Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
10-08-1990 Council Packet
AGENDA FOR CCUNCIL MEETING SET FOR MONDAY, OCTOBER 8, 1990, 7:00 P.M. (*)Asterisk items are considered to be routine items to be enacted upon by one motion by the City Council under the Consent Item'* on the agenda. Discussion will be helc upon recuest. Memos regarding each of the Agenda items a available in the Public Packet which may be obtained upoi' request from the ?.“corder. POLL CALL 7:00 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING - 1. #1590 Minnegasco In:., 330 Old Crystal Bay Road North - Conditional Use Permit - Resolution 2. CONSENT AGENDA* APPROVAL OF MINUTES * 3. Regular Meeting of September 24, 1990 PARK COMT-IISSION COr^MENTS 4. Presentation 5. Park Dedication Fee PLANNING COMMISSION REPRESENTATIVE - Jeffrey Johnson Rep. PUBLIC COMMENTS - (Limit 5 Minutes Per Person) ZONING ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT ♦♦APPLICANTS**Immediately after the Council has reviewed your application please sign the three (3) original resolutions at the Recorder's desk. Applicants need not execute resolutions for subdivisions, vacations and denials. 6. #1334 Rebers Construction - Sugar woods Plat Reconsideration of Conditions of PRD Approval - Resolution 7. #1332 Fullerton Properties, 2225 Sixth Avenue North a) Final Subdivision b) Road Name Aoproval 8. #1535 Kennedv/Butterfield, 3745-3765 Watertown Road - Subdivision of a Lot Line Rearrangement - Resolution iJ. # 1555 Landstar Inc., 250 1 Old Beach Road - Preliminary Subdivision - Resolution 10. #1579 Garry Everson, 4755 North Shore Drive - Variance - Denial Resolution 11. #1585 C. Arnold Carlson, 855 Forest Arms Lane - After the Fact Conditional Use Permit - Resolution . „ . 12. #1586 James Buranen, 1085 Brown Road South - After the FaCw Variance - Resolution 13. #1587 Ruby Siford, 96 Hackberry Hill - After the Fact Variance - Resolution 14. #1588 US West New Vector Group, 850 Wayzata Blvd. - Conditional Use Permit ^ i ^ xr15. #1589 Marcus and Judy Blue, 2160 Crystal Avenue - Variance Resolution 16. Wetlands Protection MAYOR/COUNCIL REPORT ENGINEER'S REPORT ♦ 17. Request for Payment #6 - Well #3 ♦ 18. Change Order #3-6 Inch Test Well ♦ 19. Payment #4 Final Payment - Test Well AGENDA FOR COUNCIL MEETING SET FOR MONDAY, OCTOBER 8, 1990, 7:00 P,M. CITY ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT 20. Lafayette Ridge - Request for Public Street 21. LMCD Comprehensive Plan/Shoreland Regulations 22. Street Lights - Lyric Avenue 23. Highway 12 Corridor 24. Navarre Heights Drainage 25. Rules of Criminal Procedure Change - Resolution 26. Bicycle Disposition 27. Salary Adjustment - Randy Rathbun Leave of Absence - Jamie Bosma Temporary Employment - Clerical Staff 3j. Employment - Public Works Department 31. Financial Projections 32. Special Assessments - Delinquent Utility Accounts - Resolution 33. Special Assessments - Delinquent 1990 Developer Fees and Alarm User Fees - Resolution 34. Municipal Board Hearing 35. Set Public Hearing Date - Reallocation of C.D.B.G. Funds 36. Appointment of Election Judges - Resolution 37. 1486 Long Lake Boulevard - Septic Options 38. Administrator's Information Animal Care Facility Well #3 update Goal Setting Status August Receipts and Disbursements Wire Transfers CITY ATTORNEY'S REPORT LICENSES (39*) BILLS (40*) UPCOMING ISSUES AND EVENTS 10/08 - Council Meeting 10/15 - Planning Commission Meeting 10/20 - Orono Fall Clean-Up Day - Saturday 8 - 4:30 10/22 - Council Meeting 11/06 - General Election Day - Polls Open 7:00 a.m.-8:00 p.m 11/08 - Canvassing Board Meets 6:00 P.M. 11/08 - 1991 Budget Meeting - After Canvassing Board Meeting 11/12 - Holiday - Veterans Day 11/13 - Tuesday - Council Meeting 11/19 - Planning Commission Meeting 11/22 - Holiday - Thanksgiving Day 11/23 - Holiday 11/26 - Council Meeting 1 PUBLIC ATTENDANCE MEETING DATE / ^ ^ VCITY OF ORONO PLEASE FILL OUT THE INFORI'IATION REQUESTED BELCW FOR OUR CITY RECORDS. NAME (please print)ADDRESS NA25E OR NUI4BER PRESENT FOR (from agenda) 2. t K Lc. ' iv<-i -r — ^ - f\ t! \! 5"? / fj I C' f ? t. i \a.^‘L'b>:/.'R^Ml '1____C----------------^ f— ^ /'vt 'n ,-T_ ■ ■> i-h -A; 6. /Xc’u<r‘ A’ */^ z / tr^c y C' ’ AI^H t /V 7. L /X T AS^ /'fc‘ L LiP'lc^• C ' a 'Ay^/ C M 1 i----------- a. L .'T . RiiVyv\uvv^\<\pL':> / a - i 3 tL w \ 1 u c, / /r (vr*.vv i ^ J K 1 T. 1. \ "V\ ! . 0 r-"' vrit'\^U?\ (H,4 If. a1 •X.f’i't’> --------------- .2. 1'"; .1 ^ \ ri t i________(r nirU ''A'' l-'|f a..1 1 L : Hl > Ar - t <r\ ^(c M'■3. ^ 1 1 r-WXZ------- <(/C y f x\ A . \x \ \ ' '—^V 1 '-A k '1 ' '■lc ' <- ' ^ K(\* '4 n 7 ^ 1 A L 1 L* IrltK ^r^/Vcn- f(J 1-//• / ^ t 4. ! /c C „ /ft IQ/i Ml' 'j ' 'i( r* .»i - n , / _- 4‘ ■'' \ J ' / (. /.•.' . *>^1 'U-: I* i^k / ' o '( /fjri /;tv' /fhntx i-i'iM/o A /t'o^'A A ./k-., ■< /-A.'.. ■ ^ ^ /I '■ ij PUBLIC ATTENDANCE CITY OF ORONO MEETING DATE PLEASE FILL OUT THE INFORT-IATION REQUESTED BELOW FOR OUR CITY RECORDS. NAME OR NUMBER iJdcCd,^ lU.y':V '<4 >v.,. * './ X^/y :o >r y / 2. IX- ^ 4 / '7^icd:Lo iw ci ■ty f 3 /}/'. J /d ’K y/ -r/^ 4 (m AX ^ »AVv.Vis J'2 O 5. {{‘P -A lop LLSi ')/•, t\ / fU Lf Coo^i i^c<-p- uH "]o-tnu|ftiiFavr4i'^) 7. C C' r ^3 s' ;, A-r#-'. > rt - ' >. /A'1- P 8. y- ~<(.■’'f.c- / f .y/L . W :7 r}y y ■ f /i^ 1! !■ 0 ____________________ 11 . uA ia /PJ a -T?>d ■€ A«W'? 12. 1\ w' \i _______<■?«-. U-W . ^14- '/'KV C '.,.(, 'V '.Cy /.«r AS \)' -^!H- 14. '^yy\ofA\^f i>£e- Z76#ia/>*«m»..a//>j ^7Sis- 1*5.^ ^ L.^\( vr . >c. 'V-Sj’->1 ‘A ifi. , N’A \,'l7''.V-v-l .'i\P'S ’ V:, IPyis ...14 -------------- 17. \j"r X/A V ■Ah; / (',-.>^ccr /ru-xx;-, AI-a" IS.f /4i2,U6^0 C /Ul,Lfc>fO &SS I’.'tu*^ItE>«‘*/( is-*r) 19. 20. OTY OF ORONO NOTICE The Council will hold a hearing in the Coun cil Chambers at 1275 Brown Road South on Monday. October 8. 1990. at 7 00 p m for the purpoee of reviewing No 1590 Mmnegasco Inc a application for a conditional use permit for the temporary operation of a portable liquid natural gas vaporizer at a property located at 530 Old Crystal Bay Road North All persons wishing to be heard will appear at this time Written comments are solicited Plans are avail able for review in the Dty oHices by ap pointment. Dated this 18th day of September. 1990 fs/ Dorothy M Hallin City clerK (PubNahed m The Laker and Pioneer Sept 24. two) ----- MAMCTTA A. 8TTUU3 notary pumjc CARVER COUNTY MV OOHMMSON CXPME8 »-1« Affidavit of Publication Str.te 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. Min nesota. and has full knowledge of the facts which are stated below: A.) The newspaper has complied with all the require ments constituting qualifications as a qualified newspaper, as provided by Minnesota Statute 331A.02, 331 A.07. and other applicable laws, as amended. B.) The printed / L J ‘ tLLCl KlOtujL >U OUP which is attached was cl; from the columns of said newspaper, and v/as pr nted and published once each week for--------------i__________successive weeks: It was first published Monday, the 'day of 'Oj.fP'tx n\ OiH ^ and was thereafter printed and published every Monday, to and including Monday. Subscribed and sworn to me on this day of Bv:Lj1lL Notary Public Rate Information ■ (1) Lowest classified rate paid by commercial users for compara ble space *9 80 per Inch (2) Maximum rate allowed by law for above maMer $9 00 per Inch (3) Rate actually charged for above matter $5 20 per Inch Each additional successive week $3 38 per inch Mayor Grabek & Orono Council Members Planning Commission Chairman Kelley Orono Planning Commission Members City Administrator Bernhardson ? V- A. i Fron: Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building & Zoning Administrator Date: October 4, 1990 Subject: #1590 Minnegasco, Inc. - Conditional Use Permit - 530 Old Crystal Bay Road North - Public Hearing - 7:00 p.m. Original Public Hearing held before the Planning Commission at their September 17, 1990 meeting for property at at 525 Old Crystal Bay Road North (located west side of Old Crystal Bay Road within residential zone). Applicant has relocated gas vaporizer operation within Industrial Park on east side of Old Crystal Bay Road. A second Public Hearing has been scheduled before the Council in order to fulfill legal requirements for conditional use permit review. / Pertinent Secitons of the Code Section 10.50, Subdivision 3 (A) \/) - Conditional Use Permit required for public service structure within industrial zone. Minnegasco proposes a temporary installation of a portable liquid natural gas vaporizer to inject gas into the distribution system during periods of high demand within winter months. Required Setbacks A. Street setback adjacent to residential zone Required = 75' Proposed = 75' B. Required rear setback Required = 30' Setback of tanker truck from rear fenceline =» 25' Setback from rear or east property line * 100+' C. Required side yard * 1 1/2 height of the tankers, approximately 15' Side setback required =* 22.5' Side setback adjacent to residential used portion of industrial property 40' from tanker truck location Please note residential used structure on subject property is over 260' from proposed operation. Zoning File #1590 October 4, 1990 Page 2 Section 10.61, Subdivision 5 (C) - Vehicle parking ^i^.as must meet 5* side and rear setbacks and 20' street setback. Section 10.50, Subdivision 5 (I) - Outdoor storage, is required for the proposed use. Fencing 50% opaque A. Minimum fence height Required = 5' Proposed = 8' B. Type of fence required Proposed = 100% opaque With original application, applicant proposed chain link fencing at 0% opaqueness. Planning Commission required landscaping to provide necessary shielding or buffering. Applicant proposes a completely opaque fence for Council's consideration in lieu of the installation of landscaping. List of Exhibits Staff Memo 9/12/90 Exhibit A Exhibit B Exhibit Exhibit Exhibit Exhibit Exhibit Exhibit Exhibit Application Certificate of Mailing/Property Owners List Plat Map Legal Notice of Public Hearing Applicant's Addendum Location Map Site Plan Engineer's Report Elevation of proposed wall - Applicant to provide sample of wall sections at Council meeting Need for the Rescheduling of a Second Public Hearing Before Council Application #1590 was originally filed for the Rob:^ property located directly across the street at 525 Old Crystal Bay Road North. In preliminary discussions with Minnegasco, the City Administrator had consistently advised the applicant that the use was not compatible on a residential property and urged Minnegasco to relocate within the industrial property on the east side of Old Crystal Bay Road. The applicant filed the application for the Robb property at the filing deadline for your September meeting because of timing and the upcoming winter and the need to provide an auxilary backup for emergency gas needs in the winter. The applicant advised that it took six months to obtain a lease from the Robb s Zoning File #1590 October 4, 1990 Page 3 and questioned whether they could obtain a lease from an industrial park owner in this limited period of time. After the filing of the original application, the applicant was able to obtain a lease from Veda, Inc., the owners of the Van Dale property and surrounding properties. (Refer to Exhibit C & P). The area of the lease hold will consist of a 150* x 150* parcel located on Lot, 1, Block 1, Van Dale Addition. Northern portions of this parcel are currently occupied by Miller Enterprises, a legal non-conforming use consisting of a residential unit and multi-commercial uses. At the Planning Commission's meeting of September 17th, members were asked to review the proposal at the 530 Old Crystal Bay Road location in order to implement the review of this application and in consideration of the emergency aspect of the application. Review of Proposal - As already noted, Minnegasco proposes leasing a 150' x 150' parcel of land from Veda, Inc. for a temporary period of time for approximately 3 to 5 years. Minnegasco proposes to install a portable liquid natural gas vaporizer to be introduced into the distribution system (located along east side of Old Crystal Bay Road) during periods of high demands during the extreme cold winter months. A similar operation existed in the City of Spring Park last year. The applicant advises that Minnegasco used the facility four times within the 1989-1990 v/inter season. The facility itself will consist of a portable vaporizer that resembles a tanker truck and a tanker that supplies the liquid methol. They propose tapping into an existing gas line that runs along the west side of the property within the right-of-way of Old Crystal Bay Road. The vaporizing process begins at 5:00 a.m. and is completed by 9:00 a.m. During that operation period, employees will be on the site at all times (3-4 employees). When the emergency period ends, the tanker will be driven off the site but the vaporizer unit will remain. Minnegasco advises that during these months security patrols will visit the site at irregular intervals. The noise; jt’r.^rated from this operation, we are advised, is much less than the noise caused by passing traffic on Old Crystal Bay Road and Highway 12 and, possibly, less objectionable to some of the noises omitted from the existing industrial uses. At any rate, the noises are omitted during the cold winter for a maximum 4 hour period in the a.m. The applicant has submitted photos of the portable vaporize*' used in Spring Park during the 1989-90 heating season. The applicant advises that the vaporizer was used only four times during that heating period. Zoning File #1590 October 4, 1990 Page 4 As noted above, all employee parking areas must meet the required setbacks from the fenced in areas. The gate opening will open to a maximum width of 20' meeting the required opening by the Fire Department (16' required, if 20' stopping distance is not provided off right-of-way). The cyclone fencing as originally proposed would not meet the 50% opaqueness standard. The Planning Commission recommended landscaping along north, west and south sides of fencing to provide the necessary buffer and conditioned approval of the conditional use permit on this being provided. Since that time the applicant has met. with the City staff to discuss the use of a styrofoam with brick veneer fence at an 8' height providing 100% opaqueness. The applicant will provide elevations of the fence. Review Exhibit I. Samples of the fencing materials will be provided for Council's review. The applicant has asked Council to consider this fencing because of the temporary nature of this use, the evergreen plantings may not be feasible. In addition, applicant advises that the landscaping would have to be planted on properties not covered within the lease agreement. Review of Engineer's Comments Proposed access located 550' from the intersection of Highway 12 has been approved by Glenn Cook. He also has recommended screening because of the cyclone type fencing proposed by applicant in original review. The driveway area should be constructed to a 9 ton design and because of the temporary aspect of this use bituminous surfacing is not required. Cook also notes that the applicant should be required to restore the site to it's original condition when Minnegasco moves out. Applicant has advised that this is part of the lease agreement with Veda, Inc. Planning Commission RecOTimendation The Planning Commission recommended unanimous approval of the temporary conditional use permit for Minnegasco at the property located at 530 Old Crystal Bay Road North subject to applicant pro iding the necessary screening along the north, west and south side of the facility and also subject to the conditions set forth in the City Engineer's review. The enclosed resolution has been drafted eliminating the condition of screening until the matter of the fencing is resolved by the Council. A RESOLUTION GRANTING A CONDTIONAL USB PERMIT PER MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 10.50, SUBDIVISION 3 (A)7 FILE #1590 WHEREAS, Minnegasco, Inc. (hereinafter "the applicant") has an interest in the property located at 530 Old Crystal Bay Road North located within the City of Orono (hereinafter "City") and legally described as Lot 1, Bloc)c 1, Van Dale Addition, Hennepin County, Minnesota, (hereinafter "property"), and WHEREAS, the applicant has applied to the City of Orono for a Conditional Use Permit per Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.50, Subdivision 3 (A)7 to permit the temporary use of a portable liquid natural gas vaporizer. Minnesota: NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono, FINDINGS 1. This application was reviewed as Zoning File #1590, 2. The property is located in the Industrial Zoning District. 3. On September 17, 1990 the Orono Planning Commission reviewed the application as proposed and recommended approval based upon the following findings: a) Proposed location of this use within the City's industrial par)c meets the objectives of the zoning chapter and purposes of the industrial district in which the use is located. b) The proposed use was found to not be detr^;mental to the public health, safety or general welfare or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity and will not have a negative impact on the surrounding residential properties because of its limited period of operation within the year. Page 1 of 4 4. The City Council finds that granting a conditional use permit to allow the temporary use of a portable liquid natural gas vaporizer at the property will not be detrimental to the health, safety or general welfare of the public, would not adversely affect light, air nor pose a fire hazard or other danger to neighboring properties, nor will it depreciate surrounding property values and that the proposed level of use of the property will be in keeping with the intent and objectives of the Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan of the City. 5. The City Council has considered this application including the findings and recommendations of the Planning Commission, reports by staff and comments of the applicant and the affect of the proposed use on the health, safety, and welfare of the community. CONCLOSIONS, ORDER AND CONDITIONS Based upon one or more of the above findings, the Orono City Council Hereby grants a Conditional Use Permit per Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.50, Subdivision 3 (A)7 to permit the temporary use of a portable liquid natural gas vaporizer at the property located at 530 Old Crystal Bay Road North, subject to the following conditions: 1. ? Condition resolving screening vs. fencing.ill 2. Any changes in the hours of operation or expansion in the period of operation (outside of cold weather months) shall require additional review of this conditional use permit or possibly a new conditional use permit. 3. Driveway areas should be constructed to a 9 ton design and bituminous surfacing shall not be required for this temporary use. 4. The applicant shall be responsible for the complete restoration of the site at the time proposed use is removed from the site. 5. This temporary conditional use permit is approved for a period of 5 years. Applicant must resolve permanent service needs for this area of Orono within that period of time as there is no guarantee that the City will grant another conditional use permit for an extension of this use. This conditional use will expire on October 8, 1995. Page 2 of 4 6. 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 terminaU's any authority granted herein, and shall be punishable as a misdemeanor, 7. The undersigned representative of Minnegasco has read, understood and hereby agrees to the terms of this resolution and on behalf of Minnegasco, Inc., it's successors and assigns, hereby agrees to the recording of this resolution in the chain of title of the property. Adopted by the Orono City Council on this ^>th day of October, 1990. ATTEST; Theresa L. Naab, Deputy Clerk Edward J. Callahan, Jr., Acting Mayor Authorized Representative of Authorized Representative of Veda, Inc. Minnegasco, Inc. Page 3 of 4 Mayor Grabek & Orono Council Members Planning Commission Chairman Kelley Orono Planning Commission Members City Administrator Bernhardson 7. Date: Subject: Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building & Zoning Administrator September 12, 1990 Inc. - Conditional Use Permit -1590 Minnegasco, Public Hearing - Original Public Hearing scheduled for property located at 525 Old Crystal Bay Road North has been relocated to the east side of Old Crystal Bay Road within Industrial Park. A second Public Hearing will be rescheduled before the Council to fulfill legal requirements for review. Pertinent Secitons of the Code Section 10.50, Subdivision 3 (A) (7) - Conditional Use Permit required for public service structure within industrial zone. Minnegasco proposes a temporary installation of a portable liquid natural gas vaporizer to inject gas into the distribution system during periods of high demand within winter months. Required Setbacks A. Street setback adjacent to residential zone Required = 75' Proposed =■ 75' Required Rear « 30' Setback of tanker truck from rear fence line = 25' Setback from rear or east property line =* 100+‘ Required side yard = 1 1/2 height of the tankers, approximately 15' Side setback required =22.5' Side setback adjacent to residential used portion of industrial property = 40' from tanker truck location Distance from residential structure on subject property can not be confirmed as residence has not been located on site plan. B. Satellite structure (use undefined) located 7' north fence line. from 3. Section 10.61, Subdivision 5 (C) - Vehicle parking areas must meet 5' side and rear setbacks and 20' street setback. Zoning File 1590 September 12, 1990 Page 2 4. Section 10.50, Subdivision 5 (1) - Outdoor storage. Fencing is required for this use. A. Minimum fence height Required * 5' Proposed * 8' B. Type of fence required *50% opaque Applicant proposes chain link fencing at 0% opaqueness. List of Kxhibits Exhibit A - Application Exhibit B - Property Owners List Exhibit C - Plat Map Exhibit D - Applicant's Addendum Exhibit E - Location Map Exhibit F - Site Plan Mood for the Rescheduling of a Second Public Hearing Application 1590 was originally filed for the Robb property located directly across the street at 525 Old Crystal Bay Road North. In preliminary discussions with Minnegasco, the City Administrator had consistently advised the applicant that the use was not compatible on a residential property and urged Minnegasco to relocate within the industrial property on the east side of Old Crystal Bay Road. The applicant filed the application for the Robb property at the filing deadliie tor your September meeting because of timing and the upcoming winter and the need to provide an auxilary backup for emergency gas needs in the winter. The applicant advised that it took six months to obtain a lease from the Robb's and questioned whether they could obtain a lease from an industrial park owner in this limited period of time, A week ago the applicant advised that they were able to obtain a lease from Veda, Inc., the owners of the Van Dale and surrounding properties. The area of the lease hold will consist of a 150' x 150' parcel located on Lot, 1, Block 1, Van Dale Addition. Northern portions of this parcel are currently occupied by Miller Enterprises, a legal non-conforming use consisting of a residential unit and multi-commercial uses. In order to implement the review of this application and in consideration of the emergency needs expressed by Minnegasco, the Planning Commisaion will be asked to review and make a recommendation to the Council on the current proposal. At your September meeting, if Planning Commission is satisfied with the information submitted for this review, a public hearing will be Zoning File 1590 September 12, 1990 Page 3 scheduled at the October 8, 1990 meeting of the Council. Property owners will be renotified of the public hearing at the Council meeting. Review of Application - As already noted, Minnegasco proposes leasing a 150' x 150' parcel of land from Veda, Inc. for a temporary period of time at approximately 3 to 5 years. Minnegasco proposes to install a portable liquid natural gas vaporizer to be introduced into the distribution system during periods of high demands during the extreme cold winter months. The facility itself will consist of a portable vaporizer that resembles a tanker truck and a tanker that supplies the liquid methol. They propose tapping into an existing gas line that runs along the west side of the property within the right-of-way of Old Crystal Bay Road. The vaporizing process begins at 5:00 a.m. and is completed by 9:00 a.m. During that operation period, employees will be on the site at all times. When the emergency period ends, the tanker will be driven off the site but the vaporizer unit will remain, Minnegasco advises that during these months security patrols will visit the site at irregular intervals. The noise generated from this operation, we are advised, is much less than the noise caused by passing traffic on Old Crystal Bay Road and Highway 12 and, possibly, less objectionable to some of the noises omitted from the existing industrial uses. At any rate, the noises are omitted during the cold winter months for a maximum 4 hour period in the a.m. The applicant has submitted photos of the portable vaporizer used in Spring Park during the 1989-90 heating season. It would appear that the use meets all required setbacks from proposed lot lines although the existing residence on the property has not been located, the tanker truck would appear to be approximately 100' from the re»iJt;nce structure but this must be confirmed prior to the Council public hearing. As noted above, all employee parking areas must meet the required setbacks from the fenced in areas. Note that the gate opening will open to a maximum width of 20' meeting the required opening by the Fire Department (16' required, if 20' stopping distance in not provided off right-of- way). Applicant should be asked to respond to the question of the opaqueness of the fencing proposed. Landscaping doesn't appear feasible because of the temporary nature of the facility. Planning Commission members should provide direction on this matter. The use of the satellite should be defined by applicant. Is this a sanitary facility? Zoning File 1590 September 12# 1990 Page 4 As of this writing the City Engineer's review comments have not been received but will be reviewed at your meeting. Cook's comments will specifically address the location of the access. Applicant had originally considered using an existing gravel road located further south because of the condition of the road bed and other conflicts with existing uses. Access directly off Old Crystal Bay Road is sought by applicant. Cook will also provide additional background on the possible impact of the proposed use upon existing development. Options of Action A. Denial - Please refer to your necessary findings in Section 10.09, Subdivision 6. B. Approval - Members may consider the following approval recommendation - to approve a conditional use permit for a stand-by supply of natural gas provided by a portable liquid gas vaporizer for Minnegasco, Inc. at a property legally defined as Lot 1, Block 1, Van Dale Addition, based on the following findings: 1. Proposed location of this use within the City's Industrial park meets the objectives of the Zoning Chapter and purposes of the Industrial district in which the use is located. 2. The proposed use was found to not be detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity and will not have a negative impact on the surrounding residential properties because of its limitpd period of operation within the year. The following conditions may be considered with this approval: Any changes in the hours of operation or expansion in the period of operation (outside of cold weather months) shall require an expansion of this conditional use permit or possibly a new conditional use permit. 3. Resolve of fencing - issue of opaqueness. 4. This temporary conditional use permit is approved for a period of 5 years. Applicant raust resolve permanent service needs for this area of Orono within that period of time as there is no guarantee that the City will grant another conditional use permit for an extension of this use. C. Tabling - A second public hearing to be scheduled before the Planning Commission at their October 15, 1990 meeting. 7'/ CITY OF OFOHO - GENERAL LAND USB APPLICATION PROPERTY LOCATION South 150.00 feet of the West 150.00 feet of Lot 1 BI ocr 1 Van Dale Addition, Orono, Minnesota Site Address _ _ _ — Property Identification Number (P.I.D.)33-113-:3 13 0011 Please attach legal description to application if not included on required survey. APPLICANT Name Minnek;asco, Inc. (Jerone Kallstroa) Phone (home ) Phone (worlc) 342-5319 Address 700 W. Linden Ave.. P.O. Box 1165 City Minneapolis Zio 55-*40-ll65 OWNER (if different than applicant) Name Veda. Inc. (Bob wliito, Sr.) Phone (home ) Phone 476-2637 Address Rivd.City Orr''no Zip Date Procertv Acouired 1968 (month/year) I (do) (do not) also own the adjacent parcels of land. FEES - CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS - Renewal Fee - 1/2 Current Fee After-the-Fact Fee - Double Current Application Fee _ _ _ _ $ 50.00 For each variance request with CUP application _ _ _ _ $125.00 Residential accessory Use _ _ _ _ $150.00 Institutional (church, school, etc.) _ _ _ _ $150.00 Guest House/Guest Apartments _ _ _ _ $150.00 Duplex Credit/Bldg X $250.00 Commercial/Industrial Use $200.00 Land Alteration Grading and filling - designated wetland or floodplain Grading and filling - 101 cu. yd. or more Grading, seawall, retaining walls within 75' of lakeshore PRD/PID - see fee schedule OTHER APPLICATIONS _ _ _ _ $200.00 Commercial Site Plan Review (+ consultant fees) _ _ _ _ $250.00 Vacation $175.00 Easement Vacation $ 50.00 Easement Vacation With Subdivision $250.00 Rezoning (PUD - refer to fee schedule) _ _ _ _ $100.00 Appeals _ _ Other - see fee schedule PWKK8T OSl OF PROPERTYPresent Zoning District Present Use of Property i-idustri u Residential Other (specify) OF RBC^TBST Use of the property is temporary, the lease with the Describe recjuest in detail : l.md c^Tier expires in five vcirs. U5;e will be to operate a portable liquid var>orir;er o"! the The rrnpcrt:’. will be restored to its current condition at the end of the lease.____________________________________ RBQaiRSD SUBMITTALS X. Completed Application Form. Certified Property Owners List of owners within 350' (you can obtain this list from Hennepin County Department of Finance A-603 Government Center 348-3271). Plat Map. Certificate of survey (signed by a licensed surveyor). Topographic survey (existing and proposed contours) if land alterations involve changes in elevation (grades). Construction plan, if applicable (see staff for requirements). As an addendum to this application, please attach a separate list of any other persons you wish notified of this application. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. YOU ARB REQUIRED TO SUPPLY 30 COPIES OF LARGE DOCUMENTS OR A FORKING COPY (ll* X 17" OR SMALLER) FOR ALL DOCUMENTS SUBMITTED- The applicant and Property Owner must sign this application. Please remember that your application is not complete if the above information has not been included. Certification by Clerical Department that Land Use Application is complete. Initials of Clerical Staff_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Date_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ APPLICANT'S SIGNATURE The applicant hereby agrees to provide all information required or requested by the Zoning Administrator, agrees to pay additional fees (staff time not covered by original fee payment) and/or unusual expenses incurred in review of this application, and certifies that the information supplied is true and correct to the best of his/her knowledge. Applicant's signature Date onnbrs signaturf The owner hereby ac)c^owledges and agrees to this application and further authorized reasonable entry onto the property by City staff, consultants, agents, commission members, and Council members for purposes of investigation and v^xi,fJ^t4on of -^his request. 0%mer' s siqnatuj:^..^^^^^>-^^ Date ^^7' 9''^ Applicant must have all submittals into the City offices 25 days before the Planning Commission Meeting. Planning Commission Meetings are held on the third Monday of each month. Applicants must be present at all scheduled review meetings of the Planning Commission and Council. If an applicant is unable to attend a scheduled meeting, please make arrangements to have an authorized agent attend in your place and advise the Building & Zoning Office of this change prior to the meeting. CITY OF ORONO CERTIPICATB OP MAILING STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) SS. ) I Teri Naab of the City of Orono, Hennepin Co nty, Minnesota, do hereby certify that a Notice of Public Hearing concerning the matter of #1590 Minnegasco Inc.'s application was mailed to the certified list of property owners. In Witness Whereof, I have hereunto set my hand and seal this 19th day of September, 1990. i’eri Naab, Secretary ?t 1, Box 305.ong Lake, MN 55356>3-118-23 13 0001 LTTN: JOE PALLANSCH rsi ► .C. BOX 340 ^NG LAKE, MN 55356 13-118-23 24 0002 mYDIE-ROBB TRUST rOANN FROST, TRUSTEE ^21 WILLOW DR N i^NG LAKF MN 55356 ^3-118-23 24 0003 LENARD L. VICKERMAN JR 25 OLD CRYSTAL BAY RD N X>NG LAKE, MN 55356 13-118-23 13 0011/12/13 rERDA INC. >.0. BOX 375 ^NG LAKE MN 55356 P • D CITY OF ORONO NOTICE The Council will hold a hearing in the Council Chambers at 1275 Brown Road South on Monday, October 8, 1990, at 7:00 p.m. for the purpose of reviewing #1590 Minnegasco Inc.*s appl.it ,^ion for a conditional use permit for the temporary operation of a portable liquid natural gas vaporiser at a property located at 530 Old Crystal Bay Road North. All persons wishing to be heard will appear at this time. Written comments are solicited. Plans are available for review in the City offices by appointment. Dated this 18th day of September, 1990. /s/ Dorothy M. Hallin City Clerk Publish the week of September 24, 1990 in the Laker and Pioneer newspapers. DESCRIPTION OF THE PORTABLE LNG EQUIPMENT & PROCESS Minnegasco desires to provide a stand-by supply of natural gas that will preclude supply problems in the Orono area during extreme cold periods. This stand-by supply involves using a portable liquid natural gas (LNG) vaporizer to inject gas into the distribution system during periods of high demands under extreme cold conditions. The need for the equipment is temporary, however, it will be necessary for three to five years. Minnegasco’s portable LNG vaporizer facility is composed of two semi-trailers; one with the LNG vaporizer, the other an LNG tanker. The vaporizer delivers natural gas from the LNG tanker into a roadside tap which is connected to Minnegasco’s distribution system. Before cold weather strikes, the LNG tanker will be brought to the site. Minnegasco personnel will make all the piping connections. The vaporizing process will begin before 5:00 a.m. and be complete about 9:00 a.m. When the process is complete, the disconnections are made, and the LNG tanker is driven off the site. The vaporizer remains on site to be utilized in the next cold weather. During operations Minnegasco employees will be on site at all times. The site will not be attended when the equipment is not in use. Security patrols will visit the site at irregular intervals. There will be very little noise generated by this equipment on the Orono site. Any noise will ba much less than the noise caused by passing traffic on Old Crystal Bay Road. The portable vaporizer was used in Spring Park during the 1989-90 heating season. The equipment is currently parked at Minnegasco’s Dakota Station. Dakota Station is Minnegasco’s large LNG facility located on 11500 12th Ave. S. in Burnsville. d 1 (5' ih }« >■ 1 f A <£. > I__^ t««rurr. -5<—^ \(Sr^ - ■> - ; •> **: <^' M!6^ '5’Wine X ’ ^ i '■' El^ — ^ - ic '-.•. ' F *■ ••'a!*' — . ‘■*“5 i >■ ■ •»< '■ r . y’.:/' *’ Q. Cor^TZ^on I 2 I ?? :^>4■«•^,^fia1 ‘ % :r. _________ 7»> I > - —^ i' 1 ■' / f z_■*-----------------------Zr—^--------^ . *>. •:fv- r• • « * * * ‘ ... V.«..-.>-v —«>■-•* :. /Co jA A u nfvisoNS 0mm pActtmit iHJM««i« o«^A«niiwr erre: .-, ‘'’H .^. ■'•r«C.:--.'- • _____• _____----------------------- Bonestroo Rosene Anderllk & Associates Engineers & Architects Oro G Bonesotxj PE Booert W Roiene. PE, Joseph C Anoeriiii. PE M^ivm L. SofVjM. PE Ihctvaro E lUmef P£ James C Otsoh. PE Germ R Ccon PE Thomas E Noyes. PE fibPeft G SchufKht PE Susar M EDenm C PA •Certh A Ocaori. PE Rtham w Fosrer PE Oohaid C Burgann. PE Jerry A BoorOoo. PE Mar* A Hanson. PE Ted K Feid PE Michaer T Raotmann PE Rooert R PWferie. PE Davio O Losttxa. PE Trcreas W Rr’^cacr^ PP M<haet C. LyrtcJTPi Jarres R Maiaod. PE Kenneth P Anderson. PE K'.rt R Rc#l Pc Rooert C Russek. a i a Thomas E Angus PE Hwvard A Sanibrd. PE Oaniet J Edqerton. PE Mark A PE Philip J Caswek PE ^dsaej-Mamnaa-Jg, */a< o:'*^iiis PE ' ■ C .O Thomas R Anderso/*. Af(A Gary F Rytander. PE. Miles B Jensen. PE L Phaup Gravel m. PE Rene C Piumart A I.A Agnes M Ring. AlC P. Jerry o Permch PE. CetriO ©Inner. PE Charles A ErKkson Leo M Pauversky Hanan M ©son September 18, 1990 City of Orono Box 66 Crystal Bay, Minnesota 55323 Attn: Jeanne Mabusch Re: Minnegasco, Inc. Our File No. 139-1590 SEP 2 0 1990 Dear Jeanne: We have reviewed the Minnegasco proposal for temporary installation of a portable liquid natural gas vaporizer. The unit will be used to provide natural gas during peak heating periods. The driveway access is 550 feet from the intersection of T.H. #12. This is an adequate distance from the intersection. We would recommend Spruce or Pine trees for screening on the west and north sides of the fenced area, the driveway area should be constructed to a 9 ton design. We would reconmend that bituminous surfacing not be required for a temporary installation. Restoration of the site should be required when Minnegasco move out. Please call if you have any questions. Yours very truly, BONESTROO, ROSENE, ANDERLIK & ASSOCIATES, INC. Glenn R. Cook GRC:dh itCA. grc/4 2335 West Highway 36 • St. Paub Minnesota 55113 • 612-636-4600 MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD SEPTEMBER 24, 1990 ATTENDANCE 7:00 P.M. The Council met on the above date with the following members present: Mayor James Grabek, Councilmembers Diann Goetten, Allan Nettles, and Barbara Peterson. Councilmember Callahan was absent. The following represented the City staff: City Administrator Bernhardson, Building & Zoning Administrator Mabusth, Public Works Director Gerhardson, Assistant Planning and Zoning Administrator Gaffron. City Engineer Cook, City Attorney Barrett, and City Recorder Scheffler. RECOGNITION OF EMPLOYMENT - JOHN SASS Mayor Grabek presented John Sass with a Certificate of Appreciation for his 10 years of service to the City of Orono. Mayor Grabek added that Mr. Sass not only contributed to the Community as a Public Works employee, but that he also contributed as the owner of the Texaco Gas Station on Smith's Bay for 15 years. STORM SEWER SYSTEM NAVARRE HEIGHTS AREA PUBLIC HEARING 7:04 P.M. TO 7:20 P.M. The Affidavit of Publication was duly noted. City Administrator Bernhardson summarized the history of this property leading to the Public Hearing being held this evening (see Mark Bernhardson' s memo dated September 13, 1990). He added that a petition has been submitted this evening from neighbors wishing to pursue a surface drainage solution. Bernhardson said, "The City had considered the aspect of the private property owner exploring such a solution. The City has concerns about being involved with such a system. If Council wishes to pursue a surface drainage system, it will be necessary to order a feasibility study. There are four persons who had signed Ms. Cuff's original petition that have now indicated they would prefer to explore a surface drainage alternative. If a feasibility study is ordered, it would be possible for the City to share the cost of the study with the persons interested in that alternative." Mr. Anthony Gleekel, Attorney for Mark and Karen Cuff, stated that the Cuffs have done everything that City has asked them to do. He said, "The Cuffs have obtained a petition of 35% of the affected residents. The project should be ordered. The Cuffs met with the City Engineer and Public Works Director back in February. They discussed alternatives to an underground system, b. t it was determined that a surface drainage system was not feasible. A surface drainage system would render the lot useless to the Cuffs. This issue has been reviewed for a year and a half and at this time, I think it is appropriate to order the underground storm sewer project." Mr. Jim Smith, 3580 Livingston Avenue, stated that he has - 1 - ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD SEPTEMBER 24, 1990 STORM SEWER SYSTEM-NAVARRE HEIGHTS AREA CONTINUED been a Livingston Avenue resident for two and half years. He said, "We have watched the water problem from the time we moved in. It is a substantial problem. We have considered selling our home recently, but the water problem poses a drawback. There is usually a lake in front of the Cuff's residence and it extends to our property. That is not appealing to perspective buyers. The water is ruining our driveway. It takes very little rain for a lake to form. We whole-heartedly support an underground system if that will solve the problem. I have seen the water in the Cuff's basement whenever it rains. If I were in their shoes, I would also be asking the City for assistance. Something must be done." Mr. Chet Versailles, 3472 Livingston Avenue, stated that he too has lived on Livingston Avenue for two and half years. He said, "We have been investing money in our home and have seen other neighbors do the same thing. As time went by, we realized that thert= is a water problem at the end of the street. I think the Cuffs have a legitimate concern and I would like to see something done. I signed the petition supporting this project." Mr. Harvey Reder asked what rights and responsibilities a property owner has in relation to drainage coming off of his/her property after purchasing it. Barrett replied, "The law in Minnesota states that a property owner is allowed to reasonably divert the flow of water from his/her property to the property below. The question is whether the diversion or the action taken to move water off of the property is reasonable." Mr. Reder asked, "Shouldn't a person be required to re-grade his/her property so that water continues to flow as it has in the past?" Barrett replied, "That really depends on whether or not the diversion of water from the property has been reasonable and appropriate. The property owners upgrade must act reasonably toward those persons with property at lower grades." Mayor Grabek asked Mr relating to the Cuffs. Reder if he had a specific question Mr. Reder asked, "Was it reasonable for Mark and Karen to re-grade their lot and not provide seeding or sod to slow the water flow from the property?" Mayor Grabek stated that such a question could not be answered at this time without further review. There was no further comments from the public and Mayor - 2 - ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD SEPTEMBER 24, 1990 STORM SEWER SYSTEM-NAVARRE HEIGHTS AREA CONTINUED Grabek closed the Public Hearing. Nettles stated that he has always favored an underground solution to this drainage problem. He said, "I believe an underground system is the best overall method to address this problem. It will preserve the integrity of all of the lots in the area without providing an open area that may become a problem in the future. I realize that it is more costly." Mayor Grabek asked Barrett whether the original petition meets the 35% requirement in light of the four persons who also signed the petition for the alternate method. irrett replied, "I understand that the second petition has been considered as a request for the drainage system to go above ground. The legal impact of the 35% is only that it changes the required majority for Council's vote. If the petition is less than 35%, 4/5ths of the Council must vote in favor. A petition with 35% or more only requires a 3/5ths majority." Peterson stated that she has always been in favor of the underground drainage system. She asked where the v/ater from the surface drainage system would go. She said, "I have looked at the property and know what the Cuffs intend to do with it. How would surface drainage affect their plans?" Karen Cuff said, "Drainage would have to run either through the middle of the property or be diverted to the east property line." Goetten asked Glenn Cook to provide a brief explanation of each drainage method. Cook displayed a drawing showing where the water is presently running. He said, "When the water gets deep it runs around both sides of the Cuffs' house. The property owner of Lot 6 has done some re-grading and provided a slight berm to keep the water away from his house. We are concerned how a surface drainage system would affect Lot 6 and other properties in chat area. If we were to have a drainage ditch along the Cuffs' east property line, it would probably be necessary to remove some of the large trees. I don't believe that an above ground system is a practical method. It would be necessary to obtain an easement through the middle of the Cuffs' property. With regard to an underground system, it will only handle a five year storm. That means that every five years or so we may have a storm that will overflow the underground system. An underground system would lessen erosion and contain all of the rainfall underground to the railroad ditch where it will be discharged." Goetten asked which system provided the least liability risk - 3 - ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD SEPTEMBER 24, 1990 STORM SEWER SYSTEM-NAVARRE HEIGHTS AREA CONTINUED for the City. Cook stated that the surface drainage would naturally flow toward Lot 6. He said, "If water should run over the edge of the swale and damage the property on Lot 6, there is potential liability in that regard. There is minimal risk with the underground system, except in the event of a major storm. It is possible that Lot 6 will still experience water damage and could potentially sue the City." Goetten asked what the cost difference is between the two options. Cook estimated that the underground system would cost twice as much as a surface solution. He said, "It depends on how many trees need to be removed and the type of easements that must be obtained." Peterson asked Cook whether a surface system would prevent further erosion on the west side of the Cuffs' property. Cook replied, "It would be necessary to install a gutter or curb alongside the road to bring drainage to a focal point." Mayor Grabek asked Barrett what legal, financial risks may be involved if the City orders the storm sewer project and finds that a majority of the neighbors oppose it. Barrett replied, "After examining the market impact, the City would want to distribute the cost of the project to each lot. If the property owners objected to that, they could appeal to District Court. If the Court found that the impact did not improve the property values by the amount of the assessment, it could reduce the assessment and the City would pav the difference." Peterson asked how many property owners would share in the approximate $32,000 cost of the project. Cook replied, "I believe approximately $700/lot." figured the cost to Mayor Grabek asked whether the City has a legal obligation to pj'oceed with the project if a 35% petition is received or if it is a matter of how many votes are received for the project. Barrett replied, "It is the latter," Bernhardson suggested that Coun::il could have the plans and specifications drawn and obtain bids. He said, "An Assessment Hearing could take place and the assessment could be ordered. - 4 - ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD SEPTEMBER 24, 1990 STORM SEWER SYSTEM-NARVARRE HEIGHTS AREA CONTINUED The City could then wait 30 days to see what appeals are received prior to ordering the project." Mayor Grabek asked what the City's financial obligation would be at that point. Bernhardson replied, "The City would incur the cost of the feasibility study and preparation of the plans and specs." Cook stated that it would cost approximately $2,500. Nettles noted that those costs would be included in assessment if the City chose to proceed with the project. the Mayor Grabek stated that he would prefer to neighbors in the area agree to one plan or the other. see the It was moved by Nettles, seconded by Peterson, to proceed as suggested by the City Administrator. Motion, Ayes-4, Nays-0. Motion passed. HIGHWAY 12 IMPROVEMENTS PUBLIC HEARING 7:35 P.M. TO 7:37 P.M. RESOLUTION #2876 The Affidavit of Publication was duly noted. Bernhardson stated that Rebers, Otten and Wear will be assessed for these improvements and that the project costs are within the amounts approved in the petition. He said, "Both Mr. Otten and Mr. Wear have prepaid portions of their assessments. The assessment is for the balance as agreed to in the petition." There were no comments from the public and Mayor Grabek closed the Public Hearing. It was moved by Nettles, seconded by Peterson, to adopt Resolution #2876, adopting the assessment roll for sewer and water improvement. Phase I, north side of Highway 12, between Brown Road and Willow Drive. Motion, Ayes-4. Nays-0. Motion passed. CONSENT AGENDA* Peterson asked to have item #22 removed from the Consent Agenda for discussion. Goetten asked that Agenda for discussion. item #23 be removed from the Consent Bernhardson stated that the date in the resolution presented for item #7 was requested to be revised from November 1, to December 1. He stated that if Council approved that revision - 5 - ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD SEPTEMBER 24, 1990 CONSENT AGENDA CONTINUED that the item could remain on the Consent Agenda. Bernhardson further stated that staff had been requested by the applicant to table item #8 and that item #9 should not have been included as a consent item. It was moved by Nettles, seconded by Peterson, to approve the Consent Agenda, with the exception of item #22 and #23, which were removed and discussed in the order appearing on the Agenda, and the revision to item #7 as stated by the City Administrator. Item #8 is included as a consent item, and item #9 will be part of the Regular Agenda. Motion, Ayes-4. Nays-0, Motion passed. APPROVAL OF MINUTES* It was moved by Nettles, seconded by Peterson, to approve the Minutes of the Regular Council Meeting held September 10, 1990. Motion, Ayes-4, Nays-0, Motion passed. LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT REPORT LAKE USE AND MANAGEMENT JoEllen Hurr was present to discuss any further questions or information regarding the LMCD Management Plan. Goetten asked whether there, have been any other cities that have expressed opposition to the tan. Hurr replied, "I am not aware of any more." Bernhardson said, "V^e were last informed that there were eight communities in favor of the Plan. That is not certain at this point. There has been some discussion that those communities that favor the Plan may not vote knowing that there is not unanimous support. These cities may ask that the vote be delayed." Hurr said, "The Board may wish to take more time to work with the cities. The Plan is really a guide or outline, a draft of what the LMCD needs to do further. It is not a final docu.nent such as a zoning ordinance." Mayor Grabek asked why there is such urgency to have the Plan approved if it is just an outline. He asked why the LMCD does not opt to continue to work with the other cities until they have met everyone's concerns. He said, "I thought this was a black and white situation." Goetten said, "I certainly did not view this Plan as an outline." Hurr replied, "There is more work to be done." Nettles said, "That conflicts with what we have been told - 6 - ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD SEPTEMBER 24, 1990 LMCD REPORT CONTINUED previously. I was under the impression that tnis was a take it or leave it situation. I believe that this Plan can be worked on further. I would rather have the vote delayed and the lines of comMunication kept open." Hurr stated that she could make a motion to have this matter tabled for a certain number of months at the September 26th LMCD Board Meeting. Goetten said, "I believe that it would be beneficial for the LMCD to delay the vote and work to add more votes in favor. We all know that everyone has worked very hard on this Plan." Mayor Grabek suggested that JoEllen's motion should be to table for six months due to the upcoming elections and possible changes in local governments." It was the consensus of the Council that LMCD Representative Hurr should make a motion to delay the vote on the LMCD Management Plan for six months. PUBLIC COMMENTS: None. ZONING ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT: #998 MAUREEN S. BELLOWS 265 BROWN ROAD SOUTH BYFIELD PLAT ACCESS RESOLUTION #2877 AMENDED* It was moved by Nettles, seconded Resolution #2877, as amended to show December 1, 1990, rather than November by Peterson, to adopt a completion date of 1, 1990, in condition number one. Motion, Ayes-4, Nays-0. Motion passed. #1334 REBERS CONSTRUCTION-SUGARWOODS PLAT RECONSIDERATION OF CONDITIONS OF PRD APPROVAL* It was moved by Nettles, seconded oy Peterson, to table this item as requested by the applicant. Motion, Ayes-4. Nays-0. Motio'' oassed. #1470 BILL KNAPP/DAN PARTEN 4300 BAYSIDE ROAD PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION-REVISED PROPOSAL Mr. Knapp was present. Bernhardson provided a summary of the revisions Mr. Knapp is proposing (see Michael Gaffron's memo dated September 18, 1990). He suggested that Council may wish to refer this back to the Planning Commission for their review. Goetten asked why the road is divided into several outlets - 7 - ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD SEPTEMBER 24, 1990 ZONING FILE #1470-KNAPP/PARTEN CONTINUED rather than one. Gaffron replied. "One of the reasons is that the private road may extend only to a certain point and would extend from there as a driveway. Also, because the City may take easements over the private road, the developer prefers to have it stop as shown and have a driveway continue. Because of the topography, the applicant is proposing tc put a loop farther away from the east property line." It was moved by Nettles, seconded by Goetten, to refer Zoning Application #1470 back to the Planning Commission for their review and recommendation. Motion, Ayes-4, Nays-0. Motion passed. #1532 FULLERTON PROPERTIES 2225 SIXTH AVENUE NORTH FINAL SUBDIVISION REQUEST TO TABLE* It was moved by Nettles, seconded by Peterson, to table this item to the October 8, 1990 Council meeting, as requested by the applicant. Motion, Ayes-I, Nays-0. Motion passed. #1552 STEVEN A K'.NEE FOSTER 1800 SHADYWOOD RuAD VARIANCE DENIAL RESOLUTION #2878* It was moved by Nettles, seconded by Peterson, to adopt Resolution #2878, denying variances for hardcover and work in the 0-75' zone for Renee and Steven Foster at 1800 Shadywood Road. Motion, Ayes-4, Nays-0. Motion passed. #1579 GARRY EVERSON 4755 NORTH SHORE DRIVE AFTER-THE-FACT VARIANCE Mr. and Mrs. Everson were present. Bernhardson briefly reviewed the information pertaining to the Everson's application. He noted that the Planning Commission had voted 4 to 1 to recommend denial. Gaffron depicted on a sketch the location of the original deck in relation to the new deck. Mrs. Everson explained that the area of deck shown to exist over the lot line is where a shared garbage structure is located. She said, "Our neighbors have no objection to the existence of this structure on their property. The back stairway leading to the lake was previously located next to the house. There was a problem with ice because the eaves would drip on them. If we are required to bring the deck back to its original size, we would - 8 - ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD SEPTEMBER 24, 1990 ZONING FILE #1579-EVERSON CONTINUED also have to move the steps back. The existing deck is helping to prevent erosion of the dirt under the deck. The pre-existing deck was totally rct.^n. We had intended to replace only the decking but found a? .e went that more and more needed to be replaced. We did r. r realize we needed a permit. Our neighbors have no objv^ction to "^s.” Mayor Grabek questioned whethe.. work on the deck continued after the City issued a stop work order. Mr. Everson replied, "The deck vas constructed in four days. By the time the City issued the re<’ the deck was completed.” Mr. Everson stated that he had been told that the property had 50% hardcover at the time he purchased the property. He asked whether that meant that nothing could ever be done to the property in the future. Mrs. Everson asked if they would be allowed to replace their driveway if it became damaged. She said, "It is really not fair that most of the shared driveway is located on our property." Mayor Grabek asked if a local builder constructed the deck. Mr. Everson stated that he had constructed the deck. Goetten informed the Eversons that in the event th-ir driveway did need replacement, it would be necessary to com -o the City for a hardcover review. She said, "It is likely that if replacement of the driveway is approved that you would need to remove hardcover from other locations on the property." Mr. and Mrs. Everson noted that the landscaping and large garden area in front of the house have no plastic underlining. Mrs. Everson said, "Plastic may have been installed years and years ago. However, both areas grow weeds like crazy." Mr. Everson stated that he would be willing to convert the large garden to sod. Goetten asked whether the Planning Commissi the six or seven foot fence in their motion. had addressed Gaffron stated that the Planning Commission had not taken a position on the fence. He said, "The fence would nee J a 10' setback if it exceeds six feet in height." Mrs. Everson stated that the fence was constructed long before they purchased the property. She also stated that they could consider the option of cutting the deck back to meet the 10' setback. - 9 - ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD SEPTEMBER 24, 1990 ZONING FILE #1579-EVERSON CONTINUED It was moved by Goetten, seconded by Peterson, to conceptually deny the after-the-fact Variance for Garry and Marie Everson, in accordance with the Planning Commission's recommendation and the condition that a double fee be paid for the building permit and zoning application. Mayor Grabek asked how close a deck 18' x 13' would come to the property line. Gaffron replied, "Approximately 17’ and a 10' setback is required." Mayor Grabek asked whether future neighboring property owners would have any recourse against the City should the Council approve the existing deck. Barrett replied, "The present neighbor has consented to have the structure encroach on his property. If there is no easement granted by the present neighbor, the future neighboring property owners v^ould have to take action against the Eversons to have the structure removed. The City could best protect itself from a liability standpoint by requiring a written agreement from the property owner before approving the location of the structure." Mayor Grabek suggested that the provision of such an agreement and removal of additional hardcover may be an alternative to denial. Bernhardson noted that the suggestion offered by Mrs. Everson to - ut the deck back was another option. Goetten stated that she would agree to cutting the deck back if wh.e Eversons would reduce hardcover to a level of 25% in the 75-250' se back area. Nettles stated that it is difficult to vote against .he Planning Commission and staff. He said, "Conceptual denial does provide them with the opportunity to present another plan. However, we have consistently denied applications such as this and it would be difficult to approve. Motion, Ayes-4. Nays-0. Motion passed. PUBLIC FACILITIES Bernhardson statrd that this issue would probably go before the Planning Commission in November. He said, "The language that would be presented would allow publicly owned parks and playgrounds as a Permittea Use in residential areas. Schools and daycare over 14 pupils would be Conditional Uses, as would public service structures for local use and antennas with a pre-empt limitation. All other uses would fall under commercial or industrial as a Conditional Use. CounciImember Nettles had questioned how other cities construe municipal buildings. Barrett explained, "The standard language that is used in regard to municipal buildings assumes that such structures will only be used by the municipality in which the structure is located. I have not seen language which makes a distinction between the municipality using the structure. However, I think such language is appropriate. We will have to determine a reasonable basis for distinguishing by jurisdiction." Bernhardson said, "One form of distinction could be that the City Council for the city in which the structure will be located, is the one that also approves and orders the construction - 10 - ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD SEPTEMBER 24, 1990 PUBLIC FACILITIES CONTINUED project." Nettles questioned whether there may be an issue with grandfathering such structures that have already been considered. Barrett stated that the moratorium should eliminate any problem. He said, **Only those projects for which a building permit was obtained from the City prior to the moratorium would be grandfathered." It was moved by Mayor Grabek, seconded by Goetten, to refer this matter to staff and Planning Commission for specific language development as outlined. Motion, Ayes-1, Nays-0. Motion passed. HARDCOVER VARIANCE PROTECTION Bernhardson suggested that this issue be time the shoreland regulations are mciified. addressed at the Goetten referred to paragraph C in Bernhardson's memo, attachment A, and notad that staff has started using this procedure of notification to some degree. It was moved by Mayor Grabek, seconded by Peterson, to direc staff to upgrade the language and take any comments regarding any standards changes for inclusion with the shoreland regulation modifications. Peterson asked whether this issue would be reviewed by the Planning Commission. Bernhardson stated that it vc»ui be necessary to proceed with the normal Ordinance amendment procedure. Motion, Ayes-4, Nays-0. Motion passed. WETLANDS Bernhardson reviewed the information in his memo dated September 14, 1990. He stated that the wetland regulations the C ty of Orono currently has are efficient in protecting the wetlands. He said, "Revising the present standards to increase protection may cause greater problems in the balance of the community. Goetten agreed that the City has adequate measures for wetland protection. She questioned whether it is necessary to more clearly define wetlands versus the flood plain. Peterson asKed Bernhardson whether he Councilmember Callahan regarding this issue. had spoken to Bernhardson replied, "I did talk with Councilmember Callahan. I believe that he would still like to see protection increased, though he is not sure in what area. I believe he was more concerned about the Landstar Development on Old Beach Road. - 11 - This matter could be tabled until Councilmember Callahan is ORONO COUNCIL HEETING HELD SEPTEMBER 24, 1990 WETLANDS CONTINUED present." It was moved by Peterson, seconded by Goetten, to table this issue until Councilmember Callahan is present. Mayor Grabek stated that he could see no reason to table. Motion, Ayes-2, Mayor Grabek, Nettles, Nay. Motion failed. It was moved by Mayor Grabek, seconded by Nettles, to accept the information presented by staff regarding wetlands protection. Motion, Ayes“2, Goetten, Peterson, Nay. Motion failed. It was moved by Nettles, seconded by Mayor Grabek, to table this matter until the October 8, 1990 Council meeting. Motion, Ayes"4, Nays-0. Motion passed. MAYOR/COUNCIL REPORT: Mayor Grabek reported that contributions were received for the Octoberfest banner for the School. He said, "The banner is displayed on the corner of Highway 12 and Old Crystal Bay Road. The sign can be used for many years to come." Jlayor Grabek showed a video tape pertaining to the upcoming Special Olympics that will be held in the Minneapolis/St. Paul area. Following the viewing of the tape he stated that Mr. Irwin Jacobs is the Chairman of this event. He said, "I believe this is a real opportunity for Minneapolis/St. Paul to be asked to sponsor this event. Each Metropolitan City is being asked to sponsor a certain Country. Orono needs to supply a Director to assist with the program. I would appreciate it if the press could provide some assistance. The contact person is Carol Smith, 943-2733, she is the Special Olympics Coordinator for our region. I believe Orono is being asked to sponsor two Caribbean Countries." Peterson stated that a recent newspaper article had stated that the Corcoran animal facility is going to cease to exist. Bernhardson replied, "We have been given assurance that they will continue to operate through March. We are looking at alternatives." CITY ENGINEER'S REPORT: REQUEST FOR PAYMENT #1-1990 SEALCOATING It was moved by Mayor Grabek, seconded by Peterson, to approve Pay Request #1 to Allied Blacktop Company for sealcoating City streets for an amount of $35,359,95. Motion, Ayes-4, Nays-0. Motion passed. - 12 - ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD SEPTEMBER 24, 1990 REQUEST FOR PAYMENT #5-WELL #3 It was moved by Mayor Grabek, seconded by Peterson, to approve Pay Request #5 to Keys Well Drilling Company for VJell #3 in the amount of $18,468.00. Motion, Ayes-4, Nays-0. Motion passed. CITY ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT: STUBBS BAY PROPOSED SEWER PROJECT Bernhardson presented updated information regarding the response from interested and non-interested persons. He noted that there are new 13 interested parties. He said, "We have been approached by a person interested in the project. He has indicated that he would like to go door-to-door to talk with the area residents about the project." Goetten supported such an effort. She said, "It would be helpful to know the specific reason why people are not in favor of the project." It was the consensus of Council to accept the information and recommendation presented by staff. CITY FACILITIES Bernhardson stated that the option for the property on Highway >.2 has now been obtained. He asked Council for further direction and outlined the alternatives presented in his September 18, 1990 memo. Mayor Grabek said, "We have taken a long look at this. We know we need a facility. There were only a few sites recommended by the Committee established by the City." Goetten stated that she agrees a new facility is needed. She said, "I was not aware the Citizens Committee was going to take any action at their meeting on August 23rd. I have not been updated as to the status of this issue. Since we do have six months to exercise the option on the Highway 12 property, I would like to ta^ e this." Bernhardson apologized for not providing Goetten with a full update regarding this issue. CounciImember Peterson asked whether it was appropriate for an official vote to have been taken at what was deemed to be a Council Workshop Session. Bernhardson replied, "I balieve that it was appropriate for a vote to have been taken." - 13 - SaSiRtmfiRKSftr. Peterson asked whether the public was notified of the Work ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD SEPTEMBER 24, 1990 CITY FACILITIES CONTINUED Session. Bernhardson stated that the public had been notified. Nettles stated that it would be appropriate fcr Councilmember Callahan to be present to express his opinion. He said, "We have obtained an option on this property at a favorable price. The Citizen's Committee has carefully considered this issue and has provided us with their recommendation. I would hate to see us lose this property and would suggest that this issue be scheduled for the next Council meeting and that Council take action at that time." Peterson asked when the next meeting of the Citizen's Advisory Committee will be. Bernhardson replied, "We were waiting to make a determination on a site and would then proceed with the design phase. Once Council has formally accepted a site, the Committee would meet again. I do anticipate that they would attend the meeting where the site determination is to be considered." Mayor Grabek stated that there seems to be a consensus on behalf of staff, Council and the Citizen's group. He said, "I believe we are the closest we have ever been to a public facility. If there is some way to move forward to commit to a facility this year with this administration, I believe that would be advantageous to everyone." Peterson stated that this has been an issue for four years. She said, "Viaiting another month should not be a problem. I would prefer to have the Citizen's Group meet first. I recently talked with one of the Group members who indicated that he was upset that this matter on was the agenda for this meeting. He felt it would be better for the Group to meet again ro discuss an overall picture before the press published anything. I also believe that Councilmember Callahan should be given the opportunity to express his opinion." Mayor Grabek noted that two members of the Citizen Group, Gabriel Jabbour and Gretchen Menzel, were present. He asked them to relay the consensus of the Group regarding the need for another meeting prior to purchasing property. Gretchen Menzel said, "I believe that the Committee has worked very hard in the long term on this. We have provided Council with our recommendation and would lixe to see the matter proceed." Gabriel Jabbour stated that the Citizen's Group was 14 - unanimous in their recommendation pertaining to the site. ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD SEPTEMBER 24, 1990 CITY FACILITIES CONTINUED Gretchen Menzel confirmed that at least 70% of the Citizen's Group agreed to the site recommended. Jabbour explained that the Group was told that 70% consensus was required in order to proceed forward. He said, "During our voting procedure.that is what we had in mind." Peterson explained that she was not referring to the recommendation regarding the site. She stated that the Citizen's Group should meet to discuss the specs and plans now that a site nas been selected. Mayor Grabek stated that it is premature in the process to discuss specs and plans. Gabriel Jabbour said, "In my opinion, the Citizen's Group proceeded as far as we could without having information pertaining to a particular site. Once we know that information, we can proceed forward to make other determinations regarding the structure itself." It was moved by Mayor Grabek, seconded by Nettles, to schedule a public meeting regarding the City Facilities for the October 22nd Council meeting. At that meeting Council can opt to vote on the Highway 12 site, or table action for another four months. The Citizen's Group should attend that meeting. Motion, Ayes-3, Goetten. Nay. Motion passed. Goetten indicated that she preferred to delay the public meeting until November. Bevnhardson asked if it would be appropriate to use the Mayor's Article as a method of notifying the public about this issue. Goetten suggested that a regular article in the paper would suffice. Mayor Grabek stated that notification should be given in the manner that other Council Agenda items are made public. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN RESPONSES Bernhardson presented information regarding proposed changes in response to Metro Council's transportation and sewer chapters. He suggested waiting to respond until more is known about the Highway 12 Corridor. He said, "There are areas that have been sewered but not included in the current plan and we w-^uld provide that information in our response. We would present the response to the Planning Commission at their October, 1990 meeting. Council accepted the information presented by Bernhardson and took no formal action. - 15 - ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD SEPTEMBER 24, 1990 DAVID PRASS Mr. and Mrs. Prass were present. Bernhardson explained that tha Presses have indicated that water must remain in the pool. O’^herwise the pool will heave out of the ground. He said, "Council's approval for the temporary pool cover included the condition that the pool be kept dry. Staff felt it was necessary to bring this back before Council for their review. The Presses submitted a letter indicating that they would provide information from the company that services their pool regarding the water issue." Mrs. Prass distributed a copy of the letter from their pool company (Mark, I did not receive a copy for the packet). Mrs. Prass apologized for the misunderstanding regarding whether or not water could remain in the pool. Mayor Grabek asked whether the pool has alv/ays been filled with water. Mrs. Prass stated that the pool has always had water. Mayor Grabek asked whether there is presently a fence around the pool. Mr. Prass replied, "There is a snow fence around the pool. There is insurance, liability on the property. We submitted proof of that sometime ago." Mrs. Prass said, "I would like to clarify that the pool cover is not temporary. It is a permanent cover that must be opened with a key. It is designed to last for 15 to 20 years." Nettles asked whether it might be appropriate to have the Presses submit a hold harmless agreement. Barrett replied, "Taking into consideration the manufacturer's warranty, the insurance liability the property owner has, the insurance liability the City has and their Sovereign Immunity, that the City is well protected financially." Goetten noted that the City does not require fencing around swimming poc:^. She stated that the Brasses proposal is more secure than what exists for many pools in Orono. It was moved by Ma,^rabek, seconded by Nettles, to accept the Brasses proposal for the pool cover, provided that a hold harmless agreement is prepared by them and submitted to the City and that they adhere to the building dates as specified in the previous Resolution, Motion, Ayes-1, Nays-0. Motion passed. - 16 - ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD SEPTEMBER 24, 1990 FENCE ACQOISITION-NAVARRE PLAYGROUND Peterson stated that she had removed this item from the Consent Agenda because the information presented did not include a reference to the funds coming from Park Dedication fees. Gerhardson confirmed that the Park Dedication fee is the source of the funding for the Navarre Playground fence. Gerhardson stated that such language must be included in the motion in order to use the Park Dedication fees. It was moved by Peterson, seconded by Mayor Grabek, to authorize acquisition of the fence for the Nivarre Playground in an amount not to exceed $800.00. The funding for the fence is to come from Park Dedication fees. Motion, Ayes-4, Nays-0. Motion passed. ADMINISTRATOR'S INFORMATION Goetten had asked this item to be removed from the Consent Agenda for discussion. She noted that the resolution approving this item referred to the bicycles as being destroyed. She asked whether it would be necessary amend the resolution. Bernhardson replied that further. he would have to review that It was moved by Goetten, seconded by Peterson, to accept the City Admini. trator' 3 Information regarding; Viell #3 Update, Bicycle Disposition, Assessing Service, Cable TV, Lorraine McGowan, and Western Hennepin County Pioneers Association. Motion, Ayes-4, Nays-0, Motion passed. CITY ATTORNEY'S REPORT: None LICENSES* None BILLS* It was moved by Nettles, seconded by Peterson, to approve payment of tho All Funds Account. Motion, Ayes-4, Nays-0, Motion passed. EXECUTIVE SESSION 9:04 P.M. City Attorney Barrett requested that Council hold an Executive Session for the purpose of discussing pending litigation. - 17 - ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD SEPTEMBER 24, 1990 ADJOURNMENT 9:20 P.M. It was moved by Nettles, seconded by Mayor Grabek, to adjourn the Regular Council Meeting at 9:20 p.m. Motion, Ayes-4, Nays-0, Motion passeu. James R. Grabek, Mayor ATTEST: Dorothy M, Hallin, City Clerk •• 18 - i i TO: FHOM: DATS: SUBJECT: Park Dedication Fee Attachment: A. Park Dedication Memo Dated 8/6/90 B. Proposed Amended Ordinance ISSUE - Determination by Council as to what action they would desire to take regarding: Park dedication fees from land previously subdivided INTRODUCTION - At the Council’s August 13th Council they referred the issue outlined in Attachment A to the Park Commission. Park Commission at their September 5th Park Commission meeting requested a sub-committee of the members meet to formulate a recommendation. That sub-committee met and presented their recommendation at the October 2nd Park Commission meeting. Park Commission’s recommendation was that the requirement for park dedication from land that had previously been subdivided be deleted from consideration. ALTERNATIVES 1. Leave the ordinance as it presently stands. 2. Take the Park Commission recomnendation and delete that section. 3. Table for further discussion. RECOMMENDATION - It is recommended in conjunction with the Park Commission that because of the legal and administrative problems related to the provision that portion of the ordinance be deleted. PROPOSED MOTION - Moved by _, seconded by _, that the Coun-il amends Ordinance #82, Second Series by the deletion of Section 2 (F) related to the development of land previously platted. Ayes __, Nays __. i 61490.1 : \ TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Mark E. Eernhardson, City Administrato DATE: August 6, 1990 SUBJECT: Park Dedication A Attachment :A. C. E. VanEeckhout Letter Dated 4/25/90 B. Park Dedication Memo Dated 4/6/90 C. Draft Response to Mr. VanEeckhout D. Park Dedication Fee Implementation Process Draft E. Resolution #1252 - Park Dedication Fund Dated 2/23/81 ISSUE - 1. Presentation to Council regarding objections to Council's adopted ordinance by Mr. VanEeckhout. 2. Allow Council to determine what action, if any, they want to take based on those objections. INTRODUCTION - Mr. VanEeckhout's objections were transmitted to the City Attorney's office. These issues were discussed by the Attorney's office with him and reviewed as to their legality. DISCUSSION - Mr. VanEeckhout raises three specific issues as -o legality of the following: 1. Obtaining a park dedication from land previously subdivided. 2. Use of park dedication fees for development or maintenance. 3. How directly must a cash in lieu of land contr ibu , be related to that subdivisions impact of the p-i' , system? Additionally he raised the issue of adopting a Park Needs Assessment prior to an ordinance. The issue that is most sensitive legally is the one for previous-V subdivided property paying a dedication. This also does pi. nt substantial problems i;. determining for each permit which t.ubdivision paid and which ones haven't and also determining the pre-development value of something that subdivided over 20 years ago. The other two areas questioned in the ordinance have adequate legal foundation although the term maintenance should be refined. Additionally the Attorney recommended adoption ofi.the following additional languauge in Attachment D. '' 'Arw Park Coranr'ssion revived the issues at their_ August 7th meeting and decided to table for consideration at their next meeting. (Attachment Cis drafted as a response to Mr. VanEeckhout.) ALTERNATIVES - 1. Accept-the information. 2. Indicate what action, if any, the Council desires. 3. Refer to Park Commission any or all of the issues for further review and comment. 4. Take no action. RECOMMENDATION - It is recommended that Council table pending recommendation by the Park Commission on repealing the section on payment of previously subdivided properties. At present while there is no direct statutory authority for such has not been ruled legal. (The policy arguement could be made that the new home will place a burden on the park system and those previously developed were "just lucky".) Staff does have a substantial concern on the fairness as this impact will fall directly on somebody who has acquired a piece of property and being faced at the time of building permit with a park dedication fee. This is a different situation than a person acquiring a piece of property from someone who has subdivided the property with the park dedication already built into the purchase price. Additionally we are not aware of other cities that do require it for property owners in the category of previously subdivided property xying at time of building permit. PROPOSED MOTION - Moved by seconded by that the Councilt * W W ^ ^ 4 * W ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ table consideration pending a recommendation from the Park Commission. Ayes _, Nays _. cc: John R. Gerhardson, Public Works Director V U TTh '■<'SXJT April 25, 1990 HAY 1 1990Mr. Jira Grabeck 3050 Jamestown Road Long Lake, MN 55356 Dear Jim: It seems to me that any reasonable reading of the statutes and case law leaves some serious questions as to the validity of the recently enacted Park Dedication Ordinance. I am f'/ruly behind park land acquisition and development, br* am str figly opposed to any ordinances that may not be h'jr defensible. 1 would like an explanation of the appa ^nt incompatibility between tha ordinance and che statutes and case law. I have noted the statute lar aage and ordinance language by reference number. 1) The statute has no provisions for park iedication for previously divided or p^^itted lands. '<2) The statute does not allow for nark dedicatioi j.,mds ~to be used for de/elopment or roaintena^c'^ This provision was included prior to '980 but was repexl^d in 1981 by the Minnesota legislature 3) The prepon Wry clear that th^ must be directly ^ *1. subdivision on tl o\ few areas to supp* xaw and the statute are ed, if cash is collected, ii\ipt*ct of the affected i..-.stem. I have highlighted a viLument. Many -‘ities that e idopxed Park Dedication Ordinances that seem wO be consistent with the statutes have first determined their land acquisition costs, estimated the total potential resiaential units and divided to obtain the costs per unit and thus assesses this flat fee per unit as development occurs. Your response to these concerns will be appreciated. Since^velj C.B. Vai. Eeckhout CEV/sjc \ZO BrtooUAj w. kj . ♦1 02^itJC\AjOc, 1 sr 4(aZ.,h^ 2-b (^-1 c-ou«^r ‘COLL.IS \/5 ■TT’UAlmlta fbtj 8-10 MiJ. Sup. r\<>s*0 Uv^rrUit / YJtM^ (ri C/ ORDINANCE #_J2 ' SECOND SERIES oonTMavC^ AMENDING SECTION 11.62 OF THE ORONO CITY CODE Elating T^^^^ and cash for development of land . follows: The City Council of the City of Orono ordains as Section 1. Section 11.62 of the Orono City Code is hereby amended and the current fee schedule for parh dedication fees is hereby repealed. Section 2. Section 11.62. Parks, Playgrounds and Open Space. ^ for Public Use. Pursuant to Minnesota cv ^n-^\i9llT^^sirrtT3^S'r.T38rTubd. 2b,. the city requires 'Qi vision, final olat, or development of any land previously WwMWEimmm deSd"brthc CU.with the Coraprehensi Plan. t> rod Land Rcauirements. Any land to be 5!S»Ms3?^ and location. c. Land Dedication r^^inlmum Arc^ Subdividers shall be required to dedicate to ^Yc '^purp'• jcs as^'^l'nTniiium that open such amount as may be detcrmir/eVby the City Council, as set forth below: (1) Rcsidentlal/Agricultural/Multiolc Residential Zoned * Land. ■5/ '■■yf <s> «♦. rtf 8% of the land being platted, l^cxlsting lot of record. Co«.cr=Ul/XndustrU^l zoned -- “"^iwVdeVor ’existing lot of record. D ci^ontribution^^ ISelulIitfdlll'tn where a'cash =ontrrhuuron rs ‘“lid, the cash contribution of a conveyance oc dedic ^ >q the faic market value of s.nxA‘“r^”fHltT;g * - , _ iit:»' is r «/?e "Fair Market Value" for /^Z. ?air Market Vtlni* pcc-dcvelopreent value to 'purposes^rof'the time of preliminary in^ac^corLnee with the following: piac Citv Coucil as to%he''fafr"ma “?It"vliue'o7X: land after consultation with the subdivider. X. agreement is "O^^^all -Il^erva'^li:/ |c"termfned''iri=cordancc with the following: Fair market value ^'^"“^"g'^al^submi^tt^^^^ the based upon a at his expense. The City by tbe subdividc^r^, appraisers who are appraisal shall • ^ equivalent real approved members of SRE a or estate societies If the City //^^c^^proVe^ ty a qualif ied selects and which ar>oraisal at fair market ?hc"?ol? oTth'e ^pr^^iisal shall be paid by the subdivider. anv final determination (e, The ^subdivider^may^^app^ */ovided by Minnesota Statute Section 462.361. (3) The determination of f *^\g^gsor,^ City Council# or undeveloped land by the ^ ^ ^ dcterioincd asScsignated appraisers, shall p".-. iV.o..l *• ■ o “"; by the City of the aoocoval of that determined as „““\se fair market value as.of extension. or the extension time of be" included in the analysis thereof, the , factors which arc generally tcd"and used^by aooroved members of SHEA or MAI or . u ■. ^h,' above, in no event shall the cash coftr\buVfon per'l^^ l«ss than SSOO.OO per lot or $300.00 per dwelling unit. , rand ?-eviouslv ^latt^ If the land^has alre"ady-beei "p're^rousiy shall^ppl/lt f'hrttme'^rAe "j'suinl'ora buildi'ng permit for the primary Structure. wj* •c-'?on Anv land which is further G. Fut ure Subd ivi.s or^apolied for such subsequent subdivided, subiect to'the requirements of the to May 1, 1990., shall of land for public ordinance then in ^or any charges previously purposes, =-''f^V??\hc lubdivider can prove that fees were‘:rAta.T,"priV. s; to be dedicated. .h. ,.0.1.10..,, ..1. section of the code. Section 3. « ehflil have full force and effect upon its This ordinance shall nave tuxo. passage and publication. P...O, a .HO coooll o. «0 CU,^0, 0.o.o,_..ffo,.H Cooo.,. L. ORDINANCE #SECOND SERIES AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE #82, SECOND SERIES OP THE ORONO CITY CODE RELATING TO PARK DEDICATION AND CASH FOR DEVELOPMENT OF LAND. follows: The City Council of the City of Orono ordains as Ordinance #82, Second Series adopted April 9, 1990 is hereby amended by the repeal of Section 2, Subdivision F. Development of Land Previously Platted. This amendment shall have full force and effect upon its passage and publication. Passed by the Council of the City of Orono, Hennepin County, Minnesota, this 8th day of October, 1990. ATTEST; Edward J. Callahan, Jr., Acting Mayor Theresa L. Naab, Deputy Clerk Publish the week of October 15, 1990 in the Laker/Pioneer newspaper 4 Mayor Grabek & Orono Council Members City Administrator Bernhardson I Proa: Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building & Zoning Administrator Date: October 4, 1990 8’ m Subject: #1532 Fullerton Properties, Inc., 2225 6th Avenue No - A) Final Subdivision - Resolution B) Road Name Approval List of Exhibits Exhibit A - Resolution Approving Final Plat of Shadowood Farms Exhibit B - Plat of Shadowood Farms Exhibit C - Resolution #2826 Exhibit D - Bernhardson's Memo 9/18/90 Exhibit E - Cox Agreement Exhibit F - Easement Agreement - Bike Trail Exhibit G - Road Name Request Exhibit H - Hudson Directory Listings A) Final Subdivision 6 Associated Docuaents - After many delays, the applicant has fulfilled requirements cf preliminary subdivision approval as set forth in Resolution #2826, Exhibit C. Since preliminary approval of the plat, the Park Commission has reviewed the subdivision for the purpose of acquiring additional lands for bike trails. As septic testing, lot lines and road designs had been approved, the Park Commission determined there would be a negligible impact on the preliminary plat if bike trails were to be taken over the 10' drainage and utility easement that outlines the property along the north and west boundaries of the subdivision (refer to Exhibit B). After much discussion, the City and developer reached agreement, the final easement agreement (Exhibit F) is enclosed for Council s review. The agreement addresses the septic concerns noted in Bernhardson's memo of September 18, 1990 (Exhibit D), that responds to the issues raised by Mike Gaffron in an earlier memo. Gaffron's memo notes that septic sites can be moved further south on Lots 1, 2 and 4, but Lot 5's septic test sites cannot be moved further south because of drainage and elevations concerns. If a bike trail is to be constructed along the northern boundary of Lot 5, it must be constructed either at the very edge of the drainage and utility easements or within the right-of-way of County Road 6 for a 50-60' length. As part of the final resolve of this easement agreement, the developer has agreed to submit in writing a letter that would agree to amend the final septic plan approved by the City whereby developer will agree to adjust and relocate existing septic sites within Lots 1, 2 and 4. The City in turn will agree to protect drainfield sites in Lot 5 during period of trail construction. Zoning File #1532 October 4, 1990 Page 2 of 2 Please review Exhibit E, the agreement that the City agreed to enter into with Mr. Cox involving the additional dedication of 7' of right-of-way for Willow Drive as it impacts Outlet A. Arlo VandeVegte, the attor.^ey for Jim Cox, will make the necessary changes as noted by staff's written comments reflecting that right-of-way is to be dedicated and not granted via an easement. In addition, Mathew Seltzer of Dorsey Whitney (conflict of interest created for Popham, Haik representing both Fullerton Inc. and the City of Orono, Mathew Seltzer has reviewed the subdivision for the City of Orono), has recommended that the agreement be amended to reflect that upon final resolve of the upgrade of Willow Drive, that the City will be responsible for scheduling appropriate vacation public hearings if the City finds that portions of the dedicated right-of-way are not used for road purposes. The agreement as currently written suggests that vacation will be automatically approved upon request of owner. Staff recommends approval of the final plat subject to the findings and conditions set forth in the final plat approval resolution (Exhibit A). B) Road Name Approval - Please review Exhibits G and H, City staff has reviewed the road name choices of the developer and recommends approval of Shadowood Drive and Cox Farm Road finding no conflict with existing road names within the City or in surrounding areas. The applicant has not designated which of the sections of roadways shall be specifically named. A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE PLAT OP SHAOOWOOD FARM PILE NO. 1532 WHEREAS, the City of Ororo is a municipal corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of Minnesota; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Orono has adopted subdivision regulations for the orderly, economic and safe develcpment of land within the City; and WHEREAS, the City Council has considered the application for a subdivision of a plat of 13 lots by Fullerton Properties Inc., a Minnesota Corporation, the subdivider; and WHEREA.., the subdivision has been found to meet all standards of the RR-IB rural residential zoning district finding that each lot is of a size and configuration that will allow its use as a single family residence to be fully developed without the need of any variances; and WHEREAS, the subdivider has completed all requirements of the platting regulations of the City, including: 1. Completion of all the requirements of R«-'^olution #2826, a resolution that granted preliminary approval of the 13 lot subdivision. 2. Dedication on the plat of rights-of-way for public roads shown as H.C.S.A.H. No.6 and Willow Drive. 3. Dedication on the pla easements. f drainage and utility 4. Dedication on the plat of drainage easements. 5. Creation of private roads shown on the plat as Outlets B and C. Outlet C to be known henceforth as Shadowood Drive and Cox Farm Road. Page 1 of 4 6. Concurrent with the creation of this private road/ the subdivider has dedicated to the City a road and utility easement granting to the City permanent access, improvement and utility easements over said outlot; the subdivider has created non-exclusive ingresS/ egress, drainage and utility easements over said outlot in favor of all abutting and/or benefiting lots including a declaration of certain maintenance covenants wherein each of the abutting and/or benefiting lot owners covenants and agrees to permanently maintain and pay the cost of maintenance for said private road. 7. Dedication to the City of a Flowage and Conservation Easement providing for limitations on the use of wetlands, drainageways, flood plain and Dickeys Lake described therein and shown on the plat as drainage easements. 8. Execution of a subdivider's agreement providing for installation of certain improvements as a condition of subdivision approval. 9. Creation of three outlets for the following approved uses: Outlot A - to be legally combined with the James Cox homestead property which ; surrounded by Outlot A. Outlot B - designated for future road extension to the south. This section of roadway is not to be constructed at this time but is set aside for future road use. Outlot C - interior road outlots to be constructed upon final plat approval. 10. Execution of agreement with James Cox dealing with interim use of 7' of additional right-cf-way of Willow Drive along west border of Outlot A and possible vacation of unused portion of right-of-way upon determination of final upgrade of Willow Drive whether by City based on MSA standards or as future County Road 116. 11. Execution of an easement agreement with developer granting easements to the City for bike trail purposes over the 10' drainage and utility easements that border the property on the north and west sides of the subdivision. Page 2 of 4 12. Payment to the City of a Park Dedication fee in the amount of $2,400.00. 13. Payment to the City for the legal review and filing of the plat, easements and covenants in the amount of $150.00. 14. Payment to the City of a final subdivision application fee in the amount of $150.00. NOW, THKRBPORBr BB IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Orono hereby approves the plat of Shadowood Farm, Hennepin County, Minnesota; subject to the following condition; 1. Prior to the issuance of building permits for new construction, the following improvements must be completed and approved by the City: A) Gravel road base to be constructed per engineering plans by Mark S. Gronberg, Sheets 1 and 2, dated August 31, 1990. B) Ditch along Willow Drive to be graded in accordance with City standards. C) Drainage swales and water quality structures as shown in final grading and drainage plan^'^ per plans by Mark S. Gronberg, Sheets 1 and 2, dated August 31, 1990. 2. Prior to any land alterations or road construction on this property, the following septic envelopes must be fenced; Lot 1, Block 2 - septic envelopes 1 and 2 Lot 5, Block 1 - septic envelope 1 Lot 8, Block 1 - septic envelopes 1 and 2 3. Owner of Outlot A shall apply for the legal combination with adjacent homestead lot. U. ^ ^ ogal combination, the owner has right to construct acce3fe\;ry structures or use area of outlot for other permitted accessory uses. Page 3 of 4 i 4. The aforesaid plat shall be filed by the City of Orono with either the Hennepin County Recorder's Office or the Registrar of Titles Office on or before April 8, 1991 together with a certified original copy of this Resolution together with executed copies of certain easements and covenants noted above. The approval granted by this Resolution shall expire if the plat has not been filed by the date specified above. In that event, it will be necessary to file a new application with the City of Orono for subdivision review. Dated *^s 8th day of October, 1990. ATTEST; Theresa L. Naab, Deputy Clerk Edward J. Callahan, Jr., Acting Mayor STATE OF MINivi.. QTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this 8th day cf October, 1990, by Edward J. Callahan, Jr. & Theresa L. Naab, Acting Mayor & Deputy Clerk of the City oi Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City. Motary Public Page 4 of 4 OP ORONO City of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 2826_ _ _ _ _ _ A RESOLUTION GRANTING PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION APPROVAL OF SHADOWOOD FARM PLAT FOR FULLERTON PROPERTIES, INC. PILE NO. 1532 aty for"a“AvYs'lon of 13 lots of a property legally described as follows; Refer to Exhibit A attached (hereinafter "the property") and; WHEREAS after due published and mailed notice in accordance 'sV4n; application were given the opportunity to speak thereon; and WHEREAS, at their regular meeting held on Orono City Council considered the subdivision application of the applicant, noting the following findings of fact. 1 The property is located within the RR-IB Single Family Rural Residential Zoning District requiring a minimum c. acres of contiguous dry buildable land within each newly created lot. 2. The property contains a total of approximately 36.8 acres. 5.8 acres are considered wetlands. 3. The proposed plat contains 13 lots each exceeding or meeting the 2 acre dry contiguous minimum lot aiea requirement. 4. All lots shall be served by private roads to be within the property. The location of the curb cut of the private road that intersects at Willow Drive has been approvec by the City Engineer and the Hennepin County Department of Transportation. 5. 12 of the 13 lots meet the required 200 feet "i'^th at the rear of the front yard setbac)c line. The City sta the Planning Commission and Council q variance for Lot 6 in order to open up the building and sepr Page 1 of 7 OF ORONO City of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 2826__________ envelope for Lot 7. Lot 6's building and septic envelopes have been located to the extreme east of the property. There is adequate lot width between Lot 6 and 7 to meet the required 200' width for each of the lots. 6. A single family residence can be constructed on all proposed lots without the need for any variances. 7. Septic testing has confirmed that all 13 lots contain adequate and suitable soils for on site seweage disposal systems to serve 5+ bedroom residences. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that based upon one or more of the findings noted above, the City Council of the City of Orono hereby approves the preliminary plat application of Fullerton Properties, Inc. per plat drawings by Mark S. Gronberg of Coffin & Gronberg, Inc., dated March 1, 1990, revised June 11, 1990, and furLl.er grants a variance to the standard that would require all lots have frontage on a public road with the creation of a private road, and further grants a variance to the lot width standard for proposed Lot 6 subject to the following conditions: 1. Prior to the issuance of building permits for new construction, the final plat must be filed with either Hennepin County Recorder's office or Registrar of Titles, road base installed and approved by City, and, if all necessary lot grading, drainage improvements, water quality structures, and paving of road are not completed by final plat approval, the developers must execute a developer's agreement and post a letter of credit (150% of cost of remaining improvements). 2. The following is a listing of required improvements for this subdivision ; a. Private road to be constructed per engineering plan by Mark S. Gronberg dated May 14 , 1990 subject to the changes requested by the City Engineer in his report dated May 30, 1990 as follows: , 1) Ditch along Willow Drive to be graded in accordance with City standards. 2) Silt fencing should be shown on the grading plan. 3) PVI at Station 8 +00 to be moved to 8 +25 providing flatter grade coming into Tee intersection. Page 2 ot 7 City of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 2826 The following is a bid security required for the project: 1) 5000 cubic yards conunon excavation at $2.00/cubic yard = $10,000 2) 3500 ton Class 5 100% crushed at $8.00/ton = $28,000 3) 650 bituminous surfacing at $22.00/ton *= $14,300 4) 2 acres seeding with 4" topsoil and mulch at $1000/acre = $2000 5) Total = $54,300 6) 50% increase = $27,150 7) Total bid security required = $81,450 By Mark Gronberg dated K*i,y 14, 1990, revised June 11, 1990. b. Drainage swales and water quality structures as shown in the grading and drainage plans. c. Prior to any land alterations or road construction on this site, the following septic envelopes must be fenced: Lot 1, Block 2 - Septic envelopes 1 and 2 Lot 5, Block 1 - Septic envelope 1. Lot 8, Block 1 - Septic envelopes 1 and 2 3. Execution of agreemen* with James Cox dealing with interim use of additional right-of-way of Willow Drive and eventual vacation of unused portion of additional right-of-way upon determination of final upgrade of Willow Drive whether by City based on MSA standard or as future County Road 116. Applicant to advise if they wish the City attorney's office to prepare Page 3 of 7 CITY OF ORONQ City of OROINO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 2826__________ agW^ent. Applicant shall then agree to pay the cost of City Attorney's time. Applicant has option to prepare agreement for City review and execution. 4. The City has approved the creation of Outlots for the following approved uses: Outlot A - To be legally combined with the James Cox homestead property consistent with previous subdivisions of lot line rearrangements. Upon final subdivision approval, James Cox shall apply for the legal combination of Outlot A with homestead lot. At that point applicant has right to construct accessory structures or use area of Outlot for other permitted accessory uses. Outlot B - Desginated for future road extensio che south. This section of roadway is n be constructed but is set aside for future road use. Outlot C - Interior road outlots to be constructed upon final plat approval. 5. The following list of final submittals must be submitted to the zoning administrator 2 weeks prior to the regularly scheduled Council meeting on the second and fourth Mondays of the month. Preliminary subdivision approval expires within 1 year of the date of Council approval (July 9, 1991). a. Record plat drawings in the form of (2) mylar copies and (1) copy reduced 1" = 200' . Drawing to include: 1) Lot lines platted per preliminary survey by Mark S. Gronberg dated March 1, 1990, revised June 11, 1990. 2) Dedication of "drainage and utility easements" 10' ' wide along all perimeter property lines and 5' each side of internal property lines - omit along the sides of the designated wetlands or lakeshore. Page 4 of 7 City of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 2826__________ 3) Designate and dedicate all drainage easements that define drainageway within swales between the shared lot lines of Lots 2 and 3, Block 2, 4 and 5, Block 1 and 7 and 8, Block 1. 4) Define ordinary high water mark of Dickey Lake at 987' elevation. 5) Define area between elevation 987 and 988 as flood plain district. Designate as drainage easements. 6) Wetlands as designated by staff at on-*site inspection as wetland area also as drainage easement. b. LEGAL DOCUMENTS required: 1) Title opinion addressed to the City. All owners, mortgage holders or othe»-«5 with property interest indicated therein shall sign the plat and all other documents affected by such interest. 2) The applicant must provide certified copies of all recorded easements currently affecting the property. 3) Signed and executed Flowage & Conservation Easement over drainage easements that define wetlands, flood plain and Dickey Lake. (See copy enclosed.) 4) Signed and executed developers agreement and letter of credit for construction of the private road and othei improvements. (See copy enclosed.) 5) Signed and executed Road and Utilities Easement (see copy enclosed) over Outlot B and C. 6) Signed and executed "Declaration of Private Road Easement and Declaration for Maintenance of Same". (See copy enclosed.) Note need to amend for ownership purposes. If it is to be shared ownership, there is need to create a homeowner's association or other vehicle for the multiple ownership. Page 5 of 7 OF ORONO City of OFtOIVO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL MO. 2826__________ 7) Completed ’’Application for Private Road Name”. (See copy enclosed.) The City is aware is that you have selected a specific name but you should provide other name choices for the two roadways for Council's consideration. c. FEES TO BE PAID: Total Due $2/700.00 1) Park dedication fee per former schedule; $200.00 for 12 lots at $2,400.00. Please note no charge for Lot 5 that contained former residence. 2) Final plat fee = $150.00 3) Legal review and filing fees of $150.00 Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota at a regular meeting held this 9th day of July, 1990. llin, City Clerk JTATE OF i^NNESOTA ) ) COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) ss. The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this 9th day of July, 1990, by James R. Grabek & Dorothy M. Hallin, Mayor & City Clerk of the City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf the City^- ^ Notary Public THERESA L. NAAB NOTTARY PUBUC - MINNESOTA HENNEPIN COUNTY lly commlwion «xplrM 9-«-92 1^9 3- My Commission Expires Page 6 of 7 ORONO Exhibit A City of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 2826_________ T.F.OAT. DF^CRTPTTQN fM’AKF.N FPOM ARF;TRA<Tr OF TITLED OF PROPERTY TQ B£ subdivideh ^ That part of the Southwest Quarter of Section 27, Township 118 North. Range 23 West of the 5th Principal Meridian, described as follows: Commencing at the intersection of the centerline of County Road No. 6 and the West line of said Southwest Quarter; thence S ch along said West line to a point distant 1572.5 feet North from the Southwest corner thereof; thence East at right angles a distance of 324.5 feet; thence South at right angles a distance of 149.5 feet; thence VJest at right angles to the Wf’st line of said Southwest Quarter; thence South along said West Line a distance of 149.9 feet; thence East at right angles a distance of 324.5 feet; thence South at right angles to a point distant 825.00 feet North from the South line of said Southwest Quarter; thence East parallel with said South line to its intersection with the West line of the East 1091.94 feet of said Southwest Quarter; thence North along said West line a distance of 1030.00 feet; thence East a distance of 56.4 feet; tlience North to the center line of County Road No. 6; thence West along said center line to the point of beginning. 91890.3 P TO: John R. Gerhardson, Public Works Director Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building & Zoning Administrator Michael P. Gaffron, Asst. Planning & Zoaing Admin. FROM: Mark E. Bernhardson, City Administrate?)^^ DATE: September 18, 1990 SUBJECT: #1532 Fullerton Properties As part of the subdivision of the Cox property, they have agreed to include bike trails in the ten foot drainage and utility easement abutting County Road 6 and Willow. Given the need for a 20' setback, for protecting the septic systems, if the trail system is constructed, all drainfield sites as well as the trail and easement site; should be staked. A. ) Construction equipment must remain either in the 10 foot easement or County 6 right-of-way and in no case go closer than 20 feet to the primary or alternate septic sites for Lots 1, 2 and 4. B. ) For Lot 5, the alternate location can not be moved and as such the equipment and trail construction must maintain a 20 foot setback to that site. The trail should be placed in the County Road 6 right-of-way in areas where drainfield site is within 20 feet of the easement (an area about 50-60' in length). This should be incorporated as an addendum to the easement granting this, the address file for each and on file with the Bike/Trails information. To: Mark E. Berr.hardson, City Administrator *« Prom: Michael P. Gaffron, Asst Planning & Zoning Administrator Date: September 14, 1990 Subject: #1532 Fullerton Properties - Bike Trail Ev^sement Request The Orono Park Commission has requested a 10' easement along County Road 6 for the purpose of constructing a bike trail. Because this request is occuring after preliminary plat approval, the opportunity for possijile changes to the plat which could minimize the impact of such a trail, is very limited. Had the request for a trail occured during the preliminary plat review process, it is likely that some of the drainfield sites would have been shifted to minimize the potential for conflicts between the bike trail and drainfield sites. There are 4 lots abutting County Road 6 through which a 10' wide bike trail easement is requested. Based on a review of the site plan for each lot in relation to topography, I would make the following comments: 1. In general, the City requires a 20' setback from drainfield sites to any hard surface areas, structures, etc. These setbacks are especially critical for mound drainfield systems which will be used exclusively in this plat. When the encroaching structure or hardsurface is uphill from the mound site, the concern is that such hardsurface areas will add surface runoff to the drainfield sites. When the hardcover or structure encroachments are downhill from the mound site, the concern is more extreme in that such structure, hardsurface, or the compaction of soils required to create such encroachment, will cause a "damming" effect in the upper few feet of soil through which the sewage is percolating both vertically and horizontally outwards from the mound system. Such a damming effect could cause surfacing of partially treated se-^tic effluent. 2. No design detail for a bike trail has been submitted by the applicant nor by the Park Commission. However, I would expect that a 5'or 6' wide paved surface over a gravel base would be the intended trail. It would seem likely that the equipment needed to bring in materials and create such ^ase work ajid pavtment will necessarily extend outside the 10' wide easement area. I would also expect that such equipment would tend to cause some compaction outside the boundaries of the finished pavement. #1532 Fullerton Properties - Bike Trail Easement Request September 14, 1990 Page 2 of 3 3. In Lots 1 and 4, proposed drainfield sites are for the most part more than 30' from the north lot line, and lateral below-grade drainage will generally follow the contours sloping away from the bike trail. If the bike trail and its construction traffic do not go outside the easement/right- of-way the rrail will have little impact on Lots 1 and 4. In Lot 2, one corner of the alternate site extends to within 10' of the proposed easement. While topography suggests that this site can be moved 10' further south, that will also shift the primary site further south. This could tend to slightly further limit the flexibility for house placement on the property, but not to a critical degree. In Lot 5, which contains steeper topography and a significant number of existing buildings, the two tested drainfield sites are the only sites available. Within this plat, the alternate site for Lot 5 is the most likely to be negatively affected by construction of the proposed bike trail. The toe of the proposed mound system is 20' from the north lot line, and the natural flow of water underground away from the mound will be to the north and northwest. Due to steep topography that site cannot be shifted further away from the north lot line. The probable compaction associated with construction of the trail in a 10' easement inside the property boundaries would in my opinion would have a severe negative impact on the ability of this mound system to function hydraulically. It is my recommendation thac along this mound site the bike trail, if constructed, be located within the County Road 6 right-of-way, with no construction traffic allowed within the property boundaries adjacent to this mound site. Summary - 1. Drainfield sites in Lots 1, 2 and 4 can likely be ??hifted southward so that the impact of the bike trail is nellgible. 2. While the primary drainfield site on Lot 5 should not be affected, the secondary site would be severely impacted by construction of a bike trail (or construction traffic) within the property boundaries. The trail should be located within the existing right-of-way of County Road 6 rather than within the property boundaries as it passes this alternate drainfield site. 3. . Due to proposed grading of a drainage channel parallel to County Road 6 just north of the primary site on Lot 5, construction of a bike path within the 10' easement in the area would be very difficult. #1532 Fullerton Properties - Bike Trail Easement Request September 14, 1990 Page 3 of 3 4. A copy of the drainfield site map is attached to this memo. I would recommend that the map and this memo be included as part of the final nlat resolution if a bike trail easement is approved. agreement ■^3: </ ■9c Ccf~/-i-: o C ^^C3l THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into this___day of ^ 1990, by and between James A. Cox and Bemadine Cox, husband and wife (hereinafter called "Cox"), and the City of Orono, a municipal corporation under the laws of Minnesota (herein^, ter called "Orono"): WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, Cox is the owner of that certain real property located in the City of Orono, County of Heimepin and State of Minnesota, legally described as Outlet A, Shadowood Farm; and WHEREAS. Orono has approved the plat known as Shadowood Farm based upon, among other things, the agreement of Cox to dedicate on the plat abutting Outlet A, Shadowood Farm, a forty foot (40’) right-of-way for the Easterly half of Willow Drive North, said forty foot (40') right-of-wav being seven feet (7') wider than the existing thirty-three foot (33’) right-of-way; l. WHEREAS, Cox has agreed based upon the conditions and exceptions set forth below, to dedicate said additional seven feet (7) of right-of-way abutting Outlot A, Shadowood Farm (the "Outlot A Seven Feet"); NOW, THEREFORE, based upon the consideration hereinabove set forth, together with One Dollar and Other Good and Valuable Consideration, receipt of which is acknowledged by Cox, the parties hereby covenant and agree as follows: 1. Agreement to Vacate. Orono, for itself, its successors and assigns, hereby covenants and agrees to vacate said Outlot A Seven Feet, or any unused portion thereof, at such time as final determination is made, following all appropriate public hearings and subject to the consent of all other necessary parties, that said Outlot A Seven Feet, or any unused portion thereof, is not required for the upgrade of W illow Drive North to MSA standards or as future County Road 116, either by the City of Orono or the County of Hennepin. 2. Restrictions upon Use. During the interim period between execution of this agreement and final determination as to the upgrading of Willow Drive North as above-described, Orono may not remove special plantings or improved lawn sections located within and upon the Outlot A Seven Feet. 3. Enforcement. The provisions of this agreement may be enforced by Cox through proceedings in equity, including but not limited to mandamus or injunctive relief. B-4. Successors and Assig ns. The provisions of this agreement shall inure to the benefit of the parties respective successors and/or assigns. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed and delivered this agreei: ■ ent the date and year first above-written. James A. Cox Bemadine Cox CITY OF ORONO By____________ STATE OF MINNESOTA ) )SS. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN) The foregoing Instrument was acknowledged before me the___day of ________, 1990, by James A. Cox and Bemadine Cox, husband and wife. Notary Public -2- £> STATE OF MINNESOTA ) )SS. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN) ■n^e foregoing instrument was acknowledgcJ_before me this-----day of of the CITY OF okC)NO, a municipal corporation under the laws of Minnesota, on behalf of the corporation. Notary Public This Instrument Was Drafted By: Arlo H. Vande Vegte, P.A. Box 39 Long Lake# MN 55356 -3- AGREEMOlT ■ THIS ACREEHEilT. made and entered Jhis wite. inereln- -^Poratlon under the laws i'f Ninnesota (heremafwer cal.ed g>a....e ,. WITNESSETH; tt= cr5?v.:n~r.i"5.s as Outlet A, Sbadowood Farm; and iiucdeas Grarit66 has approved the plat known as $hadO'..cod Fair'in based uponi rig-,-.;..., wn,. 9ri.=, all as depicted on said plat; and WHEREAS, grantors have agreed based upon the forth below, to conditionally convey said roadway ease .=nt .0 gran.=e, "OW TH-REFCRE, based upon the consideration hereinaoove set with Cne Dollar and Other Good and Valuable Consideration, receipt of which is acknowledged by grantors, the parties hereby covenant and agree as fol ^ • 1 ronv-vance of Roadwav Easement. Grantors hereby convey to grantee_a^d'^T^« aran*ee heeebv'^acceots corive'"ance of"ln easement for roadway purposes over and across that part o/outlot A', Shadowood Farm, !'eo'’oP ’o/°onty, Minnesota whic nac cov/an PA<;ti>riv of the existinq riqht-of-wav .or Uillcw Drive, all ^ 'iW uM^delKdUow'S^ive ?i liSA standards, either by the City of Orono or ^ County of Hennepin. Jtc ■ ,tu^ 3. Restrictions upon Use. Curing the interim period ceCween execution_of this agreement and nna'I deteFr.'.ination as to the upgrading of Willow Drue as above-described, grantee nay not relieve special plantings c-' unproved lawn sections located within and upon the above-described roadway easement areas. 4. Enforcement. The provisions of this agreement nay be enforced by grantors through proceedings in equity, including but not IJnited to nanddnus or injunctive relief and upon successful conclusion thereot grantors shall ce entitled to recover their costs and disbursenents, including reasonable attorney's fees and witness fees. tl. t- — I li c,irrp«;snrs and Assiqns. The provisions of this agreer.ent shall inure to th^benefit of the parties respective successors and/or assigns. Ill UlTilESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed and delivered this agreesent the date and year first above-written. James A. Cox Bernadine Cox City of Orono By; Its: By: STATE OF MIUI^ESOTA ) ) SS. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me the _ _day of , 1^90, by James A. Cox and Bernadine Ccx, husband and wife [Jotary Puolic" STATE OF MlfiNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) SS. The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this , 1990* by and day of of the City of*0ro«o! a municipal corporation uTider the laws or MTnneso'ta, on behalf of the corporation. This Instrument Has Drafted By: Arlo H. Vande Vegte, P.A. Box 39 Long Lake. 'All 55356 Notary Pul'l ic /a EASEMENT AGREEMENT cox Brothers Fsrm, a Minnesota general < J|®"^®'tionthe City of Orono. Minnesota, a Minnesota municipal corporation (-City^). RECITALS: A. Developer owns a vendee’s interest in that certain real property legally deacrib-d on Exhibit ”A- attached hereto (the “Property"). B. The property is subject to the provisions of . certain Contract For Deed between Developer, as vendee, and Lender, as vendor, dated _ __ _ _ _ _ _. 1990, and recorded on 1990, as Document No. in and for Hennepin County, Minnesota. in the Office of the County Recorder C. T!ie Property is also subject to those matters set forth on Exhibit "D’’ attached hereto ("Existing Easements"). D. Developer and Lander are sometin.es collectively referred to hereinafter as the -Grantors." E. City desires to obtain from Grantors an easement for bikepath and other recreational purposes over that Property legally described on Exhibit "C” attached hereto (the -EaLmeit A?ea") and Grantors are willing to grant such easement upon the terms and conditions hereof. AGREEMENTS: NOW, THEREFORE, for One and No/100 Dollars JJJ® receipt and sufficiency of which is consideration of the foregoing Recitals and the _ conditions hereinsftst set forth, and for other fo^Sorel as consideration, the parties hereto hereby covenant ai-d agree follows: 1. incorporation of Recitals. The foregoing Recitals are hereby incorporated, by reference thereto, into Agreement as though the same had been fully set forth herein. 2. Grant of Easement. Subject to cl^im Aarcement, Grantors hereby grant, bargain, sell, gift, quit claim and convey to City a non-exclusive easement for purposes of cSnstrCcK maintaining, and public use of a bikepath |^P°" and throuqli the t:a.-^^ment Area, together with ingress, egress and access thLeto over, upon and througi» the Easement Area (the “Easement"). 3. use. The Easement may he used only by the City/ its residents, their guests and invitees, and the general public and solely for purposes of non-motorized bicycle and pedestrian recreational traffic from and after the construction on the Easement Area by the City as herein provided. 4* Construction. City shall not commence any construction of any improvement on or about the Easement Area until such time,as. all of the following have occurred: <i) the City shall have acquired an interest inJJH^erty for purposes similar to those of the Easement, (ii) such property shall consist of no xess feet than the linear feet contained in the Easement Area, (iii) such property shall be adjacent to, abut, or be contiguous with (other than intervening public rights-of-way) the Easement Area, and (iv) the City shall have commenced on such property and be diligently pursuing the construction of improvements on such property, such improvements consisting of a bikepath and related landscaping and signage. From and after such date City may, but shall have no obligation to, construct any improvement on the Easement Area consistent with the provisions of this Section. In the event that City commences any such construction, it shall comply with the following conditions: a. City shall diligently pursue completion of such construction. b. City shall perform such construction at its sole coat and expense and on a lion-free basis. c. Such improvements may consist only of a bikepath and related landscaping and signage. d. Any improvement shall be designed and constructed so as not to (i) interfere with the use of any of the Existing Easements, or (ii) damage or interfere with the installation, maintenance”! use of any utility, septic sewer system or well now or hereafter located on any portion of the Property, which has been constructed in accordance with and is being maintained pursuant to all applicable state, federal and local laws, regulations, permits and agreements_^ 5. Maintenance. Upon construction of any improvement located on the Easement Area by City, City shall, at its sole cost and expense, cause the same to oe properly maintained and repairea. 6. Title to Easement Area. City acknowledges that the Easement Area is subject to the Existing Easements. 4 a7. Duration of Provisions. The easements, covenants and conditions set forth in this Acjre»-ment shall lun with the land and shall b« a servitude thereon, and shall be binding on all ot tne ZLJR885 -1- parties hereto, upon all persons claiming under them, and upon all purchasers of all or any of the land so described herein and respective heirs, assigns, and successors-in-interest. All provisions of this Agreement shall remain in full force and effect in perpetuity. aB» Provisions Separable, invalidation of any one or more of the" provisions hereof by judgment or court order shall not affect any of the other provisions, which shall remain in full force and effect until the date of expiration. ^9. Governing Law. The provisions hereof shall be governed in accordance with and construed under the laws of the State of Minnesota. jIO. Enforcement. Developer, Lender, City and any of their respecFive successors and assigns shall have the right to enforce, by any proceeding by law or in equity, all easements, conditions and covenants now or hereafter imposed by the provisions of this Agreement. ^11. Counterparts. This Agreement may be executed in counterparts. IN WITNESS WHBREOF, the parties hereto have hereunto set their respective hands as of the day and year first above written. ■DEVEIiOPBR" KUIaLERTON properties, INC., a Minnesota corporation •LENDER" COX BROTHERS FARM, a Minnesota general portnorship Its General Paitnec -3 ZLJR885 -CITY- CITX OF OBONO, MINNESOTA, a Minneaota municipal corporation Its Mayor And by_ _ _ Its Clerk -4- ZLJR085 STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) ) S8. ) The iorogoing instrument was acknowledged^^efore me this __ Fullerton Properties/ Inc., Minnesota corporation, on behalf of said corporation. Notary Public STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) ) ss ) general partnership. Notary Public STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) ) SS > Tha foregoing instrument was acknowleagefl before me this - - a*X the Mayor and Clerk, respectively, of the City of Orono, Minnesota, a Minnesota municipal corporation, on behalf of said corporation. Notary Public this INSTRUMENT WAS DRAFTED BY: Popham# Haik, Schnobrich & Kaufmen, Ltd. 3300 Piper Jaffray Building Minneapolis, Minnesota 55402 <612) 333-4800 LJR -5- 2LJR885 EXHIBIT ’A" PROPERTY T.prAL descriptiqh Lots 1, 2, 4 and 5, Block 1, Shadowood Faim, according to the plat thereof on file end of record in the office of the County Recorder in €ind for Honnepin County/ Mxnncsots* -6- ZLJR885 exhibit "D" PXISTIMG RAggMEMTS 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Easement for highway in favor of Hennepin County# including billboard restrictions, filed on August 12. 1954 as Document No. 2090650. Rights of City of Orono over *>«st 33 feet pursuant to deed filed on April 1, 1983 as Document No. 4782350. Rights of Hennepin County in that nart northerly of the southerly right of way line of CSAH #6 as shown on^Highwey Plat 5 Document No. 3844152 pursuant to deed filed as Document No. 4782351. Declaration of Easements. Covenants. Conditions and Restrictions dated as of- - --- - -* 1990 filed Qn . 1990 as Document No.- - - - - -——• The Plat of Shadowood Farm on file and of record of the County Recorder in and for Hennepin County. Minne.^ota. -7- ZLJR805 EXHIBIT -C“ EASEMENT AREA LfigAIi-J?£SCRlgIIOM The northerly ten (10) feet 1- 2, 4 and 5, Block i, Shadowood Farm and the westerly ten (10) feet J' Shadowood Farm, all according to the plat thereof ?* record in the office of the County Recorder in and for Hennepin County, Minnesota. -8- ZLJRSflS CITY OF ORONO C r fcrControl No. A. The Subject of this request is: _ _ _ _ _ an existing private roadway. X a oroDOsed public roadway which is to be created as a - - -^— condition of pending subdivision approval. B. Owner(s) of the subdivision C. The above owner (s) hereby request that this Roadway be known by the following name: ^ o>L ) jtZI Choice No. 1 Choice No. 2 D. Choice No. 3 (List three*choices'^'preferanca. The City Council will anorove a name provided no conflict exists with n^.es or naiiiinc policv. If all names have a cor.rlict, you w.ll be asked to make new choices. The approved name will be usee for all mai-ing address and official identification purposes.) The above owner(s) hereby request the City of ;°nwnerts^ her^^vfollowing standard street and trarric signs anc said owner(s,her--y acree to reirU^urse the City for all costs or (Such signing may be required :S part or a se?ara..e Developer Agreement and/or subdivision request.) ( Standard si reet name sign(s) - number required sign(s) - number required __________ I^!d"pu"!ir-:ai"’anl Ihfcrtv'^fOrono .^frnrobti^atlSrto' maintain or Service said Roadway until that by the City of Orono as meeting all public road standards St>ec^^^ . y the completion of the paving. Signaturtuy (s) ot o^er(s) x^ 7/'C QO ________ Date ^r Date Date Date ■■'^~';:7^-' V.-- // S»iS' U*B''S “C M*« S* N * Mu'' Sl« $* sr P**ac« _J| f3 Sa-N" »•',;. •.<> u»i. Ja.N? »»■ 1. *.€ 3"» $a.m’ o»i,i. ».« it »• Si.D SO -tL 5A.NTPrv*»sr .:■ 5A.N- *»r-r« jAN^aAPNAf, ST SA N» apris:# ^SC 5A N-t-«P^?N5T »w 5A»,rs5- :A^£UA.>f 9* 'AvtMA.f *4? jAUMAwg 9t iA..6MC- ?P ■A.riM;:* :» *AUM DP <« Ar« jA.iMP'. 9PP • At.£Ml>' Mr :a. KM »- *5 •:a, 38*.* •€ M« •Al S- ..p s^p aa .A. S** 3^ s#p PA •tA(..»A,e jAt.? :;p .:3 -A.^- .> »D :al- ' :a^.9 “• MM Ml ;> PCNPO W M ■«»«» ^*p - I. AC fD A*.^ ,PM.;t. CP AwP .AHU -r ,• ASC ?M «.,3 5C* :aho i-Af :p :p .as;: :oif •:• k* ASCPPAP^ %c A-,;: A->»c a^: lo .A*,-::A, A»->:r »D ^8 as.:a p.', A • as::a >-, AC ,, ••aN'.fo ;• u* 3*Nr.-^. . • ;asv» L. »'- >• a; h~0 ; a •, Jas. : a wM iAM*.*. P9-P 4, ■iAs:-A p»p :• »c ^ascppap^p >ASoP p«p : p € 4», ',AH' P PAP CP M ;.an.:p-p«p »c V*. AS P Pf P ’P , Asr;PA , A .-•! AS «A .A MP .Asr PA ,A Mti. .AsrMA,rfcP< i*p .ASLP':»a Ac .As;,3r :si ;.p la AS' » A -4PS ';Asr.*^ i, A MA ASC-«•>, • : P •Asc» -cr.p :p pv jAsC f MIS ■ P'C :ASu* p«' ST »0 <P .ASK. PO Mf AS Bf . . P MP AS^A 1 JC30 »8>.3 98«4A >A>a3A J8P AS'I I «« *P MS % H ’P ■ AS^A aPPA *.S .AS^»P ..P ’^9 AP AS’«| . >*S ASTK£ .A '.-MS APP*. P£ A f i APPH PV ',r SM PA .A4AT.>iA’. P .^S .AAA’'>iA;. P »1 :APA»>iACP >S .APAr >iA ( A f • .APA’:>.A ASS ■ APA'VU.AS MU 'iAPA">iA . A S P- -,A«A'-^iA 3T S -i’A .AMAf ViA -\r 9 r** iA«Af ^.|A SA» S Mf3 3AWAr>^A SAr s PC ^AMriKsfAWf i?P ^A»Mifsrpo An 3ap-|_ »o r.3 9Afr- 'p A >P 3ATHfP9T 3 3A? PS ir Sf • \A<>sr/#p« A»f jrp 'iA.A:.,* ^A tC )A. ASSAM AO ».') 9A4%Miw .A <scr *,j»isM‘i. PO \cr iAf'JS* r.A Vkit'/Nv ':* •;:Mi 3a,4;.s» pn fo 3CASOA AO 10 SCAT«0«A «0 .rr SCasuA-pskcT SC4S0P -PS S$» SCAPBCP^:.H SCAPSr.pr 3„A0 *c 3CABl|r .AA « CD SCaaj^- 'aa a. OO sacc j, u. JCfHC c* s^esH!:- ;v SCfNC ?» U« SCS VC .a BfiN jce*.< ^ s M. jce-c -a » u« scfNC «o — ...JN<h«<}»',00 f» K FSa. -<.rs »o Ma :C.-aNC»., ^a? on 3(Ut v'.M.wja-, ;~a .;• i^-aa»»B ,• «o<i ‘1 .L-»fi..:«as •i» -,•» « ..:-fafq,4 -a Vi >f -F*a»q“3 l4 ;• -nr ,a*vasN a,| i*B f c-f.-aa; a • iw.* i, Sil c a jS -Cm> A»:S aa V"3*. ■• 5c-.i^:a.r a- f,V> .c-i.e-' S' *sp va .C»i.:^seaao .;o •• -.C-CfN .a .w -a ,>:->.H.a.* •, a.s s* *0 ■: ■c-oci.;a*«r: • 5Cw>.x 3? la. iO«0<H ;aa** ag ^as a .CHi,„,acB ., 0 .-.a • If.-.Ma ,-aaa; ,ja • >C“'.,"aao ,, • ,c-.~t». •» t 3-.>.'"*ao 0 ■ 3Cf«a 1 I ICO'^aaNf ,» ;. » 3C.'a;,a»; f• a.J N a.; I i..7 ”a.fs»a >C.3-a,, a:.» I H- a.( N J. a.» •. a« I a;..;: 3 I .c ‘^** ::.• M'p '’.A at-t Jk v’:; ;. -'-• .A A» ;m9 ac.;*’'* »o 3'P ,»s nr -,mp MP «c jCsj^r -P t i •..- •,:i;T P APS il.Ac.f P A3 f C •-.f.,;-r:»p -.-A »KA s? si 9S .KAHi/Pv A%| mA< jf AB'^Pr PO MO '■* .FauaaiBt>a taa ■,faui I ,'M sfa- -SB., u. 3ira,a.a;a C’ a^ a fO ^fne» ti i 3a. iF.aear ar 3n#...f IP. 3t!.BTa,f >ra It.#. .: 3'a lli. a. a„ aa., «v««. :.a Bfla Ba PI B..M «.Ma ^a 1-a F*'« '>•• 3FU.Mat a.f a>BB 3»Ma..0( .a ua '.tsaca PO I'l Sf-FCa ra a>«r IFPPaua ai »o SBB M:j.j.:.a.:,a fO ifO'-a.xacr IBM FFaf.,* 5v U'.rsACPinsrjID sn*AsTA%e .c St>"*AST AvI M^ 9f>M0Pf Awf niMPc Sf>MC“l DP MP •-A.,' .A MTP .-AC- ^ ,MB «A.:» '.A A»A» -AC* .A <V8C •-AC* ^ S MA .-AC- > MP '.-AC* ATA* :p >A.rSCAC«A.| PS :.NA..*etAcs''»si P8 >AC* :a.£ PO MP .“ACf - ;: p -mP ■-A.;- —ati »o i«* » «0 ;-T i-AC* <;_AS0':8 i-P -AC- SwASOP» jMP -A M <i^.*sD PO i-« >-Aj» n^^so •• s-p MAC* '*• p -.1^ jMA..* :aa i*p up 5-A-.> AP .A MP »MAC ' AP PO f • |-A.:» AP *»C MP .-A.:» fl.' sr ao . — :-A.M s ■ :j.a afw -A.:» ^ * :c9 40 :c r ‘AO- :a« :p ,p^p .>AC»n :f : p -: 3-a: Cl _A at8- :=%-i •Cp»r 'A.Ai 3-4:.■•■. ra. a S at."• 1 lA..') 4-a;.. . fa,.4 P.iO- t SA.;IJH.;;.-, fa. 14 N ::»N .a <A • Fa L4 s M.);a- • 3--. •. Fa . 4 N a.S3. 3 lA .J >-a,' 4. ar> aa..: ;a3-ar.a:-'0Bj :b >A.M a-ji 3»aar3aa4aa JF»n ,»; «3P44.-paf 4.C i.,B • O-aa i • MAMPfX:« ' M --C n-AM4.X. CP 9A •-••*.“1 i . . P iPN .mask : p ‘ c :mASS‘SCP 10 ;mass.'s p m pp ,*.*ss<-sc* S8 MASS s -^P ,MAss':sc" s8 -a*Ass's A . ::p MASS. S . A MO MASS! S 'P Sf ^p ;map. ass ^a BP -APi:s A.f -f MPl .,MAPv:S;.A APS SaaAPrs.A SPl •,MAPrsAPAfV -JMC _MAPrS AO MP .-APCSOAvf A.I PV -.Mas’a ;.|B a .pa;, : ■ . Jt ;h..,.,ms|SS* »0 la ipa.iBB;,. ao :Ha.»B 3 ^4.1 D« :0H 3p4,?b 3 La«e BO :»•( ;M4a4,f 44 3H4aMi_;' 3T l.B ',-4as»* B 10 paasff ,4 aan ,P4asff 4 i.HM ■ an » i •>H4*sir afj Sir :,p4as»t >D %M4As»r a.-.-n'jo" Ulo <>p|». FILM IB »l S~K* FLac a N wa 3M».»'(toc a B UB IPFM riO'-r to JM|»» H.,1C;.‘B UB iHt*. t Ftl 3-F.. f,J,.4 U.J »Pia»'HO lb s MrT Bp„0 •« «T .C«.«ir. «o«0 '«• ,-T JOv.^r' ■OMO <a 30* •T «W '0-4M • C «• »» S3 >0 •a -wr* ■ : «» a? V-VN'V BC SO -W -M !*- ^srv-OSOM.* . ■?. VA .4 .fA ‘'^•|•> «r Mj - . - : *1-, • Ni— 1 -AN Ni; -4^ .4.^- •■*e« -• #*• •«* = rr , '> A •• AAsrpH' -• ID •»»Sv-|S- an »AO "• kMi i>»5 >s« :^PV .li .%*• a^ N •• ar; ^ SM . ■-•-«•• • Ml 0.»Ta,-. i, „ t':.»*-': .M»iO ».r-r. a--.- _,|:• : C .'.•• *«," •■ j*» p..««v>s.-«r — :>j»- .sc i- M : 3 .•* - a.-! sa ::>*•.« f.'« , ;,f.,-.. .-,- , ^ :. -■.*s*». »-« » -.••(•B. A«< ‘■~ : >'s.,"-s .•! .3, -J- -N >«. • ST)- ., , B »1 : r :•»! ’ s . a wi / X ,,:«••ar ■ H-:* . ••'I* ••»••-. «M ’v-A*ri--N ar- wa :. •«•,♦ N »Ci -.-a , N<r N S* ,ac • *a** N '?a MH- XA.fftNo, s^a t»mn Aa»< ■ . 4 ■)• a. . FBfaa. .,,, *a **' • ia«“a> a.. *• a., aa. .,fsiaa. *a «• B.-J . ,• • ,M B. ,i IB »»s' s* :• S .«■ -•*5 "s* 0»-- « .M :»»5’assit -a .as •tS-B -aj* a w.» » , •-•xi:::::'; ; ••fS% a -N ,afs-. a -s :»f r. a M«% A :a M5-. .4 M4 .•f ^•'a fM .4 .»•' •'. «!*«::? M' 4 :«»S-4»'-nr ‘ ., • '•:> . 4 «A« .«f i-ai.- ■ ' .:. 4fN 4^, a* ^'■N< ••m . a>»• -•*rt4,4 :mo af’ N 4,» N -s*a •'• ■«■•<§ «0 -»• «• < a sc B'v ^ a. _-B ■■.-< : « *• «a' •- •; 1 S' sat as »■< 3 s- a •■a- a 3' sat .j» at a- a Baa r* -a ;a a' a". *» ••a ua • . aa a a aa :-v:rr^c':jsr .-.i.fsai* sH. •TALSsa* <«■ :vi,.is3T aaa ?4.i. las ^a SIS ■-i.iassaf sm ;.!•*■ “r .a . safaiasoc- 5W - M*a.,asO»P a. Mstaiasoao wo . w«eai asO»0 w»t. waiBLaso i* wala aso 3- ;, wa*B;_aso -a -c.B wst viS a aa sa*s -a -la s*'s :*r ia aa.M 3' 5»p ••«:.. a; ,3 «• •“»».« WM > aa.» a t( s w»- ao a ■;• w* «• -» 3*» --B a’ » 3* s 3*a .«v3 a.a as av# ss ,«a •s« 1* <aMt o.aj»» :-ra/?^; V* •*•*q 4 b4 •S*~ 4 A Mtt *••»«!! : • MN .A »• .-••f .A MC jv.- 9% € 1* f ai 4 H4 «i »• ;. *4 •4-'» N4« «• 44 .«• ' • <44 v a« ;«4N«f 4 14 «4SA»4,. « • 4 •44N# » H4T » »4-f tt s* 4«ai o*4r*'-4C wr WI4 AA4r« '40 S* • » v«® 4v ,r :a* •-MfAAo w »• :*fi «•• -tMr A . r.m$t t A -»»«« 4*p I4M :«M- .• fo A .'.) »fr« »;.■ 4 M® MfM -n tP Pffm P444 -4 mm Uffm M4M ,4 MM ■ff« p«'. *#r MM «M« M \0it P4M MM ,4l MO •ffM aAMT. A 'A MPf « «•««*» MM -Mff • . -fM» Mm • MM .^r9wPLt,%9 .4 FM M, M« nPMA^>»r •!• MM Pf9m%npHO^P MM :p»f-'. A --»I^M^ - A ^ A MM .«j».n.r>P r 4 M P4 •‘ffM’S.r.# • Ml C < L« 44. , 4 C 4 MM A .MM4 AM.V PM» A *0 Aff M V PIA . 4 IM ^.A«|Mo*4«4 ^lAl. MM -»r 4^:.o r.; #• ^4 M44 4.f .-M M- M4* * MA A-" MMif „ ;a «A ;m>'mmim . a . a ma- ••!■. .4 a : A< 5«» 4aC f .IM A< ••’T M‘ ma* . A<:'^Ar an ^4* an-<®^ .4Mf ML .•• :»*'W 5* 4M • • 44* :Af:\^ AT's- m*a .»rHA4NOA4 r t ;a ■AOAV ^-Nia- A<''a1*'4i.Ai.^)NP4 4N A. lAM Mi nM A*Mf 4 |M a.s^MP4. A a -<^M4«4| ^AM| jm i_* im:4 i.,4 *m<' •‘4 > N M44M 40 »*'A» Af>f 4 -4 M4N a*':4» ar.f 4 :-4 -4^ «4 4r*w^: • ^ I • .IK:4r*t< A MM Ai^WM • * MM _ «• M4 '4 I P at'A^N ; 4 MM ar) »4 Mpn *t' mm A. A»N*. .i. A4t t*i ::4N <M->i4r :'4 mm a* :*nM, A ^.j Ul.i4(>f4 4*« Minf4i 4*4 4 m MM*4l 4*f 4 "•5T4C4,i ,y -;A*n^4i ' . Afnr4l 4 4 R44 •i A»4*4t . 4 Mr H4N ■A.^'41 4. 4 • A»qf4t ftA* AC JA 14., 4 4»F i a« • •4., .f 4«t «f _4«^ «.f m«4 :a-:, .* MI4 ;aM'. an *4 •- lAfAMC -*• 4a«. iA|H 4r: mm •- a A ffi a**., 4 -i* M* va-, 4 i' SMT 44 •• ^ 4*4. mF* a .4 4M 4 S» -• 4Ar . 44.'* 4 4*4 4 m >'4 «v4 «• ; .*'4*;'»l ^ At. V.. ■;;;:! s... -a a.» 3 ,i .-aa-'a^ a ai .raai,;ta ‘ a -s* ■a*.:'a a api :a..-'a r ' .a* isirii n4. ;-4 40 At D4M-4 i* M4A ,14« *-*4 S* •»-* ;'44r3»4 3^* ^44 a. *4 s" a«i '44i'r4 ^4 44 a- '4 - A fD 4M -4M 1- S4I 1 A ai ^wf'Mr Mf. MfA a.t..« 44 4 f 4«p fn . 4i I 4v ait J* N •All ,v -'All.-'.A A*. -Aif : a pd >'A^| P\. i«A Ail an MO : au an Mr A Ai I if AV 'Pi I if iiA aij -1* iv ail >»• s a»a 'ai • ifi -fA ai* * P4T! 4 MA AiaA-iCAMA* tm JO a/ •CV.ll SA 44 K-aj ««.4i J4 4ia ^^V I «A 44• '• • k: j- 5 a li 4A-A la rOA iJu w u J Additional policv guidelines will be addressed at the next coiTuHission meeting for recommendations to be sent to the City Council. 5. BEDERWOOD PARK PROPOSAL. There was neyy a discussion about the Bederwood Park proposal, which was discussed at th last meeting. It basically relates to a plan dated July 27, 1990 prepared by Earl F. Anaerson & Associates. Because of the absence of three members, it was aecided to defer any final action on this until the next meeting. All the commission members appeared to generally favor this proposal, and were impressed with t: a detail and initiative taken bv the neighbors in coming up witn a plan such as this. Ms. _ Scherokee Use was also there with some comments concerning uheir desire to complete this project. Mr. Gerhardson mentioned that it might be best to present this in snages on a priority basis. ^ Accordingly, the Bederwood park proposal will oe taxen up at uhe next commission meeting. Mr. Gerhardson also rr.entionec tnat there mioht be so.-..e charitable contributions available tnrougn the Lions Club, which might want to donate some money to help build part of this- 6. FULLERTON DEVELOPMENT. The Fullerton development was then discussed. Chairman Dick Flint mentioned that he had talked about some of the concerns expressed by the developer with city staff and with tne developer. The developer has evidently withdrawn his request to seek city indemnification to have a green buffer zone there, and the only issue remaining was the timing issue. The developer still wanted to not have anyt hing developec for these bike trails ^ two-year period. The developer suggested a compromise that tne bike trail and path would not be built until it could be hooked up with some continuing bike trails throughout the city. It was then discussed by the commission and the commission did not want the developer have a delay built into the easement nego tiations. There was some concern that this might be lost in the shuffle if it was not done during the planning stages now, ana tie it to something that might not ever happen ne^r that area would make it a useless benefit that the city had obta. led. Accordingly, Mr. Flint was instructed to oppose any delays in implementing this plan, but to take due consideration for working around any septic system problems that might exist, as a practical basis. Mr. Flint is going to be appearing at the City Council meeting on Monday to express our opinions. . r'- To: Mayor Grabek & Orono Council Members City Administrator Bernhardson From: Michael P. Gaffron, Asst Planning & Zoning Administrator Date: October 3, 1990 Subject: #1535 Gerda Kennedy/Ned Butterfield - 3765-3745 Watertown Road - Subdivision of a Lot Line Rearrangement - Resolution Zoning District - RR-IA, Single family rural residential, 5 acre, unsewered Application - Lot line rearrangement to place existing garage within property boundaries of 3765 Watertown Road List of Exhibits Exhibit A - Survey Exhibit B - Resolution Exhibit C - Planning Commission Action Notice 6/15/90 Exhibit D - Memo and Exhibits of 5/16/90 Discussion Please review the memo and exhibits of May 16th. Briefly, survey work done during the sale of the property at 3765 Watertown Road revealed that the lot line ran through the garage on that property, and didn't follow the fence line boundary historically accepted by both property owners. As a result of legal action, the affected property owners have agreed to the proposed lot line configuration, leaving the garage within the boundaries of 3765, with a 6' setback, while leaving a 10' setback for the house at 3745. There is a trade-off in lot area that slightly favors the Butterfield property, with the net result that each property including roadway will contain approximately 5.02 acres. Planniiig Commission Recommendation At their May 21st meeting. Planning Commission reviewed the proposed subdivision and voted 6 to 0 to recommend approval as proposed, finding that this lot line rearrangement creates no new lots but solves an existing problem for the property owners. Staff Recommendation Staff recommends approval per the attached resolution. A RESOLDTION APPROVING A SUBDIVISION OP A LOT LINE REARRANGEMENT FOR PROPERTIES LOCATED AT 3745-3765 WATERTOWN ROAD PILE NO. 1535 WHEREASr the Ci'y of Orono is a municipal corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of Minnesota; and WHEREASr the City Council of the City of Orono (hereinafter "City Council") has adopted subdivision regulations for the orderly, economic and safe development of land within the City; and WHEREAS, the City Council has considered the application for a subdivision of a lot line rearrangement by Gerda Kennedy and Ned Butterfield (hereinafter "the subdividers") of properties legally described as follows: Exhibit A attached; and WHEREAS, the subdividers have completed all requirements of the City for a metes and bounds subdivision for division and combination purposes. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Orono hereby approves the metes and bounds subdivision of a lot line rearrangement for Gerda Kennedy and Ned Butterfield as shown on the Certificate of Survey by Martin J. Weber dated January 26, 1990 and attached to this resolution as Exhibit B, subject to the following conditions: 1. Upon approval of this subdivision by the City Council of the City of Orono, the owner of Tract 1 as described in the Certifi cate of Survey referenced above must apply to the City for legal combination for tax purposes with Tract 2 as described in that same survey. Likewise, the owner of Tract 3 must apply to the City for legal combination for tax purposes with Tract 4 as described in that Survey. 2. The aforesaid division as shown on the attached Certificate of Survey shall be filed by the City of Orono with the Hennepin County Recorder's office on or before April 8, 1991 together with a certified original copy of this resolution. Page 1 of 2 The approval granted by this Resolution shall expire if the division has not been filed by the date specified above. In that event/ it will be necessary to file a new application with the City of Orono for subdivision review. Adopted by the City Council of Orono, Minnesota, this 8th day of October 1990. ATTEST: Theresa L. Naab, Deputy Clerk Edward J. Callahan, Jr., Acting Mayor STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this 8th day of October, 1990, by Edward J. Callahan, Jr. & Theresa L. Naab, Acting Mayor & Deputy Clerk of the City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City. Notary Public My Commission Expires Page 2 of 2 ZONING PILE NO. 1535CITY OP ORONO NOTICE OP PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION P.O. Box 66 , . ^ ^ Crystal Bay, MN 55323 473-7357 Date of Notice; 6/15/90 TO: Timothy W. Fafinski COPIES TO: 5881 Cedar Lake Road Minneapolis, MN 55416 TYPE OP APPLICATION: Subdivision - Lot Line Rearrangement DATE OP MEETING: 5/21/90 VOTE: 6 For 0 Against Planning Commission recommends the following: Approval subject to conditions noted below NOTES AND SPECIAL CONDITIONS: Your subdivision of a lot line rearrangement wi11 be presented for final approval by City Council upon receipt of the following; 1. Provide a Certificate of Survey per the survey dated January 26, 1990 by Martin J. Webber of W*»stwood Professional Services Inc. The drawing must include signature lines for all property owners with an interest in the subject properties (spouses, contract for deed holders, etc. - signature lines must be signed by all appropriate parties prior to submittal), and signature lines for the Mayor, City Clerk, and date of final approval. 2. Please refer to the attached sketch. Please have your surveyor provide legal descriptions for each of the four parcels 1 through 4. Upon subdivision approval, the affected property owners must complete appropriate ombination forms at the City offices. All final submittals must be submitted to this office 10 days before the meeting at which Council will grant final subdivision approval. The Council meets on the second and fourth Mondays of the month. Please contact Mike Gaffron at 473-7357 if you have any questions. ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD MAY 21, 1990 ZONING FILE #1532-FULLERTON ^ previously expressed concern regarding the dedication of an additional 7' of right-of-way. Mabusth stated that it was first hhnnaht that the riqht-of-way could be taken from the west side of Willow at the t "me County Road 116 was installed. She saxd that since that project is no longer scheduled to occur, alternatives have been discussed. Mabusth stated that sne had asked the City Administrator if the 7' could be dedicatee from the east side now, with the condition that it be vacatea ^nould County Road 116 be constructed. Mabusth said that only the 7 right-of-way along Lot 1, Block 1, would be retained by the City due to the^ potential of a traffic signal being placed at the intersection. Mr. Cox stated that he objected to dedicating 7' of his nropertv to the City. He did not understand why the Ci.y oreferred to disturb the existing trees anu landscaping on the east side of Willow. .Mr. Cox said t.hat there is nothing on ..... west side. There were no further comments from the public regarding this matter and the public hearing was to be continued. KeUev c'ked Gaffron whether iz may be necessary to have the Planning Commission review anything further with regar- to the septic sites. Gaffron replied that it would only be necessary if it became necessary to move lot lines to accommodate septic areas. Bellows believed it would be necessary to table this matter due to the revision of the lot line between Lots 6 an- / in addition to the other issues yet to be resolvea. It was moved by Hanson, seconded by Bellows, to table this application. Motion, Ayes-5, Cohen, Nay. Motion passed. 11535 TIMOTHY W. FAFINSKI 3765 WATERTOWN ROAD PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION PUBLIC HEARING 9:00 P.M. TO i..J5 P.M. for Mr. Timothy Fafinski and Mr. Larry Cook, the Contract Deed owner of 3765 Watertown Road, were present. The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing were duly noted. Gaffron explained the pertinent facts involved with this application to the Planning Commission. There were no comments from the public regarding this matter and the public hearing was closed. - 6 - ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD MAY 21, 1990 ZONING FILE #1535-FAFINSKI CONTINUED It was moved by Cohen, seconded by Bellows, to recommena anoroval of the subdivision of a lot line rearrangement for the property owners of 3765 and 3745 Watertown Road, subject to the combination of the triangu] ir parcels with the larger tracts as shown on the survey. Motion, Ayes-6, Nays-0. Motion passed. #1502 MICHAEL HILBELINK 2180 PROSPECT AVENUE VARIANCE REFERRED BACK TO PLANNING COMMISSION Mr. Hilbelink was present, as was Mr. and Mrs. Jentilucci and their Attorney, Neil Heikkila. Mabusth briefly reviewed the history of this property and informed the Planning Commission of the current inrormation regarding this application. Hanson noted that the side setback for a corner lot is 50'. He-ever, he would accept a 20' variance in this case. Bellows and Kelley indicated that they agreed with Hanson. Bellows suggested that a two-srory structure may be more suitable for this lot than the plan p oposec. Mr Heikkila reminded the Planning Commission that the proposed structure for this lot would not be located where tne pre-existino structure stood. He statea that the location or the proposed residence has been recently fillea a.nd remains in disturbed state. Mr. Heikkila questioned whether it was Mr. Hilbelink's intention to construct the house for wnicn he is showing a plan. He concurred with Bellows that another house plan may be more suitable than the ranch-style being proposea. Mabusth informed Mr. Heikkila that the City Building Inspectors will determine whether the ground conditions allow the structure to be constructed in the location proposed. Mr. Heikkila stated that his clients are still concerned about the potential for their property to flood as a result of Mr Hilbelink's proposal. Mr. Heikkila presented photographs of Mr. HiJbelink's property. The photos showed the area before ana after the storm sewer was installed. Kelley asked Mabusth how the drainage issue will be handled. Mabusth understood that Jentiluccis and Mr. Hilbelink will grant a drainace easement to the City over their portions of the drainageway. The City would now be responsible for the drainageway. - 7 - Planning Commission Chairman Kelley Orono Planning Commission Members City Administrator Bernhardson From: Michael P. Gaffron, Asst Planning s Zoning Administrator Date: May 16, 1990 Subject: #1535 Gerda Kennedy/Ned Butterfield, 3765-3745 Watertown Road - Subdivision of a Lot Line Rearrangement - Public Hearing Zoning District - RR-IA, Single family rural residential- > acre, unsewered Application - Lot line rearrangement to place existing garage within property boundaries of 3765 Watertown Road. List of Exhibits Exhibit A - Application ^ Exhibit B - Plat Map Exhibit C - Property Owners List Exhibit D - Survey of Proposed Lot Line Rearrangement Exhibit E - Survey for 3765 Watertown Road (1986) Exhibit F - Letter from Attorney Anderson 11/14/89 Exhibit G - Letter from Attorney Fafinski 4/24/90 Pertinent Pacts • 1. The contract for deed owners of 3765 Watertown Road are Larry and Linda Cook. The fee owner is Gerda Kennedy. The house and greenhouses at 3745 Watertown Road are owned by Ned Butterfield. 2. This lot line rearrangement is a result of recent survey work which showed that the garage serving 3765 Watertown Road is almost entirely outside the actual property boundaries. Although all parties involved had believed that the old fence line east of the garage was the property line, the surveys indicate otherwise. This proposed rearrangement is intended to place the garage inside the property boundaries of 3765 Watertown Road. 3. Kennedy and Butterfield have come to an agreement regarding the disputed lot line, and are proceeding with the lot line rearrangement . 4. By staff's calculation, 3765 Watertown Road will gain 6,500 square feet (excluding road) in the front of the lot, in exchange for approximately 15,000 square feet to be deeded to Butterfield at the rear of the property. The net result according to the survey is that, including the road right- of-ways, each property will contain approximately 5.02 acres. Zoning File #1535 May 16, 1990 Page 2 of 2 5. The proposed lot line leaves a setback of 10.88' from the residence on the Butterfield property to the new lot line. The garage at 3765 Watertown Road will be 6.0 feet from the new lot line. Obviously, neither of these setbacks meet the current standards for the RR-lA zone, which would require a 50' side setback for a principal residence and a minimum 10' side setback for this size garage. However, since these buildings are existing, and because the proposed lot line in the area of those buildings follows the fence line historically thought to be the property line, this application should not be considered as granting a variance for setbacks, but merely as a lot line rearrangement to better accommodate existing buildings. Discussion - I am advised by Mr. Fafinski representing Gerda Kennedy and the Cooks, and by Ned Butterfield, that all parties involved have agreed to this lot line rearrangement to settle their property dispute, and that all parties will agree to filing of the appropriate documents. Staff would n ce that the 2 triangular parcels have net been shown as separate tracts for purposes of our resolution/combination requirement, hence the surveyor will be advised to label these 2 tracts and describe them separately, per our standard metes and bounds lot line rearrangement procedure. Regarding how this division affects the principal residence structures on each property, tno visually perceived lot line will not change. The new lot line will increase the east side setback of 3765 Watertown Road from 32’ to just over the required 50'. The west side setback for 3745 Watertown Road will decrease from approximately 39' to about 10'. Regarding lot width, at the 100' setback line, each property previously contained approximately 213' in width, both short of the 300' standard. The new arrangement will decrease the defined width of 3745 Watertown Road to approximately 193', while increasing that of 3765 Watertown Road to approximately 233'. Staff Reconraendation - This is merely a lot line rearrangement and is not creating ar’- jiK-w lots, but is solving an existing problem and placing a loc line generally in a location where all parties involved historically perceived that line to be located. Staff recommends approval of the lot line rearrangement, subject to combination of the triangular parcels with the appropriate larger tracts, as shown on the surve* . / ^CITY OP ORONO - SUBDIVISION APPLICATION PROPERTY LOCATION Site Address 3765 Watertown Road_ _ _ _ _,ii,- - - - Property Identification Number (P.I.D.) Please check one - Property abstract or torrens? CITY OF llRm -.-r'-'jf 1-^ Attach legal description to application. "‘TFiEIFr--THm^YOU - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Phone (home) 04/27MAPPLICANT Timothy W. Fafinski Phone (work) 545-9000 Address: Cedar Lake Road Citv: Minneapolis 2ip:55416 OWNER (if different than applicant) Name ^erda L. Kennedy_ _ _ _ _ Phone (home) f218> 233-3372 Phone vwork)N/A Address: 3208 So. 9th St.. «205 cltv: Moorhead, MN 56560 (attach list if more than one) EXISTING LAND USE Number of Tax Parcels ^______ Development Size __________ JJQ. Present Use (check) Acres Dry Land Acres Wet Land Acres Total, all parcels Residential; no. of units Other (specify)_ _ _ _ _ __ Present Zoning District PROPOSAL _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Division for Tax Purposes X_ _ _ Lot Line Rearrangement Only (no new building sites) _ _ _ _ _ _ Subdivision for New Building Sites Number of Building Sites: _ _ _2 Proposed Gross Density: Minimum Lot Size: Proposed Use: (check) Existing Units New Units Total Units Units per _ Acres Sq Feet Dry Buildable Land Residential Other (specify)^_ _ _ _ _ _ MINIMUM MATERIAL NECESSARY FOR COMPLETE PRELIMINARY APPLICATION 1. Completed Application Form Preliminary Plat information on Certificate of Survey. Certified Property Owners List of owners within 350' (you must obtain this list from Hennepin County Department of Finance A-603 Govt Center 348-3271). As an addendum to this application, please attach a separate list of any other persons you wish notified of this application. 2. 3. 4. Certification by Zoning Department that Preliminary Plat Application is complete. Zoning Official's Signature_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Date_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 1. Payment of fees (park fees, filing fee, sewer and water assessments). 2. Signed certificate of survey or mylar copies of formal plat. 3. Title opinion. 4. Easements, Covenants, etc. 5. Developers Agreement and Letter of Credit. Certification by Zoning Department that Final Plat Application is complete. Zoning Official's Signature_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Date_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ FEES _ _ _ Sketch Plan Review (Class I, II & III) _ _ _ Subdivision of a Lot Line Rearrangement _X_ _ Preliminary Review (Class I & II Subdivision) _ _ _ Preliminary Review (Class III and all non-residential ) _ _ _ Final Plat Review (Class III) ♦(Plus any legal or engineering charges. The applicant hereby agrees to provide all information required or requested by the Zoning Administrator, City Engineer, City Attorney, Planning Commission and Council necessary to process this application and further agrees to pay all additional fees established by ordinance. $150.00 250.00 250.00 300.00 + 20.00/Lot 150.00* Applicant's Signature Date Owner's Signature Date Applicant must have all submittals into the City offices 25 days before the Planning Commission Meeting. Planning Commission Meetings are held on the third Monday of each month. Applicants must be present at all scheduled review meetings of the Planning Commission and Council. If an applicant is unable to attend a scheduled meeting, please make arrangements to have an authorized agent attend in your place and to advise the Building & Zoning Office of this change prior to the meeting. RUN DATE 01/26/90 BATCH 003 PROP ADOR ONNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/ADOR 38 05-117-23 21 0002 03750 BAYSIDE RD JOHN BURGER ETAL JOHN BURGER 3750 BAYSlOE Rb LONG LAKE HN 55356 HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORMATION SYSTEM PROPERTY OWJERS LIST 30 05-117-23 21 0015 03750 BAYSIDE RD JOHN BURGER ETAL JOHN BURGER 3750 BAYSlOE RD LONG LAKE MN 55356 P.bi REPORT NO. PI935<»01 PAGE 11 38 05-117-23 22 0010 00055 LANDMARK DR GARY N A VICKIE J ROSS GARY N A VICKIE J ROSS 90 SMITH AVE WAYZATA MN 55391 38 32-110-23 31 0005 PROP ADOR 03760 WATERTOWN RD 0»#IER NAME CATHARINE A CRAM TAXPAYER CATHARINE A CRAM NAME/ADOR 3760 HATERT0M4 RO y MAPLE PLAIN MN 55359 38 32-118-23 32 0005 03850 HATERTONN RO S M A C A HARRIS STEVEN M HARRIS 365 TURHAM RO MAPLE PLAIN MN 55359 38 32-110-23 33 0002 03785 HATERTOHN RD JAMES F BROOKS JAMES F BROOKS 3785 HATERTOHN ROAD MAPLE PLAIN MN 55359 PROP ADDR (»MER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/ADOR PROP ADDR OHNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/ADOR 38 32-118-23 33 0009 03855 HATERTOHN RO CATHARINE A CRAM CATHARINE A CRAM 3760 HATERT0M4 RO MAPLE PLAIN MN 55359 38 32-118-23 39 0011 03685 HATERTOHN RO THOMAS JOHN MAXHELL THOMAS JOHN MAXHELL 3685 HATERTOHN RD MAPLE PLAIN MN 55358 30 32-118-23 39 0009 03793 HATERT0HI4 RD G F BUTTERFIELD ETAL NED BUTTERFIELD 3795 HATERTOHN RD MAPLE PLAIN MN 55359 TOTAL BATCH 003 00010 38 32-118-23 39 0010 03765 HATERT0M4 RO GEROA L KENNEDY LARRY L COOK 3765 HATERTOHN RD MAPLE PLAIN MN 55359 Vs) ii)' h r j I CERTIFY THAT THE FACTS REPRESENTED ARE AN ACCURATE AND TRUE REPRESENTATION OF INFORMATION AS IT APPEARS THIS DATE ON THE RECORDS OF THE HE4ff4EPIN COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF PROPERTY TAXATION, TO THE BEST OF MY KfWHLEDGE AND BELIEF. DATE i -nn '■70 by •r pi: ■'N' |'!i- !: ":f;; ■ 5|; ■ ?! -i’ i CE LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF RECORD: The West 196.5 feet of the Southeast l/A of tlie Southwest 1/4 in Section Thirty-two (32), Township One Hundred and Eigiitcen (118), Range Twenty-three (23), lying South of County Rood, containing 5.18 acres. LEGAL DESCRlPriON OF RK jORD: The fost 196.5 feet of West 392.98 feet of the Southeast 1/4 of'tiie Southwest 1/4; South of Road; Section Thirty-two, Township One Hundred and Eighteen, Range Twenty-three. S0 40i0?0,0_0_______ J'O ___ »oo >5( SCALE IN MET • • ^ D avid b. arkold CHARLES R. CARMICHAEL DART D. MCDOWELL STEVEN A. ANDERSON O. BARRY ANDERSON STEVEN S. HOOE LACRA R. FRETLAND DAVID A. BRUEOOEMANN JOSEPH M. PAIEMENT JAMES UTLEY JULIA A. CHRISTIANS RICHARD O. McOEE A rnold 8c Mc D ov ^ A ttorneys at 5081 C edar Lake .R oad Minneapolis . MiNNESOTA'^ss^ie- (612) 5A5-90 MN Toll Free eoo- C able MCLAW Mi or COUNSEL lAM W. CAMERON •AUL D. DOVE /(Ol TELECOPIER (SIS) »A8-ITBO H FOURTH STREET ON. MINNESOTA SS37I (012) 380-2214 foPIER *812) 38B-SS08 lOI PARK PLACE HUTCHINSON. MINNESOTA 8S380 1812) S87-7S7S TELECOPIER (812) 587-4008 November 14, 1989 Orono Planning & Zoning Dept. 1335 South Brown Road Orono, MN 55359 RE; Kennedy v. Butterfield Section #; 32^^4-8^23 Address: '2-7-6^^Watertown Road Our File #; 3204-86-0001 Gentlemen: I believe I spoke to a representative of your department regarding the dispute between Mr. and Mrs. Butterfield and Gerda Kennedy. That dispute has now been resolved, at least with respect to the major points of contention, and the parties are proceeding ahead with a readjustment of their property line. I am assuming that as a matter of municipal law, that new line will need to be approved by your department. We are having a survey prepared with the new line in mind and I assume that survey will need to be submitted to your department. I would appreciate it if you would advise me at your earliest convenience the requirements of local ordinance for appro al of transfers of small parcels of real estate for the purpose of quieting title and cleaing up land descriptions. For example, is a survey required of both parcels, or merely that portion of the parcel that is in dispute? I would also appreciate it if you would advise me of the evenings that these matters are considered so that we can plan accordingly when the appropriate requests, permits and applications are filed. Orono Planning & Zoning Dept. November 14, 1989 Page 2 Thank you for your time and attention to this matter< Very truly yours, A’lNOLD & MCDOWELL G. GB irry Anderson cc: Richard J. Rodney Gerda Kennedy DAVID B ARNOLD CHARLES R- CARMICHAEL*' OARY D. MCDOWELL STEVEN A. ANDERSON O. BARRY ANDERSON* STEVEN S. HOOE LAURA K. FRETLAND DAVID A. BRUEOOEMANN PAUL D. dove JOSEPH M. PAIEMENT JAMES UTLEY JULIA A. CHRISTIANS RICHARD O. MeOEE TIMOTHY W. FAFINSRI ^ i. A rnold <Sc Mc D owell A ttorneys at Law 5881 C-KDAR Lake Road Minneapolis . Minnesota 554.10-1402 (012) 545-9000 MN Toll Free boo -340-4545 Cable MCLAW Minneapolis TELECOPIER (rtl U) SA5 - 1703 b OP COUNSEL WILLIAM W. CAMERON SOI SOUTH FOURTH STREET PRINCETON. MINNESOTA S537I (6112) 300-12!2iA TELECOPIER (.SI2) 300 - SSO0 lOl parr PLACE HUTCHINSON. MINNESOTA 88380 (012) 807-7875 TELECOPIER (012) 807-4000 April 24, 1990 Orono Planning & Zoning Commission Att: Michael Gaffron 1335 South Brown Orono, MN 55391 Re: Gerda Kennedy - Lot Line Rearrangement Our File No. 3204-86-0001 Dear Mike: Initially, I would like to extend my deep appreciation for your assistance, not to mention your patience, with respect to this matter. Enclosed herewith is the Subdivision Application, together with the required attachments. If there are any deficiencies, please do not hesitate to contact me at your earliest convenience. Very truly yours. ARNOLD & MCDOWELL Timothy W TWF/ls Enclosure *CERTIFIED AS A CIVIL TRIAL SPEC IALIST BY THE MINNESOTA STAIE BaM aSSOCIAIION •*CEHTIPIED AS A REAL PROPERTY LAW SPECIALIST BY THE MINNESOTA STATE BAR ASSOCIATION To: Prom: Date: Subject: Mayor Grabek & Orono Counci.mbers City Administrator Bernhardson Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building & Zoning Administrator October 5, 1990 #1555 E.W. Blanch, Jr., 2501 Old Beach Road - Preliminary Subdivision Class III - Resolution Pertinent Ordinances - Chapter 11 Section 10.55, Subdivision 15 (A) - Minimum lot area requirements. The property may receive credit for portions of land located within wetlands and floodplain as property is sewered, but in no case can a dry buildable envelope be less than 1/2 acre of dry contiguous land. The following dry buildable areas of Lots 3 *-hrough 8 have been determined above the 932 elevation. These dry areas are contiguous and should not be confussed with the area of a defined building envelope determined by setback areas. (Dry Buildable contiguous lands above 932 elevation) Lot Size Lot 3 - 1.08 acres Lot 4 - 1.74 acres xOt 5 - 2.14 acres Lot 6 - 1.41 acres Lot 7 - 1.63 acres ot 8 - 1.48 acres Minimum Zoning standard Area Reauirements Requirements [§10.55, Subd.15(H)] acre acre acre acre acre acres acres acres acres acres 20,000 s.f.20,000 s.f review Exhibit N, grading plan for the project. Note dble envelopes for each site defined by required P bu seti-cjcks from lot lines and wetlands. List of Exhibits Exhibit A - Exhibit B - Exhibit C - Exhibit Exhibit Exhibit Exhibit Exhibit Exhibit Exhibit D F 1 G H J K Application Property Owners List Planning Commission Minutes 5/21/90 Sketch Plan Review Planning Commission Minutes 7/16/90 & 8/20/90 Cook's Report 7/16/90 Cook's Report 9/11/90 Resolution #913 Lafayette Dredging Project Zoning/Municipal Boundaries Map Jessen Letter 7/31/90 Fresh Water Foundation Hennepin County Department of Transportation's Report 7/13/90 Zoning File #1555 October 5, 1990 Page 2 of 5 Exhibit L - Paul Smith's Report - Determination of Park Dedication Fee Exhibit M - Wetlands Map Exhibit N - Crading/Utility Plan Exhibit 0 - Preliminary Plat Overall Review of Application - The application involves a subdivision of a total of 9 lots, 3 within the City of Minnetonka Beach, and 6 within the City of Orono. Lots 3 through 7 within Orono are residential and shall be served by individual accesses off of Old Beach Road. Lot 8 has been created along an existing B-4 zoning line and satisfies all B~4 zoning standards. It is staff's understanding that Lot 8 will be deeded to the Freshwater Foundation as well as Outlet A, the wetlands outlet, so that Foundation can retain control over the future use of the wetlands area. Review Mr. Jessen's letter (Exhibit J). Jessen advises that if the Foundation does not build upon Lot 8, that it will be offered to the University along with Outlot A. The City will protect the outlet by requiring flowage and open space easements oyer the entire wetland area. In the original preliminary plan reviewed at the July 16, 1990 public hearing, the applicant proposed excavations and filling within a portion of Minnetonka Beach with compensatory excavations within the City of Orono's wetland areas. This phase of the application has been withdrawn. The Planning Commission of the City of Minnetonka Beach granted unanimous approval of the preliminary plat at their September 17, 1990 meeting. PlCdse review the Orono Planning Commission minutes of September 17, 1990 for the Planning Commission's unanimous recommendation o^ the plat as amended. Each of the residential lots meets th required standards of the LR-lB zoning district. Although the is extensive wetland involvement within the subject property, each of the lots well satisfies the dry buildable contiguous above the 932 wetland elevation as noted above. Lot 8 meets all standards of the B-4 zoning district with 1.48 acres of dry land. In reviewing the grading plans (Exhibit N), note that there is adequate area within each defined building envelope. You should also note all proposed elevations for building sites are well beyond the 26' setback from the wetlands elevation at 932. The City has asked that each building site be provided with a basement floor elevation because of the depth of the sewer lines to serve the houses off Old Beach Road. Zoning File #1555 October 5, 1990 Page 3 of 5 Sewer & Water - In reviewing Exhibit N, note that the water main expansion through Minnnetonka Beach now connects to the Lafayette Ridge water line to the north, providing a loop system. This was requested by the City Engineer, Glenn Cook, The applicant's atto'-nev advised at the City of Minnetonka Beach meeting that the Public Works Director noted that such a line d^es not exist in Lafayette Ridge. The City Engineer will be asked to clarify this point. Throughout the review, both the Public Works Director and the City Engineer have asked for the looping system with Lafayette Ridge line. The sewer line has been amended by moving manhole #3 along the shared lot lines of Lots 5 and 6. Please note the severe topographical problems if sewer line was to be extended alon<;, public roadway, the City has agreed to allow the exter municipal lines to be placed along shared lot lines (Lots ‘ and 8). The City will ask for 20* wide easemen • 10* on eith side of the lot lines to provide adequate acces- aiea for serving system. Although not pertinent vc ocs City', review, manhole #8 has been realigned and moved ac-uth to th 3 936 elevation as vequested by Glenn Cook. With the installation of Lift Station I? approximately 4-5 years ago, there is adequate cap. sity in the ,*fiv»ar lines to serve the proposed Jsvelopment. Soil borings must brt taken prior to designing the sewer and v. ‘ter utilities. Public Road Access - All 5 residential 1: served of f of Old Beach R^ 'T’he City will ask that J fiaal plat. Please re** additiciial 7* for classification map #1* 716 def-lnes these spe' ^-'i- parkway:. :.equiring a 50-o finds \ I there is adequc '•'ith.in Cit of Orono shall be ’• •3''' accesses for each lot. *\oad be dedicated in the the County asks for an vs 19 and 15. The road r; i. .,iun3 V,.' Managen.J»nt Plan and CMP •?ctjon3 d County Roads as scenic righr-of-way wkd>r. Ti. ? City w.iith within the defined right-of- ways of both County Roads at a 66* width. The City cannot appi ve the request by the County for an additional 7* of right- of-way resulting in a total County Road right-of-way of 80*. In earlier discussions with John Gerhardson, Public Works Director, staff was advised that the City was considering an rading of Old 3e-dch Road this year consisting of leveling and jituminous covering. The developer will be asked to share the cost of this improvement. It may also b. appropriate to work with the City of Minnetonka Beach regarding a comprehensive upgrading of the road. Zoning File #1555 October 5, 1990 Page 4 p£ 5 Gradincr, Drainage Concerns - The final grading plans now define drainageways from the east and south via Old Beach Road and Shadywood Road continueing through the property to the retention area. Such drainageway will be defined at a 15' width. Please note the building envelopes are not severely impacted by the proposed drainageway locations. Each drainageway does connect to the retention area. These drainageways will be defined as drainage easements and dedicated to the public. Once again, the wetlands will be designated at the 932 elevation and shown as drainage easements on the plat. The Glencoe soils area shall also be designated on the final plat as a drainage easement connected by the drainageway that flows eventually into the major wetland to the north. Please note the hatched, darkened, outlined area on grading plans. These are the areas that received spoils from the Lafayette Bay dredging project of 1978 and 1979. ^ Review Exhibit H, the City has asked that these areas be defined for future bv^’ding considerations although all proposed building sites wi n the City of Orono are located out of the fill area. The ft :e commercial building site of Lot 8 will require special foundation considerations. Park Dedication - The Park Commission has reviewed the Marsh of Lafayette at their September October meetings. The Assessor has prepared a written report ruaking determination of the fair market value of the subject property for the Park Commission's review and recommendation. Such fee must be paid as part of the filing of the final plat. We have enclosed Paul Smith's report for your information (Exhibit L). Planning CoiBBissi«!>* 'Recommendation ~ ommission recommended unanimous approval cf presented and adopted the following staff __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _approve the 6 lot prel ’f Inary subdivisicvr application of E.W. Blanch Jr., for the property located at 2501 Old Beach Road, based on the following findings: The Plannii the subdvision recommendation to 1. All residential lots meet the pertinent standards of the LR-IB zoning district and Lot 8 satisfies all standards of the B-4 zoning district. 2. There is adequate sewer and water capacity within existing lines to serve the new development. F Zoning File #1555 October 5, 1990 Page 5 of 5 3. All lots shall achieve access via an approved public roadway. Approval is subject to the following conditions; A) Payment of a park dedication fee based on 8% of :he fair market value as determined by the City Assessor. Payment to be made by applicant upon filing of the final plat. B) Granting of a Flowage and Conservation Easement over the wetlands area defined below the 932 elevations with the wetlands defined as drainage ease ments on the final plat. Wetlaiid areas to include the Glencoe soils areas located within Lots 4 and 5. C) Applic^unt to dedicate and designate all drainageways on the plat as drainage easements at the minimum width of 15'. D) Applicant shall be responsible for the exter ;> ton sewer and water lines and upgrading of Old Beach Road consisting of leveling and 2" bituminous overlay. E) Wetlands to be designated as an outlet. The City will ask for an open space easement over the entire outlet. F) All utilities located within portions of residential lots shall be defined with a minimum of 10' easement and should appropriately lun adjacent to the road right-of-way of Old Beach Road. The final plat should designate existing utility easement over Lift Station #7. C/ Applicant is advised that the current sewer unit charge for new construction for the year 1990 is $897.62. This will be adjusted each year based on the inflationary rate. The total sewer units at 6 units per $897.62 is $5,385.72. The sewer units must be paid at the time of final plat approval. The enclosed resolution has been • fted per the Planning Commission's unanimous approval recommena .ion. A RESOLOTION GRANTING PRELIMINARY APPROVAL OF A PLAT AT 2501 OLD BBACB ROAD FILE NO. 1555 WHEREAS, E.W. Blanch, Jr. on June 15, 1990 filed a formal subdivision application with the City for a approval of a 6 lot subdivision (5 residential, 1 commercial) of property legally described on Exhibit A, attached (hereinafter "property"); and WHEREAS, after due published and mailed notice in accordance with Minnesota Statues 462.358 et. seq. and the City of Orono Zoning and Platting Codes, the Orono Planning Commission held public hearings on July 16, 1990 and September 17, 1990 at which times all persons desiring to be heard concerning this application were given the opportunity to speak thereon; and WHEREAS, at their regular meeting held on October 8, 1990 the Orono City Council considered the subdivision application of E.W. Blanch, Jr. noting the following findings of fact: 1. The property is located within the LR-IB Single Family Lakeshore Residential Zoning District requiring a minimum of 1 acre of land within each newly created lot. 2. P. r Section 10.55, Subdivision 15 (A), property served with sewer may receive credit for wetlands area, but in no case can dry buildable envelope be less than 1/2 acre of dry contiguous land. All 5 residential lots have over 1 acre of dry contiguous land. The total property consists of approximately 31.26 acres. 3. There is adequate sewer and water capacity within the existing lines to serve the new development. 4. All lots shall achieve access via an approved public roadway. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that based upon either one or more of the findings noted above, the City Council of the City of Orono hereby approves the preliminary plat application of E.W. Blanch, Jr. for the property located at 2501 Old Beach Road per the survey dated May 25, 1990, revised October 2, 1990 by Willieun R. Engelhart, subject to the following conditions: Page 1 of 4 1. Prior to the issuance of building permits for new construction, the applicant shall be responsible for extending sewer and water lines and for the upgrading of Old Beach Road within the City of Orono. * ‘ these improvements are not completed prior to final plat approval, applicant shall execute a developer's agreement and post appropriate security in the form of a Letter of Credit to assure that these improvements are completed. 2. Outlot A has been created for the purpose of creating special protection for the sensitive wetland areas within the City of Orono. The City of Orono to acquire special open space and flowage easements over the outlot. Applicant has agreed to execute specific covenants for the protection of the area and shall provide copies of these covenants for the City's review. 3. Lot 8 has been created for the future use of the Fresh Water Foundation to be developed by either the Foundation or to be transferred to the University of Minnesota. All future uses of Lot 8 shall be consistent with current B-4 zoning. Access to this site must be approved by the Hennepin County Department of Transportation. 4. All residential accesses to Lots 3, 4, 5, 6 and 7 shall be reviewed and approved by the Public Works Director of the* City of Orono. 5. All Engineering plans for the extension of municipal services and possibly upgrading of Old Beach Road must be approved by the City Engineer prior to the commenc<^ .ent of any work. FINAL PLAT SUBMITTALS The following list of final submittals must be submitted to the Zoning Administrator two weeks prior to the regularly scheduled Council meeting on the second and fourth Mondays of the month: A. RECORD PLAT drawings in the form of two (2) mylar copies and one (1) copy reduced to 1*'=200'. Drawing to include: a) Lot lines platted per preliminary survey by William R. Engelhart dated 5/25/90, revised 10/2/90. Page 2 of 4 b) Dedication of "drainage and utility easements" 10' wide along all perimeter property lines and 5' each side of internal property lines. c) Designate all drainageways on the plat as drainage easements at a minimum 15' width. d) All utilities located within portions of residential lots shall be defined with a minimum 10' easement. All utilities proposed along road right-of- way and not included within right-of-way shall be defined as utility easements also. e) The final plat should designate existing utility easements over Lift Station #7. f) Define all wetlands area below 932 elevation. g) Designate all existing utility easements throughout the plat. h) Naming of plat. B. LEGAL DOCUMENTS REQUIRED; a) Title opinion addressed to the City. All owners, mortgage holders or others with property interest indicated therein shall sign the plat and all other documents affected by such interest. b) The applicant must provide certified copies of all recorded easements currently affecting the property. c) Signed and executed drainage easement over all drainage easements within the plat. d) Signed and executed Flowage & Conservation Easement/open space easement over Outlot A. C. FEES TO BE PAID: Total Due $300.00* a) Final plat fee = $150.00 b) Legal review and filing fees of $150.00 c) * Park dedication fee to be determined by Park Commission. Park dedication fees must be paid upon filing of final subdivision application. Page 3 of 4 Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota at a regular meeting held this 8th day of October, 1990. Edward J. Callahan, Jr., Acting Mayor ATTEST; Theresa L. Naab, Deputy Clerk STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this 8th day of October 1990, by Edward J. Callahan, Jr. & Theresa L. Naab, cting Mayor & Deputy Clerk of the City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City. Notary Public Page 4 of 4 CITY OP ORONO - SUBDIVISION APPLICATION ^ PROPERTY LOCATION ^ ^ jr'^ -T2T HSite Address I'nasslgned_________________jj” PI ^ ^ Property Identification Number (P.I.D.) See attached_______ LITY OF UFi^ij OFFICE Please check one - Property x abstract or x to-^rens? 00 ^ Attach legal description to application. it.V _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _iTti-uiT^ titntfts I uu APPLICANT Phone (home) H1S1530 CCOl HOI T09:12 ---------------------------- 06/15/90 Neune Dennis E. bandin___________________ Phone (work) (612) 591-1329 Landstar, Inc. Address: 6 inn r,n1dpn Vnllpv. Road City: nnldpn Vnllpv Zip: SS42? OWNER (if different than applicant) Phone (home) Name E.W. Blanch. Jr._ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ Phone (work) (612) 835-3310 Address: 3500 West 80th Street City: Minneapolis Zip: 55431 (attach list if more than one) EXISTING LAND USE Number of Tax Parcels 6_ _ _ _ _ Development Size _ _ _ _ _ _ _ A s Dry Land _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Acra.i Wet Land 31.26 Acres Total, all parcels Present Use (check) _ _ _ _ _ _ Residential; no. of units _ _ _ _ _ _ _ X_ _ _ _ other (specify) Vacant Land_ _ _ _ _ _ Present Zoning District_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ PROPOSAL _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Division for Tax Purposes _ _ _ _ _ _ Lot Line Rearrangement Only (no new building sites) X_ _ _ _ Subdivision for New Building Sites Number of Building Sites: _ _ _ _ _' Existing Units I')_ _ _ New Units 10_ _ _ Total Units Proposed Gross Density: _ _ _1_ _ _ Units per i.q +Acres Minimum Lot Size: _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Sq Feet Dry Buildable Land Preposed Use: (check) _ _ _^_ _ _ Residential _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Other (specify)^_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ MIHIMUH MATERIAL NECESSARY FOR COMPLETE PRELIMINARY APPLICATION 1. Completed Application Form Preliminary Plat in/ormation on Certificate of Survey. Certified Property Owners List of owners within 350' (you must obtain this list from Hennepin County Department of Finance A-603 Govt Center 348-3271). As an addendum to this application, please attach a separate list of any other persons you wish notified of this application. 2. 3. 4. Certification by Zoning Department that Preliminary Plat Application is complete. Zoning Official's Signature_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Date _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 1. Payment of fees (park fees, tiling fee, sewer and water assessments). 2. Signed certificate of survey or mylar copies of formal plat. 3. Title opinion. 4. Easements, Covenants, etc. 5. Developers Agreement and Letter of Credit. Certification by Zoning Department that Final Plat Application is complete. Zoning Official's Signature_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Date _ _ _ _ _ _ _ FEES _ _ _ Sketch Plan Review (Class I, II v ’II) _ _ _ Subdivision of a Lot Line Rearrangement _ _ _ Preliminary Review (Class I & II Subdivision) X Preliminary Review (Class III and all non-residential) _ _ _ Final Plat Review (Class III) ♦(Plus any legal or engineering charges) The applicant hereby agrees to provide all information required or requested by the Zoning Administrator, City Engineer, City Attorney, Planning Commission and Council necessary to process this application and further agrees to pay all additional fees established by ordinance. $150.00 250.00 250.00 300.00 + 20.00/Lot 150.00* Applicant's Signature Owner's Signature Date Date Applicant must have all submittarS'^ia4^o the City offices 25 days before the Planning bmmission Meeting. Planning Commission Meetings are held on the third Mon^^ay of each month. Applicants must be present at all scheduled review meetings of the Planning Commission and Council. If an applicar’»* is unable to attend a scheduled meeting, please make arrangements to hav^ an authorized agent attend in your place and to advise the Buildirg & Zoning Office of this change prior to the meeting. RUN DATE 05/ZA/90 BATCH Oil PROP ADOR ONNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/ADDR PROP ADOR O^tJER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/ADDR PROP ADDR ONNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/ADDR PROP ADOR OHT^R NAME TAXPAYER NAME/ADDR 38 21-117-2S 23 0030 0264' LYDIARO AVE E 6 ^REESE A J P FREESE ELDON 6 A JOANN P FREESE 2648 LYDIARO AVE EXCELSIOR MN 5S331 38 21-117-23 23 0058 02750 KELLY AVE JOHN L KOZAR ETAL JOHN L KOZAR 2750 KELLY AVE EXCELSIOR MN 55531 82 16-117-23 33 0019 00082 ADDRESS Ur4ASSIGNE0 LAFAYETTE RIDGE HOMEOWERS LAFAYETTE RIDGE H0ME0lt4ERS PO BOX 41 MTKA BEACH MN 55561 82 16-117-25.33 0025 00082 ADDRESS)UNASSIGNED E.H-JR A f KiBLM4CH E H BLANCH Cd C/OwBO^ERT BROBERG 3500 H BOTH ST MPLS rtl 55451 HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORMATION SYSTEM PROPERTY OFMERS LIST 38 21-117-25 25 0056 02720 KELLY AVE CATHERINE E HANSON CATHERINE E MEAGHER 2720 KELLY AVE EXCELSIOR rt4 55551 58 21-117-23 23 0054 02615 SHADYHOOO RO THOMAS P A NArCY A HUBER THOMAS P A NANCY A HUBER 2615 SHADYHOOO RD EXCELSIOR MN 55551 82 ;6-117-23 33 0023 00082 address UNASSIGNED E HUR A P BLANCH E H BLANCH CO \ C/0 ROBERT BROBERG 3500 H BOTH ST MPLS MN 55431 82 16-117-23 53 0026 02515 OLD BEACH RD R M ADAMS A K B ADAMS RICHARD M A KATHL«="M B ADAMS 2515 OLD BEACH Ri HAYZATA MN 55391 REPORT NO. P1435401 PAGE 32 r; 38 21-117-23 23 0037 02740 KELLY AVE JOHN 6 MUIR ETAL MRS PHYLLIS E OMALLEY 2740 KELLY AVE EXCELSIOR MN 55331 82 16-117-23 33 0018 00082 ADDRESS’ UNASSIGNEO LAFAYETtE IRiBgE HOMEOFWERS LAFAYETTE>'R100E HOMEOFMERS PO BOT 41 MTKA BEACH 55361 82 16-117-23 33 0024 00082 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED E H JR A P^K BLANCH E 1h BIawh CO cA) ROB^LG BROBERG 3500 BOTH ST H MPLS rtl 55431 TOTAL BATCH Oil 00047 1 CERTIFY THAT THE FACTS REPRESENTED ARE AN ACCURATE AND TRUE REPRESENTATION OF INFORMATION AS IT APPEARS THIS DATE ON THE RECORDS OF THE HENNEPIN COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF PROPERTY TAXATION, TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE AND BELIEF. DATE j» ■"■J ■V II RUN DATE 05/Z<»/90 BATCH Oil PROP ADDR OHNER NAME TAXPAYER riAIC/AODR PROP ADDR OIMER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/AOUR 38 17-117-23 94 0005 03390 SHORELINE DR STEVEN H MARTIN STEVEN K MARTIN 6690 GAME FARM RD MINNETPISTA MN 55369 38 17-117-23 99 0099 00038 ADDRESS UNASS16NED LAFAYETTE RIDGE HOMEOHNERS LAFAYETTE RIDGE H0ME0*«4ERS 1709 N FARM ROAD LONG LAKE MN 55356 HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORMATION SYSTEM PROPERTY OHNERS LIST 38 17-117-23 99 0091 03265 LAFAYETTE RIDGE CT CHEYENNE LAND CO STUART A A HILDA J GOLDBERG 3265 LAFAYETTE RIDGE COURT HAYZATA MN 55391 38 20-117-23 11 0002 02920 SHADYHOOD RD BOYAGEUR SERVICE CENTERS VOYAGEUR SERVICE CENTERS CO RD 15 A 17 NAVARRE MN 55392 REPORT NO. P1935901 PAGE 30 38 17-117-23 99 0092 03295 LAFAYETTE RIDGE CT CHEYENNE LAND CO DAVID F A SUSAN J BRIGGS 3295 LAFAYETTE RIDGE CT HAYZATA MN 55391 38 20-117-23 li 0C03 02585 LYDIARO AVE GLENDON J OLSON 6LEN00N OLSON 2565 LYOIARD AVE EXCELSIOR MN 55331 10 ,r- 4.' •V PROP ADDR OHNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/Af^' PROP ADDR OHNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/ADDR 38 20-117-23 11 0009 02595 LYDIARO AVE P A E LENOX PHILIP A ELIZABETH LENOX RT 1 1APLE PLAIN MN 55359 38 20-117-23 11 0017 02955 SHADYHOOD RD JARIBO INC JARIBO INCORPORATED 9595 ENC' ANTED PT SHOREHOOO 55369 38 20-117-23 11 0007 02560 KELLY AVE KIRK K NELSON KIRK K NELSON 2560 KELLY AVE EXCELSIOR MN 55331 38 20-117-23 11 0018 02955 SHADYHOOD RD PAUL M ENGIUNO ETAL PAUL M A JEUINE M ENGLUND PO BOX 9*3 MOUND MN 55369 38 20-117-23 11 0015 02995 SHADYHOOD RD 1ST NATL BANK OF NAVARRE 1ST NATL BANK OF NAVARRE CO ROAD 15 A CO ROAD 19 NAVARRE MN 55392 38 20-117-23 11 0021 02565 LYDIARO AVE VALERIA M ELLIOTT VALERIA M ELLIOTT 2565 LYDIARD AVE NAVARRE m 55392 c- t - PROP ADDR OHNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/ADDR 30 20-117-23 11 0029 03333 SHORELINE OR MGT COMPANY SUPER VALU STORES INC CORPORATE TAX DEPT PO BOX 990 MPLS ttl 55990 38 20-117-23 11 0027 02977 SHADYHOOD RD R FREDERICK FREVERT ET AL MICHAEL HURLEY A MAPY HURLEY 5100 GAMBLE DR UNIT 90 MPLS MN 55916 30 20-117-23 11 0028 02535 SHAOYHOpO RD THOMAS C |A DEANNA M LEACH th6masic\eaoh 896b.133RD COURT APPLE VALLEY Itl 55129 36 20-117-23 11 0029 PROP ADDR 02595 SHADYHOOD RD OHNER NAME THOMAS C A DEANNA M LCACH TAXPAYER THOMAS C LEACH NAME/AnL^ 8960 133R0 COURT APPLE VALLEY MN 55129 38 20-117-23 11 0030 02525 SHADYHOOD RD THOMAS C\A\DEAr4lA M LEACH Tr'^MAS CT.PAC»\ 89b0^133RD CT APPLE VALLEY MN 55129 38 20-117-23 11 0031 02965 SHADYHOOD RO ISr NATL BK OF NAVARRE ISr NATL BK OF NAVARRE P 0 BOX i23 NAVARRE MN 55192 (Ti RUN DATE 0i,/ZA/90 BATCH Oil PROP ADDR 0»t4ER NAHE TAXPAYER NAME/ADDR PROP ADDR ONNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/ADDR PROP ADDR OHNER NAHE TAXPAYER NAME/ADDR PROP ADDR Ot««ER NAHE TAXPAYER NAME/ADDR PROP ADDR OHT4ER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/ADDR HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORMATION SYSTEM PROPERTY OHNERS LIST 58 20-117-23 11 003^ UNIVERSITY OF MIM4ESOTA UNIV OF Mirt4-REAL EST OFF HOt.. L HALL RM 335 100 :HI'9CH ST MPLS Fjr. 55A55 58 21-117-25 22 0002 02420 OLD BEACH RO NAB ROHMANN NALT^R A A BETTY T ROHMANN 242^ OLD BEACH ROAD NAY/ATA ^t4 55391 PROP ADDR OHTJER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/ADDR 38 21-1J7-23 22 0005 02490 OLD BEACH »D HINVESCO CORPORATION MINVESCO CORPORATION 9372 CREEKHOOD DR EDEN PRAIRIE MN 55344 38 21-117-23 22 0010 02560 OLD BEACH RD J R KREY A J L OICKI44SON JAMES R KREY 2560 OLD BEACH RD HAYZATA MN 55391 38 Jl-117-23 22 noi3 02585 SHAOYWOOO RD D M SCHULTZ ETAL DONALD M SCHL'YTZ ‘!565 SHADYHOOU RO EXCELSIOR MN 55331 38 21-117-23 23 0001 02765 KELLY AVE DAVID H JELLISON A HIFE DAVID M A SUSAN JELLISON 2765 KELLY AVE EXCELSIOR 55351 38 20-117-23 11 0036 FRESHWATER FOUNDATION FRESHWATER FOUNDATION C/6 E W,BLANCH CO 3500 W BOTH ST BLOOMiNGTOtN MN 55451 38 21-117-23 22 0003 U2440 OLD BEACH RD EARL A SWEEN EARL A SWEEN 2440 OLD BEAtri kO HAYZATA MN 55391 : 21-117-23 22 0006 •'6 OLD BEACH RO A SAKLAD ASM SAKLAD DANIEL A SAKLAD 7496 OLD BEACH RD ORONO MN 55391 38 21-117-23 22 0011 3£S70 LYDIARD AVE T A RVAN A P J RYAN THOMA A AyAN 1070 lOtV50 LOtNG LAKT tr’ 55356 38 21-117-23 22 0014 00038 ADDRESS UNASGIGNED E H JR A P K BLANCH E H JR A PATRICIA BLAINCH C/O E W BLANCH CO ' 3500 80IH SI W BLCX)Mir4n''UI NtN 55431 58 21-117-25 23 0005 02655 PHEASANI RD F T FORRER JR A D C FORREK J T For RER ADC FORi’tR 2655 PHEASATNT RD EXCELSIOR UN 55351 REPORT NO. P1435401 PAGE 31 38 20-117-23 11 0037 W JR H A P li Bt ANCH JR A PATtaClA BLANCH e/6l E N'bIaNCH CO 35^ H^BOTH ST BLOOMINGTON MN 55431 a 21-117-23 22 0004 02480 OLD BEACH RO GEORGE N RONALD ETAL GEORGE H RONALD 2480 OLD BEACH RO HAYZATA 55391 38 21-117-23 22 0009 02540 OLD BEACH RO D M SCHNEIDER A M H LEAF D M SCHNEIDER A M H LEAF 2540 OLD BEACH Ru HAYZATA rtN 55391 38 21-117-23 22 0012 02636 LYDIARD AVE S M SHE*roN A G M LARSON STEPHry RATLIFF 2636 LYuIAt'^ AVE EXCELSlc.. MN 55331 38 21-117-23 22 0015 E H JR 6 ANCH E H JR ♦'p' :a blanch C/O.E H.B( mNCH ko 3500 H BOIH ST BLOOMINGTON rt4 55431 38 21-117-23 23 0026 02755 KELLY AVE 0 GESELL A K KAVERMAN-GESELL DREW A GESELL ?755 KELLY AVE EXCELSIOR FW 55531 V 0ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD MAY 21, 1990 #1526 LANDSTAR INC. 3150 SHADYW30D ROAD 10 LOT SUBDIVISION SKETCH PLAN REVIEW , ^ i Mr. Sandin was present and provided the Planning Commisb^on with the sketch plan for a proposed subdivision. Kelley indicated that he was concerned about additional cur 3 cuts on County Road 19 in order to access Lots 8 and 9. Mabusth stated that Lot 9 will be served from the property to the north and Lot 8 will have a single access. Kelley asked if it would be possible to design the subdivision to that access is achieved entirely from Old Beach Road. Mr. Sandin said that the parcel is very wide and a portion of the property will revert back to the FWBI. He said that they will rezone Lot 8 so it will be zoned LR-IB. Kelley suggested that the B-4 Zoning District follow the uv*tline of Lot 9. Mr Sandin said that it is his intention. He also noted that prior to aivinc Lot 9 back to the Freshwater Foundation, covenants will be filed against the chain of tit.e which wi^- prohibit them from placing any structures in the wet^an^. #1533 RICHARD & JULIE MARKLUND 3415 HIGH LANE SKETCH PLAN OF A 2-LOT SUBDIVISION It was the consensus of the Planning Commission to table this matter for discussion because the applicants were not present. MINUTES OF APRIL 16, 1990 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING It was moved by Hanson, seconded by Johnson, to approve the minutes of the April 16, 1990 Planning Commission Meeting. Motion, Ayes-5, Nays-0. Motion passed. PLANNING COMMISSION REPRESENTATIVE It was agreed that Chairman Kelley would be the representative to attend the June 11, 1990 Council Meeting. MOOS, seconded by Kelley, to adDOurn the Planning Commission Meeting, passed. Motion, Ayes-5, Nays-0. Motion - 19 - MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD JULY 16, 1990 ATTENDANCE 7:00 P.M. , . . The Orono Planning Commission met on the aoove aate witn tne following members present: Planning Commission Chair, Charlie Kelley, and Planning Commission Members Jeffrey Johnson, Maureen Bellows, Ed Cohen, and Candace Rowlette. The following represented the City Staff: Building and Zoning Administrator Mabusth, Assistant planning and Zoning Administrator Gafrron, and City Recorder Scheffler. Councilmember Callahan was also present. INTRODUCTION-PLANNING COMMISSION MEMBER ROWLETTE Kelley took this opportunity to introduce Candace Rowlette and to welcome her to the Planning Commission. #1555 LANDSTAR INC. 2501 OLD BEACH ROAD PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION PUBLIC HEARING 7:00 TO 7:45 P.M. ^ • Mr. Dennis Sandin, Lands tar, Inc., • Bill ..udnicki. Surveyor, and Ms. JoEllen Hurr, Zoning Administrator for uhe Ci»-y of Minnetonka Beach, were present. The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing were duly noted. Mabusth noted that this subdivision was also scneculed fo.. the Minnetonka Beach Council Meeting this evening. Kelley referred to a memo th*>t had been received from JoEllen Hurr. He questioned whether it was appropriate for the Planning Commission to address the issues raised in the staff memo as it appeared that Minnetonka Beach would have to table tne subdivision review until v/etlands ordinance ’s passed.. Hurr explained, "The Minnetonka Beach City Council^ is considering an ordinance that would pertain to wetlands and flood plains. It is anticipated that the issue will be resolved at their August meeting." Kelley suggested that it may be appropriate to hold the matter in abeyance until that time. Hurr replied, "I don't believe that the City of Minnetonka Beach expects the Orono Plann" .ig Commission and Council to delay action due to issues that Minnetonka Beach is considering." Kelley advised that Orono is being asked to approve of certain land alterations within the flood plain of our City pending resolve of the filling activities \/ithin Minnetonka Beach. - 1 - ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD JULY 16, 1990 ZONING FILE #1555-LANDSTAR INC. CONTINUED Mabusth asked the Planning Commission to explain any concerns they have regarding this subdivision for the benefit of the applicant. Bellows stated that one of her concerns is the proposed excavation which would occur in a wetland area. Rowlette stated that she was concerned about the lot line rearrangement that is proposed with Lafayette Ridge owners. Mabusth noted that the purpose of the lot line rearrangement is to provide additional boat slips for Lafayette Ridge. In reference to the proposed excavation, Mabusth asked the Planning Commission whether they would recommend that the applicant file a separate Conditional Use Permit and Variance application. Mabusth asked, "Would the Planning Commission consider a compensating excavation in Orono's protected wetlands/flood plain area to mitigate filling done in a prof-^ted area in another City?" Johnson asked the applicant to provide ad- *1 information regarding the excavation. Mr. Rudnicki explained that the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District requires the compensation for a wetland area that is filled. Kelley asked Mr. Sandin what position the Freshwater Biological Institute has regarding the disturbance of the wetland area. Mr. Sandin replied, "I received a letter from Marty Jessen, President of the' FWBI, which indicates that they have no objections to disturbance of the wetlands provided that construction does not occur." Bellows read the letter from Mr. Jessen. She said, "I do not interpret this letter to mean that the Freshwater Foundation approves of the proposal to excavate the wetlands." Kelley asked Mr. Sandin whether Mr. Jessen has been specifically apprised of the proposal. Mr. Sandin indicated that he has provided a sketch plan to Mr. Jessen. JoEllen Hurr said, "I have talked with Mr. Jessen and I am sure that he is aware of the proposal to excavate.” Johnson asked whether the wetlands existing on the private - 2 - ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD JULY 16, 1990 ZONING FILE #1555“LANDSTAR INC. CONTINUED lots will be protected. Mabusth replied, "The City of Orono will take conservation and flowage easements over the entire area where the elevation is below 931.5." Bellov/s said, "I do not approve of the proposal to excavate in a protected area within Orono, to compensate for filling that will occur within the City of Minnetonka Beach. The City of Orono does not allow excavation or filling within a lakeshore protected area." Mabusth took the opportunity to briefly review the subdivision proposal for the benefit of the public (see Jeanne Mabusth's memo dated July 12, 1990). Mr. Drew Gesell, 2755 Kelly Avenue, asked what must occur after this evening if this proposal is to be approved. Kelley explained the process required for applications. subdivision Mr. Don Schultz, 2585 Shadywood °oad, said, "All of the runoff from Kelly Avenue runs to my property, under County Road 19, and drains into this property. How will the subdivision affect my property?" M’-. Sandin replied, "Not at ail. We will not change the culvert." Mr. Gesell asked for information regarding the size of the lots and homes that will be constructed if the subdivision is approved. Mabusth reviewed the lot size of each of the lots located in Orono. She also provided the dry buildable areas for each lot. Kelley noted that the lots contain 2 acres of dry buildable area. He questioned whether it would be possible for each lot to subdivide further, id, if so, if anything could be done to prohibit that. Mabusth answered that it would be possible to further subdivide the lots provided the standard lot width along the roadway is maintained. She noted that placement of the principal structures will affect the ability to further subdivide. Mr. Dave Schneider, 2540 Old Beach Road, drainage does run down Old Beach Road to Lot 4. drainage will be handled beyond that point. stated that He asked how - 3 - ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD JULY 16, 1990 ZONING FILE #1555-LANDSTAR INC. CONTINUED Mabusth asked Mr. Rudnicki to address Mr. question. Schnieder's Mr. Rudnicki replied, "Drainage behind the house pads will be handled with a swale system that will allow the water to continue to drain into the wetlands." Mabusth stated that she had asked the applicant to provide specific drainage information at the sketch plan review and that this specific information was requested. She said, "This area is a major drainage collection basin for this neighborhood. It is important that the drainageways are protected, designated and easements taken over them." Bellows observed that the grading plan did not provide specific information regarding the cutting and filling in relation to grade change. Bellows also noted that the gracing plan indicates that ail spoils from the excavation will be deposited on Lot 8. Bellows informed Mr. Rudnicki that the grading plan does not show where that soil will be deposited. She said that the grading plan should show not only the present grade, but the proposed grades once the project is completed. Bellows suggested tabling the application until all of the necessary information is provided, including how the City or Minnetonka Beach is going to proceed. Johnson added, "We also need information regarding how graciing that will occur for the individual house pads will affect the drainage for each lot." Mr. Rudnicki explained that it is difficult to provide such infc rmation because the size of the lots will allow a structure to he placed in a variety of locations. Johnson stated that the sketch plans do show basement elevations. He also noted that the grading plan coes not indicate how drainage from the 4 existing culverts (three ..rom Old Beach Road and one from Shadywood Road) will be addressed. Mabusth suggested that the Planning Commission may wish to recommend that Mr. Sandin file a separate Conditional Use Permit and variance application. She said, "The applicant is going o have to provide hardships relating to the variance in addition to a grading plan." Mr. Gesell expressed concern for traffic safety due to the increase in curb cuts resulting from this subdivision. Mr. Gesell stated that he was also concerned about how the development of this property will impact the wetlands. He said, "Most people use chemical fertilizers on their lawns. In this case, all of the chemicals will drain directly into the wetland. - 4 -» ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD JULY 16, 1990 ZONING FILE #1555-LANDSTAR INC. CONTINUED Kelley noted that the leeching of fertilizer is not a situation unique to this subdivision only. He stated that anyone living around Lake Minnetonka can fertilize their lawns and that it all drains into the lake. Mrs. Schneider stated that she too had concerns regarding the increased traffic on Old Beach Road. Mr. George W. Ronald, 2480 Old Beach Road, asked when information will be available regarding the size of the homes that will be constructed in this subdivision. Kelley explained that the City has no ability to regulate the size or architecture of homes that are constructed. He said that the residents can come into the City once construction begins to find out more information. He suggested that the area residents may wish to meet with the developer to discuss his intentions. There were no further comments from, the public regarding th' matter and Kelley continued the Publio Hearing. It was moved by Bellows, seconded by Johnson, to table this application pending the receipt of a grading plan showing any and all land alterations and grading in relation to the existing culverts, in addition to the house foot prints. Further, thao the disposition of the City of Minneionka Beach regarding the filling be determined and that the applicant submit a Conditional Use Permit and variance application for the excavation proposed. .Motion, Ayes-4, Nays-0, Cohen abstained. Motion carried. #1564 JOANN GRIMES 4720/4730 NORTH ARM DRIVE SUBDIVISION/LOT LINE REARRANGEMENT PUBLIC HEARING 8:17 P.M. TO 8:20 P.M. Ms. Grimes was present. The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing were duly noted. Gaffron reviewed the information regarding this application for a lot line rearranaement (see Michael Gaffron *s memo dated July 7, 1990). There were no comments from the public and the Public Hearing was closed. It was moved by Johnson, seconded by Cohen, to recommend approval of the Subdivision of a Lot Line Rearrangement for JoAnn Grimes and Jim Hoffman, 4720-4730 North Arm Drive West. Motion, Ayes-5, Nays-0. Motion carried. - 5 - ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD AUGUST 20, 1990 #1554 TIMOTHY GRAMENTZ 4680 NORTH ARM DRIVE VARIANCE CONTINUATION OF PUBLIC HEARING 7:23 P.M. TO 7:25 P.M. Mr. George Jones was present on behalf of Mr. Gramentz. Gaffron provided a summary of the major issues involved in this application (see Michael Gaffron's memo dated July 1, 1990). Johnson said, "I went to the site and looked at the footprint of the structure. It lends itself well to having a second story above the garage." Hanson said, "It does not appear that this will have any impact on the neighbors." Bellows and Rowlette concurred with Hanson. Mr. Jones said, "This proposal will enhance^ the property. The single sto-y garage was awkward in appearance." There were no comments from the public regarding this application and the Public Hearing was closed. It was moved by Hanson, seconded by r.oos, to recommend approval of application #1554, a side se.-.back variance to construct a second story over an e.^isting garage. Motion. Ayes-5, Mays-0. Motion carried. #1555 LANDSTAR, INC. 2501 OLD BEACH ROAD PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION CONTINUATION OF PUBLIC HEARING 7:27 TO 7:34 P.M. Bellows stated that the Army Corp of Engineers has requested additional time to review this application. She said, "In light of this, the Planning Commission will take comments from anyone present this evening. We have learned that inaccurate information v/as distributed to area neighbors regarding this subdivision." Mr. Drew Gesell, 2755 Kelly Avenue, said, "I attended the previous meeting when this was discussed. I expressed concerns at that time about the impact this development will have on the wetlands. Those concerns still exist. It is difficult to imagine houses in portions of this property. Years ago, that lake was much larger than it is now. It is hard to say what will happen in the future if the property is developed." Mr. James MacKinnon, Attorney foe Landstar. Inc., asked Mabusth if she could provide him v/ith the information she had learned just prior to this meeting. - 7 - originally designated at at 934. It now the determine the appropriate ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD AUGUST 20, 1990 "°“"“Lbisth'iaid!^"A^^^ is not waiting for any additional information from the Corp of Engineero, but rathe- vour client's representative to provide direction to the surveyor to make changes to preliminary plan that re-lects tne Corp of Engineer's findings. Also, fill is no longer proposed in the lot on^ the lakeshore. There will be no need for compensatory excavation. The other issue raised by the Corp involves ^he wetland within the City of Orono. They feel the wetlana should be designated at a hig.ier elevation. This could have a major impact on the subdivi'.ion. It was 931.5, and the City considered ic responsibility of the City Engineer to elevation." Bellows asked whether the DNR will review this. riabusth reolied, "The DMR will review this in addition to the Corp of Engineers, the Wild Life Agency, the EPA, and other agencies." Rowlette asked, "vmat was the outcome from the riinnetonka Beach meeting?" Mabusth replied, "The applicant did not proceed to the Minnetonka Beach Council meeting. I believe the matter was tabled." Mr. MacKinnon referred to a letter he had from the Corp of Engineers. He said. "The letter states that the subdivision, as proposed meets all of their requirements. In aoing the site, they are hoping that they will get some cooperation from the developer to restrict any grading or fill in that certain right next to the high water mark. The letter says that they do not require any change in the elevation or the high water mark. Vie would really like to proceed with this matter this evening. Bellows replied, "I’m afraid at tnis point in that is not possible." Bellows asked whether all neighbors would be notified again of the meeting when this matter would be discussed. Mabusth i?-’.’'tv*d that would be appropriate in light of the interest in this matter, and the incorrect information that has been circulated. There was no action taken on this matter. - 8 - ^ J Bonestroo M=S Rosene vpa Anderlik & \ Associates Engineers & Architects July 16. 1990 Crto G 8or«tw PE octxn W Koier^c. PE J0$«yi C Anc«fiik. PE ViiVin L Sorva^J PE PiC^'afO E Tumef. PE James C Oson PE Genn R Cook. PE '"omas E \o>ev PE Sooert G Scnun<nt. P£ Sosan Vi Etsetim. C PA Ketn A Goicon PE »<nafa w Fostef. PE Ooraw C Burganat PE JCTy A BctifOcn PE Mark A Manjor’ PE 1W < Fe-O PE MK^aei T Rawtmarm PE RoMrt R p*effere PE Oav<j O Lcskota PE Thorriai vv PKffScn PE Micnae C Lyr^n PE James R Ma'arxJ PE Kenrem P Arvlersor'. PE Mark R Rolfs. PE Rceerr c Russek a > A T^cmas E Anguv PE Hcwana A Sanfora PE Dan«l J EJgeiton. PE Mark A Sea PE Primr J Caswen. PE isrrw va.mea. PE Mark O M/aiH P^’p" T»iomas R A'-cerson A IA Gary F Ryiarcer. P£ Miles 8 ..ensen. PE L P^JiiO Gravel IN. PE Re~ C P'ur'.iit AIA Agnes V Ring. A IC P Jerry O Pfftzscn. PE Ceciiio Oiivier. PE Cnaries A Encuson Leo M Paweisky Harian ,M O^son ini 2 L- City of Orono Box 66 Crystal Bay, Minnesota 55323 Attn: Jeanne Mabusth Re; Marsh at Lafayette Our File No. 139 Dear Jeanne: We have reviewed the proposed Marsh at Lafayette subdivision, new lots proposed in the City of Orono. 1 8 19S0 There are six The sanitary sewer is proposed to be served from a new line tying into lift station 7. The City prefers that the sanitary sewer lines follow the street right of way. The topography however doesn't allow for tlii”^ to occur very easily. We would recommend that manhole 4 be eliminated and manhole 3 he moved to the line between lots 5 and 6. The grade of the sanitary tewei* will not allow extension into Minnetonka Beach as ahowii. The end luauhole wiJl have to be moved south to about the 936± contour. The corner lot ou Mi.'inotonka Beach will have to be served by a grinder station. The water Tnin Iri Minnetonka Beach should be extended to CSAH 13 and connected, to tr.o water line in Lafayette Ridge. Soil borings should he taken prior to designing the sewer and water utilities. The street should be upgraded in accordance with City standar- s. The property owners on the east of Old Beach Road should be contacted to determij-.o if ths> are interested in reconstruction of the stre?t. The developer plans to excavate an area in the wetlend to provide ad.JIc».'»nal water storage volume. This would be to mitigate proposed fil.ling below Che 931.5 elevation on lot 1 block 2 in Minnetonka Beach. Please contact this office if you have any questions. Yours very truly, BONESTROO, ROSENE, ANDERLIK & ASSOCIATES. INC. Glenn R. Cook GRCIdh 2335 West Highway 36 • St. Paul, IVlIrnesota 55^ 7 • 612-636-4600 ^ i Bonestroo Rosene Anderiik & I Associates Engineers fit Architects Otto G Borwttoo. PE BocetT w tosene. PE Jojcpn C Andefiik. PE Marvin L Sofvaia PE P<njnO E Turner Pg Jam*! c Ofvjn PE Glenn R Coot. PE Tnomaj E Noyes. PE Booett G Schunjcnt PE Susan M Eberim C PA Kenn A Gowon PE R<nara W Pouer PE DonakJ C BufganJt. PE Jeny A Bouroon. PE Mar* A Hanson PE :eo K Eie'd. PE Michael T Rautmann PE Rocert R PV^fhe PE David O Loskota. PE Thomas W Peterson. PE VKhae) C Lynch. P£ James R Maic.xJ. PE Kenneth P Anoerson P£ Mark R Roifl PE Rooert C Russek. ' A Thomas E Angui PE Howard A Santoro. “E Oan*» j Edgerton. ?£ Mark A Se« PE Philip J Caswell. PE Ismael Martinet. ®E Mark D Waan PE Thomas R Anoeison. AIA Gary F Rytanoer. P£ Mites a Jensen. PE L Phdp CSravei in PE Rene C PHjmart AIA Agnes M Png. AiCP Jerry O RertZSCh. PE CfCrIO O'wie', PE Charles A E"CkSOn Leo M Paweisky Harlan .M Cison September 11, 1990 UJL iiij;::___.inii Jlli SEP 1 4 1990 City of Orono Box 66, Crystal Bay Orono, MN 55323 Attn: Jeanne Mabusth Re: 139-1555 Marsh § Lafayette Dear Jeanne: Ve have reviewed the storm water storage required on the marsh at Lafayette Subdivision. The 100 year return frequency storm would raise the water elevation on the property to 932 with a 1.5 cfs outfall under Old Beach Road. The high water elevation on the subdivision should be established at 932.0. The outlet control structure should be designed to limit outflow to the 1.5 cfs. Please contact this office if you have any questions. Yours very truly, BONESTROO, ROSENE, ANDERLIK & ASSOCIATES, INC. / Glenn R. Cook GRC:ci 2335 West Highway 36 • St. Paul, Minnesota 55113 • 612-636-4600 ; s V.'i .j:m t' i w^1 •* ^2i iL'if'X .. .'vL- m ,.»- , "*-r. ' '• RESOLUTION NO. 9/V // A RESOLUTION APPROVING CERTAIN DREDGING AND SPOILS DISPOSAL FOR THE WEST SHORE LAFAYETTE BAY ASSOCIATION WHEREAS, the City of Orono is a municipal corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of Minnesota; and WHEREAS, the City Council is concerned about the problems created by unregulated dredging in and adjacent to Minnetonka, which problems affect the Lake and all the property adjacent thereto; and * WHEREAS, the City Council is concerned that permanent structures and artificial obstructions located in wetlands, lakes, drainageways, and on property adjaceat thereto may adversely affect the natural resources, open space, drainage patterns and wildlife habitat of the City; and WHEREAS, because of the abc e noted concerns and for the protection of the health, safety and ^eneral welfare of citizens of Orono, the City Council has established and adopted regulations providing for strict control of dredging in and adjacent to the lake and strict control of filling or alteration of wetlands, marshes drainageways and land adjacent thereto; and WHEREAS, the Planning Consnission and City Council have reviewed at length an application by the West Shore Lafayette Bay Association for certain maintenance dredging of a channel in Lafayette Bay, Lake Minnetonka, and for placesient of dredg'^d .materials upon land occupied by the Fresh Water Biological Institute. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council hereby makes the following findings of fact: 1. 2. 3. The channel dredging is located in Lafayette Bay, Lake Minnetonka as shown on Exhibit A attached. The channel dredging is required to maintain riparian access to nine residential properties within the City of Orono. The channel to be maintained was previously dredged under proper state permits. ..w^olucion No, 2 <0- 4. The dredging will only remove silt from within fhe existing chann;^! and will not affect the hard lake bottom, 5. 6. according to the condltlona of tha MNDNR permit No. 78-6325 attached hereto as Exhibit B. :^e dredge spoils will be deposited on property owned by tha Fraah Water Biological Research Foundatlcn as shown on Exhibit C attaehad. Conservation District has determlnad that the dj'jposal site is dry land and not wetland or marsh land.. The spoils disposal will be a settling basin behind earthen dikes as noted on Exhibit D attached and as regulated by MPCA state disposal system permit (application attached as Exhibit E). The effluent from the disposal area will be contained within the large FWBI wetlands and the wetlands water quality will be *■ ■ nnf-AH furthermore resolved, that based upon the above noted findings of fact, the City Council of the City of Orono does LaFayette Bay Association a Conditional 'ondltl^ dredging and spoils disposal subject to the following 8, 9. 1. 2. 3. 4. Dike Construction shall be subject to the approval of the dty engineer prior to the start of any dredging. ^ ^e culvert under Old Beach Road (between the FWBI marsh and I^ke Minnetonka) shall be sealed to the satisfaction of the City engineer prior to the start of any dredging. Dredging may not begin until receipt by the City of nermlts from tl:: “inspect. ilesolutlon No. Page 3 /7^ !>,... ' ■K -m 5. Upon construction of the dike, a sign shall be erected at the applicant's cost on the disposal sitey visible frea Old Beach Road and at a location acceptable to the City inspector, vhich * sign shall be as follows; Size: no less than 3* high by 5* long on posts at least 6' high. Material; wood or metal with white painted surface and red, black or blue letters. Legend: West Shore LsFayetta Bay Asaoeiation Fresh Water Biological Inatitote ' RESEARCH PROJECT (Urgar lattara) Effects of Dredgii^ & Nutrient Release Permits granted by: Minnesota Dept, of Natural Resources Minnesota Pollution Control Agency Minnehaha Creek Watershed District City of Orono 6. Irior Lj the start of dredging, the FWBI shall sai^ple the waters of LaFayette Bay and the FWBI marsh for turbidity and for nutrient levels and shall submit a report of Fame to the City. 7. During the dredging operation, the FWBI shall daily ssmitor turbidity of LaFayette Bay water and shall submit weekly reports of same to the City. 8. Prior to discharge of marsh water to the lake,' the FWBI shall monitor the concentrations of nitrogen, phosphorus and dissolved organic carbon in the FWBI marsh, shall weekly submit reports of same to the City, and shall prohibit discharge of marsh water to LaFayette Bay until concentration levels are equal to or lower than LaFayette Bay levels. 9. After completion of the dredging and release of the marsh MAter to LaFayette Bay, the FWBI .hall prepare a comprehensive report including conclusions gained from the study and shall submit same to the City, the MNDNR and the MPCA. 10. If, at any time during the dredging operation, the nutrient levels in the marsh water or outlet to LaFayette Bay rise to a point determined by the City to be detrimental to Lake Minnetonka, the City reserves the right to enforce a stop work order prohibiting further dredging activity until the nutrient levels are reduced. Resolution No* Page 4 11. Upon completion of the dredging end releeee or eveporetlon o£ impounded waters, the diepoeal site shall be reeontonred landscaped, including reaavml of the dike, sodding, seeding tree or shrub planting to prevent erosion and to return the erne fo a natural state, which landscaping shall be at the applicant*! cost and for which the-appl^lcant shall post with the dtp « letter of credit for $3,000.00 to ensure perfomance. 12. The West Shore LaFayette Bay Association and the Ftash Hftar: Biological Institute shall review this Resolution and agree to the conditions contained herein prior to thie peselt being effective, which agreement shall be indicated by execution of this agreement in the spaces provided. AGREED: in od, DirectBT* 'ater Biological Institute Earl Sween, Chairman West LaFayette Bay Association This Resolution adopted by the. City Council of the City of Orono on day of 192Sr mm-'.- ■f*' *<»/ tt J/e -^Si. • •$$•** tt t f** •it.w«*i d* O V O /N cJ'j % ** • I •:iivr «i y .5 ' ^■H' •IjA ■ ^o_ S ^7s/£-v •1 23 5* .>.., W i’ ^ , , 07i ,' ”i* t: / w ‘*000 . . ^ ' •«J -9^ FrvsIuvdUr Foundalinn Z*ro Shady wood Road P.O. Box *W Naxarre. MN 553V: 0090 Ai: 47|.fU07 612 471-90*0 (FAX) Water is Life (nuiMlrr H;.r;arJ O (irav. '*f. D Sv Offlrcn nl ilir Board I :nUxa\ G Aithur. U. < '/iiltrmun Ru'hard S Ca)dea'K. Ph D : i«v Chairman »<eid Cafon ^rttarx rhomav L. Warner Prafuirr otcitors h. ITraUhurt ■Irt.'iwnf rreafurrr Board ul Uireelun Howard A Vnucr«n. M U ite(%v Baker Jamn H Ucarddey. Jr Raxrrond D Black Donald Ci. Uraucr M Hoed Burton. Jr,. Ph D Daniel C. Chaho! Henry Doetf klfred Fi France CUrK C Grilfuh RoPert 1.. Herhsl David F. Hukok. M D Jo hllen Hurt Mrx Stephen F keaiing Joveph r Line, Ph D John B l.undquiti \\ Duncan Mac.Miilan Warren (1 Malkcrvun Charlex M Minn Marc Rctvner Stephen Ruv/rll tt Dean Spat/ Lucie ne J fay lot N|r ard R ntcomb Mrv Je F W heaton H. Martin Jevven Prrudent S C E O Advitory Board Roeer I Baker Wiiliam M Baker E. W. Blanch. Jr Mrv. Hetbeti W Buveher Jamev I.. Hctland. Jr \trv. John O Itvine Earl H Moviman Mrv William <i Phillipv Robert L. Seatlev DjC_jiists OP 'AUG 1 5 1990 July 31, 1990 Mr. Mark Bernhardson City Administrator, Orono Orono City Offices 1335 S Brown Rd. Wayzata, MN 55391 Dear Mark, I am writing to clarify a couple of items regarding the relationship be" :en the Freshwater Foundation and the University of M^r.r.sccta' s Gray Freshwater Eiclcgical Institute as it might relate to the land subdivision proposed by Ted Blanch. In 1987 the Freshwater Foundation sold the land it owned bounded by County Road 15, 19, Old Beach Road and Lake Minnetonka, to Ted Blanch. The Foundation had previously given approximately five acres to the University of Minnesota, including the Gray Freshwater Biological Institute (You may recall that the gift to the University was made in 1976, but that the deed was not recorded. The final conveyance of the land and the recording of the deed took place only recently after I appeared before the City of Orono to clean up the legal description that allowed for the final conveyance to the University of Minnesota.) Also in 1987, Mr. Blanch made a commitment to convey back to the Freshwater Foundation a portion of the land which he had just purchased from us. Mr. Blanch has now put before the Cities of Orono and Minnetonka Beach his proposed subdivision. Per his plan. Lot 8 (approximately 2.75 acres) will be given to the Frcr.hvcter r-L.ndav:io:i. in compliance wirn rne agreement made in 1987. This Lot 8 corresponds with the land that was previously zoned by the Cit^- of Orono for office purposes. At the time that the zoning was sought by the Freshwater Foundation it was anticipated that a residential component would be added to the Institute to provide temporary housing for visiting scientists and students. At this point, no such construction is anticipated or planned. The Foundation is currently contemplating the sale of the property at some future date, or perhaps building an office facility for its use. It is not anticipated that Lot 8 would be conveyed to the University of Minnesota for any use associated with the Gray Freshwater Biological Institute. K Puhlii Niinprulll Fiiundilion ( unlrihuliiinv ^rr l(v-l>rduiiihlr printfd tin Hti ini f'apri page 2 of 2 July 31, 1990 Mr. Blanch has also contemplated the conveyance of the wetland outlet parcels to the Freshwater Foundation. As I previously indicated in a letter to Denny Sandin, the Foundation has considerable interest in maintaining these wetlands for their "natural values". I carefully chose that term to imply that the wetlands will need to be managed if they are to function in this manner. They can not simply be neglected. These kinds of management approached might include; vegetation management, sedimentation control and other techniques. The wetland area provides a valuable setting for the Gray Freshwater Biological Institute, both for aesthetic and functional purposes. However, it need not, and should not, simply be left alone to fulfill these purposes. The Freshwater Foundation has discussed with the University of Minnesota giving the wetland outlot areas to the University to be attached to the approximately five acre parcel upon which the Gray Freshwater Biological sits. This would be pursued if the Freshwater Foundation ends up selling Lot 8. I hope this letter has provided some further information about our relationship to the Gray Freshwater Biological Institute. While the Foundation built the Institute, we gave it to the University of Minnesota. We are two separate organizations, albeit pursuing the same objectives of protecting freshwater. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to call. Sincerely, H. Martin Jessen President & CEO HENNEPIN July 13, 1990 DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS Engineering Division 320 Washington Ave. South Hopkins. Minnesota 55343-8468 Phone:(612)935-3361 Ms. Jeanne A. Mabusth Building and Zoning Administrator City of Orono P. 0. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 Dear Ms. Mabusth: RE: Proposed Plat - The Marsh at Lafayette CSAH 15, Southeast quadrant of Old Beach Road Section 16,17,20 and 21. Township 117, Range 23 Hennepin County Plat No. 1848 Review and Recommendations Minnesota Statutes 505.02 and 505.03, Plats and Surveys, require County review of proposed plats abutting County roads. We reviewed the above plat and make the following comments: - For future Improvements to this segment of CSAH 15 the developer should dedicate an additional 7 feet of right of way along CSAH 15 making the right of way 40 feet from the center of CSAH 15. - For future improvements to this segment of CSAH 19 the ceveloper should dedicate an additional 7 feet of right of way along CSAH 19 making the right of way 40 feet from the center of CSAH 19. - To help limit private driveways unto heavily travelled CSAH 15 and CSAH 19, all driveway access to the county roads must be via Old Beach Road as much as possible. - Any new access to a county road requires an approved Hennepin County entrance permit before beginning any construction. Contact our Operations Division for entrance permit forms. - All proposed construction within County right of way requires an approved utility permit prior to beginning construction. This includes, but is not limited to, drainage and utility construction, trail development, and landscaping. Contact our Operations Division for utility permit forms. HENNEPIN COUNTY an equal oppodunlty employer J. Mabusth July 13, 1990 ’’age 2 - The developer eust restore all areas disturbed during construction within County right of way. Please direct any response or questions to Les Weigelt. S1n«rely, Dennis L. Hansen, P.E. Transportation Planning Engineer 0LH/L0I«;1« > - PAUL SMITH d ASSOCIATESRMi Esttt* AppraiMT A Property Consultant Raaidanpai/Commaroat jL. Jmmnnm H«buath Building & Zoning Administrator City of Orono P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, HN.5S232 August 20>199B THE MARSH AT LAFAYETTE R.E. Fair Markst Valua in pra-davalopmant stags. Dasr Jaanns, As raquastadf I havs mads a dstsrmination aa to ths fair markst valua of tha marsh at Lafaystts dsvslopmsnt in ths prs-dsvslopmant stags* As to my intsrprstationa of the Amsndsd City park dedication ordinance which is as follows: 6X of dsvslopmsnt ■ 1.84 acres Cash squivalsncs is estimated at S136»168 Rsspactfully» Paul J City mith or I-I I ' ■ ! I t f i : ■jr- •rir 1 3 PAi7L SM/rif <6 ASSOCIATES I-RmI Estitt Appraiser & Propprty Consultant Raaidorttiai/'Commarciai TABLE OF CONTENTS LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .i TABLE OF CONTENTS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . AREA LOCA'i ON MAP. . . . . .-. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1 LEGAL DESCRIPTION. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .2 APPRAISAL PROCESS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .3-4 CONCLUSIONS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .5 COMMERCIAL AREA LOCATION .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .6 ORDINANCE #82 PARK DEDICATION. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .7 DEFINITION OF MARKET VALUE. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .® CERTIFICATION AND STATEMENT OF CONDITIONS. . . . . . . . . .8 ; 1 h . i r pf*‘nt c MFM fi ■y;r:i,»t> =ss~h:™t™ frc«l 3; A. ot County %] Section 21, Toyrwhip r “- "S*"" Hill." .nss^r"'‘r’;;■ ,r?oi^:s,"'Uv,';i.'!;:‘'- i^£“Sli.Tr'HTf£;S'"‘- sin5sn6. °Lir ^'T” """°' ■« i,South I in. of^.d Or'sr^^, -3. «^"wi«urwJ oc ritfit .>«t<>. to th» i-« .t th» wMfw-it corrwr of M.d u~*rr™^1 ^ch*ir^;Tiil /‘^'r^TonC . U* 3 to I. pom; N JM.Cr. IT!;, '«rto.r„ ,t r.K^t „^Un . ,uu^r of ?»r rr A'"’"'Go^rnTt iJT ,£_‘ «th th, «wh i.„ „fuawniiait Lot 3, thmc. M>«toriv tc .ctual r«iiit of ‘i'» of Uid f»Tti™un;. u7 '’f JO. T.«vdup ^ •‘"*'.r U*t 4 di.t4>re of 11^' r* **K'^*^» "nmjtc 10 .ocorals •A" thCTK* *«>rth^*’^ r '"‘'^ hrrcitMftrr r»i*rTo.| to 4« f. m ot radii* of' 8M ^ turw to t>« left. Imv,.,. 4 2^1^ fi-rt- ttmrJT -fcfll ^ft<rriv 4ii«« «ai«l crurvr « tltsr;nm'if of *' - 1-- —3® i>»*iirr«s nun*ce4 ’j .vii #1% immt «xnr«r^i. (n^ T;‘ £^££r'r'" f''“-■T'-- : tenij.ut. ^ ■'"■■ "•< *!l livit tort of f<«oir,rrT,t mt 6. S«t|.». .’I. I<»4»h,p n; S;:;, V.?."::^ .Sc .“;’.';.;;:7,“a ■ "‘ •''' ” !•«; Oimo M.rih b9 .Jrnfor, 13 •>. Interwti.*. «ilh thr -r^t l,nr of % tanMoaciibt. h Tract A. R.e.Me,r.l i.iral Ra«i.' r of TItli-*. l6a,4|-io GxM r. rit 4 dKt.iocr of ir .flj toctial* W»«t tu It. I.A 6 ani ifvn- • , Ift I), r» J r» 4i| thp 5iI?*UL 1H»t fiirt of UwrrTtiwK !*it I. Scctlm 70. TuMidiio 11?. lUicc il i»ir« rurthnidrciy of U» tiirtm.tKrlv linp of Blur. h . riMwiC* of P»rh .ni «<«i(tiP44trr|v ol Rrfiairml ljt»| Oiirvrv (A». 1630. ik ft ^ 9 note- limits or riLL MATEdiAj. C The HCMNEP'N CCX^NTl SUB VET data THE aoiociwEi *. ..;.ting arti AS SET rORTM BY THE DEPART FOR EAuAVATION OF TM£ PROF THE ftPPRfilSAL PROCESS In arriving at an titxaation of aarket valut for tht tubjtct proptrty, itrtintnt data Nhich has an influenct on tht valut of tht proptrty, it ^uaulattd froa tht aarktt. This data is thtn analyztd in rtlation to its nflutnct on tht subjtct proptrty in aonttary ttras to tht typical buytr. This malysis involvts thrtt approachts to valut, inhich art tht Dirtct Salts loaparifon Approach, tht Incoat Approach, and tht Cost Approach. All thrtt ipproachas art ustd in this rtport. Tht Oirtct Salts Coaparison Approach is bastd on salts of siailar proptrtits n tht local aarktt. Tht salts pricts of tht coaparablt proptrtits art adjusttd or thfir rtsptctivt difftrtncts froa t\ subjtct in artas such as data of altf location, aga and condition, sizt of iaprovtatnts, and aatnitits. Tht djusted salts pricts art indications at which tht coaparaolts would havt sold ad thty been tssentially siailar to tht subjtct. Tht adjusttd salts pricts act s support and art ustd to deteraint an tstiaatad aarktt valut of tht subjtct (rooerty through reconciliation. This aporoach is tost aoplicable when an idequate aaount of aarket data is available. Insufficient data, incorrect data, r errors in judgaent can liait this approach. The Incoae Approach typically ustd for residential properties is bastd on the ross rent aultiplier. An appropriate gross rent is aultiplied by a gross rent ultiplier to arrive at an estiaate of value. Tne gross rent aultiplier is trived froa recent sales of cotparable properties that were rented at the tiae f sale. By dividing the aonthly unfurnished rent into the sjkle price, a gross ent aultiplier is established. Several gross rent sultipliers fora a range rot whicn an appropriate one is then selected. Estiaated rent for the subject s also derived froa the rents of siailar properties. The incoae approach is onsidered to be a reliable approach wnen an aaequate aaount of rental data is vailable. This approacn can also be usee to estiaate aiainisned utility by pplying the aultiplier to the rent loss aue to the obsolescence. In the Cost Approach, the value of the site is e-*’iaated as if vacant and t^ailable to be put to its highest and best use. This is cone dv the Direct lies Coaparison Approach using recent sales of vacant sites, froa the saae or iailar neighborhoods as the subject. An estiaate is then aade of the ^production cost new or replaceaent cost new of the laproveaents using today’s )sts. Froa this is subtracted as estimate taken froa the aarket of all accrued ipreciation. The indicated value of this approach is the sum of the site plus >i depreciated value of the laproveaents. Due to the difficulty on accurately nessing depreciation, this approach tends to be less reliable in older 'operties and can result in a over or under estiaation of value. The final estiaation of aarket value is reached through the reconciliation of It indicated three approaches. Consideration is given to the reliability of ich approach, ana the quality and quantity of data available. fined in Real Estate Appraisal Terainology (coapiled and edited by Byrl N. lyct Ph.D. fSRPA, copyright 1984, Ballinger Publishing Cotpany, Pages i, 79,122, 132.) as: ■Direct: Sales Coiparison approach-That approach in appraisal analysis which it based cn the proposition that an inforeed purchaser would pay no eore for a property than the cost of acquiring an existing property with the saat utility. This approach is applicable when an active aarket provides sufficient quantities of reliable data which can be verified froi authoritative sources. The direct sales comparison approach is relatively unreliable in an inactive ■arket of sales in estimating the value of properties for which no real comparable sales aata are available. It is also questionable when no sales data cannot be verified with principals to the transaction. Also referred to as the Market comparison or Market Data Approach. " “Income Approach-Gross income (rent) multiplier analysis. That approach in appraisal ^sis which is based upon the proposition that an informed purchaser w. d pay no more for a property thar the cost of obtaining a return (in income or amenities) of the same amount a., embodving the same risk as that involved in the subject property. This approach is applicable when sufficient numbers of comparable properties are rented at the time of sale. The gross income (rent) multiplier approach is not applicable when few or no comparable properties art rented in the competitive market. This aboroach also is ouestionable in aarket situations in which market rentals and sales prices do not bear a constant relationship to each other." "Cost Approach- That approach in appraisal analysis which is based on the proposition that the informed purchaser would pay no more than the cost of producing a substitute property with the same utility as the subject property. It is particularly applicable when the property being appraised involves relatively new improvements which represent the highest and best use of the land or when relatively unique or specialized improvements are located on the site and for which there exist no comparable properties on the market." L ConclUSions t This property has been tax txampt for th® pass 10 y®ars and no knoMn purchas* pric® is r®cord®d. With this in wind it is this ass®ssor* s opinion that all th® r®quir»ni®nt s of ■ark®t valu® oust b® ®stxoat®d fro* th® actual market of siailar prop®rti®s within th® g®n®ral ar®a. The sal®s used ar® considered to b® the best available at this tie®, they are all recent, similar to th® subject, and within th® same competing market. Total Estimated Market value pre-development is «13&,160 of development is 1.84 acres portion of pr.-d.v, 1 op.ent 1. It per acre or £0. 39Q i? fS500* 1113,156. portion of pr.-d.v.lop.ent i. ..ti..t.d It I9C.00 per acre or £.6 IP i? 19300= i34,0i=- I'otal Market value per-deve 1 opment zs estimated at 1136, 160. i% of development « 1.04 acres lesidential sales . 33 acres/ sale price 1139,00c/ !. 3*0 acres/ sale price $100,000/ 14 acres/ sale price $ 77,500/ ledian $5,535 ean $5,500 ange $5,000 to $5,600 . sed Mean at $5,500 per per per acre $5,600 Minnetrista 3/90 acre $5,000 Minnetrista 3/90 acre $5,535 Minnetrista 3/90 ommercial sales * sale price $330,000/ per acre $ 7,057 Rockford 3/90 . 10 acres/ sale price $100,000/ per acre $10,000 Medina 4/90 IhJI price $139,036/ per acre $ 9,935 Medina 4/90 $9,300 Inge $7,057 to $10,000 ^ed Mean at $9,300 L A DRAINAGE. GRADING . a UTILITY PLAN MARSH AT LAFAYETTE 1154 ORONO/MINNETDNKA BEACH.MINNESOTA ',l \ \ ' ^ af ■xv:?irr;£=-v"?!''? ■~f=SSSLT ^^aixas.»mmi_____ ^rs==j:£r*.‘.T^ ,/%. .• /!;/* ' V ^ 47 ~"J3 •'•.'.'III «| 4f* 4i«»I tw. ft 7 e iw . _ **nr, *- ••• -?as \ M' *•!»• !••> MAH .S^'-xSftw \i wuiAii a miiMatf «t»0CMfii «k T^XZ. ZX.'X~ZZ.---------— • ton •«wt- ^ f 9MM« itoWWto M<4 L Jr>C..‘.A.sC2 No. il. S£.= .i5AN C«2 inanC£ AM£NCtNG SECT-CN 1 1 62 CP TMg C«ONO CTY CCrS »E-A'nNG TO •AffK CEOICATTCN AND CASH FC« 0€- V£i,CPM£NT Of TNf C.Ty CoiAtoA 0? r^# ef Orano o<ts»^ AS ?suows; Section 1. Secr.ofl n.62 o( '^e Crono ON Coo# * nofcov Nwnood aofl :rm autrvtt !»t Kftoouts ter earn moicanon t*«a is n*f»ey Seci«n 2. SACtion 11,62. PtsycrounSS AoO Coon Smc* A. UAf^s loe f Mto»*e u»«. Pufstioni to Mwv 'lesou StAJuioA, ;1389), Scstion 462.254. SU53 23. tn* Crty rocun’M mi Dorsons. ce«W’ raiiona or ott^er Imsm eni;h«s tnsi uioonnoo iv)« wttft tno City o» Crono aa a oforoovBSrto to aeorova* oi a toi onnmort. fmai o*ai. or ao- woioomoni of any iar»« areviowaiy ounoeO &y pta:. (not os and Douncs. or any oiw tnoani. mwat csw'voy to tno Crv or oooicato to no r- > kc. for uso AS DOTAJ OlOvdrounas. traua or ooon ssaeo a onro" oorsontaoo ot tno tana 3o* r>q piattoo or covoiccoa as ’•o'tnaftor soect- • cc. saiO cc-.c-s :o ae isc'o»fC 5v 2.fv •» 10%. tno'oc-' 'fte si.aa‘*'Of' $“a» a: -"o oo- :.a.n S’ no C-t* cav ;c ■.-o 2-:^ 'or ja r. ;to ac3u.i‘i>on. aovoxcnon; c' -oi.-iorarict 3-oi.c par AS. 5.av;'0w(tcs. •ra.is *01 ares or oson ssacos arc coc: 'otirowen: connoc ;.a.n rrio ■a'sc c'Ovourw accuiroa lorsuci 5>0!1C rurpesos ar oS'ji»aiont anour’t .n eaan sasoa w3on •~e ’a' “".ano! naiuo s‘ no ana ;; 3t 30V0IC50C *'0 ' Om 0( JOn" SutiOn cai.* 0' lana or anv co.-no'naiiW’ :norec( sf-ai! ?« cot coc r>' ’“0 2 fv Cotiirc: sasoc -oct *t*o3 ana zontcrtr.arce •in t.to CO'“:ro''of*- si»o ®'an 2 Oodicatod Lane Booutromonta anv arc :c 50 cecicatec as a '•tc-'iro'nen: cf nn soct.c." srtaii 30 roaa3."a3iv asactao-o ‘O' '.no asovo cuoiic swrrsses -ictors uses m ovaiw a:ir>5 -no aaesuaev o’ srcooaec oecicaioO a'oaa jna« ■'•etuao sue snaot ;c50?ris.ny, oramajof. c«oi05y :.'oo :avO' access ana :o- catioc. 2 Land Ooeication Minintum Area. SuO- Ci*>oo'S s*tAi' ce rooi-iroc to cec.ca’O to *no 2.:r 'or catas cav2'co.'“CS '■ans csen scaccs a'.a onof susnc ryreoses as a mmimun tr.ai cerce-taao o' ?'osi la.'C area, or otne- swc.n anoun: as nay re cete'-'nes 5v tno C.ty Cowncii as sot 'orr.n co o*» ' ' ®0SiConiiai/A5.'ic«(tj'ai.'Mutf'.sie ^osoen* ;.A 2o(WC Lana ;«o caiion recto 'O-c-t o' 3 se'cent o' no .arc 3on5 ptattoG st.3a'»iOoa or oitsnrs ‘Of ;2: Comnorciai/ineustnai Zoned Land. OoaiCJtoa rooutfomont ot 8 oorconi Of no iacic 3oing piattoa suoanrooa or owstsnB tot of record. 0 Coon Contribution in Uow of Unas- in t.ncso mrances wnoro a casn con incut ion IS 10 DC maoo oy iNo suoanneor m sou o< a con- vovanco or aoOicaiiort of land, tn# casn con- srouiion to Po comnpuiod snail Co eounaiont 10 tno lair mar«ot vaoio of t.no oourvaiont un- aovoioood lard tnal wowid etno(n*rao fta*o coon convoyed or aodicaioa,- The C.fy snafl ac count lor suen funos to a soocJU lund rtanod Pan« Oooicaiion Funds £. Fair Marhot Value of Unoa. "For Mar- hot Value ■ lor ourpoaos cl tfvi Cooe snail Co tno land pro-aovoioomoni vauo lo eo aoior- mmod Cy tno C.ty Council as of tno wno pf oroiiminary put appucaiio.. -i accaroanco wiift tno fouowms: (1 1 Tho C.ty Assessor snail rocominond lo tno G.:v —.w.nc.1 as lo t.-e a-rtno ww attor eanaunanon oirtn tno suocfv.dor. ,21 If ocroomoni la not roacnod Oorwoon tnoC.ty *iti-------»>d auodrndcr. :non tno fa*r nw-Mt vohio mAd CO eotorrmooO *n accoroaneo witn tno toilowms: (a) Fair mantof vsjuo aa ooiormmod Ov mo C.ty CouneJ Cosod upon a eurroni apcra.sai atomittod to mo C.ty cy tno aucdivioor. at nn osponso. Tho ascratsai anou bo mace ov ab- prMors wTo are approved ■•nomoo.'S sf SSSA or .MAI. or oauivMoni root osiaio socionos. (01 If tho C.ty disoutoa sucn acpraisal amounts. « m»y ootam an acsracsai of tno property Dy a cuaofwd roai ostaia aopratsor •men tno cty Council saioets ano •rwen ao- erataal may oo accootod Oy tno C-fy aa Oemg an aceursio aeoraisai at fair marnot vatuo. Tno c3s: cl tno acsfAsai Atoii Oo pme oy tno suo- Oivtdor :ci The suOdivioof may appeal anv iirsai co- termination of tmr maraot vomo as crovidod Oy Mmnosota Stafvita Section 462.361 .31 Tno eoiormnoiion of fair marAOt vaiuo of mo unaovoiopod land Oy tno C-ty Assessor. C-iy Council or ootidnaio aooraisora snail DO' coiormmod as of mo time of proiiminatv swo- c.vision ooorovoi IS srantod as tong as more >• ‘nai oiat aoorovai entnin tno time umiti as sol •erm m tnis cnseior The time of s’oiimmarv 5:at approval ;a utdizec oosause *no nature of mo swPO «s»on ti preoaco oeousron ct sze sno »a .0 a.-C ztno' o ovsnt actors j e oo»r' .' an eitonsion ct mo t:mo rir.its <n tn s enactor s ap.-ro»od Pv 'no C.tv Ccunc;; 'no •air mar«0T va -o s.nan so ooiorm.noc aa s* mo time ot tno AOorovai ot tnai e«.ona>on in so- ■ormimnj mo tair mar«ot va*uo as of '.:mo ot ;-0..m nA-v p.a: icc^-cat.on. o- ;po eifonsio-' ■*o'oo', 'nt tac'O'S to uo mc-ucoc n mo ana" .ss s.“.a: ■r'.c:-=e anv and a.i tacto'l -nen are je.nerai'v accepted ana -sec 5* acc'cvoa momoofs Of SF=A or MA, or ocu.vaie'^t 'es es- 'ate acpraiSA see et es 4; Noiwmsianoing tno aoovo n no event $na.i tno OAJn ecntncui'on cor let 50 'tss man $*;::: co’ <ot or S3:c ;o sor o»o.’ n; --n - Covoiopmoni of Und Froviouaiy F'ot- tod. f *no and nas ai/eaov coon provious.v suoo:vcoo ano a too nod not soon cfev-ous»v >n* 'oouiromontt of mis 0>vt5'0n snati as- 5v a' mo "mo ot tno .ssuanco of a ouuc.-n; so'- •Tit ‘or mo onmarv sm.-cturo C Future SuOdivieion. anv :ano •"cn • ‘urmor iucoivcoo oiviood or roosttod or ao- -nod 'or S-C.n s-SSOSuort to May ' ' 59C. snail SO SuS'Oc: to tno rocuiromonia of fno o'- S.narct men <n otter: crncemm; see caron of iAnd tor suOiic 5»rpos#s. and c'ec.t sna.i so given tor anv cnar^es proviouarv ..mposop -son mat .ano i* t.no s-coivoor can crovo :.--at 'oos •ore c'oviouiv SAO in no event snsi mo -».ty uaoio tar anv savmont wnic-n may so cjo oocauso C a s-ssocuont roouction in tno ap plication po'centago ot lano or ocuivsont ,nv - hoi vaiuo U1 earn to o* cooicaiod. H. Adminiatroiiyo Frocoduroo. Tno C.ty Council snail ostasusn sucn jcmioistraiivo procoouroass tnov may doom nocoasary or ao- preonato to imoiomoni tno proviaiona of t.nii section ot tno coot. t 4 Section 3 ■ This ordinance sruil Nave lull force and of- toct uo»t ita CAssapo and suoiicanon Ouaod Dv tno Counoi of tno Ciy of Ofono Monnoom Cjunty. Minnesota. tNs 9tn flay of Acni 1930. ; Lames F. Graooa, Mayor | Aiiotr: Ooroiny M. Maifm. Gty Cor* • _ . - • JL. • o' ./•• • (Pi-Ousnud tn Tho Ua*r and Pioneer AonI 30. 199CI 0^'u OEmmON OF MARKET N ALL'E; The mo»i probeble price which • propenjr iheuM hnnp in ■ competitive ind open wiet Mttfer afl comthiom lepnikiie to a (air tate. ihe buyer and Kltef. each acnn| prudently, knowtedpeabiy and anummp «e prtee n not affected by undue uimuiua. Impiicii in ihia dcluMion ii the consummation of a sale as of a specified date •wf the passtnp ^ mic from lefler to buyer under conditions whereby (I) buver and teller arc lypicalty motivaied; (2| btuh paniei are well informed or well advised, and each acnn| in what he considers hit own best inierm: 13) a reasonable lime IS allowed (or etpoaure in the open market; |4) payment it nude m lemn of cash in U.S. dollars or in terms of hnancial arronpementt comparable Iheieia; and iS» the price represents the normal considersuon for the property sold unaffected by special or creative financing or sales cencetsioni* granted by anyone sttocisied with the sale. •Adjostme ms to the comparablet must be wade for special or creative financin| or sales enneessums. No adjustments ate narcssary for these costs which arc normally paid by sellers as a result of triidition or law m a market area; thew costs are readily idemniabic since the seller pays these costs m virtually alt sales transactions. Special nr creat vc linancinp adjustmems fee to the comparable property by comparisons to hnancing terms olfcrcd by a third party Mtsi.tuuonal lender that is not already involved in the property or transaction. Any adjustment shouM nut be calculated tm a mechanical dollar lie doflar COM of the hnaoeinf or concession hut the dollar ameont of any ad.iusimem should appmsimaie the irwrsci s rcaciion M the Anancinf or concessions based on the appraiser's judgment. CERTIFICATION AND STATEMENT OF UMITINC CONDITIONS CERTIFICATION: The Appraiiei ccrurici snd sgreei that; I. The Appraiser has no ptemm or contemplated future interest in the property apprsiied: snd ntUher the employment to tMht the spprsissE nor the compensation for It. is contin|cni upon the spprsiMd vsloe of the propeny. 2* The Apprstser hat no personal mteresi in or bias with respect to the luhjcci mttier of Ihe spprsttal report or the partlch pants to the sale.The “Estunsic of Msiket Value” in ihc spprsttal report it not bat t whole or in psn upon the race, eolot, or natiortal origin of the prospective owners or occupants of the propeny spprtiis , or upon Ihe race, color or nsuonsi ertgin of Ihi present owners or occupants of the properties in Ihe vicinity of ilie properly appraised. 3. The Appraiser hei personally mtpecitd the property, both inside snd out. and hsi made sn taicrior inipceiion of all comparable tales listed m Ihc report. To the best of the Appraiur'i hnowltd|e snd belief, all stsiemenii and inlormsiion m li*** report are true and concci, and the Appraiser hei not knowingly wiihiield any ii|niricani uiformtiion. ■ 4. ^il contingent snd limiting conduioni are contained herein (imposed by the terms of the assignment or by the under* signed afTccting the snelyMi, opuiiont, snd eonclusioni contained in Ihe report). 3. This apprsiisl report has been made in conformity with snd u subicct to the requitementt of the Code of Frofeuions) Ethics and Standards of Frofcnionsi Conduct of the spprsiui or|tnizaiioni with wruch the Appraiser is ifTihaitd. A. All eoncliuioai and opinions concerning the real ttiitc that are set forth m the apprsiul report were picpvcd by the Appraiser whoee signature cppceri on the eppreiwi report, unless indicated as “Review Appraiser.” No chengt of any iiem in the apprsiul report thtll be made by snyene other then the Appratset, snd the Apprtiur mail have no reiponubiliiy for any ivch uiMuthorued change. CONTTNCENT AND LIMITINC CONDITIONS- The ecrtirictiion of the Appraiser ippeirmi m the apprsiul report is tubieei to the following condiiioni and to such other ipccific and limiting conduioni at sic ui forth by the Apprsiur m the report. 1. The Appraiwt auumci no rcip«ntibiiii> tot miiieri of s tcgel nature i(feciin| the property tpprsiwd or the iiiie ineie- to, nor does the Apprsiur render any opinion si lo the title, which u assumed to be good snd maikttabic. The property is appraiwd at though under tctpeniibic ownership 2. Any sketch in the lepori may mow ippioximait dimenstons snd is included to tsiisi the reader in vtiuiiixing Ihe prop^ erty. The Appraiut has made no survey of the property. 3. The Apprsiur it not requited to give testimony or eppcsi in court bcksuu of having made me appraiu! with le'eien't to the property m quctiion. unitts arrangemcnii have been previoutly made therefoi. 4. Any distribution of the valuation In the report between land and tmprovcmcnit applies only under the eiiiuni program of utiUzition. The aeparate valuations foi land and building mutt not be uud in conjunction with any other appraiui and art mvtlid if so uud. 5. The Appraiut istumcs that there ire no hidden or unsppsicnt conduioni of the property, subsoil, oi mueiurei. wruch would tender it rreort or lets vslusbie. The Apprsiur issumts no responsibiiuy for luch conditions, oi for tnginttiing which might be required to discover such fictott. 6. Information, titunsics. and opuuoni fumimed to the Appisiur. snd comemed in the report, were obtained ftom sources considered reliable and believed to oa iiut snd coiicct. Howcvei. no lespontibiliiy (or accuracy of such iitms furnished i^c Appriiut can be aitumed by the Appisiui. 7. Discloiurt of Ihc contents of the apprsiul report is governed by Ihc Bylaws and Rtgulsiioni of the professional ipprsiul organiuiions with which the Appraiser is sfniiaitd. I. Neither all, nor any pan of the content of the report, or copy thritof (including conclusions is to the property value, the Identity of the Appraiut, piofesstonai designations, itfctcncc :o any professional appraiui orgaruistiont, or the Turn with which Uu Apprsiur is connected), mall be used for any purposes by anyone but the client ipecincd in Ihc report, the borrower If appraisal fee paid by umc. the motigigec or its successors and suignt, mortgage insurers, consuiianii. ptofestionsl apprsiul otgtniuitont. sny siaic or federally approved rmanctsl insiiiuiion. any depeiinicni. ageacy, or miitumentaliiy of Ihe United Sieics or any itaic or the Oiiiricl of Columbia, without the picvious wniicn conuni of the Appraiui: not shell it be conveyed by anyone to the public through advertising, public rcisiions. news, ules, or other media, without the wiiiien conuni and approval of the Appraiui. . 9. On all apprsiuls, subject to uilsfsciory completion, rrpaiii. oi elieiaiions. Ihe eppteiul icpori and value conclusion tic contingent upon completion of the impiovememt in i woikmsniike minnei. 0- ... •wool awi ee B/M s5SI ifli wmmrn t..i r-'^-;." ;> ''i'S.‘»« g^ono rr4 P 4 . •■ •.*’•■ Jfi ^ af t! :, 5s^v ' f,rf ■* ■- ■- ■• • ■^ r'^’' C ■ ■f'*,VVr -“Wa A-^rh* .? mK- ■' S A • >^A-i ' :-^’r. rr ' •A:'- / ;*■ . • •'■>,“. . . :t - vi . A INNOVATIVE MICROGRAPHICS DUE TO THE POOR CONDITION OF THE PRECEEDING DOCUMENT WE CANNOT PRODUCE AN ACCEPTABLE MICROFILM IMAGE. Tos Mayor Grabek & Orono Council Members City Administrator Bernhardson From: Michael P. Gaffron, Asst Planning & Zoning Administrator Date: October 5, 1990 Subject: #1579 Garry & Marie Everson, 4755 North Shore Drive - After-the-fact Variance - Denial Resolution - Revised Proposal List of Exhibits Exhibit A - Survey with Revised Proposal Exhibit B - Denial Resolution Exhibit C - Notice of Council Action 9/24/90 Exhibit D - Memo & Exhibits of 9/17/90 Discussion - At your September 24th meeting. Council voted 4-0 to conceptual ■> y deny the after-the-fact variances to allow expansion of the deck on the west end of this property. Council indicated that this conceptual denial would require that the deck be converted back to its original dimensions. Council also indicated to the applicanr that because this was a conceptual denial, that applicant would Tave the ability to pre^'ent a revised proposal before final action. Applicants are proposing two revisions which they have discussed with staff (see Exhibit A). Applicants would remove all portions of deck located over the property line and less than 10' from the property line. They would also agree to remove approximately 664 s.f. of crushed rock hardcover area between the house and road, replacing this with sod so that it no longer is hardcover. This would leave a deck area of approximately 398 s.f. plus the stairway, and coupled with the 664 s.f. crushed rock conversion to sodded area reduces hardcover to 5,142 s.f. (49.9%) as compared to the currently existing 57.3% or the pre existing 54.7%. As a comparison, Walter Krahl next door, the neighbor who shares the driveway, was allowed 51.6% 75-250* hardcover to construct additions. Staff Recommendation The denial resolution attached requires that the applicants remove all portions of new deck that exceed the pre-existing 13'xl8' deck/stairway, and grants after-the-fact variances to hardcover and average setback to allow replacement in kind of the pre-existing deck and stairway, continuing the hardcover at its pre-existing 54.7%. Council has the following options: Zoning File #1579 October 5, 1990 Page 2 of 2 1. Adopt the denial resolution as drafted, which merely grants the necessary variances to replace in > ir' the pre existing deck and stairway. 2. Conceptually approval applicant's reviseu proposal, leaving some of the expanded deck areas in place along with partial deck removal and crushed rock hardcover removal for a final hardcover of 49.9%. 3. Some combination of the above. 4. Other. / Prepared for •£VtKSON Kt'ilpeiviOt . \ I /n* <c^ A RESOLUTION DENYING AFTER-THE-FACT VARIANCES TO MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 10.22, SUBDIVISIONS 1 & 2 AND SECTION 10.24, SUBDIVISION 5 (B) FILE #1579 WHEREAS, the City of Orono is a municipal corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of Minnesota; and WHEREAS, pursuant to State Statute 412 et. seq. and 462 et. seq., the City Council of the City of Orono has adopted a community management plan and zoning regulations for the protection of the public health, safety and general welfare; and WHEREAS, Garry & Marie Everson (hereinafter "the applicants") are the owners of the property located at 4755 North Shore Drive within the City of Orono (hereinafter "the City") and legally described as follows: The southeasterly one-half of Lot 7, and Lots 5 and 6, Bergquist & Wicklunds Parle, ."ding to the recorded plat thereof, Hennepin County, Minnesota (hereinafter "the property"); and WHEREAS, the applicants have applied to the City of Orono for variances seeking after-the-fact approval for construction of a deck located lakeward of the defined average lakeshore setback line where no such encroachment is normally allowed per Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.22, Subdivision 1 (B), such structure being located less than the 10' side yard setback required for such structures per Section 10.24, Subdivision 5 (B), and such structure increasing hardcover in the 75-250' lakeshore setback zone in excess of the 25% normally allowed in that zone per Section 10.22, Subdivision 2; and WHEREAS, the City Council has reviewed the application; the recommendations of the staff and Planning Commission, and the comments and written statements s’ bmitted by the applicants. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of Orono, Minnesota hereby denies the after-the-fact application for expansion of the pre-existing deck, as described above based upon one or more of the following findings of fact concerning this property : Page 1 of 7 FINDINGS 1. The property is located in the LR-IB Single Family Lakeshore Zoning District, and consists of 20,344 s.f. or 0.47 acres. The Zoning District requires 43,560 s.f. or 1.0 acres in area. 2. In 1988 the applicants determined that the existing deck at the southwest corner of their residence was in poor condition and they commenced to replace that deck. The original deck of approximately 13' x 18' (234 s.f.) was not only replaced, but was expanded to a deck area of 502 s.f. Construction or reconstruction of decks requires a building permit. The property owners did not apply for nor obtain a building permit prior to deck construction. 3. Subsequent inspection of the property by the building inspector verified in October 1988 that the deck was entirely new construction and not only required a building permit but appeared to be in violation of the hardcover, setback, and average setback ordinances of the City. 4. The property owners were advised of the building permit and zoning code requirements, and after an extended peric 3 of time provided sufficient survey and hardcover calculation data confirming that violations of the hardcover, average setback, and side yard setback ordinances had occurred. Rather than removing the offending structures, the applicants applied for variances after-the-fact to allow the new deck to remain as constructed. 5. The new deck encroaches 10' past the average lakeshore setback line where no encroachment is normally allowed per Zoning Code Section 10.22, Subdivision 1 (B). The original deck had been apparently constructed prior to adoption of the average setback ordinance, and had encroached 4' past the average lakeshore setback line. 6. Orono Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.22, Subdivision 2 limits the percentages of hard surface allowed in various zones along the lakeshore. In the 75-250' lakeshore setback zone, hardcover is limited to 25% of that zone for residential properties in lakeshore zoning districts. Page 2 of 7 Hardcover existing on the property prior to construction of the new deck was calculated by City staff at 5,638 s.f. or 54.7% of the 75-250' zone, where only 2,577 s.f. or 25% hardcover would normally be allowed. The additional deck area constructed in 1988 increased the 75-250' zone hardcover to 57.3% (5,910 s.f.). Both the pre-existing and post construction hardcover in the 75-250' zone greatly exceeds the hardcover limitations imposed by Section 10.22, Subdivision 2. 7. Orono Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.24, Subdivision 5 (B) requires maintenance of a 10' side yard adjacent to another lot. The deck constructed in 1988 is sufficiently elevated above grade so as to require a railing, and therefore that deck is considered an encroachment into the required side yard. In fact, the Certificate of Survey provided by the applicant indicates that the deck is constructed across the lot line onto the neighboring property. 8. At their regular meeting of August 20, 1990, the Orono Planning Commission reviewed the request for after-the-fact variances to allow the offending deck structure to remain, and on a vote of 4 in favor, 1 against, recommended denial of variances for hardcover, side setback, and average setback, finding that no hardship was given to justify the excessive hardcover associated with the deck additions, and no reasonable justification was provided for the granting of a side setback variance. The Planning Commission recommended that the decks be cut back to the pre-existing 18' X 13' dimensions. The minority opinion was that required deck removals should not be that extensive. 9. At their regular meeting of September 24, 1990, the City Council of the City of Orono voted 4 in favor, 0 against, to conceptually deny the requested after-the-fact variances per the recommendation of the Planning Commission and directed City staff to prepare a resolution of denial. 10. The City Council finds that the applicant has not demonstrated that strict enforcement of the literal provisions of the Zoning Code would cause undue hardship because of circumstances unique to the property, as follows: Page 3 of 7 a) The property in question can be put to a reasonable use i^der conditions allowed by the Zoning Code. b) The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances created by the landowner, i.e. if the property owner had applied for a permit prior to the reconstruction and expansion of the deck, he would have been advised of the side setback requirements and would have likely avoided the need for a side setback variance. However, replacement of the existing deck in kind would have required a hardcover and average setback variance regardless. c) The special conditions of the Zoning Code applying to the deck structure and to this property in general are not peculiar to this property but apply to all residential lakeshore properties within the City. d) The granting of the application for the expansion of the deck is not necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right of the applicants. Expansion of the deck areas across the property line with a further encroachment into the average lakeshore setback and increased hardcover from the pre-existing situation, place this application in a different light than would mere replacement in kind of a pre-existing deck. e) Granting of variances for the deck expansion will serve merely as a convenience to the applicant and are not necessary to alleviate a demonstrable hardship or difficulty. FURTHERMORE BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of Orono hereby grants after-the-fact variances for hardcover and average lakeshore setback to allow the reconstruction in kind of the pre-existing 13' x 18* deck plus a m-^ximum 4' wide stairway to grade, subject to the following conditions; 1. Applicants shall pay to the City an after-the-fact investigation fee in the amount of $175.00 as provided in City Council Resolution #1306. Page 4 of 7 r 2. Applicants shall obtain an after-the-fact building permit for the 13' x 18' deck and 4' wide stairway to grade. 3. Applicants shall within 60 days of the date of this resolution remove all portions of deck in excess of the 13' X 18' section plus the 4' stairway, and further, the applicants shall bring the remaining deck into compliance with all building code requirements as may be required by the Orono Building Inspector. 4. Hardcover on the property in the 75-250' zone shall not exceed 54.7% (5,638 s.f.) as shown on the survey and hardcover calculation worksheet on Page 6 of this resolution. The current property owners and all future owners of this property are placed on notice that hardcover shall not be increased above the currently approved level and any proposed improvements of this property that will result in additional hardcover must be approved by the City. Such approval may result in a requirement for concurrent equivalent or greater removals of existing hardcover. All existing hardcover scheduled for removal as a condition of this resolution must be removed prior to the 60 day deadline imposed by the conditions of this resolution. 5. Violation of or non-compliance with any of the terms and conditions of this after-the-fact partial variance approval shall constitute a violation of the Zoning Code, shall automatically terminate any authority granted herein, and shall be punishable as a misdemeanor. 6. The undersigned applicant has read, understood and hereby agrees to the terms of this resolution and on behalf of himself, his heirs, successor and assigns, hereby agrees to the recording of this resolution in the chain of title of the property. Page 5 of 7 Adopted by the Orono City Council on this 8th day of October, 1990. ATTEST; Theresa L. Naab Deputy Clerk Edward J. Callahan, Jr, Acting Mayor Property Owner(s) STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this 8th day of October, 1990, by Edward J. Callahan, Jr. & Theresa L. Naab, Acting Mayor & Deputy Clerk of the City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City. Notary Public My Commission Expires Page 7 of 7 CITY OP ORONO P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 473-7357 /APPLICATION NO. 1579 NOTICE OP COUNCIL ACTION Date of Notice: 9/26/90 COPIES:TO: Garry & Marie Everson 4755 North Shore Drive Mound, MN 55364 TYPE OP /APPLICATION: Variance DATE OP .MEETING: September 24, 1990 VOTE: 4 For 0 Against COUNCIL ACTION - MOTION: Council voted to conceptually deny the request, directing staff to draft a resolution for the next meeting. Council indicated to applicants that if a revised plan is prjpojed in a timely manner, it could be considered prior to final Council ac*ion. Please contact staff at 473-7357 if you wish to discuss your op Jons. Your next Council meeting is scheudled for Monday, October 8, 1990, 7:00 p.m. at the Orono Council Chambers. 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. To: Mayor Grabek & Orono Council Members City Administrator Bernhardson From: Michael P. Gaffron, Asst Planning & Zoning Administrator Date: September 17, 1990 Subject: ^1579 Garry & Marie Everson, 4755 North Shore Drive - After-the-Fact Variance Zoning District - LR-IB, Single family lakeshore residential, 1 acre, sewered Application - Request for after-the-fact hardcover and average setback variances for decks constructed without a permit. List of Exhibits Exhibit A - Planning Commission Action Notice 8/24/90 Exhibit B - Applicants Letter to Council 9/17/90 Exhibit C - Memo & Exhibits of 8/17/90 Discussion Please review the memo and exhibits of August 17, 1990^ and the applicants letter of September 17, 1990. Briefly, the applicants are requesting after-the-fact approval for a hardcover variance and average lakeshore setback variance for decks which were constructed without a [.ermit in 1988. The August 17th memo details the history of this application. Applicants have submitted a chronology from their point of view. The pre-existing deck on the property was 230 s.f. The currently existing deck is 502 s.f. Pre-existing 75-250' hardcover was 54.7% (5638 s.f.). Currently existing 75-250' hardcover is 57.3% (5910 s.f.). If the crushed rock without plastic is excluded per applicants letter, existing and current 75-250' hardcover is 4974 s.f. (48.2%) and 5246 s.f. (50.9%) respectively. Planning Commission Recommendation The Planning Commission reviewed the application on August 20, 1990 and voted 4 to 1 to recommend denial for the following reasons: 1. No hardship was found to justify the excessive hardcover associated with the deck additions. 2. No reasonable justification presented for granting a side setback variance, noting that the deck a^ onstructed is over the property line into the neighbor's property. Zoning File 1579 September 17, 1990 Page 2 Planning Commission did not consider the average lakeshore setback encroachment a significant issue because no neighboring property owners views of the lake are diminished. Planning Commission recommended that the decks be cut back to the pre existing 18' X 13' dimension. The miniority Planning Commission opinion (Commissioner Rowlette) was that the required deck removals should not be as extensive as recommended by the majority. Note that applicants were scheduled for a court appearance regarding the violation tag, on September 19, 1990. No word on the results has been received as of this writing. Staff Recommendation Staff would concur with the Planning Commission recommendation. Because the Planning Commission recommendation is essentially for a full denial of the variance request, with restoration, staff has not drafted a resolution pending Council's conceptual action. Council has the following options: 1. Direct staff to draft a resolution for denial, for adoption at your next meeting. 2. Conceptually grant partial approval, directing staff to draft a resolution reflecting your action. 3. Conceptually approve the decks as constructed, directing staff to draft a resolution of approval. 4.Otner. ^ mV CITY OP ORONO P. O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 473-7357 ZONING FILE #1579 NOTICE OP PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION Date of Notice: 08/24/90 TO: Garry & Marie Everson 4755 North Shore Drive Mound, MN 55364 COPIES TO: TYPE OP APPLICATION: Variance DATE OP MEETING: August 20, 1990 VOTE: 4 For 1 Against Planning Com; dsslon re<-nmmends the following: Denial for reasons noted below NOTES AND SPECIAL CONDITIONS: Planning Conunission recommended denial based on finding no hardship to justify the excessive hardcover associated with the deck additions, and no reasonable justification for granting a side setback variance. Average lakeshore setback ercroachment was not considered a significant issue in this case relative to any neighbor's views of the lake being dininished. Planning Commission recommended that the decks be cut back to the pre existing 18' X 13' dimension. The minority opinion was that required deck removals should not be that drastic. Applicant's next sch« Monday, September 24, 1990: If you desire certified minutes, they are available f. by the Planning Cemnii «;-.ion. meeting is confirmed as City Council on ng starts at 7:00 p.m. »s of the official Planning Commission e City Clerk after review and approval Any additional information you wish to have reviewed by this City Council should be Svibm. tted to the attention of Mike Gaffron by September 14, 1990. September 17, 1990 TO: ORONO CITY COUNCIL RE: OBJECTION TO PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION 8/24/90 iQisso Dear Members of the Council: We wish to object to the Planning Commission Action 8/24/90 regarding removal of our deck. Enclosed is a Chronology of Events which the Planning Commission refused to read because we didn't submit it in advance of the meeting. Our hardcover calculations are misleading. The reason we have such a large driveway is because we must share it with our neighbors to allow them access ttheir house, and we should not be penalized for this. The 664 square feet area adjacent to the house entitled "crushed rock" should be excluded from hardcover calculation because it no longer has plastic underneath and grows weeds. The length of time taken to resolve this ratter has not been entirely our fault as evidenced by the enclosed Chronology If we are required to reduce deck to original size, we will be required to move st^os back to area against house under eve where they will be wciter and ice covered again, which is the reason why we moved them. The area where t.he deck extends over the lot line is a joint or common area with our neighbors where we put our garbage cans, and they have no objection to this. Garry & Marie Everson 4755 North Shore Drive Orono, Minnesota 55364 Enclosures: Chronology Certificate of Survey cc: Mike Gaffron CHRONOLOGY OF EVENTS - DECK PERMIT Fall 38 10/21/88 10/28/88 10/31/88 11/3/88 11/1S-/88 11/29/88 12/15/38 12/30/88 2/2/89 Fall 89 Feb 90 2/27/90 Started replacing boards on rotten deck. As it progressed, entire deck was done because all v;ood rotten Letter from City - They wart permit by 10/31 Sent letter to City stating we only replaced the existing deck. Letter from City - permit required Called to ask if plans required. They will com.e out and do an inspection Note left by i.nspector - v;ant permit Permit application dclive ’'cd to City (they clai". -.:.ev' didn't get this) Letter from. City -* v.'ant permit Another cc; • of pormit to City (they later claimed at meeting 3/"0 hey never cot second permit application b:t i.en found a cc -ated 11/29/83 by us and rarted date rec'd lit/30/83 Leti- from Citv - the\ .ow want Certificate of Surv-" ' Hat' r Calculation. Called ne ■ ioing survey next door and tl- er $2,000 aC.* i-U. acot - fo- failure to apply for permit, -edale Court 3 times to trv to take ticket and were told nvi'^ter dropped. one on record. Orono Police came to hom.e with arrest warrant for failure to pay ticket. Police officer determin 1 the reason Ridgedale couldn't find the ticket was because City spelled name wrong. Iverson instead of Everson. Paid ticket rather than argue any further and thought matter settled.UT'd. vn! ' ^->0 Letter from Oronc sttting still want application (now clai:a they don't have' and giving deadline of March 6 (note 7 dayi after date . ’-ter typed which was received March 3) . Callea ^..yle Oman and he agreed to meeting >t City 3/16/90 3/16/90 3/16/90 4/12/90 4/12/90 4/18/90 Meeting with Lyle Oman and Jeanne Mabusth at City Hall. They will want Survey and said they never received permit application. They looked further and found permit application dated November 1988. We argued that we did not feel we should be required to bear the expense of survey but reluctantly agreed to have it done. Called All Metro Survey. They will do estimate on cost of survey. Called Gronseth in Long Lake who agreed to look at property and call me back Should take 2-3 weeks. Called All Metro. They needed further information of legal description, etc (provided) and will go ahead and do the survey in next couple of weeks. Called City Inspector Oman. He is on vacation until near end of month. Asked receptionist to pull our file and advise if there was any required compliance date. She couldn't find the file. I advised that: survey was underway and asked her to please note for their records and to have the person in charge during Mr. Oman's absendle call me back that afternoon, since he was busy. No return phone call from City that afternoon or any subsequent time. Received a Complaint from Ridgedale Court for building without a permit with a Court date scheduled 5/8/90 Prepared for CERTIF ICATE OF SURVE y II ||ij EveRsoN REsiprMce I: I' SV \ ^ ■ " V HARDCCNER atCULATlONSi A/. (Are«\ in tone HAMCewetZOti£ ^fEA ^ LEGAL DL’SCR 1PTION ; T[ie southeasterly One-haif of Lot 7, and Lots 5 and 6, Block 6, BEHGQUIST AND WICK LUND'S PARK, accordinq to ».r)r« recorded plat thereof, lknii<*- f)in County, Minnesota. O’- 15' 10,035 4^0 4% Cov«ra<5« 10,^09 5150 %Vo OM^r.^r. GENERAL NOTES o Denotes iron mofiumeni * Denotes cross chiseled in concrete * 939 .7 Denotes existing spot elevation 193 9] Denotes proposed spot elevotion <---------- Denotes surface drainage Proposed top of foundation elevation ^ Proposed bosement floor elevation = Proposed garage floor elevation = benchmark : Dashed contour lines denotes proposed features Solid contour lines denotes existing features ALL-METRO IlAND survey ors" 2340 Daniels Street I nnn I ukA MjurmA«£djnLJSSLi5JEL^ I hireby ctflify Uiot tttn turvay, plon <M raport wo» prapurad by m# jiidrir my direct sopcrvinon and inol I om o duly Ragiytcrad Land Survayor undar tht la<*t pf fha Stole of Minnesota )/. /liAsnJ scall I"-. JO' POOK u PAGE n To: Planning Commission Chairman Kelley Orono Planning Commission Members City Administrator Eernhardson From: Michael P. Gaffron, Asst Planning & Zoning Administrator Date: August 17, 1990 Subject: #1579 Garry & Marie Everson, 4755 North Shore Drive - After-the-Fact Variance - Public Hearing Zoning District - LR-lB, Single family lakeshore residential, 1 acre, sewered Application - Request for after-the-fact variance for decks constructed without a permit. List of Exhibits Exhibit A - Application Exhibit B - Plat Map Exhibit C - Property Owners List Exhibit D - Survey Exhibit E - Staff Memos of 5/18/90 from Gaffron and Oman Exhibit F - Construction Plans Exhibit G - Hardcover Calculations by Applicant's Surveyor Exhibit H - Copy of Assessor's Record RE: Pre-existing Deck Exhibit I - -A-yr-' Photo Exhibit J - Documentation of City Action Regarding Deck Pertinent Pacts - 1. In October 1988 the Inspections Department observed a new deck constructed at the applicant's residence and subsequently sent a letter notifying the property owner that a permit was required. Subsequent discussion with the property owner and a site ir.-^, action by the Building Inspector found that the deck was all row construction. The applicants submitted an incomplete building permit application on December 30, 1988, they were advised to provide the survey and hardcover calculations necessary to complete the application. With no response from the applicant, a citation was issued for working without a building permit on April 18, 1989. The applicant's did not respond to the citation, hence the City Attorney issued a formal complaint. The property owners again failed to appear, and in February 1990 paid a $74.00 fine without ever appearing in Court (see Oman memo of May 18, 1990). In February 1990, the City again sent letters to the defendant advising him that payment of the fine does not resolve the problem. Applicant's f\na)ly met with City staff in March 1990, and in May 1990 provided the survey w.iich verifies that hardcover on the property is excessive, and the deck is o”er the lot line. Zoning File #1579 August 17, 1990 Page 2 Applicants proceeded with the necessary after-the-fact variance application, although they were advised that the City could not ultimately allow the continuing encroachment of the deck over the lot line, and that a hardcover variance request might not be successful. 2. Per the survey, the deck is approximately 2' over the lot line. City codes allow a platform type d. c with no railing to extend to within 2' of a side lot line. A deck such as this with a railing must be setback 10' from the side lot line. 3. Hardcover on the property, as calculated by the applicants surveyor with one revision by staff and shown in detail on the survey, is as follows; Zone 0-75’ 75-250' Zone Area 10,035 s.f. 10,309 s.f Existing Hardcover 430 s.f. (4%) 5910 s.f. (57.3%) Allowed Hardcover 2577 s.f. (25%) 4. The assessor's record card indicates that an .8' X 13' deck previously existed adjacent to the garage and screen porch. That deck extended approximately 4' lakeward from the house, as compared to the new deck which extends about 10' lakeward from the house. Dimensions of the previously documented deck are 13' X 18', or 230 s.f. The currently existing deck has dimensions 9| X 38' plus an extension toward the lake averaging 10' deep x 16' wide, for a total deck area of 502 s.f. 5, The average lakeshore setback line coincides with the lakeshore side of the house. The old deck encroached 4' p ist the average setback line. The new deck encroaches 10' pt " the average setback line. No neighboring property owners have views that are affected by this encroachment. 6. The applicants have constructed a 7' high fence along the street side of the length of the deck. Because this fence is over 6' high based on the grade at the driveway, such a fence would need a building permit, unless it was dropped to a height of 6'. Discussion The piers from the pre-existing 13' x 18' deck are place, hence we believe the assessor's records are correct. still in There is no question that the 13' x 18' deck was completely removed and the currently constructed deck is entirely new as of 1988. Zoning file #1579 August 17, 1990 Page 3 This lot is similar to the Wally Krahl property to the immediate west, in which the house is below the road and there is significant hardcover (rock and plastic) north of the house to help eliminate basement water problems while providing a ground cover where no grass would likely grow. As indicated above, staff noted one minor addition to hardcover which the surveyor did not note on his survey, i.e. 4' x 40' rock bed adjacent to the driveway. It appears that applicant has been digging a trench underneath the 3 season porch adjacent to the deck. If the intent is to replace the existing porch support posts with a concrete wall and footings, that also will require a building permit. Given the lengthy process through which staff has attempted to gain compliance on this property, the applicant has enjoye<: at least two seasons of use of this deck system. However, with little existing hardcover area that can be reasonably removed to significantly reduce hardcover on the property, the added deck area is significant from a hardcover standpoint. Staff Recommendation 1. Staff recommends that the 20' x 9' deck section furthest from the house, which extends 2' into the next property, be removed in its entirety, and this area revert back to non-hardcover. This will not only reduce hardcover by 180 s.f., but will eliminate the encroachment across the line and the encroachment into the 10' required side yard setback area. 2. Planning Commission should determine whether the remaining iO' x 16' and 9' x 18' deck areas can remain, given the hardcover situation and the 10' encroachment past the average setback line. Removal of the 10' x 16' portion that extends lakeward of the house, would leave a deck about 4' x 18' smaller than what originally existed. 3. Planning Commission should determine if there are any other areas of hardcover on the property that can be eliminated to reduce the high percentage of hardcover in the 75-250' zone. 4. For whatever deck is allowed to remain, applicant should be required to obtain an after-the-fact building permit and revise the deck as necessary to meet building code standards. 5. Applicants paid only the standard $175 variance application fee. Does Planning Commission feel there is any justification to not require payment of the after-the-fact fee of an additional $175 which should have been collected at the time of application? CITY OP ORONO - VARIANCE APPLICATION t g Initial Application Fee $175.00 ($50.00 per each additional variant/ Renewal Variance Fee $1('0.00 (no change from original application) After-the-Fact Fees (Double application fee) / 1 : ■V PROPERTY LOCATION Site Address hfnnfhi S’hnrp. ^riilt). cirr if oiisiio-------------- rmncE i^FicE ^ iiECEiFr-THiiHH you Gtr>nr. , m %r'M Property Identification Number (P.I.D.) A? Attach legal description to application if not included on required survey. ^ejL- APPLICANT Phone (home) ^7A _ _ _ Phone (wor)c) ^ Address; V75^ fJ. v^hnr/? iOr/t^/ City: QmiO<0 ■_ Zip; >5^Zin ^ Name F^IJ ^ r5^A A. f OWNER (if different than applicant) Name _ _ Phone (home) Phone (work) Address:City;Zip; Date Property Acquired (month Vsar) I (do) (do not) also own the adjacent parcels of land. PRESENT USE OP PROPERTY Present Zoning District _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ___ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Present Use of Property ^ rVj r . iDO 11 11_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Ocher (specify) Residential DESCRIPTION OP REQUEST Estimated Construction Cost $ Sj . OO Describe request in detail; 5sHr(lgi^ ^ f 1 ^t AC______ VARIANCES REQUIRED _ _ _ Lot Area Setback Variances ( Other Lot Width Front _ _ _ Hardcover ^ Side Rear) HARDSHIP Describe undue hardship or practical difficulty resulting from strict enforcement of zoning regulations; g r* Tinr^ - ropiQOld v 0vl;s4-fr/s: ^\?e ^ ' _ _ _ DBSCRIPTION OP UNUSUAL PROPERTY CONDITIONS Describe unusual property conditions preventing compliance with Zoning Code Requirements ; _ _ _ _ _ _ ___ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ UIRED SUBMITTALS Completed Application Form Certified Property Owners List of owners within 150' (you must obtain this list from Hennepin County Department of Finance A-603 Govt Center ^ 348-3271). m Plat Map (obtained with property owners list). ^ Certificate of survey (signed by a licensed surveyor) to include hardcover calculations as required. 5, Topographic survey (esiisting and proposed elevations) if any changes ^ in existing grade are proposed. @ S)cetches or plans of floor and elevation views. ^7, As an addendum to this application, please attach a separate list of any other persons you wish notified of this application. Additional items as may be requested by City stcjf.8. YOU ARE REQUIRED TO SUPPLY 30 COPIES OP LARGE DOCUMENTS OR A WORKING COPY (ll" X 17" OR SMALLER) FOR ALL DOCUMENTS SUBMITTED. The Applicant and Property Owner mu remember that your variance applicati information has not been included. sign this application. Please is n< complete if the abv?ve Certification by Clerical Department that Variance Application is complete Initialed by Clerical Staff;_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _Date_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ APPLICANT'S SIGNATURE The applicant hereby agrees to provide all information required or requested by the Zoning Administrator, agrees to pay additional fees (staff time not covered by original fee payment) and/or consultant expenses incurred in review of this application, and certifies that the information supplied is true and correct to the best of his/her knowledge. Applicant's Signature Date 7 - 23 OWNERS SIGNATURE The owner hereby ackowledges and agrees to this application and further authorizes reasonable entry onto the property by City staff, consultants, agents. Commission members, and Council members for purposes of investiga tion and verification of this request. Owner's Signature )n of this reque; Date 7 5 6 Applicant must have all submittals into the City offices 25 days before the Planning Commission Meeting. Planning Commission Meetings are held on the third Monday of eacn month. Applicants must be present at all scheduled review meetings of the Planning Ccmraission 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. B iff BERGCUIST AND #ICKLUND'5 ACPM ^ BERGOuISl and WICklun D'S PA^.^ (jUV I LLn L :/ 4.. J RUn OATt 07/17/90 BATCH 010 58 07-117-23 32 0009PROP ADDR 0<*736 NORTH SHORE ORONNER NAME CHRISTINE J SCHANZENBACH TAXPAYER CHRISTINE J SCHANZENBACH NAME/ADOR 4.^6 NORTH SHORE OR HOUND HN 5536^ HEmtPlN COUtJTY PROflHTY INFORMATION S. PROPERTY OWNERS LIST38 07-117-23 32 001009750 NORTH SHORE DR JAflES R THOMSON ETAL JAMES THOMSON 9750 NORTH SHORE DR MOUND tlN 55369 .TCM REPORT NO. PI93S901 PAGE 2238 07-117-23 32 001100038 ADDRESS UFMSSIGNEO RICHARD D CLIFFORD RICHARD D CLIFFORD 10155 GREEFCRIER RD APT 208 MirfflETOr^KA MtJ 55393 38 07-117-23 32 0012 PROP ADDR 09789 NORTH SHORE DR OWNER NAME JEFFREY J MARSHALL TAXPAYER JEFFREY J MARSHALL NAME/ADDR 9789 NORTH SHORE DR HOUND HN 55369 38 07-117-23 32 0019 09795 NORTH SHORE DR HERMAN CRAWFORD ETAL HERMAN CMAWFORD 9795 140 SHORE DRIVE M0UI4D MN 55369 38 07-117-23 32 0020 09753 F40RTH SHORE DR LESTER A DIETHART LESTER A DIETHART 9753 riORTH SHORE DR M0UF4D MN 55369 ■iv 38 07-117-23 32 0021 PROP ADDR 09755 NORTH SHORE DR OWr4ER NAME G R EVERSON P M E EVERSON TAXPAYER GARRY A MARIE EVERSON NAME/ADOR 9755 F40RTH SHORE DR MOUND HN 55369 38 07-117-23 32 0022 09775 NORTH SHORE DR H A KRAHL ETAL WALTER A A DOf4f4A L KRAHL 9775 NORTH SHORE DR MOUrJD M44 55369 38 07-117-23 32 0023 09795 NORTH SHORE DR STATE LAND DEPT CITY OF OROF40 LAKE ACCESS LANES 6/19/70 ST DEED 136852 PROP ADDR OWNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/AOOR TOTAL BATCH 010 00009 1 CERTTfy THAT THE FACTS REPRESENTED ARE AN ACCURATE AND TRUE REPRESENTATION OF INF0RMATI0T4 AS IT APPEARS THIS DATE ON THE RECORDS OF THE HEfTNEPIN C0UT4TY DEPARTMENT OF PROPERTY TAXATION, TO THE BEST OF MY i-NOWLEDGE AND BEIIEF,iti lEF. /V ‘ p A AJU ’j. jui vrjc u xx v iLi X EVERSON RESiPE-MCE \ LK, ^ DESCRIPTION: The southeasterly Ono-nalf of Lot 7, and Lots 5 and 6, Block b, BEPGQUIST AND WICK- LUND'S PARK, accordinq t'' the recorded plat thereof, l». ,ne' pin County, Minnesota. 59/0-/oV- O’ 1^’ 10.OJ5 4^0 4% 0>v»r«^e 15-150' 10,305 5150 5<p*/o GENERAL NOTES ^fO ^ - A --....... o Denotes iron monoment *♦ Denotes cross chiseled in concrete K 939.7 Denotes existing spot elevat!?-* [9391 Denotes proposed spot elevation 4 ---------- Denotes surface drainoge Dashed contour lines denotes proposed tvatures Solid contour lines denotes existing feotcres Proposer- top ol foundation elevation = Proposed basement floor elevotlon = Proposed garage t‘ or elevotion - BENCHMARK. ALL-METRO LAND SURVEYORS 2340 Daniels Street Long LoKe, Minnesota 5S356 Ph. 475-1433 I Irtrtby CtrM, ihut lh<« turv«y, pidn or raport wot praparad by ma or undar my d ^tct tuparviaion and tnot I am 0 duly Ragittt'ad uirid Survayor undar fha iowt pf tha Sioia r * Minne».:»to .-I DjMmj -ilLhoDATF _ REG NO scale 1 “^^ ^0- BOOK RAGE file nc1. ____gLOBVATjOL To: Prom: Date: Bryan Crawford, City Attorney Michael P 'iffron. Asst Planning & Zoning Administrator May 18, 1990 Subject: Zoning Review - Garry Everson Property 4755 North* Shore Drive Today I received . of the Certificate of Survey for the above referenced prope.- such survey being completed by All Metro Land Surveyors. ± would make the following specific comments regarding information shown on that survey: 1. The survey verifies that the wood deck for which the applicant was cited, is not in the 0-75' protected lakeshora setback zone. 2j It is unclear from the survey whether the deck extends into the average lakeshore setback zone. No new instruction is allowed to encroach toward the lake past a line drav/n between the lake sides of existing residence structures on either adjacent property. (Reference Zoning Code Section 10.22, Subdivision 1 (B), attached.) 3. The wood deck has been const ''ucted over the lot line and onto the neighboring Walter Krahl pr-perty to the west. Zoning Code Section 10.03, Subdivision 15 (C), the non- encroachment section, notes that a grade level deck cannot extend closer thcin 2’ from any lot line, and a deck structure that is abo ’*'i ,f3<3e level so as to not meet the criteria for a grade level deck, would have to meet a 10 side setback in the LR-IB zoning district in which this property is located. 4. The final critical issue with this wood deck is that it increases the already o^'cessive hardcover on the property. Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.22, Subdivision 2, limits hardcover in the 75- 250' sf ttr'^ck zone to 25%. This prc! .:4rty is currently at 56% in that and the contruction oi wood deck certainly exacerbated the pre-exirting hardcover excesses. To sumirarize, portions of the currently existing wood deck which were newly constructed in 1988, and which resulted in action, do not conform to the Code because they are: A) Too close to the lot line (in fact over it); and B) Contributing to and incieasing the pre-existing hardcover excesses on the property. Zoning Review May 18, 1990 Page 2 of 2 — Garry Everson Property 4755 North Shore Drive The property owner would appear to have 2 options: 1. Remove the decks which were added or totally repiLaced. City policy has been to allow repair of pre-existing decking, but total replacement of a non-conforming deck would not be allowed unless a variance is granted. 2. Applicant could make the appropriate after-the-fact application for a hardcover variance, with the knowledge that the City will expect portions of the deck encroaching on the required setbacks would have to be removed. There is no guarantee that a variance would be granted, and in a case where the hardcover on the property is so excessive, it is doubtful applicant would be grr.ited approval to keep anything more than the original deck in that location. To: Bryan Crawford, City Attorney From: Lyle Oman, Senior Building Inspector Date: May 18, 1990 ^ Subject; 4755 North Shore Drive - Deck Construction Without a ■ Permit 10/21/88 letter sent notifying owner of requirement of permit for deck deadline date of 10/31/88. Permit application enclosed. 10/28/88 owner returns letter with note on bottom "the work we did CO our deck was simply repair and replacement of existing, rotting decking and we are not a;:are this type of maintenance work required a permit". 10/31/88 letter sent to owner saying yes a permit is required for this type of work. Deadline given 11/8/88. 11/8/88 phone call asking if plans are required, I said I would do a site inspection to determine. 11/18/88 site inspection found deck to be of all new construction. 7 days to get permit noted on inspection slip left on site. 12/13/88 letter stating legal action will be initiated if no permit by 12/19/88. 12/30/88 permit application received. 2/2/89 Zoning Department sends letter requiring a Certificate of Survey and hardcover calculations within 45 days. 4/18/89 no response from applicant - citation issued for working without building permit. 6/8/89 applicant does not respond - Court sends delinquent ticket notice. 9/26/89 applicant dot' not respond - Attorney issues formal complaint. 10/17/89 failed to appear. Bench warrant issued. 1/2/90 Building Inspector requests police to enforce warrant (verbal). 2/21/90 Building Inspector request police to enforce warrant (in memo). 4755 North Shore Drive - Deck Construction Without a Permit May 18f 1990 Page 2 of 2 2/26/90 Police attempt enforcement of warrant, wife of defendant states defendant is out of town. Officer aocepts $74.00 fine from wife and declares case closed. 2/27/90 Inspector sends letter to defendant stating payment of fine in no way makes his deck a legal structure, requires permit application and required submittals to be provided to City no later than 3/6/90. 3/7/90 submittals not received. Inspector requests City Attorney to take further action. 3/16/90 applicants come to office to discuss and were told a survey must be provided. 5/18/90 survey provided - see attached memo from Mike Gaffron, Assistant Planning & Zoning Administrator. rlrry»r ->•/HARDCOVER CALCULATION WORKSHE^f- , SETBACK zone: (CIRCLE ONE) 0-75' 75-250' 2*50^500' 500-100'0' Existing Hardcover in Zone M • ru V X V>^ length WIDTH y-' Garage . c. Driveway X D. ■SIDEWALK 'S>^:CLlr.^ kffi LqlI4a_ E. Patio/ Deck F.Landscape AREAS underlain BY . . plastic sheeting .^lLcJc-Ojc]d^ G. Other Total Hardcover in Zone Total Property Area in Zone B X 100 S4i2^ daj^. o^' >Sur a u.1 'rl\ =S.F. s S.F. s S.F. 3 S.F. S.F. 3 _ S.F. 3 2. me S.F. S s.rr>. 3 S.F. s S.F. s S.F. =S.F. s S.F. s S.F. a S.F. 3 S.F. a S.F. S.F. A S.F. B % riTY . OF ORONO CITYof ORONO Post Office Box 66-CrysUiI Bay. Minnesota 55323 • Municipal Office. I On the North Shore of Lake Mmnetonka March It 1990 Bryan Crawford Popham, Haik fc Associates 3300 Piper Jaffray Tower 222 Ninth Street South Minneapolis, MN 5540^ Re: Garry Richard ^-rson, 4755 North Shore Drive Deck Construction without Permi. Dear Bryan: Thank you for Ihlre a"re“is^sueVto be on formal " ui 3 be more cost effective to oeal;r;;Stvany further comments on tr.is le^ u Enclosed is a complaint process “ y'^ou need anymore " llTllliV. you ir a^y way. fe^^l free to contact me at my of-ce. Sincerely, ci Lyie Oman, Senior Building Ir«^Fector LO/tln Enclosure cc: Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building 4 Zoning Administrator BUILDING & ZONING - 473-TJS7 assessing ADMINlSm^TlON & FINANCE - 47J-7358 FAX-473-0510 PUBLIC WORKS - 473-7359 asSaS |r OF laHaNcr CITYof ORONO Post Office Box 66 •Crystal Bay, Minnesota 55323• Municipal Offices t On the North Shore of Lake Minnetonka February 21, 1990 Gary Pichard Everson 4755 North Shore Drive Mound, MN 55364 Re:Derk Construction without a Building RerT.it Dear Mr. Everson: t-va*- vnn have oaid a $74.00 fineIt has come to my au.en.ion th without a oermit. or. a citation issued to you for bui-d.n? w.c..ou Tuis letter is to inform^ you that °sln 1're'qci^ed ?o way makes your deck a ^a’^'aoDlicabie codes if obtain a building permi. and r^n with the rtcuired vou wish to keep the o.ec*'.- . .I, 1990.-submittals must be proviced to -he C..y be.o.e If this deadline has t.o t been met -he w . ..y 1.. a Sincerely, Cvle Oman, Senior Building Inspector ’"Saffron,^APt'naLinS'SSSni^ Bruce Vang, Building Inspector BUILOI.NG & ZONING - 473.73r/ assessing administration & n.NANCE - 47J.7358 FAX-4TW5I0 PUBLIC WORKS - 473-7359 • • •• ■ -K. ! • - S . ' " v';: ' '• ■ ’ '•o ■ ■•• • la-lEivliaSEKtvj.-K'l >‘.V [sminnivVansiicE».* < ,I^NIlIUQt•V |V5 m 4is ■ire-LAST.FIRSIr. raiDin. r.uA.OEN : ;i r,‘^.^?;:-W,V.r».v.^ • >‘.-♦o I M s' :a:,. 5 A ;»c- 1 ■■#11 1^1■rL ■■si. • VJ ;i:.i •-nV 'ilt 'i-i 4:« . f. ;Jri ■pi fi'-l i •‘;.’‘"'v *•■.•• • ; ;■■ ■ ■.• - • . * * 1 •.'•••• *• • *. j • *'. • Piv-I ‘ - □ 'Sn PmPEm" □ ACcieW^iDSra 1 .v.v ' .. • ■ ..• •.;■•. - . . • ■'•.-u*:..:*'.. v.‘, .'r.-. ■ - • ..df:S i5;-: ’■ f' ■ . , '.A. ; j.. ' . ' ». I , ./ ‘* ••. •.• • • • II you lall lo lespomJ lo Ihlj cllallon within 7 days. Increased penalties will be?rp assessed and a watian* may be Issued for ybiir arrest. II a warrant Is Issued. • %'t*. penally ol $30 00 will be added lolho |ina,*.».u.>*v>*t_.-^-«*-7 XI,;, 1 w .•. V w • '. j V • .V.- ■• •.•. ^ ‘ .' w P iL) t Ka 1 \ h'. f: hi 't i p • ^ * 'T aw I 3 T a' cr'‘ yvA a fel <»• Q X LV ::r. • .V 'e rl-fh •f’S iii • '- pv.-. V.;. -.-• ■ . , .e p i f .4;i ;f 'rfJ e R • ■ • '*•■•••‘V-• ■\i . a - 1 •R B?W.it;?§■£ ‘VLt -*w -4 /COURT COPY f DO NOT WRITE ON REVERSE 1 •• »<• crrY DF OFIONO CITYof ORONO P„« om- B« 66.Cry.-l B.y. Mimr-o- 55323-Muniapal Offic- On the North Shore of Lake Minnetonka February 2, 1989 Mr. Garry Everson 4755 North Shore Drive Mound/ MN 55364 Re: Deck Construction Without Permit Dear Mr. Everson, The Building and construct new decks apolication for an af^e.. ^ decks. A review of the :iiffc\\irn |fnYs^°r3j^th\-/o'S-,in%ormation neeaea tor review is missing: 1. certificate of survey. The ----- survey. , 1 6-,-y^oc This deck construction is 2. Hardcover ‘d a site inspection of your considered as hardcove^r, nrooe^ty very likely already property indicated hard‘coVe^ of 25% in the 75-250 Totatrail ^t^ms^ol-Lracov^r! fncluling the aeck, siae«alks. driveway, etc. on the survey. x„ the event that V-/ evef/“thVt Iny havV®?o apriy^^f^^ a^^p^o^p^ia^e -^^=c^esr°"^a/encr;s\i, a variance for your use, 'should you need to Apply. Review of yourbuiiaing Vlure"to p?tvTd"e''the until the noted aays^'of the date of this letter “l\“Ve\ult"irrr%'f%rr7l"of\h!s"m^tter to the City Attorney. building a ZONING - 473-7337 assessing administration k finance - 473-7358 PUBLIC WORKS - 473-7359 Mr. Garry Everson February 2, 1989 Page 2 . 473-7357 if have any questions.Please contact me at 474 , Sincerely^ 'f . zom., MPG/dh Enclosure: Variance Application cc: Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building and Zoning Administrator Tom Jacobs, Building Inspec^o Lyle Oman, Field Inspector Total Fee: $. CITY OP ORONO - BOILDIHG PERMIT APPLICATION Date Received t ' 'hO 'V ^ Date Approved i .. Perait#:_ _ _ _ Project#; Building be filled out completeiy and signed 2. 2 sets of construction plams to include the following. a) Floor plans; b) Footing and foundation plan; c) Elevations (of all sides); d) Wall sections and cross sections; Details — stairs and any special connections. certificate of survey with location of existing and proposed st^cturls including hardcover calculations and grading and drainage plans as required. 4. Energy calculations - form provided. ABOVE^iNFol^TloN^^MO^T^^^^^ THE APPLICANT IS: (circle one) Co^E^br CONTRACTOR JOB SITE ADDRESS: —O'Cl ‘JL^--------- xilP.— 3. (work)J,2±lii2£ PHONE: (home ) unNAME OP OWNER: C=.A D I h- ^ ST./^J - - --- - - - - - - - mailing »nnov«. A ! .ikvj. Or'O'L.. CITY: . ZIP: CONTRACTOR:_ _ _ _^ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ___ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _PHON-.- - - - - - - - - - - - - MAILING ADDRESS: ARCHITECT:_ _ _ _ CITY:ZIP: PHONE: MAILING ADDRESS:,CITY:ZIP: TYPE OP WORK: New____ Addition Demo_____ Remodei/Alteration MoveAccessory Structure_ _ Renovate .K Land Alteration PROPOSED OSE (describe in ^**Tn ills ^ ^p jp ^ ^ A > (1 L. ---------------i^'ront UjaULDcJ^ , STORIES:' P7mNirS(l. FEET OF EACH FLOOR;/f?O0L- - - - - - - --- - - - - - NO. OP BEDROOMS:^. GARAGE .STALLS: ATT.4— - - ESTIMATED COHSTROCTION VALDATt J!? (exciuiS^and) s ? / I hereby apply for » w\"ri be'^in conformant with the above is complete and accurate: that S^ate Building Code; that I si.♦ hat the worJc will be in accordance with the approved plan. — . . . . . . . .APPLICANT'S STSNATCRB:-- - - - - - - - - - - - - -»orm^(Please fillreverse side of this ^orm) I . ^ ^ DATE: / / -~0 ^^ ^ /.. (1/ CITY OF ORONO INSPECTION NOTICE PERMIT NO.,_________ CALLED IN SCHEDULED COMPLETED DATE TTME «3.<£)S> ADDRESS OWNER TELEPHONE NO. footing FRAMING INSULATION WALL BD. FINAL PROGRESS OEMOL. FIRE PREV. 2 COMMENTS: V7 z -i □ plumbing ri □ plumbing final □ mechanical □ WATER HOOKUP □ meter SET/TURN ON □ SEWER HOOKUP □ SEPTIC INSTALL □ SEPTIC MAINT. G WELL TEST PUMP .CONTR. /gJ^ITE INSPECTION ^ EXCAVyGRADING/FILLINQ lakeshorejwetlanos LICENSING COMPLAINT FOLLOW-UP SEPTIC FINAL FIREPLACE/WOOO BURNER UJ o^ _c: Ujc. _ § O ” >. tScC /Hg~ULj f 3-AS •C'r<o—r r l/VU. ^ «=»T' '<^1? IL. .... ^^rH- ~-7 c:ou. Uj c: 2: Uj 5 Uj so Ujc: Uj Q Oo G WORK SATISFACTORY PROCEED ° PHOTO TAKEN call for the next inspection 24 hours in advance. Owner/Contju^on site_ Inspector.473-7357 WhiU /lntp*ctor'» Fil«CAruiy/Sit* Notica oxy: OF QRawa CITYof ORONO Post Office Box 66-Crystal Bay, Minnesota 55323• Municipal Offices On the North Shore of Lake Minnetonka October 31r 1988 Gary Iverson 4755 North Shore Drive Mound, MN 55364 Re; Deck Construction Without Pemit Dear Mr. Iverson: u ^ iQSa this office notified you that a permiton October 21, 1988 this oj.xce ^ ^os^onded with a note was required for aeck cons*-- ■, ""I--an'^ vou we^® not aware of saying it was a is to conform the requirement for a New work or may issue citations. If vou have any cuestions or if yea have a problem meeting this afadUne? pleas'^ feel free to contact me at my offree. Sincerely, LyW Oman, Field Inspector LO/tln Mabus*h- Building S Zoning Administrator ^tchall^. SarfroA, Lht planning S Zoning Administrator Thomas J. Jacobs, Senior Building Inspector .ILOFNC a ZONING - 473-7337 assessing administration k finance - 473-7358 PUBLIC WORKS -473-7359 CITY OP "ORaNCtJ CITYof ORONO Post Office Box 66•Crystal Bay, Minnesota 55323 • Mtmidpal Offices I On the North Shore of Lake Minnetonka October 21, 1988 /|7 81903 Gary Everson 4755 North Shore Drive Mound, MN 55364 Re; Deck Construction Without Permit Dear Mr. Everson: It has come to the attention of this office that you have recently ==r°sTru=ted a deck at 4755 North Shore Drive without the required building permit. This letter is to notify you that a building permit is required for deck construction and thft city my office. Sincerely, Lyle Oman, Field Inspector Enclosed: Permit Application a Mabusth. Building & Zoning Administrator M!cha:i P. SaffroA. Asst. Ilanning s Zoning Administrator Thomas J. Jacobs, Senior Building Inspector 'fhe uocrk, uoa. cl><i our UJ<3-S r€.pair '1. roplac^merrt. o9 o,S u>^ 2;^^ not of UJOrlc. rn(^^rc.d s pojrmit. BUILDING a ZONING - 473-7357 assessing admin ~rK(^PiL LOU , ration 4 finance - 473-7358 • PUBLIC WORKS - 473-7359 oxy: OF QRawa CITY of ORONO Post Office Box 66•Crystal Bay. Minnesota 55323• Municipal Offices Ofi the Notch Shore of Lake Minnetonha October 31r 1988 Gary Iverson 4755 North Shore Drive Mound/ MN 55364 Re: Deck Construction Without Permit Dear Mr. Iverson: on October 21, 1988 this office notified you that^a Perait was required for deck construction. You responaed ® - was a -=oa ’-- and reolace.ment and you were not aware o. saying it was a t''-'‘s is to conform apply for a building permit before Novemoer 8, 198^ or .ne C-ty may issue citations. If you have any questions or if y°“.have a problem meeting this deadline, please feel free to contact me at ray o-.-c.. Sincerely/ LyW Oman/ Field Inspector cc( Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building S !^in°st-atorMichael P. Gaffron, Asst Planning s zoning Adrainist-ator Thomas J. Jacobs, Senior Building Inspector ;ILDING A ZONING - 473-7357 assessing administration a finance - 473-7358 PUBLIC WORKS - 473-7359 Mayor Grabek & Orono Council Members Planning Commission Chairman Kelley Orono Planning Commission Members City Administrator Bernhardson / From: Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building & Zoning Administrator Date: September 12, 1990 Subject: # 1585 C. Arnold Carlson, 855 Forest Arms Lane - After-the-Fact Conditional Use Permit - Public Hearing Pertinent Ordinance- Section 10.03, Subdivision 19 and Section 10.55, Subdivision 9 (B) Conditional Use Permit required for wooden seawall constructed sometime in 1988 along the east side of the Forest Lake Channel. List of Exhibits Exhibit A - Exhibit B - Exhibit C - Exhibit D - Exhibit E - Exhibit F - Exhibit G - Exhibit H - Exhibit I - Exhibit J - Application Property Owners List Plat Map Plan Section Materials List Applicant's Engineer's Review DNR Letter 2/8/90, Permit 89-6019 MCWD After-the-Fact Permit Survey Review of Application - Sometime in mid-summer of 1988 the DNR Field Inspector discovered the newly constructed seawall within the Forest Arms Channel. The City soon received notice of the violation on the Carlson property and applicant was advised of the need for a conditional use permit. In later discussions with Mr. Carlson, staff advised him to proced with all necessary permits from the discovery or initiating agencies and upon completion proceed with an after-the-fact conditional use permit with the City. Permits have been issued by both the DNR and MCWD. Review of Seawall Review Exhibits D, E, G and J. The seawall extends 52' along the east bank of the channel area located within applicant's property. It is approximately 2* high above the lakebed with the remaining 2' of the 4' high timber imbeded within the lakeshore bed. Drainage holes have been placed within the wall to prevent freeze damage from water trapped behind the Zoning File 1585 September 12 Page 2 wall. The engineer's letter. Exhibit G, confirms that 8 cabled anchors installed within the adjacent bank will provide protection from overturn (shoreline side washed away reducing wall imbediment). It is the engineer's opiniion that "the seawall will structurally withstand the earth's pressures and environmental elements for the expected life of the wall materials themselves". Staff has worked with Mr. Carlson in the past in seeking special approval for construction of the dock within the channel area. All residents within this subdivision whose properties abutt the channel area are reauired to seek special approval from the Council for the issuanc Df building permits for docks. Mr Carlson has been a resident our City for over 6 years. It may be appropriate for members to ask the applicant to respond as to the circumstances surrounding the installation of the dock without the benefit of permit review. Options of Action A. Denial - If d>:nied, please refer to the necessary findings set forth in Section 10.09, Subdivision 6 (A). Please note that the seawall does not require a variance approval as this is an accepted or permitted structure below the 929.4 elevation of the lake. B. Approval - If approved please refer to the same section for the necessary findings. An approval recommendation should include the following conditions; 1. 2. Applicant to obtain required building permit, fee will be required. Penalty Applicant is placed on notice that any repair of the existing seawall will require a separate conditional use permit review. Zoning File #1585 October 3, 1990 Page 3 Additional Comnents and Planning CcHnmission RecosBiiendation - Planning Commission members found no major concern with the seawall installed by the applicants without the benefit of the necessary permits. Members noted the erosion of the channel bank called for a seawall. The wall is exposed approximately 2' and there is no negative aesthetic or visual impact when viewing the property from the lake. Prior to formally acting on the application, members were reassured that all other agencies involved in this review process had granted the necessary permits noting once again that it was the DNR inspector that had discovered the seawall installed some time in 1988. The Planning Commission recommended unanimous approval of the after-the-fact conditional use permit for the installation of a seawall at the property located at 855 Forest Arms Lane. The enclosed resolution has been drafted per the Planning Commission's recommendation. A RESOLUTION GRANTING AN AFTER-THE-FACT CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT PER MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 10.03, SUBDIVISION 19 AND SECTION 10.55, SUBDIVISION 9 (B) FILE #1585 WHEREAS, C. Arnold Carlson (hereinafter "the applicant") is the owner of the property located at 855 Forest Arms Lane within the City of Orono (hereinafter "City") and legally described as Lot 5, Block 2, Forest Arms, Hennepin County, Minnesota (hereinafter "property"); and WHEREAS, the applicant has applied to the City of Orono for an after-the-fact conditional use permit to permit a seawall installed along a channel that abuts the property along the west side, per rlunicipal Zoning Code Sections 10.03, Subdivision 19 and 10.55, Subdivision 9 (B). NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono, Minnesota; FINDINGS 1. This application was reviewed as Zoning File #1585. 2. The property is located in the LR-IB Lakeshore Residential Zoning District. 3. On September 17, 1990, the Orono Planning Commission reviewed the application as proposed and recommended approval based on the following findings: A) The seawall extends 52' along the bank of the channel. The wall is approximately 4', 2' remains below the lakebed and 2' extends above the lakebed. B) Severe erosion of the channel bank required some form of physical support to sustain the bank. C) The 2' high wall that extends above the lake bed provides no visual or negative aesthetic impact upon viewing the property from the lakeside. D) In a letter from Lloyd E. Weisert, a licensed engineer, dated January 31, 1990, he notes the following: "it is my opinion that the seawall will structurally withstand the earth pressures and environmental elements for the expected life of the wall materials themselves". Page 1 of 4 4. The City Council finds that granting an after-the-fact conditional use permit to allow the seawall to remain on the property will not be be detrimental to the health, safety or general welfare of the public, would not adversely affect light, air nor pose a fire hazard or other danger to neighboring properties, nor will its use depreciate surrounding property values and that the proposed level of use of the property will be in keeping with the inteot and objectives of the Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan ♦:.he City. 5. The City Council has considered this application including the findings and recommendations of the Planning Commission, reports by staff and comments of the applicant and the affect of the proposed use 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 an after-the-fact conditional use permit per Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.03, Subdivision 19 and Section 10.55, Subdivision 9 (B), subject to the following conditions: 1. Applicant to obtain the required building permit, permit will be subject to a penalty fee. Such 2. Applicant is placed on notice that any repair of the existing seawall will require a separate conditional use permit review. 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 owner has read, understood and hereby agrees to the terms of this resolution and on behalf of himself, his heirs, successors and assigns, hereby agrees to the recording of this resolution in the chain of title of the p ^'erty. Page 2 of 4 kB. Adopted by the Orono City Council on this 8th day of October, 1990. ATTEST; Theresa L. Naab, Deputy Clerk Edward J. Callahan, Jr., Acting Mayor Property Owner(s) STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) SS. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this 8th day of October, 1990, by Edward J. Callahan, Jr. and Theresa L. Naab, Acting Mayor & Deputy Clerk of the City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City. STATE OF MINNESOTA ) Notary Public ) SS. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) On this _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ -_ _ _ _ _ _ ___ _ _ _—- - - -' —before me a Notary Public within and for said county, personally appeared __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ,_ _ _,_ _ _ _ _^ . . ■ ■■ known to me to be the person(s) described in and who executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that he (th-y) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed. NOTARY PUBLIC Page 3 of 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 instrument, and acknowledged that he (they) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed. NOTARY PUBLIC Page 4 of 4 CITY OF ORONO - GENKRAL LAND OSE APPLK ^ ri&1585 PROPERTY LOCATION ^/Z,yv\S ! 171 QSite Address Property Identification Number (P.I.D.) CITY OF CiiC^d Firi^CE CFFICE 1J10200000 — VI 200.00 CFHK JL 200.^ Please check one - Property abstract or ________htCEIFT-rH^K YOU ff2 82490 cool 801 707:09 torrens? OS/24/90 (for Conditional Use Applications only) Please attach legal description to application if not included on required survey. APPLICANT C /) Phone (home) V ^ S f ^/Vo uo C .r2) Address 5 ^City Zip y(oH OWNER (if different than applicant)Phone (home) Name Phone ■«. Address City zip Date Pro cquired 7/7 9 (month/year) I (^cte-) (do noO also own the adjacent parcels of land PEES - CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS - Renewal Fee - 1/2 Current Fee After-the-Fact Fee - Double Current Application Fee $100.00 a)Residential accessory Use $150.00 b)Institutional (church, school, etc $150.00 c)Duplex Credit/Bldg $250.00 d)Commercial/Industrial Use X $200.00 f)Land Alteration Grading and filling - designated wetland or floodplain Grading and filling - 101 cu. yd. or more Grading, seawall, retaining walls within 75* of lakeshore PRD/PID - see fee schedule OTHER APPLICATIONS $150.00 Commercial Site Plan Review (+ consultant fees) _ _ _ _ $250.00 Vacation _ _ _ _ $150.00 Easement Vacation _ _ _ _ $ 50.00 Easement Vacation With Subdivision _ _ _ _ $250.00 Rezoning __ _ _ _ $100.00 Appeals _ _ _ _ Other - see fee schedule PRESENT USE OF PROPERTY Present Zoning District Present Use of Property / / 0 > it 1 r -N oOO fr Residential Other (specify) DESCRIPTION OP REQUEST Describe request in detail:0 <1 s c r 3 iaj f AiV'/ cPocl</^ REQUIRED SUBMITTALS 1. Completed Application Form. Certified Property Owners List of owners within 350' (you can obtain this list from Hennepin County Department of Finance A-603 Government Center 348-3271) Stamped, legal sized envelopes (#10) pre-addressed to each of the names on the above list with no return address. Ceruificate of survey. Topographic survey (existing and proposed contours) if land alterations involve changes in elevation (grades). Construction plan, if applica le (see staff for requirements). Plat Map. As an addendum to this application, please attach a separate list of any other persons you wish notified of this application. 2. The applicant and Property Owner must sign this application. Please remember that your application is not complete if the above information has not been included. Certification by Zoning Department that Land Use Application is complete. Zoning Officials Signature _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ___ _ _ _ _ _ _ Date_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ APPLICANT'S SIGNATURE The applicant hereby agrees to provide all information required or requested by the Zoning Administrator, agrees to pay all fees and/or unusual expenses incurred in review of this application, and certifies that the information supplied is true and correct to the best of his/her knowledge. Applicant's signature Date ^2^/ro OWNERS SIGNATURE ^ . The owner hereby acknowledges and at to this application and further authorized reasonable entry onto th ;perty by City staff, consultants, agents, commission members, and uncil members for purposes of investigation and verification of this request. Owner's signature c u Date Applicant must have all submittals into the City offices 25 days before the Planning Commission Meeting. Planning Commission Meetings are held on the third Monday of each month. Applicants must be present at all scheduled review meetings of the Planning Commission and Council. If an applicant is unable to attend a scheduled meeting, please make arrangements to have an authorized agent attend i, your place and advise the Building & Zoning Office of this change prior to the meeting. lim ORONO L . ...g CITY of ORONO Post Office Box 66•Crystal Bay, Minnesota 55323• Municipal OfGcss On the North Shore of Lake Minnetonka \ September 11, 1990 ftCe 1.4 1890' C. Arnold Carlson 855 Forest Arms Lane Mound, MN 55364 RE: After-the-Fact Penalty Fee Dear Mr, Carlson: City or ORS^ FIRY^aCE OFFICE 1jIz0200C^ iM r :^CEIPT-1PM YOU ^i9vI40 COOl ^2 707 r 09/14 A In the review of your after-the-fact land use application we note that the penalty fee was not paid at the time of filing. In order to complete the review of your application we must ask that the penalty fee of $200.00 be submitted as soon as possible. Please contact Jeanne Mabusth (473-7357) if you have any questions pertaining to this request. Sincerely, J^nne A. Mabusth Building & Zoning Administrator cc: Mark Bernhardson, City Administrator JAM/1sv Bt'ILOING A ZONING - 473-7357 ASSESSING ADMINISlTlAnON A HV\NCt - 473-7358 FAX -473-0510 PL-BUC WORKS - 473-7359 RUN DATE 08/21/90 BATCH 008 PROP ADDR : OWNER NAME TAXPAYER NAHE/AODR i":'- ■ PROP ADOR OWNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/AOOR *'( i tt PROP ADOR ’ OKWER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/AOOR 4. PROP AOOR OWNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/AOOR PROP AOOR 0I«4£R NAME TAXPAYER NAME/AOOR ‘ *,;>/HEWEPIN 38 07-117-23 12 0002. 0097S WILOHURST TR. AIL SODERMAN AIL SGOERMAN 975 WILOHURST TRAIL, MOUND MN 5536A ) ' ■ i 38 07-117-23 12 00'' 00860 FOREST ARMC ROYETTA I MARCOTTE ROYETTA I MARCOTTE-SNOri 860 FOREST ARMS LA MOUND MN 55369 r» ; 1 •: V 1 1 ‘1, 38 • 07-117-23 12 0009 * 00805 ‘ FOREST ARMS LA 6 B BORROW IMA VOLPE ' GEORGE BORKOW/MARZLYN VOLPE 805 FOREST ARMS LA ' ORONO m 55369 Ar 38 07-117-23 17 0012 00835 FOREST ARMS LA i « P E SCHNEBELE I V SCHNEBELE > P E SCHNEBELE I V SCHNEBELE 835 FOREST ARMS LA MOUND MN 55369 . 38 07-117-23 12 0015 00895 FOREST ARMS LA . F BROGHAMNER I P BROGHAMMER F BROGHAMMER I P BROGHAMMER 895 FOREST ARMS LANE <MOUND MN 55369 4? .PROP ADDR OWNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/ADDR 38 07-117-23 21 0009 00997 WILOHURST TR C E BOEHM I M A C BOEHM CHARLES I MARY ANN BOEHM 997 WILOHURST TRAIL MOUND MN 55369 ' ! !• »• • t COUNTY PROPERTY INFORMATION SYSTEM PROPERTY OWNERS LIST 38 07-117-23 12 0009 00800 FOREST ARMS LA R W BOmEMA I J R BOmEMA ROBERT W I JANIS R BOWIEMA 800 FOREST ARMS LA MOUND MN 55369 38 07-117-23 12 0007 00890 FOREST ARMS LA 0 J FARLEY I E C FARLEY 0 J FARLEY I E C FARLE> 890 FOREST ARMS LA ORONO M»4 55369 38 07-117-23 12 OOlO 00815 FOREST ARMS LA M I M MC ELLIGOTT MICHAEL I MARY MC ELLIGOTT 815 FOREST ARMS LA MOUND MT4 55369 38 07-117-23 12 0013 00855 FOREST ARMS LA C I C CARLSON C I CHARLEEN CARLSON 855 FOREST ARMS LANE MOUND MN 55369 38 07-117-23 12 0016 09265 FOREST LAKE DR HIM OlESKY BRIAN HIRT 9265 FOREST LAKE OP MOUND MN 55369 38 07-117-23 21 0015 09955 WEST BRANCH RO JANE E KLINE JANE E KLINE 9955 WEST BRANCH RD MOUND HN 55369 ‘ REPORT NO. PI935901 ^ 38 07-117-23 12 0005 'l! , 00830 FOREST ARMS LA T K SAMUEL T K I A SAMUEL 830 FOREST MOUND m ' ' . ,V '■ ‘v ' '- ’■ ^ 38 07-117-23 12 0008 00038 ADDRESS UNASSIGNEO FISCHER DEVELOPMENT CO - I ♦ i ^ , j i, , : FISCHER DEVELOPMENT CO - I 'T !>• f. • * . * ; . 6801 W 150TH ST ‘ ' 4 *- ^4. i ‘ '’i'.- APPLE VALLEY 58 07-117-25 00825 JIM BURCH JOHN C I MARION BURCH 825 FORREST ARMS MOUND MN 55369 oou ^ V:. a 1 ^ ‘J t: ;•HS u:U ,1- i‘-; j'f URCH • . ' ; -.f-. • f.i' -1 s ’ • :'V: : i*'K .♦ ■« ■ 50 07-117-25 12 0014 j' ' i ' I.'4^^ ’ ' ’ ■ ljl 1' ^'00075 FOREST ARMS U-,‘' ' > • ' H f ' i?'p;''S >9 , .it ■ DARLOW T MADGE DARLOW MADGE 875 FOREST ARMS MOUND MN 55369 38 07-117-23 12 0023 • 00038 ADDRESS UNASSIGNEO FOREST ARMS CTRY CLUB ADON FOREST ARMS COUNTRY CLUB ADDN HOMEOWNERS ASSOC INC 960 FOREST ARMS LANE MOUND MN 55369 I i; * „ ,;S;. ■ «■.. ^ S [ . V ? ,♦. TOTAL BATCH [NC 4.!-»»' < • 4J,- . .’.4-i r- :V -..I* V V >i;v 008 00017 I ■. •*. .' *■ A. iK . ’J ■ i - I ’»■ V* ••liu-Vi:? •'■ ' v! ; 'HEWEPIN '' •. I ! (■<’'••?> ! ,!i, ‘ .«t!' - * . j1'f' V ■:'> IIIMf''“lii'ir- r ■'•’ ’iia-fi:; ■3;S I ?i'i; I ?!U*' * ^'1 9 'B'i: 5>- ;A. j;'.I ‘At‘ • I V i ' :iil:'!iilt S'l;!?'4; if:'II' mw •■' !■ }^f . *•'; ft' * ajhJ'. - t- : ■• "5*1* • » i. *\ui \ M i Xi ‘niiai;;,-5M$ 4r*?- u.'fVif'f "'Ift Eli ■;t * I*.. COUNTY PROPERTY INFORMATION SYSTEM PROPERTY Ot«4ERS LIST REPORT NO. PI455401X' PAGE.;;21.-:i DAT I CERTIFY THAT THE FACTS REPRESENTED ARE AN ACCURATE AND REPRESENTATION OF INFORMATIOfl AS IT APPEARS THIS DATE ON OF THE HENNEPIN COUT4TY DEPARTMENT OF PROPERTY^TAXATION, OF MY KT40WLEDGE AND BELIEF wi**;«f«4 ‘ «♦* ‘ '>■ I V.•:-‘i r; ‘ ■ j< . ( ;■; Ji‘>{.;?it X-■; V. ’ '• >' f;.i ' ■ ■ • ' ' r Tf ■ ) A—' A D ! i i r-- ^ • i I i thAr£R\ftLS Li ST H Lat^s<A^ /'mitcW 2.;^ Vs -;s^, __M , n f 7f y (9 X 5 ' So Lu»nt-e*- . . i. 1*^ , y/ ^- . ______ - —•: --/)-•■------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ___,t>“, S O.D.._STfeL hfc___ ^ -Cf /4*V /4.<-r .1^-7 i^/»y/ Coa'hD CuLU. ‘p/;v^ o^af.]riB.r^cs P.” Tuk'h t uckUs .3 < ^ '3 00 SVi-ci R/.f - 4 ^cj- 12 " /o~. i 'i - * ■ ) January 31,1930 Dear Mr. Carlson, # '4-S tl I has e examineu tiie sKecches of the retaining wail (seawall) you provided, and have made the following observations and conclusions. This wall can be described as a she'^twall with anchor. The wall is subject to eartii pressures but not to any significant surcharge such as vehicles or buildings on the backfill side. The wall is subject to possible ice and wave action depending on the season and water level. The primary modes of failure for this type of construction are overturning, underturning, and material failure. The usual analysis of this type of construction involves a calculation of the active and passive forces (earth pressures) on the wall. These calculations will vary somewhat depending on the values used for the density and type of soil, water levels etc. The dimensions and design of this wall (4 ft total height with a 2 ft imbediment) however, is such that most design guidelines and references would not recommend the need for the use of anchors. I did however, make some elementary calculations of the earth pressure forces on the wall. Attachment A illustrates that the cable anchors are more than capable of resisting the earth pressure overturning fore; , e\'en when we assume no structural assistance from the wall itself, i;hen they are spaced no more than 8 ft apart. The 5 additional cabled anchors you installed after the initial construction provides a consistent anchor factor of safety of nearly 2 along the entire seawall length. The cabled anchors add assurance that the wall will not overturn, but they present an increased vulnerability to underturning if the soil on the shoreline side is washed away thereby reducing the wall imbediment. It is my opinion that the most likely _ause for premature failure (failure before the expected lifetime of the treated wood materials), would be vinderturning after wave or current action has removed soil on the lake side of the wall. To prevent this from happening, a minimum imbediment of 2 ft should be maintained for a minimum of 4 ft e.xtending out toward the lakeshore from the wall. It is also very important to have adequate drainage provided for from b**hind the wail to prevent freeze damage due to water trapped behind t)i*^ wall. This is par t icu Lir ly important when the water level is lower than normal, as it has been. Apparently the drainage holes you provided are adequate,, since it has remained stable for 2 winters with no evidence of free ..in? dami»ge. Hi? tier u.i’vr actually servfto protect the waxi as i'lig as tiie imbedimont level is maintained. With these precautions, it is my opinion that the seawall will structurally wirhstand riie eai-tii prossuies and environmental elements for the e.xpected life of the wall materials themselves. Sincerely, Lloyd E. Weisert PE Minnesota License Number 016202 j i fr .-i OO Attachment: cabled anchor load calculations (jk^SUSi aurci^ J2a -oJU- Ji/ujL .Jo- zU xo>^ “ + if C»a 3^ — Cu\m P - jmX^ yiAJUAJUAfc. ^ukA. ^^♦JT C aa 4^ (ly s jteiS^ uma ^Ijc ^ too ^ i jlajO^ Off^ ^ <J r zl® J A<*>|L»*< ZWUML^ = ui^-Y .£*^ = 0 P - rt.6 ^ - 5"r«C» X 8 rV4f.T4 /TQ^. St, 2,0 iT" STATE OF jKii?^[is©Tr^ k DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES METRO REGION HATERS - 1200 HARNER RO., ST. PA'JL, HN 55106 rr/'V ’^AIINNESOTA " 1990 PHONE NCC96-7523 FILE NO. February 8, 1990 Mr. C. Arnold Carl son 855 Forest Arms Lanfe Mound, MN 55364 Dear Mr. Carl son: u u =: i ff ' '•r*' RE: TITLE REGISTERED PERMIT #89-6019, TIMBER RETAINING WALL, LAKE MINNETONKA (27-xj3) FOREST LAKE #18, HENNEPIN COUNTY Enclosed is Permit #89-6019 authorizing construction of a timber retaining wall along the shoreline of Lake Minnetonka. This permit must be title registered in the office of the Hennepin County ?*corder at A607 Government Center, Minneapolis, MN 55487. The purpose if the registration is to insure the wall is maintained as specifically stated in General Provision #14 of this permit. When you return the recorded permit to this office, we will forward a Notice of Permit Card to you. You do not have authorization to begin this work until you have received such Notice of Permit card and posted same at project site. Please send the stamped copy to the following address: DNR METRO REGION WATERS 1200 Warner Road St. Paul , Minnesota 55106 Minnesota Statutes provide for an administrative hearing if you are aggrieved by the action taken on this permit. Be advised that to take advantage of this review process you must file a hearing request and any required bond within 30 days. If you have any questions regarding this process or about the terms and conditions of your permit, contact Area Hydrologist Pat Lynch at 296-7523. If you have any questions concerning the title-registration, please call Jan Witkowski (Recorder's Office, 348-3070) or our Metro Region Office at 296-7523. Jofe/i Line Stine Regional Hydrologist Enelosure AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER Protected Nater County ! Minnptonka (27-133) Forp<;t Lake #18 Henr-ecin Naae of Aopl leant Telephone Nuaber (include Area Code) r.. Arnnl d Harl «;on (612)472-4841 . Address (No. G Street, RfO, Box No., City, State, Zip Code) i Fnrect Arrn<: 1 ane Mnunr! MN 55364 Authorized to: ' constructs i^-foot long retaining wall;in accordance with plans 1 received July 8, 1988.r 7 ■ f ^ Purpose of Perait :Date of Perait Expiration 1 bnoreline protection Does Not Apply i Property Described as: 5^ gl OCk 2, Forest Arms Addn .County \ Section 7, Township 117 North, Range 23 West Hennepin ' A» Indicated (6): (if applicable)As Indicated (9); (if <jpaiwiary high water Does not apply elevation., 929.4' (NGVD, 1929) ^M/innesota Ouudr''TH.'fii (}l Resources Wj HHUftCrtO WAJtnCD PtriMlI(to be RECORDED with the COUNTY RECORDER) P.A. KuBber89-6019 OvisMon o» aie«s Pursuar.t to ><innesota Statutes, Chapter lOS, and on basis of state«en*s and irfomation contained in the -•riiit Application, letters, «aps, and plans sub»ittea bv '•ne apclicanr ano othe'-s supporting data, all of which re Bade a part hereof by reference, PERKISSIOII IS HEREBY GP4RTE0 to the applicant naeed below t -^ange the course, irrent, or cross section of the following; This perait granted subject to the following GENERAL and jPECIAL PROVISIONS: GENERAL PROVISIONS 1. This perBit is peraissiwe ui.ly and shall not release the perwittee froB any liability or obligation iaposed by Minnesota Statutes, Federal Law or local ordinances relating thereto and shall reaain in force subject to all conditions and liaitations now or hereafter iaposed by law. 2. No change shall be la without written pereission previously obtained froB the CoBwissioner of Natural Resources, in the diaensions, capac.ty or location of any itess of worl> authorized hereunder. 3. The peraittee shall grant access to the site at all reasonable tiaes during and after construction to authorized representatives of '^ht Coaaissioner of Natural Resources for inspection of the work authorized hereunder. k. This perait aay be terainated by the CoBaissioner of Natural Resources at any tiae he deeas it necessary for the conservation of the water resources of the state, or in the interest of public health and welfare, or for violation of any of the provisions of this peri-'t, unless otherwise provided in the Special Provisions. 5. Construction work authorized under this perait shall be coapleted on or befr^'e the date specified above unless terainated as hereinafter provided. Upon written request to the Coaaissioner by the Peraittee, stating the reason therefore, an extension of tiae aay be obtained. , 5. The excavation of soil authorized herein shall not be construed to include the reaoval of organic aatter(AS indicated above) unless the area froa which such organic aattei" is reacved, is iapervious, or is sealed by the application of bentonite after excavation. 7. In all cases where the doing by the poraittee of anything authorized by this perait shall involve the taking, using, or daaaging of any property rights or interests of any other person or persons, or of any publicly owned lands or iaproveaents thereon or i-.terests therein, the peraittee, before proceeding therewith, shall obtain the written consent of all persons, agencies, or authorities concerned, and shall acquire all property, rights and interests necessary therefore. 3. This perait is peraissive only. No liability shall be iaposed upon or incurred by the State of Minnesota or any of its officers, agents or eaployees, officially or personally, on account of the granting hereof or m • account of any daaage to any person or property resulting froa any act or oaission of the oeraittee or any of Its agents, eaployees, or contractors relating to any aatter hereunder. Ihis perait shall not be construed #■ / ’ •. ' ^ J p , ■ * * as tstoppi^q or li-iting any legal clai.s or right of actfo.^ of an^f person other than'The stafTagainst the Ot -ittee it< agents, eeployees. or contractors, for any daeaqe or injury resulting fro. any such act or oeission, or' as estopping or li.iting any legal clai. or right action of the state against the per.ittee, its agents, e.ployees, or contractors for violation of or failu- to coeoly -ith the persit or applicable provisions of la«. No .aterial evcavated by authority of this persit nor .atenal fro. other source, except as specified herein, shall be placed on any portion of the bed of said waters which lies below(as indicated above) if applicable. ). Any estension of the surface of said waters -esultmg fro* work authorized by this oer.it shall beco.e protected waters and left open and unobstructed for use by the public. 1. This per.it shall beco.e effective on the date it is reci rded in your County in the Office of the Recorder. * Provided, the work affecting protected waters authorized he'ein shall not be cowwenced until a Notice of Per.it has been conspicuously posted -t the construction site and a copy of the recorded per.it is posted on or near the pre.ises upon which such wor. is ccnOucted. A Notice of Per.it will be issued by the Co..issioner upon his receipt of a Certified copy of the recorded per.it. 2. All general and special provisions of this per.it shall bind the per.ittee. his heirs and assigns and shall run with the land. 3. After the co.pletion of the project authorized, uer.ittee shail supply the Depart.ent of Natural Resources with photographs of the project area. 4. Per.ittee shall .aintain the autho. . zed project m a s:atle and safe condition. At any ti.e the Cc.issioner finds that the project is subject to instability, creates a navigation hazard, has beco.e a public nuisance, or has fallen into a state of disrepair, he shall order the owner to repair the project within a specified ti.e. 5. Any Ccissioner's Order ter.inating this per.it .ay also require the per.i-'-ee. at his own expense, to re.ove within the ti.e specified in said Order, any autficrized project .onstructed under is penit and. if applicable, - any unauthorized project in violation of this ,er.it. Said Order shall also require the per.ittee to restore, if necessary, the protected waters or beds thereof to the condition existing before the unauthorized activity. 16. This per.it does not obviate any require.e-U for federal assent fro. the U.S. Corps of Engineers. 1135 U.S. Post Office and Custo. House. St. Paul. Hinnecota 55101. SPECIAL PROVISIONS The permittee shall comply with all rules, regulatTons, r^cuirements, or standards of the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency and other applicable f**-iorai , state, or local agencies. Permittee shall ensure that the contractor has received and thoroughly understands all conditions of this permit. Erosion control measures shall be adequately designed for the site charactt istics. They may include staked haybales, diversion channels, sediment ponds, or sediment fences. They shall be installed prior to commencement and maintained throughout project. All exposed soil shall be restored {by seeding and mulching or ssdding and staking) within 72 hours of completion of project. The permittee shall protect the base of the sea wall from failure by placing 12” riprap against the base of the sea wall for its entire length. The riprap shall be of natural rock and shall not extend more than 5-feet waterward of the ordinary high water elevation, 929.4' (NGVD 1929). IISCOE, Hennepin SWCD, Minnehaha Creek WSD, LMCD, City of Mound, J. Parker/AWM, Walter/C.0., J. Fax/St. Paul Waters, Violation file V88-6095, Lake Minnetonka file #18 s instrument was prepared drafted by Area Hydrologist Patrick Lynch-DNR Metro Region ers, 1200 Warner Road, .St- Fl-» MN 55106 (612)296-7523. STATE Of/^/f/. i,Execute' at St. Paul. Minnesota COUNTY Subscribed and sUa>n-ty>‘bef ere «e-tb-i day of r, this q a y 0»_ _ _. 10 wwi-.Sir.NIR 'TC MINNKOIA pLf ’AHlHENl Of NAIUHAL RESOURCES -A cow.ission expires: Notary Pu^^ Signat^rg^ Ai(jAiorized Signature John Line Stine, Regional Hydrologist 4Pi.Mi #1 r/ilWrCEKAKA CREEK WATERSHED DISTRICT P.O. Box 387, Wayzata. Minnesota 55391 myW OF MXimai: Janes B SpeawyPws • Altwft L Lehman • John E Thomas Ricnard R Miller • Roden D Enckson • C Wooorow Love • Clarkson Lmaiev V.__r' V HM MIHMITONia Permit Application No. 90-31 June 26, 1990 Owner: C. Arnold Carlson 855 Forest Arms Lane Mound, MN 55364 Location: City of Orono, Sec. TAB Purpose: Construction of 52 lineal feet of wooden seawall along the north channel of Forest Lake "after-the-fact." Dear Mr. Carlson: Receipt is acknowledged for the following w hich you have submitted as pan of the above permit application: 1. Permit Application 90-31 received June 11,1990. 2. Lencr from the applicant to the District dated June 8, 1990. 3. Site survey dated April 17. '’990. 4. Payment of Rule J fees daitw. June 19, 1990. These items are in accordance with the acb- taken by the Boaid of Managers on March 15,1990 in reference to the above permi This letter is your after-the-fact permit from the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District. Permit approval is based upon the following exhibits: 1. Permit File 88-89. 2. DNR Permit No. 89-^019 dated February 8, 1990. 3. Letter from Lloyd E. w^eisert, P.E. to the applicant dated January 31, 1990. 4. Site plan dated February 1, 1990. 5. Cross section dated February 1, 1990. 6. Letter from the District to the applicant dated March 19, 1990 informing him of the Board action on March 15, 1990. 7. Permit Application 90-31 received June 11, 1990. 8. Letter from the applicant to the District dated June 8, 1990. 9. Site survey dated April 17, 1990. 10. Payment of Rule J fees dated June 19, 1990. Permit Application No. 90-31 Page Two June 26, 1990 #1- V. ^— :z=: This pennit is issued after compledcn of the project If you have any questions feel free to contact me or Ron Quanbeck at 473-4224. JAMES M. MONTGOMERY, CONSULTLNG ENGINEERS. INC. Engineers for the District Jar^/J. Maht^y, P.E. Date of Issue / bt cc:Board file C. Strauss, DNR City of Orono To: Mayor Grabelc 6 Orono Council Members Planning Commission Chairman Kelley Orono Planning Commission Members City Administrator Bernhardson Froa: Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building & Zoning Administrator Date: September 12, 1990 Subject: #1586 James S. Buranen, 1085 Brown Road South - After-the-fact Variance - Public Hearing Pertinent Ordinance - Section 10.28, Subdivision 5 (B) - Side yard setback variance for addition to principal residence. Required * 30' A) Existing * 11' from line as previously staked and occupied Proposed * 10'9" Variance = 19'3" or 66% B) Existing = 6'6" from line based on northeast corner of Govt Lot 6 according to judicial land marker at center of section Proposed = 6'4" Variance = 23'4" or 76.6% C) Existing * 2'9" line based on northeast corner of Govt Lot 6 using true center of section Proposed * 2'7" Variance » 27'5" or 90% 3 List of Exhibits Exhibit A - Exhibit B - Exhibit C - Exhibit D - Exhibit E - Exhibit F - Exhibit G - Application Property Owners List Plat Map Letter from Most Affected Neighbor Plan Elevation Survey Review of Application - The applicant commenced the construction of an approximate 12' addition to the rear of the existing attached garage without the benefit of a building permit review. The inspector discovered the applicant's builder in the process of installing footings to the rear of the structure and advised of the need for a building permit. All work on the structure ceased. The applicant was advised of the need for a survey before the City could review a building permit application. In light of the findings of the survey, the applicant was advised of the need to file an after-the-fact variance application for a side setback. Zoning File #1586 September 12, 1990 Page 2 of 2 The current owner of the property has a limousine service in another City and drives the limousine home. The addition to the garage is to allow applicant tc park the limousine within the garage structure rather than having it parked within the front street yard. Please review Exhibit D, the owner of the most impacted property has submitted a letter approving the proposed variance. Of the three after-the-fact applications, Mr. Buranen appears to be the only one who recognized the need to file a penalty fee. Staff is not aware x. the applicant wishes to appeal the penalty fee. In any case, such an appeal would have to be presented by the applicant. As for which of the setback lines should be used to determine the specific setback variance to be granted, staff will seek direction from the City Attorney's office prior to your meeting. Options of Action - 1. Denial. Please refer to the necessary findings 10.08, Subdivicion 3 (A)l-12? or in Section 2. Approval. Please refer to the same necessary findings. Such approval should be subject to the following conditions; A) Based on the substandard setback of the north wall of the attached garage, a fire wall shall be installed along the north side of the existing garage and proposed addition. B) Applicant to obtain a penalty building permit for proposed construction. Zoning File #1586 Page 3 Additional CoaMents and Planning Conaiission Ree October 3, 1990 ndation - The Planning Commission has asked that the Public Works Director review the safety aspects of the access to the County Road as property has no turn-around capable of providing a back- out area for limousines stored on property. John Gerhardson will be asked to review the site and report to the Council at your meeting if he sees any special concerns. Applicant has already responded to these concerns by trimming back all of the shrubbery within the right-of-way upon visiting the site. Staff noted no concern in the process of backing out onto the County Road as far as sighting distance for 30 MPH. Council should be reminded that the reason for the expansion of the garage is to provide adequate area to store the two limousines owned by applicant. The business is not operated from his home, but from an office in the City of Plymouth. The Planning Commission recommended unanimous approval of the after-the-fact setback vp.riance application for James S. Buranen for a property located at 1085 Brown Road South. The enclosed resolution has been drafted per the findings and conditions of the Planning Commission's recommendation. A RBSOLOTION GRANTING AN AFTER-THE-FACT VARIANCE TO MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 10.28, SUBDIVISION 5 (B) FILE #1586 WHEREAS, James S. Buranon (hereinafter "the applicant") is the owner of the property located at 1085 Brown Road South within the City of Orono (hereinafter "City") and legally described as follows: That part of Government Lot 6, Section 10, Township 117N, Range 23W of the 5th principal meridian, described as beginning at a point on the East line of said Government Lot 6 distant 7.78 chains (513.48') South of the Northeast corner of said Government Lot 6; thence West 312 feet; thence South 111.54 feet; thence East 312 feet; thence North 111.54 feet to the point of beginning, (hereinafter "the property"); and WHEREAS, the applicant has applied to the City for an after-the-fact variance to Municipal Zoning Code Sec*^ion 10.28, Subdivision 5 (B) to permit the construction of an addition to the existing garage located 6'6" where the addition will be 6'4" instead of the required 30' setback. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono, Minnesota; FINDINGS 1. This application was reviewed as Zoning File #1586. 2. The property is located in the RR-IB Single Family Rural Residential Zoning District. 3. The Orono Planning Commission reviewed this application on September 17, 1990, and recommended iporoval of the after-the-fact variance based upon the fo . .ng findings; A) The proposed addition will encroach no closer into the substandard setback area than 2". B) The fee owner of the property located at 1045 South Brown Road has submitted a written statement noting that he has no objection to the proposed addition to the garage. Page 1 of 4 4. The City Council finds that the conditions existing on this property are peculiar to it and do not apply generally to other property in this zoning di3trict; that granting the variance would not adversely affect traffic conditions# light# air nor pose a fire hazard or other danger to neighboring property? would not merely serve as a convenience to the applicant# but is necessary to alleviate a demonstrable hardship or difficulty? is necessary to preserve a substantial property right of the applicant? and would be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan of the City. 5. The City Council has considered this application including the findings and recommendations of the Planning Commission# reports by City staff# comments by the applicant and the effect of the proposed variance on the health# safety and welfare of the community. CONCLUSIONS# ORDER AND CONDITIONS Based upon one or more of the findings noted above# the Orono City Council hereby grants an after-the-fact variance to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.28# Subdivision 5 (B) to permit the construction of an addition to the existing garage that will be located 6'4" from the north side lot line instead of the required 30'# subject to the following conditions: 1. Based on the substandard setback of the north wall of the attached garage# a fire wall shall be installed along the north side of the existing garage and proposed addition. 2. Applicant shall obtain a building permit subject to penalty fees for work previously conducted without the benefit of a building permit. 3. Authorities granted by this resolution run with the property not with the applicant, but are permissive only and must be exercised by application for a building permit within one year of the date of Council approval# or this variance will expire on that date (October 8# 1991). 4. Violation of or non-compliance with any of the terms and conditions of this variance shall constitute a violation of the zoning code# shall automatically terminate any authority granted herein# and shall be punishable as a misdemeanor. Page 2 of 4 5. The undersigned applicant has read, understood and hereby agre'is to the terms of this resolution and on behalf of himself, his heirs, successors and assigns, hereby agrees to the recording of this resolution in the chain of title of the property. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota at a regular meeting held on the 8th day of October, 1990. ATTEST: Theresa L, Naab, Deputy Clerk Edward J. Callahan, Jr., Acting Mayor Property Owner(s) STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this 8th day of October, 1990 by Edward J. Callahan, Jr., Theresa L. Naab, Acting Mayor & Deputy Clerk of the City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City. Notary Public Page 3 of 4 STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) On this _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ day of ^_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _r 199^_ before me a Notary Public within and for said county, personally appeared_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _r—i_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ known to me to be the person(s) described in and who executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that he (they) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed. STATE OF MINNESOTA ) )ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) On this day of NOTARY PUBLIC 199 before me a Notary Public witl*in and for said County, personally appeared _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ___ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ known to ine to be the person(s) described Tn and who executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that he (they) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed. STATE OF MINNESOTA ) )SS. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) On this day of NOTARY PUBLIC 199 before me a Notary Public within and for said County, personally appeared _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ___ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ known to me to be the person(s) described in and who executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that he (they) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed. NOTARY PUBLIC Page 4 of 4 i ICITT OF OROHO - VARIANCE APPLICATION Initial Application Fee $175.00 ^ ($50.00 per each additional variance) ; Renewal Variance Fee $100.00 §1^ (no change from original application) If —‘ After-the-Fact Fees (Double application fee) PROPERTY LOCATION Site Address 10 9:5' S. Ad oRc/^O Property Identification Number (P.I.D.) -- - - - - - r-—. OciTf u o:<siO f irt^CE SFEICE truEoccn) 01 an Jso.oi TCllL j7E.a Attach legal des iption to application if not included on required survey. CniitEkiCEin-rm^^ lOu iHBiSlO cool ROl r0J:55 OS/24/90 ilESiCO coot FOi r07:^ iiS/Cl'iO APPLICANT Name . In9fr K City: - - - Zipi^j’^/ Phone (home) _ _ _ Phone (work) 90,5' OWNER (if different than applicant) Name 5T ^ fY) ^_ _ _ _ ___ _ Address: __ _ _ _ _ _ Phone (home) Phone (work) City:Zip: Date Property Ac ^ _ (month/year) .- - I (do) (^o nq^y & the adjacent parcels of land. PRESENT DSB OF PROPERTY Present Zonii‘‘g Distri^ . Present Use of Property RR-lB ^^sident^J? Other (specify) DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST Estimated Construction Cost $, ^ Describe request in detail: VARIANCES REQUIRED _ _ _ Lot Area Setback Variances ( Other _ _ _ __ _ _ Lot Width ^ Front _ _ Hardcover Side _ _ _ Rear) HARDSHIP Describe undue hardship or practical difficulty resulting from strict enforcement of zoning regulations: o^loT ^ _ _ _ _ _ DESCRIPTION OF DNUSDAL PROPERTY CONDITIONS Describe unusual property conditions preventing compliance with Zoning Code Requirements I LocaT^c/ S f. ^ REQUIRED SUBMITTALS !• Completed Application Form 2. Certified Property Owners List of owners within 150' (you must obtain this list from Hennepin County Department of Finance A-603 Govt Center 348-3271). 3. Plat Map (obtained with property owners list). 4. Certificate of survey (signed by a licensed surveyor) to include hardcover calculations as required. 5. Topographic survey (existing and proposed elevations) if any changes in existing grade are proposed. 6. Sketches or plans of floor and elevation views. 7. As an addendum to this application, please attach a separate list of any other persons you wish notified of this application. 8. Additional items as may be requested by City staff. YOU ARE REQUIRED TO SUPPLY 30 COPIES OP LARGE DOCUMENTS OR A WORKING COPY (11" X 17'' OR SMA LKR) FOR ALL DOCUMENTS SUBMITTED. The Applicant and Property Owner must sign this application. Please remember that your variance application is not complete if the above information has not been included. Certification by Clerical Department that Variance Application is complete. Initialed by Clerical Staff:_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Date_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ APPLICANT'S SIGNATURE The applicant hereby agrees to provide all information required or requested by the Zoning Administrator, agrees to pay additional fees (staff time not covered by original fee payment) and/or consultant expenses incurred in review of this application, and certifies that the information supplied is true and correct to the best of his/her knowledge. Applicant's Signature _ _ _ _ _ _Date _ _ _ _ OWNERS SIGNATURE The owner hereby ackowledges and agrees to this application and further authorizes reasonable entry onto the property by City staff, consultants, agents. Commission members, and Council members for purposes of investiga tion and verification of this request. Owner's Signature Date Applicant must have all submittals into the City offices 25 days before the Planning Commission Meeting. Planning Commission Meetings are held on the third Monday of each month. Applicants must be present at all scheduled review meetings of the Planning Commission and Council. If an applicant is unable to attend a scheduled meeting, please make arrangements to have an authorized agent attend in your place and to advise the Building & Zoning Office of this change prior to the meeting. r RUN DATE 08/2<^/90 BATCH 006 P' r: r r PROP AOOR 0»tCR NAME TAXPAYER NAME/ADOR PROP ADDR OHNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/AOOR PROP AOOR 0»«CR NAME TAXPAYtr NAME/AuOR r PROP AOOR CiMNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/AOOR SB 10-117-23 13 0001 01000 BRONN RO S JAT«S A ABBOTT JAMES A ABBOTT 311a belair dr LAS VEGAS NV 89109 38 10-117-23 29 00U3 OlOBS BROI«J RO S J S BURANEN JR A F E SCHAUL JAMES S B<Jr U4EN JR FRAfJK E SCHAUL 1085 BROMT4 RO S HAY2ATA MU 55391 31 10-117-23 29 0006 01135 BRONN RO S 0 A N GLEN DUANV A A NANCY GLEN 1135 8ROI14 ROAO S NAYZATA m 55391 38 10-117-;» 01130 NILL- SAD MCNI SHIRLEY I 1130 Nil'*' CRYSTA' m.». nf33 MEitiEPIN LOL^r'V property INFORMATION SYSTEM rr-oPERT/ 0»fJ€RS LIST 10-117-23 21 0007 CG038 ADORESS UNASSIGNEO L S BORMAN A I E CORHIN .'ULIUS HENOEL / BURT H CORWIN 900 1ST AVE N MPLS MN 55901 38 10-117-23 29 0009 01105 BRONN RO S ABIE J CHRISTEt4SUN ETAL ABTF J r-IRISTENSON 110. '1 b. RO V^VZAlA rW 55391 38 10-117-23 29 0011 OHIO NIL' '>H OR S C A SUESS A J J KEMNA J»*1ES KEMNA/CANDEE SUESS 1! 10 NILLON DR S k; 7ATA MN 55391 REPORT NO. PI935901 PAGE 19 TOTAL BATCH 006 00010 38 10-117-23 29 0002 01095 BR06t4 RO S ARLENE L JANSEN STEVEN 0 VAN OE VEIRE 1095 S BR0»«4 RO NAYZATA MN ’.391 38 10-117-23 29 0005 01115 BRONN RO S S T JAMES A L M JAMES STEVEN T A LYEME M JAMES PO BOX 82 LONG LAKE 55356 38 10-117-23 29 0032 01120 NILLON OR S S A 0 MCNIL»lAMS SHIRLLY A DORCAJ ML'NILLIAMS 1130 NILLON DR S CRYSTAL BAY MN 55323 .'■i i »• * \* ' t -.I?'*''* • ^ V..: ; O•; -I. . Y'. -J ; J r I CERTIFY THAT THE FACTS REPRESENTED ARE AN ACCURATE AND TRUE REPRESENTAT:0f4 OF INFORMATION AS IT APPEARS THIS DATE ON THE RECORDS OF THE HEf«4EPIN C01A4TY DEPARTMENT OF PROPERTY TAXATION* T(HTHE BEST OF K/ K140WIEDGE AND BELIEF. DATE ■ 4 t • ^ * t•Q: ' • #•’ K-'i I , , YY v;\ • ' /o'-Y 1. ..■« VI » • f * A*•- f • ■; y ' , \ • . i [ 4 1 , *1 ■ ’ i C . 1 ■ ■;.! ■ ' ' ' • ' f J.. - • . -• ■V ■• I .•.•■.' ' >* 4^ ly ■ K • '=*4*1 a-f- \3T- y- 0 I have no objection to James Euranen adding 10 feet to the rear of his garage. ^Jff yje ^ :.\ . 4':. «•’ ‘i ■A ”'3 if'I: i . ■! -- . t /•««,’• ' 1 »J • *»i. - v ;<'i V '.1 ■ ' "I •• i;V . ? =t PlmsI : i: hj' V L• * i •• IS' r.- To: Planning Commission Chairman Kelley Orono Planning Commission Members City Administrator Bernhardson Prnfw: Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building & Zoning Administrator Date: September 12, 1990 Subject: #1587 Ruby L. Siford, 96 Hackberry Hills - After-the-fact Variance - Public Hearing Pertinent Ordinance - Section 10.03, Subdivision 12 - Required separation between principal structure and accessory structure. Required « 10' Proposed * 5' Variance * 5' or 50% Section 10.03, Subdivision 14 - Lot coverage. Total Area = 15,550 s.f. Allov^ed * 2,632.5 s.f. or 15% Proposed - 2,505.2 s.f. or 14.2%* /3 * House ■ Deck “ Garage * List of Exhibits Exhibit A - Exhibit B - Exhibit C - E.<hibit D - Exhibit E - Exhibit F - Exhibit G - Exhibit H - Exhibit I - Exhibit J - 1,627.6 s.f. 473.6 s.f. 404.0 s.f. Application Applicant's Addendum Plat Map Property’s Owners List Plan Staff Letter dtd 5/23/90 Staff Letter dtd 8/20/90 Survey Building Department Memo dtd 9/12/90 Staff Letter dtd 9/11/9 to Zoning Administrator Review of Variance Application - The rear deck built without the benefit of the building permit review has been placed 5* from the accessory garage located within the street side yard. The required separation is 10'. If deck is to remain in its present configuration, a separation setback variance must be granted. Zoning File #1587 September 12, 1990 Page 2 of 2 Please review Exhibits B and I. The applicant has listed a hardship '-iting the City staff had mislead the applicant in making necessary alterations to the deck that was under construction. In the building staff's chronology, the applicant's builder was advised of the need to obtain a building permit for the siding of the residence structure without a building permit. During the time the builder was awaiting the issuance of a building permit for the siding, he then proceeded with the construction of the rear deck. At later inspections, the Building staff discovered the deck under construction and advised once again of the need for a building permit. All work was to cease at that inspection (May 14, 1990). The builder continued to work without a building permit and proceeded to make other alterations and completed the deck. It would appear that the applicant or applicant's representative has created the hardships in not following the proper procedures through the process of a building permit review. The Planning Commission should allow Mrs. Siford her opportunity to address the City as the applicant may not be aware of the staff's interactions with the builder on those specific dates noted in the staff chronology (Exhibit I) Options of Action - 1. Denial and require immediate alteration of the deck so that it meets the required 10' setback from the detached accessory structure. Applicant to obtain a building permit for the deck construction with penalty fee, 2. Approval as proposed, granting a 5' separation setback and requiring the installation of a fire wall within the existing garage (south wall of garage). Zoning File #1587 October 3, 1990 Page 3 Additional CoMents and Planning Coamission Peconnendation As of this date, the City has not received the penalty payment requested for the after-the-fact variance application. It is staff's understanding that Mrs. Siford will appeal the payment before the Council. In the Planning Commission's review of the application, they questioned the substandard setback of the shed from the garage and the deck. The Commission questioned whether there was a need to address the need for additional firewalls because of the shed. Staff advised that this other factor would be considered in the determination of firewall construction for the existing detached garage. In light of the circumstances surrounding the after-the-fact aspect of this application and the fact that the owner, Mrs. Siford, appeared to be completely unaware of the work being done without a building permit, the Planning Commission recommended unanimous approval of the 5' separat on setback thereby requiring no future alteration of the deck structure. Their approval recommendation did include payment of all penalty fees due the City. The enclosed resolution has been drafted per the approval recommendation of the Planning Commission and subject to the conditions set forth Hv the P nning Commission. A RESOLUTION GRANTING AN AFTER-THE-FACT A VARIANCF TO MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 10.03, SUBDIVISION 12 FILE #1587 WHEREAS, Ruby L. Siford (hereinafter "the applicant") is the owner of the property located at 96 Hackberry Hill within the City of Orono (hereinafter "City") and legally described as that part of Lots 3 and 4 lying northerly of the southerly 97.50' thereof, Block 3, Daniels Long Lake Heights, Hennepin County, Minnesota (hereinafter "the property"); and WHEREAS, the applicant has applied to the City for an after- the-fact variance t^ 'Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.03, Subdivision 12 to permit a decK constructed to tne rear or east side of the existing house structure located 5' from a detached garage instead of the required 10*. Minnesota: NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono, FINDINGS 1. This application was; reviewed as Zoning File #1587. 2. The property is located in the RR-IB Rural Residential Zoning District. 3. The Orono Planning Commission reviewed this application on September 17, 1990 and recommended approval of the proposed after-the-fact variance based upon the following findings: a) The City has received no negative comments from the affected property owners notified for this review. b) The substandard separation setback is between an enclosed structure and an open deck structure. The open deck structure will present less of a fire hazard than an enclosed structure. 4. The City Council finds that the conditions existing on this property are peculiar to it and do not apply ,eneraliy to other Page 1 of 4 property in this zoning district? that granting the variance would not adversely affect traffic conditions, light, air nor pose a fire hazard or other danger to neighboring property; would not merely serve as a convenience to the applicant, but is necessary to alleviate a demonstrable hardship or difficulty; is necessary to preserve a substantial property right of the applicant; and would be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the Zoning Code and Com{.rehensive Plan of the City. 5. The City Coun-il 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 u|on one or more of the above findings, the Orono City Council hereby grants an after-the-fact variance to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.03, Subdivision 12 to permit a deck constructed to the east or rear side of the existing house struc-ure located 5' from a detached garage rather than the required 10' separation, subject to the following conditions; 1. Applicant shall submit full payment for an after-the-fact variance application. Upon application for a building permit, the applicant shall p^y a penalty fee. 2. The Orono Building -i *tment is asked to consider both the shed and deck in the application of the fire code as it relates to firewall construction within existing detached garage. 3. Authorities granted by this variance run with the property not with the applicant, but are permissive only and must be exercised by application for a building permit by October 29, 1990. 4. Violation of or non-compliance witn any of the terms and conditions of this variance shalJ constitute a violation of the zoning code, shall automatically terminate any authority granted herein, and shall be punishable as a misdemeanor. Page 2 of 4 6. The undersigned applicant has read, understood and hereby agrees to the terms of this resolution and on behalf of herself, her heirs, successors and assigns, hereby agrees to the recording of this resolution in the chain of title of the property. Adopted by the Orono City Council on this 8th day of 'October, 1990. ATTEST: Theresa L. Naab, Deputy Clerk Edward J. Callahan, Jr., Acting Mayor Property Owner(s) STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this 8th day of October, 1990, by Edward J, C.?llahan, Jr. & Theresa L. Naab, Acting Mayor & Deputy Clerk of the City of Oronc a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executec .n behalf of the City. Notary Public My Commission Expires Page 3 of 4 r STATE OF M:) ) ss. COCNTY OF HEN:^- -N ) On this day of 199 before me a Notary Public within and for said county, personally appeared __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ___ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ known to me to be the person(s) described in and who executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that he (they) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed. NOTARY PUBLIC MY COMMISSION EXPIRES STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) S3. COUNTY OF EENNEPIN ) On this _________________day of _______________________r 199_, before me a Notary Public with and for said County, pers-aally appears _____ known Lo tc be the person(s) described in and who executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that he (they) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed. NOTARY PUBLIC MY COMMISSION EXPIRES Page 4 of 4 /^f 1CITY OF ORONO - VARIANCE APPLICATION Initial Application Fee $175.00 ($50.00 per each additional variance) Renewal Variance Fee $100.00 (no change from original application) After-the-Fact Fees (Double application fee) PROPERTY LOCATION Site Address //>// /tOf^ / Property Identification Number (P.I.D.) _ _ _ 7 7 * i ’>* I V*' ■) Phone (home) Attach legal description to application if not included on qri chi - - . 7'77 ^<2/ '7^- Phone (work) required survey APPLICANT Name Address r City:Zipt’^^£_ OWNER (if different than applicant) Name ‘ _ _ _ _ Phone (home) Phone (wor)c) Address:City:Zip: Date Property Acquired ✓ Vi^x 1 Q C'(month/year) I (do) do not) also own the adjacent parcels of land PRESENT USE OP PROPERTY Present Zoning District __ _ _ _ ___ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Present Use of Property "7 '.o t ■ /" < /Residential Other ^specif y) DESCRIPTION OP REQUEST Estimated Construction Cost $ Describe request in detail: tx Ht ^_ c/ hcl^y_e S y—! ■^ y'\ VARIANCES REQUIRED _ _ _ Lot Area Setback Variances ( Other Lot Width Front _ _ Hardcover Side Rear) HARDSHIP Describe undue hardship or practical difficult enforcement of zoning regulations; iltVfresulting from,strict DESCRIPTION OF DNUSDAL PROPERTY CONDITIONS Describe unusual property conditions preventing compliar c ; with Zoning Code Requiremients;_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ REQUIRED SUBMITTALS Completed Application Form Certified Property CH'r ers List of owni'srs within 150' (you must obtain this list from Hennepin County Department of Finance A-603 Govt Center 348-3271). Plat Map (obtained with property owners list). Certificate of survey (signed by a licensed surveyor) to include hardcover calculations as required. Topographic survey (existing and proposed elevations) if any changes in existing grade are proposed. Sketches or plans of floor and elevation views. As an addendum to this application, please attach a separate list of ^ any other persons you wish notified of this application. /8. Additional items as may be requested by City staff. A< 5-. YOU ARE REQUIRED TO SUPPLY 30 COPIES OF LARGE DOCUMENTS OR A VIORKING COPY (ll* X 17" OR SMALLER) FOR ALL DOCUMENTS SUBMITTED. The Applicant and Property Owner must sign this application. Please remember that your variance application is not complete if the above information has not been included. Certification by Clerical Department that Variance Application is complete. Initialed by Clerical Staff:_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Date_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ APPLICANT'S SIGNATURE The applicant hereby agrees to provide all information required or requested by the Zoning Administrator, agrees to pay additional fees (staff time not covered by original fee payment) and/or consultant expenses incurred in review of this application, and certifies that the information supplied is true and correct to the best of his/her knowledge. Applicant's Signature ^IJXo Date ^ ^ OWNERS SIGNATURE The owner hereby ackowledges and agrees to this application and further authorizes reasonable entry onto the property by City staff, consultants, agents. Commission members, and Council members for purposes of investiga tion and verification of this request. /^' Date ^ ~ ^ dOwner's Signature Applicant must have all submittals into trfie City offices 25 days before the Planning Commission Meeting. Planning Commission Meetings are held on the third Monday of each month. Applicants must be present at all scheduled review meetings of the Planning Commission and Council. If an applicant is unable to attend a scheduled meeting, please make arrangements to have an authorized agent attend in your place and to advise the Building & Zoning Office of this change prior to the meeting. j; RUN DATE 07/25/90 BATCH 009 SB S3-11S-2S 94 0009 PROP AOOR 00129 HACKBERRY HILL ONTCR NAME VIL OF ORONO TAXPAYER CITY OF ORONO NAME/AOOR BOX 99 CRYSTAL BAY Ml 55323 HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORMATION SYSTEM PROPERTY OMTCRS LIST 38 33-118-23 99 0007 00058 AD0RES3 UNASSIGNEO VIL OF ORONO CITY OF OROt« BOX 99 CRYSTAL BAY MN 55525 REPORT NO. PI935901 PAGE 5 38 33-118-23 99 0011 00125 HACKBERRY HILL P A I M L NELSON PHILLIP A NELSON 125 HACKBERRY HILL LONG LAKE Ttl 55359 38 33-118-23 99 0012 PROP AOOR 00109 HACKBERRY HILL OHNER NAME OAVIO J STEJSKAL TAXPAYER OAVIO J STEJSKAL NAME/AOOR 109 HACKBERRY HILL LONG LAKE MN 55559 38 33-118-23 99 0015 00095 HACKBERRY HILL D 0 PEASLEY ETAL DUNWHEATH PEASIE'' 95 HACKBERRY HILL LONG LAKE MN 55359 38 33-110-23 99 0019 00081 HACKBERRY HILL 0 i D DALY DANIEL P DALY ai HACKBERRY HILL LONG LAKE MN 55359 PROP AOOR OMCR NAME TAX. ter NAME/AOOR PROP AOOR ONNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/AOOR PROP AOOR OMIER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/AOOR 38 33-118-23 99 0015 00095 HACKBERRY HILL DONALD M DAHL ETAL DONALD M I KAREN S CAHL 95 HACKBERRY HILL LONG LAKE MN 55359 38 33-118-23 99 0022 00080 HACKBERRY HILL J E MOCK I 0 L MOCK JAMES I DANA MOCK 80 HACKBERRY HILL LONG LAKE MN 55359 38 33-118-23 99 0033 00095 HILLON OR N 0 GRONBERG ETAL DONALD GRONBERG 95 HILLON OR N LONG LAKE MN 55359 38 33-110-23 99 0020 00095 HILLON DR N L t E FAIRBAr«(S ELEANOR A FAIRBANKS 95 HILLON DR NO LONG LAKE MN 55356 38 33-118-23 99 0023 00096 HACKBERRY HILL RUBY L SI FORD RUBY L SIFORO 96 HACKBERRY HILL LONG LAKE MN 55356 38 33-118-23 99 0039 00038 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED TONN OF ORONO TONN OF ORONO 38 33-118-23 99 0021 02925 MAPLE LA CLIFFORD A HAMPEL CLIFFORD A HAMPEL 2925 MAPLE LA LONG LAKE MN 55359 38 33-118-23 99 0029 00066 HACKBERRY HILL THOMAS S PIERCE THOMAS S PIERCE 66 HACKBERRY HILL LONG LAKE MN 55359 : >?) .1 TOTAL BATCH 009 00019 c? RUN DATE 07/25/90 BATCH 004 HfNNEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORMATION SYSTEM PROPERTY OHNERS LIST REPORT NO. PI455401 PAGE 4 6 m I CERTIFY THAT THE FACTS REPRESENTED ARE AN ACCURATE AND TRUE REPRESENTATION OF INFORMATION AS IT APPEARS THIS DATE ON THE RECORDS OF THE HEr«JEPIN COUNTY DEPARTHENT OF PROPERTY TAXATION, TO THE BEST OF MY KNOHLEDGE AND BELIEF. u CITY OF ORONa CITYof ORONO Post Offic* Bo* 6<i»Crystal Bay. Minnesota 55323•Municipal Offices On the North Shore o ' LcJte Minnetonka May 23, 1990 Ruby Siford 96 Hackberry Hill Long Lake. MN 55356 Dear Mrs. Siford: The Building and Zoning Department is in receipt of your application for a Building Permit which was received by this office on May 22, 1990. A review of the application finds that the proposed deck construction does not meet the following code requirements: 1. Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.03r Subdivision 12. Crowding Principal Building. No accessory building or structure unless an integral part of the principal building shall be erected, altered or moved within 10' of the principal building, nor within 10' of another accessory structure. % Your proposed deck may be no closer than 10' to the existing garage. Your plans show the deck as being 5' from the garage. Although one of your options is to apply for a variance, it is my opinion that the Planning Commission and City Council would probably not grant a variance for your deck to be less than 10' from the garage. My recommendation is to remove all portions of the deck that are within 10' of the garage. Also, it is my understanding that, this deck was recently constructed without the required permit. You are advised that in order for the City to issue a Building Permit for this deck, you must provide an updated Certificate of Survey that verifies the location of the existing house and garage on the property. BLILDING a ZONING - 475-7357 ASSESSING ADMINISTRATION A nNANCE - 473-7358 FAX-473-0510 PUBLIC WORKS - 473-T35V Ruby Siford May 22, 1990 Page 2 Review of your application will not continue until an updated su*.'vey is provided" and revised plans submitted. If you wish to apply for a variance, be advised that that application would similarly require submittal of a new Certifici.te of Survey, the application fee is $175.00, and the process of hearings before the Planning Commission and Council would take approximately 2 months, with no guarantee that a variance would be approved. Please contact me if you have any questions. Sincerely Michael P. G^fron Asst Plannir^g & Zoning Administrator cc; Lyle Oman, Senior Building Inspector Bruce Vang, Field Inspector Jeanne Mabusth, Building & Zoning Administrator MPG/lsv CITY OF ORONO Gf CITY of ORONO Post Offi« Box 66•Crystal Bay, Minnesota 55323•Municipal 0£Bcea I On the North Shore of Lake Minnetonka August 20f 1990 Bill Siford 96 Hackberry Hill Long Lake, MN 55356 RE: Deck Dear Mr. Sifords We are in receipt of a copy of an as-built survey of your property, which was surveyed by Coffin & Gronberg, Inc., dateo August 3, 1990. This survey confirms that your upper level deck is less than 10' from the existing garage, and a variance is necessary in order to retain the deck. As I mentiorod in my letter of May 23, 1990, your choices are to remove the portion of deck that is in violation, or to apply for a variance. The deadline for variance applications for the September meeting is Friday, August 24th at noon. Tbelieve we have already sent you a variance application. Please contact me at 473-7357 if you have any questions. Sincerely, .dchael P. Gaffn Assistant Planning & Zoning Administrator cc: Lyle Oman, Senior Building Inspector Bruce Vang, Field Inspector MPG/lsv BUILDING & ZONING - 47J-7357 ASSESSING ADMINIS1R-\T10N & MN.ANCE - 4’ VT3f;» FAX -4734)510 PUBLIC WORKS - 473-^359 EXHIBIT I) Prom: Date: Subject: 4/18/90 5/4/90 approx, 5/14/90 approx. Lyle Oman, Senior Building Inspf :tor September 12, 1990 Chronology of Penalty (after-the-fact) Building Permit - 96 Hackberry Hill Inspector Bruce Vang left door hanger advising permit needed for residing job which is underway. Inspector Vang posted "Stop Work Order' applied for. as permit not 5/9/90 Permit applied for and issued. Inspector Vang stopped and talked to 2 men siding on north wall of house and asked about deck which had appeared on east side. One said that he had built the deck while they were waiting for owner to get permit for re-siding. Inspector advised him he also needed permit for deck. Both Lyle and Bruce spoke with builder of deck and told him to stop work until he got a p*=*rmit for deck and indicated of ocher problems; - stairs built incorrectly - deck too close to garage - footings not inspected - joist and beam sizes questionable. All these were to be addressed on permit application - no work was to be done before permit was approved. 5/22/90 Deck application received. 5/23/90 Gaffron's letter sent to owner indicating deck needs to be 10' from garage (Exhibit F). CITY ORONO CITY of ORONO Post Office Box 66* Crystal Bay, Minnesota 55323* Municipal Officsa On the North Shore of Lake Minnetonka September 11, 1990 Ruby L. Siford 96 Hackberry Hill' Long Lake, MN 55356 RE: A^ter-the-Fact Penalty Fee Dear Mrs. Siford: In the review of your after-the-fact land use application we note that the penalty fee was not paid at the time of filing. In order to -complete the review of your application we must ask that the penalty*;fee of $175.00 be submitted as soon as possible. Please contact Jeanne Mabusth (473-7357) if you have any questions pertaining to this request. Sincerely, Jeanne A. Mabusth Building & Zoning Administrator cc: Mark Bernhardson, City Administrator JAM/lsv BL'ILOING a /«)MNG - 473-7357 ASSESSING ADMIMSTRAnON h UNANCE - 473-7358 tAX-4734)510 PtBUC UOKK-S - 473-7359 /Tos Mayor Grabek & Orono Council MembersPlanning Commission Chairmaii Kelley Orono Planning Commission Members City Administrator Bernhardson From: Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building & Zoning Administrator Date: October 5, 1990 Subject: #1588 US West Vector Group - 850 Wayzata Blvd. - Conditional Use Permit Zoning District: RR-IB Pertinent Ordinance- Section 10.02 - Definitions 1. Accessory Use or Structure- The use or structure subordinate to and serving the principle use or structure on the same lot and customarily inciden .nl thereto. 54. Public Serv ices - Underground oi overhead gas, electrical, steam or water transmission or distribution systems, collection, communication, supply or disposal systems including poles, wires, mains, drains, sewers, pipes, conduits, cables, fire alarm boxes, traffic signals, hydrants or other similar equipment and accessories in conjunction with therewith; but not including buildings or major structures locate‘3 above ground level. 72. Use__^ subordinate to the principal use on a lot and exclusively used for purposes incidental to those of the principle use. 73. Use - Conditional - Those occupations, vocations, skills, arts, businesses, professions, or uses specifically designated in each zoning district, which for their respective conduct, exercise or performance in such designated use districts may require reasonable but special, peculiar, unusual or extra ordinary limitations, facilities, regulations in such use district for the promotional preservation of the general public weIfare, health, convenience, or safety therein and in the City and therefore may be permitted in such use districts only by a conditional use permit, which is designed to meet the problem that arises where certain uses, although generally compatible with the basic use classification of a particular zone, should not be permitt ed to located as a matter of right j^n every area incTudeH witBin th^ zone because of hazards inherent in the use itself or sj^eci^aJ. problems which It's proposed location may represent . Zoning File #1588 October 5» 1990 Page 2 74. Use Permitted - A use which may be lawfully established in a particular district or districts provided it conforms with all requirements, regulations and performance standards (if any of such districts). 75. Use__1 - The main use of land or buildings as distinguished from subordinate or accessory uses. A principal use may be either permitted or conditional. Section 10.03* Subdivision 7 - One building per lot except in the case of planned residential developments as provided for hereinafter no more than one principle building shall be located on a lot except that staff may issue a permit to use a manufactured home that shall meet all required setback standards of an existing dwelling while a new principle structure is being constructed ......................... Section 10.20* Subdivision 3 (D) - Public Service Structures (Conditional Use Permit). Public service structures, including but not limited to electric transmission lines, buildings such as telechone exchange stations, booster or pressure regulating stations, wells and plumbing station*?, elevated tanks, lift stations and electrical power substations, pro vided no bui Iding shall be locat ed within 50 ' from any lot li^ne o^ a_n abutting lot in ajl R district. Prior to Mranti nq such permit it sh^ii ^ found that the architectural design of service structures is compatible to the neighborhood in which 11 is to be located and thus will promote the general welfare. Public service structures as defined above that have been approved by the City at required public hearings for public improvement projects shall ......................... Section 10.20* Subdivision 3 (K) - Antenna Structure (Conditional Use Permit). One independent antenna structure with antenna or combination of antenna attached thereto, subordinate to and servicing the principle usje o£ structure on the same lot and customari ly incid ental thereto and is not attached to another structure provided that height of the antenna structure does not exceed 65' and the antenna structure is set back from any lot line a distance at least equal to the total height of the antenna structure. Section 10.20* Subdivision 4 (H) - Antenna (Permitted Accessory Use in Residential Zone). Any antenna or combination of antenna rigidly attached to the principle or accessory structure provided that none of the foregoing exceeds the total height allowed in Section 10.70. Zoning File #1588 October 5, 1990 Page 3 Section 10.55, Subdivision 8 - 26' setback required from edge of wetlands. Section 10.75, Subdivision 1 4 2 - Increase in heights controlled through conditional use permit. List of Exhibits Exhibit A - Exhibit B - Exhibit C - Exhibit D - Exhibit E - Exhibit F - Exhibit G - Exhibit H - Exhibit I - Application Property Owners List Location Map Owners Written Confirmation Applicants Addendum Search Area Beuteispacher’s Letter - Dept, of Administration Engineer's Report, Noble's Letter 11/29/89, Exhibit Exhibit Exhibit Exhibit Exhibit Exhibit Exhibit Pirod, Inc. Peter J. Patchin & Appraiser - Letter Topographic Survey Site Plan Elevations Landscape Plan Wetlands Antenna Elevation Pamphlet Entitled ' Technology" Associates, Inc. - Appraisal on Property Valuations Introduction Into Cellular Additional Exhibits Submitted Since Planning Commission's Review Exhibit Q - Anand Gopinath Letter Exhibit R - Petition from Residents of MyrtJewood Neighborhood Exhibit S - Petition from Affected Neighbors Exhibit T - Staff Letter to City Attorney Exhibit U - Additional Comments - C. John Uban Exhibit V - Alternate Sites within Search Area Exhibit W - Residential Sections Exhibit - Views of 4 Residences Review of Application - The applicant has applied for a conditional use permit to install an independent tower and antenna structure on a property owned by Vineyard on the Lake located at the east entrance to the City on Highway 12 on the north side of Highway 12. The structure will be located just to the north of the existing gravel parking lot and will be placed a minimum of 150' from all adjacent lot lines. The antenna will be located 250+' from the Church structure. The applicant also proposes the installation of a 12 ’ x 30' Zoning File #1588 October 5, 1990 Page 4 prefabricated equipment building. A gravel drive will be installed along the west and north sides of this structures located to the exterior of the fenced area to provide access and parking for service vehicles. The wetlands shown on the plan has been designated per the City's wetland maps, not be and OHM determination. Please review Exhibits E and U. The applicants addendums that review the background and needs of the applicant, search area criteria, application of local zoning requirements, supportive data to confirm selection of site, sections measuring impact upon adjacent residential homes and findings to support use related to Orono's conditional use criteria. Zoning Concerns The applicant has applied under Section 10.iO, Subdivision 3 (D) for a conditional use permit for a public service structure. Specifically a 150' high tower and antenna structure to service cellular phone customers within a 3 mile radius aiea. Applicant has also applied under Section 10.20, Subdivision 4 (H) which classifies antennas as accessory uses to the principle use which in this instance is a public service structure. Is the antenna both a conditional use and accessory use? It is not clear if the applicant proposes the antenna structure as accessory to the principle church use on the property. In previous applications when dealing with free standing antennas for ham radio operators, the City considered Section 10.20, Subdivision 3 (K), but the antenna was to be subordinate or accessory to the prirciple residential use. The application of this section of the code could not pertain to this application because the Church is the principle use, permitted via a conditional use permit. In Section 10.20, Subdivision 3 (D), the only setback required under this s^^rtinn is a 50' setback for all public service structures. Section 10.75, Subdivisions 1 and 2 are only applicable to height considerations for antenna structures. It is only Section 10.20, Subdivision 3 (K) that provides standards for setbacks that relate to the height of antenna structures. Note that Section 10.20, Subdivision 4 (H) discusses antennas as accessory structures that are attached to principle or accessory structure. The applicant proposes a free standing 150' high tower and antenna structure. In recent discussions with the City Attorney, Section 10.03, Subdivision 7 was noted advising that only one principle building can be located on a lot. Section 10.20, Subdivision 3 (B) Churches and Subdivision 3 (D) Public Service Structures are considered two principle permitted uses, thus the two uses could not be on the single lot. The antenna structure is clearly not accessory to or subordinate to the principle use on the property, the Church. The antennas are not noted in the definition of public services as buildings or major structures located above ground are not permitted. There is no mention of antenna-like Zoning File #1588 October 5, 1990 Page 5 structures within the conditional use {.ermit for public service structures applied for by applicant. Standards are not applicable. The applicant has referenced the antenna as an accessory use refering Section 10.20, Subdivision 4 (H). In this Section only antennas attached to a principle or accessory structure is permitted. There is no mention of free standing antennas . Staff would suggest that Council members refer to sections of the ordinance noted above. Council members may have other concerns. It is the opinion of staff that the current zoning code does not permit a free standing antenna, a permitted or rinciple use via conditional use permit on a property that ,lready contains another principle use. The code lacks appropriate standards for this type of structure. The section specifically applied under by applicant (Section 10.20, Subdivision 3 (D) - public service structures) relates to compatibility with architectural design in immediate neighborhood, to promote the general welfare. The question of general welfare has been raised by several residents. Public Responses The applicant held an informational meeting at the Council Chambers on Friday, September 14, 1990 at 6:00 p.m. All residents within 1,000 feet of the proposed antenna location were notified. The applicant advised that only two residents had attended. At the Public Hearing held on September 17, 1990 approximately four neighbors were in attendance voicing concern with the proposed antenna installation. Since that meeting staff has received many calls advising of concerns from the affected neighborhood. Staff would ask that members review Exhibits Q, R and S. The concerns are summarized as follows: 1. Negative impact on the rural surrounding character of the neighborhood. 2. Negative impact on the aesthetics of the area. 3. Impact on the Luce Line. 4. Concern with the safety issues by placement of an antenna at such height. 5. Detrimental impact of the surrounding property value. Zoning File #1588 October 5, 1990 Page 6 Site Plan/Blevation/Landscaping As already noted, the wetland has been determined using the City wetland maps. Security fencing is located within the 26' setback area. The actual dimensions of the base of the towe^r have not been shown. The accessory structure will be 12' x 30'. The prefabricated unit is to be covered with a beige gelcoat. The structure would stand approximately 9' 7" high. The use/function of this structure is to serve as an equipment storage building. Applicant proposes evergreen plantings along south and east sides of structure. Based on the proximity of the Luce Line, it would be appropriate to provide screening along the north and west sides of the exterior sides of the gravel driveway, at least to shield lower portions of tower and accessory structure. Other Review Issues Outside of the zoning issues discussed above and the concerns of the neighbors, staff would add the following: Search Criteria - The applicant has explained in detail the criteria used in determining the location for an antenna. Review Exhibit E. In Exhibits U and V, the applicant has attempted to explain why this specific area was selected for the antenna location siting specific reasons why this site was selected. " 150' height appears excessive. Applicant has advised that the height is needed to meet the 3 mile radius service area. In consideration of topography. Applicant also advises that lighting will not be required either on buildings or on tower. Noise Impact - The applicant advises that there will be minimal sounds emitted from the structure. Maintenance vehicles will visit but there will be no regular daily visitation. Note that applicant has provided an engineer's evaluation of the structure's stability (Exhibit H). In response to the usual question of diminishing property values, the applicant has also provided comments from Peter J. Patchin & Associates (Exhibit I). In reviewing Mr. Patchin's letter it would appear that the properties used in the comparison are not similar to the lands/densities of neighborhoods adjacent to this proposed antenna site. Zoning File #1588 October 5, 1990 Page 7 Options of Action Denial - Finding the current residential code does not allow free standing antenna structures as principle uses (permitted or coi*ditional) and that the code does not allow two principle uses on one lot. Council to provide conceptual direction to staff to draft a resolution of denial. Recommend tabling app1ication - Adopt a moratorium ordiance that would provide the City with adequate time to review Its ordinances to determine standards for the use and siting of wireless telecommunication facilities and structures in the City. The city attorney will present a draft of a moratorium ordinance for your consideration and action. ^iSyd CITY OP ORONO - GENERAL LAND USE APPLICATION PROPERTY LOCATION Site Address 850 west Wayzata Boulevard Property Identification Nuir.ber (P.I.D.) 3a35-il8-234i_oooj^ 3.. , -ZLZlri —IcSUO iOOl m U0:0S Please attach legal description to application if not included on required survey. APPLICANT Naxne USVvT.ST New vector Orouc lac^ ■- Address 3350 161st Avenue S.£, F. OWNER (if different than applicant) Name Vineyard of the Lake Phone (home) ______Phone (work) 339-3300 li:y City Belle^/ue Zip 98008 Phone (home) ^ ^____________ Phone 612 471-Q7~’3 Address 850 W. Wayzata Ek^ulevard City Wavzata Zip 7S36j^ Date Property Acquired N/A (month/year) I (do) (do not) also own the adjacent parcels of land. FEES - CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS - Renewal Fee - 1/2 Current Fee After-the-Fact Fee - Double Current Application Fee $ 50.00 For each variance request with CUP application _ _ _ _ $125.00 Residential accessory Use _ _ _ _ $150.00 Institutional (church, school, etc.) _ _ _ _ $150.00 Guest House/Guest Apartments _ _ _ _ $150.00 Duplex Credit/Bldg X $250.00 Commercial/Industrial Use (Coirunumcation Tower and Accessory Structure) _ _ _ _ $200.00 Land Alteration Grading and filling - designated wetland or floodplain Grading and filling - 101 cu. yd. or more Grading, seawall, retaining walls within 75' of lakeshore PRD/PID - see fee schedule OTHER APPLICATIONS , ^ ^$200.00 Commercial Site Plan Review (+ consultant fees) $250.00 Vacation $175.00 Easement Vacation $ 50.00 Easement Vacation With Subdivision ■ $250.00 Rezoning (PUD - refer to fee schedule) _ _ _ _ $100.00 Appeals Other - see fee schedule PH2SENT OSB OP PROPERTYPresent Zoning District Present Use of Property Residential Other (specify) church DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST - i , Describe reguest in detail: consti act ion or i ISO' antenna tow er anu the., location of a 12* X 30^ prefabricated equipment buildinu for a r’S West - New Vector Cellular phone antenna. ____________________________ REQUIRED SUBMITTALS Cert if i^d Owners List of owners within 3 50' (you can obtain this list from Hennepin County Department of Finance A-603 Government Center 348-3271). Plat Map. ^ . Certificate of survey (signed by a licensed surveyor). , ^ r ^ Topographic survey (existing and proposed contours) if lan alterations involve changes in elevation (grades). Construction plan, if applicable (see staff for requirements). As an addendum to this application, please attach a separate list of any other persons you wish notified of this application. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. YOU ARE REQUIRED TO SUPPLY 30 COPIES OF I.^GB DOCUMENTS OR A WORKING COPY (11" X 17* OR SMALLER) FOR ALL DOCUMENTS SUBMITTED. PleaseThe applicant and Property Owner must sign this application, rememb^e^r that your application is not complete if the above information has not been included. Certification by Clerical Department that Land Use Application is complete. Initials of Clerical Staff:_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - - - - - - - - - - APPLICANT'S SIGNATURE T.he applicant hereby agrees to provide- - requested by the Zoning Administrator, agrees to pay additional ^ees ^stat time not covered by original fee payment) and/or unusual expenses incur ^ in review of this applicatio,n, and certifies that the information supplied is true and correct to the h^^he^ knowledq^. Applicant's signature [AJIDate (for USUEST Vector) OWNERS SIGNATURE , . ^ The owner hereby ac)cnowledges and agrees to this application and entry onto the property'b^y City staff, consultants, and,^-G<unci 1 mtembers for purposes of est. J_________________^ all information required or authorized reasonable agents, commission investigation anc ■mber s, ifl if th! )(^0wner's signati re \ Ja Applicant must have all submi^als i Planning Commission Meeting. >^nn>hg third Monday of each month. App Date to the City offices 25 days before the Commission Meetings are held on the Icants must be present at all scheduled authorized agent attend in your place and advise the Building & - 9 Office of this change prior to the meeting. PROPERTY OWNER LIST f H DATE 10/z<»/s« SAfCM uM ADOR >««R NAK -4>^AVE» N«.*«/AOOI( ■W AOM ->C£ll NANC :«j<rAYt« arc/A00« ’OP ADOR •«R KAMI 'A!<AAYHI» NA«/ADO* >ROP AOOII -WA NAHE ■-XTAYER NA«/tOC« »3R ACOR CdW NATC AXPAYER 'tAME/AOOR l» SS-118-ZS A1 OOOA OORZO NAYZATA »tVO 0 ( ANDERSON ETAL DARRELL E ANDERSON RZO M MAYZATA BLVO KAYZATA rt4 SSSR; 58 B5-118-Z3 R* OOIK. - 00850 MAYZATA 8LV0 VINEYARD OP THE LAKE IK VINEYARD OF THE LAKE INC C/0 ROBERT NMITESSEL 111! 01 0 courmr bo MAYZATA W4 553*1 58 5A-118-ZI 5Z 0005 00038 ACDRESS 0NASSIC*4E0 BRUCE 8 DAYTON BRUCE 8 0AYTOr4 Air: IDS center NPIS W 65^o: 58 5A-118-Z3 55 OOOA 00070 NYRT lEKDOO RO R J NELLS JR ETAL RAY J NELLS 70 KYRT lEhOOO RO NAYZATA 553*1 72 35-ll8-:i Ak 0002 00*15 MAYZATA BLVD N E J 80ULEY ETAL E J BX'LEY *15 N MAYZATA BLVO MAYZATA fW 553*1 HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPERT' INfORHATlON SYSTEM PROPERTY 0RP€RS LIST 58 35-118-25 A1 000* 00805 OLO LONE LAKE RO BRUCE B DAYTON BRUCE B OAYTOM C-'O PKABENA CO Ai:; IDS CEIATER MPLS m 55A02 58 35-118-25 A* 0005 00058 ADDRESS UNASSIGACO P M CICI t 1 M CICl PANOELI H A INCEBORS CICl 7532 TROY lA maple GROYt >** 5SIA* 58 3A-118-23 55 0001 00058 ADDRESS UNASSIGNEO VINEYARD OF THE LAKE INC VINEYARD OF THE LAKE INC C/0 ROBERT M. ITESSEL 3111 OLO COIKTY RO NAYZATA P*4 553*1 38 3A-118-2S S3 0005 000*0 MYRTLENOOO RO A 8 DROGUE I S E DROCLI ARTHUR 8 DROGUE AND SHERR! E DRCCJE *0 HtHTLENCOO RO NAYZATA 7*1 i5i*i ' '' ** 35-118-23 AA 0008 CITY OF MAYZATA CITY OF MAYZATA *00 RICE ST MAYZATA 7*t 555*1 RERCRT NO. RI hSSa OI RAGE 8 38 55-118-23 *1 0010 00038 ADDRESS IMASSIGNEO STATE LAND DEPT CTAT' LANO DEPT 38 35-115-:3 AA 03C7 00038 AOORCSS LAiASSIGNEO STATE OF MlrS* STATE OF 7UNN 58 3A-11B-23 33 0002 00C38 ACDRESS LYaSSTSMEO A 8 DROGUE A S E CAOCL'E ARTHUR 8 ORnCUC UC. SHERRI E CROGUE *0 mytrlewooo RO MAYZATA 7*4 553*1 38 3*-U8-:3 35 OCi: 000*0 HYRT lEHOCC RO R H GOUGMNOUR/N 0 C0UCM740UR PETER I DENISE OU 8CIS *0 TTYRTLEHOOO RO NArZATA Tfi 553*1 total BATCH r^'ir < ' \ i ■ / ' I CERTIFY that the facts REPRECeNTlO ARE XN ACCURATE A740 TRUE REPRECENTATION CF IN»CR.“.AriCN AS IT APPEARS THIS DATE CM THE RECCROS OF THE METPiEPIN COUNTY OlPARrMEHT OF PROPERTY TA^TICN, TX T.tE BEST OF MV KECNLtOOC A7J) BELIEF / / V ‘ ■ * -r _r - 11 - ) \o Q . V I “r il RR-1B-1 /r^ » -1 I r'-t* ^ ,§V! \ SITEj-i,' ' =ii. ''"I. •‘.. r -.•.wm.^3^a?r-JBrTTc»t- w.. V .fc,. -------•H'.'^JV .. RR-1B ^ r -: __.1. ■■.^r-nr .."^ny. j) A r-' WAYZATA u\n.vf_f- ■ ;.>•' \ ZONING / EXHIBIT A VINEYARD of the Lake H50 West Wayzata Boulevard \Va>^ta, Minnesota July 24, 1990 .11ir Mark Bernhardson Ciyt of Orono P.O. Box 66 Trvstal Bay. MN 55323 Re: Minneapolis SMSA Limited Partnership (US WEST NewVector Group, Inc.) Dear Mr. Bernhardson: As the representative of the property located at 850 West Wayzata Boulevard, I hereby authorize Minneapolis SMSA Limited Partnership to make application for all land use, zoning and building permits for a cellular communications facility at this location. Sincerely;, 1. \ Robert B. Whitejal-^ j Senior Pastor ( / I r Tvv-Mmwmm \ -.• i:,;_.... .*'•. - r;:-S'" .s' •7E :’■' 21 August 1990 Mr. Charles Kelly, Chair and Planning Commission Members c/o Mark Bernhardson, City Administrator City of Orono P.6. Bo.\ 66 Orono. MN 55323 ::z #1 O RE: Proposed Cellular Telephone Antenna. Vineyard of the Lake Dear Mr. Chair and Commission Members: This letter accompanies an application for a Conditional Use R'*rmit to locate a cellular (elephone antenna on property owned by Vineyard of the Lake The application is in the name of US West NewVector Group. Inc., which is part of US West. Inc., one of the regional holding companies formed as a result of the break up of ATctT. Dahlgren. Shardfow, and Uban. Inc. has been authorize ' by US West to act as its representative for planning and zoning matters. Specifically, we propose to construct a single 150-foot self supported antenna and a 12-foot by 30-foot prefabricated equipment building. The base of the tower and equipment building will be enclo.sed by a 6-foot high chain link fence. The site will be accessed by a gravel drive connecting the site to the Vineyard of the Lake parking lot and Wa\zata Boulev.trd. The Cellular Phone Svstem The primary u.ser:. of cellular telephone serv'ice are members of the business community and the public sector. The phone becomes a useful tool leading to increased productivity. Doctors, builders, sale.spersons. busine* ■, owners and executives all benefit by using cellular phones, .additionally, cellular is extensively used in the public sector principally by fire and police dep.irtments. Cellular allows police and others to conduct discreet communication in the field. Citizens can contact "911" to report accidents, fires or other » mergencies. The cellular phone system interfaces fully th the "911" emergencN' reporting system. .Mr. James R. Beutel.spacher, 911 Projeci Manager tor Minnesota, recently wrote, "the unimpeded growth of cellular service is an important adjunct to 9-1-1 emergency reporting". His letter is attached for your information as Exhibit G. / ; /■/ 1 Orono Planning Commission, 9 Februar}’ 1990 Page 2 y Cellular Grid System Cellular service provides subscribers with office quality phone serv'ice by developing a grid of antennas arranged in a geographically hexagonal pattern. Each hexagon is a "cell" created by an antenna and serves as the link between the customer and the system while the customer is within that particular cell. Each cell can only handle a certain number of calls simultaneously. As the number of customers increase, the grid must be chanced to handle the appropriate number of simultaneous calls. This usually means that more cells need to be created within the same area resulting in a new ^id pattern of smaller cells. A new antenna must be constructed each time a new cell is created. .As the grid matures and more cells are added, antennas are made shorter because of each cell’s smaller coverage area. Antennas are also constructed to expand the grid of coverage into new areas. The antenna in Orono is being proposed to expand cellular phone coverage in an 3-mile radius area. The cellular mobile phone system operates on a specific set of channels set aside by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC). The filtering ot spurious signals is ver\' ightly controlled. Cellular telephones operate within a very' strictly controlled set of allotted frequency between 835 to 897 megahertz. US West New Vector Group is currently operating over 160 cellular antennas around the country with no case of television or radio interference reported. Search .Area Criteria We have been working for several months to locate an antenna site in the Orono area to solve cellular phone service coverage needs. Many factors go into the selection ot a location for an antenna site. These include market factors, technical considerations, cellular grid, zoning and land use compatibuity. landowner willingness to sell or lea.se. land forms of the surrounding area, and accessibility to roads. All of these factors taken together create a narrow site search area for location of the antenna The technical aspects of fitting a new cell site into the grid pattern dictates a small search area for new antenna sites. The search area is further refined by topographical features and a sophisticated computer modeling that takes into account existing antenna sites, predicted coverage of the new cell and FCC service area requirements. Federal Aviation Administration regulations must also be followed in locating and constructing antennas. The search area in Orono that resulted from this type of analysis, is illustrated c^xhibit B. It is an area 1.2 miles in diameter and generally centered on the Luce Line crossing of Highway 12. Once the search area has been defined by these technical constraints, zoning and land use factors can be addressed. We have been in contact with the City s Planning and Zoning Staff from very' early in the proce.ss to identify the most appropriate location. Our search was narrowed to the area around the Luce Line ; c vcllular telephone system does not have the power of eminent domain and we must deal w ith willing property owners. In this instance Vineyard ot the Lake has agreed to lease a portion of their property for use (see attached letter). #.7 J V.. Orono Planning Commission, 9 Februan- 1990 - \ J ..J J Page 3 Local Zoning Requirements meAs shown on Exhibit A, this project is located in the RR-IB Residential Distr* City of Orono. Section 10.02.54 of the City's Zoning Regulations defines ''communications systems" as Public Services and Section 10.02.75 states that "a principal use may be either permitted or conditional". Section 10.20 Subd. 3.D allows Public Services Structures as a "conditional use" in this district and Subd. 4.H provides for antennas as "accessory uses" to the principal use, which in this instance is a public serv ice structure. The height of the antenna is controlled by the conditional use permit under Section 10.75 Subd.2. The antenna ’s 150-fooi self supported tower and equipment building will be placed a minimum of 150 feet from all property boundary lines and a minimum of 26 feet from the abutting wetlands area, which will meet all district and wetland setback requirements (see E.xhibits C, E and J). The tower will be located a minimum of 2S0 feet from any other structure and a minimum of 430 feet from any residential structure (see E.\hibit D). Conditional Use Criteria Section 10.09 Subd. 6.A addre.s.'^es the findings that must be met before a conditional use permit is granted. The findings are addressed below: 1. That the proposed location of the conditional use is In accord witl 'he objectives of the Zoning Chapter and the purposes of the district in which the site is located and Comprehensive Municipal Plan; The purpo.se of the RR-IB one family rural residential district provides for a mixture of low density residential development and limited agricultural uses. Public Serv ice Structures are a conditional use within the district under Section 10.20 Subd. 3.D and as such are subject to conditions of approval before they area permitted to develop. That the proposed location of the conditional use and the proposed condition under which it would be operated or maintained would not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare, or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity; The antenna and equipment building will be set back a minimum of 1.^0 feet from all property lines and 26 feet from the adjacent wetlands. Failure of this tower design is extremely rare, but should it occur, the antenna will fall within the property boundaries (.see Exhibit 1). It is also located 270 feet away from the Vineyard of the Lake building and 430 feet from the nearest residence. Cellular is a low power system. 'Hie amount of energv’ generated from single cellular phone channel is about the s.ime that generate from a 100 wait light bulb. This is le.ss energy than is generated by the typic.il cordle.ss telephone in u.se in many homes tod.iy ...a-' ■? Orono Planning Commission, 9 Februan' 1990 Page 4 3. That the proposed conditional use will comply with each of the applicable provisions of the Zoning Chapter. The RR-IB zoning district provides for Public Serv’ices Structures and antennas as conditional uses. The antenna and equipment structures will be placed to meet all pertinent setbacks for both the zoning and wetlands ordinances. Conclusion Locating the ceUular antenna on the Vineyard of the Lake property wiU aUow placing two conditional uses adjacent to tach other. The antenna is located away from all residential structures and is generally beyond the sight lines trom these homes. The closest res’ cnce is some 4.>0 feet away to the southeast and this home is oriented to the southeast as well (see E.xhibit D). This letter is intended to better explain our application and hopefully answer many of your questions. If we can be of further assistance, please call. We will be in attendance at your September 17th meeting to make a presentation and answer any questions you mav have. We appreciate all ot the help we have received trom your staff, and we look forward to working with you to provide cellular phone serv'ice to the Orono area. Sincerely, DAHLGREN. SITARDLOW, AND UBAN, INC. idjULc^n f?. WUliam R. Buell Senior Consultant Att ichments: Check for Application and Filing Fee in the Amount ot S2:?0 Conditional O.se Permit Request Form Legal Description of Subject Property Names and Addres.ses of Properly Owners within .>50 Feet Intente to Lease Exhibit A - Zoning Exhibit B - Search Area Map Exhibit C ■ Site Plan Exhibit D - Aerial Photography Exhibit E - Wetlands Exhibit F - Tower Elevation Exhibit G - Letter from James R. Beuielspacher re; 911 Exhibit H - Letter from Peter J. Palchin re: Property Values Exhibit I - Letter from Pirod. Inc re: Tower Sateiy Exhibit J - Plan Sheet Exhibit K - Survey Exhibit L - Landscape Plan ' f Jepartment of i.dministration kte ok mlnnesota tcrTcchnologics Group 6^ November 1. 1989 ’ i lit O fei,- r -) Mr Ron Sanders Regional General Manager U.S. West Cellular Opus Gateway. Suite 410 9800 Brenn Road East Minnetonka. Minnesota 55343 Dear Mr Sanders: I am writing to thank you tor your contmue-J cooperation m prrr.'irtmg the t>est possible 9 ! 1 to your subscnbeis and to express my support for further cellular grow'f As you know, the public safety community began receiving 9 f i em-rc-mw calls users from the start of cellular service The o.t-t svstern improves :^e level • service to the community by allowing fastei and easier emergency lepro-ting Cellular s. ,, enhances that ca.;abilitv by allowing 9 f : -alls r-om the scene, leoardess of landlm.^ .emt.ho availability It provides'the opportunity for on the spot emr^igencv reo-:--j Your effort to help route cellular 9-M calls to the proper public safeW ’''f''"9^'"' vour subscribers about 9-l-t availability has been a significant help to t''i0lic saeiy ' ^ Lidon Valley Stale Patrol dispatch center answered about 300 cellular J I • I calls ^r moni^ ^ ■ year, welt over 2.000 calls a month are responceo to That increase .no^caies both your .uc„.^. in selling cellular telephones, and your help m educating your ^ ^nV.>i: '.r those 9-1-1 calls reported emergencies located away from conventiona te .pho e,. saved precious time^ The mobility of cellular service complements the universality U Me v . ■ system to provide a real benefit to the community It has been a pleasure working with you to bnng the benefits of 9-M and cellular service to the comLrtkes of Minnesota. InJ. is proud of our accompl.shmen: ^;sMlew, e o-, ^ efforts at eventual statewide cellular service is apprecialeo amt ennM.aged Ti, ,, ^ ^ . orowth of cellular service is an impodant adjunct to 9-M emergency -epoiting We look ,„i,v,i . to fuflher joint efforts to provide this service to more Minnesotans Sincerely. // ' mix ^ ^mes R Beutelspa^r ^lale 9-M Project Manager Business Technol raies n-vision ■<»1 MwiMin* bM fvir (»i2i cc:John Shardlow DSU Incorporated Minneapolis. Minnesota EXHIBIT G ik PiROD me -• - r; November 29, 1989 1200 N. OAK RD. P.O. BOX 128 PLYMOUTH, INDIANA 46563-0128 (219) 936-4221 FAX (219) 936-6796 Mr. Tim Malloy D.S.U. Inc. 300 First Ave. North Suite 210 Minneapolis, MN. 55401 Dear Mr. Malloy: Thank you for your inquiry regarding self-supporting cower design ractices and predicted failures. While failure is extremely rare in any king of cower, it especially so for self-supporting towers. In fact, only i: tower were subjected to a direct hit from a tornado or severest of hurricanes would failure be predicated. is a the We are aware of only a verv few documented instances of self- supporting cower failure. In each o: these Instances. the failure was in the upper middle region of the cower, with the upper portion of the tower remaining connected and ’’bowing over against the base of the tower. The fact that the wind is normally greater on the upper portion of the structure contributes to the likelihood of this type of failure. In addition, the factors of safety in the tower in the upper miadle region are kept somewhat below Che factors of safety in cne rest of the tower. Thus, if a failure condition is reached, it ^-Iv-uld be reached in the upper middle region of the cower first. Needless to say, the engineering codes which govern cower designs are extremely conservative. Towers are designed for extreme wind conditions, and even under these extreme conditions, .scrirc.Mit factors of safety are required. Should you have any questions, on the roregoing, pleai^e do rot hesitate to contact us. Sincerely, Myron C. Noble P.E. President MCN/lsc I Hereby eeriiiy tbei r '.>• wf^-^^^^Rlstered No.^nii 0 .EXHIBIT I T- ir Tr^tw. ,■ - Peter J. Patchin & Associates, Inc. Valuation Consultants 7 7 LI :C vi :n O 14300 Nicollet Couru Suite 240. Burnsville. Minnesota 55337 (612) 435-5999 April 15, 1988 U.S. V7est New Vector Group, Inc. 3350 151st Avenue S.E. P.C. Box 7329 Bellevue, WA 98008 RE: MIN - B, B1 Credit River Township Scott County, Minnesota H.E. King; Gentleaen: your reguest I have investigated the potential aarket value imoact of the proposed cellular communication tower whicn is to be located on the Minneapolis Gun Club site cn Judicial Read. The proposed tower is to be 350 ft. tall, single pole, with wire suppozrt. The specific purpose of this study was to est.^Tria^a the market value impact, of the proposed tower, upon properties in the surrounding neighborhood. The surrounding neighborhood is of a predominantly rural character with scattered single family dwellings and small farms located on large acreage lots. The present Scott County zoning is A-2 Agricultural District. This zoning is intended for current use as agricultural, but with a gradual transition to single family residential. The minimum lo^ size under this zoning is 10 acres. EXHIBIT H r ' C-tr The investigation as to market value impact included the inspection of sites with the same type of tower as is proposed. Those sites were: 12666 Dakota Ave. So. Savage, Minnesota Industrial area with single family bluff top hones, immediately to south. 1929 Eagle Creek Blvd., Shakopee, Minnesota Light industrial area between Canterbury Downs and the Haver Addition, a single family residenuial area overlooking tower site. 14950 Chippendale Avenue, Rosemount, Minnesota Located next to City of Rosemount water tower in a predominantly residential area. A review of market data in these neighborhoods revealed no measureable value impacts. Contacts with well informed real estate brokers and assessors familiar with these neighborhoods revealed no value impacw. Further, I reviewed appraisals I have made of properties lying in close proximity to towers and found no value impact. My conclusion is that given the subject location, there should ce no measureable value impact upon neighborhood properties. PETER J. PATCHIN & ASSOCIATES Sincerely, Peter J. Patchin, MAI, CRE, ASA President Enc: Appraisal Qualifications of Peter J. Patchin I’otcf J I’.ilchm iV X.socm K'n Iik 'm wm#1 ias* afi ^‘;*-wHaKjS^ : J&. <immmsefsfeaitli mm.sm-Si mmmm mm^Sm .'"*' WntHH ( Wt U AMDS Ptp. 1 xHiuir E ^w«4-«irrT^ n <Ti<"C4(|A« INNOVATIVE MICROGRAPHICS DUE TO THE POOR CONDITION OF THE PRECEEDING DOCUMENT WE CANNOT PRODUCE AN ACCEPTABLE MICROFILM IMAGE, R I Sfp 2s m Septemb' -i, 1990 Orono City Planning Commission 1335 S. Brown Road Orono, Minnesota Dear Planning Commission: The undersigned are all residents of the City of Orono, living on Myrtlewood Road. We have been advised that US West NewVector Group, Inc. has made in application to the City of Orono to place acellular phone antenna on the Vii ;d of the Lake Property, 850 West Wayzata Boulevard. We do not have a great deal of information about the proposal, but are sure that the proposed antenna would not be consistent with the character of the area and would disturb its aesthetics. We also wish to request that you investigate thoroughly safety issues raised by the placement of the antenna. In any case, we are opposed to the application. £: LJj;__________) OCT. 3 1S90 7^<9rc<j».e^ <s^-^ Zl •?^25=<S*-t^ . <2^«5^5!^E-fe?4 p CC4^ ^ «2g>g=*^Po^V»^ «<<■ J) K<nm, 0VrdJ4\ [3 jJI^T^O jjjl^ ^ ckU-L ^ Tn. %,9) ScJj^^iuni')ifkA C(^ Z-c^ rf- L fh ' \tU ‘::^:!..V 'V /£’) jj J^^iecZZ^ 1^1 '^UAObU /^ ---------------- /fl 7^ (msij d[^k.tts ^‘^^■oJL/\;.^^^ L>JicJ\ ^jLqMA^J !'yici)tnAHJlJi_ ■J5’) . \M^l(A^(Jln 61 A a A ■\ / 70 ^MT^xl ^cJl -‘ "^ /LL- , ^//i-,4—»#0c:/ <2?o^ ZS' ^ \b !C> Mylrfl^Ure>^ /^ 7-0- <55^" _-.w O^r/^ - /^s/ (36^ ^ lo^ luU J^.. , iOo^ auJ lJ^ u.J^^ Rcl^ I'^t r-- Ar J \ A $ -3^ v5*^ f^ii-^yUL, /Ckr- '- -2^ / yV^^'M ^OT-Sr^^ 33)^-P^ii(X-(l^‘ 3H^ lb>c-^UA<8. 6^^ ^IJ Lo/^^ 1~<\/Ct. /^J 'b^^^QM tcy^Uti KJoa^^ .... (a 6 0 Old Lo'C c ^C cl R^ oJou^-j^ . (o'SO Oid lOk rv-rd^^ XlM X,T2o iM. \b(t^ijz^/ib<r-/. fJ b^S' 0^ ^ U)aj^(3Ssi_ - - t JJL t i liOA/ESr NEW VECTOR GROUP Introduction to Cellular Technology i’rcp;:red By: Rc:u Estate and Zoniim (9 ^ TOWER ELEVATION MO ^CRLC EXHIBIT F r US V/EST Cellular us WEST Cellular is a division of US WEST NewVector Group, a subsidiary of US WEST Inc., one of the seven regional companies created by the divestiture of AT&T in 1984. US WEST NewVector Group offers a full range of mobile communications, including cellular phone systems, as well as a ccmprehe.nsive line of communications sen ices for other cellular operators. US WEST NewVector Group is licensed to provide cellular telephone service to a market area that includes the fourteen western states illustrated below, plus some additional local markets, such as the San Dieuo Metropolitan .Area, that lie outside this area. The corporate headquarters for US WESt NewVector Group is located in Bellevue, Washington US n^EST Sc'-vVcctor 1 4-State .\far<et Area T . . ^ ^ n . 1 . „ -r* , ,1. . » .liui i.'uuuiiutl lu j In the pa.>t, moi^ile telephones 'Aere oniy avail.ible lo .i privileged tew who were willing to tt'ierate tne consiueraoie iimiiaiipn.s of ,i s\sie:n ’.Ii.i; i.illizeu v>niy cnannels .inJ otten had poor voice quaiity and spotty eo'.erage. These -.y-'ier.is operated W;th one centrally loctiled hich-powered transmitter to oomnvirioate with all o: the mooile units in tne service area. This leeitnoiouv did not make !.trge-«v.ile seiAiee piawt.e.i*. ’'wCause each ot to.e system channels could handle only one call afa lime. Channels eould not be reused because the transmitted signals were strong enough to interfere with <me another. innennotuil S'.Mem The current cellular telephone technology wa • developed by Bell L.iboratories to respond to lhe.se problems. This system consists of many low-ptnvered antenn.is erected in a honeycomb pattern of "cell.s” that invisibly blanket the sen ice area. Tne cellular system consists of a cellular phone that both transmits and receives radio signals. From the mobile phone, calls are sent to a central computer called the Mobile Telephone Switching Office (MTSO). The MTSO connects the cellular phone transmission with the local telephone company system which completes the call. r;- u F'^om Ceil To Ceiural Cjmrnter ■fT^r ‘ To LncrJ 7*,’ '"r.n'ipcr'- Call Anx'^Cnere ■7 -/-t- \v„r\- As a caller drives from one cell to another, the call is automatically handed off to another cell by computer. The cells are also overlapped to insure calling success even during the busiest hours and days of the month. The system is engineered to provide e.xceilent signal strength and clarity. In addition, all NewVector cellular serv ice systems are compatible with each other, so when a caller travels into another city, the system still wor.ks. rr:,:.:- .a:, ; ■•-‘•v < ei:. Reiaiio.iihip Vv'i:h >i'eii;hbcri:vi Svstem;ju All cellular systems are compatible, so when you tr.avel to another city which has cellular serx’ice, your cellular telephone still works. This is called roaming. .As cellular mobile .syste.ms e.xpand throughout the nation, many major highway corridors between cities will be covered with additional cells. ■p-: '.v,„ tf'■ir P' m.^ U' 1^" IIP Is#!''®- m Cell Site Seiscticn Cellular telephone serv'ice is expanded In a given area to provide better ser\ice to cellular custontcrs. This can be dene in 'wo ways: extending the ceverr.ge tn ne’v areas nr increasing the capacity of the system within the current ser/ice area. Tlie decision to expand the system depends on a number of factors. First, the number of current customers within the area and the capacity of the current system are anahtted to identic the need to expand. Second, the quality of serv'ice within the area is constantly being e**alua?ed, both electronically at the switching equipment, where every cail is monitored and any ser/ice failures are recorded, and throuch feedback from customers. Once the decision 'eejn made to errand . r .oivc.ve er- xc:. x* .icl-: ' iC .. !■> \'cwVector prepa ’'*!' ■; ;''‘eiiminar>'design '.naiy*’’;'^ '" 'c '• •* • ‘-iW.r-f'- v^T'ir, the serN'ice area are -ntered Into a computer. Vili .i .'.crij. .uiiaMe.s. .-uV'. .i.s .aucn.a.1 height, available treouencies. and equipment characteristics, “"•m mis inrermation the en gineers determine 'caren .:rea tor the '''i.m.mt ^ c :he ;n:cnn:; t .maximize scr%ice .\aio ;;te ceil. When dd> .c;r':v-;., m;;/. :. ■ c.;.\ : i“- > r:.;” :ind other requirement ■ are provided to me re::l cst.ate and -a::- r v:..‘n :onsu:tanrs. With lhi.s information. :he “eai est.ite acquisiri.-n con^uitan' .lAvI .ank poiciilKi! T'.tc .Vilowinc Is .« . ^u i au>. \ i .i.w. Tdsrria :■*. \ientifv CGSA Cellular Geii^rauhical Sendee \rea. TIte hound, deiermineu In'me ’-rucrai \..ommunic;»tion>mi.sMi-ri that radio .signals ;r ''n he >ysiem stay within the boundaries 'i :.tc •tc enure >\>ic:n ;.re e .1 c.uc'J jO The Cellular grid pattern. This therefore, fewer ■‘.sectorization". ;rid.iA. nc'W'.hin the t pr. • ides cf crt.gc :Vr .• ivap.icts. Ti’..s ..cjd .i .Att.tg uuti Topography, Land Forms and Ollier Lhmstraim.s. I .ne : .r,a,ys:s conducted by the engineers takes iniii cor.<ider;alnn the hiiis vv; . r:- • -ve •re.'. BiL'icany. a line of sight relalion.^hip is needed between the antc.-tni. .ir.d th. ce.i .i..r telephone :o in.surc quality serv'ice. There are often land features .vithin a .search are.* th./i iimit the options tor site locations. Features such as bodies of water, .swamps and .steep slope.s may ,;fove impo.ssihle to build upon, and since cell sites must be periodically maintained, they must be accessible to technicians year-round. Therefore, we need to find sites near the center of the search area, at the optimum elevation, and accessible by existing roadw.nys. Sites with existing or proposed high-rise buildings nearby must also be avoided because of the potential for “shadowing" within the service area. Since alt of the cell sites work together (calls are automatically handed off from one cell to another as the driver travels lietween coverage areas), one antenna may not he li^ered or raised without affecting the performance of that cell and adjacent cells. The mmbination of these factors results in the identification of well-defined "preferred locations" within the search area. 1 ■i 1 ■S ,1 r f- i' £-• m-.: r|y Exiitiilg Radio ConHicts. In addition to the engineering constraints noted abov^ the site location must not interfere with either Federal Aviation Administration fFAA^ f^quummts, or existmg radio transmitters operating at high frequencies. FAA reeulations pljcemeni of a ceil site in dose proximiw to AM or F\f towers must be thoroughly ana{yzed. Zimlat and Land Use Coaqtalibility. Whenever feasible US WEST NewVector strives to and adjacent to compatible land uses. Sites adjacent d lines, microwave facilities, antenna farms, water treatment facilities and -‘rcumsmS^« re*! n!!’' technical requirements of the system. When*" “jnpatibiiity concerns, a concerted effort is made in the de.sism process to screen facilities and otherwise mitigate the ’^e prohle.ms. * ^ < ouiiding spiiu'e ror sale or lease. In rro^i cases, more thar. on:' dv is evaluated pncr to ':eiecting the most favcraHe location. Tite foUowinc hvpoyr.telical iliustrnti.ir, .c.r..ti.;rizcs some of :he site selection constn.ints. •*■ . . * ink ' ’ ■■■■..• 'c.i; . \ - N m W ,<v,.;c c,.'.\ f A t.’.'T / A"-.' >v “ ^ t*r< Heeled \usp;icK Ztino 5pt'- ■I;?? It IP 'i V" fi P-Ublic Sllfer-- In rv-c.-nt vears there has '-e- .-roern ..ver radira. and olher'sources. The frequencies used i'y the cellular pnone nenverK are the stutie ones assigned previously to certain fHF TV channels. .,nd so have been in the airaavcs for mans sears. The American Naiioniii Standards insiiiute X * - . ANSI) has esiabiis.aed a standard idr >are c.^- pt^sure levels to RF energj'. That standard is compared below to other household sources and a topical cellular phone antenna. Cellular antennas transmit relatively short distances and operate at very low power levels. As the hypot hetical illustration suggests, the amount ot en ergy from a single cellular phone channel is tvpicallv about the same as .i lOO-watl liuht bulb. While there may ''ctween eicht an., fiity channels operaiiny from one cell ate. channels rarely all transmit at the s.ime time and each operates at a Jifferem trequcncy. J'v , .. . r.i-*.'-,:- • •• H - *V I \ Some antennas in the .-ellular phone network .ire m.cr.' Aave rcaiy antennas that [r.in.Mnit .ind r.*:-nhor.r* mts'iages from ceilut.ir sites ;o the wiretin.e :e:-"''hone network. The ''iunal antennas is in a directed beam. \NM so :he di>persion of RF energy outside this na.'ro'v ■’’e.-.m ‘s 'n'-’C’^iticanl. fcven directly lene.ith .; .eiiuiar antenna, the e.vposurc is ..bout liait mat o: an ordinary’ cordless phone, or less than one percent of the A.N'SI standard. To ma.ximtze the capacity of the system. celluUi .uuenruis tranami: This^.lous the .same frequencies to be u.sed simultaneously in non-adiacent ceils. LS WEST New Vector Group operates hundreds of cell .sites in fourteen .late:- ..nJ h:o: never expenenced any mtertcrcnce problems with other transmissions. Radio frequencies are a sort of {>recitnis n.i- lional resource for which there is a tremendous • and growing demand. The Federal Commum- ^ ^ \ cations Commi.ssion (FCC) regiil.iies the use oi \ radio trequencics throughout the I , ,,..... States. The graphs illu.strate the broad range ^ frequencies "and the narrow segment ot ihr. spectrum that con.stilutes radio .md telex i«ion * " frequencies .ind those allotted to cellular phone transmissions. w t.' 1^- L Ceiluiar Glossaiy Cell. A smaU geographic area served by a low-powered transmitter. 2 to 10 miles in radius. Cell Site. An instailation containing the Transmitters, receivers and control equip ment necessary to connect the cellular phone system and the conventional wireline Tciephone network. Cell Splitting. The division of a larger ceil i.atc several smaller ceils to provide more channels within the same geographical area, .ind therefore provide belter .service. Ceiluiar Geuf^rupiiicai Service .Area tCGS.A). A specific geographic area, viipan which a ccilmar system serves ,;ns- .vjmeri. Mobile cu.'lemers are expected to subscribe to cellular service within a civen CGSA. Digital Radio Link. .A radio signal used to connect telephone circuits from a cel! site to the central switching equipment (the MTSO). "nmic Switching System. A computer i lUtomatically routes calls within the cel- luiar system, located at a central .site. Hand-OIT. The automatic switching of a signal from one cell to another, which (veurs within u fraction of a second. Mobile Telephone Switching Office (MTSO) Also known as the MTX or "Switch". The interface between the cell sites ad the cor.veniional wireline tele phone network. It serves as the central co ordinator and controller, as well fs housing the switching equipment for a cellular tele* phone system. Radio Common Carrier (RCC). Firms licer^^ed by the Federal Communications Commission (FCO to provide a variety of radio services to the public, including dis patch and paging services. .Many RCC's now own cellular licenses. US WEST New Vector is an RCC licensed bv the FCC. Roaming. Tac .ibility to operate a cellular mobile telephone in a mobile service area other than Lhe one from which .service is subscribed ■ for e.\ample, being able to use your cellular phone in Minneapol- though you subscribed originally i;. Sectoriiation. An engineering refinement of a celFs transmission antennas, which im proves call quality by reducing cross talk/interference. This is done by splitting the coverage of the cell site into three equal sectors, by means of directional antennas. Wireline Telephone Network. The con ventional local telephone network which transmits calls over wires rather than radio waves The FCC has ruled that wireline companies or their uffUiates may apply for cellular licenses in those areas w'here they currently provide wireline service. i'*"INNOVATIVE MICROGRAPHICS DUE TO ;he poor condition OF THE PRECEEDING DOCUMENT WE CANNOT PRODUCE AN ACCEPTABLE MICROFILM IMAGE. The Chairperson, Planning Commision City of Orono Town Hall Crystal Bay, MN Dear Sir/tladam, 70» 0i>: Long Lake Road Wayzata,MN 55391 S^tembe r^j_7.1990 nil p'c.-Uil CitV..o iSEP 1 7 is&D I write to you in regard to the application '' ' the siting of a 150 ft cellular radio telephone tower on the • ty of the church Vineyard on thi* Lake ' object to the •: of this tower almost in cur backyard Orono has a largely rural character, and when we chose to purchase and I've in our house at 7 l5 Old Long Lake Road, we were told by the Orono Town ' that the region wa ‘= zoned residential with a two acre lot rec ji 'einent. A variancv. was granted for the church and ! expect anot; “'■ was granted for the child care center acro ‘. ■■ street- ■ are now faced with commercial use of pa'-t of H ^ by the US West Cellular Telephone Vector Gr- .vithin the zoning regulations for tne area, nor ‘r- t; . joping variance granted to the church. I strongly O' 'c‘ i'L g'tf.ting c‘ a commercial variance for the siting of this tows '.ni5 residential area. Ve think that the presence of such a tower would destroy the rural c, ii'acter of the area, and furthermore would not be aesthetically pleasing. US West also proposes to radiate as mjch as 3.8 KW of rf energy from this tower. Discussions wif’ the US West engineer did not provide information on the expeo-Ld power densities on the Luce line close the tower, and also at our house which would be quite close to the antenna. I was not able to ascertain the antenna pattern, nor the location of the first side lobe to enable me perform these calculations, to determine how much rf power will affect us. It is generally accepted that the currer^ US standard of 3 mW per square centimeter is too high, and an acceptable level should be a factor of 1 0 to 100 times less. The tower should be sited in an industrial zoned area. I am sure that the planned network and radiated power densities may be altered to suit the location of a tower in an industrial zoned setting, it may increase the initial installation costs of the system, and alter the pattern coverage to some degree, but claims to the contrary should not be accepted. I do not believe the tower should be sited in this residential zoned area. I write to you as I have a prior engagement, and thus may not be able to attend the hearing today, and express my views in person. I am a specialist in high frequency engineering, and therefore I am qualified to comment on various technical matters in this area. Yours sincerely Anand Gopinath ' CItY OF ORONO 7 CITY of ORONO Post ornce Box 66•Crystal Bay. Minnesota 55323• Municipal Offices On the North Shore of Lake Minnetonka September 2<4, 1990 Tom Barrett Popham Kaik & ^vssociates 330C Piper Jaffray Tower 222 Ninth Street South Minneapolis, MN 55402 Re: Application #1588 U.S. West Vect Group property located at 850 West Wayzata Boulevard Dear Tom: - involving The above referenced application was reviewed at the Planning Commission's meeting of September 17, 1990. Staff asks for clarification in respect to the pertinent sections of the code and whether the existing code would allow a 150' free standing antenna for the cellular phone use on a residential zoned property. The following are the lists of code references used in that review by both staff and applicant, as follows: 1. Section 10.02, Definition 54 - Public services. 2. Definition 75 - Principal use. 3. Section 10.20, Subdivision 3 (D) - Public service structures, antenna for U.S. West considered under public service structures conditional use permit. This was the section indentified by applicant for filing of application. 4. Section 10 , Subdivision 4 (H) - Antenna as a permitted access y use. Note antenna must be attached to structure - intent of this section was not for free-standing commercial antennas but for accessory residential use. 5. Section 10.20, Subdivision 3 (K) - Conditional use permit for free-standing antenna. Standards suggest that antenna must be subordinant or incidential to principal residential use. Principal use on property is a church. There is no connection between existing principal use ai*d proposed conditional use for public service structure oi antenna. 6. Section 10.75, Subdivisions 1 and 2 - Height increases controlled through conditional use permits. Bl II.IHM;AZ0NIN(; -473-7J57 • ADMI.MSl RAI ION A UNAM K 473-735* • PI BLIC WORKS 473 7359 ASSfcSSINC; KAX - 473-0510 Tom Barrett P.e; Zoning File #1588 September 24, 1990 Page 2 of 2 I have enclosed the original staff memo and applicant's written comments, these were already included in the Planning Commission packets sent last week. Please contact staff if you need additional information. The staff memo lists the various exhibits included in that packet. Staff seeks your opinion on the following issues: 1. Does the code permit two principal uses, whether permitted or conditional uses, on one property. 2. Is the public service structure both a conditional use permit and accessory use as proposed by applicant? 3. Does the current code allow U.S. West's proposal for a 150' high antenna in consideration of Section 10.20, Subdivision 3 (D); Section 10.20, Subdivision 4 (H); and Section 10.20, Subdivision 3 (K). 4. Is U.S. West Vector's 150' high antenna a public service structure? Is the limited market of a cellular/portable phone user considered the general public, or is that pertinent? I am sure there are many, many other questions that I could raise regarding this application. Before I bring it to Council, it is important that I have some direction regarding the application of the ordinances in relation to this specific applicant. Please call, I can't wait. Sincerely, JAM/tln Enclosure Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building & Zoning Administrator u-. - V ; ISCOHt>OMA rtp CONSULTING PLANNERS LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS 300 FIRST AVENUE NORTH SUITE 210 MINNEAPOLIS, MN S^.J0! 612-339-3300 2 October 1990 Mayor James Grabek and Orono City Council Members City of Orono Box 66 Crystal Bay. MN 55323 RE; Cellular Phone Antenna on Conditional Use Permit Dear Mayor and Council Members: At the request of the Planning Commission, we have reexamined our site location to look for possible alternatives. Upon that review we have determined there are no other suitable sites in or near the search area. We are including a map showing those propf*rties that are unavailable to us and the various alternatives that we have look at. The church property is uniquely suited to this use because of the following reasons: 1. The church property is underutilized and provides ample room to site the antennas. 2. The church is a willing lessor of space for the cellular phone facility. 3 The church property located on Highway 12 '• ’Id not normally develop as a residential use. In fact, the property has the characteri.stics of a commercial site. 4. The tower site location will be significantly screened from adjacent properties by virtue of e.xisting woods and topographic relief. 5. The cellular phone facility and its use will not create any impairment to the health, safety, morals or welfare of the Orono community. 6. Because of its location which minimizes the view of the tower from adjacent properties, this facility will not impair any owner from enjoying their own property. Mayor and Council Members, City of Orono, 3 October 1990 Page 2 7. A cellular telephone equipment facility and associated antenna system is a use allowed through the conditional use process under the zoning ordinances of the City of Orono. A cellular phone system is low powered, which necessitates careful placing of each antenna to complete overall coverage as required through the licensing by the FCC. Because of this low powered system, the flexibility of choosing antenna sites is narrowed to a relatively small search area. This type of communications system can exist successfully in residential areas, and in fact, does already in many installations in the metropolitan area. The fact that our proposed location is more commercial in nature only strengthens the conclusion that this is the best site in the search area for a cellular phone installation. The cellular phone system, although it is new, is becoming an essential part of urban fabric, which depends heavily on communiaitions for emergencies, security, and has been determined to be essential and desirable for the welfare of the .ommunity. Tne community at large involves not only citizens of Orono. but also the citizens that depend on a complete communications system throughout the metropolitan area. 'Hie conditional use permit process, as specilied in the Orono ordinance, deals with findings as they may affect the health, safety, and welfare of the community. We have submitted documentation showing how the facility is safe and does not have any health hazard. The community ’s welfare is benefited through an enhanced 9-1-1 emergency response system, as well as enhanced communication for all residents provided tor without discrimination. The cellular phone installation is quite compatible with residential uses because it provides a minimum of perceived impact to an area. The use is non-occupied. thus it does not need the services of an occupied use, nor does it offer the problems that may arise Fom an inhabited facility. There are no Lights on the antenna, therefore, it does not create a glaring trespass on adjacent properties. The facility does not create a traffic hazard since visitations to the site are only a few times a week. Instead of excluding such antenna installations entirely from residential zones, they are allowed with conditions to mitigate any unfavorable effect. Reasonable requirements ran then be attached to approval requirements, which cannot be oppressive in application especially if there is not a a direct relationship to health, safety, or morals. It has also been suggested that other sites might be available on which this antenna could be relocated. Over the past twelve months, a number of sites have been reviewed and analyzed as antenna locations. A quick review of the attached map will reveal that over 50 percent of the search area lies within residentially development areas of either Orono or Long Lake. As can be e.xpected, these areas are e.xtremely difficult to locate an antenna in and, for this reason, we have chosen to contact all other owners within the search area whose property was not residentially developed. There are many reasons why a particular site may not be u.sed for an antenna. The following list indicates those sites that w-ere analyzed and the reasons for their dismissal from consideration. Mayor and Council Members, City of Orono, 3 October 1990 Page 3 Alternate 1 - MnDOT/Wavzata This site owned in part by the City of Wayzata and in part by MnDOT was unable to be secured due to the ambiguity of the future alignment and development of ffighway 12. While MnDOT is just ow in the process of studying the Highway 12 Con 'dor and no alignments are specifically under study, several of the previous alternatives would have used this property in their alignments. Alternate 2 - Woodhill Coiinirv Club Again, the directors of the Country Club could not agree to allow this facility to be constructed on their property. While it was felt that the tower was compatible with the golf course, other political factors stood in the way of agreement by the Board. Alternate 3 - Dav Care Design were prepared for this site, but it was impossible to develop due to the need for an extremely long driveway to the base of the tow^er from the parking lot. This driveway would have to be plowed each time a maintenance vehicle arrived (once a week). It should al.so be noted that the abutting residential area in Long Lake would have been within 250 feet of the tower. Alternate 4 - Wavzata Countr\* Club Upon review by the Engineering Department, it was determined that a tower in this location would have to be too tall to be practical from both "quality of service" and a zoning perspective. The impact of an extremely tall lowc. would not have been acceptable to the club as well. Alternate 5 - Vinevard of the Uike This site is centered on the search area, provides for the best coverage possible, and is situated on property currently developed as a conditional use in the R-IB District. The owner is willing to lease tne property necessary to develop the cellular antenna facility and the antenna will need to be only 150 feet in height and will be located a minimum of 450 feet from the nearest residence. Alternate 6 - Wavzata Water Tower This water tower is currently being used by another cellular phone service and is not available for our use. Alternate 7 - Conference Center The Engineering Staff determined that this location was too far removed from the center of the service area to be practical. If developed, it would have to be augmented by a second tower to complete the service needs of the cell. In addition, the owner was unwilling to discuss a practical lea.se agreement. Mayor and Council Members, City of Orono, 3 October 1990 Page 4 As neighbors have complainetl about being able to view the facility, it really is no more unsightly than the loag line of repeating power poles along the luse line, as well as other utility structures found throughout me area. As is shown on the attached sectu'ns, a significant amount of vegetation or distance separates the nearby homes from he tower. It is true that the tower will be visible from some of these surrounding \ omes, and it will most certainly be visible from the Highway (which is the intent). However, the view from nearby homes will, in most cases be only a filtered view thro jgh barren trees during the winter months. Just as the FCC has preemptive powers regulating communications facilities, such as antennas, HAM radios antenn.'.s, etc., there is a concern here that the City might try to exclude antennas from the Ciry. Because of the small search area and the need to locate towers in a very small area, the choices available to the cellular phone provider are quite limited. The site we have chosen and the manner in which we propose to . develop the site successfully mitigates the conditions of the elements expressed in the conditional use permit process of the City, documentation has previously been submitted to provide findings addressing the health, safety, and welfare of the community. Sincerely, I^HiGl^EN, SHAR W,AN. UBAN, INC. C. John Uban, President CJU/gms OFrlCES BRIGGS A X D MORGAN PROrESSION’AL ASSOCIATION fiCOO FIRST S'ATION a I. BANK BCII-OINO SAINT Paul . MINNESOTA 50101 TKX_£PU0NE iOlti! 2*#I-iai5 TELECOPIEH (Oiai 222-4071 INCI.C31NO T«2 rOHMKR FinM O* LEVITT, PALMER, BOWEN, BOTMa N A SHARE October 8, 1990 WHITEUS P1P2CT DIAL NVMBKH 223-^M« DELIVERED VIA FAX Mayor and City Council City of Orono c/o Mr. Mark Bernhardsoa Box 66 Crystal Bay Orono, Minnesota 55323 FAX No. 473-0510 Mr. Tom Barrett City Attorney City of Orono 222 South Ninth Street Suite 3300 Minneapolis, Minnesota 55402 FAX No. 334-2713 Re: U.S. West NewVcctor Group, Inc. Conditional Use Permit For Communication Tower Dear Mayor Grabek, Council Membe-s, and Mr. Barrett: We represent U.S. West NewV'ector Group, Inc. ("U.S. West”) on the above matter. We understand that questions have been raised concerning application of the City s Zoning Code to the proposed communications tow-er. The purpose of this letter is to set forth the reasons why the City ’s Zoning Code ("Code") allows a conditional use permit to be approved for the communications tower and related structure ('Tower"). This letter is a supplement to the October 2, 1990 letter to you from .Mr. Uban which provides a fuller description of U.S. West’s proposal and its benefits. Under the Code there are two alternatives under which the conditional use permit for the Tower should be granted. Each will be addressed below. THE TOWTR TS PART OF AN ESSENTIAL SERVICE The Tower would be an integral part of an increar'ngly important element of the communic«'itions infrastructure of the metropolitan area. The Code addresses the granting of conditional use permits for structures invoMng essential services such as communications at Sec. 10.03, Subd. 17 which provides as lollows: WTO >0< TliAO* CC.VTC« SAl!*'! ^AUL. mVHtV/TA 03IOI «iC) • lata 4C00 7!BTT hatio .val »Avt »c/ai;>o fact . **rr:«MOTA oaiOJ -.OiS) 301 Lll* .1400 IDS ecKTta xrw»Ai>oiJ0. »»nr«B»crtA oaaoo xnai 300-OMi BHICGS axd MORGAN October 8, 1990 Page 2 Essential Services. This Zoning Chapter shall require a permit for all structures including utility poles, and right-of-ways which are an integral part of a system for public transportation, as for transmitting power, water, heat, communicationi, gas or sewage by any public utility. The Council shall grant a conditional use permit only after a showing that the public safety, health and welfare will not be harmed by the essential services. (Emphasis added.) Under this provision, a permit must be granted unless it is demonstrated that the public safety, health and w-clfare will be harmed. A cellular telephone system is low powered and the pVoposed site is safe and spacious. Moreover, the cellular telephone system contributes to the public welfare by improving the communications infrastructure. For e.xample, the effectiveness of the ”911’’ emergency reporting system is improved with the cellular telephone system. The Federal Communications Commission has also determined that cellular telephone systems are in the public interest. The nature of the system and its increasing importance qualify it as a telephone public utility for pu poses of the Code. It is important to note that any opposition to the Tower because of any impact on the "view” of the surrounding residents is not sufficient to deny the conditional use permit. The Minnesota Supreme Court indicated that "aesthetic concerns cf neighboring landowners will not rise to the level of '.crious, health, safety, or public welfare considerations which justify denial of a speciai-js.. r>; .'mit." Luger v. dry of Burnsville, 295 N.W.2d 609, 612 (Minn. 1980). THE TOWER IS A CONDITIONAL USE IN THE RR-IB DISTRICT As an alternative or in addition to being an allowable "essential service," the Tower is a permitted conditional use in the RR-IB residential district, because *i ts a public service structure" under Sec. 10.20, Subd. 3.D. (Conditional uses in the RR-IE District arc generally the same as those in the R-IA District. Sec. 10.28, Subd. 2.A.) The definition of "public service structure" is broadly inclusive and includes structures such as the Tower. In addition to noting that the Tower is a "public service structure," it is also important to note one thing that the Tower will not be. The Tower will not be a principal use of the lot within the meaning of Sec. 10.02.75 and Sec. 10.03, Subd. 7 which prohibits the location of more than one principal building on any one lot. The church will remain the principal use of the lot. The Tower will become part of the communications infrastructure of the metropolitan area in a manner similar to electric transmission lines and similar public service and utility facilities which exist on many residential, commercial, and agricultural propert.-cs. BRIGGS AN’D MORGAN October 8, 1990 Page 3 The Zoning Code’s criteria for granting a conditional use permit are set fonli in Sec in no Subd 6 A ^Mr Uban has set forth in detail how these criteria are satisfied by the ToS’r It shouW be related, however, that opposition due to aesthetic concerns is^^t a sufficient basis for denying the conditional use ?*,he*^^^denr'CoX^^Riinirva/e set forth above. As also mentioned above, the Federal Lomir.-i.icjtions rnmrn! ’on fFCO has determined that cel’jlar communications system arc in the public interestrwe request that you consider this determination in making your decision on the permit for the Tower. moratorium We understand that the City is considering enacting a moratorium on the granting of Planning issues when a city is confronted with potential developments that may sigiiiuv.antly Cac. fanZ" patterns. The proposed T does rot present such a case. Tne cehu^ tZr neZork isLi.ed and the"Cily will n. ’cience a number of requests for additional towers. We are still willing to work with the City to address its concerns. If you believe that you cannot grant the permit at tonight’s Council Meeting, we suggest that you lay ‘^'i'’ Zr for additional discussion and work rather than denying the permit or enacting a moratorium. Mr. Uban, myself and other representatives of U.S. West will be avaiiaole for a presentation and questions at this evening's Council Meeting. Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely ycurs, Briggs Morgan, P.A. / Timothy ETNlarx / TEM/dij To: Mayor Grabek & Orono Council Members Planning Commission Chairman Kelley Orono Planning Commission Members City Administrator Bernhardson From: Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building & Zoning Administrator Date: *:ember 13, 1990 Subject 89 Marcus & Judy Blue, 2160 Crystal Avenue - iances - Public Hearing Pertinent Ordinance - A) Section 10.28, Subdivision 5 (B) - House addition, setback variance required for northern extension. Required = 30' Existing = 22.2' Proposed = 24' Variance = 6' or 20% B) Garage Addition. 1. Side street setback: Required = 50' Existing = 52.9" Proposed = 36' Variance = ^4' or 28% 2. Front street setback: Required = 50' Exi ting = 15' Pi'p sed = 14'9" Variance = 35'3" or .0% C) Section 10.03, Subdivision 14 (C) - Lot coverage. Lot Area = 14,000 s.f. Allowed = 2,100 s.f. or 15% Existing = 1,314.45 s.f.*j^ Proposed = 2,106.46 s.f.*^ Variar-^ ® 6.46 s.f. or .l!46% iS Side Garage House = Deck * 416.15 s.f. 1,204.93 s.f. 109.52 s.f. *2 House Addition = Garage Addition List of Exhibits 467.21 s.f 324.8 s.f. Exhibit A - Application Exhibit B - Propc^rty Cw!it;rs I.ist Exhibit C - Plat Map Exhibit D - Existing Floor Plan Exhibit E - Proposed Floor Plan Exhibit F - Survey Zoning File #1589 September 13, 1990 Page 2 of 2 Review of Application * The applicants wish to reconstruct a garage addition of approximately 16'x20' to the west side of the existing garage. The original addition was removed and in the process of the applicants attempting to rebuild, he was stopped by the building staff because of the need for a variance. The footings remain from the previous addition. The proposed addition will not expand beyond the original envelope. In addition, the applicants propose a single story addition to the present residence, to the north side of the house, requiring approval of a side setback variance. The addition would not extend any further into the substandard setback area, but would gradually move away from the east lot line. The garage addition will not create any sighting problems at the intersection of Briar Street and Crystal Avenue. Applicants should be advised that their property is currently at the allowed structural development level. Lot coverage allowance is already over the 2,100 s.f. or 15% and will require a variance for 6.46 s.f. or .046% excess structural coverage . If applicants propose any major repairs to the porch located within the substandard street setback area, that variance approval is required for major structural repair of the non- conforming portion of the structure. Options of Action - A. Denial. If denied, please refer to the necessary findings in Section 10.08, Subdivision 3 (A). B. Approval. If approved, please refer to the same section for the necessary findings. Additional hardships for consideration: house was placed on the property prior to current zoning standards and garage addition is to be placed within existing envelope of previous garage section to make use of footings already installed. The following conditions may be considered in your recommendation: 1. To reduce structural coverage so that no variance is required at approximately 6.46 s.f. and to further place applicants on notice that property is already at 15% allowed structural lot coverage. 2. Any other deemed appropriate by the Planning Commission. Zoning File #1589 October 4, 1990 Page 3 Additional Comments and Planning Commission Recommendation ~ Additional Exhibits - Exhibit G - Elevation Per the Planning Commission's direction, the applicants have submitted elevations of the proposed additions and change in roof design (refer to Exhibit G). During the Planning Commission's review, the applicants were advised that if any major structural improvements were proposed for the deck located v.o the south/street side of house, that variance approval is required. Note deck is located approximately 8' off the street right-of- way. Applicant advised the Planning Commission that because of the instability of the deck, that he proposed to replace the frost footings. The Planning Commission extended their approval to include the structural repair to the deck located in a substandard street yard. The Planning Commission recommended unanimous approval of the variances for the garage addition, the house addition to the north, and for frost footings for the deck within the substandard front street setback area. The resolution has been drafted per the recommendation of the Planning Commission. A RESOLUTION GRANTING VARIANCES TO HUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 10.28, SUBDIVISION 5 (B) AND SECTION 10.03, SUBDIVISION 14 (C) PILE #1589 WHEREAS, Marcus and oudy Blue (hereinafter "the applicants") are the owners of the property located at 2160 Crystal Avenue within the City of Orono (hereinafter "City") and legally described as Lots 7 and 8, BlocJc 2, Crystal Bay Minnetcn)ca, Hennepin County, Minnesota (hereinafter "the property"); and WHEREAS, the applicants have applied to the City for variances to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.28, Subdivision 5 (B) to permit the construction of an addition to the north side of the house requiring approval of a side setback of 24' instead of the required 30' and approval of a front street setback variance for the structural repair of a deck located 8' from the street lot line instead of t-he required 50'. Per the same zoning code section, the applicant seeks variances for a garage addition to be located 36' from a side street lot line instead of the required 50' and 14'9" from the front street setback line instead of the required 50'. In addition, applicants seek variances to lot coverage allowance as proposed improvements result in total structural coverage at 2,106.46 square feet, instead of the allowed 2,100 square feet or 15%. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono, Minnesota: FINDINGS 1. This application was reviewed as Zoning File #1589. 2. The propttrty is located in the RR-lB Single Family Rural Residential Zoning District. 3. The Orono Planning Commission reviewed this application on September 17, 1990, and recommended approval of the proposed variances based upon the following findings: A) The house was placed on the property prior to current zoning standards. Page 1 of 4 B) The garage addition is to be reinstalled within the defined envelope of the former garage on the property. C) The excess of 6.46 square feet of structural hard cover appears to be minimal and will have no negligible impact on the property. 4. The City Council finds that the conditions existing on this property are peculiar to it and do not apply generally to other property in this zoning district; that granting the variances would not adversely affect traffic conditions, light, air nor pose a fire hazard or other danger to neighboring property; would not merely ''ve as a convenience to the applicants, but is n sary to alleviate a demonstrable hardship or dj^ necessary to preserve a substantial proper applicants; and would be in keeping with u. intent of the Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan of the City. .Ity; is nt of the spirit and 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 variances on the health, safety and welfare of the community. CONCLUSIONS, ORDER AND CONDITIONS Based upon one or more of the findings noted above, the Orono City Council hereby grants variances to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.28, Subdivision 5 (B) to permit the construction of a rear north side addition to the existing residence, the repair of frost footings of a deck located 8' from the street lot line, and side and front street setback variances for the reinstallation of a garage addition and a variance to Section 10.03, Subdivision 14 (C) approving an excess of 6.46 square feet or .046% structural improvements on the property, subject ♦■o the following conditions: 1. Authorities granted by this resolution ran 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 (October 8, 1991). 2. Violation of or non-compliance with any of the terms and conditions of this variance shall constitute a violation of the zoning code, shall automatically terminate any authority granted herein, and shall be punishable as a misdemeanor. Page 2 of 3 3. 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 m.eeting held on the 8th day of October, 1990. ATTEST: Theresa L. Naab, Deputy Clerk Edward J. Callahan, Jr., Acting Mayor Property Owner(s) STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this 8th day of October, 1990, by Edward J. Callahan, Jr. and Theresa L. Naab, Acting Mayer & Deputy Clerk of the City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City. Notary Public Page 3 of 4 STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) On this _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ day of _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _t 199 before me a Notary Public within and for said county, personally appeared _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _rr—c—ii_ _ _ _ _ _ _ known to me to be the person(s) described in and who executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that he (they) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed. NOTARY PUBLIC STATE OF MINNESOTA ) )SS. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) MY COMMISSION EXPIRES On this day of 199 before me a Notary Public within and for said County, personally appeared _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ known to me to be the person(s) described in and who executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that he (they) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed. NOTARY PUBLIC MY COMMISSION EXPIRES Page 4 of 4 rr CITY OP ORONO - VARI7VNCE APPLICATION Initial Application Fee $_T73.00 ($50.00 per each additional variance) Renewal Variance Fee $100.00 (no change from original application) After-the-Fact Fees (Double application feel PROPERTY LOCATION Site Address ^ I C O jLy c. o oO Property Identification Number (P.I.D.) 7 Attach legal description to applicat on if not included on required survey. APPLICANT Name u Phone (home) . ___-------------- LlTTZi- lU vu O F'mCE OFFICEPhone (work) Address; P Q /IxV i OWNER (if different than applicant) Phone (home)_ _ _ _ _ _ Citvi Zip: iiECElPT-ih^K fOiJ litL-e-fcvi hOl rtuoi OB/24/90 Name Phone (work) Address:City:Zips, Date Property Acquired (month/year) I (do) (do not) also own the adjacent parcels of land. PRESENT USE OP PROPERTY Present Zoning District _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Present Use of Property _ _ _ Residential Other (specify) DESCRIPTION OP REQUEST Estimated Construction Cost $ Describe request in detail __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ___ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ VARIANCES REQUIRED _ _ _ Lot Area Setback Variances ( Other _ _ Lot Width Front _ _ Hardcover Side Rear) HARDSHIP Describe undue hardship or practical difficulty resulting from strict enforcement of zoning regulations:_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ DESCRIPTION OP DNUSDAL PROPERTY CONDITIONS Describe unusual property conditions preventing compliance with Zoning Code Requirements:^_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ___ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ REQUIRED SUBMITTALS 1. Completed Application Form Certified Property Owners List of owners within 150' (you must obtain this list from Hennepin County Department of Finance A-603 Govt Center 348-3271). Plat Map (obtained with property owners list). Certificate of survey (signed by a licensed surveyor) to include hardcover calculations as required. Topographic survey (existing and proposed elevations) if any changes in existing grade are proposed. Sketches or plans of floor and elevation views. As an addendum to this application, please attach a separate list of any other persons you wish notified of this application. 8. Additional items as may be requested by City staff. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. YOU ARE REQUIRED TO SUPPLY 30 COPIES OP LARGE DOCUMENTS OR A WORKING COPY (11" X 17" OR SMALLER) FOR ALL DOCUMENTS SUBMITTED. The Applicant and Property Owner must sign this application. Please remember that your variance application is not complete if the above information has not been included. Certification by Clerical Department that Variance Application is complete. Initialed by Clerical Staff:_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _Date_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ APPLICANT'S SIGNATURE The applicant hereby agrees to provide all information required or requested by the Zoning Administrator, agrees to pay additional fees (staff time not covered by original fee payment) and/or consultant expenses incurred in review of this application, and certifies that the information supplied is true and correct to the best of ^his/her knowledge. Applicant's Signature Date C? OWNERS SIGNATURE The owner hereby ackowledges and agrees to this application and further authorizes reasonable entry onto the property by City staff, consultants, agents. Commission members, and Council members for purposes of investiga tion and verification of this request. Owner's Signature Date PA Applicant must have all submittals into the City offices 25 days before the Planning Commission Meeting. Planning Commission Meetings are held on the third Monday of each month. Applicants must be present at all scheduled review meetings of the Planning Commission and Council. If an applicant is unable to attend a scheduled meeting, please make arrangements to have an authorized agent attend .in your place and to advise the Building & Zoning Office of this change prior to the meeting. RUN DATE 08/30/90 BATCH 008 PROP AOOR 0NT4ER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/ADOR 38 10-117-23 31 001« 02140 PROSPECT AVE G F DERGQUIST ETAL GOOFREY F BERGQUIST BOX 125 CRYSTAL DAY MN 55323 HENT4EP1N COUNTY PROPERTY INFORMATION SYSTEM PROPERTY OHMERS LIST '8 10-117-23 31 0014 02145 CRYSTAL AVE G F BERQUIST ETAL G F BERGQUIST BOX 125 l.iYSTAL BAY MN 55323 REPORT NO. PI435401 PAGE 22 38 10-117-23 31 0016 02150 PROSPECT AVE MAT WHITE HARK A A TINA M WHITE 2150 PROSPECT AVE CRYSTAL BAY MN 55323 v-3 3 38 10-117-23 31 0017 PROP AOOR 02160 PROSPECT AVE OWtTER NAME PATRICIA 0 DRUMMOND TAXPAYER PATRICIA 0 ORUTfflONO NAME/ADOR 2160 PROSPECT AVE CRYSTAL BAY MN 55323 38 10-117-23 31 0018 02170 PROSPECT AVE BOBBY 0 JOHNSON A WIFE BOBBY 0 JOHNSON BOX 123 CRYSTAL BAY IfT 55323 38 10-117-23 31 0019 02180 PROSPECT AVE FREDERICK W CURTIS HELEN CURTIS MORRISON 1351 HOLLISTER RD BABSON PARK FL 33827 PROP AOOR OFV^IER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/ADOR 38 10-117-25 31 0032 01261 ARBOR ST FAB PETERSON F P PETERSON P 0 BOX 164 lUYZATA MN 55391 38 10-117-23 31 0033 01271 ARBOR ST MARIBETH ANDRIK5 SWANSON MARIBETH ANDRUS HAYES 1271 ARBOR ST WAYZATA MN 55391 38 10-117-23 31 0034 01285 ARBOR ST JAB WOOD JAY A BARBARA WOOD 1285 ARBOR ST BOX 43 WAYZATA Ttl 55391 38 10-117-23 31 0035 PROP AOOR 01295 ARBOR ST OWNER NAME ARLENE L HOPPE TAXPAYER ARLENE L HOPPE NAME/ADOR 1295 ARDOR ST CRYSTAL BAY MN 55323 38 10-117-23 31 0036 02160 CRYSTAL AVE M A J BLUE MARCUS J A JUDY A BLUE BOX 62 CRYSTAL BAY MN 55323 38 10-117-23 31 0037 01290 BRIAR ST FAYE M HARTRANFT FAYE M HARTRANFT 1290 BRIAR ST WAYZATA MN 55391 ■». 38 10-117-23 31 0038 PROP AOOR 01270 BRIAR ST OSINER NAME DIATtTE J MATTILA TAXPAYER OIAHTE J MATTILA NAME/ADOR 1270 BRIAR ST CRYSTAL BAY MN 55323 38 i0-ll/-23 31 0039 01250 BRIAR ST K E TESSMER » C A TESSMER KENNETH E S CATHY A TESSMER P 0 BOX 84 CRYSTAL DAY Tfl 55323 38 10-117-23 31 0041 U1251 BRIAR ST MICHELE L COMBS MICHELE L COMBS 1251 BRIAR ST CRYSTAL DAY MN 55323 38 16-117 73 31 0042 PROP AOOR 01261 BRIAR ST OWNER NAME OIL PRINTUP TAXPAYER GARY M PRINTUP NAME/ADOR P 0 BOX 104 1261 BRIAR CRYSTAL BAY 191 55323 38 10-117-23 31 0043 01291 BRIAR ST K CURLEY A W KELLTTT MR A MRS KEVIN CURLEY 1291 BRIAR ST S CRYSTAL BAY TW 55323 38 10-117-23 31 0044 01295 BRIAR ST ALEXANDER J JENTILUCCI ETAL ALEXANDER A DIANE JENTILUCCI 1295 BRIAR ST PO BOX 27 CRYSTAL BAY Ft! 55323 RUN DATE 08/30/90 BATCH 008 HENT4EPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORMATION SYSTEM PROPERTY OHNERS LIST REPOUr NO. PIA35A01 PAGE 23 PROP ADDR Ot-t4ER NAME TAXPAYER TOTAL BATCH NAME/ADOR 008 00018 I CERTIFY THAT THE FACTS REPRESENTED ARE AN ACCURATE AND TRUE REPRESENIATION OF INFORMATIori AS IT APPEARS THIS DATE ON THE RECORDS OF THE HENNEPIN COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF PROPERTY TAXATION, TO THE BEST OF MY KTTOULEDGE AND BELIEF. DATE IT5 •. ■' «n r75 « J' u 175 : 3 a 15 175 • ^ \anan 'S JSfiL-2. " --0 -..0 1 a 'V p •*o ® a 140 ^ .'(75)^^^ H70) / V t7 * a ' 10 '«,fzrrr"' ^v ‘iS D:n ^ av P tn a ' »1 (40) T m V G oc ^ (3fl)^»2,xi)^ < a , _i riA^ ^i '(^r» 2 a (43) 5= a- •\'<0 , 7 ^ 5D ^v'„\,'.;. > /oak(a4)V«8 r’ a x. ( 19) 3 'rTl a X J 75 ' (57)' \ 1 f S ■ 175 ’ 5-.. r' I n i 1 i ‘ ;S S7 5 ’ '5 ' i (9«)- «7 5 ro' SPcCT or<c t—« a: CD ILLLl-l 17T a ‘ 3j 3 ar 5 ' a (ii6) q:o CDerr<c >•' •v. -•;; •A,». , « m V-S*\ • ’ ' ; ''r , f ‘-V '4 s. ^:'s ■mV ;'iv, *•' .• ' *'. * . • ' ' .41 vV-i [5 . ••?"V »» , 1 • . . y '■ '.'■ Vv ;‘l /;;‘v^>_v 1 * • m’s! 7 -y. rfey '.15 > a 1 (47) '55 *(49U48,1 fe/ ” / / / r ' :,*■*• :.M - «fv'r-- ; -:-.4 (S' j C-e.I "aaBBeaggogBBiBBt'^—■------------------------------------------------------- 1 2'-8" ------------ 14*-------------- I ^---------•8*-9**--------r 15* 9’-6 ‘ ! 2’-6‘ /* I r _ .0.— >. 5’-6‘ 1 L \ \^wwwH •StJ-e f-1' O -5'-8*'-----> kXWNW MARCUS BLUE • RESIDENCE - existing structure Sullders Alliance SA 7/90 \ fV\(Xvc,vts 6/«-*-«- Iriir' ss OCT 3 1990 Mna .! H'/H - *■ :LA-MkL. A~ ' 9 For wtsual effscl only. not to aoolo. 10390.6 Mayor and City CouncilTO: FROM; DATE: September 14, 1990 SUBJECT; Wetlands Protection Mark E. Bernhardson, City AdministratoijC ,/6^ Attachment: A. Wetlands Protection Memo Dated 8/8/90 ISSUE - Determine whether the Council desires to; A. Modify protection B. Impose a moratorium INTRODUCTION - This item was tabled at the Council’s September 24, 1990 meeting. RECOMMENDATION - It is recommended that the Council after having discussed this and raised any concerns not take any further action at this time as staff feels adequate protection exists for the wetlands and that further protection would not have only an impact in this local and not totally eliminate the development but also may have adverse impacts in other areas of the community given the substantial wetlands in the community. PROPOSED MOTION - Moved by s =»conded by_ _, that Council accept the information regarding wetlands protection. Ayes _, Nays 72590 TO:Mayor and City Council FROM: Mark E. Bernhardson, City Administrator DATE: August 8, 1990 SUBJECT: Wetlands Protection Attachment:A. E. W. Blanch Application (Memo Only) B. City of Crono Letter Dated 8/2/90 C. General M.ap Showing Wetlands ISSUE - 1. Review of City policies related to wetlands and floodplains protection. 2. Determination as to whether the Council desires: A. To modify protection B. Impose a moratorium O';r' • , l; INTRODUCTION - At the Council meeting of July 23, 1990 the issued of wetlands protection particularly as it related to the pending Blanch application on Oid Beach Koad was taised. Iiicladed in the application are questions regarding setback from wetlands together the proposal to fill in wetlands within the City of Minnetonka Beach and dredge out a compensating amount within the City of Orono. In addition, was the question of fill already deposited upon the property and also the developability related to the property. A' X"’I" DISCUSSION - The City’s Comprehensive Plan Objective - The primary thrust of the City's Comprehensive Plan related to improving the quality of Lake Minnetonka through the removal of sewage going into the lake together with not creating greater non-point pollution in the process. This non poinc poliutiun particularily came about from storm water run off. The Comprehensive Plan addresses it through the large lot zoning in the rural area of the community together with the hardcover regulations and wetlands protection. The primary goal of wetlands protection was to allow these natural stormwater ponding areas to provide some cleansing effect to improve the water quality before it goes into Lake Minnetonka. Wetlands Generally - While wetlands have been more and more protected for natural habitats together with some improvement in water quality, not all experts are in agreement that over the life cycle of a year or two that the wetlands naturally will have a net improvement in the water quality. We11 • Purpose - The purpose of wetlands as noted is for: A. Storm water ponding B. Water quality improvement C. Wildlife habitat While cattails etc. do remove nutrients during the growing season, during the v'inter these die off and may in fact re deposit their nutrients in the wetlands which are flushed out in the spring thaws and dump more nutrients back into the lake. The second problem with wetlands are that over time they do silt up and have mature growth. (i.e. Willows etc.) Such was the case in a wetlands near the Gregory property at 1420 Shoreline Drive which the Council in 1985/65 allowed to be re-configured to restore it back to a less mature state. Wet lands C1 assification - Attachment C represents the various types of wetlands that can be found in the community. The DNR classification system recognizes the difference in the type of wetlands and the purpose of those. It should be noted that the DNR does not protect certain classifications. Floodplain and Flood Fringe Protection - The City does regulate building and construction in these areas. Restrictions in these relate to the Federal flood insurance program. These regulations are similar to Federal regulations and were put in in order to allow City residents to participate. Jurisdictional Protections - Wetlands in various circumstances are concurrently protected or addressed by the following jurisdictions: City DNR (particular classifications) Corps of Engineers Environmental Protection Agency Minnehaha Watershed District Lake Minnetonka Conservation District (below 929.4) State Pollution Control Agency There has been a substantial shift in policy as to view of long existing regulations by the Corps of Engineers. This has come into play in the Carlson application as noted in Attachment F, which the City did approve for construction of a road with compensation in a wetlands that is not DNR protected. This is an area that was tiled out 30 or 40 years ago and has little, if any, of the type of vegetation normally found in wetlands. The Corps of Engineers recently indicated that they would not approve it since there was another route that could minimize the construction in the wetlands. The developer is currently reviewing his options in this matter. It is interesting to note, however, the Corps of Engineers within the past several months has given their tacit approval to a similar situation in Medina. Process - With all of these agencies it becomes a substantial coordinating process to determine whether such developments will go ahead. Currently the Corps of Engineers has directed that a City work on approving a subdivision before they will review it. This however, does place the applicant at considerable expense before their review by the Corps is undertaken. 211 A££l j,ca t i,on - This property which previously was owned by the Freshwater Biological Institute was sold to Mr. Blanch. There have been proposals submitted by FWBI in prior years which contemplated various types of multiple residential, duplex, single family development of this property. The property outside the designated wetlands has been available for development since its purchase. The fill that was placed on the property was the result of suction dredging done in Lafayette Bay (main lake) in 1978. It was an experiment by FWBI to see what could be done with dredging spoils without having to cart them out of the area. Controlled experiments were done to determine the amount of nutrient run-off from this fill into the wetlands. While fill such as this is not usable for spetic systems, it is with appropriate soil boarings a property that can be built on. It should be remembered the City did allow such suction dredging in North Arm in an application in 1987. Waade Application - This application was for construction of a road which bordered along some wetlands and floodplain areas. Orono Protection of Wetlands - The City protects its wetlands in the following ways; 26 Foot Setback for Structures - This is a primary control that not only keeps construction out of existing wetlands but also gives a reasonable setback. In addition the City does not allow any filling or grading without a variance and conditional use permit. No NeJt Lo££ - This has been a popular term used regarding any wetlands alteration that the amount of storm water ponding area not be reduced by any work that has been done. Generally this is done by compensating either for surface or depth in another area of the property. ALTERNATIVES POLICY 1. Maintain current protection. 2. Revise protections. A. Increase protection B. Decrease protection ACTIONS A. Direct changes be initiated regarding wetlands protection B. Direct that a moratorium be undertaken following a published public hearing C. Table for further discussion D. Take no action RECOMMENDATION - It is recommended that Council accept the information and table further discussion to the September 10, 1990 meeting. In general it is felt that the City's current regulations give the City adequate authority to protect wetlands appropiately yet leaving a flexibility to allow for improvements in those situations. The problems related to these applications is that as long as they meet the development stantards set forth in the ordinance they would be allowed to _• •• r the development. In order to restrict development in these casos u City may need to set up extraordinary setbacks, which woulc seerly limit not only these properties as far a de ve lopab i 1 i ty but would have a substantial negative impact on the deve lopabi 1ity of substantially other properties within the City. PROPOSED MOTION - Moved by seconded by that the Council after discussing this information tables this to the September 10, 1990 meeting. Ayes _, Nays _. To: From: Date: Subject: Mayor Grabek & Orono Council Members Planning Commission Chairman Kelley Orono Planning Commission Members City Administrator Bernhardson Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building & Zoning Administr ■n N July 12, 1990 #1555 E.W. Blanch, Jr., 2501 Old Beach Road - Preliminary Subdivision Class III - Public Hearing Zoning Districts - B-4 & LR-lB Total Area = 31.26 acres Pertinent Ordinances - Chapter 11 Section 10.55, Subdivision 15 (A) - Minimum lot area requirements. The property may receive credit for portions of land located within wetlands and floodplain as property is sewered, but in no case can a dry buiidable envelope be less than 1/2 acre of dry contiguous land. List of Exhibits Exhibit A Exhibit B Exhibit Exhibit Exhibit Exhibit Exhibit Exhibit Application Property Owners List Plat Map Staff Memo - Sketch Plan Review Planning Commission Action Notice Staff Sketch - Amended Sewer Plan Preliminary Plan Grading, Drainage and Utility Plan The applicant has filed a preliminary plan for a 9 lot plat located within both the Cities of Minnetonka Beach and Orono - Lot 1, Block 2 and Lots 1 and 2, Block 1 within Minnetonka Beach and Lots 3 through 8 within the City of Orono. At the sketch plan review, the applicant was asked to define the purpose of Outlots B and C located within the City of Minnetonka Beach. The Zoning Administrator of Minnetonka Beach has advised that she had asked the app3leant to eliminate the outlots as currently shown. Applicant should provide the City of Orono with some background on this matter. In general, the City staff has no major concerns with the preliminary plan submitted for our current review. The preliminary plan is reviewed in detailed below. Zoning File #1555 July 12, 1990 Page 2 of 5 LOT CONFIGURATION - All lots continue to meet the required lot width to the rear of the 35* front setback line. Lot 9 has been omitted, replaced by Lot 8. Lot 8 is defined along the existing B-4 zoning line. As a result, the applicant did not have to file a petition for rezoning with the preliminary plan. Lot 8 is to be donated to the Freshwater Foundation for future use of the institute. As already noted at the sketch plan review. Outlet A will also be in the control of“ the foundation for future use by the Fresh Water Institute. During the sketch plan review, the applicant was advised that designation of the outlet as proposed needs a variance to the normal procedures of the City and that wetland areas were to be incorporated within the boundaries of the residential lots. Applicant had advised that the foundation wished to retain the wetlands area so that appropriate controls could be developed on the property as further restrictions on the institute's use of the wetlands. This appeared to be acceptable to members of the Commission. Applicant was further asked to provide documentation concerning the specific controls to be placed upon the outlet. As of this writing, the City has not received the special covenants although applicant has contacted the administrator of the foundation who may have the covenants by our meeting date. ACCESS - Lots 3 through 7 shall achieve access via Old Beach Road. Lot 8 shall achieve access via the defined road systems within FWBI property. Access is not proposed directly onto Shadywood Road for Lot 8 at this time. It is staff's understanding that Lot 8 shall serve for future dormitories for visiting students. In discussions with the City Engineer and the Public Works Director, staff has been advised that Old Beach Road, at least the portions within the City of Orono, have been scheduled for upgrading within this year. The road at an approximate 24' width is scheduled for leveling and 2" bituminous overlay. Applicant shall be asked to make payment for these improvements. It may be appropriate for the City of Minnetonka Beach to coordinate required improvements with the City of Orono. Staff will review this matter with the Zoning Administrator at a later date. The City will ask for 33' dedication of right-of-way for Old Beach Road as shown on the preliminary plan. Zoning File #1555 July 12, 1990 Page 3 of 5 SEWER & WATER UTILITIES - Already noted in the sketch plan review, there will be a sewer unit charge of $897.62 for each sewer unit based on the 1990 fee schedule. This fee is adjusted each year based on an inflationary rate. There will be no water unit charges for the 6 lots within Orono. Minnetonka Beach shall be charged at the same sewer unit rate quoted for Orono. There will be a charge of $1,691.78 per water unit.for lots within the Minnetonka Beach area. There is an existing water main within Old Beach Road. The applicant proposes a 500' extension to the north to serve the northern lots within Minnetonka Beach. The City of Minnetonka Beach shall be responsible for portions of the water lines within the boundaries of their City. This may also be an issue to discuss at a future date with the administrator of Minnetonka Beach. Please review Exhibit F, staff must ask that the proposed 8" sanitary sewer line be amended as shown on the staff sketch (Exhibit F). The City does not approve of public utility lines placed within the private boundaries of properties because of the difficulties of achieving access and creating an impact upon existing improvements within those lots. The City staff recommends that the sewer line be routed down Cld Beach Read and then along County Road 19 up to the lift station. The City will ask for a 25' wide drainage and utility easement along the street lot lines of Lots 6 and 7 up to the lift station in Lot 8. Applicant's surveyor should designate existing utility easement over lift station within Lot 8. DRAINAGE/GRADING PLAN - At the time of the sketch plan review. City staff had asked that the revised grading plans show locations where fill had previously been placed as part of the dredging project within the Lafayette Bay area in 1978. The filling involved Lots 4, 5, 6, 7 and 8 within the City of Orono. Note that the wet lands has been defined at the 931.5' elevation. The major concern for this review is that the City of Orono is asked to approve excavations within the defined wetland area to offset filling of the flood plain/wetlands/lakeshore protected area of Lot 1, Block 2 within the City of Minnetonka Beach. Applicant failed to advise the City of this land alteration at the time of the sketch plan review. If the City had been advised of the proposed land alterations, a separate conditional use permit ard variance application would have been required to be filed -within the preliminary subdivision application. Section 10.55, Subdivision 8 prohibits the filling of floodplains, wetlands and lakeshore protected areas within the City. If an applicant wishes to fill within these protected areas, a variance application is required and a statement of hardsliip must accompany that application. Zoni..:J :lle #1555 July 12, 19''" Page 4 of 5 The applicant has been made aware of the need for a separate filing and has asked that the preliminary subdivision application be considered independently from the conditional use and variance application. The staff has discussed the proposed land alterations with the Zoning Administrator for Minnetonka Beach. She advises that the City of Minnetonka Beach currently has a moritorium on all proposed land alterations of flood plain and wetland areas within their city. The City of Minnetonka Beach cannot affectively act on the request to fill within Lot 1, Block 2 at this point. Applicant proposes placement of approximately 1,800 cubic yards of fill to be placed below the 931.5' elevation but above the 929.4' OHW of Lake Minnetonka. The excavations within the City of Orono are to compensate for the storm water storage volume lost within the Minnetonka Beach portion of the flood plain. The purpose of the filling appears to not provide greater area for the building envelope, but merely as an expansion of the yard area. Isses for Planning Commission's Consideration Regarding Land Alteration Issue: 1. Should the City of Orono permit excavations within flood plain/wetlands for filling projects that would be in complete violation of the codes of our City? 2. Should all compensating excavations be completed within the City of Minnetonka Beach? 3. Based on the configuration of the floodplain within the Minnetonka Beach area, compensating excavations may be severely limited? - Should filling be limited to the ability of Minnetonka Beach to locate suitable area within the floodplain boundaries of Minnetonka Beach? Planning Commission should advise applicant as to their position regarding a conditional use permit and variance that would ask for excavations within the floodplain of Lake Minnetonka for filling within a lakeshore protected area no matter what city the property is located. The applicant h property along the map '•hould be upda* upon the dry buildab^ ‘ailed to show drainageways that enter the and southern boundaries. The drainage D locate drainage paths and their impact envelopes if any. Zoning File #1555 July 12, 1990 Page 5 of 5 Options of Action - 1. Table application providing applicant additional time to file a conditional use permit and variance application with the City for the excavation of wetlands/floodplains within the City of Orono; or 2. Approval finding the 6 lot proposal meets all standards of the zoning code and subdivision regulations of the City. In addition, there is adequate sewer and water capacity within existing lines to serve the new development and that all lots achieve access via an approved public roadway. Approval is subject t^' the following conditions; a) Payment of a park dedication fee based on 8% of the fair market value to be determined by the City Assessor upon final approval of the preliminary plat by the Council of Orono. Payment to be made by applicant upon filing of the final plat. b) Granting of Flowage and Conservation Easement over the wetlands defined below the 931.5' elevation. Wetland to be defined as drainage easements on the final plat. c) Applicant to dedicate and designate all drainageways on the plat as drainage easements at a minimum width of 15'. d) Applicant to be responsible for expansion of municipal sewer service and upgrading of Old Beach Road consisting of leveling and 2" bituminous overlay e) The City of Orono sh.^ll agree to the creation of Outlet A for the exclusive ownership of either the Fresh Water Institute or Foundation. Such usage to be limited by special covenants to be approved by the City. Such covenants shall not be in conflict with the ordinance of the City that protect wetland floodplain areas as set forth in S-iction 10.55 of the municipal code. f) Final plat to shew a 25' wide drainage and utility easement along the street lot lines of Lots 6 and 7 through Lot 8 up to the utility easement over the City's lift station. Final plat should designate existing utility easement over lift station. g) Applicant to provide amended sanitary sewer extension plans for final approval by the City. h) Applicant is advised that the current sewer unit charge for new construction for the year of 1990 is $897.62. This will be adjusted each year based on the inflationary rate. ;€maN€i^ CITYc Post Office Box 66*Crysul Bay, Minn On the North Shore of Lake Minnetonka 5 August 2, 1990. Bill Rudnicki William R. Engelhardt Associates, Inc. 1107 Hazeltine Blvd., Suite 480 Chaska, MN 55318 Dea. 11: In consideration of Ben Wopat'j* letter (Corps of Engineers) received by this office July 26, 1930, the City must ask for the following amendments of the preliminary plat application: 1. Per Item c of that letter, define 1 acre wetland within Lot 4 and Lot 5, Block 1. This wetland aiea is also designated within City's wetlands maps. (See enclosure.) Applicant may wish to make soil borings to confirm actual limits of Glenco soil as dry buildable envelope is severly impacted by the placement of the wetland within Lot 4. Note house pad must be located 26' from the edge of newly defined wetland. If filling of this wetland is proposed, a separate conditional use permit will be required. 2. Per Item d, wetland within the Orono portion of the subdivision must be redefined at the 934' elevation. 3. Provide amended dry buildable area calculations for each of the six lots within the City of Orono based on the newly defined 934' wetland elevation. In reviewing the sketch included with Mr. Wopat's letter, it would appear Lot 8 will not meot the required 1/2 acre of dry contiguous land area. It may be beneficial to your client that we meet to discuss the scheduling of the application before the Planning Commission at their upcoming August 20th meeting. In reviewing the most recent information from the Corps of Engineers, we have newly defined major issues to be resolved. BL'ILDI.NG 4 ZONING - 473-7357 ASSESSING ADMI.MSTR.ATION 4 FINANCE - 473-7:5* FAX - 473-0510 PL BLIC WORKS - 473-7359 Bill Rudnicki August 2, 1990 Page 2 Please contact my office at your earliest convenience so that we may schedule a meeting with both myself and the City Engineer. Sincerely, Jeanne A. Mabusth Building & Zoning Adminstrator cc: Dennis E. Sandin, Landstar, Inc., 6100 Golden Valley Rd., Golden Valley, MN 55422 Jo Ellen Hurr, City of Minnetonka Beach, 2945 Westwood Rd., Wayzata, MN 55361 Glenn Cook, City Engineer Mark Bernhardson, City Administrator JAM/1sv - . ^ ------ 11. DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY ar P aul oistpict copps op eNGiNeep'J t«2i U S posr opp'ce 4 custom mouse 3T PAUL. MINNESOTA 5510I-14.-9 July 23. 1990 AlTCMriON Construccion-Operacions ReguLacory (90-2549N-92/90-2550N-92) I n c;T.' c' -=-■ ••_ _ _/ \ I JUL 2 6 1290 SUBJECT: The Marsh ac Lafayccce, Residencial Developmenc, Sec. 20. T. 117 N R 23 W., Cities of Orono and Minnetonka Beach, Hennepin County, Minnesota Bill Rudnicki William R. Engelhardt Associates, Inc. 1107 Hateltine Boulevard, Suite 480 Chaska, Minnesota 55318 We have reviewed the information provided us about your project. The work is authorized by a nationwide Department of the Army permit, provided the enclosed conditions and management practices are followed, and provided that you incorporate the changes discussed in your telephone conversations with Joe Yanta of our staff. These changes are summarized below. The enclosed map provided some aoDroxiraate wetland locations, although the flags placed in the field should be considered a more definite wetland delineation than the approximate lines on the map. a. Omit the wetland fill in Block 2. Lot 1. 'Larry Smith of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) and Joe Yanta met Dennis Sandin of Landscar at the site. Mr. Yanta marked the wetland line in this lot (approximately ac elevation 931.5-932). Any wetland fill in this lot would require an individual permit. As Mr. Yanta explained to both you and Mr. Sandin. this proposed fill would be (difficult to justify under the Clean Water Act Section 404(b)(1) Guidelines because you already have a developable lot. The resource agencies chat review individual permits have often opposed such fills. Tlie FWS has already informally indicated chat it would object to this part of the project. b. Avoid wetland fill in Block 1, Lot 1. below the wetland line marked by Mr. Yanta. This line appears to be generally somewhat above the 932 elevation (see map), as shown on the. enclosed map. Some of the wetland line may lie slightly below 932 because portions of this lot have been filled with miscellaneous material and have been effectively converted to non-wetland areas under Federal criteria. If you are planning any fill that might fall below 932 inside the area marked as upland, however, yen should check with Che Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (MDNR) to en-urc that you do not place any fill below Che ordinary high water mark of Scate-protected Wetland 27-912W. Previous correspondence from the MDNR indicated that they had not established an ordinary high water elevation for this wetland but that you were not planning to place any fill below 932 along it. A very short segment of fill for the driveway appears to lie below elevation 932, but this fill would be authorized by a nationwide Department of the Army permit, as long as it contains a culvert to maintain existing drainage. You should contact the MDNR directly to determine whether this driveway/ditch crossing requires a State permit. c. Avoid ocher wecland fill, excepc for Che niniraun necessary Co fill in Block 1, Loc 4, in an essencially isolaced pockec separace from che larger marsh. This pockec does noc show on che Nacional Wecland Invencory map buc does appear on Che soil survey as an isolaced area of Glencoe soil. The wecland pockec (shown on che accached map) is separaced from che main marsh by a ridge of upland soil (shovm on che councy soil suxr/ey and verified by field inspeccion) wich only an old, dry dicch conneccion co convey high wacer. This wecland pockec covers approximacely an acre of grassy. c*/pe 2 wecland, wich a wooded fringe. Your grading plan shows chac che house pad in Loc 4 may require a very small area of chis wecland". AlChough che nacionwide perraic would allow up co an acre of fill or grading in chis wecland, we suggesc chac you minimize filling and ocher adverse discurbance chere. (On chis sice, only chis small wecland qualifies for Chis nacionwide permic. The ocher wecland require individual pennies for residencial or ocher fill and gradirg.) If you, or a subsequenc landowner, wishes CO excavace a wildlife pond in chis area, we can make some specific suggescions. This wecland encroaches slighcly inco Loc 5. d. Keep ocher fill and grading around che main marsh above elevacion 934. Mr. Yanca did noc mark che encire wecland. buC ne did verify chac che wecland generally seems Co go above elevacion 932 buc noc quice co elevacion 934. Your grading plan does noc show any fill or grading below chis elevacion, aside from che cwo areas discussed above chac would be covered by nacionwide permics and che area in Block 2, Loc 1, chac we suggesc you do noc fill. Some of che area shown as old fill in che councy soil sur-/ey (see accached map) scill appears co be werland, wich sacuraced hydric soils and wecland vegecacion. Perhaps chese areas were low, wee spocs parcly filled wich hydric soil chac has since subsided and caken on a more nacural wecland characcer. If you plan co fill or grade below 934 in chese areas, we would require a delineacion of che encire wecland. We could do chis delineacion ourselves, alchough ic would be several weeks before we could schedule ic, or you could hire a qualified consulcanc co do che delineacion and subraic a reporc chac would be subjecc co our review and approval. e. Clean excavacion of che area shown in Block 1, Locs 5 and 3, would noc require a Deparcmenc of che Army permic if che excavaced macerial is placed on an upland area and if no ocher fill or grading is involved in che excavacion. (This excavacion would probably receive only parcial micigacion credic, if any. for wecland fill auchorized under a Deparcmenc of che Army permic because che excavaced area appears Co be all wecland. The excavacion would only converc one wecland cype Co anocher, racher chan creace or expand an exiscing wecland.) If chese changes are accepcable and no ocher changes Chac aighc involve wecland fill are necessary, we do noc require any furcher review of your projecC or processing of your applicacion. The nacionwide pexrmics for che fill described in seccions b and c are already in effecc. If you wish Co apply for a permic Co place fill in Block 2, Loc 1. or in any ocher wecland areas adjacenc Co Wecland 27-912W, you muse apply for an individual permic for che encire project. (Your currenc applicacion covers only che proposed fill in Block 2, Loc 1.) This deCerminacion covers only che projecc referenced above. If che design, location, or purpose of che work changes, you should concacc us co make sure che work would noc resulc in a violacion of Federal law. Our celephone number is (612) 220-0375. will issue a public notice announces Che changes when they occur. Furthermore, if you begin or are under contract to begin this project before Che date the nacLnwide permit is modified or revoked, you will have 12 months from the date of Che modification or revocation to complete the project under the present terms and conditions of this nationwide permit. It is Your responsibility to insure chat the work complies with the terms of this letter and the enclosures; IT IS YOUR RESPONSIBILITY TO OBTAIN ALL REQUIRED STATE AND LOCAL PERMITS AND APPROVALS BEFORE YOU PROCEED WITH THE PROJECT. If you have any questions, please call Joe Yanta at (612) 220-0362. Enclosures Ben Wopac Chief, Regulatory Branch Construction-Operations Division Determination: 330.5(a)(14) and (26) - Minor isolaced/headwaters wetland fill of less chan an acre. road crossing and r" iP s?m I’ II 1 i^V;)i I •^i ' 'i‘ ’■ y^\ 'jj^'-’ / : . . v;' - ■• fr' r r I ;r * ^ V.S:'r> ■N . ,T .-•S..-.. >.v:,y . '• ...\n‘ ?. . ‘i. '-, ai55:?5S;32K3»i£5 — .Ji. .l- n V v> 'ji- S-r^rr - V ’■’■"■y. ^■*- rtr,K;r -.ll87Choin5-^7??4:-.- • VILLAGE OF MINNETONKA B ■r?5/'\?-' rjrt-'.'f- i*" ; ^.Mvr^O'V. ^ r ^ 5- ^ ^ ,-* • r''. • - ..VILLAGE Of ORONO K(''S Jl■W--'M •Ltr^rSCTSa §fmm,mm K * * 1 - - ! t t I tf/ 1 1 (k 1vr~9- ite^ nr r ■'1 Ujso Map - l‘J8d CITY OF ORONO WETLANDS INVENTORY ^UP This Bsp was ccmpllad froa tha airphoto bata map syscaa antltlad 'Watlands Invancory and Classiftojtion* prepared far the City of Orono by the Hennepin Soil and Water Conservation District (Jana 1 9751, showln<) wetlands which have bean dasl>jnaced tor special protection under Orono Municipal lonlnq Coda Section lj.55 OVERVIEW OF OHOMO'S WETLAND FROTECTION REGULATIONS - No -iradlnq, filling dredqing or axcavatlon is allowed within wetlands nor within J6 feat of wetlands. - No temporary or permanent stcucturas, obstructions, saptl- systems, walls or other construction is allowaJ within wetlands nor within 26 feat of wetlands. Changes to a wetland. Including eacavatlon of wildlife ponds or decorative ponds, requires s Conditional Use Permit. NOTEi The ‘Wetlands Inventory and Classificatlon' airphoto base maps are available for public view at the City Offices. Where the location of a wetland boundary is in quastion. factors Includl 9 soil types, vegetation types, topo graphy and hydroloqlc characteristics will be taken into account In detaralninq the actual bou/)klj ry. 3. Cl fi m Bones troo Rosene Anderlik & Associates Octo G Bonesuoo PE Booen w Uoiene. PE Joieon C Andefhk. PE Mdfvin L SorvaU. PE ffichatd E Turner, PE James C Olson. PE Ciet'n B Coo*. PE Tnomas E Noyev PE Boocn G Scnuncnt. PE Susan M Eoenm C PA Engineers & Architects October 1, 1990 Ke«n A Gordon, PE Ricnaid w Foster PE Oonak) C Bunjaidt PE Jerry A SourOon PE Mar* A Hanson. PE Ted K Fiem. PE M<naei T Rautmann, PE Rooers R Pfefferie. PE Oavx] O Loskota. PE Thomas W Pnerson PE Michaer C. Lyncn, PE jarm B Maiano. PE Kenneth P .Anoerson. PE Ktark R aotfs. PE Rooert C Russe*. A i A Thomas £ Arigui. PE Howard A Sanford PE Oan«( j Edgerton PE Mark A Se>pL PE Phtno j Caswea. PE Ismael Kaamnet. PE .Mar* D \*a«ii PE Thomas R Andervjn. AIA Gary F Ryianoer. PE Miles a Jensen. PE. L Phirtip Grave* III PE Rene C PHjmart A I A Agnes M Raig. AiCP Jerry D Permcn. PE. CecJkS OIrvier PE Chanes A Erickson Leo M Paweisky Haoan M. Otson /7 H t ') 4 1990 City of Orono Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 Attn: Mr. John Gerhardson Re: Well No. 3 Orono, MN Our File No. 13949 Dear Mr. Gerhardson: Attached is Pay Request Number 6 for Orono Well Number 3. This Pay Request covers work completed through September 28, 1990. If you have any questions, please call. Yours very truly, BONESTROO, ROSENE, ANDERLIK & ASSOCIATES, INC. Daryl Kirschenman DK:lk Enclosure 13949/L2 2335 West Highway 36 • St. Paul, Minnesota 55113 • 612-636-4600 REQUEST FOR PAYMENT DATE:October 1, 1990 FOR PERIOD: PLACE:Orono, Minnesota From: Sep. 1, 1990 PROJECT:Municioal Well No. 3 16" Production Well SPECIFIED CONTRACT PROJECT NO.•FILE NO.: 13949 COMPLETION DATE; CONTRACTOR:Keys Well Drilline Company June 15. 1990 ADDRESS:413 North Lexington Parkway St. Paul. MN 55104 REQUEST FOR PAYMENT NO.:6 SUMMARY: 1. Original Contract Amount Change Order - ADDITION Change Order - DEDUCTION Revised Contract Amount Value Completed to Date Material on Hand Amount Earned Less Retainage 5 Z Sub-Total 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 31,475.00 Less Amount Paid Previously AMOUNT DUE THIS REQUEST FOR PAYMENT NO.:. 70,155.00 101.630.00 82.079.00 0.00 82,079.00 4,103.95 77.975.05 67,952.55 10.022.50 Recommended for Approval by: BONESTROO, ROSENE, ANDERLIK & ASSOCIATES, INC. By.__ OWNER APPROVAL: By_ _ _ _ _ _ By_ _ _ _ _ _ Date:Approved By; KEYS WELL DRILLING COMPANY Contractor By PR13949 PROJ.ECT: • Municipal Veil No. 3 16" Production Well PLACE;_ _ _ _Orono, Minnesota_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . CONTRACTORi Keys Well Drilling Company_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ PAYMENT NO.: FILE NO.j _ DATE: 13949 October 1. 1990 STATEMENT OF WORK Contract Item Unit Unit Est’d Quantity Amount Price Quantity To Date To Date L.F. BASE BID II - 16 INCH PRODUCTION WELL Item 1 Mobilization, transporting of materials & equipment & setting up same for construction of 16" production well Item 2 Drill open hole into top of Limestone to set 16" produc■ion well casing Item 3 Place 16" casing in open hole Item 4 Place neat cement grout in annulas around 16" production well casing Item 5 Drill 16" open hole through the Limestone and Jordan Item 6 Dynamite for blasting incl. labor for shooting, caps & wire Item 7 Bail Item 8 Furnish, install & remove air compression equipt. for air surging of the well L.S. L.S. $6,000.00 L.F. C.Y. L.F. Lbs. C.Y. Item 9 Air surging of the well Mrs. Item 10 Furnish, Install, & remove test pump for capacity test of well L.S. PR13949 35.00 32.00 200.00 25.00 2.00 40.00 1,000.00 100.00 2,500.00 Page 1 L S 160 300 400 L S L S 0.5 $3,000.00 310 190 340 10.850.00 9.984.00 4.800.00 4.750.00 80.00 13.600.00 1 1,000.00 50.5 5.050.00 1 2,500.00 PROJECT? Municipal Well No. 3 16" Production Well PLACE:_ _ _ _Orono, Minnesota_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ CONTRACTOR: Keys Veil Drilling Company_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ PAYMENT NO.; FILE NO.;_ _ DATE; 13949 October 1, 1990 STATEMENT OF WORK Contract Item Unit Unit Est'o Quantity Amount Price Quantity To Date To Date Item 11 Test pumping Hrs, Item 12 Televise completed veil L.S. Item 13 Sterilization of well upon completion, cleanup & veld cap on 16” casing L.S, TOTAL BASE BID II - 16” PRODUCTION WELL 90.00 950.00 ,000.00 100 L S L S 166 .00 $70,554.00 CHANGE ORDER NO. 1 Item 1 Provide silt fence along Hwy 12 L.S.$975.00 L S $975.00 CHANGE ORDER NO. 2 Item 1 Furnish «i Install air compression equipt L.S. Item 2 Surge fc bail well Item 3 Install test pump Item 4 Test pumping TOTAL CHANGE ORDER NO. 2 - ADD Hour Hour $1,000.00 100.00 L.S. 2,500.00 90.00 180 100 1 $1,000.00 95.5 9,550.00 $10,550.00 PR13949 Page 2 PROJECT: * Municipal Well No. 3 16" Production Veil PLACE:_ _ _ _Orono, Minnesota_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ___ _ _ _ _ _ CONTPvACTOR: Keys Veil Drilling Company_ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ STATEMENT OF WORK PAYMENT NO.: FILE NO.:_ _ DATE: 139A9 October 1, 1990 Contract Item Unit Unit Price Esfd Quantity Amount Quantity To Date To Date TOTAL BASE BID II - 16" PRODUCTION WELL TOTAL CHANGE ORDER NO. 1 - ADD TOTAL CHANGE ORDER NO. 2 - ADD TOTAL WORK COMPLETED TO DATE $70,554.00 975.00 10,550.00 $82,079.00 Page 3 PR13949 PROJECT PAYMENT STATUS CITY: Orono, Minnesota PROJECT: Municipal Well No. 3 - 16" Production Well FILE NO.: 139^9 CONTRACTOR: Keys Well Drilling Company ORIGINAL CONTRACT AMOUNT $70,155.00 TOTAL CHANGE ORDERS $31,475.00 REVISED CONTRACT AMOUNT $101,630.00 date no. change ORDER DESCRIPTION 5-22-90 1 Provide silt fence for Hwy 12 9-10-90 2 Development work to increase capacity 3 TOTAL CHANGE ORDERS - ADD amount $975.00 30.500.00 $31,475.00 PROJECT PAYMENT SUMMARY: PAYMENT PERIOD PAYMENT VALUE NO.FROM TO THIS VOUCHER COMPLETED RETAINAGE 1 Start 3-30-90 $21,456.70 $13,850.00 $1,129.30 2 4-1-90 4-30-90 .0,315.10 33,444.00 1,672.20 3 5-1-90 5-31-90 11,020.00 45.044.00 2,252.20 4 6-1-90 7-31-90 6,692.75 52,089.00 2.604.45 5 7-31-90 8-31-90 18,468.00 71.529.00 3,576.45 6 7 9-1-90 10-1-90 10.022.50 82,079.00 4,103.95 TOTAL PAYMENT TO DATE $77,975.05 RETAINAGE FOR PAYMENT NO. 6 4,103.95 TOTAL VALUE COMPLETED $82,079.00 PR13949 PROJECT: * Municipal Veil No. 3 16" Production Well PLACE:_ _ _ _Orono, Minnesota_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ CONTRACTOR: Keys Well Drilling Company_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ PAYMENT NO.: FILE NO.*_ _ DATE: 139A9 October 1, 1990 STATEMENT OF WORK Contract Item Unit Unit Est'd Quantity Amount Price Quantity To Date To Date TOTAL BASE BID II - 16' PRODUCTION WELL TOTAL CHANGE ORDER NO. 1 - ADD TOTAL CHANGE ORDER NO. 2 - ADD $70,55A.00 975.00 10,550.00 TOTAL WORK COMPLETED TO DATE $82,079.00 h ■ Page 3 PR13949 DATE* PLACE* PROJECT* CONTRACTOR* BOND CO.t CHANGE ORDER NO.* CHANGE ORDER September 19, 1990 Orono, Minnesota Water Well Test Drilling Keys Well Drilling Co., 413 N Lexington Pkwy, St. Paul, MN 55104 (Capitol Indemnity) W.A. Lang Co., Attn* H. Glennon, 3 PO Box 64215, St. Paul, MN 55164-0215 /f FILE NO* 13948 DESCRIPTION OF WORK* Because the Otten development did not proceed as quickly as anticipated, it was necessary to install the electric service for the 6 inch well to a power pole along Highway 12. The cost of the service is as followst Change Order Item ELECTRIC SERVICE FOR WELL Item 1 Excavate through berm Item 2 Trenching, conduit and wire Item 3 Install stand for panel Item 4 Deduct service pole TOTAL CHANGE ORDER NO. 3 ORIGINAL CONTRACT AMOUNT PREVIOUS CHANGE ORDERS THIS CHANGE ORDER NO. 3 - ADD Unit L.S. L.S. L.S. L.S. Unit Price $390.00 3,000.00 326.70 -600.00 Esfd Quantity $62,590.00 650.00 3,116.70 Total Amount $390.00 3,000.00 326.70 -600.00 $3,116.70 REVISED CONTRACT AMOUNT Approved by* CITY OF ORONO, MN By_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ By_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Date:_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ C013948 $66,356.70 Recommended for Approval by* BONESTROO, ROSENE, ANDERLIK & ASSOCIATES, INC. By Approved by: KEYS WELL DRILLING CO. Mayor Clerk 1 - Bonding Co. 1 - Contractor 1 - BRA M Bonestroo Rosene Anderlik & Associates Ono G Booettroo PE Rotwa W Rosw. PE Joiepn C AfxJffWt. PE Vtarvm I SorvaU. PE RicnarO £ ^umer. PE JaiT'Ci C 0,.on Pc Gienn R Coo*. P£ Thofnas £ Noyri PE Hoben G ScnunicPt PE Susan M EDeriin C PA Engineers & Architects nieitn A Go«on PE P<ra'fl W pQStef PE Doraw C Bu-garot PE Jerry A Bourdon. PE Mart * Hanson PE Tf»J < ?E Mcnae* T Kautmann PE Rooer: R PWtene. PE David O Lostota PE Trorras *' Petersen. PE Micnae* C Lyncn. P£ James R MaiarxJ. PE iCenrietn P Anderson. PE Mart R Rolfs. P£ ftotert C Russet. A i A Thomas E Angus PE Hcjward A Sar-tyd. PE Dane) j Edgerron PE vlart A Se« PE Phifip J Caswefl PE ■smaei Martinet. PE Mart O WaMU PE. Thomas R Anderson. AIA Gary P Ryiander, PE MW a Jensen. PE L Phi«tp GravetPE ReneC PHjmaa aia ' Agnes M Rmg A 'C P Jerry D Pemscn. PE Cecltj anner PE Charles A Enckson Leo M Pajveisky :Haiian W Oson 4 / October 1, 1990 City of C.ono Box 66 Crystal Bay, Minnesota 55323 Attn: Mr. John Gerhard.son Re: Water Well Test Drilling Orono, Minnesota Our File No. 13948 .OCT ». r*‘ • Dear John: Enclosed is Request for Payment No. 4 & Final, Change Order No. 3 and the State Withholding Form Ic-134. The 6 inch production well was started April 4, 1990. The project has been completed in conformance with plans and specifications we therefore recommend the project be accepted by the C'ty. The final amount of $36,544.20 is substantially less than the revised contract amount of $66,356.70. The original project included drilling a second Jordan test hole and a Mt. Simon test hole. As the Jordan was found on the first try, the remaining work was not necessary. Change Order No, 2 covers the cost of an underground service from the well to NSP pole mounted transformer along Highway 12. The original project assumed NSP would provide a service drop to the well. However, only rough grading of the Otten property was complete and the underground service was »-equired to place the well in operation. Yours very truly, BONESTROO, ROSENE, ANDERLIK & ASSOCIATES, INC. Richard W. Foster RWF:dh End. 2335 West Highway 36 • St. Paul, Minnesota 55113 • 612-636-4600 Form IC-134 Rev 9 89 Minnesota Department of Revenue ^ Withholding Affidavit for Contractors This affidavit must be approved by the Minnesota Department of Revenue before the State of Minnesota or any of its subdivisions can make final payment to contractors.A\3V-J1 Company twno Minnasota 10 number Keys Well Drilling Company 8105506 N. Lexington Pkwy. Monttvyaar work began I'lovember , 1989 OtvSt. Paul Stata Mil Zip Coda 5510^+Montfi/yaar work ended April, 1990 Total contract amount: $36,532.50 Tataphona numbar Amount still due ( 612) 6U6-T8T1 $uTT6.38 Did you have employees work on this project?Project number; l^oUS if none, explain who did the work:Project location: Qrono , Minnesota vrc Project owner: Citv of Crono Address Box 66, Cystral Bay, Mil 55323 Check the box that describes your involvement in the p'oject and fill in all Information requested in that category: £ Sole contractor G Subcontractor If you are a subcontractor, fill in the name and address of the contractor that hired you; Prime Contractor If you subcontracted out any work on this project, all of your subcontractors must file their own IC-134 affidavits and have them certified by the Department of Revenue before you can file your affidavit. For each subcontractor you had. fill m the business information below, and attach a copy of each subcontractor s certified IC-134. (If you need more space, attach a separate sheet.) Business name Address Owner Offic -r ___ i (JttCraie trial an iiiioimation i fiave imed .n on inii tomi .s irue ano complete lo ina pesii o( my «noi^i«age and Ueiiel I aotnon;® the Department ol Revenue lo disriose pertinent 'nlotmation relating to inis proiect including sending copies ol this form, to the prime contractor if I am a subcontractor, ano to any suDcontractors iM am a prime contractor and to the contracting agency T.iw' Oat*Contractor * figrtatur* 1 yf/. . / Jeffrey W. Keys Secretar;.' Treasurer T-12-90 __ For certification, mail to: Minnesota Department of Revenue. Business Trust Tax Section Mail Station 6610. St. Paul. MN 5514t'-66l0 Certificate of Compliance with Minnesota Income Tax Withholding Law Based on records of the Minnesota Department of Revenue. I certify that the contractor who has signed this certificate has fulfilled all the requirements of Minnesota Statutes 290 92 and 290 97 concerni.nii the withholding of Minnesota income tax from wages paid to employees relating to contract services with the state of Mmnesotu and or its subdivisions JUL 1 3 1990 Instructions for form IC-134 Who should file? If you are a prime contractor, a contractor, or a subcontractor who did work on a project for the state of Minnesota or any of its local government subdivisions — such as a county, city, or school district — you must file form IC-134 with the Minne sota Department of Revenue. This affidavit must be certified and returned before the state or any of its subdivisions can make final payment for your work. When to file The IC-134 cannot be processed until you are finished with the work. Do not send the affidavit in for certification before the project is completed since it will only be returned to you unprocessed. If you are a subcontractor or sole contractor, file form IC-134 when you have completed your part of the project. If you are a prime contractor, tile form IC-134 when the entire project is completed and you have received certified aff davits from all of your subcontractors. Where to file Fill out form IC-134 and mail the original and one copy to: Minnesota Department of Revenue Business Trust Tax Section Mail Station 6610 St. Paul. MN 55146-6610 How to file If you have fulfilled the requirements of the withholding tax laws of Minnesota, the Department of Revenue will sign your affidavit, keep the copy, and return the original to you. If any withholding payments are due to the state, Minne sota law (M.S. 290.97) requires that payment must be made by only money order, cashiers check, certified check, or cash. Take the certified affidavit to your prime contractor or to the governmental unit for which the work was done m order to receive your final payment. Minnesota tax identification number You must fill in your Minnesota tax identification number on the form. You must have a Minnesota tax ID number if you have employees who work in Minnesota. If you need a number, get form MBA. Application for Tax Identification Number, and file it with the Minnesota Depart ment of Revenue. To get form MBA. call 296-3781 from the Twin Cities area or 1 -800-652-9094 from elsewhere in Minnesota, or write to Minnesota Tax Forms. Mail Station 7131. St. Paul. MN 55146-7131. You do not need a Minnesota identification number if you have no employees and d'd all the work yourself. If this is the case, fill in your Social Security number in the space for Minnesota ID number and explain who did the work. Are you a prime contractor and a subcon- tractor on the same project? Ir you are a subcontractor who was hired to do work on a project and you subcontract all or a part of your portion of the project to another contractor, you become a prime contractor as well. If this is the case, fill out both the subcontractor and prime contracts areas on a single form. Use of information The Department of Revenue needs all the information, except your phone number, to determine whether you have met ail state income tax withholding requirements. If all required information is not provided, the IC-134 will be returned to you for completion. All information on this affidavit is guaranteed private by state law. It cannot be given to others without your permission, except to the Internal Revenue Service, other states that guarantee that it will be kept private, and certain state or county agencies. If you need help or additional information to fill out this form, call 296-6181 m the Twin Cities area. From elsewhere in Minnesota and from outside the state, call (toll-free) 1-800- 657-3777. REQUEST FOR PAYMENT DATE:September 19, 1990 PLACE:Orono, Minnesota PROJECT:_ _Vater Well Test Drilling PROJECT NO.:FILE NO.: 139A8 CONTRACTOR:Keys Well Drilling Company ADDRESS: 413 N Lexlneton Pkwy ft. Paul. MN 55104 REQUEST FOR PAYMENT NO.;4 & FINAL FOR PERIOD: From;Apr. 10. 1990 To;Sep. 1. 1990 SPECIFIED CONTRACT COMPLETION DATE; January 1, 1990 SUMMARY; 1. Original Contract Amount Change Order - ADDITION Change Order - DEDUCTION Revised Contract Amount Value Completed to Date Material on Hand Amount Earned Less Retainage 0 I Sub-Total 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 3.766.70 Less Amount Paid Previously AMOUNT DUE THIS REQUEST FOR PAYMENT NO.; 4 & F 62,590.00 66,356.70 36.544.20 0.00 36,544.20 0.00 36.544.20 31,756.12 4,788.08 Recommended for Approval by; BONESTROO, ROSENE, ANDERLIK & ASSOCIATES, INC. By OWNER APPROVAL: By_ _ _ _ _ _ _ By_ _ _ _ _ _ _ Date:Approved By; KEYS WELL DRILLING CO. Contractor PR13948 PROJECT:. PLACE: Water Well Test Prilline Orono. Minnesota CONTRACTOR:Keys Well Drilling Company PAYMENT NO.t 4 & FINAL FILE NO.: 13948 DATE: September 19, 1990 STATEMENT OF WORK Unit Est’d Quantity Amount Contract Item Unit Price Quantity To Date To Date Item 1 Mobilization, transport equlpt. & mat'l to project area, set up equlpt. at primary well site (Ltd. to lOZ of Total Base Bid):L.S.$4,000.00 L S lOOZ $4,000.00 Item 2 Mobilization & demobilization to each add'l well site.Each 500.00 3 1 500.00 Item 3 Drill 4 Inch test holes, collect samples & analyze L.F.10.''O 720 475 4,750.00 Item 4 Ream 4 inch test hole to set 4 inch casing to Prairie-du-Chien L.F.2.00 245 309 618.00 Item 5 Ream 4 Inch test hole & set 8 Inch casing Into St. Lawrence L.F.5.00 500 Item 6 Drill 8 inch test hole Into Mt. Simon L.F.12.00 500 Item 7 Set 4 inch casing Inside 8 inch casing & open hole L.F.6.00 825 309 1,854.00 Item 8 Drill 4" hole through Mt. Simon L.F.10.00 175 Item 9 Drill open hole of sufficient size to set 6 Inch production well casing L.F.20.00 210 220 4,400.00 Item 10 Place 6" casing in production well L.F.11.00 200 213 2,343.00 PR13948 Page 1 PAYMENT N0.» A & FINAL PLACE: Orono. Minnesota FILE NO. :13948 CONTRACTOR:Keys Well DrllllnK Company DATE:September 19. 1990 STATEMENT OF WORK Unit Est'd Quantity Amount Contract Item Unit Price Quantity To Date To Date Item 11 Place 6 inch stainless steel screen in production well L.F.120.00 10 10 1,200.00 Item 12 Place neat cement grout between casings and open holes C.Y.200.00 46 1 200.00 Item 13 Develop 6 inch well screen Mrs.110.00 15 7.5 825.00 Item 14 Install test pump in production well L.S.800.00 L S lOOZ 800.00 Item 15 Install test pump in Prairie-du-Chien/ Jordan test well, collect & analyze water sample L.S.900.00 L S Item 16 Install test pump in Mt. Simon test well, collect & analyze water sample L.S.1,000.00 L S Item 17 Test pumping of production well Mrs.75.00 30 6.5 487.50 Item 18 Furnish & install pitless adapter tank; bowl assembly with submersible motor; column check & bleeder valves; concrete pad; electrical controls; & electrical work L.S.10,000.00 L S 1 10,000.00 Item 19 Furnish & install 2* column pipe and electric cable L.F.5.00 160 160 800.00 TOTAL BASE BID COMPLETED $32,777.50 PR139A8 Page 2 PROJECT! Water Well Test DrilllnR PAYMENT NO.! 4 S. FINAL PLACE! Orono, Minnesota FILE NO.!13948 CONTRACTOR!Keys Well Drllllna Comoanv DATEi September 19. 1990 STATEMENT OF WORK Contract Item Unit Unit Price Est'd Quantity Quantity To Date Amount To Date CHANGE ORDER NO. 1 - WATER SAMPLING Item 1 Gross Aloha/Beta test L.S.$150.00 1 1 $150.00 Item 2 ‘.elnstall test oumo for samDline L.S.500.00 1 1 500.00 TOTAL CHANGE ORDER NO. 1 - ADD $650.00 CHANGE ORDER NO. 2 - COMPLETION DATE CHANGE TO MARCH 16. 1990 $0.00 CHANGE ORDER NO. 3 - ELECTRIC SERVICE TO WELL Item 1 Excavate throueh berm L.S.$390.00 1 1 $390.00 Item 2 Trenchlne. conduit and wire L.S.3,000.00 1 1 3,000.00 Item 3 Inst nd for oanel L.S.326.70 1 1 326.70 Item 4 Dedf't •» Dole L.S.-600.00 1 1 -600.00 TOTAL CHANGE rm 3 $3,116.70 TOTAL BA.5E BID TOTAL CHANGE ORDER NO. 1 - ADD TOTAL CHANGE ORDER NO. 2 - DATE CHANGE TOTAL CHANGE ORDER NO. 3 - ADD ONLY $32,777.50 650 00 0.00 3,116.70 * TOTAL WORK COMPLETED TO D#.$36,5^4.20 Page 3 PR13948 PROJECT PAYMENT STATUS CITY: Orono, Minnesota PROJECT: Water Well Test Drilling FILE NO.: 13948 CONTRACTOR: Keys Well Drilling Company ORIGINAL CONTRACT AMOUNT $62,590.00 TOTAL CHANGE ORDERS $3,766.70 REVISED CONTRACT AMOUNT $66,356.70 date no. CHANGE ORDER DESCRIPTION 1- 22-90 1 Water sampling 2- 2-90 2 Completion date change to March 16, 1990 9-19-90 3 Electric service for well TOTAL CHANGE ORDERS - ADD AMOUNT $650.00 0.00 3,116.70 $3,766.70 PROJECT PAYMENT SUMMARY: PAYMENT PERIOD PAYMENT VALUE NO.FROM TO THIS VOUCHER COMPLETED RETAINAGE 1 Start 11-27-89 $20,688.62 $21,777.50 $1,088.88 2 11-27-89 1-6-90 807.50 22,627.50 1,131.38 3 1-6-90 4-9-90 10,260.00 33.427.50 1,671.38 4 4-10-90 9-1-90 4.788.08 36,544.20 0.00 TOTAL PAYMENT TO DATE RETAINAGE FOR PAYMENT NO TOTAL VALUE COMPLETED 4 & F $36,544.20 _ _ _ _0.00 $36,544.20 PR13948 10190.3 C: U TO: FROM: DATE: Mayor and City Council ^ Mark E. Bernhardson, City Administrato^^ October 1, 1990 SUBJECT: Lafayette Ridge - Request for Public Street Attachment:A. City of Minnetonka Beach Request Dated 8/21/90 B. Lafayette Ridge Plat Resolution ^891 Dated 3/30/78 C. Oronc Council Minutes Excerpt Dated 9/12/77 D. Orono Comprehensive Plan Excerpt E. Private Street Listing (Urban/Rural) ISSUE - 1. Present to Council a request by residents of La ’yette Ridge that their cul-de-sac be made a pibMc street. 2. Determine Council action regarding this matter. a. ) Public street b. ) Credit for hardcover using commons area 1 i^v^ LDL^CTION - As noted in the request the He ?’=‘ov.ners Associate o- are requesting both Minnetonka Beach and Orc’^o portions be m . public streets. Thes'"' streets for thir- .n>~division which straddle the boundaries has a cul-de-sac *ach of the two ers Associati . of the entire t-wc. -de-sacs. In action each indicated their eet and the request is .. of Orono would consent communities and the Home: subdivision is maintainin ’ earlier this year the Cit” wil lingness to take ove*: brought forward to dete^r... to Lhe same. D’SCUSSIPy • publj^c - LXixm B2£^s/U£oan Areas - This issue has been discaF''ed’' on a general basis by the Council several times. It shoulo be noted that the Comprehensive Plan specifically indicates that all properties in 'he urban areas should be public streets. These properties are served by both sewer and water. This has not necessarily been what has been acted upon, but may be nood guide in allowi ig certain roads to go from private to pu' ' provided they meet City standards. Lafayette Ridge - In this specific case the streets were built in approximately 1978 to the c'rrent City ctandarc.^. The porti in Orono serves five homes. A related problem is if, in fa- t, Minnetonka Beach accepts their portion the way •■he Homeovners Association currently is constructed the h )meocners in Minnetonka Beach would be responsible for paying or the Oronc rtion. Hardcover Credit In addition to the road, the asso iati-on has asked that they can receive credit in their lot calculations for hard cover, 1/^ credit to their lot of the commons area. In the Orono portion which is generally in the 500-1000 (35%) range for the lots with the bulk of the outlot outside the 1000 foot mark, they would substantially increase their hardcover available. As an alternate since this is in a 1 acre zone as a PRD, the credit would be allowed for harcover up to the 1 acre as is done in other PRD's. The City's 15% lot coverage requirement however may be the governing consideration. ALTERNATIVES - 1. Accept the request. 2. Determine if a public hearing is desired. 3. Accept the public road. 4. Reject the public road. RECOMMENDATION - It is recommended that Council indicate any conce ” ’ or questions they may have and table this application to ■*s C ber 22, 1990 meeting. Indicating to residents that may 3ii. to be in attendance they could be available for that scussion. seconded byPROPOSED MOTION - Moved by _. _ _ action on this item until the Council's October 22, meeting. Ayes _, :.’ays_. , Council table 1990 Council Lafayette Ridge Homeowners Association, C/0 Steve Simpson 2163 Lafayette Ridge Road, Wayzata JoEllen Hurr, City of Minnetonka Beach VILLAGE OF MINNETONKA 8 MINNETONKA BEACH, MINNESOTA 55 August 21, 1990 To: Orono Mayor Orono City Council members Mark Bernhardson, City Administrator John Gerhardson, Public Works Director From: JoEllen L. Hurr City of Minnetonka Beach Planning and Zoning Administrate The residents of The Lafayette Ridge Development (PUD) in the cities of Orono and Minnetonka Beach have requested that the respective cities take over ownership of the private roads '»/ichin the cities. Please review the attached petition signed by all pro perty owners in both cities. They also request consideiation of hard cover calculations on each lot. See alcachea letter dated July 9, 1990. The City of Minnetonka Beach has voted to accept Lafayette Ridge Road. They are also in agreement with the "credit" for common propert*', I will look forward to discussing this with you at your meeting on August 27, 1990 Sincere WoEJoEllen Hurr City of Minnetonka Beach Planning and Zoning Administrator PAG£ 1 OF 2 L A F A V E T T E R I D G E HOMED W HERS .-I S S O C I . A T I 0 A' The undersigned lot owners ot' the LAFAYETTE RIDGE HOMEOWHERS .4 SSOCIA TION (L RHA ) here by ^rant permission to the Bo a rd of Directors of LRHA to proceed with the complete transfer of title and ownership of the two roads currently owned and maintained by LRHA - Lafayette Ridge Roail and La fayet t e Ridge Court - to the respective cities of Minnetonka Bench and Orono. BLOCK /; LOT 1. BLOCK 2: LOT I. ADDRESS :t2ir> LA FWhi rr ridge coi rt LOT 2.... 322a LAFAVrvn: RllulE CDER I' 32S3 I.AFAVETTh RIDGE COER F LOT 2..........12G5 LAFAVrrrr RIDGE rOERT LOT 3____3215 LAFAYETTF RIDGE COER F BLOCK 3: . LOT 1 ____3171 LAFAYETTE RIDGE ROAD LOT 2.»..3167 LAFAYETTE RIDGE ROAD * LOT 3____3163 LAFAYETTE RIDGE ROAD lot •/____3irCJ LAFAYETTE RIDGE ROAD LOT OWXER...........DATE. ----r----- ^ ' M"' Berrg tAY nE Jt. tv\AiL<V ^ nSoi^Apdj^ &RM,ioS f^Lcr\J CLjCy OAuUlfKB/cL^ (2rfXi_.A ------- STtet. ^ SLnfiia*) ------AA® ts. Si/y»®5«kn 'Aw --------------- -YviflUjlaiOMiA/. PA(JE 2 OF -I \ ‘ \ V !• r l ’■ /«’ / /’ < ’ F // (> V A (' •« \ V .> \ s i i i' \ r i > > \ rht^ iitidf* i''I ~ !i>'0 l.f’H \ i‘>t i>u/<»»rs /r.n i tm rf.ui :inti .'^hovt* s t :i I l on f’luo I o t" t h i •- Om nmt'nt : FLOCK I: • LOT I AnPFFSS 31 r> 5 i \F\) FT TF FI If*F FO\n !jrr r...........•'/;■/ i. \F \ ) FI n f/ //.f ku .LOT U7 i Ah WFri! hlhtlF /. M/' i.or /.......nr i </•’.»///• *. / < v» : // BLOCK 5: LOT / • LOT 2 LOT 3 31 :n I Sr \ \ h H r l FFi- t -.' i/' .//;.• 7 /. \F > \ FTTh I. il‘OF /.<• w) / LA /■ . I / r;' /.’; />. »'£■ .vo i r> 7*110 OLD CoiWTV Ru\D 15 • LOT 4____3111 OLD CUiSTV ROAD 15 •LOT 5....310r OLD dnST] RtMD 15 LOT R....3101 (h’A' i'OlKTV RO\D 15 LOT )h \FR...........DAI F. . . /#->>//i/ MU. jt. Ctilu- f “SHc./ ^ AKj^v-, Ulb/J- M. tV , -■ - t’- /•' • ^ >V 'r ' /-ji-fj JUyV AS': / * , *' '* ftXL-LW j7=f,v--fl<.sr AxAa. 1 *Q^^v.c^^’• ' ‘■'M C.\V ^C’/ !<:;;. . -r V <!• . !■. i7f ,^im J’v LAFAYETTE RIDGE HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION ^ July 9, 1990 The City of Minnetonka Beach, Minnesota The City of Orono, Minnesota The Ufayette Ridge Homeowners A>s(Kiarion (LRR\) requests that the Cities of Minnetonka Beach and Orono modify their respective interpretation of individual lot size tor purposes ot hard cover limitation calculation based on the toilowing approach: Eath lot would receive an additional credit of common area space based on equal '.stnbuiion of common area space residing in the lot’s respective city (i.e.. the 15 lOts residing in the City of Minnetonka Beach would each receive an additional credit equal to l/15th of the amount of LRHA common area space residing in the City ot Minnetonka Beach- respect*vely, die five lots residing in the City of Orono would receive an addiiiona] credit equal to l/5th of the amount of LRHA common area space residing in the City ot Orono). We anucipaie the deterniinanon of LRHA comnuin area residing in each respective City will require a prjitessional survey Accordingly, euch lot with ns additional credit for common area space will dclinc the lot size tnim which hard cover limitation calculations will be based. By Direction of the Board. Steve R Simpson President, LRHA SRSilo Lafayette Ridge Homeowws Associaiwn I , c* ■ lir-jidfMiXr 'B ;-S-. 2. ^3. ✓ 4. resolution no. 891 A RESOLUTION APPROVING the plat OF LAFAYETTE RIDGE . .ubSi C^Mtlor<.f^*h‘‘*^®^°‘’"'* «lth the city. :'4ML%s Sir:i%tss;‘“ ^-r" ci., iforSfSJSj .■fJL2 ‘s:'.'i.:'“; j;: •' “• County. Mlnne.ot., .object to the followfn^^I^f*' u ^ . . ’: : 4‘eV.: s:::.T;:i,:"".r«:rs,:'':“;;.:;r:-::;“ “ "“■' to Outlot C .nd th. .ewer .nd Lt.r .xt«tloiL to ti^^Sri^H?*' »l ,5. -^if 1. « ) » ■ I i i S’. 4:r ' ; * i • •. » ! i ‘ '1 r I f ■-.*r.\^‘.v. ■ ' ■ ■'.♦•'■•-•.'■■»-• 5.ms l! 3!”lSc“2‘*IrS*’SSt^SiS.ruS^^uke Minnetonk..^ , U ■■.•:•-■■ '•h -'-v V '-r, '■ I... not boon file-ty 'V! ^‘!L*SSSumtlcm -1 ^ ...............b.«, flleo^^y mSloS-lih cur or Or.«-.will b« neee»»arr to file e new eppw. , . £or fubdlvliion revtev*v *r .>» N ,V, >*'• ^ e*‘ <* ‘ * * :.;v 'f . •• i"ACRiED: *'■ •' i ■..••' ■■■ ;m- « ■*> . _. * . ■ • i» ■- '.' Partner7*^roMtown AiiocUtei -• V., . . I>Ated this day of Marc^19^8 V •' , r* wilUm B. via Neet, ’.. 7:.- AIIESI: - ->v. ; ■ • * *v :■ V ■ , •V:V>"T U-ik/AU..laietr-«w ' '■ ... '■ 3^y‘^;-: -ry ‘''■■' •' ■ ' rv?f . ' ■* .*•, •■ ■■ V ' '• •■ *»- 4>ue , V.‘7 * _ .*e .*•....-.-v^e, .4 5,1 .^ ,»• r Vi^-' • i W «> ,W~ -fy *f - ■' ' -'i- V-T:": .:' •••■•'S'■'..y.-",'.^ ■1 CITY OF ORONO• ■ ■ ; . j -V •Re9ular bating of tha Orono Council, Sap teabajCf^ • • 19 7 7 -^^vTKa Orono Council oat ,on tha above data with ' tha following manbarai Mayor Van Nest, Council- ; ^.r'^j^oaobara Butler and PasaK. Asbent: CounciImenbera ^fcMaasangala and Paurus. Also presents City Administrator Benson, Assistant Building & Zoning L^^i^^Adainistrator Olson, and City Attorney Malkerson* ‘v> • • (■ ^ ^ ■Nayor«Van •Mast announced that this was tha tisM and^,.' Caj;tor the public, hearing concerning an amandisant^ . thOoSki Ordinance. City Administrator Dick Benson^ C »’v. > .V- *■ •^PUB1,1C; HBARING r Ski Ordinance presented the-Notice of Public Hearing, tha •Affidavit", • . of-Publication, and the Certificate of Mailing. \ Ifnaybr'Van Nest asked if any one present, wished to ' , *'**‘"^^ /i:^"Aheard. • There were no'cosazients from the audience. Die Public Hearing was closed at 7:05 P.M, , i\Butl«r jBoved, Pe8ak seconded, that the Minutes of; . MIIIUTO tf the;Council Work Session, August 18, 1977, be . > ® v : ^^approved« Motion, Ayes (3) - Nays (0). . v ^*X»<>:.c<»»«nts from the Park Commission.'.. . ^.v .v,; <PAKX .OQMNZSSXOH ■ ' ■ IjJ. o. ~ r ■■.r ■PfiANilWMOMMSSIOl*,Vo^coseBents from the Planning Commission. ^Councilnember Pauius, .X«ake Minnetonka Conservation^’ J)Istrict representative, • was not present. No • ^--•^coBm«nta. * ’ ... • . • * x.. v . V- : ,, • -Alan, Olson, Assistant Building * Zoning \ >Admiaietrator, entered into the record the following^* .•«,3201 iNavarre.X.ane e^Mt'Of Cross coi^ Prope^ies, Inc. ^ for * ‘eubdivision, located ..at .3201 Navarre Lane,; dated; ly) 11, -977, which .states i \^-'r ^vsstom ‘Proper tiee^are • regueatiiig v sketchy 3^evleir; g£ ;a proposed PRD > subdivision on 21,l^K»Sai Qepsetoim^^rdpertic 'L Cd^^rop^rty located . in JUnnetonkar^BeachMem ;Aiipodel'^of ;the*concspt‘fwaa-.presented'to^the^l«......^^.,r- . IJCoemission. at their April 4, 1977 meeting. - The - ;v ; ^^OroDO portion of the proposal includes five eeparatn'i. ^ '.'’ .a’.* j • IHlots clustered around one access drive off Navarre *Vi' * ' ' ^Baae. r.The Minnetonka Beach portion includes IS lots ' . Lvitb access fren niimetonka Beach. .There are extensive - Xl '' ’ ^wetlands on the Orono land, but with the wetlands ' . ’ ;• f^edit and a cooperative agreement with Minnetonka., ^ 'v ih, the proposed density would not exceed the it|t‘;;^cur.ent zoning .-equirements ..v.?. ^ (Continued)’'-, ’ ••’A. iaaatJJi HSErniG or the orono council, September 12, 1977 Fr^llaijiAry plat xaviaw will require submittal of ] drawings based upon ^-he su4.-vey indicating lot location» setbacks, wetlands area, dry land P;i^'^mrea, sewer and water proposals, drainage, etc. ‘T'^Ttiis information should be available for the public .bearing which has been scheduled for June 6, 1977 at ;:^^tsoo F.j«.^ » • ^Planning Commission Meeting - May 16, 1977> >^dandy Hitter, owner's architect, was prem^nt to acuee proposal with.the Planning Commission, was advised of smterials and information required ror proper analysis of the proposal, and he indicated ;Hhat it would be impossible to have this to the City 'in time to hold the June 6, 1977 public hearing which ^has# therefore,been postponed. He did indicate t*that.‘the. lots would be sold as building sites onlyj 'h'-tbey would be sold fee simple with common msaoclatioo ownership of open space j roads are to i§Lbe,.privet2 wetlands and open spare are to have ^conservation easements deeded to .he City, plats wUl be filed for each city. ■■ *Staff - August 10, 1977 Paga 2 SUBDIVISION - P 3201 Navarre La (Continued) V. •r., Separate ived copies of preliminary plat survey. The ^!!^>asic concept of the project has not changed from ^?.^thn.eerlier submittals. Note^the slopes indicated Von Lots 1, 2, 6 3 of Block 2. The proposal for ,,^yOrono is e PRO with five lots on 8.3 ° Conditions sboold include correct, we ter «*«d. ta, ;.perk«dedicetion^feeer end 7 - * - /•. »■ r ^>^v ;vv^^ i*. a;,. j. <■. r * it ■ O «» dry scree 'V « r. iaemsnta;9o«mrCOiitlot.H4*^A'pablio heeiring I:.. swn^mtnrceptor^ end\lJifml fhes been.*esaeaw««. ■woxjfMntf of,r<225 <eecb ;must..be collected ah-the w-’ ime-«>^OQnstrmction ^of oaeh dwelling. Iieter'hassen*meaeeaed<to the_ _ _*- —^ _i_ __ _ _ _ _j.i \. V t.' I, t of eleven wit*- A- Planning r Sij- • , . . ;o'.t ^ •I."* -«* .lb .a', -s aeion Hasting - Sept 6, 1977 Public Hearing. Disouseed general layout as modified by the latest plan. The propoeel Includes five Oromo lots, each large enough to provide adequate setbacks within the proposed lines. The street setback should be measured frem the project boundary/ street r.o.w and not from the individual lot line. (Contlnuaci) MEBTING OF 7HE ORONO COUNCIL. SEPTEMBER 12, 1977 ,- sFJjfF— ^F:F:n£;iFr ' SLs*:ji'Fv'■« "•>• Page 3 SUBDIVISION - PRD 3201 NdVdrre L^no (Continued) wr ' *"• *on«. TTitee theireoltMM. ZL * ^ apoKe about the P™PO»«<J miltipla dock, but” f°"2 *••*<> h® jurisdiciion end .Ud With Hinnetonk. r Council neeting - '^pteabe* 12, 1977 "presenting Crosstown t K*-?SS‘JS„ ,*-l. to««rvatlon eaaeaents } Opma space and flow aaaaaants ^•scass Msaaanta ^ yard aetbacka24* buffer zone 'V .■'■,.•%•’-A'-’ •,.S‘ . .'< s^.: :£;J5Ls;',ss2^..■••" * “-w -^«s (3)., -; Mays r‘*v^AV a aewer charges * . • ’ w ^ ,ii fr'• ! ■;-o ..JA,^, -,.. ,,. .. -i • ,---.’> -■.■ ■. .^V ^wnitehead^ Orono»s .representative-to ■- ^SSSSLd^S?^^*?^®” sPlnimlng Board, * ./• .I;■ . —- “T ** •—sss«*4i^ 0OASQ, _ t/. - Swanson, -1820 Lakeview ' City Council recoaaaendina her ' ‘ Schroeder who has her desire to resign for personal A-^^^rBSPBESBIiTitrivil^ ,'r‘ :C J^ded, to appoint ‘ ' I • . ;^: the Meet V-^rracc, to to Mrs. DorS^sSrSSIif! “o***** -ubject APPOnRMDIT V Gloria Swarsson ' ; 7- i i:- WATIVE MICROGRAPHICS DUE TO THE POOR CONDITION OF THE FRECEEDING DOCUMENT WE CANNOT PRODUCE AN ACCEPTABLE MICROFILM IMAGE. ITTfii:^evr-E TRANSPORTATTON URBAN TRANSPORTATION POLICIES 1. LOCAL STREETS IN THE URBAN AREA WILL BE OWNED AND MAINTAINED BY THE CITY. Because the land use and street use density of the urban neighborhoods is relatively high, the City will provide public street access to all urban properties. City responsibility for proper maintenance levels will ensure passable, all-weather streets availaba.e at all times for emergency vehicles and for general public ingress and egress. 2. ALL URBAN PROPERTIES SHOULD BE DIRECTLY SERVED BY THE PUBLIC STREET SYSTEM. Urban density development is not appropriate on narrow or poorly maintained private roads. Significant exceptions to this rule are in the case of a planned residential or commercial development having private maintenance personnel, or on sensitive lakeshore lots where two homes could be served by one common private driveway co reduce hardcover and topographical problems. 3. URBAN STREETS WILL BE CONSTRUCTED TO URBAN DESIGN STANDARDS. All urban streets will be paved and of sufficient width to accommodate the number of properties being served. Intersections and driveway aprons will be designed and regulated according to commonly accepted engineering safety standards. Street drainage will be designed to utilize existing natural drainage systems and to avoid direct runoff into the Lake . 4. CURB CUTS AND DRIVEWAY LOCATIONS WILL BE LIMITED FOR TRAFFIC SAFETY. All new curb cuts and driveway locations will be subject to performance standards relating to sight distance, lot width and proximity to intersections or other driveways. All properties will be allowed access, but the number of access points and the location of allowable access will be limited for public traffic safety purposes. 5. ON- STREET PARKING WILL BE STRICTLY LIMITED. No parking will be permitted on narrow streets or at hazardous locations. All urban development must provide adequate on-site parking facilities. (. CMP 7-10 TRANSPORTATION JUNE, 1980 Thus, in one motion, thru-traffic movement will be increased in speed and safety while environmentally sensitive areas will be protected from degradation. 3. ORONO WILL ACTIVELY PROMOTE A SCENIC PARKWAY SYSTEM TO DESIGNATE THOSE ROADS TRAVERSING ENVIRONMENTALLY SENSITIVE AND SCENIJALLY ATTRACTIVE AREAS. The intention of the scenic parkway system is to provide a special designation connoting the typically narrow, curvy, slow-speed character of these roads. Scenic parkways provide special vistas of Orono's natural amenities and are best suited for relaxing unhurried travel. High volume traffic, commuter traffic, and commercial traffic is not appropriate on scenic parkways because these users do not benefit from the attraction and the physical nature of the road is not conducive to efficient thru-traffic movement. Because of natural topographic limitations, scenic parkways will also continue to provide local property access and limited collector road functions. 4. ORONO WILL ENCOURAGE IMPROVED TRANSIT SYSTEMS AND INVESTIGATION OF ALTERNATIVE TRANSIT MODES. Orono will support innovative approaches toward providing trans portation alternatives to the private auto. This includes such concepts as pedestrian and bicycle trails, para-transit, improved bus service, and investigation of light rail transit. 5. ORONO WILL SUPPORT THE LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT IN THE CONTROL OF SEAPLANE OPERATION ON LAKE MINNETONKA. The existing level of seaplane operation is satisfactory to Orono. The City will support the LMCD in their monitoring of seaplane operation and in any reasonable changes in regulations necessary to prevent seaplane conflict with the primary boating use of the lake. CMP 7-9 TRANSPORTATION JUNE, 1980 SCENIC PARKWAY Scenic parkway is a designation and classification used by the Cities of Minneapolis and Saint Paul and applied by Orono to those roads which traverse especially scenic and environmentally significant areas of the City. The scenic parkway is typically a narrow, curvy, slow soeed road which provides access to recreational areas and special vistas of scenic attractions. High volume through traffic and commercial traffic is not appropriate on scenic parkways because these users do not benefit from the attraction and because the physical nature of the roadway is not conducive to efficient through traffic movement. Because of environmental sensitivity, scenic parkways cannot be rebuilt into higher capacity collectors or minor arterials without adv:rsely affecting the natural setting, the scenic quality of the road and/or the property rights of abutting landowners. Because of the natural topography of the area, scenic parkways also provide some of the traffic and local access functions of both local and collector streets. JURISDICTION: COUNTY OR CITY RIGHT-OF-WAY WIDTH: 50-66 FEET LOCAL STREETS Local streets are public streets that function to provide direct access to abutting properties. Local streets carry traffic within neighborhoods rather than through traffic between neighborhoods. Inter sections with collector streets ar;? controlled by stopping the local street traffic. JURISDICTION: CITY RIGHT-OF-WAY WIDTH: 50-60 FEET DEAD-END: LENGTH WILL BE LIMITED BY PUBLIC SAFETY CONSIDERATIONS PRIVATE ROAD A private road is a privately owned and privately maintained road, located in the rural area or within a planned development, that functions as a local access street. The City will require that private roads be constructed and maintained to City standards. The City will acquire an easement for public ingress, egress and access to all properties but the City will allow the property owners to limit normal use of the road to the benefitting landowners and their invitees. Private roads will be located on platted cutlots intended for joint and several ownership by all the benefitted prop rty owners. JURISDICTION: HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION WITH UNDERLYING EASEMENT TO CITY MAXIMUM SERVICE; APPROXIMATELY TEN RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES RIGHT-OF-WAY WIDTH; 30-50 FEET DEPENDING UPON NUMBER OF USERS DEAD-END; LENGTH WILL BE LIMITED BY PUBLIC SAFETY CONSIDERATIONS c CMP 7-16 IRAN.SPORTATION JUNE, 1980 Principal Arterial is a grade-separated, highPRINCIPAL ARTERIAL capacity, controlled access highway designed to move vehicles through an area, not within a community. Principal arterials have no local land use access. The only principal arterial near Orono is that portion of State Highway 12 that becomes limited-access east of Orono's eastern boundary with Wayzata. INTERMEDIATE ARTERIAL An Intermediate Arterial is a controlled-access , moderately high capacity highway designed to move vehicles between cities and, in Orono's situation, between the free-standing growth centers and out-state cities west of Orono into the metropolitan area. Intersections are limited and controlled. Land use access is intended to be limited to major traffic generators without direct access to residential properties. State Highway 12 is an Intermediate Arterial through Orono although many access and intersection characteristics are typical of -^inor arterial or collector. JURISDICTION; STATE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION RIGHT-OF-WAY WIDTH; MINIMUM 100 FEET FOR TWO LANt. *..HWAY MINOR ARTERIAL A Minor Arterial is a controlled access, moderate capacity street or highway designed to move vehicles within planning subregions and betw» e.-. adjacent subregions. The Lake Minnetonka Ring Route is a minor arterial functioning to move, principally commuters and truck traffic, from the western Lake Minnetonka communities into the urbanized areas of the Twin Cities. The minor arterial route channels traffic away from Lake Minnetonka to State Highways 12 and 55, and in the near future, to a direct intersection with Interstate 494 in Plymouth. Land use access xs intended to be limited to major traffic generators and local street intersections without direct access to individual residences. JURISDICTION; HENNEPIN COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION RIGHT-OF-WAY WIDTH: MINIMUM 80 FEET FOR TWO LANE HIGHWAY COLLECTOR A Collector street functions to collect traffic from local streets and move it to neighborhood activity centers or to intersections with minor or intermediate arterials. Local land use access is permitted but is regulated as to location and number with direct access to be avoided whenever alternative local street access is available. Intersections with other collectors are often controlled with signals or with four-way stop signs. Traffic usage is moderate. JURISDICTION: COUNTY OR CITY RIGHT-OF-WAY WIDTH: 60-66 FEET CMP 7-15 n o o ■> CITY OF ORONO - PRIVATE ROADS Abingdon Nay •ay kidga Rd ■order Avo iieeiCov* INDEX ROW NO. WIDTf G-4 50* 0-7 X-7 875 1520 TYPE SURFACING WIDTH THICKNESS! TYPE BASE WIDTH THICKNESS YEAR CONST. YEAR SURF. URBAN OR rural sect REMARKS 2341 22*3-Cl 5 - 100% Cr. 28 8-1983 1984 Rural 2341 22'2"C1.5 - 100% Cr. 28 6-1970 1980 Rural Chriatii 820 2341 Cbaroh Laao > * Colin Orivo C-10 • ^ ■ _<480 22* . i Countryaide Dr F-4 875 2341 24*2*Cl.5 - 100% Cr. 30 6'' 9 \ Dakota Avanuo X-1 720 Deborah Drive A-2 50* 2200 Cl.5 - 100% Cr. 26 6*1978 1978 Rural Devin Lane G-4 1350 Edgewood Hi11 a Rd J-5 10 ' Fox Run P-5 1520 French Creek Dr French Creek Cir , 1 French Lake Rd Q-8 50* 1620 Cl.5 - 100% Cr. 20 6"1981 1981 Rural C‘Golden Vlev Drive 1125 2341 24* c»Creentreea Road 1-8 50* 500 3341 24'2-Cl.5 - 100% Cr. 26 6*1983 1982 Urban («]’ ierriek Circle ^ E‘3V—- ." ■ollander Road L-1 310 ♦H' 50* 2550 3141 24'2*Cl.5 -30 6**1979 1979 Rural 100% Cr. CITY OP ORONO - private ROADS INDEX ROW SURPACING NO. mOTH LENGTB TYPE NIDTR THICKNESS TYPE base year year urban or WIDTH THICKNESS CONST. SURP. RURAL SECT REMARKS ■uBt fmtu Road 2060 2341 24* JuMBtown Road B-1 1680 Knoll Manor Road S25 24* Landsark Driva 255 2341 24* LaCayotta Ridga Ct D-9 50*300 2341 24*2-Cl.5 - 100% Cr. 26 6"1979 1979 Longvlaw Clrcla 0-4 60*1263 2341 26* 2*C1.5 - 100% Cr. 28 8**1977 1977 Urban Luca Lina Rldga 50*950 Lydiard Road 1-2 2200 C1.5 - i00% Cr. 24 6-Rural iflatlaiANoaoa D-11 i f 4t0 r Kilisten Road H-6 600 2341 24*2**C1.5 - 100% Cr. 36 ■6*Urban N irth Pans Road H-1 60*950 Cl.5 - 100% Cr. 20 6*1978 Rural N< rthgata Road L-3 560 Moi'h ftraaa Read 400 2341 34* Orono Oa.« Drive 1-3 1920 2341 24*2‘Cl.5 - 100% Cr. 30 6**1976 1978 Rural Oxford Road D-5 60*1174 3341 34*2**Cl. 9 28 8«1978 Urban Paaoo Lana B-10 •90 Pbllllpa Drive 550 24* Rainy Road 800 3341 24* RldHOWood Circle E-4 SO*790 Cl.5 - 100% Cr. 20 fe*1978 Rural Ruann Road K-3 CITY or ORONO - PRIVATE ROADS INDEX NO. RON HIDTH LENGTH TYPE 6URPACING WIDTH THICKNESS TYPE BASE HIDTH THICKNESS YEAR CONST. YEAR SURP. URBAN OR RURAL SECT •alM Court 0-1 50*650 2341 20* 2-C1.5 - 100% Cr. 22 6“1982 Rural Shorn Rills 1-10 475 2341 24* 2-Cl.5 - 100% Cr. 26 6-Urban Sllvar '■ M Drive 1B55 2341 24* Tanglawood Road I-l 50*1230 C1.5 - 100% Cr. 24 6-1978 Rural Hakefisld Road R-3 50*1700 Cl.5 - 100% Cr. 20 6*981 Rural Naar tana North 1100 2341 24* Haar Lana South Hast Pam Road D-1 60*1300 Cl.5 - 100% Cr. 20 6“1978 Rural Nhita Oak Circle P-5 1600 2341 24* 2-Cl.5 - 100% Cr. 26 6“1976 Urban Hoodhavan Drive Noodhill Road J-5 1600 Noodhill Ridge 650 2341 24* Wyndawra Road J-1 60 740 Cl.5 - 100% Cr. 24 6-Rural Ho Ham 1-2 2100 Cl.5 -20 24 Rural (N. of Chovy Chaso)1001 Cr. HO Naao L-2 (I. of Lrdlard) 6S0 Hot on H8A Map Ho Ham H-2 (8. Of H. Para Rd) 1600 10190.4 Mayor and City Council V\6HMark E. Bernhardson, City Administratqr'^ TO: FROM: DATE: October 1, 1990 SUBJECT: LMCD Comprehensive Plan Attachment: ISSUE - A. LMCD Letter Dated 10/3/90 B. LMCD Preliminary Minutes of 9/26/90 1. Presentation to Council of information related to LflCD's action on their comprehensive plan at their meeting of September 26, 1990. 2. Determine what action Council desires related to this action. - LMCD Plan - Shoreland Adoption Agreement INTRODUCTION - As the Council may know the L’!CD, at their September 26, 1990 general meeting, initially approved portions of the plan and tabled the balance for 30 days to determine if they would be able to work out with the various cities the concerns that the cities raised. DISCUSSION - As directed by the Council Jo Ellen Hurr had moved to table the entire item for six months and apparently that was rejected on an 10 to 2 vote (one abstention). At that point the Board moved to approve sections of it including sections: Recreational Management User Experience Environmental Protection These were approved with little dissent. They also approved the management structure which included the issues of changing the Board composition and the altered funding mechanism. This was approved on a 8 to 5 vote. The following items were tabled for 30 days: Introduction Shoreland Regulations Implementation These section were primarily tabled because of the interrelatedness on shoreline regulations. As noted in the cover letter, DNR is available on 10/10 to discuss the shoreland issues further. I anticipate attending that meeting. This would be a follow up meeting in particular to shoreland and to a meeting held on Thursday, September 20th in Wayzata. As you will note, the sections that were "passed” were done so tentative so they could focus on what seemed to be the major area of concern. While shoreland was one Orono has had concerns and objections, it did indicate a number of other concerns with other sections. It is our understanding that LMCD's attorney advises that the plan to be formally adopted would require a vote to pass the plan in total. While it is an agenda item for the October 24th meeting, it is unclear aj to whether the final vote may be taken. This may depend on progress on the shoreland issues. ALTERNATIVES 1. Accept the information. 2. Give further direction. 3. Take no action. RECOMMENDATION - It is recommended that Council direct staff together with requesting other interested parties to seek to discuss the remaining issues. While Orono has objected to certain segments of the three items that were approved, and particularly with the items in the management structure, the implementation portion together with shoreland regulations are the ones that may be ripest for alteration. The City may still attempt to seek amendments to areas with which it does not agree. JoEllen had previously indicated she would not be able to be in attendance at L.MCD's October 24th meeting. PROPOSED MOTION - !!oved by seconded by Council accept the information provided and direct staff and members of the Lake Use Committee to continue monitoring the situation to determine appropriate responses. Ayes _, Nays _. cc: JoEllen ’iurr, Orono LMCD Representative Gene Strommen, LMCD Executive Director Gabriel Jabbour, 985 Tonkawa Road, Long Lake John Shardlow, Dahlgren Shardlow & Uban LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT -j.--------------- lD/3/=lD OCT 4 to: FROfI: SUBJECT: Lnco Cities Participating in Shoreland Rules Review of Chair Dave Cochran-i Advisory Committee Chair Bob Rascop Shoreland Protection Study As Tabled by LhCD Board 'l/Eti/iD You will find the Board minutes enclosed in advance of their normal distribution to report on the proceedings and action taken on the flanagement Plan- The tabling action for 30 days is intended to allow cities to individually or as a group bring their specific recommendations together- In so doing with advice to LHCD by Uednesday^ October 17. it is anticipated a resolution to differences in the Shoreland Protection plan section, and Appendix C. can be reached- The recommendations received by 10/17 will be forwarded to the LfICD Board for reconsideration and incorporation into the Shoreland Protection chapter- The Introduction. Appendices and Implementation sections II. VII and VIII were similarly tabled for 30 days as those portions of the plan relate to the Shoreland Protection chapter- It is apparent that the City of Uayzata and Spring Park are initiating their proposals to address differences with the Shoreland Protection- Perhaps others are as well- Ue encourage your collaborative effort as may be appropriate- John Stine. flN DNR Regional Hydrologist. 773-7*110. suggv.-sted to our office that he would be available to discuss Shoreland Protectici ind the new rules- He tentatively set aside some time for 1:00 pm. Wednesday. October 10- ANY CITY SO INTERESTED IN HEETING WITH STINE SHOULD HA<E THEIR ARRANGEHENTS DIRECTLY WITH STINE- HE LIKELY WOULD NEET AT AN AREA NEAR THE LAKE. PERHAPS AT THE WAYZATA COUNCIL CHAHBERS SIMILAR TO THE *1/30 MEETING- In any case. LMCD looks forward to receiving your further advice for making appropriate adjustments to the Shoreland Protection, and for that matter other points of concern you still wish to convey- /// LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT Board of Directors Re^lar Meeting, 7:30 p.m. , Wednesday, September 26, 1990 Tonka Bay City Hall 1. Call to Order The meeting was called to order by Chair Cochran at 7:30 p.m. 2. Roll Call Members Present: Douglas Babcock, Spring Park; Marvin Bjorlin, Tonka Bay; Jan Boswinkel, Secretary, Minnetonka Beach; David Cochran, Chair, Greenwood; Bert Foster. Vice Chair, Deephaven: James Grathwoi, Excelsior; JoEllen Hurr, Orono; John Lewman, Treasurer, Minnetrista; Thomas Martinson, Wayzata (as noted); Robert Pillsbury. Minnetonka; Robert Rascop. Shorewood; Thomas Ree.*^e, Mound; Robert Slocuni, Woodland. A Is*' present: (Jharie.s LeFevere, (Jounsel; Rachel Thlbault, Administrative Technician; David Arndorfer, Consultant; Eugene Strommen, Executive Director. Member Absent: John Malinka, Victoria. 3. Reading of Minutes: Boswinkel moved, Foster seconded, to approve the minutes of the August 22. 1990 meeting as submitted. Motion carried unanimously. 4. Public Comments: Gabriel Jabbour. Orono, a.sked that tlie Board not be hasty in adopting the Management Plan because future ecological problems have not been identified. He urge.s more of the cities to become active participants in the Flan development. A1 Klingelhutz, Carver County, deferred his comments for the arrival of the Carver County planner. Agenda Amendment Grathwoi moved. Boswinkel .seconded, to amend the agenda order to consider item 5.A.4.a) at this time. Motion c -ried unanimously. 5.A.4. ADVISORY COMMITTEE, Chair Rascop Lake Minnetonka, as submitted or a) Long Term Management Program f-,^r cons i de ra t i'jn of final draft, August 1990, c^mended. r Rascop stated this meeting is intended for adoption of the Long Term Management Program. He called upon the public pre.sent for comment Liz Jensen. Mound City CounciImember, speaking on her own behalf, shared views expressed by the Mound City Council. Sh<“ expressed th.inks to Tom Reese and the Board for their work Jensen states tlie City of Mound supports moving ahead wi».h the Management Plan although they are not in total agreement with the Flan. They have concern about democratic representation when their cmmunitv of 10.«'(.»() h.as tJie same vote as a .n.mun i t y -t 600. Che s.aid the fourteen communities mu.st w->rk t to avoid some other agency t.’sking over Uie Lake m^na*’emotit IjMCD Board of Directors Septeinber 26, 1H9(I Virginia Hc^rris. Planner, spoke on behalf of Carver Countv'. She expressed biie surprise of the Carver County Board when they received a copy of the Plan which indicated ail of Carver Countv would be subject to a tax for support of the Lake Management program. She noted there was no provision for Carver County representation on the LMCD Board. Harris mentioned the funding of regional parks by Carver County, parks which serve the entire >rea. The Carver County Board requests the portion referring to f.axing their county be removed from the plan. Rascop apologized repeatedly to Carver County for the late notice of its inclusion in the Plan, particularly without being involved in the discussions leading up to it. Arridorfer said there is a change in wording which leaves in the statement that it would be equitable for Carver iJounty to pay its fair share. Tlie purpose is to acknowledge the fut.uio growth of Carver County’s use of Lake Minnetonka. A1 Klingelhuts, Carver County Commissioner, a.skcd that reference to Carver County be el? ..inated in it.s entirety. Cochran responded the concept is that the people using the Lake should pay for its management. It is planned that s<*me funding will come from user fees. The Carver County representatives were assured tli-^y will be tiotified of meetings in t)ie future. Doug Eaion, Mound, objected to Jensen'.s oinment.s. He feels there has been very little detail available to tlie public. He objects to wliat he iuentifies as taxation without representation. He also thinks tiie shoieland controls will prohibit some communities from controlling their zoning. liascop re.sponded that the shoreland ordinance places the controls in the hands of the communities. It al.so wouJd protect against implemeri t.a t i f ui of a .state-wide .slrTeiand management rule whicli would not meet the needs of Lake Minnetonka municipalities. Thomas Martinson arrived. Robert tii.jvold, M.ayor, C’ity of Way.cat.a, submitted a lettei* from the City indicating their concerns about tlie .'dioreland Management Plan, expansion of LM'JD membership and staff. and increases in costs to implement the Plan. Jisvold requested t.abling of the plan until the cities c.an get tog*»ttier. Addressing the Shoreland Mcanagement Plan he said it w<->uld create an additional delay for zoning applicants to go through LMCL> for approval. The City would welcome input fr'.^m the District at ary time and he beli*^ves LMCD can now this. Don (ierman.son, Tonka Bay. representing t h<« Lake Mi r'.n»»t onka Lakeshore <Jwrier3 Associatio n ( LMI.OA) . stat*=*d tin- group b-a-^ks the plan He expr^''.sed the LMLOA o'oncerns about t Ir* »I** r'-ric- to "beaclilng” art'll find.s a c 1 ar i f i<*.at ion is re*er|»?fl I.NI-<tA is concerned about the wording regarding b«>at acce.ss. it questions the usable water acreag** in view of the los^ .->f add i t i < ui.s i u.sable .area to Eura.sian water nnltoil. tJermanson suggested O''minun i ■ *a 11 ng v;ith the Lake tJeneva. Wi3oo»nsin. authorities on their m ui on'm^uit c'ontrols LMCD Board of Directors September 26, 1990 Arndorl'er responded that he weic^ined tiie comment on the usable acreage. An attempt has been made to get the DNR and Metropolitan Council to adjust the density figures for public access of one boat per ten acres. Those agencies set the standards a; d have independent authority to do so. Hascop noted the 7U0 car/trailer parking spaces for public access is a compromise from the original amount, which is half of what could be 1,400 car/trailer parking spaces based on one boat per ten acres. Jerry Rockvam, Mayor, Spring Park, stated their representative has been instructed to vote no on the Plan. He asked for del? in action, noting Spring P.ark is a nr>n-conforming community in many aspects of the shoreland rules proposed. Arndorfer responded there is a time frame established for shoreland rules i..doption. This is a section which c^uid be open to amendment in the future. Rascop noted the hMCD enabling legislation already gives tlie District authority over storm water run-off from iiard-cover. Storm water run-off is an environmental concern. Jan Boswinkel, Minnetonka D^ach. presented his O’ity’s statement approving the plan. The statement recognises the need for a plan. It details the thoughts of the City Council in arriving at the decision along with suggestions for implementation. The statement was made a par: of the files. ACTIONS: Hurr moved, Bjorlin seconded, to table tiie plan for six m' nths because there will be local elections this fail wiiich C- lid result in a change in municipal leadersiiip and because it will give the Board time to wori: out some of the concerns expressed. Hurr and B.iorlir> voted .^ye. MarLin.'^'-ui ab.st.ained. There were ten nay votes. The moti'.'ii failed. Crathwcl moved. Foster seconded, to consider the Long Term Management Program draft of August, 1990, is aniended, in .sect ion.s in an effort to find out if there are certain porti'-.iis of the draft that the Board supports. Motion carried. Kees^j, Hurr and Babcock voting nay. Grathwol moved, Foster seconded to approve Section II. Recreation Management, Section III, Cser Experience/Satisfaction, and Section V, Environmental Protection. Motion carried. Hurr voting nay. LeFevere counseled the Board in response tr> <irathwoi’s request regarding the action being prop^^ed that the Board at this time i.s approving the Flan, or p-^rti.'ns of the Pl.an. in the s-^nse that a committee report is being approved. I he te.xt of the Plan is being approved, but the appi'-wed text portions are not beirjg formally adopted as the H uiagement Plan at this time. Formal adoption of the Plan will r-^quirc later f^oinl a«:'ti<>n for adoption. LMCD Board of Directors September 26, 1990 Grathwol moved, Reese seconded. approval of Section IV, Shoreland Protection. Cochran moved, Pillsbury seconded, to table the motion for approval of Section IV for 30 days. Motion carried, Grathwol, Reese, Hurr and Bjorlin voting nay. Grathwol moved, Foster seconded, approval of Section VI, Management Structure. A1 Klingelhutz. Carver County, asked that tlie reference to Carver County be removed from the draft. Grathwol accepted Foster’s amendment to the motion to change the reference to Carver County to read “every co'^nty". Met on carried as amended. Pillsbury. Ree.se. Hurr. B.iorlin and Martinson voting nay. Grathwol moved. Ra.scop seconded, to approve l>ec’ti«:>ns I, introduction. Section VII1, Appendices and Section VI1, Implementation, of tlie draft. Martinson moved, Pillsbury seconded, to table approv.al of Sections I, VI11 and Vll for 30 days. Motion carried, Grathwol. Lewman. Reese, Hurr and Bjorlin voting nay. The deadline for comments on the sections not approved set for the third Wednesday in Octobez*, the 17th. Hurr was excused. was 5. Reports A. Standing Committees 1) WATKR STRUCTURES.Babcock for Chair GraUiwol a) Boswinkel moved, Pillsbury seconded, to approve the minutes of 9-8-9U as submitted. correcting the typographical error in sentence 5 of paragraph 4 under Lake Virginia Control Structure to .show the UHWL as 929.6’. Motion c.arried unanimously. b) Lake Virginia Controi Structure. Babcock moved. Pillsbury seconded, to recommend responding to the MN DNR request for comments on the application of the Lake Virginia Homeowners Association by recommending restoration of an appropriate weir as determined by the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District to establi.sh the ordinary high water (929.8’) level, and then study the matter to come to a long term solution. Motion carried unanimously. c) Amenity Study. Babcock moved, f^ascop seconded, approval of the Water Structures Committee recommend.^tion lor approval of the proposed code amendment, as amended. During the dlscus.sion the que.stion was raised as to wiietlier th** tiueniti*^n applied to grandfatliered license.s or only to new additions to a current lioen.se. There was a diversity of opinion on this point. Foster moved, Martin.snn secoiwled, to table the am»-*nit.v study back to the Water l»tructure Committee Motion oarri^-d LMCD Board of Directors September 26, 199U d) North Uhoro Drive Marina iJtipuiation Amendment. Babcock moved. BoswinkeJ seconded, to remove the requirement for fencing the east dock ^.t the North Shore Drive Marina, substituting signs to be posted along the dock length restricting the east dock to short term loading and unloading of handicapped persons. Motion carried unanimously. e) City of Deephavcn Fee Refund. Babcock moved. Foster seconded, approval of a $3,270 refund to the City of Deephaven due to overpayment as a result of the reduction of slips and therefore fee obligations.in its new dock license. to include the new dock license fees for the eight additional slips. Motion carried unanimously. 2) LAKE USE COMMITTEE. Chair Pillsbury a) Pillsbury moved, Foster seconded, aF^provnl ot the minutes of the meeting of 9-17-90 as .submitted. Motion carried unanimously. , „ , ,, .. b) Amendment to Code ro Observer Rule (.ode J.IU, oubd. 1 Pillsbury moved, Foster seconded, approval of an amendment to Code 3.10, Subd. 1, providing for exceptions to the observer rule while towing persons in tlie water. Foster, Pillsbury, Reese, Babcock, Martinson and Clo'jum voted aye. Cochran. Boswinkei. Lewman, P.ascop and D.jorlin voted motion failed on a 6 - 6 vote. c) Resolution 62, Resolution Setting Fees, moved. Foster seconded, to aporove an amendment to ide.solution 62. changing the late fee requirement for open water fishing contests to 90 days; removal of the $25 administrative fee for deicing non-renewals, Code now to "»llow new deicing licenses; and ctiange the Charter license fee fmm $50 to $10U and renews i deadline to March 1 from May 1. Motion carried unanimously. d) Buoy Removal for Watercraft Moorings. Pillsbury moved, B.icrlin seconded, to instruct staff to prepare an amendment to Code 2.12, Subd 7, requiring buoy removal by December 15 ‘^r as ice/weather condition.s permit. During the discussion que.stions arose regarding wording in the existing Code relative to getting written approval from the Sheriff to leave a buoy in beyond that date. It was also suggested that wording about submerging the buoy in lieu of removal be included. Grathwol moved, Rascop seconded, to table the Lode amendment back to tlie Committee. Motion carried unanimously e) Deposit Refunds Pillsbury moved. Babcock seconded, to approve deposit refunds to MN/Wl Pro-Am Bass lournaments. 5/27. 7/28 and 29. and 8/25/9U and to Wednesday Night Da.ss Tournaments 6/13 through 8/22/90 as all permit conditions were met. Motion carried unanimously. f) Hennepin County/l.MCD Joint and Cooperative Agreement. The Board received an updated draft of the operating agreement between Hennepin i.’ounty and the enforcement services on Lake Minnetonka 1 be draft im 'il-’ra Grathwol. nay. Tlie Pillsbury LMCD Board of Directors September 26, 1990 the changes recommended by the Lake Use Committee and a subsequent additional minor change in wording suggested by the Sheriff. Bjoriin moved, Rascop seconded, approval of the Hennepin County/ LMCD Joint and Cooperative Agreement and authorized its signing and forwarding for completion by Hennepin County. Motion carried unanimously. LeFevere noted there will be some changes in statutory citations in the Agreement because of legislation passed since the original agreement was enacted in 1970. g) Water Patrol Report Pillsbury reported from a written Water Patrol report on property damage accidents and a personal injury accident. There have been 94 BWls issued on Lake Minnetonka, 91 by the Sheriff, 2 by the DNR and 1 by the City of Orono. Over all lUU BWIs have been issued in Hennepin County. Sgt. Chandler was absent due to priority duty assignment. 3) ENVIRONMENT. Chair Reese a) 1990 Operating Report Reese presented the 199U Eurasian Water Milfoil weed harvest program report in draft form. A substitute Page 2 was presented at the meeting to complete blanks left in the draft at the time of mailing. Reese said the 1991 program will be prepared for early consideration. Information from the Corps of Engineers is that the Corps’ funding priorities are (1) navigational use; (2) water for consumption (reservoirs); and (3) recreational. Letter.s supporting LMCD's position have been sent to the Corps’ Chief by Governor Perpicii, Congressman Stangeiand and Senator Boschwitz. Reese reported the Fresh Water Foundation has conducted a study finding that there are 192,UUU acres of water in the state lakes subject to milfoil infestation. The cost to treat such a state-wide infestation could cost $4U million to control. Milfoil has been found in Bush Lake and Lake Sarah. The chemical treatment at Lake Independence in late .summer wa.s not e.^^fective. Reese read a quote from Aquatic Plant Management Magazine stating the breaking of the milfoil stem occurs naturally and spreads itself without human intervention. Reese moved, Rascop seconded, approval of the 199U Eurasian Water Milfoil Weed Harvesting Program Concluding Report as amended. Motion carried unanimously. The Board thanked Reese for chairing the program. The Executive Director acknowledged the extensive work of Norm Paurus and Rob Merila. They were faced with making an exceptional number of adjustments during the season and were very inventive in carrying them out. b) Reese submitted a preliminary financial summary. It was acrcepted and ordered filed. 5. B. Treasurer, Lewman 1) Lewman presented the Gtatemerit of Cash I ransaotioiis through August 31, 1990 It was accepted and ordered filed. LMCD Board of Directors September 26, 199(J 2) Le^^man moved, Bosv;inkei seconded, approval of the payment of checks numbered 6404 through 6466 in the total amount of $77,572.09, copy attached. Motion carried unanimously. 5.C.Executive Director, Strommen 1) Office Space Strommen submitted a recommendation to enter into a lease for new office space in the Norwest Bank, Waysata Blvd. at Superior Street, Wayzata. Lewman and Cochran have viewed the space. They are strongly in favor of the expanded facility and rent quoted within LMCD budget. The lease agreement is being prepared bv Norwest Properties. Strommen said there wii. ot be any .separate storage space. It may be necessary to rent ^ome outside storage space. Rascop suggested microfilming old records to save space. Rascop moved. Bjorlin seconded, approval of a lea.se with Norwest Wayzata Bank meeting the details in the Exe<:utive Director’s memo dated September 25, 1990. Motion carried unanimously. 2) The Executive Director reported he will attend the Minnesota Lake M<*na|:.einent Conference. October - 9, at Cragun’s, Brainerd. He has been asked to serve as a candidate for the organization’s board. Rascop moved, Babcock seconded, to authorize Eugene Strommen’s candidacy for the Board of the Minne.sota Lake Management Federation. Motion carried unanimously. 6. Unfinished Business A. Thibault presented the dock license and density orders for the City of Deepliaven, tlinnetonka Boat Works (Urono) and the City of Wayzata. Slie said Beth Whittaker. Minnetonka Boat Works (Orono) has pointed out that 2 b of their Order should read "Licensee shall provide a boat for charter purposes for groups and individuals . . . ." omitting the reference to underprivileged and handicappf*d. Str'"»minen confirme*! the applicant was correct in this regard. Grathwol moved. Foster seconded, approval of the dock Lcenses and density orders for tlie City of Deepliaven. Minnetonka Boat Works (Orono) and the City of Wayzata, the Minnetonka Boat Works Order to be amended as discussed. Motion carried unanimously. 7.D.Chair, Cocliran a) Cochran reported tlie Fresh Water Foundation has asked him to sit in with tliem on fund raising discussions with their Development Committee. He was urged to do so. LMCD Board of Directors 8. New Business September 26, 1990 A. The Executive Director informed the Board he has appeared with Gen Olson in a photo for campaign literature showing the milfoil disposal site on her farm. The photo recognizes her active support to assist Lake Minnetonka’s milfoil problem. Olson is a candidate for State Senator. Rascop expressed reservations, but recognized her assistance in securing state support to fund milfoil weed control programs. Rascop suggested sending letters of appreciation to the people who cooperated in providing disposal sites. B. Election of Officers Slocum moved, Babcock seconded, nominating officers by a submission of a slate of officers rather than nominating each office individually. Motion carried unanimously. Slocum moved, Pillsbury seconded, approval of the following slate of officers, terms to be effective with installation at the October Board meeting, LMCD's founding anniversary month: Chair Vice Chair Secretary Treasurer David Cochran, Greenwood Bert Foster, Deephaven Douglas Babcock, Spring Park Jan Eoswinkel, Minnetonka Beach Rascop moved, Pillsbury seconded, that nominations be closed. Motion carried unanimously. Grathwol moved, Rascop seconded, to cast a unanimous ballot for the nominated slate of officers and to declare them duly elected. Motion carried unanimously. Cochran and the new officers expressed their appreciation for their election. C. Adjournment Rascop moved, Pillsbury seconded, that the meeting be adjourned. Motion carried unanimously. Meeting adjourned at 10:10 p.m. David Cochran. Chair Jan Boswinkel, Secretary Presented to LfICD Board ‘l/Bfci by Jan Bosuinkle on behalf of Minnetonka Beach City Council POSITIOM OF THE CITY OF THE VILLAGE OT MIMHETOMI'.A BEACH REGARDING THE LAKE MINNETONKA MANAGEMENT FLAN - 1??0 THE CITY OF THE VILLAGE OF MINNETONKA BEACH RECOGNIZES THE DESIRABILITY TO SET UP A MANAGEMENT F-LAN FOR LAKE MINNETONKA AND AFTER ANALYZING THE PLAN PRESENTED FOR APPROVAL TONIGHT WISHES TO STATE THE FOLLOWING: 1. THAT THE CITY DOES NOT AGREE IN THIS PLAN AND CONSIDERING THE NIRIAD OF RECOGNIZING EXISTING PROBLEMS OVER A BROAD THAT THE L.M.C.D. WILL SERVE AS THE TARGET IDEAS MAY PE EXCHANGED, OPINIONS EXPRESSED EFFORTS FOR THE BETTERMENT OF THE LAKE AND FORMULATED. WITH EVERYTHING DETAILS AND SPECTRUM TRUSTS ENTITY WHERE AMD ADDITIONAL THIS FLAM WILL BE 2. THAT BY ARPROVIfIG THE FLAN RATflER THAN GIVING IT THE FORCE OF LAW IT IS TO BE A STATEMENT OF COOPERATION WITH ALL THE MUNICIPALITIES AROUND THE LAKE AND THE D.N.R., HENNEPIN COUNTY, THE METRO COUtICIL, THE MINMEHANA CREEFt WATERSHED DISTRICT. HEfiNEPIN COUNTY PARKS AND OTHER INTERESTED ENTITIES TO WORF: TOVFAPD KEEPING LAKE MINIIETOtlKA A VIAF?LE ASSET FOP ALL PEOPLE. 3. THAT WHILE ADOPTING THIS FLAN F FIE LAKE MINNETONKA MUNICIPALITIES CONTINUE TO^AVE A SUB5FANTIAL INFLUENCE OVER THEIR OWN DESTim. IN OTHER WORDS 1NAT THE CITY WILL REGULATE THE USE OF TflE LAND AMD THE L.M.C.D. THE WATER UNLESS ONE CONFLICTS WITH THE OTHER, SUCH AS RUN OFF, WETLANDS ETC. A. THAT BY APPROVAL OF THIS FLAN THE CITi WISHES TO DECLARE THAT IT IS MOT OUR IDEA TO It»!FOSE THIS PLAN ON OTHER CITIES BUT THAT THEY WHEN APPROVING THE TLAN SHOULD ATTACH THEIR DISSENTS TO IT. 5. THAT WE ARE A RESIDENTIAL COMNUNIT. AND RECOGNIZE THAT OTHER CITIES HAVE WITHIN TF^E1F BOUNDARIES ESTAPLISF^ED NON-CONFORMING DESIGNATIONS THAT CAM NOT BE CHANGED. 6. THAT APPROVAL OP THIS PLAN SHOULD BE BUT A FIRST STEP TO DEVELOFE A PLAN WITH WHICH ALL COMCERflED CAM AGREE. THAT IN IR(ING TO ::OLVE PROPLEMS Of AN i INVOLVING THE LAKE IT WELCOMES THE E;'PERTISE OF THE L.M.C.D., THE D.N.R., HETTNEPIN COUNTY PARKS AND THE MINNEHAHA CREEK WATERSHED DISTRICT ETC. KIND 0. THAT WE REALIZE THAT FAILURE TO ADOPT THIS MANAGEMENT PLAN WOULD JEOPARDIZE THE PRESENT INFLUENCES AMD CONTROL AFFORDED US THf^OUGH THE L.M.C.D. o. THAT WE ARE CONFIDENT THAT THE LAKE MIMNETOMI.A CITIES HAVE THE PROPER MOTIVATION FOR THE PROTECTIOti OF THE LAKE AMO WILL USE COMMON SENSE IN BALANCING THEIR CURRENT LAYOUTS WITH THE SUGGESTIONS IN THE PLAN. --^v • «ry. ’• LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT ■ ........ LONG TERN NANAGENENT PROGRAN Shoreland Protection Review Meeting Highlights ' MEETING HELD: Thursdayi September 20*. mO, Uayzata City Hall PRESENT: City representatives Cliff Robertsi mayori Council members Dick Brown-i Howie Bennisi Deephaveni Steve Smith-i mayor-i Mark Koegler-i Planner-i Mounds Ann Perry-i Phil Rosenquisti planners-! Minnetonkai . .. . . . . . Jerry Rockvam-t knayor^ Pat Osmonson-i clerki Alan Brixiusi planner-i ^ Spring Parki A1 Oreson-i city managers Tom Young-i planning coordinator*! David Lichti planner-i Uayzatai Nick Duff-! mayor-! • • Woodland; Vern Haug-! mayor-i Tonka Bayi Mark Bernhardson-i Or'onoi • LMCD Directors Dave Cochran-i Greenwoods Marv Bjorlin-! Tonka Bay*! Doug Babcocki Spring Park; JoEllen Hurri Orono; John Lewman-! Minnetrista; Tom Martinson-i Uayzata; Bob Rascop-! Shorewood; Tom Reese-! Mound; Executive Director Gene Strommen MN DNR representatives John Stine-i regional hydroligist; Ed Pick-! shoreland management hydrologist; Pete Otterson-i supervisor-! shoreland management-! all from Division of Waters; Consultant David Arndorfer INTRODUCTION — The anticipated outcome of this meeting as described in the meeting notice was intended as follows: 1. Further clarification of the need and appropriateness for the Shoreland Protection segment of the Management Plan- 2- Establishment of a working agreement between the municipalities-! LMCD and DNR to cover issues which are not directly covered in the present Management Plan-! allowing the Plan to progress toward adoption with assurance that critical needs are met* 3- Secure the understanding and support of the municipalities which have not yet entered into Shoreland Rules Agreement to begin the Rules adoption process required by the MN DNR by 7/31/'U- MN DNR PRESENTATION — Stine welcomed this meeting as an opportunity for he and the DNR staff present to learn more about the specific issues related to the . Shoreland Protection segment of the Long Term Management Program-, and what can be done to improve that segment- - Stine reviewed the state history on how shoreland rules came into being-! starting in when outstate shoreland rules were mandated by the legislature- In l*i7M metropolitan cities were given the same mandate- Rules were published inl*17b- Howeve"-! without funds to assist in the rules adoption-! and subsequent provision . of needed staff to assure their implementation-! many cities did not adopt the = rules* Recognizing this shortcoming*! and further realizing shanges in shoreland growth-! the DNR began a review of the existing rules-i resulting after seme two- plus years of review and public hearings-i a new set of Shoreland Rules adopted by the state 7/31/flT- Accompanying these rules was #2-2 million to assist local governments in the adoption process- LMCD*s management plan development coincided with the states new Shoreland Rules. As a result-! LhCD was invited by the DNR to facilitate the adoption process among the IM Lake Minnetonka communities- more • • • ■ I I '-45ft' SHORELAND PROTECTION REVIEW-. “1/20/^G. P- 5 m DNR PRESENTATION {continued} Addressing more direct lake-related issues of the Shoreland Protection segment of LMCD*s plan-. Stine emphasized that development on the land has a definite influence on water surface use and water quality* The area under consideration for this immediate influence is l-iOOO' feet from . the ordinary high water level of the lake-, known as the shoreland* . . Section t.l5D*2b00 of the new Shoreland Rules states in part * * * . ”The uncontrolled use of shorelands adversely affects the public health-, safety and general welfare by contributing to pollution of public waters and by impairing the local tax base* * * * The standards and criteria are intended to preserve and enhance the quality of surface waters-, conserve the economic and natural environmental values of shorelands-. and provide for the wise use of water and related land resources of the state* (3UESTI0NS AND COnHENTS FROH CITY AND OTHER REPRESENTATIVES PRESENT: Licht-. LJayzatai asked about funding LMCD is receiving for its Management Plan from the DNR. Stine related that $M0-.00D has been pledged toward the $5S0-.0QQ total cost* LMCD’s agreement to facilitate the shoreland rules among the IM cities includes a $lSiQQD reimbursement for consultant/staff time necessary to carry out this adoption process- LMCD expects to engage a consultant for the majority of this work* What is LMCD’s job once shoreland rules are adopted by each city^ While this question was not directly answered at the meeting, it deserves a reply based upon information in the PERSPECTIVE opening section of the Shore- land Protection chapter-, p* Ml-, paragraph M-. namely: LMCD's approach to shoreland protection "does not alter the traditional jurisdictions and powers of local government on the lake- Instead-, it depends on intergovernmental agreements and long-term cooperation to achieve the stated goals and objectives* * * * Accordingly-, protection of the lake from the adverse effects of development and redevelopment requires a strong working partnership between managing entities {municipalities and other shoreland-influencing agencies} and the LMCD* The section on AUTHORITY, p. M5. also addresses LMCD's position in this regard* What if a city decides not to work through the LMCD on the shoreland rules adoption process^ - - --- . - Stine responded that in order to qualify for the flexibility provisions allowed rSk through LMCD’s management program {which has been inserted as Item Z. Appendix C} ' cities must work through the LMCD* Otherwise more stringent rules will be , applied to meet state-wide standards* Under the flexibility provision. 1 example, some density transfer from another area within the shoreland may be made to accommodate an area where a city determines it qualifies for greater-^»JT^ density* This type of transfer must be legally defined and preserved by’|j-*->'£M'. ' the cities with the knowledge of other landholders who might be restricted^in * their future development potential* # A shoreland density example was illustrated for the City of Wayzata. noting that the further away from shore, greater allowances for density are permitted* . more • *• * 'SHORELAND PROTECTION REVIEW-. VED/^D-. P- 3 flUESTIONS/COnnENTS -Ccontinuedl Licht volunteered the position that their firm {Northwest Associated Consul tants! and the City of Wayzata are not anti-LhCD. They are just not asking LHCD to do planning for the city. Licht agrees density problems must be recognized and determined how they can be accommodated in the LHCD plan. - Licht further added they do not have any parameters from which to come from — they want to see the criteria in the management plan. Licht then questioned the capacity of residential units within the shoreland area- He noted lilayzata has determined it has excess development capacity of lOfi units- Licht added they still need criteria from a regional perspective of the lake in LMCD's plan-, for example-, what percent of shoreland can Uayzata develop for residential-, commercial-, multiple family-, etc.f Stine observed that such planning criteria requires some land use inventory data This would include: 1- 5- What could be developed if comprehensive plans were fully achieved- Communities must resolve this answere among or for themselves as to what amount of development is appropriate- Arndorfer stated that the development of such criteria is step two ^nCD must first resolve step one. namely adoption of the management plan- Lnp is not poised to undertake involvement in establishing land use criteria in Arndorfer s judgement- But the development of a consistent set of shoreland rules through the proposed adoption process is a step in that direction- The Protection section is a series of goals as to how the cities are to ge. there- Arndorfer added- He acknowledged further that specific studies may be identified now but done later- Alan Brixius said he sees the performance standards in Appendix C as Too restrictive- It either makes many properties non-conforming. or prtphibits some prospective development/redevelopment- {The flexibility provision as noted in new Para Z is intended to avoid the non-conforming problem-> Bernhardson expressed the concern that the tnCD plan may require cities tr amend their comprehensive plans- The extent that city suoerior to LHCD’s plan for shoreland rules as not been defined- Their council is^concerned that developers and future councils will insist on lowering shore- land standards based upon other city's more liberal allowances- Cliff Roberts believes shoreline protection can be construed as "zoning"- He sees this as a "zoning grab" on the part of LhCD- {n...nerous statements in the plan assure the cities that LHCD intends no such role!- Roberts fupHing alternatives as remote - "hopes" - for getting funding lake cities- {The plan admits these will be challenges to secure- but support^ irbroade^public recognition of the need, such as noted in the recent Citizen' Leage report on surface water management for metropolitan lakesJ- Vern Haug noted that while Tonka Bay has questioned the tnCD it UnCD overall- He does agree with Robert's observations on funding, and sees LflCD as being under funded- under staffed- Nick Duff sees the IM cities as having an obligation to support the goal to preserve the lake- The IM cities are already subject to much reguUtlon. ^ they would much prefer to deal with LhCD- The lake is c anging. w 9 r mm SHORELAND PROTECTION REVIEW. P. M (JUESTIONS/COnnENTS CcontinuGd} Pete Otterson noted for the DNR how the North Shore hanagement Plan was developed bringing 3 counties and M cities together through a joint powers board- The plan has guided them into a position of unity* Otterson recognizes there are different development patterns among Lake Minnetonka cities* Flexibility among them is need as well as mutual approval* Reese noted he is concerned about pollution coming from upland development* Ann Perry stated Minnetonka's position as not finding a commonality for land use as suggested in the Shoreland Protection chapter. The city objects to Appendix C. and believes LMCD should only be concerned -Cwith shoreland develop- raentflasit relates to lake use and water quality. -CThe plan states that lake use and water quality are highly influenced by shoreland development and therefore must ha addressed in the plan> A suggestion was proposed {source missed! that Appendix C be dropped entirely from the plan with a statement that T’-nreland Rules adoption by the cities is a significant responsibility of each ciwy* The plan could address how Shoreland Rules are to be adopted for each city's special needs* Mark Koegler stated Minnetonka's concern for more assurance of flexibility with the shoreland rules* Licht stated he believes Appendix C has not been "hashed out" enough* He added that the circumstances have changed since the shoreland rules were structured in the Appendix C and now Uayzata sees what the problems it will have with it* Arndorfer reminded the audience that nearly six months of study went into the Shoreland Protection study, involving all IM cities, with most in attendance including some elected officials as well as staff* The communications between Staff and councils appar'ently deserved more exchange to help them understand that segment of the study* Lewman noted Minnetrista pr .>fers to work with LMCD than some higher level of bureaucracy• Stine concluded that the problems appear be with Appendix C* ''ensity is a flexibility issue- Some further inpt. and DNR is willing to be of service in needed to resolve the d. •rea* r erences to keep talking on the differences o assist in presenting their ideas Cochran agreed there *s still time ana pointed out today- He invited the cities and input toward resolution- Depending upon on the LMCD Board's outcome on the over-all Long Term Management Program review up for consideration a move to bring the cities together on this portion of the plan ie an apparent priority* //// THE ABOVE SUMMARY HIGHLIGHTS COMMENTS PRESENTED BY PARTICIPANTS* IS NOT INTENDED TO BE A COMPuETE DOCUMENTATION. BUT REPRESENTATIVE OR ThC DISCUSSION. PREPARED BY EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR GENE STROMflEN* r 10190.6 i IJ ./- r* TO:Mayor and City Council 1 V V FROM:Mark E. Bernhardson, City Administrato^r' \r ; 'V- DATE:October 1, 1990 SUBJECT: Street Light Request - Livingston Avenue Attachment: A. Street Light Request Dated 8/23/90 ISSUE - Determine if the Council desires to pursue the issue of privately installed street lights and the method for paying the ongoing cost. INTRODUCTION - At the Council's August 27th meeting Attachment A was presented for Council cons deration at which time they tabled it requesting staf^ to do further work on the matter. This was in part done because of the City's concern for its exposure to future street lights. DISCUSSION - 7n a subsequent conversation, at least o: e of the residents has indicated the neighborhood was willing to pay the costs, however, the mechanism to do it privately did not exist or was "a hassel". Attachment A addressed the issue as the City having to provide the revenue ♦•o fund these. As noted in the history the City funds approximately 53 street lights and there are another 67 street lights that had been put in at private request and had been previously handled as a special assessment. Because of the need for a public hearing and notice every year this became an administrative headache and in response to the actual dollars received (each individual assessment was approximately $10-15.00 per year). In addition the concern was other private lights may exist out there presently that are being paid privately or ones in the future. Given the willingness of this group to pay for it plus the past history of persons paying for the private lights; perhaps the issue is n;>t one of the City having to develop additional revenue, but having the City only serve as the structure* to collect the revenue. In this vain the City could determine a standard billing rate to be applied to all the homes which have private lights and had been previously acsessed or who desire to have their private light funded through the City and have this put on as a seperate item on the City's utility billing. Failure to pay the street light charge would result in it being included and specially assessed with the delinquent utility bills each year. The utility customers with delinquent accounts are notified by a separate billing sent prior to the special assessment action. The costs and number of customers notified for assessment of the street lights would be substantially less than if all of them were notified and specially assessed for a hearing annually. Additionally any particular street light where substantial numbers are not paying for it, could be disconnected and the charge discontinued. ALTERNATIVES 1. Direct staff to work on the utility billing for street lights. 2. Direct staff not to take any further action. 3. Table for further discussion. RECOMMENDATION - It is recommended that staff be directed to bring back a proposal which will utilize the utility billing system for charging the street lights that are not ones put in by the City. Together with a policy statement of how these will be handled in th'' future. PROPOSED MOTION - Moved by _, seconded by ^, Council direct staff to develop a system for billing all priTate street lights through the utility billing system. Ayes _, Nays _. cc: John R. Gerhardson, Public Works Director Thomas Kuehn, Finance Director k To: Mayor Grabek & Orono City Council Members From: John R. Gerhardson, Public Works Director Date: August 23, 1990 Subject: Petition for Street Lights Livingston and Lyric Avenue Recently the City of Orono received a petition from residents on Lyric Avenue requesting street lights in the area of Lyric Avenue extension in Navarre. The existing street lights were installed by Northern States Power Company as part of the development of that subdivision in the early 1980's. The street lights were placed at the request of the developer at the time of development with the Homeowners Association paying for the cost of the electricity. Most recently, the Homeowners Association has dissolved and Ncrthern States Power Company has disconnected the street lights for lack of payment. City wide there are 120 street lights either commercial or residential. Approximately 53 of the 120 are commercial in nature that are installed as part of a semaphore project or as part of the County Road 15 rehabilitation project. The balance of approximately 67 are to light an intersection or a street at the request of a property owner or neighborhood. Until just recently the 67 street lights costs were assessed to benefiting property owners, however a recent change in assessing laws ha' dictated that in order to assess for street lights, a Public Hearing is mandatory every year. We have delayed this just simply due to priorities and the actual dollars involved (approximately $8,000 - $10,0()0 per year). However, in addition to the 120 public street lights, there are an unknown number of private lights installed. Those lights are placed by Northern States Power Company and billed directly to the homeowner. The two street lights involved are 100 watt high pressure sodium on ornamental poles (18' high). Typically street lights are placed at a 30' height for the best coverage. Annual costs for the two street lights is $325.00 Options 1. Review the request and table. 2. 3. Isv Deny the request and direct the property owners to deal directly with Northern States Power Company. Approve the request and pay for the street lights out of the general fund. OWA'O CIT'J COU,\>CIL iiJe., the. ande.xAi^ae.d pn.ooe.xtij. owne.xA in (^Javaxxo pxope.xtj de.ve.lopme.nt axe.a, would like, to -lee the. two Atxe.e.t lijhtA in oux a/iea tuxne.d back on. 'JJe. be.lie.ve. the. coAt ^ox ele.ctxicitj Ahould be. paid out o^ the. je.ne.xal ^und aA othe.x Atxe.e.t lijhtA axe. in the. axe.a. If!. ne.ce.AAaxj, we. would like, to have, a he.axinj on thiA Aub^e.ct. / // X <fr . I tc. i ^ >'v> '--P■"‘‘O XJ. J /7 Aij^- T^vk <^6i.-e<^/ N /O ; y ^ ^____^ SN 3GGS Ida^C A\J^ ^ 3G7S lyVc/i.c 1 10190.7 TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Mark E. Bernhardson, City Administrator ' DATE: October 1, 1990 SUBJECT: Highway 12 Corridor Attachment: A. Highway 12 Minutes from Policy Meeting of August 22, 1990 B. Highway 12 Minutes from the Technical Meeting of August 21, 1990 ‘ -J ' '■ .a K/ ISSUE - Presentation to Council of most recent information on Highway 12 corridor. This meeting was a review of the objectives to date. Once the City has received the necessary maps from the consultant the cities will then have the opportunity to begin drawing lines for possible corridors for study. It is my understanding at this point the meeting in October will be the initiation to that process. PROPOSED MOTION - Moved by _, seconded by _, that Council accept the information presented relative to the Highway 12 corridor. Ayes , Nays __. HOWAnO NEEOUSa lAMMBN & BERC3BNDOPF 6700 Francs Avenus So. Minneapolis, MN 5543S Telephone: 612-920-4666 Fax: 612-920-0173 Data id A'H Time 2 •35’© TO:Mama FAX No. iSstmWPSifJ -lOS-IO ^f'Pj 0^ f^p-AklO FROM: Senders Name ^5$ Project Number Number of pages Including this transmittal RECIPIENT: If box is checked, please acknowledge receipt to sender [ ] INSTRUCTIONS OR MESSACES TO RECIPIENT: MrMJei; Miui/res pMM A06- mlubucv__ , nuU- ^T&i. L 'tWiAM) TiTZ^p < \hir^tjA\L. Forms:7 TH 12 Corridor Study Policy Committee Minutes August 22, 1990 Maple Plain City Hall (Approved September 26, 1990) Memharw Pfcacnti G. Wcttcr, M. Johnson, A. Kunze, J. Grabek, M. Alger, R. Bauman, T. Humbert Altftmfttftx Pres^r^t! Others Present! M. Bemhardson S. Hay, L Dallam, R. Harris, R. Scheucr, A. Vande Vegte, D. Lorsung, G. Johnsoa T. Johnson The meeting was called to order shortly after 5:30 p.m. by Hay. (A revised agenda was distributed at the meeting). The agenda was approved as submitted and the minutes of the July 25, 1990 meeting were approved with an attendance correction. Dallam stated that approved minutes would be mailed to members and alternates after each meeting, and that "draft'* minutes will be mailed the week following the meeting for preliminary review and comment by those members in attendance. Future meeting notices and agendas for all TH 12 Corridor Study committees will be mailed to each participating jurisdiction’s city hall. Hay updated the Policy Committee on the status of TH 12 Citizen Committee appointments. Most appointees are in place; Orono will try to complete its appointments so that the Citizen's Committee can be activated on September 6th. Dallam then presented the Preliminary Projea Goals/Issues/Concerns paper for the Committee’s review, and stated that the Technical Committee had reviewed and commented on them yesterday (August 21st) and that their changes were incorporated. Vande Vegte distributed a paper representing Long Lake’s goals, concerns, and issues regarding the relocation of TH 12. M. Johnson requested that the concern of "impacts on city hall" be changed to "impacts on historic sites" and use city haU as an example. He also stated that there are at least four known "Big Woods" tree communities in Independence that will need to be considered - and will identify them to the consultant for mapping purposes. G. Wetter stated that the conflicts between local traffic and T.H. 12 traffic is both east-west and north-south. No other comments were received by the consultant from the committee. M. Johnson also asked whether Franklin Township’s goals, issues, and concerns should be included - Dallam and Hay stated that the township would be included in this paper. Dallam then asked for additional comments. Wetter discussed great concern at the end of the corridor for crossroad traffic and the effect that TH 12 will have on local streets. Hay mentioned that traffic forecasts are being prepared to assess local and regional traffic related to this project. In Other Business, Hay stated that Tom Johnson of the Transportation Study Board had requested «me on the agenda to discuss the linkages between Greater Minnesota and the Twin aties Metro Area, and that members of this Committee would be invited to the Transportation Study Board’s next meeting to share their experiences related to accessibility between these linkages. (See additional minutes on this subject.) Comments from the committee on other business were then received: M. Johnson asked when othen - citizens, jurisdictions, etc. -- using TH 12 (but not in the study area) will be able to conimenl. Dallam said this will be done at the draft scoping meetings/public hearing when there is a manageable set of alternatives. Wetter asked at what point should the project go to planning commission for public opinion. Dallam again stated that it is preferable to wait until alternatives have been mapped and people can see possible impacts. Hay added that public information meetings can be held when maps, etc. have been prepared for comments. Dallam said that if a community deems it practicable at this time to get better input, then it could conduct such a meeting. Wetter thought that better input would be received from Delano if an information meeting were held before the alternatives were mapped. Grabek added that the Concerned Qtizens for Highway 12 (from Orono) was organized some 6-10 months ago for community input on the project. Hay mentioned he will be videotaping an update on the project for local access cable TV on 8-23. Comments from the Audience: G. Jol son asked that all TH 12 Corridor Study meetings, minutes, and notes should be copied for the Highway 12 Task Force. (Hay mentioned that Dave Eckem from Mn/DOT District 8 had requested this.) For the next meeting, the committee was informed that the input/comments from the first Qtizen’s Committee meeting would be addressed and that corridor location concepts would possibly be presented. Meeting was adjourned at 6:20 p.m and Tom Johnson arrived and the committee was reconvened. He distributed the Transportation Study Board’s August 29,1990 agenda and requested participation from the committee to discuss highway needs in the outlying parts of the Twin Cities Metro Area. He said that it would be important for cormnittee members to share their experiences with the Board and help direct future metro fringe area growih policies and infrastructure priorities. Wetter and G. Johnson will provide input at this TSB meeting; Tom will call M. Johnson for his possible participation. Meeting adjourned at 6:45 p.m. RDH/mst miMlitWrtl HM TH 12 Corridor Study Technical Committee Minutes August 21, 1990 Delano City Hall (Approved September 18, 1990) Mftmherx Present: S. Hay, J. Gerhardson, J. Dillman, T. Loucks, J. Sweeney Alternates Present: B. Swartwood, A. Vande Vegte Others Present: L. Dallam, R. Harris, A Kunze, J. Barbre, J. Donahue, M. MastcHcr, S. Nelson, P. Theis, D. Hamilton, G. Johnson The meeting was called to order at 1:15 p.m. The meeting agenda was amended by adding "approval of minutes" from the previous meeting. J. Sweeney previously submitted a correction to the minutes; no others wer s received for the ^nly 17, 1990 meeting. (Future meeting minutes to be labelled "draft" until approved by coni."^ittee). L. Dallam discussed the first draft of the TH 12 Corridor Study paper entitled Project Goals/Issues/Concerns, based on his meetings with local representatives, and stated that each of the projea committees would be able to provide input to modify as needed. After the goals/issucs/and concerns of Mn/DOT were read, each representative provided input for his respective community: T />ny T^lce - Vande Vegte elaborated on the c:t> s concern of the corridor passing through on the existing alignment, which could wipe out T.I.F. areas bonded with new and future development He indicated that the dty would likely seek compensation for T.I.F. improvements that would be lost. Businesses w^ani and need traffic (10,000 ADT desirable), but that highway improvements must be consistent with the Cit>^s economic growth plans. J2iQnft - (no changes) Medina - (no changes) M^le Plain - (no changes) Independence - Loucks discussed the need to review the historic significance of the city hall/locatlon (he will do) and that local road continuity and accessibility to TH 12 w-as an important concern, especially relating to future land use in the city. (Dallam agreed to modify this concern). Delano - (no changes) Questions related to the eforcmcniioncd paper were received from the audience; Swartwood requested a clarification as to bow a highway could provide a high quality of life. Dallam stated that the goals were state and dty goals (from the perspeaive of the State of Minnesota and the affected cities about what kind of place they wanted to be) and the issues/concems deal with the impact of the project on these goals. Hay then explained the purposes of the TH 12 Corridor Study committees to the audience, and mentioned that the first Citizen Committee meeting will be September 6th. (Dallam added that the Technical and Citizen Committees will always meet prior to the Policy Committee to provide input for Polic>' Committee meetings, and as such, will not deal with the political process as much.) Other questions from the audience; (Hay and Dallam responded to the following) • Difference between a freeway/expressway and R.O.W. needs • R.R. crossover problems • Criteria used to develop a list of priorities on the project • All TH 12 Corridor Study meetings are open to the public • Dates when these meetings are held? (Technical - third Tuesday; Policy - fourth Wednesday; Citizen - T.B.A.) Meeting adjourned at 2:12 p.m. RDH/mst 10390.2 (yo(f TO: Mayor and City Council FROM; Mark E. Bernhardson, City Administrator! DATE; October 3, 1990 SUBJECT; Navarre Heights Drainage Attachment:A. Meeting Notice for Navarre Heights Mailed 9/7/90 B. Beth Escher Letter Dated 9/25/90 C. Paulette A. Bohlen Letter Received 10/2/90 ISSUE - Subsequent to the Council's last meeting it was brought to our attention that we had made an error in publishing the notice for the Navarre Heights listing the public hearing in the notice that was mailed out as 7:30. While the discussion overall on this item lasted to about 7:30 the public hearing had previously been closed. There were at least a couple of people that came in about 7:30 and desired to express their objections. DISCUSSION - The public ^-aring that was held was a voluntary public hearing not required by statute. The City is required, however, to hold a public hearing to lay out the project. A new public hearing for the project could be held at the time plans and specifications are are accepted or bids are received. ALTERNATIVES - Alternatives in this case are as follows: 1. Hold a public hearing - Hold another public hearing with official notice any everytime before the project is ordered. A. Prior to plans and specifications on receipt of plans and specifications - Hold a public hearing at the time plans and specs are drawn prior to going to bids. 2. Informal input - Schedule this as a regular agenda item and send letter notice to allow those who are interested to come and express any further information regarding the project. 3. Table for further discussion. RECOMMENDATION - It is recommended that the following process be utilized: Schedule as a regular item with notification for the October 22, 1990 meeting before further work is done on the plans and specs. Hold a project public hearing at the time that the plans and specs are received before bids are ordered. Upon receipt of bids have the special assessment hearing. Order the special asses-"‘int. Depending on alternati^-. received order the project. PROPOSED MOTION - Moved by seconded by that the Council allow those interested to present their thoughts and concerns regarding this item on the agenda at the Octob»^c 22, 1990 meeting prior to further work being done on this p public hearing would be scheduled at the time completed. Ayes _, Nays _. ct and another ans and specs are 83090.1 CITY OP ORONO NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING A public hearing will be conducted on September 24, 1990, at 7:30 P.M. in the Orono Council Chambers, 1275 Brown Road South. The public hearing is for purpose of considering^ underground storm sewer system for Navarre Heights generally described as those properties east of Blaine Avenue fiorth of Lyric Avenue south of Crystal Place and west of Shadywood Road (County Road 19) . Engineers estimated cost of this project is $32,200. Such persons as desire to be heard with reference to the proposed improvement will be heard at this meeting. Dorothy M. Ilallin City Clerk .e week of 91390.5 TO: FROM: DATB: Mayor anc’ City Council ^ Mark E. Bernhardson, City Administrato\^' September 13, 1990 SUBJECT: Storm Sewer System - Navarre Heights Area Attachment: ISSUE - A. Storm Sewer Memo Dated 8/23/90 B. Hearing Notice Published 9/10 and 9/17/90 to ordering plans and1. Hold a public hearing prior specifications on the project. 2. Determine whether Council desires to have plans and specs developed on the project. 3. Determine type of desired solution. INTRODUCTION - This issue was discussed at the Council’s August 27, Fee ting with a public hearing scheduled for the September 24, 1990 meeting. Attach.aent B reflects the hearing notice that was transmitted. DISCUSSION - In addition to the issue of whether the Council desires to go ahead with the proposed project or not is an issue what alternatives exist for res'irg the iss- e. Alternatives regarding the storm water ponding are as follows: A. Status Quo - Taking action to leave matters as they are with n'F^ormal drainage system. The resident may choose to do something minimal on their property. B. Surface Drainage - As noted in Attachment A a surface drainageoutline had been prepared as a possible alternative that could be done privately. It is our understanding that a neighborhood petition to request that this matter be undertaken and the City do so as a public project to be assessed has been circulated although the City has not received a copy. C. Underground Storm Water Piping - This is the project that has been proposed for a considerable period of time and is designed for a five year storm. In this situation this may be more expensive than a surface solution, but also the one that perhaps limits the city's liability to the greatest degree. in addition tne alternatives for financing are: I, Private Financing - Any of these alternatives coi’lT^e“'3o’ne by the neighbors in conjunction with each other, however, the larger the cost of the project the more difficult it becomes. 2. Public Financing - This would entail the City engaging a contractor and specially assessing the cost against the storm sewer area that is served. Not only does this put the city's stamp of approval on the project but regardless of the route taken puts the city at risk for financing to the degree the risk has not been limited by special assessment waivers. The City does have some concern regarding the city's partici ’-ation inabove ground a storm sewer project in this oarticuxar situation. The underground solution would be built to the 5 year standard and the city's liability would probably be to the extent of the 5 year design, however, solution may in fact result in the assumption that it will handle any storm. While this may not be the case, it may handle tht water better than not doing anything. An avenue related to an above ground solution would be the possibility that the City "reacquire" this parcel from the Cuffs as part of the solution. ALTERNATIVES Issue 1. Pub1ic Hearing 1. Hold the public hearing. 2. Close the public hearing. 3. Continue the public hearing. Issue 2. Development of Plans and Specs 1. Direct plans and specs be developed. 2. Direct an alternative system be designed. 3. Take no action. 4. Table for further discussion. Issue 3. 1. Approach a) Status Quo b) Aboveground c) Underground 2. Financial a) Private b) Public c) Waiver of Assessment RECOMMENDATION - It is recommended that the public hearing be EeTH“and upon"“conc lusion of the public hearing not undertake plans and specs until the neighbors have agreed upon a solution and signed petition waivers if they desire the City to do a public project. PROPOSED MOTION - Moved by _, seconded by _, that Council after the public hearing direct staff to undertake plans and specs to the point that a significant majority of the neighbors are interested in doing the project and have signed petition waivers if they desire the City to do a public project. Ayes __, Nays 2 isao September 25, 1990 Mayor and Council Members City of Orono Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 Dear sirs and madams: Last evening I, and a group of neighbors, arrived at the council chambers for a public hearing on the Navarre storm sewer project at 7:30 as indicated on the attached notice from the city. By this time the council was acting on the issue, the attached agenda shows it was heard at 7:00 not 7:30. The outcome was ordering an assessment survey (costing an estimated $2,500) and waiting to see how many would appeal their assessment. I am NOT in favor of this project and do not feel we should be assessed for it. In addition I am very angry about attending a public hearing and not being able to be heard. I feel that before $2,500 is spent on this project the affected neighbors should be able to express their opinions. When the Cuffs purchased the vacant lot next to was a puddle in front, they lived there and knew yet they went ahead and purchased it. Some time cleared the lot of the brush and dead trees and with earth-moving equipment. While ir improved the lot, it exaggerated the water problem. Much now sits in the street used tc drain to the back understand them wanting to have a dry lot . . . them moving water out of their lot and into the claiming it's all of our problems and we should their home there the problem existed after that they did some landscaping the appearance of of the water which of that lot. I I DO NOT understand street and then all pay for it! I further resent being <-old by their attorney after the meeting that there is really no reason to appeal the assessment because even if a judge would reduce the assessment amount you have to pay an attorney to fight it so you're spending the same amount of money. It appears that appealing an assessmeni is not a viable alternative; we should not have to pay an attorney to make our opinions known! He then expressed his opinion that $700 "really isn't that much" Ours is a double lot (as are many others) so we are looking at $1,400 and maintain that it IS a lot to us. I would challenge him to explain to the widow who lives next door that $700 "isn't much money" I spoke with her and her son this morning and they feel it is! September 25, 1990 Page Two As you are well aware, the majority of the signatures Karen collected on her petition were from Lyric Avenue and therefore wouldn't even be affected by the assessments. There are many of us opposed to this project and we want to be heard. We are requesting that a public hearing be held on this matter (with proper notification) BEFORE any further action is taken. I trust we will be hearing from you shortly regarding this matter. Sincerely, (Mrs.) Beth Escher 3556 Livingston Ave. Wayzata, MN 55391 AGENDA FOR COUNCIL MEETING SET FOR MONDAY, SEPTEMBER 24, 1990, 7:00 P.M. (*) Asterisk items are considered to be routine items to be enacted upon by one motion by the City Council under the Consent Item* on the agenda. Discussion will be held upon rriquest. Memos regarding each of the Agenda items are available in the Public Packet which may be obtained upon request from the Recorder. ROLL CALL 1. Recognition of Employment - John Sass TsOOP^^POBLIC hearing - —■'^"^Sr'^^torm Sewer System Navarre Heights Area 7:30 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING - 3. Highway 12 Iroorovements 83090.1 CITY OP ORONO NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING 1990, a South. A public hearing will be conducted on September 24, ^^^30 P.M.; in the Orono Council Chambers, 1275 Brown Road The public hearing is for the purpose of considering an underground storm sewer system for Navarre Heights generally described as those properties east of Blaine Avenue north of Lyric Avenue south of Crystal Place and west of Shadywood Road (County Road 19}. Engineers estimated cost of this project is $32,200. Such persons as desire to be heard wi: i reference to the proposed Improvement will be heard at this meeting. I Dorothy M. Ha.iir. 1 City Clerk Published in the Laker and Pioneer newspaper the week of September. 10, 1990 and September 17, 1990. /“tl/Axctcc C- X_C c ^)C c oC ct O (X c K^ C Cu^^Lj^-yitcLj HM -55J<7/ '^A/V. A)Ucoij c^U^ CcL^LtcC ^ J 0 ^^6^ 6nrX OPt^CSE^ t^ (Ac c-^CoL c6utC/x^CJ ^V0c|^Oti:^-X. y<iX '^{6iC(r^V'lX /dccc^/ctj . )2^irLcC ifycc CL^q^ dj^X.'-X-cLc^ (^Cj yjccC'^tcCL' 7 jO plr'/i^ ( tL^ 'ttyiLi^ !c/dcC.c/c.Lcl .L /Cc^Cccc. id tx I [LcyiCc. J c »C j tcici c-<^ (^ 7 66 jO /t (^ t/d 6cxl /CCcC^ u^CA.Cd /L ll -v. /LL^^A^ 7u />( (:L, ‘V '6Coc<^C-/jij 6<-VcO Jv1/ul.ax l/iot c-uctl^nC ^6^ ( C-e J 6c v> x6hf'C O'-/6 U L l ^t.c6«-')CC "tA-C^ .[l 0 ' ' (jA^dic ’Ce. ■<-J^'- c^'t^ytCcC r^ccic^^ wjO (Ju_ U-yjl*-r/CL>-t I- S^V /*7^^ t'-'->-'.c 0'-^ t/i. pU'i<-CC\j. \l}i. ip rU. U'<-ti iXc Cr-|(^ UuvjCc-><_ -cA^C (ilXX- JJt^ottrXJ (5UX ^'C r>C t/,co pC(Mt6t • *<j tO(Lj ’t(^60 a^M^i^CCc^ -ilJ ^ AWd,6^ yjccU-U(L tX;Lt VcL^cf^L a- ^ '^S'Vc c/ ^;^L pCtXtcX ^L^TLO-tct-Uj ii' ^tcW/C p^C^tcC (Lie )Lj^ ^ I'xci ''iP c/a'V ^ i^icc-<^- i Jic >/ -t/.c'-ucv u^~L<^ ,L;<-^)Cctx_ (x u C CVJ Vj (. c/(^ . o tt L II .'// / L-y ^ C ,cL C--<w ^/K\ <, V • I tJ- ^ ^ ' CLLtLcXUl C(.C<X C'L. . c'-V-----^ (!c -u^ ^d-p'-^L liTA. C-' 'C/U c^T ( f-L,<xq tk .:cucv.vjncc,ct U/iuLuv,a. Cc,L.uxcutc. ^ /KC-yUo Cc' cc.j , ^ o t~J ; iCi! Ct J<-tic Lv/'’^t>-)(.cit ^C/ -' ,uct •{,/c.L Ci.^l(j L'C-U.-.k -{/Cc tlt^C-i.cc jU^{.■•'^ tCCf^L /.i.t.LC A xU'6C'-''.(.fa.<-(q. i!-/ jtc< i ^«_(.vUi. L. A. cl C^ tLlt-C ( \C.o, u>-,>^-i- t \. ^<- >1^ / i LL-L\j {_/ctt\^ CU(CIc<l_ -1/0^ ^ICKCi'Uf.c C«_<rcc C(_ LiC -C/U, ,>ZCvjLC-t kv olf Cc vC-C^-tcA., tc“ " U )Ul- " 1 Lh“^ ’ /Lc^C Cc yc Cw .'/I'C w ^ r 6p '. C^- (/- Lc , It, 1 vt (li I cK. r/ (. ^t c V. , • , ^ -• • ■ “ / , ^ ^ ^ i-cC -C c <L l^f^cL\^c iC-^ ^ ^ (_ y^'f-C cO ^ V- ^ A vj 1. L C \ j t.w \.K (^ (. c /LC C /Ck u) tvc«.yT(c)L. (U,' /u.ii.c k-k v^'«.c<.(o ^CH-^ rc .L (loUj LAc ^UCL^CCO t )L C')Lk. cXc VC (» r< (T>kx ^ TAx^<-/L .f j~luLUt(x Si 10190.2 r /TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Mark E. Bernhardson, City Administra^^J^^ DATE: October 1, 1990 SUBJECT: Rules of Criminal Procedure Change Attachment:A. City of Bloomington Letter Dated 9/12/90 B. Bryan Crawford Letter Dated 9/25/90 C. Hennepin County Attorney Letter Dated 9/21/90 D. Proposed Resolution ISSUE - Determine if Council desires to go on record indicating their oposition to the Supreme Court for rules change that is to take effect January 1, 1991. INTRODUCTION - As noted in Attachment A there is a proposed rule change to go into effect for Hennepin and Ramsey Counties that is anticipated to significantly increase both prosecution and police costs. A brief review of this for Orono may be in the $15,000 to $25,000 per year range. As noted in the attachments the Hennepin County prosecutors are attempting to have the cities go on record requesting that this change not be made effective as of January 1 and hopefully not effective at all. The change requires preparation for a full hearing for what has principally been a pretrial matter to this point. It is our understanding that this rule change has already become effective outstate, however, the impact in the two Metro counties may be substantially greater for a number of reasons. ALTERNATIVES 1. Adopt. 2. Table. 3. Amend and adopt. 4. Take no action. RECOMMENDATION - It is recommended that the Council adopt the proposed resolution I__ indicating their desire to have the proposed rule not be made effective for Hennepin and Ramsey Counties. _ that Council adopt indicating their desire not to not have the PROPOSED MOTION - Moved by _, seconded by Resolution i proposed rules of criminal procedure change made effective January 1, 1991. Ayes , Nays _. )} city of___II bloomington, minnesota Municipal Building • 2215 West Old Shokopee Road • Bloomington. Minnesota 554 / September 12, 19 Mark Bemhardj;on, Administrator City of Orono SEP 1 4 Box 66, Crystal Bay 0"ono, MN 55323 Dear Mark: Enclosed is a memorandum to me from our Prosecuting Attorneys relative to a change in Rules of Criminal Procedure. This rule is in effect in most of the Courts now but not Hennepin. It is scheduled to be enforced in Hennepin next .January. My people tell me that the implementation of this Rule will cost Bloomington several hundred thousand dollars a year, mostly for police pay for sitting around the courts an.> some for prosecutors: they tell me that we will probably need at least one additional prosecutor. I am having a more or less objective study of our costs and staffing made to obtain accurate figures. Only time will tell if our fears are justified, but the Hennepi' Judges say that although they do not like the rule, they wi’ rce it. I am informed that Minneapolis estimates a raillit -le-half dollars in additional police costs are anticipated on imnl on of this Rule. It is ray understanding the Prosecutor for Minnetonka has called a Meeting of Hernepir Co . .ecutors for September 18. Please urge yours to attend. .After prosecutors discuss the question and after your Police .m.»Ke an estimate of their additional costs, I believe we should discuss some sort of concerted action. This is too important, and expensive, to be left to the police and prosecutors. Very txul*^ yours, // r Enc. Jofiry'G/ Pidgeon Ci^ Manager an AFP.BMATtvE ACTION eOUAi. C-PPOOTUNlTV EMPtOVEP T*4etO»T'«^<jn»c«lion* 0«t»*ce ^ot tn* TO; FROM: SUBJECT; INTER-OFFICE CORRESPONDENCE 01 10iV>Um .»! •jjUOli John G. Pidgeon, City Manager, and David R. o5rffl5fi%£a5 OfijCS City Attorney Sheila M. Happe, Henry Wieland & LaRae Bradley DATE; Sept. 5, 1990 Pretrial Hearings — Impact of Crim. Prac. Rule 8.04; to be implemented on Jan. 1, 1991 The Supreme Court Advisory Committee on the Rules of Criminal Procedures recommended amendment to Rule 3.04 of the Rules of Criminal Procedure. Rule 8.04 deals with the Pretrial Hearing, the second stage of the criminal court process. Currently, after the first appearance, the Defendant-, requests a continued arraign ment date or a pretrial hearing. ; the pretrial hearing, the Defendant waives or demands an eviaentiary hearing which is held iiumediately prior to jury trial unless the court, for good cause, orders otherwise. The amendment to Rule 8.04 on the other hand requires an omnibus heeiring within 14 days of the Defendant's initial appearance before the court unless the court extends the time (to a later date within 30 days of the initial appearance) for good cause upon motion of the defendant or upon th^ court's own motion. The Hennepin County Public Defender's Office and the Legal Rights Center have both indicated that they would demand an evidentiary hearing within the 14 days as they believed it was their duty as a responsible defense attorney. The ramifications of the amended criminal rule 8.04 of the Rules of Criminal Procedure are disastrous not only to the Bloomington City Attorney's Office, but also to the Bloomington Police De partment. If this amendment is not changed before the effective date of Rule 8.04, January 1, 1991, both the City Attorney's Office and the Bloomington Police Department will be forced to hire additional prosecutors, police officers and clerical staff. The amended Rule 8.04 will rec^ire our prosecutors to be prepared for approximately six evidentiary hearings per day (according to Hennepin County Judge Porter). Moreover, all of the witnesses on each of the six cases would have to appear in court at the pre trial to testify. This means that at the very least six officers will be sitting in court, waiting for their case to be called. These hearings will be downtown at the Hennepin County Government John G. Pidgeon, City Manager and David R. Ornstein, City Attorney September 5, 1990 center, not at Division Four in Edina. Trie overtime budget of t' e various police departments will be exhausted early in the ii “yiis time getting the victim to appear ens, time to testify. Finally, is a waste of resources to have the witnesses appear twic- to testify about the same issues. The Supreme Court Advisory Ccmittee on the Rules of Criminal^ Procedure (hereinafter the Rules Committee) indicated ch purpose of the amendment to Rule 8.04 is to establish ^ uniformity. Out-state Minnesota is currently operati:*.. amended Rule 8.04. The amended RUj.e 3.C- es not appl^ Hennepin County or Ramsey unty until out-state Minnesota does la.: h«ve as ^ ny cases as Hennepin County and Ramsey County do. Moreover, it is our experience th. defense attorneys plead thf^.ir clients when the ^udge sitting on the bench (on any given diy) gives favorable s ntences. Most attorneys are merely "judge-shopping" or accommodating their clients to the fact of a negotiated ^ and sentence, " amendment will not adjudicate thev ar^attorneys will still only plead tht*:: c lents when they are before a judge who s -fences more fav - bly than other -judges (w.hether or not the\ *: the r-^-ent-^ry hearing). A meeting was he:-. - conference room on September - loan ^at 12*"'' persons attended the meeting tAciudiAa Judg;/ ^. . . county District Court Judge Por ter Hennepin^C ant s:. iy 'I'^ Frost, Hennepin County Attorney 'Keith Henn^ ‘ ' Attor vsy Ted Wilson, Minnetoi^a Prose- •-.ofi^Siel SSis.. .;>^ington City Attorneys Kerry Wieland and ‘•ii.aila Happe, Bloouit Police Department i-c. Stone, . Prairie Prosecutor Lea Desusa, Minneapolis City Attorney Mitch Rothman, several Hennepin County probation officers, and several persons from the Sheriff's Office and other law enforcement agencies. Judg^i Lew explained that Hennepin County Pocter, Hennepin County Public Defender's Office Bill Kennedy, Ramjey County Public Defenders Office, and Judge Levy Bade a p?esenta?ion\o the Rules Committee °“=ii"i"9.the dis.srrous effect amended Rule 8.04 will have on the municipalities, the court system procsss, and _he Dudgets of the polic ep John G. Pidgeon, City Manager and David R. Ornstein, City Attorney September 5, 1990 and the city attorneys offices. Judge Levy expressed great disappointment with the feedback from the Rules Committee. She stated that the Rules Committee was in favor of the amendment to Rule 8.04 as it created state uniformity. Judge Porter stated that he presented to the Rules Committee that approximately 75 - 80% of the gross misdemeanor cases plead out at the pretrial hearing in Hennepin County under the present system. He also stated that he would have to transfer judges from Faunily Court and judges from the civil side to the Criminal Court to have approximately 6 - b additional judges available just to deal with the pretrial evidentiary hearings required by the amended Rule 8.04. He stated that not only would the criminal court system fail, but also the Civil Court would be backlogged due to less judges available for civil cases. Booh Judge Porter and Judge Levy indicated that they are extreme ly frustrated and need any new ideas to present to the Rules Committee to undo the evidentiary hearing requirement in amended Rule 8.04. The Hennepin County Attorney's Office stated that it is dismantling prosecution teams to deal with the recjuirement of evidentiary hearings in Rule 8.04. The city attorneys offices of every municipality in both Hennepin County and Ramsey County will be greatly affected. In Bloomington, the City Attorney's Office would be forced to hire additional prosecutors and clerical staff. How',ver, the Cit / Attorney's Office budget cannot provide for these additions. We have several suggestions to overturn Rule 8.04 or at least have the effective date of Kcle 8.04 continued for r«ie more year. One suggestion is to send the Rules Committee co5^t estimates the implementatif of Rule 8.04 would require from all of the police departments ar Attorneys offices in Hennepin County. The Police Depairtment o ‘ -.nneapolis estimated that it would cost the^; $1.5 million to v -million in overtime pay to arrange for police officers to be at the evidentiary hearina*;. One sugges':' jn. .s to send the Supreme Court Advisory Committc* on the Rules of Crimi nal Procedure and the Minnesota Supreme Court Justices the esti mated costs which the city attorneys offices and the police departments would be forced to expend to comply with amended Rule 8.04. The police department of Minneapolis estimated that it would cost them $1.5 s’l.icn to $3 million in overtime pay to arrange for police officers to b?. : the evidentiary hearings. A second suggestion is to serd the : ales Cc.:imittee and the Supreme Court the position of all of the municipalities ir Hennepin County regarding this rule along with there cost estimates. John G. Pidgeon, City Manager, and David R. Ornstein, City Attorney September 5, 1990 A third suggestion is to communicate with the City Council mem bers of municipalities and adopt resolutions regarding amended Rule 8.04 and send the resolutions to the Rules Committee and the Supreme Court. A fourth suggestion is to contact the Suburban Prosecutor's Association and submit a memorandum representing the joint position of the prosecutors. The final suggestion is to lobby the legisl,>ti>re to exempt Hennepin County and Ramsey County from complying with Rule 8.04. Hence, the effect of amended Rule 8.04 of the Rules of Criminal Procedure is disastrous on the budgets of municipal!“ -s; and steps need to be taken quickl: to prevent Rule 8.04, iS 2Lmended, from going into effect on Jan..ary 1, 1991. POPHAM, H aik, Schnobrich & Kaufman , Ltd . 3300 PIPER JAFFRAY TOWER MINNEAPOLIS. MINNESOTA 55-402 WAVSC O POPHAM PATMOHO A. HAIK POOCR W. SCHNOBRICH OCNVCR KAUFMAN ROaCRT A. MINISH ROLFC A. WOROCN O. MARC WHITCHCAO BRUCE O. WILUS O. ROBERT JOHNSON OARV R. MACOMBER ROBERT S. BURK HUOH V. PLUNKETT, III FREDERICK C. BROWN THOMAS K. BERO JAMES B. ORUCK JEFFREY S. HALPERN BRUCE O. MALKERSON ^AMES R. STEILEN JAMES B LOCKHART ALLEN W. HINOERAKER CLIFFORD M. OREENE D. WILLIAM KAUFMAN PAUL H. TIETZ MICHAEL O. FREEMAN HOWARD SAM MYERS. Ill LARRY O. ESPEL JANIE S. MAYERON Thomas j B arrett JAMES A PAYNE OAVIC A. JONES LEE E. SHEEHY ALA IN FRECON LESLIE OILLETTE MICHAEL T. NILAN THOMAS M. SIPKINS ROBERT C. MOILANEN THOMAS F NELSON THOMAS J. RADIO DAVID L. HASHMALL KATHLEEN M MARTIN JOHN C. CHILDS DOUOLAS P SEATON THOMAS E. SANNER RICHARD A. KAPLAN BRUCE B. Mc PHEETERS SCOTT E. RICHTER PAUL J. LINSTROTH SCOTT A. SMITH BRIAN N. JOHNSON BRADLEY A. FULLER DONALD M lewis KENNETH ROSS- DAVID R strand SCOTT K OOLOSMITH OIRARD P miller ELIZABETH A THOMPSON KEITH J HALLELAND MARK B PETERSON TELEPHONE 612 •333-4800 TELECOPIER 331 612-334-2713 '32' 612-334-2781 311 61? 334-2503 SUITE 2AOO 1200 SEVENTEENTH STREET DENVER. COLORADO 80202 TELEPHONE 303-aB3-iCJ0 telecopier 303-BB3-2IB4 SUITE 300 SC JTH iBOO M STREE’. N, W WASHINGTON, D. C. 20036 TELEPHONE 202-B2B-B300 telecopier 202-B2B-S3IB DIRECT DIAL NUMBER 612-334-2687 TIMOTHY W KUCK BRUCE A PETEPSOI f.UTH A MICKELSEN JANNA SEVERANCE THOMAS C. MIELENI MICHAEL O. CHRIST J MICHAEL SCHWAP JEFFREY P CAIRNS ELLEN L. MAAS LEWIS J. ROTMAN TODD M JOHNSON LOUIS P SMITH BRUCE H. LITTLE MARK F PALMA RUSSELL S PONE3SA BRYAN L. CRAWFORD MATTHEW E. DAMON JOHN W. PROVO JILL I. FRIEDERS PAUL B. JONES WILLIAM O. HITTLER ELLEN SUE PARKER OREOORY O. BROOKER BRIAN W OHM OREOORY O. SCOTT ROSANNE o. ZAiOENWEBER CECILIA M. MICHEL ROBERT C. castle Th ERESE M. HANKEL ouANcir^roecKCR DEE ROWE CARY P OENOEL.S JOHN BAKER KAREN M HANSEN SUESAN PACE-SHAPIRO STEVEN M. PHILLIPS LINDA S FRICDNER ANDREW D. PARKER JOY M WALDERA PATRICIA A. O'LEARY KAREN R. COLE or COUNSEL FRED L. MORRISON JUDITH YOUNOER . AONIYTCD IN CJIurONNIA ANO NtSSOUM INCLUOINO THE FORMER LAW FIRM OF HALPERN & DRUCK September 25, 1990 iuIlL^LluVL^Lyj Mr. Mark Bernhardson City of Orono P.O. BOX 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 '^EP 2 6 1990 Chief Melvin Kilbo Orono Police Department P.O. BOX 86 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 Re;Impact of Criminal Rule of Civil Procedure 8.04 to be Implemented on January x, 1991 Gentle'- -'n: Both of you have inquired as to the impact of the amendment to Minnesota Rule of Criminal Procedure 8.04 on our current prosecution practice for the City of Orono. As you know, that amendment is scheduled to take effect on January 1, 1991 (copy enclosed for your review). In short, the rule as envisioned would require an evidentiary hearing with officer and witness testimony at the omnibus hearing for all gross misdemeanor offenses. Currently, an omnibus hearing is for all practical purposes handled just like a pre-trial conference with no actual hearing taking place. The new rule would require the city attorney to prepare the case almost as though he or she was preparing for trial. Officers would need to be noticed and attend and witnneses J Mr. Mark Bernhardson Chief Melvin Kilbo September 25, 1990 Page 2 may need to be subpoenaed. Larger communities, including Bloomington and Minneapolis, have indicated that the impact of the rule will be, to say the least, devastating. While the impact in smaller communities such as Orono may not be as great, expenses in terms of the time and money involved n prosecution by both this office and the police department wil- increase. Moreover, because so many aspects of the implementation of this rule are in a state of confusion within the judiciary, it is difficult to determine at this point exactly what the impact on Orono will be in terms of increased costs. However, I have attempted to estimate increased costs and have enclosed those estimates for your review. As you will see, even assuming a limited number of probable cause/evidentiary hearings on a monthly basis, the cost will increase to the extent that I believe Orono should be taking affirmative action to prevent the implementation of this rule. In that regard, the Suburban Prosecutors' Assocation has agreea to take the following steps. First, each of the city attorneys has agreed to submit a Resolution to their city councils which would recommend to the Supreme Court Advisory Committee on the Rules of Criminal Procedure to rescind the amendment to Minnesota Rule 8.04 and 11.07. I am enclosing a draft resolution which I prepared for city council consideration. This resolution is similar to resolutions presentea to the city councils in Eden Prairie and Plymouth. The only difference between the draft resolution enclosed for your review and drafts submitted in other communities relates to an additional option given to the council to recommend that Hennepin County be given an additional one year during which time further consideration to the rule's implementation can be given. If you are in agreement with the effects of the implementation of this rule, I would ask that thi :esolution be submitted at the next City Council meeting for approval. it tne Council decides to pass the resolution, either the city or tnis office can forward a copy to the Justices on the Minnesota Supreme Court. Other city attorneys intend to do the same. Second, it was agreed that the attorneys would write to the chairperson of the Supreme Court Rules Advisory Committee. The nature of that letter would be similar to the contents of the resolution itself. Third, it was agreed that the city attorneys would write to the individual members of the Supreme Court urging them to rescind implementation of the rule. Again, the contents of these communications would be similar to the resolution. Mr. MarK Bernhardson Chief Melvin Kilbo September 25, 1990 Page 3 Confusion regarding the actual implementation of this rule arises in several respects. One relates to whether or not defense attorneys will actually demand evidentiary hearings in all gross misdemeanor cases. The public defender's office has indicated that they will demand such hearings in all cases. Likewise, I expect private defense attorneys to do the same. Consequently, if officers do not show for the evidentiary hearings which will be scheduled within 14 days of the first appearance, the court will probably dismiss the case. Therefore, there would be a tactical advantage to requesting such a hearing from a defense standpoint in every case. Others have suggested that defense counsel will not demand hearings or that hearings would be waived at the time of the hearing. Nonetheless, even if a waiver occurred, the officers would still need to be in court and the city attorney would have had to prepare the case for the hearing itself. Perhaps an even more important factor is the location and timing of these evidentiary hearings. Currently, the probable cause hearings are done at the same time the arraignment and pre-trial conference calendars are heard on Tuesdays at the Ridgedale Courthouse. The Hennepin County Bench has indicated that they intend to move all gross misdemeanor evidentiary hearings downtown and schedule them for a different time period. If that is the case, it would increase expenses greatly in two respects. First, it would require a city attorney to be present at a time other than the normal arraignment/pre-trial calendar at Ridgedale. Attorney costs would obviously increase. Further, it would require officers to travel to downtown Minneapolis as opposed to the Ridgedale Courthouse. Indeed, I envision a possible scenario whereby several evidentiary hearings would be scheduled for 9:00 a.m. at the downtown courthouse and the officers would need to be present at that time and simply wait for their case to be call-.’d. This may necessitate waiting at the courthouse for several hours. with respect to the second enclosure, I would like to attempt to clarify some of the numbers set forth. First, our data was compiled for the first eight months of 1990. Based on the number of probable cause hearings we have had each month, there appears to be an average of approximately 3.5 probable cause hearings per month. However, I am using a figure of 4 probable cause hearings per month based on the fact that many gross misdemeanors which are pled out at the first appearance may be extended to the evidentiary hearing stage in the hopes that officers will fail to appear and the case will be dismissed. Mr. Mark Bernhardson Chief Melvin Kilbo September 25, 1990 Page 4 I have also estimated the total hours per case to be approximately 6.5, This number includes the following. First, preparation time by the attorney and legal assistant on the file, second, staff time in typing notices and witness letters. Third, time spent in court by city attorneys waiting for cases to be called and actually conducting the evidentiary hearing. Fourth, time expended by police officers waiting in the courthouse and actually testifying, ’^lease note that the 6.5 hours per case is < rough estimate only but does provide some guidance for cost determinations. Assuming that approximately 4 of the 6.5 hours represents attorney time, approximately 16 hours per month in additional attorney time or 192 hours per year will be incurred a; a result of this rule. As to officer time, using an average of 2.5 hours per case and an average of 1.5 officers per case, additional officer time (which may be overtime) would amount to approximately 15 hours per month. This does not factor in the possibility that additional officers will need to be on duty if officers on call for evidentiary hearings are at the downtown courthouse. I hope that these numbers are of assistance in giving you a sense for the effect of this rule. While there is a definite adverse impact, the situation which will be created if the amendment goes into effect is certainly a manageable one from the standpoint of this office. I do not believe that any «. ditional staff or attorneys would need to become involved in prosecutions. Therefore, unlike some communities who will be hit very hard by this rule, I believe that Orono can continue to operate effectively and efficiently. Please contact me if you have any questions, know what actions the city council takes. Also, let me BLC/blr/89ZBLC Enclosures RULES OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE Rule 8.06 ment, Uie defendant shall be arraigned upon the complaint or the complaint as it may be amend^ or, for en)88 misdemeanors under Minn.Stat. § 169.121 or MiniLStat § 169.129, a tab charge, but may only enter a plea of guilty at that time. If the defendant does not wish to plead guilty, no other plea shall m called for and the arraignment shall be continu^ untQ the Omnibus Hearing when pursuant to Rule 11.10 the defendant shall plead to the complamt or ‘the complaint as amended or such tab charge or m ‘iriven additional time within which to plead. offense charged in the complaint is a homicide Md the prosecuting attorney notifies the court that .the 'case will be presented to the grsmd jury, or if the offense is punishable by life imprisonment, the pre- ttmtation of the case to the grand jury s^l com mence within 14 days from the date of defendMt's appearance in the court under this ruie, and an ■indictment or report of no indictment shall be re- -tamed within a reasonable time. If an mdictment is »Teturaed. the Omnibus Hearing under Rule 11 shall be held as provided by Rule 19.04, subd. 5. Amended effective August 1, 1987; amended Dec*mber 18, 1989, effective January 1. 1990. See Rule 8.06 for Comment RULE 8.02 PLEA OF GUILTY At an appearance under this rule, the de fendant may enter a plea of guilty to a ® gross misdemeanor, or a misdemeanor as penmtted under Rule 15. If the defendant “nters a plea of gufl*y, the pre^iente-icing and sentencing proc^ dures provided by these rules shall b^ followed. Amended effective August 1. 1987; amended December 13. 1989, effective January 1. 1990 See Rule 8.06 for Comment RULE 8.03 DE.M.AND OR WAIVER OF HEARI.NG If the defendant does not plead guilty, the defen dant and the prosecution shall each either waive or demand a hearing as provided by Rule 11.02 on the •admissibility at trial of any of the evidence specified in the notice given bv the prosecuting attorney under Rule 7.01 or the admissibility of any evidence obtained as a result of such evidence. \ Sm Rule 8.06 for Comment .Oil RULE 8.04 PLEA AND TIME AND 1. - PLACE OF OMNIBUS HEARING [Pub. Note: Effective until January 1, 1991. See •u*. tat /oUovtng this version for provisionn ■ . effective January 1, 1991.] V(a) If the defendant does not plead guilty, the ^^Buubus Hearing on the issues a-s provided for by Rules 11.03 and 11.04. shall be held within the time hereinafter specified. (b) If hearing on either of the issues set forth in Rule 8 03 is demanded, the Omnibus H' aring shall also include the issues provided for by RuJ 11.02. (c) Tiie Omnibus Hearing provided for by Rule 11 shall be scheduled for a date not later than fourteen (14) days after the defendant’s initial appearance before ^e court under this rule. The court may extend such time for good cause upon tnotion of the defendant or upon the court’s own motion. Amended effective August 1, 1987. . See Rule 8.06 for Comment. * • .. ■ RULE 8.04 PLEA AND TIME AND- PLACE OF OMNIBUS HEARING • [Pub. Note: Effective January 1, 1991. See preceding text for provisions effective until January 1, 1991.] f ' If the defendant does not plead guilty, Omnibus Hearing on the issues as provided for by Rules 11.03 and 11.04, shall be held withm the time hereinafter specified. (b) If hearing on either of the issues set forth in Rule 8.08 is demanded, the Omnibus Hearmg shall also include the issues provided '•'r by Rule 11.02. (c) The Omnibus Hearing provided for by Rule 11 nhall be scl -uled for a date not later than fourteen ' days » er the defendant’s iiutial appearance ,re the cf urt under this rule. The court may extend such time for good cause related to the particular case pon motion of the prosecuung at torney or defendant or upon the c'^urt s initiative. Amended effacUve August 1. 1987. amended December 13. 1989, effective January 1, 1991. See Rule 8.06 for Comment. RULE 8.05 RECORD A verbatim record shall be made of the proceed ings at the defendant's initial appearance before the court under this rule See Rule 8.06 for Comment rule 8.06 CONDITIONS OF RELEASE In accordance with the rules governing bail or release, the court may continue or amend those conditions for defendant’s release set by the court previously. Comment Unless the offense charged in the complaint is a ho^ cide and the prosecuting attorney noufies the »urt that the “ will be presented to a grand jury, or the oiiena* ESTIMATED COSTS - AMENDED RULE 8.04 PBPC's Per Month January February March April May June July August 0-2 0-1 0-3 0-3 0-7 0-2 0-6 0-2 M-1 M-2 M-1 M-1 M-0 M-2 M-5 M-0 S-1 S-0 S-0 S-1 S-1 s-1 s-1 s-1 Case Total 4 3 4 5 8 5 12 3 Hours 17.0 12.75 17.0 21.25 34.0 21.25 51.0 12.75 199.75 0 * Orono M = Minnetrista S « St. Bonifacius Time per File (average) 1. Prep Time (attorney and legal assistant) 1.5 - 2.0 depending on amount cf advance notice of date 2. Staff Time .25 - .50 (s/a/a) 3. Court Time 1.5 - 2.0 4. Witness Time Using 1.5 witnesses per case 2.0 - 3.0 Total * 6.5 hours per case 89ZBLC ••• • ••M* ^ . . 1 ». ,-f ». 1.Vv • •! A * • • • Thomas L. JohnsonCOUNTY ATTORNEY Office sf the Hennepin County Attori 2000 G overnment Center Minneapolis . Minnesota 55487 September 21, 1990 -hief Melvin Kilbo Orono Police Department Box 86, 1285 South Brown Road Crystal Bay, MN 55323 Dear Chief: This is to follow up the discussion at the last Hennepin County Chiefs of Police Association meeting. At that meeting I said I would send each Chief some background information regarding the Omnibus Hearing Rule that will go into effect on January 1, 1991. The new Rule is effective on that date unless the Minnesota Supreme Court acts to either defer the implementation date or to otherwise modify its current position. The new Rule change mandates a full Omnibus Hearing within 14 days of every defendant's first appearance for all felc.iy and gross misdemeanor prosecutions. This includes a Hearing on all Constitutional and other legal issues (the so-called Rasmussen Hearing). Such issues now go through a Rasmussen Hearing only if the defendant does not otherwise enter a guilty plea—something which happens in about 90% of all felony cases. To put some nu.mbers on this, about 250 felony cases go to f each year in Hennepin County. Only these cases are now subjected Rasmussen Hearing. However, we prosecute approximately 4,000 felonies Ldch year. So, about 3,700+ cases which now settle without a Rasmussen Hearing will be required to have one. (A few cases wil] settle within 14 days after the Rule change, but very few.) Each Rasmussen Hearing will require minimally the presence of the arresting officer. It may also require the presence of the investigating officer(s) and others as well. We estimate each Omnibus will take a full half-day. So, your department will have 1-4 officers subpoenaed for perhaps as many as 3,700 felony cases where their appearance is not now necessary. (This number will, in all likelihood, be smaller than 3,700. But it is impossible to project how much smaller and even if it is, say, 50% sma3 1er, it is still significant.) It would be very useful for you to analyze the cost your city would incur because of the Rule change. Please note that the numbers above are for felonies only. You will need to consult your city T.D. D. (6I2J 348 6015 HENNEPIN COUNTY IS AN AFFIRM.MIVE ACTION E.MPLOYER FAX 1612)348 2042 Chief Melvin Kilbo .Orono Police Department September 21, 1990 Page 2 attorney to get gross misdemeanor figures. Th-*n, a letter should be sent with your cost estimate, along with any other explanatory comments you would like to make, to: Frank Claybourne, Chair Supreme Court Criminal Rules Advisory C .imittee 30 E. Seventj Street #2800 St. Paul, MN 55101 Chief Justice Peter Popovich Minnesota Supreme Court Minnesota Judicial Center 25 Constitution Avenue St. Paul, MN 55155-6102 Obviously, speed is of the essence. The Criminal Rules Advisory Committee is scheduled to meet in October. It is critically important that this Committee recommend to the Supreme Court that it defer in’; ' -mentation or toss-out the Omnibus Rule now scheduled to go into effec- Januax/ 1. As additional background for you, I have enclosed the letter the Hennepin County Chiefs of Police Association authorized be sent to Mr. Claybourne. Please contact Tom Frost (348-5520) or myself if you have any questions. Sincerely, THOMAS L. JOHimSON Hennepin County Attorney cc; Tom Frost [TLJLTRS]CHIEFS/CH1EFS MTG P.S. I just received notice that the Advisory Committee is mee October 5 and 6 — so, as I said, speed is of the essence. * ig The llennepiu ('ouiily Cliiels of Police A.s.socialion rJoptninI»r*r in, l‘•OU Frank CJnyboui n^*, Chnii poison Supreme Court Cr im i na I Ru LeP Advisory (’ommillep 30 East: Seventh Street /2noo St. Paul, Minnesota *?510l Dear Mr. Claybourne: This lolt-.Pi IP Wi il l on t f> oxpr»>‘=R M>p» <!f»ni'orn of the Ilpnnopin Coin.l y rhipfs of Pc»li«*p Asso«Hal ion logaiOing I ho pol oiil ini olmngo ■ho way relony aiul gr oss in i siloinP*nnor- Omnihns hoar ings ar e ho|fl in llennopi*! County. ny vinaniinous resolution of the Association membership at its monthly meeting September 6, 1990, 1 was askeil to send this jetter requesting tl»at the Supreme Court '"riminal Rules Advisory Committee reconsider this issue and recommend to too Supreme Court that the new Omnibus Hearing Rule, presently sci.edu led to be effective January 1, 1991, be rescinded. In considering this i'sue, we urge the committee to take into account the impressive record of the memb'^r ^ of the Hennepin County criminal justice system in working together to eliminate criminal case backlog. At present, two-thirds of all felony cases are resolved before they are set for trial. Since January of 199U, the number of felony cases awaiting trial has dropped from over 3U0 to about 180. These numbers alone are signi f ic.ant, but with the history of 1,450 felony cases awaiting trial in Hovemher, 19R7, it is obvious tiiat dramatic ch'=' *«s have occurred. Omnibus hearings involving live testimony now occur in al.'out 250 cases a year. If the Rule change takes place and full Onnibus hearings are scheduled 14 days after first appearance, members of the Hennepin County Public Defender's Office have said thev will demand hearings in all felony and gross misdemeanor c«.. If demanded in all cases, it will increase the nui.iber of lira* ,s to • about 10,000 cases. Even if demanded in only lialf the cases, it will require twenty times mo»e hearings than under the present system. With each Omni has learing involving one or more police officers, the impact on the delivery of police services and its resulting effect on public safety is apparent. In summary, we urge the committee to consider the effect the rule change will have on police officers' time spent in and awaiting court. Our agencies' abilitv to perform the duties expected by our citizenry wiM be reduced significantly. The current system has proven t-j be effective in resolving cases Frank Clay bourne, Chairpersnii Supreme Court Criminal Rules A«.lvisory Comm • 11 ee September IP, |oo(» Paqe 2 exp#=il i I i «>us 1 y w»Ui«>ut advpisoly nffoctinq nit her the )mniun i t y ' s ot the clerenclanfs r.iyhts. To snap it in Favor of a more costly and Xeetc; prficjen*t system seems unwise. 'I’hank you Cor your consideration, and w*::* trust that you will act in the public's interest considering this important issue. VoiV truly yours, * Dt^n (.)ino«lt Sheriff of Hennepin County Secretary/Treasurer Ifounfapin County Chiefs of Police Association DO:gk cc: Members of Supreme Court Criminal Rules Advisory Committee Members of the Supreme Court . Chief Keith Wall, President, Hennepin County Chiefs of Police Association Supreme Court Advisory Committee Rules of Criminal Procedure 2800 Minnesota World Trade Center St. Paul, Minnesota 55101 Judge Robert E. Bowen Judge Charles F. Cashman Henry II- Feikema Judge Donovan W. Frank David Graven Judge Charles C. Johnson John E. MacGibbon Judge Henry W. McCarr, Jr. Ronald 1. Meshbesher Judge Bruce C. Stone Pauj K«»!*ipaVnen Philip Marron ProfeRRnr Maynard F. Piisig Supreme Court of Minnesota 230 State Capitol Building St. Paul, Minnesota 55155 Chief Justice Peter S. Popovich Justice Lawrence R. Yetka Justice Rosalie E. Wahl Justice John E. Simonett Justice Esther M. TomlJanovich Justice M. Jeanne Coyne Justice A. M. Keith 1019( A RESOLUTIOH TO RECOWffiND TO THE SUPREME COURT ADVISORY COMIUTTKB ON THE RULES OF CRINIRAL PROCEDURE TO RESCIND THE AMENDMENTS TO MINNESOTA RULES OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE 8.04 AND 11.07 WHEREAS, the Minnesota Rules of Criminal Procedure 8.04 and 11.07 have been amended to require that the omnibus hearing in all felony and gross misdemeanor cases be held within fourteen (14) days of a defendant's first appearnace in court; and WHEREAS, the current practice in Hennepin County is to reserve the omnibus hearing until the day of trial; and WHEREAS, the current practice of reserving the omnibus issues until the day of trial results in an overwhelming majority of the cases being settled without the need for an omnibus hearing or trial; and WHEREAS, the private defense bar and Hennepin County Public Defender's office have indicated that under the amended rules they will demand an omnibus hearing in every gross misdemeanor and fel<^ny case; and WHERES, the implementation of the amendments to Minnesota Rules of Criminal Procedure 8.04 and 11.07 will have a substantial and detrimental impact on the City of Orono by; 1. ) causing a dramatic increase in the overtime costs of the Orono Police Department; and 2. ) creating the need to hire additional officers and/or requiring the payment of large amounts of police overtime pay to handle the law enforcement duties of those officers who are needed to testify at omnibus hearings; and 3. ) creating a potential need to hire additional prosecutorial personnel to handle the anticipated increase in work load; and WHEREAS, the amendment to Rules 8.04 and 11.07 will take effect on January 1, 1991; and WHEREAS, the Hennepin County Attorney’s Office, the Hennepin County Public Defender's Office, the Orono City Attorney's Office all strongly oppose the amendment to Rules 8.04 and 11.07. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, as follows: 1. The Orono City Council strongly urges the Supreme Court Advisory Committee on the Rules of Criminal Procedure to recommend that the Minnesota Supreme Court exempt Hennepin County from the amendments to Minnesota Rules of Criminal P’^ocedure 8.04 and 11.07, repeal the amendments 'rely, or grant Hennepin County a further one exemption and order hearings to be held <' .* necessity of changing the present system. 2. The Orono City Council strongly urges the Justices of the Minnesota Supreme Court to reconsider the amendments to Minnesota Rules of Criminal Procedure 8.04 and 11.07 and exempt Hennepin County from the amendments, repeal the amendments entirely, or grant Hennepin County a further one year exemption and order hearings be held on the necessity of changing the present system. Adopted by the City Council of Orono this 8th day of October, 1990. Edward J. Callahan, Jr., Acting Mayor ATTEST: Theresa L. Naab, Deputy Clerk 10390.4 n TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Mark E. Bernhardson, City Administrato DATE: October 3, 1990 SUBJECT: Bicycle Disposition A ISSUE - Amendment of the motion relating to bicycles to correctly reflect disposition of the bicycles. INTRODUCTION - At the Council's August 23, 1990 Council meeting disposition of the bicycles as outlined in the proposed motion was to "destrov" the bicycles. This is not a correct reflection of the disposition as the matter is being handled by a person who may be able to salvage certain parts and recycle the other metals. The bicycles, however, are items not saleable in their condition as bicycles. This is presented to correctly reflect that disposition. PROPOSED MOTION - Moved by _, seconded by _, Council revises its direction of the August 23, 1990 meeting and that the bicycles will be disposed of by an individual for possible salvage and recycling. Ayes , Nays cc: Mel Kilbo, Police Chief 1 TO: Mark E. Bernhardson, City Administrator FROM: John R. Gerhardson, Public Works Director DATE: October 4, 1990 SUBJECT: Salary Adjustment Barry Rathbun - Maintenance Worker Barry Rathbun, maintenance worker in the public works department received a salary adjustment on July 6, 1990, That salary adjustment did not bring Barry ’s hourly rate to Level 5, Step 4 as allowed for in the compensation plan because we were unable to evaluate Barry's capability of welding. Since that time we have been able to evaluate that part of the job description for that position and have determined that Barry's welding meets our requirement. Recommendation to adjust Barry Rathburn's salary to $12,303 per hour effective October 1, 1990, which is the hourly rate for Level 5, Step IV as per the compensation plan. PROPOSED MOTION - Moved by seconded by to adjust Barry Rathbun's salary to $12,303 per hour effective October 1, 1990, which is the hourly rate for Level 5, Step IV as per the compensation plan, i.yes __, Nays __. TO: FROM; Mayor and City Council Mark E. Bernhardson, City Administratoi?’ Forwarded recommending approval. 92790.4 TO:Mark E. Bernhardson,City Administrator FROM:Dorothy Hallin, City Clerk DATE:September 27, 1990 /; I ■ SUBJECT: Leave o£ Absence - Jamie Bosma Attachment: A. Leave of Absence Memo Dated 9/26/90 Under the Administrative and Personnel Policy it requires that Council approve any leave of absence that exceeds 20 working days. As stated in Attachment A Jamie is requesuing a leave of absence for approximately 35 days. She will use _ hours vacation and __ hours accumulated sick leave with the balance of time beinj unpaid. TO: FROM: Mayor and City Council j ; ■']Mark E. Bernhardson, City Administrator\'\ Forwarded recommending acceptance. FROM: Mark E. Bernhardson, City Administrator Dorothy M. Hallin, City Clerk J€unie Bosma, Secretary 'eTjr 4 DATS: September 26, 1990 Subject: Leave of Absence I would like to request a leave of absence of 7 weeks to be taken starting when my baby is born. The due date that the doctor has given is October 22, 1990. I would like to use the balance of my vacation and sick leave for part of this leave and the balance will be unpaid. 10490.8 TO: Mayor and City Council ^ FROM: Mark E. Bernhardson, City Administrator . , DATE: October 4, 1990 SUBJECT: Temporary Employment - Clerical Staff Attachment: A. Temporary Employment Memo - Clerical Staff ISSUE - Means to provide clerical assistance during the leave of absence of Jamie Bosma. RECOMMENDATION - Forward recommending approval of temporary employment of Laurie Scheffler. This would be separate from her work on the minutes. ‘f PROPOSED MOTION - Moved by _, seconded by _, to approve the temporary employment of Laurie Scheffler at $9,182 per hour effective at the start of Jamie Bosma's leave of absence and will terminate upon Jamies return or December 21, 1990, which ever occurs first. Ayes __, Nays __. 92790. TO: Mark E. Bernhardson, City Administrator FROM: Dorothy Hallin, City Clerk DATE: September 27, 1990 SUBJECT: Temporary Employment - Clerical Staff Attachment:A. Temperaries-To-Go Letter Dated 9/19/90 B. Alternative Staffing Letter Dated 9/27/90 During the leave of absence for Jamie Bosma it is recommended that a temporary part time person be hired to fill the vacancy. Recommended hours of work would be 11:00 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. Monday through Friday. With the following duties required: phone answering helping walk in customers with homesteads dog licenses utility payments copying filing occasional typing and/or word orocessing Temporary employment agencies have been contacted and their placement charges for a qualified person are as follows: Temporaries-To-Go Maple Plain (Attachment A) Alternative Staffing Chanhassen (Attachment B) $10.00/hour $13/95/hour word processing experience using word star $10.75-11.55/hour wo.d processing exper’Ciice In addition I have asked Laurie Scheffler, City Recorder, if she was interested in this temporary part time position. She stated she would be willing to accept this temporary part time position on the condition she would fill the position until Jamie is back to work or the 21st of December which ever occurs first. It is my recommendation that the City employ Laurie Scheffler at $9,182 per hour for the duration of Jamie Bosma's leave of absence this employment not to extend past December 21, 1990. Laurie is familiar with the current staff, work flow and job description. Staff is confident that she is capable of doing a good job. In addition this will eliminate training time by the current staff. The salary recommended is the same hourly rate Jamie is currently paid. As a temporary employee there will be no withholding for PERA or FICA for either the employee or the City, however, medicare will have to be withheld and matched by the City. m Temporaries~To~Go!! Office Personnel Services 5270 V Maple (612) ^ FAX ^ SEP 2 1 1930 September 19, 1990 Dorothy Hallin City of Orono P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 Dear Dorothy: As per your request from our telephone conversation of September 13, 1990, we wc ’d be very interested in filling your secretarial position ror a eight week period to begin sometime in October of 1990. I understand the person we would place would be responsible for answering telephones, typing, word processing, handling cash (training would be done by you on your cash register), and public contact. Our hourly rate for this placement would be $10.00 per hour. We cover full insurance on our employees — Workers Compensation, Liability, Employee Dishonesty Bond, and Unemployment Compensation. We have some excellent personnel available with a variety of office skills. Our personnel pool is basically from the Long Lake, Maple Plain, Mound, Delano and surrounding areas and most desire long term or short term placements within a ten to fifteen mile radius. We have several experienced word processors available, with Word Star experience or computer literate as to pick-up Word Star with ease. Thank you for your interest in our company. We look forward to being of assistance to your office. Sin^sely, ^ Robin Schiel TEMPORARIES-TO-GOl! SX Alternative\qtaffing, in< 3600 West 80th Street, Bloomington. Minnesota 5 4r September 27, 1990 sL.nDjiS OCT 1 1990City of Orono Ms. Dorothy Hallin P. 0. Bok 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 Dear Dorothy: ThanU you for your interest in Alternative Staffing, Inc. I have listecJ below the rates for the job description we lied previously discussed. General Office/Justoeer Service Answer 6 lines, 24 extensions, photocopying, filing, typing, customer service (issue building permits & dog licenses, voter registration, take utility bills & misc. duties). Rate: S10.75 - ill.55 Dorothy, we carefully screen and test our employees. 1 feel very confident that we can fill your position . ith an excellent match. If you need more information or have any questions, please feel free to give me a call at 835“9977. Sincerely, JQM Jane GursWe Account Manager JG/sj 612/835-9977 FAX 835-0909 DTo: Mark E. Bernhardson, City Administrator Proa: John R. Gerhardson, Public Works Director Date: September 28, 1990 Subject: Employment Public Works The City of Orono Public Works Department received application for employment due to the recent retirement of John Sass. After review of the applicants, it has been determined to recommend employing Scott Oberaigner as a maintenance worker in the Public Works Department. Racoaaendation : To employ Scott Oberaigner as a maintenance worker in the Public Works Department at a starting rate of $10.45 p*»r hour which is Level 5, Step 1 of the Compensation Plan. Employment is contingent upon a favorable physical examination and stress test. Proposed Notion______Moved ________ 2nd to employ Scott Oberaigner as a maintenance worker in the Public Works Department at a starting rate of $10.45 per hour which is Level 5, Step 1 of the Compensation Plan. Employment is contingent upon a favorable physical examination and stress test. A tentative starting date is October 22, 1990. To: From: Mayor Grabek & Orono Council Members Mark E. Bernhardson, City Administrato^^\^ Forwarded recommending approval. 10590.4 TO: FROM: DATE: Mayor and City Council Mark E. Bernhardson, City Administrat^ October 5, 1990 SUBJECT: Financial Prcject Attached please find: a. ) A financial layout using a special levy separate from the levy limit (either through an HRA or Bond Referendum) to help fund a $3.6 million facility, utilizing about $3.2 million in current available cash the levy is about 1.2% increase of total property tax levy. This does provide continuing funding to the general fund with about $2.0 million in cash available when bonds are paid. The assumptions can be altered. b. ) Use of $3.3 million in cash to fund $3.6 million without a separate levy. c. ) Sources for $3.2 million in cash. 1*11 be happy to review these with you together with the 5 year financial projection I am preparing. ■OXUZK COmMCTlOM ran ■BiMM »0C,000( tobtotal BapmaitoTM TrmafBrs Oat OMBral rand ■Idf Pond Cash Baianc* Bon ruKE PAmsirr ■ld«. CMiat. IMl 100,000 13C.5C0 13C.5CC Ta* Uary (rapraaaata l.dl) rayMmtt 7.2S« ant tarvic*130.500 4i % I99i 1793 1994 1995 1999 1997 3,^00,000 3.219.500 3.117,135 3.02-.093 2,951.094 2.i7«,l)« 2.909.247 2,744 390 250.000 233.590 225,3-0 219,19-212,099 209.091 20C,99t 90,000 245,925 90.000 235.413 -0,000 224.179 95.000 222.032 90,000 213.992 245,925 150.000 235,413 190.000 224.K9 170,000 222,032 1-5,000 213.992 190.000 209,529 195.000 395.925 395,413 394,179 39-.032 393.982 394.529 195.550 3.450.000 3,453.090 3.342.505 3.245.290 3.193,170 3.092.229 3,008.907 2.939.930 55.000 50.000 209,529 204.992 3.219.500 3.117,135 3.02-.092 2,951.084 2.979.139 2.909.247 2.744,391 2.994,949 204.992 19C.000 394.992 M.OOO If 9, MO i If3,f50 I 390,000 3000 4001 3004 3003 3004 3005 3,OT4,f4i 2,C31.»f3 ifo.ffs i§e.s5i 50,000 Ifl.f31 200, orr. 993.050 391,€32 50,000 193,144 5C.OOO It*. »»9 50,000 192,:t^ 50,000 109.344 50,000 109,075 Mil,093 2.57€,013 2.515.014 2,455.€90 2,305.903 2.313,< 393,144 387,398 397.102 309,344 309,8?5 3006 2.570,813 2.515,014 2,455.090 2.385.953 2,313.405 2.234.009 182,145 17-.205 17^.455 lff.8'6 101,078 154,775 2,rT5.743 2.018.444 2,*»58,95f ^.€93.0-9 2.628.145 ..55,.829 2,4^4,503 2,389,. 50.000 188.594 2.234,088 2.15C.8-C 193.144 187.388 197,18.^ 109.344 109,0-5 108.594 200.OOC 20C.00C 200.000 200.000 20C.00r 20C.0O0 300.594 •OUI *soieix>ssv pu® sjoim Aq pojedajj X!Tg Vw oto co)^. <Z. ^ic^\ <^C.O‘)'€ I ' *.MS'SIt l«Z*9i£S 'SSiSf^-C90 SCI 611'KCS Sii£ ii! «R'6« i^l 160'9ISt sae^fiM wi'iosi 'ISl mVoit sei'682s BB6'6Uf (XK'OCIS 01 d3IAJ«S »<»»□ MS'ClS l8e ‘9Z$saB* C90'8Ct 611 *6n 69Z'6SS fi£8*89S mm 0 xa*2 iiii 9SZ*iit Mo'sn 0 X«-/ m*£6S SCI*101$ HSii ns'zoit wi*ni$ 806*611$ 00$*0Cl$ 0$ isajaiui X$Z ’Z x«*z x«*z XSZ'Z ucx^3 0$ 000*0&£$ 0$ 000*SO£$ 0$ 000*S9^$ 0$ 000'0£Z$ 0$ 000*(M» 0$ 000*^1$ :Ot':;::.v..r;'- - (f$ 000*0(1$ ox--; ••■ :i^ 0$ )L>dl3Ut Jd 90/1/1 . (0/i/z (0/t/l tO/l/A to/l/lrai lO/l/Z lO/l/t oo/l/xii od/iAv' 66/l/Z 66/1/1 /6/l/Z Z6/1/1 ^Ul 56/1/1 myu V6A71; I6/I/Z S6/1/1 Wia ) mtv} ibnfi 16/1/1 aicfl 059*{Z{$ 05£‘2Z($ «?*ZlZ*-^^i:; 826 8£0‘l$ /9S*5£0*l$ ;t£0'®E£*W ; i 6S0*Z09*l$ 812 ‘209*1$ ZV9U9it'l$ .- ; lZ?*9«'i« ;: 612'56b’2$ 66{*6W‘2$ 1Z6*2^?2$ : 000'515*<!$ t29‘80S*?$ :f»*iat*2i:i;: X6*2Z8 ‘2$ 251*998*2$ q86n»^S$ OO'ZhJ^M ZZB‘6/I'S$ I'rb'ai'lX n8 ‘80£*£$ 8W*l»'£$ 95Z*7t>*£$ 0Xi®)®8 6uipuj <$6S'B8£$> ' CW5*£I$) U82'9Z£$) {$82 ’«$i.:l (£9a*:ispii, <£90'8£$) (6U •$(£$) C6fc|B:6£S$)^:t:: C692*65$> (5Z8'£££$> (iir^y\iv <9iZ^22S»i;>V- <95/*Z2$) <^‘9l£$) (888*88C$>' i:*; (888*£6$) (8£l'lO£$> tStl^HOlS); ;i <m‘zbi$) (881*682$) <881>1$> : (W6f)Ui<$>.::, (V86*6ll$> (52>*522$> (52>*«l$> : (oo5*oz2$>;’.;: (005*0£l$> 0$ ;uowAed b/a $68*tl$ >6Z*82$ £29*in 6W*£S$mm: 060*V9$ 99^*W$ ■W'SW:;)’;!;: 9/S*£8$ 615*26$ SfKiit 59£*00l$ 890*801$mm 9W*$U$ 65£*l2l$ «i*Ki$ , S6)K'izU;;;;;- 816*921$ 0i9*21l$ eSS*?Cl$;"::: i9!AUar:' 06£*Z£l$ 90l*2tl$ X00*8 » ]CiiUiv- iiu^S 05£*2Z£$ 8£8*61Z$ 2«'5t0'l» 2t2‘9Ct'lt ■■■ 8£2*2W*l$ zr?* 198*1$ V> 66£*680*2$ $Z6*2(£*2$ g®i| I29‘90S‘2S (M'UU'n 251*998*2$ 086 ’££0*£$ ZV6*2Zl‘$$ 2W*5l£*£$ ■9i8 ’9Qi:*£$;;;;; :lh»itw*x$ ::ii 85/*k»*£$ 259*20£'£$ axieiirg butuui&>8 50/l/Z SO/l/l £0/1/Z £0/1/1 POM/li: V 10/1/Z lo/l/l 66/l/Z 66/1/1 Z6/1/Z 26/1/1 ib/ui S6/1/1 fiSli £6/1/Z £6/1/1 »OA* 16/l/Z 16/1/1 »iea 2lA>-0 »0 Ajl] ORONO FACILITIES IL.- Building Fund Sewer Water PXR General Fund 66-76 Bond Fund 2,200,000 450.000 50,000 100.000 100,000 300,000 3,200,000 Still Available $600,000 PIR $280,000 1980 Bonds (1996) $150,000 Street Lights (90-99) $160,000 Equipment Outlay $900,000 General Fund Working Capital plus monies in sewer/water $150,000 Park Funds Financing Primary HRA Revenue Bonds - Establish HRA - Finding of blight of current buildings - Special levy outside of Levy Limit - HRA can make separate levy . . - Designate funds to pay bonds (availability for short term transfers.) Options for Portions ^ , *.«Park/Street Improvement Bonds (Land and improvements excluding building pads.) r Water/Sewer Improvements (Water/Sewer portions of buildings) Both outside Levy Limits Generally need $100,000-200,000 levy to insure continued Strong financial position. Alternate Means a.) Building Authority Lease Purchase (Not outside Levy Limit) b.) Bond Referendum Contingency Means for Additional Levy (Outside of Levy Limits) - Levy for *89 Bonds to pay early - Levy Limits Off for 1993 - Use of Capital Notes or Certificates of Indebtedness for Capital Equipment (vehicles etc.) $75-125,000 - MSA/Street Bonds (could include sealcoating program) $100-200,000/year - Sewer/Water Revenue Bonds - fund major improvements to existing systems - Referendum for Levy Limit increase - Depending on actual levy, passage may not increase taxes - Exceed Levy Limit/No penalLy 10490.5 3;^ FROM: DATS: Mayor and City Council Mark E. Bernhardson, City Administrator Tom Kuehn, Finance Director' October 3, 1990 r •< : I ■ '«? V ■ SUBJECT: Certification of Delinquent Septic Inspection Fees, Sewer and Water Utility Accounts and Recycling Program Fee Attachments:A, Resolution Providing for Collection of Delinquent Sewer, Water and Septic Accounts and Recycling Program Fee B. Assessment Roll DISCUSSION - Each year the City certifies to the County all unpaid annual service charges for the septic inspection program, the annual recycling program fee, and all delinquent sewer and water accounts of $18.00 or more, to be collected with the following year's taxes. In addition to the outstanding amounts delinquent the City adds 8% interest to all accounts and an administrative fee to the septic accounts. At this time the total to be assessed is $55,684.16 including administrative charges. These amounts are expected to be decreased considerably before the final payment date of November 15, 1990. A copy of the assessment roll is attached for your review. PROPOSED MOTION - Moved by__, seconded by__, to adopt Resolution #__ providing for the collection of delinquent charges for 1990 sewer and water utility services and annual septic inspection and recycling program fees. Ayes __, Nays __. A RESOLUTION PROVIDING FOR THE COLLECTION OF DELINQUENT 1990 SENBR AND WATER UTILITY SERVICE CHARGES, RECYCLING PROGRAM FEES AND ANNUAL SERVICE CHARGES FOR THE ON-SITE SEWAGE TREATMENT (SEPTIC) INSPECTION PROGRAM WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota has enacted certain ordinances under the Minnesota statutes, therefore pursuant to Chapter 3 and Chapter 12, Orono City Code pertaining to payment and collection of sewer and water charges and annual service charges for the On-Site Sewage Treatment (septic) Inspection Program, the following properties are delinquent in nature. 1. WHEREAS, the City has obtained from Hennepin County Auditor Levy Number 12029 for the delinquent accounts. 2. That the Hennepin County Auditor be and is hereby authorized and directed to extend upon property tax lists of the County and further collect said assessments thereon in the manner provided by law. 3. That eight percent (8%) be added to the amounts due. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota at a regular meeting held October 8, 1990. Edward J. Callahan, Jr., Acting Mayor ATTEST: Theresa L. Naab, Deputy Clerk REPORT NBR.SUMRPT-l DATE OF RUN 10/03/90 SPECIAL ASSESSMENT ROLLS MUNICIPAL LEVY PROPERTY ID CODE NUMBER 38 012029 02-117-23-13-0005 38 012029 02-117-23-21-0002 38 012029 02-117-23-21-0022 38 012029 J2-117-23-21-0032 38 012029 02-117-23-22-0002 38 012029 02-117-23-24-0003 38 012029 02-117-23-31-0002 38 012029 02-117-23-31-0011 38 012029 02-117-23-31-0018 38 012029 02-117-23-31-0040 38 012029 02-117-23-31-0046 38 012029 02-117-23-34-0004 38 012029 03-117-23-13-0006 38 012029 03-117-23-13-0008 38 012029 03-117-23-21-0003 38 012029 03-117-23-21-0024 38 012029 03-117-23-22-0007 38 012029 03-117-23-22-00143801202903-117-23-23-0006 38 012029 03-117-23-31-0002 38 012029 03-117-23-31-0003 38 012029 03-117-23-33-00063801202903-117-23-34-0019 38 012029 03-117-23-34-00293801202903-117-23-42-0007 38 012029 04-117-23-22-0007 38 012029 04-117-23-22-00133801202904-117-23-22-0027 38 012029 04-117-23-24-000'38 012029 04-117-23-34-001:. 38 012029 04-117-23-42-0014 38 012029 04-117-23-43-0007 38 012029 05-117-23-12-0011 38 012029 05-117-23-12-0017 38 012029 05-117-23-13-0036 38 012029 05-117-23-13-0040 38 012029 05-117-23-14-0020 38 012029 05-117-23-14-0021 38 012029 05-117-23-14-00243801202905-117-23-14-00283801202905-117-23-14-0031 38 012029 05-117-23-14-00353801202905-117-23-22-0008 38 012029 05-117-23-23-00213801202905-117-23-24-0111 38 012029 06-117-23-21-00033801202906-117-23-41-0019 38 012029 06-117-23-41-00353801202906-117-23-41-00463801202906-117-23-41-00993801202907-117-23-11-0015 38 012029 07-117-23-12-0016 38 012029 07-117-23-12-0023 PAGE; 1 DISTRICT: ALL ADDITION CERTIFIED n NUMBER AMOUNT 01373 40 00 42840 49.00 42840 49.00 42825 49.00 41302 49.00 41640 49.00 41640 245.63 42560 245.63 42560 245.63 42560 58.82 42560 58.82 42340 127.99 42270 49.00 42270 49.00 41303 49.00 02563 20.00 42475 49.00 00359 49.00 02196 49 00 41303 49 00 41303 49 00 43570 49 00 43570 49 00 43570 49 00 43535 49 00 43450 49 00 20 00 41520 49 00 41520 49.00 42227 49 00 43174 49.00 4150U 49.00 4144C 49 00 41440 49.00 41900 49.00 41900 49.00 41900 49 00 41900 49 00 41900 49 00 41900 49 00 41900 49 00 41900 49 00 41440 49 00 42320 49 00 42860 49 00 41306 49 on 42620 245 63 42620 58 82 42620 245 63 42620 127 99 42950 127 99 42235 226.24 42950 245.63 'm REPORT NBR. DATE OF RUN MUNICIPAL CODE 38 38 38 38 38 38 38 38 38 38 38 38 38 38 38 38 38 38 38 38 38 38 38 38 38 38 38 38 38 38 38 38 38 38 38 38 38 38 38 38 38 38 38 38 38 38 38 38 38 3 38 38 38 SUMRPT-1 10/03/90 LEVY NUMBER 012029 012029 012029 012029 012029 012029 012029 012029 012029 012029 012029 012029 012029 012029 012029 012029 012029 012029 012029 012029 012029 012029 012029 012029 012029 012029 012029 012029 012029 012029 012029 012029 012029 012029 012029 012029 012029 012029 012029 012029 012029 012029 012029 012029 0- ■) 0 C r 012029 012029 ORONO CERTIFICATION SYSTEM SPECIAL ASSESSMENT ROLLS PROPERTY ID ADDITION PAGE: 2 DISTRICT: ALL CERTIFIED NUMBER AMOUNT 07-117-23-14-0014 41307 67.84 07-117-23-14-0018 42440 245.63 07-117-23-14-0019 42440 58.82 07-117-23-14-0023 43240 58 82 07-117-23-14-0062 41307 67.84 07-117-23-21-0003 41307 66 63 07-117-23-22-0016 03487 49 00 07-117-23-23-0006 41307 58 82 07-117-23-24-0029 43500 245 63 07-117-23-31-0001 41940 245 63 07-117-23-31-0004 41940 353 28 07-117-23-31-0023 43080 245 63 07-117-23-31-0037 43176 67 84 07-117-23-31-0038 43500 67 84 07-117-23-32-0003 42000 245 63 07-117-23-32-0010 42000 245 63 07-117-23-32-0021 42000 245 63 07-117-23-32-002;43132 467 59 07-117-23-32-0030 43080 245 63 07-117-23-32-0038 43360 58 82 07-117-23-34-0003 41940 245 63 07-117-23-41-0008 43120 245 63 07-117-23-41-0013 43120 58 82 07-117-23-41-0016 43120 245 63 07-117-23-41-0030 43120 245 63 07-117-23-41-0054 43120 245 63 07-117-23-41-0071 43120 186 81 07-117-23-41-0074 43120 245 63 07-117-23-41-0084 00365 245 63 07-117-23-42-0024 43120 58 82 07-117-23-42-0037 43120 245 63 07-117-23-43-0002 41307 58 82 07-117-23-44-0003 42300 245 63 07-117-23-44-0014 42300 245 63 07-117-23-44-0020 42300 245 63 07-117-23-44-0021 42300 245 63 07-117-23-44-0026 42300 245 63 07-117-23-44-0030 42300 58 82 07-117-23-44-0032 42300 245 63 07-117-23-44-0033 42300 205 63 07-117-23-44-0052 42300 245 63 07-117-23-44-0062 42300 245 63 07-117-23-44-0066 42300 245 63 07-117-.; A 44-0073 42300 245 63 08-1 17-23-13 -^:38 41480 58 82 08-117-23-13-0013 41430 58 82 08-117-23-23-0003 41308 245 63 08-117-23-23-0005 42460 58 82 08-117-23-23-0020 42460 58 82 08-117-23-31-0015 41860 294 63 08-117-23-32-0019 43120 95.03 08-117-23-33-0066 42280 236 81 08-117-23-33-0068 42280 58 82 o REPORT NBR.SUMRPT-lDATE OF RUN 10/03/90 MUNICIPAL LEVY CODE NUMBER 38 012029 38 012029 38 OJ2C29 38 012029 38 012029 38 012029 38 C12029 38 012029 38 012029 38 012029 38 012029 38 012029 38 012029 38 012029 38 012029 38 012029 ^8 012029 38 012029 38 012029 38 012029 38 012029 38 012029 38 012029 38 012029 38 012029 38 012029 38 012029 38 012029 38 012029 38 012029 38 012029 38 012029 38 012029 38 012029 38 012029 38 012029 38 012029 38 012029 38 012029 38 C12029 38 012029 38 012029 38 012029 38 012029 38 012029 38 012029 38 012029 38 012029 3 8 012029 38 012029 38 012029 38 012029 38 012029 ORONO CERTIFICATION SYSTEM SPECIAL ASSESSMENT ROLLS PROPERTY ID 08-J17- 08-117- 08-117- 08-117- 08-117- 08-117- 08-117- 08-117- 08-117- 08-117- 08-117- 08-117- 08-117- 08-117- 08- 117- 09- 117- 09-117- 09-117- 09- 117- 10- 117- 10-117- 10-117- 10-117- 10-117- 10-117- 10-117- 10-117- 10-117- 10-117- 10 117 10-117 10-117 10-117 10-117 10-117 10-117 10-117 10-117 10-117 15-117 17-117 17-117 17-117 17-117 17 117 17-117 17-117 17-117 17-117 17-117 17-117 17-117 17-117 23-33- 23-33- 23-34- 23-34- 23-34- 23-41- 23-41- 23-41- 23-41- 23-41- -23-41- -23-42- -23-44- -23-44- -23-44- -23-32- -23-33- -23-33- -23-44- -23-13- -23-22- -23-24- -23-24- -23-24- -23-31- -23-31- -23-31- -23-31- -22 Jl- -23-31- -23-31- -23-31 -23-31 -23-31 -23-31 -23-32 -23-32 -23-32 -23-42 -23-21 -22-22 -23-21 -23-21 -23-22 -23-22 -23-22 -23-23 -23-24 -23-24 -23-24 -23-31 -.3-31 -23-31 0076 0079 0008 0010 0017 0007 0010 0011 001? 0014 0015 0003 -000' -000 -0014 -0012 -0005 -0009 -0005 -0004 -0002 -0002 -0003 -0021 -0004 -0007 -0013 -0016 -0022 -0033 -0036 -0039 -0057 -0058 -0072 -0005 -0007 -0012 -0003 -0004 -0032 -0008 -0027 -0019 -0028 -0029 -0008 -0002 -0007 -0028 -0030 -0032 -0041 PAGE: 3DISTRICT; ALL ADDITION CERTIFIED NUMBER AMOUNT 42280 245.63 42280 245.63 41600 245.63 41600 245 63 41860 127.99 41308 245.63 41308 186.81 41308 186.81 41308 842.31 42500 253.30 42500 186.81 42500 506.06 41308 67.84 41308 245 63 03276 48 45 42160 58 82 41309 18 75 43075 127 99 42215 245 63 42265 49 00 41310 49 00 41310 49 00 41310 201 04 42540 245.63 41310 245.63 41310 186 81 41310 127 99 41310 245 63 42140 245.63 42140 253.30 42140 245 63 42140 186 81 42520 245.63 42520 194.48 42540 245 63 02558 49 00 02558 49 00 02558 49 00 41682 49 00 42273 49 00 56 81 43104 ",6 42 43180 474 06 42060 377 18 42060 304 51 42060 304 51 42220 92 38 41317 367 75 43101 200 56 43180 191 33 42420 304 51 42420 354 31 43623 475 40 REPORT NBR.SUMRPT-l SYSTEM DATE OF RUN 10/03/90 SPECIAL ASSESSMENT ROLLS MUNICIPAL LEVY PROPERTY ID CODE NUMBER 38 %012029 17-117-23-34-0023 38 012029 17-117-23-34-0024 38 012029 17-117-23-34-0025 38 012029 17-117-23-34-0026 38 012029 17-117-23-34-0027 38 012029 17-117-23-34-0032 38 012029 17-117-23-34-0041 38 012029 17-117-23-34-0046 38 012029 17-117-23-41-0003 38 012029 17-117-23-41-0004 38 012029 17-117-23-41-0009 38 012029 17-117-23-41-0011 38 012029 17-117 '>3-41-0014 38 012029 17-11 .>3-41-0016 38 012029 17-11/23-41-0019 38 012029 17-117-23-41-0023 38 012029 17-117-23-41-0028 38 012029 17-117-23-43-0010 38 012029 17-117-23-43-0012 38 012029 17-117-23-43-0016 38 012029 17-117-23-43-0017 38 C12029 17-117-23-43-0039 38 012029 17-117-23-43-0043 38 012029 17-117-23-43-0046 38 012029 17-117-23-43-0050 38 012029 17-117-23-43-0056 38 012029 17-117-23-43-0062 38 012029 17-117-23-43-0069 38 012029 17-117-23-43-0087 38 012029 17-117-23-43-0095 38 012029 17-117-23-43-0098 38 012029 17-117-23-43-0104 38 012029 17-117-23-43-0106 38 012029 17-117-23-43-0120 38 012029 17-117-23-43-0121 38 012029 17-117-23-43-0140 38 012029 17-117-23-43-0149 38 012029 17-117-23-44-0026 38 012029 17-117-23-44-0029 38 012029 17-117-23-44-0041 38 012029 17-117-23-44-0059 38 012029 17-117-23-44-0079 38 012029 17-117-23-44-0083 38 012029 17-117-23 44-0091 38 012029 17-117-23-44-0102 38 012029 18-117-23-14-0002 38 012029 18-117-23-14-0005 38 012029 18-117-23-14-0009 38 012029 18-117-23-14-0016 38 012029 18-117-23-31-0001 38 012029 20-117-23-12-0021 38 012029 20-117-23-12-0022 38 012029 20-117-23-12-0046 ADDITION PAGE : 4 DISTRICT: ALL CERTIFIED NUMBER AMOUNT 01777 385.99 01777 85.65 01777 319.79 01777 390.64 01777 161.17 01777 170.89 01777 104.49 01777 382.56 43040 381.22 43040 574.51 42420 443 11 42420 247.44 42420 358 34 43540 389.29 43540 322.00 43540 349.78 43540 205.44 42740 144 22 42740 73 54 42740 88 . 10 42740 369.11 448.49 42740 64 03 42740 77 03 42740 284 84 42740 319.32 42740 324.70 42740 150 05 42740 279 41 42740 249 82 42740 1,358 37 42740 350 06 42740 400 05 43620 145 89 43620 374 48 42740 367 76 42740 263 84 43540 401 40 43540 355 35 43540 400 06 43600 283 19 43600 241 59 43540 239 51 00369 435.03 42420 334 13 42220 224 71 42220 394 68 42220 181 66 42220 431 00 41318 40 00 42720 93 73 42720 91 OJ 00719 187 84 G ) REPORT NBR. DATE OF RUN MUNICIPAL CODE 38 38 38 38 38 38 38 38 38 38 38 38 38 38 38 38 38 38 38 38 38 38 38 38 38 38 38 38 38 38 38 38 38 38 • 38 38 38 38 38 38 38 38 38 38 38 38 38 38 38 38 38 38 38 SUMRPT-1 10/03/90 SPECIAL ASSESSMENT ROLLS PAGE: 5 DISTRICT: ALL LEVY PROPERTY ID ADDITION CERTIFIED NUMBER NUMBER AMOUNT 012029 20-117-23-13-0016 443.10 012029 20-117-23-21-0009 43490 397.36 012029 20-117-23-21-0020 42420 461.95 012029 20-117-23-21-0024 42420 383.90 012029 20-117-23-21-0034 01415 233.25 012029 20-117-23-22-0002 42420 347.58 012029 20-117-23-23-0013 42020 73.54 012029 20-117-23-24-0007 42020 123.33 012029 20-117-23-24-0009 42020 261.92 012029 20-117-23-24-0014 42020 239.77 012029 20-117-23-24-0015 42020 201.39 012029 20-117-23-24-0017 42020 168.20 012029 20-117-23-24-0040 42020 377 17 012029 20-117-23-31-0004 42020 414.86 012029 20-117-23-31-0009 42020 267.54 012029 20-117-23-31-0010 42020 400.05 012029 20-117-23-31-0033 43083 342.20 012029 20-117-23-31-0067 42020 428.31 012029 20-117-23-32-0004 42020 510.39 012029 20-117-23-32-0010 43300 105.83 012029 20-117-23-32-0015 43300 548.05 012029 20-117-23-34-0002 43081 121.98 0H029 20-117-23-34-0007 43300 405.43 012029 20-117-23-34-0020 43088 513.07 012029 20-117-23-42-0029 42350 121.71 012029 20-117-23-42-0032 43300 73.54 012029 20-117-23-42-0033 43480 96.42 012029 20-117-23-43-0022 43300 492.90 012029 20-117-23-43-0035 43640 366.41 012029 20-117-23-43-0036 43640 202.72 012029 20-117-23-43-0043 43640 405.43 012029 21-117-23-22-0012 43530 247.53 012029 21-117-23-23-0029 43116 57.10 012029 21-117-23-23-0032 43530 385.25 012029 21-117-23-24-0040 43149 304.51 012029 21-117-23-24-0065 43085 126.18 012029 22-117-23-24-0001 42400 40 00 012029 22-117-23-31-0010 42960 40 00 012029 22-117-23-31-0015 42960 40 00 012029 23-117-23-22-0009 42660 40 00 012029 23-117-23-22-0019 42660 40 00 012029 23-117-23-23-0033 42660 40 00 012029 23-117-23-32-0002 42660 40 00 012029 23-117-23-32-0039 42680 40 00 012029 23-117-23-32-0065 40 00 012029 23-117-23-32-0070 42660 40 00 012029 25-118-23-43-0026 01730 49 00 012029 25-118-23-44-0007 01730 49 00 012029 25-118-23-44-0008 49 00 012029 25-118-23-44-0015 03735 49 00 012029 26-118-23-31-0004 41326 49 00 012029 26-118-23-31-0007 43510 49.00 012029 26-118-23-33-0006 41360 49.00 G REPORT NBR.SUMRPT-1 DATE OF RUN 10/03/90 SPECIAL ASSESSMENT ROLLS MUNICIPAL LEVY PROPERTY ID CODE NUMBER 38 %012029 26-118-23-33-0024 38 012029 26-118-23-33-0026 38 012029 26-118-23-34-0008 38 012029 27-118-23-33-0007 38 012029 27-118-23-34-0004 38 012029 27-118-23-41-0003 38 012029 27-118-23-42-0008 38 012029 27-118-23-42-0013 38 012029 27-118-23-43-0021 38 012029 28-118-23-33-0013 38 012029 29-118-23-34-0009 38 012029 29-118-23-43-0011 38 012029 30-118-23-32-0001 38 012029 30-118-23-41-0001 38 012029 30-118-23-43-0002 38 012029 31-118-23-11-0004 38 012029 31-118-23-12-0011 38 012029 31-118-23-12-0018 38 012029 31-118-23-13-0002 38 012029 31 U8-23-14-OOU1 38 012029 31-118-23-21-0003 38 012029 31-118-23-23-0009 38 012029 31-118-23-24-00013801202931-118-23-33-00073801202931-118-23-41-00043801202931-118-23-42-0002 38 012029 31-118-23-42-00033801202932-118-23-13-0001 38 012029 32-118-23-23-0003 38 012029 32-118-23-33-00023801202932-118-23-34-00053801202932-118-23-42-0002 38 012029 32-118-23-43-0003 38 012029 33-118-23-13-00113801202933-118-23-22-00013801202933-118-23-31-00073801202933-118-23-31-00123801202933-118-23-32-00013801202933-118-23-43-0005 38 012029 33-118-23-44-0024 38 012029 34-118-23-22-00031801202934-118-23-22-0010 012029 34-118-23-33-0058i01202935-118-23-22-0003J801202935-118-23-33-00093801202935-118-23-41-00013801202935-118-23-41-00073801202935-118-23-;.-0001 38 012029 36-118-23-33-U0093801202936-118-23-41-000?38 012029 36-118-23-41-00263801202936-118-23-41-0049 38 012029 36-118-23-44-0006 ADDITION PAGE: 6 DISTRICT: ALL CERTIFIED NUMBER AMOUNT 42390 49.00 42390 49.00 41620 49.00 01693 49.00 41327 49 00 00390 49.00 42470 20 00 42470 49.00 00390 49.00 49 00 42580 40.00 00851 49.00 41330 49.00 41330 49.00 20 00 41331 49.00 43210 49.00 41331 49.00 41331 49.00 41331 49.00 41331 98.00 00721 49 00 41331 49.00 41331 49 00 41331 49.00 41331 49 00 41331 49 00 41332 89 00 42820 49.00 41332 49 00 41332 49 00 41332 49.00 41332 49 00 43515 251 68 41333 49 00 41333 49 00 02362 49 00 41333 49 000257498.00 42210 186 810169349 00 01693 49 00 00435 49 00 41360 49 000039449 00 41335 49 00 41335 49.00 41335 49.00 42710 49 00 41336 95 57 42310 428 05 00792 19 40 41370 225 64 REPORT NBR. DATE OF RUN SUMRPT-110/03/90 ORONO CERTIFICATION SYSTEM SPECIAL ASSESSMENT ROLLS PAGE; 7DISTRICT: ALL MUNICIPAL CODE LEVY NUMBER PROPERTY ID ADDITION NUMBER CERTIFIED AMOUNT TOTAL I 55.684.16 o 1 f 10490.3 33 '' - * ’j • i TO:Mayor and City Council Mark E. Bernhardson, City Administrator FROM: DATE: Tom Kuehn, Finance Director• October 4, 1990 -v/. SUBJECT: Certification of Unpaid Developer's Fees and Alarm User Fees Attachments:A. Resolution Pro* ‘ding for Collection of Delinquent Dt.veloper and Alarm User Fees B. Proposed Assessment Roll DISCUSSION - The City has a policy of billing developers for legal, engineering or other additional costs incurred in the process of reviewing, investigating and administering applications, licenses and permits, as provided in Orono Municipal Code, Chapter 1. In addition, the code provides for certification of unpaid costs in Section 1.05, Subdivision 5. The ordinance regulating the use of alarms provides for charging a fee for each false alarm in excess of three alarms per calendar year. All delinquent alarm fees are to be certified to the County and assessed against the properties served and collected with the taxes for the subsequent year. We have obtained a levy number for collection of the $1,554.34 in unpaid amounts. It is recommended that the City add ten percent (10%) to the amounts listed for administration and carrying costs. PROPOSED MOTION " Moved by _, seconded by _, to adopt Resolution # providing for the collection of delinquent Developer's Fees and Alarm Users' fees in the amount of $1,554.34 and to add ten percent (10%) interest to the amounts due. Ayes __, Nays __. 1 10490.4 A RBSOLUTION PROVIDING FOR THB COLLECTION OP DELINQUENT 1990 DEVELOPER FEES AND ALARM USER FEES WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota has enacted certain ordinances under the Minnesota Statutes, therefore pursuant to Chapter 1, Orono City Code pertaining to payment of fees and additional costs and collection, and pursuant to Chapter 9, Orono City Code as amended pertaining to payment and collection of Alarm User Fees, the Attached list of properties are delinquent in nature. 1. WHEREAS, the City has obtained from Hennepin County Auditor Levy Number 12030 for the delinquent Developer and Alarm User Fees. 2. That the Hennepin County Auditor be and he is hereby authorized and directed to extend upon proper tax lists of the County and further collect said assessments thereon in the manner provided by law. 3. That ten percent (10%) be added to the amounts due effective October 1, 1990. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota at a regular meeting held October 8, 1990. ATTEST; Edward J. Callahan, Jr., Acting Mayor Theresa L. Naab, Deputy Clerk SPECIAL ASSESSMENT CERTIFICATION ROLL HUNIC CODE NO. 38 LEVY NO. P.I.D. NO. ADDN. CODE 12030 TOTAL ASSESSMENT MISCELLANEOUS 36-118-23 14 0013 04332 $1,554.34 Application #1326/1407 10190.8 / - .....■ u . / I .<• ' -■ » TO: FROM: DATE: Mayor and City Council Mark E. Bernhardson, City Administratol|p October 1, 1990 r - • 'kJ SUBJECT: Municipal Board Meeting ISSUE - Presentation to Council of information relative to the Municipal Board hearings held September 26th and 27th regarding the sewer plant property on Orono Orchard Road. INTRODUCTION - The City of Long Lake as a moving party has presented two witnesses during the first day and a half of hearings. The City of Orono was able to cross examine both witnesses. Following the City of Orono's cross examination of the second witness and upon reconvening for the afternoon session the Municipal Board in accordance with their statutory authority continued the hearing until December 17, 1990 and ordered the parties to negotiate three times during the next 60 days w th the Board Chair acting as a facilitator. The Board directed tha* the Mayors, attorneys and Administrators be in attendance from each jurisdiction. The progress of these settlement discussions will be presented to the Council in executive session. To: Mark E. Bernhardson, City Administrator From: John R. Gerhardson, Public Works Director Date: October 4, 1990 Subject: Reallocation of Funds - Community Development Block Grant For year XV of the Community Development Block Grant Program, the City received $23,126.00. That amount was allocated to the following: 1. Highway 12 Corridor Study 2. Rehabilitation of Private Property 3. Westonka Intervention $ 14,476.00 7,650.00 1,000.00 $ 23,126.00 According to within 16 months reallocated or we 1991 for use of November 1, 1990. November 1, 1990, regulations set by HUD, the funds must be used after receipt of the funds or they must be lose the monies. That deadline is January 1, the monies or they must be reallocated by (If the reallocation process is in place by that is acceptable.) Of the total amount received, the amount allocated to the Highway 12 Corridor Study has not been used and it does not appear that they will be. In order to reallocate the monies, it is required to conduct a public hearing to receive citizen input. Staff is recommending to reallocate the Highway 12 Corridor Study funds in the amount of $14,476 to Rehabilitation of Private Property and to conduct a public hearing on November 13, 1990; 7:00 p.m. Proposed Motion _ _ _ hearing on November 13', Moved _ _ _ 2nd to conduct a public 1990 at 7:00 p.m. to consider reallocating Community Development Block Grant funds. To: Mayor Grabek & Orono Council Members Frosi: Mark E. Bernhardson, City Administrator Forwarded recommending approval. 92790.2 L, ■: TO: Mark E. Bernhardson, City Administrator . • / ^ ^ FROM: Dorothy Hallin, City Clerk DATE: September 27, 1990 SUBJECT; Appointment of Election Judges for General Election - November 6, 1990 Attachment: A. Proposed Resolution Per State Statute the City must appoint election judges for the general election November 6, 1990. Attachment A lists the persons willing to serve as judges at the general election. PROPOSED MOTION - Moved by_, seconded by_, to adopt Resolution #_appointing election j dges for the general election November 6, 1990. Ayes _, Nays _. TO: FROM: Mayor and City Council Mark E. Bernhardson, City Administrat^^jfi^ / Forwarded recommending approval mm 92790.3 A RESOLUTION APPOINTING ELECTION JUDGES FOR THE GENERAL ELECTION TO BE HELD NOVEMBER 6, 1990 BE IT RESOLVEDr that pursuant to Minnesota Election Lc <r^s - 204B.21, Subdivision 2, the following persons are appointed as election judges for the General Election to be held November 6, 1990. A1 Ackermann Phyllis Andersen Vernice Berg Norma Jean Dickey Betty Ekeberg Val Elliott Eleanor Ferril Arliss Gadbaw Ruth Garlock Carolyn Graham Jan Johnson Barbara Olson Lou Ann Powell Dorothy Rauschendorfer Ruby Siford Lillian Stubbs Kenneth Turnham Tina White Tom Aldrich Wilbur Andersen Mary Butler Patricia Drummond Ruth Eisinger Barbara Ericson Dorothy Finkelstein Barbara Garcia Marjorie Gasch Sharon Guimond Rose Madden Christine Peasley Mary Pula Joyce Shemanek Cherry Stubbs Helen Toward Mamie Platteter Lucy Yogerst Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota at a rgular meeting held October 8, 1990. Edward J. Callahan, Jr., Acting Mayor ATTEST; Theresa L. Naab, Deputy Clerk ^ "7To: Mayor Grabek & Orono Council Members City Administrator Bernhardson From: Michael P. Gaffron, Asst Planning & Zoning Administrator Date: October 3, 1990 Subject: Septic System Repair Options, John Gardner, 1486 Long Lake Boulevard (consent agenda Issue - Since no code conforming options exi"»t for replacement of the existing failing septic system. Council is advised of the options considered by staff along with the recommended option, and is advised of general septic system conditions in this neighborhood. Existing Conditions - Mr. Gardner's home on this 0.82 acre lot has a failing, bed- type drainfield system which was installed in 1973 during a remodeling of the residence. This bed drainfield, which today's codes would not allow to be constructed in the soil conditions present, was first found to be surfacing in late 19o6, then limped along during the drought years, but again is surfacing badly. The rear half •' f the property contains a wetland adjacent to fill soils from the rear yard area, which was graded in the early 1970s. Neither the wetland nor the fill area is suitable for construction of any type of drainfield. Likewise, the front yard south of the house has been filled and is not a large enough area to construct a drainfield. The only untouched area with soils which could be considered for a conferring treatment system is in the garden area adjacent to the veil, and that area isn't large enough to accommodate the size system needed for this house. Soil borings in that garden area irdicate mottling (an indicator of seasonally saturated soils) within 2.5 to 3.5 feet of the surface, for which codes would require a mound treatment system. Options to Consider - This property does not have a suitable system replacement option that meets code requirements. There would appear to be 4 possible options to consider, as follows: John Gardner, 1486 Long Lake Boulevard October 3, 1990 Page 2 of 4 1. Allow construction of addition<^!trenches. It is topographically possible to add 1 or 2 trenches running east/west, just north of the existing bed system, and these could be in natural soil. While this soil exhibits evidence of seasonal saturation, the trenches would likely work for some period of years before they would clog up in a manner similar to the existing bed. These trenches would meet the required 75' setback from the well. This "fix" might last a year, or it might last ten years. If it does eventually fail, the final solution would be installation of an overflow pipe to a holding tank which would need periodic pumpout. 2. Require property owner to do the following; A) Move the well to the front yard (estimated cost $4,000); and B) Install a substandard sized mound, (I would label this "experimental"), and require fixture replacement in the house to reduce water use to match the hydraulic capability of the mound (estimated cost $10,000). 3. Require owner to pursue the purchase; of additional property to ■ *e east, then install a fully conforming replacement system on that property (would need additional testing to confirm whether the adjacent land is suitable). Bstimated cost is ur,>rnown, but likely expensive. 4. Require the existing drainfield to be eliminated and the tank outlet plugged, converting the existing tanks to a holding tank system. This would seem to be a rather extreme option given that the existing system is accepting a portion of the flow from the house. A related option would be to not allow additions to the existing system, but place a holding tank at the far end of the current drainfield bed so that the overflow is held for eventual pumpout. Neighborhood Septic Concerns - The Long Lake Boulevard/Dakota Avenue area contains 29 residences in an area of approximately 16 acres, or average lot size of just over 1/2 acre. Since the beginning of the septic program in 1978, 10 of the 29 have had major system repairs or replacement. While the neighborhood has generally made a commendable effort in completing repairs as they are found to be necessary, some of the systems along the lakeshore will undoubtedly need to be replaced with holding tanks as time goes on. John Gardner, 1486 Long Lake Boulevard October 3, 1990 Page 3 of 4 One saving grace in the neighborhood is the variability of soils which has allowed the use of trench systems in many cases. If this area was all clay or clay loam (as found in Stubbs Bay), there would be a much greater problem today. However, Council should be forewarned that if and when the Stubbs Bay sewer project is completed. Long Lake Boulevard will be one of the future areas of concern that may ultimately need City sewers due to small lot sizes and proximity to the lake. Mound System vs. Trench System - From a sewage treatment and disposal standpoint, the typical loam and clay loam soils found in Orono are excellent for treating septic effluent if you can get it to move through the soil. Also, the soil does a better job of treating effluent when the soil is not saturated. In our clay and loam soils, while groundwater aquifer contamination from septic systems is relatively unlikely, the seasonal perched water tables and slow permeabilities cause hydraulic problems for moving large amounts of effluent into the soil, hence the need for larger drainfield systems to distribute effluent over a greater area. Additionally, trench systems located in seasonally wet soils accumulate a sludge or "biomat” in the rockbed, which eventually causes soil clogging and system failure. The elevated sand bed in a mound eliminates this clogging problem by keeping the rock bed in a continuously aerated condition, which allows the biomat to continuously decay as it forms. Also, the mound system is used in area&. where the clay soils have extremely slow permeability, making use of the more permeable topsoil and providing a cleaner effluent being directed into the ground over a large surface area. Most mound usage in Orono is due to high seasonal water tables. Under the conditions we find in about 75% of Orono’s soils, mound systems would be expected to function on a long-term basis where trenches would likely fail after a relatively short time. Staff Reccxnmendation - For the Gardner situation, staff recommends Option 1 noted above, finding that this is *-he most reasonable repair option given that there are no good code-conforming permanent solutions available today. L. John Gardner, 1486 Long Lake Boulevard October 3, 1990 Page 4 of 4 Proposed Motion: Moved by ___, seconded by ___, to approve staff recommendation for allowing John Gardner at 1486 Long Lake Boulevard to add drainfield trenches to the existing system rather than requiring a mound system which would be required based on soil conditions but which the property is not large enough to accommodate. Ayes _ _, nays _ _. •V *■• ■ ■,»• •;i':?.'' ' ;'' ''.svv' ;■ ■ " . ■■.■-;v■.yi-^' -Vv i■■• i‘- i’. * • ') ADDRESS CODE ___ CITY OF ORONO Date Connected to SFl’TIC SYSTl-M INVFNTORY CARD Municipal Sewer ■') ' .1 . ;. » I • . ’ •• ’N vl * • . I , »• : i » I r'-i ■■•• ! •I ’i Address /^^Cr» l-£>f^C. t^^LVT^. Property I.D. P.(o~//P> ~Zi% QCXDl_ □ Standard trench □ Mound . System type ^^S^ther ^€"C>_____________________ Legal Description Permit No. _______Date ol permit //- 20 •• "7.^_______Installer Garbage Disposal A^O WELL DATA' Building type ^£S/I>^AJ<. No. Bedrooms or GPD 3? Laundry ^ Dishwasher !' C & 1 VI5 SEPTIC TANKS; Material C^A^T Cc-V-JC___Capacity H /POO_______2) ^.OQ ^f«>»-rS/Cr r/i) ^ • -h //^r^G ¥ZA L Llouid deoth to RO level ^Proper outlet and Inlet Baffles Height of tank bottom obove water table DRAINFIELD; Total length of lines /SO Total treatment area Isq. ft.) Height of drainfield above water table Type of filter material j/i /oc*C Soil typo CV/?/ LOPt^ pit- Distance from neatest bldg. - Tile sire ______Perc rate Depth of fill over drainfield Depth ol rock over tile ‘ r .ijir: I «)• , I : ■ i‘lii" R:w:Uf ■ -------r- -»-• l.F */*:v-. I Ji: '. Vv . ; v v • ' ■ ' {■'} -i . ■. i. •. ••••• '■• rT . ■• ♦ >{ * ■ ‘ .■• ‘ t____lJ. 1■ ' ..•■ ' ’='7Vf- .f '•V: yy-. S! S' :U#'vV. ;* : • if i‘'- tiiiii S-P TESTING, INC. 951 KATYDID LANE ST. MICHAEL, MN 55376 497>3566 Steven B. Schirmers John Gardner 1486 Long Lake Blvd. Orono, Henn. Co., MN September 24, 1990 This letter is in reguard to the existing On-Site Sewage Treatment System on this property which at this time has effluent surfacing. The present system is located north of the house along the west property line. The system is located in a loam soil which is mottled (seasonally high water table) at approx. 18" below the surface. This site has very limited space to replace or expand the present system. Soil Borings to the south of the house & west of the driveway indicate fill soils 18" deep with mottled soil at 30" deep. North of the garage mottled soil is at 30" to 40" deep and would need a Pressurized Mound, area available is 40'x50' & the well would need to be moved. If this area was to be used, it is approx. 2/3 of the area needed. The water use in the house would need to be reduced. In a meeting with Mike Gaffren from the City of Orono, we discussed the possibility of adding trenches to the north end of the present bed system. We feel this may be a possibility due to the other options not meeting State Code also. The area to the north of theexisting system has some fill present. Recommend if the additional trenches are added to keep the trenches at least 12" into the original soil. Soil Borings will need to be completed to determine the depth of the fill soil. Steven D. Schirmers SBS/ds Soil and Percolation Te»U Septic System Design 10390.3 TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Mark E. Bernhardson, City Administrato DATE: October 3, 1990 SUBJECT: Administrator's Information I i - t r • • 1 ANIMAL CAI^ FACILITY - As indicated at the last Council meeting the city is currently exploring alternatives. The alternative that was selected by the City of Wayzata that the City of Orono has been looking at for a period of time is estimated to increase the budget in this area and would be estimated to be about $100.00 per dog impounded. The City is now exploring further alternatives. The City does have until the end of March to continue at the Corcoran Pet Hospital. WELL #3 UPDATE - The contractor has bailed a portion of the well of about 100 cubic yards of material, has pressurized it again and will be test pumping. It is anticipated the results of this test pumping will be known within the next two weeks. GOAL SETTING STATUS - See attachment AUGUST RECEIPTS AND DISBURSEMENTS - See attachment WIRE TRANSFERS - See attachment *87 sro - 1987 Sfaoct lerm Cbjectlvc *88 SIO - 1988 Short Itera Cbjectiae *89 SIO - 1989 Short Ten Cbjective *90 SID > 1990 Short Ten Objective GOAL SEimC CITY OP GHDNO MARK B. HQVBARDGOI cm AnONISTRATOR 1 MAY 1990 - 30 APRIL 1991 Draft 05/30/90 Itevised 06/29/90 07/31/90 09/07/90 09/28/90 AREA GOAL AREA 1. OIW 'TY DEVELOPMNT A. Highway 12 1. Utilities Sewer - Part I Sewer - Part Ti Viatec System Main CBJECnVE Install Install Install DATTS STATUS 09/01/89 Ooqpleted 1/30/90 except for testing/gr./^ing 7/9/90 Engaged separate contractor to complete Assessed Part I 9/24/90 07/01/90 1/22/90 Teasibility Study to Orono Plant Ordered - 4/1/90 - Feasibility study received Well (6 months) Main Well Ttjwer (9-12 months) Plans Specs - Order Award Negotiation cn utilities (Long Lake - Medina) 09/01/89 04/01/90 12/30/90 07/01/90 Project Ordered 7/24/89 Comnenced Construction 10/27/89 & 11/13/89 Oorpleted 12/15/89 (See Sewer Pt I) Assessed Part I 9/24/90 Cleaning and Test Punping 8/10/90 Bldg/Punp Bids Close 7/13/90 Revised Contract 9/10/90 2/12 Authorized Plans/S^- Awaiting locatior. declc.i' • Oommenoed water discuss with Medina - Medina lu affected residents 1/90 to discuss M&i OORL AREA 1. OMUNriY DEVELOPMEMT Continued OBJECTIVE '88 STO •89 STO •90 STO 2. Long Terra Corridor Upgrade Feasibility Study MtDOT initiation or Undertake corridor selection study with MnDOT oonsultant & surrounding cities Take appropriate planning steps if needed in potential oorridcrs DATES 09/01/89 07/07/89 02/90 12/90 Consider Transportation Consultant 7/90 '90 STO 3. 1992 Safety Inproveraent Preliminary plan approval STATUS 6/30/89-Awaiting Response from ^WDot Central Office on Consultant Delayed mtil at least 11/30/89 Governor's Transporatlon Safety Htg 10/76/89 11/15/89 OoRicissloner Levine announces ccnsultant/^MX7^ corridor selection study Howard Needles selected as consultant Kay & June meetings delayed to July July mtgs consultant layout initial work plat. OoRpletlon of study targeted for Orono objectives submitted 9/20/90 7/91. 7/01/90 5/14/90 Discussed engagemert of possible consultant to study. 6/25/'90 Authorized request for service 9/10/90 Directed use of Dahlgren Shardlow & Uban 5/15/90 Anticipate sigruxl warrant analysis to be oonpleted by 5/.0. Council authorized 6/25 in Resolucicn. r. O c c •88 STO •89 STO •90 STO B. Navarre Redevelopment Adopt if appropriate ;*>rk with KnDOT on 12/90 right-of-way/frontage roads Encourage stoplight Willcw/l2 07/90 Determine project soope/ 08/01/89 direction Determine beautification plan 12/90 iiiplementatian if nay Coiq;lete Faster Planning, if 07/91 appropriate Determine need for Tax Incretn.»nt District Determine interest in Christmas 09/90 lighting 2 Indication is that it will meet warrants by 1992 date. 6/25/90 Adopt approval resolutiai for safety inprovement contingent on their installation 3/12/90 Tabled for additional information 4/7/90 Discussed possible inclusion in a long term Conp Plan 8/27/90 Present information relative to Issue •- t c c c. (. L L AFEA a>.L AfEA OBJECTIVE n^'IES STATOS 1, GQWimT:f DEV3:-1t:Tirr Continued •90 STO •90 STO •87 oTO •88 STO •89 STO C. Ooninunity Transportation Update capital project Plan D. County Road 116 E. Storm Water Management Plan guidelines Bridge bending program 07/90 07/90 Ic/Private street - review 09/90 'ey Undertake capital budget designate*, projects Preliminary plan review Monitor action by County as to its proposed construction Ascertain availaole mapping Pevelop RIT for study if appropriate i, i ^ I L f C { AI£A GOAL AREA1. OOWUNIIY DEVaCffMET/r Continued •90 STO G. Coranunity Developnent Direction and Progress OBJETTR'E A.) Lake Use - I/CD aonprehrnsive plan DATES 01/91 - Develop City specific objectives B. ) Vtork towards servloe and results oriented "No Surprises" process C. ) Conp Plan Response to Metro Council - Sewer - Transportation D. ) DMR Shoreland Regulation 08/90 10/90 07/91 STATTJS 6/28 and 7/12 discussed City comnents of public review draft with I/CD's Advisory Gonmittee 8/24/90 Received revised draft. Tb discuss 9/10/90. V26/90 I2t2) Board to vote cn plan 9/26/90 UCL. adopts a portion tables balance to 10/24/90 cr. C) c c 1/90 Metro Council grants extension 2/15 & 23/90 staff reviews issues 9/24/90 Miniiiud changes to Planning Coraraission 2. ENVIBOtt4E2n3VL PIOIECriON •90 A. Sti^bs Bay Determine assessment area Interest 07/90 Qngage an appraiser 08/90 Consider development noraborium 10/90 If ApproptK, - Prepare pfans & Specifications - Project bid - Assess project - Hold Hearing if appropriate - Cider project - 3ond for project - (ianmence project -• Craplete project 10/90 12/90 01/91 02/91 03/91 04/91 10/91 7/31/90 letters sent to area owners 9/24/90 Response limited. Tt> interested neighbor c c c <„ ARBV QOftL AREA 2. EMVIROMIQflAL PIOIECTION Ccxitinued *89 STO B. Solid Waste ^^anagement CBJBCTR’B Lf^TES Expect 3/31/90 conpleticn ^ATUS C. Metro Waste Replacement Ecoject Lift Station 10/Lift Station 43 Replacement Review recycling efforts Determine if further solid waste regulation appropriate 06/90 12/90 3/26/90 Ooqpost plan adopted Review organized oollecticn if needed 09/90 Review program performance Rebid contract for curbside Review incentives to improve participation 10/90 10/90 02/91 Conpleticn 10/01/09 Delayed to at least 12/31/09 Esqpect 1/31/90 oonpletion Oonpletion 07/90 Bid awarded 6/10 for work oon{)letion - Ooninenced work 7/10 after Bond company release. Oocipleted 10 A/90 ro 0 n c c 1 : (. C. i. ARDV OOftL AREA OBJECTIVE DATES STATIJS 3. QRGANIZATIGNAL DEVELOPMENT •90 STO A. 1991 Council Goal Setting B. 1991 Budget Process •90 STO C. 1991 Legislative Plan D. Team Building Cotrmence Complete Assessment Board of Review Preliminary Budget guidelines Capital projects guidelines review Preliminary mill levy adoption (Truth in Taxation) Hearing Final levy adoption Staff Council 07/90 6/25/90 - Suggestion to Council for *91 09/90 05/90 07/90 08/90 Completed 5/3/90 Presented Initial Guidelines 7/31/90 Initial revised plan 1990-2000 09/01/90 Adopted initial levy 8/27/90 12/90 Hearing set 12/3/90 12/20/90 09/-11/90 12/90 ' 1 AFEA GOAL MSA 4. SERVICE DBLT •90 STO A. Facilities Upgrade •87 STO •88 STO •90 SID B. Lcxig Range Financial Policy C. Business Strategy Plans OBJECTIVE DATES STATUS 6/29/89 Bus tour oif facilities Meeting set for 11/8/89 11/8/89 Ktg directed development of time guidelines to Council 11/27/89 project estimates/financing to Council 12/11/89 Oonplete Citizen Review Oorrmittee 07/90 If Undertaken 8/22/90 Oouncil/Facilities Coimiittee ffltg. Site acquisition, if any Select architect Design Final plans/oosts Plans/specifications Fin^mcing Bid awards Develop balance of policy 9/24/90 Established 10/22 for site discussion 09/90 Police - Update Golf Course -09/01/90 i r L C c < i i. fciir-rn AREA GOAL AREA OBJECTIVE DATES STATUS 4. SERVICE IMilVEFar Continued D. Service Reviews •90 STD ^ineering services conplete 08/90 *90 STO Legal services conplete 09/90 S. B»AN RESOURCES •90 STD A. Cotopensation Inplement Qnployee Recognition Fonnulate City eirployee development 01/90 06/90 Undertake LOGO contest first/close 4/6/90 Explore performance incentive program Explore "Cafeteria Benefits"/ IRS Section 125 Plan 07/90 07/90 1/0/90 Presented conceptual discussion to Council 8/27/90 Presented information to Comcil. Tabled to 9/10 9/10/90 Award to Safe Benefits to develop for 1/1/91 6. KARKETINS c r. Q C C c c •• i BB6XNNING 1/1/90 FOMD INVESTMENT BALANCE CASH BALANCE 1/1/90 RECEIPTS CITY OP ORONO SUMMARY OP RECEIPTS, DISBURSEMENTS AND BALANCES POR THE EIGHT MONTHS ENDED AUGUST 31, 1990 TOTAL TOTAL BUDGET (C) TRANSP INVES' BUDGET (C) 10? TRANSP INVEST 1990 IN SOLD DISBUR 1990 BUDGET OUT PORCH ENDING 8/31/90 CASH BALANCE INVEST 8/31/90 BALANCE C«n«ral Parks CDGB Equip Outlay Bldg Cap Outly Mun St Aid Cons Par Xapr Rav Swr-»ftr Cons 89 iBp Bond 66<-76 lap Bond 80 lap Bond 82 lap Bond 85 Swr-Wtr Bond 89 Hatar Op Sawar Op Golf Coursa Op Poolad Inv Trust Fund 7,914,399 810,744 143,469 0 260,672 2,196,398 3,519 636,903 1,605,551 542,039 471,927 145,120 156,989 498,193 120,820 582,014 1,137 1,862, 20, 18, 140, 54, 97, 49, 69, JO, 4->, 83, 86, 498, 123, 290 075 0 391 071 0 181 209 142 635 398 301 055 996 238 947 2,924,010 20,300 83,560 30,000 79,500 117.650 14. JO 90,780 ,250 Kw,900 479,040 115,800 (7,914,399) 486,958 1,828,438 7 0 121,709 113,513 5,587 14,038 224,987 164,073 116,046 40,277 28,045 129,231 110,824 37«,455 91,879 17,677,520 486,958 2,924,010 680 106,100 164,310 115,960 40,360 105,400 130,860 188,210 392,050 103,110 ta) 62.5% 114.7% 99.9% 100.1% 99.8% 26.6% 58.9% 96.0% 89.1% 844,596 163,544 0 157,354 2,222,956 (2,068) 677,046 1,477,773 427,108 425,516 115,241 176,245 452,017 96,992 703,797 33,205 17,268,299 (7,505,178) 7,505,178 TOTALS 7,914,399 261,096 3,647,887 4,157,790 0 17,677,520 3,852,060 4,271,050 0 17,268,299 466,144 7,505,178 TOTALS LST YR 5,514,024 98,589 3,286,670 3,868,470 2,439,161 9,422,340 3,202,955 3,942,500 2,439,161 9,455,670 148,974 5,547,354 GENERAL FUND SUMMARY - 1990t TOTAL 1990 CASH t INVESTMENT TO 8/31/90 $7,971,322 % OP REVENUE BUDGET BUDGET Taxes 779,751 1,604,460 48.6% Licenses 6 Permits 91,508 118,500 77.21 Intergov. Revenue 99,007 154,700 64.0% Chgs for Serv 570,227 723,450 78.8% Pines 67,982 115,500 58.9% Int. on Invest.103,482 195,000 53.1% Tran. Pr Other Punda Other 0 13,040 0 12,400 105.2% TOTAL REVENUE 1,724,997 2,924,010 59.0% NOTE (a) Gulf oparating fund budget does not Includa aaounta for purchases for resale or sales tax collacted/reaitted. The receipts budget projects gross profit - not total receipts. NOTE (b) General fund revenues recorded will net equal receipts collected due to receivables bille-' n other accounting (>eriods and non-i«receipts. NOTE (c) Budget amounts Include scheduled transfers, do not Include fund balance uses or additions. 10490.7 CITY OF ORONO INVESTMENT TRANSACTIONS - ELECTRONIC WIRE TRANSFERS SEPTEMBER 8 TO OCTOBER 3, 1990 DATE TRANSFER FOR 09/12/90 Purchased Commercial Paper and Resolution Funding Corp. Strip Coupon Net of matured Commercial Paper 09/24/90 Interest Received on Fed Home Loan Bank Bonds 09/2 J Proceeds from Matured Commercial Paper Net of Commercial Paper Purchased 09/28/90 Interest Received on Certificate of Deposit 10/02/90 Proceeds from Repurchase Agreement 10/02/90 Purchased Commercial Paper FROM AMOUNT 1st Bank Lakes Dain Bosworth $ (291,735.64) Dain Bosworth Dain Bosworth Dain Bosworth 1st Bank Lakes 1st Bank Lakes 1st Bank Lakes 1st Bank Mpls 1st Bank Lakes 1st Bank Lakes Norwest Bank 12,902.92 105,340.17 2,250.00 312,943.46 (322,421.00) i:'- LIST OF LICENSES FOR COUNCIL APPROVAL FOR MEETING OF October 8, 1990 Septic Installer - Marty Bros. 9436 Quaker Lane Gambling Permit Resolution National Multiple Sclerosis At Jimmies Lounge 3380 Shoreline Drive January 1, 1991 - December 31, 1991 Special Event - Viking Bassmasters fishing tournament October 14, 1990 7:00 a.m.-3:00 p.m, North Shore Drive Marina i ■ > • : '.. i ?• : • ITYoi QRONO r'Cbi ui'.iccCrystal Bay, Minnesota 55323 building a zoning - 473-7357 assessing SEPTLICE-CITV OF OROHO FINANCE OFFIC 09/26-'90 - --- -■ he. answereZr License tee, bor J "i SS SSiJiS'S. „,3„ooo Le subject to a ten (10) day aj q, ^ 1222200000 01 GEH 1311500000 '•I GEM 1. Business or trade name ' 2. Business address ‘T‘/ i ^------(/JiLO. 3. Business phone ^Sr33r/------ Residence ph. 4. Name of applicant certification _ presentative CHECK 75.00 .50 25.00 100.50 RECEIPT-TH hMC you #1?1470 COQl ROl 108=415. Type of certification held: _^I"staller Site evaluator _ _System designer Is this a Provisional Certificate. - -- prior to the current construction season. 7 Have you ever held a Septic System Ing^ller license in Orono before? Most recent year gU?.. 8. Have you ever had a license revoked? When? - - - - - Where? _ _ _ , / ^ 9. Do you do Municipal Sewer hook-ups? Yes- -- * -- - - - 10~. bo you pump out septic tanks? Yes —No SUBMITTALS REQUIRED: l^o'iS^oJIlcensrknfperSit'b^Ad naming City of Orono . - -■ bXigee. The State Plumbers Bond will not be accept^. y'-x 'iio-SO-lOO ,000 minimum Certificate of C"'' 'J -7 4! iopy of current MPCA Certificate or - - at on-site Sewage Treatment Workshop held,iim tmy prior to current construction season. "2- LICENSES WILL NOT BE PROCESSED UNTIL ALL ITEMS ARE SUBMITTED. List persons other than applicant who are authorized by you to apply for permits under your licensa- - - - - --- - - --- - - -- The undersigned hereby makes application 6rono, -Minnesota, for ,“"f,^®P^^thriaissystems, and/or pump out septic tanks, subject to the of the State of Minnesota and the Ordinances of ^he ^ity^ Orono. » a *c. ** * Date J ^Applicants Signature Staff recommendation^l^pprova^y^ Reason for denial; Denial LY City Council Action Date license mailed_ _ Approved Denied A RESOLUTION GRANTING GAMBLING PERMIT FOR JIMMIE'S LOUNGE LOCATED AT 3380 SHORELINE DRIVE BE IT RESOLVED, the City of Orono agrees to approve the gambling permit application for the National Multiple Sclerosis Society for operations at Jimmie's Lounge, 3380 Shoreline Drive. The abr-ve listed resolution was moved by and duly seconded by The following Council Members voted in the affirmative: The following Council Members voted in the negative: 1990. The above resolution was duly adopted on October 8, Edward J. Callahan^ Jr., Acting Mayor ATTEST: Theresa L. Naab, Deputy Clerk M IS- LG214 • .....-... - • .4'-^'"^ Minnesota Lawful G<unbilng T " ‘ ‘‘ Premise Permit Application - Part 3 •1' - ...... . :v T; • ■ r - Vi- , 1_‘ . ...............^ -•• •.•.-.v: . •■•-• - . .yy.^ r-y •>.: :< y.v*v.%v •.*<. .*.v.- •••- ^ Aclgilig^edgement >ws* o‘.';; 'jy •,. .• ■* •'•' St • .,.‘.V. .ii*j; .V»y ■•.•-•-• ,y». M. ^-•T •i.-. r‘7**s*w.'* —-Guj^ling site Authorization ^ __• I haarby consant thn local law inforcament offcars." tha board or agerits of lha board, or tha oommbsonar at ravanua or^ ^ public safaty, or agants of tha commissionars. may antar tha pramisas to anforca tha law. _ ^ ~ ' . ..... 'i^rrr . .: Bank Records Information r . - -----—i/i -. Tha board is authorizad to inspact tha bank racords of tha gambling account whanavar nacassar. to fulfill raquiramants of currant gambling rulas and law. I dadara that: I hava raad this application and ail information submitted to tha board; All informatcn is trua, accurata and complata; All othar raquirad information has baan fully disdosad; I am tha chiaf axacutiva officar of tha organization; I assuma full rasponsibiiity for tha fair and lawful gambling and rulas of tha board and agree. 1 licensed, to abide by those laws and rulas, inc .ding amandmants to them; A mambarshp iisl of lha organization will be availahU within seven days after it is raguastad by the board; Any changes in application infonna^icn will be submitted to the board and local government within 10 d£^q rt tha change; and A tarminaton DU.f' will be submitted to tha board within 15 days of the termination of al' cyamisa permits. Failure-to provide reared information or providing falsa information may result in tbe ttemal c. revocation of the Li///lu^i/ /y^ „ DataJignature of cmaf aiacuDva otfi <r 7^/V/ Local Croverament Acknowledgement 1. The city ‘must sign if tha gambling premises is located wi*hin city limits. 2. Tha county "AND township*' must sign if tha gambling p emtsas is located within a township. 3. local government (city o< coumyi must pass a fiol-jton specifically approving or • b- 9 tha apoiication. 4. A pf tha resolution appioving tha ap»>ln.aion r. ui.. oc attached to the applicaton. 5. Applications which are denied by tha local governing >ody should not be submitted to the Gambling Control Division. Township: By signature below, tha township acknowledges mat iha organization is applying for a premises permit wlhin '4:. Clty*y=“"'»“Otooo /ownshlp" cyj 1 Tovnship Name I Signature ul ^wson receiving appiicaDv.i Tide jTide Date Received j i9^9r^I IS towr.ihip Q Organic. _i Uncganized 1 i Unincorporated Refer to tha Instructions for tha raquirad attachments Mail to;Jepartment of Gaming Gambling Cont'ol Division Rosewood PUiza South. 3rd Poor 1711 W. County Road B Rosov'ie MN 55113 ■'ate:_____/4 !19 APPLICATION PARADES and SPECIAL EVENTS CITY of ORONO, MINNESOTA 55323 .:ame __ Application Nimber. ty (r^r^LLr____dO / j^/j^//\Jn TCf^S____________ -.ddress • /4C/(p . Location of Parade or Event .LYdiu:- AP^l I f^>^c TO'^ lame of Persons and/or OrganizaLxons Handling the Event ■JoHr^ 7<^'r6rrVi^/C / • 'hone Nuinbers *7^7-239c^ 8 3^ '0 ate of Event fO!tJ 19 ^0 aason or Purpose _ Hours of Event 700aZ 3r-;,~) p,3iS:N() '.surance Coverage L.AG ,'L ^ rc^c>ount .mpany I cfc) /V<fuj //a^y.^rL.,2e • Tys. ^c- py of Insurance Certificates to be Submitted with this Application'. am aware of all applicable State and other laws regarding Parades and cecial Events and will abide by same. I also agree to hold the City of rono han^.less from all liabilities that may arise directly or indirectly ■om the Parade or Special Event approved by the granting of this permit. ie: $25.00 I f ‘Jr .‘••iTKisCi jF’IiS IjllSVijOa # jl Si :5.« n. 25 JO rOL' pJi21^0 cool Jl 'IJ’29 iO/0^/90 '• r •.Signature of Applicant / 23 Paid: -.eck _______ sh _ , 19_§V '.itials RECOMMENDED : Yes No. mJ £/Z L //rrcc^Jc/^ Public Safety Dire/£t^ Approved: Yes_ _ _ No Clerk-Administrator ffice Use Only: 2marks:_ _ _ _ _ _ ;_v p - art ; ■' : \ ae ; - a^dPKX CITY of ORONO Post Office* Box 66•Crystal Bay, Minnesota 55323 • Municipai OfSet On the North Shore of Lake Minnetonka DATA__PRr7AC7 ADVISORY In accordance with M.S. 15.165, "Rights of subjecfi o£ -sta", we would like to inform you that your request for a permit or license ?rom the^City oV^Orono^r any of its departments may r.qurre you to furnish certain private or confidential inforniation. You are notified that: 1. The information you furnish will be used to determine your qualification for the permit or license requested. 2. You may refuse to supply data, but refusal may require that the City deny the permit or license. 3. The information may be shared with other or federal agencies to the extent necessary -o process .he cermi. or license. 4. If your requested permit or license rec^ires Co’ nc-x ac. on to approve, some information may become public. 5. YOU have certain rights under M.S. 15.165 to review private data on yourself. 6. Your full name, and date of birth are required to process this application or permit. P_ //1 -V o LastFiJit • Middle Last Address City * state (Ahone I understand my rights as stated above. p/>'h- /?---—^— Signature BUILDING a ZONING - 473-7357 assessing ADMCSISTRAnON A FINANCE - 473-7358 5 PL BLIC WORKS - 47 3-7359 .7, •yvv.-v - ■■ ■••*.• •r* vr' -Vv ■■ >. - " ■V".- *- ^',V”. •• v R^^:4 r-vJv-> :v:’w>'.-*--' V ■ ■■-■! - "iV*,'V.-. .1 ,■'■ ‘ '• .••**•■' • ' •*'.-■ • •.";'.; ' ' li i - ‘U-:’ . y-. • •vvy ;v '' ■< .• '■ ... 1-.'^» -■—-.v ■• '• •• ■• * 4Crv-V^.ri ■'.^1.-. . ••• '••• ^ ■ V. . i' ...............;>'*-i mm M V-; *•' • •• ' - ** -.2* • •• •^1 •.■...•■.>«'7^;. itK r . --• • ' * *' •'* r'- •'•• ' • '• • ,-» 'V... .•• * J 09/30/90 PR CB PRREGOR 88 YTD name dpt gross ABRAHAMSON. FREDERIC 93 1612.65 ANDERSON, BRUCE L 31 33515.36 BERNHARDSON, MARK E 12 44343.45 BERNHARDSON. MARK E 12 46564.80 BOBZIEN. SUE A 31 18669.70 BOSMA, JAMIE L 12 12235 BRINKHAUS. JOHN F 42 28688 BURDICK, AARON W 93 465 CHESWICK. GARY B 31 29731 CHRISTIANSON. SALLY 31 4316 CORNICK. JAMES L 31 32258 DEMBOUSKI, JAY C 31 12684 ENGLISH III. IRVING 31 34514 ERICKSON. DOUGLAS J 93 583 ERICKSON, KURT R 31 29181 FISCHENICH. DAN T 31 28918 FRITZLER. JOHN M 31 29418 GAFFRON. MICHAEL P 33 26748 GERHARDSON. JOHN R 42 35182 GREGORY, JAMES D 42 26719 HALLIN, DOROTHY M 12 23040 HANSEN. STEVEN C 42 22144.89 HANSING. CAROL J 31 10691.14 JOHNSON, BRADLEY P 31 30616 JOSTROM. FOREST J 93 1995 KARNITZ. RICKY D 31 5834 KILBO, MElVIN H 31 39250 KNUTSON, CHARLOTTE A 15 13407 KUEHN, THOMAS M 15 37381 MABUSTH, JEANNE A 33 33497 MORAN MARK f 31 27247 MOROWCZYNSKI. JAMES 31 34937 NAAB. THERESA L 12 18669 NELSON, DAVID D 35 1246 OAS. DANIEL 0 93 1569 OBRIEN. RANDY L 92 20950.76 OMAN. LYLE E 33 24281.91 PALMER, GREGORY A 42 9231 OUAST, WAYNE A 92 26766 RATHBUN, BARRY J 92 21647 ROSS. JOHN A 93 140 SASS. JOHN J 42 22168 SASS. JOHN J 42 22526 SKREEN. DALE S 42 21736 STEFFENHAGEN RONALD 93 23070 STEVENS. BETTY G . 93 2224 THOMTON, MARK R 31 28472 TOMCHECK. LAWRENCE F 31 30723 TOMCZYK, MARK W 31 28897 VANG. BRUCE L 33 20237 VEE. LINDA S 12 9033 WALSH. KEVIN L 35 3987 WALTERS LINDA G 15 17964 WECKMAN. STEPHEN J 33 4946 YEAGER, DONALD C 93 1288 04 95 00 59 36 63 91 67 64 72 21 06 68 29 11 26 12 03 25 24 53 28 36 09 06 69 95 77 49 58 68 00 73 33 39 63 75 40 69 50 43 49 13 13 00 91 CURRENT GROSS 173.38 1489.19 350.00 2221.35 921.84 711.60 1464.31 112.50 1468.00 212.48 1420.55 980.91 1847.14 40.25 1408.48 1341.44 1356 1338 1760 1415 1153 1291.32 499.55 1408.48 163.88 408.54 1964 921 1870.88 1676.48 1337 1569 921 226 157 960 1271 962 1477 1046 60 2209 357 1154 1154 151 16 71 PO "1 13 40 83 28 58 84 95 50 00 75 15 79 04 00 92 60 40 64 25 1381.68 1459 1408 1095 783 156 935 640 49 40 48 52 61 24 04 00 88 56.361.83 ■j ■■ i . -i1-;i y V J -J ■! i;vv 1\Hi I....- .--• I»a f. 1 I: V 2 -J |;£^i •' :i i§^ K.i-'. '' * A * '• -.I I 1^';^ 1-%^I *;v ^ \l-a? ^ •• •V 5 •‘•I "i . -V. ^ i’--i , -t : I V 10/31/90 PR CM PRREGOR 69 NAME CALLAHAN. EDWARD J GOETTEN. J.DIANN GRABEK, JAMES NETTLES. ALAN R PETERSON, BARBARA A (___iy ru CLt J1 YTD CURRENT DPT GROSS GROSS 11 2418.70 241.67 11 2416.70 241.67 11 3000.00 300.00 11 2416.70 241.67 11 2416.70 241.67 1.266.68 CIT> PAYRC o C/^*S - 4)6. 1990 CITY OF ORONO CHECK NO. DATE HCS731 HC8731 HC8731 HC8731 HC8731 HC8731 HC8731 HC8731 HC8731 HC8731 HC8731 HC8731 HC8733 HC8733 HC8733 HC8/33 HC8733 HC8733 HC8733 HC8733 HC8733 HC8733 HC8733 HC8733 HC8733 HC8733 HC8733 HC8733 HC8734 HC8737 HC8738 HC8740 HC8740 HC8740 HC8740 HC8740 HC8740 HC8740 HC8740 09/28/90 09/28/90 09/28/90 09/28/90 09/28/90 09/28/90 09/28/90 09/28/90 09/28/90 09/28/90 09/28/90 09/28/90 09/28/90 09/28/90 09/28/90 09/28/90 09/28/90 09/28/90 09/28/90 09/28/90 09/28/90 09/28/90 09/28/90 09/28/90 09/28/90 09/28/90 09/28/90 09/28/90 09/28/90 09/28/90 09/28/90 09/28/90 09/28/90 09/28/90 09/28/90 09/28/90 09/28/90 09/28/90 09/28/90 AMOUNT 2 5 21 9 5 2 63 356 32 3 264 27 54 110 6 21 486 14 560 70 101 173 120 .405 82 47 85 10 64 75 59 50 25 36 00 05 38 38 62 51 88 27 61 65 87 54 01 64 83 91 37 21 36 .66 30 00 30 00 117 00 117 00 33 00 39 00 14 323 91 2 258 14 53 115 00 05 18 46 70 26 18 99 CHiCK REGISTER VENDOR ITEM DESCRIPTION ORONO ORONO ORONO ORONO ORONO ORONO ORONO ORONO ORONO ORONO ORONO ORONO ROTO ROOTER U OF MN PETTY PETTY PETTY PETTY PETTY PETTY PETTY PETTY PETTY PETTY PETTY PETTY CASH CASH CASH CASH CASH CASH CASH CASH CASH CASH CASH CASH MAINT PLUMBING WORKSHOP ACCOUNT NO. INV. 01-4210 01-4210 01-4321 01-4321 01-4321 01-4321 01-4360 01-4381 01-4382 01-4382 01-4383 72-4232 020-11 ■129-31 •039-12 059-14 •129-31 174-33 -185-35 ■129-31 -039-12 -040-13 -039-12 -569-93 1ST NATL FICA 9/2 01-4142-039-12 1ST NATL FICA 9/2 01-4142-040-13 1ST NATL FICA 9/2 01-4142-059-14 1ST NATL FICA 9/2 01-4142-069-15 1ST NATL FICA 9/2 01-4142-099-17 1ST NATL FICA 9/2 01-4142-111-31 1ST NATL FICA 9/2 01-4142-115-31 1ST NATL FICA 9/2 01-4142-121-31 1ST NATL FICA 9/2 01-4142-126-31 1ST NATL FICA 9/2 01-4142-174-33 1ST NATL FICA 9/2 01-4142-185-35 1ST NATL FICA 9/2 01-4142-249-42 1ST NATL FICA 9/2 01-4142-290-61 1ST NATL FICA 9/2 72-4142-549-91 1ST NATL FICA 9/2 73-4142-569-92 1ST NATL FICA 9/2 74-4142-590-93 MEISEL HOWE PENS 01-4210-040-11 01-4343-099-17 01-4356-039-12 1ST NATL FICA 9/16 01-4142-020-11 1ST NATL FICA 9/16 01-4142-039-12 1ST NATL F ICA 9/16 01-4142-040-13 1ST NATL FICA 9/16 01-4142-059-14 1ST NATL FICA 9/16 01-4142-069-15 1ST NATL FICA 9/16 01-4142-099-17 1ST NATL FICA 9/16 01-4142-111-31 1ST NATL F ICA 9/16 01-4142-115-31 . .) 09-30-90 PAGE - 1 i P.O. tt MESSAGE ^ MANUAL MANUAL MANUAL MANUAL MANUAL MANUAL MANUAL MANUAL MANUAL MANUAL MANUAL MANUAL •••-CKS MANUAL MANUAL MANUAL MANUAL MANUAL MANUAL MANUAL MANUAL MANUAL MANUAL MANUAL MANUAL MANUAL MANUAL MANUAL MANUAL MANUAL "••-CKS MANUAL MANUAL -••-CKS MANUAL MANUAL MANUAL MANUAL MANUAL MANUAL MANUAL MANUAL ( ^ J1990 CITY OF ORONOCHECK NO . DATE AMOUNT HC8740 09/28/90 6 46 1ST HC8740 09/28/90 21.54 1ST HC8740 09/28/90 496.95 1ST HC8740 09/28/90 15.23 1ST HC8740 09/28/90 490.84 1ST HC8740 09/28/90 122.90 1ST HC8740 09/28/90 122.90-1ST HC8740 09/28/90 122.90 1ST HC8740 09/28/90 98.05 1ST HC8740 09/28/90 205 88 1ST HC8740 09/28/90 121 40 2,452 07 • 1ST 4,284 201 379 241 79 47 09 76 CHECK REGISTERVENDOR NATU NATL NATL NATL NATL NATL NATL NATL NATL NATL NATL ITEM DESCRIPTION FICA FICA FICA FICA FICA FICA FICA FICA FICA FICA FICA 9/16 9/16 9/16 9/16 9/16 9/16 9/16 9/16 9/16 9/16 9/16 FUND FUND FUND FUND 01 72 73 74 TOTAL TOTAL TOTAL TOTAL ACCOUNT NO. INV 01-4142 01-4142 01-4142 01-4142 01-4142 01-4142 01-4142 01-4142 72- 4142 73- 4142 74- 4142 •121-31 -126-31 -174-33 -185-35 -249-42 -290-61 -290-67 -290-67 -549-91 -569-92 -590-93 J09-30-90 PAGE 2« P.O. « MESSAGE MANUAL MANUAL MANUAL MANUAL MANUAL MANUAL MANUAL MANUAL MANUAL MANUAL MANUAL -«--CKS GENERAL FUND WATER OPERATING FUND SEWER OPERATING FUND GOLF COURSE OPERATING FD 5,107.11 TOTAL 1990 CITY OF ORONO CHECK NO. DATE CHECK REGISTER 281006 281006 281006 281006 281006 281006 281006 281006 281006 281006 281006 281006 281006 10/03/90 10/03/90 10/03/90 10/03/90 10/03/90 10/03/90 10/03/90 10/03/90 10/03/90 10/03/90 10/03/90 10/03/90 10/03/90 AMOUNT VENDOR ITEM DESCRIPTION 14. 41 2 7 3 12 10 7 37 39 57 38 23 56 85 39 3.23 13.26 3.24 3.23 7.38 130.08 MIDWEST MIDWEST MIDWEST MIDWEST MIDWEST MIDWEST MIDWEST MIDWEST MIDWEST MIDWEST MIDWEST MIDWEST MIDWEST BSNS BSNS BSNS BSNS BSNS BSNS BSNS BSNS BSNS BSNS BSNS BSNS BSNS PROD PROD PROD PROD PROD PROD PROD PROD PROD PROD PROD PROD PROD OFFICE OFFICE OFFICE OFFICE OFFICE OFFICE OFFICE OFFICE OFFICE OFFICE OFFICE OFFICE OFFICE SUPPLIES SUPPLIES SUPPLIES SUPPLIES SUPPLIES SUPPLIES SUPPLIES SUPPLIES SUPPLIES SUPPLIES SUPPLIES SUPPLIES SUPPLIES 10-08-90 PAGE 1 ACCOUNT NO. INV. • P.O i MESSAGE ‘ 01-4210- 01-4210- 01-4210- 01-4210- 01-4210- 01-4210- 01-4210- 01-4210- 01-4210- 01-4210- 01-4210- 01-4210- 01-42' 039-12 039- 12 040- 11 059-14 059-14 069-15 069-15 129-31 129-31 174-33 174-33 249-42 ■ ’9-42 281010 10/03/90 22.26 AT4T INFO SYSTEM TELEPHONE 74-4320-590-93 22.26 A 281014 10/03/90 68.18 ALL STAR ELECTRIC LIGHT REPAIR 01-4342-249-42 281014 10/03/90 67.72 ALL STAR ELECTRIC REPAIR LGTS 01-4343-129-31 135.90 A 281030 10/03/90 20.84 AT & T INFO SYSTEM DATA PROCESS 01-4340-039-12 281030 10/03/90 20.84 AT 4 T INFO SYSTEM DATA PROCESS 01-4340-059-14 281030 10/03/90 20.84 AT 4 T INFO SYSTEM DATA PROCESS 01-4340-069-15 281030 10/03/90 32.50 AT 4 T INFO SYSTEM DATA PROCESS 01-4340-129-31 281030 10/03/90 20.84 AT 4 T INFO SYSTEM DATA PROCESS 01-4340-174-33 281030 10/03/90 20.84 136.70 A AT 4 T INFO SYSTEM DATA PROCESS '1-4340-249-42 281031 10/03/90 17 31 AT 4 T COMM TELEPHONE 01-4320-039-1228103110/03/90 1 43 AT 4 T COMM TELEPHONE 01-4320-040-1328103110/03/90 14.09 32 83 A AT 4 T COMM TELEPHONE 01-4320-129-31 281037 10/03/90 11 77 11.77 A AUGIES MOBILE CHEF SANDWICHES 74-4802-591-94 281039 10/03/90 748.10 EARL F ANDERSON ASSC SIGNS 01-4210-174-3328103910/03/90 47.96 EARL F ANDERSON ASSC FIRE LANE SIGNS 01-4233-249-4228103910/03/90 no 79 906 85 • EARL F ANDERSON ASSC SIGNS 01-4233-249-42 281070 10/03/90 27 40 BOARMAN 4 ASSOCIATES DESIGN I EXP 15-4399-651-00 -••-CKS •••-CKS •••-CKS -CKS -••-CKS •••-CKS 1990 CITY OF ORONO CHECK NO. DATE 281081 281085 281085 10/03/90 10/03/90 10/03/90 AMOUNT CHECK REGISTER VENDOR ITEM DESCRIPTION 27.40 - 337.08 337.08 * 401.33 121.00 522.33 • BLANKS PHOTOGRAPHY^ TRASH HAUL BUDGET PRINTING BUDGET PRINTING CRIME CARDS YARD WASTE FORMS 10-08-90 PAGE 2 ACCOUNT NO INV. • P.O. « MESSAGE 01-4343-099-17 01-4322-129-31 01-4322-295-65 281098 10/03/90 934.06 CARGILL SALT SALT 72-4234-549-91 934.06 • 281128 10/03/90 334 32 CONCEPT MICROFILM MICROFILM 01-4306-174-33 334.32 • 281143 10/03/90 8.05 COMMERCIAL LIFE/GRP OCT INS 01-4152-039-12 281143 10/03/90 25.15 COMMERCIAL LIFE/GRP OCT INS 01-4152-069-15 281143 10/03/90 25.40 COMMERCIAL LIFE/GRP OCT INS 01-4152-121-31 281143 10/03/90 3.40 COMMERCIAL LIFE/GRP OCT INS 01-4152-126-3128114310/03/90 50 53 COMMERCIAL LIFE/GRP OCT INS 01-4152-129-31 281143 10/03/90 5 90 COMMERCIAL LIFE/GRP OCT INS 01-4152-174-3328114310/03/90 16.51 COMMERCIAL LIFE/GRP OCT INS 01-4152-249-4228114310/03/90 1.42 COMMERCIAL LIFE/GRP OCT INS 72-4152-549-9128114310/03/90 2.13 COMMERCIAL LIFE/GRP OCT INS 73-4152-569-9228114310/03/90 . 85 COMMERCIAL LIFE/GRP OCT INS 74-4152-590-93139.34 • 281199 10/03/90 5.500 00 ROLF E ERICKSON OCT FEE 01-4306-059-145,500.00 • 281212 10/03/90 10 20 EXPRESS MESSENGER POSTAGE 01-4321-174-3310 20 • 281228 10/03/90 57.50 FIRST TRUST CO INC MSA RD BD DESTROY 24-4399-400-0057 50 • 281243 ■ 10/03/90 184 00 GAB BUSINESS SERVICE CLAIM REIMB 73-4399-433-81 *-*-CKS •••-CKS •••-CKS -CKS ••■-CKS •••-CKS •••-CKS •••-CKS •••-CKS 1990 CITY OF ORONO CHECK REGISTER CHECK NO.. DATE AMOUNT VENDOR ITEM DESCRIPTION ACCOUNT NO. INV 184.00 A 281257 281257 10/03/90 10/03/90 5.53 69.75 75 28 A GERHARDSON/JOHN GERHARDSON/JOHN MTG MILEAGE/PARKING 01-4356-295-65 01-4381-249-42 281258 281258 10/03/90 10/03/90 38.90 184.00 222 90 A GLENWOOD INGLEWOOD GLENWOOD INGLEWOOD WATER CUPS 01-4231-099-17 01-4231-099-17 281267 10/03/90 920.00 920 00 A GOLF CAR MIDWEST SEPT RENTAL 74-4331-590-93 281269 281269 10/03/90 10/03/90 20 00 20 00 40.00 A GOVERNMT TRAING SERV GOVERNMT TRAING SERV CLASS OMAN CLASS VANG 01-4356-174-33 01-4356-174-33 281284 10/03/90 8.88 8 88 A HAPPYS POTATO CHIP CHIPS 74-4802-591-94 281303 10/03/90 1 .781.02 1.781.02 A HENN CTY FIN DIV AUG ROOM & BOARD 01-4358-080-16 281308 10/03/90 147 16 147 10 m HENN CTY SHERIFF DPI ’“Q BOOKING FEE 01-4358-080-16 281330 281330 281330 281330 10/03/90 10/03/90 10/03/90 10/03/90 81 12 81 12 99 52 99 52 361.28 A ICMA RETIREMNT TRUST ICMA RETIREMNT TRUST ICMA RETIREMNT TRUST ICMA RETIREMNT TRUST ICMA 9/30 ADDL ICMA 9/16 ADDL ICMA 9/3-9/16 ICA 9/17-9/30 01-4140-039-12 01-4140-039-12 01-4140-039-12 0 ’ 4140-039-12 281385 10/03/90 1 19 1 19 A KEAVENYS DRUG BAT'ERY 01-4210-174-33 281388 .10/03/90 16 00 16 00 A KILUO-MFLVIN MTG EXP Cl-4356-129-31 10-08-90 PAGE 3 ***-CKS "“•-CKS •••-CKS *-«-CKS •••-CKS •••-CKS •••-CKS •••-CKS •••-CKS 1990 CITY OF ORONO CHECK REGISTER 10-08-90 PAGE 4 CHECK NO . DATE AMOUNT VENDOR ITEM DESCRIPTION ACCOUNT NO. INV.8 P.O i MESSAGE 281389 281389 10/03/90 10/03/90 10,022.50 4,788 08 KEYS WELL DRILLING KEYS WELL DRILLING WELL WELL #3 PYMT 86 TEST PYMT #4 26-4531-437-85 26-4531-437-85 14,810.58 * •••-CKS 281397 281397 281397 281397 281397 281397 10/03/90 10/03/90 10/03/90 10/03/90 10/03/90 10/03/90 5 66 45 8 2 11 140 73 50 80 59 £6 45 93 KUEHN- KUEHN- KUEHN- KUEHN- KUEHN- KUEHN- THOMAS THOMAS THOMAS THOMAS THOMAS THOMAS MILEAGE SEPT GFOA CONF TRAVEL MILEAGE SEPT MILEAGE SEPT MILEAGE SEPT MILEAGE SEPT 01-4381-039-12 01-4381-069-15 01-4381-069-15 01-4381-174-33 01-4381-295-65 73-4381-569-92 "••-CKS 281404 281404 281404 10/03/90 10/03/90 10/03/90 216 72 6 50 27.30 250.52 THE LAKER THE LAKER THE LAKER ADS ADS ADS 01-4322-039-12 01-4322-040-12 01-4322-174-33 •“•-CKS 281419 10/03/90 18 00 LAW ENFORCEMT NEWS SUBSCRIPTION 01-424C-129-31 18.00 • 281423 10/03/90 187 00 LEAGUE OF MN CITIES MAP DUES 01-4380-020-11 187.00 * 281435 10/03/90 753.43 LOG IS - SUITE 300 APPL SUPPORT AUG 01-4352-069-15 281435 10/03/90 436.76 LOG IS - SUITE 300 APPL SUPPORT AUG 01-4352-129-3128143510/03/90 229.30 LOG IS - SUITE 300 APPL SUPPORT AUG 01-4352-174-33 281435 10/03/90 733 63 LOG IS - SUITE 300 DATA PROC AUG 01-4355-069-1528143510/03/90 741.39 LOG IS - SUITE 300 DATA PROC AUG 01-4355-129-3128143510/03/90 312.88 LOG IS - SUITE 300 DATA PROC AUG 01-4355-174-3328143510/03/90 137.58 LOG IS - SUITE 300 APPL SUPPORT AUG 72-4352-549-9128143510/03/90 26 62 LOG IS - SUITE 300 DATA PROC AUG 72-4355-549-9128143510/03/90 321,02 LOG IS - SUITE 300 APPL SUPPORT AUG 73-4352-569-9228143510/03/90 118.21 LOG IS - SUITE 300 DATA PROC AUG 73-4355-559-92 3.810.82 • 281439 10/03/90 19 40 LONG LK FORD TRACTOR OIL 74-4220-590-9319 40 • 281441 10/03/90 102 25 LONG LAKE TIRE SERV TIRE REPAIR 01-4341-249-42281441• 10/03/90 16.75 LONG LAKE TIRE SERV TIRE REPAIR 01-4341-290-61 •••-CKS •••-CKS •••-CKS •••-CKS “V 1990 CITY OF ORONO CHECK NO. DATE AMOUNT 119.00 * CHECK REGISTER VENDOR ITEM DrSCRIPTION 281456 10/03/90 6.35 6.35 *MABUSTH-JEANNE PARKING 01-4381-174-33 281459 10/03/90 136.99 136.99 MACQUEEN EQUIPMENT ST SWEEPER PARTS 01-4331-249-42 281460 10/03/90 35.20 35.20 m MARK VII DIST BEER 74-4815-591-94 281469 10/03/90 1,020.00 1,020.00 m METRO W INSP SERV JULY INSPEEC 01-4306-174-33 281475 10/03/90 14.64 14.64 m METZ BAKING CO ROLLS 74-4802-591-94 281480 10/03/90 276.88 276.88 m MIDWEST ASPHALT ASPHALT 01-4233-249-42 281498 10/03/90 99.88 MN CELLULAR TELE TELEPHONE 01-4320-129-3128149810/03/90 9.40 109.28 m MN CELLULAR TELE TELEPHONE 01-4320-249-42 281545 10/03/90 134.92 134.92 m NAVARRE AUTO REPAIR AUTO REPAIR 01-4341-249-42 281562 10/03/90 36.66 NSP UTILITIES 01-4324-099-1728156210/03/90 393.20 NSP UTILITIES 01-4324-099-1728156210/03/90 297.37 NSP UTILTIES 01-4324-129-3128156210/03/90 2 94 NSP UTILITIES 01-4324-175-3428156210/03/90 164.70 NSP UTILTIES 01-4324-249-4228156210/03/90 17 . 12 NSP UTILTIES 01-4324-290-6128156210/03/90 1 , 895.27 NSP UTILITIES 72-4324-549-91281562 10/03/90 659 20 NSP UTILITIES 73-4324-569-9228156210/03/90 122 36 NSP UTILTIES 73-4324-569-9?281562 10/03/90 148.21 NSP UTILITIES 74-4324-590-9328156210/03/90 7.20 3.744 23 •NSP UTILITIES 74-4324-590-93 10-08-90 PAGE 6 ACCOUNT NO. INV. # P.O. i MESSAGE -••-CKS •••-CKS -CKS "••-CKS •••-CKS •••-CKS -CKS •••-CKS 1990 CITY OF ORONO CHECK NO. PATE 281565 40/03/90 281582 10/03/90 281597 10/03/90 281598 10/03/90 281631 10/03/90 281638 10/03/90 281657 10/03/90 281662 10/03/90 281685 10/03/90 281696 10/03/90 281739 10/03/90 AMOUNT 804.42 804.42 - 33.75 33.75 - 3,897.94 3,897.94 - 9.00 9.00 • 2,200.00 2,200.00 * 131.80 131.80 • 51.08 51.08 • 83 40 83 40 • 300.00 300.00 1,150 00 1,150.00 • 63 75 63.75 * NSP CHECK REGISTER VENDOR ITEM DESCRIPTION ST LIGHTS OMAN/LYLE PERA INS PRAIRIE OFFSET REED VENDING SR CMNTY SERVICES MILEAGE PUBLIC EMPL RET ASSN PERA 9/17-9/30 NOV INS SEPTIC FORMS RFG PET A SUPPLY CO DOG FOOD CANDY A CIGS LAURIE K SCHEFFLER SEPT MTG 4TH OTR SR CITZ STEVENS WELL DRILL REPAIR WELL 10-08-90 PAGE 6 ACCOUNT NO. INV. « P.O. i MESSAGE 01-4325-249-42 01-4381-174-33 01-2031-000-00 01-4152-129-31 POLKA DOT RECYCLING SEPT RECYLING FEE 01-4392-295-65 01-4322-174-33 01-4244-129-31 74-4802-591-94 01-4306'.D39-12 01-4385-100-21 74-4343-590-93 -CKS -CKS •••-CKS •••-CKS ***-CKS -CKS •••-CKS •••-CKS •••-CKS -CKS •••-CKS 1990 CITY OF ORONO CHECK NO. DATE CHECK REGISTER 281796 281815 281815 281815 281815 281815 281815 281815 281815 281815 281815 281815 10/03/90 10/03/90 10/03/90 10/03/90 10/03/00 10/03/90 10/03/90 10/03/90 10/03/90 10/03/90 10/03/90 10/03/90 AMOUNT 79.95 79.95 VENDOR UNIFORMS UNLIMITED ITEM DESCRIPTION COVERALLS 858.74 • 10-08-90 PAGE 7 ACCOUNT NO. INV. » P.O. i MESSAGE 01-4244-129-31 80.29 US WEST COMMUN TELEPHONE 01-4320-039-12 80.28 US WEST COMMUN TELEPHONE 01-4320-059-14 40.14 US WEST COMMUN TELEPHONE 01-4320-069-15 175.41 US WEST COMMUN TELEPHONE 01-4320-129-31 80.29 US WEST COMMUN TELEPHONE 01-4320-174-33 58.88 US WEST COMMUN TELEPHONE 01-4320-175-34 80.29 US WEST COMMUN TELEPHONE 01-*320-249-42 12.04 US WEST COMMUN TELEPHONE 72-4320-549-91 28.10 US WEST COMMUN TELEPHONE 73-4320-569-92 106.62 US WEST COMMUN TELEPHONE 74-4320-590-93 116.40 US WEST COMMUN TELEPHONE 74-4323-590-93 281841 10/03/90 29.03 29.03 m WATER PRODUCTS CO MTR PARTS 72-1273-000-00 281845 10/03/90 6.00 6.00 m WECKMAN STEPHEN MILEAGE 01-4381-174-33 281854 281854 10/03/90 10/03/90 255.00 42.50 297.50 A WMI SERVICES OF MN WMI SERVICES OF MN PORTELETS PORTELET3 01-4331-290-61 74-4331-590-93 281875 10/03/90 8 28 8.28 «WRIGHT HENN ELECTRIC UTILITIES 01-4324-249-42 281901 281901 10/03/90 10/03/90 245 .00 60.00 305.00 CELLULAR ONE SALES CELLULAR ONE SALES PHONE REPAIR ANTENNA/SPEAKER 01-4232-129-31 01-4232-249-42 281902 10/03/’0 77 00 77 00 •NATL CAMERA EXCHG REPAIR CAMERA 01-4342-129-31 281903 10/03/90 15.00 15.00 ft MN FED HUMANE SOC SEMINAR/WALSH O: -4356-185-35 281904 10/03/90 95.64 95.64 ft GALLS INC CAMERA 01-4560-129-31 2:1905 10/03/90 620 16 SHAMROCK INO INC RECYCLE BINS 01-4232-295-65 -CKS --•-CKS -CKS •••-CKS -CKS •••-CKS 1990 CITY OF ORONO CHECK REGISTER 10-08-90 CHECK NO., DATE AMOUNT VENDOR ITEM DESCRIPTION ACCOUNT NO. INV.« P.O. 9 620.16 • 281906 10/03/90 1.682.27 1.682.27 - ORONO COMMUNITY ED ORONO REC PROGRAM 01-4357-290-61 281907 281907 10/03/90 10/03/90 88.34 88.34 176.68 - BELL & HOWELL BELL A HOWELL TONER TONER 01-4210-039-12 01-4210-174-33 281908 281908 10/03/90 10/03/90 16.00 24.00 40.00 • SUBURAN UTILITIES SUBURAN UTILITIES RATHBUN/PALMER RATHBUN/PALMER 72- 4356-549-91 73- 4356-569-92 281909 10/03/90 705.00 PUBLICORP INC LL ANNEXATION 01-4306-299-72 705.00 • 30.533.41 FUND 01 TOTAL 27.40 FUND 15 TOTAL 57.50 FUND 24 TOTAL 14.810.58 FUND 26 TOTAL 3.052.02 FUND 72 TOTAL 1,470.47 FUND 73 TOTAL 1,601.08 FUND 74 TOTAL 51.552.46 TOTAL GENERAL FUND BUILDNG CAPITAL OUTLAY F PERM IMPROVE REVOLVING F 1989 SWR-WTR CONSTR FUND WATER OPERATING FUND SEWER OPERATING FUND GOLF COURSE OPERATING FD -CKS m . OCT 81330 f ITY Tr rnu?^U »'. m m MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD SEPTEMBER 17, 1990 ATTENDANCE 7:00 P.M. The Orono Planning Commission met on the above date with the following members present: Planning Commission Chair Charlie Kelley, Vice Chair Maureen Bellows, and Planning Commission Members Jeffrey Johnson, Ed Cohen, Jim Hanson, Candace Rowlette and Sara Moos. The following represented the City Staff: Building and Zoning Administrator Mabusth, Assistant Planning and Zoning Administrator Gaffron, and City Recorder Scheffler. Council Representative Callahan was present. Bellows called the meeting to order. She stated that Chairman Kelley had a schedule conflict, but that he would be present later this evening. Bellows also noted that a group of Orono citizens had scheduled a meeting to discuss the proposed Highway 12 corridor expansion. She stated that the meeting will be held at the Cosgroves on Fox Ridge Road on Wednesday, September 19, at 7:30 p.m. She said, "This group is meeting to voice their objections to the Luce Line Trail or Watartown Road being considered as alternate routes for the corridor. ■’ 11334 REBERS CONSTRUCTION SUGARWOODS PLAT RECONSIDERATION OF CONDITIONS OF PRD APPROVAL REFERRED BACK TO PLANNING COMMISSION BY COUNCIL Mr. Sid Rebers and Mr. Robert Kost, a representative for Rebers Construction, were present. Kelley said, "My position on this request is that the house pad and driveway should meet the requirements established and approved with the original PRO. I know that there are a few lots that may need to deviate from that because of the elevation of the properties. The question is whether or not it is necessary for the Planning C:>mmi33ion to review application. I think I have made my position very clear in that respect." Cohen said, "I too have always been in favor of supervision because a PRD is not subject to broad form exceptions. The plan was developed and accepted for the overall benefit of the Community. The Planning Commission spent a great deal of time on this and I believe each application should be reviewed. I believe the Planning Commission would be abdicating its responsibilities if we did not require that." Bellows concurred with Kelley. She said, "It seemed very clear to me that the 50' setback area was for one driveway 20 feet in width. There was nothing in that recommendation that implied that the garage could be placed right at the 50' setback line, thus requiring the backout/turn-around to be within the setback area. I believe that requests to do so should absolutely be dealt with on an individual basis." - 1 - TORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING SEPTEMBER 17, 1990 ZONING FILE 11334-REBERS CONTINUED Cohen asked whether there disappearing. is a problem with trees Kelley stated that there is no such problem that he has viewed. He said, "I believe the developer is doing everything possible to enhance the development and preserve the trees." Bellows added, "There were comments made in that respect because at one point it was stated that all trees that are to be preserved are to be marked. What has proven to be more feasible is that the developer is making that assessment without marking the trees. Many mature trees have been moved into protected areas." Johnson stat . that in his opinion it is not necessary for each application to be reviewed individually. He said, "We did spend a great deal of time on this. However, the Planning Commission needs to be somewhat flexible and I would prefer not to see each application come back. I think that the amendment prepared by staff should be sufficient to address the applications." Mr. Kost said, "We assumed that, as with any other setback, that we could place the garage at the setback line and provide sufficient access. The protective covenants for Sugarwoods included a requirement for three-car garages. The three options provided by staff as part of the amendment would still require the property owner to meet certain standards in relation to terrain, and tree preservation, before approval is given for an approach apron to be in the front yard setback. Any configuration other than what staff has provided would need Planning Commission approval. We view the amendment as a suitable compromise." It was moved by Cohen, seconded by Bellows, to recommend that matters involving changes or variances be referred back to the Planning Commission for their review. Johnson asked whether those in favor of individual review oppose the amendment presented by staff. Kelley stated that he preferred not to impose the responsibility on staff. Cohen rei*-erated that he did not wish to abdicate his responsibilities. Mabusth stated that the proposal prepared by staff resulted from input received from the applicant and City staff. Kelley said, "It is important to note that the 50* setback is a different definition than that typically in our Code." Motion, Ayes-6, Johnson, Nay. Motion carried. - 2 - ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING SEPTEMBER 17, 1990 #1585 C. ARNOLD CARLSON 855 FOREST ARMS LANE AFTER-THE-FACT CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT PUBLIC HEARING 7:02 P.M. TO 7:08 P.M. The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing were duly noted. Mrs. Carlson was present for this Public Hearing. Mabusth reviewed the major issues involved with this application. She stated that the City has no records relating to the date the seawall was constructed (see Jeanne Mabusth's memo dated September 12, 1990). Bellows aslced whether the Carlsons have obtained all other necessary permits from the various agencies involved with this application. Mabusth replied, "Yes, all of the appropriate agencies have granted permits." Bellows asked Mrs. Carlson why they had not applied for a permit prior to constructing the seawall. Mrs. Carlson replied, "The only purpose of the wall is to keep the ground from washing into the channel. We put the dock on top of the wall rather than using the support posts. The wall is part of the dock, for which we did have a permit. We didn't realize that we needed a permit." Bellows asked Mrs. Carlson whether a contractor had done the work. Mrs. Carlson replied, "We did the work ourselves." There were no comments from the public relative to this application and the Public Hearing was closed. Johnson asked whether the wall structure was new or if it replaced an existing structure. Mabusth replied, "The retaining wail is new." Cohen asked when the dock permit was obtained. Mrs. Carlson replied, "The house was constructed in 1979 and the dock permit was approved shortly after that." Bellows asked whether the wall was constructed at the same time the dock was installed. Mrs. Carlson replied, "The soil kept washing away. We felt - 3 - ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING SEPTEMBER 17, 1990 ZONING FILE #1585-CARLSON CONTINUED that unless something was done to stop it, we would not be able to access the dock. Vy’e c-^nstructed the wall in the 1988.” Bellows said, ’’There is an obvious need for the wall." Hanson concurrea with Bellows. It was moved by Bellows, seconded by Cohen, to recommend approval of the after-the-fact Conditional Use Permit for a wooden seawall, with the condition that the appropriate fines for the after-the-fact nature of this application are paid. Hanson noted that there is minimal aesthetic impact of the lakeshore from this structure. Bellows added that the structure is serving a purpose. Motion, Ayes-6, Nays-0. Motion carried. #1586 JAMES S. BURANEN 1085 BROWN ROAD SOUTH AFTER-THE-FACT VARIANCE PUBLIC HEARING 7:09 P.M. TO 7:13 P.M. The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing were duly noted. Mr. Buranen was present. Mabusth summarized the pertinent facts relating to this application. She asked Mr. Buranen how long he has resided in Orono. Mr. Buranen replied, "I have lived here two months.” Mabusth stated that Mr. Buranen ceased work immediately after being notified of the need for a permit. She said, "The applicant applied for a building permit and provided us with a survey of the property. During the reviev/ of the application, staff determined that a variance is required. There are several lot lines depicted on the survey. By the time a formal resolution is drafted, the City Attorney will have provided direction as to which line is relative in this case." Bellows stated that she is concerned about the safety aspect of Mr. Buranen backing the limousines out of the driveway. She said, "There appears to be no turn around space. I believe that if we approve a location to house these vehicles, we should also require that a turn-around be provided." Mr. Buranen said. "I have removed a considerable amount of brush from the area at the end of the driveway to improve visibility." Bellows asked. at the end of ' How do you feel 4 - requirement ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING SEPTEMBER 17, 1990 ZONING FILE #1586-BURANEN CONTINUED Mr. Buranen replied, “I don't feel it is necessary. If I need to back out during a busy time of day, I back up into the yard and position the car so I can pull straight ahead. In the evening hours I have never had any problems." There were no public comments regarding this application and the Publi:: Hearing was closed. Cohen stated that as long as the applicant has indicated that he has no problem, he sees no need for a turn-around. He said, "It appears that Mr. Buranen recognizes the potential problems and has gone so far as to remove the brush from the end of the driveway." Hanson concurred with Cohen. He said, "Mi‘. i '^^en has the expertise to handle this type of vehicle. I don't rel. .;e a turn around is needed." Bellows asked Mabusth whether City staff has reviewed the safety aspect of this. Mabusth replied, "No." Bellows suggested that the Public Works Director be asked to look at the site prior to Council's review of this application. It v/as moved by Cohen, seconded by Bellows, to recommend approval of after-the-fact side yard setback Variance for an addition to a principal structure, subject to staff recommendations and the inspection of the driveway by City staff to determine the s=ifety status of this condition. Motion, Ayes-6, Nays-0. Motion carried. #1587 RUBY L. SIFORD 96 HACKBERRY HILL AFTER-THE-FACT VARIANCE PUBLIC HEARING 7:17 P.M. TO 7:25 P.M. The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing were duly noted. Mrs. Siford and her son. Bill Siford. were present. Mabusth suggested that Mrs. Siford to explain how this situation arose. be given an opportunity Bill Siford said, "We were under the impression that our contractor had applied for the permits. We later learned that .*? not the case. The contractor claimed that the City inspector h. ■ stopped by and told him the deck had to be five feec from the garage. That is how he constructed the deck. I talked with the Building Inspector today. He stated that he did not tell our - 5 - ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING SEPTEMBER 17, 1993 ZONING FILE #1587-SIFORD CONTINUED contractor that a five foot separation was acceptable. He did tell the contractor to stop working on the deck.” Cohen asked Mr. Siford whether the contractor was present this evening. Mr. Siford replied, "Apparently he is away working on a project in Wisconsin and I can't get in touch with him." Mabusth reviewed the chronology of the events involved in this application (see Jeanne Mabusth's memo dated September 12. 1990). Mr. Siford added, "Once we found out that our contractor had not pulled the appropriate permits. I went to the City and made sure we had the necessary permits." Mrs. Siford said, "The contractor told us that we needed to cut 16" off of the side of the deck facing the garage. He also made an adjustment to the steps." Mr. Siford added. "v/e do have the signatures from the neighbors. They are happy that we are trying to improve the property." Bellows asked whether it would be feasible to connect the garage and deck. Mabusth replied. "I did talk to the Building Inspectors in that regard. I went out to the site to see if that would be possible. Based on the elevations of the property, it would not work." Bellows stated that she was also concerned about the storage shed located between the garage and the house. Mrs. Siford stated that the shed has been in that location since 1979. Bellows asked Mabusth whether the Building Inspector has recommended any solution to this existing condition. Mabusth replied, "We have only discussed what is required by the Building Code if the Planning Commission recommended approval of the five foot separation." Johnson asked if it is not the intent of the Building Code to require the ten foot separation for fire safety. Mabusth replied, "That is correct." - 6 - ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING SEPTEMBER 17, 1990 ZONING FILE #1587-SIFORD CONTINUED Johnson stated that due to the open nature of the structure that it should not pose a fire problem. Bellows asked Mrs. Siford if the area below the deck will remain open. Mrs. Siford replied, "It will remain open for now, but may screen it in later. We do have birds that build their nests under there." Johnson asked for the name of the contractor that had been hired by Mrs, Siford. Mr. Siford replied, "His name is John Aulwes, Designer Concepts." There were no public comments regarding this application and the Public Hearing was closed. Bellows said, "I would be inclined at this point to allow them to construct a fire wall. Because of the proximity of the storage shed to the garage, I would like fire walls on the back and the sides. Actually the entire garage, including the roof, should be fire insulated." Johnson suggested that the Planning Commission's recommendation be based on the Building Inspector's approval of the project in relation to the Fire and Building Codes." It was moved by Bellows, seconded by Johnson, to recommend approval of the 5' separation between a principal and accessory structure. The recommendation is contingent on the proper fines being paid for the after-the-fact nature of this application, and inspections by the City to insure that all fire codes are met and enforced. Staff shall take into consideration the storage shed as well as the deck. Motion, Ayes-6 Nays-0. Motion carried. (Chairman Kelley arrived at this point in the meeting) #1588 U.S. WEST NEW VECTOR GROUP, INC. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT PUBLIC HEARING 7:30 P.M. TO 8:10 P.M. The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing were duly noted. Mr. John Uban, Consultant, Mr. Ed riasek. Consultant, and Mr. Davs Hellerman, U.S. West Engineer, were present. Mabusth stated that her memo raises certain zoning issues involved with this application (se= Jeanne Mabusth's memo dated September 13, 1990). She said. "Staff feels that our Code may not specifically address this type of application." Mabusth - 7 - ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING SEPTEMBER 17, 1990 ZONING FILE #1588-0.S. WEST NEW VECTOR COW^xWOED suggested that the applicants be permitted to make their presentation. She noted that a public information meeting had been held by the applicants on Friday, September 14th, and that only two persons from the public attended." Mr. Uban explained how cellular phones function. He said, "It is a low wattage system. Towers are placed in locations so they fit together in cell system, much like a honeycomb. Each time we look for a new antenna location, we look at a small area. We have selected a site behind the Vineyard of the Lake Church. (Mr. Uban showed an aerial view of the search area and the particular site chosen.) The site we have selected is in the center of the search area. The tower will be 150' tall. A small building with the computers will *^e located at the bottom of the tower. There is a small air conditioner in the building. The tower is self-supporting, there are no guide wires. These towers do not fall down like trees. They are constructed to withstand 150 mph winds and sleet storms. However, should one ever falls down, it is designed to break at midpoint and fold. The tower is located with sufficient setback so it will pose no safety hazard for any surrounding property. The transmissions are low wattage. They do not cause any biological interference. The standard microwave or television emits more radiation than this tower will. There has been no documentation of these towers creating interference v/ith other transmissions. The tower uses a frequency that is at the upper end of the UHF frequency. This frequency is above radio and television and is used by all cellular phone systems. It is our opinion that this structure meets all pertinent criteria for public hea th, safety and welfare. The structure will be well screened from adjacent neighbors. It will be visible above the trees. The tower makes no noise and is not lighted. Approximately once a week, a pickup truck would be on the site to maintain the tower. Except for the fact that the structure can be seen above the trees, it has no other impact on the area. We considered other locations and believed this is the best location." Kelley asked whether this area is currently s^^rved by U.S. West Vector. Mr. Uban replied, "Generally. This tower is being put in place to meet one capacity. There are too many users in this area now. If too many are trying to use the same frequency, communication is lost." Kelley asked where the tower is that presently se.'ves the Cellular phone users in this area. Mr. Hellerman replied, "There are several. Part of the problem is that Wayzata is located in a bowl. There is a facility in Hamel, Shorewood and Golden Valley. Those towers are - 8 - URONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING SEPTEMBER 17, 1990 ZONING FILE #1588-D.S. WEST NEW VECTOR CONTINUED not close enough to get a signal down into the City of Wayzata.” Kelley asked if the basic intent of this proposal is to provide service primarily for the City of Wayzata. Mr. Hellerman replied, "We are trying to serve an area that has a two to three mile radius from that area." Kelley asked what other sites had been considered. Mr. Uban stated that it is difficult to locate a site because they cannot condemn property. He said, "We have considered the Country Club, but they had no suitable site. VJe looked at the Busy Beaver Daycare Center, however the slopes to the rear of the facility were too steep. Vie wanted to have the tower located close to Highway 12, but away from residential density." Kelley asked whether location or economic considerations played a greater le in determining where a tower is to be located. Mr. Uban replied, "Both of those factors must be considered. We must provide good service at a reasonable rate. There are currently two companies competing with one another." Kelley asked whether the two companies could share the same tower. Mr. Uban replied, "No, they do not share towers." Kelley was concerned about the other company requesting a location within Orono for a tower. Mr. Uban stated that the Cellular phone is a public service and is useful in the event of emergencies when regular phone lines are out of service. Mabusth asked where U.S. West's competitor has their nearest tower. Mr. Hellerman rep' "d, "Our competitor ha: a facility on the water tower in Wayzata Kelley asked whe given consideration. the use of Orono's water tower had been Mr. Uban replied, "I don’t believe the water tower is located in the search area." Bellows asked how critical this specific search is to - 9 - ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING SEPTEMBER 17, 1990 ZONING FILE #1588-U.S. WEST NEW VECTOR CONTINUED providing service. Mr. Uban explained that it is important to locate the facility in as close to the cen<:er of the search area as possible in order to have a functional cell. Bellows asked how large a typical jell is. Mr. Hellerman explained, "When the system was first introduced to the Minneapolis area, the first 12 to 15 cells, we had to use tall towers. As the system developed, and the number of cells increased, the tow r size was reduced." Bellows asked what the height of the tall towers is. Mr. Hellerman said, "The tallest tower we have, located in Cologne, is approximately 430'. In the Downtown Minneapolis area, the towers are now 60' to 80' tall." Bellows asked if the only chance for the size of the proposed tower to be reduced would be if additional towers were installed in the area. Mr. Hellerman replied, "I would expect over the long term that to happen. how long into the future that may be, I cannot say." Johnson noted that there are several Ham operation towers located within the City of Orono. Rowlette asked how tall the to"er will be in relation to the existing power lines on the proposea site. Mr. Hasek replied, "The power lines are 70 The tower would be approximately twice as high." to 75' high. Mr. Darrell Anderson, 920 West Wayzata Boulevard, said, "I believe t.iis is totally incompatible with the area in which it is proposed. All of the property to the north of the Luce Line Trail and Highway 5 is residential property. I believe it is unsuitable for the church site and is not in keeping with long term plans for the Luce Line Trail. In terms of alternative sites, there is undeveloped land across Wayzata Boulevard between the Wayzata by-pass, where the Gun Club and Driving Range are located. That area would be more suitable in my opinion." Mr. Anand Gopinath, 705 Old Long Lake Road, said, "I wrote a letter to you because I was not sure I could attend this meeting. VJhen I purchased my house, I was informed that the area was zoned residential, two acre minimum. A variance has been given to the church and the daycare facility in order for them to operate in - 10 - ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING SEPTEMBER 17, 1990 ZONING FILE #1588-U.S. WEST NEW VECTOR CONTINUED their present locations. Now the City is being asked to approve a request for a commercial, industrial use in this same area. That is not in keeping with the rural character of the area and I oppose it. I have talked with the U.S. West Engineers. I am convinced that the radiation levels from the tower are acceptable for human exposure. However, I believe that the tower ought to be located in an industrial or commercial area. I believe that locating it in a residential area will reduce property values. The majority of phone transmissions take place with underground or overhead lines. Cellular phones are only used for mobile phone traffic. They may be useful in the event of an emergency, but are used primarily by ousiness people traveling in automobiles. The pattern coverage for this area will not be altered if the tower is located elsewhere." Ms. Karen Anderson, 920 West Wayzata Boulevard, asked if it is a common practice to combine a tax free property such as a church with a commercial use. She also asked if there is suff »nt dry buildable land for the tower. Kelley replied, "I don't be the manner before." >.-ve we have combined uses in Mr. Hasek stated that he was not aware of the need to provide information regarding the dry buildable area. Mabusth stated that such information was not requested. Kelley asked why it would not be possible to put a 60' tower in Wayzatd as opposed to installing a 150' tower three miles away. Mr. Hellerman replied. "That would rot efficiently cover the area we must serve." Mr. Uban said, "We are here asking to install a public service structure. It is the height in excess of 65' that creates the need for the Conditional Use Permit." Kelley said, "I disagree that this is a public service structure. Cellular phones are only used by a small number of people who can afford them. I think there is a defined difference between utilities. Cellular phones. such as electricity and gas, and Mr. Uban replied, "Your ordinances address communications." Kelley said, "I know that is what the Ordinances state. It may be necessary to update the Ordinances to take into consideration such new technologies." - 11 - ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING SEPTEMBER 17, 1990 ZONING FILE #1588-U.S. WEST NEW VECTOR CONTINUED Bellows added, "This is a commercial operation. It is not public service orientated. I am also concerned with the fact that the tower will be visible. People who live in Orono appreciate the rural character. If you were proposing to combine the tower with an existing structure, such as a water tower, there may be less opposition. You are proposing to inject into a residential neighborhood a very large and visible commercial structure. That is exactly the type of scenario we try to avoid in this City." Mr. Uban replied, "Public service does not mean just gas and electricity. It involves all types of utilities including communication. You cannot ignore your Ordinances in that respect. This is clearly within that definition. When talking about public services as a business, all utilities charge for their service. If you do not pay, you do not receive the service. There is no difference here." Rowlette said, "There are a lot of people in Orono that have Cellular phones. We may not be serving 100% of Orono residents, but we are serving a large number." Hanson agreed with Rowlette and added, "I believe that Cellular phones do fall under the category of public service." Moos said, "I concur with Maureen. This is a commercial use in a residential area. I believe there are other alternatives." Johnson agreed with Hanson. He said, "The church and daycare center are Conditional Uses, as are the Ham radio towers on private property. I do not see any distinction between those. I do not believe this will have a large commercial impact on the area." Cohen said, "I ..m having difficulty with the location. I believe there may be a need for the service, but don't believe it has to be that tower installed in that location." Johnson said, "I would be inclined to favor this more than structures that have been approved for other utilities. Those structures are generally constructed on substandard lots and do not meet any requirements. Placing the /er on the church property may mean that the site will be mair led." Hanson questioned whether it would b( possible to combine the tower with an existing Ham radio tower in the same approximate location. Mr. Hellerman stated that the location of the nearest Ham radio tower is in the middle of residential housing. - 12 - ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING SEPTEMBER 17, 1990 ZONING FILE #1588>O.S. WEST NEW VECTOR CONTINUED Mr. Gopinath stated that it is possible for U.S. West to go back to the drawing board and determine another search area that would provide the same results. There were no further comments from the public and the Public Hearing was closed. Kelley said, "Before we address the other aspects of this application, we should consider whether or not the Planning Commission will approve this Conditional Use." Mabusth asked the Planning Commission whether they interpret the code in such a way that permits this use. She said, "If you consider the Code section relative to accessory uses, this Conditional Use Permit application for a public service structure does not fit. I don't believe there is a s'^ction of the Code that addresses this use. If this were t. fall within the guidelines for a public service structure C.U.P., there must be a 50' setback. The standards for a Ham radio structure do not apply. I'm not sure that our Code at this time allows this structure in a residential zone. I believe it would be appropriate to have a legal opinion from the City Attorney." Kelley asked whether the legal opinion should be rendered before the Plar.ning Commission makes a recommendation. Mabusth believed that may be an appropriate was to proceed. Councilmember Callahan said, "If the Planning Commission should recommend denial of the C.U.P. then there would be no need for the City Attorney to render an opinion." It was moved by Kelley, seconded by Bellows, to recommend denial of the C.U.P. for a free-standing antenna to be located within a residential zone. Motion, Ayes-5, Johnson, Rowlette, Nay. Motion carried. #1589 MARCUS AND JUDY BLUE 2160 CRYSTAL AVENUE VARIANCES PUBLIC HEARING 8:15 P.M. TO 8:19 P.M. The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing were duly noted. Mr. and Mrs. Blue were present. Mabusth provided a brief review of her memo dated September 13, 1990. She added that she has asked Mr. Blue to provide a drawing of the elevations. Mr. Blue showed the Planning Commission his sketch of the - 13 - ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING SEPTEMBER 17, 1990 ZONING FILE #1539-BLUE CONTINUED elevations. He stated that he intends to change the roof structure on the house in the near future. There were no comments from the public pertaining to this application and the Public Hearing was closed. Mabusth asked Mr. Blue whether he intends to make any alterations to the deck. She informed him that it would be necessary to apply for a variance to do so. Mr. Blue stated that he does not intend to do anything with the deck. Kelley asked Mr. Blue whether there are frost footings under the deck. Mr. Blue indicated that the deck has a floating slab. Bellows noted that a lot coverage Variance of .046% is also a consideration in this application. It was moved by Hanson, seconded by Moos, to recommend approval of the side and front street setbacks Variances and the lot coverage Variance to reconstruct a garage addition. Further it is recommended that approval be given for a sideyard setback Variance for any possible repairs to the existing porch. Kelley asked whether frost footings will be placed under the garage. Mr. Blue indicated that he did not intend to have frost footings. Mabusth stated that the garage will have to meet the Building Code. Bellows said, "This is a much more ambitious project than the drawings indicate. I am uncomfortable with the aspect of approving something that has not been included in the application (frost footings for porch). I also believe that the application is incomplete. I do not object to the project, but I do object to our voting on it without proper documentation. The application makes no reference to the roof project. I think it sets a bad precedent to approve this without having all the information required. I do not think the elevations provided by Mr. Blue are sufficient." Kelley suggested that the Planning Commission and staff should review the issue of application information at a later time. Motion, Ayes-6, Nays-0, Bellows abstained. Motion carried. #1590 MINNEGASCO, INC. 525 OLD CRYSTAL BAY ROAD NORTH CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT PUBLIC HEARING 8:27 P.M. TO 8:40 P.M. The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing were duly noted. Mr. Thomas Meyer and Susan Turbes, Minnegasco - 14 - ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING SEPTEMBER 17, 1990 ZONING FILE 11590-MINNEGASCO, INC. CONTINUED Representatives, were present. Mabusth presented information relating to this application (see Jeanne Mabusth's memo dated September 12, 1990). She said, "I have received the City Engineer's comments. He has approved the access. With regard to the concern of hazards created by the propane, the City Engineer states there is far less hazard with propane than with gasoline. There is very little opportunity for there to be an explosion. The City Engineer recommended that there be Minnegasco staff present while the vaporizing process is in operation. That is what Minnegasco has proposed.” Mabusth provided pictures of a similar tanl^er and vaporizer located in Spring Park. Kelley asked whether the blue trailer is a permanent fixture. Mr. Meyer replied, "The blue trailer will be located in the fencing during the winter months. In the summer, all of the equipment will be removed, with the exception of a power pole and stand pipe that will be installed. The fence will remain on the property for the entire three to five years." Bellows noted that the fence will serve only as security, and not as a means of screening the equipment from view. Kelley asked whether the site will be illuminated. Mr. Meyer replied. "There will be a light on during the operation periods. Perhaps I should explain the process and purpose. We are trying to provide reliable service for our customers. Two years ^go there was an incident in Mound where 1,000 customers lost gas service for a period of time. The temperature dropped to more than 20 degrees below zero. The problem is that the area has been growing faster than Minnegasco has been able to install additional pipes to provide service. The problems only oc r on the extremely cold days of the year, in the early morning, when there is a maximum demand for gas. This will provide a temporary solution to that problem until there is enough of an increase in the area to justify a permanent solution. That solution is currently being designed, but we don't anticipate it to be installed for another three to five years. The unit that is mounted on the trailer will remain on the site during the winter. When there is a forecast in the winter for an extremely cold day, the tanker truck will arrive at the site around 4:00 a.m. The unit would be disconnected around 9:00 a.m. when the process is complete and the tanker will be removed." Kelley asked if there is any other location that would be - 15 > ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING SEPTEMBER 17, 1990 ZONING FILE il590-MINNEGASCO. INC., CONTINUED suitable for this. Mr. Meyer replied, "We did consider other locations, but felt that this location is central to where there is the greatest need. The topography of the land in this location is desirable. We want a flat site that is just off of a major road and is readily accessible to our facilities. As a clarification, we will not be hauling propane as indicated by the City Engineer. We will haul liquified natural gas. The tank truck is a double- walled truck with a nickel-steel interior. It is designed to withstand the temperature of the liquified gas which is 260 degrees below zero." Mrs. Rose Mary Vickerman, 425 North Old Crystal Bay Road, asked if there will be much additional traffic resulting from this. Mr. Meyer replied, "The only additional traffic will be the tanker truck on extremely cold days. It will arrive and stay on the site until 9:00 a.m. or so." Mrs. Vickerman stated that there are many schoolbusses in that area around 9:00 a.m. She suggested that the tanker be left on the site until 10:00 a.m. Mr. Meyer stated that they could probably do that. Kelley asked how many times last year such a facility would have been utilized. Mr. Meyer stated that the Spring Park facility was used three times. He said, "If we have an unusually cold winter, it may be used more." Kelley asked if the three to five year term of the Conditional Use Permit was reasonable. Mr. Meyer replied, "We would be in this particular location for a maximum of five years. If the pipe has not been installed by that time, we would find another location." There were no additional public comments and the Public Hearing was closed. Kelley stated that he would prefer to have the 8' fence screened. He added, "I would also like to require that should the plant material used for screening die, it must be replaced." Mr. Meyer replied, "Our code does not permit us to have vegetation in the area of the facility." - 16 - ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING SEPTEMBER 17, 1990 ZONING FILE #1590-MINNEGASCO, INC-, CONTINUED Kelley asked whether plant material could be placed outside of the fence. Mr. Meyer stated that may be possible. We would have to request permission from VanDale (owner of the property) to screen outside of that area. It was the consensus of the Planning Commission that screening should be provided on the north, south and west side of the facility. It was moved by Kelley, seconded by Moos, to recommend approval of the C.U.P., with the condition that Minnegasco provide a sketch plan showing screening for the north, west and south side of the facility. Motion, Ayes-7, Nays-0. Motion carried. (Planning Commissioner Cohen departed at this point cf the meeting.) #1555 LANDSTAR. INC. 2501 OLD BEACH ROAD PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION CONTINUATION OF PUBLIC HEARING AND RENOTIFICATION Mr. James MacKinnon, Attorney, and Mr. Dennis Sandin, Developer, were present. Mabusth noted that Mr. MacKinnon had just left the Minnetonka Beach Planning Commission Meeting. She asked him to report on the action taken regarding this application. Mr. MacKinnon s id, "The Minnetonka Beach Planning Commission gave a unanimous recommendation for approval. The Planning Commission questioned whether we intended to add fill in a particular location. I informed them we did not. JoEllen Hurr indicated that she would recommend that the outlet be separated according to the property within Minnetonka Beeich and Orono so each City will have its own outlet." Mabusth depicted the outlet to which Mr. MacKinnon referred. She said, "It is necessary for each City to have a separate outlet because of the different City Ordinances each City will use to govern the outlet." Mr. MacKinnon continued. He said, "Ms. Hurr also indicated that she may recommend to Council that they not allow any outlet in that location at all, but require it to be part of Lot One and Lot Two. She stated that she does not trust the University of Minnesota. She is concerned that the Foundation may give the outlet to the University some time in the future. The Planning Commission did not include that suggestion in their motion. The - 17 - OROHO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING SEPTEMBER 17, 1990 ZONING FILE #1555-LANDSTAR, INC., CONTINUED Minnetonka Beach Maintenance Person informed us that a connection does not exist where we are intending to hook up water Mabusth replied, "Our City Engineer has reviewed this and he has recommended that the extension continue up to Lafayette Ridge so that we can create a loop system. If there is any discrepancy, we will have the City Engineer review that further." Mr. MacKinnon said, "The Maintenance Person also told me that the lower portion of Old Beach Road is asphalt over old logs. When we run our pump system through there, we will have trouble. We did receive unanimous approval of the proposal as presented with no extraordinary recommendations." Mabusth said, "The wetlanls are designated at the 932' elevation. My memo indicated that I would show the various building envelopes and area calculations. I will show that now." Mabusth showed the Planning Commission the building envelopes for each of the proposed lots in relation to the setbacks and wetland. She noted that all of the lots easily meet the half acre dry buildable requirement. Mabusth asked Mr Sandin why Lot 8 was being proposed as an outlot. She said, "That lot satisfies all of the zoning requirements for tha B-4 Zoning District." Mr. Sandin replied, "If we had showed that lot as something other than an outlot, it would have been necessary to show an access from County Road 19 and to determine a building pad." Mabusth said, "That lot is a commercial lot, not residential. Also, it may be necessary for the Freshwater Foundation to go through a re-platting process to convert Outlot B to a lot. According to Orono's Code, it is not possible to construct anything on any outlot." Mr. MacKinnon agreed that Outlot B should be a lot. He asked Mabusth if a sufficient review has been done to confirm that Outlot B does in fact comply with the necessary standards to be a lot. Mabusth indicated that such confirmation has been made. Mr. MacKinnon said, "Then we would like to make this a lot. Kelley asked how large the houses proposed for these lots be. Mr. Sandin replied, "The houses will be approximately 4,000 to 5,000 s.f." - 18 - .J ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING SEPTEMBER 17, 1990 ZONING FILE #1555-LANDSTAR, INC., CONTINUED Mr. Dave Schneider, Old Beach Road, expressed his regarding the location of the driveways in relation intersection of Old Beach Road and County Road 19. concern to the Mabusth stated that the City will exercise caution in locating the driveway accesses. She informed Mr. Schneider that this proposal is only preliminary and that necessary changes will be made prior to final approval. Kelley said, "We are specifically designating the building envelopes in this subdivision. In the past, there have been cases where house plans have been in excess of what pre-designated building pads will allow. The City has been asked to grant Variances in those situacions. I am stating my position at this time. I am not going to recommend approval of any Variances for any of these lo’-s. That is my personal opinion. These lots are very unique because of the wetland and Old Beach Road." Mabusth noted that these lots will not only be controlled by setback standards, but also by lot coverage requirements. Mr. MacKinnon stated that he will draft a memo to his client in that regard. There were no additional comments from the Public regarding this application and the Public Hearing was closed. It was moved by Johnson, seconded by Hanson, to recommend approval of the Preliminary Subdivision for E.W. Blanch at 2501 Old Beach Road, subject to staff recommendations A through G, and Chairman Kelley's notice to the Developer regarding future Variances for houses constructed in this subdivision. Bellows added that this site is very sensitive and that the City will make every attempt to assure that the delicate character is maintained. Kelley asked whether Mr. Blanch has considered donating the Outlot to the Nature Conservancy or the City of Orono to assure that it will be protected. Mr. MacKinnon stated that Mr. Blanch is on the Board of e Freshwater Foundation. Motion, Ayes-6, Nays-0. Motion carried. COMMENTS OF PLANNING COMMISSION REPRESENTATIVE COUNCIL MEETING OF SEPTEMBER 10, 1990 Moos briefly discussed the Rebers application. APPROVAL OF MINUTES-AUGUST 20, 1990 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING It was moved by Johnson, seconded by Hanson, to approve the minutes of the August 20, 1990 Planning Commission Meeting. Motion, Ayes-6, Nays-0. Motion carried. - 19 - ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING SEPTEMBER 17, 1990 PLANNING COMMISSION REPRESENTATIVE It was agreed that Jeff Johnson would be the Planning Commission Representative at the October 8, 1990 Council Meeting. ADJOURNMENT The September 17, 1990 Planning Commission meeting adjourned at 9:17 p.m. - 20 - n ( c-TY «= ] UU OPCYQ j LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRl<|jJ][lE[in^7il Action Report: Meeting: Lake Use Committee Monday, September 17, 199U, Shorewood City Hail ' • . m. "HP 2 e 1890 Members Present: Robert Fillsbury, Chair. Minnetonka; Douglas Babcock, Spring Park; Marvin Bjorlin, Tonka Bay; Bert Foster. Deephaven; Thomas Reese, Mound, David Cochran, Greenwood, (as noted). Also present: Eugene Strommen, Executive Director; Sgt. William Cha* il r. Sheriff's Water Patrol; Rachel Thibault. Administrati\_ Technician. The meeting was called to order at 4:30 p.m. by Chair Pillsbury. 1. LMCD/Water Patrol Special Deputy Award for 1990. The committee reviewed the criteria, selection process to be used in selecting the recipient of the LMCD/Water Patrol Special Deputy Award for 1990. The committee accepted the procedures as submitted with no change. 2. 1990 Lake Use Study. The committee received the shoreline boat counts dated August 22, 1990. The committee commented on the reductions in the vj. -ous classifications from 1979 through 199»-. It was noted the Miscellaneous category includes canoes, small sail boats and, for 1990, personal watercraft. 3. Code Amendment Regarding Water Ski Observer Rule. An amendment to the ordinance relating to the requirement for observers when towing persons was tabled by the Board at its d/22/90 meeting. . . i r Foster moved, Reese seconded, to recommend adoption ot the amendment to LMCD Code Section 3.10. Subdivision 1. as submitted, which amendment orovides for exceptions to the observer rule. Motion carried, Bjorlin abstaining. A letter from Gregg Klohn, Spring Park, requested consideration for reducing the age minimum for observers from 12 years to 8 years. The committee took no action on the request. 4. Update Resolution 62, Resolution Getting teos. The code covering the late fee requirement for open water fishing contests was changed from 6U days to 90 days but the enabling Resolution was not changed. Bjorlin moved, Reese seconded, to amend Resolution No. , Resolution Setting Fees for License.s or Permits, Sertion 5. to change the late fee requirement for open water fishing contests from 60 days to 90 days. Motion carried unanimously. Lake Use Committee i?eptember 17, 1990 Chandler commented that staggering of ease off starting times has improved fishing contests, although speed continues to be a problem. Review of Winter Rules. a. Buoy Removal suggested a uUu'^ge in Code Currently the Code calls shows that the ice may safety. Foster moved, B.iorlin Code which would call for 15 "or as ice/weather unanimously. From Lake. The Executive Director 2.12. Subd. 7, regarding buoy removal, for removal by December 15. Experience not be thick enough on that date for seconded, to recommend a change in the buoy removal from the Lake by December conditions permit". Motion carried b. Winter Rules - Deicing. The committee reviewed the Winter Rules brochure and agreed to re-word the Deicing section to conform to the Code to eliminate the statement regarding the policy not to grant new deicing licenses. 6. Deposit Refunds. Ejorlin moved. Reese seconded, to recommend the following deposit refunds as all permit conditions were met: ^ MN/WI Pro-Am Bass Tournaments, 5/27, V/'28 and 29, 8/25/90. Wednesday Night Bass Tournament.s 6/13 tlirough 8/22/9U Motion carried unanimously. 7. Water Patrol Report. a. The question was raised late in the 19H9-9U winter by the committee as to the advisability for the Water Patrol to close the lake during winter months to motorized vehicles due to lake ice hazards. Chandler reported there is a state policy being considered by the Minnesota Sheriff’s Association. The difficulty involves making a judgment as to when ice is safe or not, and the Hennepin County Sheriff's Water Patrol does not certify as to ice being safe at any time. The further c implications of enforcement make it difficult tn implement, especially for large lakes. It was the committee’s consensus to await possible recommendations on a state-wide basis. b. P' raoTiJil Watercraft Operation and Safety Evaluation. There have been a number of personal watercraft accidents stemming from inexperienced people operating them. Chandler will have more information on th ^ statistics at the September ..6 Board meeting On the plus side there have been fewer citations involving non-wearing of life .iackets. Chandler said there were fewer decibel complaints and test.s than anticipated. Some owners of PWC’s and otlier watercraft aske<l voluntarily for a decibel test. Lake Use Committee September 17, 1990 c. Charter Boat Operation Evaluation. Chandler recommended adopting the Coast Guard rules for watercraft capacity ratings. He has a list of items they inspect and will discuss them with Attorney LeFevere. Including the standards in an ordinance will be considered. Foster objected to using Coast Guard rules for an inland lake. Reducing capacities would cut access to the lake by the public, contrary to the LMCD desiro to provide a positive Lake Minnetonka experience. Reese stated cutting capacity would hurt the charter boat operators. Chandler noted that manufacturers tend to exaggerate their boat capacities to satisfy their customers' interests. d. Statistics. Chandler reported 99 BWIs have been issued in the County, 93 on Lake Minnetonka. According to the MN DNR, Hennepin County is the highest county in tlie nation for BWl arrests. The six month report sliows accidents ai up 28%, citations are up 14%, and lake patrol is up 13%. From January through June 1990, the Water Patrol has logged 1400 hours of patrol in boats. 8. County of Hennepin/LMCD Joint and Cooperative Agreement. The Executive Dii ::tor distributed ca copy of the operating agreement between Hennepin Countv and the LMCD for law enforcement services on Lake Minnetonka. This copy was reviewed by tiie appointed sub-comn' -September 12. This is the first review of the agreem^.-nu since 1979. Bjoriin moved, Foster seconded, to recommend approv.il of the Joint and Cooperative Agreement draft as submitted with the additional change- Section I C to read* Cooperation With Oth'^t* Enforcement Agencies: COUNTY and LMCD mutually agree that they wiii cooperate to maximise the level and quality of services on the Lake by cooperative efforts with other law enforcement agencies having jurisdiction on the Lake. including. but not limited to, the State Department of Natural Resource-s, Park authojcLtles and Igcai law er.f•p.rc_ement agencies. In particular, LmCD shall sponsor semi-annual meetings to coordinate special events on the Lake. Since the committee meeting. Sheriff recommend.s deleting "to coordinate special events on tlie Lake . Section I D. The words "operation and" and "and financial" deleted from the draft are to be left in. Motion carried unanimously. Cochran arrived. 9. Accreditation Outline. The Executive Director submitted a statement concerning services and perf orMc'.nce of the d, .inepin County Sheriff’s Water Patrol for submission to the Uommis.sion for Accreditation for Law Enforcement Agencies, Inc. It will be submitted to the Commission at 7 pm., September 17. Lake Use Committee September 17, 199U 10. Video Presentation. The Committee viewed a video taken on the Paradise Princess charter boat. The video showed the rescue of the passengers prior to the sinking of the boat in Carson's Bay, caused by an uneven distribution of passengers. Reese and Bjorlin were excused 11 Power Boat Racing Mark Welch and Schuyler Wallace, Twin City Power Boat Association. requested approval to conduct a power boat race on Wayzata Bay in conjunction with the Wayzata Chamber of Commerce J. J. Hill Days celebration. The Committee took no action after a discussion which included information from the Executive Director that pov;er boat racing is prohibited under LMCD Code Sec. 3.02, Sub. la) and lb) which limits speed to 40 m.p.h. day, 20 m.p.h. night. 11. Adjournment There being no further business to come before the Committee the meeting was adjourned at 6 p.m. FOR THE COMMITTEE: Eugene Strommen, Executive Director Robert Pillsbury, Chair LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT Action Report of: Water Structures and Environment Committee Meeting:Saturday, September 8, 1990 7:30 a.m Shorewood City Hall Mesbers Present: Douglas Babcock, Vice Chair. Spring Park; David Cochran. Greenwood; Robert Pillsbury. Minnetonka: dan Boswinkel. Minnetonka Beach; John Lewman, Minnetrista; Marvin Bjorlin. Tonka Bay. Also present: Eugene Strommen. Executive Director; Rachel Thibault, Administrative Technician. The meeting was called to order at 7:30 a.m. by Acting (.hair Babcock. 1. Lake Virginia Control Structure. David Bartos. President of the Lake Virginia Homeowners Association, explained an application the Association has made to the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources for a permit «o construct a temporary rock weir water level control structure near Sraithtown Road ( Victoria) to retain higher water levels in Lake Virginia. , The rock weir would be a temporary solution to the level problem. The long range intent is to construct a 12 x culvert to establish a waterway to Lake Minnetonka. | Association had received a preliminary estimate for installing the culvert of $187,000. which would include increasing the public access on Lake Virginia from 6 parking spaces to lb. it they can purchase the land at the north Responding to Committee questions. Bartos said he does not know if there will be any land arquisition costs. Bartos said that, depending on the water levels. currently the water can flow in either direction. Cochran noted that the MN DNR has established the Lake Virginia water level at and the natural flow is to Lake Minnetonka. Babcock raised the question as to whether Lake Virginia would Minnetonka if a permanent structure were constructed that created * ''^"‘cochran moved, Babcock seconded, to recommend responding to the MN DNR request for comments on the application ol the LaK Virginia Homeowners As.sociation by recommending restoration ot an appropriate weir as determined by the Minnehaha Creek Watershed D^trict to establish the ordinary high water (929.9 ) then study the matter to come to a long term solution. Motion carried unanimously. Boswinkel arrived 2. Commercial Marina Code Amendment. , , . r The Committee received a letter dated 9/^9^ LeFevere. LMCD Counsel. reexamining the definition - continued Charles of a Water Structures and Environment Committee September 8, 1990 commercial marina. Because the letter is complex, members were not comfortable in taking action on short notice without an opportunity for analysis. There is ai; involvement with a pending situation of the docks at the Excelsior Bay Gables and an involvement with conversion of use and public use of docks on outlots. Cochran suggested continuing the discussion as an agenda item at the committee level and to ask Grathwol and LeFevere to attend a futu^ a meeting. Pillsbur> moved, Boswinkel seconded, to table the discussion. Motion carried unanimously. Cochran said some action will have to be taken on the Excelsior Bay Gables matter. Boswinkel asked for a copy of the agreement with the City of Excelsior which led to the classification of the docks as commercial. 3. Chapman Place Docks. The management agreement for the Chapman Place docks has been changed as described in correspondence from attorney LeFevere dated 7/16/90. A significant change is that C ■'pman Place Association has purchased the actual dock structure. That changed the nature of the operation from the original arrangement in 1989. It affected fee structure and subsequent payment to the Association. As a commercial dock, Chapman Place Association now appears to have too much control over its operation, including setting the fees. The executive director, in discussing the arrangement with licensee Bob Cuthill, was assured the Association intends to keep a fully open commercial licensed operation. The committee requested the executive director review these concerns with the licensee. The consensus was to continue the review to the next meeting. 4. Amenity Study. The Committee received an amenity study comparison with the proposed code amendment as it would have affected special density allowances for licenses granted in the rast three years. Bjorlin moved, Boswinkel seconded, to accept the changes submitted and to amend the first sentence on page two to read: "Each amenity, subject to acceptability by the Board of Directors, earns 10 poinos for each item of Group A, 5 points for each item of Group B, and 3 points for each item of Group C. Motion carried unanimously. Cochran moved, change: 2. Group B Bjorli^ seconded, to add the following - Environmental Protection add 'and other governmental" to the change following Environmental Protection, QQW r-eading .'lay^r aod above city and Qkher KQX.*^XWn^ntaX agg^ncies’. mtpinjum requirements. ‘ an<i to add Item d - Milfoil Off Load Sites. Motion carried unanimosly. Water Structures and Environment Committee September 8, 1990 5. Interagency Agreement on Dredging Status. The Executive Director reported there has been no report from the DNR on the Interagency Agreement on Dredging. The subject will be continued on the agenda. 6. Wayzata Yacht Club Site 2. The Executive Director reported that Duane Markus has furnished information to the LMCD that a restriction on the Wayzata Yacht Club Site 2 property provides for use of the property for residential purposes only. The information was noted as a matter involving the Club and the City of Wayzata. BJorlin left 7. Staff Report, Administrative Teclinician Rachel Thibault. a. Multiple dock inspection progress. Thibault reported most dock inspections have taken place. They are generally in good condition. Some are not in conformance with the site plan on file. In tho.se cases notice, through letter, has been given the permit holder and generally the responses have been cooperative. Thibault reported Gray’s Bay Marina had paid for fewer water storage units than that which they have. They were notified and have paid the additional fees. Tonka Bay Marina is licensed for 54 racks and have 59. The Tonka Pay Marina manager’s response was tliat the City gave them permission for 58. The marina is being advised on 54 as the licensed number. Their fees will be adjusted to reflect the correct water storage units. There has been no change in the Gayle’s Marina situation whereby they have three barges in an area not authorized as a dock use area. A final notice is being prepared. Cochran observed that registered surveys are needed on all new applications for commercial, special density and permanent docks. Thibault reported the Lakeside Marina floating docks do not conform to the original plan. The docks are only partially installed. The licensee, Jim Dunn, said it will be taken care of next spring when the docks are completed. Thibault submitted a memorandum explaining that the North Shore Drive Marina has a Board stipulation requiring fencing of their east dock. They are using the area for loading and unloading handicapped people from charter boats as allowed in a previous court order. The licensee has ordered four signs to be posted along the east dock stating it is limited to loading and unloading of handicapped persons only. Boswinkel moved, Cochran seconded, to recommend release of the stipulation calling for fencing of the ea.st docks at the North Shore Drive Marina, provided adequate handicapped only sign.s are erected. Motion carried unanimously. Water Structure and Environment Committee September 8, 1990 Thibault asked about permits for canoes and canoe racks erected away from the water, mentioning the canoe racks at the City of Deephaven. The Executive Director will ask LeFevere about canoe storage on land. It will also be added to the priority study list. b. Complaints processed and resolved. Thibault reported on complaints about neighbors having too many boats docked. She noted in all cases letters were written and compliance was received. There continue to be complaints about infringements on dock use areas. Most of them are settled by the neighbors. Lewman left. Boswinkel mentioned a security light at Bohn’s Point. The Executive Director will check tlie ordinance and ask the Water Patrol for problem. information as to whether it is a navigational 8. Additional Business. a. City of Deephaven Fees The Executive Director presented a summary report on the City of Deephaven which is entitled to a refund of $3,270 because excess fees were paid when they were applying for a new dock license, new district mooring area license, submitting a special density application and variance application. His report detailed the various fees paid. The City is asking consideration for a refund of the fees paid for the 8 new slips at 1.5 WSU each or $120. The slips were not built yet. Cochran moved, Boswinkel seconded, to recommend approval of the $3,270 refund per the Executive Director’s report and to recommend denial of the $120 refund requested as it has been LMCD’s practice to charge the full license fee for the year in which it is applied for, even if the docks are not installed daring the year. Motion carried unanimously. b. Excelsior Bay Yacht Club Environmental Worksheet. Assessment The Executive Director reported the EAW on the Excelsior Bay Yacht Club is pending as the licensee c * not met with the City of Excelsior. He will contact the licensee and the City so all unresolved questions can be answered. c. Hennepin County Sheriff’s Office Review. The Executive Director distributed a copy of material from the Water Patrol regarding a review of the Hennepin County Sheriff’s Office by the Commission on Accreditation for Law Enforcement Agencies, Inc. , 7 p.m. , Monda»' Sept. 17. The Water Water Structure and Environment Committee September 8, 1990 Patrol has asked the LMCD to be present at the review at the evening session to speak about the LMCD/Water Patrol working relations. The Executive Director will attend and Cochran will find a Board member to also attend. environm1':nt On behalf of Reese, the Executive Director submitted the Eurasian Water Milfoil Harvest Report as of 9-5-90. Harvesting ended on 9-7. The program will come in under budget. About 1,300 acres are expected to be harvested at the close. Cochran stated the program must be put together early, suggesting fall or early winter. He also said there should be a review of marking areas being harvested, and there should be more aerial observations. There being no further business, Pillsbury moved. Cochran seconded. that the meeting be adjourned. Motion carried unanimously. Meeting adjourned at 10:00 a.m FOR THE COMMITTEE; Eugene Strommen, Executive Director James Grathwol. Chair LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT 473-7033 L.N.C.D. MUTING SCHEDULE October 1990 JiOini d LS ['VLJ: Lk OCT 2 1990 Monday 8 Columbus Day Holiday, LMCD office closed Saturday 13 Water Structures & Environment Committee 7j30 a.m. Shorewood City Hall Monday 15 Lake Use Committee 4i30 p.m. Shorewood City Hall Friday Eurasian Water Milfoil Task Force 8:30 a.m. Freshwater Foundation Wednesday 24 LMCD Board of Directors' Regular Meeting 7t30 p.m. Tonka Bay City Hall 9-28-90 LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT 473-7033 B?KNTS SCHEi>ULB October 1990 Race schedule, Wayzata Yacht Club, Lower Lake onlyi Oct 6 Saturday 10:00 a.m.2nd Commodore Cup Oct 13 Saturday 10:00 a.m.3rd Commodore Cup Oct 20 Saturday 10:00 a.m.4th Commodore Cup Oct 27 Saturday 10:00 am.Main1 Lake (Frostbite) Viking Bassmasters of Minnesota tournament Oct 14 Sunday 7:00 a.ra. North Shore Drive Marina 9-28-90 MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE SCHOOL BOARD OF ORONO INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 278 HELD ON SEPTEMBER 10. 1990 " 'jlfl The regular meeting of the School Board of Orono Independent School District No. 278 was held on Monday, September 10, 1990. SEP 2 6 1890Thomas MichPresent: Dave McKown Don Anderson Lucie Taylor James Franklin John Maresh Peg Swanson Wi11iam Fenholt UPON MOTION by Lucie Taylor, seconded by John Maresh, the consent agenda was approved as follows: - ap oved the minutes of the August 13, 1990 regular meeting; - approved the minutes of the Board Workshop, August '' 1990; - approved participation in the Metro Educator's Exchange Program; - approved the bills as covered by vouchers 066959 through 067254 and building construction bills as covered by vouchers 1055 through 1077. - approved the appointment of Leslie Larson as part-time kindergarten teacher at Orono Primary School for the 1990-91 school year; - approved the appointment of Carol Seemann as a fifth grade teacher in the liddle school for the 1990-91 school year. Motion carried unanimously. Dr. Mich reported that the opening of the 1990-91 school year was successful in spite of the intensely warm weather and he expressed appreciation to everyone for their ef^ held for suirr months; that B: of the material, wanted to draw s, jects, especia’y wantPd tc express ■orn in a successful start; that on August 22 a picnic was ^ in appreciation for their work/efforts during the summer olt had informed him that, regarding the construction, 39t place and 47% of the labor has been completed; that he attention to the information item regarding summer pro- 'that has been done at Orono Primary School; that he . .elation to V.F.W. Post #5903 for the four prints titled “Silent Kings" in coiK.iemoration of the Challenger accident, one print will be placed in each school; that a new homeroom (Advisor/Advisee) program has been started a: Orono High School, requested by students, which will provide 9th and 10th grade students the assistance of a faculty member and a Student Senate member fc. academic progress, recreation, social and wellness issues; that on September 27 the Metropolitan Academy Program will address the issue of desegre gation and Board members are invited to attend; that the Annual Report is under way and that last year's report received honorable mention for the way in which it dealt with process; that the revised Mission Statement will be returned to the Board for a first readio'' <it the next Board meeting and that he appreciated Peg Swanson's work on this, it the Octoberfest will be held 'n October 6 as a fundraiser for the Wolfridgt program to reduce overall cost to students and to provide scholarships as needed; that the final site plan for the 51 acres across the street will be available on October 11 and the Facilities Committee will meet on that day at 3:00 p.m.; that a Personnel Directory has been developed for all faculty and staff; that a tape is available to Board members of Irma Kelley's speech from the opening session of the preschool workshop. Board members commended administration, faculty and staff for the excellent start of the school year, the only problem being the late arrival in the homes of bus schedules for students. Bill FenhoU stated that the schedules were mailed in time but because of bulk mailing, not all homes received them and that steps will be taken next year to correct this problem. UPON MOTION by Don Anderson, seconded by Jim Franklin, the Board of Education approved the proposed tax levy for 1990, collectible in 1991. as certified by the clerk. Carried unanimously. Dr. Mich reported that the Board of Education had met in a workshop session on August 13 for the purpose of reviewing at the finances and budget of the district. He stated that the Board reflected on some accomplishments of the last four years which have upgraded our schools programmatically and in terms of facilities but that there remains a concern regarding the continuance of ade quate funding from the state. For clarification purposes, Pr. Mich stated that all funding for the riew construction is in place for completion and that Board discussion at the workshop was in regard to program and operating funds for the daily operation of the district. Dave McKown, Peg Swanson, and Lucie Taylor will meet with administration on September 18 to review/study materials regarding revenue issues. UPON MOTION by Lucie Taylor, s jnded by Jim Franklin, the Board of Education approved the contracts for the Community Education personnel as negotiated by the Board Negotiation Committee. Carried unanimously. UPON Motion by Lucie Taylor, seconded by Jim Franklin, the Board of Education approved the contract for Coordinator of Buildings and Grounds as negotiated by the Board Negotiation Committee. Carried unanimously. UPON MOTION by Don Anderson, seconded by Jim Franklin, the Board of Education requested bids on assorted school f-rnlture for the new addition. Carried unanimously. Karen Orcutt reported to the Board on the special education audit which was con ducted in the spring of 1990, this audit being in conjunction with Hennepin Technical College and the thirteen member districts and that i'^^-^rnal rela tionship. Ms. Orcutt provided an overview of the areas that were r, iewed, pro vided information on the comments/improvements necessary both in program and fiscally as well as enumerating for the Board the strengths of the program. Ms. Orcutt, in her report, briefly commented on the special education guidebook in which all the programs and procedures of the special education system are explained. She stated that this guidebook will be made available to each Board member as it is a document that should be most helpful to them as policymakers of the district. Dr. Mich expressed appreciation to Karen and her staff for their work/efforts in the special education program. He stated that he received a "glowing report" from the auditor reMarding not only the quality of the program b fessionalism of t^he staff. also the pro- Ron Gilbert pro- ded the Board with a sumrary of the summer school program. He stated that 't was a busy but successful suTiner school with 430 students involved in recr^-ational as well as academic courses. The Board aiso heard a report froir Ron Gilbert on the openng of Schumann Elementary School for the 1990-91 school year. Mr. Gilbert stated Inal the start of the year was "ucressful owing to the dedication of the facuUy/staff for their preparation efforts/work. Mr. Gilbert highlighted va-.ous activities/programs that are presently taking place at Schumann or th.^t he plans to initiate during this school year. UPON MOTION by Lucie Taylor, seconded by Jim Franklin, the meeting was adjourned. Lucienne J. Tayior, CVer, Approved: Dave McKown. ^ HOUSE RESEARCH July 1990 Information Brief Joti* HcOiaijul Legislative Analyst 296-5039 1990 Constitutional Amendment Question: Environment and Natural Resources Trust Fund Revenue On November 6, 1990, Minnesotans will vote on an amendment to the state constitution. The amendment concerns the dedication of state lottery proceeds to the Environment and N^'tural Resources Trust Fund (created by constitutional amendment two yerr* ^igo). This i** amen n b. nswers frequently asked questions on the constitutional For moi . iiled information on how the Trust Fund operates, see EnvironoMfit and Natural Resources Trust Fund Proposal: Questions and Answers by John Helland, August 1988. 1. VVhat is the Environment and Natural Resources Trust Fund? The Environment and Natural Resources Trust Fund is a fund in the state treasury. The Trust Fund was esublished by a constitutional amendment approveJ by the voters in November 1988. Money appropriated to t‘ “^rust Fund is invested and the investment earnings of the Trust Fund are used to finan *ie protection, conservation, preservation, and enhancement of the sta^ .r, water, land, Gsh, wildlife, and other natural resources. The principal of the T Fund is perpetual and inviolate forever, except that, until 1997, up to 25 percent of the annual revenue deposited in the Tru^r Fund may be expended. .Also, up to 5 percent of the p'-incipal of the Trust Fund, uiicr it reaches S200 million, can be loaned for water system improvements. These prov ‘ ions regarding the use of the money in the Trust Fund can only be changed by con.stitutional amendment, except that the $200 million amount for water loans can be changed by the Legislature. 2. What does the amendment say? The proposed amendment states: "Shall the Minnesota Constitution be amended to dedicate not less than 40 percent of the net proceeds from the state lottery to the Minnesota environment and natural resources trjst fund for environment, natural resources, and wildlife purposes until the year 2001?" f D...A ha r » t f :B ..: I : n 1990 Constitutional Amendment Question:Environment and Natural Resources Trust Fund Revenue July 1990 Page 2 3. What vote is needed to pass the amendment? 1 tkm all constitut’onal amendments, the lottery proceeds dedication amendment requires a majority of all persons voting in the November 6, 1 990 election. 4 What will the amendment do if it is approved? If the amendment is approved, at least 40 percent of the net proceeds of the state lottery will be placed in the Environment and Natural Resources Trust Fund until the year 2001, and can only be used for environment, natural resources, and wildlife purposes. 5. What happens if the amendment is not approved? If the amendment is not approved, the proceec:> of the lottery will be used as provided by law. Current law designates that 40 percent of the proceeds be placed in the Trust Fund, just as the amendment would provide. However, the law providing for distribution of the lottery proceeds can be changed by future legislatures. There is no guaran»«.e that at least 40 percent will be placed in the Trust Fund each year until 2001, as the constitutional amendment would require. The amendment would guarantee this distribution until 2001, and this could only be changed by the adoption of another constitutional amendment. 6. What happens to the other 60 percent of lottery proceeds? 1990 law distributes lottery proceeds as follows. ■ 40 percent to the Trust Fund ■ 28.3 ocrcent to pay for debt service on stale bonds issued for capital improvements at >tate institutions for higher education ■ 6.7 percent to pay for deot service on stale bonds issued for capital improvements to develop or protect the sute's environment and natural resources ■ 25 percent to the Greater Minnesota Corporation At present none of the distribution of lottery proceeds b governed by a specific constitutional provbion. All of the dblribution is governed by state law, ; can be changed by the Legislature at any time. 7. If the amendment passes, how much money will accrue to the Trust Fund? According to the State Lottery Office, 40 percent of the net lottery revenue will amount to aLiiost S21 million from fiscal year 1990 to fiscal year 1991. If thb revenue figure continues, $231 million will accumulate in the principal of the Trust Fund by 2001. DATE: September 26, 1990 TO: Chief Mel Kilbo FROM: Officer Jim Cornick SUBJECT: 1991 D.A.R.E. Program On Septeraber 25, 1990, I met with the principal of the Orono Middle School, Warren Nelson. I met with him to discuss the upcoming 1991 D.A.R.E. Program in the school. Mr. Nelson is 100% behind the program, as well as all of the 5tr grade teachers involved. The program this year will pro bably go somewhere between 11 and 12 weeks beginning the 2nd week in January and ending at spring break, March - approx, the 22nd. Changes this year will be that there will be 8 classes iustead of 7 and will involve 4 days of teaching. The number of students has risen 25 and is a total of 197 students. Mr. Nelson and myself agreed to meet again with the 5th grade tea chers for the purpose of passing on any information to them re garding the D.A.R.E. Program. The meeting will be set in approx. 1 or 2 weeks. Mr. Nelson also reque«?ted some budget figures from me in relation to possibly getting a professional speaker for the graduation ce remony. I will be checking into this further, however, this brings us up to date at this tim*e. OFFICE OF THE INSPECTOR IN CHARGE Post Office Bo* 64558 Saint Paul. MN 55164-2201 September 5, 1990 Melvin Kilbo Chief of Police Orono Police Department P.O. Box 86 Crystal Bay, Minnesota 55323 Dear Chief Kilbo: Postal Inspector M. R. Desrosiers has advised me of the excellent assistance and cooperation extended him by Lt. Gary Cheswick and Patrol Officers Bruce Anderson and Mark Thornton in apprehending William Ulrich on August 30, 1990 For your information a Federal Grand Jury, Minneapolis, Minnesota, returned a sealed Indictment on August 21, 1990, which charged Ulrich with 15 Counts of Mail Fraud. The enthusiasm and professionalism extended Inspector Desrosiers was invaluable and instrumental in the successful arrest of the subject. I would like to take this opportunity to express the appreciation of the St. Paul Division to Lt. Cheswick and Patrol Officers Anderson and Thornton for the comm‘»ndable manner in which the matter was handled. Sincerely, Denny Copl Postal Inspector in Charge Septeaber 11* 1990 Dear Police Chief, I would like to thank the officers and park workers for bringing to our attention earlier this week some tapes that had been stolen from Video Update. Ve recently did some moving around of our tape racks and in doing so made one of the racks available to our customers, not on purpose, to which they could reach. Had it not been for the officers and the park people we would not have know tfhat these tapes were being reached from in front of the counter. Vee preceded to ir:ve things around so this could not happen again. The off ter checked in with us again later in the week to make sure that all was safe. WE appreciate the time and effort these people took. Again thanks, you probable do not hear from us little people very ouch but you have always been there to help us. Sincerely Hikelyn Carlson General Manager Video Update Spring Park ORONO POLICE DEPARTMENT ^ CQN^aa ^^UM6Ea QCAi _________CQNT *GtNCY SCK iSEN7 CAGi ^ E, c , ri /1 '^.r>\nn\Q, , lMiN|o,2.7|^/i/9y^ DATE reported iRPOI ^!VE PTO ^TRP5 LOCATQW GRIND >fflR XGN) 7] / i^J^U ,7 iT^ / I II PUCE CCVMi^O iPLC) SQUAD OR BADGE * iSBNI ^IM€ AStG TASi TIME ARR iTAPi TIME CLR iTCU m] / E /1 ■ I /. 4<^i Ysn /1 Vi v.^i /1/ I / S/Gfr ucs /[ MtRTl/h 33ZES/S /[ OFFCER ASST DFPSNSEO ORPCTIALCOMPU ^TG PRPCiPAl CODE SUSPECT sus VCTIM VIC REPORT PARTY RP AOMIN ADM OFFENDER OFF other OTH HROCodH P-<N« R.Raoo A-AWm 1- In Person V-V«ua M-MM T-OPiw ARREST CITATION I NARNC crc o?K & NAME {LAST. FIRST. MOOE) I'T”NAME lUST, FIRST MCOLE) PM RO PM.Rl ADDRESS PH W PHRi NAME (LAST. FIRST MIDDLE! OT>«R REPORTS INCL JD60 FigoundZ PropK«rtoryZ impaad Contcn Z AocxAM RtooR f MR-nc#Rwoft Z .PhowZ TagiZ Cofnm. VMi R«nn Z 0**««ig«Z RoiCMiZ ADDRESS PhiWI PM-,R> -r<.-'■*vn JT ca ^cT-v v/v4a/*(.*- /-o C -7'“^ s^uc y/^^r 7C^rJ^( y^^Q ^ C<,y// C/Vg>^^ ^ /!-4 >7 -^cT^j 3PTT0; 0 0 0 («] ) ATTw □ crry attny □ court □ chief z imp cons z other ISPOSITION: Unfounded Cleared By Arrest Ref Other Agerxry Inactive Other FRCERS SUPERVISOR S SIGNATURE Lake Minnetonka Cable Communications Commission 443 OAK STREET • EXCELSIOR, MINNESOTA 55331 • 1612)474 5539 J OctoDer 4, 1990 Mr. Paul Nazarow, Regional Manager Trlax Cableviaion 1S04 2nd St. S.E., P.O. Box 110 Waseca, MN 56093 OCT 5 1930 Dear Paul: On Monday morning I was greeted by some very irate messv^ges on my answering machine. They were left by angry suoscribers who were, as beat I can tell, without cable service when they returned to their homes late Friday afternoon. I have since been told the outage lasted through Saturday morning lour ser vice was still out on Monday morning) and was due, incredulously enough, to the switch from the Excelsior headend equipment to the fiber-optic link! The judgement in making the decision to perform this technical adjustment at peaK ca.ble-viewing time shows cynical contempt tor the subscriber at a time when ma • subscribers are still recovering from the recent no of 'te increases and tiering. I might add I nave already spoken to Ric Hanson reqard,.ng this matter. Coupled with the incident involving Regional Cable Channel 6, I hope you will make every effort possible in the future to prove to your lake area subscribers that you mean to provide the services you've promised and to uphold a decent level of customer-service standards, not the least of which should be sensitivity to appropriate shut-down hours of the system. Ydbrs trul r Jennifep Watts Administrator 1 cc: LMCCC Executive Committee w/attacnment LMCCC member cities' staff w/attachment attachment: letter to Triax re: Regional 6 discor.nect Lake Minnetonka Cable Communications Commission 443 OAK STREET • EXCELSIOR, MINNESOTA 55331 • (612)474 5539 S*»ptetnber 28, 1990 Mr. Paul Nazarow, Regional Manager Triax Cableviaxon 1504 2nd St. S.E. P.O. Box 110 Waaeca, MN 56093 Dear Paul: Today# during my attempt to find out why Regional Channel 6 has been off the caole since before our meeting on the 18th. 1 discovered that the Wayzata school district has arbitrarily shut down the interconnect as a direct response to the lack of response on the part of Triax to a service problem on their local origination channel 01 Though I understand Wayzata's frustration. 1 cannot condone their action# as it makes the other 20 communities on the system the victim# not Triax. And I find the lack of action on the part of your service representatives to Wayzata's equipment service request not only inexcusable and setting poor customer service standards, but also wonder if it doesn't violate standards set down in your agroem-3nt with that community. If Triax is making promises it can't keep (wit.h respect to interconnects and interactive equipment), service guidelines it can't meet (such as response to all service calls within a specified period of time per the agreement with the community)# and equipment it can't protect (like access to interconnect hardware by unauthorized personnel), we are in for troubling times . My suggestion to you is obvious: Restore Regional 6 to the cable system immediately# and resolve the dispute with Wayzata as soon as possible. The rest of your subscribers in the lake area should not nave to suffer as the result of this dispute. ruly# ^enryifer Watts administrator CO:Tim Pattrin, Wayzata School District I NEWSLETTER ORONO INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 278 iNDtPFNDENCr LONG LAKF MAPLE PLAIN MEDINA MINNETONKA BF ACM ORONO ^ 68^ OLD CRVSTAI BAY ROAD lONGLAKF MINNESOTA SS3S6 473 ni3 ORONO SCHOOL BOARDDavid McKown. Chairman 479-1692 Don Anderson. Vice Chairman 479-1810 Jim Franklin. Treasurer 479-2130 Lucie Taylor. Clerk 477-n 89 John Maresh, Director 475-3197 Peg Swanson, Director 473-0603 OCTOBER, 1990 ISSUE NO. 2 Superintendent ’s Notes A fner\d of mine recently stepped down from the prestigious position of Dean of the school of education at The University of St. Thomas. Dean TTiomas McCarver served in that capacity for eight remarkably successful years. I believe that his success, and ultimately that of the school he served, was due in great measure to his leadership. Without attempting a textbook analysis of the qualities or ,-acteristics of leadership, I think l know why he was a successful leader. To begin with he is a man of great personal integrity. But, of course, that alone does not guarantee succef‘;^ul leadership. His honesh and integrity provided the climate for his leadership As a leader he did two ver>- important things; (1) he mrnaged the day to day operation of his school while (2y collaboratively (w'lth faculty & community) establishing a vision for that school. That doesn't sound revolutionary or even particularly insightful. Nevertheless, it is fundamental to leadership and success. Too often a superb visit n for excellence is lost because a poorly managed operation drains aw-ay all of the attention and energy. Similarly a well managed operation without a guiding vision is doomed to staleness and unending repehtion. In the first case, crisis after crisis controls the day. In the second case, bureaucracy rules supreme. My friend's leadership provided the balance so that on the one hand the daily operation was stable and the faculty and staff were responsive to the needs of students, and on the other hand a visio'^ for the future was delineated so that realistic goals could become the building blocks for securing that vision. My friend and his associates provide a good model. It is in fact one that we can emulate. We want the stabilitv of efficiently and effectively run schools for each of our students. And we want that within an age appropriate climate that encourages learning. But we also want to make progress toward a vision that includes: (1) quality programs, (2) motivated learners, (3) increasing effective instruction, and (4) opportunity's for all students to excel. That vision is a reflection of the expectations of the Orono school community. One of the clear strengths of our community is it's high regard for education, it s support for our schools, and the high expectations that charactenze the school distnet. Thomas B. Mich, Ph.D. Supenntendent ECFE "Super Saturday" Preschoolers and their families arc invited to our 4th annual Early Childhood Family Education Halloween Party, loin us ?aturd.iv. Oct. 27th, 10 - 11:30 a.m.. at Orono Primary Sc)^no| m Maple Plain. Tlicre will be activities, refreshments, and a costume parad ‘7 ''Our cameras! At 11 a m. Climb Theatre will orc-M : ■ ^mart About Strangers ” - well learn with Gilly how t.' stay safe and healthy. A study guide for r‘frents will be available beginning Oct. 22 in the ECFE Bulletin Board file in the entry of Orono Pnmary. T)^e event is free. Call 479-3648 for more information. See page 3 for information about Oktoberfest 1 Guidance at a Glance First Fall College Entrance Test Dates: ACT: Oct 27,1990 Registrarion Deadline 9/28/90 SAT: Nov. 3, 1990 Registration Dead!ifiC 9/28/90 liiigtTCitPitCS? ACn December 8,1990 Registration Deadline 11/9/90 SAT: December 1,1990 Registration Deadline 10/26/90 Note: The ACT Test has been completely o’ -rhauled. Ihe structure and content have changed and is i v referred to as the Enhanced Act. Students are cautioned to be careful that they are using preparation manuals and/or courses that accurately reflect these changes. The test has been revamped for the first time in thirty years to more closely measure the skills necessary to compete in college in the nineties. PS AT For Juniors The Preliminary Scholastic Aptitude Test/National Ment Qualifying Exam will be given on Tuesday, October 23, 1990. Check in time is 730a.m. The preparation bulletins are available on or after October 1st in the Guidance Office. Students who signed up last spring may pick up their bulletins at a cost of S6.00. They are necessary as an admission ticket to the test and contain a practice test and other information. Students . n a waiting list will need to wait until we have an idea of how many extra tests will be a ’^ailable. Check with your counselor one week before the test. Early L M Application Deadline The U has informed us that deadlines have again been moved up. This year freshrr.cn admitting colleges especially the College of Liberal Arts and the Institute of Technology are recommending applications be submitted between October 1 and December 15. The 1‘ will begin review-ing applications as of Octooer 1 and students are encouraged to apply on or soon after that date. Applications submitted after December 15 may not be considered because the U expects to have enough applicants by December 15 to fill out their freshman class. High School Counselors 473-5472 CALL WITH YOUR QUESTIONS Ms. Woyteke - all students with last names A-K Ml Wasbotlen - all students with last names L Z College Representatives- •We have college rcprescntativ'cs from ad o\^r the country visit Orono High School during the course of each school year. They are available in the Guidance Office to visit with parents and students. We wi’l publish in this newsletter each month a schedule for the upcom.ing 30 days. Students are also notified by a College Rep Bulleti*. Board at the high school. Please have your student check the bulletin board because some schools may schedule visits after the date the Piitrict Newsletter is published. Plea<;e call us (473-5472) for any updates or additional ir»‘‘'rmalion. .. O ober Cc.lege Representatives ^ — .. . 4th U of Mn-Duluth 10am Brandley University Ham Cornell College 1pm 15th St. Olaf College 1030am 16th Carleton College 9ai^ 23rd College of St Catherine 10:15am 31st Pine Manor 8:30am I'niversity of Puget Sound 9:45am New England College ll:30ain Notes from the Hi^h S^ool High School Parents Gi. up An official parent group was formed at the last Parent Forum in Mav. The group is to le called Spartan Parent Association. The following parents agreed to act as officers; Co-Chairporson(s) Renee Olsten Gail Gabbcrt Secretary Sharon Griffiths Treasure." Carol Roland MemK*rsIiip Marianne Dudley Ka ’by Wenger Kathy Hayes Teacher Rcprcsf’nlativc; Jeff Brown Orono Schools Oktobei^fest ->«>.« » r- •« • '. •• • . • * 'i yo-^.^saBTLi —■ *■»'. •a 4 r> ,i?s> s . ■ > -; ' T« >’ • . a'' •* ^>0 •3r«■-. r ______.A— _ ^ ^ Bavarian Club Enziar ^' irk your calendars for an event niade for everyone - coung and old alike - to en)oy! Orono Schools bktobeifest is planned for Saturday, October 6, from 2:00 - 7:00 p.m. on the Middle School grounds. The fc. -vities will be housed, ram or shine, under colorful tents. There will be events and entertainment for cvcr\- age group - primary through high school students, parents and grandp >.ents. Food and music wnll be found in th? mam tent. Brats, hoi dogs, sauerkraut, pies and other treats will be the offenngs. Dance to the music of :? ■ Elk River German Band and enjoy the singing and dancing penormances of the Bavarian Oub Enzian. Both gixnips are colorful and well-known and are looking forward to bringing their music to us in Orono. The Bavarian Oub Enzian, comprised of performers >-anging in age from children t: senior citizens, performs annually at Orchestra Hall's Sommerfest and the Festival of Nations in St. Paul. The Elk River German Band has most recmtly performc'd at Montrose's Gasthof Zur Gemutlichkeit's Sommtrfesi and Cktoberfest. Costumed parents and student ilunteers and a clown or two will provide additional ^olor. The Oktoberfes* cnlertammen' committee has been working for months to provide fun for all. Games (and the opportunity to win prizes) mclude: Jacob s ladder, basketoall shoot, football throw. Gummie Bear count. "Hi Stnkers" for adu'*s and enndren, poster toss, dart p.ime, fishing ^■*oth. Lean bae loss, and pound the nail in the stump. A > .iR f. r.k w’llh participants that the older kid: will enjoy (at least one high school coach and his co-capt"*"' F-*vc agreed to be dunked), pony rides for th‘- .’et, and horse-drawn wagon and carriagL 11 have also been planned. Gather your fam ner. Is and plan to have your picture taken behinci iman costume board, and have your face painted by tne high schcxil dance line. The Silent Auction Committee har obtained an array of wonderful items for vou to bid on in the Silent Auction tent. The vanety of apjoeal is great and ranges from a Florida Condominium during spring break to sports and theater tickets with much, much more in betw ’ecn. The children will en)oy their own sales event m the children's Garage Sale tent. The Ratfle, drawn up by this same committee, includes an Alverez 6 string acoustic guitar and four free lessons, an jwc:Hime juvenile mountain bike, two S30 savings h-onds. a pair of Ultra Wheels (vour size), dinner for two at the < .a‘'thof Zur Gemutlichkcit in Mvntrose, and a romauc getawav for two at Schumachers New Prague Hotel, including dinner and brcuNList. Raifl^ rickets will continue to be sold up vft*l 6 (X) p.m. that dc w’hen the drawing will be held and prizes awarded. This IS ar event intended to bring the schools and community logctlu proceeds will benefit the fourth grade Wolf Ridg. Environmental Learning ''rogrim. Bring vour familv and friends and j«.'in us v. a Saturday, October nth. ■ ■ ■ i =5 Elk River German Ba.nd Board Revieiv Activity Calendar Q£Q|^gf,^j[£gtUULjAUSUSt_12a_lS3i2 • r -• Approved the appointment of Linda Wiard-Bauer as niath/biology teacher at the high school. • . Approved the appointment of Julie Olson as a part time physical education teacher at the high : • school. " ’ • Approved the appointment of Susan Hofer as a teacher at Schumann Elementary. • ^ Approved the appointment of Kathleen Hiniker ; as an English teacher at the middle school....... • Approved the appointment of Jerry Jones as full- . . time custodian at the high school. • Approved the appointment of the following personnel for part-time positions at Orono Primary School: Julie Stieve, Jane Dwyer, . Ruthmary Nowak, Patty Brindley, Theresa Emhart. • Approved the appointment of the following personnel for part-time positions at Schumann Elementary: Jan Marr, LaVonne Dorrel. • Approved the continued use of the Community Resource Pool for 1990-91, cost to be shared by the Orono Education Fund and Orono Community Education. • Approved the new ECFE course offerings as presented. • Approved the District level goals for the 1990-91 school year. • Directed the Clerk to certify the 1990 tax levy on or before August 31, 1990. • Approved the Master Contract for food service personnel for 1990-92 as negotiated by the Board Negotiating Committee. • Approved the adoption of the D'Neilian Handwriting Curriculum for the elementary grades, effective during the 1990-91 school year in kindergarten and grade 1, with subsequent grades added on a yearly basis. MOMS Orono MOMS will be meeting on Friday, October 26 at Trinity Lutheran Church. We meet from 1:00 - 3:00 pm on a very informal basis. Please feel free to drop by for coffee and conversation. mSTRTCT WIDE ArTTVTTTES . ' . 10/6 Oktoberfest at Middle School Grounds 10/8 School Board Mtg., MS.................;....:.....7:00pm :: 10/9 Orono Ed. Fund Lecture Series, Aud......:..7:00pm-.^ 10/15 ECFE Speaker, OPS ............ 10/18MEIA/MFT NO SCHOOL •. n..' i 10/19 MEA/MFT NO SCHOOL 10/22 Teacher Workshop NO SCHOOL ^ ~''jr School Board Meeting .................................7:00pm 10/27 ECFE Super Saturday at OPS................10:00am Basketball Travel Team Tryouts HS Gym.8:30am ' 10/31 Halloween - —^ - - - —:'• FT.FTVTFNTARY ACTTVITIES 10/2 SE & OP August BD Party 10/6 Oktoberfest at Middle School Grounds 10/11 PTA Family Fun Night at Cheepskate ....6:00pm 10/23 SE & OP Oct. BD Party 10/27 ECFE Super Saturday at OPS................10:00am IVTTnnLE SCHOOL ACTTVITIES 10/16 MS Stud»-nt Council Fundraiser Kickoff 10/16 MS PAC Mtg. FDR......................................7:30pm HIGH SCHOOL ACTTVITIES 10/1 Girls Soccer at Visitation...........................4:00pm 10/2 Cross Country, Chaska Invitational.........4:00pm Girls Soccer - Minnehaha ...........................7:00pm Volleyball, Tri Metro (2,4,9) 10/4 Cross Country, Conference at Como Girls Soccer at Mound.................................4:00pm Boys Soccer - Minnehaha ............................7:00pm 10/5 Football at Mound.......................................7:30pm Volleyball at Riccori.....................................7:30pm 10.^6 Bovs Soccer - Brcck.....................................7:00pm 10/8 V'blleyball at Cambridge .............................7:30pm 10/9 Girls Soccer - Breck....................................4:00pm Boys Soccer at Blake ...................................7:00pm 10/11 Cross Country, Conference Meet at Como Girls Soccer at Mahtomedi.........................4:00pm Boys Soccer - Mahtomedi............................7:00pm 10/12 Football at St. Agnes ...................................4:00pm 10/13 Boys Soccer, Sections (15,18,22) 10/15 Girls Soccer at Chaska ................................7:00pm Parents of Seniors Mtg. Cafe ......................7:30pm 10/16 Volleyball Tri Metro (Oct. 9,11,16) - 10/17 Cross Country District 17A at Lake Rebecca Football at Mahtomedi...................................7:30pm • 10.'22 Valleyball at Waconia . ................. 10//23Football Section IV (23,27, Nov. 3) PSAT - High School Cafeteria ....................7:30am 10/25 Cross Country Region 5 10/29 Volleyball Dist. 17A (29,30, Nov. 1,3) 10/30 Boys Soccer - State AttSnti'on Parents of Seniors A group of parents of Orono seniors gathered after the Homeconnihg Coronation to begin plans for the all-night party after graduation in June. Working from the materials passed on by last year's parents of seniors, they started the process of finding a site and planning activities for the party. . _ One decision was unanimous - they_ would need all the help they could find - from as many parente of seniors as could spare a few hours during the planning stages and during the pjarty itself. *. : _. Meetings for the parents group are scheduled for Monday, October 15 and Monday, November 12 at 7*30p.m. in the high school cafeteria.- All parents of seniors are encouraged to attend. . • If you can't be there in p>erson and want to help, please contact one of the chairpersons - Jean Dettloff, Carol Roland or Barb Dugan. For All Parents! We all want to do our best at parenting but sometimes it’s difficult to know how capable we are. Nancy Delin, director of the Edina Family Center, will lead us down The Yellow Brick Road: Under Construction". This presentation will address the importance of parental self esteem, looking at four sign posts along the way which influence our self-esteem. The danger signs that cause detours and delays will be examined as well. Learn ways to lead a healthier life in our personal relationships with our family and ways to celebrate the job you're doing. You'll e joy the way Nancy captivates her audience with a unique blend of warmth, enthusiasm, musical talent and storytelling. Join us Monday, October 15. 7 - 9 p.m. at Orono Primary School. $2 at the door, no registration necessary. Call 479-3648 for more information. Student Directory The Orono Student Directory for 1990-1991 has been on sale at the individual Open Houses at the schools. If you have not purchased your copy, you may do so in the office at your student's school. The Directories are on sale for S4 per directory and additional copies may be purchased. If you have any corrections, additions or questions about the directories you may call Kathy Hayes (476-6020) with questions concerning the directory or Julie Palmer with questions about the PCN membership. We will print a corrections list in the December edition of the District Newsletter. We hope you will find this directory useful and convenient for your family. Thank you for your support. School Breakfast Survey A State mandated survey is being conducted to determine if there is interest in a school breakfast program. A good response will be very helpful in determining whether a school breakfast program v^l be offered in 1991-1992. W. A. Fenholt . : • iSmim Mid Winter Fun Fest The Orono Elementary PTA is planning the annual "Mid Winter Fun Fest" to be held on Feb. 2 from 1-5 p.m. Orono Middle School. The carnival is the PTA's major fund-raiser, with proceeds used to fund field trips for each class and other school relate.; projects. In conjunction with t’ne Carnival is a raffle featuring many fun and exciting prizes. Raffle tickets may be purchased from any elementary ’ school student or at the carnival. The chairpersons arc looking for volunteers to help with the carnival and donations of prizes for the raffle. If interested in volunteering, contact Carnival chairpersons Will and Carolyn Endslcy (473-8232) or Tim and Sandy Pattnn (475-1921). For raffle donations, contact Raffle chairperson Susan Vickerman (473-7410). Ma k your calendars for February 2nd. Basketball Registration Orono Community Educarion will be holding basketball registrations for boys and girls in kindergarten through 6th gr.iJv'. The registrations will be held on Saturday, October 27, K’tween 9.00 - 11HX) a.m. in the Orono High School Gym. For more information, call Brian Bergstrom at Orono Community Education, 473-4879. GOOD WILL RECYCLING DAY rr£-1 ^ Saturday October 20 r- g-QQ am - 4:00 pm : ■ ORONO^^DDLE SCHOOL PARKING LOT - All donations are tax deductible ~ tax ^i;.*. i£K* ••awes'# V ::vx-- receipt available" - • iv. -Acceptable Donations* (must be in good-usable condition) ..J.. x’ Clotltog • Small (working) appliances' 'i'^ T.V.V* Stereos'* G^es/toys • Small **'• S furniture • Ho"usewares • Leather ' ' _ • .... -.»/.••• r- . . Sporting goods • Bikes • Scrap Metal* • Un-acceplable Donations* (please do not bring) Tires • Used carpeting • Soiled or tom mattresses or box springs * Large or non- worKing appliances • Furniture needing repair • Paint • Storm doors, windows or screens Bring recyclables (cans, bottles, newspaper) - The mobile recycling unit will be there all day CASH for aluminum cans!! Sponsored by West Hennepin Recycling Commission with 80% funding by Hennepin County Board of Commissioners •Scrap Metal :::You may also bring in metal items that are no Tiongcr usable*.'-'A scrap metal hauler will be- -available to collect this material for' Irecycling.. These could include: swing sets, ^bar-b-que grills, bicycles, mufflers and other auto parts, patio furniture, lawn mowers, etc. - . j r. • • Senior Volunteers Nee’dedSenior Community Services is an~agency serving senior citizens in several suburban'communities. We • are currently seeking volunteers to visit older adults in the western suburbs. These are homebound older adults who are lonely, depressed, or isolated. Some of them are experiencing loss or change in their lives which can be very difficult to handle alone. Many times no one is even aware that they are in need of help. - If you enjoy listening,' talking, giving encouragement and becofning'a friend, this program could be jtist for you. A few hours of your time a month can be a wonderful inspiration to someone who ne^ the outside world.i If you would be willing to give this ^^e of support to someone in your area, please call Libby Hansen at Senior Community Services (933-93" . Boys Basketball Metro League Tryouts The Orono Basketball Boosters will be holding tryouts for Metro Travel Teams for boys in grades 6, 7, and 8 on Saturday, October 6 at the Orono High School. The tryouts will be from 9:00 - 10:00 a.m. for 6th grade boys, 10:00 - 11:00 a.m. for 7th grade boys, and 11:00 - 12:00 noon for 8th grade boys. These travel teams will play in the Saturday Metro League and in Saturday and Sunday tournaments during the Winter basketball season. Questions about the tryouts may be directed to Brian Bergstrom at Orono Community Education, 473-4879. The next Orono Basketball Boosters Meeting will be held on Tuesday, October 16, at 8:00 p.m. in the Orono High School. g NEWSLETTER AOMINICTIUTtON OVPICt MS OLD cnrtTAi. Mr NOAO noutm LOMO LAKI. MINMCSOTA SS3SS PvMn-r.sl.1 0*f. O S »OSI*OJ PAID' l»k«. ftlMItlsO 1} C.tv c*f UrcTD [nit " ^ P.O. E'o:.' 66 //if''__ ■ - Crystal Eay, MM OCji s - SEP 1 3 1990 September 11, 1990 John Gerhardson c/o Orono Public Works P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 Dear John A great big THANKS for your help on our Transportation Day this past Saturday. Approximately 150 children (as well as their parents) got to explore, learn and play "make believe" on your Street Sweeeper. A special thanks to your driver for representing a true interest in their profession and the children. You are helping to make BIG memories in the minds of our LITTLE ones. Sincerely, Jenny Brown Project Chairman ORONO POLICE DEPARTMENT DEPARTMENT MANUAL Effect, Date Section Number TITLE: Business Cards _ _ _9/27/90. Distribution All Personnel _ _900.8_ Recinds Effective immediately, the attached white card shall serve as the official Orono Police Department business card tor all citizen contacts made by uniformed personnel. Officers shall issue this card whenever Section 900.8 (business cards) of the Department Manual directs. State law further mandates that this card be given to all crime victims as well as victims of domes^ic violence. Officers shall list their Name. Badge Case File « (if you have it) and Date on the front of the card. New cards may be picked up from the duty Lt. Olll-Ziv ^suo!isa66ns ‘stueiqoJd 'suoiisano 9S60-9€6 JO 9601.*1^2-008* I................... Biosauuii^ 89Sl.-lt^9 asnqv PINO P uoauaAaJd-aauiuJUJOO eiosauuii/^ 9SW-2ZS 0008-lZe QUl-£l^ QQSS-IVS E00fr-8trG 211.9-8^8 .....................Bjosauuii^ p uajpipo 6uissi^\j ....................qpoA ABMBuny joi a6pug aqi •• spodad luappov - tupv idaQ aoipd ouojq ....a|Bpa6p!d-yrioo louisiQ AjunoQ uidauuaH •aouBisissv oi!P!A/^aujouv AjunoQ ujdauuaH .................(uoijeLUJO^u! aseaiar japuapo) — IjBrAjunor jidauuaH NoiivwaodNi slunoo qnv aonod OFFICIAL NOTICE OF CRIME VICTIM’S RIGHTS AND DOMESTIC VIOLENCE INFORMATION Orono Police Department Serving Orono. Long Lake. Spring Park. Minnetonka Beach Emergency 911 Administration 473-7710 ORONO POUCE DEPARTMENT DATE;CASE CONTROL NUMBER (CCN) OFFICER(S) BADGE NUMBER(S); :(S)d3gwriN 30QVq (s)030l j jO :(N00) 039WnN lOUiNOO 3SVO :31Va iNiMiuvdsa aonod onouo QUI-ZIP uoj}ej;s!U!UJpv U6 AoueOjaujg qoeag b)(uo|8uuiv\| OufJdg Suoi *ouojo OuiAjas UJeuivJBdaa aanod ouojo NOIlVVUUOdNI 30N3101A OILS3WOQ QNV S1H9IU S.VVIlOIA 3VimO dO 33LLON IVIOIddO POLICE AND COURTS INFORMATION Hennepin County Jail — (Offender Release information)...............................348-5112 Hennepin County AttorneyA/ictim Assistance...........348-4003 Hennepin County District Court-Ridgedale...............541-8500 Orono Police Dept. Adm.- Accident Reports............473-7710 The Bridge for Runaway Youth ..................................377-8800 Missing Children of Minnesota...................................572-0456 Minnesota Committee-Prevention of Child Abuse ... 641-1568 Minnesota MADD ...................... 1-800-247-1098 or 938-0956 Questions, Problems, Suggestions?.........................473-7710 RIGHTS AND SERVICES FOR ALL CRIME VICTIMS , TV Vtetlm ’8 Rights1. I he nght to request restitution. ?■ ThJ P*«a negotiations. O'*”^ »' ■" -^"9 'O - --oposad SSIJJ’rtBte ‘"'“"’“io" «tc«t oti^r cha.e 0*«“’ ®«-0M7 if you fe«l your vicdm's rights ^ 24 Hour Crisis Phone Unes Crime Victim Center (Any Cnme Victim)....... , First Call for Help (Emergency Resources) ..................................................?f 9'^°® SL Joseph ? Shelter - Mimi^lis ...........................................................335-5000 Sexual Violence Center 1 YES/NEON (Mental HeaJtfi .................................................................................824-5555 ....................................................................379-6363 rnm^vy;^ ■ Of Violent CrimeCrime Victim s Reparations Board (Not a 24 hour line).....................................642-0395 patiuon n«,u«hng an Ordar iSr "** * The order oould include the following: I An ZiZ [,•**^“"'"9 ^ abuser from further acts of abuse ? An ZZ" directing the abuser to leave your househo^ ’ ^ •"’•""S ^0“' «=Pool. bus,n«. or o' O' Son wth your minor ® i^ulSl h^'.X"2t'2b" ^SSTn^o ”’0 """O' «>"« RnH emergency SHELTER ^th T?y1?^ ' Uo-^bobar Informahon 24 Hour Una Hamet Tubman ShefterrMinn^^ .................................................................... ...........................................................827-2841 MlP.JCoun ............ I^^B.CA Black Battered Women Program... ............................................SJ?*35?9 !». * / U \*c x%'-»~ •:.u- '>•" K ;,/v/--------------------- ■>. / vvc-k. Stole U " ^-£LS Percolation Tests XSoil Borhgs 9 Bench Mark Note: This system is to be cortstructed to meet the Mnnesolo Pollution Control Agency Chapter 7080 t Local Ordinance PROPERTY op::rou>^ m«KC-- t-ikY-’C- TjiWO. gy&oyto w>YN ■ Uetao ■ Co. Note : Check all underground utilities Date 2./3P/SS, PH.612-497-3566 oc ■nh. rs f 4 {' s i (v- ONOHO JO Ai!0 , -0661 8 0 iOO ■ 9^J5133W imim • C a -tt*. ^^^^» ^frfvtJU. ^ v»\»K A^CUv+w-* w«*^\i». ivwe. .._ n^^ v^»l v.v,iCv- \w^. C«'»v.J? V ‘—P i» Y»ju^ Sw^jiCQ vs.o^i? ^ ol^ 3- /f' »m OM PllV «*>t '5. ■ s*^e «r'y \»^'" . Certificate of Survey for Marcus Blue of Lots 7 » 8. Block 2. Crystal Bay Hinneto"ka Hennepin County. Minnesota •s 2 ^ v'c. LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PREMISES SURVEYED: Lots 7 and 8. Block 2. Crystal iBay Minnetonka I hereby certify that this survey was prepared by me or under my direct supervision, and that 1 am a duly registered Civil Engineer and Land Surveyor under the laws of the State of Minnesota. COFFIN & GR0NBER6, INC. Mark S. Gronberg HN. Lie. No. 12755 Engineers. Land Surveyors. Planners Long Lake. Minnesota O -< o-n osSBoScale: 1 Inch « 30 feet Date ; June 15. 1990 • Iron marker found 0 Iron marker set Bearings shown are based upon an assumed datum. I if \fc SPECIFICATIONS OUAUTV ASSURAMtc EVERGREEN TREE PLANTING - fPU TO « SET WIMR Wwr SlAMiitUitOrX lo I «ppro»«e br L»"*Hctp« Afe«rt«fl. fAy TOP OF GALL TO •£ 8CT At r—■irr nnnfTT nrr-rr ■JMAP HM3M TOP OF GALL M POOGLV OGAGICO SOIL PLANT fifl. MlOH PONM a* OeCP WAT9MO GAAP •AOinu, WVTH Mooffeo CtAMIVta GOG. <AG GPECGCD) PHOVnC CMAVCL FN.LEO OGVWGLL, ch «rc r«elG>9ro«n nuTMrjr •ntKl in -rf'teh they arc > placed in a caraamar le uAbfokan. Container qrewn plamt mwtl ha*« b«an > e^Cam*' fot a m>n»munt o* tii (6) month*. potters planit oru bail p( caiii* u*ll borlapprng, rcpiacefnaru a pari for sAi any plant one r*«J Cuararueoi v ■ 'Ulen ^waraniea mataiial (atlMb -^r«i«e anp thrive altar llnat data el acecptanca. Two yaart inciwt in Glanwtcr at trunk an4 cvarGraana o«ar 1) loat el plant matenala with ^raGinQ and Contractor to verify leestien of all rmdergroiPid utilities. Cleans dabris retult»nq from plantinq operation. i PCDCSTAL OF COa»ACTCD ON UNOttTUWeD EAFtm • l»p« for the Provide fertiiiaer, humus particular plant matenal O-P-IM) with topsoil ir tr» Fcrtilite soil lor planting phosphorus, 4 perccnc mti fcrtiliccr. applied and rm. pounds per cubic feci ol sail and humus. Ballad and flapped tree* maybe machine - if appio-ed by landscape architect. Machine Ma.ed Plam i «neh through 10 inch diameter trees ma» be piamed wuh .n /« inch diameter tree spade. Scarify sides Qi planting pit belflre transplanting tree. potash not 1*1 ocr Os 1990 CITY OF GROHO ;«d''i!lM‘bV i«raT'd!«a«. d.ifilj^r.'nq b^is! •nfestatient. dead or broken branches, barb OOfffCtionable COn'S'linos..stirasiont, Evergreen tree* not fully branched from bottom to top will be refected end those with terminal leaders eiceeding t; inchos m length will also be refected. Planting ahall be located as shewn on the Drawings escept where obstructions below ground or overhead are eneoimtcred or wnere changes have been maO* m construction. Necessary adfustmmis shall bt made only after approval. No planting, et-rept ground cover and vines, shall be placed closer ;t\an two feet or structures. I pavements LAhOSCAPC MAINTENANCE If 10 days immediatey «a|or category el r-orb. Include watering, weeding, cultivating, restoration of grade, mowiivj and trimming graft, pruning tree* and shrubs, protection from insects and dneasct, fcrtiiiiing and similar operations as needed to ensure normal growth and good health lor 'ive plant material. ■<^gk5pAj7c> Furt>iEr-|^ I I g>/1o' I [7)<^THPC£C? /*f£A^ PerCTHP TP PE^EVE. ^EEP |h lO ______________ LANDSCAPE PLAN r=,0'NORTH-i^ PREPARED BY DAHLGREN. SHARDLOW AND UBAN. INC. ^ 7. CONFEKNCE CENTER T 0 3 mo OF GROHO 6^ WAYZATA iWATEH TOWER Lll^lESr NEWVeCrOR CROUP. INC. ALTERNATE SITES SfS^ .■ •■ K'v Dtstsfwv lo Aflttnna Tew«r 42S' iHollimdn Residence H“'f ?,1a Dlitane* to Anitimo Toi»«r 870*:...............................................................- . ■ ■ll- t . .. : \ " ■..... "fT . dwells Residence juyntawooQ Road I M CGl?ND1L MEEliNS OCT 0 3 1990 CITY OF CROHO V-, I. j v-i tie-. '"I X >X XUJ X X , // /:r/7 COl’HDilf®itiG OCT 0 3 1990 CITY OF OfiONO LEGAL DESCRIPTION That part of Lots 3 & 4 lying North erly of the Southerly 97.50 feet thereof^ Block 3. Daniels Long Lake Heights. 1 hereby certify that this survey was prepared by me or under my direct supervision, and that I am a duly registered Civil Engineer and Land Surveyor under the laws of the State of Minnesota. COFFIN i GRONBERG, INC. Hark S. Gronberg fIfJ. Lie. No. 12755 Engineers, Land Surveyors. Planners Long Lake, Minnesota Scale: 1 inch = 30 feet Date : August 3, 1990 0 : Iron marker Bearings shown are based on an assumed datum. co*ii imm--''7 Legal Description That part of Governnent Lot 6, Section 10, Township 117 North, Range 23 West of the 5th Principal Meridian, described as be ginning at a point on the East line of said Government Lot 6 distant 7.78 chains(513.48 feet) South of the Northeast corner of said Government Lot 6; thence West 312.00 feet; thence South 111.54 feet; thence East 312.00 feet; thence North 111.54 feet to the point of beginning. Date : 8-9-90 Scale: 1" = 30' # : Iron marker found Bearings shown are to an assumed datum. This survey shows the location of an existing house and a proposed addition in relation to the boundaries of the described property, as previously staked by others. It may be necessary to judicially determine the boundaries because of differences regarding the location of the northeast cor- of Government Lot 6. It does not purport to show any other improvements or encroachments. I hereby certify that this survey was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly regist ered land surveyor under the laws of the State of Minn esota . COFFIN & GRONBERG, INC. lark b.^Gronberg Mn. ric. No. 12755 Engineers, Land Surveyors, Planners Long Lake, Minnesota SHORELINE DETAIL FOR C. ARNOLD CARLSON IN LOT 5, BLOCK 2, FOREST ARMS HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA h A. <1/ COFFIN & GRONBERG, INC, Engineers, Land Surveyors, Planners Long Lake, Minnesota N. UJbC)l^'hury\ - I