u y/' L* Nt- ^4’ CATWALK OVER WETLANDS TO SHORE. 4' BOAT DOCK x 180 ’ LONG. Outlot BCA ■*•>0 V DOCK LOCATION ■ (5 Plat of Victoria Estates \ «‘rr», ri o » oVc APR 13 1979 I \ * ' **^T vV r*- • ’* n O L C D. r RESOLUTION DIRECTING STAFF TO ISSUE A JOINT USE DOCK LICENSE TO NAVARRE COVE HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS NOTED HEREIN FOR THE PERIOD OF JANUARY 1, 1996 TO DECEMBER 31,1996 WHEREAS, the City of Orono, hereinafter "City" is a municipal corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of Minnesota and has the authority and responsibility under Minnesota Statutes, State Statute 412, et. seq. and State Statute 462, et. seq.. to protect the health, safety, and general welfare of the citizens of the City and other members of tlie public within the City; and WHEREAS, the City shares concurrent jurisdiction over the primary harbor limit of the City of Orono with the Lake Minnetonka Conservation District and the Department of Natural Resources of the State of Minnesota; and WHEREAS, the regulation of the navigable waters involves an exercise of police power of the State, LMCD, and the City of Orono, all of which have adopted rules to ensure to all equal enjoyment of the public rights and equal protection from activity on or near the public waters and on the land within the City which, if unregulated, may be detrimental to the public health, safety and general welfare; and WHEREAS, the regulations of the DNR, LMCD, and the City of Orono regulate the property rights of the riparian owners both as to residential owners and the commercial marina owners to the extent prohibiting any interference with the public waters adjoining their property. The LMCD, DNR and City of Orono must fulfill their trusteeship over the public waters by protecting against interference by anyone, including those who assert the commonlaw rights of riparian owners, whether or not they be commercial marinas or residential owners; WHERE.AS, as to Lake Minnetonka, a mutual right of enjoyment exists between and is shared by riparian owners and the public generally, no one riparian owner has exclusive privileges over Lake Minnetonka. The only additional private right that any riparian owner may have over the public generally is to construct one dock to the navigable depth of the public waters. There can be no dispute but that the public generally and each riparian owner to Lake Minnetonka has the right to use the entire surface area of Lake Minnetonka for all suitable purposes in common with all other riparian owners. This right is a right not only to members of the public hut the right to each riparian owner. This mutual right of enjoyment w hich is shared by riparian ow ners and the public generally includes the recreational benefits of the lake such as boating and fishing therein; the riparian owner has no exclusive privileges to these rights; and Page 1 of2 WHEREAS, Lake Minnetonka is capable of substantial beneficial public use only as long as all riparian users of the lake are regulated in such a way as to ensure there is no abuse of the limited riparian rights; and WHEREAS, the City has adopted reasonable regulations regarding the construction and use of lakeshore and dock facilities when such facilities are used and maintained by three or more families, which regulations include the annual licensing of Joint Use Docks pursrant to Section 5.42 of the Orono Municipal Code; and WHEREAS, the purpose of this Resolution is to set forth the above noted general conditions and concerns and the following special conditions as they relate to an application for an annual Joint Use Dock License described on Exhibit A attached, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Orono hereby directs the Staff to issue a Joint Use Dock License according to the facts and conditions noted on Exhibit A attached. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono at their meeting on the 1 1th day of March, 1996. Gabriel Jabbour, Acting Mayor ATTEST: Dorothy M. Hallin, City Clerk STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this 1 1th day ot March, 1996 by Gabriel Jabbour & Dorothy M. Hallin, Acting Mayor & City Clerk of the City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instmment w'as executed on behalf of the City. Notary Public Page 2 of 2 CITY OF ORONO EXHIBIT A RESOLUTION NO.__ rONDTTTONS OF TSSUANCF. FOR ANNUAL JOINT USE DOCK LICENSE I. LICENSEE: Navarre Cove Homeowners Association Dock Address: 2505 Kelly Avenue Agent: Daniel T. Lindsay (Attn: Kim A. Goebel) Address: 100 South 5th Street, Suite 2500, Minneapolis, MN 55402 Licensee is: ___ unincorporated homeowner's group X incorporated homeowner's association _____ unincorporated club or recreation group ___ incorporated club or recreation group other _________________ License Period - January I, 1996 to December 31, 1996 II. BOAT DENSITY The number of in-place boat slips, lifts and buoys shall not exceed the number shown on the attached plan. Exhibit B, and in accordance with Resolution 938, in no case shaiJ the ^ . -.•'her of authorized boat slips, lifts, or buoys exceed the number permitted in the prior year's licenoc. Authorized Boat Density per attached plan: Bay Transient (Day use only) Slips Permanent Moorage Slips Boat Lifts Sub-Total: Slips at Dock Offsb .re Buoys Maximum Boats in Water Maximum Boats per prior license MAXIMUM BOAT DENSITY Carman same Exhibit A Resolution No._ Page 2 Exceeding this maximum boat density, or exceeding the number of permitted slips, lifts or buoys is a violation of this license subject to revocation and/or prosecution for violation of Section 5.42 Subdivision 2 of the Orono Municipal Code. III. DOCK LAYOUT The dock structure or layout authorized by this license shall be as shown on attached Exhibit B. Any changes in this layout shall be subject to prior review and appro'^al of the City Council. IV. SPECIAL CONDITIONS required for compliance with the ordinance of the City and'or the LMCD. The issuance of this license is subject to full compliance with these conditions. Failure to comply with these conditions is cause for license revocation and/or prosecution by the City. "None" V. Nothing in this license shall confer upon any person for the benefit of any property any vested right to use Lake Minnetonka or the premises in a manner permitted by this resolution, but the use of Lake Minnetonka and the premises shall remain subject to such regulations and ordinances as the City and other competent regulatory authorities shall deem necessary from time to time in the public interest. CUY OF ORONO P.O. BOX 66 CRYSTAL BAY, MN 55323 473-7357 LICENSE YEAR 19_J>A annttal joint use dock license application Pursuant to Orono Municipal Code Section 5.42 Date Form Sent by City Staff.Tanuarv 26. 1996_ Date Application Returned to City -------------- Fee Received S S2i.By Employee Sectio- 5 42 Subdivision 2. I TrFNSF. REQUIRED - It is unlawful for any (group or association nrrrrsons or f^mlies more than two in numbedwhether incorporated or not to engage or pardcipate in ... joint use (of any lakeshore property) vvithout first having obtained a license therefor from the City. DiFaCF rnvtPLETE ALL ITEMS AND SUBNET SIGNED APPLICATION, UCE n 7e application FEE TO THE CITY CLERK BY FEBRUARY 20 OF THE LICENSE YEAR. associatio n rvFORM.ATlON ,1 . f ■ r n //. 1 Association title or name (if any) Kk\/flW- W i.ake __________---------------------------------------------------------- Person responsible for this application Name Kj'li A- Pho"® Mailing Relationship to association 1\AiAj1|/U 1/^------------------------------------- Association is (check applicable items). unincorporated homeowner's group. incorporated Homeowner's Association, unincorporated club or recreation group. ___ incorporated club or recreation group. Page 1 of 5 FEB c...,...... ; 5. Principal purpose of joint use dock is (check applicable items): ✓ provide boat mooring and lake access for residential property. _____provide swimming access, beach, or offshore dock. provide a club or association gathering place for activities. 6. Dock is located on (check applicable it on). ____ one member's private property. ^ casement or outlot owned in common, property leased by the group/association, property owned by the group/association. 7 List Dock location and ownership information. Street address l^lluoueei auuicaa v/ ---------------------------------- Legal property description 0(L"bT. Aj—tsfa-W/d piD#luw --------—-------------------------------- Listed property owner(s) Um Names of abutting lakeshore property owners: mnnhP^/sX') * (Nam(Name + Address) rSnuth/East) (Name + Address) Names of other affeaed property owners: (Name + Address) (attach sheet if necessary) Insurance Coverage - The jointly used dock is insured by one of the following, property owner ’s homeowners policy. ^ separate group/association owned policy. List the following information; Name of insured A . A . . « / /V Name of insurance carrier (^ ■................ _-----H Name of insurance agency PnUrvNn M-nlfVl-^t>-^g; Effective date of coverage Amount of coverage; Public liability, per person, per occurrence Public liability, per occurrencs S_22£}-Ui&— Page 2 of 5 Security and poUcing of the jointly used dock and property is provided by (check applicable items): _____ fencing _____ security Ughting _i^ property owner's presence ____ contract security service _____ other (specify)--------------------------------------- DOCK INFORMATION 11. List Dock Use Area Specifications: Width of shoreline: 14. 15. ft. Length of main dock from shore: 44 Dock setbacks from side property lines at shore; —2D.------- ^ ft. ft. Dock Construction (check applicable items): _____ seasonal dock (relocated or replaced each year) _____ permanent piling with seasonal deck permanent piling and decking wooden decking _____ metal decking List Dock Accessories; Number of fire extinguishers available at the dock __Q_ Number of life preservers available at the dock __........ List number of slips in each category (Mips" includes boat lifts); Transient (day use only) slips 0 Transient (day u e) off-shore buoys _Q_ Permanent moorage slips _____^ Permanent........age off-shore buoys _Q_ Drv storage (rack) slips 0 Maximum number of boats at the dock \o List number of off-street parking spaces available for users of the joint use dock Parking, if provided must not be separated from the dock by any public road. -----0------- spaces frosion and sedimentation control 16 Shoreline is protected by (check applicable items); stone rip rap ____ wood seawall ___ metal seawall concrete seawall 17. ^ grass and vegetation only Depth of water at shoreline; _0_ ___ other (specify) ft; at 50 ft. out; j4l.at 100 ft. out: Page 3 of 5 REQUIRED ATTACHMENTS The following must accompany this application: A DOCK PLAN - Al.L APPLICATIONS , , i. j A dock plan, drawn to scale, showing the shoreUne width of this proper^, the side property tines and the location, layout and dimensions of all docks, slips and buoya If off-street parking, dry storage or other on-land functions are intended, these also should be shown on the plan. B TINTNCORPORATED GROtJPS OR ASSOCIATIONS 1. A list of the names and mailing addresses of all members and/or slip users. 2 A certified copy of the by-laws or agreement for joint use. Note- This copv is not reQuired if the applicant miUais and certifies the tollo%vmg statement: This is a renewal application and our jomt use dock is to be operated under the same by-laws or agreement originally made m_______(state year) and on file with the Cit>'." Applicant's initials TNrORPORATED CLimS OR ASSOCIATION^ 1 A list of the names, mailing addresses and titles of all corporation officers. 2. A statement as to the total number of members in the club or association. ____ members 3 A certified copy of the articles of incorporation and by-laws of the corporation. Note: These copies are not required if the applicant iniUals and certifies the followmg statement: " fhis is a renewal applicaUon and our joint use dock is to be operated u^er the same articles of incorporauon and/or by-laws as origmally made or last amended in (state year) and on file with the City." Applicant's initials ANNT^AL I.TCF.N.SE FEE - ALL APPLICATIONS Joint Use Dock License Application Fee according to the current City Fee Schedule initial application fee RENEW,AL joint use fee. per year Pf I’S SLIP FEE for each permanent moorage slip, lift, dry stack, or buoy slips (S). 2.00 each TOTAL DUE THIS APPLICATION 20 00 a >00 H aQO Page 4 of 5 LATE HE - Renewals Application for renewal of Ucenses shaU be made no later r;tC .h»ll not acr^t renewal license^rr«^’'>i""^ ?PP'lcaWn is accompanied bv a Ij^K of S25.0Q. REVIEW PROCEDURE When a complete application is received, the application will be reviewed by the City Council ^d, in the case of new or unusual applications, also by the Planning Comm.ss.on and Manna Committee. The Council will pass upon the application after complete review. THE SUBJECT DOCK MAY BE INSTALLED AND/OR OPENED FOR USE ONLY UPON APPROVAL OF THE LICENSE BY THE CITY COUNCIL. Pursuant to Section 5 42 of the Orono Municipal Code, the applic^t hereby Council to review this Joint Use Dock License Applicat.on, and agrees and authonzes the C^ of Orono and the City ’s employees and agents to enter upon the property at any reasonable pertbrm safety and code compliance inspections. Date ^1 Page 5 of 5 NAVARRE COVE HOMEOWNER’S ASSOCIATION OF OIMm KELLY COVE HOMEOWNER’S ASSOCIATION OF ORONO IW South Fifth Street, Suite 2500 Minneapolis, Minnesota 55402 i > t t \ ^ May 23, 1995 Mr. Michael P. Gaffron Assistant Planning & Zoning Administrator City of Orono P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, Minnesota 55323-0066 Dear Mr. Gaffron; I have attached for your files a copy of the executed Joint Resolution of Members In Writing In Lieu of Meeting of Kelly Cove Homeowner’s Association of Orono and Navarre Cove Homeowner’s Association of Orono. This document should be attached to the site plan for Navarre Cove Homeowner’s Association's Joint Use Dock License, Resolution No. 3550. If you have any questions or require further information, please call me at 337-1839. Sincerely, KAGxpq Attachment cc: File NAVARRE COVE HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION OF OROW KELLY COVE HOMEOWTVERS ASSOCIATION OF ORONO Joint Resolution of Members in Writing In Lieu of Meeting WHEREAS, the land on which Navarre Cove Homeowners Associatun of Orono has maintained a multiple dock, has been subdivided since the original license was granted as follows: The original propertv. Tract A was owned by Kelly Avenue Holding Co. The property, with 400' of laJceshore, had'three duplexes for a total of six residences. A mnhiple dock license was granted in 1978 for three docks with sLx boats, one for each residence. In 1979, Tract A was replatted as Navarre Cove and subdivided into three lots, one for each duple.x, plus two outlots A and B. Outlot B was donated to the City of Orono, and Outlot A was a designated area for the multiple docks. In 1984, Lots 1 and 2 were replatied as Kelly Cove, consisting of four "house pads" and one large outlot, with Lot 3 remaining Navarre Cove. An easement was included as part of the subdivision allowing residents of Kelly Cove access to the docks on Outlot A of Navarre Cove. Also, a restriction was placed on both properties that the docks could only be placed on Outlot A. Currently, Navarre Cove Homeowners Association of Orono owns the Outlot A that has the docks, and Kelly Cove Homeowners Association of Orono owns the large Outlot of Kelly Cove. The docks located on Outlot A are reserved for the members of these associations, one each for each residence. WHEREAS, the Lake Minnetonka Conservation District has determined that the 80' of shoreline owned bv Navarre Cove is insufficient lakeshore to accommodate six boats under the current code and has asked for a resolution stating that the associations collectively control the dockage rights over the entire 400' of lakeshore, in order to remain in compliance with licensing regulations. WTEEREAS, we being all the members of Navarre Cove Homeowners Association of Orono and Kelly Cove Homeowners Association of Orono, do hereby approve the following resolutions in writing in lieu of meeting: BE IT RESOLVED, that the members of Navarre Cove Homeowners Association of Orono and Kelly Cove Homeowners Association of Orono control the dockage rights over the 400' of lakeshore property originally known as Tract A of Kelly Cove. RESOLVED FLUTHER, that these Associations collectively agree that each of the six residences located within Navarre and Kelly Cove: as currently platted will have and enjoy the use of one slip at the docks on Outlot A of Navarre Cove as currently configured. RESOLVED ITJRTHER, that no docks other than those on Outlot A of Navarre cove will be placed on the entire 400' of lakeshore originally known as Tract A of Kelly Cove. Effective Date Of Action: December 1, 1994 Daniel T. Lindsay \ Member of Kelly Cove Homeowners Ass6(:iation of Orono Member of Navarre Cove Homeowners Association of Orono Owner of Property at 2401 & 2403 Kelly Avenue Austin Evans Member of Kelly Cove Homeowners Association of Orono Member of Navarre Cove Homeowners Association of Orono Owner of Property at 2497 Kelly Avenue n^w SylviA Berganoli Uepbei of Kelly Cove Hom/owners Association of Orono Member of Navarre Cove Homeowners Association of Orono Owner of Property at 2499 Kelly Avenue 4 ix: (r ^ Peter Chow Member of Navarre Cove Homeowners Association of Orono Owner of Property, Navarre Cove - Lot 3 RESOLUTION DIRECTING STAFF TO ISSUE A JOINT USE DOCK LICENSE TO MINNETONKA POWER SQUADRON SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS NOTED HEREIN FOR THE PERIOD OF JANUARY L 1996 TO DECEMBER 31,1996 WHEREAS, the City of Orono, hereinafter "City ” is a municipal corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of Minnesota and has the authority and responsibility under Minnesota Statutes. State Statute 412. et. seq. and State Statute 462, et. seq., to protect the health, safety, and general welfare of the citizens of the City and other members of the public within the City; and WHEREAS, the City shares concurrent jurisdiction over the primary harbor limit of the City o.'Orono with the Lake Minnetonka Conservation District and the Department of Natural Resources of the State of Minnesota; and WHEREAS, the regulation of the navigable waters involves an exercise of police power of the State, LMCD, and the City of Orono, all of which have adopted rules to ensure to all equal enjoyment of the public rights and equal protection from activity on or near the public waters and on the land within the City which, if unregulated, may be detrimental to the public health, safety and general welfare; and WHEREAS, the regulations of the DNR. LMCD, and the City of Orono regulate the property rights of the riparian owners both as to residential owners and the commercial marina owners to the extent prohibiting any interference with the public waters adjoining their property. The LMCD, DNR and City of Orono must fulfill their trusteeship over the public waters by proteotinp ngainst interference by anyone, including those who assert the commonlaw rights of ripanari owners, whether or not they be commercial marinas or residential owners; WHEREAS, as to Lake Minnetonka, a mutual right of enjoyment exists between and is sluired bv riparian owners and the public generally, no one riparian owner has exclusi\e privileges over Lake Minnetonka. The only additional pri\ ate right that any riparian owner may have over the public generallv is to construct one dock to the navigable depth of the public waters. There can be no dispute but that the public generally and each riparian owner to Lake Minnetonka has the right to use the entire surface area of Lake Minnetonka for all suitable purposes in common w ith all other riparian ow ners. I'his right is a right not only to members of the public but the right to each riparian owner. This mutual riuht of enjoyment which is shared by riparian owners and the public generally includes the recreational benefits of the lake such as boating and fishing therein; the riparian owner has no e.xclusive privileges to these rights; and Page 1 of2 1 i WHEREAS, Lake Minnetonka is capable of substantial beneficial public use only as long as all riparian users of the lake are regulated in such a way as to ensure there is no abuse of the limited riparian rights; and WHEREAS, the City has adopted reasonable regulations regarding the constmction and use of lakeshore and dock facilities when such facilities are used and maintained by three or more families, which regulations include the annual licensing of Joint Use Docks pursuant to Section 5.42 of the Orono Municipal Code; and WHEREAS, the purpose of this Resolution is to set forth the above noted general conditions and concerns and the following special conditions as they relate to an application for an annual Joint Use Dock License described on Exhibit A attached, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Orono hereby directs the Staff to issue a Joint Use Dock License according to the facts and conditions noted on Exhibit A attached. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono at their meeting on the 1 1th day of March, 1996. Gabriel Jabbour, Acting Mayor ATTEST: Dorothy M. Hallin, City Clerk STATE OF ^IINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this 1 1th day of March, 1996 by Gabriel Jabbour & Dorothy M. Hallin, Acting 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 2 of 2 CITY OF ORONOEXHIBIT A RESOL TION NO.__ CONDITIONS OF ISSUANCE FOR ANNUAL JOINT USE DOCK LICENSE I.LICENSEE: Minnetonka Power Squadron Dock Address: Big Island, Record Lot #5 (510 Big Island) Agent: Jean S. Peterson Address: 1758 Essex Road, Minnetonka, MN 55305 Licensee is: ___ unincorporated homeowner's group ___ inco 'orated homeowner's association unincorporated club or recreation group incorporated club or recreation group other License Period - January 1, 1996 to December 31, 1996 II. BOAT DENSITY The number of in-place boat slips, lifts and buoys shall not exceed the number shown on the attached plan. Exhibits B and C, and in accordance with Resolution 938, in no case shall the number ot authorized boat slips, lifts, or buoys exceed the number permitted in the prior year's license. Authorized Boat Density per attached plan: Bay Tr.T use only) Slips Pe. . , -iloorage Slips Boat Lifts Sub-Total: Slips at Dock Offshore Buoys Maximum Boats in Water M,*.\imum Boats per prior license MAXIMUM BOAT DENSITY l ower Lake 45 45 Exhibit A Resolution No._ Page 2 Exceeding this maximum boat density, or exceeding the number of permitted slips, lifts or buoys is a violation of this license subject to revocation and/or prosecution for violation of Section 5.42 Subdivision 2 of the Orono Municipal Code. HI. DOCK LAYOU1 The dock stnicmre or layout authorized by thib license shall be as sho\vn on attached Exhibits B and C. Any changes in this layout shall be subject to prior review and approval of the City Co- .-.cil. IV SPECI AL CONDITIONS required for compliance viih the irdinaiice of the City and/or the LMCD The issuance of this license is subject to full compliance w iiii these conUiOis '■■ 'failure to comply with these conditions is cause f .e revocation and/or prosecution by the C.ty, CompI iance with conditions o. tesolution No. 341 6. V. Nothing in this license shail confer upon any person for the benefit of any property ^y v'-'ted right to use Lake Minnetonka or the premises in a manner penai'ls.^ by this resolution, but the use of Lake Minnetonka and the prer . 3 shall remain subject to such regulations and ordinances as the City and other competent regular ,7 authorities shr". deem necessary from iime to time in the public interest. • •o:-(icio) ■ ''.(I)-*v*...V L Jr -c. % r :f -n;’ \ . ■ ■• \ ■.: ^ r - r \ ■' r.^\ji;'5'£/5' -■ • h : •' .:Axy 's. \ .t'l:'- • "7^77 ^TUT ==^^.-3 )■ • v'N- . s. ■ ., • ^''”v V- ... • ^uj flAni^: *. DrairiA^-^ •.■; ALVER COUNTS HENNER ^WUMCRK ptuuvcav ^ n . c t•.^ -n ^ t . ISLMID nCILITY / f/-3 * • ■ . ’ "9«Ji5r-4;l,^3?50 1963ORGfO.UlCRt'f.AUOUon t-MnS PAY* OLE IM ON WITMIM OESCniOCO pnOPEIITY ARE PAID ^oisinc. U.0, uuuva 4 /) ti:7L,.i-mu^ -------- ’ IBHHEi ’lN COUl.TX, HUUiSSarA. . Hn^ of Tr.ci C I♦ rnr/ !•»* of Coy'f iof h • fl'-',5r'-;''"" ;s\U B ______- . ■< _ . . • - -nu m‘ . II 'f.Or ! j.; - pk^^l^(ERS I or;^ o>^ IV. ■ I;./ N ;V.i:3l V' MCI/ sf>»rr/inf ' of channti — ***» -N '’kV'^ ••I /••• V ^ • • . 1 J ^ /<nW'„KT^ POWER SQUADRON streater cove facility ^ _ _ 1" = 100' CITY OF ORONO P.O. BOX 66 CRYSTAL BAY, MN 55323 473-7357 LICENSE YEAR 19 96 ^ fit ANNUAL JOINT USE DOCK LICEN^F, APPLICATION Pursuant to Orono Municipal Codfr .jC«.t»3ii 5.42 Date Form Sent by City Staff Taniiarv26. 1996 Date Application Returned to Oty ------IS Fee ;ceived S Z-O _By Employee Section 5.42 Subdivision 2. T rrFNSF. REQUIRED - K is unlawful for any (group or association Sate"!n"/ru“\oT^^^ from the City PLEASE COMPLETE ALL ITEMS AND SUBMIT SIGNED APPLICATION, AmCHM^S. AND LICENSE APPLICATION FEE TO THE CITY CLERK BY FEBRUARY 20 OF THE LICENSE YEAR. association info rmation 1 2. I. I V/I ^ 1 * w - V Association title or name (if any) Lake PT\llJklF^_T/:)kJ^__________ Bay ___------------------------------------------ Person responsible for this application ^ 'Tp.f'£r^or\ Phone 4. INCUiiw v«^f I t ^ I i- - I—^ Mailing Address I^^Sf5 E6S5)C ___COti Relationship to association ---------------—------------------------ Association is (check applicable items^ ____ unincorporated homeowner's group incorporated Homeowner's Association, unincorporated club or recreation group ;S incorporated club or recreation group. Page 1 of 5 5. 7. 8. Principal purpose of joint use dock is (check applicable items). _____provide boat mooring and lake access for residential property. _____provide swimming access, beach, or offshore dock. y, provide a club or association gathering place for activities. Dock is located on (check applicable item): _____ one member's private property. easement or outlot owned in common. _____property leased by the group/association. ^ property owned by the group/association. List Dock location and ownership information: ^ID 'PilPr -----------Street address Legal property description 1 /-Cit-—"^5- P'h. f4' OOOJU — ---------------PID# Listed property owner(s) Names of abutting lakeshore property owners: rNnrthAVest) _ jshore property owners: (Name + Address) (Snuth/East) (Name + Address) Names of other affected property owners. (Name Address) (attach sheet if necessary) Insurance Coverage - The jointly used dock is insured by one of the following: property owner's homeowner's policy. ^ __ separate group/associaiion owned policy. List the following information Name of insured Name of insurance carrier ------- Name of insurance agency Q. Policy No. Effective date of coverage Amount of coverage: Public liability, per peison, per occurrence S 000,00^ Public liability, per occurrence Page 2 of 5 Security and poUcing of the jointly used dock and propeny is provided by (check applicable items): _____CM^ng _____security Ughting X property owner's presence contract security service other (specify) POCK INFORMATION 11. List Dock Use Area Specifications; Cl ^TTfiicHBO Width of shoreline; ______ 12. 13. 15. _______ft. Length ofmain dock from shore; _________ Dock setbacks from side property lines at shore; -------------- ft and -------------- Dock Construction (check applicable items) X seasonal dock (relocated or replaced each year) ____ permanent piling with seasonal deck ____ permanent piling and decking wooden decking ____ metal decking List Dock Accessories; Number of fire extinguishers available at the dock fJ[Pl------------------------------ Number of life preservers available at the dock —jA------------------------------ 14. List number of slips in each category ("slips” includes boat lifts). Transient (day use only) slips Permanent moorage slips - Dry storage (rack) slips ' O "■ Transient (day use) off-shore buoys Permanent moorage off-shore buoys Maximum number of boats at the dock List number of off-street parking spaces available for users of the joint u.se dock Parking, if provided must not be separated from the dock by any public road. ^ ^paces. fro SION ANH SFnTMENTATION CONTROL 16 Shoreline is protected by (check appli'-able items); ^ stone rip rap ___ wood seawall ___ metal seawall concrete seawall grass and vegetation only other (specify) 17 Depth of water at shoreline;_____ft; at 50 ft. out:at 100 ft. out: Page 3 of 5 REQUIRED ATTACHMENTS The following must accompany this application; A DOCK PLAN - ALL APPLICATIONS A dock plan, drawn to scale, showing the shoreline 'vidth of this property, the side property lines and the location, layout and dimensions of all docks, slips and buoys. If off-street parking, dry storage or other on-land functions are intended, these also should be shown on the plan. B.UNINCORPORATED GROUPS OR ASSOCIATION^ 1 . A list of the names and mailing addresses of all members and/or slip users. 2.A certified copy of the by-laws or agreement for joint use. Note: This copy IS Qotjreauired if the applicant initials and certifies the following statement; "This is a renewal application and our joint use dock is to be operated under tne same by-laws or agreement ongmally made in________(state year) and on file with the City. Applicant's initials u ^ C INCORPOR ATED CLUBS OR ASSOCIATIONS 1. 2. A list of the names, mailing addresses and titles of all corporation officers. A statement as to the total number of members in the club or association. 37^ members A certified copy of the articles of incorporation and by-laws of the corporation. Note; These copies ar not required if the applicant iniuals and certifies the followmg statement. "This is a renewal application and our joint use dock is to be operated under the same articles of incorporation and/or by-laws as ongmally made or last amended in_________(state year) and on file with the City." Applicant's initials ANNUAL LICENSE FEE - ALL APPLICATIONS Joint Use Dock License Application Fee according to the current City Fee Schedule INITIAL APPLICATION FEE RENEWAL JOINT USE FEE, per year PI US SLIP FEE for each permanent moorage slip, lift, dry stack, or buoy ______slips @ 2.00 each TOTAL DUE THIS APPI 'CATION 20.00 Page 4 of 5 LATE FEE • Renewals Application for renewal of licenses shall be made no later than March 1 of the license year. Ihg City shall not accept renewal license applications received after February 20 unless the application is accompanied bv a late fee of S25 00. REVIEW PROCEDURE When a complete application is received, the application will be reviewed by the City Council and, in the rase of new or unusual applications, also by the Planning Commission and Manna Committee. The Council will pass upon the application after complete review. THE SUBJECT DOCK MAY BE INSTALLED AND/OR OPENED FOR USE ONLY UPON APPROVAL OF THE LICENSE BY THE CITY COUNCIL Pursuant to Section 5 42 of the Orono Municipal Code, the applicant hereby requests the Orono City Council to review this Joint Use Dock License Application, and agrees and authorizes the City of Orono and the City's employees and agents to enter upon the property at any reasonable time to perform safety and code compliance inspections. Signed Om^, -J __________Di City of Orono P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, HI 55323 (612)473-7357 02/14/% 11:21:29 license - ono bus. ^ _1 I 0.00 0.00 it use dock license ^ ^ ^1 I 20.00 20.00 SUBTOTAL 20.00 TAX 0.00 TOTAL SALE 20.00 RECEIVED 20.00 CHAWE 0.00 CLEn(l02 TRA»!SI 691 Page .5 of 5 ■ WASHi[OHGEOICKtY.AUOIIORHENNUIN COUNIt. MIHH.rAxr.S PAYABLE IN is!__ON WITHIN DESCniDEO PnOPEHTY ABP. PAIDAf v '6.purr nEClSIERED UUU; iJURVEI NU. X2-9 4 HENHKPAN COUl.TI, HIKNKSOTA ,^e»r! lin* of Traci C \V-- Cpti Imt of Govt lei J, Sctfon izjuTH.nrjtv - lOOttr lat{_ *BT.9t rOiZ- 'i| \0 ^' ;? -r N;^ // .'-or /.? ; (Z B. FaNIMMER'S .‘iUBDiV. I .or o)\K/7-c.s'i(..'s _,' ,vv. or cov ' ^ 6 IN SEC..SZ?% ■N .R.B3l'V AT// sftarchn* r ' of channel MKTA POWER SQUADRON STREATER COVE FACILITY /Z>^’NT)CAC ^ > RESOLUTION DIRECTING STAFF TO ISSUE A JOINT USE DOCK LICENSE TO PHEASANT LAWN HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS NOTED HEREIN FOR THE PERIOD OF JANUARY 1,1996 TO DECEMBER 31,1996 WHEREAS, the City of Orono, hereinafter "City" is a municipal corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of Minnesota and has the authority and responsibilit>' under Minnesota Statutes, State Statute 412, et. seq. and State Statute 462, et. seq., to protect the health, safety, and general w-lfare of the citizens of the City and other members of the public within the City; and WHEREAS, the City shares concurrent jurisdiction over the primary harbor limit of the City of Orono with the Lake Minnetonka Conservation District and the Department of Natural Resources of the State of Minnesota; and WHEREAS, the regulation of the nav igable waters invuives an exercise of police power of the State, LMCD, and the City of Orono, all of which have adopted rules to ensure to all equal enjoyment of the public rights and equal protection from activity on or near the public waters and on the land within the City which, if unregulated, may be detrimental to the public health, safety and general welfare; and WHEREAS, the regulations of the DNR, LMCD, and the City of Orono regulate the property riglits of the riparian owners both as to residential owners and the commercial marina owners to th.* extent prohibiting any interference with the public waters adjoining their property. The LMCD, DNR and City of Orono must fulfill their trusteeship over the public waters by protecting against interference by anyone, including those who assert the commonlaw rights of riparian owners, whether or not they be commercial marinas or residential owners; WHEREAS, as to Liike Minnetonka, a mutual right of enjoyment exists between and is shared by riparian owners and the public generally, no one riparian owner has exclusive privileges o\ cT Lake Minnetonka. The only additional private right that any riparian owner may have over the public generally is to construct one dock to the navigable depth of the public waters. There can be n^ dispute but that the public generally and each riparian owner to Lake Minnetonka has the right to use the entire surface area of Lake Minnetonka for all suitable purposes in common with all other riparian owners. This right is a right not only to members of the public but the right to each riparian owner. This mutual right of enjoyment w hich is < hared by riparian owners and the public generally includes the recreational benefits of the lake such as boating and fishing therein: the rinrrian owner has no e.xclusive privileges to these rights: and Page 1 of2 WHEREAS, Lake Minnetonka is capable of substantial beneficial public use only as long as all riparian users of the lake are regulated in such a way as to ensure there is no abuse of the limited riparian rights, and WHEREAS, the City has adopted reasonable regulations regarding the construction and use of lakeshore and dc<-k facilities when such facilities are used and maintained by three or more families, which reflations include the annual licensing of Joint Use Docks pursuant to Section 5.42 of the Orono Municipal Code; and WHEREAS, the purpose of this Resolution is to set forth the above noted general conditions and concerns and the following special conditions as they relate to an application for an annual Joint Use Dock License described on E.^hibit A attached, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City C« cil of the City of Orono hereby directs the Staff to issue a Joint Use Dock License according to the facts and conditions noted on Exhibit A attached of March, 1996. Adopted by the C ty Council of the Ci Irono at their meeting on the 11 th day ATTEST: Dorothy M. Hallin, City Clerk STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. Jabriel Jabbour, /iCting Mayor COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foreuoinc instrument was acknowledged before me on this 11th day of ivlarch, 1996 by Gabriel Jabbour & Dorothy M. Hallin, Acting Mayor & City Clerk of the City of Orono. a Minnesota municipal cerporation and said instrument was e.xccuted on behalf ot the City. Notary Public Page 2 of2 CITY OF ORONO EXHIBIT A RESOLUTION NO. CONDITIONS OF ISSUANCE FOR ANNUAL JOINT USE DOCK LICENSE I. LICENSEE: Pheasant Lawn Homeowners Association Dock Address: 2790 Pheasant Road Agent: Joseph T. Forrer Address: 2655 Pheasant Road, Excelsior, MN 55331 Licensee is: ___ unincorporated homeowner's ^.roup X incorporated homeowner's association _____ unincorporated club or recreation group ___ incorporated club or recreation groun other ______________________ Carman’s . _ License Period - January 1 . 06 to December 31, 1996 II. BOAT DENSITY The number cHn-place boat slips, lifts rnd buoys shall not exceed the number shown on the attached plan. Exhibits B-1 thru B-3, and in accoi Janet with Resolution 938, in no case shall the number of authorized boat slips, lifts, or buoys exceed number permitted in the prior year's license. Authorized Boat Density per attached plan: Bay - Transient (Day use only) Slips Permanent Moorage Slips Boat Lifts Sub-"; Jtal: Slips a: Dock Offshore Buoys Maximum Boats In Water Maximum Boats per prior license MAXIMUM BOAT nr\SITY plus 1 detached _plus 1 detached ExIlibit A Resolution No., Page 2 Exceeding this maximum boat density, or exceeding the number of permitted slips, lifts or buoys is a violation of this license subject to revocation and/or prosecution for violation of Section 5.42 Subdivision 2 of the Orono Municipal Code. III. DOCK LAYOUT The (] structure or Invout authorized by this license shall be as shown on attached Exhibits B-l and B-- Any changes in this layout shall be subject to prior review and approval of the City Council. IV SPECIAL CONDITIONS required for compliance with the ordinance of the City and/or the LMCD The issuance of this license is subject to full compliance with these conditions. Failure to comply with these conditions is cause for license revocation and/or prosecution by the City. 1 The City acknowledges the historic and continued use ot this five-slip multiple dock since the 1950's for the benefit of five designated non-riparian properties on the west side of Pheasant Road. 2 llie City recognizes the easement over the Pheasant Lawn Homeowners Association commons lot to provide lake access to Lots 15 and 18, Pheasant Lawn, and Lots 1 and 2, Yale Smiley Addition, because as a result of past dredging of the lagoon area in Lot 14, said lots might not abut the actual shoreline of Lake Minnetonka at any given time. 3 Tlie City acknowledges the existence of the portion ot dock and shed existing on City richt-of-way and grants temporary pennission for said dock and shed to remain at their existing location within the right-of-way until such future date that the City determines that removal of said structures from the City right-of-way is in the best interests of the City of Orono. 4 The Homeowners Association and Mahoney shall agree to hold the City harmless from any damage to any private or Association improvements within the right-of-vvay that might be caused by the City. (Hold Harmless agreements on file) 5 Tliis approval urants a 12% Joint Use Dock License to the Association for six slips (including Mahoney’s detached slip). Applicants are advised of the need to henceforth apply for a Joint Use Dock License annually. Exhibit A Resolution No._ Page 3 6. 7. The five multiple dock slips are designated for use by specific properties as spelled out below, and no transfer of dock rights to different properties within the subdivision of Pheasant Lawn may occur without City approval. Transfer of dock rights to any property outside the subdivision of Pheasant Lawn or to any person who is not a Pheasant Lawn property owner, will not be allowed. The five properties which are each allowed one slip within the five slip multiple dock are described as follows: A. B. C. D. E. (Forrer) 2655 Pheasant Road (Lots I, 2 and part of Lot 3. Pheasant Lawn) (Shert) 2675 Pheasant Road (Lot 6, Pheasant Lawn) (Reddick) 2695 Pheasant Road (Lot 8, Pheasant Lawn) (David) 2725 Pheasant Road (North part of Lot 10, Pheasant Lawn) (Bakke) 2765 Pheasant Road (South Part of Lot 10, Pheasant Lawn) V. Nothing ir this license shall confer upon any person for the benefit of any property any vested right to use Lake Minnetonka or the premises in a manner permitted by this resolution, but the use of Lake Minnetonka and the premises shall remain subject to such regulations and ordinances as the City and other competent regulatory authorities shall deem necessary from time to time in the public interest. CITY OF ORONO P.O. BOX 66 CRYSTAL BAY, 55323 473-7357 LICENSE YEAR 19_96 ANNUAL JOINT USE DOCK LICENSE APPLICATION Pursuant to Orono Municipal Code Section 5.42 Date Form Sent by City Staff.Taniiarv26. 1996 Date Application Returned to City --------— Fee Received S -32-^^^______ By Employee Section 5.42 Subdivision 2. i TrFNSE REQUIRED - It is unlaw&l for any (group or association of persons or families, more than two in number, whether incorporated or not) to «''Sage participate in... joint use (of any lakeshore property) without first having obtained a license therefor from the City. PLEASE COMPLETE ALL ITEMS AND SUBMIT SIGNED ^^^ICATION, A^AC^lSs. InD license APPLICATION FEE TO THE CITY CLERK BY FEBRUARY 20 OF THE LICENSE YEAR. ASsoriATinN information 1. fJ,&^arjr MufO Mm . 2. 3. Lake W PjTo 'Kph-____Bay-------^ Person responsible for this application: ^ P Phone /CName '-x Mailing Address 4. Relationship to association _ Association is (check applicable items); unincorporated homeowner's group 5r3 ’5y incorporated Homeowner's Association, unincorporated club or recreation group. incorporated club or recreation group. Page 1 of 5 \ 5. 7. Principal purpose of joint use dock is (check applicable items): provide boat mooring and lake access for residential property, f pi^mmina flccess beach. or offshore dock.provide swimming access, beach, or offshore dock, provide a club or association gathering place for activities. Dock is located on (check applicable item), one member ’s private property. ^ easement or outlot ovvned in common. ___ property leased by the group/association. property ovvned by the group/association. List Dock location and ownership information: • Street address )^s Legal property description ( /V— PID# Listed property ovvner(s) Pwr----'S»; c_ Names of abutting lakeshore property OAjmers: rNorthAVestl f South/East) (Name + Address) t3> ) (Name + Address) Names of other affected property owners: (Name Address) (attach sheet if necessary) Insurance Coverage - The jointly used dock is insured by one of the following: / property owner's homeowner's policy, separate group/association owned policy. List the following information: Name of insured ___ (^CA<rU Name of insurance carrier Name of insurance agency Policy No. ____________Effective date of coverage Amount of coverage: Public liability, per person, per occurrence S. Public liability, per occurrence S. Page 2 of 5 1Security and policing of the jointly used dock and property is provided by (check applicable items): _____ fencing security Ughting property owner's presence 7.contract secunty service othfer (specify) nnrK INFORMATION List Dock Use Area Specifications: ( ft. Length ofmain dock from shore: ft. and 11. Width of shoreline: Dock setbacks from side property lines at shore; Dock Construction (check applicable items). ft. ft. seasonal dock (relocated or replaced each year) permanent piling with seasonal deck _yC permanent piling and decking wooden decking ____ metal decking 13.List Dock Accessories: Number of fire e,xtinguishers available at the dock Number of life preservers available at the dock U TO List number of slips in each category ("slips" includes boat Ufts): Transient (day use only) slips ______ Transient (day use) off-shore buoys Permanent moorage slips {r.-----Permanent moorage off-shore buoys Dry storage (rack) slips Ma.\imum number of boats at the dock —{^2- 15.List number of off-street parking spaces available for users of the joint use ^ck. Parking, if provided must not be separated from the dock by any public road. ----[O,---- spaces. FROSTON and SEDIMTINTATTON CONTROL 16 Shoreline is protected by (check applicable items). /( stone rip rap _wood seawall seawall ___ concrete seawall grass and vegetation only other (specify) 17.Depth of water at shoreline: ^ ft; at 50 ft. out:< ; at 100 ft. out: Page 3 of 5 required attachments The following must accompany this application; A nnrK pt .an - ALL APPLICA' '{S ... AdcKkplan,drarto^ale.stow,:.>, ‘he shoreline width of this property, the s.de property lines and the location, layout and dimencons of all docks, slips and buoys_ If o^Ef-street parking, dry storage or other on-land functions are intended, these also should be shown on the plan. ttntncorporated groups or association 1. A list of the names and mailing addresses of all members and/or slip users. 2 A certified copy ofthe by-laws or agreement for joint use, xT„e.. TKi. e-ortv i, not reouircd if thc appIicoiU initials and certifies the following statement; This rental apphcauon and^lTjoint use dock is to be operated under the same by-laws or agreement originally made in ______(state year) and on file with the Ciw. ___________ Applicant's initials B. C. D. rNrORPORATED CLIIBS OR ASSOCIATIONS • 1 A list ofthe names, mailing addresses and titles of all corporation officers. 2. A statement as to the total number of members in the club or association, members 3.A certified copy ofthe articles of incorporation and by-laws ofthe corporation. Note: These copies are not renuired if the applicant initials and certifies the foUowmg statement. TbiS is a renewd applicalton and our joint use dock is “im!?.!”" and/or by-laws as original'y made or last amended m f ( ■ City.' the same articles of incorporation (state year) and on file with the Applicant's initials AMKTJAL LirFNSF FEE - AT I - APPLICATIONS Joint Use Dock License Application Fee according to the current City Fee Schedule INITIAL APPLICATION FEE S __ renewal joint use xEE, per year S __ PT TTg SLIP FEE for each permanent moorage slip, lift, dry stack, or buoy (// slips 2.00 each S _ TOTAL DUE TfflS APPLICATION S _ 20.00 ^7J>C Page 4 of 5 LATE FEE - Renewals Application for renewal of Ucenses shall be made no later than March 1 of the hcense ye^. rZ .h.ll not accent renewal licens- ^Trlirations received after February 20 unless the application is accompanied bv a late fee of $25 00^ REVTEW PROCEDURE When a complete application is received, the application will be reviewed by the City Council and. in the case of new or unusual applications, also by the Planning Commission and Manna Committee. The Council will pass upon the application after complete review. THE SUBJECT DOCK MAY BE INSTALLED AND/OR OPENED FOR USE ONLY UPON APPROVAL OF THE LICENSE BY THE CITY COUNCIL. Pursuant to Section 5 .42 of the Orono Municipal Code, the applicant hereby requests the Orono Ci^ Council to review this Joint Use Dock License Application, and agrees and authonzes the City of Orono and the City's employees and agents to enter upon the property at any reasonable time to perform safety and code compliance inspections. Signed Date City of Orono (612)^73-7357 02/13/% 11:09:20 UCBGE -^Oh€H BtB.^ jT ta SUBTOTAL TAX TOTAL 5AL£ •riTIVED CH»£it CLEBKI Ot B85 0.00 32.00 32.00 0.00 32.00 32.00 0.00 Page 5 of 5 RESOLUTION DIRECTING STAFF TO ISSUE A JOINT USE DOCK LICENSE TO SANDY BEACH PLACE SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS NOTED HEREIN FOR THE PERIOD OF JANUARY t, 1996 TO DECEMBER 31,1996 WHEREAS, the City of Orono, hereinafter "City ” is a municipal corporation organized and existing under the law-= of the State of Minnesota and has the authority and responsibility under Minnesota Statutes, Sta'e Statute 412. et. seq. and State Statute 462. et. seq.. to protect the health, safety, and general welfare of the citizens of the City and other members of the public within the City; and WHEREAS, the City shares concurrent jurisdiction over the primary harbor limit of the City of Orono with the Lake Minnetonka Conservation District and the Department ot Natural Resources of the State of Minnesota; and WHEREAS, the regulation of the navigable waters involves an exercise of police power of the State, LMCD, and the City of Orono, all of which have adopted rules to ensure to all equal enjoyment of the public rights and equal protection from activity on or near the public waters and on the land within the City which, if unregulated, may be detrimental to the public health, safety and general welfare; and WHEREAS, the regulations of the DNR, LMCD, and the City of Orono regulate ^e property rights of the riparian owners both as to residential owners and the commercial marina owners to the extent prohibiting any interference with the public waters adjoining their property. The LMCD DNR and City of Orono must fulfill their trusteeship over the public waters by protecting against interference by anyone, including those who assert the commonlaw rights of riparian own'ers, whether or not they be commercial marinas or residential owners; WHEREAS, as to Lake Minnetonka, a mutual right of enjoyment exists between and is shared bv riparian owners and the public generally, no one riparian owner has exclusive privileges over Lake *Minnetonka. The only additional pri\ ate right that any riparian owner may have over the public generallv is to construct one dock to the navigable depth of the public waters. There can be no dispute but'that the public generally and each riparian owner to Lake Minnetonka has the right to use the entire surface area of Lake Minnetonka for all suitable purposes in common with all other riparian owners. This right is a right not only to members of the public but the nght to each ripanan owner. Tliis mutual riuht of enjovment which is shared by riparian owners and the public generally includes the recreation^ benefits of the lake such as boating and li.shing therein; the riparian owner has no exclusive privileges to these rights, and Page I of2 WHEREAS, Lake Minnetonka is capable of substantial beneficial public use only as long as all riparian users of the lake are regulated in such a way as to ensure there is no abuse of the limited riparian rights; and WHEREAS, the City has adopted reasonable regulations regarding the construction and use of lakeshore and dock facilities when such facilities are used and maintained by three or more families, which regulations include the annual licensing of Joint Use Docks pursuant to Section 5.42 of the Orono Municipal Code: and WHEREAS, the purpose of this Resolution is to set forth the above noted general conditions and concerns and the following special conditions as they relate to an application tor an annual Joint Use Dock License described on Exhibit A attached, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Orono hereby directs the Staff to issue a Joint Use Dock License according to the facts and conditions noted on Exhibit A attached. of March, 1996. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono at their meeting on the 11th day Gabriel Jabbour. Acting Mayor ATTEST: Dorothy M. Hallin. City Clerk STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) 'Fhe foregoing instrument was acknow ledged before me on this 11th day of March, 1996 by Gabriel Jabbour & Dorothy M. Hallin, Acting 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 2 of2 CITY OF ORONO EXfflBIT A RESOLUTION NO.__ CONDITIONS OF ISSI lANCF FOR ANNUAL lOTNT USE DOCK LICENSE I. LICENSEE: Sandy Beach Place Dock Address: 3995 North Shore Drive Agent: H. Richard Zuckman Address: 1819 Dupont Avenue South, Minneapolis. MN 55403 License Period - January 1, 1996 to December 31, 19% II. BOAT DENSITY The number of in-place boat slips, lifts and buoys shall not exceed the number shown on the attached plan. Exhibit B , and in accordance with Resolution 938, in no case shall the number of authorized boat slips, lifts, or buoys exceed the number permitted in the prior years license. Authorized Boat Density per attached plan: Bay Transient (Day use only) Slips Permanent Moorage Slips Boat Lifts Sub-Total: Slips at Dock OlTshore Buoys Maximum Boats in Water Maximum Boats per prior license MAXIMUM BOAT DENSITY West Arm 6* See Item IV-4. Exhibit A Resolution No._ Page 2 Exceeding this maximum boat density, or exceeding the number of permitted slips, lifts or buoys is a violation of this license subject to revocation and/or prosecution for violation of Section 5.42 Subdivision 2 of the Orono Municipal Code. III. DOCK LAYOUT The dock structure or layout authorized by this license shall be as shown on attached Exhibit B. .\ny changes in this layout shall be subject to prior review and approval of the City Council. IV. SPECIAL CONDITIONS required for compliance with the ordinance of the City and/or the LMCD. The issuance of this license is subjec . ftill compliance with these conditions. Failure to comply with these conditions is cause for license revocation and/or prosecution by the City. 1. The five approved slips are for the e.xclusive use of the residents/renters of Sandy Beach Shores. 2. 3. 4. ' ity mav require written approval from abutting and affected property owners for each annual licei.se review. During the current license period, the City reserves the right to require a reduction in the number of license slips commensurate with any reductions of habitable dwelling units which may occur during the license year. Because one cabin was demolished in 1991, leaving six rental units, the number of slips licensed fo '''^3 was commensurately reduced. The fire and subsequent demolition of an auditional cabin in early 1994 left 5 rental units on the site, resulting in the reduction to 5 licensed slips for 1994 and future years. V. Nothimi in this license shall confer upon any person for the benefit of any property any vested right to use Lake Minnetonka or the premises in a manner pemiitted by this resolution, but the use of Lake Minnetonka and the premises shall remain subject to such regulations and ordinances as the City and other competent regulatoiy authorities shall deem necessary from time to time in the public interest. :r-. . •' * * .• * * 4 •.* ,* *^ • * Uio'H ^\&{T ■<\o^ CTTYOFORONO P.O. BOX 66 CRYSTAL BAY, MN 55323 413-7357 LICENSE YEAR 19 96 ^iNimTAl iniNTllSE DOCK LICENSE APPLICATION Pursuant to Orono Municipal Code Section 5.42 Date Form Sent by City Staff---------—T.^miarv 26. 1996 Date Application Returned to City ----— " ,L^--------- Fee Received S ^O-_________ By Employee _ . ,-> i trFM.<;F REOUIRED - It is unlawful for any (group or association S L ™o„0,.,.d «,) » ™s«. .. in ,, iob, use <of any lakeshore properly) ayillioul first hnaang obtained a license iherefot from the City. diptacf rOMPLETE ALL ITEMS AND SUBMIT SIGNED APPLICATION, REQUIRED ATTACHMENTS. AND LICENSE APPLICATION FEE TO THE CITY CLERK BY FEBRUAR 20 OF THE LICENSE YEAR. ARSnriATION info rmation 1 Association title or name (if any) 2. 3. Lake Person responsible for this application: Mamp U ^^R^cb3rJ Phone Mailing Address Dopo^t fiv/ Relationship to association______0^ n..il— Association is (check applicable items). unincorporated homeowner's group, incorporated Homeowner's Association, unincorporated club or recreation group ____ incorporated club or recreation group. p<op4>r‘^y ’ 1 6 1996 5. Principal purpose of joint use dock is (check applicable items). ^ provide boat mooring and lake access for residential property, provide swimming access, beach, or offshore dock. _____ provide a club or association gathering place for activities. 6. Dock is located on (check applicable item): ^ one member's private property. easement or outlet owned in common, property leased by the group/association. ____ property owned by the group/association. 7. List Dock location and ownership information: street address___________StxoCc Legal property description _____PCj-cu ^-------------- piD# ____________~\n - 2.“*^ Listed property owner(s) Names of abutting lakeshore property owners: 13,\OPT______4QqS SUo<-g jjrrNorth/WestL (Name + Address) fSouth/H?^sl>\U3S c.g(k\s (Name + Address) Names of other affected property owners: (Name + Address) (attach sheet if necessary) Insurance Coverage - The jointly used dock is insured by one of the following; property owner's homeowner's policy. ____ separate group/association owned policy. List the following information: Name of insured ___ Name of insurance carrier Name of insurance agency _____ Policy No Effective date of coverage ___ Amount of coverage: Public liability, per person, per occurrence S—li Public liability, per occurrence S \ i 00_^ Page 2 of 5 Security and poUcing of the jointly used dock and property is provided by (check applicable items): fencing __ security lighting _ property owner ’s presence contract security service ____ other (specify) DOCK information 11. List Dock Use Area Specifications: Width of shoreline: Length of main dock from shore: -------------- Dock setbacks from side property lines at shore. ------------- ft- ^d -----3^---- 12. Dock Construction (check applicable items); i seasonal dock (relocated or replaced each year) _____ permanent piUng with seasonal deck ____ permanent piling and decking wooden decking ____ metal decking ft. ft. List Dock Accessories; Number of fire extinguishers available at the dock Number of life preservers available at the dock _ List number of slips in each category (Mips ” includes boat lifts): Transient (day use only) slips ______ Transient (day use) ofiF-shore buoys _ Permanent moorage slips S Permanent moorage off-shore buoys Dry storage (rack) slips Maximum number of boats at the dock List number of off-street paiking spaces available for users of the joint use dock. Parking, if provided must noi oe separated from the dock by any public road. ----22=i---- spaces. fronton a vn .SFDIMENTATION CONTROL 16 Shoreline is protected by (check applicable items): wood seawall ___ metal seawallstone np rap 17. erass and vegetation only Depth of water at shoreline; O other (specify) concrete seawall bggch ft; at 50 ft. out: S : at 100 ft. out: ----!_0. Page 3 of 5 REQUIRED ATTACHMENTS The follow* ig must accompany this application: A B. C. DOCK PLAN - ALL APPLICATIONS A dock plan, drawn to scale, showing the shoreline width of this property, the side property lines and the location, layout and dimensions of all docks, slips and buoys. If off-street parkine, dry storage or other on-land functions are intended, these also should be shown on the plan. UNINCORPORATED GROUPS OR ASSOCIATIONS 1. A list of the names and mailing addresses of all members and/or slip users. A certified copy of the by-laws or agreement for joint use. Note: This copy is not required if the applicant initials and certifies the following statement: "This is a renewal applicauon and our jomt use dock is to be operated under the same by-laws or agreement originally made m________(state year) and on file with the City." Applicant's initials INCORPORATED CLUBS OR ASSOCIATIONS 1. A list of the names, mailing addresses and titles of all corporation officers. 2.A statement as to the total number of members in the club or association, members 3.A certified copy of the articles of incorporation and by-laws of the corporation. Note: These copies are not required if the applicant imtials and certifies the following statement: "This is a renewal applicauon and our joint use dock is to be operated under the same articles of incorporation and'or by-laws as onginally made or last amended in_________(state year) and on file with the City" Applicant's initials ANNUAL LTCFN.SE FEE - ALL APPLICATIONS Joint Use Dock License Application Fee according to the current City Fee Schedule INITIAL APPLICATION FEE RENEWAL JOINT USE FEE, per year PLUS SLIP FEE for each permanent moorage slip, lift, dry stack, or buoy .iT slips @. 2.00 each 20 00 TOTAL DUE THIS APPLICATION \0.0b 30. 00 Pase 4 of 5 I LATE FEE - Renewals Application for renewal of Ucenses shall be made no later than March 1 of the license year, Ihe application*? rpf^eived after February 20 unless the applicationghall not accent renewal license. is accompanied bv a late fee of S25.00._ REVIEW PROCEDURE When a complete application is received, the application will be reviewed by the City Council and, in the case of new or unusual appUcations, also by the Planning Commission and Manna Committee. The Council will pass upon the application after complete review THE SUBJECT DOCK MAY BE INSTALLED AND/OR OPENED FOR USE ONLY UPON APPROVAL OF THE LICENSE BY THE CITY COUNCIL. Pursuant to Section 5.42 of the Orono Municipal Code, the applicant hereby requests the Orono City Council to review this Joint Use Dock License Application, and agrees and authonzes the City o Orono and the City's employees and agents to enter upon the property at any reasonable time to perform safety and code compliance inspections. Signed Date City of Orono P.O. Box 66 Cry^al Bay, Hi 55323 (612)473-7357 02/06/96 13:26:05 LICENSE - OnO BUS. 1 ft 30.00 30.00 SANDY BEACH A DOCK LICENSE 1 §0.00 0.00 SUBTOTAL TAX TOTAL SALE RECEIVED 30.00 0.00 30.00 30.00 CHANGE CLERK! 03 TRANS! B46 0.00 Page 5 of 5 1 0 ns I'•/ •—;^ • '^p ; f ' / / •». •• •; X i, • / r ., :*-'0'l" uw*-^ */•/■<#» tt(i« o/’6#vV 5 >s^ ■ S««.'a-»i7-/3 \ ^ ----------------------------------------- =-a—^ ^ ~------• ------»«_ ~ HUnn. C*. f»»1 64.04 Q ------------------- X. \ i/^ Henn.£i^«■«?*-■ v ^ -------------- , DocK Plan 5^nc!u Beach"^'^^ Platt J RESOLUTION DIRECTING STAFF TO ISSUE A JOINT USE DOCK LICENSE TO BIG ISLAND, INC. SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS NOTED HEREIN FOR THE PERIOD OF JANUARY 1,1996 TO DECEMBER 31,1996 WHEREAS, the City of Orono, hereinafter "City" is a municipal corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of Minnesota and has the authority and responsibility under Minnesota Statutes, State Statute 412, et. seq. and State Statute 462, et. seq., to protect the health, safety, and general welfare of the citizens of the City and other members of the public within the City; and WHEREAS, the City shares concurrent jurisdiction over the primary harbor limit of the City of Orono with the Lake Minnetonka Conservation District and the Department of Natural Resources of the State of Minnesota; and WHEREAS, the regulation of the navigable waters involves an exercise of police power of the State, LMCD, and the City of Orono, all of which have adopted rules to ensure to all equal enjoyment of the public rights and equal protection from acdvity on or near the public waters and on the land within the City which, if unregulated, may be detrimental to the public health, safety and general welfare; and WHEREAS, the regulations of the DNR, LMCD, and the Citv of Orono regulate the property rights of the riparian owners both as to residential owners and the commercial marina owners to the extent prohibiting any interference with the public waters adjoining their property. The LMCD, DNR and City of Orono must fulfill their trusteeship over the public waters by protecting against interference by anyone, including those who assert the commonlaw rights of riparian owners, whether or not they be commercial marinas or residential owners; WHEREiVS, as to Lake Minnetonka, a mutual right of enjoyment exists between and is shared bv riparian owners and the public generally, no one riparian owner has exclusive privileges over Lake Minnetonka. The only additional private right that any riparian owner may have over the public generally is to construct one dock to the navigable depth of the public waters. There can be no dispute but that the public generally and each riparian owner to Lake Minnetonka has the nght to use the entire surface area of Lake Minnetonka for all suitable purposes in common with all other riparian owners. This right is a right not only to members of the public but the right to each ripanan owner. This mutual right of enjoyment which is shared by riparian owners and the public generally includes the recreational benefits of the lake such as boating and fishing therein; the npanan owner has no e.xclusive privileges to these rights; and Page 1 of2 p WHEREAS, Lake Minnetonka is capable of substantial beneficial public use only ^ long as all riparian users of the lake are regulated in such a way as to ensure there is no abuse of the limited riparian rights; and WHEREAS, the City has adopted reasonable regulations regarding the construction and use of lakeshore and dock facilities when such facilities are used and maintained by three or more families, which regulations include the annual licensing of Joint Use Docks pursuant to Section 5.42 of the Orono Municipal Code; and WHEREAS, the purpose of this Resolution is to set fortli the above noted general conditions and concerns and the following special conditions as they relate to an application for an annual Joint Use Dock License described on Exhibit A attached, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Orono hereby directs the Staff to issue a Joint Use Dock License according to the facts and conditions noted on Exhibit A attached. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono at their meeting on the 11th day of March, 1996. Gabriel Jabbour, Acting Mayor ATTEST: Dorothy M. Hallin, City Clerk STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this 11th day of March, 1996 by Gabriel Jabbour & Dorothy M. Hallin, Acting 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 2 of 2 CITY OF ORONO EXHIBIT A RESOLl TION NO. UCENSEE: Big Island, Inc. Dock Addnrss: Big Island. Record Lots #12 and 19 (520/530 Big Island) Agent: Brian Tichy (Treasurer) Address: 1471 Lake Lucy Road. Excelsior. MN 55331 Licensee is: __unincorporated homeowner's group incorporated homeowner's association unincorporated club or recreation group XX incorporated club or recreation group other ____________ II. License Period - January 1, 1996 to December 31, 1996 BOAT DENSITY The number of in-place boat slips, lifts and buoys shall not exceed the number shown on the attached plan. Exhibit B and C, and in accordance with Resolution 938, in no case shall the number of authorized boat slips, lifts, or buoys exceed the number permitted in the prior year's license. Authorized Boat Density per attached plan; Day Transient (Day use only) Slips Permanent Moorage Slips Boat Lifts Sub-Total: Slips at Dock Offshore Buoys Maximum Boats in Water Maximum Boats per prior license MAXl.MUM BOAT DENSITY Lower Lake *Per Resolution No. 3006. occasional overnight camping allowed. i Exhibit A Resolution No. Page 2 Exceeding this maximum boat densit>-. or exceeding the number of pemiitted slips, lifts or buoys is a violation of this license subject to revocation and'or pros-cution for violation ot Section 5.42 Subdivision 2 of the Orono Municipal Code. 1. 2. HI DOCK LAYOUT The dock structure or layout authorized by this license shall he as shovsn on attached Exhibit B. Any changes in this layout shall be subject to prior res lew and approval ot the City Council. IV SPECl AL CONDITIONS required tor compliance with the ordinance of the City and'or the LMCD The issuance of this license is subject to full compliance with these conditions. Failure to comply with these conditions is cause for license revocation and'or prosecution by the City. Licensee shall comply wiui all requirements of City ot Orono Resolution No. 3006. The maximum allowed boat d. .ity per Resolution No. 3006 is 1 5 total slips. Any increase above this number of slips shall be subject to licensee first obtaining Conditional Use Permit approval from the City. The number of slips licensed for the current license peritxi is _Li_ V Nothing his license shall confer upon any person for the benefit of any property any vested rigni to use Lake Minnetonka or the premises in a manner permitted by this resolution, but the use of Lake Minnetonka and the premises shall remain object to such regulations and ordinances as the City and other competent regulatoiy authorities shall deem necessaiy from time to time in the public interest. VI. STYROFOAM DOCK ADVISORY. Licensee is advised that the use of unprotected styrofoam as a dock flotation material has been banned per Ordinance No. 104, Second Series. =!S si|r;l s5i /.CREA6E, SURVEY »-UK*••Biq tetond, \cvc. • ». 'V /7 . a!' / *•»* ... *• • ^' ■/ ■ • V-f,'.f c A t „ it:- ••• • ■ ■■•^!??■ Vi :;•>■■ ■/ ■• *OOftrk. . • Kf k • i ^O «'•» tif 0 » ?QS—:::— TOTAL* 5.4* ' Aria C » ZOOgCI li. total * 7.4* ' jl :r..'r.‘.i.“.:.*.'''.? *.:...... ,- LWri- ' ■ ^ ' ' MIIIMUOHKA v’^;- ' ill p'jf^:. . LiKt*!' •I.;-': • cm' OF ORONO P.O. BOX 66 CRYSTAL BAY, MN 55323 473-7357 LICENSE YEAR 16 96 ANNUAL JOINT I'SE DOCK LICENSE \PPLICAT1QN Purmant to Orono Municipal Code Section 5 42 Date Form Sent by Cit\' StalT Januan,' 26. 1996 FIB X 1996 ■* * Date Application Returned to City — ^ c^lV3 Fee Receiv ed S ^_______ By Employee Section 5 4^ Subdivision 2 ] RFOLIRED - It is unlawlul for any (group or association of persons^'or families, more than tvvo m number whether incorporated or not) to engage or pjnicipale m jomt use (of anv lakeshore pu ) without first having obtained a license therefor from the City PI EASE COMPLETE ALL ITEMS AND SUBMIT SIGNTD APPLICATION, REQLTRED ATTACHMENTS, AND LICENSE APPLICATION FEE TO THE CITf CLERK BY FEBRUARY 20 OF THE LICENSE YEAR association information cn Association title or name (if any) /O^ Lake ________ Bay Person responsible for this application Name < i C-i-t-y Phone *^7V-<3V y_[-------------- ----------_ Mailmg Address /V7 f Lucy ^> Relationship to association f _______________________________—-------- Association is (check applicable items) unincorporated homeowner's group incorporated Homeowner's Association _____ unincorporated club or recreation group L/^incorporated club or recreation group Page 1 of 5 Principal purpose of joint use dock is (check applicable items); _____ provide boat mooring and lake access for residential property. _____ provide swimming access, beach, or offshore dock. provide a club or association gathering place for activities. Dock is located on (check applicable item); _____ one member’s private property. easement or outlet owned in common. _____ property leased by the group/association. property owned by the group/association. List Dock location and ownership information; y j ^ Legal property description ----------------- PID# ■2-Z-/n-Z^ ^-2^ aOZC Listed property owner(s) 8. Names of abutting lakeshore property owners; nsiorthAVest) _ (Name + Address) (<sniith/East) (Name Address) Names of other affected property owners; (Name + Address) (attach sheet if necessary) Insurance Coverage - The jointly used dock is insured by one of the following: property owner ’s homeowner's policy. ^-''^eparate group/association owned policy. List the following information; Name of insured ----- ---------------------------------------------^ Name of insurance earner ------------------------------- Name of insurance agency Otv-S L.---------——----------- Policy No. 6/Z7C Effective date of coverage ^2,9/9^ Amount of coverage; Pubhe liability, per person, per occurrence $ ---- Public liability, per occurrence S — Page 2 of 5 Security and policing of the jointly used dock and property is provided by (check applicable items): _____ fencing _____ security lighting _____ property owner's presence contract security service other (specify) DOCK INFORMATION 11. List Dock Use Area Specifications: Width of shoreline;__________ft- Length of main dock from shore: Dock setbacks from side property lines at shore; __________ ft- and 12. Dock Construction (check applicable items): 13. Ofc/A^rv ________ft. ft. ^'^easonal dock (relocated or replaced each year) __ permanent piling with seasonal deck __permanent piling and decking metal decking^ wooden decking __ List Dock Accessories: Number of fire extinguishers available at the dock Number of life preservers available at the dock_ 14. List number of slips in each category ("slips" includes boat lifts): Transient (day use only) slips Transient (day use) off-shore buoys ---------- Permanent moorage slips___________ Permanent moorage off-shore buoys --------- Dry storage (rack) slips ____________ Maximum number of boats at the dock 15. List number of off-street parking spaces available for users of the joint use dock. Parking, ^ spaces.if provided must not be separated from the dock by any public road. FRO.STON AND SEPrMENTATION CONTROL 16 Shoreline is protected by (check applicable items): ____ stone rip rap _wood seawall metal seawall concrete seawall _^^^ass and vegetation only other (specify) 17. Depth of water at shoreline: ^ ft; at 50 ft. out: P* ; at 100 ft. out;25^ Page 3 of 5 REQUIRED ATTACHMENTS The following must accompany this application; A. nnCK PLAN - ALL APPLICATIONS ...................... A dock plan, drawn to scale, showing the shoreline width of this property, the side property lines and the location, layout and dimensions of all docks, slips and buoys. If oEF-street parking, dry storage or other on-land functions are intended, these also should be shown on the plan. B. tTMTNrnRPOR ATF.D GROUP<^ OR ASSOCIATIONS 1 A list of the names and mailing addresses of all members and/or slip users. 2 A certified copy of the by-laws or agreement for joint use. Note- This copy is not required if the applicant initials and certifies the following statement; "This is a renewal application and our joint use dock is to be operated under the same by-laws or agreement originally made in_______(state year) and on file with the City." _______________ Applicant's initials TNCORPQRATED CLUBS OR ASSOCIATIONS 1. 2 3. Lr'VJK/V 1 wre x A list of the names, mailing addresses and titles of all corporation officers, A statement as to the total number of members in the club or association, members A certified copy of the articles of incorporation and by-laws of the corporation.^ Note; These copies are not required if the applicant initials and certifies the following statement; This is a renewal application and our joint use dock is to be operated under the same articles of mcorporation and/or by-laws as onginally made or last amended m (slate year) and on file with the City." Applicant's initials A>JNT JAL LTCFNSE FEE - .ALL APPLICATIONS Joint Use Dock License Application Fee according to the current City Fee Schedule INITIAL APPLICATION FEE S ----- RENEWAL JOINT USE FEE, per year S ---- PM IS SLIP FEE for each permanent moorage slip, lift, dry stack, or buoy _____slips @ 2.00 each S ---- TOTAL DUE THIS APPLICATION S----- 20 00 Page 4 of 5 LATE FEE - Renewals Application for renewal of licenses shall be made no later than March 1 of the license year. The (^ity nnt accept renewal license applications received after February 20 unlessjhe applicatio n is accompanied bv a late fee of S25.00, REVIEW PROCEDURE When a complete application is received, the application wUl be reviewed by the City Council and, in the case of new or unusual applications, also by the Planning Commission and Marina Committee. The Council will pass upon the application after complete review. THE SUBJECT DOCK MAY BE INSTALLED AND/OR OPENED FOR USE ONLY UPON APPROVAL OF THE LICENSE BY THE CITY COUNCIL. Pursuant to Section 5.42 of the Orono Municipal Code, the applicant hereby requests the Orono City Council to review this Joint Use Dock License Application, and agrees and authorizes the City of Orono and the City's employees and agents to enter upon the property at any reasonable time to perform safety and code compliance inspections. Signed Date City of Orono P.O. Box 66 C2/01/96 17:18:14 LICENSE - OnCR BUS. 1 %20.00 SUBTOTAL TAX TOTAL SALE RECEIVED CHANGE CLERK! 03 TRANS! 826 20.00 20.00 0.00 20.00 20.00 0.00 Page 5 of 5 I O O'-CITY of OllONO RESOLUTION OP THE CITY COUNCIL instJBCtlon of -oor^ved day use recreationexisting system meets needs of approvea area. 5. Applicant =hal l provide ub jeSt lo ??;rs;tc?af sPnTa/d^-d/{elopea f^ ^Lll" fo"/si°/t°of"V supply "of sand, water, bucket and blankets 6. Applicant i^®^Vlnted^to*membership to City for P^??erpriorirfo"rmal'a:iion by board of Big Island Inc. 7. Authorities granted by gre^pe^islive only and prooertv not v/ith_tlie_^eP2J:C£{lt' ,-L^ate of Council this resolution will expire on that date (August 26, 1992J. ■ fl. Violation of or condrarSH il^L-Sjli^^^-^^f” t A1 V^ermina te__any 6f the 'ZoKTng ^<Je< li^^opunishablX^ a authority granted Jij;rejJ, and snail misdemeanor. 9. The undersigned representative of Big^ Island^ Inc. read, understood and jnc., its successors resolution and on behalf of Big Islnnd ^^"-'^Jalng ?e.solVJon Yn' the'Yhain of title of the property. Adopted by the Orono City Council on this 26th day of August r ATTA'^Y^’r-^t-'\A'-- \\ ra A. Edtersojif Mayoi- Edv/ard J, C^rllahan, Jr., Acting Mayor ^ A. Agent ot big Island i.nc7 a Page 4 of 5 9 i £5££0t'09SS 0N/82:5I lS/28'51 E6 ,i3 '31 iNOl'il Hoaj - CITY«f ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. CONCLUSIONS r ORDER AlTD CONl:)ITIONS Based upon one or mors of the above findings, the Orono City Council hereby grants a conditional une permit per Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.31, Subdivision 3 (C) to permit a day use recreation area with occasional overnight camping at Record Lots 12 and 19, Big Island, for Big Island Inc., subject to the following conditions: 1. Big Island Inc. shall be shared joint use dock. <yfi limited to 15 slips at.t he Any attempt' to indreasd tn^"hurnnffl' 'Sri^B^sHFlT^^Te^JiliTe an amendment o£ this conditional use permit and the filing of a new condirional use permit with the appropriate notice to adjacent property ownero- ?, Applicant shall file a special let combination of Record Lots 12 and 19 with the City. 3- If at any time a special activity results in the attendance of more than lOO users at the facility, a responsible agent of the association ishall apply for a large assembly permit at the City of Orono. Page 3 of 5 ' *^7 \ -4- 9 2LU. >ri /'. rt.' \ '"■'‘V" R£Cb.lVtU JUN 3199Z LM.C.D. - //3S.5& - f,3>^V y 53' 2C 3^0 ^ ^ p. RESOLUTION DIRECTING STAFF TO ISSUE A JOINT USE DOCK LICENSE TO THE OWNERS OF PROPERTY LOCATED AT 460 TONKAWA ROAD, 500 TONKAWA ROAD AND 550 TONKAWA ROAD SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS NOTED HEREIN FOR THE PERIOD OF JANUARY 1,1996 TO DECEMBER 31,1996 WHEREAS, the City of Orono, hereinafter "City" is a municipal corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of Minnesota and has the authority and responsibility under Minnesota Statutes, State Statute 412, et. seq. and State Statute 462. et. seq., to protect the health, safety, and general welfare of the citizens of the City and other members of the public within the City; and WHEREAS, the City shares concurrent jurisdiction over the primary harbor limit of the City of Orono with the Lake Minnetonka Conservation District and the Department of Natural Resources of the State of Minnesota; and WHEREAS, the regulation of the navigable waters involves an exercise of police power of the State, LMCD, and the City of Orono, all of which have adopted rules to ensure to all equal enjoyment of the public rights and equal protection from activity on or near the public waters and on the land within the City whi ii, if unregulated, may be detrimental to the public health, safety and general welfare; and WHEREAS, the regulations of the DNR, LMCD, and the City of Orono regulate the property rights of the riparian owners both as to residential owners and the commercial marina owners to the extent prohibiting any interference with the public waters adjoining their property. The LMCD, DNR and City of Orono must fulfill their trusteeship over the public waters by protecting against interference by anyone, including those who assert the commonlaw rights of riparian wners. whether or not they be commercial marinas or residential owners; WHEREAS, as to Lake Minnetonka, a mutual right of enjoyment exists between and is shared by riparian owners and the public generally, no one riparian owner has exclusive privileges over Lake Minnetonka. The only additional private right that any riparian owner may have over the public generally is to construct one dock to the navigable depth of the public waters. There can be no dispute but that the public generally and each riparian owner to Lake Minnetonka has the r’'’ht to use the entire surface area of Lake Minnetonka for all suitable purposes in common with all *.>iher riparian owners. This right is a right not only to members of the public but the right to each riparian owner. Page 1 of2 This mutual right of enjoyment which is shared by riparian osvners and the public generally includes the recreational benefits of the lake such as boating and fishing therein; the riparian owner has no exclusive privileges to these rights; and WHEREAS, Lake Minnetonka is capable of substantial beneficial public use only as long as all riparian users of the lake are regulated in such a way as to ensure there is no abuse of the limited riparian rights; and WHEREAS, the City has adopted reasonable regulations regarding the construction and use of lakeshore and d^k facilities when such facilities are used and maintained by toce or more families, which regulations include the annual licensing of Joint Use Docks pursuant to Section 5.42 of the Orono Municipal Code; and WHEREAS, the purpose of this Resolution is to set forth the above noted general conditions and concerns and the following special conditions as they relate to an application for an annual Joint Use Dock License described on Exhibit A attached, NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Orono hereby direct^ the Staff to issue a Joint Use Dock License according to the facts and conditions noted on Exhibit A att.‘ Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono at their meeting on the 11th day of March, 1996. Gabriel Jabbour, Acting Mayor AITEST: Dorothy M. Hallin, City Clerk STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF instrument was acknowledged before me on this 11th day of March, 1996 bv Gabriel Jabbour & Dorothy M. Hallin, Acting Mayor & City Clerk of the City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was execute ,, on behalf of the Uty. Notary Public Page 2 of2 CITY OF ORONO EXHIBIT A RESOLUTION NO.__ CONDTTIONS OF ISSIJANCE FOR ANNUAL JOINT USE DOCK LICENSE I. LICENSEE: Property owners of 460, 500 and 550 Tonkawa Road Dock Address: 500 Tonkawa Road Agent: % Donna Snyder, Carlson Companies Address: Carlson Parkway, P.O. 159, Minneapolis, MN 55459-8215 Licensee is: ___ unincorporated homeowner’s group ___ incorporated homeowner's association ____ unincorporated club or recreation group incorporate ' . lub or recreation group X other not aPDiicable License Period - January 1, 1996 to December 31, 1996 II. BOAT DENSITY The number of in-place boat slips, lifts and buoys shall not exceed the number shown on the attached plan. Exhibit B, and in accordance with Resolution 938, in no case shall the number of authorized boat'slips, lifts, or buoys exceed the number permitted in the prior year's license. Authorized Boat Density per attached plan: Bay Transient (Day use only) Slips Permanent Moorage Slips Boat Lifts Sub-Total: Slips at Dock Offshore Buoys Maximum Boats in Water Maximum Boats per prior license MAXIMUM BOAT DENSITY Stubbs Bay Exceeding this maximum boat density, or exceeding the number of permitted slips, lifts or a violation of this license subject to revocation and/or prosecution for violation of Section 5.4^ Subdivision 2 of the Orono Municipal Code. Exhibit A Resolution No._ Pa^2 III. DOCK LAYOUT The dock structure or layout authorized by this license shall be as shown on attached Exhibit B. Any changes in this layout shall be subject to prior review and approval of the City Council. IV SPECIAL CONDITIONS required for compliance with the ordinance of the City and/or the LMCD. The issuance of this license is subject to full compliance with these conditions. Failure to comply with these conditions is cause for license revocation and/or prosecution by the City. 1.The nine approved slips are for the exclusive private use of the property owners at 460 Tonkawa Road (Mr. and Mrs. Edwin C. Gage), 500 Tonkawa Road (Dr. Glen and Marilyn Nelson) and 550 Tonkawa Road (Mr. and Mrs. Curtis L. Carlson). V.Nothing in this license shall confer upon any person for the benefit of any property any vested right to use Lake Minnetonka or the premises in a manner permitted by this resolution, but the use of Lake Minnetonka and the premises shall remain subject to such regulations and ordinances as the City and other competent regulatory authorities shall deem necessary from time to time in the public interest. . * Dr. CUn H«lson 500 Tonk*'#* M Wayzat* KK 55391 /?j*iO w»-v.-rio**^ A^o, TALL CAASS H^cau.kU OCT IC9Z [#■ CITY OF ORONO P.O. BOX M CRYSTAL BAY, MN S5323 473-7357 FEB Z 1936 UCENSE YEAR 19 96 ATVNITAL JQfNT USE p OCTK LICENSE APPUCATIQN Pursuant to Orono Municipal Code Section 5.42 Date Form Sent by City Staff------------Tanuarv 26. 1996 Date Application Returned to City Fee Received S 38.00 By Employee paiticipate in ... joint use (of any lakeshore property) without first having obtained a Ucens therefor from the City. PLEASE COMPLETE ALL ITEMS AND SUBNDT SIGNED APPLICATION^QJ^D ATTACHMENTS, AND LICENSE APPLICATION FEE TO THE CfTY CLERK BY FEBRUARY 20 OF THE LICENSE AR. ASSnriATlON INFORMATION 1, ^. ... . . . . . . .n,.rif.nvt Ca. son. Nelson and Gage Families- - - - - -- 2 Lake Minnetonka _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ —Stub.hg- - - - - - -— - - - - - - --- - - - 540-8023 Person responsible for this application. Name Donna Snyder_______ - Pbone------- vr^ilmp Address Carlson Companleg, Carlson Pnrkwnv. FO Rnx 59159. Mpls. 55459 Relationship to association Director. Family Office---------------------------—---------- Association is (check applicable items); ____ unincorporated homeowner's group. incorporated Homeowner’s Association. _____ unincorporated club or recreation group. ____ incorporated club or recreation group. X not applicable Page 1 of 5 \ c ,-I> t^ 5. Principal purpose of joint use dock is (check applicable items); X provide boat mooring arwi lake acc^ for residential property, provide swimming access, beach, or offshore dock. _____ provide a club or association gathering place for activities 6. Dock is located on (check applicable itemV X one member's private property. _____ easement or outlot owned in common. property leased by the group/association, property owned by the group/association. List Dock location and ownership information: 500 Tonkawa RoadStreet address Legal property description MWl-SWt, section 5. Township 117. Range 23, PID#_____________________________________________________________ Listed property owner(s) Dr. Glen D. Nelson & Marilyn C. Nelson, 8. Names of abutting lakeshore property owners: fNorth/W«^^T^ :ir. & Mrs. Edwin C. Gage, 460 Tonkawa Road, Long Lake, MN 55356 (Name + Address) Mr & Mrs. Curtis L. Carlson, 550 Tonkawa Road, Long Lake, MN 55356 r South/East)________________________________________________ (Name + Address) Names of other affected property owners: None______________________________________________________________—--------- (Name + Address) (attach sheet if necessary) 9. Insurance Coverage - The jointly used dock is insured by one of the following; _____ property owner's homeowner's policy. _____ separate group/association owned policy. List the following information: Name of insured Dr. Glen D. & Marllvn C. Nelson-------- Name of insurance carrier The America n Insurance Company^ Name of insurance agency Harris-Hnmt»vur r.n., Kdina. MN 5i42 4- PolicyNo. NZA 131 9205 Effective date nf coverage6/3/94_ Amount of coverage: Public liability, per person, per occurrence $. Public liability, per occurrence 5. Page 2 of 5 I 10. Seoaity and poUcing of the jointly used dock and property is provided by (check appUcable items): fencing security lighting property owner's presence contract security service other (specify) ♦Note: Dr. Nelson's shoreline is 396'; the combined shoreline, adding Carlson's & Gage's is 1,242'. DOTK INFORMATION 11.List Dock Use Area Specifications: Width of shoreUne: 296* ft. Length of main dock from shore; Dock setbacks from side property lines at shore: -------------- ft and 95'ft- ft. Dock Construction (check applicable items): X seasonal dock (relocated or replaced each year) ____ permanent piling with seasonal deck ____ permanent piling and decking X__ wooden decking____metal decking List Dock Accessories: Number of fire extinguishers available at the dockThe boats are eauiDped with e.at.tlnguishers. Number of life preservers available at the dockThe boats & storage shed CQntaln .adequate preservers List number of slips in each category (“slips'* includes boat lifts). Transient (day use only) slips 9 Transient (day use) off-shore buoys _Q------ Permanent moorage slips ° Permanent moorage off-shore buoys 0 ------- Dry storage (rack) slips ° Maximum number of boats at the dock 2.----- List number of off-street parking spaces available for users of the joint use dock. Parking, if provided must not be separated from the dock by any public road. -------------spaces. f noSTON AND sedimentation CONTROL 16. Shoreline is protected by (check applicable items): stone rip rap ___ wood seawall___metal seawall X grass and vegetation only ____ other (specify ) ____ 17. concrete seawall Depth of water at shoreline: ft; at 50 ft. out: 6* ; at 100 ft. out. iftL Page 3 of 5 REQUIRED ATTACHMENTS The following must accompany this application: A DOCK PLA^ - ALL ^fPUCATlONS A dock din, drawn to scale, showing the shoreline width of this property, the side property lines and the location, layout and dimensions of aU docks, sUps and buoys. If off-street parkmtt. dry storage or other on-land functions are intended, these also should be shown on the plan. B UNINCORPORATED GROUPS OR ASSOCIATIONS 1. A list ofthe names and mailing addresses ofall members and/or slip users. 2 A certified copy of the by-laws or agreement for joint use. Note rnpv .s not required if the applicant initials and certifies the following stetement: "This is a renewal application and our joint use dock is to be operated under the same by-laws or agreement cnginaily made in_______(state year) and on file with the City." Applicant's initials INCORPORATED CLUBS OR ASSOCIATIONS 1 A list of the names, mailing addresses and titles of all corporation officers 2. A state* cat as to the total number of members m the club or association, members 3.A certified copy ofthe articles of incorporation and by-laws of the corporation. Note: These copies are not required if the applicant initials and certifies the following statement. This is a renewal applicauon and our jomt use dock is to be operated under the same articles of mcorporaUon and/or by-laws as ongmally made or last amended m________(state year) and on file with the City- Applicant's initials ANNUAL LICENSE FEE - ALL APPLICATIONS Joint Use Dock License Application Fee according to the current City Fee Schedule INITIAL APPLICATION FEE S ------ RENEWAL JOINT USE FEE, per year S ----- PT I JS SLIP FEE for each permanent moorage slip, lift, dry stack, or buoy 9 slips @ 2.00 each S ----- TOTAL DUE THIS APPUCATION $------ 20 00 18.00 38.00 Page 4 of 5 y JiTK FEE - Renewals ritv !thall not is accompanied bv a late fe? S25 00 RFVTFW PROCEDURE When a complete application is received, the appUcation wiU be revietved by the City Council and. in the case of new or unusual applications, also by the Planning Commission and Manna Committee. The Council will pass upon the application after complete review THE SUBJECT DOCK MAY BE INSTALLED AND/OR OPENED FOR USE ONLY UPON APPROVAL OF THE LICENSE BY THE CITY COUNCIL Pursuant to Section 5 42 of the Orono Municipal Code, the applicant hereby requests the Orono City Council to review this Joint Use Dock License Application, and agrees and authonzes the City of Orono and the City ’s employees and agents to enter upon the property at any reasonable time to perform safety and code compliance inspections. Signed Hate 1/29/96 Dr. Glen D. Nelson or Marilyn C. Nelson City of Orono P.O. Box tt Crystal Bay, Ml SS323 (612) 473-7X7 02/09/% 15:2St00 LICBCE - OMR BU5. 1 f 38.00 38.00 CMLSQN,)CLSQN,GR6E JT DOCK _ 1 8 0.00 0.00 SUBTOTM. TAX TOTAL SALE RECEI\e 38.00 0.00 38.00 38.00 CHANGE 0.00 CL£RKt03 TRANSI 843 Page 5 of 5 REQl'EST FOR COUNCH. ACTION DATE: MarM^ ^ 1996 ITEM NO: CITVOROROHO Department Approval: Name Ron Moorse Title City Administrator Administrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: Administrator’s Report Item Description: Orono Baseball Association Request for Hxpiu ded Use of Bederwood Baseball Field Currently the Orono Baseball Association (OBA) is authorized to use the bas^^ball field at Bederwood Park two nights per week (see the attached agreement) The OBA and the girls softball league have met with the Orono Park Commission to request one more evening of use of the Bederwood ball field (see the attached minutes of the February Park Commission meeting). The Park Commission is recommending the Council approve a total of three week- nights use of the baseball field at Bederwood Park for the OBA. The benefit of providing an additional evening to the OBA is that it would ensure that this facility is fully used at least three nights per week while still being available for public use two weekday nights and on weekends. The disadvantage is that the field would be available for general use one less evening per week. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Motion to approve/deny the request by the Orono Baseball Association for expansion of its use of the Bederwood baseball field from two nights per week to three nights per week. GROUND SUBLEASE TEDS GROUND SUBLEASE made as of this 15th day of ApriL by and between the City of Drono, a Minnesota municipal corporation fSublessor") and OroQO Baseball/Softball Association, a Minnesota nonprofit corporation ("Subtenant"). WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, Sublessor is the Tenant under that certain Ground Lease dated as of April 1994 between Independent School District No. 278, a Minne^ta independent school district and political subdivision under the laws of Minnesota ( Lessor ) as Lessor and Sublessor, a copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit A (the Ground Lease ), and WHEREAS, pursuant to the Ground Lease Lessor has leased to Sublessor that certain real property located in the City of Orono. Hennepin County, Minnesota as described in the Ground Lease (the "Leased Premises"); and WHEREAS, Sublessor desires to sublet to Subtenant, and Su' nant desires to accept from Sublessor the Leased R -mises in accordance with the provisior hereof. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the premises the parties hereto agree as follows: 1. Sublease of T^Ased Premises. Sublessor hereby leases lo Subtenant and Subtenant hereby accepts from Sublessor the Leased Premises in accordance with the provisions hereof. 2. Lease Term. The term of this Lease shall commence on the date hereof and, unless earlier terminated as provided herein, shall terminate on March 15, 2014. 3. Rental. In consideration of the Leased Premises, Subtenant shall pay to Sublessor the r in Section 4 of the Ground Lease. 4. i *5 i _ I ins sjid Rights Under Ground Lease. This Sublease is subject to the provisions S' the Ground Lease which, except to the extent modified by this Sublease, are hereby incorporated herein to the effect that Sublessor hereunder shall have all rights and remedies of the Lessor under the Ground Lease, and Subtenant hereunder shall have all rights, remedies and obligations of the Tenant under the Ground Lease, provided, however, that the obligations of Sublessor hereunder shall be subject to the performance of the obligations of Lessor under the Sublease. Subtenant hereunder hereby assumes all obligations of the Tenant under the Ground Lease and agrees to indemnify and hold Sublessor hereunder and the Lessor under the Grci id Lease harmless from and against any loss or liability that may arise as a result of any failure by Subtenant to perform such obligations. Subtenant agrees that the provisions for the benefit of the Lessor under the Ground Lease shall also apply in tiiis Ground Sublease for the benefit of the Lessor of the Ground Lease. This Ground Sublease if 444;22038M3 4/22/?4 not sooner terminated, shall terminate with the expiration or earlier »-rraination of the Ground Lease for any reason. 5. Covenants of Subtenant In addition to its obligation to comply with the requirements of the Ground Lease. Subtenant specifically covenants and agrees as follows: (a) No artifici^’ lighting shall be installed or '^-.crated at the Leased Premises except a secai \' light on the concessiui jtanr- (b) No loud speakers shall be used at the Leased Premises; (c) No advertising shall be displayed at the Leased Premises; (d) The schedule of me Subtenant’s use of the bailfields operated at the Leased Premises shall be posted at such bailfields; and (e) The use of the ballfield at Bederwood Parr limited to two (2) nights per week. the Subtenant shall be 6. Notices. Any notice or document required or permitted to be given or delivered hereunder shall be in writing and shall be deemed to be given or delivered when deposited in the United States mail, postage prepaid, certified or registered mail, return receipt requested, addressed to the resoective parties hereto at their respective addresses herein below set forth, or such other addresses as they may have heretofore specified by written notice in accordance herewidi: If f'* ‘'"'■tenant: If to Sublessor: City of Orono P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay. Minnesota 55323 Orono Baseball/Softbali. ^..^ociadon P.O. Box 503 Long Lake, Minnesota 55356 7. Default; Rc. iedies , In addition to the Events of Default set forth in the Ground 1 c-ise, which provisions are incoiporated be!^in, it shall constitute an Event of Default hereunder if Sub^*nant shall fail to (i; operate die Leased Premises and conduct die little league b.iseball pr' . lam m accordance with the standards of comparable little league baseball faciliiics and { 'Ograms in the Mmneapolis/SL Paul Metropolitan Area, as d ‘-ermined by Sublessor, (ii) maintain the Leased Premises in a safe, cleoii and af'Tictive condition, (iii) cease to exist or become inactive, or (iv) comply with the provisions t * Jiection 5 above, and, in any suc.n case, shall not cure such failure within the time period allawjd under Section 22.B. of the Ground Lease. Upon any such Event of Default. Sublessor shall have the remedies set forth in Section 22 of the Ground L ?se. 8. Insurance. It is e-'^nressly agreed that Subtenant shall be responsible for obtaining the insurance required unuer Secaon 13 of the Ground Lease, pro’.: 'ed that both 444/22038143 5/19/94 -2- Sublessor and Lessor shaU be named as additional jnsureds under Se^on I3.B., and provided further that both Sublessor and Lessor receive the notice required under Section 13.D. 9. Sublessor and Subtenant hereby agree to the terms set forth in the Consent to the Ground Sublease attached hereto. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have duly executed this Agreer-jnt effective as of the and year first above written. SUBLESSOR: CITY OF ORONO /a SUBTENANT: ORONO BASEBALL/SOFTBALL ASSOCIATION 444/22038143 4/22^4 -3- c.. CONSENT TO GROUND SUBLEASE The undersigned executes this Consent solely for the purpose providing the written consent required under Article 21 of the Ground Lease. All rights, terms and condidoos of die Ground Lease, including without limitation. Article 21, remain unchanged, are hereby aSIrmed, and shall be prior and paramount to this Ground Sublease. INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 278 By__' Tfc And By 444/22U38I43 ^/22/94 -4- ORONO PARK COMMISSION MEETING FOR FEBRUARY 5.1996draft attendance n» Pirlc Comi^on mrt Richard Flint, Lili McMilto R •mved during asenda item #3. Representing Stafif called the meeti.ig to order at > ;25 p.m. («) APPRO> AL OF MINUTES OF JANUARY 2. 1996 MEETING about the polic.’ regarding who can play. ofJanuary 2, 1996, as amended. Vote. Ayes d , . not present at that meeimg. (#2) SAGA HILLS ' »I)ATE - PATTI AFFELDT thcCounrysplan.se a^ ^^'pSor wS=iepin is also in comaa with the County. ^^sL tes° d thelponance of a ciry offical working whh the County on tins tssue. ^eldt satd the ^ tHe to save as much of the area as possible tor open space. ^e.dt =atd it was her understanding that the County is considering f forfeit parcel, seiitng a portion to the Valek’s. selling t.he portion to the nonh market, and m.amtaming the middle seaion for the City'. (#2 - Saga Hill - ContmuedJ AffMdt said the group has received a couple Vrason inquired ibout the 6^/*^ , „ „ised but said the group is working gr«.,. She was not aware of the Affeldt told M^ennott that rvith larger foundanons to ™se ‘he ^ March. When asked by WUson what she is hopeful that the money wou March, she noted the $50,000 grant that has r:rrS, has shown .nterest in the e.ort, u « nf the Park Commission, All of the Commissioners present O,. MQWST OF USAGE OF BEFFF'*OOD F.AiUA FOR OmLS SOFTBALL k™ H-io-*,. 0'~ Softball Association were present. Flint said the ‘’te ofSwood bv^he^ Association to be regarding the addmoi^ usa^ Baseball Flint noted receipt of three letters jllJiSSS Ma ..0 nights but not for four raghts of organized use W„™ ASkF. S.. » p,.p.FV promises or commitments V , j jnd it was unclear whether any promises said the property was ^ the^ark Commission meeting at the time of sale were made. Use said the owners came to the i„ and asked that no organized spons take place m the park, howeser, writing. Flint read the letters from KroU and Whirman. both stating their preference that no additional nights for baseball be allowed. "S “ “S ”“r r.-’piesiS — supply of playing space does not ceme from one community alone. (#3 - Bederwood Puk - Continued) ..w,th« mebt usage at Bederwood to be traded with HaDqwst said the requea is to add ^ ^ ^ program has paid the basebaU association for a night jj ,he City for the Lee Carison ‘■iiTiJsss'S, s r-ciiy -<« Wason asked if Rainbow. Independmee^ ^f^vsT^^'snd ufdoing^their pan in “siir HaaquistnotedlhaldieT-lO =** ^^ddns T1^ Nonh he largesi oy i«u, k»ui. wtw*w —--------- Use said she had spoken with that there "-HSotd" rr.sr.r.-irs^. ^ Hallquist provided choats and a matrix regarding softbaU and baseball usage which are attached to the minutes. I (#3 • Bcdcrwood Park < Coatmued) McMm«ii. McMillan ,,fl;^.i. ft was reported that Momingside field was ^edTl^cSr^rMcMUlan counted t^t Orono co^ist of children from Medina too. The fields in Medina were said to be small, HaUquis. reported that Long Lake charges S5 a night to play at Holbrook Park. nse asked that the — —^ of the 0^?c^l BoL^d'^°ii^'reBorted that he is proposing a sports board commission. Use °o?ed thel^k of a re^eation depanment within the City, and the unponance of all groups to work together. Hawkinson commented on the forementioned meeting of March of 1990 regarding the use of Bederwood Parle He beUeved that it was said that Bederwood was the neighborhood and added that he did not think it was a contradirton to ask usage for playing baU. McMillan said the comprehensive plan noted specific c^ld take place at Beder.vood but that this did not necessarily mean organized athletics. Flint said the 1980 plan calls for a neighborhood park to be more active than the immediate area. This would include Bederwood. which is classded as a neighborhood park. McMillan said the use was for field games, but not listed under imeMive-active or specifying athletics. Flint recaUed that the recent survey for a preference for open space ..nd nature trails Organmed acnvmes was no a high priority in the survey. He did however, note the receipt by the Orono BasebaU Association of the Friends of the Park award in 1995 Hawkinson commented th,it he came to the meeting to show cooperation between oreanizaiions. He added that, in addition to the neighbors or Bederwood who '"°‘® letters received by the Park Commission, there were neighbors who T", basebaU being played at the park. Hawkinson noted the term, "park full of people tn one letter, and coLnemted that this is what a p-rk is for. He added that it was the grandson of the previous owner, Larson, who spoke ai the Council meeting of j/26/90. McNljilan asked what nights the field is used for baseball and ':vas told Tuesdays and Thursdays. Hawkinson commented that if the park was left open, the baseoall fields wouldn ’t be used. He noted the difficulty in scheduling 60 teams and the future needs of a possible adult league. McMillan asked if there was such a field as a multi-use field. Hallquist said four fields at the'high school were muiti-use. The softball fields are used up through the 8th grade. Baseball was said to have different pitching distances. (#3 - Bederwood P«k - ConWu«<i) that are out HiUquist said it W»1 Ho^mflsMked what he in use from raid May for games and there. would not do so. Howells moved. VHdie seconded, lo cerommend snolher S"fSf Si. “SStaw Eme .eld ™ cmsend, beln* used am. .« told two nights a week. Dse sa.d she has spoken with Ron .Moorse '^e noTtoteres^e^m a f«r^stral» ^portertto the Park Comimssion not to undermine the decision of the CouncU for wo nights ot play at Bederwood. "^?d mdTp“r^l'5.1^« would oXrork for in- '^use games ^d baseball fields would be required for tournament use. (#3 - Bcdcrwood Pirk - Continued) McMDUn i»qu>r«l .bout concession sunds. HaAquia «d the «>te.n usodation has a for an association their children are not involved with White sunnested withdrawing his second to the motion if there was no support for 4 ^fTsage. Flint commented that the motion indicates what the Park Commission is S to do for the association. Hallquis. asked and was told that if the motion was Ised it would be brought before the Counal. FUnt said that the bi^eb^ association to a park at Lee Carlson that is dedicated to baseball use already. He added that he sees the Imu Bederwood as being more than just for baseball only noting that it was omy to be used as a temporary measure. Flint said the usage would create more “«“sive play and saw the motion as a good solution and sees the possibUity ot a multi-use field. Hallquist reiterated if the usage was designated for softball, the infiel Is -““If ^ removed. Wilson asked if the field was altered to make it usable, who would pay for the alterations. Flint said the motion was for the usage only, not for payment ot alterations. McMiUan further inquired if the motion passed, would alteration be allowed. Vote; Ayes 1, White, Nays 6. Motion denied. McMiiJan said she was concerned with cfianging a field. Wilson questioned whether the neighborhood could tolerate nights o flaying bail. McDermott said he beUeved the request for usage should come from the group wanting the use of the field. Use inquired about shared use at Holbrook. She suggested other communities be solicited for assistance Ilse said if other communities would provide fields, consideration could be given for 1 more rhght usage. Suggestions were made for I night at Bederwood for girls softball and 1 night at Hackberry. Ilse also suggested the use of another field at the school, nse said she would not support the usage of 4 nights at Bederwood as it undermines the Council ’s decision of 2 nights only. Wilson said she would recommend 3 nights and usage by the Little League. Wilson moved, McDermott seconded, to approve 3 nights of baseball at Bederwood The third nieht use would be traded with the OBA for a night a- Holbrook, since basebaU cannot be played at Holbrook. Flint said he was sympathetic with the neighbors of the park. ”^^S'•^^ptS^’X ...‘."it^si.. ..»•“'“p ■>“ p'“” ~ "??“ »1 ”3S.~TS sr^pSr—vri= softball. use asked that the motic be rev,e.ed on a yearly basis. McDenrron arKi McMUlan agreed. m morior. was amended .o stipulate a weekly usage of three times for basebaU to free up another field for softball. Vote: Ayes 7, Nays 0. Use asked that the game schedules be posted at the fields. McDermott sard the park shouM be advemsed for usage next year to decide on who will be playing. Him noted that the park improvements were paid by the basebaU association. McMiUan said it was her opinion that the concession Bedenvood and the field be used as more of a practice ^Id. S association was the only group runrung the ^'uson siu^ if^^he if Holbrook could be shared, so could Bedenvood. (^) HOCKEY BOOSTERS PROGRESS REPORT There was no progress report at this time. MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO PARK COMMISSION RffiETING HELD ON FEBF JARY 5, 1996 <4 (»5) PROGRESS REPORT ON >VIN TER USE OF ORONO GOLF COURSE AND SKATING RINKS (GERHARDSON) The Orono Golf Course is open for sledding on Saturdays from 12-4 p.ia, whirh has been advertised on the local newspaper. Gerhardson said Moorse has report^ a large turnout for this program. It wa: noted that Gear West is not paittapattng tn a Wednesday everung program this year. McMillan said she would like the City to consider the possibility of making the clubhouse non-smokina for tWs particular use. It was noted that the C.ty feahtyts smoke-free but an area of the clubhouse has been set aside for smoking. Gerhardson said he would check into the request by McMillan. The ice rinks were said to have good ice this year. The use has not been nio-wored. however. White did note that Casco has had use by adults. Gerhardson said Staff h« received no comments from the Antoine Park area regarding the lack of an ice nnk this year. Howells noted that boards and lights have been put up adjacent to the lake near Antoine for skating. (#6) SUBDIVISION APPLICATION - NOKBERT JOHNSON, 1181 WULDfU RST TRAIL Interest was noted in a possible trail on the 1 181 Wildhurst property as the land abu- Garden Lane, which neighbors the Saga Hill property. Wilson asked if the Commission can request land contiguous to the land under tax torfeit consideration. :>ajd tne dec n taking land or money would depend on what land could be gone; I for the trail. McDermon was :oncerned that taking land would result in making a designated lot non- buildable and whc. her the subdivision was for 4 or 5 lots. Gerhardson noted that the application is in skei \ eview only at this time, and the determinarion of buildable lots would be discusst. Flint noted that the prouercy the Commission would like for a trail vvouid be from Lot j. The amount of land would be 0.5 acres. Flint said the Commission definitely should e.xpress inter est in preser%ing the land ne.xt to the Saga Hill property. Flint asked for a representati\e to anend the Planning Commission meeting of February 20 where this subdivision would be discussed. Wilson volunteered to attend that meeting. Wilson moved, Howells seconded, to recommend that the Park Commission further review the application for consideration of land for Park Dedication. Vote; Ayes 7, Nays C. OOUNOLMEETMa MAR 11 199< REQUEST FOR COtT^CIL ACTION DATE: March 6, IW ITEM NO: / ^ Department Approval: Name Ron Moorse Title Ciry Administrator Administrator Reviewed-Agenda Section: Administrator’s Report Item Description: Part-Time Police Officer Appointment ^7^ The Police Department currently has a part-time police officer position vacancy. An additional vacancy is projected in die coming months. The Acting Police Chief has requested that an internal promotional process be used to fill the existing vacancy to enable the field traininj, process to be completed prior the busy summer season. Both the City Council and City Attorney havv uggestcd that prior to initiating any new part-time or full-time police officer selection processes the city should retain the services of a consultant to provide the city with advice regarding selection processes, procedures, and testing instrument that meet all currr * legal requirements. One purpose of the consultant assistance was to ob^»in advice regarding the city ’s part-time police officer selection r -ocess, and whether the city should consider using an internal promotional process to fill a part-time officer position, particularly in view the current situation with MPRS. Staff has met with a .. ruitment/selection consultant to discuss issues related to the part-time officer selection process in addition to other general selection process issues. I'he consultant has advised that the decision regarding whether to use an internal hiring process should be based on v. hether. at the time of each opening, the city has internal candidates that have demonstrated a high potential for succeeding in the promotional position. If the city has good internal candidates the city should siron^-iy consider using an internal promotional process. A oraft nolice hiring policy which sets out recruitment procedures and discusses the issue of internal TTSUS external selection processes is attached for Council information. Recommendation The Acting Police Chiet and City Administrator hav-^ conducted struciu'-ed interviews with the city ’s cuirent Community Service Office.rs as part of the interna! selection process. Based on his performance in the interview process, a;#* his pe<. ^rmance as a Police Intern and Commumty Service Officer, it is recommended that Correy Puiniok be appointed to the position of Part- Time Police Officer erfectivc March 12, 1996. Correy has a 4 year degree in law enforcement from Man* alo State I'niversity. and has compltted all requirements to be eligible tor licensure as a full-time police otficer. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Motion to appoint Correy Farniok to the position of Part-Time Police Otficer .tlectivc March 12. 1996, at a siartinp pay rate of $11.54/hr. POLICE HIRESG POLICY Policy Statement The City of Orono is committed to equal opportunity in hiring which includes the recruitment of minority candidates into the Orono Police Department. The city is also committed to using selection processes that enable the city to select the best available candidates. This policy extends to all police positions. Procedure A. Recruitment 1. Place an advertisement in a newspaper of Metro wide circulation. 2. Place an advertisement in newspapers serving minority groups. 3. Include in all advertisements the notification that Orono is an equal opportunity employer. 4. Participate in minority candidate outreach et'orts. B. Selection A. External process versus internal promotional process. Fv r each position opening, the city will determine whether to recmit external candidates or to use an internal promotional process. This determination will be based on the number and quality of internal candidates. If there are a sufficient number of internal staff who have demonstrated levels of skills, abilities and performance that reflect high potential for success in a position that is open, the city may choose tO use an internal promotional process to fill the position. It is important that all hiring processes follow equal opportunity procedures, so that the candidate pool in an internal promotional process is the result of equal opportunity hiring processes. 1. The benefits of having the option of an internal promotional process are as follows: a. ) Provides opportunities for employees to grow and develop in the organization. b. ) Because the city has had an opportunity to obser\'e the perforf";.’.!‘icv if the internal candidates the city is better able to predict su..ce';s in the new position. fOUCE HIRING POLICY PsiCe2or2 B Screening. Wten tlw city has more candidates than can be effectively evaluated, a screening process will be used to narrow the field of candidates. The screening process will consist of job related screening instrumeni(s) which provide for veterans preference. C.Evaluation. The top candidates will be evaluated using job related written and/or oral testing instruments. Reference checking. Prior to making a job offer, references and background information including information from prior employers will be obtained to confiim and supplement information provided by the applicant. E.Conditional offer of employment. An offer of employment for a police officer position will be conditioned upon the results of physical and psychological examinations I mar 11 1996 al QI.XST for COL-NCIL action OTYOFORONO DATE: March 6. 1996 ITEM NO: Department Approval: Administrator Reviewed: Nmic Ron Moorse 1 /^c’ Title Cirv .AdmimsirMor fV/ *7 Agenda Section: .Xdministraior's Report Item Description: Police Records System Replacement 7 In September 1995 staff beean an extensive review of the information system currently used in the Police Department Included in this review was a feasibility study of new police records systems to be used as an alternative to the LOGIS system. The projected 1996 cost related to the I OGIS police records svstem is approximately $23,000. Because this represents a significant portion of the police budget, city staff have reviewed alternative police records systems to determine whether anv could provide better services at lower costs. A summary' of the police information smdv is attached. The study found that the LEADRS police records system, which is a PC-besed svstem, could meet the needs of the police department at a much lower cost than the LOGIS system. The I.EADRS system proposal includes the installation of local area network in the police department along w ith the upgrade of a number of computer work stations. Du^mg the period 1997 to 2001 the city will save approximately $68,000 by changing to the LEADRS system. 'Fhese savings enable the upgrade of a number of computer work stations. When these costs are subtracted from the LEADRS system savings, the total savings for all jxilice information systems during this period will be approximately $31,500. The cost for the installation and implementation of the LEADRS police records system and the local area network and peripheral equipment will be approximately $42,000 in 1996. It is recommended that this amount be borrowed from the Improvement and Equipment Outlay Fund to be paid back in $8,350 installments over a five year period beginning in 1997. This is consistent w iih the arrangement made when the accounting and tinancial systems were upgraded in 1995. Recommendation It is recommended that a local area network be installed in the police department area and that the LE.'kDRS police records svstem be installed on the network. It is also recommended that 4 personal computers be upgraded in the police department. The total cost of these recommendations is S42.000 It is recommended this proposal be implemented m 1996 and that the $42.0(X) cost amount be borrowed from the Improvement and Equipment Outlay Fund to be paid back over a five year period. agnmjBKiKfi Rei|ucsf fcr OdMBXctiMi coudnatd Page 2 of 3 IVlarch^, 1996 PioUce Records System Replacement COLNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Motion to approve the installation of a local area network in the police department along with the upgrade of four personal computers, and the installation of the LEADRS police records system on the network, at a cost of $42,000. This amount is to be borrowed from the Improvement and Equipment Outlay Fund to be paid back in imtallnicnis of $8,350 over a five year period beginning in 1997 City of Orono Pobce Informabon Systems Study Elxccutive Suramafy Ba?-kg:omad In September, 1995, City Staff began an extensive review of the information systems curently being used in the Police Department Included in this review was a feasibility study of new police records systems that could be used as an altcmativ’c to the LOGIS system. The focus was on a long-term solution that would provide the police department an effective means of providing services and information for at least the next five years With any long-term plan, it is understood that periodic enhancements will be necessary to maintain the expected level of service and information. Police Records System The Orono Police Depanment is contractually obligated to the LOGIS Police Records System until December 31, 1996 The projected 1996 costs related to this system is approximately $23,000 Because this represents a significant portion of the Police budget, city staff reviewed alternative systems to determine whether the Orono Police Department could provide better services at lower costs to the communities they serve Two viable alternatives were identified and reviewed The LEADRS Software put out by Quest Data Systems, and ENFORS Software put out by the Masys Corporation Police Records System Selection Criteria The records systems chosen met the following criteria • Provided levels of service and sources of information that meet all Police Department and City guidelines Demonstrated history of software and support in the field of law enforcement. Strong client base. Compatible with the existing record system. Based in the Minneapolis / St Paul area Provide equal or better service for communities served for lower costs. Consistent with other information systems used throughout the City. Each alternative was evaluated on the above criteria to determine the best long-term solution for the Orono Police Depanment Based on the review by city staff, a recommendation was reached, and along with the selected police records system, the needs of all information systems for the Police Depanment were addressed. City of Orono Police Information Systems Study Executivf Summary Palice Recor^^ System RccommgnjdatiflS •nie LEADRS software was selected as the best solution for the Police records system LEADRS is put out by Quest Data Svstems in Minneapolis Quest Data Systems is a leader m law en^ement software throughout the United States They currently bas e a chent base of .50 customers (120 m Minnesota), in 25 states A demonstration of the LEi^RS software wm viewed by citv staff and all record keeping needs were addressed It is likely that most of the information in the current record system will be transferable to the LE.ADRS sys'e™ The LEADRS system is compatible with all other information systems m use, as weU as the recommended additions detailed below Pplice Information Svstems Recommendatjoil As part of the long-term solution, additional equipment is necessary to properly run the LE.ADRS software, maintain data integntv, and improve productivity City staff recommends that a Local Area Network (LAN) be installer' in the Police Department Area (separate trom the LAN in the General Administration area), with additional hardware and training provided to Police Department Employees to effectively meet a high level of service for those communities being served Costs The costs for the installation and implementation of the LEADRS Police Record System, and the local area network and peripheral equipment will be approximately $42,000 in 1996, It is recommended that this amount be borrowed from the Improvement and Equipment Outlay Fund to be paid back in $8,350 installments over a five year period, beginning in 1997 This is consistent with the arrangement made for the General Administration Area in 1995 Savins Dunna the penod 1997-2001, the city will save approximately $68,000 (after repaying the loan to the Eqiuipment Outlay Fund) on the Police Records System, The total savings for all Police Information Svstems during this same period will be approximately $3 1,500. Beginning in , the Citv will realize a savings of approximately $6,300 per year. This will sigmficantly reduce the impact on the Police Budget for equipment replacements and system development charges that will likely occur in the next few years. City of OronoPolice Information Systems Study Executive Summary Summarv The recommended long-term solution will enhance the services provided by the Orono Police Department, and will make available more useable information that should allow city staff the ability to process their workload more effectively. In addition, it will provide significant savings to those commun,;'es being served by the Orono Police Department. oftware City of OronoPoUceInfonnatioii Systems study Cost / Savings Summary LEADRS Police Record System Sales Tax Configuration to LAN Software Support Data Conversion (Estimate) 3 Days On-Site Training ardware _____ —-----------------— Four Personal Computers-Sue, Kns,lnvesugai Total r,^TirinpencV @ 10%- Total Total Costs 4.690.00 304.85 1.070.00 1.400.00 2,000.00 1.450.00 10.914.85 13.542.55 2.915.00 1.900.00 350.00 8.400.00 27.107.55 3.802.24 t,i.824.61 ^■mmarvot Savings/ Police RecordsSystem LEADRS/LAN System I^^sfia^Equip Charge-1997) Depreciation on Equipment (5 yr) Pa Vk to I&E Outlay Fund Total Additipnal^Suipmen^ Four Personal Computers Sue Kris, Investigator, CSO/Carole Payback to I & E Outlay Fund (5 yr) Total 1996 (31,174.64) 0.00 (23,000.00) 0.00 0.00 rS4.174.64) 1996 (8.400.00) (2.250.00) 0.00 • 0.00 nO.650.00) 1997 1998 1999-2001 0 00 0.00 0-00 tSSS' (ISIm) (!*«■'"> 21.656.56 11.656.56 MS69M 1997 1998 1999;:2001 0.00 0.00 (8,400.00) 0 00 0.00 0.00 (3,550'.00) (3,550.00) (1^50.00 (2.130.00) (2.130.00) (6,a90.00) (■5.680.001 15.680.00 ) (25,440^ Total Savings 1997 - 2001 Total 1997-2001 0.00 (12,000.00) 125,000.00 (13,542.55) (31,174.64) 68.282.81 1997-2001 (8,400.00) 0.00 (17.750.00) (10.650.00) (76.800.00) 71.482.81 Comments: Savings Per Year After 1996 6,296.56 -»-r* *>City ofOronoPoUce Infonnation Systems Study Ixjcal Area Network Costs hardware ----------- Cost 7,190.00 iP NetSeiver 5/133 (Pentium 133) • Pentium 133 • 4 GB Mirrored Hard Drive ^ 32 MB Ram HP Surestore 5000 Tape Backup System 10 Backup Tapes 2,620.00 315.00 Smart-UPS 600 Battery Backup System 96.00 14’ Drop Cables @ S12.00 each * Sue. Kris. CSO/Carole, Investigator. Squad Room Area . ^:^,orai:s Office, User Prie.er-Froau Laser Pn^u=r-Squad Room 64.00 3’ Patch Cables @ S8.00 each * Same as above -therliTik 10-Base T Interface Cards @ $97.00 each ‘ Squad Room Area 1. Corporal’s Office Subtotal 194.00 10.479.00 Sales Tax 681.14 Total Hardware 11.160.14 Software ---------------------1,735.00 Novell Netware 4.1 - LAN 502.00 Cheyenne Arcserve 5.01 Subtotal 2.237.00 Sales Tax 145.41 Total Software 2,382.41. T AN Installation & Configuration 2,850.00 Estimated 30 Hours @595.00 per hour 65.00 ^timated 1 Hour @ 65.00 cabling Total LAN Installation 16.457.54 OOUNCLMEETM MAR 11 1996 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION CfTYOFOIIOto DATE: March 6, 1996 ITEM NO: Department Approval: Name Ron Moorse Title City Administrator Administrator Reviewed: Item Description: Use of Recycling Commission Budget Reserves Agenda Section: Administrator’s Report *is budget reserve is approximately $6,000. The Recycling Coord- ator is requesting direction from the city council regarding possible uses of the reserve amounf She is recommending the reserve Lount be retained and invested as a partial off-set to the Hennepin County recycling grant revenue in 1999. Another option not listed m the «port is to simply^reduce tte contributions of the cities to the Recycling Commission for the years 1997 and 1998. It does make sense to put some funds aside in anticipation of the loss of the recycling grant revenue which is approximately $14,000 per year for Orono. The cnly question is whe her this rbes^done through the Commission or directly by the city. Because of the rela ive y smal amount of the budget reserve, it seems reasonable for the Commission to manage those funds for three years. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Motion to provide direction to the Recycling Coordinator regarding the use of the West Hennepm Recycling Commission’s budget reserve. * Budget Reserve Good news. Not only has VVHRC decreased its 1996 budget ($29,000 in 1995; $27,000 for 1996), but has accumulated an estimated $15,000 budget reserve. This reserve, of course, belongs to all VVHRC cities, and assuming a distribution of a percentage of households to VVHRC total household cour t, could amount to a cit> - bv-citv distribution of City 1996 HH Count Percentage of HH Count Amount Greenfield 525 7.8%S 1,170 Independence 1.029 15.3%2.295 Long Lake 627 9 3^ 0 1.395 Loretto l.^2 2.3%345 Maple Plain 520 7.7°o 1,155 Medina I.174 17 5° 0 2,625 Orono 2J396 40 1%6.015 TothiS 6,723 100 $15,000 The Commissioners and I have discussed several ideas for the possible use of this rcser\ e as follows: Ideas Comment Subsidize recvcling bin reorders Not a fair distribution because landlocked cities rarely need to reorder. Assist small business recvcling Possible, vet several cities have most of the businesses Revisit weeklv curbside pick-up Distributions would not cover more than a vear of additional costs to residents. Off set clean-up dav costs Residents should probablv directiv pav to cover the costs for their wastes. Parks and Trees Could 120 toward park plavground equipment, tables, bins, trees. Invest VVHRC could establish a three-year certificate of deposit and let the money sirow for future programs A three-year CD would mature at just about the same time as current Hennepin County grant money expires (1999). Your recvcliniz coordinator believes this would be the best option at this time Please give us your thoughts 476-0012 Ver\- truly yours. 1 .Amelia Kroeger Recycling Coordinator copy: VVHRC Commissioners WEST HENNEPIN RECYCLING COMMISSION Greenflelc^-Independence-Long Lake-Loretto-Maple Plain-Medina-Orono 65 Stubbs Bay Road Maple Plain, MN 55359 476-0012 14 Febmary 1996 . 5 To; Mayors and City Councils West Hennepin Recycling Commission (WHRC) cities From: Amelia Kroeger Recycling Coordinator WHRC Program Report for 1995 A brief comparison and recap for WHRC’s 1995 program year follows. The Commissioners and I are requesting WHRC City Council input. Refer to Reser\ e detail on side two Highlights Category Specifics Hennepin County Average Abatement 2,194 tons recycled 27.19% abatement 22.7% abatement Particioation 70.47% participation 67.8% participation Net cost ner ton S78.98 per recycled ton S93.34 per recycled ton Net cost per household S25.77 a year S29.06 a year New Residents In addition to each city sending packets to new residents, WHRC now sends post cards to all new residents who homestead in all WHRC cities. This effort has been well received. not applicable Curbside Contractors Instituted revenue sharing for paper w hen the price per ion is over a specified amount. not applicable Recyclopedia This waste reduction guide has been delivered to curbside recyclers. If council members do not have a copy, there is a supply of guides at all city halls. It is V nrth having and using. not applicable Biidsct Reserve Rl juesting WHRC citv input.not applicable -OVER- Funded by WHRC with partial funding by Hennepin County Panted on Recy cled Pape, with 50^v Post consumer Content COUNCLMEEIMa mar 11 1996 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION CITY OF QRONO DATE: February 28, 1996 ITEM NO.: Department Approval: Name John R. Gerhardson Title Public Works Director Administrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: Public Works Item Description: Equipment Purchase Public Works Recently the City Council approved the purchase of the cab and chassis portion of the replacement of a one ton utility vehicle. I have received the following bids for the dump body and the snow plow for this vehicle as follows: Pump Body Truck utilities Crysteel Inc. 9* Snow Plow Miller Enterprises Ciysteel Inc. $4,632 includes tax $3,895 includes tax $2,878 includes tax $2,792 includes tax The amounts allocated for the above purchases are $4,000 for the dump body and $2,900 for the snow plow. It is recommended to award the bid for the dump body and snow plow to Crysteel Inc. for one dump body for an amount of $3,895 and one 9’ snow plow for $2,792. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Motion to aw'ard the bid for the dump body and snow plow to Crysteel Inc., for one dump body in the amount of $3,895, and one 9’ snow plow in the amount of $2,792, to be funded trom the Improvement and Equipment outlay fund. Budget Reserve Good news. Not onlv has WHRC decreased its 1996 budget (S29.000 in 1995; $27,000 for 1996), but has accumulated an estimated $15,000 budaet reserve This reserve, of course, belongs to all VVTIRC cities, and assuming a distribution of a percentage of households to WHRC total household count, could amount to a cit>-- bv-citv distribution of: City 1996 HH Count Percentaize of HH Count Amount Greenfield 525 7 8° b S 1.170 Independence 1.029 15.3?b 2.295 Long Lake 627 9 3^/0 1.395 Loretto 152 2.3%345 Maple Plain 520 7 7%1.155 Medina 1.174 17.5%2,625 Orono 2.696 40 1%6.015 Totals 6,723 100 °b $15,000 The Commissioners and I have discussed several ideas for the possible use of this reserve as follows. Ideas Comment Subsidize recvcling bin reorders Not a fair distribution because landlocked cities rarely need to reorder. Assist small business recvcling Possible vet several cities have most of the businesses Revisit weeklv curbside pick-up Distributions w ould not cover more than a vear of additional costs to residents. Off set clean-up dav costs Residents should probablv directlv pav to cover the costs for their wastes. Parks and Trees Could uo toward park plavground equipment, tables, bins, trees. Invest WHRC could establish a three-year certificate of deposit and let the money grow for future programs A three-\ ear CD would mature at just about the same time as current Hennepin County grant money e.xpiies (1999). Your recvclinu coordinator believes this would be the best option at this time Please give us your thoughts 476-0012 \ er\- trulv vours. 7 Amelia Kroeger Recycling Coordinator copy: WHRC Commissioners REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION DATE: March CITYOFORONO ITEM NO.: Department Approval: ^ Name: Tom Kuehn Title: Finance Director Administrator Reviewed;Agenda Section: City Administrator's Report Item Description: Computer Connection Between Public Works and Administration Building Attachments:A. Memo dated March 5, 1996 B. Invoice/Quote for Computer/Monitor C. Estimate taken by phone from A.U.S. Communications The Public Works department does not currently have a link to the city's computer network. There are several advantages to adding this capability for the Public Works department including the ability to use software currently available on the network and security of computerized records. Addir.g a network workstation in Public Works would also allow installation ot software that would specifically help in the management of the department, (e.g., scheduling software and fleet maintenance software). The workstation would also allow access to financial and budget records. A fiber optic link between the buildings, and a laser printer are available. The cost of the purchase can be funded by the savings from the recent purchase of a one-ton truck. The original budget included $22,000 for the one-ton truck and $12,000 for a 1 /2-ton pickup. The budget was amended on January 22, 1996 so the total of $34,000 was available for the purchase of the one-ton truck. The price of the one-ton truck ended up being $31,224, which leaves $2,776 available in the Public Works' equipment outlay fiind. The cost of adding the computer workstation, linked to the city's network, is budgeted at $2,260. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Council authorize the purchase of a computer and appropriate communications equipment to link a computer workstation in the Public Works building to the city's computer network located in the Administration building. PROPOSED MOTION:Moved by ,seconded by purchase a computer and the necessary communications equipment, for a workstation link between the Public Works building and the Administration building, from the Public Works equipment outlay furd at a cost not to exceed S2.260. Ayes____, Nays _ t Marchs, 1996 To: From: Subject: Ron Moorse, City Administrator John Olson, Finance Computer Network Link to Public Works The Public Works department does not currently have a link to the city's computer network. The assets of the network, (e.g., shared files, shared programs, and security) are not available for use by Public Works. Some of the advantages of adding a computer workstation at the Public Works building would include: 1. Ability to use software that is currently on the city's network for preparing documents, financial worksheets, graphics, and database applications. 2. Ability to create and securely store computerized records. 3. Ability to communicate via electronic mail with the Administration and police buildings. 4. Would allow for installation of scheduling software, which would be beneficial for ensuring that routine maintenance is performed according to manufacturer recommendations. 5. Would allow for installation of fleet maintenance software, which would help to make decisions regarding nearly all of the city's most expensive equipment. 6. Would allow Public Works administration immediate access to budgetary records which would allow increased control on Public Works spending. Currently the Public Works building and the Administration building are linked by fiber optic wire. This link would allow a computer workstation to be installed at the Public Works building and attached to the city's computer network, located in the Administration building, with minimal installation problems. There is currently a printer available for use at the Public Works workstation. What we propose is to purchase 486/66 or 486/100 computer with 16M RAM to be used in the Public Works building. This computer would be hooked up to the city's network using the fiber optic link that is already in place. ■ V Ron Moorse March 5, 1996 page 2 Attaching the Public Works computer workstation to the city's network would involve the following: 1. In the Administration building: Attaching a transceiver to the computer network and to the fiber optic cable. 2. In the Public Works building: Attaching a transceiver to the fiber optic cable and to a special port in the computer purchased as the computer workstation. The cost of the two transceivers, the required cable, and the installation of the equipment should be about $600 according the A.U.S. Communications, the company who installed the fiber optic link. i have also received a quote from Portico Computers for a 486DX4/100 computer with 16MB RAM and a 635M harddrive. The cost of the computer, including tax and 3-year warranty will be approximately $ 1,640. Therefore, the total cost of installing a computer workstation in the Public Works building that is linked to the city's network will be as follows: Personal computer, with monitor: Equipment, cable, and necessary labor to install communications link between buildings: Laser Printer (from Finance) Total Cost of the Workstation $1,660 600 __Q $2,260 The funding for this project will come from the savings of the budget amendment described below: Original budget: 1/2 Ton pickup $12,000 1 Ton Dump 22.000 Total $34,000 Amended budget (01/22/96) 1 Ton Dump $34,000 Less: Purchase of 1 Ton Cab/Chassis $24,324 Dump Box 4.000 Snow Plow 2.900 Total $31,224 Budget Savings $ 2,776 PORTICO COMPVnB3S«.INC. 805 WEST 106TH STREET BLOOMINGTON. MN 55420 (612) 888-1888 • FAX (612) 888-1813 DK]W@a©l JA.N 19 invoice NUMBER: q 177^3 199S invoice DATE: PAGE: 01/09/96 1 SOLD TO;CITY OF ORONO ATTN: ACCOUNTS PAYABLE 2750 KELLEY PARKWAY ORONO, MN . 55356 SHIP TO:CITY OF ORONO ATTN: CHRIS MILLER 2750 KELLEY PARKWAY ORONO , MN. 55356 NET JO ITEM I.D./DESC.________________ORDERED SHIPPED UNIT PRICE NET TX] SHiPVU .. SHIP DATE DUE DATE .01/09/96 02/08/96 OUST. I.D............. P.O. NUMBER ... P.O.DATE .......... OUR ORDER NO. SALESPERSON . C00075 19616 01/03/96 ANNE >C1 SILVER SERIES 1.00 1-00 DX4/100. INCLUDES: MT CASE & MDB.DX4/100 CPU & CPU FAN. 16MB SIMM. VLB CONTROLLER 1MB VLB VIDEO. 1.44 FDD, >3:SMB IDE HDD, 101 KEYBOARD & DEXXA MOUSE, MS DOS & WIN 4 WG, 3COM 509BTP. 14” CTX MONITOR SYSTEM S/N: 57110425 •MONITOR S/N: KAO-53503708 1572.0000 yric< 1 .00 1 .00?.E WARRANTY 3-'. EAR ONSITE -REIGHT -t TU.'t yC f-^ f f/\ *■ r- /cJr r -fc X r7, ,ci . ■for ^ 17?. r-eo^iv^J , 145.0000 ■1575-.00^ T 1^00,00 145.00 T 15.00 E <6^7 $■70 SUBTOTAL TAX. . PAYMENTS TOTAL..... |5T4o.Od -1732 ."00~ 100. iS 0 .00 r-"- f,. ^Ivpyuih^ (i. ^.I' Ae/^-->' i 900 C 1'^ * /,V.fc Aw>4 -hTivisc^.^nfr^ -^* w.rkjlAi-/>.i,j)5o l^e^loov ^ ■2Tn?/vi.//<^/>^*’y Cai^^^o'ycne.^ f o f Q oc £♦/ / REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION COUNOLMBIHQ DATE: February 28, 1996 MAR 11 1996 ITEM NO. OnVOPOROND Department Approval: Name John R. Gerhardson Title Public Works Director Administrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: Public Works Item Description: Park Lawn Maintenance 1996 & 1997 In 1995 the City contracted with Lawn Detailc • :o perform turf maintenance on City parks and the City office. The amount of the bid from Lawn Detailers was $13,200 plus tax for the 1995 season. Lawn Detailers has presented a proposal for the 1996 and 1997 season for $13,200 plus tax per year. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Recommendation to approve a two year agreement with Lawn Detailers for an amount of $13,200 plus tax per year for the 1996 and 1997 season. r:^ OREQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION DATE: March ITEM NO: OOUNCLMEETING 11 1996 CITYOFOBONO Department Approval: Name Ron Moorse Title City Administrator Administrator Reviewed: ¥4__ Agenda Section: Administrator’s Report Item Descnption: Resolution Approving Allocation of Damages and Authorizing Payment Thereof On February 26, 1996 the Council, in an executive session, approved a resolution approving the allocation of damages and authorizing payment thereof related to the Starks and Fields versus MPRS lawsuit. Tlie resolution is now in final form for official Council adoption. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Motion to adopt the attached resolution approving the allocation of damages and authorizing payment thereof. nr r > VTV| RESOLUTION APPROVING ALLOCATION OF DAMAGES AND AUTHORIZING PAYMENT THEREOF BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota (City) as follows: Section 1 . Background 1.1. The City of Orono (hereinafter referred to as the "City") is a defendant in the cases of Starks v. Minneapolis Police Recruitment System, ^ a].: Hennepin County District Court File No. EM93-219, and Fields v. Minnesota Police Recruitment System, et District Court File No. EM93.218. 1 2 The Court has concluded in said actions that the defendants violated Minnesota Statutes Chapter 363, the Minnesota Human Rights Act, in the administration of the Minnesota Police Recruitment System (MPRS) testing process for entry level police officers employment screening and that defendants are obligated to pay certain damages and penalties. 1.3. In its order dated November 6, 1995. the Court determined that the defendant cities are obligated to pay $156,688 in damages for lost wages and emotional distress. 1.4. The Court has also determined that the MPRS. a joint powers organization of which the City is a member, or was a member at the time the actions were commenced, is obligated to pay each of the two plaintiffs punitive damages in the amount of $8,500. 1 5 The Court has not yet made a determination as to the award of plaintiffs costs, disbursements, and attorneys* fees. 1 6 The Court also det^'nnined that the unlawful discrimination by the defendants can reasonably oe remedied in pan ny paying a statutory penalty in the amount of $300,000 to the state of Minnesota, or in lieu of such penalty establishing a reasonable minority race hiring commitment satisfaciorv to the Court. In the event a hiring commitment is submitted to the Court which is found to be satisfactory, it may be that the payment of a statutory penalty will not be required. / 1.7. The MPRS has proposed that the payment of monetary damages to the plaintiffs described above in paragraph 1.3, punitive damages described above in paragraph 1.4 and plaintiffs’ costs, disbursements and anomeys’ fees be allocated among the parties on the following basis: 20% of such costs would be divided equally among the 36 city defendants, 80% of such damages would be divided pro rata on the basis of the population served by the cities police departments as of the time the actions were commenced in January of 1993. Such populauon would be determined on the basis of Metropolitan Counci: estimates tor cities in the metropolitan area For communities outside of the metropolitan area the population would be determined by the State Demoorapher’s estimates. For communities with service contracts under which police service is provided to other municipalities, the populations of such other municipalities would be included in the computation of population s-^rved. Sec. 2.Findings. 2.1. It is in the best interest of the City to reach muUial agreement on the allocation of damages. 2.2. The allocation proposed by the MPRS is found to be fair and reasonable, and consent thereto is in the best interest of the City. Sec. 3. Approvals and Authorizations. 3.1. The allocation for payment of damages, penalties, costs, disbursements and attorneys’ fee-: described above is hereby approved. 3 2 The City consents and agrees to payment of its share ot such damages, penalties, costs, disbursements* and attorneys’ fees in accordance with the allocation formula described above. 3.3. The City Administrator and Finance Director are authorized and directed to make payment for the City ’s share of final judgement of such expenses in accordance with the agreed upon allocation. 3.4. This resolution does not amend any previous agreement among the defendant cities for allocation of defense costs and defendants’ attorneys fees; and nothing herein shall be deemed to be an agreement as to allocation of any statutory penalties which may be awarded in the future. 3.5. This resolution constitutes only an agreement between and among all cities which are defendants in the above-referenced actions which consent and agree to the allocation formula described above by adoption of substantially similar resolutions. Nothing herein shall be deemed an admission of responsibility or a liability in any action for contribution by any city which has not consented to such allocation or a waiver by the City of any rights, claims, demands, or causes of action for contribution by the City against any city which has not agreed to such allocation. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono, this 26 day of February, 1996. Edward J. Callahan, Jr., Mayor ATTEST: Dorothy M . Hallin, City Clerk REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MAR il DATE: March 8, 1996 ITEM NO: ^ j Department Approval: Num: Gary Cheswick Title: Chief of Police Adminirtrator Reviewed;Agenda Section: Item Description: Purchase of Security/Monitoring System for PD Exhibits: See Attached DISCUSSION The Police Department has obtained bids for a closed circuit television security/monitoring system. This item was deleted from the police department during the building construction due to budget constraints. Funding is now av' lable to the department obtaining nearly $30,000 in seizure/forfeiture a ts in recent years. In addition a Safety Abatement Grant through the Department of Labor and Industry has been obtained for $2341.53 to be applied to the total cost of the Police Security System. Based on the proposals submitted, it is recommended the proposal from Floyd Security for the purchase and installation of the system for a cost of $10,748.00 be accepted. COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED: Motion to approve the purchase of a closed circuit television system from Floyd Security in the amount of $10,748.00 with funding to come from the seizure/forfeiture fund (with $2341.53 to be reimbursed through the Safety Abatement Grant). forms/council.act POLICE SECURITY SYSTEM The following is a review of need for a closed circuit television system (CCTV) for the police department. It is prepared as an addendum to the request for council action authorizing the purchase of the CCTV system. The police department has explored with three vendors, the cost and design of a CCTV system for the police department. As a result of this review, Floyd Security was selected based on cost and company performance. At the time the police department building was constructed, there was to have been a CCTV system installed. This was deleted for budget reasons as building costs escalated. Most of the conduit for installation of the system was laid in during the time of construction and this minimizes current expenditures through simplifying the installation process. The CCTV system proposed, in essence is two separate systems. The first part of this system is for recording interviews that will be used for court purposes, and is independent of the monitoring system proposed for the rest of the building. The system as currently bid offers closed circuit monitoring of seven key areas ill the police department. These areas are: 1. Bookir j Room 2. Sally ■>ort/Garage 3. Cell Number One 4. Squad Car Parking Area 5. Cell Number Two 6. Interrogation Room 7. Front Entry/Public Phone Monitoring of these seven key areas is deemed important for minimizing liability exposure and providing increased security for the police facility. The key liability exposures we see being reduced are: 1. Improper Use of Force 2. Sexual Improprieties/Harassment 3. Prisoner Security/Safety The monitoring will also allow ennanced officer safety. Frequently there is only one officer available to process prisoners as the other officer is required to fulfill a Spring Park contract or other duties. When a prisoner is brought in, office staff will be able to monitor the safety and needs of the officer in the detention area. Documentation of prisoners self -inflicting injury and then claiming officer abuse will be much easier to screen and resolve. Pg. 2 Two monitoring locations are called for in this CCTV system. These locations are the squad room and the front office, visible to office staff. This monitoring equipment allows for seven cameras to be viewed simultaneously. The squad car parking area is a potential target for vandals. There has already been damage to the squad cars, wherein a number of tires were slashed on parked squads. In one incident the City of Orono spent over $800.00 repairing damage to the tires. There has been other damage to squad cars in the past and to the old police building. A high resolution camera mounted outside to monitor the parking lot will serve both as a deterrent to offenders and with recording equipment added, provides evidence for investigators to use. With the front entry doors unlocked 24 hours, allowing public access to the phone for emergency use, it is felt that monitoring of the location is important. It will serve both as a deterrent to possible vandals and to provide security to persons coming to the police department to report incidents after hours. The installation of cameras in the holding cells will provide for increased prisoner safety by watching for possible self-inflicted injury and documenting prisoner action. The cameras installed in the booking room will be used in the monitoring of persons arrested for suspected D.W.I. This filming will provide for documentation of conduct, and the individuals condition. This provides evidence, as well as officer involved challenges. The camera ports to the holding cell were built in at the time of construction and are secured to prevent damage to the equipment in the holding cells. The interrogation room is frequently used for a holding area for juveniles rather than imposing the reality of the holding cells on them. It is also an area in which officers will converse with prisoners, and for officer safety activities in that room should be monitored. The general consensus of officers believe the system will provide for increased officer safety, reduced claims of improper use of force and claims of improper touching. Th: ^ system will meet current and what is felt to be, future legal requirements and provide aid in the protection of the building and persons using the building. Pg. 3 This system involves the video and audio recording of the witness interview room located in the fr^- office area of the police department. This system will use . equipment already owned by the police department to minimize expenditure it will allow the add to the relaxed atmosphere and avoid intimidating witnesses (particularly children) when recording their statements. When dealing with a child as a victim or witness the police find it necessary to document all interviews and to minimize the number of interviews the child is subjected to. By recording a child s interview this reduces, if not eliminates, the need for other investigators to re-interview a child. Having the interviews documented/recorded prevent accusations of directing the child in their statement. The child may not have the ability to verbalize what occurred, but may be able to graphically demonstrate, and having the graphics recorded is important for court purposes. In child abuse cases, a frequent defense allegation is that investigators planted or suggested to the child what happened. This ties in witn leading or directing witnesses in their statements. By documenting all interviews, these allegations can be eliminated. The recorded statements can be strong evidence in court. The juries can see and hear what the officers did. They can also see and hear the witness/victim. This does add credibility and help in building a better case. Current available funds include a safety abatement grant through the State of Minnesota Department of Labor and Industry tor $2341.53, along with forfeiture funds in the amount of $7556.4/, generated by the police for a total 9898.00. This provides funds without need for budgetary expenditures. In conclusion Department feels the previously explained needs are important enough to justify the purchase of the equipment. FEB.-29* 96(THU) 10:40 FLOYD TOTAL SECURITY TEL:612 881 6524 P. 002Addendum A STATEMENT OF WORK AND COST DOCUMENT ORONO POLICE DEPARTMENT CAMERA SYSTEM Camera 1: Camera with wide angle auto iri5 lens mounted in a comer housing viewing front foyer Camera 2; Camera with wide angle lens mounted on ceiling in and viewing holding area Camera 3; Camera with super wide angle lens mounted in existing housing viewing cell #1 Camera 4: Camera with super wide angle lens mounted in existing housing viewing cell #2 Camera 5; Camera with wide angle lens mounted on the ceiling and viewing the interrogation room Camera 6: Camera with auto iris lens mounted in an environmental housing in the garage viewing garage transfer area Camera 7: High resolution camera with aulo iris lens mounted in a dome housing with integral heater and blower on outside of garage viewing parking area. Camera 8: Camera with pinhole lens hidden in location provided by Police Department viewing soft interrogaiion room - microphone hidden in ceiling. Camera and microphone wired to detectives office Monitor Location #1: Located in squad room 2 17“ black and white monitors 2 Quad processors 2 24 Hour Real Motion VCR’s Monitor Location #2: Located at front desk 1 17’’ black and white monitor mounted on front wall 1 8 position sequential switcher Installation using locations at conduit now existing in building and wiring in cell locations. VCR and push button to be connected so as to allow VCR to be activated from garage. FLOYD TOTAL SECURITY INSTALLED PURCHASE SYSTEM: Installation $10,748.00 Department Approval: Name Dorothy Hallin Title City Clerk REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION COUNCIL MEETMa MAR 11 1996 DATE, M„h m**’' ITEM NO: c5?<=5- Administrator Reviewed:Agenda Section: Licenses Item Description: List of Licenses for Council Approval Special Event Permit Norwest Bank Minnesota 16th Annual Lake Minnetonka Half Marathon May 5, 1996 - Approximately 8:30 to 11:30 a.m. Annual Fred Kurz Memorial Run On Luce Line April 14, 1996 - Approximately 8:30 to 10:30 a.m. COL?^CIL ACTION REQUT:STED: Motion to approve licenses. jic; voo Date: To: From: Subject: February 29, 1996 Ron Moorse, City Administrator Gary Cheswick, Chief of Police Half Marathon Race T have reviewed the application from Norwest Bank represent .tive and reserves needed to assist with the race. PARADES & SPECIAL EVENTS PERMIT APPLIcElfl8l$ CITY OF ORONO, MINNESOTA Permit #: Fee: $50.00 ^ . Date Received: Phone Number: 476-3882 - Paul Ilaahs Name; Morwest Bank Minnesota, Mationnl Association . 900 East Wayzata Boulevard, Address:_____________ ______ City,State.Zip: »ayzata, :iN 55391 Location of Parade or Fvent: From Wavzata ro F.xrelaior. Pleasp SPP rhp .^rracLsd race route _______________________________________ Date of Event: s-s-<Hours of Event: 8:30 to 11:30 Type of Event: 16th Annual Lake Minnetor^^a H.-il f M.nrnr.hon------------------------------ ... ______ _ , . , Amount: $5.000.000.0ilInsurance Company. Continental- - - - - --- - --——- (Copy of insurance certificate must be submitted with this application) I am aware of all applicable State and other laws regarding parades and special events and will abide by same. I also agree to hold the City of Orono harmless from all liabilities that may arise directly or indirectly from the parade of special event approved by the granting of this permit. Remarks: 010396 3 ■ >/ /Addendum to City of Qrono Special Event Permit Application Race Route Start: Norwest Bank Wayzata Lake Street to Ferndale Road to County Road 1 5 to Orono Orchard Road to Fox Street to Old Crystal Bay Road to County Road 51 to County Road 19 to Northview Road to Lake Road to County Road 15 to Old Beach Road to County Road 19 to George Street to Water Street. Finish: Norwest Bank Excelsior Date: To: From: Subject: March 8, 1996 Ron Moorse, City Administrator Gary Cheswick, Chief of Police.>^^^ Special Event Permit I have reviewed the application from Clyde Gates on behalf of the Annual Fred Kurz Memorial Run. I have no objection to the issuance of this permit. They must provide enough volunteers to direct runners/traffic at intersection roads along the race route, and provide first aid assistance to the runners. In addition, there should be a notation on the 1996 Special Event Permit that there will be an additional fee when the use of police reserve officers are needed in 1997. PARADES & SPECIAL EVENTS PERMIT APPLICATION CITY OF ORONO, MINNESOTA Permit if: WAR Cl 1996 Peer $50.00__) Dat^eceived: T- (q Phone Number: Name:CL" Address: 3> ^ 2^0 Sk.^Croj-i’ C} City, State, Zip: f (S V^8> Location of Parade or Event: J-o Lf /^S / Oh U uc <^ L(fte -/o H i 'iL Date of Event: A^pr(!^ /^^If Typeof Event: f^o r> V^ACe Hoursof Event: Insurance Company: *^Amount:_________________ (Copy of insurance certificate must be submitted with this application) I am aware of all applicable State and other laws regarding parade*" ji d special events and will abide by same. I also agree to hold the C'ty o' Orono harmless from all liabilities that may arise directly or indneciiy from the parade of special even: approved by the granting cf this permit. I understand some events may require off-duty or reserve officers and a fee may ^ required for the^ services. Signature^ ^ Date' Approved: O Denied: C By: Remarks: 5 -X) o 31 O ►-*S s V 'J 27 Feb 1996 Tue 1:17 PM Check Nuiter Qieck Niater 51024 Check Register City of Orono Page 1 Date Na« 51024 CITY COUNTY CREDIT UNION 28-Feb-96 CITY COUNTY CREDIT UNION Totals Check Niaiter 51024 CITY COUNTY CREDIT UNION Check Nuiter 51025 FIRST NATIONAil BANK OF LAKES 51025 28-Feb-96 FIRST NATIONAL BANK OF LAKES 51025 28-Feb*96 FIRST NATIONAL BANK OF LAKES Totals Check Nut4>er 51025 FIRST NATIONAL BANK OF LAKES Check Nknber 51026 GREAT WEST LIFE ASSURANCE CO. 51026 28-Feb-96 GREAT WEST LIFE ASSURANCE CO. Totals Check Nuiber 51026 GREAT WEST LIFE ASSURANCE CO. Check Nunber 51027 HENNEPIN CO. SUPPORT & COLl 51027 28-Feb-96 HENNEPIN CO. SUPPORT & COLL Totals Check Nurtaer 51027 HEHNEP!N CO. SUPPORT & COLL Check Nuii^r 51028 HENNEPIN COUNTY SUPPORT & COLL 51028 28-Feb-96 HENNEPIN COUNTY SUPPORT & COLL Totals Check NtniJer 51028 HENNEPIN COUNTY SUPPORT & COLL ::heck Nj^r 51029 ICMA RETIREMENT TRUST • 457 51029 28-Fec 96 ICMA RETIREMENi TRUST - 457 Totals Check Na*er 51029 ICMA RETIREMENT TRUST - 457 u'heck Nunber 51030 LAW ENFORCMENT LABOR SERVICE 51030 28-Feb-96 LAW ENFORCMENi LABOR SERVICE Totals Check Nunber 51030 LAW ENFORCMENT LABOR SERVICE Check NUT*)er 51C31 >^;NNtSOTA DEPT. OF REVENUE 51031 28-Feb-96 MINNESOTA OEP^ OF REVENUE Totals Check N n»er 51031 MINNESOTA DEPT. OF REVENUE Check NwrtJer 51032 MN OFP’ OF REVENUE 51032 28-Feo-9iS MN DEPT Of REVENUE Totals Check Nvjnber 51032 MN DEPT OF REVENUE Transaction Amount 5,587.00 5,587.00 9,883.95 2,885.70 12.769.65 1,265.00 1,265.00 164.82 164.82 174.50 174.50 100.00 100.00 495.00 495.00 212.46 212.46 2,957.36 2,957.36 Coninents SAVINGS W/H & TRANSFERRED F1T,FICA,ME0CR W/H FICA.MEDCR CITY SHARE DEFERRED COMP W/H THOMTON #C0266780 SKREEN #C02623:a DEFERRED COMP W/H UNION DUES W/H OMAN-#0000047747 STATE TAX U/H r Ftb 1996 M 1:17 PM Chtck hMk Nuiter 51033 Check Register City of Orono Date Name 51033 MN MUTUAL LIFE 28-Feb<96 MN MUTUAL LIFE Totals Check Hwter 51033 MN MUTUAL LIFE heck Nlflter 51034 MN STATE RETIREMENT-DEF COMP 51034 28-Feb-96 MN STATE RETIREMENT-DEF COMP Totals Check Nurtoer 51034 MN STATE RETIREMENT-DEF COMP heck Niaiter 51035 PEBSCO/OBRA 51035 28-Feb-96 PEBSCO/OBRA Totals Check Number 51035 PEBSCO/OBRA heck NUlber 5103: PEBSCO/US CONF OF MAYORS 51036 28-Feb-96 PEBSCO/US CONF OF MAYORS Totals Check Nuiber 51036 PEB .0/US CONF OF MAYORS heck NiJifcer 51037 PERA 51037 51037 28-Peb-9j 28-Feh-96 PERA PERA Totals Check Number 5103/ PERA heck Nu«*>er 510.14 UMTFO UAY 51038 28-Feb-96 UNITED WAY Totals Check Nuiber 51038 UNITED WAY Transaction Amount 55.00 55.00 150.00 150.00 18.25 18.25 1,485.00 1,485.00 3,788.27 5.001.68 8,789.95 29.00 29.00 Page 2 Comments DEFERRED COMP U/H DEFERRED COMP W/H OBRA D', COMP W/H USCM DEFERRED COMP W/H PERA EMPLOYEE W/H PERA CITY SHARE CHARITY DONATIONS W/H Srand Total 34,252.99 Check Register Page 1 Thu 12:51 PM City of Orono Check Nuiter Date Name Transaction Amount Check Nwber 51041 51041 BUFFALO BITUMINOUS INC. 31-DCC-95 BUFFALO BITUMINOUS INC.81.883.65 Totals Check Nurber 51041 BUFFALO BITIWINOUS INC.81.883.65 Grand Total 81.883.65 Connents CHANGE ORDER rav COact mm ^ l m City owe* M>r Ooto •MMM dMlMMT 5mt 0-1 mmm Situ OAHM m^-OO *•1 ontAi I•immrntr 5i042 * i wtaa 5104J ili OTM ILfCTOiC 51041 07-Mar-0*ALL OTM ElECTOIC 51041 04-Mar 0*ML OTMI ILECTOfC tMtMi* CMMCt “ —51041 A4i tTM iLlC^tlC 51044 ATIT 55044 04-Mar «*AT4T 51044 07-Mar-0*A^AT 5^4*04 Mar «*AT|T 51044 07 Mar 00 ATIT 51044 04 Mar 0*AT4T Tot*l4 Cheek IKJ***' 51044 ATIT OkKk Muaiar 51045 ATAT WIMLESS SfOVICft 51045 07 Mar-0*ATIT WIMtLEU MlVlCfS 51045 07-Mar0*ATIT WlOfLESS ntvicfs 51045 07'Nar0*ATIT MIMLEU StIVICfS T*t*iA a»«ck N«j*ar 51045 AT|T MIMELESS SfiViCES Owek 5104* OfMfMTS «oi15104*04 Mar 9*IfMET ITS DESIGN GIOLP r«a» 1 Total. Chock MuitJor 5104* MMfMTS Of SIM MOUP Olock IkMbor 51047 IlACSCMIAK 4 SO* 51047 51047 Totol. Chock Chock OijTtwr 07-Hoc -9* 07-«or-9* •CAC<r'%IM I SOM tLACKOWlMC I SON kUit>or 51047 ILACKCUUK i SOM 51040 »U0GfT PAIMTIMG 51048 04 Mar-96 8O0GET painting 51048 04-Mar-96 OUDGET PAINTING 51048 04-Mar-96 BUDGET painting 51048 04-Mar-96 BUDGET painting 51048 04-Mar-96 BUDGET painting 51048 04 Mar-96 BUDGET painting Total. Check Nunber 51048 BUDGET painting TramMCttan AMItflt 45.W 45.» «5.a4 •7.14 112.M 22.15 10.40 44 JO 5.SO 2S.91 104.2* *51 4.50 42.54 55.55 1.72t.19 1.72i.19 19.06 166.58 H7.64 «Mi MMIMT MMAII t.S. 04 kfPAlt SiUM •fPlACI LAKMS lONe OISTAMa MtVlCf 1.0M6 OISTAMCf CMMaS MUMTINAM:! MMCN lOMO OISTAMCI IC»6 OISTAMCf kVVICf UTILITIIS T*UW CILLUIAA UTIUTIIS TMUCK CIUU1A4 VANG, QNAM CELL 4HOME MAtCN FEI SEAVICE-GCXF COUMSf FEi SEUVICE-CITT MALL 5.42 UPS PACICAGE SENT 5.66 UPS PACICAGE SENT 191.18 1996 AMENDED BUDGETS 125.16 INSPECTION NOTICES 15.08 ASVP CAA08, ENVELOPES 17 52 360.02 STAMPS r 7 Mar 1996 Thu 1:27 PN Chtck Ntaber Chtck Ihabcr 51069 51069 51069 51069 Check Register City of Orono Date Nana 51069 BUSINESS FORMS t ACCOMTIN6 06-Har-96 BUSINESS FORMS t ACCOUNTING 06-Mar-96 BUSINESS FORMS & ACCOUNTING 06-Mar-96 BUSINESS FORMS 6 ACCOUNTING 06-Mar-96 BUSINESS FORMS t ACCOUNTING Page 2 Totals Cheek Nuitoer 51049 BUSINESS FORMS & ACCOUNTING Check Nuitier SI050 CHUNKS LAKESHORE AUTO 51050 06-Mar-96 CHUNKS LAKESHORE AUTO 51050 06-Mar-96 CHUNKS LAKESHORE AUTO 51050 04-Mar-96 CHUNKS LAKESHORE AUTO 51050 06>Mar-96 CHUNKS UKESHORE AUTO Check Nuitoer 51055 EGGHEAD SOFTWARE 51055 04-Mar-96 EGGHEAD SOFTWARE Totals Check Nui*>er 51055 EGGHEAD SOFTWARE Check NtrtJer 51056 ESI COMMUNICATIONS 51056 04-Mar-96 ESI COMMUNICATIONS Transaction Amount 178.46 178.46 209.19 239.22 805.33 174.82 25.12 218.22 741.33 72.85 72.85 118.60 CoRinents UTILITY BILLS UTILITY BILLS PAYROLL CHECKS FUND ACCTG CHECKS #171 DIAGNOSTICS #175 OIL CHANGE #172 DIAGNOSTICS #171 TIE RODS, BRAKES Totals Check Nurber 51050 CHUNKS LAKESHORE AUTO 1,159.49 Check Nunber 51051 CKS INC. 51051 07-Mar-96 CKS INC.59.91 FLUORESCENT TUBES Totals Check Nunber 51051 CKS INC.59.91 Check Nuiber 51052 COMMEF.:iAL LIFE INSURANCE 51052 04-Mar-96 COMMERCIAL LIFE INSURANCE 0.85 MARCH INSURANCE 51052 04-Mar-96 COMMERCIAL LIFE INSURANCE 2.66 MARCH INSURANCE 51052 04-Mar-96 COMMERCIAL LIFE INSURANCE 1.14 MARCH INSURANCE 51052 04-Mar-96 COMMERCIAL LIFE INSURANCE 265.80 MARCH INSURANCE Totals Check Nunber 51052 COMMERCIAL LIFE INSURANCE 270.45 Check Niirber 51053 DNR-■DIVISION OF WATER & MAIL 51053 07-Mar-96 ONR-DIVISION OF WATER & MAIL 84.01 WTR APPROPRIATION Totals Check Nunber 51053 DNR-DIVISION OF WATER & HAIL 84.01 Check Nunber 51054 E-Z RECYCLING 51054 04-Mar-96 E-Z RECYCLING 5,422.92 FEBRUARY SERVICES Totals Check Nunber 51054 E-Z RECYCLING 5.422.92 OEMM MEMORY MGMT SOFTWARE SWITCH PHONES 7 Mr 1996 Thu 1:27 PN Check Nwber Check Nuaber 51056 Total* Check ICheck NMber 51057 Totals Check Check Number 51058 51058 510S8 51058 51058 51058 51058 51058 Totals Check Check Ninber 51059 51059 Totals Check Check Nunber 51060 Totals Check Check Nunber 51061 Totals Check Check Nunber 51062 51062 Totals Check Check Nunber 51063 Totals Check Check Register City of Orono Page 3 Date Name 51056 ESI CGMHUNICATIONS 04<Nar-96 ESI COMNUNICATIONS Nuiber 51056 ESI COMMUNICATIONS 51057 FROST. SHERRY R. 07-Nar-96 FROST, SHERRY R. Nunber 51057 FROST. SHERRY R. 51058 G S K SERVICES 07-Mar-96 07-Mar-96 07-Har-96 07-Mar*96 07-Mar-96 07-Har-96 07-Mar-96 04-Mar-96 G & K SERVICES G & K SERVICES G & K SERVICES G & K SERVICES G a K SERVICES G a K SERVICES G a K SERVICES G a K SERVICES Nunber 51058 G a K SERVICES 51059 GALL'S INC. 04-Mar-96 04-Mar-96 GALL'S INC. GALL'S INC. Number 51059 GALL'S INC. 51060 GANGELHOFF, OONNA 04-Mar-96 GANGELHOFF, DONNA Number 51060 GANGELHOFF, DONNA 51061 GENERAL RCPAIR SERVICE 04-Har-96 JENERAL REPAIR SERVICE Nunber 51061 GENERAL REPAIR SERVICE 51062 GENUINE PARTS CO. 07-Mar-96 07-Mar*96 GENUINE PARTS CO. GENUINE PARTS CO. Nunber 51062 GENUINE PARTS CO. 51063 GERRING'S CAR WASH 04-Mar-96 GERRING'S CAR WASH Nunber 51063 GERRING'S CAR WASH Transaction Amount 21.29 139.89 420.00 420.00 8.15 48.20 71.79 2.60 8.15 66.15 2.60 132.41 340.05 74.99 81.94 156.93 50.00 50.00 1,530.12 1,530.12 18.57 241.64 260.21 10.00 10.00 Comments REPAIR PHONE PARK COMMISSION HTG RATHBUN STREET EMPLOYEES FLOOR MATS STEFFENHAGEN RATHBUN STREET EMPLOYEES STEFFENHAGEN FLOOR MATS #175 GUN LOCK #176 GUN LOCK DEER PICKUP PUMP #2 REPAIR MI SC PARTS MI SC PARTS CAR WASH TICKETS 7 Iter 1996 Thu 1:27 Pn Ch«ck CMck Nuiiter 51064 51064 Totals Chock Check Nuiter 51065 Totals Check Check Nuiter 51066 Totals Check Check N(jrt)er Check Register City of Orooo Date Naiw 51064 HEALTHPARTNERS 04-Nar-96 HEALTHPARTNERS 04-Nar-96 NEALTKPMTNERS NuiRwr 51064 HEALTHPARTNERS 51065 HENNEPIN CO-OP SEED EXCHANGE 07-Nar-96 HENNEPIN CO-OP SEED EXCHANGE Nuitwr 51065 HENNEPIN CO-OP SEED EXCHANGE 51066 HENNEPIN COUNTY SHERIFF 07-Mar-96 HENNEPIN COUNTY SHERIFF Nunber 51066 HENNEPIN COUNTY SHERIFF 51067 HENNEPIN COUNTY TREASURER Page 4 Check Nuiter 51068 Totals Check Check Ncnioer 51069 Totals Check Check Nuit>er 51070 Totals Check Check Niirber 51071 51071 51071 Totals Check Check Nurber 51072 51068 JEWETT, ARTHU® H. 07-Nar-96 JEWETT, ARTHUR H. Nunber 51068 JEWETT, ARTHUR H. 51069 LEAGUE OF MH CITIES 04-Mar-96 LEAGUE OF MN CITIES NLfiber 51069 LEAGUE OF MN CITIES 51070 LONG LAKE CHAMBER OF COMMERCE 04-Mar-96 LONG LAKE CHAMBER OF COMMERCE Niut>er 51070 '.ONG LAKE CHAMBER OF COMMERCE 51071 M.E.M.A. TREASURER 04-Mar -96 04 -Mar-96 04 -Mar-96 M.E.M.A. TREASURER M.E.M.A. TREASURER M.E.M.A. TREASURER NLTber 51071 M.E.M.A. TREASURER 51072 MACDONALD LABORATORIES 07-Mar -96 MACDONALD LABORATORIES Transaction Amount 313.50 2,508.74 2,822.24 159.43 159.43 54.45 54.45 51067 07-Mar-96 HENNEPIN COUNTY TREASURER 674.50 51067 04-Mar-96 HENNEPIN COUNTY TREASURER 137.13 Totals Check Ntnber 51067 HENNEPIN COUNTY TREASURER 811.63 220.00 220.00 15.00 15.00 75.00 75.00 25.00 25.00 25.00 75.00 30.64 Connents MARCH HEALTH INSURANCE MARCH HEALTH INSURANCE 80« CALCIUM CHLORIDE JANUARY BOOKING FEES JANUARY ROOM & BOARD MICROFICHE-TAX INFOR REFUND APPLICATION FEE 1996 LMCIT WORKSHOP 1996 MEMBERSHIP TOMCHECK MEMBERSHIP ERICKSON-MEMBERSHIP CHESWICK-MEMBERSHiP N175 FLASHER Mr 19M Hu 1:27 m Check Register City of Orono Page 5 PMck Muifcer S1072 51072 Totals Check Hack Muter 51073 Totals Check Hack Muter 51074 Totals Check Heck Muter 51075 Totals Check Heck Muter 51076 Totals Check Check Mbster 51077 51077 51077 Totals Check Cheek Muter 51078 Totals Check Check NLfte- 51079 Totals Check Check Muter 51080 Totals Check Date Mas* 51072 NACDONALO LAMRATORIES 04>Nar-96 MACDONALD LABORATORIES 04-Nar-96 MACDONALD LABORATORIES Muter 51072 MACDONALD LABORATORIES 51073 MACOUEEN EQUIPMENT 04-Mar-96 MACOUEEN EQUIPMENT Nuter 51073 MACOUEEN EQUIPMENT 51074 PKNICHOLS. DAVID 04-Mar-96 MCMICHOLS, DAVID Nuter 51074 MCNICHOLS, DAVID 51075 MILLER, CHRIS 07-Mar-96 MILLER, CHRIS Nuter 51075 MILLER, CHRIS 51076 MINNEAPOLIS OXYGEN COMPANY 07-M»r-96 MINNEAPOLIS OXYGEN COMPANY Nuter 51076 MINNEAPOLIS OXYGEN COMPANY 51077 MINNEGASCO 04-Mar-96 04-Mar-96 04-Mar*96 MINNEGASCO MINNEGASCO MINNEGASCO Nuter 51077 MINNEGASCO 51078 MINNESOTA BOOK STORE 04-Mar-96 MINNESOTA BOOK STORE Nuter 51078 MINNESOTA BOOK STORE 51079 MN BENEFIT ASSOCIATION 04-Mar-96 MN BENEFIT ASSOCIATION Nuter 51079 MN BENEFIT ASSOCIATION 5'080 MN DEPT OF HEALTH 04-Mar-96 MN DEPT OF HEALTH Nuter 51080 MN DEPT OF HEALTH Transaction Amount 32.00 174.39 237.03 30.00 30.00 170.82 170.82 39.60 39.60 13.50 13.50 92.66 255.75 3,019.96 3,368.37 228.70 228.70 74.22 74.22 1.039.00 1.089.00 Comments RADAR SUAP *175 #175 SETUP GREGORY-SWEEPER CLINIC DARE CONFERENCE MILEAGE REIMS. MEDICAL OXYGEN GAS CHARGES GAS CHARGES GAS CHARGES TRAFFIC LAWS, CRIMINAL CO MARCH INSURANCE 1ST QTR WTR CONNECTION FE 7 Mr 1996 Thu 1:27 m Check Nuriaer OMck Mater 51081 Check Register City of Orono Date Not* 51081 MM DEPT OF REVENUE 04-Mar-96 NH DEPT OF REVENUE Totals Check Niater 51081 MN DEPT OF REVENUE Check Ntater 51082 NPLS COMNUNITY COLLEGE 51082 04-«ar*96 NPLS CONMUNITY COLLEGE 51082 04-Nar*96 MPLS COMMUNITY COLLEGE 51082 04-Mar-96 MPLS COMMUNITY COLLEGE Totals Check Hoiter 51082 MPLS COMMUNITY COLLEGE Check Mater 51083 NAVARRE HARDWARE 51083 51083 07-Mar-96 07-Mar-96 NAVARRE HARDWARE NAVARRE HARDWARE Totals Check Niater 51083 NAVARRE HARDWARE Check Niater 5108A NORTHERN STATES POWER 51084 04-Mar-96 NORTHERN STATES POWER Totals Check Niater 51084 NORTHERN STATES POWER Check Niater 51085 NSP 51085 51085 51085 51085 51085 07-Mar-96 07-Mar-96 07-Mar-96 07-Mar-96 07-Mar-96 NSP NSP NSP NSP NSP Totals Check Niater 51085 NSP Check Niatet 51086 O'SULLIVANS AUTO REPAIR 51086 07-Mar-96 O'SULLIVANS AUTO REPAIR Totals Check Nurter 51086 O'SULLIVANS AUTO REPA»R Check Niater 51087 OBRIEN. RANDY 51087 07-Mar-96 OBRIEN, RANDY Totals Check Niater 51087 OBRIEN, RANDY Check Niater 51088 OFFICE DEPOT 51088 04-Mar-96 OFFICE DEPOT Totals Check Niater 51088 OFFICE DEPOT Transaction Amount 30.00 30.00 340.00 80.00 85.00 505.00 41.69 ’86.89 228.58 1,096.57 1,096.57 124.75 124.75 19.00 19.00 359.56 359.56 Page 6 Coiments FEBRUARY SALES TAX SCHOENHOFF-1ST ON SCENE BORIS-VERBAL JUDO TOMCHECK-DIFFUSING AGGRES MISC PARTS MISC PARTS STREET LIGHTING 225.74 NSP CHARGES 2,247.70 NSP CHARGES 76.45 NSP CHARGES 1,635.73 NSP CHARGES 143.82 HWY 12 & WILLOW 4,329.44 CAR WASH TICKETS LICENSE REFUND DUE PROJECTOR-C.C. CHAMBERS rnv 1996 rtNi 1:27 pn Check Mutter Check Register City of Orono Page 7 Date Name teck Muter 51089 PCRA LIFE IMSURANCE 51069 07-ller-96 PE*A LIFE IMSUWMCE Totals Check Muter 51089 PERA LIFE INSURANCE 3»eek Niater 51090 PIONEER 51090 51090 51090 04-Mar-96 04-Mar-96 07-Mar-96 PIONEER PIONEER PIONEER Totals Check Nutter 51090 PIONEER 3ieck Nutter 51091 PRAIRIE OFFSET 51091 07-Mar-96 PRAIRIE OFFSET Totals Check Nutter 51091 PRAIRIE OFFSET ;heck Nutter 51092 PRECISION turf 51092 07-Mar-96 PRECISION TURF Totals Check Nutter 51092 PRECISION TURF ateck Nutter 51093 PRO TIRE 4 EXHAUST 51093 OA-Mar-96 PRO TIRE 4 EXHAUST Totals Check Nutter 51093 PRO TIRE 4 EXHAUST Check Nutter 51094 RETTINGER BROS OIL CO. 51094 07-Nar-96 RETTINGER BROS OIL CO. Totals Check Nutter 51094 RETTINGER BROS OIL CO. Check Nutter 51095 ROLLINS OIL CO. 51095 07-Mar-96 ROLLINS OIL CO. Totals Check Nutter 51095 ROLLINS OIL CO. Check Nutter 51096 SCHOENING EXCAVATING 51096 04-Mar-96 SCHOENING EXCAVATING Totals Check Nuter 51096 SCHOENING EXCAVATING Check Nuter 51097 SNYDER DRUG STORES 51097 07-Har-96 SNYDER DRUG STORES Transaction Amount 132.00 132.00 38.50 91.00 57.75 187.25 389.90 389.90 1,651.06 1,651.06 379.92 379.92 11.30 11.30 2,311.00 2.311.00 1.760.00 1,760.00 9.99 Comments APRIL INSURANCE COBG HEARING CDBG HEARING LAND USE APPLICATIONS WINDOW ENVELOPES GROUNDS SUPPLIES «170 BRAKES KEROSENE UNLEADED GAS HAUL SNOW EYE WASH 7 Mar 1996 Thu 1:27 PM Check NtjMier Check Ntabar 51097 51097 51097 Check Register City of Orooo 8 Date 51097 SMYOER DRUG STORES 04-Mar-96 SNYDER DRUG STORES 04*Mar-96 SNYDER DRUG STORES 04-Mar-96 SNYDER DRUG STORES Totals Check NuAer 51097 SNYDER DRUG STORES Check Nuiter 51098 ST. JOSEPH'S EQUIPMENT INC. 51098 07-Mar*96 ST. JOSEPH'S EQUIPMENT INC. 51098 07-Mar-96 ST. JOSEPH'S EQUIPMENT INC. Totals Check Noiiier 51098 ST. JOSEPH'S EQUIPMENT INC. Check Nutfcer 51099 STAR TRIBUNE 51099 04-Mar-96 STAR TRIBUNE Totals Check Hwtoer 51099 STAR TRIBUNE Check Noiiser 51100 STREICHERS 51100 51100 51100 51100 51100 04-Mar-96 04-Mar-96 04-Mar-96 04-Mar-96 04-Mar-96 STREICHERS STREICHERS STREICHERS STREICHERS STREICHERS Totals Check Nurfcer 51100 STREICHERS Check Nuikwr 51101 STRINGER BUSINESS SYSTEMS 51101 04-Mar-96 STRINGER BUSINESS SYSTEMS Totals Check Nui*>er 51101 STRINGER BUSINESS SYSTEMS Check Nui*)er 51102 TOWN & COUNTRY 51102 04-Mar-96 TOWN & COUNTRY Totals Check Nuiijer 51102 TOWN i COUNTRY Check Nuitjer 51103 TWIN CITY GARAGE DOOR CO. 51103 07-Mar-96 TWIN CITY GARAGE DOOR CO. Totals Check Nurt»r 51103 TWIN CITY GARAGE DOOR CO. Check Nuikjer 51104 US WEST CELLULAR 51104 04-Mar-96 US WEST CELLULAR Totals Check Nuiiser 51104 US WEST CELLULAR Transaction Amount 6.78 3.54 38.10 58.41 123.99 60.16 184.15 308.00 308.00 28.22 48.99 118.22 26.63 26.57 248.63 1,065.00 1,065.00 963.83 963.83 67.99 67.99 386.51 386.51 Connents FILM DEVELOPING FILM DEVELOPING POLARDOID FILM STROBES HEADLIGHTS EMPLOYMENT ADVERTISEMENT DOME LIGHT SQUAD #176 SETUP NEW SQUAD CHANGEOVER #175 SETUP #175 SETUP 4200 FAX MACHINE MARCH SERVICES REPAIR HINGE & ROLLERS CELL PHONE-CHESWICX mar 1996 rhu 1:27 PM Check NiMiser Date Check Huiter 51105 US UEST 51105 07-Mar*96 51105 07*Mar-96 51105 07-Mar-96 51105 07-Mar-96 Check Register City of Orono Page 9 US WEST COMMUNICATIONS US UEST COMMUNICATIONS US UEST COMMUNICATIONS US WEST COMMUNICATIONS Total* Check Nuiiier 51105 US UEST COMMUNICATIONS Check Hxmfr 51106 VEE, LIN 51106 04-Mar-96 VEE, LIN Total* Check Nuiter 51106 VEE, LIN Check H\Mtter 51107 UESTSIDE lESALE TIRE 51107 07*Mar*96 UESTSIDE WHOLESALE TIRE Total* Check Nuitoer 51107 UESTSIDE WHOLESALE TIRE Check Nuit)er 51108 UIDMER INC 51108 04-‘'ar-96 UIDMER INC Totals Check NuiiJer 51108 UIDMER INC Check Nuitoer 51109 WRIGHT HENNEPIN ELECTRIC 51109 51109 07-Mar-96 WRIGHT HENNEPIN ELECTRIC 07-Mar-96 WRIGHT HENNEPIN ELECTRIC Total* Check Nuntjer 51109 WRIGHT HENNEPIN ELECTRIC Check Nurtwr 51110 YOCUM OIL CO INC. 51110 51110 Totals Check Nui*>er Grand Total 07-Mar-96 YOCUM OIL CO INC. 07-Mar-96 YOCUM OIL CO INC. 51110 YOCUM OIL CO INC. Transaction Amount Comments 289.34 29.75 68.72 690.96 US UEST CHARGES US UEST CHARGES US UEST CHARGES US UEST CHARGES 1,078.77 64.45 MREAGE REIMS. 64.45 29.45 REPAIR RIM 2'>.45 1,945.00 L.S. #6 REPAIR 1,945.00 7.99 8.00 STREET LIGHT STREET LIGHT 15.99 69.76 191.08 HEATING OIL HEATING OIL 260.84 43,253.84 11^' T mg im hw 4:01 PM OMCk l«f Isccr City of Orono Chock Dote 0«9e 1 Check Amount ■••*1 t . ■: 040731 040731 tfOtm. JMIXI L. mtMlm CtmOt MM* 040733 Ckadt lOMtiir 040734 040734 MALua, oooutmr M. TMnln OMCk Murtoor 040734 OMCk MUMM* 04072S 04073S HASBWI. CAROLI A. Totalo Cheer Oumtoer 04073S OMCk Murder 040726 040736 MOORSI, RONALD J. Totals Check Humber 040736 Check HiMbor 040737 :40737 VSE, LINDA S. Totals Check Nuaber 040727 vecK Number 040728 040738 KUEHN, THCMkS N. Totals Check Number 04072B Check Number 040729 '>29 MILLER, CHR1.«T0PHER K. .is Check Number 040729 Check Number 040710 040737 OLSON. JOHN C. Totals Check Number 040730 Check Number 040731 040731 ANDERSCN, BRUCE L. Totals Ch n Number 040711 3B-Peb-96 28-Feb-96 28-Peb<96 38-Feb-96 36-Feb-96 28-Feb-96 28-Feb-96 28-feo-'>6 28-Feb-96 341.59 341.59 917.47 917.47 753.38 753.38 1,785 »8 1 714.55 71', 55 1,298.15 1,298.15 795.54 749.?9 749.96 919.33 819.3 ' Ml »mm»w 4 Y1S mmrnm nevM »4«TM rev I • JIM L iMCk ■b-J'** 4J7M O0VOOMX. J»f C. ir. ItartMr 040737 «.«. '^0''34 C4073I IKLISM III '•SH TMAla Owck HuMr 040731 QMCI rnmtmT 04073S 0407*9 ERICKSON. KURT R Totals Check Numt>«r 04 )7 39 OMCk auMr 0407)0 040740 FISCHENICH DAN T Totals Chack Number 040740 OMCk Number C 0741 M-M-H 3l-reb-9« 3- rab-9« 21 Feb 94 2l-Peto-94 2I-Peb-9C 24-Feb 9« 28 Feb-96 28-Feb-96 M« «a Ml 42 7«1 33 711 33 746 07 746 07 1 26t 64 1.241 64 1,104 03 1.104.02 1.090.1 1.090.Si 124.09 124.09 1.088 83 1.088.83 1.138 91 1,134 91 MtT«t MOIICIIOLS. MVIO L OMCk Hunter 04074S eteall HUteur 040744 M074« NOftOHCTkinKl. JAMS Tot«l4 Cteck Mumter 040746 Cteek J40?47 040/47 PEkSELL. HIL.MAM It. TttCAla Cteck Hunter 040747 Check Hunter 04074$ 04074$ SCrtOE7.nw«F. JCKN B Totnls Check Numter 34074$ Check Number 04074$ 040749 THCMTON. MARK S. Tctele Checf. Number 04 074 9 Check Nunber 040750 2i-PeH-»4 ao-reH-»< 2i-reb-»« 2$-Peh-96 2$-Feb-96 2$-Peb-96 Feb-96 ;. reb-96 29-Feb-96 Pene J Chneli )»a.ss 392 SS 9S1.S6 9S1 56 279.66 239 66 S$6.40 S$0.4O 342.05 342.05 1,291.70 1,291 '> 53$ 65 53$ 65 1.001.30 1.001.30 912 52 912.52 I Mr itM I 4ioi m ClMck KagUtcr City of Orono MpleyM 040710 040700 lOCOU Choat I0a*«r 040750 Mk HMter 040781 040751 T0MCZY1C. HMIX M. VotoJr Chock ikMbor 040751 Chock Mohor 040752 040752 FMUnOK. COmtSY L. T0C4i0 Chock NUabor 0407S2 Chodi ikiobor 0407S3 040753 rXSCHIR. CHRISTOPHER K. fhcalo Chock Muobor 0407S3 OMCk IkMbor 040754 040754 OAPFROH. MICHAEL P. Totolo Chock IkMbor 040754 Chock MoObor 040755 040755 MABUSTH. JEAHNE A. Totals Chock Nuaibor 040755 Chock Nunbor 040756 040756 OMAN. LYLE E. Totolo Chock Muobor 040756 Chock Mu- 14 0757 040757 VAMG, BRUCE L. Totals Chock Number C40757 Chock Number 040756 04 0758 WECWAN. STEPHEN J. Totals Check Number 040758 Chock Number 040759 Chock Oaeo 2l-Pob-96 28>Peb-96 28-Feb-96 38-Feb-96 28-Fob-96 38-Fob-96 28-Feb-96 28 Feb-96 70-Feb-96 Pago 4 Chock Amount 400.43 400.42 1,154.44 202.93 202.93 149.20 149.20 915.76 915.76 1,159.53 1,159.53 923.79 923.79 949.10 949.10 53.57 53.57 ClMdc nafiatar City of Orono Mint mwOT. jaw p. Itocala ctaefc auwar 0407S» 0407CO (MOTCO OmiMIDSOH. JOHN R. TKala Chaek Huabar 0407CO 0407il 0407C1 OIURMRy. JAMES 0. Tbtala Chaek Nbabar 0407«i Chari! Huabar 0407C2 040742 KRNSCN, STEVEN C. Taeala chaek Huabar 040742 Chaefc Huabar 040743 040743 OBESAXGNER. SCOTT 0. Itocala Chaek Nuabar 040743 Chaek Huabar 040744 040744 OBRIEN. RANDY L. Tocala Chaek Nutnbar 040744 Chaek Huabar 040745 040745 PALMER. GREGORY A. Totals Chaek Number 040765 C.'.ack Numbar 040766 040766 RATHBUN. BARRY J. Totals Check Number 040766 Check Number 040767 040767 SKREEJJ, !5AI,E S Totals Check Number 040767 Csack Number 040768 Chaek Data 24-Fab-94 28-Feb-96 24-Feb-96 28-Feb-96 28-Feb-94 28-Feb-96 28-Feb-96 20-Feb-96 23-Feb-96 Page S Check Amount 1,054.44 1,056.64 1.327.28 1.327.28 681.$7 681.57 889.01 889.01 842.40 842.40 190.98 190.98 794.92 794.92 902.60 902.60 591.25 591.25 Check Date 2l-reb-9« 28-Feb-96 ll-Mer-96 U-Mar'96 ll-Mar-9« ttttale Check Huiaber 040774 OMOll MMber 040775 040775 JABBOUR, GABRXEl. Tecele Check Nun^r 04077$ Owck IMaber 040776 040776 KELLEY. CHARLES TCtaXe Check Number 040776 ll-Ker-96 ll-Mar-96 Orend Total Pege 6 Check Amount 40.36 40.36 964.79 904.79 220.65 220.65 223.19 223.19 223.19 223.19 223.19 223.19 223.19 223.19 36,472.06 ■■S INFORMATION ITEMS COUNCIL MEETING OF MAR ll 1996 cnvoroMNO To: Mayor Callahan City Council Members Ron Moorse, City Administrator From: Michael P. Gaffron. Asst. Planning & Zoning Administrator Date: March 6, 1996 Subject: Neighborhood Responses Update Strategic Planning for Neighborhood Sewer Projects Attachments: A - 10/18/95 Responses Update Memo B * 11/13/95 Responses Update Memo C - 2/5/96 Letter to Peg Swanson Assuming the currently proposed MUSA amendments are approved by the Metropolitan Council this spring, it would be appropriate at that time to formulate a strategy for providing sewer to the 10 'hot spot’ neighborhoods. In deteimining such a strategy, the Council should take into consideration a number of factors which may include: Responses received from the neighborhoods as to desire for municipal sewer, willingness to pay for it, and requested system design or financing considerations. Relative needs for sewer as outlined in the study completed in 1994-95. Analysis of existing system capacity (Highway 12 area) to conclude whether adequate capacity exists to accommodate the proposed projects and if not, formulate a strategy to increase capacity as necessary. Optimization of financing by funding multiple projects under a single bond issue. Timing coordination with any other planned infrastructure upgrades. Etc. .As noted previously, we have received formal responses from some ibut not all) of the neighborhoods which were invited to Public Information Meetings held last sum^' 'r. As an update, we have now received the following responses: (Neighborhoods are listed m the order of priority based on need per the 1994-95 study) North Long Lake: We have received formal responses from three individual property owners, each noting specific concerns; but we have not received any formal reponse from the neighborhood as a whole. Keith Gasner and Scon Momson had sent a petition to each resident in October, but we have not been apprised of the results. Because this area is the most critical in terms of relative need for sewer, it is likely that more discussion with the neighborhood may be needed this spring. Lom Lake Country Club: On December 7 we received a letter from Merrill Swanson indicating 16 of 20 conceptually in favor of sewer, 4 opposed. The general neighborhood concern is cost of the project in relation to the home values, and the need for City financial participation. It IS still stajfs opinion that these two neighborhoods should be provided with sewer as soon as possible. Orono Orchards: No response. Fox Ridge: East Long Lake: Webber Hills: No response. No response. In October we received petition results indicating 28 of 34 residents were in favor of sewer with the understanding there would be no City finan'- al participation. A number of properties in this neighborhood have been sold in the past two years and have money in escrow for septic repairs pending the City’s decision to sewer or not (see attachment C). Given that 28 of 34 is not 100% but yields only a minor risk of assessment appeals. Council should give senous consideration to providing sewer to this neighborhood. The eight Bay Ridge homeowners have petitioned for sewer, the sooner the better'. The Hartwood residents have not responded. This neighborhood has indicated in a letter dated October 21 that they wish us to pursue sewer further, and look at some route alternatives. We now have petitions from all but one owner requesting sewer, and that owner (Headrick) has not responded. We continue to get calls from Mrs. Bouchard, and she and the Stiemas would like sewer, but the Heritage Drive /Heritage Lane residents are on record as being opposed. There is still a possibility of doing a short segment of sewer for those lots abutting Co. Rd. 15. To summarize, it appears that projects have excellent support in Bay Ridge. Bracketts Point and Edgewood Hills; and a majonty support projects in Webber Hills and Long Lake Country UuD. North Long Lake has the highest need but the degree of support is unknown. Foxhill has some support for a short segment. Orono Orchards. Fox Ridge and East Long Lake have shown no support for a project. Bay Ridge: Edgewood Hills: Bracketts Point: Foxhill: 8y llMt amt w« receiipt ftnal w«rd from M«t Ci^ncil t likely now to be sometime in Apnl. as we cxpact llity will be rvqycsniif to ettmd the r.*view past the bOslay linut) it may be diffkuh to move fast cwMifh on any of the projects to start actu^ cotainjction in 1996 However, it wouki be appfopnme thts tprti^ to cstaMtsh an esiima^ tiinetabic for sewer consmiction so chat lesideats can plan accordingty Deadlines for septic upfraocs should also be extended at that time to avoid residents being hit with the Joubie whammv of septic upgrades followed bv sewer construction i^yu A To: From: Date: Subject: Mayor Callahan Councilmembers Ron Moorse, City Administrator John Gcrbardson, Public Works Director Jeanne Mabusth, Building & Zonmg Administrator Steve Weekman, Septic Systems Inspector Glenn Cook, City Engineer Michael P. Gaffron. Asst. Planning & Zoning Administrator October 18. 1995 Update on Sewer Study Neighborhoods After the initial round of neighborhood meetings in July and August, I have had further discussions and meetings with a number of neighborhoods. Each neighborhood has been requested to provide a 'position statement' regarding sewer by the end of October, so that the Council can proceed with a MUSA amendment application to Met CouncU that identifies which neighborhoods are likely to be sewered prior to year 2000 (Met Council staff indicated they would not support MUSA expansio V. now for projects which wUl happen after 2000, although we intend at this point to apply for all 10 neighborhoods). Following is an update regarding the status of neighborhood responses to date: North Long Lake Imiial meeting was July 12. A second neighborhooc ’ meeting was reque by Keith Ganser and Scott Momson which was held in the Council Chamc'crs September 14 a ended by about 2/3 of the neiehborhood. My expectation is that the neighborhood will shortly uw forwarding a letter indicating: -The neighborhood wants sewer -They will request City financial assistance -They woi Id like City Engineer to redesign .o minimize the numoer of individua, grinder stations if at all possible. -They want Long Lake Country Club project to be done at same time, and have City divide the total cost of both projects equally between all 52 units, which ends up at about $16,000/ unit. This eliminates one neighborhood having an advantage over the other... -Thev would like City to take over maintenance of Dakota Avenue once sewer is in and it has been paved. We have rec:ived individual leners from Donald Lund, Keith VandenBranden, and Troy Anderson (attached). Lony Lake Country Club Initial meedny was July 12. A second neighborhood meeting was requested by Gloria Swanson, which was held in the Council Chambers on September 27. About 60% of the neighborhood was in attendance. They have scheduled another meeting in the Council Chambers for October 25, at which time I expect they will finalize a position letter to the Council. Additionally, tt .'\ have requested and staff has committed to doing conformity inspections for the entire neighborhood the 2nd and 3rd weeks of October so they can make informed decisions. I anticipate they will request a sewer project if financial assistance can be provided, and they seemed to concur that both North Long Lake and Long Lake Country Club should pay the same assessment. We have received one letter, that from Gloria Swanson (attached). Orono Orchards We have had almost no contact from the Orono Orchards neighborhood. Initial meeting was July 20. My sense is that, given the information presented them ft the meeting, they are expecting the City to come back in a few years with a proposal for a sewer project and City financial assistance, and they may feel there is no more action to be taken. We have received one letter, from Matthew Nicoll (attached). There are a number of systems in bad shape which may not last 5 years... Initial meeting was August 3. At that tune we had included the Hartwood (Pink Palace area) neighborhood as an option. We have not heard from Hartwood except for the Head's, who are down below the tracks near the channel, and they are aware that Hartwo*.'d has not responded. However, the S Bay Ridge neighbors at the urging of Urban Kerber held a meeting in the neighborhood September 20 which I attended and was wined, dined and grilled. The 'griiling' was quite productive in answering many of their questions. Subsequently, Glenn Cook and I met with them in response to their request for locating the sewer lines in their lakeshore yards rather t^'yu the street, which seems quite feasible. I anticipate receiving a unanimous request for sewer from Bay Ridge in the near ijiure, conditioned on the lake side location. They may request some financijl assistance given the tiCarly $19,000 .nit cost, although I didn’t offer triem much hope considering there are other neighborhoods with greater oec. v Foxhill Initial meeting was held August 3. We have a standing request from Robert Stiema for sewer on Shoreline Drive, and have received a letter (attached) in favor of sewer from Thomas and Pauline Bouchard, also Shoreline Drive. However, the Foxhill Association, representing Heritage Drive and Lane, has gone on record as not wanting sewer under the conditions as presented. See the attached letter from Darnel Hoffrnan. It's ironic that the people with large properties on Shoreline with septic options seem to want the sewer, but those in Foxhill with smaller lots and more potential future septic problems, are balking at it. This may be a reaction to the letter from Garfield Clark (attached) who seems to have his own agenda. We may wish to consider a partial project just for the Shoreline Drive residents... Edgewood Hills Initial meeting was July 27. I have had phone conversations with a few residents, and Edge Jackson seems to be the organizer. I will be attending a meeting in the neighborhood at Freda Keith's on October 19. Preliminary indication is the neighborhood would like sewer. Fox Ridge Initial meeting was July 27. We have had no contact from this neighborhood. My guess is the $30,000 price tag scared them away. Fast Lake Initial meeting was July 27. As with Fox Ridge, we have had no response, perhaps due to the high cost. pr.ncketts Point Initial meeting was July 20 at George Pillsbury's. George is the organizer for this neighborhood. We have received petitions for sewer from 9 of the 12 property ow ners, and are advised that 2 of the remaining 3 are likely in favor. The Headrick's are the only unknown at this point. I did have a conversation with Mrs. Headrick this week. I would anticipate a followup letter from the neighborhood by the end of the month. VVghh#r Hilit InilUl meeting was May 17 at the resideuce of Tom and Marti McCune. Smcc then we have received many phone calls, and Tom McCune is the neighborhood representative. The attached memo from McCune to the neighborhood gives a sense of how the Webber Hills people have proceeded. At point I advisf i that about 80% of the residents are in favor of sewer, with those not in favor mainly being owners of new mound systems. Of course, the neighborhood is somewhat concerned about the $14,000 unit cost and lack of financial assistance, but is equally concerned that 80% is not the 100% that Council was looking for. I anticipate a letter from the neighborhood stating their position by the end of October. PRELIMINARY SUMMARY North Long Lake Long Lake Country Club Orono Orchards Probably Want Sewer X X Probably Don't Want Sewer Unknown/ Undecided X Bay Ridge X (Hartwood)X Foxhill X (Shoreline Dr. area)X Edgewood Hills X Fox Ridge X East Long Lake X Bracketts Point X Webber Hills Assuniin2 we will have responses by the end of October from those noted, I would hope we could submit a formal MUSA amendment application to Met Council in November if Council desires. I expect to have a draft of the application package for your review in a week or so. r To: Couocil From: Michael P. Gaffron, Asst. Planning & Zoning Administrator Date: November 13, 1995 Subject: Neighborhood Responses: Additional Info Received Since October 18 Memo The following attached items have been received since October 18: Letter from Larry Berg re: Troy Anderson (North Long Lake) received 10-30-95 Bay Ridge petition received 10-19-95 Two additional petitions from Bracketts Point received 10-23-95 (All but Headrick have responded to date; so far, all are in favor of sewer) Letter from Edgewood Hills neighborhood received 10-24-95 Petitions and summary from Webber Hills neighborhood received 10-23-95 Two additional items of note: Jim Dillman of 225 Willow Drive North called today requesting that we place his property in the MUSA. He abuts Hackberry, and sewer is in the street adjacent to his home with two smbs aimed at him, but he was never assessed for it. He expects to have to replace his system probably within the next five years and would like the option of sewer. He will likely send a lener... Today we denied a building permit for a room addition for the Bouchard's at I860 Shoreline Drive because they have a non-conforming septic system which needs to be upgraded firs:. They are pan of the Fo.xhill'hot spot'. Although the owners in'Foxhill'have responded negatively to sewer. Bouchard and immediate neighbors could be served by constructing a shon segment of sewer along Shoreline Drive eastward from Nettles' property. We will no doubt hear from the Bouchard's shoniy, and have a letter on file from them supponins sewer, as well as one from Stierna . and I'm getting calls also from Morris Nelson who also is along that stretch. C GITYorORONO MmiriH Oflfcw $tt«ttM*tsS: 2750 Wl«y Ptfkwty Orom. MN SS3S6 MaiihifMimi: P.O. Boi 66 Cfystil Bay, MN 55323-0066 February 5, 1996 Peg Swanson Counselor Reair>- 3622 Highway 101 South Wayzata, MN 553Q1 R£; Stams of Sewer Planning - Webber Hills Dear Ms. Swanson Thank you for your inquiry regarding the status of sewer planning for the Webber Hills neighborhood. I hope the following information is helphil. Rackip-ound In early February 1992, the City Council adopted revisions to Orono ’s septic system ordinances in order to conform with MPCA standards. The new ordinance changed the status of septic systems with less than 3* of unsaturated soil between the bottom of the drainfield trench and the seasonal water table, from merely ’’substandard'* to a "non-conforming ” stams. Non- conforming systems are required by code to be upgraded once they are identified. Upgrades must be completed within two hill construction seasons (t>'picaily 2-2'/: years) of identification. Also in February 1992, the Council adopted a new Shoreland Ordinance which requires that non-conforming septic systems within the Shoreland District must also be upgraded and made conibrmind whenever a building permit or variance is required. .A portion of the Webber Hills neiahbornood is within the Shoreiand Distnet. On September 13. 1993. ±e C;t>- Council established a moratorium on the enforcement ot City ordinances requiring the upgrade of non-contbrming systems. The intent of the moratorium was to allow lime for the City to smdy whether certain neighborhoods would be better served by construction of murucipal sewers rauher than upgrading septic systems. The intent of the Council was to avoid the potential of a neighborhood constructing many new septic systems xnd then bemg forced to further bear the cost of municipal sewer within a few years. Durmg 1993 and 1994 the Cir/ idendiied a number of neighborhoods, including Webber Hills, as being potentially better ser/ed by murucipal sewer. The ten neighborhoods were evaluated and Telephon* (612) 473-T357 • FAX 473-0510 Ptg Swanson Febniaiy 2, 1996 Page 2 prioritized as to the relative degree of need for sewer. The prioritization was primarily based on the relative capability of the neighborhood to replace non-conforming individual systems with conforming systems. A significant factor was whether each property contained a suitable site for drainfieid’replacement. Webber Hills ranked as the fifth highest priority of the ten neighborhoods. The City Council allowed the moratorium to expire in November i994, and at that same time indicated that while it appears all ten neighborhoods would be best served by municipal sewer in the long term, the City is not in a position to fmancially assist with the construction of all ten projects immediately, but may be able to do so over a ten to fifteen year period. The Council then identified two neighborhoods. Long Lake Country' Club and North Long Lake, as being the highest priority for sewer construction m the ne.xt 2-3 years, with some City financial panicipation in their project costs being likely. The Council ftinher indicated that lower priority neighborhoods who wished to avoid the "double whammy" of paying for a new septic system and a municipal sewer, would be provided with sewer relatively soon if the residents of those neighborhoods agreed to forego City financial participation. Cir.- staff subsequently met with each of the individual neighborhoods. City staff met with the Webber Hills neighborhood in May 1995. The City was subsequently advised by the Webber Hills homeowners in October 1995 that 28 of 34 would support a municipal sewer project absent City financial assistance. MUSA Amendment In January 1996, the City formally submitted a request for an amendment of the Metropolitan Urban Scrv'ice Area (MUSA) boundary to include ail ten neighborhoods including Webber Hills. Approval of the MUSA boundary' revision by the .Metropolitan Council is required before the City' can e.xtend its municipal sewer system. There are a number of related and unrelated factors taken into account by .Metropolitan Council in reviewing such proposals, and there is no automatic "guarantee" that the City's request will be approved. However, we anticipate final action by the Metropolitan Council in late March 1996. Tin.- Courc:il Consideration Assuming that .Meiropoliian Council approves the MUSA revisions in late .March, the City Council will at that nm.e review the responses from each of the neighborhoods including Webber Hills, to dete.Trane which neighborhoods will in fact be provided with municipal sewer and in w hat timeftame construction of sewers will occur. The fact that 1 S% of the property ovvners in Webber Hills were not in favor of sewer suggests that the City risks a (relatively small) number of assessment appeals if the project goes forward. Other neighborhoods have indicated unanimous support for sewer without subsidy, while additional neighborhoods have indicated absolutely no suppon for a sewer project without City subsidies. City staff cannot predict the City Council’s conclusion regarding the sewering of Webber Hills, but we anticipate Ptg Swanson Fcbniify 2, 1996 P%t3 Oat on the .natter wU occur in the late spring of 199«. We would hope that the Couik U can reach a conclusion on whether Webber Hills will be sewered and in what tune&ame, in early summer 1996. As you know, it wnuld not be prudent for a property owner to construct a new septic system in Webber HilU until a decision is reached on murdcipal sewer instaUauon. A number of home sales in Webber Hills in the last two to three years have resulted in funds being escrowed for septic system uparades. In some cases new systems have been installed in Webber Hills m the last' few years despite the moratorium and in absence of the formal final decision on municipal sewer. I hope this has provided vou with some useful information. I anticipate that tne City will be in a position to reach a'conclusion on sewer for Webber Hills within the next three to six months. Please feel free to call me at 473-7357 if I can be of further assistance. Michael P. Gaffron Assistant Planning & Zoning Administrator MPG/lsv PtKNT9nCILI CQMHaSIONCt PHONK «12 34»-7MT FAX «U-34«-«701 TOO «a-34«-77M Board of Hennepin County Commissioners A>2400 G overnment Center Minneapolis , Minnesota 55487-0240 F€bruiry29.1996 Ttw Honorabit Edward CaNahan, Jr. Mayor CHyofOrorK) 2750 Kaiay Pkwy.. P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay. MN 55323 Dear Mayor CaNahan. Jr; The Joint Property Tax Reform Committee, of which I am a member will be meeting throughout 1996 to devise legislation (for the 1997 session) that will provide a fairer, more equitable form of property taxation. The Committee consists of county commissioners, school board n>embers and city council members from Hennepin, Ramsey and St. Louis County I am one of only two ’’suburban ” county commissioners serving on this cc 'iimittee. So that I may fairly represent the interests of the suburoan property taxpayer, I must attend these committee meetings armed with your ideas and opinions concerning property tax reform. You can help me ensure the suburban taxpayer is not forgotten! Attend one of the property tax leform town meetings I will be holding in March and April. Encourage your staff to attend. Share with me your viewpoints on property tax reform. Your input is important not only to me, but the constituents we represent. There will be three town meetings, ail beginning at 7 00 p.m Monday. March 25,1 will be at the Plymouth Library, 15700 36th Avenue North; Tuesday. March 26, at Maple Grove City Hall, 9401 Fernbrook Lane North; and. Monday, April 1, at the Westonka Library, 2079 Commerce Boulevard. Mound. I am looking forward to listening to your thoughts on this issue so dear to the hearts of our friends and neighbors. Sincerely. Penny Steele County Commissioner - 7th District PS:pr PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER Minnesota Department of Transportation Metropolitan Division Waters Etlge Building 1500 West County Road B2 Roseville. Minnesota 55113 March 6, 1996 TH 12 Policy Committee RE: Tentative March 20, 1996 Policy Meeting Canceled Dear Committee Members; This letter is written to inform the TH 12 Policy Committee members that the tentative meeting scheduled for March 20 will be canceled. We would like to reschedule the next Policy Meeting for April 24. 1996. Mn/DOT will be announcing a decision of the preferred altemative(s) and the course of action the department will be taking due to their decision, on approximately April 22, 1996. At this time, the decision document. Trunk Highway 12 Comprehensive Report, will be distributed for review to all agencies and persons designated in Mn/DOT’s Highway Project Development Process Handbook (the same distribution who reviewed the Scoping Decision Document). Upon distribution of the document, a notice of intent will be published in the EQB Monitor, a press release will be sent to local newspapers, and a 30 day comment period will commence. The April policy meeting would be held at an appropriate lime to address any issues regarding the decision and direction of Mn/DOT for the TH 12 Corridor. If you have any questions or concerns regarding the meeting date, please feel free to call either myself at (612) 582-1293. or Tom O’Keefe at (612) 582-1296. Sincerely. Patti token, P.E. Project Manager cc; Tom O’Keefe An Equal Opporumity En,player