Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout11-13-1990 Council PacketIIUIIIWWIWIII wil 4iA/<L Va cKcT /^■70 AGENDA FOR COUNCIL MEETING SET FOR TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 13, 1990, 7:00 P.M. (*) Asterisk items are considered to be routine items to be enacted upon by one motion by the City Council under the Consent Item* on the agenda. Discussion will be held upon request. Memos regarding each of the Agenda items are available in the Public Packet which may be obtained upon request from the Recorder. ROLL CALL 7:00 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING 1. Amendment of Year XV Statement of Projected Use of Funds */ for Community Development Block Grant 2. CONSENT AGENDA* APPROVAL OF MINUTES * 3. Regular Meeting of October 22, 1990 * 4. 1990 Canvassing Board Meeting of November 8, 1990 PLANNING COMMISSION COMMENTS - Edward Cohen Representative PUBLIC COMMENTS - (Limit 5 Minutes Per Person) ZONING ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT ♦♦APPLICANTS** Immediately after the Council has reviewed your application please sign the three (3) original resolutions at the Recorder's desk. Applicants need not execute resolutions for subdivisions, vacations and denials. 5. #1470 Knapp/Parten, 4300 Bayside Road - Preliminary Plat - Resolution 6. #1497 Toberman Property, 1960 Shorelii^ Drive - Conditional Use Permit - Denial Resolution 7. #1555 Landstar Inc., 2501 Old Beach Road - Preliminary Subdivision - Resolution 8. #1579 Garry Everson, 4755 North Shore Drive - Variance -- Resolution MAYOR/COUNCIL REPORT ENGINEER'S REPORT 9. Navarre Heights Drainage Well #3 Direction Pay Request #2 Highway 12 Sewer & Water Restoration Pay Request #1 Lift Station 8 Renovation Change Order #1 Lift Station 8 Renovation 10. 11. 12. 13. CITY ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT 14. Street Lights Request - Livingston/Lyric Ave 15. Facilities Workshop 16. Highway 12 Corridor 17. Commercial Telecommunication Review Plan 18. Flexible Benefits Plan 19. 1991 Health Insurance 20. 1990 Auditor Appointment 21. Animal Care Facility * 22. Amendment of Year XV C.D.B.G. Funds - Resolution AGENDA FOR COUNCIL MEETING SET FOR TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 13, 1990, 7:00 P.M, CITY ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT Continued * '>3. LMCD Comprehensive ?lan/Shoreland Regulations * 24. Accreditation * 25. 1991 Meeting Schedule * 26. Administrator's Information Response Lorraine Moss Landmark Suit Stubbs Bay Sewer Windward Marina CITY ATTORNEY'S REPORT LICENSES (27*) BILLS (28*) UPCOMING ISSUES AND EVENTS 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 / To: Mark E. Bernhardson, City Administrator Prom: John R. Gerhardson, Public Works Director Date: November 6, 1990 Subject: Public Hearing - Reallocation of Funds Community Development Block Grant - Year XV Attachment memo dated October 4, 1990. On October 8, 1990, the Orono Council designated November 13, 1990 as the public hearing date to reallocate Community Development Block Grant Funds from Year XV of the program. The monies were previously allocated to the Highway 12 Corridor Study, but because the funds have not been used within the sixteen month time period, they must be allocated or we lose the funds. An ongoing program that has had a high rate of participation is the Rehabilitation of Private Property. That program allows residents who qualify to perform repairs (roofing, plumbing, etc.) to their residence that they may not afford to dc on their own. I have prepared a resolution to reallocate the funds from the Highway 12 Corridor Study to the Rehabilitation of Private Property. Proposed Motion _______ Moved _______ 2nd to approve Resolution #_____ adopting an amendment to the Year XV Vrban Hennepin County statement of Projected Use of Funds and authorizing the Mayor and City Administrator to execute Amendment No. 1 to Contract No. A07289. To: From: Mayor Grabek & Orono Council Members AmMark E. Bernhardson, City Administrator^] Forwarded recommending approval. A RESOLUTION ADOPTING AN AMENDMENT TO THE YEAR XV URBAN HENNEPIN COUNTY STATEMENT OF PROJECTED USE OF FUNDS WHEREAS, the City of Crono, through a joint cooperation agreement with Hennepin County is a participant in the Urban Hennepin County Community Development Block Grant program, and WHEREAS, the City of Orono and Hennepin County has executed Hennepin County Contract No. A07239 the Year XV subrecipient Agreement, wherein the city agrees to assume certain responsibilities for the implementation of approved community development activities in the Urban Hennepin County Community Development Block Grant program, and WHEREAS, the City of Orono held a public hearing on November 13, 1990 to consider public comments on a proposed amendment to the Year XV Urban Hennepin County Statement of Projected Use of Funds. BE IT RESOLVED, that the City of Orono amends the Urban Hennepin County Statement of Projected Use of Funds for Year XV reallocating $ 14,476.00 from the Highway 12 Corridor Study to Rehabilitation of Private Property. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, the City Council of Orono authorizes the Mayor and City Administrator to execute Amendment No. 1 to Contract A07289, to implement the subject amendment to the Year XV Urban Hennepin County Statement of Proposed Use of Funds. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota at a regular meeting held November 13, 1990. James R. Grabek, Mayor ATTEST: Dorothy M. Hallin, City Clerk s To:Mark E.Bernhardson From:John R.Gerhardson, Date:October 4, 1990 Subject: Reallocation of Funds - Community Development Block Grant For year XV of the Community Development Block Grant Prograun, 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 -*r 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 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 ______ Moved ______2nd to conduct a public hearing on November 13‘, 1990 at 7:00 p.m. to consider reallocating Community Development Block Grant funds. TO: Mayor Grabek & Orono Council Members Proa: Mark E. Bernhardson, City Administrator Forwarded recommonding approval. MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD OCTOBER 22, 1990 “• ATTENDANCE 7:00 P.M. The Council met on the above date with the following members present: Mayor James Grabek, CounciImembers Diam Goetten, Alan Nettles, Barbara Peterson, and Edward Callahan. The following represented the City staff: City Administrator Bernhardson, Building & Zoning Administrator Mabusth, Public Works Director Gerhardson, Assistant Planning and Zoning Administrator Gaffron, Police Chief Kilbo, City Engineer Cook, City Attorney Barrett, and City Recorder Scheffler. PUBLIC DISCUSSION FACILITIES COMMITTEE - SITE RECOMMENDATION Bernhardson explained to those in attendance that an 18 member Citizens Committee had been selected in April to assist with the City facility project. He said, "The Committee undertook the task of reviewing all of the elements involved with a new facility, such as space, sites, etc. After reviewing eight or nine sites, the Citizen's Committee reduced the selection to the current site and a site on Highway 12. It has been determined that the present site has drawbacks such as its location in relation to residential properties, and the fact that all City departments could not be housed within one building. They are recommending that this site, if it is no longer used, be converted to additional park area. The site on Highway 12 was selected as the best site. In August the City obtained an option on a parcel located near the Orono Middle School. At Council's September 24th Meeting, the site issue was discussed and Staff was directed to schedule this public meeting. Council has the site comparison information and the schematics have been done. The next step is the design/planning process. In order to proceed with that step, it is necessary to have a site selected. The design process will cost approximately $60,000. Council and the Facilities Committee have reviewed various funding options. It is estimated that, should the City build a facility on the Highway 12 site, property taxes would increase one to two percent for the next fifteen years. The purpose of this meeting this evening is to determine whether Council wishes to exercise the Highway 12 option, and if so, when. Council may wish to select another site. The City has funding set aside for this project and currently holds a AA-1 financial rating, which is an excellent rating, especially for a City of this size. If a site is selected this evening. Council and the Facilities Committee would work with the Consultant to determine a design. Issues relating to financing would be addressed next, and then preparation of construction documents would likely occur. The City would probably schedule another public meeting to provide information regarding the status of the project prior to taking bids. •• Mayor Grabek announced that the public would now have an - 1 - ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD OCTOBER 22, 1990 CITY FACILITIES CONTINUED opportunity to express tneir concerns, suggestions and questions Mr. Jerry Sveeggen, 1525 Bay Ridge, asked for clarification regarding the action proposed for this evening. Mayor Grabek explained that following an analysis to determine whether a new facility is actually needed, the City undertook a space study. He said, "The space study neiped us determine what we needt'd within a facility to properly conduct business. Follov/ing that process. Council and Staff reviewed building types and sites. Staff toured five or six different city halls to view various construction materials and methods. We then reviewed various building designs provided by the Architect and are now at a point of selecting a site. The Facilities Committee has recommended the site on Highway 12 which would be adequate for not only the City Administration, but the Police Department and Public Viorns as well. Council needs to make a final decision on the site and begin design work with the Architect. Tonight Council is considering the direction to give Staff with regard to a site." It was relocated. asked whether the Post Office would also Mayor Grabek replied, "There has been some discussion regarding how this present site will be utilized if th3 Highway 12 site is chosen. Tnat may or may not affect the Post Office. However, all other aspects of the City will be combined. The City has asked the City of Long Lake if they wished to participate in a joint facility. However, they declined our offer. The present facility does not meet building code standards and the City employees are working under terrible conditions. I believe f.hat a new facility is important if we are to retain the good staff we have and encourage future employment." Ms. Ann Cosgrove, Foxridge Road, asked how much consideration is being given to the plans to upgrade Highway 12. Mayor Grabek stated that the upgrade of Highway 12 is considered in any plans for rr>nstruction in that area. He said, "The property is located £ar enougk tack, that sh^md the upgrade take place along the existing corridor, it should jve little impact on a new facility." Ms. Cosgr've said, "The proposed location shown by the Highway Department last week is the present corridor with an Interchange going down Old Crystal Bay Road. Wouldn’t that affect the property for the new facility?" Bernhardson stated that the new facility would not be — ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD OCTOBER 22, 1990 CITY FACILITIES CONTINUED located any further south than the Middle School. Ms. Cosgrove said, "The proposal I saw interchange going through the School parking lot." showed the Mr. Carl Parten, 1025 Tonkawa Road, asked when this project was first considered by the Council and if this was the first public information meeting. Mayor Grabek responded that this project has been by the City previous to the time he v;as first elected said, "Since the time I have been Mayor, we have been the condition of the present facility and the need for We have studied the issues and have provided public via newspaper articles aid the Mayor's letter. We selected the Citizen's Committee. I don't believe should be a surprise to the public." considered Mayor. He considering a new one. information have also this issue Mr. Parten indicated that due to his vision impairment, he could not read the newspaper. He stated that he had no notice of this issue until he received a letter today and believed the matter is being hurried along. Mayor Grabek apologized for the problem of getting information to individual citizens. He said. "I believe the process has been straight forv;ard and has been a matter of public record for some time." Mr. Parten asked whether the Highway preferred by the Council. site most Mayor Grabek replied, "There is not Council consensus for the Highway 12 site. There is a recommendation from the Architect and the Facilities Committee." Mr. Mike Ellis, 1020 Old Crystal Bay Road, asked if the decision to consolidate all of the City departments into one building was final. Mayor Grabek responded that there cannot be a final decision in that regard until the site is selected. Mr. Ellis stated that it makes more sense to combine all of the departments on one site. He asked what percentage of the costs could be paid from the proceeds of the sale of City property. Mayor Grabek stated that a portion of the sale of the old sewer plant property would be applied to the new facility costs. Bernhardson stated that the sewer plant property would sell - 3 - ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD OCTOBER 22, 1990 CITY FACILITIES CONTINUED for $150,000 to $200,000. Mayor Grabek stated that it has not been determined what will be done with the present facility site. Mr. Bob Paige, 3493 Crystal Place, asked the size of the present facility parcel, including the Post Office, and its estimated value. Bernhardson replied, "The parcel is approximately 2.5 acres and would sell for $34,000 or $35,000 if the buildings are cleared." Mr. Paige asked whose decision it will be to sell this parcel or convert it to a park. Mayor Grabek responded that it will be the Council's decision with the assistance of the Park Commission. Mr. Wilbur Andersen, 3555 Frederick Street, asked who had made the motion at a previous Council meeting to purchase the property. Mayor Grabek stated that he may have made the motion, but did not recall for certain. Mr. Andersen stated that he has not seen any articles in the paper regarding this issue. Mayor Grabek replied, "It is City policy to make these meetings known to the public. The press attends and reports on our meetings." Mr. Andersen stated that in his opinion, there will be traffic problems if the City Facility is located on Highway 12. He said, "There are busses in and out of the school at various times of the day. If you couple that with the Public Works trucks and the Police vehicles, there could be some safety hazards for the school children." Mr. Curt Quady, 1223 South Brown Road, suggested that the various aspects of this project be worked out and that the public be asked to vote on the project. He said, "If the people vote in favor of the project, fine. If not, then the project does not proceed. Council is acting as though the project it> definitely going to happen without taking the public’s opinion into account. I don't believe that the public is in favor of Council approving this project without public input." Mayor Grabek assured Mr. Quady that the Council would not push for a projeci that was not needed or approved of by the - 4 - ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD OCTOBER 22, 1990 CITY FACILITIES CONTINUED majority of citizens. He said. "VJe are approaching this project; in a manner that is commonly ased by municipalities. This meeting has been scheduled to orovide the opportunity for public input now thac Council and Staff has determined the need for a new facility. We have only begun the process." Mr. Quady asked whethe. Council will allow the public to vote on this issue. Bernhardson stated that a public vote on this is an option available to Council. Mayor Grabek added, "The size and location of the facility make little difference, as such projects can only be funded through tax revenues. The issue then is whether there is a new facility or whether we continue to ask our employees to work under the poor quality conditions now existing." Walter Pemberton, 1720 Shadywood Road, asked whether Council has the authority to raise taxes for fifteen years. He also asked for the opportunity to poll the Council regarding their position on raising taxes. Mayor Grabek stated that the C icil does have the authority to raise taxes. Callahan stated that he believes a new facility is necessary and that there ought to be input from the citizens regarding that project. He said, "Yes, I would fund a new facility by raising taxes if it is necessary to do that. I agree with Mr. Quady that the City should determine a location and a design so that the public can be accurately informed of what the City intends to do and how much it will cost." Mr. John Farnham asked for the Councilmembers' comments regarding whether or not there should be a referendum on this matter. Callahan said, "I am willing to commit the taxpayers to paying for the facility over a 10 or 15 year time period. I am inclined toward a referendum, but am not totally committed to it. If there is no referendum, I believe there should be sufficient public meetings so that the City is aware of what the public wishes to do." Peterson said, "I do not think that anyone can disagree that a new facility is needed. I do feel that a rel3rendum should be helc. I would not have a problem with asking the taxpayers to fund the new facility if the referendum indicated they were in favor of doing so. In the initial discussions of this topic, I understood thac information would be sent to the general public - 5 - ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD OCTOBER 22, 1990 CITY FACILITIES CONTINUED as the stages progressed." Bernhardson commented, "It ^vas m/ understanding that a Committee would be appointed and that a package of information, including location, cost, etc., would be prepared and presented to the public. The package of information would answer as many questions as possible." Peterson said, "If that is the case, then why are we trying to push for this option to spend nearly $300,030 without having public input." Bernhardson replitid, "Council directed Staff in August to proceed with obtaining the option. Council agrees that a facility is needed, therefore, location becomes the next issue. The potential location has been narrowed to two sites. Those sites have been compared and it makes little difference in the cost if the facility is located on one site or the other. The next step in the process is the design stage, which will cost approximately $60,000. Staff did not feel it made sense to spend $60,000 to design two facilities on two different sites uaeii only one site will be used. There really is little information that could have been provided to the public prior to this point." Peterson explained that she and CounciImember Callahan had initially voted no for the motion to pursue the option. Sne said, "It was a two to two vote. Another motion was made and it was my understanding that we would pursue the option, but that we would have six months to prepare information and receive input from the public. I voted in favor of that motion. I- is now two months later and nothing has been done, with the exception of obtaining an agreement on this particular property. I do not know what will happen this evening, whether Council will vote to spend $300,000 to purchase the property, I will not." Goetten stated that she too strongly agrees that a new facility is ^oded. She said, "I have been concerned about the escalating cost of the project which started just under two million dollars and is now over three million. Should taxes be raised to fund a new facility? If it wj ’ 1 cost over three million dollars, I guess that will be necessary. I am still waiting for information pertaining to the H'.ghv/ey 12 site and the option. I agree that more public meeting'j are necessary and that the process has been lacking in the area of providing information. I will not vote to exercise an option this evening. I believe there should be a referendum." Nettles said, "I have been a Councilmerrber for two years. This project pre-dates me. I became aware of the project in 1986, just after moving to Orono. It does seem that there is consensus among the people of the COitimunvty that a facility is - 6 - ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD OCTOBER 22, 1990 CITY FACILITIES CONTINUED needed. The question is where we go from there. I believe that this meeting is a first step of many that will involve the public in this issue. I am happy to see such a large turn-out as we have had little input up to this point. We decided to obtain an option on the Highway 12 property to avoid the possibility of the purchase price increasing. That had previously occurred on another parcel on Highway 12. when the owner learned that the City was" negotiating"^ for the property, the price immediately escalated. Tae decision to obtain the option also resulted from a recommendation from the Citizens Committee who spent a great deal of time reviewing sites and possible building structures. I agree with Mr. Ellis that all departments should be located on the same site. I had originally believed that the Public Works facility should be separate. I have since learned that the requirement of sprinkler systems in each building would add a significant cost to the project. I have not seen any attempt on the part of the Council or City to keep this information from the public. I do not know what we need to do to better inform the public. Tne Council Agenda is always posted. Another reason that we chose to obtain the option is so we could proceed v/ith the process to a point where we would have some concrete information to provide to the public. I would commit taxpayer dollars to this project, but there are other aspects to that. The City has saved a considerable sum of money for this project. Also, the financial rating we have allows us to borrow money at a lesser rate of interest. The City could opt to use the entire amount saved for a new facility. However, we could lose our bond rating and would have no funds to fall back on. In the alternative, we could use a portion of the savings, in conjunction with a tax increase, which would allow us to keep our financial rating and corresponding benefits. I believe that the issue of a referendum depends on how the project is funded and how the public feels as the project and public meetings continue.'' Mayor Grabek stated that he would commit the tax dollars of the Community, which included his own, for this project. He said, "I believe we would all benefit from a new facility in the long run. I am not sure that a I can make a decision regarding the referendum at this time." Gabriel Jabbour, 985 Tonkawa Road, stated that he had received information pertaining to this issue just prior to this meeting. He asked whether this meeting would be taking place if the Council had voted to exercise the option on the Highway 12 property. He also asked whether the proposed two percent increase in property taxes would be to fund the difference between the cost of the facility and the 2.2 million saved by the City. Mayor Grabek replied, "It was not my intention to proceed - 7 - ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD OCTOBER 22, 1990 CITY FACILITIES CONTINUED with the facility project without acknowledgment of our expenditure for the land or the facility. There would have been a public hearing prior to that. I believe that the City should push for this land and commit to a new facility. I wish to correct earlier comments made regarding the cost of this project. The 1.7 million first discussed pertained to land. The cost has not escalated from 1.7 million to an excess of three million." Bernhardson stated that the City had experienced financial difficulties back in the 1970's. Since that time it has tried to prevent that from occurring again. He said, "The City has been very frugal with tax dollars. In response to Mr. Jabbour's question, at the two percent level, the City would have 2.2 million, plus other funds, that could be used for the facility. If the two percent level is used, the City would have a cash reserve, after the facility costs, so that it could maintain a strong fiscal balance for the future.- and keep taxes lower than they otherwise would be. The City of Orono has the lowest City tax rate of any city in Hennepin County with a population over 1,000. I believe this Council has done a good job in trying to manage City funds. If we lost our bond rating, it may cost the taxpayers more in the long run." Mr. Dave Peterson stated that construction costs are generally based on so much per square foct. He asked \;hy it is necessary to design the entire building .n order to provide the public with a cost estimate. Mayor Grabek responded that it is important to have a design plan in order to assure that the structure will in fact be sufficient in size and functionality for some time. He stated that it may be necessary to remodel or add on, at additional costs, if an adequate structure is not designed from the start. Goetten stated that up until a few months ago, the Mayor has been dragging his feet on this issue Mr. Quady concurred with Goetten and asked why nothing has happened over the last four years regarding this issue. He said, "The City has been dragging its feet up to this point. If there is so much concern about the working conditions, why hasn't something been done prior to this? The City has made no attempt to improve the conditions of the existing facility." Mr. Norman Paurus, 2500 Casco Point Road, stated that he has lived in Orono for 21 years and served on the City Council in the 1970's. Ke said, "This issue v/as as much a problem then, as it is now. The issue is not whether or not we need a City facility. The question is where and when. I believe that the process of determining that has fallen apart. In my opinion, the public has not been adequately informed. Secondly, I believe that great - 8 - ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD OCTOBER 22, 1990 CITY FACILITIES CONTINUED consideration should be given to housing all departments on one location. As to the timing, I think it would be sheer disaster to consider this issue without knov/ing the route of Highway 12 if that is to be the chosen site. I do not think it is necessary to delay this project that long however, because there are alternate sites." Ms. Candace Rowlette, 3775 Bayside Road, stated that a new facility is needed as soon as possible aid that the project cannot be delayed pending decisions regarding Highway 12. She said, "The City has one chance to do this and it should be done right. If the project is delayed, it will only cost more. I believe it was appropriate that a decision was made to pursue the option at the August meeting. Otherwise, it would have become impossible for the City to purchase any property at a decent price." Call ihan added, "The purpose of the option was allow us time to more carefully consider the Highway 12 location as well as other options." Mr. Harry Sv/eatt, Bohn's Point Lane, stated that the people attending this meeting were responding to a surt'rise. He asked if the City had distributed a yellow flyer to Orono citizens. Mr. Farnham indicated that he v/as responsible for the yellow flyers. Mr. Sweatt asked how many square feet the City will require in the new facility. Mr. Jack Boarman, Architect/Consultant for the City, stated that the total office space for police and City hall is approximately 8,000 to 9,000 s.f. He said, "The total building, including the garages and detention facilities, public meeting spaces, etc., is approximately 18,000 s.f." Ms. Pam Peters, Togo Road, asked to have the financial information repeated concerning the cost of the land on Highway 12 and the resale value for the current site. Mayor Gcabek replied, "The land on Highway 12 is approximately $20,000/acre for 14 acres. It would be necessary to separate the Public Works facility on another location if we chose to rebuild on this present site. This may result in a higher cost for the facility if it is constructed in this location. It is the consensus of Council and Staff that it would be easier to function if all departments were located in one facility." Ms. Marsha Rokke a member of the Citizen's Committee, - 9 - ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD OCTOBER 22, 1990 CITY FACILITIES CONTINUED Stated that the need for an extra wall for this site adds a significant cost to building. She said, "The-e are other considerations such as the cost of the sprinkler systems that make this site more expensive than it would seem. Tha Highway 12 site already has municipal watar." Mayor Grabek added, "The cost of reselling this parcel would be approximately $30,000 provided that the buildings are demolished." Peterson added, "It would cost the City approximately $30,000 to demolish the buildings existing on this site. The property on Highway 12 will cost $292,000." Ms. Nancy Brantingham, 3185 County Road 6, stated that in her opinion, public notification regarding this issue has been insufficient. Mr. Farnham stated that he would like to have a referendum on this issue. He asked whethe*- it would be possible for the City to summarize the report f i the Citizen's Committee for distribution to the community. Gabriel Jabbour commented that there had been little direction given to the Citizen's Facility Committee and what direction was provided came from City Staff. Mayor Grabek stated that it was the intention of Council to have no interaction with the Citizen's Committee initially. He said, "We did not want the Council to have any influence on the Committee. The information they receive should come from the consultant and City Staff. When Council aid the Citizen's Committee met together in a workshop session, it was clear that the Highway 12 site was preferred by everyone." Mr. Jabbour stated that ha did not object to the recommendation for the facility location on Highway 12. He said, "What I object to is the process and the lack of input to and from the citizens." Mr. Art Torangeau said, "I think what people are trying to say is that this is being rammed down their throats. Everyone is concerned when it has to do with their pocketbook." Mayor Grabek replied, "If it is necessary. Council can consider mass mailings to keep the citizens informed. Hov/ever, that may be a costly venture." Mr. Farnham commented, "Due to the magnitude in the cost of this project and the effect on the citizens, I think there should be mass mailings." - 10 - ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD OCTOBER 22, 1990 CITY FACILITIES CONTINUED Mayor Grabek said, "We have no objections to providing the citizens with information. However, before v/e can do that, we must have some information to provide. It will do no good to provide generalities or figures that have no realism. There has always been an intent to provide the public with information and to receive input back in that regard. There is only so much the City can do. It is also up to the citir.ens in the community to attend meetinos and read articles in the paper, or contact the Councilperson from their area." Ms. Marilyn Pemberton, Shadywood Road, asked why it would not be possible for the smaller cities to combine their facilities. Goetten stated that in order to combine facilities, it is necessary to have a working relationship with the other communities. She stated that is not the case. Mr. Bill Stubbs, 18"> Old Crystal Bay Road, stated that he is also a member of the Citizen's Committee. He said, "It was my feeling that we could pick up the option for $5,000. When considering the entire cost of this project, it seems that this land is reasonably priced. I think everyone agrees that a facility is needed. I believe that the facility should be visible and accessible. There is a service road planned right across from Old Crystal Bay Road to Willow. I also believe it is important to have all of the City functions on one site. I do not want to see this option run out. In all of the sites that we reviewed, there were none for sale that compared to the Highway 12 property. It seems to me that we are progressing in the right direction if we can communicate more to the people. We should not let this property get away from us." Mayor Grabek stated that it would now be appropriate to take V '>mments only from the Council and Staff at this point. He said, ** X e next step in the process is to identify the site and to diru-t the Architect to provide plans based on that site selection. The option is available to us for another five or six months. It would not pay for us to exercise that option unless there is a threat of losing the property. I would like Council to engage in discussion regarding whether or not the Highway 12 site is appropriate. If it is the consensus that the Highway 12 site is most sensible and economical, then, without exercising the option, perhaps we could have the Architect draw plans taking that site into consideration." Peterson stated that there are only four months left on this option, but there is an opportunity to extend that for six more months. She said, "That should provide ample time for more information to be gathered, prepared and presented to the public." - 11 - ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD OCTOBER 22, 1990 CITY FACILITIES CONTINUED Nettles stated that it is necessary to provide the public with the information from the Citizen's Committee pertaining to their review process and recommendation. He said, "I also think it may be interesting to have the public tell us what kind of tax increase they would agree to." Goetten stated that she is not ready to make any decision on this issue at this point in the process. She informed everyone that the Citizen's Committee had met only four times. Sne said, "While the Citizen's Committee has provided a considerable amount of good information, there is more to be done before the option is exercised." Callahan said, "I favor this present site more than the Highway 12 site. The cost differential is a major factor. Also, I have not been totally convinced that it is necessary to have all of the City operations located on one site. If it can be determined that the Highway 12 site is more economically feasible, I would give that consideration. I do agree that the basic cost of the biiilding will be approximately the same, regardless of whether it is constructed oi Highway 12 or here. However, there are other aspects of the project, such as landscaping, etc., that must also be included and from a cost standpoint, are unknown at this time. If it is possible to construct a building that has lesser square feet than shown by the schematic drawings, this site may be appropriate. However, I understand that it would still be necessary to construct a Public VJorks facility elsewhere. It would also be necessary to provide an additional source of water to provide a sprinkler system for the building. All of this has been discussed previously at public meetings. I want the opportunity to review whether or not the City needs to have a facility with all of the features shown in the schematic drawings. I do not believe that Council should spend $60,000 for design work until that has been determined. I am not prepared to vote on a site selection. Even if it could be determined that the Highway 12 site is the most feasible site, I would not vote to exercise the option because I believe that should be done just prior to beginning construction. The term 'referendum' could refer to a form of bond referendum, or a method of gathering public opinion. If it is the public intention this evening to have a referendum to provide public opinion, I would favor that. It may not be necessary to have a bond referendum, however. That would depend on the method of financing that is chosen. Tnere is little doubt that the building could be entirely paid for by the City. However, the money used for the building would greatly affect the operating budget for the City and may have a tax impact on the City. This information would have to be explained to the public at a later time." - 12 - ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD OCTOBER 22, 1990 CITY FACILITIES CONTINUED Mayor Grabek said, "It is prudent for the Council to question and identify wnat the City needs in terms of a facility. That has been done on a preliminary basis. A needs study v/as done to help us determine what our needs may be in the future. At some point in time, Council will have to make a decision as to where the appropriate site will be. There is no reason why that could not be determined this evening. We should target our direction as where the facility should be. I think it would be dragging our feet to delay that decision any further. Via have been talking about sites for over a year. It was moved by Grabek, seconded by Netties for purposes of discussion, to identify the more preferred site, that being the option land of 14 acres off of Old Crystal Bay Road, as the targeted site for the new facility. This would enable the City to identify the land and the type of structure that could be constructed on that site. The process of reviewing alternate funding sources could then begin, which would enable us to provide more information to the public. This motion does not include exercising the option at this time. Nettles stated that the reason he agrees with the Mayor's motion is r use he believes Council is taking the next necessary step, . icH the public has indicated that they want Council to do. He s . 'Tt will then be possible to provide the public with some j. .. . ate information. It was my understanding that there was a 90% consensus among the Citizen's Committee in favor of the Highway 12 site. I am being guided heavily by that recommendation. I started out in this process believing that this site or the sewer plant site would be more appropriate. If the Council does not target in on a particular site, it is not clear to me how we would provide any additional, realistic information to the public. Peterson stated that it was her understanding that there had been a 70% consensus of the Citizen's Committee in favor of this site. Marsha Rokke stated that 70% represented the minimum required for a consensus, but that more than 70% agreed with the recommendation for the High -»y 12 site. Callahan stated that the Committee Report included a recommendation for four sites. He said, "It turned out that three of the four sites were not available. Thus by process of elimination, the Highway 12 site v/as chosen. I am not convinced that the Citizen's Committee chose that site based on other factors. I also believe that the Highway 12 project could have a negative impact on this site." Bernhardson stated that there had been an earlier report, in June, from the Citizen's Committee, which indicated that the Highway 12 area was most preferable among the other sites being considered. Goetten indicated that it may be appropriate to delay a decision until the results of the upcoming election are known. Peterson stated that she did not believe the election was a factor in this process. She said, " I would not vote for the option because there are too many unanswered questions. The majority of Orono citizens reside south of Fox Street. I prefer - 13 - mORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD OCTOBER 22, 1990 CITY FACILITIES CONTINUED the present site and have not been convinced that the Hignway 12 site is most suitable. I would like to have more information and make a decision when it is nearly time for the option to expire." Nettles said, "I do not understand. Barb, how we can provide the information that the public is requesting without targeting in on a particular site.. I do agree that the elections have nothing to do with this. Everyone pretty much agrees that we need a new facility." Motion, Ayes-2, Peterson, Goetten, and Callahan, Nay. Motion failed. Callahan said, "I would like the opportunity to review the drawings provided by the Architect to determine whether or not we need to have all of the features and spaces shown." It was moved by Callahan, seconded by Peterson, to table this matter until November 26, 1990, to provide time to see comparisons and information regarding building spaces and requirements and financing options. Mayor Grabek stated that such information has already been reviewed, but he suggested that Staff provide a compilation of the information pertaining to space needs, financing alternatives and building types that could be constructed on each site. He said, "I would like to be able to make some forward motion at the November 26, 1990 Council meeting. \ie should be able to select a site, but not necessarily exercise the option. If that is agreeable, I wilJ not oppose the one month delay. Callahan stated that he could not commit to what he may do a month from now. Goetten stated that she would like more time for this issue to be discussed and more information to be provided. Mayor Grabek asked whether Council would like to a hold work session prior to the November 26, 1990. It was the consensus of Council that a workshop should be held. Motion, Ayes-1, Mayor Grabek, Nay. Motion passed. NAVARRE HEIGHTS DRAINAGE CONTINUATION Mabusth stated that the purpose of this continuation was to allow additional opportunity for public opinions to be expressed. Ms. Pam Peters, Togo Road, stated that she had missed the previous meeting and asked for a brief summary of the two options available to solve the drainage problem. Ms. Beth Eisher, 3556 Livingston Avenue, stated that a letter had been submitted to the City today that included the signature of 16 property owners that would be financially affected by this proposal. She said, "The 16 people are not in favor of the storm sewer project. We do not feel that our property values will be increased by the amount of the assessment. We think there are other options that have not been explored. We believe it is possible for the Cuffs to construct a garage on that lot without assessing the neighborhood for a sewer project. The Cuffs have made changes to lot and perhaps if those - 14 - ORONO COUNCIL M»2ETING HELD OCTOBER 22, 19 90 NAVARRE HEIGHTS DRAINAGE CONTINUED revisions were reversed, there would be no problem." Mr. Harvey Reder, 3598 Livingston Avenue, asked whether the City was putting pressure on the Cuffs to solve the drainage problem in order to obtain a permit for a garage. Mayor Grabek stated that was not the case. He asked Bernhardson to briefly review the events of the last meeting. Bernhardson explained that the time of the Septe.mber 24, 1990 Public Hearing had been incorrectly stated. He said, "As a result, we scheduled this matter for the October 8, 1990 Council meeting. At the October 8th meeting it was agreed that the City should notify the property owners and provide an additional opportunity for public input. If the Council, following that felt it was appropriate to have specifications prepared, there would be another project Public Hearing once the plans and specs were completed. If, based on the input from the Public Hearing, Council wished to proceed with the project, bids would be taken and another Public Hearing would be scheduled regarding the special assessment. If the special assessment is ordered, the City would then consider the appeals. Council would consider the number of appeals in determining whether or not to proceed with the project. There has been some question about whether or not all of the persons who signed the 35% petition were v/ithin the confines of the project area. It is our determination that they were. There was only person in question and that person has moved." Gerhardson displayed a copy of the plat showing the various lots that would be involved in the project. The plat map also indicated which of the property owners had signed each of the various petitions that have been submitted. Bernhardson commented that there are four property ov/ners who have signed both petitions. Ms. Shirley Spalding stated that those four persons wished to have their names removed from Karen Cuff's. She said, "They wish to only have their names on the petition opposing the project. They did not fully understand the proposal when they signed Karen Cuff's petition." Mr. Anthony Gleekel, Attorney for the Cuffs, stated that there is no other option available to satisfactorily resolve this problem. He said, "If there was a less expensive method of solving this problem, the Cuffs would prefer to proceed in that manner. The Cuffs would be assessed for this project as well. This is not just simply being propossd to allow Cuffs to construct a garage. There are properties other than the Cuffs that are experiencing water problems as well. Council had - 15 - ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD OCTOBER 22, L990 NAVARRE HEIGHTS DRAINAGE CONTINUED previously informed Karen Cuff that if she obtained a 35% petition, that they v;ould order the project. . Cuff has submitted a 35% petition. I do not believe that Council should revise their position from that in their motion on Seotember 24, 1990." Ms. Karen Cuff, stated that she had discussed the project with each of the neighbors at the time she v;as circulating her petition. She said, "I gave each resident a copy of the proposed assessments and time period, and a complete copy of the feasibility study. I feel that I did accurately explain the project. The excavation that was done on the lot was to be a temporary solution to the drainage problem. We experienced drainage problems before we did anything to the property." Mr. Robert Paige, Crystal Place, asked if the cost of the project has been estimated. Bernhardson stated that until the specs are drawn and bids are taken, it will be difficult to determine the cost. He said, "Staff estimates that the project may cost aporoximately $32,000." Mr. Paige asked how many properties would share in that cost. Cook replied. "There are approximately 42 lots. There are fewer people than there are lots. It will cost aporoxima tely $700/lot." Mr. Hersel Forester, 3599 Crystal Place, said, "This v;as a tax forfeit lot and was used for drainage before the Cuff's purchased it. Wouldn't it be less expensive for the City to purchase the property and let the water run. I am downhill from the Cuffs and I have no water problem. I have seen only two houses on that street that have a water problem. Yet they expect the rest of the neighbors to pay for their problem." Bernhardson commented tnat the property was purchased from Hennepin County, not the City of Orono. Mr. Jim Smith, 3580 Livingston Avenue, said, "The problem is that the water isn't running, it is creating a very large pool. During the first week of August, shortly after a heavy rain, a child was nearly hit by a car. The child lives in one of the houses that have signed both petitions. This child was laying on his skate board in this pool of water. I watched the car approach and barely stop in time to avoid hitting him. Children are automatically drawn to water puddles. This is a pool. There must be something done to stop water from pooling in this location." - 16 - way 1 ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD OCTOBER 22, 1990 BIGHTS DRAINAGE CONTINUED Recier suggested that Cuffs should regrade the lot to the isted the day they purchased it. Mr, Michael Bohlen, 3525 Livingston Avenue, questioned why the City could not pay for the cost of this project out of the general fund. Mayor Grabek replied, "It is the policy of the City that we assess projects such as this to the area residents that most benefit from the project." Bernhardson added, "Storm sewer projects are difficult to assess because the people downhill receive the most benefit. However, it is the people uphill that contribute to the problem." Mr. Peter Niesen, 3533 Livingston Avenue, stated that in his opinion this should be a City project. He said, "The City knew that water pooled in that area when they put in the blacktop. Something should have been done at that time. The road is damaged from this problem and it is necessary for the City to fill the potholes periodically. It would seem to me that the City would correct the problem to avoid the need to repair the road." Ms. Peters asked if the water from the proposed storm sewer would be discharged on the north side of the railroad tracks. Cook replied, "That is correct." Ms. Peters asked, "So water will drain onto the properties on the south side of Togo Road is that correct.^" Cook replied, "Yes, that is correct." Ms. Paters said, "Those lots currently have water problems." Cook acknowledged that there are some drainage problems in that area. Ms. Peters stated that there are some significant drainage problems in that area. Mr. Dave Carlson, 3645 Togo Road, said, "I get all of the drainage from Northern Drive. If a storm sewer is added to the property, it will have a real problem. Currently, every time it rains, I g?t one to two feet of water in my backyard, and it is ruining my basement, complain about this that I maintain the storm sewer will onl I have called th-* City several times to blem. Nothing has b>'n done. I believe erts bettor than the City. The proposed /ravate the situation." - 17 - ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD OCTOBER 22, 1990 NAVARRE HEIGHTS DRAINAGE CONTINUED Ms. Evelyn Lang, 3585 Crystal Place, asked if the drainage will go under or stop prior to the railroad tracks. She said, "There is a swale between the street and railroad track. Will there be an additional culvert under the railroad tracks?" Cook replied, "There will be no additional culvert. The water will drain under the tracks through the culvert that now exists. " Ms. Peters asked what the City intends to do about the properties on Togo Road that will be adversely affected by the storm sewer project if it proceeds. Cook replied, "It is true that water will drain at a faster rate to Togo Road. Staff will need to review the present situation in that area before proceeding with the project." Mr. Paige asked if there was any possibility that the City would participate in the funding of this project and who made that decision. Mayor Grabek stated that at this point the City does not intend to participate in funding, and that such a decision is made by Council. Mr. Forester asked whether it is Counci] 's decision as to whether or not the project will proceed. Mayor Grabek replied, "That is correct, based on the information pertaining to the costs and feasibility of the project and the input from the public." Mr. Forester said, "The City has received a petition with 16 names opposed to the project. That is 50% of the neighborhood that is opposed to this." Ms. Peters added, "The neighborhood below does not want the project either." Mr. Bohlen asked if the City could estimate the costs of the easements. Cook stated that it is impossible to estimate easement costs. Mayor c. :abeK stated that he would take no more public input at this point. Peterson asked what ramifications the withdrawal of the four names from t.he 35% petition will have on the validity of the petition. - 18 - ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD OCTOBER 22, 1990 NAVARRE HEIGHTS DRAINAGE CONTINUED Barrett replied, "The statute states that if a petition is belov; 35%, it requires a 4 ^5ths vote. There is no other reference. In my preliminary opinion, at: this point, since rhe 35% petition has not been officially voted on, it is possible for persons to withdraw their names. If the petition drops below 35% as a result, it will take four Counci Imembers voting affirmatively to approve the project. I v/ould like to research that further." Callahan asked at what point in the process the 4/5ths vote would apply. Barrett replied, "Once the specs have been prepared and bids taken so that a final cost is known, it will be necessary to hold a Public Hearing to order the project. It will be necessary to order the project with a 4^5ths vote if there is less than 35% on the petition." Goetten stated that she is nov/ concerned about aggravating an existing drainage problem for the residents o'l Togo Road. She questioned how this new information will affect this process. Nettles concurred v;itli Goetten. He said, "It appears to me ’ihat the problem may be more extensive cnan we first believed. I would like to direc- >e City Engineer to review th^ Togo Road area to determine the tent of the drainage probl*. It was moved by Nettles, seconded by Mayor Grabek, to table this item and direct City Staff to review and report on the drainage in tha Togo Road area and whether this storm sewer project will have any effect. Metion, Ayes-5. Nays-0. Motion passed. CONSENT AGENDA* It was moved by Mayor Grabek, seconded by Peterson, to approve the Consent Agenda. Motion, Ayes-5, Nays-0. Motion passed. APPROVAL OF MINUTES* It was moved by Mayor Grabek, seconded by Peterson, to adopt the minutes of the Regular Council meeting held October 8, 1990. Motion, Ayes-5, Nays-0. Motion passed. LMCD REPORT LMCD Representative JoEllen Hurr was present. Bernhardson referred Council to the additional information that had been placed before them just prior to this meeting. He stated that he had attended the LMCD meeting on October 16th and had thought that the Board may be v/illing to explore the proposal from the City of Wayzata. He said, "However, in reviewing Mr. - 19 - Bf ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD OCTOBER 22, 1990 LMCD REPORT CONTINUED Arndorfer's comments, I am not sure." JoEilen stated that she would not be able to attend the meeting on October 24th. Mayor Grabek asked JoEllen what the City needs to do in light of her absence. JoEllen replied, "A representative from the City could attend the meeting, but cannot vote. They can speak on the City * s behalf. ' Callahan stated that he would like Administrator attend the meeting. have the City Mayor Grabek asked JoEllen for her opinion on what action may be taken at that meeting. JoEllen replied, "I believe that the Plan will be passed. The thirty-day delay was not long enough to accomplish anything given the magnitude of issues. I don't believe there will be another delay." Mayor Grabek asked if there were any additional cities that have chosen to oppose the Plan along with Orono. JoEllen replied, "As far as I know, Orono, Spring Park, and Vi?ayzata are the only cities voting no." Nettles stated that having input regarding the Shoreland Management Regulations done at the Comprehensive Plan level was a positive step toward developing a working relationship. He asked what happens once the Plan is approved by the LMCD Board. JoEllen replied, "The Plan is submitted to the Metropolitan Council and I do not believe they will oppose it." Goetten asked how long the Metropolitan Council may take to review the Plan. JoEllen replied, "They are allowed 90 days to review the Plan. However, they may not take that long." Callahan said, "This is a real mess. First of all, the LMCD has assured everyone that this is only a plan. So voting no or yes, makes no difference to anyone except for moral suasion. Secondly, it was apparent to me from the meeting of October 10, that this, particularly the Shoreland Management, is a DNR operation and the LMCD is there to carry out whatever the DNR wants done. The DNR is confused by it all because they expected that they would have unanimous consent of the cities. If they do - 20 - ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD OCTOBER 22, 1990 LMCD REPORT CONTINUED not have that, they do not have an interlocking method of working the scheme. They now have a scheme which they rely on for their Shoreland Management which they think may change the rules, but Orono, Spring Park, Deephaven, Minnetonka, v;ayzata, and Tonka Bay are not going to agree v/ith the v;hole thing. The DNR is not sure what to do because they are not sure they have the authority to enforce it until this Plan that is only a plan is approved." JoEllen said, "The DNR does have the ability to legally enforce Shorel-nd Regulations." Callahan replied, "That may be the case, but they were relying on the LMCD to be the instrument to carry this out. They have nov/ found out that the LMCD is not going to be an effective method. It may be that the Plan is no longer important to the DNR. " JoEllen said, "I think they still cace. From the down side, it may have been easier for the DNR to have the LMCD be the middle person in this. I think in the long run it would have easier for many of the cities to have the LMCD be the middle person rather than each city having to negotiate on its own." Callahan said, "The DNR is really concerned that they have $45,000 which must be given away. This scheme through the LMCD was a method to give it away to the cities. If that scheme falls through, they won't know v/hat to do with the $45,000 and that presents a bureaucratic problem." JoEllen said, "$5,000 will go directly to Orono." PUBLIC COMMENTS Ms. Lorraine Moss, Crystal Bay Road, stated that someone is in the process of constructing tall, cement posts in the wetland. She said, "Rumor has it that this person intends to construct a pool in the wetland area. I have lived in my house 45 years and have enjoyed all of the wild life that comes and goes in the wetland area. That area is a nature conservatory." Mabusth explained, "This issue is scheduled to come before the City shortly. V7e have sent a letter to the owner of the property. It is my understanding that he will be applying for a Condi* ‘ *'r*al Use Permit. Mrs. Moss is referring to pillars that the ' intended to use as part of a fencing project. V7e have orde> to cease work immediately." Mayor Grabek advised Mrs. .Moss that the City would keep her apprised of the progress involving this matter. Mr. Robert Gehrman, 4300 Sixth Avenue North, stated that it has come to his attention that the City of Orono v;as sued by the - 21 - 1ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD OCTOBER 22, 1990 PUBLIC COMMENTS CONTINUED Mayor in regard to work done to his home. He asked Mayor Grabek if that is correct. Mayor Grabek replied, "That is correct." Mr. Gehrman asked Mayor Grabek why he sued the City. Mayor Grabek responded that this was not an appropriate place or time to discuss his personal lawsuit. He offered to discuss the matter individually with Mr. Gehrman. Mr. Geh-.-nan asked if it is City policy to notify the Council of all lawsuits pending before the City. Barrett stated that in this particular case, the lawsuit was referred to the City's insurance carrier, and was dismissed. Bernhardson reviewed the City’s standard procedure regarding lawsuits. Mr. Gehrman asked whether there is any cost to the taxpayers for such lawsuits. Nettles confirmed Bernhardson's statements relating to the standard procedure for municipal lawsuics. He added that the only cost in cases such as the Mayor's is the insurance premiums that are normally paid. Mr. Gabriel Jabbour stated that he had attended a recent meeting at the League of Minnesota Voters. He said that he had received a phone cal 1 after the meeting regarding his position on annexation. He said, "I was informed that the City of Orono is coming across much more aggressive than need be. I was told that the position taken by the Mayor of Long Lake did not necessarily reflect the opinion of the Long Lake Councilmembers. I also told that the Mayor of Long Lake did not fully communicate with the Councilmembers. The present Council feels that the issue of the number of houses to be constructed is not an issue. They indicated that they would be willing to develop only 13 houses. I believe that it would be beneficial to meet with the Long Lake Councilmembers to see if we can amicably resolve this issue. Callahan stated that the number of houses to be constructed was never the sole issue involved in this matter. Callahan said, "I am aware that the Long Lake Council changed their position. However, once they have the property, there is nothing to stop them from constructing 40 houses or more." Mr. Jabbour urged Council to make an attempt to rekindle a friendly working relationship with Long Lake. - 22 - ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD OCTOBER 22, 1990 tr ■ PUBLIC COMMENTS CONTINUED Mr. James MacKinnon, Attorney, stated that his lawfirm had initially represented an individual involved in the lawsuit referred to by Mr. Gehrman. He said, "The matter with respect to the City arose because there was information that led us to conclude that the City undertook a special duty. Thar can arise when a city does not do what it normally does to design something for somebody's house, but goes over and above. By taking on this special duty, the city then has a certain obligation. If they do not do it properly then can they can be subject to suit. We sued the City of Orono. After that, I did some investigation, which included speaking to Jeanne Mabusth and Mike Gaffron. I found out through them that the City did not undertake any special duty. They treated the Mayor exactly like they treat every citizen in Orono. Based on Mike and Jeanne's expressions to me, and based on the fact that my clients did not wish to spend a large amount on the lawsuit, we decided not to fight the Summary Judgment. The matter was dropped because I determined that what we had originally thought was a bonafide suit ended up not to be. With respect to the actions and cost to the City, it was the conclusion of our lawfirm that nothing irresponsible had been done." ZONING ADMINISTRATOR’S REPORT: #1334 REBERS CONSTRUCTION - SUGARWOODS PLAT RECONSIDERATION OF CONDITIONS OF PRD APPROVAL Mr. Sid Rebers, Mr. Stephen Pflaum, Attorney, and Mr. Robert Kost, Planning Consultant, were present. Bernhardson explained the present conditions of the PRD for driveways, and Mr. Reber's request to have those conditions reconsidered. He stated that there will be a number of lots that will be unable to meet the existing PRD requirements. Bernhardson said, "The Developer is making this request so that he will have more flexibility in designing these individual driveways without having to go through a Variance process for each. Several templates have been designed by Staff and BRW for use in such cases. If the owner of the property did not wish to use the templates, a review by the Planning Commission and Council would be necessary. The Planning Commission reviewed the templates, but felt it was their responsibility to review each of these cases individually. The Planning Commission was concerned about tree preservation." Mr. Pflaum said, "Thare were two key issues in the Sugarwoods Development. Minimal hardcover and maximum tree protection. From discussion I have had with Chairman Kelley, it appears that hardcover is not an issue here. However, tree preservation continues to be a concern. During the planning and review process, consideration was not given to the ramifications that may result from the requirement for a maximum driveway width - 23 - ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD OCTOBER 22, 1990 ZONING FILE 11334-REBERS RECONSIDERATION CONTINUED of 20 feet. The interior lots of the subdivision have such a configuration that it is ir..possible to provida a turn-arouid no matter where the house is placed on the lot. Tnere can be no loop or circular drivev^ays, but a turn-around area is acceptable. The turn-arounds will eliminate the need to back out unto the street, which in some cases may prove to be very dangerous. Most of the lots in this subdivision are heavily wooded, thus reducing sight capabilities. The templates present three options for providing a turn-around." Mr. Kost used a sketch of the development plan and an actual house footprint to support Mr. Pflaum's comments. Mr. Pflaum said, "We have an economic problem if we are to proceed with the recommendation of th;j Planning Commission. This subdivision is catering primarily to c*)rporate transfer executives that have little time to go through a designing process. They wish to be provided with a design and cost estimate as quickly as possible. They need to know that they can build the house design of their choice on the lot they have chosen without delay. Mr. Rebers is competing with other subdivisions of this nature that exist in Minnetonka, Eden Prairie and other suburbs. We ere asking to be allowed to use the templates in order to avoid the time delay of a review process to determine whether a particular lot is buildable. If a home buyer wishes to have a driveway design not represented by a template. Planning Commission review would be required. Gc ■‘tten asked how many lots v/ould need this special driveway consideration. Mr. Kost replied, " Appro.ximately 12 would need this special consideration." or 13 of the 23 lots Goetten asked Mr. Pflaum if he understands why the Planning Commission has taken such a strong stand on this issue. Mr. Pflaum replied, "Mr. Kelley told me that this subdivision had special benefits includad with it. It is the only subdivision in Orono that is less than two acres and has sewer and water. Mr, Kelley's point of view is that we negotiated the package and if wa did not give consideration to the driveways, that ii our problem. He does not wish to see any change in the original coiiditions. Mr. Kelley told me that I could quote him. He said that he and the Planning Commission had walked the site and saw the houses that v/ere under construction. He was fully satisfied that a maximum effort is being made, more than they had intended, in regard to tree and site preservation. Mr. Kelley does not object to what we are proposing, except that he wishes to view each of these on a case by case basis." - 24 - ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD OCTOBER 22, 1990 ZONING FILE #1334-REBERS RECONSIDERATION CONTINUED Goetten stated that Planning Commissioner Cohen had expressed to her this evening that he felt very strongly that each of these situations should be reviev/ed individually. Planning Commissioner Rowlette said, "The vote was six to one in favor of reviewing each of these individually. The Planning Commission believed we would not be serving our purpose if we gave a blanket approval." Mayor Grabek stated that if the Planning Commission approved the template designs, that Staff should be able to handle the process without involving the Planning Commission. He said, "I belie/e that the Planning Commission has more than enough to do already. I am not trying to take any authority away from the Planning Commission." Goetten stated that she supports the Planning Commission's recommendation. She said, "It may be that this issue was not considered fully by Mr. Rebers. However, the Planning Commission worked very, very hard to address all of the aspects of this unique, sensitive parcel. My option would be to allow the Planning Commission to review these case by case and leave the decision there. I would like to see the Planning Commission make some decisions on their own. I think they took ownership of this subdivision and I would like to support them." Callahan stated that originally he had concurred with Goetten's position. He said. "However, as I now understand it, there are 12 lots that may have difficulty meeting safety codes for a driveway. There is no question then, that a turn-around must be provided from a safety point of view. If the Planning Commission is going to be forced to make a change anyway, why is there a need to review each change individually. More than likely, the turn-around will be designed as the templates show." Rowlette said, "There are alternatives. This is not cut and dried. If we give blanket pprovai, each of the 12 lots will design the house to the maxin .m limit of that approval." Mr. Kost stated that would not be the case. He said, "Even if the property owner agrees to use a template design, it \;ill be necessary to work with City Staff to assure that the driveway is sited giving consideration to the trees and land characteristics. If at any point in the process. Staff is uncomfortable with the request, the matter would go before tho Planning Commission." Callahan asked whether it wculd be possible for the Planning Commission to work with Mr. Rebers to pre-determine an acceptable location for the driveways on each of the 12 or 13 lots. Rowlette replied, "I do not believe tho Planning Commission - 25 - ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD OCTOBER 22, 1990 ZONING FILE #1334-REBERS RECONSIDERATION CONTINUED v/ould object to reviewing all 12 lots at one time if Mr. Rebers wishes to proceed that way." Mayor Grabek said, "It seems to m= that is basically what has been proposed." Mr. Pflaum noted that the template designs are a compromise between Mr. Rebers and Staff to provide street. safe access to the Rowlette said, "The question is whether the Staff or Planning Commission should take the time to solve this issue. The Planning Commission wishes to take the time." It was moved by iMayor Grabek, seconded by Callahan for the purposes of discussion, to accept the templates as a method of allov/ing Staff to restrict what may be done on these lots. If there are any exceptions other than those designs represented by the templates, the matter must go through the planning process. Callahan asked if this proposal varied at all from Staff's original proposal. Mabusth repliad that the proposal before Council this evening is reflected in the resolution first prepared. Motion, Ayes-2, Peterson. Mettles and Goetten, Nay. Motion failed. #1497 TOBERMAN MANAGEMENT 1960 SHORELINE DRIVE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT REQUEST TO TABLE* It was moved by Mayor Grabek, seconded by Peterson, to cable review and action by the Council on Application #1497.- Toberman Management, for property located at 1960 Shoreline Drive. Motion, Ayes-5, Nays-0. Motion passed. #1592 SMITH BAY MARINA & YACHT CLUB, INC. 1955 SHORELINE DRIVE RENEWAL VARIANCES RESOLUTION #2891 Mr. Vern Larson, an Associate, of Toberman Management, was present. Bernhardson provided a brief review of the information pertaining to this application (see Jeanne Mabusth's memo dated October 11, 1990). He stated that this application included the same conditions and requirements set forth in Resolutions #2190 and #2648, with the exception of the club house which is proposed to be one story rather than two. Bernhardson noted that the Planning Commission had unanimously recommended approval. Peterson asked if there was a limit on the number of times an application could be renewed. - 26 - ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD OCTOBER 22, 1990 ZONING FILE #L592-SMITH BAY MARINA CONTINUED Mabusth replied, "Tha City ordinances do not set any limitations ■:or renewals. She asked Mr. Larson if he could estimate when a building permit: may be issued for this proposal. Mr. Larson stated that he d:.d not knov/ when a building permit applic.ition would be submitted. Callahan stated that it was his understanding that the property v;as in the process of being sold. He questioned whether it was appropria^£ to proceed with this application at this time. Mabusth replied, "The property was in the process of being sold to this same party when Council reviewed this application last year." Callahan said, "On the other hand, if the property is not sold, should we consider this application when it is possible that these improvements will never take place?" Mr. Larson stated that the reason the improvements had not been done prior to this was because of the economic hardship caused by the low lake levels. He said, "We completed the dredging, the replacement of the old docks and the construction of the seawall. Then the lake level decreased and it was not economically feasible to proceed with the other improvements." Callahan said, ''I can understand why you chose not to go ahead. I am questioning whether it makes sense to grant Variances relating to a building in a commercial site plan, when we have no idea when the building may be constructed." Goetten asked whether Council could request that a specific time period be provided indicating when construction would begin. Mr. Larson stated that he was not prepared to provide such information. He added, "If that information is normally required as part of the renewal Variance process, we could probably provide an estimate." Goetten asked, "Can you give the City a expectation that the building will be constructt?d?" reasonable Mr. Larson replied, "Probably just as reasonable as any of the other times we have been before the Council." Mr. Art Torangeau asked if the building will have indoor plumbing facilities. Mr. Larson replied. "Yes it will." Mr. Torangeau asked whether there would be an entrance and - 27 - ■ - •‘r'lUrUfTiTiyrifni^-Tt r-• - - ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD OCTOBER 22, 1990 ZONING FILE #1592-SMITH BAY MARINA CONTINUED exit to the property. He said, "There are two access locations. If both are used for entering and exiting, it will make traffic a mess. Tne traffic on County Road 15 has really increased over the last few years. I think that is something that should be considered." Planning Commissioner Rewlette said, "The Planning Commission did consider the issue of traffic. We believed that there would not be as much traffic generated with this use as with the previous use. It was our feeling that there would be sporadic traffic coming and going." Peterson asked whether the City had received the report from the State inspectors regarding the proposed sale of gas on this property. Mabusth replied, "Staff has not received any updated reports in that respect because there has been no activity on the property. If the sale of gas is proposed, we will have to ask for those reports." It was moved by Callahan, seconded by Peterson, to adopt Resolution #2891, granting Variances and approving the Commercial Site Plan far Smith's Bay Marina and Yacht Club, Inc. Motion, Ayes-4, Hays-0. Mettles abstained. Motion passed. 1555 LANDSTAR, INC. 2501 OLD BEACH ROAD PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION Mr. James MacKinnon, present. Attorney for Landorar, Inc.,was Bernhardson referred to the resolution presented for Council approval. He said, "The City Engineer has estimated the cost of curb and gutter to be $10.00/foot and the expanded roadbed at $20.00/foot. This would be independent of the City's bituminous overlay. The curb and gutter would be only be constructed on the west side of Old Beach Road. We have been informed by the City OL Minnetonka Beach that they wil not include curb and gutter along their portion of the road." JoEllen Hurr, City Planner, City of Minnetonka Beach, said, "The City of Minnetonka Beach is not in favor of any upgrade of Old Beach Road." Goetten asked if the need for curb and gutter had anything to do with drainage. Cook replied, "Drainage is part of the reason. It provides adequate drainage and helps increase the life of the r.^ad." - 28 - ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD OCTOBER 22, 1990 ZONING FILE #1555-LANDSTAR, INC., CONTINUED Mr. Jim Krey, 2;'360 Old B.^ach Road, said, "It was my understanding that drainage is not a concern for the lots in chis subdivision. Tie City Engineer is now saying that curb and gutter is needed to help drainage. I would like to know v;hy the curb and gutter is needed." Cook replied, "It is a City requirement that curb and gutter be provided in urban sections of road in new dev 'spments. We had originally stated that Old Beach Road v/ould .. ought up to City standards. The 32 foot width with euro ar^ • • o -er is what the City requires." Mabusth stated that the drainage referred to by the City Engineer pertains to the roadway. She said, "The City Engineer is not referring to drainage within the ' ts of the subdivision '■ Mr. MacKinnon said, "I would ask the Council keep in mir. that my c lent is proposing to develop this parcel at approximately 50% of its maximum density. We are developing nine lots, but could have 17. The owner of the property believed that he could recover a comfortable amount of his investment by developing only nine lots. He only considered sewer and water and the -ontribution toward a l^s'' overlay in his cost estimates. At a late date, that is now being changed. The City is now asking for curb and gutter. If that is the case, we v/ill submit a new plan with more lots so we can recover more money to pay che cost of the road improvements." Mr. Dave Schneider, Old Beach Road, asked what the City of Orono would like to see Old Beach Road become. He said, "If the road is upgraded, it wxll become a super short-cut. There is a newl ' expanded and upgraded intersection in Navarre. Why upgrade Old ach Road?" Mayor Grabek stated that the upgrade is not intended for the purpose of turning Old Beach Road into a faster shortcut. He stated that the upgrade is required from a safety point of view. Cook commented, "The widening of Old Beach Road will primarily be done to accommodate the ctirb ind gutter. Tne traveled portion of the road will not increase significantly. I do not believe that the quality of the road will cause people to drive at a higher rate of speed." Mr. Schneiuer asked whether it would be appropriate to consider placing a cul-da-sac at the end of Old Beach Road. Cook replied, "Thr^t could be addressed as a separate issue. However, that would create a very long cul-da-sac, which is not looked on favorably from a safety standpoint." - 29 - ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD OCTOBER 22, 1990 ZONING FILE 11555-LANDSTAR, INC., CONTINUED Goetteri esked whether the road issue could be separated from the subdivision. She said, "I cannot see a cul-do-sac being placed at the end of the road. Ho\/ever, I am also against curb and gutter for this particular road." Bernhardson stated that Council could opt to approve the subdivision without curb and gutter and require the developer to share in the cost of the overlay. Goetten asked what the overlay Mill cost. Staff did not know at this point what the cost of overlay will be. Cook said. "Council could i .djcate that the developer would have to share in whatever that couc is determined to be." Goetten stated that she would prefer to know that information prior to approval and that the developer should also know. It was moved by Goetten to approve the pceliminary subdivision as recommended by Staff and Planning Commission, without consideration for the road. The m:?tion failed due to a lack of a second. It was moved by Mayor Grabek, seconded by Nettles for the purpose of discussion, to approve the preliminary subdivision in accordance with the resolution presented this evening, which includes curb and gutter. Callahan asked whether tho cost of any f the road upgrade will be assessed to the persons living on the east side of Old Beach Road. Mabusth stated that the property owners on the east side cf Old Beach Road would not be included. Nettles asked whether curb and gutter is a requirement. Mabusth stated that curb and gutter is reqi'.ired in an urban area. She said. "Only Council can change that requirement. Staff had to include that requirement. Nettles stated that the people want t. leave the ro . as is and that the present road is in keeping with the character of the area. He stated that he preferred to have lesser density. Mabusth noted that if curb and gutter is not included in the subdivision, the resolution would need to be amended accordingly. Bernhardson suggested giving conceptual app^i jval so that the cost of the overlay could be provided. Motion, Mayor Grabek-Aye, Nays-4. Motion failed. It was moved by Nettles, seconded by Peterson. to conceptually approve the preliminary subdivision with a I*?" overlay. Staff is directed to include in the resclution language pertaining to curb and gutter being excluded from the requirements of this subdivision. Goetten asked whether Nettles' motion included a requirement to be provided with cost figures. Nettles r'^plied, "The motion is to conceptual approval of this subdivision and direct Staff to provide the Variance - 30 - ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD OCTOBER 22, 1990 ZONING FILE #1555-LANDSTAR, INC., CONTINUED language pertaining to the curb and gutter and bring that back for Council to consider at the next meeting." Gerhardson stated that he would like to maintain the City's standard to be a consistent 24 feet in width. He stated that the road presently varies in width. Nettles amended his motion to include Gerhardson's request. Peterson seconded. Motion, Ayes-4, Mays-0, Callahan abstained. Motion passed. #1593 PHILIP KALEY 1395 BROWN ROAD SOUTH VARIANCE RESOLUTION #2893 Mr. Kaley was present. Bernhardson summarized the pertinent information relating to this Variance application. He noted that thi Planning Commission had unanimously recommended approval. It was moved by Callahan, seconded by Nettles, to adopt Resolution #2893, granting street setback Variances to construct a 10' addition to the residence located at 1395 Brown Road South. Motion, Ayes-5, Nays-0. Motion passed. #1594 DUANE LUKE 2465 NORTH SHORE DRIVE VARIANCE RESOLUTION #2894 Mr. Luke was present for this review. Bernhardson reviewed the nature of this application, noting that the Planning Commission had recommended '.pproval provided that an equivalent amount of hardcover be removed. It was moved by Nettles, seconded by Goett.,?:;. to adopt Resolution #2894, granting a side setback and hardest.Variance to construct an addition to the residence at 2465 North Shore Drive. Motion, Ayes-5, Nays-0. Motion passed. #1596 DARYLE L. UPHOFF 2699 KELLY AVENUE VARIANCE RESOLUTION #2895 Mr. Uphoff was present. Bernhardson made a brief statement explaining Mr. Uphoff's application. He stated that the Planning Commission had recommended approval provided that hardcover not exceed 35.7%. It was moved by Nettles, seconded by Goetten, to adopt Resolution #2895, granting hardcover and average lakeshore setback Variances to construct an addition to the existing - 31 - ORONO COUNCIL Mt-ETING HELD OCTOBER 22, 1990 ZONING FILE #1596-UPHOFF CONTINUED residence and repair timber walls and a stairway at 2:S99 Kelly Avenue. Motion, Ayes-5, Nays-0. Motion passed. #1597 RALPH D. BURGESS, JR. 2610 WEST LAFAYETTE ROAD VARIANCE RESOLUTION #2896 Mr. Mike Peters, Contractor, was present on Mr. Burgess's behalf. It was moved by Goetten, seconded by Peterson, to adopt Resolution #2896, granting lakeshore setback, average lakeshore setback and hardcover Var^nnces for replacement of a deck in kind. Motion, Ayes-5, Nays-0. Motion passed. #1598 IRWIN JACOBS 1700 SHORELINE DRIVE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT/VP lANCE RESOLUTION #2897 Mr. Jim Jensen, Jensen Homes, Jacobs. was present on behalf of Mr. 3ernhardson reviewed the information presented in Jeanne Mabusth's memo dated October 12, 1990. He added that the Planning Commission had recommended approval of this application. Goetten said, "The Accessory Structure Ordinance does not take into consideration an estate of this size. It applies mainly to the one, two and five acre parcels. There are 30 acres of land in this case. I see no problem approving this application." It was moved by Mayor Grabek, seconded by Peterson, to adopt Resolution #2897, granting a Conditional Use Permit and an oversized accesf ry structure Variance, to construct a guest house at 1700 Shoreline Drive. Motion, Ayes-5, Nays-0. Motion ^dssed. CITY ENGINEER'S REPORT: None. MAYOR/COUNCIL REPORT: None. CITY ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT: LAFAYETTE RIDGE Bernhardson stated that his memo presented information regarding other urban streets that could also be converted, if requests were received to do so (see Mark Bernhardson' s memo dated October 17, 1990). JoEllen Hurr did not believe that there would be any major - 32 - iimilliiiiiiilii... Iiiiii ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD OCTOBER 22, 1990 LAFAYETTE RIDGE CONTINUED impact to the City if it converted the other urban roads that do not meet City standards. Goetten stated that her concerns with upgrading were primarily involved with the rural area roads. She said, "I believe we could approve the conversion of Lafayette Ridge without setting a precedent we could not manage." It was moved by Goetten, seconded by Peterson, to approve the Lafayette Ridge conversion per Staff recommendations. Motion, Ayes-5, Nays-0. Motion passed. HIGHWAY 12 CORRIDOR* It was moved by Mayor Grabek, seconded by Peterson, to accept the information presented by City Administrator Bernhardson. Motion, Ayes-5, Nays-0. Motion passed. 1991 BUDGET MEETING* It was moved by Mayor Grabek, seconded by Peterson, to accept the information presented scheduling November 8, 1990 at 6:00 p.m. as the time and date for the 1991 Budget Meeting. Motion, Ayes-5, Nays-0. Motion passed. 1991 MEETING SCHEDULE* It was moved by Mayor Grabek, seconded by Peterson, to accept the 1991 Meeting Schedule as presented. Motion, Ayes-5, Nays-0. Motion passed. WEST HENNEPIN HUMAN SERVICES - RESIGNATION* It was moved by Mayor Grabek, seconded by Peterson, to accept with regret the resignation of Gary Printup from the V7est Hennepin Human Services Board and direct Staff to thank him for his willingness to serve. Motion, Ayes-5, Na/s-0. Motion passed. STEP RAISE - JAY DEMBOUSKI* It was moved by Mayor Grabek, seconded by Peterson, to approve a step increase for Jay Dembouski to $11,738 per hour, effective October 6. 1990. Motion, Ayes-5, Nays-0. ‘ Motion passed. ADMINISTRATOR'S INFORMATION* It was moved by Mayor Grabek, seconded by Peterson, to accept the City Administrator's Information regarding: Cable TV, City Assessor, Stubbs Bay Sewer and Well #3. Motion, Ayes-5, Nays-0, Motion passed. CITY ATTORNEY'S REPORT: None. LICENSES* None. - 33 - toy. ><«•■>: ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD OCTOBER 22, 1990 BILLS* It was .Tioved by Mayor Grabek, seconded Peterson, to approve payment of the All Funds Account. Motion, Ayes-5, Nays-0, Motion passed. ADJOURNMENT It was moved by Goetten, seconded by Peterson, to adjourn the Regular Council Meeting at 11:48 p.m. Motion, Ayes“5, Nays-0, Motion passed. James R. Grabek, Mayor ATTEST: Dorothy M. Hallin, City Clerk A - 34 - ATTENDANCE 6:17 P.M. Tha Orono Council met as the 1990 Canvassing Board on the above date with the following members present: Acting Mayor Callahan, CounciImembers Goetten, Nettles and Peterson. Mayor Grabek was absent. The following represented City staff: City Administrator Bernhardson, Public Works Director Gerhardson, Police Chief Kilbo, Building and Zoning Administrator M.abusth, Finance Director Kuehn and City Clerk Hallin. 1990 CITY ELECTION RESULTS It was moved by CounciImember Nettles, seconded by CounciImember Peterson to certify the results of the November 6, 1990 City election as follows: Mayor - two year term, Barbara Peterson receiving 2,119 votes. CounciImembers - four year terms Gabriel Jabbour receiving 1,955 votes and J. Diann Goetten receiving 1,818 votes. Motion, Ayes 4, Nays 0. ADJOURNMENT 6:20 P.M. It was moved by CounciImember Nettles, seconded by CounciImember Goetten to adjourn the 1990 Canvassing Board meeting at 6:20 P.M. Motion, Ayes 4, Nays 0. ATTl : Edward J. Callahan, Jr., Acting Mayor 4 MINUTES OF THE 1990 CANVASSING BOARD MEETING HELD NOVEMBER 8, 1990 ■ • Dorothy M. Hallin, City Clerk 111390.1 To: Prom: Date: Subject: Mayor Grabek & Orono Council Members Mark E. Bernhardson, City Administra^ November 13, 1990 Survey Requirements - 1029 Loma Linda Avenue - Appeal of Administrator's Decision Attachments - A) Information Packet Mr. & Mrs. Knox Submitted 11/13/90 B) Council Minutes Excerpt 10/27/86 C) Excerpt City of Orono Building Application Issue - Determination if Council desires to waive a survey requirement on an addition to a primary structure. Introduction - On Friday afternoon, Mrs. Knox came to my office to discuss the possibility of waiving the requirement for a survey for her addition to the house. Discussion - In 1986 based on a request on South Brown Road, Council amended the requirement for survey for all building permits when one is not on file. Based on that appeal, the City amended its policy to exempt accessory facilities under 1,000 s.f. where it exceeds the required area and staff is satisfied that it is reasonably out of the setbacks. This policy however did not include additions to primary buildings. In the present instance, the sket i provided appears to indicate the primary structure is outside the 35' street setback and the addition is on the back which has about 125' to the rear property line. The lot itself is a 2 acre lot in a 1 acre zone. Staff however does not presently have the authority to grant an exception. In this instance, staff has not requested a full lot survey but only a verification survey of the setbacks to the additions which would cost about $150.00 to $200.00. Alternatives - 1. Allow the variation. 2. Table to November 26, 1990. 3. Indicate the requirement does apply. K10T£:SEZ EMS bATA •' rOR C>TR’JCTU/LAL 4 0B5/GKJ LOAbS MOTE ;SEE. EKi& data FOR. STBOCTORAU g DBSI6K) LOAbS PDC.CJV P\ ttp\c^ re o TO HOUSE vu' A Ut_ /////•7 . // n 1.____ I I I I 1 I . J TBr^f^Eft^Zb \f^Z'JLATZO (5LASS UJ/ •h •'■• 1 7'7/ <: 1 N/ !V/?; , , i r • .* / i / / :•/i // DooeuB , (ZLAIZ \>j/ SCREEN I I ' I LJ ■ / i! ( f . i/,/ ' !l ' I ! I I SOUTH EL^VATIOM Me .iXli.. &LEMAXIOJM 5CAi_e i/H“ — r-0 scAue i/H" - r-O" .IINUTES OF THE REJULAR ORCNO COUNCIL MEETING HELD OCTOBER 27, 1986MAYOR'S REPORT:.Mayer Bugler had r.cthir.g to r^rert CAALE TV REPORT: REQUEST FOR CHANGE IN SYSTEM OWNER* , It was moved by Council member Frahm, secondeo .y Counci Inember Adams, to accept the information •. r . m staff regardii - the pending cable TV ownership cha.'.ge. Motion, Ayes Nays 0. fCITY ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT: NORTH BROWN ROAD PETITION CounciImo.ber Callaha.., to acce, t;ie petition from the North Brewn Road residents, include it in the Highway 12 input and schedule the subject for the Council meeting on November 24, 1986 to determine if speed limit enforcement, has had significant impac^ on the problem. Motion, Ayes 4, Nays 0. BIG ISLAND BO^dElD OP GOVERNORS*It was moved by CounciImember Frahm, seconded by Counci 1memoer Adams, to table this matter until the November 10, 1986 Council Meeting. Motion, Ayes 4, Nays 0. JOSEPH MIMMS - APPEAL OP ADMINISTRATIVE DECISION Joseph Mimms, matter. Brown Road South was present for this City Admin .^.ac.>r Bernhardson explained thi matter in w *ch Joseph Mimms is appealing the Administrator s decision requiring surveys on all properties when requesting a building permit when such a -urvey is not on file. This policy has been in ef with-u exception since July 1986 in order • problems of location of structures, surveys have pr^^iously been required 80-85% of v-iilding permit application;, not alreo.'.y on file. He explained -.a requesting that this requirement k* ’-'r particular -e becai v The propose..; constructed . .i the si - of a demolished . probably well within the required side yard, and rear setbacks . May r Butlti suggested that the City adopt a p>. icy that whei the property exceeds the required area in the zone in which it lies, and reasonable satisfaction is given that the propos building doe£ not encroach into the tck, a survey eed not be required. •y ■y is .ihm** .s ■»Q this 4- i.t to be 3.1,<r and. is MINUTES OP THE REtUJLAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD OCTOBER 27, 1986 MIMMS REQUEST CONTIN17ED C^ty Administrator Bernhardscn added to Mayer Butler's suggestion that t:'e policy be limited to accessory buildings which by 'efinition are under 1000 s.f.. Councilmember Frahm also added to Mayor Butler's suggestion that the proposed building be staked out for staff to verify and letters of non-objection from adjacent neighbors t.' required. tt was irtoved by Mayor Butler, seconded by Councilmember Aaams, to amend the policy as recommended by Mayor Butler includina the additions made by City Administrator Bernhardson and Councilmember Frahm. Motion, Ayes 4, Nays 0. MEDINA POLICE SERVICE* It was moved by Councilmember Frahm, seconded by Councilmember Adams, to accept staff's update regarding Medina Police services contract. Motion, Ayes 4, Nays 0. COMMISSION APPOINTMENTS City Administrator Bernhardson explained that there are several individuals on the Park Commission and Planning Ccmmission whose terms expire this year, asking Council to direct staff to determine level of interest of the individuals who are currently serving or who have indicated an 'terest in the positions so that the appoi- -^nts t ready to be rr de it the first regular meet Ja. ^ry. Due impending change of the Council membership. Counci .i-member Frahm recommended that this matter be tabled until after January 1, 1987 for the new Council to make their recommendations. Council directed staff to proceed with informing the public of the positions available w.iich will be considered after the first of the year. FACJTITIES STUDY - ENGINEERING PROPOSAL City Administrator Bernhard i explained the various steps that the consulting eng ^er would undertake to determine the City's sp- needs together with determining alternate co • arrangements i)ased on preliminary design sketches. Staff recommends that the following items be contracted with the City's consulting engineer for a total amount of $7,200: A. Space prograun study Adaption and Re-use - current facilities New Public Works building on City owned land Combined City Hall/Public Wor-<» new site B. 2 C. D. BUILDING PEHJ-IT APPLICATION PRCC2DUR2Each application for a building per!nit shall be accompanied by the data indicated below. Failure to submit complete information will result in return of apolicaticns. Please read carefully the listed recuirements._ 1. ALL APPLICATIONS A. Completed application forms including all information required in the numbered spaces# dated and signed by applicant. Two copies of building plans# drawn to scale, together with specifications containing the following minimum information: (requirement for building plans may be waived by the Building Official for small structures or minor work). Where manufacturer or dealer requires the return of one approved sot of plans, four copies will be necessary. B. Residential Plan reviews will require a minimum of 7 working days for Staff review. All new commercial structures must be approved by the 9rono Council. Modification of existing commercial structures will require a minimum of 2 weeks for staff review. 1. CERTIFICATE OF SURVEY (signed by a registered land surveyor). A survey is required for all types of construction including new homes, room additions, porches, decks and accessory t i!o.dings. The survey must include the legal description of property, location of existing and proposed structures on the site, location of all proposed improve­ ments such as driveways, retaining walls, decks, sidewalks, etc. (Refer to minimum standards sheet attached.) Survey Requirement Exemption - A survey will not be required for detached accessory^ structures of less than 1,000 s.f. in total floor* area when of the following conditions are met: a) The area of the property exceeds the minimum lot width/lot area standards of fhe zoning district. b) Owner/applicant has staked the location of the proposed structure meeting the required setbacks, and the property corner pins are staked and visible. c) Owner/-iplicant has obtained written non-objection of most-affected adjacent procerty owner. A site inspection by City staff is required. Site inspection fee is $30.00 and shall be paid with the building permit. 2. Grading and uiraxuaMc ^____ drainage are proposed as a result of the construction, a grading ana drainage plan must be submitted showing existing and proposed contours or grades. Required for all projects. Drainage Plans - where any changes in grade L... Proa: Date: Mayor Grabek & Orono Council Members City Administrator Bernhardson Michael P. Gaffron, Asst Plannina & Zcninu Administrator November 8, 1990 Subject: #1470 Bill Knapp/Dan Parten, 4300 Bayside Hoad - P-eliminary Subdivision (PRD) List of Exhibits E::hibit A - Notice of Planning Commission Action 10/19/90 Exhibit B - Preliminary Plat Drawing Exhibit C - Mem.o & Exhibits of 10/11/90 Discussion The applicant's Planned Residential Development proposal was referred to the Planning Commission at your September 26, 1990 meeting. At their October 15th meeting, Planning Commission voted 4 to 0 to recommend approval of the 3-lot PRD proposal, finding that topographic constraints as well as the unusual configuration of the property, provide substantial justification for development through the PRD concept. The Planning Commission also made the following recommendations: 1. The cul-de-sac loop as presented is acceptable at the location shown. Planning Commission recommended approval of a single driveway heading east from the loop approximately 150', then splitting off eastward to serve McCloud and northward to serve the two northerly lets. 2. Planning Commission recommended that a road corridor to the Luce Line not be provided. 3. Planning Commission recommendea that a road corridor to the Asao and Deters property to the northwest, not be provided. 4. Planning Commission rec;n.«nended that the applicant be required to grant an easemen^ to the City for access to the Nature Conservancy property. 5. Planning Commission recommended that the private road be constructed to private road standards from Bayside Road to the loop cul-de-sac as presented by the applicant, with only private driveways being constructed eastward to serve McCloud and the two northerly lots. The original a/plication by Mr. Parten was for a standard plat subdivision, and if Council agrees with the Planning Commission recommendation to allow development as a Planned Residential Development, the review process must necessarily Zoning File #1470 November 8, 1990 Page 2 include a formal conditional use permit application, since PRD development is a conditional use in residential zones. Until the October 19th Planning Commission meeting, there was still some question as to whether the Planning Commission felt that the property should be developed as a PRD, and the recent revisions have in effect functioned as a sketch plan review. If Counci;* agrees with the Planning Commission recommendation, the applicant should be directed to file a conditional use permit application for review at the January Planning Commi' on meeting. Then, the conditional use permit and preliminary plat approval resolutions will be brought to Council for review in early February. During the conditional use permit process. Planning Commission and Council will be asked to review conditions of approval for the PRD, such as special setbacks based on individual building lots, and any conditions that may be deemed appropriate for the open space areas. Staff Recommendation Staff would recommend that Council grant conceptual approval of the PRD concept as recommended by the Planning Commission, and direct applicant to make the appropriate PRD conditional use permit application. CITY OF ORONO P. O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 473-7357 553^3 ZONING FILE #1<70 Kr*^ICE OF Pl^'vNNING COMMISSION ACTION r -e of Notice: 10/19/90 TO:Bill Knapp 13809 Industrial Park Blvd. Plymouth, MN 55441 COPIES TO: TYPE OF APPLICATION: Subdivision DATE OF MEETING: October 15, i'90 VOTE: 4 For 0 Against Planning Connission recenoiends the following: Approval subject to conditions noted below MOTES AND SPECIAL CONDITIONS: 1. Approval of 3-lot PRD concept as presented, based on topographic constraints of property. 2. Cul-de-sac loop as presented is acceptable at location shown. Recommended approval of a single driveway splitting off at east corner to serve McCloud plus two northerly lots. 3. No requir*ment for road corridor to Luce Line. 4. No requirement for road corridor to Asao and Deters. 5. Applicant to grant easement to City fo ■ access to Nature Conservancy property. 6. Private road to be constructed from Bayside Road to loop cul-de-sac as presented. Applicant's next scheduled meeting is confirmed as City Council on Tuesday, November 13, 1990; meeting starts at 7:00 p.m. If you desire certified copies of the official Planning Commission minutes, they are available from the City Clerk after review and approval by the Planning Commission. CITY OF ORONO P. O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MM 473-7357 55323 ZONING PILE #1470 NOTICE OP PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION Date of Notice: 10/19/90 TOz Bill Knapp 13809 Industrial Park Bivd. Plymouth, MN 55441 COPIES TO; TYPB OF APPLICATION; Subdivision DATE OF MEBTIliG: October 15, 1990 VOTE: 4 For 0 Against Planning CcsMission recOTSiends the following: Approval subject to conditions noted below NOTBS AND SPECIAL CONDITIONS: 1. Approval of 3-lot PRD concept as presented, based on topographic constraints of property. 2. Cul-de-sac loop as prer.ented is acceptable at location shown. Recommended approval of a single driveway splitting off at east corner to serve McCloud plus twc northerly lots. 3. No requirement for road corridor to Luce Line. 4. No requirement for road corridor to Asao and Deters. 5. Applicant to grant easement to City for access to Nature Conservancy property. 6. Private road to be constructed from Bayside Road to loop cul-de-sac as presented. Applicant's ne. scheduled meeting is confirmed as City Council on Tuesday, November 13, 1990; meeting starts at 7:00 p.m. If you desire certified copies of the official Planning Commission minutes, they are available from the City Clerk after review and approval by the Planning Commission. PRELIMINARY PLAT OF BAYSIDE WOODS I 300 scale in F«^ET M 3,3''0 OWNER-DEVELOPER BILL KNAPP 13809 INDUSTRIAL PARK BLVD. PLYMOUTH, MN 55441 AREA LOT 1 BLOCK 1 a3 AC AREA LOT 1 BLOCK 2 3.0 AC. AREA LOT 1 BLOCK 3 2.7 AC . « '/. r! OTAL Area s IT.OB Acres . hereby certify that thi* survey «*as prepared by me or untjer my supervision and that I a * dUly registered land surveyor under Minnesota Statutes Section 326.02 to 326.16. \^ R*nistration No. /76>3 / PRELIMINARY PLAT OF BAYSIDE WOODS .M 1,'': ■ 300 scale in feet f4 3.3'0< OWNER-DEVELOPER BILLKN/^ 13809 INDUSTRIAL PARK BLVD. PLYMOUTH, MN 55441 AREA LOT 1 BLOCK I a3 AC AREA LOT 1 BLOCK 2 3.0 AC AREA LOT 1 BLOCK 3 2.f AC n •/, c/. j •’OTAL A rea ? ir.oe Acres I hereby certify that this survey •••i prepared by me or under my supervision and that l am f duly registered land surveyor under Minnesota Stalutea Section 326.02 to 326 6. !^ Renistration No. / Planning Commissicr Chairman Kelley Planning Commission Members City Administrator Bernhardson Ftob: Michael P. Gaffron, Asst Planning & Zoning Administrator Date: Octobe d , 1990 Subject: #1470 B^ll Knapp/Dan^^l Parten, 4300 Bayside Road - Preliminary Subdivision, Planned Residential Development - Referral to Planning Commission from Council /26/90 at Drawings .8/90 List of Exhibit Exhibit A - Council Action ^ Exhibit D - Revised Preliminc Exhibit C - Memo & Exhibits of Discussion - Bill Knapp has purchased this property from Dan Parten and has taken over the subdivision application where Parten left off. A new proposal for a three lot PRD has been submitted. Please review carefully the memo of September 18, 1990. The additional exhilT'-*-s are included to provide a perspective on past Planning Cr'mission and Council action on the various proposals Parten had bmitted. Staff Recomsiendation - Planning Commis ion is requested to carerully review the proposed 3- ot PRD, c d make recommendat .on^ on not only the proposal as presented, but consider also the issues noted on Page 4 of ne September 18, 1990 memo. mm To: Mayor Grabek & Crono Council Members City Administrator Bernhardscn Froa: Michael P. Gaffron, Asst Planning & Zoning Administrator Date: September 18, 1990 Subject: #1470 Bill Knapp/Dan Parten, 4300 Bayside Road - Preliminary Subdivision - Planned Residential Development Soning District - RR-IA, Rural residential, 5 acre Application - 3 Lot Planned Residential Development - Preliminary Plat note: Bill Knapp has purchased this property from Dan Parten and has taken over the subdivision application where Parten left off. A new proposal for a 3-lot PRD has been submitted. List of Exhibits Exhibit A - Preliminary Plat Drawing Exhibit B - Notice of Council Action 3/15/90 Exhibit C - Council Minutes 3/12/90 Exhibit D - Previc IS Memos, Minutes and Notices Pertinent Pacts - J U' o Total Property area; Area Lot 1 Block 1: Area Lot 1 Block 2: Area Lot 1 Block 3: Outlet A (open space): Outlot B (open space): Outlet C (private road): 17.06 acres 3.3 acres 3.0 acres 2.7 acres 1.6 acres + 4.5 acres + 1.2 acres Outlot D (private driveway): 0.8 acres + Each of the building lots exceeds 2 acres, and each has tested suitable primary and alternate drainfield sites. The shape of Lot 1, Block 1 is of necessity contrived in order to place the alternate drainfield site within that lot. The applicant proposes to construct a private road to City standards within Outlot C, with a loop rather than a full cul-de-sac. The intent of the loop is to save as many trees as possible on a center island, therefore being functional for traffic purposes while not appearing to be a broad expanse of bituminous in the middle of a woods. A driveway outlot (Outlot D) is proposed to continue past the loop turnaround, to serve 3 residences. Staff has discussed with the applicant the possibilities for placing the cul-de-sac further east so that the McCloud property would abut the cul-de-sac rather than the driveway Zoning File #1470 September 18, 1990 Page 2 outlet. While Outlet D has been widened at the southeast corner, the topography at tnat location is relatively steep (14-16% slopes) and would not allow development of a full cul-de-sac without major excavation and tree removal. With respect to the cul-de-sac location, two houses will use a single 800' long driveway for access, while the McCloud property will share as a third user of that driveway for the first 100 ’, then split off directly east towards his property. It would seem that the topography of the site might be considered as sufficient justification to allow construction of the loop as proposed, allowing the driveway configuration proposed to serve 3 houses for a short distance. 4, The City Engineer has reviewed the plat and has recommended that a drainage easement be taken over the portion of Outlot B which separates Lots 1 and 2; and an additional drainage easement 30' in width over the drainage way running from south to north within Lot 1. Block 1. 5. Outlets A and B are intended as open space outlets, and the applicant intends to provide covenants for the ownership and use of those outlets by a homeowner's association. The homeowner's association will also be responsible for maintaining Outlets C and D. The road and driveway outlets were separately designated not only for the purpose of defining what is private road and what is private driveway, but to aid in drafting maintenance agreements for the various segments. The existing 60* "Reiersgord easement' released by Mr. McCloud. is intended to be Discussion Because this application has seen so many revisions and variations, a brief chronology of action to date may be helpful to keep this current proposal in perspective: 1. 9/22/89 - .Applicant proposed a 3 lot plat of the 17 acre property. 2. 10/16/89 - Planning Commission tabled the request; applicant advised to consider a PRD; 50’ road outlot corridors need to be platted including access corridors to Reiersgord, Asao and Deters properties; Lot 1 to be revised so it contains the alternate drainfield site. Zoning File #1470 Septembeer 18, 1990 Page 3 3. 11/7/89 - Applicant proposed a 3 lot plat addressing concerns of outlets and Lot 1 septic contiguity, requested area variance for Lots 2 and 3 (4.3 and 4.4 acres respectively) and requested that City waive requirement for paving of the private road. Parten also provided a 2 lot concept plan omitting the northerly parcel, and submitted a conceptual PRD plan with reasons why he doesn't prefer the PRD. 4. 11/20/89 - After much discussion between Planning Commission and Parten, including discussion about a 2 lot subdivision, application was tabled pending submission of a 2 lot plat of the southerly 12 acres, addressing the issue of site drainage and road easements vs. outlot creation. 5. 1/9/90 - Applicant proposed a 2 lot plat of the entire 17 acres including a 40* "driveway" outlot from Bayside Road to the southeast property boundary, with a 20' driveway outlot to the northerly parcel. 6. 1/16/90 - Planning Commission voted 5 to 0 to recommend approval of 2 lot plat with 50' road outlot and 20' driveway corridor; road upgrading to City standards required at the time Lot 1 is further subdivided or when an abutting property using the road outlot for access is developed. 7. 1/22/90 - Pursuant to applicant's ”1/19/90 letter to Council regarding private road and driveway standards, CounciImember Callahan suggested that staff comprehensively review the road systems in the area of the Parten and McDowell applications before they are brought to Council. 8. 2/8/90 - Results of that study recommend that a 50' road outlot be extended to the north property line for potential future access to Watertown Road. 9. 2/26/90 - After much discussion. Council tabled application but advised applicant of likelihood that Council will request a 50' outlot heading north along the east property boundary. 10. 3/12/90 - After additional discussion. Council tabled the request until the ipplicant proposes a revised plan. Zoning File #1470 September 18, 1990 Page 4 No additional information was sutmitted by Parten. In Summer 1990, he sold the property to the current applicant, who has been working with staff to devise a PRD that addresses the issues of concern. The current applicant has acknowledged tnat a private road will have to be constructed in Outlet C ail the way to the loop. Issues previously of concern but not addressed with the proposal include: A. Easement access for the City to Nature Conservancy parcel. B. Continuation of Outlet D for future use by Asao and Deters properties. C. Continuation of Outlet D for future access across Luce Line Trail. Regarding Item A, if the City requests an easement for access to the nature conservancy parcel, that easement would logically be through the neck area of Lot 1, Block 1. The applicant could be requested to provide such an easement, which would have no significant effect on the subdivision. The intent of that easement would be merely for City maintenance of the nature conservancy parcel should the City acquire it, and wouj.d not be intended to provide a public access to that parcel. Regarding access to Asao and Deters, if an access corridor was dedicated now, such corridor likely being within open space Outlet B, the City would not have to deal with the homeowner's association in the future should such an access become necessary. Asao and Deters have stated they have no need for such an access. Regarding the access to the north, such a concept met with extreme resistance from property owners in the area, if proposed along the east property line would have a significant effect on septic sites for Lot 1, Block 3 if such a road was ever developed. Council might consider the option of making Outlot D 50* wide, and ending it at the south end of Lot 1, Block 3, with the idea that should a future connection to the north become necessary, there is adequate acreage in Outlot B and in the Reiersgord property to accomodate that. Staff Burn—endation Because Mr. Parten last appeared before the Council, this application for preliminary plat is brought forth again to the Council. The Planning Commission has not reviewed this specific proposal. Council's options are as follows: Zoning Pile #1470 September 18, 1990 Page 5 1.Refer this PRD proposal to the Planning Commission for review and recommendation. Direct applicant to make specific changes to proposed PRD and bring it back for further review. Direct staff to prepare a preliminary plat approval resolution for your next meeting, incorporating whatever additonal conditions or requirements Council deems necessary. 4.Other. CITT OF OROHO P.O. Box €6 Cryital Bay, MN 55323 473-7357 APPLICATION NO. 1470 NOTICE OP COUNCIL ACTION Date of Notice: 9/26/90 fOt Bill Knapp COPIES:Dan Parten 13609 Industrial Park Blvd.1015 Tonkawa Rd. Plymouth, MN 55441 Long Lake, MN 55356 TTFB or APPLICATION: Subdivision OATS OF MBBTIN6: September 24, 1990 VOTE: 4 For 0 Against COUNCIL ACTION - NOTION: Council referred the application to the Planning Commission for i^0view. This item will be reviewed by the Planning Commission on Monday, October 15, 1990. Meeting starts at 7:00 p.m. 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. Mayor Gr?'oek & Orono Council Members City Administrator Bernhardson Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building & Zoning Administrator Date:November 9, 1990 Subject:#1497 Toberman Management, 1960 Shoreline Drive - Conditional Use Permit/Variance - Denial Resolution The enclosed denial resolution has been reviewed by the City Attorney, Suesan Pace-Shapiro, and all requested amendments and additions have been completed. Unfortunately, because of the Zoning Administrator's two-week leave and the difficulty of transferring the final editing responsibilities to another staff member, the final draft was completed and mailed to applicant and applicant's attorney Friday, November 9th. Staff would recommend that all formal action on the resolution be tabled until Council's November 26, 1990 meeting providing Council, the applicant and applicant's legal representative adequate time to ask any questions or make any corrections of the factual findings within the subject resolution. Proposed Motion: Moved by _ _, seconded by _ _, to table formal action o.i the denial resolution for application #1497 until the November 26, 1990 meeting. Ayes _ _, nays _ _. A RKSOLUTIOH DENYING A VARIANCE TO MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 10.03, SUBDIVISION 5 (B) A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT PER SECTION 10.03, SUBDIVISION 5 PILE #1497 AND 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 zoning regulations for the protection of the public health, safety and general welfare; and WHEREAS, Gerald Toberman of Toberman Management Inc. (hereinafter “the applicant”) has an interest in the property located at 1960 Shoreline Drive within the City of Orono (hereinafter "the City") and legally described as Lot 2, Block 1, Tourangeau Addition, Hennepin County, Minnesota (hereinafter "the property"); and WHEREAS, the applicant has applied to the City of Orono for a conditional use permit per Section 10.03, Subdivision 5 to allow non-conforming commercial use of the residential property involving a boat sales/ship store; and WHEREAS, Section 10.03, Subdivision 5 (E) requires a variance for a non-conforming use of property as conunercial use of the property has been discontinued for over a 12 month period of time; and WHEREAS, the applicant has discontinued use of the non- conforming use for :iore than 12 months; and WHEREAS, the City Council has reviewed the application; the recommendations of the staff and Planning Commission; and the comments of the applicant and applicant's attorney. MOH, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of Orono, Minnesota hereby denies the conditional use permit and variance for the property described above, based upon one or mere of the following findings of fact concerning this property: FINDINGS 1. On November 14, 1978, Ordinance #214 was adopted rezoning the property to LR-IA, single family lakeshore residential district. 2. A portion of the property was originally zoned B-1, commercial. 3. The LR-IA zoning district requires a minimum of 2 acres in area? the property consists of 11,435 s.f. or .26 acres in area. 4. Comparable use in a commercial district would have the following minimum area requirements; B-1. B-4 and B-5 would require a minimum of 20,000 s.f. in area; B-2 and B-3 require a minimum of 2 acres in area. In 1978 at the time of the rezoning of the total property to LR-IA, a gasoline sales/auto repair business existed on the property. Prior to the 1978 rezoning this use existed as a permitted use requiring a conditional use permit. The LR-IA zone does not allow gasoline service station use. Portions of the gas station use encroached into the surrounding LR-IA zone. 5. On December 18, 1978, the City adopted Resolution #961 establishing a conditional use permit for the operation of a lawful non-conforming use of the property. 6. Under Orono Municipal '■‘cl - Portion 10,03, wSubdivision 5, a conditional use permit is required for a lega non- conforming use as automatic condition or result of the rezoning (e.g. adoption of Ordinance #214). 7. Conditional use permit issued pursuant to the adoption of ResolULici #961 allowed the property to continue to be used for the existing gasoline sales/auto repair use subject to all pertinent sections of the non-conformirg use sections of the Orono zoning code and to special conditions set forth in Resolution #961. 8. The property continued to be ur for gasoline sales, auto/transmissicn repair through yiay/June of 1987. 9. On June 8, 1987 a conditional use permit was granted to the applicant for a boat sa1es/nautica1 shop. No boat repairs were to be performed on the site, and as such the boat sales/nautical shop use was considered a less intense commercial use of the residential property than the gasoline sale auto repair use. 10. Resolution #2193 was considered based upon the standards set forth in Orono Municipal Code Section 10.03, Subdivision 5 (J) and conditions contained in Orono Resolution #961. Orono Municipal Code Section 10.03, Subdivision 5 (T) provides as follows: The non-conforming use provisions of the zoning chapter apply only to the use to which land and buildings are put and do not apply to situations where location or height of structure, lot size or other factors not involving the use of the premises prevent strict conformance with the requirements of the zoning chapter. Where, however, such a situation existed legally under the prior applicable law, the Council will not unreasonably require strict compliance and will generally look with favor on granting of a variance under Section 10.08. 11. Orono Resolution #961 states as follows: Other uses may be considered by the Council upon application and upon the finding that the proposed use is less non-conforming than the above permitted uses. 12. After the approval of the conditional use permit (Resolution #2193), the applicant obtained permits necessary to prepare the building for the sales use (i.e. removal of underground tanks, remodeling of building and installing of air conditioning). 13. Early in the summer of 1987, the applicant learned that the persons who were to operate the boat sales business wer«. no longer interested in operating a boat sales operation on the property. 14. During the rest of the summer and early fall of 1987, the applicant attempted to sell or lease the property for boat sales use. If the City received calls from persons interested in other uses, they were advised of the need for a conditional use permit. 15. After a phone call from the applicant, the Zoning Administrator sent a letter on January 25, 1988 advising applicant of limitations of the conditional use permit granted in June of 1987. The letter reads as follows: "Dear Mr. Toberman: This letter is written to confirm matters discussed in an earlier phone conversation relating to the use of the property located at 1960 Shoreline Drive. If a boat/sales operation is in use by June 8, 1988, a new conditional use permit will not be required. The original conditional use permit approved for your boat sales use will expire on June 8, 1988. As we discussed, any other commercial use proposed for the residential zoned property will require a new conditional use permit review in order to permit a non- conforming use. Please contact my office if you have any further questions on this matter. Sincerely, Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building and Zoning Administrator 16. At no time prior to the June 8, 1988 deadline was the property used for a boat sales/nautical shop or any other use that woul^i have been permitted under the applicant's conditional use permit. 17. In a letter dated August 16, 1990, James H. Gilbert, applicant’s attorney, notes as follows: "My client will never concede that there has been a lapse of commercial use on this property. There is no fi§l been a continual use of this property for commercial purposes related to the Marina business. This has included, but has not been limited to, the storing of property, the conducting of meetings, the storage o^ boats and other Marina equipment, sales and leasing efforts relating to the Marina property and other miscellaneous commercial work. 18. If the uses noted in Mr. Gilbert's letter of August 16, 1990 took place on the property, the applicant knew he was violating the non-conforming use sections of the Orono Municipal Cede. Any of the uses described in Mr. Gilbert's letter would have required the applicant to seek a new conditional use permit. 19. Mr. Gilbert's letter of August ^6, 1990 goes on to note: ". . .this property is an integral part of the Marina". 20. Prior to 1987, the properties located at 1955 Shoreline Drive and 1960 Shoreline Drive were under separate ownership. In 1987, the applicant acquired both properties. Historically, there has never been a connection between the properties either in use or ownership. It should be noted that 1960 Shoreline Drive and 1955 Shoreline Drive are divided by County Road 15. 1960 Shoreline Drive is zoned LR-IA lakeshore residential and 1955 Shoreline Drive is zoned B-2 lakeshore commercial. 21. In 1987, Application #1112 was filed by the applicant and involved a comprehensive land use review th.-*t included three properties purchased by the applicant within the Crystal Bay neighborhood; 1950, 1955 and 1960 Shoreline Drive. r A) 1950 Shoreline Drive was residentia11y zoned property (LR-IA) that was residentially used (4 residential units). The applicant proposed the removal of all structures and the installation of a parking lot for the use of the marina at 1955 Shoreline Drive. The City Attorney advised that the City could not approve the proposed use because the use was commercial and would be in violation of both Orono code and State Law. The City would have to rezone the property to commercial. The City denied the request. B) 1955 Shoreline Drive is zoned lakeshore commercial. The City approved variances for the construction of a new clubhouse and other site improvements. C) 1960 Shoreline Drive, a residential zoned property, had an established legal non-conforming use, gas sales and auto repair. Based on the findings already noted in this resolution, the City approved a boat sales/nautical shop use. The City specifically granted approval of this use because there was to be no specific connection to the marina use on the east side of County Road 15 and no service of boats because of the physical limitation of the property. It was clear throughout the review that the property at 1960 Shoreline Drive had no connection with the operation of the Marina at 1955 Shoreline Drive. File #1112 is hereby referenced to confirm this finding. 22. On January 29, 1990, the applicant filed a conditional use permit to permit boat sales and service use at property located at 1960 Shoreline Drive (Orono File #1497), The current application involves an expansion with the servicing of boats. This use was specifically denied in the review of #1112 because of the limited size of the -v;: 23. On March 19, 1990, the Planning Commission voted (3 ayes, 1 abstention) to recommend approval of a conditional use permit to allow the property located at 1960 Shoreline Drive to be used for boat sales and service. The Planning Commission further directed the City Council to seek further advise from the City Attorney regarding the legality of this approval under Orono Municipal Code Section 10.03, Subdivision 5 (E), since commercial use on the property had ceased over 12 months ago and the current application for a conditional use permit involved a change in use from the conditional use permit approved in 1987 (File #1112). 24. On April 9, 1990 the City Council considered the applicant's request (File #1497) for a conditional use permit. The Council conceptually denied the conditional use permit application that would allow a continued commercial use of the residential property and directed staff to draft the appropriate denial resolution for formal action by the Council. In addition, the applicant was asked to provide a plan for the restoration of an approved residential use on the property and asked the applicant to meet with staff within the next 30 days to discuss a plan for restoration. 25. At the request of the applicant and applicant's attorney, Jim Gilbert, the Council once again reviewed the conditional use permit application at their August 27, 1990 meeting. The Council reaffirmed it's original action to deny the conditional use permit. The applicant's attorney sought direction on the specific issue raised in Finding #17 and #19 noted above. 26. In a notice of Council action dated August 30, 1990, the applicant was once again asked to meet with the Orono staff to develop a plan for a residential use of the property. As of this date the staff has not been contacted by the applicant. 27. The City has been advised that the property continues to be offered for commercial sale and use. In a phone conversation (October 15, 1990) with an attorney for a potential buyer, the City was advised that the property is being offered for sale for joint use with the Marina property located at 1955 Shoreline Drive. 28. Orono Municipal Code Section 10.03, Subdivision 5 (A) provides that: "the non-conforming use may not be changed to another non-conforming use". 29. In a memo to the Zoning Administrator from the Assistant City Attorney, Suesan Pace-Shapiro, dated March 8, 1990, the City Attorney commented on Resolution #961, approving the 1978 conditional use permit which allowed a legal non-conforming use on the property. Resolution #961, Item #6 provides the following: "Other uses may be considered by the Council upon application and upon the finding that the proposed use is less non-conforming than the above permitted uses". 30. In 1978, the City approved the continued commercial use of the 1960 Shoreline Drive property for gasoline sales and auto repair. Since that time the City allowed an expansion to include transmission repair of automobiles and small trucks in an attempt to assist the former owner during the "gas shortage/higher price" years when the business was in danger of failing. 31. On June 8, 1987, the Council approved Resolution #2193 granting a conditional use permit for a limited boat sales ■operation finding that use to be less non-conforming than the gasoline sales/auto repair/transmission repair use. 32. A boat sales/ship store use was never installed on the property. No permitted commercial use has been made of the property since the gasoline/auto repair use ceased in May/June of 1987. 33. Condition #5 of Resolution #2193, approving the 1987 conditional use permit for a boat sales/nautical shop, provides the following: "authorities granted by this conditional use permit run with the property not with the applicant, but are permissive only and must be exercised by application for a permit within one year of the date of Council approval, or this conditional use permit will expire on that date (June 8, 1988)." 34. Applicant and applicant's attorney argue that the language in Condition #5 is misleading. Applicant and his attorney argue that Condition #5 is satisfied because the applicant obtained a building permit to make the necessary alterations to the property for a boat sales/nautical shop. Finding #15 set forth above negates this claim. Applicant had adequate notice concerning the expiration of the conditional use permit and the legal status of that permit. 35. Orono Municipal Code Section 10.03, Subdivision 5 (E) provides : "Whenever a lawful non-conforming use of a structure or land is discontinued and remains discontinued for a period of 12 months, any future use of said structure or land shall be in conformity with the provisions of this zoning chapter". 36. The 1987 conditional use permit has lapsed since a boat sales/nautical shop was not in use by June 8, 1988 and the applicant failed to request a renewal of the 1987 conditional use permit prior to its expiration. The applicant may only use the property for purposes permitted in the LR-IA lakeshore residential zoning district. Retail operations are not permitted in an LR-IA district. 37. Minnesota Statute Section 463.357, provides in part: Subdivision 6 "The Board of Appeals and Adjustments or the governing body, as the case may be, may not permit as a variance any use that is not permitted under the ordinance for property in the zone where the effective person's land is located." The Council cannot approve the current application for a conditional use permit. 38. The property located at 1960 Shoreline Drive was entitled to a conditional use permit when the property was rezoned in 1978 from B-1 to LR-IA. Since the granting of that original conditional use permitr the City has continued to grant many concessions regarding the use of this property, based upon findings that each new use was less non-conforming than a previous use. 39. In 1987 the property was granted a conditional use permit because the sailboat sales and nautical shop retail operation was viewed as less non-conforming than a transmission repair business. 40. The property has not been used for a legal non- conforming commercial use for more than 2 years and per Section 10.03, Subdivision 5 (E) of the Orono Code, the 1987 conditions] se permit has lapsed. 41. The City Council cannot grant a use variance, pursuant to Minnesota Statute Section 463.367, Subdivision 6. Any future use of the property must be for a permitted use in the LR-lA zoning district. 42. In review of specific findings noted above, it is apparent that the applicant had received adequate notice advising of the expiration of the 1987 conditional use permit. The 1987 conditional use permit expired June 8, 1988. The current application for the commercial use of the property was filed January 24, 1990. 43. The property can be put to a reasonable allowed use. It can be combined with the adjacent residential property also owned by applicant but applicant has failed to meet with staff to discuss options for residential use of the property. 44. The intent of the application is contrary to the intent of the Orono Comprehensive Plan. 45. The granting of this conditional use permit and variance would establish an adverse precedent in the City. m IM 46. The applicant had full and complete knowledge of his rights and risks regarding the non-conforming use of this property, any alleged hardship appears to be self-imposed. FURTHERMORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City of Orono continues to encourage the applicant to work with the City to develop a reasonable residential use on the property. If dimensional variances are required to accommodate such residential use, the City Council may consider the granting of reasonably needed variances to install such use. on this Adopted by the Orono City Council of the City of Orono _ day of November, 1990. ATTEST: Dorothy M. Hallin, City Clerk James R. Grabek, Mayor STATE OF MINNESOTA ) COUNTY OP HENNEPIN ss. this The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on day of November, 1990 by James R. Grabek & Dorothy M. Halli^n, ,Mayor & C.ity Clerk, of. the City of Orono, a^ Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City. Notary Public ■i.. •vf-'• '/"'*••••/ ' ••'t.f-'t- -• .•i i ■ Mayor Grabek & Orono Council Members Planning Commission Chairman Kelley Orono Planning Commission Members City Administrator Bernhardson 7 From: Date: Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building & Zoning Administrator November 9, 1990 Subject: #1555 E.W. Blanch, Jr. (Landstar, Inc.), 2501 Old Beach Road - Preliminary Subdivision - Resolution List of Exhibits Exhibit A “ Council Action Notice Exhibit B - MacKinnon Letter of October 24, 1990 Review of Current Application - The preliminary subdivision resolution has been amended to include the granting of a variance to Section 11.33, Subdivision 4, PUBLIC STREETS/RESIDENTIAL, allowing the rural section of road to remain rather than upgrading to the urban section. In addition, the supportive findings have also been included within the resolution. Please review Mr. MacKinnon's letter. Exhibit B, in which he asks that Council consider a 2" bituminous overlay instead of a 1 1/2" as previously recommended by the City. Mr. MacKinnon has also requested that the applicant's share be 25% of the total cost of the bituminous overlay. Staff has asked that applicant pay 50% of the total cost of the overlay improvement at a 1 1/2" thickness. We concur with applicant that a 2" overlay will wear better than a 1 1/2" layer. The City Engineer will provide costs for both a 1 1/2" and 2" overlay. Note the resolution has conditioned preliminary approval on that payment being made to the City upon the filing of the final plat. The resolution has been drafted such that the thickness of overlay and percentage of applicant's share can be filled in subject to Council's final action. Options: 1. Thickness of Overlay a. b. 1 1/2" per staff 2" at applicant’s request 2.Percentage of Applicant's Share a. 25% as request of applicant b. 50% as request by staff A RBSOLOTION GRANTING PRELIMINARY APPROVAL OP A PLAT AT 2501 OLD BEACH ROAD PILE 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 Statutes 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 . t-rd concerning this application were given the opportunity to sjk < ^hereon? and WHEREAS, at their regular meeting - .d 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. Per 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 conti^ 'ous 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. 5. Old Beach road currently serves a rural-like neighborhood and the proposed five lot division will be consistent with that rural character. 6. The major upgrading of Old Beach road to an urban road section would be in complete conflict and contrast with the existing and proposed land and pattern of use. Page 1 of 4 7, The installation of curb and gutter would have no positive impact on the internal drainage concerns of the subdivision. 8. The current road is under the jurisdicition of both Minnetonka Beach and Orono. The City of Minnetonka Beach will maintain the road at itT present rural design. It would be incongruous and poor design practice for the City of Orono to require an urban section for the portion of the road within Orono. NOWr TBBRSFORB BE IT RBSOLVBD, 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 William R. Engelhart and a variance to Section 11.33, Subdivision 4 "Public Streets/Residential" that would allow the existing rural section of roadway to remain rather than the required urban section at a 32 feet minimum width with curbing, subject to the following conditions: 1. Prior to the issuance of building permits for new construction, the applicant shall be responsible for extending sewer and water lines and payment to the City for the cost of a _ _ inch bituminous overlay over portions of Old Beach road located within the City of Orono. The applicant shall pay _ percentage of the total cost of the bituminous overlay prior to final plat approval. If sewer and water 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. Outlet 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 outlet (see sample easements enclosed). Applicant has agreed to also execute private 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. Page 2 of 4 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 the upgrading of Old Beach Road must be approved by the City Engineer prior to the commencement 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. 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 must 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. Page 3 of 4 b) The applicant m’v,t 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: a) Final plat fee Total Due $300.00* = $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. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota at a regular meeting held this 13th day of November, 1990. James R. Grabek, Mayor ATTEST: Dorothy M. Hallin, Clerk STATE OP MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this 13th day of November 1990, by James R. Grabek & Dorothy M. Hallin, Mayor & City Clerk of the City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City. Notary Public Page 4 of 4 rr-n OF ORONO J. Box 66 \»^’ystal Bay, MN 55323 473-7357 APPLICATION NO. 1555 NOTICE OP COUNCIL ACTION Date of Notice: 10/23/90 E.W. Blanch, Jr. 3500 West 80th Street Minneapolis, MN 55431 COPIES: Dennis E. Sandin Landstar Inc- 6100 Golden Valley Rd. Golden Valley, MN 55422 James MacKinnon Johnson, Wood, Phleger & Bigelow 730 East Lake St. Wayzata, MN 55391 TYPE OF APPLICATION: Preliminary Subdivision DATE OF MEETING: October 22, 1990 VOTE: 5 For 0 Against COUNCIL ACTION - MOTION: To conceptually approve the 6-lot subdivision per the findings and conditions of the resolution previously sent to you and further granted a variance that would allow Old Beach Road to remain as a rural section at an average 24* width. Council has directed staff to amend the original resolution to include the variance and the necessary findings. The amended resolution will be presented for Council's review and action at their November 13, 1990 meeting. In addition, Council has asked for staff to determine the cost of the leveling and 1 1/2** bituminious overlay and to determine applicant's share in the cost of that improvement. As I will be out of town th-ough November 8, 1990, please contact either John Gerhardson (473-7357) or Glenn Cook (636-4600) if you have any further questions concerning the upgrading and cost information. oct Mark Bernhardson, City Administrator Glenn Cook City Engineer John Gerhardson, Public Works Director lAA OFTIIXS PntR W JOHNSON JOHN W WOOD. JR. UAfYLPHUGER WAJlt'EN V BtCELOW JR C Sf ^ ■*' MASSIE WILLIAM H KOENIG ANN C SCHUU T CHRIS STEWAHT RICHARD J SCHIEITER BRIAN H GAVIGLJO Johnson & Wood MO EAST lake MRf E' •A A V Z V \ M I N N f >; <» T > A 10 ; ■^ELEPH'INF •'!?’ TELECOPIER M ! J . I : 5 Mil ' J I) 5 ' ■) M M t i; I F. 3 O L L E V ‘fleemone ,4i;i c: .j I _ 1 P.. B S'.’ I CARLE J NIEPfHI I Fi KF ..’AME? P M» KIVNF'N j liCAE ASSlM'V^m CONNIE L UARDNKR DAVID J HERELs K )ANI) MILLERB^J^Nt) ’UP'A ’o *avz.\ta OCT 2 6 55323 October 24, 1990 Ms. Jeanne Mabusth City of Orono P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, Minnesota Re: Landstar Dear Jeanne: Soon, City staff will be preparing recommendations for Landstar's participation in the overlay to be done on Old Beach Road. Previously, the City had scheduled thi.^ work to be done and had already budgeted the item without any contribution from us or other adjoining land owners. It's also my understanding that the City was considering a one and one-half inch overlay. I would like to address the issue of the work itself, as well as the extent of my client's financial participation. I have very little background in specifications for road work, but one of the employees of my client tells me that he feels a two-inch overlay would cost only slightly more than a one and one-half inch overlay, but the end product might be significantly better. If that is true, in keeping with my client's spirit of doing a quality development, we would like to recommend a two-inch overlay. Secondly, I would like to express my client's thoughts regarding its financial participation in the road work. Because, early in our discussions with you, there was some talk of our participation in this cost, we are willing to do so, but we would like two factors taken into consideration. The first factor which I have alluded to previously, is that the city was going to do the overlay Ms. Jeanne Mabusth Ms. Jeanne Mabusth City of Orono October 24, 1990 Page Two in 1991 regardless, at no cost to us. Also, it should be noted that our property borders only one side of this road. Because of that, we feel that it would be equitable to split the difference with you on the issue of the City's previous plans, and then split the difference with you again on the issue of the benefit to us, leaving us paying 25% of the cost. Very tru y your MacKinnon JDM:mb cc: Bill Rudnicki Bob Broberg Dennis Sandin i a-tta V ij > t '■} To; Mayor Grabek & Orono Council Members City Administrator Bernhardson Fron: Michael P, Gaffron, Asst Planning & Zoning Administrator l>ate: November 7, 1990 Subject: #1579 Garry & Marie Everson, 4755 North Shore Drive - Variance - Resolution Application - Revised request for after-the-fact hardcover/average setback variance. List of Exhibits - Exhibit A - Notice of Planning Commission Action 10/19/90 Exhibit B - Approval Resolution Exhibit C - Memo & Exhibits of 10/10/90 Discussion - At your October 8th meeting. Council referred the applicants' revised deck proposal to Planning Commission for review and recommendation. At Planning Commission's October 15th meeting, they voted 4-0 to recommend approval of the following revised proposal: 1. Applicants shall remove all portions of deck that are less than 10' from the side lot line. 2. Applicants shall replace the rock/plastic on north side of the house with grass, yielding a final 75-250' hardcover of 49.9%>below the 54.7% hardcover which existed before the deck was built. The rock/plastic removals are to take place in the spring of 1991 when grass can be established. Staff Re idation Staff recommends approval per the Planning Commission recommendation, per the attached resolution. cm OP OROHO P. O. Box 66 Crystal Bayr MR 473-7357 ZOHUIG FILE #1579 55323 NOnCB OF PLAHHING COMMISSION ACTION Date of Notice: 10/19/90 TOt Garry and Marie Everson 4755 North Shore Drive Mound, MN 55364 COPIBS TO: TXPB OP APPLICATION: Variance DATS OP MSBTIR6: October 15, 1990 VOTE: 4 For 0 Against Plaiiiilii9 CoHBlssion reccmends the following: Approval suD3ect to conditions noted below NOTBS AND SPECIAL CONDITIONS: 1« Remove deck portions to meet 10' side setback. t. 2« Replace rock/plastic on north side of house with grass, yielding a final 75-250 ’ hardcover of 49.9%. Applicant's next scheduled meeting is confirmed as City Council on Tuesday, November 13, 1990; meeting starts at 7:00 p.m. If you desire certified copies of the official Planning Commission minutes, they are available from the City ClerJt after review and approval by the Planning Comnission. I:' A RESOLUTION GRANTING VARIANCES TO MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 10.22, SUBDIVISIONS 1 & 2 PILE #1579 WHEREAS, Garry and Marie Everson (hereinafter "the applicants") are owners of the property located at 4755 North Shore Drive within the City of Orono (hereinafter "City") and legally described as follows: The Southeasterly 1/2 of Lot 7, and Lots 5 and 6, Bergquist and Wic)clunds Park, according to the recorded plat thereof, Hennepin County, Minnesota (hereinafter "the property"); and WHEREAS, the applicants have applied to the City 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, after initial review by the Planning Commission and City Council, the applicants revised their proposal to omit the request for the side setback variance, proposing to remove all deck portions not meeting the required 10* side setback. HOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono, Minnesota: FINDINGS 1. This application was reviewed as Zoning File #1579. 2. The property is located in the LR-IB Single Faunily Rural Residential Zoning District. Page 1 of 5 3, The Orono Planning Commission originally reviewed this application on August 20, 1990 and on a vote of 4-1 recommended denial of the hardcover and side setback variances, finding no justification for approval. On September 24, 1990, the City Council reviewed the application and voted 4-0 to conceptually deny the request. At the Council meeting of October 8, 1990, the applicants proposed to revise their request to omit the need for a side setback variance. The Council referred the matter back to the Planning Commission. 4. The Orono Planning Commission reviewed the revised application on October 19, 1990 and recommended approval of the revised variance request based upon the following findings: A) Applicants have agreed to remove all portions of the deck less than 10' from the side lot line, thereby eliminating the need for a side setback variance. B) Applicants further proposed to replace the rock and plastic on the north side of the house with grass, yielding a final 75-250' hardcover of 49.9%, below the currently existing 57.3% and below the 54.7% hardcover that existed before the new deck was constructed. C) Retention of the portions of deck encroaching past the defined average lakeshore setback line will not have any impact on existing lake views enjoyed by neighboring property owners. 4. The City Council has considered this application including the findings and recommendations of the Planning Commission, reports by City staff, comments by the applicants and the effect of the proposed variances on the health, safety and welfare of the community. 5. The City Council finds that the conditions existing on this property are peculiar to it and do not apply generally to other property in this zoning district; that granting the variances would not adversely affect traffic conditions, light, air nor pose a fire hazard or other danger to neighboring property; would not merely serve as a convenience to the applicants, but is necessary to alleviate a demonstrable hardship or difficulty; is necessary to preserve a substantial property right of th» applicant; and would be in keeping with the spirit and Intent of the Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan of the City. Page 2 of 5 (■ CONCLUSIONS, ORDER AND CONDITIONS Based upon one or more of the findings noted above, the Orono City Council hereby grants after-the-fact variances to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.22, Subdivisions 1 and 2 to permit the construction of a 398 s.f. deck plus a 4' wide stair­ way, such deck and stairway constituting hardcover in the 75-250' zone in excess of the 25% normally allowed, and such deck encroaching 10' past the defined average lakeshore setback line where no encroachment is normally allowed, subject to the following conditions: 1. Applicants shall remove all portions of the currently existing deck which are located less than 10' from the side lot line, such removal to occur no later than June 1, 1991. 2. Applicants shall remove 664 square feet of crushed rock/plastic hardco/er area between the house and the road and replace this area with sod, such removal and sodding to occur no later than June 1, 1991. 3. Applicants are advised that hardcover on the property in the 0-75* and 75-250' zones may not exceed the amounts and percentages as shown on the survey and table attached as Exhibit A. In the 75-250' zone, final hardcover shall not exceed 49.9%. Any future proposals to increase hardcover on the property in the 0-75' and 75-250' zones will not be allowed, but might be approved only in conjunction with concurrent removals of existing hardcover, yielding no net hardcover increase. 4. 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. 5. Applicants shall obtain an after-the-fact building permit for the portions of deck and stairway to remain, and furtherncore phall bring such remaining deck into compliance with all building code requirements as may be required by the Orono Building Inspector. 6. Authorities granted by this resolution run with the property not with the applicants, but are permissive only and must be exercised by application for a building permit within one year of the date of Council approval, or this variance will expire on that date (November 13, 1991). Page 3 of 5 7. 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. 8. The undersigned applicants have read, understood and hereby agree to the terms of this resolution and on behalf of themselves, their heirs, successors and assigns, hereby agree to the recording of this resolution in the chain of title of the property. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota at a regular meeting held on the 13th day of November, 1990. ATTEST: Dorothy M. Hallin, City Clerk James R. Grabek, Mayor Property Owner(s) STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this 13th day of November, 1990, by James P. Grabek & Dorothy M. Hallin, Mayor & City lerk of the City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City. Notary Puolic Page 4 of 5 IN­ STATE OP MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OP HENNEPIN ) On this _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ day of _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _r 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 OP MINNESOTA ) )ss. COUNTY OP HENNEPIN ) On this day of 199 before me a Notary Public within and for said County, personally appeared __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _known to Ine to be the peiTson (s) described Tin 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 5 of 5 3 To: Planning Commission Chairman Kelley Planning Commission Members City Administrator Bernhardson Proa: Michael P. Gaffron, Asst Planning & Zoning Administrator Date: October 10, 1990 Subject: #1579 Garry & Marie Everson, 4755 North Shore Drive - After-the-fact Variance - Revised Proposal - Referral Back to Planning Commission List of Exhibits Exhibit A - Council Action Notice 10/9/90 Exhibit B - Memo & Exhibits of 10/5/90 Discussion - The City Council at their September 24th meeting voted 4-0 to conceptually deny the after-the-fact variance request, per the Planning Commission recommendation. At the October 8th meeting, the applicants proposed to revise their plans, suggesting a removal of deck back to the 10' side setback line, and removal of 664 s.f. of landscape hardcover north of the house. This would reduce the currently existing 57.3% 75-250' hardcover down to 49.9%, below the pre-existing 54.7%. Council referred this revised proposal to Planning Commission for further review and recommendation. Staff Reco—pndation Planning Commission is requested to review the proposal, and make a recommendation to approve, deny, or approve conditioned on additional revisions to be specified. fi pitoPpcfe*- ‘i -o CITY OF OROMO P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN APPLICATION NO. 1579 55323 473-7357 NOTICE OP COUNCIL ACTION Date of Notice: 10/9/90 TOs Garry & Marie Everson 4755 North Shore Drive Mound, MN 55364 COPIES: TYPE OF APPLICATION: Variance DATE OF MEETING: 10/8/90 VOTE:4 For 0 Against COUNCIL ACTION - MOTION: Council referred your revised proposal back to the Planning Commission for further review. This item will be placed on the Planning Commission's agenda of Monday, October 15, 1990. Meeting starts at 7:00 p.m. Please advise staff immediately if you cannot be in attendance. s' To: Mayor Grabek & Orono Council MembersCity Administrator Bernhardson Proa: 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 Propc i 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 votec >-*0 to conceptually 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 applicant that because this wcis a conceptual denial, that applicant would have the ability to present 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 6S4 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 arta 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 Keen— n ndation The denial resolution attached requires that the applicants remove all portions of new deck that exceed the pre-existing 13'xl8* < ack/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: r 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 kind the pre­ existing deck and stairway. 2. Conceptually approval applicant's revised 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. 4. Some combination of the above. Other. I’^i in I 1 iTi ■Wft*iii mini iif l■l^i^lSl~|| *11^ I . T ■’In'n rii1r ' mil Nil- .. *.»-.■—.»i^a jwtMW-'~-vk'».;rr«v:v^.*.ii«-w«^- •■» ukW.*:««»MUu arMuritt A RBSOLDTION DENYING APTER-THB-PACT VARIANCES TO MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 10.22, SUBDIVISIONS 1 S 2 AND SECTION 10.24, SUBDIVISION 5 (B) PILE #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 Park, according 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 submitted 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 t the southwest corner of their residence was in poor v^ondition 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 period 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 under 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 enjoymer><- of a substantial property right of the applic .s. Expansion of the deck areas across the proper ^ 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 merp teplacement 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 maximum 4' wide stairway to grade, subject to the following conditions; 1. Applicants shalx pay the City an after-the-fact investigation fee in the aa. A' of $17 5.00 as provided in City Council Resolution #1306. Page 4 of 7 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 mm 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 OP 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 6 of 7 APPLICATION NO. 1579 CITY OF ORONO P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 473-7357 NOTICE OP COUNCIL ACTION Date of Notice: 9/26/90 TO: Garry & Marie Everson 4755 North Shore Drive Mound, MN 55364 COPIES: TYPE OF APPLICATION: Variance DATE OF MEETING: September 24, 1990 VOTE: 4 For 0 Against COUNCxL 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 proposed in a timely manner, it could be considered prior to final Council action. Please contact staff at 473-7357 if you wish to discuss your options. Your next Council meeting is scheudled for Monday, October 8, 1990, 7:00 p.m. at the Orono Council Chaunbers. 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, Asbu t^lanning & Zoning Administrator Date: September 17, 1990 Subject: 4Jr'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 permit 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' *'‘^rdcjver was 54.7% (5638 s.f.). Currently existing 75-250' ^cover is 57.3% (5910 s.f.). If the crushed rock without •ic is excluded per applicants letter, existing and current )* hardcover is 4974 s.f. (48.2%) and 5246 s.f. (50.9%) 1 -ively. PX. 9 Commission Recommendation The Planning Commission reviewed the application on August 20, 1990 and voted 4 to 1 to recommend denial for the followin* 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 as constructed is ov' 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 •'ecommended that the decks be cut bac-: 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 Recomendation 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.Other. r (Zj^ Irfl. r A/ '* >rA\)r-rj "bo* lI'O CXTT OP OPOHO P. O. Box «« Crystal Bay, l473-7357 55323 ZONIBG FILE #1579NOTICE OF PIANMIBG COMMISSION ACTIONDate of Notice: 08/24/"lO COPIES TO:TO: Garry 4 Marie Everson 4755 North Shore Drive Mound, MN 55364 TYPE OP APPLICATION: Variance DATS OP MBBTING: August 20, 199u VOTE: 4 For 1 Against Planniag CosBission ^cuaaenda the following: Denial for reasons noted below ■OTBS AND SPBCIAL CONDITIONS: Planning Commission 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 encroachment was not considered a significar'_ issue in this case relative to any neighbor's views of the lake being diminished. 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'r^ next scheduled meeting is ccm.*^ rmeo as City Council on Monday, Septe-mbiJr 24, 1990; meeting starts at 7:00 p.m. If you desire certified copies 'f the official Plan- ing Commission minutes, t^zy are available from the City Clerk after rev low and approval by the Planning Commission. Any additional information you w' Council should be submitted to the att-?. 14, 1990. awed by this City daffron by September :■ r iJ;. r fT. l T- Sept.anber 17, 1990 iep TO: ORONO CITY COUNCIL FL: OBJECTION TO PLA2ININC COMMISSION ACTION 8/24/90 iS90 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 advance of the meeting. Our hardcover calculations are misleciding. The reason we have such a large driveway is becausv- we must share it with our neighbors to allow them access to their house, and we should not be penalized for this. The 664 squ?feet area ad^’acent to the house entitled "cru'’’^ed roc should be excluded from hardcover calculation bee t 1 .onger has plasL^c underneath and grows weeds. The 'i of time taken tt resolve this matter has not been . irely our fault as evidenced by the enclosed Chronology, If we are required to reduce deck to original size, we will be required to move steps h./ck to area against house under eve where they will be water and ice covere : aga.'n, whic^ is the reason w'hy we moved them. The area where the deck extends over the lot line is a joint or common area with our neighbors where we cut our garbage cans, and they have no objer‘*ron to this. Airy & Marie Everson '55 North Shore Drive Orono, Minnesota 55364 Enclosures: Chronology Certificate of Survey cc: Mike Gaffron CHRO:;OLOGY OF EXTENTS - DECK ?E?>MIT Fall 38 10/21/88 10/28/88 10/31/88 11/3/88 11/13-/88 11/29/88 12/15/38 12/30/88 2/2/89 Fall 89 Feb 90 2/27/90 Started replacing boards -n rotten deck. As it progressed, entire deck was done because all wood rotten Letter from City - They want 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 come out and do an inspection N’ote left by in^;-'<^-or - want permit Permit application delivered to City (they claim they didn’t f^et this) Letter from^ City - v/ant permit Another copy of permit to City (they later claimed at'meeting 3/90 they never got second permit application but then found a copy dated 11/29/83'ksy us and marked date rec’d 12/30/33 Letter from City - they now want Certificate of Survey and Hardcover Calculation. Called neighbors who were doing survey next door and they said cost over $2,000 Tic.ket issued for failure to apply for permit. Went to Ridgedale Court 3 times to try to take c-:.i of ticket and were told none on record, assumed matter dropped. Orono Police came to home with arrest warrant for failure to pay ticket. Police officer determined the reason Ridgedale couldn’t find the ticket was because City spelled name wrong. Iverson instead of Everson. Pai'^ ticket rather than argue any further and tho ^ ^^t«^ 8e^tt5..ed. Letter from Orono stating still'want application (nrw claim they don't have) and giving deadline of March 6 (note 7 days after date letter typed which was received March 3). Called Lyle Oman and he agreed to meeting at City 3/16/90 I'.m 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. The/ will want Survey and said they never received permit application. They looked further and found permit application dated November 1933. 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 absence 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 P i • II i II •‘ i t / ;\ r.!‘| ii| I eMMMm 1:•>*' * \ *V ?! i V ij.; i i . ■V i '' P'liif i The southeasterly One-half of Lot 7, ami Lots 5 and 6, Block 6, BERGOUIST AND WICK- LUND'S PARK, accordinq to » !te recorded plat thereof, IIciiim pin County, Minnesota. 0‘- !♦ 10^0*5 4»0 4% U-«».^e If-WO' ie.»09 9140 %•/• GENERAL NOTES o Denotes iron monument Denotes cross chiseled in concrete *039.7 Denotes eiistmg spot etevotlon rSSo] Denotes proposed spot elevotion d ~~ ■ Denotes surfoce drolnoQc Proposed top of foundation elevation = Proposed basement floor elevotion s Proposed goroge floor elevation - benchmark ; Oeehed eonleur lines denotes proposed features Solid contour line* denotes eeisting features ALL MBTB9 IrAtiP BURVEYORS I ■ 1: i;. 2340 Ooniels Street Long Loke, Minnesoto 59356 Ph: 475-1433 I ticttpy cv'tily fhai this Survey, plan er rspert •OS erteOfStf by me 9> unStr my direct sueervislon end Ihof I am a duly nee<Stered Land Surveyor under the io«i et tbe State or Minnesoto. ___'JJxlutiJ M/iiDATE REO. NO noli SCALE r * $0’ BOOM mot t3 FILE NO • t S0«47A M. ^ • ; ? ■« I '} 1 ' f '• \Mr If i'r / Fron; Date: Planning Commission Chairman Kelley Orono Planning Commission Members City Admii trator Bej.nh rdson Michael P. Gaffron# Asst Planning & Zoning Administrator August 17, 1990 lie Subject:: #1579 Garry & Marie Everson, 4755 North Shore Drive - After-the-Fact Variance - Public Hearing Soiling District - LR-IB, 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 Exhibit B Exhibit Exhibit Exhibit Exhibit Exhibit Exhibit Exhibit Exhibit C D E F G U I J Application Plat Map Property Owners List Survey Staff Memos of 5/18/90 from Gaffron and Oman Construction Plans Hardcover Calculations by Applicant's Surveyor Copy of Assessor's Record RF; Pre-existing Deck Aif Phete Documentation of City Action Regarding Deck Pertinont 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 inspection by the Building Inspector found that the deck was all new 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 finally met with City staff in March 1990, and in May 1990 provided the survey which verifies that hardcover on the property is excessive, and the deck is ^ er the lot line. Zoning File #1579 August 17r 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 deck 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 Zone Area Existing Allowed Hardcover Hardcover 0-75'10r035 s.f.430 s.f.(4%)0% 75-250'10,309 s.f 5910 s.f.(57.3%)2577 s.f. (25%) 4. u s. The assesijor's record card indicates that an 18' 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. The average lakeshore setback line coincides with the lakeshore «,de of the house. The old deck encroached 4' past the average tback line. The new deck encroaches 10' past the average setback line. No neighboring property owners have views that are affected by this encroachment. 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 still in place, hence we believe the assessor's records are correct. There is no question that the 13' x 18' deck was completely removed and the currently constructed deck is entirely new as of 1988. 6. 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 deck with no railing to extend to within 2' of a side lot line. A deck sucn as this with a railing must be setback 10' from the side lot line. 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 Zone Area Existing Hardcover Allowed Hardcover 0-75* 75-250* 10,035 s.f. 10,309 s.f 430 s.f. (4%) 5910 s.f. (57.3%) 0% 2577 s.f. (25%) 4. 5. 6. The assessor's record card indicates that an 18' 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 eck has dimensions 9' X 38* plus an extension toward the wide, for a total deck area of 502 v-e a\ raging 10' deep x 16' The average lakeshore setback line coincides with the lakeshore side of the house. The old deck encroached 4' past the average setback line. The new deck encroaches 10' past the average setback line. No neighboring property owners have views that are affected by this encroachment. 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 still in place, hence we believe the assessor's records are correct. There is no question that the 13* x 18* deck was completely removed and the cun antly 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 enjoyed 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 Re ndation 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 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-rardcover. This will not only reduce hard'over by 180 s.f., but will eliminate the encroachment across the line and the encroachment into the 10' required side yard setback area. Planning Commission should determine whether the remaining 10' 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' originally existed. smaller than what 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. 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. 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? i'^ ' ICITY OP ORONO - VARIANCE APPLICATION 4^ Initial Application Fee $175.00 *5^ \i ($50.00 per each additional variant/ ^ Renewal Variance Fee $100.00 (no change from original application) After-the-Fact Fees (Double application fee)CITY OF 0!<O^Q ^ CFFICl >0U i I w ‘‘« vrvPROPERTY LOCATION Site Address '<7A^ hfcirih .S?Hnrp. ^r 'n\o , GmnA , m U"--— Property Identification Number (P.I.D.) ’^Ol ~l I *J - ^ ^^>^0 -^OOciXi [ Attach legal description to application if not included on t require’ survey. ^0 0 , APPLICANT Phone (home) _____ Phone ^work) Address; 4l5fi iVf. Shc^^P Or/i\^ City: QmM<^ Zip; ^ Name ClAtrLj PjJ^r<;AAf ONNBR (if different than applicant) Name 5sA mf_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Phone (home) Phone (work) Address;City:Zip; Date Property Acquired (month/year) I (do) (do not) also own the adjacent parcels of land. PRESENT USE OF PROPERTY Present Zoning District Present Use of Property I i Residential Orher (-p-i^cify) DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST Describe Estimated Construction Cost $ Sf . QO request in detail; 3^0 d dr>^/niO(j VARIANCES REQUIRED Lot Area Setback Variances ( Other _ _ _ _ _ Lot Width Front Hardcover ^ Side Rear) miy i' £ RUN DATE 07/17/90 BATCH 010 PROP ADDR OHNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/AODR PROP ADDR OHNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/ADDR PROP AD^** OHNER NAi«. 'PAYER mME/ADDR PSOP AODR Ct/4ER .MME TAXPAYER NAME/ADDR I I I HENNEPIN COUmY PRUPLHTY INFORMATION SYSTEM PROPERTY OWNERS LIST38 07-117-23 32 0009 04736 NORTH SHORE DR CHRISTINE J SCHANZEf.* CHRISTINE J SCKANZE i 4736 rJORTH SHORE DR MOUND MN 55364 38 07-117-23 32 0012 04784 NORTH SHORE OR JEFFREY J MARSHALL JEFFREY J MARSHALL 4784 F40RTH SHORE OR MOUr40 MN 55364 38 07-117-23 32 0021 04755 NORTH SHORE OR G R EVERSON P M E EVERSON GARRY I MARIE EVERSON 4755 NORTH SHORE DR MOUND MN 55364 TOTAL BATCH 010 00009 38 07-117-23 32 001004750 NORTH SHORE DR JAMES R THOMSON ETAL JAMES THOMSON 4750 NORTH SHORE DR M0Uf40 IU4 553b4 38 07-117 23 32 0019 04745 NORTH SHORE OR HERMArj CRAWFORD ETAL HERMAN CRAWFORD 4745 NO SHORE DRIVE M0Ur4D MN 55364 38 07-117-23 32 0022 04775 NORTH SHORE DR W A KRAHL ETAL WALTER A A DONNA L KRAHL 4775 NORTH SHORE OR HOUtTD lUJ 55364 REPORT NO. PI455401 PAGE 2238 07-117-23 32 001100036 ADDRESS UrLASSIGTTEO RICHARD D CLIFFORD RICHARD D CLIFFORD 10156 GREEF4BRIER PO APT 208 MlfTTJE TONKA MN 55345 38 07-317-23 32 0020 04 755 t!ORTH SHORE DR LESTER A DIETHART LESTER A DIETHART 4753 NORTH SHORE DR MOUND MI4 56564 38 0/-1I7-23 32 0025 04795 NjRTH SHORF DR STATE LAND DEPT CITY OF ORONO LAKE ACCESS LANES 6/19/70 ST DEED 156852 I CERTIFY THAT THE FACTS REPRESENTED ARE AN ACCURATE AND TRUE REPRESENTATION OF irJFOPMATION AS IT APPEALS THIS DATE ON THF RECORDS OF THE HET4NEPTN COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF PROPERTY TAXATION, TO THE BEST OF MY KtLOWlEDGE AfJD bwLIEF. Sate -I- ■4f.T?} f, •* i Mi' ' ii} MM ■; V;* ' M' ^ >.■' r Ik -■wl' i: ki.M: •V.I ;, • V- y ■i.I MM'?• • .• CERTIFICATE OF_SURVEY EVERSON RESiPrWCE V " ' V W^RUCOviER CftLOJUTlONSJ ^ (Arut »o f«e<) toMC HARPOWl IOW€ amA AtfA ^ r \ LEC.AL DESCRIPTION: I'kf’ soul hoa stor 1 y One-ha If of I.ot 7, and I.ots 5 and 6, Block 6, PEHCgUIST AND WICK- EUND'S PARK, according to the rr>( orded plat thereof, Henne­ pin County, Minnesota. 59/0 -/oV- O'* 1*’ I0,0^5 4^0 4% Co-t»*<5e •H-IW »0,V)9 9TW %Ve Ov»*^e. 4- 5 7. 2 ■*/<GENF.RAL NOTES o D®not65 iron monumerif '♦ Denotes cross chiseled m concrelR » 939.7 Denotes existing spot elevation f939] Denotes proposed spot elevation < ' ■■ "• Denotes surface drainage Prv po«sed top of foundation elevation = Proposed basement floor elevotlon = Proposed garage floor elevation = benchmark Doehed contour lines denotes proposed feotures Solid contour linos denotes existing features AL1..METRQ I,AMD \l herebjr cenify that teis turver, pisn or resort ■es freesred b> me or undor m» eif et s.^fvisiflH SCALE I k < A'. ij: I- l:i .. ik l|: ll::r^: . : ■ 'I , 5: ;■ :r k; i • V. .1 ■ \k ■, 'L- k-I' !, ■ i ■ . • : /■ I 1.1 -r.k v,:k *. ■ • » ik ‘ /• ! k :>i To; Bryan Crawford, City Attorney From: Michael P. Gaffron, Asst Planning & zoning ‘-^irtinistrator Date: May 18, 1990 Subject: Zoning Review - Garry Everson Property 4755 North’Shore Drive Today I received a copy of the Certificate of Survey for the above referenced property, such survey being completed by All Metro Land Surveyors. I would make the following specific comments regarding informution sho.^n on that survey: 1. The survey verifies that the wood deck for which the applicant was cited, is not in the 0-75' protected lakeshore setback zone. 2. It is unclear from the survey whether the deck extends into the average lakeshore setback zone. No new construction is allowed to encroach toward the lake past a line drawn 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 constructed over the lot line and onro the neighboring Walter Krahl property to the west. Zoning Code Section 10.03, Subdivision 15 (C), the non ­ encroachment section, notes that a grade level deck cannot extend closer than 2' from any lot line, and a deck structure that is above grade 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 excessive hardcover on the property. Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.22, Subdivision 2, limits hardcover in the 75-250' setback zone to 25%. This property is currently at 56% in that zone, and the contruction of the V.v.od deck '^ertainly exacerbated the pre-existing hardcover excesses. To summarize, portions of the currently existing wood deck which were newly constructed in 1988, and which resulted in this 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 increasing the pre-existing hardcover excesses on the property. Zoning Review - Garry Everson Property 4755 North Shore Drive May 18, 1990 Page 2 of 2The property owner would appear to have 2 options: 1. Remove the decks which were added or totally replaced. 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 s doubtful applicant would be granted approval to keep anything more than the original deck in that location. To: From: Date: Subject: Bryan Crawford, City At*orney Lyle Oman, Senior Building Inspector May 18, 1990 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 to our deck was simply repair and replacement of existing, rotting decking and we are not aware 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 1-^ft 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 does 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 requeac police to enforce warrant (in memo). 4755 North Shore Drive - Deck Construction Without a Permit May 18, 1990 Page 2 of 2 2/26/90 Police attempt enforcement of warrant, wife of defendant states defendant is out of town. Officer accepts $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. HARDCOVER CALCULATION WORKSHE^/ SETBACK ZONE: (CIRCLE ONE) 0-75' 75-25 Existing Hardcover in Zone j LENGTH WIDTH A. House H (AArQ.io^g.x C A.rtntHor<^ op ^ ay Garage . c. Driveway D. ■»4D£W,LL:<LqlIu-. E. Patio/ Deck F.Landscape AREAS underlain BY PLASTIC SHEETING C^ftg.k r\rY^ i G. Other Total Hardcover in Zone Total Property Area in Zone 250-3C0' 500-1CC0' = 2,0=,?S.F. S.F. s S.F. s S.F. =S.F. =S.F. S.F. S.p.IIiJ«AT-V S.F. S.F. r:S.F. = tsBQ _S.F. S.F. =S.F. 3 S.F. a S.F. a S.F. _ii+i£0-S.F. S.F. X 100 -% S«jt. cart. o4' 'Sur u 1 Ml\ lUAV 1 j' 34b6 7 iZ'C 1 .’ 3 4 b 6 7 a: *1 ( .\»«M 1 3 3 4*w 6 7 ____UCrP 1 j 4 e C 7 f ■4f t» •*; *tv»1; 3 41> e 7 K^ '*k f.« ?* j « * t 7 Vr.aSCO I ' i: S ••• - ..t. 3456 7 . : * •' . 4 • t 7 — '*^"1 __3 cjc-c>'J ' iI CITY I■ DRONO CITY of ORONO Post Officf Box 66•Crystal Bay. Minneaou 55323• Municipal OfScaa I On the North Shore of Lake Minnetonka March 7, 1990 222 Ninth Street S°“th Minneapolis, MN ,540^ Garry Richard Everson, 4755 North Shore Drive Deck Construction Without Permit Dear Bryan: Thank you for there a”r\''is’sLV°to be on formal complaint he more cost effective to oeal any furt:her comments on this leu Enclosed is a “/d°Vith'the formal complaint process vou need anymore ,• Ilfassis? you in aVy viay, feel free to contact me at my of- • Sincerelyr s L'V^e Oman,Senior Buildiaig Inspector LO/tln Enclosure cc: Jeanne A. Kabusth, Building 6 Zoning Administrator tUIlDING * ZONING - 473-7357 ASSESSING administration a finance - 473-7358 FAX-4734IS10 PUBUC WORKS - 473-7359 r CIW OF aHawcrJ CITY of ORONO Post Office Box 66 •Crystal Bay. Minoeaota 55323• Municipal Offices 1 On the North Shore of Lake Minnetonka Februarv 2*^, 1??0 Gary Richard Everson 4755 North Shore Drive Mound, MN 55364 Re:Deck Construction without a Bunding ?e Dear Mr. Everson: u a mv a*-*-®nt^on that vou have paid a $74.00 fineIt has come to my a-^enu-on w'-^out a oermit.on a citation issued to you ror build.ng w_..ou. . This letter is to infort, you that ? y^nen-. To way r.akes your ceok a obtain a building pertiit and ^ or with the recuired you wish to keep the =5 = ^ C-'t'v befoU 1?^°-submittals must be prov^s-e- w - - /t7/5/L£.h u, o •.Wdr-'-vw’’''' acain issue If this deadline has notteen me., to citations ana ?'^°^®;i';-':c^g ,'ssues‘before fines can be pare request the court to » apv cuestions, reel free to =-oS, -<’3 — Sincerely, (J^L02awo—■ nyle Oman, senior Building Inspector fiScloLre - Building I zon?„g Administrator '== «S^“fifoA,"A^s^S!aL?n^i^=ning Administrator Bruce vang, Building Inspector ■UILDING a ZONING - 473-7357 ASSESSING administration a finance - 4T3-TJ58 FAX -4734)510 public works - 473-V359 l.’UU1 nnniCM SuritMSailUMatN ■ y .».»»»«r«.a‘» .• . .»■ •^4r.. 1^'’V i'?'eM L±1 i NAI4E-ILAST.FUlSIt.uioniFAiMocN : jUiV-.'-^'.-rv ’-.i-'y1 ' tl s i;.l 0 t ii! .#* . i ‘‘4 $■ JJI' .:y •Vi ■J-p .;U: % ■^\'£.;r..-. olribJiillc ■:.uivvVy-v. ■•.".’*.. *. □ £iP ^aaSfeNTggg ^ □ a^.troN3^. ffApG| NHMUtR OmNUMBtW ‘. - *■>*■»■* S:I?;- . V -.•.•. '« •«-• . ’. t‘ II you tail 10 (ospond lo ihls citation within 7.day«, Increased penalties twill ba assessed and a warrant may be Issued lor your arrest. II a twartsnl Is Issued. • V*.*. .' : ; •••. y .• ■■ p d -V 'ii 1 .'r:£ )•^r Vi : r,.-£i h /i £y t (L.e i 5 •a %IMlillliMlIll V.'. It . ‘.. •.* > •!*♦ • * CITY OBONO CITYof ORONO P„.t Office Box 66-Cr«ui Bxy. Minn-oU 5S323.MunidpJ Offic- On the North Shore of Lake Minnetonka February 2, 1989 H Mr. Garry Everson 4755 North Shore Drive Mound, MN 55364 Re: Deck Construction Without Permit Dear Mr. Everson, The Building and construct new’decks application for an a^ue- f d«cks A review of the appliVa\ron lines'°thlt "rheSol lowini inforn.ation needed for review is missing: 1. of ...V.. Th. survey. ^ 1 This deck construction is 2. Hardcover j ‘ site inspection of your considered as hardcovej, n-ooerty very likely already property indicated ^ hard‘cove^ of 25% in the 75-250' exceeds the maximum allowable ha c calculation worksheet zone. Please Your surveyor should !otatf ail lleL'if hardcover, including hhe deck, sidewalks, driveway, etc. on the survey. I„ t». ...Of to.. rx%".Vln".V..V.'p'.".Vo*.V.“ “'i; constructed decks ^ decks extend into the O-Jjf event that any POj:tion ^ave to apply for the 'should you need to apply* Review of yourbuilding P«"i!/P?“«Vlure^rlvlTe’^'t”^: until the noted of the date of this letter ”?l^Vsuulrrr\S«r"a?of"this"»^tter to the City Attorney. lUILOlNG A ZONING - 473*7357 assessing administration a FINANa - 473-7358 PUBLIC WORKS - 473-7359 Mr. Garry Everson February 2, 1989 Page 2 Please contact me at 473-7357 if you have any questions. Sincerely# Assin^t'planning S Zoning Administrator MPG/dh Enclosure: Variance Application co: Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building^and Zoning Administrator Tom Jacobs# Building Inspector Lyle Oman, Field Inspector I Total Fee: $ CITT OP ORONO - BUILDING PERMIT APPLICATION Date Received: Date Approved: Perait #:Project#: Building Permit Application Requirements: , 1. Building permit application - to be filled out completely and signed 2. 2 sets of construction plans to include the following: a) Floor plams; b) Footing and foundation plan; c) Elevations (of all sides); d) Wall sections and cross sections; e) Details - stairs and any special connections. Certificate of survt/ with location of existing and proposed structures including hardcover calculations and grading and drainage plans as required. Energy calculations - form provided. Septic report and design if required. 3. 4. 5. ABOVE INFORMATION MUST BE SUBMITTED IN FULL BEFORE PLAN REVIEW WILL BE STARTED THE APPLICANT IS: (circle one)CgWNER^,or CCNTPJi.CTCR JOB SITE ADDRESS:^ 7 5 ShnOr ' 'ZIP NAME OF OWNER: 0 C : i '0 CC MAILING ADDRESS: ^*7 CONTRACTOR: (work) PHONE : (home ) A 'CITY:iTk' ZIP: PHONE MAILING ADDRESS:, ARCHITECT: _ _ ^Trnv .ZIP: PHONE: MAILING ADDRESS:CITY:ZIP: TYPE OF WORK: Demo _ _ Addition^ Remodel. Alteration New MoveAccessory Structure_ _ _ Renovate x Land Alteration PROPOSED USE (describe in detail):il 3 n In /->■ y /S,h’.'T r. K lO / 7 DET. s ! i^'rcnt Loa//o?c^ . STORIES: PamNgf'SQ. FEET OF BACH FLOOR: /1^00 ■O. OF BEDROOMS: A GARAGE .STALLS: ATT,^ ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION VALUATION (exc^ing^and) r I hereby apply for a building permit and I acknowledge that the above is complete and accurate; that the work will be in conformance with the ordinances and codes of the City and with the State *nd understand this is not a permit and work is not to start without a permit, that the work will be in accordemce with the approved plan. APFLZCAHT*S SIGNATURE DATE; / / ^3.------- (Please fill reverse side of this form) CITY OF ORONO INSPECTION NOTICE PERMIT NO---------------- DATE TTME called in SCHEDULED completed CO ADDRESS OWNER AJc> 6 rTXJ-Pf^O/^ CONT rT TELEPHONE NO. V7Z k. is 5 Q footing FRAMING INSULATION WALL 80. FINAL PROGRESS OEMOL FIRE PREV. plumbing RI plumbing final mechanical water hookup meter set/turn on SEWER HOOKUP septic install SEPTIC MAINT. WELL TEST PUMP JgfCs\Tz inspection ^ EXCAVyGRAOING/FILLING lakesmore /wetlanos licensing COMPLAINT FOLLOW-UP SEPTIC FINAL RREPLACE/WOOO BURNER ^ COMMENTS: h: Cgc (C^ 2 Tl3T I.AO \ T'H' / 5: Ou. Ujc: a Photo takenWORK SATISFACTORY; PROCEED e.-.SPECT,o~ BeroRE cover ,no _____ co SSIct ui?sa « cONomoR w.ih.n hours .nspector wiu. return . call for the next inspection 24 hours in advance. Owner/Contji,on site_ J /wv -----------------473-7357Inspector White /ln*p«eiof I Fite CAiury/Site Notic* Cl rr QRONa CITYof ORONO Post Om« Box 66.Cryt.tal Bay. Minnesota 55323• Municipal Of5c« On the North Shore of Lake Minnetonka 0c-2ober 31/ 1?88 Gary Iverson 4755 North Shore Drive Mound, MN 55364 Re: Deck Construction Without Pert.it Dear Mr. Iverson: on October 21, "°oVV'esoo'nd'ed^'ith a note ^pafr ^d ;;;i;=^.;^nt -=^ycu^werir;'o^“orio™ the requirement for a /®^Jair/reolacement New work or that a permit is required^ s-an'dards of the Uniform Building repairs must meet the I'^e Orono 3oning Code. Vou mus. Kov.,,., ...^ »--- =>-.• may issue citations. or •’f vou have a problem meeting If you have any contact me at fv office, this deadline, please feel ^.ea to con Sincerely/ LvL^ Oman/ Field Inspector cc^'^ Jeanne A. Mabusth, ‘ning^s^Zo^ng Administrator ^iudin^ Inspector _ BUILDING A ZONING - 473-7357 assessing administration a finance - 473-7358 PUBLIC WORKS - 473-7359 Cl r Y OF QRONa CITY of ORONO Post Office Box 66•Crystal Bay. Minnesota 55323• Munidpai Offices I On the North Shore of Lake Minnetonka October 21, 1988 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 have recently constructed 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 tnat you must apply i. nsiSinit before 10-31-88. If this deadline is not meet the City S!ris»ue^ -ionsT If vou have any questions or if you have a probiem meeting “is deadline please feel free to contact me at my office. Sincerely, ■0 O' Lyle Oman, Field Inspector Enclosed: Permit Application cc: Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building & Zoning ^ Michael P. Gaffron, Asst. Planning & Zoning Administrato Thomas J. Jacobs, Senior Building Inspector 1hc_ uoort uje. diti to our aeoh am repair ^ oftoe. toere. oot of iTt^ntomnto viorlc. a p<Lrmit_. tfILDING a ZONING - 473*7357 ASSESSING "ThaLnle uou , administration a finance - 473-7358 • PUBLIC WORKS - 473-7359 103090.3 TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Mark E. Bernhardson, City Administrator^ ^ ^ DATS: November 8, 1990 SUBJECT: Navarre Heights Drainage Attachment A. Navarre Heights Drainage Memo Dated 10/17/90 B. Map of Navarre Heights/Togo Area (To be submitted on 11/13/90) C. Sketch of Navarre Heights/Togo Road Area ISSUE - 1. Determine nature of drainage problem in Togo Road. 2. Determine if Navarre Heights drainr on Togo situation. proposal has any impact 3. Determine if Council wants to set the project public hearing for its November 26th agenda. INTRODUCTION - At the Council's October 22, 1990 meeting at a formal comments section on the Navarre Heights drainage the question was raised regarding what impact this project would have on Togo Road. To this time it was the staff's understanding that drainage did not go down to the Togo Road area, but the Navarre Heights was tabled to determine further information on this subject. DISCUSSION - Drainage Issues on Togo Road - The issues for drainage in this sub~drainage basin include: - Drainage coming from the culvert under the railroad tracks from up by Navarre Heights - What impact the filling of a ditch and an improperly constructed tile line had on the south side of Togo Road - Determine the impact of the narrowing of the ditch on the north side of Togo Road to create a boat storage pad had on the drainage in the area While there is an old tile line on the south side of the railroad tracks going towards Togo Road, the Engineer is currently not able to locate an outlet and feels that only about 10% may go down to Togo. The City could look at pluging the tile line inlet if this is a contributing factor on Togo. The principle reason for ponding in the Togo Road area appears to be the filling in of a ditch and a poorly constructed tile line together with the fact that the lands in the area going into the lake drain rather / ; slowly. Issue #2 - Impact of Navarre Heights on Togo Road - While the tile line does exist towards Togo, as noted above, the water from Navarre Heights dissipates through a combination of drainage towards Crystal Place and down towards the lake and evaporation from the area on the north side of the tracks. While this area needs to be cleaned out, this would be appropriate regardless of whether the Navarre Heights project were developed or not. It is estimated that this project could be done by a City crew in 2 days. The question related to Navarre Heights impact on Togo Road is dependent on whether, with the proposed project in place, the water would move more quickly down to the ponding area by the railroad tracks at a faster rate and, if in fact, that would create a greater overflow of water through the culvert down towards Togo Road. Based on elevations and estimated volume of water from Livingston, it does not appear that this will have an appreciable negative impact and, in fact, a sealing of this tile line could be an option. Public Hearing - If the Council decides to further pursue the NavarTe Heights project, a public hearing could be set for the November 26th meeting at which time plans and specs would be completed and the project would be outlined by the Engineer, notices put in both the paper and sent to the individual property owners and then the Council deciding whether they need to undertake the project or not. One issue raised at the October 22nd meeting was, at the point the Council orders the project, whether they need a 3/5's or 4/5's vote. It is the City Attorney's initial opinion at the last meeting that given the removal of the signatures, it would require a 4/5's vote to proceed in ordering the project. As you will note in the project schedule, which is Attachment C, that this actual ordering of the project would be after bids were taken, the assessment hearing held and the number of appeal waivers determined. ALTERNATIVES Drainage on Togo - 1. Accept the information 2. Direct Engineer to develop a storm plan for this area 3. Recommend individual property owners reinstate previously existing drainage using swales etc. 4. Take no action 5. Table for further discussion 2. Impact of this project on Togo 1. Accept the information 2. Request further information 3. Table for further discussion 4. Take no action 3. Public Hearing 1. Set the public project hearing for November 26, 1990 2. Table for further discussion 3. Take no action RECOMMENDATION - It is recommended that the City be available to the neighborhood when they attempt to reinstate existing drainageways that were improperly filled. It is further recommended that the project in Navarre Heights proceed forward with plans and specs, establishing a public hearing for November 26, 1990. This is based on the fact that there seems to be little relationship between the two, and in fact this relationship could be severed. It is further directed that staff, as part of the project, work to clean out the necessary drainage downstream towards County Road 19 from the railroad tracks to allow drainage to flow freely by the time the new project is installed. PROPOSED MOTION - Moved by _, seconded by _, Council accept the information regarding the drainage issue on Togo Road in its relationship to Navarre Heights and that Council establishes a public hearing for November 26, 1990 and further directs staff to be available for neighbors to restore previously existing drainageways and that staff also schedule cleaning of drainage downstream from the railroad tracks towards County Road 19 to allow more expeditious flow of the waters from the area. Ayes _, Nays _. cc: Karen Cuff, 3572 Livingston Avenue, Wayzata Tony Gleekel, 100 Washington Square Bldg, 55401 John R. Gerhardson, Public Works Director Glenn Cook, City Engineer 101790.: TO: FROM: DATE: Mayor and City Council J Mark E. Bernhardson, City Administrator^'^ ^ October 17, 1990 • T—r ■ U ! I , SUBJECT: Navarre Heights Drainage • ' . h I ' '-V'' Attachment;A. Navarre Heights Memo Dated 10/3/90 B. Proposed Schedule for Project Development C. Drainage Area Map D. Letter to Neighbors Dated 10/11/90 ISSUE - 1. Provide an opportunity for those individuals who were gi - the wrong time for the public hearing an opportunity to voi their comments regarding the project. 2. Present a possible schedule for further pursuing the issue. 3. Determine whether Council desires to proceed further with plans and specifications on the project at this time. INTRODUCTION - At tne Council's October 8, 1990 Council meeting the issue relating to the incorrect notice times of the public hearing were addressed. It was decided to provide additional opportunity for persons to express their opinions on the matter. Attachment D represents a letter transmitted to the persons in the neighborhood regarding this item. Additionally Attachment C indicated on th-. petition originally presented to the Council where they are located as there was some question as to whether they were in the proposed district or not. ALTERNATIVES 1. Accept the input. ^ ^13 / OU.'-ajC 2. Direct plans and specifications be continued and establishment of a project public hearing on the matter for the November 13, 1990 Council meeting. 3. Direct staff to take no further action regarding this matter. 4. Table for further discussion. iv r .1 I' 1 RECOMMENDATI"'N - It is recommended that unless there is substantial ev 1 7 r;>ce or new objections to the contrary that the plans and speciiv rations be prepared with a public hearing on the project to be held at the Council ’s November 13, 1990 Council meeting. ■ J PROPOSED MOTION - Moved by _, seconded by _, Council direct continuance of the project for a public hearing on November 13, 1990. Ayes __, Nays __. Karen Cuff, 3572 Livingston Avenue, 55391 Tony Gleekel, John Gerhardson, Public Works Director Glenn Cook, City Engineer I "1 I/ll Bonestroo Rosene SB Anderlil< & Associates CCS 5 BC^’^ 't X '«r.w'^ n ;o^ C Anflen*. VUAW^ L SflAOrt- •• I V'T •» C 0*wp GtefVl • COOA »• •ho«-« ! ''*oyfv •*• •nMft 0 kfSiWm Wt;i«V tSf " C** »iefv3<t. * “Oicr 't C0C4IC C «fV A aeuAMA *1 V«n A -aumn « »e-d *1 MCfW ^ »l teec? • <"pAc!^ PI 34vifl o u»«acj ~x *?WA«n. »f Npi-f jt" C »S .tr-n 9 Mjufvi t^rrej-. • ,\r^<ra!' »* V4rt « ‘iOA Pt B0»;^ C. «uW* ^ I HOMva A liPf3*a pf SjAv j. logene*' 'f Mjn A SM Pf »<\io ; Ciiwti P8 ir-atl VifD"n 'f MJf* 3 x>»». *» ff,^\ 8 W»rrv*> A » ; 9y.if.t« t»* VK« 0 .f'"'"' '** t »a «b U^*»f '• P* 9k^C A w«4R A iA Ag^\ V A 'C • ^ 3 ■e-vif- »l CrcoOt'-** Pt A k ***®" M4"jr M n-'n»- Engineers A Architects Movetnber 9, 1990 « City of Orono Box 66 Cry»tal Bay, K» 55323 Attn» John Garhardaon Be: 13946 Livingaton Drainage Dear John: ;tr-srLs:,-r Togo Road. The v«ter 1* currtntly ponded (Pond l) just North of the teilroad and sloely dralna out through a « inch tile. The eater pondt {Pond 2) again on the south aide of Togo Road. The drainage from Pond 2 is through an eight inch tile North Urote Togo Road. The a inch tile doesn't work well because the outlet Is 1.3 feet below the mareh it dlecbarges to North of Togo Road. the drainage syatea needs lone maintenance cleaning hut this would not solve all of the problems. the ayltem design principals are lound although slightly undersised. I2:.”r it"inr.iV.d‘ fh‘. 7:^%^ Ve would have to complete a storm sewer analysis to determine improvements that would have to be made. The excavation of a drainage ditch that has been filled by property owner South of logo Road would bo a aipiiflcant factor in solving the drainage problem. Ploaew contact this office if you have any quastlons. Youra very truly, BONESTROO, ROSENE, ANDERLIK 6 ASSOCIATES, INC. Glenn R. Cook GRC:lk 1S»/1J946.lt1 1029C.: TO: FROM: Mayor and City Council Mark E. Hernhardson, City Adxinistrator', DATE:October 3, 1990 SUBJECT: Jlavarra Heights Drainage Attachment:Meeting Notice for B. Beth Escher Letter Dated , in/'’/90C. Paulette A. Bohlen Letter Received 10/-/90 ISSUE - Subsequent to the an^Lror^^i^n pubUs^hing the to our attention that we lis'-inc the oublic hearing in the notice for the Navarre ^ while the discussion overall notice that was mailed ,20 the public hearing had on this Item '^.^ere were at least a couple of people ?h!riameVVbout'7 = 30^nd dasired to express their objections. DISCOSSION - The pub 1 ic hear ing_^th^at^s _h^e^ld ^w_as required', public hllring not „V t^ i ay out the project. A new however, to hold a public cQ^ld be held at the time plans !nd“ip'ec\"Mcafionrare a?e Accepted or bids are received. ALTERNATr/ES - Alternatives in this case are as follows: -- -- - - - ^pe"fi=at?oL^^"^Ho\"d s|ecs are drawn prior to going to bids.- - 2. inforaal ij^ aU^ow^^thoVe'' who \r?Sres«d‘^ w'come and exptesl'any ?Sr“h« information regarding the project. 3. Table for further discussion.j, xawj.^ -- - - - - - - - - recommendation - It is recommended that the following process Utilized: the plans and specs upon receipt of bids have hearing. the special assessment Order *:^*e special assessment. Depending on alternatives 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 October 22, 1990 meeting prior to further work being done on this project and another public hearing would be scheduled at the rime plans and specs are completed. Ayes __, Nays __. r o:o9o .1 CITY OF ORONO N0TIC2 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 the purpose of considering^ underground storm sewer system for Nas;arre Heights generally described as those properties east of Blaine Avenue north or Lytic 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 inrorovement will be heard at this meeting. Dorothy M. Hallin City Clerk Published in the Laker and Pioneer newspaper the week of September. 10, 1990 and September 17, 1990. 91350.5 Mayer and City CouncilTO: FROM: Mark E. Bernhard son, Ciry Adam is tr DATS: September 13, 1990 SUBJECT: Stu.m Sewer System - Navarre Heignts Area Attachment: A. Storm Sewer ;:emo Dated V:3/90 B. Hearing Notice Published 9/10 and 9/17/90 ISSUE - 1. Hold a public hearing prior to ordering plana and specifications on the project. 2. Determine whether Council desires to have plans and specs developed on the project. 3. Determine type of desired solution. eptember 24, 1990 meeting. Attachment ^ .e-lec.. ..-a..ng .otice that was transmitted. SesiW^go aSe^f with''''the ‘' oropos^'l^'p^o^ecrir *'not^^^^^ a Status Quo - Taking action to leave matters as they «e^^n^ormal drainage system , The resident may choose to do something minimal on their property. Ba Surface Drainage - As noted in Attachment A a surface had been prepared as a Possible alternative that could be done privately. It is our undmrstanding that a "«i5^b°rhood petition to reque ^ha^^ this matter be undertaken and the City ao so pSSlic peSjeerto be assessed has been circulated although the City has not received a copy. A ' c. nnderoround Storm Water Pi^ino - This Is the liv .’iVo ‘.vv:. ’xp::>.SrJ.!rA^ City's liability to the greatest degree. In addition the alternatives for financing are: 1. Private Financing - Any of these could be done by tne neighbors in conjunction wi Aach other, however, the larger the cost of the project the nora difficult it becomes. 2. Public Financing - This would entai. tne Citv engaging "a concractor and specially assessing the cost against the storm sewer area that is servec^. Not only does this put the city's stamp o: approva- on the project but regardless ot the route ta<en puts ^he city at risk for financing to the degree tne ris< hks not been limited by special assessment waivers. l.rUz-nl-ar situation. Tbe underground solution would -frZJiViiVar ««i*-uation. The underground <?olution would be built to solution may in fact result in tne ^22umpji‘0n any storm, while this may not be the ^ase, it may ..a..c.e ^n. water better than not doing anything. as part of the solution. ALTERNATr;r:s Issue 1^ Public Hearing 1. Hold the public hearing. 2. Close the public hearing. 3. Continue the public hearing Issue 2. Develoaraent of Plans and Soecs^ 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 av/«nMMPNnATiON - It is reconunended that the public hearing b® n*ia .no neighblcf “hivf a|re^" Von" a“"soVution they desire the City to do a public project. .<7T. . I & '!• f“VA' .*,‘i;1;i;:.V ..iorl-.y =f n«l3hb0t. .r." •«*. A «5'~cnifleant majority of the neighbors are inter^^ted in doing the project and have signed petition waivers if they desire the City to do a public project. Ayes —, Nays J I' I-V‘ Oct ^ 2SS0 Seotember 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. dv this time the council was acting on the issue, the attached agenda shows it was heard at 7:00 not 7:3C. 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 snould 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 tne affected neighbors should be able to express their opinions. When the Cuffs purchased the vacant lot next to their heme there was a puddle in front, they lived there and knew the problem existed yet they went ahead and purchesed it. Some time after that they cleared the lot of the brush and dead trees and did some landscaping with earth-moving equipment. While it improved the appearance of the lot, it exaggerated the water problem. Much of the water which now sits in the street used to drain to the back of that lot. I understand them wanting to have a dry lot ... I DO NOT understand them moving water out of their lot and into the street and then claiming it's all of our problems and we should all pay for itl I further resent being told 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 assessment 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 Pace Two As you are well aware, the majority of the signatures Karen collected on her petition were from Lyric Avenue and tnerefore 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 (wicn proper norifioaoion) BEFORE any further action is taken. SS!R)A FOR COUNCIL MEETING SET FOR MONDAY, SEPTEMBER 24, 1990, 7:00 P.M, 0 Asterisk items are considered to be routine items to be enacted upon by one motion by the City Council under the Consent Item* on the agenda. Discussion will be held upon request. Memos regarding each o£ the Agenda items are available in the Public Packet which may be obtained upon request from the Recorder. ftL CALL I. Recognition of Employment •• John Sass HBARING - ^^?5torm Sewer System Navarre Heights Area 30 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING - 3. Highway 12 Imorovements 83090.1 CITY OF ORONO NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARINGI A-pubLic hearing will be conducted on September 24, 1990, a|^ 7:30 P.f^ in the Orono Council Chambers, 1275 Brown Road South. — 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 no^th of Lyric Avenue south of Crystal Place and west of Shadywood Road (County Road 19). Engineers estimated cost of this project is ?32,200. iSueh persons as desire to be heard with reference to the proposed sipcowement will be heard at this meeting. Dorothy M. Hallin City Clerk ^ttbjliahed in the Laker and Pioneer newspaper September. 10, 1990 and September 17, 1990. the week of lep . i ‘> ; i : •I-1 • 0^ . ' I .^eXc i-Aj 60(ToC!^^aw HkI <5'5 j<7/ /I ^ nC.CCi-'i.dLC,f){uLL^ (XLcL ^ 6V< OPi>CS£h tc tXL. p^ti^pc^^coL ctyic,ui<j^<U \Qc^J^')nL. ficLc^l^'tj . j^O-CL -OLc (Ictq^ di^Ct.'TLcLcC AjLC^ cC"-' yjCcC^iLCi^ ^rc 1 sc p'Y%^ i ^lL YILl^ XcL ^ ,C C.'wW^ cV C /C.i5-tcC-C^ J C)tjZLclci^ 4r 'J Co pini^ •*-/lc (Icxl a. CcC^ llXzJ^<:x^ /Lcd t^x. -/U~/o( ;P'h^^6'-Lc CyLo'-^Kp p y(a %IUl.\jl iJjCt cpf^ c^lTlciU • (^CL-j (^ CcO 6c (- V6H.^rC- LcC666«-tCv v^6C^ C' • 0 • • qj(Jx(!.Cl J\xcpO(jL^"CA-C cl<rL<-->cx>^ccCx^^ u Q<ji^ Pp'O^rLt'^^- ■'^‘7 l^^lC c-jj ^ cxi'^^-ccAj. (^c/c /OOl ii^LtX- OKx 6ooC^'VXUK?'^o>0 Xl/uiA- (TA "CLlo pc(M6<iX: ■ ^ 60(X-j 'to-tdj /CctJcX^^/UL 'b6oL<^c-;C6J C’^'vCO u 76^ >:>|ofcc^TCj (T>c "tXc<3 j^C6-^t<LX; ■ 'CP a}(X-3 U^^tLL^CCu -(J^ :^0-r^ ^ Xinb-Lt j ipd. o_ p Mjlul SU -tU. /7(.6't^, iX- )Jcl 6(1<l -/CUXccL 0.0^ ^ *T^ viS'Vo 6/6 ^^>£cCuX ;dt^-i<jXXuAX<3 ^ju Lcc L tx) jdu.V2/t fcX''^ I'-cci. ^ (X’V "t O^Imc K j ij-^ cv/ U.-U Jdc^^iLC^. CclCC cCLicdLLci c^jj-^tLciX.' ru , L-VicCl^^-lc^ -Co -lU. ' Crp^Lu-y^ c-r^ -tU. CJCte-l ^ hh- r.CC ^ LcCu^iu^t. C'yX.C't^. iCL 6-^ /iCoi^C^ ~(j; cL-J v3^ CJ / >U| 6ciCct,c-t^Tlfa-,(xtlc. ;CC/ --r/L.ut.• » » (2i-c.4/o i^c-r.<.u!L-^ -C/Cc c-ot'Ct i(-i •)Cr'^ Ci.'t-t'/l ,CC jL,Uuj-i<icL^i<^ <w u-/C cC U -- C- cL.(Xc / ><Lo; CJCcSCcXc^- c»_<^cr_c o c ’,c "C/'U- vjctytk. 'LJ lc<j (\<j ^ C'^CC t/i-C.-\ CVC^CCC(X.. /lI^Kw'Lc^c ^VrC’vX-Ct C^C Lc -) t-jj "tTc 7u. “to W ;Lo-C 6v-.c^cti / (i'ULcLXc^^ Y 1/u.'^ l^ucio,^ .C'-L/Ll’C<-‘-(--^.'-<L /'^i^V(--iC' Li (jX^'-Lyi^ • t. Y'C''L. cT>. •'.. ' -i L .**?—• j .'1 . . ' • w '’^^^'-C/LlvJ VJ^<. Lt."-<-^y 0 c-vC ( (.o;U TT/cc. ^t-Ct^G-rccX^' do K-c/. ,g,(.<UvjixXcjj cj W i ict^ M^pc*^u^ -u, Tu^,. •fc/Lc /VlcL^Xoj c^c qcc <j6c'\x<i.Zo (T)CJ ^ ^ cjCLL /I ; f~koMtC(^ C^. f PROPOSED SCHEDULE FOR PROJECT DEVELOPMENT NAVARRE HEIGHTS DRAINAGE Receive Preliminary Report Order Plans & Specifications Approve Plans & Specifications Receive Bids Public Hearing Assessment Hearing Award Bids Start Construction Complete Construction 1989 October 22, 1990 November 12, 1990 December 6, 1990 December 10, 1990 January 14, 1991 February 25, 1991 r-!ay 20, 1991 June 28, 1991 " n ^1- • ii ■! 'i*■ E r-|H 7 isf* 10 3«n Uff r’/ 4 /f )$SI [6 Ss3i 3SJ* > 3 t 2 Sil«^ <T 1 {14 15 16 17 18 19 20 ?l 22 23 24 J____UJ'L_L''R c i ^— 2'.4.^'" i ^1 llJ I 12 It to 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 < 1 1 ~7 ———> <i 13 14 ts 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 2 24 !C :)Ut w f RO ^D ---------------- ^113 1 10 L M ^iag ) 9 12 e ^13 3V»J 7 5Via 14* 3</73 6 3t&5 5 16 4 17 iVt 3 18 Nl r>> 2 19 E V 20 \ 21 I -1 14 13 12 11 10 . 9 8 7 6 5 4 --—~5 — 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 A /El JU - 14 13 i 12 rr 1 1^'V 9"____17 6 5 4 H '__1 (« —_ 15 16 17 18 19 20 2t 22 23 24 25 NC 15 IJI^VARRE HEIGHTS STORM SEWER IMPROVEMENTS DRAINAGE AREA ORONO, MINNESOTA Bon««lroo flOMA# Andvrllk 4 AMoei«l«« Dote: 4/20/09 Comm. 13940 Fig. P No. —- * . I ,! -• *4QY^n-rm^^'-r 4) ^ OHONO Post OfTice Box 66*CryaUi Bs On the North Shore of Lake Minnetonka October 11, 1990 Dear Resident; On September 24 , 19 90 the City of Orono conducted a public hearing regarding a proposed stonr. sewer it your neighborhood. The oublic hearing was held at TrCC t.m. that day. The notice nailed to vou however stated that the public hearing wou-c be held at 7:30 m. Therefore, seme were^not given tne opportunity tc express your feelings cr. tr.is matter. The Council action on Sertem.ber 24t.t v;as tc direct the City voluntary on the par- cf the City, another public hea-ing at >-^-5 time is not mandatory. We wil' however schecule this natter cr* October 22, *»990 to allow those persons that were not allowed to soeak the o* ortu..--,. ---- ------------------- -- ^ soecificatiOiiS will be held in abeyance pencing tne resu-*. o. that meeting. If the Council, at that meeting, directs^that plans and soecificatiens be developed, another public hearing will be held prior tc ordering bids. If bids are directed to be taken, the City will hold an assessment hearing prior tc ordering the project. A ew ^ w w w The development cf p'ans and The meeting starts at 7;0C p.ir*. any questions, please call me at 473-7357. Sincerely, 'John R. Gerhardson, Public Works Director JRG/tln ■UILDING a ZONING - 473.7357 AMSHNG AOMINlSntATIOIS k n.NANCE - 473-73M FAX-47M5I0 PUBLIC WORKS - 473-735» l"'f isri 10 O i«n 9 Ufff X V rV 'A JS$|3S1IV X ?S3!3M X, 3 f 2 \o <8!•» < ! 1 1'lA SI - 15 (6 17 IQ 19 20 21 22 23 24 ^ ~ ui' ^mm *9~ 1 —L]'R c - «c» <——----_ H 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 Id < 13 l4 15 16 17 18 -7 19 20 21 22 ?J > < Z 24 cpu IT'TO \D--------------------—j——1- 10 9 a J/^u 8 5 21 ~ l gV IB NO i 20 storm SEVVER^lMiRTv^ drainage /<R ea ORONOi MlNNPsnTA ---------------------1 lissr* ■Ijiisau 1 pDale; 4/20/80n l^onim. 13940 ~------ rig. No. y 5T2y 91390.5 Cy <^22 DMB: September 13, 1990 Subject : storm sewer System - *«avarre Heights Area l- \ o „uch.«.. {. |s;;4'SiS:'1.”b;i55*S''l%”."a V17/90 ISSUE -prior to ordering plans and .b..b.5 developed on the project. specs 3. Determine type of desired solution. TrnmnoDtJCTIOlJ - This is^e ^sched^^^^^gj;jsrT;rVA’. TOtice that was transmitted. ■ .I - - '-no.., tnc ------ - hhev A. S^^l2uo - Tahin^^^ „ay “cS::!rSt"refhinr™rn^al - B. surface Dr^J^ ‘ p\%ra-1"- ' pMs\l"| dta-lnagToutiinT “a,^. pri'^ately. It is alternative that «®"^„'l,‘’Aborhood petition to request understanding undertaken and the City do so as a that this matter be “"^®%“gaged has been circulated :. nndMqroand St^ p«lod «< ;hat has been |ive year stormthat has''been proposed for A®‘y'®year storm. In this and is designed for a fy« , surface situation t^s Yso the oA that perhaps limits the StV-s lability to the greatest degree.—---- in addition the alternatives for financing are: ;r:* xion -- - - - 1. Private "ig^bofs* in’con junction withcould be aSne ty tne neignuoi p.r I II ■I"' liv' •;:; -’j. J.-i- l- ■• i‘.••■•■./.:... m mr ■■ Qiva'..cJ^ - l’..oT h^DjJtX^ Oix!U\ ^ r— . n , I Ov^ u \ L^t'X??t7L<^ - !'sJwOiLctp> —^ -f ^ pp^ SjAJiScS ^r f, y\J:rji,^ [jj_^ _ cO^euAjin Q^fS^Ju^ '—^-f «vr ^ /^ /r'Bf Sccrjfvv- OVV 0^^ dIjUucJ/iiy,n ds^M. M mi 1 .»w J > V : ■V ■i s. i «» e ■V each other, however, the larger the cost of the project the more difficult it becomes. Pub 1ic 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. -T)ie City does have some concern regarding the city's participation inabove ground a storm sewer project in this particular 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, the above ground solution may in fact result in the assumption that it will handle any storm. While this may not be the case, it may handle the 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. Public 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 Held and upon conclusion 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. 814 V-. .,1 ^ ■'' t L- r) TO. Mayor and city Council /{777fd/^ttrr Mar. .. Bernhardson, City Adr.ini3trat|Sl^ August 33, 1990 ^ SCBTEcT: Livingston Avenue Drainage ^ 7/27/90 Letter Dated • Cuff Letter Dated 8/20/90 »••«. c«r. .„. E i'-’ -Of 1989 it was ^1- studt ahead, further that a UVns^^Athe Ojunc'u Earlier this year the ,1 °" "^^Shbors had V„ h Proceed City proceed with th<» for the Cuff's ^®^®oeived. This was discussed at th°^®f' "" the absence of th. %t®,^ the the result was that Council’s May 29 1*oon^^* Petition, private methods co-fia t"'^"^ directed sta« J ' 3®?° meeting and discussed the ^® ”°rhed out. Sta''' vif®t alternativepropo.., ”■"■ "-■• s p^o”3;F"Hn“i/£V“^*“" ” "?■ as a separate request does relate <1 S'— .'fFTO DISCUSSTf)M _ Th#i fAN 1 1 iaprovea,ent process Propos^ro”lheltubb^Ba"y"i33e% Project Petition Verification of petition signatures Plans and Specifications Project Construction Alternatives to this are; A. Project hearing - This could be held either prior to plans and specifications and bids being sought or afterwards. The advantage of waiting until afterwards is that the cost would be known for the project more firmly than the initial estimate. The advantage to holding before the plans and specifications are that depending on the input at the public hearing, the Council may or may not proceed with plans and specifications and the associated cost. B. Holding the assessment hearing prior to the project being adopted. - The assessment hearing can either be held prior to the project or it can be held after the project completi'' The advantage of holding before the project is orde , but after the bids are received are that the assessment would be fairly accurate as to costs and the City does have the option of a supplemental assessment later, if project construction costs radically exceed that. The advantage c.: waiting until afterwards are that the full project costs would be incurred and known. (The City could do a supplemental assessment should project costs exceed the original assessment.) C. Combination of Project and Assessment Hearings. The process would allow for the project and the assessment hearings to be combined with the Council adopting the assessment first and then after the 30 days appeal period determine whether they desire to order the project. (It would be appropriate to continue the public hearing on the project until the project is ordered.) As a reminder the 35% petition is needed for the Council to be able to order the project i ? 3/5*s vote. If it does not have a 35% petition it ^u^ ld require a 4/5*s vote. D. Signature of waivers - As the City is currently - • doing for stuobs Bay the Council may desire to require ! waivers signed by a soeeified nercentaae orior toSpecified percentage prior to I' further work being undertaken. This was not previously a condition stated to the residents. ACTION ALTERNATIVES 1. Initiate the process with ordering the plans and specs with an anticipated combination of the project and assessment hearings. 2. Hold the public project hearing before ordering the plans and specs. 3. Table for further discussion. 4. Take no action. RECOMMENDATION - It is recommended that the Council, given that the 35% petition is verified, proceed with plans and specifications, then to bidding and combining the project and assessment hearings as proposed above. Staff still does feel that the proposed private surface alternative is feasible, but if the property owners are willing to pay for the public improvement project, that the City proceed. PROPOSED MOTION - Moved by _, seconded by _, that the Council direct staff as to the process they desire to undertake in relationship to this. Ayes _, Nays _. cc: Karen Cuff, 3572 Livingston Avenue, Wayzata 53391 TO: Mark E. Bernhardson, City Adininistrator FROM: John R. Gerhardson, Public Works Director DATE: May 19, 1989 SUBJ: Livingston Avenue Storm Sewer On April 24, 1989, Council accepted a feasibility report from the City Engineer regarding a storm water runoff problem at 3572 Livingston Avenue. The feasibility report was the result of a petition from Mark and Karen Cuff of the above address requesting a solution to the flooding problems they have experienced after normal to heavy rainfalls. Following the April 24, 1989, Council Meeting, staff supplied information to Karen Cuff to exhibit to the affected property owners regarding location of a storm sewer and costs per lot. Since that time, neighbors of the Cuff’s have submitted preliminary sketch plans of an alternative to the storm sewer by directing the storm water above ground to the culvert inlet on Crystal Place. Regardless of which option is taken, easements from the Cuffs, as well as all properties affected downstream, will have to obtained. Cuffs have also submitted information objecting to an above­ ground drainageway and wish to proceed with an underground storm sewer system. The information presented by the Cuffs on Friday the 19th is additional information that staff and Council has not had time to review. Recommendation; To accept the information from the Cufffs and table any action on this matter until staff has had time to x-eview and report to Council the effect, if any, regarding chemicals being discharged onto the Cuffs' or neighboring properties. Proposed Motion; It was moved by seconded by to table any action on this matter until there has staff review regarding chemicals being discharged onto the Cuffs or neighboring properties. TO: FROM: Mayor and City Council Mark E. Bernhardson, City Administrate t,.- \ Forwarded recommending tabli ’^g as proposed. r 'S August 9. 1990 City of Orono Atrn: John Gerhardson Box 66 Crystal Bav, MN 55323 Dear John, Per our phone conversatI on, please find enclosed the petition for the storm drain system on Livingston Ave. in Navarre. I have twelve siQiiatures in total. Host of the people that have signed this petition requested that the city should expedite this matter as soon as poss.ble. We feel that the weather pattern of the area since spring could possibly mean a heavy snow season- If this is the case, there are several of us that could have major damage to our property and basements due to the excessive snow. (this summer has been quite an experience to most of us) This drain needs to be installed before the ground freezes. This has been a lengthy project for my-self and the city. I feel that I have done my part in ootaining 30.77, of the property owners in the area to agree to be assessed for this project. Per the council minutes of May 29. 1990 ”tne city maintains its position of agreeing to order the storm sewer project if 3o7.^^of the residerits agree to sign a petition asking for the project. Please put this request to proceed with the storm sewer project on the city counci I agenda possible. I look forward to future. Sincere1y, for the earliest meeting date hearing from you in the very near Karen Cuff 3572 Livingston Ave Wayzata, MN 55391 cc: Mark Bernhardson Anthony Gleekel PETITION We, the undersigned, hereby petition for the installation of a storm dram to be located at 3572 Livingston Ave. This drain will go through Block 3, Lot 17 on the easterly edge and go north to Crystal Place and flow into the swamp. This will be brought before the City Council of Orono at the next meeting. This will collect all run off between Navarre Ln. j Witness Address ^ ^ 'S', Anr ''n<>s ^i/-€_______S' ■^■rsro 5r- 7- ic>i V CITY of OKOXO p -cruY- - b OF taROHO-i Post Office Box 66*Cry»t*i Bay. Minnewta 55323 •Municipal OfP. On the North Shore of Lake Minnetonka \ ■ June 19, 1990 Karen and Mark Cuff 3572 Livingston Avenue Wayzata, MN 55391 Dear Karen and Mark, on Wednesday, June 6sh, City Engineer ^Xenn Cook, Assistant Zoning Administrator Mike Gaffron and myse-,. »is..-d your property to see if there were new alternatives .or addressing the drainage situation in your area. Af.e. ore ’iminary review of t.he site, Mark arrived home and we were able to discuss what you anticipated as far as ..uture plans -or the property. Based on that and further discussion it appeared that the-e was a feasible orivate alternative. T..at pri.a.e llte'rnati^e is outlined in the Attachment A. If tnis appears to b«*a desirable direction for you, you may --ant to wor.< in coniunc'ion with your neighbor to the northeast of your pcopef'!' 'nd^aSs^engaU an^ngineer to do a more definitive layout o_f ‘..he proposal. Once this has been developed it may if oarmi*-3 f"om the City depending on the amount of grading and f^-1 tSn would be requ^d. If it is under 100 cubic yards it could be a permit i^s^d by staff, if over that it may require_ a conditional use permit through Council, -t is poss.b.e -na- Mjority of thil work would be done in conjunction with a building permit for the garage structure that you had desireo. Sincerely Hakk E. Bernhardson City Administrator Mike^Gaffron^^Asst.Planning & Zoning Admin IUILDIM: a ZONING • 473*7357 ASSCSnNG AOMINlSnUTIO.N A nNA,NCE - 473-7351 FAX -4734»I0 PUBLIC WORKS - 473*”359 ORONO REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING BE^D MAY 29, 1990 LIVINGSTON AVENUE DRAINAGE CONTlNTirD obtain a petition of 35% of tbe area property owners. It was moved by Counciimember Hetties, seconded by Mayor Ccabek. to direct staff to continue tw explore options to resolve draina,. pr-bl«t. In the oeantiae. t.he City maintains its position of agreeinq to order the stom sewer projec- -- ^5% of the residents agree to sign a petition asiting -or tna projec-. Motion, Ayes-5, Nays-0. Motion passed. HICoUAT 12 CORRIDOR MEETING Bernhardson informed Council thaw he has confirmation of the date for the Policy Meeting. not received arLTTrovided information regarding the history of Hr. Per:^e's busings and apprised Council of ^ that have occurred (See Mark Bernnardson s memo dawed May -S, 1990). Bernhardson stated that he has received • * and MTS. Kramer, Bayside Floral, ana (Vir. and ParK Spur, expressing concern about the safety ha..a.>- ^ is creatine in its present location. He said that ilr. Pchke'^attorney, rJ. Indritr, had indicated^thot tlr. ^eaveny had given Mr. Penke oermis n to seix ^rom his proper ..y. L.-nhardson also r ‘ t.h:- letter had be in and Mrs. Butterf: jtt.-ing acainst transient me..whanis general. Mayor Grabek as<ed Mu:. Pen'<e why 1-e had not applied for a license in the last two years. Mr. Penke su.'ited t.hat at the April 1 . 1988 there was discussion as to whether he was class-..lec as a solicitor. He said that Council had asked Mr. Larson, the property owner, to submit an application to rezone lo Commercial, but that did not occur. Mr. Pe^xe said wh«t he was notified of the need for a license by the Police Of f iCi. that ticketed and shut him down on Mother's Day. Mr. Indritz stated that in his opir , communication has been * problem. He said that ilr. Penke ha^ ^old flowers ^rom one locatioS for 5 years and there have beer no complaints about the business during that period of time. Mr. Indritz xefety issue seems tc be a new concern end was n 9 previously to Mr. Penke*s attention. He noted that Penke*s competitors that have written to the City reg safety issue. He said that there have been incidences of safety hazards during the last ^ ; Indritz stated that the Ordinance Amendment regarding trans-.<. n merchants did not take place until after the Penke s appearanct^ - 20 - G TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Mark E. Bernhardson, City Administrator DATE: June 19, 1990 SUBJECT: Administrator's Information NAVARHE/LIVING3T0N STORM SEWER - Attached please find a copy of a letter sent to the residents regarding a potential private solution in the area. (Attachment A) SANDY BEACH RESORT - Staff has been working with the owner of the property and it is auiticipated that the owner will file a sketch plan review for that property presented at the Planning Commission's July meeting. COUNTY ROAD 15 WELCOME SIGNS - It was felt by John Gerhardson that it woulT be appropriate that any sign have incorporated in it the logo. We at*e currently awaiting jne completion of the logo contest. Additionally the initial plan had expected to have up to three signs in the area. If they are the same type as those going uo in Mound and Spring Park it is estimated that all three signs iiiav cost in the neighborhood of $3-4,000. Once a design is dev'eloped this will be presented for Council consideration . BEDERWOOD "GRAND OPENING" - The opening was rained out on Saturdav, June 16th and has been rescheduled for Saturday, j une 23rd. BEDERWOOD PARK - PARKING LOT - In preparation for the open house the metal posts were placed to indicate car centering. As a result of this, it is anticipated that 40 cars will be aole to park in the parking lot. Depending on the initial months level of business at the park will determine whether the current parking lot i' configured as adequate or if it will need to be expanded as proposed as part of the review. ELECTRICAL UTILITY TERRITORIES - Attachment B is a letter sent to the electric utilities regarding a meeting on territorial areas. Attached also is a letter from Marlow Peterson along with copies of Northern States Power electric rates. NATCTRE CONSERVANCY/BAYS IDE - LPCS LI^^E - As you may recall ' ring the Par ten discussion there was an indication 40 aci^rs cu. owned by the Nature Conservancy adjacent ^ojiis property on the west was being offered for consideration by the City ownership. This will be referred to the Park Commission at their July 1990 meeting. BIG ISLAND TOUR - JUNE 27 - Attachment C was given to Council regarding the upcoming date. Only two persons between Council and Planning Commission have indicated interest in attending this, if so it may be appropriate to delay that ® people can be available. Please contact Jeanne regarding whether you will be able to attend or not. C 35i9 C 3T AL,iSS5 1 12 31^3 II 3StS U 10 9 7 8 7‘ 1 6 13 V 15 16 ^\7 18 % 3 119 33?i )SK>3S1i 3SSi JV ’21 3S 22 ^Sao ON 23 t 3fo8 UJ > < '^4 ___UJ • 1 4-^2 2 Ul > < 3S4<) 10 3t^^ 9 Tf^ us9 8 / KSI < -J 03 L'^R I i53i 3SJ^ 3 -_J I 6 -7 19 COUNT RO\D UJ § 2 24 in 3 3VfS ay;:jy7j 3l«S V 10 1 9 7 6 5 4 3 2 > ———\ t",12 13/ JVw 14 >16 17 18 19 20 21 3986 39it> i ^VE Nl E j f 13 12 1 1 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 1 i ———5 — ’ 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 A ^El JU r .—► i .13 12u 1^"H 9*7 6 S 4 H —>———__ 15 16 17 13 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 NC 15 ^ 1 NAVARRE HEIGHTS STORM SEWER IMPROVEMENTS drainage area ORONO, MINNESOTA l/U aon«tlroo ■••**»*f* A A/Mii, ! Andmrilk A |\J1 A moc I«I«8 Dote: 4/20/89 " Comm. 13046 Fig. No. ' . . . If ' : ' fl7r/K^/ns7.T- C July 27, 1990 City of Orono Attn: Dorthy Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 3 0 1880 Dear Dorthy, Per our phone conversation, I am sending you the information that you reauested for the assessments for the water and sewer lines that I have paid for on lot OlocK 3 in Navarre Hts. PID #17- 1 17-2343-0137 (now PID #17-I I 7-2343-0 ! 50 } Per Mary Sarcoa in the State i_and Deoartment 348-3256 all of tne following pa*./ments were made to Orono in May of the following years. 1982 $757.74 #5303 for residentia 1 water main 1970LW1 1982 295.34 #3309 for lateral sewer 64-IB 1982 12.24 #3302 for Inprec san sewer 63-IB 1983 362.27 #5383 for resident’a’ware’* main 1970LW1 1984 247.98 ff W w C* —for ’■es i dent i a v^ater main I970LW1 .675.97 Tota 1 Please find enclosed a copy o- the sewer assessment for 1968 showing the first year that tne assessment was effective. Your records should show receipt of these funds from the county for forfeit land tax. I had originally oaid 26,000.00 for this property on May 10,_1982 and the assessments for 1982 that I paid were part of the purchase price of the property. ($1,064.82 assessments, $4,935.18 property) This is my formal request for a refund of these assessments. I feel that since this property had been owned by Orono, Hennepin County, and the State of Minnesota, and the fact that you claim to have been using this oS a run off site, th i« property should not have been assessed for these improvements. If you need additional information, please me. feel free to contact .Sincerely, caren 3572 Livingston Ave Wayzata, MN 55391 JU31-TAJL*!* .KMLUTLA£ 11*4. iZLIM.TAA CJttaiT ■B4 U« _____ - 121 1 - __—Ail------- Ai, J* jum JO imr »v #J is 511ltJL.kJ 10 I^T VAM 5EWU *J. iO ____ _____ 76.5* -<10«£4T_!nLj»?tl----------I, ^ TAM______________ ____MU SCM_'f«lir liai 11 ir:_ .:?. i*. — iti» 47,51 777 3 505 ,J S 70^75 47.M 74,55 2000 ^^^^»CULJaiCL£»’iMVAwrf ><ti6HTi •r -:SSS^-47502 .wa^’Ao. ... 4AH^»OL ♦> 10 ^umc-iAK *j^ . UJ **'*i_^S:WLR 4J 18 .,., ^ jf onii rrju. y .■ >.. r:»,C.-' INNOVATIVE ►MICROGRAPHICS DUE TO THE POOR CONDITION OF THE PRECEE'''NG DOCUMENT WE CANNOT PRODUCE AN ACCEPTABLE MICROFILM IMAGE. L City of ORONO resolution of the city council NO. 1314_______ TAX FOP^SITED LAMDS RELEASED FOR PUBLIC CITY ORONO of Orono is a nor.icipaX corporations organized “istlng ^l^der the laws of the State of Minnesota.- and oursuant to Minnesota Statutes of real estate taxes; and WKEKEAS, the Hennepin County Board by the City; and VHiE^AS the_City_C=un=il_nas _ reviewed =J-',,,eing IoeSiafaLes%tents’;e;ai.;V'g l^^ald to the City, and/or for posstbie public -use by the City as authoriteo =y tne t.^.-es. „o,.T I—.-r-TJvvnn? 32 :c HZSCL'.^B Chat the City Council ot tne Citv of Orono! TuTsTa^t to Minnesota, Stat-utes 5^2, hereo-y approves^ the classification ®®=-2.°-^^®,'°3^;°!^";;es^fhe'Dubiio*sale of each conservation lane, and _ur-ne--i»o—t parcel of land as listed below. Release of !”“"!?r=a??:ir rinktr iLiLt'to , an appiicable^zoning provisions', including those be mininat. lot area and minimum lot o^^o^Ms? useable onlv in combination -with otne. _-j0...^ng pa.c—( j:t'S;oS=s*.ag.Tj:.”rsir.Ers by the City. Parcels Released For Sale - Per Hennepin County Letter - August 7, 1981 DISTRICT PLAT PARCELPLAT 41317 P.I.D.LE'UY OUTSTANDING amount due 4250 17-117-23 22 0002 #4048 #5383 T. $3,340.40 2.309.85 $5,650.25 1^-.1- I’ I iF 'a'< CJlty of OROINO resolution of the city council NO. 1314_ _ _ _ DISTRICT PLAT PARCEL P.I.D.LEVY OUTSTANDING amoltjt due 38 41336 3037 36-118-23 44 0002 none 38 4200C 4950 07-117-23 32 0013 #3302 #5382 #6660 38 42060 5000 17-117-23 22 0025 #3302 #4048 #5383 38 42620 5550 06-117-23 41 0085 #5382 38 42620 5600 06-117-23 41 0086 #5382 38 42740 ol/> ( 1 n17-117-23 43 0037 «33C2 ?33C9 i. ; *? c *:• W w w w 38 42740 4650 17-117-23 43 0073 #5333 -0- $ 31.05 2,724,70 550.09 T. $3,305.lTf $ 50.60 3,054.72 1,503.94 T. $4,609.2d $2,844.53 $3,119.02 S 8.80 217.36 £"0.0C $1,096.1c $ 870.00 Adootsd by the City council of tne City of at a ragular raeati.ic held the 1-i - <iay of ^ Seotember------, X981. by a vote of 4 ayes and Q nays. WllliMi VaA iiaft. Mayor ATTEST: Albarta M. Sr'oin, city clerK _ ... 1 1'..._■■.' - - • If--.. yi «M«t fnr II#' wi B, Ml 11.1 tlWlOS mark If I KARrii L curr rrARK N i ka -:m l cwf 5572 LIVIMGuIWI AVE HAVZAIA rtl 55391 lots 16 AMO 17 TAXADLE MARKEr RROSS 1AX CAPACIiy met tax CAPACIIY R eiiial tax IF rnoj AMF MAHIyASMU •ir 096 00000059,0.0105 -r,AVARRf „r,c„TS» , 000.00 !77 5 siAur.! cum,nil 00,900 1,061 409 TAX levY/OEscnipTiori GROSS TAX STATE PAID AID MACA QUALir iwG AIIT FO SMArLD 1C FO AREA RAIE IF P»’ ’JECr flu. A39.Au OOOOOOOO IIIISIDPOTYP rate •• R 89.0730 26.9620 total iA total PAID AMOUlir 1,005.30 151.0iCR SIO.OOCR A39.66 .00 Division fio Division DATE 00102 11/00 RTF ID S 17-117-23 63 0036 17-117-23 63 0057 lAIII) 10,000 niDG 50,100 flAC'l Olffl^i 1 on 11L tli I ii I li COttSTRUCTiai YEAR DASEI BASE2 MUDASE 609 NOM-IWST AMT UMPAID A39.66 August 20,'•^0 Aug 21 1990City of Orono Attn: John Gerhardson PO Box 66 Crystal Bay. 55323 Dear John, Per my phone conversation with liark Bernhardsont he has requested me to submit a list of people that have had pT*oblems with excess water in their basements due to the run off on Livingston Ave. Don & Evelyn Lange Grove Hts Mark & Karen Cuff Elizabeth Balter Jamt 3mith Mark Spag1ding Robert Peters John Rosholt 1600 1st Bc.nk PI Paul Anderson 3533 Crystal PI Robert Paige 3493 Crystal PI Please note that the majority of the homes that are affected on Crystal Place di»-ectly north of our property is due to thr imount of water that runs cf through lot 17 on block 3. The he s that, are Just to the north west of lot 17 get flooded from the excess water that backs up off of the street in front of our house and then proceeds north down our drive way (lot 16 block 3) through our back yard and then on to their prope'"tv. The Lange's vlots 8,9, & 10 block 3) are having an extensi**e amount of water flow onto their property and into their basement wnen the water backs up. The water enters the south end of lot 9 block 3, flows over their retaining wall like a water fall, cnen proceed^ to run into their Ave 3585 Crystal P 1 Daniel Radford Ave 1246 90th St E 1 nver 3593 Crystal PI Ave Lupe Gomez Ave 3488 Li . ingston Ave Dean Young Ave 3555 Crystal PI .enevieve Ebert W 3520 L i V i ngstor.Ave Davie: Re inhold 3551 LiVingston Ave es Donna1 Meyers Bancnie Ave 3585 LiVingston Ave Cherv . Gou1et 3485 C-ystai ■■’1 " A s This causes water to enter their basement and has •'' > damaged landscaping around their home^ only 7 years foundation. damaged 1 an».-——t-• ■ a. — —old and they feel that this drain system is very necessary. Dean Young (lot 7 block 3) has a trench doug around his home that is quite large. The amount of water that runs though lot 17 has caused serious erosion to his property and water in his basement. He would like to build a garage on his property, but knows that he can not build one due to the amount of water that runs around his property. James Smith (lot 15 block 3) has had damage to his driveway due to the amount of water that runs through the west side of our property. His drive way is attached to ours. Our drive way has been sinking the last few years and is causing his drive way to sink and crack along with it. Elizabeth Balter (lot 9 block 4) is having the end of her driveway washed away every time it rains. Due to the amount of water standing in the street and because the water is so deep on the north side of the street, everyone drives on the end or her drive way packing it down and causing the water to move further into her drive way. Mark Spalding (lots 23 & 24 block 5) gets run off from the homes on lots 1,2, S3 block 4. These lors are on higher ground and causes the water to flow across the sc-eet into the front or h i s house, forcing the water to enter their basement. Ir a curb or berm was placed across the south end of their property it would cause all the water to flow down Livingston Ave into the future storm system. Daniel Radford (lot 11 block 3) has water r jnning off of the street on Crystal Place into the northwest corner of his house. This is causing water to enter the crawl space. He that ir that area is wet for an extended period of time, it wi11 cause structural damage to the floor Joisrs. Paul Anderson (lots 3.4 & 5 block 3) has water pooling in the low spots on the west side of his property due to the amount of water from lot 17. The culvert in the street in front of his property is not large enough to handle the amount of water. John Rosholt (lots I & 2 block 3) has had quite a bit of water in the south east corner of his basement. The water comes off or Navarre Ln down the drive way. then enters though the foundation. By looking at the water marks on the sheet rock in the basement there has been between 2 and 4 inches of water in most of the basement. Lupe Gomez (lots 11.12. & 13 block 2) has water entering the south west corner in his basement. Either the water 9°®® ' through the culvert or over Livingston Ave across the yard and enters the basement. He feels that if the culvert was removed* and a curb or ber^ was InstaHed around that corner of his property, the water would flow into the future storm system instead of his basement. Donna Meyers Banchiedot 10 block 4) has had water entering her basement from surrounding property and from some of the run off on Livingston Ave. Other people that live on higher ground that have signed the petition realize that the run off from their property is causing an excessive amount of water to be forced through our property. One feels that curb and gutter world be the best solution, but knows it is not economically feasible in this neighborhood. Others are having water problems in their basements due to higher ground around them. Robert Picha, 5930 Seamans Dr. has stated to me that he will not volunteer his signature but will pay the assessment if the project goes through. There are a few others that own rental property in the area that feel the same way. There response was to increase the tenants rent to pay for tne project. Most of the residents in the area feel that there is a real drainage problem on Livingston Ave in general. As for Mark and I, we have warer on 3 sides of our house, and flowing through both of our lots (16 & 17 block 3) most every time it rains. Our sump pump is running continuously when we get more than 1/4 inch of rain and it can not keep up with the amount of water coming in. This causes water zo stand in our basement anywhere from 1 to 4 inches of overflow from the sump pump hole. The amount of water standing in the street is causing damage to the street its-self. The asphalt is breaking and sinking. During the winter months any melting turns to a frozen lake. This is a hazard to anyone driving or walking over this area. It has also created an un-safe play area for the neighborhood chi1dren. Anyone with water in their basements more than once in a great while looses resale value of their property. If this drainage system was installed it would correct this problem for may residents of the area. I have not been able to speek to everyone on the list for the assessed project. Between my schedule and their's It is not easy to get a hold of everyone. I look forward to meeting with you on August 22 at my over any questions and show you the areas affected. home to go Sincerely, Karen Cuff r.* cc: Mark Bernhardson Anthony Gieekel m CITY OF ORONO NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING A public hearing will Le conducted on September 24, 1990, at 7:30 P.M. in the Orono Council Chambers, 1275 Brown Road South. 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 with reference to the proposed improvement will be heard at this meeting. Dorothy M. Hallin City Clerk Published in the Laker and Pioneer newspaper the week of September 10, 1990 and September 17, 1990. i-i r.: August: 9, 1990 City of Orono Attn: John Gerhardson Box 66 Crystal Bay. MN 55323 Dear John, Per our phone conversation, please find enclosed the petition for the storm drain system on Livingston Ave. in Navarre. I have twelve signatures in total. Most of the people that have signed this petition requested that the city should expedite this matter as soon as possible. We feel that the weather pattern of the area since spring could possibly mean a heavy snow season. If this is the case, there are several of us that could have major damage to our property and basements due to the excessive snow. (this summer has been quite an experience to most of us) This drain needs to be installed before the ground freezes. This has been a lengthy project for my-self and the city. I feel that I have done my part in obtaining 38.7% of the property owners in the area to agree to be assessed for this project. Per the council minutes of May 29, 1990 ’’the city maintains its position of agreeing to order the storm sewer project if 35% of the residents agree to sign a petition asking for the project.” Please put this request to proceed with the storm sewer project on the city council agenda possible. I look forward to future. for the earliest meeting date hearing from you in the very near Sincerely, Karen Cuff 3572 Livingston Ave Wayzata, MN 55391 cc: Mark Bernhardson Anthony Gleekel PETITION We, the undersigned, hereby petition for the installation of a storm drain to be located at 3572 Livingston Ave. This drain will go through Block 3, Lot 17 on the easterly edge and go north to Crystal Place and flow into the swamp. This will be brought before the City Council of Orono at the next meeting. This will collect all run off between Navarre Ln. Haine Ave. -Cl Signa collect all run off between Navarre i,n. j wi tneias and Address \ y:\wmmmocumf D te Znr''n<>s~7t^ fAC-1>L ■ 1^0 /jg/AX^Sr^ ,s-/4-3<^ 3^-30-?^ ^7 -J-?b 7-/ HU-9!'-C rfA A- y O v/zs-ho if- 7- fC> mim To: Mark E. Bernhardson, City Administrator Froa: John R. Gerhardson, Public Works Director Dabe: May 25, 1990 Subject:: Drainage Problem - 357 2 Livingston Avenue - Mark and Karen Cuff 52590.5HD \ ^ v) /1?' 'jO In 1989, the City of Orono received a request from Mark and Karen Cuff, 3572 Livingston Avenue, to assist them in correcting a drainage problem so that they may construct an addition to their home. After several meetings and feasibility study, the matter was tabled to allow the Cuffs additional time to perform soil testing to determine contamination to the soil as a result of the run-off from the neighborhood to the Cuff's property. The Cuffs have performed the testing which is inconclusive regarding contamination and have now hired an attorney to help them convince the City to perform a storm sewer project as proposed in the feasibility study.. Mr. Tony Gleckel, attorney, and Mark and Karen Cuff will be in attendance on May 29, discuss the matter. ^ To: Mayor Grabek & Orono Council Members From: Mark E. Lernhardson, City Administrator as >rney, ^ iOAto ^ ^Wn v'.f, I ' N/-'-' , Forward recommending the Council continue with the offer as originally proposed. This is in part based on t.he Council's action regarding drainage issues in other areas of the City. The Cuff’s are not precluded from constructing a detached garage bv usThq a private solutioiv^f either a swale or piping. ];i^\they d^esire to ini, j^' i^te a lawsu.'t, such would be referred to ^u A ^ vy ■ \, y' \j ^ I ' .1- \J yj V 'jY vy ^ 11 >> V'- ■ • AiCHAivo siecet. josiAM c. aniLU u" jAMca m. OR«uPNCi» acRALO S- ourrv WOOD R. rOSTCR, JR. THOMAS M. OOOOMAN R. CRAIO WIUORANO JOHN S. WATSON WM. CHRISTORHCR PCNWCLU hurray r. muanc SUSAN M. VO(GT BRUCC HCOOCOCK (CATHUCCN a . CONNCLUY STCVCN U. SCHCCHTMAN* ANTHONY J. OLCCKCI. SHCRRI U. SRICK BRIAN E. WCISBCRC 16793-JW Ljkw orriCCS SIEGEL. BRILL, GREUPNER & DUFFY. P.A. roRHCRwr QROSSmam . KARLINS. SICCCL S BRILL SUITE 1350 lOO WASHINGTON SQUARE MINNEAPOLIS. MINNESOTA 55-lOi TCLER n CNC l«l2) 339-7I3I TCLCCOPICR iBI2J 339-BS0I May 21, 1990 HAND DELIVERED pcnpco M. L. GROSSMAN. PA. SHELDON D KARLINS. PA. •aomittco in kasmington Only V . .« The Honorable Mayor Grabek and Members of the City Council City of Orono 1335 South Brown Road Orono, MN 55323 Re: City Council Agenda Items for Tuesday, May 29, 1990: Mark and Karen C'if f Drainage Problems The Honoradale Mayor Grabek and Members of the City Council: Our firm represents Mark and Karen Cuff of 3572 Livingston Avenue, legally described as Let 16 and 17, Block 3, Navarre Heights (collectively referred to as "Property"). The purpose of this letter is to set forth the facts supporting the Cuff's request that the City commence assessments to fund the construction of storm sewer improvements, which will alleviate water drainage problems on the Proper>-.y and adjacent properties. In 1982, at the suggestion of JoAnne Ellen Herr of the Orono City Council, Tom Jacobson former Orono City employee, and members of the City planning staff, Karen Cuff purchased Lot 17 from Hennepin County. Councilwoman JoAnne Herr, the planning staff and Orono City employees made representations that Lot 17 was buildable and that there would be no problem in obtaining a building permit. Hennepin County was placing Lot 17 up for auction and it was the City's desire to have the Cuff's purchase the lot instead of a prospective developer. The lot was undersized and any development would have required a variance. In order to avoid a variance application the City suggested that Ms. Cuff purchase Lot 17. The Honorable Mayor Grabek and Members of the City Council May 21, 1990 Page 2 Ms. Cuff decided to buy Lot 17, in part, because of the City's representations that the lot would be perfect for an addition to the homestead or for a garage, and that obtaining a building permit would not be a problem. At the time the City made its representations. City records regarding Lot 17 did not indicate that the Property was a drainage site for water run-off. However, the City has since taken the position that the Property has always been considered a drainage area or natural waterway. The Cuff's Property has become the site for excess water run-off from city streets, thus seriously impairing the Cuff's use of the Property. Moreover, the City has informed the Cuff's that a building permit will not be issued for the Property until the water drainage problem is cured. The water drainage problem and the City's refusal to issue building permits have prevented the Cuff's from improving their existing homestead. Had Ms. Cuff been aware cf the drainage problem and the possibility of not obtaining a building permit, she would not have purchased Lot 17. The Cuff's have made a valiant effort to work with the City to solve these problems. Pursuant to City procedure, the Cuff's submitted a written request seeking assistance in correcting the Property's drainage problem. At City Council meetings of February 27, March 27, April 24, and May 22, of 1989, the Cuff's request came before the City Council. During the time period between February and May 1989, the City completed a feasibility study to determine the manner and costs associated with solvirig the drainage problem. The City's consulting engineers and architects completed a study, and proposed a storm sewer improvement project with a price tag of $30,250.00. The Cuff's were then directed to obtain at least thirty-five percent (35%) of all property owners within the designated drainage district to consent to an assessment for the project. It was the City's position, that without the consent of the thirty-five percent (35%) of the Property owners, the City could not proceed with assessments for the sewer system project. Due to the high cost of the proposed assessments, the Cuff's were unable to obtain the required number of signatures. Prior to the time the final vote was made on the storm sewer project, the Cuff's informed the City that their two dogs had developed cancer, and that the cancer may have been caused by contaminants contained in the street water run­ off. Accordingly, prior to the time the City Council made a r- *• - Vi V .v • The Hcnorahle Mayor Grabek and Members of the City Council May 21, 1990 Page 3 final vote on the sewer system project, the Cuff’s decided to have tests comoleted to determine whether the Property was contaminated.' The Cuff's have expended considerable amounts of time and money in having the tests completed, and have provided the results of the tests to the City. The tests, thus far completed, establish that there are no unsafe contaminants on the Property. However, the testing company has suggested that further tests must be completed in order to provide conclusive evidence that the Property is not contaminated. The Cuff's have attempted to work with t.he City to come up with a less expensive solution to the drainage problem. The City has steadfastly refused to build a storm drain at its expense, or to alleviate the drainage problem on the Property by some other, less expensive alternative. The City's position lie-- in the face of its knowledge that the proposed storm sewer system will alleviate the drainage problem for the Cuff's Property as well as other properties West of County Road 19 and North of County Road 15. Because the cost of the City's proposed sewer system is e.xorbitant, and beyond the Cuff's means to pursue themselves, the Cuff's feel that their only hope lies in the hand? of the members of the City Council. At this time, t.he Cuff's request that the City Council vote to assess all property owners within the drainage district and construct the proposed storm sewer system. We are aware that the City's historical position is that all Property owner's must take care of individual flooding problems themselves. However, the City Council's decision in this case must take into account the unique facts surrounding the Cuff's purchase of Lot 17, as well as the fact that the City added to the drainage problem. The Cuff-s pioc-;.^" warrants affirmative vote to their request. Finally, our client has further advised us that if the City refuses to commence assessment procedures and construction of the storm sewer system, that a lawsuit may be imminent. It is our position t.hat the Cuff's have claims against the City which include but are not limired to negligent misrepresentation and fraud surrounding the City's representations and admissions mado to the Cuffs in regard to their purchase of Lot 17; and, liability for creation of a nuisances, trespass, and the taking of the Cuff's Property. We ask the City Council to vote in favor of proceeding, with the storm sewer project as it will not only prevent The Honorahle Mayor Grabek and Members of the City Council May 21, 1990 Page 4 further problems for the Cuffs, but will alleviate a drainage problem in the entire drainage area set forth by the City's engineers and architects. We appreciate your consideration. Respectfully yours, Anthony J. Gleekel AJG/tmt cc: Mark and Karen Cuff —.% >• © MINUTES OF THE ORONO COUNCIL MEETING OP MAY 22, 1989 '"30LICS SUPERVISORY IMPLEMENTATION CONTINUED ^ lore rapidly, he would be happy co adjust accordingly. Councilmember Nettles questioned whether option 2 would utilize the same process used for selecting the second supervisory position? Kilbo replied than the process wc-.la ce very similar. It was moved by Mayor Grabeb, seconded by Councilmember Nettles, to accept the information from the Police Chief regarding his imolementation plan for the third supervisor. Motion, Ayes=3, Peterson, Nay due to the further delay. Mavor Grabek took this opportunity to commend the Police Department for their efforts regarding a medical emergency involving Ms. Charlotte Hill. She wrote_a setter to .he C^t/ indicating that the responding Police Oriicers nad saved he. life. ACCESSORY STRUCTURE MORATORIUM City Administrator Bernhardson presenteo an interim ordinance drafted by the City Attorney. Bernhardson said tha. the recommendation is for a 90-day duration period. Councilmember Goetten asked if a moratorium was required with everv ordinance amendment. She e.-<?ressed her aisli.<e or .moratoriums and questioned whether this particular cne__ was -•‘ecessary? Zoning Administrator Maousth interjected .ha. the ■moratorium should have been placed on accessory structures two years ago. Goetten concurred with Mabustn adding .hat it se-med senseless to propose a moratorium when the amendment was only weeks from adoption. City Attorney Barrett explained that the reason for proDOsing a moratorium would be in the event an applicant had rights under the existing ordinance, the City could not deny the Application. He said that the City did not have the right to delay an applicant merely on the premise of an upcoming ordinance amenLent. A moratorium allows the City to legally delay an action pending an ordinance amendment. Barrett further explaine that if the City delayed an appli-^ation which in some for resulted in dSnag^e to tL applicant, the City could be sued if a moratorium did not exist. It was moved by Mayor Grabek, seconded by Councilmember Hetties, to table ^his^matter to the June 12, 1989 Council Meeting. Motion, Ayes-4, Nays=0, Motion passed. “^^“Ad^st^“ernhardson provided a brief review of this aVp^lica“tion? The results of the .feasibility ^ were “U:rvrd^n%^r‘m^%i\^^Vo ^aU^^^lk^rer^ MINUTES OF THE ORONO COUNCIL MEETING OP MAY 22, 1989 LIVINGSTON AVENUE DRAINAGE CONTINUED City. The Cuffs are concerned about above-ground drainage due to the possibility that the runoff niay be contaminated. Ms. Cuff said that she would be more comfortable if she knew that the runoff was clean. She said that the majority of the neighbors preferred the over-ground drainage and were concerned about cost and the required easements nvolved with the underground project. Mayor Grabek asked about the agreement regarding payment of the feasibility study? Bernhardscn informed him that should the storm sewer project be abandoned, the Cuff's would pay for half of the study. i'layor Grabek suggested tabling this matter until the Cuff's and the City obtained more information regarding each proposal. Mr. Curt Thostenson said that he was concerned about the impact that either prop al would have on residents at the end of the drainage area. City Engineer Cook replied that the water would run across the tra and down into a ditch on the north side of the tracks. Mr. Robert Paige asked where the storm sewer would be located between Livingston and Navarre Avenues? Cook replied that it would run north to Crystal Place and then west across the railroad tracks. It was moved by Mayor Grabek, seconded by CounciImember Nettles, to table this matter. Motion, Ayes=4, Nays=0, Motion passed. PLANNING COMMISSION/CODNCIL JOINT MEETING NAVARRE* This was a reminder of the upcoming joint .meeting on June 1, 1989, at 6:00 p.m. BOARD OF REVIEW RECONVENE MEETING MAY 24, 1969, 7:00 P.M.* It was moved by Counci1member Goetten, seconded by CounciImember Peterson, to accept the information regarding the Board of Review reconvening date at 7:00 p.m.. May 24, 1989. Ayes»4, Nays=0, Motion passed. ADMINISTRATOR'S INFORMATION* It was moved by CounciImember Goetten, seconded by Councilmember Peterson, to accept the City Administrator's Information regarding: Highway 12-Safety Improvement; ‘ 1972 Shadywood Road; Spring Managers Conference; Highwood Storm Sewer; Ferndale Marsh Fire; Camp Teko; Spring Clean Dp; Metro Waste/Weekend Construction; and 4460 North Shore Drive. Motion, Ayes*4, Nays»0, Motion passed. , V- > .• V a: - \ I I I T - - . V..- -, V-■• ■ • •• i:- 'ri m t*- -.'. ^ .••'.V City of Orono Council Members The fo:lowing people petition the City of Orono to evaluate the purchase of a surface drainage easement from the owners of Lot 17, Bit 3 Navarre Heights, to provide a means of removing excess water from Livingston Avenue. We feel the relatively small volume of water does not justify such a large expense of over $30,000. We feel tht^ i small surface easement for a much smaller amount of money would be adequate. We also feel that the expense of providing for removal of water from the street should be paid for by the city. Just as the coat of snow removal is paid for by the city. Let’s Iteep It simple and less expensive. 8. 9 10.^ 11. 12., 13. 25. 26. 27. 28. 29. 30. 14., 15., 16., 17. V • ’. . . . * • ♦ r v- C *.*T m J Wi -K.- , • ; -4. .^or * T ::si 3533 CrvBtoJ Placf! Orono. 55391 21 1989 - -I Orono CUT Council Meaber* Orono Citr Kail CTT*tAl Bar toad Orono, yw 55391 To th« Cltr Cocrcll .'teaber*; It ha* coao to ar attention that on TV»*dav, ytir :3rd. then* will be a public hearing to decide w+iet.her or not to have a itora «e«*r draina*e ■raten placed In the Navarre Heitht* Addition. I aa i*«ble to attend Tueadar’a neetin*. and aa placln* thl* letter with the Co»*icll to *lve ar vleva. I vnderatand that the Cltv't atudy ahowa that the preferred location for an utllltr eaaeaent for the atom aewer to alleviate uiter probleaa for our neighborhood la through a>' property. The cu-rent naioff situation doe* not affect aa odx-eraely, but br Improving the neighborhood, it will only help ua all. I aa in favor of having the ■tom tewer ayatea laillt If it will alleviate the problea on Llvlngaton Av'enuo. But I Juat recently jairchaaed thi* property and the adjacent lot, and I am not In fbvor of nor do 1 have the budget for additional eatiaated aasenaaent* to ay parcel In ercesa of t2,000. Therefore, I will grant a utility eaaeaent over the eaaterly 15 feet of ay hoaeateaded property provided that: 1. there ahuij-l be no aaaea»aent« placed agalnat my property, and 2. the property will be returned to It* current condition (including ■ceding or sodding I. These are the tern* vaider which I will greuit the eascaent. This Is ay stance on the issue and although I hope the problea oon be resoU-ed for the Cuffs and their adjacent property esmers, I don't feel it is to arr benefit and therefore would only grant the eaaeaent provided there »«■ no coat to aa. Sincerely, I Paul Ril iM h : ;■ •'■■■ rp ''i ft'/■Ir’,-/ fy 'j: • V' » —■ ' ' -0- - /•*t ^ »nmv.m3.n^ / -------- „ „ „ ''^'i » . c. ., ... l'-'T.s ■- ,*;;::-<.>tr*. rc.'T;v;., y y 'i m•<*- ,j--.>-^' V a »"■ ":.rarr -;3 TOi Mark B. B«mh«rd»on, City Administrator PBOMi John R. Carhardton, Public Worka Diractor DATBi May 19» 19S9 SOBJt Livingston Avanua Storm Sawar On April 24, 1989, Council accaptad a faaalbllity raport from tha City Snginaar ragarding a storm watar runoff problaai at 3572 Livingston Avanua. Tha faaaibility raport was tha raault of a patition from Nark and Karan Cuff of tha abova sddrass raquasting a aolution to tha flooding problaas thay hava axpariancad aftar noraal to haavy rainfalls. Following tha April 24, 1989, Council Mooting, staff suppliod inforaation to Karan Cuff to axhibit to tha affoctod proparty ownors ragarding location of a atom sawar and costs par lot. Sinca that tiao, naighbors of tha Cuff's hava subaittod praliainary skatch plans of sn sltomatlvo to tha stora sowar by diraeting tha stora watar abova ground to tha cnlvart Inlat on Crystal Placa. Ragardlass of which option is takan, oaaaaanta froa tha Cuffs, as wall as sll propartias sffoctad downstraaa, will hava to obtainod. Cuffs hava also subaittod information objocting to an abova- ground drainagaway and wish to procaad with an uadarground atora sawar systoa. Tha inforaation praaontad by tha Cuffs on Friday tha 19th ia additional inforaation that staff and Council has not had tiaa to raviaw. Rocoaaandationi To accopt tha inforaation froa tha Cufffa and tabla any action on thla nattar until staff has had tiaa to raviaw and raport to Council tha offact, if any, ragarding chaaicala boing diachargad onto tha Cuffs' or neighboring propartiaa. FroDosad Motiont It wan aovad by to table any action on this nattar until there has bean fvrthar staff raviaw ragarding chaaicala being discharged onto the Cuffs' or neighboring propartias. TOi FROM I Mayor and City Council Nark B. Bamhardaon, City Adninlatrato Forwarded raconmanding tabling as proposed /9 ,T^ ■ -U :.'j: :-;vv'. r: ;'<^r" ■■■ ■- 1989 City of Orono Attnt Council Members ao* 8*Crystal Bay, MN 55323 Bonotabla Mayor 6 Council Maabar*; «• orlclnally can# to you for aaalatanca In tha drainaga nrobfa. Ci ara haainq. Aa atatad in tha past, dua to tha r^ Sff if our naighborhJod, our proparty bloOc 3. lota 1« and 17 has baa^usad for a drainaga aita. At this ti.a aa ara unabla to obtain a building paralt to furthar davalop our proparty. \11 tha^run off has cauaad proparty d«aga to our dtlsaway, ground arroaion, and aacaaa flooding In our baaaaant. Ma hava slnca found anothar poaalbla haaard,{n tha back of our proparty carrlaa contaainants auch.T«U «: .?.»? «.d chaalcals. Laat Moraabar itf our two uoga daaalopad tuaors at tha saaa tlaa. In ®*®*^*' *► auraarv Ona had four tuaora raaoaad. tha othar had a t««e jro.ln. tu«or tn«t tgcn.d out to 0. ei^iJo”. .ir<lltt.r.nt br.«l. .nd dUt.fnt J,.., hut thav hava llaad at out praaant addraaa about tha ?2«th tlia. in April of this yaar tha ona that had cancar dlad This cauaad grajt concarn to ua in that aa aay ba cil^I.tlT. cS«iJal build up fro. tha runoff and poor drainaga on our proparty. N. C..1 th.t . pot.ntl.l h..lth h...td >.y «f« “• or for futura childran tt aoda point In tlaa If this drainaga problaa la not corractad. Tour final TOta of 'yaa* on tha installation of tha proposad :;o« ij:in oi MaJ I^nd 1. nj|ca..ary to ^ out a atoo to our concarna and claan-up of tha soli fSSlJ JS2.ne.. out ptop.tty .could WT ‘"talts for tha nalghborhood’a watar, road salt, and laan chaaileals. t haaa aubolttad plcturaa In tha paat ahowing tha aatar that flows through both of «« ?Jf^SJa?ionaatar that stands in tha ■ttaat. X ha^ atta^^ inflation froo parlodlcala on lawn chaolcal hayrda* chaoical If^tadiantt found at awary hardwara and gar dan ■*»oP» ^taat. and tha lab raaults of our dogs tuoors. X hops you wiax taka tha tlaa to raad thao and undarstand our concarna. Thank you* nark a mSIm Cuf 3S72 Llwlngaten i nark 3572 Nayaata* MM Cuff Ava SS391 \ \\ . ->v '.S—•. 'J .. . f -v>r V ."If-' '7 . ^ \ * >■: •.. 7.- . .‘.r** ^ ^ ^ Vt. : ■, -■ J ■ J _ i• C. /T . • i; I iW-'*« a II,af: fl I II. . mm ■■ ■■.JL ~r I '#.. ^ * . -:?5*:i^'1 2,4 01c.1ioroph«no*yac®tic Acid 2,(2-H*tfiyl 4 Chlocoph«no*y) Ortho <»8»d 8» Gong! Accxv* xngreoencs; Oinaehylaain* salt of Dlaaehylaain* salt of Propionic Acid mart inqradants; Bquil to 9.0% 2,4 Olchlorophanoxyacstic Acid Xsoasr Spacific by AOAC Method $.0ol-5 Bquil to 9.6% MCPO 2,(2 Nethyl-4H:hlorophenoxy) Propionic Acid Danger I Corrosive to eyes, harmful if swalloved, avoid skin and clothing contact. Do Mot Induce vcaltting. Consult Doctor. Ortho Kleen-uoi laopropyiaame salt of Glyphosate 5% !l-(Phosphonooethyl) '"'veins 95% Round-up I Isopropyl amine salt of Glyphosate 18% M-(Phosphonomethly) Glycine Ortho Brush-a-ConeI Triciopyr U,^,6 Trichloro 2-Pyr id inyloxyacstic Acid) Trietbylamine salt 3% Inert ingredents 92. Ct equil to 5.7% Acid Ortho Vegetation Killeri PrcxseeonirSTr 2*Miithoky-4,6-bis( Isopropyl amino) -S-Traxine Pruiitol Weed % ^ed by Greenthuabi Active ingredentsi Dlaethylamine salt of 2,4-oichlorophenoxyacetlc Acid Dlmethylamlne salt of 2 (2-Methyl-4-Chlorophenoxy) Propionic Acid Dlaethylamine salt 2-(2,4-Olchlorophenoxy) Inert ingredentsf 2,4-Dicnlopophenoxyacetlc Acid 2-(Methyl-4 -Chlorophenoxy) Proponle Acid 2-(2,4-Oichlorophenoxy) By Isomer Triamine In undergoing ay researc have much controversy in One of the ehealeals, 2* linked to be a cancer ca It caused aoft tissue ss; non-hodgktns lymphoma, form of soft tissue saroi from the or 0 phosphor! IS to know 1 cause a ^■1 ihSKSiv 'Ji- i; ^ V" '^rCr- - „ -. i ■yi r**'.'- VV . ’•?■ * ' -^iS' sUt-^t-;.-.::-:::, „c| ni!?! pinpoint th* haiardoua ch.micals and tl.Ir taat on tha dogs tuaora show that sjininiAa F^r US to find out if th. dog that va atill hava is woHld"hI!*f,^ ^3ticidas tha cost would ba $140.00 ~his rr .p I”spaclflc chaaicals. TT>is would cost approsiaataly $500.00. th#s* t»sts MCfonitd. Wa yoa'd «rMl Kat* . fi vNt:;v -: ^vv ; iteai .&*•■■_•' *>ia5 SOIL THS7 REPORT UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA SOIL TESTING LABORATORY -;jFT Jarj uivi.swSTf:;. Avt W.LTiArA, -N 3i^*l SO.I Sci*«*«-t C#OJ">T*««t *4KTurtuf»i SUtio»t Cooo«»»«'"t Reoort NO; HbonfcryNO: l^6wO 0*uR»c«tv«J; 0 3/39/J'* Oit# R#oort«<l: 33/iO/U) Si mmMm Soil Test R«sult3 Samoio Otsifr'ot'on i Toil Tojrtura Soil pH Bulfor InOto O'fsnic Virttf f» I r\ 1 jw'wwiw » p^o^ononisiPof•^S'um| Sons l (Ib/A) 1 (ib/A) ,(mmfios)| .1^1 I l-a.-i /. 2 f^cJlUM I UO*-*3*Z C.i\ • OLSEN - Pwm Si ■a » ........... ¥j - Phosphorus (P),..,. Potassium (K),,..,. Solubia Salts............... interpretation op soil tests M Madium ipppPPPPAPRR >»*»p*PPPi RECOMMENOATIONS pnai MfluE T . ‘•'1 LAkHS^ Ll.td n»L./'*.lC.NOArrUN* .‘iCME AECQ.tPEnCeU r;i- A-inoNT :f each puamt mutris ?^ ro --------------- --------------“^“Tsj ♦ PH.iSPHArc_<Pi:J3»_> -HEftruCRY SLUtGKASS PUFA2M (K2u) • w '.i: * •» ■rJ ••5 ♦ 0.0 CO./XOOO so.«. *'’-■■? accc.^«.«co *.icu«T. uf - 1/3 olf3o|U auo }* i"0 *ic fol: t'A ilEISli Si *??uts 2‘fSrf« 'iSr Is .«o «uv Ij. ,r li ...wo-HaH/Co r»f t« /.ariu:« oe t«o.uu».t. «'«« '*•'“ "" *=“- THt SLLJoLC iAtrS TEST INOlCATESl NO SALT PACULfcM fcAlSTS. to'y M .i - . .;v>4 ' -4 " 1 ^■4 S«»«Y5 «Cf4 ILPIN ar aMItlMi i«»armat»on eawtct your •wntyCnanamnAiami^fj -UiiAAS ol2 5a :-1-**T aacaoat; TS>«t ■ m ast^war I m (M amouM of t mmm ^>gk'V>'- .T* '•^ ' 33?&^'Jl55.v-r.. . :T>j^y-7 ^ lO.dO eusTOMn con 'Y*'r 7'^—-' d v-i , .'V i '-V •, '--'r »■■*—,, »..r.*-^ “7 I -if^;'-d UNrVERSrTY OF MINNESOTA [ rwTNcrne? I IC*ren Cuff U^yzata. MN MiTYiMota Vmtnntrf Ot»gr>o«oc i-ifloniort** Co«*C« crt Vt»»nn«f)r M*copi« 1»43 C4UW *v«no« St Piu. MmoMOM 5S1M (912I62MW Date: Oecsnt>er 22, 1988 Long LMC i<etenn«ry Clinic 1854 W. trtyzata 81 vd. Box 10 Long Lake, mn 55356 "Accession No.: 088-33078 Received: 12-20-88 Species: canine Breed: Sex: H Age: 6 yr, 8 yr Weight: 90#, 75# Herd/Flock Size: Clinic*! Signs: j ' * Specimen: m One fixed ikm mass and small fragments of a second mass v^re received. cr«««- The larger mass was brownish-white, firm, smooth, spherical, and «!,ur« I c. in al».wr. in. fr.,«n« «r, Mr. rM tn bra.n. ulctnnath* The first mass is partially encapsulated and consists of sheets andHistopath. [;• ^eli; separated by moderate to abundant matu^ fibJoul connective tissue. Fat cells are detected at all margins of the mass. The second mass is an unencapsulated ' cells are closely spaced and fona urge sneesj or strw^in^ w«.... '"’^'•The various sized and spindled to stellate cells hate a moderate '_ __ Mt_»n jmeNoBhllic cytoplasm, one fi^r.. *I”pl,M*t«l'iMt”l”'«n5'occiiiM.I Mcrepn.,,. rtien eontil^ varioussized golden brown intracytoplasmic granules. There are two to four mitotic figures per (x 400). Comments : Simiaary: \ .•.*; ;•>.'--'v>‘- :;y>?: . - .. __'.V.‘**^v*.>,-*’^<»>-‘ - u v *,‘.- - V . v^-> « -» Pi V,>*vr*- •-•*‘' ^ r^:. •':? :c I vn»«t A/« Lawn Car* C?»*mic**« ‘ MvwArvTTwyUaa^ niiiiii *iitlTl"'------ ‘—’■■^'•••■^* ^ .Vfrtrtrt Ljn« C»« If* *ucst*nc« uwa oy "'^'O ujnttO—.Ijwwryqwg^c^*^'*^”*^ oingiara ,i*gda whU •»• oilrt fHiiTnnti to fwo t* gnn axa wfOfmctvn p»*wm-w r«w, Otf ai* *B»n«ra( uat* orocx:*— laOMtf E/Twe nrnafKH Piofacson Aqy>gME^) cofv ^'sz:ssssi:^'zsr^ inowat9imwmm»9taf»raontmxjm. sssssssss^srs^s^"•J—gowiqou»o<pif--w^inayr<ne> OuiorMi growwo « a OfvtqrMi Q0« «niai M oonadvid ■ *w(L ConvaniM ,auiff M(awwaamoioetKtienaaaw f<i^—cn j]Qi ii fiirn ^ ~~ r*-^-** H*rt>w« c» b« 0« roi »»imo w«»K "H)* wdary o—Q i»wi f’»' ^4.0M3o• «MM.f<ona*aet Tvahaft>cdwWt»gypfWMWW^ iMWiaiaia<Kvioir>ayeant»u«>dt>a«ortny ^ l««i»» »«b««o ovarrun Oy »^'<J»waw« pw* wiat gi—■ Wwwf*rt^ad«aar*P<waf>CfTnonwin*lcontro< bwatfartwawtteyd^njow^nwc^ana □lunrtpfOMMW Sof*vwq.<aon>{>foo»t^ »«j^ SoM 0W» w*#a control tw«ra«:^ncgr yff^a0». to w«rng « o«*o tfi# fiw»wd DrotanaO 6y corrv rweal cam eomoaraaa maartcWaa contrc* nwaanca naaea w>cn imfffa wnriiri- t~-—u/uoa !/#»>#iwvaaoi6aai«aaiuehaaJaoanaaaeaaaat.Mayoa*- jaa(JunaOugaj. cflafara. ano oatJuQs mai cama^ SSWiaaSajongrasaf^ •vaMra « na enng and »ai *<nan C~f ba aPM uo cacjuaa ma rooti r^ava oaan cut Oy UiWwff* wtwton naroodtt. »na naac!«aJa forinu- ianv«(ganartfr ma nignar concamranorw) ara data* haotariaaaaaaouaaoniyovcaftrf^dacoi catora. na fariirrana"f vntaMM. enanacaia laina to *a acac an a taoPa***>oua ■ humaoa < ra tattar ara anwaad 10 •»«taan» Ftmfteldaa ara uaaO » corard tunout o<iut. Si^ II. Ar* Lawn Car* Ch*mlcai* S«f#t Par:t»rariaranotoaanoOaaand'JWroanafaifyafan« ^ contcafaato«c^uOauncaa.T^«aoofaIsa(«£>fOOa0^y wrjfita. out uaaca at fartaara m<xad m uia cm n nanoiM tnanv (or maianca. u> avoaS aya axooura ana to^ni^aceaiaoycn*<w.a aariytaraa«araafanM \iB^ teSfex''] anurdy nan-fraa aufisancaa. Naaanfwaa fc ra canteorv cams rava baan raaaa abcui sasfiodaa. not (arttlfan. »o tna fam*noar ot wa txsowat w* loo* on tftaaa maianaia. UniAarg«oinarsu&sancasusaObyman.paaa odw ara oasignao to tul oata and mu« &a io«<c lo ma oaaa ■noma^t^oriLAiaariawncarapaatoOaaaratoaeio naarty aa arwnai ana piani irfa. a«n aa lumioania «aad to»aTwatanama»daapnorto ractananqpa«n an nfastadafaa.M<»iawnearaoawooa a.ftoway a ra rautwaty soaesfc oacauaa ff*a orwwv iw alto M c.raeea only to tar^ loaoai. For aaamoi*. ttoi w fr^a^eono.t■onso<uaalpnana«v^aroc^daa>oi>T1og (yoadiaal plant* out do not aovaraay artad oraaaaa. niaca. or fOdani*. Tbacty to animal*, siana. or numans can oa acuta or cnrorvc Acuta io*M.ity raiar* to ina damaga a au o^^ sianca can oo a* a raaut o< a angtta«x»jra to rata* trv«ry larga amount* ol ma maianaL COronc toaitfy oa*cnoaaina*o*tyo<**uost*nea loca^damagaaB afasutolmanyraoaawtfa«ooatfaadunnoaort>» tongarf oaood ol tima to raiativaty tow'iayata ol inamM nai. Kjxicity can raaut from darmal (sun) contattnga* ;on(ad).ornn*(aton. Tiieia 1 prasamsinafoi# < ^i;5JIli;u.adtooa*cr«a»wacutato«:fyoi5a«i- c^aa^arooaurawaomacnameaamayoaooiarv *^^.•- '*1 t>arfyf\a2*n5oua.Ducavaoamaoa(Suiua»youaio*ta '*a^ • ■oc*m»ant orooart>a*oitna*uoaiancaratftar»tan«* i tytnmc lOTOty Acui# toxcrfv ol any Qivan oaiwaJa oaoand* upon ma .n.n#rani toicty 01 tr* auotanca M i-aa M ina amo^ 'cosa) and tna raat organam racamng it ma orat or^ oar.tw ooaa d a *uO«aneacaoaoia d eating oaaat fatnai doaai in fifty oar oant (SOHi d a grouQ d taw n- xry ammaa a caM ffta (.Ow For mnaiawn io*«rit jamaooaamamuramartaaiagivannunifi diaq n* centranon suen a* rmiigram* par ilar (mg.fi) <aadng to y>a oaagnawn LC» Aimougruna LO, and cruoa maaauraa cf acuta tonoty and cJtarant loaoM of arumaa may nava oitarani auacaotibaaaa to a *J*>nanca.mayp»T>ydaaacataoy*mcn inay utanury toroiy d a *uotanca can oa rot^dy aaamaiad. ma LD, • uaua»y aaorawad aa an amount d *jOt*a« *omr»aiaraadmdad by IT*iiwigiitdmaanmwfjfltn afiyratmouaaofrantXtawad:foraMmo ia.m*graro SitoMnea oar aaegram dio»artnalJ3,orLC,to.>*totoda«torw firoir)0mtoi9anmm.wrmnfr ^tfo*^;^;;;^ (or aodeaicn acoorOTK w‘•Od <*'•0^to turt. moai lawn cara gawciciaa 'owfl ioa< cdagory IV and ooaa wiuaPy no itofl. tong oa aaaa ^ I*: ;: r fc 11.1 . '-vl- T«M« I C»t*9oH«« ol Tb*le»ty i.. -N ^0 CittQormi P#CMr«lon tneLaJset WmVhpW .mM I — Higr»y Tb*e m-Shohify^^ iv-P«tuv«<y Hon4oxc__________ S3J5*3Tr5iIi*o'^5I»^ O^EP - SJo4 »nd crossoonw POtSON VWRNlMl CAUTION CAUTION • iU.ion«N'> * ..rU'« 11-. ■ I^A-i "i--‘l.~ •' • . • *-K CMwdnon JjSSSToIS >wpy P^ tn«w o< -wd«pc* for ixi iintwini r-* ■" °r*^i ag^MUavrt-ior^ * . sSISsssi^i^sssr 2.44).* y« «•“ *"*■ >o * >; ISSSj Swwcwf\i\ '^’Zssszs vjsiry Cll»0Or»l 0/ ACVl« '^Or'CtV f • iT On fT^q 0*rrna( rOQ>q inrxaiaoon moA___ OtfvuSO from 50 tfvuSOO from 500 ihnj 5.000 gr«a(flrt^an 5.000 O0VU2OO from 200 Bwu 2.000 from 2.000 thru 20.000 grMMrVMP 20.000 0ihni02 from 0.2 0vu2 from 2 0 tfwu20 20 ChJ«rottMio«na The tufi forger# o< oIrt»nw mrm c*n ®J|JSSe2i • 0.* a naart anacA. H4 affcw was c-cno-O aa to.c .«rf>g ana oaa»^ d larga araai^fl^ OUS (orooaofy a>ooa««j 0^ raia«50oafcant*» sss^i-SSS^^S kssssss . varort oraacnpw orugi ^ *22^cau^ th* d«aaa W - no ona ^ OWJJW 0„«, mmunowgc »*^gf^aS^Snratr*» S?IiSSI^linI»?oou»^ ^i„,,rtaurar >ia maoa aue^ an-no»0«m" fi^hcmentca arAi .-«w^tjnuauatona.Bu>uwa»"*»"0*"*f?L?riL^ •ouauu »»'• —irtnuaimat^m ■•.>.~."L_.’^Hr';-’.---' r..< • : •* .V ‘*1 .--*•■■■■ i-' pmi IliiiitttiiBii ■ .. •. . *. - --• * V-JV "?i3t ■ ;• ^.V>* -r* ■ ,.>i' ' WKm wMjy5u« rtmcforr Crncx Summary •'vj •ommc o« SJ^iSJS nSTS^;Acnum '^Cl r»oort3 OO OWKXJM. o »t:. ’.- • •...'• 1 iSKiS^ji V- • r'JKiiC.--. J: • '■• •:.■‘ 'i * S . *-r rT^-'^'V7:>^c. '■ * (-''•■%*i?i ■'iU.'- - • />. i? '••■ ':T' Cominon hcrbidcte linked to ciucgf »f 9m*» K. Hmt NHLl ^ tm M m^y¥t&n ——- *wrt«Tt«*r^ C_ £«s=::=-75 P0«1^ • •--— ^ **^*JJ^ JT» :<■«***—*****^ -< uaiwiii ';•. . • _>T-W -.. V‘-i . ; ., ,.s SCIENCE HEVS Volume 130 September 13,1986 '3 ► («/mai ■ a WT______________ _____________ ,pwfc»**rw*.ih«'«P*^a"'»*'*~^ HMW« •»*< o**** —"* *”* 1^ I LI. I r om «w P*rt»nHkr ,<>wfT «»y »■"***» ?gy I----------- -i> ittut:£^,sr!Z^jkSLw0Lin. t»^ ^SSTscfwcrrtI, DW« . IM <»w»*«J ^------------- WMU«»uie««ewn ’»*»’**! >'^**^ ii^a**e1»-ocXUiUma«rmtod , M t« latwef-f ■*« ptwIXrfT ---------------------------------------------“7 €rtg»o«»WtaUma»Tmnno •« •« *• rw«»y L-rw-T/o^oatixT**^** o( 2i 0 «*• or ^^• wtmm «* ,tBB*nmii*«nilt*'X*N “ -■ • -------------- ------: mmm fesrc-M ■? 1^ mf! mmm i‘; !-. f »fiS 1^- iP il n- i*r I- ?!■.F ’r- s^^■■mm?iV-'.'':^'.:’r . ■ :• '..i^ •* -^'v. /• I-. - * I' > t r>F'. >v- rl„ •'itiMl. >vk v.'^X •• j ^ ' !.f=». .'• f. //O Chemical lawn "'can can be kuaniaus to your lealtk. I ■•li^ .i»*y mtfm The Dan^rs Of Lawn Care j ou io«xwn ooc li ^«d. TW |QM« Utk tjafU lu>« bccB • ttmmimm hv: Ut Ivatf. t»* U* pm- «l&.VUMi*aa'lki«cikuchHn Na tin «i hii Mn. Ske mm ^»umt4. •M. lafte isM IM poa *tn pet- mbb 4 wtea triridM i^r*d ky ■ liM MnicB MiteiV wW oau '«.-r |wj»MtT Vimtaan ii<van kc/ citM. ad a Ky jft ikDM ikM tli« vcir piKVxirc tijr am u«(wui<. ( 0Oii o/ ClKBB. «tk Rail) bva CMC (KB pacBcc me li'a* BUitr tui m lenm ytma k«t br war all bM luihLa.' A ti«« c«c cu<a pamf oamta auuml pfooMf ctKOBcal ■■TK-n. Aurkt iob and BJO«ct an A Ir* Aiy« am. a |»1 ■ dead m a taredy gru the *' W " Foria jewdana el foacMkike. Aid . liar dcail td emr pel aa4 Ike Ai^aa BY JAY HI' K S i; II H amam c( aniiUct tnciilj aloui a irakta'aai ila a:.ciel>i.jtj u ti^Likby niur.a »l<c («o I W- (i:k aahlf a&l |juJ le-ahh lur nerd lee li«iu A:id at lie Ae<lina <;'iakly (Li.otcird. U.c<j ripeiicnrc la no eo- Uud cavlcut. CUiOia a^aatat il^uaral bva caic mai^ica a<c m (Ic m« na- Lecw'kk. Tuidle la Urwv4 oitlao il« ruuM'a Ad A li«D caie utLuUf Aijalab cuajr Utfi) CMC [auScaUculi Uac« cut- icol kuiibcaa «cea o* kigUt coua (Wj.lf a iraJl ul uk'iraacd AdJjy cov ­ erage). aXiauetde •raltev I 'Xeini and nitaaed luii^ciiUjR. cisjcita te- Lecc Ihc coxpaaiict' Uggtal cirfacc/a atkJcaVl be tLc ctconb ihcy luc. Cculiuvciay a.nouwlj4 Lhecikal oa Lu u4mc 4 i1« luiBMai uuiVxA ul Baaay ■ the itkAialij N;^. ia.UBd ol accarg pren. a pu*iA( Bualcr ci U«d aervk« b|<uaio<a aic aenn| icd li'i a aiiuiuaa Uvil'a loiivxg ttMtj Uwo |<taa lu uukc ctorgea ■ liic Bay U«y tviraU. A tckcut su(\cy ul k»B .aic pair*' a>uiih toiMlixltd ky laum SeriMing uupiMie aU]»ei «d^ el ibua< irapcaA *4 l-cW»c poUic coaeriB ovee U bb tkriijcab ia aS^-cij^ Uac nay tAcy do luaccM Sum 64% taad ruaioaocra icc lkc« iMjgktAaa) have ccolrucicd iffAca- kin B-uk rmaciRa atuU pcaunA: iaky>, aiai 13% ka\e capcnecccd rao:cBaU«« u airudl el alaai U«y Unwd "kadpark- kary ** SUl. d'l caut-aud ■ ai^BC aicaa ooc out ol every k>ui aalMbaa bona a urwed by a A bb theoBcal caaa fmnr LLemLeBB. Ike Mwa'a bigni bo* care lurrpany. aao bo^MTaa %cp ■% m BJlila. N Y . dun^ a IM4 b*B pnta ode cciBUOveciy A beat articM poav tILU* «lk%> ClUMMU U b B fraUCairU. iraa bcBard M Ike auinurf ul IMS to ed- Bcate peepk tboU ckraBal prUai^ dantera ad ptoaaJie aak- A bb ^air Met• Bajivea. 1W roup, landid ky Ikdalj baieBdc K mcb lUake ahrt »<■ a«d Uk en n ike coennaMv kre«i> •Bterwe ut Brre alctpc rcauat u >lBa« J bwa aprtta. ^rt^tird UaU and k. 4 idaMt to cMrukiCe kpOauio i.tpBiag b«« earc furnniuim-t Ur gni prt< maiMig m4 petal a«aa Uelore cpr.iBa 'V WBk k-giabun* pcetikat. CUi voluataiiiy agreed u cocaply IIL'I J**a denvan^ Tbc roaputy a iBuetc rdUaecrcvbvrBcaic opUa avadtblc euiBiowidc. TWat iiB "leitikica cady" opUak. a "kmilcd tawdc peop-aai ihu iavaKet t^Vjti tiridct oJf utn a taoUcaa ii e aad a “dry aptiora" peopM uaag Ux (ert3ucri and peitkidea to i VauUeisa atMciaicd Bntk deakd Ctcri.a«B baa ab* atepped varwe ontd-caiBMi aad pata^id puatieg and»irdca4gaii4«toa.ci eUnuraia a44dK«S and tt« pieata Aditkm^«vh«.k lUy B«TC used. Im tiiiirn^ Ike Maccuoipaey I kciWidc I.C D-a Middf «<d kOee ibM a Natud Caaew h atudy baa Aided In Bcicaied iacM tyauibatk cbbx(-««i leikee ui Ike pradua ia CMt^kicd. IIELT BCBibcn aay ifcev an BCk CheaLiBB’a uofietaiiM aia ury Biovca b>a.BayaBbkc.lke« dta I fo (ai etUBtgb. VUe dry bona and baiud pcauib aiae l dice IkiauB capcMcaB. ike Mpa Uicy doB’l ptnUcI irffc «r poimdmaut CMtaMcuiB Sn ekaagea arc m racoMf^ji^ ag pwnoia atomm cam malm a e«c*. iacoavaeiBC. «M. li tt* pan **W^ IB kv a** kC0dMoB.^ «aica ikai i^bb aend* cm Im kdd wiidi ckcaaiuAi «• ha Mi r %«M. b addiMM. a^ tOB ■ aoM iialea prmnba i IMB b B <%r«BB3i eelBHd bedb and prooBtaMa kr Bvalbie «b i aad a|«ne ia ae« «m «b hde tkal pijprny kc faded ««h ■«aa lar niMa ClMit due Saaw af Ike ar« IMS dba tc«M d f cMwatcd. CBBiBAtca aid bed kr Baracd 4S kMa » b «m apety««i lu per.Bdi— ob kc ( Ud Uadr bkMd. ^riarl ani araou Md loBia ItMc awMcd I bau« IrewbiBiB. BBd «lk>t I'uBrMvUw. Mere kniA. kb%kB. ■ Mii V!-.^r3 sas^mm \i % ; 9 ii«ai ■< ate luMini |i«u ^«nM{ k'tl I* lUiK *0 Boik (>|*nnrx« lOU. aCdM (kc4U*«i itcocaim StivUiisroficir iireccalalqf^ Sav Oiiiid ft* 1 cdjM JtatuB cMifty rf ivut- • ^ <n.UAUC W itcocftiia LUJ * I .:. ( * 'imr \ MM« M* ^rsziaSM mm mm ■ mmm umiiun uja aiij O^ito «r; coonl-tinf lur.lu ntra tuztl 1 U Uiia<-»\ *» uiuilin Uif b«» (uc u»ViUiy IV c Ik -!.* j1 IMS hii« tr«b pul onCK'lae ou ('j\nk : Aii’KQv:ii An«d U< a ! •rxiU:>'riT]r. • or« Uw>i (A UwncAir |«< b taattf ia| lUikh lid ulcliraxx:eni», cMi4^ »«k (, 0**4 e« kl( ol c s>:(^««iir4 11 {uac Uw« iA(C (tk.~U:r«. Wvc led an r\cf' nirAvnC U cyriiliMa Ij t*> U k C • IV<lt:Ml ^ (wc. U^t Mtiaef II OK (d iVm. lluti ci^ ixu\ ^-u. U« CKuktU»'n It I., tualuapri r.n alul «e ikicr^s a* a “lUeoiaa! iolMiovc" kwitait U imvu . Did B 1^. lA^f lean ot i/«ci%i4 (V ejects >(<i¥raaab oi gUf coum * aod U«o* tcf«i<ed by us cucapar^. be tvilded 10 ui|anK naclKsls *‘WVl lUr^ Ui itunge my nnd «m IV poor Uackltvoidif tbc (britui Ji br- C4 oaed ta sgikcdiaie a»4 ti*t Ufv- B#«t.’*i4)rstbr 3S |ei/-(jldo^. ^Ibr Oi(S(ac L^ua ^ C<a *'A LA os •« • teetkadrs. iHibteides and fjngicilei I Bscd B ibe *iOs and aily 'TOs a.T re- ■tiicted or baared luar I begie to ar<bac that uang cbe imals sc. itp a mouecyiir » tbr kns I «as cSiBg ke.** Moarr taji Uul titiMjgb fau raid icaidu h>«o ewnneda verr good. V he- gae onCB mg llaldi and iftaeaac pro drnia aJUr stuii ikee yeas el Uratoems Those pf utlera «ruuhl kaJ to earraMd laae tl pesCKKet. *'la lt|K mrafroieM b*r« Btih ai those I votfted oe. dx led ■ aeser b (ftod tamSukm." he says "Chrtacab out dc ssd's Me f«ic(s-tbe bJoM if bearbi-Mf iBcmnegBasaM that ogesl dhaitii sad piuhace beJUiy eod *' Osiaac prakets. os Ibe other laed. ked He a^ Not iiurbiB^y. thry'ie ke hrad of Mfmei'o «• lave care pn>- p^soi ‘‘Coogriu m tV beahliesi thiag tbric a le non «h a lasei.** Mcinet Mya ‘TiiU) i. you ir out cniy adih(4 auUi tie>. y iu’rc ili“ a>UB<«lKe benrfkui no uoaiMtAiiu fat tetp tsjdJ gud ssl " I ftVxiwr bu iMd Ual OB-e chc^tl tt;a;ivclt air tio, ted i tihrt a niuo nkn if Utice yem i.> icviiic tie b jl>p 1 il IcrUh oi lie sml IId b ihoe l« last d-il .1 Jsng t Ut>o!fi d Usn. Ue« UitUu- eg »kc a yru wMh a If^ td of i> ganic mil ei*' ■ fi.h Icallef w U^d ued lor olrcgea. iiiubed i nk (funphiUt k* paaipl,a;v*. aod gieestaad lor pat^viars f.J^Kcd b) Ckciig tie Uai' siVb <u:n;vU si lie UI AlU-iigh Mrincr puiilAse* ihe ot- gM-k Itniutf Ueid be cses oa cus- bu^it' taiDi. Ibe Cuevbt be uaes is s'*t ;ed up in lit Ok-n baikyaid I brae. ic« yletp. (l•AkeD and laliK BUitac ia iikcicd Loa 24 kxd latint. ar4 fah , wia^ aic Liolrd b tioio a ksal sualuod iauii*>wt. Hit Utkl-cajing buunrss Si^ («es (ieoly of leairs and vast ct^vir^t lo add to lie enuruesis pies. ~Otk.e a U«n d b good skipe. ycu cm gel gyraf >ctoha bun usa4 roitaAg bap as a Uvdtetung.'' fttener rs- (iitm "Cooptiai providra a laws with cwrr«iJcag io iest lie rigid awoid .** \f«iart Las pul b hausheda oi arm lavsi UifVigVnd Mrs Ea^andusing ftts naicial ap^uadi to laws care. Orcc s lavs s esiatihshed. bit cuu^atg siipro­ vide awn cate to am oaunera tcigKsd- Bg Liuong Ibe saae haiic irsars be laroovamdi fur boraeossera Aing iIm wort ihenseKes- S potsiii mi m m ftme brtiacr bleal per 1.000 aesar* lr«l of bsa lokc a yra. phn s topdiesa- Big cf tcosposi m> Ibe lal. Of ctsMte ptapic inoosig and oatenug mma be svtreaaied Adbtiisuhy. Mrmet laeoU ars bsm otik o>*y tpotc Jscaer ha cotuol Jtpaoeie beetle be ftaesf aid lestt sahiaie Pke seed. *Ao loBg at I siaMUB a bws. I •ssxao- let. ■ kr a kfbviae agansi Hcttt raJda- ease.* ke uys **bBaidy mf pngnm taeu a bd amc Ora cftraKSI laeal- ■enu. kP It Ihe kag iM d's BMcJ rsore rr»oiible. Ibr isAy gpore braced is ars ded ody oore Io lahe care of lapaaeae bretk r“bs. »««d "‘her prstt tatio'l K a prthbm ai a oeft aurwartf lass “ No riACf. a hrafU y baa thcadd ctohe tail Buu B>et-di "1 aaLSiaojUt)." styt bfrinn. Hknl |V-t4<tr iMnr bra a riti4 UlOr" !<• •' • r,'.' . PiaiierMo!j2«'Si|ir dP cc . . a. <• ra •• «a» aL^ MB ara man t9MW sr^asA m. ^ niur/'^^ gzg^ JT " [ 4msa n vn ft^Br Okd «• *iB|dNi kB •0*^luuin-MniSridB Ma do.* bm »*p add ^o ------------------------ i—i= Vss_______-------- Leaves-Aivnr*, Gutter Guaids^ ■ ViUfcfJ N'- o M lUy htve tar ^ cti^ tct AAff al. wtctlt lie ^c>l beck lod •’OJfWtrdt. Wlirt I (osl iSil out. ODti |>c«^ dua'l Mcr- about at>aMC. ‘ llcJlliV i. J )v U» trf-ikti) |whit. and LSe *»y la |<l kJ u t» Cilaiili hu«ju.i>li Id Uir u4't Lf EUa l>jtciu. itacviM ul ihc I «»n It «ii:i.tr t i.iUi'ul >u £ iKal ni : < « i.il > t.1 a,,' I d ««a Mciik'I » it w.% i>-ia ul If.- I (1. lit rlri •. al> <4 vj ■ K .«r '' ■<■ t'** dn--j|il iiJi.lt>* i;ua.ni> in il« v.J »ah Lipt u-Vfntit ].A\\ N U\HU'C|ir^UQ,V!.^^tS|F AKk«^ UK atodiea arc ioco» fttt, IM Caauer Ualhitfc jrf Mfter Uatati ItbonioriM havt a^aaMUnwccbtakaiiloaK- «n* Iaw40a Isalifc tfrm.‘TWm ackaklZ|hM h«tf«4Bak kfthi, hcc ao4 - - ^ IkMit kicj^k^ ■cnfeMiy to' «uracaa. Dopto kMi .4^iJsaSstiS5?ir^,mm=>i ti^blccta B lb* cbcti, tia) caiui* Imkcbct. Adttrw cU'uiac tO*vti ■» ckik iljc^t M n*iia *c\nvi tiai liiutck i/eabiicu m Uboitiut y tAi- naU. TUfC it tuinc ctvlcocc of UutB| kiitb ^kltt, V>bMi U4it:u.icbivtJ<tlcSirU.iBirU m wiah h la tba teca (umd to l« uat U^tak r aoM bb(*au« y ictu. AUtii^ sd wiki) ux4. ikizno* tot U«o tooMid o« td oourt** and faal bnm bn aite cd to ge U d kfa UauciiH witlt i fu taa^. fCO total peac itod frooi k«<&Lg cq t pd csL*u k; ticia Vat utoxc itmuq Mtocatti(toid puNoaniifj . ‘OJ«i«»aU*U (Ilac««llJ atU I to Ibctc hBO (Mae toii tnUlKM cat to BtoM to d- toiouit Ito ttoatoiJ C7«. V ^S«£fTJS-*a5 ‘t' |w—k tfai todk IrtoKrtoWgkMCI ■ laaAito«m.U..toM.. Ir.? : to toon ■ Uaa toM lao aoeto 0l akMomttotottoid.tototdaia rftoato* toanioat ItoiMti •attopvwd toaactt, H toix amtdrta (irtoird i if; v-^i W1SSM 1___Z i —. _ t)iidatim te.^er..lLng » uci»J de- g;*« Uatt. %•; Many •agroiliV.itiid. Ce ginup ol ihru'kJt l?a.‘T^b (lAaututoai t*- b rsgt. >JO c./b* (UtcK Ujn uU.*1 ti.uii II1 ill (^«.<tiyr. aid to«e J>o Um*« ( uud 11 )«uAa-r orituut tyv Ucn Jr-yilrrt iciuba^ ito Utio. pe- i^toiil tifttrt a.*d otkAclrk. Ito L f‘A ba di>i.ifcd toiaaiijt u a (»*t>tl( huaiia (txdncgca Tent Ux Ua.»o ■ atact toll it kvit aod ikd^ju'd (Ou3t ib ttoyjiaaf aijauto. t ’ . I • rthKIVK'JDliS t.l Ik tip «dH| utc4 toiWale. wto-b kttV^ oi ibe aaz^HaiCOIt cd (to it'tofcial tbar«i Rad io Vwi(u<n. toa^txcdrily toco kiAcd v«b to'KaMC ibiictec cd htoftouc aan Sto npusu>« aa a irttoi el ^Aa Wto KtoA>4 « anitt dctiyto ■enu% an^ toiMto ■ kenf ^ nato^ tod laiuejai to Ito C>C«. ftoroi aaU^aWT trirt tie totot pottoRcmto b to***d. toxvee. 14 0 amtot to to raiafti uiirud toaa tto to^l Movwg abueptoa > Doto mx I 4lv*da<lr araisnc to X4 O. ee4 iMn art iaauaoea ttton ItoT toae «|idtm<4 aevuc to«x •catinM ItoB totoflr vaitoi ac^ b«Hi Llo»Wlto^toaliBB Tto (tosB-al m m«d m man ito* 1.SOO Titod Hito Motoda tcM ever toe cuuatoc. CtnaLa«m. ito MUa ’t tovrtl bn caa amftof. tot le- caady tiMf*nlc4 to «te «l Ito toita (»k loti tottoi aiMbt Uiatok a<- CMBfdcioi ~Jb Q mmm tea m lyesi* I ouaom irMMS - aw^iUi s«to to Mr aau si ; Mktitot Cai«Hi ato ’MV vf- a 11 ttMOCtociiB11 ^!|9^} ■iiiP |:i! j'-'i mi'": ,.A iili wt/ 'w*. ;<ii /'• IkM «f ui haunc Icrtl- ben. foQ R »l«Ab,- b. un- 1W UabOiid n S^tatstn- •m tin. u lia* (M br. vara and ■an frobabonb M rabi IMW4 ttc ■on aalani •?•<««• Nlara evri.3f*Js=aasii.iEt SOSlC^lio mwiL. ‘ Mw ina(4N|la wnaSea. a Ckrua bn can ■ liia uiiib ■liBB«Ui acb anfida ■- jinaiinlamrMibnnUejbonuic Yie Caibnb badar^ m *a -ob^ b> aat.^ inawa tmmfi ■ frma« aai cvikatibc bva cue (/.irTJiiLn kjntilctl io Lw o.'fan: So^ cliCtrtftDf <4vate4 btra cue p(cI:iujaJi ue iwiltls.-^ lu o^ib^b me advoctle *l i ic<uU c4 the Li|;b ci«t at LiliSt] iiuuiuk'c ikai ciccu-al if^'ka ton mu cui f.'' Mja Zjcxl. "Bai mu cl Uuce »hD i»4cb «e bLniUir cxa»- cen»4 atoJ Ute uUij at li< pnducU Uaj'tc leco uv4| T>cy icaLre iL^ic's a koU mb .vl vau to Si a.^Bjcikiaa alnUk.’* Zica puiBU to a eecol Huh coubicted bj tbe Aotenraa Cuui oo b-y«< nd Iteakb u ao cuin;lc U hov the kiSairf aa a abrlc lab ibjU tic iaw^ at lUam at uc TW Uo-b cuubJft ilul bn caic dcoBcab 'Vice (onatiy aod Ir- gtMf uMd" puM oo Liiaxd to bunaa Ica^ “S>cb cliunj laa'l l< made, yet il'i bdai done," uyt Zn. Lava tare cornyanca Migije iKal (be cbcuacab ibcy om mc "tab" boauae Uci'n lepsiereii aitb Uc El'A. But ac- eerikac k ibe Cocial Auountind CM fioc'a (CAU) ftratnp oo tic ElA'i bn Sweet, mild and meaty...#" ' V If;'fe 10*.DiaassJKapar,a/3i? I \I 8III : ■“••G4w«vatt=;£;My!'“’**,=5ft^ maiaiaiMiMT «M oam aul aaaniHi -“O . .-A .t uf («atv^ie rra*-d.U>n. not uly b l< ro poiaioc ui vilcty.iut as ptuiV lac te iLemeil ule waJ trUag u (Co^Jetc. Petta-vtra are. aiiei al. (Ici^aais dtugAed to IB bc4>^j| or- Asm rV:i;*:e aj;LcatJ(a ’ (tama tiat ibe (t^rii^ab llwy UK arc ekUcvcIy <Uulr4 arii lu'.e bi« tuu.'cy. lie Kr« Uek Suu Pcittcaie A,--(icaio( Timing Uasail alUea Ibal ibouc (cabdde (ta oeuw M a icauA li itgcriod ibu I u>D LU^ data met a bng period ct tide. Sax 1973 tie ERA Laa Icxa cnnAjri- Ittg trakb aol aairtf oabulaaa at aitin ingiedieata la ila ic^ttucd icaiiodc Uaixta. le julialiy. uotc <jI tic aearb uC e. aiutaca iad beta ncmielcd aa at (he CAO'a 1936 lepat. Aa a >i^v^ ■- w) ihe tUg icna ciaooic cf- leiti ol pcalaide cepouxe-<aacef. ate- Hilly aod Ui(b deteria-b acriooi)y U^io.g By (Ic ETA'a o«x adiaata* || aB ulc at baai 30 eiac ycart to El tin dita gjf Hi, e«'Jeut cwicUly eima tm m rTS^Z~ (KDve Be arfety at bn peukid T« c teee adii aatifig (he baa tkiie aak.(f lor yeatv** MBa try to coarkee « arc d-riDUoai. Utougb- vEAI Ir liuc Bcix ol kiaicad b iba Iroc ctsM^b about Ibdf clKti calx irtiog tien. ViTgr gatiit 11 aieiBjlivcxr* OQNSt AiEX eOtJCAT TEal aarat aMtaBt b bdat ( Ey the Nalicaal CaWba ASM( uac al Peatkik* (MCiMT). bgtn UacB caaunea pana^ iciMc ■ ngMuni pat* and* I tekxx) pcalkxlc hat. ~1Eo iBUa. kmeovnea < cicaiadd bciWidn m Hair fci Ea Kc cd tuiund ai haaa.* ca|t afoAxatiaa Ton OalM. **nca iaUbaixa fcr a laincr an nc Cldc aWa In c«i|a aaBtwBba niubiBroatendiaflibni M Bctaachca ■ ibk be w 1988 Eari M SPRING CATALl lU u>R«lm cataltB lat mr awBa. fal Ct4w fian tmtr aa com. VaaH fci I thnte. gbadt. nant, fraba aaB bcffiai. AbaLd r ; ^ 'iV-INNOVATIVE ►XJf MICROGRAPHICS DUE TO THE POOR CONDITION OF THE PRECEEDING DOCUMENT WE CANNOT PRODUCE AN ACCEPTABLE MICROFILM IMAGE. (C //> \ TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Mark E. Bernhardson, City Administrator'\^ DATE: November 9, 1990 SUBJECT; Woodhi11 Country Club Attachment:A. City of Orono Ordinance Section 3.05/Subd. 10 B. Map of Area ISSUE - Determine issues Council may have regarding the request by Woodhill Country Club to hook up their club house to an Orono sewer line. INTRODUCTION - The Woodhill Country Club club house is located in Wayzata and is currently on a septic system and needs to develop an alternate septic system or hook to sewer. DISCUSSION - Under Section 3.05 Sub 10 (Attachment A) the City Administrator has the authority to allow hook up of sewer by a property in another community. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN - As the club house itself is located in Wayzata it is probably included in the MUSA line and if so therefore a comprehensive plan amendment would not be needed. At the present there is no proposal to hook up other club house properties in Orono or the houses abutting the club house. These would require a comp plan amendment. Cost - The system is proposed to be done at club house expense in a configuration outlined in Attachment B. Location - The entire line is on club property except for the last connection to the sewer on Russell using a gravity line. (The proposal has another option for this, which is on their own property using a short force main.) They would be responsible for obtaining easements. Maintenance - Although an 8" line (the size of our public lines) it would remain the property of the Club and they would be responsible for all maintenance and repair. (In the future should other properties be allowed by the City to connect, the City may deem it appropriate to take over certain portions of the line.) Capacity - The proposed line would not present a capacity problem for our lift station or the interceptor (even if other properties were added.) Sewer Charges - The charges will be established based on the usage in a mariner done with other non-residential properties. ALTERNATIVES 1. Indicate any concerns. 2. Table for further discussion. RECOMMENDATION - It is recommended that after Council has ejT^^s'sed issues or concerns that staff proceed accordingly. A shall specify the amount thereof, the description of the premises served, and the name of the owner thereof. The amount so certified shall be extended by the Auditor on the tax rolls against such premises in the same manner as other taxes, and collected by the County Treasurer, and paid to the City along with other taxes. Subd. 9. Damage to Municipal Utility Equipment. It is unlawful for any person to intentionally cause any damage to any municipal utility equipment or appurtenance, including, but not limited to, meters, street lights, water hydrants and curb cocks. Anyone causing such damage shall pay the reasonable value thereof to the City, including labor for renewal and installation of any equipment and shall be, in effect, an insurer of any equipment in his possession or with which he comes in contact. Subd. 10. Municipal Utility Service Outside the City. The City Administrator is hereby authorized to furnish municipal utility service to consumers outside the City, provided, that such consumers specifically agree to all the terms of the City Code, including, but not limited to, rules, regulations and rates adopted thereunder and the right to specially assess delinquent services, charges and penalties. Subd. 11. Separate Services. Each separate occupied property or each separate building or occupancy on a single property shall be served by and shall utilize a separate service connection not shared by any other property or occupancy, including each unit of any townhouse development, or each commercial occupancy under separate ownership. Exceptions: (1) duplex dwellings consisting of two residential units in one building, on one parcel of property, owned by one owner; or, (2) condominium, residential or commercial uses having more than one owner within the same building, where the land and/or common areas of the building including service areas are owned in common or by an association; )r (3) apartment buildings or leasehold commercial buildings having one owner but multiple tenants. SEC. 3.06. CERTIFICATION REQUIRED PRIOR TO TAPPING OR CONNECTION. Prior to issuance of a permit to tap or connect a lot or parcel of land with a municipal utility, the City shall issue a certificate of compliance with one of the Subdivisions of this Section. Any certificate issued under this Subdivision shall provide that in the event of a subsequent assessment thereon for such utility, the amount of the assessment hereunder shall be credited against the subsequent assessment. Subd. 1. The certificate shall state that such lot or parcel has been specially assessed for its share of the cost of construction of the sewer or water main, as the case may be, and that no installments thereof are delinquent or permit fees unpaid. ORONO CC (4-1-84) 1 :\r To: From: Date: Mark E. Bernhardson, City Administrator John R. Gerhardson, Public Works Director November 8, 1990 ■ ■■ 'j// Subject: Pay Request #2 - Otten Brothers Nursery - Restoration Highway 12 Sewer & Water Project Attached for review and approval is Pay Request #2 from Otten Brothers Nursery for work performed on the Highway 12 Sewer and Water Project. The work to date has been completed according to specifications in the amount of $16,359.00. Recommendation Tc approve Pay Request #2 to Otten Brothers in the amount of $16,359.00 for work completed to date for the Highway 12 Sewer and Water Project. Proposed Motion ______ Moved ______ 2nd to approve Pay Request #2 to Otten Brothers in the amount of $16,359.00 for work completed to date for the Highway 12 Sewer and Water Project. To: Prom: Mayor Grabek & Orono Council Members ^wMark E. Bernhardson, City Administrator^' Forwarded recommending approval. REQUEST FOR PAYMENT DATE:November 8. 199C PLACE;Orono, Minnesota PROJECT: Trunk Highway 12 Cleanup & Restoration PROJECT NO.:_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ FILE NO.: 13939 FOR PERIOD: From: Aug. 23. 1990To: Nov. 8. 1990 SPECIFIED CONTRACT COMPLETION DATE: CONTRACTOR: Otten Bros. Nursery & Landscaping. Inc. ADDRESS PO Box 2A9_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Long Lake, Minnesota_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ REQUEST FOR PAYMENT NO.:_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _2_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ SUMMARY: 1. Original Contract Amount 2. Change Order - ADDITION 3. Charge Order - DEDUCTION A. Revised Contract Amount 5. Value Completed to Date 6. Material on Hand 7. Amount Earned 8. Les«? Retalnage 5 Z Sub-Total9. 10. 11. Less Amount Paid Previously AMOUNT DUE THIS REQUEST FOR PAYMENT NO.:. A5^81A.35 A5.81A.35 32.677.69 0.00 32,677.69 1.633.88 31.0A3.81 1A.68A.80 16,359.01 Recommended for Approval by: BONESTROO, ROSENE, ANDERLIK & ASSOCIATES, INC. OWNER APPROVAL: By_ _ _ _ _ _ _ By. . E!?.te:Approved By: OTTEN BROS. NURSERY & LANDSCAPING 13939PR mmPROJECT: Trunk Highway 12 Cleanup ^ RestorationPLACE;_ _ _ _Orono, Minnesota_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ CONTRACTOR; Otten Bros. Nursery & Landscaping,_.PAYMENT NO. FILE NO.:13939 DATE: November 8, 1990 STATEMENT OF WORK Unit Esf d Quantity Amount Contract Item Uniw ?rice Quantity To Date To Date BASE BID Class 5, lOOZ crushed aggregate base Ton $19.88 200 18.77 $373.15 23'1 Bituminous binder course Ton 56.00 170.4 9,542.40 23«»i Bituminous vear course Ton 60.25 100 88.91 5,356.83 Bituminous material for tack coat Gal. 1.10 50 36.64 40.30 Erosion control fence L.F. 1.25 500 "od with topsoil S.Y. 3.39 2,500 1,192.03 4,040.98 Seeding with topsoil, mulch & fertil.Acre 2,371.00 5 4.8 11,383.68 Adjust manhole castings Each 145.00 12 4 580.00 Adjust G.V. box castings Each 100.00 8 3 300.00 Flowers and edging (Bill Wears)L.S. 1,060.35 L S 1 1,060.35 TOTAL WORK COMPLETED TO DATE $32,677.69 13939PR Page 1 PROJECT PAYMENT STATUS CITYt Orono, Minnesota PROJECT: Trunk Highway 12 Cleanup & Restoration FILE NO.: 13939 CONTR-^CTOR: Otten Bros. Nursery Si Landscaping, Inc. ORIGINAL CONTRACT AMOUNT ^45,814.35 TOTAL CHANGE ORDERS $0.00 REVISED CONTRACT AMOUNT $45,814.35 DATE NO, 1 2 3 CHANGE ORDER DESCRIPTION AMOUNT TOTAL CHANGE ORDERS - ADD $0.00 PROJECT PAYMENT SUMMARY, PAYMENT PERIOD NO. FROM PAYMENT THIS VOUCHER VALUE COMPLETED RETAINAGE Start 8-23-90 8-23-90 11-8-90 $14,684.80 16,359.01 $15,457.68 32,677.69 $772.88 1,633.88 TOTAL PAYMENT TO DATE RETAINAGE FOR PAYMENT NO, TOTAL Value completed 13939PR $31 043.81 1,633.88 $32,677.69 Bones troo Rosene Anderlik & Associates I>t0 u donewoo. E UotWf! * lto»r* -e ,c>s«jr< C AfK»r<i« PE 1. S(XV*4 PE p«:^j«0 E ’ufne' ”6 -»r<n c 0<lOA “E •3erw. » Cjo « »E t V)y«, ‘*6 «50pf! O )cr\/n<r«. p£ 3uv»r V Etefwi C PA Engineers & Architects October 25, 1990 A Jmocin PE vV ‘=>.'«w P£ Oon#d C SufWA*. PE >er^ A 3oufOOf> PE Viar* A H*rwr pE >C < t-Wj p£ Mcfaet T *E POOM « PA«PWif .>£ Cav«3 O u3$«0M p£ W Pptenon pE MK'-in C urncf! P£ < '.(Mno. PE P Anaenon p£ VAT* » toPv PE C »uup« A ^ A •hcrw £ Anguv PE A iirAra P£ D*r«( j ioqgrton PE VAjnc A i«x PE p»^ j Caf««« PE vr\te* vu«nn« »E VUrt D Aa«v P£ TNjmai « Aoofnor a i a G»ry £ PyiardP PE Mdn B «<'«n PE L P^mo '^»vtA V PE Bfne C AIA Agn« M Png, A IC P 0 !‘wzxn P£ Cfc'^*". wKvipr PE C^xnps A tncMOr L«0 M Hjran V Otscm / C/fy 0/ Oroho Sox 66 Crystal Bay MN 55323 Attn: Mr. John Gerhardson Re:Lift Station 8 Renovation Orono, Minnesota Our File No. 13945 Pay Request No. 1 Dear John, Enclosed is Pay Request No. 1 for your approval and processing. This pay request covers work done to October 24, 1990. We reco,nmend payment in the amount of $9,044.00 from the appropriate construction funds.'i If you need further information, please call me. Yours very truly, BONESTROO, ROSENE, ANDERUK & ASSOCIATES, INC. 5 Mark D. Wallis MDW:li End. WPILTR 2335 V^st Highway 36 • St. Paul, Minnesota 55113 • 612-636-4600 REQUEST FOR PA:'MEN7 DATE;October 24. 1990 FOR PERIOD: PLACE;Orono. Minnesota From: Start PROJECT;Lift Station No. 8 Renovation SPECIFIED CONTRACT PROJECT NO.; CONTRACTOR; FILE NO. :13945 COMPLETION DATE: Northwest Mechanical, Inc.October 31. 1990 ADDRESS:432 Mill Street. PO Box 40 Lone Lake. MN 55356 REQUEST FOR payment NO.; 1 To; Oct. 24. 1990 SUMMARY; 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 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 Less Amount Paid Previously AMOUNT DUE THIS REQUEST FOR PAYMENT NO.: *AGT0f I^commended for Approval by BONESTROO, ROSENE, ANDERLIK & ASSOCIATES, INC. By:,//lUl /). OVNER APPROVAL; By_ _ _ _ _ _ _ By._ _ _ _ _ _ _ 48.000.00 48.000.00 9,520.00 0.00 9.520.00 476.00 9.044.00 0.00 9.044.00 Date;Approved Bv; NORTHVEST MECHANICAL, INC. Contractor Bv;ApDroval stated on attached AIA form 13945PR APPLlL-iTION AND CERTIFICATE FOR PAYMEN M \ noi UMCI^T C702 I'sr.E ON! I'F PX<.£'i TO (Owner):City of Orono 1335 Brown Road Crystal Bay, Minnesota 55323 p.^OlECr Lift St it ion No. 8 Renovation APPIU ATION N(T 1 PFK.OnfKOM 10/24/90 DiitrihuLon to □ OWNER □ AKtUlTECr n contractor □ ATTENTION;CONTR VCi fOK Northwest Mechanical Inc. 432 Mill Street, Box 40 __Lonn Lake, MN 5S3S6-------------------- ARCHITECT S PKOlfCT NO CONTR,\CT DATE 8/2.3/90 LI CONTRACTOR'S APPLICATION FOR PAYMENT CHANCE ORDER SUMMARY Change Orders approved in previous months by Ow ner total Approved lhi> Mor.ih Number Date Approved ADDITIONS DtOuCIujN' TOTALS Net change by Change Orderi Cunlinualion Sheet, AIA Dotumenl C703, i> attjcheij Tht* p estMit >t iius of the jccount tor this Contract is as follows: 48,000.00ORIGIN U CONTRACT SUM ..................................................S Net change by Change Oulerj ................................................$ CONTRACT SUM TO DATE.......................................................S 00 48.000.00 TOTAL COMPLETED & STORED TO DATE........................S- (Column G on C.'OU 5______o;. ............................................S- 9,520.00 RETAINAGE 476.00 or t.jljl in Column I on C'O) TOTAL EARNED LESS RETAINAGE .........................................$-9,044.00 The undersigned Contractor certifies that to the be»; of hu kno Altdgo information and belief the Work covered by thu Application for Payment has been completed in accord.»nce v\ith the Contract Docu ­ ments, that all amounts have been paid by him for Work for v.hich previous Certificates for Payment were issued and pj>ment, rec.-i.eci from the Owner, and that current payment sho.vn here.n is now due LESS PREVIOUS CERTIFICATES FOR PAYMENT............S-00 CURRENT PAYMENT DUE.................................................S-9,044.00 CQ^^CTOR: NORTHWE iTi I f £«:Miinn7r. ri State of Subscribed and sworn to before me this Notary Public. My Commission expires: County of: day of ARCHITECT'S dERTIFICATE FOR PAYMENT AMOUNT CERTIFIED ..........................................................$. In accordance with the Contract Documents, based on on-site ob>er vations and the data comprising the ibove application, the Architect certifies to the Owner that the Wor\ has progres.ed to the point indicated, that to the best of his knowledge, information and belief, the quality of the Work is in accordance with the Contract Docu ­ ments; and that the Contractor is entitled to payment of the AMOUNT CERTIFIED. (Attach exphnilion if amount certified differs from the amount applied for.) ARCHITECT: Date: This Certificate is not negotiable The AMOUNT CERTIFIED is payable only to the Contractor named herein Issuance, payment and acceptance of payment are without prejudice to any right, of the Owner or Contractor under this Contract. AIA OOCU.MINT C7fl2 • APPLICATION AND CERrifiCXTE fOri P ayment • APRIL ViTn EOH.O n • AU*- • 19:b THE A.MERICAN INSTITUTE Of ARCHITECTS. 1735 NEW YORK AVENUE, N W , UA.SHINCTON, DC 20006 G702 —1978 CONTINUATION SHEET ORONO LIFT STATION MA DOCUMEMr C70i (Instfuci.ons on roMMse si.le) »'v< 7 AIA Document C702. APPLICATION AND CEKIIFlc:Ar£ FOK PV'jMFNr, tonij.n.n^ Contractor ’s signed Ceriilicalion is attached In tabulations below, amounts are slated to the nearest dulljr Use Column I on Contracts where variable retamage for line items may apply Al’PlK AflON NUMIUK; APPl ICATION DAIE: PERIOD 10. AKl HUH r b PKOlFCr NO; I 10/24/90 10/24/90 A B c D E F G M 1 ITEM DESCRIPTION Of WORK SCHEDUUD WORK ( OMHlEfED MAIERIMS TOTAL %BVLANCE TO FINISH (C G) RETAINAGE NO.VAIUE FROM PREVIOUS APPIICAIION (P f E) THIS PERIOD PRESENTLY STORED (NOT IN D OR El COMPLETED AND STORED TO DATE (D t F) (G -C) 1.Bond & Insurance 2,500.00 2,500.00 2,500.00 100 0 2.Bypass 2,000.00 2.000.00 3.Top slab 4,600.00 4.600.00 4,600.00100 0 4.Demolition 1,000.00 1,000.00 5.Grout Bottom ^ Mi sc. Metals 1,000.00 1.000.00 6.2,000.00 2,000.00 7.Pumps 22,000.00 22,00^.00 8.Piping 5.200.00 5,200.00 9.Painting 300.00 300.00 10.Site work- grading bituminous trees fence restoration 4,400.00 2,420.00 2,420.00 55 1,980.00 11.Electrical 3,000.00 3,000.00 48,000.00 9,520.00 9,520.00 38,480.00 CtKIlMCAIt rUK CMMfSI • MM tUIHUN * t THE AMERICAN INSTITUTE Of ARCHITECTS, 17J5 NEW TORK AVENUE N \V. WASMI nCTQs DC ’OOiX j G703 1983 PROJECT PAYMENT STATUS CITY: PROJECT: FILE NO.: CONTRACTOR: Orono, Minnesota Lift Station No. 8 Renovation 13945 Northwest Mechanical, Inc. ORIGINAL CONTRACT AMOUNT $48,000.00 TOTAL CHANGE ORDERS $0.00 DATE NO, 1 2 3 CHANGE ORDER DESCRIPTION TOTAL CHANGE ORDERS - ADD PROJECT PAYMENT SUMMARY; PAYMENT PERIOD NO. FROM PAYMENT THIS VOUCHER Start 10-24-90 9.044.00 TOTAL PAYMENT TO DATE RETAINA6E FOR PAYMENT NO. TOTAL VALUE COMPLETED 9,044.00 476.00 9,520.00 13945PR REVISED CONTRACT AMOUNT $48,000.00 AMOUNT $0.00 VALUE COMPLETED RETAINAGE 9,520.00 476.00 To: Mark E. Bernhardson, City Administrator Fromi John R. Gerhardson, Public Works Director Date: November 8, 1990 Subject: Change Order #1 - Lift Station # 8 Renovation / Due to a delay in awarding the contract for Lift Station #8, the contractor is requesting a change order for completion of the project. RecoMMendation To change the completion date for Lift Station #8 renovation from October 31, 1990 to November 21, 1990. Proposed Motion Moved 2nd to change the completion date for Lift Station #8 renovation from October 31, 1990 to November 21, 1990. To: Fron: Mayor Grabek & Orono Council Members A.; Mark E. Bernhardson, City Administrato^^' Forwarded recommending approval. Isv I. CHANGE ORDERmt UCIt KUtCTt OmACTORt MO CO.t FILE NO: 139A5 IAM6I ORDER RO.t 1 KCtfwiON OF WORE: November 1, 1990 Orono; Minnesota Lift Station No. 8 Renovation Northwest Mechanical, Inc., 432 Mill St, PO Box 40, Long Lake. MM 53356 (United Fire 4 Casualty) Mischke-Borrell 4 Assoc., 1000 Shelatd Pkwy. #250, Mpls, MN 55426 Attn: Dan Borell to a three week delay in awarding the contract, the completion date has been changed October 31,'1990 to November 21. 1990. ^ lilt change order will not change the contract price. IX6INAL CONTRACT AMOUNT "iVIOUS CHANGE ORDERS IIS CHANGE ORDER NO. 1 - NO CHANGE - r .1,^* $48,000.00 - - - - - - - - - - 0.00 0.00 gVlSED CONTRACT AMOUNT $48,000.00 Reconunended for Approval by: BONESTROO, ROSENE, ANDERLIK & ASSOCIATES, INC By. by: NORTHWEST MECHAI Bv Approved by: NOF^THWEST MECHANICAL. INC. V _______ proved by: CITY OP ORONO. MINNESOTA . . By----------------------------------------------Mayor . .-A. .. . .—-- -- .—- - - . V--, V JM-. ■' JR" itf-T 'r 'i>'T ■--- 'i , ...A ^ . lii. mf. Distribution 1 - City 1 - Bonding Co. 1 - Contractor ' ■ 1 -;bra_^^ -”7:7-’^ * — "A-caa.rsT.'v is:.-■ wiT:,: ’ V-::* ^ V i ' '■ - I'T.'T ■ - .- r'.'4 ■*u, 103090.5 /(/ TO: FIOM: DATS: Mayor and City Council Mark E. Bernhardson, City Administratoi^)-*' October 30, 1990 <,» i ' SUBJECT: Street Lighting Request - Livingston Avenue Attachment:A. Street Lighting Request Dated 10/1/90 B. Terry Beich Letter Dated 10/19/90 C. City of Orono Letter Dated 10/26/90 D. Inventory of Lights/Orono Dated 11/15/90 ISSUES - 1. Present lighting. further information to Council regarding street 2. Determine if Council desires to initiate such a program. 3. Determine if Council wants to implement to determine the process for futher consideration of it. INTRODUCTION - At the Council's October 8, 1990 Council meeting because o^ lateness of the hour Council tabled discussion of this Item although there did not seem to be substantial disagreement with exploring the route proposed in Attachment A for funding street lighting. DISCUSSION - Street Lighting Inventory - As noted the following number of lights: in Attachment D the City has Public lights Private lights Previously assessed by the City 66 Not funded through City 104 Future lights - In addition there is an unknown number of lights not currently constructed which people may desire to use in the future. The differentiation between the public and private lights is a function of the request. Public lights were put in generally as part of a public project principally along an arterial such as County Road 15. In addition certain street lights on the corners were put in response to requests. Generally private lights are ones that have been put in mid block or as part of a subdivision at the instigation of the owner without a decision by the City to have them Installed. (Exceptions may be in subdivisions that were required to install them by the City but at developer expense and maintenance.) pp The petition from the neighborhood specifically requested the City undertake funding of their 2 lights, which ha%’e an annual cost of $325. Mr. Beich has indicated that the City charging the neighborhood was only an alternative discussed if the City would not fund out of the general fund. (He has additionally had felt Attachment C downplays the importance of the issue to the neighborhood. The intent in C was not to indicate it was insignificant to the neighborhood but that the neighborhood thinks their request for $200/year should be insignificant to the City and that therefore the City should move quickly to fund their lights. From the City perspective it encompasses much more than just their particular lights.) Attachment A outlines a procedure the City could use to recoup cost for street lights for any street lights that do not qualify as public lights. While the City has statutory authority under MS444.075 Subd 3 to specially assess delinquent water and sewer bills, the same authority does not exist for street lights. It does however under MS429.101 have the authority to specially assess for among other things street lights. Finally, owners can voluntarily agree to waive their right of appeal to a special assessment. Should a neighborhood that currently has a street light come forward as is the case with the Livingston/Lyric people that a petition would be signed by all the neighboring property owners agreeing to the charge being billed in the utility billing. This waiver would form a contract and they would agree to an assessment if not paid. (Copies would be filed in each address file.) The City Attorney is currently reviewing these applicable authorities. Bi1 ling - This billing amount would be placed on the quarterly billings for sewer and water billings for the people. The amount of these billings could either be set for each area or the City could have a schedule based on the type of light. The third way would be to charge one standard fee for lights per property owner regardless of type of light it is or number of properties served. However, from an administrative standpoint this would be easiest as determining a particular coverage and cost of a light on an individual basis may yield a multiple of rates. The intent of the City is to recover its cost for the street lights that are placed in and an average rate to accomplish that. It is estimated that generally the average cost of lights for those assessed before now would oe approximately $30.00 per year per homeowner being billed at rate of $8.00 per quarter. Assessment - People who fail to pay that rate could be assessed as a delinquent utility in the same manner as sewer and water. The question was raised as to what difference there was between this and I'.e old procedure that the City would specially assess annually or under the new ruie would have to establish a new hearing every year. The difference between the proposed system is; A. That most of the billings would be paid when billed and that the numoer to be assessed would be substantially reduced. B. No specific public hearing is required for assessment of delinquents, only notice of the delinquency. C. The notices of those delinquent would be generated through the computer. On the old system this was all handled manually because it was a seperate system. Program for Implementation - Private Liqhts/Not Current ly Funded ^ City - This cTtTgTf y, which would include the ones on Livingston/Lyric would submit a petition and if the neighborhood agrees they would be placed on; Private/previously assessed - For these lights the City could do one of four things: A.) Given the fac. that the City had previously assessed these and the people were paying for them, the City could choose to place the fee on the utility billings and respond to questions from there. The one who were previously assesed would be in a different position "than as they would would not have signed a "contract/petition" with the City. B. ) The City could send out a communication explaining its position, schedule it as an agenda item and based on response determine how it desire to handle that program. C. ) Annually assess with public hearing noticf D. ) Discontinue paying the lights until the property owners enter into a contract. ALTERNATIVES - Pol > Alternatives Street Light - Livingston Avenue a.) Accept any lights on Livingston/Lyric (3) by City. b.) Leave to neighborhood to develop a private solution. c.) Table Funding - If City accepts; a.) Fund from general fund b.) Develop/Implement a system to charge residents 1. Utility charge/specially assess 2. Annual special assessment c.) Determine system for other "private" lights Action 1. Accept the information. 2. Direct staff to obtain further information. 3. Indicate the policy direction. 4. Table further discussion. 5. Take no action. Policy Alternatives 1. Table for further discussion. 2. Take no action. RECOMMENDATION - It is recommended that the billing .on does provide the City with a means of assisting resic ..s whose neighborhood can not get together on paying the bill and yet recoup the City's monies from such lights without causing the City a negative financial risk in the future for other lights. It is further recommended the rate for this particular area would be $ 15.00/household/year or $3.50/qu ter and that the City would pay the bills for the first 3 mor hs immediately and i: the petition is received agreeing to t.ie billing that it continue beyond the 3 months. PROPOSED MOTION - Moved by _, seconded by _, the Council direct staff to further develop a program requesting a neigborhood sign a petition at the rate established to have this lighting put on the sewer and water billings. In addition direct staff to prepare notice for ones who had previously been assessed that this program change has happened and schedule it as an agend; item. Ayes _, Nays _. cc; Terry Beich, 2697 Lyric Avenue, 55391 if--:.- 1019C.6 TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Mark E. Bernhardson, City Administrator \ DATE: Oc":ober 1, 1990 SUBJECT: Street Light Request - Livingston Avenue ■i // Attachment: A. T'-r^et Light Request Dated 8/23/^0 ISSUE - Determine if the Council desires to pjrsue the .^sue of privately installed street lights and the method for poking the ongoing cost. INTRODUCTION - At the Council's August 27th meeting Attachment A W3w presented for Council coiisider at ion at which time they tabled it requesting staff to do further work on the matter. This was in part done because of the City's concern for its exoosure to future street lights. DISCUSSION - In a subsequent conversation, . I aast r: of the residents has indicated the neighborhood was willing to pay the costs# howe''jr# the mechanism to do it privately did not exist or was "a hasse ! "*. Attachmp-*^ A iddressed the issue as the City having - rovide the revenue to fund th^se. As noted in the histo-, ^ City funds approximately 53 street lights and there are * a* eer 67 street lights that had been put in at nrivate reques ;d had been previously handled as a special need for a public hearing and notice administrative headache and in res received 'each individual assessmen*" per "ear). 1^ addition the concer: w- exist. oJt there presently that ar oe in ’ he future. sment. B^’caus - of the - became an .«al dollars .eiy $10-15.00 .i/ute lights may pr■ ately or ones Given the willing^.. 3 of this group . ry for it pius the past history of persons paying for the private lights, perhaps the issue is not c ^ of the City having to develop additional revenue, but having the City only serve as the structure to collect tiie revenue. In this vain the City could determine a standard billing rate to be wpplied I 11 the homes which have private lights and had •■/w^n previous y assessed or who desire to have their private light funded through the City and have this put on as ^ separate item on the City's utility billing. Failure to pay the street light charge would result in it bs g incl’ded and specially assessed with the delinquent utility 11s each year. The utility customers with delinquent accf nts are notified by a separate billing sent prior to the special ass?sr:,menaction. The CO. ts and number of customers notified for assessment of the street lights would be substantially less than if all of them were notified and s^jecialiy assessed for a hearing annually. Additionally any particular street light where substantial numbers are not payinn for it, could be disconnected and the charge discontinued. \Ltrr.NATIVES 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 bringljack a proposal which will utilize the utility billing system for charging the street ligh's that are not ones put^in by the City. Together with a policy statement of how these will be handled in the 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 _. Jot- R. r Kufe rdson, Public Works Director Finance Direc-ur t ■* K. To: Mayor Grabek & Crcno City Council Members .From: John R. Gerhardson, Public Works Director ate: August 22, 1990 Subject: Petition for Street Lights Livingston and Lyric Avenue f! 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 Hcmecwnes Association has dissolved and Northern States Power Company has disconnected the street lights for lack of payment. City wide there are 120 street lights either conunercial or residential. Approximately 53 of the 120 are commercial in nature that are installed as part of a semaphore project or as part '/f the County Road 15 rehabilitation project. The balance of approximately 67 are to light an intersection or a street at •he request of a property owner or neighborhood. Until just recently tne 67 street lights costs were assessed to benefiting property owners, however a recent change in assessing laws has 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 - $10,000 per year). However, in addition to the 120 public street lights, there are an unknown -“umber of private lights installed. Those lights are placed Northern States Power Company and billed directly to the homeowner. The two street lights involved are 100 watt high pressure sodium on om2unental 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. 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. r- 0^(0 tiO CIT!/ COU.VCIi i/e. tAe. unde.AAL^ne.d pxooe..xtu owne.xA La tVava/iiio pn.ope.xtu de.ve.lopme.at anea, mould like to \ee the two Atneet li^ntA La oun anea tunaea back oa. 'Me. believe the coat Ion electnicit^ aAouII be paid out oi. the ^eaenal luad aa otAen Atneet lickta axe ia the anea. If neceAAan^, me mould like to have a AeaniaQ. oa tkiA Aub^ect. r L-r W »- o 5CSS::r.% ,</;/iur>wW-rv " t j 'hC^O Ac'^ , / / . _,ftxL >.^-.1 t-r- ItJ ■ '* t 4^/ V ;■ /4 Bev4hij^(r 3 ggS r^-t, October 19, 1990 Dear Mayor Grabek, I am writing to you in regards to the never ending battle to have the lights turned on at Lyric and Livingston Avenue. As of the present time we have heard absolutely nothing on what you called the need for further study on what may be a Pandora's Box to the city. The people who live in this neighborhood are asking for the lights to be turned on and we proved that through the pet. -.on. This neighborhood is tucked in and receives no light from any of the present lights. By turning on the lights we already have, you will be providing these people with a safer place along with the elimination of the kids who come back here to drink and party because it is dark. We also have alot of kids playing in this neighborhood and when they play at night it scares me as to what dangers they face from cars who can't see them among many other dangers. If you have any concerns towards the children who play here or the people v;ho drink back here, then please get on the ball and do something about it. The lights are already up, all you need to do is give the word for the switch to be flipped and you will have a happy neighborhood and not on<^ that is already quite discontent with the mayor and city council of Orono. I am quite sure you are aware of the article written in the Sailor by Sherie Bentley. I hope what she writes is not true, but after my own attendance at the meetings I am afraid it might be. Maybe you should think about what she wrote. We want •—-c mm ;/ : I" P- ■ f'- something done, Mr. Grabek, and we want it done now! Please don't shrug this letter and request off because we really are in need of a street light. I look forward to hearing from you on your actions and we request a timely response. We have waited much to long already. I hope that no child gets hurt as you are making your decision as that potential always looms with the present conditions. Maybe you should ask yourself, "What if it was my children playing or drinking there?" Then maybe you would take it a little more seriously I look forward to hearing from you in the near future. . . . Sincerely, Terry Beici. Terry & Sandy Heich 3697 Lyric Ave. Orono, MN 55391 471-9336 r . • •. -I ii r* I £ h --a.... -^T CITYc a Cr TY ORONO Po«i Office Bo* 66•Crystal Bay. Minnesota 55J23• MumaiMsl Offices On the North Shore of Lake Minnetonka October 26, 1990 Mr. Terry Beich 3697 Lyric Avenue Wayzata, MN 35391 Re; Street Lig’its Dear Mr. Beich, Based on the request of your neighbors, staff developed and oresented a prooosal to Council at its October 3th meeting to place the stree't light's costs on the City's sewer and water billings to the neighborhood. This is based on my understanding the neighborhood is willing to pay for it, however they lack a mechanism to charge people. Council tabled this item and it has been placed on the oreliminary agenda for the Council s November *3, 1990 meeting. While your situation may seem insignificant to 'u, the proposal needs to be able to accommodate the balance of .reet lights in the City which are not currently funded by the City. Please call me at your convenience Sincerely Mark E. B^xinbardson City Administrator MEB/dh BUILDING & ZONING - 473-7357 ASSESSING administration a RNANCE - 473-7358 FAX-473-0510 PUBLIC WORKS - 473-7359 PRIVATE STREET LIGHTS 1 3240 Bayside Rd 95.81 2 3470 Bayside Rd 83.27 3 50 Big Island 82.47 4 3460 Birch La 83.41 5 3470 Birch La 83.41 6 1420 Bracketts Pt Rd 83.41 7 809 Brown Rd N 220.63 8 940 Brown Rd S 83.41 9 1251 Brown Rd S 902.68 10 1305 Brown Rd S 154.48 11 3295 Carman Rd 83.47 12 2617 Casco Pt Rd 83.47 13 2807 Casco Pt Rd 83.47 14 3884 Cherry Ave 83.41 15 1450 Cherry Ave 83.41 16 1675 Concordia St 84.37 17 1745 Concordia St 84.37 18 3205 Crystal Bay Rd 52.57 19 3457 Crystal Pi 83.41 est. 20 25 Cygnet PI 84.24 21 3980 Dahl Rd 43.67 22 2560 Dunwoody Ave 83.47 23 865 Ferndale Rd N 83.41 est. 24 1055 Ferndale Rd W 83.41 25 4215 Forest Lake Dr 130.43 26 4445 Forest Lake Landing 62.81 27 4480 Forest Lake Landing 83.41 28 2180 Fox St b '1 29 3020 Fox St 8 est. 30 1160 Heritage La 112.- : 31 2509 Kelly Ave 83.-'7 32 565 Leaf St 83.4J est. 33 3500 Lyric Ave 83.41 34 3559 Lyric Ave 83.41 35 3220 Navarre La 83.41 36 500 North Arm Dr-83.41 est. 37 645 North Arm Dr 83.41 38 680 North Arm Dr 83.41 39 1280 North Arm Dr 83.41 est. 40 1355 North Arm Dr 83.41 41 1370 North Arm Dr 84.37 42 205 Northgate Rd 103.60 43 2180 North Shore Dr *’8.70 44 2485 North Shore Dr o3.41 45 2683 North Shore Dr 84.37 46 2840 North Shore Dr 83.41 47 2865 North Shore Dr 78.70 48 3200 North Shore Dr 84.37 49 3324 North Shore Dr 401.42 50 645 Tonkawa Rd 78.57 51 650 Tonkawa Rd 83.27 52 680 Tonkawa Rd 83.27 53 720 Tonkawa Rd 84.24 54 740 Tonkawa Rd 83.27 'evr 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 1220 1365 430 2745 3020 3400 3725 160 850 2689 364 1146 525 1390 480 1890 1166 1978 2106 2118 2380 2795 2800 1449 1449 1955 3435 3574 3596 3607 3790 1940 2060 80 325 505 1100 430 625 685 825 965 320 1355 3442 3995 4345 3670 285 315 Tonkawa Rd Tonkawa Rd Wakefield Rd Watertown Rd Watertown Rd Watertown Rd Watertown Rd Wayzata Blvd Wayzata Blvd Wayzata Blvd Westlake St Wildhurst Tr Park La Rest Pt Rd Russell Ave Shadywood Rd Shadywood Rd Shadywood Rd Shadywood Rd Shadywood Rd Shadywood Rd Shadywood Rd Shadywood Rd Shoreline Dr Shoreline Dr Shoreline Dr Shoreline Dr Shoreline Dr Shoreline Dr Shoreline Dr Shoreline Dr Sixth Ave N Sixth Ave N Smith Ave Old Crystal Bay Rd Crystal Bay Rd S Old Crystal Bay Rd Old Long Lake Rd Old Long Lake Rd Old Long Lake Rd Old Long Lake Rd Old Long Laxe Rd Orono Orchard Rd S Arbor St North Shore Dr North Shore Dr North Shore Dr Nc them Ave Olu Crystal Bry Rd Old Crystal Bay Rd 83. 83. 166. 140 . 83. 84. 83 . 200. 122 . 390 . 83. 83 . 83. 83. 238 . 83. 163 . 83. 83. 83 . 147 . 83. 83. 130 . 84 . 200. 250. 401 156 83 83 84 84 123 83 83 84 84 260 83 69 83 84 83 84 83 41 84 83 84 83 27 41 48 25 27 24 27 30 5 76 37 27 41 27 41 07 41 74 41 .41 .41 .75 .47 .41 .43 . 37 .75 .41 .50 . 58 . 47 .41 est .19 . 19 .75 .41 .27 .24 .41 . 18 .23 .28 .23 .41 .41 .37 .41 .83 .37 .41 .24 .27 $12,895.88 * Commercial ** More than one NORTHERN STATES POWER COMPANY ATTN ACCOUNTS RECEIVABLE 3115 CENTRE POINTE DRIVE ROSEVILLE. MN 5S113 nURNOO 13350000 1 OROMO. CITY OF I 1 /15/90 1 0& 7 H9 RENEE HEURUNC AI2-A39-435A RORNO0I3350000I 10/21/90 I OA 7.89 ENERGY CHARGE IRA FUEL CLAUSE MONTH Tr TAL ?90.05 88.40 9.44 1087.89 PREVIOUS BALANCE PREVIOUS PAYMENT 804.4 804.42 TOTAL DUE 1087.89 ORONO. CITY OF BOX 88 1335 S BROUN RO CRYSTAL BAY MN 55323 OJOE FORMAT = STR5,FORMS = srfl*4,END ; O, CITY OF STREET LIGHTING BILL FOR THE MONTH OF OCT 90 _ ___________ r:*a»ss!sssas = = = = ==sss:ss = r: = = s: = = = = = = = rr = = r = = = = = = = = = = = r = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = r = = = = r = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = -= = = = = = = = = = =- = -=- - - - - - - TYPE OF LIGHT H BILLED COST ENERGY I'* A FUEL CITY STATE NET BILL Lie KWH LIGHT CHARGE 0 0A‘;i 0 00094 FEE TAX -aasrsssssssssssssasssssss = = = = = = = = = = r = ; = - = = = -,.: = = = = = = =. = = = == = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = ==* I KFO0B IttU S AN OH I KFOOB II0U S AN OH I KFtfB CIBU 8 AN OH 49 U I C253 1075 121 9 75 10.55 13 75 477 75 16R SO 13-75 33 0 1 I I 64 0 95 2.12 10 1 Oil 0.00 0 00 0.00 0 00 0.00 0.00 512 •it 101.47 14.01 I K8009 200U 8 AN I ORN I K8009 250H 8 AN I ORN I KSee9 400H V AN I ORN 0ao 7 745 4585 1265 5 .25 6.20 7.45 42 00 ;35.60 52 15 2 90 16.28 3 6 0 0 70 4.31 119 0 00 0 00 0 00 0.00 0.00 0.00 45 60 256 ■ 19 56.94 • LINE FORMAT = STRI,FORMS = STRTI .END 5 10044 990 05 68 40 9.44 0 00 0.00 1067.09 i0i090 .6 TO: FROM: DATE: Mayor and City Council Mark E. ardson, City Administratocj October 30, 1990 SUBJECT: Facilities Wr*^' ISSUE - Establishme Councilmembers to which l be invited. f an informational workshop for public has specifically requested to INTRODUCTION - At the Council ’s October 22, 1990 meeting it was requested that the issue be tabled and that a workshop for Council be held. DISCUSSION - Establishment for that meeting based on holidays and other scheduling has been difficult. It was staff's underrtanding from Council that the format of the meeting would *^e to review past information and the significant information at comprised the primary elements of decision together with aetermining where the Council would go from that point c;;. A good date may be a Saturday morninq. P related item was based on the ‘.act that the . ublic was supposed to be specifically invited for that, the City would provide publicity either as an article in the paper or could be on individual notice. Place of Workshop - Given the nature of the interest the meeting be sch^uled for a place such as the school. ALTERNATIVES 1. Set a date. 2. Await assembly of the new Co^ » 3. Table for further discussion. RECCMMENDATION - It is recommended that once a date for it is established, the workshop be held either at the Auditoriu** ' cafeteria at the school. It is further recommended that t format be presentation of past information, review by archi.. with principle focus of discussion by Council and that once that has been done that public comment could be taken. The architect is currently compiling a’ I information for the meeting. t’>e background PROPOSED MOTION - Moved by , seconded by , Council decides to establish _ _ _ as tne upcoming workshop on“nFhe facilities. Ayes _, Nays _. 11190 . 3 TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Mark E. Bernhardson, City Administrate DATE: November 2, 1990 SUBJECT: Highway 12 Corridor Attachment: A. Highway 12 Corridor Study Letter Dated 10/30/90 ISSUE - 1. Present to council the information regarding potential initial layouts. 2. Prepare reaction to those initial corridor loc ted as to locations within the community. 3. Determine if it is an approrpiate time for a workshop to review issues and material with City Council, Citizen Committee and intereste i community members and if so when. INTRODUCTION - At the meetings held in October the mapping Attachment A was presented with the indication that it showed the routes that initially people had talked about. The intent of the routes was not to limit the scoping study to this but as a point of discussion and that new routes and alternatives to these could be developed during the process. DISCUSSION - Corridor Information - As you will note three of the five major routes are partially or totally within Orono between the Wayzata border and the Maple Plain border. Over half f the current corridor is in Orono. Two of those three routes in Orono place it all in Orono, with Orono then sharing the burden of the entire relocation. Relocation substantially outside the current corridor will cause dislocation of existing land uses that are highly dependent and create pressure for new land uses which have not had a highway near them either in the short or longterm. Such a relocation will have deleterious effect on the commercial business that is highway dependent. At this point, the level of review requested by the consultant is for each City to see what changes could be made to each of these corridors by themselves to make it a more acceptable corridor to the community. These are currently being reviewed in light of the wetlands mapping, etc. An additional consideration, should a portion of the current route be used, is where traffic will go during construction and what provision will need to be made at some point for that. Issue #2 and #3 - Response to Mapping Data. Now that the process has reached a juncture for response to information on possible routes, it may be appropriate to hold a workshop to review information to date, get reaction to them and evaluate them in light of the City's initially established goals for corridor study. Possible options if a workshop is appropriate may be a Saturday morning in early December at a facility able to hold a significant number of people. If held, an article in the paper would be appropriate. ALTERNATIVES - 1* Provide additional input to staff to develop responses to these routes. 2. Accept the information. 3. Establish a workshop date. 4. Table for further discussion. RECOMMENDATION - It is recommended that Council, after giving any initial ideas and reactions, provide further information and reaction to staff in preparation for response to be presented together with requesting a possible extension for response from the consultant in order to allow a workshop in early December. PROPOSED MOTION - Moved by _ having discussed table the Council meeting. Ayes , Nays seconded by _, that Council after item until the November 26, 1990 cc: John Shardlow Jo'n R. Gerhardson, Public Works Director HISTTB HOVWAnn Naaouas TAMMaN a aanoaNoaFP TH 12 Technical, Citizens and Policy Committee From Larry Dallam, Steve Hay Subject Potentially Feasible Corridors Intel Con Qg(g October 30, 1990 Enclosed is a (1" @ 4,000 ’, approximately) reproduction of the map of the alternative corridors presented at the October meeting of each committee. (The affected county roads are highlighted on the map.) Also enclosed is an 11" x 17" reduction of the map. They are sent to you for public information and study. As mentioned at the committee meeting, the location of each corridor is preliminary and general. We request that you look at each of the corridors within or near your municipality or jurisdiction and determine the "best" location of each - from the perspective of your municipality or jurisdiction. Use a red marking pen for shifts in the alignment(s). TTie changes should be made on the basis of providing better transportation service and/or less adverse impact to the City. We sugges*^ that representatives on the Technical, Citizens and Policy Committees of each City get together so that there is only one set of changes for each City. Please send your proposed changes on a marked-up map to Larry Dallam by December 2, 1990. We will then use these revised corridors in the preliminary evaluation, where possible. Following this evaluation, additional changes may be made. LND/vw Enclosure t41-KVFEAXX>IULMEM 066T a AOH ONIOI^ 1 ps-, s ... r* ' m ^ y '.liu. yi Vm THAKKIC VOLVHKS^- »'HlikT MUUKk - .. . ^ * «• I i ;■■• Iti ^’••^ ■W i I ^ • _;i-■' V » .»»- ■ . V :* ; ♦ "»• ;’ "■ -*'rf - : -^ I-**- .'“r •--f i ' : "• . .“i. > ^ Ni?«NieMirT'« (wfoiTMBvr or -nMSM>vmr%rms m-MKIi'*!. IMVa-MI ■«'----- ■ I I9M9 * j 'ML., /•', -'-r ^ i ■.lN <^1" LBUKND i ?' . -ir'' ^t-."T'-‘.^ ■.. .• , ,r-'"^-;^:......; ] •'*s — ;-*r u ._2— .♦ »•'! f*JI* •-«»>•■• X*»» %•%'! • i * f' «M0 .... ■ . t •«>li------- Tw:l. , r r •*“ • ♦ .- : i •-. •, I ’'v_J . ; . ...---------^ ''•*»- r i ;v^»j '■' ' 'i - ' ^ W-»- aKC^A*^.- ‘ ,T ».. U- ‘ • f.: mi lK>, M.L BOLD NUMBERS REMCSENT iMB avcrace annual oailt raarric /xutcs. I A. A. D. T. I Kl-Y MAM * •-. ant* TTif 1 w%y, "T*— __I j;^‘ i .I:*€ • • • 1 9 * m ,:.4'4 IZl '■*1 j; 1 W:;.\ rtifToimtiiinrliUrtl iiiifattirtfa,-..Miiii \ 7" 1 1 ! __________._______^±- I — 1 , ■ f ”i ” 1* I1 Om. V- W- •- |^'*r , -: -; >• " t .--f„. «- ----------, •v.i-Y::.: . ...•;3—-:!^5..v^ V j ' ^ . ‘.rw ‘ 4 V ‘ ^ ^ \' . ; - ■■; \ ; * —ir'-*-->-^ !’•• ’ I ^' -. »' . » >-*li ■' - »• , : ; - V, ^ _ _ , -„. t I :*- .... I ’■"■ * ' . '.■•}■.= ' -*-\‘ •v! i ' ■' V ,* ^ ______ 1 ’ - •*'• ‘ Jr' -tM^ T, i I ! . irfy .'; ' ’« ^.- El. i. N 1988 TRAFnC VOLUMES siRRP.r siwrs' ■■’*"' »T. PAUL-MINN2AP0I.W ■“ »K \' liX. COI XT ^ ARliA «iiv<iii!*orA iwF»rriMi^f »<wwmTAi TWDMittmtvT* inv»««r» irs WAOTwiaiT Vni.»!w*«rr*Tww Hilt iwi—t —iiMroaTmi LBGBVD .......HI"®u.\. >*fm >.»••................ 3 mn iM »tM>...........................S CMU. ..M....... CMit m*.................................. ....................... • —- lUiiiaiM tliM......................................— •LI MLD NUMOK RCMCSCNT t9M •VtRACe •WUU. OAILV TRATriC VOLUMCS. c •. •. 0. r.) KEY MAP T- , 0 •«- , "ft VftJ-rJ 1 icl i v£riTl r.fsPVr.-a.•4*M| a^safsO tflu •t*’!p' •*m ■T“”'ft- M* *•• ....... ,vi^ .;•?■• • ■ y- .... tern T.H. 12 CORRIDOR STUDY Policy Committee Minutes Maple Plain City Hall October 24, 1990 V Members Present: T. Humbert, G. Wetter. M. Johnson, R. Baunan, M. ,^ger, J. Grabek, G. Acromite, A, Kunze Alternates Present: KL Gabriel, G. Cook, A Vande Vegte Others Present: S. Hay, L. Dallam, R. Harris, J. Knutson, J. Johnson, D. Lorsung, R. Peterson, R. Scheuer, B. Colons, P. Zanetti, K. Madson, A, Carlson, E. Peterson, G, Cook, C. Rowlette, P. Pittel, J. Pittel Hay called the meeting to order shonly after 5:30 p.m. The meeting agenda and the minutes of September 26, 1990 Policy Committee meeting were approved. Hay recommended that M. Johnson serve as Chair for the Policy Committee. This was acted upon and approved by committee members. Chair Johnson then asked for an update on the activities of the Technical and Citizen's Committees. Dallam explained that representatives from Hennepin and Wright Counties were added to the Technical Committee. Chair Johnson asked that minutes from the Technical and Citizen Committees be forwarded to Policy Committee representatives - both draft and approved. Wetter added that this is preferable, and that it would become the Policy Committee representative’s responsibility to forward them to their respective City Offices. Dallam distributed current member rosters for each of the corridor study committees. Kunze said that Arlo Vande Vegte should be listed as alternate for the Policy Committee. A discussion followed on the sequence of meetings and the speed of information dissemination, in particular the availability of project mapping of the potential alternatives. Dallam explained that no copies of the mapped alternatives had yet been made available because of the need for the Policy Committee to first meet, hear the presentation, and offer comments on the suggested rj»?>rTiatives. The concern was that information is given to the Technical and Citizens Committee over a week before h giv^n to the Policy Committee, and Policy Committee members are asked to respond to things they are unaware of. The Committee discussed changing the meeting date and getting copies of the other committees’ minutes. It was agreed that the draft minutes would be sent as soon as possible after the meetings. Dallam said the committee meeting dates were established to have the Policy Committee meet last because the other committees "report” to the Policy Committee. Dallam and Hay said they would discuss ways of resolving the problem. Johnson then asked for an update on the City/State Goals, Project Issues/Concems paper. Dallam distributed the revised paper which incorporates a (supplemental) new Goal 5 for Long Lake, as introduced at the September 26 Policy Committee meeting and recommended by the Technical Committee at their October 16 meeting. In response to a question from Johnson, Dallam explained that changes in this paper can be recommended by other committees or the general public, but that the Policy Committee would have the responsibility of approving them. The Policy Committee approved the addition of new Goal #5 for Long Lake (see 10-18-90 paper update). A discussion on the possible alternative highway corridors as identified on the base map board was then led by Dallam. They were presented as follows: 1. No build - (not shown, assumes only minor modifications to the existing roadway) 2. Upgrade existing T.H. 12 on the mainline (red line) - to carry local and through traffic 3. T.H. 55 Bypass (northernmost blue line) - to remove outstate through traffic from T.H. 12 4. C.R. 11 Bypass - new nonhem a'ignment between T.H. 55 and T.H. 12 (blue line - suggested by HNTB) - to remove outstate through traffic from T.H. 12 5. C.R. 6 Bypass - new alignment paralleling C.R. 6 nonh of Long Lake (blue line) - to remove outstate and Study Area through traffic from T.H. 12 in Long Lake. 6. South Bypass - new alignment bypassing Long Lake, Maple Plain, and Delano (blue line) - to cany outstate and Study Area through traffic Dallam added that the orange lines represent possible connectors to combine/modify alternatives. The green line represents the old Mn/DOT smdy bypass of Long Lake, which the Citizen’s Committee had asked to identify. The Committee then discussed the availability of cunent traffic data (1988) and that forecasts will probably be available in November. Johnson then asked for comments on the alteraativeL tiom the Committee. Grabek and Hay asked if s»"all copies of the alternative corridors could be made available. Dallam agreed to provide these copies, and said that the Committees would also be receiving full- size prints of the corridors for further study. Wetter mentioned that there is some local confusion that the current Highway 12 improvement program is not the same as the Corridor Study. Humbert added that several localized, minor improvement projects west of Long Lake are programmed for construction. (Only an upgrade of T.H. 12 to a four-lane roadway would qualify as part of the corridor study.) Dallam said that there had been some minor modifications since the Technical and Citizen’s Committee meetings the previous week (variations/connectors, old study bypass of Long Lake) but that generally the five major alternatives are the same. He said the next step is to apply the environmental data to screen (i.e. narrow the field) of corridors to a feasible number, and that the Policy Committee should meet in January to discuss the remaining corridors. Acromite asked how many corridors would remain as a result of the screening process. Dallam said all major alternatives that can satisfy the project need will be considered - if not, a "fatal flaw" is observed and the alternative is dropped. Johnson asked if the Policy Committee is responsible for acting on shifts that may be necessary (corridor realignments) as a result of avoidable issues ~ Dallam responded "yes" and that the screening process would be reinitiated. Grabek asked about the project schedule - if lost time could be made up, or what is reasonable to expect for a completion date. Dallam said that data collection and traffic forecasts are taking longer than expected to complete, and that mid-1991 is probably a more realistic completion date. Grabek also asked who presents the rationale for the committee(s) to make adequate judgements as to which corridors are better than others. Dallam responded that HNTB was hired to make screening recommendations for the Policy committee to act on. He also reiterated how colored overlays with environmental and special features would assist in the screening process. Dallam also mentioned that colored slides may be made of each overlay with alternatives and provided to the cities. Dallam then distributed a handout and briefly described Social, Economic, and Environmental impacts to be evaluated for each alternative in the EIS. Johnson asked who would be hired to do the EIS. Hay said that Mn/DOT usually hires the consultant to complete the EIS process (including scoping), and therefore HNTB’s contract would probably be extended. They were hired for only the sccpmg because of available funds. Dallam explained that Mn/DOT chose to prepare a 'Tiered EIS" for this projert (Tier I will only address in depth those issues in the scoping decision document that are considered to be significant) to expedite the selection of a preferred alternative. Humbert added that funds will be allocated in FY 1992 for the EIS, probably at the end of the scoping process. J. Knutson (HNTB) then explained traffic growth on T.F. 12 using 20 and 30 year projections firom historical growth rates, using between 2 and 4 percent growth scenarios. He also explained right-of-way needs for freeway and expressway standards, and explained the differences in design and access between them. The preliminary layouts prepared for the Orono/Long Lake area were then presented, which showed both freeway and expressw'^y scenarios. Knutson pointed out possible locations for grade-separated interchanges and potential environmental issues with each. He also stressed that these layouts are very flexible and do not represent final layouts for this area. Kunze asked why the Long Lake/Orono area was being presented first. Knutson and Dallam said that the Techmcal Committee asked HNTB to look at this area first, to study the "bottleneck" issue on T.H. 12 east of Long Lake. There were no other questions on the layouts. Johnson asked about the next meeting date for the Policy Committee, and whether the other committees will meet before January. Dallam said that the Technical and Citizen ’s Committees will meet November 13 to discuss the results of this meeting with the Policy Committee. It was suggested that the Policy Committee recom^^e on November 28th to discuss traffic forecasts if they are available. Johnson then asked if there were comments from the audience, to which Hay, Dallam, and Knutson resi*onded: (Alan Carlson, Orono) Is cost of roadway and of acquiring right-of-way considered? Comment: S. Bypass alternative should not be considered. A: The EIS considers construction cost estimates for each alternative, including right-of- way acquisition cost estima' (Ed Peterson, Long Lake) Have measv ,ments between Long Lake and the BN tracks been made to see if a 4-lane highway can fit? A; No extensive smdies have yet been conducted - right-of-way restrictions will depend on documented impacts of whether the selected roadway will fit; whether the railroad will need to be relocated; and/or whether Long Lake itself would need to be partially filled. (Pam Zanetti, Long Lake) When will (programmed) interim improvements to existing T.H. 12 be constructed? A: (Humb ert not sure but would find out; Kunze said 1992) (Rosemary Scheuer, Pioneer/Laker Newspaper) When will products be available and what’s the schedule for future presentations? A: Traffic forecasts will probably be available in November. HNTB will prepare overlays in November and December for a January Policy Committee presentation. The earliest a general public meeting could be held on the results of the scoping process will probably be mid-1991. In Other Business, Hay discussed that Mn/DOT decided to add representatives from the City of Wayzata to the three committees because at least one major alternative (the South Bypass) affects the dty. Johnson asked whether Plymouth might be added - Hay responded that if the T.H. 55 Bypass alternative appears to be feasible for further study, representatives from the City of Plymouth would be added. The discussion then refocused on mapping availability. HNTB agreed to send as soon as possible a full-size map and 11" x 17" print of the alternatives to each Policy Committee member and the affected local governments. Johnson adjourned the meeting at 6:55 p.m. FDm T.H. 12 CORRIDOR STUDY POLICY COMMITTEE MINUTES September 26, 1990 Maple Plain City Hall (Approved October 24, 1990) Members Present: T. Humbert, M. Alger, A. Kunze, M. Johnson, J. Grabek, G. Acromite, G. Wetter Alternates Present: K. Gabriel Others Present! S. Hay, L. Dallam, R. Harris, P. Zanetti, P. Pittel, D. Cook, D&D Didinsky, B. Collins, G. Johnson, Allen, J. Stark, K. Reilly, D. Stinson, R. Scheuer Hay called the meeting to order at 5:30 p.m. The agenda and the minutes of the August 22, 1990 Policy Committee meeting were approved as written. There was discussion of the TH 12 Corridor Committees - their purpose and function, and why a member of one committee should not be a member of another committee. Dallam then updated the Committee on changes to the Goals and Issues paper by community. He explained that the changes resulted from input from members of the other committees and subsequent meetings with local members of the representative communities. A list of initial objectives and issues was received from the City of Orono, to which M. Johnson and G. Acromite stated should serve as a model for other affected project communities within the Metropolitan Council ’s jurisdiction. It was agreed that the objectives should be added to the list of goals. (See Attachment I). Dallam then began a discussion on possible alternatives that have been identified by representatives of the three committees and others. He mentioned that the Techmcal Committee had asked to have layouts prepared for three types of highway - a rural and urban at-grade alignment (expressways) and a freeway alignment - for the Long Lake/Orono area, since it is the most developed portion of the smdy area. Kunze ^ked whether TH 55 would also be studied as an alternative. It was stated that this option is included as one of the TH 12 alternatives. Discussion followed on using this corridor as an alternative ("east end" issues of TH 12; how traffic/design considerations would be evaluated by diverting traffic to TH 55). Dallam responded to a question from Humbert that preliminary layouts would be prepared for all alternatives that survive the initial evaluation process. -1- HR T.H. 12 Corridor Study ■ Policy Committee Minutes September 26, 1990 Page 2 The Committee, Hay, and Dallam then discussed the purpose and basis for the project's traffic forecasts, current traffic data (both on TH 12 and cross streets) and the status of available information for the Committee ’s use. Acromite requested that available and current (1988) traffic counts be provided at the next meeting. In Other Business, Long Lake and Orono citizen’s groups concerned with TH 12 were dji^cussed. Kunze described Long Lake’s committee, the TH 12 Relocation Committee, and S. Pittel presented a copy of the minutes of this group’s meetings to Hay (see Attachment //). An Orono citizen’s group membership, contacts and minutes are available from the City. Hay mentioned that the project study area will, at likely locations for alternative corridors, be aerially videotaped by MnDOT. The Committee asked why this was being done at this time (before seleaion of alternatives) and Hay said it was the decision of Commissioner Levine. Comments were then received from the audience: G. Johnson asked why 1990 traffic forecasts (meaning counts) couldn ’t be prepared for members of the three committees to assist in decision-making. Hay and Humbert explained that MnDOT staff resources (for traffic counting) are limited, and that 1990 counts will eventually become available during the course of this study for MnDOT. P. Pittel asked if TH 12 would be entitled to federal funds for its construction. Hay responded that once a preferred corridor is established, federal and other funds should become available for the project and that a proposed half of a one-percent metro sales tax by the Transportation Study Board would generate revenue for projects like TH 12. TH 12 does not qualify for interstate funding (90% federal) but does qualify for "regular" funding (75% federal). D. Stinson asked if 1-394 could be extended westward. Dallam and Humbert explained that 1-394 could not extend past the 1-494 interchange. P. Zanctti and Acromite again raised the funding issue of the project. Hay replied that even with competition for funds with other top-rated projects (in MnDOTs Metro District, west) this project ranks behind only one other (TH 101 at Rogers) as the highest priority, and that the resources to complete it will most likely be made available. -2- T.H. 12 Corridor Study - Policy Committee Minutes September 26, 1990 Page 3 K. Riley asked for what purpose the aerial surveying/videotaping would be conducted. Discussion followed on the need to do this, its usefulness to the project, and how it may be conducted in conjunction with other projects. G. Johnson mentioned that cities to the west along TH 12 would be meeting for a funding lobby day, and recommended that TH 12 associated groups (for this project) join together to lobby for funds. P. Pittel recommended the following change for Lx)ng Lake ’s goals: "Ensure syo dval for Long Lake". Other questions from the audience focused on probable impacts that alternative corridors would have on school districts and the Luce Line Trail (acquisition or joint use), and that the Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) would cover these issues. The EIS could begin in July 1991 and continue for about two yeu'S. Alternatives to be studied should (realistically) not exceed four, according to Hay, including the No Build alternative. However, sdl feasible alternatives will be studied in the EIS. Pittel asked whether traffic forecasts would consider the new (Hennepin County) park in Minnetrista, expected to place a considerable quantity of traffic on TH 12 (that could not be served by a TH 55 alternative). Hay said that traffic forecasts do consider development and land use changes that are occurring in the area. Other audience questions dealt with the project schedule, and when data/mapping would be available. Delays have been incurred as a result of obtaining mapping and revising old data, but Hay and Dallam said the project is still close to the original schedule. Acromite asked if corridor alternative overlays (on the base map) would be available for the next Policy Committee meeting. Dallam said that the layouts prepared will only show the Orono/Long Lake area (see previous discussion on "alternatives") and that these overlays are not intended to replace item #7 in the Schedule of Activities (Prelimmary Layouts of Remaining Corridors). Next meeting — October 24, 1990, Maple Plain City Hall, 5:30 p.m. Meeting adjourned at 6:45 p.m. IMWfOUCVJIW -3- Attachment I T.H. 12 CORRIDOR STUDY T.H. 101 - T.H. 25 CITY/STATE GOALS PROJECT ISSUTS/CONCERNS (Revised 10-1-90) Mn/DOT Goal 1. Accommodate through trips by auto and trucks at a high level of service along T.H. 11 Goal 1 Provide for the safe movement of vehicles along T.H. II Goal 3. Enhance the economic vitality of the State of Minnesota. Goal 4. Prese,ye the quality of the natural environment along T.H. II Issues: • obtaining political consensus on preferred corridor • availability and source of funding for design and construction • characteristics of new roadway (freeway vs. expressway) • access to T.H. 12 (type and spacing) Metropolitan • compatibility of project with Metropolitan Council plans and policies • characteristics of upgraded T.H. 12 (freeway vs. expressway) • establishment and preservation of preferred corridor as soon as possible (in order for municipalities and townships to plan effeaively and to remove uncertainty of potentially affected property owners) LongUkfi Goal 5. Provide a high quality of life for Long Lake residents. Concerns: • impacts on local businesses • impacts on existing homes • impact on tax base (existing T.I.F. commitments and the finanaal abihty to provide necessary public services) • impacts on the natural environment (lakes, woodlands, wetlands) • water quality of Long Lake • congestion on T.H. 12 1 Orono Goal d Provide a high quality of life for Orono residents. Concerns: • impacts on single family residential property • appropriate access to existing and planned development • noise and air quality impacts • protection of natural environment • safe, effective movement of vehicular traffic • impacts on local businesses and tax base • Safe and convenient movement along and across T.H. 12 for pedestrians and bicycles Medina Goal 7. Provide a high quality of life for Medina residents. Concerns: • impacts on adjacent property (economic, access to T.H. 12, relocation costs, noise, visual) • mitigation of impacts on adjacent property • impact on local roads (cost to City of upgrading, relocation) Maple Plain Goal 8. Provide a high quality of life for Maple Plain residents. Concerns: • impacts on local businesses (loss of highway traffic/sales if bypassed — quantity and convenience of access - adequate visibility and signing for the City.) • safe and expeditious movement of local traffic within the City • improved accessibility to Twin Cities Metropolitan Area • local road continuity and access to T.H. 12 (upgraded TJH. 12 could be a barrier and divide the City) Independence Coal 9. Provide a high quality of life for Independence residents on large lots in a rural setting. Concerns: • impacts on residential property • local road continuity and access to T.H. 12 (upgraded T.H. 12 could be a barrier and divide the City) • impaa on CR 6 (in terms of existing conflict of through traffic with local traffic) • impacts on historic sites (e.g. City Hall) • impact on "big woods" remnant communities • provisions in T.H. 12 R/W for future mass transit Delano Coed 10. Maintain a small-town-urban quality of life for U^'.aAO residents. Coal 11. Enhance the City of Delano as a service center for - .nding areas. Concerns: • conflicts between local and through traffic on T.H. 12 (ability to enter and cross T.H. 12 in peak periods) • impact on residential tax base • improved accessibility to Twin Cities Metropolitan Area • impacts on existing businesses and industrial development Franklin Township Coal IZ Provide a good place for harmonious living and farming. Goal 12. Accommodate growth in an orderly and economical manner. Concerns: • ability of township roads to accommodate growth after T.H. 12 is upgraded |4nD>ll4aiCa Attachment 2 mm Sept. li. N1NU1ES HIGHUAY \2 RELOCAriON COMMITTEE (.Initial organizational meeting) Preface: A group of approximately 25 Long Lake Citizens met at St. Georges Church to organize an effort to prevent the routing of a 4—lane up*grade of Hwy 12 througl'i the city of Long Lake. At a preced­ ing meeting of approximately 100 concerned Long Lake citizens at the Long Lake Fireball ion September 5, 1930), a unanimous concensus st'iowed the desire of citizens to form action committees with the common goal of organizing! an effort to oppose the aforementioned cJeve 1 op'fiient. fwenty—six p'eople signed up to p>art ic ip<ate in this ef fort. Voluntary contributions to support this action group totaled S273.13 while ♦50.(I»(1» caine in during the following week, along with pledges of <225.00. in-The iiieeting was called to order by Dr. Mary Miller . A. packet of formation was distributed; contents of the packet were... I) A local contact list (participants at the Sept. 5 meeting), A list of r.oriimittee volunteers, A copy of City o'/ Long Lake Resolution No. 3-d-?0, TH 12 Corridor Study - TH 101 to TH 25; Schedule of Activities Citizens Action Committee Interest Survey, Handout; Long Lake's Goals, Concerns and Issues Regarding Re­ location of Trunk Hwy 12, A Call to Action Handout: Concerned Citizens for Hwy 12, Vol 1, No. 1, Aug 90. Committee Volunteers (grouped by preference of committee). 2) 3) 4> 5> €.) 7) S) 9) Dr. Hiller asked attendees to gather at tables designated STEERING COMM., COMMUNICATIONS COMM., ENVIRONMENTAL COMM., FUNDRAISING COMM., & POLITICAL ACTION COMM. Citizens at these tables were then asked to elect two Co-Chairs and a Secretary and to brainstorm what they per­ ceived their goals and priorities to be. After about 30 minutes, Dr. Miller asked the several committees to name their officers and to offer stated goals. -Beginning with the STEERING COMMITTEE, the table named Or. Miller and Ed Peterson as Co-Chairs, Dale Behmer as Sec'y, and Alice Peterson as Treasurer. Dr. Miller asked the attendees to select a name for the group as a whole; the name HIGHUAY 12 RELOCATION COMMITTEE was selected. Sub—committees were theiT asked to name their elected officers and to list any perceived goals without order of preference. STEERING COMMITTEE: 1) Officers (listed above) 2) Goals: a. Identify the number of people likely to be dir­ ectly impacted (relocated) by an expanded Hwy 12 corridor, and appro.<imate the loss of tax dol lairs Minutes: Hwy 12 Reloceition Cornuiittee. Page 2 of 2. tax dollars h j corridor and approximate the loss of to the City of Long Lake. Estimate the effect on commercial/business activ­ ity as a result of Hwy construction, Estimate the effect on Police/Fire protection during the construction period, provide specific identification of responsibility within each comrni ttee, Determine most highly/Iikely travel routes to the proposed new Minnetrista Park, IdeiTti f i cation of Historic Structures (local). Reporting routes, ie, does the Steering Comm, re­ port to the City CounciI, . . .par ticipating corri­ dor towns,...other effect areas? Meeting places for the committees Frequency of meeting Sup'plies needed, sucl'i as chalkboards, map*s, etc. Ne-:t Meeting for the Steering Committee: Sep*. 17, 6:30 pmi. 2) Goa1s: CUMMUNICATIUNS COMMITTEE: I) Officers. Lisa Ehlers/Susanne Pittel Get Survey Maps for the old south route for ex­ panded Hwy 12, and current maps for a north route (may be more than one. Contact Hennepin Co. Parks for an update on the new Minnestrista Park; get all available inform­ ation of environmental impact/concerns, Get information on social and economic impacts, esp. with respect to schools, fire protection & and law enforcement. Set up contact persons for media when pertinent P'ublicity is obtained. Consider publication of a newsletter. d. ENVIRONMENTAL COMMITTEE: 1) Officers: Carol Brick ley/Bernadette Collins. 2) Goals: a. Get information on Environmental Impact. POLITICAL ACTION COMMITTEE: 1) Officers. Not named: Dick Casewell attending. 2) Goals: Not specified. The meeting was adjourned at 8:4.6 pm by Steering Committee Chair Miller. Respectful'lW si^riitted,1 Dale E. Behmer, Sec'y (Steering) ;ep t I ^ , 13 >0 HIuHyAY 12 RELQCATKJM COr Ml TTEE Minu li5S Me*tiriQ (.>lled to ordt-r by Steering C...iMhu 1 I -e Co-Ch*n M«»ry Miller. Minutes of the previous rrteeting (Sept 15, f30 initial rneeUrj) were appro-vd as subriiiiled Pr,regent f*;«r the St-^ering Corrirn i > tee : Or. Mary Miller Pat Schulz Ed Peierso«r. Peter I i tte r>rile Behroer , Oonn • msc '•lir^r Platers- n iMck • .wel lo'dd Olson Present for the Co'rnfnunication » jfdfrti c • ^e Suzanne P i t te 1 ‘ C-^-Cha i r ) Presen* f«:*r ttie Env i ronmen tci 1 Cornrni^ iae t' a t hV Br i nk 1 ey *. C o-C ha 11*.» Lis Olson h'i-7<:> attending and reques t in«g'C i-nsu ' t .«nt Status Peg Swanson The meeting opened with a report f rort Suzanre Piitel on contacss wit-h MnDOT. Suzanne stated that MnDOT has a* L’/ast three routes se- Xected and that as many as si.< are under con» ideration. . . with cofnrrent one of the MnOOT personnel that the r. jrri-tor is "pretty well de- '. ,;V^-C i ded. " Maps of the routes are to be a/ailalle by the end of October, was dete? mined that Long L-ake (the Icike itself) and the BN trac> s in route selection. Also, a regulation e?<ists onp 1 are major obstacles I' taking designated Park Lands for highway routes I Swizanne reported that the ne:;<t known MnDOT meeting would be on ‘i p— [:■ tember 26tli with the location to be annc-unceo. Liz Olson of the COMMUN. COMM, reported thet a meeting is scheduled for 7!30 pm at the Maple Plain City Hall,...agenda unknown. She vol­ unteered to stay on top of MnDOT meeting schedules and pass the in- 7 F>: ;; formation along to the Steering Committu*-.- U. y. i: ACTIONS, ASSIGNMENTS Environmenial Committee: Uill Look in o possible designation r.r .* sites in Long Lake that might coKre undei- the :a<egory of "hisio* i ..al felgnificance " that might be decla^>d *o be in a "historical dis- aresent, no buildings ir* Long Lake are on the Si t^ -e ^o*ric Registry e;<cept f .«< the leg cabin which c -lid irict". At of Minnesoir^ be .relocate l‘/90 .^ of 2. Li-: Oison .• >^n. I O. U>d tr-.c- qroi-JC thr«t one- roir ♦ i c il nr rr-.^u 1 t i on fftig^ii have relevance to the Comdo»' xs tna- the DNR has a ahore-Iine designation wlni-h -jays that there »:^nnc>» bo ^tiore that 2S'^ hard surface within I Ot't) ’ of i. a!; e sho r e 1 1 ne Dice said h wo could ”bac : into h Irfif r-Litchf leld-Oasst ?lr. in-Long L ske . I*, '-teering C*;air riii. ‘ serdxng an i if orma t < n ed •v:.' Id I. ••"■ t Steerino Cohirn 11 lee ! The c ornin 111 ee in c-nn'' idering meeting with all oUier’corndor comiMittees ‘including Or-mo’ m order o g.=.t ine wha t c 11 i zens o r official c omn.un i I-y " c r r 1 dc r " gr oup2 are active • nd what progress 1*=; being m^de relative rori idor routes. Licr ’..aiwell noted* that Litchfield ha.- had three coi '.do> possibilities pr- to ihewi and iha‘ selectio-ns are being c .msi«: ered; try to get a copy of the routes so lhal likely route from a western point, le, Cok a to-Howar d L jk e-Mo*n tr - se-Oe I nno-Hap On matters of dissemin^ting informal the Comrriun i c a t i o-ns C ornm i 11 ee to c ons i d.: ^ fetter to Long Lake residents and busin.-sses; part of the purj. -se of this newlelter would be to let resident i knew that '*we are at worl and help is needed and appreciated. Cii-<ir filler asked that the tSec'y to tlie Steering Corurnitlee assembl =r information that couh: also be used in a nev.-s release, and to' c oorrj: nate this witn the tor. ;i 1 :a- 11 ons Cornrn i i tee -,ked Corrimuni c a t ions Commi t tee ; Suzanne P1 with appropriate media, f'jr e;campie th'o "investigative veporting", ' I—Team Repor The Ccmmrtn t c a 1 ons Committee agreed t signed up for various comrnittees but ha ;• 1 -:is very appro>pr»at<? for those committee •. for example, thi.* Fund Raising and Pod i t . Dick Caswell -.n' f ered to do pr ir. t ing >-lers but sug<jested that the Hwy 12 m logo that would prominently iden agreed to make contact -e media who h.nve a rec :<i d of s', etc. • cor tael those people -1 . 'enM attended meetings. IMS 1 who are under-staffed. as cal Action Cornrnitie s . '* inf or'^net ion it I fly rs ;.nc 1 oc a t iOil Comm i ttee ofm-* uc .ify the Relocation LommiK ?e Co—Chair Miller announced that the rrn Committee would be on Sept. 24, S:Lv pm i meeting of the Sts-ering ai the City Hall. There being no further business, Co-Ci«air Miller adjourne-- il'w group V f ' -'I -*' •**v. i? L •t 8:30 pm. v»>^l Respectful :y suomi‘I i^«d, ■■■ &Ut: I Iv.1 I.1A C Dale E. Bec.mer. Steering C* rom i t tee Sec ' y 'O?;. ‘ 1 •*.* \: ir - - - - - - - - - - --- - - - - - - - -Jr. HIGHWAY 12 RELOCATION COMMITTED / COMMUNICATIONS COMMITTEE REPORT ninutSB o-^ Wedneso^v'- SeGtema^r- 19, In attendance: Suzanne Pittai-Cc Chair, jtearinq ComiMCtee reore«&enc«r.i *•« Leea Ehlera-Cn Chair .'Seer at ary Kete Hadson-BackuD to Steer inq Cammittea rep resent at i'/p Ovloree Svianson PiMMla Zanetti •lake Sohn Jaaies Swartwaod« Old Buslnese. RSviewed Steering Committee’’s September 17 Defined Goals \copies attached) wit itdecific goals delegated. New Bualnees. Oe-^ined •iruncdiate Communication Cemn:.' rep goals: 1, Oe-Fi. our Mission iratement 2- Design ? logo S. Coin a slogan 4* Prioritize actions ir* aro.;>rcisnca '-nrh .jiaering Committee's counuei 8* Determine strategy Am Identify media to be contacted ann seloct Committee people to repreeent the Relocation of Highway 12 Committet? to the media 7» Have a banner similar to that of Lone Lake’s Corn Days lOetereined the following questions to put before the Steering Committee at the Met meeting of September 24: Why was it originally considered a conflict of interest to hold the Relocation Committee meetings ac Long Lake City ** not? Whmn will the Steering Commlcteo talk to the Long Lake Chamber cif Commerc in order to appraise attitudes and dnte'”fl'ihe support j^^ected from local bueinessee? ^fei \ a-A.-| (Sf*■ When will the next Toi^ Meering be hetd^ Thereafter? is the first message theWhat is the first mAssage the Reloiat.ion Committee shCMild present to the p:«b.l ic.. . i n fivers, newsletters, signs, etc., and what should the strategy be (a blitzkrieg of massive infoim.^t^on : slow distribution)? Will the St ear 1 no Commi lie In ii?c-re more PAC mofTitersand Fund-raisers? PAC -ni-iftbers: A. Graf, after January 1991fund-rsisina Coaimitree: Joivr.n &ern-i, Delores Swanscn (also ^ Communications Committee, J ?mes Swartwed -.also Communications Lommitt-^#). The Communicat12PS Committee la in need or funds and a PAC member to begir the political process and needs to wrn-k closelv with these two committees to obtaui funds anci ciaut. 6-An updated li -t of all cau.mittee members with home and work phone numbers is needed. t Other business. —To send an initial m-issaqs tc the Dublic bv uc’obei 1. -Get s oetition out to Long Lal.e residents, business, for support of the ^Lttion ^ hxqhnav IX to a oiace oth.r th.„n trxat oi the present L.ng L.k. corridor, -Send an updaL.,a ;--.-r •out-ineiy to o.-.-ic. keeping them uedatej on Info. vy ■WM: s® pl'- .Ift-: >.hy\'m. v: 1 I- f''v li.MS'iS-i Sept. 24, 1990 HIGHWAY 12 RELOCATION COMMITTEE Minutes Meeting celled to order by Co-Cheir Mery Miller let G:37pm) Minutes of the Sept. 17th meeting were read and the following cor­ rections were made: 1) Corrected name spel1ing... Carol Brickley.. Co-Chair for the Environmental Committee. 2) Para. 1, line 4, delete "MnOOT personnel**, insert-**committee* 3) Para. 3. line 1. delete **C0MMUN.**. insert ENVIRONMENTAL. Present for the{Steering Committee: Or. Mary Miller Alice Peterson Ed Peterson Pat Schulz Dale Behmer Jerry Allen Peter Pittel Don Stinson Present for the Communications Committee: Sue Pittel (Co-Chair> Dick Caswell (re-assigned) Present for the Environmental Commrnittee: Carol Brickley (Co-Chair> * Co-Chair Ed Peterson opened the meeting with a question, **Should more people be added to the Steering Committee and should general meetings be held once a month? After some discussion, it was agreed that a general monthly meeting would be a good., idea, but that the Steering Committee should not become too large,.:.probably not much larger that it is now. ACTIONS, ASSIGNMENTS. Communications Committee Sue Pittel, Co-Chair. 1 2. 3. 4. 5. On the past Thursday evening MnOOT meeting: much concern ex­ ists on route selection with a badly "splintered** attitude of "it's all right if it goes through your property but it's a rotten deal if it goes through mine." Asking if one of the Steering Committee Co-Chairs could come to the COMMUNICATIONS Comm, meetings. Yes. Specific goals were delegated to metAbers (See attached min­ utes). Seven Immediate Goals were defined (See attach^ minutes). Send a flier or newsletter to the general public by Oct 1. Note: It was decided by the Steering Committee that a flier would be the best format, and that a rough draft would be ready to- the Steering Committee at the next meeting. Pete Pittel. Dick Caswell, and Sue would- coordinate its creation. ^ • • -::5. •=. . 0)> U»e gutT-stion, "was xt a conflict of interest to hold Comwi— ittee r«i»frtings at City Hall?" Answer: No. 7. On appraising the Charnber of Commerce for attitudes and sup** P'ort, the Steering Coriiiiii tiee asked CofC member Behmer to speak briefly to the Chamber at their next meeting. 3. When will the next Town heeting be held? On Thurs. Oct. ll, at 7 pm. 9. What time fi'ame and intensity should an informational cam­ paign take? Although not decided at this time, it was felt that it should be a blits with a steady monthly or bi-mcnthly flow of news/informaiion. 10. On the question of getting help to locate more committee members# esp. on those committees that are understaffed* the Steering Committee reported that Liz Olson was preparing a mailing list so that address labels could be produced for a general mailing. An appeal could be made in early mailings for volunteers to report to under-staffed committees. FOR THE FULL REPORT OF THE SEPT. 19 MEETING OF THE COMMUNICA­ TIONS COMMITTEE, SEE THE ATTACHED MINUTES. Environmental Committee. Carol Brick ley, Co-Chair. An 11 —page report was provided for the Steering Committee (Copy attached). Four i esearch items were noted: Environmental Impact letters sent. Uni-on Cemetery relocation c.i.sts/preservat ion... report enc . Historic5«l Preservation Di s tr : c t... pending findings. Park Lands Preservation...research pending. Other items of note: Possible Committee Slogan: "Uherr;- the West begins and the Freeway Bends." Public Meeting: MnOOT, Sept. 2S, 5:30 pm. Maple Plain City Hall. NnDDT Citizens Committee, Oct. IS, 4 pm, Maple Plain City Hal 1. Considerable concern was expressed over the failure of designated representatives of the City of Long Lake to attend HnOOT meetings. Steering Committee member Allen volunteered to make reminder calls. Liz Olson has attended regularly while other members have not. ' Steering Committee members, Miller, Stinson* and Peterson reported on a recent MnDOT meeting that they attended. Particulars of the meeting: - MnOOT appears to have eliminated consideration of a route south of Long Lake, citing the Luce Line as a reason. — MnOOT has many reasons for not taking a north route around Long Lake. , « - MnOOT seems comitled to staying on "hard surface rather than taking *'soft" routes. The reason for this is cost,... the lack of Federal funds for property/right-of-way costs. - Thai all if nearly all communities in Hennepin County have received County Assistance Funds,...but not Long Lake. Why. ?a«« 3 or 3 - at ihft start of the rueeting, a MnOOT rep stated, "this is the last cliance Long Lake has." What does this fuean! !! Special informational request: Ed Peterson asked Envir. Comm. Co- Chair Brick ley if she would determine the historic bounds of "tepee hill" which is the mound where Union Cemetery is now located, and where Chief Shakopee often pitched his tent. It was noted that one of the children of the Long Lake Pioneers had a photo of his son sitting on the knee of Chief Shakopee. Because of this historical signifi­ cance. the area should be given consideration as an historic site. TREASURERS REPORT; Treas. Alice Peterson reported that a new checking account had been opened at the State Bank of Long L.ike; the opening balance was liiiler and Peterson are signal ory to the ac- c oun t Co—Chair Miller announced that the next meeting of the Steering Comm­ ittee would be on lion. Sept. t. 6:30 pm at the City Hall. Ad j our nrnent: S : 37 pm . Respectfully submitted.Kespectruiiy suoi Dale E. Cehmer, Sec'y T.H. 12 Corridor Study Citizen’s Committee Minutes Maple Plain City Hail October 16, 1990 -56 N Members Present! S. Hay, D. Cade, D. Hamilton, R. Gnitka, J. Berns, G. Cook, T. Wenz, G. Johnson, E. Winston, E. Olson Alternates Present: J. Massopust, R. Dayton Others Presents L. Dallam, R. Harris, J. Knutson, M. Miller, M. Fischer, T. Olson, A. Cosgrove, N. Stott, J. Stott, L. Shull, B. Field, G. Madson, K. Madson, P. Schroeder, S. Payne, K. Gnitka, M, Weatherill, D. Challa, A. Peterson, G. Wetter, T. Ritchie, C. Johnson, S. Ritchie, R. Scheuer, P. Pittel, S. Pittel S. Hay opened the meeting shoniy after 4:00 p.m. The meeting agenda was approved as submitted as were the minutes form the September 20 meeting. Dallam distributed committee lists, discussed the modifications to the Goals/Issues/Concems paper that were recommended at the September 26 Policy Committee meeting (Metropolitan concerns) and the addition of a second goal for the City of Long Lake as a result of the Technical Committee ’s recommendation at their October 16 meeting. (See updated paper). Dallam also distributed a handout which identified Social, Economic, and Environmental impacts to be evaluated for each alternative in the EIS. Also distributed was historic T.H. 12 traffic volume data and typical rural/urban freeway/expressway cross sections. A discussion of possible alternatives was then begun. Dallam explained that the base map represents the no-build alternative and other alternatives to it, and that each alternative (except a mainline upgrade of T.H. 12) provides the ability to divert long through trips in the project area. The five general corridor alternatives which were prepared using committee input and available data sensitive to wetlands, parks, developed areas, etc. are as follows: 1. Z Along T.H. 55 westward from 1-494 bypassing Rockford to the south; New northern alignment (between T.H. 12 and T.H. 55), northwest from near Femdale Road, through Medina, and westward through Independence (S. of CJi. 11); 3.Northwest from near Femdale Road and westward parallel with C.R. 6, then back to mainline T.H. 12 east of Maple Plain; fAToSt: the ebove have several variations through and bypassing Deiano before reconnecting to existing TJi. 12 in FnmhUn TownMp) Citizen ’s CommA-iee Minutes October 16, 1990 Page 2 4. Mainline T.H. 12; and 5. New southern alignment, generally paralleling or crossing between the Luce Line Trail and Watertown Road (on the east), then proceeding west-northwest to bypass Maple Plain and Delano and reconnect with existing T.H. 12 west of the T.H, 25 intersection in Franklin Township. Dallam noted the several variations and crossovers that could occur with each alternative, and the flexibility of their current placement as shown. The purpose is to identify potentially feasible corridors for further study. Once the data is assembled to identify potential environmental and traffic impacts, then the Goals/Issues/Concems for each affected community will be applied and evaluated. Committee members discussed the alternatives - diverting trips to T.H. 55, joining T.H. 12 and T.H. 55 on the east end, and impacts to the metro and outsiate highway systems as a result of improving T.H. 12 via T.H, 55 (example: potential need to upgrade 1-494). As a possible alternative, T.H. 55 would be upgraded to a high-speed route to be able to attract trips. J. Knutson (HNTB) then explained traffic growth on T.H. 12 using 20 and 30 year projections from historical growth rates, using between 2 and 4 percent growth scenarios. He also explained right-of-way needs for freeway and expressway standards, and explained the differences in design and access between them. The preliminary layouts prepared for the Orono/Long L-ake area were then presented, which showed both freeway and expressway scenarios. Knutson pointed out possible locations for grade-separated interchanges ard potential environmental issues with each. Questions on the layouts were received by the Committee: Dayton asked whether the original southern route (from the 1960’s) would be studied. Winston suggested that through traffic be rerouted to T.H. 55 (at freeway standard) and make alterations to the current alignment (i,e. mini-bypasses) and limit access to T.H. 12 at various locations, as a con^>romise. Dallam and Hay responded ihat T.H. 12 would remain a 2-lane roadway with potential turn-back problems to Hennepin County (may require certain improvements to be made). Johnson asked how future Hennepin County roadway improvements (example: C.R. 6) would affcrt the T.H. 12 project. Dallam added that Hennepin County is now represented on the Technical Committee to address this type of question. Dayton asked how the Long Lake bottleneck (where the fr’ceway section in Wayzata ends) would be resolved and how much right-of-way is available for the south alternative (especially with railroad considerations). Hay, Dallam, and Knutson responded that 4 lanes would ease filtering problems, and that the southern route would probably abut the railroad right-of- way. Citizen’s Committee Minutes October 16, 1990 Page 3 Questions and comments were then received from the Audience and addressed by Hay, Dallam, and Knutson: Q: How many lanes west of downtown Long Lake (for an expressway)? How wide is this? A: Six to eight, by the time left/right turning lanes and/or frontage access lanes are added. With a 40 ft. median, a minimum of 120 ft. would be needed. Q: Weren’t overlay maps for environmental features to be expected at this meeting? A: Environmental data and mapping are not yet available - layouts were based on visible features from aerial maps. Therefore, the alignments may shift somewhat after the environmental factors are evaluated. Q: Isn’t the Orono Middle School parking lot impacted (by the mainline upgrade of T.H. 12)7 A: Yes • either as a freeway or expressway. The alignment was shifted onto the northside of T.H. 12 and again is only one possibility. Q: Are the other corridor study committees getting the same information and mapping? A: Yes - when a consensus is reached on the corridors to be evaluated, then the environmental overlays will be prepared. Q: When will the project be completed? At what time will a decision be made on a (preferred) corridor? A: Most likely between one to two years. Q: South of Maple Plain, there is a lot of new construction. Is it possible to avoid areas that simply are not possible? A; It is possible to run an alignment nearly anywhere, except that the impacts become more severe and therefore more difficult to take in some instances. Q: Can the Luce Line be taken, or other parks? Golf courses? A: Publicly-owned recreation areas must be documented as Section 4(f) properties, which are veiy difficult to take. The Luce Line trail may be crossed by an alignment, which then becomes an impact Golf courses that are privately-held are not treated the same as publicly-held courses [4(f)]. Q: Is this why the freeway section of T.H. 12 swerves to miss the Wayzata Country Qub? A: Probably; it could have been a political compromise, or it was the least cost alternative. Citizen ’s Committee Minutes October 16, 1990 Page 4 Committee members then briefly discussed mini-bypasses. Wenz asked if the Litchfield By­ pass data (on economic impacts) was yet available? (prefers a mini-bypass around Maple Plain). Dallam said data is not available yet, but that bypassed communities in rural areas n^ically suffer if their marketing strategies do not change. Winston added that mini-bypasses in local areas would alleviate local problems, and that trucks should be rerouted to TJl. 55. Gnitka thought that a freeway would only work as a mini-bypass around Long Lake, and that expressway should only be considered through downtown areas because of tightness of space. An audience member expressed concerns on the affects of new highway alignment to (Long Lake's) Long Lake. Other discussion on highway service levels followed. Cade asked if it were possible to rate the alternatives. Hay and Knutson said it is possible, but does create weighting problems, especiaUy for quaUtative impacts. Dallam added that screening of impacts will be covered in the scoping process, but not at the level to be detaded in the EIS. Winston asked about the origin of the new northern alignment, and questioned its potential park and residential area impacts. The alignment came from HNTB. Other questions from the audience; Q: Is it possible to upgrade existing T.H. 12 and others (like T.H. 55) to serve the need? A: Mn/DOTs goal is to limit the dispersement of through traffic, and, rather, to load it onto a major carrier. This would be accomplished by developing one primary transportation route, and can also consider other options (such as mini-bypasses, access control, etc.) Q: Is there room for a freeway in Long Lake between the railroad and the lake? A: Possibly, but it's very tight Comments on development, future development control and notification of buyers were also heard. Hay said once the EIS process is completed, then right-of-way can be purchased. It is, however, the responsibility of the municipality to let people know where final alternative corridors are being considered. Q: What can be expected at the next meeting? A; 1. Traffic forecasts 2. Further refinement of layouts as needed. (Environmental mappmg will probably be completed in 2 months). Citizen’s Committee Minutes October 16, 1990 Page 5 % Q: Will home buy-out include million-dollar properties? A: Yes, if needei which would possibly raise the cost of the project- Q: Who officially decides (the ’•oute)? A: Commissioner Len Levine, after staff recommendation. Q: Should representatives from Wayzata be added to the committees? A: Possibly, also from other communities with the T.H. 55 alternative. Olson presented a letter to Hay from the (Long Lake) Highway 12 Relocation committee. Next Meeting: Meetings will be held monthly on the third Tuesday at 4:00 p.m. (Next meeting is November 20, 1990) Meeting adjourned at 5:55 p.m. fuk T,H. 12 Corridor Study Technical Committee Minutes Delano City Hall October 16, 1990 Members Present: S. Hay, J. Sweeney, ■ . T. Loucks. J. Gerhardson, W. Fingalson Alternates Present: J. Goetten, A* Vande Vegte T. Johnson, P. Nesenson Others Present: L. Dallam, R. Harris, J. Knutson, J. Hanson, J. Janzen, L. Clem, D. Engelstad, M. Weatherill, A, Peterson, D. Fritz, M. Sievert, B. Kozel, C. Brickley, S. and S. Rettinger, J. Barbre, M. Mi B. Collins, B. Erickson, P. Pi’ l. S. Pittel, S. Roskowiah, R, Roskowiah, M. Ryerse. J. Bongaarts, P. Theis, K. Madso^i, >Jd, K, Theis, S. Riskowak, S. Nelson, R. Manley, L. Olson, E. Winston, M. i . :mk, F Alger, J. Zanetti, A- Kunze, R. Scheuer, and approximately 3 others not on attendance sheet. Hay opened the meeting at 1:10 p.m. New members from Wright and Hennepin Counties and other community alternates were introduced. The meeting agenda was approved with no revisions. A discussion and clarifications followed on the Technical Committee ’s group recommendation of studying a southern Long Lake by-pass alternative along the Watertown Road Corridor -- that the term "corridor" implies general search area, that the street was referred to only as a geographic reference point (one of the through east-west streets south of town for a possible corridor location), and that no committee member or local citizen in particular was responsible for its suggestion. With that, the minutes of the September 18 meeting were approved. TH 12 Corridor Smdy committee membership rosters were also distributed. Dallam then updated the Committee on revisions to the Goals/Issues/Concems paper for the Corridor Study. It was determined at the September 26 Policy Committee meeting that a list of initial objectives and issues received from the City of Orono should be incorporated as Metropolitan concerns for all the affected project communities within the Metropolitan Council’s jurisdiction. Also discussed was a citizen’s recommendation from the September 26 Policy Committee meeting to replace Long Lake’s goal to provide a hign quality of life for Long Lake residents (Goal 5) - however, Dallam suggested adding a new goal rather than replacing it, Dallam and Vande Vegte then recommended the following additional goal (new Goal 5) for Long Lake: "Ensure the survival of Long Lake as an indenendent municipality and a viable economic and residential entity”. This goal will be addi :o the paper. A discussion on five general corridor alternatives which were prepared using committee input and available data sensitive to wetlands, parks, developed areas, etc. was next presented. These potential alternatives include: 1. Along T.H. 55 westward from 1-494 bypassing Rockford to the south; Technical Committee Minutes October 16. 1990 Page 2 2. New northern alignment (between T.H. 12 and T.H. 55), northv.est from near Femdale Road, through Medina, and westward through Independenc e (S. of C R 11); 3. Northwest from near Femdale Road and westward parallel with C.R. 6, then back to mainline T.H. 12 east of Maple Plain; (Note: the above have several variations thrcAigh and bypassing Delano before reconnecting to existing T.H. 12 in Franklin Township) 4. Mainline T.H. 12; and 5. New southern alignment, generally paralleling or crossing between the Luce Line Trail and Watertown Road (on the east), then proceeding west-northwest to bypass Maple Plain and Delano and reconnect with e.xisiing T.H. 12 west of the T.H. 25 intersection in Franklin Township. Dallam noted the several variations and crossovers mat culd occur with each alternative, and the flexibility of their current placement as shown. I also explained that all alternatives attempt to separate local and through-traffic except the TH 12 and TH 55 alternatives. A handout on Social, Economic, and Environmental impacts to be evaluated for each alternative m the EIS for the project was distributed, as was historical T.H. 12 traffic volume data and typical mral and urban freeway/expre.<3wjy cross sections. J. Knutson (HN lb) then explained traffic growth on T.H. 12 using 20 and 30 year projections from historical growth rates, using between 2 and 4 percent growth scenarios. He also explained right-of-way needs for freeway and expressway standarc.«, and explained the differences in design and access between them. The prclirninaiy layouts prepared for the Orono/Long Lake area were then presented, which showed both freeway and expressway scenarios. Knutson pointed out possible locations for grade-separated interchanges and potential environmental issues with each. Dallaiu agreed to mail Committee members full-scale reproujctions of the layouts and base map corridor alignments. Committee members discussed the ability (at this point) for the alternatives to be rated; whether an ass^^sment of cost which would demonstrate the economy of one alternative over anoth^ ; whether expressway right-of-way (needs) are flexible. A Long Lake 1>ottieneck'' (east of the downtown betweeri the lake and railroad tracks) area ’s right-of-way Technical Committee Minutes October 16, 1990 Page 3 needs were discussed. Loucks suggested that an overview of impacts by alternative be compared to the Issues/Goals/Concems paper - Dallam added that after the other committees have reviewed the alternatives, the environmental mapping is prepared, and the detailed layouts are complete, then an evaluation will be made to compare them. Comments were then received from the audience, with responses from Hay, Dallam, and Knutson: Q: A: Q: A: Q: A: Q: A: Q: A: Q: A: Are there economic and environmental savings to be had from using existing roadways for right-of-way? Taere are right-of-way savings, but design standards still require additional right-of- 'vay and consequential environmental impacts, and the existing pavement and roadbed would most likely be replaced. What are the long-term state goals for highway right-of-way? What futire needs will be used as a basis (for this project)? 2010 is forecast design year for this project, based on Mn/DOTs 20 year forecast des’«;n policy (also of Federal Highway Administration and Metropolitan Council). What precaution wi!^ be used to avoid railroad right-of-way? Special considerations “ i.e. bridging - may be used. Can four lanes be used thi^u-ab Txng Lake? Based on the aerial photos, yes; but it appears to be very tight. Can a specific area (in Long Lake) first be measured (for right-o >way) to determine if there will be impacts? No - impacts are measured from the prepared layouts of the atematives and then tabulated accordingly. The severity of the impact would be based on the minimum right-of-way needed for the particular design used. Can cemeteries be avoided? 'Fhere are legal ramifications involved in taking cemeteries for right-of-way. There are no examples in Minnesota where graves have been moved for a highway. Technical Committee Minutes Octobjr 16» 1990 Page 4 Q: A: With the current federal budget deficit, how will federal funding for this project be affected? The current Senate Authorization Bill is proposing solutions to transponation funding cuts. Proceeds from the federal gas tax may also be used for funding this type of project. If the environmental documentation for this project is not completed, it cannot be funded. Q: Q: A: Q: A: Will a T.H. 55 committee be organized or added to the corridor study groups? Why not leave T.H. 12 for local trips and divert other trips (and trucks) to T.H. 55? The focus appears to be more so on T.H. 12 than T.H. 55. T.H. 55 will be studied as an alternative in the scoping process, and may involve bringing in additional representatives from other commumt.js. It will be studied using the same criteria for all other alternatives. Why is it O.K. to select a preferred corridor if all the impacts haven’t been evaluated by reviewing agencies (i.e. DNR, railroads, others)? It is difficult to obtain a complete agreement from reviewing agencies at the metro, state, and federal level on the most "acceptable" alternative - usually are held accountable for mitigation to the preferred corridor to satisfy agency concerns. Has a master program plan been established for this project? The prepared schedule of activities is the "plan" throu^ the scoping process prior to beginning the EIS, and there is an over^ master plan that includes the scoping study. Meeting adjourned at 2:40 p.m. 103090. TO: FBOM: DATE: :*ayor and City Council ^ :^!ark E. Berhnardson, City Admin is tr ator\Vl November 2, 1990 SUBJECT: Study Regarding Commercial/Industrial Telecommunications Attachment:A. US West Memo Dated 10/5/90 B. City of Orono Moratorium Adopted 10/8/90 C. Public Facilities Memo 9/14/90 ISSUE - Present for Council the determination of process for the study of commercial/industrial telecommunications facilities within the City of Orono. INTRODUCTION - At the Council's October 8, 1990 Council meeting in response to a request by US West a moratorium was placed on all commercial/industrial telecommunications facilities within the City. As part of that moratorium the City needs to undertake a study of the issues related to that in order to determine what action, if any, it needs to take for regulations once the moratorium would expire, DISCUSSION - As an initial review process the City would be undertaking the following: 1. Develop a listing of non-residential tower/antennas in the City. 2. Review of "Master Plan" that the cellular companies may have for other sites within the City of Orono both now and in the future. 3. Determine what alternatives to the type, height and location of antenna presented at the Council meeting October 8th may exist. 4. Review other types of broadcast facilities that could be constructed. 5. Develop recommendations for the following: - Types of facilities or structures often associated with this - Appropriate zoning catagories - Appropriate criteria related to primary versus accessory setbacks etc. Determine the relationship of facilities that are traditionally public utility facilities to appropriate classification of zoning together with determining which are appropriate for other zones. (This may be in line with the regional/local breakdown provided conceptually in Attachment C.) It is hoped that the City may be able to use experts within the community in telecommunications on a voluntary basis during this process. (Dr. Gopinath has indicated his willingness to assi .t the City in this matter on a voluntary basis.) ALTERNATIVES 1. Accept the information. 2. Direct different or additional considerations be made during the process. 3. Table for further discussion. 4. Take no action. RECOMMENDATION - It is recommended that this be accepted as an initial review process subject to change as staff works further in the process. PROPOSED MOTION - Moved by _, seconded by _, Council accepts the information as an initial work plan for a study of telecommunications facilities in the community. Ayes , Nays cc: Dr. Anand Gopinath, 705 Old Long Lake Road, 55'*91 Proa$ Oates Subject: Mayor Grabek & Orono Council Members Planning Commission Chairman Kelley Orono Planning Commission Members City Administrator Bernhardson Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building & Zoning Administra October 5, 1990 #1588 US West Vector Group Conditional Use Permit - 350 Wayzata 31vd. - SoniJig District: RR*‘1B 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 incidental thereto. 54. Public Services - Underground or 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 includinr> buildings or major structures located above ground ’ al. 72. Use - Accessory - A use subordinate to the princl'pal use on a lot and exclusively used for purposes incidental to those of he 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 welfare, 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 permitted to ^ ^ 4 matter of rig^£ ^ every area include wit^:^ \ zone ^cause of hazards . inherent in the use itseTlf or special problems which it*s proposed location may represent. Zoning File #1538 October 5, 1990 Page 2 74. Use Permitted - A use which may be lawfully particular district or districtsestablished in a - - - - - - -- provided it conforms wich all requirements, regulations and performance standards (if any of such districts). 75. Use - Princital - The main use of land or bull dings as (rjrst inguished 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 telephone exchange stations, booster or pressure regulating stations, wells and plumbing stations, elevated tanks, lift stations and electrical power substations, provided no bui Iding sha11 be located within 5 0' from any lot line of an abutting lot in ^ H district,. Prior to aranting such permit it sha 11 be found tha^ architectural design of service structures ^ compatible ^ the neiahborhood in which it is ^ ^ located and t^^ iiiJii: ^mote 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 use or structure on the same lot and customaril y incidenta l thereto and is not"attached”to another structure provided that height of the antenna structure does not xceed 65' and the an enna 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) - Antanna (Permitted Accessory Use in Residential Zone). Any antenna or combination of antenna rigidly attached ^ the princi ^j^ accessory structure provided that none of foregoing exceeds the total height allowed in Section 10.70. Zoning File #1588 October 5r 1990 Page 3 Section 10.55, Subdivision 8 - 26’ setback require! from edge of wetlands. Section 10.75, Subdivision 1 i 2 - Increase in heights controlled through conditional use permit. List of Exhibits Exhibit A Exhibit B Exhibit Exhibit Exhibit Exhibit Exhibit Exhibit Exhibit I -Associates, Inc. - Appraisal on Property Valuations Exhibit Exhibit Exhibit Exhibit Exhibit Exhibit Exhibit Application Property Owners List Location Map Owners Written Confirmation Applicants Addendum Search Area Beutelspacher's Letter - Oept. of Administration Engineer's Report, Noble's Letter 1.1/ 29/ 39, Pirod, Inc. Peter J. Patchin & Appraiser - Letter Topographic Survey Site Plan Elevations Landscape Plan Wetlands Antenna Elevation Pamphlet Entitled "Introduction Into Cellular Technology" Additional Exhibits Submitted Since Planning Commission's Review Exhibit Q - Anand Gopinath Letter Exhibit R - Petition from Residents of Myrtlewood 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 X - Views of 4 Residences Review of Applicatiion - 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 tne City on Highway 12 on the north side of Highway 12. « structure will be located just to the north of the existing gravel parking lot and will be placed a minimum oj 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 Oct.ober 5r 199G Page 4 prefabricated eqcipmenr building. A gr^-el drive will be installed along the west and nortn sides or 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 CHM determination. Please review^ Exhibits E and 'J. 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 10.20, 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 area. 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 principle 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 section is a 50' setback for all public service structures. Section 10.75, Subdivisions i 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 C" Churches and Subdivision 3 (D) Public Service Structures a,:e 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 permit for public ser ice 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 principle use via conditional use permit on a property that already 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- Publlc Responses The applicant held an informational meeting at the Council Chambers on Friday, September 14, 1090 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 ha.3 received many calls advising of concerns from the affected eighborhood. Staff would as)c that members review Exhibits Q, R d 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 isjues 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/Elevation/Landscapinq 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 cf the base or the tower have not been shewn. The accessory structure wi^- be — x 30 . The prefabricated unit is to be covered witn a beige geicoat. The structure would stand approximate-^y 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 tol>.cwing: Search Criteria - The applicant has explained in detail the criteria used in determining the vocation ror an antenna. Review Exhibit S. In Exhibits U and V, the app:.icant has attempted to explain why this specific area was selected for the antenna location siting specific reasons why this site was selected. Height of Structure - 150' height appears excessive. Ap^li^nt has advised that the height is needed to meet che 3 mile radius service area. In consideration of topography. Aoplicant also advises that lighting will net be required either on buildings or on tower. Noise Impact - The applicant advises tnat the^ /ill be minimal sounds emitted from the structure. > , fenance 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. Patel . & Associates (Exhibi- I). In reviewing Mr. Patchin's letter it would appear that the properties used in the comparison are not similar to the lands,''densi ties of neighborhoods adjacent to this proposed antenna site. Zv^ning File #1588 October 5, 1990 Page 7 Options of Action Denial - Fin ling current residential code doe*, not allow free standing an.enna structures as principle uses (pemnitted or conditional) anc that the code does not allow two principle uses on one lot. Council to provide conceptual i:.rection tn uta^f to draft a resolution of denial. Recommend tabling application - Adopt a mornt.>riun> ordiance tivat would p /lue the City with adecuate time to r*-v'tsv its ordinances to determine standards for the use and siti"g oi wireless telecommunication facilities and structures in the Ciiv. The city attorney will present a draft of a moratorium ordinalce for your considerat:on and action. dTY OP OROMO - GESERAL lARD OSE PROPERTY LOCATIOH i V* -•^■Jl’'.:zO.X ... -^ Address <i5a Mesi Kayzata aoulevari ----------£_£-------rid---------------------i'MiO 'Ci)01 'Ml 'UOlis »■ • .1 -’y/^ property Identification Nmnber (P.I.D.) ,3835-118-234ioopi--------------- Please attach legal description to application if not included on required survey. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Phone (home) - - - - --APPLioorr , Phone fwork) 612 339-33^_ _ __ . name TTSVTEST New Vector r,TauT3 Inc^---------------- Address 3350 161st Avenue S.E. P.O. 3°x >329_ I-"-f-L'!!!!-"- Tirdlffet^urtharap^ilclnu’ Phone ihome)_Ji^---------------- Name vineyard of the LaXe______________Phone 613 471-~723------------------------------ 350 W. Wayzata Boulevard______________ City Hav;ata Mh------- , , M/A (month/year)L. '4. __ _ FBBS “ CONDITTONAL CJ. ’’ERMITS DAnAwa'? * 1 Jurrent Fee After^ t Poe - Double Cu'rer.t Application Fee 'll _______ V 00 For each variance request with CUP application $125.00 Residential accessory Use _ _ _ _ $150.00 Institutional ..;aurch, school, etc.) $150.00 Guest House/Guest Apartments • _ _ _ _ $150.00 Duplex Credit/Bldg _ _x_ 5250.00 Commercial/lndu. ial Use _ _ _ _ $200.00 Land Altetatic- Grading and filling - de=ig"«ted wetland or floodplain = rrfdiS|,^^ta^il^^^^et-a^n”^ng-a^f;e^t^::rI5. of la.eshore PRD/PID - see fee schedule OOBR CoauBfercial Site Plan Review (+ cou.- tant fees) ■ $250.00 Vacation ' $175.00 Easament Vacation ^ ^! - - - - $ 50.0.1 Ea.Mi.nt Vacation With Subdivision ic -- - - - $250.00 ae.oning (PUD - refer to fee schedu $100.00 Appeals ~ Other - see fee schedule PBBSSNT OSB OF PROPERTYPresent Zoning District Present Use of Property Residential Other fspecify) Church SBSCRZPTIOM OP REQUEST Describe re<^uest in detail:Constr*-crior. cf a 1_0' antenna tcwer and the location of a 12* X 30*' prefabricated equipiaent for a U5 West - New Vecnor Cellular phone antenna, - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - REQUIRED SUBMITTALS 1. Completed Application Fom. 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 licenset surveyor). Topographic survey (existing and proposed contours) if j.an alterations involve changes in elevation (grades). Construction plan, if applicable (see staff for requirements). ^ As an addend’un to this application, please attach a separate «ist or any other persons you wish notifiec. of this applicat-i-on. YOU ARE REQUIRED TO SUPPLY 30 COPIES OP LARGE DOCUMENTS OR A WORKING COPY (ll" X 17" OR SMALLER) FOR ALL DOCUMENTS SUBMITTED. The applicant and Property Owner must sign this application. Please remember that your application is net complete if the above information has not been included. Certification by Clerical Department that Land Use Application is complete. Initials of Clerical Staff;._ _ _ _ _ _ ___ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _Date- - - - - - - - - - - 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7, APPLICANT* S SIGNATURE ^ ^ The applicant hereby agrees to provide all inrormation 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 -his applicatiqn, and certifies that the information supplied is true and correct to the at MT^h» knowledq^. (Ay//L KB^y 0...Applicant’s signature (for USIJEST New Vector) 552^aerTe^y acknowledges and agrees Authorized reasonable agents# commission investigation an entry onto the pro ambers# and, LiOirsif thi uncil members Owner's signature I est. Date Office of this change prior to the meeting. /Z*/8^ -t U»4 SB 3S*il8-ZS OOOfc 7 OM 00*20 MAYZATA BLVO 42 SAM 0 E ANDERSON ETAL OARAELL E ANDERSON ->«./AaM *20 N NAYZATA OLVO HAYZATA m SS371 J» 35-118-23 ** 000« - ^9R 00850 MAYZATA BLVO am VlflEYARO OF THE LAKE INC R VINEYARD OF THE LAKE INC OOR C/0 ROOERT MHITESSEL 5111 OLD COUnV R9 MAYZATA r*l 553*1 38 3A-118-Z3 32 0005 •OOR 00038 ADDRESS LTtASSICNED £1 NAM BRUCE 8 DAYTON *’Y€R BRUCE B DAYTON AOOR *122 IDS "ENTER MPLS rtl 55*02 38 SA-lll-ZS 33 000* ]0R 00070 .WRTLEKOOD RO SAM R J N'.LLS JR ETAL .-..ER lu>i J HELLS -i. AOOR 70 HYHTLEHOOD RO MAYZATA rt4 553*1 PROPERTY OWNER LISTMEWEPIN COLPTTY PROPERTY INFORrATION SYSTEM PROPERTY CMCRS LOST 38 35-118-23 *1 COO* 00S05 OLD LONG LAKE RO BRUCE B OAYTCN BRUCE B DAYTON C/0 OKASENA CO ■..22 IDS CE:^EH MPLS m 55*02 38 35-118-23 ** 0005 00038 ADDRESS L*OLSS1CNEO P » CICI AIN CICI PANDELl H A INCEBORC CICI 7532 troy la MAPLE GROVE 5536* 38 36-118-23 33 0001 C0058 ADDRESS UfiASSICTlEO VINEYARD OF THE LAKE INC vineyard Of THE LAKE IfX. C/0 ROBERT hh ITESSEL 3111 OLD COLWTY RD h AYZATA m 55391 38 36-118-23 33 0005 00060 MYRTLEHOOD RO A B DROGUE I S E DROCL'E ARTHUR B DROGUE AND SHERRI E DROGUE oO MYRTLEHCOO HO MAYZATA m P»£BCRT no PI-.i5NOI PACE 8 39 3S--'ia-r5 *1 0010 00038 ADDRESS LR4ASSISNE0 state land DEPT STATE lANO DEPT 38 35-115-23 ** CCCT 00038 ADDRESS UUSSia^EC state OF MirK STATE OF tUW 38 30-118-23 35 0302 C0CS8 ADDRESS '.♦UiSSTaiEO A B DR03UE A S E CROCLE ARTHUR B DROCUc AJO SHERRI E DROCUc 60 KYTRLEW003 RD WAYZATA 553*1 38 36-ii3-;3 31 oci: 000*0 .^PTLEWCOC SO R M COLCHNOUR/N 0 COUGHNOUR PETER i DENISE DU B0I5 *0 MYRTLEHOOD RO KATZAIA 553-1 *1^ *i -T*, ' P' i 0 C-* AOOR |. R NAM 72 35-118-23 ** 0002 00*15 h AVZATA BLVD M E J BOULEY ETAL E J BOULEY *15 H NAYZATA BLVO MAYZATA 553*1 »* 55-118-23 ** 0008 CITY OF HAVZATA CITY OF MAYZATA 600 RICE ST HAtZATA m 55391 total batch 1 CErriFY that the facts REPRESEMTcO are xn accurate and true HEPRESENTATICN OF rJlFCRMATION AS IT APPEARS THIS DATE CN THE RECOROS OF THE H£M«PIN COUNTY 0EPART7?£MT OF PROPMTV TAXATICN. TI^THE BEST OF MY KFCHLEOCr .NO BELIEF. ly ) ' f i ) • »J ! ) i 1 ZONING EXHIBIT A July 24, 1990 Mark Bemhardson Ciyt of Orono P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 VINEYARD of the Lake 850 West Wayzata Boulevard WavTata, Minnesota 77' Re: Minneapolis SMSA Limited Partnership (US WEST NewVector Group, Inc.) Dear Mr. Bemhardson: As the representative of tlie property located at 850 West Wav-zata Boulevard, I hereby authorize Minneapolis SMSA Limited Partnership to make application for ail land use, zoning and building permits for a cellular communications facility' at this location. Sincerelely^ \ ^ ^ \ Robert B. Whites®!— i Senior Pastor ( J i I? 'iv '!■■■ f' a: Tow ^ i / « i A< • 21 August 1990 Mr. Charlw KeUy. Chair and Planning Commission Members c/o Mark Bernhardson. City .Administrator City of Orono P.6. Bo.\ 66 Orono. .MN 55323 #v n o RE; Proposed Cellular Telephone Antenna. Vineyard of the Lake Dear Mr. Chair and Commission .Members; This letter accompanies an application for a Conditional L'se Permit to locate a cellular telephone antenna on proper^' owned by Vine;. ard of the Lake. The application is in the name of US West N'ewVector Group. Inc., which is part of US West. Inc., one of the regional holding companies formed a.s a result of the break up of AT&T. Dahlgren. Shardlow, and Uban. Inc. has been authorized 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 ‘ ’ foot by 30-foot prefabricated equipment building. The base of the tower and ‘pment building will be enclosed by a 6-foot high chain link fence. The site will be a. >sed by a gravel drive connecting the site to the Vineyard of the Lake parking lot and VVaN'zata Boulevard. The Cellular Phone System The primary users of cellular telephone service are members of the business community and the public sector. The phone becomes a useful tool leading to increased productivity. Doctors, builders, salespersons, business owners and executives all benefit by using cellular phones. Additionally, cellular is extensively used in the public sector principally by fire and police departments. Cellular allows police and ot *ers to conduct discreet communication in the field. Citizens can contact "911" to report accidents, fires or other emergencies. The cellular phone system interfaces fully with the "911" ernergency reporting system. Mr. James R. Beutelspacher, 911 Project Manager for 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. N ) ‘V ‘ ■V:^^ iktiLi-lL..: fr Orooo Plaiuiiiitf Commission, 9 February 1990 Page 2 Cellular Grid Svsiem Cellular service provides subscribers with office quality phone service by developing a grid of antennas arranged in a geographically hexagonal pattern. Each hexagon is a "ceU” 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 L.^e^, the grid must be changed to handle the appropriate number of simultaneous This usuimy means that more cells need to be created within the same area resultmg m a new^id pattern of smaller cells. A new antenna must be constructed each time a new ceil is created. As the grid matures and more cells are added, antennas are made shoner 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 e.xpand cellular phone coverage in an 3-mile radius area. The cellular mobile phone svstem operates on a specific set of channels set aside by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC). The filtering of spurious signals is very' iithdy controUed. CeUular telephones operate within a very strictly controlled set ot allotted frequency between S35 to 897 megahertz. US West New Vector Group is currently operating over 160 cellular antennas around the country with no case ot television or radio imerierence reported. ^e.-^rrh Area Criteria We have been working for several months to lor.iie an antenna site in the Orono area to solve cellular phone ser^'ice coverage needs. ..lanv tactors mio the selection oi a location for an antenna site. These include marke ors. tec nical considerations. ceUuUr grid, zoning and land use compatibility', latw. ..ler willingness to seU or lease. Iftftd forms of the surrounding area, and accessibility t > roads. All of these factors taken together create a narrow site search area for locuion of the antenna. The tfi^hni^* 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 e.xisting antenna sites, predicted coverage of the new ceU and FCC service area requirements. Federal Aviatmn Administration regulations must also be followed in locating and constr iciing antennas luustrai i< The search area in Orono that resulted from this type of analysis, is !e3onnExh0)it 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 c lua with the City’s Planning and Zoning Suff from very early in the process to identify the most appropnate location. Our search was narrowed to the area around the Luce Line J^rail. ine cellular telephone system does not have the power of eminent domain and we must deal with willing property owners. In this instance Vineyard of the Lake has agreed to lease a portion of their property for use (sec att^hed letter). ,K..‘ ..I- 4i i W ifOrono Planning Cnmmissinn. 9 Februan 19‘M) ...y “-■JN ■■ ^ Page 3 Local Zoning Requirements As shown on Exhibit A, this project is located in the RR-IB Residential District for the 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. 'Fhe height of the antenna is controlled by the conditional use permit under Section 10.75 Subd.2. The antenna’s 150*foot self supported tower and equipment building will be placed a minimum of 150 feet from all propertx ’ boundary lines and a minimum of 26 feet from the abutting wetlands area, which will meet all district and wetland setback requirements (see Exhibits C E and J). The tow'er will be located a minimum of 2S0 feet from any other structure and a minimum of 430 feet from any residential structure (see Exhibit D). Conditional Use Criteria Section 10.09 Subd. 6.A addresses t.he tindings th. t mus^ before a conditional use permit is granted. The findings are addressed below: 1. That the proposed location of the conditional use is in accord with the objectives of the Zoning Chapter and the purposes of the district in which the site is located and Comprehensive .Municipal Plan: The purpose of RR-IB one family rural residential district provides for a mixture of low density residential development and limited agricultural uses. Public Service Structures are a conditional use within the district un'^er 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 heallh, safetyi or welfare, or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity; The antenna and equipment building will be set back a minimum of 150 feet trom all property lines and 26 feet from the adjacent wetlands. Failure of this tower design is extremeiy rare, but should it occur, the antenna will fall within the property boundaries (see Exhibit I). 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^owcr system. The amount of energy generated from single cellular phone channel is about the same that generate from a 100 watt light bulb. This is less energy than is generated by the typical cordless telephone in use in many homes today. ordinamcf: n('. __ _ AM ORDINANCE ADOPT IMO AM INTERIM MORATORIUM ON THE GRANTING OF BUILDING PERMITS, LAND SUBDIVISIONS, REZONTNG APPLICATIONS, (^ONDITrONAL OR SPECIAL USE PERMITS VARIANCES, OR OTHER AUTHORITY RELATING TO THE SITING OF WIRELESS TELECOMMUNICATION FACILITIES AND STRUCTURES IN ALL RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS IN THE CITY OF ORONO THE CITY OF ORONO DOES ORDAIN: The Municipal Code of the City of Orono is amended to arid: Sectian—l. 5tatsmen-t_i!i_PiXLci. The purpose of Orono Municipal Code Chapter 10 is to provide for the orderlyMunicipal ooae - --- - development of commercial and industrial activity so as not to unreasonably conflict with the primary residential and agricultural character of the City. Section 2. Int.^.m_Mi)_r_a toxLum. To facilitate the purpose stated in Section 1 tlie City Council finds it necessary to impose a one year moratorium, pursuant to Minnesota Statute Section 469.355, subd. 4, granting of building permits, land subdivisions, rezoning applications, conditional oi special use permits, variances, or other authority relating to the siting of wiiele.ss telecommunication facilities and structures in all districts in the City of Orono. : ' Sect ion 3 . aLLldX-g.L-jr„^lei;pmmmij£a i r the piiipo.ses of this Section the words used herein shall have the following meaning: 1.Telecommunication - the ’;.«less transmission, emission or reception of er. , or communication impulses by cable, microwcve, . -..ellite or radio signals affecting radio, telephone, telegraph or television communication ’r medical or industrial energy transmission... 2. Facility - any antenna, tower, or structure associated with the tra ismission, emission or reception of telecommunication signals. SiB£tiS2n_JL. Duration. Thi.s oidi nance may be extended by been finalized. iTt yr ■frhi'riiMifMlI,!- f i p If Sscii PJl ^ £ Jt;JS.C t i’^e— ^ ^ ? effective ar? October J3, I'^^O. Tliifi ordinance sliall be the Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono on day of October, 1990. Mayor Attest: City Clerk Reviewed for administration Approved as to form and execution City Manager City Attorney ZSPS 64(11) -2- fr ORDT NANCE N* c AN ORDINANCE ADOPTING AN INTERIi. MORATORIUM ON THE GRANTING OF BUILDING PERMITS, LAND SUBDIVISIONS, REZONTNG APPL TC'vt'• , CONDITIONAL OR SPECIAL USE PERMITS VARIANCES, «' < AUTHORITY RELATING TO THE SITING OF WIRELESS '1 UNICATION FACILITIES AND STRUCTURES IN ALL RE. XAL DISTRICTS IN THE CITY OF ORONO THE CITY OF ORONO DOES ORDAINr The Municipal Code of the City of Orono is amended to add: Section 1. Statement of Policy. The purpose of Orono Municipal Code Chaptei 10 is to provide for the orderly iif?»^'elopment of commercial and industrial activity so as not to unreasonably conflict with the primary residential and agricultural character of the City. Section 2. To facilitate the purpose stated in Section 1 the City Council finds it necessary to impose a one yecr moratorium, |Tstiant to Minnesota Statute Section 469.355, stibd. 4, qranting o- building permits, land subdivisions, rezoning applications, c uditional or special use permits, variances or other authority relating to the siting of witele.ss telecommunica on facilities and structures in all residential districts i he City of utono. Section 3. Study of Telecommaoi<iat:.Qn Fa^ili.t.igLS• E»'»r the purposes of this Section the words used herein shall have the following meaning: 1. Telecommunica I ..on - the wireless cransmission, emission or reception of energy or communication impulses Ly cab? .:?icrowave, satellite or r Jio signals affecting .««:Uo, telephone, telegraph ••• television communication or medical or industrial energy transmissions. 2. Facility - any antenim, tower, or structure associated with the transmission, emission reception of telecommunication signals. Section 4. Duration. This ordinance may be extended by the City Council for a period not to exceed an additional eighte^;^ months beyond its initial expiration unless the Council determines it is no longer required be^’anse rhe requisite studie.s have been completed and adopted and appropriate evaluation and action, including any necessary revisiof»s to the zoning code, have been finalized. t- w ii P' W: ■ II i- 'Pr-: |iErf; ‘1Ij: Ssciian 5 • Effsc t —D^e.effective as of Occober is, l??0.This ordinance shall be the Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono on day of October, 1990. Mayor Attest: City Clerk Reviewed for administration:Approved as to form and execution City Manager City Attorney ZSPS 64<11) -2- ORDINANCB #90, SECOND SERIES . AN ORDIHAHCE ADOPTING AN INTERIM MORATORIOM J ON THE GRANTING OP BOILDING PERMITS, LAND SUBDIVISi- UjJjlCi// REZONING APPLICATIONS, CONDITIONAL OR SPECIAL DSE PERI VARIANCES, OR OTHER AOTHORITY RELATING TO THE SITING OP WIRELESS TELECOMMUNICATION FACILITIES AND STRUCTURES IN ALL ZONING DISTRICTS IN THE CITY OF ORONO The City Council of Orono dees ordain: The Municioal Code of the City of Orono is amended to add: SECTION 1. Statement of Policy. The purpose of Orono Municipal Code Chapter 10 is to provide for the orderly development of commercial and industrial activity so as not to unreasonably conflict with the primary residential and agricultural character of the City. SECTION 2. Interim Moratorium. To facilitate the purpose stated in Section 1 the City Council^inds in necessary to a one year moratorium, pursuant to Minnesota Statute Section 46..355, Subdivision 4, granting of building permits, land subdivisions, rezoning applications, conditional or special use permits, variances, or other authority relating to the siting of wireless telecommunication facilities and structures in all zoning districts in the City of Orono. SECTION 3. Study of Telecommunication Facilities. For tne purposes of this Section the words used herein shall have the following meaning: 1. Telecommunication - the wireless transmission, emission or reception of energy or communication impulses_ by cable, microwave, satellite or radio signals affecting radio, telephone, telegraph or television communication or medical or industrial energy transmissions. 2. Facility - any antenna, tower, or structure associated with the transmission, emission or reception of telecommunication signals. SECTION 4. Duration. This ordinance may be extended by the City Council for a period not to exceed an additional eighteen months beyond its initial expiration, unless the City Council determines it is no longer required because the requisite studies have been completed and adopted and appropriate evaluation and action, including any necessary revisions to the zoning code, have be finalized. SECTION 5. Effective Date. This ordinance shall be effective as of October 8, 1990. Adopted by the City Council of Orono on this 8th day of October, 1990, by a vote of 4 ayes and 0 nays, L. Naab, Deputy Clerk Published in the Laker and Pioneer newspaper the week of November 5, 1990. 51 4 0 . TO: FROM: DATS: Mayor and City Council . Mark E. Bernhardson, City Adtrinistra'^ vj September 14, 1990 SUBJECT: Public Facilities Attachment I A. Public Facilities - Zoning Memo Dated 8/8/90 B. Moratorium - Facilities for Non City of Orono Municipalities Dated 5/15/90 ISSUE - Determination of general language for consideration by Planning Commission regarding the following: Facilities of other governmental units Public utility facilities INTRODUCTION - At the Council*s August 13, 1990 Council meeting Council tabled discussion regarding Attachment A. Initial focus of this plus the moratorium was facilities of other local governmental units, which led to further consideration of State and Federal facilities* Additionally there is reference to public utilities primarily as they relate to other governmental units. However, recent considerations for public service structures of public utilities. (These inclu<ied the electrical company for a substation and Contel for a switching station on North Shore Drive West together with pending applications from Minnegasco for temporary "peak shaving" plant in an industrial zone and US West for a cellular phone antenna and switching building near Wayzata Boulevard in a residential district.) The basic recommendation for Attachment A was to limit the use of these types of facilities in residential zones to city owned facilities as permitted uses, conditional uses for schools in their o%m jurisdiction and other facilities whether governmental units such as Metro Waste that serve primarily a local need. Other facilities for other governmental units and public utilities that do not serve local Orono need would be requried to be located in compatible commercial or industrial zones as conditional uses. The types of issues related to both the local government and public utilities facilities are as follows: Governing organization of the facility Local Orono versus non local need Compatibility of use Size of structure Ownership pattern ALTERNATIVES - 1. Give conceptual direction for language to be developed for Planning Commission consideration. 2. Table for further discussion. 3. Take no action. 4. Await recommendations from staff and Planning Commission on this issue after public hearing for proposed zoning amendment. RECOMMENDATION - It is recommended that primarily Ordinance 10.20 which governs permitted and conditional uses in all the residential zones by reference together with applicable sections in commercial and industrial be amended as follows; Residential zones Permitted use Publicly owned parks and playgrounds Municipal buildings Conditional uses Schools and daycare over 14 pupi1 s - (This would be limited to K to 12th year instruction and within the schools jurisdictional boundaries.) Schools that are not local K to 12 school districts are limited to a specific number of pupils and are not to be residential schools at which students live on campus. Public serVice structures - Amended to limit this primarily for local use to residents of the City of Orono. Antennas - Indicate the provisions of Section 10,75 do not pre-empt this limitation. For all these conditional uses for unit of government not in its jurisdictional limits condition of the approval would be an arrangement for payment in lieu of taxes on the property. Parks - Parks primarily for local usage generally have under a specific visits per year shall be permitted in residential zones, Commercial/Industrial - Conditional Use Permit - Non local facilities of other local governments or public utilities. All facilities that do not primarily serve non-local are permitted as conditional use permits in commercial or industrial zones for that type of facility use and building structure is compatible with that type of zone. Offices permitted where offices are permitted and light industrial buildings are permitted. Building materials are subject to standards se«- forth in the Highway 12 corridor and such facilities must establish a fee in lieu of taxes and an agreement for no annexation. If the use is subservient to a primary use a lease hold arrangement is acceptable if this constitutes another primary use an independent lot must be created for this function which meets all the zoning standards of the district. PROPOSED MOTION - Moved by seconed by the Council after given direction to staff refers the matter to staff and Planning Commission for specific language development along the lines outlined. Ayes __, Nays __- To: Froa: Date: Mayor Grabek & Orcno Council Members Mark E. Bernhardson, City Administratoi^x.M ^ August 8, 1990 Subject: Public Facilities - Zoning Attachment - A - Mcratcri’um Ncn-City Facilities Memo dtd 5/15/90 ISSUE - 1.Determination of approach for regulation of facilities owned or used by other governmental units under Orono's land use ordinances. 2. 3. If allowed, what conditions would be attend-nt to such uses? Refer concepts to Planning Commission for their consideration. INTRODUCTION - At the Council's May 29, 1990 meeting, a moritorium ordinance was adopted to limit the construction of facilities by other local governmental units in the City's boundaries. The issue raises a more general issue of facilities of all governmental units in the City. DISCUSSION - The City in its zoning code permits its municipal facilities, except utilities which require a conditional use permit, to be located in residential zones. It additionally allows, by conditional use permit, school buildings to be located in those zones. The intent is to allow facilities to be located near where the "customer base" is. The location of the facilities of other governmental units, may serve eitner local or regional needs. To the extent that they serve regional needs, their locations close to the customer base could be more generally located. The issue of whether other governmental units should be located in the community raises the following issues: A) Tax exempt status. The development of governmental facilities removes those properties from the tax rolls and to the extent that they are primarily for regional needs, places a burden tax exempt on the City for a regional or State need in a single community. lO — ------------^.1—- Public Facilities - Zoning August 8, 1990 Page 2 of 4 Minneaoolis and St. Paul are good examples of this with the University and State government complexes removing substantial portions of valuable property from the tax rolls. (Other cities may desire to locate facilities in this community because they do not either have enough land for such facilities or choose to use available land in their community for taxable purposes.) B) Annexation. To the extent that facilities of other cities are located in border areas near those cities^ they may make them ripe for a petition for annexation. Whether they are ultimately successful or not, the City bears the expense if it chooses not to allow the land to be annexed. This would additionally remove what would have been potentially taxable property not only from the City's tax base but also its jurisdiction. C) Non-local use. Generally these facilities serve regional purposes and their location in selected residential zones may not be appropriate. D) Control of use. Once such a facility is located, it mav • difficult, particularly in a residential zone, to control growth of other uses of that site desired by that governmental unit. Currently apart from highways, roads and utility line^:; other governmental units have the following located in Orono: Long Lake - Discontinued Sewer Plant MWCC - 3 Pump Stations University - Fresh Water Biological Institute Hennepin County - Maintenance Garage - North Arm Landing - (Library Land on Highway 12) Park District - Baker Park - Noerenberg Park - Portions of Big Island In addition, the postal system does rent space from public/private owners. — the following represent the various governmental units who might locate facilities in the Community with the second column listing potential uses. This list is not intended to be inclusive. V - ; Public Facilities - Zoning August 8, 1990 Page 3 of 4 Jurisdiction Tvoe Federal State Regional (including regional operating agencies) County Park District Other Cities Schools (outside jurisdiction) Vo-tech Schools (within jurisdiction) Tvoe of Uses Service Branches Offices "Light Industry Type-uses" Parks - including buildings and public access Schools Public Utilities Streets/Roads Tower Structures - including water Pump Stations/Lift Stations Airports Wells/Water Treatment Plants Recently a suburban city to our northeast has considered the placement of city wells in another community because of the difficulty of finding well sites within its own boundaries. In general, facilities of a city within their own jurisdiction zoning are allowed in all districts for the following reasons: A) The City Council, which ultimately is responsible for regulating land use, also decides locations and use of such facilities. B) These city services are local, and services such as parks, are generally located close to the persons they serve. ALTERNATIVES - Policy. 1. Treat facilities of other governmental units the same as Orono city facilities would be treated. 2. Treat them in the same category as the Orono City facilities but subject to conditional use permits in the same manner as schools. 3. Differentiate them from City and school facilities within their own municipal or district boundaries. Treat them in a manner that would be similar to a private owner of similar land use in the zoning code (i.e. no offices located outside zones where offices are allowed/no maintenance buildings where light industrial is not allowed). Public Facilities - Zoning August 8, 1990 Page 4 of 4 4. Limit all units of go verr.rier. t, including the City, to the same categories as one would find for a private enterprise. 5. Split consideration as to allow zoning by whether the facility serves essentially a local Orono purpose. A non- Orono/regiona1 purpose would have greater limitations as to the districts that those would be allowed. ACTION - 1, Discuss to determine desired Council direction. 2. Table for further discussion. * s RBCOMNEMDATION - The following represent recommendations: A) Clarify language by indicating that municipal facilities allowed in residential zones are only those for the City of Orono. B) Amend the conditional use permit fr public utilities to allow those deemed appropriate, primarily for local use of the City of Orono, excluding structures/abcve ground structures not specifically serving Orono from residential districts. (It may be desirable to split consideration between governmental ly owned utilities and privately owned utilities such as telephones, electric and gas.) C) Specifically limit above ground structures such as office buildings to business zones and uses similar to light industrial uses by other governmental units to industrial zones and only as conditional uses. D) Limit facilities of educational institutions, research institutions, etc. that are apart from schools within their own judicial boundaries to the RR-lB-1 zone or in a business zone subject to a conditional use. E) Look at receiving •?. f i r Meu of taxes as part of a conditional use for facilities that become tax ixeiKjrt. As a related item, scheduling on on-site visit is currently being arranged and hopefully a date will be presented at the Council meeting. Proposed Not!01:1 - moved by seconded by that the Council after discussion give staff direction for development of draft language to be presented at the Planning Commission meeting for a public hearing. Ayes _ _, nays _ _. MEB/tln Li]5155C.:.ilFF JATB: Mayor and City Council Mark E. Bernhardscn, City Administrato^rr May 15, 1990 omciL McsriHs '»My 2 g |CGQ ^ITY of opoffo iiJBJECT: Moratorium - racilities ior Mon Cicy Municipalities 0 r o no Attachment:A. Draft Ordinance No. B. Ordinance No. 10.20 Zone C. Ordinance No. 10.40 D. City of V.-ayzaca lenzer lacac 2, --i- r j Second Series R-IA One Family Residential SSUE - Hold the public hearing. regulations are appropriate to such use. •* .If so, adopt Attachment A, effective ------------• tMTRODDCTION - In the past there has been one case of the location oT"selected facilities of another municipality being located in the City of Orono. This has subsecuent.y resulted an attemoted annexation, .as Council may be aware there has been interest exatessed in another parcel oy another municipa11^y. While thev have indicated that such municipality may not need to have it 'annexed into their jurisdiction at tnis ^ obviously sets uo a possible basis for an annexation ongterm. ?raldUiorther°e a?e other land use issues related to sucn considerations that need study. 3ISC0SSI0S - Minnesota Statutes 462.3 5 1 et. sq. aunlclprnties the ability to adopt a moratotiuni ir -/det to allow it an opportunity to explore selected land use issues. *he nty can adJ|t a moratorium for up to 18 months can lUbMcuently extend tiiat moratorium subject to a public heating iSr a period not to exceed an additional 12 months. AS you will note in Attachment B the City does allow .unieiaal facilities as a permitted use in any of its residei^i ^ ?Siem*^ti«ether ■ with its commercial rones. (As noted in AfebMtaen/C-they ate only permitted in business zones where the conside^d an office usage.r It is our City Attorney's •' received a response from that community.) A moratorium maxes t.te issue moot.. » The proposed moratorium would not apply to any facilities the i'.tsVrf was contemplating but only those of local '•^governmental units, apart from the School District which is already addressed in the code as a conditional use permit. (Local government facilities currently locared in the community are the Hennepin County Public Works garage, Noerenberg and Baker- Par ks.) It is anticipated that the consideration of this should take no more than six to nine months and the city staff will provide to the Planning Commission alternatives regarding possible changes to our ordinance. Once 'acted on by the Planning Commission it would be presented to the Council for a de terminat ion. If concluded earlier and policy adopted the Council could repeal the moratorium earlier. ALTSRNATI^/SS - Policy for consideration during the term of t^ moratorium - 1. Clarify in ordinance that 10.20 applies only to City of Orono facilities. 2. Determine if the City desires to allow governmental facilities (apart from School Districts which are already a conditional use permit) as permitted or a conditional use permit and under what zoning categories they may be allowed. A. Any residential zone. B. Selected residential zones. C. Commercial. D. Industrial. 3. Allow no other local governmental entities or category of governmental entities to construct such facilities in the City of Oronq. ACTION ALTERNATIVES - 1* Enact a moratorium effective immediately. 2. Direct staff to undertake the necessary consideration and study of such facilities.• ^ 3. Table foe further discussion. 4. Take no action.(-X tjTrrnMMF'iDATION - It is recommended that the City adopt the Necessary mor TTo ria^ regarding the governmental facilities apart ftl^it^own and the school district. The moratoriim puts other furisdictions on notice that Ocono is considering the moratorium ind unde^Shft conditions the zoning code would permit such. ncu!tr.r4..= ■«. district as set forth in the moratorium. Ayes Nays —. m.9 0^^ & :.*;X ^.“*1 4ir- i Ll I? ? 515? TO: FROM: DATE: Mayor and City Council Mark E. Bernhardson, City AdministratoV^' Kay 15, 1990 SUBJECT: Moratorium - Facilities for Non City of Orono Municipalities Attachment: A. Draft Ordinance No.Second Series B. Ordinance No. 10.20 - R-IA One Family Residential Zone C. Ordinance Nc. 10.40 D. City of Wayzata Letter Dated 5 '23/'90 ISSUE - 1. Hold the public hearing. 2. Determine if the City desires to impose a moratorium as it relates to facilities of other units of governemnt other than those of the City of Orono and the school districts outside the jurisdictional boundaries, to determine what zoning category and regulations are appropriate to such use. 3. If so, adopt Attachment A, effective INTRODUCTION - In the past there has been one case of the location of selected facilities of another municipality being located in the City of Orono. This has subsequently resulted an attempted annexation. As Council may be aware there has been interest expressed in another parcel by another municipality. While they have indicated that such municipality may not need to have it annex. ^ into their jurisdiction at this time, it obviously sets up a possible basis for an annexation longterm. In addition there are other land use issues related to such considerations that need study. DISCUSSION - Minnesota Statutes 462.351 et. sq. gives the municipalities the ability to adopt a moratorium in order to allow it an opportunity to explore selected land use issues. The City can adopt a moratorium for up to 18 months and can subsequently extend that moratorium subject to a public hearing for a period not to exceed an additional 12 months. As you will note in Attachment B the City does allow location of municipal facilities as a permitted use in any of its residential zones together with its commercial zones. (As noted in Attachment C they are only permitted in business zones where the usage is considered an office usage.) It is our City Attorney's position that that applies only to city of Orono facilities; the municipality interested in the land indicates that there is a Court interpretation that indicate that it may be broader than that. (Staff asked for a legal citation of that but has not received a response from that community.) A moratorium makes the issue moot. The proposed moratorium would not apply to any facilities the City itself was contemplating but only those of local governmental units, apart from the School District which is already addressed in the code as a conditional use permit. (Local government facilities currently located in the community are the Hennepin County Public Works garage, Noerenberg and Baker Parks.) It is anticipated that the consideration of this should take no more than six to nine months and the City staff will provide to the Planning Commission alternatives regarding possible changes to our ordinance. Once acted on by the Planning Commission it would be presented to the Council for a determination. If concluded earlier and policy adopted the Council could repeal the moratorium earlier. ALTERNATIVES - Policy for consideration during the term of the moratorium - 1. Clarify in ordinance that 10.20 applies only to City of Orono facilities. 2. Determine if the City desires to allow governmental facilities (apart from School Districts which are already a conditional use permit) as permitted or a conditional use permit and under what zoning categories they may be allowed. A. Any residential zone. B. Selected residential zones. C. Commercial. D. Industrial. 3. Allow no other local governmental entities or category of governmental entities to construct such facilities in the City of Orono. ACTION ALTERNATIVES - 1. Enact a moratorium effective immediately. 2. Direct staff to undertake the necessary consideration and study of such facilities. 3. Table for further discussion. 4. Take no action. I if't RECOMMENDATION - It is recommended that the City adopt the necessary moratorium regarding the governmental facilities apart from its own and the school district. The moratorium puts other jurisdictions on notice that Orono is considering the moratorium and under what conditions the zoning code would permit such. seconded by that Council adoptPROPOSED MOTION - Moved by _ _ Ordinance NO. ___, Second Series establishing a moratorium on governmental facilities apart from its own and the district as set forth in the moratorium. Ayes , Nays school ila /f ORDINANCE NO.SECOND SERIES AN ORDINANCE ESTABLISHING A MORATORIUM ON THE GRANTING OP BUILDING PERMITS, LAND SUBDIVISlOH/ZONING APPLICATIONS, CONDITIONAL OR SPECIAL USE PERMITS, VARIANCES OR EVERY OTHER AUTHORITY FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF ANY FACILITIES OF A LOCAL GOVERNMENT APART FROM THE CITY OF ORONO'S FACILITIES OR THE SCHOOL DISTRICT WITHIN THEIR OWN BOUNDRIES. The City of Orono ordains: The municipal Code of the City of Orono is amened by adding Ordinance No. ___, Second Series. Section Statement of Policy. - The City Council finds the City is faced with potential for applications for development of local government facilities which raise the potential issue as to the most appropriate land use, compatibility with residential development together with the potential threat for annexation of property so developed into that of another jurisdiction. The City f in the process of re-evaluating its official controls in order to determine what appropriate place, if any, there is to permit such facilities within its jurisdictional boundries. The Council finds that amending any other official controls can not be done until a study is completed and a hearing held. During this interim period it is desirable that Council establish criteria for those who wish to develop property in order to bring about savings in public and private expenditures and provide public guides to the future City action. The City determines there is an urgency involved because of the need to control development during the interim period so that the benefits of proper planning will not be lost, to preserve the status quo pending adoption of these measures so the City will not be impared in its ability to effectuate the purposes and goals of these planning efforts. Since enactment of an ordinance will undoubtedly modify existing regulation concerning permitted land use and zoning performance standards, the granting of various zoning and permit applications during this interim period would be detrimental to the effectuation and contrary to the purpose of the zoning enabling act. The Council further finds that it would be unwise, improper and unjust to allow individual development to occur during this study period to avoid discrimination and unfair advantage to a few to the detriment of the entire City. Therefore, the Council and staff's authority to grant permits described herein shall not be exercised during the limited term of this ordinance, except as provided in Section 6. Section 2. Restrictions on the Granting of Permits and App lications. No building permit for construction or total replacement, land subdivision applications, rezoning applications, conditional or special use permits, variances or other authority for development of any local government facilities within the City shall be granted for any purpose that would be inconsistent with the intent of the ordinance, including but not limited to any local government offices or other facility. Section 3. Exceptions. Exceptions or modifications of such facilities during the moratorium can grant variances on a case by case basis showing unique hardships on a 3/5 majority vote. Section 4. Area of Application. This ordinance shall apply to all land within the boundaries of the City. Section 5. Duration. This ordiance shall expire on ___________________________, 1990, with : Council action or it may be repealed earlier Tf the Council o-carmines that the requisite studies have been completd and adopted and that the appropriate evaluation and action, including any necessary revisions of the Zoning Code, have been finalized. The duration of this ordinance may be extended by adoption of a subsequent ordinance. Section 6. Variances. Council may grant a variance to this section if it finds after careful review of all the facts the proposal is not contrary to the intent of its Comprehensive Community Management Plan and that it is compatible with the zoning and official control amendments being considered by the City and that it does not adversely impact the health, safety or welfare of the citizens. Section 7. Separability. Every section, provision, or part of this ordinance is declared separable from every other section, provision or part and if any section, provision or part thereof or action taken hereunder shall be held invalid, it shall not affect any other section, provision or part. Section 8. This Ordinance shall be published in the Laker and Pioneer newspapers and shall be effective immediately upon adoption. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono on the day of______________» 1990, by a vote of ______ ayes and _____ nays. ATTEST :James R. Grabek, Mayor /IrrACiH/Uevr '12. § 10.20 SEC. 10.20. R-IA ONE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT. Subd. 1. Purpose. The "R-lA" One Family Residential District is intended to provide a district which will allow a combination of low density residential development and limited agricultural activity. Planned residential developments may be allowed by conditional use permit. The district shall have immediate access to highways and public sanitary sewer, Subd. 2. Permitted Uses. Within any "R-lA” One Family Residential District, no structure or land shall be used except for one or more of the following uses: A. One family detached dwellings. B. Public owned parks and playgrounds. C. Municipal buildings. Subd. 3. Conditional Uses. Within any "R-lA" One Family Residential District, no structure or land shall be used for the following uses except by conditional use permit: A. Schools. Public schools and parochial or private schools which teach a curriculum similar to a public school provided no building shall be located within fifty feet of any lot line of an abutting lot in an "R" District and that a fence be erected fifteen feet or more from all street loc lines where the abutting use is for open play, and nursery schools providing fifty square feet of playground space per pupil. B. Churches. Churches including those related structures located on the same site which are an integral part of the church proper, convents or homes for persons related to a religious function on the same site provided no building other than a residence shall be located within fifty feet of any lot line of an abutting lot in an "R” District. C. Clubs, Camps, etc. Golf courses, country clubs, tennis clubs, public swimming pools serving more than one family, scout camps, YMCA camps, YWCA camps, church camps, or private non­ profit parks, playgrounds and other similar uses. The principal structure for any of the above listed uses shall be 100 feet or more from any abutting lot in an "R" District, and accessory structures shall be a minimum of fifty feet from any lot line* D. Public Service Structures. Public service structures, including but not limited to electric transmission lines, buildings such as telephone exchange stations, booster or pressure regulating stations, wells, ' elevated tanks, lift stations and ele<=trical power substations, provided no building shall be located within fifty feet from any lot line of an abutting lot in an "R" District. Prior to granting such permit it shall be found that the architectural design of ORONO CC (4-1-84) § 10.20 service structures is compatible to the neighborhood in which it is to be located and thus will promote the general welfare. E. Greenhouses. Commercial greenhouses provided all outside storage is fenced in such a manner so to screen the stored material from view when observed from the public street or adjoining lot. F Recreation Areas. Private gun clubs, archery ranees riding stables, ski slides, provided the area is fenced and no pact of the principal use is less than 100 feet from any lot line. G Guest Houses. A separate dwelling constructed on an existing undivided lot for the sole use of the occupants of the principal buildings, including their domestic employees or theif non-paying guests. All regular lot requirements shall be met by the guest house. H Planned Residential Development. Limited to detached single hmily dwellings only and subject to the limitations of Section 10.32. I. Duplex Credit. One duplex may be located on a single lot as a conditional use upon application ► niihlic sanitary sewer service is available, and t.ie lot is adjacent to a commercial or industrial district, r-nnqtructed within 200 feet of the commercial or industrial district. A duplex is defined as a two-family unit residential building.j. Apiaries. K, Animals. The keeping of domestic animals for non-commercial purposes including horses for the “se of the be available for each animal unit, except as hereina U."".'.* ^ co.ply with the provisions of the City Code. L. Farms (Crop). Provided that the area is ten or more acres.Source: Ordinance No. 172 Effective Date: 1-1-75 ORONO CC 280 (4-1-84) § 10.20 M. Antenna Structure. One independent antenna structure with antenna or combination of antenna attached thereto, subordinate to and servicing the principal use or structure same lot and customarily incidental thereto that is not attached to another structure provided the height of the antenna structure does not exceed 63 feet and the antenna structure is set back from any lot line a distance at Least equal to the total height o .e antenna structure. Source: Ordinance No. 177 Effective Date: 6-5-75 Subd. 4. Accessory Uses. Within any "R-IA" One ramily Residential District, no accessory structure or use of land shall be permitted except for one or more of the following uses. A. B. Garages Pools, Private garages and parking space, etc. Private swimming pool, tennis courts, and paddocks C. Home Occupations. Any gainful occupa' >n structure only, when evidence of the occupation is not visible “Om the street, no signs other than those permitted in *R Districts are present, no excessive stock in trade is stored on the premises, over^the counter r-tail sales are not involved, the entrance to the home occupation is gained from within j does not adversely affect the character of the uses permitted in the district in which it is located. A professional person may use his residence for consultation, emergency treatment of religious rites but not for general practice of his profession when such general practice will involve the need for more than three off-street parking spaces fo.. the occupant and visitors. D. Signs. Signs as regulated in the Zoning Chapter. Temporary Structures. Buildings temporarily located for purposes of constructing on the premises for a period not to exceed time necessary for such constructing. F. Gardens, etc. Gardening and other horticultural uses including aviaries and decorative landscape features. G. Roadside Stands. One roadside stand for sale only farm products produced on the premises such stand does not exceed 200 square feet located at least thirty feet back from the public right of ay. Source: Ordinance No. 172 Effective Date: 1-1-75 ORONO CC 281 (4-1-84) § 10.20 H. Antenna, Any antenna or combination of antenna rigidly attached to the principal or accessory structure provided that none of the foregoing exceeds the total height allowed in Section 10.75, Source; Ordinance No. 177 Effective Date; 6-5-77 Subd. 5. Area, Height, Lot Width and Yard Requirements. A. Height. No structure or building shall exceed 2-1/2 stories or thirty feet in height except as provided in Section 10.75, B. Lots. The following minimum requirements shall be observed: Lot Area Side Yard Lot Front Side Rear Adjacent to Width Yard Yard Yard Street 1 acre 140 feet 35 feet 10 feet 30 feet 35 feet SBC. 10.21. R-IB ONE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT. Subd. 1. Purpose. The "R-IB" One Family Residential District is intended to provide a district which will allow denser residential development. Planned Residential Developments may be allowed by conditional use permits. The district shall have immediate access to highways and public sanitary sewer. Subd, 2. Permitted Uses. Within the ”R-1B" One Family Residential District, no land or structures shall be used except for one or more of the following uses; District. A. Any permitted use as regulated in the "R-IA” Subd. 3. Conditional Uses. Within any "R-IB" One Family Residential District, no structure or land shall be used for the following uses except by conditional use permit; A. Any conditional use as regulated in the "R-IA" District except that a Planned Residential Development shall not be limited to detached single family dwellings only. Subd. 4. Accessory Uses. Within any "R-IB" One Family Residential District, the following uses shall be a permitted accessory use: District. A. Any accessory use as regulated in the "R-IA ORONO CC 282 (4-1-84) i Tr/Ki^/ksV7Q_ s 10.40 SBC. 10.40. B-1 RETAIL SALES BUSINESS DISTRICT. Subd. 1. Purpose. The "B-1" Retail Sales Business is intended to provide a district for businesses that supply inmniodities or^ •'erform a service primarily for residents in the surr^ndWg neighborhood. The district may adjoin residential distfictror other business districts which are subject to more restrictive controls. The district shall have immedia..e access to adequate highways and public sanitary sewer. Subd. 2. Application. All applications for a building n.rmit In anv "B-1" Retail Sales Business District shall be ?ev?eied by the council and may be referred to the Planning Commission for review. Subd. 3. Permitted Uses. Within any "B-1 ” Retail Sales Business District, no structure or f ^ ^ one of the following uses or uses deemed similar by the Council. A Retail and Service Businesses. The following neighborhood retail sales and service businesses supplying commodities or performing a service primarily for residents in the surrounding neighborhood: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. Arts and school supplies store. Banks and insurance companies. Barber and beauty shops. Bicycle sales and repair. Books, magazines, record shop. Drugs, candy, ice cream, soft dr inks. cosmetics and other usual drug store merchandise. 7. Dry cleaning and laundry pick-up stations including incidental pressing and repair. ^ 8. Garden supplies, florist shop. 9. Gift or antique shops. 10. Hardware store, paint store. 11. Hobby shops, camera and photographic supply stores. repair stores. furniture, carpet store. 12. Jewelry shops and repair. 13. Laundromats. 14. Locksmith. ,. , ^ 15. Music, radio, TV, appliance sales and 16. Newsstands. 17. Office supply store, office machine store, is! Pet shop. 19. Pipe and tobacco shops. 20. Plumbing, electrical, heating, housewares. ORONO CC (4-1-84) > 10.40 supplies lots. 21. Postal substation. 2“^ Real estate sales. iV, Retail food of all varieties and home 24. Sewing center and yardgco j. 25. Sporting goods store. 26. Tailor shoos. 27. Temporary sales such as Christmas ti.ee 28. Travel bureau. 29. Variety store. 30. Wearing apparel store, shoe store. B Municipal Buildings. Municipal buildings wnere the use conducted is customarily considered to be an office us. . Subd 4. Conditional Uses. Within the "B-1" Retail sales Business'nistrict no structure or land shall be used for on of the following uses except by conditional use permi . A Garages. Tor the servicing and repair of automobiles provided repair functions are totally enclosed in building. Stations. Subject to the provisions set forth in Section 10.61, Subdivision 13. C Restaurants (Class I). Rood is served to liquor sales are permitted in Restaurants (Class D. Restaurants (Class II). Fast Drive-in, and Liquor Store Restauran^ts^. counter it^ratk^ag°is ^reptt'ed Vo t*i® P"emise^ fe^:rd\"es“s''nt To^^ which serve intoxicating liquor or have live entertainment. E. Off-Street Parking. Off-street Peking “^en the principal site of the o“-street parking abuts o„ a lot w^^^ Snothe? -B* or “nd to th°°“ “ ,^‘t"firtn'’fn necrion^0°.6*l';“nbVvision^ and such other conditions as found necessary by the Council. substations. ORONO CC Ord. 67, 5/8/89 2nd series (4-1-84) § 10.40 50 square ft. fenced. general nature. Nurseries. Day nurseries provided not less than of outside play area per pupil is available and H. Offices. Professional office and offices of a Source: Ordinance No. 172 Effective Date: 1-1-75 I. Antenna Structure. One independent antenna structure, with antenna or combination of antenna attached thereto, subordinate to and servicing the principal use or structure o" the same lot and customarily incidental thereto that is not attached to another structure provided the height of the antenna structure “oes not exceed 65 feet and the antenna structure is set back from any ;ft Une a dikance at least equal to the total height of the antenna structure. Source: Ordinance No. 177 Effective Date: 6-5-75 Subd. 5. Accessory Uses. Within any "B-1” Retail Sales Business District, the following uses shall be permitted accessory uses: A. Garages, Etc. Private garages, off-street parking and loading spaces, as regulated in this Chapter. P ^ B. Signs. Signs, as regulated in this Chapter. C. Temporary Buildings. Buildings temporarily located for purposes of construction on the premises for a period not to exceed time necessary to complete said construction. D. Landscaping. Decorative landscape features. E. Fences. Fences, as regulated in this Chapter. F. Incidentals. Any incidental repair or processing necessary to conduct a that the incidental use shall not exceed 30% of the floor space of the principal building. G. Public Telephone Booths. H. Antenna. rigidly attached to the pr that none of the foregoin Section 10.75. ORONO CC Source: Ordinance No. 172 Effective Date: 1-1-75 .^ny antenna or combination of antenna oal or accessory stc-cture provided ceeds the total height allowed in Source: Ordinance No. 177 Effective Date: 6-5-75 (4-1-84) s 10.40 Sabd. 6. Area, Height, Lot Width, Setback Requirements and Design Requirements. A. Area. The minimum lot size shall be 20,000 squar- £e-t. width. The minimum lot width shall be 100 (3^ Front Yards. The minimum front yard shall be 20 feet. D. Rear Yards. The minimum rear yard shall be 30 feet; side yard adjacent to ”R" District shall be 15 feet; side yard adjacent to street shall oe 10 feet. E. Setback Requirements. No building shall be nearer than 35 feet to any front lot line, 35 feet from any rear lot line, 15 feet from any side lot line, 35 feet to side lot line adjacent to street; except abutting or across the street ^^om an "R" District, no building shall be less than 35 feet from such lot line. F. Fencing. Wherever a "B-1" Retail Sales Business District abuts an ”R" District, along the side or rear lot line, a fence or compact evergreen hedge no less than 50% opaque nor less than six feet in height shall be erected along the abutting lines except within the required front yard. G. Building Design and Construction. In addition to other restrictions of this Chapter, the use, construction, alteration or enlargements to any building or structure within the district shall meet the following standards; 1. All exterior wall finishes on any building shall be:(a) Face brick, or, (b) Natural stone, or, (c) Specially designed orecast concrete units if the surfaces have been integrally treated with an applied decorative material or texture, or, (d) Factory fabricated and finished metal framed panel construction, if the panel materials be of any of those noted in Items (a), (b) and (c) above. (e) Other materials as may be approved by the Council. Combinations of such materials shall be permitted. 2. All subsequent additions and outbuildings constructed after the erection of an original building shall be constructed of materials comparable to those . original construction and shall be designed in a manner conformi g with the original architectural design and general appearance. ORONO CC (4-1-04) S 10.40 3. No building or tructure of a temporary character, trailer, basement, tent or shack shall be constructed, placed or maintained upon the property except as accessory to and during the construction of permanent buildings. H. Drainage. No land shall be developed and no use shall be permitted that results in water runoff causing floods, t osion, or deposits on adjacent properties. Site and drainage plans shall be submitted by the applicant in such detail as required by the Council and those plans shall be reviewed by the City Engineer before submission to the Planning Commission and Council for approval. Such runoff may be required to be properly channeled into a natural water course, ponding area, storm drain or other public facilities. Any change in grade affecting water runoff whether onto adjacent property or otherwise must be in compliance with the Surface Water Management Plan and shall be consistent with other applicable regulations or City Code provisions and subject to the approval of other agencies having jurisdiction over the area affected by the drainage. I. Height. No structure or building shall exceed 2-1/2 stories or thirty feet in height except as provided in Section 10.75, SBC. 10.41. B LAKESHORE BUSINESS DISTRICT. Subd. 1. Purpose. The ”B-2” Lakeshore Commercial District was originally intended to provide areas where limited commercial businesses could be located to service boats used for recreational purposes on Lake Minnetonka. However, many of the operators of the lakeshore commercial businesses have stripped the trees and vegetation from the shorelands and have expanded the operations so that now the Lakeshore Commercial Districts adversely affect the lake water quality and the real estate values of adjoining properties. The purpose of this Chapter is to provide for additional reasonable regulations that require partial restoration of the shoreland vegetation, that will serve to avoid pollution of the lake water and to insure protection of adjacent residential properties which have previously suffered from the unregulated expansion of commercial activities. Subd. 2. Application, All applications for a building permit in any "B-2" Lakeshore Commercial District shall be reviewed by the Council and may be referred to the Planning Commission for review. Subd. 3. Permitted Uses. within the "B-2" Lakeshore Business District, no land or structure shall be used except for one or more of the following uses; A. Repairs. Repair and ser*'icing of boats. B. Storage. Winter storage of boats. ORONO CC (4-1-84) r 1•yy N too RICE STREET. UAVZ.VTA. MINN. 5??VI PHONE 4'?-0234 CITY COl'.NCIL Robert 0. Citvoid Mayor Robert P. Ambrose Richartf C- Hannon F. Pner Herfurth Greiory 0. Rye r cnvoF I OBOHO tdEElG'^uJ Allan Oncn City Manager TfAY 2 4 1990 May 23, 1990 Mayor James Grabek City of Orono Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 Dear Jim: The City of Wayzata respectfully requests a visitor’s presentation at the next Orono Council meeting on Tuesday, May 29th. The purpose of the presentation is to discuss and explore options in the best interests of both cities in regard to property recently acquired by the City of Wayzata for the possible location of a new public works facility and a park and ride facility. We understand Orono is considering an ordinance that would prohibit Wayzata building a facility in your City. We would like the opportunity to informally present and discuss our plans prior to any such action, as we feel both cities will benefit from what is proposed and we would like to share those plans with you to gain your input. James Grabeck Page 2 May 23, 1990 Your prompt consideration of our request will be greatly appreciated. Sincerely, — /'PRobert D. Gisvold Mayor RDG/js cc: Council Members Ed Callahan J. Diann Goetten Alan R. Nettles Barbara J. Peterson Mark Bernhardson r •yy CITY COilNCU. Robot Oi CUvold Miyor Robot P. Ambrow Rkbaid C. Hannon F. Pro Hofunh Offiory Dl Rye Allan Onoi Chy Manato CITY OF W4YZATA 600 RICE STREET. WAYZATA. MINN. 55391 PHUNh 473-02.14 To: Mayor and City Council of Orono From: The City of Wayzata Re: Visitor’s Presentation May 29, 1990 Orono Council Mtg. Purpose: Review and discuss concept sketch plans and proposals of land use with respect to an 8+ acre site recently purchased by the City of Wayzata. Outline of points to be covered 1. Options considered by city of Wayzata for location of a new Public Works facility. 2. Location of the purchased site. 3. Site considerations A. City boundaries B. Adjacent land uses C. Topography and vegetative cover D. Transportation related issues E. Soils and drainage issues F. Utilities (sewer, water, etc.) 4. Possible park and ride facility on the remainder of the site. CITY OF WAYZATA m^mwy *■ Pi mg .1 mrnmm mI ^ '<’s^lS3wR•PSr aPi i iwfe'fe'' J if-L.' ■ :• t ji ...... INNOVATIVE ► J MICROGRAPHICS DUE TO THE POOR CONDITION OF THE PRECEEDING DOCUMENT WE CANNOT PRODUCE AN ACCEPTABLE MICROFILM IMAGE. T)52 vv\ 11190 TO: FROM: DATS: Mayor and City Council Mark E. Bernhardson, City November 1, 1990 AdministratoV^ SUBJECT: Flexible Benefits Plan Attachment:P., Flexible Benefits Plan Adoption Aqreement B. Flexible Benefits Plan Document C. Flexible Benefits Memo Dated 9/4/90 ISSUE - Adoption of the plan for implementation of Section 125 Flexible Benefits Plan. INTRODUCTION - At the Council's September 10, 1990 meeting the City chose to go with the Safe Benefits program. DISCUSSION - The necessary documents have been developed and the initial document reviewed by the City's Attorney for acceptability within the costs outlined in Attachment C. He is currently reviewing the final documents. Once adopted a presentation will be made to employees the end of November with enrollment the first week of December in order to have it effective for the first of January. ALTERNATIVES 1. Accept the plan as presented. 2. Amend and accept. 3. Table for further discussion. RECOMMENDATION - It is recommended that the program be adopted as presented within the bounds pre ausly established if the final documents are acceptable from a legal standpoint. PROPOSED MOTION - Moved by _, seconded by _, Council adopt Attachments A and B as its plan for Section 125 program. Ayes _, Nays _. 'evr ADOPTION AGREEMENT Th* Employer n*m«d below hereby ••tablishee a Flexible Com­ pensation ("Cafeteria’*) Plan pursuant to Secri^ ?5 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as aaercted, by a. pting the Plan annexed hereto and named below (the Plan) which the employer has read, accepted and incorporated by reference with the terms and provisior- of the Plan. 1) The following named company is the Employer and Administrator as referred to in the Plan Document: Name: Citv pf nronr^ Business Address :^^^^_j5j2iUiii_J8flai3—SQutJi#-_CritaJLaJLJBLa.y.f-j!llL__--5J5L223 Telephcne; 473-73S7_ _ _ _ _ Employer I.D. Ho. 4'!->6008^85 Nature of Business; rorpnr;^^ i nn_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Effective Date of Plan: January 1. iqgi_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ Plan No: Plan Name_ _ _ _ _ __ Employer's Designated Representative: Name: SAFE Benefits Telephone: (612) 544-2121 Business Address: 6681 Country Club Drive Minneapolis, MN 55427 PIAH VEAjR. For the first and subsequent years, the Plan shall operate starting on January 1, 1991, and continue for the following consecutive successive twelve (13) nonth period. Such dave shall be the Effective Date. ENTRY DATE. The first day of the month following the date the employee completes 30 days of service and meets the eligibility requirements of Article III of the Plan and Section 8 of this Agreement. SALARY REDUCTION BENEFITS. _2L-A. (Select any of the following) Medical or Medical-related Premium Reimbursement Benefits. (See Article VI of the Plan). X B.Medical or Medical-related Expenae Reimbursement Benefits. (See Article VII of the Plan). Benefit Maximum $ ISO.00_ _ _ _ _.* X C.Dependent Care Assistance Benefit. (See Article VIII of the Plan). Benefit Maximum S 416.66_ _ _ _ _.* ,D. B. Limit $5000 per year. Life Insurai.ee Benefit. (See Article IX of the Plan) Disability Insurance Benefit. (See Article X of the Plen). *Employer selected limit to benefits. -w A A i A i, i' Im. i't 4 W W Ea^h new regular employee shall be eligible to participate at the time below unless the employee is separated from service before such date (select one and complete): On the First Entry Date on or after he or she has become employed. ,B. On the first Entry Date on or after he or she has completed _ _ year(s) of service (maximum 3). 7) REGULAR EMPLOYEE. A regular employee is an employee Jho is regularly scheduled to worX more than 20 hours per wee)c. MINIMUM AGE FOR i'ARTl Cl RATION A.There is no minimum age requirement for participa­ tion. yL B.The minimum age requirement for participation is 2Q vrs/aqe. (Mi Lmum age may not exceed ago 21.) f IN WITNESS WHEREOf, th® Employer has caused this Adoption Agreement to be eyecuted by its duly authorized officer on this _ _ _ _ day of _ , 19 _ _, in the City of _ _ _ _ _ _ and the State of Authorized Signature: Title: STATE OF . COUNTY OF The foregoing instrument was acknovldeged before me this . day of_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _; 19 _ _, by _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ (office held) (name of officer) __ _ _ _ _ _on behalf (name of company) (name of company) Notary Public My Commission Expires: TABLE OF CONTENTS Article I. II. IV. 1. 2. 3. 4. 4a 5. 6. 2.7. 2.8. 2.9. 2.10 2.11 2.12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 2.21 2.22 3.1. 3.2. 3.3. 3.4. 3.5. 3.6. 3.7 4.1. 4.2. 4.3. 4.4. 4.5. Purpose Definitions Administrator Adoption Agreenent Agreement Election Election Agreement Beneficiary Benefits Code Company Compensation Dependent Dependent Care Dependent Care Seirvice Provider Disability Earned Income Effective Date Employer Enrollment Period Entry Date Fiduciary Flexible Compensation Enrollment Form and Salary Reduction Agreement Highly Compensated Employee Key Employee Eligibility and Participation Eligible Employees Notice of Eligibility Enrollment Employment After Effective Date Re-Employment Discontinuance of Wage/Salary Mistake in Eligibility Contributions Limitation on Contributions Wage/Salary Reduction Election Date Right to Contributions Unknown Beneficiary Article V. VI. VII VIII IX. 4.6 5.1 5.2 5.3 5.4 5.5 5.6 5.7 5.8 6.1 6.2 6.3 6.4 7.1 7.2 7.3 7.4 7.5 7.6 8.1. 8.2. 8.3. 8.4. 8.5. 9.1. 9.2. 9.3. 9.4. 9.5. TABLE OF CONTENTS - Pace Z Interest on Account Balances Election of Available Benefits Benefits Available Election Irrevocable Effective Date of Election Deposits by Participants Prohibited Failure to Elect Non-Discrimination C ry-over of Contributions Forfeiture of Contributions Medical or Medical-Related Premium Reimbursement Benefit Benefit Provided Coverage Payment Code Compliance Medical or Medical-Related Expense Reimbursement Benefit Medical or Medical-Related Expense Reimbursement Benefit Provided Coverage Payment Forfeiture Code Compliance Benefit Provided Coverage Payment Forfeiture Code Compliance Life Insurance Premium Benefit Benefit Provided Crediting of Accounts Debiting of Accounts Forfeiture of Accounts Purchase of Life Insurance Policies Pace 9 9 10 10 10 10 10 10 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 12 12 12 Dependent Care Assistance Benefit 12 12 12 13 13 13 13 13 13 13 14 TABLE OF CONTENTS - Page 3 Article X. XI. XII. XII. :xv. 9.6. 9.7. Page Submission to Physical Examination 14 Payment of Insurance Benefits 14 Disability Insurance Benefit 14 10.1. Benefit Provided 14 10.2. Crediting of Accounts 15 10.3. Debiting of Accounts 15 10.4. Forfeiture of Accounts 15 10.5. Payment of Disability Insurance Premiums 15 10.6. Submission to Physical Examination 15 10.7. Denial of Insurance Benefits 15 Trust 16 11.1. Establishment and Acceptance of Trust 16 11.2. Investment of Trust Assets 16 11.3. Powers of Trustee 16 11.4. Payments 16 11.5. Trustee Compensation; Trust Expenses 17 11.6. Accounting 17 11.7. Trustee Liability 17 11.8. Term of Trusteeship 17 Continuation Coverage 17 Plan Changes and Amendments 18 13.1. Amendment 18 13.2. Changes in Law 18 Administration 18 14.1. Administrator 18 14.2. Representative 18 14.3. Employer-retained Powers 18 14.4. Duties of Administrator 18 14.5. Administrator to Use Due Diligence 19 14.6. Accounting to Participants 19 14.7. Access to Records 20 14.8. Summary Plan Description 20 14.9. Participants to Sign Documents 20 14.10. Indemnification of Administrator 20 XV.Claims Article XVI. XVII. XVIII. XIX. XX. XXI. 15.1. 15.2. 15.3. 17.1. 17.2. 17.3. 17.4. 17.5. 17.6. 19.1. 19.2. 20.1. 20.2. 20.3. 20.4. 20.5. 20.6. 20.7. 20.8. 20.9. 20.10 20.11 20.12 20.13 TABLg OF CONTENTS ~ Pace 4 Page Claims Processing/Payment 20 Denial of Claim 21 Appeal of Denial 21 Records and Reports 21 Participant Rights/Obligations 22 Right to Benefits 22 Anticipation of Benefits 22 Discontinuance of Contributions 23 Plan Not Contract of Employment 24 Rights Limited to Plan Only 24 Summary Plan Description 24 Employer Rights/Obligations 24 Plan Termination 25 Plan Termination 25 Employer Dissolution/Merger/ Consolidation 26 Plan Construction 26 Statement of I* nt 26 Conflict With ^ 26 Severability 26 Multiple Copies 26 Insurers Not Party 26 Entire Agreement 26 Law to Govern 26 Gender 26 Headings 27 Third-Party Contracted Benefits 27 Non-Alienation of Benefits 27 Limitation of Rights 27 Successor 27 Adoption 27 I. PURPOSE We have adopted this flexible non-deferred compensation plan, the "Plan”, to provide our employees and their beneficiaries with options regarding different types of benefits based on their goals, desires, and needs. The Plan also provides alternative methods for contributions toward these benefits, including an option to receive certain tax free benefits in lieu of taxable compensation. Our intention is that the Plan qualify as a "Cafeteria Plan** within the meaning of Section 125(c) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended. Further, the benefits which our employees elect to receive under the Plan are to be excluded from their income under Section 125(a) and other applicable sections of the Inte„ al Revenue Code of 1986, as amended. They may exclude from income, benefits received under the Plan to the extent nontaxable benefits are selected. The Plan will be "nondiscriminatory" as such term is used in the applicable provisions of the Internal Revenue Code and we shall take whatever steps are necessary to maintain the Plan as "nondiscriminatory". II. DEFINITIONS Unless a different meaning is clearly indicated in this Document, following words have the following meanings; the 2.1. Administrator. The company. A Representative may be named by us in the Adoption Agreement, to Keoo records and perform certain other functions, but the representative will not be the administrator. 2.2. Adoption Agreement. The document in which we adopt the Plan and select the options available under the Plan. 2.3. Agreement. T.iis Document together with the Adoption Agreement, appendices or supplements thereto, shall constitute the entire document and shall govern the rights, liabilities, and obligations of the Plan, except as they may be modified. 2.4. Election. The portion of an employee's Annual Compensation he/she has committed to a particular benefit of the plan. 2.4a. Election Agreement. The agreement the employee signs autho­ rizing the allocation of a portion of his/her annual compensation to the Plan, also referred to as an Enrollment Form. 2.5. Beneficiary. Any one or more primary or contingent bene­ ficiaries designated by the employee to receive any benefits payable under the Plan. 2.6. Benefits. Any disbursement or reimbursement provided to or on behalf of the employee under the terms and conditions of this plan. 2.7. Code. The Internal Revenue code of 1986, as amended. Reference to any section or subsection of the code includes reference to any amending or replacing provisions of any legislation or regulation. The reference may also include the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (ERISA), as amended, and any other applicable Federal or State legislation or regulation. 2.8. Company. The company named in the Adoption Agreement, also referred to as we, us or our(s). 2.9. Compensation. The total earnings actually paid to an employee by us. This includes over-time pay, scheduled bonuses, and commissions, but excludes expense allowances and any other extraordinary compensation. 2.10. Dependent. The term "Dependent” shall have the same meaning as set out in Section 152 of the Code. In addition, for purposes of this plan, it means any individual for whom the participant is entitled to claim an exemption under Section 151(c) of the Code, 2.11. Dependent Care. Within the meaning of Code Section 129, Dependent Care shall mean household and employment related services and expenses incurred by a Participant which: (a) are incurred for the care of a qualifying individual within the meaning of the Code Section 21(b), (b) are performed to enable a Participant to remain gainfully employed, and (c) are incurred for the care of dependents in a dependent care service provider pursuant to employment-related expenses under Code Section 129. 2.12. Dependent Care Service Provider. Dependent Care Service Provider means a person who provides care or other services described in Section 2.11 above, but shall not include (a) a dependent care center (as defined in Section 21(b)(2)(D) of the Code), unless the requirements of Code Section 21(b)(2)(C) are satisfied, or (b) a related individual described in Section 129(c) of the Code. 2.13. Disability. The definition of "disability" will vary, depending upon the benefit claimed. The statutory or contract definition provided in the governing contract or statute shall apply to the exclusio'* of any other definition. 2.14. Earned Income. All income derived from wages, salaried, tips, and other employee compensation paid to an employee during the Plan Year. Such income does not include any amounts paid or incurred (i) as a pension or annuity, or (ii) paid by the Company for Dependent Care Assistance to an employee. 2 15 Effective Date, The date scecified in the Adoption Agreement on which this plan is effective and applicable to eligible employees. 2.16. Employer. The company named in the Adoption Agreement of this Plan (also referred to as we, us, or our) ani any affiliate or subsidiary that, with our consent, becomes an employer by adopting this Plan; or any successor business organization that assumes our obligations under this Plan. 2.17. Enrollment Period, start of each Plan Year. The 60 day period immediately preceding the 2.18. Entry Date. The date(s) specified by the Company in the Adoption Agreement as of which Eligible Employees may become Participants. 2.19. Fiduciary. The Company shall be the "Named Fiduciary" and shall be subject to service of process on behalf of the Plan. 2.20. Flexible Compensation Enrollment Form and Salary Reduction Agreement. An agreement between the employee and the Company under which the employee agrees to reduce his/her current salary and the Company will contribute the amount of reduction to the Plan on his/her behalf as a before-tax contribution. 2 21 Highly Compensated Employee. A highly compensated employee is as defined in Section 414(g) of the Internal Revenue Code, and other applicable law and regulation. 2.22. Key Employee. A Key Employee is as defined in Section 416(i) of the Internal Revenue Code, and other applicable law and regulation. III. ELIGIBILITY AND PARTICIPATION 3.1. Eligible Employees. Each Employee shall be eligible to participate in this Plan upon meeting the eligibility requirements set forth in the Adoption Agreement. Each employee who is in our employment on the Effective Date shall be eligible to become a Participant on the Effective Date as set forth in the Adoption Agreement. The Administrator shall determine the eligibility of each employee for participation in the Plan based on infopiation furnished and such determination shall be conclusive and binding upon all persons. 3.2. Notice of Eligibility. Each Employee shall receive written notice of his/her eligibility to participate in the Plan on or before the dat( on which he or she becones an Eligible Eniployee to enable the Employee to submit an application for participat ' in the plan. 3.3. Enrollment. To become a Participant, an Eligible Employee shall sign an application or agreement as may be required by the Administrator and shall specify his or her election of Salary Reduction Benefits within a reasonable time after the Entry Date. By signing such application, the Eligible Employee shall be deemed for all purposes to have agreed to participate and to conform to the requirements of the Plan. If an Eligible Employee fails to comply, he or she shall be advised by the Administrator of the consequences and given an additional five business days to comply. If the Eligible Employee fails to timely submit an application which conforms to the requirements of the Plan, he or she can only re-apply on the next or any subsequent Plan Year anniversary. 3.4. Employment After Effective Date. Each Employee whose employment by us begins after the Effective Date shall be eligible to become a Participa on the Entry Date following the date on which he/she has met the e igibility requirements set forth in the Adoption Agreement. 3.5. Re-Employment. A former Employee re-employed during the plan of his/her termination of employment shall be eligible to become a Participant on the Plan Anniversary Date coincident with or next following the date on which the Employee returns to regular service, such Employee must otherwise meet the eligibility requirements set forth in the Adoption Agreement. 3.6. Discontinuance of Wage/Salary. (a) When an Employee's wage/salary is discontinued due to Layoff, Leave of Absence, or similar circumstance, claims incurred during such period of discontinuance of wage/salary can be continued until the end of the Plan Year or until fi nds contributed prior to the discontinuance are exhausted, wh *r comes first. ose salary is not continued later returns to •ation resumes on the 1st day of the month o regular service. Upon resumption of ims incurred but unreimbursed pursuant to s Section 3.6, can be claimed by the participant; ___ __ _ _ _ _ benefit elected and available for reimbursement shall be reduced by the sum of unpaid premiums, it any. (b) If an empic work, his/her p^. following the re participation, in subsection (a) of however, the maximi L (c) When salary is continued during Leave of Absence, Sabbatical, or similar circumstance, the Participant is treated the same as an active employee. 3.7. Mistake in Eligibility. In the event of a mistake regarding the eligibility or participat* ^ of an Employee, or the allocations made to the account of any Par ipant, or the amount of distribution made or to be made to a Participant or otner person, there shall be adjustments to the allocation or distribution of such amounts that will provide such Participant or other person that which he or she is properly entitled under the Plan. IV. CONTRIBUTIONS 4.1. Limitations on Contributions. Each Participant's benefits will be funded for a Plan Year in an amount as elected on or before the first day of each Plan Year. This amount cannot be more than the amount specified in the Adoption Agreement. 4.2. Wage/Salary Reduction. The Participant shall authorize the reduction of his or her compensation by such amounts as are necessary to provide for those Salary Reduction Benefits which the Participant has elected on the Enrollment Form. 4.3. Election Date. Elections of salary reductions shall be made by each Participant within 60 days prior to each Plan Anniversary Date. 4.4. Right to Contributions. By virtue of this Plan, no Participant shall ' ave any interest in any specific asset or assets of the Employer. A Participant has only an unsecured contractual right to receive payments in accordance with this Plan. 4.5. Unknown Beneficiary. If Administration is unable to make payment of benefits due under the Plan to a Participant or beneficiary because the identity or whereabouts of such person cannot be ascertained, Administration shall mail a notice by certified mail, return receipt requested, to the last known address of such person. Unless such person makes written reply within sixty (60) days, liability to such person under the plan shall cease. 4.6. Interest on Account Balances. No interest will be credited or paid on a Participant's Flexible Spending Account or Benefit Account balances. V. ELECTION OF AVAILABLE BENEFITS 5.1. Benefits Available. The benefits available for Participant's election are as set forth in the Adoption Agreement and are subject to the limitations herein. Non-taxable benefits specifically prohibited as options ur ler this Plan include scholarships, vanpooling, education assistance programs, and those fringe benefits described in Section 132 of the Code. 5.2. Election Irrevocable. After the start of the Plan Year, elections made under the Plan shall be irrevocable by the Participant during the Plan Year, except as to a change of elections resulting from the following; a) A change in family status as set forth in the applicable regulations of tne Treasury Department, or: b) A change in premiums charged by an independent, thiri party insurer, but only to the extent of such change. Howevrr in che event of a significant remium increase, current election may oe revoked and, in lieu ther >of, similar coverage under another health plan may be elected, or; c) A change in insurance plans or :overage by the empu . er as srt forth in the applicable regulations of the Department Treisu;/. 5.3. Effective Date Ejection. Any change of elections male pursuant to Section 5.2 shall be effective not earlier than ‘ n first pay period following the first day of the month after the change form is completed and returned to the Administrator. 5.4. Deposits by Participants Prohibited. Participants shall not be permitted to deposit their own after-tax dollars into their reimbursement accounts. 5.5. Failure to Elect. An employee who fails to return a completed Election Form to the Administrator on or before the specified due date for the Plan Year in which the Participant first becomes ei^gibl^ shall be deemed to have elected to receive his/hei. 11 v^ompensation and to have declined to participate in the Plan. A Participant who vails to return a completed Election Form to the Administrator on before the specified due date ^or any subsequent Plan year shal] ir learned to have made the same e..e. .ion as was in effect just pr - the end of the preceding Plan Year. 5.6. Non-Discrimination. This plan sha.,1 not discriminate eligibility, contributions, or benefits in fa^’or of Highly Compensated Employees (HCE) or Key Employee T will not provide greater than 25% of the to^ Key Employees. If it is determined that t. an HCE or Key Employee must include in hir- benefits in «yces.^ of that permitted by ' n “■ ^ipantr •*- X. Thii Plan 'enefits to ^..linatory, value of any ■^.7. CAP’^Y-OVEH OF CONTRIBUTIONS. EXCE.'* .. ICALL'' PROVIDED HEREIN, PARTI Cl P'NTS MAY ’ . CARRY OVER ;u>ii :D CONTRIoUTIONS OR AVAILABLE BENEF JS FROM C. PLAN YEAR TO A S- QLENT MAN YEAR. PARTICIPANTS MAY NOT USE ANY CONTRIBUTIONS FROM ONE PLAN YEAR TO PURCHASE ANY AVAILABU BENEFITS THAT WILL BE PROVIDED IN A SUBSEQUENT PLAN YEAR. 5.8. FORFEITURE OF CONTRIBUTIONS. IF h PARTICIPANT FAILS OR IS UNABLE TO FULLY UTILIZE A BENEFIT DURING THE PLAN YEAR, UNUSED ^ENEFIT J ^CTIc. DOLLARS W BE FORFEITED BY THE PARTICIPANT. VI. MEDICAL OR MEDICAL-RELATE::, PREMIUM REIMBURSEMENT BENEFIT 6.1. Benefit Provided. This benefit provides payment for or reimbursement of medical or Tedical-related premium incurred by a Participant during the plan year to the extent elected. 6.2. Coverage. For purposes oi -his benefit, medical or medical- related pr:-^inium ?hall include cost of medical or hospitalization insuranr:e, major medical insurance, dental insurance, cancer insurance, and/or vision insurance. Eligible insurance premium shall include those premiums incurred with respect to the Participant or his/her spouse or dependents. No reimbursement will be made to the extent reimbursement is received from another source or plan. 6.3. Payment. The Administrator shall pay group premiums due on behalf of a Participant directly to the appropriate billing entity. 6.4. Code Compliance. This benefit is intended to comply with the provisions of Sections 105 and 106 of the Code. It shall be deemed to be amended to comply with any legislative or regulatory changes made regarding those Code Sections as of the effect! ® date of such changes. VII. MEDICAL OR MEDICAL-RELATED EXPENSE REIMBURSEMENT BENEFIT 7.1. Medical or Medica 'elated Expense Reimbursement. The Company shall reimburse Par ipant for medic .1 cr medical-related expenses incur the extent provided for in the Participant's signed Electic. Such payments » ill be for expenses incurred by him/her or his/. ipouse or child, or other dependent, for medical care as defined In Section 213 of the Code (including without limitation: amounts paid for hospital bills, doctor and dental bills, prescription drugs and premiums for accident and health insurance) , but only to th<= extent that he or she or >ther person incurring the expense has not and will not be reimbursed for the expense through insurance or otherwise. 7.2. Benefit Provided. If selected in the Adoption Agr-eement, this benefit provides reimbursement of Participants' medical or medical- related expenses. 7.3. Coverage. The maximum amount o'" lical Expense Reimbursements which any Participant may receive in a .xan Year shall be as set forth in the Participant's signed Election Form. The maximum amount of benefits a participant may receive snail be available to the Participant throughout the plan year subject to the provisions of Section 17.3(b) of this Plan Document. The benefits provided under this Article shall not discriminate in favor of highly compensated individuals as to eligibility, benefit options ava\iable or benefits received. r 7.4. Payment. The Participant may incur medical expenses and then submit to the Administrator proof of such expenses. It is not necessary that the Participant actually pay an expense prior to being reimbursed for it. Payment of the incurred expense will not be made directly to the service provider in lieu of reimbursement to Participant. The Participant shall provide such information and verification at such times and in such manner as required by the Administrator. 7.5. FORFEITURE. IF, AFTER THE FINAL PAYMENT OF REIMBURSEMENT BENEFITS FOR THE PLAN YEAR, ANY AMOUNT REMAINS IN A PARTICIPANT'S MEDICAL EXPENSE REIMBURSEMENT ACCOUNT, THE PARTICIPANT SHALL FORFEIT THAT AMOUNT TO US AND SHALL HAVE NO FURTHER CLAIM FOR REIMBURSEMENT. 7.6. Code Compliance. This Benefit is intenoed to comply with the provisions of Sections 105 and 106 of the Code. It shall be deemed to be automatically amended to comply with all changes to legislation or regulations affecting these Code Sections on the effective date of such changes. VIII. DEPENDENT CARE ASSISTANCE BENEFIT 8.1. Benefit Provided. If selected in the Adoption Agreement, this benefit provides payment to reimburse Participants for Dependent Care Assistance. Subject to the limitations set forth in this Plan Document, each Participant shall be reimbursed for expenses incurred by him/her for Dependent Care Assistance. 8.2. Coverage. The maximum amount which a Participant may receive in any Plan Ye-r in the form of Dependent Care Assistance under this Plan shall be the lesser of: a) The participant's earned income for the Plan Year after all reductions in compensation including the reduction related to dependent r-*re assistance, or; b) the actual or deemed ■-irned income of the Participant's spouse for the Plan Year. In the case of a spouse who is a full-time student at an educational institution or is physically or mentally disabled, the spouse shall be deemed to have an earned income of not less than $200 per month if the Participant has one qualifying individual(s) and $400 per month if the Participant has two or more qualifying individual(s). No more than twenty-five percent (25%) of the total benefits paid for Dependent Care during any Plan Year may be paid to Par' pants who are Highly Compensated Employees or Key Employee Partio. ^nts. If the Administrator believes that this twenty-five percent (25%) limit may be exceeded, he may, in his absolute discretion, uniformly limit the amount of benefits that may be paid to such Participants, so that the limit will not be exceeded. 8.3. Payment. The Participant may incur dependent care assistance expenses and then submit to the Administrator proof of such expenses. It is not necessary that the Participant actually pay an expense prior to being reimbursed for it. Payment of the incurred expense will not be made directly to the service provider in lieu of reimbursement to Participant. The Participant shall provide such information and verification at such times and in such manner as required by the Administrator. 8.4. FORFEITURE. IF, AFTER THE FINAL PAYMENT OF REIMBURSEMENT BENEFITS FOR THE PLAN YEAR, ANY AMOUNT REMAINS IN A PARTICIPANT'S DEPENDENT CARE ACCOUNT, THE PARTICIPANT SHALL FORFEIT THAT AMOUNT TO US AND SHALL HAVE NO FURTHER CLAIM FOR REIMBURSEMENT. 8.5. Code Compliance. It is our intention that these benefits shall be eligible for exclusion from the gross income of the Participant covered by these benefits, as provided in Code Section 129, as amended. All provisions of this benefit plan shall be construed in a manner consistent with Code Section 129. IX. LIFE INSURANCE PREMIUM BENEFIT 9.1. Benefit Provided. If selected in the Adoption Agreement, this benefit i^ intended to provide funding for qualified group-term life insurance coverage under section 79 of the Code (and coverage in excess of the section 79 limits), and is to be interpreted in a manner consistent with section 79. The plan shall maintain a lifT insurance premium account for each participant in order to accomplisi. this purpose. If a participant elects life insurance coverage, then the participant's life insurance premium account shall be applied to obtain and maintain qualified group term life insurance coverage on the participant's life. Any policy or policies of group life insurance purchased pursuant of tnis plan and the terms and conditions of such policies shall be incorporated by reference into this plan. 9.2. Crediting of Accounts. There shall be credited to a participant's life insurance premium account for each plan year, as of each date compensation is p..id to the participant in such plan year, an amount equal to the r^^duction, if any, to be made in such compensation and credited to the life insurance premium plan in accordance with the participant's election pursuant to Section 3.3. hereof. 9.3. Debiting of Accounts. A participant's life insurance premium account for each plan year shall be debited from time to time in the amount of any payment hereunder to obtain and maintain qualified group term life insurance coverage on the participant's life. No payments may be made which would reduce the participant's account balance below zero (0). Amounts debited to such account shall be treated as payments of the earliest amounts credited to the account and not yet treated as paid under this 'lection, under a ”first-in/first-out" approach. 9.4. Forfeiture of Accounts. The amount credited to a participant's life insurance premium account for any plan year shall be used only to obtain and maintain qualified group term life insurance coverage on the participant's life. IF ANY BALANCE REMAINS IN THE PARTICIPANT'S ACCOUNT FOR A PLAN YEAR AFTER ALL SUCH PREMIUM PAYMENTS ARE MADE, SUCH BALANCE SHALL NOT BE CARRIED OVER TO PAY PREMIUMS INCURRED DURING A SUBSEQUENT PLAN YEAR, AND SHALL NOT BE AVAILABLE TO THE PARTICIPANT IN ANY OTHER FORM OR MANNER, AND THE PARTICIPANT SHALL FORFEIT ALL RIGHTS WITH RESPECT TO SUCH BALANCE. 9.5. Purchase of Life Insurance Policies. If policies are to be purchased by the administrator pursuant to a participant election hereunder, the administrator shall purchase the policies from a specified insurance company. The Participant and/or his/her employer shall provide the documents and information necessary to file an application with the insurance company. The administrator shall file the application with the insurance company within a reasonable period of time after receipt of the completed aoplication. An insured death benefit is not in effect, and the partic ant and/or his beneficiary is not entitled to benefits thereunder, until the insurance company places the policy in force. 9.6. Submission to Physical Examination. If a policy or policies purchased by us require that participants complete a medical questionnaire, submit to physical examinations, or satisfy other requirements of the insurer, the administrator shall notify the participants eligible for such benefits of the requirement(s). If a participant fails *:o satisfy such requirement(s), after request from the administrator, the participant shall not be entitled to such insurance coverage or any insured benefits until such later time as the participant complies with the requirement. 9.7. Payment of Insurance Benefits. The terms and conditions of the insurance contract govern the payment of benefits. X. DISABILITY INSURANCE BENEFIT , I 10.1. Benefit Provided. If selected in the Adoption Agreement, tnis benefit is intended to provide funding for disability insurance under section 106 of the Code, and is intended to be interpreted in a manner consistent with Section 106. The plan shall maintain a disability insurance premium account for each participant in order to accomplish this purpose. If a participant elects one of the disability insurance coverages which we may offer from time to time, then the participant's disability insurance premium account shall be applied to obtain and maintain disability insurance for the participant. Any policy or policies of disability insurance purchased pursuant of this plan and the terms and conditions of such policies shall be incorporated by reference into this plan. 10.2 Crediting of Accc :“ts. Theri; s ill be credited to a participant's disability insurance premium account for each plan year, as of each date compensation is paid to the participant in such year, an amount equal to the reduction, if any, to be made in such compensation and credited to the disability insurance premium plan in accordance with the participant's election pursuant to Section 3.3. hereof. 10.3. Debiting of Accounts. The participant's disability insurance premium account for each plan year shall be debited from time to time in the amount of any payment hereunder to obtain and maintain disability insurance for the participant. No payments may be made which would reduce the participant's account balance below zero (0). Amounts debited to such accounts shall be treated as payments of the earliest amounts credited to the account and not yet treated as paid under this section, under a "first-in/first-out" approach. 10.4. Forfeiture of Accounts. The amount credited to a participant's disability insurance premium account for any plan year shall be used only to obtain and maintain disability insurance for the participant. IF ANY BALANCE REMAINS IN THE PARTICIPANT'S ACCOUNT FOR A PLAN YEAR AFTER ALL PREMIUM PAYMENTS ARE MADE FOR THE PLAI^ YEAR, SUCH BALANCE SHALL NOT BE CARRIED OVER TO PAY PREMIUMS INCURRED IN A SUBSEQUENT PLAN YEAR, AND SHALL NOT BE AVAILABLE TO THE PARTICIPANT IN ANY OTHER FORM OR MANNER. THE PARTICIPANT SHALL FORFEIT ALL RIGHTS WITH RESPECT TO SUCH BALANCE. 10.5. Payment of Disability Insurance Premiums. If premiums are to be paid pursuant to the participant's election hereunder, we shall direct the administrator to pay such premium to the specified insurance company or companies. Provide the documents and information necessary to file an application with such company or companies. The administrator shall file the application within a reasonable period of time after receipt of the completed application. An insured's disability benefit is not in effect, and the participant is not entitled to benefits thereunder, until the insurance company places the policy in force. 10.6. Submission to Physical Examination. If a policy or policies purchased and incorporated into the Plan require that participants complete a medical questionnaire, submit to physical examination(s), or satisfy other requirements of the insurer, the Administrator shall notify the participants eligible for such benefits of the requirement(s). If a participant fails to satisfy such requirement(s), after request from the Administrator, the participant shall not be entitled to such insurance coverage or any insured benefits until such later time as the participant complies with the requirement. 10.7. Denial of Insurance Benefits. The terms and conditions of the insurance contract govern the payment of benefits. XI. TRUST 11.1. Establishment and Acceptance of Trust. A trust is hereby created for the purposes of holding and administering the assets of the Trust to provide benefits stated herein. The Trustee shall be the designated representative set forth in the Adoption Agreement. The trust shall receive all contributions from the employer in cash, or in such other form as may be subsequently approved by the United Stated Department of Labor. All amounts so received, together with any earnings thereon, shall be held, managed and administered by the trustee in accordance with the terms of this plan. By execution of this agreement, the trustee hereby accepts the trust created hereunder and agrees to perform all duties specified herein. 11.2. Investment of Trust Assets. The trustee shall keep all the assets held in trust in one or more demand account or accounts in a federally insured bank, savings and loan association, or other similar financial institution. 11.3. Powers of Trustee. In addition to all other powers expressly vested in the trustee in other parts of this plan, the trustee shall have the following powers: a) To exercise any of the incidences and rights of ownership with respect to any financial accounts created and held hereunder, subject to the written direction of the plan administrator or its designee. b) To cause all financial accounts to be registered in the name of the trustee or its nominee. c) To make, execute, acknowledge and deliver such documents as may be necessary to carry out the purposes of this trust. jj) o-ettle, compromise, or submit to arbitration, any claims, debts or dci. **s due or owing from the trust; to commence or defend law suits ^ other legal proceedings; and, to represent the trust in all law suits or other proceedings. e) To employ suitable agents or representatives and legal counsel (who may be counsel for the employer). and to pay the reasonable fees, expenses and other just compensation. f) To perform such acts and exercise all such rights and privileges, including those not mentioned herein, including the incurrence of additional administrative expenses, as the trustee ma/ deem necessary to administer the trust fund and to carry out the purposes of this trust. 11.4. Payments. The trustee shall disburse such amounts at such times as u'ay be necessary to pay the benefits due under the plan and' pursuant to its terms. ^ 2,1.5. Trustee Compensation; Trust Expenses. The trustee shall serve without compensation, unless other-i^ise agreed by the employer, but shall be reimbursed by the employer for all reasonable expenses incurred by it in connection with the operation of the trust. Before seeking direct reimbursement for such reasonable expenses from the employer, the trustee shall reimburse itself for such expenses out of the income earned by the trustee through the investment of the trust assets as provided herein. 11.6. Accounting. The trustee shall keep necessary books and records of all receipts, disbursements, transactions and other investments, and shall permit their examination during reasonable business hours by the employer or the employer's designee, or as may be required by law. Within 270 days following the close of the Plan Year, the trustee shall submit to the Plan Administrator, a detailed, written report of all financial activities of the trust for the most recant Plan Year, including the fair market value of all assets held by the trust on the last day of such previous Plan Year. Upon rhe expiration of 60 days from the filing of the Annual Report with the Plan Administrator, as required by this section, the trustee shall be forever absolved from resiyonsibility to the employer or the Plan Administrator for the propriety or accuracy of such report, for the transactions reflected therein, except with respect to acts of commission or omission for which the employer or Plan Administrator files a written exception within said 60 day period. 11.7. Trustee Liability. a) Trustee shall be fully protected in relying upon the written instructions and representations of any o/f^'^er or ?enr of the Plan Administrator, or in reliance upon the ten nd co. ditions of this Plan. b) The employer shall indemnify the trustee and the trust fund against liability imposed as a result of a claim asserted by any person or persons under state or federal law, where the trustee has acted in good faith in reliance on written direction of the Plan Administrator, or their designee, or the terms and conditions of this Plan. c) The employer may, at its option, purchase “errors and omissions” liability insurance for any trustee. 11.8. Term of Trusteeship. Each individual trustee shall serve at the pleasure of the employer, or its Board of Directors, without specific term of Trusteeship until removal or resignation occurs. XII. CONTINITATION COVERAGE 12.1. An employee who is a participant under this Plan and who has elected insurance benefits and whose employment with us is terminated, for whatever reason, shall be entitled to continue such insurance coverage to the extent provided in such insurance contract(s) or by law. XIII. PLAN CHANGES AND AMENDMENTS 13.1. Amendment. The right to make any amendment(s) to this Plan, with or without retroactive effect, to comply with the law is expressly reserved. To the extent consistent with applicable law, such amendments shall not affecr any right to benefits which arose prior to such amendments. 13.2. Changes in Law. If the Administrator determines, before or during any Plan Year, that the Plan may fail to satisfy any requirement imposed by the Code or Federal or State statute or regulation, the Administrator shall take such action as he/she deemed appropriate to assure compliance with the Code, or such statute or regulation. Such action will be uniformly and consistently applied to ail Participants in similar circumstances and may include, without limitation, a modification of elections by Highly Compensated Employees or Key Employees with or without the consent of such employees. If the United States, any state, or other jurisdiction enacts a law which prohibits the continuance of this Plan, or the Internal Revenue Code or other existing laws or regulat , are interpreted so as to prohibit the continuance of this Plan, cue Plan shall terminate automatically as of the effective dat ' of cuch law or interpretation. Such termination shall be undertaken as provided in Article XIX below. XIV. ADMINISTRATION 14.1. Administrator. The administration of the Plan shall be under the supervision of the Administrator. It shall be a principal duty of the Administrator to see that the Plan is carried out in accordance with its terms, for the exclusive benefit of persons entitled to participate in the Plan without discrimination among them. The administrator shall have the power and duty to do all things necessary or convenient to effect the intent and purposes of this Plan. Such actions shall be consistent with the provisions set forth in this Plan Document. 14.2 Representative. The day-to-day administration of the Plan shall be managed by the representative named in the Adoption Agreement. All Participants shall be notified of any change in the person(s) serving as Administrator or designated representative. All customary and reasonable expenses of the Representative may Le paid in whole or in part by us. The Representative shall have no responsibility for any expenses not paid by us. 14.3. to: Employer-reCained Powers. The employer shall retain the power a) Provide rules and regulations for the administration of the Plan and to amend or supplement such rules and regulations, as necessary. b) Construe the Plan, which construction shall be final and binding on all parties to the Plan. c) Correct any defect, supply any omission, or reconcile any inconsistency in the Plan in such a manner and to such extent as it shall be deemed expedient to carry the Plan into effect. d) Determine all questions regarding interpretation that may arise under the Plan including questions submitted by a Participant. 14.4. Duties of Administrator. The Administrator shall: a) Perform the duties and exercise the powers and discretion granted in this Plan. The Administrator's decisions and actions shall be final and conclusive as to all persons affected therein. b) P.esolve any and all disputes which may arise involving Partici­ pants, Former Participants or Beneficiaries. Decisions in such matters shall be final. c) Be entitled to rely upon infcrmation furnished by a Participant, when making a determination or calculation. d) Have the sole responsibility for the administration of the Plan as is specifically described in this Plan Document. The Administrator may name a representative to assist him. The designated representatives of the Administrator shall have only those specific pov,ers, duties, responsibilities, and obligations specifically given to them .:y the Administrator. 14.5. Administrator to Use Due Diligence. The Administrator shall use reasonable care and diligence in the exercise of his powers and the performance of his duties. Whenever, in the administration of the Plan, any discretionary action by the Administrator is required,, the Admi:.. i ".or shall exercise such discretion in a non-discriminatory manner that all persons similarly situated will receive substantially the same treatment. 14.6. Accounting to Participants. The Adminis .ator shall render a quarterly accounting to each Plan Participant within 30 days following the end of a Plan quarter. The quarterly accounting will show the elections under which any claim was paid and the totals paid under each election, a quarter-to-date summary and a year-to-date total of payments made. However, in the last quarter, an additional accounting shall be provided to the Participant approximately 30 days prior to the end of the Plan Year. Within forty-five (45) days after the Plan Year end, the Administrator shall furnish to each Participant a written statement showing the amount of contributions, deposits and benefits paid during such year with respect to the Participant. 14.7. Access to Records. The Administrator will make available to each Participant such of his/her records under the Plan as he/she requests for examination ar reasonable times during normal business hours. 14.8. Summary Plan Description. A summary plan description of the Plan shall be given to all Employees who are or may become eligible to participate. If Participants have questions concerning the operation of the Plan or t'* ' Participant's eligibility for the payment of benefits under t. Plan, the Administrator or his or her designated representative is to be contacted either in person or in writing. 14.9. Particip..nts to Sign Documents. Participants shall sign such documents and provide the Company and Administrator with such information and evidence as may be reasonaoly requested for the purpose of administration of the Plan. 14.10. Indemnification of Administrator. The Administrator and/or his Representative shall be indemnified by the Employee against any and all liabilities arising by reason of any act or failure to act made in good faith pursuant to the provisions of the Plan including expenses reasonably incurred in the defense of any claim relating thereto. XV. CLAIMS 15.1 Claims Processing/Payment. Claims should b filed as soon as the Participant or eligible dependent incurs an eligible expense. Upon request, the Administrator shall provide tr- his/her designated representatxve with any and participant or ecessary forms. A ''Reimbursement Application” should be cc pleted and signed. This form must be completed for all claims submitted. The completed form(s) should then be sent to the Administrator for processing. The Participant "Reimbursement Application" form will be processed by the Plan Administrator. Determination of expense eligibility and fund availability will then be made. Prior to making any payment of benefits hereunder, the Plan Admini­ strator shall require the Participant to provide such information and complete such appropriate documents or forms as necessary for the proper administration of a claim. After reviewin^^' the claim, the administratLshall issue a benefit check, if appropriate- to thfi Plan ParticiparSuch checks will be disbursed on the regularly scheduled disbursement date(s). IT IS THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE PARTICIPANT TO DETERMINE THAT CLAIMED EXPENSE HAVE NOT BEEN PREVIOUSLY REIMBURSED BY ANY OTHER BENEFIT PLAN OR POLI>.t .\ND WILL NOT BE CLAIMED AS A TAX DEDUCTION. 15.2. Denial of Clax If the claim is to be denied, the Admini­ strator will provide adequate notice in writing to any Participant or beneficiary whose claim for benefits under the Plan has been denied, setting forth the specific reasons for such denial. 15.3. Appeal of Denia- aimant may appeal the denial of a claim by delivering to the Adi. ator or Designated Representative a written application for within thirty (30) days after receipt by the claimant of written i../cification of denial of the claim, or such longer period as the Administrator may, in our/his discretion, permit. The written application shall be dated and signed by the claimant or his/her authorized representative and shall request a review of the prior denial of the claim. The claimant shall be entitled to a full and fair review of the denial of his/her claim, including the opportunity for the claimant or his/her authorized representative to review pertinent documents and to submit issues, additional information and comments in writing. T' administrator, or the Designated Representative, shall review and d - .ermine appeals from denials of claims submitted under *:he medical or medical-related expense benefit and the dependent care assistance benefit. The decision on the appeal shall be made withii thirty (30) days after receipt of the request for review, unless special circumstances (such as the need to hold a hearing, if in our or the administrator's determination a hearing is necessary or advisable) require an extension of time, in which a decision shall be rendered as soon as possible, but not later tha.i sixty (60) day^ after receipt of the request for revie*/. If such an extension of time for review is required because of special circumstances, written notice of the extension shall be furnished to the claimant prior to the commencement of the extension. Unless otherwise agreed by the parties, if the decision on review is not furnished within these time limits, and the claim shall be deemed denied on review. The decision on review shall be iii c^'.ting and shall include wr^t..:ific reasons for the decision, with spc'^ fic references to the perc .*,ent plan provisions on which the decision is based. XVI. RECORDS AND REPORTS The administrator chall exercise authority and responsibility co comply with the Plan relating to Participant records, balances and benefits payable under this Plan. The Administrator shall also be responsible for all reporting and disclosure requirements for the Plan. The Administrator will process claims and maintain participant account records. Account records established and maintained for Plan Participants will record 'deposits' and 'balances' prior to each reimbursement. A quarterly information report will be provided to the Employer showing previous balances, deposits, payments, reimbursements, and current balances. In addition, the Employer report will include the following: a) The number of Employees of the Employer; b) The number of employees of the employer eligible to participate under the Plan; c) The number of employees actually participating in the Plan; d) The total cost of the Plan during the Plan Year; and; e) The Employer's name, address, taxpayer identification number and type of business. The above report will be used to satisfy any Internal Revenue Service reporting requirement and shall be modified as necessary to assist in the preparation of any IRS ; 2porting requirement. XVII. PARTICIPANT RIGHTS/OBLIGATIONS 17.1. Right to Benefits. Subject only to the specific provisions of this Plan, nothing shall remove a Participant's right to the benefits to which he/she becomes entitled in accordance with the provisions of this Plan. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained in the Plan, no part of any Participant's Account shall be used for any purpose other than for the exclusive benefit of Participant or his/her beneficiaries. No part of the Participant's Account shall be paid, distributed or made available to the Participant at any time, except as expressly provided by this Plan. 17.2. Anticipation of Benefits. Benefits payable under this Plan shall not be subject in any manner to anticipation, alienation, sale, transfer, assignment, pledge, encumbrance, charge, garnishment, execution, or levy of any kind, either voluntary or involuntary, including any such liability which is for alimony or other payments for the support of a spouse or former spouse, or child or for any other relative of the Participant, prior to actually being received by the person entitled to the benefit under the terms of the Plan and any attempt to anticipate, alienate, sell, transfer, assign, pledge, encumber, charge, or otherwise dispose of any right to benefits payable under the Plan shall be void. Plan benefits or trust assets shall not in any manner be subject to the debts, contracts. liabilities, engagenents, claims, demands or causes of action ur any person entitled to benefits under the Plan. 17.3. Cessation of Participation During Plan Year; Maximum Benefits a) Voluntary Cessation of Participation. For purpose of this Plan, voluntary cessation of participation occurs in the event a participant delivers written notice of termination of the participant's benefit elections and salary' reduction agreement but at such time the participant is otherwic-e an eligible participant. In the event a participant voluntarily ceases to participate in the Plan during the Plan Year, other than by termination of employment, the maximum benefits available for eligible claims incurred during the then current Plan Year shall be equal to the benefit account balances on hand at the end of the month such voluntary cessation of partici­ pation becomes effective. Voluntary cessation of participation becomes effective st the end of the month followi.ng written notice of termination of the participant's benefit elections and salary reduction agreement, and at such time that the total eligible benefits claimed by the participant during the Plan Year for each elected benefit is equal to or less than the total contributions made during the Plan Year for each elected benefit. b) Involuntary Cessation of Participation. Por purposes of this Plan, involuntary cessation of participation includes but is not limited to cessation of participation occurring as the result of voluntary or involuntary termination of employment. In the event of involuntary cessation of participation of a participant during a Plan Year, the maximum benefits available for eligible claims incurred during the Plan Year shall be determined for each benefit elected at the date such involuntary cessation of participation becomes effective. Involuntary cessation of ''aiticipation becomes effective at the date during which the participant is no longer eligible to participate in the Plan. The maximum benefit available for each benefit elected shall be determined at the date such involuntary termination becomes effective to be the greater of the following: (i) The total contributions for such benefit elected made prior to the effective date cf the participant's involuntary cessation of participation, less eligible claims incurre i by the participants, for such elected benefit prior to the effective date of such participant s cessation of participation. (ii) The account balance then on hand for such elected benefit. 17.4. Plan Not Contract of Emplcy::3ent. Nothing contained in this Plan shall be construed as a contract of employment between the Employer and any Employee, or as a right of any Employee to continue employment, or as a limitation of the Employer's right to discharge any Employees, with or without cause. 17.5. Rights Limited to Plan Only. No Employee, Participant or Beneficiary shall have any right to, or interest in, any of the Employer's or the Trust's assets upon termination of employment or otherwise, except as provided under this Plan; and then only to the extent of the benefits payable under this Plan to such Employee, Participant or Beneficiary. All payments of benefits as provided in this Plan shall be made solely out of the contributions made to this Plan and the Administrator or its Designated Representative shall not be liable in any manner for such contributions. Neither the establishment or amendment of the Plan nor any payment of benefits will be construed as giving to any Participant or other person any legal or equitable right against the Employer, Administrator, or its Representative except as provided in the Plan Document. Neither the Administrator or designated Representative makes any commitment or guarantee that any amounts elected or paid for the benefit of a Participant will be excludable from the Participant's gross income for federal or rtate income tax purposes, or that any other federal or state tax treatment will apply to or be available to any Participant. It shall be the obligation of each participant to determine whether each payment is excludable from the Participant's gross income for federal and state income tax purposes, and to notify the Administrator if the Participant has reason to believe than any such payment is not so excludable. Any participant, by accepting a benefit under this P'l'in, agrees to be responsible for any tax penalties and interest which may be imposed by the Internal Revenue Service, or any state taxing authority, with respect to these benefits. 17.6. Summary Plan Description. All participants shall receive in writing the terms and conditions of this Plan through a Flexible Compensation Plan Summary Booklet. XVIII. EMPLOYER RIGHTS/OBLIGATIONS The Representative designated in the Adoption Agreement shall: a) Establish a Tzrust Account at any commercial Bank whose deposits are insured by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) or Federal Savings A Loan Insurance Corporation (FSLIC) herein called “Client Trust Account". b) Endorse for deposit checks and drafts to the Client Trust Account 24 c) Issue checks, drafts or other orders fcr payment, withdrawal or transfer of funds drawn on the Client Trust Account. Except as otherwise provided in the Plan, any action under this Plan may be taken by resolution of the Board of Directors or by any person or persons duly authorized by said Board to take such action. Regardless of who is designated as our Representative, the Administrator shall have the sole fiduciary responsibility for the administration of the Plan under the provisions set forth in the Plan. Upon approval of the Board of Directors, this Plan may be adopted by any organization affiliated with us. Affiliated organizations for the purpose of this Plan must qualify under Section 414(b), (c), or (m) of the Code. The adopting organizations shall execute and deliver a supplemental agreement providing for the adoption of this Plan and such othei documents as deemed necessary or desirable. The provisions of this Plan shall be applicable to such organization to the extent provided in the supplemental agreement. The exercise of any of the powers, duties, and discretion under this plan and within the scope of authority, and all acts, decisions, and determinations made within the Plan, shall at all times be in good faith and in a non-discriminatory manner and shall follow a consistent policy on comparable issues. All actions and determinations shall be duly recorded and all such records, together with such other documents as may be necessary for the administration of this Plan shall be preserved for a minimum of six years after the close of the particular Plan Year to which they pertain. Decisions as to any disputed questions relative to the rights of a Participant under the Plan and upon all matters within the scope of our authority shall be final and binding on all parties involved. XIX. PLAN TERMINATION 19.1. Plan Termination. While it has been the Employer's intent that this plan be established for an indefinite period, this Plan, or any portion of this Plan, may be terminated at any time; provided, however, that such termination shall not affect any right or claim arising under the Plan. Upon the termination of the Plan, the rights of all Participants affected by the termination shall accrue as the Administrator directs. Such direction may include, but not be limited to i) a continuation of the Plan in order to pay balances in accordance with elected benefits, or ii) a distribution of Participant Account balances. Upon termination of the Plan, the interest of a Participant will be determined as of the date of termination, and the final distribution will be made according to the provisions of the Plan tc» such Participant. 19.2. Employer Dissolution/Merger/Consolidation. In the event of our dissolution, merger, consolidation, or reorganization, the Plan shall terminate unless the Plan is continued by the successor. XX. PLAN CONSTRUCTION 20.1. Statement of Intent. This Plan is intended to be in compliance with sections 79, 89, 105, 106, 125, and 129 of the Internal Revenue Code and applicable statutes and legulations governing employee benefit plans. However, this Plan has not been submitted to the Internal Revenue Service or other appropriate regulatory agency and there is no assurance that the intended tax benefit under this Plan will be available. 20.2. Conflict With Law. No provision of this Plan shall be construed to conflict with any Treasury Department, Department of Labor, or Internal Revenue Service regulation, ruling, release or proposed regulation or other order which affects or could affect the terms of this Plan. 20.3. Severability. The voidance of any particular provision of this Plan, whether oy law or a court of competent jurisdiction, shall not affect the other provisions, but the Plan shall be constr^.ed in all respects as if such invalid provision were omitted, provided the basic purposes of the Plan can be effected through the remaining valid provisions. 20.4. Multiple Copies. This document may be executed in any number of counterparts, each of which shall be deemed an original, and said counterparts shall constitute but one and the same instrument. 20.5. Insurers Not Party. No Insurer shall be considered a party to this Plan nor to any future amendment to the Plan. The rights and obligations of any Insurer are those specified in the insurance policy or contract and no provisions of this Plan shall be deemed to alter or change the terms of such policy or contract. 20.6. Entire Agreement. This Document together with the Adoption Agreement, appendices or supplements thereto, shall constitute the entire document and shall govern the rights, liabilities, and obligations of the Plan, except as they may be modified. 20.7. Law to Govern. This Agreement shall be construed and enforced according to the laws of the state in which it is adopted. 20.i. Gender. Any reference in the masculine gender in this Plan Docuttont shall be deemed to also include the feminine gender, unless expressly provided otherwise. Wherever appropriate, any reference in this document in the singular shall include the plural and any reference in the plural shall include the singular. 20.9. Headings. The headings used throughout this Plan are included for convenience of the reader only, and are not part of the governing terms and conditions of this Plan. The specific language within each Article, Section or Paragraph of this Plan shall govern the respective rights, obligations and benefits pertaining to this Plan. 20.10. Third-Party Contracted Benefits. If there is a conflict or inconsistency between the description of benefits contained in this Plan and any benefit provided through a third party, the terms of such third-party benefit shall control. Benefits payable under any policy of, or contract for, insurance described in this Document, shall be the exclusive responsibility of the insurer that issued the contract or policy and are not guaranteed by any party to this Plan. 20.11. Non-Alienation of Benefits. No benefit payable at any time under this Plan shall be subject in any manner to alienation, sale, transfer, assignment, pledge, attachment, or encumbrance of any kind. 20.12. Limitation of Rights. Except to the extent otherwise provided herein, neither the establishment of this Plan, nor any modification of it, nor any distribution under the Plan, shall be construed as giving to any Participant or any person whomsoever any legal or equitable rights against the Employer, its shareholders, partners, directors, officers, or other employees as such or as giving any person a right to be retained in employment. 20.13. Successor. Unless this Plan has been previously terminated, a successor to our business may continue this Plan by appropriate supplemental agreement. XXI. ADOPTION We have adopted this plan on the date and subject to the conditions and limitations set forth in the Adoption Agreement. The Adoption Agreement is included in this plan by reference as though set forth verbatim herein. 9490.3 TO: FROM: DATS: Mayor and City Council Mark E. Bernhardsor., City Administrator September 4, 1990 c SUBJECT: Flexible Benefits ISSUE selection"VrVgram/^ Council desires to undertake the benefits 2. Selection of a vendor to design the program. wuncirij°the August" 2°?V99°o" Council'“meetingpresented to g^ircr°aLrt?o^^^fre”n^or fn^formVti^r savings above expenses will be about V:-2, Sob/yeL'.'"^ estimated alternate- ^ 1. undertake design of a flexible benefits program. 2. Table. 3. Select a vendor for development. 4. Select a vendor for development and administration. 5. Table for further discussion. 6. Take no action. ifghfvenrorf'or^the' wTfi:xi^*lV ^fits be selected anticipated that program develop „oAd Program. It isor month and a half for consideration e during the next month Council in November for a start ud t^ aPProval of the plan to estimated costs are as follows- ^ first of January. The Initial Ongoing (Estimates) Plan set up 2tnd Communications Enrollment Legal Review (Popham Haik) Initial Once developed and reviewed it will be submitted to Council for approval. PROPOSED MOTION - Moved by _, seconded by _, Council directs staff to work with Safe Benefits to develop a flexible benefits program which will be submitted to Council for approval. Ayes , Nays ii- i $600.00 Administration $1,350- (Depends on number of enrollees.) $980 $300.00 $500-1,000 Enrollment $ 300 $500-1,900 I 0: t ••<a;--or and citv Council ^mOM. Mark E. Bernhardson, C'— Ad ' ■ 1 'DATS.. August 21, i990 ^^--^n.strator // SDBJBCT: flexible Benefits Attachment: a. riexim B- Table ol Ven^ocs^ V2/90 ISSCTE ^.u.. „ ^ iHSODtJCTION - a, i^ogram can"^» noted in A-t, u ave-alf fo^r the%mn7^"'' for =ave At the Council's v» ^‘‘’eir f® seek other vended/' <^°'^ncil meeting they di DISCUS!^TnA7 . i-ected staff Issue II Yendorg - while m the city '» Program'^a]?d^j°““®® P®°Ple tl she ®*Pfoyees co^sell^"® raon-,y, he employee's n ” ^^‘'ftlon could con^****^ from particln^^°<*^'^'^*’®' “'-p-w,.,.............. a® program , le employee' ■M2< pi.p,. ■" ■.rT,v.““*' “»“«>' j: •■p:py.. .o Care Re iribur senien t - This is an account where persons set aside ncnev to pay for health care exDenses- ^ -- C-—^ — w.. '= that are not normally covered by the insurance plan. This could include co-pays, dental expenses and etc. D_ependent Care - This would allow the employee to defer up to $3,000 to pay for the cost of deoendent care as a pre-tax item. Each of the vendors offer the basic programs with some sMqht variations. Vendor Services - ^^an Development - In each case the vendors are taking their standard plan and adopting it to the City's. As noted in Attachment 3 this ra’nges from $500 to $2,700 .* ^sgal Review - This is offered by one of the plans in their plan development fee while others have had them reviewed by prominent legal firms in the area, the Citv could either rely on such legal representations or choose to have their own legal review. A separate legal review by Popham Haik is estimated tc be 'about $400- 1,200. (Some of the plans have not been reviewed locally as best as we can determine.) Administration - Once the program is up and running it can either be self administered by the City or it can be administered through a third party. Quotations for these expenses and the basis for these differ by type of plan. It should be noted that the City would feel it prudent to have a third party administrator as employees may be reluctant to participate in a program if they know their fellow employees are reviewing reimbursements for particularly health related items. Additionally the types of administration do differ, some handle the accounting and transmit to the City for writing all the checks. Others handle all the check writing directly from their office. RECOMjpNDATION - It is recommended that the Council indicate any questions or issues they would like to address and request tabling until the September 10, 1990 Council meeting. PROPOSED MOITON - Moved by _, seconded by _, Council table the issue until September 10, 1990. Ayes _, Nays _. cc: Department Heads - // TO: FROM: DATS: Mayor and Ci-y Council Mark E. Bernhardsonr City Adninis May 2, 1990 trator SUBJECT: Flexible Benefit Plan Attachment:A. Flexible Benefit Plan Memo Dated 4/20/90 (Cover Memo Only) employees. the 5/14/90 meeting. ALTERNATr/ES 1. Approve 2. Modify and approve 4! Acceot^the legal review of DCA's master documents 5. Table to 5/23/90 meeting recommendation - It is teco^nraended that the City wor^ «ith DCA Stanton to: A Develoo a flexible benefits plan in an amount not to exceed $4,000 for plan design and communication accept the legal review by DCA's legal firm. B. Develop the plan to be administered by DCA Stanton for approximately $1,700/year. PROPOSE St;ntofto''d%vllop'a fd'«%^’i"ste%"ed 'bro«1ta^^°on forfppVo°ximate^y $l/700/year. Ayes __. Hays __. Mayor and City C3unci- fHOM: Marl< E. Bernhardaon, City Adninistrato ^ SAT2: April 20, 1990 SUBJECT: Flaxible Benefit Plan m / / Attachment: A. CCA Flexible Benefit Outline ICSOE - presentation of iaforaation to Council regarding the EasTos of flexible benefit plan. iVT'lODt:C"''^C J - Over the past couple vears staff has drsoussed dollars certain amounts Lilians toge-.her efth"lo:idlnYlfnT.^harpl^^^^^ compensation. Even though this ^^^ar'a's a d°rcr!mlnratron council for some ', !«='-=L" design of e olan more test, made =^tain .^1", J'.V/ealed by th4 Congress. IfSS s-::s K-JLStri^ *89 since the repeal made it no longer necesoar,.) isssMs - ^1"??;?'rt“tt“.tv;i.;&%nrinn;trr^^^^^^^ number or organizat,. „»t-o ar“a ' The DCA Stanton group has private ?tt‘« adopted such programs, done It in most ^ f j-v.- nian would be about Subsequent to ^90^ memo I have done |«t'the°r Exploration f ®5=°Voo'‘*ioEExaf com^unciations 87 for 1990.) The in^o-VhEiEfoEmEtEoE%o^^:TbEt ^SeftEonEEr TssEeEyC S:?e^;“lr to a'decisYoEEs to whether staff should initiate t.he work with DCA Stanton. While the City could »olicite alternate•eeas, it is not required nor felt that ne would net a substantial savings, itieg. (xhe only workinq fl'Je leqat r!vLwE“DCA‘s master unknown expense at this point is m s plant law firm. These documents have been reviewed by the Gray, Plant iaw titm Ssrfa“or3 will be presented at the next meeting.) G la addition to the initial outlay expense there is the administrative cost of the program. While it can be done ^nhouse, the aooroximately $1,700 per year that DCA would charge for administration of the program would do a much better job than we would be able to do and would probably make the program much more widely used. (Thera has been a reluctance to participate by ^gftain emmlovees in organizations tnat used their own inhouse administration, of people submitting for particularly health related matters. Ones tnat have s..i-ted from an innouse to a contract administrator have seen their participation rates CO UD, (This is because a number of people are concerned whaw people in their own orgai,'ization are reviewing bills for healtn matters that they consider to be personal.) ALTSRNATr/ES 1. Accept the information. 2. Ask any question you may have at this point or over the next three weeks. 3. Table until subsequent meeting. ^^COMMENDATION - It is recommended that Council accept tne information and ask any questions --^y may ha v e be tween now and the next meeting and that the matter -e tao^e^ un- ..a, - , 990. / PROPOSED MOTION - Moved by seconded by that Council Icceorthrinformation and Si^ any question— they may hare SL and now and the next meeting and that the matter be tabled until May 14, 1990. Ayes _, Mays —. cc: Janet McCui , DCA All Department Heads a j.t VENDOR NRNB CONTACT VLAN MBAS ■«alth Insuranc<" Hedlcal Expensa R«l«barsamant9 Oepandant Cara COSTS h. Initial 1. Flan Satup 2. Cnployaa Communlration 3. I.#sal Ravlaw Ongoing 1. Adslnlntration (20-30 pnrtlcl- panta) 2. Othar COMMENTS MUNICIPAL RBFBBBNCBS CowpanaatIon Conaultant a Joa Nolvarton 1500 $500 (a) (500-100C) I960-1200 $350/yaar anrollaiant Locatad in Cloq'i**^ Fophan Salk not- Raxlawad Flan no Mayba raxlaw around $1000 City doaa all chack Nrltlnq Nona Schools and non-profits In tha _ _Dotthscn part of I1 th« atata 0TA/5tant on rlaxiM- ron*p«naat I on Inc. Mtnn*ap«-*l 1 a rioiiT '■.ipt y h Alllaon Wandrlckaon S?2«^0 $145 $1700 (a) i 400-«.00) $575 (a) (500-1000) $1700 $1000-2200 Plan <!av» 1 op««d In conjunctlrn with Cary Plant. Pnpham Balk ha a for anothof city Standard doc\im**nta In good ahapn. L i V i t nd r ** V1 nw. Ml chacks prnparnd hy DCA Standard plan has bann ravinwad by Pophaai Halk. Maad auhatantlal updatas Brooklyn Park Appla Va1lay Brooklyn Cantar Goldan Va1 lay Edina Bloomington Eden Prairie Barnsaille Bt. L—la PMxk Legal Seralcea Corporation St. Louis Park Safa Benefits Qolden Valley Georg Kibble Pat Scott P'a includes both Initial a ongoing (estleatel 1st year year year year year To be doteralned 2nd 3rd «th 5th 3210 2022 10«2 1003 S75 Fees include legal review. Means to Unit the employers and employees exposure tn the health care relmburaaatent acct by deferrlne contri­ butions to it ontll expenses have been Incurred. Bone feel this nay be questioned legally while Keclnee maintains It la legally a viable method of doing it. This la a flrn that la Insurance related, kwaltlag further Inforaation. New Rope '.r >-.v^ - BMltll laMTMW* - MMiMl 9mrrm»» ft. taltUI 1. ViftB ft»t«9 >* Mnpitm CMMHlImtlM >• ftaval ft«vi9« ft. mmi»9 1. lUftiiBlatratlM ptftlcl- fMita) 2. otlMir CBMpKII—ttcWI C->Maltmits OCft/ttsnton ricxtblv CtN»p#niiat ton Ine. ninn»iipol 1 ■ L<»9al Service* Cerperetlon St. Loele Sark Safe Saaeflta Oelft«Mi Vsllaf Joe HBleartea Deaf Snlth Slllepn Sendrirkaofi ftary Slat Natt ftMtt S2250 SS49 fSM fat I9OO-1M0I • 1700 (a) (400-5001 • 525 (a» (400-500) SSSO-1200 • 1700 •lSOO-2200 See Includea both laitlal • ensolny (eatlMta) let year « J210 2nd year - 2022 JrS year - 10S2 4th year - lOOJ 5th year - 175 ••00 f500'4S0 a) (500>1000t fl320-1fftO •350/year aarellawat 100/year fer reaerellMMit Ifteseafta •• aaoftl teeatei la Cloqeet ftesftae ftalk aot RevleeeO Siam ae •layfce review aroeaO flOOO City Sees all Slaa SevelopeS In cenjvt^tlon with Gray Slant. Sephaw Salk has for another City StanSarS docoBonts cheek wrltlaf yood ahape. Llailted review. All checks prepared by DCA Standard plan has been reviewed by Sophaw Salk. City pre-acreena all relnbaraeiRentB. City writes all check* to ralMbure* anployeaa Sees Include lofal review. Sy eaeecl- ated law flrai. Means to Halt the eaipley- ers and ewployeee eapoaura In the health car* rele- bareeaicnt sect by deferrlny eentrlbn- tlons to It niitll eapenaas have been Incvrred. Soaw feel thin awy be qeeatlened leyally while Sosalnl aalntaln* Ik la leqally a viable Bathed ef deln* It. Thl* !e e fins that Is InaersBee related. Thia* hww- ever, can be dalatad froB any at the earailBant activity. Theyreceive all elalBa and laaa* ehaeka. Caa IndcBBlfy Badleai relBbaraaBaat. Schoola and nen-preCIta in the northern part of the atata •rooklyn Sark Apple Valley Brooklyn Center (Solden Valley Bdlaa Barnevlli* •t. Louie Sark Bloomlnqton Bden Sralrla Mew Bop*Nora a» Batlaekao trcB ■aik ? . . * .■ i; ■ *i‘V • si p .:;t *.v -1;’. V -• . il'^9Q . 4 TO: Mayor and City Council flONs Mark E. Bernhardson, City Administrat OATS: November 9, 1990 SOBJSCT: 1991 Health Insurance Attachments; A. 1991 Cost Comparisons ISSUE - Establishment of the amount for Increase in the City's contribution for family health insurance. INTRODUCTION - In 1990 the City contributed $211.00 per month for persons selecting family coverage. The 1991 budget proposes a $20.00 per month increase for those persons selecting family coverage. DISCUSSION - The increases are about 11% for ne^t year. The w*i ighted average increase based on utilization within this •‘Sganization results in approximately $37.30 per month. As a general guideline in the past the monthly contribution the City has looked to split the increase with the employee on a 50/50 basis. ALTERNATIVES 1. Adopt the $20.00 per month as set forth in the budget. 2. Amend and adopt. 3. Table. RECOMMENDATION - It is recommended that the City contribution for family coverage be increased $20.00 per month from $211.00 in 1990 to $231.00 in 1991 for general City employees. PROPOSED MOTION - Moved by seconded by that the Council adopt a contribution rate of $231.00 per month for family health coverage for general employees for 1991. Ayes , Nays . CC! All Department Heads DATEi Mark E. Bernhaidson, City Administrator Tom Kuehn, Finance Director November 9, 1990 StXBJBCT: LOGI3 Group Health Insurance Rates for 1991 ISSUE - Presentation of 1991 health insurance rates for Council information to determine 1991 City contribution rates for those employees not covered by a collective bargaining contract. DISCUSSION - The LOGIS Health Care health insurance rates for 1§51 have increased an average of 11% from 1990 rates. A comparison of monthly rates from 1990 to 1991 with the percentage of increase follows: SINGLE COVERAGE 1990 1991 % INCREASE Group Health $106.53 $117.82 10.6% PHP $129.50 $147.00 13. 5% Ked Center $109.60 $120.00 9.5% FAMILY COVERAGE Group Health $290.67 $321.46 10. 6% PHP $299.50 $340.00 13. 5% Med Center $326.20 $357.20 9.5% Currently the City contributes up to $211.00 per month toward family coverage for those non-union employees who have chosen family coverage or pays the entire cost of single coverage for those employees who have chosen single coverage. 11990.3 TO: rmoM: DATS: Mark Bernhardson, City Administrator Tom Kuehn, Finance Director November 9, 1990 SUBJECT: Appoinc Auditor for Fiscal Year 1990 We have requested cost estimates from the audit firm of Pannell Kerr Forster for performing the 1990 fiscal year audits. They have submitted a total estimate of $15,450, excluding direct expenses and excluding any additional expenses incurred as a result of application to the Certificate of Achievement for Excellence in Financial Reporting. This compares with an actual cost for the 1989 audits of $ 14,700 plus $721 for direct expenses and $3,000 for the certificate program. The 1990 FY cost estimates are: a. Annual audit for the City $13,600 b. Single audit covering federal programs 750 c. Minnesota legal compliance audit 1,100 TOTAL $15,450 We have budgeted $15,840 in 1991 for the 1990 audits, plus $3,800 for the Certificate of Achievement and direct costs. RECOMMENDATION - It is requested that Council approve the appointment of the audit firm of Pannell Kerr Forster, C.P.A.'s to perform the required audits of the 1990 fiscal year records. Mayor and City Council FROM: Mark Bernhardson, City Administrate!^ Forwarded recommending approval. PROPOSED MOTION - Moved by _, seconded by _, to appoint the audit firm of Pannell Kerr Forster to perform the required audits for the 1990 fiscal year at an estimated cost of $15,450 plus direct expenses. Ayes __, Nays __. TO: FROM; DATE: Attachment; ISSUE - A. Kilbo Memo Dated 10/25/90 B. Carol Hansing Memo Dated 10/26/90 C. 1989 Animal Control Statistics 1. Present to Council the results of efforts alternate kennel for storage of impounded dogs. to obtain an 2. Determine if the City should enter into a contract with the recommended impound facility. INTRODUCTION - As you may be aware the City's current kennel desires not to continue after March 31, 1991 providing service to any of the communities. Staff has been exploring alternatives. DISCUSSION - The alternatives explored included; 1, Near the old Corcoran Pet Hospital. The cost of this facility would run the City about $500 per month or $6,000 per year. Currently the City has budgeted $1,500 per year for impound services. 2, Public facility Maple Grove. A number of communities have gotten together and are on the front end of constructing a facility in Maple Grove. Initial assessments however for this for a city of Orono's size would be about $27,074. (Wayzata was informed it would require $22,924 over five year of capital expenditures as well as administrative cost of $3,056.00 annually. There was also an animal cost of $1,094.) 3, Alternate private kennel. Staff has reviewed with other kennels in the area that might be interested in undertaking dogs as an impound facility. There are nc locally in Orono and only one in close proximaty is the Reo Raj facility in Minnetrista. Given the 75 animals impounded between Orono and the three cities of which it contracts a year the city's maximum exposure would be under about $3,500 and anticipated to be down below the $2,000 presently incurred. The only thing this facility does not have that the current facility does is an association with a veterinarian. The City has been in contact with two local veterinarians who are willing to provide a review of injured animals prior to them going to the kennel for a nominal charge. The number of animals that are injured is generally about 10 per year. In addition for 1991 the rates for the three contract cities will be 2% increase over 1990 for scheduled patrol hours based on actual time in the contract city of $14 hourly. The price per call for unscheduled service or call out would remain at $21.00. The City is still able to cover the costs that it incurs at this level for the program. ALTERNATIVES - 1. Accept the recommendation of Reo Raj as the kennel in conjunction with local veterinarian for injured animals. 2. Direct further study of alternatives presented or other alternatives. 3. Table for further discussion. RECOMMENDATION - It is recommended that the Council acc'^pt ».^.e Police Department's recommendation to utilize Reo Raj together with local veterinarians, Dr. Janet Roshar and Dr. Daniel Hartnett for injured animals. Additionally it is recommended that the Council endorse the 2% increase rates for 1991 to the contract communities. (It should be noted that impound costs are billed directly to the cities independent of the other service rates.) (It rhould be noted that Reo Raj was the kennel used by the contracting agency to provide animal control services to Orono a number of years ago but when an agency changed the new agency used a different kennel. So the City does have some past experience with Reo Raj as a kennel.) seconded by that CouncilPROPOSED MOTION - Moved by _. _ _ direct staff to contract with .'**0 Raj for animal impound services for 1991 and approves the 2% increase of rates for the animal control contract for 1991. Ayes __, Nays __. cc: Mel Kilbo, Police Chief 4 Date: To: From: He: Interoffice Memo October 25. 1990 Mar’ Bernhardson, City Administrator Mel Kilbo, Chief of Police Animal Control Contract and Facility As you are aware, Corcoran Pet Care no longer wishes to continue as our impound facility past March 31, 1991. The City of Orono has made many inquiries and has decided to take its stray and impounded animals to Reo Raj Kennels. Reo Raj Kennels are located at 1195 Kennel Road, Maple Plain, MN 55259. (Geographically, they are located by going west on Cty. Rd. 15 to its junction with Cty. 92, crossing 92, going west on 15 about one-quarter mile. Kennel will be on the right side.) Reo Raj Kennels will charge $3 per dog or cat on a one time handling fee, that are brought into their facility. They will charge $8 per day boarding fee. They will hold the dog for five days for the owner, if any. The owner, to claim the dog, would pay the $40 plus any impound fees imposed by the City. If noone claims the impounded dog after five days, the kennel will charge the City involved $40 board, $3 fee, $10 disposal, for a total fee of $53.00. These charges are far less than our previous alternatives. We have not had a large number of dogs that were not claimed within five days. I have made arrangements with Reo Raj Kennels if the City approves and can begin bringing animals in on January 1, 1991. They indicated they would take in dogs before this if Corcoran Pet Care were to choose not to accept dogs at an earlier date. The City of Orono will contract to supply animal control services to the other cities for services at a % increase of the 1990 contract rates. ^ J • .','s \f^r- -r-T r REO-RAJ KENNELS 1195 Kennel Road MAPLE PLAIN, MINNESOTA 55359 (612) 955-1426 CITY POUND CONTkACT Any animal brought in by your dog warden or by a person authorized by the City will be accepted as a Pound Animal by Reo Raj Kennels, the City's official kennel, owned and operated by James L. Kappes, State Kennel License ?DK264, The Pound Master, in conjunction with the dog wardens, will make every reasonable effort to locate the owner of the animal to advise him of the impoundment. All dogs and cats will be held for five (5) days or until claimed by the owner, whichever period is shorter. To reclaim any animal, the owner must present to the Kennel a release from the City and must pay the normal, posted, boarding charges for the time the animal has been impounded. Any animal which is not cli^imed by the end of the five (5) day impounding period will become the property of the Pound Master and may be disposed of in any humane manner he selects. .Any sick or injured animal brought to the Pound will be kept for five (5) days unless, at the discretion of the Pound Master and the Community Service Officer, it would be inhumane to do so. In such cases, the Pound Master, after making every reasonable effort to locate the owner, will dispose of the animal in a humane manner and will be held totally free of liability for not keeping the animal for the prescribed period. The City agrees to pay Reo Raj Kennels on a monthly basis for their services as a Dog Pound. The books and records for Pound Dogs will be available for City inspection at any time during business hours. Rates for the services provided by the Dog Pound are: Admittance Fee: Boarding per day: Disposal Fee; $3.00 $8.00 $10.00 This agreement will remain in effect until such liJme either party shall give sixty (60) days prior notice of termi­ nation. CITY OF REO RAJ KENNELS JAMES L. KAPPES ■fM 1 »l*tu I /n DATE:October 26, 1990 TO:Chief Kilbo FROM:Carol RE:Reo-Raj Kennel Inspection jT^^^eKir :s This date at approx. of'^the^kennel facility,made an unannounced, on-site inspection u We checked for ”‘’^°it“®«dogaL°doorP'^at the rear are inside („i access to the outside. Each ^ag^had^rLcLf orwfter! Cats and smaller dogs had blankets in the bottom of their cages. The have 5 full time ' g^is^rand SeLfore someonethem live in the house on the premis-s is there 24 hours a day. TTVTnrxFD facility - no key is necessary The kennel area is an UNLOCKED faciiiy security is to enter the facility to hunting dog training facility concerned, this .ami building as the impounded and numerous labs are housed in t. possible for ANYONE to ente. Hours for release to wI°MlkId tl^lowllefindillle^lhat tlly^^rflirsf Ilrinf "o?rIIuII-!^i.pounds can be brought m at any time of the day or night. IhlfllthalLrind^IIrfIhriogri^a'^Irle pit. Trii TllttiZiiiTn tiirit esiTi^rikirrthoft s;idi«i‘=«irtirnt first. The CSO staff will Inmle^Ip tnitl^rabies impounded dogs are „ type of a form similar to our vaccine. My suggestion was current rabies will be "i“" srii =,» ^ »» -\L COUTROL OFFICER STATISTICS FOR 1939 STTPOt^ii^yi^0ORONOSPRINGPARK MINNETONKA BEACH LONG LAKE TOTALS dog BITES;7 0 0 0 7 IMPOUNDS;56 7 1 9 73 barking DOGS;38 14 10 5 74 dog at LARGE;79 16 2 9 106 RACOONS;9 2 2 2 15 CATS;5 3 0 1 9 HORSES;5 0 0 0 5 MISC;40 6 0 6 52 TOTAL;239 48 15 32 334 • -v • f-- ' .r. . '. -V* .-»v • •-.-rr ••■■ ■ •'• '.'^v'v*-.. . .T. -••• 1: ■■ ■ •'• ■■■■^ r:."‘ t m’ . - . ................................ * • •^ •- >«« - .. '••.«•• i>t •■ * .......................................................... .iiw^;.-*,: ...* .. •'• '-.••.^■;,v-— ■< • — • -- -* . . -v . . , - . . ^ *. •*~» ’•.T'.- • •.-•” I-—’• •, .••■.•■.•-»«•'.■ animal control contract Page 2 7. 8. 9. At the time Impounded animal is confined at Corcoran Pet Care Center, Contractor is released of all interests and liability while animal Is at Corcoran Pet Center. ^JTprcoran Pet Care Center shall collect the impounding fee and boarding charge as provided by City Ordinance. Contractor and Corcoran Pet Care Center shall furnish monthly reports to the City as required as to the service or services ' rendered in connection with each animal impounded. All impounding fees, license fees, and/or penalty fees collected by Contractor or its agent and/or Corcoran Pet Care Center shall be remitted to the City. In the event an animal impounded and boarded by order of the City Health Officer or placed under quarantine by ruling of the State Board of HeaJ.th, said animal shall be boarded as required by said order or rulingy^'^t the end of such period, the City releases all its interests', right, and^^ccntXT^T^over said animals^j*th-ich may then be dispose,4 of at *the’ dfsyret/iorj,>^of,^gontrVrtor. the event that any dogs, cats, orfother^-lrnpoilVs^d-'^imals are unAaimed after five (5) days, tK^y^shali<become the^^rdperty of Contractor and may be disposed of or sold at their discretion. All proceeds' from the disposition of such animals jwy be retained^by Corf^actor, including any proceeds from any animals disposed of ip ac^cordajjice-totatutes 35.71. ^ ^ r-—^ 10. The Contra^E^ shall h^ep records ^ a^ll ar>imals impounaed together with a ^ The City agrees to pay Contractor for services in the performance of this contract as follows: •A. Price pe : hour - For scheduled patrol based on actual time in service for the City......................................................................... $12.00 B. Price per Call - For unscheduled service during regular working hours of 7 am to 6 pm weekdays.....................................................$21.00 C. Price per Call - For service during other than scheduled or regular working hours . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $21.00 D. Monthly administrative charge ......................................................... $15.00 11. All payments shall be made by the City upon receipt of monthly statements by Contractor. Payments shall be made within ten (10) days of receipt of statement. ^ 12. City agrees to pay for reasonable veterinary cost for emergency care deemed necessary, unless the owner reclaims animal and Che owner will pay. 11190.1 w 'L'' TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Mark E. Bernhardson, City Administrator: DATE; November 1, 1990 SUBJEv .: Christmas Eve Day 1990 : -i/U i. ‘ Attachment: A. 1990 Calendar ISSUE - Determine the desire of the Council related to the upcoming Christmas Eve day, Monday, December 24, 1990 relating to: A. City Hall closure B. If closed appropriate way to account for employee time off. INTRODUCTION - The City Orono currently grants 10 holidays as actual days plus a floa j holiday (total of 11). The actual holidays include Chrisu. s Day and New Years Day ' 'j;t do not include "eves" the day before. DISUCSSION - A number of people have indicated a desire to be gone on that date and given that the City would be open only on Monday and then not again until Wednesday, staff has looked at the possibility of closing City Hall for Christmas Eve day. The same situation exists for New Years Eve day, but the nature of the holiday is different so staff is not proposing that any changes be made there. A number of people have expressed interest in taking the day off and it looks as if the City would only maintain a skeleton crew if it were to be open. It is additionally not anticipated that there would be significant business conducted that day based on experience in previous years for that day. The options are as follows: Close City Hall for the day. (Police Dept, would remain open however with a very reduced staff.) Maintain a skeleton crew. Let Public Works Department Head determine whether it has that as a work day based on department needs. If closed the options are as follows: Have employees use a vacation day. Have employees use floating holiday Grant an additional holiday. As those who intend to be gone would have anticipated using vacation, the use of floating holiday or vacation would not seem to be an inappropriate method to account for the day. Additionally since Christmas actually falls in a pay period for that includes 1991, persons could utilize the 1991 floating holiday for their Christmas vacation. RECOMMENDATION - It is recommended that for Christmas Eve day the City officially close City Hall and that employees be allowed to use either vacation or the floating holiday (which is treated the same as vacation) and that City Hall be open with possibly a reduced staff for New Years Eve day, December 31st. For Public Works it is recommended that the department head determine whether the department will have that as a scheduled workday. (Their work is not dependent on whether City Hall is open or not.) (Those taking the 31st off could use either vacation or the floating holiday if they haven't already.) This situation last occurred in 1984 and will not happen again until the year 2000. PROPOSED MOTION - Moved by seconded by Council direct Staff to close City Hall on Monday, December 24th and allow the option of using either vacation or 1991 floating holiday to be used for that day and acknowledge that staff will maintain at least a minimum staffing level for Monday, December 31, 1990 with Public Works department head determining whether it is a scheduled work day. If not a scheduled work day department personnel would use either vacation or a floating holiday in the same manner as City Hall personnel. Ayes _, Nays _. 11190.4 TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Mark E. Bernhardson, City Administrato^/ ^ DATE: November 1, 1990 SUBJECT: LMCD Comprehensive Plan Attachment:A. LMCD Memo Dated 10/29/90 B. LMCD Comprehensive Plan - October 1990 Revision (Currently a printer) ISSUE - Present to Council information regarding LMCD's com^'ehensive plan and action taken at the meeting of October 24, 1990. INTRODUCTION - As you are probably aware the LMCD, which had submitted a revision to the plan adopted with some amendments noted in Attachment A of the plan. DISCUSSION - CounciImember Callahan and myself were in attendance at the the October 24th meeting and although several communities urged delay in adoption of the plan LMCD's Board chose to look at the plan anyway. In response to VJayzata's plan which had recommended they become involved in the front end of the planning process rather than the review and comment in the back end through variances/ they chose to do both by incorporating in their Comprehensive Plan a program to do the Comprehensive Plan inventory as noted in Item 4 of Attachment A. While this may be an avenue worth exploring it does not mean that it is appropriate avenue or that if adopted the review and comment authority should be retained. It is interesting to note although the plan was adopted on an 8 to 4 vote (Orono's representative was on a long scheduled vacation and the representative from Tonka Bay was not present) that the City Council ’s of the following communities are on record in opposition to the plan. These include: Orono wayzata oring Park nnetonka Deephaven Greenwood Victoria In addition Tonka Bay expressed reservations on the plan. The next step in the proposal is a review by Metro Council although it is not clear what status this review will have in part because Metro Council had given their blessing to the plan through their Representative before and secondly there is no clear direction in the statute to the plan as to what authority Metro Council would have should they choose not to adopt it. In a related matter on shoreland regulations the staff is working with John Shard low to develop a recommendation to determine the best route for pursuing the City's overall shoreland regulations. In addition as LMCD has indicated they will be undertaking an inventory of the Comprehensive Plans and Land Uses as part of their program this could also be a critical area in two respects (which is alluded to in Attachment C): A. The amount of authority that communities are willing cede to LMCD as a review and commentor on its Comprehensive Plan changes so that as a group LMCD can have influence on the land uses in individual communities. B. I;i development of what are appropriate land uses what negative impact will "over development" in some communities have on the future developabi1 ity of others. (Th 5 statement is made in the Comprehensive Plan on page 43 that the extensive development in some of the commercial centers, (i.e. Spring Park, Excelsior, etc.) are acceptable because there is much underdevelopment in other areas (i.e. Orono.) While Orono may choose never to have greater development in Orono, with LMCD being involved, the other communities may be able to continue at Orono's expense. The only trade off for density should be within a community such as "over development" that may exist in Navarre as an exchange for other "under development" in other areas Orono.) Staff will monitor this and be involved as it developes. ALTERNATIVES - 1. Accept the information. 2. Give reaction. 3. Await further action until; Official notification of review by Metro Council Notification from LMCD on developing a comprehensive plan inventory 4. Direct staff to proceed with a recommendation on shoreland regulation adoption. RECOMMENDATION - It is recommended that after any comments and discussion that the item be tabled directing staff to work on the shoreland regulations and request a response when various notifications are given by Metro Council and LMCD related to LMCD's plan and the Comprehensive Plan Inventory. PROPOSED MOTION - Moved by __, seconded by __, Council after any comments and discussion table this item directing staff to work on the shoreland regulation and request a response when various notifications are given by Metro Council and LMCD related to LMCD's plan and the Comprehensive Plan Inventory. Ayes __, Nays p- LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT TO: LMCD City Mayors U'ICD City Administrators FROM: Chair Dave Cochran Advisory Committee Chair Bob Rascop DATE: October 29, 1990 SUBJ: Long Term Management Program Adoption r... ' “L. \-iul 1S90 The October 1990 draft of the LONG TERM Mv\NAGEMENT PROGRAM was presented to the LMCD Board on 10/24/90 for consideration of both the text revisions in this draft identified by bold tvpe (except for the objectives) and re­ visions proposed at the 10/24 Board meeting. Amendments proposed and adopted at the Board meeting were (new letions = lined-out)* bold, de- 1. Ch. IV, Shoreland Protection, P. 47, 52, line 9, "To that end the District has proposed a draft choreland ordLnanc-e- a set of standards and criteria based on the DNR statewide standards, but tailored to fit Lake Minnetonka, as the basis for consideration by the cities." 2 Ch. IV, P. 53, Objective 3, to delete items "a" and "b" and amend the objective to read: "The LMCD shall counsel with lake cities In reviewing and commenting on the following-applications that affect the shoreland program. 3. Appendix C, Shoreland Standards and Criteria and reinstating 1Z on Flexi­ bility, amending 5C, P. C-3, line 6, at the end of the fourth sentence: "and Wayzata may have 9,000 square feet"; and line 7, last sentence: "However, those -t+HPee-four communities are owpocted. encouraged to move toward the 15,000 square foot standard as redevelopment occurs. 4. Ch. VII, Implementation, P. 87, Intergovernmental Coordination Program, add a new sentence to Item 3, which in total would read: Act as a technical clearinghouse for data concerning the lake, lake use, access and shoreline development. This incl:;dcs Comprehensive Plan inventory of the cities." P. 89, Intergovernmental Coordination Program, Item 1, add the following; "This adoption should be based on the cities’ Comprehensive Plan analysis and Coordination with the LMCD. In*a final summary vote, the Board voted to formally adopt the Long Term * 'T Management Plan as the official Management Plan of the District. The October draft, as amended, was adopted with "Aye" votes from Foster ^ ^ (Deephaven), Grathwol (Excelsior), Cochran (Greenwcod), Bosw.nkcl (Minne ^ _ tonka Beach), Lewman (Minnetrista), Reese (Mound), Slocum (Woodland); "Nay" votes from Pillsbury (Minnetonka), Babcock (Spring Park), Mallnka (Victoria), and Martinson (Wayzata). .^ The Management Plan is now being prepared for presentation to the Metro­ politan Council. (continued) LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT LMCD Management Plan Adoption In taking the action on the Management Plan, the Board took into considera­ tion the concerns expressed by some cities regarding the flexibility allow­ ances in the Shoreland Standards and Criteria. As the facilitating agency with the MN DNR during the Shoreland Rules adoption process, LMCD will represent the cities to the full extent of the Management Plan provisions. The Plan was amended to include each city's Comprehensive Plan Inventory. This will provide specific data which can be shared among the cities to provide the regional perspective considered a priority for the Plan. Your LMCD Board wishes to reassure the cities that the implementation phase of the Management Plan will be designed to accent the city/LMCD partnership. Legislative change will be the last step in the Plan s implementation. Anticipating that will be some three years hence, we trust the working re lationship will be well established for our mutual support. Naturally, the changes in operation which can and will be made will take place in full and open communication with our member cities. The Board thanks every mayor, council member and administrator who invested substantial time and energy in reviewing the drafts leading to this final Plan. We are most grateful and appreciative. c: LMCD Board of Directors '7^-*jr.;S-':, • ' '■ .■ :.r .. a--- -. , , ■«. V. REVIEW OF WAYZATA'S SHORELAND PROTECTION OUTLINE A review of the October 12, 1990 Wa>^ata Shoreline Protection Material reveals very serious flaws in the approach. The study outline that they propose Is inappropriate for the LMCD in part and redundant in the remainder. Mr. Licht has stated that this outline was developed to assist cities in developing their, shoreland ordinance. It would serve that purpose, It does not serve the LMCD. The redundant portions relate to the study outlines steps for defining goals and policies. Examples are listed below; Page 4, step 1. "Determine the 'Development Capacity'...." In preparation for the subcommittee meetings held from December, 1988 to February, 1989 we did major portions of this and presented the material to the attendees (14 communities, DHR, Metropolitan Council, and the Watershed District). Much of the material is presented in the Working Paper and the Preliminary Plan. Page 4, step 2. "Establish a Shoreland Development Data Base". We did that part which was appropriate for the LMCD in the fall of 1988 and used it throughout the tour months of the Shoreland Management Subcommittee proceedings. Tlie remaining parts are appropriate only for the individual cities. Page 5, step 3. "Identify the lake use and land use issues...." We also did that in the fall of 1988 and the work appears In the "Shoreland Management Working Paper" and "Shoreland Management Preliminary Plan". Page 6, step 4 "Develop policies and guidelines...." We have developed specific policies, and this was accomplished by the 14 cities, the DNR, Metropolitan Council, Watershed District and the LMCD in meetings held from December 1988 to February, 1989. All cities were rep.'esented, including Wayzata. The participants from Wayzata are no longer in that city's employ. We also performed parts of steps 5 and 6 to the extent that it was appropriate for a lake protection agency without significant jurisdiction over upland areas. Most of the work suggested is beyond the scope of LMCD autnority and interest. It is our conclusion that the City of Wayzata wants us to go back through the process that we have already completi because they now disagree with the decisions that were made with all 14 cities, the Watershed District, Metropolitan Council and the DNR participating. The parts that are inappropriate would involve the LMCD in land use decisions and policy that would do grave harm to the District's constituency. That is. the outlina calls for the LMCD to determine, city by city, wnat land uses are appropriate. We believe that is clearly beyond the authority of the LMCD and solely the purview of the individual cities and the Metropolitan Council. Examples from the outline are: Page 4, step 1. "Determine the development capacity...." This involves "preliminary land use allocations (i.e., low density residential, high density residential, commercial, water-oriented commercial, industrial)". The LMCD should not do that, the individual cities need to make these determinations. If the LMCD attempted this step, it would likely alienate the cities that now support us in our current efforts. 1 Page 5, step 2, parts c and d. "Establish a Shoreland Development data base...," These steps are best completed by the cities as part of the development of their individual shoreland ordinance. Page 7, step 4. "Specific policy areas...." Some policy areas that are listed could not be addressed by the LMCD without intruding on the individual city's traditional jurisdictions. The LMCD should not put itself in the position of telling the 14 cities what land uses and zoning classes are appropriate within their municipal boundaries. The LMCD should continue to focus its attention on what impact those uses and zoning classes will have on the lake. The LMCD's objective is to protect the lake, not establish land uses around the lake. Page 9, step 5. "Develop a Regional Lakewide Development Framework...." This is to develop a generalized plan for the type of development that should be allowed within each city. We did some of that during the subcommittee work -- insofar as it was needed and appropriate. Beyond that, we feel this intrudes too much into the individual city's traditional jurisdiction. Our goal of protecting the lake from pollution can be accomplished without this step. Further, the LMCD performing this step is sure to alienate most of the cities on the lake. It simply is unnecessary for the LMCD given its lack of jurisdiction in this area. Page 9, step 6. "Develop an Implementation Program...." The Shoreland Subcommittee determined, as the DNR did, that the program should be implemented by the individual cities that have the sole and exclusive authority in this area. Specific details on how this program is implemented within each city need not involve the LMCD. Once an ordinance is developed that indeed protects the lake, the LMCD need be concerned only that the ordinance is enforced. The Shoreland Management Chapter and Appendix C has come under sharp attack In the past months. A vocal minority of the cities oppose the Chapter, primarily because they perceive that adoption of this chapter and appendi.x will limit their future options to redevelop their communities. But those arguments are counter to policy set by the State Legislature, rules as implemented by the DNR, and demonstrably detrimental to the water quality of Lake Minnetonka. The Shoreland Management Chapter and Appendix C need to be adopted with only minor change for three reasons: 1. Without it, there are no effective environmental controls for the lake; water quality will seriously degrade over the coming years. 2. Without it, the cities will be subject to the same regulations because the DNR will enforce its program; we have made only minor changes in the DNR program. 3. Without it, the LMCD will suffer serious loss of credibility with other cities supporting the plan, and the other managing agencies. If the shoreland management chapter Is not adopted, we will have to completely rework the Environmental Quality Chapter, seeking other means of protecting the lakeshore. Environmental protection of the lake is totally dependent upon i;estrIctions on redevelopment within 1,000 feet of the shoreline. Wayzata has taken the lead arguing that our rules are too inflexible. But in fact, our suggest standards and criteria to be used as a guide for developing local shoreland ordinances offer more flexibility than the DNR existing rules and regulations. The DNR has Indicated In meetings that they will accept the less restrictive elements of our program as contained In Appendix C. The October 12 outline distributed by Wayzata repetitively argues that our chapter (and the DNR's rules) "do not give sufficient attention to the existing development patterns, or the future land use objectives of the Individual lakeshore communities." (This same point is reiterated on pages 1, 4, 5, 6, 7, and 9). But the LMCD Board should give serious consideration to rejecting that argument. If the State Legislature and the DNR believed that existing development patterns or future land use objectives posed no threats to state lakes, there would be no legislatively mandated Shoreland Management Program. It simply would not be needed. But the State Legislature has mandated that lakeside cities cannot continue development without regard to the adverse *■ fects to the lakes. Under our Shoreland Management Chapter and Appendix, Wayzata and Spring Park can continue to redevelop their downtown areas, maintain their present character, and continue traditional uses within the shorelands. Outside of the shorelands, Wayzata can redevelop and expand without these restrictions. But within 1,000 feet of the lake, Wayzata will be precluded from redevelopment inconsistent with the DNR regulations, whether or not the LMCD Board adopts this chapter. Various cities, especially Spring Park, have suggested various changes in wording and Intent. We have accommodated most of those to assure reasonable flexibility, without allowing unrestrained development that will unquestionably degrade the water quality of the lake. The Chapter before the Board on Wednesday Is significantly Improved, less restrictive and more flexible than the Public Review Draft issued in April. But it still achieves the reasonable environmental protection goals. RECEIVtU OCT 2 2 1990 L.M.C.D David J. Arndorfer LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATIOrj DISTRICT Octooer EE. ISSD lx ^ to: FROn: SUBJECT: ‘OCT 2 2 1S90 City Administrator-. Mayor and Council Members Chair Dave Cochran Response to City of Uayzata's Shoreland Protection Outline of October 1E-. ISSD ^ October edition of the Management Plan Respecting the amount of time and exchanges which have taken place among several cities relating to the Shoreland Protection chapter of the Long Term Management Program for Lake Minnetonka the attached response is forwarded for your consideration. Reference is made in the second paragraph examples to subcommittee meetings-. Uorkir.g Paper and Preliminary Plan- LMCD has the Dorking Papers as part of the subcommittee review process* The Preliminary Plan is the being covered document distributed in November, for the December E public review of this-, among the eight other chapters presented at that time- You will notice that much of the commentary relates to the approprlateness of LMCD conducting certain portions of data base developf^ent-. as contrasted to the cities taking these steps- Maintaining the disti- ction between LMCD jurisdictions and those of the cities is a sensitivity wh ch LMCD truly does respect. In order to provide the most current information-, taking into account a number of minor clerical adjustments, as well as additions to the Management Plan since the August edition, we are enclosing the copy just received* Additions, most particularly in the Shore. :d Protection Chapter IV, and Appendix C, have been noted by BOLD PRINT. Other changes of consequence, some in the Implementation Chapter VII, have also been so entered- De regret it has not been possible to show the deletions, but there were very few except to bring the material closer to the correct interpretation- Given the above new material, your LMCD Board will be reconsidering the chapters VI, VII, and VII and Appendicies A through C at its regular October EM, mU meeting. This will be considered at the beginning of the meeting shortly aft 7:30 pm at Tonka Bay City Hall- Thank you for your continued interest and recognition of LMCD's position on this most important matter* /// 11190.5 TO: PROM: DATE: VVVi\ Mayor and City Council Mark E. Berhardson, City Administrator'/ November 1, 1990 SUBJECT: Law Enforcement Accreditation Attachment: A. Chief Kilbo Memo Dated 11/8/90 B. Law Enforcement Accreditation Letter C. Customer Services Survey _!SSUE - Pres n^ to Council review method for possible accreditation of the Police Department in accordance with National Law Enforcmenr. Standards. INTRODUCTION - At the recent International Chiefs of Police conference Chief Kilbo went looking for a means in which to review the Police Department against nationally accepted standards. Being aware the program outline in Attachment A he did researcii it regarding the scope of it, is getting a manual and will be attending a seminar on the program which is coming up this month. DISCUSSION - Accreditation - At this point the City would probably not be able to be accredited because of its facilities but feel that an internal review against these standards as a prepatory to eventual accredition would serve as a guide plan for areas for improvement against these standards and al"o serve as a means ^ know how the department itself compares to these nationalxy developed standards. An appropriate review mechanism for this preliminary review will be determined once the Chief has had a chance to review the book and attend the program. The Chief has had an opportunity to particiate in these. In addition to the Chief and Lieutenants involved in the assessment, it may also be appropriate to have one or more of the Patrol Officers involved in that in-house assessment team. Customer Service - .n a related matter the department has been look ing at the customer service aspect and the Chief has developed Attachment C in conjunction with the Superviors as a program to measure the customer service level of the department, as noted this is intended to give feed-back to both the department and the individual officers and that it will not be the basis for discipline, and in fact, persons who desire follow up action are specifically requested to handle this separately from this customer service survey. While Police often interact with people on less than positive experiences for those people a number of police departments have y d 1 been usinq si.-ni lar documents to gauge their customer service resoonse and feel it it an appropriate matter to undertake. (Departments ^ho currently do surveys include Eden Prairie and Chaska.) ALTERNATIVES - 1. Accept the information. 2. Make any comments Council desires. 3. Table for further program development. 4. Accept the information regardin7 -he initiation of customer service survey. RECOMMENDATION - It Is recommended that Council accept ther\.£d\^\j i‘i X .L XU ...... —-- -----------------------— 4. information a"n3 acknowledge the initiation of customer server survey program. Should there be areas identified for improvement, these will be the basis of future training on a department wide basis. PROPOSED MOTION - Moved by seconded , Council accept the information provided to it regarding the in-house assessment based on National Accreditation Standards and the initiation of a customer service survey for the police department. Ayes __, Nays i itII- :K 'k' .& i 3r : z^ **3mc /IwKWevr /! uat:??:t'jovemoer -3 flarf-: Bernnarascn. -1 Momin1anr ator From: nei Kiibo, Lhiet qi- Foiics Police Department Standards The commission on accreoniaT: 1 on tor ! aw snror-e'nepr agencies was -formed in 1979 through comDined o^rorts or tour major law enforcement associations or «,Nnicn lACP ' Internar 1 onal Association of Chiefs 0+ Police- one association. Standar05It was -formed to develop a sec or i aw enrorcsfiienc and establish and administer an ac ::r sc 1 t at i on process ov which law enforcement agencies at tne stats and local ie.eis can demonstrate voluntarily that cnev meet proressionai criteria. The overall goal or tne accrea11at 1 on program to improve the deli'.ery or law enrorcement ssr.icos coast to coast. 1 s f r cm The Standards address si:: major I av*j enrorcement topics: 1. role, responsibilities and relationsnio with otner agencies; 2. organisation, management, ^ng aami r 1 -ntr at: ?n; .. personnel administration; 4. i .aw entcrcement operations, operational support, ar.ci tratric law enrorcement; d. prisoner and court 'slatad ser 1.1-5; v. au; : 1 1 ar-. ?.nd technical services. The standards ar? aesigneu to rer.ect the best professionai practices in eacr. Of "ne si.. the standards deal with the "wnat to oc". l.avinq tne decisions of "how to' up to tne agencv. The Standards were developed to help law enfon agencies achieve the following: - increase agency capaoiiities to prevent and controi. crime. - enhance agency effectiveness and efficiencv in tne delivery of law enforcement services. - improve cooperation and coordination with other law enforcement agencies and with other components of the criminal justice system. - increase citizen and staff confidence in the goals, objectives, policies, and practices of the agency. The Qrono Police Department will begin to look at itself in relation to the standards to try to increase the Departments productivity and professionalism. Another tool we will use to determine our direction is a survey of our citizens to locate our prioriti-s. jUrrTlQjfiiievT 'S COMMISSION ON ACCREDITATION FOR LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCIES Incorporated 4242BChain Bndgc Road. Fair!ax. Virginia 22030 • Local (703) 352-4225 • Toll-Free(800) 368-3757 • FAX (703) 591-2206 K. H. Medeiros, Executive Director Ml Dear Lav Enforcement Professional: There's nothing like a meeting of the Commission on Accreditation for Law Enforcement Agencies, Inc.--not even another meeting of the Commission, And the upcoming meeting to be held November 15-17, 1990, in Sc. Paul Minnesota, offers a solid gold opportunity to tune in on the latest thinking of accreditation's forw .d-looking leaders... share your own ideas with your peers...gain organizational know-how. management tips and firsthand advice about law enforcement accreditation and reaccreditacion. Diverse, multitrack workshops, discussions, displays and demonstrations are planned to meet a variety of needs. From inquisitive beginners to seasoned accreditation managers and CEOs--all will come away with much, much more knowledge and enthusiasm about lav enforcement professionalism. Are you: o Just chinking about accreditation? Special sessions are planned to introduce your agency to the accreditation proc< s, then get you started. o CoBBitted to accreditation, but stuck in a self-assessment rut? Discussion groups on several operational and motivational subjects will get you on the inside crack to success. don'ts o Hearing time for your on-site assessment? Those who have gone beforr you will provide some time-tested **dos and o Seeking reaccreditacion? A staff-led discussion group will sort out the challenges for "second time arounders.” Ypy ^eave ^hts three-dav meeting with specifics you can law enforcement Itidtgg. A hospicalicy suite, hosted by the Henr.epin Cour.tv jherift's Office and the Miniiesota Police Accreditation ioalitior. .“-C.’PAO . viil be open at posted times during the meeting. FURTHERMORE: St. Paul, the site of these three professionalIv stimulating days, offers the world's largest network of skvwavs connecting 22 separate blocks of climate controlled convenience. History buffs will find carefully-preserved Mississippi River trading posts and mansions. Arts, culture, entertainment and fine restaurants especially featuring German and Scandinavian delicacies abound in this city chat blends old world charm and high tech. All meetings will be in the easy-to-reach Radisson Hotel St. Paul. Rate5 are S65 single or double plus tax. More details on the enclosed registration form. AIRLINE DISCOUNT RESERVATIONS; You will get special rates when you use the information on the enclosed flyer. LOCAL TRANSPORTATION: From the airport to the hotel, G & R Transportation. Sc. Paul Suburban Limo Service and taxi services will cost approximately $6.50 one way. Parking for a fee of $6.75 per day is available at the hotel. ROOM RESERVATIONS; Last time it was a sell out. You must act now to nail down your space in the 400 rooms reserved at the Radisson St. Paul Hotel where all of the meetings will cake place. (SEE ENCLOSED RESERVATION CARD. If more Chan one registrant, reproduce sufficient copies and mail in envelope.) An overflow hotel is nearby. Rooms are only $65 single or double plus 11% tax per night. This rate is guaranteed only if vou register for the meeting and return the enclosed room resen.^ation card directly to the hotel bv October 15. 1990. After October 15. 1990, call the hotel directly. Hotel Address & Telephone Number: Radisson St. Paul. 11 East Kellogg Boulevard. St. Paul. Minnasoca 55101, Reser\'ations: 800-228-9822; Information: 612-292-1900. ★ * * REGISTER NOW; TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THIS CHANCE TO; o Participate and learn o Sharpen your skills to achieve and maintain accreditation o Identify resources and contacts that will continue to enhance professional excellence long after you return to your agency. * ♦ ★ Quesclona about the meeting or meeting registration, call; Mrs. Martha Mahieu, 800-368-3757, extension 20; local; 703-352-4225. See enclosed form to raeiater. THE SCHEDULE IN BRIEF Pre-Meeting Acrivities. November . 1990 State Agencies' Accreditation Coalition (SAAC) to hold an all-day meeting. Contact SAAC Chairman, Captain Howard Shearer, Ohio State Highway Patrol, 614-644-5100, for details. State coalitions/networks officers or official designees will meet early evening. Contact Beth Denniston, Commission Headquarters. 800-368-3757. ext. 34, for details. (In addition, all representatives of coalitions/networks or persons interested in forming a statewide or regional group are scheduled to meet Thursday afternoon, November 15, 1990.) Day One. Thursday. Novembet i.5. 1990 (Choose as many of the following workshop subjects as you can fit between 8:30 a.m. to 5:00 p.m ) Introduction to accreditation--what's involved; how it works Avoiding self-assessment trouble spots Exploring accreditation's public information potential Defining and developing policy Meshing directives systems with accreditation requirements Computers and the process Getting and keeping self-assessment moving Preparing for the on-site assessment Reaccreditation pointers Resource Room (Opens at noon)--displays of candidate agency policy manuals and the Commission's computer information services and products Coalitions/Networks--all representatives share know-how Evening reception Day 2. Friday. November 16. 1990 Resource Room (Open all day) Commissioners sic in general sessions Conniccaes of the Commission consider such Issues as: interpretations and amandmants to standards, requests for waivers on standard requirements, and other business matters. Dev 3. Saturday. November 17. 1990 CcMBission committees review assessment team reports on candidate agencies and make recommendations for accreditation Full Commission voces on candidate agencies Evening Banquet celebrating newly-accredited agencies r- MEETING REGISTRATION FORM Register by mail or FAX with your payment by VISA or MasterCard, check or purchase order. Confirmation sent by return mail. Fees are: Rtrd Ptscount: Each full registration postmarked before October 12 1990. it only $105. This covers the cost of all the meetings, workshops, throa concinantal breakfasts, morning and afternoon refreshments and the Saturday Ban<|uat. (To attend only the Thursday workshops. pay just $30.) ★ ♦ ★ Meet the November 2It ion:1990. deadline and each full ragitcracion £ae is only $120 for all the meetings, etc. fThursday workshops only, pay $35.) ♦ ♦ ★ Qn«eite Realetraclon: After November 2, 1990, all full regist:ations will be dona on tica in Sc. Paul for a fee of $135 for all the meetings, etc.; $40 for Thursday only.... - - - . * ♦ * gpoutat; Spouses who do not attend the sessions nor partake of breakfasts or rafrashaants, may attend the banquet at a cost of: Early Bird--$30; Advance--$35; On Site (after November 2, 1990)--$40) MEETING REGISTRATION INFORMATION: (Please fill in and return) Agency Name: _ Address: _ Contact Person: _City/State/Zip_ Telephone ( ) Individual Registrant Information Name_ Title Preferred Badge/Highlight Name Name__ Title Preferred Badge/Highlight Name Name_ Title Preferred Badge/Highlight Name Name_ Title Preferred Badge/Highlight Name *4/mL?r) Cost Total full meeting registrations @ $_ _ _each (Includes workshops, meetings, breakfasts, banquet) Total Thursday workshops only @ $_ _ _ each (P oar) (Nu^ar) Nathod of '. - -I , Total banquet registrations only at $_ _ _each Payment Check or purchase order VISA • _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ TOTAL NaaterCard # • •> Commission Use Only Status; Size:_ _ _ _ Type:_• V. ,r- tv ;^llaka cheek payable co: «CALBA ' 'Mall to: GAUA. 4242S Chain Bridge toad, Pairfax ■ 11 <m Pol lev: After November 2, 1990, refunds of meeting . PAX: 703-591-2206 VA 22030 - —irr-.—r-irs’- reglatration fees will be SMde less a 10% administrative charge; no refunds after November 9, 1990, excepting emergencies. Call or FAX the Commission to cancel; phone call must be confirmed in writing. %mU: HOW ARE ME DOING? Thi* Department intends to conduct a survey ot the people it serves as one element ot customer relations, to do a better job of designing our future services. The data derived will be used in reports to contract cities, newsletters, special reports and to gain direction in departmental training efforts. Data for use outside the Depar‘tment will delete references to specific officers. Surveys will oe mailed. Each person will receive a copy of a copy of a survey in incident he or she handled. The Department intends to use as a guideline the following selected target groups. 1 in every 25 incident reports, consisting of burglaries auto accidents information requests investigation case files DWI's - other arrests Cl tations random incident reports of dec)artment personnel All personnel will have 10 random incident reports each quarter surveyed. Positive survey forms will be placed in personnel files Negative survey forms will not be placed in personnel file^. but just given to the individual (no copies made). If a number of negative reports indicate a department-wide problem, training in a particular area for the department will be considered. * ^ (0VT CL Greetings Since you recently had contact with our Police Department, we are ashing for your help. We believe that we have people who are committed to providing excellent professional and friendly service to all our citizens. You can help us ascertain this by completing and returning this questionnaire. Tell us where we surpass your expectations and where we fall short. We will do our best to correct any shortcomings,and to give credit to our personnel who are doing outstanding work. After completion, simply fold with the police address on the outside, si-aple or tape closed, and mail. Thank you for your help. Melvin Kilbo, Chief of Police IF YOU SEE A CRIME IN PROGRESS, DIAL 911. Police need your help in preventing crime and catching the responsible. IF YOU NEED NON-EMERGENCY POLICE SERVICE. DIAL L44-9511. Usually a police officer will arrive at your door in a short time. Of course, you may stop in at the police station during business hours. ' V — IF YOU DESIRE TO ASK A SPECIFIC QUESTION OR WANT A FOLLOWUP, PLEASE FEEL FREE TO CALL THE CHIEF OR A SUPERVISOR AT 473- 7710. IF YOU DESIRE INFORMATION OR NEIGHBORHOOD CRIME WATCH OR OPERATION IDENTIFICATION. CALL 473-2811 FOR THE NORTHTONKA CRIME PREVENTION COALITION. f.!. }!■ i 1.Please check those that apply to you. _ _ _male _I am _ _ _ My age is _ _under 18, _ I live in: _ _ Long Lake _ _ Orono _ _ Other _ _ .female _ _10-24,.25-30,.40+ _ _Minnetonka Beach _ _Spring Park 2.How many contacts with Orono Police in the past year? _ _one_ _ _two _ _ _three or more 3. What was the nature of your most recent contact? _ _I called the Department to report an incident _ _I was the victim of a crime _ _I was a witness to a crime or incident _ _I was involved in a motor vehicle accident _ _I requested information from the Department _ _I was arrested _ _I was issued a citation _ _I was contacted about a problem or disturbance _ _I was involved in another way with the Department Please specify_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 4. How would you rate us on each of the following: Excellent Good Avg. Fair Poor a. Concern . b. Helofulness c. Knowledge "d. Quality of Service e. Solving the Problem 1 f. Putting you at ease i g. Professional Conduct 1 h. Listening 1 i. Resoonse Time ; t 5.Please name any member of our Department who served you especially wellJ_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 6. Your comments: How can we improve? 7. Your name ana telephone number (Optional) m o *<Hs h* HCJ U) Ul o O *i O 9 O O9* H* O Hi ' 5•«* tS H H*n IP s M <s- idZ Pi CO g •o H Wi ftill sr Ul - M “I t H tro A 9 ft 00 OI C I r I Z E N COM l\ ENT CARD PLEASE EVALUATE tted THE .lience ATTITUDE OF OUR STAFF s <o *0 <0 ft M N 01 D> (Pan *0 o ORONO POLICE DEPARTMENT serving Long Lake, Spring Park Minnetonka Beach & Orono b'"- - workinci with NORTHTONKA CRIME PREVENTION COALITION v> CO X o (Q r> ■P n C - <n in O M O <0 to M O* 01 Sc . •HO >1 >*H c IdM rH 5 « 01 o oZ PU M iH 0) Id *M O 4J 0) cm « •H pm N 11790.:c^r TO: FBOM: DATE: Mark E. Bernhardson, City Administrator Dorothy Hallin, City Clerk November 7, 1990 SUBJECT: 1991 Meeting Schedule Attached is a proposed 1991 meeting schedule. A 1991 meeting schedule was approved at the October 22, 1990 Council meeting but the Park Commission has requested a change in their meeting dates for the months of February, March and April. During these three month they desire to meet on the first Monday of the month. During the remainder of the year they will continue to m' t on the first Tuesday of the month. TO: FROM: Mayor and City Council Mark E. Bernhardson, City Administrat<3^ Forwarded recommending approval. PROPOSED MOTION - Moved by __, seconded by __, to approve the 1991 Meeting Sched presented. Ayes __, Nays __. 1991 ORONO CITY MEETING SCIIEDlill [^7:00 P.M. Council Meeting 2nd 4 4th Mondayd) 7:00 P.M. IM aiming Conuiiission 3rd Monday Q IMay ibroucjh victober 1st Monday as an alternate date) /\ Pai k I'.iinmi ss j on 1st Tuesday X I) i f icia! Hull day FEBRUARY S M T W T F S SEPTEMBER $ M T W T_ F_ J 1 6 7 8 m\0 n 12 13 14 15^17 18 19 20 21 22^24 25 26 27 28 29 W S M APRIL T W T F S ^ 2 3 4 5 6 7 iSl 9 10 11. 12 13 14^16 17 18 19 20 21^23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 DECEMBER S M T W T F S 1 4 5 6 7 8 \9\W n 12 13 14 15(^ 17 18 19 20 21 22 W 74 X 26 27 2829 30 31 mmm \. TC: !-:ayor and City Counc'i FROM: >!ark E. Bernhard son, Citv Adn'.in i str > DATS: NovL.f.. er 1, 1990 SUBJEC.: Administrator’s Informa .on NAVARRE LANE COMPLAINT - At the Council’s last meeting during public comments a longtime resident rtouested the City look into what was currently happening on a wp ar.ds near Navarre place. The property owner had teen construct.ng several brick pillars around the wetlands in addition to "scooping out" the area. Staff was aware of the issue at the time and had already requested the owner to stop work and fill out the necessary applications regarding the program. The wetland had become a dumping grop*"^ over the years and the owner initiated removal of trash and debris. The intent of the pillars which are to be intersperced with bushes was to define the property boundries. The concern related to this is that some of the pillars may have been cor^ ^ .icted too high in relationship to setbacks. While the owner has partially cleaned out the areas around the w^tlanH there has been no alteration of the wetland per se. However, an application for creating a pond in the wetland has been submitted and will be coming forward at the November Planning Commission. LANDMARK SUIT - At the Council’s October 22, 1990 Council meeting t^e issue was raised regrrdi-n the septic system at 3030 Jamestown Road and what if a i -=;.;yunses the City incurred as a result of the lav uit on tnat property. Attachment A was included in the Council's packet at the November 20, 198f Council meeting, *hlch indicated uhere was a dispute between *:he contractor .?.nd the City as to who should pay for the repr v. This contractor was subsequently sued by the homeowner a- that point the contractor sued City for the amount of that he had tried to seek back in ..o 'ember of 1988. The sw filed against the City on Auaust 10, 1989 and was referr'=> . City's insurance company. >i City'a Insurance company " c originally denied the c aim ir the fall of 1988 proc •>deu undertake sumnury judge ..ant, which was inted to the . July of 1990. As noted by an ,ittorne\ jr the contract* initially entered suit thi;>ing that tiiere had been prtferenuial treatment given to che homeowntsr, o in a review of the case determined that there had not been ana therefore did not furtnei. pursue the suit and allowed t''‘> nummary judgement to entered. STUBBS BAY SEWER - Michael Gaffron and myself met with four interestc- parTF" fro. the Stubbs * area to determine strategy of marketing the system .. .:he neighborhoods and the potential variablei; iav'^lved. Once staff has provided them with some additional i. ' «Mtion it is anticipated that they wi*’ meet within the next couple weeks to undertake a program to en -rage their n> !qhborhood to undertake the project. WINDWARD MARINA - i t h the con s tuc t i on o j the new building on Windward Marine the Citv has received questions regarding the nature of the project with a specific request made from LMCD. While the new building does seem to be quite an addition close to the water the persons have forgotten tne metal building which was replaced by the gazebo, a much more appropriat- =»esthetic. view of Browns 3ay and an overa'1 reduction of 9,000 square feet of hardcover when the project is completed. While the new building is located close to t .e water near the old blue building it is not as close as the old sheet metal building was on the Browns Bay side. (At one time there was in addition to the two marina buildings located on the property in 1977, a house where the new building is located and the building on the Browns Bay side was twice as large with about 1/2 of it covering the water. See attached air photos 1945 - 1971 - 1989.) Staff will be preparing an appropriate respo- *e "o request. ORONO CITY of OROXO B« «.C,^ B.r MU.O— V>3»——' <»- On IhM north Short of Lok. Mtnrx,tonko Novanbec IB, 1933 MV Paul D. Swanson, presidentconstruction Company Subjact! 3»59 Jamestown Road Dear Mr. Swanson, ,,..,dbiU from your firm tora; Jii coat of the ’'^,%ed October 19, 1988. .. . . . . .. ^"=- officials rv"er‘VW.ri‘t:^S S::lwer. 1. *V ‘>VnVtl2-/s"inSurer,‘ Vb. l-«rtnVl«,u; Sr."V.".*%e%"»lce\ 1. ‘''•,';.V*rh?cV ‘-ma;:s'determination, on general llablll y ^ „ .n. citv is responsible for to the estent ^'’•^/^“d'Vnde'rt^e the appropriate legal p?”.*ed?^VM ^tt-pt to ad-.dicate the claim. a n H«L , City Adalnli HBB/ah dson ■tor Ap?l2 V«Il«y ^3*'*'*"pJ|bUrworH* Director&:^?‘J:S«^:'bu Idln, ^onln, hdminu V . m;.uc.oa«-.n.«a fUH,0aiOAIOMM-47>nf7 beet City Council i .».. e J ,e . ■! i _ (• I 1 ■ i 5^’ ■r' r ' ‘ ’’iS ■ * ' 4i ' ■"'ii M t .■ >[ i^pi i‘^ "s 1 ' 1 .1- ' ”11 •:./.- r •^.;; «*•♦*• ■ i | LteiViltittl-ii . VI. > mm -'.'y m/,' < I (• ;>! f f 't '■'■'I- ■ •'' Af I ' ■ ^...., ifts'iiiiHa % pi'!!mmw . ! ! ii'. ;'14“ 4m / ^ mui ■ l<1!-ii% (}i >»^ ^*iV,->'vv.v '.' a»i,« li V » > ^ 7//^'-^S'"Hnfii • ri*^ r '?’■ r'^, !. V- ,tii;. !■: .'■»»: ’<* trir ’T'f’— r'rr^l -JP-V iJ —^ INNOVATIVE ►ij MICROGRAPHICS DUE TO THE POOR CONDITION OF THE PRECEEDING DOCUf'ENT WE CANNOT PRODUCE AN ACCEPTABLE MICROFILM IMAGE. ll- m mI"' n % 1^:- P %r- "7 LIST 0? LiCtMSES FOR COUNCIL APPROVM* FOR HCBTING OF November 13, 1990 Limited Leghold Trap Permit - Michael & Sally Bosanko 2090 Shoreline Drive One Day Set Up Permit - Art Center of Minnesota Holiday House November 28, 1990 Approximately 5:30 to 9:30.P.M. LIMITED LEGHOLD ;^U- PSHHIT DATEt _ _ _ _f Name: ■•'^' I'T^S./h Application Number: Address:As.7, Location of Trapline:, - - --—l0CH^^IO5Ai0OM . 2cYa ^ '\I^CUa/Hi^ {W^ ^ Number of Traps: L4^ Maintenance procedure for trapline: Period of time needed for permit: /j _ _ _'f^J, / 9 9c . ~_ _ _ _ _![yu^ Purpose ( Include 'written statement cf hcrichip)_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ sUn^ ,yi ^ L t-<^ ^ , , '7?^9t 'Zu^r>\cr>K^ MA ■ r-i -■'-eV' I agree to furnish a certified property o^vners list of property owners within 500 feet of trapping area. Property owners will be notified of application. I agree to abide by all applicable Federal, State, and Local Laws Including ordinance 232. Fee paid: / n Date: io/lQ 19_j_r y 1/Check Cash Initials rzi Signature of Applicant RECOMMENDED; Ye s No 1 lis lie Safety DirectorPub APPROVED:Yes City Administrator f Certified list of property owners within 500 feet of your trapline can be obtained from the Hennepin County Property & Description Office, A-603 County Government Center, downtown Minneapolis. pje^ %M to/I ?/'07-i) o-fliy 'o/l'^' Or m PoUci i::'- V'( Department H.H. Kilbo Chi«f of Mice Aijmimscrauon 473-7710 Non-Emergency 544-9SM Emergency 91 I Crystal Bay, MN S5323 445 Willow Onve Long Ukc. HN SS3S6 Dear Michael and Sally Bosanko, owners of the property at 2090 Shoreline Drive, Wayzata, Minnesota 55391, are re­ questing a limited leghold trapping permit to have a pro­ fessional trapper trap beaver which have moved in on their shoreline and are doing extensive damage to trees in the area If you have any objections or comments, please call me at 473-7710, ^r write to me at P.O. Box 36, Crystal Bay, Minnesota 55323, by 4:30 p.m. on October 23, 1990. Sincerely, Melvin Kilbo Chief of Police MKrcjh Swvkig Honh UA» Mkmatonka Communities of Orono. Long Lake. Minnetor.ka Beach and Spring Perk ORONO POUCE DEPARTMENTaMft r«v OONTnX NUMBea (COI _______CCWT AOewCY NCC CCMT .C*Gi_____ ft . C , 1 I / / IM , N j 0 , 2 , 7 I /, S.QO yan OATf «EromED(IW)| TUgaWfTIW LOC^TTCW GBIND^NBP_IC»N' |T1 / I ^Pl >■QIVy^~l / I /lO lo pj / [TvT PLACE COMMOTED PLCl LMH WO SQUAD OR BADGE #(SBN) /CZIZs^^/C rwE ASC. iTAS)AflR .■'Af^ /[ TMEClfl .'TO.l 1 I 1 J / UM ON . UOC /L M , , 1/n OFCtCcW 1 1 1 principal CX c 1 SUSPECT SuS .ic ’Tm .IC ASST REPORT PARTY p.r ADMIN AOM OPPENOER Off OTHER OTM HROCoM P-Plwnt R-R«m A- Atffin ' - n Pefjon V - i/nuai M-AW CAc: C a ^c ARREST 3 citation :WARN kffi /77/'c^uJ OCfo SEX "®®‘ /Vo7 1^1 SouA ; PHiWi ) ^S/oOw./ict S^raw -5-'T'/5/1 ? 6 NMC (LAST FMST. UDIXa Doa : i£A "tt&Sk PH;W) cnv ST CP Ph.R) f.t name (LAST. FAST. MOOLEl DOS SD ism PM yvi onr ST . ;p PH ifii other reports included l»T>sxX;na ■ Pt«)I<W«0»y3 'noi«a ConJArt C Acd Oaw Reoort I ■niKMnot Reoon ^ I . pnkos ’»?« Comm Vffi J J Rod CaJ .: pa« ‘T Jr^ .J7V>-U2A<-- 1/ .. 1-n . , r-. A* y ■* / . ^ ji OOWTO 00 0^ caAnwr.g otvattwo cjuHrg CHg3 ttfccNsz other aSPOSmON: intanm CteKEdByAffta FW. Other AQBocy Inadw Otfiec______________ omcm _______________! SUPERVISOR S SIGNATURE r < ^ Jntwro-f-fice Memo Dat*: October 19, Tot nerk Bernhardson, City Admi FroMS n«l Kilbo, Chie^ of Police Res One Day Set Up Permit trator I have reviewed the application -for a .. av set up permit applied for by the Art Center of MN. In ^viewing past permits, we have not had anv problems reported to this Department. I do recommend issuance of this permit. r II >■ •::: • il ; • . *. ■ • :iMi;: iM'. » .’M i f\•n ; ill ' ^» • ?}•V ' k ) :l; n; ■¥ ■(i‘ ! Mjp? f-.yi;’ Mm t !■ • /V ONE OAY SETUP PEPMIT Date of event: November 28, 1990 - HOLIDAY HOUSE Time: 5:10 to 9:30 P.M.i) ; Lttjuo' Coritiol Oi«ltlon Hioov#* OulMIng 480 C«d» SlfMi Si. I>»iiI, Mlnna-oi* SStOl 10121 2904158 CU T or om F IHAMS OFFICE imicc':a».,,ooro, h 01 w :5.w cm TL r5.» APPLICATION FOR PERMIT TO ONLY ALLOW CONSUMPTION JV DISPLAY OF IN TOXICAWi/Sr^JO^^^ (Thlt App(ic5tlon Shall Be Typewritten and Submitted Belore June 1st of each Yearl STATE OP MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY *. . i • ?T i •V \'( . li - • \ 1 In aniweiing the following qucsiions -APPLICANT" shall I*, governed as lollowi: For a Partnership, one of the partners shall exern.e this appli. ation for all members of the partnership Fo a aI”'rr!ror.he ' h' M*" «" “•'•Ptors, and stockholder,. ,n^ ’ H ” aiml.cat.nn for all the members. If add.tional tpaco Is renu.red. use a separate sheet of parser, indicating by number the question answered. IFEE FOR PERMIT - flOOiOOiX $25.00) EVEnY QUESTION MUST BE ANSWERED 1- •. /\ ■ /^rilKke.^• ®* r QAimrlffs,, /Vvfrwiif»- IlncSI.Idud own*'. P*Mn*>. oUlc»>, club oiricwlINamc ol ncMon making appiicailoni for and In behalf of Ctn/r.- of /y\,nrh^lr. Unl.L.. . (Myiair, na>nat pi paitnart. nama el corpQfatitn. p'r 0*^11170: club). , , , ................... • na—» Ol coipoiatipn. or nim« or eliibl c,n.un,p,ion <°»’«'»««■<« tSlrcol iddrast end/nr Lol and nioth niimhail Post Office of VJCuj7(xfc^ . County of State of Minnesota, in accordonce with the provisions ol M.S. 340.119. 2. Will business be operated as a private dub rjr puhlic place ^nvA/r 3. State type ol business I ,_ tObrii\r> ff~-/b ITowintrtIp and SoellonI a ® pmtncrsl.ip, stale name and address of each member of partnership- if a corporation, state name and address of officers and directors. I Noma) lAddrat.l — nrnber” o'f m^mh^'^'7 is club incorporated h cs Ter^hj^ oj^'pe^’hers . . length of ume m present location , is club building ovmed or rented /v/A---------------what is the membci^iip dues ______ZT^hst are the requi?ements formemberrhip A^/a . Names of all (Nama) iNamcl lAddimil (Naina) lAddiml INcncI lAildicttl fide members. Unllcd'S? n ” s3, °""" ^ "»• • o' »“ 7. State name of person who will operate or manage business; ■H)^hf'f^ JiisLf LJ- «=i____________ IMimal — HT^fi Ai'i bn/-y a-fr I iL>\ ■ AJ lAddrntI 7 Pi ttryiTMlj-'U /KaJ 8. On wliat floor is the establishment located, or to lie located /K.tM flmr- 9. How are the premises classified under the zoning ordinance _________________ 55V y 7 Approved lor Violations by Check Cash _ DO NOT USE I*-** >C1loil fdM'UlM Reed. Rec'd. hy Ctfhitf ‘vili M.u •M > 'Vf i|S M] i .> ! i. ;■ -;a [ !■ * * i 1 ■ ■ 1 f |; f ''4i f;. •i a t M-'Sr i r-: f ! { I !:.i ■' I i ■ * M ■ S 5 ^ ii'' i f ; iv ■' '• i I •: 1 1 1 M ^i-'i i ■ . 1.1 • i • ■i r4\%■y . ;:j; . ,c if ^■U:i i's\ ■ f.F« i ‘?i; ;■ rlHii\Uv -I ’^1 ;<••-'••4• Vlf. , tl■i| ■!! ■;? ■' ■ .i;mm 10. State n«ime and address of owner or nwm’rs of huildinq wherein the fni':iness will be locatcrl Art Qtt\-hr o4 Alr>meJo/gu_____________A^Uri^ivr v / IV f A»m«)Jj/r^2Ai-Tf ( Aririt •««! II.Haj applicant; if partnership, any partner; if corporation, any nffirer or diiector; if dub. any club officer or director, ever had a license under the Minnesota Liriuor Control Act revoked or suspended or been convicted for any violation of State Laws or local ordinances; if so, give date and details A/o 12.1s applicant; if partnership, any partner; if corporation, any officer or director, if club, any c'-rb officer or director, a member of the governing body of the municipality or county in which this permit is to lie issued; if so, in what capacity f\lo_________________________________________________________ 13. Has applicant; if partnership, any part.icr; if ernporation, any officer or director; if club, any club officer or director, any Interest wliatsoever, directly or indirectly, in any liquor establishment in the State of Minnnota Aio_______ . Give name and address of such establishment ___ 14. Furnish the name and address of at least three business references, including one bank reference: ti- * f^tf . I S' I(if IN»m«l l.m.7 J 0 f Adi!«4f j Sujpp jij l<y Vi l4iUli««l iNcmal (Addmitl 7 ’ 7 15. Will intoxicating lirtuor fw sold on the premises Kjr.':,________ 16. (a) Stale whether a|i|ilicatinn is: 1. Original V 2 Renewal (b) Stale whether dancing will be permitted on the premises 3. Transfer 17. Are the premises now occupied, or to be occupied, entirely separate and exclusive from any other business establishment \jt£,________________. r « «- 18. State trade name to be used ^ _______ 19. State whether an "On Sale" or "Off Sale" Non Intoxicating Malt Reverago License has or will be granted in conjunction to this business and for the same premises Aia__________. 20. Has there been issued, or will there be issued, a $54.00 Federal Retail Liquor Dealer's Special Tax Stamp for the sale of liquor on these premises hJn___________________________________________ 21. Has your loc^l^^government an ordinance regulating the consumption and display of intoxicating liquor 22. If operating under zoning ordinance how is location of building classified ____________________ . ui** “"'‘*'‘'7'* nutuion In (hit .pplic.litm, .nd Ih.t IM ■niy,,.. |,u. of my own koowiMfo* I 1 fhtl lt« ihrloi of faho iofotmtlion In il.li ippIlcMlon. or Iht ftilur* lo givi p..lin.nl Informitlon eonitituut tiuM lot tb* tWL^OF irTo'xmApiNn 7 '• I"!’"’" UNOEWST ood that any permit issued hereunder DOCS NOT ALLOW TH^ S^LE OF INTOXICATINO LIQUOR. Enelotod It poymonl of $100 00 poyibU lo ih« Liquor Conliol Diioclor m providod by M S, 1967 SMtIon NO CONSIDERATION WILL BE GIVEN TO THIS APPLICATION UNLESS APPROVED AS HEREINAFTER PROVIDED: If applicant Is located in the County, the Chairmnn of the Board of County Commissioners or his Representative shall approve both r:opics nf thp application. 7V f f)T Vt>_ of I (Sion»iur« o* Authofirod AupHcani) Subscribed and sworn to fieforc me this of__________________________ . 19 (Chairmon, Board of County Commtn*onaf« or hit n^r«t*MiaOv«t If applicant is located In a Municipality, the President of the Council or his Representative shall approve both copies of this application. I^tatldont of Iha Council or hit ftar>ra»antal<val IflOfary ruhhc) My Commission expires________ '-•i -C4«y jtTfiioJ laktj j . V s 1 •V. •: •’S' © 11/30/90 P9 ‘2 CM PRRE60R ;T\ / / &jiv}/zi 10/28/90 PR CB PRREGOR NAME DPT YTD GROSS CURRENT GROSS CALLAHAN, EDWARD J 11 GOETTEN. J DIANN 11 GRABEK. JAMES 11 NETTLES, ALAN R 11 PETERSON. BARBARA A 11 2658 2658 3300 2658 2658 37 37 00 37 37 241 241 300 241 241 67 67 00 67 67 1 .266 68 ssseessssssss NT 1, s’ ^ } C./v » NAME I ABRAHAMSON. FREDERIC I ANDERSON. BRUCE L I BERNHARDSON. MARK E I BOBZZEN, SUE A BOSMA, JAMIE L BRINKHAUS. JOHN F BURDICK. AARON W CHESWICK. GARY B CHRISTIANSON, SALLY CORNICK. JAMES L DEMBOUSKI, JAY C DENNISON. TROY A ENGLISH III IRVING ERICKSON, KURT R FISCHENICH, DAN T FRITZLER, JOHN M GAFFRON, MICHAEL P GERHARDSON. JOHN R GREGORY, JAMES D DOROTHY M STEVEN C , CAROL J . BRADLEY P FOREST J RICKY D KILBO, MELVIN H KNUTSON. CHARLOTTE A KUEHN. THOMAS M MABUSTH. JEANNE A MORAN. MARK F MOROWCZYNSKI. JAMES NAAB. THERESA L NELSON. DAVID D OAS. DANIEL 0 OBERAIGNER. SCOTT G OBRIEN. RANDY L OMAN. LYLE E PALMER. GREGORY A OUAST. WAYNE A RATHBUN. BARRY J ROSS. JOHN A SCMEFFLER. LAURIE K SKREEN. DALE S STEFFENHAGEN. RONALD STEVENS. BETTY G THOMTON, MARK R TOMCHECK. LAWRENCE F HALLIN HANSEN. HANSING. JOHNSON. JOSTROM KARNITZ TOMCZYK. MARK W VANG BRUCE L VEE. LINDA S WALSH, KEVIN L WALTERS. LINDA G WECKMAN. STEPHEN YEAGER. DONALD C X.' ‘ -•*-. . . YTD CURRENT DPT GROSS GROSS : 93 1769 40 80.75 ... * 31 36664 18 1605.81 12 51007.52 2221.36 31 20513.38 921.84 12 13348 81 417 78 42 31617.59 1464.32 S'", 93 662 50 95.00 , . . •• . ^ 31 32667.59 1468.00 • » • 31 4744 64 222.44 31 35786.28 1614.84 V V ; ■'/ ; - 31 14623 42 996 29 35 277 95 22 95 31 37674.40 1666 65 * • • ‘ . • 31 32024 21 1434.01 31 31726 85 1366.59 ' *• “ 't 31 32210.38 1396.16 33 29426.14 1338.73 ••• 42 38703 89 1760.80 42 29645 84 1452.89 • „ 12 25346 50 1153.12 \ . i- 42 24301.77 1153.68 . . .- . 31 11690 24 499.55 31 33493 82 1469 22 93 2320 41 135 38 31 6699 61 419.68 31 43179 04 1964 40 15 20251.21 921.83 15 41123.05 1870.89 » • 33 36850.33 1676 48 ■ 31 29921 .65 1337.28 31 37'54.02 1408 48 * * * 12 35 93 20513.36 1700.85 1824.40 921.84 209.10 94.50 42 418.33 418 33 • .. . 92 23302.76 1392.00 33 26825.43 1271.76 .. '1 42 11331,26 1087.63 92 29125 16 1179.29 92 23911 43 984.23 93 240.00 45.00 ; :12 4577 67 100 98 42 24250.66 1153.68 93 25379 91 1154.64 93 2477 75 115.50 V_.r 31 31235.76 1381.68 >■ ' . • ■ 31 33512,97 1407.60 .. N. 1.31 33 31723 26 22478 48 1417.28 1095.531210674 15 783.60 . .. ,. _ . 35 4233 51 144.22 ■*' 15 19787 46 935.04 93 6226 00 1404 42 640 00 49 88 53.540.51 IMO CITY Of OffONO CHECK NO. DATE 317006 317006 317006 317006 317006 317006 317006 317006 317006 317006 317006 317006 317006 317008 317010 317014 317014 317038 317064 11/07/90 11/07/90 11/07/90 11/07/90 11/07/90 11/07/90 11/07/90 11/07/90 11/07/90 11/07/90 11/07/90 11/07/90 11/07/90 11/07/90 11/07/90 11/07/90 11/07/90 11/07/90 11/07/90 O CHECK REOXSTEf AMOUNT VENDOR ITEM DESCRIPTION 11-13-iO fAOE 1 ACCOUNT NO. XNV. • P.O. • HESSAOE 116 44 27 4 27 27 4 4. 52 4 27 4 27 374. 40 11 85 45 84 83 45 45 21 45 84 45 84 17 MIDWEST MIDWEST MIDWEST MIDWEST MIDWEST MIDWEST MIDWEST MIDWEST MIDWEST MIDWEST ‘UDWEST MIDWEST MIDWEST esNs 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 PAPER OFFICE SUPPLIES SUPPLIES OFFICE SUPPLIES SUPPLIES SUPPLIES OFFICE SUPPLIES OFFICE SUPPLIES SUPPLIES OFFICE SUPPLIES SUPPLIES OFFICE SUPPLIES supplies 01-1261- 01-4210- 01-4210- 01-4210- 01 4210- 01-4210- 01-4210- 01-4210- 01-4210- 01-4210- 01-4210- 01-4210- 01-4210- 000-00 039-12 039-12 059-14 059-14 069-15 069-15 129-31 129-31 174-33 174-33 249-42 249-42 1,686.00 1.686 00 ALL STEEL PRODUCTS CULVERTS/TIES/APRONS 01-4233-249-42 16 68 16 68 AT&T INFO SYSTEM TELEPHONE 01-4320-175-34 240.86 240 86 481 72 ALL star electric ALL star electric HWY 12 SWR/WTR HWV 12 72- 4531-436-84 73- 4531-434-82 317030 11/07/90 2C 8S AT &T INFO SYSTEM DATA PROCESS 01-4340-039-12 317030 11/07/90 20 88 AT &T INFO SYSTEM DATA PROCESS 01-4340-059-14 317030 11/07/90 20 88 AT &T INFO SYSTEM DATA PROCESS 01-4340-069-15 317030 11/07/90 32.50 AT &T INFO SYSTEM DATA PROCESS 01-4340-129-31 317030 11/07/90 20 88 AT &T INFO SYSTEM DATA PROCESS 01-4340-174-33 317030 11/07/90 20.88 136 91 • AT &T INFO SYSTEM DATA PROCESS 01-4340-249-42 317031 11/07/90 5 51 AT &T COMM TELEPHONE OJ-4320-039-12 317031 11/07/90 8 46 AT &T COMM TELEPHONE 01-4320-129-31 317031 11/07/90 2 33 16 30 ■ AT &T COMM TELEPHONE 01-4320-175-34 7 79 7.79 ANDERSON-BRUCE training SUPPLIES 01-4241-129-31 4 00 4 00 BLITZ ONE HR FOTO PHOTO FINISH 01-4210-249-42 o •-CKS --•-CKS -CKS -CKS -CKS -CKS 1990 CITV OF ORONO CHECK NO DATE AMOUNT CHECK REGISTER VENDOR ITEM DESCRIPTION a-13-90 FAQE 2 ACCOUNT NO INV • P 0 • MESSAGE 317095 317065 317065 317065 317065 317067 317074 317074 317074 317074 317074 317074 317074 317074 317074 317074 317074 317074 317074 317074 317074 317074 317074 317074 317074 317074 317074 317074 317074 317074 317074 317074 317074 317074 317074 317074 317074 317074 317074 317074 317074 317074 317074 317074 317074 317074 11/07/90 11/07/90 11/07/90 11/07/90 11/07/90 11/07/90 11/07/90 11/07/90 11/07/90 11/07/90 11/07/90 11/07/90 11/07/90 11/07/90 11/07/90 11/07/90 11/07/90 11/07/90 11/07/90 11/07/90 11/07/90 11/07/90 11/07/90 11/07/90 11/07/90 11/07/90 11/07/90 11/07/90 11/07/90 11/07/90 11/07/90 11/07/90 11/07/90 11/07/90 11/07/90 11/07/90 11/07/90 11/07/90 11/07/90 11/07/90 11/07/90 11/07/90 11/07/90 11/07/90 11/07/90 11/07/90 337 869 869 J75 8.691 9.403 08 10- 10 00 01 oy BLACKOWIAK & BLACNOWIAK & BLACKOWIAK BLACKOWIAK & BLACKOWIAK & SONS SONS SONS SONS SONS 166 9S 166 95 11 51 51 51 50 50 100 120 44 300 447 44 103 145 .205 866 68 35 360 386 772 120 .386 673 268 415 415 .269 296 308 852 948 869 415 300 60 60 133 15 0.- 13 13 13 13 00 00 00 00 70 .00 00 70- 00 50 50 00 92 53 00 25 50 00 58 49 29 06- 06 34 98 06 57 53 89 06 00 00 00 94 SAM Bloom iron BONESTRJO BONESTROO BONESTROO BONESTRCO BONESTROO BCNESTROO BONESTROO BONESTROO BONESTROO BONESTROO BONESTROO BONESTROO BONESTROO BONESTROO BONESTROO BONESTROO BONESTROO BONESTROO BONESTROO BONESTROO BONESTROO BONESTROO BONESTROO BONESTROO BONESTROO BONESTROO BONESTROO BONESTROO BONESTROO BONESTROO BONESTROO BONESTROO BONESTROO BONESTROO BONESTROO BONESTROO BONESTROO BONESTROO BONESTROO BONESTROO ROSENE ROSENE ROSENE ROSENE ROSENE ROSENE ROSENE ROSENE ROSENE ROSENE ROSENE ROSENE ROSENE ROSENE ROSENE ROSENE ROSENE ROSENE ROSENE ROSENE ROSENE ROSENE ROSENE ROSENE ROSENE ROSENE ROSENE ROSENE ROSENE ROSENE ROSENE ROSENE ROSENE ROSENE ROSENE ROSENE ROSENE ROSENE ROSENE ROSENE ASN ASN ASN ASN ASN ASN ASN ASN ASN ASN ASN ASN ASN ASN ASN ASN ASN ASN ASN ASN ASN ASN ASN ASN ASN ASN ASN ASN ASN ASN ASN ASN ASN ASN ASN ASN ASN ASN ASN ASN TRASH HAUL PALL CLEANUP pall CLEANUP leaves FALL cleanup SUPPLIES MAPS MAPS PRECINT MAPS MAPS MAPS MAPS ENG RETAINEP-JUL ENG RETAINER-AUG ENG RETAINER-JUNE ENG CONSULT AUG ENG CONSULT-JUNE TRANS NEED STUDY ENG CONSULT JUNE ENG CONSULT JUNE ENG CONSULT-JUNE ENG CONSULT JUl ENG CONSULT-JUNE ENG CONSULT AUG UNALLOCATED JUL UNALLOCATED AUG ENG STUBBS BAY SWR ENG CONSULT AUG ENG CONSULT JUL ST SWR NAV MGTS-CUFF ENG PUMP HOUSE 83 ENG WELL 43 ENG WELL 43-AUG ENG INSP JUNE ENG INSP JUNE ENG FIELD JUL ENG FIELD SERV AUG ENG INSP JUNE ENG INSP WELL JULY PUMPHOUSE REVIEW AUG WEL! FIELD SERV AUG ENG INSP JUNE ENG CONSULT JUNE ENG CONSULT AUG ENG CONSULT-JUNE ENG FIELD JUL 01-4343-099-17 01-4348-249-42 01-4348-249-42 01-4348-249-42 01-4348-249-42 01-4232-249-42 01-4210 01-4210 01-4210 01-4210 0’-4210 01-4210 01-4304 01-4304 01-4304 01-4305 Ci-4305 01-4305 01-4305 01-4305 01-4305 01-4305 01-4305 01-4305 01-4306 01-4306 24-4305 24-4305 24-4305 24-4305 72-4305 72-4305' 72-4305 72-4306 72-4306- 72-4306- 72-4306- 72-4306- 72-4306- 72-4306- 72-4306- 72- 4306- 73- 4305- 73-4305- 73-430S- 73-4306- -039-12 -039-1“ -040-13 -129-31 -174-33 -249-42 -200-41 -200-41 -200-41 -200-41 -249-42 -249-42 -249-42 -249-42 -290-61 -840-71 -840-71 -840-71 -840-71 -840-71 -408-00 -408-00 -408-00 -424-00 -437-85 -437-85 -437-85 -427-85 -427-85 436-84 -436-64 -436-84 -437-85 -437-85 -437-85 -437-85 -433-81 -569-92 569-92 -433-81 -CKS -CKS « •» Itto CITY OF OKONO CHECK NO DATE CHECK REGISTER 317074 317074 317074 317074 317074 317074 317081 317081 317090 317111 317111 317128 317128 317128 317128 317128 317164 317198 317109 317203 317240 11/07/90 11/07/90 11/07/90 11/07/90 11/07/90 11/07/90 il/07/90 11/07/90 11/07/90 11/07/90 11/07/90 11/07/90 11/07/90 11/07/90 11/07/90 11/07/90 11/07/90 11/07/90 11/07/90 11/07/90 U/07/90 AMOUNT 1.035 186 148 636 712 4,370 43.278 62 88 94 16 01 10 30 82 93 28 47 111 40 330 00 330 00 10 00 6 00 16 00 632 818 555 649 294 2.950 29 77 78 02 85 71 37.84 37 84 85 00 85 00 • 5.500 00 5 500 00 8 99 8 99 • VENDOR BONESTROO BONESTROO BONESTROO BONESTROO BONESTROO BONESTROO ROSENE ROSENE ROSENE ROSENE ROSENE ROSENE ASN ASN ASN ASN ASN ASN BLACKS PHOTOGRAPHY BLACKS PHOTOGRAPH'' BUREAU CRIMINA. APPR CHESWICK/GARY CHESWICK/GARY CONCEPT CONCEPT CONCEPT CONCEPT CONCEPT MICR0«^ILM MICRO*I.M microfilm MICRO'^UM microfilm 30.00 DAY TIMERS INC ELMER J PETERSON CO ROLF E ERICKSON ERICKSON/KURT FRIT2LER J MARK ITEM DESCRIPTION ENG FIELD SERV AUG ENG INSP JUNE ENG FIELD SERV AUG ENG FIELD JUL ENG INSP JUNE ENG LS 88 PHC^O REPRIN' PHOTC REPRINT CJDN CHARGES 11-13-90 PAOtACCOUNT NO. INV. • P.O. • MESSAGE CLASS TG microfilm MICROFILM microfilm microfilm SERV CONTRACT office SUPPLIES 2140 PROSPECT NOV FEE ANTI FREEZE CODE BOOK 73-4306 73-4306 73-4306 73-4306 73-4306 73-4531 01-4210 01-4210 -433-81 -433-81 -434-82 -434-82 -434-82 -569-92 129-31 174-33 01-4355-129-31 01-4356 01-4382' 01-4306- 01-4306- 01-4306- 01-4306- 01-4340- 129-31 129-31 039-12 129-31 174-33 174-33 129-31 01-4210-129-31 24-4399 01-4306- 462-00 059-14 01-4341-129-31 01-4240-129-31 •••-CKS -CKS ••■-CKS -CKS -CKS ••■-CKS -CKS -CKS IMO CITY OF ORONO CHCCK NO. DATE CHECK REGISTERAMOUNTVENDOR ITEM DESCRIPTION 30 00 • 3172SS 317256 317256 317256 317256 il/07/90 11/07/90 11/07/90 11/07/90 11/07/90 12* 36 34 85 10 00- 49 79 2 11 201 11 « GENUINE FARTS CO GENUINE PARTS CO GENUINE PARTS CO GENUINE PARTS CO GENUINE PARTS CO MISC PARTS MISC PARTS MISC PARTS MISC PARTS MISC PARTS 01-4232-129-31 01-4232-249-42 01-4232-249-42 01-4341-290-61 72-4341-549-91 317257 317257 11/07/90 11/07/90 179 00 2 40 181 40 a GERHARDSON/JOHN GERMAROSON/JOHN mileage PARKING 01-4381-249-42 01-4381-249-42 317272 317272 31*:;72 3172'•2 317272 11/07/90 11/07/90 11/07/90 11/07/90 11/07/90 214 97 80 50 50 90 18 95 9 20 374 52 • G & K SERVICES G & K SERVICES G & K SERVICES G A K SERVICES G 4 K SERVICES UNIFORMS RUGS UNIFORMS UNIFORMS UNIFORMS 01-4221-249-42 01-4343-129-31 72- 4221-549-91 73- 4221-569-92 74- 4221-590-93 317271 317278 11/07/90 11/07/90 41 00 61 50 102 50 ■ GOPHER state ONECALL GOPHER STATE ONECALL OCT SERV OCT SERV 72- 4306-549-91 73- 4306-569-92 317291 11/07/90 9 50 9 50 0 HALLIN/DOROTHY MILEAGE 01-4381-040-13 317303 11/07/90 1.521.25 1.521.25 m HENN CTY FIN DIV SEPT ROOM/BOARD 01-4358080-16 317308 11/07/90 380 50 380.50 0 HENN CTY SHERIFF DPT SEPTBOOKING FEE 01-4358-080-16 317311 317311 11/07/90 11/07/90 20 00 564.00 584 00 0 HENN CO-FORFEIT PROG HENN CO-FORFEIT PROG FORFEITURE RACHAL FORFEITURE REGER 01-3611-000-00 01-3611-000-00 317330 317330 11/07/90 11/07/90 99 52 81.12 ICMA RETIREMNT TRUST ICMA RETIREMNT TRUST ICMA 10/15-10/28 ICMA ADD 10/28 01-4140-039-12 01-4140-039-12 ll-13-tO RAOf 4 ACCOUNT NO INV • P.O • MESSAGE •••-CKS ••--CKS -“•‘CKS •••-CKS •••-CKS •••-CKS •••-CKS •••-CKS 1»»0 CITY OF OHONO CHECK NO DATE 31736B 3173SI 3X7388 317395 317395 317397 317397 317397 317404 317404 317404 317437 317437 317437 317439 317439 317441 317441 317462 CHECK REGISTERAMOUNT 180 64 - VENDOR ITEM DESCRIPTION 11-13-90 PAGE 5 ACCOUN'!' NO INV • P 0 • MESSAGE 11/07/90 140 00 140 00 • JET QUICK PRINT ENVELOPES 01-4322-129-31 11/07/90 11/07/90 628 96 382 25 1.011 21 • KILBO-MELVIN kilbo-melvin lACP CONF KIcEAGE 01-4356-129-31 01-4381-129-31 11/07/90 11/07/90 6 00 149 05 155 05 • KOEHNENS STANDARD KOEHNENS STANDARD OIL AuTO REPAIR 01-4220-129-31 01-4341-129-31 11/07/90 11/07/90 11/07/90 47 75 5 75 51 5C 105 00 • kuemn-thomas KUEHN-THOMAS kuemn-thomas mileage-oct MILEAGE-OC' MILEAGE-OCT 01-4381-069-15 01-4381-174-33 73-4381-569-92 11/07/90 11/07/90 11/07/90 14 30 89 44 65 00 168 74 • THE LAKER THE LAKER THE laker ADS ADS ADS 01-4322-039-12 01-4322-040-13 01-4322-174-33 11/07/90 11/07/90 11/07/90 22.497 00 15 02 65 59 22.577,61 « CITY OF LONG LAKE CITY OF LONG LAKE city of long lake 4TH OTR PIRE OCT FLASHER OCT LIGHT 01-4315-130-32 01-4325-249-42 73-4344-569-92 11/07/90 11/07/90 6 99 57 85 64 84 - LONG LK FORD TRACTOR LONG LK FORD TRACTOR filter CYLINDER 01-4232-249-42 01-4232-249-42 11/07/90 11/07/90 26.70 23.25 49 95 • LONG LAKE TIRE SERV LONG LAKE TIRE SERV TIRE REPAIR TIRE REPAIR 01-4341-249-42 01-4341-290-61 11/07/90 938 73 MARTINS NAVARRE 66 AUTO REPAIR 01-4341-129-31 -CKS -CKS -CKS •••-CKS -CKS -CKS •••-CKS •••-CKS -CKS 1»»0 CITY OF OHONO CHECK NO. DATE 317469 11/07/90 AMOUNT 938 73 • 126 00 126 00 CHECK REGISTER VE NDOR METRO W INSP SERV item description PLAN REVIEW 11-13’90 PAQE • ACCOUNT NO INV. • P 0. • MESSAGE 01-4306-174-33 •‘•-CKS 317480 317480 11/07/90 11/07/90 451 38 805 56 1 256 94 MIDWEST ASPHALT MIDWES'' ASPHALT asphalt ASPHALT 01-4233-249-42 01-4233-249-42 -CKS 317485 317485 11/07/90 11/07/90 13 50 27 00 40 50 MPLS OXYGEN CO MPLS OXYGEN CO DEMURAGE DEMURAGE 01-4232-129-3. 01-4232-249-42 -CKS 317408 317498 11/07/90 11/07/90 123 64 14 32 137 96 MN CELLULAR TELE MN CELLULAR TELE “TELEPHONE TELEPHONE 01-4320-129-31 01-4320-249-42 -CKS 317500 11/07/90 25 29 25 29 MINN COMM TELEPHONE 01-4320-129-31 •““-CKS “••-CKS 317505 317505 317505 317505 317SOS 11/07/90 11/07/90 11/07/90 11/07/90 11/07/90 88 136 58 596 62 941 00 MN FIRE &SAFETY 00 MN FIRE &SAFETY 80 MN FIRE &safety 35 MN FIRE &SAFETY 75 MN FIRE &SAFETY SERV EXTG SERV EXTG SERV EXTO UPGRADE AIR SERV EXTG 01-4324-099-17 01-4324-249-42 72- 4342-549-91 73- 4234-569-92 74- 4324-590-93 317518 317518 11/07/90 11/07/90 10 00 282 00 292 00 MN TREAS-CRIME ACCT MN TREAS-CRIME ACCT FORFEITURE RACHAL FORFEITURE REGER 01-3611-000-00 01-3611-000-00 -CKS 317548 317548 317548 317548 317548 317548 11/07/90 11/07/90 11/07/90 11/07/90 11/07/90 11/07/90 -CKS 45 56 8 68 21 40 15 50 41.04 21.62 153.80 NAVARRE HARDWARE PARTSNAVARREHARDWAREPARTSNAVARREHARDWAREPARTS NAVARRE HARDWARE PARTSNAVARREHARDWAREPARTS NAVARRE HARDWARE PARTS 01-4231-099-17 01-4231-290-61 01-4232-099-17 01-4232-129-31 01-4232-249-42 72-4234-549-0’ ••“-CKS Ifto CITY or OtONO CHECK NO DATE CHECK REGISTER AMOUNT VENDOR 317562 317562 317562 317562 317562 317562 317562 317562 317562 317562 317565 317590 317590 317597 317598 317614 317621 317621 317621 317621 317621 317621 317621 317621 317621 317621 317627 11/07/90 11/07/90 11/07/90 11/07/90 11/07/60 11/07/90 11/07/90 11/07/T0 11/07/90 11/07/90 11/07/90 11/07/90 11/07/90 11/07/90 11/07/90 11/07/90 11/07/90 11/07/90 11/07/90 H/07/90 11/07/90 11/07/90 11/07/90 11/07/90 11/07/90 11/07/90 11/07/60 303 2 85 149 34 1.387 818 17 161 61 3.021 32 94 41 60 20 27 41 44 03 93 55 1.067 89 1.067 89 8.179 50 8 179 50 16.359 00 3.898 94 3.898 94 9 00 9 00 90 00 90 00 987 681 422 388 210 1.162 340 844 155 233 50 00 00 50 16 82 50 00 40 10 5,424 98 47.25 47.25 NSP NSP NSP NSP NSP NSP NSP NSP NSP NSP NSP OTTEN BROS OTTEN BROS PUBLIC EMPl ret assn PERA INS PERSONNEL DECISIONS ITEM DESCRIPTION UTILITIESutilities UTILITIESutilities UTILITIES utilities UTILITIESutilities UTILITIES utilities ST lights SWR TOWER EXT SWR TOWER EXT PERA 10/15-28 DEC INS SEPT SERVICE 11-13-90 PAQE 7 ACCOUNT NO. INV. • P.O • MESSAGE 01-4324 01-4324 01-4324 01-4324 01-4324 72- 4324 73- 4324 73-4324 73- 4324 74- 4324 -099-17 -175-34 -249-42 249-42 -290-61 -549-91 -569-92 569-92 569-92 -390-93 01-4325-249-42 72 4531-438-86 73-4531-434-82 01-2031-000-00 01-4152-129-31 01-4399-069-15 physicians HEALTH NOV INS 01-3872-000-00 PHYSICIANS HEALTH NOV INS 01-4151-039-12 physicians health NOV INS 01-4151-069-15 physicians HEALTH NOV INS 01-4151-121-31 physicians HEALTH NOV INS 01-4151-126-31 PHYSICIANS HEALTH NOV INS 01-4151-129-3 PHYSICIANS HEALTH NOV INS 01-4151-174-33 PHYSICIANS HEALTH NOV INS 01-4151-249-42 PHYSICIANS HEALTH NOC INA 72-4151-549-91 PHYSICIANS HEALTH NOV INS 73-4151-569-92 -CKS ■*‘-CKS •••-CKS •■•-CKS •••-CKS -CKS PITNEY BOWES POSTAGE 01-4321-129-31 ifto CITY or oroMOCHECK NO. DATE AMOUNT CHECK KEGISTERVENDOR ITEM DESCRIPTION 11>13-I0 RAOE • ACCOUNT NO. INV • P.O. • MESSAGE 31762S 317S2I 3l7t2l 3l7t2f 317621 317626 317626 317626 317626 317628 11/07/60 11/OY/tO 11/07/80 11/07/80 11/07/80 11/07/80 11/07/80 11/07/80 11/07/80 11/07/90 128 771 861 182 213 94S 67 143 135 135 714 30 59 19 20 90 00 30 59 70 70 47 POPHAM HAIK & ASSCX LEGAL RETAINER-SEPT POPHAM MAIK A ASSOC LEGAL PROSECTNS-SEPT POPHAM MAIK 4 ASSOC LEGAL LL105 SEP POPHAM HAIK 4 ASSOC LEGAL CONSULT-SEPT POPHAM HAIK 4 ASSOC LEGAL CONSULT-SEPT POPHAM HAIK 4 ASSOC LEGAL CONSULT-SEPT POPHAM MAIK 4 ASSOC LEGAL CONSULT-SEPT POPHAM HAIK 4 ASSOC LEGAL CONSULT-SEPT POPHAM HAIK 4 ASSOC LEGAL CONSULT-SEPT POPHAM HAIK 4 ASSOC LEGAL CONSULT-SEPT 01-4301-080-16 01-4302-080-16 01-4303-060-16 01-4303-060-16 01-4303-129-31 01-4303-840-71 15-4303-651-00 24-4399-454-00 24-4399-455-00 24-4399-456-00 317631 11/07/90 2 200 00 2.200 00 - POtKA DOT RECYCLING OCT SERV 01-4392-295-65 317661 11/07/90 5 83 5 83 ■ SCHARBER 4 SONS INC OARTS 01-4342-290-61 317685 11/07/90 200 00 200 00 • LAURIE K SCHEFF^ER OC’ MTGS 01-4306-039-12 317668 11/07/90 50 00 50 00 • PARK NICOLLET REPORT ERICKSON 01-4306-129-31 317740 11/07/90 76.00 76 00 • STREICHERS MOUTHPIECES 01-4232-129-31 317741 317741 11/07/90 11/07/80 149 49 4 15 153 64 * DEMBOUSKI/JAY DEMBOUSKI/JAY DRIVING SCHOOL PARKING 01-4356-129-31 01-4381-129-31 317751 317751 11/07/90 11/07/90 442.70 282 60 725.30 • SUNDIAL BLDG SERVICE SUNDIAL BLOG SERVICE OCT JANITOR OCT JANITOR 01-4349-099-17 01-4349-129-31 317752 11/07/90 1.116 36 1.116 36 • SUBURBAN TIRE INC 22 TIRES 01-4232-129-31 317776 11/07/90 100 01 100.01 • TOLL CO SUPPLIES 01-4232-249-42 •& •••-CKS •••-CKS -CKS -CKS -CKS •CKS -CKS m Ifto CITY OF OFONO CHECK NO DATE 317779 317779 317779 317796 317115 317115 317115 317115 317915 317115 317915 317915 317915 317915 317915 317954 317954 317966 11/07/90 11/07/90 11/07/90 11/07/90 11/07/90 11/07/90 11/07/90 11/07/90 11/07/90 11/07/90 11/07/90 11/07/90 11/07/90 11/07/90 11/07/90 317942 11/07,90 317945 11/07/90 11/07/90 11/07/90 11/07/90 31767S 11/07/90 317901 11/07/90 AMOUNT 149 44- 149 44 149 44 149 44 ' 99 95 99 95 79 79 39 173 79 62 79 65 27 1C6 116 910 30 30 65 79 30 70 30 90 78 62 40 04 2 .685 29 2 685 29 15,50 15 50 232 33 42 50 274 83 105 00 105 00 8 40 8 40 106.05 CHECK REGISTER VENDOR TRACY OIL CO TRACY OIL CO TRACY OIL CO UNIFORMS UNLIMITED wayzata-city of WECKMAN STEPHEN WMI SERVICES OF MN WMl SERVICES OF MN te^DMER BROS WRIGHT HENN ELECTRIC ALBINSON ITEM DESCRIPT* N HEATING OIL HEATING OIL hemting oil JACKET 3RD OTR WATER MILEAGE PORTELETS PORTElE'^S BACKHOE LABOR utilities HAND level a H-13-90 PAGE • ACCOUNT NO. INV • PO. 9 MESSAGE 74-4234-590-93 74-4234-590-93 74-4324-590-93 01-4221-129-31 . •WEST COMMON telephone 01-4320-039-12 US WEST COMMON TELEPHONE 01-4320-059-14 US WEST COMMUN TELEPHONE 01-4320-069-15 US WEST COMMUN TELEPHONE 01-4320-129-31 US WEST COMMUN TELEPHONE 01-4320-174-33 US WEST COMMUN TELEPHONE 01-4320-175-34 US WEST COMMUN TELEPHONE 01-4320-249-42 US WEST COMMUN TELEPHONE 72-4320-549-91 US WEST COMMUN TELEPHONE 73-4320-563-92 US WEST COMMUN TELEPHONE 74-4320-590-93 US WEST COMMUN TELEPHONE ■’4-4323-590-93 72-4359-549-91 01-4381-174-33 01-4331-290-61 74-4331-590-93 72-4345-549-91 01-4324-240-42 01-4210-174-33 •••-CKS ■•"-CKS -CKS •"•-CKS -CKS •••-CKS •••-CKS •••-CKS IMO CITY Of OffOMO CHECK REGISTER U-I3-90 MQC 10CHECK NO DATE AMOUNT VENDOR ITEM DESCRIPTION ACCOUF'* NO INV 317901 11/07/90 91 47 albinson CLINOMETER 01*4210-lT4-33 197 52 N 317902 11/07/90 175 00 DAMLKE TREE SERVICE TRIM TREES 01>4391-249'42 175 00 N 317903 11/07/90 467 50 ESS brothers a sons MANHOLE WXT 01-4233-249-42 467 50 • 317904 11/07/90 36 75 HENNEPIN TREASURER BOOKS 01-4240-129-31 36 75 • 317905 11/07/90 128 40 HlftMWAY 55 RENTAL levelier 01-4331-290-61 317905 11/07/90 267 50 HlftHWAY S5 RENTAu TREE SPADE 74-4331-590-93 395 SO II 317906 11/07/90 216 37 insty prints FORMS/ENVELOPES 01-4322-059-14 216 37 II 317907 11/07/90 46 20 CITY OF LONG vAKE 3RD O'^R WATER 01-4324-129-31 317907 11/07/90 9 , 950 00 CITY OF long ^AKE 3RD QTR WATER 72-4359-549-91 9 ,996 .20 • 317909 11/07/90 27 00 LEHNES ^IRE fall CLEANUP/TIRES Cl-4348-249-42 27 00 • 317909 11/07/90 34 90 Intl conf Bldg off MANUALS 01-4240-174-33 34 90 ■ 317910 11/07/90 62 34 MIDCITY COLUMBIA INC RIBBONS 01-4210-129-31 62 34 II 317911 11/07/90 59 00 MOUND MED CLINIC OBERAIGNER PHY 01-4306-249-42 59 00 A 317912 11/07/90 30 00 NO STAR CHAPTER ICBO DUES 01-4380-174-33 30 00 • 317913 11/07/90 486 00 AACA MINNESOTA INC FALL cleanup APPL 01-4348-249-42 486 00 » 317914 11/07/90 629 40 AMERIDATA SEW AGMT 01-4340-129-31 629 40 ft 317915 11/07/90 46 90 MN BOOKSTORE BOOKS 01-4240-129-31 46 90 ft 317919 11/07/90 28.50 MEDTOX LAB OBERAIGNER TEST 01-4306-249-42 28.50 ft 317917 11/07/90 5 70 MEDICAL 0<YGEN PART 01-4232-129-31 5 70 ft 317911 11/07/90 29 00 LESTER THOMPSON REIMBURSE OVERPAYMNT 73-1191-000-002900ft Ufa ItfO CITY OF OftONO CHECK NO. DATE3179X9 317920 317921 317922 317923 317925 317926 317934 11/07/90 11/07/90 11/07/90 11/07/90 11/07/90 11/07/90 11/07/90 11/07/90 AHOUNT 31 95 31.95 * 2.500 60 2.500 60 • 500 00 500 00 • 9.044 00 9.044 00 * 5 785 00 5.785 00 • 20 00 20 00 • 2.440 75 2.440 75 " 5.9J- 50 5.938 50 * 98.388 66 2.567.90 2 .138 74 53.170 94 36.973.66 816 34 194.056.24 CHECK REGISTERVENDORWEST METRO PROF SER BRAUN ENG TESTING WEST SUBURBAN MED northwest mechanical CARLSON ASPHALT ASSOC METRO MUNICIP PUBLICORP INC NSP FUND 01 TOTAL FUND 15 TOTAL FUND 24 TOTAL FUND 72 TOTAL FUND 73 TOTAL FUND 74 TOTAL TOTAL ITEM DESCRIPTION LAW ENF DIRECTOR EVAL HWV 12/OCBR 1990 DONATION PYMNT •! LS«8 LSiO A43 11-13-90 PAGE 11 ACCOUNT NO INV • P.O. • MESSAGE01-4240-129-31 15-4305-651-00 01-4385-100-21 73-4531-569-92 73-4531-433-81 MTG LL ANNEXATION 01-4356-039-12 01-4306-299-72 Electric well ts 72-4531-437-85 BUILDNG CAPITAL OUTLAY F PERM IMPROVE REVOLVING F WATER OPERATING FUND SEWER OPERATING FUND GOLF COURSE OPERATING FD •-CKS •••-CKS -CKS MINUTES OF PARK COMMISSION MEETING CITY OF ORONO October 1, 1990 The meeting was ca i Jed to order by Chairman Dick FJ int at approximately 7:10 .m. Dick FJint, Jim GUbert, Phil Bradley, Alexander Vongries, and Lee Erger were (.resent, along with John Gerhardson from the City of Orono statf. Absent were I.es Kelly, Susan Wilson and Bruce KokaJ. 1.APPROVAL OF MINUTES. The first order of business was reviewing the minutes from the September meeting. Upon motion, the minutes were approved. 2. LAKE QUALITY DISCUSSION. Marty Jessen of the Fresh Water Foundation appeared to talk about Eurasian Water Milfoil. He explained the general nature of the exotic weed that was introduced to Minnesota some time in 1987# and how it has severely infested Lake Minnetonka and was being spread to other lakes around the state. The Fresh Water Foundation is working to organize and mobilize spending efforts to decrease the spread of the weed, to harvest the weed, and to educate the public. Mr. Jessen commented on chemical, mechanical and biological ways to counteract the weed, and so far, he is only satisfied with the mechanical and bioJogicaJ use of irradication techniques on Lake Minnetonka. He also mentioned that Long Lake is not yet infested, but they have not done a systematic or scientific study or search of that lake. He recommended that a search be done this Fall, and thay any sign of the weed be immediately acted upon before it spreads into that lake. Clarkson Lindlay from the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District appeared next. Mr. Lindlay indicated that his organization is currently gathering data for the Long Lake Basin to analyze the run-off, the condition of the water and outi^ow. Ms. Lore Schull, 1125 Spring Hill Road, Orono, who is the head of the "Save Our Lake - Long Lake/Orono Partnership" appeared next. Her organization is concerned about the water quality of Long Lake and is endeavoring to start an educational and community action program to educate the public on uses to monitor the lake and to look for warning signs. They are attempting to ob* in volunteers to monitor the lake and to monitor the boat accesses in the lake for evidence of the weed before boats are put in the Jake. Mr. Lee Ashenbeck f roir the Long I.ake Park Commssion then a|;peared and made some brief comments concerning Long Lake boat access monitoring. A short discussion foJJowed concerning jet skis. It appeared that both the City of I.ong Lake and the City of Orono would have to approve any joint ordinances for that lake because the lake is in both jurisdictions. Once that is done, the DNR would also have to aj-prove any final ordinances for use on that lake. More information is going to be obtained, including the Long Lake ordinance, which is already drafted and can he reviewed. Dick Flint asked that John Gerhardson get a coi. y of that ordinance for our review before the next meeting. 3. PARK DEDICATION FEE ORDINANCE. There was a discussion concerning the recently adopted park dedication fee ordinance. Jim Gilbert and Dick Flint met as a subcommittee meeting last week to discuss the concerns of one of the developers in Orono, and also the opinion of the City ^^^otney of Orono. There was also a discussion about the valuation process used by the current appraiser. First of all, in regard to Ordinance Sectior 11.62, subd. 2 (f), which relates to previously subdivided property not having P>^®viously paid a fee, there was a recommendation for amendment. The ordinance, as drafted, recommended that if one lot previously subdivided had not previously paid a park dedication fee, upon the application for a building permit, they would th^n be called upon to pay the new fee in effect based on the value of the property at the time of the initial subdivision. Thiu provision was used in two other municipal ordinances, namely the cities of Greenfield and Minnetrista. However, the City Attorney felt that there was not appropriate authority for this provi’sion, pursuant Minn. Stat. 462.356. That statute appears to allow a city to impose dedication requirements on proposed subdivisions. It is not a retroactive situation and, if one was grandfathered in before, the City apparently does not have authority to impose the new fees at this point in time. Accordingly, upon motion by James Gilbert, seconded by Dick Flint, it was unanimously approved to recommend that Section 11.62, subd. 2 (f) be deleted from the Ordinances by the City Council. Additional policy guidelines will be addressed at the next commission meeting for recommendations to be sent to the City Council. 5.BEDERWOOD PARK PROPOSAL. There was a discussion about the Bederwood Park j.rof,osaJ, which was discussed at the Jast meeting. It basically relates to a plan dated July 21, 1990 prepared by EarJ F. Anderson & Associates. Because of the absence of three members, it was decided 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 the detail and initiative taken by the neighbors in coming up with a plan such as this. Ms. Sherokee Use was also there with some comments concerning their desire to complete this project. Mr. Gerhardson mentioned that it might be best to present this in stages on a priority basis. Accordingly, the Bederwood Park proposal will be taken up at the next commission meeting. Mr. Gerhardson also mentioned that there might be some charitable contributions available through the Lion's Club, which might want to donate some money to hel{. build part of these improvements. 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 the 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 anything developed for these bike trails for a two-year period. The developer suggested a compromise that the 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 commission did not want the developer to have a delay built into the easement negotiations. There was some concern that this might be lost in the shuffle if it was not done during the planning stages now, and to tie it to something that might not ever happen in that area would make it a useless benefit that the City had obtained. 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. 4.WILDHURST ESTATE. There was a discussion concerning the Wildhurst Estate's market evaluations prepared by Paul J. Smith. Mr. Smith came up with three potential valuations for that property, pursuant to an August 20, 1990 letter to Jeanne Mabusth. There was a general discussion of all commission members concerning these comments. It was the opinion of Jim GiJbert and Dick FJint that the valuations were to reflect true market vaiue, minus the cost of structures on the property. There was then some general discussion concerning the "one free lot" issue. Some staff members had seemed to indicate that in previous subdivisions one free Jot was aJ.lowed as part of the subdivision process because that was an existing situation. John Gerhardson mentioned that he did not think that was a City policy. Before the commission acted on any finaJ resoJution on the "one free lot" issue, the commission wanted to know more facts concerning the history of the interpretation of prior dedication ordinances and, specifically, if one free lot was given in the prior caJculations. It was the general feeling of all coinmission members that one free Jot was not to be included within this ordinance, but any final rsolution on that would be deferred until the next meeting after we receive more facts. This should be an agenda item for the next meeting with some additional facts supplied by Mr. Gerhardson. It was decided to defer a decision on the WiJ.dhurst evaluation of the dedication fee, awaiting the above information concerning the City’s past policy on the "one free lot" issue. There was some generaJ dissatisfaction with Mr. Smith’s evaluation. In some conversations with Dick Flint, Mr. Smith indicated that he not only removed the value of the existing structures, but also gave them some additional deductions for wells and garages that were going to be removed. It was a general concensus of the commission that those additionaJ demolition items would not be subtracted from the initial market valuation, and there was nothing in the ordinance or in our intentions to have those items subtracted. The value of the structures can be subtracted, but it was a general concensus that, to allow the value of the structures to bv. removed from this valuation process, plus eliminating any demolition costs would be giving the developer a double credit, which was not intended by these ordinances. 7. MULTI-PURPOSE RECREATIONAL CENTER. The Orono school site for a multi-purpose recreational center and a joint Park Commission meeting was then discussed. Park Commission members had received a notice from the Orono Community Education Department announcing a meeting for October 24, 1990. Dick Flint, Phil Bradley and John Gerhardson plan on appearing at that meeting, and Jim Gilbert will attend if he is back from out of town. Jim Gilbert mentioned that he is going to be sending a copy of the notice to the hockey and baseball association leaders so they can come as observers to this public meeting. 8.MEETING TIMES AND NEXT MEETING. The last item on the agenda was discussed and a meeting time for 1991. When everyone is there, hopefuJJy at the next meeting, we are going to discuss if we can switch the meeting to a Monday night, as opposed to a Tuesday night. There are already some continuing conflicts on Wednesday night, so be {.repared to discuss that also. The next Park Commission meeting is going to be held on Monday, November 5, 1990, at 7:00 p.m., because of the Tuesday elections. HENNE 5|N DATE: November 1, 1990 ' ’ TO: Commissioners _ __ _ FROM: Judy Chumley, Deputy Clerk of the Board Ji'! ! 1 SUBJECT: MEMBER AT LARGE APPOINTMENTS - 1991 MOV •5 As required under the open appointments policy, attached is the Annual List of all Member-At-Large Appointments that are due to expire in 1991. I Attach: cc: Douglas Bryant, Superintendent Sub. Henn. Regional Park District Joel Settles Henn. Conservation Dist Fred Johnson Dale Ackmann Chuck Sprafka Bob Rohlf Gary Macomber - Atty - M'haha Creek Watershed District Bd. Bill Brumfield Gary VanBeusekom Bruce Malkerson - Atty - Watershed District Boards Jim Erchul, Acting Director - CASH Bd. Liz Sands Barbara Thell Mel Sinn - Soil & Water Phil Eckhert Monica Sausen Mental Health Assoc, of MN 328 East Henn. Ave. / Mpls., MN 55414 / Various Municipalities TERM ENDING 01/01/91 01/02/91 01/31/91 03/08/91 03/14/91 03/22/91 05/02/91 05/10/91 07/30/91 00/29/91 09/29/91 09/30/91 12/31/91 iiiiis 1991 SCHEDULE FOR COMMITTEE APPOINTMENTS MEMBERS AT LARGE COMMITTEE/BOARD PERSONNEL BOARD LIBRARY BOARD MINNEHAHA CREEK W/S DISTRICT LOWER MN RIVER W/S DISTRICT RILEY-PURGATORY-BLUFF CREEK W/S DISTRICT HENNEPIN TEA PRIVATE INDUSTRY COUNCIL NINE MILE CREEK W/S DISTRICT COMMUNITY ACTION FOR SUBURBAN HENNEPIN BD CAPITAL BUDGETING TASK FORCE COMMUNITY HEALTH SERVICES ADVISORY C'TEE COUNTY EXTENSION COMMITTEE INCUMBENT Howard Peterson James McDonough* Jr. Dr. Eugene Davis VACANT VACANT VACANT VACANT VACANT Gloria Johnson Edward Jc Grabowski Walter 1. Sandison Patti Sue Selseth Jerry Dulgar LaDonna Hoy Jerry Thelen Gayle Hallin Walter Fehst Mary Tambornino Laurel Deloria Mary Hathaway Leonard Franklin Joan B. DeMeules NOV -11990 LENGTH OF TERN DISTRICT Mona H. Moede 4 years Robert T. Dolan 4 years Milton Goldstein Jack Cole 3 years Thomas Maple* Jr. Richard Miller 3 years COUNCIL Douglas Davis 3 years William Jaeger# Jr.3 years COUNCIL Morgan Smith 3 years COUNCIL Paul Bridges Thomas Zalac J. Eric Earl 3 years 3 years 3 years 3 years 1 year 4 years 2 years 3 years mum s 'V'. S"''r I- 11 LAKE MINNETCrJKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT Monday Friday Monday 10-30-90 473-7033 l.m.c.d. meeting schedule November - DeceniBer 19^ CC7 3 1 11-12-90 Veterans Day, LMCD office closed 11-16-90 Eurasian Water Milfoil Task Force 8:30 a.m. Freshwater Foundation Saturday 11-17-90 Water Structures & Environment Committee 7:30 a.m. Shorewood City Hall 11-26-90 Lake Use committee ♦:30 p.m. Shorewood City Hall Wednesday 12- 5-90 LMCD Board of Directors’ Regular Meeting 7:30 p.m. Tonka Bay City Hall V' m wa>-- LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT TO: MEMBER MUNICIPALITIES FROM: Gene Stronnen DATE: November 2, 1990 SUBJ: LMCD Minutes Distribution NOV 5 tsgo Because of the nature of the current adoption of the LMCD Management Plan, we are enclosing the minutes of the Board of Directors' October 24, 1990 meeting. This mailing is in advance of the normal agenda distri­ bution so that you may have the benefit of knowing the action taken by the District. ERS:Jim enc: minutes c/encx LMCD Directors •; .• .rt .- - -.^.ugr.cg- —>*■:— cr-j*-vM.- rsES^v . T-r,.'.*;- *: ■‘.■iVT'ttrs.J ■- r*—*'• ■ ?* ■ -f--. fc»j; j . . ^ 'iusmtu -T-. ■■■ |»t;'T««(!9Ja»»''aw3^i.% -p---. '*-><r-{w» :7~r ‘•vn.*-- ■ '.v r, ■ '•-mvf. ■ ■ .-'i'C.ii, •* -r- ■• * • - ~'-riar33»"*v. -'«««• rsxa- . ' -4' - . .. . .,v. ■1/ fb; LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT BOARD OF DIRECTORS Regular Meeting, October 24, 1990 Tonka Bay City Hall 1. Deephaven; Greenwood; Secretary, Call to Order The meeting was called to order at 7:35 p.m. by Chair Cochran. 2. Roll Call Members Present: Bert Foster, Vice Chair, James Grathwol, Excelsior; David Cochran, Chair, Robert Pillsbury, Minnetonka; Jan Boswinkel, Minnetonka Beach; John Lewman, Treasurer, Minnetrista; Thomas Reese, Mound; Robert Rascop, Shorewood; Douglas Babcock, Spring Park; John Malinka, Victoria; Thomas Martinson, Waysata; Robert Slocum. Also present: Charles LeFevere, Counsel; Sgt. William Chandler, Sheriff’s Water Patrol; Rachel Thibault. Administrative Technician; Eugene Strommen, Executive Director, Members Absent: JoEllen Hurr, Orono; Marvin B.joriin, Tonka Bay. 3.Reading of Minutes Grathwol moved, Babcock seconded, to approve the minutes of the September 26, 1990 meeting as submitted. Motion carried unanimously. 4.Installation of Officers LeFevere administered the oath of office to^ the officers elected at the 9~26~90 meeting. David Cochran. Chair, Bert Foster, Vice Chair; Douglas Babcock, Secretary. and Jan Boswinkel. Treasurer, were seated to their respective offices. 5.Public Comments There were no comments from per.sons in attendance on the agenda. not 6. Chair Report, Cochran A. Cochran r.ioved, Boswinkel seconded, approval of the following standing committee chair and vice chair appointments: ♦ Water Structures and Environment Grathwol, Chair, Babcock, Vice Chair Lake Use Pillsbury, Chair, Foster, Vice Chair Eurasian Water Milfoil Task Force " Reese, Chair, Foster. Vice Chair Advisory Rascop Save the Lake Fund Campaign Pillsbury. Chair, Slocum. Vice Chair Motion carried unanimously. % I •» r. ■ >'ii^ .'1 rl.^1 to: LMCD Board of Directors Uctober 24, lyHU 7.Reports A. Standing Committees 1) ADVISORY COMMITTER.Chair Rascop a) Long Term Management Program for Lake Minnetonka• consideration of Shoreland Protection Chapter IV, Appendices A, Authority; B, Definitions; and C. Shoreland Standards and Criteria; and Sections 1* Introduction; VII, Implementation; and VIII Partial List of References Reviewed. Rascop opened the report by stating the sections under consideration were tabled at the 9-26-90 meeting. Written and oral comments were received in the interim. Change.^ and amendments will be discussed. Rascop acknowledged a letter from Jerry Rockvam, Mayor, Spring Park, calling attention to the omission of Paragraph Z. Rascop stated it will be reinsl.ated. H«; then called for comments from the public; on the ent.ire plan. Alan Brixius, Spring Park, submitted a letter dated 10/24/9U in which Spring Park reviews the October 1990 Management Flan draft. Their concern is flexibility in determining lakeshore density. Reinstating Paragraph Z meets at least in part the concerns, Rascop noted, along with further amendments to be proposed at this meeting. The MN DNR has agreed that use of the cities* comprehensive plans may be used as a basis for determining different le\e.:.s of lakeshore density. Speaking for the UNF -.'ohn Stine, Regional Hydrologist, said its plan defines shoreland as lOUU’ f om the water. Their interest is in having the communities we among themselves to get conflicts resolved with LMCD coordination. Local units of government are to map out their own shoreland uses. Edward Callahan, Acting Mayor, Orono. and Mark Bernhardson. City Administrator, Orono. urged tabling the plan. Callahan observed that there are a number of communities whicli object to the plan and when LMCD goes to the legislature to get the power to enforce the shoreland protection policy, those cities will make their ob.lections known. Rascop responded tVat LMCD is not going to the legislature for any authority on uhe shorelaiid. LMCD would like the cities to adopt a shoreland code and then be th^ enforcing agency. The only instance in which LMCD would approach the legislature would be to request funding. Ron Harnack, DNR Divisions of Waters, stated his opinion that this shoreland management plan is a plan of the communities, coordinated with the LMCD. This is a response to the the legislative mandate that all communities adopt a shoreland management plan. The LMCD is an existing structure to assure development of compatible plans for the benefit of the Lake. Al Orsen, Manager, Waysata, stated they have not had time to study the LMCD response to the Waysata plan and rerwain opposed to adoption^^^^^ proceeded with the plan for presentation of the tabled sections. .Pv LMCD Board of Directors October 24, 1990 I':ifc Grathwol moved. Lewman seconded. to* approved Shoreland Protection Chapter IV. Cochran moved, Grathwol seconded, to amend Para^iraph 2, Page 47, line 9. to read: To that end the District has proposed a draft ahereiand ordinance A SET UF STANDARDS AND CKiTERlA BASED ON THE DNR STATEWIDE STANDARDS. BUT TAlLURED Tu FIT LAKE MINNETONKA, as the basis for consideration by the cities. Motion carried unanimously. Cochran moved, Grathwol seconded, to delete a and b on Objective 3, Page 53. and amend the objective to read: The LMCD shall counsel with the lake cities by reviewing and commenting on variance applications that affect the shoreland program. In response to Reese’s comment that he believes this is a subjective decision. Harnack stated the current shoreland ordinances require notit,e to the DNR of certain shoreland changes and LMCD would receive the same notice. As an alternative, he suggested a city considering a variance affecting the shoreland send a notice to every community so there is a peer review. In Harnack's judgment use of the LMCD for variance reviews is appropriate. Callahan said this develops another layer of government at the taxpayer’s expense. Rcckvam ob.jected to review of variances within 1000’ of the shore which have no effect on the Lake. Cochran pointed out that the LMCD has no interest in variances that do not impact the shoreland standards and criteria Duane Markus. Waysata resident, requested t-abiing of the motion. . , Malinka raised the i.ssue of additional cost to the cities for additional LMCD staff to conduct variance reviews. Rascop expressed the opinion that there will be very few variance applications that need extensive review. Reese agreed citing his six years experience on the Mound Planning Commission. Martinson stated his opinion that tliere are pr oblems in the area of communication. He does not believe there will extensive additional costs. . » j Steve Cmith. Mayor, Mound, expresseti b.is opinion that use should remain under local control. Ail tourteen communities should get together on shoreland use. Boswmkel expressed the opinion that the cities should have faith in their representative and someone must look to the welfare of the Lake. Vote was called for by the Chair. Motion carried unanimously. Voting aye: (Greenwood);VOTE ON MOTION TO APPROVE CHAPTER IV AS AMENDED: Foster (Deephaven): Grathwol (Excelsior); Cochran Boswinkel (Minnetonka Beach); Lewman (Minnetrista): Reese (Mound); Rascop (Shorewood); Slocum (Woodland). Voting nay: Ptllsbury (Minnetonka); Babcock (Spring Park); (Victoria); Martinson (Wayzata). Motion carried. MaIinka Grathwol moved, Reese seconded. Authority; B, Definitionn; and C, Criteria, reinstating Paragraph Z. to approve Shoreland Appendices A, Standards and £ I. V. I k I- if: LMCO Board of Directors October 24. 1990 Martinson moved, Grathwoi seconded, to amend tne section by changing the fourth sentence of Appendix C, Paragraph 0 on Page C-3 to read: The single-family minimum lot standard is 15,000 square feet. except that Excelsior, Mound and Spring Park may have 10,000 square feet and WAYZATA MAY HAVE 9.OUU SQUARE FEET and the last sentence in the subject sentence to read "FOUR coiTununities". Motion carried unanimously. Cochran moved, Grathwoi seconded, to change the wording in the last sentence of "C” to read: However, those four communities are expected ENCOURAGED to move toward the 16,000 square foot standard as development occurs. Motion carried unanimously. Babcock moved, Pillsbury seconded, to table the motion because the exceptions in Appendix C, Sections A. B and C have not been spelled out. Motion failed, with four aye.s .and eight nays. VOTE ON MOTION AS AMENDED; Voting ava: Foster (Deephaven); Grathwoi (Excelsior); Cochran (Greenwood); Boswinkel (Minnetonka Beach); Lewman (Minnetrista); Reese (MoundRascop (Shorewood); Slocum (Woodland). Voting Nay: Pillsbury (Minnetonka): Babcock (Spring Park); Maiinka (^Hotoria); Martinson (Waysata). Motion carried. Grathwoi moved, Reese seconded, approval of Sections I, Introduction; VII. Implementation;and VIII Partial hist of References Reviewed with the following amendments: Page 87 add-a sentence to Item .3 - “This includes comprehensive plan inventory of the cities." Page 89 Paragraph 1 on the bottom to read: This adoption should be based on the cities' comprehensive plan analysis and coordination with the LMCD. VOTE ON MOTION AS AMENDED: Voting aye: Foster (Deephaven); Grathwoi (Excelsior); Cochran (Greenwood); Boswinkel (Minnetonka Beach): Lewman (Minnetrista); Reese (Mound); Rascop (Shorewood); Martinson (Wayzata); Slocum (Woodland). Voting nay: Babcock (Spring Park); Maiinka (Victoria); Pillsbury (Minnetonka). Motion carried. Uarnack said the MN DNR looks forward to working with the LMCD and cities. Ho suggested meetings with the local planning commissions or planners to review the process on how the shoreland rules will be adopted. Grathwoi moved, Reese seconded, that the Board hereby Resolve to formally adopt the Long Term Management Plan of the Lake Minnetonka Conservation District, as amended, as the official Management Plan of the District and that staff be directed to forward the Plan to the Metropolitan Council. - Vote on Page 5 LMCD Board of Directors Uv-tuber 24, 1990 u- Voting Aye: Foster (Deephaven); Orathwol (Excelsior): Cochran (Greenwood); Boswinkei (Minnetonka Beach): Lewman iMinnetrista); Reese (Mound); Rascop (Shorewood): Slocum (Woodland). Voting Nay: Pillsbury (Minnetonka); Babcock (Spring Park); Malinka (Victoria); Martinson (Way^ata). Motion carried. Martinson submitted the following statement for inclusion in the minutes explaining his vote against the Long Term Management Program for Lake Minnetonka. As a representative of the City of Waycata I have been requested by that City to vole against the Long Term Management Program for Lake Mi_nnetonka, I am. at the same time, confident that the City of Waysata will cooperate reasc^ably with the LMCD in the plan's implementation if adopted. Wayaata's opposition, in my opinion. relates to lack of specificity regarding LM)..*D budgetary considerations and implementation of shore I and standards and criteria in terms of a ‘flexible" approach tailored to Wayzata’s unique circumstances. While I am disappointed that sufficient clarification was not possible by this time to satisfy Waysata’s concerns in these regards, I am confident that the im; iement.ation phase of the shoreland program will ultimately result in a process that Wayaata can and will support. Cochran expressed appreciation to Rascop and Reese and the Advisory Committee members for their efforts in developing a program to protect Lake Minnetonka and provide a positive user experience on the Lake. 7. A, 2) WATER STRUCTURES COMMITTEE. Babcock for Chair (irathwol a) Approval of Minutes Babcock moved. Boswinkei seconded, approval of the minutes of the 10-13-9U meeting as submitted. Motion carried unanimously. b) Amenity Study Boswinkei moved. Crathwol seconded. To authorize preparation of an amendment to Code 2.0b. l^ubd. 4 as stated on the 10/15/90 draft with changes as noted. Motion carried unanimously. Babcock thanked Thibault and Strommen for their of the alternate point scale. development c) 1990-91 Deicing License Applications Babcock moved, Reese seconded, to approve the twenty-one de-icing permit applications received to date. with the understanding that temporary low water dock extensions beyond 200' should not be de- iced. Questions were raised as to whether temporary low water dock extensions are seasonal docks to be removed at season end or whether they are eligible for de-icing. The Executive Director reviewed the Code Sec. 1.07, Variance. Subd. 9, T*impi»rary low - continued I- LMCD Board of Directors October 24. 19.90 Water Variances, which does not specify a requirement for the use of seasonal dockaee. Particular concern was pointed out for dock extensions creating winter lake use hazards from deicing, particularly in the case of one 600’ extension granted. It was also noted that a 200’ dock length normally is deiced some distance beyond the dock length as a buffer between the ice and dock. The Executive Director and Water Patrol concurred that a conscientious inspection program can assure a reasonable deicing activity is maintained. Foster moved, CJrathwoI seconded. to amend the motion by deleting the 20U’ deicing restriction. Motion carried unanimously. The motion as amended was approved unanimously. d) Windward Marine New Building Construction. Mark Bernhardson, Orono City Manager, responding to the staff report, advised the building under construction at Windward Marina was approved in 1987 based on the removal of a sheet metal building and old sales/service buildings. Time extensions have been given to the variance. The existing sales/service building will now be torn down. Responding to a comment from Reese about whether the old building was non-conforming, Bernhardson respoin.led it was a case of best possible improvement. Cochran said he is assuming the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District has given approval to the .Ntorm water run-off weir. No action was taken. 7. A. :3) LAKE USE COMMITTEE. Chair FiUsbury a) Approval of Minutes Piilsbury moved, Babcock seconded, approval of the minutes of lU-lb-9U as submitted. Motion carried unanimously. b) Code Amendment Removal. Piilsbury moved, to 2.12. Subd. 7, Regarding Buoy Babcock seconded, to approve an amendment to Code 2.12, Subd. 7 and Code 2.08, Subd. 3 per the draft dated 10-10-90, publication authorized and amendment to become effective upon early publication due to closeness to dates of compliance. Motion carried unanimously. c) Proposed Minnesota Department of Natural Resources Bill for an Act Regulating Personal Watercraft The committee received a recommendation from the Lake Use Committee that the LMCD support the proposed DNR bill regulating personal watercraft. Foster called the Board’s attention to the provision in the bill requiring a 5 mph speed when the personal watercraft is within 150’ of another watercraft. Foster^, views this is highly dangerous in narrow areas of the lake. Piilsbury moved. Rascop seconded, to support the MN DNR efforts in establishing a state law regulating personal watercraft and referring the portion of the bill limiting the speed to 5 mph within 150’ of another moving watercraft to the sub committee studying personal watercraft. Motion carried unanimously. LMCD Board of Directors Uctober L'i, 1990 d) Aaendmenb bo LMCD Ordinance 2.U41 Subd. 2 Ke^ardln^ Personal Flobabion Devices. Pillsbury moved, Rascop seconded, to approve an amendment to LMCD Ordinance 2.041 Regulating Personal Watercraft. bubd. 2. Personal Flotation Devices, to identify Type 1. II. Ill or V as the Coast Guard-approved personal flotation devices. Motion carried unanimously. e) Special Deposit Refunds Rascop moved, Martinson seconded, approval of the following deposit refunds: a) Upper Lake Minnetonka Yacht Club for 1990 race schedule. b) Viking Bassmasters of Minnesota for lU 14 90 tournament. Motion carried unanimously. f) Pillsbury reported the Save the Lake annual recognition dinner is proposed for Thursday. February 14. 1991 at Lord Fletchers of the Lake. (Re-confirmation with the restaurant advises 2/14 date is not available due to Valentine’s Day sell out. Thursday, February 21 is b ng hkeid as an alternate date.) g)Counsel Advice LeFevere noted approval of the amendments to Code 2.05, Subd. 4, Amenities, Code 2.12, Subd. 7 Buoy Removal and 2.08, Subd. 3. Impoundment and Ordinance 2.041, Subd. 2 Personal Watercraft Flotation Devices. Cochran moved, Pillsbury seconded, to direct preparation of the Code amendments for formal approval at the next Board meeting, excepting the amendment to the buoy removal which may be published immediately effective the day following publication. Motion carried unanimously. 7, A. 4) RURASIAM WATER MILFOIL TASK FORCE, Chair Reese Reese reported a text has been prepared defining the 1991 mission* program objectives, operation, public relation events and financial obligations. Alternative methods of moving the weeds from the harvesters to shore are being investigated. An opinion from LeFevere regarding negotiating rather than bidding some of the contracts is needed. The 1991 Eurasian Water Milfoil program will be presented in drait form at the December 5 Board meeting. Grathwol requested having the information be^re the meeting. 7. A 5) FIMAMCIAL REPORTS. Treasurer Boswinkel a) Boswinkel submitted the statement of cash transactions for the month ending 9-30-90 and it was ordered filed. b) Boswinkel submitted the quarterly report for the three months ending 9-30-90. Babcock moved, Cochran seconded, approval of the quarterly report as submitted. Motion carried unanimou.sly. y I: Ur§ i .'I.m fc"M ? tr- ■■u-' #0p: u;H'vs:. LMCD Board of Directors October 24, 19^0 c. Boswinkei moved. Martinson seo.’nded, approval of bills for payment, clieckn numbered 648 ' throutfli 6539 in the amount of $27,331.76. Motion carried unanimousiy., 7. A. 6) EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR. Strommen a) Gtrommen reported the lease for office spac»* at Morwest Bank Wayzata is being signed and occupancy is scheduled for December 1. b) A copy of the MN Lake Management Federation annual conference program was available. The conference wa.s attended by 300+ lake association directors, agency people and county officials involved in water management. Strommen was elected to the Board and to serve as the Secretary to the Federation. c) The meeting schedule for the balance «.>f 199t» waL- announced. The Water Structures and Environment Committee will meet on on November 17, the Lake Use Committee on November 26 and the Board will meet on December 5. 8. Unfiniahed Business There uas no unfinished business 9. New Business for the raising Milfoil proposed a) Consideration of an auditor and financial .service quarterly reports for 1991 was withdrawn from the agenda. b) Save the Lake Fund Analysis Slocum submitted a mission statement and objectives for Save the Lake program. He stated there are three fund operations concerning the Lake: The Save the Lake Fund, Weed Harvesting Fund and Fresh Water Foundation. It is to combine the Save the Lake Fund and the Milfoil fund rai.sing. Pillsbury circulated a letter, brocliure and pledge card suggestion to be used in a combine*! fund drive. Slocum moved, Babcock seconded, to approve the Hls.si''«n Statement. Ob.jectives, Funding Considerat ii>ns. Budget Procedure and Amendment.s outline as submitted. Motion carried unanimously. The committee will meet to review a letter and pledge card plan to launch a 1990-91 combined Save the Lake campaign. C. Cochran moved, Foster seconded, to approve the following Resolutions: * Resolution designating the Northwest Bank Wayzata as depository for LMCD checking, savings and/or securities. * Resolution authorizing the Treasurer to meet statutory requirements for investments in general obligations of the United States and the State of Minnesota maturing in less than three years. * Resolution designating the Treasurer and one otlier officer or the Executive Director, two signatures required. lo pay, trari.iifer or withdraw funds on deposit with Northwest Bank Wayzata. M^’ttion carrle«l unani im'His 1 v . ■j£. .. .' -I .1 MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE SCHOOL BOARD OF ORONO INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 278 HELD ON OCTOBER 8. 1990 OCT 2 4 19^0 The regular meeting of the School Board of Orono Independent School District No. 278 was held on Monday, October 8, 1990 Present: Dave McKown Lucie Taylor James Franklin Peg Swanson Thomas Mich William Fenholt Absent: Don Anderson John Maresh UPON MOTION by Lucie Taylor, seconded by Jim Franklin, the consent agenda was approved as follows: - approved the minutes of the September 24, 1990 regular meeting; - approved the appointment of Jane Hanson as a short hour cook at Orono Primary School; - approved the appointment of Marjo Wirtjes as a short hour co<^k At Schumann Elementary School; - approved the appointment of Phyllis Simon as a special educati ’ . apro- fesslonal at Orono Primary School; - approved the bills as covered by vouchers 067397 through 067621. Motion carried unanimously. Or. Mich reported that the Oktoberfest held on October 6 was a great success and that he wanted to express appreciation to Jim and Penny Grabek for chairing the event, to Paul Magers and Paul Douglas for their participation, to Ron Gilbert and the Orono staff for their contributions; that on October 8 and 9 and again on October 10 and 11, the Elements of Effective Instruction workshop is being held at Trinity Lutheran Church and Board members are invited to attend; that he wanted to congratulate the following students who are Commended National Merit Scholars: Ann Doherty, Angela Gawron, Findley Griffiths, Laurie Hite, Jill Salo, Melissa Wyatt; that John Parker, teacher at Schumann Elementary School, has received a commendation from Governor Rudy Perpich for his leaders' 'p as chairperson of the Community Transition Interagency Committee acknowledging his orchestration of interagency collaboration between schools, human service agencies and community members for the purpose of providing uninterrupted service/support for persons with disabilites; that on October 24 there will be a joint meeting of the Park Commissions of the communities that Orono School District serves to foster communication and cooperation between the cities on park usage; that about one-third of the Breakfast Surveys have been returned and far less than 15% have indicated interest in having breakfast provided by the schools; that the TIES Annual Meeting will be held on October 10; that he was distributing copies of letters from Ron Gilbert regarding the initiatives being implemented at Schumann Elementary; that on October 11 at 3:00 p.m. the Facilities Conmlttee will meet with Ron Anderson regarding the final site plan for the acreage across Old Crystal Bay Road; that depositions from administra- tors Mill take place this week regarding the equity lawsuit and also an inspec­tion, by the plaintiffs, of our high school and one elementary school; that the Dedication Conmittee, which includes Lucie Taylor, Dave McKown and Dr. Mich, for the new building has met and information will be provided to Board members as the plans progress; that he wants the Board to be aware that Brian Bergstrom has requested that Community Education join the National Youth Sports Coaches Association which provides training for youth volunteer coaches and that Brian should be commended for initiating this opportunity for volunteer coaches; that he was distributing the Superintendent evaluation forms which should be completed and returned to Lucie Taylor by October 17; that progress continues on the new building construction and that the "digging out" of the pool could be completed within the next three weeks. UPON MOTION by Lucie Taylor, seconded by Jim Franklin, the Board of Education adopted the revised Mission Statement for the Orono School District as follows: Is' Approved by the Orono Board of Education - October 8, 1990 MISSION STATEMENT The Board of Education of School District 278 recognizes its responsibilities to the residents of the communities served and acknowledges the continuing support of its citizens. The most fundamental of these responsibilities mandates the development and implementation of a sound educational program which promotes Intellectual curiosity and assists each student to reach his/her potential. As such, the educational program is designed to meet the needs of individual stu­ dents through a curriculum program of studies based on the instructional goals of the District. The curriculum is implemented by each teacher's selection and use of sound methods of instruction. The Board of Education also recognizes the educational benefits of an effective program of cocurricular activities for students. The Board of Education promotes the availability of self-development oppor­ tunities for all residents through a program of Community Education. The Board of Education is dedicated to the continued growth and learning for all who serve district students: including staff members, teachers, administrators, and members of the Board of Education. Revised 10/8/90 INSTRUCTIONAL GOALS The following Instructional goals are listed In priority order. They define more specifically the mission of School District 278 and Its educational commit­ ment. These goals are promoted within established fiscal policies, limitations, end obligations of the School District. 1. Develop good character, self-respect, a feeling of self worth, and self-discipline. 2. Gain a sound education In the basic skills Including reading, writing, arithmetic, speaking and listening. 3. Gain the skills necessary for critical thinking, creative problem solving, and the systematic Inquiry and evaluation of Information. 4. Gain a general education providing appreciation for and achievement In the humanities, the sciences, the fine arts, and vocational studies. 5. Learn to be good citizens who appreciate, understand and practice democratic Ideals. 6. Learn to work In groups and to respect and resolve human differences. 7. Learn to meet the challenge of dealing effectively with one's own strengths and weaknesses. 8. Develop skills necessary to use and to take advantage of modern technology. 9. Develop skills, attitudes, and understandings necessary for the management of money, property, and resources. 10. Learn safety and good physical/mental health practice:. 11. Learn about and understand the changes In the world and the global Interdependence among people and resources. Reviewed 10/8/90 M, *1 Carried u -^ously. Bill Fe Warren Nelson updated the Board on the recycling program that has been s i in the school district involving staff as well as students. Mr, Fenholt stated that some set-up costs have been realized but that after one year the savings generated will pay for the recycling equipment. Warren Nelson provided background Information on the recycling of previous years and the recycling that is presently taking place or in the planning stages. The Board heard a report from Doug Erickson regarding the development/implementation of the Orono Homeroom Program which is presently underway at the high school for ninth and tenth grade students. Mr. Erickson stated that one of the key elements in the program was to emphasize being an Orono student, no matter the grade level; therefore, students are assigned to a homeroom with equal numbers of each grade in each room and they meet once a week. Through this program students will receive information on health and wellness Issues, academic assistance from faculty advisors, peer counseling/tutoring, as well as the opportunity for socialization with fellow students. The students are currently preparing a weekly taped program of high school news called "Spartan Update" to be broadcast on Channel 20 at 5:30 p.m. on Tuesdays. Mr. Erickson reviewed some of the plans that are being discussed for future Implementation, one of which would increase the program to include at least the Junior class next year. UPON NOTION by Jim Franklin, seconded by Lucie Taylor, the Board of Education approved the Special Education Director's contract for 1990-93 as negotiated by the School Board Negotiating Committee. Carried unanimously. Ms. Diane Higgins and Ms. Linda Wiard-Bauer, memberc of the Orono Education Association's Communications Committee, were present am. provided an overview of the activities that are being planned in celebration of American Education Week, November 12 - 16, 1990. Ms. Higgins solicited the support of the Board, and possiblly their participation. In the OEA's plan to invite community members to teach a class session and share their expertise with students during the month of November. The Board responded to this idea with enthusiasm, suggesting the use of such a program during the entire school year. UPON MOTION by Lucie Taylor, seconded by Jim Franklin, the Board of Education approved the Annual Report as presented. Or. Mich stated that the contents of this report are required by law although Orono's report does go beyond the scope of the P.E.R. law and, as a result, the report becomes a good reference for our residents. Jim Franklin requested that a survey/questionnaire be developed which would provide the district with Infor­ mation as to the numbers of residents who read/use this report. Administration will review/study this Idea. Dr. Mich expressed appreciation to Toni Bergland for her work in compiling the Annual Report. Motion carried unanimously. A brief Informational report was giver by Warren kelson regarding the activities/sessions that took place during the week of preschool workshop for middle school teachers. These workshop sessions were implemented as a result of the middle school study/recommendations of last year. Mr. Nelson will return to the Board of Education at a later date to provide a progress report on the Implementation of the recommendations resulting from the Middle School Study. Or. Mich announced that Kitty Crosby has consented to continue her work in the area of fundraising for the Scholarship Fund for the 1990-91 school year and that her willingness to continue in this capacity is greatly appreciated. UPON MOTION by Lucie Taylor, seconded by Jim Franklin, the meeting was adjourned. Approved: /(X.X7»it Dave McKown, Chairman O R O N O SCHOOL 685 Old Crystal Ba\ Road Long l^ke. Minnesota 55356 (612) 473-731.1 Indqiendent School District 278 October 25, 1990 Thomas B Mich. SupcniUendcnt :0CT. 3 0 Mr, Mark Bernhardson City Manager City of Orono P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 Dear Mark: As promised, I am sending to wou a copy of our recently completed site plan. Please share the copy h Mayor Grabek and members of the City Council who may have an intett City Council Member Diann Goetten has requested a copy and I have obliged. I regret that I do not nave sufficient copies to provide one for each member of the City Council. If you or any others have any questions regarding the site plan, please don't hesitate to give me a call. Sincerely, B. Mich <f*intendent of Schools TBM:eaz Enc, Serving . Independence—Ltmg Lake—Muplc Plain..Medina—Minnetonka Beach Orono An Equal Opporiunitv Empjo\er 'tv PROPERTY UTILIZATION STUDY ORONO PUBLIC SCHOOLS INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 278 October 1,1990 ROY A. ANDERSON ASSOCIATES, INC. Site Planners Landscape Architects Minneapolis, Minnesota 55422 (612) 544-7129 ft ROY A. ANDERSON ui5 ASSOCIATES MBcdnve INC * minnesota 55422 October 1, 1990 Dr, Thomas B. Mich, Superintendent and Orono School Board Independent School District No, 278 Orono Public Schools 685 Old Crystal Lake Road Long Lake, Minnesota 55356 Re: Property Utilization Study Gentlemen: Attached find submitted twelve (12) copies of the "Property Utilization Study*' prepared for the new 51 acre site east of Old Crystal Lake Road. We have appreciated the opportunity to serve the Orono School District on this important project. We stand ready to serve the District in the future as other site improvement activities become necessary. Sincerel y. Roy A. Anderson President RAA:ljm Enc. cc: Hr. William Fenhol t Business Manager Sfli ptemMfs — landscape archills 612'544-7129 ORONO PUBLIC SCHOOLS PROPERTY UTILIZATION STUDY Contents Introductory Letter Purpose Methodology The Site Site Analysis Topography Utilities Street Access Conclusions Land Use Schematic Site Development Concept Plan Conclusions Exhibits: Location Map Site Topography Map Site Analysis Land Use Schematic Site Development Concept Plan Pa^ 2 3 4 5 5 5 6 6 8 9 11 Exhibit 1 Exhibit 2 Exhibit 3 Exhibit 4 Exhibit 5 PURPOSE This study represents a preliminary analysis of the ability of the subject site to accommodate three potential uses: • An elementary school to serve an enrollment of 900 students in first through fourth grade, including playfields and other essential outdoor support facilities. • Municipal facilities for the City of Orono, including administrative offices, a police station, warehouse space for public works, and a water tower, requiring a site of approximately 15 acres. • A hockey arena, requiring a site of approximately 10 acres. METHODOLOGY The development potential of the subject site was evaluated through the following sequence of tasks: The site was inspected and analyzed to identify opportunities and constraints related to development. The site's topography, vegetation, drainage, street access, and utility availability were evaluated. The general site development requirements for the contemplated elementary school were determined, including building size, vehicular access, parking, and playfield needs. A conceptual plan was prepared to illustrate a potential elementary school development. Based on the conceptual plan, the remainder of the site not required for the elementary school was evaluated for its ability to accommodate potential municipal facilities and/or the hockey arena. The results and conclusions of the preceding tasks are briefly summarized in the following sections of this report. THE SITE The subject site, shown on Exhibits 1 and 2, is a 51.5^ acre parcel located at the southeast quadrant of the intersection of Old Crystal Bay Road and Sixth Avenue North (C.S.A.H. No. 6). The site is directly across Old Crystal Bay Road from the existing Orono High School. SITE ANALYSIS Topography: The majority of the site, approximately 38 acres, shown on Exhibit 3, is active agricultural land with varied topography ranging from gentle to moderate slopes at the south, central, and east portions of the site to steep slopes at the northwest portion. The grade differential across the site is approximately 39 feet. \ densely wooded ravine separates the north 12± acres of agricultural land from the remainder of the property. This deeply cut ravine directs major site drainage to the northwest corner, the low point of the site. The southeast acres of the property' are flat and. densely wooded. Although this portion of the site is at a relatively high elevation, large areas are poorly drained and marshy, and generally unsuitable for development. Utilities: Gravity flow sanitary sewer exists only to the southwest comer of the property, which is also the highest point of the site. The gravity flow sewer terminates there at a manhole with an invert elevation of 1013.50. A sanitary force main extends from that point along the entire frontage of Old Crystal Bay Road and along the majority of the Sixth Avenue North frontage. A water main exists in the south 750 feet of Old Crystal Bay Road frontage only. The subject site was intended for large lot residential development with ojA-site utilities. Public utilities, therefore, are limited at this time. Street Access: Public streets extend along the entire west and north frontages of the property. Flexible vehicular access is available from both streets, although steep slopes adjacent to segments of Sixth Avenue North may restrict access at st^me points. Conclusions: The southeast llj: acres of the site are unsuitable for development, but have potential for use as an environmental study area related to the school. The 26±_ acres of agricultural land south of the ravine are the most suitable for elementary school site development for the following reasons: • The gentle to moderate slopes will accommodate the school building and associated outdoor facilities (parking, bus corral, playfields) without excessive grading. Only the far northwest portion of this area has slopes which are too steep for playfield development. • This area is currently served by sewer and water. If the school building is carefully located, access to the gravity flow sanitary sewer can be accommodated. • Vehicular access from Old Crystal Bay Read is relatively unrestricted by topography. • The physical relationship of the site to existing school facilities is excellent. The majority of the agricultural area north of the ravine is suitable for development, but steep slopes at the west portion (northwest comer of site) present limitations for the construction of large buildings and extensive surfaced areas, such as parking lots. This factor will significantly reduce the development flexibility and efficiency of the site. LAND USE SCHEMATIC The Land Use Schematic, illustrated on Exhibit 4, identifies tvwo development sites and establishes the general organization of uses on the future elementary school site in a manner which responds to the natural conditions of the property. The schematic ;rnposes; • Preservation of the wooded ravine as a natura* .separation between the two potential development sites and as a major drainage swale. • Retention of the wooded area at the southeast portion of the site as a natural area. • Arrangement of facilities on the school site to take advantage of the existing topography and available utility and vehicular access. SITE DEVELOPMENT CONCEPT PLAN The Site Development Concept Plan, illustrated on Exhibit 5, represents a preliminary design to test the space requirements and physical relationships established by the Land Use Schematic. Specific features of the conceptual design are as follows: • The school building is located on the relatively flat land at the southwf'st portion of the site at an elevation which will allow access to the gravity flow sanitary sewer. • Access to the site is obtained from Old Crystal Bay Road at two locations to serve private vehicles, school buses, and service vehicles. • Staff parking is located at the southwest corner of the site, adjacent to the school building and close to the ,:reet to minimize the penetration of vehicular traffic into the site. Although this l--ation places the parking farther from the softball and soccer fields, it avoids the need for students to cross a parking lot to access the playfie d*. • Bus circulation is separated from automobile circulu '.on extending to a bus loading/unloading area at the rear (east) of the school building. The bus corral can be chained vtf from traffic during school hours and can, therefore, be safely used as a surfaced play area. 1 1 •. lay equipment areas are conveniently located near the school 1 building, separated from any conflicts between students and vehicular traffic. 1 •A large playfield is located at the northeast portion of the site. 1 1 easily accessible from the school, but removed from vehicular traffic. Existing slopes in this area are adaptable to playfield use without excessive grading. 1 1 •A smaller playfield is located directly north of the school building to allow flexible and efficient use of the site. The number of softball and soccer fields shown on the plan 1 1 exceeds the typical requirement for a 1-4 elementary school, but the additional facilities are provided to accommodate secondary school use and antictpated community-wide use. 1 •The wooded and marshy area at the southeast corner of the 1 site is preserve^, as an environmental study area, with development limited N- pathway construction to provide 1 1 1 ■ student access. 1 1 (10) CONCLUSIONS Based on the preceding site analysis and conceptual designs, the following conclusions have been reached: • Approximately 38 acres of the subject property are readily developable. The ravine and the wooded, marshy area which comprise approximately 13.5 acres, are considered marginal for development. • The southern portion of the property is most suitable for elementary school development because of its existing topography, its accessibility from Old Crystal Bay Road, and the availability of utility services. • The developable portion of the property lying south of the ravine (approximately 26 acres) is adequate for the contemplated elementary school and associated support facilities. In fact, conceptual design indicates that through efficient site arrangement, the site can accommodate a community recreation field (softball/soccer combination) or secondary school student use in addition to the required elementary school playfields. • The undevelopable wooded, marshy area at the southeast comer of the property is not essential to the school site development, but can be productively used by the school to expand it environmental study program. (11) • The remainder of the property (approximately 12 acres) north of the ravine is not considered adequate for the proposed municipal facilities because of its size and topographic limitations. The site does offer the opportunity for the development of a hockey arena or other compatible public uses. Utilities, however, are not directly available. The preliminary nature of this study must be emphasized. Because the school facility is not expected to be constructed for 4 to 5 years, a detailed design program has not been established. Conceptual design was, therefore, based on a typical design program for an elementary school of the contemplated size. The conclusions of the Site Analysis are based on general topographic information and visual observation. As the School District proceeds with project planning, a more thorough Development Feasibility Study should be conducted. Such a study should include detailed soils analysis, a detailed engineering study of grading, drainage, and storm water management and a thorough review of the proposed development with all governmental agencies which have jurisdiction over the property. (END) (12) ,.„ / . . _ ^ ^ 33 o 2cX ^ ^;• 33 > . ^ C/>i CO 1 _-.;j. --, . “6> S (0 \ ■* i-ji* n. i O'*" ' i 57i o'' .1 - - t:u§f •> Jifc.': /^.^oi«f .'“.T^i c* Sl :^i* «> n:*"* >: : Hi:> » a ^ < p 1 ORONO PUBLIC SCHOOLS LOCATION MAP MOCPCNOOfT SCHOOL MTl ;T NO- >78 ONONO. WSSCSOTA E NEWSLETTER h'ONO iNUfPFNDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT NO ORONC) SCHOOL BOARD David McKown. Chairman 4'’d Don Andersttn. Vii.e Chainnan 4"'‘>-i!<lU Jmi Hranklin. Trea.surcr 4’d-Zl30 Lucic Tav lor. Clerk 4-,^-1 1 Sd John Maresh. Diretti’r 4‘'S-3i9‘^ Peg Swanson. Dim.for 4'’3.(VtO'< NOVF MLU H ISSUE NO 3 a lu I ni (rn (h'Ji t \ American Education Week November 12 -18 November 12 is the start of American Education Week. It is one of the times during the year when we arc asked to focus on the necessity and benefits of education in a democratic society. It is difficult for any of us to imagine a sooety abM.'nt ot schools. Our way of life, our culture, is integrallv united to education and to schools. To be sure, we pnze education because of the requirement of an i iformed citizenry m a democratic society. But we also value schools as the organizing principle for our learning and many growthful experiences. It is commonplace to remember our growing up m terms of grade levels, favorite teachers or classmates and other school experiences. It is also usual to identify a cit>', town or suburb with its school system, I once visited a retirement town without a school It was beautifully landscaped, wonderfully ne.. nd somehow it seemec less than complete. I wonder how a town without a school or school affiliation views the future? How does yesterday get balanced with tomorrow in such a place? Schools are not only purposeful institutions. They arc symbols of education and learning. They are reminders of our own past or present. They are hope for the future. Because there are schools all about us we tend to take them for granted. Yet we shudder at the picture of a "black-board jungle" school. Somehow problem plagued schools are a sacrilege, a contradiction to the promised learning and the opportunities for the future. And, sinailarly, we rejoice over the well being and successes of other schools. Yes, we Americans are school people. We value education, but we love our schools. Thomas B. Mich, Ph.D. Superintendent This vear s theme tor .American Education Week is "Educating Evervone Takes Everyone". This seems particularly appropriate to the members of the Orono Education .Association because our nation s public schools attempt to serve the needs of all citizens. Programs such as early childhood development and adult education have great!V expanded the traditional role of the schools. .Vluch has been written about the problems in public education. As teachers we recognize the need for change: the need to meet the demands of a rapidly changing world. However, we also recognize that excellence m education is <>nlv achieved through the cooperative effort of our entire community: students, teachers, administrators, school board members, parents, persons without school age children, business leaders, civic groups and elected offiaals at the local, state and national levels. The Orono Education Association would like to take this opportunity' to thank ail members of the Orono School District for their enthusiastic support of the schools. We would also like to invite you to become an active participant in the future. Volunteer to help in one of the schools, take a class through Community Education, attend an athletic event, concert, play, or PTA meebng. Help make the educational process in our distnet a tiisk shared by everyone. ANNUAL REPORT The Annual Report that you recently received is a report on the activities, goals and personnel for the the 1989-90 school year. As such it is not intended to reflect the present school year. Guidance at a Glance Upcoming Test Dates: ACT: Decembers, 1990 Registration Deadline 11/9/90 SAT; Januarv’26,1991 Registration Deadline 1-/'21 ,'90 Juniors arc reminded to obtain a Social Security number as soon as possible it thev don t already have one. The number is requested on many college applications, admissions tests, and financial aid forms. Financial Aid On Monday, December 3 there will be a meeting for all senior parents to discuss the financial aid form. Because of the necessity of filling out this form for Guaranteed Student Loans, the meeting is of general interest. Gary Ness, Financial Aid Officer at .Normandalc Community College will present this material. The meeting will bo held in the high school choir room at 7;00 p.m. While this meeting is planned essentially for senior parents, any junior parents who want to start planning are welcome to attend. Other financial aid topics will also be discussed. Senior Planning Conferences The high school counselors have begun to conduct senior planning interviews with students and parents. Each senior family received a letter inviting parents to participate. The purpose is to help students and parents in the process of post-secondary- educational and/or work planning. We hope to provide appropnatc and up-to-date information that will help with these plans. Evening hours are available to accommodate those who cannot attend during the day. For mo “e information or to schedule an appointment please call 473-5472, ext. 230. CHOICES Career Conference Young women in grades 6-12 and their parents arc encouraged to attend the 'th Annual CHOICES Career Conference on Saturday. Wvember 10, 1^^^^), from 8:30 a m to 4;lK) p m. The conference, which is sponsored by Intermediate District 287/HTC, will be held at Hennepin Technical College, Eden Praine Campus, 9200 Flying Cloud Dr., Eden Prairie, M.\. The goals ot the con tort.,ce are to develop an awareness of non-traditional career opportunities for women and to increase young women s interest in mathematics and science Highlights include lane Curry’s solo performance - 'Samantha Rastles' the Woman Question", music featuring Prudence Johnson with several p'-omincnt women musicians, exploratorv math and science activity workshops and career int<'rmation sessions and di: ays. .Nearly ninety career women who have pursued careers in ’ olving mathematics and science expertise or arc in non- traditional careers have volunteered to lead workshops and discussion groups. Teachers and counselors are encouraged to attend the conference. Spc'cial workshops planned for adults include: Personal Safety for Women, Balancing Career and Family, Financial Planning fc'r College and Future Careers for Women. For information and reuistration forms, contact school counselors and math and science teachers or call 550-7154, Career Education K-12 Services. A $10 single rate or a $25 family rate registration lee covers the cost ot lunch and materials. Early registration is suggested. Spartan Parents The next scheduled meeting for the Spartan Parents is Wednesday, November 14th at 7:00 pm. Please plan to attend this meeting which will be held in the high school cafeteria. High School Counselors 473'5472 CALL WITH YOUR QUESTIONS Ms. Woyteke - all students with last names A-K Mr. Wasbotten - all students with last names L-Z College Representatives We have college representatives from all over the country visit Orono High School during the course of each school vear. They arc available in the Guidance Office to visit with parents and students. We will publish in this newsletter each month a schedule for the upcoming 30 davs. Students are also notified by a College Rep Bulletin Board at the high school. Please have your student check the bulletin board because some schools may schedule visits after the date the District Newsletter is published. Please call us at 473-5472 for any updates or additional information. November College Reprpsgntatives Nov. 1 UniV'irsity of Mn. Morris 11:30am 6 Maca tester College 8:00am 8 Drake University 8:30am H Marquette University 9;15am ,.1, Green Mountain College 12:00 noon Mid Winter Fun Fest The Orono Elementary TTA is planning the annual "Mid-Winter Fun Fest" Carnival to be held on Februaiy 2 from 1:00 - 5:00 p.m. at the Orono Middle School. Funds from the Carnival provide field trips and a variety of school related activities for all elementary students K - 4. In conjunction with the carnival, a raffle fcatunm^ many wonderful prizes will be held. The chairpersons are 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 Endsley (473-8232) or Tim and Sandy Pattrin (475-1921.) For raffle donations, contact raffle chairperson Susan Vickerman (473-7410). MOMS It's not too late to find out about Orano”MOMS**. "Meet Orono Moms" is a very informal group of Moms who get together to discuss school issues, kid issues and the hows, whys and wheres of our district. Many friendships are made and ideas exchanged. This group meets the third Friday of the month, November 16> at Trinity Lutheran Church on County Road 6. Plan to come and bring a friend for some coffee and conversation. Stop in between 1:00 and 3:00 p.m. for a break in your hectic schedule. Middle School Volunteers The middle school staff appreciates the excellent volunteers who have helped us in thv past and wish to encourage anyone who can spare some bme on a regular basis to volunteer this year. Library help once per week or twice per month, 9.-00 - 12:00 or 12:00 - 3:00 is especially needed. Please call Zoe Palmer at 473-7301 if you are able to help out. School Finance Lawsuit In the next several months, you will be hearing a lot more atK’^ut the school finance lawsuit in Minnesota, now scheduled to go to tna! in February'. The diffcrcni^c between school funding :n Minnesota and several other states with similar lawsuits is that Minnesota already has a state funding system that assures reasonable funding for all schools. Often referred to as the "equity" lawsuit, this suit could actuallv can've venous educational inequities for the children in the Orono School District and throughout Minnesota. It would also take away the right of communities to pass referendums for building bonds or operating levies necessary to maintain their quality pnigrams. The heart of the lawsuit is a demand for et^ual dollars spent on all students - regardless of differences in costs or communitv needs and expectations. Orono'Schcxil Distnet and the 23 other school districts in the Oganization of Intervening School Districts iOlSD) are formally "interx'cning ' in the lawsuit and sidiiig with the State against the plaintiff school distnets. The OISD districts support the State's current education funding s 'stem, which attempts to address the varying needs ot local school districts. Equal dollars do not mean equal education, because a dollar in one part of the state docs not have the same purchasing power as it does in another part. In addition, school districts with highly trained, experienced staff have significantly higher salary costs than districts with less ovpt.*nenced staff. Unless this lawsuit is deteated, either the Courts or the Legislature will dictate statewide equal funding with no Uxal options. Districts like Orono, still faced with higher than average costs, will be forced to drastically cut personnel and programs to bring expenditures within the new revenue limits. And, regardless of local circumstances or community desires, there will no longer be a referendum option if our residents want more educational programs than the stale allowance will buy. Anyone who would like more information about the lawsuit is welcome to call the Superintendent s Office (473-7313), and ask tor a copy of The Full Story of the School Finance Lawsuit." Student Directories Student Directones are still available in the individ al school offices. We would appreciate your picking up your copy (S4) al your earliest convenience. Directories will also be available in the middle school the evenii.gs of conferences. You will find this directory very useful and helpful for your family You may even find that more than one directory is needed! As with any large publ.crfuon there is room for improvement. If you have any corrections, questions or additions to this useful tool, please contact Kathv Hayes at 476-6920. We plan to publish a corrected list in the December or January district newsletter. Copies arc going fast, don t miss out! \ ( i : I , Approved participation in the Metro Educator s Exchange Program. Approve the appointment of Leslie Larson as part-time kindergarten teacher at Orono Primar>* School. Approved the appointment of Carol Seemann as a fifth grade teacher in the middle school. Approved the proposed tax levy for 1990, collectible in 1991, as certified by the clerk. Approved the contracts for the Community . Education personnel as negotiated by the Board Negotiation Committee. Approved the contract for Coordinator of Buildings and Grounds as negotiated by the Board Negotiation Committee. Requested bids on assorted school furniture for the new addition. (Iggl^lar Meeting- September 24.1990 Appioved the following coaches for fall sports; Steve Boylan, assistant football; Lowell Seash e, head soccer coach; Brad Carlson, assistant soccer; Tim Vaughn, assistant soccer; Manuel Jordan, assistant soccer; Jane Schleisman, assistant .tennis; Daun Henning, assistant volleyball. Approved the appointment of Geraldine Dressel as computer lab clerk at Schumann Elem. Approved the appointment of Marcia Wilcox for part-time position at Orono Middle School in the Assurance of Mastery program. Accepted the resignation of Marcella Frost, .short hour cook at Orono Primary. Accepted the furniture bids as recommended. Kids* Qothing and Etc. Sale* We extend a BIG THANK YOU to all the sellers, shoppers and contributors who made the third annual Kids’ Clothing & Etc.. Sale our biggest ever! Early Childhood Family Education book in $1,085.22 which will be used to purchase children's books. Half will be used in the Orono ECFE program and the other half will be used for Operation Bookshelf. This program provides books as gifts to families involved with social service agencies during the holidays. THANK YOU! \i firitu ( (ilniih ff] M :I Tn a. i 11/6 Election Day 11/9 End of first quarter 11/11 Veteran’s D' / 11/12 School Board Meeting, MS........................7:00pm 11/22 Thanksgiving 11/29 District Piano Recital in Aud.....................5:00pm ITT .FMKNTARY AmVTTTES 11/6 SE & OPS Nov. BD Party 1V13 Orono Primary School Read In Elem. PTA Bd. Mtg. at OPS......................7; 15pm 11/16 NO SCHOOL FOR KDGN ONLY KDGN Conferences 11/19-21 NOSCHOOi.K-4 11/29 PTA Family Fun Night at Cheepskate....6;00pm Mmni.E SCHOOL ACTIVITIES 11/6 MS CAP^ Award Day (1/2 dav> 11/13MS PAC Mtg. in FDR..................................7:30pm 11/19MS Conferences ..............................................4-8pm 11/20 MS Conferences ..................noon - 4pm & 5 - 8pm 1U21 NO SCHOOL MS STUDENTS HIGH SCHOOL ACTIVITIES 11/1 Volleyball - Distncts 11/3 Cross Countn,’ - State Meet Volleyball - Districts 11/8 Fail Musical at .Aud.......................................7;30pm End of first quarter 11/9 Fall Musical at .Aud......................................7;30pm Football State Quarter Finals 11/10 Fall Musical at .Aud......................................7:30pm 11/16 Fall Musical at .Aud......................................7:30pm Football Semi Finals lL/17 Fall Musical at Aud.....................................7:30pm 11/19 HS Conferences ..............................................4-8pm 11/20 HS Conferences ..............................................4-8pm 11/21 NO SCHOOL FOR HS 11/27 Hockey at Delano .........................................7:30pm Girls Basketball - Armstrong .....................7:30pm 11/29 Hockey at Cooper .........................................7:30pm Wrestling at Edina.......................................5:30pm Orono Basketball Boosters Meeting Wednesday November 7,1990 7:30 p.m. Orono High Set ool Cafeteria Ann Doherty, Angela Gawron, Findley Griffiths (back). Missy V\^a« (front), Laurie Hite, Jill Salo Six Orono Seniors Named Commended Students Orono High School has been notiticd bv the Natumai Merit Scholarship Corporation (\MSO (’t Evansti'n. Illinois that the following students have been designated Commended Students in the 1990 National Mont Scholarship Program and will receive a Letter ot Commendation in rccognili >n or outstanding acaJeniu promise: Ann Doherty, daughter of Patrick & Maiy Dohert>' Angela Gawron, daughter of Lech 6c Nancy Gaw^on Findley Griffiths, son of William 6c Sharon Griffiths Laurie Hite, daughter of Eugene & Barbara Hite Jill Salo, daughter of Ralph it Lesley Saio Melissa Wyatt, daughter of William & Sara Wv att The principal, Dr. Steven Greenheld, announced that on the basis of performance on the qualifying lest tor the 36th annual Ment Program, these seniors [ilaced in ttio top 50,{XX)of more than one million participants. An officer of NMSC, which conducts the program, stated, "The very high lest performance of the young men and women who are honored as Commended Students in the Merit Program is indicative of exceptional scholastic ability. We hope that NMSC s recognition of these high school students will increase their motivation to make the best use of their talents and to develop the skills tnat will be needed by the future leaders of our nation. Being named a Commended Student in this keen competition is a credit to these young citizens as well as to their schools, which play a key role in their development. ‘ The Wizard of OzThe Orono High Schvud drama and music departments are presenting Tv VVi::urJ cf O' Novembe-' 8, 9, 10, 16. 17 at 7;30 p.m and Sund.iv afternoon. November 11. at T(10 p.m. in the high s<.hool auditonum Reserved seat tickets go on sale in the high schocil office November 5. The well-known stoiy tells the story of Dorothy's adventures in the land ot Oz where she meets She Scarecrow, the Lion, the Tinman, and the Munchkin>. Many of the tunes will include >.horeography under the direction of Cart>! Oiiiru' ‘Vom Mound Playing the lead.-, are Ainv Marr. leif Marr. lim Trowbndgc, Brad)' Rahertv, Tim Cvuirteau. and llilarv Rose. This production features live trees, live flowers hopefully a real Toto and danang jitterbugs. The witches arc Mindv Anderson, Sarah Klah and S.ira Bc'ach. VN’ell-known show tunes include 'Over the Rainbow, "We re C>t to Sev the Wizard. It I t.>ilv Had a Brain, " etc. Be*oa ‘ and after each pertonmance. the tht.'spians will Iv selling ci.'ii.'nng Kn'ks that children rnav buv and then have autographed bv cast members Choral director is Howard l erohl; pit band director, Don Krubsack, scenic director, Ken Scott' rehearsal assistant. Bill .Mills; and overall director. Dee NeL-<»n. Tickets, which go on sate \ovombi*r t, are S4 a ->eat and mav be reserved bv calling the high schtiol iitfice at 473-5472 but must be picked up bv 3 (H) p.m. prior to the evening s performance. Remaining tickets u ill be .>n sale at the door each evening Senior citizens and district pass holders mac pick up tree tickets ti> the opening night performance .November H. This is the onlv night the passes will be h(mt>red. The Wizard ot lAz cast from l'Jf->9 is planning a reunit'n tor Saturday night, November M. Cast and crew members trv>m that show who would like ttf make reservations to attend the perfi'rmance and attend a reunion party after the show should call their Wizard (|im Reftinger) at 475*0957 to make reservations. Scarecrow - Jeff Marr, Lion - Brady Flaherty, Dorothy - Amy Marr, Tinman - Jim l^owbridge Attention Parents of Seniors The next scheduled mcetm^ for Parents ot Seniors planning the all-night party is Mondav, \ov<'mber 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 person and want to hei please contact one of the chairpersons - lean Dettloff, Carol Roland or Barb Dugan. Essay Winners Four Orono High School students eere winners in the 10th annual Minnesota Conservation Fssay Contest for Hennepin County. Conservation specialist David Thill presented the certificates and checks to Paul Spnngmeyer, John Zietlow and Ben Carlson, first, second and third place winners, respectively in the lunior division. When their essays advanced to area comp*tition, john s placed first, Paul ’s, second. These essays wca’ written as e\tra-crcs.iit research papers in Dee Nelsian's Honors English class last year. Yan Qiu wrote his papH?r as an extra-credit pro|oct in Advanced Placement English last year. His essay placed fst in district, third in area, and second in the state competition. He will be receiving his awards and checks and reading his essay at the State convention December 2 at the Minneapolis Marriott Oty Center. ' r* Da\ id Thill %vith Paul Springmeyer, John Zietlow and Ben Carlson New Facility Update The construction of the nine classrooms and swimming pool facility is proceeding nght along after being hindered this past summer with weather. As of the third wcvk in October the final stage of the roof was being done, windows and doors being installed and the pool had been dug. .All the outside landscaping has been done bv the custodial staff. Wo expect to be usi.ig the new facility no later than the second semester, and p<'*ssibly before that. B KEVSLETTER «OM)NlSTM*nON ornce MS OLD eSrSTAL SOAO NOSTM LONG LAME. HINNESOTA SS3M American Education Week November 12-18 NOV e Popham . Mask . Schnobrich & Kaufman . Ltd . 33C'.: oiPEM jAnPAv Ml NNEAPOLiS. MINNESOTA 55A02 VWAVNC a. l>OPMAM RArMONO A. HAIM ROOCR Wf. SCHNOBA iCh OKNVCM NAU^MAM ROBCirr A. minish ROLTC A. WFOROCN a. MAAC WHITCHCAD •RUCK O. WILUS a RORCRT JOHNSON OARV R. MACOMBKR ROBERT S. BuRM HUOM V RLUNNCTT, Ml FRCOCRICM C. BROWN THOMAS K. BERQ JAMES a. ORUCH jErrREY S. halrern •RUCE Ol MALMERSON JAMES R. STEILEN JAMES a. (.OCKHa RT ALLEN W. HINOERA k CR CLirroRO M. ORCCNC B. william KAUFMAN RAUL H. TIETt MtCHAEL Ol freeman HOWARD SAM MYERS. lO LARRY O ESRCL JANIE S. MAYERON THOMAS J. BARRETT JAMES A. RAYNC 3AV10 A jONCS lee S Smc Cht alain faccon LESLIE OillE'TC MICHAEL T N ilAN THOMAS M SIRA'NS ROBERT c MOILANCN THOMAS F SCLSON Thomas j. rao <o DAV<0 L. hashmall KATH lCCN M MART.N JOHN C. CHILDS DOUOLAS «• SCATON Thomas e <!anncr RICHARD A. nAPLAN BRUCE S. McRHCETERS SCOTT E. RICHTER RAUL J. LINSTHOTH SCOTT A. SMITH BRIAN N. JOHNSON BRAOLCt a . fuller OONALO M lewis KENNETH ROSS* DAVID R. STRAND SCOTT K. GOLDSMITH GIRARD P miller CliZaseth a Thompson KCf'H J h ALLCLANO MARK a PETERSON telephone 612 -333- A0OO telecopier 33 6<2-33R-27'3 32 «i2 33N-27BI 31 6i2 33A 2303 suite 2AOO 1200 seventeenth street OCNVEB. ccuor AOO S02C2 'E^CPHONE JOG aS3 203 telecopier 3CS a»3'2l9~ SUITE 300 south aoo M street n m. WASHINGTON. O c. 20038 telephone 202 sza S300 telecopier 202 S2B B3iS DIRECT DIAL NUMBER 612-334-2687 -'MO'MrW KUCT BRUCE A PCTCRSON ruth a mickel SEN ..anna severance THOMAS C MiELFNHA uSCN HICHAE l O. CHRISTENSON J MICHAEL SCHWARTI JEFFREY P CAIRNS CLlEN L. MAAS lC-VIS ... ROTMAN Tr DO M jOmn ST'n lOu>S P SM.Tm aPuCE M little mark F PALMA PjSSELL 3 PONC3S' BI*YAN L. CRAWFOPO ma Ttmew E oam On .Ohn W RPOvO lILL FRICDERS PAUL a ^ONES william O. hi TTlCP ELLEN Sue PARKEP OPCOORY O. BROOKEP BRIAN W OHM GREGORY G. SCOTT ROSANNE O. ZAiOENWCaCP CECILIA M. MICHEL ROBERT c castle th ERCSE m mank Cl juliE Fleming - nolfe OEBORAH a DYSON BENSON K WHITNEY KATHRYN M. WALKER GEORGE J- SOCHA SMANF R. k CLLEY MARK F TEN EYCK DUANE R NOCCKCR DEE ROWE GARY .> GENGCL.O ..OHM M. BAKER KARSN M. HANSEN SOESAN pace SHAPIRO STCVCN M PH..LIPS lINDA S. FRIEDNEP amdrcwto . Parker .lOY M WALDERA PATRICIA A O'LEA'RT' KAREN R COLE or COUMSKL ’’110^1 ALISON UMOC b ttoo ■ OHITTCS .M CALI^KHM MO WOOPMW INCLUDING the former lAW FIRM OF HALPPRN 4 ORUCK November 5, 1990 Mr. Mark Bernhard ion City of Orono P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay* MN 55323 Chief Melvin Kilbo Orono Police Department P.O. Box 86 Crystal Bay* MN 55323 Re: Criminal Rule of Civil Procedure 8.04 to be Implemented on January 1, 1991 Gentlemen: I have recently been informed that the Supremu Court Advisory Committee on the Rules of Criminal Procedure has adopt a number of proposed changes in the rules. While I have not sf a copy of the proposed changes* I am told that one of the chan^-s will* for the most part* eliminate the concerns expressed in my letter to you dated September 25* 1990. Obviously* this is good news and is an obvious reflection of the concerns expressed by coimunities throughout Hennepin County. I will keep you informed of further de\ opments. 3LC/blr/89ZBLC(l) ^. L October 23, 1990 Chief Mel Kilbo*' Orono Police Department PO Box 86 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 y RE:Our file #90-7981 James Granowski Suicide Dear Mel: On behalf of the public safety department, I would like to take this ooportunity to personally extend my thanks and ap­ preciation to Officer Chip English of your department. On October 13, 1990, Officer English, along with Officer McCoy and Sgt. Dave Pierson, responded to a domestic call in the city of Maple Plain involving an intoxicated male party -o was armed with a handgun and threatening suicide. Officers arrived and »v began the preparation of approaching the sub­ ject . The subject was in negotiation with a family member in the front yard and after a moment, broke off that negotiation and proceeded to the back yard of the residence. Officers proceeded in that direction and immediately detected shots coming from the back of the residence. The subject randomly discharged six rounds as the officers restrained themselves and called to the subject to lay down his weapon. Unfortunately, t*ie subject did not heed the repeated calls from t^ie officers and turned the firearm to his head, dis­ charging same and killing himself instantly. It is a tragic event when a situation such as this occurs but even more tragic when officers are attempting to perform their duties and must witness this type of incident. Our investigation into this particular incident shows a very restrained and thoughtful approach In an attempt to resoive this situation. Upon completion of the shooting, the officers conducted the investigation very competently and thoroughly in spite of the gruesome events that they had just witnessed. The maturity and the training of the officers was evident in the proce­ dures and process that they used in an attempt to resolve this particular situation. On behalf of the citizens of our community and the family of the deceased, we would like to extend our commendations and appreciation for a job well done. Wt9t Hennepin Public Safety Department / 1620 Maple Aveuae / Maple Plain, Minnesota 55359 Phone (612H79 0500 / Fax (612) 479 0519 PAGE 2, Granowski de^ta Sincerely yours, WES>v HENNEPIN PUBLIC SAFETY DEPARTMENT James D. Franklin Dl&ector of Public Safety JDF;pjk 2 C- ^ 'A '*4 Ifr f <% g 1^s t? jr !• I. \ {' _\ -:\ V'o _ r •■. ‘-’'m 1 i 11^ 5 1 i ‘I P^\£ ^iiiu OiO M.'^J jZSAuyj ^ ^ f„A€. (H; If 7:ir OM*nf^nt^ if> fl^ PBOpLt Ui^ Ca^. X. CM/) H^<£ ver^ ^. £>»C y ORONO POLICE DEPARTMENT ton «£Y CONTflOL NUMBER .'OCAi CCNT a GENO ‘iCC DtVT CAG. [T. c .~n / \ on s f\ us M , N I 0 . 2 , 7 I / fT O 0ATEaEPOrrE0(fM*0)’iME =^PD.TRP« U 11 I .Q i i.alri.ol / 1/ 1 / ig| / _____ >2 ‘iTA location GPIN0V8R lGN) PWCE CCMMiTTtD in^' feU ’jIK um MHO SQUAD OR BADGE »(sawi [E/EI/II j TIME ASK j Ta SI time ARR I TAR)TIME CLP iTCu s.^. 71 / n ,g> I I 1^1 /11 ) A13 ] 1 ICR ISW UOC_________ UCS D / E2] / CZSIE2I3 / S 6N UOC fJ/[J/L ;□ ormtialcomplamt : JCS /k>0 CrF'CER^ . --I , =0'*JC'PAL :CCt J [ SUSPECT s s /IC’ M vtc ilSST REPORT PARTY RP ACMIN AOM OFF CT)-ER OTVIGFTESCtR HRO Cooes P - R^5^'e R -Riiio A - Alarm 1 - ;n p«ffon .' - v-suai M . Mu T-Othef c C" c arrest :;iTAT?CN WARN NMCMST.RRST.MOOiri 1.L .At'y r\ 1^^ 955 AA/>ple Crc^^ C63i7^;m other reports included NINE (LAST. RRST. MOOLE)tA 1*1+el5 i l-'’^7'^/ •'^WunO . PfOO :rr<enHyV ■ -N ;SEA. ‘'TV« Conjeni ; Accoeni Reoofl CKllGtTil lA , I ; 5T B2L32^I (U5T.PIRST nOoence R#oon “ I 'igs Carvn Vefl R«oort ! OvefwgH “ RoiiCail ^\L ’j 0 :p 2m V)1 t t.f <« ^ ill*' ^ l' J'—A ivJ 1 A 1 - f 'I |l ' c \ V \ fr' ‘1 p f i L-/^i ' ^ j ^ \ V-nS^'AS. '.n\ ^ A jJ C 6oiA5,.'> (rJn) WvS “3------- —^ ------- T" v/torv oVOvAr-^ci/' V'^V.-A ',C. /. ;/i ,■^'1 /^ci' / -r.^. .\// H 1 'r< ’ J , / rSAV £i-»\,.rNX H/iOO^Tyr^' Xd:'^ U") Ia I<A' % J V ^ J Qys . Xvj C dxAcA--------M------------A----------1 M. V 11 TW. W----------- ------^-LA------- 1 * ' Wr<N \a vL *\^ Wxi \V..>N >T J * •* ■ Witt 00130 l*TH*f.O CnVATTNT[] COURTC CMCF:: WPCONSC 0T>€R MSmON; UMomtod Ctearad By Anesi FW. Oltier Agency Inactive Othe; IVm SUPERVISOR S SIGNATURE >Z^ Il 2t5Boiu^actus pTo/UinnGt/'itgta PUBLIC SAFETY DEPARTMENT PuWie Safety Offictt 7701 County Road 110 West Mifinatrista. Minnesota 55364 ei2-448-1131 Craig A. Anderson Chief of Police Police/Fire/Am^ulance Emergency: 911 Dispatcher 544-9511 Crime Stoppers: 45-CRlME October 8, 1990 Chief Mel Kilbo Orono Police Department Box 86 Crystal Bay, 55323 RE: Officer Kurt Erickson Dear Chief Kiibo: On October l, 1990 at 0115 hours, Officer Kurt Erickson assisted Officer Tom Olson, from our Department, with two suspects he stopped under suspicious circumstances. While Officer Erickson was talking v^ith a passenge-. ■ the car, he noticed the passenger appeared to be trying to conceal a checkbook on the floor between his feet. He asked whose checkbook it was, to which the passenger responded as if the checkbook was not there. Thanks to Officer Erickson’s experience, officers were then able to conduct an investigation leading to the arrest of two people c* nd cleared several theft from auto cases involving a number of communit i . Officer Erickson is to be commended for his investigative skills and techniques. •SEE II HEAR IT, REPORT IV H • S S October 24, 1990 Chief Nel Kllbvo Orono Police Deoartment P. 0. Box 86 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 RB: OUR CASE FILE NO. 90-7616 Dear Mel: I would like to tak# this opportunity on behalf of the Public Safety Departaent to thank you, and specifically, Lt. Marc Pritzler for the eeeistance that he rendered to Officer Mutchler on September 30, 1990. Officer Mutchler had received information of tn« clerk at the Speedy Market writing a note requesting a passer-by to rail 911. It was un­ known as to the nature of the problem, and later it was learned that several carloads of "gypsies” had Invaded the store and were In the process of attempting to shoplift various items within the store. Officer Mutchler observed one of the suspect vehicles leaving the scene In pursuit of same to approximately the 6000 block of Highway 12. Traffic stop was made at that location, and he encountered three Individuals and was shortly thereafter backed up by Lt. Prltzler who was off-duty ^nd several blocks away from the scene of the Incident, tt. Frltzler assisted Officer Mutchler In containment and detention of the parties which led to sufficient probably cause to Initiate an ar­ rest In conjunction with the shoplifting Incident. The combined efforts of the officers resulted In a felony arrest and indletaent of one individual, the pending Indictment of perhaps two additional persons, and the recovery of various merchandise that had been stolen In various cities dotting our map all th ^»ay from the Mlsconsln border to the Twin cities Area. It Is cooperation such as this and extra effort put forth by Lt. Prltzler that makes our Cv^tmblned law enforcement endeavors so effec* tlve. Please convey to L*^. Frltzler our thanks and appreciation for his assistance. cerely yours. D. Franklin Pimlc Safety Director ^F/lks Wmt Bmntpin Public Safety Department / 1620 Maple Avenue / Maple Plain, Minnesota SS3S9 Date To: Noveaber 6, 1990 Real Estate Agents Patrol Officers Froa: Chief Melvxn Kilbo Placeaeat of Real Estate Signs This meao is being written to adcress the concerns of real estate agents and their sign placement. Minnesota statute 160.27 "Particular Uses of Right of Way", Subd, 5-8, states, "it shall be unlawful to pi or maintain any advertisement within the limits of any hit way". Subd. 6, "Removal of unauthorised advertisement, ouildings, or structures in or on a public highway. The -oad authorities may take down, remove, or destroy any advertisement, building, or structure in or upca any highway in violation of this section." Long Lake Ordinance 197 - erns all real estate signs within Long Lake. Section 8, pe. .litted, r-^uirlng no permit. Subd. 9 "Real Estate signs on a temporary basis for the purpose of selling or leasing individu 1 lots or residential building, provided that such sign is not more than 6 square feet in area, such a sign shall be located only on the preaises involved and said si^n shall be removed upon sale or lease of the property. Section 7, "Prohibited ‘'igns", Sub. 1, "any sign that does or would interfere with ability of drivers or pedestrians to see any traffic sign or signal or any crosswalks or otherwise ^ istitute a traffic hazard". Minnetonka .ach ordinance 05.24, Sign Regulations, Subd. 7 A, "signs snail not be permitted within a public right of way or easement". Subd. 4 (B) "a sign pertaining to the lease or sale of the building or property, provided su'“h sign does not exceed four (4) square feet in surface ai.^a, sucn sign shall not be illuminated." Orono ordinance 10.ol, Subd. D Sales Signs "for purpose of selling, renting, or leasing property, a sign not in excess of ten square feet per surface may be placed witMn the front yard of such property to be sold or leased. Such signs shall not be less than fifteen feet from the right of way lino unless flat against the structure." Subd. (A) on right of way, "private signs are prohibited within the public right of way or easements except that the Council may grant a conditional use permit to locate sirns and decorations on or within right of way under their jurisdiction for the specified time not t- oxcoed ninety days." i f/Spring Park ordinemce #59, Section 2 (BB)Sicn - Real Estate, 'a sign placed upon a property advertising that earticulur property for sale, for rent or lease" Section 3, permitand prohibited signs A. Signs not requiring permits A.(6) Real Estate or rented sign. "Signs must be removed within fourteen (14) ays after sale or rental of property. Signs may not measure more than eight (8) square feet in residential districts, nor more than twenty (20) squad feet in all other districts. There sh?. ily one (1) sign per premises. Corner properties & e front lots may contain two signs, one per frontage 4(C) "No signs other than government s.„^,is shall be erected or temporarily placed within any street right of way or upon any public lands or easements or right of way . Section 9 - Administration, Subd. 3, "Pursuant to MN Statute S160.29. the administrator or authorized designee shall have the power to remove signs placed on street right of way without first given notice of violation." The Right of Way najor roads and highways is 66 feet wide, 33 fee ®rom center line. The minimum right of way usually is a« least 24 feet, 12 feet from center line. If you have any questions, call the street department personnel of thtf'. particular city. m ihl ujo ^^8 a //. /J- VC tr^- -■k. 4....J j. „ -j—-•.* LAND USE SCHEMATIC ,PIIIHhi /('/ J'fi-I’liii SITE ANALYSIS