Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout02-13-1989 Council PacketPUBLIC ATTENDANCE A CITY OF ORONO MEETING DkTE^/l^/^ PLEASE FILL OUT THE INFORMATION REQUESTED BELOW FOR OUR CITY RECORDS. NAME (please print)ADDRESS NAME OR riUMBER PRESENT FOR (from agenda) # o AGSRdA FOR COUNCIL MEETING SET FOR MONDAY, FEBRUARY 13, 1989, 7x00 P.M. {*) A sterisk 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 ^^GOUII0|C^IKF£f^Q ROLL CALL ^ FEB 13 tS33 1. CONSENT AGENDA* APPROVAL OF MINUTES * 2. Regular Meeting of January 23, 1989 ^ITY OF OPOTO PLANNING COMMISSION COMMENTS - Jim Hanson Representative PUBLIC COMMENTS - (Liait 5 Minutes Per Person) ZONING ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT **APPLICANTS** Immediately after the Council has reviewed your application please sign the three (3) original resolution copies. * 3. #1296 Peterson/Stodola, 1895 Shadywood Road - Denial Resolution 4. #1330 Fullerton, 880 Townline Road - Request for Approval Entry Monument * 5. #1334 Sidney Rebers, Highway 12 and Brown Road North - Planning Commission Recommendation - Amended Preliminary Plan 6. #1362 Paul Hauser, 2801 Casco Point Road • Variances - Resolution 7. #1364 Edwin Gage, 480 Tonkawa Road - Conditional Use Permit - Resolution 8. #1366 Loren Butterfield, 3925 Watertown Road, Class 2 Preliminary Subdivision - Resolution ENGINEER'S REPORT * 9. 1989 Engineering Rates MAYOR'S REPORT CITY ADMINISTRATOR'S R^ORT 10. County Road 51 Parking 11. LMCD - Eurasian Milfoil Task Force Request 12. County Road 116 - Resolution 13. 1988 Corporate Report 14. Highway 12 - MnDOT 20 Year Plan 15. 1988 Final Transfers 16. 1988 Summary of Receipts, Disbursements and Balances 17. Agreement with State of Minnesota/Alco Sensors - Resolution 18. 1987 Financial Health 19. SAC Refund - Resolution 20. Replacement of Terminal - Police Department 21. Suburban Hennepin County Community Profile of Orono 22. Seasonal Weight Limits - Resolution 23. Bid Award - 1989 Materials and Equipment 24. Salary Adjustments - Randy O'Brien and Barry Rathbun AGENDA FOR COUNCIL NESTING SET FOR MONDAY, FEBRUARY 13, 1989, 7:00 P.M. CITY ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT Continued * 25. Administrator's Information 3536 Lyric Avenue MCWD Operation Policy ^ 1950 Shoreline Drive ’ ' » City Clerk International Clerk's Certification GFOA Stun Gun Training County Road 15 Speed Limit Establishment Goal Setting Status CITY ATTORNEY'S REPORT * 26. Amendment of Original Flowage & Conservation Easement - Stielow Addition LICENSES (27*) BILLS (28*) ADJOURNMENT MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETI HELD JANUARY 23, 1989 COUNCIL MEETING FEB 131933 "°CITY OF ORONO ATTENDANCE 7:00 P.M. The Council met on the above date with the following members present: Acting Mayor Callahan, CounciImembers Nettles, Peterson and Goetten; Mayor Grabek was absent. The following represented the City staff: City Administrator Bernhardson, Building & Zoning Administrator Mabusth, Public Works Director Gerhardson, Assistant Planning and Zoning Administrator Gaffron, City Attorney Barrett, City Engineer Cook and City Rv '•order Scheffler. CONSENT AGENDA* CounciImember Peterson requested that Consent Items 9, 10, 17, and 19 be removed; CounciImember Goetten requested an amendment to the Minutes from the January 9, 1989 Council Meeting and asked to remove item #23 from the Consent Agenda. It was moved by CounciImember Peterson, seconded by CounciImember Goetten, to approve the Consent Agenda, with the exception of those items listed above. Motion, Ayes=4, Nays=0, Motion passed. APPPROVAL OF MINUTES* Councilmember Goetten asked that the Minutes from the January 9, 1989, reflect her nomination of Councilmember Peterson to be a representative to the Westonka Beautification Committee. It was moved by Councilmember Peterson, seconded by Councilmember Goetten, to approve the Minutes of the January 9, 1989 Regular Council Meeting. Motion, Ayes»4, Nays=0, Motion passed. LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT REPORT SHORELAND MANAGEMENT - POLICY DIRECTION Ms. JoEllen Hurr, LMCD Representative, expressed her appreciation for City Administrator Bernhardson's memo pertaining to the Shoreline Regulations and Zoning Administrator Mabusth's input to the subcommittee. She stated that she was proud of Orono's stringent shoreline restrictions and hoped that outside pressure would not cause a relaxation of those restrictions. There have been two meetings on the Eurasian Milfoil problem. The LMCD is receiving approximately $1,000.00 per day in contributions, but Ms. Hurr still did not believe that they would reach the $550,000.00 goal by mid-February. She said that there is significant public concern. There will be an upcoming meeting on the low water level of Lake Minnetonka. It is causing major problems especially where the marinas are concerned. The LMCD has scheduled 5 Thursday evening meetings to introduce their Comprehensive Plan to the Publ’ic. The meetings will be held in Mound, January 19; St. Louis Park, February 2; -yv, ?’>V. MINUTES OP THE ORONO COUNCIL MEETING OF JANUARY 23, 1989 * Jt LliC!) REPORT CONTINUED Minnetonka, February 9; 16. Wayzata, January 26; and Edina, February COUNTY ROAD 116 Acting Mayor Callahan explained that the Council would be addressing the question of County Road 116 possibly being extended to the northern boundary line jf Orono. There is approximately 600* between the Orono boundary and County Road 6. If extended, further consideration could be given to the possibility of County Road 116 extending beyond County Road 6 to Highway 12. The issue of safety at the intersection of Willow and Highway 12 has been a concern of the City and citizens of Orono. Attempts have been made to have a stop light installed at that location. There is a possibility that bringing County Road 116 to Highway 12 would generate enough traffic in that area to warrant a stop light. However, the installation of the stop light may become a reality without the County Road 116 project. Present this evening were Mr. Patrick Murphy, Ted Hoffman and Bruce Polaczyk from Hennepin County. City Administrator Bernhardson commented that the County feels that County Road 116 could extend all the way to County Road 6, with or without Orono's consent. As far as extension to Highway 12, that would strictly be Orono's option. The proposal does not call for the Road to extend south of Willow Drive. Mr. Murphy reported that the County is proposing to proceed with County Road 116 from Highway 55 to County Road 6. This project is in their 1990 program for construction and will be financed by bonds. 'He reiterated Bernhardson*s statement regarding their plans to extend County Road 116 all the way to County Road 6. The County has a layout showing the extension to go to Highway 12, as that is where they believe County Road 116 should end. They are currently examining the intersection of County Road 6 to tie it into any future projects that may occur with Highway 12. The County was hoping to have approval from the Orono City Council for whatever layouts they may propose. There are no plans to extend County Road 116 beyond Highway 12. Mr. Ted Hoffman depicted the proposal for this project. He said the extension would not vary from the existing portion of road. Basically it will be two 12* paved lanes and two 8* paved shoulders and ditches on either side. There will be a portion north of County Road 6 where both urban and rural sections will be installed, depending whether there is a need to cut or fill. They will do this to lessen the impact on properties in that area. The proposal calls for a shift to the west so that 14* of right-of-way they would need to purchase would be on one side of the road. Callahan inquired about the plans for the homes in that area? Hoffman replied th=it they would remain, and would be less impacted by the installation of curbs as opposed to ditches. Callahan asked about the width of the road from ditch to ditch. Hoffman answered that it would be 65-70*. Callahan asked about MINUTES OF THE ORONO COUNCIL MEETING OF JANUARY 23, 1989 COUNTY ROAD 116 CONTINUED the width of the current Orono section of road. Public Works Director Gerhardson said that it was 22-24* for the travelled portion, from curb to curb it would be 40*. Acting Mayor Callahan asked, if approval were given to do so, would the extension to Highway 12 also take place in 1990. Murphy explained that there would be an upgrade in their program mid-year and they would have to find the funding. However, if Orono approved, the County would do everything possible to bring that about. Callahan asked how County Road 116 was chosen for upgrade when there was so much opposition to the project. Murphy said that the City Council of Medina had indicated that road was very important as a north/south connector. The County also had the upgrade of County Road 116 in their plans for the same reason. The fact that funding was available made the present time the best time to go ahead with the project. Mr. Wilfred Sherer, a Medina CounciImember, was present, as was Mr. James Dillman, the Medina Public Works Superintendent. In addition, there were many concerned citizens from Medina present. Ms. Marsha VanPeVen, said she has been involved with this issue for two years. She said that she obtained over 350 signatures on a petition opposing the upgrade of the road. Unfortunately, the City Council did not take that into consideration when making their decision. She wanted to encourage the Orono City Council to really examine what effect this project would have on Medina. She hoped that Orono would have some creative alternatives to offer and indicate to the County Commissioners that they were not in favor of the current proposal. Ms. Madeline Wink said that she is very concerned about the speed of the traffic; she has four children who catch the bus in that area. She questioned whether the County would aid in financing the extra police protection that would be necessary due to the increased speeds. She did not believe that the Medina Council took the citizens* concerns seriously. Mr. Wilfred Sherer stated that a plan had existed for County Road 116 for the purpose of emergency vehicle access. He acknowledged that there was opposition to this project, but felt that the election results were more indicative of the Medina*s stand on this project. He believed that his views represented the views of the majority of Medina citizens. Acting Mayor Callahan asked Mr. Sherer if Medina had any plans regarding development of the land immediately to the north of County Road 6. Mr. Sherer said that the Votech property off of Morningslde war the only undeveloped property in that area. Ms. Debbie Lewis, an Orono citizen, believed that the 400 MINUTES OF THE ORONO COUNCIL MEETING OF JANUARY 23, 1989 COUNTY ROAD 116 CONTINUED signatures obtained on the petition constituted a large percentage of people. She believed that if the road went through, Medina would benefit, but Orono would inherit traffic problems at the corner of Willow and Highway 12. She did not believe that the road could stop at County Road 6, it would eventually have to come all the way to Highway 12. She said that if Medina had that many people against this project, it would be even less desirable and beneficial for Orono. Acting Mayor Callahan reminded the public that the County intended to extend County Road 116 to the Orono boundary. The portion of Willow between Highway 12 and County Road 6, has always been in Orono's plans to be a connecting road between those areas. The question is what will Orono do about the increased traffic that will result on Highway 12 and Willow. Should Orono upgrade that portion of Willow to handle the possible increase, or should they do nothing and hope that traffic will disburse to other locations? If Orono objects to the proposal now, but finds later that a wider road is needed between County Road 6 and Highway 12, the citizens of Orono may be asked to aid in financing the upgrade. If they were to proceed at this time, there is the possibility that the County would help pay for the upgrade. Acting Mayor Callahan said that he was not using that as an argument against the public*s concerns, he just wanted to clarify what the real problems for Orono may be. Ms. Karen Ziminski felt that the upgrade was unnecessary and a waste of money. She also did not feel that there were any ligitimate reasons expressed as to why the road must be done. It was her opinion that the Hamel merchants were pushing for the road to get people up in that area. Mr. Tim Schoen asked the County about the traffic counts. Mr. Murphy responded that in 1987 traffic on Willow drive, north of Highway 12, traffic was approximately 1400 cars/day. North of County Road 6, there were 1900 cars/day. If upgrade occurs, they would expect to see between 2500 and 3000 cars/day. Acting Mayor Callahan asked Mr. Murphy if he had any information concerning a stoplight at Willow and Highway 12. Mr. Murphy said that the increased traffic would make it more likely, but he was not sure whether that alone would be enough. Mr. Rob Merkow, asked the County what specific reasons they had for putting in the road? He said that there are other north/south roads that currently exist. Mr. Murphy said that the first north/south route to the west would be County Road 19, and to the east it would be Highway 101. He said it would make good planning sense for suburban development to place a north/south route in the proposed location. Mr. Gene Hite asked the County what this project would cost. Mr. Murphy stated that it would cost an estimated $2.9 million. MINUTES OF THE ORONO COUNCIL MEETING OF JANUARY 23, 1989 COUNTY ROAD 116 CONTINUED and that would include down to County Road 6. Mr. Hite then asked whether traffic would indeed continue beyond Highway 12 and filter down into Orono by way of Willow and Old Crystal Bay Road to County Road 15. Mr. Murphy said that it was incorrect to assume that all of the traffic heading south on 116 would continue all the way down to Lake Minnetonka. The reason for bringing 116 as far as Highway 12 is to make the north/south routes connect with major east/west routes. Mr. Hite suggested that the Council take into account the earlier proposition by Mrs. VanDeVen, that they consider whether Orono should fight the proposal. If the County does succeed in bring County Road 116 to the Orono boundary, he would hope that Orono would not proceed to do any upgrading merely because funding was available. Mr. Dick Lewis said that it would be impossible at this time to determine what other solutions or options were available for Orono to take. He believed that there were many questions that needed to be addressed before any further discussions could take place regarding solutions. CounciImember Goetten mentioned a phone call she had received from a Kevin Hawkinson, 1125 Willow Drive North, expressing his safety concerns for the intersection of Willow and Highway 12. CounciImember Nettles asked for a clarification about the traffic counts. He asked whether the increase in traffic would come from other north/south roads. Mr. Murphy believed that to some degree that would be true. Murphy went on to say that the estimated 3000 cars/day would not significantly increase in the future. They are not contemplating a rapid escalation in growth for the area, even though there will be some. Nettles asked if there would be an immediate increase that would come from existing traffic on other north/south routes, and the County sees no other increases in the future, why would it be necessary to upgrade County Road 116 at all? Mr. Murphy said that from a planning standpoint, it would make good sense to upgrade the road. Also, there would not be an overloading of any of the existing routes. Nettles said that he understood, but felt that the concerns of the citizens of Medina and Orono were very important. He believed that County Road 116 would become a major north/south route that would create more traffic flowing south into Orono. CounciImember Goetten asked about safety measures that may need to be taken due to the upgrade. She asked whether there would be increases in speeds after the road is built? Mr. Murphy said he saw no reason why speeds should increase. He said that the connection portion of the road would be upgraded to resemble Willow Drive. Goetten questioned whether there would be safety concerns if Orono chose not to allow the upgrade? Mr. Murphy said that County believed it would be best to continue the road through the intersection of County Road 6. MINUTES OP THE ORONO COUNCIL MEETING OP JANUARY 23, 1989 COUNTY ROAD 116 CONTINUED City Administrator Bernhardson stated that Medina's population was under 5,000 persons and therefore it did not get Municipal State Aid funds, although Orono does. If Medina was eligible for MSA funds, they would undertake the upgrade of County Road 116 on their own. The standards would be the same and would result in an upgrade that would look like Willow Drive, south of Watertown Road. Orono has tentatively programmed an upgrade for Willow between Highway 12 and County Road 6 to occur in the ar 1995. This upgrade would be similar to what the County currently proposing. That portion of road would be brought to MSA standards whether County Road 116 went through or not. It was moved by Acting Mayor Callahan, seconded by Councilmember Nettles, that should there be anything that the Council could do to pursuade the County not to build County Road 116 down to the boundary of Orono, they should proceed in that direction. He directed the City Staff to talk with the County Personnel on that issue. Motion, Ayes*4, Nays*0, Motion passed. Acting Mayor Callahan stated that he was concerned about the timing of this proposal. He said there was no question about the upgrade of Willow Road, at least between County Road 6 and Highway 12. However, it seemed to him that the development of County Road 116 to the north, at this time, opens up the possibility that there will be a more intense development of the land along the north side of County Road 6. That intersection may lend itself for the purpose of a gas station or some other commercial use. This would have an impact on Orono's Comprehensive Plan and the development of the land immediately to the south. He believed that due to the attention the development of Highway 12 was now receiving from MNDOT, that it would not be beneficial for Orono to spend money on development to the north at County Road 116. It was moved by Acting Mayor Callahan, seconded by Councilmember Goetten, that the determination of what is to be done with the road between the Medina/Orono border and County Road 6 be tabled. In addition, decisions regarding upgrade between County Road 6 and Highway 12 should also be tabled to allow Orono more time to consider its long range plans. Staff is directed to continue to investigate and inform the Council as to the ramifications of this issue. Motion, Ayes*4, Nays»0, Motion passed. PUBLIC COMMENTS There were no comments from the Public. MINUTES OF THE ORONO COUNCIL MEETING OF JANUARY 23, 1989 ZONING ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT: #1328 HOWARD JOHNSON 1635 CONCORDIA STREET FINAL SUBDIVISION RESOLUTION #2571* It was moved by CounciImember Peterson, seconded by CounciImember Goetten, to approve the lot line rearrangement via Registered Land Survey for Howard Johnson and Helen Trainor at 1635 and 1675 Concordia Street. Motion, Ayes=4, Nays=0, Motion passed. #1353 JOHN FIEBELKORN 2730 SHADYWOOD ROAD VARIANCE Mr. and Mrs. Fiebelkorn were present for this matter, as was their attorney, Larry Berg. City Administrator Bernhardson explained that this matter involved an after-the-fact request for variances for a pool located within the 0-75* zone. The property is restrictive in that there are no other areas in which the pool could be located with the need for variances. Acting Mayor Callahan informed Mr. Berg that he had the right to present his argument as to why the pool should remain. However, he believed that the Council would vote as dia the Planning Commission. Mr. Berg stated that there was a spa and pool equipment shed to consider in addition to the pool. The Dunsheath's, owners of adjacent property have offered to sell additional property to the Fiebelkorns that would permit the pool equipment shed to be located entirely within the Fiebelkorn*s property. Mr. Berg eyplained that dredging occurred back in 1970 that created a lagoon area on what was originally dry land on the property now owned by the Fiebelkorns. Mr. Berg also told the Council that the Fiebelkorns did not deliberately disregard Orono*s regulations. The violation occurred accidently, due to the Fiebelkorn’s unfamiliarity with Orono’s lakeshore regulations. He said that his clients would be willing to do whatever it would take so that the pool and spa could remain. However, if the Council decides that the pool must be removed, the Fiebelkorns would ask that the spa be allowed to remain and th? ^ a "surround" be built around it. Acting Mayor Callahan asked Mr. Berg to explain the hardship in this matter. Mr. Berg cited the land configuration caused by the dredging to be the hardship. He also questioned whether using the average lakeshore setback forri'ila would allow more flexibility in allowing the spa to stay. Mr. Berg explained that there were accessory structures such as tennis courts and docks on neighboring properties that would be closer to Lake Minnetonka than the spa. MINUTES OF THE ORONO COUNCIL MEETING OF JANUARY 23, 1989 ZONING FILE 11353-FIEBELKORN CONTINUED Acting Mayor Callahan said that if the Fiebelkorns wished to retain the spa only, a separate application would need to be filed for that purpose. CounciImember Goetten stated that she could not allow the pool to remain, mainly due to the precedent it would set. CounciImember Nettles asked about the patio. Mr. Berg informed him that the patio had not yet been built. Goetten commented that the Council should be straight forward with the applicants in regard to the spa. Acting Mayor Callahan said that he believed the pool and the spa must be removed. CounciImembers Nettles and Peterson concurred. Mr. Berg asked if other hardcover were removed if the spa could remain? Acting Mayor Callahan said that he would review their application if submitted, however his inclination was that he would not allow it. Councilmember Goetten said that the Council had been consistent in disallowing any new structures within the 0-75* zone. Acting Mayor Callahan explained that the Council was trying to be polite, but they favored the Planning Commission's views. In addition, Councilmember Goetten observed that there was no hardship for the spa. Mr. Fiebelkorn asked for some guidelines as to the removal of the pool. Acting Mayor Callahan stated that the City staff would have to be consulted. City Administrator Bernhardson suggested tabling this matter so that the issue of removal could be further explored. It was moved by Acting Mayor Callahan, seconded by Councilmember Nettles, to table this matter to allow the applicants time to work with the City Staff on the removal of the pool and spa. Motion, Ayes=4, Nays«0, Motion passed. 1360 MERKOff/CHARLTON 2340/2380 ABINGDON WAT LOT LINE REARRANGEMENT RESOLUTION #2572* It was moved by Councilmember Peterson, seconded by Councilmember Goetten, to adopt Resolution #2572, allowing for the vacation of the dedicated drainage and utility easements. Motion, Ayes»4, Nays*0, Motion passed. 1361 ORONO SCHOOL DISTRICT #278 980 OLD CRYSTAL BAY ROAD VACATION OF BASEMENT RESOLUTION #2573* It was moved by Councilmember Peterson, seconded by Councilmember Goetten, to adopt Resolution #2573, granting the vacation of a portion of the dedicated drainage and utility easement. Motion, Ayes=*4, Nays-0, Motion passed. MIHUTBS OF THE ORONO COUNCIL MEETING OF JANUARY 23, 1989 ENGINEER’S REPORT COUNTY ROAD 15 FUNDS - STATE RESOLUTION #2574 CounciImember Peterson asked for clarification of this item. City Administrator Bernh'».rdson explained that when MSA funds are used off of the system, there is a certain penalty. If MSA funds are used on County or State roads rather than City designated MSA roads, then there is a 5%/year penalty that runs for 10 years, which fould amount to $10,000.00/year for 10 years. However, there :.s an offset created if you consider the cost of money (interest that would be charged if the money were borrowed). City Engineer Cook further explained that if the $200,000.00 MSA funds were spent on Willow Drive (as an example), the City would no longer have needs for Willow Drive. If the $200,000,00 were spent elsewhere, the City would lose those needs. The City would ultimately have to spend the equivalent of the $10,000.00 penalty by using it on other streets because we do not accumulate the needs for the system. If the money were left in the State- Aid fund and not used, the City could lose twice the amount that would be lost because of the penalty. It was moved by Acting Mayor Callahan, seconded by Councilmember Goetten, to approve Resolution #2574, authorizing the use of $200,000.00 of MSA funds toward the City's share of the cost for the reconstruction of County Road 15. Motion, Ayes*3, Peterson, Nay because she did not fully understand the ramifications of this proposal. MAYOR'S REPORT: 1989 APPOINTMENTS - RESOLUTION #2575 Councilmember Peterson inquired of City Administrator Bernhardson what questions he had concerning the Cable Commission Appointments. Bernhardson replied that he was questioning whether the 2 CounciImembers that were listed were agreeable. Councilmember Goetten commented that she did not have Cable TV. Councilmember Nettles has Cable TV and agreed to be an alternate. Councilmember Peterson suggested that the appointment of the Engineering and Legal contract be re-examined in the Fall. Acting Mayor Callahan suggested that the medical clinic may also be re-examined. Peterson asked how the Mound Clinic was ever chosen. Public Worksj Director Gerhardson explained that was actually the Mound Clinic in Maple Plain. Councilmember Peterson questioned why Lt. Cheswick was not the alternate for the Minnesota Police Recruiting System. City Administrator Bernhardson stated that generally the system was comprised of Police Chiefs and City Administrators. He did not see any reason why that position could not be delegated to Lt. Cheswick, providing he was agreeable. The final revision to the 1989 appointments requested by Councilmember Peterson was that of Acting Mayor. It was her MINUTES OF THE ORONO COUNCIL MEETING OF JANUARY 23, 1989 1989 APPOINTMENTS CONTINUED belief that due to Mr. Callahan's appointment to this position for two years, that other CounciImembers be given the opportunity to experience Acting Mayor. She felt that Callahan had done the job well, but she wanted to see that position rotate. She nominated Councilmember Goetten for Acting Mayor for 1989. It was moved by Councilmember Peterson, seconded by Councilmember Nettles, to substitute Councilmember Nettles for Councilmember Goetten for the Cable TV Committee; to substitute Lt. Giry Cheswick for City Administrator Bernhardson on the Police Recruiting System; the City investigate the contracts for City Engineer and City Attorney; and J. Diann Goetten be appointed Acting Mayor. Councilmember Nettles questioned the how the Acting Mayor was appointed. Councilmember Goetten believed that it wais a Council decision. Acting Mayor Callahan believed that it was decided with a majority vote. Councilmember Goetten asked City Administrator Bernhardson about her designated position for the AMM. Bernhardson replied that he would look into that further and add the position to the appointment list. It was determined that the appointment of Acting Mayor would be voted upon separately and Councilmember Peterson withdrew that portion of her motion. Councilmember Nettles seconded. Acting Mayor Callahan asked that the motion include a directive to the City Administrator to provide the Council, by the October 9, 1989 Council meeting, with a report setting forth the criteria for the positions of City Engineer, City Attorney and Clinic. Councilmember Peterson accepted that addition to her motion, Councilmember Nettles seco* ^ed. Motion Ayes«4, Nays»0, Motion passed. It was moved by Councilmember Peterson, seconded by Councilmember Goetten, to nominate J. Diann Goetten as Acting Mayor for 1989. Motion, Ayes-2, Callahan, Nettles, Nay, Motion failed. It was moved by Councilmember Nettles, seconded by Acting Mayor Callahan, to nominate Edward Callahan, Jr. as the Acting Mayor for 1989. Motion, Ayes»2, Peterson, Goetten, Nay, Motion failed. It was moved by Acting Mayor Callahan, seconded by Councilmember Nettles, to table this item until the February 13, 1989 Council Meeting. Motion, Ayes»2, Peterson, Goetten, Nay, Motion failed. Councilmember Nettles questioned whether the Acting Mayor had two votes in the case of a tie vote? Acting Mayor Callahan did not believe so. City Attorney Barrett concurred. Acting Mayor Callahan suggested moving this item to the end of the agenda so that the meeting could proceed. CounciImem' rs MIHUTBS OF THE ORONO COUNCIL MEETING OF JANUARY 23, 1989 1989 APPOINTMENTS CONTINUED Peterson, Goetten and Nettles agreed. CITY ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT: MARINA LICENSING PROCESS - 1989 Assistant Planning and Zoning Administrator Gaffron explained that there were three issues involved with this matter. Should there be a Marina Committee; should the City continue to license marinas (Orono's codes require licensing to occur); and whether marinas should be an allowed use in the B2 zone or should they be a conditional use. When this third issue was previously raised, it was met with opposition from the marina owners. The owners felt they were losing some degree of security in their business by changing marinas from an allowed use to a conditional use. The City Staff believes that past marina committees have dealt with specific issues, but have not had the authority to negotiate with the marinas as they were not established as a legitimate body within the code. They were not effective in dealing with the issues. It is also Staff's opinion that the licensing process has not been very effective in that marinas have been allowed to operate without a license. If the Council feels that there should be a marina committee. Staff would request that the committee be created by resolution and be given some specific authority and direction as to their goals and intent. There are three factors that support discontinuation of licensing: 1. The City has limited jurisdiction over dock use areas, layouts, number of slips and dredging. The City's main jurisdiction lies in land use controls. 2. Marina licensing duplicates existing regulations. Anytime a marina requests a change in land use, or its operation, a land use application is normally required. 3. Denial of licenses has not been an effective reprimand. The lack of a license has not stopped marinas from operating or selling their business. At this time, licensing represents little more than a paper work process. CounciImember Goetten stated that the licensing was the only control the City has had. She agreed with Gaffron that the marina committee was only a recommending body with less authority than the Planning Commission. She suggested that perhaps the authority given to the marina committee needs to be enlarged. Goetten felt that the City should have a number of subcommittees addressing concerns such as marinas, shoreline regulations, etc. Che felt that if the committee had some authority it could assist the Zoning Department. MINUTES OF THE ORONO COUNCIL MEETING OF JANUARY 23, 1989 MARINA LICENSING PROCESS CONTINUED Acting Mayor Callahan suggested discussing this issue at the joint meeting between the Planning Commission and Council. He said that if a committee were established, it should have some authority and guidelines. CounciImember Peterson asked who initiated the marina committee and why it was abolished? Zoning Administrator Mabusth stated that the committee was in existence when she began working with the City in 1978. There have never been any ordinances defining its authoi ty. The reason it was abolished was because the LMCD took over all dock regulations. Between the Planning Commission and the LMCD there was nothing left for the Marina Committee. The Marina Committee had to refer their decisions to the Planning Commission on land use matters. It was moved by Acting Mayor Callahan, seconded by CounciImember Nettles, to bring this matter before the joint meeting of the Planning Commission and the City Council, on February 6, 1989. Motion, Ayes*4, Nays=0, Motion passed. UNION CEMETERY Public Works Director Gerhardson explained that the City had received a request to dead end the cemetery road. Gerhardson suggested that the road be designated a one-way road. He stated that if a funeral procession was eastbound on Highway 12 and tried to turn in at the east entrance, this would create a safety hazard for westbound traffic that cannot see the procession. If they were to turn into the west entrance, there is adequate sight distance for the oncoming traffic to slow down and stop. When the time came for the cars to exit, they would no longer be in a procession. It was moved by CounciImember Peterson, seconded by Councilmember Goetten, to designate the Union Cemetery Road a one-way road and to post one side of cemetery road "No Parking" Monday through Saturday, 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. Motion, Ayes»4, Nays«0, Motion passed. NAVARRE REDEVELOPMENT* This is an information item. RECYCLING AGRBEMENT/CONTRACT It was moved by Councilmember Peterson, seconded by Councilmember Goetten, to approve the attached agreement/contract vith Polka Dot Recyclers of Buffalo, MN. Motion, Ayes=*4, Nays=0, Motion passed. UTILITY SERVICES - SPRING PARK* It was moved by Councilmember Peterson, seconded by Councilmember Goetten, to approve the attached Emergency Stand-by Agreement for utilities with the City of Spring Park. Ayes*4, Nays*>0, Motion passed. MINUTES OF THE OROHO COUNCIL MEETING OF JANUARY 23, 1989 RESIGNATION OFFICER JAMES MORROW Councilmember Peterson asked that a written letter be presented to Officer Morrow expressing the City's appreciation. She asked that the Mayor and CounciImembers signature appear on the letter. It was moved by Councilmember Nettles, seconded by Councilmember Peterson, to accept the resignation of part time officer James Morrow. Additionally authorization is granted to hire a part time officer as a replacement. Officer Morrow is to be presented with a letter of appreciation signed by the Mayor and all four councilmembers. Motion, Ayes-4, Nays*0, Motion passed. SALARY ADJUSTMENT - OFFICERS MARK THOMTON & IRVING ENGLISH* It was moved by Councilmember Peterson, seconded by Councilmember Goetten, to adjust Officer Mark Thornton's salary from $14,123 per hour to $15,692 per hour effective February 1, 1989. In addition. Officer Irving English's salary is adjusted 3% on February 11, 1989 from $15,692 per hour to $16,163 per hour. At the present time there is no change in vacation accrual. These adjustments are within the 1988 contract. Motion, Ayes=*4, Nays=0, Motion passed. POLICE DEPARTMENT PURCHASE - OFFICE EQUIPMENT Councilmember Peterson stated that she had a hard time approving a purchase when there is no set amount specified. It was moved by Councilmember Nettles, seconded by Councilmember Peterson, to table this item until more information is presented. Motion, Ayes-4, Nays=0, Motion passed. VEHICLE PURCHASE PUBLIC WORKS - UTILITIES* It was moved by Councilmember Peterson, seconded by Councilmember Goetten, to approve the purchase of one 1/2 ton 4- wheel drive pickup for the Public Works Utilities Department from Thane Hawkins Chevrolet for an amount of $11,563.00. Motion, Ayes=4, Nays=0, Motion passed. KENNEL LICENSE - ORDINANCE AMENDMENT* It was moved by Councilmember Peterson, seconded by Councilmember Goetten, to adopt Ordinance No. 63, Second Series as an amendment to the Kennel Licensing ordinance which changes the expiration date of kennel licenses. LAKEVIEW GOLF OP ORONO - 1989 ON-SALE NON-INTOXICATING MALT LIQUOR LICENSE* It was moved by Councilmember Peterson, seconded by Councilmember Goetten, to approve the 1989 On-Sale Non- Intoxicating Malt Liquor license to the Lakeview Golf Course. Motion, Ayes«4, Nays^O, Motion passed. MIHUTBS OF THE ORONO COUHCIL HBBTIN6 OF JANUARY 23, 1989 ADMINISTRATOR'S INFORMATION CounciImember Goetten questioned when the sewer hookups would be completed for those persons required to do so. Public Works Director Gerhardson stated that the City was trying to negotiate with these people. The weather has been another factor. He felt that at this point, however, the City had been more than fair. Councilmember Goetten suggested setting a deadline. With regard to the Highway 12 development, Mr. George Johnson said that he would be attending the Transportation Committee Meeting on Wednesday. He asked Bernhardson for items of importance that needed attention. The Task Force Committee has asked that the completion date for the section of Highway 12 between Oronc and Delano be moved to 1996. He said that the Corridor Sit.? Selection Committee needed to be determined immediately. Bernhardson said that the issue of financing needed to be addressed, not only from the corridor site aspect, but also the environmental impact. Mr. Johnson said those items should be addressed at the meeting. Bernhardson said that the site selection study could be done before the environmental impact study, but he recommended that they be done together. Acting Mayor Callahan thanked Mr. Johnson for the time and effort he has put into this project. It was moved by Councilmember Goetten, seconded by Councilmember Peterson, to accept the City Administrator's Information regarding: Eurasian Milfoil; Highway 12-MNDOT 20 Year Plan; SAC Refund; 130 Cygnet Place; Recycling Program Start Up; MCWD Operation Policy; City Administrator Vacation; Payroll Conversion; Sewer Hookup Status. Motion, Ayes=4, Nays*0, Motion passed. CITY ATTORNEY'S REPORT: There was no report from the City Attorney. LICENSES* It v/as moved by Councilmember Peterson, seconded by Councilmember Goetten, to approve the following licenses: Cigarette Licenses:Richard M. Keaveny Keaveny's Navarre Drug Grant R. Wenkstern Lakeview Golf of Orono LeRoy Koehnen Navarre Amoco Don Scherven Navarre Bowling Lanes Steven Corl Navarre Liquors, Inc. MIMUTBS OF THE ORONO COUNCIL MEETING OF JANUARY 23, 1989 LICENSES* CONTINUED Residential Kennel: Orono Golf John M. O'Sullivan O'Sullivans Minnesota Vikings Food Service Washington Scientific John A. Downey Wayzata Country Club Judith A. Spinner 940 North Arm Drive Motion, Ayes*4, Nays^O, Motion passed. BILLS* It was moved by CounciImember Peterson, seconded by CounciImember Goetten, to approve payment of the All Funds Accounts. Motion, Ayes=4, Nays=0, Motion passed. ADJOURNMENT 10:05 P.M. It was moved by CounciImember Nettles, seconded by Acting Mayor Callahan, to adjourn the Regular Council Meeting at 10:05 p.m. Motion, Ayes»2, CounciImember Peterson Nay and CounciImember Goetten did not vote, due to their wish to further discuss the appointment of Acting Mayor. Motion passed. ATTEST: Dorothy M. Hallin, City Clerk Edward J. Callahan, Jr. Acting Mayor ARLO H. VANDEVEGTE, RA. A ttoi»ni :y and Counselor at Law 612-475.2219 1880 W. WAYZATA ROULCVARO R.O. BOX 38 LONG LAKE. MINNESOTA 8S3S6 February 10, 1989 Mr. Mark Bernhardson City Administrator City of Orono P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 RE: Sewer Plant Property Dear Mark: At its regular meeting of February 7, 1989, the Long Lake Council, after much deliberation, instructed me to send this letter explaining Long Lake's present position with respect to the difficult sewer plant issue. First, the council is adamant that this property should come into the City of Long Lake. The present administration feels that Long Lake should have the flexibility to develop the site into as many as 15 single family residential sites. Second, the council has become anxious over the timing of progress with respect to the negotiations between our two cities, V/e would very much like to have the cooperation of the City of Orono in this detachment and annexation process. We do understand Orono's concerns and reluctance to do so. However, Long Lake wishes to move forward expeditiously. Therefore, I have also been instructed to inform you that unless Orono is willing to negotiate with Long Lake on the above-described basis, such that resolution of the issue can be reached by March 1, 1989, the City of Long Lake will then proceed to file petition for simultaneous detachment and annexation of the sewer plant property, Should you wish to discuss the matter further please feel free to give me a call at anytime. I want to take this opportunity to thank you for the assistance c.nd cooperation you have lent in this difficult and knotty problem. Very^ruly yours. AVV/jlh Arlo H. Vande Vegte City of OROINC CITY OF aRONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. ________________If 3 A RESOLUTIOH DENYING VARIANCES TO MUNICIPAL CODE SECTION 10.25, SUBDIVISION 6 (B) PILE NO. 1296 COUNC/l meetwg f^EBX3l933 Ciry OF OROHO 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 Statutes 412 et. seg. 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, Merritt J. Peterson and Rick Stodola (hereinafter "the applicants") have an interest in the property located within the City of Orono (hereinafter "the City") legally described as Tracts F and G, Registered Land Survey #1216, Hennepin County, Minnesota (hereinafter "the property"); and WHEREAS, the applicants have applied to the City for variances to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.25, Subdivision 6 (B) seeking an area variance to allow construction of a principal residence within an approximate building envelope of 5,500 s.f. and an average dry buildable land depth of 95 to 105 feet where the zoning district would require a min.i.mum of 21,700 s.f. or 1/2 acre in area, requiring approval of an area variance of 16,280 s.f. or 75%. Absent a site plan for the development of this site, and in consideration of the minimum standards of the LR-lC zoning district, the applicants would probably have to seek additional hardcover and lakeshore setback variances to Section 10.22, Subdivisions 1 & 2, and variances to Section 10.55, Subdivision 8 that would prohibit structures and excavations within 75* of the lakeshore; and WHEREAS, the City Council has reviewed the application; the recommendations of the staff and Planning Commission; and the comments of the applicants and applicants* attorney. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Orono hereby denies the requested variance for the property described above based upon one or more of the following findings of fact concerning this property: 1. Registered Land Survey #1216 was filed on May 8, 1967. The property at that time was zoned R-lD, requiring 1/2 acre in area and the subdivision regulations of the City would have required City approval. The public records of the City do not provide any evidence that the record owner at that time, Miriam D. Coffee, now Mrs. Ewald Gustafson, had filed an application for subdivision approval, as the majority of tracts within RLS #1216 are wetlands area, it is not clear as to the original purpose of the division. CITY OF ORONO city of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. ____ 2. The property is currently zoned LR-IC, Lakeshore Residential zoning districtr requiring a minimum of a 1/2 acre in area and 100 feet minimum width. Based on the performance standards of the zoning district^ the proposed use of the property as a residential or buildable lot would require the following variances: a) Lot Area: Required « 0.5 acres or 21,780 s.f. Existing * 0.126 acres or 5,500 s.f. Variance = 0.38 acres or 16,280 s.f. or 75% b) The following variances would be required if the lot was developed as a buildable lot because of the limited depth of the lot at an average depth of 95 to 105*. Street Setback; Required * 30* Lakeshore Setback: Required = 75 * Hardcover Within the 0-75* Setback Area Must be Maintained at 0 s.f. Average Lakeshore Setback Variance 3. The present owners (originally only Mrs. Gustafson) owned the property prior to 1967. Ewald and Miriaun Gustafson owned a residence on the east side of the County road, opposite the subject properties. The Gustafsons have maintained single separate ownership of RLS Tracts B, C, D, E, P & G. In addition, Gustafsons own approximately a 1/4 acre lot to the north and adjacent to Tract G of RLS #1216, (hereinafter referred to as **Exception**). 4. The property, currently owned by the applicants, consists of Tracts F & G, RLS #1216. Tracts P & G are divided by a lagoon area. The majority of Tract F consists of wetlands. The narrow land strip of Tract G is restricted by a County road right-of-way and by the encroaching wetland and lagoon. 5. Per the Flood Insurance Rate Maps of the City of Orono, Community Pannel No. 2701780005 C, the majority of Tracts F & G are located within the flood plain of Lake Minnetonka. The flood plain elevation of Lake Minnetonka is determined to be at the 931.5 elevation. 6. On November 24, 1967, Miriam D. Coffee received $100 from the County Highway Department for the sale of an easement for the adjacent County Road 19 involving Tract G of RLS #1216. The relinquishing of this additional dry land area created more of an impact on the buildable envelope of this tract. Page 2 of 9 CITY OF ORONO city of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 7. Tracts F & G of RLS #1216 have never been assessed for sewer or water. 8. The following table reviews the assessed market valuations for Tracts P & G: Tract F Tract G 1988 $100 $300 1987 100 300 1986 100 300 1985 100 300 1984 100 300 1983 110 270 1982 100 250 1981 60 140 1980 40 100 1979 30 80 1978 50 70 The market valuations suggests that the properties have never been assessed as building sites, although the assigned valuation of this property might change as a result of a new clarification in allowed uses of this property. 9. The LR-IC, single family lakeshore residential zoning district contains 631 developed residential units. Of these 631 units: 2C9 of 631 (or 33%) exceed the 0.50 acre lot area requirement 517 of 631 (or 82%) are in excess of 0.20 acres 611 of 631 (or 97%) are in excess of 0.15 acres The Council finds that this lot with an area of 0.128 acres is not consistent with the existing developed lot sizes in the LR-IC zoning district. 10. The property falls so short of the zoning standards of the district, that the area variance and the variances required to build on the property are so excessive that they cannot justify the granting of the variance. 11. On May 6, 1988 the Building & Zoning staff discovered a dock constructed on the property and posted the dock advising the owners of the violation on the property. In addition, a letter was sent on May 12. 1988 advising the record owners of the violation. Page 3 of 9 CITY OF ORONO City of OROISO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. _ _ _ _ 12. The following code sections were violated with the construction of the dock: Section 10.03, Subdivision 9 (A) - Time of construction. No accessory structure shall be constructed on any lot prior to the time of construction of the principal building to which it is accessory. Section 10.25, Subdivision 5 (A) - Accessory uses. Any accessory uses regulated in the R-IA zoning district, any private docks subject to the City Code and other applicable regulations, including boat storage density regulations. 13. On May 20, 1988, staff met with Al Michaels, the attorney representing persons with an interest in the property, regarding the violation and advised of the necessary administrative steps to be taken in order for the City to determine that a dock can be legally installed on the property, as a dock is considered an accessory structure, staff recommended that a lot area variance application be filed with the City in order to determine if the lot was a buildable lot. If the lot was deemed unbuildable, then it was appropriate for the current owners to ask what other reasonable uses can be made of the property. 14. Tracts F & G of RLS #1216 were purchased by the applicants in 1987. The tax records refer to the fee owners as Coffee Landings. 15. At a preliminary application conference with the applicants, they advised staff that they had met with the Administrator of the Lake Minnetonka Conservation District prior to constructing the dock in orde to determine if there was legal authority to construct a dock on the property. The Administrator has since advised staff that he cautions all persons to check the regulations of the local jurisdictions before any improvements or use is installed. Applicants failed to contact the City of Orono even to question the need for a building permit for such construction. 16. On May 26, 1988, the applicants filed a lot area variance application with the specific purpose of maintaining a dock on the property without a principal structure. 17. The applicants were allowed to retain the dock until the buildability of the property was resolved by the Council. The applicants were asked to not use the dock until the Council had made a final decision concerning the future use of the property. 18. On June 20, 1988, the Orono Planning Commission reviewed the lot area phase of the variance application and recommended denial of the requested variance based on the following findings: Page 4 of 9 CITY OF ORONO City of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. ________________ A) There is only approximateI3’ 5,500 s.f. of area within the defined building envelope, with an approximate depth of 100*. B) There is not adequate area to build a house and meet the 75* lakeshore setback requirement, the street and side yard setback, and hardcover regulations. C) The property has never been assessed for sewer or water. D) The property was valued for tax purposes in the past at a reduced amount to reflect the fact that these are substandard lots and not appropriate for residential construction. E) The lot is subject to flooding and is in the natural drainageway to the lake for the surrounding watershed. Any construction would be subject to periodic flooding. P) The property is substandard in size in relation to other lots in the area upon which development has already occurred. G) The granting of a lot area variance for this property would result in additional traffic congestion, surface water drainage problems, surface water pollution problems for Lake Minnetonka, congestion in the area, diminishing value to the surrouding properties, and parking problems in the area. H) The applicants have failed to demonstrate any hardship to warrant the granting of the variance, as the granting of the variance would be hazardous to the health, safety, and welfare of the citizens of Orono. I) The granting of the requested variances would be adverse to the Comprehensive Land Use Plan and Zoning Code of the City. 19. The Planning Commission moved on the second phase of the application voting to recommend against the use of the residential dock, an accessory structure, on a lot that cannot sustain a principal structure based on the following findings: A) The lack of the principal structure means that there is no individual responsible for protecting the dock nor the boats maintained at that dock. B) An adjacent neighbor already has a dock located on Tract F. Page 5 of 9 CITY OF ORONQ city of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. ________ C) The property is not wide enough to provide adequate parking that would meet the required setback of 75' from the channel area nor the required 30 feet setback from the street lot line. The County Highway Department also does not allow parking along this section of the County road. D) Approval of the use of an accessory structure such as a dock, without a principal structure would establish a negative precedent in dealing with a similar request for lots of similar size. 20. At the January 9, 1989 meeting of the Orono Council, the applicants submitted a written response/proposal dated December 19, 1988 that they felt addressed the concerns of the City: A) To propose a lot line rearrangement with the neighbor's property to the north so that neighbor's dock, now located on applicants' property, would be located within his redefined residential property lines. B) Applicants propose removal of illegal dock on Tract F, RLS #1216 and enlarging neighbor's dock. Applicants would ask City to credit residence structure on neighbor's property for shared dock use. C) The applicants would use the existing drive on neighbor's property to the north for access to shared dock. They plan no additional hardcover improvements within substandard building pad of Tracts F & G and will park all vehicles on neighbor's property with residence. D) Security of dock is no longer an issue since dock is now located on a lot with a principal residence. E) The question of negative precedence setting is no longer an issue since the accessory structure, now a shared dock, is located on a lot with the principal residence requiring no variance approval, merely a joint use dock license. 21. Council refused to accept the interpretation of the accessory use/structure ordinance as proposed by applicants based on the following findings: A) The City has never credited a preliminary structure on an adjacent property to allow accessory uses or structures on lots that did not sustain principal residences. Page 6 of 9 CITY OF ORONO city of OROIVO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. ______________ B) The credit of the principal residence for an accessory use/structure serving an adjacent property will establish a negative precedent for the City when dealing with similar requests for accessory uses and structures on unbuildable, substandard lots. C) The applicants' proposed interpretation of the accessory structure ordinances is in complete conflict with the original intent of the code. 22. Approximately 2 to 3 years ago, staff met with Mr. Gustafson, the former owner of the property, to discuss the potential use of RLS #1216 and the lot referred to as Exception. Mr. Gustafson was advised that if all lots were combined that there was a potential for a buildable lot as it appeared that the lot referred to as E.xception had appropriate lot width but that a survey was necessary to make such a determination, in addition to the filing of the appropriate variance application. 23. It was unknown at that time by the reviewing staff, that the dock of the neighbor to the north encroached upon the Gustafson property and that an earlier lot line rearrangement had reduced even greater portions of the potential building pad. 24. Ewald Gustafson advised the City staff that prior to the sale of Tracts F & G, RLS #1216 to applicants that his attorney required applicants to sign off on a disclaimer that they understood that their proposed use of the property may be in complete conflict with the Orono Code. Applicants still failed to seek direction from the City prior to the installation of the dock on Tract F. 25. The property can be put to a reasonable allowed use as the tracts can be combined with the adjacent property. 26. The granting of the required variances would result in the following violations of Section 10.03, Subdivision 3 (A) of the zoning code with which the applicants must first comply before the requested variances can be granted: A) In review of the factual findings noted above, the City finds that the essential character of the neighborhood will be altered if the property was to be residentially developed. Page 7 of 9 CITY OF ORdNa City of OROINO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO._________ B) In review of the factual findings noted above# the City finds that to establish a precedent that would allow severely substandard lots to be developed in complete conflict with the established environmental standards for lakeshore development within the City and to be determental to the public health, safety and welfare. The City also looks to the broader environmental principals and goals setforth in its Community Management Plan and the intent of the specific zoning district when dealing with matters related to the public health, safety and welfare. Issues involving the public nealth, safety and welfare are not only resolved in securing the obvious traffic and drainage concerns of surrounding property owners, but the City must also provide its citizens with defined and approved optimum levels of density, open space and quality of life. 27. Appro'^al of an application that requires a 75% variance to lot area would establish a negative precedent in the future development of the LR-IC zoning district. The standards and intent of both the City Zoning Code and Community Management Plan would no longer have any effect if the City establishes a precedent of approving variances of this degree. 28. The applicants have failed to satisfactorily respond with supportive data and written response to the City's concerns. The City cannot permit illegally installed dock to remain on a property that cannot sustain a principal residence and found to be in violation of Section 10.03, Subdivision 9 (A) and Section 10.25, Subdivision 5 (A) of the Municipal Code. 29. In review of many of the findings noted above, it is very apparent that applicants had received prior notice or warning prior to the purchase of the property and prior to the installation of the dock that the City regulations may not allow their proposed use of this property. AND, FURTHERMORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City of Orono requires the removal of the illegal dock by May 15, 1989 and that no use can be made of said structure while it remains on the property, and further directs staff to formally contact in writing the adjacent property owner who has installed a dock on applicants' property. Trace F, RLS #1216. Said property owner shall be asked to provide the City with a satisfactory plan to bring the "^ock into confortiance within a specified period of time are subject to t‘ City's approval. Rage 8 of 9 CITY OF ORONQ City of OROIVO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono this 13th day of February, 1989• ATTEST: Dorothy M. Hallin, City Clerk STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) ss. James R. Grabek, Mayor The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this _______ of - ___________________________f 19_____, by James R. Gr^bek & Dorothy M, Hallin, Mayor & City Clerk of the City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City. Notary Public My Commission Expires Page 9 of 9 Mayor Grabek & Orono Council Members City Administrator Bernhardson From:Michael P, Gaffron, Asst Planning & Zoning Administrator Date: Subject: February 8, 1989 CDOKCIL MEFTiKG #1330 Fullerton Properties, 880 Townline Road Review of Proposed Entry Monument riB List of Exhibits A B C D E F Side Elevation Dimensioned Side Elevation Plan View in Relation to Roadways Dimensioned Plan View Proposed Corner Marker (Temporary Use Only) Municipal Code Section 6.06 - Excerpts CITY OF OftONO Attached are plans for the proposed entry monument for thr ’'ainters Woods Subdivision. The monument is proposed to be constru within Outlot A, within the proposed road island. The structure appa* .ly will have less than a 1* setback from the right-of-way line. The plaque portion of the monument will be facing towards Town line Road, just the reverse of the Coffin & Gronberg survey depiction (verified by applicant 1/7/89). The entry and exit lanes on either side of the monument are proposed at 14* paved width, and have a straight apron length of approximately 30* back from the paved portion of Townline Road. As staff has previously discusse'd, the Municipal Code contains no standards for the type of island entry me lent proposed, nor for when such a monument is located on a private buildxi*g lot. Municipal Code Section 6.07, Obstructions in Streets and Private Roads, Subdivision 4 states: **Signs and Other Structures. It is a misdemeanor for any person to place or maintain a sign, advertisement, or other structure in any street or the right-of-way of any private road." Certainly the proposed structure requires a variance to this Municipal Code Section, although the regulation is not technically a zoning code matter and need not be the subject of a public hearing. Ordinance No. 54, adopted July 25, 1988, puts a new twist on the approval process for improvements to private roadways such as that proposed. Section 6.06, Subdivision 3 states that the Public Works Director shall have the authority to refuse to issue a permit (for such construction) when, in the judgement of the Public Works Director, the requested construction would impose an unreasonable hazard to the public. Such a decision may be appealed in writing by the applicant to the City Council. The City Council shall have the power to affirm, reverse or modify the decision of the Public Works Director. Zoning File #1330 February 8, 1989 Page 2 of 2 Copies of the exhibits noted above have been submitted to both the Public Works Director and the City Engineer for review. It is the recommendation of the Public Works Director that this item be tabled for two weeks in order that he and the Engineer can develop some definable standards for such structures should the City wish to approve them now or in the future. Standards likely to be considered would be setbacks from public right-of-way, setbacks from paved portion of road, and location and height of center islands from the standpoint of traffic safety and visibility. Regarding the proposed temporary markers to define the lot corners, these are simply a 4" post and 8"xl0" sign which staff would consider as merely a corner post and not requiring any permit. Staff Recoonendation - Staff recommends tabling this item until the February 27th Council meeting, allowing the City Engineer and Public Works Director to come up with an appropriate standard for roadway center islands, and review the current proposal relative to those standards. , to table the request of for approval PROPOSED MOTION: Moved by _seconded by _ _ _ _ Fullerton Properties, Application #1330, at 880 Townline Road of a center island entry monument as part of the private road construction, until the February 27th Council meeting, and further directing Public Works Director and City Engineer to develop appropriate standards for such center islands in both public and private roadways. Ayes _ _, nays _ _. EXHIBIT i 11^ 11I K-Ofl S»1S I 6 O- 2: i ^ . LlJ 21 i i5\ 'V Pi m. «Hiir psii^ ipISi# ■Mm * ■ liii|ilii •'ft|l-:iE, •t' i?'f|% • .•'■:;..v’r..1'i 33' ?yy?pjT -a™. / OUTLO=F If^ SCALE: r - 10'DATE : 2-2-89 COFFIN i GRONBERG. INC.ENGINEERS. LAND SURVEYORS. PLANNERS LONG LAKE. MINNESOTA 5« V»i « 2 C; V.*" exhibit exhibit F /aJ I Oi^ Section 6.06, Subdivisions 1, 2, 3,__4_and_5 of_the_Clty_o€_Orono, Municipal Code are hereby amended to read as follows: SZC. 6.06. CONSTRUCTION AND RECONSTROCTION OF PRIVATE ROADWAY^SURFACING, SIDEWALK, CURB AND GUTTER, DRIVEWAY APPROACHES,. OR CURB CUTS, Subd. 1. Methods of Procedure. Abutting or affected property owners may contract for, construct or reconstruct private roadway surfacing, sidewalk, curb and gutter, driveway, driveway turnaround, driveway approaches or curb cuts in accordance with this Section. Subd. 2. Requirement and Application for Permit. It is a misdemeanor to construct or reconstruct a sidewalk, curb and ■guf^er7 driveway, driveway approach, driveway turnaround, curb cuts, roadway surfacing or any other private improvement ijL.|5X private road or private property in the City with^ ^per^ in writinq from €He“'City. Application for such permit shall be made o^forL approved and provided by the City and shall sufficiently describe the contemplated improvements, the contemplated date of beginning of work, and the length of time required to complete the same, provided that no permit shall be required for any such improvement ordered installed by the Council. Such application shall also contain information showing the type of construction, the width and the location of an improvement on the parcel of Ian and the lot and block number or the parcel number and the street and house number and a profile of the proposed improvement, if necessary, and other such information as nay be re<^ired by the Public Works Director. The application shall ^ flied ^ property owners desiring to construct such ^dfTveway approach, h^iklk,--cufhran^-^ter,~dri^?^^driveway turnaround, curb cut, roadway surfacing or private improvements in ^ or any property in the-5Tty, or by “ffTs or iier ^Hy autnpizi^ agent. All such applications shall contain an agreement by the applicant by this Chapter. A permit from the City shall not relieve the holder from damages to the person or , , another caused by such work. These regulations shall apply to all City, Stats, County and private roads. 3. Issuance of Permit. Such permit shall be^ if he or she haS"'c[efermined tefms "ef glia ordinance, Subd • _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ issued by the Public Works Director, t?Tat the aorocant "Has comptrec v^h She _ —^ ,-rT„ th^ parkit-TeTTiFraxnaftir^^cified HaT bsSITpaid 553 3ia Public Worica Director has approved the driveway, roadwavdriveway turnaround, sidewalk, curb and gutter, curb cut ' ^ surfacing or private impi.uvaBent in any private property in the City as requested or with stipulated changes. The Public Works Director shall have t^ au^or.ty ^ refu^ to issue a permit whan, in the judgment of the Public Worits DT?5ctor7 thl~»questad construction would impose an unreasonable -11- hazard to the public. Such decision may b^ appealed in writing by the applicant ^ the City Cou"ncil. The City Council'snail have the power to arlirm, reverse or modify the decision of the Public Works Director. Subd. 4. Permit Fees. The fees for permits for the construction of improvements as outlined above, shall be as set forth in the City's Fee Schedule which may be amended from time to ^ Subd. 5. Revocation of Permit. ^ A. All permits granted for the us. of private property under the terms of this Ordinance shall be revocable by the Public Works Director pursuant to the procedure set out below in Section 6.06, Subd. 6, "Authority of Public Works Director." B. In addition to the provisions of Section 6.06, Subd. 6, a permit may be revoked by the City Council and City shall have the right to revise, relocate or close any sidewalk, curb and gutter, driveway, driveway approach, driveway turnaround, curb cut or private improvement in any private road or other private property in the City as the result of the reconstruction of any road, a change in land use, or a major change in the traffic pattern of an existing land use. Subd. 6. Authority of Public Works Director. A. All work done under a permit issued in compliance with this Ordinance shall be under the direction and fupervisioh thTTublTc WorAs Director, who is hereby_authorized _‘make necessary rules, regulations and specification.3 _wjQn respect to materials for and method at construction of_ a sidewalJC, CUfBTancT^gutfer, driveway,""driveway approach^ driveway turnaround, curb cut, roadway surfacing or private improvement in any private road or other private property in the~lZi€y‘: a copy oT""Such rules ana Fegulations shall be kept on file with thi» City Clerk. A permit issued under the provisions of this Ordinance may be revoked by the Public Works Director when he or she determines that the construction or activity authorized by the permit is not being performed according to the terms of the permit or this Ordinance. B. Notice of such revocation, with a description of the facts support.ng such revocation, shall be mailed or delivered to the person named in the permit at the address listed in the permit. * of Revocation. C. • All work shall cease upon receipt of the Notice -12- D. Any person whose permit is revoked as set forth herein may appeal that revocation to the City Council by filing notice of such appeal with the City Clerk within ten (10) days of the date that the revocation was mailed or delivered. E. The appeal of such revocation shall be conducted according to the procedure set forth in Section 6.06, Subd. 3, '•Issuance of Permit" herein. Subd. 7. Submission of Plans to Public Works Director Anv plans submitted to the Building Inspector for his or her _ approval, which include or iTIvolve a sTdewslk, euro and gutter, driveway, driveway approach, driveway turnaround, curb cuts, roadway surfacing or private improvement in any private road or other private property in the City, shall ^ referred by the Bnildina_I ns pec tor to the Public WorkT^rectoT~^or his or her approval b^ore a buTlding permit snail be issued. Subd. B. Construction Requirements Generally. In addition to the rules, regulations and specifications as outlined by the Public Works Director with respect to the improvements listed above, the following requirements shall be complied with when work is done under the provisions of this Ordinance. A. All driveway approaches shall intersect the private road pavement at an angle to be approved by the Pujlic Works Director based upon the physical characteristics of the private road, driveway approach and the parcel of land being accessed. Such angle shall be as close as is reasonably practical, in the judgment of the Public Works Director to a right angle to the pavement of the private road. B. No curb cuts shall be made in such a way that^ the curb return extends beyond any property line as projected, except when consented to, in writing, by the ajoining property owner involved. Said consent, if necessary, shall be submitted to the Public Works Director prior to the issuance of a permit. C. The top of the paving of the driveway appi jach slab at the curb line shall be 1-5/8 inches above the flowline of the gutter, and shall not extend into the gutter beyond the face of the curb or beyond the gutter line, and shall not be constructed in a manner that will in any way interfere with the use of the road for the purpose of travel or maintenance. The constructed private road shall not be excavated -13- in the process of constructing the driveway unless previous approval, in writing, has been granted*by the Public Works Director, D. Driveway culverts shall be provided and installed by the owner as required by the Public Works Director. E. Driveways shall not be constructed over curb stops, catch basins or other structures, if at all possible. If there is not other feasible location for the driveway, it shall be the responsibility of the applicant to set the curb stop, catch basin cover, or any other structures flush with the final driveway surface. 7, The owner and contractor shall protect the public from injury or damage during the construction of the sidewalk, curb and gutter, driveway, driveway approach, driveway turnaround, curb cuts, roadway surfacing or private improvement in any private road or other private property in the City and any permit issued pursuant to this Ordinance shall contain the agreement of the applicant thal the City shall not be liable for damage which may arise from the result of work, and that the applicant will hold the City harmless for any liability incurred by the City as a result of such activity. G. H. Trees or shrubs shall not be placed adjacent to a driveway so.as to constitute a site distance problem. If a parcel of land has frontage on both a cul-de-sac portion and a -lead-in" portion of the private road, the driveway shall be constructed off the "lead-in" portion of the private road and not the cul—de—sac. Subd. 9. Resident Driveways. Approaches and Turnarounds. One driveway approach shall be allowed from up to two single residential parcels of land to the same private road provided that appropriate easements exist between parties sharing the driveway and driveway approach. Parcels having frontage on more than one private road shall be allowed a driveway approach to one private road. A. C -14- To:Planning Commission Chairman Kelly Orono Planning Commission Members City Administrator Mark Bernhardson ‘u' CITYOU^ From: Date: Jeanne A. Mabusthr Building & Zoning Administrator January 12, 1989 Subject: #1334 Sidney ReberSr 715 North Brown Road - PRD/Subdivision - Referred Back to Planning Commission for Further Review List of Exhibits Exhibit A - Topographic and Building Pads - Lots 1 through 4 Exhibit B - Amended Plan In order to satisfy the intent of the Comprehensive Plan with the higher density development adjacent to the existing rural development along the northern property line of the Rebers* property. Council has approved the 25 unit PRD with a 100' wide restricted development area. In addition, it has required the plantings of evergreen buffered areas in three strategically placed locations that would lessen the visual impact upon the adjacent properties. An agricultural/farm fence will also be installed along the north boundary of the property to prevent trespass of children and animals upon the Platteter property. Council also called for the aunend~ ment of the original PRD that would reduce the number of units to four building pads along the north property line in another attempt to lessen the Impact of the higher density development to the south. The reduction from 6 to 4 lots would minimize impact of higher density development, but would the increase in the size of pads create potential for more intense structural development? With many other pressing issues for Council to resolve at preliminary approval. Council asked that the Planning Commission reconsider the amended proposal, specifically to determine the need for further building controls on the four northern building pads (1 through 4). The neighbors in attendance appeared concerned that with an increase in the building envelopes, that massive structures would be constructed creating a visual impact for surrounding rural residential owners. Is the 80% hardcover limitation adequate for building pads ranging from 17,200 s.f. to 23,000 s.f.? If not. should the hardcover allowance be reduced or would other controls be more effective in reducing the visual impact of development at the higher elevations along the north border? Zoning File #1334 January 12, 1989 Page 2 of 5 Review of Hardcover Controls - Lot 5 - (the largest of the remaining 21 pads) 80% of 21,400 s.f. of building pad = 17,120 s.f. Lot 11 - (the smallest of 21 pads) 80% of 8,200 s.f. of building pad - 6,560 s.f. Coaq)are Building Pads 1 through 4 with Hardcover Lot 1 - 80%of 20,800 s.f.s 16,640 s.f. 70%of 20,800 s.f.*14,560 s.f. 60%of 20,800 s.f.s 12,480 s.f. Lot 2 - 80%of 23,000 s.f.s 18,400 s.f. 70%of 23,000 s.f.=16,100 s.f. 60% of 23,000 s.f.=13,800 s.f. Lot 3 - 80%of 20,600 s.f.=16,480 s.f. 70% of 20,600 s.f.=14,420 s.f. 60% of 20,600 s.f.*12,360 s.f. Lot 4 - 80%of 17,200 s.f.=13,760 s.f. 70%of 17,200 s.f.=12,040 s.f. 60%of 17,200 s.f.ss 10,320 s.f. Hardcover Improvements Associated with Lots Reported to Sell at $80,000-$100,000 - Drive + Turn-around =* (includes 20*x50* drive through restricted area plus remaining drive and turn-around area) Principal Structure 100-120 'x 50-60' * Accessory Structure 20*xl6* ■ (maintenance shed) TOTAL - 2,250 to 3,000 s.f. 5,000 to 7,000 s.f. 320 s.f. 7,820 to 10,320 s.f. Zoning File #1334 January 12r 1989 Page 3 of 5 Staff Conments - Compare hardcover allowances for each pad at 80% through 60% to estimated hardcover improvements. Does reducing the hardcover allowance have any significant effect upon reducing the profile or mass of a structure? If you reduce hardcover allowance you encourage upward expansion. Lot 4 with graduated lower elevations to the north and west will provide negligible visual impact upon the northern property owners, certainly no more than Lots 5 and 19 would along the westerly existing rural residential development. The 70' of depth (review Exhibit A) of the building pad will place greater restrictions on structural planning. Staff would strongly recommend no special restrictions for Lot 4. In staff's opinion even at 60% or less h.irdcover allowance, there is negligible impact on development as far as the visual aspect is concerned. What other contz Is may be more effective in dealing with structural intensification? Height. If the goal is to reduce visual impact of structures, a height control should be considered. A recent recommended standard by the DNR for all lakeshore property has been set at 25' in height. If height is to be restricted than residential development along the horizontal plane will be intensified and encouraged. Is this what is sought by lessening visual Impact? If a walk-out to the north is planned, the 25* height would be measured from the lowest elevation at the walk-out side. This is different from the existing Building & Zoning Code c?tandards that would measure height from the entrance level (only if 50% of lower level is not expned). All other standards in the zoning coO^ would be applicable in determining height of structure (review tecticn 1G.02, Definition 13). Planning Commission may wish to consider other height elevations. For staff, 25' would still allow 2-story structures with room for creative roof designs. No Accessory Structures. If we limit accessory structures, this might encourage the expansion of the principal structure. This most certainly will not be a n^-ighborhood of detached garages and small barns, etc. The most one would envision would be a maintenance structure, if even that. Zoning File #1334 January 12, 1989 Page 4 of 5 More Restrictive Building Envelope. T think this would be difficult for the developer to accept after our lengthy discussion at the Planning Commission meeting regarding building envelopes. The more restrictive the building pad, you encourage vertical expansion of the principal structure. Options of Action - To require no further restrictions fc~ the residential development of Pads 1 through 4 based on the following findings; 1. There is no sound environmental basis or unique physical characteristics of the subject properties that would call for special controls on residential construction. 2. Council's recent amendment of the PRD from 6 to 4 units along the rural residential boundary at the north will lessen the impact of the higher densities to the south. If the property was developed at rural 2-acre standards, development along the north property line at 1250 lineal feet could have been at 5 to 6 lot densities with a 50' setback for construction of a principal residence and an accessory structure at a 10' setback. 3. To establish additional controls for specific properties within a PRD will establish a negative precedent in the review of similar applications. 4. The additional landscape screening, fencing along the north boundary, the 100' wide no construction/no grading zone, and the reduction of units along the north boundary have already addressed the impact upon the existing rural residential neighbors. Visual impact concerns created by the mass of a residential structure has never been a consideration of the City outside of the historic and environmental concerns addressed in our existing code for lakeshore/shoreland development. To recommend the following additional controls for the residential development of Lots 1 through 3 or Lots 1 through 4, as follows: Zoning Pile #1334 January 12r 1989 Page 5 of 5 Planning Commission may choose any combination or all A) Hardcover allowance to be limited to 70%, 60i&, or less. B) Height limited to 25* (walk-outs to be measured at the lowest final grade at the walk-out side) or another height _ _* _ _*. C) No accessory structures permitted. D) Increase the setbacks for the building envelope. E) Any other deemed appropriate by the Planning Commission. Zoning File #1334 January 12, 1989 Page 5 of 5 Planning Coamission aay choose any combination or all A) Hardcover allowance to be limited to 70%, 60%, or less. B) Height limited to 25* (walk-outs to be measured at the lowest final grade at the walk-out side) or another height _ _* _ _*. C) No accessory structures permitted. D) Increase the setbacks for the building envelope. E) Any other deemed appropriate by the Planning Commission. Additional Comments and Planning Commission Recommendation - February 8, 19'*9 The Planning Commission considered the options present by staff noted above. The majority of the Planning Commission felt that the only feasible option was to increase the side setback areas of each pad from 30* to 40* providing an increase within the north/south restricted development areas from 240* of cumulative corridor area to 320*. Compare cumulative corridor widths of 6, 5, and 4 lot configurations: A) B) C) D) 6 lots at 30* 5 lots at 30* 4 lots at 30* 4 lots at 40* side setbacks side setbacks side setbacks side setbacks 360* 300* 240* 320* The minority opinion felt that there were adequate controls already provided in the conditions setforth by Council in the preliminary approval. The majority opinion of the Planning Commission considered no other controls except for the increase in the side setback and once again approved a 80% hardcover allowance for new construction within each of the defined building pads. A copy of the revised preliminary plan will be attached to the preliminary resolution approving the plat as the final approved draft. umu /A 'Vt N 'l-X^'1 /f mm :i /b'^ ■ ■ -»~'r ■> I y^n / \ ' /’/ V L/'--I •A \ / / X'N ./r:J hI/7'-^'4:\ir/!/,f*. Kl \ \ /Plin/ypp'lfif! I ')t\] iiWTr -1 liiliLviilU? \\ - \ »g\\ \ d JXSlfeF* \\ L'>:"0 I ^'AQC/ \ ,7 /f7\ \A^^—I\, \ / U ^v\ .-Tej-i I '" 1 ' I'VddV'kH ~^ \ ’’A' y/' If* T'O 'V- \ ^1 \ f V'. 'll- /1 ^1 \ n I \I ^ niiMmm Wifi l\ vi' 6 Mayor Grabek & Orono Council Members City Administrator Bernhardson Fron: Date: Subject: Michael P. Gaffron, Asst Planning & Zoning Administrator February 2, 1989 #1362 Paul Hauser, 2801 Casco Point Road - Variances - Resolution Zoning District - LR-IC NTv Application - Request for average setback and hardcover variances to construct addition to existing residence. List of Exhibits Exhibit A - Notice of Planning Commission Action of 1/25/89 Exhibit B - Planning Commission Minutes of 1/17/89 Exhibit C - Memo & Exhibits of 1/11/89 Exhibit D - Resolution Discussion - Please review the memo and exhibits of January 11, 1989. The applicant is proposing to construct an addition to his existing house, which is located more than 160* from the shoreline. The average lakeshore setback variance is required due to the relative locations of neighboring residences. The hardcover variance is due to excess hardcover in the 250- 500* zone. Planning Commission Recommendation - The Planning Commission reviewed this item at their meeting of January 17, 1989, and recommended approval of the average lakeshore setback variance in conjunction with removal of existing hardcover in the driveway area to result in no need for a hardcover variance on the property. Approximately 417 s.f. of existing hardcover must be removed to accomplish this. The Planning Commission recommended the further condition that the property owner shall submit for staff approval a plan showing which hard­ cover areas will be removed, prior to issuance of a building permit for the proposed additions. Staff Recommendation - Staff would recommend approval based on the Planning Commission recommendation, per the attached resolution. CITY OF ORONO P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 ZONING PILE NO. 1362 NOTICE OP PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION 473-7357 Date of Notice: 1/25/89 TO: Paul Hauser 2801 Casco Point Road Wayzatar MN 55391 COPIES TO: Jeffrey M. Schoenwetter 5353 G£unble Drive Parkdale IV #307 Minneapolis, MN 55416 TYPE OP APPLICATION: Variance DATE OP MEETING: 1/17/89 VOTE: 7 For 0 Against Planning Conission recommends the following: Approval subject to conditions noted below NOTES AND SPECIAL CONDITIONS: 1. Reduce hardcover proposal by 417 s.f. to result in no hardcover increase as a result of this building addition. 2. Average setback variance approval. Applicant's next scheduled meeting is confirmed as: City Council February 13, 1989; meeting starts at 7:00 p.m. If you desire certified copies of the official Planning Commission minutes, they are available from the City Recorder after review and approval by the Planning Commission. MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING JANUARY 17, 1989 ZONING FILE #1361-ORONO SCHOOL DISTRICT CONTINUED It was moved by Planning Commissioner Cohen, seconded by Planning Commissioner Bellows, to recommend approval of this application, to allow the vacation the drainage and utility easements as described on Exhibit C, based on the findings of the staff as set forth in their proposal. Motion, Ayes=7, Nays*0, Motion passed. #1362 PAUL HAUSER 2801 CASCO POINT ROAD VARIANCES PUBLIC HEARING 8:25 P.M. - 8:40 P.N. The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing were duly noted. The applicant was present for this matter, as was Mr. Jeff Schoenwetter, the applicants* developer. Assistant Planning and Zoning Administrator Gaffron explained that this was a request for variances to construct an addition and decking to an existing residence. A variance will be required for hardcover in the 250-500* zone. An average lakeshore setback variance will also be required. Chairman Kelley clarified that even though the applicant was allowed credit for unused hardcover allowance in the 0-75* and 75-250* zones, he still exceeded the limit by 417 s.f due to excessive hardcover in the 250-500* zone. Kelley suggested that hardcover be removed from the garage area. Mr. Hauser indicated that the portion of hardcover to the north of the garage was of least importance and could be removed. Planning Commissioner Hanson inquired as to the size of the garage doors. Mr. Hauser replied that they were standard size for a two-car garage. Hanson suggested removing a portion of the access to achieve the 417 s.f. Mr. Hauser felt that would not be necessary. Kelley suggested allowing the applicant to remove the 417 s.f. from any location he chose. Gaffron explained that there was a curve on Casco Point that limited sight distance from Mr. Hauser*s driveway. He believed it would be best, from a safety standpoint, to maintain a turn ­ around area in Mr. Hauser*s driveway. Bellows concurred, adding that the 417 s.f. removal could be achieved by taking hardcover from the north of the garage, and a small portion from south of garage. Mr. Hauser stated that he required the area to the south for additional parking. Planning Commissioner Brown suggested removal of the walkway in the front of the house. Mr. Hauser stated that he would remove the 417 s.f. and leave the turn ­ around . Planning Commissioner Cohen stated that in his opinion, the average lakeshore setback variance should not be allowed. He believed the City had been consistent in upholding the average. Gaffron said that he had not received any letters from concerned neighbors, nor were any present for this meeting. Kelley asked MINUTES OP THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING JANUARY 17, 1989 ZONING FILE #1362-HAUSER CONTINUED the applicant if he had discussed this proposal with his neighbors? Mr. Hauser replied that he had and the neighbor to the south had no objections. Mr. Schoenwetter explained that the neighbor to the north had no opinion, mainly because he was selling his house and moving to Florida. Bellows commented that the "leap frogging" circumstance was typically considered when reviewing average lakeshore setbacks. She questioned what would happen to the property directly north of Mr. Hauser's. Gaffron depicted the lakeshore setbacks for the properties to the north. Kelley observed that if one were to draw a line between the two houses on the north to the south, it would run out into the lake. The same would occur on the south side. This is typical of properties located on points or peninsula's, as is this property. There were no comments from the public regarding this matter and the public hearing was closed. It was moved by Chairman Kelley, seconded by Planning Commissioner Cohen, to recommend approval of application #1362, subject to a hardcover reduction of 417 s.f. from whatever source available, and to approve the average lakeshore setback as defined. The hardships of this application would be the property being located on the point and the addition being 160' from the lakeshore. Motion, Ayes=7, Nays=0, Motion passed. #1363 ROGER & BECKY BERRY 1392 BALDUR PARK ROAD VARIANCES PUBLIC HEARING 8:42 P.M. - 8:55 P.M. The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing were duly noted. The applicants were present for this matter. As explained by Assistant Planning and Zoning Administrator Gaffron, the Berry's were seeking variances in order to demolish an existing residence and rebuild. Currently the hardcover on the property consists of a detached garage, as well as a driveway that continues uphill to the existing house. The proposal calls for a new residence with a porch, deck and attached garage. The driveway would remain in the same area, but would become slightly steeper. It is the intention of the Berry's to maintain the detached garage. In order to access the new, attached garage, it will be necessary to raise a portion of the yard by bringing in fill in the south 0-75' zone. The Berry's are proposing a walk­ out which will require grading to be done within the north 0-75' zone. One of the reasons the Berry's preferred not to locate the house further back to meet the average setback, is to preserve a mature red oak tree. Gaffron said it would be necessary to make a 2' cut in order to achieve the walk-out. Planning Commissioner Bellows expressed her reservations of From: Dates <p<i. 1-'^ . 0 . c. "i::- Planning Commission Chairman Kelly r_—\iLi^ Orono Planning Commission Members ^^ City Administrator Bernhardson ^ - 0> Michael P. Gaffron, Asst Planning & Zoning Administrator January 11, 1989 Subject: #1362 Paul Hauser, 2801 Casco Point Road - Variances - Public Hearing Zoning District - LR-IC Application - Request for average setback and hardcover variances to construct addition to existing residence. List of Exhibits Exhibit A - Exhibit B - Exhibit C - Exhibit D - Exhibit E - Exhibit F - Exhi: *. G - Exhii^xc H - Exhibit I - Application Plat Map Property Owners List Survey Staff Survey Compilation Including Neighboring Properties Staff Letter to Applicant Dated 11/18/88 Proposed House Elevations Proposed Floor Plans Staff Hardcover Calculation Pertinent Facts - 1. Hardcover on the property is relatively minimal, however, due to the extensive blacktop driveway near the road, the total square footage of hardcover on the property slightly exceeds that which is allowed, per the following table: Zone 0-75* 75-250* 250-500* Zone Area 5,250 s.f. 11,300 s.f. 3.300 s.f. 19,850 s.f. Existing 0 s.f. ( 0%) 1,595 s.f. (14.1%) 2.252 s.f. (68.2%) 3,847 s.f. Proposed 0 s.f. ( 0%) 1,980 s.f. (17.5%) 2.252 s.f. (68.2%) 4,232 s.f. Allowed hardcover on the property: (.25x11,300 s.f.) + (.30x3,300 s.f.) Excess hardcover (variance) ■* 4,232-3,815 3,815 s.f. 417 s.f. Zoning File #1362 January 11, 1989 Page 2 of 3 2. The proposed addition and decks, while being located more than 160' from the normal shoreline, does require an average lakeshore setback variance due to the convex shoreline at this point. Neither neighboring property owner enjoys significant lake views across the area proposed for the addition. Note that the applicant originally questioned the City's interpretation of the ordinance language regarding the average lakeshore setback. A literal interpretation of that section as written would indicate that a measurement should be taken of the distance from the shoreline of the houses on either side, and the middle house must meet the average of those two distances. In fact, the proposed decks and addition would meet that standard, if that was how the City had always interpreted the code section. However, standard City practice has been to draw a straight line between the neighboring adjacent resident structures, as shown in Exhibit E, and that is considered the average setback line regardless of actual distances from the lakeshore. You may -^call that this interpretation was brought to the Planning Commiss^vn as an informal conceptual review at your November meeting, and Planning Commission unanimously felt that the interpretation of average setback by drawing a straight line should be continued, not only from a consistency standpoint, but from a practical application standpoint. Discussion - The proposed addition and decks appear to be appropriately and logically located in relation to the property and to the existing residence. Note that the house to the immediate south has a garage on its north side, and has no views of the lake that will be encroached upon by this proposed addition. The house to the north side of the subject property enjoys views generally in a westerly direction, and the existing bluff topography southwest of the proposed addition already blocks any substantial lake views that might potentially be blocked by the proposed decks. Therefore, it appears that neither adjacent residence will be significantly affected by this addition. Zoning File #1362 January 11, 1989 Page 3 of 3 Prom a hardcover standpoint, the proposed 417 s.f. excess is quite typical or even low for the Casco Point neighborhood. As a way to visualize the seemingly high 68% hardcover in the 250-500' zone, consider that if the 75-250' zone went all the way to the s’ . this property would then have the equivalent cL 29% hardcover in vi -250' zone, with virtually no hardcover in the 0-75' zone. Approval of this variance would appear to be very consistent, being generally lesser in magnitude than similar variances granted on Casco Point in recent times. Staff Recomendation - Staff would recommend approval of the proposed hardcover and average lakeshore setbacks, based on the following findings: 1. No significant lake views enjoyed by neighboring properties will be reduced or encroached upon by the proposed additions. 2. Hardcover on the property is slightly excessive based code standards but is very consistent with other properties and variance approvals in the Casco Point area. The proposed additions and hardcover removals result in a hardcover increase of 417 s.f. There does not appear to be excessive non-structural hardcover on the property that can be easily removed without causing additional hardships for use of the property. /•/ ^ nar. 'V i,;CITY OP ORONO - VARIANCE APPLICATIM/.T/ ^ Initial Application Fee $150.00 ($50.00 per each additional variance) Renewal Variance Fee $75.00 (no change from original application) After-the-Fact Fees (Double application fee) PROPERTY LOCATION Site Address 2801 Casco Point Road. Orono. MN_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Property Identification Number (P.I.D.) 2011723230014_ _ Please check one - Property _ _ abstract or X torrens? Attach legal description to application if not included on required survey. » ! “ ' ^hf! OF OFQiO nmCE OFFICE 1350200000 Oi 150. OC CHECK 71 , 150.00 irtCEIPMHM YOU H122010 cool ROl TIU 12/19. EXHiSJT 4_ APPLICANT Name Paul and Rosemary Hauser Address; 2801 Casco Point Road City; Orono Phone (home) 471-8417_ _ _ _ _ _ Phone (work) 726-8261 (Mrs.) _ _ _ Zip; 55391 OWNER (if different than applicant) Name Phone (home) Phone (work) Address;City;Zip; Date Property Acquired December 1987 (month/year) I (do) (^^£P9^^) also own the adjacent parcels of land. PRESENT USE OF PROPERTY Present Zoning District Present Use of Property .Spx_LoLQ_PajLk. R-1 Residential Other (specify) DESCRIPTION OP REQUEST Estimated Construction Cost $ 80,000 Describe request in detail; Pursuant to November 18. 1988 letter from Michael Gaffron VARIANCES REQUIRED _ _ _ Lot Area Setback Variances ( Lot Width Front ^ Hardcover Side Rear) Other Average Lakeshore Setback HARDSHIP Describe undue hardship o^^^^^actisaj di£ficulty^esulliing fror:. strict enforcement of zoning regulations; 7^^ 7^ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - / $ 7~ DESCRIPTION OP UNUSUAL PROPERTY CONDITIONS Describe unusual property conditions preventing compliance with Zoning Code Requirements:_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ___ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ___ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ___ _ _ REQUIRED SUBMITTALS 1. Completed Application Form 2. Certified Property Owners List of owners within 150' (you must obtain this list from Hennepin County Department of Finance A-603 Govt Center 348-3271). . ^3. Stamped, legal sized envelopes (#10) pre-addressed to each of the names on the above list with no return addresi (use address labels obtained with property owners list). ^ 4. Certificate of survey including ha: dcover calculations as required. 5. Topographic survey (existing and proposed elevations) if any changes in existing grade are proposed. 6. Plat Map (obtained with property owners list). 7. As an addendum to this application, please attach a separate list of any other persons you wish notified of this application. 8. Additional itejns as may be requested by City staff. The Applicant and Property Owner must sign this application. Please remember that your variance application is not complete if the above information has not been included. Certification by Zoning Department that Variance Application is complete. Zoning Official's Signature_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ___ _ _ _ _ _ Date- - - - - - - - - - APPLICANT'S SIGNATURE ^ ^ __The applicant hereby agrees to provide all information required or requested by the Zoning Administrator, agrees to pay all fees and/or unusual expenses incurred in review of this application, and certifies that the information suppLi£4is true and correct to the best of his/her knowledge. ' a /' ^^Applicant's Signature \ Jn Date / The owner hereby ackowledges and agrees to this applicatiwn and further authorizes reasonable entry onto the property by City staff, consultants, agents. Commission members, and Council members for purposes of investiga­ tion and verificatidiT’o^Nthis r^ou^st. Ijj^wner's Signature V I ' I _ Applicant must have all submittals into the Cxty offices 25 <iays before the Planning Commission Meeting. Planning Commission Meetings are held on tne third Monday of each month. Applicants must be present at all scheduled review meetings of the Planning Commission and Council. If an applicant is unaoie to attend a scheduled meeting, please make arrangements to ve an unauthorized agent attend in your place and to advise the Building & Zoning Office of this change prior to the meeting. /r■ O X O O rW •Spring ^•(17-^ 1 K ^^X-..,^.Lr:7SF:: 2 3100 !2 (■'>' \ 1 12 -- ■! Al tK V V* ■ o joiw ; o i <0 ? /? f -f N I.,. ' - e.t-«^*''5, 117 <33-^) ir .a O iTh r - . r.R9W-'- ;-vc25? H 1 “h I aSoSgs< as M in a&!a“2 ® M** S«22gss I X X < < M in « K ^ SSlSS2 EXH13*;T o sSgi:iOM(- CO M ' ^ S <m o a. a Ni X M o i2:==5 ,Su,2*«§ S lU 2 -cB M 5 CO < M e ui ui M X H ui 2 (- (/) UI u aUJ Ik u. M X o o fH I M S S2 eg oM a. srH S S“§g|f 83i^“S r CrTY OF aRONa . i CITYof ORONO Post Office Bo» 66*Crystal Bay, Minnesota 55323•Municipal Offices On the North Shore of Lake Minnetonka November 18, 1988 J.M.S. Homes, Inc. Attn: Jeff Schoenwetter 5353 Gamble Drive Suite 307 Minneapolis, MN 55416 Re: Proposed Addition - 2801 Casco Point Road, Orono Dear Mr. Schoenwetter: The Building & Zoning Department is in receipt of your application for a building permit, which was received by this office on November 15 1988. A review of the application finds that a number of variances a^e requi. *d for the proposed construction: 1. The proposed room addition and deck extend lakeward from the defined average lakeshore setback line as depicted on the attached survey, per Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.2?, Subdivision 1 (B), copy attached. 2. Although hardcover in the 75-250* zone will not increase above the 25% threshold, Jiotal proposed hardcover on the property will now exceed the allowable square footage, based on the following calculations: A) 75-250* zone: Area » 11,300 s.f. 25% s 2,825 s.f. Allowed Hardcover B) 250-500* zone: Area « 3,300 s.f. 30% a 990 s.f. Allowed Hardcover C) 2,825 + 990 » 3,815 s.f. Allowed Hardcover Overall D) Proposed total * 1,980 s.f. + 2,252 s.f. “ 4,232 s.f. i2) Excess hardcover * 4,232 s.f.-3,815 s.f.s417 s.f. Excess building a zoning - 473-7357 ASSESSING ADMINISTRATION A FINANCE - 473-7358 PUBLIC WORKS - 473-7359 err J r --i ) ^ J. 51 “ .5 = •^.,; :., k< F~L.Ag- t.'^C>VAT .c?v -/WL-^r) -^Z-BOI <S4S«io fV. >£ja. A> .__0 t *7S* I ^2-S^ -s/, &rrsr7rii»_y/AAJi<zoVtr^ ' ^ tP. (^AJO A*»&fT?OWV<_ B». 7 T'-S-SZi'5.0/0 5' .* /4AC AS//500 S^. guoc^ aubC. C.^,/>f4..7'^ ^o/v»c. coAvi^ ^t'yn’'^ Srt^e tf^M^ (/.rv^Si"^ tAjooC> SrePS c?.a^4a»'i (./ 2. fpjrZO (7oxzf>(2>V.^<3xa> Co/Jc tAjfet^ ^i‘5"xss>0 n^/n^zcto - JH. / % V/ ^-f. 6-2- foC, . <;zs" s./. •2^2- i/.. V-C. x-i:. ^ro S:P.. /S^S" a..(. ---.... 7^...,_..____________2^fip2. ..irC,., i*” / ^> ^l-Of ?*/0 5i?f?-1 >/ * - .................. //6T ^ :^.- i^ao fftf.. -------------14 -------- ir » c <2 , S ,T« ^AAi^CAMeit^ er/ri77*^C» i ;'; ^AM,<J€ 2-y, iX2-V, i s/. ujJM^a 3S'V‘y'At»c* /Vo s:^. giAe-i^iTSf^ Cz-lx 7'^+-(^^a /S'ZC^ s^, t , • » •^65:r/»cV6i >-3i)--------------------- 2-2.5'^ j:f. 2.*2-S2./3 i®0 * U%^'i-~*/» (^O CWc^&r<»5 J ,'i'T S. s- ^?0. 3.B/S- i/. = 2.tS-2.-r n«0 * ^2''^'^ V2-S2_-5a/r- * V/7 s.^. A RESOLUTION GRANTING A VARIANCE TO MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 10.22, SUBDIVISION 1 FILE NO. 1362 WHEREAS, Paul Hauser (hereinafter "the applicant") is owner of the property located at 2801 Casco Point Road within the City of Orono (hereinafter "City") and legally described as follows: Exhibit A, attached (hereinafter "the r-operty"); and WHEREAS, the applicant has applied to the City for a variance to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.22, Subdivision 1 & 2 to permit the construction of additions to the existing residence which encroach past the average lakeshore setback line where no encroachment is normally allowed, and which result in a hardcover square footage on the property in exjess of the square footage normally allowed. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono, Minnesota: FINDINGS 1. This application was reviewed as Zoning Pile #1362. 2. The property is located in the LR-IC Single Family Lakeshore Residential Zoning District. 3. The Orono Planning Commission reviewed this application on January 17, 1989 and recommended approval of the average lakeshore setback variance and denial of the hardcover variance based upon the following findings: A) No significant lake views enjoyed by neighboring properties will be reduced or encroached upon by the proposed additions. B) The hardcover excess on the property due to the proposed construction is 417 s.f. The property owner can remove 417 s.f. of existing hardcover in the driveway area without causing traffic safety or vehicle storage problems, so that no hardcover variance will be necessary. Page 1 of 4 4. The City Council has considered this application including the findings and recommendations of the Planning Commission, reports by City staff, comments by the applicant and the effect of the proposed variance on the health, safety and welfare of the community. The City Council finds that the conditions existing on this property are peculiar to it and do not apply generally to other property ift this zoning district; that granting the variance would not adversely affect traffic conditions, light, air nor pose a fire hazard or other danger to neighboring property; would not merely serve as a convenience to the applicant, jut is necessary to alleviate a demonstrable hardship or difficulty; is necessary to preserve a sub­ stantial property right of the applicant; and would be in keeping with the spirit an’ intent of the Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan of the City. CONCLUSIONS, ORDER AND CONDITIONS Based upon the above findings, the Orono City Council hereby grants a variance to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.22, Subdivision 1 to permit the construction of an addition to the existing residence which will encroach past the average lakeshore setback line where no encroachment is normally allowed, subject to the following conditions: 1. The property owner shall remove 417 s.f. of existing hardcover on the property, thereby eliminating the need for granting of a hardcover variance. 2. Maximum total square footage of hardcover on the property shall be 3,815 s.f., as shown on the attachea survey. Exhibit B. Areas of hardcover to be removed in order to maintain hardcover at or below the 3,815 s.f. level, shall be removed prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy for the new additions. The property owner snail provide a diagram of proposed hardcover removals for staff review and approval prior to issuance of a building permit for the proposed additions. 3. Authorities granted by this variance run with the property not with the applicant, but are permissive only and must be exercised by application for a building permit within one year of the date of Council approval, or this variance will expire on that date (February 13, 1990). 4. Violation of or non-compliance with any of the terms and conditions of this variance shall constitute a violation of the zoning code, shall automatically terminate any authority granted herein, and shall be punishable as a misdemeanor. 5. The undersigned applicant has read, understood and hereby agrees to the terms of this resolution and on behalf of himself, his heirs, successors and assigns, hereby agrees to the recording of this resolution in the chain of title of the property. Page 2 of 4 1989. ATTEST: Adopted by the Orono City Council on this 13th day of February# Dorothy M. Hallin# City Clerk James R. Grabek# Mayor Properry Owner(s) STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this day of _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ > 19_ _ _, by James R. Grabek & Dorothy M. Hallin, Mayor & City Clerk of the City of Orono# a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City. Notary Public My Commiss'ion Expires Page 3 of 4 O Zo H D O COu qe: ZO H tn H (x:uw Mo ow ta ■ «n C 4J c rH "a eJ C « 0)*^ M CO O rH x; • o t-t UO U O O U bO r-i (0 r^u p) C>M M 0) h Oi-t 9 U UOOOIJ^COU £c;o. to* Q o 13 « 0) U C0*H C.M0I a>4 b0« u •M13 >«c 044 c>-*je (0 u •H(ozo*H&oua« ac044VliJ CC*H x:(ooo)co«o>ccojcoo fw.O 4J-rCX:M3 »B hiJCOISUO^U *rl 44UCV ja Ji u u ocdoisaocovooBO. S U B -H t4 Mco*o 3 vno o*h m o « B M U(M^04:•H o. P f-iag4JB«-ir4iJ u •rC i-i>-<cou «-i (Sigat IS B x: u o iH OiJUXl'O 0»-4 CO iJO UOlUiS C 01 •• nJ B*H M O IO£\044 O 3 3 01 • J3 U UCM 0 44 CO B so U r-4 OCOCCS-rCB 0) IS B « 6 0 Qlr-tn-Cu=i^>HAJCoio)-HS e U4J 0*HCC->U r-IB •OJi-l-H X O CO 0‘-*4 44 0) 01 r-l 0) 0) CQi-l 60 0X:B44>> CO <-40i JJHOi-4>»I0|4 *IS^ 44 Wlr-CCJ0)B>4 0)44 0)t4 0ll4-H4JOca44>o*oo)ijo) B*Hao M B (0 U13 n4 m 34J13V4CSSDB B13U IOMCOUISIOIOO)<HB cgcou U) 4J4JIQ14 CD O. 01 vO*H X CO O *3 4J J5 OICS 01 B. 44Ua)l04J£fHO 60 Ocsjjcd u UCOBOI. x:ioo)o u u o xi CUCJSUOOiOi-li-tiJ O sou UiJ^ IS 6*0 O U c CO O 0)r444 O C >» U C3iS0)Zi-40)OUC0r4 U 13 I-4.-4 0) U ►» C** 0)(Si-40)BvO0)i-4 U'OCO^UISCBCMUU COO)ISU(SU*r4>Hf-4COO) 0)U aC0r4Z igu M(S0)u a ubjco C.U3lS>^ >^0)0 CO 0) (S C r4 Ss-4 ^ J 0) W >4>0)60U'HUI0 U . >C0)U0)»J44C0I > U 00)0, UO) UUC4J44 X ti d 0)30)B3Ul4O0)UU H UBUO)OMO B X U 0)0 BC/3OZ0)*H ••U 0>£B Z V4r4C u<cnoo) 0)0 o- U u OIXIJ: >«n4 60 130)0) BOUC0r4l0C B>4.Xl00)C MB*H (0 0 (001X0) 60 0) 0) 0)6 Xh-) UXCXXUB o)tn D uouux*u 3 44 0) ••'-I M0)b0 |40)OXU>*(OSOO 0) U^ •H0)60 CZCOX (00)WO)C>. O u (0X13 U44' <rH*4 0)<r(44 •H (0 c U (SX O *- (044(00)OBO) U’O • •HO 'OCM'HUSs BU44, 0) 60(QfHM4(0CO C0UUX44 0) 0)ViO *H0) •HU*HMOXSO) 430U X (0 (0 (0 0) X >>44 0.0) UO.OP4>4 44 0)UfH,H X a 0)OU3U o)u U U o. sox C O 0) U X (0(OOCUUO)COXOUU XX -H BX UX _ (0 U‘)0)M0)<HU0)3 X O. C O U 044 >>•3 UtO*H O.**Cl0 C 44 c <H VO 0) •HC0B 44 0)<4XU« U O O >\X ^ U 0) B u •• >H U 0) *H >H 0) VO vO U 14 U >*44 rH u O UC40I3. 3 003 VU r-4*-4*HXUXXO >vU 0) >v O.U Cr^fH (6 l4 x*313 UU440 MO) 3CBO)OUOU'00)30) M33XZU OICX X (U u 44 0)B3UUUxmm 0) cc MO) C4CM44X0O.H.H O O 0) O M*Hr-4 O Ucnr4Z4JZ44 U (d Xo0) (Dcc •Hs B ^ o a. .1 3oo c.•Ho.0)c;c Q) ffi 7 f r/' TO: Mayor Grabek and Council PROM: Michael Gaffron, Asst. Planning & Zoning Administrator DATE: February 8, 1989 SUBJ: #1364 - Edwin Gage, 480 Tonkawa Road Conditional Use Permit/Variance - Resolution Zoning D*^trict - LR-IB Application - Construction of a 6* Wide Permanent Dock/Walkway Structure Located Partially in 0-75* Setback Zone. List of BXk A. B. C. D. J -jtice of Planning Commission Action 1/25/89 Planning Commission Minutes 1/17/89 Memo and Exhibits of 1/12/89 Draft Resolution for Approval Please read the memo of January 12, 1989. Briefly, the applicants are requesting approval for a 6* wide permanent walkway that crosses a lakeshore border wetland in order to reach a seasonal dock on the shore of Stubbs Bay. This permanent walkway is necessary because the only way to reach the lakeshore without walking through the wetland is to cross the neighboring property. The 420 s.f. of hardcover that will be a<2<3ed by t,^' permanent 6* wide walkway amounts to 1.8% hardcover in t^ zone. All other hardcover on the property is in the 25C^ *500 zone. Planning Commission Recommendation - The Planning Commission, at their January 17, 1989 reviewed the proposed walkway and considered tne request for the 6* width. Staff noted that a 4* wide walkway would not nave required a zo:>,lag application because staff is authorized to approve such structures. Applicant's representative, D^'^le Gustafson, stated due to the length he walkway and the owner's intent to keep it low profile without a railing, the 6 width would offer increased stability given the permanent intent and provide more walking room as a safety measure. The Planning Commission recommendatici ? upon the hardship being the safety aspect c. ;he 2 additional feet, passed on a vote of 4 Ayes and 3 Nays. The minority opinion was that sufficient hardship was not shown to 3ustify tne excess 2* in width. staff Recommendation - City Engineer, Glenn Cook, r- ’iewed the proposal and found that the proposed permanent walkway and associated hardcover would have no significant impact on the runoff quantity or quality. He recommended that the dock should be constructed high enough to avoid potential obstruction of runoff waters. Staff recommends approval of the proposal per the comments of the City Engineer. A resolution for approval has been drafted should the council wish to approve this application, however, a resolution for denial would be presented at your next meeting if such an action is taken. If approved, the applicant proposes to construct this walkway while the ground is still frozen this winter. A RESOLUTION GRANTING A VARIANCE TO MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 10.22, SUBDIVISIONS 1 & 2, AND SECTION 10.55, SUBDIVISION 8, AND A CONDITIONAL USB PERMIT PER SECTION 10.55, SUBDIVISION 10, FILE #1364 WHEREAS, Edwin Gage (hereinafter "the applicant") is the owner of property at 480 Tonkawa Road located within the City of Orono (hereinafter "City") and legally described as follows; Tract A, RLS #1305, Hennepin County, Minnesota, (hereinafter "property"), and WHEREAS, the applicant has applied to the City of Orono for a variance to Municipal Zoning Code Sections 10.22, Subdivisions 1 and 2, and 10.55, Subdivision 8; and a Conditional Use Permit per Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.55, Subdivision 10 to permit the construction of a 6* wide permanent walkway through a designated wetland area, located less than 75* from the shoreline where such structures are normally not allowed to exceed 4* in width, and comprising hardcover in the 0-75 setback zone where hardcover is normally not allowed. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono, Minnesota: FINDINGS 1. This application was reviewed as Zoning File #1364. 2. The property is located in the LR-IB, Single Family Lakeshore Residential Zoning District. 3. The property is approximately 5 acres in area. 4. The Orono Planning Commission reviewed this application on January 17, 1989, and recommended on a vote of 4 to 3 to approve the proposed variances and conditional use permit for the 6' wide walkway structure based upon the following findings: Page 1 of 5 a. The proposed walkway structure is necessary to provide reasonable access to the usable lakeshore without forcing the property owner to cross neighboring property. b. The structure will maintain a low profile and is not intended to have a railing. c. The 6* width, while 2* in excess of the 4* width normally allowed for such structures, is necessary for safety of th^ users of the structure, considering the extremely long 175* length of this walkway. d. The structure comprises 1.8% hardcover in the 0-75* setback zone. There is no hardcover existing or proposed in the 75-250* zone. The proposed walkway will have no significant impact on runoff quantity or quality. 5. The City Council finds that the conditions existing on this property are peculiar to it and do not apply generally to other property in this zoning district; that granting the variance would not adversely affect traffic conditions, light, air nor pose a fire hazard or other danger to neighboring properties; would not merely serve as a convenience to the applicant, but is necessary to alleviate a demonstrable hardship or difficulty; is necessary to preserve a substantial property right of the applicant; and would be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan of the City. 6. The City Council finds that granting a conditional use permit to allow the construction of proposed walkway would not be detrimental to the health, safety or general welfare of the public, would not adversely affect light, air nor pose a fire hazard or other danger to neighboring properties, nor will it depreciate surrounding property values and that the proposed level of use of the property will be in keeping with the intent and objectives of the Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan of the City. Page 2 of 5 CONCLUSIONS, OltDBR AND CONDITIONS Based upon one or more of the above findings, the Orono City Council hereby grants a Variance to Municipal Zoning Code Sections 10.22, Subdivisions 1 and 2, and Section 10.55, Subdivision 8, and grants Conditional Use Permit per Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.55, Subdivision 10, to allow construction of the 6* wide walkway structure as proposed, subject to the following conditions: 1. No railings will be allowed on this structure in order that it shall remain as a low profile structure, not highly visible from the lake. 2. The dock shall be constructed at an elevation above the normal high water level to avoid the potential of obstructing any runoff flows. 3. Hardcover in the 0-75' zone is limited to the 1.8% (420 s.f.) associated with this structure in the 0-75* setback zone (above the 929.4 contour line). 4. Authorities gra..ted by this resolution run with the property not with the owner, but are permissive only and must be completed within one year of the date of Council approval or the special conditions of this resolution will expire on that date (February 13, 1990). 5. Violation of or non-compliance with any of the terms and conditions of this resolution shall constitute a violation of the Zoning Code, shall automatically terminate any authority granted herein, and shall be punishable as a misdemeanor. 6. The undersigned owner has read, understood and hereby agrees to the terms of this resolution and on behalf of himself, his heirs, successors and assigns, hereby agrees to the recording of this resolution in the chain of title of the property. Page 3 of 5 Adopted by the Orono City Council on this Februrayr 1989. ATTEST: day of Dorothy M. Hallin, City Clerk James R. Grabek, Mayor Property Owner(s) STATE OP MINNESOTA) ) SS. COUNTY OP HENNEPIN) The foregoing day of instrument was acknowledged before me on r 198__, by James R. Grabek andthis _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Dorothy M. HalliriT Mayor & City Clerk of the City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City. Notary Public My Commission Expires Page 4 of 5 STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) On this day of 138 before me a Notary Public within and for said county, personally appeared _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ^_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ___ _ _known to m€; 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 OF HENNEPIN ) On this day of 198 , before me a Notary Public within and for said County, personally appeared _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ___ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ known to me to be the person (s) described in and who executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that he (they) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed. NOTARY PUBLIC MY COMMISSION EXPIRES Page 5 of 5 ZONING PILE NO. 1364 CITY OF ORONO NOTICE OF PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 473-7357 Date of Notice; 1/25/89 TO:Edwin Gage COPIES TO:Gustafson Design 480 Tonkawa Road 1845 Wisconsin Ave N Long Lake, MN 55356 Golden Valley, MN 55427 TYPE OF APPLICATION: Conditional Use Permit DATE OF MEETING: 1/17/89 VOTE: 4 For 3 Against Planning CoHaission recoasBends the following: Approval subject to conditions noted below NOTES AND SPECIAL CONDITIONS: MOTION: lecommend approval of conditional use permit and variances for work in 0-75* zone including variance to allow 6* wide walkway and its associated hardcover. Applicant's next scheduled meeting is confirmed as: City Council February 13, 1989; meeting starts at 7:00 p.m. If you desire certified copies of the official Planning Commission minutes, they are available from the City Recorder after review and approval by the Planning Commission. MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING JANUARY 17, 1989 #1364 EDWIN GAGE 480 TONKAWA ROAD CONDITIONAL USB PERMIT/VARIANCE PUBLICS HEARING 9:00 P.M. - 9:10 P.M. The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing were duly noted. Mr. Dale Gustafson, a representative for the applicant, was present for this matter. Assistant Planning and Zoning Administrator Gaffron explained that the applicant was seeking approval to construct a 6* wide access/walkway through a wetland area partially in the 0- 75* lakeshore setback zone. Gaffron showed the Planning Commission where the proposed walkway would be located. The 6* width exceeds the 4* standard and would therefore require a 2* variance in addition to a conditional use permit. The walkway would consist of wood and wood posts that would extend approximately 187*. Chairman Kelley asked how the property owners currently accessed the existing dock. Mr. Gustafson said that currently the only way to access the dock is by using a neighboring property. Planning Commissioner Bellows inquired as to the hardship for the 6* width as opposed to the standard 4*. Mr. Gustafson explained that the 6* would offer more stability and would provide more walking room and safety. Gaffron questioned whether railings would be added to the walkway in the future. Mr. Gustafson replied that the owner would rather not install railings. Bellows asked why the walkway did not continue all the way to the seasonal dock as opposed to stopping at the little knoll? She believed there would be a risk of the water level rising, making that area unpassable. Mr. Gustafson stated that to the owner's knowledge, that area had never been under water. Bellows questioned whether there were any future plans to put a gazebo or storage shed in that spot? Mr. Gustafson, replied that the owner had no such intentions. There were no comments from the public regarding this matter and the public hearing was closed. It was moved by Planning Commissioner Brown, seconded by Planning Commissioner Hanson, to recommend approval of application #1364, the hardship being the safety aspect of the 2 additional feet. Motion, Ayes=4, Nays»3 (Kelley, Bellows, Cohen), Motion passed. cm OF OROHO - 6BHBRAL LAND USB APPLICATION PROPERTY LOCATION Site Address 460 Tonkawa Road_ _ _ A Property Identification Number (P.I.D.) _ _ _ _ Please check one - Property X abstract or torrens? CITY Of Ci<CnO rlr^i^KE(for Conditional Use Applications only) Please attach legal description to application if not included^'^^'^^^^^^^^^ I -t-*u on required survey. APPLICANT Name Gustafson Design 01 CE^ 2C0.ee Phone (home) 544-?77l....'V _Phone (work) 544 CQQl !<0l TiE: CityGolden Valley zip 55^27 —Address 1845 Wisconsin Ave. No. OWNER (if different than applicant) Name Edwin Gage Phone (home) 475-5812 Phone 540-5288 Address 480 Tonkawa Road Date Property Acquired March 1974 City Orono Zip55356 (month/year) I (ddO (do not) also own the adjacent parcels of land. FEES - CONDITIONAL USB PBRMITS - Renewal Fee - 1/2 Current Fee After-the-Fact Fee - Double Current Application Fee $100.00 a)Residential accessory Use $150.00 b)Institutional (church, school, etc $150.00 c)Duplex Credit/Bldg •r f •. $250.00 d)Commercial/Industrial Use •. X $200.00 f)Land Alteration ‘ ; Grading and filling - designated wetland or floodplain Grading and filling - 101 cu. yd. or more Grading, seawall, retaining walls within 75* of lakeshore urv PRO/PID - see fee schedule OTHER APPLICATIONS —. .- - - - -- -- - - - - - - - — . ■ • $150.00 Commercial Site Plan Review -(+ .consultant fees) : ; . . $250.00 ;t Vacation ^ noi / $150.00 r -Easement Vacation.: . 1J:. c;; -io-o : ' ^ ■■ $ 50.00 Easement Vacation With.Subdivision i/ ; i. $250.00 Rezoning • • - • c L*-i'.* ..'n : • • : • •• $100.00 Appeals • : r: r > : r r. ' ’ _ _ _ _ Other - see fee schedule -- nr*. .V-M V ^ ... .* .. . -••w ' ‘li c ff . t .>» oav I. • («'•' 2 •• HVHiN3SOa rcttf ■ % 3 :r. cz' W !i.f »«4 « ^ 1 • (a9do 3A90Nni 0?li S1H9I3H lNOW3dV3D„ '» nj««8 I r '--'• •• i»n • j " (i') II t’••• [■>• . •<«• ( ■ ~ 1.11) V.H , iJil?------ *’ ■ • . ^ P^>!S»l!in I t»- H O § » S ■ a S 5 o z 7 *^5s: ^SzzSs si Jl nil ^ ^#1>3 II Me <M < ifip I U 5 A z U) lu z “iis32 SiSSSi gi _ o « < N w a M o a u to £siiil uj-J >IS* S «» S S ^ ^ ^ K lA ■|! _ M M ■-< -J K) o > > <0 a s- —* <e a a. ^ ”& = 3|S2» X X o o M O O. Q. <4- ~i O n O I- UlzSxS CNI K lA UJ >I w Z W X __ ::!£S!SS£ S ishi! “S^SKSCO O UJ UJ O' X ro o -J o o u- rC Ooo o >^.“ SoS X g ..Isli 3’-3^|s u) UJ 3 ^ ®S-‘2-a coS-ysg Ht o X £ 4- ^ so “S K»|iis“< -1 -J X _ OJ ^ X X Z I 2 < < < £ 3g“‘'5u. in vnno-t :iiis§K) o u u m -J gi Di SoSX U. fC ♦ SSSiSSi^ 1 “2!i-a*-!a I M N0 X OMU. N?- -I 0 Omoo vj>m m 8 £i! iai ! •H Ul s o (7) m UJ m3 X 7{nigg “cm O 0 .. Js V 3®a 0 XX OJU > lU ,.oSKSCO O UJ UJ O' Xm o -J Q no u- «slo 0 1 UJ X X £ as!ii iin 0 0 m _ kS m§il07&;SSJ$5 0 0 3 O ON K >- z gi^“ m 0N ss , CO o -> "> M -J xl^ g O < X o or j;< giiiX S < z a 5 h- 0 a «a§§o®m 0 -J -J X _ VgSSaSK O U U Z O < 0 f4 < < FC 0 0 0 O O O M W H «o2 X o 5 O X X O 0 0 3 5 0 O 0 .J m o u u 0 X xS X ^ g0 4X0 O Z 0 < < >• N.X < 0 0 < < 0 gl?^ fH 0 '3-' f: ss o o &10 O O CO .sg§s§m O H h- ? -J 0 X gSxS O Z 0 < < > \ X < 0 X 5 < z X 5 H r Ck i Msp eo K Of Ul UJ inmm vggg-'j K M M M r •H -I BE Oe lU UJ e 0 o a ^ • S““o r X <«> -I 5 M £ o S B^S! 3ZsS*“ c2 K iiirg,gg*“S* UJ O. lU 0 ^ ^ I- X -jO 0 OE OE MN in U. i3 scS-:'*^ ei“3 S 2 fc lUgg UJ II. U. mo:o o M p o K O'e ®§ ^i^is •-I H S 0 1 UJ • “-gsOE ^'O UJ00;«g ^ ^ w o S O X S 'O ^ aea _ O Z lU , -‘oE^i «3 eoo CMoo I I nrg go < o£ a llli TO: FROM: DATE: r:2 13 5233 C ity of okono Michael P. Gaffron, Asst Planning & Zoning Administrator February 9, 1989 Mayor Grabek Orono Council Members City Administrator Bernhardson SUBJECT: #1366 Loren Butterfield, 3925 Watertown Road - Preliminary Plat Approval - Resolution Zoning District - RR-IA, 5 acre Application - Split off a 5 acre lot for applicant's son to construct a residence. Exhibits Exhibit A Exhibit B Exnibit C Exhibit D Planning Commission Action Notice Dated 1-29-89 Planning Commission Minutes Dated 1-17-89 Memo & Exhibits of January 12, 1989 Draft Preliminary Plat Approval - Resolution Discussion Please review the Planning Commisison minutes and action notice, and the memo of January 12, 1989. Briefly, the applicant is proposing to split off a 5 acre lot in order for his son to construct a home. The proposed 5 acre lot will contain approximately 2 1/2 acres on the north side of the Luce Line, and 2 1/2 acres on the south side. The proposed house site will be on the north side. At their January 17 meeting. Planning Commission discussed in depth the merits of creating a 5 acre building lot separated into two parcels by the Luce Line Trail. Planning Commission generally concluded that as long the building site parcel contains a minimum of 2 acres, and that the property configuration will allow for 100* setback from the Luce Line right-of-way as well as allow for primary and alternate drainfield sites, the separation is not a critical concern. The Planning Commission did place specific restrictions and requirements for the outlets on the south side of the Luce Line, as noted later in this memo. The proposal leaves a 12 acre parcel with the Butterfield Greenhouse operation. The access to the proposed new building lot is to be via a 28* wide outlet along the east property boundary. This leaves a 1* setback from the existing greenhouse structures. Planning Commission felt that this driveway outlot location was appropriate, with the entrance revisions suggested by the City Engineer, because it could provide for potential future roadway to serve the neighboring property to the east. Zoning File #1366 February 9, 1989 Page 2 of 2 Planning Commission felt that the septic testing for this property was necessary, and recommended conditioning subdivision approval on completion of appropriate testing. Preliminary borings had been completed early this winter, but perc tests could not be taken due to the frozen ground. The site evaluator has preliminarily indicated that septic sites appear feasible within the proposed boundaries. Staff had initially recommended to Planning Commission that the subdivision be approved with the requirement* of septic testing before a building permit could be issued. In keeping with the Planning Commission's concerns, staff is recommending that preliminary plat approval be granted under the condition that drainfield sites be fully tested prior to final plat approval. With this procedure, the property owner has the ability to complete his survey work and submit it to the County Engineer for preliminary approval, while taking a slight risk that, although not anticipated, septic testing might indicate the need for minor lot line revisions. Planning Commission Recommendation At their January 17th meeting. Planning Commission voted 6 to 1 to recommend approval subject to the nine conditions noted in the Notice of Planning Commision Action (Exhibit A). Staff Recommendation Staff recommends approval per the recommendation of the Planning Commission. A resolution for preliminary plat approval is attached for Council review. CITY OP ORONO P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN ZONING FILE NO. 1366 NOTICE OF PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION 55323 473-7357 Date of Notice: 1/25/89 TO: Loren Butterfield 3925 Watertown Road Maple Plain, MN 55359 COPIES TO: TYPE OF APPLICATION: Subdivision DATE OF MEETING: 1/17/89 VOTE: 6 For 1 Against Planning Conlssion recomiends the following: Approval subject to conditions noted below NOTES AND SPECIAL CONDITIONS: 1. A special lot combination resolution shall be filed for Lot 2 and Outlot A, specifying that the 2 parcels must be sold as a unit. 2. Likewise, a special lot combination for Lot 1 and Outlot B shall be required. 3. Outlot C shall act as a private driveway access serving Lot 2. The owner of Lot 1 shall remain the owner of Outlot C as a condition of the subdivision approval, due to the proximity of Outlot C to existing buildings on Lot 1 and for long-range road planning purposes for this and neighboring properties. An access easement over Outlot C granted to Lot 2 shall be executed by the owner of Lot 1 and Outlot C. 4. The driveway access where Outlot C intersects with Watertown Road shall be upgraded per the recommendations of the City Engineer to provide a perpendicular, flat access entrance. 5. A 9* variance is granted for setbacks to the east line of Lot 1 for the existing greenhouse buildings. The setback normally required for those structures would be 10' from the side lot line. 6. The applicant is advised that any future subdivision of Lot 1 may require a widened outlot and cul-de-sac, since a subdivision would create a potential for as many as 3 residences being served by a single access road. Applicant is furt'n^er advised that it is the City's policy to consolidate accesses when feasible, for safety purposes. 7. No structures may be constructed on the south side of the Luce Line Trail in Outlets A or B. 8. Subdivision final approval is contingent on providing complete on-site sewage treatment soil testing information showing that primary and alternate drainfield sites exist within the boundaries of Lot 2. 9. Building setback from Luce Line right-of-way shall be 100'. Applicant's next scheduled meeting is confirmed as: City Council February 13, 1989; meeting starts at 7:00 p.m. If you desire certified copies of the official Planning Commission minutes, they are available from the City Recorder after review and approval by the Planning Commission. MmUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING JANUART 17, 1989 ATTENDANCE 7:00 P.M. The Orono Planning Commission met on the above date with the following members present: Chairman Kelley; Planning Commission members Johnson, Bellows, Brown, Cohen, Hanson and Moos. The following represented the City staff: Building and Zoning Administrator Mabusth, Assistant Planning and Zoning Administrator Gaffron and City Recorder Scheffler. Council Representative Edward Callahan, Jr. attended and CounciImember Goetten was also present. #1366 LOREN BUTTERFIELD 3925 WATERTOWN ROAD CLASS II PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION PUBLIC HEARING 7:00 P.M. - 7:35 P.M. The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing were duly noted. Mr. Butterfield was present for this matter. Assistant Planning and Zoning Administrator Gaffron explai .tid that Mr. Butterfield was requesting to subdivide a 5- acre dry buildable lot from a 17 acre parcel. The applicant is proposing to use Out lot C, which is 28* in width, as an access to the new lot. The accessory structures on Lot 1 will no longer meet a 10* side setback, but will be only 1* from the new side lot line. Outlet A and Lot 2 will be subject to a special lot combination, yielding a 5-acre parcel that cannot be separated. The DNR has indicated that they have no specific setback requirements from the Luce Line Trail. Chairman Kelley asked whether the lot to the south of the Luce Line could ever be accessed from the south. Mr. Butterfield stated that he had a right-of-way agreement with the DNR to allow crossing the trail. Planning Commissioner Bellows asked for the combined total of Outlots B and A? Gaffron replied that it would total approximately 3.5 dry acres. Bellows expressed her concern about the Luce Line Trail dividing the property. Mr. Butterfield interjected that the Luce Line was in a deep cut at that location. Planning Commissioner Hanson questioned the ramifications of dividing the property in such a way. Gaffron explained that the code section allowed 5 acres to be split into 2 parcels that are not contiguous as long as the building site has a minimum of 2 acres. Another code section addresses the issue of a lot being split by a road or road easement. This would bring forth the question of whether the Luce Line would be considered a public road or a public road easement. Bellows, Hanson and Kelley expressed their concerns and reservations about the involvement of the Luce Line in the subdivision. Bellows asked whether building restrictions could be placed upon the lots to the south of the Luce Line. Her main MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING JANUARY 17, 1989 ZONING FILE #1366-BaTTERFIELD CONTINUED objective was to discourage any further crossing of the Luce Line. Kelley asked whether it was the concensus of the Planning Commission to have Outlot B combined with Lot 1, and combine Outlot A with Lot 2. Hanson asked Mr. Butterfield why Outlot B did not go with Lot 2. Mr. Butterfield replied that he wanted to maintain access to Lot 2. Gaffron observed that Outlot A would only be accessible by foot, given that the crossing easement would not be within the new lot. Mabusth asked the Planning Commission to consider whether there were any alternatives to this proposal. Kelley recollected an application where access was allowed through a wetland area. Mabusth reminded Kelley that the DNR would not allow such an access since alternatives were available. Kelley commented that Outlot A was landlocked. Brown mentioned that the building envelope for Outlot A was severely limited. Planning Commissioner Hanson commented that after thorough consideration, he had no problems with this application, with the exception of setting forth a specific provision pertaining to access. Setback requirements we»:e another issue to be considered. Gaffron stated that the Planning Commission should determine setbacks from the Luce Line, since the lot configuration both sides of the Luce line made questionable the interpretation of which is the "rear" lot line. The other setback concern involved the fact that the greenhouse would be located only 1* from Outlot C. Kelley observed that the Luce Line Trail was staked considerably wider than the trail that is actually travelled. Bellows added that the Trail was actually 100 ft., though the travelled portion was only 10 ft. Cohen believed that the setback from the Luce Line should be 100 ft. All other Planning Commissioners concurred. Johnson suggested designating Outlot C as a driveway easement to resolve the problem with the greenhouse location. The remaining Planning Commissioners agreed that would solve the problem. Gaffron stated that such a solution would not provide the City with any access for future development of adjacent lots. Bellows noted that this was a special condition and where Outlot C could normally be considered a driveway easement, it should be designated as an outlot only for future planning considerations. Gaffron stated that technically a 10* lot width variance would be required due to the property not meeting the width requirement at a point 100* back from the right-of-way. In addition, the City Engineer had suggested that the existing access where Outlot C and Watertown Road intersect may need to be realigned so it would be perpendicular to Watertown Road. MINUTES OP THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING JANUARY 17, 1989 ZONING FILE #1366-BUTTERFIBLD CONTINUED Planning Commissioner Brown mentioned the fact that the percolation testing had not yet been done. Gaffron stated that soil borings were taken and preliminary testing indicates that the soils were typical for the area. Before Mr. Butterfield can obtain a building permit, the perc tests must be performed. There were no comments from the public regarding this matter and the public hearing was closed. It was moved by Planning Commissioner Bellows, seconded by Planning Commissioner Brown, to recommend approval of application #1366. Approval would be subject to staff recommendations 1 through 7, and in addition thereto, that no structures be built upon the area south of the Luce Line. Kelley clarified that no building could begin until positive results were obtained from septic tests. Gaffron added that this matter would not go before the Council for final plat approval until such time as those results were determined. Motion, Ayes=6, Cohen, Nay, Motion passed. #1334 SIDNEY RBBERS 715 NORTH BROWN ROAD CONDITIONAL USB PERMIT/PRD AND CLASS III PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION Mr. Rebers was present for this matter, as was Mr. Stephen Pflaum and Mr. Robert Kost, representing Mr. Rebers. Zoning Administrator Mabusth reviewed for the Planning Commission the reason why Mr. Rebers was back before them. The City Council, at their December 12, 1988, meeting, had amended the subdivision proposal to have only 4 lots along the northern property line rather than 6. This realignment would cause the pad size on each of those four lots to increase considerably. The Council referred this matter back to the Planning Commission to have them review and determine if there was a need for additional controls on those lots because of the larger sized building pads. CounciImember Goetten clarified that she wanted the building pads on those 4 lots decreased to limit the size of homes that could be built. Planning Commissioner Bellows believed that five lots would have been a more equitable solution. She :*tated that in nearly all subdivisions, lots had their narrow dimension to the street and were deeper. This allowed for mbra lots and less street frontage. By using a 4-lot proposal, there has been a creation of "abnormal lots" because they have moro width than depth. This would allow for more density in that r.rea than five lots would have allowed. It was her suggestion that this matter be forwarded on to the Council with a recommendation that there be 5 lots along the northern boundary. Planning Commissioner Johnson concurred. Planning Commissioner Hanson asked for a comparison of lot To: Planning Commission Chairman Kelley Orono Planning Commission Members City Administrator Bernhardson From: Michael P. Gaffron, Asst Planning & Zoning Administrator Date: January 12, 1989 Subject: #1366 Loren Butterfield, 3925 Watertown Road - Preliminary Subdivision - Public Hearing Zoning District - RR-lA, 5-acre Application - Split off a 5-acre lot for applicant's son to construct a residence. List of Exhibits Exhibit A - Application Exhibit B - Plat Map With Wetland Map Compilation Exhibit C - Property Owners List Exhibit D - Survey Exhibit E - Proposal With Building Envelope Added Pertinent Facts - 1. The property extends across the Luce Line Trail and contains 2 wetland areas. The applicant has additionally purchased Outlet A of Katherine Cram's Hillaway Farm ih order to make up a total of 5 dry acres for the proposed lot. 2. Applicant inter»,ds to keep Outlet B with his main parcel, shown as Lot 1 on the survey. 3. Lot 2 is proposed to be served by an access driveway shown as Outlet C. This outlet width is shown as 28', which is proposed due to the existing greenhouse buildings being 29' from the east lot line. This is somewhat similar to the subdivision approved for Michael Plank further west on Watertown Road, where a 30' outlet was approved based on the concept that while one additional building site might be split off from the large remaining parcel, the existing homestead would be unlikely to access from the outlet area, hence there was no need for a 50' road outlet. The same situation appears to be prevalent in this case. 4. The applicant intends to keep Outlet C and Lot 1 in common ownership, granting an access easement to Lot 2 over Outlet C. Then, if Lot 1 is ever subdivided in the future. Outlet C could be widened to accommodate the normal road outlet width associated with a 3-lot division. Such a future widening of Outlet C would likely require removal of portions ’• the greenhouse operation. 5. Inherent in this blivislon request are some unusual occurrtQi/ice^ft. First, the accessory structures on Lot 1 will no longer meet a Ivlt' side setback, thej will be set back only 1' from the new side line. This requires a variance. Zoning File #1366 January 12, 1989 Page 2 of 3 Secondly, Lot 2 and Outlot A are intended to be considered as a single 5-acre parcel. Lot 2 contains 2.44 acres and Outlot A contains 2.79 acres of dry buildable area, for a total of 5.23 dry acres. This meets the letter and intent of the subdivision code which requires that at least 2 of the 5 acres of dry land must be contiguous. The applicant intends that the building site on the new lot will be within Lot 2 on the north side of the Luce Line Trail. The building envelope for that portion of property is shown in Exhibit E. Planning Commission may wish to consider whether the setback from the Luce Line should be 50' or 100'. In either case, this is an appropriate situation for use of the "special lot combination" document which is simply a resolution that recognizes the common relationship between Lot 2 and Outlot A, and which places a prohibition on selling Outlot A separately from Lot 2. 6. City Engineer Glenn Cook has reviewed the access location where Outlot C intersects Watertown Road. This is an existing driveway that serves the greenhouse operation. The Engineer has suggested that the access be improved to create a more level and perpendicular access to Watertown Road. This can be accomplished within the property boundaries. 7. Mr. Butterfield has operated the commercial greenhouse on this property under a conditional use permit since 1972, although the operation existed many years before that before a conditional use permit was required. City files indicate that no limitation or conditions have even been placed on the minimum size of the property necessary to accommodate the operation, although in the early 1970s a 5-acre "farm operation" standard was apparently in effect. The current greenhouse operation would appear to use less than 1/3 of the 12 acres remaining in Lot 1, hence splitting off the 5 acre parcel for a single building site will have no effect on making the current Conditional Use Permit^ Note that i^p this was considered as a "crop farm", the minimum Conditional Use Permit standard for acreage is 10 acres. C__ Discussion - The applicant states that he has no intent at this time to further subdivide Lot 1, and is only applying for the current subdivision in order that his son can build a home on the property. The building envelope for Lot 2 has been designated by staff on Exhibit E per the standards of the RR-IA zone, being 50' on the east and west lot lines, and 100* on the north lot line. There is no clear direction in the code that would define the south line of Lot 2 as a rear lot line, considering that the buildable lot area is intended to be continuous across the Luce Line. A conservative interpretation would be that the north right-of-way line of the Luce Line Trail should be considered as the rear lot line for Lot 2, and a 100' setback should be observed. The DNR has been asked to verify what setback they want maintained from their right-of-way, but no answer as of this writing. Also, if a 100' setback from the Luce Line is maintained for Outlot A, with the 26' wetland setback the buildable envelope in Outlot A is minimal at Zoning File #1366 January 13, 1989 Page 3 of 3 best. Staff would suggest that a stipulation be placed on the property that no principal residence structures may be constructed within Outlet A, and Planning Commission may wish to consider whether accessory structures should be allowed on Outlet A. Regarding septic testing, the total parcel will be greater than 5 acres in area, hence technically septic testing is not required. The 2.44 acre parcel north of the Luce Line is essentially a 2 acre lot, and it would be highly unlikely to have the septic system serving a house on Lot 2 be on the south side of the Luce Line. The applicant has attempted to do soil testing this winter, however his site evaluator has indicated that the ground was too frozen to test. The Hennepin County Soils Map indicates areas of Lerdal and Kilkenny soils over most of the area of Lot 2, both of which are normally suitable for mound-type systems. Slopes on the south side of the Luce Line would generally prohibit mound systems. The site evaluator has indicated that he feels that there are a number of suitable sites for mound systems within the proposed Lot 2 boundaries. Testing would certainly be required before a permit for a house would be issued. However, staff is comfortable in going forward with this subdivision without requiring full percolation testing. Staff Recommendation - Staff recommends approval of the preliminary subdivision for Loren Butterfield, subject to the following conditions: 1. A special lot combination resolution shall be filed for Lot 2 and Outlot A, specifying that the 2 parcels must be sold as a unit. 2. Likewise, a special lot combination for Lot 1 and Outlot B should be required. 3. Outlot C shall act as a private driveway access serving Lot 2. The owner of Lot 1 shall remain the owner of Outlot C as a condition of the subdivision approval, due to the proximity of Outlot C to existing buildings on Lot 1. An access easement over Outlot C granted to Lot 2 shall be executed by the owner of Lot 1 and Outlot C. 4. The driveway access where Outlot C intersects with Watertown Road shall be upgraded per the recommendations of the City Engineer to provide a perpendicular, flat access entrance. 5. A 9' variance is granted for setbacks to the east line of Lot 1 for the existing greenhouse buildings. The setback normally required for those structures would be 10' from the side lot line. 6. The applicant is advised that any future subdivision of Lot 1 may require a widened outlot and cul-de-sac, since a subdivision would create a potential for as many as 3 residences being served by a single access road. Applicant is further advised that it is the City's policy to consolidate accesses when feasible, for safety purposes. 7. Septic testing will not be required for the proposed building site until such time that a building permit is applied for, since the property in question exceeds 5 total dry acres in area. # 1 T7 “ I cm OP OROHO o “TT" a - SOBDIVISldff^PI.ICaTIOH .'f'" ,.i'- T7 FR0PERT7 LOCATIOH Site Address 3 9 ’7 V/a T^^ ^c/ n Property Identification Number (P.I.D.) _____ Please check one - Property abstract or Attach legal description to application. torrens? APPLICANT Ncune Address: Phone (home) //7?- 9 f'^9'_ _ _ V» ( Phone (work) W~A- / IoW/Sr Rd Cityr/VA^Z/l Zip: J OWNER (if different than applicant) Name _ Phone (home) Phone (work) Address:City:Zip: (attach list if more than one) EXISTING LAND USE Number of Tax Parcels Development Size Present Use (check) il± .:z’:ci.voo 01 OSO.CC Acres Dry Land Acres Wet Land -itLEIPT-y^M fOU Acres Total, all parcels ™ 7^5. Residential; no. _of units Other (specify) Present Zoning District A ^ / A PROPOSAL _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Division for Tax Purposes _ _ _ _ __ Lot Line Rearrangement Only (no new building sites) v/ Subdivision for New Building Sites Number of Building Sites: Proposed Gross Density: Minimum Lot Size: Proposed Use: (check) /Existing Units New Units Total Units g. Units per :Z0 Acres , 7. /OOi^OO Sq Feet Dry Buildable Land Residential Other (specify) MINIlfOM MATERIAL NECESSARY FOR COMPLETE PRELIMINARY APPLICATION 1. Completed Application Form Preliminary Plat information on Certificate of Survey. Certified Property Owners List of owners within 350' (you must obtain this list from Hennepin County Department of Finance A-603 Govt Center 348-3271). Stamped, legal sized envelopes (#10) pre-addressed to each of the names on the above list with no return address (use address labels obtained with property owners list). As an addendum to this application, please attach a separate list of any other persons you wish notified of this application. 2. 3. 4. 5. Certification by Zoning Department that Preliminary Plat Application is complete. Zoning Official's Signature_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Date_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 1. Payment of fees (park fees, filing fee, sewer and water assessments). 2. Signed certificate of survey or mylar copies of formal plat. 3. Title opinion. 4. Easements, Covenants, etc. 5. Developers Agreement and Letter of Credit. Certification by Zoning Department that Pinal Plat Application is complete. Zoning Official's Signature_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Date_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ FEES _ _ Sketch Plan Review (Class I, II & III) y Preliminary Review (Class I & II Subdivision) A $150.00 250.00 Preliminary Review (Class III and all non-residential) 300.00 + ^ ^ 20.00/LottuALuxTIOA^ Ktuitu) 30. 00 _ _ _ Final Plat Review (Class III) 150.00* ♦(Plus any legal or engineering charges) The applicant hereby agrees to provide all information required or requested by the Zoning Administrator, City Engineer, City Attorney, Planning Commission and Council necessary to process this application and further agrees to pay all additional fees established by ordinance. Applicant's Signature Owner's Signature Date Date 1 Applicant must have all submittals /into the City offices 25 days before the Planning Commission Meeting. Planning Commission Meetings are held on the third Monday of each month. Applicants must be present at all scheduled review meetings of the Planning Commission and Council. If an applicant is unable to attend ai scheduled meeting, please make arrangements to have an authorized agent attend in your place and to advise the Building & Zoning Office of this change prior to the meeting. y'-^oo :-i m*4it0 ‘2^1 IH os 5 M H a \ asM3« ! siVaU .U " 7T ^ \ inKlss i!M oe ui •H £ O O UJ < a a h -i H r r S “■ S o ui ui <r X N o a o oe o UJ ss$1 I- UJ >• z z K) a: u ui S XCvi Ul M -J O _ I a : g a. ”8-S«3e V) K N a O ^ ” UJ o sNo°g inwinin o -< S z N 00 ^ U UJ ^“18^2 2 u _ < a o o X ® lU ^Ss:o «• oe ^ S a tt § Ul BiV A i o iH a QC S C3a < B a IB Ua < B a 1 mia. O H> i|iia 5 1- ■1 o •V i 1 CL <■« \ IH O O o cc o M O UJ inKl a in 1“* fo a Of o: § E. ^ K K ^ C|j |u p O p'.J -J I- Zp < >• > a: MIH Z < < UJ «c Ni p ae oe _ lu^UJUJO —p a a o. a Ki p p O' < m o oe oe K> X \ S lU M (J Ih ^8 S O' inM a a Ki uj ° a E E cj g a. u p _ S < w <aal2:5 u < ar-l M Ui Z '^S“Sal3 ®i!^2o| M O ^ m UJ ut w a 7ss:;:!x» a a K B K M ** UJ UJ 5 aazE •^S||oaO P P o ^ a P X X a ^ a o "N eg lu a: oe UJ a a z V 1^1=; "asSMSO' ir B . a, a a p p H ^a o a a B N a a O B °5 a a a B eg I N Nsiiiss a B B -.O' B B a a.a a a a a < a o I- »- a X SSaaa< <!j •^SS2a3O' > > a B a o a a \ ir>ooo PO inn in in CVJ ro m I—I CO OC hh CO CVI I CO CVJ CO ex pr o z: <C PC cx □c <c _ z z s: •—• c <c c se : 3z -J o pe pu z =3 oC LU H- LJ > —I z: LU in P-V- 00 < CO 00 CO Z N o to z z < c > > LU LU IP U —Joo z z O I— H- LU LU f-i CP CO Ii «c «t CU |V4 CO »—( K-t CU ^ I LU LU r-"t-4 »S o9 <Ti in CO in in Qz z Z LU O Z I CO to IP •—I I—• O h-h- z pe 00 z z CO o o to <C >- -J < a. CO LU f-J P.o a mJ oo ^ z CO <C CO zo CO QCVJ LU cX I Z 00 to LU I—• I—• Z r—1 to *—• I CO Z CVI <C <C CO 3Z <01 in CO in in z z 3 ZoI— z Z t-i LU < 00 O <C CO z o < z 3 LU O -J IP zc CO Z •a* o o O Qz z CO C CO z z 3 tJ CO o CVJ I— < I z 00 LU LU r-» h- Zr-H «X >—< I 3 Z CVJ <C CO in z m J— 00 00 «*: CO CO CJ az ov in CO in m z z 3 Z O H- Z Z hh LU < C Z 3 LU O -U lO z r» <C CO z r \ •( S«. ST-ne-Q Propostrt Suliilivitiun for j Loren V. Oullrrflelil in th# Southwi'tt Ou.irier nf SeniMti l.'.im- *; linnnnpiii Countr. Hinnrsott * „ LOT I g5 -I 3 O LKISMHC LEG*l DESCmPTlOH:• Tim part of ilie Northnest Querter of the Sotthnett QLerier dtscriped et followi: Beginning at a point 100.81 fett East of a folnl 878.6 feet South cf the Northuest comtr of said touihwasl Quarter; thence Kerth 79*03' East 339 feet to the centerline cf Watertoan Koad :(foroarl)r County Road Ko. <S): thence Sottheasterly along said centerline to a point 878.6 feet Soith fro» the Rorth lint of said Soulhwtst Quarter (Measured perpendicular to said Korth line): thence Vest to the point of Otginnlng; AiSC that part of said Korthaest Quarter cf the Southuest Quarter described at follout: Beginning at a point on the Vet line of said Northwest Qtarter of the Southwest Quarter dist* ant 878.6cS feet South of the Korthuett corner of said South­ west Quarter; thence South along said West line a distance cf <39.3I2S feet: thence East <9S fett; thence Kortn 439.3IZS feet- thence vest 495 feet to the point of beginning; ALSO all that part of the Vest half of said Socthwcst Quar­ ter .escribed as follows: Beginning at the Southwest corner nf said Southwest Quarter; therce Porth along the Vest line rf sai l Sni-thwest Quarter a distance of l3ao.i feet ncre or lets to a pcini 1317.937S feet South of the Korthwest corner of said Southwest Quarter; thence East parallel with the Scuth line of said Southwest Quarter a distance of 49S feet; thence north pa'allel with the west line of said Southwest Quarter j distance cf 439.3 feet Mere or lest to a point 878.625 leet S'>ulh of the North line cf said Southwest Quarter; thcrcc East parallel with the South line of said Sruthwest Quarter a distance of 2S.S feet; thence South parallel with the west line cf said Southwest Quarter to the Souih line cf said Southwest Quarter; therce Vest along the South line of said Southwest Quarter to the point of beginning, eiccpt highways and right-of-way of the Electric Sho.'t Line railway. All In Section 32, Township 118 North, Range 23 West of the Slh Principal Meridian._ _ * (he atev- •■••scrlption aay be ciuuged title ri inioii mat Is to te prer're.i. ALSO. ....... A, IllUAUAT FARM. r-ne:* the final coffin s !<•(,!,tor,, me. £lir!-ie** . Li'i’’ Surreyors. ?l-i:inr' I >U • l.t* ■ ■'! lir-'St l a Scale: 1 inch t idQ feet Cate : l.ecevtcr ?2, 1988, < : Iron marker Prnposeil Sulnlivi simi for I ortn V, Oultprf It lil in the Southwpit Ou.iritr n1 Sprimii l,'.il(|. lll•nntplll Couiiiy, Hiiiiipsntt IXHiSiT il!LEGAl DE^RJPMOH^* Thil pjrl of lilt Nortnktft Qutrttr of tlit Southtitst Qttrter describtd ts follows: Beginning it i point 100.81 ftet fist of 4 toint n78.6 feet South rf tht Northwtst cornir of s.ild Soi-tiiwtsl OutPier; thenct Kcrth 79*03’ Cist 339 fiei to '.h# eenierllnc cf Wittrtown Roid.(forairly County Roid Ko. 4s): mtnee Sotthejsttrly ilong slid ctnttrllnt to l point 878.6 fttt So itn fro* tht North llni of slid Souinwist Quirltr (ntisurcil ptrppndlculir to Slid North lint); thtnet Vtst to tht roint of btginning: AiSC thit psrt of Slid Horthktst Quirttr cf tht Socthwest Quirltr dtscrllitd is follows: Btginning it I point on tht Vt; lint of Slid Northwtst Otirttr of the Southwest Ouarttr dlst- int 87R.6iS fttl South of tht Northwtst corntr of ;ild South* wtst Quirltr; thtnet South Hong slid Util lint i distinct cf 439.3I2S fttl: Ihtnct Cist 49S fttl: thtnet North 439.3tiS ftci: thtnet util 495 fttl to tht coint of btglnnlng; Also III thii pin of tht Ktsi hilf of si.-J Sot.lhi.cst Quir- lor ctscribtil .IS follows; Beginning it mt Softhwtst eorntr of Slid Soulhwtsl Quirttr; therct North ilong the Vtit lint c< SIM Sf i thwest Otirler i distinct of 1340. 1 fttt »cre or lts% to I relnl 1317.9375 fttl South o* tht NorthutSl cerntr of Slid Souihwtit Quirttr; thence Eisi pirillel with int South lint cf Slid Southwest Quirttr i distinct of 495 feet: thence Horih pirilltl with the West line of slid Southwest Quirttr J disimcc cf 439.3 feet acre rr less to e point 878.625 ftn S'liiiii of the North lint c' Slid Soulhwett Quirttr: tlM'rrr (.im pjr.il lt| with the South line of Slid 5< uthwcst Qii.irtnr i distinct Of 2S.S fttt; thcnct South cirillel with thr k-psi lint cf Slid Southwest Quirltr to the SouMi line cf Slid Soiiihwesi Quirltr: therct Vest ilong me South lint of Slid Southwest Quirttr to the coint of beginning, oiccpt highwiys ind rlght-of-wiy of the Electric Short Lint Fillwiy. All In Section 32. Tounshlp 118 North. Ringt 23 Ut;t of the 5th Principil Meridiin. •flit 4t'»" di.v:ripiion aiy bt tlunged ’.III* r:iii|oii I lilt Is to te pr»r’r«.l. >i.i l..l IllUAUAT FARM. it:’ the finil f^sPOSe^ DiV/S/OAi cr.rriii s N.’hfKf.. me. ■ i:..' iu'veyors. ?|.rn. t 111 • L • S( r I laT It /2JS Ac- -rttOH. :;u,.... /.s? kl twai. 8S At. J>ie.y) Lo-r 2.; 2.VyAc-I>R>' A : 2.71 At txtr L«fr ' 5.2-3. At Dity' 5.1 S AttCTAt- T;HXHiaiT Propottil Sulidivitiiin for l.or»o V. Oultprficlil in tht SoultiMHtt nu.irtrr nf Sminn iipnnppiii Couiily. HiniirsnK dw<Ur.Ai*6w«i •< S«. sr-iiO’O LJ LOT I it.ia:»en» iLi ilL'I'i - U£* L £!1L"J f L* S!!i * Inti port of Ilia Norihktst Qutrttr of the Sotthwcil Qctrter dticribed as follows: Beginning at a point 100.81 feet Cast of a point 878.6 feet South ef the Northwest cornsr of said Soi-iiiwast Ouarter: thence Kcrth 79*03' East 339 feet to the centerline cf Watertown Road . (foratr1y County Road Ko. 45); thence Sobihejsterly along said centerline to a point 878.6 feet Sn ith froe the North line of said Southwest Quarter (Measured perpendicular to said North Unci: thence Vest to the point of beginning: RISC that part of said Northwest Quarter cf the Southwest Quarter described at follows: Beginning tt a point on the Ve* line of said Northwest Quarter of the Southwest Quarter dist­ ant 878.6<S feet South of the Northwest corner of said South­ west Quarter; thence South along said west line t distance of 439.3I2S feet; thence East 49S feet: thence North 439.3I2S feet: thence vest 49S feet to the point of beginning: Also all mat part of the West half of said Southwest Quar­ ter cescribed as follows: Beginning at the Soi-Uiwest corner of said Soutiiwwsi Quarter: therce Norm along the West line e* said Soitiiwest Quarter a distance of 1340.1 feel Mere or less to a rclni 1317.937S feet South of me Northwest cerner of said Southwest Quarter: thence East parallel with me South lln« cf said Southwest Quarter a distance of 496 feet: thence North parallel with the Nest line of said Southwest Quarter a distance cf 439.3 feel Mere cr less to i point 878.62S feet South of the North line of said Southwest Quarter; iherrt EaM parallel with the South line of said Sruthwest Qiiarinr a distance of 2S.S feet; thence South parallel with the West line cf said Southwest Quarter to the Sou'h lire cf said Southwest Quarter: therce Vest along the South line of said Snuthwast Quarter to the point of beginning, escept highways and right-of-way of the Electric Short Line Fallwcy. AU In Section 32. Township 118 North, Range 23 Utst of the Sth Principal Meridian. • riit at'.r- •ll•scripllon nay be tiungeU title Cl 101 on I hat 1- to te prep-red. ALSO. 0wt}o4 A. IIILLAUAT FARM. • lie:' the final CP.mii s MiMitpr,. me. fnrioer - . in.' Surveyors, Planner' I VI' 1.: 'll •l•l•■•st fa I Inch . 100 i;er,ert«r 22. Iron marker feet 1988, »-»-•» dXfSr/AJCe. A RESOLUTION GRANTING PRELIMINARY APPROVAL FOR A PLAT AT 3925 WATERTOWN ROAD APPLICATION NO. 1366 WHEREAS, Loren Butterfield on December 22, 1988 subdivision application with the City for approval of a 2 plat of property legally described as follows; Exhibit A attached filed a formal lot residential (hereinafter "the property"); and WHEREAS, after due published and mailed notice in accorda^'^e with Minnesota Statues 462.358 et. seq. and the City of Orono Zon and Platting Codes, the Orono Planning Commission held a public hearing on January 17, 1989, at which time all persons desiring to be heard concerning this application were given the opportunity to speak thereon; and WHEREAS, at their regular meeting held on February 13, 1989, the Orono City Council considered the subdivision application of Loren Butterfield , noting the following findings of fact: 1. The property is located within the RR-IA Single Family Rural Residential zoning district, requiring a minimum of 5 acres of dry buildable land within each newly created lot, of which 2 acres must be contiguous with the building site. 2. The property contains a total of approximately 20.56 acres total area, of which approximately 18.07 acres is considered dry buildable. Of the 20.56 total acres, approximately 5.37 acrer are located on the south side of the Luce Line Trail right-of-way which is owned by the Department of Natural Resources. 3. The proposed plat contains 2 lots and 3 outlots. Proposed Lot 1, containing 11.44 dry buildable acres, is intended to remain with the existing residence and greenhouse conditional use that exist on the property. Lot 2, containing approximately 2.4 acres of dry land, is intended as the proposed new building site. Both Lots 1 and 2 are located north of the Luce Line Trail. Outlet A, located on the south side of the Luce Line Trail, is intended to remain with Lot 2 as additional acreage making up the 5 acre dry buildable requirement. Outlet B, located '>n the south side of the Luce Line Trail, is intended to remain in common ownership with Lot 1. Page 1 of 6 4. Lot 2 is proposed to gain access to Watertown Road via an easement over Outlot C, a strip of land 28* wide along the east lot line of the property. Outlot C is intended to remain in the same ownership as Lot 1, due to the potential for a future subdivision of Lot 1, and due to the location of the existing buildings adjacent to Outlot C. 5. The existing property contains approximately 248.9* of frontage on Watertown Road, and has a defined width at the 100* front setback line of approximately 430*. Proposed Lot 1 will have approximatley 192* of frontage on Watertown Road and a defined width of 380*. Lot 2 requires a variance because it does not have frontage on a public road. Lot 2 has an east west width dimension of 350* and an average depth of 300* at the intended building site. 6. Lot 1 requires a side setback variance for existing accessory structures which will, as a result of the subdivision, be located 1* from proposed Outlot C, where a 10* setback is normally required for such structures. 7. Outlot C is recognized as being in a location that may be suitable for access for future development of existing vacant property to the east. 8. Two distinct wetlands existing within the boundaries of Lot 1 and Out lots A and B will be subject to Conservation and Plowage Easements. 9. Due to the increased traffic anticipated by development of a residence on Lot 2, the existing access to Watertown Road within Outlot C, which will be shared by the owners of Lot 2 and the greenhouse operation on Lot 1, must be upgraded to create a safe access per the recommendations of the City Engi: r. 10. A total of 33* of right-of-way southwest of the center line of Watertown Road shall be dedicated on the plat if the title opinion verifies that such right-of-way has not been dedicated previously. 11. Proposed Lot 1 contains more than 5 acres in contiguous dry buildable area and is not subject to testing for future drainfield sites as part of the subdivision process. Preliminary soil borings have been completed for Lot 2 and indicate that suitable sites for mound systems likely exist within the proposed boundaries of Lot 2. Additional soil borings and percolation tests are required for Lot 2 to verify specific drainfield sites before final plat approval will be granted. Pge 2 of 6 12. A single family residence can be constructed on Lot 2 meeting the 100* minimum setbacks from the north line of Lot 2 and the Luce Line Trail right-of-way line, and meetrng the 50* side setbacks from the east and west property lines cl Lot 2, without the need for further variances. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that based upon either one or more of the findings noted above, the City Council of the City of Orono hereby approves the preliminary plat for Loren Butterfield at 3925 Watertown Road per the survey (attached as Exhibit B hereto) by Coffin and Gronberg Inc., dated December 22, 1988 revised January 1, 1989, subject to the following conditions: 1. A "special lot combination" resolution shall be filed for Lot 2 and Outlot A specifying that the 2 parcels must be sold as a unit. 2. Likewise a special lot combination for Lot 1 and Outlot B shall be required. 3. Outlot C shall act as a private driveway access serving Lot 2. The owner of Lot 1 shall remain the owner of Outlot C as a condition of subdivision approval, due to the proximity of Outlot C to existing buildings on Lot 1 and for long range planning purposes for this and neighboring properties. An access easement over Outlot C granted to Lot 2 shall be executed by the owner of Lot 1 and Outlot C. 4. The driveway access where Outlot C intersects with Watertown Road shall be upgraded per the recommendations of the City Engineer to provide a perpendicular, level access entrance, prior to issuance of a building permit. 5. A 9* variance is granted for setbacks to the east lot line of Lot 1 for the existing greenhouse buildings. The setbacks normally required for those structures would be 10* from the side lot line. 6. Lot 2 shall be granted a variance because it does not have frontage on a public road. Page 3 of 6 7. For setback purposes, the north line of Lot 2 shall be considered the front lot line, the east and west lines of Lot 2 will be considered side lot lines, and the southwest line of Lot 2 abutting the Luce Line Trail right-of-way is considered the rear lot line. 8. The applicant is advised that any future subdivision of Lot 1 may require a widened Outlot and cul-de-sac since a subdivision would create a potential for as many as 3 residences being served by a single access road. Applicant is further advised that it is the City's policy to consolidate accesses when feasible for safety purposes. 9. No structures may be constructed on the south side of Luce Line Trail in Outlets A and B. 10. Subdivision approval will not be granted until complete on-site sewage treatment soil testing infomation is provided, showing that primary and alternate drainfield sites exist within the boundaries of Lot 2. 11. If the Title Opinion indicijtei that right-of-way for Watertown Road has never been formally dedicated, plat drawings shall indicate a dedication for 33* of right-of-way southwest of the center line of Watertown Road. 12. Standard Drainage and Utility Easements shall be shown on the plat drawings, with easement widths conforming to the sketch attached as Exhibit C. 13. Conservation and Flowage Easements shall be dedicated over the 2 major wetlands on the property. 14. Payment of the standard Park Fee of $100.00 for the new building lot comprised of Lot 2 and Outlot A. 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: 1. RECORD PLAT drawings in the form of two (2) mylar copies and one (1) copy reduced to 1"=200*. Drawing to include: Page 4 of 6 a) Lot lines platted per preliminary survey by Coffin and Gronberg Inc. attached as Exhibit B hereto. b) Dedication of "drainage and utility easements" 10* wide along all perimeter property lines and 5* each side of internal property lines, or as modified in the attached sketch. Exhibit C. c) Designation and dedication of the wetlands as drainage easements on the plat. 2. LEGAL DOCUMENTS required: a) Title opinion addressed to the City. All owners, mortgage holders or others with property interest indicated therein shall sign the plat and all other documents affected by such interest. b) The applicant must provide certified copies of all recorded easements currently affecting the property. c) Signed and executed Flowage and Conservation Easements; blank area requiring description may be filled out as follows: "Over the drainage easements as shown on the plat of (plat name)". d) Signed and executed access easement over Lot C in favor of Lot 2. e) Signed and executed "special lot combination" resolutions for Lot 2 and Out lot A, and for Lot 1 and Out lot B. 3. PEES TO BE PAID: Total Due $250.00. a) Park dedication fee per current schedule: One residential lot at 5 acre density =» $100.00 per lot; total $1(50.00. b) Legal review and filing fees of $150.00. Page 5 of 6 Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota at a regular meeting held this 13th day of February, 1989. ATTEST: Dorothy M. Hallin, City Clerk James R. Grabek, Mayor STATE OF MINNESOTA) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this _____ day of ^_____________, 198 , by James R. Grabek and Dorothy M. Hallin, Mayor & City Clerk of the City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City. Notary Public My Commission Expires Page 6 of 6 2189.2 Mark E. Bernhardson, City AdministratorTO: FROM: Thomas M. Kuehn, Finance Director DATE: February 1, 1989 SUBJECT: Approve Engineering rates for 1989 CITY OF OROJ^O The engineering firm of Bonestroo, Rosene, Anderlik and Associates, Inc. has submitted for approval revised engineering rates to be effective January 1, 1989. A comparison of current to proposed rates is shown below. Note that the $10.00 attendance per meeting increase is the first increase in that item since before 1984. Principal Engineer Registered Engineer/Architect Graduated Engineer/Field Sup. Senior Draftsman Senior Technician Technician Word Processor Clerical Attend Regular Council Meetings Reimbursable Expenses Mileage TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Mark E. Bernhardson, City Administrator Forwarded recommending approval to accept the above rates as being appropriate within budgeted amount. PROPOSED MOTION - Moved by _, seconded by _, to approve the proposed 1989 rates as an amendment to the contract with Bonestroo and Associates for engineering services. Ayes __, Nays Rate Per Hour 1988 1989 % Incre. $54.50 $57.00 4.6% 49.00 51.00 4.1 39.25 41.00 4.5 36.00 37.75 4.9 33.00 34.75 5.3 24.00 25.00 4.2 24.25 25.25 4.1 18.50 19.50 5.4 40.00/mtg 50.00/mtg 25.0 at cost at cost — $ .21/Mi $ .24/Mi 14.3 21089.2 TO: Mark E. Bernhardson, City Administrator FROM: John R. Gerhardson, Public Works Director DATS: February 10, 1989 SUBJECT: County Road 51 Parking • V. to 4 V , u Of omo Attachments; A. Hennepin County Department of Public Works Letter Dated 2/8/89 B. County Road 51 - Parking Memo Dated 11/30/88 (No Attachments) In December 1988 Council reviewed information regarding roadside parking along County Road 51 from the Hendrickson Bridge to County Road 135. We requested Hennepin County to review the matter as we felt if changes were necessary it is an appropriate time to do so due to the construction of the MWCC interceptor during the spring and summer of 1989. Attached for your review is the most recent proposal from Hennepin County. A draft sketch of the area will be available at the Council meeting Monday evening. RECOMMENDATION - To accept the information as presented and to direct staff to notify the affected property owners prior to the February 27, 1989 Council meeting to get their input. PROPOSED MOTION - Moved by __, seconded by __, to accept the information as presented and to direct staff to notify the affected property owners prior to the February 27, 1989 Council meeting to get their input. TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Mark E. Bernhardson, City Administrate 1^ Forwarded for comments recommending notification for public input at the 2/27 meeting. HENNEPIN DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS 320 Washington Ave. South Hopkins, Minnesota 55343-8468 935-3381 /A February 8, 1989 lUr li^l FEB I 01589 ■' Ui___ , n ‘'ll ii^' Mark Bernhardson City Administrator City of Orono 1335 South Brown Road P. 0. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 CSAH 51 PARKING NORTH ARM BOAT LAUNCH SITE Dear Mark: We have made some additional review of pedestrian sight distances which would be obtained with the installation of a full 10 foot wide parking lane on the south side of CSAH 51 . Our previous report listed three options. One option removed parking and the other two provided for a full 10 foot wide parking lane. With the full width parking lane, a pedestrian crossing from south to north can stand on the parking lane and have sight distance in both directions well in excess of that required to cross the road. This is the case except in the area of the first curve east of the Hendrickson Bridge where parked vehicles could cause sight distance to become somewhat restricted. Through this curve area, sight distance is adequate to permit time for the pedestrian to cross only about one half of the roadway. Also, stopping sight distance for an eastbound vehicle travelling at 40 mph is marginal. If four parking spaces were eliminated in approximately the middle of this curve, adequate stopping sight distance at 40 mph would be obtained. While Option No. 1 in our previous report, eliminating parking, is probably the safest situation, it does not address the city’s concerns over providing parking for the boat access. If parking is to remain, we offer an additional Option No. 4 which optimizes the sight distance with parking provided. As described above, this option is to provide a 10 foot wide paved parking lane on the south HENNEPIN COUNTY an equal opportunity employer Mark Bernhardson February 8, 1989 Page 2 side, but eliminate four parking spaces in the approximate middle of the first curve east of the bridge. We will be happy to meet with you to discuss this further with City Staff or the City Council. Sincerely, Dennis L. Hansen, P.E. County Traffic Engineer PBM/DLH:jfe cc: Patrick 8. Murphy James M. Wold 113088. TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Mark E. Bernhardson, City Admin is tratorj' DATE: November 30, 1988 SUBJECT: County Road 51 - Parking /rmMajrB Attachments: A. County Road 51 Memo Dated 9/20/88 B. County Road 51 Memo Dated 10/13/88 C. County Road 51 Memo Dated 10/26/88 D. County Road 51 Memo Dated 11/18/88 E. Hennepin County Letter RE: County Road 51 Dated 11/28/88 F. Diagram of County 51 G. City of Orono Letter Dated 1/29/86 ISSUES 1. Presentation to Council of alternative packages that are agreeable to Hennepin County. 2. Determination as to what alternatives the Council desires for further consideration. INTRODUCTION - As indicated in Attachment D Attachment E represents Hennepin County's summary of three different packages for different approaches on handling the parking on County Road 51. DISCUSSION - The primary objectives in dealing with this problems are: 1. Safety 2. Parking needs for public access 3. Property owner trespass The three alternative packages as noted in Attachment D are summarized as follows: Alternative 1. - Eliminate parking totaling on County Road 51 and find an alternative place for the parking. The parking for Zone 1 as outlined in the 1983 Task Force Report were a total of 139. The present number of spots at North Arm are: - Current North Armn Access 64 vehicle trailer (+ 17 singles for cars/vans/pickups) - County 51 parking 28 (not all within 1500 feet of access) Alternative 2. Widening Shoulder - This alternative would widen the shoulder to the approprlate 10 foot width, which is approximately three feet wider than presently exists and would involve the double stripping of a fog line for a safety zone between where people park and where traveled traffic is supposed to go. The County has indicated a willingness to delinate the parking spots to get the parking vehicles to "crowd ” the curb leaving space between the parking vehicles and the "fog lines" (white stripes on the side) . Alternative 3. - This would entail the removal of selected parking slots (approximately 6). Two options with this regarding the parking are to either replace it with a parking area on the north or to delete the 6 spaces as a consideration. Additional considerations that should be looked at regarding the issues are as follows: Speed Limit - Change in the speed zone as noted before the speeds on either sides of this area are at 30 MPH west and 40 MPH east and this is a 35 MPH zone. Once the construction with Metro Waste Control is done, we would request a speed study to see if this could be lowered. The risk in this however is they may raise it further as it is based on the average traveled speed drivers go. Theoretically it could raise the limit rather than lower it. 2. Access Dock - In order to address the trespass problem the City could on its winter access install a dock to allow those people who are parking on County Road 51 to use a dock rather than traspass on the residents. In addition to placing the dock there it may be appropriate to notify people of the location. Mr. Singer has raised the question as to whether prior to 1983 parking was prohibited on County Road 51. In researching the records it is our understanding that it had not been restricted prior to that. The following items were considered, but not chosen for consideration these include as follows: - Pedistrian Crossing Lanes - At present the County does not feel they would be beneficial as the limited cross pedestrial traffic fromt he north is limited it would generally be ignored by both pedistrians and drivers. “ Flashing Pedestrian Signa1 s - While initially effective these loose their effectiveness to most drivers in the area and begin to blend into the background. " li£ Passing Lane - A request was made regarding extending these based on site distances when they are parking. The County looked at these but does not think that would have an appreciable effect on safety. - Turn-Around - The feasibility of a turn-around near the Crystal Bay Service was looked at, but not deemed feasible at this point. A requirement is state law is 1000 feet either direction - This would require removal of a number of small scrub trees east of Tonkawa Road. - Narrowing Driving Lanes - Currently the issue is looked at regarding the driving lanes as to whether they could be narrowed to; a) slow down traffic and b) not have to encroach towards the lake side any greater. It was determined that these are presently at the minimum standard for the County. - Rea 1ign Center Line - This was looked to swing it further to the north, but the County did not feel it was an appropriate solution based on current road structure. The possibility that a couple of the packages could be looked at, one for the short term and another for the long term with options 2 and 3 being shorter term solutions and option 1 being perhaps a longer term solution. The 1-4 widening of the shoulder may be a further encroachment of hardcover into the 0-75* lakeshore to the extent it is already not driven on gravel. This may require an amendment to Metro Waste Control's conditional use permit. Attached please find Mr. Singer's correspondence with DNR. ALTERNATIVES 1. Council directs staff on developing a desired alternative and/or variations. 2. Establish public meeting for January 23, 1989. 3. Eliminate undesired alternatives. 4. Develop a short term and long term strategy. 5. Table for further discussion. RECOMMENDATION - It is recommended the Council establish 1/23/89 as a date for consideration of alternatives having given staff direction as to a desired alternative. At this time the minor widening and curbing or the elimination of up to 6 slots without replacement would improve the safety as a long term solution Attachment H may lend some guidance for eventual eleimination. cc: David Singer, 3520 North Shore Drive, Wayzata Dennis Hanson, Hennepin County 2889.4 // TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Mark E. Bernhardsonr City Administrate DATS: February 8, 1989 SUBJECT: Eurasiiin Milfoil Task Force/LMCD Request - • . . . . . . .. .J C‘»Tr Of OnC:'i Attachments:A. LMCD Letter Dated 1/27/89 Re: Eurasian Milfoil B. Excerpt from LMCD 1989 Budget Request ISSUE - Determination as to the level of funding, if any, the Council would like to make for 1989 to the Task Force's work. INTRODUCTION - As noted in Attachment A the LMCD is now formally requesting donations from each of the cities which is to be equal their annual LMCD levy. For 1989 the LMCD levy for Orono is $16,940. As you may be aware the City has helped the LMCD distribute the brochures on milfoil, which now is found in almost all the bays on Lake Minnetonka. DISCUSSION - Depending on the amount of money that the LMCD is able to raise this first year will somewhat dictate the tract they must undertake to tackle this program. Presently they have received approximately $40,000 in private donations from the solicitation they had sent out. Alternatives for the 1989 program are as follows: A. Alternative 1. - This alternative would entail the acquisition of two to three harvesting machines and attendant equipment at approximately $80-90,000 per unit for a total $160-300,000. In additior there would be operation costs of this equipment for personnel and other supporting equipment to a private contractor for trucking and disposal of approxmiately $200,000. The total cost the first year would be approximately $500,000. After that the annual cost would be the $200,000 operations costs. B. Alternative - If the LMCD was unable to get the amount needed to acquire at least two machines they would have to go with contracting the work to a private contractor, who in turn would have the expense of acquiring the machines. It is estimated that the cost would be about $300,000 annually. The preference of LMCD is to go with Alternative 1. They are looking to fund the operating costs by a split of approximately $100,000 request from Hennepin County together $100,000 from the cities around the lake (The annual revenues LMCD receives from the Cities for 1989 is $99,032 and as such a proration of the annual fees would be one way to acquire that money.) At present the City of Orono has not budgeted any money in 1989 for this expenditure# but could transfer money from its budget reserve for such an item if the Council so desired. It is expected that the harvesting program would be ongoing for a number of years# although as noted in Attachment A they would expect perhaps a change in funding. A local Legislator is probably going to make a request for State funding as efforts to control”Lake Minnetonka may be beneficial to limiting its spread to other lakes in the state. ALTERNATIVES - 1. Agree to the amount requested. 2. Selection of a different amount. 3. Choose not to fund any amount. 4. Table until February 27# 1989. RECOMMENDATION - It is recommended that the City of Orono contribute up to $15#000 for this project for 1989 as the City has the greatest amount of lakeshore of any of the communities around the lake and it would be a definite benefit to Orono residents for this program. Additionally it is recommended that this money be a transfer from the City's budget reserve. PROPOSED MOTION - Moved by # seconded by # that the Council indicates its willingness to fund up to $15#000.00 for the program for 1989# which is to be funded by a transfer from its budget reserve. Ayes _# Nays _. cc: Jo Ellen Kurr# LMCD Representative Eugene Strommen# LMCD Executive Director BOARD MEMBERS JoEllen L. Hurr Chair Orono Thomas Fleese. Vice Chair Mound Jan Boswinkel, Secretary Minnetonka Beach Mark Westlund, Treasurer Wayzata Marvin Bjorlin Tonka Bay David Cochran Oareenwood Albert O. Foster Oeephaven James N. Grathwol Excelsior Ron Kraemer Spring Park John Lewman Minnelrista John G. Malinka Victoria Robert K. Pillsbury Minnetonka Robert Rascop Shorewood Robert E. Slocum Woodland vm-Q.lf/tfeTJ'ri LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERV 402 EAST LAKE STREET WAYZATA. MINNESOTA 55391 January 27, 1989 ITM MIIOMMFM FXFfMiTi\/P DIREC Ml '^3/W89The Honorable James Graybek Mayor, City of Orono 3050 Jamestown Road Long Lake, MN 55356 "- -— Dear Mayow Graybek: The infestation of Eurasian water milfoil in Lake Minnetonka has attracted widespread concern. The Task Force organized by Tom Reese, Mound, on behalf of the Lake Minnetonka Conservation District, supports an immediate weed harvesting plan starting this summer. While Eurasian water milfoil cannot be eradicated, we definitely cannot afford to wait out this summer while the weed advances. Private funding is now being solicited to achieve an equipment and operating budget described in the enclosed outline. We are confident individuals will be joined by regional resources from the county, possibly the state, and for 1990 the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. LMCD Chair JoEllen Hurr, your Board representative, joins in asking your city to make a significant investment in this year's equipment and operating needs. We realize budgets have already been set. We also expect that emergency conditions can find a way to be met given the care and concern of its officials. May we ask your favorable and prompt consideration of a dollar commitment in February equal to your annual LMCD levy? That amount, and comparison with :he other Lake Minnetonka cities, is on the Attached summary. Your LMCD representative and a Task Force member will be present to answer questions as you consider this request. Thank you for allowing this on the full schedule of priorities your city handles so well. Yours with pride in Lake Minnetonka, igeiie R. Stronunen, Executive Director Lake Minnetonka Conservation District enc c: Mark Bernhardson, AdminT JoEllen L. Hurr . // / Lake Minnetonka Conservation District 1989 BUDGET b DISTRIBUTION OF EXPENSE -JJeephayen- I-^Excelaior-~ •^Greeniibod Assessed Value (1.000*s) $ 48.053 24.688 9.460 —Minnetonka—— ' 559.196 rzrMtmrcftronka^Bearfr .Minnetrista “MoundTzr Orono — - ^horewood .Spring Bark Tonj^ Bay_ l^ictoria Hayzata. Woodland Total 127369 37.535 71.058 107,415 56,590 17.703 21,794 18.948 64.771 12,372 $ 1,061,952 ( 503,056) X of Total Assessed Valuation 1/3 Mil Taxable Z of Budget Resulting from $19,806 Maximum to Minnetonka Share of 99,032 1989 Budget 4.5Z $ 16,018 7.6Z $ 7,526 2.3 8,229 3.9 3,862 0.8 3,111 1.5 1,486 52.6 41,886 20.0 *19,806 1.6 4,123 2.0 1,981 3.5 12,512 6.0 5,942 6.6 23,686 11.3 11,191 10.1 35,805 17.1 16,934 5.3 18,863 9.0 8,913 1.7 5,901 2.8 2,773 2.0 7.265 3.5 3,466 / 1.8 6,316 3.0 2,971 6.1 21,590 10.3 10,200 1.1 4,124 2.0 1,981 100.OZ $209,429 100.oz $99,032 ^Maximum of $19,806 12689.1 TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Mark E. Bernhardson, City Administrator^^ DATE: January 26, 1989 SUBJECT: County Road 116 i i ' V ■ h- Attachments:A. County Road 116 Dated 1/11/89 (Memo Only) B. County Road 116 Draft Resolution ISSUES - Determination as to whether the Council wishes to adopt the attached draft resolution as its statement of opposition to County Road 116 proceeding south of Highway 55. INTRODUCTION - At the Council's last meeting they directed staff to indicate the Council's opposition to County Road 116 going forward together with tabling the balance of the issue related to the City's action should the road be constructed. DISCUSSION - In addition to the issues contained in Attachment A is the fact that an upgrade to standards similar to that the County would be using on Willow is contemplated in the City's Capital Budget for about 1995. The estimated cost of this reconstruction was approximately $300,000. Related to this was the potential need for further right-of-way to the west to protect homes on the east and that such be undertaken prior to any development in that area. (As potential acquisition of right-of-way may be required regardless of who reconstructs it, it may be appropriate that the City explore giving the property owners equivalent density credit for the right-of-way given up in exchange for no cost incurred in the right-of-way acquisition. If the County were to do the road the only City cost would be half the right-of-way costs.) It may be appropriate that this be dedicated in any planned development or subdivision. Raised at the meeting was the issue of the future location of Highway 12 and its relocation to an upgraded Willow. Should Highway 12 stay with the current corridor 116 would continue to provide the feeder to the extent that it presently is proposed. To the extent that Highway 12 would go north of the current location, the Willow/116 would provide an access route to that northerly location. Should it go further south it would serve as part of the conduit for traffic to Highway 12. ALTERNATIVES - Adoption of Resolution a. Adopt the resolution b. Amend and adopt c. Table RECOMMENDATION - It is recommended that the Council adopt the resolution for transmission to both the County Board and the City of Medina• PROPOSED MOTION - Moved by _$ seconded by _, that the Council adopt Resolution #__ indicating its opposition to County Road 116. Ayes __r Nays __. cc: Pat Murphy, 1108 TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Mark E. Bernhardsonr City Administrator DATS: January 11# 1989 SUBJECT: County Road 116 iT ^ Attachments:A. County Road 116 Memo Dated 1/4/89 B. Letter to Residents Dated 1/19/89 ISSUE - 1. Determination of Council's support or opposition regarding the proposed upgrade of 116 to be expressed to the County Board. 2. If County 116 goes ahead, determination as to what actions the City would like the County to take in Orono. INTRODUCTION - At the Council's January 9, 1989 Council meeting the issue of County Road 116 was discussed by Council. At t«at meeting it was tabled until the January 23, 1989, meeting when individuals from the County would be present. DISCUSSION - Issue 1. - As mentioned at the last meeting the decision^i^s one with the County Board and the City of Medina ® regarding that in the City of Orono should be directed to eiuher one of those two bodies or both. It currently is programmed for Spring 1990 construction. Issue 2. - The following represent issues the City has discussed vTTth"the County to determine their position should the County choose to go ahead on 116. A. willow Drive ^ Medina Border to Six - Related to this segment are two issues: 1. If Council desires County to take over this section voluntary. (The County feels they have right to acquire without City concurrence.) 2. Once County has acquired jurisdiction the County, at its option, can either construct an improved segment to County Road 6 or step at the border. 3. Construction layout - This would be construction layout to minimize the impact to the majority of homes.’ B. Willow Drive - Six ^ 12 - The issues related to this are the foiiowingT "" 1. Allowing County Road 116 - County 6 ^ Highway 12 - Determination as to whether” the CouncTl desires to request Hennepin County take over this on a voluntary basis. 2. Reconstruction - Determining whether the Council desires to have or approve plans of this segment if the County takes it over. 3. Alignment - Determine if the Council desires to have this segment constructed slightly to the west (up to 14*) to buffer existing residences on the east without a substantial impact on the undeveloped portion to the west. 4. Right-of-way - Only the costs entailed would be 1/2 of right-of-way costs. ($19,000 - 2 » 9,500) right-of-way costs between 6 and 12 could be minimized by dedication of ROW for development. 5. Bike Trails - As an option a one sided bike path could be installed for about $19,000 of which the City would pay half. It should be additionally noted that should the County take oyer the entire lenght from the border to Highway 12 tne folloWi.ng benefits accrue to the City of Orono; 1. Siqnalization at Willow/12 - While this would not guarantee a signal at the point that /ehicle warrants for cross traffic are met, the County would pick up a portion of the light which would otherwise be Orono s ($10,000). 2. MSA Mileage/Funding - Should the County take over Willow Drive the City would be able to designate another portion of that road in the City if it chooses for MSA designation together with using its funding that it gets for other needs in the community. This is particulary in light of the City saving any reconstruction monies for the future for Willow. ALTERNATIVES - Issue 1. 1. Choose to support. 2. Choose to oppose. 3. Choose to take no position. 4. Choose to table. Issue ^A. Willow - Medina to Six la. Choose not to participate. lb. Allow County to voluntarily take over the segment. 2. Allow construction of an upgraded segment. 3. Specify alignment for that construction. 4. acquistion of effected properties. 5. Table. B. Willow - Six ^ 12 la. Choose^not to participate. lb. Voluntarily allow the County to take over that section. 2. Allow the County to reconstruct. 3. Allow the County to under take a relignment. 4. Allow reconstruction of Willow Drive into allignment 1. 5. Table. RECOMMENDATION - Issue 1. - It is recommended that if the Council desires to express opposition or support to do so in the form of a resolution directed to the County Board. Issue 2. - If the project goes ahead the staff makes the following recommendations for the City Council to consider. This is predicated and assuming that the traffic generated will be at the Medina border and its an effort at trying to make the best of the situation. a. That the Council allow the County to take over the entire stretch to Highway 12 b. Require the County to reconstruct it along an alignment that the City desires. c. That the County work with the City to minimize the impact on the homes particularly north of County Road 6. d. Predicate it upon the County contributing to the area south of should the bridge upgrade be undertaken. PROPOSED MOTION - Moved by _, Seconded by _, that the Council directs staff to work with the County along the lines of the staff's rejommendation. Ayes _, Nays _• RESOLUTION IN OPPOSITION TO COUNTY ROAD 116 BEING EXTENDED FROM HIGHWAY 55 TO COUNTY ROAD SIX WHEREAS, the City of Medina has contemplated construction of a north/south route from Highway 55 to its southern border in the approximate center of the community, and WHEREAS, the City of Medina under 5,000 population does not qualify for Minnesota State Aid Roads, and WHEREAS, the County has agreed to fund construction of this road through its bonding funds for an estimated total of $2.9 million, and WHEREAS, the City of Orono having a population over 5,000 receives its own Municipal State Aid monies, and WHEREAS, although the County's standards for construction of 116 would be similar to a revision of Willow done by the City, the City is concerned about the negative impact of increased traffic by construction of this route in Medina, and WHEREAS, substantial opposition to this road in Medina was made evident at the Orono Council's consideration of this matter, and WHEREAS, substantial opposition in Orono was generated to this proposal, and WHEREAS, the City of Orono realizes that the County has the legal right to designate and/or construct any or all portions of the road it chooses to in the City of Orono. HOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Orono goes on record indicating to the County Board and the City of Medina its opposition to construction of County 116 from Highway 55 to County Road Six. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota at a regular meeting held February 13, 1989. James R. Grabek, Mayor ATTEST: Dorothy M. Hallin,City Clerk 12689.2 /i TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Mark Bernhardson, City Administrato DATE: January 26, 1989 SUBJECT: 1988 Corporate Report Attachment: A. 1988 Corporate Report . -4 ISSUE - !• Presentation of the 1988 Corporate Report. 2. Acceptance of the report by the Council. INTRODUCTION - As has been done the last four years the staff has prepared a summary of major items for the municipal corporation of the City of Orono. DISCUSSION - The information prepared attempts to put the year in perspective from a National, State and Local view point. The issues mentioned for the organization are ones felt appropriate as highlights of 1988. It is helpful to compare the statistical index kept by the City with the Financial Health report prepared by the State. Some of the statistics differ in that they are done at differing times of the year, but provide a check and balance. As additions to the Corporate Report this year the staff has also attached its summary of Cash, Expenditures and Revenues together with the summary of its investment portfolio for the Council's acceptance. ALTERNATIVES 1. Accept. 2. Request additional information. 3. Amend and adopt. RECOMMENDATION - It is recommended that the Council accept the information as presented which will be additionally transmitted to the community in summary form through the Mayor's Article. PROPOSED MOTION - Moved by _, seconded by that the Council accepts the Corporate Report and other relevant financial information for 1988. Ayes __, Nays __. cc: Department Heads 11789.3 1988 CORPORATE REPORT Attachment:A. Orono Statistical Index B. City of Orono - Personnel Diary C. Building/Zoning Summary D. 1988 Investment Summary INTRODUCTION - For the sixth year in a row the United States economy has continued its expansion and the anticipated downturn has not yet materialized with unemployment having reached the lowest rate in the Country in 15 years. Other positive economic trends included lessening of the Federal deficit although the proposed 1990 budget still has a 91 billion dollar deficit. Additionally the monthly trade deficit has decreaded, however, it does continue to grow on an aggregate basis. The dollar has continued to be rather weak, although it showed some strength in mid-summer and again late in the year into 1989. It is anticipated that a general instability will continue as long as both the Federal and trade deficits are a problem. The positive economic news for the country resulted in a Republican being elected to the White House with Democrats gaining greater control in both the U.S. House and Senate. One of the biggest issues in the news during 1988 was the prolonged drought and high heat particularly in the Midwest. For some this was clear and convincing evidence of the Green House Effect (better termed "The Hot House Effect") brought on by a combination of human made fluorocarbons in the air, increased carbon dioxide levels due to energy usage and the substantial amounts of rain forests being cut down in the world. Others, however, feel that the drought and heat were of a cyclical nature nd may in fact be due to unseasonally warm waters off the west ^st of South America. . Minnesota the drought was a substantial concern for wide areas of the state and many farmers were surpri^; even harvesting half the yields that they normally v , x. The Legislature continued to find the Metropolitan area of the state to be the "Engine" of the economy and continued to increase taxes on this source of wealth. Violent crime was on the upswing, particularly drug related crime, with an upswing also in fire relat deaths in the state. The state's economic picture has been much better than the other states in the Upper Midwest which has brought comfort to those who proudly proclaim Minnesota as a high tax, high service state. The year has also seen the University of Minnesota coming under attack leading to the resignation of the President, together with reports of the state's entire public educational system. While absorbing substantial state revenues, many allege the highly touted system produces only a mediocre product. The drought evidenced itself in Orono by substantially reduced lake levels with the Council adopting a water conservation ordinance to protect this valuable resource. Building in the community was higher than expected, although down from the record in 1987. The average permit for a new single family residence being about $240,000. The City of Orono's tax base continued to be strong and had the second highest average house value of any community over 1,000 population in Hennepin County. This strong tax base however, has been detrimental as the state's funding formulas direct monies to areas where there are low property tax values (regardless of income in the area). ORGANIZATIONAL POLICY BODY - The 1988 election continued into 1989 the same composition on the Council as in the 2nd half of 1988 with James Grabek being re-elected Mayor and CounciImembers Barbara Peterson, Ed Callahan and Alan Nettles being elected to the Council seats. Mr. Nettles had replaced Mr. William Sime, who had resigned as a Councilmember mid-year. Other notable events the organizational body included the "Olive Branch" approach to the City of Long Lake in an attempt to resolve mutual issues of the two councils through mediation. The annual Board of Review resulted in an ever increasing number of assessment appeals of property values. Many were not contesting that their property is not actually worth that value, but primarily because of the ever increasing taxes that accompany such values. The Council undertook the annual goal setting in August during the budget process. Of benefit for both the primary and general elections this year was the newly acquired voting equipment which greatly cacilitated the election process with result being completed in just a few hours after closing of the polls. The City was deeply saddened by the loss of its former Mayor Brad Van Nest (1976-1982) who died unexpectedly in August. The City’s appreciation for all of his work was noted in a plaque which was presented to the family on Dec^?^ber 12, 1988. 1988 FINANCIAL REVIEW - The City, as has been traditional, had Its revenues actually exceed its projected revenues by 8.9%. The expenditures for the year were approximately 3.7% under thai. anticipated in the budget. The Cit: *s mill rate continues to be the second lowest in the County and is substantially below that of any other surrounding communities. As not'^i? in the Statistical Index the project growth in tax dollars based on population and consumer price index expectations equal the actual growth in the property tax. This reflects excellent management on the part of the Council while still improving the level of service to the community. 1988 was the first year the City submitted its substantially expanded financial report for the Government Finance Officers Associatio,n Certificate of hievement for Excellence in Financial Reporting. The City was arded th2 certificate for the 1987 Fiscal Year on January 31, i.989. COMMUNITY DEVELOFMENT - Si-’n^ficant elements in this field of City operations ii.clude: - Adoption of the Comprehensive Plan Amendment #2 in May of 1968 following approval of the Metro Council. - Approval of the Reber’s subdivision which included new design elements not previously required by the City. - Processing of 125 zoning applications which are more than double those done in 1985. - Participation in LMCD’s Comprehensive Manag:^Tnent r-lan. - Hiding of a consultant to do background work in preparatioii of potential renewal/redevelopment in tie Navarre area. - The reopening of the Big Island Ve<“ or day use reel04 on ou July 4th. - Updating Ian ,uage t for sec / > r/ontracts for spring Park and Minnetonka Beach. - Hii Kiling 300 complaints regarding possible violations of codes. - Initiating 15 hazardous building actions. - Continuing the septic inspection progt^-m with 440 sy terns inspected in 1988. PUBLIC SAFETY - The Police Department continued to provide a wide range of citizen safety and emergency services including the followings - Drug enforcement, which resulted in 38 arrests. - A new emphasis during 19FS on DWI and minor alcohol consumption which resulted in 273 DWI arrests and 130 arrests of minors. - DARE (Drug Awareness and Resistance Education) this program was undertaken to strengthen grade school children's level of resistance to abuse of substances. - 368 vehicle accidents of which there ’ere 3 fatals. - Increased computerization of the department with a second on-line State computer. - Successfully solved 2 Super Valu robberies and the "Crappie Contest Caper". - Handled sigr ficant traffic ncobl as a result of construction on County Road 1 5*. - Undertook cooperative truck enforcement programs with the State vhich resulted in 77 citations, 640 warnings issued and 51 vehicles put out of service. - Recommended Officers Tomcheck and Morowczynski for Officer of the Year as the result of their successful efforts rescue a homeowner during a fire. - Issued a total of 5,688 citations in the four communities of which 3,364 were in Orono. - Improved customer service by placing squad identities for the contract cities together with Orono. - Utilized the services of a part time officer to aid in providing service at a reduced cost. PUBLIC WORKS AND TRANSPORTATION - Significant areas have included: - Substantial completion of County Road 15 construction which included improved street lights, the addition of sidewalks and a broader, safer traveled surface. - Highway 12 which has now been programmed for a safety improvement for 1991 between North Brown Road and Old Crystal Bay together with further work regarding a longterm solution through an Ad Hoc Committee of the six communities on Highway 12 in this area. - Passage of a water conservation ordinance to assist in the preservation of this valuable resource. - The Parks Commission developed both a work program and a Bike Hike Trail Comprehensive Plan for the community which was approved by the Council. Increased recycling efforts by meeting goals through the joint powers agreement for recycling and authorizing the cujbside pick up of recyclables commencing in 1989. ADMININSTRATION - Significant issues included: - Adoption of an investment policy. - Implementation of a formal compensation plan together with part time benefits. - Drafting of a capital budget. - Improved records management and disposal by greater micro-f' ming, shredding and recycling of paper together with the acquisition of new copier. - Conversion of the Recorder position to a 40 hour position. - Dealing with the ever increasing health insurance premiums. - Having all employees attend a Sexual Harassment seminar. MAJOR GOAL AREAS - The City made significant progress in a number of areas that it had identified in the strategic plan: - Stubbs Bay Sewer Project - Completed the prerequisite septic system analysis, which involved over 200 staff hours to prepare, together with exploring financing and construction options to make it a viable project. - 1989 Budget Guidelines - Introduction of these guidelines and review by the Council in advance of the actual budget process. - City Facilities - Developed the criteria for an authorized analysis of thr^e sites to obtain more accurate cost estimates of the alternatives. - Media Communications - Continued the City's monthly articles to the newspaper. CONCLUSIG- - The City continues to improve its corporate identity and the organizational dedication to operate in a businesslike manner with the staff making increased efforts to improve customer response and satisfaction. irrioMevT B CITY OF ORONO - PERSONNEL DIARY The following represents significant personnel actions during the year: - Officers Toracheck and Morowczynski were recommended for the Police Officer of the Year Award by Chief Kilbo. - Teri Naab completed her third year of training by the Clerks Institute and awaits certification based on membership with the Minnesota Clerks and Finance Officers Association. - Lyle Oman received his Class II Building Official Certification which qualified him to conduct inpsections on all phases of construction (residential^ commercial and industrial). - Authorization in 1988 to convert the Recorder's position to full time. - The part time position that was used to fill during Officer Kirnyczuk's absence was made a regular part time position because of Long Lake's decrease in contractual personnel. - New employees: Laurie Scheffler as the City's Recorder James Morrow as a part time Police Officer Randy O'Brien as a Utility Maintenance Worker Barry Rathbun as a Utility Maintenance Worker Kevin Walsh as Animal Control - Employee departures during year were; Jerry Smith as Utility Maintenance Worker Patti Peterson as the City's Recorder Rick Dennison city's Animal Control Officer Michael Kirnyczuk on a medical retirement - Council Recognition Tom Kuehn received special recognition for his superior efforts in preparing the 1987 Financial Report in an expanded, informative format. Mel Kilbo was recognized for his excellent efforts in drug enforcement. UJ(»<a. 0) 3 I o o t— to> aeCD Z H OCo a. Illae I «o oe I S o I «H 0. lu ir N oe o a ozUJ Z Z 3 Ulz K >• UJ (A CD Q Ul > I U Z I H M I ^ Ol o -J UJ zoa. 3oo M Ih K h »- C< Z UJCO< u Z h O 4ae a 3a. I-z UJ a z ui t- gg tfk X UJ 3> a z UJ 3 O IXoaz Ui> 9 9 h 0 9 9 • 0 9 9 0 0 0 9 0 9 9 9 9 — 9 0 0 0a 0 9 9 9• •• • *• 9 9*9 0 01 9 0 9 «9 9 9 0—0 9 O ■0 o o • 9 9 9 ^- 0 o •“ ri 9 u 9 9 0 9 0 0 9 0 9 0 9 0 9 0|9 0 0 9 O O If 9 9 0 9o o ■9 9 0 9 0 0 r 0-0 9 O C 0 o o 0 • 9 9 9 h - 0 o• •• • 0 9 a 9 9 0 9 0 0 9 0 9 0 9 0 9 G 9 0 0 9 O 9 «% O o u 9 9 0 9 O O CE 9 9 0 9 0 0 r 0 — AJ — — 0 h 0 9 0 0 lio 9 ai 0 0 O < 0 9 0 0 0 O H 0 9 9 9 9 0 O 0 0 n 0 0 9 9 9 9 «9 9 9 — 0 9 0 9 0 o oeo 0 9 0 0 0 O Q 0 9 0 0 0 O z 0 9 9 9 9 0 0 0 0 P 0 0 9 > 9 9* 9 9 ■ N N > — 0 - — 0 e X N >— - r 9 9 0 CO 9 9 N N. S 0 9 0 — o W X N. S 0 9 9 e e G 9 9 8 9 9 8 X S > 9 9 If 0 — - V N. V 0 0* » — G K K a UJ Ul n a. 0 u < < 8 0 0 8 _J -I _L PAPER IE /1 5 /a a 0C NOTE 1 0 /1 1 /8 3 0L O A N B D 0 4 / 2 5 / a a 0X < < 4 < v>I- M •>M UJ B o u c u a X C IB oe a oe c 3 Ul bi u 0 X V Z Z X Z 9 c Z Z X Z -J bJ ao o c U L O Z U u u. u 3 — — u 9 0 If <c 1 8 G 9 9 e 0 9 9 9 9 8 O 9 .C a OJ e >— 0 U c 0 0 •-0 - V c 0 0 U 0 0 8 3uu 9 9N • •10 11 ts^ H ▼ <ojT *2 OJ « w •-— o o e O lO If ♦ n «i 'T lU (U e o e Ul O e e e «a o o 0| <a o a CO oJ U) o o n ei 9« o o o e 'T o n — o e «o o e o 0 O n o o o ▼ o n - (U e o OJ o o* o U) a OJ o h- o OJ o o» a in « o» »« 0 0 N. V Ul - o V. s 0 0 o o 0 0 0 n N 9i ■»- W S, V 0 0 o e 0 J- H 0 H 3 mI o z a. a. u 3 a o u u. o 0 •-* H ae 0I- UJ0 u 0 If 00 r- 0 0 0 — 0 0 0 0 r» n 0 0 0 0 » r* 0 - 0 • o o o ^ Oo n o n 0 o ei o h* •> o a o 0 0 — - — ff* o o a MOO 0 o e woo 0 e of « % • 0 o ol «- o o 0 — - CO o o o o » o e e o e n 0 « •o e o *- o e n o n o N o 0 — a* o j o < 0 H 0 O r- H « » o d o o N o a o a » o a 0 ze o o 0 0^ • a o 0« 0 V N V \ 0 «r u N X N 0^-0 o o - «0 0 Uo n 0 N. V N •o <o Ul 0 —N N > ^ r o o ^ m H j-w •- 3 0VI o c z 0. a, Q. u u 3 o c o u u. u o c tnj. 0KB K UJ U 0 U IJ C^ O ^ 0 n a 0 0 *■ «0 o e 0 n r 0 I- ^ 0 0 r- > 9 3 2 i» n n I r- n n I 0 0 n I o o 9 ♦ OJ o 10 0 t- ^ 0 0 *> 0 0^0 0 9 0 o n 0 9 0 0 e o oi o a e oi o o o o< o o o Sooo OI o o o oj o o o e e o o o a- o e 0 e o «aO O N e| o e o» oj o o 9 H - - 0 0 o o o 01 o o o 9 0 0 >- e e 9 0 0 o o e 0 o e 0 — - o o o » o e 9 0 0 •“ 0- O 9 9 0 0 9 0 0 9 Oj 0 ^ 9 0 0 r» o o 9 0 0 9 9 0 0 h- 0 0 0 0 — 1.10 0 9 l» 9 T 9 e o o o o e e o e e o o o e e e o e 0 o o 0 0 0 0 o e 9 0 0 9 9 0 9 0 0 9 9 — 0 9 9 0 9 0 0 9 0 0 9 0 9 9* 9 9 0 0 o o o o o o 0 0 9 O O 0 O O T 0 0 9 O O O 0 — 0 o 0 o 0 0 o 0 — 9 9 9 0 0 0 9 0 9 0 9 0 9 0 9 OI 9 O O 0 - 0 - - 0 o o o o o o O 0 o « 9 0 9 9 CO CO 9 - 9 9 9 9 0 • o o o — O 9 O 9 O 0 O 9 o o 0 9 • o o O 0 O 9 O 9 O 9 O 9 o e 0 9 0 0 9 o o o 0 9 OI 8 o r19 9 0 9 0 0 9 0 0| 9 9 * 19 9 9 9 CO 9 O ID CM 9 CD * J o o o 9 0 0 o o o O O 0 o o o o 9 O oi O O OI O O r«i o O O 0| 9 o o(o in o O O 01 o 0 0 o o o e 0 9 0 o o r V 9 9 0 <o lA e 9 0 0 9 9 * >• r - - a 8 CO 9 9 9 9*9 9 9 9 9 * N S. X s V. N V V V V V V \ •i 9 0 9 9 0-^9 0 9 0 0 tf 0-0 0 0 0 0-01 - 0«- ^ V N N N V V V. V V \ •i 0 9 9 9 9 0 9 — 01 9 9 a o o o o o o e o o o e o o r>9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 ^ 8 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 N N S V X VI V V V V V V V 9 0 9 8" — 9 0 O 0 O 0 * 0 — 81 — o o 0 — 0 — o ->S N, N.V V V V V V V V V 0 9 9 — 08 9 0 0 9 0 8 o o o o --0 0 — 0 0-0 Z 0 o z o Z O 8 9 9 9 10 0 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 — I- <9 0-<< 8 cn CO 9 O Z 9 z z Z 3o o 0 0 9 Z O < 9 <9 < 1 Kj a.a. a. «9 a O K O K O X UJ UJ UJ o U K UJ J O J o _j a 9 a O Q z 9 3 0 z Z 3 — CO 0 hi Ul C z u.U U. 9 o < u.c 9 xq 9 Z Uu o o o <0 a 0 9 0 < O T z oe Z Z Z z z a > 9 9 9 a 9 9 m O OC K K O _j at o o o D o a Z Ul UJ UJ UJ Z 9 w UJ Ul u 0 0 1-u U O U a. 3 u u. u u 0 U M Z z 1 9o <v 9 9 9 9 9 8 9 — 8 9 9 8 r 9 0 9 9 0*0 0 8 <0 9 8 CB t>i'—00 0 0 9 — 00 9 0 h O OC 9 9 0 0 e o 0 0 0 0 0 O o r 0 9 9 9 0 9 9 9 9 9 9 C Z 0 0 0 0 0 9 0 0 0 0 0 0 ^ 0> s s 5i 3 5li s“aij 2S"it • An I h O O Ul O _| O O H o < 0 0 9 0 9 O O 9 9 e K O O o a ■ zO 0 9 > 9 T 5 2'2*2 ? ■ $ -- 12689.8 /4 TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Mark E. Bernhardsonr City Administrat DATS: January 26, 1989 SUBJECT: Highway 12 - MnDOT 20 Year Plan COUNCIL MEETING rL-3l3 5iS3 iiry OF Attachments: A. Ad Hoc Task Force Letter Dated 1/18/89 ISSUES - update of information to the Council regarding Highway 12. INTRODUCTION - The Task Force centered in Willmar met w^x^th Teaislators’^f the Transportation Committee on January 25, 1989. ThI City of Srono and other members of the Ad Hoc Task Force to the eas\^ are currently awaiting word from Commissioner Levine for a meeting with this group sometime in February. discussion - The numerous issues confronting the communities and St ^outlined in Attachment A. Key to these decisions will W for the scoping process whereby corridor options Untttd?ng"tte'rresttro?erirl selected, the P-cess for doing the environmental impact statements on these three to £o r/.ivr that it would take about three years for the pre-design time and fi^ht-of-way acquisition and another two to three years for contract award and construction. ALTERNATIVES - 1. Accept the information. 2. Request further information. 3. Table. nproMMENDATION - It is recommended that the^ceS by t^ council at this time pending further word from, MnDOT*s office regarding a meeting with the Task o cnrvF OF aHanci CITYofORONO Post Office Box 66«Crystal Bay, Minnesota 55323• Municipal Offices On the North Shore of Lake Minnetonka January 18, 1989 THIS LETTER ALSO SENT TO CounciImember Fred Patch, Long Lake Mayor Jeff Walton, Maple Plain CounciImember Wilfred Scherer, Medina Mayor Marvin Johnson, Independence Mayor Gordon Wetter City of Delano P.O. Box 108 Delano, MN 55328 Dear Mayor Wetter, This letter is written to update you on progress regarding Highway 12. Commissioner Levine desires to have a meeting out in this area but is currently awaiting submission of the consolidated 20 year MnDOT plan to establish the meeting. It anticipated he will receive this by the end of the month and will then be contacting me to set a meeting with the Task Force for the later part of February. Some of you may know unofficially that after a significant technical analysis by MnDOT District 5, that the Highway 12 project in the Orono/Long Lake area is rated #2 and the Maple Plain/Independence section is rated just a little bit lower. The indication from the Brainerd District that handles 12 west of Maple Plain to Delano is that they will coordinate with District 5. This good news however is subject to several unresolved issues including the following: 1. Level of Sta^ Funding - Currently MnDOT District 5 has indicated they can spend all projected finances on just maintaining what they have over the next 20 years. The need for Highway 12 will be to get additional funding of transportation during this legislative session. 2. Corridor Selection Study - a. Financing - priority does not dictate that MnDOT will necessarily foo the whole bill for the corridor study. There may be a request for at least some participation from the cities. b. Soon, orihg Agency - The corridor selection study done either by MnDOT or a joint powers. If done as a joint powers then the communities would need to get together to develop the joint powers agreement and then select a consultant to undertake the study. BUILDING a ZONING - 473-7337 assessing ADMINISTRATION 4 FINANCE - 473-7358 PUBUC WORi.S - 473-7359 Mayor Wetter January 18, 1989 page 2 3.Cooperation of Cities - To the extent that the cities agree to cooperate with development of the outcome of the corridor selection study/ a project will probably go forward. However, it was indicated that if there is substantial political and/or citizen resistance to the improvement, MnDOT has several other areas where there are needs as closely ranked as Highway 12. They could easily spend their money on those instead of having it tied up on Highway 12 for a significant period of time. Process Timeframe - It is presently expected that if everything would go according to plan that it would take approximately 10 years from initiation through completion of a four-lane expressway from Wayzata to Delano. 1991 Safety Improvements/Orono and Long Lake - As you may be aware MnDOT is proposing some work to improve safety in the area between North Brown Road and Old Crystal Bay Road. This project is separate from anything that would happen longterm. The monies from it cannot be used to assist in the longterm solution. I am told that it will have n impact on a longterm solution happening. In advance of this meeting it would be appropriate that we have a meeting of the group in order to discuss any presentation that we would like at that meeting. This will be set once the meeting with the Commissioner has been set. Please call me if you have any comments. Sincerely, 4. 5. Mai^k B. Bernhardson City Administrator MEB/dh 11089.3 cc: Mayor and City Council John R. Gechardson, PublicJeanne A. Mabustb, Building emd Zoning Administrator Glenn Cook, City Engineer - _ _ Ken Madole, 804 Meadow View Drive, Horthfield, MN 55057 2889.3 TO: Mark E. Bernhardson, City Administrator FROM: Tom Kuehn, Finance Director'T^^^- DATS: February 8, 1989 SUBJECT: Final Interfund Transfers for 1988 C0UI«C!l r. '■ '13 U 3 ri'fv As of December 31, 1988 there are three funds which require year end transfers. The ?IR Fund requires $123,840.80 from the General Fund to temporarily fund part of the street construction costs for County Road 15. This will be permanently refunded in 1989 when we receive Municipal State Aid Construction monies requested from the State of Minnesota. ($200,000) The Golf Course Operating Fund has a deficit of $11,624.86 which is recommended to be funded by the General Fund until such time as the Golf Course Fund has sufficient cash flow to reimburse the General Fund. The reimbursement should be in 1989. A report on the operation will be provided once the operations statement is complete. With all construction related activity completed it is appropriate to close out the 1985 Capital Project Funds. (This final is separate from the 1985 Rond Improvement fund used to pay off the bonds and interest.) To close it out requires the transfer of funds from the General Fund to offset the liabilities of the fund of $81,828.89. An alternate source of funds could be the sewer operating fund. TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Mark E. Bernhardson, City Administrate^A Forwarded recommending approval PROPOSED MOTION - Moved by _, seconded by _, to approve transfers as follows effective December 31, 1988; from the General Fund to the PIR Fund, $123,840.80 for temporarily funding part of the MSA cost portion of the County Road 15 street improvement; from the General Fund to the Golf Course Operating Fund, $11,624.86 for temporary funding of the golf course cash deficit; fro»'i the General Fund to the 1985 Capital Project Improvement land $81,828.81 to transfer the Improvement fund liability to the General Fund, Ayes __, Nays __. Mayor Wetter January 18, 1939 page 2 3. Cooperation of Cities - To the extent that the cities agree to cooperate with development of the outcome of the corridor selection study, a project will probably go forward. However, it was indicated that if there is substantial political and/or citizen resistance to the improvement, MnDOT has several other areas where there are needs as closely ranked as Highway 12. They could easily spend their money on those instead of having it tied up on Highway 12 for a significant period of time. is presently expected that if everything would go according to plan that it would take 4. Process Timeframe - It approximately 10 years from initiation through completion of a four-lane expressway from Wayzata to Delano. 5. 1991 Safety Improveme nts/Orono and Long Lake - As you may be aware MnOOT is proposing some work to improve safety in the area between North Brown Road and Old Crystal Bay Road. This project is separate from anything that would happen longterm. The monies from it cannot be used to ass'st in the longterm solution. I am told that it will have no impact on a longterm solution happening. In advance of this :..eeting it would be appropriate that we have a meeting of the group in order to discuss any presentation that we would like at that meeting. This will be set once the meeting with the Commissioner has been set. Please call me if you have any comments. Sincerely, m Ma^k E. Bernhardson City Administrator MEB/dh 11089.3 cc: Mayor and City Council John R. Gerhardson, Public Works Director ^ Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building and Zoning Administrator Glenn Cook, City Engineer ** . ™Ken Madole, 804 Meadow View Drive^ Northfield, MN 55057 TO; Mark E. Bernhardson, City Administrator FROM; Tom Kuehn, Finance Director DATE; February 10, 1989 SUBJ; 1988 Summary of Receipts, Disbursements and Balances t jUNCll ' ■ ■ ■■• 13 V,;j •f,r^ i?: ■'■'■ ■’^'0 As you know, I had hoped to be able to include the 1988 Summary Statement of receipts, disbursements and cash bala«ices for the eleven-month period ending November 30, 1988, for this agenda. However, the statement should be ready Monday, February 13th so it can be distributed to the Council at the meeting Monday night. TO; Mayor Grabek and CounciImembers PROM; Mark E. Bernhardson, City Administrator When completed, they will be forwarded for your information 2889.6 n TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Mark E. Bernhardson, City Administrate DATE: February 8, 1989 SUBJECT: Agreement with State of Minnesota/Alco Sensors ‘V''' j\r Attachment: A. State of Minnesota/Department of Public Safety ISSUE - Determination as to whether Council desires to enter into "Oie agreement enclosed in Attachment A in order to receive initially a "free" Alco Sensor and possibly up to 5. INTRODUCTION - The device the State is proposing to "^end" to the City is used as a preliminary test carried in squads for a "pre­ screening" of possible DWI suspects when an officer has stopped i:hero. The City currently owns 1 with 2 on order. This "loan" would bring the total to 4. It would be helpful to have one available for each squad. Each unit costs about $400.00. ALTERNATIVE 1. Adopt the resolution and agreement. 2. Choose not to adopt. RECOMMENDATION - It is recommended that the Council adopt the attached agreement and resolution. PROPOSED MOTION - Moved by _, seconded by _, that Council approve the agreement between the City and the State of Minnesota which authorizes the lending of Alco Sensors additionally Council adopts Resolution #_ authorizing such agreement. Ayes _, ^^lys ^ STATE OF MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF PUBUC SAFETY January 27, 1989 BUREAU OF CRIMINAL APPREHENSION 1246 University Avenue SL Paul, Minnesota 55104*4197 612/642*0610 Melvin Kilbo, Chief Orono Police Department 1330 Brown Rd. S. Crystal Bay, MN 55323 Dear Chic The September 1987 Porc.ole Breath Tester (PBT) survey has given the Department of Public Safety the information necessary to purchase a limited number of Alco Sensors. Your agencies response to the survey make you eligible to receive one /\Jco Sensors. I have enclosed the necessary documents to accomplish -k. You will find a sample resolution which must be passed by your go >g body, a copy of the agreement for the loan of PBT's and instructions on mpleting these L«.cuments. When the resolution is passed, the officials authorized by it can complete the agreement. This together with a certified copy of the resolution passed by your governing body must be returned to the Forensic Science Laboratory. Once we receive the agreement and resolution we will be able to schedule one or more officers from your department for the necessary training and at that time we will issue the instrument to you. Yoi* will note that on page three of the agreement we have indicated the ni ,ar of instruments this agreement is permitted to cover. We will only be able to distribute one unit per department at this time, having the agreement cover the total number that your agency indicated on the survey the agreement will cover future units if chey become available. When complete, please return all documents to the BCA Forensic Science Laboratory, Breath Test Section. If you have any questions contact Bob Mooney, or Eldon Ukestad at 612 2-0760. Sincerely yours. Lowell C. Van Berkom Director Forsinsic Science Laboratory End. LCV:ds AGREEMENT FOR THE LOAN OF PRELIMINA**Y BREATH TEST INSTRUMENTS VITNESSETK: VHEREAS the State of MlnnesoU, Department of Public Safety (hereinafter referred to as "DPS”) baa received granta of money through aeotion A02 of the Federal Highway and Traffic Safety Act of 1966 or through other aoureea for the purohaae of preliminary breath teat instrumenta; and WHEREAS DPS deairea to provide a mechaniam through which local law enforcement agenciea nay uae theae preliminary breath teat inatrumenta to aaaiat them in the detection of drivers who are in violation of Minneaota laws relating to traffic and highway safety, NOV THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY AGREED BY AND BETWEEN DPS and the local government unit designated as "Recipient” on page 3 of this agreement (hereinafter referred to as "Recipient”)as follows: I, DPS*a Rgaponsibilitlea. A. DPS Shall make available to Recipient up to the number of preliminary breath test instruments (PBTs) specified on page 3 of this agreement, the exact number of instruments supplied to be determined by DPS subject to availability of funds and instruments. Recipient shall use and have possession of these instruments but DPS shall retain title and legal ownership of them. B. Any and all repairs shall be made by or at the direction of DPS. If funding is available, DPS shall pay for the cost of maintenance and repair or replacement due to normal wear and tear resulting from routine proper use of the instruments. C. DPS shall train at least one person designated by Recipient in the proper handling and use of these instruments. DPS shall provide this training without cost for the training itself. D. DPS shall maintain all recessary state and federal inventory control records on these instruments. II. Recipient*a HaaDonaibllitiaa. A. Recipient shall use the instruments provided under this agreement to assist in enforcing Minnesota laws relating to traffic and highway safety. B. Recipient shall keep and maintain the Instruments in proper operating ooodition. Recipient shall supply all disposable oomponenta for the instruments at Recipient's expense. C. Recipient shall be responsible for the oost of repairing or replacing instruments which, in the opinicn of the Bureau of Criminal Apprehension, have been damaged due to abuse, misuse, or other oause outside the scope of normal wear and tear in routine proper use. Recipient shall also be responsible for the costs of maintenance and repair resulting from normal wear and tear in routine proper use of these instruments if funding for such maintenance and repair is not made available to DPS. D. Recipient shall return to DPS any instrunent which is obsolete, inoperable, Balfuactioning or no longer in use. Such instruaents to be delivered or shippci to the Bureau of Criminal Apprehension Laboratory, postage and handling charges prepaid. E. Recipient shall not permit the instruments to be tampered with or operated by individuals who are not trained in their operation. F. Recipient shall designate at least one person to be trained by the DPS in the proper handling and use of these instruments. Recipient shall bear the cost of any travel expenses incurred by any person attending such training. G. The people trained by DPS in the proper use and handling of these instruments shall train other officers in their departments in how to properly use and handle these instruments. H. Recipient shall make these instruments available to personnel authorized by DPS when required for Inventory or Inspection purposes. III. Tern of tgraenent. This Agreement shall take effect on the date of final approval by the Comnlssioner of Finance and remain in effect until terminated by either of the parties as provided in section IV. IV. Temination. This Agreement may be terminated by either DPS or Recipient at any time with or without cause, upon ten (10) days written notice to the other party. In the event of such termination. Recipient shall return all instruaents that it has received pursuant to this agreement to the Bureau of Criminal Apprehension Uboratory within thirty (30) days after the termination of this Agreement. If Recipient fails to return the instruments within this time period. Recipient agrees to pay the cost of replacement of the instruments. V. laalyTMBant- Recipient shall neither assign nor transfer any rights or obligations under this Agreement without the prior written consent of DPS. VI. Liability. Recipient agrees to indemnify and save and hold the State of Minnesota, its agents, and its employees harmless from any and all claims arising from the use of these instruments or fk*om the performance of this Agreement by Recipient or Recipient's agents or employees. VII. Walationghip of Parties. Neither Recipient nor Recipient's agents or employees are to be considered to be agents of DPS or to be engaged in any Joint venture or enterprise with DPS, and nothing herein shall be construed to create such a relationship. IN VZTNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto, intending to be bound hereby, have caused this agreenent to be duly executed. RECIPIENT:.City .^OF Orono Shall be provided with up to seven (7) _ _ _ _ _ _ _ preliainary breath testing instrunents for use by the Orono Police Department For the RECIPIENT By:_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Title:. Bate Title;. Bate:_ STATE OF MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETI BUREAU OF CRIMINAL APPREHENSION LAB ;:ecomended for Approval: By:_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Titlei tnhPTl r, Visp Rprknm. Director Date:_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY By:_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Title:_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Date:_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Approved as to Foro and Execution: ATTORNEY GENERAL: By:_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Date COftUSSIONER OF ADMINISTRATION : By:------------------------------------------- Authorized Signature Date APPROVED COMtUSSIONER OF FINANCE: By:_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Date A certified copy of the resolution authorizing the Citv of_Orono_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ to enter into this Agreenent and authorizing ------ and to execute this Agreenent nust be attached hereto. 2889.7 A ISSOLUnON OF AUTHORIZATION TO ENTER AGREEMENT WITH STATE OF MINNESOTA FOR PRELIMINARY BREATH TEST INSTRUMENTS BE IT RESOLVED that the City of Orono enter into an agreement with the State of Minnesota, Department of Public Safety for the purpose of receiving from the State of Minnesota, Department of Public Safety, preliminary breath test instruments on a loan basis for use by law enforcemnt officers to assist in the detection of motorists who may be in violation of Minnesota Statutes Section 169.121, or local ordinances in conformity therewith. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Mayor and City Cleric be and they hereby are authorized to execute such agreement. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota at a regular meeting held February 13, 1989. Edward J. Callahan, Jr., Acting Mayor ATTEST: Dorothy M. Hallin, City Clerk 12689.1 TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Mark E. Bernhardson, City Administrator^ DATS: January 26, 1989 SUBJECT: 1987 Financial Health Report COUNCIL MEEnNQ FE313I983, GITY OF ORON0 Attachment A: 1986 Financial Health Report Dated 1/14/88 (Memo Only) B. City of Orono/Financial Report Dated 12/87 ISSUE - Receipt of information for the State of Minnesota regarding the financial health profile that they annually provide based on the City's financial reports and other da«.a. INTRODUCTION - As you may recall last year the City has received the Financial Health Profile from the State Auditor. The information does provide some background direction and comparisons for the City visavis the other cities in the State. DISCUSSION - A review of the data enclosed is helpful in better understanding the direction of Orono and its comparison to other communities. The data however, is done for every city in the State and as such there is little, if any, review by the State at each of the individual cities data. As noted last year, the data does not always accurately reflect the city's position. In Orono's case the Police costs for all three contract communities plus the cities are lumped in its governmental expenditure fund and its only the City of Orono's population that is used to determine any per capita figure. (The City's actual per capita Police cost for '87 was $78.85.) It is helpful to contrast this information with the information the City prepares locally as part of its statistical index. The most accurate data is the City's revenue and expendiure data, as this is taken directly from the City's financial reports. ALTERNATIVES 1. Accept as presented. 2. Request additional information or clarification on selected items within the report. 3. Table the information for further discussion. RECOMMENDATION - It is recommended that the Council accept the information as presented after asking for any clarification on data that they would desire. PROPOSED MOTION - Moved by seconded by _, that Council accepts the Financial Health Statement as presented for 1987. Ayes _, Nays _. cc: Thomas Ruehn, Finance Director 11488.4 A TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Mark Bernhardson, City Administratorjv DATE: January 14, 1988 SUBJECT: 1986 Financial Health Report Attachment A. City of Orono Financial Healt’i Profile 1982-1986 ISSUE — Acceptance of information from the State Auditor re^a"rding the City's financial profile. INTRODUCTION - For the last several years the State Auditor's offrce'”jra~s*”been working to develop a format for information to which they have, access regarding local communities over 2500. This is based principally on the community's audit report in order to inform local government officials and the community as to how their community rates on a state wide basis. The value of this report has been improving with each addition. The State's lack of familiarity with each city however does require the local community to closely examine the information as to its validity. DISCUSSION - The following represent staff comments regarding the various indicators. 9 i " This figure is base.'* on the Metropolitan Council estimate as of April 1, li. The City's 12/31 estir“te for that year was 7,310. The Metro Counci I's Apr 1 1, 1987 estimate was 7,212. The difference is the result of the City's estimating single family additions having a higher per house rate than the 2.3 estimated by the Metro Council. ^ downturn in market value for 1986 was the result principally of the revaluation of lakeshore property. The downturn in assessed value was in part due to that coupled with changes in classifications. The assessed value for 1987 was $103.6 million and for 1988 is estimated to be $107.5 million. 3. Building^ Permits - The estimated value of building permits~F<Tr "l9^7 is expected to be $20.7 million. 4. Retail Sales Activity - This indicator is generated from~gross sales tax receipts by the State. The staff has no idea as to why their are great fluctuations between 1982 and 1986 as the number of businesses listed for the reports have not changed markedly since 1983. It is also felt this is not significant when related to the City's general financial health at this time. 5* l!ldividual_Economi^^ - These figures generated from income tax figures show Orono with an individual per capita income substantially less than the state wide income. Possible explanations may include a; reflection of the disparity in income in the community together with population with a minimal taxable income, including retirees and persons of substantial wealth. 7. Expenditures by Function and 8. Per Capita - Because of the contract work that the City does, the figures for expenditures are somewhat skewed, particularily as it relates to the Police Department. The City of Orono's costs are approximately half those listed and as such would reduce the total per capita expenditures in 1988 by $56 to $279. The City's Police per capita expenditures would be adjusted to about $50 per capita. As noted in the latter portion of the report the City's per capita cost of $50 per capita for Police is substantially below even the average for Metro cities. The overall cost of $279 is substantially below the total average. 9. Chang^e_in_Property_Tax_Levy - Orono's levy through 1986 has increased 25% since 1982 against a Metro average of 31.5%. 10. Outstand^ng^_Indebtedness_Tre - As noted the City's indebtedness during the last five years for general obligation has decreased 64% with a 20% reduction in special assessments. The Metro averages have gone up 46% for G.O. Bonds and about 1% in specials. The City currently has no tax increment financing bonds. During this time period the Metro area increased its tax increment financing bonds by 143%. 15. Earnings on Investments - The primary reason for decrease rn earnings has been the decrease in interest rates. These have stablized in 1987 and are expected to remain about the same in 1988. 17. Number of Employees - The number of employees reported reflects the police officers specifically assigned to the other communities, as does the payroll figures in indicator 18. 19. Operating Funds - The net income deficits reported in the”sewer an^water funds are those as reflected before applying operating transfers in/out and before applying credits for depreciation on contributed assets. After the inclusion of these items the net income to retained earnings for the water fund is $10,166; the sewer fund is $69,611; with the golf course fund reflecting the only net loss of $4,485. The actual position of these funds has working capital for the sewer fund of about $424,000 as of the end of 1986 and the water fund having about $32,000. Cash and investment balances were $33,300 for the water fund and $257,000 for the sewer fund at the end of 1986. RECOMMENDATION - It is recommended that the Council having made any comments or questions they may have regarding the material accept the information. % PROPOSED MOTION - Moved by _, seconded by _, that the Council accept the State Auditor's Financial Health Profile for the City of Orono for 1982 through 1986. Ayes _, Nays _• cc: Tom Kuehn, Finance Director State of Minnesota OFFICE OF THE STATE AUDITOR SUITE 400 525 PARK STREET SAINT PAUL 55103 /lTTB<iU4Heur~B ARNE H. CARLSON state auditor December, 1987 Dear Finance Officer: Enclosed Is a copy of your city's Financial Health Profile. These profiles review the revenues, expenditures and debt In each city over a five-year period and compare trends In each city with those In similar-size cities. This year we have added a section providing comparable Information on a regional basis which we believe will be useful to city officials. If you have any questions or comments, please give me a call. Warmest personal regards. ARNE H. CARLSON State Auditor AHC:mbm Enclosure AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER ■' ,T.-'v»5 ni*-? irt • MINNESOTA OFFICE OF THE STATE AUDITOR -V: X-.ARNE a CARLSON snoc AUDm^ ^ , lv.v5^,V The Office of the State Auditor is a Constitutional office which provides a post-audit function for local governmental units. The Office attests to the fairness of these financial statements as well as to their compliance with applicable laws and regulations. In general, the Office facilitates improved financial management practices within the State through its oversight programs and contributes to the ongoing economic education of public officials and taxpayers. The State Auditor has financial oversight for over 4400 local units of government. The local units of government include the following: ■ 1800 townships ■ 8.^j cities ■ 517 educational districts ■ 87 counties ■ 700 police and fire relief association funds ■ 150 housing and redevelopment authorities ■ 22 port authorities ■ 91 soil and water conservation districts ■ 144 (approximate) special districts The State auditor also maintains a data base of financial information on local governments. The data are collected by the Financial Health Program which assesses long-term trends for cities and counties. The State Auditor serves on the Statens Executive Council, ^ nd Exchange Board, State liiv^-rment Board, State Housing Finance Agency, Rural Finance Administration Board, and the Public Employees Retirement Association Board. FINANCIAL HEALTH PROFILE CITY OF ORONO Years Ended December 31 1983 through 1987 December. 1988 ARNE H. CARLSON STATE ALDITOR S tate of Minnesota OFFICE OF THE STATE AUDITOR SUITE 400 525 PARK STREET SAINT PAUL 55103 MINNESOTA FINANCIAL HEALTH PROGRAM - A Synopsis - The problems which create fiscal difficulties seldom emerge overnight; rather, they develop slowly, thus making potential difficulties less obvious. - Is Your City Heading F^r Financial Difficulty? Municipal Finance Officers Association, 1978 Cities and counties In Minnesota have faced a number of factors In the '80's which necessitated constant monitoring of their financial situations by elected officials and community residents. High Inflation In the early '80's has given way to low Inflation In the past few years. Intergovernmental revenues for cities (funds from the federal, state and county governments) continue the decline that started In the early '80's. Federal revenue sharing was discon­ tinued In 1986. In addition to factors that Influence the state as a whole, regional Influences have taken their toll. While the 7-county metro area, which Includes Minneapolis and St. Paul, has remained strong, the mining- and farm-dependent areas are feeling the stress associated with declining market values, Increasing unemployment and greater needs for welfare, health and social service programs. The Office of State Auditor designed the Minnesota Financial Health Program (MFHP) In 1980 to assist city and county government officials and community residents In monitoring statewide and regional fiscal stress Influences. The MFHP then provides needed help In resolving financial problems. The MFHP currently Includes all 87 Minnesota counties and 180 cities with populations of 2,500 or more as of the 1980 census. These cities and counties prepare annual financial statements In conformity with Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP) and use the Uniform Chart of Accounts, developed by the Office of State Auditor. There are, however, 188 cities with populations of less than 2,500 which, fur the last two years, have elected to prepare annual financial statements :i accordance with GAAP. These cities are being reviewed for possible addition :o the MFHP data base In 1988. If added, the size of the program will nearly double. Five major fiscal trends have been Identified In this program. By analyzing key financial Indicators for five-year periods. It Is possible to establish trends and patterns. It Is from these statistics that Interpretations of each local unit's financial health can be determined. 296-2551 AN EQUAL OPPORTL-Nm* EMPLOYER The five major trends and ex^ple Indicators measured by this program are: A. Economic Vitality ,1. Population: Is there an increase or decrease In population? 2. Real estate: Is the taxable valuation of real estate growing too slowly?3. Retail sales: Does the growth or decline In the number of businesses and retail sales reflect an overall economic recession or an erosion of local economic vitality? 4. Social welfare: Is unemployment placing greater demands on health, welfare, and social service programs? B. C. D. E. Revenue Trends ^ ^1. Levy limit: Is the actual current levy rate at or approaching the legal levy limit? ^ ^2. Earnings on Investments; Is the percent of revenues derived from earnings on Investments changing? 3, Tax collection rate: Is the trend In property tax collection rates declining? . . ^ i... r4, Revenue/expenditure comparisons: Is there a consistent pattern of revenue shortfalls? Expenditure Trends .1. Expenditures: Are the overall expenditures or expenditures by function In line with the current rate of Inflation? Per capita expenditures: Are the municipal expenditures per capita growing at a faster rate than the change 1n population? Interest and fiscal charges: Is the cost for Interest and fiscal charges escalating as a percent of total expenditures? 2. 3. Future Solvency1. Debt: Is future financial flexibility being lost due to a growing debt burden?2. Bond rating: Is there a change In the bond rating? 3. Debt service payments; Are debt service payments becoming a larger percentage of*total revenues? 4. Fund balance: Is 'here a decline in the general fund balance? Hanagement Practices . , wi. 41. Auditor's opinion: Is there a consistent failure to obtain an unqualified opinion on financial statements from Independent auditors? . . ,2. Municipal employees: Is the number of municipal employees consistent with current population trends? 3 Fringe benefits: Will growth in fringe benefits and employer-paid contributions place undue demands on future revenues? 4. Municipal enterprises; Are the municipal enterprises Incurring unplanned for losses or gains? The MFHP was developed as an Index of economic Indicators to help elected munlcloal officials determine fiscal trends. Identifying a negative trend does not automatically spell fiscal decay. Rather, the answers to these and other questions tell municipalities whether or not a sound fiscal course lies ahead. 2/8B MINNESOTA FINANCIAL HEALTH PROFILE 1983 THROUGH 1987 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page Graphs Governmental Revenues (Metro Area Cities Only) Governmental Current Expenditures (Metro Area Cities Only) Indicated Market Value Gross Retail Sales Indicator Indicator Indicator Indicator Indicator Indicator Indicator Indicator Indicator Indicator Indicator Indicator Indicator Indicator Indicator Indicator Indicator Indicator Indicator Indicator Indicator Indicator Indicator Data Base: Profile Change In Population . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Change In Property Values . . . . . . . . . . . . . Trend In Building Permits . . . . . . . . . . . . . Trend In Retail Sales Activity . . . . . . . . . . . Trend In Individual Economic Status . . . . . . . . Change In Consumer Price Index . . . . . . . • . • Trend In Revenue Sources . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Change In Property Tax Levy . . . . . . . . . . . . Trend In Property Tax Collection 10: Tend in Earnings on Investments (Governmental Funds) 11: Trend In Expenditures by Function . . . . . . . . . 12: Trend In Expenditures by Function (Per Capita) • . . 13: Budget to Actual Revenues . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14: Budget to Actual Expenditures . . . . . . . . . . . 15: Trend In Outstanding tended Indebtedness . . . . . 16: Current or Change In Bond Rating . . . . . . . . . . 17: Trend in Current Debt Service Costs (Governmental Funds) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18: Trend In Governmental Fund Liabilities . . . . . 19: Change In Fund Balances (Unreserved, Undesignated) . 20: Opinion on Financial Statements . . . . . . . . . . 21: Trend In Number of Employees Compared to Population (Governmental Funds) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22: Trend In Compensation and Employer Paid Fringe Benefits (Governmental Funds) . . . . . . . . . . Profit or Loss In Enterprises23: Content of Indicators for Financial Health Profiles Appendices 10 10 Appendix A - Analysis by Class of City Appendix B - Regional Map and Analysis of Selected Indicators GOVERNMENTAL REVENUES (Totals for Metro Area Cities Only) Millions 1983 1964 1985 1966 1987 Intsrgov'tsl Rsvenue Ail Other Revenues GOVERNMENTAL CURRENT EXPENDITURES (Totals for Metro Area Cities Only) $175 Millions 1983 1964 1985 1988 1967 Q«n«rai Qovammant GB Foliea H FIra Straata I Hlghwaya INDICATED MARKET VALUE Billions $60 $50 $40 $30 $20 $10 $0 iH f mm liiililiiii mm II IIIid 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 H Metro Non-Metro GROSS RETAIL SALES Billions I■ ’ 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 im Metro HI Non-Metro CITY: ORONO COUNTY: HENNEPIN MINNESOTA FINANCIAL HEALTH PROGRAM OFFICE OF THE STATE AUDITOR (612)296-2551 ECONOMIC VITALITY 1. INDICATOR:CHANGE IN POPULATION 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 Population 6.820 6,820 7,020 7,172 7,212 Percent Change O.OX O.OX 2.9X 2.2X 0.6X Nunber of Households 2,349 2.349 2.462 2,540 2,568 Percent Change a e e e O.OX 4.8X 3.2X 1.1X 2. INDICATOR:CHANGE IN PROPERTY VALUES 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 Indicated Market Value S 417.480.091 S 408,921,088 S 444,024,716 S 442.638,681 S 449,695,073 Percent Change 8.4X •2.1X 8.6X •0.3X 1.6X Assessed Valuation $ 89,951,749 S 95,064,821 t 101,745,272 S 100,331,833 S 102,970,459 Percent Change 12.9X 5.7X 7.0X -1.4X 2.6X Tax Increment District Captured Assessed Valuation % 0 S OS 0 S 0 S 0 Percent Change • • • •............e • • a Sdles Ratio 0.831 0.883 0.870 0.880 0.896 3. INDICATOR:TREND IN BUILDING PERMITS 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 Value of Building Permits S 9,748,180 S 13,625,990 S 15,826,755 S 14,145,515 S 22.380,545 Percent Change 51.0X 39.8X 16.2X •10.6X 58.2X Nunber of Building Permits Issued 252 335 322 354 371 Percent Change 4.6X 32.9X •3.9X 9.9X 4.8X 11/29/88 METRO AVERAGE 5 YEAR 5 YEAR X CHANGE X CHANGE METRO AVERAGE 5 YEAR 5 YEAR 9.AX 2.6X 14.5X 21.IX 133.6X AVERAGE 5 YEAR 5 YEAR X CHANGE X CHANGE 58.2X 129.6X 95.0X NOTE: Asterisks (**,***.*X) on any page indicate that a percentage change was too targe to be meaningful 1 OFFICE OF THE STATE AUDITOR ECONOMIC VITALITY 4. INDICATOR: TREND IN RETAIL SALES ACTIVITY CITY: ORONO 11/29/88 METRO AVERAGE 5 YEAR 5 YEAR 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 X CHANGE X CHANGE Cross Retail Sales % 6,357,096 S 6,523,427 S 3,658,342 S 1,113,581 t 1,190,707 Percent Change 185.9X 2.6X -43.9X -69.6X 6.9X •81.3X 42.7X Nunber of Businesses 12 11 13 12 10 Percent Change -29.4X •8.3X 18.2X -7.7X -16.7X -16.7X 5. INDICATOR: TREND IN INDIVIDUAL ECONOMIC STATUS 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1986 5 YEAR STATEWIDE X CHANGE PER CAPITA Per Capita Federal Adjusted Cross Income * $ 7,411 S 6,439 % 6,085 t 7,756 Unavailable SI1,906 Percent Change 12.4X -13.IX -5.5X 27,SX ........ Nutnber of AFDC Recipients in County 34,2V5 36,965 37,883 40,226 42,288 23.3X AFDC Recipients as a Percent of County Population 3.6X 3.9X 3.9X 4.2X 4.3X Unemployment Rate in County ** 6.3X 4.4X 4.IX 3.9«4.IX 1987 STA1EUIQE RATE 5.4X 6. INDICATOR: CHANGE IN CONSUMER PRICE INDEX 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 5 YEAR X CHANGE Mpls-St. Paul Percent Change *** 2.2X 3.6X 3.8X 1.3X 3.0X I2.2X Notes: (*] Per capita adjusted gross income figures for 1987 are not available at this tine. [**] The 1983 through 1986 unemployment rates were revised in April 1987 by the Department of Jobe and Training. [***] Source: U.S, Department of Labor, All Urban Consuners - (CP1*U) 1982-84 • 100. OFFICE OF THE STATE AUDITOR REVENUE TRENDS 7. INDICATOR: TREND IN REVENUE SOURCES CITY: ORONO 11/29/88 GOVERNMENTAL FUNDS 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 REVENUES AMOUNT X AMOUNT X .AMOUNT X AMOUNT X AMOUNT X Inttrgoverniwntal Revenues Federal S 30,076 1.1X $47,020 1.BX S 29,932 0.8X S 123,169 3.5X $16,937 0.5X State 482.906 17.9X 413,910 16.1X 542,470 15.2X 525,570 15.0X 520,256 16.1X County 0 O.OX 0 O.OX 0 O.OX 0 O.OX 0 O.OX Local 0 O.OX 0 O.OX 0 O.OX 0 O.OX 0 O.OX Total Intergovernmental Revenues 512,982 19.0X 460,930 17.9X 572,402 16.0X 648.739 18.6X 537,193 16.6X Taxes 825,843 30.6X 932,760 36.3X 892,479 25. OX 988,711 28.3X 1,106,613 34.3X Special Assessments 541.306 20. OX 154,359 6.OX 1,037,255 29.0X 671,947 19.2X 378,567 11.7X Franchise Taxes 0 O.OX 0 O.OX 0 O.OX 0 O.OX 0 O.OX Sales t Hotel/Motel Taxes 0 O.OX 0 O.OX 0 O.OX 0 O.OX 0 O.OX Licenses and Permits 71,243 2.6X 102,958 4.OX 102,811 2.9X 102,533 2.9X 136,420 4.2X Charges for Services 382,322 14.2X 438,643 17.1X 473,850 13.3X 605.002 17.3X 594,424 18.4X Fines and Forfeits 37,518 1.4X 46,400 1.8X 61,611 1.7X 84,877 2.4X 102,058 3.2X Miscellaneous Revenues Interest Earnings 312,211 11.6X 388,373 15.IX 383,729 10.7X 351,447 10.1X 330,093 10.2X All Other Revenues 17.886 0.7X 45.185 1.8X 47.757 1.3X 39.678 1.1X 43.274 1.3X Total Revenues 2,701,311 mmmMmmmmmmm 100.0X 2,569,608 100.0X 3,571,894 SUMS ussaxaasaB aaaaaa aaaaaaaaaaa 100.0X 3,492,934 UMss mmmmmmnumm 100.0X 3,228,642 100.0X mmmmmm Total Revenues Per Capita % 396.09 % 376.78 S 508.82 S 487.02 S 447.68 Annual Percentage Change Per Capita 9.5X -4.9X 35.OX -4.3X •8.1X OFFICE OF THE STATE AUDITOR REVENUE TRENDS 8. INDICATOR: CHANGE IN PROPERTY TAX LEVY CITY: ORONO 11/29/88 METRO AVERAGE 5 YEAR 5 YEAR 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 X CHANGE X CHANGE Special Assassment S 347,068 % 444,023 S 375,744 %462,254 S 333,175 •4. OX Lifflitad Levy 909,573 1,021,426 1,001,044 1,089,557 1,206,520 32.6X Other Local Levy 46.005 46.022 15 77 40.154 ■12.7X Total Property Tax Levy, Fiscal DIsp. Levy and Sp. Assassment Levy 1,302,646 BXSSSXSSSSSSS 1,511,471 1,376,803 1,551,888 1,579.849 USSXXSXXXBXXXX XXXXXSXXSXXXBX XXXXXXXXXXXXXX XXXBXXXXXBXXXX Percent Change 5.IX 16.0X -8.9X 12.7X 1.8X 21.3X 26.3X Levy Limit 921,573 1,090,109 1,155,992 1,288,746 1,389,395 50.8X Limited Levy as a Percent of Levy Limit 98.7X 93.7X 86.6%84.5X 86.8X Fiscal Disparities Levy 16,252 18,248 22,927 20,311 26,218 61.3X 9. INDICATOR: TREND IN PROPERTY TAX COLLECTION lOfl^ 1984 1985 1986 1987 Percent Collected 95.9X 94.9X 96.7X 97.4X 97.7X 10. indicator :TREND IN EARNINGS ON (GOVERNMENTAL FUNDS) 1983 1984 INVESTMENTS 1985 1986 1987 METRO AVERAGE 5 YEAR 5 YEAR X CHANGE X CHANGE Interest Income S 312,211 S 388.373 S 383,729 S 351,447 S 330,093 Percent Change •15.8X 24.4X •1.2X •8.4X •6.1X 5.7X 44.0X Interest Income as a Percent of Total Revenues 11.6X 15.IX 10.7X 10.1X 10.2X . I OPPICB OP THE STATE AUDITOR EXPENDITURE TRENDS CITY: ORONO 11/29/88 11. INDICATOR: TREND IN EXPENDITURES BY PUNCTION GOVERM€NTAL FUNDS CUNREMT EXPEND ITURPS Central Gove/nment Police Fire Streets 8 Highways Refuse I Sanitation Culture and Recreation Urban Redevelopment I Housing Interest and Fiscal Charges Miscellaneous Expenditures Total Current Expenditures Total Current Expenditures Per Capita Annual Percentage Change Per Capita SUMMARY OF EXPENDITURES Total Current Expenditures Total Capital Outlay Debt Service Fund Principal Total Expenditures 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 AMOUNT AMOUNT AMOUNT AMOUNT AMOUNT $ 384,675 21.1XS 459,955 23.1X S 409,659 20.9X S 458,631 19.'X S 535,558 22.OX 563,377 30.8X 128,409 7.0X 610.885 30.7X 119,035 6.0X 323,908 17.7X 360,053 18.1X 0 O.OX 30.628 1.7X 0 O.OX 221,686 12.IX 174,666 9.6X 0 O.OX 37,865 1.9X 0 O.OX 209,446 10.5X 191,860 9.6X 652,587 33.2X 131,569 6.7X 306,479 15.6X 0 O.OX 38,967 2.0X 0 O.OX 219,050 11.2X 205.351 10.5X 766,042 31.9X 142,436 5.9X 461,855 19.2X 0 O.OX 44,817 1.9X 0 O.OX 223,450 9.3X 307.638 12.8X 815.482 33.5X 146,531 6.0X 385.422 15.8X 0 O.OX 61.720 2.5X 0 O.OX 193,773 8.0X 297.900 12.2X 1,827,349 100.OX 1,989,099 100.OX 1,963,662 100.OX 2,404,869 100.OX 2,436.386 100.OX MSSSSSSS3S ssssr: sssssssssss sssszs ssssssssasx ssssss xssssxxaxss xasssx xsxxsassssx sxssss S 267.94 S 291.66 8.9X S 279.72 -4.IX S 335.31 19.9X S 337.8^ 0.7X 1,827,349 83.6X 1,989,099 88.IX 1,963,662 66.8X 2,404,869 82.9X 2,436,386 79.IX 357,623 16.4X 267,976 11.9X 942,880 32.IX 460,274 15.9X 157,703 5.IX _______0 O.OX________0 O.OX 35.000 1.2X 35.000 1.2X 485,000 15.8X 2,184,972 100.0X 2,257,075 100.OX 2,941.542 100.OX 2,900,143 100.OX 3,079,089 100.OX ■s««xs ssssu *■««»■»*««* «*«»»****** ■■**** *********** »«**** Total Expenditures Per Capita S 320.38 Annual Percentage Change Per Capita 5.8X S 330.95 3.3X S 419.02 26.6X S 404.37 •3.5X S 426.94 5.6X OPPICB OP THE STATE AUDITOR EXPENDITURE TRENDS 12. INDICATOR: TREND IN EXPENDITURES BY PUNCTION (PER CAPITA) GOVERNMENTAL FUNDS CURRENT EXPENDITURES <Pt Capita ) Central Government Police Fire Streets I Highways Refuse t Sanitation Culture t Recreation Urban Redevelopment t Housing Interest and Fiscal Charges Miscellaneous Expenditures Total Current Expenditures Annual Percentage Change 1983 198A 1985 1986 CITY: ORONO 11/29/88 1987_ _ AMOUNT X AMOUNT AMOUNT AMOUNT AMOUNT 56.40 21.IX S 82.61 30.8X 18.83 7.0X 47.49 17.7X 0.00 O.OX 4.49 1.7X 0.00 O.OX 32.51 12.IX 25.61 9.6% 67.44 23.IX S 89.57 30.7X 17.45 6.0X 52.79 18.1X 0.00 O.OX 5.55 1.9X 0.00 O.OX 30.71 10.5X 28.13 9.6X __ 58.36 20.9X t 63.95 19.1X % 92.96 33.2X 106.81 31.9X 18.74 6.7X 43.66 15.6X 0.00 O.OX 5.55 2.0X 0.00 O.OX 31.20 11.2X 29.25 10.5X 19.86 5.9X 64.40 19.2X 0.00 O.OX 6.25 1.9X 0.00 O.OX 31.16 9.3X 42.89 12.8X 74.26 22.0X 113.07 33.5X 20.32 6.0X 53.44 15.8X 0.00 O.OX 8.56 2.5X 0.00 O.OX 26.87 8.0X 41.31 12.2X 267.94 100.OX 291.66 100.OX 279.72 100.OX 335.31 100.0X 337.82 100.0X SBS33SSSBSS SS3SSS 3SSSS33S3SS SSS3S3 SS3S3333S33 3X3333 3S3333S333S 33S3SS 33333333333 333333 7.3X SUMMARY OF EXPENDITURES (Per Capita) Total Current Expenditures 267.94 83.6X Total Capital Outlay 52.44 16.4X Debt Service Fund Principal _ _ _0.00 0.0% Total Expenditures 320.38 100.OX 8.9X 291.66 88.IX 39.29 11.9X 0.00 O.OX •4.IX 279.72 66.8X 134.31 32.IX 4.99 1.2X 19.9X 335.31 82.9X 64.18 15.9X 4.88 1.2X 0.7X 337.82 79.IX 21.87 5.1X 67.25 15.8X 330.95 100.0X 419.02 100.OX 404.37 100.OX 426.94 100.OX Annual Percentage Change 5.8X 3.3X 26.6X •3.5X 5.6X — OFFICE OF THE STATE AUDITOR REVENUE/EXPENDITURE COMPARISONS 13. INDICATOR: BUDGET TO ACTUAL REVENUES 1983 1984 GENERAL FUND: ■udgtttd Rtvanutt Actual Rcvcnutt Paretnt Ovcr/*Undcr 1.602,184 % 1,864,019 16.3X 1,772,323 2.061,930 16.3X 1985 1,876,193 2,129,764 13.5X 1986 CITY: ORONO 11/29/88 1987 2,163,193 S 2,343,116 8.3X 2,322,590 2,567,914 10.6X SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDS: Budgeted Revenues Actual Revenues Percent Over/-Under 33,042 S 66,255 100.5X 42,000 96,431 129.6X 64,595 68,347 5.8X 161,438 S 165,960 2.8X 32,880 48,999 49.0X 14. INDICATOR: BUDGET TO ACTUAL EXPENDITURES 1983 1984 GENERAL FUND: 1985 1986 1987 Budgeted Expenditures S 1,611,752 S 1,758,014 S 1,853,525 $2,203,383 S 2,257,680 Actual Expenditures 1,632,011 1,786,613 1,781,311 2,126,563 2,246,748 Percent •Over/Under -1.3X -1.6X 3.9X 3.5X 0.5X 1AL REVENUE FUNDS: Budgeted Expenditures S 15,000 S 35,812 S 55,605 S 190,078 S 71,490 Actual Expenditures 49.188 97.836 70.656 150,592 86,031 Percent -Over/Under •227.9X •173.2X -27. IX 20.8X •20.3X OFFICE OF THE STATE AUDITOR CITY: ORONO FUTURE SOLVENCY 15. IHDICATOR: TREND IN OUTSTANDING BONDED ...^DEBTEDNESS 5 YEAR 11/29/88 METRO AVERAGE S YEAR 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 X CHANGE X CHANGE Cerwrtl Obligation 8 G.O. Ravenuc Bonds $180,000 S 145,000 S 110,000 S 75,000 S 35,000 -80.6X 54.OX Par Capita 26.39 21.26 15.67 10.46 4.85 As a X of Assessed Valuation 0.2X 0.2X 0.1X 0.1X O.OX Special Assessment Bonds $3,150,000 S 2,785,000 S 3.280,000 S 2,795,000 S 2,350,000 -25.4X 6.1S Per Capita 461.88 408.36 467.24 389.71 325.85 As a X of Assessed Valuation 3.5X 2.9X 3.2X 2.8X 2.3X Tax Increment Financing Bonds S 0 $0 s 0 S 0 s 0 .... 152.3X Per Capita 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 As a X of Tax Increment Value ....e • • e a • • •• e • a • e a • 16. INDICATOR:CURRENT OR CHANGE IN BOND RATING 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 RATING FIRM Moody'S A1 A1 As Aa Aa Standard and Poor's 17. INDICATOR:TREND IN CURRENT DEBT SERVICE COSTS (GOVERNMENTAL FUNDS) METRO AVERAGE 5 YEAR 5 YEAR 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 X CHANGE X CHANGE Debt Service Payments S 586,686 S 609.446 S 659,050 S 743,450 S 678,773 Percent Change -6.9X 3.9X 8.1X 12.8X -8.7X 15.7X 23.OX Debt Service as a Percent of Total Revenues 21.7X 23.7X 18.5X 21.3X 21.OX 18. INDICATOR:TREND IN GOVERNMENTAL FUND LIABILITIES METRO AVERAGE 5 YEAR 5 YEAR 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 X CHANGE X CHANGE Total Liabilities S 3,349,895 S 3,043.983 S 3.764.026 S 1,578,972 S 1,404,034 Percent Change Liabilities as a Percant -9.6X -9.1X 23.7X -58.1X -11.IX -58.IX -33.5X of Current Expenditures 183.3X 153.0X 191.7X 65.7X 57.6X OFFICE OF THE STATE AUDITOR FUTURE SOLVENCY 19. INDICATOR: CHANGE IN FUND BALANCES (UNRESERVED, UNDESIGNATED) CITY: ORONO 11/29/88 METRO AVERAGE 5 YEAR 5 YEAR 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 X CHANCE X CHANGE General Fi^^ %1,694,0:3 S 1,929,185 S 2,215,606 %2,227,876 t 2,613,610 Percent v .18.3X 13.9X 14.8X 0.6X 17.3X 54.3X 44.5X X of Actual Expenditures 103.8X 108.0X 124.4X 104.8X 116.3X Special Revenue Funds S 333.619 S 385,978 S 427,556 $472,951 $513,622 Percent Change 92.9X 15.7X 10.8X 10.6X 8.6X 54.0X 422.3X X of Actual Expenditures 678.3X 394.5X 605.IX 314.IX 597.OX General Fund Balance as a X of Total Current Expenditures 92.7X 97.0%112.8X 92.6X 107.3X MANAGEMENT PRACTICES 20. INDICATOR: OPINION ON FINANCIAL STATEMENTS 1983 Auditor's Opinion GFOA Certificate of Achievement UNQUALIFIED 1984 UNQUALIFIED 1985 UNQUALIFIED 1986 UNQUALIFIED 1987 UNQUALIFIED OFFICE OF THE STATE AUDITOR MANAGEMENT PRACTICES CITY: ORONO 11/29/88 21. INDICATOR: TREND IN NUMBER OF EMPLOYEES COMPARED TO POPULATION (GOVERNMENTAL FUNDS) (As Reported by the city) 1983 1984 1985 1986 Full-Time Employees 31 Employees per 1,000 Populetion 4.55 31 4.55 31 4.42 33 4.60 Pert-Time Employees 3 Employees per 1,000 Population 0.44 10 1.47 3 0.43 9 1.25 22. INDICATOR:TREND IN COMPENSATION AND EMPLOYER PAID (GOVERNMENTAL FUNDS) (As Reported bv the city) 1983 1984 1985 1986 Total Payroll t 703,000 S 859,803 S 1,075,683 S 1,211,324 S Percent Change -2.6X 22.3X 25. IX 12.6X Employer Paid Fringe Benefits 8 239,177 S 263,537 S 271.671 S 336,518 % Percent Change 77.8%10.2X 3.IX 23.9X Fringe Benefits as a Percent of Payroll 34.0X 30.7X 25.3X 27.8X 23. indicator :PROFIT OR -LOSS IN ENTERPRISES 1983 1984 1<»85 GOLF COURSE Operating Revenues Operating Expenses Operating lixrotne S 74,044 S 69,265 4,779 78,204 $ 76,497 1,707 82,807 % 76,456 6,351 Net Income 6,753 4,049 9,264 LIQUOR STORE Operating Revenues Operatirig Expenses Operating Income %444,510 $ 427,027 17,483 419,509 % 414,144 5,365 431.987 S 443.419 -11,432 Net Income 21,203 9,118 -8,594 SEUER Operating Revenues Operating Expenses Operating Income %337,733 $ 382,548 •44,815 313,808 t 419,298 •105,490 318,182 t 404,722 •86,540 Net Income 8,298 •53,566 •35,908 10 1987 36 4.99 14 1.94 METRO AVERAGE 5 YEAR 5 YEAR X CHANGE X CHANGE 16.IX 1.7X 366.7X 93.0X 1987 METRO AVERAGE 5 YEAR 5 YEAR X CHARGE X CHARGE 1,300,817 7.4X 372,208 10.6X 28.6X 1986 85.OX 41.6X 55.6X 17.4X 1987 79,710 87,931 •8,221 •6,126 479,635 467,727 11,908 15,275 347,536 446,032 •98,496 •49,272 89.288 89,203 85 3,904 184,241 198,822 •14,581 37,884 382,352 462,494 •80,142 -28,573 23. INDICATOR: PROFIT OR -LOSS IN ENTERPRISES (Continued) 1983 1984 1985 1986 CITY: ORONO 1987 Operating Rtvanuea Operating Expanaea Operating Incoa* $ 105,744 S 132,807 -27,063 131,022 S 146,268 •15,246 138,174 S 153,658 -15,484 136,032 S 158,531 •22,499 148,767 154.357 -5.590 Net IncoMc •29,478 •17,972 •16,687 -22,853 -4,989 ARNE H. CARLSON STATE AUDITOR S tate of Minnesota OFFICE OF THE STATE AUDITOR SUITE 400 525 PARK STREET SAINT PAUL 55103 DATA BASE CONTENT OF INDICATORS FOR FINANCIAL HEALTH PROFILES 296-2551 Throughout the profile, class refers to the following population groups: 1. First Class Cities (more thin 100,000 population) 2. 20,000 to 100,000 population 3. 10,000 to 20,000 population 4. 2,500 to 10,000 population Note: Unless otherwise indicated, the source of information shown on the Financial Health profile is the annual financial statement. 1. Population - Source: Minnesota State Demographer; estimate Households - Source: Minnesota State Demographer; estimate 2. Property Values Source: Minnesota Department of Revenue. Data shown for the "payable" year; e.g., 1986 value is payable in 1987. Indicated market value, assessed valuation and sales ratios are from the Department of Revenue. 3. Building Permits Source: Data provided by individual cities. 4. Retail Sales Source: Minnesota Department of Revenue's Historical Retail Sales data on "Gross Retail Sales," showing both taxable and nontaxable sales. Number of businesses equals the number of vendors who filed sales tax returns. 5. Individual Economic Status Per Capita Income - Source: Minnesota Department of Revenue. Federal Adju:ted Gross income (FAGI) divided by demographer's estimate of popu­ lation. AFDC Recipients in County - Source: Minnesota Department of Welfare's "Minnesota Aid to Famihes With Dependent Children" annual report (State Fiscal Year). Totals Include caretakers and children. Unemployment Data - Source: Minnesota Department of Jobs and Training. AN EQUAL OPPORTL’Nm- EMPLOYER 6. Consumer Price Index Source: U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics 7. Revenue Sources Governmental Funds Revenues Intergovernmental Revenue: Federal State County Local Taxes Special Assessments Franchise Taxes Sales and Hotel/Motel Taxes Licenses and Pennlts Charges for Services Fines and Forfeits Miscellaneous Revenues: Interest Earnings All Other Revenues Total Revenues Revenues Per Capita (total revenues divided by current population in Indicator 1) 8. Property Tax Levy Special Assessments: Limited Levy: Source: Department of Revenue Source: Department of Revenue Total levy ’•ss limited levy The sum of above Calculated o> Department of Revenue pursuant to levy limit law. Fiscal Disparities Levy: Source: Department of Revenue Other Local Levy: Total Levy: Levy Limit: 9. Property Tax Collection Rate This Is current-year data» showing the collection rate on the current year tax levy. Does not reflect delinquent tax collections. 10. Earnings on Investments (Governmental Funds) Interest Income Includes earnings on all governmental fund Investments, such as surplus funds which may be temporarily Invested. General fund, special revenue funds and all other governmental funds are Included. - 2 - 11, Expenditures by Function Governmental Funds Current Expenditures General Government Police Fire Streets and Highways Refuse and Sanitation Culture and Recreation Urban Redevelopment and Housing Interest and Fiscal Charges Miscellaneous Expenditures Total Current Expenditures Total Current Expenditures Totals the functional current expenditures shown above. Not Included are the following: capital outlay (where It Is separated from current weJSltlirls in Innual financial 'reports), debt 3 and short term), and operating transfers out (e.g., to special projects or for debt service). Total Capital Outlay Sum of annual capital outlay from all governmental funds Including capital outlay for general fund types of activities, and also capital outlay for enterprise fund activities where those are financed by governmental funds. Debt Service Fund Principal Principal paid on long-term debt from debt service funds. (Does not Include enterprise fund payments.) Total Expenditures These Include current expenditures (as described a^oye), capital outlay, and debt service principal, but exclude debt redemption for 1983 and 1984. Expenditures Per Capita Total expenditures divided by population In Indicator 1. 12. Expenditures bv Function (Per Capital Expenditures shown in Indicator 7. divided by the population In Indicator 1 for each year. - 3 - \i tiidlet Actual IxBlures ) Source: Annual Flna-:1al Statement Compares budget to actual figures for two fund types: general fund and special revenue funds. Not shown are debt service funds, capital projects furds, special assessment funds, any enterprise funds, or fiduciary (trust and agency) funds which are not required to be compared to budget by GAAP. 15. Outstanding Bonded Indebtedness The outstanding principal portion of three types of long-term debt Is shown. The types are: general obligation (general obligation and generdl obliga­ tion revenue); special assessment debt; and tax Increment financing bonds. Each amount Is also shown divided by current population and by assessed valuation. 16. Bond Ratings Source: Bond rating services. Note that often cities are rated only In years when the city markets an Issue. 17. Current Debt Service Costs Includes the prlncloai and Interest paid during the year on long-term debt by the governmental funds. Total debt redemption plus Interest and fiscal charges 18. Governmental Fund Liabilities Total liabilities of the governmental fund types. Includes accounts payable, outstanding principal of short term debt, certain long-term debt, and other liabilities. 19. Fund Balances (unreserved, undesignated) Source: Annual Financial Statement General Fund Special Revenue Funds - 4 - 20. Opinion on Financial Report and Certificate of Achleverent Unqualified opinion « In auditor's professional opinio:;, the financial sta­ tements conform to generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP). Qualified opinion ■ In the auditor's opinion, the financial statements are not in conformity with generally accepted accounting principles. A common example Is general fixed assets, which may not be accounted for In a manner prescribed by GAAP. A "Certificate of Achievement" Is awarded by the Government Finance Officers Association to cities which exhibit excellence In financial reporting. This Is the highest form of recognition In the area of governmental financial reporting, and its attainment represents a significant accomplishment by a government and Its management. 21. Number of Employees (Governmental Funds) Source: Data provided by Individual cities. Full-time generally Includes full-time only. Part-time Includes part-time and part-time seasonal workers. 22. Compensation and tmployer-Pald Fringe Benefits (Governmental Funds) Source; Reported by city personnel. Compensation covers governmental fund employees. Also reported are fringe benefits Including sick leave, vacation leave; severance pay; employer contributions for retirement; employer payments for health, life and disability Insurance; benefits and Insurance premiums for unemployment compensation and workers compensation; the value of past retirement benefits and any other benefits. Some cities have estimated fringe benefits, while some provide actual dollar .amounts. 22. Enterprises - Profit or Loss Includes operating revenues, expenses, operating Income and net Income for enterprises such as. water, sewer, and electric. - 5 - APPENDIX A ANALYSIS BY CLASS OF CITY OFFICE OF THE STATE AUDITOR FINANCIAL HEALTH PROFILE SUMKAR'. BY CLASS OF CITY For tbs Ysar Endod Dsesfflbsr 31r 1937 CLASS 1 (Grsatsr than 90,000 in Population) 09/26/88 Indfeitor Total Rtvtnuta • 5 Yoar Porctnt Chang* Chang* State Intargovarrwantal Ravanuat • 5 Yaar Pareant Chang* Chang* Fadaral Intargovarrwantal Ravanuat • 5 Yaar Parcant Chang* Chang* Local Intargovarrwantal Ravanuat • 5 Yaar Parcant Chang* Chang* Total Intargovarrwantal Ravanuat ■ 5 Yaar Parcant Chang* Chang* Proparty Taxat at a Percent of Total Rovarwat Spaclal Astattmantt a* a Parcant of Total Ravanuat Total Intergoverrwental ReverKiat at a Parcant of Total Raverxiet Limited Levy a* a Parcant of the Total Levy Total Current Expanditurat Par Capita Total Ravanuat Par Capita Total Expanditurat Par Capita General Obligation Indabtadnats Par Capita General Obligation Debt at a Percent of Attassad Valuation Special Assassmant Indabtadnats Par Capita Special Assessment Debt as a Parcant of Assessed Valuation Total Liabilities (Governmental Fuidt} at a X of Total Ravanuat Total Fund Balance a* a Parcant of Total Current Expenditures Interest IrKoma as a Parcant of Total Ravenuas Debt Service as a Parcant of Total Ravanuat Full-time Employaat Par 1,000 in Population (Govammantal Futdt) Part-tim Employaat Per 1,000 in Population (Govammantal Fiaidt) Fringe Benefits as a Percent Total Payroll (Govarrwtntal Funds) ^rao*he • iflun Mininun 12.7X 21.5X 7.0X 16.9X 44.4X 7.9X -S9.6X O.OX •42.3X S6.7X 157.1X •41.2X •5.3X 18.6X •11.8X 31.3X 33.4X 23.3X 3.0X 5.IX 1.SX 40.2X 44.7X 39.5X S8.SX 68.6X 45.SX 795.98 S 980.69 S 565.58 907.78 S 1,024.59 s 718.36 ,125.54 S 1,358.64 s 759.46 496.77 S 701.35 s 454.85 6.5X 19.5X 4.9X 62.33 S 88.41 s 22.62 0.8X 2.1X 0.3X S9.4X 56.8X 27.4X 3.0X 4.IX 0.4% 5.5X 6.3X 3.7X 19.5X 22.8X 14.IX 10.6 11.2 8.8 1.3 6.5 1.1 21.9X 30.9X 19.5X 09/26/M OFFICE OF THE STATE AUDITOR FIHAMCIAL HEALTH PROFILE SUMXARl BY CLASS OF CITY For tho Yoar Endod Doeombor 31, 1«87 CLASS 2 (20,000 to 90,000 1b Populatior.) Indicitor Total RtvonuM - 5 Ttar Porcont Changt Chang* Stat* Intargovarwaantal Ravanuoa - 5 Taar Pareant Chang* Changa Fadtral Intargovrnwantal Ravanuaa - 5 Taar Pareant Changa Chang* Local Intargovamaantal Ravanuaa - 5 Yaar Pareant Changa Changa Total Intargovamaantal Ravanuaa - 5 Taar Pareant Changa Changa Proparty Tax** a* a Pareant of Total Ravanuaa Spacial Aasastmants a* a Pareant of Total Ravanuaa Total Intargovarnmantal Ravanuaa a* a Pareant of Total Ravanuaa Lifflitad Lavy a* a Pareant of tha Total Lavy Total Current Expenditures Par Capita Total Ravanuaa Par Capita Total Expendituraa Per Capita General Obligation Indabtadnaaa Par Capita General Obligation Debt aa a Percent of Aaaaaaad Valuation Special Aeaaaamant Indabtadnaaa Par Capita Special Aaaaaamant Oabt a* a Pareant of Aaaaaaad Valuation Total LlablUtlaa (Govarnaantal Fund*) aa a X of Total Ravanuaa Total Fund Balance as a Percent of Total Currant Expenditure* Interest Incona as a Percent of Total Ravanuaa Debt Service aa a Percent of Total Revenues Full-time Eirployaas Par 1,000 In Population (Govarrmntal Finds) Part-time Employees Par 1,000 in Population (Govammantal Findi) Fringe Benefits as a Percent Total Payroll (Govammantal Finds) Avaraaa Pf iwuw Plnlmum 39.4X 28.0X -42.9X 37.4X 18.2X 29.OX 17.1X 24.OX 54.8X 24.8X '6S.4X 132.5X -4.6X -5.7X -100.OX 92.4X -100.OX 135.8X -20.4X 52.IX 18.0X 49.8X 0.3X 46.5X 9.8X 80.4X 41.9X B 325.79 S 534.39 S 161.42 S 528.60 B 8M.54 B 236.36 B 637.32 B 1.050.61 B 258.41 B 270.08 B 1,322.09 B 0.00 3.3X 11.IX O.OX B 440.11 B 1,490.99 B 16.71 5.4X 16.7X 0.3X 83.67 225.8X 17.7X 27.1X 68.2X O.OX 11.IX 23.8X 3.IX 30.OX 87.7X 9.3X 4.3 6.9 1.4 3.8 13.2 0.6 24.2X 37.2X 12.8X Indicator OFFICE OF THE STATE AUDITOR FIMAHCIAL HEALTH FROFILE 8UMMAR. BY CLASS OF CITY For tho YoAT Endod Docombor 31# is 87 CLASS 3 (10,000 to 20,000 in Population) Avaraga Me i won 09/26/88 Total Ravanuas - 5 Yaar Parcant Changa Changa Stata Intargovanwantal Ravanuaa - 5 Yaar Parcant Changa Changa Fadaral Intargovamaantal Ravanuaa • 5 Yaar Parcant CManga Changa Local Intargovarnawntal Ravanuaa • 5 Yaar Parcant Changa Changa Total Intargovamaantal Ravanuaa - 5 Yaar Parcant Changa Changa aroparty Taxaa aa a Parcant of Total Ravanuaa Spacial Aaaaaaaianta aa a Parcant of Total Ravanuaa Total Intargovamawntal Ravanuaa aa a Parcant of Total Ravanuaa Limited Levy aa a Parcant of the Total Levy Total Currant Expandituraa Par Capita Total Ravanuaa Par Capita Total Expandituraa Par Capita General Obligation Indabtadnaaa Par Capita General Obligation Debt aa a Parcant of Aasask^d Valuation Special Aasassmant Indabtadnaaa Par Capita Spacial Asaasamant Debt aa a Parcant of Aasaaaad Valuation Total Liabilitiaa (Joverrwcr.cal Ftfida) aa a X of Total Ravanuaa Total Fund Balance aa a Percent of Total Current Expenditures Interact Income aa a Parcant of Total Ravanuaa Debt Service aa a Parcant of Total Rtvtnuea Full-time Eof)loyaaa Par 1,000 in Population (Govammantal Fuida) Part-time Eeployaaa Par 1,000 in Population (Govammantal Fi«Ja) Fringe Banefita aa a Parcant Total Payroll (Govammantal Fiaida) MininMn 47.7X -83.4X 24.9X 81.6X 14.6X 1,^71.5X •28. IX 4,’:77.2X 22.6X 1S1.0X 26.7X S4.6X 16.7X 50.4X 33.7X 72.7X 58.SX 83.5X S 339.22 S 769.37 S S 545.66 S 947.53 S S 660.39 S 1,311.35 S S 284.11 S 1,902.64 S 5.IX 49.7X S 480.95 S 1,619.50 S 8.6X 37.7X 76. IX 33. IX 7. OX 30.8X 4.9 6.2 21.4X 440.OX 74.6X 16.1X 123.6X 13.0 22.4 33.7X I. 2X •27.0X •100.0X •100.0X •23.7X 10.IX 1.0X II. 4X 31.2X 155.49 244.03 247.81 0.00 O.OX 0.00 O.OX 9.9X 2.5X 1.1X 7.4X 1.6 0.0 O.OX 09/26/88 Indfeator OFFICE OF THE STATE AUDITOR FZNAMCZAL HEALTH PROFZLE SUMMARY BY CLASS OF CZTY For ths Ysmr Bndod Docombor 31, 1987 CLASS 4 (Loss Than 10,000 in Population) Avraat Waainmi Total Rtvanuat - 5 Ytar Poreant Chang* Chang* Stat* Intargovamaantal Ravanuaa * S Taar Parcant Chang* Chang* Fadaral Intargovamaantal Ravanuaa • 5 Yaar Parcant Changa Chang* Local Intargovarmantal Ravanuaa • 5 Yaar Parcant Chang* Chang* Total Intargovarraaantal Ravwwaa - 5 Yaar Parcant Changa Changa Proparty Tax** a* a Parcant of Total Ravanuaa Spacial Aaaaaamants as a Parcant of Total Revenua* Total Intergovarrwantal Ravanuaa as a Parcant of Total Ravanuaa Linitad Lavy a* a Parcant of th* Total Lavy Total Currant Expandituras Par Capita Total Ravenue* Par Capita Total Expenditura* Par Capita Canaral Obligation Indebtedness Per Capita General Obligation Debt as a Percent of Assessed Valuation Special Assessment Indebtedness Per Capita Special Assessment Debt as a Percent of Assessed Valuation Total Liabilitia* (Governmental Funds) a* a X of Total Revenues Total Fund Ealanca as a Percent of Total Currant Expenditure* Interest Income as a Percent of Total Ravenue* Debt Sarvic* as a Parcant of Total Ravenue* Full-time Esployaa* Par 1.000 In Population (Covammantal f»A<d*) Part-time Enployaa* Par 1.000 in Population (Governmental Fwids) Fringe ianafit* as a Percent Total Payroll (Govammental Funds) 28.8X —.*X 24.AX **.*^.n •18.3X •*.*^.*X •S8.8X S.982.7X 11.6X •*.***.*X 27.8X ••.•••.•X 14.OX ••.••*.*X 36.6X *•.*•*.*X 19.1X 99.3X % 305.23 i 637.36 S % 463.65 S 1.158.97 % % 565.93 S 1,778.33 % % 240.43 S 1,821.54 S 4.3X 53.4X $ 444.05 % 1,874.48 S 7.9X 45.4X 79.9X **,••*.*X 36.2X 6.7X ••.•••.•X 27.9X 4.1 9.0 9.2 78.3 20.4X ••.•••.n jMnimun. "‘-,00.OX -100.OX -100.OX -100.OX -100.0X 8.3X o.ox 8.9X O.OX 0.00 0.00 0.00 o.co o.ox 0.00 o.ox 1.3X •6.IX 0.6X O.OX 0.2 0.3 O.OX appendix b REGIONAL ANALYSIS Minnesota County Outline By Region WCWMWI |mah «<OMCN TMC wooes^ ■ttniMi 2 ITASCA ST. touts UKCOUt trON JAOttON OFFICE OF TNE STATE AUDITOR HfnnMota Financial Naalth Program Citita ovtr 2,S00 in Population 09/27/88 ANALYSIS OF POPULATION Itgion 1 Ragion 2 Ragion 3 Ragion 4 Ragion S Ragion 6E Region 6U Region 7E Ragion 7U Region 8 Region 9 Region 10 Region 11 Total 1983 2S.017 U,20S 188.481 71,151 31,471 39,171 15,485 9,241 79,012 44,413 99,157 212,316 1,914,117 2,743.237 1984 25,121 14,410 186.627 72,261 31,504 39,604 15,644 9,299 a 79,392 44,820 99.420 214,109 1,936,734 2.768.945 1985 24,869 14.245 182,325 72.246 31,695 39,904 15,431 9,412 81,006 U,882 100.U2 216,409 1,964,982 2,797.848 1986 24.910 13,944 179,640 72,067 31,761 40,009 15,379 9,351 82,366 44,571 99,967 216,982 1,993,568 2,824,515 1987 24,681 13,827 177,727 72,280 31.738 40.267 15,271 9,483 85,837 44.636 100,339 218.949 2,026,109 2,861,144 1 Year 5 Year X Chanoa X Change •0.9X -1.3X •0.8X -2.7X •1.1X -5.7X 0.3X 1.6X •0.1X u.dX 0.6X 2.8X •0.7X -1.4X 1.4X 2.6X 4.2X 8.6X 0.1X 0.5X 0.4X 1.2X 0.9X 3.IX 1.6X 5.9X 1.3X 4.3X 09/27/88 OFFICE OF THE STATE AUDITOR Ninntsota Financial Maaith Progra Cities over 2,500 in Population ANALYSIS OF CROSS RETAIL SALES Region 1 Region 2 1985 1984 196.691,594 181.380.902 Region 3 1.255.629.955 Region 4 576.849.433 Region 5 361.344.629 Region 6E 313,836.649 Region 6y 132.455,563 Region 7E 129,433,975 Region 7W 674,526,701 Region 8 395,483,103 Region 9 647,216,362 Region 10 1.608.139.650 Region 11 12.376.666,378 Total 18,849,654,894 216,523.255 197,807.047 1.382,001,702 610.825,914 392,902.316 349.172.023 143,277,242 140,657,751 755,048,092 406,363,164 703,805,166 1,774,719.198 14,100,243,994 1985 220,947,878 213.937,294 1,384,852,712 636,278.792 404,534,853 348,727,619 139,408,817 135,978,696 825,227,366 400,886,382 716,502,850 1.787,723,921 14,926,528,719 1986 215.153.915 213,716,584 1.402,951.985 634,948.737 433,433,128 365,198,022 127,384,369 131,616,879 964,968,731 400,171,349 725,500,034 1,825,358,693 16,430,806,859 1987 195,491,120 227,981,141 1.428,631.034 664,200,661 439.186,702 385,946,960 138,273,348 140,790,859 950,853,707 433,012,295 •4.013,206 V?,885,185 17,449,652,491 1 Year 5 Year t Change X Change •9.1X -0.6% 6.7X 25.7X 1.8X 13.8X 4.6X 15.IX 1.3X 21.5X 5.7X 23.OX 8.5X 4.4X 7.0X 8.8% •1.5X 41.OX 8.2X 9.5X 7.0X 19.9X 7.4X 21.9X 6.2X 41.OX 21,173,346,864 22.141,535,899 23,871,209,285 25,190,918,709 5.5X 33.6X 09/27/88 OFFICE OF THE STATE AUDITOR MIrvwsota FinwKial Naalth Program Citiaa ovtr 2,500 in Population ANALYSIS OF NUM8ER OF RETAIL lUSINESSES 1983 1984 1985 _ _ _1986_ _ 1 Year 5 Year 1987 % Chanee X Change Region 1 428 449 428 446 408 •8.5X •4.7X Region 2 539 598 604 609 628 3.IX 16.5X Region 3 3,466 3,618 3,646 3.493 3.413 •2.3X •1.5X iegion 4 1,600 1,635 1,642 1,679 1,647 •1.9X 2.9X Region 5 1,010 1,049 1,058 1,039 1,022 •1.6X 1.2X Region 6E 856 891 935 938 909 -3.IX 6.2X Region 6U 457 460 442 428 417 •2.6X •8.8X Region 7E 342 339 360 363 366 0.8X 7. OX Region 7W 1,405 1,514 1,604 1,594 1,615 1.3X 14.9X Region 8 1,062 1,078 1,079 1,042 1,025 -1.6X •3.5X Region 9 1,848 1,925 1,959 1,936 1,857 V.1X 0.5X Region 10 3,915 4,093 4,070 4,013 3,982 •0.8X 1.7X Region 11 21.795 22,510 22,829 23,329 23,110 •0.9X 6.0X Total 38,723 40,159 40,656 40,909 40,399 -1.2X 4.3X 09/27/88 OFFICE OF TNE STATE AUDITOR MIrwMota Financial Haalth Pro«ri Citiat ovar 2,500 in Population AMALYSIS OF NUMBER OF BUILDING PERMITS ISSUED DURING THE YEAR Ragion 1 Ragion 2 Ragion 3 Ragion 4 Ragion 5 Ragion 6E Ragion 6U Ragion 7E Ragion 7W Ragion 8 Ragion 9 Ragion 10 Ragion 11 Total 1983 599 227 3,885 1,128 687 1,067 299 234 1,575 946 2.466 4.872 42.268 60,253 1984 530 289 3,888 1,199 642 613 321 249 1,547 965 2.478 4,680 48,563 65,964 514 282 3,323 1,222 748 918 282 236 1,756 807 2,444 4,660 49,178 66,370 1986 503 288 3,396 1,491 689 897 229 311 1,800 856 2,354 4,782 53,257 1987 533 328 3.943 1,365 784 774 236 330 2,326 800 2,441 4,737 59,497 1 Yaar 5 Yaar X Chanoa X Changa 6.0X -11.OX 13.9X 44.SX 16.IX 1.5X •8.5X 21.OX 13.8X 14.IX •13.7X -27.5X 3.1X -21.IX 6.1X 41.OX 29.2X 47.7X -6.5X -15.4X 3.7X -1.0X •0.9X -2.8% 11.7X 40.8X 70,853 78,094 10.2X 29.6X 09/27/88 OFFICE OF THE STATE AUDITOR NInnMota Financial Ntalth Prograa Citiaa ovar 2,500 in Population ANALYSIS OF VALUE OF 8U1L0ING PERMITS ISSUED DURING THE YEAR Rtgion 1 Region 2 Region 3 Region 4 Region 5 Region 6E Region 6U Region 7E Region 7U Region 8 Region 9 Region 10 Region 11 Total 6,014,300 19,306,815 42,913,707 28,161,095 20,723,683 22,658,261 6,819,006 10,612,355 64,093.487 23.891,360 45,576,668 128,193,894 1,719,669,991 5,895,123 7,698.765 63,096.814 27,055.489 28,951,594 20,295.533 3,797,228 9,734.470 75,320,130 18,236,205 46,025,865 189,890,242 2,143,648.351 1985 8,403,602 10,598,112 32,U2.063 38.371,799 17,676,814 32.224,538 2.682.697 10,348,140 91,117,477 15,875.069 41,355,892 160.378.885 2,608,108.627 1986 6,868.790 11,258,705 82.241.551 30.242.050 15,263,786 24.735.146 2,506.778 9,096,769 88,203,621 14,957.066 52,012,580 180.4U.255 3,122,627,188 2,138,634,622 2,639.645,589 3,069,583.715 3,640,458,285 1987 1 Year 5 Year X Chanae X Change 7,055,332 2.7X 17.3X 9,004,705 •20.0X •53.4X 75,676,349 -8.f«76.3X 36,509,263 20/*'X 29.6X 23.047,025 51.0X 11.2X 34.509.481 39.5X 52.3X 2,827,295 12.8X •58.5X 11.537,737 26.8X 8.7X 124.844.624 41.5X 94.8% 21.800.525 45.8X •8.8X 48.339.065 •7.1X 6.IX 195.797.576 8.5X 52.7X 3.404.655.891 9.0X 98. OX 3.995.604.868 9.8X 86.8X 09/27/88 OFFICE OF THE STATE AUDITOR Minnesota Financial Health Program Cities over 2,500 in Population ANALYSIS OF UNOESl(MATED. UNRESERVED GENERAL FUND lALANCE Region 1 Region 2 Region 3 Region 4 Region 5 Region 6E Region 6U Region 7E Region 7U Region 8 Region 9 Region 10 Region 11 Total 1983 1.861,916 1.782.977 13,219,189 5,229,017 2.431.434 2.107,826 1.367,039 567,583 7,098,585 4,738,125 5.916.435 22,701,828 91,616,891 1984 2.112.273 2.095.549 15,771.128 6.270.381 2,964,188 2.048.550 1.105.382 424,260 8,887,229 5,000,392 7,601,605 27,030,677 106,503,232 1985 2,215,014 2.546.753 14.527.731 7,520,540 3,601.942 1,808,121 903,702 U0,549 10,570,958 5.139,714 8,683,008 27,682,469 116,049,883 1986 2.467.101 2,738,777 16.156.001 8,205,006 3,782.856 2,348,402 1,162,373 420,395 11,975,829 4,924,192 9,588,881 29,753,900 131,385,935 1987 2,759,584 2,758,227 15,586,701 9,655,712 4,406,954 2.725.886 1,230.973 557,963 13,024,867 4,912,964 10,025,841 31,080,918 132.370,835 1 Year 5 Year R Change X Change 11.9X 46.6X 0.7X 54.7X •3.5X 17.9X 17.7% 84.7X 16.5% 81.2X 16.1X 29.3X 5.9X -10.OX 32.7X -1.7X 8.8X 63.5X •0.2X 3.7X 4.6X 69.5X 4.5X 36.9X 0.7X 44.5X 160,658,845 187,814,846 201,690,384 224,909,648 231,097,425 2.8X 43.8X 09/27/88 OFFICE OF TNE STATE AUDITOR Minnesota Financial Health Prograia Cities over 2,500 in Population ANALYSIS OF NUMBER OF RETAIL BUSINESSES 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1 Year 5 Year X Change X Change fttsfon 1 428 449 428 446 408 -8.5X -4.7X RtBion 2 S39 598 604 609 628 3.IX 16.5X Rtflion 3 3,466 3,618 3,646 3,493 3,413 •2.3X •1.5X 4 1,600 1,635 1,642 1,679 1,647 •1.9X 2.9X Bcflion S 1,010 1,049 1,058 1,039 1,022 •1.6X 1.2X Rtflion 6E 856 891 935 938 909 •3.1X 6.2X Region 6W 457 460 U2 428 417 •2.6X •8.8% Region 7E 342 339 360 363 366 0.8X 7. OX Region 7W 1,405 1,514 1,604 1,594 1,615 1.3X 14.9X Region 8 1,062 1,078 1,079 1,042 1,025 •1.6X •3.5X Region 9 1,848 1,925 1,959 1,936 1,857 •4.IX O.SX Region 10 3,915 4,093 4,070 4,013 3,982 •0.8X 1.7X Region 11 21,795 22,510 22,829 23,329 23,110 -0.9X 6.OX Total 38,723 40,159 40,656 40,909 40,399 -1.2X 4.3X 09/27/88 OFFICE OF THE STATE AUDITOR Mfnnetot* Fin«nelil N«alth Progrim Cfti#* over 2,500 In Populition ANALYSIS OF NUMBER OF BUILDING PERMITS ISSUED DURING THE YEAR Rtgion 1 Rtgion 2 Rtglon 3 Rtgion 4 Rtfllen 5 Rtflion 6E Region 6U Region 7E Region 7U Region 8 Region 9 Region 10 Region 11 Total 1983 599 227 3,885 1,128 687 1,067 299 234 1,575 946 2,466 4,872 42,268 60,253 530 289 3,888 1,199 642 613 321 249 1,547 965 2,478 4,680 48,563 65,964 1985 514 282 3,323 1.222 748 918 282 236 1,756 807 2,444 4,660 49,178 66,370 1986 503 288 3,396 1,491 689 897 229 311 1,800 856 2,354 4,782 53,257 70,853 1 Year 5 Year 1987 X Change X Change 533 6.0X -11.OX 328 13.9X U.5X 3,943 16.IX 1.5X 1,365 -8.5X 21.0X 784 13.8X 14.IX 774 -13.7X -27.5X 236 3.1X -21.IX 330 6. IX 41.OX 2,326 29.2X 47.7X 800 -6.5X -15.4X 2,U1 3.7X -l.OX 4,737 -0.9X -2.8X 59,497 11.7X 40.8X 78,094 10.2X 29.6X / OFFICE OF THE STATE AUDlTOi Mirvwsota Firwncial HMlth Program Citiaa ovor 2,500 in Population ANALYSIS OF SPECIAL ASSESSNENT lONOEO INDEBTEDNESS lagion 1 Itgion 2 ■tgion 3 lagion 4 lagion 5 lagion 6E lagion 6U lagion 7E lagion 7U lagion 8 lagion 9 lagion 10 lagion 11 Total 1983 11.585.000 4,319,800 15.288.000 30,009.112 11,419.400 19.250.000 3.351.104 4.265.249 53.549.500 13.001.000 40.200.000 55.848.500 704,191,242 12.245.000 4.824,900 15.995.000 28,756,in 12,386,400 20.310.000 3.463,604 4,349,249 49.841.000 13,417,800 41.650.000 58.157.000 694,551,078 1985 11.075.000 4.820.000 15.051.000 27.220,635 12.226,400 20.350.000 3,941,104 4.418.000 44.762.000 13,619,700 46.365.000 59.320.000 711,988,992 1986 10,200,000 4,591.600 14.227.000 24.519.597 11,785,400 19.930.000 3,593,604 3.446.000 53.477.000 12,929,200 49.005.000 63.437.000 730,056,670 09/27/88 1987 9.240.000 4.113.200 15.612.000 23,013.558 9,857,400 21.180.000 4,222,170 3.079.000 53.866.000 14,222,400 47.890.000 61.090.000 747.202.206 1 Yaar 5 Yaar X Change X Change •9.4X -20.2X •10.4X -4.8X 9.7X 2.1X -6.IX -23.3X •16.4X -13.7X 6.3X 10.OX 17.5X 26.OX •10.7X -27.8X 0.7X 0.6X 10.0X 9.4X •2.3X 19.IX -3.7X 9.4X 2.3X 6.1X 966,277,907 959.947,204 975,157,831 1,001.198,071 1,014,587,934 1.3X 5.OX 09/27/88 OmCE OF THE STATE AUUiTOR MinnMota Financial Maalth Program Citias ovar 2,500 in Population ANALYSIS OF GENERAL OBLIGATION AND G.O. REVENUE BONDED INDEBTEDNESS Ragion 1 Ragion 2 Ragion 3 Ragion A Ragion 5 Ragion 6E Ragion 6W Ragion 7E Ragion 7W Ragion 8 Ragion 9 Ragion 10 Ragion 11 Total 1983 12.350.000 2.070.000 76.667.000 11,759,188 2.606.000 28.695.000 11,229,896 312,000 14,472,500 21.240.000 23.670.000 51.989.000 408,485,965 11.773.000 5.222.500 80.767.000 14,295,927 4.296.500 17.760.000 11,077,396 192,000 13.990.000 21,226,200 20.895.000 52.675.000 446,130,637 1985 11,068,000 4.635.000 86.435.000 18,306,265 4.497.000 40.445.000 8.013.000 107,000 16.030.000 23.689.000 20.050.000 54.875.000 491,776,848 1986 10,620,000 2.562.500 86,000,000 18,288,603 4.252.500 27.770.000 8,650,000 57,000 17.800.000 20,355,800 20.475.000 53,780,653 596,291,000 1987 10.603.000 3,535,000 104,384,334 18,321,942 3,552,500 34.750.000 10.690.000 17,000 18,855,OJO 19,260,600 21.410.000 54,517,653 622,678,000 1 Yaar 5 Yaar X Chanaa X Change •0.2» -14.IX 38.0X 70.8X 21.4X 36.2X 0.2X 55.8X •16.5X 36.3X 25.IX 21.IX 23.6X -4.8X -70.2X -94.6X 5.9X 30.3X -5.4X -9.3% 4.6X -9.5X 1.4X 4.9X 4.4X 52.4X 665,549,549 700,301,160 779,927,113 866,903,056 922,575,029 6.4X 38.6X 09/27/88 OFFICE OF TNE STATE AUDITOR NinntsotA Financial Naalth Program Citiaa ovar 2,500 in Population liAlYSIS OF TOTAL CURRENT EXPENDITURES Rtgion 1 Ragion 2 Ragion 3 Ragion 4 Ragion 5 Ragion 6E Ragion 6u Ragion 7E Ragion 7U Ragion 8 Ragion 9 Ragion 10 Ragion 11 Total 8.824.791 3.690,269 73,627,607 21,418,861 7.419,633 11.356,412 4,280.228 2.995.399 22,707,900 12.624.248 28,159,022 63.482.209 695,651,718 1984 9,625,755 4,144,951 80,290,798 23.810,703 8,033,852 12.081.720 4,865,840 2,957,132 25,379,722 15,114,439 29,223,922 71,067,930 741.208.092 1985 10,575.775 4.219.657 85,196,490 24.517.911 8,165,666 12,828,799 5.278.996 3,239,087 27.624.565 15.566.661 31.092.566 77.199.539 798.669,021 1986 11,284.650 4.339.171 82.947,285 25,109.742 8.980,787 13,041.074 5,265,585 1,825,978 28,020,813 15,564,989 32,427,431 83,402,045 867.181.221 1987 11,820,285 4,374.336 87.594.661 24.377,310 9.406.047 14.217.662 5,193,377 1,870.865 29.410.197 16.242,343 33,471,287 89,999,001 930,311,945 1 Yaar 5 Yaar % Changa X Change 4.7X 33.9X 0.8X 18.5X 5.6X 19.0X •2.9X 13.8X 4.7X 26.8X 9.0X 25.2X •1.4X 21.3X 2.5X -37.5X 5.OX 29.5X 4.4X 28.7X 3.2X 18.9X 7.9X 41.8X 7.3X 33.7X 956,238,297 1,027,804,856 1,104,174,733 1,179,390,771 1,258,289,316 6.7X 31.6X 09/27/88 OFFICE OF THE STATE AUDITOR Mirvwtota Financial Health Progran Citiaa over 2,500 In Papulation ANALYSIS OF INDICATED MARKET VALUE 1983 1984 Region 1 421,260.976 Region 2 216.898.739 Region 3 3,524,011.457 Region 4 1,286,844.077 Region 5 544,368.457 Region 6E 818,369,597 Region 6U 251.590.068 Region 7E 200,647.315 Region 7U 1,727,657,391 Region 8 867.113.992 Region 9 2.001,170,107 Region 10 5,030,015,542 Region 11 61.921.315.024 1985 391.707.071 235,276,539 3,335,893,024 1.293.243.075 556,901,256 817.330,649 261,619,273 202,665,859 1,816,846,160 852,560,930 1,996.937,338 4,885,777,882 61,790,347,592 383.799.766 232.528.982 3.036.220.506 1,302,002,964 561,930.868 863,577,008 253.686.888 212.946.164 1,914,496.065 879.118.945 2.004,693.625 5.180,017,869 63.643.609.626 1966 402,780,983 231.333,184 2,909,806.721 1,346,448,831 559.186,812 879,640,782 256.218.943 226,856.724 2.034.952.489 891.337,740 2.084.962.632 5,491,720.018 65.807.841,976 1987 372,473,254 232,132,304 2,668,570,852 1,232,010,551 548,142.321 807,789,100 236,928.006 219,746,964 2.048,742,418 780.679.559 1,913,564,125 5,126,610,156 67.734,013,642 1 Year 5 Year X Chanoe X Change •7.5X -11.6X 0.3X 7.OX *8.3X -24.3X •8.5X -4.3X -2.OX 0.7X •8.2X -1.3X -7.5X -5.8X •3.IX 9.5X 0.7X 18.6X •12.4X -10.OX •8.2X -4.4X •6.6X 1.9X 2.9X 9.4X Total 78,811,262,742 78.437,106,648 80,468.629,276 83,123,087,835 83,921,403,252 1.0X 6.5X COUNCIL MEETING To:Mayor Grabek & Orono Council Members Orono Planning Commission Members City Administrator Bernhardson FB 13 1933 OfTf OF ORONO Prom:Michael P. Gaffron, Asst Planning &Zoning Administrator Date:February 2, 1989 Subject:SAC Refund Resolution Attached is a resolution of intent to not participate in the Metropolitan Waste Control Commission SAC Charge Refund Program. This resolution is pursuant to Council's vote of 5-0 on January 9, 1989 to not participate in the program. Moved by seconded by to approve Resolution notifying Metropolitan Waste Control Commission of Orono's intent to not participate in the M.W.C.C. SAC Refund Program. Ayes - -, nays _ _• A RBSOLUTIOH OF INTENT TO NOT PARTICIPATE IN THE METROPOLITAN WASTE CONTROL COMMISSION (M.W.C.C. ) SAC REFUND PROGRAM WHEREAS, the City of Orono is a muni' ' organized and existing under the laws of the State oi corporation ^esota; and WHEREAS, the City of Orono contains properties which have not been served with municipal sewer and are outside the defined Urban Service Area, but for which a Sewer Availability Charge was paid with the original building permit; and WHEREAS, as of January 1, 1987, properties outside the M.U.S.A. line have not been required by the M.W.C.C, to pay the SAC charge until sewer becomes available; and WHEREAS, the M.W.C.C. has initiated a program to make SAC charge refunds available for properties which have not been served with municipal sewer; and WHEREAS, the M.W.C.C. has authorized the City of Orono and other similarly situated cities to participate in a Sewer Availability Charge Refund Progreun at the option of each individual municipality; and WHEREAS, at the regular meeting of the Orono City Council on January 9, 1989, the merits of participation in the SAC Refund Program were considered. HOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the Orono City Council hereby determines that the City of Orono will not participate in the SAC Refund Program. Page 1 of 2 Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota, at a regular meeting held February 13th, 1989. ATTEST: James R. Grabek, MayorDorothy M. Hallin, City Clerk STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this day of , 19_ _ _, by James R. Grabek & Dorothy M. Hallin, Mayor & City Clerk of the City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City. Notary Public My Commission Expires Page 2 of 2 DATE: TO: FROM: RE: COUNCIL WCETING February 2, 1989 , . FEB 13 1373 Mark Bernhardson, City Administrator „.i Kiibo, Chi„ Of poue. S!rr OF CROMO Replacement Equipment Purchase - Unbudqeted Item In 1982, the Police Department purchased a used machine from the Administration Dept, to be used as a Loais terminal. This terminal, a Hewlett Packard 125, is outdated in that the disk drive no lonaer works, and the terminal configurations, etc., ap continually rendering the machine inoperable. The nroblem has been steadily increasing in recent months. Technicians from Logis told us six months aao that it anytime and it is now on its last lea. la; requesting peraission to purchase an IBM PC 2 with word processing software ^. hi „ this terminal as soon as possible. This replacement would be compatible with our purchase in 1988 for the replacement of the state terminal. I have received two quotes for the replacement terminal. One is from our current supplier. Office Products of MN. That quote is a hardware investment of $4790 for an IBM System 2, model 60, with necessary hardware and software to function as a Logis terminal. I received a second quote from Sears Business Systems of v5,178, for an IBM System 2, Model 60 with all necessary hardware and software to function as a Logis terminal. I would request permission to purchase the teminal from Office Products of Minnesota at the low quote as soon as possible. Mayor and Council Mark E. Bernhardson, City Administrator TO: FROM: PROPOSED MOTION - Moved by _, seconded , to authorize purchase of a police department terminalAroFd processor with software from equipment outlay fund monies in $4,790. The purchase is to be reimbursed from the 1990 general fund police department budget. Ayes_ , Nays — . Forwarded recommending approval. This replacement type is needed for compatiability with both the LOGIS system for recordkeeping and the States system for Criminal Justice information. S SYSrmS CENTBt Scars. R«K'buck and Co. Yorkiown Fa>hion Mall -VS 1 3 Hu/citon Road Edina. .MN 5543.^ lb 1 2) .S3lod5ft QUOTE FOR CITY OF ORONO POLICE DEPARTMENT, CHIEF KILBO BY SEARS BUSINSlS SYSTEMS CENTER, DICK RASTER SKl^?DESCRIPTION LIST PRICE YOUR MAINTENANCE PRICE PRICE* 12064 IBM PS/2 MOD 60/40 $5,295.00 $3,971.25 $530.00 15022 IBM 8512 COLOR MONITOR $624.00 $468.00 $63.or 11910 IBM DOS 3.3 $125.00 $93.75 $0.00 40361 MICROSOFT WORD 4.0 $450.00 $295.00 $0.00 20002 HAYES SMARTMODEM 1200 EXT.$399.00 $320.00 $40.00 SPEC MODEM CABLE $50.00 $30.00 $0.00 TOTAL $6,943.00 $5,i78.ro $633.00 Ori-site installation of the above equipment would be $75;.oo. Trainning on software would be $50.00/hour on site performed by ou systems engineer, o^ can be arranged through a company called Microworx at their location as indicated in the attached flier. If you have any further questions regarding the above prices or configuration, please feel free to call me during regular business hour at 831-5956. Thank you again for your request f«~r information. Dick Raster Account Executive Sears Business Systems Center * Maintenance »?^?£reement is listed for a two year period '^nd is on-site fr.il coverage! OFFICE PRODUCTS iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii^iiiiiiii^ii^ni^miiiii^s 7704 BUSH LAKE ROAD • MINNEAPOLIS. MN 55435 • (612)835-6776 OF MINNESOTA. INC. Office Products Of Minnesota Microcomputer Recommer ation for: CITY OF ORONO POLICE DEPT. P.O. BOX 86 CRYSTAL BAY MN 55323 Salesperson:CHIEF KILBO KRIS ZIEGLER 473-7710 335-6776 JAN. 24, 1989 12.21.88 Our Part No.Description Your Price IBC 3560041 IBM Personal System/2 Model 60-041 3700 IBC 8512001 IBM PS/2 Color Display 8512 428 IBS 6280060 Disk Operating System 3.3, and 5 1/4”)93 SOFTMSWORD Microsoft Word 4, IBM PC 290 HPS 68333F NEW! Ad’ anc«Link/ IBM Version (LOGIS)249 OPM-P2 PRINTER CABLE (IF NECESSARY)$30.00 Included: SERVICE AGREEMENTS: 1ST YEAR ON-SITE $ 125.00 2 YEAR AGREEMENT $ /‘^*'.00 3 YEAR AGREEMF"^ $ ‘ .00 Hardware Total ****************************** $4,790.00 Additional Items Total ********************** Total Investment >c*************************** $4,790.00 The next generation in personal computing IBM Personal System/2 Model 60 A powerful combination of capability and capacity IBM Personal System/2 Model 60 combines high per ­ formance with high capacity, making it an excellent choice for anyone who manages large amounts of information, big projects, tight schedules. In a systems network setting, this model can be used to share files and programs and provide rapid communications— so no matter now much there is to do. everyone can work at peak efficiency. Here are just a few ways Model 60 can work for you and your business. Manage more in less time. Model 60's Micro Channel'” architecture, fast 80286 micro­ processor, and 1MB memory are the right combination to cut through big processing jobs in a hurry. And this model offers large-and expandable- fixed disk storage to match its powerful performance. Make Model 60 your network workhorse. When used with the new IBM Operating System/2!“ Model 60 will support advanced applications, multiple appli­ cations and a large number of peripheral devices. So you can use it for such important tasks as spreadsheet process ­ ing and data base management. Or use it as a file and print server —or communications gateway. However or wherever you put Model 60 to work, you can count on it to pull an impressive share of the load. Highlights Model 60 IS available with a 44MB or 70MB fixed disk. Whichever you choose, you’ll be getting a system that offers ad­ vanced features and functions to meet today's requirements ... and tomorrow's demands. New Micro Channel architec - ture provides wide data paths for fast processing and com­ munications. It accounts for this system's balanced perfor ­ mance-even when support­ ing multiple tasks and input/ output operations. 80286 microprocessor works at high speeds to help you com­ plete large jobs quickly. For even greater calculation speed, an optional IBM 80287 Math Co-Processor can be installed. 1MB user memory (expand­ able to 15MB with memory expansion options! supplies workspace for ad'^>nce<j appli­ cations—even ~ - -Itiuie appli­ cations—and volumes of data. Integrated functions give you significant capability from the start. Model 60 comes ready with advanced color and graphics capabilities—plus built-in support for your dis­ play. printer, keyboard, even for a modem and mouse. And because all these features are built in-not added on at extra cost—you get more for your money and a system that's reliab'e. too. Built-in Video Graphics Array (VGA) capabilities provide videolike clarity and detail for your graphics and text. These advanced capabilities result in a screen image that's brilliant and natural looking. VGA also supports CGA. EGA and MCGA graphics and text. A palette of over 256.000 colors plus 64 shades of gray provides a wide spectrum to work with. You can view up to 256 colors at a time —and colors automatically convert to gray on a monochrome display. There ’s almost no limit to the contrast and shading you'll be able to create and view on ­ screen. 44MB, 70MB and optional 115MB fixed disks provide ready-access storage for large files and applications, even elaborate data bases. 1.44MB diskette drive lets you easily load files and programs stored on the 3.5-inch diskettes used with Model 60. Compact and durable, each high-density diskette can hold as many as 720 pages' of information. Seven expansion slots make it easy to add more functions to Model 60 to keep pace with changing needs. Switchless setup means all you do IS connect your system and begin. Convenient ports and plugs keep things simple. Four superior analog displays offer you a choice of price and function —and bring the built-in text/graphics capabilities of Model 60 into clear focus Whether you need crisp text or vivid, detailed color graphics, you ’ll find the right display to suit your work and your budget. ,y/de range of communica ­ tions options lets you connect Model 60 in a variety of local area networks and access the power of many larger systems. What you get IBM Personal System/2 Model 60 IS packaged in two cartons, one containing the sy'Stem unit. The other contains: »One-page customer setup sheet • System unit power cord > K^board and cable • Quick Reference manual ► Systei .1 Reference diskette with tutonal • Technical Directory Options Model 60 supports a wide array of optional devices — including many of the penph- erals currently available for IBM Personal Computers. What follows is a listing of some of the new options available for Model 60: • IBM Persona) System/2 80287 Math Co-Processor (10 MHz) »IBM 80286 Memory Expansion Option • IBM 80286 Memory Expansion Kit • IBM Personal System/2 Mouse • 44MB. 70MB and 115MB Fixed Disk Options • IBM Personal System/2 5.25" External Diskette Drive • IBM Personal System/2 Data Migration Facility • IBM 6157 Streaming Tape Drive • iBM 3363 Optical Di .< Dnve • IBM 300/1200 Internal Mooem/A • IBM Dual Async Adapter/A • IBM Multi-Protocol Adapter/A • IBM 3270 Connection • System 36/38 Workstation Emulation Ao. -cter • IBM Token-Ring Network Adapter/A • IBM PC Network Adapter ll/A • IBM PC Network Baseband Adapter/A • IBM Personal System/2 3117 Adapter/A • IBM Personal System/2 High Speed Adapter/A Warranty/Service Every IBM product is built to meet high standards of quality and reliability. So you can count on Model 60 to perform smoothly year after year. Model 60 IS backed by a one- year limited warranty. And extended service terms are available from IBM and from IBM Authorized Advanced Products Dealers. With an IBM Maintenance Agreement, you can arrange for on-site sen/ice. ’*■ Personal System 2. Ooeratmg System/2. Mcio Channel and Propnnter are iraaemarlrs ol International Business Machines Corporation •> IBM and Qmetwnter ate legtstered trademarks ol International Business Machines Corporation ' 8'/i * it irKh. double spaced typevmtten pages IBM Personal System/2 Model 60 at a glance Microprocesaor 80206.10 MHz Optional IBM 80287 Math Co-Processor (10 MHz) Pennanent memory (ROM) 128KB standard Memory (RAM)1MB standard, expandable to 15MB with memory expansion options imegrated functions Video Graphics Array (VGA) and dispi .y port, senal port, parallel port, pointxig device port, keyboard port and diskette controller Text/graphics support New display modes VGA supports existing color graphics modes and provides up to 256 colors (from a palette of over 256.(XX)) and 64 shades of gray (rrronochrome) 320 X 200 pels x 256 ccjors-all points addressable 640 X 400 pels X16 colors-all points addressable 9x16 character box -16 colors (text) Dimensions approx 23 5-Hx6 5'Wxl9-D (597mm x l66mm x 402mm) Auxiliary storaga Model 60 041 one 144MB 3 5-inch diskette drive and a 44MB fixed disk standard; additional 44MB fixed disk optional Model 60-071 one 144MB 3 5-inch diskette drive and a TOMB fixed disk standard: additional TOMB or 115MB fixed disk optional Also oplional either a second 144MB diskette dnve or 5 25' External Diskette Drive. 3363 Optical Disk Dnve. 6157 Streaming Tape Ove System expr Seven available expansion slots Keyboard 101 keys, including 12 function keys. 3 lighted mode indicators: 9-loot coiled cable Power supply 207-watl (Model 60-041) or 225-watt (Model 60-071) worldwide autosensing power supply Operating systems IBM PC DOS 3 30. IBM Operating System/2 Supported displays IBM Personal System/2 Color Displays 8512.0513 and 8.S14: IBM Personal System/2 Monochrome Display 8503 Supported printers IBM Propnnter'* family. IBM Quiei voter® printers. IBM Wheelprinters. IBM Pageprinter, IBM Color Jelprinter Communications support IBM Token-Ring Network Adapter/A. IBM PC Network Adapter ll/A, IBM PC Network Baseband Adapter/A, IBM 3270 Connection. System 36/38 Workstation Emulation /VJapter, IBM Dual Async Adapter/A. IBM Multi-Protocoi Adapter/A, IBM 300/1200 Internal Modem/A ’"® © IBM Cofp. 1907 tntemational Business Machines Corporation lntorma»ion Systems Group Dept.KPE 900 King Street Rye Brook. NY 10573 Printed in the United States of America 4-07 All Rights Reservsd G50OO794-OO References in this publication to 8M products or services do not imply that IBM intends to make them available outside the United States. £586-0794-00 12689.10 ji/ *11 M££nmg TO: Mayor and City Council FBOM: Mark E. Eirnhardson, City Administrato DATS: January 26, 1989 ?tD 13 lITy OF OROFD SUBJECT: City of Orono/Profile by Community Action Suburban Hennepin County Attachment: A. Profile of Properties/Orono Minnesota ISSUE - Presentation of information compiled by the Community Action for Hennepin County (formerly West Hennepin Human Services). INTRODUCTION - The City of Orono's representative to the West Hennepin Human Services Council LaDean McWilliams made the attached copy available to the City of Orono. The data enclosed is taken from various sources with a focus on statistics that provide indications as to the economic well-being of citizens in Orono. DISCUSSIONS - The data that is presented is helpful in indicating trends that are within the community and how the City of Orono is relationship to other communities. Some of the data is based on the 1980 census and at this point may be outdated. The newer data from *86 *87 may be more relevant and give a more realistic picture of the ecomomy status in the community. It is interesting to note in review of surrounding communities that depending which statistic is selected that Orono is either better or worse off in this category than most communities. ALTERNATIVES - 1. Accept. 2. Request fu..ther clarification of information. 3. Table for further discussion. RECOMMENDATION - It is recommended that the Council accept the information as presented and await further information for action to be taken on this information by the West Hennepin Suburban Human Services Board. PROPOSED MOTION - Moved by _, seconded by _, that the Council accept the information and thank its representative LaDean McWilliams for providing the information. Ayes __, Nays __. cc: LaDean McWilliams o To: John R. Gerhardson, Public Works Coordinator Proa: Jack Brinkhaus, Street Foreman Date: February 1, 1989 Subject: Seasonal Weight Restrictions Attached is a list of the recommended axle weight limit restrictions for each City street. The streets will be posted from March 15 through May 15r 1989. The normal length of time that restrictions are in effect is related to weather conditions. Certain streets might be closed to school buses if a street becomes impassible. In the past several years, we have allowed solid waste haulers to continue their normal operations, limiting them to gross weight on any single axle of seven tons or 14,000 pounds. If a street shows signs of severe breakup we will limit the solid waste haulers to smaller vehicles. I have drafted a resolution for the 1989 weight limits for Council approval. WEETWe OF TO: FROM: Mayor and City Council Mark E. Bernhardson, City Administrator Forwarded recommending approval. The City of Orono ordains that axle weight limits are restricted on the following streets in the City of Orono from March 15, 1989 through May 15, 1989 in accordance with regulations as provided in Chapter 6.11 of the Orono Municpal Code. No refuse collections vehicles shall be operated during the seasonal restriction time where the gross weight on any single axle exceeds 14,000 lbs. and no vehicles shall be operated upon any City street at any time where special posting specifially prohibits refuse collection vehicles. The following streets are limited to five ton axle limits: Arbor Street Baldur Park Road Barrett Avenue Bayview Place Bederwood Drive Birch Lane Blaine Avenue Bohn's Point Lane Bohn's Point Road Brackett's Point Road Briar Street Brown Road, North Carman Road Carman Street Caroline Avenue Casco Avenue Casco Circle Casco Point Road Cherry Avenue Cherry Place Chevy Chase Drive Chippewa Lane Concordia Street Corral Road Country Club Road Crestview Avenue Crystal Avenue Crystal Bay Road Crystal Place Cygnet Place Dahl Road Dickenson Street Dickenson Street Alleys Dickey Lake Drive Dunwoody Avenue East Lake Street East Long Lake Road Eileen Street Elm Lane Elm Street Elmwood Avenue Ethel Avenue Eagerness Point Road Fairview Cottage Farview Lane Ferndale Green Ferndale Road West Forest Arms Lane Forest Lake Drive Forest Lake Landing Fox Ridge Road Fox Street (S. Brown to Orono Orchard) Fox Street (S. Brown to Willow Drive) Fox Street (#84 to Willow Drive) Frederick Street Glendale Avenue Grandview Avenue Hackberry Hill Hanlon Avenue Heritage Drive Heritage Lane High Lane Highwood Road Hunter Drive Ivy Place Keene Avenue Kelly Avenue Kenwood Way Lakeview Avenue Lakeview Terrace Leaf Street Lilac Lane Linden Avenue Linden Lane Livingston Avenue Loma Linda Avenue Long Lake Boulevard Long Lake Union Cemetary Road Lydiard Avenue Lydiard Circle Lyman Avenue Lyric Avenue Maple Lane Maple Place Mapleridge Lane Minnetonka Avenue Minnetonka Highlands Minnie Avenue Myrtlewood Road Navarre Avenue Navarre Lane North Arm Drive North Arm Lane North Ferndale Road Northern Avenue Oak Street Old Beach Road Old Long Lake Road Olive Avenue Orchard Beach Place Orchard Park Road Orono Lane Orono Orchard Road Orono Townline Road % Continuation of five ton axle limit streets: Park Avenue Park Drive Park Lane Partenwood Road Pheasant Lawn Road Prospect Avenue Railroad Avenue Rest Point Circle Rest Point Lane Russell Avenue Scotch Pine Lane Shevlin Drive Smith Avenue Spates Avenue Spring Hill Road Spruce Place Starkey Road Stubbs Bay Road Tiunarack Drive Togo Road Tonka Avenue Turnham Road Vine Place t'^atertown Road Webb Street Webber Hills Road West Ferndale Road West Lafayette Road West Lake Street Wildhurst Trail Willow Drive (Highway #12 to Sixth Avenue) Willow Drive (Sixth Avenue to Medina City limits) Willow Drive (from South Brown Road to Fox Street) Willowbrook Road Windjammer Lane Woodhill Avenue C The following are nine-ton axle limit: Old Crystal Bay Road McCulley Road Tonkaview Lane Willow Drive (from Watertown Road to Long Lake) Willow Drive (from Fox Street to Watertown Road) The follr * ig bridges are limited to 19-ton per vehicle: 32 Tons p truck and full trailer or semi-trailer combination: Willow Drive Old Crystal Bay Road West Ferndale Road Adoped by the City Council of the City of OronOf Minnesota at a regular meeting held February 13, 1989. ATTEST: Dorothy M. Hallin, City Clerk James R. Grabek, Mayor COUNCIL MEETING toz John R. Gerhardson, Public Works Director ri‘jl3u33 Pros: Jack Brinkhaus, Street Foreman '"''TY Date: February 1, 1989 Subject: Bid Award - Equipment & Materials Bids 1989 The City of Orono advertised for two successive weeks for street materials and equipment rentalr with bid opening at 10:00 A.M. Friday^ January 27, 1989. The enclosed tabulation contains a complete accounting of all bids received and the recommended low bidders and alternates. The accepted low bids for materials are determined by availability and location of materials. Traveling distance to a supplier is considered a cost factor when determining a low bid. When renting equipment with an operator, we are guided by the type, size of equipment, and an hourly rate. It is possible to award the low bid to mere than one contractor when considering materials and equipment. In order to stimulate enthusiasm for the following years work, we make sure to divide the work accordingly among these low bidders. In the event the low bidder is not available, the City reserves the right to purchase from the next alternate. I recommend that the City Council accept the bids as presented for the calendar year 1989. TO: MAYOR GRABEK & ORONO COUNCIL MEMBERS FROM: MARK E. BERNHARDSON, CITY ADMINISTRATOR Forwarded recommendinq approval. o\ COas H • • 1 1 CM V 1 1 in —>» * 1 1 1 in 1 1 1 as ^ 1 OS ^1 ro fo 1 00 « 1 1 00 CM Q H 1 • iH 1 •1 • 1 1 • Z Q 1 CO w 1 in 1 CO 1 1 ^<1 1 1 1 1 CO^ z Pm Eh g H Z Hw CM § u z o>A Eh < H Q CM M I CO£-Eh H P. <Nas •« m —« »H oVC ^ • *H 00 ^ oo • ♦ in CM CM inm •« m 00 —‘ • iHm —. M 1-5 •1 CM 1 in 1 in 1 o 1 as 1 in i VCmH h5 1 as 1 00 1 as —*1 o 1 VC '—' 1 r^1 rH ^ > H 1 • rH 1 • ^1 • CM 1 • in 1 • CO 1 • «1 • VC S3 I °1 1 HO*1 in ^11 ^ w 1 VC w 1 i1 in 1 1 1 VC 1 3 Pm C3 1 1 1 1 11 1 11 1 1 1 1 11 1 11 S in z O 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 H CO Eh I 1 1 1 1 1 Eh CO 1 CM 1 in —*1 o 1 O —'1 1 O 1 in —' M < Eh 1 as 1 CM rH 1 o ^1 in CM 1 1 00 CO 1 00 in Eh M M 1 • «1 *1 • wr 1 *1 1 1 • U P<11 1 —1 ! CM 1 1 CO 1 CM 1 1 1 11 CM 1 CO 111 1 1 1 1 I • 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 11 11 U 1 11 11 111 1 1 1 1 P4 1 1 1 1 1 13110)1 U 1 1 1 o 1 1 >1 0 1 1 1 H 1 1 (0 1 Id 1 u 1 1 1 GQ 1 1 C 1 u 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 o 1 4J 1 1 1 Z 1 1 CO 1 1 H 1 1 1 o CO 1 1 03 1 ft?1 1 1 h5 H 1 1 ««1 1 x:1 1 1 G Eh 1 1 *0 1 a*1 1 1 0 CO < 1 •1 U 1 c 1 <0 1 1 1 (0 w z 1 u i 0)1 id i <1 I 1 iH Eh K 1 c 1 iH 1 CO 1 1 t 1 0)1 M O W 1 H 1 iH 1 1 4->1 U 1 M 1 Id Z Eh 1 1 0)1 G 1 CO 1 G 1 (0 1 u U Xi 1 O'1 9 1 0 1 0>1 H 1 0 1 Q < 1 <1 X i ■P 1 ^1 1 O'1 >1 1 1 u 1 *0 1 H 1 G 1 u 4t VC 1 cd 1 B 1 Id 1 *H 1 m 1 0 1 9 1 1 CO 1 ^05 1 X 1 X 1 Q 1 n > i H On CO HI . CO H CO H Qo s H ^M Z Q H s » « S\co CO D Z U H 0« H Q H §Eh Z CO < H H S t-3 H U Zo8 Q Eh Hf H CO CO Eh D H X 04 U U § Eh CO CO D M Z ZM M Z 1-3 8 Q OJ H \ B rH CO D •H B U •-3 H Q Eh HCU H Q 8 Q cs W \ K rH CO D •H B U Eh H 1 1 1 1 1 1o 1 in 1 o 1 o 1 1 1 00 —'|CO<N 100 — ICM-8 1 • fH 1 • 1 • iH 1 •o 1 VO w 1 1 VO 1 in 63 1 i 1 1 U 111 1 1 1 1 1 O t-3 1 i 1 1 1 O 04 1 1 1 1 00 Z t«1 i 1 1 1 O •1 o 1 in — 1 1 m O B 1 00 — 1 00 cs 1 1 *H «m 63 1 • iH 1 • 1 1 •cs < Q 1 CO 1 CO 1 1 CO u 1 1 1 i U I 1 1 1 Z Eh 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 ‘ 1 I 1 1 1 1 O 1 O— 1 o— 1 1 ^ 04 1 1 O 1 .H IH 1 fH fH 1 1 • « 1 • w 1 . w 1 1 00 1 00 1 00 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 ■ !1 1 1 o 1 1 1 1 1 63 1 1 1 i y I11 1 1 0 —10 1 1 M 1 O iH 1 VO « 1 1 CS 04 1 • w 1 • 1 1 441 1 in 1 ^ 1 1 «<B Z •1 1 1 1 O 1 1 i 1 rH iJ 63 1 1 1 1 1-3 O 1 1 1 i 1 <1 1 1 1 o 1 1 1 i CQ 1 1 1 1 Z Eh 1 o 1 m — 1 o — » o 1 00 — ICOCSIOOiHiCS-8 1 • ,H 1 • ^ 1 • 1 •1 VO 1 1 VO 1 in CD I 04 1 1• ' !1 1 1 z 1 1 1 1 M 1 1 1 1 •-3 1 o — 1 in — 1 1 in •-3 1 00 iH 1 00 cs 1 1 rH H 1 • w 1 • w 1 1 • «CQ 1 CO 1 CO 1 1 CO 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 W o 1 1 1 1 Eh O 63 1 1 1 1 04 o U 1 1 1 1 <00 g 11i 1 1 1 1 1 CQ 1 1 o 1 in — I o 1 >H O i«1 OV 1 CO iH 1 ov ♦ 1 <in z •1 •« 1 • w 1 • 1 o cs O tJ 1 VO 1 1 VO 1 1-3 63 1 1 1 i o •>•-3 0 1 1 1 1 »H O <1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Q 1 1 1 1 H 1 1 1 1 <o 1 o 1 in 1 1 04 CO Eh 1 o OV — 1 00 « 1 1 2!1 in • iH ’ • 1 1 Oi y 1 • * CO w i rr» 1 1 H z ^1 rH 1 1 1 04 1 1 1 I Eh 1 1 1 1 U 1 1 1 1 D 1 n 1 1 1 Q Q 1 Q 4-> 1 1 1 M H 1 H U 1 1 1 CQ Q 1 1 CQ SI 1 1 *o 1 1 1 Z Z 1 n Z 0 1 1 1 o o 1 c o M ' 4J 1 i B U Eh 1 0 (X| 1 fH 1 1 EH 1 CQ 1 Id 1 1 CQ < B 1 CQ .ifi 1 X 1 1 H Z H 1 63 O 1 OU 1 1 Eh Z 04 1 Eh 0 1 CQ 1 1 O H 1 u O B 1 < I 1 Z Eh in 1 0)Z 1 1 • 1 <D 63 B cs 1 rH 63 G 1 -P 1 O 1 M Q < •1 fH Q (0 1 (0 1C in 1 O >1 10) 1 H 10 ! B 4i P 1 ^ 1 1 CT>•H CO ♦1 Z m 1 T) 1 u 1 c 1 ♦ ! .§« 1 *H IB 10 iH * I z 1 Z IQ 1 z QHO 3a* I Q I SS H I rH O « I fO H W I CO > I H HQ QHU 3 (U w g -1 1 1 i O Z Q 1 1 1 1 Pn H O » 1 < Z i 1 1 o 1 O 1 1 o I o (0 Q Z H 1 1 rH 1 OS 1 o ^1 o S fH O > 1 1 • «1 • ro 1 • CM 1 • fHo n cn Eh M 1 1 OS i *H ^1 fH w 1 O ^ H fO I 1 iH 1 CM 1 CM 1 CM Si CM H 1 Q 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 i D 1 1 1 Q CO 1 1 1 1 < H 1 1 1 1 H H tH 1 o o 1 O 1 >n 1 SO 1 O fH Z 1 00 —»ro 1 in 1 CM 1 00 1 o ^ Q < 1 • ^ •ro 1 •«I • in 1 • CM 1 • iH H H 1 w 1 in 1 00 1 VC w 1 VO wn 1 Of j rH fH 11 iH 1 iH 11 fH 1 fH os 5 00 Oi ! 1 1 1 1 1 1 i OS i 1 1 1 1 H »J 1 1 i ■ o rH • iH fHto o iH • iH \0 w CM O in • iH CM w CM O I—I t « CM CM iH ^ • CM I—I 'n in •H • CM CM O in • CM ro CM r- CT\ —* • ro in ^ CM 1 4J 1 1 1 1 iH i (0 1 1 1 lO 1 G ,•1 1 1 1 0 i -P 1 1 • 1 'A 0)i cn 1 1 c; 1 CO >1 1 i G 1 < 0 1 iO 1 c 1 H 1 p 0)1 1 1 0 1 1 •H O 0)1 M 1 i CO 1 % 1 10 Oi 1 0)1 <1 IH 1 CO 1 •H 0)0 1 fH 1 1 U 1 0) 1 O «H M 1 fH 1 4J 1 10 1 > U A lO 1 0)1 (0 1 u t -H10) iO JA 1 3 1 0)1 1 u 1 CO 1 X 1 3 1 >1 1 TJ 1 1 ^1 1 *0 1 u 1 u 1 0 ' M 1 -H 1 3 1 10 1 u 1 z i X 1 n 1 s in fO •« 00 CM oo•« in CM o o •« CM CM o in —' • iH ^ W CM inr- — • CM ^ w CM Q Hn 3:O CQ yA H EH CQ < M Z Eh (H O H Z Eh U yA Q < VI m Q M§cu ^ . ^ H Q fO 3 0-: QH V< Pn U< •2 •H O H ^ Eh Q m CM Ehz < o iH ^ • fH O iH • iH VO w CM O in » iH CM w CM O rH • ♦ H#* CM O iH• «o\ iH O in • « CM m • CM I—I ^ro in in • CM CM oo» • CM m w CM r*o ^ • ro VO CM o CO• r> CM w CM in I—(^ • ini1 in 1 ON w 1 VC '1 00 w w 1 VC D ''h I rH 1 «H 1 rH 1 rH fH 1 fH 00 0»1 1 1 1 1ov11111 H |iJ 1 1 •i 1 1 1 1 A 1 1 1 <1 1 M 1 1 1 1 ] 0 1 1 <P 11 m 1 U 1 1 iH 1 1 c 1 1 1 10 1 1 0 1 4J 1 ■ C!1 • 1 CO 1 fH 1 . 0)1 0 1 1 (0 1 1 CO >1 G 1 4«1 x:1 c 1 < 0 1 H 1 1 P4 1 0 1 p 0)1 1 ^i CO i CO 1 rH o 0)1 1 0)1 <1 iH I 10 04 1 CO • fH 1 1 M 1 -H 0)0 1 0) 1 fH 1 -P 1 fO 1 0 «H 1 > 1 0)1 CO 1 U 1 h 04 (0 1 *H 1 9 1 0)1 1 0) to .c 1 0 I Z 1 ^1 >1 1 1 ^CO 1 13 1 1 -o 1 P 1 M 1 £1 -H 1 P i 0 1 (01 f 1 Z 1 n 1 u 1 ffi inn • ♦ 00 CM oo• *m CM o o •« CM CM O in — • fH HT w CM Oo -«• • CM rH '»«' CM VC CO • CM VO VC ^ OV —*• ^ • cn in • CM oo «. iH O CM o O • iH QHn zo w t>q H EH CO < U Z Eh Oi; O W Z Eh •k in I rH V §o J in CN #¥»^ i O 1 CM 1 oW 1 rH 1 CM 1 o'^ 1 • iH 1 • CM 1 • « ^ •CM w 1 CM w 1 iHQXM 1 ro 1 ro 1 cn H H W 1mz u O 1 O 1 ow• 1 rH *** 1 ^ ' 1 o H Z W 1 • »H 3 • CM 1 • -It Q O S TOW ro Z i Q N Z 3w X Hs u w < z Q W 3 CM O in • *H CO w. CM O iH • iH in CM o • « o ^ • iH CM O a\ ^ • H in CM in CM ^ • fH CM w CM 00 w CM in • CM "M* w CM n* • cn VO w CM m o —' n H rH O Ci:1 o 1 m w i CM W Eh C5 1 CM 1 CM 1 CM CO I 1 1 • CM 1 1 1 a Eh 1 O ! O i in CM CM 9 25 1 in 1 ^ r—1 00 —»OV ^ Z <1 • -ic 1 •• 0 CSl 4 • in • 1 VO 1 OV 1 OV w OV w 1 rH 1 iH 1 IH rH r-i o o • « CM O o • ♦ ro CM o o• « o CM VO CM o o» • ♦ CM CM O in • CM in w CM o o —» • CM 1 ^4 1 1 1 1 U 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 4J 1 to 1 u 1 1 iH 13111 CO , 1 4J 1 1 A i • ui 1 ri 1 1 04 0)1 O 1 Id 1 1 10 >i C! iji 1 1 G 1 < c 1 H 1 04 i 0 1 u 0)1u1 (0 1 (0 1 rH IJ 0)1 ^ Q)1 <1 rH 1 (0 04 I rH 1 1 P 1 -H 0)0 rH I -P 1 ID J 0 iH M ( O 1 CO 1 U i U 04 CD •. -rj 3 1 0)1 1 O (0 JZ 1 UZ1 ^1 >1 cn 1 'O 1 TJ I U 1 1 ^3 M M 1 *H 1 9 1 0 i IDz1 Z 1 ffl 1 u 1 W o o • « m CM oin ^ • rH O w CM in CM • iH iH Q Hw I COw EH W < W Z Eh W O W Z Eh W hq O < ■It m I rH HO S3U O B o o so •-» lUo u o 8 00 CM Cl U 04s < u o 8 SO ^ CO iH Ho 04 D5 < U C5 8<qt CM iH Hw 04 D £ < U U 8 CM rH HO 04 D £ < u o 8 00 so iH rH H U 04 D £ 4<U O 8in so iH iH H O 04 D £ < U O 8 CM SO rH iH in H • ro VO w 00o ^ • ro in w CM VO *-»• m VO w CM r- rH• ro ^ w fH 00 CM —'• m iH a> ^ • ro o w iH •M* r-»• m os w o O • CM O w so oo • CM W <H Oo • iH OS iH Om —^ • CM O w rH Oo • rH CM w rH Oo • iH 00 oo • CMr- m 1 O 1 CM 8 1 inoo ^1 O 1 OS 1a• cn 1 • CM 1 • rH 1 • 0 00 1 SO —'1 in 1 in H 1 1 I >1 1 1 H 1 1 1 1 1 1H111a•1 to 1 1»o 1 1 1n01 U 1 1nM1 9 1 1 04 1 T3 1 1o1 0 1 a 1 EH rH 1 M 1 0 1 0)1 04 1 -p 1 CO 0)1 1 to 1H4J1 rH 1 G 1uCO1 0)1 JS 1 H 1 0)1 0 Ia;OS 1 -P 1 1 u 04 c 1 CO 1 1 0) •H 1 1 •1 4J 1 »H 1 >1 G •H 1 rH 1 •1 0<>1 <1 s 1 u • rH SO in cn CM ^ • iH m w cn CM so • CM os w rH • iH O iH r- ^ • CM CM rH VO O • CM 00 in os • rH VO —' Oo• «m in m 00•« o fO o 00•« iH Oo• « on' • ♦o rH O CM • 'll Oro• « so Q H0 O 0 0 H 0 < a ss 0 o w z H U 0 Q < * m SBo B eei O P4 \c < H B in rH ^ • CS CS W r* inm • CM 00 m in VOov —* • CM 00 in<«• —• • CM ■M* 00 00 r* • CM VO in ov VO • CM m 'O' ^ H • CM ^ W m Qa XH >H 0) -P H U Q S *0 H O 0 U 04 OEh .H 0) 0 0) W ^ U W H « CT 04 G •H -H < > Oo • n O 00cr> o o • «n O 1^ in o O —' • fO o ^ in CM o o • ro in GO o o • mr* ^ in o o • ro 'O' VO • m "O' —' fO m 4JUP TJ O U0 rH 0)0)4JW iH rH < ro in • *H <T* w fO o> VO OV — • rH CM w ro m o in —' • rH O w CM CM O 00 ^ • rH ^ w r* ov CM r^ • rH Oin or*. ^ • rH 00 ^ CO Oin • rH O ^ CO G O ■P 10 Gxio *-3 oo•«o VO r* o o •« om or*•« rH rH CM O rH • « Or- o ON • « r* 'O' o 00 • ♦ VOro o o •« ON CM XIu 0) 4J G O U Q B Zo < VO 0 Q B Z GO < '«' 0 Q* 5VO <ro 0 Q B Z 'O' < CM 0 Q• 5GO < rH 0 Q* 5in <•H 0 Q* 5 rH 0 GO ON • ro 'O' rH rH CM \C —'• ro VC CM VO r^ • rH VO CM rH r^• ro '0* ON• ro O rH 'O'<41 —. • ro ON »— ro o • ro 00 —' QH 0H > H iX0 U Q P 'O H O 0 U 0 OEh rH 0)0 0) H 4J U 0 H 0 PN 0 G •H 0 -H < > o O —' • CM O w o rH Oo ^ • CM in w in o O —' • ro O ro o O —‘ • CM CM w rH O O r-. • CM ON o O —' • CM 00 w oO —' • CM r* w n 4Jop»oop 0 I—I 0) 0) XJ 0 rH rH < • rH 'O'ao m 00 —* • rH C^ w ro •M* • CM ON w CM tn 'O' • rH O rH VO O ^ • rH GO w 0 ON • rH VO w CM ON ^ • rH in w GO4->(fl G X O •P o o •« in m CM •«inro om•«o CM inVO•« o VO• «r- or*•« • ♦m Xu 0) 4J G O U QH 0 ZO 0 P] 0 EH 0 < 0 Z EH 0 O 0 Z Eh 0 0 a < ♦ ro I rH XD H « O S XH X 0< U D H « O ^g*g XEh o: H >H P< U pe; u D H« o < u as KD g PiH >4 P4 U ggac o <U S KDPiEh Pi >4 H U PU oo•« VOro oo • iHinin 00 rH O O —' • rH 00 w m oo•« 00 iH o O —‘ • rH 00 —' m HM Pi Eh O D <son X as u< oi as H 0< >4u HH Pi Eh O D <as o K X s u< Qi a H PU >4o «H Pi Eh O D <as O K X as u< Pi PQ a X >4u CN 1 CN 1 CN 1 iH 1 rH 1 rH i 1 1 11 O' 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 O' p:1 i 1 c •H 1 1 1 *H 1 1 1 4J (d 1 10 1 1 Id 1 (0 >1 G 1 1 >1 Pi (0 1 0 1 1 Id 1 0 u 1 CO 1 1 u 1 CO X 1 ] X H i iS 11 1 H 1 1 vO O'1 >p 1 1 1 O'1 -p G 1 c:1 •1 c 1 p: •H 1 <0 1 u I *H 1 Id c 1 G 1 G 1 p:1 p: 0 1 0)1 H 1 0)1 0) 0 1 .Ai 1 1 0 1 M Xi 1 «H 1 H 1 x:1 u 1 0 1 CQ 1 c;1 0 CQ 1 >1 S 1 CO 1 > oo•«o VO ro o o •« 00 CN\ rH O O • rH in w VO o o •« 00 Hf ro rH Q Hpa §hq H Eh W < H Z Eh « O U Z Eh H ^ Q < * iH D Os « u i§ ^ 0< \ m CO IS o o • ♦ ro O'c •H +J<d> Idu Xu O'c •Hc 0)o jcu CO o o • rH in w fO U) 0)cc H H Q os; < H < D «o oCO sc Q ^ 01$ M H H • K H 04 U”g I 0$H 0$ D O O S §§s ij o; H H H 04n o o • ^ in w 0)m Idu o o ^ • iH 00 W O'c •H 4J Id> Idu XH O'c •H C 0)o JSu CO o o • « 00 CO oo r» «o iH 0)s o o ^ • CN O w VD nco CO 4J G Id G 0) iH O> o o •«m VO 'O >1 uffi 2 oo — • CM o ^ -u Ido on o o •« in (0 0)cc H 4JU 0) X)o 0$ o o in o ^ • fH • CO 00 w ^ w o I—t VO 4J Ido o SQ <u iit Idu CQ »Dc Id b* < C Id iH iH £ » 2 Q H 0) O COuEH CO < H 2 Eh 05 O U Z Eh «»-q Q < * -V tot rxomt Date: Subject: Mark E. Bernhardson, City Administrator John R. Gerhardsonr Public Works Director February 1, 1989 r ^ r ^ — ^ ■ ‘ >R »*- Performance Review & Salary Adjustment - Barry Rathbun, Maintenance Worker Public Works On July 6, 1988, Barry Rathbun began employment with the City of Orono as a maintenance worker in the Public Works Department* Barry has performed very well in all phases of Public Works Maintenance to date and has attended the necessary sanitary sewer collection system schools as required. Recommendation - To adjust Barry Rathbun*s hourly rate to $11.18 per hour effective February 6, 198? which is Step III of the City of Orono Compensation Plan. Proposed Motion; Moved by seconded by , to adjust Barry Rathbun's hourly rate to $11.18 per hour effective February 6, 1989 which is Step III of the City of Orono Compensation Plan. Ayes _ _, nays _ _. TO: Mayor Grabek & Orono Council Members FROM: Mark E. Bernhardson, City Administrator Forwarded recommending approval. 0 Tot From: Date: Si0>ject: Mark E. Bemhardson, City Administrator John R. Gerhardson, Public Works Director February 1, 1989 2789.IHD r**“. - c ■ w_ 1 J ^ [ ''TV Performance Review & Salary Adjustment - Randy O'Brian Maintenance Worker Public Works On July 6, 1988, Randy O'Brian began employment with the City of Orono as a maintenance worker in the Public Works Department. Randy has performed very well in all phases of Public Works Maintenance to date and has attended the necessary sanitary sewer collection system schools as required. Recommendation - To adjust Randy O'Brian's hourly rate to $11.18 per hour effective February 6, 1989 which is Step III of the City of Orono Compensation Plan. Proposed Motion; Moved by seconded by _ _, to adjust Randy O'Brian's hourly rate to $11.18 per hour effective February 6, 1989 which is Step III of the City of Orono Compensation Plan. Ayes _ _, nays _ _. Tot Mayor Grabek & Orono Council Members From: Mark E. Bernhardson, City Administrator Forwarded recommending approval. 0 2889.1 TO: Mayor and City Council FHOM: Mark E. Bernhardson, City Administrato DATS: February 8, 1989 SUBJECT: Administrator's Information 3UNc«L mwm r:^i3u3: C*TY OF 3536 LYRIC AVENUE - The property owner was in Court on January TT7~T¥8lT^^e“~was~given up to a 90 day sentence on each guilty plea, which is held in abeyance at this time provided that certain requirements are completed by June 1st. These requirements include the appropriate licensing and maintenance of cars, appropriate storage of the motor home, appropriate usage of the turn-around, uniform parking of his boats and cars and removal of a plastic tree, refuse barrel, trailer sides, selected storage, re—stacking of fire wood, and maintenance of lawn and weeds in the front of his property and the requirement to get a building permit. In addition must complete the rough grading by August 1, 1989, replace the jrth rear wall, and put a safety bar on one of the doors. He hcs to lock the well by February 24th. He has to complete construction currently underway, framing and sheeting and roofing by September 30, 1989 and the external finish by June 1, 1990. In addition the previous charge for disturbing the peace the Judge invoked $70.00 of a $200.00 fine and continued the other $130.00 with the rest of the charges. MCWD OPERATION POLICY - Please see attached copy of the minutes. —-------------------------—(Will send when available.) 1950 SHORELINE DRIVE - An inspection of all the discrepancies has been completed with owner agent but no exterior work had been completed and they did not have access to the interior. A Court date on the issue of not having an appropriate sanitary system is currently being scheduled. CITY CLERK INTERNATIONAL CLERK'S CERTIFICATION - It is with pleasure that the City announces that Dorothy Hallin, Orono's wonderfully talented City Clerk, has achieved her International Clerk's Certification. In the near future a presentation will be scheduled before the Council. GOVERNMENT FINANCE OFB^ICERS/ACHIEVEMENT OF EXCELLENCE IN FINANCIAL REPORTING - As you may have noted the City has received the Certificate of Achievement in Financial Reporting for its 1987 report. Tom Kuehn is to be commended for his excellent efforts and would anticipate presentation to the Council and Mr. Kuehn when the plaque comes. STUN GUN TRAINING - During the time the City has allowed the use of stun guns by its Officers it has required an "in house" training program of all those who have used it. In addition it was felt appropriate that an outside resource be employed to undertake such training and on January 1, 1989 such training was held for 12 regular and reserve officers plus 5 from other departments. The training was a 7 hour course including classroom training, operational limitations of the device together with situational information as to its appropriate use. As part of the training each of the Officers was required to receive a minimum of 4 to 5 stuns from the device. COUNTY ROAD 15 SPEED LIMIT ESTABLISHMENT - As you are possibly aware the City has been working regarding traffic speed cm County Road 15. The State has conducted the appropriate speed survey and the City has been notified that the survey has resulted in the limit to be posted of 35 miles per hour. GOAL SETTING STATUS - See attachment. January 31, 1989 GOVERNMENT FINANCE OFFICERS ASSOCIATION 180 NORTH MOIGAN AVB^E The Honorable James R. Grabek o!c®.iLUNOfi606oi Mayor fa^i^7M806 City of Orono P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, Minnesota 55323 Dear Mayor Grabek: We are pleased to notify you that your comprehensive annual financial report for the fiscal year ended December 31, 1987 qualifies for a Certificate of Achievement for Excellence in Financial Reporting. The Certificate of Achievement is the highest form of recognition in governmental accounting and financial reporting, and its attainment represents a significant accomplishment by a government and its management. When a Certificate of Achievement is awarded to a government, an Award of Financial Reporting Achievement is also presented to the individual des­ ignated by the government as primarily responsible for its having earned the certificate. Enclosed is an Award of Financial Reporting Achievement for: Thomas M. Kuehn, Finance Director The Certificate of Achievement plaque will be shipped under separate cover in about six weeks. We hope that you will arrange for a formal presenta­ tion of the Certificate and Award of Financial Reporting Achievement, and that appropriate publicity will be given to this notable achievement. A sample news release is enclosed. We suggest that you provide copies of it to the local newspapers and radio and television stations. In addition, enclosed is the 1987 Certificate Program results representing the most recent statistics available. We hope that your example will encourage other government officials in their efforts to achieve and maintain an appropriate standard of excel­ lence in financial reporting. If you have any questions regarding this matter, or if we may be of any further assistance, please do not hesitate to contact us. Sincerely, GOVERNMENT FINANCE ^OFFICERS ASSOCIATION . ^ Frederick G. Lantz ^ Assistant Director/Technical Services Center FGL/ds Enclosures WASrtNGTON OFFICE; SUITE 200 • 1750 < STREET N.W. • WASHNGTON D.C. 20006 • 202/429-2750 • FAX; 202/429-2755 NEWS RELEASE RE: CITY OF ORONO Is Awarded HIGHEST AWARD IN FINANCIAL REPORTING GOVERNMENT RNANCE OFFICERS ASSOCIATION 180 NORTH MICHIGAN AVENUE SUITE 800CHICAGO. ILUNOIS 60601 312/977-9700 FAX: 312/977-4806 (Chicago)—The Certificate of Achievement for Excellence in Financial Reporting has been awarded to: CITY OF ORONO by the Government Finance Officers Association of the United States and Canada (GFOA) for its comprehensive annual financial report (CAFR). The Certificate of Achievement is the highest form of recognition in the area of governmental accounting and financial reporting, and its attainment represents a significant accomplishment. When a Certificate of Achievement is awarded to a government, an Award of Financial Reporting Achievement also is given to the individual designated as primarily responsible for its having earned the certificate. This Award of Financial Reporting Achievement has been presented to: THOMAS M. KUEHN, FINANCE DIRECTOR The CAFR has been judged by an impartial panel to meet the high standards of the program including demonstrating a constructive "spirit of full disclosure" effort to clearly communicate its financial story and motivate potential persons and user groups to read the CAFR. The GFOA is a nonprofit professional association serving 11,500 government finance professionals. The association produces a variety of technical publications in various fields of governmental finance, and represents the public finance community in Washington, D.C. The association provides numerous training opportunities, and conducts an annual conference attended by 5,000 public finance professionals. For more information, contact Fred Lantz at 312/977-9700. WASHINGTON OFFICE. SUITE 200 • 1750 K STREET MW • WASHINGTON D.C 20006 • 202/429-2750 • FAX: 202/429-2755 c:o uoc/3 C/3 <3 (/) Ui U ^ ^ nj !■§ J :: LL, 0> •u oS C c/D n "O a « U ‘2§ D O « y H o H I gia X Oz H 2 C^ 2 O UJ h> -a O 3 O ^ UJ ^5 421 Oh g a: a CO UJ c o 3 2o < 2 2 ^- »-• U. u I s & I ft I II I s •I ld I pill i s I 5s I u i I i jea s I a I I I- a liii P>4 Mil I fH •H = S 6^ 1 g!g!•W «H U Ai AJfill CO *o B 4J 4JIp^toco 00 Ot 00 00 S3 I I I I ii SS I M , f-t Ik m<^ CO Ml 8"* ‘I fO I Is I i s a m I fHs; H .s i •8 J8 It JS 4J Ai . . S« 5 sIII ^ !t sfi Ip?l illill I't IS! II III EE S3 Pg g s s ! I 3 i i 6 1-1 s B5 S § I I 3 I !! I Sf 1^ i! Is ?!p! i S'a.si'ss Bss| s I w t I 3 •H I?u fls11 3 in r-t ig SS a\00 I Is gg 33 3 ■B|*a*Sga a I' SIt ill ‘J li i i5|l JfJi «B|“8iTj,83| tlllll|S||^IPI I 8 s I I ?MI m ii!rtIsal 8 S ^ 8 w cttaa lii'^ s I I mi I *» •HI V n 1 s a I 2 ® I X* S^ I s•H Is ^ IIS ll “ll IIIS'® I* 1 iiicss I I 8 fig |ss iii i CO S S i'- •f St I ¥k a i Iga*2' « II I t 8S8-8I.3 I f^lKSlio h llljllilf iS £ \® s s n 2 i I I •sS' I « II I•HI II ^S8 I s I 1 Ii Is SI sis S8S I S3' 3S3 sI |sl 9 8 «> p 8^ Mi fill * ***^ -a % s 8 Ot Aea 80^ S I I ss •m I 0 a1 4> 6 ! 5 8 I I a•8 «M “ I 6 •r4 I 5 ii I d S S s H g: I ! As I S•Hs I liil S I s t ij»•u«inj eii:•3 ___dU m I "SUi. B§|| s S I d I I ^ o I*I II « S!! I I I 0 1 II I I t I5 I j 6 Mayor Grabek & Orono Council Members City Administrator Bernhardson 2989vlM'SCfL . w. « > ^ J Frcm: Date: Jeanne A, Mabusth, Building & Zoning Administrator - February 9, 1989 Subject: Amendment of Original Flowage & Conservation Easement - Stielow Addition U.8t of Exhibits Exhibit A - Flowage & Conservation Easement Executed for Stielow Addition Exhibit B - Resolution Approving the Plat of Stielow 2nd Addition Exhibit C - Plat of Stielow 2nd Addition Exhibit D - Plat of Stielow Addition Discussion - Please review Exhibit Dr the plat of Stielow Addition that designates the wetlands area dividing the residential pads from the l^keshore. A Flowage & Conservation Easement was executed by both applicant and the City in order to protect the limited use of the sensitive wetland area (review Exhibit A). Each of the original riparian lots was limited to a single residential dock. In the later platting of the Stielow 2nd Addition (review Exhibits B & C), the resolution approving the final plat specifically addressed riparian rights for Lot 1 in addition to transferring and/or continuing conditions of original Flowage & Conservation Easement to Lot 1, Block 1, Stielow 2nd Addition. At the time Lot 2 already had a residential structure with a dock at the lakeshore. Lot l*s riparian rights need only be addressed with the final plat resolution. The current owner of Lot 1 is in the process of selling his property and has been advised by an attorney of the prospective buyer that there is a need to also amend the directives of the original Flowage & Conservation Easement to include riparian rights of Lot 1, Block 1, Stielow 2nd Addition. The City Attorney has reviewed the proposed amendment and recommends approval advising the Mayor and Clerk to execute the amendment of the Flowage & Conservation Easement for the Stielow Addition for the benefit of Lot 1, Block 1, Stielow 2nd Addition. Af»D CmiSCRVATTOM EASEKPfT AND WAIVER OF DAMAGES r,J.. ' 'v;:; ITHIS INDENTURE, nade and entered into this 2U^ day of _ _p 1978, by and between Lynn L. Chtrlsoii and Beryl H. Charlson, husband and wife, their heirs, assigns, successors (hereinafter collectively re­ ferred to as the "Grantors"), and the City of Orono, a nmlcipal corporation under the laws of the State of Minnesota, Its successors and assigns, (hereinafter re­ ferred to as the "Grantee"). WITNESSETH, Grantors for and In consideration of the sue of One Dollar ($1.00) and other valuable consideration, heretsy covenant, grant, gift, quit claim and convey to Grantee the right to restrict and Grantors agree to limit and preclude the use, improvement and development, under the conditions and covenants herein contained, the following described Land In the County of Hennepin and State of Minnesota: See Exhibit A attached hereto for legal description. as follows: 1) Grantors reserve for the benefit of the owners and occupants of lots 1, 3, 4 and 5, Block 1, Stielow's Addition, a 10-foot wide walkway ease­ ment to Lake Minnetonka over and across each of Lots 1, 3, 4 and 5, Block 1, Stielow's Addition, together with the right to maintain and repair said walkway easement. Gran;,ors further reserve for the benefit of the owners and occupants of Lots 1, 3, 4 and 5, Block 1, Stielow's Addition, the right to construct, main­ tain, repair and use a single-family residential dock on each of Lots 1, 3, 4 and 5, Block 1, Stielow's Addition. 2) Subject to the rights reserved In Paragraph 1 hereof. Grantors hereby covenant and agree: a) No structures shall be construcifed, erected, or placed upon, above, or beneath the Land Including without limitation, fences, fireplaces, steps, hard-cover or roads of any nature whatsoever or any other structure or Improvement Inconsistent with the natural jktate of the Land. ■ •>-::.r;..;r“Ji3^J^ .• , «* ■ •* b) No troos, shrubs-or othec vosototloo iholl bo doitroyod»^ cut or rouBvod fro« tho Und o«ept u o-JthortMd by wHtton . consent of Grintee. e) NO eorth. loen. p* grovel, soil or ony other notunl Mterlil or substonee shell be eoved or revved fro« the Und end there shall be no dredging or excavation of any nature whatso­ ever or any change of the topography of the Und without the written consent of Grantee. d) No soil. sand, gravel or other substance or vterlal as landfill shall be placed, dunped or stored upon the Und and no waste, trash or garbage shall be placed, dunped or stored upon the Land. e) No use shall be made of the Und except uses. If any. which will not change or alter the natural condition of the Und. and no use which would tend to change the drainage. Hood control, water conservation erosion control, soil conservation, fish and wildlife hablttt characteristics shall be made of the Land or the water situated thereon. f) Grantee may enter upon the Land fi r the purposes of Inspection and enforcement of the covenants contained herein and to cause to be removed from the Land without any liability any structures, uses, materials. subsUnces. or unnatural matter Inconsistent with the covenants contained herein and the natural State of the Land. 3) Grantors hereby grant, gift, gult claim and convey to Grantee, a perpetual flowage easement and right and privilege to trespass with water over and upon apy or all of the Land. 4) Grantors herein do hereby remiss, release, acquit and forever discharge, forever, the Grantee and any and all of Its officer, and evloyees of .. ’• .. . V i I * ' *r -V I ’'' ^bj. * h 'a'%; i 'i -r. and froi any and all clalM* denands or caustt of action of aoy kind or MtM nhatsoovor nhlch «ay arlso or accrue by virtue of any flouago or troaposo irttfc. Mtor within tew of these agreewents. In addition to any other rcMdy the Grantee have, the . covenants and lestrlctlons contained herein nay be enforced by Injunction*. Grantors do not Intend that the public should have any Intarost In the above land by virtue of this indenture or otherwise* except as hereinabove ;Vir.i set forth. The Grantors herein certify that the Land herein described Is free and clear of all encunbrances except easenents* restrictions and resorvtt1ono.*^^| of record* If any. All the provisions hereof shall run with the la»id and shall extend to and bind the heirs, successors* representatives* grantees or assigns of the respective parties hereto. Lynn Chari son Beryl WTXharlson •i STATE OF MINNESOTA SS: COUNTY OF HENNEPIN) On th1s-3?^ day of 1578* before ne a notary public within and for saTTTbunty* pcrsondlly appeared Lynn L. Charlson and Beryl W. Charlson, husband and wife, to me personally known who being duly sworn did say that they are the Individuals named In the foregoing Instnaent and acknowledged said Instrument to be th-jLr free act and ffiWARON. frank NOIAW nMUC-MMNiaOl* H*NNVIN COWMTV HAri^i Noury THIS INSTRUHLKI UAS UKAFIED BY: SWEEN & SALAZAR, LTD. Attorneys at Law 7900 Xerxes Avenue South Suite 1401 Minneapolis. MN 55431 v:4^ >• '/ ■A e resolution no. 103S A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE PLAT OF STIELOWS SECOND ADDITION UHEREAS the City of Orono Is s munieipsl corporetlwi organized undL th. l.«. of th. Sue. of Mlnn..oU; .«d WHERE.\S. th. City Council of th. Cl^of Orono h.. «dopt^_ subdivision regulations for the orderly, econotdc and saf. dawelopMiC of land within the City; and WHEREAS, the City Council ha# considered the eppWcetlon for a subdivision plat by Lynn Charlson and John Peterson (LAD Development), the sxabdlvlder; and WHEREAS, the subdl' lder has completed all requirements of the platting regulations of the City, Including: 1. Dedication on the plat of drainage and utility easements. 2. Dedication on the pi.it of a drainage easement over the marsh area along the shoreline of Lot 1. 3.Park Dedication Fee In thePayment to the City of a amoxmt of $200.00. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that th. CltF the City of Orono h.r.by approves the plat ' Hennepin County, MlnnesoU; subject to the following conditions.M 1. together with a certified original copy of this Reaolution. 2.Lots 1 and 2 are riparian to Lake Minnetonka . Docl^ge may be extended across the '‘drainage easement on Lot 1 to navigable water In accordance with all ordinances regarding dock construction and use. 3.Lot 1 shall have no direct access from County Road ^ but all access shall be from the private road, Stielows Addition, Outlot B. 4.Lot 1 has hod a drainfield site tested and approved for installation of a innovative mound-we swage treat^t system according to Ordinance No. 210, which site must be reserved for said purpose. ,.v^?;-'i:r', ItMOltttlOII Ito* 1035 ?as« 2 - -• . J-> * 6. 7. Lot 2 lu« l««i • ir»intUU •!» WMd «WW«d > s:s= s s: ^, xMorvod tor uoo •• drolnfloW. i;u 1 Lot 1, Stlolowo Second Addition. *. w «!. >“";s‘s ""CSS “iS !“5i“- ruStli .S o. subdivision review. Dated this 22,day of Mav-1979. i/jILun William B. Van est, Mayo '4 ^ •^1. ATTEST: nadn. Clerk/Administrator cJ7 JUWi LIST OP LICENSES FOR COUNCIL APPROVAL FOR MEETING OP February 13, 1989 _ on-sale Non-Intoxicating Malt Liquor - Orono Golf Course Cigarette License -. June Candy Co for Crystal Bay Services 3398 North Shore Drive Jimmie's Lounge 3380 Shoreline Drive Q-Superettes 2160 Wayzata Boulevard Rick's Super Valu 3333 Shoreline Drive Gambling License Renewal - Multiple Sclerosis Society ^ North Star Chapter 2344 Nicollet at - Jimmie's Lounge 3380 Shoreline Drive Septic System Installer - Clover Hill Co., Inc Residential Kennel License - Grant & Sue Kokesh * 4100 Watertown Road Robert S. Waag 4760 West Branch Road Frank D. Yusup. 2220 French Creek Circle . Maxwell E. Alvord 960 Brown Road North • ••r t- -- -- ■p—▼ • ■ " --T—- :_ _ __ __ _ _ _r-jr? .. ••I.r-V.-'-—*- - • S-.- - -- ■ 1-.. . —r;-- - - - - - - - - - - -' ‘ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _•^*«^—^******* I --v- STATE OF MINNESOTA Combination AppUcation for Retailer ’s (On-sale) Non-Intoxicatins Malt Liquor License I at Uccaslnc autlwritr (coontr) (citv) (*U n) To ih>, O/-f y o~(^___CPvV).v2.Q. : of UmmIbc I Covtnly ------——----p-/._S _______ town n/nty of. __________________ of the eUy, viUago, or _______________ Stuff of Minnesota, hereby make application for a Retailer’s (On-sale) (Off-saU) ^”n-intoxioat^f Liquor License to sell such Malt Honor under and pursuant to an ordinance on) passed by etty. village council, county board of.—-------------------------------—-------------------— and Chapter 340, Minnesota Statutes 1945, as amended, providing for Ueen., tale of non-intoxicating malt liquor. During the past five years, my residence has been as follows;-------------------- regulating the I was bom. SUte or CoontTBerooeb Ton / am a (nature) (naturalised) citizen of the United States. / am_______________married. My (wife’s) (husband’s) name and address is. I am proprietor.. Firm was incorporated. Corporation is authorized to do business in Minnesota. Jn the state of. license is for..(street) (highway) located as follows; The license ivill be in connection with--------- Drut Store. Cefe. fUeUarenl. Helel. Cleb which hoe been in operation. Monlho The establishment is located on the. Toon )M at < **« The business premises are atoned by...'/y (yiravio .floor. The taxes on the properly are not delinquent. I am______________engaged in the retail sale of intoxicating liquor. / have_______________had an application for Uernse rejected as follows; I have never been convicted of a felony nor of violating any Xational or state liquor law or local ordinance relating to the manufacture, sale or transportation, or possession for sale or transportation of intoxicating liquor. Gambling or gambling devices will not be permitted on the licensed premises. I am the owner of the leasehold, furniture, fixtures, and equipment in the premises for which the license is applied, except ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I have no intention or arreement to transfer the license to another person. I submit the following names of persons, includlnic a bank, for reference, with whom I haeo had business relations as follows;--------------------------------------------------------------------- ----------- .Intend to ensaKe in the sale of intosicatini; liquor and will have a Federal Occupational Tax Receipt in accordance with the ordinance sovernlns this liconse. My Federal Tax Stamp Receipt la No. I will comply stadctly with the provisions of the ordinance relating to the sale of soft drinks for and will serve natrons in full view of the public. ‘mixing ” purposes Kt Ion) ling for the granting of this license. I hereby solemnly swear that the foregoing statements are true and correct to the beat of my knowledgs and that I to wmply with all the provisions of the ordii^ce under which this license is panted.agree to 8n no and swpm to before me thiv^md swpm / ---- /T---------'------------------------- ' •MCffgi lieamam bmt m fmaaS anp la paraaaa «he ara eMaaaa at Oa XJalUS Blaba aaS wha ara at soorf mersi ebaruUr .ai npal., attahwS tba ao ^l^apa aa< who at. pntsriaUwa of Uw aitaMlibaMala (or «bkb tho llroaM ara laaaaS. U«a ttU. a. TSS. H JM26I989 CITY OF OROI^O CRYSTAL BAY, MINr^ESOTA 5SS23 ADMINISTRATIVn OFFICES Phone: 473-7358 APPLICATI0:4 FOR LICE:4SE TO SELL CIGARETTES AT RETAIL (Chapter 62, Orono Municipal Code) 1, Nanc of Applicant Address '^co <s ^U\ 2« Sales Location: .^anic Crystal Bay Services </ Phone yO Address 3398 North Shore Drive Phone 3. Principal business carried on at this location ;r£JA ^ 4. Method of Sales: Vending Machine Over Counter .Other ■- -- I hereby make application for license to sell cigarettes at retail at the above location subject to the laws of the State of Minnesota and the ordinances of the Villa»ra of Orono durinf? the following quarterly periods: Feb-Mar-Apr ,May-June-July Aug-Sept-Oct Nov-Dec-Jan LICENSE FEES Expiration date of license, Jan. 31, each year. Annual license fee is $20.00. inhere applicable, as in the case of seasonal-sales, this may be pro-ratC'^ by quarters, at $5.00 per quarter. Hake remittance payable to : City Orono Signature of applicant ^ Clu Dated f- For Office fJse -i.' Action: CITY or ORONO CRYSTAL DAY, MIN.'JESOTA 55323 ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICES Phone: 473-7358 APPLICATION FOR LICENSE TO SELL CIGARETTES AT RETAIL (Chapter 62, Orono Municipal Code) 1, Name of Applicant -rrv -r -•11:9 -M'''"'"*' ' ^ Tv r:: 131120CQ00 JTMMTE r,. ROl.TZ 01 OEi^ 20. Address ^233 BARTLETT BLVD. MOUND ^ ''N. 2.Sales Location: Name JIMMIE’S LOUNGE u.TuLA /L Phone 472-6T62-“/^i^* > - mi IIMI I..I I ■! I II Irt ^127050 2001 Pi r09: 01.-21: Address 3380 SHORELINE DR. NAVARRE. MN.Phone 471-7666 3. Principal business carried on at this location BAR & restr. 4, Method of Sales: Vending Machine Y Over Counter Other I hereby make application for license to sell cigarettes at retail at the above location subject to the laws of the State of Minnesota and the ordinances of the Village of Orono during t’lo following quarterly periods: Y Feb-Mar-Apr May-June-July LICENSE FEES Expiration date of license, Jan. 31, each year. Annual license fee is $20.00. Nhcrc applicable, as in the case of seasonal-sales, this may be pro-rate^ by quarters, at $5.00 per quarter. Make remittance payable to : City of Orono Signature of applicant Dated ^Aug-Sept-Oct Nov-Dee-Jan For Office Use Action: _____________. —CITY OF OROHO f^|l [1 DW day , MIN:4CS0TA SS523 ul JAN 3 I 1989 ■' 'pMINISTBATIVn OFFICES uu APPLICATka^ FOR LIcn:J5^n m Plione: 473-7358 SELL CIGARETTES AT RETAIL C'n >jF jROf^Q OFFICE L' 1 ’^TuTT’ -• • u V CHECK TL C.Oi(Chaptsr 62, Orono Municipal Code) 1. Name of Applicant M>clua.oV \\JO FECtIFT-lr^Mr^h_ruU_ Address ^ llaO (Ua^ _______Phone hJ 2. Sales Location: .Mane brittle Qak.-Markgf Address 2160 Wayzata Boulevard Phone 3.Principal business carried on at this location Q.oajw^\/ c:^rC)(LM _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ 4. Method of Sales: Vending Machine_ _ _ Over Counter ^ Other_ _ _ I hereby make application for license to sell cigarettes at retail at the above location subject to the laws of the State of Minnesota and the ordinances of the Village of Orono during the following quarterly la i ^ LICENSE FEES ,May-Jiinc-July ^ Aug-Scpt-Oct V Nov-Dec-Jan Make remittance payable to : Signature of applicant Dated Expiration date of license^ Jan. 31, each year. Annual license fee is $20.00. ;Vhcrc applicable, as in the case of seasonal-sales, this may be pro-rate^ by quarters, at $5.00 per quarter. City of Or4rio t For Office !Jsc Action: i©(iMa J«i27l989 ri^ CITY OF OROWO CRYSTAL DAY, MINNESOTA 55!^23 ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICES Plionc: 473-7358 APPLICATION FOR LICENSE TO SELL CIGARETTES AT RETAIL (Chapt>^r 62, Orano Name of Applicant1. 2. mTJA .-13 ■ - .r —V'-:ff:ce Addros s 10'? S' Imi) e //Phono Sales Locat: Name tydn: M r r ( Sf>pr>- Mi) :e:i:p'- Ycu ^I2i720 ::0i ROl TiCi Add re s s_3333 j/QUi) ______________________^ 0 ^ Phone ^7 I 3.Principal business carried on at this location {^/2jQC£tZ^^_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _— Over Counter Other4. Method of Sales: Vending Machine_ _ I hereby make application for license to sell cigarettes at retail at the above location subject to the laiifs of the Statv? of Minnesota and the ordinances of the Villarrc of Orono during the following quarterly periods: ‘^cb-Mar-Apr ^May-June-July j*^ug-Sept-Oct y>^Nov-Dec-Jan LICENSE FEES Expiration date of license, Jan. 31, each year. Annual license fee is $20.00. Nherc applicable, as in the case of seasonal-sales, this may be pro-ratC'^ by quarters, at $5.00 per quarter. Hake remittance payable to : City of Oi^ Signature of applicant Dated ___/2zll U A__ For Office Use Action: RI?rFIVEOf'OV2ll9e3 Charitable Gambling Control Board Rm N-475 Griggs-Midway Bldg. 1021 University Avo. St. Paul, MN 55104-3383 (612) 642-0555 GAMBLING LICENSE RENEWAL APPLICATION For Board Use Only Paid Amt; _______ Check No________ Data: ___________ / AMOUNT OF FEE:tSMI 1. Applicant-Legal Name of Organization I01TIPU SCIEIOSIS SOCIETT NORTH STIR CHAPTER 2. Street Address 23M Hlcilltt 3. City. State. Zip Nlmiiiolis. NR SS4M 4. County NtnniDln 5. Business Phone ( 812 ) 821-lSII 6. Name of Chief Executive Otficer HillarO RuitQtr Jr 7. Business Phone ( 812 ) 871-lSH 8. Name of Treasurer or Person Who Accounts for Revenues Elianor Nsvik 9. Business Phone ( 812 ) 878-1S08 10. Name of Gambling Manager R S Siciity Uaym Nsvik 11. Bond Number S88226I 12. Business Phone 13. Name of Establishment Where Gambling Will Take Place Jiiiit't lotinfli Rivirrt 14. County Ninnepin 15. No. of Active Members 20081 16. Lessor Name Jiuit's louitQt 17. Monthly Rent: 8600 Times Days Times Days Times 19. Has licer.se ever been:□ Revoked Date:. 20. Have internal controls been submitted previously? 21. Has current tease been Hied with the board? 22. Has current sketch been filed with the board? □ Suspended Date:_________ P^Yes □ No (II “No." attach copy) 6^ Yes □ No (If “No." attach copy) ^ Yes □ No (If “No." attach copy) □ Denied Date: GAMBLING SITE AUTHORIZATION By my signature below, local law enforcement officers or agents of the Board are hereby authorized to enter upon the site, at any t'me, gambling is being conducted, to observe the gambling and to enforce the law for ary unauthorized game or practice. BANK RECORDS AUTHORIZATION By my signature below, the Board is hereby authorized to inspect the bank records of the General Gambling Bank Account whenever necessary to fulfin requirements of current gambling rules and law. OATH I hereby declare that: 1. I have read this application and all information submitted to the Board; 2. All information submitted is true, accurate and complete: 3. All other required information has been fully disclosed: 4. I am the chief executive officer of the organization; 5. I assume full responsibility for the fair and lawful operation of all activities to bo conducted: w 6. I will familiarize myself with the laws of the State of Minnesota respecting gambling and rules of the board and agree, if licensed, to abide by those laws and rules, including amendments thereto. ______________________________ 23. Official Legal Nar ^^^ o c./y Signature (Chief Executive Officer) Date Title ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF NOTICE BY LOCAL GOVERNING BODY I hereby acknowledge receipt of a copy of this application. By acknowledging receipt, I admit having been served with notice that this application will be reviewed by the Charitable Gambling Control Board and if approved by the Board, will become effective 60 days from the date of receipt (noted below), unless a resolution of the local governing body is passed which specifics!'y disallows such activity and a copy of that resolution is received by the Charitable Gambling Control Board within 60 days of the below noted date. Sign re of Person Receiving ity Name^Local Governing Body) iving ApfSiication: fat^ Received^is (^te begins 60 day^ei^d) /9<k^ if Person DeliverincLApplication tq^ocal Governing Body: Township; If site is located within a township, please complete items 24 and 25: 25. Signa' jre of Person Receiving Application Title: Township Name CG-00022-02 (8^)White Copy-Board Canary-Applicant Pink-Local Governing Body CITY of ORONO Crystal Bay. Minni 55323 SEPTIC SYSTEM INSTALLERS LICENSE APPLICATION building a zoning - 473-7357 assessing All questions must be answered. License fee, bond, certificate of insurance, and evidence of MPCA Certification or Home Sewage Treatment Workshop attendence must accompany this application. All applications are subject to a ten (10) day approval period. 1. Business or 2. Business address trade name /7j/( 6o 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. Business phone V/^3^ Residence phone Name of applicant o^company representative holding MPCA certification her-_ _ ___ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _— / Installer _ _ Pumper Certificate No Type of certif cation held: _ _ Site evaluator _ _System designer Is this a Provisional Certificate? _ _ If no Certificate is held, provide evidence of attendance at^ one of the Gn-Site Sewage Treatment Workshops held immediat*^^), prior to the current construction season. Have you ever held a Septic System Installer license in Orono before? ^ Most recent year 0S> Have you ever had a license revoked? When? Where? Do you do Municipal Sewer hook-ups? Yes /No Of oRm -f^CE uFFIC CITY SUBMITTALS REQUIRED: ^ 1. $25.00 license application f^. TL - 2. $2000.00 license and permit bond naming City of ynu obligee. The State Plumbers Bond will not be tac. \/^2. $10-50-100,000 minimum Certificate of Insurance. Oi OEH S5.0( Cory of current'MPCA Certificate or evidence of attendence at On-Site Sewage Treatment Workshop held immediately prior to current construction season.01/23A LICENSES WILL NOT BE PROCESSED UNTIL ALL ITEMS ARE SUBMITTED- List persona other than applicant who are authorized by you to apply for permits under your license - - -- - - - -— The undersigned hereby makes application to C^fy ^ Orono, Minnesota, for license to install and repair septic systems, and/or pump out septic tanks, subject to the laws of the State of Minnesota and the Ordinances of the City or Orono. Date 7- 2J^ ^7 Applicants Signature CITY USE ONLY Staff recommendation I Reason for denial: _ City Council Action Date license mailed Approval Denial Date /-2S-g9 Date Approved Denied KENNEL LICB^ APPLICATION Effective January It 19 to December 31, 19g T Owner; ff. ^Llq _________________________ Property AOdreaa; t (include city and zip) ' ' Mailing Address (if different); — Phone: <home ) -*4^ & Q 4 5^ *1 (work)___, HSl^ RESIDENTIAL Kennel License Information: (paynent must accompany application) $20.50 - 1989 Licetising Period Kaximuft o* dogs to be Icept at one time: - (oye^* ^ isonths of-age) • Princi^ai flic<Bed; Orv^# Purpose fcx mre than 2 docs ; V\AA ai >v ^^ --------- Dogs np2?mally kept: inside kennel structure _.;nAL KenQ«^l License Infojma^ici:^: -?i25.0d - 1989 Licensing Period (payment must accompany applicationJ Name Oif Business? Business Activities: (example: boarding, breeding, veterinary care, retail, etc.) Normal Business Hours: After Hours Contact: cirr OF opo^o ZtmtE OFFICE .siiocooo^ 01 CliI LnSrf Ji :o,5i *»i^ cr.' 4.V» ta‘V (name)i£L:IP7-;7i^A^' YDi! (phone) Dog runs/exercise areas are: IZO COOi POL 711: inside outside both 01/26. The undersigned hereby makes application to the OroAo.City Council fpr a Kennel License as specified on this form; the undersigned acknowledges that a kennel license is permissive only and does ntt grant any authority to violate any provision of any City Ordinance or other law or regulation; the undersigend hereby grants tjie City permisssif>/n to^ instfect the prior to license approval and at any other reas«3S»ab^time dunitig license duration; and the undersigned agrees to abidt of Municipal Code Chapter 5.36 including any mpecdi^l coiiJ^itritons imp<2>a«d by the City Council as part of any kennel license apgirpv^J.. :r-- V21UI. Applicant iA4Jk/LDate / For City Use Only Kennel inspected by Da^ie Recommends Approval^Denial ^ JN27S89 ________Effe^ /y / XENMEL LICENSE APPLICATION ve January 1, 19 to December 31, 1922. 7 < (a A clO ^ i. i ^ r \ u f T i> uwner; ^ ,— --------;--------------— "/i/fZ—!—. , A^^reee. /^/ ./TJom^W/A (include city and zip) -—v ^ -15^3^^- u~Z'-a Mailing Address (if different): Piaine : (homto) ^ m • W‘ (.o,kI RBSIDBHTIAL Kennel Licens*^ Information: $20.50 - 1989 Licensing Period (payment must accompany application) Maximum No. ef dcjgs to be Icept at one time: o_ _ (over 6 iiio,nths of age) Principal Breed: . P;AXpos8 fo^ more t>ian. 2 dogs: Doga normally icept: ____ i cn \ 'i |7 ^A^inside _____^kennel structi^re V ll,r^ COMMERCIAL Kennel License Information: $125.00 - 1989 Licensing Period (payment must accompany application) Name of Business: Business Activities: _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ___ _ _ _ _ _ _ _T”Ti-(example: boarding, breeding, veterinary care, retail, etc.) Normal Business Hours:_ _ _ ___ _ _ _ ___ _ _ _ _ _ ___ _ _ __ _ _ After Hours Contact:(name)_ (phone) Dog runs/exercise areas are: ^inside outside both The undersigned hereby makes application to the Orono City Council f* Kernel License as specified on this form; the undersigned acknowledges that a kennel license is permissive only and does not grant any authority to violate any provision*^of any City Ordinance or other law or undersigend hereby grants the City permisssion to prior to license approval and at any other reasonable time during the ficonsa duration; and the undersigned agrees to ^ide ‘’J.by of Municipal ■<5ode Chapter 5.36 includxng any special conditions imposed by the City Council as part of any kennel license approval. _ _ _ ___ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ TlJrdJn Date _ _ For City Use unly Kennel inspected by _ Recommends Approval_Denial ?Nll©110^S KENNEL LICENSE APPLICATION JWI 3 0 January 1, 19 S'! to December 31 r 19 ^ j It ^ u xLli J)J Property Address; ^Mj /km .^3^/ (include city and zip) j () t Mailing Address (if different):. Phone: (home)_ _ (work)^‘^~r^CE OFFICE ^ 11 •>'r^A AnA RESIDENTIAL Kennel License Information: $20.50 - 1989 Licensing'Period - (payment must accompany application) _ -■'‘* / ^ CiiECE 7L 20.5- ____ -ELEIF'^-Thi^Nh YOU "12i9^C COOl ^0l TIO’ Maximum No. of dogs to be kept at one time: (over 6 months of age) Principal Breed; )(_ _ _ _ _ _ _ Ol-EC. Purpose for more than 2 dogs; ^tLuiUJAJi^ Dogs normally kept: _ _ _inside kennel structure COMMERCIAL Kennel License Information: $125.00 - 1989 Licensing Period (payment must accompany application) Name of Business: Business Activities;_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ (exeunple: boarding, breeding, veterinary care, retail, etc.) Normal Business Hours: After Hours Contact: (name)_ (phone) Dog runs/exercise areas are:inside outside both The undersigned hereby makes application to the Orono City Council for a Kennel License as specified on this form; the undersigned acknowledges that a kennel license is permissive only and does not grant any authority to violate any provision of any City Ordinance or other law or regulation; the undersigend hereby grants the City permisssion to inspect the premises prior to license approval and at any other reasonable time during the license duration; and the undersigned agrees to abide by the requirements of Municipal Code Chapter 5.36 including any special conditions imposed by the City Council as part of any kennel license approval. nlieant // i/Applicant 19•4-Date For City Use Only Kennel inspected by Recommends Approve 1_ ----'Date 2 9-S:± Denial fl(5[lD^ Owner i i KEMNEL LICENSE APPLICATIOW JAN 3 1 S89 January 1, 19 __ to December 31, 19_§2- A1 t/ ^L 9^0 N HJ__Ah Wi^ I I LII~ W.-'U'ITU’ FSC? CFFICr(include city and tip) Mailing Address (if different); /V Jll----Lffhe U ^ M rr.w r.-i r* . ^ - • % Vi l?Uit £.Vtw*' Phone; (home) V73 -S^Xf ------------- Ivorii)------------------------- HBSparriAL Kennel License Inftion ; 520.50 - 1989 Licensing^Mg^^/.^ M /Tf \/l.* (payment must accompany application) Maximum No. of dogs to be kept at one time:_g- - (over 6 months of age) Principal Breed: UJhrfc—- - - - - Purpose for more than 2 doas 2 5*X - - - --- - - - - -- Dogs normally kept: V inside X _kennel structure COMMERCIAL Kennel License Information: $125.00 - 1989 Licensing Period (payment must accompany application) Neime of Business: Business Activities:,Business ACClvu^ies ;_ _ _ ___ _ _ _ _ _ ___ _ _ _ _(example: boarding, breeding, veterinary care, retail, et .) Normal Business Hours:- - --- - - --- - - - - - - --- - - - - - - - After Hours Contact: (name)__- - - - - - - - - - - --- - - - - - - (phone)__ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ___ _ ___ _ _ _ _ _ Dog runs/exercise areas are:inside _ _^outside _both ss EHthe City Council as part of any kennel license approval. For City Use Only Kennel inspected by Recommends Approval i CITY OF ORONO P A V Y-T-D • - - - - - f\i NAHE OlV GROSS GROSS EXP/AL 3 t ANDERSON BL 31 2784.62 1342.88 4 i BERNHAR080 HE IE 4088.16 2044.08 SI BOBZIEN SA 31 1785.09 928.29 6 1 B08HA JL 12 993.38 536.48 7 ;BOYLAN 80 93 0.00 0.00 a ‘BRXNKHAU8 JF 42 3032.30 1452.40 iSU—CARLSON HB 35 0.00 0.00japCHESUICKGB312899.84 1481.84 itt 1 CHRISTIANS SL 31 183.00 183.00 l.t;CORNICK JL 31 2655.86 1408.36 EN6LI8H II IH 31 2557.80 1255.36 1'*1 ERICKSON OJ 93 0.00 0.00 l’®ERICKSON KR 31 2672.57 1318.16 FARR PS 33 0.00 0.00 |,7|FI8CHENICH DT 31 2565.64 1286.74 liai FRXTZLER JH 31 2800.26 1318.16 IS 6AFFR0N HP 33 2481.80 1268.20 20 !GERHAROSON JR 42 3344.40 1708.32 ihi GREGORY JD 42 2530.58 1157.69 1 HALLIN DH 12 2190.40 1119.20 HANSEN SC 42 2166.42 984.21 '24 HANGING CJ 31 1145.00 524.94 ;JACOBS TJ 33 2427.20 1213.60 pal JOHNSON BP 31 2705.11 1342.88 ‘27 KILBO HH 31 3599.20 1839.20 '23>r KNUTSON CA 15 1752.41 895.60 •:23 KUEHN TH 15 3367.80 1721.16 30 1 LINOSTROn DJ 93 0.00 0.00 31 HABU8TH JA 33 2973.56 1519.48 ' 32 i HAROUARDT BJ 93 0.00 0.00 iHfl HEYER HA 35 0.00 0.00ppnXKELSONRA151776.16 907.52 ; 79 1 HILLS JR UH 93 0.00 0.00 ; 38 i 1 HORAN HF 31 3663.30 1827.33 ; 37 j H0R0UCZYN8 J tsi 3536.78 1552.96 ' 38 t HORROU J8 31 1419.52 842.72 39 1 NAAB TL 12 1752.00 895.20 . ^0 OAS 00 93 0.00 0.00 ; 41 f OBRIEN RL 92 1980.69 838.19 42 j OHAN LE 33 2080.93 1063.33 43 1 PALHER FB 31 0.00 0.00 44 PETERSON RH 93 0.00 0.00 itf QUAST MA 92 2288.07 1236.13ItRATHBUNBJ922057.92 868.01 47 ROSS JA 93 0.00 0.00 48 SAS8 JJ 42 2304.29 1039.34 49 ^ChAUSS CR 31 2102.79 1060.81 . 90 8CHEFFLER LK 12 1463.17 875.13 St 8KREEN 08 42 2203.03 993.48 S2|8TEFFENHAG RE 93 2193.84 1121.04 53 54 STEVENS BG 93 0.00 0.00 58, 56 cPS w ! £1 : 3| CITY OF ORONO P A ' Y-T-D -- - - - - - NAHE- - - - - - -blV CROSS CROSS EXP/ALL THOHTON MR 31 2259.68 1J_29,84_ _ _ TOMCHECK LF 31 2520.25 1256.95 TOHCZYK MU 31 2607.40 1369.24 UALSH KL 35 333.95 180.95 7] a!i COUNT CRANO 48,908.40 lOj PAID 00042 111 1=1 TOTAL 00055 TOTAL 13| 14| hi TOTAL FICA TAX CROSS- 26,911.02 EMPLOYERS F CROUP HEALTH PHYSICIAN'S HEALTH PLAN BLUE CROSS/BLUE SHIELD .1 nkKl ,=01 MEDICAL CENTER PLAN PRUDENTIAL COORD. HEALTH CARE MINNESOTA HMO TRANS-AMERICA OCC. 31 32 33 BANKERS LIFE MUTUAL SERVICES MUTUAL OF OMAHA 41 42 EMPLOYEE'S BENEFIT M N AETNA NICOLLET ElTEL LEACUE OF CITIES P Q METROPOLITAN HEALTH PLAN SHARE U aa 54 55 56 HEALTH CARE MAINT ACCT. HI88INC HOSP CODE FOR SOME EMPL'S r 02/28/89 PR CM PRRECOR CITY OF ORONO PAYROLL REGISTER V a a YTD CURRENT 4 ■ -NAME DPT GROSS GROSS FIT SIT 8 8 CALLAHAN, EDUARD J 11 483.34 241.67 7 8 8 ■ -r‘ GOETTEN, J.DIANN H GRABEK, JAMES 11 NETTLES. ALAN R 11 463.34 600.00 483.34 241 .6t 300.00 241.67 ■ ■ 10 11 12 PETERSON, BARBARA A 11 483.34 241.67 1,266.68 —— 121 '■•i 181 1 i ----------------------- 181 ■i18l ’•i 2o| ' i. ...f. . ■ ....................................■' 2S! 2el Izt! 281 !30 »v,r-' v«/‘; ’-I Ml aei 48 47 I 49 80 91 37 38 1 |39 , ■........................................................................ ........................................... " ' ■ ■■■■■■ .r . ■ ^ 40 41 42 43 44 49 j :'ri'’ .'.''v V... r r 02/05/09 PR: CB PRRECOR NAME J^ND£B50No_BRUCE_l ------ BERNHARDSON, MARK E BOBZXEN, SUE A 30SMA^-JAMIE I------------- BRINKHAUS, JOHN F CHESWICK, CARY B _CHRISTI ANSON^S ALUL CORNICK, JAMES L ENCLISHIII, IRVING I ERICKSON. KURT-R FISCHENICH, DAN T FRITZLER. JOHN M JrAEFRONMICHAEL P„ GERHARDSON, JOHN R GREGORY. JAMES D JiALLIN.-DOROTHY M _ HANSEN. STEVEN C HAN5ING, CAROL J ..JACOBS^THOMAS_J_ _ JOHNSON. BRADLEY P KILBO, MELVIN H KNUTSON, CHARLOTTE i KUEHN, THOMAS M MABU5TH. JEANNE A J3XKEU.SON .._R0B1N_A- HORAN. MARK F MOROWCZYNSKI, JIORROW^-JAMES NAAB, THERESA OBRIEN, RANDY _OMAN^„LYLE_E- - - - - - PALMER. PETER B QUAST, WAYNE A J?ATHBUN.-BARRY J------- SASS, JOHN J 5CHAU55, CHARLES R ^CHEFFLER.. LAURIE. _K_ SKREEN, DALE S STEFFENHACEN, RONALD _JHOMTDN..._MARK R . TOMCHECK, LAURENCE F TOMCZYK. MARK W J^ALSH-c-KEVIN-J-- - - - DPT _ _ _YTJ}- GROSS CURRENT- GROSS J46S.j45 JAMES 5_ _ _ L L 12 6132.S4 2044.08 31 8667.49 882.40 12_1Sll-.84_. _517_.86. 42 4431.77 1399.47 31 4360.40 1460.56 31 40.t.A0 .2E5. O.Q_ 31 4028.93 1373.05 31 3871.22 1313.42 -31 - -3990-73 1318.16 31 3833.55 1267.91 31 4192.57 1392.31 _33 . .373U82.1250.02 42 5028.63 1684.23 42 3660.06 1129.48 _12 ..3293.6.1 -1.1 03^21 42 3180.63 1014.21 31 1603.81 458.81 33_ _ _3731..81 _1304,61 31 4060.35 1355.24 31 5412.00 1812.80 15 .2634.82 .882.41 15 5064,13 1696.33 33 4471.24 1497.68 _15 2670., 73 ._89_4^.57_. 31 5189.35 1526.05 31 5192.73 1655.95 31 1.928.64 509.12 12 2634.40 882.40 92 2887.09 906.40 -33 _31.29...02. .1 048 J)9_ 31 80.00 80.00 92 3322.47 1034.40 _92_ _ . .2290..-12 ._ _932.20. 42 3327.61 1023.32 31 3263.41 1160.62 12 22r3...42 -750.._25. 42 3217.24 1014.21 93 3298.80 1104.96 31_ _ -.3389.53...._J.129..85 31 3703.05 1182.80 31 4005.56 1318.16 35 _494.95 161.00 46,164.05 I ii' ss I O'CO ??[n f^.fsl?l ffm npr* rsm rin on on fm s sn np np iTil ^ lls n;'0 f ^ N r-o ss i o> « o*o I* o T • 'T sTl:j'J-r't* tr' - e o «o « ? S~« § a a .'! o o ■» ♦ ui ino o U) M a a a lAIA «0 M : 7 # *- * ▼ t o u i ^ 0 n °4h• - 1 e r »* V ® O' O' ?? M AJ O O Si? ? ? IZ uh- O o u55 K K il II <J JO loiri o» a'a «olo' M«i ss S|E tt 5§ sslii n » ▼ «o ♦ 'T M iuo o X 'A % r. ‘s ‘ *1s '; '3 * (U 3T\ i r a lA U) CO CO 9- O' I S! r \z 9 «0 :* <uI i 't r r 3 * r s § OC I • ; « - ; . 5- . . g,;. 3 a s S S fi 8 a « S s a » « s 6 M ; 3 3 j « j 5 \U ; S :a S 8 S S 8 8;i 3 3 3 UH t S ^ Ci\2 fjj - <« 7 To* o>«u « T7 I I e o ■i3rr sc o § III III 0 o u u K H 550. a. ss 1 z 2RK ui N ni <• » o> o> CO «D o o M M o o «0 ID W W » o o in in CD CO<u cu 2 Z~? t •* o>» I I I II o> o> o>»> ♦ «0 «oiniinw, o o o o ;oi Ch o» 10) CD CO .CO o o o o iN N N S !(U (U 01 (U o o o t •« Ml 01 « « Ml Ml Ml 'mi « ;0I 01 01 <01 • r‘t » T l» o o o o 2 3; o o ojo illli 01 o o in r- ^ in ojo o> lii oi ciloi V ujoioi^ CO CO 0* 0* oi oi r- N riJjLA^p‘ » »ih l^ • Ml,Ml lO ^ OllOI 01 » M- » » * M-iV <r I $ i." tI1?I ■ a 9 s <» • ► • !!???? i 2 ;i § i : : » •U s • RR ¥ ;; iw 1^iz•• ••11RR?o u 1 1 <o o o i M a g (0 1a88 M < ^ Ul53 1ft. E Q w s i 8 g?!1 CD tt §1 i!$!*» *»$ S5 5 H H *» ft ft s s ?SS 8D O s nn W 9^ 0< O CO;1o §o o i t IX Ul° i;'(u a o a ! o ^1 B ^! O 3(; :\ n r* \ >o >c ! :t P 0> L-. CO 3! \1 n r 1 V a I i[ 5 o> C* 11 a- a 1 o c i S c. ""r1 « • «» K • «■ ^ = " ? o • AJ• t-■ s : i t! 2 j s 2 t 5 5 s sla 'a s a s r. « 9 • 2R:! I I tr ♦ h- « » •. I I 5 o P iff _rar! ni?l rpi sTin ntn n-n n «i iTH Hill rm rm itF! fl[i»jlp s r« ? = sT?. f fe ii>: h- •* Ift *» r M t^ r n!»■>•> S N V Ds f> r o o o o o e 5:5; S???• ^ ^ ^ft poo fl * n ft ft ft ft ? S S II <0 <o•» 9* I a |?Tl?S I I I 0- r: o o o o0 op o 1 I ;i I o o o o o o o o e o p o 8 S o o II|; e o o r» 8sn iliiisjS O Q, u & 8 Sae K •> ft. a - - 8888 M M M M m^'MK ss'^9K H H ►- «> COM (0 ts|ii H l-'l- I- M M'M Mu u y u 5555 o O r- a o o o o o o ri V • O lO ^- - n » o> ff> o> O OlOMD a> o> o o (U M o o V ; 3i? 1 ; S 5 a ? ♦ o o a 8 (U (U ii 8 8 S s ? I fI V, ■ ti i i s * <1. “•o • s ^ t s ^ u o> UJ O X Hi flTs nio fir? ?ni ^ iTi n r *i-» im mi mi rm mi np ?nn f rn rro n «- Mr » r •> 7^?sss♦ ♦ p III mill M M M •- K H dldd 888 «» «» <0 r s r - o* r-O K AJ •o oi o ^ ♦ ®® r- ® ® ® o ® ® o o Ai M SISjrO' ff> ii nI t o e o o N • o» o> • ? • o e o o e 1^ 1^ ii r, » kn• o • in : $ f! ? io o o o o onn » n : I n n u r- ll *i M TT n PI AI rt O ® ioMP o ® ® ®t'TVTrr 7 I I |i I I ^ ^ - W PI ♦O o oi^ p- r- ssgs s M M -4 M M ^ -IJ J -I Sill I 8uIj8®w®u Ulkl UhlUWIlllil iiiinii ill UJ L hi talL ttl 111ac tc ac K tc ac at ac >>>>>!>>> V M 9> a*o o o o N S AJ AJ O O 9> ft Atlffk 9> 9>o o o o » « IIP g« 0« fft ot 0t o o o|o O O iu M lu'oj (U M p o o o o o 00)000000 ▼ »<r ♦ T » <r inininininininin v »^ T ▼ e o p o op p p RRSi&SRS »p r- U 1 -Snpn I I I ^ I PI R n n nmil o o e P o o o o W hi U o o UJ hi M (■< h- ►> ^33 p SIC^P O^ AiAlAi O AI PI «U n o o o P o o o o o o o o o o o |P P P P o O (U M ^ p P P o o AI AI AljAl AI «o «o «o in in lA in in ???;?? o o oo o 2 5 5 5 A? 8 «J a 5 a s aa a a«a a»a ?.,»a ««v3_a j 3)a3$saS|S28ss8S8i3S3ssa3Sf!;.5 s s ct •> o tsis? <• h♦ •* inn ' h- r- n ««»«»« « » III Uilll III uiu M M M •-• M M M !»4 M •-< M J -l L( -1-1^ M •>« :•-• M •» M t H 'K »- K 3 3 3 3 3 III! <o e o* ® n 585 ® o> ®* 9* 9>0 o 1 Me o ® o o e M *• ® ® o>o> o o ® ® N N NIN ot 0« 0> M o o o jo (U (U (U^ o o e (U (U (U N (U to tOiO vO «4>in IT in in inilIT _ . _ ,^ T '» ♦ ▼ ^ » To o o o) « n • K a • o lo o eio o e e o 'o IT I I II• «B o e o TTTiTB o e.o M W W;n «•««!«nn% ® « ”|t77” zmt um UUl M H M M Mr E r c,E S6 ««3!t|SSSiiili 888888 o » » •M in in ♦ ♦ M M W o «- ^2 e«!o« *> ® •« ® A O O O N V, N N,S a»B» •* 0* .B* lo O OiO - ‘ sis 0)1xr o M i g iu Ninivi in n.m o o o o Olw o ♦ H TT gg Zl 101-- r JiiUjLll o W 2? r- o I Iss ?l? %% o o •I lU ; lU u Bii! < < ft. 0. sst't < < e>b k:k gg 3 3n m « ESa. a n «i in N n o A in in in>in - niin o* II S3 A <0 5 ? a a aia 8 a a'Va e o o o o o e o e e e o o ^ i e e om hi M w J;ssm 'll i i._ &a a g o o M o «in N in CO- A ^ i«- in ?? 9* 0>o o M (U o o « toW (U4 A ii ^ 8 ala a s o e o o I o e o o ui iii o o inirt o!einlin i S i « * rl h 4■I t*__A M I s i a. ,v If: :.•: •I iI; f » $ < <• I o s I __A;.' .?:?i5sss up lA rtM (■ t;s¥raaa it IE r» 88 >o IS « o o <o n lA «j o> np - o loo o n Birn rsn risi rrra rm nm srn stts firn np 5"m s cT? a & •IF.- • - = 5 |2 ! 5 St 5 = 8 sir? s 'S S 51.1 i sL 3? ^ Un — •* * •I•I n w •- o o 5iw n ^ I o o 25 n R 5r n •* k I I I II I I i ■»«'«'«> O' r A « M N Y M V • f 7 7^ T 1 ffE> o e |o o o o I I 1 1 1 I I 5 B e o o o S5 !! a. IL A. t. «. a. k. M |i4 M M »>4 M g§i§§ §SkJ u u ai hi u hi Siiii.iS ouuuuacuu mDQOOQMOQ iihiili! z zbz z'z Z uuuuuuuuu O D Q Q D|Q ODD 10 lollO t» ID 1(0 W W In hHUUliJhihlhlhlQ O UU U U U O U z z!z z z!z z z 933333333 Pl-HI-Hjl-l-l- k SSSSSSSS^iS gsi(jk2KiSisks z O't>o»o>o»o>o«a>o> «> a>» o a> a> a> a 01 ooooooooo \ N. \ \ S N. fv. AI M lU (U AJ Ai l(U o o o o o o o M (U o o ojaiajaiai'aiajojIai ft* ^ 1^ 0% CF^ ^ jjo-o-o-v'fo’k <0 0- ^ » O- .V V » fo- ooooooooo “'TVPVTTfTTT? s|ssij|!?t!5ss:snEiifhin j hi 'Si &j Si hiy iilQ'Qda SL SiSiSil mwliSi Sift Si S 3 u d a d Q -l-Hpl>< I- I- H V I- I-iD 10 ton tom.____________ o- s I- o n in .- <r so » W oi CD no- ▼ AJ » <o ID « CO 333 ^ M n CD n CD^ * ’T O' lo' o> 0>CD CD CD CDV |\ s \o p O' o o p o o V S N V AJ «i Ai Ai O O O O O It O O' O P O' o CD CO <0 CD CD CD k H- l-p I- i- » CO CD ICO ID ID mm^ A O CD Ai N O >“ lA «o - cr » CDCOODCDCOCDCOCDCD VSNXSNSNVO'O'O'pO'O'O'OO O' O' I CO CD I p o o o o S. S. S S N(U M Mtiu W (U o o o p o o s « a in lA lA ^ lA lA DO CD P to m P iOD P P ▼ ▼'OVV'OIVn-T o o o o o o o " r? 3V3.5 r? P P lA p p p O- 'T ▼ V <0 n’ o o o fr?rs 5 o o lA lA o o to m O' P 8 ? i S* 5 •I • K •• 2r ??55S t2sa nua aa.a 49X9 axis :8}i Sl5i 1 a s a Sas;asxs ;33)sltj i ss a 0>CO 00 00 COg3338ii< i •:S • o> • I d 8 • i )S 8 n n!n n n 8 R R R n nc^ i K 1 1 RS 1•j r♦O' •1 1cu H s 1 8 1 8 ft i 9>s i 1 81•- o cu «;T \ e o I cu 1 I S 11 1 f iu nn▼ 1 11 on T Rr § 1 S 1 51 R 1 3 1 S ftf X ft ;?s4<O o B e o o o e o e o N o o N XTEH DESCRIPTIONis■c § III > S IT id u. >i\ « 9> S 5 M t M s 10u J M 1 ? >• 6 A. a. 1 j s 0. i ! 5 ' ^ ' ® CO < < n to 2 i COa \ •0 g i! Ia -1 00 CO IH 1 CO 1 I 5 1 S 8 g g Su 1 wp u 1 o M CO 8 CHECK REVENDORu 5 CO fih § i B u 3 8 to u o CO K] *-4 5 b M 5 ou i M 1 f 8 1 1 IS -1 »4 tt M Mu u < < K H (1 I 00 8 1 1 ! I is i g< u 8 8 2 !il So 01 i 1 u 0. ou z 3 i< i m 1 so K t-t« 0. ! 3 I 3 1 u i 1 f M •V «•••ft ft ft ft ft ft ft ft •s s SSi s o o o o I8«o 2 &;S 8 n uit> o S8 S o o jO o o oo o S 8 ft o ft o o e |0 o S 52 R S H g M su» «« o R?8 o o RR ■> CO P P R (U O'S s R 8 o o f o o Ut o o s ?o o ft »- d o " 8 o id 8 ^ Id I'* ft1% ^♦* « < O O* 0* 00 00 S O* 00 0* CO S s s S o>o 8 O' 8 o ■sg s o» «D 8 o* O O'J;5:I s 1 o S 111 O 1- u. S o o o o o o s O' OJo o o o g O o o o o o 1 o e o o o o o £ s u ac 1 1 w ▼s •• ••• n ii 1 O'RiO 1 irt & ?o • ^ » o * ? i i 0 1 o o* o z i 0 1 o o* ■ft ft g O' ft e o c^ ftz o O' ft o o R 8o o (U O' ?o n ♦ f» •”N • •r=«< «? 5: ?Is 8 5 8 8 9 'a 8 8 aXA s'a a 9 X X a X X S'; '5 3 9 5 rrf 5 8 ;i 5 S 0'i K 10 r r/ . > .I ! !:: V- II ■B- I I f M s • i: V-_____A." - in in »«- r- » o« 9> 9» • s iipi sip twr^ iTsi fintm rpi nrri nri rpi mi mi jiin m? rm r a 55 • n n ff> v> o o <o *o ^ ^ ? 2 * ; f t; • • 8 ; o M o0 ♦ o 1 I I lo •» o lo » oisillO M O •I Y M I I I»o e »- HI Hi < A. < SdS•» 5 *1 - w - u u u z z z ttt §§§ HI III kl z z zki lu kJ o o o u u u o o o o Si Si S2,.r- »> •t«>•>■) s s s<r> w t« o o o (U (U M o o o a« » » T V » ♦o o e ss iLo o o o III Ul <!< an o o o o S5 «n o o o o iCS ni1'^ oo w « k.'U Q Q k. •• K M! k. < nmhl f"” ipiik. C Ik. k. k. IS o in o o r>- in — o ^- »- r- IS ” a.q 5 8 s ^ a as rst 5?5 » ri n M s a a a 2 a a" x' a ■/; a 5 1 5 m S 8 a s s 2 X t COUNCIL MEETING F£313(330 CITY OF . 21089.1 TO: Mayor and City Council FBOM: Mark E. Bernhardson, City Administratoif DATS: February 10, 1989 SUBJECT: Informational Meeting - March 8, 1989 »> Wondering if you would be available for an informal meeting with David Kroos of Boarman and Associates to review the site analysis work. It is expected this analysis will be sent to you as part of the 2/27 packet. Additionally it may be an opportunity to have the preliminary inventory work and range of options on Navarre discussed. Please let me know if this is an available date for you. Thank you. >1 (0 T3 Cos >ito 'Oc s >1 to•ocos cnc •H 4J 0) 0)s •oum •ac CN D« C •H 4J 0) 0)s co ■H n 00 Ou H •H Uc pou Dc•Hca to •Ha< •p n rH ^ 0) P 4J 0) (0 43 T)o 0) O 4J O Id c 4= p D 0) P -P O «H P to 43 •p a to >1 to oi S to co •H (0 00 >1 Id•o 00 § ou +> oo rH 0>c ■H cc Id iH OU co •H (0 CD >1 Id •H rH 0 X •ac Id S 0« s cu ou o o o o 4<: p rH Id •Hu •H»« rH •H U c pou •pc•H Id (p o D« O ►o DO <x 0 ID HP LUm CD CO LU LU CD O 0 01o cnoo CD 03 GO 03 03 CO ^00^ ^ ^00 ?u. ^ CNJ C\J ^ CO T- CNJ CN4 03 CO inc\J03co CO r-1- c\4 03T- u. ^^coin h- $ <oco o t- C\J CM H* CO O h* t- T- CM CO in CM 03 CO T- ^ CM g CMCDCOCnO CM CO H t- CD in T- t-CM OOinCM C33 »-CMCM gJ8.3 Q.C0 CM 03 CO CO O T- CM CO S2 03 3 CO CD CO O h* < T- CM CM 03 CO ^ ^ ^ 00 ““r-T- CM 8^ 03 CO ▼“ ® CD 03 « t-LL COOh'^T'^^^ CO C33 r-CM t-T- CMCQ«/»g ^ CM 03 CO COoSjj CMCOfliT aS> T- CO in CM 03 > t- CMCMT- VM ^W/^jdo €2 I- $ I- :s cocoor^ t-CM CM in CM 03 CO T- t- CM ^^co in CM ^ CO in CM 03 ^3 CO CM 03 CO CO O T- CM CO 03 CO ®CO T- r- CM 03 ^ IL CO O h* 'M* T- 1- CM 03 CO ® ®GO r- 1— CM 2 LL CM C33CO CO O i-CMCO 1— CM 03 CO CO T- CM I— ® ® CM C73 t-CMCM g T-ooin CM 5 ____N^t-CO 'f- CM CM COOI^ CM CM CO in CM 03 CO li. T- f CM 0) aCO ffilSl ^ T- CO in t-t-CM ocor^’^;:!®CO ▼- CM CM S- u. (ocoo T- CM CM I— in CM 03 cp T- T- CM > ^T-00in > ^T- CM g«®52S& ii ?LLU3CM2<p o5l r/^ J jl-^'T^KOOin . »7^.^CM ^ CO o m: s |«r-CDW~® >» CO cn ^ T- CO 2 t- CM CM 03 CO CM 03 CO coo 00 T— CM CO 03^ LL T- 00 in CM 03 ^ »-CMCM h- ® t-CMCM g to cooir-CM CM |s . ®co O CM I geo ^.eviatojjo > T- CO m CM 03 > ^CM CM ® H- |5> OCO "i 00 CM CM fj in CM C73 CO t- r- CM 03 T- U. COCOOh* T- CM CM H ® ® > ^ T- CO m > t-T-CM 't-t-CMCO 1 2'm gtOr.««gjg 03 CO CM 03 CO CO O 03 T- u. T- GO in CM 03 t-CMCM .H 5 I^^I^CO • T- CM CM CO CO o r- CM CM S'- §2 03CM O) CO CM Q. 0) CO CO IMil CO O h- -M- T- ▼- CM 2889.2 TO: FROM: DATE: Mayor and City Council Mark E. Bernhardson, City Administrator!^ February 8, 1985 SUBJECT: Police Squad Accident This is to notify you that at approximately 7:00 A.M. on Thursday, February 2, 1989, while enroute to a meeting in Minnetonka Beach, Chief Kilbo's squad was involved in an accident at Brackett's Point curve. This accident resulted in no personnel injury and the damage to the two vehicles involved is being assessed. The morning was very cold with snow and although Chief Kilbo thought he was operating in a safe manner, the car lost traction on the curve. A review of this accident will be conducted in a manner similar to those of all City accidents. \ O MIHUTBS OF THE PLANNIHG COMMISSION MEETING JANUARY 17, 1989 ATTENDANCE 7:00 P.M. The Orono Planning Commission met on the above date with the following members present: Chairman Kelley; Planning Commission members Johnson, Bellows, Brown, Cohen, Han.^on and Moos. The following represented the City staff: Building and Zoring Administrator Mabusth, Assistant Planning and Zoning Administrator Gaffron and City Recorder Scheffler. Council Representative Edward Callahan, Jr. attended and CounciImember Goetten was also present. #1366 LOREN BUTTERFIELD 3925 WATERTOflN ROAD CLASS II PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION PUBLIC HEARING 7:00 P.M. •> 7:35 P.M. The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing were duly noted. Mr. Butterfield was present for this matter. Assistant Planning and Zoning Administrator Gaffron explained that Mr. Butterfield was requesting to subdivide a 5- acre dry buildable lot from a 17 acre parcel. The applicant is proposing to use Out lot C, which is 28* in width, as an access to the new lot. The accessory structures on Lot 1 will no longer meet a 10* side setbac , but will be only 1* from the new side lot line. Outlot A and Lot 2 will be subject tc a special lot combination, yielding a 3-acre parcel that cannot be separated. The DNR nas ’indicated that they have no specific setback requirements from the Luce Line Trail. Chairman Kelley asked whether the lot to the south of the Luce Line could ever be accessed from the south. Mr. Butterfield stated that he had a right-of-way agreement with the PNR to allow crossing the trail. Planning Commissioner Bellows asked for the combined total of Out lots B and A? Gaffron replied that it would total approximately 3.5 dry acres. Bellows expressed her concern about the Luce Line Trail divir*’ tiie property. Mr. Butterfield interjected that the Luv ne was in a deep cut at that location. Planning Comr oner Hanson questioned the ramifications of dividing tl '>perty in such a way. Gaffron explained that the code sectio ^owed 5 acres to be split into 2 parcels that are not contig\. . as long as the building site has a minimum of 2 acres. Anot-iier code section addresses the issue of a lot being split by a road or road easement. This would bring forth the question of whether the Luce Line would be considered a public road or a public road easement. Bellows, Hanson and Kelley expressed their concerns and reservations about the involvement of the Luce Line in the subdivision. Bellows asked whether ’"' tiding restrictions could be placed upon the lots to the south . the Luce Line. Her main MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING JANUARY 17, 1989 ZONING FILE #1366-BUTTBRFIBLD CONTINUED objective was to discourage any further crossing of the Luce Line. Kelley asked whether it was the concensus of the Planning Commission to have Outlot B combined with Lot 1, and combine Outlot A with Lot 2. Hanson asked Mr. Butterfield why Outlot B did net go with Lot 2. Mr. Butterfield replied that he wanted to maintain access to Lot 2. Gaffron observed that Outlot A would only be accessible by foot, given that the crossing easement would not be within the new lot. Mabusth asked the Planning Commission to consider whether there were any alternatives to this proposal. Kelley recollected an application where acce£>s was allowed through a wetland area. Mabusth reminded Kelley that the DNR would not allow such an access since alternatives were available. Kelley commented that Outlot A was landlocked. Brown mentioned that the building envelope for Outlot A was severely limited. Planning Commissioner Hanson commented that after thorough consideration, he had no problems with this application, with the exception of setting forth a specific provision pertaining to access. Setback requirements were another issue to be considered. Gaffron stated that the Planning Commission should determine setbacks from the Luce Line, since the lot configuration both sides of the Luce line made questionable the interpretation of which is the "rear" lot line. The other setback concern involved the fact that the greenhouse would be located only 1* from Outlot C. Kelley obser'« d that the Luce Line Trail was staked considerably wider .iian the trail that is actually travelled. Bellows added that the Trail was actually 100 ft., though the travelled portion was only 10 ft. Cohen believed that the setback from the Luce Line should be 100 ft. All other Planning Commissioners concuridd. Johnson suggested designating Outlot C as a driveway easement to resolve the problem with the greenhouse location. The remaining Planning Commissioners agreed that would solve the problem. Gaffron stated that such a solution would not provide the City with any access for future development of adjacent lots. Bellows noted that this was a special condition and where Outlot C could normally be considered a driveway easement, it should be designated as an outlot only for future planning considerations. Gaffron stated that technically a 10* lot width variance would be required due to the property not meeting the width requirement at a point 100* back from the right-of-way. In addition, the City Engineer had suggested that the existing access where Outlot C and Watertown Road intersect may need to be realigned so it would be perpendicular to Watertown Road. MINUTES OF THE HANNING COMMISSION MEETING JANUARY 17, 1989 ZONING FILB #1366-BDTTBRPIELD CONTINUrD Planning Commissioner Brown mentioned the fact that the percolatio* testing had not yet been done. Gaffron stated that soil borings were taken and preliminary testing indicates that the soils were typical for ?rfe«. Before Mr. Butterfield can obtain a building permit, the perc tests must be performed. There were no comments from the public regarding this matter and the public hearing was closed. It was moved by Planning Commissioner Bellow. >conded by Planning Commissioner Brown, to recommend approval of ... lication #1366. Approval would be subject to staff recommendations 1 through 7, and in addition thereto, that no structures be built upon the area south of the Luce Line. Kelley clarified that no building could begin until positive results were obtained from septic tests. Gaffron added that this matter would not go before the Council for final plat approval until such time as those results were determined. Motion, Ayes*6, Cohen, Nay, Me. ;on passed. #1.j4 SIDNEY RBBBRS 715 NOETH BROWN ROAD CONDITIONAL USB PBRMIT/PRD AND CLASS III PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION Mr. Rebers was present for this matter, as was Mr. Stephen Pflaum and Mr. Robert Kost, representing Mr. Rebers. Zoning Administrator Mabusth reviewed for thr ann ng Commission the reason why Mr. Rebers was back befer ). The City Council, at their December 12, 1988, meeting, mended the subdivision proposal to have only 4 lots along ti.^ ,iorthern property line rather than 6 This realignment would cause the pad size on each of those four lots to increase considerably. The Council referred this matter back to the Planning Commission to have them review and determine if there was a need for iditiona 1 controls on tho^^^e lors because of the larger sized building pads. CounciImember Goet clarified th^» she wanted the building pads on those 4 lots de leased to limi . cae size of homes that could be built. Bel?believed that five lots would a. She stated that in nearly narrow dimension to the street for more lots and less street :: prcpv;sal, there has been a creation Planning Commissi have been a more eqv ail subdivisions, and were deeper. i; frontage. By usi> ^ a of "abnoTn».«l lots- ' ■ tney hK.ve more width than depth. This woni; ‘liow for mor'« \'sity in that area r.nan five lots would have allowed. It was her suggestion that this matter be fc warded on to the Council with a recommendation that there be 5 lots along the i.orthern boundary. Planning Commissioner Johnson concurred. Planning Commissioner Hanson asked for a comparison of lot MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING JANUARY 17, 1989 ZONING FILE «1334-RBBERS CONTINUED sizes and building envelopes between the 4 lot proposal and 2- acre lots. Mr. Kost s-id a 2-acres would yield a lot size approximately 80,000 s...., which would allow 60,000 s.f. of building pad area. The largest 2 lots in the original plat have a lot size of 54,500 s.f, building pad of 21,400 s.f., and 50,800 s.f. rnd building pad of 20,600 s.f. Lot 1 of the 4 northern lots is 52,400 s.f. with a pad size of 20,800 s.f.; Lot 2 would allow for a building pad of 23,000 s.f.; Lot 3 would have a building pad of 20,600; Lot 4 would allow for a building pad of 17,200. Kost commented that these 4 lots are more in conformance with the larger lots approved in the original plat. Mr. Kost observed that as the size of the building pad increased, it becomes more difficult to control where on the property the house is to be located. This would also make it more difficult to preserve the maximum number of trees, which is one of the main objectives of the proposal. He reminded everyone, however, that the total amount of hardcover in the entire de^^elopment would not change more than 1,000 to 2,000 s.f. Bellows agreed, but added that there wouid be a change in the number of protected strips between each lot, due to the decrease in lots. Kelley suggested adding more width to each strip of trees between each lot. Kost said that he had discussed an increase in the sideyard setbacks of lots 2, 3, and 4 with Mr. Rebers. It was the concensus of the Planning Commission that ther^' be a 40* sideyard setback on each side of the shared lot lines between lots 1 and 2, 2 and 3, 3 and 4. Chairman Kelley asked about restrictions pertaining to accessory structures. Mr. Kost said that the covenants would address that issue. Mr. Pflaum added that the concept of the building pads was to leave as many trees as possible. The original plan was to allow only a house and a detached or attached garage, nothing more. Plann^ 'om^ sioner Bellows expressed her belief that building 1 limitations were inappropriate in that they restricted design and function of the house. She believed that there b.^culd be no further restrictions beyond the 30* limitation. It was moved by Chairma/i Kelley, seconded by Planning Commissioner Brown, to recommend approval of application #1334 topographic and building pads. Lots 1 through 4 as follows: 1. That 80% of the building pad may be hardcover; 2. That the sideyard setb« s that have been identified between lots 1 and 2, 2 and 3, >nd 4 be increased from 30* to 40*; 3. That no accessory structures of any kind, be allowed. Mr. Kost asked that rather than excluding accessory structures 4 MINUTES OP THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING JANUARY 17, 1989 ZONING FILE #1334-RBBBRS CONTINUED entirely, if that issue could be addressed in the final homeowner document. Kelley asked whether the Planning Commission would see the homeowner document? Mabusth replied that the Planning Commission would see the subdivider's agreement and the covenants. Kelley rescinded his portion of the motion pertaining to accessory structures. Brown seconded. Motion, Ayes*6, Johnson, Nay due to his preference not to restrict the subdivision any further by increasing the sideyard setbacks; Motion passed. #1359 DAVID LINDSTROM 1315 WOODHILL AVENUE VARIANCES PUBLIC HEARING 8:05 P.N. - 8:20 P.M. The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing were duly noted. The applicants were present for this matter, as was Mr. Steve Sather, the applicants* developer. Zoning Administrator Mabusth informed the Planning Commission that an amended site plan had been submitted showing the proposed deck location to be on the east side of the property. The street setback, originally thought to be required, will not be necessary. The only variance required will pertain to the separation setback required between the garage and porch addition. Chairman Kelley's opinion was that the garage should be attached to the addition. Mr. Sather explained that could not be done due to the garage having a floating foundation. It would also limit the size an3 purpose of adding the porch. The applicants are trying to have an open room and minimize looking out the back wall of the house into the garage and maintain a porch-like atmosphere. Planning Commissioner Brown asked whether the addition could be located on another side of the house? Mabusth explained that there was steep topography and the septic system that limited expansion to the east. The location of the well on the west side would prevent expansion in that direction. Planning Commissioner Bellows asked why the mud room and porch could not be interchanged? Jan«^ r^elaney explained that such an arrangement would not fit in with the present layout of tne house. Mr. Sather gave a brief explanation of the floor plan of the existing house. Bellows believed that there were other alternatives to this proposal. Planning Commissioner Johnson concurred with the applicants regarding the limited area in which the porch could built. Brown concurred with Johnson. Kelley stated that one of the hardships would be the garage located on a floating slab. Mabusth explained that such a MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING JANUARY 17, 1989 ZONING FILE #1359-LINDSTRON CONTINUED hardship would be merely financial and should not be considered. She cited the topography to the east, the well location, the undesirable aspect of expanding into the street yard area. Bellows asked about the restrictions involved with expanding south from the mud room. Mr. Lindstrom replied that the driveway was located in that area. Planning Commissioner Hanson interjected that such a proposal would interfere with the well. Kelley confirmed that the addition would not be any closer to the garage than 6*. Hanson wanted confirmation that the fire codes would be adhered to. Mabusth replied in the affirmative and added that the windows would need to be examined for compliance with fire codes. There were no comments from the public regarding this matter and the public hearing was closed. It was moved by Planning Commissioner Brown, seconded by Planning Commissioner Johnson, to recommend approval of application #1359, with the variance setback of 4* between the garage and the porch, subject to staff recommendations. Motion, Ayes=4, Nays=3 (Kelley, Bellows, Cohen) due to their belief that other options could have been explored. Motion passed. #1360 ROBERT MERKON 6 JOHN CHARLTON 2340 fc 2380 ABINGDON NAY VACATION OF BASEMENTS PUBLIC HEARING 8:21 P.M. - 8:22 P.M. The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing were duly noted. The applicants were not present for this matter. There were no comments from the public regarding this matter and the public hearing was closed. It was moved by Planning Commissioner Hanson, seconded by Planning Commissioner Brown, to recouimend approval of this application, per staff recommendations 1 through 4. Motion, Ayes»7, Nays*0, Motion passed. #1361 ORONO SCHCX)L DISTRICT #278 980 OLD CRYSTAL BAY ROAD VACATION OF BASEMENT PUBLIC HEARING 8:23 P.M. - 8:25 P.M. The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mail.’ng were duly noted. Mr. Tom Haislet was present as a representative for the Orono School District. There were no comments from the public regarding this matter and the public hearing was closed. MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING JANUARY 17, 1989 ZONING FILE #1361-ORONO SCHOOL DISTRICT CONTINUED It was moved by Planning Commissioner Cohen, seconded by Planning Commissioner Bellows, to recommend approval of this application, to allow the vacation the drainage and utility easements as described on Exhibi_ C, based on the findings of the staff as set forth in their proposal. Motion, Ayes=7, Nays~0, Motion passed, #1362 PAUL HAUSER 2801 CASCO POINT ROAD VARIANCES PUBLIC HEARING 8:25 P.M. - 8:40 P.M. The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing were duly noted. The applicant was present for this matter, as was Mr. Jeff Schoenwetter, the applicants* developer. Assistant Planning and Zoning Administrator Gaffron explained that this was a request for variances to construct an addition and decking to an existing residence. A variance will be required for hardcover in the 250-500* zone. An average lakeshore setback variance will also be required. Chairman Kelley clarified that even though the applicant was allowed credit for unused hardcover allowance in the 0-75* and 75-250* zones, he still exceeded the limit by 417 s.f due to excessive hardcover in the 250-500* zone. Kelley suggested that hardcover be removed from the garage area. Mr. Hauser indicated that the portion of hardcover to the north of the garage was of least importance and could be removed. Planning Commissioner Hanson inquired as to the size of the garage doors. Mr. Hauser replied that they were standard size for a two-car garage. Hanson suggested removing a portion of the access to achieve the 417 s.f. Mr. Hauser felt that would not be necessary. Kelley suggested allowing the applicant to remove the 417 s.f. from any location he chose. Gaffron explained that there was a curve on Casco Point that limited sight distance from Mr. Hauser*s driveway. He believed it would be best, from a safety standpoint, to maintain a turn­ around area in Mr. Hauser*s driveway. Bellows concurrv-J, adding that the 417 s.f. removal could be achieved by taking hardcover from the north of the garage, and a small portion from south of garage. Mr. Hauser stated that he required the area to the south for additional parking. Planning Commissioner Brown suggested removal of the walkway in the front of the house. Mr. Hauser stated that he would remove the 417 s.f. and leave the turn­ around. Planning Commissioner Cohen stated that in his opinion, the average lakeshore setback variance should not be allowed. He believed the City had been consistent in upholding the average- Gaffron said that he had not received any letters from concerned neighbors, nor were any present for this meeting. Kelley asked MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING JANUARY 17, 1989 ZONING FILE 11362-HAUSER CONTINUED the applicant if he had discussed this proposal with his neighbors? Mr. Hauser replied that he had and the neighbor to the south had no objections. Mr. Schoenwetter explained that the neighbor to the north had no opinion, mainly because he was selling his house and moving to Florida. Bellows commented that the "leap frogging" circumstance was typically considered when reviewing average lakeshore setbacks. She questioned what would happen to the property directly north of Mr. Hauser's. Gaffron depicted the lakeshore setbacks for the proper :ies to the north. Kelley observed that if one were to draw a line between the two houses on the north to the south, it would run out into the lake. The same would occur on the south side. This is typical of properties located on points or peninsula's, as is this property. There were no comments from the public regarding this matter and the public hearing was closed. It was moved by Chairman Kelley, seconded by Planning Commissioner Cohen, to recommend approval of application #1362, subject to a hardcover reduction of 417 s.f. from whatever source available, and to approve the average lakeshore setback as defined. The hardships of this application would be the property being located on the point and the addition being 160' from the lakeshore. Motion, Ayes=7, Nays=0, Motion passed. #1363 ROGER 6 BECKY BERRY 1392 BALDUR PARK ROAD VARIANCES PUBLIC HEARING 8:42 P.M. - 8:55 P.M. The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing were duly noted. The applicants were present for this matter. As explained by Assistant Planning and Zoning Administrator Gaffron, the Berry's were seeking variances in order to demolish an existing residence and rebuild. Currently the hardcover on the property consists of a detached garage, as well as a driveway that continues uphill to the existing house. The proposal calls for a new residence with a porch, deck and attached garage. The driveway would remain in the same area, but would become slightly steeper. It is the intention of the Berry's to maintain the detached garage. In order to access the new, attached garage, it will be necessary to raise a portion of the yard by bringing in fill in the south 0-75' zone. The Berry's are proposing a walk­ out which will require grading to be done within the north 0-75' zone. One of the reasons the Berry's preferred not to locate the house further back to meet the average setback, is to preserve a mature red oak tree. Gaffron said it would be necessary to make a 2' cut in order to achieve the walk-out. Planning Commissioner Bellows expressed her reservations of MINUTES OP THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING JANUARY 17, 1989 ZONING FILE «1363-BBRRY CONTINUED allowing variances for a new residence. She felt that a walk-out should only occur as a result of the existing topography of the lot, otherwise another plan should be used. This would be especially true if grading in the 0-75* zone were necessary to achieve a walk-out. Mr. Berry explained that the walk-out would not create that much difference than the existing basement. Mr. Rod Lund, the Developer for the Berry's, presented photographs showing the existing residence, garage and the oak tree. He gave a brief description of what he was proposing to accomplish. Planning Commissioner Hanson did not believe the proposed house fit well with the site. Hanson questioned whether the oak tree would survive the construction. Mr. Lund had consulted a professional who informed him that the tree would bend toward its roots, hence this tree appeared to have its main roots away from the area to be disturbed. He also had an estimate from a tree service that valued such a tree at $4,400.00. Planning Commissioner Johnson believed that any grading that occurred would threaten the oak tree. Planning Commissioner Brown said that the Planning Commission had been fairly consistent in making new structures conform. Johnson commented that Baldur Park Road was a unique area that seemed to consistently require variances. However, due to the 3/4 acres that the Berrys had to work with, he did not believe there should be a need for variances. There were no comments from the public regarding this matter and the public hearing was closed. It was moved by Planning Commissioner Cohen, seconded by Planning Commissioner Moos, to table this item. Kelley provided some direction for the applicants. The Planning Commission did not want to see any hardcover or cutting and filling on the north side in the 0-75*. Within the 0-75* zone on the south side the attached garage must be offset by removal of the detached garage. Mr. Berry expressed his desire to build a tnree-car garage if the detached garage had to be removed. Within the 75-250* zone it was the concensus of the Planning Commission not to allow more than 30% hardcover. They also wanted the applicants to adhere to the average lakeshore setback. Bellows informed the applicants that compliance with the Planning Commission's requests would cause a substantial reduction in the size of the house. Kelley suggested that a footprint be drawn prior to an actual house plan. The applicant questioned the Planning Commission's opinion regarding the walk-out. Kelley stated that they would not allow a walk-out to be cut on the north side if it required grading in the 0-75* zone. The natural contours of the property must remain. Motion, Ayes=*7, Nays*0, Motion passed. MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING JANUARY 17, 1989 #1364 EDWIN GAGE 480 TONKAWA ROAD CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT/VARIANCE PUBLICE HEARING 9:00 P.M. > 9:10 P.M. The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing were duly noted. Mr. Dale Gustafson, a representative for the applicant, was present for this matter. Assistant Planning and Zoning Administrator Gaffron explained that the applicant was seeking approval to construct a 6* wide access/walkway through a wetland area partially in the 0- 75* lakeshore setback zone. Gaffron showed the Planning Commission where the proposed walkway would be located. The 6* width exceeds the 4* standard and would therefore require a 2* variance in addition to a conditional use permit. The walkway would consist of wood and wood posts that would extend approximately 187*. Chairman Kelley asked how the property owners currently accessed the existing dock. Mr. Gustafson said that currently the only way to access the dock is by using a neighboring property. Planning Commissioner Bellows inquired as to the hardship for the 6* width as opposed to the standard 4*. Mr. Gustafson explained that the 6* would offer more stability and would provide more walking room and safety. Gaffron questioned whether railings would be added to the walkway in the future. Mr. Gustafson replied that the owner would rather not install railings. Bellows asked why the wallcway did not continue all the way to the seasonal dock as opposed to stopping at the little knoll? She believed there would be a risk of the water level rising, making that area unpassable. Mr. Gustafson stated that to the owner*s knowledge, that area had never been under water. Bellows questioned whether there were any future plans to put a gazebo or storage shed in that spot? Mr. Gustafson, replied that the owner had no such intentions. There were no comments from the public regarding this matter and the public hearing was closed. It was moved by Planning Commissioner Brown, seconded by Planning Commissioner Hanson, to recommend approval of application #1364, the hardship being the safety aspect of the 2 additional feet. Motion, Ayes*4, Nays*3 (Kelley, Bellows, Cohen), Motion passed. MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING JANUARY 17, 1989 #1365 MARTY B. SCHNEIDER 2180 NORTH SHORE DRIVE CONDITIONAL USE PERNIT/VARIANCE PUBLIC HEARING 9:11 P.M. - 9:55 P.M. The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing were duly noted. The applicant was present for this matter, as was Mr, John Stockman, a Board Member for the Art Center of Minnesota, Zoning Administrator Mabusth briefly reviewed this application, Mr, Schneider was seeking a conditional use permit and variances for the purpose of converting the Old Hill School into a duplex, Mabusth showed the proposed floor plan for levels one and two, Mr, Schneider did meet with the City's Building Inspector, and based on preliminary proposal, there was no problem with the stucture meeting all fire and building code standards. The plat map shows the 1350* setback from the B2, nearest commercial zone. The standards for a duplex do not require that all lot standards be satisfied. If t’le Planning Commission feels that the duplex use is a more intense use than the school use. Section 10,03, Subdivision 4 would require that substandard lot standards be addressed. The performance standards for a duplex state that a commercial or industrial zone must be adjacent to the duplex property and duplex must be built 200* from that zone. The 1986 application of Margaret Bjork is similar to Mr, Schneider's current proposal. Planning Commissioner Bellows questioned why Mr, Schneider, not the Art Center, was the applicant in this matter. Mr. Schneider replied that he had a signed purchase agreement. He informed Bellows that Mr. Stockman was present to answer any questions that may have to do with the Art Center. Bellows questioned how this application would affect the Art Center's parking and setback requirements. Mabusth replied that the subdivision would have a definite affect if division occurred along lot lines 5 and 6, Mabusth added t‘ Lots 2, 3, 4, and 5 all have separate property identif icatio.. numbers. It was her understanding that Lot 4 would be included in the sale of property to Mr. Schneider. Mabusth also noted that the City could not allow division of this property without maintaining a minimum 50* setback to the Art Center structure. The issue of parking was briefly discussed, but it was determined that issue did not have any bearing on Mr. Schneider's application. Chairman Kelley inquired as to the hardship for the duplex use. Mr, Schneider stated that there was quite a bit of confusion on behalf of the citizens to his plans. Mr. Scheider clarified that he held the contingency for the purchase agreement, not the Art Center. Should the Planning Commission not recommend approval of the duplex use, it was still up to Mr. Schneider as to whether or not he would purchase the building. MINUTES OP THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING JANUARY 17, 1989 ZONING FILE #1365-SCHNEIDER CONTINUED He intends to keep the exterior of the building as is. In his opinion, he was lessening the intensity of use of the Old Hill School. Mr. Schneider also intended to register the property with the Historic Preservation Society which would forever require the building to remain in tact. He agreed that he was seeking an ambitious variance, but he believed the building lent itself to the proposed use. He also stated, that in his opinion, he would not be appearing before the Planning Commission if the Art Center and citizens were able to finacially support the Old Hill School. He believed it would be in the best interest of the Art Center to concentrate all activities into one building. He said that the size of the building would be more suitable for a duplex, rather than a single family dwelling. He said that he would consider the fact that there was far more square footage than he would require to be his hardship. Mr. Stockman informed the public and Planning Commission that the Art Center of Minnesota was having some significant financial difficulties. He said that the community has not been supporting them as well as they did in the past. One of the solutions to their financial problems is to dispose of excess property. The Art Center cannot afford to support the Old Hill School and consequently, must sell it. If the Art Center does not sell the school to someone who will use it for its current purpose, then it must be used in a non-conforming purpose. He said that any use, other than a single family dwelling, would be non-conforming, and there were no offers from anyone to purchase it for that use. He said that the group headed by Mr. Hillegass would have to obtain a change in zoning to use the building for commercial use. He said it they want to use the building as a school, they would have to go through great deal of trouble with the IRS and State of Minnesota to qualify as a school. Mr. Jim Hillegass stated that his group has presented the Art Center with an offer to use the Old,Hill School as a children's creative and dramatic art center. He said their offer was similar to Mr. Schneider's offer, yet Mr. Schneider's offer was accepted. He believed the reason for this to be that their intended use would compete with the activities of the Art Center. He said his group had no intention of competing with the Art Center. Mr. Hillegass explained his involvement arose due to work that he had done to the Old Hill School 12 years ago. He said the building had been in public service since it was built in 1892. He believed it was one of the few structures of its kind left in Orono and he want^'d it to remain in public service as opposed to becoming privately owned. Kelley asked the Planning Commission to focus their attention only on the issue of zoning and variances. Ms. Ann Warner asked whether such an application should be treated^differently due to the building being in public service for so long. MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING JANUARY 17, 1989 ZONING PILE #1365-SCHNEIDBR CONTINUED Ms. Ju^ie Peterson believed at one time that it was favorable to live near the Art Center. However, she has been very disappointed with the maintenance of the property. She thought the "Hillegass group" to be very motivated and well meaning, but questioned whether they would be able to keep the property maintained. She said that there was already considerable traffic and parking occurring due to the Art Center. She did not think that a duplex use would create any additional traffic or parking problems. Mr. Judd Dayton said that he was one of the four private individuals that has a second purchase agreement into the Art Center. He wanted to clear up any mis-communication that had occurred. He said that he wanted to cooperate as much as possible witn the Art Center. It was not his intention to compete in any way, but wanted only to preserve the Hill School. Ms. Gail Harris asked what Mr. Schneider intended to do with the building should the variance not be granted. Mr. Schnej-* ' said that it was his intention to purchase the building and w^se at least a portion of it for his own living space. He reiterated his desire to keep the exterior of the building intact and preserve it to the best of his ability because he valued property such as this. He invited any committee or group to aid or supervise him in his attempts to fully maintaii* and preserve the building. Ms. Joanne Rich stated that she it saddens her to see the building deteriorate. She said that it would be wonderful if Mr. Hillegass could purchase the property and restore it. Planning Commissioner Hanson inquired about the tennis courts. Zoning Administrator Mabusth replied that a lot line rearrangement would have to occur once this application was resolved. Mr. Schneider stated that the original purchase agreement included lots 4, 5 and 6, and he indicated to the Art Center that he would like the tennis court included. As long as the parking criteria can met, it is his intention to purchase those lots and through a lot line rearrangement attain the tennis courts. Mabusth mentioned the fact that the lots in question were never combined. Legally, the Art Center could sell them individually with the tennis court extending intc property which they still own. The issue of the property lines could then be privately resolved at a later date. Bellows questioned whether the City would see to it that the remaining lots were combined. Mabusth said that with the lot line rearrangement, the City would ask for a complete inventory of parking, all existing improvements, and how the subdivision would affect the Art Center. Hanson then asked whether the Planning Commission could legally consider Mr. Schneider's application. Mabusth responded MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING JANUARY 17, 1989 ZONING FILE #1365-SCHNBIDER CONTINUED that if the Planning Commission declined the duplex use, they may act on the application immediately. If the matter were tabled, Mr. Schneider would bring the matter back with the lot line rearrangement. Bellows commended everyone in attendance for the way in which they presented their concerns and facts involving this issue. She believed that the first order of business was to determine whether a duplex use was an intensification of use of the property. Kelley observed that should a duplex use be approved, a 4-car garage would be put on Lot 5. Hanson inquired as to the zoning for the Art Center Building. Mabusth stated that it was RR-IB, Rural Residential, with conditional use permits for school use and a non-conforming use for the food service. Johnson asked whether there would be a conditional use permit required for the duplex? MaLusth answered affirmatively. Bellows stated that the intensification of use must be based upon the zoning classification. Chairman Kelley stated that in his opinion, he could not see a duplex in that area. Brown concurred. Cohen stated that he did not like rental property there. Johnson stated that initially he agreed with the "Hillegass group". He now felt that if the building must be sold, it must be sold, but wanted to see it historically preserved. Brown stated that he could not see the hardship for the duplex use. Bellows concurred. The remaining Planning Commissioners concurred by stating that either they could not see the hardship or they did not like the aspect of rental property in that location. Mabusth advised that the code does not prohibit rental of a single-family re^iidence. Mr. Schneider asked that this matter be tabled to allow him more time to investigate the opinions of the adjacent property owners. There were no further comments from the public regarding this matter and the public hearing was clos It was moved by Planning Commissioner Cohen, seconded by Chairman Kelley, to table this item. Me' on, Ayes*7, ’ s»0. Motion passed. PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVAL OF MINUTES It was moved by Plannin Commissioner Johnson, seconded by Planning Commissioner Hansc to approve the Minutes of the November 21, 1988 Planning Co. ssion Meeting. Motion, Ayes»7, Nays*0, Motion passed. PLANNING COMMISSION I 33ENTATIVE It was agreed thi. lanning Commission member, James Hanson, would represent the Planning Commission at the February 13, 1989 City Council Meeting. MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING JANUARY 17, 1989 ADJOURNMENT The January 17, 1989 Planning Conunission Meeting adjourned at 10:00 p.m. Thursday 2- 2-89 Advisory Committee - Public Meeting on Management Plan Study 7:30 n.m., St. Loui.s Park Council Chambers 5005 Minnetonka Blvd., St. Louis Park Wednesday 2- 8-89 Advisory Committee 7:00 p.m., Tonka Bay City Hall Thursday 2- 9-89 Advisory Committee Subcommittee on Shoreland Protection 8:00 a.m., Wayzata City Hall Advisory Committee - Public Meeting on Management Plan Study 7:30 p.m., City of Minnetonka Community Room 14600 MinnetonKa Blvd., Minnetonka Saturday 2-11-89 Water Structures & Environment Committee 7:30 a.m., LMCD Office, Wayzata Monday 2-13-89 Lake Use Committee 4:30 p.m>, LMCD Office, Wayzata Thursday 2 16-89 Advisory Committee Subcommittee on Public Sa^t^ty 8:00 a.m., location to !?♦., announced Advisory Committee - Public Meeting *n 'i«nggement Plan Study 7:30 p.m.. City of Ed n?i Council Chambers 4801 West 50th St., Edina Wednesday 2-22-89 Public Hearing: Rosanblum/Ulrich Variance application for dock length Publ^ - Mearing: St. Alban'« flay Marina Variance application for dock use area 7:00 p.m.. Tonka Bay City Hall 1-31-89 Regular Meriting, Bor—i of Directors 7:30 f Tonka Bay City Hall LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT 473-7033 Saturday 2- 4-89 && Sunday 2- 5-89 Saturday 2- 4-89 Friday 2-10-89 Sunday 2-12-89 per schedule EVENTS SCHEDULE February 1989 Wayzata Chamber of Commerce Chilly Open Sat: Golf 9 am to 5 pm Sun: Wayzata Fire Dept, fishing contest 1 pm to 4 pm, Wayzata Bay to 4 pm, Spring Park Bay 3 pm. Excelsior Bay 1 pm to 3 pm, Wayzata Bay for the WINTER SEASON Broomball, Lord Fletchers of the Lake e 1-31-89 IfMWlWlLAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRI iT ^------------------------- BOARD OF DIRECTORS AGENDA JAN 2 31989 Regular Meeting, 7:30 p.m., Wednesday, JanAarv 25. 1989 Minnetonka High School 18301 Highway 7, small auditorium, main floor 7:00 p.m.I Public Hearing: Low Water Policy Review 7:30 p.m.t Regular Meeting, Board of Directors: 1. Call to Order 2. Boll Call 3. Reading of Minutes, approval as read or amended, 12*28*'88 4. Public Comments - items from persons in attendance not on agenda 3. Reports A. Chair Hurr 1) Performance review. Executive Director's completion of six months pro~ bationary period evaluation 2) Performance review, secretary, annual evaluation 3) Newspaper designation: Sailor/Weekly News/Laker 4) Legal service Request for Proposals 5) Additional Board Chair communications B. Treasurer 1) Financial condition as of 12-31-88 2) Audit of vouchers for payment per summary list, as recommended by Treasurer C. Standing Committees 1) HATER STRUCTURES & ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE, Chairperson Dave Cochran a) Approval of 1-14-89 Action Report b) Wayzata Yacht Club deicing permit to include west dock area as recom­ mended by the committee c) Upper Minnetonka Yacht Club/RDP Partners' Special Density Permit appli­ cation for 32 slips with public amenities, subject to annual review for being retained as a licensing condition, as recommended by the committee d) Chapman Place Marina multiple dock license renewal recommendation for approval, subject to 125' maximum extension from 929.4 OHW, main­ taining the Independent contractor operating agreement and responsiblllt for any unpaid previous operator license fees a) Rosenblum/Ulrich variance request public hearing recommendation for 7 p.m. Wednesday, February 25, 1989 f) St. Alban's Bay Marina & Yacht Club variance request public hearing for 7 p.m. Wednesday, February 25, 1989 g) Non-renewing dock license recommendation to retain renewal status upon applicant notice and payment of $25.00 administrative fee h) DNR permit review for dredging, shoreline applications, recommending approval for: (1) Edwin Gage permanent dock across wetlands (Stubbs Bay, Orono; (more. LMCD Board Agenda LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT 2 January 25, 1989 5. C» 1) h) DNR permits review (continued) (2) Grays Bay Resort & Marina dredging (Grays Bay, Minnetonka) (3) William Skadsberg retaining wall repair (Gideons Bay, Excelsior) (4) Pheasant Lawn Channel homeowners dredging (Carmans Bay, Orono) (5) Gary Baker dock access (Forest Lake, Orono) i) Shoreline fill violation, per DNR Inspection, Dennis Carl&on (St. Albans Bay, Greenwood), recommending letter to DNR/City of Greenwood concerning need for corrections necessary on this violation j) 1989 dock license renewal applications 2) LAKE USE COMMITTEE, Chairperson Bob Pillsbury a) Approval of 1-23-89 Action Report as distributed b) Wake Hazard Cowj**-^?.*? organization c) Fishing Policy, ?.e> . lution 59 recommendations d) Water Patrol report D. Special Committees 1) ADVISORY COMMITTEE, Chairperson Tom Reese, Consultant Dave Arndorfer a) Public meeting progress b) Subcommittee progress c) Management study current priorities 2) EURASIAN WATER MILFOIL TASK FORCE, Chairperson Tom Reese a) Public meeting review b) Fund raising progress and Board Involvement c) Prospects for Lake community participation In operating costs for 1989 d) Continuing priorities E. Executive Director Report 1) Administrative update 2) Priority meetings, exchanges 6. Unfinished Businesst None to report at this time 7. New Business: As recommended 8. Adjournaent 1-20-89 n MEMO TO: FROM: DATE: RE: Board of Managers Minnehaha Creek Watershed District JMM/E. A. Hickok and Associates January 19, 1989 Lake Level, Flow and Precipitation Sumnary January 1989 JAN23I989 Lake levels In Lake Minnetonka have stabilized through November as Illustrated by the attached graph and lake elevations. There has not been any discharge from Lake Minnetonka to Minnehaha Creek since November 17, 1986. Creek flow at the Browndale Ave. dam In Edina Is not measured during the winter months. The 30 year average precipitation for December at the National Weather Service station In Maple Plain Is 0.86 Inches. The actual precipitation recorded In Wayzata for December was 0.85 Inches. A summary of precipitation follows. PRECIPITATION SUfWARY JANUARY 1989 Maple Plain Minneapolis-St. Paul Intern*1 Airport Wayzata Actual 0.67 0.85 30 Year Average 0.86 0.87 D LAKE MINNETONKA Woltt L«y«la 19^7-1988 DATC wm liiffr ltn«lkM • lak» iiPatiM** ■«—awwwttiMi—■»iMniMMWMniaiMaan>»«w»a«^ wtuM III*5m1Fiw 3«tf Cliaticc r!s«t«tf tlavittoA liw lloallH Ma lltMllW rti» N-fra-n ts.s:1.C!»H K’.*l 12*. ?•1.^'-; !l ?:»w l.?l 13.11 1.0 t*-9n-V i;\«i Cl !.*•!?*r.*»1.V'i:».i»:,id Mo.-M •21.;I,:.' iMM-ir J.:?!-**s*r ?3 ;.' I 12*.ts - :•«5;m*..c?f2i. *M.*:r-: *-?j «:.•»iS Ki.ti .11 ni.3 •.-•r r*iffa4T •22.11 !?li*. 1—»:n*.’:O.fv-*a.*l Ml ?2«.^2 :.v.' u-in-v 13. U 5.:;•:». f , ]'12*. “I.’.'!:4».0i v.«J1-3K-21 »» . »•.<: e:-Gct<ii •2*.;;i.’i*.*.4;.-S5 ’3.11 *2'.*»%».it ;.15 121.:»1.:: :s-c:i-r ni.:;i:2.it '. t 121.:?0.*’.*•3.12 ..n lit .3 i.<; Kl.tl #.tw ll-Sjr-?!»;!.:«•;m»l».'*! -.: ll J.v; S5-5:fr 13.11 «.?r KUi ■ .'.*5 %2\:i I.f)51-e*:-22 c.» :a*eKi-if 13.12 13.r . ;.12’.»9.f.*}.» i.r 4?-5fr-3J ir».9*i:*:ii-w Ift.-f ).% •HHr4»ia.}««:s.5i >.v';•2’. 1 ».'?*:>.?• M>9br47 I3.d«i.i:»3.;i «!.»5 5.10 2t-M?m.fi u*s*.-w i:i.«IS-JjMI la.’i i.e»*^*s.;1 •>.» tn.N •.«i:i.i«2!-j«t-n 121. U •.05 n».»1.M •r-iK-o 12t.ll 1.W IS-H^-tl 13.11 >.:i mi*•.»?••::: n n*.»).7l l«-:k47 fa.M i.f*i;-!u.*n m.»nt.v*1.9T 13.21 9.M f27.M nr.u » *-v 121.’2 1.1*5 r-Jtvii 12*.ii Ml IWiMI 127.M 1.M 12M1 9.C0 m.'»•.(1 •3.11 1.M •S-TiMI 12T.H 1.W i2r.w ?.n S1-M-N f».*i 1.0“I2».?i 1.H biX MONIII f^RLCII ITAriON RECORDED o PRECIPITATION SUMMARV OCT. 87 NOV. 87 DEC. 87 JAN. 88 PEB. 88 MAR. 88 APR. 88 MAY 88 JUN. 88 JUL. 88 AUQ. 88 SEPT. 88 OCT. 88 NOV. 88 DEC. 88 MPLS. AIRPORT AVERAGE 1.83 1.27 0.8/ 0.82 0.85 1.17 2.05 3.20 4.07 3.51 3.64 2.50 1.85 1.29 0.87 MPLS. AIRPORT ACTUAL. 0.60 2.07 1.23 1.37 . • O.30 1.33 1.58 1.70 0.22 1.17 4.29 2.79 0.80 2.86 0.67 MAPLE PLAIN AVERAGE 2.06 1.46 0.86 0.84 0. 78 1.32 2.33 3.93 4.83 4.63 4.09 2.83 2.06 1.46 0-86 WAYZATA ACTUAL 0.84 2.37 0.79 0.96 0.19 1.31 0.93 1.46 0.10 2.34 3.73 3.04 0.88 2.23 0.85 MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF THE SCHOOL BOARD OF ORONO INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 278 HELD ON JANUARY 9, 1989 '^2 5/989 The regular meeting of the School Board of Orono Independent School District No. 278 was held on Monday, January 9, 1989. Present:Dave McKown Don Anderson Kitty Crosby James Franklin John Maresh Lucie Taylor Thomas Mich William FenhoU © UPON MOTION by Kitty Crosby, seconded by Don Anderson, the consent agenda was approved as follows: - approved the minutes of the December 12, 1988 regular meeting; - approved the following variance requests: Heather Winters, grade 12, to attend Westonka Schools; Angela House, grade 11, to attend Wayzata Schools; Todd Huber, grade 11, to attend Orono Schools; - accepted the resignation of Kent Winter, high school principal, effective July 1, 1989; - accepted the resignation of Marlene C. Dravlow effective immediately; - approved the Treasurer's Report for November, 1988; - apprcved the bills as covered by vouchers 061212 through 061297 (061298 through 061898 held for manual checks) and 061899 through 061967 and 060567 through 060685. UPON NOTION BY Kitty Crosby, seconded by Lucie Taylor, the Board of Education expressed appreciation to Dr. Kent Winter for the years of dedicated leadership/service to Orono High School stating that because of his leadership, Orono High School has always been held In high regard. The Board expressed best wishes to Dr. Winter In his retirement and requested that a letter of appreciation be sent to him on behalf of the Board of Education. Dr. Mich reminded the Board that on January 11 the AMSD Legislative Dinner would be held In St. Paul; that on January 20 the faculty/staff luncheon will be held in the high school cafeteria honoring the following twenty-five year employees: Dave Aldrich, Ron Gilbert, Jim Hall and Frank Schulz; that on January 20 the MSBA Convention will begin; that on February 11 the Metropolitan School Boards Academy will hold a seminar for school board members. Dr. Mich provided Information to the Board reg activities that are taking place In Orono and enct ticipate If possible. the staff development d Board members to par- Or. Mich reported that Peter Luporl will be In the elementary schools from January 9 through the 13 as the "Sculptor In Residence"; that Susan Pearson, children's author, will be In the elementary schools from January 23 through the D 3 27; that Mike Preble, grade 2 te'^cher, will receive a minigrant of $175.00 for a project on Environmental Awareness from the Minnesota Environmental Sciences Foundation, Inc.; that Roger Ray, Orono student, will participate in the 1989 International Winter Special Olympic games, April 1 - 8, at Lake Tahoe; that as far as open enrollment is concerned, administration remains cautious and con­ tinues to look at class size; that the January 23, 1989 Board meeting will be held at the Orono Primary School; that the remainder of the 1989 school year appears to be exciting as well as ambitious with the Board looking at facili­ ties, establishing a school day schedule, open enrollment, faculty hiring along with filling a counseling position at the high school plus principal positions at both the high school and the primary school; that there will be a Teacher Meet/Confer meeting on January 25 for the purpose of discussion of concerns of district specialists; that the 1989-90 calendar will be reviewed with Teacher Meet/Confer on January 17. Dr. Mich stated that he also wanted to express appreciation to Dr. Kent Winter for his support and cooperation as Principal at Orono High School. He stated that credit is due Dr. Winter for preserving the curriculum even though the high school population has been declining and for being sensitive to his faculty during this decline. Dr. Mich stated that Dr. Winter has been most cooperative with him during his two and a half years in the district and that he will miss him. Jim Franklin provided the Board with a brief synopsis of the report on high school education which was done by the program evaluation division of the legislative auditor's office. Marge Gasch stated that as she was a Board member when Dr. Winter was hired at Orono, she also wanted to express appreciation to him for his leadership/service to the Orono School District and its students. Dr. Mich reported to the Board that in studying the facilities needs of the District, it is apparent that there is a need for classroom facilities as well as core facilities. He stated that they have been examining all of the options that are feasible and building a link between the elementary and middle schools seems to be the most economical plan plus it would provide the quickest answer to the classroom/core facilities needs. Dr. Mich provided for the Board an architectural drawing, reiterating that this is not a recommendation to the Board but only a provision to keep the Board abreast of the thinking/planning that is taking place. He stated that building a link provides flexibility bet­ ween the two buildings allowing for better use of existing facilities and based on projections at this time, this addition of facilities should serve the district for five years. Dr. Mich informed the Board that a bond referendum would be necessary in order to proceed with these plans and he called on Bill Fenholt to inform the Board of the items that need to be considered/completed should they decide to move in this direction. Discussion ensued with the Board asking questions for clarification purposes. Dr. Mich stated that a recommendation should be ready for the Board at the January 23 meeting. UPON MOTION by Don Anderson, seconded by Jim Franklin, the Orono School Board on behalf of Orono I.S.O. #278 agrees to indemnify Alfred Hoskins (designated AHERA person) for any activity undertaken in the performance, duties and responsibilities as mandated by the federal AHERA as set forth in the following agreement: ) ► Q Approved by the Orono Board of Education - January 9, 1989 Orono I.S.O. #278 INDEMNITY AGREEMENT 3 The undersigned, on behalf of Orono Independent School District No. 278, hereby agrees to indemnify Alfred Hoskins for any activity undertaken in the perfor­ mance of his duties and responsibilities as mandated by the Federal Asbestos Hazard Emergency Response Act, as amended 1988, and all regulations issued pur­ suant thereto (both Federai and State). This indemnity applies to providing a defense, with an attorney chosen by the designated person and/or reimbursement of reasonable attorney's fees incurred by said designated person and extends to payment of any and all damage awards, consequential and punitive, which may be awarded based on the activities of the designated person. This Indemnity Agreement shall remain in full force and efiect unless it is amended in writing and/or revoked in writing with proof of service upon the designated person covered. In the event 'lie Indemnity Agreement is terminated, the designated person has no further responsibilities to act as designated per­ son under the Federal or State guidelines, regulation and statutes. I, David McKown, Chairman, hereby certify that I have the authority to represent the Orono Independent School District and extend the above Indemnity Agreement for the benefit of Alfred Hoskins. Date Chairman, Orono School Board UPON MOTION by Lucie Taylor, seconded by Jim Franklin, the Board of Education engaged Faegre & Benson as consultant to assist the school district in complying with Section 89 of the Federal Tax Reform Act. Wayne Smith provided the Board with an overview of activities in the athletic department. He supplied them with lists of coaches, the number of students par­ ticipating in the athletic programs, explanation of regions/districts, and information on the system that has been developed for evaluating coaches. Mr. Smith stated that there are opportunities being provided for coaches to upgrade the'!r skills in dealing with athletic injuries and that he will provide the Board with written information as to the participation level of the coaches in these programs. The Board asked questions regarding the degree of training of Orono's coaches in CPR training or first aid and Mr. Smith will survey the coaches and provide the Board with the information. The next meeting will be held on January 23, 1989 at the Orono Primary School. UPON MOTION by Lucie Taylor, seconded by Don Anderson, the meeting was adjourned. Approved:Don A. Anderson, Vice Chairman D'ave McKown, Chairman £ NEWSLETTER ORONO INDEPENDENT §pHOOL DISTRICT NO. 278 INDEPtNDE NCC - LONG LAKE MAPLE PLAIN MEL3INA MINNETONKA BEACH - ORONO oH5 OLD CRYSTAl BAY ROAD LONG LAKE MINNESOTA 55356 ORONO SCHOOL BOARD David McKown, Chainnan 479-1692 Don Anderson. Vice Chairman 479-1810 Lucie Taylor, Treasurer 473-1189 Kitty Crosby, Clerk 478-6037 Jim Franklin. Director 479-2130 John Maresh, Director 475-3197 • - V-; 473 7.T13 FEBRUARY, 1989 ISSUE NO. 6 FEB - 31989 Administrative Notes On January 23 the Board of Education approved a bond referendum dection for March 21. The question concerns the construction of a Unking building betvveen ^uinanii Elementary School and the Middle/Intermediate School. The proposed building will house dassrcx>ms, provide a corridor between the two buildir^ so tihat better use can be made of existing fedlities, arid a swiinrningpooL Currendy the school district is lacking in facilities to meet the needs of students. Additional dassnooms are urgendy needed. In fact, next year it will be necessary to house fourth grade students in two separate fadUties (Schumann Elementary and the Middle School) since there is insuffident ^>ace in any one school. Along with dassroom space, we are in need of core facilities Specifically, we need a physical education facility to meet instructional needs. I have recommended a swimming pool because it enlvmces die physical ed program and will serve the entire community as well as the students. Recommending another gymnasium for our campus does not make sense. You win receive a special edition newsletter detailing the needs, proposed construction, and cost I would, however, like to adcUessa rdated item. There is an unfortunate rumor circulating that the open enrollment law and the students transferring to the Onono Schools are the cause of our facility pitfolems. The rumor is grossly in error. The need for classroom space and core facilities is solely based on the current and prrojecled needs of Orono sdiool district residents Our sdvxd age population is growing and will continue to grow over the years ahead anticipate 2600 students, up fiom 2060 students today, inl99Z What about students who come to the (9rono School under the open enrollment law? V\fe are accepting students where space is availaUe. That situation varies fiom grade levd to grade level, and we anticipate seventy-five students will come to the Orono Schools conL next column 1 Qass size will remain as it has, averaging 25 students per class. The revenue generated by open enrollment students will help us maintain our class size, e.g., adding a section when classroom space permits. The revenue also helps us avoid program reductions. The legislature has only provide a revenue increase of 1.6% for the current year and perhaps even less for the follc ving years. The open enrollment revenue helps us maintain programs in the face of inadequate funding from the state. We will carefully monitor open enrollment and cautiously participate in the program. Please know that this Superintendent or the Board of Education would not recommend construction because of open enrollment. The needs we have are the needs of our current and future resident students. Dr. Thomas B. Mich Superintendent Mid-Winter Fun Fest - February 4 The Orono Elementary P.T.A. will be holding its annual "Mid-Winter fun Fest" carnival on Saturday, February 4 from 1:00 - 5:00 pm at the Orono Middle School. This is the P.T.A.'s major fundraiser, with proceeds used to fund field trips for each class and other school related projects. In conjunction with the carnival is a raffle featuring many prizes. The grand prizes this year will include a man's and woman's 10 speed bicycle and a child's sport bike. There are over 50 other prizes donated by area merchants. Ratfle tickets may be purchased irom any K - 5 Orono students or at the carnival. Bring the whole family for an afternoon of food, games, prizes and fun. Mike Preble, Schumann Teacher, Awarded Minigrant The 1988-89 Minnesota Minigrant Program has awarded grants to 69 Minnesota teachers who are providing innovative classroom education in energy, science, mathematics and technology. The total amount of money awarded was $18,585. > ' To qualify for a minigrant, teachers submitted applications outlining projects and explaining how they planned to achieve objectives of the program. The Minnesota Minigrant Program olfers grants of up to $250. After they complete their programs and project, teachers receive a $50 honorarium and a Minigrant certificate. The minigrant which Mr. Preble proposed was in environmental education setting up habitat centers in the classroom. The minigrant is for $175 to provide the materials to do this project. Sponsors of the 1988-89 Minnesota Minigrant Program are the Minnesota Energy Education Consortium, Minnesota High Technology Council and the Minnesota Department of Education. The Minnesota Environmental Sciences Foundation, Inc., administers the program. A committee of volunteers representing the sponsoring organizations makes all funding decisions. Sponsors providing financial support are Cray Research Foundation, Dairyland Power Cooperative, East Central Electric Association, Minnegasco, Minnesota Power, Northern States Power Company and the Minnesota Department of Education. Congratulations to Mr. Preble! Guidance at a Glance I Jpenming Test Dates: SAT March 11,1989 Registration Deadline Fdjruaiy 3,1989 ACT April 15,1989 Registration Deadline March 17,1989 In addition to the regular registration deadlines for the listed test^ there are late registration deadlines. An extra fee is involved and no guarantee of getting your requested test center. The practice is not encouraged except in an emergenty. See your counselor or consult the registration padeets for further informatioa Finanrial Aid Forms Seniors and their parents are reminded to file either the FP5 (Family Financial StatemenO or FAF (Finarvcial Aid Form) if they wish to be considered for financial aid. Aid may come a variety of sources such as federal agenaes, state agencies, and the colleges or schools themselves, arvd private corporations and orgianizations The one constant is that tirey alt want to see one of the above mentioned forms. Application packets are available in the guidance office. Scholarship Opportunities The guidance office continues to receive a wide variety of private sector, college, and public scholarship applications. We encourage seniors to check the file we have and to apply for those they qualify for. High School Guidance Counselors: 473-5472 Call With Your Questions Mrs. Betty Beach All students with last itames A - K Mr. Thomas Wasbotten All students with last irames L - Z Sculptor & Author Visit Elementary Schools Students in Mrs. Shoop's art classes had the privilege of working under the guidance of Peter Lupori, nationally acclaimed artist from the College of St. Catherine. He was with us during the week of January 9-13 working in clay. Each student was able to do a clay sculpture under the guidance of Mr. Lupori and Mrs. Shoop. During the week of January 23 - 27, Author Susan Pearson worked with Grade 1-3 students. She is a famous author of children's books. Among the books she has written are: "Karin's Christmas Walk," "Idy Favorite Time of Year," "The Day That Pork Chop Climbed the Christmas Tree," "Pork Chop's Halloween" and "Happy Birthday, Grampie". Both of these residencies were funded by your donations to the Orono Education Fund. Marvel Bongart Elementary Principal if * € Peter Lupori helping a student finish a project February - "I Love To Read" Month Februtuy is '1 Love To Read" montfv Listed bdow are some ideas and suggestions taken ftxMn Just Me & My Libraiy, Fetruary 1989, a newsletter for parents and kids. This newsletter is produced annually through the cooperation of the Q-Jldren's & Young People's Section of the Minnesota Library Association and the Miimesota Reading Association for February, i Love to Read Month. Read - Aloud Hint^ What You Can Do Start Early. Begin reading to duldren as soon as possible The younger you start tfiem, the better. E’.'en six-month old babies can benefit Take tiie Time- When reading aloud, make it a dose warm and loving time that is enjoyable for both of you. Make it Fun. Use plenty of expression when you read. Have fun vdth langi’3ge. If a dog barks in the story, bark. Whisper, laugh, oink, meow, ^reak gruffly-or soflly-as you naad. Read Pictures. Read slow or fast to fit the story and aUow enough time for children io jx)int to everything in a picture and talk about it Make it flie Sam^ Make it Different Establish a routine of re ading at certain times Oike naptime or bedtime or breakfast), but vary the length of reading time. Read a variety of things: nursery rhymes, songs, short stories and picture books. Make it a Habit Read aloud to your child every day. Plan reading into your schedule when you have the fewest interruptions. Set an Example. Children imitate what they hear and sea Make sure your children see you read ’ng. Rememben Reading aloud s. or fathers, toe. A father's early involvement with books aixi reading can do much to promote reading skills and interest. Read Everything When You are With Your Child. Labels on cans and boxes, street signs, comic strips, recipes, food coupons Use Newspapers, Magazines and Fliers. Cut out letters and words to make your own booksor use greeting card covers to make a looselcaf book. Buy or Borrow Books for your children so they can have something of their own. Give books as birtfxlay presents Use your library regularly. Set Up Your Home for Reading. Have a time and place where you can turn off the TV, take the plxjne off the hook arrd read. Make the bookshelf an important part of your child’s world. Make pens, pencils and crayons available so your child can put pictures to the stories read aloud. Di^lay the art where other children ar»d adults can see it Write Stories as your child dictates, then share the stories v\’ilh others Watch TV Shows like Sesame Street, Reading Rainbow and Electric Corr^iny v\ith your child. *Read-Aloud Delaware A Year of the Young Reader GIVE US BOOKS, GIVE US WINGS 1989 Year of tlie Young Reader Books-, how could we possibly get through life without them? They are our primary resource for information as wdl as our treasured resource of entertainment When you .share a book with a child as a gift or by reading aloud, you are sharing your time, your talents, your values. You are providing for that child a foundation for growth. You are helping that child to learn the skills he or she vuil need to be successful in today ’s wori»- You are giving that child wing?. The Librarian of Congress, James R Billington, has designated 1989 as the 'Year of the Young Reader." B(>^ your ede^tion with your children by visiting your library and bookstore. Discover togefocr the joys to be found in books 10 Reasons to Read to Your Qiild 1. Because w'hen you hold them and give them this attention, they know' you love them. Z Beause reding to them will encourage them to become readers 3. Because children's books today are so good that they are fun even for adults 4. Qiildren's books illustrations often rank with the best, giving them a lifelong feeling for good art 5. Books arc one way of passing on your moral values to thera Readers know how' to put thcmsel\. s in another’s shoes 6. Because every teacher and librarian they ever crKounter will thank you. 8. Because i I’s nostalgic 9. Because,forthatshortspaceoftime, they will stay dean and quiet 10. Because, if you do, they may then let you read in peace. From Unabashed Librarian, M39, Pg. 19 m % .. ./ ■ — ^ .♦ -• V. J First Semester Students of the Month Back row: Becky Danielson, Jason Herman, Paul Springmeyer, Tory McGrath, Matt Scho*' hilie Maas, Keith Segner. Middle Row: Josh Wilco'' ..s Boston, Laura Dulin, Holly Brow'n, Hilary SentcII, Scott Emmack, Katie Kolasa. front Row: Mary Keller, Katie Nelson, Katie Devitt, Ryan Kullbcrg, Justin Swanson, Rick Schmit, Ben Bonine NSGA Remains Undefeated The North Shore Girls Gymnastics Class IV Team continues to bring home a first place trophy in every meet. The girls have comp>eted in three multi team meets and placed 1st in all three. The girls are working hard and look forward to a good meet at Mound for the Class IV State Meet, February 4th and 5th. Currently 22 of the 23 girls will compete in that state meet and we look forward to some exciting finishes and another 1st place trophy. All of NSGA's teams (Class IV, Class III Compulsory, Intermediate Optional, Advanced Optional) will then travel to Omaha, Nebraska for the Sweetheart Invitational Gymnastics Meet on February 10 -12. It is an exciting and fun meet for all the girls and a nice finish for the Class IV's season. Last year NSGA captured a 3rd, 2nd and 6th place trophy. We are excited about even bigger things this year. Winter Aerobic Session Begins North Shore Aerobics will begin the Winter session of Aerobic classes on Monday, February 13. Both Low Impact and High Energy classes are available Monday, Wednesday and Saturday morning; Tuesday and Thursday evening. Babysitting is available for the Monday and Wednesday morning class for an additional charge. North Shore Aerobic Classes will be held at 2430 Industrial Blvd. in Long Lake. Walk in registration dates are Monday, February 6th from 1:00 pm to 7:00 pm., and Tuesday, February 7th from 5:00 pm to 8:00 pm. For more information call 473-5514. North Shore Gymnastics/Aerobics to Hold Registration Registration for the Winter program of Gymnastics or Aerobic lessons will be held on Monday, February 6th from 1:00 pm to 7:00 pm and on Tuesday, February 7th from 5:00 pm to 8:00 pm at North Shore Gymnastics Association's new facility on Industrial Blvd. in Long Lake. Gasses will begin on Monday, February 13th and run through the middle of April. NSGA opened the doors to their brand new facility in September of 1988. The building which was designed esfjecially for NSGA includes many features such as an in ground trampoline, bar/vault and tumbling in ground foam pits, a separate preschool/aerobic area, a parent waiting room and a student locker room. NSGA is a non-profit parent directed organization. Classes are offered week day mornings, afternoons, evenings and Saturdays. Programs offered include: a parent-child gym class (for 18 months to 3 years of age). Preschool Motor Learning :lasses (for the 3 to 5 year old), and Progressive ^ Gymnastics classes for boys and girls ranging in ages from ’ 5 to 18 years old. NSGA has a strong USGF team program for the competitive athlete and an Aerobics conditioning program for teens and adults. For more information call the NSGA ofiice at 473-5514. \ -v: ■■ -- ■, ► "i, -■wiaii ^ ^ r ^ , Recycle Appliances Residents now have an opportunity to recycle ?' nces. For a fee of about $20 your old appliance will b xJ up and recycled. All recyclable parts are salvaged, —ly parts with hazardous material are removed, and the rest is cut into steel fluff at North Star Steel. Twelve appliances equal one ton. Recycling appliances not only will reduce the amount of waste to the landfill, but will save wear and tear on garbage trucks. It is possible that appliances may be banned from the landfills in the future. Until then BFl believes this is an option for homeowners. BFl is now putting stickers on appliances to inform residents to this option. Anyone wanting to recycle an appliance may call BFl at 479-1967 or 941-5174. This is an excellent addition to our cities recycling program. Carolyn Smith, 421-4760, ext. 1701. R S. Winter Band Concert Tuesday, February 28, at 730 pm the Orono Concert Band will present their Winter Band Concert in the Auditorium. The featured soloist will be Diana Lee, dau^ter of Myong aiKl Sung Lee of Long Lake. Diana is Student Directs of the baixi this year and directed the Pit Band for tiie Fall musicaL She ^vill play the Rondo movement of Mozart ’s "Concerto For Qarinet". The band will also be playing Offenbach ’s "Ballet P^risien’’ which includes the familiar "Can Can" as its fifth nx)vemenL Both the Jazz Ensemble ard the Stage Band will be performing. Then? is an admission charge of $2 for adults aid $1 for students. NOMINATIONS FOR TEACHER OF THE YEAR The Orono Education Association will be sponsoring the Teacher of the Year search in conjunction with MEA. The OEA Conununications Council is hoping all parents, district patrons, former and present students, administrators, school board members, and fdlow teachers will give some consideration to nominating a teacher who might represent all Orono teachers as an exemplary teacher in our district. ^ V ^STUDENT RAPPORT . ,; CREDENTIALS The criteria used for judging are the following „ , PROFESSIONAL ACTIVITIES COMMUNITY ACTIVITIES , J -' DEMONSTRATEDLEADERSHIP - AWARDS AND HONORS i PUBLICATIONS OR ARTICLES HOBBIES AND INTERESTS The candidates do not have to meet all criteria; you might show in what ways you have seen your nominee exhibit some representative criteria. Judging will be done by a panel which will include one member from each of the following areas: high school student, administration, school board member, elementary parent, middle school parent, OEA member from intermediate school, OEA member from middle school, and a community member. If you have any questions, please contact these Communications Council committee members. MARLYS BURR PAT HEADLEY, CO-CHAIRWOMAN WAYNE JOHNSON KATHY POMMERENING PAT SHOOP, OEA PRESIDENT JEAN WRIGHT THIS YEAR ANYONE MAY MAKE A NOMINATION USING THE FOLLOWING FORM DAVE GORDER KEN JENSEN HEIDI MOHAGEN JOANN RE^ CO<TlAIRWOMAN DAVE SOHN I WISH TO NOMINATE______________________________________AS A CANDIDATE FOR ORONO TEACHER OF THE YEAR. THIS CANDIDATE MEETS THE CRITERIA IN THE FOLLOWING WAYS: 1. 2. 3. 4. Due: Wednesday, March 20,1989. Return to Pat Headley, Orono High School Nominator_______________________________________Phone __________ Address_________________________________________________________ zr-ii'• -•-•V. A’ *-4»^ ■-*♦ ^rr Activity Cnlctuiar District Activities : ^ sf 2/13 » Boaid Meetihj^MS Vocal Music Room^ .¥;. 7M 2/10?^ PriKidmt's Bilthday - No School Board Review Regular Meeting - December H, 1988 :'■- t.'t . (?T-. ■ ■;/*1- ; ■, !■■ ,'lf --. .■. 2/^^ Board Meeting, MS Vocal Music Ro6mr:?*.^i’’.* -7KX) • Elementarv ArfviHes!#** ‘'-' ■ '■" ‘' ‘ -'- ■^.-'C i'':*: ’ ^ 2/4;^ MidVto^^ 2/2f^ Uhj^ad^ Sweden Study - all week^- ^ ::: 71 pri^^^E,^Ffeb.B.D.Party ^ r - Tnt»mi»dia»»A^iddV School Acriviries ■ 2/1 IS Rewi^ Day^^ * ‘^' ■*' 'w5A*‘iicku»vr^.t t, •. 2/4*^ Mid WintoFun MS .:. IKX) -^ 2/6^IlSIVVCMeeting/:.Vv^V..;:.. .7:15 2/16 “ Grade 8 Career Exploration Day ’ ' Grade 7 Career Fair ^ ^ 'i. 2/21 ' MSPACMtg..:.....................:...........730 2/23 MS Band Concert, Aud...................................7:30 ^ 2/24 MS Band Assembly .....................1:15 High School Activities . 2/2 Ski Racing Meet.............................................4:00 ^ ^ Boys Basketball - Minnehaha - Here.....___7:30 Gymnastics - Cbnferrnce at Breck... i...... .6:30 Hockey- Minnehaha - Here... *... * *..........730 Girls Basketball at Blake..................................7:30 Gymnastics - 6AA at Minnetonka Hockey - Blake - Here.....................................3:00 Wrestling - Tri-Metro Invitational Math Team at St. Anthony...............................4:00 Tri-Metro Choir & Band Festival Ski Racing - 6AA Gymnastics - 6AA at Mound Girls Basketball at Breck..................................7:30 Hockey at Breck...............................................7:00 Boys Basketball - Tri Metro . Wrestling-6AA (11,16,18) Hockey at St. Bernards............................ 8:00 Ski Racing - State (14,17) • Boys Basketball - TVi Metro ^ - - Hockey - 6AA (14,16,18,20,23,25) '.. Wrestling- OAA at Wayzata - C 2/3- 2/6 2/9 2/10 2/11 2/14. v5' •- a.-:--'- ^ .Choir Solos & Ensembles - Here " * 2/17 ■ Gymnastics - State (17&18) Boys Basketball - Tri-Metro.............................7:30 2/21 Girls Basketball - 6AA (21,25,28) ; j: - • Boys Basketball - Delano - Here................... .7:30 2/23 Vtetling State (23-25) > “ 2/24'^ "Winter Fest Dance........... .V..,,.,........9:00 2/27 Math Team at Minnehaha................................4:00 .7/28 Band Concert, Aud...........................................7:30 t CONGRATULATIONS to PAT MEYER of Maple 5: j Plain! Pat won the $5(X) cash prize in our Orono Intermediate Fourth Grade Wolfridge Learning Center fundraiser. Approved the following variance request: r Kirsten Gilfillah, Grade 11, to attend Robbmsdale^tt^^’- S<*(»lS;^V 7;-1 • Approved Diane Dingmann's request for a maternity.. disabUityleave • Approved the following coaches for winter sportsf?: Brian Beigstrom, asst, boys basketball coach; Steve : Boylan, asst, boys & girls basketball coach; Debbie - Thompson, asst, girls basketball coach; Liz Youn^^^^^ . asst girls basketball coach; Bob Komma, asst gymnastics coach; Dave Shavlik, asst hockey coach; 7*' Kelly Shaughnessy, h^d wrestling coach; Peter DubayJ asst, wrestling coach; Todd Meyer, asst, wrestling' coach; Amy Luesebrink, head ski coach; Joe Dalman,' . asst ski coach. • Approved appointment of Etebbie Perry as noon supervisor at Schumann Elementary. • Approved appointment of Lynda Stahlke as management aide at Orono High School. • Accepted the resignation of Judy Sohliinz as " ’ lunchroom supervisor at Schumann Elementary, • Accepted the resignation of Betty Beach, high school counselor. • Approved the new winter Community Education classes as presented. • Approved the new winter Early Childhood Family Education classes as presented. • Upon motion, direct^ its representatives to AMSD to support legal efforts and activities, including the jx)ssibility of intervention, designed to counteract the "equity lawsuit" filed against the State of Minnesota. • Approved contracts for the District Coordinator of Buildings and Grounds for 1988-90 and for the District Accountant for 1988-89. • Directed Dr. Mich to represent the Board of Education in the third step of the grievance procedure in the grievance appeal of a management aide. g NEWSLETTER AOMINimUTION OFFICE . MS OLO CRYSTAL RAY ROAD NORTH LONO LAKE, MINNESOTA SS3M ■ .-.V*-*:- Non-Prefit Or«. O S. POSIAGI PAID long lolia, Mn. PtKMII NO. 12 City of Orono P n. Box 66 Crystal Bay MN 55333 MOTHERS AGAINST DRUNK DRIVING HENNEPIN COUNTY CHAPTER 8700 W. 36th St. • St. Louis Park, MN 55426 • Telephone: (612) 938-0700 January 31, 1989 Chief Melvin Kilbo Orono Police Dept. 445 UilloM Drive Long Lake, Mn 55356 Dear Chief Kilbo, On behalf of Hennepin County Mothers Pgainst Drunk Driving, I would like to thank you and your officers for the support you have given us, and also your dedication on helping making our roads a safer place. I would also like to extend a special thank you to Bruce Anderson, who has been a great help to MADD when we need a little extra explanation regarding a procedure done by the law enforcement. Also, for his assistance during project Red Ribbon. MADD can only continue to make a diffence when we have the support of people like youselves. Thank you again sincereSincerely, ^N Sharon Behrm^ Hennepin Counnty MADD CCS Bruce Anderson 9 rmi PMT Corp. • 1500 PARK ROAD • BOX 610 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 56317 • (612) 47(W)866 December 21, 1988 Mr. Mel Kllbo Chief of Police Orono Police Department 445 Willow Drive Long Lake, MN 35356 Dear Mr. Kllbo: The PMT Corporation and I would like to extend our appreciation to your department. Please apply the donation enclosed to either your benevolent fund, reserve fund, or other fund you deem appropriate. The PMT Corporation employees and I who have lived In this area for quite some time also wish to extend our personal appreciation. President /sa enclosure Meo.cal • Surgical - Laboratory • Research/Equipment and Supplies I. City of ORONO I'li.'l • »tlu » h* ' ~t • < .1* h.r.. M'.: 1 ■ ■ • M . i!':-! ()||,i c> On tic \orth Sioic of Laki Wiunctoukit Poi iee Depas ’tnieiil January 20, 1989 . V. . A . ; MJI.KIIBO CI;k : i'*' Poii.f Mr. Alfred A. Iversen PMT Corporation 1500 Park Road Box 610 Chanhassen, MN 55317 Dear Mr. Iversen, Thank you for your most generous donation. It will be used in the Orono Crime Prevention Fund program. This program provides education to citizens about neighborhood crime watch, enables signs to be posted in neighborhoods to advise burglars, thieves, that these citizens are prepared to help themselves. The programs train officers to give talks to shopowners and their employees on shoplifting and bad checks. I appreciate your help. Sincerely, Melvin Kilbo Chief of Police MK:sb