Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
02-27-1989 Council Packet
AGENDA FOR CODNCIL MEETING SET FOR MONDAY, FEBRUARY 27, 1989, 7:00 P.N. (♦)Asterisk Items are considered to be routine items to be enacted upon by one motion by the City Council under the Consent Item* on the agenda. Discussion will be held upon request. Memos regarding each of the Agenda items are available in the Public Packet which may be obtained upon request from the Recorder. ROLL CALL 1.CONSENT AGENDA*A/o 6P 5-0 Appaovu. or mxhutbs *2,Regular Meeting of February 13, 1989 *3.Special Meeting of February 6, 1989 LAKE MINNETONRA CONSERVATION DISTRICT REPORT Jo Ellen Hurr Representative PUBLIC COMMENTS - (Limit 5 Minutes Per Person) SORING ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT **APPLICANTS**Immediately after the Council has reviewed your application please sign the three (3) original resolution copies. 4.#1359 David Lindstrom, 1315 Woodhill Avenue - Variance - Re so 1 u t i on 5.#1369 Charles Kickhafer, 1040 Townline Road, Variance - Resolution 6.Planned Development Ordinance ENGINEER'S REPORT MAYOR'S REPORT 7.Long Lake Sewer Plant Property - Response to City of Long Lake 8.City Administrator Evaluation 9.Planning Commission Appointments 10.Joint Meeting Topics Council/Planning Commission 11.Acting Mayor - Length of Appointment 13. 14. 15. CITY ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT 12.County Road 51 Parking County Road 116 3399 Crystal Bay Road - Valuation 3572 Livingston - Drainage Sewer Service/Highway 12 Facilities Site Analysis Informational Meeting - Wednesday, March 8, 1989 1910 Shadywood Road Appointment of Part Time Officer Position Appointment, - Lieutenant Eurasian Milfoil^S? 1988 Summary of Receipts, Disbursements and Balances 19. * A6EHDA rOB COOBCIL MBBTHH: SKT FOR NOHDAT, FBBR0ARX 27, J989, 7:00 P.N.* 25.CITY ADMIHISTBATOR'S REPORT Continued * 24. Entrance SignsLetters of Recognition - Charlotte Knutson and Robin Mikelson Equipment Purchase Public Works - Streets Administrator's Information Stun Gun Training M.C.W.O. Operations Plan City Administrator's Vacation Highwood Sewer Metropolitan Waste Control Commission Publication CITY ATTORNBT'S REPORT LICENSES (28*) BILLS (29*) ADJOORRNENT .y\;^ ]srwQ ijel'll f4u^ ^^Hj~t. tL ,!\hf Cef^f^ 2p It, 0^ '^S ociok ! Ih^- RxjvPfhiiJbiu lC6,CD0 (fJb. 3p^^i~ Q feTlA/fc-IC UJiTH' L^) llXft/C P lak J nOoV W('74 u)»Ji> r, (s^TV^J AsKU) Afeotcr^WA ^ Wl/uWE^l^'' rAM^PoK^ftifylMOK/- AsK££> ^^^ernunP^b La KL, ,W) f\icr GtktMcfC&ujjuL.l'cuf^ — V/t-i/Zt? //^ , AC-eiJTK^SWvJ^?>vr. : (_^U&dC>L (i Q Q Dfeppio OF/^ /I LmJ^ fcv\ t)A\JbnMfW' l4^tAj{7 TA nh0^i-rl(b LX)aJTM.. -4^- fl?;e5Uj7^-'Pfff^OVL AlI ImjO ~~ 5-0 . - 5-0 Sv^feStO uXjcfi(hfWA/&iltP(MM k £>rr //)o/^ [PblbiH^. fjtm6 (AeLOu^tO AjiTf( fJ]f\i&R. n\ A~fjfl(^W Tv ffiM-, 6G - LcwC7 \ ■•A-' jTViygfi. t)lWT^ iW Cjiff\FM€it. J)5APfhAjnO l/\lm . (otututP O^nS^ajbt^f) Rb^tr mms Ibtm) IX)pm ij^oPuc^ tu Lih(t. JVifNBfi iff]ovto , f\h} Ja}d 16 knipr ^mim^Aso ^oLtnt^ 5-0. 3.:^,,.. -j| ..„,, , ^, ^0 O&jWoaD J^&L^f^bi&cuiS5ic>y(Mh^ . n ]ciT/fxjR^f^ _ I D ... Sueees/fiD5£ajdou£7 )Ai/=©uA^^!ujy&>mm()4 //)oi/?Z), A^J JAj/:) - 5-0 bb ivt{w^7t£) A3t)tAn*/10tgriA)6- ||A)1‘\VB^ f7)£) fb (fOVt^ib^ , •^// - ll/y)o-ftoiu 'To / , ^0 W. iJANfcO Ktt^ To S/Wu t r,t(}i6 puJlOfJ. TTl^et i0f{5mM J\ Mh/ iwhn- yp-^&^^6x)ttfeKj fhff\ yo^h. Gckirbj J^vD f\)&r THiAJiC.^^Ci/iL fPktfibb ki/i5 /\Pf'^oPRjJ\fB., t ... j:...,------- 4 r |: rifwjAu ^ G -_ ii mrw^4 ^^i^Okj CajJ^ , irn^^mpSiMJ. ':. 6xn/wA?^ -U Ca/^OkJ , 3^S , m f MKjL^(pSl*pL^ Tfy\iiij^ {jJt^Amu rimt/n. oea^ue^) iai: .:•« ^kW' ..... (V/ mcJy^buuLP mo'fj imct/n5 tVtPl/^S^UU*)& ..iv ^ , ■ '' Lb/i ^-, , - - . ____ _ ^ AtttSS^j^.ScO&Jf5 WltL AuxjfHti tfci£> I:W^P5^£3A;E:66 " l2)ces iumAl/10).. ________ Ucts Azru>KjrT>iM huuwit,,-^ . k)&wj) {AX/iA^iD WCiAjfc^ Ifhibl^ hiO ImjcJLSPttO Luifwe>^ \n r *1 c/v ! rrr u\j v f ^v^ ' ■*->^ * v.-9vc>>^ — hiUCVtO W5©<?^> St^otui) Op^a/wtoIT^^^/C - mlkM |)«r . nkW CjBmmU;Tl:D O k / /M/COUt?/lc5/UtY ^ Clb~J^U^ ; A»jO fclb Ge/irS- /W/5 Mdicrpu^uw (f-^^l(^^lAl6r &fiO. /W«0 ;Wcr f^P/C^TtolKi (F Alo Mfc WLAiiJiO~W\r ffh^ h-CMMtDio /IfWtUP ^ CF V ? ,.;.v Ihu hJKt. A)o P aPJC iaJ&A^^ kiA. Mt^ . <[®BB»|Al^boW6 UWoF;^^ A:^tO A^rot ^(m£>tP 01= ^Lof-^ n/i^AO Of^pfcfV. QjoKjuum>%ArSaam 1a //6/I Pfeet^/n- iM'l&fi t<PlA\iiio ftfeM/rb '^^fh'il\ilt^. Db SmbbtSfW ^sutnjcfcijf' y CAf cy . M^buS^Tf^ 6"7b feiAfca^Cg,. 101^. Cl/<teye i^i/3U)^OF M. Ow^i^ 6yav\(Ajf/) tm5 J^xpePfits (Ao/kMb. ^1b a Jo fii<fC{A^. \JW,i(i)UjM TAiPiO UOi-m hi KbP. GPft)3^7o ^Ufdcjb Cho. 5-0 CeoAjrV />(Wtv .fearT- .. , &tet>rmsD //6 imPcr^^a^ ; b(Pkii3U)LMi!p!i ^BO cxtSA-W. n A^. SfPiAiAfto ASf>nf JyAP6 PUBLIC ATTENDANCE MEETING DACITY OP OROMO PLBA8B PILl OHV THE INFORtUTIOH REQUESTED BEliON FOR OUR CITY RECORDS. NAME OR NUMBER 2. yM. So h d U 3. VjnAtf.c.M^vi <^U<. >. loQa ThmnLt^ LA r ^/i*.— 7l ------ UL{AdMJ:iC)y'-)_s£i_____^___ 7 .\lL^ iAV v\l 0 r V1 ii 9 ^________________________ 8. 8. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. IS. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. hk jll )fe- WiLo AJotGo btiOfOO niblkVAi 12. . SH)lkU/UC^[PbxiiU) OFR^hiort^ffi jAa^AAni/L If^lrtHUcAJC/ ['tM^aJc5» t\Jt _ totp ifitbfw& u^ouJiD Udim or (itQxcAV^^ fi^Lj^Fl^CAmJ. j\^hP Ikif ftBfA^udOL . ^uPL&utu^ ~fi*ArWi-OnH &(xr U)MnWtv UO^fff. I 5-0. *id Ca^sJ^fD ALUts hutTo li\}MAi O^LAKL, A/crTAtJiWt’ewe-/4rtTb CA/iy. Lm<<c Sau > SuJbvrwt^ (hto Iwa; L&tCuiOM' mhV'x^ rcKw, ifcwt, ij^tuit wvrtf^ lUAr l\fecOfo2. #/5 3502 , JA/lA/fcSffy/ ^)l^;A/ ' Bo^ aIt • Z)^'^ tU3tu^iUiC6S^ WxCjW f^kPjL . AtO - S-o m ii A//1L1A/5 hC:? A<J^^6ottr f^6w6? (A/i/dlV sD. A^£i , /yUw ^It/W I^L'Stt&aU) ^ iUbcufjiU) tA;»T?fltZ-V 6Prbc. / AA&'^f-o ryi/Mp^^ /\/v/ ^ -CiSa Io Kj»ri‘ (OtooesfyN 7t» • iiFTf^ S-w. /h^3C>, 6P O p /T)B^Te^/ 5-0 fTtev*io To f^PRsut^, t(L Oa)0 5~ 0 • ;A&©co^-- n\bt^dM^. ^ A5noA^k>or Ci&rcf-'JHim hr. 'p^ A5^4fi6^/ IMW\U ' A vo 6/^dt / Obii^fTtOh/tD ootJi^sTTi. l)fc/yio(/^, fcPc^ 6-0- imtS)^P)P 5a £). Ti^iAliAiCr a)d it iiaani m cookxl hiitzw set for normt, rwawmict 27, i9S9, 7:00 p.m. Asttcisk items are considered to be routine items to be enacted upon by one motion by the City Council under the Consent Item* on the agenda. Discussion will be held upon request. Memos regarding each of the Agenda items are available in the Public Packet which may be obtained upon request from the Recorder. CttMCIL 2719&3 CALL 1. CONSENT AGENDA* * 2. Regular Meeting of February 13, 1989 * 3. Special Meeting of February 6, 1989 LAKE mNHBTOHKA COMSBSFATION DISTRICT REPORT Jo Ellen Burr Representative POELIC COMMEETS - (Limit 5 Minutes Per Person) ***?APw1SSS5*** Iiuedi^tely after the Council has rewieved your application please sign the three (3) original resolution copies. 4. #1359 David Lindstrom, 1315 Woodhill Avenue - Variance - Resolution 5. #1369 Charles Kickhafer, 1040 Townline Road, Variance - Resolution 6. Planned Development Ordinance EMOXNEER*S REPORT MATOR*S REPORT 7. Long Lake Sewer Plant Property - Response to City of Long Lake 8. City Administrator Evaluation 9. Planning Commission Appointments 10. Joint Meeting Topics Council/Planning Commission 11. Acting Mayor - Length of Appointment CXTT AONXMXSTRATOE'S VEPOKt 12. County Road 51 Parking 13. County Road 116 14. 3399 Crystal Bay Road - Valuation 15. 3572 Livingston - Drainage * 16. Sewer Service/Highway 12 * 17. Facilities Site Analysis * 18. Informational Meeting - Wednesday, March 8, 1989 * 19. 1910 Shadywood Road 20. Appointment of Part Time Officer 21. Position Appointment - Lieutenant 22. Eurasian Milfoil 23. 1988 Summary of Receipts, Disbursements and Balances AGBHDA FOR COOHCIL HEBTIK SBT FOR MONDAY, FBBRDARY 27, 1989, 7:00 P.N. CITY ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT Continued * 24. Bntrance Signs * 25. Letters of Recognition - Charlotte Knutson and Robin Hikelson * 26. Equipment Purchase Public Works - Streets * 27. Administrator's Information Plan City AdminlsErator's Vacation Highwood Sewer Metropolitan Waste Control Commission Publication CITY ATTORMBY'S REPORT LICENSES (28*) BILLS (29*) ADJOORMHBNT COUNCIL MEETmr FES 271S33 HimiTBS OF THE RB6UIAR OROHO COUNCIL MBBTIH6 Qilf OF OKJI iO HELD FEBRURRT 13, 1989 ATTENDANCE 7:00 P.N. The Council met on the above date with the following members present: Acting Mayor Callahan, Councilmembers Goetten, Nettles, and Peterson; Mayor Grabek was absent. The following represented the City staff: City Administrator Bernhardson, Building 6 Zoning Administrr?:or Mabusth, Public Works Director Gerhardson, Assistant Planning and Zoning Administrator Gaffron, City Engineer Cook, and City Recorder Scheffler. CONSENT AGENDA* City Administrator Bernhardson requested the removal of Consent Items 16, 24, and 26; Councilmember Peterson requested removal of item 9; Councilmember Goetten requested removal of items #2, 3, 5 and 25. It was moved by Councilmember Goetten, seconded by Councilmember Nettles, to approve the Consent Agenda with the exception of Items #2, 3, 5, 16, 24, 25 and 26, which were removed and discussed in the order they appear on the agenda. Motion, Ayes*3, Acting Mayor Callahan Nay, Motion passed. APPROVAL OF MINUTES* Councilmember Goetten asked that the Minutes from the Regular Council Meeting of January 23, 1989 be amended to reflect that she did not vote on adjournment of the meeting. Councilmember Nettles requested that a further amendment be made to reflect that the meeting formally adjourned with a 2 to 1 vote. It was moved by Councilmember Nettles, seconded by Acting Mayor Callahan, to approve the Minutes of the January 23, 1989 Regular Council Meeting, as amended. Motion, Ayesa4, Nays«0, Motion passed. PLANNING COMNISSIOH COMIBNTS Planning Commission Representative, Jim Hanson, was present, but had no comments at this time. PUBLIC COMMENTS Ms. Mary Autry, 50 Hackberry Hill, wished to discuss the recycling program recently initiated in Orono. She said that she had contacted several other area communities and found that few were charging their citizens for their recycling programs. She asJced why Orono was charging the $9.00 fee. City Administrator Bernhardson stated that there are other communities charging for recycling, some on utility bills, others include the fee in the city taxes. Orono has always had a policy whereby it charges fees on a "user" basis as opposed to using tax revenue whenever users could be identified. Ms. Autry mentioned that Wayzata and Plymouth had incentive rjmm MZIIDT^' or REGULAR ORONO COOHCIL MBBTING FBBROART 13, 1989 10 5 !I' rUBLXC COMUBRTS COETXRUED programs they were instituting and consequentIv there was a tremendous amount of participation. She questioned whether Orono would ever consider such a program? She felt ic would help justify the $9.00 charge. She also asked whether there could be a pick up of leaves that would be included in the $9.00 charge. Public Works Director Gerhardson informed Ms. Autry that Orono did not pick up leavesr but did have a drop off site three times a year. Councilmember Goetten clarified that the major portion of the $9.00 fee was for the bins. Bernhardson agreed and added that the fee also covered that portion of monies payable to Polka Dot that Hennepin County did not reimburse to Orono. Ms. Autry felt that it was unfair to charge for the recycling when previously she was being paid for her recyclable cans. She added that the companies doing the recycling were paid for the recyclable items they collect. Councilmember Goetten said that the program was new and would be monitored for future adjustments. Bernhardson commented that the convenience of having the items picked up as opposed to having to deliver them, should be considered in the $9.00 annual charge. Re said that the bids the City received for pick up were over and above what each company received for the recyclable items. The reimbursement from Hennepin County was based upon participation in the program. If Orono had a tremendous amount of participation, there would be a possibility of a rate adjustment. viiuncilmember Goetten informed Ms. Autry that had the City not i:»*plemented a recycling program, the County would have come in and would have charged a much higher fee. Acting Mayor Callahan said that the Council was very anxious for the project to succeed, because recycling was a good idea. He said that the City would keep monitoring the program for ideas to achieve the maximum participation. Public Works Director Gerhardson had reported participation to be ever 30% after the first pick up. Councilmember Nettles said that the Counc. would welcome any ideas to improve the program. There were no further public comments. ZOanRS ADNIVXSTBATOR'S REPORT: #1296 PBTBR8OE/ST0DOLA 1895 SHADTlfOOD ROAD DRRIAL RB80LIITZOE #2576 Councilmember Goetten requested a correction to page 8 of 9 of the Resolution. 't was moved by Councilmember Goetten, seconded by MINUTES OF RB6UIAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING FEBRUARY 13, 1989 ZONING FILE *2576 PETERSOH/STODOLA CONTINUED Councllmember Nettles, to adopt Resolution #2576, denying variances to Municipal Code, Section 10.25, Subdivision 6(b), as amended. Motion, Ayes"4, Nays«0, Motion passed. #1330 FULLERTON PROPERTIES 880 TONNLINE ROAD REQUEST FOR ENTRY MONUMENT City Administrator Bernhardson briefly explained that this was a request for an entry monument on Townline Road. Due to an Ordinance passed in July, 1988, it is recommended that this item be tabled until the February 27 Council Meeting to allow Public Works Director Gerhardson an opportunity to meet with the City Engineer. Mr. Joe Franks, a representative from Fullerton Properties, was present and indicated that he did not objr.ct to this item being tabled. However, he said that he would be unable to attend the meeting of February 27th and wanted to take this opportunity to present his point of view. He said that when Fullerton Properties built private roads, it created a negative situation for the homeowners who would live on the road. The entry monumemt is proposed to give a more positive feeling to them. Fullerton Properties agreed that the monument could be removed if and when the road became public. Councllmember Nettles asked whether the homeowner's association would be financially responsible for the removal of the monument? Mr. Franks replied that perhaps the amount could be assessed. Nettles asked if the covenants ^^^d restrictions would address that issue? Mr. Franks said tha the City could require that the monument be removed before the City accepted the road. Councllmember Goetten questioned whether or not such a provision could be included within the Resolution as part of final plat approval? Mr. Franks said he would have no problem with that. Councllmember Goetten suggested using the criteria used for the zoning ordinances pertaining to entry monuments on private land for this new ordinance. City Administrator Bernhardson said that he would be further Investigating whether there would be a need to involve the Planning Commission due to the signage aspect of this. It was moved by Councllmember Goetten, seconded by Councllmember Peterson, to table this item until the February 27, 1989 Regular Council Meeting. Motion, Ayes-4, Nays-0, Motion Passed. #1334 SIDNEY REBERS HI6BNAY 12 8 NORTH BROUN ROAD AMENDED PRELIMINARY PLAN Councllmember Goetten stated for the record the reason why this matter was referred back to the Planning Commission. She stated that at the December 12th Council Meeting when this matter NINUTBS OF RBGUIAR OROHO COUNCIL MBBTING FBBRUART 13, 1989 S0NIN6 PILB #1334-RBBBRS COHTINUBD was brought forth, the Council was not certain as to the square footage of the four lots along the northern property line. They were also uncertain as to whether there was a need for additional controls with the enlarged building pads. The matter was referred back to the Planning Commission so that they could determine potential impact of construction on the four enlarged building pads. The Planning Commission recommended that the side setback of the no grading/restricted development areas be expanded from 30* to 40* and found no need for further controls. Councilmember Goetten stated that she had no further concerns regarding this application. It was moved by Councilmember Goetten, seconded by Cou^ Imember Mettles, to approve this item. Motion, Ayes«4, Nays»0, Motion passed. #1362 PAUL BAU8SR 2801 CASCO POINT ROAD VARIANCES RBSOLUTION 82577 As explained by City Administrator Bernhardson, this was a request for an average lakeshore setback variance. Originally, the applicants were also in need of a hardcover variance, but have since revised their proposal so as to remove 700 s.f. of hardcover, rather than the 417 s.f. recommended by the Planning Commission. The Hausers were present for this matter and had no questions or comments. It was moved by Councilmember Nettles, seconded by Councilmember Peterson to adopt Resolution #2577, in accordance with the Planning Commission recommendations. Motion, Ayes*4, Nays-0, Motion passed. #1364 BDWIN GAGE 480 TONKAMA ROAD CONDITIONAL USB PERMIT RESOLUTION Assistant Planning and Zoning Administrator Gaffron explained that the applicant was proposing to construct a 6' wide walkway through a wetland and partially within the 0-75* zone. Mr. David Stockdale, the Contractor, explained that the 6* width was preferred because of the length of the walkway. It would offer more stability and more room for passing. Councilmember Goetten expressed her concern about approving 420* of hardcover within the 0-75* zone. She felt it would set a precedent to allow new hardcover in that area. She asked why it would not be more practical, from a safety standpoint, to build the walkway 4* in width with a railing? Mr. Stockdale said that the railings would have more of a vertical visual impact. MIMUTBS OF REGULAR OROHO COUHCIL MBBTIHG PBBROART 13, 1989 ZOEIEG PILE «1364-GAGB CORTIMUED CounciImember Nettles asked Planning Commissioner Hanson for his input. Hanson explained the process of review performed by the Planning Commission for this particular item. Hanson concurred with the applicant in that 6 feet, with or without a railing, would be more safe than 4 feet. Nettles questioned the height of the walkway. Gaffron replied that it would be approximately 4-5 feet above the existing ground, a portion of which is below the 929.4* elevation and considered as lakebed but exposed due to low water levels. However, when the water level of Lake Minnetonka was restored it would be approximately 2* above the water. Gaffron went on to say that should the water level rise to 930* it would be necessary to connect the walkway with a temporary seasonal dock out to the lake. Hanson believed that the code would require a rail for elevations of 4* or more, regardless of the width. Councilmember Peterson felt that it would set a precedent if the Council were to approve a 6* wide dock/walkway. Assistant Planning and Zoning Administrator Gaffron commented on the positioning of the support posts and questioned whether there would be any problem with placing them at more of an angle, rather than straight up and down. It was moved by Counci lmemb«.r Nettles to adopt this Resolution with the 6* width as recommended by the Planning Commission. There being no second to this motion, it failed. It was moved by Councilmember Goetten, seconded by Councilmember Peterson, to adopt this Resolution, allowing only a 4* width with a railing. Mr. Stockdale at this point requested that this item be tabled. Councilmember Goetten withdrew her Motion. It was moved by Acting Mayor Callahan, seconded by Councilmember Peterson to table this matter. Motion, Ayes«4, Nays*0, Motion passed. #1366 LORES BOTTBRPIBLL 3925 WATERTOmi ROAD CLASS II PRBLIMIHART SUBDIVISION RESOLUTIOS City Administrator Ber^ihardson Informed the Council that Mr. Butterfield was proposing to divide off a portion of his property on the north side of the Luce Line. He is also requesting a lot combination of property located south of the Luce Line and the creation of a 28* outlot corridor which will come within 1* of existing greenhouse buildings. New information was presented to the Council regarding flowage and conservation easements, waiver of damages and some revisions to the original proposal. Due to the fact that neither the Council nor Staff had an opportunity to review this information, Bernhardson requested tabling at this portion of the application. Assistant Planning and Zoning Administrator Gaffron briefly added that Mr. Butterfield would like to keep Outlot B with Lot 1 MINUTES OF REGULAR OROMO COUNCIL MEETING FEBRUARY 13, 1989 ZONING FILE #1366-BUTTERFIELD CONTINUED and does have vehicular access over the Luce Line. Outlet A contains wetlands and there is a total of 2 1/2 acres of dry land both north and south of the Luce Line. The Planning Commission recommended that no structures be allowed south of the Luce Line and that there be a 100' setback from the Luce Line right-of-way. Mr. Butterfield was requesting that the pond in Lot 1 be excluded from the conservation and flowage easement. Mr. Butterfield was present anr explained that he built the pond in 1953 for the purposes of i :regation and drainage. When full, the pond will hold 1,100,000 gallons. Acting Mayor Callahan stated that in his opinion the entire application should be tabled due to the need to review the conservation and flowage easement issue. Counciimember Goetten concurred. It was moved by Acting Mayor Callahan, seconded by Counci Imember Goetten, 1:o tabls this item until the February 27, 1989 Council Meeting. MotiCii, Ayes=4, Nays=0, Motion passed. ENGINEER'S REPORT: 1989 ENGINEERING RATES CounciImember Peterson inquired as to whether the proposed engineering rates would be comparable to rates charged to other communities. City Administrator Bernhardson said that having not done a recent rate review he could not specifically answer that jestion. Previous rates charged by Bonestroo have been comparable. City Engineer Cook informed the Council that the rates were in line with rates charged to other clients; Bonestroo tried to be consistent and competitive, and in some cases, charged a lower rate/hour than other firms. It was moved by CounciImember Peterson, seconded by CounciImember Nettles, to approve the proposed 1989 rates as an amendment to the contract with Bonestroo and Associates for engineering services. Motion, Ayes=4, Nays=0, Motion passed. MAYOR'S REPORT: There was no report from the Mayor. CITY ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT: COUNTY ROAD 51 PARKING City Administrator Bernhardson explained that due to the late arrival of information from Hennepin County, he was unable to arrange to have residents in the area present. Hennepin County is now proposing a fourth alternative to address the sight distance problem. The new proposal would involve removal of 4 parking slots along the bend in County Road 51 between the Hen'^rickson Bridge to Baldur Park Road. It is Bernhardson*s intention to have the residents present and discuss this proposal at the February 27, 1989 Council Meeting. MINUTES OP REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING FEBRUARY 13, 1989 COUNTY ROAD 51 PARKING CONTINUED Mr. David Singer was present and reported that he had met with Hennepin County personnel and was appalled to discover that they had never determined any sight line distances. Mr. Singer also investigated the issue of the 700 parking spaces, required for Orono. It was his understanding that a LMCD task force will be addressing that issue. It was moved by Acting Mayor Callahan, seconded by Councilmember Peterson, 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. Motion, Aycs=4, Nays=0, Motion passed. LMCD-EURASIAN MILFOIL TASK FORCE REQUEST As explained by City Administrator Bernhardson, the City had received a request from the LMCD for monies for the Eurasian Milfoil problem. The LMCD could either buy their own equipment and contract for an operator for $280,000.00/year, or hire a contractor with their own machine at a cost of $300,000.00/year. They have asked for $100,000 from the County and $100,000 from the 14 communities comprising the LMCD. They had suggested using the p’-oration used to determine what each community contributes to the LMCD operating budget. The City is recommending an allocation of $15,000.00, which was not included in the 1989 Budget. Councilmember Goetten questioned whether the machinery, if purchased, could be rented out. Bernhardson replied that it would take ten years to rid the lakes of the milfoil. The equipment, if bought, may not be in a condition for resale at that time. Goetten further questioned whether the DNR had been approached. Bernhardson said that he did not know for sure, but it was hi . understanding that an area Legislator is discussing this issue at the State level in the Legislature, and is looking for funding either through the DNR or another agency. Acting Mayor Callahan said that his concern was not that of contributing as much as what would happen to the contribution should the LMCD come up short of their goals. He suggested making the contribution contingent upon the LMCD achieving its goal of $99,032, and should that not occur, the $15,000 would be used in Orono. Councilmember Goetten concurred. City Administrator Bernhardson suggested requiring the LMCD to receive $70,000.00 in contributions before Orono would contribute $15,000.00. It was moved by Acting Mayor Callahan, seconded by Councilmember Goetten, to direct staff to draft a resolution approving a grant of $15,000.00 to the LMCD for the purpose£S specified, conditioned upon the money being used for operations as described and conditioned upon the LMCD collecting $70,000^00 from the remaining Lake area communities. Motion, Ayes-4, Nays=»0, Motion passed. MINUTES OF REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING FEBRUARY 13, 1989 COUNTY ROAD 116 - RESOLUTION #2578 City Administrator Bernhardson reminded the Council that at the previous Council meeting they had asked for a resolution expressing opposition to County Road 116 proposal. It was moved by Acting Mayor Callahan, seconded by CounciImember Peterson, to adopt Resolution #2578, indicating opposition to County Road 116. Motion, Ayes=4, Nays=0, Motion passed. 1988 CORPORATE REPORT* It was moved by CounciImember Goetten, -econded by CounciImember Nettles, to accept the Corporate Report and other relevant financial information for 1988. Motion, Ayes=3, Nays=*l, Motion passed. HIGHWAY 12-MNDOT 20 YEAR PLAN* It was moved by CounciImember Goetten, seconded by Councilmember Nettles, to accept the information at this time, pending further word from MNDOT's office regarding a meeting with the Task Force. Motion, Ayes®3, Nays=«l, Motion passed. 1988 FINAL TRANSFERS* It was moved by Councilmember Goetten, seconded by Councilmember Nettles, 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; from the General Fund to the 1985 Capital Project Improvement Fund $81,828.81 to transfer the Improvement fund liability to the General Fund. Motion, Ayes=3, Nays=l, Motion passed. 1988 SUMMARY OF RECEIPTS It was moved by Councilmember Goetten, seconded by Acting Mayor Callahan, to table this item until the February 27, 1989 Council Meeting. Motion, Ayes=4, Nays-0 , Motion passed. AGREEMENT WITH STATE OF MINNESOTA/ALCO SENSORS RESOLUTION #2579* It was moved by Councilmember Goetten, seconded by Councilmember Nettles, to approve the agreement between the City and the State of Minnesota which authorizes the lending of Alco Sensors additionally Council adopts Resolution #2579, authorizing such agreement. Motion, Ayes=3, Nays=l, Motion passed. 1987 FINANCIAL HEALTH* It was moved by Councilmember Goetten, seconded by Councilmember Nettles, to accept the Financial Health Statement as presented for 1987. Motion, Ayes=3, Nays—1, Motion passed. MINUTES OP REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING FEBRUARY 13r 1989 SAC REFUND - RESOLUTION #2580* It was moved by CounciImember Goetten, seconded by CounciImember Nettles, to approve Resolution #2580 notifying Metropolitan Waste Control Commission of Orono's intent to not participate in the M.W.C.C. SAC Refund Program. Motion, Ayes=3, Nays=l, Motion passed. REPLACEMENT OF TERMINAL - POLICE DEPARTMENT* It was moved by CounciImember Goetten, seconded by CounciImember Nettles, to authorize the purchase of a police department terminal/word processor with software from equipment outlay fund monies in the amount of $4,790.00. The purchase is to be reimbursed from the 1990 general fund police department budget. Motion, Ayes=3, Nays=l, Motion passed. SUBURBAN HENNEPIN COUNTY COMMUNITY PROFILE OF ORONO* It was moved by CounciImember Goetten, seconded by CounciImember Nettles, to accept the information and thank its representative LaDean McWilliams for providing the information. Motion, Ayes»3, Nays=l, Motion, pasjed. SEASONAL WEIGHT LIMITS-RESOLUTION #2581* It was moved by CounciImember Goetten, seconded by Councilmember Nettles, to adopt Resolution #2581, pertaining to seasonal weight restrictions. Motion, Ayes=*3, Nays=l, Motion passed. BID AWARD-1989 MATERIALS AND EQUIPMENT* It was moved by Councilmember Goetten, secondv-*d by Councilmember Nettles, to accept the bids as presented for equipment and materials for the calendar year 1989. Motion, Ayes=3, Nays^l, Motion passed. SALARY ADJUSTMENTS-RANDY O'BRIEN AND BARRY RATHBUN City Administrator Bernhardson asked that this item be withdrawn from consideration. It was moved by Acting Mayor Callahan, seconded by Councilmember Goetten, to remove this item from consideration. Motion, Ayes=4, Nays=0, Motion passed. CITY ADMINISTRATOR'S INFORMATION Councilmember Goetten asked if new officers would be required to be trained in the use of stun guns. She felt it was imperative that training occur prior to the officers using the stun guns. City Administrator Bernhardson said that could be a criteria, and clarified that in-house training had been occurring all along. Chief Kilbo felt that another level of training would be appropriate. Bernhardson said that he would bring forward more specific information at the February 27, 1989 Council Meeting. Acting Mayor Callahan commented on the performance recognition that was upcoming for City Clerk Hallin and Finance Director Kuehn. He said that they were to be congratulated for MINUTES OF REGULAR OROHO COUNCIL MEETING FEBRUARY 13, 1989 CITY ADMINISTRATOR'S INFORMATION CONTINUED their efforts and achievements. Acting Mayor Callahan questioned the speed limit revision for County Road 15. Bernhardson stated that from Blaine Avenue in Navarre to County Road 110 in Mound, the speed limit would be 3 5 mph. It was moved by Acting Mayor Callahan, seconded by CounciImember Nettles, to accept the City Administrator's Information regarding; 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? and Goal Setting Status. Motion, Ayes=4, Nays=0, Motion passed. CITY ATTORNEY'S REPORT: AMENDMENT OF ORIGINAL 7L0WAGE & CONSERVATION EASEMENT STIELOW ADDITION City Administrator Bernhardson explained that City Attorney Barrett had requested that a requirement of approval of this item be that registration of title occur so that the other property owner involved would have time to work with this. It was moved by Acting Mayor Callahan, seconded by CounciImomber Nettles, to adopt the Flowage and Conservation Easement and the waiver of damages relating to the Stielow Addition, subject to final approval of language concerning the registration of title by the City Attorney. Motion, Ayes=*4, Nays-0, Motion passed. ADDITIONAL ITEM CounciImember Goetten stated that she had been informed by the City Attorney that Mayor Grabek could not appoint CounciImember Callahan as Acting Mayor for a two year term. The term for Acting Mayor was only one year. City Administrator Bernhardson said that City Attorney Barrett would be doing more research on this issue and would discuss his findings at the February 27, 1989 Council Meeting. CounciImember Goetten expressed her desire to have this issue formally and properly resolved. City Administrator B'^rnhardson stated that this item would be placed on the agenda for the February 27, 1989 Council Meeting. LICENSES* It was moved by CounciImember Goetten, seconded by Councilmember Nettles, to approve the '’-'llowing licenses: Cigarette License;June Candy Co./Crystal Bay Services 3398 North Shore Drive Jimmie's Lounge 3380 Shoreline Drive MINUTES OP REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING FEBRUARY 13, 1989 Gambling License; (Renewal) Septic Installers: Resident Kennel: LICENSES CONTINUED Q-Superettes 2160 Wayzata Blvd. Rick's Super Valu 3333 Shoreline Drive Multiple Sclerosis Society North Star Chapter 2344 Nicollet at Jimmie's Lounge 3380 Shoreline Drive Clover Hill Co., Inc. 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 Motion, Ayes=3, Nays*l, Motion passed. BILLS* ^ ^ V.It was moved by CounciImember Goetten, seconded by Councilmember Nettles, to approve payment of the All Funds Accounts. Motion, Ayes=3, Nays=l, Motion passed. ADJOURNMENT 8:17 P.M. It was moved by Councilmember Nettles, seconded by Acting Mayor Callahan, to adjourn the Regular Council Meeting at 8:17 p.m. Motion, Ayes=5, Nays~0, Motion passed. ATTEST; Dorothy M. Hallin, City Clerk Edward J. Callahan Jr, Acting Mayor COUNCIL MEETIN8 F£3 27 1S33 MIHDTBS OP THE SPECIAL COONCIL MEETING HELDr.;7 * - - FEBRUARY 6, 1989, ORONO COUNCIL CHAMBERS W The meeting was called to order at 7:02 P.M. by Mayor James Grabek with the following members in attendance: Mayor James Grabek, CounciImember J. Diann Goetten, Barbara Peterson, Ed Callahan and Alan Nettles. Also in attendance were Administrator Bernhardson, Building and Zoning Administrator Mabusth and Assistant Planning and Zoning Administrator Gaffron. The Mayor indicated that the special meeting had been called to addr ss the issue of the Acting Mayor appointment. Mayor Grabek oved, Councilmember Nettles seconded, the appointment of Council, ember Ed Callahan as Acting Mayor for a two year term. Ayts 3, Councilmember Goetten indicated that she abstained because she did not feel it appropriate that this matter be conducted outside a regular meeting and Councilmember Peterson indicated that she had cast her vote on this issue at the last meeting. Councilmember Goetten asked City Administrator Mark Bernhardson if notice had been made on this meeting. Administrator Bernhardson indicated that all the members had been notified and that it had been posted in the usual locations. He indicated he was not sure of notification to the press. Councilmember Goetten went on to indicated that she did not feel it was appropriate that this item be considered because it was an item that was tabled at the last meeting. Further discussion ensued among tie Council regarding the conclusion of the meeting on January 23, 1989, and their comments regarding that. On a motion by Mayor Grabek, seconded by Councilmember Callahan, the meeting was adjourned at 7:10 P.M. Three persons voted aye. Councilmember Goetten and Peterson abstained from voting. ATTEST: James R, Grabek, Mayor Dorothy M. Hallin, City Clerk Village of Orono and it*s Police Dep Orono, Mn. j! FEB27IS69 1/211.>9 7o the mayor# Chief of Police# city council# planning com mission and administration. RE: Spring Park rezoning effecting the Orono residents and property ounsrs. Dear Orono representatives and law enforcement# We reside at 3Sno Dickson P;ctenslon# Spring Park# mn. (Village of Orono). • In November of 1988 at 3781 Sunset Drive# Spring Park# Mn. (Citv of Spring Park) a contractor hired by Lord Fletchers of the Lake# demolished a house and garage# large Maple trees and top soil were stripped. A major excavation was performed to change the grade# lowering the elevation of almost the entire lot by approximotly 8 feet. Excavated material was loaded and hauled from site using largo traxcavator and and dump type trucks. Driveway or parking lot base material (I** minus limestone) was Installed. This production was the con struction of a new parking lot addition and a expansion of a alcsady existing parking lot built in aproximatly 1980 to ac- comidate Fletchers facilities. During this constrution my neighbors and I contacted the City of Spring Park administration. We asked that the construction be stopped and inquired about proper permits. We were informed that no additional permits wore needed# other than a demolition permit# and despite Improper zoning the city would allow cont inuation of construction. VJo were also informed an agreement of non use was made until the zoning is changed. This does not change the fact that a parking lot does now exist on a residential zoned lot with only a demolition permit issued. Many Orono residents and property owners including myself are subject to drastic property depreciation# along with the effects of loss of privacy# lncrca::a in tresspassing# littering# theft# traffic# after hours disturbance and the tampering of our environment# such as unflltered water shed# run off Into the wet lands and air polution. Cont. • At the February 8th Spring Park planning commission meeting ( refer to City of Spring Park, Spring Park, Mn. agenda public hearing and planning/park commission dated 2/3/1989 copy at tached and also previously sent to Orono city offices ) I asked the City of Spring Park representatives and Mr.Allan Bell ( Manager of Fletchers ) if an impact study of the effects from a parking lot on the neighborhood had been completed. The commission expressed that they had no intention and if a study was to be completed it would be up to Fletchers at their cost. The quest: capacity at Fletchers out doors as veil as in doors needs. taken into consideration, keeping in mind out side decku.:/ is also a structure, is there a large assem bly ordinance? Who determines and enforces? Is the large assem- blys on summer weekends dangerous? At vhos expense will it be when the police protection has to be increased? These are just some of the questions that need to be answered. It is my understanding that Fletchers has been allowed to expand their facilities in the past and recently outside as well as inside to accomidate more customers. It is my opinion that parking and traffic problems should have been taken into con sideration long ago. The problem was created when Fletchers allowed their business activity to c>:pand beyond the true cap acity of their facility at the expense of the neighborhood. They created the problem and their argument that a zone change enabling 15 more cars to park will alleviate problems asso ciated with customers parading back and forth to remote park ing lots, illegal parking an'J neighborhood nuisances is ridi culous. Fletchers could probably fill up 20 more acres of parking if it surrounded their establishment. The Spring Park planning commission voted down the proposal of rezoning and parking lot on 2/8/89, but on 3/6/1989 the City council votes. As per my phone conversation on 2/8/89 with Orono City ad ministrator, Mr. Mark Bernhartson, the city did not know if it was or was not in a position to help the many effected Orono residents and property owners. I am not convinced that the city of Orono and its police department does not have a position, right and obligation to help the people of Orono. We want to see residential zoning left alone. The people responsible for this illegal parking lot should replant and restore the land to insure privacy to the neighborhood. The operation of Fletchers should be clearly contained within the bounds of its present zoning. The residents should have res idential neighborhood type atmosphere, especially for the children and strict police enforcement to protect from Fletchers fall out. Cont. •r- Also take into concideration if we do not take time to weigh out the problem now there will be future expansion of Fletchers, costing all the tax payers of Orono. Please find attached some statements from people in the area who are concerned (Spring Park and Orono) and correspondence with the City of Spring Park. / cc- Neighbors cc- Lindquist & Venum Attorney at Law cc- Hickock & Assoc,( on Minnehaha Creek water shed) cc- Fire Marshall CITY OF SPRING PARK SPRING PARK, MINNESOTA AGENDA PUBLIC HEAiUNG AND PLANNING/PAR< COMMISSION February :J, 1989 1. CALL TO ORDER 2. ROLL CALL OATH OF OFFICE - Shale Nyberg 3. ADOPT AGENDA 4. OPEN PUBLIC HEARING I was published In the Laker Newspaper ’^Otlce was sent to rty owners within 350 feet. NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE r.xREBY GIVEN that the Planning Commission of the City of Spring Park will hold a public hearing on Wednesday, February 8, 1989 at .7:30 p.m. at the City Hall, 4349 Warren Ave. on a rezoning proposal for the following described property: 3781 Sunset Drive PID 17-117-23-31-0007 The east 82 feet of lot 21, GUST S. JOHNSON'S ADDITION This hearing Is pursuant to an application submitted by William 0. Naegele to rezone the above property from R-1 to C-1 for the purpose of creating an • additional parking lot to accommodate Lord Fletcher's of the Lake facilities. All comments, written and oral, will be heard at the above time and place. DISCUSSION & COMMENTS - Letter - Ron Keagle CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING OPEN REGULAR MEETING 5. PLANNING COMMISSION a) Recommendation - Re: Rezoning - 3781 Sunset Drive b) Re-draft of Nuisance Ordinance 6. PARK COMMISSION a) Gene Shavllk - Report on Beautification CSAH IS 7. MISCELLANEOUS a) Minutes - January 11, 23 & 30th b) Appointments for 1989 8. APPROVE MINUTES 9. ADJOURNMENT February 2K1989 City of Spring Park Spring Park, Mn. 55384 RE: February 8, 1989 public hearing on rezoning 3781 Sunset Drive, Spring Park, Mn. to accomidate lord Fletchers of the Lake, facilities. Dear Planning commission, council members and administration. In my previous letter dated 2/3/89 I think the position I have taken is clear - we do not agree to any zone change and resent the already constructed parking lot that has been installed with a demolition permit only. As I have expressed at the 2/8/89 planning commission meeting will there be a impact study on the increasing effects of property depreciation, loss of privacy, increase in tresspassing, littering, theft, traffic, after hours disturbance and the tampering of our environment, such as noise polution, unfiltered water she*:.' run off into the wot lands and air polution, if Fletchers is allowed future expansion. Are the large crowds at Fletchers on a summer weekend in violation of a large assembly ordinance? Who determines and enforces? Are they dangerous? The capacity should be considered outside as well as inside keeping in mind outside decking is a structure. It is my understanding that Fletchers has been allowed to expand their facilities in the past and recently outside and inside to accomidate more customers. Why wasn't the parking problem taken into consideration long ago? As Mr. Keagle ex plains in his letter to you (11/20/88' the problem was created when Fletchers allowed their business activity to expand beyond the true capacity of their facility at the expense of the neigh borhood. I also agree that they created the problem and their argument that a zone change enabling 15 more cars to park will alleviate problems associated with customers parading back and forth to remote parking lot, illegal parking and neighborhood nuisances is ridiculous. Fletchers could probably fiii 20 acres of parking lot if it surrounded their establishment. At the 2/8/89 planning commission hearing Mr. Shavlik (chair person) tried to convince us that Fletchers are very successfu and have been nice to work with. At that time he voted in favor of rezoning and said wc shouldn't knock success. Cont. In response to this I feel that Mr. Shavlik did not understand that the people at the meeting and of the neighborhood do not have a problem with Fletchers success but are concerned with the disrespect to the community. Fletchers may be successful but at our expense. The fact that Fletchers representatives are nice to work with is admirable but there still remains pro blems and questions unanswered. We thank tho majority of the city planning commission for your realistic concideration and voting NO to rezoning. We also want the people responsible for tho installation of the illegal parking lot to replant and restore the land to insure privacy to the neighborhood. The operation of Fletchers should be clearly contained within the bounds of it*s present zoning. The residents should have a residential neighborhood type atmosphere especially for the children and strict police enforcement to protect from Fletchers fall out. City council members should also vote NO for rezoning and face the already existing problems rather than letting them worsen by expansion of commercial zoning. ^ Many people in the village of Orono are also effected by your decisions. I have recently sent the Village of Orono a letter informing them of our concerns and recent happenings. yoJUrs Tr ’* • '•t c, /itCc. ^ ^ George &^Pe-'ny Norling cc- City of Orono and its Police Dept, cc- Neighbors. cc- Lindquist and Venum Attorneys at Law. cc- Hickock and Assoc (Minnehaha creek watershed) cc- Fire Marshall Mr. Kevin Larson Hickocic & Associates 2/21/89 RE: Proposed parking Lot at 3781 Sunset Drive, Spring Park, Mn. Rezoning application to accomidate Fletchers of the Lake. Dear Mr. Larson, We talked several times on the phone regarding the hard surface run off of a already existing parking lot at 3781 Sunset Drive. In my opinion was illegally installed. Please find enclosed copies of letters sent to the City of Spring Park and Village of Orono, expressing my concerns as to environmental effects. We also do not have city water and our supply is furnished by our own well. I would appreciate any out put that you may have in regards to the feasibility of safe run off and on the requirements you may have, such as, retention pond, rip rap filters, wear type baffle systems and erosion control. cc- City of Orono. cc- City of Spring Park. cc- Lindquist and Venum, Attorneys at Law. 2/21/89 RE; Capacity limits of large assemblies at Fletchers of the Lake Mr Jerry Babbs Area Fire Marshall Dear Mr. Babbs. '* • It is my understanding as per our conversation on 2/7/89 that you will inform me of the formula used to determine the outdoor- public capacity as well as indoor normally used on large ass emblies . As you know we are effected by the ridiculously large crowds of people that patronize Fletchers on summer weekends. Please find enclosed cpoies of letters sent to the city of Spring Park and Village of Orono expressing my concerns to possible dangerous situations. I await your response Si^ncerely George Marling cc- City of Spring Park. cc- Orono and it*s police department. cc- Lindquist and Venum, Attorneys at Law. cc- Neighbors. city of Spring Park Spring Park, MN February (•, 1989 Dear Council Members, Even though I am not a resident of Spring Park, I do live within 4 blocks of Lord Fletchers Restaurant. Z am not In favor of granting re-zonlng the east 82 of lot 21 for additional parking facilities. feet Ny husband and I have been at Lord fletchers during the sommer months. On the weekend evenings It Is so crowded that there la standing room only Inside and outside on the deck area. You are packed In shoulder to shoulder, there Is no room to sit or walk. . The noise leavel la un-barable, the rest rooms are Inadaqulte for the number of people. Zf you are to allow them to have additional parking, the building and grounds would not be large enough to accomodate the additional clientele. When Lord Fletchers has Special Events (brass bands i the coco butter contest) we can hear them out side In our yard. Z feel for any Immediate neighbors of the restaurant. Z would not want to put up with the noise, traffic, and littering problem that generates from Lord Fletchers clientele. Sincerely, Karen Cuff 3572 Livingston Ave Orono, MN 55391 T«d & Nancy Ahrenholtz 3801 Sunset Dcive Spring Park, MN 55384 These are Ted and my concerns: Decrease in property values. Continued encroachment by Lord Fletcher's, expanding parking lots further into the residential neighborhood. Increased noise from the proposed zoning change traveling down the small roadway to our property line. Increased late night disturbances. Concerned with the sequence of events leading up to the zoning change proposal, first obtaining the property, stripping the trees, and laying the gravel... before applying for a zoning change. Who would want to buy or lease property as a residence without any tree.**? Ideally, Lord Fletcher's, or the persons responsible for this should replant and restore the property, returning the land to its original value. We are concerned property owners and we encourage the council members to vote in the best interest of the residents of Spring Park, VOTE NO FOR THE ZONING CHANGE. Ftbraary 1989 City of Spriof; Pirk Sprinc Park, kixin«aota 9!$38b Ra: Nawljr aona true tad parking lat at 3781 Sunaat Drira and aonlng elianga* r Daa Sirax This lattar ia ta infom 700 that wa will not agraa ta any aona ahangaa and roaant tha parking lot that haa boon in raaantly* * Lard Platahar*a parking lot haa baan a problan for many yaara. Ifb oppaao tbia aoning ohango aa wall aa tha parking lot. Wa appraaiata your taking tha naighbor'a wiawa in aonaidaratian* Thank yon. Sinaoraly, ^iJi Oaorga R* OlaaaM Jnanita J* Obaaaea 3760 Toga Road Wayaata Minnaaota 93391 ^.-^^/.jsidtcaUM^^ ^iu4>Q 2^?^ JU^UU^ ^Jtb '-^/t^ysJ /Cz/.--- - / ^ o/^HajOi/U^ . :—----H----- 2Uc OAJ^ 0f2p<UJU^ i — h^ ua^fj/dt/V^ /mJ Jo^tnJth^-----——• /) ^U^■tyJ‘r^,aL^^^*^~------- ^Crrtc6t:tic^>i^ ^ ,i2-«?us^---------- /^ joJ^dxtJ^ ^a,'*^ '~^<-60^ u^iC^ ---------- ^ ^s^^4z/yt^ ------- ». --•---------------------- ^yj/i^Auj L/daiA^'>f, — ■ <fyL- Cl.rK. oJ'tjtA^^ ------ ■ . - '..-------------—------------------------------------- - '■/JtJL^ i_^c/m^iLc:^ &t4JLf .^t)<t^lAJ-«>^^— lOa^ u)a^ ^UULt^ ^.AXC oaju 'AA^.c.^>^d^.J::d,Ceaa^\~~—- mjU.^>itMy: -. - y-—1—— - Sj —------- ^ V^^Z/?v4i. .yL^^^ccj^e^ ..Jli^j-j________... ^'uu^aM^ ^ 6-^/^ ayy<^ <J^/ it}^U/j ! u'^^dUccA^ T^Oji/uu ^!rvai^. U A/u^ -iUc^ iO CLt y^^LLt ACL^A-i^H^ave^ a^iuA^tyfZtfry^> __________ ^ C/t, tX^ ■: •• •; ~ __ oAjiA^ ayy*^ ___[_ 2^ J^itUjJi^:._____L. ^nHia\.il(iL/U£A/ ^><i^ y^>g3^^<»»!uyg^- 1_ dA.ay?7^L6d^ ^ ^____L l/J(-C^ u>A6A4X^,.,^Aji^^^^rLldnj^^ ■ iX ^i i-. ^ >s=j^<2ii^^-, ■ VCJ^, ,[ lUanning CouilaBioti City of Spring Park Spring Park, Mlnnaaota Pabrnary 8, 1989 Bax Batoning propoaal 3781 Sunaat Orira PID 17-117-23 31 0007 Tha Baot 82 faat of Lot 21,Gnat 3. Johnton't Adda. I • raaidant of Oroao and «y property abnto thla proporty an tha Saat aida* Thia abnttiag proparty hat alraady baan all but aada Talnalaat and I an anro if tha eurrant pareal in quaation it raioaad it would put an and to any raaidantial nao of ay proporty* Vary aiacaraly youra, Waltar K. Jarl ^ 3740 Togo Boad Vayaata, kinnaaota 53391 A/ >/.’V City of Spring Park Spring Park# Mn. 55304 RE: Newly constructed parking lot at 3781 Sunset Drive and zoning change. ^ Dear members of the city council# planning comnilasion end adminiatratlon. This letter is to inform you that we will not agree to any zone changes and resent the parking lot that is already con structed In front of our property. Lord Fletchers parking lot has been a problem for us in many ways such as# trespassing# noise# late night/early morning partying# theft# ect. We have resided at 3000 Dickson Extension# Spring Park# Mn. for approximately 12 years. Geor^ & Penny Norllng To whom It may concern (especially neighbors to Lord Fletchers Restaurant)» During the nearly 10 years (10/76 to 8/86) that we resided at 3781 Sunset Drive, Spring Park, Mn-, we experienced numerous problems with our immediate neighbors (Fletchers parking lot and restaurant). When we first moved in we were haunted with litter, mostly beer bottles in our yard. The worst was the noise from the parking lot especially early morning hours. People also parked in the front yard and behind our house. Spring of 1979 or 1980 Fletchers came to us about building a parking lot next to our house on a lot they had purchased. The lot had a small house and garage on it. Fletchers prom ised us a privacy fence and the lot would be used for employee parking only. The parking lot was put in but the problems worsened, instead of improving as we were led to believe. The parking was not restricted to employees only and the traffic was in and out continually, mostly at high speeds causing a major dust problem. We could not allow our children to play in their own front yard because of this. In May of 1983 a woman was brutally beaten in the parking lot next to our houje, she was heard screaming and we hao no call the police to help. Because o^ horn honking, many fights and noise we were forced to call nhe police repeat edly. Our attempt to paint the house was even Interrupted by an employee of Fletchers who sprayed rocks and dust at us with his car which caused us more time and work. Mr. Alan Bell said he would take care of the problem and then Invited us over for a free Sunday brunch. We lived with this for 10 years and sympathize with the neigh bors of Fletchers. Our excitement of our first home was quickly destroyed soon after the parking lot was built, our children were deprived of a normal residential neighborhood atmosphere. We also hope that Fletchers is not allowed to expand their parking on to 3781 Sunset Drive at the sake of the neighborhood. Sincerely N wivne & Jackie Davis Page 1 Ren Keagle 3029 Sunset Dr. Spring Park, MN 55384 November 29, 1988 City of Spring Park Spring Park, NN.55384 •> To the City Council, Planning Cemmiaaion, and Adminatratlon: RE- Illegal parking lot. Gentlemen, I*m not convinced that Lord Fletcher'a demolition permit granted 'them the right to re-grade their lot to suit any whim. The permit certainly doea require re-grading aa necesaa.^ to prevent drainage problema and fill dangerous holes, but does not (I believe) grant permission for unlimited grade changes to fulfill other purposes. In spite of improper zoning, what they have produced on their parcel is obviously a parking lot constructed under the pretext of post demolition grading. They have gone ahead and Installed their contemplated improvement without any permit and against zoning. Their agreement not to use it as a parking lot until it Is properly zoned is beside the point. I reside close to Lord Fletcher's, and can assure you that their operation has become a considerable nuisance with their patrons endlessly parading back and forth to their remote parking. Assuming that Lord Fletcher's is aware of this adverse impact, they will no doubt argue that a change in zoning to increase their on site parking will alleviate problems associated with remote parking. But to put this matter into perspective, I would suggest that the problem was created when they allowed their business activity to expand beyond the true cat>4city of their facility at the expense of the neighborhood. They created the problem, and I don't want to see them get away with using it as ammunition for an argument to further burden U3 vlth the affects of expanding thoir commercial zone. Page 2 They' could probably fill up twenty more acres of parJcing lot if;* it surrounded their establishment. With this reality in mind, I*m quite disturbed at their seemingly heavy handed approach t.«« the politics of this current expansion. I want to see their operation clearly contained within the bout Is of its present zoning, and I*m deeply concerned as to what yous position will be on this and future proposed expansion of it. I would appreciate notification of any public hearings or meet, iga regarding this matter. Thank you Sincerely, [on Keagl Mayor Grabek & Orono Council Members City Administrator Bernhardson fta 27 issa'* OF CiijVij Frost Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building & Zoning Administrator Dates February 23, 1989 Subjects #1359 David J. Lindstrom, 131^;; ^^odhill Avenue - Variance - Resolution (B) - Front Street Setback Variance Fertinent OrdioenM * Section 1C.28, Subdivision 5 Allowed - 50* Existing ■ 31*3** Proposed ■ 31*3" Variance « 18*9" The Planning Commission at their February 21st meeting unanimously approved the amended site plan of the proposed improvement of the property that would now require a front/street setback variance as opposed to the separation setback. At the January 17th meeting, the minority opinion of the Planning Commission advised the applicant that they had not felt that he had explored all the options available for Improvement of the property. At that January meeting, the applicant*s proposal would have required a separation setback of 6 feet from the detached garage and based on the requirements of the fixe code, construction costs would be excessive. In the second proposal, the applicant proposed the expansion along the west side of the house that would encroach no closer to the front/street lot line than the existing principal residence. The amended proposal provides less of an Impact on existing improvements. The enclosed resolution has been drafted per the Planning Commission r'commendation. The hardships noted by the Planning Commission were as follows* 1. The location of the well on the south side of the existing residence. 2. The drop in elevations along the east side in addition to the drainfleld being located within the east side yard. 3. i'ortions of the house already exist within substandard setback area. A RB80L0T10N 61UWTIII6 A VAKlAaCB TO NCMICIPAL I0HI1I6 CODB SBCnOV 10.28, SOBDZVISKni 5 (B), PILE BO. 1359 NBBRBAS, David J. Llndstrom (hereinafter "the applicant”) is owner of the property located at 1315 Woodhill Avenue within the City of Orono (hereinafter "City") and legally described as follows: Lot 1. A^ .cor's Subdivision #307, Hennepin County, Minnesota and that part of Lot 13, Auditor's Subdivision #307, Hennepin County, Minnesota described as beginning at the Northwest corner of said Lot 13, thence East 25'; thence South 157.75'; thence West 25' to the Southeast corner of Lot 1, thence North to beginning (hereinafter "the property"); and WHBRBA8, the applicant has applied co the City for a variance to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.28, Subdivision 5 (B) to permit construction of an addition to the wist and southwest of the existing residence requiring a front street setbacJc variance of 18'9" or 38% instead of meeting the required 50' front street setbac)c. The addition will encroach no further into the substandard front yard setl’^c): area than the existing structure. Minnesota: ■OB, THBRBFORB, BB IT RB80LVBD by the City Council of Orono, PIHDIH68 1. This application was reviewed as Zoning Pile #1359. 2. The property is located in the RR-lB Single Family Rural Residential Zoning District requiring a minimum of 2 acres of dry buildable area. The property consists of approximately 1.3 acres. 3. The Orono Planning Commission reviewed this application on January 17, 1989 and February 21, 1989, and recommended approval of •je proposed variance based upon the following findings: A) The existing structure is located 31' from the front street setbacic line instead of the required 50' • B) The location of the well on the south side of the house. Page 1 of 4 C) The drop in elevations along the east side of the existing residence. D) The location of the drainfield within the east side yard. 4. The City Council has considered this application including the findings and recommendations of the Planning Commission, reports by City staff, comments by the applicant and the effect of the proposed variance on the health, safety and welfare of the community. 5. The City Council finds that the conditions existing on this property are peculiar to it and do not apply generally to other property in this zoning district; that granting the variance would not adversely affect traffic conditions, light, air nor pose a fire hazard or other danger to neighboring property; would not merely serve as a convenience to the applicant, but is necessary to alleviate a demonstrable hardship or difficulty; is necesszAry 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. C0HCL08I0IIS, ORDBR AMD COHDITIOHS Based upon one or more of the findings noted above, the Orono City Council hereby grants a variance to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.28, Subdivision 5 (B) to permit construction of an addition to the existing residence requiring a front street setback variance of 18*9" or 38%, subject to the following conditions: 1. Authorities granted by thif 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 th<j date of Council approval, or this variance will expire on that date (February 27, 1990). 2. Violation of or non-compliance with any of the terms and conditions of this variance shall constitute a violation of the zoning code, shall automatically terminate any authority granted herein, and shall be punishable as a misdemeanor. 3. The undersigned applicant has read, understood and hereby agrees to the terms of this resolution and on behalf of himself, his heirs, successors and assigns, hereby agrees to the recording of this resolution in the chain of title of the property. Page 2 of 4 Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono^ Minnesota at a regular meeting held the 27th day of February, 1989. ATTEST: Dorothy M. Hallin, City clerk James R. Grabek, Mayor Property Owner(a) STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this day of_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _9 19_ _, by James R. Grabek & Dorothy M. Hallin, Mayor 6 city clerk o^ the City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation and said Instrument was executed on behalf of the City. Notary Public My Commission Expires Page 3 of 4 IpPlanning Commission Chairman Kelly Orono Planing Commission Members City Administrator Bernhardson Froai Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building & Zoning Administrator Datei February 14, 1989 Subjects 11359 David J. Lindstrom, 1315 Woodhill Avenue - Variance - Request by Applicant for Planning Commission to Review Amended Plan Pertinent Ordinance - Section 10.28, Subdivision 5 (B) Allowed - 50* Existing - 31*3'* Proposed ■ 31*3** Variance • 18*9** The living room addition of 6* will require a front/street setback variance. No further encroachment into substandard yard is proposed. List of Bzhibita Exhibit A - Planning Commission Minutes of 1/17/89 Exhibit B - Revised Floor Plan Exhibit C - Heat 8 South Elevations Exhibit D - Revised Survey Review of Amended Application - In consideration of the directives of the minority opinion at your last meeting, the applicant has considereii^ other options for the expansion of their residence. Please review Exhibits B & D, the amended addition now expands from the southwest and west side of the structure. The former mud room location has been expanded to the three season porch with a 6* addition along the west side for the living room expansion. There is no longer a need for a separation setback variance. The 6* addition to the west side of structure will require a front/street setback variance. The addition will encroach no further into the substandard street setback of 31*36". Applicant should also be advised that the variance approval covers only a first floor expansion. If a second floor expansion is to be considered in the future, it will require separate variance approval. MINUTES OP THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING JANUARY 17, 1989 • I*!--**ZOnW PZLS «1334-RBBBRS COST] •ntir^ly, if that Isaua 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, Hay due to his preference not to restrict the subdivision any further by increasing the sideyard setbacks; Motion passed. #1359 DAVID LZMD8TBOM 1315 HOOOHILL AVBMOB VAMZUC18 PUBLIC BBARIM 8i05 P.M. - 8s20 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 and 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 Brotm 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? Jane Delaney explained that such an arrangement would not fit in with the present layout of the 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 be 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 MlHUTES OP THE PIANIIING COMMISSION MEETING JANOARX 17, 1989 tOMTMe Fits #1359-LIJIDST»OM CONTIHDZD south from the mud room. Mr. Lindstrom replied that the driveway was located in that area. Planning Commissioner Hanson j,nterjected 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 Brownp 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 passe!. #1360 SOBBBT NBBXOIf & JOBH CHARLTOH 2340 a 23S0 ABIHGDOM MAT VACATIOa OP BASBmrS PUBLIC BBARZK 8:21 P.M. - 8:22 P.M. w-,.- 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 Comml/isioner Brown, to recommend approval of this application, per staff recommendations 1 through 4. Motion, Ayes-7, Nays-0, Motion passed. *1361 OSOBO SCHOOL DISTRICT #278 980 OLD CRYSTAL BAY ROAD TACATIOH OF BASBIBBT PUBLIC HBARIB6 8:23 P.M. - 8:25 P.M. The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing 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. 4 Dates Planning Commission Chairman Kelly Orono Planing Commission Members City Administrator Bernhardson Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building ft Zoning Administrator January 11, 1989 Subjects #1359 David J. Lindstrom, 1315 Woodhlll Avenue - Variance - Public Rearing lonlng District - RR-IB Pertinent Ordinances - Section 10.03, Subdivision 12 - Required - 10* Existing ■ 20'2" Proposed » 6' Variance - 4* or 40% Section 10.28, Subdivision 5 (B) - Front Yard Setback - Required ■ 50' Proposed Additions - 50'+ (per Exhibit G the applicants do not require front street setback variances for proposed addition to the existing residence) List of Bsdiibits Exhibit A “ Exhibit B - Exhibit C - Exhibit D - Exhibit E - ExKibit P • Exhibit G - Exhibit H Exhibit I Exhibit Exhibit Exhibit Exhibit Application Addendum Property Owners List Plat Map Surr ey of E^'istlng Development Situ Plan of Original Improvements Site Plan of Revised Improvements per Staff Recommendation (Exhibit also designates assumed property lines) Original Floor Plan Revised Floor Plan South Elevation Section/Porch Addition UBC Section 504 (c) and Table 5 (a) Septic Location Zoning File 11359 January II, 1989 Page 2 of 3 Staff Update - Co—enta - Based on preliminary review of the submittals for the application, staff called for a meeting with the applicants earlier this week to resolve certain Building Code limitations on the proposed improvement, specifically the porch addition. Applicants have agreed to revise the deck location and the chimney location and to submit revised plai*i by Friday of this week for inclusion in your packets. Saview of Application - The additions to the existing residence consist of the removal oP the porch at the southwest corn^ .nd replacement with a mud room that will not expand beyond the existing limits of the principal structure (14.1x6.7*). Porch and deck addition at the southeast of the structure will require a setback variance to the required separation between principal and accessory structure at 10*. Review the original floor plans. Exhibit H, note the grade level deck located right at the 20.2* setback to the garage. The 6* wide grade level deck was not of major concern to staff. Staff questioned why a deck would be squeezed in between the porch structure and the garage, and asked if it would not be more functional to relocate the deck to the east side of the porch addition taking advantage of the additional area of the treed sloping yard to the east. The applicants concurred noting that they had planned a deck on the east side as a future expansion, but because of cost had to refain at this point. They advised that in their amended plan that they would relocate the 6* wide deck along the east side. This time the deck would have a railing because of the sloping yard at that side of the house. Review Exhibit G, H and L, based on the Uniform Building Code, the assumed property line is 3', and at 3* there can be no openings within the substandard setback area. The chimney must be relocated (considered an openi.ig) and the door if it is to remain along the east wall must be rated 1-hour fire resistant. The applicants have advised that they wou-.3 probably prefer relocating the chimney at the northwest corner of the porch addition. The floor plans also show sliding glass doors along the east side. This will no longer be a concern as applicants plan to locate their deck along the east side of the porch addition. Zoning File #1359 January 11, 1989 Page 3 of 3 The north garage wall and the east wall of the porch addition must be of fire resistant construction as follows: 5/8” sheet rock along interioz wall; 1/2" sheet rock alon- the outside of the wall with non-corobustable siding. Applicants should designate a staircase to deck if access is desirec from grade level. Review Exhibit B, applicants addendum in which the hardships are reviewed as to why the applicant has choosen the south side for the proposed improvement. Nature trees to the Immediate west and southwest, the location of the well on the south, the drop in elevations along the east side, and the fact that the house is a corner lot surrounded by Oronc Orchard Road on the west and Woodhill Avenue on the north. As long as the special construction standards are met berause of the minimal separation of 3* per the assumed property line, staff no majoz concern with the request of the 6* separation between detached anc principal structure. To expand to the west and reduce the north/sout> dimension meeting the required setback of 10* is not feasible because ox the well location on the west side of the addition (review Exhibit M) Steeper topographies to the east and the location of the septic drainfielc prevent eastern expansion. To the immediate west of the existing structure are mature trees. Staff Pe pc—e nil at ion - To approve the variance setback of 4' or 40% to the requirec separation setback between structures on a property for the residential propety located at 1315 Woodhill Avenue based on the hardships and findings noted above subject to the following conditions: 1. Prior to scheduling the application b/'fore the Council for fine.' action, applicants must provide an updated survey of the fine.' improvements approved by the Planning Commission. 2. All construction within the substandard setback area shall be subject to the standards of the Uniform Building Code, specificall: Section 504 (c), that would allow no openings within the south wall o. the addition and the north wall of the garage and all wal3 construction to be per l*hour rating. |6 _* J _U ' David J. LindStrom 1315 Woodhill Avenue Orono, Minnesota 55391 November 23, 1988 Orouv Planning Comnlaslon Gentleman: There ere many reasons I feel the variances c#'''«eated ^aould br granted. It seems there Is an Inherent right to make re soi • e Improvements on one's property. The proposal Is for a garden room and entry, both of reasonable oize. The garden room Interferes with no sight lines and Is proposed Ir the only possible location. The entry replaces an existing pouch and is even smaller than the present structure. The house Is vary old and located unusually close to the road. Expansion In that direction Is out of the question. The proposal stays well within the confines of the opposite side of the home. The distance between the garage and the proposed addition Is six feet. The universal building code for safety requires only five feet. The contractor haa suggested rocking the Inside of the garage wall. This would allow the structure to meet the specification of even an attached garage. Unfortunately, the contour of the existing property limit the aree possible for Improvement. The problems of tree location west and south, welt access to the south, septic system to the east, and proximity to >>oodhlll Avenue to the north, are obvious. I thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, David J T In^istrom DJL:mu MM 0ATI •A1CH HI PMM ADM CMOI NAHi TA)MAVii NAMi/AmW PRM AOM ONNOI NAM TAMAYCfl NAM/AOM M tt-llT-tS tl 0D09 MIM ONMO fMCHADO 10 S JAM NC CUMIN JAM NC CUMIN 199 ONMO ORCNARO RO i NAY2ATA HN II99I M 91-117-19 19 9911 91IW NOOOMUL AVI LUCY C IIITCMU LUCY C NITCNILL 1799 N NILLON 09 LONG LAKI »M 99194 HIMEPIN COUNTY PM)PCRTY XNFMHATION 9YSTEH PROPIRTY GUNERS LIST 19 91-117-23 29 0901 91319 NOCOHILL AVI DAVID J LINDSTRON DAVID J LINDSTRCN 1319 NOODHXLL AVC NAYZATA m 5539! 39 92-117-23 29 9912 91299 MOGOHXLL AVE R • K HESSILS KENNETH MISSELS 2A31 LAKE OF ISLES RCHY E HPLS NN 55999 REPORT NO. P1935991 PAGE 9 39 92-117-23 29 9993 99299 ORONO MCHARO RO S VICTORIA N RAICWE VICTORIA H RAICHE 299 ORONO ORCHARD RD 8 NAYZATA rti 55391 TOTAL BATCH 992 99995 CO c O'.5 T CERTIFY THAT THE FACTS REMESENTED ARE AN ACCURATE AND TRUE REPRESENTATION OF INFORMATION AS IT APPEARS THIS DATE /ON THE RECORDS OF THE HENNEPIN COUNTY OEPARTHEia OF PROPERTY iyU(ATiqH* .TO THE BEST OF m ^NONLEDCE AND BELIEF. / / f ^ date/ 0 ,' • g - //7 -^3 («) #1359 1 =f L J . •}r. r-'I i ' V. MM /'■ ' V rsou_vATi3 y i,'i |i I,' •1!• !i! .i ') V • mm -rJ? i«.55ii' im "tL'•n «o(vuvj lO M papoi^flf^Mnnntag At Mqai'vd waD Md opMuig pRMMiM wA roof* ^Md coMR watts of b«ttd> ioiiovroosMoty iolwiilimMttbaiasMMadiDhayoapropwtyliMN jwa ao <N a MW bottdiog i* *0 bo anciid 00 tbs iook praHn^^lirt^^ locaite of tlw asaonod prapam liM wM^Moo 10 d» cxistiag buildng diiB4w siidi dM tte axttfkw watt aod opoMfiM buildnv nwct as sot fbrdi io 1bbte,bi^A aod Part IV EXCDtMM^iM MM bajUi^BM MOM prapwty nwy bt coMidiMd MponioMflfathailil^tO^^iMMiofiortibiiiMiafiiBwiibiaawiiMitt ipKdMioteciiaol Whn *t MMi^ao CMriddbdteM diffowo osoipHCta flr «t of tfiftaM S^|MWaiO%pPHMMaMMMOa llWMOWwaOHO IMMUMfarWWO SMO lOiV or< (a) Ooa aiory Afioa. The ana of a ooa -non>»<iUdiot ihaU ooi > set forth 01 Thbte No. 5^ eaos|K as pradM m Sactioo 306. I Ovar Om Slor|L The Mdfcornbioad floor area for k may be twice dial fKrnhiad.MfUbte No. 3^ for ooc-siory buildiots. and the floor aaM of any 1 aiM-swgiB^ (c) hiaganinaB. Udiwa con sidsiod a^a aapaaaia wor% the floor awe of ail t ahatt be inchM in cakuld^ the attowaMa flooraieaof dM Mries I not be incloM in the mal attowahia area, cxoaad the m parminad for a ona<oaory (e)Anni jnoieafeai I pardon of a boUdini aapanaad by one or ib^dforpiDvidod the 1. Area icpdMoo watts ahall be not I don ia TyndTl. D-FR.. m and IVI doD in D Ooe-hoM n-N or V1 aoch wflls ahatt 001 exceed 23 pemem of dw I L four^hoor fifeHtsiadve conamc- I two-hoor flm^esistivf consmic* . The total widdi of att openiags in ^ of the watt in each story. AU TASLB no . S-A--ComimMd oiicwaiio»oaoccuwawcr "5flSS““» B (Gm.)jUuueaaanraqiiihniMopn weldiBi.ardieuMofaauIor U ^ paridnf faiafw (For rcqainmeMi. See Sccaoa 709.)Heiipona 1 hour less iliaa 20 feet Not pemuaed less than 3 feet l*t«ecied less thw 20 feet FMona^e«Aa^ 1 hourlessthaB5[cet Not permitted less thia _______3 feet_______E Satalao SacnoB 102 3 —Aay baildiai uaed for day<a« pwpoiw for mow thw li* diildiea 2hounlessriiaa5feet. 1 hour lest diM lO feet'Not permitted less than 3 feet Ptotacted less than 10 feet*H SaaiNae 902 Md 903 >OfME.D *~^*—*! h^iy. uwoTj^of hjaartow aad hi^v naanMbk or upto. ^SSSm^t^ ** *' atao Seoioa 90l SeeCha|iMr9iiDd the Foe Coda *' 0»im*AU9iiida:<Bvcla«iiii,piM a^dm 1.0 or 10-A luaida; paiai Mores widi bulk h«»>iiii«r -Sm? j l^^'^^«”^»«^*^0«^lSeea^acSecb^^90l (alVDiv^ —1—---------- , . _____________________„ ? 4hounlcssihao5(eet, 2houniessi|iaB 10 feel. J hour Im ihaa 20fesi Not pemhaed less dUM 3 feet Piofeciad leas thaa 20 feat Groii^R.OivisMa than 20 nuy have exivior wall and opMURf pmacoM M raquind far H (0»L)4 houn leu Ihaa 3 feet. 2 houiB lau than 10 feet. 1 hour leu ihaa 20 feet Notpennittedfeudua Sf'U».P«wf2;?‘«'*“ 20 feu 1 Seirtioft 4-*'* ^-Nwseries far d» feU-tiw caia of childwo uadar the afi of Stt (each aceo» sMutariusM. aunan howes whh aoaaaibulaMvy paheaH SaL baildiati (awh actMauaodaiiaf moiB tbaa nve penoas) 2 houn leu Ihaa 3 feu. - 1 hourelaewhsu Nu pemitud feu dua S- feu Ptuucibd feu dua 10 feu2-N«rtw botws far antbatatory patfeaB. h«i« far chato SI* yean of ait_ ■ orowiaMdiBccoiniBtMiMtai mote thaa five pewoaa)_______________ lbour_ - • baildiBtMiSawpeieoaaltibeftMsofiaaieiwawsiaiiiartyt^^ - •• 1 htwralaewhsie lOfeu .M* A-: l-Piivaie laiates. c«pdhs. shads a^ agriculiuial buUdiap (SwNsoSectioallOl.Oivtsioal.) ^ 1 hour feu than 3 feu (ornaybaproucisdon the asiarior with naaeri* als approved far 1-hour fiia-RsiaiiveooaaBuc- doo) Not permitted feu thaa 3feu , 2 raBceimrar6feethiih.taafcsaadtewen ---------— • ------ n ^ 1203 *“SaieaBa3diuMB^^ aocoiwiMittotiai taoia ^ 10 pw«»> lhourfeHdua3feu Nuperauiuaieuiaaa - Sfeu 3 —Dwdlhip aad InHjjag hoys ---------- —-----------_l Iwf . .’«sfeeo 3 *w 3 feu 1 TdraricafcaiNbaiilltait. aw AppndU Qaewi 1 NOnSt (l)«aaSaatai30*fbriypw«#waUiaffacttdaad - TnSrMMia-riciS-rmeta^ >paraid^iiitii«iw<^« t; - f. ic i! ,V ■ " '\‘- iS#< IMSPECTIOW WECOWD PATE COMPLIANCE PUMPOUT RECORD DATE gallons <r A«eTWT% 7-/f - fC av. <u,efA€!Afi^ 2, ^ A/jg^Pi/Ugn______________^ fZ^ ✓' location r'SKETCH / C - CONFORMING S - SUBSTANDARD N - NONCONFCHMING Includi: t) Mil locMlon 21 OiManc* Irom houM to Mptic ttnki. dlit. boK. ■mj lirainficld 31 North arrow and road ar<? ^ -f o Z COUNCH It mnt FEB 27 >S39 Plnnnln9 Comission ChAirnAn KsllAy furfu AC AA*^UA ^rono Planning Commission Mambars Ull I Ur UI\V!*U v:lty Administrator Barnhardson Jaanna A. Mabusth, Building ( Zoning Administrator Pabruary 13r 1989 #1369 Charlas Klckhafar* 1040 Toimllna - Conditional Usa Parmlt - Public Haarlng List of Miibita - Bxhlblt A - Application Bxhiblt B - Proparty Ownars List Bxhlblt C - Plat Map Bxhlblt D - Survay Bxhlblt B - Pront/Raar Elavatlon Bxhlblt P - Floor Plan Exhibit G - Saptic Invantory Map Exhibit I - Council Mlnutas 1/10/77 Partimamt Ordimamca - RR-IA sonlng district Section 10.27 Subdlvslon 5(B) front/straat satback required for garage addition to north of existing residence. Existing *70 feat Required - 100 feat Proposed ■ 70 feat Baaiaw of Application Th. appllcMt propo... • 24 * 24' alngl. story gsrsg* .aaitlon to the north of the existing residence. The currant rasidanea Is located approximately 70* from the defined street right-of-way (measured 33* In from center line of Townline Road). Proposed addition will extend or encroach no further into the substandard ■•tback area. Both the lot and the house existed prior to the RR-IA 5 acre sonlng district standards. In 1977p (review Exhibit H)p Council approved a setback variance for an animal bai located 20* from the north lot line based on the substandard lot width. Review of hardships and additional findings! 1. Steep topography to Immediate rear of house would require excessive filling to provlds access to garage addition. 2. Existing accessory lm::rovements at rear of house would prevent garage attachment at the rear. The location of the tanks/dralnfleld to the ea^it cf existing residence also places an additional hinderance expansion to rea^ Zoning Filn fX369 February 13» 1989 Pag# 2 of 2 3. Lot was created prior to RR-IA zoning standards. Property ■eets the 5 acre area standard but is only 223' wide (5 acre sone requires a 300' minimusi width). As noted above, a previous owner received setback variance «.^proval for installation of an aninal bam based on substandard /i*^*h of lot. Options of actions If denied please refer to the necessary findings cited in Section 10.08 Subdivision 3(A). If approved the hardships and fin xngs ncted above can be considered in your recoamendaticH. In addition staff would recominend that you place the npp llcant on notice that this approval 1? based on a single story garage addition and that if a second floor expansion is proposed above the substandard setback area, a variance approval will be required. Applicant should also be asked to consider dedication of an easenent for road and utility purposes over the 33 feet right-of- way of Townline Road. Note the property line runs to the centerline of Townline Road. and Planning isaioii ReooMendation -Additional February 23, 1989 The Planning Commission unanimously approved the front street setback variance of 30* or 30% for Charles Kickhafer for the property located at 1040 Totmline Road that would permit a garage addition to the north side of the existing residence based on the following findings and hardships; 1. Applicant has no garage. 2. House was placed on property prior to creation of RR-IA, 5 acre zoning standards. 3. Topography to the immediate rear of house would require excessive filling to provide access to garage addition. The enclosed resolution has been crafted per the Planning Commission's approving recommendation. A RBSOLUTIOR GSA5*TIN6 A VARIAHCB TO MDHICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 10.27, SUBDIVISION 5 (B), FILE NO. 1369 NHEREAS, Charles Kickhafer (hereinafter "the applicant" is owner of the property located at 1040 Townline Road within the City; of Orono (hereinafter "City") and legally described as follows: The North 6 acres of the South 12 acres of the West 1,17V 5' of the Northwest quarter of the Southwest quarter of Section 3-118-23, Hennepin County, Minnesotia (hereinafter "the property ) y anc WHEREAS, the applicant has applied to the City for a iriance to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.2^ Subdivision 5 (F4 to permit ^ construction of a garage addition to the north residence to be located 70* from the front street setback line instead of meeting the required setback of 100*. The addition will encruac-. no closer than the existing principal structure on the property. Minnesota: NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Councl * of Orono, FINDINGS 1. This application was reviewed as ning File #1369. 2. The property is located in the RR-IA Single Pa»nily Rural Residential Zoning District requiring a minimum of 5 4cres. The property consists of 6 acres. The RR-IA zoning district tsquires 300 of width. The subject property consists of 223* of wi^th. 3. The Orono Planning Commission reviewed this application on February 21, 1989, and recommended unanimous approval of the proposea yaric’rce based upon the following findings: A) The existing residence does not have a garage. B) The house was placed on the property prior to «R lA, 5 acre zoning standards. C) The steep topography tr the Immed^^ r rear of the ouse require excessive filling to pro i’a access to * iiv. garage addition. Page I of 4 ^ 4. The City Council has considered this application including the findings and recommendations of the Planning Commission, reports by City staff, comments by the applicant and the effect of the proposed variance on the health, safety and welfare of the community. 5. > The City Council finds that the conditions existing on this property are peculiar to it and do not apply generally to other property in this zoning district? that granting the variance would not adversely affect traffic conditions, light, air nor pose a fire hazard or other danger to neighboring property; would not merely serve as a convenience to the applicant, but is necessary to alleviate a demonstrable hardship or difficulty? is necessary to preserve a substantial property right of the applicant? and would be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan of the City. CONCLUSIONS, Or<DBR AND CONDITIONS Based upon one or more of the findings noted above, the Orono City Council hereby grants a variance to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.27, Subdivision 5 (B) to permit the construction of a garage addition on the north side of the existing residence requiring a 30* front sjtreet setback variance and resulting in no further encroachment within the substandarr! front street setback of the existing principal structure, subject to the following conditions: 1. Author^txteS granted by this variance run with the property not with the apv licant, 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 27, 1990). 2. Violation of or non-compliance with any of the terms and conditions of this variance shall constitute a violation of the zoning code, shall automatically terminate any authority granted herein, and shall be punishable as a misdemeanor. 3. The undersigned applicant has read, understood and hereby agpes 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 regular ATTESTI Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota at a meeting held the 27th day of February, 1969. Dorothy M. Hallln, City Clerk Jda;es R. Grabek, Mayor Property Owner(a) STATE OP MINNESOTA ) ) 88. COUNTY OP HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this day of_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _, 19_ _, by James R. Grabek 6 Dorothy M. Hallln, Mayor 6 city clerk oi the City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City. Notary Public My Commission Expires Page 3 of 4 cm OF OROHO - VARIAHCE APPLICATI Initial Application Fee^lSO.OO^ if* i ($50.00 per each add^ional variance) Renewal Variance Fee $75V0XL^ (no change from original application) After-the-Fact Fees (Double application fee) PROPBmnr locatiot Site Address / n T n ujn i / /? g ^ ^ Q A- Property Identification Number (P.I.D.) ’ Please check one - Property _ _abstract or torrens? Attach legal description to application if not included on required survey. .««««•. APPLICANT Phone (home)V79*^5^^^ _ 0 A S a/ C 0 Phone (work) P V ^ "D ^ Addra.ai y,-) VO ?-/ CitV»/^ g^ TS>lg\ r, ZiPf;^ (if different than applicant) Name _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Phone (home)^ innnLtl wi“ “ - Phone (work) ,"*/VfcVVV vv hlJEK.<r/. Address:City: ::iSCK n- 150, oc Date Property Acquired (montnfi?:i^ak<-K'^ Ol/lS. I (do) (do not) also o%m the adjacent parcels of land. PRESENT USB OP PROPBRTT Present Zoning District Present Use of Property lesiMntial Other (specify) ONSCRZPTXOE OF RBQOBST Estimated Construction Cost S 5T./)/oa/a r Describe request in detail:A"f g_ T/i i\Q(L^ TARZA _ _ _ Lot Width Setback Variances ( Front Other _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ ' Hardcover Side ’ Rear) ““®DeLribe undue hardship or practical difficulty resulting from strict enforcement of zoning regulations; <, <» aH - - - - - DBSCRIPTIOII OF OMOSOAI. PBOPERTJf COBDITIONSDescribe unusual property conditions preventing compliance with Zoning Code Requirements; 'i-o ~/7i /rC'o'r<2.- fo^Ai/^CL— Att C _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ___ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ___ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ^AnUIRBD SUBMITTALS Certified Property^^ner™ List of owners within 150* (you must obtain 'O' thl&->Xi8t from Hennepin County Department of Finance A-603 Govt Center i34A—327ii(5^ stamped, 'legal sized envelopes (#10) .re-addressed to each of the names on the above list with no return address (use address labels Certif iMte^af Vu/v^^ hardcover calculations as required. Topographic survey (existing and proposed elevations) ij Any changes in existing grade are proposed. " ST) Plat Map (obtained with property owners list). ^ /TTv As an addendum to this application, please attach a separate list of any other persons you wish notified of this application* --f/T— Additional items as may be requested by City ®"taff^_ _ ___ __ _ __ The Applicant and Property Owner must sign this 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^_ _ _ ___ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Th^ai^ican^'^ereby agrees to provide all information requested by the Zoning Administrator, agrees to pay all *««* unusual expenses incurred in review of this application, and certifies that the information supplied is true and correct to the best of his/her knowledge. Applicant's Signature _ _ _ _ _ Date /-/7 Th?*wnM**h^eby acitowledges and agrees to this application and fur^^^ authorizes reasonable entry onto the property by City staff, agents. Commission members, and Council members for purposes of investiga tion and verification of this request. Owner's Signature __ _^ Applicant must have all submittals into the City offices 25 days before the Planning Commission Meeting. Planning Commission "®«tings are held on the thi . Monday of each month. Applicants must be review meetings of the Planning Commission and Council. If “ unable to attend a scheduled meeting, please malce arrangements . authorized agent attend in your place and to advise the Building i zon g Office of this change prior to the meeting. RUN DATE oa/ovaa BATCH Bit HEftCFlN COUNTY mOPERTY INTORNATION SYSTEM PROPERTY ONNERS UST PROP AOOR OM«R NMC TAXPAYER NAHE/AOOR PROP ADOR OIMER NAME TAXPAYER NAHE/AOOR PROP AOOR OMIER NAME TAXPAYER NAHE/AOOR REPORT NO. PIAlSAOl PAGE El SO st-iio-n SI 0004 •4B7S MAYZATA BLVO I B U BRESN ETAL L B U BRESH AS7S NAYZATA BLVD HAPU PUZN HN SSS59 30 30-MO-2S SZ OQOS 01100 TONN UNE RO NAROLO OIESEN ETAL HAROLD OIESEN 1100 TOUNLINE RO HAPLE PUIN m 55S59 SO so-iio-^s SZ eeoA 01040 TONN LINE RO RICHARD E NEUMANN RICHARD E NEUMANN 1040 TONNLINE RO MAPLE PUIN fM 55359 SO SO-llO-ZS SZ 0005 OlOZO TONN LINE RO R E NASH APR NASH ROBERT E NASH lOZO TONNLINE RO S MAPLE PLAIN MN 55S59 70 Z5-110<Z4 41 0007 01067 TONN LINE RO JAMES A A LOIS A 6ARNER JAMES A A LOIS A GARNER 1067 TONN LINE RO MAPLE PLAIN MN 55359 70 Z5-110-Z4 41 0000 00070 ADDRESS lAUSSIONEO 0 A L BETTS JEROME P OR KATHUEN LllONER 1479 RAINBOH AVE MAPLE PLAIN Itl 55359 TOTAL BATCH 010 00006 CD rn V> <7-^ I CERTIFY THAT THE FACTS REPRESENTED ARE AN ACCURATE AM) TRUE REPRESENTATION OF INFORMATION AS IT APPEARS THIS DATE ON THE RECORDS OF THE HEMIEPItl COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF PROPJRTY TAXATION* TO THE BEST or MY KNOHLEDGE AND BEUEF. . , . . ns ocsi DATE! PROKRTY TAXATION* TO r as- ‘I * ■" ’I-I . JSff V555J i/'W .>• 1 (i»» ■■>at •*.r*»« ' I*. I ■yy.^/A 0) * I ^ .• , ... «c , 0?OfjQ, /v\M, /v^ = <A o +“ AC\DiTi!3fj F£<5u£iT'n/5- (^TTT'CA/IO “V'2(1 kj T OiCCj O r;"\ ftoD/r T//7/0 \ HI lO^Q T&ujuL-^Ajt C?0ioO, y- B ^ c r: vj I £,co t: ■ k j - .r^S V , :V ,.hV I V' " I ■ .'• f ■fi ’ 7* s. < ■■I • ‘j;- 'H- f f ry'.vt‘S' t I / •• ■ ;y^ •f. \ \!!'II: V ■V- V ■'t. .k •Vi INSPECTION RECORD DATE ?z2,7-8z _A«o :suiegA«p.,^^_______ ^ COMPLIANCE PUMPOUT RECORD pate gallons ^ TOLA*AJ^/AJg jeoAt^ \ ' LOCATION * \ SKETCH y N ------------ C-CONFOAMINO 8 - SUBSTANDARD N - NONCONFORMING •■«« sirainiWKI 31 North ■rrovw and road fi ■‘\i OKIO aXWCXL MEETXI^C HELD JANUARY 10, I'J"/ Hjnry Muhich, nuildimj & Zoning Adminiatcator, stated.Charlea Wostnan, 1040 Townlino Road, is requesting a variance to add a horse barn on lot of substandard width and otable. The subject property meets the five acre area requirement, but lacks 77* of the required 300**ot Width. Hr. West.^n's proposal requires a conditional ***** * 222 sq. ft. in area, require a lot width variance for thid addition on the 223 ft. substandard lot. The proposed location would also require a *®^*^*ck from the north rropnrty enclosed sketch shows the pronosed iSd*i50? only 20* from the north lit line A variance of 130* wouldbe necessary on this. "® objection “•? '^o'fioncos from the neighbors on eitl-er side of the Hestnsn property. Sk2****“^ inelirfes erection of a fence 5' in *??* y** prevent the aninals fromdaaeging any foliage on the neighbor's properties. Planning CosBiaaion tlaeting - December 20, 1976 ’'5'* P'ooont. Racosraended approval. •Siustification for approval: 2* • (lemonetrated hardship.2. Uo other adjoining land available to provide location encroaching the north iwnasf is about equidistant between adjoining provide a foi ce S' in property line for security against damage to the neighbors. Neighbors have submitted letters of no objection, nsssengale seconded, to approve the toSd oL Ci'*rles Westman, 1040 Tox^rnline De2iiK£r%ft^ Commission Minutes ofDecember 20, 1976. Motion, Ayes (4) - Nayn ^O). 3. Phge 9 VARIAIiCE 1040 Townline Road *207 Charles Westman 5. 22289.1 TO: Mayor and City Council FBOM: Mark B. Bernhardson, City AdministratoJ^ 0 DATS: February 21, 1989 SUBJaCT: Planned Development Ordinance MEETIHG F£3 27 JS33 OF or:.vo Attachment: A. Zoning Admendioent - Planned Development Memo Dated 12/13/88 B. Letter to Carol Sattervall - 2/23/89 ISSUE - Determination of issues related to the proposed ordinance that“could make it a viable ordinance for adoption. IHTRODUCTIOM - At the Council's January 9, 1989 Council meeting they reguei^ted that the item be tabled until they had further opportunity to have the concept discussed with them graphically to illustrate the advantages of a planned development over -hat currently exists in the zoning ordinance. Since that time I :ave had an opportunity to discuss this, at least on a initial basis, with all the CounciImembers. In addition the City Attorney has done a further review of the issues and I have had an opportunity to revie^^ the conceptuaJL framework with him in the same manner that I have done with the CounciImembers. DISCUSSION Planned Development Concept “ A primary focus of the individual discassions with counciimembers was the concept, how it works and how it differs from currently existing zoning ordinances. Area of Application - A primary concern to the Council was the unknown impact on the community should this type of ordinance be permitted through out the community. As such it would be appropriate that the Planned Development Ordinance draft which is originally intended for the Highway 12 corridor be amended to limit its applicability at this time to the Comprehensive Plan Amendme'it area along Highway 12 (and should you desire the Navarre area.) At the point that the Council would have more experience with such a ordinance and should it feel appropriate in the future to expand it to other areas, it could then do that- If this is the tact that is to be taken it would be appropriate then that the current conditional use permit sections allowing for planned developments for residential and industrial zones be retained at this time as part of the zoning ordinance. Should expansion be eventaully done f> the full community it may appropriate to repeal those at that time. Implementation of Planned Developed District ''A second issue of concern as to tfre actual utilization of the planned development. As proposed the planned development zoning would apply only when someone came forward with a proposal and requested that the current zoning be amended to a planned development zone. Unlike some communities the City would not designate or rezone a piece of property to a planned development zoning in the areas that are currently undeveloped until it is requested. Future Councils The issue of future Councils or for that matter the issue of future action by this Council was discussed. With the currently existing zoning ordinances and the process by which they can be amended, the addition of a planned development does not give those individuals anything they would not already have or couldn't pass if they were so inclined. It takes the same 4/5 s vote to rezone a property to Planned Development as it does to adopt the ordinance or amend the Comprehensive Plan. Any rezoning must be in accordance with the Comprehensive Plan and if not an amendment to such must be undertaken. Other issues earlier identified included: Project Density Development Criteria Minimum Acreage Process and Review Additional issues that had not been directly discussed with Council include: Changes to Approved Planned Developments — Should a developer or owner de“^re to (deviate from what was approved would require a new rezoning to the amended Planned Development for any change deemed major. (Either the Planned Development Ordinance or the specific development agreement can define what is major and what is not. Changes deemed to be minor would be reviewed by staff.) "Undeveloped* Planned Development - If a CUP/PRD is not developed it just reaverts to the original zoning. A Planned Development as a zoning stays for the particular developemnt approved and any change requries a new rezoning. Burden of Proof ■* In light of Nollan vs California, the burden is on the“City to demonstrate that any requirements of the CUP/Subdivision are related directly to the development. In a Planned Development zoning, the burden of proof is on the proponent to prove to the Council's satisfaction that the overall development is an improvement (including any Council desired requirements). ALTERNATIVES - Action ^ " 1. Determine other issues of concern to the Council. 2. Adopt with limitation of the proposal for the planned development to Highway 12. 3. Taole for further discussion. 4. Amend any other issues and adopt. RECOMMENDATION * It is requested that the Council identify other issues at this time that are a concern and table further discussion of this to the March 13th meeting, the limitation to Highway 12 corridor for this usage will be included in the language and in addition any other issues the Council would desire to have addressed. As noted in Attachment B there is interest in selected developi .nt proposals in the corridor being resolved. PROPOSED MOTION * Moved by , seconded by , that the Council table further discussion of tHe planned deveTopment ordinance to the March 13, 1989 meeting. Ayes _, Nays _. cc: John Shardlow, Dahlgren, Shardlow and Uban Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building and Zoning Administrator Michael P. Gaffron, Asst Planning & Zoning Administrator 121388. TOs Mayor and City Council FBONf Mark Barnhardson» City Adminlstrato DATIt Decembar 13r 1988 SQBJBCTi Zoning Amendment - Planned Development 4 Attachment: A. Comprehensive Plan Zoning Amendment Dated November 22, 1988 B. Planned Development/Traditionally Zoned Subdivision Comparison ISSUE 1. Presentation of issues and alternatives based on the November 28th discussion. 2. Request for Council policy direction In the areas discussed. INTRODUCTION - At the Council's November 28, 1988 meeting a review of Attachment A was made with the Council tabling the matter to a future meeting. Subsequent to that meeting Attachment B was prepared to further illustrate the difference between a standard rezoning/subd 1 vision and the planned development approach. DISCUSSION - As noted in the comparison the planned development approach, on the Reber's property gav^* an Increased control with standards for the subdivision substantially in excess of those of a traditionally zoned subdivision. The movement from a planned development as a conditional use permit to a rezoning not only requires a 4/5*s majority vote to make effective but is a legislative act to which the Courts give the City broader discretion than a CUP when the applicant meets the "standards". Standards can be included in the planned development ordinance in the ways outlined in Attachment A. Any flexibility in these standards is based on an improved "solution" requiring a 4/5th's vote to allow. Enforcement of a CUP/planned development is by the terms of the developers/subdividers agreement. Enforcement of a planned development as a rezoning can be by both a violation of t’ zoning code and through the developer's agreement^ ALTERNATIVES • on each of the points 2. Discuss and table for further discussion. 1. Discuss and give staff direction outlined on Attachment A. 3. Refer to Planning Commission. 4. Direct staff to amend the draft ordinance in line with the Council's suggestions on the issues to be tabled for adoption at a future meeting. RBCOMMBNDATIOH - It is recommended that the Council give staff direction to be able to bring back a revised draft of the ordinance. This recommendation is based in part on the fact that there are other persons desiring development in the corridor along Highway 12 for which this zoning vehicle would be most appropriate. PROPOSED MOTION - Moved by , seconded by __, that the Council having directed staff regarding revision of the draft ordinance tables the matter until February 1989 for review of an amended draft which could be jointly discussed with the Planning Commission at the February 6th Joint meeting. Ayes # Nays _. „r and CltV Council TOS Udmin*’*"’**'”'’ H.rvc 8.rnd.r<i»o>“ City rioM: Movaatar 22. 19 ) 08Ti: *® Taoin# naanC»»“^ c,...-............ » Co®P***^**' fctt.oW"’^*' • «®f*Vr*':dor Study »• ®-®’Vots'froa Hi»h«« '• «.»• ■ ..... ««.“• °SSB - .. .i,.....!"* •• prasantation of ith dl.cu.»i«"- .....ion i" rasantatio" -»f ....... »'’jaduast tor Council P ^ Ootobar onaidarad this di»o«»‘-‘’“ ” aiS22i£IJ2i ; 1988 idantifl* ,„ndaant. -V//.i“.r tnan b. -\Vt: =*“““" ............,a«in» *V o« 1900 3 i<j«nv*a 3n«n0»«”''* -V//.i“.r ’ thi. "“‘oil dir.otio .i on dirao6i«“ t***-* council tb. ^,ount. r-«aiaaio» vot. :n; t:: aoont. piannin* «otad tnat tba ?>■ .,atin« t '’•/.V tbair audu.t 17. », ..andaant a disouaa*** ^n aaMl>OV0^ WO* ^ ..^^aa uho ^‘* r.aUtlC^^or shouJ.« , ..andaant a disouaa*** ^n r appro''*^ Go.ttan %,urua. Council „f Counciia-'**'’ .i„.nar »ora P« iopa«»ta foo that tl„ par^rdln" * cV"“ '’"''laloo l„ • P**®"* conversation ^4 ‘■•'‘•''•nee ‘ha draftthought it ue, . “ith mp. Pauru. Devalon™. ccBprehensive piVn* n^ »1 th" th*”''*"*’*'’ l98a" V’£55,rH'i;=^ h •::: “ -»-: umti............., . “ «»...::::::: ! 0°tob7rT^^^y3--£2 B_H ,, cnnUnued?’’ 'V'uaV'tV'"* r‘”“* Alternatives 40... .. Th« ,e-a_ . -------- - Hfi principal i,. Alternatlvea 1. 2. 3. C. ^••ve as 1,^ or csea. •‘•■••a.„,. .. 1, Planned Development Concept - The principal concept underlying a Planned Development ordinance is to allow a City Council increased control on the type of development allowed in an area. Additionally it allows more flexibility as to direction it can undertake in land use. Any such development would need to be in lire with the City's Comprehensive Plan goals and objectives. The City's current zoning code Incorporates a Planned Residential Development (PRD), a Planned Industrial Development (PIO) and an M6 Multiple Family Planned Residential (MFPRD), all of which are forms of planned development with reference to specific uses. For Orono, the bulk of uses are covered by those with commercial and mixed use the only exception. The present PRD and PID's however do not afford the amount of control that a more universal Planned Development zoning wodld allow. The concept avoids the cookie cutter approach of traditional zoning and allows proposals to take into account the needs of the community and the opportunities and limitations on a property. 2, POD/PRD/PID Comparisons - The Council requested, as part of the discussion of this matter, a comparison of the present PRD's and the proposed PUD approach. Pertinent to the comparison is the Planned Industrial District (PID) ordinance the City has in its zoning code. As noted above the present PRD and PID are "subsets" of a PUD. The difference between these present types of PUD'S and the proposal la outlined in Attachment 2. V The present PRD la not a rezoning, but only a CUP which requiros "Council Approval" which could be as minimal a. 2 to 1 on a night with three Counci 1pw. sons are in attendance. The PID is slmlllar to the PRD. Both of these are to allow more flexibility within each of the underlining zones but no more control of development, any proposal that would have a use or a density different than existing zoning would require a rezoning in the same manner that you would have rezoning to a Planned Development as proposed. The proposed amendment not only generalizes the uses of the "Planned" approach, it requires an actual rezoning and would require a 4/5'3 vote in order for it to be implemented similar to the current M-6 MFPRD. The advantage to this approach is not only that it requires an extraordlnary majority of the Counoil to approve, but also it is a legislative act which the Courts allow more discretion as to the decision by the Council than they would in a ministerial or administratlve act that might be found In a "CUP". In order to condition any development as part of a CUF it must reasonably relate to the specific conditions listed under the CUP. This is not a limitation for a rezoning. Issues related to this are addressed below. The degree of flexibility allowed la subject to type of benefits gained by the rezoning. The burden of proof for a development is on the applicant for a rezoning does not adversely effect the community but is a benefit to the City. Alternatives 1. Adopt a broader Planned Development repealing PRO, PID and tMFPRD sections. 2. Adopt a broader Planned Development leaving PRO, PID and MFPRD in place. 3. Leave PRO, PID and MFPRD as they are. 4. Combination thereof. 3. PROJECT DEMSITY/AREA3 FOR APPLICATIOW - As presented at the October 10, 1988 Council meeting the draft density was subject to the most closely associated district. For PRD»s and PID’s as presently incorporated in the Ordinance they were tied as an overlay district into the underlining zoning. A Planned Development ordinance can be adopted in a various ways to address the density issues. Alternatives / 1. Planned Development Ordinance with no density requirements. ^ 2. Planned Development Ordinance subjeo^ to most closely associated district. 3. PUD only in selected areas, i) sewered b) delinated areas c) prior dl at riots liniitation 4. DEVELOPMENT CRIT&HIA - The proposed ordinance as currently drafted references the most closely associated district for standards. Depending on the direction of the Council as to where and how density Is applied the other standards will be made applicable In a similar manner. In addltlo.n to the base requirements of the zoning oode. througfi^evlew process additional controls fche#e would be Included In a "project specific" design manual that becomes an additional requirement to be met by the development. (The City could have a generic framework developed to Indicate Issues and level of detail to be addressed In project specific manual.) ALTERNATIVES 1. Criteria from other zoning standards. 2. Standards based on prior zonlng/or most closely related use. 3. "Project specific" design manual development as part of developer's agreement based on a City developed generic framework for a Planned development specifying Issues and level of detail. 5- MINIMUM ACREAGE - The minimum acreage to be brought In for development under a PUD was Initially drafted at 5 acres. This parallels the 5 acre minimum found In the PID and MFPRD ordinance. This means that parcels of larger size can be brought In for development, but that smaller parcels under 5 acres cannot be used under the PUD ordinance. The density within this 5 acre minimum would be subject to Council decision as to how to approach density and use. ALTERNATIVES A. Leave at b* acres. B. Decrease. C. Increase. SPOT ZONING - Related to the Issue of minimum acreage Is the issue of spot zoning. While to some degree this Is in the eye of the beholder, the City has approved zoning areas as small as 1 acre. (Casco Run office property on Shoreline Drive.) 6. PROCESS AND REVIEW - While the process for PUD involves the sUaff in a more significant role than the current PRD «r current PID does, the process also allows early Council Involvement Into significant design Issues that would would not be under the .purview of the Council In a standard rezonlng or under the current PRD/PID setup In the ordinances. alternatives 1. Further dellnate the process. 2. Revise the process to meet Council goals. 7. future COUNCILS - This Issue was raised by both Planning Commission and Council. To the extent that the zoning and the zoning amendment require a 4/5*s vote as does a Comprehensive Plan Amendment there Is nothing that precludes a future Council (or for that matter this Council) from altering the direction and utilization of these ordinances or similar types of ordinances or ordinances of greater concern baaed on following the appropriate process. The Council’s Implementation of a Planned Development will need to be within the scope of the City’s Comprehensive Plan Amendment goals and objeutlvea. Should this Council not adopt a broader Planned Development ordinance, future Council’s could, rezone a property by the same vote that la required to adopt a Planned Development ordinance or rezone a piece of property to a Planned Development zoning. alternatives - 1, Do not adopt a broader Planned Development ordinance. 2. Adopt a Planned Development that reflects Council desires and directions. RECOHHEMDATION • The following recoonendations are presented: A- SPECIAL ^REqUIREMENTS - Incluslon^of a broader Planned Development as an authorized approach in this zone . B. CO M MERCIAL - Leave as is with uses apart from those listed to be taken under a Planned Development ordinance. C. PLANNED DEVELOPMENT - planned development - Conceptual review and approval. 2. PRD/PUD/PID - Adoption of broader Planned Development ordinance with repeal of the PRO, PID r and MFPRD because greater design control gains, vote required and the fact tnat it is a legislative rather than a ministered act. ^ 3. DENSITY - Limitation the in the unsewered areas PUD to prior existing densities. As for sewere^areas^ this would be a density establl^shed by the Council based on Comprehensive Plan. Any Increase in density is subject to the applicant demonstrating there is no adverse impact together with a benefit to the City. CRITERIA - Standards to be applied would included from the applicable zoning ordinance modified and delinated in the rezonlng together with a project specific development design manual baaed on a City developed generic framework out lining issues to be addressed and levels of detail. 5* HINIHUM ACREAGE - It is recommended that the minimum acreage be left at 5 acres. 6. PROCESS - That the process be clarified to take into acoount^Council and staff Issues related to this matter. It Is further recomoended that the Council based on these discussions directs staff to further define the ordinance and bring back an ordinance evening. In line with direction given this PROPOSED NOTIOIf - Hoved by __, seconded by __, that the Council having given staff direction on the natter request that it be incorporated In the Planned Developnent ordinance an'endment for review at the Cc^unoll's Decenber 12, 1988 meeting. Ayes Nays r co: John Shardlow Jeanne Habusth Michael Gaffron CONPARISOM OF PRO/PIO/POD ATTACHMEHT B PRO PID PUD Type of Land Use Lla'^ted to Residential Llnlted to Industrial Allows flexibility for all types of land use as outlined by Counoil in the Ordinance including oixed jse 1 Density Sane density but allows actual lot size flexibility Same as PRO Depends on standards set. Currently the nost closely associated zoning district. Inpl^aentation Conditional Use Permit Platting Conditional Use Permit / Rezoning Related to subdivision Can be independent^ of subdivision Related to subdivision Goals Open space Beat property fit Best design to fit the City objectives and land topography Design Control Limtied to land configuration Limited to land configuration Allo^ standard fro^ desLt^g manual plus negotiated design controls TOS raON: DATS: Mayor and City Council kc-V / Marie E. Bernhardson, City AdminiatratoJ[V“ Q October 6^ 1988 ............ .HiS c:tio :9:g ^»iV 5? Qhmjr SOBJSCT: Comprehensive Plan Zoning Amendment Attachments:A. Zoning Ordinance Amendment Dated 6/22/88 B. Draft Ordinance - Revised - Highway 12 ISSOB —Prasantation of introductory tamarks tagatdlng tha zoning ama^mant to iaplamant tha Comprahansiva Plan Study. ISTROOOCTIOM - At tha Council's May 23, 1988 Council ®***^“*,*5!I! jity had angagad John Shardlow to undartaka tha davalopmant of an ordinanea to iaplamant tha city's Comprahansiva ^ Tha original draft was prasantad to tha Council as Attachmant A, and waa^ initially haard by tha Planning maating on July 18, 1988 and on a 3 to 2 vota adoptad by tha Commission at thair Saptamber 19, 1983 masting. HJISCOSSIOM - Tha naw draft of tha zoning ioe yout"considaration at this tima, ** abla to ba prasant to indicata concarns the Planning CoOTission arid how thav hava baan addrassad togathar with 9 availabla for any quastions you, as a Council, may hava ragarding tha introduction. ALTBBMATIVBS » 1. Adopt the ordinance as presented. 2. Amend and adopt. 3. Table for further discussion. Take no action.■> 4. aaeoMMESOATIOB - A. th. docum.ot is •»t«nsiv.^and_isj aoriev item the staff recommends that this be taoiec iniiuTof^twi in ordar to allow th. Co«"c^ 1 to joc. fully study the matterp to discuss any further ^ •ither tS.y hav. iith it and that it th.n ba -Vb^t.'^he October 24 or Movember 14th meeting. (At present olan while following the guidelines contained in the ordinance# !i wtually proc.^ing undar tha currant s.t of ordinancas.) PROPOSED MOTIOR - Mov«l by _, T988“’"Sym*tabla th. oMttar until at l.ast Ocbob.r 24, 1988. Ay.s —, y ce: John Shardlow /i7*rjuu<^cu— f- TOs Mayor and City Council FROMx Nark Barnhardaon, City Administrator DATS: Junt 22, 19,88 SUBJECT: Zoning Ordinance Amendment - Highway 12 Corridor Attachment: A. Zoning Ordinance Amendment Drafts Prepared by John Shardlow B* Council Minutes Exceprx Dated 5/23/88 ISSUE - 1. Acceptance of initial draft work by Shardlow as authorized on May 23r 1988 together with referral of these drafts to the Planning Commission for their considerat^n. INTRODUCTION - As noted in Attachment B the Council authorized contracclng* with John Shardlow to undertake the necessary ordinance amendments to Implement the Highway 12 Corridor study. Attachment A reflects the work he has done to date and the next step would be submission of these draft ordinances to the Planning Commission for their review. DISCUSSION - The process for zoning ordinance review as you are familiar with, requires either initiation of the planning Commission or referral by the Council. If initiated by the Council# the Planning Commission has a responsibility to review and make a recommendation. I-f however Aone is forthcoming after 68 days the Council then'has the right to consider it without Planning Commission recommendation. Presently certain property owners in the corridor are interested in submitting their proposals for as least initial review. Any work and approval of tnese plans would await the completion of the Corridor Zoning Amendments. Development of Zoning amendments or at least the portions that are or would be applicable to their property will be closely followed by these individuals. The structure is such that it provides for an ■unbrella* section incoprorating the preconditions for zoning. (Transportation# sewer# water# etc. as outlined in the comp plan amendment) and then incorporates much of the existing districts as the actual zoning with additions of a Highway Business District and PUD. Inclusion w£ existing zonina standards under this umbrella should minimize the extent cf needed review to the'‘'ujsbreria* section# the new two zoning sections and any special zoning provisuions applicable to this corridor. s ALTERNATIVES 1.the submission of ^ese drafts 1 to the Planning Conuniasion foe their review and recommer iation. 2. Amend and refer. ^ Table f'^r further Council discusalon. ^ 4. Take no action./ RSCOMMENDATIOR - It la recommended that these be referred to the Planning Commiaaion for their review and recommendation. it is anticipated that the Planning Commisaion wl^ll have the opportunity to conduct a work session with John Shard low on July 6, 1938 to review background on performance zoning and the Cofridor Study. it is then anticipated that the Planning Commission will consider further work on this and that a public hearing in relationship to these be held perhaps at the August 1, 1988 meeting if appropriate progress has been made. r It is additionally recommended that the Council direct the Planning Commisaion that their review of this matter is to entail ^a recommendation on the zoning amendments kiveded to the Corridor ^ Study. ^ PROPOSED MOTION - Moved by seconded by that the Council refer the drafts prepared by John Shardlow to the Planning Commission for their consideration and recommendation and that they be directed to undertake the review of the ordinances as to to implement the Comprehensive Plan following appropriate meeting(s) with John Shardlow. Ayes __, Nays __• cc: Planning Commission Members John Shardlow SEC. 10 •SPECIAL REQUZREMEIITS FOR REZONIEG IN THE HIGHWAY 12 CCRRirOR STUDY AREA. A.Minimum Area To insure consistency with the goals atnd objectives of the Highway 12 Corridor Study, applications for rezoning within the study area must include a mininum of five acres. The plans submitted along with these applications must also include enough information regarding the effect of the proposed development on surrounding parcels to insure that the property can be developed in a manner that is both compatible with adjacent properties and consistent with the Highway 12 Corridor Study. B.Access and Circulation Plan The plans submitted along with the application must propose access to the proposed development which is consistent with the Transportation Planning Objectives of the Highway 12 Corridor Study. All public easements and road right of way that is needed to allow the construction of service roads and/or the expansion of Trunk Highway 12 past the subject property, shall be dedicated to the City. c. Sanitary Sewer Availability The available sanitary sewer capacity to serve vhe development of this corridor is currently very limited. Therefore, any plans to develop within this arei must either demonstrate that it can occur utilizing current sewer allocations or they must include improvements to increase the capacity of the systems serving area. If sanitary sewer system improvements are propojed as part of the application, then the feasibility of pro iding thiat service will also be scratinized along with an mprovement financing plan to insure that the costs associated with providing this additional capacity will be paid for by the development. 0.Storm Water Management Site Drainage plans must be submitted to insure consistency with the storm water management objectives of the Highway 12 Corridor Study. Plans will be carefully r reviewed to insure both that proposed stem water ponding areas contain sufficient storage capacity and whatever additional measures are necessary to guarantee that the quality of runoff from the site, meets or exceeds the City's standards. E. AvailadDle Zoning Districts Due to^the iinique set of constraints and opportunities ' that effect future decisions regaurding development within the Highway 12 Corridor Study Area, applicaints for rezoning are strongly encouraged to utilize the plemned unit development approach, outlined in Sec. 10. of the Orono Zoning Ordinance. However, applications will be accepted for rezoning requests for any of the following existing zoning districts within the City, consistent with a finding of consistency with the Highway 12 Corridor Study and subject to compliance with all of the additional requirements established in this section: HC Highway Commercial District. PRD Planned Residential Development RIA One Family Residential District RIB One Family ResidentiaJ. District M6 Multiple Family Planned Residential District / F. Building Design and Construction In addition to other restrictions oi tnis Chapter, the use, construction, alteration or enlargements to any building or structure within the district shall meet the following standards: 1. All exterior wall finishes on be: .ilding shall (a) Face brick, or (b) Natural stone, or (c) Specially designed prei^ast concrete units if the surfaces have been integrally treated with an applied decorative materials or texture, or ^ (d) Factoryte>f2Lbricated and finished metal framed panel construction, if'^e panel materials be of any of those noted in items a, b and c above, or glass. {€' Other materials as nay be approved by the Council. Comblrations of such materials shall I_ ’be permitted. v>2. 3. All s\ibsequent additions and outbuildings constixicted after the erection of an original building or buildings shall be constructed of materials comparable to those used in the original construction and shall be designed in a manner conforming with the original architectural design and general appearance. No builddlng or structure of a temporary character, trailer, basement, tent or shack shall be constructed, placed or maintained upon the property except as accessory to and during the construction of permanent buildings. G. Requirement of Development Agreement All development permits authorized within the Highway 12 Corridor Study Area shall be subject to the execution of development agreement. Said development agreement shall clearly identify the timing of all of the public improvements associated with the development and the developers' financial commitments related to these ^improvements. The agreement shall also include any and all other conditions of approval deemed necessary to insure compliance with the Special Minimihn Requirements for Rezoning the Highway 12 Corridor Study Area, as well as the goals and objectives of the Highway 12 Corridor Study. SEC. 10.45 B-« HlSHWAJf COMMEHCIM. DISTRICT Subd. 1. Purpose. The purpose ot the HC Hiahwav ' sp™ificailv*tallored%^“ Provide a conmercial district tailored to accomplish the commercial SertioS Highway 12 Corridor StudySection of the Orono Comprehensive Plan. ^ Application. All applicants for a building *”y. Highway Business District shall be the Council and referred to the Planning Commission for review. Planning Within any "B-6" Highway "o structure or land shall be uMd sS?lL b? toe A. B. C. D. E. (business and professional) • Banks and financial institutions. Libraries. Motels, emd hotels. Restaurants (Class I). D^fio™.n?^*^n2I!“‘‘^S Chapter 10._ Planned UnitOevelopnent. Other types of cuomercial uses and mivoH Applications that include commercLl uses Subd. 4. A. Conditional Use Within any •«B-6" -Highway Business District, no st«cture or land shall be used for one of toS following uses except by conditional use permit; 1.Any business that includes a drive*thru function. Subd. 5. Accessory Uses. Within any "B-6" Highway fcIwS^y following uses shall b^ permitted V' A.Any accessory use as regulated in the Business District. Subd. 6. Area, Height, Lot Width, Setback Requirements and Design Requirements. The following minimum requirements shall be observed subject to additional rec[uirements and exceptions contained in Section of this Title. A. B. C. Lot Area two acres Lot Width 100 ft. Setback - Principal Structure Front Yard Side Interior Side Street Rear Yard 30 (35)* ft, 10 (35) ft. 30 (35) ft. 30 (35) ft. D. Setback - Accessory Structure Front Yard Side Interior Side Street Rear Yard E. Setback - Parking Front Side Interior Street Side^ V Rear Yard 30 (35)*ft. 10 (35)ft. 30 (35)ft. 30 (35)ft. 15 (20)ft. 5 (10)ft. 10 (15)ft. 10 (10)ft. Setbacks in parentheses apply adjacent to all residential districts. *30 feet or 1 1/2 ^imes the building height whichever is greater. F. Drainage. No land shall be developed and no use shall be permitted that results in water runoff causing floods, erosion, or deposits on adjacent properties. Site'and drainage plans shall be submitted by the applicant in such detail as required.by the Council and those plans shall be reviewed by the City Engineer before submission to the Planning Commission and Council for approval. Such runoff'may be required to be properly channeled into a natural water course, ponding area, - drain cr other public facilities. Any change in grade affecting water runoff whether onto adjacent property or otherwise must be in compliance with the Surface Water Management Plan and shall be consistent with other applicable regulations or city Code provisions and subject to the approval of other agencies having jurisdiction over the area affected by the drainage. 6. Height. Ko structure or building shall exceed 2-1/2 stories or thirty feet in height except as provided in Section 10.75. H. At least twenty five percent (25%) of the land area shall be landscaped^with grass, approved ground cover, shrubbery and trees. At least three percent (3%) of the land area within a parking area shall be landscaped. The following minimum sizes shall be required at the time of planting: Overstory Deciduous Trees Ornamental Trees Coniferous Trees Major Shrub Plantings 2-1/2 inches in diameter' 1-1/2 inches in diameter 6 feet tall 5 gallons I. All trash ai4d trash handling equipment shall be stored within the principal structure, within an attached structure accessible from within the principal structure, or totally screened from eye-level view from public streets* and adjacent residential properties. If accessory structures are proposed, they shall be constructed of the same building material as the principal structure and be readily served through swinging doors. / J. Garages, accessory structures, screen walls and exposed areas of retaining walls shall be of similar type, qpiality and appearance as the principal structure. K. The ground level view of all mechanical utilities shall be completely screened from contiguous properties and adjacent streets, or designed to be compatible with the architectural treatment of the principal structure. /•L-. External loading and service area^* must be^ completely screened from the ground level view from contiguous residential or commercial properties and adjacent streets, except at access points- ^ ^H. The light from automobile headlights and other sources shall be screened whenever it..may be directed onto adjacent residential windows. SEC. 10.PLA2INEO UNIT DEVELOPMENT (PUD) SECTION: 10,_.A: 10._.C: 10._.D: 10._.E: 10._.F: 10._.G: 10. .H: Authorization Allovad Uses Required Standards Coordination With Subdivision Regulations Revisions emd/or Changes Phasing and Guarantee of Performance Control of Planned Unit Development Following Completion Procedure for Processing a Planned Unit Development SECTION 10._.A AUTHORIZATION: Planned unit development authorization may allow: Subd. 1. Variety: Within a comprehensive site design concept a mixture ot land uses, housing types and densities. I Subd. 2. Sensitivity: Through the departure from the strict application of required setbacks, yard areas, lot sizes, minimum house sizes, minimum requirements, and other performance standards associated with traditional zoning, planned unit development can maximize the development potential of land while remaining sensitive to its unique and valuable natural characteristics. Subd. 3. Efficiency: The consolidation of areas for . recreation and reductions in street lengths and other utility related expenses. Subd. 4. Density Transfer: The project density may bt< clustered, basing ^density on number of units per acre versus specific lot dimensions. / Subd. 5. District Integration: The combination of uses which are allowed in separate zoning districts such as: A. Mixed residential allows both densities and unit types to be varied within the project. B. Nixed residential with increased density acknowledging the greater sensitivity of PUD projects, regulation provides increased density on the property if a PUD is utilized. C. Mixed land uses with the integration of compatible land uses within the project. SECTION 10._3 ALLOWED USESSubd. 1. Used within the PUD may include only those uses generally considered associated with the general land use catago^ shown for the area on the official Comprehensive Land Use Plan. Specific allowed uses and performance ‘standaird& for each PUD shall be delineated in an ordinance and development plan. The PUD development plan shall identify all t;he proposed land uses and those uses shall become permitted uses with the acceptance of the devei.opment plan. Any change in list of uses presented in the development plan will be considered an amendment to the PUD and will follbw the procedures specified in Section 10._.F of this Title. SECTION 10._.C REQUIRED STANDARDS Subd. 1. The City shall consider the proposed PUD from the point of view of all standards and purposes of the Comprehensive Land use Plan to achieve a maximum coordination between the proposed development and the surrounding uses, the conservation of woodlainds and wetlands, the protection of health, safety and welfare of the community and residents of the PUD. To these ends, the City Council shall consider the location of the buildings, compatibility, parking areas and other features with respect to the topography of the area, and existing natural features such as streams and large t^ees; the efficiency, adequacy aqd safety of the proposed layout of , internal streets and driveways; the adequacy and location OL* green areas; the adequacy, location and screening of parking areas; and such other matters as the Council may find to ^lave a materi.al bearing upon the stated standards and Obj'actives of the Comprehensive Land Use Plan. SECTION 10._D COORDINATION WITH SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS Subd. 1. Subdivision review under the subdivision regulations shall be carried out simultaneously with the review of the PUD. The plana required under this Chapter shall be submitted in a* form which will satisfy the requirements of the subdivision ordinance for the preliminary and final plat. SECTION 10._.E REVISIONS AND/OR CHANGES Subd. 1. Miner changes in the location, placement and height of structures may be authorized by tiie Development Review ComHittce if required by engineering or other circumstances not foreseen at the time the final plan was approved and filed with the Zoning Administrator. Subd. 2. Changes in uses.- significant changes in the location, size, or height of structures, any rearrangement of lots, blocks and building tracts, changes in the provision of common open spaces, and all other changes to the approved final development plan may be made only after a public hearing conducted by the Council. Any changes" ' shall be recorded as amendments to the recorded copy of the final development plan. •V Subd. 3. All of the provisions of this Title applicable to the original district within which the Planned Unit Development District Is established shall apply to t^jiS' PUD District except as otherwise provided in approval of the final plan. Subd. 4. Review: If substantial development has not occurred within a reasonable time after approval of the PUD Zoning District, the City Council may instruct the Planning Commission to initiate rezoning to the original zoning district. It shall not be necessary for the City Council to find that the rezoning was in error. SECTION 10._.F PHASING AND GUARANTEE OF PERFORMANCE Sxibd.'l. Tne Planning Commission shall compare the actual (lavelopment accomplished in the various PUD zones with th^ approved development schedule. Subd. 2. Upon recommendation of the Planning Commission and for good cause shown by the property owner, the " Council nay extend the limits of the development schedule. Subd. 3. The construction and provision of all of toe common open space and public and recreational facilities which are shown oh the final development plan must proceed at the same rate as the construction of dwelling units, if any. The Development Review Committee shall review all of the building permits issued for toe PTO and examine the construction which has taken place on .the site. If they find that the rate of construction of dwelling units is greater than toe rate at which common open spaces Md public and recreational facilities have been constructed and provided, they shall forward this information to the Council fbr action. Subd. 4. A performance bond ot letter of credit shall be required to guarantee performance by the developer. The amount of this bond or letter of credit, and the specific elements of toe development program that it is intended to guarantee, will k)e Hitipulatert in toe development agreement. A. B. SECTION 10. G CONTROL PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT FOLLOWING COMPLETION y modiflca'tloxi or alteration of any buildings or structures within thi plannad dovalopment snail be governed by the final development plan. subd 2. After the certificate Of occupancy has been iMuid^no chSges shall be sad. in the approved final d*velimSnt plai accept upon application as pr .viaed below: Any minor extensions, alterations or modifications of existing buildings or structures may be authorized by the Development Review Coamittee if_ they are consistent with the purposes and intent of the^final plan. No change authorized by tois Section may increase the cube of any building or structure by more than ten percent (10*). Any building or structure that is totally or substantially destroyed may be reconstructed compliance with the final development plan unless and^^amendment to the final development plan is approved under Section 10.^.F. in the use of the common open space may be SriziS S aS L-ndment to the final development plan under Section 10._.F. Any ether changes in /inal dm^lop^nt plan must be authorized by an amendment of the development plan under Section 10.—.F. SECTION 10. .H PROCEDURE FOR PROCESSING A PLANNED UNIT ~ development siihd 1. Application Conference: Upon filing “ iSS^s^to^proviS: s%pp^sSity to S?iir inforSSSon and ottSin guidance as to the general ISitSility of his proposal for tte pn^ed aid its conformity to the Title before Incurring dStapreparation of plans, surveys and other data. C. D. Subd. 2. General Concept Plan A. Purpose: The general concept plan provides an opportunity for the applicant to submit a plan to the City showing his basic intent and the general nature of the entire development without incurring .substantial cos^. The plan shall include the following:' 1. Overall maximum PUD density range. 2. General location of major streets and pedestrian ways. 3. General location and extent of public and common open space. ^ 4. General location of residential and nonresidential land uses with approximate type and intensities of development. 9. Staging and time schedule of development. , 6. Other special criteria for development. S. Schedule: 1. Developer meets with th^ Zoning Administrator to discuss the proposed developments. 2. The applicant shall file the concept stage application and preliminary plat, together with all supporting data. 3. Within thirty (30) days after verification by the Zoning Administrator that the required ^ plan and supporting data is adequate, tne Planning Commission shall hold a public hearing. 4. The Planning Commission shall conduct the hearing and report its findings and make recommendations to the City Council. Notice of the hearing shall consist of a legal property description, description of request, and be published in the official newspaper at least ten (10) days prior to the hearing and written notification of the hearing shall be mailed at lea st ten (10) days pfior thereto to owners of land within three hundred fifty feet (330^) of the boundary of the property in ^ question. 5. The City may request additional information from the applicant concerning operational factors or*retain expert testimony at the expense of the applicant concerning operational factors. 6. The Council may hold a public hearing after the receipt of the report and recommendations from the Planning Commission. If the Planning Commission fails to make a report within sixty (60) days after receipt of the application, then the City Council may proceed without the report- The Council may approve the concept plan and attach such conditions as it deems reasonable. Approval shall require a four-fifths (4/5) vote of the entire Council. C. Development Stage: Following general concept approval, if given, the applicant shall submit the development stage application and final plat. The application shall proceed and the acL^-d upon in accordance with Section 10._.F for zoning district changes. If appropriate because of the limited scale of the proposal, the concept stage and development stages may proceed simultaneously. D. Applications: Ten (10) copies of the follow*-^g exhibits, analysis and plans shall be submic\.:«d to the City: ' General Concept Stage: 1. Preliminary plat and information required by subdivision Title. 2. General Information: (a) The lauidowner's name and address and his interest in the subject property. (b) The applicamt's neune and address if different from the landowner. (c) The names and addresses of all professional consultants who have contributed to the development of the PUD plan being submitted, including attorney, land planner, engineer and surveyor. Evidence that the appl»icant has sufficient control over the subject property to effectuate the proposed PUD, including a statement of all legal, beneficial, tenancy and contractual interests held in or affecting the subject property and including an up-to-date certified abstract of title or Registered property report, and such other evidence as the city Attorney may require to show the status of title or control of the subject property. 3• Present Status: (a) (•) The address and legal description of t*he property. ^ The existing zoning classification and present use of the subject property and all lands within one thousand feet (1,0000 of the property. A map depicting the existing development of the property and all land within one thousand feet (1,000'} thereof and indicating the location of existing streets, property lines, easements, water mains and storm and semitary k sewers, with invert elevations on and . within one hundred feet (luo') of the property. A written statement general describing the proposed PUD and the market which it is intr>: ied to serve and its demand showin' relationship to the City's Compre^ sxve Plan and how the proposed PUD is uo be designed, arranged and operated in order to permit the development and use of neighboring property in accordance with the applicable regulations of the City. Site' Conditions: Graphic reproductions of the existing site conditions at a scale of one inch equals one hundred feet (1" - 100'). (1) Contours; minimum two foot (2”) intervals. , (2) Location, type "and extent of tree cover, (3) Slope analysis. (4) Location and extent of water bodies, wetlands and streauns and flood plains within three hundred feet (300'J of the property. (5) . S.ignificant rock outcroppings. (6) . Existing drainage patterns. (7) Vistas and significant views. (3) Soil conditions as they affect development. All of the graphics should be the same scale as the final plan to allow easy cross reference. The use of overlays is recommended for clear reference. Schematic drawing of the proposed development concept including but not limited to the general location of major circulation elements, public and common open space, residential and other land uses. A statement of the estimated total number of dwelling units proposed for the POO and a tabulation of the proposed approximate allocations of land use expressed £n acres and as a percent of the total project area, which shall include at least the following; (1) Area devoted to residential uses. (2) Area devoted to residential use by building typcw. . (3) Area devoted to common open space. (4) Area devoted to public open space. (5) Approximate area devoted to streets. (6) Aporoxisiata area devoted to, and number of, off-street parJcing and loading spaces and related, access. (7) . Approximate area, and floor area, devoted to commercial uses. (8) Approximate area, and floor area, \ devoted to industrial or office use. (h) When the PTO is to be constructed in stages during a period of time extending beyond a single construction season, a schedule for the development of such stages or units shall be submitted stating the approximate beginning and completion date for each such stage or unit and the proportion of the total Pao public or common open space and dwelling units to be provided or constructed during each such state and overall chronology of development to be followed from stage to stage. ^ (i) When the proposed PUD includes provisions for public or common open space or service facilities, a statement describing the provision that is to be made for the care and maintenance of such open space or service facilities. (j) Any restrictive covenants that are to be recorded with respect to property included in the proposed PUD. (k) Schematic utilities p^ans indicating placement of water, senitary and storm sewers. The City may excuse an applicant from submitting any specific item of information or document required in this stage which it finds to be unnecessary to the consideration of the specific proposal. The City may require the submission of any additional information or dr/oumentation which it may find nAceesary or appropriate to full consideration of the proposed PUD. v}- 4. Development: Stage: Development stage submissions should depict and outline the proposed implementations of the general concept stage for the PUD. Information from the general concept stage may be included for baclcground auid to provide a basis for the submitted plan. The development stage submissions shall include but not be limited to: (a) A final plat information required by the City subdi ;ion Title. (b) Ten (10) sets of preliminary plans drawn to a scale of not less than one inch equals one hundred feat (i'**100') (or > scale requested by the Administrator containing at least the following information): (1) Proposed name of the development (which shall not duplicate nor be similar in pronunciation to the name of any plat theretofore recorded in the county where the subject property is situated). (2) Property botindary lines and dimensions of the property and any significant topographical or physical featiires of the property. (3) The location, size use and arrangement including height in stories and feet and total square feet of ground area coverage and floor area of proposed buildings, including mobile homes, and , existing buildings which will - remain, if any. (4) Location, dimensions of all driveways, entrances, curb cuts, parking stalls, loading spaces and access aisles, and all ^ther circulation elements including bike and pedestrian; and the total site coverage of all circulation elements. > (5) Location# designation and total area of all common open space. I (6) Location, designation rand total area proposed to be conveyed or dedicated for public open space# including parks, playgrounds, school sites and recreational facilities. (7) Proposed lots and blocks, if any and numbering system. (8) The location, use and size of structures and other land uses on adjacent properties. (9) Detailed sketches and provisions of proposed landscaping. (10) General gradir * and drainage plans for the developed PUD. (11) Any other information that may have been required by the Planning Commission or Council in conjunction with the approval cf the general concept plan. (c) An accurate legal description of the entire area within the PUD for which final development plan approval is sought. (d) A tabulation indicating the number of residential dwelling units and expected population. (e) A tabulation indicating the gross square footage, if any, of commercial and industrial floor space by type of activity (e.g. drug store, dry cleaning, supermarket). (f) Preliminary architectural "typical** plMS indicating use, floor, plan, elevations and exterior wall finishes of proposed building, including mobile homes. (i) A detailed site plan, suitable for recording, showing the physical layout, design and purpose of all streets, easements, rights of way, utility lines and facilities, lots, block, public and common open space, general landscaping plan, structure, including mobile homes, and uses* Preliminary grading and site alteration plan illustrating changes to existing topography and natural site vegetation. The Plan should clearly reflect the site treatment and its conformance with the approved concept plan. A preliminary plat prepared in accordance with the Subdivision Ordinance. A soil erosion control plan acceptable to watershed districts. Department of Natural Resources, Soil Conservation Service, or any other agency with review authority clearly illustrating erosion control measures to be used during construction and as perm2uaent measures. /jrrAaUiv\€jrr^ ^ > III- IMPLZMBHTATIOH ABD CHAH62 1. INTRODOCTION This docuflisnt represants the summary of the study phase I . ^ giving the background, considerations, and conclusions for the nXteration of land use patterns in the Highway 12 corridor. This docuaent, submitted as part of the comprehensive plan amendment to the Metropolitan Council# has been reviewed at a publttc hearing held before the Planning Commission and by the City Council. The review of this comprehensive plan amendment is in addition to the nine meetings that were held during the study phase. During the Metropolitan CounciJ s review of this plan, the City will be working to develop the appropriate zoning implementation tools for this amendment. Implementation tools will break down into two groups. The first group is the standards which will have to be satisfied prior to a property being rezoned. / The second set will be the actual zoning ^ standards. • Some will be new and others will be revisions of the existing Planned Unit Development (PDO), zqning standards incorporated within current ordinances. Dpon review and subsequent approval by tne Metropolitan Council, the cosiprehensive plan amendment will be brought back for formal adoption by the City Council. At that time the zoning 4ia^ix^aoiita will, be considered and adapted to allow for imploMntation of the comprehensive plan amendment. At the same ^4mm the allocation of existing sewer units currently assigned to Orono will be made. Upon adoption of all those items, the City will then be in a position to consider requests for rezoning for properties in the corridor. 2. MINIMUM STANDARDS TO ACHIEVE ZONING In order to achieve the perfomanee zoning classification a developer would have to meet certain perfonnance standards which would include the following: a) Master Plan Layout - A preliminary design to demonstrate ability to meet major issues for performance zoning. b) Minimum Developable Area - This would be a standard to establish the minimum area that a person would have to develop in order to achieve the zoning. This would generate developments of significant size to effectively use performance type zoning, avoiding development On a lot by lot basis. g) Aoorooriate Development Schedule . - A timetable of anticipated development. / d) Utility Capacities ^ Demonstration of ability to have utility capacity for the development, plus an improvement financing plan. e) Storm Water Management - Approximate layout to appropriately handle storm water. f) Traffie/Transoortation - Adequacy of general circulation, cap;^bility and direction of plan. "-V: 3.' PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OF THE ZONING DISTRICT j Tvoma Of Planned Unit D#velooafnt - All zoning changes within A9 corridor will bo of tho Planned Unit Development nature, bus will b« broken down as follows: - piannsd Basidutlal Dsvalopmsni: - Slasls raadly - 1 Onit/2 Acre - unsswsrsd and sswarsd up to 1 On±t/l Acts - sswarsd - Moltifamily - Op to lO units par aers depending on sqaare footage of units. - Planned Conaaercial Development - development of retail and commercial areas Including consolidated retail and / limited fru standing sites. a ) yi^<<.vde Within Bach Planned Onlt District - Issues that 9Uld be addressed by the actual performance zoning standards lelude the following: Site Development Celcalation - In an effort to attain protection of appropriate uvironmutal assets determine the amount of the site that is developable through a resource protection calculation. / B. of gees - A listing of uses considered compatible within the established performance zoning. C. »Aeethetles» - Standards for development of property would includet le Zeandflcaping miniimiin raquirenents. 2. Lighting standardSe 3« Signage standards. 4. Requirements for cosipatibility of building materials• !“■ j-Vr!• kr;’ » * ATWiM-iw,eTjr ® Sf xu.jj. F. There shall be no setback exceptions permitted for any horizontal building addition or hardcover* increase of any kind within 75 feet? of the shoreline or within 26 feet of any wetland. There shall be no setback exceptions permitted without a Council approved vatiance in cases where arty existing building is being reolaced by a new building,* or where the proposed addition, remodeling* and/or renovation work constitutes 50 percent or more of the assessor's fair market value for the existing building. In these situations, the new work shall conform to all required setbacks. H. The exceptions authorized by this Subdivision apply only to setback requirements and do not authorize variance of any lot area, hardcover, building height, building area or any other zoning or building code performance standard. Subd. 19. Future Amendments. The "RS” District regulations adopted by this Section represent an innovative attempt to solve the unique problems relating to JPf p]^0viously platted substandard lots on the islands while at the same time assuring the property owners of continued reasonable use q£ their property. It may be found by subsequent fkiat this Section was not restrictive enough to protect the healwh, safety and welfare of the citizens and that new development ootential granted to property owners by this Section may have to be modified. Therefore, no new development rights granted by this Section shall be deemed to be vested property rights but shall remain subject to future modification by the City. Source: Ordinance No. 246 Effective Data: 1-13-83 SBC. 10.32. PRD PLANNED RBSIDBNTIAL DEVELOPMENT. Subd. 1. Purpose. This plan is available to 1*"^ subdividers subject to Council approval, as alternative to standard minimum lot size subdivision of land. The purpose of this plM is to enhance the appearance of neighborhoods through preservation of natural open spaces, to counteract the effects of and monotony, to provide cohesive structure to neighborhood design, to offer recreation opportunities close to home, and to aid in improving the welfare in general of City residents. Subd. 2. Submission of t»lans. Land owners m^ay submit land subdivision plans for any 'R- °|*®trict without ad^^^ minimum lot^-size requirements for each building the total number of building lots, or exceed the number of such lots or units minimum lot size requirements of the zoning district or districts in which such land is situated. ORONO CC 330 (4-1-84) 5 10,32 Sabd. 3. Council Discretion, The dwelling units permitted may be, at the discretion of the Council and subject to the conditions set forth by the Council, in detached, attached or multiple family dwelling structures? subject to the limitations provided for in each zoning district. SubdT' 4. Open Space, Etc. The dedication, ownership, use and maintenance of open spaces created by the application of tlie Planned Residential Development shall be subject to conditions deemed necessary by the Council to assure 'the preservation of such open spaces for their intended purposes. ^ Subd. 5. Dedication of Open Space. The dedication and ownership of such open spaces may be through: (1) Homeowners Association; (20 Landlord Maintenance? (3) Special Service District; (4) Municipal Ownership; or (5) any other method deemed appropriate by the Council to accomplish the purposes of this plan. Subd. 6. Site Plan. The proposed site plan, including location, spacing and basic design of proposed buildings, street and parking plans, water and sewer (public or private) plans, and plans of open space available for park or recreational purposes, shall be submitted for approval by the Planning Commission and the Council. Subd. 7. Bearings. The Council may direcc that a public bearing be held to review such plans. Subd. 8. Pinal Approval. Pinal approval shall not be granted until all conditions set by the Council ate net; and, further the Council shall not approve any such Planned Residential , Developaent prior to the legally binding establlshnent of the open space dedication, ownership and maintenance provisions, such provisions to bm guarantasd by bonding or othsr means satisfactory to the Council, Subd. 9. Subdivision Requirements. All provisions of subdivision procedure established oy the City Code except as modified herein above, shall govern applications under this plan. Source: Municipal Code Effective Date: 9-14-67 (Sections 10.33 through 10.39, inclusive, reserved for future expansion.} ORONO CC (4-1-84) S 10.50 I. Storage. In addition to other restrictions of this Chapter^ all raw materials, supplies, finished or semi- ^ finished products and equipment shall be stored within a completely enclosed building; or shall be screened by a fence or wall not less than five feet in height and not less than 50% opaque; provided, however, that motor vehicles necessary to the operation of the principal use and of not more than three-fourths ton capacity may be stored within the permitted parking areas. J. Landscaping. All open areas of any site, lot, tract or parcel shall be graded to provide proper drainage, and except for areas used for parking, drives or storage, shall be landscaped with trees, shrubs or planted ground cover. Such landscaping shall conform with the planting plan approved by <he Council at the time the building permit was issued. It shal. e the owners* responsibility to see that this landscaping is maintained in an attractive and well-kept condition. All vacant lota, tracts or parcels shall also be properly maintained. K. Drainage. No land shall be developed and no use shall be permitted that results in water runoff causing floods, erosion, or deposits on adjacent properties. Site and drainage plana shall be submitted by the applicant in such detail as required by the Council and those pl2ms shall be reviewed by the City Engineer before submission to the Planning Commission and Council for approval. Such runoff may be required to be properly channeled into a natural water course, ponding area, storm drain or other public facilities. Any change in grade affecting water runoff whether onto adjacent property or otherwise must be in compliance with the Surface Water Management Plan and shall be consistent with other applicable regulations or City Code provisions and subject to the approval of other agencies having jurisdiction over the area affected by the drainage. Source: Ordinance No. 172 Effective Date: 1-1-75 SEC. 10.51. PIO PLANNED INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT. " Subd. 1. Purpose. The purpose of this Section is to establish provisions for the granting of a conditional use permit to erect a multi-building industrial facility in relation to an over-all design, an integrated physical plan and in accordance with the provisions and procedures as provided hereafter. Subd. 2. Submission of Plans. The owner or owners of any tract of land within an "I* District may submit to the Council for approval a plan for the development and use of such a tract of land for a Planned Industrial District for commercial or other uses permitted in the district within which the land is located by making an application for a conditional use permit authorizing ORONO CC (4-1-84) s 10.51 comoiation of the development in accordance with the plan. The plan for tlie development shall-conform to the requirements of the district within which it is located except as herein amended. Subd. 3. Size Required. The tract of land for which a development is proposed and a permit requested shall not be less than five (5) acres. Subd. 4. Sewer and Water. The tract shall be served by the City water and sewer system when available and fire hydrants shall be installed according to a plan approved by the Fire Chief as to type and location. Subd. 5. Drainage. A surface drainage system shall be constructed according to a plan approved by the City Engineer. Subd. S. Parking. The off-street parking, spaces shall be painted on the surfaced area according to a plan which has received approval of the Planning Commission and the Council. Subd. 7. Roadways. Pri^'^fc* roadways within the project shall have an improved surface or more in width and shall be so designed and const ■ to permit the City trucks to provide protection to «... .i-ilding. Parking on a 24 foot roadway is to be prohibited; parsing shall be permitted on one aide of a 30 foot roadway. Subd. 8. Variances. It is the intent of this Section, IndustriateOnit Plan, to provide a means to allow substantial variance «om the provisions of this Chapter including setbacks, height, and similar regulations but not including parking requirements, off-street loading, necessary screening and the like. Variances may be granted for the industrial unit plans provided: A. Certain regulations contained in this Chapter do not realistically apply to the proposed development due to the unique nature of the proposed development; B. The variances, if granted, would be fully consistent with the general intent and purpose of this Chapter; C. The planned community unit would produce development and an environment of equal or superior quality to that which would result from strict adherence to the provisions of this Chapter; 0. The variances will not constitute a threat to the property values, safety, health, or general owners or occupants of adjacent or nearby iMd he det^mental to the health, safety, moraJ^, or general welfare of the people of Orono; ORONO CC (4-1-04) S 1C.51 E. The proposed development is of such a unique nature as to require consideration under conditions of the industrial unit plan; and, It shall be determined that the variances are required for reasonable and practicable physical developm?:it according to a plan and are not required solely on the basis of financial considerations. Source: Ordinance No. l72 Effective Date: 1-1-75 (Sections 10.52 through 10.54, inclusive, reserved for future expansion.) ORONO CC (4-1-34) s 10.29 Subd. 4. Helaiit. No structure or building ir^ a study and research center shall exceed thirty feet in height except as provided in Section 10.75. Subd. 5. Temporary or Permanent Residents. No study and research center shall at any time serve as a temporary or permanent residence for a number of persons in excess of that determined by multiplying by 2-1/2 the number of acres of land devoted to use such study and research center without a special permit allowing & greater number of persons in such number and for such periods of time as the Council may deem appropriate, due consideration being given to the interests of health, safety and public welfare. Subd. 6. Cse. No study and research center shall at any time permit more than 300 persona to be present by invitation upon its property, without a special permit allowing a greater number of persons in such number and for such periods of ^ime as the Council may deem appropriate, due consideration being given to the interests of health, safety and public welfare. Subd. 7. Area, Height, Lot Width and Yard Requirements. (See Section 10.23, Subdivision 5.) OISTHICT.' 10.30. N-€ M0LTIPL8 PAHIL7 PUNNED RZSIDENTIAL Subd. 1. Purpose. The "M-6" Multiple Family Planned Residential District is intended to provide a district which will allow multiple dwellings in those areas where such development fits the City's Comprehensive Land Use Plan, where properly related to other land uses, where there is immediate access to adequate existing arterial highways and public sanitary sewer and in no case where located within 1,000 feet of the Lake Minnetonka. Rezoning of an area to the Multiple Family Planned Residential District shall comply with Comprehensive Land Use Flan or may be allowed only after the Comprehensive Land Use Plan is amended to show the possibility of the future rezoning of that area to the •M-6" Multiple Family Planned Residential District. Design and development shall follow the spirit and ii.tent of the land use objectives of Section III-5A of the Comprehensive Land Use Plan as adopted December 2, 1974, and the Guiding Principles of Section 10.01, Subdivision 1 of this Chapter. Subd. 2. Permitted Uses. Within the "M-fi* Multiple Family Planned Residential District, no land or structures shall be used except for one or more of the following uses: A. One family detached dwellings as cegulateJ i. < the "R-IB* District. D. Public owned parks and playgrounds. OROHO CC 290 (4-1-84) S 10.30 Sabd. 3. Conditional Uses. Within any "M-5" Multiple Family ?>nn«d Residential District, no structure or land shall be used hc'*.a9 eollowing use* ascept by conditional use permits A. Any conditional use as regulated in the "R-13" District and as further regulated in L.ie "M-fi* Multiple Family Planned Residential Distr.ct. B. Multiple Family Planned Residential Project ((ff 'R Project). Subd. 4. Aceessicy r Within any *M-6“ Multiple Family Residential Distr)/>>:, cie toilowing uses shall be permitted accessory uses: A. Any accessory use except for "Roadside Stands" as regulated in the "R-IA" District and as further regulated herein. privately owned buildings containlno r»-reation or social functions, garages, or storage areas for fc enance •quipiBttnt or rubbish. Subd. 5. Area, Lot Wicth, Yard Requirements, Height and Hard Cover Recuitements. The following minimum or maximum ?eauirements shall apply to all buildings, including accessory buildings except that permitted, conditional and "R-IB" District as allowed herein shall be regulated by the ■R-IB* District requirements. Subd. 6. Minimum MFPR Project Area. An ^*®!| flhall not be allowed on an area of less than five acres. Areas or less than five acres may qualify only if the tffPR that the minimum area should be waived because the proposed Project is adjacent to an existing Project /hich '»•» under the provisions of this "M-6" nistriot and is <1®*^^"*'^. crests s l«ger, unified, physically integrated project, and will contribute to the amenities of the neicnjorhood. subd. 7. Density in MFPR Project. The “iniraum P^ted lot area per dwelling building in an MFPR Project and t-he maximum number and type of dwelling buildings allowed in a project ate based on the following factors: ’ ' A. Minimum lot ateie as set forth in S«o«f i 9 of this Section. platted lot which *.*d buildable based on the Rcaourcre Component Analysis of .Jio/r less public rigbt-cf-way. C. The number of b6droorr..«j per dwelling _ D. The number of each type of dwelling building. B. Requited setbacks. ORONO CC S 10.30 F. Cr«ditr for housing for low and moderate Income individuals and fcimilies. G. Required open space. H. Hard-cover areas. Subd. 8. y Type in MPPR Project. tiaum Percentage of Dwelling Buildings by Single Family Two Family Three Family Four Family (maximum allowed) 10 percent 40 percent 80 percent 80 percent Subd. 9. Each Dwelling Building in an MFPR Project Shall be Platted to Meeting the Following Minimum Lot Requirements. A. Lot Area Lot Widtn C. Lot Depth D. Front Yard E. Side Yard F. Side Street Yard G. Rr ORONO Project 5 ac. (dry buildable area) 300 ft. (on public street) 300 35 feet from project boundary 30 feet from project boundary 35 feet Single Two Three Four Familv Familv Familv Familv 6,000 10,000 16,000 20,000 sq.ft.sq.ft.sq.ft.sq.ft. 50 ft.65 ft.80 ft.100 ft. (on public (on public (on public (on pub or private or private or private lie or street)street)street)private street) 100 120 120 120 25 feet from public street right-of-way or private street easements. Sum of side yards to be 15 feet, one of which may be 0 feet, but minimum distance between principal itructures must be 15 feet unless attached on separate lots. 15 feet from public street right-of-way or private street easements. 30 feet 30 feet 30 feet 30 feet (4-1-84) Project Single Familv Two Family Three Familv S 10.3a Pour Family H. Building 15 feet between principal buildings and between Separa- principal building and accessory buildings on separate tion lots in project. 10 feet between principal and accessory buildings on same lot. Subd. 10. Minimum Platted Lot Area Required Per Dwelling Unit (DU) Based on Number of Bedrooms. Efficiency 1 Br. Unit 2 Br. Unit 3 Br. Unit 4 Br. Unit 4.500 sq.ft. {9.7 DU/ac. 6.000 sq.ft. (7.3 DU/ac. 7.500 s<j.ft. (5.8 DU/ac. 9.000 sq.ft. (4.8 DU/ac. 10,000 sq.ft. (4.4 DU/ac. or or or or or 48/5 ac.) 36/5 ac.) 29/5 ac.) 24/5 ac.) 22/5 ac.) However, not more than 20% of the dwelling units in any one Project shall be efficiencies. Not more than 40% of the dwelling units in any one project shall be efficiencies and one bedroom units. Subd. 11. Height. No structure or building shall exceed 2-1/2 stories or thirty feet in height except as provided in Section 10.75. Subd. 12. Housing for Low and Moderate Income Persons and Families. In MFPR Projects containing fifty or more dwelling units in all construction phases, one dwelling unit of of the total number of dwelling un^ts shall be provided for eligible persons or families in the low ^d This provision may be waived by the Council if: (1) the percental of existing low and moderate income housing in the City exceeds the percentage of such dwelling units in the funds for subsidy program are not available ^ application; and (3) the Council determines that the MFPR location is inappropriate for such dwelling units because of the lack of public and private support services. A. Density Credit. For all eligible MFPR Projects providing dwelling units for low and moderate income persons and families? One additional dwelling unit will twelv* dwelling units allowed under the standard lot area requirements of the "M-B" District. B. Procedure. In order to provide low and moderate income de.l-ing units, th. applicant shall propo.a to the Federal Housing hdministration (PHA) of i le OnitM States Department of Housing and Dtban Development, (or , f1 »5 subsidy funds) under programs for home ®*"*?“**^f ‘^"^^“hiii condominiums), rental or cooperative housing. The proposal snail ORONO CC (4-1-84) $ 1 conform to the guidelines established by the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development with respect to cost limitations, construction and other standards for development of moderate income dwelling units under the applicable subsidy program(s). The applicant shall furnish any proposal and supporting documents in the form of exchanges of correspondence with responsible officials of the FHA (or other source of subsidy funds), together with affidavits by the proponent reporting its discussions with such officials, indicating, to the extent then possible, whether there are uncommitted funds available for projects to develop low and moderate income dwelling units of the type proposed as well as for other type of units for low and moderate income persona and families. C. Satisfaction of Requirement Without a Subsidy. An applicant may propose to satisfy all or part of the low and moderate income dwelling unit requirement without utilizing a government subsidy program; provided, however, that prior to Pinal Plan approval by the Council, the applicant clearly demonstrates and warrants in writing that the proposal will benefit the same number of families at the same income levels, and for the same rentals or prices, which the low and moderate income dwelling unit requirements are intended to assure. D. Architectural Design Requirement. The architectural design of low and moderate income dwelling units will be consistent with the design of the overall MFPR Project and shall not be physically separated, screened or in any manner made identifiable as distinct from the rest of the development. 9ubd. 13. Hard Cover. The total hard cover on any one MFPR Project shall not exceed 35%. Subd. 14. Recreation and Open Space. MFPR Projects shall contain an adequate amount of land for park, recreation or local open space use which shall not be less than 10% of the Project area, or the sum of the minimum floor areas baaed upon the number of bedrooms in r ^division 16, Subparagraph C below, whichever la greater. Tne recreation and open space shall be easily accessible to the dwelling unit(s) it is intended to serve. The Project area not eligible to meet this requirement are driveways, parking areas, swamps, drainage areas, sumps, public sidewalks, required yard areas and required lot area required in Subdivision 9 of this Section. Subd. 15. Operating and Maintenance Requirements for Community Recreation and Open Space in MFPR Projects. Common open space (defined as that area of the project area set aside for the use and enjoyment of all residents in the Project, including residents of lots within a Project which may be under private ownership and on which lots there may or may not be private open space) shall be subject to requirements in Section 10.32. ORONO CC (4-1-84) s 10.30 Subd. 16. Building and Site Design and Construction Requirements. A building permit for a multiple dwelling building shall not ba issued unless the applicant's building including the site plan, are certified by an architect regiSered iSd’^suV^^as^beenTeeVate^^^^ r h*is direct ISliVillrii’u K tti- “iU plan by a professional site planner. B. Development within an MFPR Project shall contribute to the image and heritage ofbeauty# spaciousness and high quality. Proposed buildings^ structures and site elements shall be in good proportion; simplicity of mass and detail; there shall be an aW^P^-ata use of materials; colors shall be in good taste and not used for dramatic effect but in harmony with themselves and their environment. T following building materials will not be allowed on exposed exterior blocks or other structural fiberglass panels; asbestos or asphaltic siding materials, materials that are subject to rapid deterioration. C. Floor Area Requirements. 1. The minimum net floor area requirements per dwelling unit for multiple dwelling buildings shall be as follows; Efficiency Units One Bedroom Units Two Bedroom Units Three Bedroom Units Four Bedroom Units Five Or More Bedroom Units 500 square feet 700 square feet 850 square feet 950 square feet 1050 square feet 1150 square feet 2 For purposes of measurement# the net floor araa of a dwelling unit shall mean that area «ithin a as a sinole dwelling unit, and shall be measured from the ^^*^“*. * outside building walls to the center of partitions of the building bounding the dwelling unit being _ shall not include public stairways, uHlity public balconies, or unenclosed theiooms, furnace areas or rooms, storage areas not witnin apartment, or garages. 0. Closets and Bulk Storage. Only clo*«t •?««• having a minimum clear finish to finish depth of 2 e^t, 0shall be considered in ^«termining the lineal feet of cio provided. The following minimum amounts of closet and bulk storage Shall be provided for each dwelling unit; ORONO CC Cr-1-84) .J 1. Efficiency Units - 8 lineal feet of closet soace and 80 cubic feet of bulk stoca9S* 2. One Bedroom Unit - 12 lineal feet of closet apace and 100 cubic feet of bulk storage. 3. Two Bedroom Unit - 24 lineal feet of closet space and 120 cubic feet of bulk storage. 4. Three or Mora Bedrooms - For each bedroom in excess of two in any one dwelling unit, an additional 8 lineal feet of closet apace and 20 cubic feet of bulk storage volume shall be required. E. Sound. Party and corridor partitions and floor systems shall be of a type rates by a laboratory regularly engaged in sound testing as caoable of accomplishing an average sound transmission loss (using a 9 frequency test) of not less than 50 decibles. Door systems between corridors and dwelling units shall be of solid core construction and include gaskets and closure plates. Room relationships, hallway designs, door and window placements and plumbing and ventilating installations shall be such that they assist in the control of sound transmission from unit to unit. F. Projecting Air Conditioning and Heating Units. Air conditioning or heating units projecting through exterior walls or windows shall be so located and designed that they neither unnecessarily generate or transmit sound nor disrupt the architsctural amenities of the building- Units projecting more than four inches beyond the exterior finish of a shall be permitted only with the written consent of the Building Inspector, which shall be given when building structural systems prevent compliance. G. Trash Incinerators and Garbage. Mo exterior trash or garbage disposal or storage shall be permitted. There shall be no exterior incineration, and any storage shall be completely enclosed by walls and roof. H. Accessory Buildings. Accessory buildings including structures for the storage of boats and vehicles shall observe the same setback requirements established Cor tb. MSidenc. buildings. Th. Council may rsquit. for accessory buildings where common walls will eliminate unsightly and hazardous araas. Accessory buildings shall have the same exterior finish as the principal structure and shall be designed and located on the site in a manner which complements other site elements and facilities. I. The "M-6" District or any development therein may not be adjacent to any One. Family ^**^*®hore Residential District or within 1,000 feet of a lake, or within 200 feet of a wetland. ORONO CC (4-1-84) S 10,30 J, Elevation. No dwelling unit or any part thereof may be built at an elevation lower than the elevation of the ground at the base of the building. K. Entrances. Each dwelling unit shall have its own separate exterior access, L. Parking. There shall be provided on the lot occupied by the multiple dwelling building two off-street parking spaces per dwelling unit, one of which is an enclosed parking apace which may be located in or under the multiple dwelling building; detached from the principal building if its location serves some beneficial screening, buffering 6r transitional function; or else completely underground. In addition, .25 parking sj^aces per dwelling unit shall be provided for guests, and shall be located conveniently for the units they are intended to serve. The parking areas shall be surfaced with a hard, all-weather, durable dust-free surfacing material and shall be properly drained and landscaped and shall be maintained in a well-kept condition. No parking area shall occupy any required Project yard area, nor shall it be located closer than five feet to a side or rear lot line, nor closer than ten feet to any principal building. Each parking JPace shall have a minimum width of nine feet and a minimum depth of 200 feet exclusive of aisles and maneuvering space. All parking areas containing more than six spaces which adjoin either a public street or residentially zoned property shall have a solid wall or fence of not less than three feet nor more than four and one-half height along such adjoining line. Such fences or walls shall be so designed that they are architecturally harmonious principal structures on the lot. A screen planting approved by the Council may be substituted for the required wall or fence. Guest parking stalls shall be easily accessible to or from the main entry of the multiple dwelling building. Mo street parking shall be permitted. M, Internal Streets. All minor internal streets shall be owned and maintained by the owner of the Project, by a Homeowner's Association or by ' ny other agency or method deemed appropriate by the Council. Permanent easements fifty feet in width shall be provided as required by the Council for all private streets. Collector streets which may be required to maintain neighborhood continuity of circulation with other adjoining development shall be provided with a public right-of-way. M. Outside Storage. Mo boats, recreational vehicles over twenty feet in length, maintenance vehicles or ower similar bulky objects shall be permitted on the Project completely enclosed in a building or in an area completely enclosed by a fence of such opacity and height to obscure the contents from any living or pedestrian areas on or Project area. Required garages or parking areas shall not be usee for the storage of such objects or vehicles. ORONO CC (4-1-84) S li 0, Landscaping. All open areas of the Project or individual platted lots within the Project shall be graded to provide proper drainage, and except for areas used for parking, drives or storage, shall be landscaped with trees, shrubs or planted ground cover. The natural landscape shal'' be utilized where possible and reinforced with additional landscaping that is compatible with and complementary to the various use areas and functions of the site, the structural additions to the site development on neighboring properties and the adjacent public streets and highways. Landscape materials shall be of adequate size to contribute to the environmental quality at initial planting as well as at maturity. Generally new plant material shall be of the following sizes? deciduous overstory trees - 3 inch caliper; deciduous ornamental trees - 2 inch caliper; evergreen trees - 6 foot height; evergreen shrubs - 24 inch spread or height, dependent on form; deciduous shrubs3 feet height. Lawn areas other than natural landscape areas shall be sodded. Such landscaping shall conform with the planting plan approved by the Council at the time the building permit was issued. It shall be the owners* responsibility to see that this landscaping is maintained in an attractive and well-kept condition. All vacant lots, tracts or pair cels shall also be properly maintained. Subd. 17. Application Review and Administrative Procedure. A. General Procedure. The general procedure for application, review and action on any Multiple Bamily Planned Residential Project shall be according to the following outline, with more detailed requirements found in the remainder of this Subdivision. Single family detached dwellings are excluded from the review process. 1. Application, filing fee and six copies of the Preliminary Plan are to be filed with the Planning Commission through the Zoning Administrator at least thirty days prior to the public hearing date. 2. Public hearings shall be held by the Planning Commission for all Projects. 3. Planning staff reviews Preliminary Plan and transmits copies of review to Planning Commission members. City Administrator, Park Board, affected surrounding municipalities and other appropriate agencies and applicant at least five days before public hearing before Planning Commission. 4. Planning Commission holds public hearings on Preliminary Plan. ,5. Planning Commission makes recommendations for action on Preliminary Plan. 6. Council acts on Preliminary Plan. ORONO CC 298 (4-1-84) S 10.3t) 7. Applicant submits Final Plan within ninety days of Preliminary Plan approval and fourteen days prior to Final Plan review at Planning Commission meeting. 3. The Zoning Administrator transmits copies of the Final Plan to the Planning Commissionr Park Boards Planning Staffy City Engineerf Building Inspector and Fire Chief. 9. Planning Staff reviews Final Plan and makes recommendation to Planning Commission at least five days before meeting. ^ 10. Planning Commission reviews Final Planr recommends action to Council. li. If Council approves Final Plan, Zoning Administrator changes the zoning classification on the Official Zoning Map, as required, and files the Final Plan for enforcement. B. Application for an MFPR Project shall be made by the owner of the property except that an option holder may apply provided his application is accompanied by a signed statement indicating no objections from the owner or owners of all properties involved in the application. C. Application for a Preliminary Plan shall be filed with the designated Administrative Official and shall be accompanied by six copies of the following plans and information: 1. Location maps showing location within City and more specific location on a half section plat map showing ajl surrounding property lines within 350 feet of the proposed plan. 2. Resource Component Analysis (RCA). The purpose of the RCA is to determine specific design features of a Project that will minimize the detrimental effect of development on the natural and man-made environment. Opportunities and constraints imposed by or on the site will be key considerations in the City's Project review procedures. (a) Natural Elements in the RCA shall include documentation and analysis of existing conditions and rela tionships and a projection of the effect the proposed development will have upon: Vegetation (forests and woodlands, wetlands, and grasslands); Geology and Soils (bearing capacity, erodibility, and permeability); Slopes and Topography (slope stability, landscape features, and development potential); Hydrologic Systems (surface and groundwater, wetland , flood plans, and absorption); Wildlife (natural habitat, variety, and preservation-protection). (b) Man-made Element? *n the RCA include documentation and analysis of the factors tha* feet development either providing opportunities or constraints, ..luding Community Facilities (schools, parks and City services, such as fire and ORONO CC 299 (4-1-84) S 1* police protection, etc.); Utilities (sanitary sewer, storm sewer, water, electric transmission lines, etc.); Circulation (vehicles and pedestrian); Surrounding Development (character transition/ buffers, orientation/access, scale/bulk, and building materials. 3. If platting of public streets ojc division of land are proposed, all Information required in the Subdivision Regulations Chapter of the City Code for a Preliminary Plat. 4. General development plan with existing topography at two foot contour intervals indicating: ^ (a) The proposed site and existing development on adjacent properties. (b) All types of uses proposed. (c) Proposed size, location and arrangement of buildings and preliminary architectural delineations including but not limited to schematic building plana and elevations. use. (d) Density or intensi^ of each type of (e) Parking areas and stall arrangement. (f) Entrance and exit drives. (g) Schematic landscaping showing tree massing, typical plant groupings, and screen plantings, etc. utility systems. (h) Park and open space lands. (i) Dimensions, (j) Proposed schematic drainage and 5. Summary sheet indicating: (a) Area of land in each use of each separate intensity of use. (b^ Number of dwelling units proposed including number of bedrooms in each area in Item 4(c) above. (c) Tabulation of parking facilities by type related to number and type of use served. (d) Number of acres and general Intended use and ownership of open space. (e) Modifications of any provisions of this Section and any other City Code provisions or regulations of the City. 6. Phasing Plan indicating geographical staging and approximate timing of the Plan or portions thereof. ORONO CC 300 '4-1-S4) S 10.30 7. Written statement by the applicant indicating how his proposed development conforms to the' stated objectives and purpose of this Section and the Orono Comprehensive Plan and why his proposal would be in the public interest. 8. Fee for filing an MFPR Project application which includes the fees, ^ if required, for subdivision; newspaper publications of the public hearing; mailing of notices to owners within 350 feet and staff reports shall be as determined by resolution of the Council and may be varied from time to time. Subd. 18. Preliminary Plan. Planning Commission Study and Review of A. The Planning Commission shall make its recommendations to the Council for Project approval, approval with conditions, or denial. Such recommendations shall be made within sixty days of the initial hearing unless the applicant files a written request to the Planning Commission for delay. If the Planning Commission does not make its recommendations within the specified time period and a delay has not been requested by the applicant, the Council may take action on the request by the applicant. B. The Planning Commission shall be responsible for evaluating the Project in terms of maintaining the desirable characte: of the City, tije neighborhood and site. The Planning Cpmmiss.^on shall forward to the Council its recommendations based upon evaluation o the following considerations: 1. Relationship to the Resource Component Analysis. Are the features preserved, protected or enhanced; or are they diminished, destroyed or exploited? 2. Contribution to the Bxii.wing Desirable Qualities of the Neighborhood. Are the local factors of traffic movement, safety, convenience, appearance and general character strengthened? 3. Integration of the Various Site Components. Are the locations and arrangements of the various development elements functionally and aesthetically related to each other as well as to the neighborhood setting? 4. Implementation of the City's Comprehensive Plan and Specific Community Objectives. Does the Project help correct a deficiency in the balance of community or neighborhood development? Does it integrate or provide a transition between otherwise incompatible areas of existing or proposed development? 5. Compatibility With Characteristics of Adjacent Development. Are visual features, *ruch as overall scale, bulk, height, building materials, landscaping, color, and open apace in harmony with each other and with surrounding development? ORONO CC 301 (4-1-84) 5 1 .jO Are essential but adverse building and site elements properly screened or obscured from neighboring property and public places? C, A finding that any of the above does or does not exist shall not solely be cause for a Project to be unacceptable, but further that it is of such a nature as to produce one or more of the following harmful effects on occupancy of the proposed development or on immediate or neighboring areas: 1. Adverse Ly affects the benefits and' desirability of occupancy/ 2. Ciminishos the stabililty and taxable value; * 3. Prevents the most appropriate use of real estate and resources and the moat appropriate development; 4. Produces degeneration of property; 5. Produces «:dverse conditions on the public health, safety and welfare. D. The Planning Commission and Council may from time to time amend or vary the application and review procedures and the amount and type of documents to be presented. Subd. 19. Pinal Plan Review. A. Before a building permit is issued for any structures within the proposed site, Pinal Plan of one or more stages in accordance with building permit requirements and requirements contained in this Section, shall be submitted to. the Planning Commission for review and recommendation and to the Council for approval. B. A Pinal Plan shall be submitted with an application for Pinal Plan approval within ninety days after Council approval of the Preliminary Plan unless a written request for an extension is submitted by the applicant. If an application for final approval or a request for an extension is not received within ninety days, the Preliminary Plan will be considered abandoned and a new application for a Preliminary Plan must be submitted following the Preliminary Plan procedure. There shall be maximum extensions of not more than one year. C. The application for Pinal Plan (or for any stages of the Pinal Plan) approval shaU be accompanied by a legal description of the total property together with copies of tne following plana and data: 1. A plan with locations of all structures Including placement, size and type with existing topography showing two foot contour intervals or spot elevations of “ ^00 foot grid such contours are over 100 feet apart. ORONO CC 302 (4-1-84) S 1C.30 2. Pinal architectural plans as reauirad Car building permit application. Plans for detached single farailv dwellings may be submitted directly to the Building Insoector for approval unless part of an MFPR Project. ^ ^ ^3. Elevations o sections through the site which will best indicate the relations! of the buildings with the various terrain features and sits elerac j. ^ 4. Grading and drainage plan at two foot contour interval or spot elevations on a 100 foot grid if the two foot contours are over 100 feet apart. Site and drainage plans shall be submitted by the applicant in such detaH as required by the Council and those plans shall be reviewed b\ le City Engineer before submission to the Planning Commissi and Council for approval. Mo Project shall be permitted tha^ results in water runoff causing flood, erosion, or deposits on adjacent properties. Such runoff may be required to be properly chanrjsled into a natural watercourse, ponding area, storm drain or other public facilities. Any change in grado affecting water runoff whether onto adjacent property or otherwise must be in compliance with the Surface Water Management Plan and shall be consistent with other applicable regulations or City Code provisions and s^*bject to the approval of other agencies having jurisdiction over the area affected by the drainage. 5. Utility plan for all public utilities and Indication of private utility service. 6. Landscape plan showing species and sizes of all ant materials. 7. Legal descriptions of proposed zoning district boundary changes. 3. Deed restrictions, covenants, agreements, by-laws of proposed Homeowner's Association and other documents controlling the use of property, type of construction or development or the activities of future residents. 9. A Title Opinion by the attorney for the applicant addressed to the City showing that as of the date of the filing of the Pinal Plan the applicant his fee title to the property, subject to outstanding easements and mortgages, or showing that applicant has a right to fee title tu the property pursuant to a purchase agreement. 10. The applicant certifies on the Pinal Plan and on any resolution adopting tae Pinal Plan that the applicant agrees to bind himself, his successors and assigns to the Pir*..al Plan and to limit the development of the property in accocd'e<fsce Kith the Final Plan. 11. The procedures for approving and recording of final plats and resolutions shal.'^ fallowed if the Pinal Plan involves platting or division of >..«nd or the platting of public streets. ORONO CC 303 (4-1-84) S lu.io 12. Any other information which is necessary to fully represent the intentions of the Preliminary Plan. D. The Planning Commission shall review the Final Plan at its first regularly scheduled meeting which occurs at least fourteen days after filing of the application for F^nal Plan approval. E. The Final Plan shall be in substantial compliance with the approved Preliminary Plan. Substantial compliance shall mean: 1. The number and location of the dwelling units has not been changed. 2. Open space has not been decreased or altered to change its original intended design or use. 3. All streets, utilities and other special conditions prescribed on the Preliminary Plan by the applicant or any of the reviewing bodies have been incorporated into the Final Plan. Subd. 20. Zoning Change. If the Fina^ Plan includes a zoning change, the Final Plan is attached to and is therefore a part of the ordinance establishing the zoning change. The Zoning Administrator shall then cnange che zoning classification on the Official Zoning l^ap if a zoning change was made and issue a building permit in conformance with the Final Plan as approved. Source: Ordinance No. 185 Effective Date: 6-14-76 SBC. 10.31. RS SEASONAL RBCBBATIONAL DISTRICT. Subd. 1. Purpose. The *RS** Seasonal Recreational District is intended to provide a district which <^111 allow a low- density seasonal form of residential development or recreational activity on the three Lake Minnetonka islands within Orono. 5ig Islamd, Mahpiyata Island and Deering Island are totally surrounded by water. Special problems exist because of their isolated location and because there is no direct access by land or bridge. Transportation is difficult, dangerous, and slow especially in fall or spring when the :.e Is forming or melting. Engineering, financial, adm.^*:iatrative and practical difficulties prevent servicing the islands with sewer or water utilities, garbage collection, or complete police, fire, medical emergency or other municipal services. The islands have historically bjen used for summer cajlns, camping spots, temporary boat Iv^f.dings and a disabled veteLan's summer camp. As long as this ;sage remains minimal, public health and safety is reasonablv malntaino'^ But development forecasts indicate increasing presaur-s f more intensive usage that could easily exceed the City's public capabilities. For these reasons, Qrono's comprehensive plans h-vc ORONO CC 304 (4-1-84) ' - PLABUBD OBVBLOraBHT/TBADITT.OHAL ZOIOCD SUBOIVISIOII CQMPARI80H SELECTE D FACTORS 715 aORTB BROmi ROAD AFPLICATIOH If Traditionally Prooosad Planned Davelooment Zoned Subdivision (2 Acre Standard) Satback from lot lina All structures SO* Rear 30* Sides Primary structure 50* Rear 30* Sides Accessory 10* - setbacks side and rear Buffaring 50-70*None Woodland/ Grading Frasarvation All trees over 2" except - allowed building pad None - Entire site could be cleared out Fancing As agreed to with neighbor No ability to require Scraaning As agreed to with neighbors No ability to require Iiot Dasign Nunber/width across *top"No control over configuration that meets minimum standards Lot covaraga 80% of building pad with buildings Total area within setbacks (accessory behind front lot line within 10 ft. of lot lines.) N. Brown Rapair •Sacurity *apgrada Security provided Yes Questionable Construction traffic diraction Yes No Construction Yes No hone a 1 asv aBQPlO Poal OfBo* Bas 96*Crystel Bay. Mi On th$ N^itth Short of Lakt Minnetonka CITY ~S Ftbruary 23, 1989 Carol Sattarvall Edina Raalty 1X20 Bast Ifayaata Boulavard Wayzata, MN 55391 Daar Na. Sattarvall, Thank you for your lattar that wa racaivad on Fabruary 13, 1989. As a City wa ampathiza with you as to tha frustration and azparianca of tha proparty ownar at 725 Oickay Laka Driva. Tha City is currantly working on zoning amandmants to giva tha City tha graatast aaount of control in tha davalopmant of proparty in tha Highway 12 corridor and still allow a raasonabla usa of that proparty. Thasa significant zoning aoMndsMnts ara not easily adoptad and tha Council and staff ara continuing to work to davalop an accaptabla fornat for davalopmant throughout tha Highway 12 corridor. Onca this foraat is finalizad howavar, davalopmant will than dapand on tha ability of tha davalopar and tha City to coma to a comiBon understanding of tha davalopmant on tha proparty. It is our undar standing, howavar, that a van tha initial proposal for Ottan Brothers will not utilize the entire acreage that ha is purchasing and future davalopmant of that may also have an impact on tha built environment in which tha house at 725 Dickey Laka would exist. It is tha intent of tha Comprehensive Plan to provide raasonabla buffering of tha uses between tha single family residential and tha davalopmant to tha south. Howavar, tha extant of that buffering is to soma degree in tha "eyes of tha beholder*. Council and staff will continue to work to provide tha ordinance basis in which a davalopmant of tha property can be brought in, howavar, shortcuts on tha front and of this process may actually be detrimental to tha eventual control of tha davalopmant south of this property. SUnJMWG a ZONINC - 473-71S7 ASSeSHNG AOMSIlStmAllON a finance - 473-7358 PUBLIC WORKS - 473-7359 Carol Sattarvall Edina Realty February 23, 1989 Page 2 Thank you for your concerns. Sincerely^ irk B. BeMAardsoi City Adainiatrator BIEB/dh Mayor und City Council Jeanne A. Mabusth, Zoning Administrator Michael P. Gaffron, Asst Planning t Zoninc Administrator Edina Rsolfy. Wifwii IuAu> BUnmMca Qffk9 "run tnlT-irt lihfMt. Ttbmmm Slltl (02) 47S-24U February 9, 1989 Mr. Mark Bcmbardson, City Adeinistrator Village of Orono PO Box 66 Crystal Bey. mn 55323 Dear Mr. Btmhardson: I would like to share with you the frustration we are experiencing in marketing the property located at 725 Dickey Lake Drive. This property has been on the market since March, 1988, competively priced, and still is not soldi We have had several interested families, but the uncertainty of the development of the area across the street has been very detrimental. To make the kind of investment necessary in this property, most people are scared off by the prospect of multiple dwellings and/or cownercial development not knowing how this neighborhood would be protected. It is our understanding tne Otten Brothers Nursery has plans to relocate in that parcel and with the proper berraing and planting, feel this neighborhood would benefit. This is not a pitch for Otten Brothers, as much as an urgent plea to please resolve the issue. The uncertainty is killing the owners' chance to selling this property, and certainly delaying the opportunity for Orono to obtain an active interested homeowner. The length of time if*has taken to sell this property, and the prospect, according to Mike Gaffron of no decision until late sumner, has created a tremendous hardship for the McKay's. To have buyer after buyer walk away because they don't know what is going to happen across the street has been horrendousi Ue would appreciate whatever you can do to expedite this situation and eliminate the unknown. Sincerely, Carole Sattepvall REALTOR aMU(S> 21589.2 7 TO* Mayor and City Council FBOM: Mark B. Bernhardson, City Administrator^ DATB: February 15, 1989 COUNai MEETtNG FEB 27 1S33 CITY OF Oft ?H3 80BJBCT: Sewer Plant Property Attachment: A. City of Long Lake Letter Dated 2/10/89 I3SUB - Determination of response to Attachment A. INTRODUCTION - In May of 1988 the City of Orono, through its Mayor, extended its willingness to cooperate with the City of Long Lake in solving several problems of mutual concern. This resulted in meetings with a mediator in both October and December with positive results being generated from those. DISCUSSION - In recent weeks however, there has been a change in the tenor of cooperation as Orono has waited for a response from Long Lake to set up the joint meeting to further pursue this. This change as noted in Attachment A indicates that the City of Long Lake desires 15 units on the property and under their jurisdiction. If they will not get that they will proceed to file for detachment and annexation. ALTERNATIVES - 1. Transmit a letter. 2. Choose not to transmit any response. 3. Table for further discussion. RECOMMENDATION - It is recommended that Council transmit a letter to Long Lake City Council and additionally release it to the press. PROPOSED MOTION - Moved by _, seconded by _, that the Council authorize transmission of a letter to the City of Long Lake in response to Attachment A. Ayes __, Nays __. ARLO H. VANDE VEGTE. R A. T'\ATTOHNCV and COUNDtLOD AT LAW • •t /frrwiHmcMT Alaso w. WA D O. BOX SD LONG LAKK. MINNBSOTA . tv’ ‘f February 10, 1989 Mr. Mark Bernhardson City Administrator City of Orono P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, NN 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 adamai.c 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. We would very much like to have the cooperation of the City of Orono In this detachment and annexation process. Ite 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 and cooperation you have lent In this difficult and knotty problem. Ver^ruly yours. AVV/jlh Arlo H, Vande Vegte TOx Mayor euid City Council FBON: Mark B. Bernhardson, City Administrato^ DAtlx February 15, 1989 8DBJKT: Annual City Administrator's Evaluation COUHCtt WEETING TEB 27 CITV 0F0R:H3 Attachment:A. Evaluation Form B. Potential Areas for Goals Setting ISSUE - Initiation of process to: 1. The annual Administrator evaluation. 2. Determine further goals for the Administrator for the ensuing year. INTRODPCTION - Annually in advance of the Administrator's anniversary with the City# Council and the Administrator have undertaken a process to establish goals for the upcoming year# together with review of the past year's performance and goal setting. DISCUSSION - Information is presented to allow for the Council review and discussion of this item during March and April. The process this past year allowed for individual discussions of performance by roundImembers with the Administrator if they desired together with their ideas for goal setting and that this be put together prior to the anniversary with evaluations being provided to the Mayor. In addition CounciImembers are invited to discuss the evaluation with the Department Heads. (The Department Heads are requested by the Administrator to individually evaluate him with responses back to him for further discussion.) ALTERNATIVES - Policy Action a. Use the same format. b. Revise format or evaluation or process. a. Adopt as presented. b. Amend and adopt. c. Table. ■'“".‘jr.; RECOMMENDATION - It is recommended that the process be undertaken as presented for 1989 and that: a. Administrator meet individually with Councilmembers to desire to meet to discuss past years goal setting, evaluation, and ideas for 1989-90. b. That CounciImemhers undertake their evaluations with inclusion of discussion with Department Reads if they desire with CounciImembers discussing their evaluation with the Mayor. PROPOSED MOTION - Moved by __, seconded by __, that the Council adopt the above outline process for the 1988-89 City Administrator review. Ayes __, Nays __. cc: Department Heads POTSHTIAL AREAS FOR GOAL SETTING (IN ADDITION TO ONES ALREADY LISTED AND NOT COMPLETED) 1. Community Development Highway 12 Sewer/Water Service County 15 Beautification Planning and Implementation Highway 12 Corridor Selection Commencement 2. Environmental Protection Replacement of Lift Stations #10 and #43 Recycling Program - Performance and Funding 3. Organizational Development 1990 Goal Setting ' 1990 Budget Process 1990 Legislative Program 4* Service Delivery Facilities * Next Steps Service Provision Engineering Services Legal Services Police Services Fire Services Animal Patrol Services Emergency Prepardness ulix MXUHiunvuvJK Evnuunnai my I9B8 - April 1989 (NaM Optional) QIMMLimnsS 1. OGUNClIHUXUNXSTRKiai RELKTIONSHIP a. General b. IiBqpanalveneaa to Oouncll c. Keeping oouncll InCorieed oC algnificant issuea 2. ACMlNia BftlGR - GOAL 8B1T1NS a. Batabllahlng appropriate goals NOT OBBIVD tMsnnsncicn b. Perfoci to achieve ooMMin nuvnoNSlUFS a. RBsponslveneas to p«B>llc b. Understanding of oomunlty uniqueness ORSKMUAnCMAL lAOBBSHIP a. Providing appropriate organization direction b. Developing eufaordinates e. Understanding of organizational operation d. Deolsion asking XHlBOIOANISAaiaiAL OOOPEBKnCN a. Nelffhbocing ooneunitles b. Other publH entitlee TRfiX PB90MAHCS a. OoiSKil eeetlng preaentatlon/deli«>f:y b. Adainietration of organization c. Labor contract negotiations d. 1.) Policy developwent and ~ition 2.) Significant policy issue handling e. Developnent and seating of organisational goals and objectives f. Developsent of organization to seet dianglng needs and laprovesenta 7* OHUBBS (Please list ones you feel appropriate) *JL Any oonnents or thoughts as to directions you would like to see either the organization or Administrator go or undertake. *B. Any coeaaents or thoughts on areas that either the organization or adaiinistrator should be working to improve. * If related to any of the "objective" measures please list the nunber/letter. o 21589.7 TOs Mayor and City Council FBOM: Mark E. Bernhardson, City Administrat OATS: February 15r 1989 SUBJECT: Planning Commission Appointments COUNCIL MEETING FZ3 27:::3 CITY OF Ck Attachments: A. Planning Commission Appointments Memo Dated 12/28/88 ISSUE - Determination of process for appointment for Planning Commissioners. INTRODUCTION - At the Council's January 9, 1989 Council they directed staff to inquire of Planning Commissioners as to their willingness to continue to serve and any recommendations they may have regarding Chair and Vice Chair. The three who are up for appointment have indicated their desire to be reappointed. The issue of Chair and Vice Chair can be discussed at their March meeting. ALTELRNATIVES - 1. Choose to reappoint as presented. 2. Undertake a search process to explore alternatives. 3. Table for further discussion. RECOMMENDATlON - It is recommended that the Council direct staff as to its wishes regarding the Planning Commission appointments which expire the end of March. PROPOSED MOTION - Moved by __, seconded by __, that the Council directs staff as to its appointments for the seats that are up for appointment March 31, 1989. Ayes __, Nays __. 121388.6 I TOs Mayor ^uld City Council FROM: Mark E. Bernhardson, City Administrat DATS: December 28, 1988 SUBJBCl^: Planning Commission Appointments llriK: • • 4 •4 ISSUE - Determination of what process the Council would like to take regarding its 1989 Planning Commission vacancy appointments. INTRODUCTION - As you may recall the appointments have been delayed until the April timeframe with February and March being the appropriate timeframe for review. DISCUSSION - The terms for the following individuals expire 31 March, 1989: ^ Charles Kelley Maureen Bellows Sara Moos PROCESS ALTERNATIVES - The following represents process alternatives for appointment: 1. Automatic appointment of current members interested. 2. Refer to Planning Commission for a recommendation. 3. Advertise and have a review process to include current members. 4. Select other means for appointment. ACTION ALy^RNATIVES - The following represent alternatives for this meeting': 1. Determine process 2. Table for further discussion RBCOMMBNDATION — It is recommended that this issue be referred to the Planning Commission for their recommendation. PROPOSED NOTION “ Moved by seconded by , that the Council refer the issue of appointments to the Planning Commission for a recommendation. Ayes _, Nays _. 21489.2 mm C/TV OF iV- ■■' TO: Mayor emd City Council FROM: Hark E. Bernhardson, City Administrato DATE: February 14, 1989 SUBJECT: Joint Council/Planning Conunission of February 6, 1989 Attachment: A. Planning Commission Minutes Excerpt 2/17/89 At the joint Council/Planning Commission of February 6, 1989# the Planning Commission members raised a number of issues that were of concern to them. Below is an attempted summary of those issues with response to the major items. I. ann_in£ Commission Information - The Planning Commission outlined a number of issues related to information provided to them in advance of the Planning Commission. These included: a. Completeness of information b. Level of information (too much verbage) c. Recommendations d. Initial communication of upcoming applicatipna e. Information sheets outlining the basics f. Receiving the Information only two to three days in advance. These issues have been reviewed by the Building and Zoning staff and myself and commencing with this Planning Commission they will transmit a copy of the legal notices together with a sketch of each of the applications to the Planning Commission two weeks prior to that meeting. In addition the staff will continue to try to get the bulk of the information to the Planning Commission members by delivery on Wednesday with the follow up delivery on Friday. A review by the staff indicated everyone should have the bulk of the information four to five days In advance of the Planning Commission meeting. In a review of previous Planning Commission meetings there are only a few applications in the last year that have been delayed because of lack of information. For the most part those were items that were delayed as a result of changes the applicant desired during the review process and which staff attempted to accommodate in a timely manner. II. Comprehensive Plan #2 - Highway 12 - The Planning Comm isTionr a rse<r an umber of issues related to this including: a. Dislike of the process b. Piecemeal report c. Complaints about the author d. Persons not listened to during the review process e. Feeling that issues that came up in the Rebers application should have been resolved in the Comprehensive Plan process f, A feeling that the Planning Commission had been bypassed in the process g. The fact that the actual process for Rebers was a combination of existing ordinance authority, which was allowed in Rebers* case but for which no alternate provision is available for non^resident ial development. (Left unaddressed may have been some issues related to the proposed amendment for planned developments whic** were not specifically addressed by any of the Planning Commission members, but may have been alluded to by them.) The Highway 12 process was commenced under a different Planning Commission and Council in 1985. It attempted to get input from the people present as to the process to be undertaken including the way the process was conducted. Once the initial work of the study was over the draft document was actually prepared by staff (not the consultant) for presentation to the Planning Commission. The Planning Commission reviewed that draft and did go through area by area as to what they wanted on each of the properties. There is no comment regarding the quality of the draft during the review in any of the minutes or in the recollection of staff. The review of the Planning Commission recommendations together with those of the Council and what was submitted to the Metro Council indicate only one change from the original Planning Commission recommendation. This change entailed the northeast quarter of the property between Willow/Old Crystal Bay and Highway 12 and County Road Six. The Planning Commission had recommended that it not be sewered and the Council baaed on additional information concerning the marginal soils, allowed that area to be included within the MUSA line, however, retaining it at a two acre density. With that one excei on documented, the recommendations given by Planning Commissio*: »#ere identical to those eventually approved by the Metro Council and adopted by the City. It must be remembered that the planning document is a comprehensive plan amendment and as such is drafted to meet the requirements of the Metro Council based on issues they desire to be addressed. In addition there were areas where definitive positions and proposals were not included to provide greater flexibility for the City and the developer t.. come in with a specific proposal at the time of development. The intent of the Comprehensive Plan is not to eliminate all the issues related to a development but take into account the major issues for which the Metro Council is concerned. HI. Planning Commission Roles and Responsibilities - The Planning Commission spokesperson indicated two specific areas of concern; a. No time to allow for planning. b. No authority to decide in the case of variances. The intent of the meeting was specifically to find ways to assist the Planning Commission to do longer range planning together with determining if there were appropriate ways that were agreeable to Council to expand the Planning Commission's authority. The apparent tenor of the meeting indicated that the Planning Commission did not interpret what was being proposed in this light, and felt it was being proposed as a means to take away the little responsibility that they have. IV. Rebers' Subdivision - A couple of issues mentioned in this area included the fact that the Planning Commission felt that the presentation at one meeting of the preliminary subdivision application was confusing as to whether John Shardlow was an advocate for the developer or the City. Additionally it was the feeling that thf. whole process on Rebers' was muddled by threat of annexation. Response - A review of the documents specifically shows that John Shardlow was representing the City at the sketch plan review and the first public hearing for rezoning and subdivision although he happened to sit next to the developer the night of the Planning Commission consideration of the initial rezoning subdivision because other chairs in the Council room were occupied. He introduced the application as would City staff. The issue was raised by Mr. Shardlow at the time that it happened and staff expected it to have been an issue of short term duration. As for the issue of annexation, the Planning Commission reviewed the initial Comprehensive Plan in February/March timeframe of 1987. The Council began their consideration through the March/April timeframe and during this period Long Lake indicated their desire to annex all the property on the north side of Highway 12. This was reiterated in a letter to the City of Long Lake of June '87, during the Council's review of the amendment process and prior to their final vote for submission to Metro Council. This was very visible as these letters were presented at the public meetings at which at least a couple of the Planning Commission members were present as representatives. V. Communications - In this area comments included: - The general comment that there was a breakdown in communication. "Us verses Thera" A feeling of: A lack of understanding as to the Council's support of the rural character of Orono but more to the point "what is the Counci's planning philosophy for the city. Responses - Unfortunately# communications are in the eyes of the beholder and the intent of the meeting was to improve communications in a positive manner. To date the effect has been just the opposite. As for the issue of "Rural Character"# it should be noted that a majority of the current residents in the community live in or around Lake Minnetonka on lots that are substantially below two acres. The "Rural Character" probably entails approximately 1/3 of the sites in Orono. The development of the "Rural Charater" was a function or the desire of the people who lived on Lake Minnetonka to protect the lake from non point source pollution and came about as a result and not the primary goal of the Comprehensive Plan for the major area left undeveloped that remained to be developed. IV. Other Related Issues - Three other issues were raised which include: * County Road 116 Future Highway 12 Executive sessions Response - The utilization of County Road 116 as a minor arterial is outlined in the City's Comprehensive Plan and has been on the City's MSA system since its development. Whether this is a minor arterial under Orono or County jurisdiction it is more appropriately an issue for the City Council than a planning issue for Planning Commission review as its status har already been determined. As for the future of Highway 12 it is anticipated that once a corridor selection process is undertaken# Planning Commissioners and Council together with other Interested parties would be involved in that process to address particular land use concerns. It should be noted that the Planning Commission has not traditionally been involved in transportation planning issues. As far as the executive sessions are concerned their content is not apprporaitely discussed publicly but Planning Commission may not be aware that the scope the Council can utilize in conducting them is limited to the following issues: A. Land acquiaion discussions. B. Pending or current litigation. C. Labor relations contract discussions. The Council has been very diligent in limiting their use of executive sessions and does not use or encourage excessive discussion for these ito'ns. cc: Jeanne A. Mabusth# Building and Zoning Administrator John R. Gerhardson# Public Works Director Michael P. Gaffron# Asst Planning & Zoning Administrator »; NURFnS OP THB PZAimillG COMMISSION MEETING BIM FBERDARy 17, 1987 ,i 91108 NcGONEN CONTINUED It was moved by Taylor, seconded by Chairman Kelley, to recommend approval per staff rvicoramendation and subiact to a survey verifying the actual location of the existing driveway to determine what measures need to be taken for proper placement on Lot A (staff to aporove location). Notion, Ayes 6, Mays 0. CONPUBBHSXVB PLAN ANEHDNENT. NO, 2 - COUnHUATZON OP PUBLIC BEARING Consultant Planner John Shardlow was present for this matter. City Ao^.,nistrator Bernhardson explained that the Conipr«h«n«iv« Plan document preeented la the culnlnatlon of the Highway 12 Corridor Study which atarted In ..eptember 1985, The document implements the changes to the comprehensive plan and will be presented to the Metropolitan Council with the appropriate application in order that the tity may have the appropriate MUSA line extension approved by the Metro Council together with various other revleo by Met Council of significant ira^cta on the regional systems. This planning document be used as development takes place within the corridor. He reviewed the following final items for Planning Commlssinn to conceptually review and make their recommendationst A. North Brown Road Alternatives B. Area 4 - Sid Rebers Property C. Area E - Requirement to Extend Municipal Services Request from Clci (Busy Beaver Day Care Center) to connect the new facility to the the Long Lake Citv Water t Sewer System. ^ D. Engineer's Report - Concerning existing capacity of Long Lake water system and impact of proposed Orono use at 600 sewer unit level. E. Elsenger - Written request to withdraw request for sower for consideration with the current Comprehensive Plan Amendment. P. Further discussion cf Areas 1,2,3, and 5. Lake City Engineer, was present end made the following commentst 1. Regarding the traffic pian. Long Lake Is opposed to any option that closes North Brown Road. 2. Regarding a south frontage road from Willow Drive to Daniel St., there is concern about the traffic on Daniel Street. 3. Regarding the water issue - Long Mke will review hook up to its water system with consideration of demand and if Long Lake can support the system. iirV*;!.>:j-. MIMITBS or THB PUUnilllG COMNlSSIOli MBBTlllG BSLO PKBBUARY 17« 1987 ooNPmmzvx plan akbhdmeiit coiminnD 4. Regarding Sanitary Sawer service problens, the 600 units is a concern noting that there may be additional capacity in the interceptor line. He noted that the City of Long Lake would 1 to be kept Involved in this planning procedure. John Shardlow noted that when the Metropolitan Council reviews the MUSA line, a public hearing will be held for the cominunities involved by the Council. Rodger Bense of the State Bank of Long Lake requested that the City consider them in negotiations regarding the future of North Brown Road since this is an integral part of access to the bank as well as to downtowr shopping area of Long Lake. Marshall Levin of Pope Associates Architects voiced concern regarding the number of sewer units allocated to Area 3. Chairman Kelley noted that the 500 sewer units has always been an issue of negotiation with Long Lake and Medina, in which Orono cannot simply take these units. Dave Willits, 1900 West Farm Road, commented that he is a new resident who moved to Orono because of the 2 acre rural area requirements and feels there are many residents who are willing to pay the price to live in rural Orono who are not in favor of the proposed changes. Referring to the Corridor Study map. Chairman Kelley noted that there are no changes proposed in Areas A-E in which he is in agreement with. He asked the other Planning Commission members their feelings regarding Areas A-e. Taylor stated he felt comfortable with them continuing in their present state subject to the minor modifications such as; Area A - the previously approved use other than residential. Area E - Finding the Cicl request for sewer and water reasonable. Chairman Kelley stated that he would be opposed to sewer requests in Area E, bat due to the need for a sprinkler syetem in the day care center, he approves of the request for water. Hanson would incorporate Area E in the sewer area MU8A line. NZB0TB8 or THB PLMniING CCMNISSXOII NEBTXIiG HELD PBmOARY 17t 19t7 rmSBBMIVB FLAM MfBMDllEMT COHTXMD Planning Commission recommendation~ t.iat Area E be amended in Comp plan to be included in the MtlSA line extension. Regarding Area 1 which is currently residential property on the west side of Old Crystal Bay Road between the railroad tracks and Highway 12. Chairman Kelley felt aa he has stated at previous meetings, that this area should be left as-is, a 2*acre residential area with no MUSA line extension. Taylor agreed with Chairman Kelley's opinion noting that there have been no formal requests by any of the current property owners to change Area 1. Ballowa stated that previously s.ie has agreed with Kelley and Taylor's opinion, but now has concerns with NnDoT's future plans for 394 extension westward. City Administrator Bernhardson explained that the Willmar Chamber of Commerce has initiated a request to extend the freeway from Wayzata to Willmar and possibly eventually to the State line. MnDot has indicated that they do not anticipate anything happening and there is no funding available for an extension in the forseeablo future. Taylor and Cohen folt that consideration of a future 394 extension was too far away to include in this planning study. Planning Commission recommendation* no changes in Area 17 Regarding Area 2, Chairman Kelley felt a service road should be put in at an undetermined location. Planning Commission concurred with Chairman Kelley's opinion. Planning Commission reccmmendation* service road be installed at some location in Area 2 to support the traffic and eliminate the existing traffic hazards. Chairman Kelley reviewed Area 3 noting that it is currently part of the MUSA line. He reconnended that a portion of Area 3 along Highway 12 should be denignated non* residential and recommended that the wetlands act as the natural barrier between the residential and non- residential. 3 ■ i•r.I '■ywrxn/^ar.^ •; n v %, ^ "amts OP m pimiumg conhissiom mEBriwa held pewomy 17. i9t7 OOMFIEHBISIVB PIAM ^JISmiBn COVTIIIDBD Bellows asked if the property north of 7 • «2irusSid"not’ '«it th.t .o.« -Sich o„,"“^ooS reiVon to •»•»"' (Plonnod Heoidontm Di«^iI:tK *'** ** ZlgPS^na Cgwmlaslon racommendAt 1 o«. __ .. 5 connoctin, to th.“GsriioH? “ SrH'Sr"-•»- - -^1 r;:s‘K f:s‘sir,;:isr."4!s.!'“ '•" of th. B-i ,„d ••ptle aysteaa, he felt it ahould be eeweredf :S:Su':H- “ •“ ",r.‘.5i..‘5: trees should not be the Hanson concurred with Bellows. PiM-J^K - * ">««• or TH. C«««„0« «BTI«, ^ —™ ~. »»» “ ““ ”™' >’• •»> xw "" WBmww oownma that 1 and ^wwi tomproaiae, untiT*^ ^"h^**MusA^°rrnd *rr"~ ®"“" *'•• *1 • »P«cifie proposal is *** ••- b« la Chairaan Kall,y f,i* “'■•"■ "• ‘'i Thera wer» «« «a.w._ . ’ ^Th —* «*9nway 12, PuhUe ’;Va*ri"„? 2a‘rV:,?ed?"‘’ P'-'-Uc and th. atatsd t«coaaendad aodificAf *“*"<*"«nt Mo. 2'Motion, Ayes 6, Nays 0. Praviously COMTlMUATIOli OP POBUc BSAMOG ~2tln,*thl^VoVa«Vappa^^^ explained that at the last "^tola ?.r.T*rdcove?Vtc"’ *;• 5?«^‘0°e"v*ro^5ti? there were eny-- «.*• eree. —■* «u"dVVn ‘*“ *»' would happen aor/d ii t^“yfarVIrVa - />'• -VlV.'t It 21589.6 TOs Mayor and City Council FROM: Mark B. Bernhardson, City Administrato DATS: February 15, 1989 SOBJBCT: Acting Mayor - Length of Appointment II COUNCIL MEETING ISSOB - Determination of maximum length of Acting Mayor's position and any amendments to the current appointment to conform to that. INTypUCTION - At the Council's special meeting on February 6, 1989 the motion was that the Acting Mayor's position be for two years. This motion was adopted and in a subsequent conservation Councilmember Goetten raised the issue with City Attorney Thomas Barrett as to whether an appointment for Acting Mayor can be made for two years. DISCUSSION - After research City Attorney Barrett opines that it should only be for one year term and that it be reappointed at the beginning of each year. ALTBRNATIVBS - X. Take no action. 2. Table. 3. Amend. RBCOMMBW)ATION - It is recommended that the term of Acting Mayor be amended to a one year term to conform to the City Attorney's opinion on the matter. PROPOSBD MOTION - Moved by _, seconded by _, that the Council appoint the term of Acting Mayor for calender year 1989. Ayes __, Nays __. O 21689.1 COUNCIL MFETIN6 TO: FROM: DATS: Mayor and City Council Mark E. Bernhardson, City Administrato^^ February 16, 1989 t m ^ • 4 SOBJBCT: County Road 51 Attachment: A. County Road 51 Memo Dated 2/10/89 (No Attachment) B. County Road 51 Memo Dated 11/30/88 C. Letter to Residents Dated 2/21/89 ISSUE - 2. Selection of a means to address those concerns. INTRODUCTION - When this issue was raised again last fall, Hennepin County developed three alternatives to address the problem and in response to Mr. David Singer's issue related to Site distances on the curves developed another alternative which would be a variation on one of the first three. DIgCUSSION - A review of Attachments A and B indicate the necessary issues re''ted to this item. ALTERNATIVES - 1. POLICY ALTEyJATIVES A. Eliminate all parking. B. Widen the shoulder to 10 feet and provide for double striped fog line and curbing to encourage people to park away from the traveled portion of the road. C. Removal of up to six parking spots along this route to allow for clear pedestrians zones. Variation on B in which four slots would be removed around the curve to improve site distances for other pedestrians walking between cars further along the route. ^ 2. ACTION A. Adopt a selected method for addressing the problems. B. Determine other alternatives. C. Table for further discussion. D. Take no action. RECOMMBHDATION - In conjunction with the work that is being done by Metro Waste Control it would be appropriate that the shoulder be widened and that the four parking spots along the curve be eiliniinated with no replacements spots at this time. In addition staff would recommend the utilization of an access dock off the City's fire access during the summer for loading and unloading of people to limit the trespassing on private docks and that the issue of the speed limit be undertaken once construction is completed. PROPOSED MOTION - Moved by , seconded by , that the Council request the County to have tEe shoulder widened in conjunction with the project work on County Road 51 together with curbing and double striping and that staff is directed to establish a make ready dock off its fire lane access and that the necessary speed limit request be made following construction. Ayes Nays _. cc: Pat Murphy, Hennepin County Dennis Hanson, Hennepin County David Singer, 3520 North Shore Drive, Wayzata ^ •• w : ■ I rmG^c’AjT A TO: Marie Z. Ser.iiiardson# Cicy Adminiscracoc FBQHt John R. Garhardson, Public Works Director DRIBt February 10, 1989 SOBJICT: County Road 31 Parking Coa.iiy 0e;:ar i-aeni oc ? jalic Letter Dated 2/8/89 B. County Road 51 - Parking Memo Dated 11/30/88 (No Attachments) Zn 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 natter as we felt if changes were necessary it is an appropriate tine to do so due to the construction of the MWCC interceptor during the spring and susMer 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 aa 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 anT to direct staTf to notify the affected property owners prior to the February 27, 1989 Council meeting to get their input. 'layor ani FROM: Mark 3, 3?r.-tuarison, C.cy Adninijtra ;uc Forwacd’^d foe commen:j recomman-iioc no*:'! rloat!. 3T zz: ouollo Ino’i!; o«•*a m i <naa i • ^ ■ A.1130t T08 Mayor and City Council FROMt Mark B* Batnhatdson, City Administrator DRras Novanbdr 30# 1988 SOBJlCTt County Rood 51 * Parking |-rr#cA ‘'-sroT” Vv - .-kClac.ia-incj. Councy -3;. U-s: - = B» County Road 51 Momo Datad 10/13/88 C. County Road 51 Memo Oatad 10/26/88 D« County Road 31 Mamo Datad 11/18/88 B. Hannapin County Latter RE: County Road 51 Oarad 11 '23/93 F» Diagram or County 51 G. City of Orono Lattar Oatad 1/29/86 XSS0B81 •^rlisantation to Council of altarnatlva packagas that ara agraaabla to Hannapln County. 2. Datarmlnatlon aa to what altarnatlvaa tha Council daairaa for furthar considaratlon. XMTRODUCTIOH - Aa indicatad in Attachmant p Attachmant B tapraianta Hannapln County's aumnary of thraa dlffarant packagas for dlffarant apptoachaa on handling tha parking on County Road 51. OXSCUSSXOM - The primary objertives in dealing with this problems are: 1. Safety 2. Parking needs for public access 3# Property owner trespass .a* I . .... ^ \ J * V ' ■ • • 2 j * .* . - ^ t - -t i - ' J S TT.iiTVn A"rialMciv. p»r’<l.i3. T*** -.hc^i :er-iti z sf no-.*l ;i ittachnaic 2 are I 4im:aari2^i iS i5’.lows: • ::inc. ' • iu s*.- ..................................................»_____- 2cne i*as outVineV in* the‘ 193 3 7aa*< Force Report ware a total of 13?. r The present number of spots at tlort:^ *«»rm are: • ZJiCCiiXZ lOZZA \ZZi\ .\CCdi4 i-t v^n«>j4i singles fct c.ars '-ans/pickups) - County 51 parking 23 (not all within 15'30 f»et of access) Alternative 2. Widening Shoulder - This alternative would wide.n the shou to tne appro priat'? L^J foot width# whicn is "*.1 ■ ^ h ■ %: 1; • r- ^oproxlaat^ly thr»a f»at vi^er *:yian pres3ni:l7 «xi3t3 ^nd involve the double stripping o£ a fog line for a safety zone between where people pac^ and whera traveled traffic la 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 periling vehicles and the "fog lines" (white stripes on the side). Alternative li. * This vouli entail the of ?eleered par.ving al'ocs ;appto:<i naceiy 5y. ?.vo options vicn tnis regarding the parking are to either replace it with a packing 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: 1. Speed Liait - Change in the speed zone as noted before the speeds on either sides of this area are at 30 NPH west and 40 MPH east and this is a 35 HPH zene. Once the construction with Metro Waste Control is dene# we would rsquest a speed study to see if this could be lowered. The risk in this however ie they mey raise it further ss it is bsssd on the average traveled speed drivers go. Theoretically it could raise the limit rather than lower it. 2. Access Dock - In order to addresa the trespass probiem rlTe dity could on its winter access install s dock to allow those people who are parking on County Sosd 51 to use e dock rather than trsspass on the residents. In addi*:ion 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. j )n.5: following 1:e a 3 / i : * : : a 3 : 1 a * j 3 , ; ; ; ii :‘ : < 5: TO t rho 3 ? a : a i: - ?af15tria a :r ' a 3. a - : ? i . :r la.ae* - ■ : *. :•. a . i i :: i3 pedajcrial zraczlc fram: le tiorin is limitsd it wouli generally be ignored by boch pedistriana and drivers, - 7la3h_i_na ” '*?h:Le i i i *: i a 1 1 y effaceive chase loose their effeccivaness :o mo sc drivers in the area and begin to blend into the backgi lund. • ££££i.!12. ^ request was made regarding extendFiTg "these based on site distances when they are parking. The County looked at these but does not think that would have an appreciable affect on safety. - Tutn-Agound - Th« fsaaibllity of a turn-around naar tha Crystal Bay Sarvica was lookad at» but not daanad faaslbla at this point* A raquiraaant is stata law is X099 fast aithar ditaction * This would raquira caaoval of a nuabar of small scrub traas aast of Tonkawa Road* - Marrowing ving uanas - Currently tha issue Is 1 ooTceTTT"?egT ’tlia -iriving lanes as to whether they could ba narr>./,v.; to; a) slow down crsciic and b) not have to ancro* ' towards tha laka sida any graatar* It was daterainad cnat these are presently at the minlmam standard for tha County. • Ry^lign Center Line - This was looked to swing it further co tha north, but tha County did not faal it was an appropriate solution based on currant road structure* Tha possibility that a coupla of the packages could ba lookad at, ona for tha short tarn and anothar for tha long tarn with options 2 and 3 baing shortar tarn solutions and option 1 baing parhaps a longar tarn solution* Tha 1-4 widaning of tha shouldar nay ba a fur that ancroaehnant of hardcovar into tha 0-75* lahashora to tha axtant it is alraady not driven on gravel* This nay raquira an anandnant to Metro Waste Control*s conditional use parnit* Attached please f^nd Mr. Singer's correspondence with DNR* AtTMUiATIVlS 1. Council directs staff on developing a desired alternative and/or variations* 2. establish public meeting for January 23, 1989. 3. Eliminate undasired alternatives. 4. Develop a short teem and long term strategy. z. ::: ::riw: ^321C T10.) . z . i r i i r r. -3 - i i ■ -i 1 > ^. r j i ... . . 3• * . « . as a~data cor cons idar a cion of al^iernativea having given staff direction as to a desired alternative* At this time the minor widening and curbing or the elimination of up to S slots without r so 1 acernsn t ^ouli inorova the sif-jt/ is i rerm solution Attachment H may lend some guidance for eventual eleimination. cc! David Singer, 3 5 2^J Morth Shore Drive, Way?at*. Dennis Hanson, Hennepir. Sounc', ^ kJT r’* rc:y.aycr -Srace.-; Orono Council Members It Di!Rt Mark E. Bamhardson, City Admlniatrato Saptasbar 20, 19B8 SUBJSC7: Lake Minnetonka ?arking/?arkir.g County ?cad 51 AttachMat A - Singer Latter Dated 8/31/88 B - Northshora News Dated 5/23/85 C - Northshore News Dated 7/5/8j D - yorthshcre News Dated 7/18/'’5 E - Northshora News Dated 8/21/85 F - Council Minutes Dated 8/26/85 G - Lake Minnetonka Use Dated 9/20/85 H - Council Minutes Dated 9/23/85 I - Lake Minnetonka Use Dated 10/10/85 J - Lake Minnetonka Use Dated 10/23/85 X - City of Orono Dated 11/20/85 L - Orono Kesolution #1915 M - v’xcerpt 1983 Lake Minnetonka Task Force N - Excerpt Lake Access Parking Study 11/30/82 0 - LMCD Letter Dated 9/26/85 ISSUE - X. Deteraination of what safety iaproveaents the City would like to see undertaken and recoiBMnded to the County as it relates to the parking on County Read 51« 2. Determination as to what action if any the City wants to take in relating safety improvements to the "quota requirements" for parking slots in Orono as set forth in 1983 Lake Minnetonka Task force report. IHTRODUCTION - 1985 and 1986 the Department of Natural Resources through the Lake Minnetonka Conservation District was looking for commitment of the r^cerrended -arkiry s yir.netonks f?r icness. >s -0- i,.:j -2 .i ^ ir. '.r ; s s ■: '1-*. it"jrenn " - *i'"' f "*:r: “'a' incirt-.i' t.*-:' ad , s ^ 1 .r : rj ' ' . ; : : . * 5 r r ' : : :r - - . ^ _ - - .- net tt cOitir.it ahose slots. Ir. 193= the ,5Sue of access v;a3 .-aised but t.-.a City tqok nc further action on committing additional slots apart from those that were in the current access. The issue on safety improvements was ^13° raised aitheugh ^'urther action -/as net undertaker, at that time apart from monitoring, .attachment A, a letter from hr. dinger outlines suggestions to improve the saftey. DISCUSSION - .-1-* cir*9fi- *“^^53 sa;2“y ^rso-.s.us slcnc ^cad 5 1 dra noc •** of balancing but raquiraa that safety be primary over any convenience as it relates to parking for public access* The situation is generally not great, however the City records indicate no personal injury accidents along this area for the last 2 1/2 years* Actual jurisdiction for road Marking is with the County* Should the City recosuaend safety improvements to the County along SI following Mr. Singer's sugcestion would ^emove approximate^'/ 6 potentially "commitabls'* spaces whicr. perhaps the wity could find sunslitut 2 slots n'^mhers to replace these. As noted i.n .'!r. Singer's letter, the City has posted no parking both to the west along 19 •JJ® •l»o south along 19 on both sides of this parking posted was done in about 1980* It should also be noted that Mr. Singer has indicated that the proposed solution back in 1985 for pedastrian walk avary 100 to 200* was not an apprepriat? solution because of li.Titaticns or sheds in the lakeshore. The City has generally approved small sheds in this araafor storage of equipment of the type noted by Mr. Singer in hla letter upon application for a variance for specifically that reason. ALTIKMATIVNS - Issues #1 - safsty 1. Request posting the entire street no parking. 2* Ifiden the shoulder (this asy have soas relationshj MNCC project for the Orono Minnetonka Beach intercaptor)* a. Bezffl curb for drainage. b. Double stripping for cresting s bike pedestrian lane c* Pedestrian crosswalk* 3. Bliaination of up to 6 parking alota intsrraittently spaced eaong eixeting ones to iaprove line of eight. 4. Take no action. 5. Table. 6. Select the preliminary design after the staff has an initial dlscusiion with the County to see what is acceptable and present such to the neighbors. -Parking Space Commitment Take no action. Commit all the slots cl itly along 51. Commit a reduce number oi alots along 51. tne Issuas 12 1. 2. 3. i.T-ird 3 r--‘babl '* tb® or thf? j-'ser :f f . i.*. • RECOMMENDATION - It IS recommendad that uf„sr an initial discussion at the Ccunci' oeeting that a pr»Lsclurion be taken tc the County tr iiscuss vha they consider to oe zeasi.,-3 ana tnat rolicwinc tnar '.-•.is ..culi ou presented to the neighbors. Presently the City staff would recommend: a. That the shoulder should be widen aeproxiitat lev 3* with a berm curb in conjunction with the MWCC l reject. This *shculdsr would encroach furtl.er into the existing lakeshore and would be additional hardcover within the 0-75’. b. That 2 to 3 pedestrian crossings he installed. c. That eliminate up to 6 of the parking slots to allow for improved sightlines along 51 in the appropriate intervals. d. Find alternative locations for the spaces eliminated. e. It is further recommended that this be brcucht back hotfullv to the Council meeting -n October 24. It is also recommended that^the Council take no action cn ccmmitmenrs of slots az znis point. PROPOSED .MOTION - Moved ___, Seconded ___, the Council gives staff direction on parameters for a preliminary discussion with the County to determine which of these options would be acceptable to the County and that it be tabled until at least October 24, 1963. Ayes ___, Nayea ___. cc: David Singer DAVID A- SINGES Suite 220 Marsh Run 11900 Wayzata Blvd. ^^nnetonka, MN 55343 612/544-0110 IN ASSOCIATION WITH FETEHSCN & SINGES 250 Norm S:ar East j 6C8 2nd Ave. So.. ' Minneapolis. MN 55402 DAVID A. SINGEH, LTD. LAW OFFICES August 31, 1988 Mark Bernhardson City Administrator City of Orono P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, Minnesota ^21 sea ii: Mr. James Grabek Mayor of Orono and Members of the City Cov City of Orono P.O. Box 63 Ctystal Bay, Minnesota 55323 ' Mr. Eugene Strommen Executive Director Lake Minnetonka Conservation District 402 Eas- e Street WayzaU resota 55391 Mr. John Denis, Chairman Hennepin County Board of Commissioners and Members of the Hennepin County Board of Commissioners A2400 Government Center Minneapolis, Minnesota 55487 Mr. Budd Robb Commissioner of the Fifth District Hennepin County Board of Commissioners A2400 Government Cente*' Minneapolis, Minnesota 55437 .Minnesota Leparirr.eni Natural Resources 500 Lafayette Road Saint Paul, Minnesota 55101 To Whom It May Concern: 1 am writing to call your atteni.’on to a matter of grea^t concern to me as a home owner on County Road 51 near the North Arm pi'Jlic boat landing. The issue involves the inability of residents along County Road 51 to safely cross the highway during times when parking at the public ooat launch is inadequate, it ilso invoh'es the safe use of the roadway tor joggers, walkers, and bicylists. Page Two August 3U 1988 I am enclosing photographs which graphically demonstrate the inability of drivers and/or pedestrians to see one another due to an obstructed line of vision along the south side of County Road 51 from the point where parking is permitted to the east of the North Arm channel. The speed limit on the road at this location is 35 m.p.h. It is my understanding that a car travelling at that speed would take more then six car lengths to come to a complete stop from that speed, taking into account both the reaction and braking time. Clearly, the enclosed photographs demonstrate there is no margin of safety when the south side of the highway is used for bumper to bumper parking. The problem is particularly acute because boaters frequently drive vans or pickups which are particularly difficult to see over, or around. An additional factor exacerbating the risk is the narrow width of the roadway and shoulder; which literally necessitates a pedestrian stepping into the roadway in order to determine if there is traffic coming. Even then, along the curve that is depicted in these photographs, the first line of sight for such traffic coming from the westerly direction would be around or less than six car lengths. I recognize the competing pressures with regard to maximizing lake usage for the public as well as the home owners. However, I respectfully suggest that t’ ' issue in this instance cannot be postulated as a balancing to the competing interests of private property owners with the public. The issue is pure and simple, one of safety, vis-a-vis convenience. A significant part of my professional life is involved in automobile accident litigation. From my professional experiences, and work with accident reconstruction experts in other matters, I hope I am^ not being prophetic in expressing my concern that this situation is an accident waiting to happen. The safer/, health, or Ii:» of iny child or icuit is too high i price to pay, or too high a risk to take: for the sole purpose of adding twenty to thirty parking spots for the public using the North Arm boat launch, on the six to eight summer days when usage is heavy. I submit that the recommended lake wide goal of 700 ptrking spaces for boat launch users must look to some other solution tl.an dangerous off street parking spaces. Page Three August 31, 1983 I recognize I am not the first individual to raise the issue, although I was not aware that a petition had been filed in 1985 by my neighbors. I nevertheless feel constrained to speak out now, having had or observed three close calls myself. I would also like to comment upon my own views with regard to the possible solutions. Ideally, parking should be prohibited on both sides of County Road 51 along Crystal Bay. The fact that parking is prohibited on both sides of County Road 19 and on both sides of County Road 51 to tie east of Tonkawa Road, as well as on most if not all of the other county roads winding through residential parts of the lake area; highlights the fact that safety officials have obviously determined such a restriction is an appropriate means of ensuring the safety of pedestrian home owners who own property on both sides of the road, as well as joggers, walkers, and cyclists. I have reviewed the public record that came about as a result of the earlier petition. It does not appear the safety issue was adequately addres.sed; apparently because no one has been hurt or killed yet. I challenge any government official to locate and find a public safety or law enforcement official who can comfortably say these pictures depict a situation that is safe for all concerned. Another altnerative which has been discussed is to widen the paved shoulder along the north side of County Road 5L This only superficially addresses the issue. Certainly, it would be nice if the shoulder of the road was wide enough to accommodate the vehicles so it would not be necessary to trample the boulevard. However, a wider lane would only exacerbate the problem that there is no line of vision for anyone standing along the boulevard on the south side of County Road 51 looking west. It would still be necessary for a pedestrian to actually enter the roadway in order to make a firm determination of whether there is traffic coming, unless the width of the shoulder is at least doubled in size. A third alternative would be to stagger the parking so there are intermittent no parking zones which would be safty zones where residents can walk between the vehicles before crossing the roadway. If this was adopted, I would suggest that there be one safety zone of no less than a 15 ’ width abutting each lot. As there are 22 lots between the North Arm channel and Tonkawa Road, this would result in the loss of only six parking spots assuming the recommended 50 ’ lengths per spou Page Four August 3U 1988 I recognize an earlier suggestion by city officials that there be pedestrian crosswalks at ISO* to 200* intervals along the road. This is impractical, in view of local zoning ordinances which restrict the right of property owners to use aesthetically acceptable sheds for the storage of lawn chairs, barbecue grills, and/or boating equipment. Transporting such items across the road at intervals of 150* to 200* from our property is not realistic. An additional suggestion would be to install flashing yellow lights at the beginning of the parking area facing the easterly direction of traffic, and restricting the speed limit to 25 m.p.h. when the lights are flashing. It would not be difficult for local law enforcement officials to monitor those days when the reduced '*peed limit would be appropriate, such as the fishing opener, and weekend days when the weather is ideal. I, for one, do not raise the suggestion of eliminating parking along the south side of County Road 51 because of the problem of boaters trespassing upon private lake access and private dockage to get to and from their boa^.s. I do not mean to minimize that problem, particularly since a college age swimmer using my ^each nearly bled to death from a broken bottle some irresponsible boater deposited in the lake by my property this past spring. Of course, I cannot really say how many of the one to two dozen broken bottles or smashed cans that 1 retrieve each summer float ashore from the middle of the bay, vis-a-vis are dumped by trespassing boaters at the conclusion of their boating day. I understand that the county traditionally adheres to the recommendations of local municipal officials on parking issues involving county highways. However, because this particular issue evolves from a political problem that transcends local boundaries, I would suggest that the impetus for change should come from all directions. I theink you for your courtesies and attention to this matter. In the event this matter is raised as an issue for public discussion in the future, I would appreciate being notified of that so I may attend. Very truly yours, f/^ David A. Singer DAS/Jmb Enclosures cc: County Road 51 Home Owners mrm wmsmiiteat ‘n»a»'K. • vv / A}‘^r^,t->.\ •. ■ .• ' ,jr r • .k:.^•i. ^ r-J f'# ' - - > T'.i^ r>. •1--^ ■ ;i' •r=w »!•> P rv cL*l I #■• iw’ ‘ " M .V ■ . ■ -r.:' • ' . '£3k' : 1 - • t>-^- A», N r--*i>jrvCt'.' ______'i-. {•. _■»_ < ^ '■ f . J O O t %. A K««A K« i I i- ,-’-1 f • .->, •. - •vt'i? Tv ' ■*/ . .,# ' ' J ' '*' ■ V/, ', f f ^-^^===!r’rrC'.-' ^ y^L,i i % 1% L - . \ £S!Sif.€:vr--^v r»'‘ 'r V 'V •* *. -’.Ay- v; . .• ;,V:- • ' ■ ‘•' . ::- •V: * 'ii'- ; •- i'.I* TvY- ■) 'v>^i;i/■'•.■>• V._'.‘^t-'»1 1. Shows view from driveway at 3520 North Shore Drive looking across County Road 51 towards lake 2. Shows view westward from 3520 North Shore Drive, standing on boulevard side of eastbound lane. Demonstrates inability to see vehicles coming east on County Road 51. 3. shows view westward from 3520. North Shore Drive, standing on boulevard. Demonstrates inability to see vehicles coming east on County Road 51. 4. shows view eastward on County Road 51, looking toward 3520 NorthShore Drive (approximately at dark blue van). Demonstrates vehicle inability to see pedestrians at 3520. 5. shows view eastward on County Road 51, from 3520 North Shore Drive,standing on boulevard side of eastbound lane.Demonstrates vehicle inability to see pedestrians to the east of 3520 North Shore Drive. Also demonstrates narrow width of shoulder. A' TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Mark Bernhardsonr City Administrator DATE: May 23, 1985 , w yVo --SUBJECT: North Shore Drive Petition - No Parking / cn,£^^i O At the last Council meeting property owners from North Shore Drive handed staff a petition requesting No Parking signs be posted on both sides of the road on North Shore Drive east of the bridge. At present there are no parking signs on the north side. As you may recall back in 1982 a similar petition request was made. With the principal problem identified being vehicles with trailers. The City at the time explored the possibility of prohibiting parking for vehicles with boat trailers, but as it is a County road they would not permit that, since they felt it was discriroatory without any basis. In reviewing the problem the items of significant concerns seem to be: - Pedestrian Safety - Given the posted speeds along that area, vehicles parked on the side do not allow much visible distance for vehicles and pedestrians to see each other when people are crossing the road from the south to the north side. At present we have no significant history of accidents, however we understand there have been near misses on occasion. - Trespassing - There seems to be a problem in the practice gf persons when the public access is full to put their boat in at the access to drive up park in the area that the no parking is being requested and proceed to cross private property and utilitize private docks to board the boat. “ Disturbing the Peace - Apparently boaters particularly those who have parked along there tend to be rather raucous in their return and wrapping up their activities and generally causing a problem in the neighborhood. On these following two items there has not been any significant reports or problems identified by th^ police department in this area. While these last two problems may be alleviated by eliminating parking along tha^stretch these items may be able to be addressed in another^^InanjPr and working with the police department and the patrol ofTicer in the area. f The concern on the Cit\Ss side, should there be No Parking posted, are the allotment of slots along the lake for vehicular trailer parking and since^^ese are counted in the DNh a allocation to eliminate these^^2^ slots would necessitate finding allocated slots somewhere else. page 2 May 23, 1985 North Shore Drive Petition - No Parking It is the recommendation of staff at this time that: a) Council acknowledge receipt of the petition for further study. b) That the Police Department and neighbors work together to attempt to alleviate the trespassing and disturbance of the peace problems. c) Staff will explore the concerns regarding pedestrian traffic crossing and see if there are solutions that are practical for all parties involved. As this is a county road any posting of signs regarding parking are finally up to the County Commissioners, however they generally don't act on these requests without an endorsement of an action from the City Council of the community affected. Should you have any further questions please feel free to contact me. '“i * i. ."T. M ■2 ' V * •.Vi*. .'"*r - > '• - . • ■ '■ .'.V- ■ TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Mark Bernhardsoi DATS: July 5, 1985 counci SUBJECT: Lake Parking Spots/North Shore LMCD LAKE PARKING As you will note in the attached letter the LMCD has adopted the attached standards for car-trailer parking spots in accordance with the Lake Minnetonka Task Force recommendations. Currently Minnesota DNR is attempting to get long term commitments from zhe various on street parking sites which previously have not been "committed”. In speaking with the people at DNR that are handling this matter.it has been requested that they contact the City of Orono prior *to making any long term agreements regarding any spots in Orono. NORTH SHORE DRIVE During the past three weekends the City has had Police Reservists in the area to monitor the amount of traffic that is utilizing the spots on North Shore Drive together with observing any trespassing or other public safety problems related with that parking. Additionally we have asked residents to inform us of persons who are trespassing and to take license plate numbers of those individuals. We anticipate continuing this problem identification by surveying for the next couple weekends and from there we'll develop recommendations as to how to address the problems. Based on information gathered to date some of the problems indicated by the residents have been verified, hcw^ver it is a question of the magnitude and frequency as to determine the extent of any public safety problems. 3hou11 frae t: ?,r.y f'jr">.r=r qu r s *: i. on aither issue pla'dsa fee me. -t!I sJ Uw V:;_____ LAKE DISTRICT 402 EAST LAKE STREET '.VAV^aTA. MINNESOTA 55291 TELEPHONE 612/473--/0 j3 mAWK MtlA. EXCCUTtVC OinECTOR TO:MEMBER MUNICIPALITIESlOMOMtMItllS «e*n Tioien •*e«wn. Chairman ;eiion Murr Sacrmary Ororte in glam. Traaaurar f/ouna :Mare O Bauman Ibnaa Say »naid C Boynton V.innetonKO Banch ana da Monchaua Mmnatnaia enard J Oanwoed Oaaonavan idray Ottvold waytaia sn Kraamar Spring Para laan K. Piiiabury Minnatonaa MMTt C. Slocum Woodland Chard Sodarbarg Victoria • in H watsaar ■aeaisior SUBJ: Public Access Parking for Luke I.'inneConka The LMCD, in response to the Lake Minnetonka Task Force recommen* datlons, has adopted the attached standards for Identifying the car-trailer parking spaces needed to reach the goal of 700 reliable car-trailer spaces set for Lake Minnetonka under the current state access program. The Task Force, after considerable di«tussion, particularly with representatives of the MONR about over-flow car-trailer spaces actually used today vs. the need for long-term space meeting cer tain basic requirements, deterr.lned that the MDNR standard of one car-trailer space pe^' 20 acres of water (700 for the Lake) was reasonable for Lake Minnetonka. In addition it determined that those spaces already meeting these standards could be supplemented by other ne ir-by parking chat also meet these standards when set aside specifically for the use of the boating public. The District has developed these standards which thi^ MDNR has ac cepted for the use of the lakeshore municipalitii^' «.• wish to participate in the program by designating long-t« car-trailer parking spaces on a seasonal basis near existing pu.>Aic launching facilities. These spaces may not be restricted by a permit process. These spaces, when accepted under the standards, will be applied toward the 700 spaces required and will be used to help determine the need for development of further public ^ccess on Che Lake. The District has been charged with Che responsibility to monitor Che program. Thank you for your consIcaration. Your cooperation is greatly lake MINrJETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT PARKING STANDARDS LAKE MINNE'^ONKA PUBLIC ACCESSES Th« Lak« Mlnii«tonk« Task Pores agreed to a goal of 700 long-tera reliable •paces for car-trailer parking in the vicinity of present and future access sites at Lake Minnetonka. The Task Force further recosssended that the Lake Minnetonka Conservation District establish an acceptable set of standards for identifying and counting of these spaces and nionitor progress toward the goal on a continuing basis. The following set of standards has been adopted by the LNCD and the Minna* eota Department of Natural Resources for application to Lake Minnetonka: 1. All spaces oust be within 1,500 feet o| a public access point. 2. All off-site locations should be provided with a long-term agreement, five year minimum, on file with the LMCD. 3. The location of off-site spaces, either off-street or on-street, must be identified by clear, permanent-type signage at the access point. 4. All off-street spaces nmst be layed out on a plan on file with the LMCD. The plan shall clearly indicar^ ^ach car-trailer space and adequate in gress, egress and suneuvering space. 5. All spaces must be available on an unrestricted, first-come-firSt-served basis, as a minimum from 5 p.n. on Friday until midni nt Sunday, and on holidays, from April IS to October 15. 6. All on-street spaces should meet the following additional standards: 6.1 Minimum length of 50 feet per space. 6.2 Adequate shoulder width to preclude door opening into a traffic lane and to provide a safe route to the access point. 6.3 Regularly-spaced permanent signage stating "transient car-trailer parking only." 6-25-85 : fOs FBOH: DATE: Mayor and City Council Nark Bernhardson, City Administrato July 18, 1985 SUBJECT: North Shore Drive Parking Status As you are aware the City together with the residents have been monitoring and recording problems that have occurred along North Shore Drive during the summer particularly on weekends and holidays. There has been some indication of trespassing, some moderate use of the parking spots on the good weekends together with some parking of vehicles and trailers just off curbing on the aand/grass. Although there have been some minor eonfontations between residents and trespassers there does not appear at this time to be significant pedestriai/1>icycle problems that have been reported as accidents or near accidents. As you are aware we will be bringing the issue of commitment to LHCD parking spots back to you on August 2|/and we would like to bring this issue at that time. At .this tiwm the proposed avenues to attempt ameliorate the esisting problems will include parts or combinations of the following: - Acceptable (fencing) by private residences bet* een the road and the beach - Possible asphalt curbing - Restripping to provide pedestrian bikeway passes - Use of a dock off the fire access for loading and unloading of passengers - Appropriate signage Should you have further questions or comments please feel free to contact me- i^^^saa . I y.4 Mayer 9utlar, Orono Councii Meiieers Nark e. Bernhardson« City AdMiniatrater Aiifiast 21, IMS Dviee Lon9*Tem Public Access CcsMitsMnt tkCTiM ^uc28aas mtrmm 3AC!tGPOtyHD 5Sr. '5iSiK!2. •%V’^tTa*SSrSSIL“»“S,t‘SrS!*£S.'SA‘z‘is.s‘sas-ii!Sss mm ** ^ coMitMiit is aids for those slots. %fhethsr the Tmnrtni Mrtiss are Interested in taking ether actions te help alleviate the problee• DISCUSSION -nc.cant3 i nancy nature ja r icer'Jad to<iithtr #i1h license /3 ?urdin .j j jsp4.»4in<i. 12 cneri irt lerlaus jjr.cjrn^ .o sc -nj: >1. :• ijao. Ja .ud a i^aaczjriAg each oi ^r.«*so« out not.Tinq idwnnify jn cv •r^rchinq nood *ar i^i.exAasion 9( parking. i.'.a *ni.i <«e .nitij../ .aantii^ad as seing signiiicsni* tree* pass;.ng on privata Jocks toqetner with the attended liability (er the pr:.vatu ownora and the 'criisea of opportunity* that are oeoesiag hMSUse of that aeef!»ed moat significantly. Additionally there nee eeee diaturhenee ef -.he peace, particularly of aoatara returning after oartying on the lake.•:orrh Shor^ '.'ive r 'f 4 Mifyst 21# ms Vm« 2 Xt is f«lt that th««« can ba a4draaaa4 in othar aaaiMca •f t?? ’ •*-iiiiprava t2ta aituation. laara af m aaifHbara la pmr% in tMt Hava arablaa laerMaa ovar tba laat 3 ta 5 yaara la part diM ta alaa^a liaitatiaaa af athav aeaaaaaa aa tha lakaeraaaa la baa^iaa la fukura yaara# Thla la la para aaaaa aa aa ai^AV.r.r. ‘mV 2;*AV,*u v;,v:;:tvr iVv^^vr^rLUT-is^ ^ arnaaaaa oa a rafulax baala. Xf It bopad that tha OM*a attaapM ta aaaara tha pablla aceaaaaa althar aa tha aaat or aouth alda will allaalata part of thla prohlaa. lU that tha Coaaell aacoorafa tha fghiaa^ taha tha foiloalaf raaadial actioa to addraaa thla apaolfla piahlaaa. 1. toooarafo ooaatraotloa of loo daoaratlva ^ ——* •aaOa aat ta aaaaad 3 1/2 foot ta ha aaaatraatad hy tha appaa* yriat* private casidaats aa« help y******. >***?!*? j?^*****S.yi:srxvjrt?ti- ^ 4O8il0a 2. Tha city work alth tha Covaty to attaapt tha fallaalaft - utlliaatloa of asphalt eorhlaf to praaaat poftlap aft tha asphalt daaaflap tha paoplo's fraaa *■ '*•' - stripplap ba to alleo for padaatrUa/hlha path aa lahaalda of County Road SI - tha dasignatad gap (f to 10 faatl aaary ISO ta 2H foot ta inprova padlstrian aafaty erosalng - if naadadp appropriata aignapa ba put up to dliaat back to tha public accass 3. That tha rasidanta and tha City s.^tuatlon and davalop uaana and can work with tha poilca to Holt thalr proparty. Lty work topathar to aonltor tha infaiostlon by uhlsh tho Mara It law vialatlono so rolotoo to ‘f ' .1 .rMlld •:w/d Morth Shore 3riv« August 21# l^tS 9m^m 3 ^ ss‘r„“f.“iSi ‘.r’sis \\us:!5-’~vsir ir^sS; jrunsir. ~ -^va «?a*. ‘s*.- .•stss'^js.'a-a'sasK’a!s.:-m;~s-«,»V. ,?.-srAsr'asiga ?robi«s<» li«n«itiad. how«v«t, ti;i« »»y b* •» eptloa to osplero. a,::uv:uh*«:ir V/AinJt.d^’i* *4«c?^V^ilc yfot^^gtobloo.^.x";h3L!S*-“s.K';s' *.vwi-“ Ka^hlMB MftllAMo th« r^^ioii^I coog^lMtor should you has# sny ^uostions ru^ardlnq aeeoss on ooot and aout tho lako. Should you havo furthor quostiona or eonoonta* floaso tool t9— of to ?w?ie -a ♦*'••• MIMITES OF THB REGULAB OROSIO COUNCIL MBBTIMG UELD AUGUST 26. 198S. PAGE 5 f: :r'" 'V:. m V- mrotL*M UFon CABLE TV RBPOtT CITY BMGINESR'S REPORT: CRYSTAL BAY CHARGE ORDER 12* It was moved by Mayor Butler, seconded by CounciImember Adams, to approve Crystal Bay Change Order #2 per staff recommendation. Motion, Ayes (3), Nays (0). Mayor Butler had no report at this time. Councilmember Frahm reported that there is a budget which must be reveiwed and approved within 30 days. City Administrator Bernhardson stated that the budget was received today in the mail and it will be on the agenda for reviewal at the September 9th meeting. TRARSPORTATiOR REPORT! COOHTY ROAD 15 VARXAKE APPROVAL* Xt was moved by Mayor Butler, seconded by Councilmember Adams, to approve staff's recommendation as requested in the memo dated August 23, 1985. Motion, Ayes (3)» Mays '0). CITY A0imiX8TRAT0R*S REPORT! RORTB 8B0RB DRIVE City Administrator Bernhardson racalXed that at tha May 13th Council meeting the residents on North Shore Drive presents^ a petition requesting that no parking signs ba poatad dh County Rd. 51 r which followed a 1982 petition requesting no parking of boat trailers, et which time the County stated that thay would not saparataly prohibit parking for a cartain class of vehicles. Bernhardson reported that because of concerns and discussions with the neighbors in June 6 July, the Police Dept, has tried to work with the neighbors. Bernhardson stated in addition the DNR and LMCD has attempted to secure long term parking near the public access. As outlined in his memo uated August 21, 1985, Bernhardson requested Council to approve staff's recommendation. Can Regan, 3410 !:cr*h Shore Dr., was present representing the residents of LIcrrn Shore Drive. Also present •;as I'athleen Tallace, Commtssionar ‘ s Aordnistm tor ior one DMR. Mr. Regan enpressec his thanks tc staff for t.teir time and assistance in this matter. Regan mentioned a concern of his regarding the liability cf the homeowner should anyone be hurt on their property even though the property is posted no trespassing. Regan stated that in his opinion, the only one that would possibly be adversely affected by the posting nc parking signs would be other Orono residents. City Administrator Bernhardson stated that by posting no parking east of North Arm it may just push the cars to park further down County Rd. 51 together with adversely affecting the off-lake Orono residents from using the lake. MINUTES or THE XBCULAll CRONO COUNCIL NESTING HELD AUGUST 2S, 1985. PAGE 7 NORTH SHORE DRIVE continued Mr. Regan stated that more traffic is coming from the marina whan they are full. Regan stated he is also against a five year commitment. Kathleen Wallace stated that the task force recognizes that there are probleas. Wallace stated that there is e need for more secure access across the lake everywhere. Wallsce noted that based on a study of parking of 1 per 20 acres f they recommended there oe 700 car trailer parking spaces on the lake. Wallace stated that per LMCD there are presently 1171 unraliaoie parking spaces, and 135 free reliable parki.^.c spaces within 1500 feet of e public access. Kathleen Wallace stated that earlier this season they wrot.^ to the Hennepin County Sheriff informing him of the additional funds available for enfcrcement and to date have not received a response. Wallace also stated that they will be actively pursuing, through the Attorney General' s office, that Hennepin County to increase the prosecution of violation on the lake. Wallace stated that they will lose some overflow parking because of the re-alignment of County Rd. 15 ft 51 in Spring Park. Councilmember Frahm stated that he has never heard the DNR indicate that thay would avan raeognise parking spaces ether than ones directly at access parking lots. Frahm also stated that tha citiaa should not be tacked with the expense of maintaining these proposed free parking spaces. Frahm expraasad hia concarns for the current safety problems on the lake without the increase of traffic and boaters and felt that these safety issues should be solved before more accesses are provided. Further discussion on this matter will be held when all counciImembers were present. BIG ISLAND* v.T. c rr.cved by :sv':r Sutler,. 33.rcr.ci5 : y C c un c i Imeir be. .r .dcisori 5 :-r* .;r J . • .-.ic*7 'T i«-t 2^* - ■••r Cicv i^.^r.inisr.rai:cr larnharlson actau ciiat the casa -hac brought this natter up was the request to put in a laundromat in one of the buildings in Navarre. Bernhardson stated that ‘'.here Tire currcr.tl*' 19 s.cv."rir 'inir’3 isress-ed to that ^;rop5.cy -vli.ch ..'cuia jcct cne j.aunrrcmar ov/r.arc ir. connection charges only. Citv Adn.: r.i St rater Dornhardaon ra\/'iewod his report and rocoirrrendations rogarcling the policy Cor asses.sing sewer units. M.iyor .iml City Council ni*rnh-irdson» City A(iiiAiii!itc«itrM S«pt»iiber 2f» IM5 t ntimvtonka Uso and Ac?mss I- to I' «i, UlfiOOMCTlOli • In tn» Task Pocc* looking at laha aaaafa TiiaSTari^rt aliieh cal lad for tpacific racoaaandatlona ra^ardincf particul.it i? oubli.: acceka and usa on thn laha. Sari lac tiiia yaar tha Depactaant of Natural Naaauteaa aaat lattara ta aacN of tNa aoiMaunitiaa rt^aaotinN that thay ha^ln laplaaantatiofi of tha racoamanJatlona undar which thay had caatrol* which includad through U.*KD aacurinp laaf tara pachiaa aaat tha Narth hta pahlle aeeasa. (Saa attaehaant 1). Oucinq diaeuasion af tha iaaua raUtint to aaeurint tha aeeaaa, eaneacna vara ralsad by Couneilaambars ratardint tha yanaral policy diractian tha City ahould ba taking on thia iaaua* haaad aa thia dlaaasalaa It aaa fait appraprlata ta bcinf in tha principal afaaciaa that ralata to thaaa cancarna in acdar that a diaeaaaian aay avantaally halp thapa tha Caanail*a policy dlraatlaa aa tha laka aaaat# iaaaa. OlPfPaL COWCtmtl - Tha following rapraaant tha aajor cancarna and taaaaa aaaar aaeh that saaa appropriata Cat thia diacaaaiaa. - d. *fBappt(^tiata aaa*/hoatin9 aafaty on tha taka Im hofalatiaa a« hatharlty to rapulata b. Knfatcaaant 2. Offandinp aaara t« Total baatiny activity !• Vaata by aathad af accaaa a* bakaohora pcoparty b. CooMaceial aacinaa c. Public aceaas I. "-jf:.!! 'i, 'iitrioution if jctivity 1. Cco«?r iprticj 11? 2. Tiitia : ^•’••kday/’^o'ficund) 3. Type of bojta a rapart that waa coaplatad by ONR on all aatropolitan laka araaa waa iasuad in n*co«bar of I9t4 which dona niva data calatinc to ooaa of than© innu**n, nsx.imp ! ■>«! n{ loific j£ thoa© distr iPuc lona ara indicated on attachiaant 2). V. yoroiNC yriOMa - in addition tn tn» Imm ot snetuinn tn» n»r>i> «rili "lnn4tni-n.«tn nt« nodd athdt inddVn tnnT .r. «i the l.,k» dhich todult, tov""" ”J Coo«I?*n Jli.i! difetion. Th... pdndin, .ctl.n. Inelndd; pvi&li.? '•l"nn5or;.1<5 comognit/“ Add i t i on.i ?r3nc*»rn;*j titing ^cocur»iii»i«ts - Securxn^j Long t«rm otC tit* p«fliia« ■ i«..ie.t.d - Kd^iiUtion of ^«ts at privat* docks • LNCO • Nvnieipsl&tlcs • Rsvicv ot prosceutatorisl sefscts - Rropssad funding for inctoaointj beatlii<i snforcMisiit U Pfbdbly STyr —nt BlStlXSt* - IRdthlddn • CnforcMicnt - Public aecbss Acquisition Oonl Mt«blialM«nt/7H public neecia tlet* - Public ostors Cona^?-->> ; nn 0l3-r . ?<i . lurr, • i ■•. ;.JT 3: ..i<.» 14c* - :..v,u looo.-; r„, ;t3;..«»nr,e;o„ * »' »hoc./«.rinn jccoss Bnforromunt ot oeloet^d Uconoinn onU r»<juUtion % - CnfQCMMAt o£ propcc boatUif MfyUtioM on Uk« - rundir^ - Coiiplaint.J/Incident trends Minnesota LenialJture • (Senator Sen Olaon) - fslsetsd U«is on iopcopor hoociAf . randlnd/1lo(|ulstin9/?tantin<i pooocs to vieloos co^ulatin9/^ov<*rnwenti I vioncios Ogono/WonAeioslitlos . poijtod land uso cogulation scoond Iskothoco • Lskoshoco - nsrinos - Poolie oeeosa • Inforeoswnt of rodulatinos • Loud MO • Lioitod bostin<) abuso (no boot) - Hisdooosnoc/cgioinsl activity colstod to Islio . ptnnoedtlofi of violation iooood by voriooo oooncioo otboK inoolood Moncioo (Wot oongooootodi - • tmnnopin County Public aceoos Oporation/acquisition Rolatod county road partinq - Suburban Honnopin County rait Rosorvo District Public property oequioition/oporstion PSION - It is bopod that this diaeuooion uill result in _ Counc'iT clar 1 fyinq the issues and then at subsoquont oootinq iddress tho oMi r/ dlr*cvlen C:n *hloh they vant to indettaks iddr»ss*n<7 ka.'ju**3. .■vLiu-n' >• !•> i or rm: nrom, .-oum:... hk ..o :-..:rT.*..KU . .. >•«.« ciTT nommswATOii's rkhmitj imrr. Crrno'» !.'h :0 .■.rrrcr,rr|tj.tiv^, . ur.r y . :. r i i .. . • ' »• • • C.ty AU.Inl«»tcr ‘'T, .'Tp : ??.,o the • enjorift r.-4.»rdinn the North Arfli public ''^•'rnh.;rH»on nofeil thn OHR rrport eontainln, u.a9« stn«-i?ri- r fir ►h- «i:t!wer ot KothWr. “'•‘‘.c* Pr..cntca .or* ss: sv,;; *Sth« other type* o£ u*c *uch as fishinq, skimp, otu. CowicilM>b«r Cr.b.k "*density aress indicated on the chert. Kathleen Hallaee boat aeeidMta hae. aceaerad aa «»durinp this past suiewr. on sn eeersp^j^k^ Averepe of 300 boats on the lake, and on an aeerape wooeena 1300 boats. rnmfmwrina to tAo UCO data of sn Inatantaniooa cMt. date), -ith a *Upht increase oter tii^. but ^ -^th no patterned increase. oth^r 1.1-tp. incr.'.sr.l «i;n *ho nunrer of ooats on :h« ioKe. vv r - -.rr ra-v.r..-n...l -ho .liot .t ».• ‘-h.t “ ;,ceons..s nuot oe Iron. =t..ff -as aireetod re r»«..tcn that question. also'.'.bl.' Voonforee those ordinance, aochao bnaee Jumpera. kC^ ■*' vor. ~ 'if'; ;■’ ’^n u mom 0«IM ^^***??nf*^otcI^< jj, iM* »e* * «M Miv« "-“‘"fjrrUT'th.t practi.-«U*Y"rlIJitcr W"*'*'***^ JI Inv i«.*lor «nforc«Mi»t- S?SSs=s5-ss iMchanlsw* 2 ui.. i»d.p.»a«"e-. you .rtiti—i SSTu“»--»ss?t.iK wr-'KT- c, -ru" u5v'‘!s:s5*3Hisri:^ KK'Inw otr *5U«i*r *•' • *•______ J!!li***‘^ii« not«d th«^ M 5Uy CM ^ K-ii'.-ri.s.-i-“JSs-•;;“ r„^„ ■»^"‘":^rS'.’.3S«“»I^'%;3 "3 SSUtS;s;;;’S^U;.'SS -~s*.i’r.‘/** »»—“•• their lenetiona. Me «l«o »»P th«y h®ce. ___ II*U> ««n« or T«- n-wuM ««*•*• "*"••“ ““ ** *hl. ti-c. X„*0.1C.t1 t-t-r, rro«... C... A..orn.r out, -xpuin,. th. PpcMroond »£ th. SMiator Olaon atatwl that uii«^ i!!!” m parxinq ‘* ‘"^_^***• to peoyld* »oro tkio thoto is 90m .Law osro tusk «»i»<* *»•* 2J K‘ir-i'v;'Si'~‘*'“" ” ““2ur^ssar.r»”rr5:sr.s^^ Cw»«lXMS*sr Mm ststM h. -• t» ‘•‘•i •«' •9fC0adi talMW* rin*' .-■ f ft $ I j.l» osrhsrtsok. »«bUe works Coordisstor - *rs- Z^llZ. rinsnc olrsetor/nr-«*»*» - ** I •,- . 'oil-? 3.*rg-*an* ••*-'"'•• •■ €rooS2».2»Oto.;:9.5'''J j,ex arinmos. Strm Jormn £roo & ■■fo;ri»»T.—.'T;, ■ .... ~v -. z »• * fl z * • - *1 -V-‘ • • -. . \I- - f ■W-r**'' < '• .H' 'I :»W TOs !4ayo£ jnd City Council? Mark B«tnhatd»on. City \dmiaiut;.moils OATS:Octooec 13* 19^5 I LAKE NXMMSTONKA USE AND ACCESS Th« following reocoseots so«a of the aignificont findings of discussion cogsrding Lako Minnetonka at the Council's Septeabes 23, 19SS, eeeting. - Miiabec of Users - The perception verses reality as to iaber'*oT^oata and "source* was interesting inthe nuaber of boats and "source* was intarestsag in ;hat according to study done for ONU, the total nuaber of persons using public access did not aaount to aore than 3Sf at any one tiae and was often down in the ltf*-2f§ range. The oiibotaatiol nnaber of osers caae froa the aarinaa, although weekend use by abutting lakeshore access owners was up considerably both in nuabers and percentages on the weekends as opposed to during the week. - now sroblee to Public Access - The apparent prohlea in public aceesoeo is net so auch*the perking and the eenveaieak er ineonveaience of the parking but froa the free P«Mie aeeeen users standpoint (or intended users) is the actual tiae ena convenience esperienced In putting boete in and takim tbea eat. To thin estent the problea is not the opeto that evecyonn has focused on, but it is the nuaber of reap spotn aveilnble far persenn wanting to use the lake. - Total Lako Usage - The attendant question then is if the flow thcougiT the ramps either puolic or private is increased does that significantly affect the total number of users that are on. tho lake. • Safetv and Snforceiient - Acci*' nts and insuries on the lake are not neewasarily a lunction of the absolute voluae on the*tew« « y ^ -------------------------------------- ——--------------- lake, with perhaps i higher correlation to abuses sucn use as alcohol . , i j ».:3,rjnc, <::.i .nInertiac.an . jjv 'oc : tiZi". *hata ’.a i ^uaJc;ort ■ u-. J'l ^ -»a .1 r■ 3: - vlho las wnat auti'.oriv/ to cr-^aca cagulations on the lake. - Who has authority to anforce. . ‘.iho 13 doing the prosecution work inU how affectively ir i I'.'.av • -Accfrss Siting - l*rusently the number of osiating access 3itc3 apart from mecina Ooctod boats and lakaahora sccasa docked oout» are aa follows; . Vm. i,.'* ■ -,icfcV:s»:U3 ■Ir V K' '■ rf . iJi3k A:% is*jus:u.’ siir».;"r ?iir..'»".‘?.ff'tia fMt) - ?rivat* Maiina Sitaa - 3 aisa*. anknown nuabac o< parkifu} apota Tha calatad aecaaa iaavia &a tba aatant to ybicliv if all altaa. • gaauiraaant fog i|£££Si£ ” Oapactaaat of Natutal Raaouccas Kaa baan pualiinp ^ot addltioaal ftaa aceaoa altaa on tha Uka thara la no apacifle atatutory caqoiraMOt that In aeqalrino altaa that tha OjIR nor any othw; public apanoy baa to aaka than aval labia fsaa of chacpa* - Watra Council kccaaa Sitino - aa you aro anata tbo ^o««*tnac*a CS^Iftiva CSSittaa haa non involvad tha Kctfo Council in tha aitinp of public faeililiaa on tha lako* ISSQgS Tha follaalnp cape t tha aajoc iaaaaa aa thay aaiac: • hceaaa altaa - Muabaca uaiap Uka • Ploa thcouph accaaaao TOThL USkCg - - Lake kceasa Usact - Coaaaceial Hanna Uaura - Off lake raaident^a of late coi • Othac accaaa uaaca lunitiau SAggTY/gHPOUCgHgHT - fundIno - j ; . *r ; - : •c - SCdtrf - County • ?rivate/U«aea ; acj . / >5 n : r:«• pe«3:ienrly iton •jither ir -not ?**goonj .*pd*.T portion ot thoa*» expenar pru^idua oru thatu la M pood Jcd rinp tha aajoc t'*' "■■ S\P8Tt/ISSQg - Jurisdiction - SnforcoMnt - Shoriff - ?:o3«cution HgC0H«8dD»TIOWS - ?bo following s^ptos^tot r«co»*«ndstions cs9srdis« various Issuos in front ot tho Council for both prsssst so# futuro consideration. 1. woftvi Shore Crivo • It is roco—sndsd tbst: Stsif uorh with residents to continue to asaitoc the problena that sro 6 to S tiass out of tbs jfast* b.) Tnst the City not coaart tbosa raaafvad sia^ aith biiCD until such tiaa es that# la a ^aaaaamM need for sddUloasLly coaaittad pstki^ eaatlfaM m other eoaaunity's coaaitaants end sppcottiata gao^rapbie distribution of access. Public beeasi - that the City la eaajaactiaa wtU tbu datropol U^n Couaei 1 and otbat lake esanaitlaa aaib2. to assistin the public access sitiag ta tba aataak tbak ilound Jite. "(A 3. Look for Additional taep Ploe Spots a. ) Private access ^ ^b. ) Evaluate current rasp uee and parking at taese sites ,.^vl 4. 90ATTSG ' *VTO:' EO - '4o?’< ind encottcsge t»!lCD . j i . r f ^ :r. *•:: j .... iC JiJt :ar - j , -- *j;* . • s.: . * jj'- jn. . j.: . - f i i.i - n ■ j .r.zo 1 jinctjc*. to miorco ; 3rd..'.jnce:i : uvsires so en£or:;j ai so tae ?und 1na - Sncouraqo that the iolloen^ funding ba izr^: j.) Lune MinnetonKa aticker That •‘vocyone aciiirinq tnu lake be requited to p^ a 5 “3->25 1 year «jtic'4er lae and that persons not nev»eq » % - I i h.d -Jf'} *■ s +2 Jiicii «ppcopci«t9iy Cin«d. Noni«s tzom tMim — gWbllc •€€— f— MfkiM ia th...labUc aTcaM ^ •• '■■•nta, plaaaa faai -,. f. T^.>- ■ v>«. _t»aV^‘ li I ■' I 1 • ■ttirtlifl liV >■ s. . -...^^, ■ •' ............on'iiiwiiinMMiiii lot OATSt Hayoc Mid City Coiineil HmIi tocniMcdsoii. City Adainistrato Octoavc 23, i»iS Lak* ?Unn«tonka w«« and Accass 4t'b C(ltf!>(<ii> MSIM OCT 2 51385 CIT' OF OWWO I- 4^. I * V Attaehad you aill find a a««o cagarding ttia saM«cy •! o«g SaftMNMC 23cd Mating togntHnr with caewaMiidationn minting tn eonoitannt of pntking an it pennantly ntintn in tiM vicinity of tho Nortli kro landing, no oeuid ilk# you to covioo tho ioooon not foctSi in thin '?ovnc nooo togothor uith tko inniioo liotod in tno nttnenod oooo foe d<neiinnion at out Movonboc I2th nooting* ko yon ago aoago tho ionuo kan again coon to tiM fogoftont boeanoo of tho acgninltion option foi a nito in llinnotfintn at tho ond of King*o foint toad. 0«k had ovaloatod a noohog niton acoond tho lake foeuning principal ly on tho oooth aoi and it nan thoir dotoinination that thin non tho hoot nitn and hod gono to tho Oovognog*n tioentivo Council nooting no Oggghnc« 2nd intending to got aothocity to go ahoo' and pfoento. the authogity hooovog wan not gmntod bocauoo t . lanontion eMdnil ,: . folt that it non appgopgUto to innnlvo tho Hotgo Council in thn^'g niting of ouch gogional facilttioa. ko you vill note in the ^4 attachnont tho Council hao laid out tho pgoconn hy which thoy"'^ will toko a look at tho ianuo. In osdoc to pcoo^ta tho aetivo involvonont of tho lako connonition in thin niting proeonn. aoO aaneop» tho Nayog of Shornwood and alno tho pennant Chair of L.M.C.O.« hold a nooting. « ^ Tuonday* Octobor 22« Ifts, to dlacuna digoctionn and noana of '^ input of tho lako eoonunition to thin proconn. It wan indicatod that L.M.C.O. will dovolop innuoa and agoao to look at fot nurfaco watoc nanagonont on tho lako, howovor thoy folt it won appropriate that tho eoonunition each Involve fonoono olno ipart Jtoo tha T tof ♦ i-.3 •..tj .jiual ii . ind -i-» 4j i . j : i j . .vi . Je 4 .. 2» 2 3.*aau.l: c 4 : <. :/a :jCwtCJ;ng t.n;j aacsae. j: -.7.^ '... •.J.:. .1 ino tj t:.1 • ion icti v* raqainu ;ii: jy it% of fort to riocaatal. wan fucthac ptaaauco foe additional aceoiooo around tha laka. Mayor Raacop vill ho proaont at our hovonbog I2th mooting to diacusn cha inouo. an vill Jotrian Hurt and ponoibly Sanatot Can Olaon. Adc: tionai ly ateachad is a meant Artiela fron tho Minnoapolio Stat dnd Tribune regarding £*aka :iinnatonka aceaaa aa noon by Onn, together vith a li:it of sites the OMR has haon aaploring foc poasibla ucceaa. nt:coVMr.ssATroN - it is rucomoenuod that Council diaeuaa any Ml , a "*■ initial 4ltn«tion that tliny i*nnt thn City to »-•'ot'onahip to this prior to tho Sovsnbor I2th sooting. This Ltiofi -ouid bo to boeoM octivoly involv^ in input »*o tho !iotro Council procsss coqacdin9 land uso eonsidocstiono •or 'public accoss. (This say bo aiax.jc so jooo 04. tho tU.T. ^ hovo any further thoughts or considotations roqordios tho nsttoi that they bo relayed to us prior to cne sovonber I2th neetan^* that the balance of the iaaue be tabled until houeebec I2« IftS# iMotinp. Ayes _ _• hays '••ii > rr CITY of OBOiN'O Poal Ofik* Bm aS*CnraUl Bay. Minncaala 55323•Mttaidpal OCRcaa CM th€ North Shoro of Lmko Mumotonkm Sov«mb«r 29r 1985 V- ’•i-V Mr. Patrick Scully, Chairman H«tropolitan Council Talk Force on Lake Minnetonka C/0 Arne Stefferud Metro Council 7th and Robert Streets 8t. Paul, MM 55101 Dear Mr. Scully, Enclosed please find the City of Ocono's response to your letter of October 30, 1985, regarding the Metropolitan Council Task Force on Lake Minnetonka. Sincerely, Mark Bernhard^n City Administrator BUILDING a ZONING - 47 J-7357 ASSESSING ADMINISTRATION a FINANCE - 4 73-7358 PUBLIC WORKS - 473-7359 Attn: Patrick Scuily, Chairman CITY OP ORONO RESPONSE TO LAKE NXNHETOhKA TASK FORCE 11/2R/35 1. How Is Lak® Minnetonka managed by your city under its statutory authority? Th® City of Orono interests and Involvement stems from the fact it has 33% of Lake Minnetonka as area and 43% of the total shoreline within it*s boundaries. Additionally it has 6 commercial marinas^ one of the most actively used public accesses together with having both Big Island and Deering Island, which present unique service problems within its Jurisdiction. Because of this it has been a leader in efforts to regulate land use of the abutting shoreline together with it*s upland areas in order to preserve and pcotect the water quality of Lake Minnetonka. This leadership is coupled with a strong commitment to preserve and protect the public safety both on and near the lake. Orono has utilisied its statutory authority as have moat municipalities to govern land use and public safety as it relates to residential property, commercial marinas, joint docks and other usages on the lake. In conjunction with LHCD, Orono has worked to make the lake a cleaner and safer natural recreational resource for all lake users including Orono residents both on and off the lakei and nonresident users of the lake through marinas, persons fishing rora shore; free public access users; and park users, all of which constitute forms of public access. 2. Define your city's critical interests in managing Lake Minnetonka and related land uses within your jurisdiction. As noted in the prior response the City’s critical interests :: *. qua.l'-.y t or ^-‘.1.3 r ‘z'c\b/cr zzzBZ' :z:. 2 B -* ?l233e idazz.l" :3b -.r.d 3^r-i:a 3.r., :zriC *331 .**. :a.-.ar. j = . “ / : : .* :arTiar. : .^ j :aJ ; ii 2 iz a : by lake access and la»;a use within ycur jurisdiction. In addition to land use considerations to protect both the -runlity tnd -cross on =-..'3 in': 3. Orono'3 itt3ndant conosrns regard parking; pedestrian ar.d biitar safety; trjjpassing; vandalism; accidents; fires and law enforcaraent ralated issues both on the laka and at the shoreline, especially on and near across sites (not only in '5rono but in Minnetonka 3each and Spring Pari;, to whom Orono provides police services). Although Orono has a limited ability or capability for on-lake enforcement, Orono is becoming more i.T/ol/id to o-ocdinat2 1:j 3ftorts wio.i oo>. ssr agencies. With its limited on laKe capacity it is working to 7 r 3 V i d (3 3 2 r V i ja 'vh an o 2 1 t ad on zo 2 dd r a 33 t>.e .-oo3 t significant problems. The City is also concerned with maintenance of water quality as it relates to polluting run off and clean up around the lake. 4. Please describe how your city is implementing the recommendations contained in the "Heport of the Lake Minnetonka Task Force** (June, 1983). The City of Orono is presently reviewing the Task Force recommendations regarding implementation. Since Orono possess one of the major access sites, the principal issue at this point is consideration of the securing of parking as it exists near the public access sites for off lake residents including a large number of potential users from Orono. (Enclosure A summaries progress to date.) 5. Identify any barriers you city has encountered in attempting to implement the recommendations in the **Report of the Lake Minnetonka Task Force.** The primary issues are Council*s overall public safety concerns on both the land and the lake. There has been significant neighborhood concern regarding commitment of the parking spots because of the attendant problems with off-site parking related to the access including trespassing and vandalism. As a part of this concern is the extent to which an increased utilisation of the lake may escalate existing problems. 6. Please suggest proposals fo.* public participation procedures as well as intergovernmertal planning and negotiations procedures to resolve lake iranagement issues. It is hoped the Task Force in the development of the preliminary recommendations would work closely with LMCD on the water surface issues and the individual communities on the land use issues. Is is suggested the departure point for 1 : * 3.2 c 1 n : 2 r. f : 3 2 : . \ . * 2 1 b ? : ' i 2 3 3 2 2 2 : s 3 i .2 3 2-2 222:27 *23- : ! i 23 322:22 222 '?'.22.3^ r 3 2 2 r : : 2" : _ : 3:: 2 2 = J j : 2 2 2 7 : cr 2 _ 2 u 2 1 i 2 e ; 2 land 233 133 233 . • Please conroenc and submit any suggestions on 'ina remaining steps of the Council's review procedure. - % -A »i 13 0 2 2 2 : 3 2 d ■; 2 a 2 2 2 2 :i j : 1 >. 0 2 : 2 2 c 2 ; 13 i a * 2 1 2 2 3 d iCD and the Cities individually be allowed to respond to ^ draft report in a meeting in the Lake Minnetonka ar^a. ClTtf OF ORO&IO SUMHART OF PROGRESS ii85 LA4^2 ;412i:JS70£!iIU TASK FORCE R8C0HHBEDATZ0RS Bncloaure A Morsh Ara/HandrIclcson - As a County operaiad facility, the City's primary issus rslatss to securing of offsite parking on adjacent City and County roadsr over which the County has final word. 2. This would be addressed at the point long tarm commitments are not realized. 3. Moerenberg Bridge - As a County owned bridge and Suburban Park Reserve owned facility this is more properly addressed by those bodies. 4. Holly's Corner - No formal action taken. 5. Fishing craft/Small recreation boat - No action taken. 6. Big Island Veteran's Camp/Oeer i ;jg Island - The City's Comprahensive Management ?lan mdicatas this should be dedicated as park space. The Ci:y of Orono has been active in closing the operation of the Veu5»ran's Camp because of the existence of hazardous buildings among other public safety# health and welfare concerns. The City does support acquistion of the property for park purposes. Additionally Orono has indicated to the present owner of Deering Island 1that ?e«»rir.g Ts'and should also be a par’:. '.2 3 ■. ?’dsr i.t vresar-a ::: tr. :: ■ ■ ZM z . 'i : : : r. z j a 3 . ipptopristj 3C3ZJ variances :o resurface ihe road as ^ two lane route. No further action has presently been taken. rrai- - .30 _;rr.2* ic::or. 9. Consideration of conversion of commercial marinas to public access - No e;:i5cing marinas have request a :hange in use. 10. Improved fishing access No formal action. J.7 ::vc. l.ucz ::.3k 7Q2C2'z RECO»M£NDATIOKS FOR PUBLIC ACCESS Cp—inityt Addraass Coiitacs Paraoat PhOMS mm ?.0. 2os 56 Crratal toy, MR 55323 Hark tonhardson* Clt7 Adainlatrator (612) 473-7357 1» 2, 5 Zopta^ I. » Task Forea tocoaaandacloaa a. »'* 3. ' ‘I. » tlopi Rorth An/tondrlckaott Accaaa - Add doaks M6d sitoa ahowliit tha location of off-aita paASSSTaiM yvoTlda toilata, traah eontalnara, yobllc phoaaa, and adaqnata Undacaping, la addition, any or all of tha folXoviat nathoda aboald ha aaployad to roach tha Taak Forea goal of 700 total a car-trallar pablie parking apacaa for tha lakat Xaeraaaa on-oica parkiag hf land acqniaitioa vhara land amilahillty and fnnding parnitai iaeraaaa raliabla parking by aequiaition of or through vrlctan ,»arking agraananta for off-atract parking lota in tha aieinity; incraaaa long-tam raliabla on-atraac parking in cha vicinity chrongh vrittan parkiag agraananta. If lont-t iithilTcE I written yarkto ^|raananta for axiacing aitaa within tiiaaa tonaa^wSoF^oaaaSfSI^ than additional accaaa for anall boata with aaaoclatad parking ahonld ha eonaidarad to caac raliabla parking goala for tha aonaa. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _RoaranbargBr^ - laprova Bahchaa, trasn eontainara, ana toiiata ahould ba Racomiandation*»5hora Facllltlee; landacaplng. prorldad. lacoMandation—Shore Pacilitiaai Molly*a Carnmr/tmsmmm ga«_ - Saetirg -?>arklna l3r.c>.33, :r33>. :zr.Z3.±T.2rz , ird x-u.2^-r3’7id2d. J . Z nagrr:3»snQa:-!.3n; . -dirlcr.a.: zzzzz ind :S33S3 ». ’ M T’t ». (f 1» 3 RacoTBPandatlent «\CQul3ltion of Dagring lalaod ind Vatarana for Thd alaca acouid'^tain full and clear ritla to :ho Canp and tne^ HCPRD should develop and laanoga tha 3ira in ccr.jur.c.icn %i:>. :!:a Arthur All’r. co a regional park, addraaa tha dlatrlbution of accesses for fishing craft and soall recroa- Clon boata, the Task Force arrived at a ayotsw vhcreby the lake vas divided into five nukjor zones. Sec attached oap. ’’ U2.3 Hacoirn-endatlen; !fl»en CountyJjyd^J^ecvesn '.Joysata and 'lavarra aaada loprevaMac, it abeuld ba daalgiiad and aanaiad aa a twe-laaa aeawle nar’wa'^ .s. .,i3,.aa at thi3 “jaiaua xaicaanora roadway. Twprawaaaata abowld ptorlda. whara aanrlcoBMataUr poaalbla. btha and hlktns traila aad aeaale narklag araaa. Couaty aad Staca acaadarda abooU ba aodldlad to tha roadway to ba claaalflad aa a aeaala parba^p. <* 1.J.3 n. 1*3 10, 1.2,3 lirf inditiont If joar e__ • trtll <>Iaoa th« task fores Wc tbm p4oa ba lapisMatsd Lu Xapcovs IBBfa acesaa* la pwtftowg aeesaP ‘ it lea I Zapli _Ma-seetis uaa* itlas. siSBelsa and Oroao ahoold eooparata riTTi ___ ■saaglag aeesss sites sad vliso consldorlaa Mrs ds¥sIopMat» psrtieaUr attsatleo slMald ba sivaa to the goal of teprorlaa sccsss for fisbiii^ egmft and rseraatloo POSSZBLS LAND OSB XSSUB8 SOU ACC3S3 BAS2D IN ?AA7 ON NABINA BaelOSOM S - Parking - (Function of aspactad damand - ovarflov availability on roads only for faw times par year* Relation to rasp slots.) ^ • Yard araa/Satbaeks - Landscaping - Orainaga and Hardcovar - (runoff/pollution) - Sacority fancing/scraaning - Raqoirad facilities - Sanitary - Road access - Lighting - Claanlinass/Maintananca - Traa removal - Ramps - Slots - Boat sisa/draft - Hotaapowar - Width/Depth - Composition - Setbacks - Docks - Length - Width - Construction - Satbacl:3 -pera clonal 2-.oo: 11 - Hours - ZciZiS - ,'jsages - Compatiabi1ity with adjacant daveiopment City of 0R0>,'0 BSSOLUTION Of THE crri” COUNCIL NO. 1915_________ Tnu, , ”S0I,0 T10W REGABBINO PASXZNS SiCTS POR ZOn 1 AS DETS»tH*8 BY MRSOPOtlTAH COONCIi*S PORCS on uno nS^Sl.r'Jn?'' “ <» U an nno.-nlln. snSfo*n«s«, «aa .or .11 i.u u,,., .^a l.ki.aor. MOBS otBor'itoa/ th^« 76B°a«-^»^V* *‘^®***^®’*'‘* r«eefia«ad#d aoBMSM, of 4o «i*.“Vo n 1 %*,* o***®.‘* *=•«for oueh Mo^lSs ® *** t® ®« roliaOi/ >to;s 1..0. u a a. h«i purch***^^Vo?r^-y^^^^ ?-**currt*•csti*, and cn fer additoaal ir«« puiJlie i=?air?d ticr.il" r.V=^^insrsssed and * ..........» •a.««e sus zs "-V. -•■• •-••■•i=" -•■^*--- is ..-.■>9 ad'-'i^on*-. Z2ZII •—eat ... .rsr-.s r.aedir.; essrira.r.i ■ -s -- .d-.-ona. ,5s-.a ..o .,5 .--- -. =.; V=L-.';ir,-l-J''=“' = • I.nSr;=H,o?”;“' ;;=a-S_-' = ! ='<.-!;o» J.tJin; : = ; ;-, ® 5 tiaas per seaicr.. 4 ■1 X3TT - Tff ~ oRnrsiD City of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. IglS________ HOW, 7MZMZTOMZ BE IT RESOLVED, thct tb« City Cooneil of tbt City of Orono will work towards ths dtvslopstat of up to 79 additioasl parkins spots in Zont 1 on land ownad by tithsr tbc vty os tbt County provldsd that: s.) Ho aessssss in addition to thosa that axistad on January 1, 1984 ba plaead on tha laka and that D«K«IU sign a writtan agraaaant with L.M.C.D. that thay will not plaoa any asoassts on tha laka. s.) Funding dor total davalopaant of tha sitas oobs dto& soureas outsida tha City and that davalopaant ba only to tha axtant of availabla outsida funding and e«) To tha axtant faasibla that davalopaant ba phaaad to aaat danand and d.) That any davalopaant of eff-straat parking ba dona in a aannas that providas for a laval of sosaaning and coapatability with rasidantial naighberhoods, and FVRTSXJl 32 IT RESOLVED, that tha City Council of tha Cit^ of Orono strongly urgas tha Laka Minnatcnka Coasarvation District to inpcsa a faa on all boating usars of tha laka to pav for tha costs of law anfcrcaaant, claaaup, accass cparatioa and laka adBinistration, and FORTB&l BE IT RESOLVED, that as parking is davalcpad ofd-atraat that aaprcpriats staos be taker, to linit cn-strtet parking tn the vit^-ity cd :ne access to linit the oublic saiet'* hacards and nuisances associated wi^t the access. Minnesc Adopted by rhe Ziz'j Council of the Cit^ ta at a regular neeting held January it, 15£5.* ^ ^ ^ ^ ^W m ^ ms ^ f \ Vj ATTEST:M»ry c. K*yer ZONE 1 2 3 4 m 5 ACHES OF WATER 2,780 2,880 3,100 2,520 2.720 14,000 TABLE 1 DISTRIBUTION OF CAR-TRAILER PARKING SPACES AT PUBLIC ACCESS SITES BY ZONE TASK FORCE goal . FOR RELIABLE'EXISTING PARKING SPACES IDENTIFIED PARKING IN uirruTTY* nP IN VICINITY- Or ACCESS SITES VIwlN11T Ur ACCESS SITES RaiABLE*'UNRELIABLE—TOTAL 139 60 109 159 144 46 363 409 155 0 8Q 80 126 79 216 295 136 0 219 219 700 IBS 987 1,172 * In Vicinity owans within 1,500 fttt from tha acctss s1ta. ** Rtllabia car-trallar parking space Is ona that 1$ publicly owna4 or guaranteed by long term written agreement. Source: See Item 20 of Bibliography TABLE 2 DISTRIBUTION OF CAR-TRAILER PARKING BY ZONE ON-SITE VS. OFF-SITE ZONE ON-SITE OFF-SITE 1 36%. 64% 2 11%89% 3 0%100% 4 6%94% 5 0%100% 115 895 Source: See Item 20 of Bibliography TABLE 3 t DISTRIBUTION OF CAR-TRAILER PV,KING 3Y ZONE ON-STREET VS. CFr-S*?.£ET CONE• 2 3 4 CN-STR 395 05 325 10C5 575 OFF-STREE*”'’^ 3c2 il5 1005 535 05 off-street oarkino includes both on-sits ana otner parking 1wts .within 1,£0u feet from launch ramps. Sr.-rca: See item 20 of Bibliograpny P.eoorz of the Lake y^rnetonka ■"acl* r'- r.ahe Aoo-ss ParTiing Study novfswb'sr ^0. 1992 NOMH M9% LAHDINO - l!*im«pAn County oimad/oparuted Location: on County Road 31 juac oaut of O-un*:-; -oiu i>, c-'j Zona Location 0n-Slt3 Parhiag e M•«4 IWr 4i O 4*4* ooss 4^ is *4 44 f M 10x20 Spacaa noat on Vohlcle 10x40 Spaces Vahielo w/Tral1er 7ot.il a•w» Ioo “i *2 ri OFF-SITS PARKiriG eastwardwestward-north Shore Drive subtotal this zone ^ ^ runnino total within SOO ft 10 eastward-north Slioro Drive wastward-North Shore Drive subtotal this zone ruaniao total within 1000 ft eastward-North Shore Drive -■aldiir Park Road wastwardOiarth Shore Drive •Naplo Place soutfiward-Shadywood Road __^ .ragariMM Pt M . ...> .laMitiooai mum «MiipbX« but rarely used) eehtots l this eone A reattiaq total within ISOO ft eastward iJorth Shore Drive -Si ldur Park i^oad wastward-no:th Shore Drl'/e -Maple Place — subtv»tal this SOHO ^ rywaing total within 2000 ft 1<^ eastward-(none In use beyond 2000 ft) •/cetvmrd-'lrrth r»iore Dri*»e - ! ' rn Zt \ __ :cnj r'U'.nir.'T *3:3. vioswwaru-!ori.i .i-- : ^ . (additional spacoa avail, but rarely usod) subtotal this zone ^ runnim ‘•.qh.I vl ’/.-.m 50 : 3 16 104 10s IS 4 4+ lae 1»6 •. J O 10 701 1 \ total snaces available ?or -ohi':'.'2s with trailora .^01 orryVici'id on-‘Jito '*•* pr*nvll»U*Q un-.itr:jirr 32^* K> »-«<• ^ SritiMfi T^spic TTscat U a »ioi»^(Sts V r/''iwc« Jhw» Aiowfiiity i» Ifes /'r.««T(piu» T& OQC no TVtieC fhcMt AfM Lmtum 9fr»rJ* Pv« U hTmi* ToTftu ^?9nucS 5'Ht i’*ffiost>rT H*99-te icsr u(C r^'ii Aici % US9 w. *'v [''mfi®!. \ • * i\ WEST tm <> f^-%A / •'^v v-i3r?ffx ( Cofk-er lercrgaK^aia m yn F* ■• •*• icif]M ...:j i-'- iY/i t. \w j ^ ^ 7 ♦MIN • • ’ '• LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT mCASTUKESTREET WAYZATA, MINNESOTA 56Wt TELEPHONE«ia473.7033 10. molt HonciPioims - I Tipiati rntatm. Ghmimmt TSSUTi^SSJS:. •***»- M. ms .. —Moil Hum Sucruiary Oiunu m Kiw*i. IMa. •' .................... **•• -------------- sow. Monitor Report of Public Acccti P.rkin* on Uko Minnotonko MUin—ooita S«ue«» Runu du Mooenuu* 'tMa IHwud J. Garwood Dodphofii m NMdmor •Pliitf HiHl ■MitK. mdatoury IC. >4. m to July 2, ms tho Oittriet forwordod to you otudardo to ooaiot thoio nunicipalitios uiihing to provide lonftera roUeble cer- progress covsrd those goals on s continuing bssla. The foi^ovlu tot!d'M^'3i7m5! -2on# Fublic Ac«»Oe of Reliable Additions/ R6. of lellsble C^T Speces 1983 Deletions C*T Spaces 1985 Zone 1 north Ara Sub Total -0- -0-AO i 9 ••Snb Total '46 -0- Zone 3 Carsons Bay de • iB w -0--0--0-Sub Total -0--0--0- Zone 4 Spring Park Bay 79 .,-•0-79Fhelps Bay __-0--0--0-Sub Total 79 -0-79 Zone 5 Halsted Bay -0--0-•0-Cooks Bay ^ ! MB . « -0-30 \J 50dub Total -0-;0 50 T0Ta\L TOR LAKE 135 -0-225 coo^ration*^!^*^^ tables and maps are attached. Thank you for yorr LAKE M Ik^onservation district f Chat naan c/enci LM Task Force Alexander, Cardebrlng, Dayton Carlson, Harkell, Wallace, Wheeler Area State Legislators State Executive Council County Connlssloners Klossner, Ault, Latvaaho TABLE 1 OISTBIBUTION OF CAR-TRAILER PARKING SPACES AT PUBLIC ACCESS SITES BT ZONE TASK FORCE GOAL FOR RaiABLE** ACRES PARKING IN ___ OF VICINITT* OF ACCESS SITES1 2.7B0 139 2 2.880 144 3 3.100 155 < 2,520 126 5 2.720 136 M.OOO TOO RELIABLE** 60 46 0 79 0 IBS UNRELIABLE** TOTAL 109 169 363 409 80 80 216 295 219 219 1,172 * ** owfltd or guaranteed by long term urltten agreement. Source: See Item 20 of Bibliography table 2 I DISTRIBUTION OF CAR-TRAILER PARKING BY ZONE ON-SITE VS. OFF-SITE ZONE I 1 2 3 4 5 Source: See Item 20 of Bibliography •SITE OFF-SITE 36S 64SinBBS OS lOOS 6S 94S OS lOOS ns BBS TABLE 3 ZONE 1 2 3 4 5 ON-STREET OFF-STR 64%36S BBS m OS loos 32S 68S 100S OS 67S 33S SoMree: See Item 20 of Bibliography Report oC tho Lake Minnetonka Teok Force June 1903 -12- ■I... >!v:; .►Ms «■ ? 2 Ji i * t ;s-r^ d r• «v y—.!lt?L >;^;V' • • • • Analysis Zone Boundarv "t EXISTMG PUBLIC ACCESS SITES AND COMMERaAL MARMAS Pubic ACCOM SKm Pubic Access Sites that should be Improved Key Pubic ACCOM SitM witti most on-sils parking Commercial Marinas Commercial Marinas witi fee launching tacilitles 10148 TOs Mayor and City Council FlOlf: Mark £• Bcrnhardson, City Administrato Ohm Octobar 13, 1988 SUBJICT: County Road 51 IfA Attachaant: A. city of Orono LatCar Datad 10/5/88 ISSUE - Praaantation of information ragarding progress of County 5oia"51. INTRODUCTION - At tha Council's Saptambar 26, 1988 Council maating tha issua ragarding County Road 51 was raviawad. Attacbmant A was transmittad to Varn Ganzlingar, tha Associata Adaiinistrator of Hannapin County* In a phona convarsation with Mr* Ganslingar tha waak of Octobar 18th ha indicatad that ha would ba rafarring this work to Patrick Murphy and that Nr* Murphy would ba gatting in contact with ma. Thay ara initially axploring altarnativas that would not raquira raconstruction togathar with onaa that could ba on in conjunction with Matropolitan Wasta Control Commission work* A masting with Hannapin County staff has baan sat for Tuasday, Octobar 25, 1988* ALTBRNATIV8S - 1. Accapt information* 2* Raquast furthar action. 3* Tabla for futhar discussion* RECOMMENDATION - It is racommendad that Council accapt tha information witli staff continuing to pursua tha mattar with tha County* PROPOSED MOTION - Moved by , seconded by __, that the Council accapt tha information from staff regarding County Road SI* Ayes _f Nays _. cc: David Singer, 3520 North Shore Drive, Wayzata QRONCE- CITirof OBONO Post Offiet Bn §S*C;?Mal Bay. BfiiiBMOCa SS323*Muudpal OOom Oft tkt North Short of Lakt Minnttonka October 5^ 1988 , Mr. V«rn G«nzlinger Associate County Administrator Hennepin County Canter A-2387 Minneapolis, MN 33487 Re: County 51 Parking and Striping Dear Vern, As you are probably aware County 51 has for a long period of time been of concern to neighborhood residents as it relates to the parking and safety on the south side of the road. This issue has been reviewed by the City of Orono in the past, as noted in the attached memorandum. Xt has again been requested to be addressed by Mr. David Singer, 3520 North Shore Drive, whose letter is enclosed in that memo. The Orono City Council at its September 28, 1988 meeting requested that staff discuss with Hennepin County the possible solutions to alleviate some of the safety concerns that have been raised. The City, at the County's earliest convenience would like to ait down and review the issue. Possible options to address which, include, but are not limited to the following: 1. ) Widening of the road up to 3 feet. 2. ) 2oubie striping ‘-er'/een tr.s parking and the "fog line", 3. } Removal of up to 3 parking spaces to improve sight line distance. 4. ) Installation of pedestrian marked crosswalks. 5. ) Extension of "Ho Parking" to account for sight lines when there is parking on zhe south. In addition to the safety issues are is the general issue of public access parking and the inter-relationship to parking with Hennepin County's North Arm access. BUILDING a ZONING - 473-7U7 assessing administration a finance - 473*73i«PUBLIC WORKS - 473-7339 Mr. V«rn G«n2ling«r October S, 1933 Pag* 2 Yoor cooperation on this natter is greatly appreciated. The timeliness of a review is even more appropriate given the construction currently being done along County 51 by the Metro Waste Control Commission. Sincerely mrrdsoir City Administrator MEB/dh cc: David Singer TOs Mayor and City Council raOM: Nark Barnhardaon, City Administrator DATBs Octobar 26^ 1988 8UBJBCT: County Road 51/Safaty 4 <^iU£/U Ufisid Attachmants:A« David Singar Letter Dated 10/21/88 B. LMCD Latter Dated ______ C. DNR Letter Dated ______ ISSUE - Presentation of information regarding progress on County Road 51. INTRODUCTION - At the Council's September 26, 1988 Council meeting the issue of safety of County Road 51 was discussed* Since that time the County has indicated their willingness to work with the City* Staff met with Dennis Hanson of Hennepin County Transporation to review alternatives on October 25, 1988. Subsequent to that September meeting the City has received a letter from Lake Minnetonka Conservation District expressing their opinion on the matter together with DNR indicating that safety of parking is the primary issue (however they still feel that there need to be a select number of spots around the lake and it ia up to the Cities and other agencies to insure that they are provided*) DISCUSSION • At our meeting with Mr* Dennis Hanson of Hennepin County on October 25, 1988, the City laid out the following items for exploration: - Crosswalks - Pedestrian safety zone - Car spacing - Restriping of the road - Expanded shoulder - Curbing - Flashing pedestrian lights - Narrow drive lanes - Speed limit change - Lengthening No Passing lane - Access dock The County is exploring these and will bring back recommended alternatives and options that they may see as feasible on that stretch of the road. It was hoped that they will be back to us by this time for further communication at this meeting, but it is not anticipated that we will see those until the week of 11/14* The City, when the alternatives are developed, will send a list of those alternatives to all the residents along County Road 51 to appear at the discussion of this item. ALTERNATIVES 1. Accept the information, 2. Make any further comments Council wants to make. 3. Take no action. RECOMMENDATION - It is recommended that the Council accept the information presented making any further comments that they may desire regarding this item and table it to the December 12, 1988 Council meeting. PROPOSED MOTION - Moved by _, seconded by that the Council accepts the information and tables discussion on the item until December 12, 1988. Ayes _, Nays _. cc: David Singer, 3520 North Shore Drive, Wayzata Dear Neighbor: I am enclosing copies o£ all pertinent documents that have generated to date, regarding the parking Issue. been Some of you received some of these papers earlier. However, I had only randomly selected a few households based on the number of available copies I had made at the time. That was done on short notice, when I realised how quickly the City had placed the matter on the Council Agenda. Ler me explaitt how I came to act on this matter by myself. Z first called Mr. Bemhardson in late summer to inquire about whether there was any history of this Issue coming before the Council or the City staff. He was kind enough to put together a rather bulky packet of materials that had accumulated from pre vious governmental activity on the matter. That was the first that I knew of a petition that was many of you In 1985. filed by After reviewing the materials provided me, I was at a loss to understand why nothing further was done; whether through a failure of City's elected or staff officials, and/or the County's elected or staff officials. Given the governmental political sensitivities towards lakeshore issues, I did not presume the fault was with any particular official, group of officials, or a specific governmental entity. That is why I have addressed my letters expressing concern to everyone who is in a position of potential power. In any event, Mr. Bemhardson expressed a geniune interest and willingness to reopen and reconsider the issue, and was partic ularly receptive to do so on an accelerated time table, while the road is being tom apart for sewer construction. H^th this background, let me state that my letters to govern mental officials are intended to only express my point of view, which may differ in perspective from your own. I do not purport to Icnow the right answers or to serve as a group spokesman. My only intent is to raise some thought provoking suggestions for anyone interested and willing to listen and hopefully, in a position to respond and act. X felt the urgency of having the issue promptly raised and con sidered regardless of whether there is a neighborhood consensus of the best or preferable solution, or what that consensus might be. In that regard, I personally think the best solution should come from persons with expertise in traffic safety, vis a vie private citizens, elected officials, or other government employees with areas of expertise that are elsewhere. Please be assured that I do not however, feel your input or assistance is unwelcome or would not be helpful. Time con straints made any sort of organizational effort impractical. My purpose in sending you these materials is primarily to keep you informed of what is going on since I am in the best position to do so. Since the City obviously did not endeavor to notify me of the petition that was filed in 1985, X want to make sure that everyone who is affected by any action that is taken at. least has - opportunity to know of what is taking place and can make a Conscious choice whether to offer suggestions, input or otherwise remain non-involved. .. ... Xf you have any questions or suggestions, for me, it is easiest to catch me at work or leave me a message at work. Since I will obviously have something to say for myself in any future public meetings, I would certainly welcome any thoughts you may have for me to consider, if you are unable or otherwise not desirous of personally attending. With this backgroxmd, let me state that my letters to govern mental officials are intended to only express my point of view« which may differ in perspective from your own. X do not purport to know the right answers or to serve as a group spokesman. My only intent .. is to raise some thought provoking suggestions for anyone interested and willing to listen and hopefully# in a position to respond and act. I felt the urgency of having the issue promptly raised and con sidered regardless of whether there is a neighborhood consensus of the best or preferable solution# or what that consensus might be. In that regard# Z personally think the best solution should come from persons with expertise in traffic safety# vis a vie private citizens# elected officials# or other government fmployees with areas of expertise that are elsewhere. Please be assured that I do not however# feel your input or assistance is unwelcome or would not be helpful. Time con straints made any sort of organizational effort impractical. My purpose in sending you these materials is primarily to keep you informed of what is going on since Z am in the best position to do so. Since the City obviously did not endeavor to notify me of the petition that was filed in 1983# I want to make sure that everyone who is affected by any action that is taken at least has the opportunity to know of what is taking place and can make a conscious choice whether to offer suggestions# inpu^ or otherwise remain non-involved. If you have any questions or suggestions# for me# it is easiest to catch me at %#ork or leave me a message at work. Since I will obviously have something to say for myself in any future public meetings# I would certainly welcome any thoughts you may have for me to consider# if you are unable or otherwise not desirous of personally attending. ^ry truly yours# ivid A. Singer DASsnr John E. D eruj CHAUMAN PHONE 34a-3oae Board of Hennepin county Commissioners OCT 1 1 1988 A-2400 Government Center Minneapolis, Minnesota a54d7-0240 October 3, 1988 Mr. David A. Singer DavM A. Singer, Ltd. S\iit 220 Marsh Run 11500 Waysata Blvd. Minnetonka, NN 55343 Dear Mr.Singer: I vould like to thank you for your letter expressing concern for the traffic situation in the area of the North Arm Boat Launch facility. I share your concern for the safety of those %iho frequent this area. Z have directed Hennepin County staff to review the ^tematives outlined in your letter, and to meet with representatives of the City of Orono. I have asked Vem Genzlinger, Hennepin County Engineer, to place this item on the Public Service Committee agenda as soon as staff has made a thorough investigation. I have also asked him to inform you of that meeting date so that you can be in attendance if you wish. If I can be of any further assistance, please do not hesitate to call. Sincerely, I John E. Denis IjChairman TO; Mayor and City Council FIOM: Nark Barnhardaon, City Adainistrat OATB: November 13, 1988 SUBJECT: County Road 51 ISSUE • Updating Council regarding information on County Road 51. INTRODUCTION - Presently the staff has been i* contact with the Hennepin County Department of Transportatlon but has not met to review the alternatives that they consider acceptable on thet road. Once this has been determined staff will make a recommendation as to when this should be placed on the agenda and the affected property owners notified. At the present time it is not anticipated that this will be able to be considered for an initial review by the Council at its December 12, 1988 meeting and then discuss with the neighborhood at the Council aeeting in January 1989. ALTERNATIVES - 1. Accept the information. •2.* Direct staff to-bring back an initial package to the. December 12, 1988 aeeting for review before presentation to the neighbors. 3, Direct staff to notify neighbors for consideration either January 9th or January 23rd meeting as deemed appropriate. 4.. Table until the next aeeting for further discussion. RECOMMENDATION - It is recommended that the Council accept the iflfoFmatlon from staff and direct staff that if the County's package is prepared that it be presented to Counoil initially at Ohe December I2th meeting for eventual presentation and (iscussion with the neighborhood during a January 1989 Council I eeting• FROPOSED MOTION - Moved seconded tha information reglfrdlng County ToadN^S Boeemhsr 12, 1988. Ayes / Mays Council SLOd TT HENNEPM DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS 320 Washington Ai/e. South ^ Hopkins, Minnesota 55343-8468 ^(| ^ C 935-3381 NovMbtr 28, 1988 DEC Hr. Hark E. 88rnhardson City Adalnlstrator City of Orono 1339 South 8ro«n Road Crystal 8ay, HN 99323 RE: CSAH 91 Parking North Are 8oat Launch Sita Oaar Hark: Enclosad Is a raport antitlad 'Parking on CSAH 91 In Conjunction With tha North Ara 8oat Launch Facility*. This report outlines tha parking options on CSAH 91 froa tha County’s perspective. Although the three options discussed In the report appear to be workable froa the County’s viewpoint. It Is recoaaended that Option Nuaber 2 be sued. This option retains and laproves the parking provisions on the south side of CSAH 91. Recoaaended is a full 10 foot wide curbed parking lane within the current parking llaltatlons along the south side of CSAH 91. We will be aost happy to aeet with you end your staff to further discuss and resolve this Issue. Sincerely, Dennis L. Hansen, P.E. County Traffic Engineer 0LH:gk Enclosure cc: Patrick 8. Hurphy Yarn T. Genzilnger HENNEPIN COUN1Y on equal opportunity emptcyef Parki =80on CSAH 51 In Conjunction With the rth Ara Boat Launcn ^ac^lUy Currently, the Lake Minnetonka North Are boat launch facility contains 64 ckiuble parking stalls designated for vehicle/traller coeblnatlons, and 17 single parking stalls designated for cars/vans/pickups. Vehicle/traller conblnatlon plus general parking Is also periltted on the south side of CSAH 51 froe CSAH 133 iresterly approxleately 1400 feet. This area serves as launch site spill-over parking. Assueing 30 feet for a vehicle/traller coeblnatlon parking space, this provides approxleately 28 stalls on CSAH 31. Residents living on CSAH 31 have raised Issues of safety as It pertains to the designated parking zone. The hoees are located on the north side of CSAH 31 but the property extends across CSAH 31 for lake access rights. The residents point out two safety Issues. The first Is the Inability of residents to cross CSAH 31 safely during tiees when vehicles are parked along the roadway. This Is due to obstructed lines of vision between pedestrians atteepting to cross the roadway and the approaching eotorlsts. The second Issue Involves safe use of the roadway for Joggers, walkers and bicyclists. During the three year period of 1983-87, records Indicate that only one accident occurred on CSAH 31 between the Intersection of CSAH 19 and CSAH 133. This alshap occurred at the boat launch facility driveway and was totally unrelated to parked vehicles. The following options have been developed for consideration. Option Nueber 1. Ellelnate all parking alnnq CSAH 31. This option would provide eaxleue safety and convenience for the residents and joggers/walkers/bicycllsts. However, It would probably nandate the reestabTlsheent of an equivalent nueber of parking stalls for boat launching purposes elsewhere. cst1on Nueber 2 Retain and Iwprove the parking provisions on the south side of AH Si. ITEhln the current parking Holts on CSAH 31, this option would Include widening of the shoulder to provide a uni fore paved parking stall width of 10 feet. A bituelnous curb would be placed on the outer edge of the shoulder to encourage full width use for parking (In the absence of a curb drivers soeetlees hesitate to park close to the shoulder edge). The existing shoulder varies In width froe six to nine feet, depending on location; therefore, the proposed shoulder would be one to four feet wider than the existing shoulder. It does not appear that this relatively elnor shoulder widening would present a hardship to the properties Involved. The shoulder widening could be acconpHshed In conjunction with the roadway restoration necessitated by the HWCC project currently underway on CSAH 31. Option Nueber 3. Saee as Option Nueber 2, except provide pedestrian safety p in the parking lane and juflynt the lost parking by constructing "a short parx lane on the north side of CsAH 31. A series of no parking spaces 50 feet In length would be provided for pedestrian crossings at select locations along th^ south side of CSAH 31. ten foot wide, approxleately 200 foot long, curbeu parking lane would be constructed on the north side of CSAH 31. The location would be east of Baldur Park Road. This frontage Is void of driveways and wall boxes so a parking lane would not Interfere with those facilities. MS Tng During devalopient of the options other features were explored. Under Options 2 and 3. eovlng the earked centerline of CSAH 51 northerly about two feet was considered. This would have the effect of reducing the necessary widening on the south side of the roadway for the establlsheent of a full width (10’) parking lane. This feature did not appear practical, however, because of the narrowness of the existing north shoulder, and the adequate space on the south side of CSAH 51 to provide the desired parking lane width. Vhlle pedestrians and bicycle eoveeents are quite frequent along CSAH 51, designation by signing of a bike/ped lane In coeblnatlon with the parking lane would not eeet county criteria. If the City Is Interested In establlsheent of a designated bike/ped lane such facility should be detached free the roadway. Joggers, pedestrians and bicyclists will certainly use CSAH 51; however, unless certain criteria are eet, such as a detached facility, the roadway under the parking conditions cannot be designated as a ped/bike lane. Designating the segeent of CSAH 51 between CSAH 19 and CSAH 135 as no passing was considered. However, our studies failed to uncover a need for such a restriction. Accident records, as Indicated earlier, showed only one accident during the past three years and that elshap was unrelated to passing. Dbservatlons of this roadway segeent did not unveil any visible haiards Involved In Baking the passing eaneuver. Lowering of the existing 35 HPH speed Halt has also been suggested as a safety eeasure. Since the roa^ay Is currently closed for sewer construction the feasibility and effectiveness of a speed reduction Is difficult to ascertain, be suggest that this question. If It Is to be pursued, would be better addressed after the roadway Is again open to traffic. Although all three options would appear to be workable froe the County’s standpoint, for the following reasons It is recoeeended that Dptlon Nueber 2 be pursued. 1) Option Nueber 2 provides a "status quo” as to the location of the parking lane, yet provides for safety In the establlsheent of a parking lane of adequate width. 2) Option Nueber 1, while probably providing the safest situation, leaves soee unanswered questions. The eajor question revolves around the availability of property within reasonable distance that could be developed Into a parking facility. Also, If such site Is located. Its purchase and developeent places a financial burden on the responsible agency. 3) Option Nueber 3, while expending upon the safety features of Option Nueber 2 by establishing pedestrian crossing spaces In the parking lane, adds the feature of a short parking lane on the north side of CSAH 51. This short parking lane Incurs additional cost and eay not be fully acceptable to the coeeunlty. The County Is coeeitted to the developeent and lepleeentatlon of a parking plan that will, hopefully, eeet with the acceptance of all those Involved, be will work closely with the City and residents toward this end. 11/28/88 2CSAH51 METaOPOLITA.*! CCr^ICIL’S TASK ?C?CE 0!I LAKE Mi::::ETOriKA Appendix; Lake Access Work Plana Heceived frca Lake Mi.-:nei;nka Cosnunitias In NoTMiber of 1985» the MCTFLN requested that coimunlties on Lake Minnetonka provide work plans which would show how they preferred access needs around the lake should be met. The request was made to provide nunicical ^cverrjnents "an opportunity to...cone up with viable solutions to iapleaent the reccnnendatlons for publio boat access and shore access of thtj 1983 Lake Minnetonka Task Force." The responses received were as follows; Shorewcod pp. 1-? Orono pp. 3-5 Mound pp. 6-7 Minnetonka pp. 8-23 Tonka Bay pp. 24—38 Woodland p. 39 Mlnnetrista pp. 40-end Telephone responses were also received from Excelsior and Spring Park. MAVW couNc;-Jam tm AOMiNomiA*: jn Omij.aTYOF SHOKEWOOD 87S8 COUfCniY cun ftOAO • SHOREWOOO. MINNESOTA 55331 • (612) 47A323f •s- J«ju*r7 13, 1986 Hr. Patrick Scully, Chair Hacrouclitan Council Task Perec on Lake Minnatonka 300 Hatro Square Building 'TL*Sevaxtth aad Bobart Scraacs StT. Paul, Hn- 53101 *:T5 Dear Chaisaan Scully: Shoruwood has asalycad the lakashora within its jurisdiction on PttspoM of locating water access.sites. It was found that - JB^^additional sites for water access onto Lake Hiaaetonka are available la .ShorsMood. _ It. is apparent- that only through the coadeBaatioa of property with . exisciag could sites be fouadl As you know, this would be eattreaely C0BsuBdag..J:?,;r..^^-^ - . -stroetnres larbor and IliaMtoaka rortabl* Dradsi.,. Am th. sit. ' • the site tnac receive a poor ranking. These aspects include: - ?“»■ r«l»tioB»Mp to rttidcntUl. rttidostisll?. saa*d, poor _ ie«, sad pool title or eoaplsz: oira«rsbip.-- ~jpe«^s3»re-fishiag opportanlsl.s, poor titl.owsrship, ronerr' barriars to limit larte boat2 . ■■ ,'ii -••.r*. _ —r.. ■ - £7-.•*• A fiesieerrTJjt Zsnmunir/ on Uke Minneronkt': Scl-^. Znon 1L>. llr. Pitrick Scull? Jamisry IS, 1986 zyf ^ crtatiag aert car-crailar parking sp«cts, since Shorcwood has ao public aeeaaa sices onto liaka ttiaaatonka, cba eraacien of parking spacas fo» ear-crailar parking within ISPO fact of axiating public access sites is inappropriate. 2IS R “r ;:.s:rin order to develop such a site. Zf X can be of further assistanca to the Task Force, let me know. Siaeerelp, nr? OF SHC8TBOOO .i . , '' 1. - r. i ¥«5pi.S>PC ' ■ ‘..r ’. . . . . . . .. . '• .. IT *. r CIX' 1 On the North 5^korr of Lake Minnoton,^ Januiry 2$, 1986 Mr. ?itriek Scully, Chairman Mttropolitaa Council Task ?orct cr. Lake Minnetonka Metro Council 7th and Robert Streets St. Paul, MM 551CT1 Dear Mr. Scully, pleas* find x copy of the Resolution outlinin9 Croao*s contingent coanitaent for up to 79 parking spots which balance of pro-rated parking needed in Zone 1, as originally outlined in the 1983 Lake Minnetonka Cask Force report. As indicated it is anticipated that the slots would come through the deeelopaent of parcels that are both off-site and within 1508 feet of the access that are currently owned by the City of Orono. Please note the contingencies fcr which this ccnnitaent is given. Should you have any further questions or consents, tlease feel free to contact ae. Sincerelyq-- - - -vfT^ ::ark Sernhrctiscn City Aininistrtcrr cc; Trsnk Mixs, Lsks Minnercr.KS Ccnser~scicn Piscric liCk Msuriii, :i2rrc Ccuncil JcSllen 5urr, Orcnc Representative L.M.C.C. Jon rias, Metre Ccuncil - \ 3fILD!vC i. Zavr-G - -475-T2JT ASSESSING admin ’.strat :o.v l ?i\ancz « j*5.t:<o pu3z:r-ORKs - tjf City of OROIV O HBOLUnON Of TH« CITY COUNCIU NO. ISIS k azsoianoM 33skxs::>s sasuzhs szsts ?ss son 1 AS Bxmntzns sr m»o»oLZ7AH coonczl 's sass rose: mmSr zh9 City of Orono contains 40% of ths sborolino on XfSko KinnstenkSf and wssUASr Loict Kinnttonka is an sxtraatly valuablt nsborml and rsessational rtsouretf and vms&S# tho City of Orono has font to ssoat lonfths to not only prosorvt but also ioprovo lako Kinnttonka for tbo public boalthr safety and wtlfast for all lake esass and lakosbors oimoss» and WWMMXkM^ a Task fores on lake Kinnttonka rscoBatadsd amoap otbsr itacs that 700 parkins spots aaar fraa public aoeossosr of tbs axlstinp lrl72 bo eosaitad to bo raliabla spots tbo Lako Kinaotoaka Coasoroatiea District bas dooolopod criteria and is sooklnp voluntary eoaaitaont of tbasa spotsr and WUXSlSr tbo Katrepolitar. Council's Task fersa on tha issua is oaeocrspins essstitsant of tbesa 700 slots# and wizas&Sr tba Kinnoseta Dapartaant of natural nasourcas bas purebasod preparty on tba Laka for additonal froo public iccosss and t-f safity tf rcattrs tr. tni liHt is li:<sly ^npairtd sy iddit;snal nuncars sf scats cn tba laica dut tc insraasad acessSi and Wgsasisr Icna 1, tba only sona in vbicb tbara is an txistinp fraa public tccasi in Creno r.tadinp cesnitstnt ef up tc 79 additional spots to raach 139 raliabla sects in tba cena, and KZSaSASr parking effsita ef tba public aesass cn tba strtat can causa cartsin public saiity ccncarns, and WSSaSASr tba danand far ararflcw parking frr tba Ss*«*i2kicn accass is .-------tg .0 , ts 3 tisM ptz sitssr.. k xanr - I ® ~IjDKOTMa City of OROrs'O NESOLUTION OP THE CITY COUNCIL NO. :91S________ City or 8b* Couaty providoE 8h«tJ «.) So tsstsstt ia aasitlea so shest si«s oxiatod oa i?2-*** ^*** pl«e#d oa 8h« loko tad shot 2.K.K.■ipa t wslstoa ■grooBoat with 2.N.C.8. that thay will ?!««• «ay aeetaaaa oa tho laka. h.) raadiap dot total dawalepaaat od tha aitaa sooa ^TM aoBseaa oetaida tba city aad that davalopaaat ba ealy to tba aataat ed awailabla eataida daadiap ud e.) To thn aataat daaaibla that dawalepaaat ba pbaaad to aaat daaaad aad • " --t A^bat aay.dawalopaaat^ad afd-attaat'Bt*liiat*ba-'«OBa • - bkat pxoTidaa tor a laaal odaetaaaiag aad ea^taj^lity with taaidaatial aaisbberboeda, aad rsXTSXX as azsOLVSa, tsat tba Citv Cosaoil e* tba atroaply esgaa tha 2aka Miaaato'aka Coaaatwatioa »•*•••«• •* -^aaa a daa oa all boatiap aaara cd tba laka to pav ■PUKTldlt SS CT 1IXS0LVS9, that aa paskia; ia davalcpad **•?* -• *’ =-^"«t*r.;. 1'* asstjs to lisit tbs tublir saitt--.-.atards aad atiaaacaa aaatriatad vitb tba asttaa. ndsttsd by t-s City Zssr.bil ti --< ~- ----- ■libasasta at a rsjtlar aastib; bald Jabtary IT, lii;/ ”* /Corotbv .ti/gall'iR, dity iiar Kmrv Ca Kiycr . Jmimrf 30* 1fl4 HDfiormteU fcrtJy ^•rplcti fiovcnwr of Himiosoto Stats Caaitol St. Nalt MN 5515S Nsnsrsais Artis M. CsrUer* Ststs Aiiaitar of Hinsotots Softs 440, 555 ^srk Strsst St. 5auU HN 55193 MsoofsaU Nokoft H. Noaphfsy 111 Atternsy Ssnsrsi of KImisfots 101 Stott Cooftol St. rool, MM 55155 Monorsbis Join Andsrson ^rom% Sserotsry of tho Ststs of .ninnoiots Soon ISO* Ststs Offles lulldiiit St. PauU UN 55in HonersbU Sebsrt Kittson Ststs Troisoror of Kinnstots 120S Srsfid Avsnus St. Foul* KN 55195 Honorsbis norlons Johnson Llsutsnsnt Sovsmor of Hinnuets T22 Ststs Cspltol St. Fsol. UN 55155 St: Ssolow of locrsassd'FoNIte Acssts on Uks Hfnnstonks Osor Soosfwor Foroleh snd Hsobors of ths fjcoentlvo CdUnotl: Thla lottsr outllnos ths foiml rssponss to ths Nstropolltat Counctl Task fOroo 00 Uhomoootonho who» at yoor'NIrSirtloiiV airo In tho >fiiasa''of ' loolosantlni tha 1513 Task Foroo rssaisnditlon of Idsntlfytng TOO rollahio ear*tfot1or forklno spaaos sorvlns puhlls aeeatsoa on Laka HInnatonka. Ths City of Mound has s long history of nskin$ Uks Hinnitonks setsssTbls to city roafdsnts snd oosbsrs of ths aansrsl public. Sssll sessss sitss sri scattarsd sround ths City of Mound. Thsss sitss* sltheush not sporoortsts for aorvino rsalonal oaors. provide ths osans for lioftsd nissbars of nan*1sksshoro nslghborhood rssidsnts to psin sscsss to ths lake. Additieniily, ths City has satabllshod OMnorahip ef A.f Itnoal nifos of park snd coswon srsos srewnd ths lake. Surinp 1555. 400 docks Msrs In plies lions thsss t^sis srovidTns sscsss to rtslosrts sf tr.s CIr/ *^ns*ln .tost ossss, s^t ncr-iiAssnort Ths sost sscsss It Koenc Ss^- ?irk is ttsse o>* doth iosil nsissfrts tnt rrm psnsrsi public. Tns City has cstsftiinse that further ixcinsisr of this fscility is net tossic** dui to lojassr.t Itr.d usss, Itsitis ’ir.d srij ms ‘as*, ef suitibis arsis for parking, Tns hound lay Far^ aecsss is iocstsd ostMSsn a sw* fng bsach and a su1ti*fsai1y rssidsntial structure. In tnt tuo»ar fficntrs, 1.5 aers park is Ir.tansivsly used. Ous to this tnttnsivs usags and ths I. :sd sits sf ths sark, sxssnslen ef tht facility would incraass tns shansss ef pssastrian/vsnicuiar conflicts te unftssastaals isvtls. As a result* tr.s City ef neunc cannot suspsrt expansion of this fscility. Farklng In ths vicinity ef hound lay Fsrk is also cssslicatsc cy tns existing dsvsleaosr.t pattern. Vlrtuslly all on*strsst parking escortunitiss eccur • along county roses which centain lifaittc shoulder arses or prtssntiy have AnMWWMWnMlMv mat c««n«ti mt asM et lact.anfir r w>c ntiM tnui M iiw aa wwMia w e* utau ». m trawmam or aMgiavffian: ir. lu S7S9tt*r.i ans 6 Cwimor ifitf h«ters of £x«eutiv« Council Jomiory 30* 13#^ offttfoot porklng »«hieh sorvcs obutting businostos ond rosSdoneos. Dwo ce this situation, onoansion of ooMiraat parking Is vl««fsd as bolng physleany IiapossibU wttbout costly modlf teatlons to tha axlstins county road syst«R. Tho 1583 Task Fereo idantlf^ad tost taka as a potential aceasi sits. At tha prasont tlnot tha City Is eenductlos a dataltad analysis of tha Lost Laka slta and its potontlal for future usa. Frallolnary rasulu *;,dloata that Lest Laka should ka daalgnatod as unaultabla for construction of « *ako aecoss duo to souora or •^nnontal constraints, hlph davalepoont coi^s ^td unaceaptabla local C9 * ^ooaets. Oua to thasa factors, tha C of hound raconmands that L caiva no further consideration at this &ina nor in tha futurii. On Dacflsbar I385f tha City raealvad a latter fron tha Oaoartoant of Natural kasoureai raouastlng eomant on tha usa of a L acre parcel on the north shore of Halstad Bay as an access site. This slta Has within tha Cities of hound <000 hlnnatrlsta. nound*s review of the usa of this property as an aecais slta has ssncludad tha: tha property Is unsultable for suen an activity. This conclusion Is based on tha fact that entry to tha slta 'nvolvas travel on a narrow rasidaatial street and construction of parkins assoclatad with tha access would racuira clear cutting up to 3 acres of anisting tree cavar. Additionally, this parcel presently contains a oeblla heoo park which • is a non*confenalng land use under tha hound lonlng Coda. Acaulsltlan of a portion of tha site by tha ONB far access purposes weu1d.net raduea*tha Inten sity of tho odjoeont non-eenfonsing use but In actuality, would Incraasa tha • .. density of tha anblla hone park duo to tho reduction In total land area. Such an eeeurraneols contrary to tha Intent of tha non-conforolng usa provisions ef tha hound Zoning Coda. -^Afta^tllOfoug^^•r•vlaw of petontlal. accasa sites within the City,-the iiaand • City Caunell kss caneludad thst tha caasainity is provldlns as auch aaoaas to Lake HInnatonka as Is physically and financially feasible. Therefore, tha City of hound does not racoonand expansion of any existing access points nor does It racoBnand instaUatlon ef any new accassas within tha hound Corporate Ltolts. As t«s stated In tha beginning'of this latter, the City will eontlmie to support public access to Lska Klr.natsnka. In that regard, tha Mayor and tha City Council ef tha City ef hound eortUHy extend an Invitation to monbars of tha Sxacutiva Council to visit tha sonrujnjtv and rtv Iaw tna City's currant tffertt. *<«a faal tnat after suer, t rtview, :nt Executive Council will egrta that tha City is croviding osre t.*.an Its fair snare af access to Cake .dlcoassoMa. Sd^rd i.^Shukla, Jr. City hanagar ec: nr. Jesaeh Alexander Coaisslenar, Dacartrttr.t of Natural Rtseurces hr. Pat Scully, Chair, hatrooolitan Council Task Force on CtM Minnetonka f/.;‘v!N=TONrv. Jaaaasy SO* 1580 ::^-v r*>- ■tv;?;: i’ J / . » . ,.4A 4 • • Sr* Yatriek Seolly, Chalraaa laatosLiTAr cscrcn. zsjz rcscr OC JMZ CimTOKSA Satiosoliaaa Cosaell tttitt 300 - Hatre fqvart lail£in$ ft. 7aal» Kiaaasota 551C1 Daar Sr* fcullyt SacIecaO u a ec;y ef tf rtpcrt ccta^ling Miaatteaaa'a plant to iaeraaaa and i&provt public aectta to l*akt !!inntteaka* to^Klly# our City* a afferti vill help it aebiavinp tht coal cf 700 reliable ear/trailer partiaf apacea that vaa identified in the If 83 Saak Feree Sepert. seat of Sinaeteaka*a report portaina to our work in nofotiatinf a eea^roftiae plan for isproveaenta to the Qraya lay Caeaevay aeeeaa aita. The 1583 7aak force leport recesaanded that thia aite be expanded and isproved. to reapopd tQ^yeur plaa^aa KoaeM ^a^Mdh* -if -you have furth^^^Mtiena of ^hd additional infersatien eoneeminf the report* ^eaae contact ad* Sinurely* Kanager JFiysa cc: :Uycr lenlin and ntnntrs zi Zzzy Ic-r.ril Sne/ C.:, -T^.. Z£' w 5 RSPCRT ?c nrrjiGFCLirAr ccr::cn, i;.rr r::n!rro:Tj^ icat acctss 2A5iLS*Mi^ In Otetsbtr# 19eS» tht FittrepolitaA Council's ?stk Feret or. Lskt HiaMCoaki rtfutstod thsc oseh aunieipslicy berdtring on I»sk« Rinactonks dtvoiop a plan to ineroaao and ii^rovo public aeooaa to Lako Cisnotonka. Kinaotonka is loeatod it Son# 2 along with tiM eltios of Soopkavon* Oreao* acysatar ar.d Voodlaad* Of tbo 2#tS0 acras ef vatar in :cnt 2, apprcsioataly 22Z (Srays lay and Libia lay) art loeatod within tho City ef ilinnateaka. no 1113 Task foreo itport uaod a Dopart&oet ef Katural laaourcM standard of 1 en-sitt ear/trailtr parking spaeo par 2C acras of vatar to datarmina a goal for raliahla parking apaeaa. fbo asistinf parking and raliabla parking geal for Sona 2 is shewn on tha following chart: ton# 2 Acras ef 2,8S0 Goalt fer 2JkaJ^h^la2ErhilXLSN misting rw.^Mtne laliatla - Cl Cnraliabla - 3C3 Total - dfil Tha ebaetivas ef this rapert ara fer each city berdaring tha lake to aaasiaa both anisting and potential access sites and datarsina the faasihility ef isprering and ineraasing public aeeass to seat tha goal ef 700 raliabla ear/trailer parking apaeaa that was idaatifiad in tha 1183 Task Fores aepert« Furtliarawra# . t^e Task Force. . has asked that this ^aa also address the issue ef ia;preTiag aesess araasr sseh as the 6rays lay Causeway site# that ware idantiflad in tha 1183 reports 2h8^Al2£iJbihlJifiMiAfiSSll Thera ara two existing access cites in which City cf Kinaatenka has a direct interest and invelTasant. Th^ iys*Sav Causeway site# althsugh located in tha City ef TTaycata# .s ewnai by Zlinnatenkt and ctrrantly prcvidas 24 Ttliahlt en-sita car/tr&ilfr parking spacts. This aitt has haan naintainei and oparittd ry tht Ciry cf ::innttcn.;t fer tr.t tart aoTtral yaarx. Tha is:: Task ferra r.apcr*: rtcerrardad aictar.dir.r and irprcvinc this sitt tc prcTidf landscaping and incraastd tunlic access. Tha Sfccr.d xit» Iccarid in ::inr.accn.‘:a is cha :rays Eay Tan site. Tha ownership cf this site is shared by Sannaptn County and tha City. Tha haadvatars ef Ilinnahaha Crtai: is also located in this City park. Tha siti is located at the and cf 2ra**s Sav SctlfTiri in a rasiiantial area of tha Cir*. It o-rrantly providaa punlio aooess for IS car/tratltr parking starts and 11 car only parking xtaoas. ---- ns* 3 r»*»gy IPlaM I'' K-6:.:. •- '■ ■ /'■ tep- Einstscv . ^laproTiac tat titt for t nusbtr ef yoars, howovor* «a tfrttstnt eottlf atvtr at ;tteht£ oa tht plaaat^ is^rovoaonti. ftiUtiriiif ttrtral seatht of tfiteottioaf tht eititt ef iiinatttakt tai Vtytttt tpprerta tht ttttehtf eonetpt pita etlliaf for tht epfrteiaf of tht Ctcttvty tftt. This pita vill prerift 37 eftitt str/trtiltr ptrtiap tpastr tad ! ctr raly ptritiag Further* tht pita will proridt fer Itadtstpiag ef tht ijsprtvod iattratl cireulttloa. Fiatl tpprovtl ef this vith Wtyxttt It tsptettd to eceur vithla tht next eve ?ht ultisttt pita it for tht City ef r.iaattoakt to tht ouatrthip tad eptrttiea ef tht Ituach fteility to County la txehtagt for tht portiea ef tht Crtya ity dts atd hy tht Csuaty. ?ht City htt att with Itttt tad rttff tad thty trt ir. i^rttatat v*z- rat prcpoitd isprevoMat pleat tad Itad txehtagt. In addition* tht City Ceuaeil rtetatly approved t auppltatatal tfrttotat with tht State* which calls fer tht State to cover tht ctttt of landteapiae he Casttway site. Included in thit tfrttMat it a ttipulatiea that tht City will coeptratt with tht tttte in attesting to ttcurt additional car/trailtr parkiat tpaett. - titt tad ^ OfrttMBt noatha* transfer ntnatpia Site facility* at defined in tht lfS3 7atk Foret atport. The City •aoi^ttte* of Cinntttnka it anxioet to hate theta :iw< however* I&/DC7 htt indicated that tht earlitat thit trejtct eeuld he placed en their Capital Inprsvastnt tchadult is ^il« 7ht City would support any tffertt cf tht Httrepelitan Council er ether gevtrnstnttl tgtncitt to tnseurtgt that these isprovtBtnts he sespltttd at an ttrlitr data. Xs prtvlocaly stationed* the Crays Sty Can sits it owned partially hy Stnntpin County a^u partially hy tht City. Cht currtr.t tlar. is ftr tht City zz taks rrr.trtl :f tht tr.tin das aitt ir.i rift Htnnitrr. Ccuary :tr.tr:l zi tht CiUitva* scat launsh facility. Tht City vsiii r;-cr. ht rtspeasisit fir tht optratits and sainttaanct cf tht litt. Sinci it is 1 seatid Vi ::isnttsni;a cssprtntnsita Flan,•r*centssl cf tnt sita. and classifitd as a City tar.*; in cur it sttss itprcpriatt that tr.t City have 3 Th% only tttjer ro4dw«y vith dirtet aestxt to Lakt llisnotonka, which is loestsd ir. tht City is Ststt Highway «1C1. Ir. tht City's opiaioSf this is tht htst loestioa fer public scecss* sines it is directly eit a sajer thoreuphfara* assy to lecatt# sad has the issst ispset on rssidtatisi asifhberhoods. It is tbo City's hops that ths planasd isprevsssats to ths Grays Bay Csttssosy will hsip in achitvinf ths seal of 700 rsliabls car trsilsr parkins spacss. ?hsss iBpressssnts ars consistent with ths rscocasndatlens and poals of ths 1063 task fores Bsport. Althcufh ths Causeway sits is officially iceatsc in Waysatsr the City Kinastonka has hssn instruasntal in prosetins these iaprossDSBts to ths Caussvay aits. rollowinf eesslstien of these isprovsasnts» this sits will prerids sere than 2i\ cf Sens 2*s ^wal of 144 rtlishls car/trailsr parkino spaces. At this tias« ths City is not svars of any oths: available sites alenp 7.1. flOl that could provide edditienal public access to Lake ::innttsr.ka. ^ ■' V\-.. A \ * .k' '‘u > a. i: . •siir-juau* toiVr —; nf|» !• IH ^*1(1 WAVZA.TA DAY •• -4...Tts'iS: ..-rse;___ •4?.!J«V?;o.^ r.M/\y3 HAY •i»««<-i *i.* •««•«. 4</l« ► (ifi-rn *••1* • f* •# «M f* ► I iI! 51 il ? 4•• I i O i4sr ,v>>%- M1M \t JsscmsK xs. mz*i lu CSXC3m nanoD XZ XSSSTDf ^ thm Ci«7 fsuxvss ittlxn 1. lug ef xjM CtzT ef xlsst^sakx as - 'i. I*C1 I;'-1.63 (■ ■. ■ r<=1.63 f :■■. • isTslTid f 8? a saBsXar sf ?aars ix a Xisxxxa ev«* txa fxxxffa dsira«s^asx cf ths JSisssxssXa*ovxad Sriy's lav Caxssway isax lasses iacillsy is ^szaslva patiwiflnf. 9«Mi&U <«aifs yUsa Ser tha CBMawa; beat Uaeb ti«a as£ tea yraaassaC taaaa ta liiaaaasska tsz esa— aiteaaaiaa aa a *«««<’ 1.04 Saa «va elalaa aava zariamA sBaaa ;lasa is axaesslTa ■ ...- aaaaiaaa .wltt ttai: ^ ^ * * ** ^ s'Xasdsa ilsfstm tlrssfS xha aggggyal ef tls xlc des a wo aero loax lasssS sisa (Ccseogs 1) • I«PS Vaysssa xsafoss sho plas as xsoposod. mssossata prafars so rap lass sho tvs eossar eras islasds vitS ws addlsissal ear-srailar psskisf spasss asd as add Lddltissal sdspla ear paajgUnff spasa. l.C€. re* Crtrsil visSas rev tc irprr.'i ^a prspssai plas dssall3 si srs prspssad sssprssisa. Saesiss 1. XrersrTi ir.d kssssrlsasisr 3 a 61 rsa CiST Cesseil ef xt% City ef Slisstsssxa haraly apprsTss is esssaps eft assasfad eve isrt esas laiz:es lies plas fsr -sit Sray’j Say lisjsvay, visi sss sssdiiLisss rssad rtlsv. -I tmf • 2 V. ■ ' 2.C2 Cdssil %?7MJ u b« beis£ ^7 ci Orsr'J S47 Casj«wi7 Css* slnM (esssis^isf ef Hs^ts SmsC«s* ?as isa^U. isfi Darifi CdcSrss) vitJH smgpmcz ss ^sjsiss cf «A£is^«aal ysrlrinf 1.03 S Cisy &«S8sa«y is dirsrss^ so eossisso sorosissiess wish S2M vorsasa Cis? Irsossoy so flsaiiso sio ftos.*'• of: a) X sorssissi^o eorosass assaciMd so s2m 1 fsoridisf for ao froasar aa£ ao loss fill shsa s2:as eassssplasof ^ s^&o ?las: sfsosaass provi&lsf fs? ^lisisf asf saissssasss ef s2:e sisar e) X lasf axslasfa afraaaass visi Xaasapfa Cssssy ^rsTifisf fsr sha axsiasra ef sha Cassaway gssyarsy far Cosssyowsad proparsy as sha Cray's lay daa sisa; d) la afsaacms daparsaass ef Sasssal iMaeseas ia vtisl they **, • •-•»,•■ ■• •,- ►' ef leeal esssseli asfi a) to S4 2.C4 3.CS Cisy ssaff is firaesaf se prasacs sha prspesaf eespr piss so all affaesad fevassaaasal apaseias asd Issarassad eisisass fss ispss aSoss sOa dasifs ef sia siss. Cisy ssaff U fssslar dlraesad so irisp sSis sassas so sSa fossil fsr fisal •■7**^«* afsar all dssails ef sha prspssad sospmisa isrra baas rafisaf. Idopsad by sba Cisy Co ssoil of ssa Cisy of fissasosxa, 2£issasj _ _ _, 1S25- irry 1. ics.^. .nysr xrcrsc: a—a*• ippa. sa par # ^ssy «.»arx Xaselssies 8e:, 3 Acssew ow zas a»en jgssigrzgs i Hoiiai for otoFsiesi__________ Ve«o£ is frrer esi Vosof ogiiarsi AAs«oisa£t Soseimea «eep€S&. -• -• *ffo=*«r»«r» Ciry c^orx :?€EH? az$ A6»0»SK7, aadt this d«y of If IS, botvooa tbt Stato of Kiaaosotar acting by and through tho CoaBiaaioaar of tht dtpartatnt of Katcral nosoureta, baraiaafttr rtfarrtd to aa *Statt,* and tht City of Xinattoakar 3taatpia County, Xiancaota^ baraiaafttr rafarrad to aa *City.* Kisisssarst mxasxSf tht Coesia. eatr of Pataral Ataoureta baa uadtr Xiaaaaota Statutta 1SS4, ftetioa S7.4I# Subd. ISr tbt actborlty, datff and raapoaaibility to protidt tbt poblie with frat atatt watar accaaa aitaa oa labaa vbara aecaaa ia inadagsattf and mnEM, tbt City ia aotberiaad cadar Miaaaaota Statctaa •ISSdf Sactioa 471«lfl to oparatt raeraatioaal faeilitiaai and •iSEaSAS, tbt City ia tbt owaar of tbt folloving daacribad park praparky loeatad oa tha C?ay*a *1^ Caaaaaay adjaeaat to Laka Kiaaatoakav Btaaapin County (bartiaaftar rtftrrtd to aa tbt *Xeeata Site* or "public aecaaa aitt*)s All that part ef Goramaast lot 7# Sight Cl), Cownahip Cat Ssafrad SoTtsttas 017} Berth, Sasgt Ci»tnty-tto (Z2, Hast ef tbt Sts Srinsipal ntrifim/ vhirh lita Sstth cf -artantir‘1 Stnnttis County/ Hinstaets, tretpt tot road ^trtsn and tsoitt tha nsrtsarly €sl«lC faat toaraef aa ntaaustd • down tbt ctntar lint cf tbt tsiating roadway aa shown by tbt sur^sv nadt on tht 13tO dar cf April 1335 by Carlial* hadacn, land Surttyos; and BSS3SAS, tbt Cosniasientr and tbt City batt dtttmintd that tbt tziatisg public aostss litt ia inadtguatt and ai a rtault thtraef is a ?rleri%7 Sor ia?revtaaat ondtr tha Mitrsfolisas ?ublie • I Watax Aeeass Vrofraa; and mnBXSr tha Niaaaaeta Oapartaant oS traaapertatiea (*HR/SO;*) baa proposal plans Sex eppxaflias Stats Sisbws? Id ybleb ereassa sbs Citv-ewasd assass slta. As paxt a£ that prsjtet, m/OOT will ioad a peraiea of tba isprovaaants to tba City«waad- aicwtaa sits,. laiTiaf aa aatisatad S2S,00fl e* tha ispxoaaaaat easts net balBd faadad. 10BASAS, tha Csasissieaar wiabaa to aaka ieada sTsilabla ia tba fstuxa to tba City 2ex that pextiea o2 tha ispxeaassat eoata to tbo aoeooo sito aot daadad by tbt City ox MK/SSC. Mfafaf» tbo City aad Stato lattiid that tbia asxaasaat shall aot bo adSoetiao satUt a) all aea-ant faads bars bata aassrad; b) tba Kiaaaasta Lapialatsra appxoprlataa asddisiaat faads ^ aaksa-tba faads saailabla to tba eocsiaaioaar o£ tba bapaxtMat of aataral aatoaxeas for daaalepsaat of pehlie watars aesaaa sitas batwaaa faly 1, 19S8 aaf Jna 3C, 19S3t aad, e) faads axa aaesabaxad ex etborviaa sada arailabla by tbt Cocsisaisaar of riaassa. Ke aassabraasa ef saxxaat fads is iataadad. SCS, T3S22?t2S. it ttaaiiaratitt si tia stttal hataiitt -s -• dariTad by tba ptblis bsfias barats aai ftr tha baaafit cf tha ;aaaral pthlis, tha paxtias apraa as fsUsws: Aeeats Cha City shall sthait ts tha Caaisaieaar fsr etaatt * plas dor the ispzevaaatt aad dtTslepoaat ef tha abeaa dastribad peblis aeeass site. .-s • -i X* ?bt City shall eoBply vith all local f stata and fodtsal lavs# rtgalations# rules and ordiaanets vhich apply to Baaaffaaant# oparatioa and oaiatanaaca of a pahlie aeeass. 1. Tha City shall bt solay raspoasibla for tha aaaasanaatr oparatioa# and aaiattaaaca of tha aesass sits as dascribad baraia ia eospliaaea with tha tasas of this aprtaoaat. e. 7ha ttsa of tha aooass sits and ralatad faeilitias aball ba fraa of any sad all ehargas and shall raaaia opaa to tha public svary day ef tha yaar. a. 7ba aesass aita shall haaa no lasaeh sastsietioaa plaead tpoa tba boat aisa or aagiaa borsapovar# aaeapt as adoptad tbroopb sorfaea oaa toning ragnlatioas. X. Tba City shall install and aaintain a aign^ appsoaad by tha Stata# infosning tha public that tha assess site la a oooparativa nodartokiy by tba City and tba Oapartoont of liatnral baaonreaa. Tba sign say also iasloda tha saaas ef otbar pastieipstlag aganeias. y« Tba Stata shall have no raspoasibility far police pretartien for tha access site. This rastcesibility shall stsain vith the ipprctriatj Iccal iurisiicticr.. S. Tha City shall ntintain the ^scass site and heap tha sasa in good erdtr inf sanitary ecnditi=n and shall spaeifisally anferei pr oris ions ef this Agraastnt. S. Tha City shall eooparatt vith the stats in attainting tc sacurt additional ear*trailar park:.sg spacts eff tha aeeass sita within twe ytars aftar tha ecsplauon ef tha above a«seribt4 aeeMS ti%* Ispzevwsnts. TbM* adiltional «pae«a shall ba '2os pshlie watar aeeaas ea laka Klaaasaaka eaaaiatass with tha J^2C8S££_fiS_ttli^l2ilJSuLSSlSSSlUJtlliLS2£Etl* adaptad Migr 31« 19i3f laeerperatad basaia by safaraaea. ZS. Taadias Tha Stata shall prewida daads aet to azsaad 128,080 to sapplsBsat tha east of ispraTiao aad dawalaplao tha pahlle aaeass sita la aeeasdaaaa with tha plaa. Casts aliflbla fat raishassasasts by tha stata ara lisitad ta thesa easts whish t;a: a) las laadseaplag aad assaeiatad sits ispsawaasats ralatad ta tha pahUe aaeass sita pertiea ei tha prajaet aet eewarad by HS/VOS laadsi aad, b) these ix^sevaseats Idaatiliad by tha stata la Its eeaaaats as balag allglbla 2es saiabasseaaat. Sayaaat will ba asda by tha Stata withia a seaaaaahU tlas altar tha City sahBits.waslllad pseaS ef • ^ • a • t a^. ’• • ••♦ I aatbeslsad aapaaditsras which hawa baaa paid. Zha Stata zasaraas tha right ta zelssa payaaat or partial paysaat el say east il it is datassiaed b? the State that tha east is aet sada ia aeeesdaasa with tha tazss el this XgraaBaat as is axeassiwa. Zha City apsaas ta iadaaaily, sa^a, aad hsld the Stata el Xiaaassta, its a;eats aad aapleyaas hsssleas Irsa tay *=d all elaiss as cats as el aetiea arisiag Ires tha pazlersaaea el this hgrsawat by the City, er its agaats et asplayaas. This tlaasa shall set ha eaastrtad te har aay legal raaadias the Citv say for tbt Statt*s fallurt ta folflU its cbll^atlsaa poraoiat to this eoatraet. ZV, 7an« This eontraet is only afftctlrt 15: a) all non- am ftafa hart boon stcrrtf; h) tht Xlsnaaota la^lslarurt a;pro?rlatt5 afo^utt f»da and sakta tht 5 unfa arailahlt ta tht Costiaaloatr • of tht htpartatat of Katcral htaotrsas far pchlls vattr asataa aitt atrtlepstat httvtta July 1, 1J»0 aaf Joat 3D, If S3; anf, c) tht fanfs art than taatrhtrtf tr ethtrvist aaft arailahlt by tht Coasiaaioatr of Piaaaet* Thtrtmfttrr thia Agrttstat ahall bt parpataal, taetpt aa say othtrviat bt proiriatf. V. Asdit Tht hooka f rtoorfif fossatats aaf aesocatiag proetdcrta tafi jp^aotlota c« tht City rtltraat ta this Agrtt&tat la aahjtct to osasiaatloa by tht Coosiiaaioatr of VataraX htaoorcta asf thp itatt Aafltor. Tl« Hos-fiasrisiaatian. Tht City than aot tagagt in any fiaorislaato^ osployatat pristlsta aaf ahall la ail rtaptota casply vith Xiaaaaota Ststttts Thtpttr 3^2 l-S^: , Xiaassttt Szatttis tt isi.55 - 121.1:, all appllsahlt rtlts taf all sthstgttat tatriatttj. Aaslgaatat. Tht City say aaalga all or part of its rights aaf ©bligatioas ptrauaat to this Agrttatat to tht Cetaty of ltaaapia« Ke ftrthtr ^proral oy tht Statt of sura tssigaatat is attdtf* :o 710 othtr assi9»tst aay bt frantti vithoot vrlttta approval of tbo Stato. XS ICSHSSS nmsOFt tbo partioo baot eiosod thia eaotraet to ba isl; asasstaf ista&fiap to bo beoaf tboroby. sns or HiwwgforA ODJuesfnc or mtom xssounas cxrr or fr- Satt. F batt * ir Titl# Datt esMSSSiaMBi er AaoRZSTitxTxoR eoMiasvxoBft cr rmita »?___________________ Oats.Sat* ^ eartlfiat csyy oS t2i* Kisaatsaka Cit^ Cssasil easaaiitieaallv »7p:oviss ttia A$rataaat ia asaast*< ai Zztitia X. ' *»- ^*1. UnOTS XS 70 : 713(B XK9 7TSOI C S« S0S£?2Sr7r zzz. Xtrorrty doosi^a. Xssi.sta::*: Artsrritv Sonsrol bopartaost of Katsral Jtosourooa Sata U5X77I0K K2. 15- kss XmTiok xstbo^zzz^z a c3D?s3Arr;rr AsiisSrsc wir> ZEZ 57x:z kssajci :;g ths Gsurs bat caosska ^ U IT xrSXVST, by tbt City Council of tht Citv of niaaotoaka, itiaaosotor ts follows: Sostioa l« 1.01. 1.62. 1.03. 1.04. Soctics 2* 2. Cl. aagkerounf. 7iw Klnaaset. OapartMitt «£ Traasporsisioa (ibOO;} bw fzopotmi to c;s;b£« stitB !i$bway so. IQl asrosa tb. Gzaya lay Canaovay. As part e£ that prejast, sr.»rT will raeoaatrust taa City^ovaai laka assass sita. fadaral 2saas mad by KaSST vUl aot 9V cartaia costs e£ eeastraetioa, priasipally laadssspiae, toilats aad kiosk. tba Kiaaasota Sapartiiast e£ Satsral Xasosreas has isdisstad a trilliagaass so pay £or tbesa costs epob cartaia eoaditioas. • Tbs A;ro«atzt bttv««a tbs Stats asf tbs City for ftziit; of csrtsls eonstrustioa costs for tbs Crs?s Catssway ssssss sits is bsrsbv* a??ro7si. w^«Tbt Rayor v:f CiTy Hass?ir arc ittitriaaf ts tnsttta zzLs acrt :ttt. 22 XSSXTnOK M9. I5> Atestcd by tb« City Coaaeil o£ tha City of Kiaaatonfca ea this «ay at______________, l» iAMiy A. S91C.IK, iuyos KTSZKt ft. i. lijiSMilACEA, cm CLtK ■ Ae*ioa on th# abovt yol^jrian Hotioa for ado^tioa: ___ ioeoadtd Vetod la favor oft Voaoe tfalasas Abatalaads _ Abaaari Jtaaolstloa ado^adT I ba«aby etraifv that tba fortfoiag la a traa and eorraet eopv of a roasiraloa adspttd by tha Citv com-ii cf tha Citv of itiaaaosaka at a duly aatherirad aaatiaj hald on tha day cf . 3. La SSSK 4 CZ=T CS2£ 4fOiMMou>^.^oM lay. Mnnmta 98331 7tt.4T4.TH* J4B1U7? 3t, 1986 M.MWt H. fmcnak Scully* Chcl----- 2its?oycllsca Couacll task ?orct os Ickt iCsstseskt HmyclltH Couseil SOO ktsrt Square lullSlAt 7tk h4 lakers Ssreesa St. faal* » 5S101 Bear Ckai ScaUrs taalMai ylaaaa iiai sba City ei Teaks Say's raayeaaa sa ska Hasreysllsaa rwmr1^ laak ferea ea Lake Ittaaataaka'a rafaaat Set preyaaala ratartSat rallakla easl^t asaeaa ea ska lake. ^%llt skart art so ysklls boss lamek rHH cusraasly XaeasaS is ska Clsy» sar 6eaa ska Clsy dastra skas eaa ka tstakllakad kart* aa bara Bslysad ska parklat skas is ysetldad 2er a Tislasy of askar lakaakera asslTlslaa. Sisk two larfa eaaaarslal ZMTisMM already locat«r vltkSa ear eaa a quart slla araa# *a art casfldaas skas ska Task ?srsa elll eadarasaad eer yealslot aad eyyoslslea so ska assakliateaas ef a aev la«ak slsa as Old Orskasd Sark, lalda Ires ska ceaarslal sarSraa. ska llsy asaesraiaa ska T/iHit se tea aaay ef ear lakaakera racraaslea sraaa Sacludlat ynklle decks a&d evSssSat kaaekaa. Sa faal skas «a art deist our fair akara H asalas is zjtkm klsaaseaka assasslkla se ska ycklls far a askar ef aeslTlslae^aes just ska Issmeklas of beats. If you kava «sy scssessi er quatslsas ritsrdlss tkls Irisrraslsu. slaasa fitl fraa so sossacs s*. Z ”»ouls tsssurisa skt Zasi: Icrzt so ssaiuss of skt yuklls kaanrta so at ktls btsvtts Ttbruary ZOsk trl ZSsk is skt Zaaica lay City latsrla. 2:irk ksfieaall City iddsUrrasos Cfctl cc: Clsy Coucsll CI7T or TOKXA UT TAIU I fthlic ?AiaaKS wctoed ia ACnviTSS iOL TOXAL SQDAIS raOIACT IISSCE 4.254 fiMI tAtt amiA SSA3 S2s; UJkZl 7CZAL *q. ft, 11.000 •4* 5.100 ft- (Sierti^vttt •ld« of P*rk) 5.040 sq. ft. Clad ef Tctka Izy load) '1.000 *e ••• OZStAKC THOtt UATSl 10 fast 25 f««: 3C- 230 ft. 20 ft. iO ft. 21,694 *q. ft. 10* » 50’ SPACZSvmtcxi TRAXm Fishing fros — short 1. Fishing free 22 shers. 2. Lsnashiag tsaoss/aen* asterissA crsft. 3. Ficaic arts with tmblss sad grills. 1. Sviaaiag 2. FlsTgreund 3. Fitsie arts Saas as shows. —* StfisitS 25 10’ a 23* SFACSS AUTO OICIT 20 126 - uoa ?gsyrrt3!cxA khiasu : famcnc s?acss tto Ti I %mf Clvj foiTll la vail cwara that 014 Orehard fark la Taaka lay la alta la 2aaa 3 of Lako !Slaa«toBka that has booa ratad fair or kottor ky * of Xataral laaovrooa for fotoatlal yokllc aeaoaa oltoa. Iko 9991 nd tka HatroyoUtaa Coimell ara alao aoara of ska Clsr'a atroac opyoaltloa to craadas m aaeooo sl«;a at locasloa duo to ?Ha proxlalsy of clsy faelllsiaa* tka daaforoaa road eoadisfons lad oshar aastara ousllnad is a kaoelosloB skat «aa •selasad vltk ovr raapoaaa so yeur data raquaas laas K«rvaakar. »a ara plaaaad that tka foraa kaa oklftad ska foeas of tkia atudv froa ootakXlahlai aora aftar* oltaa to tko idoasifleatlon tad traasloa of 700 rallaklo ear*trailar lacaa. 9o oadorotaad that if tkia |oal la aat. tka taak roroa «U1 to tka Xaoctttiva Cotmeil skat no farskar ?uolie aeeaaa aisaa ko aataklit* tka Taak Torsa rateaaaadad skas ska is cesiasirles visk lakaahera aiaieipal asploy ska felloviag aaaaa to aekitva ska parkiss apaet goal: 1. laeraaaa OMita parklag at oaiaslag aeeaaa aitaa by laad aadalaltioa akara laad aaiilakilisy asd fndisf parsisa. 2* oa-oita paskfag aa aov aeeaaa aisaa ara aatakliakad# 3. laeraaaa rallaklo parklas by aegdaisios of. or tkroufk vrlrtaa parkfag isa for* o2f-arroat parklag lota la tka Tielaisy of paklie lasaek lasraaaa leag-tars raliakla os*atraas parklag ia tka risiaity of aeaoaa raapa skroagk aristes parkisg agraoaaata. gaea&ao skara praaaatly ara ao ptklis aeeaaa boas latasklag aitaa la loaka lay aad kaeasao tka City doaa aot took tka deralepsaas or aatakliakaaat of aaek a fatiliry la Toaka lay. it ia lapeaaikla fsr tka City te lapaet tkia pr^dag preklflK iaaoa talag tka aaaaa idaatifiad la akooa. Tka City easaot lavaatigata tka poaai* kllisy ef leaf tars parklag agraaaasta or oa-atraat parklag aitaatieaa okas so poklie boat aaiat oiskia ess eerperaso betsdariaa* To do faal, kovooor. tkat parklag etrraatly prsrldad at ses*la;ssk aitaa tkeuld ba eatatad aad tkat tka City akosld raeaiva eradit for tpaeaa saar lakaakora raeraaties fa as r:'isad sy ska pebZie* Taeilisias ssek as skis oauld Iselsda sksrt srtas ostrt tsa ptelie say fist fros locks, araaa vkart saasas asd ses-soterisad craft sigkt ba lassckoi. asd svisiss baackas aad pij g arias. .sale araaa < TCSSi liT A2UlTnS Tcaka lay saa eesdsetad aa iarastigatics aad asalysii ef tka parklag tkat ia proridsd la tka eity saar lakaakora facilisiaa tkat ara uaad by tka pucCic. i. Sarrooi Iriita (C ?tblis fiskiag froa akera ia proridad es tka Teska lay sida of tka 2Iarro«a Iridga (Cesacy load 19). Tka arts aTaiCakia for parklag is leeatad ^sat off ef aad sertkvaat ef Cirtla load. Tkis blacktoppad araa vtick U aiirroiadad by guard rails aaasuraa 138 laas is lasgtk asd 13 faas is vidtk •r • l»tMl 9f 4.35^ Muart f«<c. Gtlag «& 4r«a of 10 ft. x 23 ft. to docorBiao tho ofoeo thoc U Modod to pork o oiaglo otitoMbilo* thoro W9UU bo CMS to pork opproslBotoly 18 eort la tkio oroo. Dorlag tbo fUblas ooaooB aoap poroono bock tholr trucko up lato thlo porklag oroo aad flak froa tbo back of tbtir ^ohielo. 1. ai£jaiiEL2aa « Taaka lay la oaa of cho fov Mlcipalltioa U tbo aroa that aot oaly oBcouragoa tbo public to aako uao of ihott fiiblag epportualtlta. but olao provldoa tbo public vitb doeka/plors to flab froa. Tbroo public flaking plora aro avallablo for uao at Old Orchard Park. Mealc tabloa* gtiUa and raarrooao aro alao avallablo for tbo public*• uoo. I boliooo that tho City aould alloa tbo of eaaooo aad otbor aoo-aotorlaod craft from tbia aroa. altbougb tt la proaaatly poatad mtb a No Boat tauaablag alga. Tbo elt^’o aunielpal docko. ovallablo ce roaidoata on a ftrat-eoao/ ftrattor^d bMla. aro also locatod at Old Orebard. fublla flabiag la «o*. poralttod on tbo auaiclpal docks. Tbo parking lot at Old Orebard Bark aoaauroa UC foos long by 100 foot vldo •• A total of 11.000 oguaro foot. Thla vould provldo a* 10 ft. a 23 ft. "auto aaly** parking apatoa aad 22 10 ft. a 50 ft* *'auto aad trallor" apacaa. Tboro la adoguato parking apaca avallablt far roaidoata who rant aualclpal dock alipa aad far tba public uba doairo to flab itm abara. lauBab a caaao. ar aiaply aako uao of tbo plemic facllltloo. Tbo BUBlcIpaX doeka contain 37 alipa far raaidaata. but cooiialy aaly 5-4 parklag apacaa ara uaad br dack ramtara at aaa tfaa bacauaa boat aaaara oajay tka uaa af tka lake at a uBxiaty af tlnaa during tba day aad uaak. Tborofara. tbora era 35-10 9P9C99 avallbblo far public uao during a aajorlry of tbo boatfag aoaaoa. C. Cokoto Uoch Qiagraa C) Svlslag. playground oad picnic oeslrltioa cro oil orollablo to tbo public ot Cokoto loack. 2Slsnotoako Cosssslty Sorricoa prorldoc *llf op^arda and gwinning laatructers to tuporriao an aetivo cusaar acts progron. Tbo lolarioa of tbooo roeroosloaal poraoaaol art paid ultb Tonka Bay tax dollara aad tbo city's public verka crev la roapoasibla far dally salataaaaco. ill of tbooo mail oxpoadlturaa. raaglsg fros tba rant/1 of aotolllto rostrees facllitloa to tbo kixfag of Ufoguardo. add 9 to a alaoakla aaauaT park budget for tbo city. Tboao facllitloa oro provldod to roaidoata of Toaka Bay and to tbo psbllt an largo. Tnori aro ruo porslns or001 avolloblt f:r rtclit tst ot “-oketo looob. Cno 0700 is locatod on tbo nortbvost tidt cf tbo pork end vropa orsund tno ptrlaotor. Tbla oroo la 2C loan vLU and 135 in. Icng *tsn nbo olnaoat parking apoco bolng locatod opproxlsotoly 30 foot frsn tbo vat or. oroo z on tbo south aldo of tbo pork nooauroa 60 foot vldo and io 8^ foot doop or aontolna 0 —— — -- -•• roo centoiaa o tctol of 3>10C aguoro foot and vauld oecesadont .t. 13 ft. ’’onto only" apoeoo. Tboro u o aosmd snollor parklag oroo Icnat i tbo south aldo of tbo pork ot tho ind of Tsnko Soy Bood. Tbia oroo oroo c: 3.0^0 aguaro foot, parking apoeoo. Ir vlll occescdzto 22 12 ft. z 23 ft<1* 4. _iy* 0. CT%9cmzz (Slagris D) CrMCMt iMch is owm4 MMi «^r«t«4 ioiacly by she citlai of Tonka lay as4 Skora«oo4. Is ia a vory popular ivtaslng boaeh fer ettaagora ic cht araa. Tba Craaeaas Baaah yarklsg araa ia 100 ftat oaty and 60 foot vida Old OMColaa a total of 6.000 oguara faat. Thla araa vUI aeeoaodata agyMdaataly 24 10 ft. s 25 ft. ’'auto only" parking apacaa. This ia a fn^lU kaaok and ia otUiiad not only by Tanka lay and Sborawood raaidonta. by raaidonta froi nany anrrouading Miicipalitiaa. Tba eitiaa of Toika lay and Sberaveod abort cht eoasa for liftguarda, btach naisttaaact. 1* Tabla Zf a total araa of 31»6f4 agoara faat ia arailabla to tha niiblia in tha City of Tonka lay for lakaahora aetirisiaa. 1 total of 126 narking anaeta far OMoa ia arailabla at tka public baaehaa and fiahing araaa. Vhila thara ara no public aecaaa Uunehing aitaa arailabla ia tha city, ua ftal that tha city preridaa aspla public parking for othar lakaahort aetivitiaa. Thia data doaa not incliida public parking available at othar city parka vhieh lacluda 2 baaahall diaamda* a hockay/akating rink, aoccar field, baakatball court and playground agttipaast. all ukick art uaad by the raaidonta and ganaral public astanaivalv. Va foal that tkaaa acatiatica aho« that Tonka lay ia providing ita fair chare of ygfclie la CMatntlr tirla. te teps... ch. maUcr a« Ukaatosa aatiflilaa fiwrtut. jsTss's.rsis; aur Sovanbar raaponaa te tha Tack ?orct va ett: ..inad hov the Ctrr vac raaneadiag so thaaa racoBcndasiena. Thaaa iaeludt tht follovlng: Iran Svatan 1 racssaaadatisn that lake SSitsttsaka corsuaitiaa Isplasast their tran eaa provide ascaaa te public lakaahora raeraatiaa araaa. lonaa lay a easprahmiva parka and raeraatioa plan ealla for tha develop- WBt of OBk a mil ayatan uhish nonld casenact raeraasiaaal araaa vithls tha city vith oat aaothar. hay Isprovaaaasa have already baa sada at ^ 5^^ y*ska and tha trail tyasa vtll be isplaatad aa fuada ad/or grata oatcat available. * ZaxlSLJisaSll lltheugh tha rtpers ctataa that vistar aesaaa ia adaguata. is ahsuld bt rteegsaad that a aushtr cf vistar asseaaaa at aailaslt is Isaka lay for aaovsesilta. akiitg. ict fiahiag ad vthisula asetas. Is ia at fteliag thould bt vievtd fra a ytar-road ptraptstivi ad that coasaisia shas provide vi-tar asstaa should bt srtdittd. y 3, • riihlnt ?lTi rteoBMAdatloai caII for isprovoi lokothort fishing opportiAlrits. Thft Cisj bu roetntir fiaaaeod a scudy rogardins^tht rtconasruerion of tht flshlag docka md baa bad plaoa drafcad. 7boa« chrao doeka «H1 probably ba raplaead la altbar 1966 or 1967. Land Paa OMataa daotbar racooMBdasiaa atatoa tba: lakaahort sualelpaliriaa ahoiiXd eoeparato in noBitoriag any futura land uaa ebaagaa at axiatlag eoanarelal aisaa. Aa acacad la our original raaponaa. tht Tonka Bay City Council eonducsa all public baarlnga regarding toning laauaa and la eoaataatly nonltorlng any futura land uaa ebangaa at axiatlng coaarelal aeeaaa altaa. Tba eonprabanalTa plan calla for tba praaarmclon of thaaa araaa for laka aeeaaa. Xbara art praaantly evo largo and ona eoaarsial narlna l^tad la tba city vhleb gaaarata a larga anouat of traffic during tba ■iinar aontba. Vhiit r^a Council vould hava no authority ragardlag tha prlrata aala of tbla land froa ona party to aaothar, tbay vould hava final authority If ona of tbaaa altaa uaa tha target of a poaalbla rasoslng to a nultlpla dvalUng dlatrlet or otbar aon*laka aeeaaa uaa. Zf tba eosprabenalva plan la adbarad to, I think It la ellkaly that tba Council vould approva aneb a rasonlng raquaat. 2S Tonka Bay baa cnalysad tha parklag that la mllabla at mrioua lakaabera raeraatlenal araaa la our clsy» aa par tba Xaak lorea raguaat. Although tbara la not a public launch alta fa Tonka Say» It la our foaling that aspla parking la avallabla to tba public lor a Tirlaty of etbor laltaabora aetlrltlaa. Tba City la also vail avara of otbar Taak Jorea raeoawadatloaa and la Isplenantlag tbaaa ac tint and aebadulaa patslt. 29 I'l-:TVS. o.V) <\ ■ \;^nVi\^k\ ^iVrwvVV', \.v>*iX,c VN»-tVA.v!?v>^\\t. KCV*(»;\.\ <; ).’: M 's*Ss*i \w*W\ C.V\'. ni)VSKv«^»N":» C.V.\3cSV\v V.SKcU s 7=1. HV.V.^.N,' 7V*N\IIA> JSSMO™' >6^. \VS\> )<\ \ K >(< I i^. % \ tSiioo4 m ||«i4CUK. O > ■ nfmAf r»wl«i»ky ■! ■: ,i'■ i ; ' i- r; s X »• T'n \\VL m T yiii.Mii! iiAi I •, .1, Mf9MI IM1CM* i, V CfllllMliVAl N nm^ in All «i>c’A a i.rf •« ►.I •- ■.S u*«* \\\c> \i.tV Ccvt^MN, / ^■Jo^h V O'nrw f; #■* %s;^ bl<<!i;M\\c.'' sV^SylA/V■v»^\V ». «n 1**! \I. ...\g\.. ■■^:m ‘ fj *{“!* -*•**?*“ •«/ *"** J:VJ5S? ^ Ommsvsf. ^^gaf4YOftiMMH> (>« KC \v --------- l!“^w- .!lo««»!M'»„*«rv» PARK NO. 3 vr '•M Kt.' ■■■ ' , iK ' • tUv'.N. . •• *•• •• i.: ■• ■V i' ^ 'A^-' V/: h ^: v'--' ‘.' i r y .i. ^ . .4^'^ • V • • .< 1 7 .f .1' 4: ■r- I :t /. ii i .■^1 :t. \ \ \ “tP rir wfii iir.*^, thdbm :if|j|un^& AMaNHA|Mr| s®aS:Ey Cirtrw. 'iflfi mm ••tJMMAtfwa' 7». • •. .V. f. '.i' % IS#s>W^ Q^ J Citjf of WoodUnd HtNNiPm COUNTY ■C 3cat sss.i^Ufin^tai !£29i Serasias ig, 1505 Coai^t^S KlJattcaea V# ssppert It* p8llc^*t* as* ^ teMic •--«» «^ «• inz:,^ 2. *eo£^2 i, cK?lin> rM'4*»-*ii ... . . ^ 3# iTTir, uic. eeS^w'Swr:*;!^* *• c««8ta>. s««.M «a«sF„-;-.£:j “g£g “. , ‘ «-«ta«sT sS >■;• iwzizt i a- ti. Srar^ 5^*2S;:;r. “ ~ -.5 <*!%’• - ^d^j^AryuC /^/•*^*yrt.n utfCi/ ^ 7701 COUNTY IIOAO 110 W M MlNNCmiSTA. MINNCiOTA H30« • January 30# 1986 Mt cormiM Mr* fatriek Scully# Chair Matsopolltan Council task Ferea on Xiaka Miaaatonka Malta 300 Mateo Ssuara Suilding •t* Faul# Miaaaaota 55101 Maar Nr* Scully: Tha City of Miaaatrista has eoamittad substantial staff tlMa and rasoureas to prapara th% anelosad datailad work plan which trill bring adaguata aceass to Sona 5. Pa hava davalopad an opan and dalibarata proeass tihieb ‘ parallala cha caeoMandatiens of tha 1983 Laka Hinnatonka Task Forea. Pa ask for# and baliava it narita# approval by tha Natropolitan Council's Task Forca. Pa will ba happy to raspond to any quastions which yon or othara nay bava* Finally# Z wish to iafom you that tha City will work with tha Laka Hinnatonka Cona:rvation District eoneaming possibla *raliabla* parking at Ziaaaman'a Pass in Sona 4 should such a raeoanandation ba fortheoaing for tha Task Forca* Sinearaly# PaIton Clavangar Mayor PSC/djl 02930 r- , % X. II. III. ^-'• IV. 20IIE S WOIIK ?LA» rO» 1 KTATION 5IFM?S^MIHWSTQNKA TASK FORCS a£CO!>!M£NDArIQ^^S ON ACCISS S3SCUTIVZ SUMMARY. . . . . . . . SXSCU7IVS COUNCIL CXRSC7Z0N . . LM7P RECOMMENDATIONS FOR ZONE 5 A.LKTP Report Suaniry: *R«liabls** Parking, Sita Distribution and Siting Proeoduras and Crltaria . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.Oaanriaw of tba LNTF*8 Proeass for Aebiaving Adaquata Public Aeeass in Zona 5 . . . . . . C. D. LIfZF Aeeass Sit a Salaetion Crltaria. LMTP*s Misundarstanding of DNR*s PcliCT’ on "Adaquata* Aeeass . . . . . . . . . . . IMPLEMENTATION OF 19S3 TASE FORCE REPORT A.Zona 5 Now Ranks Sacond In Providing Adaquata Parking . . . . . . . . . . . . B.Priority LH7F Raeoiaaandations for Zona 5 Ramain Unaddrassad . . . . . . . . . . . . . No writtan Evaluation oi Pctar.tial Sits: iy LMT? crittria Enista. . . . . . . . . . 0. E. Acquisition of Ring's Feint: An Erample of DNR*s Only Sita Salaetion Criteria. . Unknown Eeelcgical and Sociological Carrying Capacity of Lake Minnatenka. . . . . . . . . . SRSR 1 2 3 9 10 ■4 . -i- I? »• -■ t. M: mU ■•> V. VI. VI • • f. L«T? Cost Acsiysis S«coram«ndation.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6. larut Froa Affaetad Units of Govominont. • . METIIOFOLXTAII COUNCIL TASK FONCE FSXCSFTTON OF FAlHAinr GOAL AND ITS PROCESS FOR ACHIEVEMENT . A. .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . B. .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . IBCOISaNOATIONS FOR ACHIEVING 136 RELIABLE CAR-TRAILER PARKING SPACES. . . . . . . . . . . . . . A. ^iBcrsasing On-Sits Parking at Existing Sitss by Land Acquisition Whsrs Land Availability and Funding Paraits*. . . . . . B. *lBcrsasiag On-Sits Parking as Nsw Acesss Sitss ars Establishsd*. . . . . . . . . C. *Xaessasiag Rsliabls Parking by Aeguisitioa of or Through writtsn Parking AgrsssMWts for Off-Strsst Parking Z«ots in ths vicinity of Public Launch Raaps*. . . . . . . . . . . . . D. *Incssasing Long-Tsrm Rsliabls On-Strsst Parking in ths vicinity of Accsss Ramps Through writtsn Parking Agrssmsats*. . . . . E. -Incrsasing On-Sits Parking with Agrssasat From Commsreial Marinas or as Conditions to Marina Dsvslepmsnt or Expansion*. . . . . F. Psak Rsntal and Othsr Options to bs Considsrsd . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . G. Summary of Options to Rsaeh Adequata Accsss. MORATORrJM ON ACQUISITIOU A20 Dr/SLCPJ^SNT OF OTHER SITSS. INCLUDING SING'S POINT . . . . . . . . A. Statutory Authority Liaitad to *Adsquata* Accass . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . B. Priority LMT? Racoaaandaticns Should ha Fully Addrssssd. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . fiat13 13 14 14 15 16 17 20 21 23 24 t y.- rK t: C. lBpl«»iit«tton of tbo Ton-Sito Soloctien Ciitorlo Handatorr . . . . . . . . . . . . D. fiscal implications Raisa Quastions. . S. Oovalopmont of Accoaa on King's Point would AdvorsolT Affoct tho Environmant Vlll. FISCAL IMPLICATIONS Of ACCESS EKPENOITURES . IK. WORK PLAN. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . • • • • • • • • • • 24 25 25 26 2* 3S66r 2QWg S WORK FLAW FOR IMPLEMENTA7IQW or 1983 LAK£ MIHNETOMKA TASK FORCE RECOMWaiDATIgWS ACCTSS 4 2.rOTIVg SUMMARY Rscoomndations of tho *Roport of too Lako Minnotonka 7ask Foret" dattd Juno, 1982, portaining to Zeno 5 can and aOould Oo aebitvod by iapltmoatlng tho procass and sdto aoltetion critoria sot forth la that roport. This work plan outUaos that pwoeoss and its rosults which load to adoquata, ovon abundant, public aeeoss. Tho Zono 5 goal of 136 "soliablo* ear*trailor parking spaeos can bo aot or oxeoodod as follows: o SO to 7S spaeos at an ozpandod *William*s Stroot" sits la Miaaotrista. o • so or sort spaeos at tho ozisting sito on Cook's Bay ia Mound. • IS to 40 spaeos at a now sito to bo dovolopod oa tho southora portion of Saithtowa Bay. • 20 to 50 spaeos roquirod on wookonds and/or stagod o>."*r B throo yoar poriod at oxisting or now eosBiorcial siarinas and/or dovolopod at Lost Lako. Primary rosponsibility fer tho isrplonontatica cf this plan should bo with tho Lako Minnotonka Consorvation District which can assuro siaultaaoous action cn surfaco uso aanagoaont, onvironaioatal and local land uso coasidorations, and oa funding roquosts to tho Stato. m»?'» ^ • «• I i •' t -ss.-r S#eond* this itork plan rsjsets past ONX praeticss «vhieh allow a sits availahla frota a *willing* salltr to suparcada all rdcoBMndatiOBS in ths 19S3 raport# outtfsigh all sits sslsetion eritsria, ovsrrids all local land uss controls and concsrns# and Justify total disregard for ths good faith efforts of the local eoanunities. Finally* this work plan proposes a moratorium on any further acquisition of new sites and on development of King's Point because: (i) ' adequate access in Zone 5 is available under this work plan; (ii) several priority recommendations in the 1983 report should be implemented before a new access such as Xing's Point is considered; (iii) implementation of the site selection criteria through . written evaluation of Xing's Point and other sites should first be prepared from which a comparison of such written evaluations is developed and a decision then reached; (iv> fiscal implications* including the cost analysis recommended by the 1983 report* should be prepared and considered prior to any development* particularly in light of the current fiscal crisis facing state and local government; and (v) development of Xing's Point would appear to result in an ^ adverse environmental i:^aet to the area* 2 12. SrSOTTlVV eOTTWCIL PIlgCTIOW Renewad controversy over an access site proposed by the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources CDNR) on King's Point in Minnetrista* Hennepin County* and the recognized need for comprehensive planning of lake access to avoid sitt-cy-site a- i"'M V A ‘■c controversy proeipitatod diroction from tho State’s ZseeutiveCounell in October of 1P89. This direction came in the fom of a« mption unanimously passod which Cehargas tha Matropolitan Council with tha raapoaaihility to conduct a comprahansiaa rariaw of Lake Miaaatonka usa and accass iasuas* Tha raviaw should addrass avsfaca usa SMnagamant and anforeamant and public accass issues* sad maka racoonandations on Laka Minnatonka accass* and spacificallyp on tha proposed site at Ring's Point. Metropolitan Council Chair Sandra Cardabring responded to tha Ezacutiva Council request by preparing a mission statement and comprahaasiva review procedure dated October 29* 1985. In that doeuwant* Ms. Gardabring noted that tha Matropolitan Council would use tha *laport of tha Lake Minnatonka Task rerca* (LKXr) (June* If83) as tha starting point for Its review. 2II. LMTP RECOMMVWPXTIQWS FOR 5 A.XJfT? Ranort Sixmmarv:Raliabla* Parking. Site urea and Criteria Tha XJC7 found in part* that * opportunities for both boat and shoreline access ware inadequate in soma areas of tha lake.* It found that access development should focus specifically on fishing craft and small recreational boats. It concluded that tha key to adequate access is the availability of •reliable* public parking. The LKT? determined that 700 reliable car-trailer parking spaces on or in the vicinity of access sites »*ould adequately 1 t«rv« th« public. To addrofs diitribution of those 700 parking spacas. the LMTF divided the lake into $ zones. In furtherance of the equitable distribution of public access* the LHTF reconmended the development of netf boat and shoreline access sites in certain areas of the lake. Generally, the report perceived Zones 3 and 5 to be in need of additional access opportunities. This suggestion was based primarily on the assumption that neither zone had any "reliable” car-trailer parking at the time of the 1983 report, which is no longer true in Zone $• In this regard* the LKTF made two specific site reconswndations in Zone 5 pertaining to the expansion of the existing william's Street access and to new sites on Smithtown Bay sad/er Lost Lake. The 1983 report also outlined site selection criteria and a process by which lake accesses should be chosen and developed. •• Overview Of The LMTF's Process For Aehievine Adequate Public Access in Zone S The 1983 Task Force recommended a goal of 136 reliable car-trailer parking spaces in Zone 5. To achieve this goal* the following methods* in order of priority* were preferred: 1. Increasing on-site parking at existing access sites..by- land acquisition where land availability and funding permits. 2. Increasing ;:-n-site parking as new access sites are established. - iO 3. 4. Znsraasing rtliabla parking by acquisition of or through writttn parking agrtuments for off-strtot parking lota in tha vicinity of public launch raa^a. Xneraasing long*tarm rtliabla on^straat parking rn# tha vicinity of iccasa raiapa through written parking agraamants. Spaeifieally# it was found by tha LKTF that tha william’s Straat accass in Minnatrista should ba improvad to furthar faeilitata tha launching of fishing and small racraational craft. Tha UfXf also raeoimandad as "a high priority* a naw accass sita cm tha soiitham pertioa of Smithtown Bay and as a ’spaeial epporttthity* tha invastigatloa of a possihla Lost Laka sita. riaally# tha Juaa* 1983 raport outlinad savaral raeommandations ragarding naw fishing craft and small raeraation host accass sitas ia Zona S. Includad wara options that a ”aaw* acer?a could aithar ba tha partial convarsioa of axisting privata laraeh facilitias to public launch facilitias. or tha davalopmant of sitas currantly occupiad by othar similar land usas. At tha tiaa of tha raport» tha LKZF parcaivad tha naad for public accass in Zona 5 to ba aehiavablt through: 1. Expansion of William's Straat accass; 2. A raeommandad *high priority* accass on tha souchara portion cf Smithtown Bay, including a possible site on Laka Virginia; 3.4. 5. D«v«loptntnt of a Lost Laks sits if fsasibis; ?9tsntial fras launch opportunitiss at Howard's FoiRt Marina; and Lon9->tsrm parking agrssmsnts and maks-rsady decks at sites which meet the ten selection criteria. Tbe LM7P also deliberated at length concerning several other potentia ccess sites, i'*^''uding Xing's Point, for which it epecificai:y made no recon..iendation. Accordingly, until the specific recommended sites, including William's Street and sites on Smithtown Bay and Lost > planned and developed, this ifcrk plan recognises that i\ ce contrary to the LKtT's reeosstendations to pursue a *new access site such as Xing^s feint• C. LMTT Access Site Selection Criteria Concurrent with its site specific deliberations, the LM7T developed ten criteria for the equitable consideration of potential boat access facilities. Given their importance, they wi*** be enumerated below: 1. Belatioaship to residential areas - Positive and negative impacts of access s:"as on adlacent residential area?, incl;^iir.g distance cer'Vsan a ^ site and nrarby homes, screening the site free, hemes, and creating ne** access opportunities for nearby cff-lake residents 1 2. li 3. 4. 5* 6. 7, AccMsibiiity to primary highways - Potantial sites near major highways (State Highways 7 and . 101« County Roads 19 and IS are examples) can reduce traffic impact on residential streets. Public use precedent - Sites already in public ownership or in commercial or industrial use, have the least neighborhood impact* where public facilities or services have been provided and accepted. Intensity of boating use near a potential access site - Sections of the lake where there is intense boating use should be avoided when possible. Wind and ice exposure of site - Sites protected from predominant winds and ice action are preferred. Cost of acquisition - Property and development coats must be considered. Implementing agencies should apply a per-boat-launc.hed and a per-car-trailer-parked cost analysis. Physical development constraints - Miniaixing the amount of site alteration needed on land and in the water to make the potential site usable is preferable. \ le -. - :8. Ability to buffer site from surrounding lend uses *" ^be site should be lerge enough to support adequate vegetation to screen the site from adjacent land uses. 9. Barriers - Restrictions such as low bridges and shallow lau.nch ramps may be used to limit the accessibility to the main lake for larger boats. 10. Multiple use opportunities for the site - Sites that could provide shore fishing along with boat access are preferred. As is discussed in Section IV{C) below, no written report evaluating individual potential sites in Zone 5 by these stated criteria exists. No comparative analysis of written reports for King.*8 Point and for other sites exists beyond a posterboard chart. Wisunderstandinc ;f DNR-s c- The LXZT was incorrectly informed or incorrectly assu-ted that DKR standards reguira one car-trailer parking space per 10 ***** ®* ®h -ake Minnetonka. DNS policies provide a sliding scale ranging from one parking space for every 2D acres of lake surface of lakes 0-1000 acres in sire to one space per <0 acres of lake surface on lakes or liOC-5000 acres i.-. sice, -hile individual guideli.nes are to be establis.hed for largar lakes, such as .„ake .Minnetonka, it is certainly inappropriate to use the standard governing the scaliest lakes in t.he state for lake Kinncior.ka. r.I rftiI Th« authority and propriaty to raquire more public access parkins par acre on Lake Minnetonka than any other lake in the stata. to our knowledge, and to require more such parking than mandated under Dm'a own policy remain subject to debate and challenge. Finally, as noted by several communities, it is inappropriate to apply i .« *adequac>- of access* standard for outatate lakes on Lake Minnetonka. Lake Minnetonka has substantially grsater numbers of residential and offshore residential usars, commercial marinas, and the like than is found on outstate lakes. A more appropriate standard would look to the mixture of users and needs rather than the arbitrary application (and, in this case, the wrong standard as noted above) used for outstate lakes. For purpose of this work plan only, we will accept the goal of 700 parking spaces suggested by the LMTF, however. IMPL2MEMTATIOW OF 1983 TASK yoPCS RTPOP? ^pne s How aanks Second In Providing Adegua»» At the time of the 1983 Task Force keport publication, no ‘reliable* car-trailer parking spaces had been approved in Zones 3 and 5. Understandably, the 1983 Task Force singled out Zones 3 and 5 for additional or *new* access. Subsequently, however, consunities in Zone 5 have guaranteed 78 parki.-.g spaces. Twenty-eigat of these spaces are located at the wiliies's Street f I-• -r r> I I p — IT* » t • access and SO at the Hound Bay access. Only Zone 4 has more reliable parking now, with 79 spaces. in light of the progress Bade in Zone 5 toward achieving the goal of 136 parking spaces, a *neW access or additional access should be considered no more critical in this zone th»n in Zones 1. 2 and 4. rurt.her, -priority- reconmendations should be pursued before developing sites for which the LKTF made no recommendation after full consideration. B«esmm«ndations for Zone « AS susanarized in Section III(B) above, the LKTF made express and priority recommendations. These recommendations remain unaddressed. This work plan proposes in Sections vi and IX below to address those express and priority recommendations prior to consideration, and certainly prior to implementation, of alternatives which according to the LKTF are less desirable and Which, in the case of King’s Point, were net recoamended by the LHTF in 1983. a? Written Evaluarinn of Potential Site* Crit€rii According to statements made by 3K?. staff, evaluation of all potential sites in Zone 5 is limited to field notes (which now could be as mush as se-tn years old), internal sonclusory aemoranda, and a pcsterboard exhibit prepared for the Sxecative Council deliberations in the fall of 1981. There is no written 2sm 5 «4 I r - ZJ •valuation analyzing each individual sit« according to LKTF Furtharmora, no datailad coraparativa analysis o£ tha various sita options oxist. Tha ONR staff has acknowladgad tha importanca of tha LMTF critaria, but has not asiployad any objactiva# consistant application of thasa critaria to aach potantial sita. Sathar* undocumantad subjactiva judgmants hava boon tha chiaf mathod of sita raviaw and salaction. No writtan racord justifying tha agency's actions exists. 0.s^ampla of DWR*g Q«w Previously, in FoOruary et 1982, tho DNS proposed'to develop * access on the Xing's Point parcel. The ensuing controversy jsc^**-**!L**. Covernor Quie to direct the DBS to abandon •* their access plans for the site. ~la i4 tv m. Oim*s conduct again in 1985 promptad tha £xacutiva Council to diract tha Matropolitan Council to conduct a comprahensiva raviaw of Xing's Point and othar possibla accass sitas. Sisultanaous with tba Sxacutiva Council action, and in total tha Matropolitan Council procass, tha ONS purchasad tha Xing's Point parcal and procaadad with its plans to davalop tha accass. ONR's willingnass to participata in tha Matropolitan Coixncil procass in good faith bacana subjact to quastion. But DKR's actions also axposad its only raal sita salaction critaria. DRR's axplanation for purchasing Xing's Point uncovarad for tha first tiaa tha only sita salaction critaria in DNR's aind_a •willing* seller. DNR justified its acquisition and proposed development of King's Point on an internal, unwritten, unannounced, unjustified -policy- that the availability of a site from a -willing" seller supercedes all site selection criteria,, overrides any concerns over local land uses or land use controls, moots any environmental concerns, and justifies total disregard for the 1983 LHTF recommendations. This work plan rejects this policy as arbitrary and capricious and contrary to statutory reouirements and common sens#. 2. Unkno%m Ecological and Soeiolocical Carrying y of Lake Minnetonka — Surface use conflicts were debated extensively by the LMTT. It waa "taeoaiMadail ?-6iat* oeu ^data -ahould ^ ‘collaetad.^o determine the ecological and sociological carrying capacity of the lake." The only information made available by the DNR in this regard is an evaluation of surface use conducted for DNR by Biocentrics, Inc. Interestingly, that study shows Zone 5 to be the third most active zone without the additional proposed access, percentage of observed boats in Zone 5 ranging between 15% - 20% of the total on the Lake during the nine days surveyed in 1984. More importantly, the public perception, including the perception of the State's Executive Council, reaffirmed concerns voiced in 1983 and again in 1985 that the Lake is overcrowded. Yet no progress has been made on the ecological or sociological •r f. I F carrying.capacity studiaa raconmandad in 1983. Whila this raconsaandation doss not pertain solsly to Zone £ a.ny work oUn for tha Laka should mandata axpandituras for thasa studiaa prior to tha aspanditura of bundrads of thousands of dollars on additioaal aecass. Cost Analysis aecontne.-.datior. Ur.aohiev#d— Ona kay site salaetion criteria recsnaiandei by tha tX7T involvas a par-boat-launchad and/or par-car-trailar-parkad cost analysis. Daveiopniant of any one site has capital costs upwards of SSOO.OOO (aaclusiva of capital costs to local units of govarnaant) as well as operating costs. Capital costs to nuaicipalitias prasent a graat burdan, such as road iaprovanants of up to SSOO.OOO which would ha nacassitatad by traffic ganaratad by a Wag's Point sita. Fiscal rasponsibility dietatas a full and iasaadiata threshold analysis of all cost i.T.?licitions. Baspita rapaatad raguasts for such data and analysis, including a letter to tha Metropolitan Council Task Force on Lake .Minnetonka dated Noversar 13, 1935, and a letter to =KS Segienal Administrator Wallace dated Oacembar i, 1985. this matter remains totally u.-.addtassed by DHR. l.trut From Affected 'Jr.-tT ;f 3evart-.— DNa-s efforts to solicit input for local units of government in 1985 were limited to form letters to city officials. DNS s letter to the .Misnetrista City Ai.-r.i.-.istrator ik 3P dated August 19, 1985, made no mention of King’s Point despite the fact that ONR had already requested another appraisal of Xing's Point with the intention to acquire it. Further, the DNS letter only selectively noted LMTF recommendations, failing, for example, to make reference to the "high priority- recommendation for an access on Smithtown Bay. This correspondence and subsequent meetings and conversations involving DNR gave the City no reason to believe that its concer.ns were being acknowledged or addressed or that DNS was being candid with the City. » Other affected units of government have expressed their views as a part of the ongoing Metropolitan Council Task Force activities which will undoubtedly be summarized in its report. Those views reflect a consensus opinion on the adequacy of implementation of the LXTF recommendations summarinad as follows; 1. Surface use management and enforcement remains critical and must accompany (or precede) any expanded public access. 2. Public access development activities have not been coordinated with, and in fact have ignored, local land use controls and local interests. 3. Concerns over costs for public access sites imposed directly or indirectly on local muncipalities have not been addressed. .^gT?.o?oL:TAN couNcri TASK -opcz cf gcai-Ai?D ITS PRocrss res Ac>::r^-Mfy=" " A. Goals In accordance with the directive of the Executive Council and its own mission statement, t.te primary issue to receive attention by the Metropolitan Council Task Force on Lake fI f Minnetonka (MCTF) is that of the adequacy of access. The means to that end will he a consideration of now tne 1933 Tas/c fores reconaendations for access and reliable parking will be met in each lake zone and« if the recommendations from a municipality or zone differ from the 1983 recommendations, why that difference ezists and what should be done aoout the differences. The intended outcomes of this process will be both general and specific. The general outcome will be a statement regarding the status of 1983 recommendation implementation and an evaluation of the probability or feasibility of accomplishing those recommendations within a reasonable time frame, r.he specific outcome of the MCTF efforts will also include a recommendation to the Szeeutive Council about the appropriate use of the King's Point parcel, and Halsted's Bay in general. Toward the stated MCTF general and specific goals, this Zone S Wv-^rk plan is being submitted. S. Process The work plan proposal for Zone 5 is sequentially outlined la Saetion IT balow. in •doptiag it. th« MCI? dnaa several taings. First, it iapXenents a process i. ’ci prioritises sciiavMiear ef tie iSsS IXTT rscssrr.enratior.s. Seesrd, it avsiis uaaectssary espenditaras cf r.aspaysrs’ dollars aai unprcductiva coairsntation iserween DNS and adiaetad local units ai govarraant. siaia^ras tiia MCT? rola of cadiating disgutas Setv>aen stats and local units of governr.ent over lake accsss on Lake Minntttonka by establishing a work plan involving all concerned parties. VI. RSCOMKENDATIOWS FOR ACHIEVING 126 R£LTA3L£ PARKING SPACgg ^ keeping with the L^TF recoirjnendation of achieving 136 reliable car-trailer parking spaces in Zone 5, the methods and priorities suggested in the 1963 report for achieving the parking have been adopted in this work plan. As detailed in Subsection 0 below, zone 5 currently has 78 guaranteed on-street parking spaces wit.hin 1,500 feet of existing launch accesses. Therefore# 58 reliable car-trailer spaces are yet to be identified or created. Recommendations for reaching that goal follow. *^ncreasjng On-Site Parkino at Zxiszinz Sites bv Land .Vcouisirion Where Land Availability and Fundinc"?enaira^ The WilViao’s Street access in Minnetrista, Halsted's Bay, currently has 18 guaranteed parking spaces. Up to an additional 50 reliable spaces are attainable if the site were expanded. Approximately i/4 of a mile to the west of the present site is a lake channel which terminates along the south side of North Halsted Drive. Parking may be provided for about 34 oar-trailers on an acre of land immediately across North Halsted Drive. An additional ^6-^0 reiiabie cn-street spaces might be guaranteed within 1,500 feet oi the access site. (v;e have concern over ifh«th«r Halstttd Bay can handla that amount of boating traffic. A study of tha anvironmantally fragile bay is underway.} The owner of the property is willing to sell the parcel for access purposes. He has* however* expressed a desire to see the closing of the present access if the expanded site were developed. Even if this were to occur* the presently guaranteed 28 spaces would be within 1*500 feet of the new site. In either case* after expansion* up to 75 spaces would be possible on-site and within LMT? recommended distances from t.his .Halsted Bay access site. In its review of the william's Street expansion site* the DNH noted a concern about the legal question of channel bed ownership. The channel leading to Halsted's Bay is under the ownership of five different parties. Two of the parties* williams (Che seller) and the City of Minnetrista* are in support of the ’project. These two parties also own the majority of the channel bed. A small portion of the bed is also owned by Robert Dykoski* Louise Mic.helson and Floyd Thorsen. These three owners have not been contacted regarding willingness to sell* pending outcome of the MCTF review. = • •I-cr.asir.g N>« A-=a«3 Si-a« ar. Zstahliahef The L.*!TF recommended as "a .high priority* that a new access he located on S.mithtown Bay. Such a location would: 1) provide additional access to the south and west snores cf Lake Xir.netonka* 2) b€ r«*dily accsssible from an arterial street, i.e.. State Highwty 7, 3) achieve an optianun geographic distribution of public i access in Zone 5, and 4) attain the implementation of an LMTT recomnendation that *a site for the southern portion of Smithtown Bay has a high priority.• At least two possible launch sites have already been identified in the southern Smithtown Bay area. The first is a specific recomnendation by t.he 1983 Task Force. 2t is identified in the report as the Lake Virginia site and is discussed on pace 18 of the 1983 report. This site possesses several highly ^•Birable characteristics. A public access presently exists on Lake Virginia and it would not be necessary to introduce a new access into a developed neighborhood. The status quo would not be upset by a new potential conflict of land uses. Secondly, a • passage would be necessary under Smithtown Road for access to Smithtown Bay. This passage could be designed in such a way as to bar launching to «ny boats except fishing and small recreation craft. A second potential site in southern Smithtown Bay is a vacant parcel viih a willing seller which is .tcted in trier 2K?. possible sites. The site is small and presents design challenges, hut could probacly support 15 car-trailer spaces. Finally, DNR should aggressively pursue S.T.ithtown Bay-related options irrespective of the availability of a f. i.*- ijj To do othorwiso vould eonpXotoly disrogard tho1983 rtport. Zn addition to Smithtotfn Bay, tha LMTT found that Lost Laka in Mound raprasantad a •apacial opportunity* for a major accass. Ona difficulty with tha sita, as notad hy tha OUR, was eomplaz ownership of tha channel had. The prohlam has since heen resolved Mr. Stave Coddon. tha owner of savaral acres of property with lakashora on northern Halstad's Bay, has azprassad a willinonass to sail his property for public access purposes. In ▼iaw of tha availability of sufficient parking spaces if tha LMTF recommandatioRs are implemented, the Coddon site would he unnacassary and inappropriate. Zt has not bean evaluated by the tan criteria nor compared with other possible sites. Zt would also put excessive beat traffic on an anvironiaantally fragile hay. A portion of tha LKT? discussions in 1582-23 focused on Halstad Bay*s single channel of access to the remainder of Lake Minnetonka. The long, narrow channel tends to be quite congested and could he aggravated by the additional traffic of a new •ccess. This, in addition to a number of other reasons, led to the LKTT recomaendations which iii ^ include a new access on .Halstad's Bay. C. •2-sting Mound Say access sire may he augmented with tne acquisition of vacant lots on Beachwood Road. This parcel is within 1,50C fMt of the launching araa and aay serv« ver:^ well as an off-atr#€t parking Xot. Fiftaan to twanty car-t^ailar stalls could aasily ba davalopad« bringing tha total sparas at that sita to sixty-five or saventy. D, ■Inereasino LQng-Ter?n Raliabla On-Straat Parking in the Vieinirv of Access Ramos Throusn writte** Parking Aoreetnents" Savanty-eigbt reliable parking spaces have been approved by tha LWCD in Zona 5. On Saptanbar 26, 1985 tha Laka Hinnatonka Consarvation District published tha *Monitor Report of Public Access Parking on Laka Minnetonka.* Tha report showed 50 reliable car-trailer parking spaces on Cook*s Bay at Mound Park. On Dacanbar 11, 1985 tha LHCO approvad an agraaaant with tha City of Minnatrista guarantaeing 28 parking spaces at tha William's Street access on Halsttd's 3ay. Fourteen additional spaces are possible to service tha existing william's Street access. These spaces are located jv.st north of tha launch facility on tha west side of Halsted Drive. This side of the street currently fronts vacant land and would thert^ore pose no interference with residential driveways. Minaa.rista has net pursued finalicing these spaces pending the outcome of tha MCTF activities. 2, "Zncreasinc On-Site Parkinc with Acreements From Casmercial Karinas or as Car.diricns to Mailna Develccir.ent or £ntansion* Assuming a "worst case" scenario that only 50 spaces will be available at william's Street, instead of a possible «-,further assuming no o£f-str««t parking lot is davclopad in conjunction with Mound 3ay« and assuming only IS spacas will oe develcpad on Ssdthtown Bay and finally assuming no acctss of any magnituda will ba eonstruetad on Lost Laka# an additional 21 raliabla spacas must ba ganaratad to raach tha goal of 136. Up to 21 spacas may ba ganaratad ovar a stagad pariod through tha Laka Ninnatonka Consarvation District (LMCD) yaarly parmitting authority ragarding cammarcial marinas. Tha 1983 task fores raeommandad that *tha LMCD jaquirament that new marinas provida {{ublic sarviea faeilitias ba a^pandad whare possibla to axisting marinas.* Thasa "public service fdcilitias" certainly could include a certain amount of free public access. Howard*! Point Marina is currently tha only eommarcial aeeass in 2ona 5. Proposals for new marinas would ba required to assist in meeting tha public access need. It may also ba reasonable to require, or subsidise in soma way, tha use of soma spacas in marinas for public access parking. This number sf spaces cou..d ba higher if limited to peak use days itemised by tha LHXT report. T. Peak Rental and Other Octior.s to be Considered It would appear tnat each new site’s cn*site parking spaca costs S10,0C0 or more per space for a single car-trailer. Usage would indicate that peak use days number ten or few«r. A par-boat-launched and/or per-car-trailer-parked cost analysis should b« performed to determine whether “privatization* options should be pursutd.Conanerciil or governmental lots in the vicinity of existing accesses should also be surveyed to determine their availability on weekends and other peak periods. Creative planning should be pursued and adopted when successful. 6« Summary of Potions to Reach Adequate Access Possible Sites •Worst Case* Feasible Options StitMlhlSL William's Street Cook*s Bay 1983 50 50 50-75 65-70 “ li idations Saiithtown Say Lost Lake Commercial Marinas Other Peak Rental or other 135 15-40 (?) 10-20 l4G-*05 2. 3« 4. Adequatt accass is available under this wor.< plan. Several priority recommendations in tti€ 1983 LK7T report should be implemented before e new access is considered. Written evaluations of all sites based on the ten site selection criteria should be prepared and a comparison of these written evaluations should be prepared. Fiscal implications, including the cost analysis recommended by the 1983 LK7F report should be prepared prior to any further development, particularly in this time of fiscal constraints imposed on state and local government. Development of King*s Point would appear to result in an adverse environmental impact to the area. A. Statutory Authority Limited to *Adeeuate* Access DNfl’s statutory authority to develop any public lake access site is limited to lakes in which there is no or 'inadequate* access (Minnesota Statutes §97.48). Through implementation of this work plan, adequate access will exist in Zone 5 even using the more demanding parking spaces per acveage standard adopted by the LKZ7. Further, Minnesota Statutes §C6.05, Sundivision 9, similarly permits the DNP to establish an access only if it shows that public access to a body of water is nonexistent or inadequate 5. •66 and* stccnd* chat such access can he created *wi?hcut undue damage to tho environnont or unduo risks to the 1th and safety of water users.* This work plan requires data to address the second statutory standard in the event there is any question about the adequacy of access. B. Priority LKTT Recongnendations Should be Fullv Addressed The NCTF has repeatedly stated its intention to be guided by the 1983 LMTF report. Accordingly* it should impose a moratorium until the 1983 recommendations are fully considered or exhausted as being infeasible. Included in those recommendations are: 1. Need for expansion of william's Street access; 2. A recommended "high priority” access in the southern portion of Smithtown Bay; 3. Development of a Lest Lake site* if feasible; 4. Potential free launch opportimities at Howard's Point Karina; and 5. Long-term parking arrangements and make-ready docks at sites which meet the site selection criteria. C. Imolementation ;f the Ten Site Selection Criteria har.datorv No written evaluation of possible sites in lone 5* based on the LK7?*s ten site selection criteria* has been prepared. Second* no comparison of such written evaluation exists. A moratorium should be imposed until the DirR provides the MCTT and aifectad local units of gcvsrnniant with such written evaluations and a comparison. D. Fiscal Imolieations Raise Quostions • As s«t forth in Snction VXII b«low« it would bo imprudont to spond substantial stato dollars and mandats tho ozpondituro of dollars by local units of government on lake access sites at this time given the fiscal crisis facing both the state and local units of government. E.Develooment of Access on Kinc*s Point would Adversely Affect the Environment Development of the Ring*s Point site would have a material adverse affect on the environment and natural resources of the State. In our letter to the Executive Council dated September 30, 19S5# we provided an outline of environmental issues and the data currently available. These include: • 1.Traffic and noise pollution, particularly along Xing*s Point Road and Kalsted Says only connecting channel to the rest of Lake Kinnetonka. 2. 3. Degradation of habitat and spawning areas. Resuspension pollution which caused DKR to deny private development of Xing*s Point. 4. e Threat to lotus beds which are a protected species. Significant dredging will be necessary. (See enclosed letter from the Director of Gray Pres.twster 3iologieal Institute dated January 27, 198f.) We will be preparing for filing with the MCT? in t.he next few weeks additional data on the adverse er.vircr-tental impact of development on Ring's Point. I *} 4 6d ff •I 4 - 5- ■ DNR has not providad the MCT? with any response to these •nvironaental concerns which are justified, in part, on the DNK's ovn denial of a previously proposed private development on King's Point. VIII. FISCAL IMPLICATIONS OF ACCSSS EXPENDITURES The State currently faces a fiscal crisis of unknown proportions. Local units of government in Zone 5 face additional cutbacks in state and federal funding. Yet, as evidenced in ONR's own calculation of on*site capital development costs, several hundreds of thousands of dollars are proposed to be spent without the cost analysis reconmnded by the 1983 LKTF report. Further, no provision has been made for reimbursing capital or operating expenditures by local units of government which will be necessitated by such access sites. According to DMB Commissioner Alexander's testimony to the Sxecutive Council, the legislature has appropriated S800,000 for water access site acquisition and development and fishing piers. (Commissioner Alexander subsequently mentioned during questioning by the Executive Council that there may be an additional SI,000,000 available for public access sites for the encire State of Minnesota from an unspecified source.) At least two questions must be addressed in the work plan. First, in a time of budget cuts and fiscal restraint which are currently facing the State of Minnesota and its local governmental units, would it be prudent to s?«nd substantial additional dollars on tne access prsoraci? Second, ij it prudent to esbaust 50\ or more of cne S500,000 appropriation mentioned by Commissioner Alexander on one site on Lake Hinnetonka? Even assuming that it is appropriate to proceed with any expenditure of State dollars at this time, it would be inappropriate to proceed until the 1983 report's cost analysis recommendation is fully implemented. See Section iv, paragraph F above. XX. WORK PLAN fnril 1 « June 30, 1986 (a) r- Williams Street Feasibility Study to Income: <i) Agreement*In-Principle «^th Mr. Williams (ii) Analysts of channel restriction and plan to obtain access and aeintenance rights (iii) Cost Projections ?«r*3oat*Launched and Per«Car*7railer-Parked Cost Analysis Acquisition Evaluation of Site Adjacent to Existing Cook's Say Access Development of Existing Optional Sites on the Southern Portion of Smithtown Say DSR with cooperation of Minnerrlsta DNS DN?. (e) (f) written Evaluation of Potential Sit€8 Based on LKTF Criteria LMCD Plan for Connercial Marina "Public Services* at Howard*s Poin^ I July 1 » September 30> 1986 (a) LMCD Analysis of Funding of Capital and Operating Costs Imposed on Local Units of Goverzunent Arising Out of Public Access (b) Lost Lake Feasibility Study ONR LMCD LMCD with input from local units of government OKR with Cooperation of Mound Peak Leasing and LMCD Long-term Analysis of Conaereial Marina "Public Services* Policies Comparison of Written Evaluations of Potential Sites LMCD OMR with public hearing and comment from municipalities and interested citisens <e) LMCD Preparation of SFP for Ecological and Sociological Carrying Capacity Studies. (f) Follow-up Study for Lake for Lake Minnetonka only Expanding or BiocentrieSr Inc. Study (g) Public hearing(s) on Cost Analysis, Feasibility of William's Street Site, Smithtown Bay Options, and Cosscercial Marina "Public Services* LMCD DKR and LMCD All interested parties 2574r *71 m UNIVEaSriY OF MINNESOTA T^Cfnu i; Gray FfatfMiraifr Bioiogirai tmimiia Cott^t d Bioiogcil Soanoat P.O. In ^00 CoumytadslSandit S5M (612) 471-6478 Oviuiry Z7f 1986 Mr. NiUlaA Tumblad City Planntr City of Ninnttrlsto 7701 County ftoad 110 w. HlnnttriJttf Hinntsoti 5536k Onr Mr. TumOlidt 2 m uriting «t your xtquist to Kings 9oint. on tno gsoposod test tceoss st I trttrstand teat tea «ttr teste for sons distsncs frsm tet srsscstC ramps is loss man six fast. It is pssaaslt teat ir*tBns9 grswte sf aouatie plants in teis arts will aakt it difficult for teats to pet to teiptr tatar. I doutt teat teat traffic «ill solvt tnis oraaltm by fosainG a cnannal by orboallor action. If ramps art put in I btlltva teat dsttginG of a owpar cnannal will ba naaotP. I am also of tea opinion teat tna 5aarls soamittaa raport «as tea sasult of long study by a coaoatant group of inciviouals mio eonsioarao aessss Issuas in post datail. 2 baliava teis raport should aarva as a basis for na« accass points on tea lakas. Tha Saarla coaoittaa aonsiaaroo distribu* tion of acaassasy tetsr Quality issuas and tea public naad. I faal tnat na« sitas snould not ba consioarad in a ^cuusu Sinctralyy K.5. Hanson Olractary Gray frashvatar Sislsgisal Institute Psofasssr of Micrsbislsgy nSH/d jcmr I [ OF I ordtud J CIT’’ A PonOSotBa f6*C7rH«l Bay ^ On thg North Short of Lakt Minnotoru^ janoarv 23, 1986 Mr. Pitriek Scully, Cbairnan Mctropolitsa Council Task ?orcs on Lake Kinnttonka Metro Council 7tb and Robert Streets St. ?aul, MN Sdlel Dear Mr. Scully, Ittacbed please find a copy of tbe Resolution outlinins Orene's eoatiageat ce&aitaeat for up to 79 parking spots vbicb giees tbe balance of pro-rated parking needed in Zone 1, as originally outlined in tbe 1983 Lake Minnetonka Task ?orce report. Xs indicated it is anticipated that tbe slots would cone througn tbe derslepaent cf parstls that art betb eff-sitt and off-street wi^bia 15C0 ftex cf tbe access that arc currentlv owned by tbe City of Orono. Please note tbe contingencies for wbicb this consitaent is given. Should you have any furtber cutstions cr coaaents, please feel free to contact ae. Sincerelj 7^ a^lc imzk^i»os f) Ma^lc City Adainistrator cc: Trank Mixa, Lake Minnetonka Conservation District Jack Maurits, Metro Cot.ncil JoTllen Hurr, Orono Representative L.M.C.D. Jon Tlaa, Metro Council •UILOIWC a ZOVtNC - <07357 Asmstsc AOMCClSrXAtlON L FIN a NC - <i73.72J4 FUlUC woaw - <*75-*’3: f ■: xxnr -- !Of ORDND Citv of OROZVO resolution of the city council NO. 1915________ X nsoLcrxoii xzgaxdzks easking slots tgsl ZOKB 1 AS DETBRKSnSD BY MBTBOPOLZTAB COUNCIL*S TASS FOBCS W1EB2AS, tht City of Orono contains 40% of tbo sbortlina on Laka Kinnatonka, and WBZBSASr Laka Minnatonka is an axtraaaly valuabla natural and raeraational rasocrca, and I# tba City of Orono has gona to graat langths to not only prasarva but also iaprova Laka Minnatonka for tba public baaltb# safety and waifart for all laka usars and lakasbera ownarsr and BAS, a Task Force on Laka Minnetonka racosaandad among other itass that 700 parking spots near free public acetssas, of tba existing 1,171 ba connitad-to be raliablt stets for such use, and WSSBSAS, tba Laka Minnetonka ConsarTatien Oistrict has davalcpad criteria and is staking voluntary connitstat cf tbasa spots, and WSS8SAS, tba Matropelitan Council's Task Force on tba issue is aneouraging cosnitaant cf these 7CC slots, and tba Minnesota Dapartaant of Natural Masouroas has purchased property on tba Lake for additonal free eublic access, and WSSnAS, tba safety cf boaters on tba laka is likalv ispairad by additional numbers of boats cn tba laka due to increased access, and WSZASAB, lone 1, tba only rone in vbicb there is an existing free public access in Creno needing ccunitntnt cf ur —*■r79 »a4icion*l *?=-* so sets!) 135 rtlitSlt tpstt is sit scat, tsfi KEXSSJLS, ptrk'a, oflslst of sat yaOlic asstta ea sht •srtts eta etesa etrsaia pafelis aafesy csssassa, and ^ WSS*S»S, sha dasaad for ovarflow sariclas fer sit San-r.ckson acoass is li2-«-*i •.0 « .0 8 siaaa yar aaaasa. 4 ■' 1jcxnr DRDTSU^ city of OROr^O RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 1915_ _ _ _ _ «01f, THZJUUrOM IS IT HXSOLVSDf that tht City CoeASil cf tha City of Orono will work towardi tht davtlopstst of op to 79 additional parking spots in Zona 1 on land owaad by aithas tha. City or tha County providad thats a.) No acsasaaa in addition to tbosa that axistad on January 1, 1994 ba plaead on tha laka and that 0«K.3U sign a writtaa agraaaant with L.M.C.O. that thay vill not placa any ascaaaaa on tha laka. b«) Funding for total davalepaant of tba sitaa eosa froa aoureaa octaida tha City and that daaalopaaat ba only to tba axtant of availabla outsida funding and e.) To tba axtant faasibla that davalopaant ba phasad to aaat darand zzid d.) That any dtvtlopaant of off-straat parking ba dona in a aannar that providas for a laval of srraasing and eespatability vioh rasidantial naighberhoods, and FCETSSF IS IT RSSOLVSD, that tha City Council cf tha City of Orono strongly urgas tha Laka Kinnatcnka Consarvation to inpcsa a faa on ail boating usars cf tha laka to pav for tba costs ef lav anfercaaant, claanup, accaas cparatiss and laka adninistration, and FCSTZSS sz I? szsOLTSOr that as parking is davalcpad off-straat that apprepriata staps ba takan to lisit en*straat parking in tha ricinity cf tha accass to lisit tha public safatv hauards and nuisancas asaociatad vith tha accass. Ldeptad by tha City Council cf tha Citv cf Crone, Sinnaseta at a ragular seating half January 27, 19S*. Kary C. Kayer .XTTSST: /Soiosay dmma. ■■miiow—t 16Mt.Bi^«a,X00 David A. Singer. Law OfDccs Noveaber 29, 1988 Eugene Stronmen Executive Director Lake Minnetonka Conservation District 402 East Lake Street Wayzata, MN 55391 John Derus Chairaan Board of Hennepin County Coaaissioners A-2400 Governaent Center Minneapolis, MN 55487-0240 Nark Bernhardson City of Orono P*0. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 Gentlemen: I an enclosing copies of an interchange of correspondence between myself and a representative of the Department of Natural Resources. The enclosed letter is Intended to clarify things I stated in ay earlier letters that may have been misconstrued. Very truly yours. David A. Sing DAS/dt Enclosure STATI ^DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES 2M.3S72 Httro Region - Mainistratfon1200 Nirner Road. St. Paul, Minnesota SS106 «no. October 17. 1988 r Divld Ae Singer. Ltd. Suit# 220 Mirsh Run 11900 Uiyzata Boulevard Minnetonka, MN $5343 Dear Mr. Singer: Thank you for your letter of September 27, 1988, with its well-reasoned discussion of parking Issues along County Road 51 near the North Arm access. It it apparent from your letter that you are quite well informed not only on the parking issue but on the related issue of public access to j^e Minnetonka. I'm certain that vou are also aware that the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (DNR) does not manage the North Arm access nor are we involved in determining the safety of parking along County Road 51. Both of these matters are managed under the authority of Hennepin County. It was a pleasure to note in your letter that you supported car-trailer parking for public access to Lake Minnetonka. You mentioned that to mMt the goal of 700 car-trailer parking spaces for lake Kcess alterna tives other than on-street parking should be sought. As a point of clarification, you may wish to know that the Department has always supported on-site, off-street parking for public accesses. Lake Minnetonka is the only lake where we recognize on-street parking for public access. This position was adopted by the 1983 Uke Minnetonka Task Force. The Task Force, however, did note that on-site, off-street parking was preferable to on-street parking. The DNR will continue to puMM the Kquisition and development of water Kcesses with on-site parking. I^ile I doubt that the DNR will be involved in the discussion of safety issues related to parking along County Road 51, if we can be of assis tance on other matters, please feel free to contact me. Sincerely, Kathleen A. Uallace Regional Administrator AN eouAL omomruNiTY eypLOVER David A. Singer. Ltd. Law ounces DavM A* I JSSiSiSZ October 81,1938 lOtOO.MtgiwyHi•klMtoPkrt.MJiaM10(•lilMMUO aMNMtk %0»Mrn4Aw.m^. ltaMwUa.MII ' ^ . ''r' ■" ■ Mo. Kcthlotn A. WtUaec Regional Administrator State of Minnesota Department of Natural Resourees 1200 Warner Road Saint Paul, Minnesota S5108 Dear Ms. Wallacei Thank you for your letter of October 17,198S. As you can undoubtedly tell from my previous letter, It Is my personal view that a mojor dsfislency of the 1913 Thsk Force stu^y and resulting report was iu failure to adequately address the traffic safety aspecto of permitting on-street parking along County Road 9L The major thrust of my effort is to get the City of Orono and Hennepin County to more closely analyse that issue with people with espertlse in the area of traffle safety. You stated in your letter that Lake Minnetonka is the only lake where the Department of Natural Resources recognises onstreet parking for pubUc access. However, since you also sUte that you do not have direct Jurlsdietion or Involvement over the North Arm access or a determination of the safety for parking along County Road SI; I think It would be helpful if you would provide some written confirmation that the Department of Natural Resources takes no position whether parking along County Road 51 should be eliminated, or othsrwiM restrictsd or reduced. I can then confine my efforts to the agencies who are directly involved with a solution to this problem, namely the City of Orono and Hennepin County. Prom the materials that I have reviewed^ and the information f have obtained about the history of this luue. It was my Impression, mistaken, that the local governmental agencies involved in this issue felt some pressure from your agency and the Lake Minnetonka Conservation District to overlook or compromise the safety aspect of permitting parking along County Road 5L My purpose in Including you In the correspondence was to Inform you of my efforts and hopehiUy obtain a confirmation that 1 need not pursue the issue directly with the highest appointment or elected officials trom the StaU of Minnesota. sm. 7.^ ■ w ' .. . :i=r •■ >:• * & V • •• V i. t '- , Ms. Ksthlssfi A. Wallset Psgs Two Oetobor 31.1988 1 hsvo foUowod with inUrost tlio offorU of vsriout govornmonUl sgooeios to roseh sonio rosotaitloii of tho siso and seopo of park faettitlos at a now sight in Minnatrista. It would ba halpAil to know whathar tho Dapartmant faals that tha davalopnant of a boat launch at that sight or any othar naw sights that ara eontamplata^ will allaviata tha naad for parking spaoas for boat trallars In axaasa of tha numbar of off-straat spaoas that ean ba aeacmmodatad at tha North Arm launch so that tha parking situation on County Road 81 could ba usad as a tamporary rathar than a parmanant accommodation to boaters. If that quastlon Is also bayond your Jurlsdictlon» Pd appraoiata knowing that. Thank you for your cooparation. Vary truly yours, rd A.8bigaf DA8/Jmb STATi orG^ssoir^ ^DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES PNoiMiio. Regfon AdafnfstratlonPHQMiNa zy®-357z J200 tamer Road. St.Paul. Minnesota 55106 FIE NO. Noveid)er 15. 1988 David A. Singer. Ltd* Suite 220 Marsh Run 11900 tayzata Boulevard Minnetonka. MN 55343 Dear Nr. Singer: I would like to respond to several points that you raised In your letter of October 31. 1968. First. In regard to your question about the Departaent's position on car-trailer parking on County Road 51. Ibe Oepartaent does support on-road car-trailer parking for Lake Minnetonka at this tiae because there Is such a serious shortage of off-road on-site parking spaces, ta do. however, believe that the question of safety should be addressed by the appropriate professionals under whose Jurisdiction the roadwqy falls. Second, your lapllcatlon that the Oepartaent of Natural Resources (ONR) pressured the local govemaenUl agencies ”to overlook or coaproalse the safety aspect of peraitting paming along County Road 51.* This stateaent Is wrong—and offensive. Nhlle the Oepartaent does believe that there Is Inadequate access for the public to Lake Minnetonka, we have never, nor will we ever, pressure anyone to coaproalse safety standards Nhether or not to have on-road parking Is a decision which Is left ei. '^rely up to the local unit of govemaent. Third, your question regarding whether or not an access In the proposed Lake Minnetonka Regional Park will alleviate the need for on-street parking. There Is currently a alnlaal need for 700 car-trailer parking spaces for Lake Minnetonka. Today there art less than 200. Vlth an additional access In Ninnetrlsta we still will not have even half the ■Inlwal need. It wot'id be unwise to anticipate any decrease In the need for on-street parking until 700 on-site off-road spaces have been designated. 1 hope this Inforwatlon Is helpful. Sincerely. KatiilMii A. Mllact Regional AdBlnlstrator 139 Aaw AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER David A. Singer. Ltd. Law Offices DwrliA.1 iwwmwwt iMoa. WiUmr itt •l.LMtorwa,MNIMl« (•ia>M«-oiio November 29• 1988 MONwt^SwrlM •M M Ava. Mi««Mp«m. mi Ha. Kathleen A. Wallace Regional Adainiatraisor Minnesota Department of Natural Resources 1200 Warner Road St. Paul, HN 55106 Dear Ns. Wallace: The pressure I referred to in my letter referred to the subtleties of your agency's reliance upon the task force report to encourage local communities to find 700 parking sites (that do not exist) in order to avoid the ultimate means of identifying parking sites, namely, through condemnation of private property. Your first letter to me is an example of such subtle pressure. I cannot say of ay own first-hand knowledge there has been any direct pressure of a more objectionable nature from your agency, or anyone else. The task force report was the result of the diligent efforts of a good number of public minded citisens with well meaning intentions. However, it is clear that the public discussion should focus on the broader question of whether the goal of 700 parking sites is realistic or practical, in view of the present overbalance of privately owned land around the lake. It is obvious to anyone who examines a nap of the Lake Minnetonka area that the only practical way to achieve the goals set forth in the task force report is if State, County, or local government entities choose to embark upon a progr^ o& wwnverting private property to public ownership, through voluntary sales or the power of condemnation. As we all know from the Minnetriata situation, that creates a distinct set of problems beyond those my neighborhood are experiencing. Those problems include whether state, county or local government have the funds available to embark upon such a program, and/or are willing to forego the tax benefits resulting from the private ownership of Ns. Kathlsen Wallace November 20, 1088 rage 2 highly valued lake shore property; let alone objections fron directly affected citizens. Thus, there are obviously practical linits to achieving the worthwhile goal of expanded public access to Lake Minnetonka. In view of that, 1 find it offensive that public officials instead continue to expect soae citizens who have privately owned property on Lake Minnetonka to bear the burden, through iaposition of unnecessary and avoidable risks on their personal safety, the safety of their faailies, and their guests, who have Just as auch right to a safe access and enjoyment of the lake as any other citizen. In that vein, your continued reference to the goal of 700 parking spaces, with regard to the County Road 51 problem, is not well received or appreciated. We all know that the zoning laws of the City of Orono would prohibit any private enterprise from using the north era boat launch for a commercial venture, if it was necessary to rely upon off street parkiiig on County Road 51. That prohibition would be, in part, founded on interests of public safety. This would be true, regardless of how beneficial to the community the commercial venture may be. I query why such a prohibition is any less appropriate because the site is used for a public purpose, however worthwhile that purpose may also be. I have represented to the Orono city manager that I recognize the political realities that parking will eliminated on County Road 51. I sense of my neighbors have resigned that eventuality. That . not make not likely be at least some themselves to it right. I can only hope that the traffic safety officials from the County and the City are free from the political pressures of compromising what they truly believe to be the beat solution to this problem, from a pure public safety standpoint. I can then only hope that City and County officials are in a position to implement whatever may be necessary to effect a solution, even if that results ir a regression from the goal of identifying 700 parking sites around the lake. Na. Kathleen Wallace Noveaber 29, 1988 Page 3 I hope this letter clarifies that I did not aean to suggest you, or anyone froa your agency, had done anything in a aorally or legally iaproper aanner with regard to **pressuring** other governaental officials. Very truly yours, David A. Singer DAS/dt cc:Nark Bernhardson County Road 51 Residents John Deres Eugene Stroaaen O P-^ONT) CIT PoM OOlM Bn «*Ciyital Bi On tht North Short of Lmko MinnHonka k CL'‘i> FBbruBry 21, 1969 DBBt North Shoro DrivB RBsident, hn you art awart tha City of Orono hat bttn rtvitwinR tha road aida parking aituation In your araa with Hannapin County Public Norka. Wa art at a point whara wa hava four optiona to oonaidar. Thay art aa followai 1* Blininata all parking. 2. Nidan tha ahouldara to 10 faat and provida for double atripad fog llna and curbing to ancouraga paopla to park away froa tha travalad portion of tha road. 3. Raaowal of up to aix paralnc alota along thia route to allow for clear padaatrian xonaa. 4. Aa in #2, widen with ranowal of four alota on tha curwa juat aaat of Handrickaon Bridge to iaprowa aita diatancaa for other padaatriana walking between cara. Itaaa 2, 3 and 4 would require widening tha ahouldar froa 7 faat to 10 faat. Thia aattar will be on tha agenda at tha February 27th Council aaating. Plaaaa feel free to call aa at 473-7357 if you have any coaaanta or auggaationa. Sincaralyr John R. Garhardaon Public Norka Director JRG/dh 22189.1 •UILINNG a ZONING - 47l-7»7 ADMiiiaillAllON A PINANCE - 47J-71St PUBLIC WOaK|.473-7Mf /321589.8 Mayor and City Council Hack B. Bacnhacdson, City Adninisteatoi|^ n«Bt Fabruary 15, 1989 SDBJBCTt County Road 116 Attachaantai A. County Road 116 Maao Datad 1/26/89 B. Traffic Count MapC. Jaaas Cos Lattac Datad 2/1/89 Racalaad 2/15/89 X8SUB - Datarnination aa to what action tha City of Orono would Tlta to hava takan In ralatlonshlp to County Road 116 should tha County 90 ahaad with this projact* INTRODUCTION - Tha City has transmittad its oposition to tha dounty Itoad il6 in Madina as notad in Attachnant C. At tha Council's January 23, 1989 masting tha Council in ^d it ion to diracting staff to axprass its oposition tablad considaration of tha itams ralatad to what Orono would Ilka to hava dona should tha County procaad with County Road 116. DISCUSSION - Tha summary of issuas ara notad in Attachmant A and in addition ara tha following issuas: Road Classification ^ «ATaviaw of tan cdmprahansiva plan classifiad Willow north of Highway 12 as a minor collactor. As notad in tha dafinition of that in tha comprahansiva plan it indlcatas that it is to ba a minimum of 80 fast right-of-way and undar tha jurisdictional control of Hannapin County. Traffic Counts (19871 . _ . ^Xa for tha issua oV^raff ic counts that wars raisad, tha County had indioatad that it would go from approximataly 1,400-1,900 cars par day to approximately 2,900 cars par day. Most of this traffic would ba consolidated from other orth/south routes currently existing in Madina and Orono. Evan at 2,900, there ara several streets in tha community that presently exceed that including North Shore Drive (4,400), Shoreline (17,200), Shadywood (11,000 and 6,400), County Six (5,100). It should also ba notad that currently Old Crystal Bay Road between Six and 12 carries 3,823 trips par day and North Brown carries 1,911 trips par day. As noted in Attachmant C Mr. Cox has raised a drainage issua that ha feels should ba addressed in any change. in Mr. Cox's latter can ba -w w— _ _ _ ___ _on tha west side of Willow near County Road 6 or if and whan County Road 116 is scheduled to be extended to Highway 12. Drainage issuas that ara addressed addressed at tha time of davalopmant ALT8WIAT1V18 - 1. ChooM to take no action. 2. Agree with full construction to County Road Six 3. Request the construction of 116 all the way to Highway 12. 4* Get an agreenent that if it goes to 12 the County will not undertake any projects south of 12. 5. Table for further discussion. RRCOMJmiDATIOlI - It is recoamended that the City of Orono would be linanciaily best off that if the County does go ahead and construct 116 in Medina by having the County take it over to Highway 12, but that the County execute an agreenent that they ■ake no effort to undertake any project for 116 south of Highway 12. PROPOSED MOTION - Moved by _, seconded by , that the Council direct staff to aininize the iapact of^l6 should it be undertaken. Ayes __, Nays __• cc: Pat Murphy, Hennepin County Public Works 12639.1 fOs It OUls Itoyor and City Council y Mark K. Barnhardaon, City Administrator^^ January 26, 1989 SOBJlCTi County Road 116 AttaehMnt*. a. County toad H6 Datad l/H/89 (Mt»o Only) B. County toad lie Draft toaolutlon ISSUES - *ttMhid*d«?t"aMlution*M‘ita^atat“ to adopt tha County Road li« ptocaadlns south o£ Hlahway* M. " t<» lsTO?aU W^‘co2;cuT “plL.\*tlor!“?« «•«forward tosatbac with tabllBo^K^VL^®" County Road Ilf going County would ba ualms^ wiii atandards similar to that tha Capltil eVdgaV £o “r'*lb:ut’'“99V. raconstructlon was approslaatalv S3M non ‘•‘i*tha potantlal naad fo" further; "•l^tad to this was protact bonas on tha aaU tod that iuerhi"**? **■•= “» •ny dawalopaant In that araa'" ia2 right-of-way uy ba raqulrad raaardi*M*^"^l*^ scqulsltlon of It ny ba «W<>prlata that tha cit»^Imi«5.’^f '•«‘»“»t*<«ts It, ownars agulvalant danslty eradlt for tha P'®P«*ty •;eh«"9« for no cost Inourtad in tha **''•" “P If tha County ware to do tha roSd th. i ‘e^-loltlon. Aalf tha right-of-way costs ) Tt ■««, ^ City cost would ba Highway 12 stay with “ upgradad Willow. Should Ptoylda tha ftodar to tSa tottot eontinua tolo tha astant that iigh* ““ Is proposad. location, tha Wlllow/llf would nortbarly location. SbouldU to £urttor^,fth V»* '®*iV ‘***‘ part of tha conduit for traffic*?o j|f5hnyTa! **"* " ALTBRMATIVBS - Adoption of Resolution Sa Mopt the resolution ba Amend end adopt c. Table ?. I1^. t-- •, PMPOSBD MOTIOW - Nov«d by , seconded by , that tha Caiman 11??^ j5V*^^'*^^»aya — indicating its opposiTIon to County Road CCS Pat Murphy, 1108 Ma/oc and City Council Hark B. Barnhardaonf City Adainistrator January II# 1989 County Road 116 «?8 Attaelwants: A. County Road 116 Kaso Dated 1/4/89 B. Letter to Residente Dated 1/19/89 IS8UB « !• Oeteraination of Council's support or opposition rsBarding the proposed upgrade of 116 to be expressed to the County Board. 2. Zf County 116 goes ahead# deteraination as to what actions the City would like the County to take in Orono. _^JOCTZGH - At the Council's January 9# 1989 Council aeeting «..e issue ot County Road 116 was discussed by Council. At that aeeting it was tabled until the January 23# 1989# aeeting when individuals froa the County would be present. DISCUSSIOW - issue 1. - As aentioned at the last aeeting the decision is one wltTkle County Board and the City of Medina and efforts regarding that in the City of Orono should be directed to either one of those two bodies or both. It currently is prograaaed for Spring 1990 construction. Issue 2#^* The following represent issues the City has discussed wltTCounty to deteraine their position should the County choose to go ahead on 116. A. Willow Drive - Medina Border to Six - Related to this segaent 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 iaproved segaent to County Road 6 or stop at the border. 3. Construction layout - This would be construction layout to ainiaise the iapact to the aajority of hoaes.* Willow Dri^* - Ijkl il - i**tt«* related to this are tKewTlowIngr “ 1. Allowing County Road 116 - County 6^ Highway 12 - 06terinination as to whether the Council desires to request Hennepin County take over this on a voluntary basis. 2. Reconstruction - Determining whether the Coiyicil 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. Rlaht-ot-way - Only th. costs entailsd iroul- o« 1/2 of tight-of-way coats. ($19,000 ~ 2 ■ *»500) The right-of-way costs bstwasn S and 12 could b. niniialzod by dadlcation of ROW for devslopnant. 5. Bike Trails - As an option a one sided bike path coulT^ instaTled for about $19,000 of which the City would pay half. It should be additionally noted that should the County take over the entire lenght from the border to Highway 12 the following benefits accrue to the City of Orono: 1. Signalixation at Willow/12 - While this would not guarantee a signal at the point that vehicle 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 WilT^ 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 for other needs in the community. This is particulary in light of the City saving any reconstruction monies for the future for Willow. ALTBRMATIVBS - Issue 1. 1. (ihoose to support. 2. Choose to oppose. 3. Choose to take no position. 4. Choose to table. Issue 2^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 se^ent. 3. Specify alignment for that construction. 4. Acqulstion of effected properties. 5. Table. B. Willow - ^ to 12 la. Chooae^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 rellgnment. 4. Allow reconstruction of Willow Drive into alllgnment 1. 5. Table. RBCOMMBMDATIOW • 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. laay 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 beat of the situation. d. 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 w Impact on the homes partlci .:he City to minimize the iy north of County Road 6. d. Predicate it upon the County contributing to the area south of 12 should the bridge upgrade be undertaken. PROPOSED MOTION - Moved by $ Seconded by __, that the Council directs staff to work with*^e County along the lines of the jcaff's recommendation. Ayes __, Nays __. d SESOLOnOH IN OPPOSITION TO COONTT ROAD 116 BBIN6 BXTKNDND PNOM HI6BRAX 55 TO COUNTY ROAD SIX NHBRBAS, 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 NNBRBAS/ the City of Medina under 5,000 population does not qualify for Minnesota State Aid Roads# and NHBRBASf the County has agreed to fund construction of this road through its bonding funds for an estimated total of $2.9 million, and WBBRBAS, the City of Orono having a population over 5,000 receives its own Municipal State Aid monies, and WBBRBAS, although the County's standards for co*.r.;ruction of 116 would be similar to a revision of Willow done by the City, the City ia concerned about the negative impact of increased traffic by construction of this route in Medina, and WHBRXAS, substantial opposition to this road in Medina was made evident at the Orono Council's consideration of this matter, and substantial opposition in Orono was generated to this proposal, and WHBRBAS, the City of Orono realizes that the Count> has the legal right to designate and/or construct any or all portions of the road it chooses to in the Ci*’v of Orono. NOW, THBRBFORB BB IT RBSOLVBD, :hat the City Council of the City of Orcio 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 Cou«'cil of the City of Orono, Minnesota at a regular meeting held February 13, 1989. ATTEST: ai- IV 16 J2H2I 3 R. Grabdk, Mayor Dorothy M. Hallin, City Clerk m cu ‘•'■■sr' »:. • --rr-x-Z, JT.:.: . -.r-s-.i ‘ • •> u;3i Ns — ^1 MHDMA--■ ! UIMMI iiim^ > y^--:nCCFENKHCci ’'^^/wiiiiiiiiiimiMiiiiiOiiiiiiiuiijiiif,;. \__;;' - i = V • “’Ittl*. •. •'*v X L^^ L AKE llllMIMU,^ 'O, '•.Ml lit II, 11111:1111 til Ml I '///iimiintfiiiin^w'^ s\ -=.»» ■ I " .!• V:.,. SiiiiiMiiitiiii^\X I {’ o \WWZATA III > z- .M-r- •\ I,— ..^ Ml•l•ll^•l••ln J' vi/ ' ^ .’.Vj' V .-J \ N r-"'^ • ^/twvrm OROflO’5 ROAWAY CLASSIFICATIW 'kh ■■ HAJOR ARTERIAL ^ illllllll IHTERHEOIATE ARTERI^^ himor arterial ■^^- MMMII COLLECTOR — SCENIC PARK'.i;V • . w“j >.;; \ \I City of Crcno JylinnesotllH.... TRAMSPQRT^TIQftL JUNE, 1980 . i 1 la a arada-aaparatad, high •PMCIPAI. ARTERIAL A Principal Artariai vahicla* through an Hpacity. contr^ad acc... har. no local land ua. wSa. not within a cowunity. that portion of Stat. . . . . . . . .. - .. . . . . . . . .. with Naysata.is a controllad-accaaa, IHTBRHEDIATE A^RIM. ^ -* to nova vahiclaa batwaan cltlaa ■odarataiy high eapacity highway growth cantara and I"“ in orono-a aituation. »»•*''?•" ‘^**”tropolitai Iraa. Intaraaction. out-atata citiaa waat of ‘ tceaaa la Intandad to ba llbitad toara llnltad and controllad. Land uaa a raaldantial propartlaa. major traffic **"*'*^®'! t,„gai,ta Artarial through Orono although many ... •< • or eoll«ctora JORISOICTIOK. STATE DEPARTHEHT OF RIOHT-OF-WAT width. MIHIMOM 100 FEET FOR TWO LAHE HIGHH mthqR arterial * 5't*'i‘i,*^%hiclaa'within*planning aubraglona and stxo«t or nignway dorignod to Minnotonko Ring Routo it • winor batwaan adjaeant *^?„eipllly commutara and truck traffic, artarial functioning ’w^^Mmunitlaa into tha urbanlaad araaa of fro. tha waatarn L.ka "‘"“f““^J.^rroit. chaHnala traffic away fro. tha Twin Citiaa. Tha minor artarta futura, to laka Minnatonka Stat. Hig^^ay* « Plyaouth. Land ua. acc.aa a diract i“‘««”*t?\!irto «j*r«afnc ganaiatora and local atra.t i:tira:«!onrw$:hiit‘ltract aci... to individual raaidancaa. JORISDICTIOH. HEHHEPIH COOHTY DEPARTMBHT OF TRAHSPORTATIOH «•»» •• "" ““ S^fgv,.... 1. “ r.:S biru^ragul^tad IT to ""■J"aecMa'*irnallab”.*intIra.ctior :ni*:th«*”Ii:=to«”r:":“ftin controU.d with aignal. or with four-ay atop algna. Traffic uaaga ia .odarata. JORISOICTIOH. COOMTT OR CITY RICHT-Or-HAY WIDTH. 60-66 FEET CMP 7-15 To: Orono City Council I I 5B8b1 1 yei ^ Vo livo at 1020 N. Willow Drivo (east oido of Willow, iouth of Co« Rd« 6). There are two isaueo I want to cover with the Orono Council; firat, propoaed Co* Rd* 116, aecond, aurfaoe water run-off• In regard to Co. Rd. 116, there are four queationa I would like to have anawered: 1. Concerning the interaection of Co. Rd* 6 and Willow Drive — there are nuaeroua acoidenta there now, and if Co. Rd* 116 doublea or triplea the nunber of oara, acoidenta will inoreaae approximately the aaae amount. What do you plan to do to make it aafer — a 4-way Stop? 2. Concerning the interaection of Hwy 12 and Willow Drive — in the morning and from 2:30 on in the aftemoon it ia next to iapoaaible to get on Hwy 12. If traffic doublea or triplea, how are you going to handle thia additional traffic without aerioua acoidenta? 3. Do you realize if a connection ia made between Hamel and Long Lake a tremendoua amount of aemia and gravel trucka will uae thia road who presently do not use Willow Drive* Can you aee aemia trying to cross Co. Rd. 6 and get on Hwy 12? They are using 101 and 19 now. 4* How are you going to control traffic speed? Right now we have pfople traveling 50*55 miles per hour on Willow Drive* Second, regarding surface water run-off: We own the land on the southeast side of Willow Drive and Co. Hd*6. This is a fa»nily farm that has been in our family since 1855. We have had an on-going water problem encoding our land from the Phillips development on Co. Rd. 6, and also from the recent rerouting in water drainage on the west side of Willow between Co* Rd. 6 and Hwy 12. With Co. Rd. II6 being widened and new ditches coming in, the easiest way for them to get rid of excess water is to run it acrosa our property. Va will r.ot allow thla to happen, and we do want to hear hack how you intend to»lve the water problen on the west aide of Willow and from the Phillips project. I have been trying to work on this with John Oerhardson for a year and a half but have not accomplished much yet. I look forward to hearing your answers SrV,.m- Sincerely, " -g. - /James A. Cox1020 N. Willow Drive Long Lake, Kn. ■ -.-if COUNCIL if ££T>N6 r*** '•'*? V t. TO: Mayor and City Council PBOM: Mark E. Bernhardson, City Administratol DATS: February 22, 1989 SUBJKTt 3399 Crystal Bay Road - Assessor's Valuation Attachment: A, Jerry Wheeler Letter Dated 2/14/89 ISSUE - 1. Receipt of written and oral presentations Mr. Jerry Wheeler re9arding the valuation process of houses for property tax purposes. 2. Review of process for valuation. 3. Determination of response to Mr. Wheeler's issues. INTRODUCTION - The process for valuation of properties for tax purposes are an assigned responsibility of the City's Assessor. The charge of the Assessor is to place a value on the property that is termed Estimated Market Value. This would roughly correlate to the estimated sale price of a property. The County Assessor does a review of these valuations against a sales ratio study, as does the State, and to the extent that these sales ratios do not meet their minimum marks the entire appraisal is raised across the community in order to meet these marks. This is a mass appraisal system so that there are individual properties, which because of selected circumstances may not be individually identified. The process allows for this to be accommodated within the Board of Review, which is scheduled for May 11, 1989. (Valuation for 1989 taxes was done last spring 1988. When the valuation notices are sent this year they will be for the 1989 value on which 1990 taxes will be based.) As you may recall, the City back in the late '70's was part of an Assessment District that disbanded in the early '80's. This was a joint Assessment District of several communities around the lake. Following the disbandment the City contracted with Hennepin County to do the assessing. The County significantly raised property values around the lake on their mass appraisal system and it resulted in 1983 with a Board of Review composed of at least 250-350 people. \s a result of lack of sensitivity to the uniqueness presented by properties in the City of Orono the City then undertook contracting services with Rolf Erickson. Their initial review resulted in the appropriate lowering of values of many properties in the City and although there have been increases in subsequent years they have struck a fine balance between appropriate valuation and minimum requirements to avoid a substantial State imposed valuation notice increase. (It should also be noted that because of the many unique properties In the City of Orono it is probably one of the most difficult, if indeed not the moat difficult city in the State to assess. This is because there are few comparables by neighborhoods in the community. This is an exception to botn the suburban central city and the Metro Area.) DISCUSSION - In Attachment A, Hr. Wheeler indicates his concern with .the fact that he does not feel certain characteristics are being taken into account in the valuations of the property. (Three of the four conditions are typical of most of the properties around the lake this last year or two and are ones of which the Assessors are very aware. The Assessors do break down the areas around the lake into 32 different locations and are able to give unique consideration to areas. The Assessor can reflect the impact of these conditions only to the extent that the market (i.e. the collection of people buying individual properties) reflects these conditions. The valuation for properties in the City for 1989/payable 1990 have not been completed. As soon as this is done and preliminarily accepted by the County the valuations will be sent out to all property owners. (The Assessor's valuations are not "finaled" until the notices are sent out as their valuation process would be markedly slowed by individual inquiries prior to the values being completed. The Board of Review process is the time for these reveiews.) Once they receive the notices then property owners can then discuss the values with the Assessors in advance of the Board of Reivew. Rolf Erickson has indicated he would be sending Mr. Wheeler a letter on the matter within the next week. ALTERNATIVES * 1. Accept the information from Mr. Wheeler, 2. Table for further discussion. 3. Have Mr. Wheeler discuss his valuation with the Assessors in advance of the Board of Review once he as received his valuation notice. 4. Request that Mr. Wheeler appear at the Board of Review to have the valuation considered by the Council at that point. RECOMMENDATION - It is recommended that the City suggest to Mr. Wheeler to participate in the normal Board of Review process in which the City's Assessors spend time with the individual property owners to review their individual valuation and how they were arrived at. PROPOSED MOTION - Moved by __, seconded by __, that the Council thank Mr. Wheeler for his concerns and that he be directed on his individual property to discuss its valuation with the City's Assessor in person once the valuation notices are sent out. Ayes __9 Nays ___. *■> FEBRUARY 10, I989 FROMi CITY COUNCIL CITY OF ORONO P.O. BOX 66 CRYSTAL BAY, MN, CRYSTAL BAY ROAD RESIDENTS CRR/JERRY W. WHEELER VERY RE I 1989 PROPERTY APPRAISALS D OUR LAKESHORE AND BAY ALONG CRYSTAl^ POOR CONDITION I 1.) THE BAY IS NOW LESS THAN THREE FEET IN DEPTH EX* TENDING FOR ABOUT 300 YARDS FROM SHORE AND IS THEREFORE NOW INACCESSABLE TO ALL BUT SMALL RUN* ABOUTS AND EVEN THEY RISK PROPELLER DAMAGE. DUE TO THE SHALLOW AND MUDDY CONDITION, OUR BAY IS NOW SERIOUSLY OVERGROWN AND CHOKED WITH EURASIAN WATER MILFOIL. THIS CONDITION ALMOST TOTALLY ELIMINATED OUR ACCESS AND ENJOYMENT LAST YEAR. OUR STREET IS IN SERIOUS NEED OF REPAIR OR RE DUCED TRAFFIC AND THAT HAS THE ATTENDANT THREAT OF INCREASED TAXES. BECAUSE OF THESE NEGATIVE CONDITIONS OUR HONES CAN ONLY BE SOLD DURING THE WINTER MONTHS WHICH O^CURE THE POOR QUALITY OF OUR LAKESHORE AND qA I • 2.) 3.) 4.) REDUCTION IN PROPERTY ASSESSMENTS WAS BEING CONSIDERED evaluations . m„. MENTAL CONDITIONS NOW DESTROYING JUST A FEW areas of lake MINNETONKA ("WE ARE SIMPLY TOO BUSY TO DO THAT"). 2. ) THAT THE ASSESSORS OFFICE IS RESTRICTED BY THE USING PERSONAL JUDGEMENT 1 arriving at ASSESSED MARKET VALUES. 3. ) THAT THE ASSESSORS DETERMINATIONS MUST BE BASED SOL^^fY ON OTHER OROl.O REALE5TATE SALES. . .. LOCATION, ENVIORNMENTAL CONDITIONS AND THE TIME OF YEAR OF SALES HAVE NOTHING TO DO WITH PROPERTY EVALUATIONS. “ 4. ) THAT ON THE AVERAGE, THERE HAS BEEN LITTLE IF ANY ORONO PROPERTY VALUES AND THEREFORE VALUES CHANGE IN CRYSTAL BAY ROAD PROPERTY IN 1984 WHEN WE CONTRACTED IN FAVOR OF A LOCAL ASSESSOR OVER THE HENNEPIN COUNTY ASSESSORS, THE EXPRESSED REASON ING AND EVERYONES STATED BELIEF WAS THAT WE AS A COMMUNITY WERE GOING TO RECEIVE ASSESSMENTS FROM SOMEONE MORE KNOW LEDGEABLE AND "IN TOUCH WITH OUR LAKE ENVIORNMENT". WE WERE ASSURED THAT OUR SPECIFIC LOCATIONS WITHIN THE CITY AND ON THE LAKE WOULD BE KNOWLEDGEABLY REVIEWED. WE WERE ASSURED THAT OUR NEW ASSESSORS WERE GOING TO UNDER STAND HOW ENVIORNMENTAL CHANGES IMPACT OUR LAKE AND THEREFORE PROPERTY VALUES. IF MR, WILDE IS TO BE BELIEVED, WE HAVE GAINED NONE OF THE ABOVE BY CHANGING FROM HENNEPIN COUNTY, WE APPARENT LY HAVE SOME ASSESSORS WHO DO NOT KNOW OR TRULY UNDERSTAND THEIR JOBS AND RESPONSIBILITIES, THERE IS ABSOLUTELY NO DOUBT THAT THE CONDITIONS OF OUR SPECIFIC LAKE SHORE AND BAY AREA AR% THE PRIMARY DETERMINING FACTORS IN THE VALUA TION AND SA^BILITY OF OUR PROPERTIES. WE CITIZENS SIMPLY WISH TO ASK OUR CITY COUNCIL REPRE SENTATIVES TO DISCUSS THESE FACTS WITH THE ASSESSORS OFFICE. WE ASK THAT YOU HELP US RECEIVE THE JUST AND REASONABLE DECREASES IN OUR 1989 ASSESSED PROPERTY EVALU ATIONS, RELATIVE TO THE ESPECIALLY NEGATIVE CONDITIONS ON OUR SPECIFIC BAY. A COPY OF THIS LETTER HAS BEEN FORWARDED TO MR. ERICKSON*S OFFICE FOR THEIR REVIEW. CC. ROLF ERICKSON P.O. BOX 41841 PLYMOUTH, HN. 5544I SCHEDULED FOR 2/2?/89 COUNCIL MEETING !< Tot Mark E. Bernhardson, City Administrator Froai John R. Gerhardson, Public Works Director 22389.2HD COUNOL MEETING Date: February 23, 1989 Subjects Drainage - 3572 Livingston Avenue ,— . Attacbnents ~ A - Letter from Mark & Karen Cuff B - 1/2 Section - Lots 16 4 17 C - 1/2 Section - Area Contributing Storm Water Recently the City of Orono received a request from Mark and Karen Cuff, 3572 Livingston Avenue, to correct a drainage problem that will restrict them from improving their property (attached). Mark and Karen reside at 3572 Livingston Avenue (Lot 16, Block 3). In 1982, they purchased the vacant lot next to them (Lot 17, Block 3) from Hennepin County as the property was tax forfeited. Between Lots 16 and 17 there is a natural swale that drains storm water from part of the neighborhood. The Cuff's are now planning to build a garage on their property and eventually add on to their home. The drainage area, because of its location, greatly restricts them from doing so. Therefore they are requesting the City to assist them in rerouting the drainage pattern as it exists today. The City Engineer and myself have performed a windshield survey of the area to determine the most effective means of handling the storm water run-off. It is our opinion that if a storm sewer is proposed it would have to be constructed in basically the same route as the water is running now over the surface of the ground. Dependent on the Cuff's plans for improvements to their property will determine to what degree the drainage pattern will change. A storm sewer constructed in this area will directly impact two to four properties dependent on the routing, and will over all impact several other properties that are contributing water run-off to the Cuff's property. A feasibility study will have to be performed to further define the costa and exact number of properties affected. If it is the intent to proceed the following steps should follow: 1. Determine cost of feasibility study. 2. Receive clarification from City Attorney regarding Chapter 429.031, Subdivision 1 as it pertains to receiving a petition requesting the project of 35% of affected property owners. Drainage - 3572 Livingston Avenue Pt^bruary 23, 1989 ^ Page. 2 q£ 2, . Recoameadation “ To direct staff to determine costs of feasibility study and to direct the City Attorney to submit a% opinion of Chapter 429.031, Subdivision 1 regarding receiving petition from 35% of affected property owners as it pertains to storm sewer projects. Proposed Notion - Moved by , seconded by , to direct staff to determine costs of a feasibility study and to direct the City Attorney to submit an opinion of Chapter 429.031, Subdivision 1 regarding receiving a petition of 35% of affected property owners as it pertains to storm sewer. Ayes , nays .» TO: FROM: SUBJECT: Mayor and City Council Mark E. Bernhardson, City Administrator 3572 Livingston Avenue - Drainage Attachment: A- 3572 Livingston Avenue Memo Dated 2/23/89 Forwarded recommending approval of the recommendation^^^^^ T'- February 1, 1989 FEB - 3 iCity of Orono Attn: John Gerhardson Public Works Director ■_ _ _ _ _ _ __ Box 66 Crystal Bay^ MN 55323 . Dear Mr. Gerhardson; Per our phone conversation on February 1^ 1989# I am submitting a written request for a sto»^ rather than using our homestead as a drainage art* .y street run off. Presently the city is using out ^-toperty for this use# lots 16 and 17 block 3 Navarre Heights. On January 31# your department made a trench from the street# between the two lots 20 feet into our property to drain the low spot in the street. This has caused water to enter our basement and our sump pump was running continuously to keep our basement from flooding. At the present time we are planning to build a garage in the back of lot 17 and move our drive way. During our phone conversation you told me that we could not obtain a building permit for anything on t..is lot due to your drainage solution from years past# until the water problem is corrected. We respectfully request you to reconsider this position. We feel that the best and least costly solution to this situation would be to install a storm drain and connect it to the storm drain system that is located on the corner of Livingston Ave and Blain. (approximately 150 feet west of our property). Not only would this keep the water out of our basement and property# it would allow us to improve our property. Also it would keep the street free fo standing water that creates damage to the asphalt and unsafe driving conditions. Neighborhood children tend to play in the standing water in the street during the summer months. We urge you to submit this request to the city council for a feasibility study for installation of a storm drain. We regard this as a very urgent matter due to the property damage that continues to be caused. Please contact us in writing with your agenda on this as soon as it is set. Sincerely# Mark & Karen Cuff 3572 Livingston Ave Wayzata# MN 55391 Here is a general recap of facts on this matter as I know them; !• In 1980 I purchased lot 16 block 3 located at 3572 Livingston Ave. 2. In May of 1982 while I was at a CiLy Council meeting, Tom Jacobs and two members of the City Council approched roe after the meeting because they knew I had inquired about lot 17 (next to my lot) in the past. They informed me it was going up for auction by the County/State within 3 days. I was also informed that Mr. Nabb was also interested in developing this property. Tom Jacobs and two Council members said they did not want to grant a varriance for a 50 foot lot and encouraged me to purchase this property. This would benefit both the City of Orono and me. I was also informed that if I purchased lot 17 and combined it with lot 16, I would be able to request from the City, a refund on the water and sewer assessments because the trunk lines would not be usable as combined property. 3. I only had two or three days in a busy schedule to arrange financing and obtain information on this property. Neither Tom Jacobs nor anyone from the city volunteered information that some sort of waterway status existed. On May 10th 1982 I purchased this property. I was not informed that this was a natural water way as it has since been referred to, and that improvements could not be made to this property. We have spent valuable time and money cleaning our lot 17 for improvement. Dump truck loads of garbage were hauled out and excavating the property has been done. The neighborhood has been rid of an eyesore and an illegal dumping sight thereby. 4. Three years ago (appro)') when your people were digging a trench into our land, my husband and I had a similar conversation with you and Mark Bernhardson. We were told then that this was a natural water way and the only options at that time were to install curb and gutter and we would have a difficult time getting it through the neighborhood, or for us to dig a canal through the property. I consulted an attorney at the time who told me, we could be sued for flooding someone elses property if we dug the canal. We obtained lot 17 in order to improve it along with lot 16. We have made significant progress toward doing this. This request for a storm drain is to continue in keeping with the spirit of improvement we have given and continue to give our homestead. We ask the City to give it similar consideration. c.c. Mark Bernhardson II ■ii ©■Sf-X f;!sj ^ ^f|l - ^ il\' t f. .fi>■»s>Sv /I T “s ■c \3 •OA - t- ■I.' -----------nr--*—-—^-yA,_.. •lit ^r- v'''A -!■ -f. - 'Lj^j -I V^= \i} .fe r h ----------V s; Oj. © * * .5^ . ^ -■»; 'A’',. . ■ * , \ \ ' _r '->♦ V' ^■ ■•X *1-:^. ■• •-> s "il^ IW ----------------- ir>/^ i :/ h - 21589.13 i;- O TO? FBOMs OATB: Mayor and City Council Mark E. Bernhardson, City Administrator^ February 15, 1989 COUNCIL MfETING SUBJECT: Sewer Service/Eighway 12 Attachment: A. Sewer Service Request - Sidney Rebers ^SSOE - Response to request for sewer service for the Rebers* property. INTRODUCTION - The approvals for the Rebers* property were conditioned upon sewer being available to this property. The City had conducted a preliminary feasibility study of it and Rebers having now gotten a negative answer for service for sewer on this property from the City of Long Lake is now requesting that the City of Orono undertake the necessary provision of that service. DISCUSSION - As noted a service line would have to be run to the west to serve not only this property but also the Otten and properties between Willow and Old Crystal Bay. At present the City has 116 units alloted to it, however, it could either expand the line in a negotiated arrangement with Long Lake and Medina or could undertake perhaps in conjunction with the City of Medina its own line. At present construction of service to the Rebers* property would not entail having to necessarily increase its capacity at this present time but would so in the future as other properties come online. ALTERNATIVES 1. Pr *ect undertaking of formal plans for sewer service to the •ty. 2. Table for further discussion. RECOMMENDATI ON - It is recommended that the Council direct the Engineer to complete the necessary studies and layout for sewer service to the Rebers* property. Costs for the project when brought forward wr-uld eventually be paid by those who would be served by this additional capacity, be it through a connection charge and/or an assessment. PROPOSED MOTION — Moved by , seconded by the Council directs the Engineer to complete the necessary studies and layout for sewer service i the Rebers* property. Costs for the project when brought forwaio 'ild eventually be paid by those who would be served by this cional capactiy, be it through a connection charge and/or an vsment. Ayes _, Nays _. ](‘l)rrsjl(m ‘s Sidney Bernhard Rebers, Master Builder IIEICRS CONSraUCTiON COMPANY • 3525 WEBSTER AVE. • ST. LOUIS PARK. MINNESOTA February 10, 1989 John R. Gerhardson Public Works Director City of Orono 1335 Brown Road South Crystal Bay, MM 55323 RE: Proposed Meyers Woods Slngls'-Famlly Subdivision Dear Sir: This letter Is to request the City f Orono to provide sanitary sewer service for the proposed Meyers Woods single-family subdivision. This project Is generally located In the northwest quadrant of Trunk Highway 12 and Brown Road North, more specifically as that part cf the East % of the Northwest Quarter of Section 34, Township 118, Range 23, lying northerly of US Trunk Highway 12. Based on the Trunk Highway 12 sanitary sewer report prepared for the City of Orono, dated 1988, the proposed 25 lots are expected to generate 8,560 gallons per day average flow and a peak flow of 34,250 gallons per day, or .034 mdg. Given the feasibility work previously done by the city engineer, I anticipate that sewer service would be available for the spring, 1989 construction season. If there Is any additional Information that you require, please let me know. Sincerely, cc: Bob Kost - BRW, Inc. n TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Mark B. Bernhardson, City Administrato DATS: February 15, 1989 SUBJECT: Facilities Site Analysis Attachment: A. Boarman Analysis of Sites COUNCIL MEETING • ** i • ^ . >« •. ISSUE Receipt of information from Boarman and Associates regarding the three sites and various combinations that had been requested to be examined. INTRODUCTION - As you will recall following development of site criteria last summer the consultant this past fall was able to undertake an analysis of two initially identified sites plus a third site that was added. DISCUSSION - In order to provide a more informal format for review of this, other than at a regular meeting, it has been requested at a special meeting to have a review of this analysis anu further discussion of it with David Kross of Boarman and Associates. ALTERNATIVES - 1. Discuss. 2. Table until the special meeting. 3. Choose not to undertake a special meeting at this point. 4. Accept the analysis. 5. Request additional analysis. RECOMMENDATION - It is recommended that following any comments Counci1members would anticipate in advance of the meeting of the 8th that it be tabled to a formal presentation by Mr. Kroos at that meeting. PROPOSED MOTION - Moved by _, seconded by _, that the Council accept the analysis from Boarman and Associates and table discussion until a special meeting. Ayes __, Nayr. BOARMAN& ASSOClATt-S A R { M n I < r u R t f \ r. I N M R I \ C. intcrkjr ufsu.n CtTYCXXJNaL cmroFORONO P.O. BOX 66 CRYSTAL. MINNESOTA 55323 RE: ORONO MUNICIPAL PAOUTIES STUDY MARCH 8.1969 MEETING AGENDA ITEMS FOR DISCUSSION: 1. 2. 4. 5. Status Report of Study to Date Discussion of Sires . Site A-Existing Municipal Site . Site B • Sewer Pond Site . Site C-Hwy. 12 Site Discussion of Slte/Bulding Options . Option 1 Site A City HaN/Police . Option 2 SiteB City Hall/Police . Options SiteC City Hall/Police . Options SiteB City Han/Police/Public Works . Options SIteC CltyH VPollce/PubllcWorks . Options SiteB Public Works .Option? SiteC Public Works Other Site to be Considered Schedule to Coi ipletion 2 2 2 N o r I h 2nd S I r c c I M i n n i- j p o I i s M i n n i* s o I 51401 6 1 2 » 3 9 - 1 7 5 2 o li TOs Mayor and City Council FBONi Mark E. Bernhardson, City Administrat DATS: February 24, 1989 SUBJaCTi Informational Meeting - March 8, 1989 COUNCa MEETING FEB 27 1939 CITY OF ORONO Wondering if you would be available for an informal meeting with David Kroos of Boarman and Associates to review the site analysis work. 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. To date no one has indicated a problem. Thank you. /9 Datilt Mark E. Bernhardsonr City Administrator John R, Gerhardson, Public Works Director February 23, 1989 22389.IHD COUNCIL Mf ETiNG • ^ »- /. - ^ Subjects 1910 Shadywood Road On February 8, 1989, I submitted a letter to Hennepin County informing them that the adjacent property owners to County right- of-way (Coffee Bridge) were interested in pursuing the feasibility of vacating that right-of-way. To this date, I am unaware of any progress on the matter but expect to hear some thing within the next 30-60 days. TO: FROM: Mayor and City Council Mark E. Bernhardson, City Administrato Forwarded recoramendi g acceptance of the information. 21589.12 COUNCfL ME EpJijfi TO: Mayor and City Council FBON: Mark B. Bernhardson, City Administratoi MTB: Feoruary 15, 1989 SOBJKT: Appointment of Part Time Officer - Scott Kuyper Attachment: A. Application of Scott Kuyper ISSUE - Appointment of a part time officer to fill a vacancy created by the resignation of James Morrow. INTRODUCTION - As you may recall the position of part time officer witi) the City became vacant on January 31, 1989 as a result of the resignation of Officer James Morrow to take a full time position with the City of Eden Prairie. DISCUSSION - Following the review of applications given to us by the Suburban Police Recruiting System the City has done an interview and background check and is recommending the appointment at this time of Scott Kuyper whose background is contained in Attachment A. ALTERNATIVES 1. Appoint Scott Kui'per. 2. Table for further considerations. 3. Choose not to employ anyone for the position at this time. RECOMMENDATION - It is recommended that Scott Kuyper be appointed as the most qualified interviewee for the position commencing on March 1, 1989 at a salary of $9.24 plus prorated benefits conditioned upon being deemed physically and psychologically fit. It is recommended that this be undertaken as the City needs to fill a paLt time commitment for half time work for the City of Long Lake. PROPOSED MOTION - Moved by , seconded by _, that Scott Kuyper be appointed tn the posITion of part time officer on a probationary status at a hourly wage of $9.24 per hour with prorated benefits as established in the plan effective date no sooner than March 1, 1989 or as soon as practical conditioned upon being deemed physically and psychologically fit subject to normal probation for an officer. Ayes __, Nays __. cc: Chief Kilbo please return to:CITY OF OilOlia BOX 66 CRYSTAL BAY. MINN. 55323 Date Received CITY OF ORONO APPLICATION FOR EMPLOYMENT Dear Applicant, We welcome you as an applicant for employment. Your application will be considered with others. It is our policy to provide equality of opportunity in employment. This policy prohibits discrimination on the basis of racZ/dolor, religion, national origin, political affiliation, disability, marital sutus, sex or age (between 40 and 65) in all aspects of our personnel policies, programs, practices and operations. This policy apply to full, part-time, temporary, and^^asonal employment. The information conuined in this application will be considered personal and confidential and used only in conjunction with your possible employment Please furnish us with comoiete information. You are encouraged to attach any additional information which you believe qualifies you for the position. Please use INK OR TYPEWRITER. 1.Title or Kind of work applied for:Permanent —X— Part-time Date Available: Temporary ------Seasonal Immediately 2.PERSONAL INFORMATION 3.Name Last Kuyper First Scott Middle Edward Social Security No. 473-90-0566 4.Present Address 9915 Newton Ave, So., City County State Zip Code Bloomington, Hennepin, Minnesota 55431 5.Home Phone No. (612) 881-6127 Work Phone No. (612) 542-8250 6. Do you have any Physical or Health limitations whic* ct your work performance? Yes If you have answered yes, please use an additional sheet to explain. 7. If you are not a citizen of the United States, do you have Bureau of Immigration approval to work in the U.S.? Yes No EDUCATIONAL INFORMATION (To be completed only if education is a job requirement) 8. Circle the highest Grade School High School College Post Graduate grade completed 12345678 9 10 11 12 or GEO l3(t7lS 16 MA .<>hd Lib •2 Degree or Types of School Name and Address of School From To Certificate’Major High School Lincoln Senior H.S. Bloomington, MN 9/79 1 6/82 \ H.S. Diploma 1 College or University Normandale Comm. Coll. Bloominoton, MN 9/82 3/86 6/84 6/87 A.A.S.Law 2nforceme College or University Graduate School Technical Law Enforcement T. C. Bloominoton, MN 9/87 12/87 Skills Certificat g Skills Technical List any correspondence courses, special courses, seminars, workshops, training, and skills acquired that might relate to this position. Please review the job description before answering this question. CPR and Multimedia Standard First Aid Advanced Driving Techniques List any current licenses, registrations, or certificates that you possess. Include drivers license number, class and State of Issue. FT Peace Officer License #9886 DL#K-160-760-18b 330 G-00 MN TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANTS FOR CLERICAL, ADMINISTRATIVE B FISCAL POSITIONS 0*^Y Typing Ability: ( ) yes ( ) no WPM Shorthand Ability: ( ) yes ( ) no WPM Business Machines and Experiences: Bookkeeping Experience:, TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANTS FOR LABOR B SKILLED TRADE POSITIONS ONLY Apprenticeship(s) served or trades learned: Capable of operating the following equipment; .3 EMPLOYMENT HISTORY • Pl«as« list past employers beginning with your most recent employment: If necessary. Employer’s Name Taraet Stores Inc., 13201 Mailing Address Zip Code Phone No. Ridoedale Drv., Mtka., MN 55343 542-8250 Position Held Store Security Officer Duties Performed: Detect, Apprehend and process shoplifters. Immediate Supervisor: Tim Fisher Employment Oates:Ust Salary 6.85 full Time (*) Part Time ( ) From 9/88 To present Reason for Leaving: n/A May we con' iCt your present employer? ^ ( ) no If no, please explain: Employer's Name Mailing Address Zip Code Phone No. Mpls. Park Police 3800 Bryant Ave, Mpl9.> MN 55409 348-2183 Position Held Park Patrol Agent Duties Performed: . ^ lPatrol an assigned area and enforce ordinan;!es« Immediate Supervisor: Capt. William Jacobs Employment Oates: From 4/88 To present Last Salary 5,12 Full Time { ) Part Time (x) Reason for Leaving: n/A Employer’s Name Malang Address Zip Code Phone No. South Lake MthJS. P.S.D. 143 Oak Street, Excelsior, MN 55331 474>3261 Position Held Duties Performed: Police Officer-Park Patrol Patrol an assigned area and enforce ordinalices Immediate Supervisor: Lt. John Hodgedon Employment Dates: From 6/88 To 9/88 Last Salary6,50& Full Time ( ) Part Time (x) 11.77 Reason for Leaving: Seasonal •4. VoiuntMr Organization nioominoLSn Police Reserves 2215 W^*01%^S^ia1cotjee Rd.. MN S87”-9^^00 Position Held:Police Reserve Officer Doties Performed: Assist police dept. Immediate Supervisor: Michael P.Horowitz Dates of Participation:9/84-1/8 9 Hours Per Week varies Skills Learned: Reserves Mnls.. MN _ Position Held: Police Reserve Off.^cer Duties Performed: Assist Police department. Immediate Supervisor: Brad Sporny Dates of Participation:9/83-8/84 Hours Per Week varies Skills Learned: List additional Information on separate sheet ff nccwsiry. CONVICTION INFORMATION We declare that the existence of a criminal conviction record will not automatically disqualify you from employment with us, though ceruin types of criminal conviction may prohibit you from working in ceruin positions. Have you ever been convicted as an adult for a criminal violation? Yes ( )No (x) If yes, date and place Nature of Offense Disposition If yes, date and place Nature of Offense Disposition I hereby certify that all answers to the above questions are true and 1 agree and undersund any false sutements conulned In this application may cause rejection of this application or termi«'iation of em ployment. I authorize that a transcript may be requested where necessary to verify any educational re cord. 2/8/89 Signatu#^^Date 21589.9 TO: Mayor and City Counci^ FBOHi Hark E. Bernhardson, City Administrato nan: February 22, 1989 COUfiCIL MEtfliiQ "7 ' 80BJBCT: Position Appointment - Promotion' to Lieutenant Position Attachment:A. Summary of Results - Lieutenant Selection Process ISSUE - Appointment of a replacement to the currently vacant Lieutenant's position. INTRODUCTION - The Chief of Police undertook a selection process this past fall for use in determining an appointee to the current vacancy existing in the Lieutenant's position. Th>. process was composed of several items including an in-basket exercise, a group conference exercise, an oral interview, peer rank .igs done by the Patrol Officers and a candidate evaluation by the Chief of Police and myself. DISCUSSION - The Chief from an organizational standpoint desires to continue this Lieutenant's position and will be presenting a proposal in the next month or two regarding the implementation of a third supervisory position. The Chief has looked at an alternative structure of one Chief supervising one Lieutenant supervising three supervisors who would supervise the shifts. This makes a rather lateral organization that doesn't take advantage of a flat organizational structure with better use of span oJ control. In addition it would not place the management on the shifts as persons who have full supervisory authority. In additioi it would entail the appointment of an additional supervisor over what he currently anticipates in his proposal. The Chief anticipates all three supervisors wovild be .^^ilized on the street and they would not be three individmls whose sole function would be in the office but would split the administrative duties on a rotatin*} ?^asis among themselves in addition to providing on the street supervision and emergency backup. It is expected that their on the street performance would be done so as an example of leadership in that position. ALTERNATIVES - 1. Appoint. 2. Amend and appoint. 3. T*»‘*>‘*e for further d^ jcussion. RECOMMENDATION - It Is recommended that Mark Moran who is the top candidate from the selection process be api^inted to of Lieutenant, Mark had ^is^^”9uished himself as a superior oerfotmer who has gained excellent experience in a wide range of department activities most th^^inUcTpat^^d ^1989for him to be compensated at a rate above ^ ® 3rd year patrol (his present level) he should be placed at the 3rd step for Lieutenant during the probationary period. &*»*■!« March 1, 1989. Ayes _, Nays _. cc: Chief Kilbo DATE: TO; FROM: February 6, 1989 All Personnel Chief Mel Kilbo SUBJECT: Lt. Promotion The testing process is : IN BASKET Process now complete. CONFERENCE The composite scores are listed below. CHIEF/ADMINISTRATOR OUTSIDE CANDIDATE PEER ORAL RATING EVALUATION TOTAL Anderson 190 84 26 192 143 635 Cornick 170 70 42 165 144 581 English 180 95 22 242 194 733 Erickson 184 93 34 202 215 728 Fritzler 180 70 33 125 131 539 Johnson 160 95 28 145 95 523 Moran 184 75 44 185 255 743 Morowczynski 190 96 34 170 220 710 Tomczyk 180 75 30 165 79 529 The recommendation of the eligible candidate will be made to 27th of February 1989. the Council for its meeting on the 21589.5 TOs Mayor and City Council FROM: Mark E. Bernhardson, City Administrat DATS: February 15, 1989 SUBJECT: Eurasian Water Milfoil COUNCIL meeting CJTy OF ORONO Attachment: A. Draft Resolution Regarding L.M.C.D, Support ISSUE - Adoption of resolution expressing the City's support of funding for Lake Minnetonka Conservation District's Eurasian Water Milfoil control program, INTRODUCTION - At the Council's February 13, 1989 meeting the Council in(iicated their support up to $15,000.00 subject to selected conditions. Attachment A is a draft resolution encompassing that support. ALTERNATIVES 1. Adopt. 2. Amend and adopt. 3. Choose not to adopt. 4. Table for further discussion. RECOMMENDATION - It is recommended that the Council adopt Attachment A for transmission to the Lake Minnetonka Conservation District. PROPOSED MOTION - Moved by __, seconded by , that the Orono Council adopt Resolution i for transmission to the Lake Minnetonka Conservation DistrTFt. Ayes __, Nays 1 CITY OF QRONa city of OROIVO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. ______ BORASIAH 1ATBR MILFOIL CONTRIBOTIOH TO THE lAKB NimBTONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT WHEREAS, Eurasian Water An the .ast two to three years become a significant problem on ake Minnetonka, and WHEREAS, such weed growth has a detrimental affect on the aquatic life of the lake, and WHEREAS, this problem also exhibits itself by interfering with many of the recreational aspects of the lake together with making it estheticly unpleasing, and WHEREAS, the short time that it has been on the lake it has rapidly spread to all the major bays on the lake, and WHEREAS, this weed can be easily transmitted to other lakes in the State of Minnesota and have a negative impact on its tourist and recreational quality of life, and WHEREAS, the Lake Minnetonka Conservation District has proposed a program to assist in the control of this weed through the harvesting and removal of it over a long period of time, and WHEREAS, there have been no budgetings done for this program within the L.M.C.D- budget, and WHEREAS, the L.M.C.D. has requested assistance from several sources including public donations, Hennepin County Public Works and the municipalities that make up the Lake Minnetonka Conservation District, and WHEREAS, the City of Orono feels that this is a significant issue and is willing to donate to this cause- NOW, THBREPORB BE IT RESOLVED, that the City of Orono agrees to contribute up to $15,000.00 to the effort, provided that the other municipalities in the Lake Minnetonka Conservation * ^ CITV I 1 II aRQNC^ City of OROINO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. _______________ District donate up to $70,000.00 (not including Orono’s contribution) and contingent upon this program going forward and this money of Orono's is used for operational removal of the weeds rather than administrative costs. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota at a regular meeting held February 27, 1989. ATTEST: James R. Grabeic, Mayor Dorothy M. Hallin, City Clerk 22189.2 COUNCIL MEOING rZ3 3 7 CITY OF TO: Mark E, Bernhardson, City Administrator FROM: Tom Kuehn, Finance Director . DATS: February 21, 1989 « SUBJECT: Summary of Receipts, Disbursements, and Balances for the Twelve Months Ended December 31, 1988 The attached summary reflects the cash receipts, disbursements and beginning and ending cash balances for each fund within the City of Orono financial structure for the year 1988- It also reflects the Pooled Investment summary of activity for the year 1988. The lower left area of the report indicates the summary comparison of General Fund budget to actual revenues for 1988. This summary is preliminary at this time but I do not anticipate any significant changes at this time. TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Mark E. Bernhardson, City Administrato Forwarded recommending acceptance. PROPOSED MOTION - Moved by __, seconded by __, to accept the Summary of Receipts, Disbursements and Balances for the Twelve Months Ended December 31, 1988 as presented. Ayes __, Nays __. CITY OP OHOMO SUMMARY or RBCIXPT8, DISBURSEMENTS AND BAUNCB8 rOR THB TNILVB MONTHS ENDED DECEMBER 31, 19BB m i/i/u ENDXIM 12/31/BB INVESTMENT BAXJOICR XESE BEXJUICB 1/1/88 RECEIPTS TOTAL BUDGET IC) 1988 TRANSr XH INVEST SOLD DI8BUR TOTAL BUDGET (C) 1988 I OP BUDGET TBAN8P OUT INVEST PURCH CASH BALANCE 12/31^8_ INVEST BALANCB OBBsrsl 2,030,046 2,051,077 (b)2,461,070 2,531,306 2,491,070 101.6%296,459 2,961,358 Perks 117,000 17,773 14,500 19,179 17,000 112.8%116,402eiiflg04,734 -4,734 -0 Eqelp Otttlay 3S7,0SB 19,930 61,250 46,250 60,084 75,540 79.5%263,161 Eldf Cap Oakly 130,036 0,553 -20,000 5,261 10,250 51.3%145,228Mi~kmi~Coos (10,361r 20,046 -6,166 -3,519for Xapr Rev 325,714 175,770 -150,850 403,262 -149,081 laprove BS (74,326)432 -81,829 7,935 -0 Od ii kid Ed Ed ~^17Ioi 36,000 36;b45 36,050 100.0%7,310 0 lap Bead BB-YB 649,301 110,192 104,470 157,773 156,150 101.0%609,720lap BeaB BO 455,980 148,102 110,190 128,605 127,670 100.7%475,565 jipTloia S3 2io;62o 70,300 73,970 102,992 98,050 ~ 10516%195,025 lap load BS 120,777 110,030 100,830 111,746 111,460 100.3%136,861 Hater Op 65,796 105,401 152,950 147,674 129,930 113.7%113,523Bauer Op 317,036 633,726 410,950 508,392 356,560 142^6%443,170Oolf Coaraa Op Pooled lav 6,688 115,591 101,190 (al 4,040 127,119 101,190 (a) 125.6%0 Treat Pead 5,3Bl.d02^B71BI7402r 409,653 17,105,747 409,652 17,258,369 (5,514,024) 5,514,024 TOTELB S,3B1,402 56,640 4,062,488 3,628,170 303,769 17,105,747 4,767,925 3,710,920 303,769 17,258,369 98,589 5,514,024 TOTAL LT S,000,070 145,670 4,670,431 3,631,915 376,410 10,915,391 4,489,021 3,827,465 376,418 11,185,823 56,648 5,361,402 OEHERAL POHD SUNNABY TOTAL 1980 CASH « INVESTMENT TO 12/31/88 15.612.613- lOOOi NOTE (a) Golf Operating fund budget does not Include amounts for purchsses BEVEMOB % Of for resale or aalee taa collected/raeltted.The receipts budget projectsBUDGETBUDGET-gross profit - not total receipts. Taxes 1,127,579 1,121,745 100.5% Lleeaaaa t Paralts 124,336 99,300 125.2%XBrargevT~mevaaue - -444,952'-395;BIS 112.5% Chgs for Serv 643,096 625,710 102.8% Piaee 140,657 65,300 215.4% 2197444''142,000 i5iT5r Tran. Pr Other fnada 0 0 Other 37,600 11,400 330.5% TOTAL BEVEMOB 2,737,744 2,461,070 111.2% (b) NOTE (b) General fund ravenuea recorded will not equal recelpta collected due to recelvablea billed In other accounting perloda and non-revenue recelpta. NOTE (c) Budget aeounta li^^a achadulea tranefere, do not Include fund balance usea or addltlona. ” ” . . . NOTE (d) Budgot amount Includes debt aarvlca - doae not Include conetructlon d 1 eburaement 'Coiiatriict 16h~fuiid~eet'up~a^rat«Tfrom dept aervica fund In July. Construction eapenditures transferred froai debt fund to construction fund In July. j4 To: Mark E, Bernhardson, City Administrator Proa: John R. Gerhardson, Public Works Director Dato: February 24, 1989 Subject: Intersection Center Island Medians ■. ^ 7 :': OF OpnskM At the February 13, 1989 Council meeting. Council directed staff to prepare specifications and criteria for center island medians on private road intersections, and in particiular the Fullerton application on Townline Road. The applicant will not be available to discuss our requirements until sometime during the week of March 6, 1989. It is important that we discuss the items with the applicant. Recommendation - To table the Fullerton application for center island median until the March 13, 1989 Council meeting. Proposed Motion; Moved by*R _ _ _ __ _ _ _ _Fullerton application for center island median until the March 13, 1989 Council meeting. Ayes _ _, Nays _ _. seconded by to table the TO; Mayor Grabek & Orono Council Members FROM; Mark E. Bernhardson, City Administrator Forwarded recommendina to table application for center island median O 22289.5 TOs Mark E. Bernhardson, City Administrator FROM: Tom Kuehn, Finance Director DATE: February 22, 1989 SUBJECT: Letters of Recognition - Charlotte Knutson and Robin Mikelson The attached letters are for Charlotte Knutson, Sr. Accounting Clerk and Robin Mikelson, Asst. Finance Director for recognition of their combined efforts in the conversion of the payroll from the prior L06IS Gemunis system to the new LOGIS COPT system. The new system is more flexible and reflects more information on the individual employee's check stub. Charlotte and Robin accomplished the conversion and attended the necessary LOGIS training seminars while continuing to do their regular work schedule. They exhibited a high degree of cooperation and their efforts are appreciated. Copies of this letter will be included in their personnel files. TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Mark E. Bernhardson, City Administrato Forwarded recommending acceptance. PROPOSED MOTION - Moved by _, seconded by _, to accept the letters of recognition for Ms. Charlotte Knutson, Sr. Accounting Clerk and Ms. Robin Mikelson, Asst. Finance Director for their efforts in the payroll conversion. Ayes _, Nays _. 22289.6 February 21, 1989 Ns. Charlotte Knutson Sr. Accounting Clerk Dear Ms. Knutson, On behalf of the City of Orono and myself this letter is presented to you and to Robin Mikelson to show recognition and appreciation of your combined efforts in the recent conversion of the payroll from the LOGIS Gemunis system to the LOGIS CORT system. You exhibited a high degree of cooperation during the conversion process, in addition to attending the necessary training sessions at LOGIS for the new system, while continuing to perform your regular tasks in a timely and professional manner. You presented a team effort in supporting each other and my required involvement was minimal. I congratulate you for a job well done and again express my thanks and appreciation. Sincerely, Thomas M. Kuehn Finance Director TMK/dh cc: Personnel File 22289.6 f?»^tuary 27, 1989 Ms. Robin Mikelson Asst. Finance Director Dear Ms. Mikelson, On behalf of the City of Orono and myself this letter is presented to you and to Charlotte Knutson to show recognition and appreciation of your combined efforts in the recent conversion of the payroll from the LOGIS Gemunis system to the LOGIS CORT system. You exhibited a high degree of cooperation during the conversion process, in addition to attending the necessary training sessions at LOGIS for the new system, while continuing to perform your regular tasks in a timely and professional manner. You presented a team effort in supporting each other and my required involvement was minin'^al. I congratulate you for a job well done and again express my thanks and appreciation. Sincerely, Thomas M. Kuehn Finance Director TMK/dh cc: Personnel File o TO: Mark E. Bernhardson, City Administrator FROM: John R. Gerhardson, Public Works Director DATE: February 10, 1989 SUBJ: Equipment Purchase Public Works Streets For 1989, the Public Works street department budgeted for replacement ot one single axle dump truck. The City of Orono reviewed and submitted specifications to Hennepin County Purchasing for bidding purposes. Bids have been received and reviewed by Hennepin County and myself and have determined that Boyer Ford of Minneapolis is the lowest responsible bidder at $40,325.00. This bid does not include an underhody plow attachment that will be bid through a different vendor through Hennepin County Purchasing. Recommendation - To approve the purchase of one single axle dump truck from Boyer Ford of Minneapolis for an amount of $40,325.00. Proposed Motion _ _ _ _ moved, _ _ _ _ seconded, to approve the purchase of one single axle dump truck from Boyer Ford of Minneapolis for an amount of $40,325.00. TO: FROM: Mayor and City Council Mark E. Bernhardson, City Administratoij^^ Forwarded recommending approval. It is within the amount budgeted for in 1989. O 22289.2 TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Mark E. Bernhardson, City Administrator! DATS: February 21, 1989 SUBJECT: Administrator’s Information STOW GOW TRAINING - As the Council’s last meeting they asked questions regarding the use of stun guns and the policy regarding training prior to its usage. Attached please find a memo from the Police Department that they had drafted in conjunction with the prior training to address that issue. It is anticipated that this will be incorporated as part of the Police Department Rules and Regulations. M.C.W.D. OPERATIONS PLAN - Response from M.C.W.D. will be forwarded when received. CITY ADMINISTRATOR’S VACATION - In January I had indicated that I would be on vacation from the 10th through the 20th of March. Because of a change in plans, I will be leaving on the 9th and be gone through the 2Cth of March. HIGHWOOD SEWER - Scheduling has not allowed a meeting with myself, the City Engineer and Mr. Sauer. I am hopefull that we can meet with Mr. Surer during the week of February 27 - March 3, 1989. METROPOLITAN WASTE CONTROL COMMISSION - Please note the MWCC's publication included as information in your Council pack regarding the Orono interceptor project also includes an article on John GerharJson. December 21, 1988 TO ALL OFFICERS FROM: Lt. Cheswick SUBJECT: Carring of stun gun Any officer who wishes to carry a stun gun as part of their service equipmen must attend the stun gun training session being held 1/7/89, at the Orono High School. The st^ gun is optional equipment/thereby anyone carrying it will be attending on duty or compensation will be by straight time cnly. LIST OP LICENSES FOR COUNCIL APPROVAL FOR MEETING OF February 27, 19 89 Septic System Installers -Don's Backhoe and Excavation 11585 - noth Street Cologne, MN Roto-Rooter Services 14530 - 27th Avenue North Mpls Thompson Plumbing Company 12201 Minnetonka Blvd Mpls Widmer Inc, P.O. Box 219 St. Bonifacius Jerry Johnson Excavation 2445 Morningside Road Long Lake Residential Kennel License -Marilyn Pickard •, 4607 Watertown Road John Baker 4680 West Branch Road Rollie and Nancy Martin 2675 Shadywoor* Road •• ft Jr tron CITY of ORONO Ciyatal Bay, Minneaota 5S'^23 SEPTIC SYSTEM INSTALLERS LICENSE APPLICATION BL'ILDLNG 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 attendance must accompany this application. All applications are subject to a ten (10) day approval period. 1. 2. * 4. 5. C. 7. 8. Business or trade name Business address Business phone or afe ///>’^ St _ _ _ Residence phone4^/^^ Name of applicant or company ^presentative holding MPCA certification ^ t'‘/J ^_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Type of certification held; _^ Installer_ _ _Pumper X Site evaluator A System designer _ __ Is this a Provisional Certificate? a/^/ Certificate No ./5rrueIf no Certif j.cate is held, provide" evidence cf attendance at one of the On-Site Sewage Treatment Workshops held immediately prior to the current construction season. Have you ever held a Septic System Installer license ih.l.rr jrT’ Orono before? \jy^ Most recent year .J.lzCvOCv 10. Have you ever had a license revoked? aJo When? _ Where? _____ Do you do Municipal Sewer hook-ups? Yes_____ No_ Do you pump out septic tanks? Yes_____ No jiJt> SUBMITTALS REQUI' 'D: / ■Af 1. ?, ^4^ $25.00 license application fee. $2000.00 license and permit bond naming City of Orono an obligee. The State Plumbers Bond will not be accepted. $10-50-100,000 minimum Certificate of Insurance. _ _ Copy of current MPCA Certificate or evidence of attendance at On-Site Sewage Treatment Workshop held immediately prior to current construction season. LICENSES WILL NOT BE PROCESSED UNTIL ALL ITEMS ARE SUBMITTED. List persons other than applicant who ^re authorized by you to apply for permits under your license 'h Lji\Ay .'jt fd The undersigned hereby makes application to the City of 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 of Orono, Date f9^J ApgiJ„^nts Signature CITY USE ONLY Staff recommendation Reason for denial: __ City Council Action Date license mailed (^prov^Denial D-.te Date Approved Denied lITYof ORONO Poel Office Bo* 66 Crystal Bay, Minnsaota 55323BUILDING A ZONING - 473-7357 assessing SEPTIC SYSTEM INSTALLERS LICENSE APPLICATION All questions must be answered. License fee, bond, certificate of insurance, and evidence of MPCA Certification or Horae Sewage Treatment Workshop attendance must accompany this application. All applications are subject to a ten (10) day approval period. Business or trade name ^ SerUfCl^.- - - -1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. Business address / O ^ *7 At>*c mo Business phone Residence phone c— Name of apolicant or company re^esentative holding MPCA certification ^ • 5r-^_________________ Installer _>;^f’5umperType of certification held: _ _ _ Site evaluator _ _ _System designer Is this a Provisional Certificate? _ _ _ Certificate No. If no Certificate is held, provide evidence of attendance at one of the On-Site Sewage Treatment Workshops held immediately prior to the current construction season. -.i .*1-- Have you ever held a Septic System Installer license in . Crono before? vr<: Most recent year ' "j"' Have you ever had a license revoked? Where? _ _ _ When? Do ycu do Municipal Sewer hook-ups: Yes_ _ "lO^ DcT you pump out septic tanks? Yes No^ SUBMITTALS REQUIRED: 1.. $25.00 license application fee. *2. $2000.00 license and permit bond naming City of Orono as “ obligee. The State Plumbers Bond will not be accepted. ^3. $10-50-100,000 minimum Certificate of Insurance. 4. Copy of cu*^rent MPCA Certificate or evidence of attendence at On-Site Sewage Treatment Workshop held immediately prior to current construction season. LICENSES WILL NOT BE PROCESSED UNTIL ALL ITEMS ARE SUBMITTED. List persons other than applicant who are ajuthorized by you to apply for permits under your license r-^ The undersigned hereby makes application to the City of Orono, Minnesota, for license to install and repair septic systems, and/or pump out septic tanJes, subject to the laws of the State of Minnesota and the Ordinances of the City Orono. Date 2//y/S'l Applicants Signature ITY SE NXY Reason for denial: City Council Action Date license mailed Date 2-/7* 0*1 Date Approved Denied CITY«rft)RONO Crystal Bay, Minasiiou S5323BUn.DLNG 4 ZONING - 473*7357 ASSESSLNG SEPTIC SYSTEM INSTALLERS LICENSE APPLICATIONAll questions must be answered. License fee, bond, certificate of insurance, and evidence of MPCA Certification or Home Sewage Treatment Workshop attendance must accompany this application. All applications are subject to a ten (10) day approval period. 1. Business or trade name THOMPSON PLUMBING COMPANY_ _ _ _ _ _ 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. Business address mtmnf.tqnka blvd Business phone 933~2521 Residence phone Name of holding MPCA InstallerType of ertification held: _ _ _ Site evaluator _ _ _System designer Pumper 10. Site evaluator _ _system aesigner ^ _ Is this a Provisional Certificate? Certificate No. 8 25 J If no Certificate is held, provide evidence of attendance at one of the On-Site Sewage Treatment Workshops held immediately prior to the current construction season. Have you ever held a Septic System Installer license jLa.^ Orono before? yes Most recent year 1988 HI' i'l ’ Have you ever had a license revoked? No When? - Where? _ _ _ Do you do Municipal Sewer hook-ups? Yes_ Do you pump out septic tanks? Yes_ _ _No / W * wl t liECBIPT-THAti- SUBMITTALS REQUIRED: t.vv-4 <iv fz.OC 25. OC YOU T,« I ? : 1. $25.00 license application fee.^<^ 2. $2000.00 license and permit bond naming City of Orono as 02/16/S / obligee. The State Plumbers Bond will not be accepted. 3. $10-50-100,000 minimum Certificate of Insurance. 4. Copy of current MPCA Certificate or evidence of attendance at On-Site Sewage Treatment Workshop held immediately prior to current construction season. LICENSES WILL NOT BE PROCESSED UNTIL ALL ITEMS ARE SUBMITTED. List persons other than applicant who are authorized by you tc apply for permits under your license See attached Letter_ _ _ The undersigned hereby makes application to the City of Orono, Minnesota, for license to install and repair septic systems, and/or pump out septic tanks, subject to the laws of the State of MdLnnesota and the Ordinances of the/City of Orono. Date 2/13/89 Applicants Signature, CITY USE o:iLY staff recommendation Reason for denial: _ City Council Action Date license mailed Approva BSirw Denial Date Date Approved Denied aXYof ORONO Crystal Bay. Minnesota 5532a LICE BUILDING A ZONING - 473-73S7 ASSESSLNG All questions must be answeredT License fee, ^ of insurance, and evidence of MPCA Certrf ication/^ ^flU Treatment Workshop attendance must accompany this m i LLi.- All applications are subject tb a ten (10) day approval peHo^r 1. 2. 3. 4. Business or trade name w-iHmtar inn. — Business address P.O. Box 219 , St. Bonlfacius, mn 55375 Business phone 446-1495 Residence phone 466-5867 Name of applicant or company representative holding MPCA certification aifroH 5.Type of certification held: ^ _ Installer Site evaluator _ _ _System designer Is this a Provisional Certificate? — _ Pumper Certificate No« 6. prior to the current construction season. 7. 8. Have you ever held a Septic System Installer license in _ _ _ Orono before? vps Most recent year igaa_ CITr i,.- wV?ir Mo , FimCEOFF Have you ever had a license revoked? When? - Where? 10. Do you do Municipal Sewer hook-ups? Yes x Do you pump out septic tanks? Yes_ _ _ N< 01 OEii ■CfiECK Tu” •' ___ftpjiaJOT. TL'AViV' rc Wk ■ir A.) nA• w m SUBMITTALS REQUIRED: iS $25.00 license application fee. 2. $2000.00 license and permit bond naming City of Orono as obligee. The State Plumbers Bond will not be accepted. $10-50-100,000 minimum Certificate of Insurance. ;;12y010 COOl F<01 TiO^C 02/15/2 Zr.~y A. Copy of current MPCA Certificate or evidence of attendence — at On-Site Sewage Treatment Workshop held immediately prior to current construction season. LICENSES WILL NOT BE PROCESSED UNTIL ALL ITEMS ARE SUBMITTED. [TY 5E ILY Ih. ™d.tll9...d l»r.b, IUK.S 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 of 2-10-89_ _ _ _ Applicants Slanattire^^^^s]Py^^^^ Approva^^l^ Denial*^ Date Staff recommendatio Reason for denial: City Council Action Date license mailed Date Date Approved Denied CITYrf ORONO Pom OCfica Bos 66 Crystal Bay. Minnesou 35323 BUILDING k ZONING - 473-7357 assessing SEPTIC SYSTEM INSTALLERS LICENSE APPLICATION All auestions must be answered. Licsnse 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 trade name U 2. Business address 3. Business phone Residence phone ^ 4.Name of applicant or compemy representative holding MPCA certification ^ // . r£>A^_ _ _ _ _ _ _ ___ _ _ _ _ _ 5. Type of certification held; taller _ _ _ Pumper Site evaluator _ _ _^System designer _ ^ ITThis a Provisional Certificate? _ _ _ Certificate No . 6. If no Certificate is held, provide evidence of attendance at one of the On-Site Sewage Treatment Workshops^held immediately prior to the current construction season. 7. Have you ever held a Septic System Installer license in Orono before?Most recent year _ 8. Have you ever had a license revoked?When? . ...... Where? _ _ _ Do you do Municipal Sewer hook-ups? Yes_ _ _ N 10. Do you pump out septic tcinks? Yes_ _ _ No "w X i t wi* - - - - --- - - - - — ‘,1 -r>; SUBMITTALS REQUIRED: CHECK Ti $25.00 license application fee. $2000.00 license and permit bond naming City of Orpnb ^.s, obligee. The State Plumbers Bond will not be acce^ id-.''^’" $10-50-100,000 minimum Certificate of Insmrance. Copy of current MPCA Certificate or evidence of attendence at On-Site Sewage Treatment Workshop held immediately prior to current construction season. /3z: 1. 2. 3. 4. 25.0V 25.00 YOU ‘ 1 ii • 2 LICENSES WILL NOT BE PROCESSED UNTIL ALL ITEMS ARE SUBMITTED. List persons other than applicant who are authorized by you to apply for permits under your license The undersigned hereby makes application to the City of Orono, Minnesota, for license to install and repair septic systems, a d/or pump out septic tanks, subject to the laws of the State of Minnesota and the Ordinancesthe City of Orono. Date Applicants SpwXW UCLilAkO f g iifcJ JtSW W WU UaC XAWg and the Ordinances^t the City of ■:r ::ly staff recommendation (^pproval^>y^ Reason for denial: _ _ _ _ City Council Action Date license mailed Data Date Approved Denied IMMMIMIF JfN 3 ! ■; nwnai^ 2 ---------------- Property Addreaa; ^CaO'^ ck 4-tf (include city and zip) -r] ^ - / .f r7?d/^A.^c^ a oo ^pj m.r^u PL,m Mailing Address (if different): ^..one: (home) 4/7 4 - L fwnrk)I _ i. jL-r “ssss sricjs:;;' ”” *.T - - L ;.* . u ‘- Maximum No. of dogs to be kept at one time: (over 6 months of age) principal = Cix,-v ^ ^ ~ - - - - - - - --- - - P.J.rPurpose for more than 2 dogs ^ Dogs normally kept: _^insida - - -kennal structure ommerCIAL .ennel License I-'-fo^ation: S125.00 - 1989 Licensing Period (payment must accompany applicationj Name of Business:- -- - - ----- - - --- - - - - - - - - - - ?«iSp”:*“boIrdi:g; breeding, veterinary care, retail, Normal Business Hours: After Hours Contact: (name).^- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - --(phone) _ _ _ _ _ _ ___ _ _ _ _— Dog runs/exerciae areas are: --------inside ------^outside _both The undersigned ° tl^^ i^ers^'^ed'^ acknowledges that Kennel License as o_lv™id does not grant any authority to a kennel city Ordinance or other law or regulation; ^e violate City permisaslon to inspect the premises undersigend hereby grants y ^^her reasonable time during the prior to license approval and at any ocner requirements QXJ l‘3o-l± Applicant y Date LX JA Recommends Approval Y ^ Denial- - -- For Kennel Date Owner: X2HHSL LIC2SSB, APPLICATION Effective January 1. 19 r" to Decenber 3., 19 Property^ddress:_ _ _ _ _ (//,<</'' /f~ Z (include city and lip) Mailing Address (if different);- - - - - - --- - - - - - - - - - - - - - ---- - Phone, (home) - - - (wor)t)_£Z£^Z^.Z- - - - HSSlDBIPnAL Kennel License Information: $20.50 - 1989 Licensing Period (payment must accompany application) Maximum No. of dogs to be kept at one times_:3 (over 6 nortiis of ace) Principal Breed; - - -- - - - - - - - - - - Purpose for more than 2 dogs:_ Dogs normally kept: _V_in3ide ^^kennel struoture m^CIAL Kennel License Information: $123.00 - 1989 Licensing Period (payment must accompany application) Name of Business__ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ___ _ _ _ _ _ _—- - - - *rr •y <- 'V. - i; fexMple:^“bolrding,* breeding, veterinary care, retail, etc.) Normal Business Hourst _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ___ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ After Hours Contact; (name)_ _ _ _ _ _ _ ___ _ _ _ _ ___ _ _ _ _ _ (phone)_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ___ _ _ _ _ _— Dog runs/exercise areas are: _____inside ------^outside ----^both The undersigned this^fora°thV undersi^^ ^iSer,igen"d^«%'by“gr°antrthe ^ prior to license approval and at . abide by the requirements o^'“S”lcip":rcoS; intruding" any "" the City Council as part of any kennel license approval. Owner: KENNEL LICENSE APPLICATION ^ Ef^tive January 1, 19 December 31, 19C 7- -^A-^c-y /y^^i2:7'//v _ ___ _ _ _ _ _ _ Property Address:_ _ _ _ (include city and zip) Mailing Address (if different);. Phone: (home) ¥“'?/ C ^ _ ^rrsi/ (work) ^ RBSIDBMTIAL Kennel License Information: $20.50 - 1989 Licensing Period (payment must accompany application) ^*3 Maximum No. of dogs tc be kept at one tir.e:_;j^^- (over 6 months of age) Principal Breed: Purpose for more than 2 dogs:_ _ Dogs normally kept: inside kennel structure INERCIAL Kennel License Information: $125.00 - 198 9 Licensing--Period (payment must accompany application) ^ •* Name of Business: Business Activities;^_ _ _ _ _ _ __—,- - - - - - - ^ —frz^V{examples boarding, breeding, veterinary care, retail, etc.) Normal Business Hours:. After Hours Contact: (name) (phoneT Dog runs/exercise areas are: .inside outside both unS«sig./d'Kby grant, the City permiassion to in.pect the pr««l»e. prior to license approval and at any other reasonable f license durations and the undersigned agrees to abide by the requlrraents of Municipal rode Chapter 5.36 including any special conditions imposed by the City Cou... lr>«i pa^t of any Jcennel license approval. AppPihantf y Date For City Dae Only Kennel inspected b Recommends Approval Data f,/ ? Denial 1 ■ . /" I- iA 02/19/89 PR: 6 CB PRREGOR • : ' ■> *_ _ YTD..CURRENT— 4 NAME DPT GROSS CROSS 6 ANDERSON, BRUCE L 31 5890 ._53_. 1639.46 7 BERNHAROSON, MARK E 12 6632.24 500.00 > e BERNHARDSON, MARK E 12 8676 32 2044.08 B BOBZIEN. SUE A 31 3545^89._ _.882.40 10 BOSMA, JAMIE L 12 2052.80 541.56 I”BRINKHAUS, JOHN F A2 5880.06 1448.29 il2 QHE?UICK, CARY B _____31 58gP._9jL-... 146J5,.56 . 19 CHRISTIANSON, SALLY 31 600.00 192.00 14 CORNICK, JAMES L 31 5401.98 1373.05 iis .ENCL1SHIII,_IRV1NC H 31 5395 ..70 _ 1524.-48 . jic ERICKSON, KURT R 31 5308.89 1318.16 i|7 FISCHENICH, DAN T 31 5159.53 1325.98 IB FRITZLER. JOHN M 31 5609.59 1417.02„ IB CAFFRON, MICHAEL P 33 4981.84 1250.02 20 CERHARDSON, JOHN R A2 6712.85 1684.22 -c 21 jBRECORY._JAMES. D-.A2 „ 4870 .79 1210 , 73„. * •“; HALLIN, DOROTHY M 12 4396.81 1103.20 23 HANSEN, STEVEN C 42 4276.23 1095.60 HANSINC. CAROL J_ _ 31 2058.17 454.36 I2S JACOBS, THOMAS J 33 4981.83 1250.02 2«JOHNSON, BRADLEY P 31 5444.43 1384.08 £7 KILBO, MELVIN_H 31 7224.80 1812.80 ■£-KNUTSON, CHARLOTTE A 15 3517.24 882.42 2B KUEHN, THOMAS M 15 6760.45 1696.32 '^U MABUSTH, JEANNE A 33 5968.91 1497.67 MIKELSON, ROBIN A 15 3565.29 894.56 !32 1 ! MORAN, MARK F 31 6477.66 1288.31 |33 JH0R0W.C2YNSJ<.I^.J AMES_J31 _ _6980.,178T,75_J- 134 NAAB, THERESA L 12 3516.80 882.40 ” OBRIEN, RANDY L 92 3842.42 955.33 OMAN. LYLE E 33 4177.09 1048.07 PALMER, PETER B 31 255.00 175.00 i«; QUASI, WAYNE A 92 4508.80 1186.33 be ! RATHBUN, BARRY J _ _92 _ _4025,58 1035.46. 4C SASS, JOHN J 42 4423.57 1095.96 41 1 SCHAUSS, CHARLES R 31 4412.10 1148.69 l42 SCHEFFLER, LAURIE K 12 2963.66 750.24 SKREEN, DALE S 42 4195.12 977.88 *44 STEFFENHACEN, RONALD 93 4403.76 1104.96 L:..JJ^OMTON, MARK„ R_ _ _31 4707,65 1318.12 be TOMCHECK, LAURENCE F 31 4917.62 1214.57 • 47 i TOMCZYK, MARK U 31 5336.09 1330.53 UQ WALSH, KEVIN L 35 _ _ _655_.95_161 .00. |4b '80 b 152 * r »54 1 - 49,343.64 5f ■>87 i t 9 -• I I\ Oe/19/89 PR CB PRVCIDOR NAME TYPEDEPT Y-T-D TOTAl____ GROSS _ i .BEfiNHARnSON. J1A„fcL____12. CHESUICK, GARY H 31 Ju 63E.S4_. 5^620.96 12,453.20 ? 1 1:2 I ;e 17 t\b 20 21 uF ■£<. • 2i 2(. 32 133 34 I I 35 lae iF“ 'at I ' (3& i^‘ <: 1 42 I *4 ■4f 4 „ ..T 4£ FT ^c 1 ?52 19«9 CITY OF ORONO CHECK NO. DATE CHECK REGISTER AMOUNT 058006 058006 ~058906 058006 058006 ■ 058006" 058006 02/23/89 02/23/89 Oa/23/8?r 02/23/89 02/23/89 02/23/89 30.48 30.50 ~30 .50 ~ 44.77 30.50 30750 ----- 125.98 323.23 • 058861 ■027^5/89" 05806Sr —0272T/9r -18 7 6T----- 14.61 • ■727 00 — 72.00 ♦ VENDOR ACRC-MINNESOTA INC ACRO^MINNESOTA INC ACRO-MINNESOTA INC ACRO-rtINNCSOTA INC ACRO-MINNESOTA ACRO-MINNESOTA ACRO-MINNESOTA INC INC- INC ITEM DESCRIPTION OFFICE SUPPLIES OFFICE SUPPLIES OFFICE-SUPPLIES - OFFICE SUPPLIES OFFICE SUPPLIES -OFFICr SUPPLIES - 2 CALCULATORS 02-27-89 PACE 1 ACCOUNT NO. INV. • P.O. • MESSAGE BLITZ ONE HR-FOTO BLACKOUIAK 6 SONS ^ PHOTOS---------- BLDG MAINT 01-4210-039-12 01-4810-059-14 ‘0r=48T0-06S^5 01-4210-129-31 01-4210-174-33 01-4210-249-42- 14-4540-626-00 •••-CKS OT-42tO-t29-3T -------On-4343-099-1"T ------------ 058074 •~D580T4 058074 08/23/89 ‘~02/23/99 02/23/89 8.918.00 —288.81 - 54.50 3.255.31 * “058885- 058085 -08/HT/89 08/83/89 - - 1T3 19- - 3.544.55 3.717.74 ♦ -♦♦•-CK8- B0NE3TR00 ROSENE ASN BONE5TROO ROSENE ASN BONESTROO ROSENE ASN BUDGET PRTC BUDGET PRTG DEC 86 ENG 0EC~88 ENG DEC 86 ENG PRINTING PRINTING 01-8040-000-00 24-2040-000-00 73-2040-000-00 r •••-CK8 01-4306-899-72- 01-4388-189-31 —OS80S8 058128 •••-CK8 “02/83/89 08/83/89 827 .13 887.13 -CARGILL -SALT 85TON-SALr -T8-4834-549-9T 178 85 178.25-* CONCEPT MICROFILM MICROFILMING 01-4306-174-33 •981-30 J 02/23/89 OSrrSG®^ 02/23/89 02/2T/89- 02/23/89 105.77 182.40 2175397 00 2.534.40 24.401.57 058143 058143 058143 058143 056143 O2/23/0S 02/23/89 02/23/89 02/23/89 02/23/89 4.50 2.70 2.70 3.60 9.90 COLONIAL LIFE INS CO COLONIAL LIFE INS CO —V •■C ^ .pLX<__ .^1.'7 •••- CKS LIFE INS LIFE INS 1ST OTR FXPE JAN-MAR RENT COMMERCIAL LIFE INS COMMERCIAL LIFE INS COMMERCIAL LIFE INS COMMERCIAL LIFE INS COMMERCIAL LIFE INS "LIFE INS TEB LIFE INS FED LIFE INS FES LIFE INS PEB LIFE INS FEB 01-4152-186-31 01-4152-129-31 “91-4315-730-38 01-4332-189-31 ««*-CK8 ■01-4T58-039-12 01-4158-069-15 01-4158-121-31 -01-4158-186-31 01-4158-189-31 1969 CITY OF ORONO CHECK NO. DATE AMOUNT CHECK REGISTER VENDOR item DESCRIPTION 08-27-89 PACE 2 ACCOUNT NO. INV. t P.O. • MESSAGE 056143 02/23/89 02/23/69 02/23/69 02/23/69 02/23/69 3.60 1 06 .90 -36:oo-*- COMMERCIAL LIFE INS COMMERCIAL LIFE INS commercial-life INS- COMMERCIAL LIFE INS COMMERCIAL LIFE INS 056150 056150 08/23/69 02/23/69 35.30 5.00 40.30-*- CULLIGAN CULL1GAN 056199 08/83/89 4.231.00 4.231.00 ROLF E ERICKSON 056S1ET 2T“40- 21 40 * "EXPRESr MESSENGER 056246 02/23/69 41.95 4r.95 * GOVT FINANCE OFT* ASN 056254 08/83/69 813.10 213.10 • GENERAL REPAIR SV 056257-- - -02/23/69—- - - -^:00- 7.00 • GERHARDSON/JOMN — -- -.jr*-***- 4’ «« 056269 08/83/89 940.00 940.-00~< GOVT TRAINING SERV LIFE INS FEB LIFE INS FEB LIFE INS FEB LIFE INS FEB life ins FEB 01-4158-174-33 01-4158-849-48 T8=^415n=549=9T - 73- 4158-569-98 74- 4158-590-93 •••-CHS MAIN! BLDGS MAINT BLDGS FEBRUARY SERVICE 01-4343-099-17 74-4343-590-93 •••-CKS 01-4307-059-14 •**-CKS POSTAGE--0T*43E1=039^T2- -»*»-CKS- - - 1966 GAAFR 01-4840-069-15 •••-CKS 8-ALTERNATORS 73-4838-569-98 •••-CKS -MEETINGS 0l-4356-849-< ••-CKS- 8CHOOL 01-4356-189-31 •••-CKS 056872 058872 056278 056878 056878 08/83/89 08/83/69 08/83/69 08/83/69 08/83/69 801.08 77 46 -“ 84787-- 36.41 18.18 ~35TT3Jr-*- G A K SERVICES G A K SERVICES S“A K SERVICES G A K SERVICES C A K SERVICES CLOTHING BLOG MAINT CLOTHING - CLOTHING CLOTHING 01-4881-849-48 01-4343-189-31 -72-4881-549-91- 73- 4881-569-98 74- 4881-590-93 056275 •••-CKS- 02/23/89 443.55 CROUP HEALTH INC HOSP INS FEB 01-4151-181-31 1909 CITY OF ORONO CHECK NO. DATE AHOUNT 058275 058275"oseaTT 058275 058275 02/23/89 02/83/89 "02/23/89 02/83/89 02/23/89 93.35 541.20 - -93:35 — 171 90 19.10 n362.4y-w CHECK REGISTER VENDOR GROUP HEALTH INC GROUP HEALTH INC GROUP^EALTH" INC" GROUP HEALTH INC GROUP HEALTH INC ITEH DESCRIPTION HOSP INS FEB HOSP INS FEB ■~HOSP “1NS~FEB“ HOSP INS FEB M08P INS FEB ACCOUNT NO. INV 01«4151-186-31 01-4151-129-31 01^4151^174- 74-4151-590-93 74-4151-590-93 02-87-89 PAGE 3 • P.O. • HESSACE T 058330 08/83/89 It. 86.87 86.87 * ICMA RETRHNT CORP ‘TJ58385 08>^3/89'39T06 ----- 39.06 • •KILBO-MELVIN- ICMA 8/6 TO 8/19 HEETINC 01-4140-039-18 •••-CK8 •**-CK8 ---------“81 -^43S«-t89-31 058400 08/83/89 148.79 "142779 KU8T0H ELECTRONICS 058404 08/23/89 110.58 110.58 • THE LAKER 058483- 058483 08 /83 /8 9 08/83/89 —75:00 — 75.00 150.00 • -T1-.84---- 71.24 • LEAGUE OP-HN CTTIE5 LEAGUE OP HN CITIES B HAINT EOUIF PUBLISHING HANDBOOK - - HANDBOOK 01-4348-189-31 M' •••-CK8 31 01-4382-174-33 •••-CK8 01-4840-080-11“ 01-4840-069-15 -CITY OF LONG-LAKE o. •••-CKS DEO 88 SERVICE 73-8884-000-00- - 47' ••• , ****:••—- 058467 . —OS846T “ 058467 058467 058467— 058467 02/83/89 “08/23/80 02/83/89 08/83/89 “02/23/89 08/83/89 195.70 - -97.85 - 97.85 97.85 -191 01- - 388.08 1.068.28 * MED CTR HED CTR HEO CTR HED CTR HEO“CTR HEO CTR HEALTH HEALTH HEALTH HEALTH HEALTH HEALTH CARE CARE CARE CARE CARE CARE i- -058490 02/23/89 -—741.46- 741.46 • HINNEGASCO- - - - - - - -»»»-CKS- - -*!' HOSP INS FEB HOSP INS PE8 HOSP INS FEB HOSP INS FEB HOSP IN5 PEB HOSP INS FEB 01-4151-039-18 01-4151-069-15" 01-4151-186-31 01-4151-189-31 OT-4151^174-35- 01-4151-849-48 UTILITIES — •••-CK8 “ii- - - - - -0t-43S4-09»-tr- - - - - - 050585 02/83/S9 840.81 MINN UC FUND UC-HOOGENAKKER 1988 01-2882-000-00 1909 CITY OF ORONO CHECK NC. DATE CHECK REGISTER AHOUNT VENDOR ITEH DESCRIPTION Oe-87-09 PAGE 4 ACCOUNT NO. INV. 9 P.O. • HE88A6E 240.81 • «*=CIC8' 058545 05854 050545 02/23/09 02/2T/89- 02/23/89 24 VIS 12.5. 45.96 • NAVARRE AUTO REPAIR -tIAVARRE-AUTO- RERAIR NAVARRE AUTO REPAIR HAINT AUTO HAINT^AUTO- HAINT AUTO 01-4341-174-33 T2-434t^49»Rt- 73-4341-569-92 •••-CK0 •r 058552 02/23/89------------ --------It.62 — 11.62 • TERI NAAB - tixleage-01^4381-774-33 ‘^1 058559 •«-CK8 ‘•i«! • « • 02/23/89 1.687.71 17087.71 • N8P STREET LIGHTS 01-4385-249-48 •••-CK8 058574 08/83/89 394.00 394.00 • OFFICE PROD OF HN SOUND ENCLOSES 14-4540-686-00 ££ M' .ao ***-CK8 •* 058585'02/23/89 ~T4e.f9"' 148.19 • ORONO 7NDEP SCHOOL"STUN GUN rLASS- - - -—01-4338=189-37- ”058597 “050597 058597 02/23/09 02/83/89 08/83/89 9.00 '9.00~ 9 00 87.00 • PUBLIC EHPL RET ASSN PUBLIC-EHPL RET"ASSN PUBLIC EHPL RET ASSN LIFE INS FEB LIFE TNS FEB LIFE INS FEB 01-4158-189-31 0r=4TS8=189=: 74-4158-590-93 _2 «i •**-CK8 056613' 058613 058613 - -02/23789“' 08/83/89 08/83/89 37 00 • 81.80 1,527.56 ■T.^057T6“* PERRYS'TRUCK REPAIR PERRYS TRUCK REPAIR PERRYS TRUCK REPAIR HAINT AUTO - HAINT AUTO AXEL FOR OILER 0l-434T=129=3r 01-4341-849-48 14-4560-633-00 •**-CK0 -•I %ty _Uj -J5?l•’IM W. —•9.: 058681 058621 058687 * 058621 058621 '050681- 050681 058681 050681 ' 050681 02/23/89 02/83/89 08/83/89 08/23/89 08/23/09 08/83/89 08/83/89 08/83/89 02/83/09 08/83/89 768.00 497.00 - 306.00 290 10 1,813.30 - -10“ 45 306.00 879.00 98.00 138.00 PHYSICIANS PHYSICIANS PHYSICIANS PHYSICIANS PHYSICIANS PHYSICIANS PHYSICIANS PHYSICIANS PHYSICIANS PHYSICIANS HEALTH HEALTH HEALTH HEALTH HEALTH HEALTH- HEALTH HEALTH HEALTH HEALTH HOSP HOSP HOSP HOSP HOSP HOSP HOSP HD8P HOSP HOSP INS FEB INS FEB INS FEB INS FEB INS FEB TNS FEB" INS FEB INS FEB INS FEB INS FEB 01-3878-000-00 01-4151-039-18 '01-4151-069-15- 01-4151-186-31 01-4151-189-31 -01-4131=189-31“ 01-4151-174-33 01-415J-849-48 78-4151-549-91 73-4151-569-98 •*—•» _ 1989 CITY OF ORONO CHECK NO. 0.9TE CHECK REGISTER AMOUNT 4.493.85 • VENDOR ITEM DESCRIPTION ACCOUNT NO. INV. 02-27-8^ PACE 5 t P.O. t MESSAGE - -V€m9Vm- ‘I. 058887 jT------0588*7 “ 08/83/89 08/83/89 058687 08/83/89 '1 058687 08/83/89 !7o! 08B6Z7~ lit i”itj 08/8378r 8.70 ~8.“ro— 8.70 8.70 ~8'.70 ~ 43.50 • PITNEY BOWES “PITNEY BOWES PITNEY BOWES PITNEY BOWES ^PITNEY “BOWES POSTAGE METER -POSTACr METEir POSTAGE METER POSTAGE METER POSTAGE METER 01-4381-039-18 -or-138T-059-1 4 01-4381-069-15 01-4381-174-33 OT-4381 -847-48- 1 1 'f-• 16-* "wwwmnr 058639 -^•-CK8- 08/83/89 7.44 7.-44-* PROEX PHOTO SUP PHOTOS 01-4810-174-33 ia> :»<» IT- t* IS SO •••-CK8 r 058643 08/83/89 80.41 PRUDENTIAL LIFE INS FEB 01-4158-069-15 '1'058643 08/83/89 84.60 PRUDENTIAL LIFE INS FEB 01-4158-186-31 “058643- - - 08/83/89 89.07 PRUDENTIAL CIFE 3N8 FEB " ^“0 T*'4i 5c* 1 cT-3i 058643 08/83/89 86.40-PRUDENTIAL LIFE 1N8 FEB 01-4158-189-31 *' 058643 08/83/89 8.70 PRUDENTIAL LIFE XN8 FEB 01-4158-174-33 6:00 56.38 * PRUDENTIAL ‘LIFE INS^FEB OT—415C—c49-4e :> ?* —V***-*'*— 058658 08/83/89 87.50 R C INDENTIFICATIONS LONG LAKE FIRE 01-4881-189-31 _a*. tsi tS‘ fTt It ««*-CK8 4S’ 058681 7,- -058758“ 08/83/89 "08783/89 880.68 880.68 • 8A-AC ^NC STREET MAINT MAT 01-4833-849-48 «««-CKB 4». 809 764^ “ 809.64 * SUBURBAN TIRE-INC--4-TIRES -Or-4832-849-48 jft S3! 058779 08/83/89 888.34 "888T34-* TRACY OIL CO UTILITIES 74-4384-590-93 **«-CKS 058798 08/83/89 85.00 85.00 • TWIN CITIES OICTN 8V CONFERENCE MIC 01-4832-189-31 •••-CK8 Tr' IS. SSi ■^1 058796 058796 08/83/89 08/83/89 855.15 443.45 UNIFORMS UNLIMITED UNIFORMS UNLIMITED CLOTHING CLOTHING 01-4881-181-31 01-4881-189-31 .n. 1909 CITY OF ORONO CHECK NO. DATE AHOUNT 056796 02/23/89 49.50 746.10 CHECK RECI8TER VENDOR ITEM DESCRIPTION UNIFORMS UNLIMITED LIVE TRAP OP-eT-eO PACE 6 ACCOUNT NO. INV. • P.O. 6 HE88ACE 01-4838-185-35 •••-CK8 -•08783re9^ *' *1 ~Mt9V0---- 100.00 • ONXVER8ITV-OF NINN — 8CHOOL- —01-4356-9391^ -♦••-CKS- - - It* ( 056615 1 - -956615' « 056615 * 056615 058815' 08/23/69 ”98/83/66 08/83/89 08/83/69 08/83/89 40.9£ -”19;S0— 80.78 16.57 “84.66- 188.57 • JS UE8T COMMUN UR-WE8T”X0«M0N U8 UE8T COHNUN U8 UE8T CONMUN US UEST-COHMUN TELEPHONE TELEPHONE- - - - DATA PROCESSING DATA PROCESSING DATA PROCESSING 01-4380-189-31 Ot-4380-849-48 01-4355-069-15 78-4355-549-91 ^-4355-569-98^- cKr 31.00 "84'.T9~ 55.19 • VES8C0 kKC T/E88CO- TNC" HAINT WATER PLANT -HAINmATER- PLANT' 7P-1345-E49-91 -78^4345-546-91- "m M n a ««***1C- 056668 058668' 056668 02/23/69 02/83/89* 08/83/89 90.00 90.00=-“ 90.00 90.00 • DON UENDLIN6 DON ^^ENDLTNG DON UENDLING 3 HEADSETS 3'HEADSETS 3 HEADSETS 01-4838-189- . . 91-4838=48/=3r 01-4838-429-3; _____ ti*! 056895 5». •••-CK8 -----08783/69'-SSTfO---- 55.10 * -ZTEGLER-INC-EQUIP-PARTS 0T=4835‘849“48^ 4» -SI 056901 02/83/89 1,598.00 T; 596709 ‘4' AIR816NAL INC P0RTA6EL PHONES 01-4560-189-31 _ _056908 '2[ 056908 4* 056908 08/83/89 )8/2.T/86- - 08/83/89 08/83/89 69.18 56713 117.50 117.50 373.35-4- BELL AND HOWELL -BELL“AND HOWELL” BELL AND HOWELL BELL AND HOWELL TONER ONER NT-CONPACT 4000 »NT-COHPACT 4000 01-4810-039-18 01-4810-174-33 01-4340-039-18 01-4340-174-33 .4. 058903 7*- -056903 08/83/69 “08i^/B9 86.90 860T 10---- 289.00 • CHARLIES BODY SHOP -CHARLlE8-B0DY SHOP REPAIR SQUAD 8154 REPAIR SQUAD 6154 01-4341-129-31 01 -434r-189-31 “IT-AO ~ 17.40 * -J H FOSTER MN INC SAFETY VALVE- - - 01^4348-849-48- 056905 08/83/89 43.-31 -- 43.31 • ITEN CHEVROLET 9RAKE LINE 6486 01-4838-249-48 1989 CITY OF ORONO CHECK no. DATE CHECK REGISTER AMOUNT VENDOR ITEM DESCRIPTION 08-87-89 PAGE ACCOUNT NO. INV. # P.O. • MESSAGE 0S8906 08/83/89 100.00 TOOTOO-r LAKE CHAPTER SCHOOL 01-4356-174-33 058907 08/83/89 058908 08/83/89 864.69 -E64T8y • 881.68 -881“:iS8-*“ LANDIS 6 6YR REGULATOR LS #9 MACOUEEN EQUIP INC EQUIP PARTS 73-4838-569-98 01-4838-849-48 *c • • _is 19 058909 08/83/89 058910 08/83/89 158.50 -fsevso r 381.00 MPH IND INC MAINT/MI8C EQUIP RAPIT PRINTING PRINTING 58r4TT7«8- 8,047.54 888.81 ‘TTOSATaT" 816.47 446.36 ^UNO-OT-TOTAt- FUNO 14 TOTAL FUND 84 TOTAL FUN0-T8 TOTAL- FUND 73 TOTAL FUND 74 TOTAL 01-4348-189-31 01-4388-189-31 <• !«• -f •••-CK8 CeNCRAtr FUND- - - - - - - - - IMPROVE 6 EQUIP OUTLAY F PERM IMPROVE REVOLVING P WATER^DPERATTNG“FUNO- -- SEWER OPERATING FUND GOLF COURSE OPERATING FO 57,037.87 TOTAL !4J o “i CEMUNI8 FINANCIAL SYSTEM 0E/C3/89 PACE ACCOUNTING REPORT USER 00 1989 CITY OF ORONO — --------------NUMBER'or REPORTS NUMBER OF UPDATES TT' 0 UPDATE DESCRIPTIONr SUMMARY FILE - -FINANCIAL-REPORTS SCHEDULED RUN DATE 000000 NUMBER OF RECORDS - -^EVEL^T- - - - PAYROLL BENEFIT ACCRUAL- REPORT DATE 000000 LEVEL &activity REPORT LEVEL 3 LEVEL 4- LEVEL 5 LEVEL « LEVEL T 0 ^ 0 85 0 LEVEL a LEVEL 9 LEVEIT-0 CHECK REGISTER TRIAL“BALANCE BALANCE SHEET REVENUE STATEMENT -OPERATING-STATEMENT— BUDGET UORK6HEETS 0 -8* CLEAR-CURR-MONTH CITY^riLE-OPTION PROJECT DEPARTMENT ACTIVITY REPORTS SCHEDULED RUN DATE REPORT DATE ' 088309 B887Sr PAYROLL POSTING OATES 000000 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -OOOOOO X 000000 “000000- - - TOTAL CHART OP ACCOUNTS MO. “CHECK- RECONCILE YEAR TO DATE PERIOD 0 01 BUDGET RECORDS CREATED „ - I ■'iri. i I Lake Minnetonka Cable Communications C<^mlsslon443 OAK STREET • EXCELSIOR. MINNESOTA 55331 • (612) 474-553^/,'>fs, DATE; February I3» 1989 TO; All LMCCC CoronIssloners FROM; Hotly Hansen/Admin 1stratoi RE: Upcoming Full Commission Meeting There will be a Meeting of the Full LMCCC on Tuesday, February 21, I989 at 5:00 in the Excelsior City Council Chambers. This Is the first meeting that newly-appointed Ccmnissloners are expected to attend. The other Full Commission Meetings will be held the following dates In 1989: Tuesday, May 16 Tuesday, Aug. 15 Tuesday, Nov. 21 If any of you have any questions or conrnents regarding the’upcoming meeting, please call me and I'll be happy to discuss them with you. I would like to take this opportunity tc let you all know that I will be leaving the LMCCC on February 28, 1989, because I have accepted a new position as Executive Director with the Northern Dakota County Cable Com mission. The Executive Committee is working on finding a new Administrator for the LMCCC and will give an update at the February 21st meeting. This also will be my last meeting with the LMCCC. In case some of you are unable to attend that meeting, I would like to say to you now that I have enjoyed working for the LMCCC and will miss many of the friends I have madd among you. In closing, if you are unable to attend the LMCCC meeting on February 21st, please contact me no later the;' 9:00 a.m. on the day of the meetings. Your response to this request is appreciated, as It allows us to know it we will have a quorum for the meeting. Again, if you have any questions, please contact me. Thank you. .■■ v?vV. ' 'Vs,. . ••■•.4 ./V-4. . 4."* A.. r. '-T LAKE MINNETONKA CABLE COMMISSION FULL COMMISSION MEETING TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 21, 1989 5:00 P.M. EXCELSIOR COUNCIL CHAMBERS 339 third STREET EXCELSIOR, MINNESOTA AGENDA I. Cal 1 to order II. Approval of Minutes III. Reports A. Officers B. Administrator C. Triax IV. Government Channel V. Unfinished Business VI. New Business VII. Adjourn 2/89 MINUTESLAKE MINNETONKA CABLE COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION EXCELSIOR STUDIO 5s00 P,M. TUESDAY, JANUARY 17, 1989 I. CALL TO ORDER Chairman Haggerty called the January 17, 1989 executive meeting to order at 5:06 p.m. ROLL CALL Directors Present Dennis Haggerty Jim Olds Lesley Hughes-Seamans Tom Anderson Barb Brancel ( Arrived at 5:10 p.m.) Others Present Holly Hansen Shelly Quaas - Recorder II. APPROVAL OF MINUTES MOTION 1.17.89.1: Olds moved, seconded by Hughes-Seamans, approve the December 20, 1988 minutes as written. Motion carried unanimously. III. REPORTS a the A. OFFICERS: Chairman Haggerty commented on an ariticle that was printed the New York Times. It stated that the New York Cable Commission is considering enacting a regulation that would require cable companies in the state to retain ownership of system for 5 years. Haggerty would like to see a clause in franchise agreement stating that the buyer must keep the company for a period of five years. Hansen and Anderson did not think that this action would be legal. Haggerty feels that this control of the buying and selling of Cable Companies could keep the rates from continuously rising. B. TREASURER: MOTION 1.17.89.2: JUST CLAIMS: Olds moved, seconded by Anderson, to approve the Just Claims as written on Appendix A. Motion carried unanimously. Olds reported to the Commission that a surplus of approximately $5000.00 is left for year ending 1988; for accounting purposes these funds should be transferred into unallocated funds ur.wil a check for the franchise fee payment is received from Triax and the budget for 1989 is revised. MOTION 1.17.89.3: Olds moved, seconded by Anderson, to put the remaining funds for year ending 1988 into unallocated funds. Motion carried unanimously. C. ADMINISTRATOR: Hansen reported to the Commission that about half of the Joint Powers Agreement have been passed by City Councils and about half of the cities have appointed representatives for 1989 to the LMCCC. LMCCC MINUTES JANUARY 17, 1989 PAGE 2 ADMINISTRATORS REPORT - CONTINUED Hansen has contacted Jim Jones who is the Director of Minnetonka Community Services, he stated that beginning in the fall of 1989 parts of the Excelsior Community Center will be used for 4th grade classes. At this point it looks like the studio and the LMCCC will be able to stay in building. The room next door may be available this summer and LMCCC may be able to rent it depending if the school board will lease it to the LMCCC. A new secretary will be starting this week, Monique Basart's last day will be Friday, January 20, 1989. Hauisen is working on a new format for a year end report for Triax to complete. It will include nunJ^er of subscribers, channels and services, miles of cable, number of completed hook-ups per year, revenues, etc. D. TRIAX Mary Spiith was not availaible for the meeting the following numbers were handed out in her written monthly report. Beginning Subscribers for 12/1/88: 4,969 Connects: 160 Disconnects: 122 Ending Subscribers for 12/31/88: 5,007 Net Gain: 38 IV. CHANNEL SPACE Hansen feels that there is a need to open a new access channel up. During peak seasons there is not enough playback time. Hansen spoke with Mary Smith of Triax who agreed that there is a need to open up an additional channel. Triax has budgeted funds to add a channel this fall if needed- Hansen does not expect any problems opening up a channel but there may be a problem with the channel number. Hansen would like channel 8, the Government channel, opened up. She would like the Commission to make a specific request to Triax to open up channel 8 and she would like the playback time stated also. Olds mentioned that a needs assessments needs to be prepared by the Commission prior to the opening of a channel. The Commission asked Hansen to come back to the full commission in February with dates and a recommendation for the new channel. V. REGIONAL CHANNEL The signal on Regional Channel 6 is still very poor. Hansen received a visit from Jim Vaughn, National Operations Manager of Triax, and showed him the signal. He agreed that it is unacceptable and not the quality that it should be- He will speak with the local technicians and make sure that the amplifiers are in place and properly adjusted. LMCCC MINUTES JANUARY 17, 1989 PAGE 3 VI. VII. REGIONAL CHANNEL - CONTINUED Regional Channel 6 received a $20,000 grant from the Minnesota State Legislature which appropriated the amount if it could be matched. Hansen reported that Chanhassen contributed $500.00, and she would like to see the Commission contribute an amount al so.MOTION 1.17.89.4.: Olds moved, seconded by Hughes-Seamans, to contribute $500.00 to the Regional Channel, the donation to come out of unallocated funds. Motion was discussed. Haggerty is concerned that the Commission is donating money even though the signal is poor, and is also concerned with funds for next year, and if enough money will be available to operate Regional Channel 6. Motion carried unanimously. NEW BUSINESS ^ ^ ^ Lesley Hughes-Seamans asked, when meetings are held at Excelsior City Hall, if the executive committe should sit in front. Hansen commented that the Officers should sit up front. ADJOURNMENT ^ . MOTION 1.17.89.5.J Anderson moved, seconded by Olds, to adjourn the January 17, 1989 meeting at 5:55. p.m. Motion carried unanimously. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED, Shelly Quaac LMCCC JUST CLAIMS 12/21/88 - 1/17/89 CHECK S DATE PAYABLE AMOUNT ACCOUNT 10129 12/30 Holly Hansen $ 737.34 Payrol1 10130 12/30 Monique Basart 133.70 Payrol1 10131 12/30 Wi 11 lam Strohm 240.0k Payroll I8li|12/30 P.E.R.A.85.94 P.E.R.A. 1815 12/30 Petty Cash 96.64 Various 1816 12/30 U.S. West Communications 59.77 Telephone 10132 1/13 Holly Hansen 778.00 Payrol1 10133 1/13 Monique Basart 115.30 PayrolI 10I3A t/13 William Strohm 215.90 Payrol1 1817 1/13 Bank Excelsior 660.41 94l Taxes I8l8 1/13 P.E.R.A.116.84 P.E.R.A. 1819 1/13 P.E.R.A.9.00 PERA Life 1820 1/13 Paychex 27.80 Sect*l. Svcs. 1821 1/17 She!ly Quaas 60.00 Sect*!. Svcs. 1822 1/17 U.S. Postmaster 27.00 Postage 1823 1/17 Hoily Hansen 18.77 Mileage 182 A 1/17 MN Suburban Publishing 26.00 Mi seel 1aneous 1825 1/17 SW Suburban Publishing 81.20 Transfer TOTAL $3.W.65 BANK EXCELSIOR Beginning batanc^ Claims Deposit - LMCIT refund Interest Deposit - CD matured Service charges ENDING BALANCE $22,6ii7.56 ( 3,'•89.65) 672.00 109.10 7,132.33 t 1't.l't) $27,057.20 jit' STATE CAPITOL CREDIT UNION Balance 12/31/88 $ 6,<t38.5't C.O. 's $26,000 e 8.5* due A/10/89 MINUTES lake MINNETONKA CABLE COMMISSION EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE SPECIAL MEETING WEDNESDAY. FEBRUARY 8, 198? Commissioners Present: Others Present: Dennis Haggerty. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Chair Tom Anderson. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Chair Jim Olds. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Treasurer Lesley Hughes-Seamans. . . . . . . . .Secretary Barbara Brancel Lois Johnson Holly Hansen. . . . . . . . . . . .Administrator The meeting was called to order at 5:35 p.rn. by Chairman Haggerty. Haggerty announced that Administrator Hansen had accepted a new position as Executive Director for the Northern Dakota County Cable Co^isslon. Hansen's last day .as Administrator for the Lake Minnetonka Cable Com munications Comnisslon will be February 28. I989. Hansen presented a draft of an ad to place in the newspaper. Motion 2.8.89.1. Anderson moved, and It was seconded to place the ad in the Star Tribune and Pioneer Press Sunday. February 12. 1989. Vote. Unanimous. The ad to be placed follows: Administrator for fourteen city cable commission needed. Res ponsibilities include oversight cf cable television franchise and dally operation of community television studio and commis sion office. Applicants must have video production experience and administrative skills. Prior franchise administrative and/ or degree preferred. Salary range $22,000 - $25t0^f' Applications due February \f, 1989 Call 1474-5539 for further information Mall resume to:Lake Minnetonka Cable Commission 443 Oak Street Excelsior, Mn. 55331 Meeting cont. Page 2 The Executive Committee discussed when a new Administrator might be able to starts and noted that the position may be vacant for a couple of weeks. Motion 2.8.89.2 Anderson moved and It was seconded, that Bill Strohm's hours be Increased up to AO hours per week In the Interim until a new Administrator Is hired. Motion 2.8,89*3 Olds moved and It was seconded, to formally accept Administrator Hansen's resignation. The meeting was adjourned at 6:16 p.m. % MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF THE SCHOOL BOARD OF ORONO INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 278 HELD ON JANUARY 23. 1989 The regular meeting of the School Board of Orono Independent School District No 278 was held on Monday, January 23, 1989 at the Orono Primary School. Present: Dave McKown Don Anderson Absent: Kitty Crosby James Franklin John Maresh Lucie Taylor Thomas Mich William Fenholt UPON MOTION by Don Anderson, seconded by John Maresh, the consent agenda was approved as follows: - approved the minutes of the January 9, 1989 regular meeting; - approved the following variance requests: Ted Sharp, grade 7, to attend Orono Schools; - accepted the resignation of Darlyne Whitman, primary school principal,effective June 9, 1989; k k . - approved the Activity Fund Report for the second quarter, 1988-89; - approved the bills as covered by vouchers 061968 through 062043 and 060686 through 061323; - approved the Treasu*er's Report for December, 1988. Dr. Mich welcomed everyone to the Orono Primary School and expressed appre ciation to those involved with the presentation that the Bo=* 1 would hear tonigi c. Dr. Mich stated that the first semester ended on January 20 an., ne expressed appreciation to all the faculty/staff for their work during this semester; that on January 20 a luncheon was held for faculty/staff at which the following twenty-five year employees were honored: Dave Aldrich, Ron Gilbert, Jim Hall and Frank Schulz; that AMSC .eld its annual legislative dinner on January 11 and that it was an excellent opportunity for those representing the Orono Schools to Interact with the legislators; that he had met with the faculties at each level regarding open enroli.-ient, the development of a school day schedule for 1989-90 which will be presented to the Board at its next meeting, and to discuss faci lity needs; that the MSBA Convention was held on January 19 - 20; that ne wanted to encourage those Board members that were interested in attending the NSBA Convention to get their registrations in soon. John Maresn expressed concerns that he has been hearing regarding open enrollment numbers and requested that Orono residents be kept informed as to the accommodatlons/affect this will have on our own students. ♦u* responded that applicants have been accepted based on room available in the district. He stated that no building/construction will take place in order to accommodate open enrollment students and the students that have been accepted are scattered across the grade levels. Because of these additional students. at least two teaching positions have been maintained, class size of 25 or under will be more attainable, and the prospect of budget cuts has been eliminated because of revenue generated from open enrollment. Bill Fenholt added that there is an article in today’s Pioneer that should answer many of the questio:.^ udhg raised by members of the community. Dave McKown stated that the Metropolitan School Boards Academy will be held on February 11 and that he had information on this if anyone was interested. Dave Mckown complimented the Mound/Westonka Pop Singers and their director, Ms, Jane Brambilla, on their performance at the MSBA banquet on January 20. UPON MOTION by John Maresh, seconded by Lucie Taylor, the Board of Education approved the cooks' contract for 1988-90 as negotiated by the School Board Negotiation Committee. Member Lucie Taylor introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION CALLING FOR AN ELECTION ON GENERAL OBLIGATION SCHOOL BUILDING BONDS BE IT RESOLVED by th-;' School Board of Independent School District No. 278 (Orono), Minnesota, as follows: 1. This Board has investigated the facts and does hereby find, determine and declare that it is necessary and expedient for the District to finance the acquisition and betterment o school facilities by the issuance of its general obligation bonds (the "Project"). 2. 3. Subject to the Commissioner of Education completing the review and com ment on the Project as required by Minnesota Statutes, Section 121.15, which will be published at least 20 but not more than 60 days before any referendum on the issuance of bonds to finance the Project or solicita tion of bids to construct the Project, the proposition of issuing general obligation bonds for said purpose shall be submitted to the qualified electors of the District at a special election lu be held on March 21, 1989. Said election shall be held between the hours 7:00 o’clock a.m. and 8:00 o’clock p.m. The polling place for Precincv No. 1 shall be the Schumann Elementary School, Orono; the polling place for Precinct No. 2 shall be Orono City Hall, Crystal Bay; and the polling place for Precinct No. 3 shall be the Orono Primary School, Maple Plain. The Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to oosi and publish according to Uw a Notice of Special Election, and to p*^epare b^'Mots for use at said election, which notice and ballots shall bt in substan tially the following form: 4. Said election shall be held and conducted in accordance with the statutes of the State of Minnesota applicable, and the Board shall meet as required by law for the purpose of canvassing said election and declaring the results thereof. 5. Not less than 20 days nor more than 60 days before said election the Clerk of the District shall cause to be published in a legal newspaper of general circulation in the area the review and comment of the Commissioner of Education furnished to the District pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 122.90, and any information supplementary to such review and comment shall be available for public scrutiny at the central administrative office of the District. The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Don Anderson, and upon a vote being taken thereon, the following vf ed in favor thereof: John Maresh, Lucie Taylor, Don Anderson, Dave McKown and the following voted against tife same: None Whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. Or. Mich reviewed the background studies/information that led to this recommen dation presented to the Board tonight. He showed a preliminary drawing which would link the elementary and middle school with two stories housing nine classrooms, community education office and a swimming pool for use by physical education students. By way of explanation/clarification for building a swimming pool. Or. Mich stated that this is a physical education station that the district is lacking, that it is appropriate in the 1980's to teach our students the life-survival skill of swimming and that a swimming pool becomes a community resource for our district by providing programs for all ages throughout the year. Dr. Mich stated that this recommendation is very cost efficient because the corridor linking the two buildings provides access to additional facilities for students in either building. He reiterated again, that this facility would be done for the Orono community based on Orono's projected student enrollment and not because of open enrollment. Bill Fenholt provided information regarding the Review and Corr.ment Report required by the State Department of Education as well as adc ^ssing the financial aspects of the bond issue. The Board asked questions at various times during the comments by Dr. H'-'i Mr. Fenholt for clarification/explanation purposes. UPON MOTION by Don Anderson, seconded Lucie Taylor, the Board of Education called for a meeting at 8:30 p.m. on March 21, 1989. UPON MOTION by Lucie Taylor, seconded by Don Anderson, the Board of Eduivation engaged Springsteds as bond consultant and Briggs and Morgan as bond atto^^ney for the school facilities bond election. UPON MOTION by John Maresh, seconded by Lucie Taylor, the Board of Education approved the 1989-90 school calejidar as follows: Approved by the Orono Board of Education - January 23, 1989 ORONO INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 278 SCHOOL CALENDAR PROPOSED 1989-90 August September October 7 14 6 13 20 27 5 1? 7 14 b 1 8 15 22 29 2 9 16 23 30 3 10 17 24 31 4 11 18 25 1 2 3 8 9 10 15 16 17 4 11 18 0 (I 6 7 8 11 12 13 14 15 ii ii uD 25 18 19 20 21 22 25 26 27 28 29 November December 1 2 3 1 7 8 9 10 4 5 6 7 8 11 19 11 ia 1414 lb ^ 21 22 © 28 29 W Ji ic IJ 14 13 18 19 ^ 21 22 @ @ @ @ @ February March 1 2 1 2 6 7 8 ia 1C 9 1C 5 6 7 8 9 19 11 la 1C 1CIJ 14 ID 20 21 22 27 28 ID 23 ic 13 14 ID ID IQ 20 21 22 23@ @ 0 @ May June 4 11 18 25 5 12 19 26 6 13 20 27 21 22 28 29 2 3 4 5 6 9 10 11 12 U 16 17 18 (|) ® 123 1 24 25 g 27 “ 31 January 15 16 17 18 22 23 24 25 29 30 31 Apri 1 2 9 16 23 30 3 10 17 24 4 11 18 25 12 19 W 26 27 pn Teacher workshop/inservice/ ^ articulation/curriculum O School not in session ri Opening and closing of LJ student attendance ^ LUO of semester; teachers ^ will work (no school) Date 8/28-9/1 9/4 9/5 10/19-20 10/23 11/20,21 & 22 11/23-24 12/25-1/5 1/8 1/19 Activity Date All teachers wkshp 2/19 Labor Day 3/7,8,9 CLASSED BEGIN MEA,'*^F . Teacher wkshp 3/26-30 Conf.-All Schools 4/13 5/28 Thanksgiving Vac. 6/7 Winter Break 6/8 Classes resume Semester ends; Teacher wkshp Activity Presidents* Bir. Conf.-S.E. I.S. M.S. Spring Break Teacher wkshp Memorial Day LAST DAY Teacher workday UPON MOTION by Lucie Taylor, seconded by John Maresh, the Board of Education approved the 1989-90 Orono High School Registration Guide as proposed. Dr. Mich expressed appreciation to Dar Whitman, whose resignation the Board had accepted earlier in the meeting, for her years of service to the school district, particularly for this past semester and year plus her willingness to accept the leadership role in getting the primary school established/operating. Oar Whitman informed the Board that tonight they would hear/participate in the library computerized circulation system, computer lab and a reading lab. Barb Keen demonstrated for the Board the capabilities of the computer cir culation system that is being used/developed in the Orono Primary library. In the computer lab, Don BoyIan provided each person at the meeting the opportunity to participate in the operation of i computer program that has been integrated in the curriculum at Orono Primary School. This "hands on" experience provided the Board members with knowledge in the latest technology being made available for the students today. Oar Whitman then provided information on the reading lab that is provided two afternoons a week in which older adults/senior citizens participate in reading time with children on a one on one basis. Mrs. Whitman reported to the Board that the staff at Orono Primary School has come together extremely well and stated that it is an exciting staff to work with. She expressed appreciation to the Board for the opportunity of leading the primary school this year and for the trust they have placed in her to do this job. The Board expressed appreciation to Barb Keen, Don Boylan and Dar Whitman for their presentation and to Marvel Bongart for her support of these people during the past months. UPON MOTION by Don Anderson, seconded by Lucie Taylor, the meeting was adjourned. /j. Doij-Aiiderson, Vice chairman Approved: Dave McKown, Chairman 'I. GEN OLSON Senator 43rd District 133 State Office Building St. Paul. .Minnesota 55155 (612)296-1282 Home: 6750 County Road 110 West .Mound. .Minnesota 55364 (612)472-3306 u }• l!~^. '£7ii.ivjt-f ,cr/'L State of Mmii? TOWN MEETING NOTICE Rep. John Burger and I have scheduled a Town Meeting for next Saturday, Febrnnry 25 at 10 a.m. in the Westonka Library community room. While a notice appeared in local papers, busy people may have missed it. We wanted to be sure you knew we'd be there looking forward to meeting with you to discuss legislative issues of concern. Education, property taxes, solid waste, groundwater protection, Eurasian watermilfoil, health insurance for the uninsured are but a few of the issues the 1989 Legislature must grapple with in this biennial budget-setting year. Bring your opinions, your questions, and your friends. Sincerely, Gen Olson State Senator GO/bk COMMITTEES: • Education • Environmem & Natural Resources • Local «& Urban Government • Public Utilities & Energy • Education Aids Subcommittee SERVING: Deephaven. Eden Prairie (portions of). E.xcelsior. Greenwood. Long Lake. Minnetonka (portions of). Minnetonka Beach. .Vlinneinsta. Mound. Orono. St. Bonifacius. Shorewood. Spring Park. Tonka Bay and Woodland Arlo H, Vande Vegte City Attorney/City Administrator City of Long Lake P.O. Box L Long Lake, HN 55356 Subject; Sewer Plant Property Dear Arlo, It is with disappointment that the City of Orono received your letter of February 10, 1989 indicating that the City of Long Lake had amended its position regarding the means by which the Cities could resolve the sewer plant issue. The sessions to date had been, from Orono's standpoint, productive. The two cities had been talking about a number of issues of which 8 to 10 units on the property seemed to be a consensus opinion together with the fact that the issue of jurisdication was basically one of finances. At the last meeting a process for outlining the issues was agreed to which you and I had exchanged information and the City of Orono was waiting on the City of Long Lake to establish a date for the next meeting. We are sorry that our waiting for you to respond on this issue has made you "become anxious over the timing of the progress." This sudden departure in what had become a cooperative arrangement leaves us no choice but to indicate neither 15 units nor jurisdiction by the City of Long Lake is something to which the City of Orono would be agreeable. The spirit of cooperation seen in the two meetings of the two councils was very positive and can be of longterm benefit to both communities. However, the apparent direction as illustrated by this and other issues recently by the City of Long Lake will cost both communities more money. Expending money in areas that otherwise can be cooperatively handled is nost unfortunate. The City of Orono will, as it has in the past two years, will continue in a vein of cooperation. The City of Long Lake's position on the sewer plant property, however, will make this more difficult with most of the cost burden being borne by the taxpayers of the City of Long Lake. I do appreciate the personal work you have done in trying to promote this cooperative agreement and the work of those on the Long Lake City Council who have felt that cooperation is in the best interest of both parties. We look forward to cooperation in the future and thank you for your efforts. Sincerely, Nark E. Bernhardson City Administrator MEB/dh 21589.1 Feb. 1, 1989 To: Orono City Council We live at 1020 N, Willow Drive (east side of Willow, south of Co. Rd. 6). There are two Issues I want to cover with the Orono Council; first, proposed Co. Rd. 116, second, surface water run-off. In regard to Co. 3d. Il6, there are four questions I would like to have answered: 1. 3. 4. Concerning the Intersection of Co. Rd. 6 and Willow Drive — there are numerous accidents there now, and If Co. Rd. 116 doubles or triples the number of cars, accidents will Increase approximately the same amount. What do you plan to do to make It safer -- a 4-way Stop? Concerning the Intersection of Hwy 12 and Willow Drive -- In the morning and from 2:30 on In the afternoon It Is next to impossible to get on Hwy 12. If traffic doubles or triples, how are you going to handle this additional traffic without serious accidents? Do you realize If a connection Is made between Hamel and Long Lake a tremendous amount of serais and gravel trucks will use this road who presently do not use Willow Drive. Can you see semis trying to cross Co. Rd. 6 and get on Hwy 12? They are using 101 and 19 now. How are you going to control traffic speed? Right now we have p^ple traveling 50-55 miles per hour on Willow Drive. Second, regarding surface water run-off: We own the land on the southeast side of Willow Drive and Co. Hd.6 This Is a family farm that has been In our family since 1855. We have had an on-golng water problem errodlng our land from the Phillips development on Co. Rd. 6, and also from the recent reroutlnpT In water drainage on the west side of W^lllow between Co. Rd. 6 and Hwy 12. With Co. Rd. Il6 being widened and new ditches coming In, the easiest way for them to get rid of excess water Is to run It across our property. V.’e will rot alloe this to happen, and we do want to hear back how you intend to solve the water problem on the west side of Willow and from the Phillips project. I have been trying tc work on this with John Gerhardson for a year and a half but have not accomplished much yet. I look forward to hearing your answers. Sincerely, James A. Cox 1020 N. Willow Drive Long Lake, Mn. Minnesota Good Roads A Heu'sifitcr for Minnesotan^i interested in frantiijotiaiion About this issue What you are reading is a first: Volume one, Number one of Go^td Roads' new newsletter intended to keep transportation watchers updated on matters of interest around the state. It will be mailed periodically to opinion leaders at the state, county, city, township and school boani lev els. If you have colleagues who might hi- i.ttrrcsti-rt : n i . . . ... to call or u rile Fiirh i-i-iiir , ili /(,! (4A on a iftinii. the link between transportation and economic development being the theme of this issue. Future issues will look at similar links with educa tion, health care, and other sectors of Minnesota life. .Membership in Minnesota Gooil Roads is availuble to all organiza tions and individuals interested in better transportation in .Minnesota. Economic impact of improving Minnesota hi^ways to be studied by national group The Road Information Plan (TRIP), a national research organi zation, has been commissioned by Minnesota Good Roads to direct a study of how increased highway =:penHinp impacts various sectors of ' I nc<< >' , IIIH 11 i , V\ ill Wilkins, lit IP cxiculivc di rector. noted, "The study will reveal highway spending's impact on em ployment not just in the construc tion industry but in services, manu facturing and retail. It will also forecast the immediate first-year benefit of highway construction to the state treasury through increa.ses in corporate, individual and sales taxes." The final report is expected to be delivered the end of March. Re search and data collection will be conducted by Apogee Research, a W^ashington-D.C. independent re search firm specializing in transpor tation studies. Wilkins said. "The message of the six state studies we’ve completed so far is that spending on roads and bridges is an investment in econom ic development. Transportation funding not only fixes roads, but creates jobs and generates revenues going back to the state treasury.” Good Roads Kxecutive Director Fred Corrigan said his organization decided on the study because the dliam M. Wilkins F.veciitive Director. The Hoad Information Program transportation system must be re sponsive to the economic needs of the state. "The highway system al lows Minnesota to be competitive on a national scale and i,nat com mitment to transportation must continue," Corrigan said. Volume One, Number One Winter lim rail: An idea whose time has come or gone? /. I • I ), t ( h-K • ! h 'I'U I: • ( . . <1 f ■. Hi Ilt< I Hennepin County Hoard Chair John Derus and Metropolitan Coun cil Transportation T ision Manag er Natalio Diaz deb d the merits and demerits oi ligh ail in the Twin Cities, while Mn/DOT's Mer ritt Linzie offered the state's per spective at Good Floods ‘ board meeting on December 15. A long-time and outspoken advo cate of light rail, Derus describes light rail as "an idea whose time has come and gone and come again, " Car pooling, van pooling, high occupancy lanes haven't worked —"not w'hen people put hats on their dogs to get into high occu pancy lanes ’ "We re major league in sports, business, politics, but bush league in transportation. " Derus quipped. He reminded audience members that the Twin Cities was passed over as the 1996 Olympics site because of lack of good hotel space and an inadequate mass transit system. Natalio Diaz maintained that light rail is onl\' part of the answer and needs to be used in collabora tion with additional roads, car and van pooling, high occupancy lanes and more control ramps. He cited the Met Council's estimate that the average household in the Twin Cities metro area spends S5.000 a year in personal transportation, or a total of $5 billion in the Twin Cities. Merritt Linzie. director of high way progr Mn/DOT, said that Mp tes that the 24 miles o; ghwcys con sidered resp • .or "severe con gestion " in 19 nad grown to 72 miles by 1984 and is projected to ^otal 125 miles and cause delays of two hours each way by the year 2000. Mn/DOT supports a "family of vehicles" approach to solving the traffic problem in the Cities, mean ing the use of curs. vans, buses as . ^ --- that new incentives need to be cre ated to persuade people to use bus es and vans more frequently. Li nnarti Ia'I ihv, Cttnimissiant’r. Minnesota Iief}iirtment of Transportation A- House transportation chair and new members announced Rep. Henry Kalis. DFL-Walters, has been selected to head the Transportation Committee during the 1989 legislative session for his second session as chair. New members to the committee are: Reps. Becky Kelso. DFL-Shako* pee; Peter McLaughlin. DFL-Minne- apolis; Howard Orenstein, DFL St. Paul; Kathleen Vellenga. DFL-St. Paul; Jean Wagenius. DFL-Minne- apolis; Joyce Henry, IR-Blooming- ton; Connie Morrison. IR-Burns- ville; Dick Pellow, IR-New Brigh ton; and Sylvester U» hus, IR-Sauk Centre. Sen. Clarence Purfetist. DFL- Fari bault. chair of the Senate Transpor tation Committee since 1977, will continue as chair, as will Gary DeCramer, DFL-Ghent, vice chair, and the other 10 committee members, TiaiibiMjrtution Study Botird anticipates new Executive Director selection in January As this issue went to print, the selection process was still underway for the first executive director of the Transportation Study Board ap pointed by the Governor in July 1988. Rep. Henry Kalis, DFL-Wal ters. said he expects the announce ment to be made "within a couple of weeks” which would mean by the end of January. More than 60 people applied for the job. and the initial slate has been winnowed down to a few final ists. The position will be full-time until January 1992. The Transportation Study Board was established by Governor Per- pich "to study Minnesota’s surface transportation needs into the 21st century. ” Thirteen citizens and eight legislators comprise the board. "So fur the work of the board has consisted mostly of bringing its members up-to-speed on various as pects of transportation in Minne sota. primarily the complex relation ship between transportation funding and taxes.” Rep. Kalis explained. "Since our job is to look at the long view, we’ll be examining the larger issues such as loss of popula tion in rural areas and the burgeon ing expansion of suburbs. And nat urally. the airport and light rail will be issues of vital concern to the board. "Our preliminary report is due in January 1989, so there is no question that we have a lot to do in the next few months to complete the educa tion and analysis and get into rec ommendations," Kalis commented. What*8 ahead in transporta tion for the 1989 Session? MVET or no MVET? 100% or no chance? For many months. Gover nor Perpich has traveled the state advocating 100% transfer of the Motor Vehicle Excise Tax (MVET) to transportation funding, but the promises seem to have dwindled to a .soft whisper. Word has it that uu showing; in the Governor's budget. Rep. Kalis said, "I’d settle for 5% cash over a 100% promise, but it’s too early to tell. What I sense is that people are concerned now with infrastructure. They realize the big ger role of transportation and are looking at the bigger picture.’ Sen. Clarence Purfeerst, Senate 1 ransportation Committee chair, said he anticipates that how MVET morcy is divided will be "hotly de bated. Not eveiyone’s happy with the 62/29/9 formula. "There’ll also be discussion about triple-trailer trucks and the distri bution of weight loads of trucks on highways. "How to handle the overflow at all metro airports, particularly the Twin Cities, and light rail and how it ties into MVET monies will also get on the agenda,” Sen. Purfeerst predicted. Rep. Kalis summarized it philo sophically. saying. "Because of last year’s legislation, some people think the good news will go on forever. 'Fhe issue’s hot. and then it dies.’’ OFTICEKS lUHIUlTJ Mrf\HU\ H< Ijw. rarli MAV MlSUIl V«-r PmidrlM Shakiipw l>APf*K(* A ARII \ irr l'r*^trlrMI S< Paul (»AH\ NAI KH \ irr Pr*-«Mlf-nl Mapir (irmr PAl I. HI I l> S^rHa/t Aik* a PAl'I. II AII.f > Tlra,urr» MinnrapoJi* Mi^JI J IIIKHMi AS I-tnuliia llirtrlnr JfHHA ASDKKMIS A..t P.^utiw HOHKHT M JiiMssns ( «„ujiKi>t BOARD OP DIRRCTORf HIIA A.-PMAII. SI Ikui« Park JOHN At H All> A III AlinnHimka PKTKM At III ! KAI AS St Paul HU HAHl) P IIK M S I'oluinlaa llrt||hl> IAIS AI.il K III AS SI Paul PRKII IIPRPSriU K Alinnrapnlia inns X lull. AS Ihuixr IVftirf lUIB KI.AS AtapW tirmr hii.i.iam KUsHdi.rz jh Huaratlla i.irms f. s npiji SI Paul HAS IMKSTRKsx lIrnnkUn Park IIAAK IIRAAIIAIII Itrrvai ISanI IMIlKITin I.HcnTI f axmiml II AS III ST Al’sns s< Paul II II 'Hudl II AA 111 S JR l*li mouth IP III IIU.UKI H A P..UI tJlll II KSI > RftruR||':i 1- <*HM. iUMSsiiN Si |»«uJ IWiH HISi* IlmrkkK n l^arfc Wil l I \M Kn\|\t -Kl lirilr Mainr WfS 1 \lmnr«|iiiti« H( HS I \S(,sMII ll]«v>minicto«i J • Ml s r I OAM > SrrtS VUnkaio U \l\n>os Sh«f*^ t M \MIJ s M«i lliiss\\ MAI14C (im%r MH M Al I s MH.M I U«r«k jiiK Mirm Ls t.iirhfr#kl JmMN Mil Si iv-l NM'JtS lluMaJn r \l t WIN Si I'aul Jt HH\ 1*1 U HMI U K (*rand Kapul* rAlA!> H ITTKHMiN Mtnn#«r«tliA f .1 HfMI^H Ktlm l**mp»p WIU I \M \ Hll I IHIN HU h\ IIS W rvl Kmirl<M) \ J AUm. Hi»M \NO VliriArapnljA t»\H\ HI MMM.I N Krtl IjRjir Ml* HllHKHT J SI MM I r/ Jiirdan MIK^ s|l I » MAHI.Ks ; sM \SSJ|\ SttU»atr« rsiHMiA St I.4UIA |*trk Meet the board m a k-^ {> Hnbfrt ./. MvFarlin hn’suh'nt Minnesota Good Roads President Bob McFarlin knows both sides of the street when it comes to lobby ing for good trans portation. On the one hand, he served as a legislator from 1967-70 and 1973-74 and was assigned to the transportation (then highwaysl committee. On the other, he has had a high profile as a transportation advocate lobbying at both the state and federal levels. McFarlin is currently in his ninth year as chairman of the legislative committee of Consulting Engineers Council of Minnesota and on a na tional level, he has ser\ed on th(‘ Li imspiii Lalion (.Aiiar.oU.c ol Liu . . . .• .iisul( ir.^ I'.Mgmuer.s Council in Washington. D.C. for ten years and as committee chair for two years. Since 1978 he’s been a member of Minnesota Good Roads, serving as secretary of the board for five years and president since October 1988. A consulting bridge engineer, McFarlin has been with the Minne apolis-based firm of Bakke Kopp Ballou & McFarlin. Inc since 1969 and a partner since 19io. McFarlin has been involved in managing several Mn/DOT bridge projects, most notably the Lake Ave., Fifth Ave. and Michigan St. bridges and W'est Tunnel of 1-35 in Duluth, the Lester River Bridge in Duluth and the Cedar Ave. pedes trian crossing in Minneapolis, which won a national design av.aril from the Federal Highway Administration. McFarlin has been an instructor and lecturer in engineering and has published extensively in engineering tiade journals. He and his wife .Alice-Jean have been St. Louis Park residents for 26 years. MN/DOTs district 1 Mn/DOT ’s District 1. the largest of nine districts, covers 17,146 square miles representing one-fifth of the state s total area and in cludes a nine-county area that’s larger than Connecticut. Rhode Island. Massachusetts and Dela ware combined. During the 1988 construction sea son, District 1, based in Duluth, undertook 49 major highway im provement projects costing more than 8.57 million, excluding the I- ;5 completion through Duluth. Whi. District 1 builds bike paths, works with railroads, truck ers and mass transit providers and helps support developn.ent of water transportation on the Great Lakes, highways continue to be what it. and Mn.'DOT is known for. .And in the case of District 1. there's one highway that dominates U., . ............................................. is nearing completjon after more than 30 years of planning, re-plan ning and more planning to satisfy opponents who feared it w'ould de stroy the character of Duluth. The highway, of course, is the 1-35 ex tension mentioned above, which be gins in Laredo, Texas, and will end at 26th Ave. East in Duluth. Scheduled for completion in 1992, the highway should satisfy even the most outspoken critics. John Sandahl. Mn/DOT District 1 Engineer, ob served. “Besides creating green spaces and opening up the streets of down town Duluth, 1-35 is credited with a vast economic expansion in the area.’ ■ fnbn Suniltthi. Hnumxr D srrtcf / Duluth ^ r. Economic development — transportation link to be debated at public meeting in Diduth January 17 |i%^-• t Sen. Clarence Purfeerst Ret' Henry Kalis §■ f Liz Prehich Marilyn Kruener. Commissioner Chair AHIX' What role will transportation play in the economic recovery and grov th of northern Minnesota? A plethora of opinions will get aired during a gathering on Tiresday, • laniiM'v IT l>\' Vlmnp- i • .'' I ■ : ' ■ i u , ■ Cuu:it\ Hoard <i| romiiusMoners. Arrowhead Regional Development Commission (AKDC) and Arrow head Counties Association. Several lawmakers are expected to participate, including Sen. Clar ence Purfeerst. Chuii . Senate Tians- portation Committee: Rep. Henr . Kalis, Chair, House IVansportat; i Committee, Sen. Keilh Langseth. Co-chair, rransportation Stud\ Hoard -ni! Rep. Todd Otis, Chair, Hous'j e^conomic Development Housing Committee. Officiating nr the sponsoring organizations will he St. Louis County Commissioner Liz Prehich. Marilyn Krueger, chair of the Arrowhead Regional Develop ment Commission, and R^'kv Clark, chair of Arro..head Cof Association. Representing the >• partment of Transpo DOT) will he Mn/r- er Leonard Levin dahl. District l*> ti 1-Iiululh. \ inception at . . i k. dndisson Hotel. Did-. ; off the meeting with dinner and dis- (uvsion h llowing. The public is in- Mt<‘d to Ji'.end. Following a welcome by Minne sota Good Roads President Bob McFarlin and local officials, John Gephi-rd, Senior Scientist of the Natural Resources Research Insti ll te of the University of Minnesota- Dii.uth, wiil prp <ent the rlinner ad- 0 css on 'ran portation and the tim ber indu Mr;, n nor* her e Minnesota. Anticipi ling rn >..eimg, Com missioner ' fh ’c'i s.ial. “I am en- thusiastii uboid tiie ujxoming dia logue on important issues affecting our area. nan. 1> transportation and its linkage to economic growth." ItTfUT' Plnrk rtf thp A rrr>t«'V«nr»d 1 0,1 Mil- \--.ociuiion said he hopes the subject ot the motor vehicle ex cise tax (MVKT) will be an impor tant part of the discussion. "The Association supports a Constitu tional amendment mandating MVK'f ■ ; used fo - i--ansportation I’iiiding and noHiii g else. We have hud soni" mrdoi projects in this ; ’.rt of the ‘ .e cancelled be.ause of funding cu.s. the Silver Cliff project on Highway 61 being one example. It's one of the worse ->ec- tio*' > of highway in Minnesota, with the cliff eroding into Lake Superior.** Mai ilyr ,.r, chair of the - a- rectors, comment ed. “Th !p .•-.•tween Improved transpoi .i i a i economic devel opment is h< 1 question, and this ^'•■‘110 .vill pr .ide an important op- *v to inform key legislators c leaders of the importance ts link m our region. " nilar meetings around the state uie planned throughout the year. *•'••0-1 tv.rrigan. Good Roads' exeei:- *1. reef or. said he anticipates the .--V will be held i'« • -ithern Minnesota in June '2- IVoies the Executive Director The first issue of News & Issues represents a renewed commitment by Minnesota Good Roads to the public awareness of highway and transportation issues in Minne sota. This quarterly publication will focus on the organization, its membership and the role transpor tation plays in the daily lives of all citizens of our State. We hope you find the material informative and welcome any comments or suggestions you may have for fu ture editions. As the new Executive Diriv;tor. I have been busy getting to kno^ our membership througlut the State and the local issues affecting commercial and pcr.sonal travel. Minnesota Good Roads will be working closely with local highway coalitions—from Windom and Mankato. Shakopee and Eden Frailie. Highway 12 and Elk River. Brainerd, Grand Rapids and other rural suburban and urban groups. These issues and how they affect local communities will also be featured in future issues of News & Issues. We wdcn.ne the opportunity to work with any group in tlie State and are always available to speak to your organi zation on the importnr. role of transportation in Minnesota. Production will begin on a video tape presentation of issues the transportation community at tH. local, state and Federal levels over the next few years. Minne sota Good Roads will be traveling around the state beginning with the hearing in Duluth on economic development and transportation. The annual Washington Fly-in to Washington March 1-3 will be hrvdJ Corriffan, Executive Director. A/immp- .sofa (totni Hoads number eighteen and is always well received by our Congressional delegation. Thanks for taking the time to read News & Issues. Fred Corrigan Executive Director Minnesota Good' Roads, Inc. 3402 University Avenue S.E. Minneapolis, MN 55414 MISSIOS Minnesota Good Roads, Inc. is a citizens’ organization dedicated to the furtherance of better and safer transportation systems at all lev el.**—state, county, township and ir^av.. The organization stresses the importance of adequate trans portation facilities to the progress of economic, educational and social development. wm ”■■•5 ■ ... ' ■ 4 ;. ■ , "I ;aw;y: 'rnm&msK: 'mmrn^.^ V mm. •- ■■-y?sf' « llli comer of Lot 1, thence north to b^lnning. He hereby certify that this Is a true and correct representation of a survey of the boundaries of the la^ above described and of the location of all buildings. If any, thereon and all visible encroach- Mnts, If any, free or on eaid land. Dated this 23rd day of Noveabef, 1988. License No. 9018 j?' 1 ^■*’>sp ^ ■ h'I'- t. .i-y-- ■ V' /?V£A/0'B j-r.vr/^ iVoofiHiu. ^^cgg 3 _ T^'S.^ #1359 i Survey for: PAVE LINDSTROW DESCRIPTION: Lot 1, Auditor's Subdivision No. 307, Hennepin County, Minnesota and that part of Lot 13, Auditor's Subdivision No. 307, Hennepin County, Minnesota described as beplnnlnfl at the norttwest corner of said Lot 13, thence East 25 feet; thence South 157.75 feet; thence West 25 feet to the southeast corner of Lot 1, thence north to beginning. He hereby certify that this is a true and correct representation of a survey of the boundaries of the land above described and of the location of all buildings, if any, thereon and all visible encroach- laents. If any, from or on said land. fe ' \ r.. ■ * •''■I ■■m /;-: ' V -n ^ ; f.-:-"4 "r-N ':^;dr-:5| V';s:^ ^ /tire mr/te^ fi/Oae "Ih -=c‘7r PJJ J K./A';, “I ^*tef ff0¥f Survty for: ■' ' ■' / ■ OESCmPTiqil: ^VE imosniow '■■ ■• ■nrs- .. Lot 1, Auditor's SuMivisioit iio. 307, HsoMpin . County;- Mnntteto and that pirt of Lot 13.'Auditor 5£Sr^'?J2iJ!TSlll Sffirt!SS*(» • sas‘g.?^jRSS.^s«s^. iS7.7S/foot; thonco Mast 2S foot to tlw southaast comar of Lot .1, thanea nortt to btginning.. J!p5S^‘3land above dascribad and of tha location of all i^, buildin^; if a^, thoroon ai^ all visibla ancroac ■ants^ If tutf i froo or on said laM. Datad this 23rd day vt Wnmbmr, 1988. ^•Sd'it.oKa.o fNrO Lin’S- f W-r fl««CS OP dvj op«n.i tx-o+atT/m f0ume^ tr»0* X' 9B3T 4^9 rf / ~-- UMawaviTou r'4.00*^ - - I f^f.lZAfat. ^ (//4.0 A'/srO fin/tc' /r00t /r»0i ^ca/£: - }' iM&PP. «, V ; ■ r ■-^ r \ % ' mmst f %■■ . . r: % ^•: ■><'„' y lUT ^ . j |:-V\rf^“'^_^- W^>^ ■!»a nn^s4i'--4^- P •a . W/ 'tr,^.rv; 11 mmR I- ■-■‘•a.' . :'. ■;/ i. - : ■:"■>■-'-jk BOARMAN& ASSOCIATES A.-XCHIIECrut\t ENOINEEniNO INIEIXIOH DESIGN PROJECT ORONO MUNICIPAL FACILITIES CITY MAP SITE OPTION LOCATIONS City of Orono, Minnesota INSERT NAVARRE AREA DETAIL LJ Wr •mttnm mvn uMtta « atioc V- ± ^ piS" of- 0 2000 1000 5000 I-', f. BOARMAN& ASSOCIATES AIXCHlIECTUttE ENGINEEniNG INTCMOIX DESIGN PROJECT ORONO MUNICIPAL FACILITIES SITE A EXISTING MUNICIPAL SITE SIZE: 2.42 Acres LOCATION: Co. Rd. 146 and Hwy 51 ZONED; RR - IB *2 Acre Minimum *Lot width 200 Ft. Setbacks *Front 5010 *Side 3010 *Rear 50lQ *Slde 5010 (Adjacent to St^r) A 10 30 50 100 ORONO MUNICIPAL FACILITIES SITE A EXISTING MUNICIPAL SITE REZONED R-1A *0ne acre inlniinuin *Lot width 140^0 Setbacks ‘Front 35^0 ‘Side IQiO ‘Rear 30^0 ‘Side 3540 (Adjacent to street) 100 ■l-ri0^ ,r ;■•«. m''■r rp -r .'^ L- ^t i BOARMAN& ASSOCIATES AKCHITECTunE ENGINEERING INTERIOR DESIGN PROJECT ORONO MUNICIPAL FACILITIES BLOCK PLAN CITY HALL POLICE iiwii SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 11 BOARMAN& ASSOCIATES AnCHITECIUtXE ENGINEERING INTERIOR DESIGN PROJECT ORONO MUNICIPAL FACILITIES siteC HWY. 12 SITE SIZE: 15.15 Acres LOCATION: Hwy 12 & Old Crystal Bay Rd ZONED: RR - IB *2 Acre Minimum *Lot width 200 Ft. Setbacks *Front 50-*’0 *Slde 3010 *Rear 5Q10 *Slde 501' (Adjacent to St. ) 400 100 300 k;: ■ V v;-? I B^ €, ’SSft' JIfe r ”a <4^ '■^1 P-4{'':.'.>J^4 !^ j?i;s§■ it i/“.P S -^-5 y, l°i§ > CJ fo ►-• ^ rn Cn tA tn -*• r -*• <• n j»g o c c —t ■S3.SSC< Cr* O O3 n o ^ •rt n •— o nS§ 3*3,2.^-1 6i C» “H 3 rf — -n ct i,t O r+ O O. t'* tn 50 fi *4. m g3J?| |b.i J III gss j»u>iN>>-r^ ijro>-*2 . . . . g. . . § rt- rt' o rt *-• r» r+ Onoftooorjoz •a r*sgc3- si"siBIIJ 2.jrs*"‘j‘'o SS|2^qsi35scviNOCArs—= §3S •o ^ c nIfvll o o —•COM tt D O —»ra o e.' S' 3’ ==assi=S5S O O o < 7S ^.s j?r o o < 3 v> o m ^ c 1 tA i^^gi 3 Ci < O r^ fP r^3S 3 ^ *3 i ? mM. ro I-1/1 • • mg CA tA 50 r» ft M O O -< U)to»-*rienu ’'*»«jr'»«-‘^ o o n ?S ^'-g o t? re rfl c> o cj rvo o tt n "o XJ 3S35S 3S.S33o-'-orK << S3R5iJ;®s; g" 3 g cu8 5 ^•83 ^832rere oe*n rec-oo ® "*3 S S § o o o i?i2. Siif' l^”4llOOfS 3-t0^ri“r^ S. -I. 3- o wS"s> !|:?Pllilil!lll!i sSSi: «^«"?5§Ssl3 »:»=» sSJfSIsisil -.3-0 -. i r?S;!2.3reSi?n s§32.. P Is O C. -•• O’ O o ft n rr O n » c 2 2 3 n ft n o r* O n -J S O 3 C; O c# *3 3 O r** r» ” s 3-0 ■o 3 S'c X X _i 3- o.Ci rt rt 2:?3 3 ? C fci •%. V» rr TS' o rr c -I --• S' o no ?S8"§• tM’8-5; o o o --■ 3* w rf O Cio n 5 n . ?1 = il s i 1^0 SgS"St« a r» n> O VI n o n ______J =.-,s'•S:e,S?i 8*0 S'o g a. €?S£r2."’ 8- "g.?^ ‘ ■ fpS So??5 I’S f 5.|?| » r'’^ O o-5 -»'< n cn e. v» -•. r Sn=:? O Ci *•*> ?|| S m *om < 50 m o "n *o c X o c» o o - R IW '•d mr 0 ^ LI '-I ■ ■■- : "*L::.|g^|v>':: fev-'y'r^ ?''• ,f- rn i/^ o v»•rf. o -^* o ???;??§ V> (/) O Cl* 5?i:g 5 ■’ S q t/t VI v» •-• o* & v» S 3 trt r»- O “I c/>-ti O Is?- 3Sq rt O. -«»1 r;*ti c s o n «a —• rr -*•©'< rt a V* rt -si “l.§ © a Q. sisss?;o o. 6 w to »-• </% rrito </> 1/1 ra I S z(O (/I *a *41 e» c fi/ © la o a n o —4 VI o -*• no o n o s a o VI a r+*^ ■’SaS^ n *o m cr+sjr-r» —• n oc o r» •a n a o 3 f> & m 2.sro.8 =■-1" O B* -*• v> o rt sSI 3 5^0 O -i VI VI c/ o o & D a cr ta O 8- a o 82;?V» ^ • To • ' g o. C/1 to ;o o w. rn g ??s 5 2.1.1 g2.3. ^2.2. M N S88 2.8 S ?»•& ^ cj iM »-• m . . . . g.. . g 1/1 to O CO O to to to M W. w. o -»• 3 -*• -'• « Sj?R5oJ?Sf?S w'5 ^ Cl n r- o o o » ntaoGi><<<n CO < 5 r- o>ca--Qvivivi^ vcviNOtoa —'—'S 1 = o "a ■S' 3 n a CL rt Va VI N—• re -1.0 a ei a a rt 11.^1 =12.85 " So?. S " 12. a cu VI < n r* n ^sl> — p --• 7S2.S a VI §■ ^ * o 8 8 ^VI rr €♦ -*• VI o R r+ P ►-• srR.'®—* c o ^ Cl a o ^ re VI o a* o r> n _ rn »o —J -<• 3 rt CO rt 3“ n ° 8 52 3 VI re rnVI c n to i^-gs a p < o ft VI re -a 3 5p a rn n re CO a a p ca ''o2. ■o < rea o v» -*»*o c p a SR re a ro *-• 2 r-to to •-* re Cl 33 < P o re o < w re rn a < CO ft re a p 9- Cl % n p p 88 re ^ -•■g 5 ^ 8? e p :? S Q P C • 6 I' r*r§ cto CO > ss; O p CO ar t m p re CO -I P CO Sog 8?3 -> i^ VI VI n ? i; 53 s3 0*0 i8ft a a VI C VI* VI ft l5 8 5. O ft &=• • 8 i IS) l-»CO . • m o w w » ft ft -cre o -< S' o ^ VI Q. -*•re o < --• re re a re 88 p re ft CL 5 -o K& re p e o IS ^ CO toroi^^oi CO Pcjrs>»-*j ?n cto to to »to 5» -o CO to CO*4. 2 arf. & *1 ( ftrtrt>rtc^. O rtftftCoonr^o pvooor POP mx) o CO re © © 53 5Q85&grg;8 -3--5 SSc-KSre re 5853“"-,'5 8o n ill. o' 8 o -•50r» VI O 55: -H ft n 2 n p -1 Ml 2.8 = P O O. 5p re o>< < • re -'• 5*•a re 82 3 3 8 88 8 i:mii -3§*?? ^ VI rt 5 8-5'o "" § n"533 rt o re -*-- S' ® a o ft ft •■"ifiss 218588 "«88'-8 3 S^ o c <^ a o.p rt ftft o n a a o re ■S’?^ CO a co^w~^>iPC*»roi-*m^y'^wr\j>-*io -4tocototo[o^>>>2co^toto^io 2ffi88||||y8!28f8 ?| «« ^qS;S;|;S;g| 2|8i?q lass" '■-'t-t b rt CO re p M c< CO a re •2^888 5=852 re a Ms-re ca o* a.1< 58 •1 5 % . C'.> i V ■I'II PgW,:'