Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
07-10-1989 Council Packet
The preceeding two pages were placed on a separate mylar with no mention of placement. CUSTOMER TRANSMITTAL/JOB SHEET CONCEPT MICROFILM, INC. 3337 REPUBLIC AVE. MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55426 (612) 920-8812 FAX (612) 920-5113 RUSH: DATE: REP:JASON P. POI: P/UP: __ _ _ _ Company: CITY OF ORONO Bill To: 1335 Brown Rd. Orono, MN 55323 Teri Naab FAX #: FOR CUSTOMER USE Start Date: Req. Date; Ongoing: Volume: Data Disc: SHIP To: CITY OF ORONO 1335 Brown Rd. Orono, MN 55323 Contact: Teri Naab Phone I: 612-473-7357 Doc. Type: 8 1/2 x 11 Type of Service: 16mm roll jacket X cartdge 35mm roll jacket card other FOR PRODUCTION USE ONLY PROJECT DESCRIPTION Job Number: COTNCP Job Name: COUNCIL PACKETS Clerical Study: o FILMING - Planetary 32x CANON* o DATA ENTRY - Bold type in JM o JACKETS - 5 channel o DUPS - 1 Diazo white stripe Duplicates of each: ONE 16mm roll jacket X cartdge 35mm roll jacket card other_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Doc. Propping: Paper clips, folders Titling/Labeling:ORONO (yr filmed) COUNSIL PACKETS 1/3/89 1/1 SAMPLE LABEL (See Attached)_ _ _ ORONO '89 COUNCIL PACKETS^i^^WW Filming Inst: Planetary (32x) Header Up FILM IN ORDER!Disposition Of original Documents: 'Destroyin 30 days: 'jR'eturn to customer:XXX (ASAP)| Pick up/Delivery: CMI - Front Desk On call. w I 10, iW r r‘ RUN D4TE 07/22/ad BATCH 001 PROP AODR OHNER NAME TAXPAYER NAHE/AOOR 30 20-117-23 42 0004 DAK KLINT DOUGLAS KLINT 3545 IVY PUCE HAYZATA HN 55391 HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORHATION SYSTEM PROPERTY OWIERS LIST 36 20-117-23 42 0028 03535 IVY PL T DERNIER A B CLAY-BERNIER THOMAS J BERNIER 6886 PINE BLUFF CT EDEN PRAIRIE MN 55344 REPORT NO. PI435401 PAGE 1 36 20-117-23 42 0029 03525 IVY PL S R THOMPSON A J H THOMPSON STEVEN R A JANICE H THOMPSON 3525 IVY PL HAYZATA MN 55391 K r ( c PROP AODR OAMER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/AOOR PROP AODR OHNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/AOOR PROP AODR OHNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/AOOR 38 20-117-23 42 0032 03509 IVY PL MARLENE DICK / PERSONAL REP THOMAS 0 COX 3509 IVY PUCE HAYZATA MN 55391 38 20-117-23 43 0036 03038 CASCO POINT RD I P BOOTH A HIFE IAN P BOOTH 3038 CASCO PT RD HAYZATA MN 55391 38 20-117-23 43 0039 03034 CASCO POINT RD GARY A BARR GARY A BARR 1637 S E 13TH ST FT UUDEROALE FL 33316 38 20-117-23 43 0001 03030 CASCO POINT RD L R MIGGINS ASH RANSOM URRY R HIGGINS 3030 CASCO PT RD HAYZATA MN 55391 38 20-117-23 43 0037 STATE LAND DEPT IDA VIRGINIA A CAPLES BOX 314 OSSEO MN 55369 38 20-117-23 43 0040 03034 CASCO POINT RD GARY A BARR GARY A BARR 1637 S E 13TH ST FT UUDEROALE FL 33316 38 20-117-23 43 0035 03040 CASCO POINT RD J H MOGAN ETAL JOHN A SUSAN MOGAN 4632 EMERSON AVE S MP13 MN 55409 38 20-117-23 43 0038 GARY A BARR GARY A BARR 1637 S E 13TH ST FT UUDEROALE FL 33316 38 20-117-23 43 0042 03277 CASCO CIR LEE 6EINERT ETAL LEE GEINERT 3277 CASCO LANE HAYZATA MN 55391 1 •38 20-117-23 43 0043 PROP AODR 03277 CASCO CIR is OHNER NAME LEE GEINERT ETAL i TAXPAYER LEE GEINERT NAME/AOOR 3277 CASCO LANE HAYZATA MN 55391 38 20-117-23 43 0044 03287 CASCO CIR DAIU A HALMRAST DANA A HALMRAST 3287 CASCO CIRCLE HAYZATA MN 55391 38 20-117-23 43 0045 03297 CASCO CIR D A M OAS DANIEL 0 A MAOOItU J OAS 3297 CASCO CIRCLE HAYZATA MN 55391 PROP AODR OHNER NAME TAXPAYER NAME/AOOR 38 20-117-23 43 0048 03305 CASCO CIR ECKARD MUENCK A HIFE ECKARD MUENCK 3305 CASCO CIRCLE HAYZATA MN 55391 TOTAL BATCH 001 00016 r o o A PUBLIC ATTENDANCE CITY OF ORONO MiAJtil MEETING DATE 7/ PLEASE FILL OUT THE INFORMATION REQUESTED BELOW FOR OUR CITY RECORDS. NAME (please print)ADDRESS NAME OR NUMBER PRESENT FOR (from agenda) AGENDA FOR COUNCIL MEETING SET FOR HONDAT, JEUT M, lM9t ?*M timl (*)Asterisk items are considered to be routine itess to enacted upon by one motion by the City Council under tte Consent Item* on the agenda. Discussion will be held n^n request. Memos regarding each of the Agenda iteae are . available in the Public Packet which may be obtained Upon • ■ request from the Recrder. ^ ROLL CALL 1. CONSENT AGENDA*'■--m APPROVAL OF MINUTES * 2. Regular Meeting of June 26, 1989 PLANNING COMMISSION REPRESENTATIVE - Jim Hanson PUBLIC COMMENTS - (Limit 5 Minutes Per Person) ZONING ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT ••APPLICANTS** Immediately after the Council has reviewed your application please sign the three (3) original resolution copies. 3. *4. 7. 10. 11. 12. 13. #1316 Gary Barr, 3034 Casco Point Road - Variance - Resolution #1334 Sidney Rebers, Highway 12 and Brown Road North - Final Subdivision/Conditional Use Permit - Resolutions, Covenants, Easements #1405 Thomas Colwell, 2640 North Shore Drive - Preliminary Subdivision - Resolution #1415 Robert/Cheryl Humphrey, 669 Minnetonka Highlands Lane “ Variance - Resolution #1326 Wayzata Country Club, 200 Wayzata Boulevard - Preliminary Subdivision - Resolution #1407 Leopold Hauser, 475 Ferndale Road North - Preliminary Subdivision - Resolution #1418 Orono School District, 685 Old Crystal Bay Road North - Conditional Use Permit - Resolution #1419 J. K. Bowers, 2905 Casco Point Road - Variance - Resolution #1420 Kevin Norwood, 1300 Vine Place - Preliminary Subdivision #1422 David Breitner, 2755 Casco Point Road - Variance - Resolution Accessory Structure Ordinance ENINGEER'S REPORT 14. Sewer/Water Improvement - Highway 12 - Presentation of Bids 15. Highway 12 Well - Authorization for Plans & Specifications MAYOR/CODNCIL REPORT AGENDA FOR COUNCIL KBETTNG SET FOR MONDAY, JULY 10, 1989, 7:00 P.M. CITY ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT 16. County Road 51 Parking 17. Home Occupation License - 2620 Kelly Avenue 10. Orono Lane 19. City Facilities/Navarre Redevelopment Discussion Meeting 20. Financing Review - Sewer/Water Project 21. Assessing Services Review 22. Golf Course Strategic Direction 23. Police Department - Strategy Plan 24. Police Canine Unit - Request for Authorization 25. Lake Minnetonka Conservation District - 1990 Budget 26. Part-time Employment - Building/Zoning Inspector - Tabled * 27. NSP/Wright Hennepin Franchise Agreement 28. Compvjnsation Adjustment - Michael Gaffron 29. 1988 Audit - Summary for Publication 30. Public Discussion/Lift Station #10 - Informational Discussion 31. County Road 116 - Public Review Meeting 32. Bridge Bonding - Resolution 33. Administrator's Information Stubbs Bay Lake Minnetonka Regional Park Lift Station 10/43 Ambulance Response Regional Transit Nominations Summary of Receipts, Disbursements & Balances May Year-to- .ate Electronic Fund Transfers for June Letter of Comments on 1988 Audit Goals/Objectives Status CITY ATTORNEY'S REPORT LICENSES (34*) BILLS (35*) ADJOURNMENT CHMOiMmi MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MBBTIMG JUL HELD JUNE 26, 1989 ATTBNDAHCB 7:00 P.M. CITY CF OMNO The Council met on the above date with the following members present: Mayor Grabek, CounciImembers Nettles, Goetten, Callahan and Peterson. The following represented the City staff: City Administrator Bernhardson, Assistant Planning and Zoning Administrator Gaffron, Public Works Director Gerhardson, City Attorney Representative Whitney, City Engineer Cook and City Recorder Scheffler. CONSENT AGENDA* It was moved by CounciImember Goetten, seconded by Councilmember Peterson, to approve the Consent Agenda. Motion, Ayes«=5, Nays«0, Motion passed. GOVERNMENT FINANCE OFFICERS ASSOCIATION Mr. Fred Christiansen presented the Mayor and the Council with a certificate of achievement for excellence of financial reporting. The certificate of achievement is the highest form of recognition that the Government Finance Officers Association gives. Mayor Grabek asked Finance Director, Thomas Kuehn, to come forward for the presentation. Mr. Christiansen said that on a National level, Minnesota was a leader in the GFOA program and is ranked #6 with regard to the total number of recipients of this award. APPPROVAL OF MINUTES* It was moved by Councilmember Goetten, seconded by Councilmember Peterson, to approve the Minutes of the June 12, 1989 Regular Council Meeting. Motion, Ayes=5, Nays»0, Motion passed. PUBLIC COMMENTS There were no comments from the Public. ZONING ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT: #1326 WAYZATA COUNTRY CLUB 200 NAYZATA BOULEVARD SUBDIVISION-PRELIMINARY PLAT APPROVAL AND #1407 LEOPOLD & HELEN HAUSER 475 NORTH FBRNDALB ROAD SUBDIVISION PRELIMINARY PLAT APPROVAL City Administrator Bernhardson said that this item ani application #1407, Leo Hauser, were linked because of the access issue being resolved by a proposal and compromise or behalf of Mr. Lauer and the Hausers. The proposal would omit the flag lot and the need for another access onto the private road. it would provide Mr. Hauser with a portion of adjacent property northwest of the existing residence and would allow the tree in that area to remain. All three lots would acc#^ss directly onr^^ Norrh Ferndale Road. _ __ _ _ ;,-;^F^-'’:^ MINUTES OF THE ORONO COUNCIL MEETING OP JUNE 26, 1989 ZONING FILES #1326 6 1407-WAYZATA COUNTRY CLUB/BAUSER Assistant Planning and Zoning Administrator Gaffron explained that there were various options available if this proposal were approved. The Hauser application could be combined with the Wayzata Country Club application into one plat. Gaffron said that he had no preference as to how to proceed in this regard, but felt that it may be less complicated to combine the two into one. Gaffron noted that the Kausers prefer to have a separate access onto North Ferndale. Gaffron said that the City would recommend that all three lots be served by the one existing curb cut off of North Ferbdale. Mrs. Helen Hauser said that she had four reasons why they preferred a separate access. She said that shared driveways are a concern from a real estate point of view. Secondly, it is difficult to equally share the responsibility for maintaining the driveway. In addition, there is a sharp dropoff at the point where their property line will be. This would create a steep driveway that would be difficult to exit especially in the winter. Lastly, if the driveway is configured as the City recommends, the Hausers would approach their house from the garage. The Hausers also intend to layout water and sewer lines to the street and felt that the City's recommendation would interfere with such plans. Mr. Hauser said that the City Engineer had looked at the location where they would prefer to have their driveway access and did not feel there would be a safety problem. Assistant Planning and Zoning Administrator Gaffron explained that the City's concern is the additional access location with which traffic on North Ferndale will have to contend. Mr, Downey, who represented the Wayzata Country Club, indicated^hat he and Mr. Lauer were in favor of the revised proposal to access off of North Ferndale. He said that the only question Mr. Lauer had pertained to the required width of the driveway. Gaffron said that was a question yet to be determined; due to the driveway serving three properties, should it be upgraded to a private road? The City's zoning code was inconclusive in this regard. Construction of a cul-de-sac was another possibility. CounciImember Callahan opined that a cul- de-sac did not seem to be appropriate. Counci 1 member Goetten questioned whc*-her the Country Club had any future to do any additional, subdivision of the property adjacent to Mr. Lauer's? Mr. Downey replied tiiat area was the 4th hole and there would be no plans to Si’bdivide that portion of property. Goetten said that she could not see a cul- de-sac. City engineer Cook confirmed the City's position regarding the use of the existing driveway for all three lots. Mayor HI MUTES OP THE ORONO COUNCIL MEETING OF JUNE 26, 1989 ZONING PILES #1326 6 1407-WAYZATA COUNTRY CLUB/HAUSER Grabek asked whether it would be possible for the Hauser's to use their driveway as the City is proposing it to be? Cook said that they (the Hausers) would have to do some work and it may require more tree removal than they preferred to do, but it was workable. The issue of drainage was addressed. Mr. Downey recollected that at the last meeting, Mr. Greig had indicated that he did not want the detention pond at all. He said that the Country Club was looking to the City for direction. City Engineer Cook said that if there is no detention pond, runoff would occur throughout the Chevy Chase neighborhood very rapidly. He said that there were no incidents of flooding that occurred this past Spring, but the water comes very close to the Nelson property and could pose a problem. He said that the pond in the backyard of the Simmons property currently acts as a detention basin. CounciImember Goetten asked Cook whether he anticipated any increase in runoff due to the Lauer subdivision/development? Cook said that he was unsure as to the exact data, but that runoff would increase. Goetten questioned whose responsibility it would be in the future if the City did nothing at this time? Cook said that the City would probably be responsible no matter how it chose to proceed; he recommended that the City Attorney's opinion be sought. Goetten asked whether the Country Club had a shared responsibility? Cook said in the event there was a flooding problem in the future, the City would investigate the problem and solve it. Financing for the solution would probably come from the Country Club, the new subdivision, as well as the benefitting neighbors. Mr. Brooke Nelson explained the history of his drainage problem. He said that he had cured the problem by putting a groove along his property to allow water to run to the front of his properry. He said that prior to Orono putting in the sewer system in that area, the road was lower than his property. He said the road was raised and a lot was created in front of a pond area. He said that the culvert that was put under his driveway by the City was put in wrong . id the water has washed the culvert away. He said he had attempL.ed to put in a new driveway last fall but the contractor could not guarantee that it would not wash away again. He said his requests to the City to repair the culvert nave not been addressed. Mayor Grabek asked Mr. Nelson whether he would prefer to have the situation left as it is, or whether he would like to have the retention basin? Mr. Nelson said that he would like the City to fix the culvert running under his driveway. Public Works Director Gerhardson said that he would re-examine the culvert. CounciImember Callahan said that in his opinion, the existing drainage problem had very little to do with the Country Club’s application for subdivision. He suggested that the City follow the normal procedure for storm sewer installation and allow the .^MUTBS OP THE OROMO COUNCIL MBBTIliG OP JUNE 26 r 1989 ZONING PILES «1 , % 6 I1407-1IETZATA COUNTRT CLUB/BADSER subdivision application to proceed on its own merits. Mrs. Hauser stated tha^ the subdivision of the Country Club should be a separate issue, especially in respect to the drainage increase. City Administrator Bernhardson noted that drainage from the Country Club would join with the drainage from the Hauser property and the combination would cause an increase in existing drainage problem. Gaffron confirmed what the City Engineer had determined. Mayor Grabek said the City had to address the concerns of the neighbors regarding drainage, but also had to allow the Country Club's subdivision to proceed. He suggested that the detention pond be omitted at this time and allow drainage to flow naturally. He directed staff to do a site inspection of the problem with Mr. Nelson's culvert. Councilerober Goetten said that she would be willing to go ahead with the subdivision provided that the City further investigate the drainage problems and report back. City Administrator Bernhardson said that the Council would only be conceptually approving the subdivision at this time. He suggested that between the time of this evening's meeting and the final approval, that staff get the elevations of the Nelson culvert and the drainage coming into it. He said that the staff would bring that information back before the Council along with a recommendation as to the detention pond on the Lauer property. Mr. Greig expressed his concerns about th 4" inch pipe that is proposed to be placed in the bottom of the detention pond clogging. He said that the detention pond would be right against his back property line. He also objected to the berm being placed adjacent to his property. CounciImember Callahan asked Mr. Greig whether or not he preferred to have the detention pond? Mr. Greig said that he personally did not want the pond. Callahan asked the same question of Mr. Nelson. Mr. Nelson indicated that he preferred to have the pond. Mayor Grabek reverted back to the issue of the curb cuts for the Lauer/Hauser subdivision? He asked Gaffron how many curb cuts currently existed along that road and how many may be forthcoming? Gaffron pointed out the existing curb cuts on the plat map. It was moved by Mayor Grab«k, seconded by CounciImember Nettles, to accept on a conceptual basis the proposed subdivision of the Hausers and allow access for the Lauer property and the existing house off of the same curb cut. Access for the new house in the Hauser subdivision will be allowed an additional curb cut. The subdivision for the Country Club may move ahead for resolution with a recommendation from the City Engineer as to MIVUTBS OF THE ORONO COUNCIL MEETING OF JUNE 26, 1989 ZONING FILES #1326 6 #1407-fiAYZATA COUNTRY CLUB/HAOSER what should be done with the drainage situation. Staff is directed to address the problems expressed by Mr. Nelson regarding his culvert. Mayor Grabek suggested that the two subdivisions be combined into one plat. Mr. Downey asked about the need for the outlet along the northern border of the property. The Council agreed that it was important that the outlet be designated at this time. Mr. Greig asked where the responsibility would lie should he suffer water damage due to this subdivision? City Attorney Representative Whitney replied that the City would probably be responsible, but it *ou3d be necessary to research that issue further. Mayor Grabek asked that the City Attorney provide a legal opinion in that regard at the time this application is brought back for final approval. Motion, Ayes*5, Nays®0, Motion passed. #1391 TERRY SADLER 1395 BALDUR PARK ROAD DENIAL RESOLUTION #2649* It was moved by Counci 1 member Gcetten, seconded by CounciImember Peterson, to adopt Resolution #26^9, denying variances and a conditional use permit for construction of retaining walls and placement of fill in the 0-75' lakeshore setback zone at 1396 Baldur Park Road. Motion, Ayes^^S, Nays-0, Motion passed. #1410 JULIE PRINEAS 1980 HERITAGE DRIVE VARIANCE RESOLUTION #2650 Ms. Carol Laquay was present on behalf of the applicants. Mr. and Mrs. Robert Stierna were present, as v»as Mr. NelsOHr the adjacent property owner to the north of the Prineas lot. City Administrator Bernhardson explained testing had been done to determira whether there site location to the rear of the property. An was found and this will allow the driveway to middle of the "neck" portion of the lot. There for a shared driveway with the Stiernas. that the septic was an alternate acceptable site be placed in the would be no need Assistant Planning and Zoning Administrator Gaffron noted that as a result of this newly defined a•ternate septic site, the building envelope would also be enlarged. Mr. Stierna said that he had met with Mr. Prineas to discuss a proposal that would be mutually beneficial, Mr. Stierna said that it was agreed that the driveway would be placed along the north side of the property and then would swing down within 30* of the lot edge. He said that a legal document was drafted by a lawyer hired by the applicants depicting that arrangement. He said that he and his wife had signed the agreement, but shortly before this evening's meeting he received a call from Mrs. Prineas saying that they would not sign the agreement. HINDTBS OP THE ORONO COUNCIL MEBTING OP JUNK 2€« Iftt ZONING PILE #1410~PRINEAS CONTINUED Ms. Laquay explained that the reason Mr. and Mrs. Prlnaas did not wish to execute the agreement was because they did not feel that the revised driveway location would be fair to the Nelsons. They wanted to get approval from the Nelsons before they signed the agreement. They tried to contact the Nelsons^ but could not reach them because they were out of town on vacation. Mr. Nelson felt that it was inappropriate to place any restrictions on the future owners of the Prineas* property. He felt t^>at should it be necessary to place any restrictions regard! the location of the driveway that it would be better to have it located in the center of the property. Mayor Grabek said that he felt inclined to table this matter. Ms. Laquay indicated that the Prineases would prefer to have the matter resolved without further delay. She said that there were no specific code requirements by the City pertaining to the location of the driveway and that if they so chose, there should be no reason why the driveway could not abut the Stierna's property they way the Stierna driveway abutted their property. Ms. Laquay said that the applicants were only trying to make both adjacent property owners happy. It was moved by CounciImember Callahan, seconded by CounciImember Goetten, to approve the lot width variance. CounciImember Nettles moved to amend CounciImember Callahan’s motion to include a specific driveway location as a condition of variance approval. CounciImember Callahan did not wish to amend his original motion and CounciImember Goetten indicated that she would not second CounciImember Nettles amendment. Motion, Ayes*5, Nays**0, Motirn passed. #1423 EDWARD BROWN 355 STUBBS BAY ROAD VARIANCE RESOLUTION #2651 Mr. and Mrs. Brown were present for this matter. City Administrator Bernhardson informed the Council and Mayor Grabek that the Browns were seeking approval of a variance to allow an accessory building to be located nearer the front lot line than the principal building. It was moved by Councilmember Callahan, seconded by CounciImember Goetten, to approve the variance to allow an accessory structure to be located near the lot line than the principal structure. Motion, Ayes=5, Nays^-0, Motion passed. N1V0TB8 OP THE OROMO COQHCIL MBBT^VG OP JOHB 26 r 1989 MAYOR'S/GOOKIL REPORT: RB6IOIIAL TRAM8PORTATION BOARD MOMIIIATION This was an Informational item. CITY ADMIMISTRATOR'S REPORT: NAVARRE REDEVELOPMENT City Administrator Bernhardson inquired as to whether the Council will want the public to have a further opportunity to see the presentation at the upcoming joint meeting on the Navarre Redevelopment. The Mayor and Council agreed that the public should be present. It was moved by Mayor Grabek, seconded by CounciImember NettleSr to direct staff to set another preseniation of the Navarre redevelopment information together with setting a time for further discussions with Planning Commission on the direction for Navarre. Motion, Ayes»5, Nays»0, Motion passed. MATER CONSERVATION REGULATIONS It was moved by CoonciImember Callahan, seconded by CounciImember Goetten, to table this item until the August 14, 1989 Council meeting. Motion, Ayes-5, Nays*0, Motion passed. 1990 PRELIMINARY BUDGET GUIDELINES This was an informational item. 1968 AUDIT PRESENTATION It was moved by Mayor Grabek, seconded by CounciImember Goetten, to table this item until the July 10, 1989 Council meeting. Me 'on, Ayes«5, Nays»0, Motion passed. SET NOODHILL PUBLIC HEARING DATE* It was moved by CounciImember Goetten, seconded by Counci Imember Peterson, to set August 28, 1989 at 7:00 p.m. as the assessment hearing date for Woodhill Avenue. Motion, Ayes*5, Nays*0, Motion passed. HIGBNAY 12 1991 SAPBTY IMPROVEMENT SET PUBLIC INPORMATION MEETING* It was moved by qounci1member Goetten, seconded by Counci Imember Peterson, to set July 24, 1989 at 7:00 p.m. as the time and date for a public information meeting regarding proposed improvements to Highway 12. Motion, Ayes«5, Nays-0, Motion passed. CITY FACILITIES TOUR-JUNE 29, 1989* This being an informational item, there was no motion. NIHIITBS OP TBB OROM) COOHCIL NBBTIW6 OP JOMB 26* 1989 PBRPORMMCB RBVIW-RMIDY 0*BRIER MD BARRY RATHBUII* It was moved by CounciImember Goetten, seconded by Councilmember Petersonr to adjust Barry Rathbun’s hourly rate to $11.23 per hour effective July 13, which is step III of the City of Orono Compensation Plan and to review salary and performance in 6 months. Motion, Ayes*5, Nays«0, Motion passed. It was moved by CounciImember Goetten, seconded by CounciImember Peterson, to adjust Randy o'Brian's hourly rate to $11.23 per hour effective July 13, which is step III of the City of Orono Compensation Plan and to review salary and performance in 6 months. Motion, Ayes-5, Nays-O, Motion passed. PBRFORMARCB RBVIBM-LADRIB 8CHBPPLBR* It was moved by CounciImember Goetten, seconded by CounciImember Peterson, to increase Laurie Scheffler's salary to $9.972/hr (Level 4-Step II) effective July 11, 1989. Motion, Ayes*5, Nays-O, Motion passed. UQOOR ORDIMAKB AMBRDMBRT «69, 2MD SRRIBS* It was moved by CounciImember Goetten seconded by CounciImember Peterson, that the proposed Ordinance No. 69, 2nd Series amending the liquor ordinance be adopted. Motion, Ayes»5, Nays-O, Motion passed. ADMINISTRATOR'S IHPORMATION* It was moved by CounciImember Goetten, seconded by CounciImember Peterson, to accept he City Administrator's Information regarding: Recycling Progr..^: County Road 1x6 Update; Waterfowl Relocatit . f Shoreland Regulations; Highwood Storm Sewer; County Road 51 Parking; Lake Minnetonka Regional Park; Minnesota Safety Council; I^CD Report. Motion, Ayes«5, Nays-O, Motion passed. CITY ATTORHBY'S RBPORT: There was no report from City Attorney Representative Whitney. LICBNSBS* It was moved by CounciImember Goetten, seconded by CounciImember Peterson, to approve the following licenses: Set-Up Permit Renewal: Fire Works Permit: Navarra Lanes 3435 Shoreline Drive Roger Froiraelt 2805 Casco Point Road Ron Potas 2190 Shadywood Road Motion, Ayes-5, Nays-O, Notion passed. BILLS* I* was moved by CounciImember Goetten, seconded by MINUTES OF THE ORONO COUNCIL MEETING OF JUNE 26, 1989 Councilmember Peterson, to approve payment of the All Funds Accounts* Motion, Ayes=5, Nays**0, Motion passed. ADJOURNMENT 8:30 P*M. It was moved by Councilmember Peterson, seconded by Councilmember Callahan, to adjourn the Regular Council Meeting at 8:30 p.m. Motion, Ayes**5, Nays=0, Motion passed. ATTEST: Dorothy M, Ha 1lin. City Clerk James R. Grabek, Mayor Mayor Grabek & Orono Council Members City Administrator Bernhardson Michael P, Gaffron, Asst Planning & Zoning Administrator jun« 29, 1989 COUNCIL MEET1N6 JULIO 1989 cmr OF ORONO Froaix Dates Subject: #1316 Gary Barr, 303^ Casco Point Road - Variance - Revised Proposal - Resolution Soning District - LR-IC, Single family, 1/2 acre Application - Revised proposal for construction of detached garage. Rec[ulres front setback variance. List of Exhibits Exhibit A Exhibit B Exhibit C Exhibit D Planring Commission Action Notice of 6/22/89 Letter from Neighbor Ian Booth 6/16/89 Proposed Resolution Memo & Exhibits of 6/14/89 Discussion - Please review the memo and exhibits of June 14, 1989. Mr. Barr originally proposed to construct a garage exceeding the 1,000 square foot floor area maximum, adjacent to another existing detached garage. Last fall. Council referred this back to Planning Commission pending receipt of a revised proposal needing less variances. Applicant is now proposing to construct a detached garage of exactly 1,000 square feet in floor area, with no storage space above. He has proposed a location at the end of the existing driveway 15' from the existing detached gara^^e, which allows this new garage to be developed without exceeding the 25% hardcover limit. The variance needed with this current request is a front setback variance. Since "Maple Avenue" dead-ends at this property, we would view the right-of-way similarly to a cul-de- sac, and would require a 30* front setback from the pro:)erty line abutting the right-of-way. The proposed garage will i>e 15' from the right-of-way. Technically, we are also looking at a variance to allow the garage to be closer to the front lot line than the existing house. The configuration of the lot in relationship to the lake and tru road muddles this issue, however, staff feels that technically this variance is required. Planning Commission at their June 19th meeting, recommended 5-0 to approve this proposal, based on the following conditions: 1. Approval of front setback variances. Zoning File #1316 June 29, 1989 Page 2 of 2 shall not exceed 1,000 square feet total floor 3. Removal of hardcover as proposed by applicant to bring final 75-250* hardcover below 25%. Commission noted the hardships of topography, location of existing trees, and the fact that the location of the existing driveway and garage make this plan efficient in using the existing hardcover areas. Planning Commission also noted that they view the garage setback variances as a separate issue from the guest house use, but that a guest house conditional use permit application should be submitted as soon as possible to resolve that issue. Recall that the neighboring property owner, Ian Booth, had expressed concern regarding past apparent rental use of this property. There is a dwelling unit above the existing detached garage that was allowed to be constructed in the 1970s, apparently when the garage was constructed just prior to construction of the house, and the previous owners had lived in the garage temporarily. Mr. Booth has indicated that he feels the past apparent rental use and guest house use of the dwelling unit over the garage is not appropriate for the neighborhood. Staff Recommendation - Staff recommends approval of the setback variances to allow construction of the new detached garage, subject to the conditions recommended by the Planning Commission. A resolution for approval is attached. Regarding Mr. Booth's concerns, Council may wish to set a deadline for Mr. Barr to make application for continued guest house use of the ^dwelling unit above the existing garage. Also, as part of the review of a guest house conditional use permit applicatioi, staff will inspect the existing house to verify whether separate rental units exist. TY OF OROHO 0. Box 66 rystal Bay, NN 55323 SOfmiG FILE HO. . J.316 HOTICE OF PLANHIH6 COMMISSIOIY ACTIOH 473-7357 Date of Notice: 6/22/89 TO:Gary Barr 3034 Casco Point Road COPIES TO: Wayzata, MN 55391 • TYPE OF APPLICATION: Variance DATE OF MEETING: 6/19/89 VOTE: 5 For 0 Against Planning CoHBission reconmnds the following: Approval subject to conditions noted below NOTES AND SPECIAL CONDITIONS: 1. Approval of front setback variances. Garage shall not exceed 1,000 s.f. floor area.2. 3. 4. O Removal of hardcover as proposed to bring final 75-250* hardcover below 25%. Hardships noted: a) topography; b) location of existing trees; c) location of existing driveway and garage and need to efficiently make use of existing hardcover areas. Also, Planning Commission specifically noted that they view the garage variances as a separate ' from the guest house use; also noted that guest house conditional use permit application should be submitted as soon as possible to resolve that issue. Applicant's next scheduled meeting is confirmed as: City Council Monday, July 10, 1989; meeting starts at 7: 3 p.m. If you desire certified copies of the official Planning Commission minutes, they are available from the City Recorder after review and app;roval by the Planning Commission. O •n o- *2 H itj Z Z 5 5 o* o < </l K< < U N I: c\ ^ J> fl‘J U1' ^ *4 ‘iii t-l s ilT TSlI^1|3'1^?-r <4;if 4 il£i- i ii^s ^ 'll'B4:| s ’-Fjif IH -------F L rf ? 45 'I f i ^ c5,§- <J^ I %1 (5 ;? re-y ui 4a-I h o v_/' t.- -•CITY OF ORONO City of OROIVO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. _____________ O A RESOLUTION GRANTING VARIANCES TO MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 10.25, SUBDIVISION 6 (B) AND SECTION 10.03, SUBDIVISION 9 (D) PILE #1316 WHEREAS, Gary Barr (hereinafter "the applicant") is the owner of the property located at 3034 Casco Point Road within the City of Orono (hereinafter "City") and legally described as follows: Exhibit A, attached (hereinafter "the property"); and WHEREAS, the applicant has applied to the City for variances to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.25, Subdivision 6 (B) and Section 10.03, Subdivision 9 (D) to permit the construction of a detached garage located 15* from the front lot line where a 30* setbac)c is normally required, and located nearer the front lot line than the principal building on the property where no accessory structures are normally allowed. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono, Minnesota; FINDINGS 1. This application was reviewed as Zoning File #1316. 2. The property is located in the LR-lC Single Family LaJceshore Residential Zoning District. 3. The Orono Planning Commission reviewed this application on June 19, 1989, and recommended approval of the proposed variances based upon the following findings; A) The proposed garage location ma)ces use of existing driveway areas and ma)ces the move efficient use of existing hardcover areas, which result in no need for hardcover variances. B) The proposed garage results in the need to remove only a limited number of existing trees, where other locations on the property would cause more tree removal. Page 1 of 4 CITY OF QRONO City of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. ________________ C) The topography of the lot is such that this location requires only minor grading of the lakeshore property to accommodate the garage. D) The proposed garage is adequately screened from the street and from neighboring properties by existing vegetation. Furthermore, being at the end of a dead end street, the garage will have little impact on the neighboring properties. 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 variances on the health, safety and welfare of the community. 5. The City Council finds that the conditions existing on this property are peculiar to it and do not apply generally to other property in this zoning district; that granting the variances would not adversely affect traffic conditions, light, air nor pose a fire hazard or other danger to neighboring property; would not merely serve as a convenit ..ce 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, ORDER AND CONDITIONS Based upon one or more of the findings noted above, the Orono City Council hereby grants a variance to the Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.25, Subdivision 6 (B) and Section 10.03, Subdivision 9 (D) to permit the construction of a detached garage located nearer the front lot line than the principal building on the property, and located 15' from the front lot line where a 30' front setback is normally required, subject to the following conditions: 1. The garage shall not ex ed 1,000 square feet of total flooi *ea. 2. Applicant shall remove hardcover as proposed on the attached approved site plan to bring the final 75-250' hardcover below the 25% maximum. Page 2 of 4 o CITY OF QRONa City of OROINO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. O 3. Authorities granted by this resolution run with the property not with the applicant, but are permissive only and must be exercised by application for a building permit within one year of the date of Council approval, or this variance will expire on that date (July 10, 1990). 4. Violation of or non-compliance with any of the terms and conditions of this variance shall constitute a violation of the zoning code, shall automatically terminate any authority granted herein, and shall be punishable as a misdemeanor. 5. The undersigned applicant has read, understood and hereby agrees to the terms of this resolution and on behalf of himself, his heirs, successors and assigns, hereby agrees to the recording of this resolution in the chain of title of the property. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota at a regular meeting held on the 10th day of July, 1989. ATTEST; Dorothy M. Hallin, City Clerk Jcimes R. Grabek, Mayor Property Owner(s) STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) ss. The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this 10th day of July, 1989, by James R. Grabek & Dorothy M. Hallin, Mayor & City Clerk of the City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City. Notary Public My Commission Expires Page 3 of 4 City of ORONO CITY OF QRONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO._________________ STATE OF MINNESOTA )) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) 198_ On this_ _ _ _ _ _ __ , v-r- wfthin^and for said county, personallybefore me a Notary Public within ^ known to me be appeared _____________who executed the foregoing his (their) free act and deed. notary public my COMMISSION EXFIRES STATE OF MINNESOTA ) COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) ) ss. r 198__, before me On this -- - -. .-r- said <"ounty^ personally appeareda Notary public withTn and for said ‘'^o me to be the I ■■■■ —-——A . « _ £ ^ ^ ^ ^ t r\ n T ^ t # a Notary t'uo±x^ - - known to me w..- (their) free act and deed. notary PUBLIC my COMMISSION expires ?■V.'. 7. TO: Mayor Grabek and Council Planning Commission Chairman Kelley Planning Commission Members City Administrator Bernhardson FROM: Michael Gaffron, Asst. Planning & Zoning Administrator DATE: June 14, 1989 SUBJ: #1316 Gary Barr, 3034 Casco Point Road Variance/Referral from City Council Zoning District - LR-IC, Single Family, 1/2 Acre Application - Revised proposal for construction Requires front setback variance. of detached garage, List of Exhibits - Exhibit A Exhibit B Exhibit Exhibit Exhibit Exhibit Revised Site Plan Proposal Revised Hardcover Calculations Staff Letter to Applicant 4/27/89 Notice of Council Action 9/21/88 Council Minutes 9/12/88 Memo and Exhibits of 9/8/88 Pertinent Facts - 1. Last September, the Council reviewed applicant’s original request, and suggested that revisions to the site plan be made. The matter was referred back to the Planning Commission for further review of the revised plan as soon as one was submitted. Applicant was out of State this winter, and upon his return this spring contacted staff with the proposal attached as Exhibit A. 2. The proposed garage location has been moved to a site appro'^imate ly level with the existing detached garage. Applicant's intent, you may recall, is to provide storage for his classic cars on his property. 3. The original application was requesting variances lor 75-250' hardcover, structure-to-structure setback, and accessory structure floor area. Applicant has revised his proposal so that the garage will be no more than 1,000 s.f. in footprint area and will not have defined floor area above it (42 ‘ x 24' = 1,008 s.f.; applicant will reduce to 41'8" width in order to meet the 1,000 s.f. limitation). Additionally, the new proposal leaves a 15' setback to the existing garage, and applicant also proposes to remove significant areas of existing hardcover so that hardcover in the 75-250' zone will be at 24.51% (see Exhibit A). 4. The current proposal does require a variance to the front setback. This is an oddly configured lot, and staff has determined that although it is a lakeshore lot, a 30' front setback would be required from all lot lines abutting the right- of-way of "Maple Avenue". The proposed garage is 15' from the front lot line. Additionally, one could argue that the garage is between the house and the front lot line, and requires a variance for that. (On the other hand, codes do technically allow a garage to be 10' from a street lot line for lakeshore lots, see code section 10.03, subd. 9d attached). Staff's interpretation is that a variance is needed for this garage configuration. 5. The current proposal is an attempt by the applicant to minimize the necessity for cutting trees, while also minimizing new hardcover. Since a portion of Maple Avenue was recently vacated, it is unlikely that the remaining public portion of Maple Avenue will be significantly upgraded, henct the 15* setback to the right-of-way will continue to appear as a setback of nearly 50' from the actual travelled driveway. Also, during the summer, the garage will be fairly well screened by existing vegetation. The visual impact of this garage in the neighborhood would seem to be minimal. 6. Note that lot coverage by buildings with this proposal will be less than 10%, and total square footage of accessory building footprints will be about 1750 s.f., in both respects meeting the accessory structure development standards recently recommended by the Planning Commission for adoption by the Council. 7. The applicant has indicated he will be applying for the guesthouse conditional use permit to allow continued guesthouse use of the space above the garage. Applicant has requested that Planning Commission separate the issue of the existing guesthouse unit from the proposed detached garage va‘iances, in order that he can start the garage construction as soon as possible. Applicant is aware that should the guesthouse conditional use permit not be granted, plumbing would have to be removed from that structure. Discussion - In reviewing the site, the current proposal is clearly more appropriate from a hardcover standpoint than the original proposed garage uphill from the existing garage. The current proposal allows much of the existing hardcover to be removed and makes more efficient use of the existing driveway areas. The size of the lot is such that the imoact of this additional garage spaje does not cause hardcover excesses, nor does it exceed the proposed standards under consideration for accessory structures. Staff Recommendation - Staff would recommend approval of the proposed garage J "\-,'-s location and the front setback variance associated with that location, noting the unique configuration of the lot in relation to roadways, as well as the topography. Further, staff agraaa with applicant that the issue of the second dwelling unit above the existing detached garage, ^ a separate issue from the variances for this garage. Whether or not the guesthouse use is ultimately granted, does not change the physical hardships Inherent in this unique lot, nor does it change the applicant's need for additional garage space. (Note that the only neighboring property owner who had expressed interest in this application, Mr. Ian Booth of 3038 Casco Point Road, has been renotified that this item is on this agenda. Mr. Boo.h's concern had to do mainly with the "rental** use of the property. Mr. Barr has indicated that the space above the garage is not rented out and has been occupied only by his relatives for providing some degree of security to the property while applicant is away.) I L_ V. ____j. T^LtuiC /S^' '• " <24/«a •• '• fS?' y \j I Sfli e»f: a»/t4C.C 7b QL ffuT CftA> 04to««i/tt 7Ti AjectU4»i7 . 8Cn«*eC/o 6^<i4fc£-i T» 8C C/r-/t ' 4uttC uOfT-Att^ <./-v>C S*.~<Sa<-kJ‘ K^yyX yW -y Re.j^6«i«MU r» c«AA4t (* 3CACJir»^ llH/^« CMA»C ,1 &.f4.A4TtC Aio«t4 uSMl«i> 2vo >*1 ^ •i'f«UtA*r Oc««-»<Tb^ OAi^Cu'A'f AifA/ 6«AA4£ * / / if ,AC>'' / ✓'■ " ^ i/ \ \t' N .• '•- S aV\‘ /^V ;' 'V.%w my tw, jym 'c \ iV '.•t.)..'u.11' Tl.'V* ,4 ;h'l ‘s V"''iV‘ i /!,?'.•’ 1 ‘V'jli d y I ^ %y ,v ')■. •»* t ■ •' X. iJri- ♦•' •n/. I V ^\V m jt/ •' j.^♦>7*V ,r ^/P. '' y /./■ \y I liri n|iy | iM I I f V j«; ,1 I i II'' 'inil f '»• • ''' liriil nl inn nf .1 niM v^v luiiiiul.ii If’*; (OVF . l(K.llii*n li.ir firovf'r I l•f''7*^lI -,lifiw nny ollK’r iiii|n-nv»'mfiil •; (»i iiipiil.s. nf ,1 *;iM v^Y r ini ^ ill irn t > I II »|nr»^Mr \ ^ I t ’zjuT y/*. k^^cAr-s- ZILT *- Z-V^ roo =■ 2.U^C,t,S~ t ei^sa^c, AtoAtxuaue/^ <S,P^Uk<r9 '!, B A B • O Hi -/ 4'-'iiL»'- brCK. l/^ooi> CrttPs Ov/ot. jSuA^irof' 6AA- (28 - ''' (>?C/S'/z. f/.s-xnx 8^<2.S' . 3ox i.r X 2-0^2. / 3 ^ r?/z r^/^/2. *} ^ 7y/t. •B>22y2^ ^0 rix>/'2. 2-1 !/i^ ?t-.z xHH tfS^ /o-> 2. y/y.V /V7 3y./ y ZI.9 7V7 ? ^C..X vuf /vr 1 ;r y ■?/or J (. X 3.S'h ~) HAS 8x&4»y f'3^2*.2*y ,>J lUy-IZ, ■5.ISOrO 2,5X5 7 Sic:-?ro vs- 2o I ^OT> oir 200 /// yo /og e>«> I.O0 /VT ,cn®M ‘ M:i|-I r /7 /S-/t w C^^orC.An^tfA oF«6a,«i- P-L«POirt^^ <iff yie^Ve-fi uy/’AAtrte. 2,r>io "2 ? ^ •2£> 7 ,-?£lH'0 vC 'TZrrc.i^ f-fC,1'7 ‘t'?/ yl. ■7’'" ; ^,i4,s-=/i^Xyr / tey/^^Ai g. V, o y"'’" - - yi</(. it, =2i,ay. T/<»W; W,-W a-no,4 w, Rftrvs-ou^ ^ r ^ . . .. A ^ f ~i‘‘ ysr /6oO ^/yc.-^SO -•?,S-^/Ooo * 72^1 - 2.7.3-;^ ^ ill ii! S^^TH ^<A H>|MC»S .,J UiHiciA 'fl>b/rusN4rc. H<?.. P^n.^ot<r f4rrjo«CN ^u/cfc./uas'^ Pt>lM ,a ; -y,t^(^ -7sT)-7r+£-// -f-/i)(50 = 7fii2_ C ■ 7/ VC - 7i'Z)-75- ^ 4 S7 /OOO - ^‘^rs -■?<=>.& y. 1 CITY Qi- aRarvio CnTarOMMTO Post OfAc* Bqk I On the North Shore of Luke Mintmtarnkm April 27, 19B9 Gary Barr 3034 Casco Point Road Wayzata, NN 55391 Re: Application #1316 Dear Mr. Barr: Per our phone conversation of April 26th, I am anclosing the following informal*-** •*: 1. Conditioiwi use permit application for continuation of existing guest house use above garage. 2. Notice of Council action dated September 21, 1988. 3. Minutes of Orono Council meeting of September 12, 1988. 4. Letter from Clint Gables dated September 9, 1988. 5. September 8, 1988 staff memo and exhibits. The conditional use permit application for the existing guest house use must be in this office by May 26th, 1989 in order that a public hearing be scheduled for the June 19th Planning Commission meeting. This is the earliest scheduling that is feasible for this application. The fee is $100.00. The guest house conditional use standards are included with the September 21, 1988 Notice of Council Action. Regarding the proposed garage/storage space, when we last discussed this at the City Council level, your intent apparently was to construct a 26’x30' (780 s.f.) garage with additional floor space above it. You also suggested that such a structure might be placed on the property meeting the required 10* setbacks from side and rear lot line and from adjacent buildings. In order for the Planning Commission to review this proposal, you must provide a scaled site plan (use a copy of the survey) showing the exact proposed location of the structure. Also show the proposed driveway and other hardcover, to scale. BUILDING a ZONING - 47J 7357 administration a finance - 473 7358 PUBLICWORK'; - 473-735‘» Gary Barr, 3034 Casco Point Road April 21, 1989 Page 2 of 2 This information for the proposed garage must be received in this office by May 8th to be reviewed by the Planning Commission at their May 15th meeting. The deadline for the June 19th meeting would be June 12th. Please contact me when you are back in town if you have any questions regarding this information. Sincerely, Michael P. Gaff^n, Asst Planning & Zoning Administrator MPG/tln Enclosures ,:"v. cm W OROHO Box 66 CrystxX Bay, NN 55323 473-7357 Gary Barr 3034 Casco Point Road Ifaysata, NN 55391 COPIES:Clint Gablas ABA, Inc. 3600 Shoreline Drive Wayzata, MN 55391 TOm or JkPFLICATI(»: nm Of MBTINGs 9-12-88 OOmCIL BCnOH - MOTIOH: Variance VOTE: 5 For 0 Against Based on your proposal to revise this application to reduce the necessary variances. Council referred your request back to the Planning Commission for further consideration. At least 7 days prior to the Planning Commission meeting you wish to attend, you must submit a revised proposal to staff for review. A definite plan showing the proposed sue and location of the garage is required in order for Planning comnission to make a further recommendation. Deadline date for submittal for the October 3rd Planning Commission ia*Octol^r lOth*”*^^ Planning Commission meeting Please contact Mike Gaffron at 473-73f' if you have any questions.|1 Additionally, as noted by the Council, you must file a Conditional Use Permit application for continued use of the above-garage apartme ’^t as a guest house" Rental use of that apartn'ent is prohibited and will not likely be approved. See the attached "guest house" standards. desire certified copies of the official Council minutes, they are available from the City Recorder or City Clerk after review and approval by the City Council. spiap* . ■ .' fhm ■fvvi noi #•1^0 rmrn pmummd. *V.»..a ,! .'V Vl;4? itesP’ in** •2«»»*-^^-..«:, m-Panor Bo»eoi«Niw^i,.Association. gf“ ; City Adiainistrator BernhardsonCo ^applicant was seeking a variance to con-rtruct' ■ ,^, |or Cou&trysi<^ Drive that exceed the 3 1/2*^ height^*i'' Pile City and Romeowner ’a Association previojiiy dl laaue of signage on the monuments and deteririaed that there’^%oiil V.h‘v"' ff: Hr. Mill«r Mported that the Homeovnar'a Aseociation had ^,P*«P**«* SOB* elevations and drawings of what they were sa propeaiiif# The Association had no plans to Inplude any sign»ge -for the monuments and had no problem, adhering to the City*i®^ ^?vdeter«inetion. '-■ ■' ' M«. Miller m: also addressed ti 'Situation in vo I viSg-. undesireable behavior on hehali oi oac ;f the Aasqciatioai; mestbere* During a Planning Commisislon Meeting, ins person lade ruoe coimr^nts pertaining to the PXanni.ng Commission. Miller stated ®hat this person wi? out of line and ha extended an apology on behalf of this in.Uvidnai. CounciImember Goetter! thiutked Mr. Miller for his apolcgy a; <i statfiJ that sho had been seated directly in front of the indivi-iu.o. CouaciImo^ber Callelian reiterated Counci I member Goetten ’s c^^iient'S.'4, It was moved by Councilmember Goetten^ seconded by Councilmember Peterson, to adopt Resolution #2493. Motion, Av»««5V“'RSl7s*<L<^ Motion passed. ^ X- ■m \#1316 SftKX BAKR \ 3034 CASCO POINT HOAD --^nURXAMCX ' y 't ."i:; is.vT-;. present for th.is /City Administrator Bernhuxdson explained that the applicant MINUTES OF REGULAK ORONO COUNCIL MEETING SEPTEMBER 12, 1988 ZONING FILE #1316-BARR CONTINUED was seeking variances for har'^cover, structure to structure setback and accessory structure floor area. The Planning Commission recommended denial of this application for the construction of a garage. Since that time, the applicant had proposed a revised plan which the City Zoning Staff had not received or reviewed as of the date of this Council Meeting, ternhardson asked Assistant Planning and Zoning Administrator Gdffron if that was still the case. Assistant Planning and Zoning Administrator Gaffron replied that he had not received any concrete revised proposals. Originally the applicant was proposing to use a common wall with an existing garage to construct an additional garage. This woulc create an extremely large accessory structure. There were alsc two alternate plans presented which would involve building the additional detached garage 5'to 10' from the existing garage. The existing garage has a 2nd story, as would the proposed garage. The area above the proposed garage would be used as a workshop area. Gaffron referred to a letter that was received from the applicant's builder, Mr. Clint Gables, wherein he mentioned that Mr. Barr would agree to reduce the size of the proposed garage so there would be no need for a variance for floor area. However, the applicant would still require a variance for hardcover. Mr. Barr explained that he was now proposing a garage approximately 26* x 30*. I!e reiterated his desire to have the extra area above the garage for a shop area. Mayor Grabek inquired as to the current use of the area above the existing garage. Mr. Barr replied that his stepbrother lives in that area and watches the property. Mr. Barr's occupation as an airline pilot causes him to be away extensively. In addition, Mr. Barr resides in Florida during the winter months. CounciImember Goetten asked whether Mr. Barr's stepbrother rented the area above the garage. Mr. Barr responded affirmatively. Goetten informed him that he would need a conditional use permit to allow him to rent that space. Bernhardson added that a variance would probably be required whether the area is rented or not. m Mr. Barr restated that his stepbrother was a security measure, in addition to a mechanic. Mr. Barr was requesting the garage for the purpose of storing classic cars that he collected. He said that Florida was not conducive to maintaining old cars because of the excessive salt in the air. Mayor Grabek suggested to applicant that he put together more information about his re' ised plan and come before the Council again. Mr. Barr asked about the need for a variance if he were reducing the amount of hardcover. Gaffron stated that if the total hardcover percent could be reduced below 25%, a hardcover variance would not be required. CounciImember Goetten inquired as to why applicant decided not to attach the proposed MimiTBS OF RB6DLAR ORONO CODNCII. NEBTIWS m lOaiBB PIU Iiaic-BARR COHTIROBD garage to the existing garage. Nr. existing garage is nearly 1,000 s.f. to it would put him over the maxiauai 1*000 s.f* flMf requirement. He preferred to construct the additlOMl ftMf^ this fashion because it would be the least obtrusiw^. Barr sxplsiMi;^lMp-%^ Attaching snotiMIt itiiilWMii Counci 1 member Callahan stated that he would bs ineXinsd to agree with the Planning Commission's recommendation for donial* Be can see no hardship in this matter. The applicant's lot is very limited. If Nr. Barr made revisions to his plan that would not requiie variances, that would be fine. However, he would not approve any other plan. CounciImember Peterson asked Gaffron what size limitations the applicant could meet without the need for variances. The current code allows multiple accessory structures as long as they are detached. Mr. Barr could have as many 1,000 s.f. buildings as long as hardcover area limitations are adhered to. The location of the structure and how much driveway would be needed to access it will determine the maximum size the building can be to conform to an existing or decreased level of hardco^'er. ihere was a brief discussion pertaining to areas above garage structures and the potential for them to be turned into living space. City Administrator Bernhardson suggrsted that the Council return this matter to the Planning Commission. It would be necessary for them to review this application since Mr. Barr had deviated from his original plans. Also, there would need to be a review for the possibility of an after-the-fact conditional use permit for the area being occupied above the existing garage. Assistant Planning and Zoning Administrator Gaffron stated that whether the applicant needed variance approval for his proposed construction, he would still need to apply for ^ separate conditional use permit for the dwelling above the existing garage. In light of that, this matter would have to be reviewed by the Planning Commission. It was moved by Mayor Grabek, seconded by CounciImember Callahan, to refer this matter back to the Planning Commission to address the revised plan and the after-the-fact conditional use permit. Motion, Ayes*5, Nays=»0, Motion passed. #1320 DR. AND MRS. BRANDBNBORG 719 MINNETONKA HIGHIANDS LANE VARIANCE RESOLUTION #2494 The applicants were not present for this matter. City Administrator Bernhardson apprised the Council that the applicants were seeking hardcover variances to reconstruct a screen porch and existing deck on the lake side of theix home. Currently there is 3 1.8% hardcover in the 75-250’zone and would require an average lakeshore setback variance. Assistant TO: Mayor Grabek Orono Council Members City Administrator Bernhardson FROM: Michael P. Gaffron, Asst Planning & Zoning Administrator DATE: September 8, 1988 SUBJECT: #1316 Gary Barr, 3034 Casco Point Road - Variance APPLICATION: Request for variances to hardcover, structure to structure setback, and accessory structure floor area. ZONING DISTRICT:LR-IC, 1/2 acre - Sewered LIST OF EXHIBITS: Exhibit A - Memo of August 8, 1988 Exhibit B - Planning Commission Action Notice of 8-18-88 Exhibit C - Planning Commission Minutes 8-15-88 Exhibit D - Letter From Neighbor Ian Booth Dated 8-15-88 NOTE: Applicant is an airline pilot and his schedule would not allow him to be present at the Planning Commission meeting. He was represented by contractor Clint Gables of ABA, Inc. DISCUSSION: Please review the memo and exhibits of August 8, 1988. The applicant wishes to construct a detached storage garage with workshop space above,, the proposed garage being approximatley 1,000 s.f. footprint area with additional square footage above it. The property already contains a 3- stall detached garage with an unauthorized dwelling unit in the loft above it. Applicant's initial proposal was to use a common wall for the two detached garages, in order tc conserve trees on the property. This would create an extremely large accessory structure. The applicant subsequently provided two optional plans to the Planning Commission, showing how moving the garage further south or east on the property would result in the need to remove additional trees, which applicant wishes to save. However, he does not wish to reduce the square footage of the proposed structure, since he wishes to provide space for his car collection on his own property. Currently his collection is stored in neighborhoo'' garages in which he rents space. The Planning Commission recommended 6 to 0 to deny the requested variances, finding no acceptable hardship to justify the excess floor area, finding that the hardship of tree loss can be resolved by making the structure smaller, and finding that a second structure with potential space for an additional dwelling unit above it would be inappropraite when the current detached garage already contains an unauthorized dwelling unit. On September 6, 1988, the applicant's agent contacted staff and proposed to submit a revised proposal showing a new garage location. As o this writing, that information has not been submitted to staff. i^' STMfP RBCOmiBlIDATION: Absent any revised information from the applicant, staff would concur with the Planning Commission recommendation. In the memo to the Planning Commission, staff suggested that if Planning Commission wished to approve some proposal for the site, the following criteria would be appropriate: 1. No increase above the existing 29.9% hardcover (75-250*). 2. Maintain 10* required rear lot-line setback. 3. Maintain 10* required setback from the house and existing detached garage unless a hardship is shown. 4. Reduce size to meet 1,000 s.f. maximum floor area requirement. 5. Applicant should be urged to revise his proposal to reduce the impact of the structure on the property. If the applicant or his agent brings a revised proposal to the Council meeting. Council has the option to review that proposal and take what ever action may be approporiate, or Council may wish to refer that proposal to the Planning Commission. If referral to the Planning Commission does occur, it would be reviewed at the October 3rd meeting. If no further proposal is forthcoming and Council takes action on the current proposal, a /^Nresolution reflecting that action will be presented to Council at your next ^eeting. To: Planning Commission Chairman Kelley Orono Planning Coiiunission Members City Administrator Bernhardson From: Michael P. Gaffron, Asst Planning & Zoning Administrator Date: August 8, 1988 Subject: #1316 Gary Barr, 3034 Casco Point Road - Variance - Public Hearing Application - Request for variances to hardcover, setback, and accessory structure floor area. Zoning District - LR-lC structure-to-structure List of Exhibits Exhibit A Exhibit B Exhibit Exhibit Exhibit Exhibit Exhibit Exhibit Exhibit Application Plat Map Property Owners List Survey Staff Letter Dated 7/11/88 Plans of Proposed Building Revised Proposal With 3 Alternatives & Staff Notations Staff Hardcover Review Staff Suggested Alternatives Pertinent Facts - 1. Hardcover: Based on staff calculations, existing hardcover on the>^^ property is virtually all within the 75-250' zone and is 29.9%. Applicant proposes to remove a backyard area of wood chips underlayed by plastic, for a reduction of 825 s.f. or 3.1%. The other area of hardcover that applicant proposed to remove is not hardcover in staff's opinion, since the only rock in this area is a little bit that has washed down from the steep gravel driveway (area west of garage, between garage and driveway). With Option A, which applicant prefers, the final hardcover is 27.5%. With Option B, final hardcover is 29.4%. With Option C, final hardcover is 29.8%. Staff does not understand why Options B & C leave the p^»vement between the two garages in place. Applicant should address >his. 2. Setbacks, Structure-to-Structure: Applicant is proposing to construct a second garage that is uphill from but shares the same foundation wall with the existing garage structure. This would result in the structures being considered as attached, creating an accessory structure of approximately 1,700 s.f. footprint area and total usable floor space of about 2,700 s.f. Applicant's Option B would be to move the proposed garage 10' east and setback 8' from the existing garage. He would prefer not to do Option B because he claims he will loose 4 trees and will not be able to reduce the hardcover as much as with Option A. Option C is to mov- the garage 12' east from Option A and maintain a 10' setback to t existing garage and to the lot line. He claims he will loose 7 trees with this scheme. - jZoning File #1316 'August 8r 1988 Page 2 of 3 Staff would recommend that the garage dimensions be reduced to save the trees rather than grant variances for structure to structure setback. An alternative would be to relocate the garage entirely. 3. Accessory Structure Size. As noted above^ if the old and the new garages share a wall, they will be considered attached emd will yield approximately 2,700 s.f. of usable floor area, an excess of 1,700 s.£4 over the 1,000 s.f. allowed, for a variance of 170%. Note that the existing 3 car garage, with what appears to be a dwelling space above it, comprises about 1,156 s.f. and already is oversized. The new garage, if detached, would comprise about 1,561 s.f., an excess of 56% for that new building. As of this writing, applicant has not provided substantial information regarding the need for all of this bpace, but has merely applied for a 990 s.f. "storage garage". Discussion - There is no question that this property has some severe site constraints which limit the realistic potential for development of additional accessory buildings. The property already contains a detached 3 car garage with a loft and what appears to be living space above it, this structure being in excess of the 1,000 s.f. floor area allowed. That garage was allowed to be built in 1976, based on code interpretations at that time which apparently considered only the footprint. Staff received a phone call from one of the neighboring property owners who was notified of this variance application, and that neighbor was concerned that the property is already overused, by virtue of the fact that there is a separate apartment over the garage and perhaps a third dwelling unit in the basement. As of this writing, staff has not been able to verify whether these excess dwelling units exist, however there is a gas line going to the garage and a room air conditioner in one of the upper windows, and we know that two plumbing fixtures were constructed in the garage when it was built, hence th 3re is high likelyhood that this could be used as a dwelling unit. Staff Recommendation - Lacking any substantial discussion by the applicant as to the need for this oversized garage with storage space above it, and given the limited area in which to construct the building, staff would strongly suggest that the applicant consider reducing the size of the structure in order to meet the required 10' setback and still allow the trees to remain. Alternatively, it would seem that a garage could be developed to the west of the existing garage, which would eliminate the need for the gravel driveway ^nd pavement behind the existing yarage. Staff could not recommend approval of applicant's Option A, since this ultimately creates an extremely large accessory structure on a residential property with nc real hardship being shown. Option A would also require verification by a structural engineer that the existing foundation to be shared would suppo' the added structure. Notwithstanding the excess size of the structure, Options B C may not have as great an effect on existing trees as the applicant expects, and trees could be saved by reducing the size of the structure to a degree. Zoning Pile 11316 August 8r 1968 Page 3 of 3 ' \tf would reconupend the following course of action to the Planning Commission: 1. Regardless of what structure is ultimately approved, hardcover should not increase above the existing 29.9% as shown in the staff hardcover review. 2. Maintain the 10* required setback from the rear lot line. 3. Maintain the 10* required setback from the house and existing detached garage, unless a reasonable hardship is shown to allow that setback to decrease. 4. Unless a substantial hardship can be shown, applicant should cut down the “*^tal floor ^rea of che structure to meet the required 1,000 s.f. u" ' jm floor area standard. 5. Scaff would strongly recommend that alternative sites within the property be considered for construction of this garage to minimise its impact on the property; for instance, placing the additional garage west of the existing garage, to minimize the need for steep driveway and its added hardcover (see Exhibit I). Finally, I would note that the property owner has not signed the application and should do so at his earlie t convenience. * J CA«i- 4 •if V •'-.itv.-r: n Si- CITY OF ORONO - VARIANCB APPLICATION Initial Application Fee $150.00 ($50.00 per each additional variant Renewal Variance Fee $75.00 (no change from original application) After-the-Fact Fees (Double application fee) #1316 PROFBRTT LOCATION Site Address . TS39/CITY OF ORim FIi\f}nCE OFFICE Property Identification Number (P.I.D.) JXn ^ I f H - -Q o3Sl 30C200000 fl 01 5£V IzO.Oi Please check one - Property y abstract or _ torrens? iiEOEiFT- YOUAttach legal description to application if not included on [qqi jij^ required survey. ^“ APPLICANT Name QjiZ'i'Phone (home) ran: J~^Q , A/t ^ Phone (work) V7/> / Address; _ _ _ City; Zip; _ _ _ _ __ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _L_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ OWNER (if different than applicant) Phone (home) V 7• / f Name Phone (work) o Address; ^ o 3 V Gi^s eg Po,ljh A/. City; Zip;^ - Date Property Acquired cf/" /f 7 f '_ _ _ _ (mon^h/year) I (do) (do not) also own the adjacent parcels of land. PRESENT USE OF PROPERTY Present Zoning District _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Present Use of Property ^ >4»/Residential Other (specify) DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST Estimated Construction Cost $ 7<=> Describe request in detail; VARIANCES REQUIRED Lot Area Setback Variances ( Other Lot Width Front X Hardcover Side Rear) f, , ^erSficK #.04 r Ji-cftiAWp ///<* ^ rncss 6r) h)0 TfiSpi f^sr HARDSHIP Describe undue hardship or practical difficulty resulting from strict enforcement of zoning regulations:_ _ ___ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ___ _ _ _ _ _ _ DESCRIPTION OP DNUSOAL PROPERTY CONDITIONS Describe unusual property conditions preventing compliance with Zoning Code Requirements :_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ___ _ _ _ _ _ ___ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ __ /itBQniRBD SUBMITTALS (iJ Completed Application Form Certified Property Owners List of owners within 150' (you must obtain this list from Hennepin County Department of Finance A-603 Govt Center '^348-3271):^ wwio. Stampedr legal sized envelopes (#10) pre-addressed to each of the nam'?s on the above list with no return address (use address labels obtained with property owners list). Certificate of survey including hardcover calculations as required. Topographic survey (existing and proposed elevations) if any changes in existing grade are proposed. Plat Map (obtained with property owners list). As an addendum to this applicationr please attach a separate list of any other persons you wish notified of this application. 8. Additional items as may be requested by City staff. The Applicant and Property Owner must sign this application. Please remember that your variance application is not complsjte if the above information has not been included. Certification by Zoning Department that Variance Application is complete. Zoning Official's Signature_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Date_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ APPLICANT'S SIGNATURE The applicant hereby agrees to provide all information required or requested by the Zoning Administrator, agrees to pay all fees and/or unusual expenses incurred in review of this application, and certifies that the information supplied is true and correct to the best of his/her )cnowledge. # Applicant's Signature ■ JA Date OWNERS SIGNATURE The owner hereby aclcowledges and agrees to this application and further authorizes reasonable entry o”to the property by City staff, consultants, agents. Commission members, ai . Council members for purposes of investiga tion and verification of this lest. Owner's Signature Date Applicant must have all submitt.^-..s into the City offices 25 days before the Planning Commission Meeting. Planning Commission Meetings are held on the third Monday of each month. Applicants must be present at all scheduled review meetings of the Planning Commission and Council. if an applicant is unable to attend a scheduled meeting, please ma)ce arrangements to have an authorized agent attend in your place and to advise the Building & Zoning Office of this change prior to the meeting. HARDSHIP r Describe undue hardship or practical difficulty' resulting from strict enforcement of zoning regulations:_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . DESCRIPTION OF UNUSUAL PROPERTY CONDITIONS Describe unusual property conditions preventing compliance with Zonin Code Requirements:_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ___ _ _ _ . . /REQUIRED SUBMITTALS IJJ Completed Application Form (2^ Certified Property Owners List of owners within 150* (you must obtain >—^ ^this list from Hennepin County Department of Finance A-603 Govt Center ^»^348-_3271)^ Wwro. StampedV xegal sized envelopes (#10) pre-addressed to each of the names on the above list with no return address (use address labels obtained with property owners list). Certificate of survey including hardcover calculations as required. Topographic survey (existing and proposed elevations) if any changes in existing grade are proposed. Plat Map (obtained with property owners list). As an addendum to this application, please attach a separate Hot of any other persons you wish notified of this.application. Additional items as may be requested by City staff.8. The Applicant and Property Owner must sign this application. Please remember that your variance application is not complete if the above information has not been included. Certification by Zoning Department that Variance Application is complete, Zoning Official's Signature^Date APPLICANT'S SIGNATURE The applicant hereby agrees to provide all information required or requested by the Zoning Admin strator, agrees to pay all fees and/or unusual expenses incurred in revxew of this application, and certifies that the information supplied is true and correct to the best of his/her Icnowledge. o Applicant's Signature Date ONNERS SIGNATURE The owner hereby ackowledgcs and agrees to this application and further authorizes reasonable entry onto the property by City staff, consultants, agents. Commission members, and Council meiubers for purposes of investiga tion and verification of this request. Owner's Signature Date Applicant must have all submittals into the City offices 25 days before the Planning Commission Meeting. Planning Commission Meetings are held on the third Monday of each month. Applicants must be present at all scheduled review meetings of the Planning Commission and Council. If an applicant is unable to attend a scheduled meeting, please ma)ce arrangements to have an authorized agent attend in your place and to advise the Building & Zoning Office of this change prior to the meeting.’“‘•V < W.; V o I ferf CITYof ORONO Post Office Box 66•Crystal Bay, Minnesota 55323• Municipal Cfficea On the North Shore of Lake Minnetonka C July 11, 1988 American Builders & Associates, Inc. 3600 Shoreline Drive Wayzata, MN 55391 Re; Proposed Storage Garage, 3034 Casco Point Road The Building & Zoning Department is in receipt of your application for a building permit, which was received by this office on July 7, 1988. A review of the application finds that the following variances are required in order for this garage to be built; 1. Maximum floor area allowed « 1,000 s.f. The proposed garage includes usable floor space on two floors. Any second story space with headroom in excess of 5' is considered as floor area. Your second floor contains approximately 554 s.f. of usable space for a total of 1,536 s.f., exceeding the 1,000 s.f. maximum. 2. Orono zoning codes require a minimum of 10* setback between the structures. Your proposal shows only a 3* setback. 3. Per your engineer's calculations, existing hardcover in the 75- 250* zone is 35.5% where only 25% is allowed. Although you are proposing to remove ground cover in exchange for structural hardcover to reduce this to 33.5%, unless you can reduce to 25%, staff does not have the authority to approve such an exchange without City Council approval. I would further note that the proposed plans are incomplete, since they do not include details and sections for the walls, nor do they include a truss certification. Also, a second set of plans would be needed for review. Please contact the Building & Zoning Department at 473—7357 if you wish to pursue the necessary variances in order to construct this structure. Sincerely Michael P. Gaffron Asst. Zoning Administrator Gary A. Barr 3034 Casco Point Road Wayzata, MN 55391 a zoning - 473-7357 assessing ADMLNISTRATION A FINANCE - 473-7358 PUBLIC WORKS - 473-735 s: \ V ■\ . V \ 's. N \ V \ N .. .;••• 4*t*i •litlUtV GARAGE OPEN 8FAC6 NO PCSr SOPPCKTS . \ t \ ■\: N ;• i li'-o"2*-o*| ATV a N t ‘ /' • c c i/-ft I^LAN A C"v) b 'u\v I hilii I b luA.iA :ii*, |ilib I luullirm J *1 I l» •1*1 V, 4im ' nil % ill 111)1 ' ^ lllolll lo 'U III.MlMAlt lilllll lull 111 Allb* Mllip^ III :>uu|i II IlliiltOIII loAtl l|)iLM| lb Jti iiii||biu| u«n (Iiib ‘JAOl <‘Mii I I'M 1'* '^'^l •L'piiiiii'l A ua iirj b jii iiu(|b|iior> tst I iti I |iiib uiM I b ^ I A j I I Ki I Ai|ii lull I •••■' \ .. K** .r*'\ Nc: ‘‘MK f \ v>. •^•vvx v:^ ;N. / {.f-W' / i /Lvw V- V --- V V ^ \v- .' ••<•/.* 4f.v / f\ !-•=? 'if/3 0 o 0 9 ‘O 0 Mj ; 'c «w»»o wtc S 71*o«l'<s-sr //<»; 00 c 'i •//•**; o«» 'AC , o*r • yi oo D 0*0 o V(/Mi ; oo,'^, xt o ___t0»OJ t^J “ ; *4 ■'wa-ib if^oz AUO lll^^ 9 T ^ T -A4 b |)i^iitiii!ll 'A|iiiiii | iinl.iiiiKiii JAU ) U )\.\n ‘I 1 >*'hl k I'M J'» I iL'il '\i A ib'i iii| AuA iibj jii li |b i| 1 1 I lu ) o #1316 PLAN B exM- Of II n^'iuv.ur/: s o'/ V 7f<r:rs I o'.i (-r'ni»r o iMcpr I'''; rr> ii/sAnt-our r '■■1. i 3^1 >«• O S'/*' tr/t. (aio'^ 1 C^^6rA^e*> P»^Poi«uro )^(ri^v/ift>k Dae«s /Jd-r l^?»-'/ST*^ 2,rxl0 7^ 1^30 1 11 *)o i 2 /<• TO 4.0 7 >^3 2/ 2V4 '70T-M, fl.C,*79'?/ s.^. ??■?»y. I cy/sr7Ai6. li! /f locoUoHiPS^Mrnc, tS ? __' aa-r^24.8>^ t»^fT7+ of^-noAJ ill ys- a 4^.At^T:=» /ooo i.-C, (Pit- •7/VU-7SO-^r-H-zcoo ^ 7i^l - 2.7.«r;^ ^ (ai ITM oW«N/S. S ^/77/tfutT . fi^^rvoife^^'^’T'u^O S«xM-i>)Mas u>Kic^ 6.c/wves /nto^-VL. He. Pw«»«(®o^r ?'!) ^tf»7iuvCN £u/i^6i'AiCS^ ..I Pmm ^ ; 7/V6» -7^-7ry-<S/l +-/^>0O = 78S2- fu>»^ c ; -?/Vd. -'?i^-7S"'f ^37 4- /oOO ^ •7‘^rs -z?).8 y. it •v;^»' o o o il .1! ^ 2^^*/ ft*. 'D-->S • A^eA = &f^OP • ^ /J C> <» co\/t\C. ^/>o oi/ffv€- ‘I* i]7S’*-2^T^* *2-C)fs>^ i ^/A»c.«-*^nxrS *2/4*S" S'j T* FV«ei^ 2-10»S^'2^,,^.'^ j AtCevV- ZICT i-2.V, roo ^ ZLUfUU^'S.^. t ll /ybu^€f :;i ;| ^<..2- y*/^ /0-. 2. X /»/.*/ //s-i, in'? :• = 11 f 3/./ X 2.I1®7V7 II 3t.X XI-//vr ■ IS- yV /or , il'CorJc U-^Aci-yj U X J.S"21 ~~* • ll H>8 32. .!i 8x&&•/ ;a 3-xg,2*7 — •]pIt©N>T-ILylZ. l/^oobC^tPS Q\lat.S2'T' tucK-reP*fcr&A^ 6e W3W/^-?ro (t^iisr/z.y? fi //.5-xn.s-20 1 c iHl'Zl 2<l^ t>8xtS"2oZ> ■Sox i.r nr f 78 X?r>/2.7 80 J ^}%y n/TL Ilf y rx/t/i yo X Tx^y/z,lot S>72_/2,fife ZO Mo/z.7X>o l (Vx 21 in ■■}I30«> 2.ro 2S(»0 #1316 HAN C ^-7:Jf > or,T .f^5 ■ &RM»t > ^ • *. A.:• . . t »kt.^. *■■* tr««u H#"i»arr.-!.*CiT* • ‘jfc'/ CITY OP ORONO P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 473-7357 ZONING PILE NO. 1316 NOTICE OP PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION Date of Notice: 8/18/88 TO:Gary Barr COPIES TO: Clint Gables 3034 Casco Point Road ABA, Inc. Wayzata, MN 55391 3600 Shoreline Dr Wayzata, MN 55391 TYPE OP APPI.TCATION: Variance DATE OF MEETING:8/15/88 VOTE: 6 For 0 Against Planning Conmiission reconmeads the following: Denial for reasons noted below NOTES AND SPECIAL CONDITIONS: Planning Commission recommended denial of the requested setback, hardcover and excessive floor area variances. Denial was based on the following; - No acceptable hardship was shown to justify the excess floor area. - The only hardship presented for justifying the structure-to- structure setback variance is potential loss of trees, but this can be remedied by making the proposed garage smaller. - No way to justify a second potential structure with space for an additional dwelling unit when current garage contains an unauthorized dwelling unit. Given the above findings and recommendation, this item can be scheduled for Council review and action on Monday, September 12. However, if you wish to revise your request to alleviate some of the Planning Commission concerns, please contact Mike Gaffron or J.-»anne Mabusth at 473- 7357. Applicant's next scheduled meeting is confirmed as; City Council Monday, September 12, 1988; meeting starts at 7;00 p.m. If you desire certified copies of the official Planning Commission minutes, they are available from the City Recorder after review and approval by the Planning Commission. MINUTES OP THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD AUGUST 15 r 1988 ZONING PILE #1316 CONTINUED Kelley inquired as to the number of cars currently being store in the garage that were owned by Mr. Barr's brother-in-law. Mr. Gables replied that the brother-in-law did not park in t^e garage. There were no comments from the public regarding this matter and the public hearing was closed. It was moved by Kelley, seconded by Johnson, to recommend denial of application #1316. Cohen stated that he concurred with Kelley's recommendation for denial. Mr. Barr was not even listed as a resident of Minnesota on the property list. The list showed that Mr. Barr owned three lots and his address was shown as being in Florida. Motion, Ayes=6, Nays=0, Motion passed. #1317 DUANE AND NANCY GLEW 1135 BROWN ROAD SOUTH VARIANCES PUBLIC HEARING 9:10 P.M. - 9:15 P.M. The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing were noted. The applicants were present for this matter. Zoning Administrator Mabusth explained that the Glews were seeking a" side setback and a street setback variance for construction of a 2-car detached garage. The propoijd structure protrudes 34* in front of the principal structure. Mabusth stated that the County Inspector advised staff that they would approve the use of the turn around as long as there is no additional encroachment into the road right-of-way. The turn-around would work if a cut is made in the bank at the southeast corner of the garage. The majority of the trees would be untouched. The Glews are to notify the adjacent property owner to the south ten days prior to excavation. Drainage will not be changed since the garage will be raised approximately 1 1/2' higher to direct drainage toward the county drainage ditch along the roadway. The existing drainage to the rear of the garage will be taken care of by an existing catch basin. The hardships would be the severe limitations of the site and the unusual pie-shape of the lot. Cohen stated that he would have no problem approving this matter but he wanted to see the plans for the proposed garage. Mabusth explained that the Commission members were each given a specification sheet which states the type of construction, and the maximum height. The garage is being constructed by Gorco and they do not provide elevations. There were no comments from the public regarding this matter and the public hearing was closed. It was moved by Bellows, seconded by Moos, to recommend MUIUTES OP THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD AUGUST 15, 1988 ZONING PILE #1316 CONTINUED Clint Gables of American Builders & Associates, was present bn behalf of applicant. . , • ; Gaffron explained that made reference to a letter he had received from Mr. Ian Booth, a neighbor of Mr. Barr's, opposing the garage addition. Kelley read the letter, which spelled out the reasons of opposition, aloud. Mr. Booth's reasons included the fact that Mr. Barr already had a 3~car garage, Mr. Barr has a renter in the existing garage, and Orono has ordinances pertaining to the subdivision of property for the purpose of renting living space to individuals. Gaffron explained what Mr. Barr was seeking in his application. There is an existing house and 3-car garage that has a loft-type unit above it. Mr. Barr received approval in the late 1970's to install two plumbing fixtures in that loft when it was built. Mr. Barr would now like to construct a second garage for the purpose of storing old classic cars. His proposal is to construct a 34'^ x 28' garage directly behind the existing garage which would require a 3' setback. He would like to rebuild the back wall of the existing garage so it would also be a wall for the new garage. He would like to put a shop area above the new garage. A setback variance would be required for attaching an oversized structure to an existing structure that exceeds 1,000 s.f. The second option would be to locate the existing garage and the proposed garage adjacent with one another with a 10' separation or an 8' separation. This plan however may result in the loss of some mature trees. Staff had recommended some alternatives. One would be to reduce the size of the proposed garage which would allow it to be built in two different locations that would save the trees. Kelley stated that this proposal was awfully ambitious. He asked Mr. Gables to present his information. Mr. Gables addressed the issue of hardship. Mr. Barr collects classic cars that are expensive and need to be housed. He also needs living space for a caretaker of the cars since he is a pilot and is frequently away from home. It was Mr. Gable's understanding that Mr. Barr's brother-in-law inhabits the upper level of the existing garage for the purpose of security. The second hardship would be that Mr. Barr will be married shortly which will result in the addition of two more automobiles requiring storage. Mr. Gabl«\ expressed what, in his opinion, were the hardships in this matter. One would be the runoff, two would be the depreciation to the land due to the destruction of the trees. Mr. Gables stated that plan A would cause the least amount of damage to the environment and would be the most aesthetically pleasing. Plan A would effectively deal with the natural runoff of the land. It would also provide the greatest reduction in hardcover. Plan B and C would require more excavating and the removal of several mature trees. They would also not deal with runoff as well as Plan A. MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD AUGUST 15, 1988 » y ZONING FILE #1315 CONTINUED The applicants were present for this matter. Zoning Administrator Mabusth stated that this was a request for a setback and height variance for a monument, that exceeds the allowed 3 1/2* height. Mr. Phil Miller stated that he was comfortable with the findings and recommendations o€ the City regarding their proposal. They are proposing to "dress up" the intersection of Willow and Countryside. The Homeowner's Association has never been satisfied with the appearance of that area. The variance would allow them to erect curved brick walls on each side of the intersection and light fixtures on top of each end post. The end posts will exceed 3 1/2*. He was hopeful that staff would confirm that the monuments were clearly outside of the 30* triangle and should create no visibility problems. He understood that if the road is maintained by the City in the future, there would be City snow plows on the road and a hold harmless agreement would need to be drafted. Kelley assumed that the City had initially approved Countryside Road and the issue of the island was not brought up at that time. Mabusth disagreed, stating that correspondence in the file would show that the City would not guarantee that the island could remain should the City take over the Road. Countryside Road is currently classified as a public dedicated roadway and once it connects with Old Crystal Bay Road, it will be maintained by the City. Mr. Miller stated that he understood that the City of Orono and each of the homeowners had extensive communications with the original developer. The City and the Homeowner's Association have similar feelings as to the Community in that regard. They want to go forward and make the area as attractive as possible. Their proposal should meet all of the required safety standards and they wanted the Planning Commission to act as statf recommended. There were no comments from the public regarding this matter and the public hearing was closed. It was moved by Cohen, seconded by Moos, to recommend approvaT^f“the required variances, per staff recommendations and 'requirements. Motion, Ayes=6, Nays=*0, Motion passed. #1316 GARY BARR 3034 CASCO POINT ROAD VARIANCES j PUBLIC HEARING 8:58 P.M. - 5:10 P.M. The Affidavit of Publdfcation and Certificate of Mailing were MIHDTBS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD ADGDST 15, 198 8 ZONING PILE #1316 CONTINUED Clint Gables of American Builders & Associates, was present on behalf of applicant. Gaffron explained that made reference to a letter he had received from Mr. Ian Booth, a neighbor of Mr. Barr's, opposing the garage addition. Kelley read the letter, which spelled out t^e reasons of opposition, aloud. Mr. Booth's reasons included the fact that Mr. Barr already had*a 3-car garage, Mr. Barr has a renter in the existing garage, and Orono has ordinances pertaining to the subdivision of property for the purpose of renting living space to individuals. Gaffron explained what Mr. Barr was seeking in his application. There is an existing house and 3-car garage that has a loft-type unit above it. Mr. Barr received approval in the late 1970*s to install two plumbing fixtures in that loft when it was built. Mr. Barr would now like to construct a second garage for whe purpose of storing old classic cars. His proposal is to construct a 34' x 28* garage directly behind the existing garage which would require a 3' setback. He would like to rebuild the back wall of the existing garage so it would also be a wall for the new garage. He would like to put a shop area above the new garage. A setback variance would be required for attaching an oversized structure to an existing structure that exceeds 1,000 s.f. The second option would be to locate the existing garage and the proposed garage adjacent with one another with a 10* separation or an 8' separation. This plan however may result in the loss of some mature trees. Staff had recommended some alternatives. One would be to reduce the size of the proposed garage which would allow it to be built in two different locations that would save the trees* Kelley stated that this proposal was awfully ambitious. He asked Mr. Gables to present his information. Mr. Gables addressed the issue of hardship. Mr. Barr collects classic cars that are expensive and need to be housed. He also needs living space for a caretaker of the cars since he is a pilot and is frequently away from home. It was Mr. Gable's understanding that Mr. Barr's brother-in-law inhabits the upper level of the existing garage for the purpose of security. The second hardship would be that Mr. Barr will be married shortly which will result in the addition of two more automobiles requiring storage. Mr. Gables expressed what, in his opinion, were the hardships in this matter. One would be the runoff, two would be the depreciation to the land due to the destruction of the trees. Mr. Gables stated that plan A would cause the least amount of damage to the environment and would be the most aesthetically pleasing. Plan A would effectively deal with the natural runoff of the land. It would also provide the greatest reduction in hardcover. Plan B and C would require more excavating and the removal of several mature trees. They would also not deal with runoff as well as Plan A. ) MIOTTBS OF TBB PUmOW: COMUSSIOH MBBTHI6 HBU> AUGUST 15, 198S D ZmiK FILE #1316 COHTIMUBD inquired as to the number of cars currently beino ^*** garage that were owned by Mr. Barr's brother-^n-law^ replied that the brother-in-law did not park in the from the public regarding this matter and the public hearing was closed. *pattB*r moved by Kelley, seconded by Johnson, to recommend denial of application #1316. Cohen stated that he concurred with in Florida. Motion, Ayes-6, Nays»0, Motion passed. #1317 DUAHB AND NANCY GLEN 1135 BROWN ROAD SOUTH VARIANCES PUBLIC HEARING 9:10 P.M. - 9:15 P.M. noted^^* Publication and Certificate of Mailing were The applicants were present for this matter. Zoning Administrator Mabusth explained that the Glews were seeking a side setback and a street setback variaUe f^r construction of a 2-car detached garage. The proposed structure front of the principal structure. Mabusth stated that the County inspector advised itaff that they would approve the use of the turn around as long as there is no additional wSrk ’if^^^eui-^f!” *^^9ht-of-way. The turn-around wouldwork if a cut is made in the bank at the southeast corner of the fre*to'untouched. The Glews "°tify the adjacent property owner to the south ten days af™ changed since thegarage will be raised approximately 1 1/2' higher to direct exittin®. ^ drainage ditch along the roadway. The ^**® garage will be taken care of by an existing catch basin. The hardships would be the severe limitations of the site and the unusual pie-shape of the lot. Cohen stated that he would have no problem approvino this matter but he wanted to see the plans for the proposed garage. Mabusth ox| ned that the Commission members were each given a ' states the type of construction, and tne maximi neight. The g.irage is being constructed by Gorco and they do no . provide elevations. «;*nbrirhr.rSr.“.%ior.d“* “"•* It was moved by Bellows, seconded by Moos, to recommend IAN P. BOOTH ^3038 CASCO POINT ROAD WAY2ATA, MINNESOTA 55391 oj; I^.cjks: » VQ 4UV4 a-5 'TU cAvCacV W^ ... ^U.eL MC.^V -C/ \ _ •;• Ov ULa^'^fcs.^sH v^^olV'fcL^^WcV O VJ^A^f-i S Ws C^Vv.« c ^ Wa (XC>^vii\Sj2 d . <^o/^ 1 rv >. \LcV v>.4 ii^cUsL. r i —\ KOvJ^ V ei/c\)tsttAp^ O- CoSAf^OAC.-^^^ -i' ^ W VJbLVO.W ©(•fe \iAc^!L .> '■ AU i^M OAcii^VoJ^iy/ so \dc),vvc )^ a V^sx Acaol ^ vs Q(oa© \>el- c&VjL -*■ ..**n,A^ - UiVW ^\UAfc^ T>C5 iV^ V'«i.'.: ;‘.^ ; I,- -;: ...i'.. -•• ■;: -A*;^-r ^ V ■r r>^ -4^^ >.‘V4'4. •«*- Fxcmz Date: Mayor Grabek & Orono Council Members City Administrator Bernhardson Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building & Zoning Administrator July 6, 1989 cmroFOMw Subject: #1334 Sidney Rebersr 715 North Brown Road - Final Subdivision/CUP/PRD - Resolutions, Covenants, Easements List of Exhibits Exhibit A - Exhibit B - Exhibit C - Exhibit D - Exhibit E - Exhibit F - Exhibit G - Exhibit H - Exhibit I - Exhibit J - Exhibit K - Resolution #2554 - Preliminary Approval of Subd. Preliminary Development Plan Revised 1/24/89 Grading & Erosion Plan Final Development Plan Final Plat Agreements with Adjacent Neighbors Resolution Approving CUP for Planned Residential Development Resolution Approving Final Plat of Sugar Woods Subdivider's Agreement Private Covenants Resolution Directing Staff to Pile Plat Resolution #2554 set forth an outline of directives for the applicant to satisfy or complete so that Council would be able to grant final approval of the plat and planned residential development. The applicant has fulfilled all of the directives of the resolution. "*he plat and associated documents will be filed by the City upon the ordering of sewer and water to the property (please review Exhibit K). Please review Exhibit P, concerns of the neighbors were an important issue during the Council's review and the developer has resolved these concerns. The special conditions and guidelines for the development and future residential use of the property are referred to in the final plat resolution, the resolution approving the conditional use permit for the planned residential development, and in the private covenants (Exhibit J). Note that the conditions set forth in the PRD/Conditional Use Permit cannot be amended by the private homeowners until the City approves. This is also set forth in the private covenants. The special conditions of approval by the City are singled out in the covenants and future owners are advised that no amendments can be made to these specific sections of the covenants unless the City approves. The conditions of the conditional use permit resolution also gives the City the ability to enforce the special conditions of the planned residential development. Please review the documents, as staff would appreciate your comments. Scaff recommends approval of Mr. Rebers' Planned Residential Development and subdivision based on the findings and conditions set forth in the approving resolution. CITY OF ORONO City of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. _______ A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE PLAT OP SUGAR WOODS FILE NO. 1334 WHEREASf the City of Orono is a municipal corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of Minnesota; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Orono (hereinafter the "City Council") has adopted subdivision regulations for the orderly, economic and safe development of land within the City; and WHEREAS, on July 10, 1989, the City approved a conditional use permit. Resolution #_ _ _ _, for a Planned Residential Development of 25 single family detached residential units within the R-IA Residential Zoning District requiring a minimum of 25 acres; the property consists of 32.6 acres. The proposed development plan was found ro satisfy all pertinent standards of Section 10.20, Subdivision 3 (H) of the Planned Residential Development Ordinance. The approval of the conditional use permit was also based on the subdivider agreeing to the following limitations on the development ar future use of the property: 1. Each building pad is defined by specific setbacks as follows: Lots 1 through 4, Block 1: 50* front and rear 40* side All other lots in Blocks 1, 2, 3 50* front and rear 30' side and 4: 2. Each building pad is limited to 80% hardcover improvements as defined in Article IX, Section 16 of the Declaration of Covenants, Conditions, Restrictions and Easements of Sugar :;oods. Such improvements will include the access road through the portion of the property located within the front street setback area. Page 1 of 5 CITY OF ORONa City of OROINO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. _ _ _ _ 3. The open space areas. Outlets A & B, and the defined setback areas within each of the residential lots shall be restricted from all grading/land alteration activities, and no tree in excess of 2" in diameter at 4' in height shall be removed unless it is diseased or presents a hazard. Limitations of grading and tree removal shall not restrict the area of the access drive within the front street setback area. WHEREAS, the City Council has cc idered the application for a subdivision of a plat by Rebers and Barbara Rebers, husband and wife, and Rebel / C-^nstruction Company, a Minnesota Corporation (hereinafter th>-- subdivider"); and WHEREAS, Sidney Rebers and Barbara Rebers, have deeded Outlot D, Sugar Woods to the Sugar Woods Homeowner*c Association, Inc., a Minnesota non-profit corporation; and WHEREAS, the subdivision of a Planned Residential Development has been found to meet all pertinent standards cf the subdivision regulations of the City finding that each lot is of a size and configuration that will allow its use as a single family residence to be fully developed without the need of any variances; and WHEREAS, the subdivider has completed all requirements of the platting regulations of th*^ City, including: X. Completion of all vhe requirements of Resolution #23^4 that granted preliminary approval of the subdivision and Planned Residential Development. 2. Dedication on the plat of drainage and utility easements. 3. Dedication on the plat of rights-of-way for public streets and roads shown as Brown Road North and State Highway 12. 4. The creation of a new private road shown c i the plat as uutlot C, to be known henceforth as Sugarwoods Drive. Page 2 of 5 city of ORONO CITY OF ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. ________________ 5. Concurrent with the creation of this ptivate r^a^, the subdivider has dedicated to the City a road and utility easement granting to the City permanent access, improvement and utility easements over Outlot C; the subdivider has created non-exclusive ingress, egress, drainage and utility easements over said outlot in favor of all abutting and/'or benefitting lots, including a declaration of certain maintenance covenants wherein each of the abutting and/or lot owners through thair homeowners' association covenants and agrees to permanently maintain and pay the cost of maintenance for said private road. 6. Dedication to the City of a drainage easement providing for limitations on the use of a detention pond and drainageways described therein and shown on the plat as drainage easements with Outlot F. 7. Execution of a Subdivider's Agreement providing for the installation of certain improvements as a condition of subdivision approval and the posting of acceptable security to the City to ensure the completion of these improvements. 8. Payment to the City of a Park amount of $10,000.00. lication fee in the 9. Payment to the City for the legal review and filing of the plat, easemen”^s and covenants. NOW, THKRKFORIS BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of Orono hereby approves the plat of Sugar Woods, Hennepin County, Minnesota; subject to the following condition: 1. The subdivider shall post security \ the Public Works Director of the City of Orono in an amount to be determined by the City Engineer to ensure that '' 1 damage to Brown Road sustained during the construction p d of Sugarv.'oods Drive and the early bui'. -'ng stages for s.;.dential construction are repaired tc the City's satisfaction. The subdivider is hereby advised that the Cit> ma’ choose to request extention of coverage of the security beyond the original agreed upon two ye^r period depending upon the building schedule for the proposed development. Page 3 of 5 CITY OF ORONO C'lt> of OROX) RESOLUTiON OF THE Cl TY CCUNCU. NO 2. All construction • .ides used for the installation of the private road shal enter and exit only from U.S. Highway 12. The subdivider a to provide appropriate signage to control traffic during the construction period. No construction traffic shall be directed to use Sixth Avenue North. The subdivider shall be held responsible for the enforcement of the approved traffic pattern. 3. Prior to the filing of the final plat, associated documents and covenants, the subdivider shall have completed the execution of an agreement or petition agreeing to pay without appeal for sanitary sewer and water lines to be installed in or near Highway 12 by the City. 4. Outlet D, a portion of future east/west road located within the commercial zoned portion of the property, shall be installed at the time of the development of Outlots E or F or the development of the Wear pr< perty (unless the City has obtained an alternate legal access through Outlot E to the \.ear property all subject to the approval of the City). 5. The aforesaid plat shall be filed by the City of Orono with the Registrar of Titles on or before January 10, 1989 together with a certified original copy of this resolution and executed copies of the easements and covenants noted above. The execution of the plat by the City of Orono and the filing of the plat shall be conclusive evidence that the subdivider has satisfied all conditions set forth in this resolution. The approval granted by this Resolution shall expire if the plat has not been filed by the date specified above. In that event, it will be necessary to file a new application with the City of Orono for subdivision review. Dated this 10th day of July, 1989. ATTEST: Dorothy M. Hallin, City Clerk Jeunes R. Grabek, Mayor Page 4 of 5 CITY OF ORONO City of OROIVO RESOLUTION OF IHE CITY COUNCIL NO. ________________ STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) as. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this 10th day of July, 1989, by James R. Grabek & Dorothy M. Hallin, Mayor & City Clerk of the City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City. Notary Public My Commission Expires Page 5 of 5 CITY OF ORONO City of OROiNO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ A RESOLUTION DIRECTING STAFF TO FILE THE FINAL PLAT OF SUGAR WOODS WHEREAS, the City Council has approved the final plat. Sugar Woods, on July 10, 1989 for Sidney Rebers and Barbara Rebers, husband and wife, and Rebers Construction Company, a Minnesota Corporation (hereinafter "the subdivider")? and WHEREAS, the subdivider has fulfilled all of the requirements of Resolution ♦ that granted approval of the final plat and Planned Residential Development? and WHEREAS, on _ _1989 the Council of the City of Orono hereby ordered a public improvement project calling for the extension of municipal sewer and water lines to the property within the Sugar Woods plat. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Orono hereby directs its staff to file a certified original copy of this resolution, and executed copies of the easements and covenants required by with the approval of this plat with the Registrar of Titles Office of Hennepin County, Minnesota. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota at a regular meeting held on the 10th day of July, 1989. ATTEST; Dorothy M. Hallin, City Clerk J^unes R. Grabek, Mayor STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) ss. The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this 10th day of July, 1989, by James R. Grabek & Dorothy M. Hallin, Mayor & City Clerk of the City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City. Notary Public CITY OF ORONO City of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 2554 A RESOLUTION GRANTING PRELIMINARY APPROVAL OF A SUBDIVISION AND PER MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 10.20r SUBDIVISION 3 (A) GRANTS A CONDITIONAL USB PERMIT FOR A PRD OF 25 RESIDENTIAL UNITS APPLICATION NO. 1334 WHEREAS, Sidney Rebers filed a formal subdivision application and conditional use permit for a Planned Residential Development with the City of Orono (hereinafter "City") on August 26, 1988 for the purpose of platting 25 residential units, an open space outlet and private road outlets of the property legally described as follows: See Exhibit A, attached to this resolution (hereinafter "property"); and WHEREAS, after due published and mailed notice in accordance with Minnesota Statutes 462.358 and the City of Orono Zoning and Subdivision Codes, the Orono Planning Commission held public hearings on September 19, 1988 and October 17, 1988 at which time all persons desiring to be heard concerning this application were given the opcortunity to speak thereon; and WHEREAS, at their regular meeting held on November 28, 1988, the Orono City Council (hereinafter "Council") considered this subdivision application and conditional use permit and directed staff to prepare a resolution of approval; and WHEREAS, at their regular meeting held on December 12, 1988, the Council again considered this subdivision application and conditional use permit for a Planned Residential Development for the applicant noting the following findings of fact: 1. On May 23, 1988, the Council formally adopted Comprehensi/e Plan Amendment No. 2, also referred to as the Highway 12 Corridor Study (hereinafter referred to as "Comprehensive Plan Amendment"). The property was located within a section of the corridor defined as Area 4, and was recommended for the following changes: A) To continue to use the north portion of the property for single family residential use. B) That the owner could submit a plan of 1 and 2 acre mixed densities as an alternative in providing a graduated development buffer to abutting rural residential 2 acre development. CITY OF ORONO City of OROrvO RESOLUTION OF THE Cl; V COUNCIL NO. 2554 C) The property was proposed at 1-acre residential units as sewer and water was planned for the area, D) The property would be served by either a cul-de-sac or loop (circular) road with no connection to the west if a frontage road is to be installed within commercial corridor. E) Maximum allowed density would be subject to availability of municipal services, buffering to rural residential, etc, 2. On October 10, 1988, the Council adopted Resolution #2525 approving the rezoning of the property from RR-IB to R-lA based on the following findings; A) The Comprehensive Plan Amendment included this property within the Metropolitan Urban Service Area (MUSA) district approving the extension of sewer service to the area. The amendment also provided another alternative to the residential development of the property other than the existing rural residential 2 acre minimum lot size. B) The property is immediately adjacent to a commercial corridor along Highway 12 and the proposed 1 acre zoning would provide an excellent buffer or transition to the surrounding rural residential development. C) The current code requires rezoning to R-IA in order to allow the 1 acre densities recommended in the Comprehensive Plan Amendment. D) The rezoning will allow single family residential development. The R-IA zoning district will allow only detached single family residential development. E) In a preliminary report, the City Engineer confirmed that sanitary sewer can be provided to the property. Sewer will be provided either through Long Lake by the Joint Powers Agreement or by constructing a new interceptor within the Highway 12 Corridor. The expense of which is to be borne by the property owner . F) The proposed division satisfies all of the special minimum requirements for rezoning under the proposed zoning ordinance amendment of the Highway 12 Corridor currently under consideration by the Council. Page 2 of 11 CITY OF ORONO City of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 2554 3. The property is located within the R-IA zoning district. 4. Application No. 1334 proposes the creation of 25 residential units to be used for construction of 25 single family dwellings according to the preliminary plat of a street and lot layout plan, attached to this resolution as Exhibit B. 5. The application also includes a conditional use permit for a Planned Residential Development pursuant to Section 10.32 of the Orono Zoning Code. 6. The 25 unit proposal conforms to all of the zoning and platting standards for an R-lA PRD development, including; A) Net dry density (exclusive of road right-of-way); Required * 1 unit per 1 acre Proposed * 1 unit per 1.18 acres B) Proposed Setbacks: (required for PRD with R-IA standards) Front Street Setback * 35* Rear Setback » 30* Side Setback « 10* Applicant Proposes: Front Street Setback = 50* Rear Setback « 50* Side Setback * 30* C) All provisions of the subdivision regulations have been followed under the PRD format as follows; i. Outlots define the commercial corridors not considered under this current subdivision plan. ii. The plat road will be designa'^'^d as a separate out lot, as will the open space areas sur ing the residential lots (road outlots * 3 acres in rivate open space area - 6.69 acres). iii. A separate outlet will define the portion of the future east/west road access located within the southern portion of the property (commercial corridor). Page 3 of 11 CITY OF ORONa city of OROJNO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 2554 iv. Each residential unit will be defined as a lot on the final plat survey (average lot size of each unit » 38,000 s.f.). V. The actual building pad defined by the required setbacks of each lot cannot be shown on the final plat, but are shown on the preliminary plan also referred to as the final development plan, attached to this resolution as Exhibit B. vi. The applicant has created a no-grading zone/woodlands protection area within the private open space outlet and the setback areas defined within each building lot. No future owner will be allowed to remove trees in excess of 2 inches or greater in diameter. No grading is allowed within the protected areas. vii. Each building pad (defined by the setbacks for each lot) is limited to 80% hardcover improvements. Such improvements will include the access road through the portion of the property located within the front street setback area. viii. In a preliminary report, the City Engineer Glenn Cook has confirmed that there is adequate sewer capacity either through Long Lake by the Joint Powers Agreement or by constructing a new interceptor along the Highway 12 Corridor. ix. Applicant is required to submit a Storm Water Management Plan. Site drainage will conform to the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District's standards and the City's Flood Plain Management requirements. The applicant has filed a permit application with the M.C.W.D. The applicant will be required to install a detention pond within the southeast corner of the property (located within the commercial corridor). X. All lots to be served by a private loop road with a single, divided ingress/egress access at Brown Road. No additional curb cuts will be approved for this property. xi. The proposed preliminary plat attached to this resolution as Exhibit B, confirms to all requirements of the Subdivision Code, Chapter 11. Page 4 of 11 CITY OF QRONO City of OROIVO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 2554 7. The applicant has proposed a PRD plan for de^'elopment of the property based on one or more of the findings noted by professional representatives of the applicant: A) The topographical and physical characteristics of the property suggest a need for special design considerations - variations in topography range from 1,044 feet at its highest point to 994 feet at its lowest, resulting in over 50 feet of grade separation. B) The existence and location of mature maple and other deciduous trees (densely populated forest of maple trees to the west portion of the property and to the east young to mature nursery stock of evergreen trees and other deciduous trees). C) Need of providing an open space buffer to rural residential lot lines of surrounding properties, especially to the north and west. 8. The City Engineer, Glenn Cook, has submitted a report dated December 7, 1988 noting the following issues: A) The access road for the plat shall be located approximately 800 feet from the north boundary line of the property. The private road access will have a minimum sighting distance of 420 feet to the north meeting a 45 mile per hour sighting standard. North Brown Road is posted at a 30 mile per hour speed. B) The temporary construction road is not feasible based on the steep topographies that run along the east/west boundaries of Highway 12. In addition a road cut would require the major removal of existing trees. C) Upon a site inspection of the existing contours within the commercial corridor, the east/west road appears most feasible and will provide applicant with adequate area for future development within the commercial corridor. The proposed outlot for future road extension shall remain as proposed on the preliminary plans. The Engineer has provided an example of one option for the layout of the access road. 9. Neighborhood residents are justly concerned about increased traffic in and through their neighborhood. The intent of the Council is to accommodate any new traffic flow in the safest manner possible with the least adverse affect on the immediate neighorhood and on the public generally. Page 5 of 11 CITY OF ORONO city of OROIVO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 2554 10. Comprehensive Plan Amendment No. 2 (Page 52 - Recommended Alternatives) specifically addresses road improvement or upgrading as follows: "Prior to the development of the commercial portion of this property, the existing intersection at Brown Road and Highway 12 shall be improved so that safety concerns associated with »h3 current use and future increased use of this intersection are addressed. Configuration of the frontage road and North Brow Road would be determined at the time of development." NOW^ THBREFORB BB IT RBSOLVED, that based upon either one or more of the findings noted above, the City Council of the City of Orono hereby approves the preliminary plat of Meyers Woods as presented by Sidney Rebers per plat drawings by Bennett, Ringrose, Wolsfeld, Jarvis, Gardner, Inc., dated December 12, 1988, and attached to this resolution as Exhibit B, grants a conditional use permit for a Plannerl Residential Development of 25 single family detached dwellings, and further grants a variance to the standard that would require all lots have frontage on a public road with the creation of a private road, subject to the following conditions: Prior to the issuance of building permits for new construction, the final plat m'jst be filed with either the Hennepin County Recorder or Registrar of Titles office, sanitary sewer and road base installed and approved by the City, and if required improvements set forth in the Subdivider's Agreement are not completed, the developer must post a Letter of Credit (150% of cost of remaining improvements) with the City, and posting of the appropriate bond with the City to insure that any damage sustained by Brown Road is to be repaired by applicant. 2. Required Improvements: A) Private road to be constructed per standards set forth in Section 11.33, Subdivisions 4 and 5 for roads serving lots in excess of 7 units. B) All engineering plans for sewer extension/installation and road plans must be approved by the City prior to any construction. 3. The final preliminary subdivision design and layout shall be similar to that shown on Exhibit B, att.^.ched to this resolution, with exact lot layout and internal street alignment to be determined by consultation with City staff and the applicant during development of the final plat drawings. Page 6 of 11 CITY OF QRQNa City of OROINO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO.2554 4. The City will require that both the applicant and the City enter into a Subdivider's Agreement that would define the special conditions and convenants underlying the approval of this R-lA PRD subdivision and to insure that the directives of the City are upheld by the applicant, individual contractors and future owners of these properties. The Subdivider's Agreement shall deal with the following issues set forth by the City throughout this review: A) A listing of all required improvements and the pos *ng of a Letter of Credit to cover all outstanding improvements not completed by final plat approval, B) The posting of a bond with the City to insure that all damage to Brown Road sustained during the construction period of road and early building stages for residential construction. Provision should be made for the right of the City to extend the duration of the bond coverage beyond the two year deadline depending upon the building schedule for the development. Appropriate signage approved by the City shall be installed prior to construction defining the approved access corridor for all construction vehicles that will enter or exit the property. Access is approved only from U.S, Highway 12, No traffic shall be directed to Sixth Avenue North (County Road 6), The applicant shall be held responsible for the enforcement of the approved traffic pattern, C) Per Resolution #2525 that approved the rezoning of the property, contingent on sewer service being approved for the property and concurrent with the granting of sewer service the applicant agreed to enter into an agreement with the City to pay without appeal for City authorized sewer extension and service. Applicant may choose to enter into a separate agreement or to use the Subdivider's Agreement to cover this directive of the City, Prior to the filing of the final plat, an agreement shall be executed satisfactory to the City for the installation of sanitary sewer to the property. D) The cost (not covered by MSA funds) for the future upgrading of Brown Road shall be equally assessed against all users of Brown Road. This would include the 25 lots within Meyers Wood plat. Applicant is to define who will be responsible for the payment of these future costs. . Page 7 of 11 City of OROIVO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 2554__________ E) Clarify that Outlet D (portion of future east/west road) is to be fully platted and developed at the time of future develop ment of the commerical corridor. The access road will be fully installed at the time of either the applicant’s development of the commercial corridor or as a result of any other condition that may require the installation of the road prior to applicant's development of the commercial corridor. F) Both the private covenants and the Subdivider ’s Agreement should include the following restrictions: 1) No grading and woodlands preservation area. No removal of trees in excess of 2" or greater in diameter (only trees that are dead or because of hazardous condition require trimming or removal) and no grading in the protected areas without approval from the appropriate authority. The Subdivider's Agreement should also define the protected areas such as the setback area of each lot and the private open space outlet. 2) All building pads defined by the setback areas within each lot shall be limited to 80% hardcover improvements. This shall also include the portion of the access drive, that enters through the front yard setback zone. G) Entrance monuments to be defined and plans approved by the Planning Commission and Council as a part of the final subdivision approval. Entrance monuments in excess of the 3*s* height will require variance approval also. H) The enforcement of the conditions/covenants of the Subdivider's Agreement shall be a method satisfactory to the City. (The City does not feel it appropriate that the landspace buffering agreed to by the applicant be included in the Subdivider's Agreement, but that the City encourages the applicant to install appropriate evergreen buffers along the north boundary where feasible and on the east side of Brown Road where the egress road may create problems for resident to the east.) Page 8 of 1 1 " I I ' 1IORONO ■ City of ORONO RESOLUTION OF TME CITY COUNCIL NO. -55 4 5. Final plat submittals - The final plat submittals must be submitted to the Zoning Administrator two veeks prior to the regularly scheduled Council meeting on the second and fourth Mondays of the month. Applicant is further advised that the Planning Commission will review the final development plan (Exhibit B of this Resolution) and the Subdivider*s Agreement as an information item only prior to Council granting final approval of the plat. Applicant is further advised that the Planning Commission meets on the third Monday of each month and to check with the Orono staff regarding the officia.l calender of meetings for 1989. A) Surveyor to submit copy of final approved preliminary plat by locating open space outlets, road outlets, and lots with defined building pads. This final approved preliminary plan will be attached as Exhibit B of this resolution. B) Record plat drawings in the form of two mylar copieas one copy reduced to 1”=200 ‘. Drawing to incude: a) lot lines as approved on final preliminary plan referred to in Item A above; and b) dedication of drainage and utility easementa 10* wide along all perimeter property lines (open space outlet)# S* each side of internal lot lines (along the sidea and rear of each lot), and 10* along the front street lot line of each pad. C) Dedication of 33 Road North. of right-of-way for a road shown as Brown D) Designate retention pond in southeast corner of property located within commercial con dor as drainage easements and provide drainage easements for any newly directed drainageway along lot lines and provide a minimum of 15* of width for any newly designated drainageway to retention pond. E) The following areas should be defined as outlets on the plati the open space area, plat road, portion of future east/west access road, and areas of commercial corridor not included as part of this current review. Page 9 of 11 City of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 2554 F) Legal Documents required: 1« Title opinion addressed to the City. All owners# mortgage holders or others with property interests indicated therein shall sign the plat and all of the documents affected by such interest. 2. The applicant must provide copies of all recorded easements currently affecting the property. 3. Executed road and utility easements over the plat road outlet and portion of the future east/west outlet. 4. Execution of a drainage easement over the drainage area that drains to the retention pond in southeast corner in addition to the drainageways shown on plat as <^rainage easements. 5. Private road and maintenance covenants. A copy has been enclosed that is a standard covenant for the City. Applicant may wish to combine the covenants within the private covenants for the plat. The City also must receive a fully executed copy of the final approved private covenants to be filed by the Ci*.y at the time of final plat approval. 6. Complete road name request form - road name must be approved prior to final plat approval and is a separate action by the Council. 7. Executed Subdivider'a Agreement by both the City and applicant to contain conditions as set forth in Item 4 of the conditions of approval listed on Pages 7 & 6 of this resolution . (Please note all easement and covenant forms have been sent directly with a copy of this resolution to both a-^’^.cant and applicant's attorney.) 6) Fees to be paid: Total Due $10#300.00 1. Park dedication fee per current schedule: $400.00 for each one acre density lot. Total fee of $10#000.00. 2. Final plat fee of $150.00. 3. Filing fee for plat and associated documents of $150.00. Page 10 of 11 • CITY OF ORONO city of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 2554 Applicant shall pay for all of the City's legal fees and actual recording fees incurred in the filing of the final plat with Hennepin County in excess of the original payment of $150.00. 6. Landscape islands at main entrance and cul>de>saced areas within road are approved for a privately maintained road and do not meet current City standards for public roadways. The applicant is hereby advised that preliminary approval of this conditional use permit for a Planned Residential Development and preliminary subdivision shall expire one year from the date of Council approval (December 12, 1989). If for some reason the final plat is not filed by the deadline date specified above, it will be necessary for the applicant to file a renewal subdivision application at half the cost of the original application fee. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono on this 12th day of December, 1988. iDorothy M.^illin, City Clerk The undersigned applicant has read, understood and hereby agrees to the terms of this resolution on behalf of himself, his heirs, successors and assigns. Resolution No. 2554 EXHIBIT A Unplatted 34 118 23 [.COH At^THE NH COR OF E 1/2 OF (M X/4 June of. state hht no is th s 69 deo jrt. TN M '2 0E6 61 HIN tjS? SEC E A DZS OF ( FT . TH 23 SEC E A DZS 200 FT TH S 2 0E6 S S7 D£6 IS HZN 37 SEC E A DZS H A DZS OF 231 71/100 FT TO THE NLY LIMB TO THE E LZNE OF E 1/2 OF NH •COR..THOF TH H TO BE6 EX ROAD Ui*.. . • i-* TH S ALONG THE H LZNE THOF TO THE NLY IS MZN 37 SEC E A DZS OF 149 05/100 OF 334 52/100 FT TH S S7 DEG IS HZN 41 HZN 23 SEC H A DZS OF ISS 93/100 OF 200 TH S 2 DEG 41 MZN 23 SEC LZNE OF riHY TH ELY ALONG SAZD HHY 1/4 TH M ALONG SAZD E LZNE TO THE NE Property Identification Number: 34“118“23 21 0001 CITY OF ORONO City of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) COUNTY OP HENNEPIN ) ) ss. On this day of 198 before me a Notary rublic within and for said county, personally appeared_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _known to me to be the person(s) described in and who executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that he (they) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed. NOTARY PUBLIC MY COMMISSION EXPIRES STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) On this day of Uc 198f, before me a No^ry Public within and for said County, personally appeared c/ K^ _________________ known to me to be the person(s) described in and who executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that he (they) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed. MY COMMISSION EXPIRES PREIJMIMARV nc\/pt ODK/HTMT DI am \ \ / \J /y^6'jJI; y y . ----------■—" I* ' ? ^ *~1 I I^ii / //-'I i I **— f / / , ' / / y /{T i t ( ; \i\ \— 1/'Vy /P'-f'/A /'I;// 4'l I " k' '"/ / -------- \ \ V'‘• \ Ml r-’. Tv • 1 , M' '>'•4 ' -vj 33?Mm \ N .j* ; V ' ' 200 00 o/'io n IT^I ' ' \ \ \« II ' ' \ V* ro \ \ \ V ^'■. -i'■'' ~—/ •'V \ \ .40. MV 1 ' M ‘ ' :' i ; ^v.i; //Av; Sla718 ’37" E T=L . / r , ) ) H / ( y-y'-'/,'’n ■y,''y--.-y//>//> /// / -fm rr^ 1 r ffilKW — ^ -------- mmm rn^m^m M> «• m mm rnmmm M»M • ■• ■ .Jgd.!^----- 90¥mt9 » •♦-•• T m ZONMQ niA-MIO FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN if JtfiJ V j* - 11.5 i Tl! i UiFil: h !| >1 I i 1 ill '!I I [ II iiiiii. I ill I I I 1 ^ i 5il| * !?i £« I II I »lf{|iiSiI pii' U|iiI 111 !lli l\ •- l\in Hi II IR 111 illI- .1 It 1' I piiiii i 1 ai 5s«l«jpi:, !i iiil 'I liUi'lii li k ^ 111il] (Bi ;*SkT^>A‘ '^^*♦CA^''- ‘'^l^^r-^** ri^r^f - f^ 1^‘ln 'fsj lull ll ‘S Siimy Btmkmri Mtrs, Bmiligr RfllRI CIMSTRUCTIta COHfAIT • 3111 WflSTIII A¥L • ST. lOilt PARK. MIHHISOTA 11411 • TILCPHONi 121 lllV April 24, 1989 Mr. and Mrs. Dannis L. Plattatar 809 Brown Boad North Orono, Ninnasota Daar Nr. and Nra. Plattatar: This lattar will confirs our agraaaant concaming (i) additional traas along tha coason boundary lina batwaan your hoMstaad and our subdivision, Mayors woods, (ii) a naw fanca along our cosBRon boundary, and (iii) undarground utility linos froa Mayors Moods to your homo. 1. Ms agraa to plant ap«aa W avargraan traas naar tha coBBon boundary batwaan our land and your land. Sosa of tha traas nay ba on our land and sona of tha traas Bay ba on your land. Tha traas will not axtand tha full langth of our coanon boundary, but thay will ba installad as stakad in tha fiald by you and ua by April 30, 1989. Howavar, wa naad not plant any trwa in a location that would disturb an axisting traa that is 2' or nor a in dianatar at chast haight. Tha traas will ba ralocatad froB within Mayors Moods and will ba cf various haights. Each traa will ba at laast six fast tall. 2. Wa will ralocata tha traas at our sola axpansa. Wa will watar than for ona yaar, using your watar. Tha traas on our land will balong to us and tha traas on your land will balong to you. Providad you hava givan us tha watar naadad for propar maturing, wa will raplace any of tha traas wa hava installad which dia within ona (1) yaar aftar installation, providad you giva us accass to do so on tha basis dascribad in this lattar. 3. You will grant to us tha rights to antar your proparty to install tha traas and to watar than using your watar supply for ona yaar. Accass will ba from Brown Road along your axisting drivaway. 4. Tha traas will ba installad using a larga, haavy/ traa installation truck that nay conpress tha ground and nay make ruts in tha surfaca of your land. Wa will coordinata the work with you so that a ninimun amount of land will ba disturbed. Wa will fill and compact any ruts that wa create. Including any ruts to your driveway, and wa will repair any damage to fencing or structures or landscaped trees and shrubs (as opposed to trees and bushes which may be growing wild) on your land, but you will be responsible for restoration of any damaged sod or other vegetation. 5. In addition to the trees that will be installed near our common teundary, we will install at our expense a standard grade open mesh farm fence (not a chainlink fence) for the full length of our common boundary. The fence will be on our land and will be generally parallel to our common boundary at a location selected by us. The fence will be approximately four (4) feet tall. 6. He also agree to have underground telephone and electric lines extended along the common bound^iry between Lots 2 and 3, Block 1, Meyers Woods^ and across Outlot A, Meyers Hoods, to the south boundary of your land. These lines will be installed by the local telephone and electric utilities at no expense to you. You will be responsible for arranging for the extension of these lines tc your home at your expense. Once you are connected, you agree to ar£«^riqe for the removal of the existing overhead telephone and electric lines and poles along the common propeii:y line. 7. He agree to hold you and your property harmless from all costs and expenses arising out of the installation of the new trees near our common boundary, the new fence on our land and the underground telephone and electric lines on our land. He agree to indemnify you against all personal injuries and property damage (except damage to vegetation) that may occur during this work. You agree to release us, from all claims for damage to your sod and your vegetation (except already landscaped trees and shrubs). If this letter correctly states our agreement with you, please sign below and return a copy of this letter to us. Sincerely Yours, Marni R. Platteter l^bcr^Jhmos JU. c /; >CV. // . /==. 5u/ney Bernhard Rebers, Master BmiUer miCRS CONSTRUCTION COMPANY • 3STS WEBSTER AYE. • ST. LOUIS PARK. MINNftOTA fS41B • TfllPNONE flMIM April 12, 1989 Nr. and Hra. Andrew Duncanson 690 Brown Road North Orono, Minnesota Dear Andy and Kathryn, This letter will confinn our a9reene.-t concerning the planting of trees to shield your hoeestead free the headli<:hts of vehicles leaving the Meyers Woods subdivision, which we are developing. 1. He agree to plant fourteen evergreen trees on your land in two rows. The rows will be about 60 feet long and will be parallel to and close to Brown Road, as shotm on the attached sketch. Each row will consist of seven trees at least six feet tall planted with the centers ten feet apart. The rows will be staggered, so that the rear row is shifted five feet south of the front row. 2. He will install the trees at our sole expense. He will water them for one year, using your water. The trees will belong to you. 3. You will grant to us the rights to enter your property to install the trees and to water them, using your water supply, for one year. Access will be directly from Brown Road. 4. The trees will be installed using a large, heavy tree installation truck that may corpress the ground and may make ruts in the surface of your land. We will coordinate the work with you so that a minimum amount of land will be disturbed. He will fill and compact any ruts that we create and we will repair any damage to fencing or other structures on your land, but you will be responsible for restoration of vegetation. 5. He agree to hold you and yo?ir property harmless from all costs and expenses arising out of the installation of these trees. He agree to indemnify you against all personal injuries and property damage (except damage to the surface of your land and your vegetation) that may occur during installation of these trees. You agree to release u** from all claims for damage to the surface of your land and your vegetation. Nr. and Mrs. Andrew Duncanson April 12, 1989 Page 2 If this letter correctly states our agreement with you, please sign below and return a copy of this letter to us. Sincerely Yours, REBERS CONST^' TIOM, CO. dent WE AGREE TO THE TERMS OF THIS LETTER. Andrew Duncanson Katlu^ Duncansob DUNCANg'ON PROPERTY' / ..r------- EVERGREEN HEDGE FOR MR. & MRS. DUNCANSON J I I l•r•)N(1T niMonoii. «o t «# 11 o j4«v<« oamoh (m imc L- r |-J iM«f tM(n souABt rgo iHiHO state I •- winm («»olis wa is4it «ifisto-«>oo rt 4NMINO iNAHsanaiAiiOH tNowt f mao *ncMtt(c t(i«f PROJECT NO DRAWN BY REVISIONS DATE 4/12/09 r - 30* A RESOLUTION GRANTING A CONDITIONAL USB PERMIT PER MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 10.20, SUBD. 3(H) - File No. 1334 WHEPEAS, Sidney Rebers and Barbara Rebers, husband and wife and Rebers Construction Co. (hereinafter -the applicant-) is the owner of the property located within the City of Orono (hereinafter -the City-) and legally d ribed as follows: copy from plat (hereinafter -property-), and WHEREAS, the Rebers Construction Co. has applied to the City for a Conditional Use Permit for a Planned Residential Development pursuant to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.20, Subdivision 3(H). NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono, Minnesota: Findings 1. The application was reviewed as Zoning File No. 1334 2. The property is located in the R-IA Zoning District. 3. On September 19, 1988 and October 17, 1988 the Orono Planning Commission reviewed the application as proposed and recommended approval. 4. The City Council has considered this application including the findings and recommendations of the Planning Commission, reports by staff and comments of the applicant and the effect of the proposed use on the health, safety and welfare of the community. 5. The City Council finds that granting a Conditional Use Permit to allow a planned residential development will not be detrimental to the health, safety and general welfare of the public, would not adversely affect light, air nor pose a fire hazard or other danger to neighboring properties, nor will it depreciate surrounding property values and that the proposed level of use of the property will be in keeping with the intent and objectives of the Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan of the City. 6. The City Council finds that the applicant has proposed a planned residential development plan for development of the property based on one or more of the following findings noted by professional representatives of the applicant: A. The topographical and physical characteristics of the property suggest a need for special design considerations. Variations in topography range from 1,044 feet at its highest point to 994 feet at its lowest, resulting in over 50 feet of grade differential. B. On the site there are mature maple and other deciduous trees. There is a densely populated forest of maple trees in the west portion of the property and in the -2- east portion of the property there are young to mature nursery stock of evergreen trees and other deciduous trees C. There is a need for an open space buffer along the lot lines of surrounding rural residential properties, especially to the north and west. -3- Conclusions, Order and Conditions Based upon the above findings, the Orono City Council hereby grants a Conditional Use Permit per Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.20, Subdivision 3(H) to permit the use of a planned residen*:ial development, subject to the following conditions: 1. All provisions of the subdivision regulations have been followed under the planned residential format as follows: A. Outlots define the commercial corridors not considered under this current subdivision plan. These are Outlots D, E and F in the final plat. B. The road serving the residential lots will be designated as a separate outlot, namely Outlet C in the final plat. The open space areas surrounding the residential lots will be Outlots A and B in the final plat, C. A separate outlot will define the portion of the future east/west road access located within the southern portion of the property (commercial corridor). This is Outlot D in the final plat. D. Each residential unit will be defined as a lot on the final plat survey (average Jot size of each unit •I 41,000 s.f.). These are Lots 1 through 6 of Block 1, Lots 1 through 6 of Block 2, Lots 1 through 5 of Block 3 and Lots 1 through 8 of Block 4, E. The actual building pad defined by the required setbacks of each lot cannot be shown on the final plat, -O':' ■m. -4- but are shown on the Preliminary Development Plan last revised January 24, 1989. F. The applicant has created a no-grading sone/woodlands protection area within the rrivate open space outlets (namely Outlets A and B) and the setback areas defined within each building lot. Within those areas no future owner will be allowed to remove trees in excess of 2 inches in diameter at four feet above grade. No grading is allowed within the protected areas. However, each residential lot may include one driveway up to 20 feet wide leading to the loop road. This driveway may be graded and trees of any size may be removed to build it. The Subdivider's Agreement should also define the protected areas such as the setback area of each lot and the private open space outlots. G. Each building pad (defined by the setbacks for each lot) is limited to 80% hardcover improvements as defined in the declaration covenants. Such improvements will include the access road through the portion of the property located within the front street setback area. H. In a preliminary report, the City Engineer Glenn Cook has confirmed that there is adequate sewer capacity either through Long Lake by the Joint Powers Agreement or by constructing a new interceptor along the Highway 12 Corridor. -5- I. Applicant has submitted a Storm Water Management Plan to the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District and has received preliminary approval. The applicant will be required to install a detention pond within Outlot F. J. All lots shall be served by a private loop road with a single, divided ingress/egress access at Brown Road. No additional curb cuts will be approved for this property. K. The recorded plat of Sugar Woods conforms to all requirements of the Subdivision Code, Chapter 11. 2. Both the private covenants and the Subdivider's Agreement should include the restrictions set forth in paragraph l.F and l.G of this resolution. 3. Entrance monuments have been approved by the City staff. Any changes to monuments will require staff approval. 4. No changes shall be made in those provisions uf llilT" fpllgwin^ pnrtionrr of the Declaration of Covenants, Conditions Restrictions and Easements for Meyers Woods required by this C.U.P. unless the City Council agrees to the amendments by amending this Conditional Use Permit. 5. Violation of or noncompliance with any of the terms and conditions of this resolution shall constitute a violation of the Zoning Code, and the City shall have all enforcement procedures granted by law, and shall be punishable as a misdemeanor. -6- 6. The undersigned owner has read, understood and hereby agrees to the terms of this resolution and on behalf of himself, his heirs, successors and assigns, hereby agrees to the recording of this resolution in the chain of title of the property. Adopted by the Orono City Council on this, day of_ _ _ _, 19_ _ _ _, ATTEST: City Clerk Mayor Property Owner(s) ZSRP577 Spouse -7- A 6/12/89 Draft ^ SUBDIVIDER'S AGREENERT CITT OF OROMO HEMNEPiH cxxnm, MimnssoTA -SAiaaLr._WQfld5_ (Name of Subdivision) Rebers Construction Co.. a_Minnesota Corporation (Name of Subdivider) No. !3>3tf THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into this 1989, by and between the City of Orono, a municipal corporation organised under the laws of the State of Minnesota (hereinafter called "City-), and Rebers Construction Co., a Minnesota Corporation, its successors and assigns, (hereinafter called "Subdivider") MITNESSETH: WHEREAS, the Subdivider has made application to the City Council for approval of a final plat of land within the corporate limits of the City legally described in Exhibit A attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference (the -Sul^?./ision**); and WHEREAS, the City Council by Resolution No. 2554 adopted December 12, 1988, attached as Exhibit B, has granted preliminary approval to the Subdivision, on the condition that the SubdiviJer enter into this agreement to provide for among other things, the installation of streets, water, sewer, other utilities, pathways, landscaping, and any other improvements hereinafter described on the terms and conditions hereinafter set forth. MOIf, THEREFORE, in consideration of the premises and of the mutual premises and conditions hereinafter contained, it is hereby agreed as follows: 1. A. Warranty of Subdivider, The Subdivider hereby warrants and represents to the City as inducement to the City’s entering into this agreement, that Subdivider's interest in the Subdivision is as set forth on Exhibit C attached hereto. B. Covenants Concerning Titla^ Subdivider hereby warrants that the title to the property in the Subdivision presently and/or as of the time of the filing of the final plat for the Subdivision is as set forth in Exhibit C. 2. Improvements. In accordance with the policies and ordinances of the City, the following described public or private improvements (hereinafter collectively called the "Improvements'*) shall be constructed and installed on the terms and conditions hereinafter co*ntained: A. Improvements to be installed by Subdivider at Subdivider's expense shall hereinafter be referred to as "Plan A Improvements". B. Improvements whic.h t’.e Subdivider has petitioned the City to install and finance on an assessment basis shall hereinafter be referred to as "Plan B Improvements". -2- 3. plan A Improvements, A. Tmprovements. The Subdivider will construct and install at Subdivider’s expense Plan A Improvements according to the terms of this agreement and the terms and conditions as set forth in drawings and specifications as listed in Exhibit D attached hereto. If the City should decide not to proceed wif construction of any or all Plan B Improvements as a public project, any such improvement not constructed by the City shall instead be assumed by Subdivider as an additional Plan A Improvement to be designed, installed and constructed by Subdivider at Subdivider’s expense according to the terms set out herein. I>, Construction Plans and Approval Thereof« The Subdivider has engaged at Subdivider’s expense a Minnesota registered civil engineer to prepare detailed plans and specifications for the complete installation of all Plan A Improvements in accordance with City standards, including preparation of estimates, special contract provisions, preparation of proposal forms and designation and description of all necessary temporary and permanent easements. Such plans and specifications are based upon such engineering surveys, including such soil borings and material tests as were determined to be necessary by the City Engineer. Such plans and specifications shall be attached to this agreement as exhibits as set forth in Exhibit D, and shall have been submitted to and have been approved in writing by the City Engineer prior to the execution of this agreement, and/or prior to t’ ^ start of construction of any Plan A Improvement. -3- The Subdivider through his engineer shall provide for competent daily inspection of all Plan A Improvements, both public and private. Inspection rep« 't copies shall be provided by the Subdivider's engineei to the City Engineer on a weekly basis. As-built drawings with service and valve ties on reproducible mylar and certifications by the Subdivider's engineer of completion and compliance with specifications approved by the City shall also be delivered to the City in the form and C' :.»• approved by the City and shall be approved by the City Engine*tfr. C. Construction of Plan A Tmprnv«yMints. (1) Completion Date, All Plan A Improvements shall be completed not later than as shown on Exhibit E. (2) Approval of Contractors. Any contractor selected by the Subdivider to construct and install any Plan A Improvement must be determined in writing by the City Engineer to be acceptable. The City reserves the right to require satisfactory proof of successful cicperience and adequate financial status of any such contractor. Where required by City ordinances, the contractor shall first obtain a license from the City. (3) Pre-Construction Conference. Prior to any construction work on the Subdivision, the Subdivider, Subdivider's contractor and engineer, shall meet with the Cit^ Engineer to review the proposed work schedule. (4) Construction, The construction, installation and materials shall be in accordance with the plans ai. ^ -4- specifications approved by the City Engineer as listed on Exhibit D. The Subdivider will cause the contractors to furnish the City Engineer with a schedule of proposed operations at least five (5) days prior to commencement of construction work. (5) Cross Sections. Upon request by the City Engineer, the Subdivider shall cause to bt. turnished tc the City Engineer for his approval cross sections at fifty (50) feet stations of all streets in the Subdivision after initial grading. No construction of storm .sewer, sanitary sewer, water main or Utility Improvements shall be commenced until the initial grading cross sections are approved in writing by the City Engineer. The Subdivider shall cause to be furnished to the City Engineer in writing a statement or contract document indicating the contractor who is responsible for regrading to the approved section after the completion of the storm sewer, sanitary sewer, water main and Utility Improvements. (6) Suf>erviaion . All of the plan work shall be under the sole supervision and control of the Subdivider. (7) Review and Approval by the CitT. All of the Plan A work shall be subject to the review and approval of the City Engineer and, where appropriate, any ether vcverrunental agency having jurisdiction. (8) Insurance. The Subdivider will cause each person who constructs and installs any Plan A Improvements to furnish the City with the same evidence of complete insurance -5- coverage (including Workmen's Compensation, liability and property damage) as is required on City contracted construction jobs as determined by the general specifications now in use. D. Faithful Performance of Plan A Construction and Guarantee, The Subdivider will faithfully comply with all terms of any and all contracts entered into by the Subdivider for the installation and construction of all Plan A Improvements and hereby guarantees the workmanship and materials for a period of one year following the City's final acceptance of the Plan A Improvements, public or private, and agrees to repair or replace, as directed by the City, and at Subdivider's sole cost and expense, any workmanship or materials that become defective, in the sole opinion of the City, within said one-year period provided notice thereof be given by the City within 30 days after said one-year period. Subdivider shall provide to the City performance, payment and warrantee bonds, or letters of credit, to assure compliance with this provisions as provided in paragraph 5. below. 4. Plan B ImprovementgL,^ A, Public Tlipr*^^*^***^"*^ Petition. Execution of this Subdivider's Agreement by Subdivider shall constitute a petition for installation of public improvements pursuant to Minnesota Statutes Chapter 429, Section 429.031, Subd. 3, wherein Subdivider petitions the City Council to install and to finance the following Plan B Improvements and to assess the cost of said improvements against the Subdivision according to the terms of this agreement -6- and the terms and conditions as set forth in Exhibit D attached hereto. <1) Storm sewers including all necessary culverts, catch basins, ponds, inlets, channel improvements, and other appurtenances (hereinafter called "Storm Sewer Improvements"); (2) Sanitary sewer trunks, laterals or extensions, including all necessary building services to the property line and other appurtenances (hereinafter called "Sanitary Sewer Improvements"); (3) Water main laterals or extensions, including all necessary building services to the property line, hydrants, valves and other appurtenances (hereinafter called "Water Main Improvements"); (4) Standard street name signs at all newly opened intersections and such other traffic control signs within the Subdivision to be installed only by the City (hereinafter called "Traffic Signing Improvements"); B. General Tcrmap and Conditions for Ordering Public Improvement: project. (1) Subdivider*s Obliaationa. The City and Subdivider hereby agree that the City will not consider construction or installation of the Plan B Improvements as a public project unless it receives the following legal and financial assurances from the Subdivider: (a) Subdivider shall petition for said improvements by executing this agreement. -7- (b) Subdivider also agrees that it will obtain the agreement of such other landowners as the City deems necessary to petition for these improvements. (c) Subdivider shall by executing this agreement agree to the assessment formula, costs and payment terms as set forth herein. (d) Subdivider shall execute this agreement and assessment appeal waiver prior to the time that the public improvement project is scheduled to be ordered. (e) Subdivider shall at the time this agreement is executed, provide to the City all required assessment payment bonds or other security as provided herein. (2) General Procedures. Upon receipt of Subdivider's petition and that of other required parties, the City Council will order a feasibility report to be prepared by the City Engineer. Upon receipt of said report, the City Council will call an improvement hearing for the purpose of considering ordering of these Plan B Improvements. Thereafter, the City Engineer will prepare final plans and specifications and bids will oe taken. Upon receipt of bids, the City Council will determine whether or not to order any or all Plan B Improvements as a public project, or to reject any or all bids and decline to order the public project or any part thereof. Contracts will thereafter be awarded for any Plan B Improvement to be constructed and installed as a public improvement. -8- (3) City*a Option. Subdivider expressly agrees that the City Council has the right and authority to order all or part of the proposed public improvement project or to refuse to order all or any part of said project at any stage of the proceedings listed in paragraph (2) above. Subdivider further agrees to pay the City for the engineering feasibility report and for any other reasonable engineering, legal and administrative expenses related to the Plan B Improvement petition. C. Construction Plena and ApprtiYal TlKlMQt.> The City will engage the duly appointed City Engineer to prepare detailed plans and specifications for the complete installation of all Plan B Improvements, including preparation of estimates, special contract provisions, preparation of proposal forms and designation and description of all necessary temporary and permanent easements. Such plans and specifications shall be coordinated with Subdivider's engineer for proper placement of driveway curb cuts and individual building utility services. Approval of said plans shall rest solely with the City. The City, through its engineer, shall provide for competent inspection of all Plan B Improvements consistent with standard City policies and practices for public improvement projects. The City Engineer will prepare as-built drawings with service and valve ties consistent with standard City policies and practices, and will provide up to six (6) copies of same to the Subdivider if so requested. -9- D. Congf^rMction of Plain P . (1) fnapigtiion Data. All Plan B Improvements are scheduled for completion as shown on Exhibit E, however. Subdivider agrees that the City will not be liable for failure to complete the Plan B Improvements by that date. (2) Approval of Contractors. The City shall have the sole right to approve or reject contractors for construction of Plan B Improvements. (3) Pre-Conatruction Conference. Prior to any work on Plan B Improvements within the Subdivision, the City Engineer, and City's Contractor will meet with the Subdivider and Subdivider's engineer to review the proposed work schedule. (4) Construction. The construction, installation, and materials for Plan B Improvements within the Subdivision shall be in accordance with the plans and specifications prepared by the City Engineer. (5) Supervision. All of the Plan B Improvements work shall be under the sole supervision and control of the City through its City Engineer. (6) BiiiMHimnta. The Subdivider shall make available to the City, at no cost to the City, all permanent or temporary easements necessary for the installation of the Plan B Improvements within the Subdivision, as determined by the City Engineer including if requested, a blanket construction easement over the entire Subdivision. All such easements requested by the -10- city shall be in writing, in recordable form, and on the standard easement form of the City or on such other terms and conditions as the City shall determine, including dedication of permanent easements on the final plat drawings. (7) Insurance. The City will cause each person who constructs and installs any Plan B Improvements to furnish the City with evidence of complete insurance coverage (including Workmen's Compensation, liability and property damage) as is required on all City contracted construction jobs as determined by the general specifications now in use. 5. Plan A Construction Secnirity. A. Pcrforaance Bond or Letter of Concurrently with the execution of this agreement by the Subdivider, Subdivider will furnish to, and at all times thereafter shall maintain with, the City a satisfactory and sufficient performance and payment bond required by Minnesota Statutes, Section 574.26 (1967) for public developers in the amount of at least 150% (110%?) of the total estimated cost of Plan A Improvements as determined in paragraph 3 above, with a corporate surety satisfactory to the City, and naming the City as obligee thereunder. Included among the obligations of the surety under such bond shall be that the Subdivider shall fully and faithfully discharge Subdivider's obligations with respect to the Plan A Improvements during the installation and construction period and that all persons doing work or furnishing skills, tools, machinery. -11- materials« insurance premiums, equipment, or supplies in connection with the construction and installation of the Plan A Improvements, or in connection with any work thereon under the one-year guaranty of Subdivider, shall be paid therefor. In lieu of the bond herein required or at the request of the City, Subdivider will deposit with the City an irrevocable letter of credit in a form satisfactory to the City in at least said amount, providing that the City is able to draw upon such letter of credit in its sole discretion to complete the Plan A Improvements. The amounts required for the bond or letter of credit are set forth in Exhibit E attached hereto. The City Council may authorize reduction of the amount of such bond or letter of credit as completion of the Plan A Improvement progressees, based upon recommendations by the City Engineer and the City Engineer's estimate of the cost of completion of all remaining Plan A Improvements and so long as the amount of the remaining bond or letter of credit equals at least 50% of the cost of all amounts to be paid by Subdivider pursuant to this agreement ‘to complete the remainder of the Plan A Improvements. Final •• expiration of the bond or release of the letter of credit shall not be made until completion of all public or private Plan A Improvements and final acceptance or approval thereof by the City Engineeer and until receipt of all appropriate lien waivers acknowledging complete payment for all labor, materials and services related thereto. -12- B. Warranty and Guarantee for Plan A Improvenients. Concurrently, with the execution of this agreement by the Subdivider, the Subdivider will furnish to the City the attached instrument (Exhibit G) as warranty and guarantee for the Pian A Improvements in at least 10% of the total estimated cost of Plan A Improvements as determined in paragraph 3 above. Included among the obligations of the instrument are the requirements that the Subdivider shall fully and faithfully discharge Subdivider's obligations with respect to the repair or replacement of any Plan A Improvement or portion thereof that .nay be ordered by the City during the one-year guarantee period, or within 30 days thereafter, and that all persons doing work or furnishing skills, tools, machinery, materials, insurance premiums, equipment or supplies in connection with said repair or replacement shall be paid therefore, including payment to the City for any such work as may be undertaken by the City, its employees or contractors. Final expiration of Exhibit G shall not occur until at least 30 days after expiration of the one-year guarantee period, and then not until final acceptance or approval of all public or private Plan A Improvements by the City Engineer, including a certification that no defective workmanship or materials are present and that any and all required repairs or replacements have been satisfactorily completed. Depending upon the nature or extent of any defective materials or workmanship, repairs or replacements as may be found by the City during the guarantee period, the City may require and -13- the Subdivider shall and hereby does agree to extend the guarantee and the warrantee in Exhibit G £or an additional period o£ time not to exceed one additional year beyond the completion date o£ the last such repair or replacement. 6. Asseasmgnf Agreement for Plan B ImprovtHiienhg - A. Plan B Assessment Formula. City and Subdivider agree to the assessment formula and estimated costs for Plan B Improvements as set forth in Exhibit F attached hereto, and Subdivider further agrees to any incidential cost changes or supplemental assessments as may be necessary to cover actual contract bid prices, construction change orders or other unforeseen cost increases so that Subdivider's share of total improvement costs remains as agreed in paragraph 6.A. above. B. Lew of Special Assessments and Required Prepayments. The above agreed upon snare of the installation of Plan B Improvements, including any reasonable engineering, legal and administrative costs incurred by the City, shall be paid by the Subdivider to the City as special assessments levied against the benefited land area in five (5) equal annual installments with interest on unpaid installments at an annual percentage rate to be established by the City at the time of the sale of the improvement bonds issue, or as set forth in Exhibit F attached hereto. Reference herein to special assessments shall be deemed to include, and shall include, all interest due thereon. -14- (1) If the special ssments levied by resolution of the City Council pursua*. s agreement are adopted by it between October 10th of any year and April 10th of the follow! *g year# it is understood and agreed that the Subdivider will pay to the City Clerk one-half (1/2) of the first annual installment with interest on or before May 31st next following the levy# and will pay the remaining one half (1/2) of such first install.lent with interest to the City Clerk on or before the following September 30th. All remaining installments shall be paid as assessments to the Treasurer of Hennepin County as and when the general property taxes become d’>e upon said property. (2) If the special assessments levied by the City Council pursuant to this agreement are adopted between April 11th and October 9th of any year, then all installments due hereunder shall be paid as assessments to the Treasurer of Hennepin County as and when the general property taxes become due on said property. (This section needs further discussion.) C. Required prepayinent of Assess, rfflt UPQB tT ^ubdivider. If, before the entire improvement cost assessed or to be assessed against the property in the benefited area is paid in full, the Subdivi...er, its heirs, succssors or assigns, tranf'ers such property or a portion thereof# the Subdivider hereby agrees# for itself, its lieirs, successors and assigns, at its own cost and expense to pay the entire unpaid improvement cost assessed or to be assessed undtfr this agreement against the property to be -15- transferred. If any such transfer is Made before the apecial assessments have been levied^ the Subdivider shall pay the City a sun of cash equal to the City Engineer's estinate of the special assessments for Plan B Improvements that will be levied against the property to be so transferred. The Subdivider shall be liable to the City for any deficiency* and the City shall pay to the Subdivider any overplus arising from payment based on such estimate. Hereafter* any reference to special assessments shall include any such estimated special assessments. D. Acceleration Opon Default, in the event Subdivider violates any of the covenants and agreements herein contained and to be performed by Subdivitier* or fails to pay any installment of any special assessment levied pursuant hereto* or any interest thereon* when the same is to be paid pursuant thereto, the City* at its option* in addition to its rights and remedies hereunder* by written notice given to Subdivider* may declare all of the unpaid special assessments which are then estimated or levied pursuant to this agreement due and payab'e in full* with interest* and all of the unpaid special assessments* with interest* shall be payable on or before the May 31 or October 31* whichever is earlier* next following the giving of such written notice to Subdivider; or the City* at its option* may demand immeLUate payment thereof and immediately commence legal action against Subdivider to collect the enc^ *'-.j balance of the special assessments then estimated or ie .pursuant hereto* with -16- interest, including reasonable attorneys' fees, and Subdivider shall be personally liable for such special assessments, and, if more than one, such liability shall be joint and several. Also, the Subdivider shall be liable to the City for any deficiency and the City shall pay to the Subdiv'der any overplus arising from payment based on an estimate. Also, if any payment is not made by Subdivider pursuant to paragraph 6C, the City, at its option, may refuse to give a building permit to any property transferred on which the assessments have not been paid. E. Waieer of Agnesaaent Appeal, Execution of this Subdivider's agreement by Subdivider shrill constitute Subdivider's formal agreement to the assessment agreement and formula as set forth in this paragraph 6, including all subparagraphs, and in Exhibit F attached hereto. Subdivider further agrees to waive# and hereby does wai/e any and all rights to appeal from the special assessment, including any supplemental assessment, as set forth herein, including but not limited to, any procedural or substantive rights, right to public hearing, rig.it to any notice, pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 429, or any other ordinance Of the City, constitution, or law of the State of Minnesota or the United States. 7 • Services to be Perfor—d bi» ' it-v FSTBMti A. Plan A Improvements. ^ti respect to Plan A Improvements, the City Engineer: -I' -17- (1) will coordinate the design of Plan B Improvements with Subdivider's engineer as for lot layout, street and easement locations, proposed building service and curb cut location., and Site Grading Improvements. (2) will review and approv;^ the Subdivider's securing of all necessary permits. (3) may make periodic inspection of construction progress, methods and materials. (4) may make final job inspections. (5) will review and approve as-built drawings and service ties. B. Plan B Tnmrovements. With respect to Plan B Improvements, the City: (1) will order a report to determine the feasibility of constructing the Plan B Improvements as a public improvement project. (2) will hold required public hearings on said improve*"*’ ts. (3) ’’ill order preparation of plans and fications for Plan B Improvements. (4) will order advertisement for bids cid conduct a bid letting for Vlan B Improvements. (5) may order construction of Plan B Improvements as a public project, including performance of all legal, engineering and administrative review and coordination of -18- fnr said project through sale „id project, and ^,ns. . ^.ac »■»— .. p.r .» ot, .... •“ . . ...Mivl... ^'hibit H, Tbe Declaration of Covenants and Conditions, attached EX I 1 purchasers of the lots of the ~ ... ................... „..i.l p.ovi.i... . m^.iiAitka Pefita ^ ( , „o building permits shall be iss««J «« .eter final plat approval and P„ Xot (j> Building permits tor c Plot C has been improved -ith a toed will not be issued until ou base approved in writing by the C^ty „ „n ..c... .. u. ,„n.n, ... .... .."P-*- ■ C Baflal-HQ»a- an.ae and promotion, if eny< »**•“ ** „„ael home signage and P .-.cial "for-sale" signs unless spe H..ited to typical residential -19- approval is first obtained from the City Council# and a temporary certificate of occupancy must be issued for model home purposes. 11. Regolution of City. The Subdivider agrees to be bound by the provisions set forth in the resolution of the City Council approving the preliminary plat of this Subdivision, attached to this agreement as Exhibit B, and by the Resolution of the City Council approving the final plat of this Subdivision and the resolution of the City granting a conditional use for the subdivision as a PPD. 12. Binding Effect. The terms and provisions hereof shall be binding upon and inure to the benefit of the heirs, representatives, successors and assigns of the parties hereto and shall be binding upon all future owners of all or any part of the Subdivision and shall be deemed covenants running with the land and shall be enforceable by the City against the Subdivider, his heirs and assigns and against the home owners association required by paragraph 10 of this agreement. References herein to Subdivider, if there be more than one, shall mean each and all of them. This agreement, or a short form thereof to be executed by the Subdivider, at the option of the City shall be placed of record so as to give notice hereof to subsequent purchasers and encumbrancers of all or any part of the Subdivision and all recording fetv- if any, shall be paid by the Subdivider. 13. Woticaa. Whenever in this agreement it shall be required or permitted that notice or demand be given or served by -20- either party to this agreement to or on the other party, such notice or demand shall be delivered personally or mailed by United States certified mail (return receipt requested) to the addresses set forth on Exhibit E. Such notice or demand shall be deemed timely given when delivered personally or when deposited in the mail in accordance with the above. 14. ttelease of Security. Upon performance satisfactory to the City by :he Subdivider of the terms of this agreement, excluding the expiration of any guaranty or warranty period herein and the performance by Subdivider of Subdivider's obligations herein with respect to any such guaranty of warranty, the City will release to the Subdivider cash deposited in escrow in accordance with this agreement or, in case Of performance bond or letter of credit shall release such investment in a form satisfactory to the Subdivider. 15. Incorporation hr Reference. All plans, special provisions, proposals, specifications and contracts for the Improvements furnished and let pursuant to this agreement shall be and hereby are made a part of this agreement by reference as fully as if set out herein in full. 16. tteleaae to be Filed in the Chain of Title. Upon performance by the Subdivider of the terms of this ajreement, excluding the expiration of any guaranty or warranty period, the City will at Subdivider’s request, provide to the Subdivider for filing a resolution satisfactory to the Subdivider of his performance of this agreement in accordance with its terms. -21- A. niTlilir Iff rifTi It is understood end sgreed thst the City, the City Council, and the agents and enployees of the City shall not be personally liable or responsible in any BMnner to Subdi'fider, or Subdivider's contractors, subcontractors. Bwterials»n, laborers or any other persons, firm or corporation, for any debt, claim, demand, damages, actions or causes of action of any hind or character arising out of or by reason of the execution of this agreement or the performance and completion of the Improvements. B. mftim Tnrt—IflrsMnili The Subdivider shall indemnify and hold harmless the City, the City Council, and the agents and employees of the City from and against all claims, damages, losses or expenses, including attorney fees, which the City, City Council and agents and employees of the City may suffer or for which it may be held liable, arising out of or resulting from the assertion against them of any claims, debts or obligations in consequence of the performance of this agreement by the Subdivider, its employees, agents or subcontractors, whether or not caused in part by a party indeiinified hereunder. 17* Be—dy for Default, Default by the Subdivider of any of the terms of this agreement shall automatically result in the suspension or withholding of all permits, licenses, occupancy certificates or other authorizations issued b/ the City in connection with the property included in this Subdivision. The resmdies afforded to the City under this section shall be in -22- addition to any other remedies to which the City may be entitled by law or other agreement. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the City and Subdivider have caused this agreement to be duly executed on the day and year first above written. CITY OF ORONO In the presence of: - - - - - --- - - - - - - - - - - - By___ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Its Mayor and In the presence of: Its City Clerk ZSRP576 SUBDIVIDER -23- DRAFT.. nnay » DECLASATIOH OF COVENANTS, CONDITIONS, RESTRICTIONS AND EASEMENTS FOR A SUGAR WOODS CkJLa^rU. Ue«4" F»«’*'*»**** iiJodHaM4 ('/<xor#< *• Ar- ** THIS INSTRUMENT NAS DRAFTED BY: LEONARD, STREET « DEINARD (HMH) South Fifth Street, Suite^2300 Hinneapolis, Minnesota 55402 ^ 612/^35-1562 TABLE OF CONTENTS ARTICLE I DEFINITIONS ARTICLE II PROPERTY RIGHTS Section 1. Owners* Easements of Enjoyment Section 2. Delegation of Use Section 3. Right of Ingress and Egress Section 4. Utility Easements ARTICLE III COMMON AREA MAINTENANCE Section 1. a Sugarvoods Drj^ye_ Section 2. Utility Lines Section 3. ^Private Woodland Preserve Section 4. Entrance Monuments Section 5. Private Pedestrian Trail Section 6. Other Common Facilities Section 7. Costs ARTICLE IV INSURANCE Paqa 1 3 3 3 3 3 4 4 5 6 6 6 7 7 7 Section 1.Casualty Insurance on Insurable Common Area 7 Se*'* -on 2.Liability Insurance 8 Section 3.Fidelity Bond 8 Section 4.Replacement or Repair of Property.8 Section 5.Coverage, Loss Adjustment 8 Section 6.Other Insurance; Annual Review of Policies 8 ARTICLE V MEMBERSHIP AND VOTING RIGHTS Section 1. Membership Appurtenant to Ownership Section 2. Classes of Voting Members - i - TABT.B OF CONTENTS. Confd. ARTICLE VI COVENANT FOR ASSESSMENTS Section 1. Purpose of Assessments Section 2. Section 3. Section 4. Section 5. Section 6. Section 7. Section 8. Section 9. Creation of the Lien and Personal Obligation for Assessments Annual Assessments Emergency Fund Assessment^ Sinking Fund Assessments Capital Assessments Separate Assessments Uniform Rate of Assessment Effect of Nonpayment of Assessments; Remedies of the Association Section 10. Late Payment Section 11. Subordination of the Lien to Mortgages ARTICLE VII ARCHITECTURAL CONTROL Section 1. Architectural Control Committee Section 2. Design Review Section 3. Review Period ARTICLE VIII RENTAL OF LOTS Section 1. General Lease Provisions Section 2. '^ngth of Tenancy Section 3. Adoption of Association Documents Section 4. Liability for Association Assessments ARTICLE IX ADDITIONAL RESTRICTIONS 9 9 9 10 10 11 11 11 12 12 12 12 13 13 13 14 14 14 14 14 14 15 - ii - TABLE OF CONTENTS. Cont’d. ARTICLE X ADMINISTRATJVS PROVISIONS Section 1. Enforcement Section 2. Severability Section 3. Amendment Section 4. FNMA Provisions Page Section 1.Residential Use 15 Section 2.House Size 15 Section 3.Accessory Structures 15 Section 4.Obstruction of Common Area 15 Section 5.Pets 15 Sectin 6.Home Occupations 13 Section 7.Clotheslines 16 Section 8.Signs 16 Section 9.Antennas 16 Section 10.Trash 16 Section 11.Nuisance; Illegal Activities 16 Section 12.Utility and Dranage Easements 17 Section 13.Rules and Regulations 17 Section 14.^Building Setback Area 17 Section 15.Building Pad 17 Section 16.Lot Coverage 18 18 18 19 19 19 - iii - DECZARATION OF COVENANTS, CONDITIONS, RESTRICTIONS AND EASEMENTS FOR SUGAR WOODS THIS DECIARATION Is nadM_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ CONSTRUCTION CO*, a Mlnnasd^r^CDTpUra^ion (**Dscla]ran by REBERS RECITALS A. Daclarant is the fee owner of certain property in the City of Orono, County of Hennepin, State of Minnesota, legally described as follows: Lots 1 through 6, Block 1; Lots 1 through 6, Block 2; Lots 1 through 5, Block 3; Lots 1 through 8, Block 4; and Outlets A, B and C; all in SUGAR WOODS, according to the recorded plat thereof. B. Dc clarant desires to subject said property to certain covenants, conditions, restrictions and easements for the benefit of said property. DECLARATION NOW THEREFORE, Declarant hereby declares that all of the property described above shall be held, sold and conveyed subject to the following covenants, conditions, restrictions and easements, which are for the purpose of protecting the value and desirability of, and which shall run with, said property and be blinding up on all parties having any right, title or interest in said property or any part thereof, their heirs, successors and assigns, and shall inure to the benefit of each o%mer thereof. ARTICLE I DEFINITIONS 1. "Assessments'* . mean Annual Asi issments, Emergency Fund Assessments, Sinking Assessments, Capital Assessments and Separate Assessments, as described in Article VI. "Association" shall mean Sugar Woods Homeowners Associ^ion, a Minnesota nonprofit corporation, its succes sors and assii*, 2^ "Board* means the Board of Directors of Sugar Woods Home- owners AdSwciation, Inc. 4"Building Setback Areas" means the koilowing areas of each and every Lot: (a) The front 50 feet, rear 50 feet an 1 side 40 feet of Lots 1 through 4 of Block 1; and (b) The front 50 feet, rear 50 feet and side 30 feet of all other lots in Blocks 1, 2, 3 and 4. 5. "City" shall mean the City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation. 6. "Common Area" shall mean all real property (including any improvements thereon) owned by the Association for the common • e and enjoyment of the Owners. The Common Area to be owned by the Association at the time of the conveyance of the first Lot is legally described as Outlets A, B and C, SUGAR WOODS, Hennepin County, Minnesota. ^ "Declarant" shall mean Rebers Construction Co., a Minnesota corporation, its successors and assigns, if such suc- --•“.ors or assigns should acquire more than one undeveloped Lot from the Declarant for the purpose of development. 8. "FNMA" means Federal National Mortgage Association. 9. "Lot" shall mean any parcel of land shown upon any recor^^d plat of the Properties, except for the Common Area. 10. "Member" snail mean the Owner of a Lot .n its capacity as a member of the Association. 11. "Owner" shall mean the record owner, whether one or more persof?Tor entities, of fee s..Miple title to any Lot which is a part of the Properties. However, if a Lot is being sold by a ro» s^^Jed contract for deed, then the contract vendee shell be deemed the "Owner" rather than the contract vendor. 12. "Private Woodland Presr. means Outlets A and B, SUGAR W00DS~nd those porci ns of Och .ot C, SUGAR WOODS that are not improved with Sugarwooa. Drive. 13. "Properties" shall mean the real property in the City of OronoT^ounty of Hennepin, State of Minnesota, legally described as follows: Lots 1 through 6, Block 1; Lots 1 through 6, Block 2; Lots 1 through 5, Block 3; Lots 1 through 8, BIock 4; and - 2 - Outlots A, B and C; all in SUGAB WOODS, according to the recorded plat thereof• • I 14; "S".garwoods Drive** neans the private road within Outlot I c, SUGAR WOODS. ARTICLE II PROPERTY RIGHTS Section 1. Owners* Eaacincnts of Eniovnent. Every Owner shall have an equal right and easemc of enjoyment in and to the Common Area, which shall be appurtene io and shall pass with the title to every Lot, subject to the foixowing provisions: (a) The Association has the right to suspend the voting rights and the right to use recreational facilities by an Owner for any period daring whirh any assessment I ^inst his Lot remains unpaid, and for a period not to e./vceed 60 days for any infraction of its published rules and regulations. (b) The Association has the r^/ht to dedicate or transfer all or any part of the Common Area to any public agency, authority or utility for such purposes and subject to such conditions as r he ag..eed to by the Members. No such dedication or ti er shall be effective unless an instrument agreeiiAj to such dedication or transfer signed by sixty-seven percent (67%) of each class of Members has been recorded and (ii) a resolution of the City Council of the CitrT" of Orono approving sucH dedication or Transfer nas oeen reccided. Section 2. Delegation of Use. Eac>: Lot ^)wner aelegate, in accordance with the Bylaws of the Ai^.^ociar.ion, ‘-is right of enjoyment to the Common Area and facilities to the r 'nnirs of his family, his tenants, or contract purchasers who resi^rr tn lot. Section 3. Right of Tnoress and E^rress.. Each Lot Owner shall have an unrestricted right ingress and egress to his Lot from Sugarwoods Drive. Such right shall be perpetual and shall pass to- a new Lot Owner upon transfer or sale of the Lot. Section 4. Utility Easements. Easements for public utility and drainge purposes are dedicated in the plat of SUGAR WOODS along the ^ierimeter of each Lot and covering - v?. of Outlot C, SUGAR WOODS. - 3 - ARTICLE III COMMON AREA MAINTENANCE Sec’tlon 1. SuaarwQods Drive. a. The Declarant shall construct a private road on Outlot C, SXJ&Xr woods, pursuant to plans and specifications satisfactory to the City and according to the time table set forth in the ^^ubd^jliSgSJlS.between the Declarant and the City. JThe^ •^amerTn^S^^vati^^^roadjdiallJbe^JJSugarw —i ^ The Association shall maintain Sugarvoods Drive. Road maintenance shall include (without limitation) the following: plowing and removing snow from the road surface; clearing dirt, leaves and debris from the road surface; repairing the road; repairing the curbs; and replacing the road and the curbs. The Association shall maintain Sugarwoods Drive to at least the standard of quality it had upon completion of construction of Sugarwoods Drive by the Declarant pursuant to plans and specifications approved by the City. The Association shall also maintain Sugarwoods Drive to such standards as may be required from time to time by the ordinances of the City .ertaining to private roads. c^ The Association may limit access to Sugarwoods Drive to the Owners, their families, tenants, guests and invitees by appropriate means, including (without limitation) the following: signs, a gate, or a guard house. d. The Declarant hereby dedicates to the City for public use forever a perpetual easement road purposes over that part of Outlot C, SUGAR WOODS which is occupied by Sugarwoods Drive as built by the Declarant. This easement does not imply that the City has any obligation to build or maintain Sugarwoods Drive. e. If the Association fails to maintain, repair or replace Sugarwoods Drive as provided herein, then the City shall have the right (but not the obligation) to maintain, repair and replace Sugarwoods Drive as provided herein. Any such actions by the City shall not convert Sugarwoods Drive into a public road. The Owners of each of the 25 Lots shall pay the City l/25th of the costs incurred by the City in maintaining, repairing and replacing Sugarwoods Drive. The City shall invoice each Lot 0%mer for such costs. Each invoice shall be due within thirty (30) days after receipt by the Lot Owner. If the invoice against a lot is not paid on time, then the City shall have a lien upon such Lot and the City may foreclose such lien as if it were a lien for special assessments for local improvements under Minnesota Statutes. - 4 - saetlon 2. n»<ntv i.ln«s. Lots in the Properties will be •erved by underground utility lines within Outlot C, SUGAR HOODS, - - - ' intained as follr-—•lines shall be owned and naintained as follows: (a) I (a) Telephone lines will be installed> owned and maintained by a public utility. ———— Ni^tural gas lines will be installed, owned and maintained by a public utility. ——— Electricity lines will be installed, owned and maintained by a public utili\:y. ~ Cable television lines will be installed, owned and main tained by a public utility. Private water mains will be installed by the Declarant from a new municipal water main along U.S. Highway 12 near the Southwest corner of Outlot E, SUGAR WOODS, thence Northerly and Northeasterly to the common boundary between Lots 2 and 3 of Slock 4, SUGAR WOODS, thence Northeasterly along said common boundary to Outlot C, SUGAR WOODS, and looping around Outlot C, SUGAR WOODS. Said private water mains shall be owned and maintained by the Association. Water lines from homes to the water mains in Outlot C will be owned by the respective Lot cmers and shall be maintained by them separately. Private sanitary sewer laterals will be installed by the Declarant beneath Sugarwoods Drive in Outlet C and to the intersection of Sugarwoods Drive and Brown Road, thence Southerly and Southwesterly to but not including a municipal lift station on a new municipal sanitary sewer main along the South boundary of Outlot F, SUGAR WOODS. Said private sewer laterals will be owned by the Association and maintained by the Association. Sanitary sewer service lines from homes to t^e laterals beneath Sugarwoods Drive will be ovmed by the respertive Lot Owners and shall be maintained by them separately. Private storm sewer facilities will be installed by the Declarant in Outlot C and to the intersection of Sugarwoods Drive and Brown Road, thence Southerly and Southwesterly to and including a newly built storm water retentionpond in the Southeast corner of Outlot F, SUGAR WOODS. Said private storm sewer facilities will be owned by the Association and shall be maintained by the Association. - 5 - If the Association fails to maintain, repair and replace the private utilities described subparagraphs (e), (f) and (g), then the City shall have the right (but not the obligation) to maintain, repair and replace such private utilities. Any such actions by the City shall not convert the private utilities into public utilities. The Owners of each of the 25 Lots shall pay the City l/25th of the costs incurred by the City in maintaining, repairing and replacing the private utilities. The City shall invoice each Lot Owner for such costs. Each invoice shall be due within thirty (30) days after receipt by the Lot Owner. If the invoice against such Lot is not paid on time, then the City shall have a lien upon such Lot and the City may foreclose such lien as if it were a lien for special assessments for local improvements under Minnesota Statutes. Section j. Private Woodland Preserve. The Association shall maintain the woodlands in the Private Woodland Preserve. Woodland maintenance may include (without limitation) the following: trimming and pruning of trees and bushes; removal of dead, diseased and hazardous trees and bushes; removal of brush, undergrowth, leaves and debris; planting of trees, bushes and other vegetation; watering vegetation; treating diseased vegetation; installation of landscaping structures; and control of erosion. The need for and timing of maintenance of the Private Woodland Preserve shall be in the sole discretion of the Board of Directors of the Association, subject to governmental regulations concerning weed control, diseased trees and similar matters. Within the Private Woodland Preserve, there shall be no grading without the written consent of the City and no tree two inches (2") or more in diameter at four feet (4*) above ground shall be removed without the written consent of the City unless such tree is dead, diseased or hazardous to an adjoining Lot or to traffic on Sugairwoods Drive. ^See Article IX, Section 14 for maintenance of the woodlands in the Building Setback Area. Section 4. Entrance Monuments. The Declarant shall erect two entrance monuments on Outlot A, SUGAR WOODS — one on either side of the intersection ofoSuoarwoods Drive and Brown Road Nort/i. The Association shall operate and maintain the entrance monuments. Operation and maintenance shall include (without limitation) the following: lighting, painting, repairing and replacing the monu ments and watering plants surrounding the monuments. Each entrance monument and changes thereto shall comply with municipals ordinances. Section 5. Private Pedestrian Trail. The Declarant shall install a pedestrian trail of crushed rock within Outlota|l^andJE^ SUGAR WOODS. The trail shall be for the private use and en3oyment of the Owners and their respective family members, tenants, guests and invitees. The Association shall maintain the trail. Trail maintenance shall include (without limitation) the following: clearing the surface of debris; repairing the trail surface and the - 6 - slopes; and controlling erosion. Bicycles, tricycles and household pets, such as dogs and cats, are allowed on the trail, but motor vehicles and horses are prohibited. Each dog must be kept on a leash. Section 6. Other Cominon Facilities. The Association, acting through its Board of Directors, shall have the right to install additional facilities in the Common Area for the use and enjoyment of all the Owners; but no other group of Owners and no individual Owner shall have the right to install any facilities in the Common Area, whether for the private use of one or more Owners or for the common use of all Owners. The Association shall maintain all facilities owned by the Association on the Common Area ^ elsewhere. Section 7. Costs. The Association shall operate and maintain the Common Area and the Association's improvements thereon jcff elsewhere, at the cost of all the Owners. Such costs are common *Sxpenses included in the common assessments levied by the Association. However, if the need for maintenance or repair of any part of the Common Area or the Assog^aJj^iaai^ improvements thereon or elsewhere is caused through the willful or negligent act of an Owner, or through the willful or negligent act of a family member, guest or invitee of an Owner, then the cost of such maintenance or repair shall be added to and become part of the assessment to which the Owner's Lot is subject. ARTICLE IV INSURANCE Section 1. Casualty Insurance on Insurable Common Area. The Association shall keep all insurable improvements and fixtures of the Common Area insured against loss or damage by fire or other casualty. The Association may obtain insurance against such other hazards that are normally covered by the standard extended coverage endorsement and all other perils customarily covered for similar types of projects, including those covered by the standard "All Risk" endorsement. Such insurance shall cover 100% of the current replacement cost of the property covered. The Association may also insure any other property whether real or personal, o%med by the Association, against loss or damage by fire and such other hazards as the Association may deem desirable, with the Association as the jgwner and beneficiary of such insurance. The insurance coverage with respect to the CoTumon Area shall be written in the name of, and the proceeds tliereof shall be payable to the Association. Insurance proceeds shall be used by the Association for the repair or replacement of the property for which the insurance was carried. PremiuTTis for all insurance carried by the Association are Common Expenses included in the Common Assessments levied by the Association. * - 7 - Section 2. Liability Insurance. The Association shall naintain liability insurance for the protection of all Members against claims arising out of injuries or damages sustained on or about the Common Areas in an amount of at least One Million Dollars ($1,000,'000) per occurrence or such higher amount as the Board deems appropriate. Section 3. Fidelity Bond. The Association shall maintain blanket fidelity bonds for all Association officers, employees or agents who handle or are responsible for the funds of the Asso ciation. The bonds shall be in an amount equal to all funds in the possession of the Association at any time and in no event less than three months' assessments for all Lots plus the Association's reserve funds. "" Section 4. Replacement or Repair of Property. In the event of damage to or destruction of any property of the Association, the Association shall repair or replace the same from the insurance proceeds available. If such insurance proceeds are insufficient to cover the costs of repair or replacement of the property damaged or destroyed, the Association may JLe^ a Capital Assessment (pursuant to Article VI, Section 6) against all Lot Owners to cover the additional cost of repair or replacement not covered by the insurance proceeds, in addition to any other Common Assessments levied against the Lot Owners. Section 5. Coverage. Loss Adjustment. The coverage and provisions of all insurance obtained by the Association shall be in conformity with FNMA requirements. Section 6. Other Insurance; Annual Review of Policies. The Association shall maintain any other insurance required by law or by the FNMA or that it determines desirable and appropriate. All insurance policies shall be reviewed at least annually by the Board of Directors of the Association in order to ascertain whether the coverage contained in the policies is sufficient. ARTICLE V MEMBERSHIP AND VOTING RIGHTS Section 1. Membership Appurtenant to Ownership. Every Lot is subject to assessment by the Association. Every Owner of a Lot shall be a member of the Association. Membership shall be appurtenant to and may not be separated from ownership of any Lot which is subject to assessment. Section 2. Classes of Voting Members. The Association shall have two classes of voting members as follows; - 8 - Class A. Claims A Members shall be all Ovmers, with the exception of the Declarant, and shall be entitled to one vote for each Lot owned. When more than one person is the Owner of a Lot, all such persons shall be Members and each shall be entitled to a fraction of a vote equal to the person's fractional ownership of the Lot. Class B. The Class B Member shall be the Declarant, which shall be entitled to three (3) votes for each Lot owned. The Class B membership shall cease and be converted to Class A memberships upon the happening of the earlier of the following events; (a) when 75% of the Lots have been conveyed of record to Owners other than the Declarant; or (b) seven years after the first Lot is conveyed of record to an Owner other than the Declarant. ARTICI.E VI COVENANT FOR ASSESSMENTS Section 1. Purpose of Assessments. The Association may levy assessments exclusively to promote the recreation, health, safety, and welfare of the residents in the Properties and for the improvement and maintenance of the Common Area and the Association's property, including reasonable reserves for iurure repairs"^Taintenance and replacement. Section 2. Creation of the Lien and Personal Obligation for Assessments. The Declarant, for each Lot owned within the Pro perties, hereby covenants, and each Owner of any Lot by acceptance of a deed therefor, whether or not it shall be so expressed in such deed, is deemed to covenant and agree to pay to the Association; (a) Annual Assessments per Section 3 of this Article; (b) Emergency Fund Assessments per Section 4 of this Article; (c) Sinking Fund Assessments per Section 5 of this Article; (d) Capital Assessments per Section 6 of this Article; and (6) Separate Assessments per Section 7 of this Article. - 9 - Each Assessment, together with late penalties, interest, costs and reasonable attorneys' fees for the collection thereof and for the foreclosure of the lien thereof, shall be a charge on the Lots and shall be a continuing lien upon the Lots against which each such assessment is made. Each Assessment against a Lot, together with late penalties, interest, costs and reasonable attorneys' fees, shall also be the personal obligation of the person who was the Owner of the Lot at the time when the Assessment fell due. The personal obligation for delinquent Assessments shall not pass to his successors in title unless expressly assumed by them. The sale of a Lot shall not operate to discharge the seller's personal liability. Section 3. Annual Assessments. (a) The Association shall levy "Annual Assessments" to defray those costs of tne Association that occur annually or more frequently, including without limitation: taxes, insurance, bonds, operations, maintenance and minor repairs. The Board of Directors of the Association may fix the Annual Assessment in an amount determined by it to be necessary or desirable to pay such expenses for one year at a time. (b) Annual Assessments shall be due as to all Lots on the first day of the month following the conveyance of the first Lot by the Declarant to any purchaser. The first Annual Assessment may be adjusted according to the number of months remaining in the Association's fiscal year. The Board of Directors shall fix the amount of the Annual Assessment against each Lot at least thirty (30) days in advance of each fiscal year. Written notice of the Annual Assessment shall be sent to every Owner. The due dates shall be established by the Board of Directors and may be no more frequently than monthly and no less frequently than semi-annually. Section 4. Emergency Fund Assessments. (a) The Association shall establish a separate fund to meet unforeseen expenses or emergencies (the "Emergency Fund"). The Emergency Fund shall at all times be equal to two (2) months estimated Annual Assessment for each Lot, but the amounts paid into the Emergency Fund shall not be considered advance payments of Annual Assessments. (b) The Emergency Fund shall be established by "E^mergency Fund Assessments." Each Lot's share of the Emergency Fund shall be collected from the Owner at the closing of the sale of the Lot from the Declarant to the Owner. Within one year after the closing of the sale of the first Lot, the Declarant shall pay each unsold Lot's share of the Emergency ^nd to the Association. The Declarant shall be reimbursed for this payment from funds collectedi' from the various Lot Owne’-s at the closings of the sale of the Lots from the Declarant to the Owners. - 10 - (c) Whenever the Emergency Fund is depleted below the level set forth in Subsection (a), the Association shall replenish the Emergency Fund by levying additional Emergency Fund Assessments against all the Lots and their respective Owners. Section 5. Sinking Fund Assessments. (a) The Association shall establish a separate reserve fund ("Sinking Fund") to provide cash for major repairs and replacement of those improvements in the Common Area and^^^Js^wjt^gj^e that will, after a number of years, need major repairs or replacement. Such improvements include, without limitation, the road, the sanitary sewer laterals, the storm sewer facilities, water mains, the entrance monuments and the pedestrian trail. " (b) The Board of Directors shall, in good faith, determine the useful life of such improvements and an appropriate schedule of "Sinking Fund Assessment^ such that each year the Sinking Fund Assessments are approximately equal or gradually increasing and such that, when each major repair or replacement is expected to occur, there will be sufficient cash in the Sinking Fund. (c) If for any reason the Sinking Fund is ever inadequate to fund a major repair or replacement, then the Association may levy a Capital Assessment (pursuant to Section 6 of this Article) to defray the extra cost. Section 6. Capital Assessments. (a) Whenever the Board determines that the Sinking Fund is inadequate to fund a major repair or replacement, whenever insurance proceeds are inadequate to restore damaged common property and whenever the Board decides to install additional capital improvements to the Common Area or elsewhere, the Association may levy a "Capital Assessment." (b) Each Capital Assessment shall be due and payable in such installments as the Board shall determine, but no more frequently than monthly and no less frequently than semiannually, and in any event shall be fully paid within the expected useful life of the improvement. Section 7. Separate Assessments. (a) Whenrver a Lot and its 0%mer is separately responsible for maintenance or repair of any part of the Common Area, the Association shall levy a "Separate Assessment" against that Lot and its Owner. - 11 - (b) Each Separate Assessment shall be due and payable in such installments as the Board shall determine, but no more frequently than monthly and no less frequently than semi-annually and in any •vent shall be fully paid within twelve months. Section 8. Uniform Rate of Assessment. All Assessments shall be fixed at an equal rate for all Lots, except that Separate Assessments shall be levied against only those Lots and Owners whom the Board -ermines (after notice and a reasonable opportunity to be heard) . oe responsible. Section 9. Effect of Nonpayment of Assessments: Remedies of the Association. Any Assessment or portion thereof not paid within thirty (30) days after the due date shall bear interest from the due date at the rate of eight percent (8%) or such other legal rate set by the Board of Directors. The Association may bring an action at law against the Owner personally obligated to pay the entire unpaid portion including costs of attorneys* fees and interest, or foreclose the lien against the property, or both, and the costs and reasonable attorneys' fees of any such action shall be added to the amount of such Assessments and shall also be secured by the lien of the Assessment. No Owner may waive or otherwise escape liability for the Assessments provided for herein by the sale or abandonment of his Lot. Section 10. Late Payment. If an Assessment is not paid .within ten (10) days after^its due date, then the Lot Owner shall oe ooiigated to pay, in addition to fhe ^interest required under Section 9 of this Article, a late Assessment service charge under the following schedule: 11th to 30th day after 30th day $25.00 $50.00 The purpose of this fee is to compensate the Association for the expense and inconvenience of collecting late Assessments, borrowing to cover Association expenses and any other costs attributable to late payment. The Board shall collect these fees on all late payments. The Board may increase, but may not decrease or eliminate, the service charges set forth in thxs section in the same fashion as is established for the adoption of other rules and regulations. This penalty shall be added to the amount of such Assessments and be secured by the lien of the Assessment. Section 11. Subordination of the Lien to Mortgages. The lien of the Assessments provided for herein shall be subordinate to the lien of any first mortgage, provided that the mortgage was recorded before the delincjuent Assessment was due. Sale or transfer of any Lot shall not affect the Assessment lien. However, the sale or transfer of any Lot pursuant to mortgage foreclosure or any proceeding or deed in lieu thereof, shall extinguish the lien of such Assessments as to payments which became due prior to such sale - 12 - or transfer. Ko sale or transfer shall rslisvs such Lot from liability for any Assessments thereafter bscoaing dus or from the lien thereof. ARTICLE VII ARCHITECTURAL CONTROL Section 1. Architectural Control Cpyiptittee. The Board shall serve as the Architectural Control Committee or the Board shall appoint an Architectural Control Committee of at least three individuals. So long as there are any Class B Members, the Architectural Control Committee may include individuals who are not Owners. Thereafter each individual on the Architectural Control Committee must be an Owner. Section 2. Design Review. No building, fence, wall or other structure shall be commenced, erected or maintained upon the Properties, nor shall any exterior addition to or change or alteration therein be made, nor shall any change or addition in the lawns, shrubs, trees and other landscaping on any Lot be made, until the plans and specifications showing the nature, kind, shape, height, materials and location of the same shall have been submitted to and approved in writing as to harmony of external design and location in relation to surrounding structures, vegetation and topography by the Architectural Control Committee. The Owner of the Lot shall submit the following plans and specifications to the Architectural Control Committee: a. A current boundary survey. b. A site plan showing the boundaries of the Lot, the topography of the Lot, the proposed improvements, and all trees greater than 8 inches in diameter within 50 feet of the proposed house and garage. c. A grading and erosion control plan. d. Floor plans showing floor areas expressed in square feet. e. Elevation drawings, including the height above mean sea level of all floors, the peaks of the roofs and the grades immediately adjacent to the house and garage. f. Samples of the proposed exterior materials (including roofing, siding, masonry, trim, windows, doors, and garage doors) in the proposed colors. An inventory of all "Covered Areas" on the Lot (as defined in Article IX, Section 16) and a calculation of tile square footage of the Covered Areas as a percentage - 13 - VJi^ of the square footage of the "Building Pad" as defined in Article IX, Section 15; Aluminum siding, vinyl siding and masonite siding shall not be permitted. Section 3. Review Period. If the Architectural Control Committee fails to approve, disapprove or request further infor mation on such design and location within thirty (30) days after maid plans and specifications have been submitted to it, approval will not be required, and this Article will be deemed to have been fully complied with. ARTICLE VIII RENTAL OF LOTS Section 1. General Lease Provisions. Any rental of a Lot shall be by written lease. No lease shall be for less than a whole Lot and all the improvements on the Lot. Section 2. Length of Tenancy. No lease shall be for less than thirty (30) days. Any lease for more than an initial term of six (6) months shall have the prior written approval of the Board of Directors. Nothing in this Section shall limit the ability of a first mortgagee in possession of a Lot, or its succesjorm and following a foreclosure, a default or a deed or other arrangement in lieu of foreclosure from leasing the Lot for less than mix months. Section 3; Adoption of Associaticn Documents. Each lease shall contain the following provision: The undersigned tenant(s) has (have) received a copy of the Articles of Incorporation and the Bylaws of Sugar Woods Homeowners Asso-* ciation, Inc., the Declaration of Covenants, Conditions, Restrictions and Easements for Sugar Woods and the Rules adopted by the Association's Board of Directors governing this property. I (We) agree to be bound by the requirements and conditions of those dociimentm, including any other Rules adopted by the Board of Directors from time to time. Section 4. Liability for Association Assessments. A leame may provide that the tenant(s) shall pay the Association's Assess ments, but no such provision shall affect the personal liability of the Owner to the Association for such Assessments, nor the lien of such Assessments as provided herein. - 14 - ARTICLE IX ADDITIONAL RESTRICTIONS Section 1. Residential Use. Each Lot shall fes ussd only for residential purposes, except that Declarant and othy hoae builders approved bv the Declarant shall bn entitled to aaintaina»odel^hoaes upon the Lots during the construcition and sales periua. " Section 2. House Size. No house shall have nore than two stories on the side of the house facinOy^Sugarvoods Drive, (a) Each house with only one story facina^Sugarwoodg Drive shall have at least 2,200 square feet offinished interior space on that story. Each house with two stories facincuSugarwoods Drive shalJ. have at least 1,200 square feet or tinisheS interior kq^sugj space on each of those two stories. (c) Each house which is neither a single story house or a two story house (e.g. a split level) shall have at least 2,400 square feet of finished interior space on the stories that face .'^ugarwoods Drive.A — Section 3. Accessory Structures. Each Lot shall have an attached or detached garage with space for two or three automobiles. If the Lot contains a swimming pool or a tennis court, it may also contain a small building for changing clothes and storing pool or tennis equipment, but for no other purpose. No other accessory structures shall be permitted on any Lot. Each permitted accessory structure on a Lot must have the same general style and exterior materials as the house on the Lot. Each accessory structure must conform to municipal ordinances and the^ other provisions of this Declaration. Section 4. Obstruction of Common Area. There shall be no obstruction of the Common Area nor shall anything be stored in the Common Area without the prior %nritten consent of the Board of Directors of the Association. Section 5. Pets. The ownership and behavior of pet may be subject to the rules of the Association and is subject to municipal ordinances. The rules of the Association may be more restrictive that the municipal ordinances. Section 6. Home Occupations. Notwithstanding Section 1 of this Article, an Owner may engage in those home occupations that are allowed by municipal ordinances and not prohibited by rules of the Association. The Association's rules may be more restrictive than the municipal ordinances and may be amended from time to time - 15 - without **qrandfatherinq" exist j.ng home occupations. A "home occupation" is a use which is incidental and secondary to the principal use of the Lot for residential purposes and does not change the character thereof including, but not limited to, office and studio uses, weaving, dressmaking and such other uses which by custom Are considered accessory to a dwelling. Ko sign advertising a home occupation shall be displayed on any Lot or elsewhere on the Properties.^ Section 7. Clotheslines. No clothes, sheets, blankets or laundry of any kind or other articles shall be hung out or exposed in any part of the Common Area or on any Lot. Section 8. Signs. No sign of any kind shall be displayed to the public view on any Lot or on the Common Area; except that on each Lot the Owner may display one sign of not more than fi/e (5) square feet advertising the Lot for sale, and exr#>tt that Declarant may erect and maintain upon the Properties such additional signs Properties until theas it deems appropriate to advertise the Declarant ownsy^less than three (3) lots. Section_i. Adtsnnas•television antennas, satellite dishes or other antennas visible from^uqarwoods Drive, Brown Road or U.S. Highway 12 shall be erected or maintained on any Lot except with the approval of the Board of Directors or the Architectural ontrol Committee in accordance with Article^VII. Certain antennas Teguire Municipal approval. Section 10. Trash. Neither the Common Area nor any Lot shall be used or maintained as a dumping ground for rubbish, trash, garbage or other waste. No part of any Lot or of the Common Araa shall be used at any time for the storage of abandoned automobilss, boats or other equipment. Garbage, rubbish and trash shall not kept on any Lot, except in clean and sanitary containers in the garage located on such Lot. isancer Illegal Activities Nothing ehell bo Common Area or on any IJbt or on any pertdone or kept on t .« thereof which wcuj:. (i) increase the rate of ineurenee on ony other Lot over what the Owner of such other Lot or the Aoeocietion, but for such activity, would pay; or (ii) be in violation of any statute, rule, ordinance, regulation, permit or other validly imposed requirement of any governmental body. No daaaga to, OC waste of the Properties or the buildings situated thereon shall bS committed by any Owner or any invitee of any Owner. Bach Ovnar agrees to indemnify and hold harmless the Aeeocietion and the other Owners from and agaiiSt all loss resulting from any such danaga or waste caused by him or by his invitees. No noxious, daatructiva or offensive activity shall be allowed on the Coanon Area or on any Lot, nor ehall anything be done thereon, either willfully or - 16 - nn^ligently, which may be or may become an annoyance or nuisance to"any other Owner or to any other person at any time lawfully xesiding on the Properties. Section 12. Utility and Drainage Easements. In the recorded plat of SUGAR WOODS public Utility and drainage easements have been dedicated along the perimeters of all lots. Within said easement areas no houses or other improvements shall be built that would interfere with utilities or drainage. Section 13. Rules and Regulations. In addition to the foregoing restrictions, conditions and covenants concerning the use o. the Properties, reasonable rules and regulations (herein "Rules ), not in conflict therewith and supplementary thereto, may be pro ulgated and amended from time to time by the Board of Directors of the Association. Copies of the rules and regulations shall be furnished by the Association to each Lot Owner and occupant. Section 14. Building Setback Area. The Owner of each Lot shall maintain the woodlands in the Building Setback Area on the Lot. Woodland maintenance may include (without limitation) the following: trimming and pruning of trees and bushes; removal of dead, diseased and hazardous trees and bushes; removal of brush, undergrowth, leaves and debris; planting of trees, bushes and a vegetation; watering vegetation; treating diseased vegetation; installation of landscaping structures; and control of erosion. The need for and timing of maintenance of the Building Setback Area on each Lot shall be in the sole discretion of the Owner of the Lot. Within the Building Setback Area on each Lot, there shall be no grading and no tree with a diameter of two inches (2**) or more at four feet (4') above the ground shall be removed without the prior %o:itten consent of the City unless the tree is dead, diseased or hazardous to the Lot, an adjoining Lot or to Sugarwoods Drive or unless removal of the tree is nctSSRSF^jPTo build a driveway to Sugarwoods Drive in a location selected by the Owner of the Lot. Each driveway shall be no more than 20 feet wide as it passes through the front Building Setback Area. (See Article III, Section 3 for maintenance of the Private Woodland Preserve.) Section 15. Building Pad. The "Building Pad" on each Lot shall be that portion of the Lot chat is not within the Building Setback Area. All structural improvements on each Lot shall be within the Building Pad, except: (i) the driveway leading from the garage to Sugarwoods Drive must necessarily pass through the front Building Setback Area; and (ii) retaining walls and similar landscaping structures may be built within the Building Setback Area. Within the Building Pad on each Lot, no tree with a diameter of eight inches (8") or more at four feet (4') above the ground may be removed without the prior written consent of thyj^sociation. unless the tree is dead, diseased, or hazardous to the Lot, an adjoining Lot or trafficon Sugarwoods Drive, or unless removal of - 17 - the tree is necessary to build the house, garage, driveway, parking area or other improvements on the Let in locations selected by the Owner of the Lot. Section 16. Lot Coverage. on each Lot shall The square footage of the not exceed 80% of the square"Covered Area” footage of the Building Pad on the Lot. The "Covered Area" of each Lot shall include the surface area on the ground of each of the following improvements on the Lot (whether the improvement is in the Building Pad or in the Building Setback Area): (a) the footprint of each and every structural improvement on the lot, including each house, garage, building, porch and covered walkway; (b) the footprint of that portion (if any) of each roof that overhangs the building footprint by more than 18 inches; (c) all wooden decks and boardwalks, regarc spacing between the planks on the surface; (e) (f) jss of the (d) all driveways and parking areas that are paved graveled, but not those that are dirt or grass; all walkways and patios that are covered with asphalt, concrete, paving blocks (regardless of the spacing between the blocks) , or covered with gravel, rock or wood chips upon an^underliner (whether the underliner is impervious or not) , but not those walkways that are dirt, grass or gravel, rock or woodchips without an underliner; each and every landscaped area with anA underliner (whether the underliner is impervious or not), regardless oi whether the area is covered with woodchips, stones, dirt or plants. (g) any swimming pool, wading pool or artificial pond, but excluding the area of the surface of the waten. (h) any tennis court covered with concrete, asphalt or clay, but not any tennis court covered withj^grass. ARTICLE X ADMINISTRATIVE PROVISIONS Section 1. Enforcement. The Association or the City (with regard to certain provisions set forth below) or any 6vner, snail have the right to enforce, by any proceeding at law or in equity, all restrictions, conditions, covenants, reservations, liens and charges now or hereafter imposed by the provisions of this - 18 - Declaration or the Bylaws of the Association. Failure by the Association, the City or any Owner to enforce any covenant or restriction herein contained shall in no event be deemed a waiver of the right to do so thereafter. The City shall have the right (but not the obligation) to enforce the following provisi^' ^'s^6f this Declaration: Art. II, Sec. 1(b): Municipal approval of dedication or transfer of Common Area Art. Ill, Sec. 1: Maintenance of Sugarwoods Drive. Art. Ill, Sec. 2: Maintenance of private utilities. Art. Ill, Sec. 3: Maintenance of rivate Woodland Preserve. Art. IX, Sec. 14: Maintenance of Duilding Setback Areas. Art. IX, Sec. 16: Lot Coverage. Art. X, Sec. 1: EnforceT^ent. Art. X, Sec. 3: Amendment Section 2. Severability. Invalidation of any one of these covenants or restrictions by judgment or court order shall in no way affect any other provisions which shall remain in full force and effect. U0a) Section 3. Amendment.The covenants and restrictions of this %0Declaration shall run with and bind the land, for a term of^thirty J30) years from the date this Declaration is recorded, aftdr' whidfl" time they shall be automatically extended for successive periods of ten (10) years. This Declaration may be amended by an instrument signed by at least 67% of each class of members and the first mortgagees of at least 51% of the Lots. ^wever« each amendment that modifies those provisions of this Declaration that ^ i may be enforced by the City (see Article X, Section 1) or modifies fJcw the definitions of "Building Setback Area" or "Private Woodlanc Preserve" in Article I must be approved by the City Council anc the amendment instrument must be signed by the City officials authorized to sign by the City Council. ^Each amendment must be recorded to be effective. F* Section 4. FNMA Provisions. In addition to various other provisions of this Declaration and the Bylaws, which meet the requirements of FNMA, the following additional FNMA provisions are applicable to the Association, Lot Owners and the Properties: (a) No insurance on the Properties, including fidelity bonds, may be canceled or materially modified without giving ten (10) days prior written notice to any first mortgagee, any mortgage servicer - 19 - i and to the Association. First mortgagees, upon writter request, shall also receive notice of the lapse of any insura ice policy maintained by the Association. (b) A first mortgagee, upon request in writing, shall receive * notice of (i) any condemnation or casualty loss that affects either a material portion of the^Properties or the house on the Lot securing its mortgage, (ii) 4my delinquency of sixty (60) days or more in payments of assessments on the Lot securing its mortgage or (iii) any proposed action requiring the consent of a specified percentage of the first mortgagees. (c) No provision of this Declaration or the Bylaws shall give a Lot Owner or any other person, priority over the rights of first mortgagees, their successors on assigns, under the mortgage to insurance or condemnation proceeds. (d) First mortgagees, their successors or assigns, shall have the right to inspect the books and records of the Association during normal business hours. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Declarant has executed this instrument as of the day and year first above written. REBERS CONSTRUCTION CO. Sidney B. Rebers, President STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) ) ss. ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this _ _ day of_ _ _ _ _ _ _.^989. by_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _, the President rcnoof REBERS CONSTRUCTION CO., a Minnesota corporation, on behalf of the corporation. Notary Public - 20 - r 6/12/89 Draft $^;r^nTviDER*s agreement CITY OF ORONO HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA gMQar WoQ(l5_ (Name of Subdivision) Zifdyt^y/Rebers Construction Co a Minnesota Corporation_ _ (Name of Subdivider) ^nTfrol No.vJ THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into this 1989, by and between the City of Orono, a municipal corporation organized under the laws of the State of Minnesota (hereinafter called "City”), and gidrld^/Rebers Construction Co., a Minnesota Corporation, its Mid/hdif^^//successors and assigns, (hereinafter called "Subdivider") WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, the Subdivider has made application to the City Council for approval of a final plat of land within the corporate limits of the City legally described in Exhibit A attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference (the "Subdivision"); and WHEREAS, the City Council by Resolution No. 2554 adopted December 12, 1988, attached as Exhibit B, has granted preliminary approval to the Subdivision, on the condition that the Subdivider pnter into this agreement to provide for among other things, the installation of streets, water, sewer, other utilities, noLliwiys^ landscaping, and any other improv^ents hereinafter described on the terms and conditions hereinafter set forth. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the premises and of the mutual promises and conditions hereinafter contained, it is hereby agreed a? follows: « 1. A. WaiX3Jlty_Qf Subdivider. The Subdivider hereby warrants and represents to the City as inducement to the City’s entering into this agreement, that Subdivider’s interest in the Subdivision is as set forth on Exhibit C attached hereto. ?J£dyZddd/td/i;Md/eZt;//ddd/2lZZ/?id£i!(ddd/v4ZtM/driy/Zfl£d£djSt/Zd/£Md 8dbdZyZ^Zdi1/irtdi^E/dXddkltd/tMZd/d^£dd«iddt//g;drlt£de;£/fdif/dddd/ydddd£^/ Jrtd££^d^ddd/dfld/d£Mi^£^/^4Zi:M/d/e;ZdZirt/df/tZtZd/dr/v^Md/MdZd/d{idZtdbZd £ZEZd/Hld^t/d^£dd/td/dZZdv4/tKd/SdbdZyZ^Zd/l/td/bd/dde;dirtbd£dd/b//tMd C.QVenaiit5_ Concerning Title. Subdivider hereby warrants that the title to the property in the Subdivision presently and/or as of the time of the filing of the final plat for the Subdivision is as set forth in Exhibit C. 2- IfliproverBentSt in accordance with the policies and ordinances of the City, the following described public or private -2- improvements (hereinafter collectively called the "Improvements”) shall be constructed and installed on the terms and conditions hereinafter contained: A. Tmprc'yements to be installed by Subdivider at Subdivider's expense shall hereinafter be referred to as "Plan A Improvements". B. Improvements which the Subdivider has petitioned the City to install and finance on an assessment basis shall hereinafter be referred to as "Plan B Improvements". A. Improvements. The Subdivider will construct and install at Subdivider's expense Plan A Improvements according to the terms of this agreement and the term.s and conditions as set forth in drawings and specifications as listed in Exhibit D attached hereto. -T-'-tPie City sMould decide nut—vith COns-truction uC”BTiy~DT“all Plan B Improv^iiieiiLs—ffs—a-public project, any such improvement ne-te-constructed by the-City ohol-1—incfeoad assumed—by-Sthbd4rVidee—as_ati additional Plan A Improvement to be designed,- -i-ns-ba-14od and-constructcd by~~SUi ivider at bUbdivideT experrse accordim^tj iiiip hprmr rnh -pvtii inJ iMin ------- B. Construction Plans and A.pproval Thereof. The Subdivider has engaged at Subdivider's expense a Minnesota registered civil engineer to prepare detailed plans and specifications for the complete installation of all Plan A Improvements in accordance with City standards, including preparation of estimates, special contract provisions, preparation -3- of proposal forms and designation and description of all necessary tempoidiy and permanent easements. Such plans and specifications are basea upon such engineering surveys, including such soil borings and material tests as were determined to be necessary by the City Engineer. Such plans and specifications shall be attached to this agreement as exhibits as set forth in Exhibit D, and shall have been submitted to and have been approved in writing by the City Engineer prior to the execution of this agreement, and/or prior to the start of construction of any Plan A Improvement. The Subdivider through his engineer shall provide for competent daily inspection of all Plan A Improvements, both public and private. Inspection report copies shall be provided by the Subdivider's engineer to the City Engineer on a weekly basis. As-built drawings with service and valve ties on reproducible mylar and certifications by the Subdivider's engineer of completion and compliance with specifications approved by the City shall also be delivered to the City in the form and content approved by the City and shall be approved by the City Engineer. C. Construction of Plan A Improveroents. (1) Completion Date. All Plan A Improvements shall be completed not later than as shown on Exhibit E. It/'it -4- ’y' tW^/t<6My^/^tiAif^/'Ai6t)(./Ar\A/t)f\i^/Ziti/yini/^it^ttli/\Mll/%Mt'iTnt^t K «zJ / v4 ^ d /1H/ eJ (ZJ f11: zT li eJ / f 1Z)-f / P Z ii fi / B / y i!« / i lid/SklKdiy idrf iT / i M ^ 2 Z fgJ/t:h/M^/^ifri///Ifi/k:Mi:^/(z;<i*«ii//Zkik}di:yi(3i<//ii^t'^€^^/jr«!J/fii//^12/ei:if/ (2) AppxQLy^_0J_CGatlLa.GtJ2.I5. Any concractor relected by the Subdivider to construct and install any Plan A Improvement must be determined ’ i writing by the City Engineer to be acceptable. The City reserves tne right to require satisfactory proof of successful experiei'ce and adequate financial status of any such contractor, where required by City ordinances, the contractor shall first obtain a license from the City. (3) Pcje3^CQn&tiug.tiQn_i:jiQi^ien£fi. Prior to any COn.straction work on the Subdivision, the Subdivider, Subdivider s contractor and engineer, shall meet with the City Engineer to review the proposed work schedule. (4) Construction. The construction, installation and materials shall be ip accordance with the plans and specifications approved by the City Engineer as listed on -5- Exhibit D. The Subdivider will cause the contractors to furnish tlie City Engineer with a schedule of proposed operations at least five (5) days prior to commencement of construction work. (5) Cross Sections. Upon request by the City Engineer, the Subdivider shall cause to be furnished to the City Engineer for his approval cross sections at fifty (50) feet stations of all streets in the Subdivision after initial grading. No construction of storm sewer, sanitary sewer, water main or Utility Improvements shall be commenced until the initial grading cross sections are approved in writing by the City Engineer. The Subdivider shall cause to be furnished to the City Engineer in writing a statement or contract document indicating the contractor who 15 responsible for regrading to the approved section after the completion of the storm sewer, sanitary sewer, water main and Utility Improveinencs. (6) Supervision. All of the ^iai^Vork shall be under the sole supervision and control of the Subdivider, (7) Review and Approval bv the City. All of the Plan A work shall be subject to the review and approval of the City Engineer and, where appropriate, any other governmental agency having jurisdiction. (8) Insurance. The Subdivider will cause each person who constructs and installs any Plan A Improvements to furnish the City with the same evidence of complete insurance coverage (including Workmen’s Compensation, liability and property .4 .4 -6- ■f.' damage) as is required on City contracted construction jobs as determined by the general specifications now in use. D. Faithfttl Performanre of Plan A Conatructlon and Guarantee, The Subdivider will faithfully comply with all terms if any and all contracts entered into by the Subdivider for the installation and construction of all Plan A Improvements and heteVy guarantees the workmanship and materials for a period of one yeat following the City's final acceptance of the Plan A Improvements, public or private, and agrees to repair or replace, as directed by the City, and at Subdivider's sole cost and expense, any workmanship or materials that become defective, in the «ole opinicr. of the City, within said one-year period provided^notice thereof tn given by the City within 30 days after said one-year period. Subdivider shall provide to the City performance, payment and warrantee bonds, or letters of credit, to assure compliance with this provisions as provided in paragraph 5. below. 4 . Plafi B TmprnvowM»n<-« . A. Piihile Tagrovement Patition, Execution Of this Subdivider *^ Agreement by Subdivider shall constitute a petition for installation of public improvement pursuant to Minnesota Statutes Chapter 4^^Section 429^;0f3l, Subd. 3, wherein Subdivider petitions the City Counb^ to ^retail and to finance the following Plan B Improvements and to M^ss the cost of said improvements against the Subdivision a^p^rdir^iyto the terms of this agreement and the terms and conditions as set fex±h in Exhibit D attached hereto (1) storm sewers including all necessary mnel ymcAfov.em< ^provi (|) Sanitary sewer trunks^yiateroIs or extensions* including all necessary bu ’ ' lin^services to the property line and other appurtenances (hereinafter called "Sanitary Sewer Improvements”); (3) \water main l^rtierals or extension;^* including all necessary bilKflding ^^rvices to the property line* hydrants* valves and other d^purtenances (hereinafter called "Water Main Improvements"); lv^pti6y^^v^^tty K4 I 7 (4) standard sb^eet name signs at all | newly opened intersections''''''B43d such other_us^-^*H:C"^ntrol signs within the SubcUvision_J:^^H3€''Tnst>k^d only by "btoe City (hereinafter xalled "Traffic Signing Improvements"); B. General Terms and Conditions for Ordering Public Improvement project. (1) Subdivider*s Obligations. The City and Sabdivider hereby agree that the City will not consider construction or installation of the Plan B Improvements as a public project unless i: receives the following legal and financial assurances from the Subdivider: ^ii -8- Subdivider shall petition for said improvements by executing this egfalSat. ^ (b) Subdivider also agrees that it will obtain the of such other landowners as the City deems necessary to petition for these improvements. (c) y^5Vibdi^f-^Mr sha^J by exepiRlng this agreement agree/^ th^r^idCssrarot-^ cos^S*^1Ind payment m*^s as set ^ortb^erehrT (d) Subdivider shall execute this agreement and assessment appeal waiver prior to the time that the :*iblic improvement project is scheduled to be ordered. (e) Subdivider shall at the time this agreement is executed, provide to the City all required assessment payment bonds or other security as provided herein. (2) General Procedures - Upon receipt of Subdivider*s petition and that of other required parties, the City Council will order a feasibility report to be prepared by the City Engineer. Upon receipt of said report, the City Council will call an improvement hearing for the purpose of considering ordering of these Plan B Improvements. Thereafter, the City Engineer will prepare final plans and specifications and bids will be taken. Upon receipt of bids, the City Council will fete mine whether or not to order any or all Plan B Improvements as a public project, or to reject any or all bids and decline to order the public project or any part thereof* Contracts will thereafter be awarded for any -9- Plan B Improvement to be constructed and installed as a public improvement. <3) Citv*s eotion. Subdivider expressly agrees that the City Council has the right and authority to order all or part of the proposed public improvement project or to refuse to order all or any part of said project at any stage of the proceedings listed in paragraph (2) above. | ^ ay/P2ari/x//iriprbyeirttffiby/ayid/k:MaK/Sin9diryi:der/vtfazye^/an//rz^iity/tb | I iiApydytffl\^riby/^S/a/pidb22b/pyd^ebt///Subdivider further agrees to pay | the City for the engineering feasibility report and for any other reasonable engineering, legal and administrative expenses related to the Plan B Improvement petitionj./ay/ydt/y‘^yth/2il/paya^yapM/72/ | c. Construction plans and kv .^oval Thereof. The City -if^?^ngage^he duly appointed City Engineer to prepare detailed plans and specifications for the complete installation of all Plan B Improvements, including preparation of estimates, special contract provisions, preparation of proposal forms and designation and description of all necessary temporary and permanent easements. Such plans and specifications shall be coordinated with Subdivider*s engineer for proper placement of driveway curb cuts and individual building utility services. Approval of said plans shall rest solely with the City. -10- The city, through its engineer, shall provide for ccmpetent inspection of all Plan B Improvements consistent with standard City policies and practices for public improvement projects. The City Engineer will prepare as-built drawings with service and valve ties consistent with standard City policies and practices# and will provide up to six (6) copies of same to the Subdivider if so requested. D. Construction of Pjan B IiimrovMenta. (1) Completion Date. Plan B Improvements are scheduled for completion as shown on Exhibit E# however, Subdivider agrees that the City will not be liable for failure to complete the Plan B Improvements by that date. <2) Approval of Contractors. The City shall have the sole ight to approve or reject contractors for construction of Plan B Improvements. (3) Pre-Construction Conference. Prior to any work on Plan B Improvements within the Subdivision, the City Engineer, and City*s Contractor will meet with the Subdivider and Subdivider's engineer to review the proposed work schedule <4) CfiQStiUCtiont construction, installation, and materials for Plan B Improvements within the Subdivision shall be in accordance with the plans ^nd specifications prepared by the City Engineer. -11- Sr (5) S_ugQryisign> All of the Plan B Inprovements work shall be under the sole supervision and control of the City through its City Engineer. (6) The Subdivider shall make available to the City, at no cost to the City, all permanent or temporary easements necessary for the installation of the Plan B Improvements within the Subdivision, as determined by the City Engineer including if requested, ■> OMMX—the ontire^^ubdiwifliun. ^11 sucn easements requested by the City shall be in writing, it ^..ordable form, and on the standard easement form of the City or on such other terms and conditions as the City shall determine, including dedication of permanent easements on the final plat drawings. (7) Insurance-., The city win cause each person who constructs and installs any Plan B Improvements to furnish the City with evidence of complete insurance coverage (including Workmen's Compensation, liability and property damage) as is required on all City contracted construction jobs as determined by the general specifications now in use. 5- Plan A Construction Securitv. A. Performance Bond or Letter of Credit. Concurrently with the execution of this agreement by the Subdivider, Subdivider will furnish to, and at all times thereafter shall maintain with, the City a satisfactory and sufficient performance and payment bond required by Minnesota Statutes, -12- Section 574.26 (1967) for public developers in the amount of at least 150% (11Q%?> of the total estimated cost of Plan A Improvements as determined in paragraph 3 above, with a corporate surety satisfactory to the City, and naming the City as obligee thereunder. Included among the obligations of the surety under such bond shall be that the Subdivider shall fully and faithfully d^charge SubCivider's obligations with respect to the Plan A Improvements during the installation and construction period and that all persons doing work or furnishing skills, tools, machinery, materials, insurance premiums, equipment, or supplies in connection with the construction and installation of the Plan A Improvements, or in connection with any work thereon under the one-year guaranty of Subdivider, shall be paid therefor. In lieu of the bond herein required or at the request of the City, Subdivider will deposit with the City an irrevocable letter of credit in a form satisfactory to the City in at least said amount, providing that the City is able to draw upon such letter of credit in its sole discretion to complete the Plan A Improvements. The amounts required for the bond or letter of credit are set forth in Exhibit E attached hereto. The City Council may authorize reduction of the amount of such bond or letter of credit as completion of the Plan A Improvement progressees, based upon recommendations by the City Engineer and the City Engineer's estimate of the cost of completion of all remaining Plan A Improvements and so long sl the amount of the -13- \b% remaining bond or letter of credit equal? at 'east of the cost of all amounts to be paid by Subdivider pursuant to this agreement to complete the remainder of the Plan A Improvements. Final expiration of the bond or release of the letter of credit shall not be made until completion of all public or private Plan A Improvements and final acceptance or approval thereof by the City Engineeer and until receipt of all appropriate lien waivers acknowledging complete payment for all labor, materials and services related thereto. B* Warranty and Guarantea for Plan A I^pro▼e^^i»w^^^^,l•4^yelt^;^/ildlid/er/tegge//d//gredig///rQnf;^l^^enMy. with the execution of this agreement by the Subdivider, the Subdivider will furnish to/ the City the attached inst (Exhibit G) as warranty and guarantee for the Plan A Imorovementa. at least 1Q\ isfllt/ftf the total estimated cost of Plan A Improvements as determined in paragraph 3 above. Z2tf//PA6/A6vliifip/2M/znf/AP/P16ZXpPP/tMtMMPt/ Included among the obligations of the AAZAtp/AMAt/PAtfi/MAA/AHAII/M instrument are the reouiremencs that the Subdivider shall fully and faithfully discharge Subdivider's obligations with respect to the repair or replacement of any Plan A Improvement or portion thereof that may be ordered by the City during the one-year guarantee period, or within 30 days thereafter, and that all persons doing work or furnishing skills, tools, machinery, materials, insurance premiums. -14- equipment oc supplies in connection with said repair or replacement shall be paid therefore* including payment to the City for any such work as may be undertaken by the City, its employees or _ contractors . zn/Zfee/df/eMe/bend/Nerefri/rdqufred/df/ee/KMe/reqMdf '! df/eNd/eZf///cd»dzyzddf/wzzz/ddpddze/i*ZfN/rMd/ezf//dd/ZfrdddddiiZd ldCCdf/df/dfddiC/Zil/d/fdfiA/ddfZdfddrdr//£d/fMd/S;Zf//Zil/dK/Zdddi' ddZd/dMddK//prddZdZfid/eNdf/fMd/eZf//Zd/dbZd/i;d/dfdi*/dpdil/dddM Zd££df/df/dfddZK/Zil/Z£d/ddZd/dZddZdeZdil/Kd/fdpdZ///fd#Zddd/df gt/lgttgt/gt/ttg€it/gtg/ggt/tgttg/ig/TtYkVgit/A/gttg€ggt/Agtgtgi THggg/gnglZ/bg/gg/gggggtlgg/ig/KM/gMggt/gf/gggH/MM/gg/Igtggt/gf ggggig/ggtig^/tM/gM/tggg/^gg^gritgg/pgZigd///Final expiration of EAtlitUjLJS^f^M/MHgi/gt/ggIgggg/gf/tHg/Iggrg//ge/g/gdir shall not M irt^de/Qccur until at least 30 days after expiration of the one-year guarantee period, and then not un^il final cceptance or approval of all public or private Plan A Improvements by the City Engineer, including a certification that no defective workma*iship or materials are present and that any and all required repairs or replacements have been satisfactorily completed. Depending upon the nature or extent of any defective materials or workmanship, repairs or replacements as may be found by the City during the guarantee period, the City may require and the Subdivider shall and hereby does agree to extend the guarantee and the warrantee bdild/df | IdffdrVdf/dfddff in Exhibit G for an additional period of time not | to exceed one additional year beyond lx\e completion date of the last such repair or replacement. -15- S. flilimniBMnt Aor —ant tor Pl«p » *t/9lil^^i1fiM^rg/pgt^tiatl/ea/rM/^i^//f0i/lAgeMZIMl^^M/at/^ZMll/» Z^Z000M0tg/M/i/001HZt/pi0Utt//S0JSiZgZi0t/Mt00f/g0t40g/t0/M *gggg***/ZMt/gt/tM/tgrgZ/t0gt/tgt/i0gZ4gZg4/g0t/Z0gtgZZZA0/gXZ PZg0/B/ZglpZgg4gU4Zg/rg/llg/4gggttg4Z04/0ZZHZlt/tM4/8gMZgZgZg0//gg* 9gB4ZgZigi/tl4ZgBf/g4ig4g/tg/B0/ggggggt0/ltZg/tgZt/gtlgt4/4t/tMg4 rZgA/B/Z04t4ggtMMg/I4igt4i/ggtgZt4/tH4/4gBtZgZgZg0/(gA2/ttg0K 9M4Z/Z*4Z4gg*ggtg/g0i/gA7/BXgZg0/Ag0Hgg/ZmptggiM0tgf/gZI/ge/0HZiH Z0tigg0Mntg/gt0/tg40ZtgB/tg/tr0gZi0/gig4ggt0/4gBizt/ggigzeg/t0t B4Z*/B0BiZgZgZ6g///7BZg/g4t40Mgt/ZMZgigg/gggg04tZgH/Bf/BgB*ZgZ*4i Bt/gBf/figttZgg/gt/ttlB/pigpgggi/ggggggMgtg/tgZ/ttlB/gBggg/rZm/B Z0pigg0mggZg/0ilZtB/tB0/BZtp/ZBtgBig/ltg/Zggf/i4gZHgt/PtMZ P4B*tZlttZg4/pigpgtlif/P0g0tg/it/lMgg/gtMi/ptgp0ttf/g0g0tg/gpp4gZ ggtB/gggggggigge///TM/pgtpggg/0t/KilZg/gggg0ptZPll/Zg/tg/gZXg0/eH* eZtt/K0/pigtg4i/\»ZtB/4iB4tZB4/gBi/BPB*tigttZgg/0t/rZgg/B Z*ptPg4MAtg/gg/g/pgBZZt/ptgi0tK/tgZ/tM/B0tlgtZt/Pt/llBZg BdBBZgZgZgtl/ RA. Plan B Formula. City and Subdivider agree to the aa&essment formula and estimated costs for Plan B Improvements as set forth in Exhibit F attached hereto, and Subdivider further agrees to any incidential cost changes or supplemental assessments as may be necessary to cover actual contract bid prices, construction change orders or other unforeseen cost increases so that Subdivider's share of total improvement costs remains as agreed in paragraph 6.A. above. -16- Lerr of Spgcifl Raouirad | PlWiTaenta> The above agreed upon share of the installation of Plan B Improvements» including any reasonable engineering, legal and administrative costs incurred by the “ity, shall be paid by the Subdivider to the City as special assessments levied against the benefited land area in five (5) equal annual installments with interest on unpaid installments at an annual percentage rate to be established by the City at the time of the sale of the improvement bonds issue, or as set forth in Exhibit F attached hereto. Reference herein to special assessments shall be deemed to include, and shall include, all interest due thereon. (1) If the special assessments levied by resolution of the City Council pursuant to this agreement are adopted by it between October 10th of any year and April 10th of the following year, it is understood and agreed that the Subdivider will pay to the City one-half (1/2) of the first annual installment with interest on or before May 31st next following the levy, and will pay the remaining one half (1/2) of such first installment with interest to the City Clmmk on or before the following September 30th. All remaining installments shall be paid as assessments to the Treasurer of Hennepin County as and when the general property taxes become due upon said property. (2) If the special assessments levied by the City Council pursuant to this agreement are adopted between April 11th and October 9th of any year, then all installments due -17- hereunder shall be paid as assessments to the Treasurer of Hennepin County as and when the general property taxes become due on said property. _fThis section needs further disgus.siQn. ^ | B£. Required prepayiaent of Asaeasmeiit Upon Sale hy | SuMiYidCC.. It, before the entire improvement cost assessed or to be assessed against the property in the benefited area is paid in full, the Subdivider, its heirs, succssors or assigns, transfers such property or a portion thereof, the Subdivider hereby agrees, for itself, its heirs, successors and assigns, at its own cost and expense to pay the entire unpaid improvement cost assessed or to be assessed under this agreement against the property to be transferred. If any such transfer is made before the special assessments have been levied, the Subdivider shall pay the City a sum of cash ual to the City Engineer’s estimate of the special assessments for Plan B Improvements that will be levied against the property to be so transferred. The Subdivider shall be liable to the City for any deficiency and the City shall pay to the Subdivider any overplus arising from payment based on such estimate. Hereafter, any reference to special assessments shall include any such estimated special assessments. Acceleration Upon Default- in the event | Subdivider violates any of the covenants and agreements herein contained and to be performed by Subdi*ider, or fails to pay any installment of any special assessment levied pursuant hereto, or any interest thereon, when the same is to be paid pursuant thereto. -18- the City, at its option, in addition to its rights and remedies hereunder, by written notice given to Subdivider, may declare all of the unpaid special assessments which are then estimated or levied pursuant to this agreement due and payable in full, with interest, and all of the unpaid special assessments, with interest, shall be payable on or before the Nay 31 or October 31, whichever is earlier, next following the giving of such written notice to Subdivider; or the City, at its option, may demand immediate payment thereof and immediately commence legal action against Subdivider to collect the entire unpaid balance of the special assessments then estimated or levied pursuant hereto, with interest, including reasonable attorneys* fees, and Subdivider shall be personally liable for such special assessments, and, if more than one, such liability shall be joint and several. Also, the Subdivider shall be liable to the City for any deficiency and the City shall pay co the Subdivider any overplus arising from payment based on an estimate. Also, if any payment is not made by Subdivider pursuant to paragraph 00^, the City, at its option, may | refuse to give a building permit to any property transferred on which the assessments have not been paid. F£. Waiver of Aaae««Mnf- Appeal, Execution of | Subdivider's agreement by Subdivider shall constitute Subdivider's formal agreement to the assessment agreement and formula as set forth in this paragraph 6, including all subparagraphs, and in Exhibit F attached hereto. Subdivider further agrees to waive, and -19- hereby does waive any and all rights to appeal from the special assessment, including any supplemental assessment, as set forth |||^ herein, including but not limited to, any procedural or substantive rights, right to public hearing, right to any notice, pursuant Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 429, or any other ordinance of the City, constitution, or law of the State of Minnesota or the United States. fef/eMe/peypdee/df/asseririg/te/tHe/eify/tMet/tMe/agreed/e^eii/Pi^ff. it/iZZ/tlMt/tMi*itt*i/MiZZ/MiMiiA/y»ZtH/tM/Zitf/tZZ/*/t***' WM/t*/tM/iM/et/At/Ziiit/Z99t/tt/iZZ/^tttMt4A/VZM/1Z tUiZi/itl/tM/Zitt/tt/HMAtpZA/ZAAAtt/^t/tiM/iil/tM/tiiZZ/iMH tM/4itZMt4i/ilii/ZPitZAi/*pttZiZ/tH4AtMAtt/tPi/tM/rZiA/B tMiZ4iMt/iPi/4PeH/16iPfl/tMt/ZIC/MZi4/44en/tMti/ii/44iiititf/mt tBt/piTtM4t/4t/tB*/ip4eitZ/itt4*tM4t*ft4t/tM/rZM/B/Z4pt64tymti m I I -20- ^ttii/r.M/tuztit^ti/aiatiM/(tt/tM/zzt-t//*t/(ZZZii/in/ZitMMiH*/iHi *MHMMti4AiZ/Z€Zttt/tt/tttiZt/ttM/i/MtZiMl/6t/ttit^/)m^)Z _ Z4yZZti’tpttZtZ/itttttMtlt*'tit/tM/?Z»A/i/ltlipti)t4MHtiZ/ymZem/*HilZ ptt'tZM/tMt/tPMt/ynil/tt/piZi/tP/tM/ZZtf/ApPt/yltZttPA/MlMAt itM/tZM/tP/tivkP/Pt/tM/ZZtf/li6/tM/P*tPAt/Pt/ittiPlt/MitZP/}if SMiZ*Zidi/ZA/tM/ptTtMHt/Pt/t\HP/itP€Zil/itiiiiMtitt/pPit\iMt MiPtPZ/^MtK*i/iZtPlPiitPA/Pt/^tYlii\tZPPZ/y»HZi^/Zt)itPi/Pt/eZPi!'.tZ PPA/iAf/iPAPPtiMAt/tPpZitticiAt/ZPtttt/Pt/tiAiZt/iPlZylPtPA/pPtPPmt tMtPtPZ/it/Zt/PipZtPi/ptZPt/tP/tM/Zitt/Aif/Pt/lYiP/pPit/ZP/MAZZV^ tM/liit/iPPPPl/ZAttillMPt/Pt/*pPiiil/iPiPPttliPPIti/ZP/pifi)61P4 PMll/AP/tPAAvitA/Pt/tPpZitPi/Yii/Mt/liltt/tyiiA/tvtpPtp/Aipi/ptiAt/tP Ztt/AtpZtitiPAZ/\AZlA/i/ZZM/ZAttii/Pt/ttPAZt/tZA\lli/A/\imH/)MZiZA iAtMtZtAA/iAA/tAt/tM/tPZZ/imAPt/At/tM/tAAA/PHpiZA/tpAtZiZ AAAAAAAAAI!P/fAZ/ZHA/PIAri/B/Zl6pZAifAitAAKA//ilAA/it/AAIi/PA/ZApZAAAA/ tyiA/ZZtf/vtiAf/AAtZitA/SPPAZfZAAZ/ZA/AteAAZt/BAiAAAAAZ/AAA/AHAZtZtA ZZA/iZpAti/inA/ZAlAAAZAi/Ai/AAe/AAt/ZP/piZipZapB/BE//iAA/ltAf/Atiyt/AA AAZA/ZAttAt/AZ/AZAAZt/tAZ/iZZ/tMA/PApiZA/ApAAZil/AAiAtiMAtP/ 7. Services to be Performed bv rihv and Payment Therefor. A. Plan A Improvements. With respect to Plan A Improvements, the City Engineer: (1) will coordinate the design oC Plan B Improvements with Subdivider's engineer as for lot layout, street and easement locations, proposed building service and curb cut locacions and Site Grading Improvements. -21- (2) will review 3nd approve the Subdivider's securing of all necessary permits. (3) may make periodic i»‘opection of construction p'ogress, mr i^nods and mater ials (4) ma/ make final job inspections. (5) will review and approve as-built drawings and service ties. B. Plan B Improveiiients. With respect to Plan B Improvements, the City: (i) will order a itv .o determine the feasibility of constructing the Plan B Improvements as a public improvement project.MM improvements. (3) will order preparation of plans and specifications for Plan B Improvements. (2) will hold required public heart gs OH fcl' V (4) will order advertisement for bide and conduct a bid letting for Plan B Improvements. (5) may order construction of PlM B .s* " Improvements as a public project, including perforMBCB Of mm.: legal, engineering and administrative review and COOrdlttOtlM said project, and providing financing for said project thtWIfh of a public improvement bond issue or other means. (It 7f/fer/i<Mseeser/resseii//eMe/eiK//MXdMXiMtf I -22- i^I?/M^/r f /KIdtif/idf /Ki ^^^*?//' TM %^tAi^it^t/y^ill/pt^^i^^/tYi^/Ziti/^f^ii\^^t/^itYi/tt)A€4/ ^tt\At6t^/Ai\A if ^ |) I ^ r ^ / if »i f / Jrt i K if (d / ^ / *f (d / Id / id. < / ^ r5 id / ii 2 Z / ef e5 ft ^ t! ^ id «J if if ^ fl / 2? eJ li if ^ / / / V? ^ H tt^Aitiiti<^/^tt^t /t^^/Ziti /Yi^t/ ^^tt>Atit/ All AAtAfittt/itit^tt€t/Y^i / Y-Yt/Ziti / U>t / YYY^/AYit>^4^/ tAt'iittA/ Ati^/ i^t / Afii ttYY^t/iAAttYAYlA/AttY^Yt^t/iYtYitt^t/Yi/tY^/Ziti/tAlAtiY^/tA/tY^ i£.tiYtttAt,ti<tY/At/^lAY/A/l^tt<6^At^AYttl//lY/tY€/t'iAYt/tYAt/tY^/tYAt%M lY Att^<h/Yi/tYA/Ziti/^'ltAAtt/t\\<A/AtttA^/AmAYti/tY,^/%YY^i'iittt tYAll/^ YLA / tYt/Ziti / tY^/AttAtt/ ^ItYlY/2^ / tAit/ Att^t / tAtAift/ tt/A AtAtAi^^Yt/tYAtttAtAU/lYA/Ziti/ZY^iYAAt/yAill/AtAtYtA/tYA tAttilitAtA/At/tY\H\tl^YitY/AltAi/tYA/Ziti/tttA'UAt/All/A^^ Ytt/€AAi 8. Fees and Expenses. The Subdivider agrees to pay all City fees required per the current City Fee Schedule and other citv ordinances . £ / AYY/lYtYY^i / AtAtAAt/ tA// tAi^YAtAA/tYA/Zltf iYt/All/tYA/ttAt<&YAYlA/^tt^Yit^t/it/lYtYtt/lY/tAY^At<t/tA/tYA/tAlitA^ AYd/Appiai^Al/Af/tYA/lBtipiif^AjYAYtA/AYa/tYiA/gYYaii/iAiYY/iY^lYilA^/ t/t/YAt/liylUtAA/tAi/<MtAtt/Ziti/pAii^ll/AYA/A^AtYAAYi/tYttAi/lAAt pAiA/tA/ttYAYltAYtt/ AYY/<6tYAt/pt(AtAttitYAlti / AY<A/tYA/tYttA/tt piiYtiYA//BtiAiliY^/AYa/AYppZiAAi//TYA/Zit//i^lAYYAt/YAA/YAtAiiYiYAa lYA/AAtiiYAtAd/AA^iAvf/AfYeiYYtA/tY/^AiiAi/tYAAA/AAtiiPAtAA/YApAYAAA/ Ztttd'A/dAtdtitt/YA'id/YdAY/}l\Add/At/tYd/ti^d/<At/Appl'itAtidY/ltt/tiYAl gAddli^lAidY/Appidi^Al/AYd/Aid/AYd)4Y/dY/ZAYiYit/Z///VUtYiY/a0/dA/A Attdt / tYd/Ziti r t/ZYdiYddt /YAt/ dAAtdttd/ tYd/tAttit'itAtd/tt ',^¥:I .1 -24- tPitYit^llf/tP^pUtP^/iLi^/ttZiit^^M€/}AitWtM/ptPiitti6AP/€t/tMP f&t/6/t^ttitit^Y,^/tt/^tt}Ap6iitf/ttt/A^f/iMiT0iM21/l6t/iyLPll 10, Hom Owners AssociAvion, Subdividef agrees that abt^ached Exhibit: H. The Declaration of Covt^nants and Conditions^ IS. nnw in fnrce and l^hat: each of the Durchasars of t:he lots of the subdivifgjQn will be subiecfc tQ t:he obliaabioiis and restrictions wit^hin fchal- dnrument. TM/SiAMiT^Z^4Z/1ipf^PP/t^/^^^/^2ZZ/tt€£X^/A A4ZAAMAlA//A^ZAptA16ZA/tP/ZM/Zitt//^yUt)li/i4iZZ/M/t€ApPliAihZA/tAZ tM/P^Mft)Mp/^p^tAtZAA/AM/MtAtAAAAt4/At/AMAp/6tMt/t)Mli4tZ//^ZZ ZAAA/i f r <AM4/t6/}b4/€^M4/Z^/t6vMiAA/}6f/t}^tA4/At/MtA/ZAAZTiZ4AAZ/ZAt A}AAAtA/AAA/AZZ/t6\MiAAZt/P^M4/At/AAA4/tAtiZiti€t4/PM/4t %A}6tZifZMtrt/^ptZAA4/tAt/MiAtAAAAtA/tt/AAZ}A/itAM/AA/AtMt/tpM ■Sm -25- MPIZiripp/AM/fa//Milp/PZ/ZM/PtiHPt/Zit,p/pi^PMAZP/ZiZZ^e/MZPin/}4Hi€H ptP/ppz/zs/M/zzzpptpa/bp/zHp/eizt/epz/p^bZiz/PvfHPtPHip/pfid MintdMPdd//iAdZMid4/ZM/PZiddt/ZZpYiZiAp/ZPip]:pddMi\ZP///SMfi MidtMPMd/Mt/iddZdM/Mddp/PtZdt/ZfiZd4d/ZdpdZt//ZdpZdedMdt/ylMd P4tdttPtf4/tMyi/tdMytdZ4/ptddd/tdttidp//}4PPd/tddZt6Z4/Pdd nptMdiddP/ZdiZdin4/pdiAZid4/PM/MidZMPA€P/PtdA6PtdP4//Zt/P tdPtPMdZd/vSdidtddtMd/ttdMttd/Xt/Mt/MidtdiMd/Zf/tM/MM 6}/IMtt/AttdttdtiPd4/tZP/ZZtf/tZdZZ/ZPPd/tM/tiiZt/td/tdM ttttdttZPd/PttZdd/it/ddMt/dpptdptidtd/td/pidtdtt/tZd/ZdPZtZ4 tdtdtf/AAd/ddZtAtd/dt/tM/pdZZtt/dM/td/dttdtt/dpdiMt/tPZd/ZdM 6^Mtt/PPt6tZdtZM/PM/dt/tZP/ZPM/id/tM/ZMdiPZPi6d/t6t/PZZ/tdttt tMdttdd/tMtdtdtd4//ZdtYi/tdttPttiPd/dttidd/i4iZZ/Mt/t}AM4d/tM ttAtdt/tt/d/ptiitttt/Z\txptp'i€Mdtl 11. Special Provisiona, Subdivider agrees to all other special provisions and requirements as set forth below: A. Building Perming. (1) No building permits shall be issued until after final plat approval and recording. (2) Building permits for construction on any ii(td/fftf2/lot will not be issued until out lot C has been improved with a road base approved in writino bv the Citv Engineer.tMd ptPpdtdd/tttMtt/ttd/ii^pttiidd/tdttttitfit/td/tZZtd/tZZ4^^dttYidt HdYittld/ tttttt/td/ZZd/ltti -26- B. Certificates of Occupancy. No certificates of occupancy will be issued dwelling, until the sanitary sewer and water main services 'T-X.;■rsi dwelling are also completed and ready for use. c. Model Hornes^ Model home signage and promotion, if any, shall be limited to typical residential *for-sale*’ signs unless special approval is first obtained from tne City Council, and a temporary | be issued for model home purposes, Jcertificate of occupancy I home pure 12. Resolution of Citv. The Subdivider agrees to be bound by the provisions set forth in the resolution of the City Council approving the preliminary plat of this Subdivision, attached to this agreoment as Exhibit B, and by the Resolution of the City Council approving the final plat of this Subdivision the resolution of the Citv granting a conditional use for the subdivision as a PRD. 13. Binding Effect. The terms and provisions hereof shall be binding upon and inure to the benefit of the heirs, representatives, successors and a.^signs of the parties hereto and shall be binding upon all future owners of all or any part of the Subdivision and shall be deemed covenants running with the land and shall be enforceable by the City against the Subdivider, his heirs and assigns and against the home owners association required by paragraph 10 of this agreement. References herein to Subdivider, if there be more chan one, shall mean each and all of them. This c. -21- agreemeriL, or a short form thereof to be executed by the Subdivider, at the option of the City shall be placed of record so as to give notice hereof to subsequent purchasers and encumbrancers of all or any part of the Subdivision and all recording fees, if any, shall be paid by the Subdivider. 14. Notices. Whenever in this agreement it shall be required or permitted that notice or demand be given or served by either party to this agreement to or on the other party, such notice or demand shall be delivered personally or mailed by United States certified mail (return receipt requested) to the addresses set forth on Exhibit E. Such notice or demand shall be deemed timely given when delivered personally or when deposited in the mail in accordance with the above. 15. Release of Security. Upon performance satisfactory | to the City v the Subdivider of the terms of this agreement, | excluding the expiration of any guaranty or warranty period herein and the performance by Subdivider of Subdivider’s obligations herein with respect to any such guaranty of warranty, the City will release to the Subdivider cash deposited in escrow in accordance with this agreement or, in case of performance bond or letter of credit shall release such investment in a form satisfactory to the | Subdivider it| /His/per | witH/fty/rerirty/ I -28- 16. Incorporation by Referenca, All plans, special provisions, proposals, specifications and contracts for the Improvements furnished and let pursuant to this agreement shalT be and hereby are maie a part of this agreement by reference as fully as if set out herein in full. 17. Releaaa to be Filed in the Chain of Title. Upon performance by the Subdivider of the terms of this agreement, excluding the expiration of any guaranty or warranty period, the City will at Subdivider's request, provide to the Subdivider for filing a resolution satisfactory to the Subdivider of his performance of this agreement in accordance with its terms. A. Disclaimer bv citv. It is understood and agreed that the City, the City Council, and the agents and employees of the City shall not be personally liable or responsible in any manner to Subdivider, or Subdivider's contractors, subcontractors, materialmen, laborers or any other persons, firm or corporation, for any debt, claim, demand, damages, actions or causes of action of any kind or character arising out of or by reason of the execution of this agreement or the performance and completion of the Improvements. B. Hold Harmless and fThe Subdivider shall indemnify and hold harmless the City, the City Council, and the agents and employees of the City from and against all claims, damages, losses or expenses, including attorney fees, which the City, City Council and agents and employees of the City -29- may suffer or for which it may be held liable, arising cut oL or resulting from the assertion against them of any claims, debts or obligations in consequence of the performance of this agreement by the Subdivider, its employees, agents or subcontractors, whether or not caused in part by a party indemnified hereunder. 18• ajtU;. Default by the Subdivider of any of the terms of this agreement shall autumatica1iy result in the suspension or withholding of all permits, licenses, occupancy certificates or other authorizations issued by the City in connection with the property included in this Subdivision. The remedies afforded to the City under this section shall be in addition to any other remedies to which the City may be entitled by law or other agreement. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, tfie City and Subdivider have caused this agreement to be duly executed on the day and year first above written. CITY OF ORONO In the presence of: - --- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -By_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Its Mayor and In the presence of: Its City Clerk SUBDIVIDER 2SRP572 By. . . Its -30- QFrom: Date: Mayor Grabek and Orono Council Members Planning Commission Chairman Kelley Orono Planning Commission Members City Administrator Bernhardson W Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building & Zoning Administrator JUV- May 11, 1989 Cf Subject: #1405 Thomas s Phyllis Colwell, 2640 North Shore Dr - Preliminary Subdivision, Class III - Public Hearing Zoning District - RR-IB Total Area - 19.91 acres; Wetland - (.81 acres Lot 1: Area « 354,223 or 8.13 acres dry 196,025 s.f. or 4.5 acres wet Total * 550,248 s.f. or 12.63 acres Lot 2; Area Lot 3; Area Area 89,795 s.f. or 2.06 acres 108,214 s.f. or 2.48 acres 100,750 s.f. or 2.31 acres wetland o Total Acreage « 208,964 s.f. Pertinent Ordinance - Section 11.03, Definition 66 (C) subdivision - plat. - Definition of a Class III Section 11.10, Subdivision 21 (C) - Private Roads. When Preliminary Plat I21A begp apprQvgd QDthg baaia ^ A access road providing thg only accaaa three aa morg the private road aball identified aa ginai AA A separate out^lot. The code suggests that a plat of three lots must be served by a private road, it merely states that if a plat has been approved on the basis of a private access road providing the only access to three or more lots, the private road should be designed as a separate outlot. Applicant askes for a new curb cut on County Road 84 providing a single access to Lot 1. Lots 2 and 3 shall continue a shared use of the existing drive that currently serves the residence within Lot 2. Section 10.03, Subdivision 6 (B) by a road or road easement. - credit for areas divided G List of Exhibits Exhibit A - Application Exhibit B - Property Owners List Exhibit C - Plat Map Exhibit D - Septic Report and Exhibits Exhibit E - Comprehensive Management Plan 7-16, 7-17 Exhibit F - Preliminary Plat o o Zoning File #1405 May 11, 1989 Page 2 of 5 Review of Application - The Colwells are the new owners of the former residence- property of Sheldon Jacobs. The plat involves the creation of three residential lots, each containing minimum two acres of dry contiguous lands. The defined marsh areas within the plat shall be shown as drainage easements on the final plat and the City will ask for the appropriate Flowage & Conservation easement over the wetland areas already not covered under a municipal Flowage & Conservation easement. The previous lot line rearrangement between Mr. Jacobs and Mr. Schoen required the Flowage & Conservation easement over the southern marsh area. Please refer to Section 11.10, Subdivision 21 (C) noted above and Exhibit E. The applicant asks that Lot 2 and 3 continue to be served by the existing driveway. Lot 1 is to be served by a new curb cut off of County Road 84. The west corridor of Lot 1 adjacent to County Road 84 has been staked. Hennepin County Highway Department has approved the curb cut fc the driveway but the applicant has failed to submit it as part of the application. Applicant should be advised to submit it prior to the subdivision being presented for Council's preliminary action. Issues for Consideration With This Subdivision Review - Lot Configuration - Lot 1 technically would require a variance to the required width standard because the lot does not meet the 200' width at the 50' setback line. The existing principal structure does not meet the required 30' side yard setback from the newly proposed division line. The minimum 30' setback must be maintained. The existing barn/garage can easily satisfy the 10' side yard setback. Based on your current ordinance, only oversized structures would be required to meet the minimum 30' side setback. Applicant should bo asked why the lots have been designated so that the garage has been placed on a lot that does not contain a principal residence. The applicant may be asked to consider rearranging the lot line so that the accessory structure is included with the principal residence on Lot 2 requiring a 10' minimum setback from the realigned side : ot line. It may be the plan of the applicant to build on Lot 1 and to make use of the accessory structure. If this is the case, the same type of control can be placed on the now non-conforming structure as the City required of Ms. Cram in her subdivision. In other words, the accessory structure would have to be removed if a building permit has not been issued for a principal ;esidence within one year of the date of the final approval of the plat. If approved, the following conditions may apply; Zoning File #1405 May 11, 1989 Page 3 of 5 A. Options; 1. Realignment of lot line between lots 2 and 1 so that principal structure can meet 30' setback - applicant to be advised that if the bu.iJding permit for principal structure has not been issued within one year from the date of final plat approval, that accessory structure must be removed; OR 2. Realign lot line so that accessory structure is located within Lot 2 meeting the minimum 10' setback from the side lot line. B. Grant a width variance for Lot 1 measuiing approximately 145' at the 50' setback line rather than 200' (hardship - shape of lot, houses will not be located within the substandard lot width area). Future owner of Lot 1 should be advised that driveway must be 26' from iesigneted wetland within northwest portion o£ property. Access - The City will ask for dedication of right-of-way for County Road 51 and 84 as shown on the plat. Applicant proposes a new single access to Lot 1 via County Road 84 and a 5»hared access for Lots 2 and 3 via County Road 51. Granting an access easement to an interior lot weald not be consistent with :he City's previous actions on similar applications. Applicants lave always been asked to provide either a flag lot or an outlot for shared use and/or ownership. The area of the outlot or driveway easement must be excluded from the lot area. This will require reconfirmation of the dry buildable area vi :hin Lot 3. The shared lot line between Lots 1 and 3 will have to be moved further north. Lot 3 already contains 2.488 acres. It is imperative that the shared driveway tenidin in he same location because of the septic test site areas. Any chc nge or expansion in driveway access through this area will negate septic testing already performed on Lot 3. Gaffron cautions because the slopes become more severe as you move eastward, the more gentle sloped areas to the west and north of Lot 3 must be preserved for septic use. O tint* Zoning File #1405 May 11, 1989 Page 4 of 5 The future owner of Lc should be placed on notice that if Lot 1 is to be further subdivided (Lot 1 contains 8.13 acres of dry land), that a private road would be required and that Lot 2 would have to be served by that future private road. The ordinances and Comprehensive Management Plan may not be clear or as restrictive on this matter, but it has been a consistent policy of the City to require any subdivision of three or more lots to be served by one interior private road. Because of the configuration and proposed density of this property, the City will consider the proposed access plan to the new sites. It must be clear to the future owner of Lot 1 that if there is a future subdivision, that a private road would be required. The future owner of Lot 2 must be made aware of the temporary nature of the southern access to the property of subdivision of Lot 1 as planned. Conditions of Approval - 1. Access options for Lot 2 based on current proposal: A) Approve access easement via Lot 3 based on temporary aspect of access and potential access via a private road to the north if Lot 1 is further subdivided. The area of the access easement must be excluded from the dry buildable from Lot 3, applicant's surveyor to confirm; or B) A 30' wide outlet to be created, ownership to be shared. Area of lot to be amended by applicant's surveyor, 2 acres dry contiguous confirmed; OR C) Require shared access for Lots 1 and 2 via private drive from County Road 84 as all improvements on Lot 2 suggest access from north. 2.Dedication of right-of-way for County Roaus 84 and 51 as shown on the plat. Place the future owner of Lot 1 on notice that if lot is further subdivided, they will be responsible for the private road to be constructed for the future access and that Lot 2 will be required to access off the private road. Lot 3 to retain existing access off County Road 51. Septic, please review Exhibit D, Gaffron's memo reviewing the septic test results. If approved the f . r; conditions to be considered; Zoning Pile #1405 May 11, 1989 Page 5 of 5 A) Existing house on Lot 2 wi 11 require additional septic testing for an alternate site. Prior to final approval, the City is t'. receive confirmation that a nsv septic system has been installed to serve existing residence. B) All sepcic sites to be staked pr or to final plat approva 1. C) Gaffron cautions against any change in the existing accers that serves Lots 2 and 3 because of the impact upon Lot and the need to preserve the gentler slopad areas vithin the northwest portion of the lot. Review of Issues to be Peso ved Prior to Recommendation fo r Preliminary^ Approval - * 1.Applicant to provide confirmation that Hennepin County Highway Department has approved a new curb cut on County Road 84. Applicant ’s final structure on Lot 1. determination regarding acci Resolve of access to interior let, Lot 2. dry buildable contiguous area within Lot 3 or outlot area must be excluded. Need to confirm as both eaaamont Applicant should also be advised that the area of tlio property to the west of the driveway easement or outlot would have to be excluded from the dry buildable area. Our codo dOM not allow the credit of areas divided by such easementa or road outlets. Its for Planning Commission Review - June 19, 19t9 - June 13, 1989 Additional Sxhibita - Exhibit G Exhibit H Exhibit I Exhibit J Exhibit K Hennepin County Department cf Public Works Report Dated 5/24/89 Planning Commission Notice with Sketches of Staff Options Septic Mapping by Steve Schirmers Private Driveway Plan for Lot 1 Revised Preliminary Plan Please review Exhibit H, the Planning Commission action notice that defined applicants available options regarding access and the relocation of lot lines in relation to accessory/detached structure. c efi Zoning Filo #1405 ^ Juno 13» 1989 iF«go € A« to tho nccoss, nppllcanti wont with Option A (Exhibit H- 3). Tho drivowoy oosomont and area tc. tho woat has boon dofinod ao Outlet A. Aroa of Lot 3 has boon roconfirmod with 2 acros of dry contiguous land by roadjusting tho lot lino botwoon Lots 3 and 1. Tho futuro ownor of Lot 3 shall rotain ownorship of Outlet A bocauso of tho tomporary status of accoss to tho Lot 2 vi.. tho outlet - doponding upon futuro division of Lot 1. An approval of this subdivision must bo conditionod on Lot 3 'doing ^^9*1 iy conbinod with Outlet A and that an accoss oasoraont must bo granted by tho ownor of Outlet A to Lot 2. As to tho accossory structuror tho applicants chooso to go with option B (Exhibit H-6). Noto tho principal structure is now 30' from tho sido lot lino and tho dotachod accossory structure located within Lot 1 is now 14' from tho lot lino. If tho proposed plan is approved by tho Planning Commission, a c^^^ditlon of approval a ist include advise to tho futuro ownor of Lot 1 that if a building permit has not boon issued within 1 year from final plat approval tho accessory structure must bo removed. Please review Exhibit J, applicants wore asked to provide a site plan showing tho location of tho private driveway bocauso of tho many concerns expressed by tho adjacent neighbors at tho public hearing. It is staff's understanding that the applicants have reviewed tho placement of tho driveway with tho neighbors and to staff's knowledge have voiced no concern. Staff would call to tho attention of tho Planning Commission that tho driveway is not 26' from tho wetlands as tho < • ginal staff memo had advised tho applicants. Tho wetlands is designated at tho 933 elevation. Tho proposed d^ivo must be 26* from tho 933 elevation. There is adequate width within the corridor to meet the 26' setback. If approver., a condition of approval must be that the access drive meet the 26' setback from the wetlands defined at the 933 elevation. Please review Exhibit G, the Hennepin County Department of Public Works has asked for an additional 7' of right-of-way for both County Road 84 and County Road 51. The City of Orono has consistently refused to grant the additional 7' of right-of-way holding the maximum right-of-way for loth county roads at 66' maximum width. The City will only ask for the dedication of roadway as shown on the preliminary plan. Please review Exhibit I, Steve S^hlrmers has completed the additional testing for an alternate septic site for Lot 2. The alternate site would be to the immediate north of the previously tested site. Zoning Filo #1405 Juno 13r 1989 Pago 7 If tho current preliminary aubdivision is approved aa proposed, the following conditions are appliveable: 1. Outlot A is to be legally combined with Lot 3. Owner of Lot 3 and Outlot A to grant access easement in favor of Lot 2« If Lot 1 is further subdivided in the future. Lot 2 shall be served by the private road through Lot 1. 2. The subdividers shall agree to execute a covenant that would agree to remove the detached structure on Lot 1 if a building permit has not been issued within one year of the date of final plat approval. 3. Private iveway to serve Lot 1 must be placed so that a 26* setbaci , maintained from the wetland defined at the 933 elevation. 4. Existing house on Lot 2 t^ be served by a new septic system. Such system is to be installed prior to final plat approval. 5. City shall limit dedication of right-of-way for County Read 84 and County Road 51 at a 66* maximum w.Vdth. Dedication shall be as shown on preliminary plan. Additional Connente and Planning CoHieaion July 5, 1989 jttdaticMi - The Planning Commission unanimiously approved the revised preliminary plan, Exh it K, and included the conditions set forth above by staff. The enclosed resolution has been drafted per the Planning xnmission's approving recommendation. c Wm- ■ ■ ■ ^ im h USOLUTIOM niBLINIWUlT APPROVM. pob k plat AT 2A40 BOItTH SBORB DRIVB riLB MO. 1405 m WBBltBAS. PhylliB D. C oIWAU AAd Th<MA« «. ■ .^,j.:,.ihmtmitnkttrnz "the appUcanti") ph April 30, l»Bf «il«i4 ♦ l«f!iO(if?®^ MMbdiTision application with tha City for m ^iVioioil of a lot rooidontiaX plat of a property legally deseribed ia lol|bitll| p li: lefer to Exhibit A, attached Hennepin County# Minneeota# (hereinafter "the property") and; p: V VSBMBASf after due published and mailed notice In accordance with Minnesota Sf^^ues 462.358 et. seq. and the City of Orono Zoning and Plat ^ Codes, the Orono Plannln# CCHueiaaion held public hear!, on May 15, 1989 and June 19, 19f9 at which tines all persons desiring to be heard concerning this application were given the opporturity to speak thereon? and -^1 Si.'W NHBItBAS# at their regular meeting held on July 10, 1969 the Orono City Council considered the subdivision application of the applicants, noting the following findings of fact: '-m. % 1. The property is located within the RR-IB Single Family Aural Residential Zoning District requiring a minimum of 2.0 acres of contiguous dry buildable land within each newly created lot. 2. The property contains a total of approximately 19.91 acres, 6.81 acres consists of wetlands. 3.The proposed plat contains three lots each meeting the 2 acre fflinimum lot area requirement and the 200* of width at hI-ill the rear of the front yard setback line. 4. Each of the lots has been found to contain adequate area for both principal and alternate septic sites. MOW, THBRBPORE BE IT RESOLVED, that based upon one or more of ‘ • findings noted above, the City Council of the City of 0f.'Ono } iby approves the preliminary plat application of Phyllis ... Colv/ell and Thomas G. Colwell per rht2 survey dated February 20, 1989, revised June 13, 1989 by Tid Kemna of Schoell And Madson, Inc., subject to the following conditions; Page 1 of 4 \U city of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. ________________ 1. Outlet A is to be legally combined with Lot 3. Owner of combined Lot 3 and Outlet A to grant access easement in favor of Lot 2. 2. At the time of a future subdivision of Lot 1, access to Lot 2 shall be via the new private road that will serve new lots created with the division of Lot 1. 3. The applicants shall agree to execute a covenant that would agree to rer ove the detached structure on Lot 1 if a building permit has not been issued within one year of the date of final plat approval. 4. Private driveway to serve Lot 1 must be placed so that a 26* setback is maintained from the wetland defined at the 933 elevation. 5. Existing house on Lot 2 to be served by a new septic system. Such system is tc be installed prior to final plat approval. PINAL PLAT SUBMITTALS The following list of final submittals must be submitted to the Zoning Administrator two weeks prior to the regularly scheduled Council meeting on the second and fourth Mondays of ^he month; A. RECORD PLAT drawings in the form of two (2) mylar copies and one (1) copy reduced to 1"=200*. Drawing to include: a) Lot lines platted per preliminary survey by Ted Kemna of Schoell and Madson, Inc. dated February 20, 1989r revised June 13, 1969. b) Dedication of "drainage and utility easements" 10* wide along all perimeter property lines and 5* each side of internal property lines - omit along the sides of the lot lines adjacent to wetlands. c) All wetland areas to be shown as drainage easements. Include wetlands not included in original lot line rearrangement with property tn the east. d) Dedication of right-of-way as shown on preliminary survey, limiting the maximum right-of-way width to 66* of width for County Road 84 and County Road 51. Page 2 of 4 C o 0 I CITY iQRaNa city of OROINO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. B. LEGAL DOCUMENTS required: a) Title opinion addressed to the City. All owners, mortgage holders or others with property interest indicated therein shall sign the plat and all other documents affected by such interest. b) The applicants must provide certified copies of all recorded easements currently affecting the property. c) Signed and executed Flowage & Conservation Eas^ent o/er the wetlands defined as drainage easements within the plat. d) A separate covenant for Lot 1 agreeing to the removal of the detached structure if a building permit has not been issued within one year of the date of final plat approval. C. FEES TO 3E PAID: Total Due $600.00. a) Park dedication fee per current schedule: Lot 1 at 5+ acres » $100.00 Lot 3 at 2+ acres ■ 200.00 Total Park Fee = $300.00 b) Final plat fee » $150.00. c) Legal review and filinc fees of $150.00. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota at a regular meeting held this 10th of July, 1989. ATTEST: Jaunes R. Grabek, Mayor Dorothy M. Hallin, City Clerk Page 3 of 4 CITY OF ORONQ city of OROINO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO.______________C STATE OP MINNESOTA ) ) ss • COUNTY OP HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this 10th day of July, 1989, by James R, Grabek & Dorothy M. Hallin, Mayor & City Clerk of the City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City. Notary Public My Commission Expires c Page 4 of 4 Q #1405 l<i 0^ of orono - subdivisiom application "WKOPBRTif JL jCATIOH r^U^6 f[j(^\^Site Address ynJL -wWVi>--. vvv_ ^ . . . . ... L..-£i.A -U i'-' •v;^■ Property Identification Number (P.I.D.) 9 ' M OOOZ^ Please check one - Property _ _ _ abstract or s/" torrens? Attach legal description to application. APPLICANT Name P. (2>/um(| Phone (home)_4y.,;^- i¥S7 '7^r>^ac C-S>iuje^il_ _ _ Phone (worlc)^/z.- Address; 5"5"/Z^ X'f'-City; ^cL'JU Zip; OWNER (if different than applicant) Name Phone (home} Phone (work) Address (attach list if more than one) City:Zip: ISTING LAND USE Number of Tax Parcels Development Size Present Use (check) 1 /Cl. ^775* Acres Dry Land Acras Wet Land iOx Acres .otal^ all parcels \/ Residential; no. of units _[_ Other (specify)_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Present Zoning District 1 ^ PROPOSAL _ _ _ _ Division for Tax Purr i _ _ _ Lot Line Rearrangement o. / (no new building sites) Subdivision for New Building Sites Number of Building Sites: Propcwed Gross Density: Minimum Lot Size: Proposed Use: (check) /Existing Units New Units Total Units Units per Acres >1^ Sq Feet Dry Buildable Land X Residential Other (specify) #1405[A.ETE PflStlMINARY APpCiCATiBn«NIMDM MATERIAL NECESSARY FOR COMPLl Completed Application Form Preliminary Plat information on Certificate of Survey. Certified Property Owners List of owners within 350’ (you must obtain/*^ this list from Hennepin County Department of Finance A-603 Govt Center^ 348-3271). Stamped, legal sized envelopes (#10> pre-addressed to each of the names on the above list with no return address (use address labels obtained with property owners list). As an addendum to this application, please attach a separate list of any other persons you wish notified of this application.(2) Certification by Zoning Department th^t Preliminary Plat Application is complete. Zoning Official's Signature_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _Date_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 1. Payment of fees (park fees, filing fee, sewer and water assessments). 2. Signed certificate of survey or mylar copies of formal plat. 3. Title opinion. 4. Easements, Covenants, etc. Developers Agreement and Letter of Credit. Certification by Zoning Department that Final Plat Application is complete. Zoning Official's Signature _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Date__ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ PEES Sketch Plan Review (Class I, II & III) Preliminary Review (Class I & II Subdivision) $150.00 250.00 /Preliminary Review (Class III and all non-residential) 300.00 + 20.00/Lot C Final Plat Review (Class III) *(Plus any legal or engineering charges) 150.00* The applicant hereby agrees to provide all information required or requested by the Zoning Administrator, City Engineer, City Attorney, Planning Commission and Council necessary to process this application and further agrees to pay ail additional fees established by ordinance. Applicant's Signature t//‘.U ylu-Jc/L Owner's Signature // Date Date 7 ■f / Applicant must have all submittals into the City offices 25 days before the Planning Commission Meeting. Planning Commission Meetings are held on the third Monday of each month. Applicants must be present at all scheduled review meetings of the Planning Commission and Council. If an applicant is unable to attend a scheduled meeting, please make arrangements to have an authorized agent attend in your place and to advise the Building & Zoning Office of this change prior to the meeting. 1=s St! §li Ui _ |8 S S lU r.2 _e u> §< 5-5! alsisa 8 “S2S (A MM M« e a f, ^ a Sui^^0 ge ee ae SSSSSi lU UlK oe 1 oe B S eg z r«> o < < iH z a a j* e o O U» ^ “ «H 1*1 2 S S w a i ii K »H O §1 iss O g S eg “511 <«■ M Z X 10 MX S 1eg g X <Aujjusa Ul S u S 1%K g'»§!3iS22 38 002655R • SROLLI2655NAYZASs»i!a sl3!si “2 o e zI Uiih * o -? “> «5 2 S. Ul a** ....S***u. u. 2 2 !j zH K a Z ::2:3SgU U IH z 10o O ae » a M M M ^ IJ05882 mZ ,-> s “O UJ 8 **“5J « (A 3 2 « So 8SsN“’ sii:?i 1 i ‘i,ii 38 0 01150 R K 0 R K t 1150 1 HAYZA38 002660IRNINIRHZN1700HAYZAe If) K X <-e Ik in N 10 «■ u. «« >3S-,!^8S Ul Xgloi Ul X X z o a < X o X 2 a a 3 X a8*S?O Z Ul < < > N a z UJ < « > N oc g“o w «■ <A •A X <g *- 5 a 4A ee “g 2!iS -I O to e 10 z ^ isS..S8I * O U U N 2 ee ee ee a S2 Si X -S^SssSS888S U> Of X z o o 3 X a a z UJ < < > s O lO o ^ CM e ^ croa M <r »- r (0 C' Mr -j Z Vi t-i i. Hi it Ui a > O t- tr cr Q. UJ Q. >* O )- ec ioo < UJ UJ bj 10 r Q M U O > UJ < u ^ a>:"ii X u. u < »- o Z UJ >- r M CD< o a a X (H UJ Ul t- t- 2 -j< 5 g > t- UJ Q u. Z X Z •H UJ ^ *- lO UJtr UJ X > UJ a »- r u a UJ U. Lu M a o O <o 'N <sj 3 Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building & Zoning Administrator Michae'. P. Gaffron, Asst Planning & Zoning Administrator May 5, 1989 Subj-^ct* #1405 Thomas G. Colwell, 2640 North Shore Drive - Proposed Preliminary Plat - Site Evaluation Raviav 3, The pioposed drainfield sites on Lot 1 contain suitable soil conditions for a standard trench drainfield system. The primary and alternate sites are adjacent to each other. Adequate setbacks are maintained from both the proposed lot lines and from the existing wetland. Note that Lot 1 abuts Old Crystal Bay Road, and apparently is intended to gain access to Old Crystal Bay Road via a driveway iOO' in length. There are two municipal sewer stubs available to Lot 1 at Old Crystal Bay Road, however, it is my understanding in discussions with the site evaluator and surveyor that it will be more cost effective and less disruptive to construct a septic system than to attempt to make this extremely long connection. 4. The primary and alternate Sxu .3 on Lo' ^re near the nor" h end of that lot, and would rei ire n. systems due to a seasonally high water table located near as 32" below the surface. The primary and alternate sites are adjacent to each other on a slope of 4-6%. Ample room remains for location of a fairly large residence with the typical amenities on the 2+ dry buildable acres in this lot. 5. Similarly, the primary tested site on Lot 2 requires a mound system. This ite is located at the southerly end of the lot, on a slope cf 3-6%.There is no conflict with the existing well, and I would anticipate that testing will find a suitable alternate site directly north of the proposed primary site. Having reviewed the site evaluation submitted for the above referenced plat, I would make the following comments: 1. Testing was done by SP Testing Inc. Primary and alternate sites were located on Lot 1, Block 1, and Lot 3r Block 1. » tingle site was tested on Lot 2, Block 1. 2. Lot 2 ontains the existing residence known as 2640 North Shore Drive. That residence has had a failing septic system s nee at least 1986. Since that system has never been repaired, the tested site will have to be used immediately. A new alternate site should be tested as part of this subdivision process. There appears to be ample area jus-c n^’'th of the proposed primary site to support ai* alter,.- ^ site. #1405 Thomas G. Coxweil, 2640 Shore Drive - Proposed Preliminary Plat - Site Evaluation Review May 5, 1989 Page 2 of 2 Regarding the proposed easement for access, that access is over the existing driveway. Any major revision of the proposed subdivision that will revise the actual location of the access drive must be considered in relation to the tested drainfield sites. The slopes on Lot " cgest that the proposed sites are the best sites on the propei nd should be preserved if at all possible. Lot 1 could be n ch more fie; e but there is no guarantee that other locations within Lc ± could support a standard trench system as can the tested site. One of the conditions of preliminary plat aporoval and final plat approval should be fencing off of the d alternate '•Ites on each lot to avoid disturbance. Given tnc above assumptions and conditior be a reasonable ai*d feasible 3-lot subdivision. Summary - s ,'ppears to Lot 1 - Standard trenches both sites Lot 2 - Replace existing system - Test for a new alternate site Lot 3 - Mound required both si^es Am ■ mi,. RANSPQRTATIQN JURIt IfiO SCENIC PARKWAY Scenic parkway 's a designation and classification used by tha Cities ^of Minneapolis and Saint Paul and applied by Orono to those roads which traverse especially scenic and environmentally significant areas of the city. The scenic parkway is typically a narrow, curvy, slow speed road which provides access to recreational areas and special vistas of scenic attractions. High volume through traffic and commercial traffic is not appropriate on scenic parkways because these users do not benefit from the attraction and because the physical nature of the roadway is lot conducive to efficient through traffic movement. Because of environme 11al sensitivity, scenic parkways cannot be rebuilt into higher capacity collectors or minor arterials without adversely affecting the natural setting, the scenxc quality of the road and/or the property rights of abutting landowners. Because of the natural topography of the area, scenic parkways also provide some of the traffic and local access functions of both local and collector streets. JURISDICTION: COUNTY OR CITY RIGHT-OF-WAY WIDTH: 50-66 FEET LOCAL STREETS Local streets are public streets that function to provide direct access to abutting properties. Loral streets carry traffic within neighborhoods rather than through traffic between neighborhoods. Inter- ctions with collector streets are controlled by stopping the local street affic. JURISDICTION: CITY RIGHT-OF-WAY WIDTH: 50-60 FEET DEAD-END: LENGTH WILL BE LIMITED BY PUBLIC SAFETY CONSIDERATIONS PRIVATE ROAD A private road is a privately owned and privately maintained road, located in the rural area or within a planned development, that functions as a local access street. The City will require that private roads be constructed and maintained to City standards. The City will acquire an easement for public ingress, egress and access to all properties, but the City will allow th^j property owners to limit normal use of the road to the benefitting landowners and then invitees. Private roads will be located on platted outlets Intended for joint and several ownership by all the benefltted property owners. JURISDICTION; HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION WITH UNDEPLYING EASEMENT TO CITY MAXIMUM SERVICE: APPROXIMATELY TEN RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES RIGHT-OF-WAY WIDTH; 30-50 FEET DEPENDING UPON NUMBER OF USERS DEAD-END: LENGTH WILL BE LIMITED BY PUBLIC SAFETY CONSIDERATIONS CMP 7-16 IRANSPORTATION JUNE, 1980 Q PRIVATE DKIVEWAY A driveway is a privately owrad and privately maintained vehicle path between the street and private property. Private driveways shall be subject to access permits accordinq to the cla:» ^ i f icat ion of the abetting street. Private driveways will not be subject to any public easement or access right, but do require recorded private easements where driveways cros^ an intervening private lot between the residence served and the stre<«t. JURISDICTION: PROPERTY OWNER NAXIMUN SERVICE:1 RESIDENCE TYPICAL; JOINT DRIVEWAYS ALLOVID WXTN MAXINUM TNREE RESIDENTS PER DRIVEWAY IN RURAL ARIAS MORE USERS REQUIRE PRIVATE ROAD STANDARDS DRIVEWAY WIDTH WILL BE REGULATED WHERE MORE THAN ONI USER IS XRVOLVID OR FOR PUBLIC SAFETY PURPOSE^ WFERI TNERI IS IICISSXVI LENGTH BETWEEN THE RESIDENCE AND TNI PUBLIC ROAD EXISTING ROADWAY MAINTENANCE JURISDICTIONS ARE REASONABLE AS THEY RSXATt TO THE CLASSIFICATION PLAN. The State of Minnesota has approprlata jurisdiction over the onlv Intermediate Arterial in the City. The Hennepin County Department of Transportation has jurisdiction over the only Minor Arterial designated in the Plan. It is entieipeted that Nennepir County will assusie jurisdiction in the future over the City* built ring route link between County Road 19 and County Road €. Hennepin County has jurisdiction over most of the designated Scenic Parkways which is appropriate in that these roads serve as access to Lake Minnetonka and to County maintained landings for many County residents who do not reside in Orono. The City has jurisdiction over those Scenic Parkways that are away from the immediate lakeshore, including the access road to the Orono Golf Course. The City has appropriate j ur i sd i ct io** of most of the Collector and all of the local streets which serve all Orono residents. Certain key street segments have been designated for Municipal state Aid construction assistance, including: OLD CRYSTAL BAY ROAD from County Road 6 to Fox Street, County Road 84 WILLOW DRIVE from County Road 6 to State Highway 12 and from the Long Lake^border to Fox Street FOX STREET from Willow Drive to County Road 146 HcCulley Road (Ring Route link) between County Road 6 and County Road 19 Finally, individual proparty owners have appropriate private jurisdiction over those Private Roads serving only their individual properties. CMP 7-17 ' <: 1-*^. - 'J - >1 0 NOKMIuu DEFWTME?^ OF PUBUC WORKS Engineering Division 320 Washington Ave South Hopkins, Minnesota 56343-0468 Phone (612)93^3381 u uL May 24 I99f MS. Jvanna Mabusth •gliding and Zoning Adalnistrator City of Orono P. 0. Sox 44 Crystnl Bay. MW 55323 Otar Ms. MaOusth nt Propostd flat - Colwtll Addition CSAN 51/B4, Northaast quadrant Saetlon 9. To»nsnip 117, Banga 23 Honntpin County Plat No. 1746 Bavlaa and Bacomaandatlons Minnasota Statutas 505.02 and 505.03, Plats and Survays, raquira County rovloa proposad plats abutting County roads, wa raviawad tha above plat and Mka tht following comaants: - For future laprovaiaants to CSAH 51 and CSAH 84 tha developer should dadleatt ill additional 7 feat of right of way along each roadway where they abut tho plat. - rna location of tha proposad access to CSAH 64, approx1nataly 50 south of thO northwest plat corner, is acceptable to Hennepin County. - Tha location of the access to CSAH 51. near the southwest plat eornof, Is acceptable to Hennepin County. This access oust serve Lots 2 and 3. • Any new access to a county road requires an approved Hennepin County entronct pernit before beginning any construction. Contact our Maintenance Division for entrance peralt forms. - All proposed construction within County right of way requires an approved utility perolt prior to beginning construction. This includes, but Is not llaiced to, drainage and utility construction, trail development, and landscaping. Contact our Maintenance Division for utility permit forms. - The developer must restore all areas disturbed during construction within County right of way. Please direct any response or questions to Les Weigelt Sincerely. David W. Schmidt, P.E. Transportation Planning HENNEPIN COUNTY 0WS/L0W:lw cm or 01K>M0 P. O. Box Crystal Bay* Mi 473-7357 55323 XOBIBG WIIM ilBBS Boncs OP FUUmiBG COmiXBBXOB Date of Notice: 05/23/4f TOt ThoMS k Phyllis Colwell 5512 Knoll Drive Sdina, KM 55436 COPIBS TO: nPB OP BPPLICBTlOMs Subdivision DBTB OP HBBTIB6: 5/15/89 VuTBi 6 For 0 Against Plaaaiaq CosBissicm rscoHMiids the following: Tabled for reasons noted below ■OTBS JOB) 8PBC1AL COH)ITIOMS: _ Planning Conanission tabled your application pending resolve /^■^,of the following issues. 1. Access - Please review exhibits attached and entitled "Access Option A 6 B”. Option A - Shows a 30' wide outlot over the existing driveway easement. Note the darkened area of Lot 3 cannot be credited against the dry contiguous area required by the ordinance. Shared lot line must be adjusted so that Lot 3 has contiguous dry buildable envelope, exclusive of road outlot and darkened areas. Outlot B - Note shared outlot has been placed within Lot 1. Access shall be shared by 1 and 2. Outlot need only be 30* wide. If 30* access easement is not released within Lot 3 now serving Lot 2 the dry buildable area must also be adjusted for the same reasons noted in Option A. 2. Accessory Structures - Please refer "Accessory Structure - Option A & B". Option A - to attached exhibits Shows the accessory structure located within Lot 2. Note that the 10' side setback must be maintained from the side lot line. Zoning File #1405 May 23, 1989 Pag# 2 of 2 Option B - n Shows tha shared lot line adjusted so that a 30* setback Is net by the house from the side lot line and 10* for the garage/barn. Applicant must execute a covenant noting that the accessory sturcture would have to be removed if a building permit has not been issued for a prinicpal structure within a year of the final plat approval date. Other conditions considered for approval were noted as follows: 3. Dedication of right-of-way of Co. Rd. 84 k 51. 4. Place future owner of Lot 1 on notice, that if lot is further subdivided they will be responsible for the private road to be constructed for future access and that Lot 2 will be required to access off the private road. Lot 3 to retain existing access of Co. Rd. 51. 5. Additional septic testing for Lot 2 for an alternate site. All septic sites to be staked prior to final plat approval. The deadline for submittals of new information is June 7, 1989 for Planning Commission meeting of June 19, 1989. 1 O o h~H »• » * <:;<3 V V ‘ 4 '• Vi u i> I I t\!cv > ir vJ '■>1^1 ■»i '‘i w Vj| i l!' lij W)x M .1 4 u> $vj\ u><n in O' I u 1 V\;a jrq Vocu i* 5 s lo Hs °l| o°.^1. y, i a ro \P I Ji i ci[ u»! *J o TJc 3 O O' Vi V •Oc 3 Mayor Grabek fc Orono Cou*'*cil Members City Administrator Bernhaiison MSTlii 0t933 an OF Mi Proas Dates Michael P. Gaffron, Asst Planning & Zoning Administrator July 5, 1989 Subject: #1415 Robert fr Cheryl Humphrey, 669 Minnetonka Highland Lane - Variance - ResoJution Soning District - LR-IB, 1 acre, sewered Application - Request for hardcover and average lakeshore setback variances to construct pool and decking. List of Exhibits Exhibit A - Planning Commission Action Notice of 6/22/89 Exhibit B - Proposed Resolution Exhibit C - Memo 6 Exhibits of 6/16/89 Discussion * Applicants are proposing to replace the existing deck on the lake side of their house, construct an additional area of deck adjacent to it, and in the future (perhaps a few years down the road), construct a swimming pool in the lakeshore yard. Applicants request a hardcover variance and an average lake setback variance. Planning Commission reviewed this item at their June 19th meeting, and recommended approval of the average setback variance finding that neither adjacent residents will have lake views encroached upon by the proposed decks. Furthermore, Planning Commission recommended approval for a variance to allow the existing 37.11 hardcover to contii^ue, with the condition that the proposed deck addition be subject to removal of equivalent amounts of hardcover to result in no increase above 37.1%. There is substantial area of rock beds with plastic that can be removed to accomplish this. Applicant noted that the pool drawings submitted were likely not the final pool layout, and applicant was proposing merely to make Planning Commission aware of his long-term plan for development of the property. Appl:|^ant noted it may be a number of years before the pool is conirtructed, and applican : was advised that the variance would i^pire after one year. The Planning Commission then specifically excluded the future pool from this variance request, finding that it was not thr 'inal plan and therefore not a verifiable proposal at this poin*-. In effect, the Planning Commmission was not willing to g^.ant approval for variances for the pool without knowing exactly what would be the final product. The property owner would have to apply for another variance at the time the pool is actually proposed to be constructed, providing final plans and layout. Zoning File #1415 July 5, 1989 Page 2 of 2 Note that the Planning Commission recommendation was on a vote of 4-1. The minority opinion. Acting Chairman Bellows, indicated she felt the information provided was insufficient to make a good recommendation on the proposal. Staff Re ndation - Staff recommends approval per the Planning Commission recommendation, to allow 37.1% hardcover and grant the average lakeshore setback for the existing cind new decks, with the stipulation that tl.'^s approval does not include the variances required for the futu..e pool, which wil) have to be the subject of a future application. A resolution •. ef 1 ect i vg the above is attached for Counci; review. CITY OP OROHO P,0. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 tcmrm filb ho. . 141s NOTICE OP PUUnixW C01UII88I0V ACTIOE 473-7357 Date Of Notice: 6/22/89 TO: Roberc & Cheryl Humphrey COPIES TO: 669 Minnetonka Highland Lane Long Lake, MN 55356 TYPE OP ^iPPLICATION: Variance DATE OP M3ETING: 6/19/89 VOTE: 4 For 1 Against Planning Coenission recaamends the following: Approval subject to conditions noted below MOTES AND SPECIAL CONDITIONS: 1. Approval of average setback variance for deck replacement and construction of new proposed deck. 2. Hardcovet shall not increase above the existing 37.1% (9,999 s.f. per staff call ilation). 3. Proposed future pool is not included in this recommendation, since proposed plan is apparently at this time only conceptual in nature. Planning Commission recommends that a new application be submitted for hardcover and average setback variances at the time the pool plans are finalized. Applicant's next scheduled meeting is confirmed as.- City Council Monday, July 10, 1989; meeting starts at 7:00 p.m. If you desire certified copies of the official Planning Commission minutes, they are available from the City Recorder after review and approval by the Planning Commission. . ■'3 T< foO (3 i^okjV ^ Mayor Grabek 6 Orono Council Members Planning Commission Chairman Kelley Orono Planning Commission Members City Administrator Bernhardson Prcai: Date: Subject: Michael P, Gaffron, Asst Planning & Zoning Administrator June 16, 1989 #1415 Robert & Cheryl Humphrey, 669 Minnetonka Highland Lane - Variance - Public Hearing Zoning District - LR-ID, Single family lakeshore residential, 1 acre, sewered Application - Request for hardcover and average lakeshore setback variances to construct pool and decking. List of Exhibits Exhibit A Exhibit B Exhibit Exhibit Exhibit Exhibit Exhibit Exhibit Exhibit Exhibit Application & Letter of Request Plat Map Property Owners List Survey with Existing Hardcover Noted Survey with Proposed Pool and Decking Applicant's Hardcover Calculation Staff Hardcover Review Average Setback Survey Compilation Proposed Pool Layout Acknowledgements from Neighboring Property Owners Pertii'^ent Pacts -i 1.Applicants propose to replace the existing decks, add a new deck, and construct a swimming pool, on the lakeside of the existing house. 2.Per Exhibit H, the pool inself will encroach 30' past the average setback line. The existing deck to be replaced encroaches approximately 16' past the average setback line. The patio and landscaping all at grade level (as is th( pool), extend approximately 38' past the average lakesh^^e setback line. 3.There is no hardcover in the 0-75' setback zone, in the 75-250' zone is as follows: Hardcover Hardcover, 75-250' zone (area Existing* Allowed 75-250* 9,999 s.f. 6,738 s.f*. (37.1%) (25%) 26,950 s.f.): Proposed* 11,376 s.f. (42.2%) Variance 4,638 s.f. (17.2%) * see staff calculations attached Zoning File #1415 June 16, 1989 Page 2 of 2 4. Please note that applicant provided detailed hardcover calculations but no diagram keying the calculations, so staff reviewed hardcover independently per Exhibit G. 5. There is approximately 6% hardcover in the 250-500* 2one. No change is proposed. Discussion - The Planning Commission is requested to visit this site to get a first-hand view. From the standpoint of average lakeshore setback, the residence to the northwest will not be impacted at all. The residence to the southeast will not lose any lakeviews, but note the pool water surface being 12.5' from the side lot line, with pool surround being approximately 6' from the line. Applicant is proposing to surround the pool with shrubbery. Perhaps the more significant question to ask is whether fencing around the pool will be required by the applicant's insurance company, and if so, how would that fencing affect the adjacent neighbor, the Nelsons at 679 Minnetonka Highland Lane. Note that those neighbors have signed an acknowledgement that they are aware of this application. Staff has received no comments from them. Regarding hardcover, this property has hardcover concentrated in the 75-250' zone and the excessive hardcover is taken up by the large driveway area, plus some fairly extensive landscape beds. To be generally consistent with past practice, staff would suggest that concurrent removals of hardcover on this property be considered, to result in no increase in hardcover. Remember that the pool water surface is not considered as hardcover for calculation purposes. The 1,377 s.f. of additional hardcover associated with the new deck and pool surround is nearly equivalent to the areas of landscape rockbed areas. Removal of plastic from all rockbed areas would result in a net increase of about 110 s.f. of hardcover. It may then also be reasonable to require that some portion of the driveway or parking area be removed. Staff Recoanendation - If Planning Commission finds that the location of the pool will have no significant impact on :•>'<& views enjoyed by the neighboring property owners, a recommendation for approval of the average lakeshore setback variance would be appropriate. Regarding the hardcover request, it would be consistent with past practice if the Planning Commission were to recommend that equivalent hardcover be removed so that the result is no net increase in hardcover above the existing 37.1%, if Planning Commission feels a variance is justified. CIT7 OF ORONO - VARIAHCE APPLICATION Initial Application Fee $150.00 ($50.00 per each additional variance Renewal Variance Fee $75.00 (no change from original application) After-the-Fact Fees (Double application fee) PR0PSRT7 LOCATION Site Address . Qy'c Property Identification Number (P.I.D.) r>arr7 Please check one - Property abstract or _ _ _ torrens? -. - -.-M.«- • — - Attach legal description to application if not included onActacn legal aescription to app required survey. £/a/cLUP£DJ •t: APPLICANT Phone (home )___ Name /in(/o(cy\//rc^/ Phone (work) Address ; ■ City: , /1^ Zip: OViNER (if different than applicant) Phone (home)_____ Name Phone (work) Address:City:Zip: Date Property Acquired (month/year) I (do) (do not) also own the adjacent parcels of land. PRESENT USE OF PROPERTY Present Zoning District Present Use of Property /^CrSry7 M-c Residential Other (specify) DESCRIPTION OP REQUEST Estimated Const! action Cost $ TlS'.CC^a .. ^i rY/^ry>/vn Deck sA'i/fArm/^ (/■>^ tou ^'KTxn rr/^r//vn urcfc i/yueJ7nmffu Saat* '7iy •fio'r' 0/c tl ^/9 1 ^ ^ 7^* ^, VARIANCES REQUIRED _ _ _ Lot Area _ _ _ Lot Width \y^ Hardcover Setback Vari ®s ( Front Side Rear) Other 5»T/LY'/an c/® HARDSHIP Describe undue hardship or practical difficulty resulting from strict enforcement of zoning regulations:_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ DESCRIPTION OF nNDSDAL PROPERTY CONDITIONS Describe unusual property conditions preventing compliance with Zoning Code Requirements;_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ REQUIRED SUBMITTALS 1. Completed Application Form 2. Certified Property Owners List of owners within 150’ (you must obtain this list from Hennepin County Department of Finance A-603 Govt Center 348-3271). 3. Stamped, legal sized envelopes (#10) pre-addressed to each of the names on the above list with no return address (use address labels obtained with property owners list). 4. Certificate of survey including hardcover calculations as required. 5. Topographic survey (existing and proposed elevations) if any changes in existing grade are proposed. 6. Plat Map (obtained with property owners list). 7. As an addendum to this application, please attach a separate list of any other persons you wish notified of this application. 8- Additional items as may be requested by City staff. The Applicant and Property Owner must sign this application. Please remember that your variance application is not complete if the above information has not been included. Certification by Zoning Department that Variance Application it complete. Zoning Official's Signature^Date APPLICANT'S SIGNATURE The applicant hereby agrees to provide all information required or requested by the Zoning Administrator, agrees to pay all and/or unusual expenses incurred in review of this application, and certifies that the information supplied is true and correct to the best of his/her knowledge. Applicant's Signature'^-^Date OWNERS SIGNATURE The owner hereby ackowledges and agrees to this application and further authorizes reasonable entry onto the property by City staff, consultants, agents. Commission members, and Council members for purposes of investiga tion and verificatiop of this request. 'i/. ~<rlC7 Owner's Signature this request. Date Applicant must have all submittals into the City offices 25 days before the Planning Commission Meeting. Planning Commission Meetings are held on the third Monday of each month. Applicants must be present at all scheduled review meetings of the Planning Commission and Council. If an applicant is unable to attend a scheduled meeting, please make arrangements to have an authorized agent attend in your place and to advise the Building & Zoning Office of this change prior to the meeting. # -a r-. /■^ —-arj« 7>ut^ a-f, /9rf 1 ^ RotertA. lipW*^ : Oromo C;>^ Cot^ne,/ /ci)^ Jit^Mhvjrs fr»fOi» /•■ C»»I Ji P«eA tv*- /ffT ^^ ^ ftt^wirc PooiCf,w9*^ft^'0»>9 ' ^se, - K'^W^cc ^/^A'c^'otfj ' /• C»t/cr ^otJ^ s370 S,^ Si/^^ X. S!*t i;^ Cor»n»e^^S \ TA^ mAArncArnt^^c^ireaT^ fro>^ Hff^r^mft Cw^tA'mPtr m.lA /•/C fm't^cAAtrn.dfAAm ^ft7. "A/e /A^sc /9^^r9/e^€.»t/s Ae^r 4«*/4^e»'e ^r-»r#»M«/Ue</ ' tf«cK A4rcAmtc. i<^/>/*<^/*er?>5 A/e wne«/ tAere 9Ttf AS i^Ac S'^/Aer, A/A»9^ «^# /^e ^rmkcY' JSAi/cr^ ^e4ya^c4»*^W ^e. ^A/Ayy 1^ A-.;/</<*/##/ c/Ji/m^AfU^ f*r Ai-pur nr^es7jd>K»«o A^.urMc^v aAaA aAc ft^ppiyAopa a*^s ^««r iaAp¥"€*.^^p/c*»**/^A c A»4/M /pCA'Afpt^ c^efcy^iAm*/pp^'Mc A^StAe*^S«*r^c.yt Vc U^*r Jtscp^fcret/ u Yolt/^y Occk, u>*Jer a y> cp¥mys c/at/p^ ^Ae re€0r0C r^i^t . w/^/7. T^tj is A/a^ u»s*U TUvi, tje ««a »A a ^ «•'>' c^ /, C-r^-nt US^•■r^tssitn 'f* »»»«.^c We«e /«yr»«/«»»e*^ ^/Wc JV S^uld be. •noi'eit a4»/ -ti* ^e/*j»o»>^ '•*' frtf*rty «» <*//«•-’%>'<’« *^<r A/^uy* **e c/uUA»»i si>fi*f/ eAtecJ -^e fuM^esmA^ T tt-, A/oA«r u..fer Jrk •S->'»r7, Ue ’i" ‘;;rs%'»'"^4 '■* “-■-'V-'^■^"'^Jt. ■/..,‘™ WA Jc, *-»S /^Mec/A/»rAr^^ »»« esfte¥^ ^res*^A A sHe'Ai 'y^e •Asfr»t:^A^ ^ SMrrvm>«ii t\ ^e^^^oS'S. Cr*^^ef, ute-J-em./ -f^e i«y*«>.'e~—«.A/«/i&Me Adtfi'^'cA '^o oarfyoun^ *•'</*^e rte;yA*r4*»*/As a e^^e/e. "/"AAm^y ••A. f ^,S. f/eutc C«//or Vhifeur^e. .^/y/at r4s.s^^ -r; i^3:•• Jr - r-; v-j cd:-...r l-J U": U U.i CO ♦ M o ^ □ >••« < < mi X tn m* a « •< Q-3 M X 5o u < O X < -j 'Oo s •-• X ino < »- u t#jt <►-<►< in « S a. B X M o N. t- tft< <nvAi s o S| I Ml B 9-,3 25l!= ii o X mO < < 3 rn X M Ml *1 »:■■ =|5'?S N M Ml Ml 1- ^ M J8 » n Ml c ^ ME . it •M X «j Ml Ml ■ Ki^ s- >> >* M III 225i 392 , =-|i|s 'O 3 i> •-• _Jo » 2 B r 2Ss2 I-1- >« -j <« Ml IT in e B S 'O u> 2 S5 H Cm 1 -’1 :s|3S 9 5<« o 9 ox -j <« S< Sli;l:*r St a II in « 2 Ml X Ml ♦ OBI- LaJ *•* i::ii ^ M« IM ^ m UJ K> Ml iis"M ‘i;*3 2 X Ml X a Ml T a a 2 5 So352-' Ms^ O ”> 1 M» -1 255^«0 O M M Ml O m o B B <o |isl Ml at B X Q |iS9 CK < Ul liM B <4 Ml o. Mi a X ii'i r.— ■•ai < /«s/ d ..V' t/' 3 (^ ID O X o < O »o iu 7 2 5 M X - = 9 I (D O t xSS< X >n Oo << ^“Ie *Su, 515ui Xutm* ^ -t K r aiis95 >- N OC < UJa uj a. XiVA *’ ' rr «i §1 iti Ml >- 5o 8!5 Mi K 1-4 a < 5u.=" K 2 m (X _____ 9 S K 2^ ££ tft z JS<5^ Ss§ Ml M 4 • B K a u. < UJ Uia r o M 5^i«o Ml^Sg flS“’ Ml <a zSS5 a aM M Ui !=2^ >• ►- lu 3 M. z X 2 M Mi Mi ^ V) Ml B Ml X >: sje-* Ul M a c M HARDCOVER CALCULATION WORKS^ ScT3AC:< ZONE: (circle one ) 0-75'w5- Existing Hardcover in Zone A. House___"Z _x___Z-^ / / co^*^- ! ) 1-500' 500-1000' 5'5_z - , LENGTH WIDTH 2 V X 2 y «s.f. z ^ X Tu %m S.F. X m S.F. X m S.F. b. Garage .C/9 X 2¥m )S.F. c. Driveway 1 1 X17^• ^2?S.F. / 0 :X X 35T “ 1). Sidewalk ________ Pit /^r/ —------------------------.'' — If ^ xW / '^C, ^iMCJ.UD€Z ^CVi^Vir S,P,/ L-Avic/fCi'/'^i z&f*^ef / CtYtJA!^^ Ov/ve " r rrc** K >a'< <^~o ^ , S.F. S.F.w 5 E. Patio // Deck ' / 2. l—LLL Fyo^^ (^Ay^tyy ^ I________________ / y"F.Landscape / ^ AREAS / UNDERLAIN ' / ^ BY , ->->T PLASTIC SHEETING ' - X - X - X . X ____ X ' . X ____ //9.r 1^0 % 'j < I U, L^:sy S.F. -^<ry ^(r>-<r»•7 ‘' zV V7 0 /74 7.V- 25Z- 99 S.F.r ^ S.F. 5/^ -2.1—......- S.F.^zcV' / ^ <6^f Bics)> I S.F. Ill G. Other V 5" X 7 X 9 ______________ S.F. <22V /«5S-> S'^-^O ___ - -- •------i2-----------?•?• .Utr- V ■ ? 'T‘'M~T Total Hardcover in Zone - s.f. | A | Total Property A rea in Zone n 4 ^f0f€scF) aF<^'^o»s: SV.S/'^.l ,.p. [B](423y/5?.?y r ]J^J/?.7 X 100 -:%■ ~ _________ 7 mm.?m-■ -^:io t''i^Ss-n. OM>co\jeA f y.':.-m-:. " E Z- s :!^. c^x-4i>fc-r- r?i^«.«li Ik:...- -. w^.^■V ■m-m: f"' ■■^Tr r >..-■■ r4~.~ lZ->^ y'0 C^/=,j '^>2-/2. '' -?x/S ”7 '^3 ' ^ m--i-'Mm ■H - ,r / * L^ /'2o /as: Noh - 32. ^ (*OOL -f ir?*? - 2C^"^SO -j V2 . Z / f(ex>/os€^ 75--2?0'=/7r'^ys-/'* 2&,<?sro 2.-2^XZC.^ " 2Z,2 >^ V " 2 ‘^.S“ ^ y^o Dec4c 2^y/C^ 3^C(fel STAf/C zo >^/<^ 5^ V><9 ^■*''^5^0 3^22^ /^*r P^ {w^jo2<v . I (^»^•^«‘-r i.. ij i x/Cy yxi y^ yiAA*^!SrwA-y 2>V yO IZvyj — V /8/i_ yO>ri.S 7 r^ysyl SOAaf V/\<*7 £f (//iTVowiT /“USTIC^ \ ^■7<) ^) /(P^O J 2<i»o 3BV *3 to 3.2. 27^2 ■ ??f? (^7T7^^ 0% >\3 #4 U lA h Q rl a f <4 0 rl >» n f t 8 ^ o s^7 n si ^ ^ I "' 'S^1 • u I* H r^ X 0 •4 N M r* f* k. > vi V»^ -y * ' 5 ? *4r=>^si i^jiH , jdij? 4M i I A-I 1 *4 I 7c U ^ 09 * * cf ^ 4 I -5•5 10 IJ i. . vl Vjv/^ *11 <-*■I. e »•««•« >-^*« * 1 J In : 1 <-------^ I* H SKS^veeeescstQ^ >K»aW»K««N«l SWiXK^'^ .V!»KsiN^! W'NSVCxV X ^ 5 xv>'w^% fcx’kx^'*.^ ■fc • >C>i. c:v^^^^^x:x X 'N K ^v yvxXvN : ...:x •V r-m.. PT-f^g,m w Adjacent Property ^tners* Ackiiowled9«MB^ Mra I (w€) ^M/fe.vce t^/ ^/Jitu'i:, A-CnOiSmuf Mi^iLLUlMLmJLi [print name(s)] [print addrlVSl ' ' have reviewed the plans for the proposed improvement or proposed use of the property located at also referred to aa Land Dae Application No, _____. - I (we) understand that in executing this ackncwledgementr I (we) am (are) not asked to declare approval or disapproval of the property or use but merely to confirm for the City Council that I (we) am (are) aware of the improvement plans and that the proposed neighbor's project or use requires Council approval. ^operty Owner Date S'Tu,^ /???\ J Pre^rty Owner Date / r It you have any information that may assist the City in thg>review of this Land Use Application, please submit your comments to the Building & Zoning Office at least 10 days prior to the scheduled meeting date. # kL . jk.O X (w«) Adjacent Property_C^ers' Acknowledgi tnt Form J i/^ L.^er"S of 4 5~Q HT^A [print naa«(s)] J (print addreaa] hava raviawad the plana for the proposed improvement or proposed use of the located at ^ also referred to as X»and Ose Application No. _____. I (wa) understand that in executing this ackn ^wledgemantf X (va) aa. (are) not asked to declare approval or disapproval of the propavl or uae but merely to confirm for the City Council that I (we) am (ara) awara of tha improvement plans and that the proposed neighbor's projaot or aaa "7 s Data Date If you have any information that may assist the City in the review ot this Land Use Application^ please submit your comments to the Building & Zoning Office at least 10 days prior to the scheduled meeting date. rr u AdjMMt rropwty OHBm' »rlnwifl«d9—t ton 1 (wo) f(a<fen ^_ _ _ _ _ _ of [print nnMlsTj Iprint nddrooo] r«vi«w«d th« plans for tho proposod iaprovoMnt or proponod uso of th proporty locatod nt also rsfsrrad to as Land Us Application Ho* _ _ _. Z (ws) understand that in axacuting this acknowlsdgsBsntp Z (ws) a (ora) not askad to daclara approval or disapproval of tha proparty or us but aaraly to confirm for tha City Council that Z (wa) an (ara) awara o tha imprp^ a^ plans and that tha proposed neighbor's project or us raquir^ Coi fil approval. Props Property/ 7/6/fP' Data l/(pl9S Data /T Zf you have any infomation that may assist tha City in tha review o- this Land Use Application, please submit your comments to tha Building i Zoning Office at least 10 days prior to tha scheduled meeting data. #1 y,^ D I (Me) Adjacent Property Oimers' Acknoirled '7~ / /V- Tprint nane(s)J y of ^ geaeiit Porw / ^0KKMid LIL print addteas] have reviewed the plans for the proposed improvement or proposed use of tht property located at also referred to as Land Ose / Application NOe _ _ _. I (we) understand that in executing this acknowledgements I (we) ac. (are) not asked to declare approval or disapproval of the property or use but merely to confirm for the City Council that Z (w^) am (are) aware of the improvement plans and that the proposed neighbor's project or use requires Council approval. Pr'>perty Owner Date Pro^rty Owner .Date If you have any information that may assist the City in the review ot this Land Use Application^ please submit your comments to the Building l Zoning Office at least 10 days prior to the scheduled meeting date* #1 Tr ^■3 k Adjacent Property Omers* AcknowledgeMiiit Pon '^■1: (we) i?Qln-gr~f [print address][print name(s)J have reviewed the plans for the proposed improvement or proposed use of the property located at also referred to as Land Osc / Application No. _____. I (we) understand that in executing this ac)cnowled9ement, I (we) ac (are) not asked to declare approval or disapproval of the property or ust but merely to confirm for the City Council that I (we) am (are) aware ox the improvement plans and that the proposed neighbor's project or use requires Council approval. Property Owner Date 1'1 -<fcf Date If you have any information that may assist the City in the review ol this Land Use Application, please submit your comments to the Building l Zoning Office at least 10 days prior to the scheduled meeting date. rr '-j Z (wc) A^jaemt Proderty Owners' Acknowledgeaent Form P of /Ar/^-nf6*UANb Laj. [print nameCs) j Tprlxvt^ddrefisl hav« reviewed the plans for the proposed improvesient or proposed use of the property located at^/f also referred to as Land Use Application No. _____. X (we) understand that in executing this acknowledgementy I (we) am (are) not asked to declare approval or disapproval of the property or use but merely to confirm for the City Council that I (we) am (are) aware of the improvement plans and that the proposed neighbor's project or use '’hhi Date ^ Property Owner Date If you have any information that may assist the City in the review of this Land Use Appli^rationy please submit your comments to the Building & Zoning Office at least 10 days prior to the scheduled meeting date. #1415 4 •r. /■ f CHMRKEliiS Mayor Grabek 6 Orono Council Members City Administrator Bernhardson Framz Date: Subject: Michael P. Gaffron, Asst Planning & Zoning July 7, 1989 JUL 101989 #1326 Wayzata Country Club, 200 Wayzata Boulevard - #1407 Leopold Hauser, 475 Ferndale Road North - Preliminary Subdivisions - Resolutions At your June 26th meeting. Council voted 5-0 to grant conceptual approval of the Hauler and Wayzata Country Club subdivisions. The two notices of Covncil Action are attached. The two applicants have agreed to create one set of plat drawings combining the two plats. Furthermore, the City Engineer has reviewed the drainage concerns and met with the affected parties. His recommendation is as follows: 1. Wayzata Country Club shall install a storm drain pipe through the rear of the Brooke Nelson property at 141 Chevy Chase Drive, in order to reduce the impact of run-off waters through his property. 2. The detention ponds previously proposed for the Country Club and Hauser properties will both be unnecessary an should be eliminated from further consideration. 3. The culvert under Brooke Nelson's driveway adjacent to Chevy Chase Drive is a separate issue which should remain unrelated to the proposed subdivisions. Staff Re indation - Staff recommends approval of the proposed subdivisions for Leopold and Helen Hauser and the Wayzata Country Club/Ron Lauer. Separate preliminary plat approval resolutions have been drafted for each applicant. The resolutions are worded such that applicants are directed to create one set of plat drawings as a combined subdivision. Staff recommends approval of the preliminary plat approval resolutions as drafted. 1 © AWt—— 'tl ^ N \ \ S '\ '> ' :r4asrfff^f55«apg><flgaBW ~:,_ ..lil .U^ ' N H*< \\\\ \ -1 \ '\ jW?.V'\\Wi ■ '^m:'A\^'~ -laas^ 'n '&•■ ' ■5?M4)£*n- g?.'f- .lif^f .7,: :l "i I m . »*»A.'.•,-»■ ■ >•-••<■•*• APPUCATICMI MO. 1407 v; ^ CTTY L. C. jL^ P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN -t - - i- 55323 473-7357 NoncB or cooMcii* Date of Notices «/27/if Leopold & Helen Hauser 475 Ferndale Road North Wayzata, MN 55391 COPIES: Meredith Rowell Merrill Lynch Realty 315 East Lake St Wayzata, MN 55391 TYPE OF APPLICATION: Subdivision DATE OF MEETING: 6/26/89 VOTE: 5 For 0 Against COUNCIL ACTION - MOTION: Grant conceptual approval of subdivision proposal as revised, to provide access to Wayzata Country Club lot and add* • parcel to the west of existing house. Conditions of conceptual approval: 1. Private road outlet along north 25* of property shall be required. 2. Existing 475 Ferndale Road North house and new Country Club lot to access via shared driveway at existing access point. New Hauser lot to have separate driveway access as requested. 3. City Engineer/Attorney/staff to review drainage concerns of Chevy Chase neighborhood and make final recommendation to Council on July 10th regarding what improvements, if any, should be required as conditions of subdivision, also addressing the liability issue. 4. Council recommends that Hauser and Lauer choose one surveyor to put the two subdivisions together, creating a single plat that will include both properties a’*d be signed by both parties, (Opticnally, each plat could be done individually but this may be a duplication of effort.) A resolution for preliminary plat approval will be presented fer Council review and adoption on July 10, meeting starts at 7:00 p.m. APPLICATION NO. 1326 CITY OF ORONO P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 473-7357 NOTICE OF COUNCIL ACTION Date of Notice: 6/27/89 TO: Ronald Lauer 80 Gideons Point Road Tonka Bay, MN 55331 COPIES: Wayzata Country Club P.O. Box 151 Wayzata, MN 55391 Attn: John Downey TYPB OF APPLICATION: Subdivision DATE OF MBBTIMG: 6/26/89 VOTE: 5 For 0 Against COUNCIL ACTION - MOTION: Grant conceptual approval of subdivision proposal as revised, gaining Lot 1. Conditions of conceptual approval: 1. Private road outlet along north 25' of property shall be required. 2. Lauer lot to gain access to Ferndale Road North by sharing existing Hauser driveway entrance. (Hauser g anted conceptual approval to create a new separate driveway access for his new house.) 3. City Engineer/Attorney/staff to review drainage concerns of Chevy Chase neighborhood and make final recommendation to Council on July 10th regarding what improvements, if any, should be required as conditions of subdivision, also addressing the liability issue. 4. Council recommends that Hauser and Lauer choose one surveyor to put the two subdivisions together, creating a singlu plat that will include both properties and be signed by both parties. (Optionally, each plat could be done individually but this may be a duplication of effort.) A resolution for preliminary plat approval will be presented for Council review and adoption on July 10, meeting starts at 7:00 p.m. A RBSOLOnOH GRAMTIK PRELIMINARY APPROVAL FOR A PLAT FOR NAYZATA COOHTRT CLUB AT 200 NAYZATA BOULEVARD FILE HO. 1326 IfBBRBAS# Ronald D. Lauer on behalf of the Wayzata Country Club (hereinafter "the applicant") on August 11, 1988 filed a formal subdivision application with the City for approval of a two-lot residential plat of property legally described as follows: The west 930 feet of the south half of the southeast quarter of the northeast quarter, Section 36, Township 118, Range 23, situated in Hennepin County, Minnesota (hereinafter "the property") and; NBBR.AS, afttr due published and mailed notice in accordance with Minnesota Statues 462.358 et. seq. and the City of Orono Zoning and Platting Codes, the Orono Planning Commission held a public hearing on September 19, 1908 and October 17, 1906 at which times all persons desiring to be heard concerning this application were given the opportunity to speak thereon; and ifton ^ whereas, at their regular meetings held on June .2, June 26, 1989 the Orono City Council considered the subdivision application of Wayzata Country Club and Ronald Lauer, noting the following findings of fact: 1. The property is located within the RR-lB Single Family Rural Residential Zoning District requiring a minimum of ? acres of contiguous dry buildable land within each newly created lot. property contains a total of approximately 14 acres, all of which is considered dry buildable land. 3. The proposed subdivision contains 2 lots, each exceeding the 2.0 acre minimum lot area requirement. Page 1 of 5 4. The single new lot proposed for construction of a single family residence is 2.8 acijs in total area, and is intended to gain access to Ferndale Road North via a 20* "flag" corridor between Lots 1 and 2 of the Hauser proposed plat immediately to the east. The proposed building lot requires a variance for defined lot width, being 20* in defined width at Ferndale Road North where a 200* defined width is normally required. 5. The remaining 11-acre lot requires a variance to the requirement of frontage on a public roadway, this lot abutting and being served by a private easement roadway. The 11-acre lot is not intended by the applicant for development at this time, but is intended to remain in use as golf course area. 6. The proposed new lot shall share a single driveway entrance to Ferndale Road North with the existing residence on Lot 1 of the proposed Hauser subdivision. 7. It is intended .at the existing privately owned easement roadway at the north end of the property will continue to be privately owned and maintained. The City will require that the applicants dedicate an outlet over the northerly 25* of the property for private road use, and that the standard road and utility easement over that portion of the private road be executed. 8. The applicants are hereby advised that future subdivision of the property to create additional building sites may result in the Citv requiring an upgrading of the private roadway to current Oi ate road standards. 9. The proposed new 2.8 acre building site has been demonstrated to contain suitable sites for primary and alternate drainfields to serve the proposed single family residence. The remaining 11.2 acre parcel exceeds 5 acres in area and is not required to be tested for drainfield sites until it is further developed. 10. A single family residence can be constructed on the new 2.8 acre lot without the need for further variances. 11. The applicants have agreed with Leopold and Helen Hauser, who are subdividing the property immediately adjacent to the east, to combine the two subdivisions for platting purposes into a single set of plat drawings. Page 2 of 5 12. In order to reduce the impact of existing and future drainage from the property to the Chevy Chase area, applicant has agreed to install a storm sewer pipe to the rear of the Brooke Nelson property at 141 Chevy Chase Drive. NOff, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that based upon one or more of the findings noted above, the City Council of the City of Orono hereby approves the preliminary plat for Wayzata Country Club and Ronald Lauer at 200 Wayzata Boulevard per the survey by James R. Hill, Inc. dated May 21, 1988, and the revised survey drawing as amended by staff, attached hereto as Exhibit A, subject to the following conditions: 1. The 11.2 acre parcel shall be designated on the plat drawings as a separata lot. The proposed 2.8 acre building site^shall be shown on the plat drawings as a separate lot. A 25' wide outlot corridor along the northerly 25' of the property shall be designated on the plat drawings as a private road outlot. 2. The applicants shall grant the standard underlying road and utility easement for tha private road outlot, to be filed with the plat. 3. The proposed building lot shall gain public road access to Ferndale Road North via a 20' corridor to be platted between the northerly and southerly lots of the Hauser subdivision. This lot will share a single driveway access point onto Ferndale Road North with the existing residence within the Hauser subdivision. 4. A variance will be granted for the 2.8 acre building lot for lot width, to allow a 20' defined lot width where 200' lot width is normally required. Also, a variance will be granted for the 11 acre parcel which does not front on a public roadway as required. 5. Standard drainage and utility easements shall be shown on the plat along lot lines, being 10' in width along perimeter lot lines and 5' in width along interior lot lines. 6. Payment of standard park fees of $200.00 for the 2 8 acre lot and $100.00 for the 11 acre lot. At such future time that the 11 acre lot is further subdivided, credit for the p re viously paid park fee shall be granted per the provisions of the City of Orono ordinances. Page 3 of 5 7. Any proposed changes to the house footprint from the site plan attached hereto as Exhibit B will require a revised site grading plan approval by the City Engineer prior to issuance of the building permit. 8. Prior to issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall fence off the primary and alternate drainfield sites, in order to avoid damage to the drainfield sites by construction traffic. 9. Applicants shall construct a storm sewer pipe to the rear of the Brooke Nelson property at 141 Chevy Chase Drive per approval of the City Engineer, prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy for the proposed new residence on the 2.8 acre lot. The following list of final submittals must be submitted to the Zoning Administrator two weeks prior to the regularly scheduled Council meeting on the second and fourth Mondays of the month: A. RECORD PLAT drawings in the form of two (2) mylar copies and one (1) copv reduced to 1**=200*. Drawing to includes a) Lot lines platted per preliminary survey by James R. Hill, Inc., and survey by Coffin and Gronberg, Inc* as modified by staff, attached as Exhibit A hereto. b) Dedication of "drainage and utility easements" 10* wide along all perimeter property lines and 5* each side of internal property lines. B. LEGAL DOCUMENTS required; a) Title opinion addressed to the City. All owners, mortgage holders or others with property interest indicated therein shall sign the plat and all other documents affected by such interest. b) The applicant must provide certified copies of all recorded easements currently affecting the property* c) Signed and executed Road and Utilities Easement over the private road outlot. Page 4 of 5 C. PEES TO BE PAID* Total Due $450,00. a) Park dedication fee per current schedulet 1 new residential lot at 2 acre density ■ $200.00 per lot. One new residential lot at 54* acre density • $100.00 per lot. Total « $300.00. b) Legal review and filing fees of $150.00. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota at a regular meeting held this 10th lay of July^ 1909. ATTEST* James R. Grabek, Mayor Dorothy M. Hallinr City Clerk STATE OP MINNESOTA ) ) S8. COUNTY OP HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrtiment was acknowledged before me on this 12th day of June, 1909f by James R. Grabek 4 Dorothy M. Hallinr Mayor & City Clerk of the City of Orono« a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City. Notary Public My Commission Expires Page 5 of 5 A RBSOLUTION GRANTING PRKLXIUNART APPROVAL POR A PLAT AT 475 FBRNDALB ROAD NORTH PILE NO. 1407 WHBRRAS, Leopold and Helen Hauser (hereinafter "the applicants**) on April 21, 1989 filed a formal subdivision application with the City of Orono (hereinafter "the City") for approval of a two-lot residential plat of property legally described as follows: That part of the south half of the southeast quarter of the northeast quarter. Section 36, Township 118, Range 23 West of the 5th principal meridian, lying east of the westerly 930* thereof, all in Hennepin County, Minnesota (hereinafter "the property") and; WHBRBAS, after due published and mailed notice in accordance with Minnesota Statues 462.358 et, seq. and the City of Orono Zoning and Platting Codes, the Orono Planning Commission held a public hearing on May 15, 1989 at which times all persons desiring to be heard concerning this application were given the opportunity to speak thereon; and WHEREAS, at their regular meeting held on June 26, 1989 the Orono City Council considered the subdivision application of Leopold and Helen Hauser, noting the following findings of fact; 1. The property is located within the RR-IB Single family Rural Residential Zoning District requiring a minimum of 2 acres of contiguous dry buildable land within each newly created lot. 2. The property contains a total of approximately 5.5 dry buildable acres, exclusive of 33* of right-of-way for Ferndale Road North. 3. The proposed subdivision creates 1 new lot in excess of the required 2.0 acre minimum lot area. The existing residence is proposed to remain on a lot exceeding 3 acres in area. 4. Both proposed lots meet the minimum 200* frontage requirement for frontage on a public road, being Ferndale Road North. Page 1 of 5 5. A corridor providing direct access from Ferndale Road North to the proposed new lot being created by the Wayzata Country Club adjacent to the immediate west of the property^ shall be provided between proposed Lots 1 and 2* 6. The existing private easement roadway serving the plat of Fairway View and other certain properties to the west of the Hauser property, shall be designated as a private road outlot on the plat drawings, being 25* in width and extending the length of the north property line. It is intended that this private road outlot continue to be owned by the owner of proposed Lot 1, until such time that the ownership of such private road is transferred to the property owners or property owners association served by that private roadway. The property owner shall grant to the City the standard road and utility easement over the private road outlot (see Exhibit "A” attached). 7. The 20* corridor between Lots 1 and 2 that will provide access to the Wayzata Country Club property to the west, shall be platted as part of the proposed Wayzata Country Club building lot. 8. The proposed Lot 1 and the proposed Wayzata Country Club lot shall gain access to Ferndale Road North via a shared driveway located at the existing driveway location serving the existing house. Proposed Lot 2 shall be allowed a new separate driveway curb cut for access to Ferndale Road North. 9. A dedication of 33* of right-of-way shall be shown on the plat drawings for the existing Ferndale Road North. 10. The proposed new lot has been demonstrated to contain suitable sites for primary and alternate drainfield to serve the proposed single feunily residence. Proposed Lot 1, with the existing house, has been demonstrated to contain a suitable alternate drainfield site. 11. A new single feunily residence can be constructed on Lot 2 without the need for further variances. Page 2 of 5 12. The City Engineer has reviewed the property and has determined that any increase in run-off to neighboring properties to the south caused by development of the property, will be mitigated by drainage improvements being constructed as a result of the Wayzata Country Club subdivision to the immediate west; and WHBRBAS, the applicants have agreed with Wayzata Country Club to plat the two subdivisions jointly, NOW, THBRBFORB BB IT RBSOLVBD, that based upon one or more of the findings noted above, the City Council of the City of Orono hereby approves the preliminary plat for Leopold and Helen Hauser at 475 Ferndale Road North per the survey by Mark S. Gronberg of Coffin and Gronberg, Inc. dated April 19, 1989, as revised by applicants and staff and the survey by James R. Hill, Inc. (copies attached as Exhibit A), subject to the following conditions: 1. Lot 1 containing the existing residence shall share its existing private driveway entrance with the proposed Wayzata Country Club lot being accessed by the 20* corridor. 2. Lot 2 shall be allowed to create a separate driveway curb cut directly to Ferndale Road North. 3. The access corridor for the Wayzata Country Club lot shall be platted as a part of the Country Club lot. 4. A 25* wide private road out lot shall be dedicated on the plat along the north property line, where an existing private road exists serving properties to the west. A standard road and utility easement shall be granted to the City by the applicant over this road outlot. 5. A right-of-way dedication of 33* shall be shown on the plat for Ferndale Road North. 6. Standard drainage and utility easements shall be shown on the plat along lot lines, being 10* wide along perimeter property lines and 5* in width along interior lot lines. 7. Payment of standard Park Fee of $2 00.00 for Lot 2. 9. Payment of plat and easement filing fee of $150.00. Page 3 of 5 10. The private road outlet shall continue to be privately maintained and shall be privately owned by the owner of Lot 1 until such time that ownership is transferred to the property owner or association of property owners served by that private road. The following list of final submittals must be submitted to the Zoning Administrator two weeks prior to the regularly scheduled Council meeting on the second and fourth Mondays of the month: A. RECORD PLAT drawings in the form of two (2) mylar copies and one (1) copy reduced to 1"=200*. Drawing to include: a) Lot lines platted per preliminary survey by Coffin and Gronberg, Inc., and James R. Hill, Inc., as revised by applicants and staff and attached as Exhibit A hereto. b) Dedication of "drainage and utility easements" 10* wide along all perimeter property lines and 5* each side of internal property lines. c) Dedication of 33* of right-of-way for Ferndale Road North. B. LEGAL DOCUMENTS required: a) Title opinion addressed to the City. All owners, mortgage holders or others with property interest indicated therein shall sign the plat and all other documents affected by such interest. b) The applicants must provide certified copies of all recorded easements currently affecting the property. c) Signed and executed road and utility easement over the private road outlot. C. FEES TO BE PAID: Total Due $350.00. a) Park dedication fee per current schedule: 1 new residential lot at 2 acre density = $200.00 b) Legal review and filing fees of $150.00. Page 4 of 5 Adopted by the City Council of the City . . Orono, Minnesota at a regular meeting held this 10th day of July, 1989. ATTEST;James R. Grabek, Mayor Dorothy M. Hallin, City Clerk STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) ss. The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this 10th day of July, 1989, by James R. Grabek & Dorothy M. Hallin, Mayor & City Clerk of the City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City. Notary Public My Commission Expires Page 5 of 5 I/ll Bonestroo MJB Rosene Anderllk & Associates Engineers & Architects Owaioncifloofi. lioMft w teimc. w- c Anaeru H. A. tuenvcf Vne*-.^- wm« C Osioft n Oerti I Cpek. E NO>et M aae^fl 0 icnun^ l lOfvaM. Hcih A. Oeidoa U- IKhwd W.«»« « DOAVdC ” jenyA •buwoa M A. Mjniav rC MieigKlT tUutmiwt ■ooen R W»m«. OWO O Wb H«* TnemM Wefwn. W fcKMdCUffltfvW- wnnRmf.AnpMeAjI imt A. iKnmaoA W Mvtl ^ c RuMk. AlA Thornu I Anfwi n O^J iMRMfiri MinA taari' Mp Jl eMMt itf CA«r« A KKMsn U*M RMMky hirr* ^ OaeA liMtiM RRnkaCrA July 7. 1989 City o£ Orono Bo* 6B Crystal Bayi MK 55323 Attni Mika Gaffron R«i 139-1326 Wayzata Country Club 129-1A07 Leopold Houser Dear Mikti We met with the Wayzata Country Club and nelghbora in the Chevy Chase •u\»ai.vi«iou on Thureday June 29. We met to resolve the dt&lnBge CODCercS of the neighborhood. The agreement vas to place a culvert across the Nelson property to take a majority of the storm water runoff. (5 year storm return frequency design). The excess water from larger stores would go overland along the existing drainage way. The developer would provide for installation of the O'* ^rt and the City will provide the easements for Mr. Nelson to sign. Placemeni of the culvert will eliminate the need for ponding on the Wayzata Country Club property and the Houser property. This eliminates Mr. Greigs concern relative to water setting in a pond above his basement floor elevator. The City will also work with Mr. Nelson in resolving the driveway culvert problem as a separate issue. If you have any questions please contact this office. Yours very truly, BONESTROO, ROSENE, ANDERLIK & AS )C1ATES, INC. ’=x/C^/€-C-^ Glenn R. Cook GRC!df 233S West Highway 36 • St. Paul, Minnesota 5S113 • 612-636-4600 Mayor Grabek & Orono Council Members Planning Commission Chairman Kelley Crono Planning Commission Members City Administrator Bernhardson Building & Zoning administrator Mabusth COUNGH MEETM6 JUL 101989 CITY OF ORONO From: Thomas J. Jacobs, Building 6 Fire Ins^^ector Date: Jur ; “>3, 1989 Subject: #1418 Orono Independent School District #278, 685 Old Crystal Bay Road North - Conditional Use Permit/Commerica1 Site Plan Review - Public Hearing Zoning District - RR-lB Pertinent Ordinances - A) Section 10,28, Subdividion 5 (B) - Required Setbacks; Front Yard - 50' Side Yard - 30' Rear Yard - 50' Section 10.28, Subdivisior* 3 for school use. (A) - Conditional use permit Application - Request for a conditional use permit and commercial site plan reviaw for a proposed addition that would connect the Orono Middle School and the Orono Elementary School in »'’iition to a prf posed expansion to the parking and drive ■^s serving the facility. The proposed addition is two ries in height and consists of 22,042 s.f. lower level .^;.d 12,042 on th » second floor. Total floor area will be 34,083 s.f. The proposed use of this new addition will be for additional class rooms and a public pool. There will be no change in the use of the property. List of Exhibits Exhibit A - Exhibit B - Exhibit C - Exhibit D “ Exhibit E - Exhibit F - Exhibit G - Exhibit H - Exhibit I - Exhibit J - Exhibit K - Exhibit L - Exhibit M - Appl .‘tion Property Owners Lis Plat Map Notice of Public Hear , '.g Affidavit of Publicati:» Existing Site Plan Proposed Site Plan Propcs Addition to Floor Plans Additio: 'evations Letter Orono School Parking (existing) City '.eer Pev’ ow Fire u^rinkler i.^reement Fire Lane Location Zon i y' June 13, 1909 Page 2 of S Setbacks - Fronti Required * 50* Proposed « 425' Side Setback; Required » 30' Proposed » 400'+ Rear: Required « 50' Proposed » 400*+ The addition proposed meets all setback requirements. Parking - Section 10.61, Subdivision 9 (D) - Formula - High school through college. At least one parking space for each 7 students based on design capacity, plus 1 for e^ch 3 class rooms. Shown on Exhibit I, applicant has sh -..; ^11 existing parking spaces and verified these spaces. Existing Parking Spaces: Middle School - 690 students + 40 class rooms = spaces + 14 spaces » 113 spaces required. Schumann Elementary School - 386 students + 24 class rooms » 56 spaces + 8 spaces * 64 spaces required. Total Required Existing Spaces = 177 spaces Referring to Exhibit I, the elementary school has 78 spaces existing and the middle school has 133 spaces existing for a total of 211 spaces. Proposed is an addition with a designed student capacity of 462 students + 9 class rooms = 66 spaces + 3 spaces = 69 spaces. Total Required Spaces for F«tire Building « 246 spaces During this review staff has revealed that the proposal is 3 parking spaces short of the required 246 spaces. After speaking with the school, they will provide the additional 3 spaces to meet the requirements of the code. Zoning File #1418 June 13, 1989 Page 3 of 5 The City Engineer has reviewed the plans and is requesting the following for the parking area: 1. Concrete curb and gutter should be provided around the parking and driveway areas. 2. A plan showing a typical section for parking area and driveway should be provided. Access - Traffic Flow Access to the site will be the existing access which will not change. Traffic flow will remain the same, enter at the north and exit at the south. Signage should be provided. Landscaping - Plans show that there will be no additional trees added to the site and that sodding of all green areas will take place. Drainage - Drainage plans have been provided showing the grading changes. Per the City Engineer's review, applicant must provide plans showing existing storm sewer lines and must provide drainage calculations to be r2viewed by Minnehaha Creek Watershed District and the City Engineer (sesi Exhibit K). Building Utilities - Applicant must revise plans to show the existing water lines and sewer lines and show any proposed changes to these lines. ^ Building Plans - Applicant has provided elevations and floor plans (see Exhibits H & I). The exterior building materials used will match the existing buildings that are to be attached. Signage - No new signage has been proposed. Building Code Plan Review - Per the special fire suppression systems code requirements, the structure will be required to have a sprinkler system. Due to the cost of sprinkling the addition and the two existing schools, an agreement with the school district has been made that will provide fire protection systems in the entire building within 3 years (see Exhibit L). This agreement is being reviewed by the City Attorney. Zoning File #1418 June 13, 1989 Page 4 of 5 Fire Code Plan Review - Fire Hydrants - On Exhibit G, an existing fire hydrant is shown. This fire hydrant will have to be extended to within 10* of the driving surface. Fire lanes must be rovided as shown on Exhibit M. SAC Units - Formulas - Class Rooms 18 students » 1 SAC Unit Pool Area » 900 s.f. eq 1 SAC Unit Pool Area - 7,801 s.f./900 eq 9 units Class Rooms « 8,800 s.f./30 s.f./student * 294/18 ■ 17 units TOTAL SAC UNITS « 26 x $575.00 (per unit) - $14,950.00 Sewer units are to be determined by the Public Works Director and the City Engineer. The formal recommendations shall be subject to the review and approval of the Council. Staff Recowmendation - Staff recommends granting the conditional use permit based on the following findings; 1. The proposed location of the conditional use permit is in accordance with the objectives of the zoning chapter and the purposes of the district, and Comprehensive Management Plan. 2. The use and the addition is not detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare or materially injurious to properties in the vacinity. 3. The use has existed since the early 1950s. 4. Adequate sewer and water is available Staff recommends approval of the commercial site plan review subject to the following conditions. Prior to scheduling the application before the Council for final approval, the following information and exhibits must be submitted: 1. Applicant to provide plans showing existing storm sewer lines and drainage calculations. Zoning File #1418 June 13, 1989 Page 5 of 5 2. Applicant to provide plans showing concrete cu*.b and gutter around parking and driveway areas and typical section for parking area and driveway, 3. Applicant move existing hydrant to new location within 10* of road surface, 4. The fire suppression system agreement is acceptable to the City Attorney. 5. Fire lanes be provided as located in Exhibit M. Additional CoHents and Planning Comsd.S8lon Reccamendatlon - July 6, 1989 Additional List of Exhibits - ' Exhibit N - Storm Drainage Calculations Exhibit 0 - Existing Sewer Line & Drainage Plan Exhibit P - Curb & Gutter Detail 1. Applicant has provided plans showing existing storm sewer lines and drainage and provided drainage calculations (see Exhibit N 6 0), City Engineer has reviewed these calculations and plans and finds them acceptable subject to the drainage from the structure be checked by the City Engineer’s office before a building permit can be issued. 2. The applicant has provided plans showin^r ,’oncrete curb and gutter around parking and driveway areas and provided a typical section for parking area and driveway (see Exhibit P), 3. Applicant has agreed to remove existing fire hydrant to a new "location" within 10' of the road surface. 4. The fire suppression system agreement has been reviewed by the City Attorney and he has found it acceptable, 5. Applicant has reviewed Exhibit M, fire lane location, and agreed to post these locations as requ'^red. CITY OF ORONO city of OROIVO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. A RESOLUTION GRANTING A CONDTIONAL USB PERMIT PER MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 10.28, SUBDIVISION 3 (A), AND PER SECTION 10.41, SUBDIVISION 2 APPROVES THE ISSUANCE OP A BUILDING PERMIT PILE 11418 WHEREAS, Orono School District #278 (hereinafter "the applicant") has an interest in the property located at 685 Old Crystal Bay Road within the City of Orono (hereinafter "City") and legally described as follows: Part of the North 1/2 of the Northwest 1/4 of Section 33, Township 118, Range 23, Hennepin County, Minnesota (hereinafter "property"); and WHBREAJ, the applicant has applied to the City of Orono for a conditional use permit to permit a proposed addition that would connect the Orono Middle School and the Orono Elementary School per Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.28, Subdivision 3 (A), and per Section 10.41, Subdivision 2 approves the issuance of a building permit for the that same addition. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono, Minnesota; FINDINGS 1. This application was reviewed as Zoning Fi?e #1418. 2. The property is located in the RR-IB Rural Residential Zoning District requiring 2 acres in area. The property consists of 40+ acres. 3. On June 19, 1989, the Orono Planning Commission reviewed the application as proposed and recommended approval based on the follow'lng findings: A) The school use has existed since the early 1950s- B) There is adequate sewer and water available serve the proposed expansion. C) The proposed location of the addition has been found to meet the standards and intent of the appropriate zoning chapters, the intent of the zoning district and the Comprehensive Management Plan of the City. CITY OF ORONO City of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. D) The proposed expansion and use have been found to not be detrimental to the public healthy safety or welfare or materially injurious to properties in the vacinity. 4. The applicant has executed an agreement calling for a staged installation of a comprehensive fire suppression system throughout the Orono Elementary and Middle Schools by the year 1993. 5. The City Council has conside/.ed this application including the findings and recommendations of the Planning Commission, reports by staff and co.ixients of the applicant and the affect of the proposed use on the health, safety, and welfare of the commnnity. 6. The City Council finds that granting a conditional use permit to allow the proposed addition that would connect the Orono Middle School and Orono Elementary School will not be be detrimental to the health, safety or general welfare of the public, would not adversely affect light, air nor pose a fire hazard or other danger to neighboring properties, nor will its use depreciate surrounding property values and that the proposed level of use of the property will be in keeping with the intent and objectives of the Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan of the City. CONCLOSIONS, ORDER AND CONDITIONS Based upon one or more of the above findings, the Orono City Council hereby grants a conditional use permit per Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.28, Subdivision 3 (A) to permit an addition that would connect the Orono Elementary and Orono Middle Schools and per Section 10.41, Subdivision 2 approves the issuance of a building permit for the addition, subject to the following conditions; 1. Fire lanes shall be provided per the Building and fi* Inspector's approval. Applicant shall post adequate signag . locating these fire lanes. 2. Existing hydrant to be relocated within 10' of new road surface. Page 2 of 5 ciTv: JDF . ORONO City of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. ___________ 3. Upon the issuance of a building permit for the addition, applicant shall provide payment for 26 SAC units at $14,950.00 (26 X $575.00). 4. Payment of additional jewer units are to be determined by the Public Works Director and the City Engineer during the building permit application review. 5. Authorities granted by this resolution run with the property not with the applicant, but are permissive only and must be exercised by obtaining a building permit for the proposed construction within one year of the date of Council approval or the special conditions of this resolution will expire on that date (July 10, 1990). 6. Violation of or non-compliance with any of the terms and conditions of this resolution shall constitute a violation of the Zoning Code, shall automatically terminate any authority granted herein, and shall be punishabl-^ as a misdemeanor. 7. The undersigned authorized agent of Orono School district #278 has read, understood and hereby agrees to the terms of this resolution and on behalf of the School District its successors and assigns, hereby agrees to the recording of this resolution in the chain of title of the property. Page 3 of 5 . CITY OF ORONQ City of OROIVO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO.__ _ Adopted by the Orono City Council on this 10th day of July, 1989. ATTEST; Dorothy M. Hallin, City Clerk James R. Grabek, Mayor Authorized Agent Representing Orono School District #278 STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this 10th day of July, 1989, by James R. Giabek & Dorothy M. Hallin, Mayor & City Clerk of the City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City. Notary Public My Commission Expires Page 4 of 5 CITY OF ORONO City of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) ) ss. On this day of 198 before me a Notary Public within and for said county, personally appeared _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _known to me to the person(s) described in and who executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that he (they) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed. NOTARY PUBLIC MY COMMISSION EXPIRES STATE OF MINNESOTA ) )ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) On tl^ cS day of l«'c->before me a Notary Public within and for said County, personally appeared _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _known to me to be the person(s) described in and who executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that he (they) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed. NOTARY PUBLIC MY COMMISSION EXPIRES Page 5 of 5 CITY OP ORONO - GENERAL LAND USE AP PROPERTY LOCATION 05 I Please check one - Property ^ abstract or (for Conditional Use Applications only) Cite Address RAW t^cPAO L0H6. ^39U> Pj-operty Identificatxon Nuinber (P«I«D») 3 ^ — OQOL — ^ ^ torrens? '.'i .:r<v .“v.vv Please attach legal description to application if not included " * jz/2c. on required survey. _____ __________ APPLICANT Phone (home) Name i Phone (work) ?44-gfAJ------------ Address c.^.^ ff,u/D._ _ _ _ _ _ City ^UpwiS Zip_55^|^ OWNER (if different than applicant) Name <0(^I^^Vn I.».P. » '2.lt> Phone (home) — - - Phone 4"*?*^ “ S Address ?>)W RP. City W4|^ _ Zip Date Property Acquired 9**^^ Z*?*! ^^- - (month/year) I (do) (do not) also own the adjacent parcels of land. PEES - CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS - Renewal Fee - 1/2 Current Fee After-the-Fact Fee $100.00 a) V $150.00 b) $150.00 c) $250.00 d) $200.00 f) Residential accessory Use Institutional (church, school, etc.) Duplex Credit/Bldg Commercial/Industrial Use Land A3 -ation Jrading and fil’in designated wetland or floodplain Grading and filling - 101 -u. yd. or --------- Grading, seawall, retaining walls within 75 of lakeshore •i ** r*htvs i u'i-* L-jCi -iOl Vw L'- w ‘ - see fee schedule X $150.00 Commercial Site Plan Review (f consultant fees) *■ $250.00 Vacation $150.00 Easement Vacation ^ $ 50.00 Easement Vacation With Subdivision _ _ $250.00 re-.Joning ~ $100.00 Appeals _ _ _ Other - see fet schedule ’ 1 ■ V xaiiA. DATA PRIVACY ADVISORY In accordance with M.S. 15.165, "Rights of subjects of data", we would like to inform you that your request for a permit or license from the City of Orono or any of its departments may require you to furnish certain private or confidential inform ation . You are notified chat: 1. The information you furnish will be used to determine your qualification for the permit or license requested. 2. You may refuse to supply data, but refusal may require that the City deny the permit or license. . The information may be shared with other local, state or federal agencies to the extent necessary to process t.he permit or license. 4. If your requesuid permit or license recires council act'on to approve, some informacion may become public. 5. You have certian rights nder ^!.S. 15.165 tc review private data on yourself. 6. Your full name, and date of : Lrth are required to process thit. -application or permit. First Middle Last V V'O CSAV (tXJAO Address Date of birth (does not apply to building/general permits) Phone I understand ny rights as stated above. - X ^ _-,r- Signature I- M h r gS g SiS • < ^N lA a c^-liiK 9 V M ^ X * * O «'» M • M O oC^o • .1 > 10 c z •-••-•'< *o ^Sooo|{| m <0 X X ^ V o a a > S » a uj ui « M<ggoa s||tsSo o o JSS iss M (0 H* »- S o 5i ■ ‘m (0 < M M >• lA z o o «< M *^^888? 5iS«’' EXHIBIT'a /* it * gggg |s Kl O lA a lAs||§,sPi|i ;13H l^sag O X X lA -i s§8 K» « ! §2 - ^ S w w a M M 8 ^ « ^ »- M < CM A 111 X X C <{ Al K UJ UJ V. X lA I o X a 111 4 lAa o o o X X r4 < X X Q M X a X -J 'i' O -J —I >-t >7 -i Sg^SSfS Kl X lA h- lA CM COr-4 « a a < 111 X- 111 z »-• M X z X X M K U >U s M CM aa a Z .1 _i « o CC « "4 ^ z 8 iZ jaSSS a a a f4 o M M CM O O fA lA as§§ ss»» 35 a a 2< “’ a < -I i 21“ }5ui ,A mm' o a _ a CM 111 uj o SI O > > A w "* 5O </io « °Sa CM 111 a III X CM X 10X02Sls a X 5«5^ SiC a O M M a o X u 0 aS g CV* g^i0 Z m << >. N Bf ^ til HI oe X z 0||gs Bt ^ lU «w SX ^ 0a 2 X c3 p Z m < ac « ui U| cc X z 0 o < X a a z m < < > NX ^ Ul 1 2 Hb ^ )M ll|i Bm Ufl!i^i!|Si liliX C H a .•*». sgs2j«j sSg§ia o X X a ^ o o Mo 5 X 0^5 CM*-* CM < a a « a ui > <y N . Iri a ^mntI - — - aa o i::^5 Sz^SS SS-,?S8 a C3 -I O < M a a • < Ml a ats. S. aL IS I w a a a 7I a a a c> a M a a a aa a a a o (5 M) X a o CM HI afX r osm l^ll __c:l § WgM CM a M! a a a UJ 111§1 ^ r—i—^i OS am. . 7S88Sia a X K ^ a < u. u. a UJ T xxS^. a a z z z “* .giia§a o n n a a o a ^ o < ►- .tIa“ CM>X o z a Z X III V a a X X a "* 9> >11 m a C9 c3 ti t3 S a oa o X X X a X <».• hi Xan ( Ks& I Xa 2 Jl fi U O u a iw i^;: ►- ►- O 4 a < •< 5o5 U M *- ^o X ___T < ►- > ------- a 2 *- O <3~T uj «rt r —TP •Si? s c I < UJ Ui Ui(/) X o M ^ U O > M 2S>=“ $:§i iln X M ^ IM iii^ M UI $at I4J Hi Ku a Ui Uk % M K O O CITY OP ORONO - NOTICE The Planning Commission will hold public hearings in the Couneli at 1275 South Brown Road on Monday, June 19 , 1 989 to review the follaifiaa la d uae applications: 1.#1414 Temple Israel at 645 Tonkawa Road seeks a conditional Has permit for the proposed construction of a multi-use facility/struotim consisting of conference/meeting rooms and dormitory areas to sery# the existing camp use. 2.#1415 Robert and Cheryl Humphrey o; 569 Minnetonka Highland Lane !2v^sk hardcover and average lakeshcxe setback variances for the complete replacemen , of an existing deck and the installation of a pool and patio area in their lakeshore yard. 3.#1416 Jeffrey Eccles of 3025 Sixth Avenue North seeks a side setback variance for a proposed addition to ‘che existing residence that will be located 11 feet from the east lot line instead of meeting the required 30 feet. 4.#1417 Northern States Power Company seeks a conditional use permit to install an electric sub-station at the property located at 3960 Sixth Avenue North. 5.#1418 Orono School District #278 seeks a conditional use permit for a proposed addition that would connect the Orono Midale School and the Elementary School in addition to a proposed expansion of the parking and driveway areas serving the facility. 6.#1419 J.K. Bowers of 2905 Casco Point Read seeks a side setback and hardcover variances for a proposed new deck within the lakeshore yard of his property. 7.#1422 David Breitner of 2755 Casco Point Road seeks lot area, lot width and hardcover variances for the complete reconstruction of a new on a property that contains an existing residence-residence 0.#1423 Edward Brown of 3 5 5 Stubbs Bay Road North seeks r. setback variance for a proposed detached garage cn his residential property. All persons wishing to be heard will appear at this time. Written comments are solicited. Plans are available for review in the City offices, by appointment. City of Orono By: Planning Commission // Jeanne A, Mabusth, Build ir.q & Zor. i nq A^ini st rator To be published the week of June , 1989. a V. i ft.. Ir 1 m CERTIFICATE OP MAILING STATE OP MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN CITY OP ORONO ) ss. 1 Teri Naab of the City of Orono, Hennepin County^ Minnesota, do hereby certify that a Notice of Public Hearing concerning the matter of #1418 Orono School District's application was mailed to the certified list of property owners. 'm In Witness Whereof, I have hereunto set my hand and seal this 31st day of May, 1989. TY Of OHONO WTICC J%wnw> Oowimnlon ti>* twU puMc p^mmum M «w Caunen OambM « 1275 iiBgii fln mimf. .kjn* 19.1999 iJaliilM M MH«ie M uw ap9^ N9. 1414^««pl* IVWl m 945 T( |SS5« • oontfMqnti uM parmit for tr» uctlon of a naiNHiat f«e*- of LUilloionwowwa Wng Old domaiory aroaa 10 oorvo Hit omat- IfigOOTIMM - i ^ t-Ni-1419Mi9wt«iiaiarylHumphro« I MRiMMla NVdind Ijm took iwf mi mtnm wmhoqo loftioro «or (tta oompMo nglOBiiwint of an ■ dock and Ihi aioMMlan of a pool and ■on in IMr Mmoharo yvd • » Mo 1419 Joffroy fcdoa of 3029 9Mh r^Monwo Monh aooka a oMo oattocfe «*(aneo a Qfoiooad oddWin lo Wo oai owng root- ^Mnoo M «M >0 MoflM 11 foot front dio oa« Ml few Mood of moallng il« rowMd 30 fool .-Moo WoMor Compo- uoo ponidMo Molpo ati at mo jioMOfly iocaiod at 9Wh ANOfWO NofW Mo. 1419 Ofone Scfioal OMitet 279 a conMWonMuoooomidforadfOdooad «auM oonnocMtio Orono MddM w^nsm^niVir soiipoi w ^apfOMoaod oap onoion of Wo partang and -VBPVWB|f VW W^nHQ TfW vBCIBiy 9 Mn 1419 J K ioworo of 2906 Caaco ;W«d Mood oootia a aido aatdodi and ftardooMr ;wononeoa for a propooad no* dock win Ifto :iMioo9ora yard of Ma proparly 7 Mo 1422 David OroNftor of 2799 Caoco :Mnl Mood aoaka tof araa. lot wtdW an ftard- ioovof vorMncoa for tno cowpiota rocanotmc- jtion of a now raordan CQ on a propiny rttoi coniaaM an ouoling rooidonoo . 9 Me i423Cdword Bmtnof 366 9tui*a May Mood Norm aoaka a aatpack vonanco for 'f* propokkd dotacn od garago on Mo 'ootdan- M poraono wtoMno to bo hoard wW appoar at PMo 1M0. wmtan commania aro.BoHcitod Mm aro 0 ailoWi for rowlow m tha Dty lofficoo. by appointiwont jQly of Orono j9y PlannMig CommiaaMn Jowwia A MObuoW. SuOdmg « Zdnatg Acfcnna ■tralor '_______ ilWMianpd tn Tha Lakor and Ronoor Juno iTv J999|___________________________ [i^N il (S il ■ili'.r r \JUN» Affidavit of Pubiieation state of Minnesota. County of Hennepin Bill Holm, being duly sworn, on oath says that he is an authorized agent and employee of the publisher of the newspaper known as THE LAKER. Mound. Mhv nesota. and has full knowledge of the facts which are stated below; A.) The newspaper has complied with all the require* ments constituting qualifications as a qualifiad newspaper, as provided by Minnesota Statute 331A.02. 331A.07, and other applicable laws, as amended. B.) The printed. L^\J^ LLt which is attached was cut from tha columns of aakf newspaper, and was printed and published once each week for_________________successive weeks; It was first published Monday. ^ day of and was thereafter printed and published every Monday, to and including Monday. day of : . VW'.‘ *WOv V , : MARIETTA A. STRAUS ' i:-N0TA3Y ru-Lrc-f :..;:oTA Authorized Agent CARVc^t CCL'. iTY My ComnicslOA Cr r:i Jan. 27,1090 Subscribed and sworn to me on this day of.a.- By-^ Notary Public Rate Information (1) LowMI dMiifibd rat* paid by conwnpfcta i uggrg for cofiWMM* bl9 flpaca: iS.SO par Wch. (2) Maximum ral4 Mowdby law for abovd nwitar: tS-SOpar Wch. (3) Rato actuaity cfiargod for ahovo manor; $4 60 por Wch. Each addiliotiai aucccsifvt w99h: $3.24 per Wch o ozo oor nr > C/I CO O > Oo H 5z Q * : m --------ii m ■■ra W X S 1 I IL# ^3 •v^ 1335 South Brown Road Orono, MN 55323 RE: Orono Pool & Classroom Addition Dear Mr. Jacobs: Total parking stalls existing and verified by schor^ maintenance personnel. Total king If you have any questions, please call. Sincerely, Elementary:staff/visitor 76 handicap 2 Total 78 Middle School:staff/visitor 117 district office 12 handicap 4 Total i33 High Srhool:Staff 78 visitors 221 handicap 1 Total Paul Hagen North Plaza Building, 5217 VVayzata Boulovaai, St. Louis ParL, Minnesota 554US (612) 544-8641 Bonestroo Rosene Anderlik & Associates Otto O PE a BBtr'-'P P€ C Anoett* PE atMUoia • ^er'Kx^ pf £ 'u.n*-t Bf C O'Vjf’ PE Oirnn B C?c* PE E ‘jctw PE POOptT G '» f Pf Vt<KV'^ i '■ P E A CiL'tao'' PE W Eotir* “f Donjid C BottjjfOi PE jr"V * Bcxjn>i'’ PE Vtjrii * h*ohxi PE R PE r Bjoifnjn" PE Boon * PVf^tfir Pf Djvr ] O louotj PE '•Nvnji At Pitney PE M«m' C U'xt' PE Jjrryt B MMOd Pf Vfwi«r> P Andcfvyt PE Rptl- A ajrt'P'Prio PF MAH B itoBi PE Boon C BottOH A I A '’XXTUt E A(<^v Pf HowAnl A ijntwd P£ DirHf" j Edgncy PE Va#* a PE PAimp . CAU%n PE Man O MitWhv PE rt'omat B A^^(J^fVDr» A Gaty f Bytafviff p £ Cnaopt A Entiion LOO M P.MnWV Matun *.t O'vy' iuun M Ebny CPA Engineers A Architects June 12. 1989 exhibit ' City of Orono Box 66 Crystal Bay. MN 55323 Attn: Tom Jacobs Re: 139*1418 Orono Schools Dear Tom: Ve have reviewed the proposed Orono School addition. Ve would the following Infonnation be provided or included on the plan. recommend that The existing storm sever lines should be shown and drainage calculations provided. The existing water lines should be shown and casings provided for any water line placed under the building addition. Concrete curb and gutter shoulf^ be provided around the parking and driveway area. The typical section for the parking area and driveway should be provided. If you have any questions please contact this office. Yours very truly, BONESTROO. ROSENE. ANDERLIK & ASSOCIATES. INC, Glenn R. Cook GRC:df 2335 U^est Highway 36 • St. Paul, Minnesota 55113 • 612-636^600 O R O N O SCHOOLS 685 Old Crystal Bay Road ■ULllfcrir' Long Lake. Minnesota 55356 EXHIBIT. L. (612) 473-7313 June 12, 1989 Mr. Tom Jacobs, Bldg. Official Ms. Jeanne Mabusth, Zoning Admin. City of Orono P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 Dear Mr. Jacobs and Ms. Mabusth: Previously the School Board Facilities Committee agreed to install a sprinkler system in the Orono Middle School and Schumann Elementary School. The City of Crono is requiring sl in agreement prior to the of a conditional use permit for the new u 'lding cy ;‘.ruction. Tne Orono School Board h "eby certifies that the requ ted sprinkler system will be installed. The approximate cost of this improvement, according to the school architect, would be $300,000. The first levy will be for $75,000 in 1989, with additional $75,000 levies in each of' Crfe ro'i-liiwing three (3) years. Present plans call for the first phase of the system to be completed in 1991 and the second phase in 1993 when the final levy is collected. It Is our understanding that this timetable is in accordance with our initial, verbal agreement, that being to complete the installation approximately three (3) years after the completion of the new addition linking the two schools. Sincerely, David Mckown, Chairman / " ^ /I j ler no J D Kathefine P. Crosby, Clerk Serving . . . Independence—Long Lake-Maple Plain —.Medina —Mirnctonka Beach—Orono An Equal Opportunity Employer Architects, Inc. Calculaticns for Allowable Discbaxge Rates and required detention Qrono Pool and dassroan Addition Area of increased runoff Runoff Coefficient 2.18 AC 0.59 100 Year Storm Analysis Duration Storm Storm Runoff Discharg^Stored Storage Intensity Rate Rate Rate Volume (Minutes)(HH)(CES)(CPS)(CPS)(CU.Ft.) 5 108 13.93 4.58 9.35 2080 10 8.28 10.68 4.58 6.1 3660^ 405ivy157.04 9.08 4.58 4.5 30 4.88 6.3 4.58 1.7 3087 1. Max storage volume required 4051 cu.ft. 2. Rcesent conditions C « 0.33, E »22 min. 10 Year Storm Duration Storm Storm Runoff Discharge Stored Steerage Intensity Rate Rate Rate Volume (Minutes)(HH)(CPS)(CPS)(CPS)(CU.Ft.) 5 7.2 9.29 2.35 6.94 2080 10 5.6 7.22 .7.35 4.87 2925 15 4.7 6.06 2.35 3.71 3342^ 3432^30 3.3 4.26 2.35 1.91 60 1.9 2.45 2.35 0.10 363 1. Hax storage volume required 3432 cu.ft. North Plaza Building, 5217 Wayzata Boulevard, St Louis Park, Minnesota 55416 (612) 544-8941 ft •% June 26, 1989 Tom Jacobs Duilding In^)ector City of Qrcno 1335 South BrcMi Road Orono, MM 55323 PE; Orono Pool and Classroom Addition Dear Mr. Jacobs: Attached are the storm water calculations that cur engineers have rtqiniiat-iiri foT this project. Please review and advise if these are acceptable. I will send copies to Bonestroo and Minndiaha Cre^ watershed District. Sincerely, PHlVTca cc; Bill Fenholt Bonestroo, Bosene, AnderlDc Minnehaha Creek watershed District North Plaza Building, 5217 Wayzata Boulevard, St. Louis Park, Minnesota 55416 C612) 544-8941 •a.,;—. -.r'- . v^-V-t > '.•r ;•'. ,, l/m- i!l f . \ ■■.' ■ ■■ .;■ ■ IBIinifillSsESSiSpBKs /•o To: Frcn: Date: Subject: Mayor Grabek & Orono Council Members City Administrator Bernhardson Michael P. Gaffron, Asst Planning & Zoning Administrator July 5, 1989 #1419 J. K. Bowers, 2905 Casco Point Road - Variance - Resolution Zoning District - LR-IC, 1/2 acre, sewered COMICIl tIEEnNS JilL 101989 0CtTYOF Application - Request for average lakeshore setback, side setback, and hardcover variances to construct addition and decks to existing residence. List of Exhibits Exhibit A - Planning Commission Action Notice of 6/22/89 Exhibit B - Proposed Resolution Exhibit C - Memo & Exhibits of 6/15/89 Discussion - Please review the memo and exhibits of June 15, 1989. Applicant is requesting to construct a 2-story addition to the lakeshore side of his existing residence. Although the addition —^will be 130*+ from the lakeshore, the neighboring residences are ,/*^\both set back from the lake such that a variance to average >v^setback is required. The neighbor to the south who would be affected by the average setback encroachment appeared at the Planning Commission and expressed concern about the side setback of the proposed deck being slightly less than 10*, but did not state that he had a problem with the average setback encroachment. On the opposite side lot line, the existing house is approximately 8.9* from the side lot line where a 10* side setback is normally required, and the proposed addition will continue the slightly substandard setback on that side. The neighbor affected by that side setback has not commented. Existing hardcover on the property is 32.4%. Planning Commission reviewed the site plan and recommended approval of hardcover variances as long no increase in hardcover occurs above the existing 32.4%. This can be accomplished by removal of the existing brick fireplace, a portion of unused driveway b lac*; .’Opping near the garage entry, and removal of a flat stone walkway and patio area on the west side of the house. The driveway could also be narrowed somewhat in order to accomplish the hardcover tradeoffs. I ; o Zoning File #1419 July 5, 1989 Page 2 of 2 The Planning Commission recommended 4-0 to approve the west side setbackr average lakeshore setback, and hardcover variances. As was noted at the Planning Commission meeting, applicant should revise the east side walkway slightly in order to meet the required 10* side setback on the east side. Staff Re idation - Staff recommends approval per the Planning recommendation, per the attached resolution. Commission .0^ O CITY OF QROIMa city of OROIVO RESOLUTION OF THE CIT ^ COUNCIL NO._ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ A RESOLUTION GRANTING A VARIANCE TO MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 10.22, SUBDIVISIONS 1 AND 2, AND SECTION 10.25, SUBDIVISION 6 (B) PILE #1419 WHEREAS, J.K. Bowers (hereinafter "the applicant") is the owner of the property located at 2905 Casco Point Road within the City of Orono (hereinafter "City") and legally described as follows: Lot 98, also that part of vacated Lakeshore Avenue lying between extensions across it of the side lines of Lot 98 and also that part of the tract of land between said vacated avenue and the shore of Lake Minnetonka lying between extensions of the side lines of Lot 98; Lot 109; all in Spring Park, according to the recorded plat thereof, Hennepin County, Minnesota (hereinafter "the property"); and WHEREAS, the applicant has applied to the City for a variance to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.22, Subdivision 1 to permit the construction of a 2-story addition which will encroach past the average lakeshore ^.^tback line where no encroachment is normally allowed, and a variance to Section 10.22, Subdivision 2 to allow hardcover in the 75-250' lakeshore setback zone in excess of the 25% hardcover normally allowed in that zone, and a variance to Section 10.25, Subdivision 6 (B) to allow a side yard setback of 8.9' where a side yard setback of 10.0' is normally required. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono, Minnesota; FINDINGS 1. This application was reviewed as Zoning File #1419. 2. The property is located in the LR-IC Single Family Lakeshore Residential Zoning District. 3. The Orono Planning Con^nission reviewed this application on June 19, 1989, and recommended approval of the proposed variances based upon the following findings; Page 1 of 5 o,CITY OF aRona City of OROIVO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. ________________ O A) The proposed second story addition will encroach 4* past the average setback line. This encroachment is on the opposite side of the lot from the affected neighboring residence, and will cause no significant impairment of lake views enjoyed by that neighboring property owner. The proposed patio at grade level, which technically encroaches 15' past the average setback line will cause absolutely no visual impairment to the affected neighbor. B) Existing hardcover on the property in the 75-250' is 32.4%. The Planning Commission finds no hardship that justifies increasing above the existing hardcover percentage, hence any additional hardcover associated with the proposed additions should be offset by removals of existing hardcover elsewhere in the 75-250* zone. C) The proposed additions are intended to continue along the line of the existing house, which is 8.9' from the west side lot line where a 10' west side setback would normally be required. Because the neighboring residence is approximately 25' away from applicant's residence, the 1.1* variance will have no significant impact on reducing open space around the neighboring residence. 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 variances on the health, safety and welfare of the community. 5. The City Council finds that the conditions existing on this property are peculiar to it and do not apply generally to other property in this zoning district; that granting the variances would not adversely affect traffic conditions, light, air nor pose a fire hazard or other danger to neighboring property; would not merely serve as a convenience to the applicant, but is necessary tc 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. Page 2 of 5 1 city of OROINO CITY OF ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. ________________ COHCLDSIOHS, ORDER AMD COMDITIONS Msrthe average lakeshore setback line and a grade level patio fnfgrii^ s Tr.^rtVcl' /o ‘fec^tl'cn'ro!?!! ‘Az 4»"w*herro^ly \*5rha^?co^‘'e\‘’\°s a “rianc% to Sect^^^^^^ Subdivision 6 (B) to «PP^o;i« * side yard setback of 8.9' where a 10 side yard setback is normally required, subject to the following conditions. 1, Applicant shall revise his east side deck plan to meet the required 10* east side setback. Inspection for the addition. conforming structur and is subject to the ordinances governing such structures. 4. Authorities granted by this resolution run with the property not with the applicant, but are permissive must be exercised by application for a building p . within one year of the date of Council approval, or this variance will expire on that date (July 10, 1990). 5. Violation of or non-compliance with any °f wfTL of conditions of this variance shall constitute a violation the zoning code, shall automatically terminate any autlw granted herein, and shall be punishable as a misdemeanor. 5 The undersigned applicant has read, understood and hereby agrees to the terms of this resolu^on and on ^ehaU of himself, his heirs, successors and *?”*, to the recording of this resolution in the chain of title of the property. Page 3 of 5 o ot CITY OF ORONO city of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL Adopted by the City Council of the City of Oronor Minnesota at a regular meeting held on the 10th day of July, 1989. ATTEST; Dorothy M. Hallin, City Clerk Jcunes R. Grabek, Mayor O Property Owner(s) STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) 8S. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this 10th day of July, 1989, by James R. Grabek 6 Dorothy M. Tallin, Mayor & City Clerk of the City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City. Notary Public My Commission Expires Page 4 of 5 r.'.'. .;’u*-..•;. . .; , CITV 1 OF J i ORONC^ City of OROIVO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. ________ STAT^U^^NNESOTA ) ) COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) } ss • On ‘Lhi.S aay uj. - * ------. before me a Notary Public within and for said county, personally appeared day of 198 the persorTTr) described in and who executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that he (they) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed. NOTARY PUBLIC MY COMMISSION EXPIRES STATE OF MINNESOTA ) )ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) On this ________________ ueiy wj. -------------------------^----- a Notary Public within and for said County, personally appeared known to ms to be the day of 198 , before me person(s) described in and who executed the foregoinginstrumenc, and acknowledged that he (they) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed. NOTARY PUBLIC MY COMMISSION EXPIRES Page 5 of 5 G CITY OF ORONO •0. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 APPl.: ATIOH NO. .1419 NOTICE OF PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION 473-7:V*=' Date of Notice; 6/22/«‘l TO: J. K. Bowers 2905 Casco Point Road Wayzata, MN 55391 TYPE OF APPLICATION: Variance DATE OF MEETING: 6/19/89 'PIES: VOTE: 4 For 0 Against Planing Connission recommends the following: Approval subject to conditions noted below NOTE AND SPECIAL CONDITIONS: Planning Commission recommends approval of average setback, west-side setback, and hardcover variances to construct additions as proposed, subject to concurrent removals of hardcover resulting in no increase in 75- 250* hardcover above the existing 32.4%. Applicant’s next schedul'd meeting is confirmed as; City Council Monday July 10, 1989; meeting starts at 7:00 p.m. If you desire certified copies of the official Planning Commission minutes, they are available from the City Recorder after review and approval by the Planning Commission. To: Mayor Grabek & Orono Council Members Planning Commission Chairman Kelley Orono Planning Commission Members City Administrator Bernhardson Prcoi: Michael P. Gaffron, Asst Planning & Zoning Administrator Date: June 15, 1989 Subject: #1419 J. K. Bowers, 2905 Casco Point Road - Variance - Public Hearing Zoning District - LR-IC, Single family lakeshore residential, 1/2 acre, sewered Application - Lequest for hardcover, side setback, and average lakeshore setback variances to construct addition and decks to existing residence. List of Exhibits Exhibit A Exhibit B Exhibit C Exhibit D Exhibit E Exhibit G Exhibit H Pertinent Pacts - 1. Application Plat Map Property Owners List Survey Survey with Staff Notes Hardcover Calculations with Staff Notes Excerpts from Construction Plans Applicant is proposing to construct a small addition to house a spa, with balcony above. Also, decks are proposed being approximately 2-3' platform height above grade. Note that applicant's contractor had removed the pre-existing deck in anticipation of building permit issuance, then found out that variances were necessary. following variances are required in applicant to construct the proposed additions: order for Side Setback Existing Req'd C.9' 10’ Proposed 8.9' Variance 1.1' a) Average Lake Setback - with Optional Patio no encroachment 4' encr.4» b)without Optional Patio no encroachment 15' encr.*15' Hardcover, 75-250''^32.4% 25% max.34.2%9.2% 3. Regarding the side setback variance, applicant proposes to extend the existing line of the house, which is 8.9' from the side lot line. At this point, the house is about 25' from the neighboring residence to the west. ffino- /S. (,27': la O Zoning File #1419 June 15, 1989 Page 2 of 3 4. 5. Regarding the average lakeshore setback variance, please refer to the site plan with staff notations. Exhibit E. Item 1 of that site plan is the 2-story enclosed addition, which extends 4* past the average lakeshore setback line. Due to the shape of this addition and the existing grade elevation above the neighbor to the west, this addition should have no significant impact on lake views enjoyed by the neighbor to the west. Item 2 of the site plan is a deck with platform height above grade, which replaces a pre- This deck provides recreational approximately 2-3* existing rectangular deck space as well as a connection between the side access door and the south access door of the existing house. Similar to the 2-story addition, this deck will encroach 4* past the average lakeshore setback line. The proposed handrail on this deck would be about 5-6* about grade, having a slight potential of hindering some existing lake views enjoyed by the property to the east. Item 3 of the site plan appears to be a proposed grade-level patio, to be either wood decking or some other material. While technically this area extends 15* past the average lakeshore setback line, it provides virtually no impairment of lake views. Regarding hardcover, this property currently has ‘iome hardcover excess in each setback zone, per the following table: Zone 0-75* 75-250* 250-500* Area 4,495 s.f. 10,480 s.f. 9,025 s.f. Hardcover 343 s.f. 3,398 s.f. 2,900 s.f. Percent Proposed 7.63%7.63% 32.4% (-»-186s.f.) 34.2% 32.1% 32.1% Applicant proposes to remove the brick fireplace in the lakeshore yard, and will remove an area of blacktop next to the driveway that is not needed. This still results in a 1.8% hardcover increase. Zoning File #1419 June 15, 1989 Page 3 of 3 If necessary, the applicant han other areas of hardcover that could be removed. There is a stone patio near the garbage rack beside the garage, and a stone walkway along the west side of the house. Applicant maintains that while some of this could be removed, the walkway tends to direct drainage towards the north rather than directly downhill onto the neighboring house. Similarly, the existing blacktop driveway is relatively narrow in front of the garage, hence while a small portion of it could be removed, any major removals would start to hinder garage access. The other option would be to omit part or all of the optional patio area, which applicant would prefer to retain. Discussion - The encroachments past the average setback i ••.ay not have a major impact on lake views enjoyed by neighboring properties. The proposed addition is approximately 125* back from the shore line. There would appear to be enough excess hardcover in the driveway in the 75-250* that, coupled with a reduction in the size of the optional patio, a revision should be feasible that results in no increase above the pre-existing hardcover percentage on the property. Regarding the side setback variance, it seems appropriate to continue the existing line of the house, the hardship being the location of the existing house. Staff RecoflBBendation - If Planning Commission feels that the proposed additions will have no significant effect on lakeviews enjoyed by neighboring properties, that would be a justification for granting the average lakeshore setback variance. A recommendation to approve the side setback variance could be justified by the location of the existing house. Regarding hardcover, it may be difficult to justify a hardcover increase since no apparent hards., .p presents inself, hence a consistent recommendation would be for concurrent reductions in hardcover resulting in no increase above the pre-existing 32.4%. This could easily be accomplished by decreasing the size of the patio or removing a portion of the driveway and west side walkway. (0r>; CITY OP ORONO - VARIANCE APPLICATION Initial Application Fee $150.00 ($50.00 per each additional variaM^ Renewal Variance Fee $75.00 // (no change from original application) After-the-Fact Fees (Double application fee) /I I uyoJU M \ ' 4 : PROPERTY LOCATION Site Address ^ffCS ft/ <P(^ -VA r.r . r Property Identification Number (P.I.D. ) lO - 1IH - 33 ~ ~b} ~ O (o^Aio ) Please check one - Property (X' abstract or _ _ _ torrens? Attach legal description to application if not included on required survey. APPLICANT Name >J fT . S Phone (home) ^ 0 1^ Phone (work) U Address; ’276)0 H iSH City;lO^vj^TYTlrV Zip:_b_^i^£i OWNER (if different than applicant) Name — Phone (home) Phone (work) O Address;City:Zip: Date Property Acquired OuL.c|(month/year) I (do) (^o n^) also own the adjacent parcels of land. PRESENT USE OF PROPERTY Present Zoning District Present Use of Property ( (L Residential Other (specify) DESCRIPTION OP REQUEST Estimated Construction Cost $ 6^/OCC^ Describe request in detail: A ________________________________ VARIANCES REQUIRED Lot Area Setback Variances ( Other Lot Width Front Hardcover XT Side _ _ _ Rear) HARDSHIP Describe undue hardship or practical difficulty resulting from strict enforcement of zoning regulations: _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ DESCRIPTION OP UNUSUAL PROPERTY CONDITIONS Describe unusual property conditions preventing compliance with Zoning Code Requirements; _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ UIRED SUBMITTALS Completed Application Form Certified Property Owners List of owners within 150' (you must obtain this list from Hennepin County Department of Finance A-603 Govt Center 348-3271). btamped, legal sized envelopes (#10) pre-addressed to each of the names on the above list with no return address (use address labels obtained with property owners list). Certificate of survey including hardcover calculations as required. Topographic survey (existing and proposed elevations) if ai\y changes in existing grade are proposed. Plat Map (obtained with property owners list). As an addendum to this application, please attach a separate list of any other persons you wish notified of this application. Additional items as may be requested by City staff. The Applicant and Property Owner must sign this application. Please remember that your variance application is not complete if the above information has not been included. Certification by Zoning Department that Variance Application is complete. Zoning Official's Signature_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Date APPLICANT'S SIGNATURE The applicant hereby agrees to provide all information required or requested by the Zoning Administrator, agrees to pay all fees and/or unusual expenses incurred in review of this application, and certifies that the information supplied is true and correct to the best of his/her knowledge. Applicant's Signature Oj [(Li Date OWNERS SIGNATURE The owner hereby ackowledges. and agrees to this application and further authorizes reasonable entry onto the property by City staff, consultants, agents. Commission members, and Council members for purposes of investiga- this rec^jest.tion and verification 9^ Owner's Signature _ _ Applicant must have all ‘ir>T7 /\Date Uabmittals into the City offices 25 days before the Planning Commission Meeting. Planning Commission Meetings are held on the third Monday of each month. Applicants must be present at all scheduled review meetings of the Planning Commission and Council. If an applicant is unable to attend a scheduled meeting, please make arrangements to have an authorized agent attend in your place and to advise the Building & Zoning, Office of this change prior to the meeting. Q®/opi r/<jxs ^ p tvv\-tiaj2. vw.e<is ~^x. Ccw.<»r/2.ci^T,Vv, oj««e ; CD \A/;i^<i«x^£. fl-eedeA <^JL.^iS2aJ2ju,^,ui.S§. <S) Tl^ coc.4 <^dTn^c, c.c.sfl.-Te (^ TU^ CilaL^aeJr Rva . CMLOiU+ec^(^ ^ AWc' p6,^^ tr <*AD'ul*a XC^ ft^eoe . -Hcs \^v.eU^eci Sw\caJ2fi. caJ^iA'icw TX*Ji ^ TX^ d^ejcUc^0 -----' it x^HjCl G«_ joos^.6^^ t Go.; u IE-l^ '“ i r^ SlXcc<i^tZce. __ __ COou,V<L ^<1 ^ cO<x£4o.-a., t2«iS cs-xxA pcjL'tiJ c5^ V ^ «-CJ CL- Lo^ e>ulC cc^ (2/<uEL| UjcbG^. Xv>- Go-v<-w<'-i./^ UJc+^v. Ce<HiC StKcfC X OUCpULGii/ CtdCC U:3oa.\,<^ Ge, tc, (X4-G. 'f»l ol UajiAa-t-t-eij^ Jl<ySJCiiu\ tC-OAA. djijE, (jT^ »onx-e_ e^i's>7:^cf Q.cnA.(A) r,ot-i^ ituiJr iLTia^le-L^ CcvlXk^, %c:. #" / !■■.i \A. ■5-\-3uS-\fc-\ .-r.- . . ■ ■ 'fei I*n♦s s9 ^8 J 8 ! i i V- °§scil S S ^ u M mm !S "8t Sj||8 K 8 a 2 t -SlSta- 8iSss$ i <€4 < 8i “8t„ Mil >llil H ^ u a « t II !.•' I o "TI- o -8 jj: m e M u a « aS *1 s K1 O ? 8 K 3»88|S 8ois “S s§;ili o ' 8 H 8 lA O I/) U M m i[i! !i|i **?r I/'I# oSSSp aeiii^^ M Ik (k U •> “» ScSS^ S 85 “ -5 !M & a I bI z in ;li3«Ie ig- ^i! S*- N p » Q u •-<> Q Z S^S s^§ ®Ss s M s > s s s HI O E O ^ “ 29»s:x =“":9! So33«»=siiioa M M ^ >s8sss;s iiii liM llsSisg*^- M P -2 H U siss ^ -J 8a3|“S ss:2ai s l: :pi|^ rii! ~a“|HS•s^SsgP( o a p M z s M >- K sg“:’««iI O Kl S888& 2 SSis~SggKaItJ lU N > 0 M P « •> < M O Ik Ik N Z §1 g lIH nil;; C'* (" 8 ib*1 S*S mSzE^S 882!g® - O O jg 2852 HI O -i ^ N Z? « 4 in iM :!”Pr»a#8 ?“222! £ S S W Nosaass HI a 0 0 (M z ~8 8- : 8|s Hill;w• 0 0 0^ O U K>N 0 M M 0.SSSlf <1 o “I -I w z S g a-m s.ag-g5a Mlif 0 (SI ~ 0 » 0 HI O Z Z M 2 s:i M ihl C 'r 1 I I I■ QRONC^ CITYof ORONO<» Post OfBot Box 66*Cry«Ul Bay, Miim«wta 55323•Monidpol OfficM On the North Shore of Lake Minnetonka m May 10, 1989 Metro Home Improvement Attn: Calvin Jacobson 3960 Beau-d-rue Drive Egan, MN 55122 Re: Building Permit - 2905 Casco Point Road Dear Mr. Jacobson: The Building & Zoning Department is in receipt of your application for a building permit, which was received by this ofMce on May 1, 1989. A review of the application ^hat the proposed addition will be less than the retired 10' setbacX from the side lot line and therefore needs a side setback variance in order to continue. A copy of the variance application is enclosed for your use should you wish to apply for a variance. Review of your application can not continue until a variance is approved. The deadline for variance applications for the June 19th Planning Commission is noon on Friday, May 26th. "he earliest anticipated Council approval date would be Monday, July 10th. Please contact me at 473-7357 if you wish to discuss this matter. Sincerel m Michael P. Gaffrdxw Asst Planning 6 Zoning Administrator MPG/tln Enclosure cc: Jim Bowers, 2905 Casco Point Rd, Wayzata o ■UtLDING a ZONING - 47 3-7 3S 7 ASSESSING administration a finance - 473-7358 PUBLIC WORKS - 473-7359 fOVER CAtCUUVTION SUMMARY ^S A» 2 * C. m-4,'4 BISK- fey D. uakeahoro Setback Zona Lot Area In Zone Existing Exioting Rardcover nardcover Percentago In Zone {D/A)xl00 Pinal Proposed nardcovQC In Zona 0-75* 75-250• •’n-500' wJ-ioon* i.a. \ Bf X 36ZV Bf 3V.SS %2i ' % ^ozs it 'Zltca sf ?2f3 »2*9^^ af %30 « s£Bf \sf 1 35 % LIMITATIONS HARDCOVER INCLUDESt Structures with roofs JeekSf oven if slatted Sidewalks Driveways (paved or gravel) Decorative landscaping araaa underlain by plastic sheeting Tops of retaining walls, rock walls Any other surface that does not allow direct absorption of rainfall into the ground E, OTHER LAKE5R0R5 REG^JLATI0^J5 SBC. 10.22, REGOU^TlOnS POR. •LR-IA", •LR-lA-l", •l.R-lD*, ■LB-lC* AHO "LR-lC-l" ODB FAMILY LAKESnORB RBSIDEUTIAL DISTRICT. Within any "LR-lA*, LR-lA-1", -LR-lB", ■LR-IC", or -LR-IC-I* One Faaily Lakeshore Residential District the following regulations shall apply: Subd« 1. Lakeshore Set Dack Regulations. The sot back from the shoreline for lakeshore lots shall bo at least 75 foot and no building nay bo ocatod closer to the shoreline tha;: the average distance from the shoreline of exioting residence buildings on adjacent and nearby lots. Subd 2 Lakeshore Hard Cover Rcgulationa. Within 73 foot of shoreline there banooxcavotlng, filling, hard cover, temporary or permanent otructuroo. Within 15 to asrtoVt M tho ohorillno thoro .h.ll b. no ,re.tor th.n 25» hard ooy.c. Within isrtfsoo “cot ot tho ohorollno thoro ohnXl bo-no ,ro.t.r th.n 30» hard within 500 to l.OOO foot of tho ohorollno thoro .hall bo no ,r..tor th.n hard cover. 1 e«r,niationo. No trees within 75 feet of tho shoreline with th“:‘^di:;.tr:r:ir,V, m^ho. or .or. .h.n b. ro.cv,d wltho.t .rot obt.lnm, A permit from the Council. .. , r? •• K I s s•o b S «« m •m «♦ M •I ** ouo § illm I o «M m «M ■«• « M «•« I !2 t «-l «« «i a s . tJ n a 8. , 0 r> 1 Cle •H !w 1 . i ' 1 s m a b «• e *S ♦ A fci « 1 Cl 5 p> 0>1 ♦ (Vl a ? 1 •b N « •b in e >ba i«c h! «e •H •-1 3 1 ba V> V AfiI ■V oo 0 *H 1oow> o0in 1om N 0 m CM 1 %4 n IM lU• • • non •b ................................................................................................. «a I V. <s Ns IN « «M bt «4 IN <N IM•••«•*u Cl « « to n \ D. § S0 M O C Nt *Nu b b •N Cl U >^ O U « b O & M « I2 ;; 4i «N« nM M M N % v> % lb « >« t> 3o» Cl 2 i; 3 ^ M E■o •Hv> z / / s V* o C3 §ou■o c»c SI oo vt N 44 N \ nNn • %« Ita ^ «4 I • ♦ • •u. m m m m dx V.1 N <Vo Ox '•5 N tVl i::^N N <S f ■i •>4c i 1 1 1 1 ^: N *»••1 u •9 w •.4 £ 4#*o X• ;>i jK t< aa< % •Jo •|4z \*N» M %t N %£X w uo >t N C/w V; X N \ Ku c:: 'fc N, u w •j<s O: '‘n/r ^44. fe* vS N \ j| -I $ a o Xu fS uo fa. to •J i o S| s «y> fe- e c 3 ♦ ♦ ^ - oe •H •4 Js u Iu 4« o } I n tT' s « • %< %4 • « « f) I I N s K V o oca i r? I ■j / s \ uo>ou•ouj3 cc o Cm 2 - Q o 0- § T> O! HJ %♦ o fsl r» I s - ♦ ^ ^ S o rs/ e t' I oo §*N 0^ co»H K V o I: coo 'O' *nr* 1o uco N Jtu •9 •Jo 1.9 1M IM r> n W-> W. W-4 *M • o « rt o n ij t: (^ Cl O' rj k« <9o S' V. •9 :io M fj U•u 11 W4 u «« IM <«« <M «M «M• ••••• n n VI IQ n o o•*< M*J u n ei a. o *o *9 e. o Fron: Date: Subject: Mayor Grabek & Orono Council Members City Administrator Bernhardson Michael P. Gaffron, Asst Planning & Zoning Administrator June 29, 1989 #1420 Kevin Norwood, 1360 Vine Place - Subdivision ceumuanM cnYflFaMw r- Zoning District - LR-IB, single family residential, minimum lot size List of Exhibits Exhibit A - Planning Commission Notice of 6/22/89 Exhibit B - Additional Materials Submitted by Applicant Ar7- Exhibit C - Memo & Exhibits of 6/14/89 Discussion ~ Please carefully review the memo and exhibits of June 14, 1989, Briefly, the applicant is proposing to divide a 1.58 acre single tax parcel into two lots, to create one new building site. The Planning Commission initially tabled this item to allow the applicant, at applicant's request, more time to review the issues related to this subdivision. Planning Commission gave the plicant conceptual direction that the subdivision would .obably be recommended for denial. Later in the meeting, applicant returned and requested Planning Commission make a recommendation to Council so that this item could be moved along. Planning Commission recommended 4-0 to deny, following basis: on the 1. The subdivision creates 2 substandard lots from 1 conforming lot, thereby setting an adverse precedent. 2. Approval would be inconsistent with the City's established policy of denying lot area variances associated with subdivisions. Such a policy has been adhered to since establishment of the current zoning code in 1975. 3. The proposal results in the need for a hardcover variance in the 250-500' zone for Lot 1. 4. Prior assessment for municipal sewer does not in and of itself constitute grounds for approval of lot area variances to create a subdivision. 5. The extent and number of variances sought is excessive. ■IP Zoning File #1420 June 29, 1989 Page 2 of 2 6. Applicant has not submitted sufficient evidence of e hardship which is unique to the particular circumstance* Many properties are similarly situated in the LR-IB zoning district. As of this writing, applicant has not submitted additional information in support of his request. Additional information will be forwarded as soon as it is received. Staff Recommendation - Per the recommendation of the Planning Commission, staff recommends denial. Staff will draft a resolution reflecting Council's action on this application for your next meeting. CITY OP ORONO P,0. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN ZONUK* file ho. . '1420 HOTICB OP PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION 55323 473-7357 Date of Notice: 6/22/89 Kevin Norwood 2210 So Plymouth Rd #117 Minnetonka, MN 55343 COPIES TOs Earl Norwood 1360 Vine Place Mound, MN 55364 TYPE OP APPLICATION: Subdivision DATE OP MSETIHG: 6/19/B9 VOTE: (see below) Planning Conadsaion reconends the following: Denial for reasons noted below NOTES AMD SPECIAL CONDITIONS: 1st Motion; Planning Commission voted 5-0 to table per applicants* request, to allow applicant time to further review his options. 2nd Motion; At applicants' request. Planning Commission reopened this review at the end of the meeting - motion to reconsider; 4-0. Planning Commisson then, after brief discussion, voted 4-0 to recommend denial. Basis for denial (per previous discussion and staff memo}: 1. The subdivision creates 2 substandard lots from 1 conforming lot, thereby setting an adverse precedent. 2. Approval would be inconsistent with the City's established policy of denying lot area variances associated with subdivisions. Such a policy has been adhered to since establishment of the current zoning code in 1975. 3. The proposal results in the need for a hardcover variance in the 250-500* zone for Lot 1. 4. Prior assessment for municipal sewer does not in and of itself constitute grounds for approval of lot area variances to create a subdivision. 5. The extent and number of varianres sought is excessive. 6. Applicant has not submitted sufficient evidence of a hardship which is unique to the particular circumstance. Many properties are similarly situated in the LR-IB zoning district. Applicant's next scheduled meeting is confirmed as: City Council Monday, July 10, 1989; meeting starts at 7:00 p.m. If you desire certified copies of the official Planning Commission minutes, they are available from the City Recorder after review and approval by the Planning Commission. r («rl I (««in NorvOlXl [II I .jm 1 * I; «<Mi ' J • I Of« *>401 HI I I I I Ifd Hvnnaoii CUunIr H|nn#\ot» M ■10o I H«r»»T <r*rtltv tIMt Ulli la a trva and eiMiatf faifiaiatattaw of a auraaa at Uw bauaaariaa al tna (ellaatf^ iaaertM frataaty all lytaa la •lock IT. »am Mill ibiiMi. iteavte * n HtMaaaU: l«i *. H4 tka MarUMatarlr Mil a( Lot a. anrt Lot 12. OVt tkat oortla<i tkaroaf lying i^tarly rre* a llaa kruia fra* a oatnt im Uta MorUMrIy llaa of aalO Lai l| dtataat l2.& faat Soitliaagtarly fra* tka Hartkaaaiarly cartiar UMtaal t* a galat aa tka laatkarly llaa al Ut tl. aaiB aaMtvtalaa. 4Utaat 12.S faat ikaatarly fr« tka laatkaiat earaar at aal4 Ut II. IM ItM tkat garttoa of Oat 19. tn4 tkat yartlaa of tka »acala4 Caaal Itraat lylag laalarly af a llaa kraaa fn« tka kartkaagt earaar of Lat 2. •lock IS. «al4 aiMtvtaioa. la a falat 12.S faat MMf arly fma tka Soathaoatarly earaar of aol« Lat It. tleek IT. IM tkat garttoa at tka fcrtkarly Half of tka raeataa eaaal lying laatarly of a Una »aaa fro* a galnl oa tka Narikaagtarly Uaa of aald Ut 12. Ilock IT. diatMt 12.9 faat Soutkaaatar ly fro* tka aarUniaat earaar of aald oa tka SoHtkarly llaa of aald dlataa* 12.9 foal >*otarly fro* eocaar of aald Ut 11. tad aa- tarllaa of aald cmoI. and ly- a fellaatag daacrthad Uaa: Uit oa tka dortharly llaa of Dial 29.00 foot Sautkoaatarly Straat ^ata^Ktkar tkaa a tr tka g^oh*ly daocrikad llaa. tka^S^ ka^o knaa graotaualy ^tk^^pmo* -.t all kMllduiga t ^t^vWt le tkaa otkar tagr M^tawat 9t of ka ■taea tkla la kv atakadl. and of karaaa. It daaa BM 1*0010 or aa- kar furgaaaa of tkla auraar tkat _ karaat iiMlaran lying dartkaaatori? of aald aka 111 daaerikad gorttaaa of Uta J aad 4. and botmaa tka dortkaaatarly aatanalona of tka dartkaaatarly Una of aald Lat 4 and tka raatarlln* of laid Ut J. kaa baaa iiaiMad to ka ^ lacludaa aa gart af tka iknii daaerikad yrogarty Scala: T : -''Data »-29-«» Votikorg ito. 17T9S . SuaHorara. k Ung Uaa. f9 li«ln kla n **» f rrya e ♦< f •« . ««■# ■3 '3 •3 -/Sa 3*0 *00 tt* *00’ M000 0000,0000 T000'H*0 r»f>“ • 4 0T0 - 00-0 *,*» 3000 tS 00 '* t 00*0 0 •!, 00 U3*a - ,4 *00 ■■ 00' t 000000000 o -H" <* tmtt - ' »-• 3*v - * *t 10o -n.< '• ,*.r««»rl*no« ol • .ji l»ViH l» '"“’ . jrth* ;H,r-ih-*.«.r*r t*i» »« *'*“T***tL '^t r fmp* fortio*3 «»a I* ______f— • Mini Of* •c:::::-.- L4:%-tunru;:^rr ti-q» U» SoUtb*M> w n| «L«) ■.«•' F>’-^»«’ °‘Jfl ; u*v*rl» !.« • I‘"» .ictrL uT»o«*—riT of Mid Uo' «lorit<M« etrfW o' Sn>iM4kwrir tn» i*» iu« of Mid Let :2 le • l*'l''t •» ^ Wm, MOMTI* f«» - *—^-»v*rlV fr^ -J* S~'*"WgSCrth. -..» UM of Mid U» %Xr "'J!3ll^lr» f-t. «— m Lsj A t« um -la cO V ^ >r- «\ vacalMl ’■O'*^ * ,t— uua la hMi VM tocailoa of .11 or *•- Ml aurp»>« '•* o»°» Jr^iMr^I —MT «•'^^:xrr,in. __ MMrriboO Mriiooa of Icio 3 o^ •^ ______. —of Om mm U» fcrtOMOir'iT •'^ ________..MMT UM of Mid U.1 « — '•• ^lorilM ol Mid Lt.' > of ■-M • rrm» » Ftor. 5 3rM»-r^ •* Lie ao irfM ,ro Son **f•• / >-' -w <• • *f/73i '• Mayor Grabek & Orono Council Members Planning Commission Chairman Kelley Orono Planning Commission Members City Administrator Bernhardson Prcais Michael P, Gaffron^ Asst Planning & Zoning Administrator Datex June 14r 1989 Subject! #1420 Kevin/E.?rl Norwood, 1360 Vine Place - Subdivision - Public Rearing Soiling District * LR*1B, sewered, 1 acre minimum lot size Application - Request to divide 1.58 acre single tax parcel into 2 lots, to create one new building site. List Of Sxhibits Exhibit A - Application Exhibit B Plat Map Exhibit C - Property Owners List Exhibit D - Survey Exhibit E • Documentation, 1975 Garage Setback Variance Exhibit F - Documentation, 1976 Oversized Accessory Structure Variance Exhibit G - Map, Sewer Stub Location Partinant Coda Sections - Section 10.24, Subdivision Lot Area Minimum “ 1 acre. 5 (B). Standards for LR-lB district: Lot Width Minimum » 140* Section 11.03.24, 11.03.65 6 11.03.66 (definitions). By defini- tion, multiple parcels legally combined In^o 1 parcel for tax puxposes, are subject to subdivision procedure to detach or rearrange lot lines of such parcels. Minimum lot area is exclusive of vehicular easements. Pertinent Facta - 1. The applicants propose to split off a second building site from this 1.58 acre tax parcel. The proposal requires a number cf variances, as follows: | LOT 1 (aziatinq houaa)A Existing Hardcover Proposed; Lot Area 0.62 ac Lot Width* 76' 0-75' 1.17% 75-250* 25.00% 250-500' 74.13% Required;1.00 ac 140*0%25% max.30% max. Variance;.38 ac 64'1.17%_44.13% (381) * Lot width at 35 (46%) setback from Vine Place right-of-way Zoning File #1420 June 14, 1989 Page 2 of 6 LOT 2 A Existing Hardcover Proposed Required Variance Lot Area Lot Width* 0-75' 75-250' 4. 0.96 ac (0.90 ac**) 1.00 ac .04 ac ( .lOac**) 300' + 140 11.05% 250-500' 3.62% 0% 25% max. 30% max. (see Item 4 below) ** Excluding driveway serving neighbors The proposed dividing line was apparently located as presented for a number of reasons: A) The proposed line leaves exactly 25% hardcover in the 75-250' zone for the existing development on Lot 1. B) This line also leaves a setback of approximately 7' to the driveway serving the existing residence. Applicant feels such a setback is appropriate and necessary to maintain the character of his property. Consequently, Lot 2 ends up 0.04 acre short of 1 acre. Technically, the subdivision code definition of lot area requires exclusion of vehicular easements from the defined lot area. Although applicant has not provided documentation of existing easements on the survey, staff must presume that an access easement exists over proposed Lot 2 to serve the residences at 1330 and 1350 Vine Place. The paved area of that private driveway 's approximately 2,800 s.f. or .06 acre, hence the defined proposed lot area for Lot 2 is 0.90 acre or less. Planning Commission ma^ sh to review the minimum lot area definitions in Section .03.24 and 10.02.34 and consider whether this driveway n. /%.es the northerly and southerly portions of Lot 2 non-contiguous. The probable building site on Lot 2 is north of the easement driveway, mostly in the 250-500' hardcover zone. If the 250-500' zone for Lot 1 was expanded to make Lot I's 250- 500' zone conform to hardcover limits, the proposed dividing line would move south about 65'. On the other hand, if the 250-500' hardcover variance for Lot 1 is granted, with the proposed dividing line. Lot 2 would have ample hardcover allowance to develop a residence within the hardcover limits. G Zoning File #1420 June 14, 1989 Pagte 3 of 6 Note that the existing 1.58 acre parcel currently conforms to hardcover limitations in both the 75-250'and 250-500* zones, with the lakeshore access walkway being the only hardcover in the 0-75* zone, as shown in the following table: Pre-Bxisting Hardcover - Conbined Properties Zone 0-75' 75-250* 250-500* Area 7,000 s.f. + 41,590 s.f. 20,560 s.f. 69,150 s.f. Hardcover 82 s.f. + 6,83^ s.f. 3,678 s.f. s=ss=sss;3B=s:rs 10,592 s.f. Percentage 1.17% 16.42% 17.90% 5. This property was originally zoned for 75* frontage, 15,000 s.f. minimum building lot size as of November 20, 1950. Subsequent ordinances in 1958 and 1959 resulted in establishing a minimum building lot size of 1 acre, and a minimum of 140* width at the building line for any new residential use. Since that time, the property has continually been zoned for 1 acre minimum lot size, 140* minimum lot width. 6. The property was served by sewer in 1970. At that time the property existed as 4 separate tax parcels. The City apparently originally intended to assess the property for 3 sewer units and provide 3 sewer stubs. City files indicate the assessment was thereafter reduced to 2 sewer units, and 2 stubs were provided, 1 of which was used for the existing house. A single sewer stub is available for potential use by Lot 2, and the assessment for same has been paid. Staff has found no docimentation indicating reasons why multiple sewer units were given to a property less than acres in area in a 1-acre zone. It probably had to do wit*, the uncombined nature of the 4 lots. Zoning Pile #1420 June 14, 1989 Page 4 of 6 7. In 1975, Earl Norwood requested and was granted variances to front and side setbacks to construct a detached garage on the property. The City granted variance approval subject to legal combination of the 4 individual tax parcels, so that the detached garage would be on the same parcel as principal structure per the requirements of the zoning code (Section 10.03, Subdivision 9). The configuration of the 4 individual tax parcels was such that al] 4 had to be combined together in order to place the garage on the same parcel as the house. Council minutes from November 24, 1975 Indicate Zoning Administrator Henry Munich had discussed the substandard status of the 4 parcels with Norwood, and Norwood agreed to the combination if the variances were approved. In August 1976- Norwood requested a further variance to approve an accessory structure area variance of 176 s.f. to make the proposed detached garage 1,176 s.f. total. That variance was granted on the basis that the individual parcels had been combined. That combination occurred in July 1976. 8. Lot 2 as proposed will have no legal lake access. Discussion - Staff has been unable to find evidence and is unaware of any past City approval of similar requests to divide previously combined substandard lots to create substandard building sites. The most similar application f^und is that of Duane Hall at 1860 Shadywood Road, where a legal combination of 2 parcels totaling 0.9 acres in a 1/2 acre zone was denied a subdivision request for a number of reasons including the creation of substandard building sites from a conforming lot. The resolution denying Hall's variance stated that, if the requested multiple variances to lot standards were granted. Council would abandon a long-standing established policy in the review of subdivision applications and would establish an adverse precedent for the future in similar applications. In addition, the resolution noted that the City Council has not granted variances to the minimum lot area or width standards with subdivisions that create new building sites since adoption of the current zoning code in January 1975. Zoning File #1420 June 14, 1989 Page 5 of 6 Certainly, dividing a 1.58 acre single tax parcel into 2 lots of 0.62 and 0.96 acre respectively, would be contrary to established City policy. Further, the City has in the past denied lot area variances for individual lots which had been assessed for a full sewer unit, hence the City has established a precedent that previous sewer assessment is not a legitimate or compelling basis in and of itself for granting lot area variances. Notwithstanding the apparent adverse precedent that would be set in granting this application. Planning Commission should consider the merits of the proposed building site. What effect does the bisecting driveway easement have on the buildability of Lot 2? From a hardcover standpoint, aside from the variance needed for Lot l*s 250-500' zone, it is certainly feasible to develop a new residence and driveway on Lot 2 that meets the hardcover limitations for Lot 2. Note that it would be consistent and appropriate for the City to require acces via the existing easement driveway, rather than a new curb cut to Vine Place, which is a City road. Finally consideration should be given to whether or not a setback would be required from the existing easement driveway. Although it is unlikely the applicant would build right up to the driveway, a setback restriction could be included in your recommendation should you consider an approval. Staff Recomnendation - Planning Commission is requested to consider the merits of the proposed building site weighed against the precedent that would be set by granting approval. The applicant can create an attractive, albeit substandard, building site that meets the hardcover requirements. At the same time, this creates a substandard lot for the existing house. Of course the downside risk for the City is that approval would open the floodgates for potentially dozens of requests for creation of substandard lots. If Planning Commission recommends approval, you should address any specific conditions to be placed on Lot 1 or Lot 2, and might include the following findings in support of the approval: 1. Lot 2 can be developed without the need for setback or hardcover variances. 2. A sewer stub is available for connection, and the property was originally assessed for 2 sewer units. A recommendation for denial might include the following findings ; Zoning File #1420 June 14, 1989 Page 6 of 6 1. The subdivision creates 2 substandard lots from 1 conforming lot, thereby setting an adverse precedent. 2. Approval would be inconsistent with the City's established policy of denying lot area variances associated with subdivisions. Such a policy has been adhered to since establishment of the current zoning code in 1975. 3. The proposal results in the need for a variance in the 250-500* zone for Lot 1. hardcover 4. Prior assessment for municipal sewer does not in and of itself constitute grounds for approval of lot area variances to create a subdivision. 5. The extent and number of variances sought is excessive. 6. Applicant has not submitted sufficient evidence of a hardship which is unique to the particular circumstance. Many properties are similarly situated in the LR-IB zoning district. G OF ORONO - SUBDIVISIOH APPLICATid "“PROPBRTY LOCATION § Stipertyt20 \ :ry OF .hOHd • ^vr£ OFFICE Site Address 1 \JiliP Place. Property Identification Number (P-I.D.) Q"7 // 7^*3^ zoo 32. Please check one - Property )( abstract or - - torrens? ^ w - TL 2:0. rO ..^v^ ^CU .:v: .-i’ Attach legal description to application APPLICANT Name A/oruJOQc( Phone (home) S'?3 - Phone (work) Address; “zaio S. ?ly ^wactt^ City; i>MMi>ve4Te*v<^a OWNER (if different than applicant)Phone (home) ^7 ^ Neune £cu“) o^dL Phone (work)----1Cd6> Address t \3(pQ v/u^F Placf (attach list if more than one) City;Zip; SS3Cp4 ^raSTING LAND USB w Number of Tax Parcels Development Size Acres Total, all parcels ‘ Present Use (check)Residential; no. of units Other (specify)_ _ _ _ __ I Present Zoning District__L^^jJ^ PROPOSAL JL Division for Tax Purposes Lot Line Rearrangement Only (no new building sites) Subdivision for New Building Sites Number of Building Sites;I 1 Existing Units New Units Total Units oposed Gross Density; mum Lot Size: sed Use: (check) Units per Acres U^s-H»s \*MiCbrtrva.tteA . Sq Feet Dry Buildable Land Residential Other (specify) 2. 3. MIHIMOM MATERIAL NECESSARY FOR COMPLETE PRELIMINARY APPLICATION 1. Completed Application Form Preliminary Plat information on Certificate of Survey. Certified Property Owners List of ownerb within 350' (you must obtain this list from Hennepin County Department of Finance A-603 Govt Center 348-3271). ^ u r Stamped^ legal sized envelopes (#10) pre—addressed to each of the names on the above list with no return address (use address labels obtained with property owners list). As an addendum to this applicationr please attach a separate list of any other persons you wish notified of this application. 4. 5. Certification by Zoning Department that Preliminary Plat Application is complete. Zoning Official's Signature^_ _ _ _ _ ___ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Date^ 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Payment of fees (park fees, filing fee, sewer and water assessments). Signed certificate of survey or mylar copies of formal plat. Title opinion. Easements, Covenants, etc. P velopers Agreement and Letter of Credit. Certification by Zoning Department that Final Plat Application is complete Zoning Official's Signature_ _ _ ___ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Date- - - - - - - - - - FEES Sketch Plan Review (Class I, II & III) Preliminary Re/iew (Class I & II Subdivision) $150.00 250.00 Preliminary Review (Class III and all non-residential) 300.00 + 20.00/Lot 1 Final Plat Review (Class III) ♦(Plus any legal or engineering charges) 150.00* The applicant hereby agrees to provide all information required or requested by the Zoning Administrator, City Engineer, City Attorney, Planning Commission and Council necessary to process this applicat*'on and further agrees to pay all additional fees established by ordinance. Applicant's Signature Owner's Signature Date 5" - -7-6)- Date Appliv^ant must have all submittals into the City offices 25 days before the Planning Commission Meeting. Planning Conunission Meetings are held ? third Monday of each month. Applicants must be present at all scheduled review meetings of the Planning Commission and Coui.cil. If an applicant is unable to attend a scheduled meeting, please make arrangements to have an authorized agent attend in your place and to advise the Building & Zoning Office of this change prior to the meetinr. i L M h t v* S“-«o iM •• ae “Ik*® Z M o Kl rigs* . rl |si = sl^di "T 1^# •^SS^se S ui-is “Nt M UI z <q s^:i <U H £ S 10I K M M ,'y 10Moo ¥iin <*UI UI >0 — M -I UI ^a oe oe u — ass: 8!“— > IIIV ••S£r<. -I «i > o 10 UI UI a10 M M 10 2 _ M z z 10 3« — < < m g z z UI UI ee^(^ e Q UI UI m a flP o UI ee o QC UI UI a a a w a M •"SzzSSI ge a UI K Q a a — 2 m UI r^ ui UII alu tu 2 _o e a _ o o s; I a M M ? “*“»g£K -I _l 2 o a a UI A g-i* o o -j a g vO UI o 2si:;lli « aa Z a .“3 Nse L ^u.S ‘j's5S2“‘N M a □a a S^ooSla r«> a (0 o aSiisa — a a a m e o o — a Z ‘I'Sa “a^njgS m o a a — z a ec a 1 ae a o2a< a < a 0 L> 2^a. s3 Is s ^ a SIS* M '8 si; « r*si^ ®}5m COlA A i M O Xo9 0 1 I % X ae oe S -sS /> —- i;61F M UJ VgSSg*"K < oe ca 3 ‘gx a«3S ii g •H o 5 >»• M o oe U| aeg|«§ oe < tf 2M Sf««5uiS a u -i > M -j M m ^ 7T CO O M M rn M O Z X 4- M Ul U1 < UtM UJ X X >4 Mr^ X u u a I-! > -» -> Ijl _ rL §§5X X > SSoo o M u u <4 CD iH M M M M O X X r4 M K ^<4 -J UJ O Ul <D ~|p2® a=*s*»aU Z M Zrl o e»>gs O.JUJU•A «JM UJ M M -J rl5gg‘ S="--!J«x tS._-«55 M X X« < X Q c o L L H I a 3% »>s j ~o 0 X 1 3 SSSSS3 ..grf et outuiuee o at <P a-I UicE ^. .."8SS as§“ia N S X UJ Xfm^ut tf> u. SiVAi u| atOCX o ■r\ -^w.; «^g 8•-I K» KNeo M g ^ ^ k|xx 2 V “*K-I M </>Sxdzi V|iig 1 9 9 3 N X X ^S X“ass!''S • OL X « m o M tf) M M ^ -i X >assess 3!i“a 4r Q uj SaiiiSa K 9 UJ Ui ^ M X _ u — N K Z rLg^^Sr.^ s*x«ia “ rxi X X S X < M -J -J >3- >asssass y> gc X Z Omi XI I *■• ‘ • Ui ^ u.M S o o I :.•»c. r /•^bnOHO CfXMCTZ. MMn*Tifa hktj^ wntwgimgn io^c >' '"OROIICI OOmCXL MSETIHO BBLD NOVBMBBR 24, 197S This tr«« i« 2«uiijig toward tha lake and Mr. MeCaffrer i« afraid a high wind might tip it ower oprootiag aene of the other newer plantings in the area* Since purchasing the property ^hrmm years age, he has planted abont 400 various trees and shrubs on the site. t'Ci ■r. VkRZANCB • 1065 West Famdale (Continuec.) r -* •V.-’- ■V-v The Planning Coinnission recommended to the Council that the variance application to remove one tree within 75* of the lakeshore be approve as submitted as the applicant has added rdsny additional plantings since purchasing the property. Paurus moved, Welsh seconded, to approve the variance request for Maurice McCaffrey, 1065 West Femdale Road, conditioned on the removal of only one tree within 75* of the lakeshore. Motion, Ayes (5) - Nays (0). A- •* . T .■.i.c:'-* •• y- V'.* ' In regard to the street and sideyard setback variance for Bari Norwood, 1360 Vine Place, Henry Muhich, Building 6 Zoning Administrator, stated in June, 1975, Mr. Norwood applied for a permit to move his existing garage to provide M a new garage. On review, we fomd the parcel on whi^ he was proposing to build was a lot without a main structure and separa^r from the lot on which his home was adjoining parcels(4450, 4825, 4778 and 4755'. 1 explained to h^ that our code did not vermit the construction of M accessory building without a main structure. I also explained the current substandard status of the four adjoining parcels and suggested he combine them to provide the necessary main structure. VARIANCE 1360 Vine Place i): 1 reviewed the matter with the Hennepin County Tax Department and learned these parcels could not be combined unless the tax status on all parcels were equal. Currently, one parcel is tax delinquent from 1974 and three parcels are delinquent since 1971. i Informed fir. Norwood of this i*equirement. The proposed location of the garage would require two variances regardless of the combination, however, the location as proposed is 5* from the aide lot line and 5* from the street lot line. Two variances of 5* and 30* respectively would be necessary. Hr. Norwood has not combined the lots as yet but has agreed to pay up the delinquent taxes and cc*.dt>ine the properties providing these variances are approved. The approval should (Continued) r- WOVBHaKR hm on tlM condition that thaaa four parcals WBHBBR 2;/i97S V1 iaad and no building paznit would ba : nntilTaueh tiaa that thay ara coodbinad. • ;VMIXJWdb-V-'r ^ •; 1360 Vina Pla< ^i ,'- (Contintiad) Tho Planning Coil laion raoonvandad to tha Connell that tha varlanca raquaat ba grantad doe to tha ahapa and topography of tha location Let only on tha condition that tha dalinquant taxaa ba paid and that all four lota ba cocibinad with tha hbnaaita. . Haaaangala novad, Butlar aacondad, to approva tha aarianea raquaat for Earl Norwood, 1360 «lna Placa, aa par tha Planning Conmiaaion racoi—andationa> Motion, Ayaa (5).- Naya (O). Ranry Muhich, Building a Zoning Adminiatrator, etatad that Van Dala Manufacturing Company is again raquaaC:ing approval of an addition to tha axiating atructura at 2725 Nayaata Boulavard. Tha propoaad addition ia to ba 150* X 250'• A sniliar raquaat for a 200* X 250* addition waa approved by Council on July 23, 1974. Shortly after obtaining approval tha firm withdrew their raquaat for a building permit and tha permit fees and SAC charges ware refunded lata in 1974. Tha new proposal included the same site improvamants as tha previous proposal. ..ivawaya, parking areas and landscaping will ba added. Pressed setbacks do conform to tha code. Tha original proposal waa approved July 23, 1974, subject to tha following conditional 1. 2. 3. Structure shall conform to new zoning. Tha Engineer shall review and submit a drainage report. Tha landscaping plan shall ba approved and accompanied by a bond. Also atiuplatad on the previous permit waa the requirement of a 24* culvert under the r^mp connecting tha two buildings and a 12” eta vert under tha driveway entrance. The Planning Commission recommended to the Council approval of the site and building plan provided that on review of tha plan, the metal wall surfaces ..^.iply with coda, that all landscaping be included and that the Village Engl•!;prove of the drainage. butler moved, Welsh seconded, to approve the 'aquest for a building plan for Van Dalcr Inc., V >725 Waysata Boulevard, as per the Planning —Commission recommendations. Nays (0).Motion, Ayes (5) - m • t “ •' 'i# ■■■ VMI DAU^^ 2725 ffaysata Boulavard v ‘ • -V' I 111 •t!wm •••<ir •■5 TOf TOM: DKCBt PBi W. p. Banaon H. F. Muhlch Novoiter 14, 1975 #71 Earl llorvood - 1360 Vine Piece Vuiance - Street & Sideyard Setback 2h J\Mm, 1975, Mr. ftorwood applied for a permit to move his exlatlAg garage to provide the focatloi for a new garage. Cn review, we found the paroel on which he wea pit^llng to build was a lot vdthout a main structure and separate fran the lot on which his hone was standing. lie owns the four adjoining parcels (4550, 4825, 4778 and 4755). I explained to him that our code did not permit the ocnstruction of an aocssory building without a nein structure. I also explained the current substandard status of the four adjoining parcels and suggested he oonhine them to provide the necessary main structure. I reviewed the matter with the Ifamepln Osunty Tax Department and learned these parcels could not be ocxnbinad unless the tax status on aill parcels were equal. Currently, cne paroel is tax delinquent fran 1974 and three parcels are delinquent since 1971. I informed Mr. Morwood of this require ment. The enclooed map distinguishes the parcels. The proposed location of the garage would require two variances regardless of the coThinatian, however, the location aa prcposed is 5 ft. from the side lot line and 5 ft. fxon the street lot line. The required setbncXis axe 10 ft. firm the side lot line and 35 ft. fran the street lot line. Two variances of 5 ft. and 30 ft. respectively would be necessary. Mr. rtorwood has not combined the lots as yet but has agreed to pay up the delinquent taxes and carbine the properties providing these variances are ap- prtTved. The approval should be on the condition that these four parcels are cxnbined and no building permit would issued until such time that they are carbined. PLAtWDG CCrWISSlCN FTCOMfINnAnON - ^iovn^ber 18, 1975 The Planning a be granted dur ccrditicn that wi>*h the hoTBslte. * “sioi i’«ccrmended to the Cmmcil that the variance request he shape and topography of the location but only on the elinquent taxes be paid and tut ^11 four lots be carbined I MXild advise the Oouncil to look into the possihlity of turn-around problems for snow ploa due to the proposed oarage site being located on a dead end road. m fip*-Vifla^krfOfb^ VIllAGf OF ORONO ▼ lUOKW VA VMW P.0. lOX M. CltSTAL BAT. MWTf. 53313 • MWOaPAL OFFICB WOKl: .;W 0« North ShofO Lohr Mimnotomkm •A.:i-■ -i-r^.. SK£<»f:. k: .' ■:. wi' ■ V \. -.. .,v. July IS, 1975 -.,• "4 ,>1^%$ , •;v..-cVi^«-.-®'j: ':?*=1i Ntr. Earl Norvrood 1320 Vine Place Mound, Minnesota Dear Farl: V\\s is nerelv to document various verbal discussions and proposals regardinp your property so the issue is clear and on record. ,\bout one month ago you came into the zoning department stating you wished to build a new garage and move the old ,'mrage do^.-n to same adjacent property owned by you. Investigation revealed ywirsame adjacent property owned by you. Inve property was in split parcels with individual parcel minbero. I suggest^ >*ou combine the various parcels because section 31.310 forbids accessary buildings on Jots that have no principal building. In attempting to coeblne the lots in the assessing department it was found the lots, with the exception of tlve lot, your residence was on, wre tax delinquent and would require clearance from Ilennenin County before they could be combined. l?pon insfiectinp your property this A.M. It was discorored that *>*011 had moved your garage, which v^•as ala-ady non-conforning to another Jot: TIic garage Is on a movino Jolly so lias no nemiinont status, so I do not feel it is illegal. to build a new garage or place the nrcsent one on location, will renuirc combination of oroperty or a variance from the above ordinance, or if setbacks can not i>e meet, a variance will also be rcouired. If anything is not clear, feel free to call*this office. Cincercly yours. 'Ui e Scicllcr I'uilding Inspector '*S:pw MWISS OP A PLATMNG CXMIISSIGN MEETING HELD AUGUST 2, 1976 • PAGE 3 Ur. Joe Ubovsky ms present end interested in toiowing >fhet this vnrience ms about. The Zoning AMnistretor infnmed the Gomissian and Mr. Labovsiey that Mr. Moncod mis request ing an approval of a variance of 176 sq. ft. in area to build a 42* X 24* garage> This garage lenild be used for storing his recreational equipment such as boats, cancers, snoMDoiles, etc. Van Nest imved, Hninah seconcM, to reconeend approval on the basis there has been no com plaint on the proposal and all the individual parcels nave been coad)ined after ’laving paid up all delinquent taxes. Motion - Ayes (8\ Nays (0). Mir* Massengale was in attendance. The Zoning Administrator pointed out the dimensions of the area. There is no way the dimensions can be increased. Hake moved, Pesek seconded, to approve this variance based on the fact there is no other land available and the area is sewered and has water. Motion - Ayes (8), Nays (0). Mr. Mii.tney is requesting approval of a variance to add to his existing residence. Van Nest moved, Ilosfield seconcM, to reconwend approval in view of the fact that this house already exists on a non* standard lot and the proposed addition lexild not result in any encroachment of the exist ing setbacks. ?btion - Ayes (8), Nays (0). The Planning Commission scheduled a Public Hearing for September 7, 1976, at 7:30 p.m. Mr. Richards was present and explained to the Couinission that he was planning to remodel his kitchen and add a second story over that part of his house. Van Nest moved, FfcDonald seosnded, to reccmmend approval of this variance for I'Jt sire and width for this addition inasmuch as it is consistent with the neighbors and on the condition that no additional variances wUl be required, ^totion - Ayes (8), Nays (0). EARLN0R«0nO 1360 VINE PLACE VARIANOS - GARAGE AREA Mr. 6 Mrs. Shaw wexe present. Mr. Shaw explained to the Planning Conmission that he received a building permit for his r ^ge about three years ago, and at that time felt the garage ms being built within the required setbacks. Hake moved, Pesek seconded, to recornnend approval based on the fact that it was built three years «go with the understanding that the location met all setback requirements. Motion - Ayes (8), .Vavs (0). The Planning CcrmisEion vent into work sessions on the Park GUn Club and Ken Heroux. 1«VLT1D1 MASSeR^ALB 2177 KELLY AVENUE VARIANCE • LOT AREA ^mrm JOSEPH WHITNEY 840 OLD LONG LAKE ROAD VARIANOI • LOT AREA 6 ROAD SETTiAa FOR AlSmON TO RESIDENOI ON SUBSTANDARD LOT KLAUS BECKER 511 N. FERNL'»E SUBDIVISION (PRELIMINARY)4 J. RIQIARDS 3243 CASCO CIROE VARIANCE - LOT AREA 6 lyinm LARRY SHAW 1940 CONCORDIA VARIANCE - SIDE YARD SETBACK (GARAGE) Dick Tenson, City A<hdnistrator Itmk Mjhicht Zoning Adninistrator July 2a, 1976 Earl MoF^ood - 1360 Vine Place Vari«ice • Garage Area #153 nr«i' Mr. Norwood infbnw me he is making this request for the purpose of storing m greening all his creational equipment such as boats, conpers, snou« vehicles. This soifids like a reasonable le^st as it Miuld eliminate open storage and possible coamlaints fran noignoors. Cwcil ippw^ » prevlow stmt setback variance the requl.ed 3S* to S' « Hovewer M, 1976, subject to delinquent taxes beiiu paid and the 4 lets DO comoined into one parcel. Im enelosin* a copy of M.. Noivood’s application for a conbination of the four lets as sitoltted with the West ilennepln Assessment District. PWNI.no COttlSilGN SBrriNO - Auinut 2. 1976 1"''®™®^ ‘J'® Coimlsslon and Mr. Labovsky, an interested I «"»rmpie..ting an approval of a variance of 176 aq. h^’b:5siJSb‘j„jr:Mnr',?3 tIKMCIL MITINC - 9, I97ft Approved. #153 July 15 19 7G FinMmg mnsim nusrrai lid eoBTnoraB mimiMUs* Miimimii S54i3 DM SIRt 1 RBIIT NAD inUXST PO A CBPJMl* CMIHID} ASSKSAHHT OH THB fOUVIRB DBOUBIP LMfDi Dlatrlct 38 - Plat 43120 - Parcel 4778 Saga Hill Revirad and District 33 - Plat 43120 - Parcel 4550 Saga Hill Revised and D1 strict 38 ■ Plat 43120 - Parcel 4625 Saga Hill Revised and District 18 - Plat 43120 - Parcal 4575 Saga Hill Revised TOWf, VILLaCI OR MSIRICT Orono - 30 fu OWNOI 1977 TAX YXAR // rMHS OP TAX PAYlk llhti /16l^ if Ir'^ TAX PAYOI*S AOaCU cotiniHD ctMOfT mors M 1 4. R OR H.ll.W BMP.UUfD BOIUURG NACHIIVX TOTAL PULL iiND 1RD£ TOTAL ASSCSSXD /V# . 1 H A .* joOO i PO-’’ f r" " ^ i V *» W <9^ y • . ' if'J'ff D 1340 Vina Pface Mound, MN 55364 June 1 5, 1989 City of Orono Planning Commission Re: 1420 Kevin Ray Norwocd’s application for a proposed tVYO-lot suDdivision: We have no oDjection to the above apolication. We would object to any. movement of the easement road as it now stands. We expect that there will be no costs or assessments to our property if this application is approved. ThanK you. Yours truly, ^ R. J. Cherba Pam Cherba 1540 vine Place Mound, MN 55364 June 15. 1989 City of Orono Planning Commi5 Re* # 1420 Kevin F.application tor a propo-sod two-lot ayddivi^lOP.: We have no objection to i. le above application. We would object to any movement of the easement road as it now stands. We expect that there will be no costs or assessments to our property if this application is approved. Thank you. Yours truly, R. J. Cherba Pam Cherba ‘s.. D 1340 vine Place Mound. MN 55364 June 16, 1989 Cityof Orono Planning Commission Re: # 1420 Kevin Ray Norwood’s application for a proposed tyvo-lot syiJdMSidn: We have no objection to the above application. We would object to any_ movement of the easement road as it now stands. We expect that ther. will be no costs or assessments to our property if this application is approved. Thank you. Pam Cherba 'S . ,i_ i 1340 vine Place Mound. MN 55364 June 15, 1989 CityofOrono Planning Commission Re: # 1420 Kevin Ray Norwood’s application for a proposed tyvo-iot sy!3div!:' iH: We have no objection to the above application. We would object to aoy. movement of the easement road as it now stands. We expect that there will be no costs or assessments to our property If this application is approved. Thank you. Yours tnil 'i-n-TVK __ aj.Cherba Pam Cherba im G 1340 Vim PtaM Mound, MN BBS Jum 16k 1S6B CHyefOrano rk • 14S0 Riy Noiwoodii ippHcMIon for • prapoBBd lN9HgtauMM!^^ VMitMMifiDoMictfonIsIhBiboMSiDDlicflHon. WiwouldobtatlD>nv moiMmnlaf Ifw MOMiMl read M It now Wmdi. VMisxDocMhoMtiofowflllMnoooWiarM ^^^0 ^0 M O^VRp W^P Wv i WPW ^^OWW ^OP^PV vw^d VP VP ^^PV ^d ▼wVvV P^^d V WP P^P^V^WW P^P I to our praporly If mil appIcMion It apfNOWKL Think you. ilj.ChitChirbi Pun ChMbi : trf*- i 1340 Vint PtaM Mound. MN 8Sai JuntlS, 18N (%«fOrano rk • 14a) KMin Rv Norwoodii ippHcMion for a propoaad tMHot auMMs!9!!; VdBtMMtnooaMontoawtbawtappHeMlon. Wtwouldctiac<lPaK.mownMrta« mttawnRntmatHaltniirrrTnl- pitoourpvopany VtNi appOetHon It apprawad. •Vlrf Thank you.zM v<‘” llJ.Charba PamCharba Mm Mayor GrabeK ( Orono Council Members City Administrator Bernhardson Dates Svbjaets **•**•»«» Michael P. Gaffron, Asst Planning & Zoning Adainistxator June 28, 1989 #1422 David sC Breitner, 2755 Casco Point Road - Variance - Resolution Boning District - LR-IC, Single family lakeshore residential, 1/2 acre, sewered Application - Request for hardcover variance to construct a new residence. Also requires lot width and lot area variance. List of Bsdiibita Exhibit A - Notice of Planning Commission Action of 6/22/89 Exhibit B - Proposed Resolution Exhibit C - Memo 6 Exhibits of 6/14/89 Discussion - Please review the memo and exhibits of June 14, 1989. This is a request for hardcover, lot width, and lot area variances to demolish the existing structure, which is in poor condition, and replace it with a new home. The hardcover variance is due to the applicant's wish to have an attached garage, while locating the house in line with the residences on either side. No average setback variance is necessary. Lot area is 0.37 acre in the half acre zone. Lot width is 60* where 100' in width is normally required. The hardcover request is for 34.261 in the 75-250' zone where only 25% is normally allowed. Planning Commission reviewed this application at their June 19th meeting and recommended 4-0 to approve, finding that: 1. Hardcover will decrease in the 0-75* zone (applicant is removing a sidewalk). 2. The existing non-conforming detached garage will be removed. Note that the applicant proposes to retain ;:he existing boat hous^ near the shoreline. 3. The house location is appropriate given the location of neighi^ring residences in relation to the lakeshore, hence the excess hardcover associated with the longer driveway is also appropriate. Zoning File #1422 J4fi»« 28, Aim^ 0A Page 2 of 2 4. The proposed new residence will remove a neighborhood eyes9Fp, i.e. an old summer cabin which has not been used as iime residence for at least 10 years. 5. Additional hardships include the fact that no additional land is availabler and that construction of a residence nearer the road in order to meet hardcover standards would not allow for lake views afforded to adjacent properties. Planning Commission recommended that approval be conditioned on the applicant providing a grading plan, with review and approval by « City Engineer before a building permit will be issued. Staff Re ndation - Staff recommends approval per the Planning Commission recommendation, per the attached resolution. A RBSOLOnON GRAMTHI6 VARIASCBS TO mnilCIPAL S0HIV6 CODB SBCnOM 10.22, SOBDIVISIOB 2 AMD SBCTIOB 10.25, SOBDIVISIOB 6 (B) FILE #1422 WHBRBAS, D^ld S, Breitner (hereinafter "the applicant") is the owner of the property located at 2755 Casco Point Road within the City of Orono (hereinafter "City") and legally described as follows: Lot 7, Auditor's Subdivision No. 265, Hennepin County, Minnesota (hereinafter "the property"); and tlHBRBAS, the applicant has applied to the City for a variance to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.22, Subdivision 2 and Section 10.25, Subdivision 6 (B) to permit the construction of a single family residence on a lot of 0.37 acre where 0.50 acre in area is normally required, and of lot width 60' where 100' in width is normally required, and comprising 34.26% hardcover in the 75-250' lakeshore setback zone where only 25% hardcover is normally allowed. BOW, THBBBPORB, BE IT RBSOLVBD by the City Council of Orono, Minnesota: PIMDIIIGS 1. This application was reviewed as Zoning File #1422. 2. The property is located in the LR-IC Single Family Lakeshore Residential Zoning District. 3. The Orono Planning Commission reviewed this application on June 19, 1989, and recommended approval of the proposed variances based upon the following findings: A) Applicant will be removing an existing sidewalk in the 0-75' zone, resulting in a decrease in hardcover in that zone. B) The existing non-conforming detached garage will be removed, benefitting the neighborhood. Page 1 of 5 C) The house location is appropriate given the location of neighboring residences in relation to the lakeshore# hence the excess hardcover associated with the longer driveway is also appropriate. D) The proposed new residence will remove a neighborhood eyesore, i.e. an old summer cabin which has not been uSed as a full-time residence for at least 10 years, E) Additional hardships include the fact that no additional land is available, and that construction of a residence nearer the road in order to meet hardcover standards would not allow applicant to enjoy lake views afforded to adjacent properties. 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 variances on the healthr safety and welfare of the community. 5. The City Council finds that the conditions existing on this property are peculiar to it and do not apply generally to other property in this zoning district? that granting the variances would not adversely affect traffic conditions# light, air nor pose a fire hazard or other danger to neighboring property; would not merely serve as a convenience to the 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 Comprel ensive Plan of the City. CONCLUSIONS, ORDER AND CONDITIONS Based upon one or more of the findings noted above, the Orono City Council hereby grants a variai.ce to the Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.22, Subdivision 2 and Section 10.25, Subdivision 6 (B) to permit the construction of a residence on a lot of 0.37 acres in area where 0.50 acres is normally required, and of lot width 60’ where 100' in lot width is normally required, and comprising 34.26% hardcover in the 75-250 ’ setback zone where only 25% hardcover is normally allowed, subject to the following conditions: Page 2 of 5 !• The existing garage and residence, including all existing sidewalks, shall be removed prior to commencement of construction of the new residence. 2. The applicant shall provide a grading plan to be reviewed and approved by the City Engineer prior to issuance of a building permit. w 3. The existing boat house, which comprises 250 square feet or 4.5% hardcover in the 0-75' zone, is allowed to remain subject to the pertinent zoning code requirements governing such non-conforming structures near the lakeshore. 4. Hardcover in the 0-75* zone shall not exceed 250 square feet or 4.5%. Hardcover in the 75-250* zone shall not exceed 3,580 square feet or 34.26%, as follows: House Deck Driveway & Entry Sidewalk TOTAL 2,150 s.f. 350 s.f. 1,080 s.f. 3,580 s.f. (34.26%) 5. Authorities granted by this resolution run with the property not with the applicant, but are permissive only and must be exercised by application for a building permit within one year of the date of Council approval, or this variance will expire on that date (June 26, 1990). 6. 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. 7. The undersigned applicant has read, understood and hereby agrees to the terms of this resolution and on behalf of himself, his heirs, successors and assigns, hereby agrees to the recording of this resolution in the chain of title of the property. Page 3 of 5 Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota at a regular meeting held on the 10th day of July# 1989. ^ ATTEST: Dorothy M. Hallin, City Clerk James R* Grabek^ Mayor Property Owner(a) - - - STATE OP MINNESOTA ) ) ss • COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this 10th day of July, 1989, by James R. Grabek 6 Dorothy M. Mayor 6 City Clerk of the City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City. Notary Public My Commission Expires Page 4 of 5 cm OP oRom P«0« Box 66 Crystal Bay# MN 55323 XCHIIRG PIU M. 1422 IIOTICB OP PLAHimNS COMMISSIOH ACTZOR 473-7357 Data of Notice: 6/22/89 David S* Braitner Box 33 Navarra# HN 55392 COPIES lOi TTPB OP APPLICATION: Variance DATS OP MBBTIN6: 6/19/89 VOTB: 4 For 0 Against Planning COBMission rarn—enda the following: Approval subject to conditions noted below ■OTBS AND SPECIAL CONDITIONS: 1. Naximuin 75-250' hardcover: 34.26% as proposed. 2. No additional 0-75* hardcover; remove 0-75' sidewalk; boathouse may remain# subject to non-conforming structure regulations. 3. Approval of lot width, lot area variances. 4. Remove existing detached garage. 5. Applicant to provide a grading plan to be reviewed and approved by City Engineer prior to issuance of a building permit. Applicant's next scheduled meeting is confirmed as: City Council Monday, July 10, 1989; meeting starts at 7:00p.m. If you desire certified copies of the official Planning Commission minutes, they are available from the City Recorder after review and approval by the Pl2mning Commission. Mayor Grabek & Orono Council Members Planning Commission Chairman Kelley Orono Planning Commission Members City Administrator Bernhardson / Prom: Michael P. Gaffron, Asst Planning & Zoning Administrator Date: June 14, 1989^ Subject: #1422 David S. Breitner, 2755 Casco Point Road - Variance - Public Hearing Zoning District - LR-IC, Single family lakeshore residential, 1/2 acre, sewered Application - Request for hardcover variance to construct a new residence. Also requires lot width and lot area variance. List of Exhibits Exhibit A - Exhibit B ~ Exhibit C - Exhibit D - Exhibit E - Exhibit F - Exhibit G - Exhibit H - Application Plat Map Property Owners List Survey with Staff Notes Highlighted Site Plan Hardcover Calculations j Proposed Building Plans Applicant's Letter of Request Dated 6/13/89 Pertinent Facts - 1. There is an existing residence structure on this property in poor condition, which is intended to be totally removed. The existing detached garage will also be removed. The existing boat house is not intended for removal. 2.When the existing house is removed, this lot reverts to a vacant lot status, therefore lot area and lot width variances are required as follows; Lot Area Lot Width Existing 0.37 ac Required 0.50 ac 100' Variance 0.13 ac (26%) 40* (40%) 3.The applicant proposes to construct a new house, nearer the lake but still meeting the average setback requirement. The street setback, lakeshore setback, and side setback requirements will all be met with the proposed residence. Applicant proposed to construct an attached 3-stall garage, which requires additional driveway. Applicant is requesting a hardcover variance, as follows: Existing 0-75* 75-250* 430 s.f. (7.75%) 2,600 s.f. (24.88%) Allowed 0% 25% Proposed 250 s.f. (4.5%) 3,580 s.f. (34.26%) Variance 4.5% 9.26% Zoning File #1422 June 15, 1989 Page 2 of 3 4. This lot is relatively high compared to the Peterson property to the immediate north. There is r. 3-4 high concrete retaining wall which from the survey and staff s site inspection*appears to be mostly on the Peterson property. The new residence will be approximately 4 further back from the lot line tuan the existing residence, hence there should be adequate room for applicant to do the necessary grading work to protect the Peterson property rom run-off. A detailed grading plan should be required to be submitted and reviewed by the City Engineer prior to issuance of a building permit. However, staff would note that the house elevations (Exhibit G) indicate only minor overall grade changes are anticipated. The proposed house generally is designed to fit the existing contours of the lot. Discussion - Please review the applicant’s letter of request attached as Exhibit H. This lot is somewhat smaller than lots in tne immediate vacinity, but it is typical of many similar lakeshore lots on Casco Point. Aoplicant correctly notes that the Putnam gazebo to the immediate south was recently granted an average lakeshore setback variance anticipating that when Breitner s was ^ new house would be moved forward to conform with lakeshore setbacks in the neighborhood. A® ® ®°n®®<J"®"®®',®"y garage proposed by the applicant will require additional hard cover. Note that the Putnam property was ultimately granted variances to allow 40.2% hardcover in the 75-250' zone. In exchange for alditional hardcover in the '75-250' zone, applicant is proposing to remove approximately ISO s. . sidewalk in the 0-75' zone. However applicant ^®®^® existing boat house is in such good condition that he woul prefer to not remove it. He notes that one of the reaso^ns that he was attracted to the property was because of the boat house. Finally, note that although applicant has not proposed a back-up apron with the driveway, there is gravel area in front of the existing garage, between the garage and paved portion of Casco Point Road. Applicant could use this area^as a back-up aprort if necessary. The Public Works Director notes he would probably approve development of a back-up apron in the right-of-way, but also would certainly approve the gravel area being reverted to lawn by the homeowner. Zoning File #1422 June 15, 1989 Page 3 of 3 Staff Recr— nndation - If Planning Commission feels that the proposed site plan is appropriate, a recommeiySation for variance approval could make the following findings: 1. Hardcover will decrease in the 0-75* zone. 2. The existing non-conforming detached garage will be removed. 3. The house location is appropriate given the location of neighboring residences in relation tc the lakeshore, hence the excess hardcover associated with the longer driveway is also appropriate. 4. The proposed new residence will remove a neighborhood eyesore, i.e. an old summer cabin which has not br »n used as a full-time residence for at least 10 years. 5. Additional hardships include the fact that no additional land is available, and that construction of a residence nearer the road in order to meet hardcover standards would not allow for lake views afforded to adjacent properties. Appropriate conditions of approval would include: 1. Removal of existing garage and residence including all existing sidewalks. 2. Applicant to provide a grading plan to be reviewed and approved by the City Engineer prior to issuance of a building permit. 3. Optionally, Planning Commission should address whether a back-up apron must be provided. CITY OP OROW> - AP^CA«OT Initial Application TS® 515*110 ($50.00 per each additional variance) Renewal Variance Fee $75.00 (no change from original application) ter-the-Fact Fees (Double application fee) Keceipc- c-i zi .;c. rorry -I kxit TL «»Vl/ * Y0:i PROPERTY LOCATIOH Site Address Ca€0^ T^/k)T ------------------------ ■■ Property Identification Number (P.I.D.) ^/1 93>3 %30C>QSl. Please check one - Property ____ abstract or uv\‘* >v- •r “ vw, • torrens? Attach legal description to application if not included on required survey. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ___ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Phone (home) Q-71^77 OSAPPLICANT Name $•Phone (work) S>3l~)l^^ 1^^ $3_ _ _ __ _ _ _ _Citvt /vl-Aoa-gPC. Zip: SS~^£^ Phone (home)_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Address:_ _ _ _ _ _ GWNER (if different than applicant) Name _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Phone (work) Address:City:Zip:, Date Property Acquired (oil (month/year) I (do) (do^^t) also own the adjacent parcels of land. PRESENT USE OP PROPERTY D^oaon^ Zonlna District o-»-«eon^- n.csa of Prooertv (Residential ^ Other (specify) 1 > nri TTifTlT r~i1T OO U IM kl Estimated Construction Cost $^__________ M__________: in *uiitsTW r ------ VARIANCES RBQOIRBD _____ Lot Area Setback Variances ( Other _____________ X Lot Width Front X Hardcover Side Rear) HARDSHIPDescribe undue hardship or Practical dimculty resulting ^ co.pU.nb. wi« REQUIRED SUBMITTALS certilied P^fptrty'Owner? List of owners within ISO- (you must obtain this list from Hennepin County Department of Finance A-603 Govt Center Stamped,’'legal sized envelopes (#10) pre-addressed to each of the names on the^above list with no return address (use address labels ctr\1f^%"att?f ?u?v?;"in?l?^^^^^^^ calculations as required. Topographic survey (existing and proposed elevations) if any changes in existing grade are proposed. Plat Map (obtained with property owners list). n of Iran addendum to this application^ please attach_a^ separate list of 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7.any other persons you wish 8. Additional items as may be requested by Th?Applicant and Property Owner must sign remember that your variance application is not complete information has not been included. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ CertIfloatlon’brzonInrDepartment that Variance Application is complete. Zoning Official's Signature,Date ^^f'a^^^Itan^^^by agrees to provide all information required or requested by the Zoning Administrator, agrees to pay all unuS expeLes incurred in review of this A^r the information supplied is true and correct to the best of his/her knowledge Applicant's Signature Date slzskl aOcowledges and agrees to this application and authlrizes reason®‘>l« property by City staff, ^?°"®“ltants, agents. Commission members, and Council members for p p tion and verification, of this request Owner's Signature n or tnis request. _ _ _ _ _ _ Date S/^S/kl ADDlicant must have all submittals into the City offices 25 Plaining Commission Meeting. Planning Commission «®etings are held on the thfr^Monday of each month. Applicants must be all scheduled review meetings of the Planning Commission and Council. If ®PP . inIbL to attend a scheduled meeting, please ma)ce “^"^ements to have _an authorized agent attend in your place and to advise the Build g Office of this change prior to the meeting. ... desK» O M ^ a • ui Ik o >- K 01 UJ i^s M O Ui tU > <^ eg u (k OL < u) d U (k d Ui UI a _ eg in Ui Ui lO oe « Q (/)r. 4 < St d CO eg d d O' & M O u u eg r g_S CO S O fc°5 _Kt a M o m eg ck 01 a u) ~ Ui ID za o d p ^ eg K_______ S^uiuil?}^ co eg d d < Kt o Ui Ui eg X C\? c\? §h u. S12 gi Ck Ui E OCZ a. Sd s-* Ui o t-^ DC Ui Kt O _ Ui eg (j z k- Ck rlSl^OZ • ^ ^ 5O Ui Z U k- lo o (A c/> eg z IKCB UI k§S5 e t- < a a ag-‘ju5ESd Z M UI ?§-|2 4 oe d o Z 7 “s-2; O < Z U k- UiU.ll. M 01: O O oe ^ a o 3 CK a o2d< oe < lu O' § O d S dd < O'“s K> O t- t Weg Ck Ui Z UI MO Z d ro eg (k 3 Z2 ^ |Ad U| Kt O Ui Ui O eg ij u u Ck rlSSSozduckaj^t < < < < aszig rI.lSi“-OZ 1 S a < < o u t-~s55..a Sui-iS*^!; •o z UI rg kv «• u g> >sssi^i « eg d rv d M o CK K eg z CK ^ Osm IV ^ LU uj oeiisi < > S< lUi|li l|li c C-c c c c sl| - -S' ; 9 — 4^ Z U « «(A o o o 4 Qo in in 04 a; Qj > c (- 4^ 3 —* t/1 (Uu»«_ ca o -sz° U 1. (U o o m VO C\J o z: <o 4-J c o o- q; V c: - c > — - S oo - 3 >»in c t/1 3 o u o o l4-j C 3 C- 3 0> ■c c c- q; = %/Q HARDCOVER CALCULATION WORKSH^;_J*^ /] SETBACK ZONE: (CIRCLE ONE) 0-75' Existing Hardcover in Zone ■ ■ ' • "i A. House B. Garage c. Driveway D.. Sidewalk E. Patio/ Deck F.Landscape AREAS UNDERLAIN BY : . PLASTIC SHEETING G. Other 7c Y s.R. LENGTH /O.O WIDTH X J 63 7.7 /-?. <P t 5Z S.F. S.F.'^ S.F. S.F. iSfl Z9. / 3 V ? s.R. - X - X S.F. .y— X ^/s 3 7 zj-y A. V -TZ 9^ zz V<2> z /?.p # *> X' j?/x X _______ X X X _ S.F. _ S.F. _ S.F. S.F. S.F. Total Hardcover in Zone Total Property A rea in Zone ^TT\ vinn. JJj£±Jz.p. |TJ /a,9sa s.p. HARDCOVER CALCULATION WORKSHEE SETBACK ZONE: (CIRCLE OME) Existing Hardcover in Zone 75-2^' A. House /2-Z s 23a-*- c = LENGTH WIDTH y 3 y #. 3 c. c. y SB c c Y 3 c. cr B.Garage V 3 fi - P. c.Driveway y s Q - c. y 3 Q - p. 0.Sidewalk 3 3 y 3 . P - E. y 3 S. P.Patio / Deck y 2 ,5?.P. F.Landscape X s 5. P-AREAS UNDERLAIN BY X P. P.PLASTIC SHEETING X 3 P.P. X P. P. G. Other X 3 S.F. Total Hardcover in Zone Total Property Area in Zone o S.P. S.F.B B X 100 =• v- % II 1 it 0</f ■ ■v^' .'■'^#r- W ' • ’ # :;r ^aiSa.:Mc:'^£s&&=a!fc p ■ . Box 33jiti, .. ■ Navarre/ MN 55392 lii J*™ 13, 1989 City of Orono P.O. Box 66 ‘ Crystal Bay, MN 55323 ■:■■/ .. '. ATTENTION: Mr. Mike r.iimr'. SUBJECT: Variance Apfjlication Lor Property lecateo rat 2755 Casco Point Road Dear Mike: It was a pleeisure ireetiny with you in your office the ?thcr day re^ardiiiy Uie adxjve property and variance application. As yjj arc a^are, nr^' wif'^ and I are cont«rplatinq the purchase of the lot mentivnec at the above property site; however/ we are incurrinn some problems with respect to the hardcover variance situation on t'asco Poir\t. We would like very much to live on Casco Point; however, due to some of the ro:!alr3tiono in the area/ it is making it difficult for us to plan our future home on tins itt, dr.clo''.?d you will find a summary of our thoughts, along with our objective outline ter tie Planning Commission and Orono City Council. Please review this letter closely and forward to your associates for their review as well. As indicated above, my wife and I are very excited about the thought of living on Casco Point in Orono, Minnesota. It is our objective to build an average-size house of approximately 2,8U0 square feet on this location with am attached garage. The size of this house will be a’^^erage; however/ the quality of the contruction will be ab-)ve average/ as we are awa»'e of the exclusivity of Casco Point. We are aware of the setback requirements and variances needed for our house/ and we would like ''«=»uy much to comply one hundred percent with the City of Orono requirements. However/ I believe that all of the setbacks and requirements have been adhered to, except for the hardcover variance which we are applying for. There are several proL'lems that arise when contemplating new construction on the above mentioned lot. As you are aware, the lot is only 60 feet wide at the building site, and the square footage of the lot in which to build on contains aK>roximately 10,450 square feet of buildaUaie area- (This excludes the 0-75 foot setback.) X- Page Two City of Orono Hr. Mike Gaffron June 13# 1989 therefore neceeaitating the forward movement of our contemplated dwelling. TtM fon«td Bcv«nwt mentionea In the above paragraph greatly «»« hardcover surface due primarily to the hardcover generated by ^ ^ivewa^ We have attenpted to propose a dwelling of similar size to the house ^ garage that sit on the property. We have looked at ^tematives with regards to detaching the garage at this location. to the lot# we would not be able to turn our garage sideways and facilitate a driveway. If we were to detach the garage and face Casco i^int Road# we would need to adhere to the 35-foot setback rec^rement# incurring practically tM same hardcover as originally proposed. In addition# if the garage weret» beocoie detached from the house by means of new construction# we would inc» loss of additional large adult trees on this lot. We would like to save all of the trees surrounding the home to preserve its natural beauty. The advantages to approving our hardcover variance are several. ^ proposing a new house in an exclusive area which contains custom quality building. We are not trying to oversize the hou^ on this lot# and conforming to all other setbacks with regards to side setback# and sto^ setback. The driveway# which is creating conceit for the hardc^ variance, slopes away from the lake# therefore not creating a problmn. In addition# we are proposing to clean up the area coitfiderably on the eyesore that it has been in recent years. ^ are propose a horaTuit will fit in the area, add to the val« of the homes SS^ing our property# and conform to all requirements for the City of Orono. In suroacy/ w. are wiUing to confonn to all the ^inanoea. Me are to Srtvdth the City of Orono within reason to^ld » on this property with an attached garage. I believe that oar proposal ^ anoiicatlon has been made in a fair and reasonable mnner> and we are fcing ^rything poasible to confonn to all ordinances. Me would lilce to build w houSb^^T as possible; therefore, we are requesting a yatiaiw» to harttover pec our application. In addition. « are 0-75 setback from the lake in the amount of 180 square feet to help reduce runoff into the lake. I am looking forward to your favorable response. David S. Breitner MnuRnM It Dmtmt Mayor Grabok c Orono Council Mambara City Adniniotrator Barnhardson ^ JUL16I989Nichaal P« Gaffron^ Asat Planning A Zoning Adainiatrator July 7, 1M9 if MONf Slibjaett Ordinanea Aaandaantr Ovaraiiad Aecaaaory Structuraa Hat of Mahlbita Exhibit A - Exhibit B - Exhibit C - Exhibit 0 •• Exhibit E - Dlscmaaioo - Propoaad Ordinanea Mano A Prior Ordinanea Draft# 5/16/A9 Skatchaa of Varioua Lot Siiaa# Indicating Bff'aot of Varioua Dagraaa of Davalopaiant Study of Davalopad Raaidantial Lot Siiaa Tabla# Aecaaaory Structura Raatrietiona par Draft Ordinanea Plaaaa raviaw tha avcachad ordinanea draft# Exhibit A. Thia itaa waa raviawad by tha Council briefly in May# and tablad pending further "tweaking” by ataff. Staff ia ralatiwoly eoaifortabla with thia draft# although Council ahould be aware of tha aignificanca of certain aactiona* A brief aynopaia of tha ordinance followai 1« Ovaraiaad Aecaaaory Structura defined aa having footprlfsi*^ area over 1#000 a.f. 2u 9o7i.pl.? courta# paddocka or aranaa# and awiraing poola over l#dOO a«f» in area# are not conaidarad aa ovaraiaad aecaaaory atructuraa but are aubjact to principal atruotura aatbacka and cannot be laaa than 30* fron any lot line nor between tha front lot line and tha houaa. 3. Tha thraahold for defining an ovaraiaad aecaaaory atructura waa raviaad back to tha original 1#000 a.f* liait. Ovaraiaad aecaaaory atructuraa are not allowed on any lot aaallar than 2«00 acraa* 5« Tha table allowa larger ovaraiaad atructuraa aa lot aiaa inoraaaaa* 6. All parwittad ovaraiaad aecaaaory atructuraa are aubjact to a written covenant with tha City that doaa tha followings A) If a aubdiviaion occura# tha atructura nuat atay on a lot with a principal atructura. If it doaan'tr tha Council could grant a abort grace period in which to conatruct a principal atructura# or could require that tha ovaraiaad aecaaaory building be raiiovad. July 1, 1989 Page 2 0f3»* occurs, the lot area required to ^accommodate that oversized structure must be retained. C) Likewise, the required oversized accessory structure setbacks must be retained. Staff anticipates a standard format covenant would be drafted, and its execution required prior to building permit issuance. 7. Accessory buildings of any size, a stables, cannot exceed the height of th or he higher than 30'. ling barns and cipal building 8. Lot coverage of all lots less than 2 acres in total area is limited to 15% of the lot area. Since the intent of the lot coverage ordinance is to limit visual density, staff would recommend that any enclosed, roofed structure over 6* in height above grade should be considered as lot coverage. Council should consider whether tennis courts with opaque or non-opaque fencing, at a height of typically 12', should be considered in lot coverage calculations. 9. At least one Councilmember was concerned with relatively large (bu^ oversized) accessory structures being only 10' from 1 .ines. The proposed ordinance would require a 15* setback ror non-oversized accessory structures greater than 750 s.f. footprint area. Staff questivas whether this section is strictly necessary or whether it will just lead to confusion. 10. Barns, stables and greenhouses are no longer exempt from the 1,000 s.f. floor area restriction. Barns, stables and greenhouses will be treated like any other oversized accessory building when they exceed 1,000 s.f. Additional Exhibits - Exhibits C are sketches of typical lots in the various zones, showing various degrees of development and allowing CcunciImembers to better visualize the setback restrictions required by the proposed ordinance. Exhibit D is a table indicating standards contained in the proposed ordinance. Oversized Accessory Structures July 7r 1989 Page 3 of 3 Exhibit E is a study of lot sizes in Orono's various zoning districts. This information is partially from the 1983 Common Ownership Study, and partially from a recent study conducted by staff. The significance of the information here is that in the 1/2 and 1 acre zones, 2/3 of the existing developed lots are substandard for their respective zoning districts. For the most part, these zones are already subject to hardcover regulations, and the 15% lot coverage standard will further restrict development on many of the smaller properties. In the 2-acre zones, about 1/4 of the substandard lots have been sewered. However, it is significant to note that of 1,100 developed properties in the 2-acre zones, 410 or 37% are less than 2 acres in area. On these properties, and even some of the 2 acre properties, forcing tennis courts to meet principal structure setbacks will have an effect on limiting potential drainfield sites. Staff suggests that disallowing tennis courts from required side or rear yard areas may work at cross purposes with our intent of keeping alternate drainfield sites available on unsewered properties. Staff Recommendation - Staff would recommend that Council spend some time discussing the following issues, and direct staff to make any necessary revisions for final ordinance adoption; 1. Should tennis courts be included in a lot coverage calculation, dependent upon degree of opaqueness? 2. Should tennis courts be subject to principal structure setbacks in side and rear yard or is something less than that acceptable? 3. Should 750-1,000 s.f, structures be 15* from the lot line or only 10*? 4. Is there any reason why barns, stables, and greenhou-ies should not be subject to the same requirements as other accessory structures? 5. Any other concerns? ORDINANCE f , SECOND SERIES AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ORONO MUNICIPAL CODE BY REGULATING THE LOCATION, AREA, AND HEIGHT OP LARGE ACCESSORY STRUCTURES The City Council of Orono ordains as follows: SECTION 1. Chapter 10 of the Municipal Code of Orono is hereby eunended by repealing Section 10.03, Subdivision 9 (C) and adding a new Section 10.03, Subdivision 9 (C) to read as follows: C. Area Restrictions. In all "R" districts no accessory building shall exceed 1,000 square feet of footprint area except that accessory structures in excess of 1,000 square feet will be allowed under the following conditions; Not more than one Oversized Accessory Structure AS) shall be permitted on any property. An "Oversized Accessory Structure” is defined as an accessory structure of footprint area in excess of 1,000 square feet, except that the following non-roofed accessory structures which exceed 1,000 s f. footprint area aie net considered as "Oversize Accessory Structui es"", “Lut are subject to the special setback reitrict-ons of Section 10.03, Subdivision 14 (D): - Tennis courts - Pools (when pool basin structure, excluding grade level i^atios, is greater than 1,000 s.f.) - Paddocks or arenas 2. Oversized Accessory Structures are regulated by the following table: Maximum Allowed Total of All Accessory Structure Footprint Areas Lot Area Footprint. Area on a Property Maximum Individual Accessory Structure Footprint. Area 0-1.99 acre 1,000 s.f.2,000 s.f. 2.00-3.00 acre 1,200 s. f .2,400 s.f. 3.01-3.50 acre 1,400 s.f.2,800 s.f. 3.51-4.00 acre 1,600 s.f.3,200 s.f. 4.01-4.50 acre 1,800 s.f.3,600 s.f. 4.51-5.00 acre 2,000 s.f.4.000 s.f. 5.01-6.00 acre 2,200 s.f.4,400 s.f. 6.01-7.00 acre 2,400 s.f.4,800 s.f. 7.01-8.00 acre 2,600 s.f.5,200 s.f. 8.01-S.00 acre 2,800 s.f.5,600 s.f 9.01 acre or more 3,000 s.f.6,000 s.f 3. Any Oversize Accessory Structure shall to the following conditions: Page 1 of 4 a) No such accessory structure shall be located within a required yard area (principal structure setbacks must be met). Further, no such structure shall be nearer the front lot line than the front line of the principal residence on the property, and no such accessory structure shall be located less than 30* from the side or rear lot line regardless whether less strict principal structure setbacks apply. b) The maximum height for such accessory structure shall be 30* or the defined height of the principal residence structure on the property, whichever is less. c) Such structure shall be allowed only when the property owner agrees and covenants in writing with the City as follows: i. No future subdivision will be approved that places the structure within a lot that has no principal structure, except that the City in its subdivision approval may grant a finite time period in which the oversized accessory structure may remain without a principal structure, in order that a principal structure may be constructed. At the end of this time period the oversized accessory structure must be removed if no principal structure has been constructed. ii. If the property is subdivided, th® oversize accessory structure and princip' structure will be located together withii lot that meets the minimum lot area require ment for the given size of accessory building. iii. In subdivision approval, the setback required for the oversize accessory structure as defined herein shall remain. Such covenant shall be binding on current and future property owners and shall be filed in the chain of title of the property. SECTION 2. Chapter 10 of the Municipal Code of Orono is further amended by revising Section 10.03, Subdivision 9 (B) as follows; B. Height Restrictions. No accessory building in the **R** District shall exceed the height of the principal building, except barns or atabies which shaii be subject to the approval of the eoanciir nor sha11 an accessory building exceed 30 feet in height. Page 2 of 4 SECTION 3. Chapter 10 of the Municipal Code of Orono is further amended by adding Section 10.03, Subdivisions 14 (C) & (D) as follows: C. Lot Coverage. In all zoning districts, for all lots of 0-1.99 acre in total area, the total combined footprint areas of all principal and accessory structures shall not exceed 15% of the lot area. Define what structures are included. D. Tennis courts, pools, and paddocks or arenas, when such accessory structures exceed 1,000 s.f. footprint area, shall be subject to the following special setback restrictions; Front - 30* minimum and not within the required front yard nor between the front lot line and the principal structure on the property Side - 30* minimum and not within the required sido yarc area Rear - 30* minimum and not within the required rear yard area SECTION 4. Chapter 10 of the Municipal Code of Orono is hereby amended by adding Section 10.03, Subdivision 9 (E) as follows: E. Setbacks. Accessory structures in excess of 750 square feet footprint area but not exceeding 1,000 square feet footprint area shall be located at least 15 feet from any lot line. SECTION 5. Chapter 10 of the Municipal Code of Orono is hereby amended by revising Section 10.20, Subdivision 3 (E) as follows: Subd. 3. Conditional Uses. Within any **R-1A** One Family Residential District, no structure or land shall be used for the following uses except by conditional use permit; E. Greenhouses. Commercial greenhouses provided all outside storage is fenced in such a manner so as to screen the stored material from view when observed from the public street or adjoining lot. Commercial greenhouse structures sha 11 not be located in a required yard area, and are subject further to the genera 1 zoning code requirements pertaining to accessory structures. SECTION 6. Adoption and Publication. This ordinance shall be effective upon adoption, and a short summary shall be published in the Laker and Pioneer newspapers. Page 3 of 4 Adopted by the City Council of Orono on this _ _ _ _, 1989, by a vcte of ayes and _ _ nays* day of Dorothy M. Haliin, City Clerk James R. Grabek, Mayor Page 4 of 4 Froax Mayor Grabek & Orono Council Members City Administrator Bernhardson Michael P. Gaffron, Asst Planning & Zoning Administrator DateI May 16r 1989 Subject: Ordinance Amendment^ Oversized Accessory Structures Introduction - In the spring of 1987, Council directed the Planning Commission to review the accessory structures section of the zoning code in relation to oversized accessory structures. The initial review occurred at a public hearing held Monday, July 20, 1987. The public hearing notice indicated the review would be for a proposed eunendment to establish performance standards for the location, floor area, and height of accessory structures exceeding 1,000 square feet in floor area as a condi* onal use. There were no public comments at the ^blic hearing, and the hearing was closed. Further discussions by the Planning Commission were held on December 1, 1987; February 25, 1988; May 18, 1988; July 6, 1988; and May 1, 1989. Those discussions resulted in a recommended ordinance amendment attached hereto as Exhibit A. Discussion - The Planning Commission concluded that a conditional use permit is not the appropriate approach to oversized accessory structures, and instead set up performance standards for oversized accessory structures as a permitted accessory use._ The following list summarizes the Planning Commission recommended ordinance revisions: 1. Defined "oversized accessory structure" as having a footprint area greater than 1,040 square feet. 2. Allowed as a permitted use, one (1) oversized accessory structure per property. 3. As lot size increases, the maximum allowed oversized accessory structure size could increase. 4. Likewise, as lot size increases, the total combined footprint area of all accessory structures on a property can increase. 5. Excluded poolsr tennis courts, paddocks, barns, stables and greenhouses from being subject to the "size versus lot area" requirement (also see #9 below). Ordinance Amendmentr Oversized Accessory Structures May 16r 1989 Page 2 of 2 6. Al} oversized accessory structures must meet principal structure setbacksr and in no case can be less than 30* from the side or rear lot line, and must be behind the front line of the house. 7. Oversized accessory structures are subject to the current "30*maximum/no higher than principal residence" standard. 8. All permitted oversized accessory structures are subject to a written covenant with the City that does the following: A) If a subdivision occurs, the structure must stay on a lot with a principal structure. If it doesn*t, the Council could grant a short grace period in which to construct a principal structure, or could require that the oversized accessory building be removed. B) If a subdivision occurs, the lot area required to accommodate that oversized structure must be retained. C) Likewise, the required oversized accessory structure setbacks must be retained. Staff anticipates a standard format covenant would be drafted, and its execution required prior to building permit issuance. 9. Non-roofed oversized accessory structures such as tennis courts, etc. would continue to be allowed, out would be required to meet principal structure setbacks as well as hardcover requirements where applicable. 10. All lots less than 2 acres in area are limited to 15% lot coverc'ge by structures, not including tenis courts, pools, and other non-covered structures. Staff Recommendation - Staff recommends approval of the proposed ordinance as recommended by the Planning Commission. C Ot/'r^UL. IL. ORDINANCE I r SECOND SERIES AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ORONO MUNICIPAL CODE BY ALLOiaNG OVERSIZE ACCESSORY STRUCTURES WHICH MEET SPECIFIC PERFORMANCE STANDARDS The City Council of Orono ordains as follows: SECTION 1. Chapter 10 of the Municipal Code of Orono is hereby amended by repealing Section 10.03# Subdivision 9 (C) and adding a new Section 10.03# Subdivision 9 (C) to read as follows: C. Area Restrictions. In all "R" districts no accessory building shall exceed 1#040 square feet of footprint area except that accessory structures in excess of 1#040 square feet will be allowed under the following conditions: 1. Not more than one oversized accessory structure shall be permitted on any property. An "oversized accessory structure" is defined as an accessory structure of footprint area in excess of •1#040 square feet. f 2. Oversized accessory structures are regulated by the following table: Lot Area Maximum Individual Accessory Structure Footprint Area Maximum Total of Accessory Structure Footprints Areas 0-1.99 acre 1,040 s. f.2#O0O s.f. 2.00-3.00 acre 1#200 s.f.2#400 s.f. 3.01-3.50 acre 1#400 s. f .2#0OO s.f. 3.51-4.00 acre 1#600 s.f.3#200 s.f. 4.01-4.50 acre 1#0OO s.f.3#600 s.f. 4.51-5.00 acre 2#000 s.f.4#000 s.f. 5.01-6.00 acre 2#200 s.f.4#400 s.f. 6.01-7.00 acre 2#400 s.f.4#0OO s.f. 7.01-0.00 acre 2#600 s.f.5#200 s.f. 0.01-9.00 acre 2#0OO s.f.5#600 s.f. 9.01 acre or more 3#000 s.f.6#000 s.f. Structures specifically excluded from being regulated by these- restrictions^/include; uncovered arenas or paddocks; Na) b) c) d) e) uncovered swimming pools; uncovered tennis courts; stables; / barns; Page 1 of 3 f) greenhouses; 3. Any oversize accessory structure shall be subject to the following conditions: a) No such accessory structure shall be located within a required yard area (principal structure setbacks must be met). Further, no such structure shall be nearer the front lot line than the front line of the principal residence on the property, and no such accessory structure shall be located less than 30* from the side or rear lot line regardless whether less strict principal structure setbacks apply. b) The maximum height for such accessory structure shall be 30* or the defined height of the principal residence structure on the property, whichever is less. c) Such structure shall be allowed only when the property owner agrees and covenants in writing with the City as follows: i. No future subdivision will be approved that places the structure within a lot that has no principal structure, except that the City in its subdivision approval may grant a finite time period in which the oversized accessory structure may remain without a principal structure, in order that a principal structure may be constructed. At the end of this time period the oversized accessory structure must be removed if no principal structure has been constructed. ii. If the property is subdivided, the oversize accessory structure and principal structure will be located together within a lot that meets the minimum lot area require ment for the given size of accessory building. iii. In subdivision approval, the setback required for the oversize accessory structure as defined herein shall remain. Such covenant shall be binding cji current and future property owners and shall be filed in the chain of title of the property. Page 2 of 3 4. Non-roofed accessory structures such as tennis courts, private swimming pools, and paddocks, which exceed 1,040 square feet in area shall not be located in any required yard as defined for each zoning district. SECTION 2- Chapter 10 nf the Municipal Code of Orono is further amended by adding Section 10.03, Subdivision 14 (C) as follows: C. Lot Coverage. In all zoning districts, for all lots of 0-1.99 acre in total area, the total combined footprint areas of all principal and accessory structures shall not exceed 15% of the lot area. Sheds and other small buildingsAj-o vj. cj.c xot area. aneas ana orner small Duiiaings ^ ^ less than 120 square feet footprint area shall not be included in calculation of total accessory structure foot-'^^ print areas. C . SECTION 3. Adoption and Publication. This ordinance shall be effective upon adoption, and a short summary shall be published in the Laker and Pioneer newspapers. ^ Np^dopted by the City Council of Orono on this _______f 1989, by a vote of ___ ayes and ___ nays. day of Dorothy M. Hallin, City Clerk James P. Grabek, Mayor Page 3 of 3 < - o o % J O ■< V wo >2/ o O ts^ d II II if twy .1 u) j; ‘4' T J iO t.» 0 <-1’. tS.lo &i10 J o •<S>A* £j o J i< {k 5 c> <1 1)ir< <3 »»\A <3. di ■<ci s ’St 1 V) ct i< O i -a <. g *0 ca }- U) >s •3 cff !a 7- < 01 \/> d) cfl<* C \T. >- 2 v5 5: 1 • ' ____:---------------------------------- 1 1 ■ 1 ■-! ■'-•I -i- .’1 1 ' J ° 1 1 ,3^/f ^ 1 VAr I J I b t/*< <J >4 Z3 <o a 2 2 '5 k /Q % X I 0 1% I .% ov/l in \ S> CV. A u. '>• " os o. > «i 3 i 4 o T o ci It -< 0- o O H- >• 3o -X 0 M y.u Sa 0 5 <i -A V-a U) f>4 o<'. V’l c. 'W. 4^1 *v1 a' r- 00 Vv- O § —i cr C/I 0 2 <1 4 3 I SV U oa O V# V l- J J O ^ 2 4 . -A I 05 t£ ‘ C\J i CJ % f^ C 5f I 1 vj V S o >1 1 n d \ Iv:1 4‘•X-,1 8 . A^. ~~W'i»tfueioPpc^ w« 1^- 1 R 2C. n%\ 1 II 1 ' -------- ^ bIJ ijtc. . *^.oMirs _ /tM A /1M S ^ S *7 6»%') '"7llJ tamr^ —---------------- ---- ---- # __t4»r ai» --*e.o»jMir«rMC* _ik_^X*^ s*tr ./mil— ____ ^"^c^CjoPirh . s«cvnM>4W>t JSila.iUc-jA iAis»iifwirt*-o ------lAAV- -r>—s^A T /^o»rr> (7v.') 8S" (aa*/0 6>7 ^loovO 7JI (WvT) 2 S" (gfcyQ iri' 21 (XV-/.') /»o ^•yO ^ 0 —y^) ■ (stv^ /sn ___ ^SO//oon) . (p(#0 ({,%%-) Z-l9_ I •/.'>,, —# t)e<«ctc^h ------It , iPo/ajtj :_—-r •; U»I- *0 - /A/ i Ac << 4-^4 C ^ "if Pigviru>(>t^ 4ot3 -♦e^r.i^.At o«4^J — /A/ / 4e 2.oMtfS^ /O LWZi A<>0»^_ i)i\/. ^»n: aaif' -f Ac 1»—M ^«^6rr»ODA*^____ _30*A Of- ucrr\ /aJ_2-.4«- V- 2 t it II a U1 a U l ^1 w Vl o ^V-> ^^5 A'A «ji £ s^t ^'i ^ Ot f ^v5> V- © t-*"- O 0 r~1o 0 oo O \>1 G h M', o8 ^1r cil N Cl cJ-i & @ o O *=+■ o 8 0@ $y t- ^o © J i ® I - ^ o rO '\ji 2o '-k V) oo A <- w 4 W P <L X o ^ 2 3 25 ^ 3 5 Vi; I ^ 2<w<r t; • 4. ^ l- §^3!r 0, Q uTl ^ § 0 2 2i 3 t1 \5 2 AJ W J ^ Si Vu W I nJ V- Q 'yi O <0 o k/1 <0 nr- nr- Vl w J- Ni O 5 *-^ S'o U> j I ? 2. <LZ ^ ^ o J < u d I 0 <1 > 3a. I i e u o J •7-7-8 2. i/1 u. 1 G 0 @0 Mark E. Bernhardson, City Administrator Fron:John R. Gerhardson, Public Works Director Date:July 7, 1989 JUL10I9S9 cuvoFawm J Subject; Bid Presentation Highway 12 Sewer & Water On Friday, June 30, 1989, the City of Orono received and opened bids for sanitary sewer and water construction on Highway 12 between Brown Road North to Old Crystal Bay Road. Attached for your review only at th5time is a tabulation of the five lowest bids. It is our intent to be prepared to recommend bid award at the July 24, 1989 Council meeting. Recommendation ~ To accept the bids as presented for sanitary sewer and water construction on Highway 12 between Brown Road North and Old Crystal Bay Road. Proposed Motion - Moved by_ _, seconded by _ _, to accept the bids as presented for sanitary sewer and water construction on Highway 12 between Brown Road North and Old Crystal Bay Road* Ayes____, nays____, To: Mayor Grabek & Orono Council Memners From: Mark E. Bernhardscn, City Administrator Forwarded recommending approval. ■4- I I § C 8888888888888 IMSSsSSSgSSs l!:i!i8SSR88R8888 2SS5RiSSiR “gBg5 8888888888888 g j( s g s i i i i § § S s • jC kI •- • jji « SSeSC!:}58S8888 * 8888888888888 SiS§gg|8g9gSg r»OkK.M^N«-OA^<V 8888888888888 Stt^RCRS'^SSigS?* 8888888888888 § § i i i i g i i § g g § 8888888888888 5??5lcia85'®§egS m 8888888888888 gggg|g§ggigg!S 8888888888888 i>ini«*ir«is.*foind«deQ^ g g S g g g » B g • ^ a c ■ X ‘XX " « J_« Ml ^ III ui r S - i I : I 2 • **9 2 S X S a a “ “ 1 e e e e e ■>' « |!!!!!l5|t X ^ ^ p0 «* ^ ^ «** ^ ^ I I I « I ^ o ^ ^ « 1 i t i i i s « £ S ^ ’ S 5 ? a • • ■ • •m m m m m M 8 tJ ^ £ i(i s g «sir :i i If i I -' I a i % & i I U £ 8 8 ^ i i r r 8 n a INI 4/\ lA m 8 8 § S 8 8 S S 8 8 8 8 r- S 8 » INI 8 8 !® 8 8 d ^ 8 8 8 i i 3 s 3 S « 8 8 8 i S S Of 8 8 .» d -• 8 8 8 s S S 8 ? d ^ d J 8 8 8 gs§ 8 8 .« ni d J 8 8 8 § ^ § 3 S d d d -j s = II « a u -5 Q i g - f& I I Ia r o *; .5 s J a b - 2S T, 5 s S ^ y I i J ^ & V *5 " i JL 4 -j 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 i s i i g s r-‘ ^ ri ^r\j S 8 8 8 8 £ 5 5 S 3 g ° 8 8 8 8 8 8 ! § § S § § ' S f>J IM <0 >* 3 £ 8 *® 52 ? 8 8 8 s si SPO lA < *” !C 8 8 8 S S ' 8 8 8 » § Al IM ^ PA 8 8 S Of 8 P JA d 8 8 ^ 8 tn #• B 5? S ® KV 8 8 s § S 8 8 s e «K1 8 8 8 i § I R ~ 8 8 8 ^ ^ S 8 8 8 8 9 5 i “s ® 8 8 8 i i id d «r 8 8 8 ? § ^ 8 8 §S 8 8 8 ® S8888888 1 i g s 8 M ~ K. <M fVI rvi S8888880 PA ^ IM u.u.^'5'5»'5m> _jJiSiSiS'3uj-i 2 ? “ ' g 11 II > > w ^ « t» w •> & & III W W ‘p g g 1 S I g 3 <• « o siA I ^« a k - - t ^ z t t -iw 1. > « • d " - s d 3 I 8 5l PA 8 d •» m Mil I i - £ 8 8 8 § § 8 8 8 8 § § i S 8 8 8 8 8 S S S 1C a^ o •- »- K> r>* ■* o»■- »n <0 O Oin m s s s 8 ^ ^ rg Ckj K) 2 ° S 8 ~ ~ 5 8 8 § § 8 8 8 8 Q to d pO ^ kO ^o o <\J w> ig ^ fg 5 8 8 8 5 § i i § ^ O I# #A O *A io r*^ D Q lA in OO <g <N «A d d d f**r- 4M <M *A o 8 8 iS ^ *- <M O »“ 8 8 § § 8 8 8 8 g § § ^ 8 8 8 8 8 d lA d o dw^ S ^ lA •- ^ o Oi A- F) AJ «A CM fO lA 2 8 ^ aJ 2 8 8 8 d SO CD CNI rg Al K> 8 59 8 S 8 Ki rw fu •- O 8 8 § g 8 8 8 8 § § § § 8 8 8 8 8 8 § § S S «- r> VA 8 8 8 8 8 8 AJ OO '•« O rg fg lA 8 8 8 2 8 rsi CM <M •- O *” 10 8 8 § § 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 5 INi ^ O O 8 8 8 8 8 o d d 6 Q 4A «A tA O C ' fw kO O #A <g kA 9A ff> «A 8 8 8 8 8 8 CD tA tA P rg rg CS 8 fcA 8 ° 8 ^ «A rsi U M ^6 M I i j I 8 8 8 8 8 2 O IV ^ A| O O 8 2 8*" tA AJ lA L. .2 S ; 8 8 “ • I. JC u ^ O u 3 u ^ • tl ? I § i t S i § t) C L.M — t> 2 ^ fe ? i ^ > jD 111: £ 3 ^ i; S i i 5 S 4-* « 5 5 5 5 w M O !a S Id - «- r” «- 5 O CD U ■.» >» m m u - CM CM < ID -o >- :i 8 8 8 i» S 3 5 5 IQ 2 8 ^ Sir K K» 3 5 P; 8 8 8 »n ••a 2 s f- lA Ki r> 8 8 8 8 2 8m cn •- « 'OCM <♦ K1 8 8 8 S 2 8 ® K> »- 2 2 5 C- ►- I-cr cr <z< < <a a. a -j -i -j< < <*->-»- 000 *-*-»- 8 S 8 IS 8 8 3 rn K> M §8 Mu s . i 8 . . S - « • s'Htl'i § f S « • « K uT 9 ' Si 9 I A? S s s s I j I b * i IIM ‘ K 5 M ' (A ^s *=» •• 8 * 8 I I S S i R 5 ID J# 8 tjw S ^ o ® fe « I 55a 5 2 ^ »- g « .. ;: 3 2 8 i RS fi - ^ oB * irt ^ 8i''2 3 |5§•M 3 % o 5 n Z £ I /5 7789.2HD To* Mark E. Bernhardson, City Administrator COtfHClL MEtTWIG Proa: John R. Gerhardson, Public Works Director JUL 101989Date: July 1, 1989 vvi.*w w Subject: Highway 12 Well and Tower - Authorization forCirYnOF ORONO and Specifications On Friday, June 30, 1989, the City of Orono received and opened bids for sanitary sewer and water main construction for an area north of Highway 12 between Brown Road North and Old Crystal Bay Road. It is the desire of the property owners to proceed with Phase II, that being construction of a well and tower to serve the area. Recoiuiendation - To authorize the City Engineer to prepare plans and specifications for a well and tower to serve the Highway 12 area* Proposed Motion - Moved by ___, seconded oy __, to authorize the City Engineer to prepare plans and specifications for a well and tower to serve the Highway 12 arra. Ayes _ _, nays _ _. o To: Mayor Grabek & Orono Council Members From: Mark E. Bernhardson. City Administrator)^^ Forwarded recommending approval. To:Mark E. From:John R. Date:July 7, Subject:County Mark E. Bernhardson, City Administrator 7789.2HD sirfidiTQSonf Piibxi.c Woitks DxirocuOir 989 ad 51 - Parking JUL10W89 With the completion of the Metropolitan Waste SACITYpOFjGitOIMI on County Road 51, we will be able to re-establish ^ior "No Parking" areas very soon. We have received sufficient information from Hennt-j,*n County to extend the "Nc Parking" area on County Road 51 east of the Hendrickson Bridge by four car/boat trailer lengths. Recommendation - To direct staff to prepare a resolution extending the "No Parking" area on County Road 51 east of the Hendrickson Bridge by four car/boat trailer lengths and to present the resolution for review and action on July 24, 1989. Proposed Motion - Moved by , seconded by to direct staff to prepare a resolution extending the "No Parking" area on County Road 51 east of the Hendrickson Bridge by four car/boat lengths and to present the resolution for review and action on July 24, 1989. Ayes ___, nays ____. To: Mayor Grabek & Orono Council Members ’VProm: Mark E. Bernhardson, City Administrator*^^ ^ Forwarded recommending approval. PROM: DATBs SUBJECT: Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building 6 Zoning Administrator Lyle Oman, Field Inspector May 19, 1909 Home Occupation License Application - John Pritchard - Select Foods - 2620 Kelly Avenue Mr. ^'-itchard operates a food delivery service out of his home at Kelly Avenue. The applicant states that product is delivered to his home once a week by 2 different companies in CJ.P. S.-type-vans and is kept in chest freezers in his house. Independent contractors meet at his home between 8:00 a.m. and 9:00 a.m. for approximately one hour. A brief meeting is held to discuss routes and to place orders for delivery to customers. He also states that no walk-in business is conducted and that he has no distributors at this time and that is why he has all 5 trucks in his yard now (as they have been for most of the winter). He says he will attempt to find other parking arrangements if the City so desires. To:Mark E. Bernhardson Proa:Jeanne A. Mabusth, Date:July 6, 1989 Based on the review comments of Lyle Oman in his memo noted above, staff must recommend denial of the license application. The proposed home occupation violates many of the standards set forth in Section 10.20, Subdivision 4 (C). It is staff's understanding that Mr. Pritchard will appear on behalf of his license application to speak to the Council Please advise if you need additional information prior to your making a final recommendation on the license application for Mr. Pritchard. To: Fran: Mayor Grabek & Orono Council Members Mark L. Bernhardson, City Administrate! i Forwarded recommending denial of the home occupation license. Proposed Motion - Moved by the Orono City proposed by the applicant is not /vithin the occupational activities permitted by th^ ordinance. Ayes ___, nays ___. , seconded by Council finding that the type of activity »S^eet MvtriPf Top QuHty Pdodi P.O. BOX 61 EXCELSIOR. MINNESOTA 55331 /vwv 2. WfiS L>V.t ciryof-ofic'^c Oe^? cvcfc, Im YC-^ LtnZiC CATy'- W 4-“i o«^e CCN'fift’Vrc'i AS Tl, A OtSQgvfTWv'i of <^Y Vfe/^^ X <t>JW2ACTVes M <''^Y i3ov.f«i'- -Q-cc i^- \ f^t■!.T^-iC^ tii 0»SCv5S wvjt*i<t •nKY v<J«yiK\Ni(r TUAT Oa/, tfA C'Y.e2S C'lTU^* Cici'.«-:v U Trttt*Z Cvj STU*.6*2S Ot ■*V*'/ An. 'Vt i’aAJ€ M jpt'cPttS 't\K THAT Sc M-V*y T&'aCI^S WAvf Stfes, iTTpsiC AT ^^v v<: that up vj«.T(k T*ns X ucr ^ W 0*Sre>6^XCS "p. '^Y Ti^viCliiS. X vAU\. 6€l /KTtMfTl'^' T^ fvi'iC Sc/^ OTm^ pA'^Kv'iC' A2«»r<i£M€4rS ‘'^■y TC^CY-S v*VK4 TmY A^t'' “ \MUi«‘r SC T\iir iHty /vaik A*tT Avt % P'ciu.i at /^y ,Jf-' •*<'.9 StUei PA. MX ft ncuiOR, Mwnnowmwt cv'li: CCCf'ViL •'''^tTi.\t T\^+T X 'i-t>fc» \.nV C ot "Y 'X'«W'-n XU.'Vi'c'ifC^ i 3iL'vV. L Application Date;CITY OF OROHO P.O. Box SS, 1335 So Brown Rd Date License Approved: Crystal Bay, MN 55323 Date License Expires: APPLICATIOfl FOR ARNUAL BOMB OCCUPATION LICBNSB NAME: TIHm L P^2\TCvV^?>PHONE; - PEE - $30.00 M7l-77(aS yc ADDRESS: 1L20 ^Cau.V vVu<CITY: SS 3\ » No. of Employees within operation: \ ^ Provide list of names of employees on back of this application Type of Business to be Operated; fcjjC 0<.\vv4t.Lv/ License may be revoked if any violation occurs. City staff shall have five (5) business days in which to investigate and make a recommendation pursuant to Orono Nonicipal Code Section 5.02 A 5.03. If a site inspection is required by City staff, the review time will be extended to ten (10) business days. The license application with staff rerrreni1 ation will be scheduled before the Council at the next regularly scheduled meeting held on the second and fourth Monday of each month. ORONO MUNICIPAL COON RB6ULATIORS ON BOMB OCCUPATIONS PURSUANT TO SBCTIOH 10.20, SUBDIVISIOH 4 (C) Prohibited Home Occupation Practices, It is unlawful for any business operating as a home occupation to ] engage in operation without proper licenses. 2. All persons engaged in the business must reside in the dwelling. 3. No commercial signs permitted other than signs permitted in the residential zone. 4. No excessive stock in trade may be stored on the premises. 5. Over the counter retail sales is not allowed. 6. Entrance tc the home occupation must be gained from within the structure. The undersigned hereby agrees to the conditions quoted above from the Orono Municipal Code and any additional conditions the City may require. Signature of Applicant:V Date; FOR CITY USB ONLY: After review of application, staff recommends the following: _____ Approval of License _^ignature of Zoning Official: v^^^gnature of Fire Inspector Denial of License Date: Date: LZSnilG OP BNPLOYBBS: WAME; THK NAME: ADDRESS: ’2i'2Q CITY; ZIP; ^ M 'IC ADDRESS: CITY;ZIP: DATE OF BIRTH:DATE OP BIRTH: NAME:NAME: ADDRESS:, CITY:ZIP: ADDRESS:, CITY:ZIP: DATE OP BIRTH:DATE OP BIRTH: NAME:NAME: ADDRESS: CITY;ZIP: ADDRESS: CITY;ZIPt DATE OF BIRTH:_ DATE OF BTPTH:, ADDRESS: CITY:ZIP: ADDRESS;, CITY:ZIP: DATE OP BIRTH;DATE OP BIRTH: # COUNai MEETING JULI01989 CITYOFORONO TO: Mayor Grabek & Council Members FROM: Mark Bernhardson, City Administrate DATBs June 30, 1989 SUBJECT: Orono Lane ATTACHMENTS A - Orono Lane Memo Dated 11/17/86 B - Preliminary Design for Relocation C - Commissioner Jude's Letter Dated 2/28/89 D - Orono Letter Dated 6/30/89 Issue Re-initiation by neighbors on the relocation of the access to Orono Lane. Introduction - A couple years ago action by the neighbors resulted in the consideration of changing of the entrance and exit of Orono Lane. This ca^ie to a standstill when the property owner over whose property this new location would be located declined to participate voluntary in the matter. Additionally, there was some hesitation on the part of the residents regarding them having to fund the project. Discussion - This matter has again become a concern for the neighbors and the neighborhood is again attempting to work with the one property owner to see if there is a resolution of the situation in order to allow the new entrance to be located on his property. The issue as to funding also represents a concern for the neighborhood and individuals in the neighborhood have indicated they feel that this is not their responsibility but should be a County and/or City responsibility because of the situation on a City street that is created primarily by increasing traffic on a County Road. The County had indicated in the past the willingness to fund work within their right-of-way which extends approximately 33' from the center line and maybe applicable to the access acceleration lanes that would need to be installed. To date no estimate of construction cost has been undertaken and th^- next step after determining a preliminary relocation, subject to the willingness of the involved property owner and funding, would be to undertake a feasibility study. An alternative would be a lengthened acceleration lane to the east. This would not improve westbound access and may be used as a passing lane by those in a hurry. The neighbors have indicated that to the extent that the problem gets worse, their property values may decline. I indicated the City's general policy as to local streets was to have the residents pay for major improvements (other than sealcoating) and that they may desire to make their properties more marketable by improved access. Orono Lane June 30, 1989 Page 2 of 2 1. 'birect the undertake of feasibility study. OMWO 3f 1535.!^!!;? b) project 3. Determine money from other sources. 4. Table for further discussion. RECOMMENDATION - Forward recommending that the City Engineer be directed to undertake a feasibility study for a cost of approximately $300-700 once the r.eighbors have agreed to absorb up to half the cost, should the project not be undertaken. This is conditioned upon getting the approval of the property owner regarding the proposed location. PROPOSED MOTION; Moved by _ _ _, seconded by _ _ _, the Council, agree to direct the City Engineer to undertake a feasibility study should the property owners indicate their willingness to pay for half the cost of the necessary feasibility study up to a total of $500-700, once the property owner over whose property the relocation has agreed to allow it to occur. Ayes _ _, Nays _ _. cc: Mr. Henry See 111786.1 II Mayor and City Council Mark Bernhardson, City Adrolnlatcator ^ . Novcinuer 17, 1936 SUBJBCT: Ocono Lane AttachnontS! A. Otono Lane Access luiptovement Memo Dated 10/31/06 p^oieL This represent^ that additional iniotmation. History - Accidcnt statistics from 1989 to 1584 were reviewed tne County together with and *86 accident records the City has date. Based on a review of the « in the oast two year 3 none of the accidents were related to the location of Orono Lane and County Road 15 Of the 11 ptcvioua accidents (198«-1984) non. -at. ioiatentl- telaied to the access location on the cutv^ Shile accidents do occur on the curve t^»/P«»d t^ acceleration/deceleration ‘together Road. The accident history however, does not recot •near misses*. Funding Possibilities county Funrtina - While demonstrated the “'i-. ^hi^County does have some funding however, can only be spent within the ® wg^iQ-al way and generally is of a matching nature with the local unit It is iioul^tful that they would be aole to expena any funds on this change apart from items on County Roa- 15 related to turn lanes. ^'itv Funding - As discussed this is a local street and •pinion that wo would not racolvo a variance due to oaat ''•'**"=9 board. Unlike the County the f"o“ "9»^9ty*liSp/ov\“i«^ fCSdln?s. r.j.sr.f;benefiting property owners as a source of funding* I^OMHENDAT^ON - As from the accident history there does not rfffrf/ ^ suLstantlal demonstrated concern either to the residents generally or City residents more specifleally* but is street concern, it is staffs recommendation that the bulk of the project be funded on a local assessment in however, there may be some small benefit to the reducing the possible accident concern, that the Citv spend up to a total of la% of $3,500.00 to include up to ^ significant enough con«?S that the study be uncertaken, however, not of sufficient concern for the City to do anything but a minimal amount of funding. PWP03ED MOTION - Moved by __, seconded by , to authorize staff to undertake the feaslbl 11 tFatudy once thc“Iocal realdenta hiv^ is -illinuneas to at least pr.ll«i„«cly’ti ,pen5 ujto $4,300 a lot for change in the location. Ayes _, Nays^ . ^ cci tiewell Weed, 1385 Otono Lane CITY OF QRQNa CITYofORONO Post OfRcs Box 66*CrystaJ Bay, Minnsaota 55323• Municipal OfBoea On the North Shore of Lake Minnetonka June 30, 1989 Mr. Patrick Murphy Public Services Director Hennepin County Public Works 320 Washington Avenue South Hopkins, MN 55343 Subject: Orono Lane Dear Pat, In correspondence dated February 28, 1989, with the residents on Orono Lane, Commissioner Tad Jude, outlined his response to the neighborhoods reactivate consideration to relocate of the entrance layout of Orono Lane onto County Road 15. This was an item that was considered approximately two years ago, at which time the County indicated they may have some funds to assist safety improvement on the right-of-way, but would not be able to contribute beyond that. Part of the problem with the entrance is the ever increasing traffic of County Road 15, which inhibits the safety of those exiting and entering Orono Lane. As noted in the attached proposal the relocation would give better sight lines both to the east and west. This letter is written to see what assistance regarding any planning or construction costs that the County may have available to assist should this safety improvement proceed. is th- residents position thet it should be funded by orga .tions other than themselves as it is not a situation of their Jieation. When reviewed a c-»uple of years ago it was the City's position that as a local street any improvements should be be borne by those desiring the change. Related improvements to this would most p'obably be a turn lane into the revised entrance, together with an acceleration lane for leaving this property thereby eliminating i.ome of the parking. Presently the neighborhood is attempting to gain the consent of the property owner over whose property it would be located. In order to accommodate the owner, the design maybe altered somewhat to the west of the proposed layout. BUILDING a ZONING - 473-7357 ASSESSING ADMINISTRATION A FINANCE - 473 7358 PUBLIC WORKS - 473-7359 Hennepin County June 30, 190^ page 2 have contact John Se^hardson^ should the Please contact u „hat assi ^ Sincerely# " -a>L Slack E. Decnhacdson City Administrator MEB/dh Fnclosure 1389 Orono ^^ane • Tad Jude C0MMISS10N£Jl PHONE 30«4 3«»a-770« TDD Board of Hennepin County CoMilifisitKfJEj^ 2400 G overnment center ' Minneapolis , Minnesota 554s: February 28, 1989 Mr. Henry W. See 1389 Orono Lane Wayzaca, MN 35391 Dear Mr. See: As you requested in recent correspondence to me, I have had the traffic c gineers at our Department of Public Works investigate the two trail;c problem areas in the vicinity of your home. The first problem concerns the sight distance restriction at Orono I it intersects County Road 15. This is indeed a problem. As pointed rut in your letter, making left turns onto County Road 15 or attempting to cross County Road 15 to Orono Orchard Road presents a hazard. We are in full agreement with the solution outlined in your letter. Relo cation of the street entrance to a point approximately 200 feet easterly of the present intersection would afford entering vehicles adequate sight distance westerly along County Road 15. This solution has been discussed with the staff of the City of Orono. They have expressed a willingness to work with the neighborhood and County in developing such a workable plan. We suggest that the City be recontacted in this regard. Currently, the south shoulder of Coun»^* Roqd 15 is paved for a short distance east of Orono Lane. As an alternate j street relocation, this shoulder paving could be extended to provide a longer acceleration lane, as such, for entry to County Road 15 going east. However, this alternate certainly does not provide the safety benefits that could be realized by the Orono Lane street relocation. Your second problem expressed concern about the westbound merge on County Road 15 just west of Wayzata. This merge was the subject of an investiga tion by Hennepin County in 1987. At that time the accident record within the merge area was investigated, the physical characteristics of the roadway were checked, and observations of traffic operations were made. Mr. Henry See February 28, 1989 Page 2 Thia investigation found that during the five year period of 1981-85 no accidents involving the merging movements had occurred. A recent accident update indicates this trend continuing into 1986-87 when again no accidents were reported. The lack of accidents can probably be attributed to two factors. First, vehicles on each leg are entering at close ro the sa le speed making the merging movement relatively easy. Second, the merging area extends over a segment of roadway measuring about 1,000 feet. This offers the motorists ample opportunity to adjust their speeds, if necessary, to perform the merging movement. We're sure, of course, that occasional "jockeying for position" occurs within the merge area. However, this is not uncommon within areas such a?^ this - even on the most generously designed interstate freeways. The right of way at this location is assigned to the traffic on the left (that movement coming from TH 12). This movement carries the most traffic and is actually the mainline of County Road 15 The connection from Wayzata was dropped from the County system several years ago and is under the jurisdiction of the City of Wayzata. Though not the most conspicuous, the merging traffic signs in advance of the merging area Indicate, by the width of the symbols on those signs, that the left entering traffic dominates. As a result of your concern, we are having our traffic field crews review the current signing on County Road 15 for any enhancements that car be made to better identify the merging conditions. We will also keep a close eye on this location for any adverse accident experience in the future. Thank you f-jr bringing your concerns to my attention. The County staff and I stand ready to assist you and the City of Orono In the development of a satisfactory solution to the Orono Lane problem. Sincerely, 3.rvs U>^0, OF-' Tad |UDt PHONE .■>-»« 770A TDD Board of Hennepin C ounty COMMl^5i}0IK£g.^^ “5^00 nOVF R n: M F NJT C'F N TE R 11 i \ I2400 G overnment Center Minneapolis Minnlsoia 5">4A Febru.iry 23, 198^ M’-. Henry W. See 1389 Orono Lane Wayzata, MN 55391 Dear Mr. See: As you requested in recent correspondence to me, I have had the traffic engineers at our Department of PubMc Works investigate the two traffic problem areas in the vicinity of your home. The first problem concerns the sight distance restriction at OrOBO it intersects County Road 15. This is indeed a problem. Aa pointed Cnt iS your If ter, making left turns onto County Road 15 or attempting to crncc County Road 15 to Orono Orchard Road presents a hazard. We are in full agreement with the solution outlined in your letter, ftal#** cation of the street entrance to a point approximately 200 feet easterly the present intersection would affo’-d entering vehicles adequate sight distance westerly along County Roao 15. This solution has been discussed with the staff of the City of Orono. They have expressed a willingness to work with the neighborhood and County in developing such a workable plan. We suggest that the City be recontacted in this regard. Currently, the south shoulder of County Road 15 is paved for a short distance east of Oror.3 Lane. As an alternate to street relocation, thi shoulder paving could be extended to provide a longer acceleration lane, .s such, for entry to County Road 15 going east. However, this alternate certainly does not provide the safety benefits that could be realised by the Orono Lane street relocation. Your second problem expressed concern about the westbound merge on County Road 15 just west of Wayzata. This merge was the subject of an laeestiga- «-lon by Hennepin County in 1987. At that time the accident recc-d within the merge area was investigated, the physica* characteristics of the roadway were checked, and observations of traffic ..^rations were made. To: Proa: Dates Mayor Grabek & Orono Council Members Mark E. 5srnhardsonr City Administrate' 7789.4HD July 7r 1989 COUHQL MECTIH8 Subject: Joint^Council/Planning Commission Meeting(s) - Navarre Redevelopment Issue - CtTYOFOM Establishment of date(s) that the two groups could meet to discuss these two issues, at which all Council members are available. ‘ roduction - The tentative date originally selected for the joint meeting . or:e that not all the Council members can makt* As such, we Jld like to see if there are alternate dates tt. ^scuss these issues. Discussion - Facilities - The follow-up to the tour would include: - Discussion of positive/negatives of buildings viewed - architectural Cost ranges for building quality - architectural Review financial alternatives - Ci^ v A possible date could be Th i-sday, July 20, Alternatives include Tuesday/^ednesday, August 8/9, 1989 Navarye_ Redeveloomer t - At the next gathering on this subject, the suggested agenda wonld be: - Second presentation of the inventory information - Invite furth.‘>'. discussion as to general direction i-blff lates include: Monday, August 7, 1989 Tuesday, August P, 1989 Wednesday, Augusi; 9, 1989 Thursday, August 10, 19^9 or dates later in the mont!' Joint Council/Planning Commission Meeting July 1, 1989 Page 2 of 2 that the two topics might be too much for one ommission members have not yet been polled. Reconmendaftion - Select dates for each which allow all Council and substantial Planning Commission members to attend. Proposed llotxisk - Moved by ___, seconded by ___, the Orono Council establish _ _ _ _ _ as a date to discuss facilities and _ _ as a date to discuss the Navarre redevelopment. Ayes _ _, nays cc:Jeanne A. Mabusthr Building & Zoning Administrator Michael P. Gaffron, Asst Planning & Zoning Administrator John R. Gerhardson^ Public Works Director Planning Commission Members David Rroos, Boarman & Assoc. Carolyn Drude, Ehlers & Assoc. John Shardlow, Dahlgren & Shardlow m Date 7/26 7/27 (w) (th) Time 4-7 p.m. UPCOMING DATES Subject iiin.M 1 ms. To be scheduled County Rd 116 - Allow abutting property owners to review plans Stubb's Bay - Staff presentation to effected residents on Waste Management Study Joint Council/Planning Commission Meeting: 1. Facilities 2. Navarre Redevelopment UPCOMING REGULAR COUNCIL MEETINGS Public Hearing/Informational Meetings 7/24 8/14 8/25 9/11 Hwy 12 - Sewer/Water Improvements/ Public Hearing (tentative) Hwy 12 - 1992 Safety Improvement/ Public Informational Meeting Lift Station #10 By-Pass - Financing/Public Informational Meeting Woodhill Street Assessment/Public Hearing Cty 15 Lighting Assessment/Public Hearing Cty 116/Public Informational Mtg co £ >1 (0»o B 0s «o M T3 C(N o» B •H 0) 0) £ •H •H U B 9 Ou £ P« oo oo D» B -H B B (0 iHcu £ f (L O o =) C9 UJ =c C->c>o UJ UJ 01o CT> oo CD (0 T5 B £ 09iH Q> U 4J 0) m^ IQ ojj 0) O 4Jog JZ u D) 0) 9 4J 0 »H M Id £ B Id >« (d n £ Id >1 (d n 0) 9 Eh 4J id iH B O -H 0) (fl •H ou M Ida >1 Id TJ ■H »—I 0 X »—I Id -Ho •H 44 O 0»c •H 0) 0 £ B 0 -H CO 10 1 o u o» B •H B B Id CU *0 B Id rH •Hoc 9oo B -H O O 0 <3x0 ®* N.«r^co WCNi^ 11. h- H &0) <oc5 oT- CU CVi tflCM 0>^ T- ^ CM ^ 00 m T- ▼- CM CM O) coco O r- CM CO Oioo O) e.wo»««o|S > T-opio cvjO)o£ > r- CM €2 iss Ac/) lA CM ^ ^ 0> 05 ^ ^ ^CO T* t- «.M 2 IL CO o N ;j; ^ T- CM ^ CM 0) CO CM . > ▼- CO in CM > T- CM is' ^8g *§ cn to CM C) CO II r- r- CM I, \ “u.'««oj5 ^ CO CM O) CO CM gsNiajipg 09 cn *n CM o>cp CD r- ^ CM 2 11. A* CD lO T- CM •-"StSiS > CM o CO en o > ^ CM CO ««gjgj SS I’m co«ojj o> cn CO 2 If h* ^ r- GO . ^CMCM CO COO T- CM CMI- 5 in CM O CD r- T- CM 3cn f^®52g3g o) cn coo5; 03 ^ r- CM 2 LL CM O) CO COO ^ CM CO H r- 00 in CM O) r- CM CM H «2 i CO -3 -c r- CO ^CMCM <^f2cn o CM CM £111 < r- GO m t-»-CM g cooi^ a; ra rn rs. »— eo 2 T- CM CM gco<'*®«ag 5 “S2SJ3 fe>- jQ is ^ . gen •-~®52X« S’"*!? Si® ■iic 2Qi ^ o cn m CM 09 CO ^ T- r- CM genr-j-cg “u.iortorj H m CM 09 ^ T- r- CM > ^ ^ CD m > t-^CM •§=' O h- ^ ^ t-*-CMCO o CO®iSS gto-««g|g gcoeM®««o ®u.r-®tog}a> ^ h* ^ ^ CD ^ t-CMCM A S wencn ‘°2S?m A ^ i TO: Mayor Grabek and ConnciImembsrs FROM: Mark E. Bernhardson, City Administrate DATE: July 3, 1989 SUBJ: Watt ' S Sawer Financing Improvements J«I9S9 enrof ATTACHMENTS: A. Ehlers & Associates Letter dated 6/28/89 D. 1909/90 Project Horizon Layout dated 5/26/89 C. Highway 12 Project Improvement dated 6/30/89 ISSUE - 1. financing. Presentation of information regarding possible 2. Determining issues and concerns of the Council regarding current direction for financing of projects on Highway 12 and Lift Station 10 and 43. INTRODUCTION - At the Council’s June 12, 1989 Meeting, they awarded the bids for the Lift Station 10 and 43 project, which could be financed primarily through connection charges. (As you will note later in the agenda, the informational meeting for this will be held on August 14 , 1989 to apprise the neighborhood and get input on how it shall be financed.) In addition, the Council is receiving bids on the first 2 of 5 potential improvements for the Highway 12 Development at this meeting. It is anticipated that these projects will probably be ordered at the July 24, 1989 Meeting. As such, and in order to assist in getting a possible 100% petition for the project on Highway 12, the terms of financing of those improvements are cf interest to those people requesting the petition. DISCUSSION - Projects to be Financed; Lift Station 10 & 43 Highway 12 Sewer Part I Sewer Part II (Interceptor Improvements) Water Part I Trunk Extension V/ater Part II - Well Water Part III Water Tower Pro ject Financing - Apart from Lift Station 10 and 43, it is anticipated that all costs will be assessed to the property owners currently benefitting. Alternatives to that financing could also include revenue generated by the water system in that area and/or connection charges and funding from other properties currently not being assessed (such as the Wear properties) or operational from these or others that may be on the system. BONDING - As outlined in Attachment A, the bonding climate is currently favorable. It is anticipated that bonding would be a^t^boiit* 6.5% and recommended that the full amount for all of thd projects be bonded for at this time. This is recommended as 1) it is more costly to have several different bond issues; 2) bonding rates maj^ not be as favorable even in the near term future, and. 1) xS^quld the City not need the entire proceeds of the ^ijQp^\3inV»' tfie bonds can either be paid off earlier or the principle invested to help assist in financing this and other projects. A. Type of Bonds - As noted in Attachment A, these would be water and sewer revenue (G.O.j bonds as opposed to special assessment bonds. Rating agencies such as Moody's feel that General Obligation Revenue Bonds are a more marketable bond. Revenue Bonds also have fewer legal requirements in order to initiate as not all of the projects need to have hearings prior to the financing. If however, the City, feels it is appropriate, it can levy at least 105% of the needed requirement for payment should it choose. This may be an approprite feature to provide the City flexibility in this and other project funding. B. Rates - The average current interest rate of the bonds will about 6.5% and following the City's policy the rate to the developer will be about 1.25% above that, for a total of approximately 7.75%. Rat inq - As you may recall, the rating for Orono bonds is AA Bond. ££ the Bonds - It is presently recommended that it be a 10 year bond because of the fact that not all of the developments that would be assessed on Highway 12 are currently in a project to develop, and secondly, that payment of items 10 and 43 would be from connection charges which may have an uncertain timing, together with the fact that the operational payback on those .vas a 10 year time period. Sale Date - If th^ terms are acceptable, we may be able to sel l as early as 9/’1/89. ASSESSMENT - A. The actual assessme/.'- i.xi.cnce the bonds is recommended to be split into two parts as l.allows; 1. Direct Land Improvements - These woulC be assessed over a either a 5 or 10 year period and would include the sewer and water trunk and laterals to directly serve the property. These would be assessed w^-thin the next few months. 2. System Wide Improvements - These improvements would include the upgrade for the interceptor capacity, the well and the water tower which are total system improvements. As such could merit a longer term improvement. It is recommended that this be up to a 10 improvement. The payment of their principal amount could be delayed for two to three years. B. Prepayment of Assessments - 1. Rebers 25 units and Otten 10-40 units - Upon sale of property. 2. Balance of Rebers (44 units) and Property West of Wi 1 low - Upon issuance of building permits for other properties including Rebers front side. C. Security - The security from the developer for the special assessments would be provided at the time of a subdividers agreement. This means that the City would, as each of these properties gets ready to develop, receive the necessary security, either by a letter of credit or other acceptable security to back the payments of the assessments. (This is really added security for the assessments. They would eventually be paid including penalty and interest. Payment would be on redemption of sale if they would go tax forfeited,) D. Interest - From the time of bond or project payments to the initial principal payments there would be capitalization of the interest costs for the projects. E. Estimate Payments - As not all of the projects may be completed, or even ordered prior to either the sale or need for issuance of a permit, the owner would be r^uired to pay the estimate and additionally be liable up to another 10%. Rebate - A rebate is suggested to be applicable in either of two cases: year 1. Project Costs Less than Estimate - In the case that the person had escrowed an amount upon sale that was more than the project cost, it would be rebated to the developer who had initially paid the cost. 2. Development Limitation - To the extent that the Council did not want development at the intensity for which the property has been assessed, the City could buy back those additional units from the person to whom development had been limited at the principle rate, plus interest payment of the bond (or credit it to the amount remaining to be paid). I have requested that Carolyn Drude be available for any questions, however, this may necessitate a change in order as she may be scheduled to make a meeting in another community by 9:30 and may need to leave by 8:00 p.m. ACTION ALTERNATIVES: 1. Accept the information and recommendations as presented 2, Recommend changes indicating what issues the Council would like to have altered. 3. Request additional information RECOMMENDATION - It is recommended that the plan as outlined above be accepted as one that is reasonable to the developers in order to have 100% petition and yet provide the City with necessary financing to hve the project paid. PROPOSED MOTION - Moved by seconded by the Council conceptually adopt the direction for the financing and direct staff to prepare the necessary bonding documents for these projects. Staff is further directed to bring back the bond resolution on August 14, 1989 for tentative sale on September 11, 1989. Ayes____, Nays______ . Ms. Carolyn Orude Department Heads lies, Inc. LEADERS IN PUBLIC FINANCE June 28, 1989 Mark Bemliardson City Administrator City Hall Orono, NIN 55.i23 Re: Capital improvement planning This will recap recent conversations we've had relating to the possible need for 1989 financing of capital improvements in Orono. In particular, we have discussed the following: Project Est. Cost Est. Cost* Raplacoment of lift stations ^10 and #43 (MIVCC) with gravity lines and new capacity $ 272,000 $ 272,000 Highway #12 projects: Sewer Pt T: New main extension 297,000 297,000 Sewer Pt II: Trunk capacity imp.130,000 518,1S0» Water Pt 1: Trunk extension 101,400 101,400 Water Pt 11: Well/pump/structure .3.30,000 330,000 Water Pt III. New water tower 545,150 545,150 $1,675,550 $2,063,700 Legal, fiscal, administrative, est.25,000 27,000 Funds needed Plus allowance for discount bidding (an interest cost) $1,700,550 19,450 $2,090,700 24,500 Bond issue $1,720,000 $2,115,000 *Two capitalization schedules have been sized based upon the range ($130,000 to $518,150) of estimated costs for Sewer Pt II which will depend upon the construction option selected. OFFICES IN M-NNEA^OLIS AND iVAUKESHA 2950 Noiwest Center • 90 South Sov«r,ir. Stteot. Minneapolis MN 55402-4100 - 612-339-W91 • FAX 612-339-0854 Mark Demliardson Orono, MN 55"^23 June 28, 1989 Page 2 You have incu that these sewer and water projects will be paid from connectio. charges, assessments and user fees [or from some combination of these revenue sources) which qualifies them for financing under Minnesota Sta^- •»s, Section 444.078. There are some advantages to tr- undcT M.S. 444.0V8, including: :ity in financing these projects (1) All the projects could be financed as one issue fG.O. Sewer and Water Revenue Bonds), saving issuance costs; and (2) Moody's Investors Service, raters of Orono's general obligation bonds which carry a "AA" rating, views the G.O. Revenue Bond as a stronger commitment than Improvement Bonds issued pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Cliapter 429. We have discussed a maturity schedule of about 10 years for the total issue, structured around the actual anticipated revenue receipts for the individual projects (S years, for instance, for Sewer Pt I and Water Pt I). Arbitrage Rebate As you are aware, the City may be exempt from arbitraje rebate provisions for its debt if not more than SS.OOO.OtiO is borrowed during any calendar year. The borrowing capitali:e<.l above would not pose a problem in this regard, even if the'City would decide to finance the Stubbs Bay sewer ijTiprovement before 12/33/89 which is now estimated at $1,100,000 to $1,300,000. Capitalized Interest No estimate of capitalized interest has been tncliicled in the capitaliza; on schedule, and this will need some discussion. We have discussed methods of proceeding with the m v sewer extension, ^or instance, hv receiving petitions from 100% of the property own^s but delaying the actual assessment collection for a year or two. The City could proceed on that basis, borrowing the funds to complete the project and include, say. two vears of capitalized interest to allow a two year delay before the first year of assessment collections. Tills cost would be passed on to the assessed properties, of course, but would be borrowed at a favorable tax-exempt, "AA'* rate. Interest that would be due on an;, of the individual projects before revenues are anticipated to be available should be capitalized in tbc issue. I 1 Mark Bci-nhardson Orono, MN 55325 June 28, 1989 Page 3 Muntcir Bund Market Wc are experiencing senie of the borrowing rates in the municipal tax-exempt market than have been available for well over a year. Attached is a Bond Index grapli, tracking the national rates for certain "A” rated, 20 year bonds over the last year and regional rates for in year bonds. If the City is ready to finance these projects, the market should provide reasonable interest rates for borrowing. The City would then he able to invest proceeds until needed for construction at rates in the 8-9% range. We Itave not addressed the need for city building facilities, and other tentative 1990 improvements under consideration at this time, primarily because of uncertain timetables. Please don't hesitate to call with questions clarifications. Sincerely, EHLESStAND ASbOClATHa<J INC. Carolyn IJ^f^de Senior Vice President WEEKLY MARKET RATES - AS OF CLOSE REPRESENTATIVE YIELDS U.S. MAT TREASURIES WKLY CHG 8.33 -.073 MO 6 MO B.39 -.02 1 YR 8.39 -,i6 2 YR 8.34 -.14 5 YR 8.24 -.12 7 YR 8.26 -.11 10 YR 8.23 -.10 30 YR 8.19 -.11 ECONOMIC DATA: Ml -6.6 BLN CNP FINAL 1ST QTR 4.4S GNP DEFLATOR FINAL 1ST QTR 3.6T DURABLE ORDERS (MAY) -4.22 PERSONAL INCOME (MAY) 0.3X FRIDAY JUNE 23, 1989 TAX-FREE MUNICIPALS MAT AAA AA A BAA 1990 6.15 6.30 6.50 6.70 1994 6.40 6.50 6.70 6.90 1999 6.60 6.70 6.90 7.15 2004 6.80 6.90 7.10 7.35 2009 6.90 7.05 7.25 7.50 CORPORATES MAT AA A 3 YEAR 8 3/8 8.50 5 YEAR 8.50 8 5/0 7 YEAR 8 5/8 8 3/4 10 YEAR 8 5/8 8 ,3/4 30 YEAR 9 1/4 9 1/2 SELECTED INTEREST RATES THIS WEEK LAST WEEK 89 HIGH 89 LOW YEAR AGO PRIME RATE 11.00 11.00 11.50 10.50 9.00 FED FUNDS 9 1/2 9 7/16 10 1/16 8 15/16 7.50 DISCOUNT RATE 7.00 7.00 7.00 6.50 6.00 DBI 20 BOND/10 YRS 7.05 6.58 7.04 6.53 6-96 BBI 20 BOND/20 YRS 7.08 6.88 7.72 6.88 7.77 RBI 25 BONDy30 YRS 7.42 7.27 7.95 7.27 8.10 BLUE LIST/MILLS 1460.1 1296.5 1415.1 897.2 14R7.2 30 DAY VISIBLE SUPPLY/MILLS 2666.9 1501.7 3446.8 822.6 1106.1 90 DAY COMMERCIAL PAPER 9.15 1 YR CD 9. 10 3 YR CD 8.60 5 YR CD 8.65 15 YR CNMA 9.00E ***444*8.85 MY 9.00 BEY 30 YR GNMA 9.002 COUPONS 9.55 MY 9.75 BEY 30 YR GNMA 9.502 CHANGED TO 9.60 MY 9.80 BEY 30 YR GNMA 10.002 CURRENT**9.65 MY 9.85 BEY £ Is • • u:: t •= s o:G O M *t k • e o • j( > o «i • 0 o a u 4i • klo a o< X m a cj: S5 'a a § ^ o, *• V. U 2 I: S.S " I Jt o F ^ 0 -I 1) hs &*» o S a c a 1 I 2 0 Z W . i g “ 5:• o ^ ^ «i«0 -- o 4i (/) (0 %4 «M Q • 4i V M ia « • W 4i O O' a ^ 8LI •4 hu >• ^ s::! o o V ^ tf> 4T o £ is: 2 a a 2* ■iJ 82 jj m «4 e M >4 •>« a 3<M a a ^S£S 4 I I I O O Oi D ^ 3 o o (N in CX3 o in 00 C7^ 'vO o o o o o o O 4» O n K> O) s *04^ t 5 2? «i *j o a a a < C r4 ^ s ? 1« M •o > M «4 e o § s «s j. •I r I 53 Si i *4 B m i ot = In 8 I? I i ! S I 1 n I I n ; h Is s I s -E 5! Si ?E«III!-sliii § •j M § §i%i ct li li 11 1* 1 1 PI 1 11 Hih i §Hi{ S3 Ii § il 9 1^- I iiPm^ n i If I* I I . P § I 1 IjlH3i ? I 1 5 Attachment C • Draft HIGHWAY 12 -PROJECT IMPROVEMENTS 6/30/89 Number of Units Reber's Residential 25 Phase I Other 44 A) Sewer Pt I —Water Pt I 69 B) Water Pt II Otten 40 Yngve/Reiersgord Phase II Area A 25 A) Sewer Pt II Area B 195 B) Water Pt II 250 TOTAL 329 «Price/Unit of Units w/Lateral wo/Lateral Service Service Sewer Pt I A) Lateral 89,800 304 300 B) Trunk 80,050 329 245 245 169,850 Sewer Pt II Interceptor (option) A) MWCC Connection 130,000 329 400 400 B) Jt City Change 357,400 329 1090 1090 C) Alternate Line 518,150 329 1580 1580 Water Pt I - Trunk 85,200 329 260 260 Pt II - Well 330,000 329 1005 1005 Pt III - Tower 545,150 329 1660 1660 Estimated Per Unit 3870-5050 3370-4550 St I TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Mark E. Bernhardson, City Administrate! DATE: July 3, 1989 SUBJECT: Assessing Services Attachment: A. Memo from Erickson dated 7/3/89 63089.3 COUNCIL MEETING JUL101989 emroFORONo ISSUE - Commence discussion for general direction regarding the City's assessing services. INTRODUCTION - In the 1990 Budget Guidelines it was indicated that the City's present contract Assessor Rolf Erickson intends to phase out of the contract because of changes in his organizational personnel strength and also longer term changes in his career plans. The current 1988-89 contract that expires August 31st is for $50,772. DISCUSSION - The general options include: 1. Contract Assessor - This would have the City seek out another contractor to take over from Rolf's staff and continue an operation on a similar basis. This may in fact be the most cost effective when comparing costs, however, there are not that many people who do provide an assessing service on a contract basis. While the City has had excellent success with Rolf, particularly given the system he has set up, it may not be positive with other people. Contractors do give the City some level of control in that it may be on a year-to-year basis however to the extent that these firms are small they may pull out at any time leaving an individual city at a critical time without substantial recourse. 2. In-house Assessor - This, at least initially, would probably be the most expensive option. It would probably entail, at least initially, employment of a person to be an assessor together with a clericial person at least on a half time basis. While the persons may be equally as efficient as a contract person, the fact that the person would eventually office in the City and be more available to the public, it may increase the availability for contacts and therefore increase the amount of business the person has to do. It is estimated that this may cost about $60-70,000. (If the City had its own in-house assessor, it may be able to contract with other communities around such as Minnetonka Beach, Spring Park and/or Long Lake for these services. In addition. Tonka Bay is currently looking for an alternative assessing arrangement to Hennepin County. This however might increase the need for additional personnel.) Assessing Services July 3, 1989 Page 2 of 3 ■ Ari^gstrlent District - Prior to the County taking over, the City was under an Assessment District with some of the neighboring cities. While this shares the burden and cost, it does not necessarily give the control one city would have either,/^|th a contractor or with its own in-house. The OnUaiiJfiyrih^‘ demands by the participating cities for the assessor may create an untenable situation. 4. Contract with the County - Again this is probably the least desireable option at this point, although from a cost standpoint, may be in line with the City's own contract assessor, if not a little less expensive. There is a concern however, as to service level and the past working relationships between both the County and the City. 5* Phasing - Rolf has indicated his willingness to work on a phase-in to be effective towards the later part of this calendar year. The City would need to negotiate a contract with Rolf Erickson. As noted in Attachment A, this would cover from September through January 1st. The bulk of the assessment for 1990, payable 1991, would be done during those 4 months. The new person would only need to review and submit the assessment by February 15th and prepare for the Board of Review and commence work for the 1991 assessment. ACTION 1. Outline general objectives. 2. Table for further discussion. 3. Indicate primary options for exploration. RECOMMENDATION - It is recommended that the Council give Erection to the staff as to which alternatives they would desire to have explored at this point. It is staff's initial recommendation that a parallel track of looking at both another contract individual and a new in-house functionary. It would be helpful to explore the transition arrangement. While the transition may cost mor''< based on Wayzata's experience, it is felt to be worth it avoiding a loss of services. It is anticipated that it will take 3-4 months to determine which direction is the best one to undertake and engage someone. To employ them in the midst of work being done by Rolf may make it even more complicated. As such, it is recommended to look to alter the present arrangement by January 1, 1*^ ‘ using Option 4 as outline in Attachment A. Asse ^sing Services July 3, 1989 Page 3 of 3 PROPOSED MOTION - Moved by _, seconded by _, that the Council direct staff to explore further the options and include this in budget discussions during the August - September timeframe. Ayes r Nays Rolf Erickson, City Assessor Tom Kuehn, Finance Director TO: Mark Fc*rnhardson, Orono City Administrator FROM: Rol-f Erickson, Orono City Assessor REI 1990 Assessment DATE: July 3, 1989 As we discussed previously I am available to continue all the duties o-f city assessor until January 1, 1990. I have listed four options below that you may want to consider. OPTION ONE Fee %0 Let current contract run out on August 31, 1989. OPTION TWO Fee ♦4,855.00 Physically view the 1990 quartile before September 30, 1989 and update property records. Cease all other assessment functions on August 31, 1989. OPTION THREE Fee ♦25,616.00 1. Continue all day to day assessing functions including abatements, divisions, taxpayer service, and record upkeep until January 1, 1^90. 2. Do all homestead processing including posting to final county assessment rolls. This function would be completed for assessment rol1 turn in . 3. L>iew and calculate all new construction from permits and partial completions from the 1989 assessment and post to folders. This does not include posting to final county assessment rolls. 4. View the 1990 quartile and make changes to field cards and computer file. This does not include ratio studies and final calculations and valuations and posting to assessment rolls and folders. The new assessor would have to complete these functions. OPTION FOUR Fee ♦37,216.00 1. Numbers one through four of option three. 2. Completion of assessment roll to "turn In condition". RECOMMENDED DATE OF NEW ASSESSOR HIRE OPTION 1 2 3 4 DATE September 1, 1989 September 1, 1989 November 1, 1989 January 1, 1989 I will need to know which option you plan to utilize by August 1, 1989. I am also willing to discuss any other "hybrid" options that may make the transition to a new assessment department smoother. TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Mark E. Bernhardsonr City Administrate DATE: July 6, 1989 SUBJECT: Golf Course Business Strategy Plan Pi 63089.2 coimMam JWU 01989 CITY OF Attachment: Course 1985-1988 Financial Statements Audit Excerpts/Golf Lit Jt ISSUE - The issue is to initiate discussion with the Council regarding directions for the Golf Course. INTRODUCTION - As noted over the last four or five years the Gplf Course has not generated enough revenues itself to support its operation, let alone its ongoing longterm capital improvements. Net Income (loss) 1984 - 4,049 1985 - 9,264 1936 - (6,126) 1987 - 3,904 1988 - (15,091) The Golf Course which was originally purchased back in 1967 for $155,000 consists of 44.5 acres that originally was a private golf course. The course is a natural amvnity that many people comment about and is unique in that is a hillier course than most public courses in this area. “ Responses that Counci Imembers have received regarding the Golf Course over the years have been that people appreciate it, particularly the neighbors because it provides a large amount of green space. Those from outside the community find it a challenge to play although they may not be frequent players. A number of general alternatives regarding the course are available to the City. 1. Acceptable Deficit Operation - In this mode the City would continue to operate the Golf Course and establish an "acceptable" level for subsidization of this rc" national amenity to the community. It provides not oniy i,'olfing services in the summertime and open space for the neighbors but it also provides wintertime enjoyment for many of the City’s residents for cross country skiing and sledding. Based on this the City staff would work to maximize the 2unount of revenue and to keep the costs at a minimum within the limits of a good operation. The City would set a target within which it would consider an acceptable deficit operation. Over and above this the City would need to adopt a capital plan, the improvements of which would need to be funded by the general City revenues. In addition, the General Fund loaned the Course $4,840 for the cost of the maintenance shed plus $11,625 to assist its cash position in 1988-89. Revenues to date are even with 1988. Golf Course Business Strategy Plan July 6, 1989 Page 2 of 3 2. Aggressive Marketing «Operation - Under this direction, the City would look to substantial upgrading and significant marketing operation for the course. Additionally it would explore alternatives to make this a unique course and to increase the amount of traffic through the course. (Presently the course does have available capacity for play on a weekday basis.) Higher rates may also be acceptable for the course as the rates for this course are substantially below both public and private nine hole golf course rates. Given that golf is the fastest growing leisure time recreational activity in the nation, the Course may be experiencing the low point in a longterm operation. This would, in order to keep it attractive, requ.-* re some longterm capital commitments regarding the eventual replacement of the club house structure and upgrade of selected tees on the course. While the City could explore the expansion to an 18 hole course, the present land owner ship patterns around tne course are not such that this would be a feasible alternative. 3. Leased Operation - Under this scenario the City would cease directly operating the course but retain it as a golf course leased to a private individual on either a short or longterm basis. Issues related to this would be level of maintenance of the facility and payment for capital expenditures. 4. Sale as a Golf Course - In thiscenario the City would sell it to a private vendor with restrictions requiring it to be operated as a golf course for an extended period^ of time, if not indefinitely. As an additional item, special rate considerations could be included for Orono residents over a specified term. 5. Discontinue and Sell the Property for Development - While this is probably the most financially rewarding option, this one would probably be the most controversial as people, both residents in the vicinity, residents in general in the community together with non-reisdents who enjoy the course would find this option not to be attractive. ACTION - ALTERNATIVES - 1. Initiate discussion. 2. Table for further comment. 3. Undertake a more detailed study of the issue. Golf Course Business Strategy Plan July 6, 1989 Page 3 of 3 4. Give initial reactions of CounciImembers to undertake exploration of a general tract limiting the options to perhaps 2 or 3. 5. Engage a consultant to assist in development of a plan to enhance the viability as a golf course. 6. Engagement of a consultant to assist in the study of the various options. RECOMMENDATION - It is recommended that the Council indicate which range of options are acceptable for futher study. This would not necessarily limit revisiting other alternatives as the study would progress, but would at least focus initial exploration. PROPOSED MOTION - Moved by _, seconded by _, that the Council give their initial comments and request staff to come back with a proposal regarding the study of this situation. Ayes , Nays CITY OF ORONO GOLF COURSE OPERATING FUND COMPARATIVE STATEMeJT OF REVQJUE, EXPENSES, AND CHANGES IN RETAINED EARNINGS Years Ended December 31, 1985 and 1984 Sales and Cost of Sales: Sales Cost of sales Gros-' Profit Operatin-d Revenue: Green fees Equipment rental Other Total Operating Revenue Total Gross Profit and Operating Revenue Operating Expenses: Salaries and wages Retirement contributions Health and life insurance contributions Professional services Operating and maintenance supplies Heat, light, and power Depreciation Rent, buildings, and equipment Maintenance amd repairs Administrative charges from General Fund Communications Office supplies Printing, publishing, and advertising Insurance Other expenses Total Operating Expens * Operating Income Nonoperating Revenue: Interest earned on investments Net Income Before Charge to Contributed Equity Credit for depreciation on contributed equity NET INCOME TO RETAINED EARNINGS Retained earnings - beginning of year Retained Earnings - End of Year 1985 1984 $13,058 $11 ,528 7,653 7,676 5,405 3,852 61 ,862 52,589 15,477 14,057 63 30 77,402 66,676 82,807 70,528 40,029 36,170 3,428 3,218 1 ,286 1 ,206 1 ,291 450 5,049 5,992 1 ,946 2,131 2,818 3,148 4,312 4,062 4,609 4,763 795 706 1,202 1,244 64 64 2,655 2,161 6,488 2,919 484 587 76,456 68,821 6,351 1 ,707 2,91 3 2,342 9,264 4,049 2,220 2,570 $11,484 $6.619 40,772 34,153 $52,256 S 40,772 - 56 - ' • ' • V. •;* ; ;•• ■ ^ V;,. •.>,.•..'i'S.ll.'- >- w’jr< ■••# .( • ••.y. vy ‘;i' .• ■ ».» • 12 U yO Z CO 5^o 'I W4 m u ^ $ kO \D CD —eo »n « 4V o «- © m n M ^ ^ fN m © m rv © f** n CN o © © © 5 265308)509 933 710 5 30 360 710)fN m n © 0^ m V m *n r> m ^ ^ ^ rn ^ © ^ r- f-> r> o © m p»p-opinvfi0'0'0'0c3-inp» i-i vo r^' rn J *-r'»-cvo»-»-niX)iN<N ri © © CD ^ — rN o- w © v>,251,560,691,255,292472O' o ,710,37-998-63232319093602340185026092391762885ro O' •“ ©(N © O © ©oIN - p/1«o —r*^O' p»m,- -riNP-ii/Ti/i ^ ^ ^f^ © © IN IN 43,7262,052 1,75847, 53612 22iJ •»or>.0'/3 no-oininrvoo'IN O © © p- #n o O © m •- ro ^ o © © ® © O r*" © <N 'N © m IN ^© p* •• «A rM* s ^ « u X V — r- CD O' m vC O' O V — (■> <Ti »- V p- »n f't 00 CP p— ro mo0'»/'>nr'0'’0 — innominp*'- IN \0 O' p- 1/1 fN m r~ p- VO tr « u c Qp o -H P< 3 4/ o o* « H -p-( Vi C .J t) m lO m in O' 1/1 IN IN IN vO v/1 1/1 '0^or'0000^'f^lr•or'«N COO'DDOOOOCD'DIN"ir«»vO CinOP'O/NOi'O'OOmoeO rj »n rl fN «N p- s 2 « « c 2 c 0 O' & V r • n ^ o « V4 « (J» o £ u V iJ VI V > if u t) < O' 9» £ » W 41 <0 c £ 8. Sti o* o C ki H CW < 9} u (fl ii O 8*5 s #1 O' VI tl « VJ u V) §t) w c Qp .. ^ 2 !■ ^ « o Vp V •o 3 S' O' « « i Vp U 4i Q « -4 C & 3 2 eg - - 0» VP V to Qp C 2•o s O' C Op Vp « V « Vp JZ * y r Tj r> e V ui V c « > c -P ■o « U) •) C IT S.3 S'^ O' B ..5 1c C 3 -H VC <4P 4 « i Vp O't; a o 0 V « u 3 *o Op V Z C V ^ c 4 i-P fli* V « pH W w O' TJ C V •4 Vp vJ V VI « V* V U 4 TJ V E C "P « 4 S -P C • C .. ^ gccvPO'OVpJ'PQpain B.d £-pp.^u44>a V 00'0'pJ-pCVp«3 «.0V pPC-p 434v»0«0'0U «T5»^^ppJ0C«>H C' - V O' u § 82 Vp VP V 3 D <VP <« "b o -H 1 « s ^Qp O V m V pP V V V 3 « £ O' c v» to u M o p-P 4 _ C -O 9)€) ^ ww w’ww O'CB «'T5»pPpP»PJ0C«>-h CVpC CpPC/^V «4l U Cppcvna** pPVpkpKjSVpV4 *V .4/C30PJ Vp tJ4..4p-PUV<MVpV/U4>C pPe-'C43 it ^ U 4Vp^ OVVOpCpP Bi<«-'PP]« VP4VC3VVpapVVV4 ‘gO'*Ppp4C vw)oczopwapOXQocr<ooapQ*-' Opo S3 51 o C a: u O' V 5 uu m 4 V y u c V c c o a "■"US 4/ pP 4 C 0) « N -P V V ^ Vp .p 4/ n Qpg O C V 4/ V Vp 3> o o l*Sa O' C k4 C p-^ Q S 3 C 4 Q O -P u p3 ** c S,*^ • O O V O' . g 8 £ S^ S6 e £' t) « O 4) W V ^ 4J il 4-1 0 £ S5S5IS CITY OF ORONO Mm. GOLF COURSE OPERATING FUND COMPARATIVE STATEMENT OF REVENUE, EXPENSES. AND CHANGIf 3 ’ZTAlNID SA*NT»» ;^ Year Ended December 31, 1987 f? (With Comparative Amounts for Year Ended Decsaher 31. 1956) ■ . Sales and Cost of Sales: Sales Cose of sales Gross Profit Operating Revenue: Green fees EqulpaenC rental Other Total OperaClng Revenue Total Gross Profit and Operating Revenue Operating Expenses: Salaries and wages Retirement contributions Health and life insurance co.^tributions Professional services Operating and maintenance ,applies Heat, light, and pcwei Depreciation Rent, buildings, and equipment Maintenance and repairs Administrative charges from General Fund Communications Office supplies Printing, publishing, and advertising Insurance Other expenses Total On^’nring Expenses Operating In.:ome 'Loss) Non-Opcrating Revenue: Other income Interest earned on Investments Total Non-Operating Revenue NET INCOME (LOSS) Credit for depreciation on contri^.ured equity Increase (Decrease) In Retained Earnings Retained earnings - beginning of year Retained Earnings - End of Year -9G- 14.1bS 9,355 5,Hi 66,541 16,550 1,083 84,173 89,288 45.546 4,070 2,003 667 4,699 1,737 3,324 5,545 4,244 900 1,162 277 1,921 12,540 568 89,203 2.000 ^ .819 3.819 1986 $ 46.78A 14,251 1KS60 2,691 77,019 i 79,710 ^ Exhibit F-ll cm OF ORONO IN retained EARNINGS COMP..RATIVE STATEMENT S ^ Sales and Cost of Sales: Sales Cost of salesGross Profit Operating Revenue: Green fees Equipment rental S r.t"p”4.rcT.r0pe„.. ..v.n.e OperiClng Expenses: Salaries and wages S" I-.....- 'oS'rri Heat, ligtit. and power toS”'buildings, and equipment Communications Office »“PP“** . „a advertisingPrinting, publishing. Insurance ocher expenses Operating Incoice (Loss) Honoperating Revenue (Expense): ;«rreit".rrned on lnvest:sents interest «Pf/‘„„„p„,,ing Revenue (Expense) net income (LOSS) credit for depreciation on contributed equity increase (Decrease) in Retained Earnings Ratained earnings - beginning of year Retained Earnings - End of Tear 198'1987 $ 13,430 8.366 $ 14,168 9.055 “ 4,564 5,113 63,861 19,246 I.194_ 66,542 16,550 1.083 84 a303 84.175 88,86/89.28* 48,227 4,457 2,123 1,210 5.455 2,152 3,381 6,333 11,613 1,000 1.453 63 2.477 12,555 1 A77 568 "103.526 ._89alW (14,659)85 (432) 2,000 1,819 “ (432)3.819 S(15.P91)$ 3,904 254 254_ (14,832)4,158 46.781 42.623 s 31.944 S 46,781 CITY OF ORONO Exhibit P-IO GOLF COURSE OPERATING FUID COMPARATIVE BALANCE SHEET As of December 31» 1988 and 1987 1988 1987 ASSETS :urrenc Asacti: Cash and investttenta Accounts receivable Accrued Interest receivable Inventory Total Current Assets roperty. Plant» and Equipment: Work in progress - garage Land and land Improvements Buildings and building improvements Equipment Less accumulated depreciation Net Property, Plant, and Equipment Total Assets LIABILITIES AND FUND EQUITY lurrent Liabilities: Accounts payable Salaries payable Due to other funds Due to other governmental units Total Current Liabilities Long-Term Liabilities: Accrued vacation and severance benefits Total Liabilities •und Equity: Contributed capital Rc>talned earnings Total Fund Equity Total Liabilities and Fund Equity $ -$ 6,687 1S8 328 1,129 1,088 4,408 4.083 5,695 12,186 10,980 127,977 127,977 40,778 28,135 59.109 52.859 227,864 219,951 29.427 27,395 198,43>192,556 S204.132 $204,742 $ 2,941 $ 5,v^^- 1,723 1,199 16,465 - 15 - 21,144 6,288 4.990 5,365 26,134 11,653 146,054 146,308 31.944 46.781 177.998 193.089 S204.132 $204,742 -82- CITY OF ORONO Exhibit F-U GOLF CO'JRSE OPERATING FUND COMPARATIVE STATEMENT OF CHANCES IN FINANCIAL POSITION Years Ended December 31, 1988 and 1987 Sourcea of Working Capital; Nat Incoaa (loan) Iteas not affecting working capital - Depreciation Total Working Capital Provided (Used) by Operations Increase in long-tens liabilities Total Working Capital Provided (Used) Uses of Working Capital: Additions to property, plant, and equipment Reductions of long-term liabilities Total Working Capital Used Decrease in Working Capital Changes in Components of Working Capital: Increase (decrease) in current assets - Cash and investments Accounts receivable Interest receivable Inventories (Increase) decrease in current liabilities Accounts payable Accrued salaries payable Due to ocher funds Due to other governmental units 1988 1987 $(15,091)$ 3,904 3.361 (11,710) 3.324 7,228 -462 (11,710)7,690 9,262 375 28,849 9.637 28.849 $(21,347)yil^W) $ (6,687) $(20,436) (170) 328 41 560 325 (8) 2.148 (524) (16,465) (15) (4,560) (391) 3,348 Decrease in Working Capital -84- TO: Mayor and City Council nON: Mark E. Bemhardaon, City Admlnistrato DATE: July 5, 1989 SUBJECT: Police Department Strategy Plan 0/ 62889.4 c^3 Attachment;A. Draft Police Department Strategy Plan dated July 5, 1989 ml* 1989 cnroFtRow ISSUE - Presentation to the Council of information regardlr*^ t*ae departmental strategy plan developed by the Police Departmt -s the directional docximent for the department for the next three co five years. INTRODUCTION - The Police Department has developed their initial departmental strategy plan that sets forth their goals and objectives, the "products" they provide, anticipated changes and how they intend to deal with those. This la a document that wil 1 be refined over the years to provide the basis as to the departmental direction. This is a document prepared by the Chief and reviewed by his management staff. ALTERNATIVES 1. Accept the information. 2. Ask any questions or provide any commentary. 3. Table. RECOMMENDATION - It is recommended that the Council acknowledge receipt o^ the information and after giving any comments on its strategy plan, request the Police Department, to annually submit its strategy plan's update for the following year's objectives in conjunction with the budget process. PROPOSED MOTION - Moved by , seconded by _, that Council accept the information from tTTe Police Department regarding its departmental strategy plan. Ayes _, Nays _. cc: Mel Kilbo, Chief of Police David Peterson DATE: JULY 5, 1989 TO: MARK BERNHARDSON, CITY ADMINISTRATOR FROM: MEL KILBO, CHIEF OF POLICE SUBJECT: DEPARTMENT STRATEGY PLAN GENERAL GOALS The basic objectives of the Orono Police Department are innumerated below: 1.To aid individuals who are ii> d?.n^er of physical harm and to assist those who cannot care for themselves. 2. To identify criminal offende/*s and criminal activity and, where appropriate, to apprehend offenders and participate in subseiueco court proceedings. 3. 4. To resolve conflict. To protect constitutional guarantees and to promote and preserve civil order. 5. 6. To facilitate the movement of people and vehicles. To create and maintain a feeling of security in the community. 7.To reduce the opportunity for the commission of some crimes. 8.To identify problems that are potentially serious law enforcement or governmental problems. 9.To provide other services on an emergency or non emergency basis. GENERAL SERVICE QUALITY OBJECTIVES As a measure of effectiveness in accomplishing the stated^ objectives, the Orono Police Department shall evaluate it's performance on the basis of the ability to. 1.Safeguard freedom, preserve life and property, protect the constitutional rights of citizens and maintain respect for the rule of law by proper enforcement thereof, and preserve democratic government. 2.Develop a reputation for fairness, civility, and integrity that wins the respect of all citizens, including minority or disadvantaged groups. 3.Use the minimum amount of force reasonably necessary in responding to any given situation. 4.Conform to rules of law and administrative rules and procedures, particularly those which specify proper standards of behavior in dealing viith citizens. 6. Resolve individual and group conflict. 6. Refer those in need to community resources that have the capacity to provide needed assistance. DEPARTMENTAL SERVICE “PRODUCTS’ Our objectives are tied to the products and the services we dispense to the public. GENERAL CUSTOMER NEED AREAS By perception of the level of safety PERSON On property On streets In public PROPERTY ~ Real Estate - Personal - On street PREVENTION AND/OR RECOVERY FROM DEFICIT/EMERGENCY EVENT ORGANIZATIONAL PRODUCTS TO MEET NEEDS ■‘Preventative ■’ patrol squad on foot Law Enforcement Major crime investigation Self initiated calls Minor- complaint response Local call response Trafftc-DWI*s, Radar Information collection Counseling/dispute interferance Crime investigation/ prosecution Crime prevention/seminars Drug investigation RESPONSES Emergency Medical Response Traffic Accidents Invest. Animal Control Dissemination of information Fire Department Assistance Referals to appropriate agencies Lockouts Alarms Lake Minnetonka related activities Officer Friendly D.A.R.E. Program Juvenile Alcohol & Drug Program Emergency Preparedness Disaster Preparedness Warning System design and maintenance r"' ■V , a.' ^k;V- ilv- MABKET DEMAND ismm ■ !•■' '■’. Significant changes/events expected next five years affecting demand, and anticipated changes in our market and product. EXTERHAL - Highway 12 project may change traffic flow patterns significantly, may require change in department structure and size. “ County Road 15 upgrade may change traffic flow around the lake area. - LMCD changes affect lakeshore public safety committment. - Increase in domestic/wiid animal population in developed/developing areas. - Demand for more visible police service by both Orono residents and contract commurities. “ Increased use of the Luce Line Trail. - Construction of 1-394 increases access to Orono from urban core areas. - Changes in local government fincince arrangements. INTERNAL ~ Organization size and operation complexity will require an additional supervisor. (3rd Lt.) - Increased detail and ca.se load will cause increased investigation manhours. - Career development needs of on'Lcer.s will have t<> be addressed both as patrol off ice: rs and ailvancenien t to and within supervisory ranks. This will cause an increased in training needs. CHANGES IN PRODUCTION External 1. 800 MHZ trunking and computer aided dispatch may bring dispatching to a shared service cuncept. 2. New facilities development to meet needs for sr>ace consideration, for accreditation process, and iiolding facilit: or transport service for prisoners. 3. Capacity for police service must be measured- Internal 1. Review <;f perruninel .‘scrheduie tor contract city obligati nil, ais well lu (officer ''consideration. 2. Continue augmenting regular police service by use of community service officcr/reserves , and increasing reserve force to 2b persons. MAJOR OBJECTIVES EOR 1990-1994 Mi\RKETlNG 1. The Depart.ment Qiust what, it dot?s, t.hen it nust show how and why we do it., by increasing visibility by published artitjies, maiit>uts. anti pr(;sence at public meetings. We will develope/use a better avenue to explain ourselves to the public. 2. Define our role in the Criminal Justice System. 3. Sell the contract by meeting with <m ty representatives weekly or monthly. PROMOTION 1. Conduct crime prevention mtjod.ings promote neighborhood crime watch meetings. 2. Meet with civic grtjups. 3. Conduct tornado drills in nursing lujmes. FINANCIAL 1. Review of Budget process 2. Review court fine/court cost processes 3 Keep abreast of forfeiture process 4. Re-evaluate contract cost allocation 5. Proposal to Interested Cities when reqiiested- CAFITAL 1. Vehicle Replacement Formula, programmed replacement of other hardware: radar, PBT, etc. 2. Space Consideration 3. Terminal Update, mobile digital terminals 4. Budget for weather sirens for emergency preparedness. 5. Donation of Equipment 6. Emergency rental of equipment to be charged to police contract. OTHER 1. Crime Prevention Funding - uses of it 2. Forfeiture Funds SALES OR LEVEL OF SERVICE TO THE CITIES 1. Visibility or perception of visibility 2. Tell contract cities how many calIs/citations are handled in their city. 3. Priority of tasks assigned by city to us. 4. Priority of tasks in contract cities as we see it. 5. Team approach by supervisors 6. Appearances at city offices and council meetings by officers. MEANS TO ACHIEVE STRATEGY DIRECTION OBJECTIVE DATE 1. Continue pressure on teen On-going drinking/cite juveniles & parents. 2. Continue drug enforcement on a continual basis. 3. Continue DWI enforcement at same level as 1988 4. Continue traffic enforcement as a positive deterrant. Monitor Hwy. 12 Monitor Cty. 15 Radar enforcement as needed on requested local areas. 5. Accelerate Crime Prevention Progam Schedule meeting this year 9/89 RESPONSIBLE PARTY Supervisor/patrol L.L. O & S.P. patrol Chief Installed Mobile Digital Terminals into squad cars to improve communication 7. Emergency Preparedness Install second Orono siren Budget for siren - 8/90 Update program plan INTERNAL SERVICE CUief^ C. n 1. SUPERVISION CHALLENGES Recommend third supervisor Institute Follow-Up person Review Effectiveness of Followup person Training for Supervisors BCA Leadership Program - as scheduled Staff and Command School 10/89 Attitude Development Course 8/89 Continue Team Leader Program 7/89 Evaluation of PersonneJ quarterly Operation D.A.R.E. in schools - 9/89 Canine Progreim - 8/89 Quarterly Review to Council Upgrade Reserve Program il. Review/RevLse Policy and Procedure Review with Department: Deadly force 2/90 High speed pursuit 9/89 3. Structure In-Service Training Policy on recognition of officers 11. ?9 Date Responsible Party 10/1/89 1/1/90 Chief 6/15/89 - 9/15/89 Lt’s Chief Lt’3-Chief Cornick Chief/Supervisor Lt\s-Chief Lt’s-Gchauss Chief/Attorney Chief/Attorney Lt’s/Chief MID RANGE OBJECTIVES 1 1990 and Beyond Facility - More office space for supervisor/foilow - up More Conference Rooms. Consideration of Holding facility and *<iuiet room*. 2. Accredition The Commission on accrediatiori for law enforcement agencies is a national agency that accredited departments that maintain their rules, regulations, policies and procedures at the state ottne art. This Department would undertake thJ.s accreditation process when we have a facility that will meet criteria. 3. Career Development Program 4. Develop Public Information Officer Program 5. S-A.R.A. - Hazardous Material Recognition Program 6. Review of Personnel Scheduling 7. Master Patrolman Plan 8. Fitness/Wellness Program » «( 7789*3HD Mayor Grabek & Orono Council Members Mark E. Bernhardson, City Admlnlstra Dates July 7, 1989 Subject: K-9 Unit Authorization Attachment - A - Authorization K-9 (Canine) PoliSHfr^fr lasne - Determination If Council desires to authorize: a) participation in K-9 training to Implement a K-9 program; b) permission sollcate funds from non-profit groups to assist In financing. Introduction - Over the years various officers have expressed a passing Interest in a K-9 program. Officer Fischenlch has demonstrated the motivation to put together a program to implement it. In addition to assistance on the street. It can be a great assistance in public relations and the Offi-er Friendly Program. (As noted, both Mound and Wayzata have had a dog that Orono has used in the Officer Friendly Prograun.) Discussion - The cost Is estimated to be initially up to $6,000 (not including vehicle) depending on the number of "fill-ins" by ^^^icer Kuyper to provide Flschenlch's coverage during the training. On an on-going basis it is expected to cost $500 plus overtime costs for specific call-outs. A used vehicle plus "retrofit" would be about $3,500.00. (Vehicles have been donated in other programs.) Alternatives - 1. Authorize. 2. Table to July 24, 1989. 3. Deny. Recommendation - It is recommended the progreun be authorized. It could be tabled to July 24, 1989 but the City needs to inform Minneapolis Police by August 1, 1989 as training starts August 7, 1989. Proposed Motion - Moved by , seconded by , to authorize participation in the K-9 training and implement a K-9 program, and authorize solicitation of funds from non-profit groups to assist in the financing of the program. Ayes _ _, nays _ _. o INTEROFFICE MEMO DATE; JULY 6, 1989 TO: MARK BERNHARDSON. CITY ADMINISTRATOR FROM: MEL KILBO. CHIEF OF POLICE RE: AUTHORIZATION K-9 (CANINE) POLICE PROGRAM The Police Depairtment is interested in establishing a canine patrol unit. Officer Dan Fischenich has indicated an interest in working with a dog. The Department could use and benefit from a trained police dog in the areas of tracking (lost children, miscreants on foot), drug detection (trained to sniff out drugs in cars, houses, on persons), and public relations (Officer Friendly has used police dog presentation 3-4 times using Wayzata and Minnetonka K-9*s). See Officer Fischenich*s letter for details. The Minneapolis Police Department will be conducting a fall training class starting August ^, 1989, This class will end November 3, 1989. The training is 40 hours per week and includes the dog, leashes, leads, other training aids and tuition for a cost of $1000. The other fixed costs would be a kennel on a concrete slab for $375 and a dog house foi $125. This kennel would be positoned at the handlers residence. Training equipment such as bite sleeves, attack sleeves, would be $475. A squad car, an older one, with adaptation in the rear seat area is needed. The adaptation would be about $500 in the rear of an older squad. This dog, properly trained for tracking and drug detection, could NOT be transported in the same vehicle as the Community Service Officer uses. Also, the K~9 unit should be a take home squad for the program to The K-9 unit is continually "on-call" and call out when needed, even if the This unit could be a squad that was be effective, would be available for officer were off duty, not sold at auction. The yearly upkeep of a police dog is minimal as no new insurance charges are needed. Food costs are about $300 yearly with veterinarian charges of approx. $200 per year. The cost of manpower to cover Officer Fischenich’s absence while training, ranges from a minimum of $560 to ensure two officers on duty, to $3760 to ensure three officers on duty during Officer Fischenich’s absence at training. Not all shifts would need three officers for coverage. Part-time Officer Scott Kuyper would assume Fischenich's schedule slot. I have asked Officer Fischenich to make a committment of three years to the Department in exchange for the training and he has readily agreed. The cost for training, first year start-up costs, equipment (without a vehicle) would be $6000. 1 am asking Council permission to proceed with the program as I need to notify the Minneapolis Police Department by July 14, 1989, if we are going to participate in this years program. I further request permission to approach civic groups for funds to cover training and a dedicated vehicle for the R-9 use. o G G June 12, 1989 Chief Mel Kilbo Orono Police Department 445 Willow Drive Long Lake, MN 55356 Chief Kilbo: In response to your request for a proposal and costs on a canine program; I have, (after discussions with officers from several departm' come up with the following. *niis is a procx)saI for the City of Orono’3 Pubxic Safety Department to acquire a K-9 and train a police officer to handle and maintain the dog. This pro no sal is being submitted to inform you why a K-9 unit would benefit the City and also advise you of the costs of starting such a program. During the past few years this city has been using the IU9’s of other police departments to track and many times apprehend suspects. However, due to occasional problems with availability of K-9^s from other departments an-- to* time delays in arriving at the scene of a crime; the scent either gets old or becomes contaminated by other human scents; or the suspect may have had enough time to escape. If the city nad it’s own K-9 valuable time would be saved. A K-9 Unit wou] nipport the patrol staff by assisting officers tracking suspects or attempting to locate discarded evidence (for example, a weapon or stolen goods). A K—9 wuld also be able to track a lost child or adult, -r search a residence, business or large warehouse in a fraction of the time it would normally take using only officers. The K-9 unit could also be used in breaking up fights and large unruly parties if necessary. The presence of a dog at a violent gathering is ften more impressive than additional uniformed officers. K-9»s and theii handlers could attend civic group and other community meetings o inform the public of the benefits of a K-9 unit and to assure t' that the dogs are not there to intimidate or bite them. This could oe advant^'^eo js in public relations with children as well. They could meet the dog and handler (maybe witness a demonstration) and be advised of the dogs duties and performance along with the proper precautions e^^pected. The dog would be like anothex* officer on the street. Since he is trained to respond if his handler is attacked, he wjuld be his handlers primary back-up. Because the dog has a better sense of smell and eyesight, the dog could alert his handler to something that might otherwise have been overlooked. The K-9 is also trained to react to a weapon if it is seen, and a K-9 is not afraid of getting hurt. The K-9 could also be utilized in ERT activities# The K-9 sees better than humans during hours of darkness, has a better sense of smell and hearing and is not affected by gas. He could be the first one deployed into a building where un ^’rmed suspect is being held up and direct the SRT members to the suspect’s location# If the IC-9 happens to get shot or injured it is easier to sacrifice an animal than a human life# The equipment needed for the initial outlay would be: a kennel, cement slab, doghouse, food, medical fees and special squad set up only for a K-9. Other equipment vrould be attack sleeves and suits. Training wjuld be conducted by the I^nneapolis or St. Paul Police Departanent and they w~uld also supply the dog. The length of the class is thirteen weeks and is POST approved for 400 credits. Following, is a cost summary. Many of the items are one time purchases and would last a long time# Only the food, vet fees and various smaller fees would be recurring expenses# ^ Cost of gaining: Initial training is approximately 13 weeks at either the Minneapolis or St# Paul Police Departments# Generally speaking there is no cost for the dog (if they have extras on hand). The Orono Department ’would pay the handler's wages during this period# The cost of the school is approximately $1000.00 to $1,500.00 depending on the school chosen# 2) Upkeep for the Dog : An average 1939 cost based on opinions from several K-9 officers w::uij be: Food / $25.00 per month Vet / $200.00 per year 3) Kenneling; The iog is kenneled at the handler’s residence# ^st of cement slab for kennel is approximately $200.00 and cost of kennel unit is approximately $175#00# dost of jog house is aoDroximately $175.00. 4) Special Insurance tPoverage ; 'tone 5) Any Special Scpiipment Needed: Squad Car -To be used only by the K-9 handler and is a take home vehicle# Must have a special platform in the back and special slj ding partition between front and back area. Approximate cust would be about $500,00 for a decent unit well set up in an older squad car. Agression - Hidden bite sleeve and protector $200.00 Equipment Training Attack Sleeve 75.00 Muzzle Cagitation 200.00 Tracking - Tracking Harness $ 45,00 Equipment Tracking Leads 25.00 Obedience Lwads 14.00 Ck)llar3 25.00 (these items incluued in traiitig at f'tpls) o Thank you for your time and attention to this proposal. I really believe that a K-9 unit would be nothing but an asset to both our department and the community. If you have any questions, need further information or would like to discuss this matter please feel free to contact me. Thank You again. -It^ro^tfullyj Dan Fischenich Patrolman DATE! July 5, 1989 TO: Chief Kilbo FROM: Lt. Moran SUBJECT: CANINE PROGRAM C On 6-29-89, I contacted Minneapolis Police Officer Ron Johnson in referenct to the canine program. Program starts 8-7-89 and ends 11-3-89. I was advised that the dog, the dog training and eaaipment that would be provided for the dog, would cost approx. $1,000. This includes all the training that a canine officer requires. I was also informed that they would provide the dog and that the canine officer would have an opportunity prior to training to meet with himself and also get to know the dog. I checked the schedule for Officer Dan Fischenich and from 8-7-89 through 11-3-89, there would be 47 days that Officer Fischenich would be away from the police department and that coverage could be reauired. The minimum cost for coverage of Officer Fischenich*s shift would be 7 days at a cost of $560.00 (these days would be the days where there would be 2 officers required to cover Officer Fischenish's shift. Then to have maximum coverage of 3 officers to cover all of Officer Fisch enich' s shifts, this would require 47 davs at a cost of $3760.00. The cost of an hourly wage is based on the part-time officer's pav rate The achool that Officer Fischenich would be attentina will take place in Minneapolis. h- The^^ On 6-28-89, I had contacted Officer Fischenich and advised him that I would be attempting to contact Officer Johnson the following day, so I asked him if he would be willing to make a three vear committment to this police department if the program was approved and he agreed to this. Mayor Grabek & Orono Council Members Mark E. Bfcrnhardson, City Administrator^ ^ Date: July 6, 1989 Subject: LMCD Budget AttactaBents - A - Letter dated 6/29/89 B - LMCD 1990 Budget Issue “ 7689.IHD coumiMEnim JUL 101989 CITYOFOROHO Determination as to whether the City desires to approve the proposed budget for the LMCD for 1990, Introduction - Annually, the City receives the budget for the LMCD as required by its enabling legislation. As noted in 1989, the City of Orono's budget assessment was $16,934. In addition during 1989 in the special appeal for the mil foil, the City agreed to contribute an additional $15,000 for the mil foil. Discussion - The expenses for the LMCD during the past couple of years have risen markedly due to primarily to the consultant expenses for the Comprehensive Lake-uise Plan together with the expenses in combating mil foil. For 1990 the mil foil expenditures would be included in the proposed assessment for Orono of $25,862. This is an increase of $8,928 over the 1989 assessment, but is 20% less than the amount anticipated to be paid in 1989. Other expenses of note include a 14% increase in salaries and a 30% increase in professional services. In a discussion with Gene Stroman it was indicated that the $8,200 set aside for consultant time with Mr. Frank Mixa is anticipated to be completed during 1990. The additional expenditure up to $15,000 for public informational services to market the LMCD, both to the lake community and to the general public. Alternr*^ve« - 1. <s presented. 2. . ..4end desired changes. 3. Table for further Information. LMCD Budget July 6, 1989 Page 2 of 2 Recommendation - It is recommended that the budget be adopted as presented and should you desire to have table that until the meeting of July 24th, request to have Mr. Gene Stroman, Executive Director, available at that meeting. It is anticipated that Jo Ellen Hurr would not be available for that meeting as she will be out of town on that date. Proposed Motion - Moved by , seconded by , that Council adopt the budget as presented for the LMCD's budget. Ayes _ _, nays _ _. cc: Jo Ellen Hurr Gene Stroman Tom Kuehn, Finance Director LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT 402 EAST LAKE STREET WAYZATA, MINNESOTA 55391 TELEPHONE 612/473-7033 EUGENE n. STROMMEN. EXECUTIVE DlRECmOfl June 29, 1989 BOARD MEMBERS JoEllen L Hurr. Chair Orono Thomas Reoso. Vice Chair Mound Jan Boswinkel. Socreinry Minnetonka Beach John Lewmnn. iVeasurer MInnetrista Douglas E Babcock Spring Park Marvin Biorlin Tonka Bay David Cochran Greenwood Albert O Poster Deephaven James N Grathwol Excelsior John Q. Malinka Victoria Thomas Martinson Wayzata Robert K Plllsbury Minnetonka Robert Rascop Shorewood Robert E Sloc(..m Woodland TO: LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT MUNICIPALITIES We are pleased to enclose the 1990 Lake Minnetonka Conservation Dis trict budget. It has been certified by the LMCD Board of Directors at its regular meeting June 28, 1989. This budget reflects continuation of the District's obligation for the Comprehensive Lake Management Plan being conducted by Arndorfer Associates, Inc. It also reflects the added responsibility the Dis trict has undertaken with the Eurasian Water Milfoil weed harvesting control program. The remaining District priorities have been focused on resolving low water problems being experienced by residential, homeowner association, and marina dock installations. The Comprehensive Lake Management Plan through 12/31/89 will have cost $210,200 for twenty months of study, evaluation and plan de velopment. The balance of $39,800 included in the 1990 budget will close-out this immediate commitment. The initial $210,200 la being funded through reserve funds and current operations. Reserve funds will be depleted before year-end. These funds will be reimbursed by a $100,000 grant the MN Department of Natural Resources has de« slgnated for this purpose which it received through the 1989 legis lative session for its shoreland and lake management priorities* LMCD will thus have borne $150,000 of the management plan costa. LMCD member cities are to be commended, incidentally, for their active participation in the subcommittees which are shaping the plan's outcome. Significant input from the municipalities lies ahead for the balance of 1989. Your city's opportunity to be a part of it is still encouraged. The weed control program has made a significant impact on both the financial as well as administrative demands of the District. The Investment of time and money has produced the desired resuKs. Over $160,000 from private individuals and organizations for the "Save the Lake" fund, plus some $83,000 from the LMCD member municipal ities, provides the 1989 operations fund for the weed cutting service. Recognizing that this program must be maintained annually, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers is prepared with a 1990 matching grant, budgetad at $230,000. This grant plus state participation through the MN DNR and County participation as detailed on Page 5 of the budget require local matching funds. This brings the need to LMCD member municipalities for $60,000 for 1990. That amount represents the principal increase In the 1990 budget. We trust you recognize the value and benefits of this program. Citizen response has been both favorable and generous with volunteer as well as financial support. LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT LMCD Municipalities 2 June 29, 1989 Additional budget changes we wish to bring to your attention include: * Salaries, reflecting an interne addition, 1/2 of the salary, or $8,000, is budgeted under Administration. The remaining 1/2 is budgeted in the Eurasian Water Milfoil special project. Current staff salaries are projected for a 3% increase, with consideration for merit increases. * Professional Services includes additions for Contract Secretarial Services to record board/committee meetings, started in 1989, at $4,000. A temporary service contingency is included at $2,000. A financial service was approved to prepare quarterly financial reports at $760 annually, with the Dock Inspector included at $2,320. * Office rent is increased 15% to meet City of Wayzata needs on the lease. Current office space is 736 sq.ft. * Consulting service includes $8,160 for Frank Mixa, assisting in the management plan and special research projects. While the 1990 budget is 20% larger than 1989's projected outcome, city increases may vary above that amount since the proportionate operating cost is 51% higher ($149,490 compared with $99,032 - again reflecting $60,000 added for the weed control program). Your Board representative, Chair JoEllen Hurr, and the Executive Director will be present for your city council discussion of this 1990 budget. Your advance invitation will be welcome. Including any questions prior to that time. Minnesota Statute .pter 907, Section 4 provides: "Expense of the district shall I tne by the municipalities. The portion of the expenses borne by .h municipality shall be in proportion to its assessed valuation Section 5 provides: The board of directors of the district shall on or before July 1 of each year, prepare a detailed budget of its need for the next calendar year and certify the budget on that date to the governing body of each municipality in the district together with a statement of the proportion of the budget to be provided by each municipality. The governing body of each municipality in the district shall review the budget, and the directors, upon notice from any municipality, shall hear ob jections to the budget and may, after the hearing, modify or amend the budget, and then give notice to the municipalities of modifications or amendments. It shall be the duty of the governing body or board of supervisors of each municipality in the district to provide the funds necess. ■y to meet its pro portion of the total cost to be borne by the municipalities LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT LMCD Municipalities 3 June 29, 1989 as finally certified by the directors, the funds to be raised by any means within the authority of the municipalities and to pay the funds into the treasury of the district in amounts and at times the treasurer of the district may require. The municipalities may each levy a tax not to exceed one mill on the taxable property located therein, to provide such funds. Said levy shall be within all other limitations provided by law. Thank you for your interest. Sincerely, sugenx* R. Strommen Execu'.ive Director ERS:jlm enc LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT 1990 BUDGET Lake Minnetonka Conservation District 1990 BUDGET REVENUE LMCD Communities Other Income TOTAL GENERAL FUND REVENUE 1987 Actual $ 62,912 106,866 $169,778 1988 Actual 1989 Jan-May $ 91,048 $ 78,260 150,825 109,216 $241,873 $187,476 1989 Projected Estimate $ 99,032 139,990 $239,022 1990 Adopted $149,490 137,000 $286,490 DISBURSEMENTS Administration Personal Services Salaries $ 64,045 $ 67,669 $ 30,850 $ 69,960 $ 80,060 Auditing Services 650 855 --750 750 Total Personal Services Contractual Services 64,695 68,524 30,850 70,710 80,810 Telephone 747 685 555 1,332 1,406 Postage 1,767 2,751 653 1,567 1,900 Printing, 1ab. & Adv.4,120 1,145 940 2,256 2,500 Utilities 344 490 148 360 360 Maintenance - Office Equipment 627 2,469 363 1,400 1,500 Janitorial Services 660 720 225 720 720 Professional Services 3,760 2,986 1,371 7,800 10,080 Total Contractual Services Commodities & Supplies 12,025 11,246 4,255 15,435 18,460 Office Supplies 2,335 2,658 1,481 2,100 2,500 Books & Periodicals 216 66 50 210 210 General Supplies 349 379 255 380 400 Total Commoditi**® i Supplies Other Charges 2,900 3,303 1,786 2,690 3,110 Office Rent 3,600 3,600 1,800 3,600 4,140 Insurance & Bonds 1 ,6b6 3,842 2,263 3,300 3,500 Memberships 280 80 ------ Employer Contributions 10,176 10,863 4,642 11,141 11,810 Mileage & Expenses 939 1,736 481 1,200 1,300 Total Other Charges 16,661 20,121 9,186 19,241 20,750 Lake Minnetonka Conservation District 2. 1 1990 BUDGET 1989 1987 1988 1989 Projected 1990 Actual Actual Jan-May Estimate Adopted DISBURSEMENTS Adminiatratlon (continued) Capital Outlay Office Furniture, Fixtures & Equipment $ 70 $ 921 $--$ 1,800 $ 2,500 Total Capital Outlay 70 921 --1,800 2,500 Total Administration $ 96,351 $104,115 $46,077 $109,876 $125,630 Legal Legal Services 23,002 20,720 5,221 18,000 18,000 Prosecution 15,656 13,580 4,285 13,500 13,500 Process Service 1,643 593 1,400 1,400 Total Legal 38,658 35,943 10,099 32,900 32,900 Consulting Service 5,000 96,577 60,504 144,200 47,960 Total Consulting Service 5,000 96,577 60,504 144,200 47,960 Committees Committee & Contingency 2,886 14,880 4,000 5,000 Public Information 2,373 237 15,000 15,000 Total Committees 2,886 17,253 237 19,000 20,000 Special Service - Eurasian 60,000Water Milfoil Operating Total Special Service -60,000Eurasian Water Mi'foil Operating TOTAL GENERAL FUND - DISBURSEMENTS $142,895 $253,888 $116,917 $305,976 $286,490 6-27-89 Lake Minnetonka Conservation District 1990 BUDGET DISTRIBUTION OF EXPENSE 3. Deephaven Excelsior Greenwood Minnetonka* Minnetonka Beach Minnetrista Mound Orono Shorewood Spring Park Tonka Bay Victoria Wayzata Woodland Assessed Value (1,000*8) § 50,280 23,292 9,672 572,629 13,127 40,511 71,780 112,375 61,340 17,269 23,440 19,529 64,942 13,338 7. c Total Assessed Valuation 4.67. 2.1 0.9 52.4 1.2 3.7 6.6 10.3 5.6 1.6 2.1 1.8 5.9 1.2 1/3 Mil Taxable $ 16,760 7,764 3,224 43,408 4,376 13,504 23,927 37,458 20,447 5,756 7,813 6,510 21,047 4,446 7. of Budget Resulting from $29,898 Maximum to Minnetonka 7.77. 3.6 1.5 * 20.0 2.0 6.2 11.0 17.3 9.^ 2.7 3.6 3.0 10.0 2.0 Share of $149,490 1990 Budget $ 11,511 5,382 2,242 29,898 2,990 9,268 16,443 25,862 14,052 4,036 5 382 4,485 14,949 2,990 Total $1,093,524 100.07. $217,040 100.07.$149,490 ♦Maximum of $29,898 6-27-89 'm Lake Minnetonka Conservation 1990 BUDGET District 4. COMPARISON 1989 - 199U TAX LEVIES Share of $99,032 1989 Budget Share of $1A9,A90 1990 Budget Change $50.A5t Deephaven $ 7,:>26 $ 11,511 $ 3,985 ExcelDlor 3,862 5,382 1,520 Greenwood 1,A86 2,2A2 756 Minnetonka *19,806 *29,898 10,092 Minnetonka Beach 1,981 2,990 1,009 Minnetrista 5.9A2 9,268 3,326 Mound 11,191 16,AA3 5,252 Orono 16,93A 25,862 8,928 Shorewood 8,913 1A,052 5,139 Spring Park 2,773 A, 036 1,263 Tonka Bay 3,A66 5,382 1,916 Victoria 2,971 A,A85 1,51A Wayzata 10,200 1A.9A9 A,7A9 Woodland 1,981 2,990 1,009 Total $99,032 $149,490 $50,A58 '*^Maximum by law 6-27-89 LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATIO:. JISTRICT EURASIAN UATER HILPOIL 1990 BUDGET iNcone: U S Army Corps of Engineers Hatching Grant HN DNR Hennepin County LfICD Communities LflCD "Save the Lake" Private Fund Raising Dedicated Reserve Fund for Equipment Additions TOTAL INCOHE ADVANCE COPY TO LHCD Offcers 5. $ aao-GOD 30iC0D flS.DOO LD.QDO SS.DDU IDS-.ODD $SbS.0D0 EXPENSE: Contract Servicei IS weeks at $2SiDDD per week $ 37SiODD Equipment Amoritizaticn on ID year basis C^MDDfl value} MD-iDDD LHCD Program Administration {temporary contract service and reimburse internal administration} Contingency Equipment additions from dedicated reserve t TOTAL EXPENSE aS.DDD DDD ... .DDD $5L5^DDD ======= b/23/fl‘^ o To: Fron: Date: Subject: 7789.2HD Mark E. Bernhardson, City Adirlnistrator Tohn R. Gerhardson, Public Works Director MEETING July 7 1989 JUL 101989 NSP/Wright Hennepin - Franchise Q|jy ORONO Due to time constraints^ City Attorney Tom Barrett was unable to complete the review of the Northern States Power Company and Wright/Hennepin electrical franchises. RecoBBendatlon - To table review and action of the NSP and Wright Hennepin electrical franchises until July 2A, 1989. Proposed Notion - Moved by _ _, seconded by _ _r to table review and action of the NSP and Wright Hennepin electrical franchises until July 24, 1989. Ayes _ _, nays _ _. To: Mayor Grabek & Orono Council Members From: Mark E. Bernhardson, City Administratorc^r Forwarded recommending approval. o To: Froa: Date: COUNai MEETING Mark E. Bernhardson, City Administrator Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building & Zoning Administratoi!^^® July 5, 1989 CITY OF ORONO Subject: Performance Evaluation Review/Assistant Planning & Zoning Administrator - Step Adjustment Per the directives of the Orono Compensation Plan, Mr. Gaffron has completed his annual performance evaluation. Once again I can report that I am most satisfied with the performance of Mr. Gaffron in his duties. Mr. Gaffron, as Assistant Planning & Zoning Administrator, is scheduled for an annual review date for step adjustment purposes as of July 1, 1989. The point results of the Time Spent Profile provided through Personnel Decisions Inc. placed the position at a Group 9 level of the City of Orono*s Compensation Plan. Mr. Gaffron is eligible for a Step 4 at Level 9 under the 1989 Compensation Plan Wage Table not to exceed $16.02 per hour. Mr. Gaffron performs his duties above the expected performance level and I recommend his salary be adjusted from $15.62 per hour to $16.02 per hour effective from July 1, 1989 (see attached performance evaluation). To: Mayor Grabek & Orono Council Members From: ’.'.»ck E. Bernhardson, City Administ.tator^f Forwarded recommending approval. Proposed Motion - Moved by _ _, seconded by_ _, the Orono City Council authorizes the increase for Michael Gaffron, Assistant Planning and Zoning Administrator to $16.02 per hour effective July 1, 1989. Ayes _ _, nays _ _. S) 62889.1(55) TO; Mayor and City Council FROM: Mark Bernhardson, City AdministratclPSP^ DATE; June 28, 1989 SUBJECT: 1988 Financial Report Publication Summary COUHOLlUffnHG Attachment A*Proposed Publication Summary for 1988 Financial Report ISSUE A.) Approval of the 1988 Financial Report publication. INTRODUCTION - Attachment A is the state required publication summary for the 19r8 year, to be published by July 30, 1989. DISCUSSION - As noted Minnesota statutes dictate that the City publish the summary of the financial report, in the form as prescribed by the State Auditor, in a qualified newspaper of general circulation in the City... no later than 30 days after the financial report is due in the office of the State Auditor. The attached is the summary, to be published the week of July 10, 1989. PROPOSED MOTION - Mc/ed by _, seconded by _, to approve the summary publication of the annual financial report for the year ended December 31, 1988. Ayes _, Nays _. Thm of tliit ropoct it to oroviio t toMtry of flntiicitl taforootlofi eooeoraio^ tlio City of Orooo, Nlnootott to inttrtittd cititoot. Ttm eooplttt finoncltl ttatoownta aoy bo tatoioo^ at tbo Orooo City Offieo tt 1339 iroofi Hood Sooth, tolopHono 471* 7399. ^oottiont tboot this roport thoolS bo 4iroeto4 to tho fintnco offioo. THo ififoroatiofi protootod it froo tho sooortl porpooo fintneitl • tttooontt of tho City for tho yotr ondod Doeoobor 31, IfSt and I9S7. Tho rifht-hand eoluon thoot tho porcontofo chanfo in dollart botooon tho two yoara. Moonooi and Sipoiidltoroa for Gtnotal QporaUbAi (GotOfoAtAt rohdi) Kooonoot Total IlM Forcool Total Incroato JLiil_ Taios 11,172,799 $1,104,413 41 Spocial iUtoaaawnta 332,143 378,547 (12) IntorfOoornjMntal Rovonuoa 491,432 537,193 (9) Chargoa for Sorvicoa 443,151 594,424 8 Miacollanooua 447,259 411,845 Total 3,324,400 3,228,442 3 tspoftdituroa Gonoral Gooornoont 427,902 542,470 14 Public Safety 1,273,428 1,229,898 4 ' Stcoota 344,345 384,718 (5) Parka and Rocroation 41,582 104,584 (41) Niscollanooua 72,450 48,909 9 Capital Outlay 411,140 44,126 541 Debt Sorvico 534,876 682,184 (22) Total 3,348,123 3,079,089 9 Excoaa of Rovonues Ovor (Under)(21,32:^149,553 (114) Expenditur00 Operating Transfera In (Out) - Net .......... Fund Equity, Beginning of Year $5,247,734 $4,944,277 4 Residual Equity Transfer In (Out)*Net -153,904 (100) Fund Equity, End of Year $5,226,411 $5,247, 34 -1 CITt or OROiK) Enterprise Funds Operations Year Ended Deceaber 31, 1988 61u87.3 (4 J) GOLF Nane of Fund: WATER OPERATING SEWER OPERATING COURSE OPERATING Revenues Operating Revenues Other $185,832 5,650 $402,337 57,735 $ 88,867 Expenses Operating Expenses DepreciaLion Other 140,687 36,931 1,222 332,745 119,574 100,145 3,381 432 Net Income (Loss)12,542 7,753 (15,091) Credit for depreciation on Contrib4%ed Equity Retained Earnings, beginning of Year Retained Earnings, End of Year 33,019 81,534 $127,195 117,047 818,938 $943,738 254 46,781 $ 31,944 The complete financial report available at the Orono finance office includes detail on the information summarized above« KEY FINAECIAL HBRLTB INDICATORS 1988 1987 1986 Current population 7,284 7,212 7,172 Taxable valuation of real & personal $107, property 414,670 $103,551,514 $100,777,875 Percent of property taxe<; collected 97.2%97.7%97.4% City expenditures per capita (governmental funds) $459.65 $426.94 $ 471.99 Ratio of bonded debt to taxable valuation (general obligation and special 1.89%2.30%2.85% Bond rating Aa Aa Aa n = M.-ss * I 1 SSS3CS* 2SSS" = J s Ke!§=!=i~2 S: i 3 2 S5S*s»s=l= 5 « ixl J*2l i:£S i •111sis? Soil ii'«8|4S ^ t s li .e zfixii* IS Ilil \ ti Si zsx H i ij k«'Ia I I I I • I «I I I • • I I • I 11 « I • I 11 • • ■ < • I • I I • 11 I < I ■ • < * ' S £;; S S KS I * S2 2 •* 22 c • , * I I • I • t • • • I • • • R 2 e 22R= S 2 -. , -1“°-t, 2 , ....................... Oo •% M • « 5J ««■ ^ ^ ^ «A ♦ ^d s S I 2 I I • I • I I I I I I • • 2 2 5 5 =2S RS2S S'- 22S^ * • I ^ li • * ■ 2 ?V *3 t » ^ ot :, s--iss«s I, s I i 2l• 2 i SI “Sn ii.iiF I S I ^ « 2 O S ff 5.unnllijiiiiilrii iiiij 5 I 2 2 2 S I 1 M ■ f >I a s ** iZ 8222225 5- 3 £ c . 0.^ :22 2322£2S2^£ 2 li 1 e«5 t Si- *sS* B** ! J B V) U • 11*5 li j: £ 5 ! 2 gI - e• • * f I? £ £ s* tl 2 S U *- I 1 £ 8 2 g i t I 'til I • 4 I I I I I I » •* ^ If A^ ^ ^ IT ^ ^ « I • I ►••^11 * IJ ss: S :i 5sffSIiSSS ^ fto toT V i*r »-r • V toC 1- «#N•«a — ^-. o^ ^ M 2SJ to% fto Ito ^ 5 5? a:: S2|-~^ i S ^ to! 4to “u 5qisHSItl=•«<a•55s pt ^ ^ Pta — — ^ tob Ito *A «to — p» o 5 «to fK* bT cto ^ e 2 S S •to ^ S S £ 3 F> ^Ito 5 m to% a s 1 1 1 1 < » 1 t 1 *1 1 , . o lilt*o :• to«tot •» 11 f 1 1 1 1 1 1 t «o 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 >I g «to 4to •to S 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 • • 1 1m ;1 1 1 t 1 1 1 1 m rto•> JK 5 » ^ ^ »tok ^ tot » •« « g A\1 1 1 t 1 tot O ■) 9- cT V ~ «r 2 2 M ito f** o a toi ♦ — 4^ *to tP IS I •to z S.2 S ^ ^ t 1 * t 1 t 1 1 to^ ^ 1 *11 *•O w •< (-» « r«S III « 4to v> i-a • ^ ui * ta 3 « « »s II *< M > l5 I II *i'C-^^e>««.ooA^aoe^a !iits:r!;lj^ u w ^ iX• « M M ■• ••uaoo^T^C *#WC««a0^i«tobr*4««e*. I^ m o ^ m ^ ^ m ^ S JS 2 £ £ £ £ 2 3 U Me • e-< M m lls! , &;*:u ^ ^ m 4^ « & ^ UI • # 9 S J! •« ■ w 5 te to b ? O ^ ^ ^ ^ ^«W> I• e •»€*»•• toViQ«**^«-*toe*i «u>ti««««*<0e>cc;ee — K « h* ■* M B « • ^ *« » «« to r ^ • to* ^ t ato ^ OtotoSeScecc* C m «k>ai«0B«c ■toM toOficna to. ^ M • ^ C to > C M C 3 S <to I • m II = 5 SI -^5 21 (A *-I I Sc"'- 5 i\n ss?. |3“ ^ o :i:. w I t S :: S 31o m • U & 2 o<^o fto osS'toto^'A'^l *♦ ph JK — «0^«l <A fn ^ <A rfn p^ -V »A 0^0 1 a 5 3»A r4 4^ a OtolX^Niton# 0^0 «-• rto ^ ^ ^ ^ CD r*#o_ -• — •to r*% P^5 3 ::; «« 9» «»f*C f*C •to top 2 0 rCCto^fCOOX1 r<i r>^ 9^ 9*fto pto PH O O 5 5 • • 1 ^r — OiN^ J^ — **t o* ^ -to 9 i •* i • to toj• rS fto X r"> —toV « ^ pto •« fH « 9 — 0^ m — « ^S 5•" ............-., O 9 9 to^ -to CD ^ rp CO o <N o9 ^ X P^ s ID B * 1 • 1 r • 1 • ^ M fto — ^ m -a «A -•—a E'-5 3^fH *to C- "CJ "* toto to>tovi s A > ^ « 3 ia! (A M PC — PH ^ o to« ^ S>^ £to PH PH PC O <A e — t/N 1 1 1 ” 1 " ^ »CO “*• f I 1 — 9^ 0 9^^ <*to <■^9 ^ O fto — PH* to to ^ PH to IM 1© P h to to —* w lO to •to 1 w S O ^9 «n O CD to ^ to> to ^ r<i 5 to o 9* .A a to p^tA rc to t , , ^ . •. 1 — ph o m o ^ ec rs to • • t rc to ^ *o" 9 p^ -. Okps P^ rc w —o i S ^ —9j toP «»VP to ^ <10 PC P» 9 pn tto 9 PI rto 0 O « <*to pn to 9^ 9»CO PH o to to to — to PC PH to to m o • IP o to to• • )to 9^ totoPtoO ^rcX <-» rtotototo — — P.P«• ^ ^ ^ ^ —* ^ O to to to« ^ CD P^ to to XPH, «p pc ;; ^ COpp p.. to — <o — m iS §top« to» o* —•C4 1f ^•H • ■ H « • ^ k« V n-T i • M to • • a e V s:i!:« C 0 :> ^ M W • Q tt 5 3 8"* e t : ? 3 3 . c S i O a V .1'.-* .:; I? a • V ■ ^ ?S .3 • • O ^ W to • • • u to • e 0• H a&w««toM«e««« aO«Uto«e^*to<AJB • ^ c^to ex««to a L « to ii to 8 . U • toz s s *2 c 7 o o 2 « to ^ H ^ Q. > s to *« to O — • Vv « 2 ^ fr 9 « M to to *« to to ^ to to I It “ . ? - • • to I ^ to to to to U to to to 9totototo»«»^« toCtototo^Ufla '--•e^totototo 1 2iS£m3s&3Id d& 4 gg £ u uw »- s B5 ° u:siP-iiB to — o • u« e 5 'to S ^ o o S 5 ^ to u to to « y ^ to to to j; O to to to to M ^ ^ v> ”hs! sal ?332 Sffc-.-o gSo into to to k to toto to to to to to CkX o o o to G u «to to 1ii I i cto to — I I art or orono COMBI.VED STATTMEVT Of CHANCES IS nSANClAL POSITION AL- ppoprictany fund types Taart End«d 0«c**twr 31. 1988 and 1987 tnterDrJaa Funda 1988 1987 Sourcta of Working Capital: Nat Incoaa $ ' . )04 S 8,226 Itaat not affecting aorLing .•’pital - Depreciation 1)9,806 163,022 Gain on aaie cf llqoor atore aaoeta -<46.643) Tota: Working Capital Provided Fro« Operatlona lbi.190 124.605 Capital contrlbutIona A73.013 - Proceeda froa aaie of liquo' atore aaeeta, net of erpaoaea of aale and net of current aaaete auld -47,836 Reduction of other aaaeta :i,*76 20,839 Incraaae in loog'tera iiabllltlea -462 Total Working Capital Provided 659.679 193.742 I'aea of Working Capital: Addulooa to propertr, plant, anc ^^uipaent 482.275 33.600 Tranafera to other fund.-153,904 Reduction of other lisbilltlea 14.6)8 17.051 Total Working Capital ”aed -96,913 204,555 locreaae (Decreaae) In Working Capital $162,766 ?(10,91)) Changea In Coaponenta of Working Capital: locreaae (decreaae) In current aaaeta - Caah and Inveataeota $166,374 $ 17,684 AccouAta receivable 13.070 8,838 lotereat receivable (1 178)3,006 Delinquent epeclal aaaeaaaenta receivable 1,418 7,610 liue froa ocher funda (283).83 Due froa other govemaental tdlca 669 (1.759) Inventorlea 359 (84 744) Prepaid eapenaea (14.652)(.. J ’3) (iRcrcaae) decreaae In curtent Iiabllltlea - Accrued vacation and aeverance beneflta -9,536 Accouata payable (1.938)12,334 Accrued aalariea payable (1,519)328 Due to other funda ^345)19.610 Due to other goveraaeocal tailta 791 (1.406) locreaae (Decreaae) In Working Capital $162,766 $(10,813) TOs Mark E. Bernhardson, City Administrator PROM: Tom Kuehn, Finance Director ' \ DATS: July 5, 1909 SUBJECT: Letter of Comments on 1988 Audit 61989.2 COUNCIL MEETM6 JUL 101989 CnrYOFORQNO There are several comments made by the auditors relating to the 1988 audit which require a response. RECEIPTS AND DEPOSITS We have, since April 1989, been depositing at least weekly, immediately when large checks, such as tax distributions from the County or State Aid payments are received, and also at the end of the month. I will develop a written policy to implement the audit recommendation^. FINANCIAL TRANSACTIONS REMOTE FROM CITY FINANCE >F7ICE I agree with the suggested internal control enhancements of surprise cash counts and verification of temporary employees at the golf course and will implement. The Finance Department currently performs the cash counts and deposits at City Hall. The Police Department has petty cash and change funds nhich total $50.00 in addition to collecting for such on-site services as fingerprinting and copies of police reports. The receipts are to be turned in at the Finance Pspartment weekly and the petty cash is reimbursed on an as-neede -basis. FIXED ASSETS We intend to have documentation of the fixed asset record keeping procedures as suggested. suggested internal physical verification over a 3-4 yeai period will be reviewed. IRS SECTION 89 As you are aware the City has put Section 89 on hold but we have been awaiting the developments in Congress to determine what, if anything, is required of the City at this time. To: Mry.' •' Crabek and Orono Council Members Proa: Mark E. Bernhardson, City Administrat Forwc-ded recommending acceptance of the information. Staff has been closely watching development regarding IRS Section 89 and will assess any changes by Congress as of mid-August to determine what action, if any, is appropriate prior to the October 1, 1989 deadline. May 10, 1989 City Council and Residents City of Orono Orono, Minnesota PANNELL KERR FDRSTER Certified Public Accountants 400 Perk National Bank Bldg. 5353 Wayzata Boulevard Minneapolis. MN 55416 Teleppone (612) 545-0421 Telefax 612-545-0569 The following comments relating to your 1988 audit are provided to assist ycu with the financial planning for your City. Certificate of Achievement for Excellence in Financial Reporting As you are aware, the City’s 1987 Comprehensive Annual Financial Report (CAFR) was awarded a "Certificate of Achievement for Excellence in Financial Reporting" by the Government Finance Officers' Association (GFOA), We wish to c> i gratulate the City Financ" department management and staff on this achievement. The Certificate Pru^ram recognizes the highest standards of financial reporting, and the award reflects a great deal pf hard work and dedication by the City's personnel. We also commend the City’s decision to participate in this program again .his year, which shows the City is committed to maintaining this level of excellence. Receipts and Deposits We noted during our testing that the City was making deposits only three or four times each month. We were Informed that there were days when the amount of funds received was not large enough to justify making a deposit. We suggest adopting a policy requiring all funds be deposited at the end of each %#eek and whenever the amount on hand exceeds a specified minimum threshold. This policy may, in fact, require daily deposits during a period of many utility receipts; however, such a policy would assure that significant amounts are deposited on a timely basis, improving the security of City funds. Financial Transact-Remote ey Finance Office Each year we communlcatt to you In a formal letter the concept of internal controls and the reality that weaknesses are inherent in any ;^.nancial system. City Council and Residents May 10, 1989 We bei V,. the existing controls maintained by your City are good, but that any system can be improved. The basic limitations to improvement of controls are cost and icallty. Financial transactions which occur remote of the City Flnat. Office, such as at the golf course, should be considered when expanding controls. Practical and Inexpensive controls might include internal audit procedures by Finance staff, such as surprise cash counts, verifying temporary employees, or other logical audit type procedures. A review c*.' -es and modification of documentation often incrcises controls • >ving efficiency of the system. fixed Assets The City is continuing the process of converting fixed asset records from an outside service bureau to an in-house automated system. We encourage the City to develop procedures to regularly verify the accuracy of such records by physical observation. This could be accomplished in phases over a three to four year period by counting each department, or a '•a, on a rotational basis. Employee Benefit Compliance Requirements (IRC Section 89) Ttt« .986 Tax Reform Act established Section 89 which is effective for employee benefit plan years beginning after December 31, 1988. Strict requirements are Imposed on a variety of employee benefit plans including: * Accident and health plana ^ Group term life insurance plans * Cafeteria plans, and if t employer elects to treat these type plans as a statutory bene - Qualified group legal services - Educational assistance programs - Depv'ndent care a 1 stance programs * Fringe benefit prograi^s providing no additional cost services, qualified eu. loyee discounts, or meals employer-operated eating facilities ** Voluntary employees' bene t' . ry i»c.40ciat:ion.s and supplemental ^rf>mployment compensation benefit trusts * Qualified tuition reduction programs In general, the requiremeuLS are Intended to ensure tbit lower paid employees are receiving a share ' the "tax-advantaged" benefits being provided to highly compensated empiOj '. All employers ha/e at least o'" highly compensated employee by genersL definition. The compliance requirements are covered in twe broad categories: Qualification Rules and Nondiscrimination Tests. City Council and Residencs May 10, 1989 The Qualification Rules are required by all employers. Failure to comply with these rules may cause many nontaxable fringe benefits (e.g., health insurance) to become taxable to all employees. Plans will meet the qualification rules if: ® The plans are in writing, ® The employees' rights under the plans are legally enforceable, ® The plans are maintained for the exclusive benefit of employees, ** All employees are notified of their available benefits, and ® The plans are Intended to be permanent. An employer must provide all eligible participants (in general, all employees working more than 17-1/2 hours per ’eek) in the plan, a reason able notice of benefits under the plan. A single written document may satisfy the "in writing" requirements for several plans. Transition rules, in the regulations, indicate an employer ger rally must provide notice to employees before October 1, 1989. If the above notice is not properly and timely completed, the qualifica tion test may be deemed not met and severe tax sanctions can be enforced against the employer and the employees. The Section 89 regulations issued March 2, 1989, provide that the notifi cation include the following information: ** A fair and complete summary of the material terms of the plan that is reasonably likely to be significant to an eligible employee. Material terms include: - A general description of participation rules, - Coverage or coverages offered (including any deductible and co-payment amounts), - Timing and method of any election to participate, - Cost to employee, - How to obtain a copy of the plan, and - Name and method of contacting a person for further information. The Nondiscrimination Tests are very complex and may be changed by several bills being introduced by influential members of Congress. However, it is Important that you begin to gather all the employee and plan information necessary to conduct the various tests. Our Technical Tax Memorandum 89-4 further discusses these requirements. We will be pleased to assist you in reviewing your situation and assisting you with compliance. City Council and Residents May 10. 1989 Graphic Information Microcomputers are utilized extensively while performing audits of City records. A beneficial result is that certain trend analysis and analyti** cal relationship information can be obtained. The following pages contain certain generalized graphs produced from our electronic workpapers which may be of interest to you. Some of this information does appear in the various schedules of the City's financial statements while some Infer matlon Is from other sources which may not have been subject to our audit procedures. GENERAL FUND EXPENDITURE CtTYOFORONO □ ACTUAL.''PENUTURES FOR YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31 + EXPENDITURE BUDGET GENERAL FUND CASH & FUND BALANCE aTYOFORONO CASH & INVESTMENTS AT DECEMBER 31 FUND BALANCE GENERAL FUND REVENUE/EXPENDITURES aTYOFORONO REVENUE YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31 + EXPENWrURES GENERAL FUND REVENUE aiY OF ORONO ACTUAL REVENUES FOR YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31 REVENUE BUDGET TAX LEVIES CtTTOr OflONO I MILL RATES ClTYOFOftOMO City Council and Residents May 10, 1989 We would be pleased to discuss these consents with you. We also wish to express our thanks for the co« y and assistance extended to us during the course of our audit. Sincerely, P.VNNELL KERR FORSTER :enneth W. Malloy, CPA Partner-in~Charge KWM:sel 30 Dmtmt Mark E. Bernhardson, City Administrator John R. Gerhardson, Public Works Director July 7, 1989 Mating JUL 10 1989 ^OFOROHO Subjects Public Information Meeting - Lift Station #10 By-Pass Recently the City awarded the contract to Albrecht Construction Company for the lift station by-pass. In order to fund the project, it is the intent to establish a connection charge to certain properties contributing to the flows to Lift Station #10. Recosniendation - To set August 14, 1989, 7:00 p.m, as the time and date for a public information meeting to explain the project and connection charge and amount to the affected property owners. Proposed Motion - Moved by _ _, seconded by _ _, to set August 14, 1989, 7:00 p.m. as the time and date for a public information meeting to explain the project and connection charge and 2unount to the affect property owners. Ayes _ _, nays _ _. Tot o Mayor Grabek & Orono Council Members Mark E. Bernhardson, City Administrator Forwarded recommending approval. ProBs Mark E. Bernhardson, Cicy Administrator John R. Gerhardson, Public Works Director 3/ CdtMMUIEETM jUL 101989 WTYOFDate: July 7, 1989 Subject: County Road 116 - Information Meeting Because it is Hennepin County’s intent to proceed with construction of County Road 116 in Medina# it will be necessary to consider the construction of County Road 116 south to Highway 12. So that the Orono residents affected by the extension of 116 are allowed full review and comment on the project it is recommended th't a special meeting for public input be established in addition to a public information meeting at a Council meeting. Recoaendation - To establish July 26# 1989# 4:00-7:00 p.m. in the Orono Council Chambers to allow residents and property owners opportunity to inspect and review the plans. It is further recommended that a public information meeting be set for September 11# 1989# 7:00 p.m. Proposed Motion - Moved by ___# seconded by ___# to set July 26# 1989# 4:00-7:00 p.m. as the date for resident and property owner review of the extension of County Road 116 to Highway 12 and to set September 11# 1989# 7:00 p.m. as the public information meeting. Ayes ___# nays ___. TO: Mayor Grabek 6 Orono Council Members Pm: Mark E. Bernhardson# City Administrator Forwarded recommending approval. » * o 3a Tot Fromt Dates 7789.IHD Mark B. Bernhardson, City Administrator John R. Gerhardson, Public Works Director^^^^^^^ July 7, 1989 JUL 101989 •Jts Bridge Bonding - Resolution CITYOF acently the City prioritized the order in which bridge rep cement should occur. The reason for the prioritizing was to take \dvantage of funding available to replace deficient bridges throughout the State and, in particular, bridges in Orono. The attached resolut.'»on lists the bridges in Orono and the order of priority for re cement and today's cost for replacement. Part of the process 1 asign engineering costs that the City must pay for but will be reimbursed once a bridge is completed. The design engineering costs for the Old Crystal Bay Road Bridge are $30,000.00. Reconendation - To approve Resolution #_____ prioritizing the bridges in Orono and authorizing City staff to apply for funding for replacement of the Old Crystal Bay Bridge. , to approve Tn Orono and Proposed Motion - Moved by __seconded by _ Resolution #______prioritizing the bridges authorizing City staff to apply for funding for replacement of Old Crystal Bay Road Bridge. Ayes ___, nays ___. Mayor Grabek & Orono Council Members Mark E. Bernhardson, City i Forwarded recommending approval Proa: Mark E. Bernhardson, City Administrator-^ CITY OF ORONO L c*ty ORorvo RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. ______ a A RESOLOTION PRIORITIZIIIG DBFICIEIIT BRIDGE STRUCTURES WHEREAS, the Minnesota Legislature has provided funds for asistance in the rehabilitation or reconstruction of deficient bridges; and WHEREAS, the City of Orono has analyzed the bridges needing reconstruction on the City streets; and WHEREAS, it is apparent there is insufficient funding available on the local level, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Orono Council does hereby request financial assistance in the reconstruction of the following bridges: Bridge No, 90653 90650 L-8865 L-8854 Location Priority Old Crystal Bay Rd & 1 Burlington No. R.R. Willow Dr & 2 Burlington No. R.R. Fox St & Tanager Creek 3 Ferndale Rd & Brown Creek 4 Estimated Cost $ 560,000 560.000 100.000 100,000 Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota at a regular meeting held the 10th day of July, 1989, ATTEST: C Dorothy M. Hallin, City Clerk James R. Grabek, Mayor G To: Froa: Date: Mayor Grabek & Orono Council Members Mark E. Bernhardson, City Administratoj W OOUfKH MEETING July 5, 1989 JUU 01989 Subject: Administrator's information CITY OF ORl Stubb*8 Bay - u Members of staff met with the City Engineer on June 30th to discuss the agenda for the upcoming public information meeting of Stubb's Bay on July 27, 1989. It is anticipated that this will be held at one of the Orono school facility meeting rooms (preferably air-corditioned). The agenda will include a review of the Alternative Waste Management Study and a discussion of the sewering option together with the costs. It will be indicated that these issues primarily are a property-owner problem, not a City problem and that the City is there to assist in selected solutions should they desire to undertake them. Lake Minnetonka Regional Park - To date, the City has heard nothing from the City of Minnetrista regarding pending court dates. Lift Stations #10 & #43 - Construction will commence to replace these on July 10, 1989. As noted, a public information meeting will be held on August 14, 1989 to discuss the funding for those additional sewer unit on Lift Station #10. Ambulance Response - The attached information has been provided by Hennepin County and indicates the average response time by month for calls within the City of Orono. Should you desire additional information on Spring Park, Minnetonka Beach and Long Lake, please contact me. Regional Transit Board Nominations - The Association of Metropolitan Municipalities having received requests for nomination anywhere from 2 to 4 in each district decided that since the requirement for A.M.M. was to provide at least 2 names, that they would forward all the names at this point to the Metropolitan Council and allow them the opportunity to select from the field of canidates. The is primarily done because the A.M.M. at this point did not relevant criteria in order to make a recommendation as the position is new using elected officials. In addition to the 2 individuals, Janet Haugan, Mayor of Shorewood, and Patricia Pitcock, Councilmember of Eden Prairie, the name of Robert De Ghetto, Councilmember of Minnetonka, had also applied and his name was submitted. It should be noted that the persons may also submit names independently of the A.M.M. directly to the Metropolitan Council. 0 Goals & Cbjectives - See attached. I! J| ill i i I S % i 1 li Sf If i§ m ?? ??? S& S3S IMill s m i < III 1 in 1 1 1 gggess i 8,:l l! l\ §s § I ? 5r~ 8 } € I I h Is 5 555 , 8 SSS S 5 5s 8 I I t g 3 3 ® i i I 5 I I ^ . m y I P II i 3 s * !| 1 1 M5 ^ *8 I f I I fN 8 J 0. a aI Jilt II i h g g OD 9^s «> gg g Qo 0^ r* A OD OB i f p 18 l\ § 3 It I It I 3 ! S I ggg CSS o 5 r- ! i ? I I o O 1 II ip B.i i o H If S ^ I I S 2 3 S I i h I ^ I S 1 i Q e I T3 Vs= {ni II It SI s I S I <M » 9> 09 I ay CO ay !0 Cl in ay ay rsi VO Cl Cl\o \o . I! 00 •-< <H 0< 0) •o *o 33 ;::j Cl in •O t-t a a\ I .j 10 ayo £ 1 II Si >•1 n £ ON 0 II sms\o Cl ON ON ONs*Q ON 00 indinoS S ONo o CO a s a ON ON ® “ tN IN I I U-l O V a 0; (u Elil 6^ S •HI f 1 •Hs2 31 § & 2 S! •H ;3 in XJ 1 ONClr» s i a** la cno <N a> <Tt r~o ON <7S ® CO o> a O rH « n 8 ■:3 I.ml I I I I M s 8U -H U) ^ I I.X S S •H a o s a <M3 I ?3^ i 1 I I L s I I 8 f>4 J! N- 0 ii r- CD 00 CO CO <n o a\00 o g I > 5 I S sM m 9 c4 4J »H 4) 5l8 ^1S'a t® I m Clm 8 8 i:H 2 is III l§ u)oocDm0«oc^MOt^ot«m IN W) CNm-IINtHtHOBinr^OOINflooo «nmomi-iiOf-«\o(N« "» M lAmniNoor-niNcsr^iN IN mv r^r^oi«io«ein<N IN ^ •n'Vf'ttHfi m«- m e » t' M » r> • <••••• 5S5®555S o o o o o o o0> 10 0« V « Mfi m rt m (N OD m tH 00 op »» r-t iH N 10 o 10 orH tH •-» rH rt <H 2 S ® S S ° 2 3 2 S S 2 R S9«n •©M 9r>t»or^o«<*tin «n (T wm i-i d Jr-r ‘Or«-o>f'»in « « « % » * « n 01 o IN o 10 10 » « OB OD ▼ o §§ §1 ssO I'IN ct «o IN O O O O Q O Oo o M «n o IN oiOD 10 10 iH m IN f-l llf^lsss 6 n ^ m 1-4 M n M OD 01 I-I C5 2 ^ 01 I oo'«'Oi0inov^«inaDOimi0 o>«iN r^oioomi0<H«i0«m N Ota iNoiooi«nfNr>oo«Ok o> 10 10 ni0pr-iN»-iai0a^rn mNi «H a n m IN r-i 1*1 oi n« m 10 •-« N IN O(NO>HO01iHOMlin*-«riOO «mo i0iNiHaiNi0iNi0iNr« inin« fHiNmor^moam^ o •H 10 mmmaammioiNm *rmiH a^ i»OI'-Olfnr<» rNoi»N Nih m IN m llifllH»!tllil£ i Igi s% St-i m I i:ll I 1• 1 •H^ s u • 8 ^ S ll 8-g ■ *t e> a ■l«S I 8 “ SS2V 4»II? IH h ■3 °2 ?: 8. -2 . :s II ’*8 1 8 h Ji o e M 2 « 'Hg-%* ■ iH f-l • A 8; .— k • £ofi41 «H e • 8 2 1•N a a 2 2 S 2 41 I■ I 75 • 8 si Vn a 8 m m m » m ma a o m r> m •4 m V « o INr*- iN r- « r«' 2§S2§g°g in o IN 01 m o 10 %%%%«* % 00 o ^ n m tn m ^ lA M ^ 40 m N 40 iH 22532?®gm ^ 10 a a IN r4 % k » m a m m a oi IN 10 n a m r4 in 4* b ii a A H Illllsli I CT> OO ay D O o o• o o o m so pH in- t r m so so in U) <D (0 m 0) O X C «0 CQ ■P <n iH C njA U) I—< So A (h 0) 4J ■M 0) pcru nj Z 0) P P 0) pcr p fO in in 0) rH P O o a p 0)z p x: p o p p <TJ p <u E (U a< 0)o> a 0)0 p (D P 0) * r-i (TJ U) 03 CU IT3 in j:: iH U •H cr» E 03 < S in 0 (D u A £ (tJ P £ in M 0 -H P 0 03 P H H 0 a P P 0) 0) 0; P JP 0 P u p (1) A in £in p in 0 T3 E p no a oj O4 (U 0 0 (D (D x: A (DU P U 0) c (i> 0; u u u O4 H p p p (U a: Z E pa in in d> p 0)a <0 04 os 00 OS CO M < Q \ so O GO rsi VO o COUNCIL MEETMfi JUL 101989 LIST OP LICENSES FOR COUNCIL APPROV|J|yy Qp FOR MEETING OP July 10, 1989 Solicitors License - GreenPeace Action 2637 Nicollet Minneapolis, MN 55408 License No. ."TV^FLICATION FOR SOLICITATION - $20.00 fee ■ JUN30E?S Date Received Date Expires CITY OF ORONO 1335 BROWN ROAD SOUTH BOX 66 CRYSTAL BAY, MN 55323 ^rq?ni 2 a t i on Acs7^c>^_ _ _ _ Phone Address: ^7- Aj , rrv \jsr'T, i/VlP(^^ /vtAJ Representative: /a£. I'th)L. L' Vfe-^ Address: ^ V7~/<o Check One: Business Solicitation A/-^- Phone S'70 Contribution Solicitation Number of People Solicitating within the City ^^ pkjl Provide list of Names of Solicitors on back of this application. Type of Product to be solicited ccrfj*^_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ PERMIT EXPIRES 60 DAYS FROM APPROVAL DATE. POLICE CHIEF SHALL HAVE FIVE i-5) BUSINESS DAYS IN WHICH TO INVESTIGATE AND MAKE A RECOMMENDATION PURSUANT TO ORONO MUNICIPAL CODE SECTION 5.30 SUBD 5(a). v' ORONO MUNICIPAL CODE REGULATIONS ON SOLICITORS Subd. 3. Prohibited Solicitation Practices. f vv _ A. It is unlawful for any solicitor to engage in solicitation for any unlawful business or organizational purpose or activity. B. It is unlawful for any solicitor to practice harassment, nuisance, theft, deceit, or menacing, troublesome or otherwise unlawful activities during the course of solicitation. C. It is unlawful for any solicitor to enter, or attempt to gain entrance, to residential premises displaying at such entrance a sign with the words "Peddlers and Solicitors Prohibited" or "Solicitors Prohibited". D. It is unlawful for any solicitor to refuse to leave business premises when requested by V’ ^ owner, leasee, or person in charge thereof. E. It is unlawful for any person to engage in contribution solicitation without completion of licensing or registration as herein provided. F. It is unlawful for any person to engage in business solicitation without a license as herein provided. The undersigned hereby agrees t;o the conditions quoted above from the Orono Municipal Code and any addi^dn^ requirementSu^th^City staff n^y have. Signature of Applicant: Date: FOR CITY USE ONLY: After Review oi^pplication, staff recommends the following: Approval of application _ _ _ _ Denial of application may have. Signature of City Official:Date: r-s~-S9 Name: Address: Phone: License No. Name: Address: Phone: License No. Name: Address; Phone: License No. Name: Address: Phone: License No. Name: Address: Phone: License No. FULL NAME AND DATE OF BIRTH NAMES OF SOLICITORS Address: Phone: License No. Name: Address: Phone: _ License No Name: Address: Phone; _ License No Name: Address: Phone; License No Name: Address; Phone; _ License No (If additional names, please attach list) ! -1»Wa *S¥“ State OF Minnesota ■' OmCE OF THE ATTORNEV general . . . ; ; •' ’• ■ V,. • ;.:;U>■:. address REPW TO:^?:.'r ■; • '■ st paul ssiss HUBBRTHi HUMP^HRBY.ni '^' •. .- U' • V 3 --'' T.-’:" -V ■.................... ■- V. ; .. ■ U' . V; . ^•SEVENTHPL.ANDMIWffiSOTASr.;V■■ ‘2. .»»• ■■■ ■'■^v;::;'^ ; . ; ■ . V V Chirltlei (612) 2974^13 / xoxtcneix ’’.J.'; t®^’.Graenpeace Action ,;y^.vi\1436^^^ North West :,:r^>^a8hlngton>DC ^20009. • ■’ ■ • T*'’ "^' •■ '*• ■•.’. • • • . ;. I f. ■. .: . i; •,. . . ^ .'". r>.:* -.•./>'/,y Hoj* Y" ’ .C 4 »•-OY*' Jim # ■■ -»• .‘•'' *• V- • . ;-v*- ■; r '' . • . • . • ■ . . ■ . . - . v,:^.. ^,pear;Sir or.Madami , ■ . • ;.■ :;■ < : ■ • ••‘-Thie office has received and reviewed the registration materials • ’ .': for the above-referenced charitable organization. All materials have been properly filed as required. Consequently, your organization is currently registered with the Attorney General ..pursuant to Minn. Stat. ch. 309. 'vv'l;‘ Since many grant making organizations and foundations require "* ." * evidence of registration with this office, we suggest that you . retain, this letter in your files. , . •*••*■'• • •*’■■’ • ■ ■ * ■• ■•-VVfe-jv'' vi-?.-'.': • Six months after the close of the organization's fiscal year ’/^v^*-^ ' . the charity's annual report and financial statement will be due, . ' V.„ trul, ,o.r,, ANNE M. HENSELER Legal Aasistant • •'charities Division ' ' ' •'. ■ V- Si !s£i<.Vi' * *j^- ■- ■nrr'^-ir - . .. .-.gge^Mlfm:. •-•W .♦.* ,••••■••<*«? ~ , lii—w jOnA^ltfr •-.-i-jf.-• »23220^iMMnt Av. -8 ~-n<Mi»rr; “ -mmiiliifblt-jM'MN ' .......' •■• iiT - 8/S/A7 ■. ;: 88*137-6^342 d«^g«JCcir^ »8chM my, 4S37^SruinWick Aym. N -r= - - ^ Cry«t«l ;"fW ••........................... 8/9/65 SS#477-74-7lS5 Irian la-iiraaLi 2222 Niccllat Av. I. #7 S1inn*«pcliBf KN li/6/46 «N Stabs XD»H3r4-546-773-4C6 Jssl F. Hcdgin 2222 r^i-ai:«t Av. I. #3 r!i r.naap cl i s • TIN 5/12/69 SS4474-93-7663 Jsnnifsr Lynns Silvsr 2286 Lilac Lsns Whits 8ssr LskSf r1^2 5511C 88*468^2-3323 Asands Lsio^» l^ogars 1676 Hagus St. Paul« m 55104 9/15/67 . 1 SS6394-94-24S7 natthin* Ci^lssn * *' 257f,C.r^d 8t. 42 ^ raiiriMpatisj-m ■aB406 3/17/67 X. - ■ - MI .0L*C4*2^^^-7177::^^ , ilir.nsapclisy .^ . .,, _______ -John D.i.n.y ^ -^.1033 -2Sth Kinn..pali*, MN ’ ssh^- e.'l^.'tZ 83*477-83-6323 . -. «N DL*D4S0-429-149-64S . — • -7.W#' 'fay : i Cla Graa 2243 UE Pi arcs 8T. Kinnsapslia, MN " '•-••■' . •; .» ■'■’,j: 4*^^ L3''^b* L'~i • Gel dsn Vailay, m 55422 9/19/67 riN 2LSF-200-32r-454~726 -‘ s': Thssccre Ih&rXss Holst ^:i.^^.a^;:::s, ~r: 3S472 SS3C?3-jS-?171 y yy’-'M-\ms •• i-' Martir. !-!5ilar.d 13150 Hi^nlsnd Av. leaphavan, MN 55391 7/26/63 :..^ SS4472-96-4671 i":'; .7- 7 Ranaa Arrcwcod 519 3rd Ava SE, Apt. 215 «innaap=li», MN 55414 10/11/69 SS#209-62-1379 Chris Saxton U40 HoIIybrook Dr --N.ys*t., MM- SSSJM^r*- 10/4/69 -i: .;■ T«HN I^»3=35-22?-887-76S •-.%'Xi - rs-*. • -; . -r -ir— ' -'••■w “f *.' *r''" ^. .V. . ..• V , .♦•■ .J^:• .; ■ V ~'.. j ' >,L.‘- 'i-.*'- — --'AVl'Vi.-:*!-- *. r-:.■ ..r*. •-, * -*• 'S^2386-StBwart':&?^:^‘rr~ .•■ •’St.-Paul, MN ’-••■.-• - ^ WilliamJlicJiaei-Busaa^:; V^^Susan Mikol -Lin^^, a..„r is* d057 Hague -i:;:s:i.-rrrrr-xr -- -r-?=-r.:.Ts:c?ri^T:=:r ;-St. Paul r'MN-•■'■- ■ • .- - •■ =•• • • •• ’; -.-vv lla'S/e? S3#47a-6a-3977 . . . . . . . . . . . ..;7** -:‘ • '■ ■ .. -.. ■ ■••• V-.. v-'-t-v; John Charles Lo-fy • ^ .-i , 3101 12th rAve- S. •.;.. ; - Minneapolis, MN ^ 2/25/65 SS#469-90-3174 Lisa Lynne Faiistiho .2913 17th Aye.is. ; Mi nneapol i s ,‘^MN --t - - 12/17/56 . .. S3#252-C4-9534 • rt»‘ — v'> 11/16/66 S3^475-96-4SS6 m rL^5L100-429-l 15-373 JC3£ph r,ztsr p£32 3353 Knc^lwoco 3r a MounwiSview, MN -' 7/3/69 M.N EL#P2CC-44i-745-579 Mi=h£s: L=-w 2545 Pilister/ Av.3 Minneapolis, MN 9/S/66 S34J46?-72 ’1544 Erik Lundsgsard 5339 EinS.’^son Av. Ma nnaapa, Min 1-20-63 SS»469-9C-CC20 J»c:;u=linB Lcuiss Hunt :?41 Aldrich Av S. #10 rti-naapclia, MM 554C3 3/13/64 33:4 477-92-5191 MN 2L#H530-356-54?-204 Leslie Johnjion 315 W. 15th St - *:'-Minneap6lis,MN S/2S/63 S3#471-9C-S69C David raniel3 320? Sirard Av. 3 #5 Minneapolis, MN. MN 2L#D542-135-S43-012 SS#040-54-4331 Anr.emaris Margaret Lsalos 1716 3rd Ave. 3. Minneapolis, MN 9/15/49 S3#472-60-6461 - ■ ■ ■ ... V , .•■-' ■ Friilip N/hus 2017 23th Av. 3. Minneapolis, MN 1/11/67 S3#3S3-S4-9139 . Annette Loye Odren '* '^4343 4th Aver S.'^r!^- /: Mi nneapol is, MN • B/17/59 • ■. ' 1 .% i •«,, - V t-.. *■ r- - • • ^ -- Jacqueline :CaMn Starbird -2343 Irving Av. 3. " ' Minneapolis, MN 3/29/66 ^SS#35Qt64^9?04, TSin/Ll\ i ^.eriU ns rr -jR- -i::■•'j--£-.‘.-;->. :i. •_.■ ._: ..ii _. ■ .•^•'i-•j?--:^-.^iSt-.3;v " - ~" •■ •% ..i. •'=■ 5S#480-:5«' ' *: . Robert :e/is/7o -■-.••f:'- «8#47o-04-n8s_;;i' ■ 29C7 KnoH;^j.;N j'. -r^- -^- «-■ 'n£nnBap'dll^\|«i • >: ' ’ m TL ^ • V “* ?/2*/w3 SS423:-86-8114 8S#474-08-6049 1401 r*rk* Av. Mlr.riSApclla, rt:4 10/Ui/6Z 8S9474*66t3&31 -yr.n* -aw 4723 2.iL-i Av. .‘lir.r.sArs::*, .'^r: ?/ir/c3 SS#46S-94-S0X7 Dftvid SrAh«A 9S LsAf St. Lang Laks, m 2/1A/&7 SS447i-34-S^77 Heidi .‘^asc^.k■ 2172 2sfflc Av. #3 Si. .*^4 srics ... —.. Z2.1- 474“C2 *777o -»•• . ♦. ;%■ .. ^r -•;.''r ■ “ >' ■rr- --*' ^ r •* • '‘.-i * ■yi. . .. •-. . ■ '. • V -.rf . •“^v- ■?2- -V fflT;;- - ••. V -i*- - • t -w. vy s::-:jr^:v:3»- -TV " r-^'3 R> '‘gr Ail- T *--'^' **x ,-^-----*'Tv ^^ - ' ‘ '•'' ,y •■./ -•R jT ---- ^ iL= 1Tt7 iiJ* "xSfc>t T- rj -n--'Wie. *< f. ‘ -»v.mg H ■ — «4i'- «»r IT . f : S D' 3 3' 07/31/89 PR: 20 CM PRRItEQOR COUNCIL MEETIN6 JULI01989 CITY OF 0 EMP •NAME DPT YTD GROSS CURRENT GROSS 469188026 CALLAHAN. EDWfc^n ;* QOETTEN, J.DlAtih 11 1691.69 241.67 18324677 11 1691.69 241.67 339362317 GRABEK^ JAMES 11 2100.00 300.00 361385151 NETTLES, ALAN R 11 1691.69 241.67 469605135 PETERSON. BARBARA A 11 1691.69 241.67 1,266.68 mi-ms ^mm m mMm. «tj Ifas llMarKi Kfi^Sii i«{f P|«= 06/2S/I9 PR CB PRREQOR O G NAME OPT ANDERSON, BRUCE L ^ BERNHARDSON. HARK E B06ZIEN. SUE A BOSMA, iAMlE L BOYLAN. STEVEN D BRAUN. ROBERT R BRINKHAUS. JOHN F CHESWICK, GARY B CHRISTIANSON. SALLY CORNICK, JAMES L ENQLlSHill. IRVING ERICKSON, KURT R FISCHENICH. DAN T FRITZLER. JOHN M QAFFRON. MICHAEL P OERHARD^ON, JOHN R GREGORY. JAMES D HALLIN. DOROTHY M HANSEN, STEVEN C HANSINd, CAROL J JACOBS. THOMAS J JOHNSON. BRADLEY P KILBO, MELVIN H_ KNUTS6n. CHARLOTTE KUEHN^ +HOMAS M KUYPE*. SCOTT E LINDST^OM. DAVID J MABUSTH, JEANNE A MILLS JR. WALTER H MORAN, MARK F MOROWdZYNSKI. NAA6. THERESA OBRIEN. RANDY OMAN. LYLE E PALMER. PETER B OUAST. WAYNE A RATHBUN, BARRY J SASS. JOHN J SCHAUSS. CHARLES R SCHEFFLER, LAURIE K SKREEN. dAlE S STEFFENHAQEN. RONALD STEVENS. BETtY G THOMTON. MARK R TOMCHECK. LAWRENCE F TOMCZYK. MARK W WALSH. KEVIN L JAMES L L 31 12 31 12 93 93 42 31 31 31 31 31 31 31 33 42 42 12 42 31 33 31 31 15 15 31 93 33 93 31 31 12 92 33 31 92 92 42 31 12 42 93 93 31 31 31 35 YTD GROSS .94 .13 .66 .73 .76 20 11 12 35 .76 .97 .01 .11 62 20027 28359 11541 6519 232 794.25 18136.20 19057 2218 19892 99 19461 32 18274 17920 19029 16307 21985 15740 14395 12440.77 6543 43 16307 19149 23650 11508 22126 4660 146.25 19538 99 1147 18952 21894 11505 12657 13675 445.00 15213.70 13210 14239 15228 9809 13904.84 14415.40 1380 16954 18372 17934 3654 88 .26 .00 87 .33 14 13 52 64 64 48 80 42 64 .06 .79 77 22 82 84 60 CURRENT GROSS 1632.732330.16 886.40 556.22 28.50 279.00 1308.00 1468 00 223.11 1469.72 1458.59 1364.16 1380.40 1517.64 1256.08 1693.37 1084 80 1108.80 974.71 518.93 1256.07 1432.37 1821.60 886.40 1704 24 603.53 54.00 1504.95 228.00 1337.28 1914.10 886 40 828 00 1053.35 20.00 1234.05 1011 48 973.60 1185.52 781.69 973 1110 291 1299 1664 1415.32 329.34 60 32 38 20 60 V. ..4 ; .'M .: » . .*!“■ 06/25/99 PR: 19 CB PRREOOR NAME WALTERS. LINDA G DPT 15 YTD GROSS CURRENT GROSS 4826 81 804.48 51,144 19 ^ -:'r/ I -,w-u I . O- 18S9 CITY OF ORONO CHECK NO DATE 012031 07/06/B9 AMOUNT 3.792 58 3.792 58 CHECK REGISTER VENDOR A ITEM DESCRIPTION ACCOUNT NO. INV. 01-2031-000-00 177364 177364 177364 177364 177354 177364 177364 07/06/89 07/06/89 07/06/89 07/06/89 07/06/89 07/06/89 07/06/89 2214 79 86 87 98 06- 87 87 18 ' JAMES JAMES JAMES JAMES JAMES JAMES JAMES OFFICE OFFICE OFFICE OFFICE OFFICE OFFICE OFFICE OFFICE OFFICE OFFICE OFFICE OFFICE OFFICE OFFICE SUPPLIES SUPPLIES SUPPLIES SUPPLIES SUPPLIES SUPPLIES SUPPLIES 01-4210-039-12 01-4210-059-14 01-4210*069-15 01-4210-129-31 01-4210-129-31 01-4210-174-33 01-4210-249-42 • » M ■ II « 1910112 07/06/89 50.00 50.00 A-I MINNETONKA RENT PROPANE TANKS Oi-4220-249-42 191010 191011 O">91014 191027 191027 191027 191027 191027 191027 191027 191027 191027 07/06/89 07/06/89 07/06/89 07/06/89 07/06/89 07/06/89 07/06/89 07/06/89 07/06/89 07/06/89 07/06/89 07/06/89 17 17 17.17 80.00 80 00 81 24 81 24 59 29 473 59 74 15 29 74 30 842 00 00 25 00 00 00 00,oc 00 25 AT4T INFO SYSTEM AIR SIGNAL INC ALL STAR ELECTRIC APPLE APPLE APPLE APPLE APPLE APPLE APPLE APPLE APPLE VALLEY valley VALLEY valleyVALLEY valley valley VALLE'' valley agency AGENCY AGENCY AGENCY AGENCY AGENCY AGENCY AGENCY AGENCY telephone INSTALL 2 ANTENNAS 74-4320-590-93 01-4341-129-31 REPAIR TRAFFIC LGT 01-4342-249-42 AGENT FEE 01-4379-039-12 AGENT FEE 01-4379-069-15 AGENT FEE 01-4379-129-31 AGENT FEE 01-4379-174-33 AGENT FEE 01-4379-249-42 AGENT FEE 01-4379-290-61 AGENT FEE 72-4379-549-91 AGE NT FEE 73-4379-569-92 AGENT FEE 74-4379-590-93 191030 191030 191030 191030 191030 191030 191031 07/06/89 07/06/89 07/06/89 07/06/89 07/06/89 07/06/89 07/06/89 19 19 19 32 19 19 129 43 43 43 50 43 43 65 1 97 AT &T INFO SYSTEM AT &T INFO SYSTEM AT &T INFO SYSTEM AT &T INFO SYSTEM AT A T INFO SYSTEM AT &T INFO SYSTEM AT &T 1oDATA PROCESSNG DATA PROCESSNG DATA PROCESSNG DATA PROCESSNG DATA PROCESSNG DATA PROCESSNG TELEPHONE 01-4340-039-12 01-4340-0S9-14 01-4340-069-15 01-4340-129-31 01-4340-174-33 01-4340-249-42 01-4320-^ 3-12 n. 1910 CITY OF ORONO CHECK NO. DATE 191031 07/06/89 1910C4 07/06/89 191087 07/06/89 191090 07/06/89 191110 07/06/89 191110 07/06/89 191114 >»1127 191145 07/06/89 07/06/89 07/06/89 AMOUNT 18 64 20 61 30 69 30 69 1.837 80 1.837 80 150 00 150.00 48 96 73 44 122 40 58 00 58 00 85 00 85 00 . .. ;•H-;r CHECK REGISTER VENDOR AT A T COMM BLITZ ONE HR FOTO BURY & CARLSON INC BUREAU CRIMINAL APPR CHAPIN PUBLISHING CHAPIN PUBLISHING CITYVIEW PLMBG A HTG COFFIN GRONBERG 105 44 CORNICK/JAMES ITEM DESCRIPTION TELEPHONE PHOTO DEVELOP FINE MIX 2ND QTR CHRG AD S/W IMPROVEMT AD S/W IMPROVEMT REPAIR SINK EASEMT GORDON NELSON 191142 07/06/89 171 171 88 88 ■ COPY DUP PF1 INC COPY MACH MAINT 191143 07/06/89 4 50 COMMERCIAL LiFE/GRP ’ULY INS 191143 07/06/89 2 70 COMMERCIAL LIFE/GRP JULY INS 191143 07/06/89 2 70 COMMERCIAL life/grp JULY INS 191143 07/06/89 3 60 commercial LIFE/GRP JULY INS 191143 07/06/89 9 90 COMMERCIAL life/grp JULY INS 191143 07/06/89 3 60 COMMERCIAL LIFE/GRP JULY INS 191143 07/06/89 5 40 commercial LIFE/GRP JULY INS 191143 07/06/89 1 08 commercial LIFE/GRP JULY INS 191143 07/06/89 1 62 commercial LIFE/GRP JULY INS 191143 07/06/89 1 62-commercial LIFE/GRP JULY INS 191143 07/06/89 1 62 commercial LIFE/GRP JULY INS 191143 07/06/89 36 90 00 ■ commercial LIFE/GRP JULY INS LOOGE/MEALS/MILEAGE ACCOUNT NO. INV. 01 4320-129-31 01-4210-129-31 01-4233-249-42 0. -4355-129-31 72- 4323-549-91 73- 4323-569-92 01-4343-099-17 01-4305-200-41 01-4210-129-31 01-4152' 01-4152 01-4152 01-4152' 01-4152 01-4152 01-4152 72- 4152 73- 4152' 73-4152 73- 4152 74- 4152' 039-12 069-15 121-31 126-31 129-31 174-33 249-42 549-91 569-91 569-91 569-92 590-93 01-4356-129-31 r ^m 19t9 CITY OF ORONO CHECK NO. DATE 19U54 07/06/88 191164 07/06/89 191198 07/06/89 191202 07/06/89 191212 07/06/89 O; O 07/06/89 191233 07/06/89 191247 07/06/89 19126/ 07/06/89 191282 07/06/89 191284 07/06/89 AMOUNT 105.44 • 101 15 101.15 * 85 14 85 14 • 90.00 90 00 • 10 44 10 44 ‘ 20 40 20 40 • 8.00 8.00 » 46 08 46 08 ■ 35 76 35.76 • 896 00 896.00 • 19 0019 or • 33 00 CHECK REGISTER .■MDOR ITEM DESCRIPTION CYS UNIFORMS DAY TIMERS EHRICH BAKING CO EXPRESS MESSENGER FLORA & FAUNA QAFFRON/MIKE golf car midwest NAME TAGS OFFICE SUPPLIES ELMER J PETERSON CO PUMP TANK ROLLS POSTAGE FBS CAP markets grp BANK CHARGE BUG SPRAY MILEAGE JULY RENT HAPPYS POTATO CHIP CHIPS ACCOUNT NO. INV. 01-4221-129-31 01-4210>129-31 01-4343*099-17 74-4802-591-94 01-4321-174-33 01-3810-000-00 74-4802-591-94 01-4381-174-33 74-4331-590-93 HANSINQ/CAROL UNIFORM^SHOtS 01-4221-129-31 74-4802-591-94 1919 CITY OF ORONO CHECK NO. DATE AMOUNT 33 00 • & CHECK REGISTER VENDOR item DESCRIPTION ACCOUNT NO. INV. 191287 191287 191287 191287 191287 191287 191287 191287 191287 191287 191287 191287 191287 191287 191287 07/06/89 07/06/89 07/06/89 07/06/89 07/06/89 07/06/89 07/06/89 07/06/89 07/06/89 07/06/89 07/06/89 07/06/89 07/06/89 07/06/89 07/06/89 11 11 11 11 11 41 41 41 41 41 2.263 1141 1141 2,634 70 70 70 70 70 43 42 43 43 43 00 70 43 .70 43 90 HARRIS/3H HARRIS/3M HARRIS/3H HARRIS/3M HARRIS/3H HARRIS/3M HARRIS/3M HARRIS/3M HARRIS/3MHARRIS/3M HARRIS/3M HARRIS/3M HARRIS/3M HARRIS/3M HARRIS/3H PRODUCTS FAX PRODUCTS FAX PRODUCTS FAX PRODUCTS FAX PRODUCTS FAX PRODUCTS FAX PRODUCTS FAX PRODUCTS FAX PRODUCTS FAX PRODUCTS FAX PRODUCTS FAX PRODUCTS FAX PRODUCTS FAX PRODUCTS FAX PRODUCTS FAX PAPER PAPER PAPER 01-4210- 01-4210- 01-4210- 01-4210- 01-4210- 01-4340- 01-4340- 01-4340- 01-4340-01-4340- 14-4540- 72-4210- 72- 4340- 73- 4210- 73-4340- 039-12 069-lS 129-31 174-33 249-42 039-12 069-15 129-31 174-33 249-42 630-00 549-91 549-91 569-92 569-92 191291 fl « K « C^1303 07/06/89 07/06/89 5.76 5.76 1.328.15 1,328 15 HALLIN/DOROTHY HENN CTY FIN DIV MILEAGE MAY ROOM/BOARD 01-4381-040-13 01-4358-080-16 191308 191308 07/06/89 07/06/89 6 00 182 44 188 44 HENN CTY SHERIFF DPT HENN CTY SHERIFF DPT REPAIR SPEAKER BOOKING FEE 01-4342-129-31 01-4358-080-16 191330 191330 07/06/89 07/06/89 89 91 9.12 99 03 ICMA RETRMNT CORP ICMA RETRMNT CORP ICMA 6/12-6/25 ICMA 5/1-6/11 RETRO 01-4140-039-12 01-4140-039-12 191363 191364 191364 191364 191364 191364 191364 191364 07/06/89 07/06/89 07/06/89 07/06/89 07/C6/89 07/06/89 07/06/89 07/06/89 45 45 27 4 35 31 84 84 11 68 27 49 96 01 28 JACOBS/TOM JAMES OFFICE JAMES OFFICE JAMES OFFICE JAMES OFFICE JAMES OFFICE JAMES OFFICE JAMES OFF*CE MILEAGE OFFICE SUPPLIES TELEPHONE CORD OFFICE SUPPLIES OFFICE SUPPLIES OFFICE SUPPLIES OFFICE SUPPLIES OFFICE SUPPLIES 01-4381-174-33 01-4210 01-4210 01-4210 01-4210 01-4210 01-4210 01-4210 -039-12 •039-12 -059-14 -089-15 129-31 -174-33 -249-42 o Cl— 1019 CITY or O0ONO CHECK NO. DATE AMOUNT 99 80 • CHECK REGISTER VENDOR ITEM DESCRIPTION ACCOUNT NO INV. 191385 07/06/89 11 58 11.58 • keavenys drug OFFICE SUPPLIES 74-4210-590-93 191404 191404 07/06/89 07/06/89 36 45 76 15 112.60 • THE LAKER THE LAKER PUBLISHING PUBLISHING 01-4322-039-12 01-4322-174-33 191423 07/06/89 77.50 77.50 LEAGUE OF MN CITIES REG FEE CONF 01-4356-129-31 191435 191435 191435 191435 191425 191435 91435 1435 1435 1435 91435 191435 191435 07/06/89 07/06/8" 07/06/89 07/06/89 07/06/89 07/06/89 07/06/89 07/06/89 07/06/89 07/06/89 07/06/89 07/06/89 07/06/89 237.63 LOGIS -SUITE 300 PERMIT FORMS 01-4210-174-33 102 59 LOQIS -SUITE 300 PRINTER MAINT 01-4340-039-12 102.59 i.OGIS -SUITE 300 PRINTER MAINT 01-4340-174-33 717.55 LOGIS -SUITE 300 APPL SUPPORT MAY 01-4352-069-15 400 00 LOGIS -SUITE 300 APPL SUPPORT MAY 01-4352-129-31 218 39 LOGIS -SUITE 300 APPL SUPPORT MAY 01-4352-174-33 545 08 LOGIS -SUITE 300 DATA PROC MAY 01-4355-059-15 640.38 LOQIS -SUITE 300 DATA PROC MAY 01-4355-129-3: 322.72 LOGIS -SUITE 300 DATA PROC MAY 01-4355-174-33 144 13 LOGIS -SUITE 300 APPL SUPPORT MAY 72-4352*549-91 22 36 LOQIS -SUITE 300 DATA PROC MAY 72-4355-549-91 292 63 LOGIS -SUITE 3 JO APPL SUPPORT MAY 73-4352-569-9245 44 LOGIS -SUITE 300 DATA PROC MAY 73-4355-569-91 3.791.49 191437 191437 191437 191437 07/06/89 07/06/89 07/06/89 07/06/89 21,639 14 2,5J4 56 24.244 00 82 40 65 87 CITY OF LONG LAKE CITY OF LONG LAKE CITY OF long lake CITY OF LONG LAKE 2ND QTR FIRE JUNE FLASHER 2ND OTR PD RENT JUNE LIFT STATION 01-4315-130-32 01-4325-249-42 01-4332-129-31 73-4344-569-92 191441 191441 07/06/89 07/06/89 11 75 16 75 28 50 LONG LAKE TIRE SERV LONG LAKE TIRE SERV REPAIR TIRE J DEERE REPAIR TIRE BACKHOE 01-4341-249-42 01-43/.1-249-42 191456 07/06/89 6 90 6 90 MABUSTH-JEANNE PARKING 01-4381-174-33 3 o o s ... ♦ *4* ^*» p o 1999 CITY OF OftONO CHECK REGISTER CHECK NO . DATE AMOUNT VENDOR ITEM DESCRIPTION 101460 07/06/99 153 40 153 40 « MARK VII DTST BEER 191467 191467 191467 1914'J7 191^67 07/06/99 07/06/99 07/06/99 07/06/99 07/06/99 195 70 97.95 97.85 191.01 288 86 871.27 - MED CTR HEALTH CARE MED CTR HEALTH CARE MEO CTR HEALTH CARE MED CTR HEALTH CARE MED CTR HEALTH CARE JULY INS JULY INS JULY INS JULY INS JULY INS 191495 07/06/99 77 00 77 00 - MPLS OXYGEN CO OXYQEN/ACETYLENE 191490 191490 191490 07/06/99 07/08/99 07/06/99 11 00 267 96 3 57 282.53 • MINNEGASCO MINNEGASCO MINNEGASCO UTILITIES UTILITIES UTILITIES ^91495 07/06/89 7 00 7.0f • MN BENEFIT ASSN LIFE INS 191499 07/06/89 157 10 157.10 ■ MN CELLULAR TELE MOBILE PHONES 191500 07/06/99 19 66 19 66 * MINN COMM TELEPHONE 191505 07/06/99 83 40 83 40 » MN FIRE & SAFETY RECHARGE FIRE EXTG 191525 07/06/99 2 43 2 43 • MINN UC FUND UC INT 191535 07/06/89 13,356.25 13.356 25 • CITY OF MOUND FIRE CONTRACT o ACCOUNT NO INV 74-4115-591-94 01-4151-039-12 01-4151-069-15 01-4151-129-31 01-4151-174-33 01-4151-249-42 01-4220-249-42 01-4324-129-31 72- 4324-549-91 73- 4324-569-92 Oi-4152-129-31 01-432r-129-31 01-4320-129-31 01-4342-129-31 01-4100-290-61 01-4317-132-32 o 198« CITY OF ORONO CHECK NO. DATE 191545 191562 191562 191562 191562 191562 191562 191562 191562 191562 191562 191562 191571 Q.. 191574 74 74 191590 191590 191597 191597 191606 191608 191608 191608 191608 191621 07/06/89 07/06/89 07/06/89 07/06/89 07/06/89 07/06/89 07/06/59 07/06/89 07/06/89 07/06/89 07/06/89 07/06/89 07/06/89 07/06/89 07/06/89 07/06/89 07/06/89 07/06/89 07/06/89 07/06/89 07/06/89 07/06/89 07/06/89 07/06/89 07/06/89 07/06/89 07/06/89 AMOUNT 20 98 20.98 316 256 2 95 161 7 13 1,833 105.86 780.97 99 3.672 11 90 75 34 85 72 20 06 01 77 9.000.00 9.000.00 « 85 00 85 00 170 00 120 00 460 00 5 95 S3 40 59.35 3.792 58 3.792 58- 00 ' 5.865 1.000 1 .020 1.200 BIS 9.900 00 00 00 00 00 00 647 00 CHECK REGISTER VENDOR NAVARRE AUTO REPAIR ITEM DESCRIPTION OIL CHANGE TRUCK NSP NSP NSP NSP NSP NSP NSP NSP NSP NSP NSP UTILITIES UTILITIES UTILITIES UTILITIES UTILITIES UTILITIES UTILITIES UTILITIES UTILITIES UTILITIES UTILITIES NORWEST BANK HINN NA INT DUE 8-1 OFFICE PROO OF MN MAINT TYPEWRITER OFFICE PROD OF MN MAI NT TYPEWRITER OFFICE PROO OF MN MAINT TYPEWRITER OFFICE PROO OF MN DOS CLASS SCMEFFLER OTJEN BROS OTTEN BROS TIMBER REPAIR FLOWERS PUBLIC EMPL RET ASSN PUBLIC EMPL RET ASSN PERA 6/12-6/25 PERA 6/12-6/25 PANNElL KERR FORSTER PANNELL KERR FORSTER PANNELL KERR FORSTER PANNELL KERR FORSTER PANNELL KERR FORSTER AUDIT PYMNT 2 6F0A CERT ACHIEV AUDIT PYMNT 2 AUDIT PYMNT 2 AUDIT PYMNT 2 PHYSICIANS HEALTH JULY PHP ACCOUNT NO. INV. • 73-4341-569-92 01-4324 01-4324 01-4324 01-4324 01-4324 01-4324 01-4324 72- 4324 73- 4324 73- 4324 74- 4324 •099-17 -129-31 •175-34 •249-42 -249-42 -290-61 -290-61 -549-91 -569-92 -569-92 -590-93 42-4620-903-00 01-4340-039-12 01-4340-069-15 ■:i-4340-129-31 01-4356-039-12 01-4233-249-42 74-4343-590-93 01-2031-000-00 01-2I131-OCO-00 01-4300-020-11 01-4300-069-15 72- 4300-549-91 73- 4300-569-92 74- 4300-590-93 01-3872-000-00 © 19t9 CITY OF ORONO CHECK fiO. DATE 101B21 191621 191621 191621 191621 191621 191621 191621 191621 191631 191643 191643 191643 191643 191643 191643 O' 191665 191675 191696 191719 191738 o 07/06/89 07/06/89 07/06/19 07/06/89 07/06/89 07/06/89 07/06/19 07/06/89 07/06/89 07/06/89 07/06/89 07/06/89 07/06/89 07/06/89 07/06/89 07/06/89 07/06/89 07/06/89 07/06/89 07/06/89 07/06/89 07/06/89 AMOUNT 497.00 382.00 190.10 305.10 .< .068.20 306.00 764.00 138.00 207.00 4.504 40 1,617.00 1.617 00 21 1 1251 3 6 96 87 20 60 90 00 00 57 J24.9S 124.95 • 41 88 41 88 • 478 34 478 34 • 1,107 50 1.107.50 80 00 80.00 229 38 229 38 ; .:v : v * CHECK REGISTER VENDOR PHYSICIANS PHYSICIANS PHYSICIANS PHYSICIANS PHYSICIANS PHYSICIANS PHYSICIANS PHYSICIANS PHYSICIANS HEALTH HEALTHhealth HEALTH HEALTH health HEALTH HEPLTH HEALTH POLKA DOT RECYCLING PRUDENTIAL PRUDENTIAL PRUDENTIAL PRUDENTIAL PRUDENTIAL prudential RICKS SUPERVALU ROLLINS OIL CO DIXIE PETRO'CHEM ITEM DESCRIPTION JULY PHP JULY FHP JULY PHP JULY PHP JULY PHP JULY PHP JULY PHP JULY PHP JULY PHP RECYCLING LIFE INS JULY LIFE INS JULY LIFE INS JULY LIFE INS JULY LIFE INS JULY LIFE INS JULY REED CANDY & TOBACCO CIG & CANDY MISC SUPPLIES GAS/MOTOR FUEL ACCOUNT NO. INV. I SENIOR COMM SERVICES CTR 3 PYMNT CHLORINE STOFFEL SEALS CORP JR BADGES 01-4151 01-4151- 01-4151- 01-4151- 01-4151- 01-4151 01-4151- 72- 4151- 73- 4151- 039-12 069-15 121-31 126-31 129-31 i/4-33 249-42 549-91 569-92 0.-4392-295-65 01-4152-069-15 01-4152-121-31 01-4152-126-31 01-4152-129-31 01-4152-174-33 01-4152-249-42 74-4802-591-94 74-4242-590-93 74-4220-590-93 01-4385-100-21 72-4234-549-91 01-4210-129-31 .-•vJ.i-.'T,.-,,.'::': 19S9 CITY or OllOttO CHECK NO. DATE 19X739 191751 191751 191779 192790 191794 191815 191815 191815 191815 191815 191815 191815 191815 191815 191815 191815 191815 191869 191866 191875 07/06/99 07/06/89 07/06/89 07/06/89 07/06/89 07/06/89 07/06/89 07/06/89 07/06/89 07/06/89 07/06/89 07/06/89 07/06/89 07/06/89 07/06/89 07/06/89 07/06/89 07/06/89 07/08/89 07/06/89 07/06/B9 07/06/89 €9 AMOUNT 305.10 305.10 407 70 282.60 690.30 58.80 58 80 103 22 103 22 47.50 47.50 180 00 180 00 • 65 65 32 162 65 59 65 51 9 23 105 . i08 817 87 87 93 64 87 23 87 89 88 05 28 90 28 434 00 420 00 854.00 8 25 o CHECK REGISTER vendor item description c STEVENS WELL DRILL REPAIR COMPRESSOR ACCOUNT NO. INV. I 74-4342-590>93 IKSgJlt itSi iSKf jlSUSl THORPE DIST CO BEER TONYS PIZZA SERV SANDWICHES ULTIMATE AWARDS HATS UNIFORMS UNLIMITED 5 RAINCOATS US WEST COMMUN TELEPHONEUSWESTJOMMUNTELEPHONEUSWESTCOMMUNTELEPHONEUSWESTCOMMUNtelephoneUSWESTCOMMUNTELEPHONEUSWESTCOMMUNTELEPHONEUSWESTCOMMUNTELEPhHDNEUSWESTCOMMUNTELEPHONEUSWESTCOMMUNTELEPHONEUSWESTCOMMUNTELEPHONEUSWESTCOMMUNTELEPHONEUSWESTCOMMUNADV WIDMER BROS WIDMER BROS REPAIR LINE REPAIR LINE WRIGHT HENN ELECTRIC UTILITIES 01-4349-096-17 31-4349-129-31 74-4815-591-94 74-4802-591-94 74-4801-591-94 01-4221-129-31 01-4320- 01-4320- 01-4320- 01-4320- 01-4320- 01-4320- 01-4320- 72-4320-72- 4320- 73- 4320- 74- 4320- 74-4323- 039-12 -059-14 ■069-15 129-31 174- 33 175- 34 249-42 549-91 549-91 569-92 590-93 590-93 72- 4345-549-91 73- 4344-569-92 01-4324-249-42 G 18B9 CITY o Of 090NO CHECK REGISTER CHECK NO . DATE AMOUNT 8 25 ft VENDOR ITEM DESCRIPTION ACCOUNT NO. im 1B1901 07/06/89 79 30 79 30 ft AREAWIDE SECURITY REPAIR KNOB/LOCK 01-4343-129>3i 181903 07/06/89 >4 8.00 u48 00 ft CONTECH CONSTR PROD 12 APRONS 01-4233-249<42 191904 07/06/89 24 00 r .5 00 P EXCELSIOR BAY YACHT POLICE ASSOC MTQ 01-43S6*129>31 191905 07/06/89 4 . . . 00 475 00 ft HAZELDFN SERV INC REG FEE 01-4358-129-31 191906 07/06/89 90.00 EMERGENCY VEHICLE TEARDOWN EQUIP 01-4341-129-31 1919&6 07/06/89 3.366 95 3,456 95 ft EMERGENCY VEHICLE 3 OVERHEAR MODULES 01-4550-129-31 191907 07/06/89 16.95 16 .95 ft AMER EIRE JOURNAL SUBSCRIPTION 01-4240-174-33 ^^908 07/06/89 4.150 46 4.150 46 ft FOSS SWEE' NG SERV STREET SWEEPING Oi-4331-249-42 181909 07/06/89 16.00 16 00 ft J MUNSTE CIG LIGHTNER ADAPT 01-4232-129-31 191910 07/06/89 80.00 80 00 ft MULLER PRiBYL UTILTY LOCATE SEWER PIPE 01-4233-249-42 191911 07/06/89 30 00 30.00 ft MINNETONKA RADIATOR REPAIR RADIATOR 01-4342-249-42 191912 07/06/89 111 00 111 00 ft EIRE POLICE REPORTER SDUBSCRIPTION 01-4240-129-31 191913 07/06/89 65 00 65 00 ft ACE RADIATOR CAR CLEANING 01-4341-129-31 191914 07/06/89 62 50 62.50 ft RAPIT PRINTING PRINT CARDS 01-4322-129-31 191915 07/06/89 700.60 SMAR ENTERPRISES FIRE PROOF CABINET 14-4540-626-no 191915 07/06/89 700.60 1.401 20 ft SHAR ENTERPRISES FIRE PROOF CABINET 14-4540-637-00 191916 07/06/89 97 00 97.00 ft WESTSIDE REOIMIX CONCRETE 01-4232-249-42 191917 07/06/89 303 30 303 30 ft PACE LABORATORIES TESTS 3131-000-00 *0 'j :s k *'i«4 • >♦*- tfUAk**"* ' -'•* © 10t« CITY OF ORONO CHECK NO. DATE 1Q101S 07/06/B9 181918 07/08/19 191920 07/08/99 191821 07/08/99 O o AMOUNT 291.00 291.00 * <9.00 49.00 ^ 250.00 250.00 * 150.00 150.00 * 79.914 55 3,664.20 9.000.00 4,133 45 3.359.34 3,539.95 102.610 49 «*> CHECK REGISTER 'ENOOR CHARLIES BODY SHOP HARVARD BUSINESS REV TOM A CHRIS SMIEJA PUBLICORP INC FUND 01 TOTAL FUND 14 TOTAL FUND 42 TOTAL FUND 72 TOTAL FUND 73 TOTAL FUND 74 TOTAL TOTAL ITEM description REPAIR SOD SUBSCRIPTION REFUND 11426 SMIEJA OTHER CONSULTING ACCOUNT NO. INV. t 01-4341-129-31 01-4240-129-31 01-3502-000-00 01-4306-030-12 IMPROVE a'^EOUIP OUTLAY F 1866-78 IMP BOND D/S FUN WATER OPERATING FUND SEWER OPERATING FUND GOLF COURSE OPERATING FO m j4^ 8 f\ 314^^^ ^ Cdu.ncc I fVlech^ mums asxsea \' o Ti HENNEPIN COMMUNITY HEALTH DEPARTMENT Health Services Building - Level 3 525 Portland Avenue South Minneapolis, Minnesota 55415 June 20, 1989 Melvin Kilbo, Chief City of Orono Police Department 1330 Brown Road South P.O. Box 86 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 Dear Chief Kilbo: O Apparently it is my turn to error. During our meeting on June 6, I wrote down the date of our next meeting as June 15. I apologize for missing your meeting with the Public Safety Commission. I prepared several graphs and copied charts which depict EMS services to the cities of Orono, Long Lake, Minnetonka Beach and Spring Park. T was in the process of assembling additional service/geographic related data for comparison with other communities, but was unable to complete it. Also, one of my staff members pulled records for ambulance responses to the four communities and compared dates and times to your police log sheets. While we oiatched closely on total runs during a one-month period, there were some unaccountable date and time variations. As a result of the variances, we plan to conduct a radio audit using our written and recorded radio Capes in an effort Co examine things further. I will let you know the result of our findings. In the meantime, if it would be helpful to you or Che commission, I would be glad to cry and meet with you again. I can be reached at 348-4598. Sincerely, John Urbach EMS Pi ’.Ing and Administration J:\JU092 Enclosures PtesM I] READ r«9uMl pM 7SM ROUTING - REQUEST HANDLE O APPROVE •nd CD FORWARD RETURN LJ REVIEW WITH ME u f(Vj J It'Svufd .'Jrf Fn» ^-1------r-...... on equal opponur4iy empaTfer • - ■ A, , ALS RUNS 1986-89 - ORONO DATA FROM OUARTCRLY REPORT CM0OCC02 • v« '• .• J ■. ■ 1^- ,1-ilv i Is 3 K * 5 I!! S g| ■‘■‘Sssn*.......a*"*=s**'=»r2=SSSS ’'*'S52Sri=S“*»''S'’2'*ji - m m m J: 2 " IB«u s S » E ft I MBM*ieOp4eO^MOO«ioBOBO»4BOO»4eOO|iMOOOaMOOMMp4BBBOMOOOOC> 2 I 'fiiillili ■*fW'‘'V.;’, I B 1 b8 a 8® " 8 M M s B 8 8 gi IS?EjnS»a2&*2>s"-«2»"§SS3li9a$-SS93«2<l$8|M~2s I I c NEMO TO: FROM; DATE: RE: Board of Managers Minnehaha Creek Watershed District JMM/HIckok, Consulting Engineers June 15, 1989 Lake Level, FIom and Precipitation Sumnary May 1989 Lake levels in Lake Minnetonka have remained relatively stable through May as Illustrated by the attached graph and lake elevations. There has not been any discharge from Lake Minnetonka to Minnehaha Creek since November 17, 1986. Creek flow at the Browndale Ave. dam in Edina is as shown below. The 30 year average precipitation for May at the National Weather Service station In Maple Plain is 3.93 inches. The actual precipitation recorded In Wayzata for May was 4.77 Inches. A summary of precipitation follows. Maple Plain HinneapoliS'St. Paul Intern*1 Airport Wayzata PRECIPITATION SUMMARY MAY 1989 Actual 3.38 4.47 30 Year Average 3,93 3.20 MONTHLY FLOW SUMMARY Grays Bay (cfs) Browndale Ave< Dam (cfs) Nay 3 0 7.5 Nay 8 0 34.5 May 12 0 13.5 May 17 0 5.0 Nay 22 0 5.0 May 26 0 14.8 Nay 29 0 14.1 Rl ICROPliJn \ \ o \ ALS RUNS 1986-89 ORONO QATA FROM OUARTERLT REPORT EM00CC02 or>z a: u.O Oz ALL COOE5 FC*? OUARTER. TEAR (QT) , n,'. ,'-v ■• ■ . >A\ . - - • * 'a ■ r »k •■ • f' v -vK.: ■■'U #u- ■ ■■ i ■ '• V. r c/> UJ z 2 LU GO Z O CL GO liJ OH. 20 19 10 17 16 15 14 13 12 1 1 10 9 0 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 AVE RESPONSE 1 986-89 ^ - ORONO : ^ DATA FROM QUARTERLY REPORT EM00CC05 i 26 “T- 46 I 36 46 17 27 37 47 10 20 30 CODE 3 RUNS FOR QUARTER, YEAR (Q.Y) 1 40 •. • :-r*:: v.,;' s ' • ■ .i. rv'J . y. 'Wt': .-urt;- ‘ w",'*- Ur - 4 . ». srrr rvirv^ v v; ry- ■ V • • • • • ■ • '< . 4 .:t !-2s- i m > A!‘ 1 I p p e o e oooeeM^o^oeoMeeeo<rM»40MeoeM44f^«Mo«'eoee*H «-4 P^ iH ^ P^ p4 M m <# p4 M s M MI eeeooooeeooeooeoaeeeeooeoeoooot^eoeoooeooooeoeeeoo O I < p4 e K » e lA p4 M e r<4 e p4 « p4 p4 r». U) <# O M K la p4 • *4 M ^ e U> p4 p4 p4 Ift «H O N «' P4 p4 ^ Kiig s~s ^ is s s ]1||S *4»4 »4 IQ *4 r4 p41 S M P4 9oeiae^eeMMOMooiQo^MotQMi4eMMp4iQMo«eMoiAoeMMOp4eeeeo o^p4»4»nnWwlWf4^ p40M lO <<’ ^ •» lO M *4 *4 «isS! i H*«MOOOa«4M •4 «MNia^M<QeMp400WMM0»4fSJM»|a^iaeMeMNia^|QN*4MMe^^MN«»^ q eMeQoeooop4Q>oooo>4eaop40ooooso e *4 o o o o o e o o e o o e o o e 44 o o e o o m»4 ID P4 N•^K(4<lalHIAp4p4«««M<«Mp4M^•^44^44IAIoMM«44KK•>«4p4p4«^•»«•«<QM9p4«K^K44 ««40•'lAp4«p4p4a«meMoaooop4p4p4oop40M^^40p4iQoe<rMp4r<4lnop4«o«p4C4eMo Ui u SI ^|7 *4lQMN00p400p4C40d44000e0»40C30*40e0jQ<40e043l4d044«4p4e00dNi0eae0JJJ3 *• s ee 8 .« ♦ M K K • « IQ « ^ in M .# M e • IQ p4 « # < M « O « a ^ « »4 IQ K IQ a IQ M ^• K ^ ^ e <# 14 «• «> 4 #4 « « M 22 | I I p4 M p4 p4 p4 p4 p4 S'"•4 p4 p4 *4 r7^ OL MO •kMu t tj 4 'JT^. ii si- I “ Hsi^sjlJiHi -sigpiliiyfLiLoliliJliyh^ I 2 - r^^a82Sx «S S2Spjj|^SMa! Piiiiuu2|«MMWfi2ZQOaCMi4.&3S-4S2<t( - - -4# |^,‘ ’:l'ir Muiu < at» li 3 i efs Kv.-- - ■■ irv-: ■ .- ~.>. t,: ..j r \ 0^ ^ M M p4 M M p4 N « G M f M M M M N « M O------- Ml ^ M asas^p: r^s- a a sjtas-'s3M M p|4 ^ la M J| M ii# « ja a*a5|«5saas|as®3ax2«s ♦a “*I IS i .« ! SS3SKSS3SK«Ki!!r:«*'*‘SS;it*33*‘8SSSi:SS?$l8|8SS3SSSa as* iSi’a^s" * *5" a « - ■» s2 « » a j .«! ~ ♦ H SI »■-.! V* .V,*.. . ss 3 SI2«> xE|BzaS2g''-Saa^Sa I . 2 j M « « K .■.!oi,;v. k '•<■. ■ - i :-4'- ■. -v'.: MEMO TO; FROM: DATE; RE: Board of Managers Minnehaha Creek Watershed District JMM/Hickok, Consulting Engineers June 15, 1989 Lake Level, Flow and Precipitation Summary May 1989 Lake levels in Lake Minnetonka have ranained relatively stable through May as illustrated by the attached graph and lake elevations. There has not been any discharge from Lake Minnetonka to Minnehaha Creek since November 17, 1986. Creek flow at the Browndale Ave. dam in Edina is as shown below. The 30 year average precipitation for May at the National Weather Service station in Maple Plain is 3.93 inches. The actual precipitation recorded in Wayzata for May was 4.77 inches. A summary of precipitation follows. PRECIPITATION SUMMARY MAY 1989 Actual Maple Plain Minneapolis-St. Paul Intern*! Airport Wayzata 3.38 4.47 30 Year Average 3.93 3.20 May 3 May 8 May 12 May May May May 17 22 '“S MONTHLY FLOW SUMMARY Grays Bay (cfs) Browndale Ave. Dam (cfs) 7.5 34.5 13.5 5.0 5.0 14.8 14.1 o LAKE MINNETONKA ■atav UavaaiatM - Lbm mnaiiTiM DM*Sl***U*a riM»033*Il*«a3la*n*v Oct*■tovaclMi OWw««m.M M7.7« 0.00 0.00 03>A**«4a 10«An*>4a 930.90 933.93 0.00 0.00 03'■ 3*4-43 930.00 930.03 0»-Ja*-a«937. M 0.00 l2*Mt**4B 933.93 0.00 19-3**-43 930.03 937.93 0.00 1C-AU4-4S 933.13 0.00 33 3**-43 933.03 937.93 0.00 ll-Aao-39 933.73 0.00 33>a**-4a 933.03 2D-JWI*««937.43 0.00 23>Mi«>40 933.33 0.00 07H)«*Ma 933.03 937.40 0.00 24-MIOMO 933.33 0.00 i9H)**-3a 930.0027-Ja*-«i 937.30 0.00 30>AiMr<o 933.33 0.00 07^4*-4»930.00 aD-<nv««937.10 0.00 30«MI«>aO 933.93 0.00 19-f«^49 930.11 937.00 0.00 00>i«^40933.43 0.00 37-r**-4»933.19937.00 0.00 U-9«r^4a 933.93 0.00 10-II3C-30 933.33 930.90 0.00 19-93^40 933.90 0.00 31-4UK«4*^33.93 937.03 0.00 19-9*^43 933.93 0.00 27-«43r-4*933.9i930.90 0.00 20>9*^43 933.43 O.dO 90-«*r-4*933.93 XD-J«X>««930.90 0.00 30-9*^43 933.94 0.00 03-30C3O 933.43u-<Aa««a 930.90 0.00 93>9«*-40 933.90 0.00 07-A««MO 933.44a*-4«i>«a 930.00 0.00 09-oet-ao 933.33 0.00 17-»«V*0 933.99 930.00 0.00 lo-oot-ia 930.33 0.00 33-4* v-tO 133.49ox-»**-«a 930.73 0.00 17>Oa3-4a 933.13 0.00 3I-4*C'40 193.90«>-**«•••930.70 0.00 aO<OR«43 933.14 0.00 01-«My-4«*33.14 930.90 0.00 ai>08«oaa 933.03 0.00 OJ-my-ao 930.93 0.00 03-4ay-*9 •><t ft 0.00 io-«4r-*3 • 1 .0.00 19-M4V-49 ■ ^ *0.00oloo13-Mar*49 0.00 0*00 10-«uy-49 933.43 0.00 0*00 33-«Ur'*9 930.U 0.00 t4-IUr-49 930.79 0.00 0*00 13-«tav-*9 934.73 0.00 30-«(av-49 930.74 0.00 ei-sM*-49 930 ’?0.00 43-Jaa-a*930.74 0.00 0*00 09-9..-49 933.73 0.00 09*sftai-49 933.30 0.00 U-90.-49 930. U 0.00 G SIX MONTH PRECIPITATION RECORDED MONTH [771 MAPLE PLAIN AVE.WAYZ/.TA ACTUAL n PRECIPITATION SUMMARY All J AVERAGE MPLS. AIRPORT actoa:. MAPLE PLAIN AVERAGE WAYSATA ACTUAL JUL. 88 3.51 1.17 4.65 2.34 AUG. 88 3.64 4.29 4.09 3.75 SEPT. 88 2.50 2.79 2.83 3.04 OCT. 88 1.85 0.80 2.06 0.88 NOV. 88 1.29 2.86 1.46 2.23 DEC. 88 0.87 0.6T 0.86 0.85 JAN. 89 0.82 0.52 0.84 0.36 FEB. 89 0.85 1.04 0.78 0.63 MAR. 89 1.17 2.19 1.52 1.52 APR. 89 2.05 2.66 2.35 2.29 MAY 89 3.2 3.38 3.93 4.77 u LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT M73-7033 JULY nST HEETING SCHEDULE Friday 7 l:DQ pm Water cJuality Sub Committee-i Management Plan Minnetonka City Hall Saturday a 7:30 am Water Structures S Environment Committee LMCD-. M05 E Lake St-. Wayzata (londay 10 T:00 am TENTATIVE - Please call to verify as ”on schedule" LAUNCHING OF THE FIRST WEED HARVESTER Eurasian Water Milfoil Task Force Spring Park Access adjacent to the Water Patrol (ilednesday 15 7:00 pm Advisory Commit tee ■» Management Plan Tonka Bay Village Hall Thursday 13 7:00 pm Lake Access Sub Committee-. Management Plan Tonka Bay Village Hall rionday 17 M:3Q pm Lake Use Committee LMCD-. M05 E Lake Sti Wayzata Thursday 50 7:00 pm Use Management Sub Committee-. Management Plan Tonka Bay Village Hall Friday 51 a:30 am Eurasian Water Milfoil Task Force Sasha's Confet ence Roc -. Minnetonka Boat Works-. Wayzata Friday 51 1:00 pm Water (duality Sub Committee-. Management Plan Minnetonka City Hall Wednesday 5b 7:30 pm LMCD Board of Directors Tonka Bay Village Hall Thursday 57 7:00 pm Intergovernmental Relations Sub Committee-. Managerent Plan Tonka Bay Village Hall Friday 56 1:00 pm Institutional Arrang.r.:.ents Sub Committeei Managemen:. Plan Wayzata City Hall SP'^CIAL NOTICE: ilednesday IT 7:30 pm Hayor's neeting-. e flinnetonka Area Cities Shorewood Village ..<11 o DATE; June 23, 1989 TO; Officer Kurt Erickson FROM; Chief Mel Kilbo SUBJECT; Letter of Conunendation 1 am writing to make formal my appreciation for determined efforts and persistence in pursuing Mark Alan Woolery through manv jurisdi ctions and challenging the findings of the Assistant County Attor ney successfully while presenting convincing evidence to gain issue. Your diligent work involved in interrogation, preparation of the search warrant that resulted in return of $33,000 worth of vrluable guns to the rightful owner, all represent excellent follow-up work. The victim, Mr. John Prudden, was most appreciative of your work. His letter is attached. I wish to further commend your follow-up on the juvenile credit card case that was assigned to you. As you are aware, this case was brought to us on 3-3-89 with little follow up after then until you were given the case. You successfully pursued all aspects of the case to a suc cessful end, obtaining both issue and restitution. The last case, a theft of two tables from a lakeside bar was given to you to follow up on 6-12-89. Using the arresting officer's report, you executed a search warrant, not finding the tables but findino the work location of a possible thief. Upon meeting with the thief, the thief stated "can I bring the tables back?" He did so on 6-14-89 and was charged with misdemeanor theft - two days from theft to recovery. I am please to commend your actions in all of the above solved cases. John D Pri:dden ji". v»oooiiii 1. muau Wav z at a *^1 j n s ksut a a m m O liu_’ Chief Melvin Kilbo June 19, 1989 Orono Police Department P.O. Box 86 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 Dear Chief Kilbo: My purpose in writing is to make you aware of my feeling of great satisfaction with the manner and expediency with which Officer Kurt Erickson investigated the burglary at my home. The individual, believed to be responsible, has been arrested and a significant portion of the items stolen have been returned to me. This result was made possible through Officer Erickson's efforts and his management of the co-operative efforts of a number of supporting municipal and county law enforcement resources. I am very pleased that Orono has the benefit of such an individual within its police department. Sincerely, © LEN HARRELL Chief of Police MOUND POLICE 5341 Maywood Road Mound, MN 55364 Telephone 472-3711 Dispatch 544-9511 EMERGENCY 911 June 19, 1989 Chief Melvin Kilbo Orono Police Department Post Office Box 86 Crystal Bay, Minnesota 55323 Dear Mel: Thank you and your officers for the fine assistance that was provided at our Mound City Days Celebration. Thanks to all the cooperation from everyone, we had a very safe and successful event. Your department's assistance was greatly appreciated. Sincerely, Len Harrell Chief of Policv 7Af\0-o \lxxz.i-^l^ HELEN FALLER HAYSSEN IU(K(!Ila'iVi)li(f, k<M Mr aci^>y 0A[‘riJn-i- Hi'/tv diti%l3Md /W JitU- /.'AW • ^'--'‘'A M- ■ 4 hii IL HeUn r. Havucn 41^5 Bav$idt Road A^f q ^ Orono.'MN 55J53l-^ ' ‘T "Z 2'r.iUM (|w>U;« Qo.&iy /? ^5625 i ^'0uT* Twi.'vik\ <1/ ^k'M0>v\ Q G •-!> J* -MJ J «J/ I LV.OI. >K) state zf MINNESOTA 0€P*«TMENT op PijBt. C SAPETV TRAFFIC ACCIDENT REPORT ?Ofl POLICE USE ON lt as nEO BY STa T^te) j»OE VAT I O* _J M-ClOlNf ff l)f ««((■M( «M HO .(-S «o •'i.eo HO H,^,A -.1 BUN ■U J J A rtf NO AOUtt S'S'EM ON/^ n' dOUff vA &;«|CT HAMft •T ■ HTfnsECnON ■MA.ES H i N iTM ^OR vA J PtfT A-B m ACNCI AOiNf »vauc r ClOA« ^ OH AAlOaC a a PHOTOS ■4r£S a »- UMIT NO. t VEHTCU I 0/-o^O \ AOUTI i»l U' AOuTf f STAtrr orr umittl <v aost on PEAruM 'X I UNIT NO 2 VEM 3 □ PEO I amt omven uctNsc k-jmmn i vT- /Si -6oi- yys' ■ ^ ->/: iZ o iS:- o— o i OMVEA UCtHSC HUMUA //~^so t -/o^-o2 '/y-sJt. STATf PINSTNANI ,''/^7-a ^ MIOOEJ LAST "/Aj NUMMII AMO STAErt iCUAMNTT CJkTt STATt OP COM 5"> 3r^ date op iMnw so F VC .<AK>U» MlTHONAPfAL 0 a NACNO OIL aoomsi 0 a 1 aCSTHKinOHl zoumjto 0 Q S CLASS .T . 1 PlASr HAMf OPTNEN I UiOOll last NUMUN ANO STNEH ClT>S'ATl 2JPCOOC vEHiCil riTAt /o s, - •. (.iCENSt »LATt MO <"rr& rUJt ' '7 :4 state op SSt-t a J /?4 mO OCO jA a CHE iNVOLvEO a 5 /C h.O.1 rCMEO a E HSu IUMCE oo :----A r ^ .%'* ?am 4CE0 unit mum UP I .2 1 < .TOp"^ 10 sb'no^ SLIGHT MOCCHATC -eveae Di ;a n X L. £1 fcST XHUkAAMT / -Uo ' >«42AB90U5 UA^C*«At Off INA.STCa ^ -..vtA I €«K> ^fUTE INO OVEKTAAIMG 3| l£PT tuam J ^ OPP BO l£PT STATE PIBiT HAUC UlOOCi A-''/ MUHUA'anO STBlfT OiAAEN tT ^O /t^yi f j/<! /7 t/. STATE a* coot -S" /T9 OATl OP eiATN LiC unMA MITmoAAMAIm sa HBOHO OfL a COACM 0 a BESTAicnOMS CONW.IEO PATH0 0 -S - t .AST hauE OynHEN 2 UiOOU n '‘In •* fe^1 ^ J^A MUMtiA ANO STBECT n Hr- state OP coot S'<:5.y v£H<Li TYBf ftAA ANO <C h<LI MAAE 7f tEhiC lC MOOfl license >HJkfE HO Vm 5S state op ssui colon HO OCCUP A Of involved v€H>CU! »OVrtO i a i a s hSlbam CE CO tS’ OCILAA *MC»yH' X/WMHEO OvEA statute “EO S I PKlHr AHOa . f ^ wC/ *^^ 2 7 r^r*/ L. /?■/>/ I J> A-a ^ J ^ .i T't M- ^t ✓,. 'T / -AiAAOOuS ma 'IHal CA NASTE ^ 3 a| aiQMf -UAN r _ij -CAO ON /] «0 «*OMT 1 Jjsiot smaa « damaged unit humb Ea I »TOP'^ SOC mT tNJOCMAn SEvEAEc □ □ t$T OOLLAA amt O^A I UHOEA statute DCSCNA tkJw. a S OP HJOAEO BfASOHSiVIATMCSSE* a 3 ’t a a 5 :1: ? e p a 3 \ AAHA AMO HAME SAOGC HO S 'O .ir*0(Pa A<U(H> CA 4C(MCTn a a S'»I| PAT S"»B local 0*>-|A pic C wmIhOa ’ UNS e HO>NtlA<HQ ■G /_________«-!.>>■___________i'-,.. ■-_______________________________________________ BADGE HO <;• r V u a J5 * o _ 3 J a '3s UHUNU KULiUC UtKMrt • iVIcm r >"arx y*#»p TA;:CNT A, ,e><y “A C :£**' ;a 0) T'- il 7 /O A ?3 5/1 M N i 0 , 2 , 7 1 / acaro'c^ j;«3, ■ uf -ST'XA'CN J3INC *.8P -XI t------1^J '^S 1 / /, A *?1 .■• VI «AtiAr~^" » X fC, * /a „S6A 50UA0 OP »>0G£ ♦ SW) -l«<SiQ ’^S' "UC Aflfl 'AKI ' A* *1J ^ XxJM m / 3 /, ,3 “ ^O 1 / 1 .S'.'i./ (.■rsjs I i K ^ /i> »w» ^ ^«io 4 - Kmtf* 1 !»jOC X3 '^rv-fn 1 ?bim :5>aa ZiToe i r P««n1 ;;57i / r~mr^, r^ -- 15CSP?CT xa 'X-n VIC V - /•■• n SN JOC -CS asst j atPCPT OAfTTY t^P AL^<M M ■ AM 1__J”1, . 1 ! / ~| ,A 3TVi • 3*W « -o r •■inaEc: ofl iftfTwt MiL *i««ST j; SAJalil/^.f'RST ucolil , / ^ /r^/F>y p ORESS c//^S^ A^ujle 7ZQ t ^^ri5ry Vts-- 7014 J^CU^yCTZ . 4/^>c/y^/ mss jyfe O y^^^KTOtZ yhU AO TY y<if /4-i/Aj ^^7-7yv^ 'MWC 'UAST rWST, AKOO lQ 1 jCft , G 1 1 WiSS AVI TY iT ■ :y ' JN ai CTvtH «t>>T»rr$ JCl^oen ITXXXJD J ^ rvarvrr : r^vme yramt _ vxxxrt P«oon C rfkimva a«ooti j '’’t** ’»gi. :Ajrm .«« ;»ipDlt ■ N»niy< J < UP l/eUi^l fJtfi c>>y (2 Af 7?/^ roor*t ✓ . //- \J4^/D^c£^ ^/UO^ to CJ /"SlPVc/- ^ ^/JO t? ,;g<W ^cxfoc^/c^___________ G 0 0 00 3 *~Nv ’ "iTv *rsy ' ,oy.«f *"i} 1/ ^ >yS •‘*£3 ISPOSITIQN Ij^^nCed C'«ir« 9y •^eS ^ef ractv« iFfC SUPERVISORS SiGNAnjRE 1^ & IX^ iMMtai ■OUMMOOO |«IOMMMM ■l/,0 July S, 1 Nark Btmhardsoii, City Nani9tr City of Orono Box 66Crystal Bay, NN 5S323 Otar Nr. Barnhardson: On bthalf of Honnopin Parks, «t wish to cordially Invito you, your faiilly and friands to tha annual Noaranbarg Cardan Party which takas placa on Thursday avaning, July 20, fr« 7-9 p.«. at tha Noaranbarg Manorial County Park. This yaar s 0“ party Is flllad with dallghts, 1nclud1..g tha baautUul classical nuslc of tha Livingston Baroqua Trio, gardan tours lad by tha Noaranbarg Cardanars, and croquat for thosa i^o wish to brush up on thair gana or naraly show off thair ability. In addition, thara will ba a spaclal guast appaaranca by a •friand* of tha gardens. Nr. Fradrick Noaranbarg, who happans to a vary Intarasting chap. Light rafrashnants will ba providad and door prizes given away. Join us for a special evening which pronisas to ba nost anjoyable. Sincerely, Ji4>)NcC»wellDUUIon Recreation Progran Supervisor Krista Uessling Recreation Program Intern CITYof NO FmI Ofliea Bob W^Cvyatol lar. On tht North ShoroofLoki Minn/rtonkm Jun« 30, 1989 Mr. Carl Hofstad NfiDOT District 5 2000 Lilac Driva Goldan Vallay, MM 55422 Subjact: Highway 12 Upgrada Daar Mr. Hofstad, Bncloaad plaasa find a lattar writtan by an Orono rasidant, Mr. Hobart Hruca, concarnad about tha prioritias and prograss on tha isajor upgrada. As notad in his lattar tha issua of goals and objactivas hava not baan givan tha attention, to this point, that ha faals is appropriata. This latter ir written to request that at tha point tha feasibility study is undertaken that the appropriate goals and objectives be established as part of that process and that those be subject to public review and coawant at tha appropriata point of the study. Should you have any further questions please feel free to contact aa. Sincerely k B. Bds4Shardson City Adainistrator NBB/dh CCS Mayor and City Coucil Mr. Robert Bruce John R. Gerhardson, Public Work irector BUILDING a ZONING - 473'73S7 ASSESSING ADMINaTSAllON 4 FINANCE < 473-7338 PUBLIC WORKS - 473-735 ^ Ni(y 16. 1989 Mr. Mirk Btmhardson, Orono City Adafnistrator 1335 South Broun Road Orono, MN 55323 Doar Mr. Btmhardson: Vu writing with rtgard to tht Highway 12 corridor tvaluatlon and planning now underway. It Is My Iwprtsslon that to data llttlt citizen Input has been solicited particularly fro* Orono residents. Of the recent wettings of the Corridor Task Force, I've attended, prlwarlly elected officials and MN DOT Engineers nave debated the topic and Initiated next steos. In addition, developwent objectives and priorities were not discussed, rather, funding and MN DOT project protocol received the task forces attention. This raises two concerns: 1. The wettings avoid the more difficult and critical priority and objective setting process which should proceed MN DOTS study of corridor placewent. Citizen concerns should guide the study not be raised as complaints t:i a finished MN DOT corridor plan. C. Orono Is essentially a residential community and as such Ite^tlzens are less organized In comunlcatlng their priorities. Givdn this situation rm concerned that during the planning stage Long Lake business district priorities will be heard and adversely effect near In Orono as a residential area. Below are what I feel should be Orono's priorities for the nUnnIng process. The purpose In ny writing Is to determine whether these priv Itles are the same as that represented as the Cities at planning sessions and to advocate these points of view. 1. In placement of the near If lilghway corridor, residential should be considered the orlmary development priority, not business devel;srwnt or the current Business District. 2. First priority should be place on the current roadway or adjacent property for any road upgrade. 3. Development that diminishes or prevents the current roadway from being the primary site should be checked or held until a corridor Is selected. 5100C:31 -2- 4. Planning should also consider the railroad and adjacent property as . already similar zoning and use as the Highway, and therefore a priority corridor alternative. 5. The corridor should attempt to preserve all wildlife and wetlands. In particular, the Luce Line should be protected as park area. Any Information on Orono's agenda with regard to the long term developiRent of Highway 12 as well as your guidance on how citizens can Influence the process would be greatly appreciated. Sincerely, Bob Bruce 2205 Abingdon Way Orono, NN 55356 51G0C:32 MR. MARK E. BERNHARDSON City of Orcno Crystal Bay/ Minnesota 55323 Re: Home theft reported 11/2/87 at 605 No. Stubbs Bay Rd. Dear Mark/ Thanks for your letter of June 16/ 1909. It was informative. However I expected someone from the Orono Police Department t«- have written it, and not you. The airport scene was handled wrong. I don't think there was adequate briefing before hand. It was obvious that the Airport police and workers were looking for someone. If I were in line and trying to use a stolen ticket/ I would have sensed the investigation and gotten out of there in a hurry. This may have been the best chance to have solved the case. Evidently the best real evidence they had other than the tickets were the descriptions and photos of the stolen property. If sought out these might have developed into solid leads. The police did nothing with the photos and limited their investigation to Hennepin! They didn't even go as far as Ramsey County. That effort doesn't seem very thorough to me. I for one don't think that Police Departments can solve the majority of crimes anymore/ but I think I should have been kept better informed. They reluctantly sent me a report after I had requested it. Thanks for taking the time to send me your letter. Best ^gards ^i'e^he'n Krdgness SilK/^jsv ^ cc: Mayor GrabeJ^nd ucJuncil and Chief Kilbo Real Estate Brokerage — Investments — Development o o CBWWIH®** jyLlO'9B9 m S 10.20 ■© Cfjlf yf Antenna Structure. One independent antenna structure with antenna or combination of antenna attached thereto, subordinate to and servicing the principal use or structure on the same lot and customarily incidental thereto that is not attached to another structure provided the height of the antenna structure does not exceed 65 feet and the antenna structure is set back from any lot line a distance at least equal to the total height of the antenna structure. Source: Ordinance No. 177 Effective Date: 6-5-75 Subd. 4. Accessory Uses. Within any "R-IA" One Family Residential District, no accessory structure or use of land shall be permitted except for one or more of the following uses: A. Garages. Private garages and parking space. B. Pools, etc. Private swimming pool, tennis courts, and paddocks. C. Home Occupations. Any gainful occupation meeting all of the following requirements when engaged in only by persons residing in their dwelling, when there is no employed assistant, when that occupation is conducted within the principal structure only, when evidence of the occupation is not visible from the street, no signs other than those permitted in "R" Districts are present, no excessive stock in trade is stored on the premises, over the counter retail sales are not involved, the entrance to the home occupation is gained from within the structure, and the use does not adversely affect the character of the uses permitted in the district in which it is located. A professional person may use his residence for consultation, emergency treatment or performance of religious rites but not for general practice of his profession when such general practice will involve the need for more than three off-street parking spaces for the occupant and visitors. D. Signs. Signs as regulated in the Zoning Chapter. E. Temporary Structures. Buildings temporarily located for purposes of c'^nstructing on the premises for a period not to exceed time necessary for such constructing. F. Gardens, etc. Gardening and other horticultural uses including aviaries and decorative landscape features. G. Roadside Stands. One roadside stand offering for sale only farm products produced on the premises provided that such stand does not exceed 200 square feet in area and that it is located at least thirty feet back from the public right-of-way. Source: Ordinance No. 172 Effective Date: 1-1-75 ORONC CC 281 (4-1-84) tmoLmm jyul0l989 NIVUTBS OP THE PIAII1II1I6 CONMISSIOH MEETING JUNE 19, 1988 CITY OFATTENDANCE 7:00 P.N. The Orono Planning Commission met on the above date with the following members present: Acting Chairperson Bellows; Planning Commissioners Johnson, Cohen, and Hanson. Planning Commissioner Brown arrived at 7:10 p.m. The following represented the City staff: Building and Zoning Administrator Mabusth, Assistant Planning and Zoning Administrator Gaffron, Building Official Jacobs and City Recorder Sc^effler. Council Representative Edward Callahan also attended. #1411 SUSSEX SQUARE DEVELOPMENT 3020 FOX STREET PRELIMIHARf SUBDIVISION CLASS III PUBLIC HEilRING 7x00 P.M. The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing were duly noted. Nr. Mark Gronberg, surveyor, was present on behalf of the applicant. Mr. Jann Olsten-3090 Farvlew Lane explained that he was present In the capacity of a spokesperson for the Farview Homeowners Association. He said that the concerns of the homeowner's association were similar to those of the City staff. One of the three concerns is the ingress/egress and Outlet C being designated as the primary access and the resulting increase in traffic. Mr. Olsten said that Outlet C would provide a shortcut to Old Crystal Bay Road via Farview Lane. The Homeowners Association suggested that the access be located across from the church on Leaf Street. Another issue would be the environmental impact and drainage due to portions of the land being wetlands. The last concern is the density of the development. Many of the proposed lots barely meet the 2-acre minimum. He said that there is quite a bit of low land and wetlands and that the dry conditions over the last summer may provide an inaccurate indication as to what is actually wetland. The Homeowner's Association wanted assurances that the density would not affect the sewer systems. Mr. Phil Byers-3083 Farview Lane had a sketch showing the area that would be affected by runoff from the highest elevation in the northern section of the subdivision. Mr. Joe Chadwick-3060 Fox Street said that the low area shown to the north of his house is only 1/3 to 1/2 half the size it should be. He said that if the area was not in this present dry condition, it would not be possible to obtain a 2 acre parcel in that area. 'Mr. Chadwick was also concerned about lots 4, 8, 9, 10, 12 and 13 not meeting the required 200* width. He questioned whether the applicant would be requesting variances for those lots. Zoning Administrator Mabusth noted that the applicant would address that concern in his presentation, but at this time, lot width variances were not being requested. Mr. MimiTBS OF THB PlAllHIliG COmaSSI(»l MEETING JUNE 19, 1989 ZONING FILE «1411-SUSSEX SQOERB DEVELOPMENT CONTINUED Chadwick quoted sections of Chapter 11 of the Zoning Code pertaining to lot width variances. Mr. Chadwick also objected to the proposed primary access being opposite Farview Lane access. He proposed moving the access eastward 150*. He did not agree with a cul-de-sac configuration due to the need to allow emergency vehicle access. Mr. Chadwick further noted that Outlot B was located in a low area and questioned whether there would be need to fill in that area should a road be constructed. Zoning Administrator Mabusth replied that filling may be necessary but that specific low area was not a designated wetland. Mr. Gronberg advised that Outlot B had the highest elevations in the subdivision. Mr. Arnold Robbins-3211 Bayside Road expressed his safety concerns regarding the intersections at Fox Street and Bayside Road and Leaf Street. He suggested that a stop sign be placed at that intersection. He also wanted measures taken to preserve as much wildlife habitat as possible. Mr. David Maass-3175 Fox Street said that he was concerned about drainage. He referred to the pond located in the southwest corner of the subdivision. He said that a large part of the runoff from the property enters that pond and the overflow runs under Fox Street and into a holding well between his property and Mr- Dixon*s. From there, runoff proceeds to a culvert that extends half way down his driveway and empties into a ditch alongside his driveway. He said that the added density would increase the amount of lawn fertilizers draining directly into Maxwell Bay. He questioned whether the watershed engineer had reviewed this proposal and if so, what his recommendations were. Mr. George Dixon-3250 Fox Street indicated that he wished to see a strict interpretation of the 200* width requirement upheld. He also wanted the City to take a Conservation easement across the low areas. Mr. Jim Fullerton-3350 Fox Street Concurred with previous concerns indicated regarding the need to have more than one access point. Ms. Cherry Stubbs-2920 Fox Street echoed Mr. Fullerton and Mr. Chadwick. Mr. Greg Lawton-425 Old Crystal Bay Road said that the increased drainage would run through his property. He said that Outlot A heads toward a pond area. Mabusth confirmed that. Mr. Lawton said that would pose a problem for any future road. He also mentioned a discrepancy between the survey done of his property and the survey of this property, along the northeast corner. Ms. Shirley Laue-594 Park Lane contradicted staff's observations”regardrng drainage coming from the wetlands just MINUTES OP THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING JUNE 19, 1989 ZONING PILE #1411-SUSSEX SQUARE DEVELOPMENT CONTINUED Planning CommissionGr Cohon had a difficult tim© s©©ing how 18 lots would fit into this area. He wanted to see two accesses if there are more than 8 lots. Planning Commissioner Brown indicated that he did not like granting variances for new subdivisions, in this case for the 200* lot width requirement. Planning Commissioner Johnson thought that the proposed access location was the best. He wanted the applicants to pay particular attention to drainage, grading, the road and wetlands when they come back for preliminary piat approval. Acting Chairperson Bellows said that the cul-de-sac was inappropriate, and compared this subdivision with that of Mr. Pebers. She preferred to see a through road. She also expressed concern about the conflicting drainage information. She wanted to see soil testing extend beyond just septic system concerns, to help define buildability of the lot in general. There were no further comments from the public regarding this matter and the public hearing was closed. It was moved by Acting Chairperson Bellows, seconded by Planning Commissioner Hanson, to table this application. Motion, Ayes=5, Nays=0, Motion passed. #1412 MARY L. PETERSEN 384 MCCULLEY ROAD PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION CLASS III PUBLIC HEARING 7:55 P.M. - 8:25 P.M. Ms. Mary L. Petersen was present for this matter, as was Mark Gronberg, the applicant's surveyor. The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing were duly noted. Mr. Jerome O'Brien, 380 Turnham Road objected to the future road being proposed to access onto Turnham Road. pesy1 Peterson, 4385 Chippewa Lane was concerned about City s dedication of an outlot which encroached her p. operty. She questioned the City's legal authority to do that. Zoning Administrator Mabusth explained to Ms. Peterson that it was the City s responsibility to plan and provide for future access to properties that may otherwise become landlocked. Ms. Peterson questioned whether the City was basing their authority on State Statutes that allow a city to dedicate a "reasonable portion" of private property that is needed as a result of a subdivision. Acting Chairperson Bellows reiterated Mabusth's explanation and added that the higher densities Orono experiences, the more need there is for through roads. Mabusth said that 33* was a recommendation from the City Engineer. Bellows recommended that Ms. Peterson meet with Zoning Administrator Mabusth to further MIHDTBS OP TBB PLANNING COMMISSION NESTING JUNE 19, 1989 ZONING FILE «1412-PETBRSEN CONTINUED discuss this issue. Zoning Administrator Mabusth reminded thr plicant of her opportunity to purchase adjacent land now owneo the City. She noted however, that there would be a delay in final approval of the subdivision if the applicant chose to obtain the additional land. Mary Petersen said that she preferred to proceed with the subdivision as proposed and obtain the adjacent land at a later time. Planning Commissioner Johnson said that his only concern regarding the subdivision was accessing Lot 3. He agreed with the City Engineer's recommendation to realign Outlet A to entrance McCulley Road at a right angle. Planning Commissioner Hanson questioned whether the applicant understood the City's reasons for what the City Engineer is recommending for Lot 3. Hanson further said that with the exception of providing access to Lot 3, he had no other objections to the subdivision proposal. There were no comments from the public regarding this matter and the public hearing was closed. #1413 DANIEL HOFFMAN 1135 4 1155 HERITAGE LANE PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION rtLASS III AND VACATION OF UTILITY EASEMENT PUBLIC HEARING 8;30 P.N. - 8:31 P.M. The applicant was present for this matter. The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing were duly noted. There were no comments from the public regarding this matter and the public hearing was closed. It was moved by Planning Commissioner Johnson, seconded by Planning Commissioner Hanson, to recommend approval of this application per staff recommendation. Motion, Ayes«5, Nays»0, Motion passed. #1420 KEVIN RAY NORWCX)D 1360 VINE PLACE PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION CLASS II PUBLIC HEARING 8:32 P.M. - 8:36 P.M. Mr. Earl Norwood was present for this application. The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing were duly noted. Mr. Norwood said that he preferred to have this matter tabled until suU* time that his son could be present. MINOTBS OP THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING JUNE 19, 1989 ZONING PILE #1420-NORNOOD CONTINUED Assistant Planning and Zoning Administrator Gaffron informed the Planning Commission that the Norwoods were proposing to subdivide 1.58 acres into two lots containing .62 and .96 acres where one acre is required. Acting Chairperson Bellows suggested that the Planning Commission provide Mr. Norwood with a preview as to how they would vote on this application. The Planning Commission as a whole indicated they were not in favor of creating such substandard lots. Mr. Norwood said that due to the fact that he was assessed for two sewer units for this property that he should be allowed to subdivide. Bellows advised Mr. Norwood that the Planning Commission had no jurisdiction over sewer billing or assessment. There were no comments from the public regarding this matter and the public hearing was closed. It was moved by Planning Commissioner Cohen, seconded by Planning Commissioner Hanson, to table this matter. Motion, Ayes=5, Nays*0, Motion passed. (see "Miscellaneous** heading at end of these minutes). #1421 DAVID KIRKLAND 625 SPRING HILL ROAD PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION CLASS II PUBLIC HEARING 8:50 P.M. - 8:53 P.M. The applicant was present for this public hearing. The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing were duly noted. Mr. Kirkland provided a brief explanation of his proposal. He is planning to subdivide the parcel and reside in the existing house on Lot 1 and Lot 2 will be developed residentia 1 ly and sold. Mr. Kirkland indicated that he had no objections or questions regarding staff's ’"ecommendations. Zoning Administrator Mabusth advised that there was an existing 16.5* wide public cartway. The City would require that an additional 8.5* be dedicated to provide for a 25* access to the properties to the south and east. It was moved by Planning Commissioner Cohen, seconded by Planning Commissioner Johnson, to recommend approval of this application per staff recommendations including the dedication of an additional 8.5* in addition to the 16.5* now dedicated as a public cartway. Motion, Ayes=4, Nays=0, Hanson Abstained due to having a potential interest in this property. Motion passed. NIMOTBS OF THB PIAIINIIiG COMMISSION MBBTIN6 JUNE 19, 1989 #1289 ROBERT ft ANN WILL 115 OLD CRYSTAL BAY ROAD COMTINDATION OP PUBLIC HEARING 8:37 P.M. - 8:50 P.N. Mr. and Mrs. Will were present for this application. Mr. Will called attention to the letter he had recently sent to the City explaining that his access dilemma is due to an inability to obtain access rights from Mr. Wear. Mr. Wear is willing to sell the access rights to Mr. Will for $20,000 per lot. Mr. Will believes this amount is excessive and is asking the City for help. Mr. Will also believes that the City continues to lose tax revenues each year his land remains undeveloped . Planning Commissioner Hanson asked for a brief synopsis of the key issues. Mr. Will said that in his opinion the key issue was legal, safe access to those northern lots. Mr. Will recc 1lected that at a previous Planning Commission meeting, the City said that access to these northern lots come from an extenslOI^ of Wear Lane North. Bellows stated that the Planning Commisi V a had no control over the sale or price of Mr. Wear's land. Planning Commissioner Johnson agreed with the applicant in that Mr. Wear was prohibiting the development of Mr. Will's property. He suggested that the City Attorney's opinion be sought in that regard. Acting Chairperson Bellows observed that the applicants had not brought forth any more information than they had presented at the previous Planning Commission meeting. At that meeting, this application was tabled to allow the applicants an opportunity to come back with a plan showing a cul-de-sac from the outlet and a 50' easement location for a temporary/permanent driveway access. Bellows said that the applicants had not complied with that request. Acting Chairperson Bellows asked the applicant whether he would like this matter tabled once again to allow him an opportunity to achieve access as requested by the City. The appicant indicated that he would prefer that the Planning Commission vote on this matter. There were no comments from the public regarding this matter and the public hearing was closed. It was moved by Planning Commissioner Brown, seconded by Planning Commissioner Hanson, to recommend denial of this application due to the applicant's inability to achieve safe, legal access to the northern lots. Motion, Ayess4, Johnson, Nay Motion passed. MINUTES OP THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING JUNE 19, 1989 #1316 GARY BARR 3034 CASCO POINT ROAL VARIAHCB-RBVISBD PROPO. u Mr. Barr was present for this matter. Assistant Planning and Zo: q Administrator Gaffron explained that the applicant had rt *ed his plan since his last appearance before the Planning Commission. Mr. Barr was now proposing to locate the garage to a site that would be level with the existing detached garage. Additionally, the applicant is proposing to reduce the size of the garage so that it will not exceed 1,000 s.f. and will have no defined floor area above it. Mr. Barr is proposing to remove significant areas of existing hardcover so that hardcover in the 75-250* zone will be 24.51%. Acting Chairperson Bellows referenced a letter that had been received by Mr. Barr's neighbor, Ian Booth. Mr. Booth was objecting to Mr. Barr's proposal due to the fact that Mr. Barr currently has someone living above an existing garage on his property. Planning Commission agreed with staff that this issue of a guest house conditional use permit be a separate issue from the requested variance approval for the garage. Planning Commissioner Brown asked Mr. Barr what his hardship for the additional garage was. Mr. Barr replied that the additional garage was needed to store the classic cars he collected. He explained that he currently had them stored in other locations and that it would be easier to work on the cars if they were stored on his property. With respect to the location of the garage, there was no other location that would minimize tree removal and hardcover to the extent that the current proposal would. Acting Chairperson Bellows questioned whether it would be possible to move the garage further into the hill. Barr noted that this would require more tree removal and excavation. It was moved by Planning Commissioner Brown, seconded by Planning Commissioner Johnson, to recommend approval of this application. Motion, Ayes*5, Nays*»0, Motion passed. #1405 THOMAS COLWELL 2640 NORTH SHORE DRIVE PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION CLASS III CONTINUATION OF PUBLIC HEARING 9:17 P.M. - 9:25 P.N. Mr. Ted Kemna of Schoell & Madson, was present on behalf of the applicant. Zoning Administrator Mabusth advised the Planning Commission that the applicant had submitted a driveway plan and had chosen Option A. This would define the driveway easement and area to the west as Outlot A. The future owner of Lot 3 will retain ownership of Outlot A. There were no comments from the public regarding this matter NIHOTBS OF THE PLA1IMIII6 COMNISSIOII MBRTIN6 JUMB 19, 1989 ZONING FILE «1405-COLNELL CONTINUED and the public hearing was closed. It was moved by Planning Commissioner Johnson, seconded by Planning Commissioner Cohen, to recommend approval of application #1405, per staff recommendations 1 through 5. Motion, Ayes*5, Nays«0, Motion passed. #1414 TBMICJE ISRAEL €45 TONKANA ROAD CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT PUBLIC HEARING 9:26 P.M. TO 9:35 P.M. The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Hailing were duly noted. Mr. James Cohn was present as a representative for Temple Israel/Camp Teko. Building Official Jacobs informed the Planning Commission that the present use of Camp Teko will not change. The applicant is proposing to construct a multi-use facility that would consist of conference rooms and dormitory areas to serve the existing camp use. In total, 6 modules will be constructed, 3 now and 3 at a later time. The applicant has agreed to meet the required number of parking stalls (11), though their initial plan allowed for only 10. When the other 3 modules are completed, applicant agrees to provide one additional parking stall. The City Engineer has reviewed the access point and has recommended that the entrance centerline be moved 10* southeast so that it would be at a right angle. Mr. Darel Leipold, 678 Tonkawa Road, was very impressed with the C2unp and was pleased vith the proposal being presented this evening. There was discussion between applicant and Jacobs regarding parking along the proposed firelane. There were no further comments from the public regarding this matter and the public hearing was closed. It was moved by Acting Chairperson Bellows to table this matter until the pending issues of access and parking are better planned and documented. Mr. Cohn indicated that he would prefer to proceed on to Council with this matter. Jacobs indicated that he was comfortable with the documentation he presently had and did not feel it was necessary to table this application. (There being no second to this motion, it failed. It was moved by Planning Commissioner Brown, seconded by Planning Commissioner Cohen, subject to staff recommendations and conditioned upon the applicant having the required information and exhibits submitted prior to the July 10, 1989 Council Meeting. Motion, Ayes**4, Bellows, Nay, due to the lack of documentation for the commercial site plan review. Motion MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING JUNE 19, 1989 ZONING FILE 11414-CAMP TEKO CONTINUED passed. #1415 ROBERT i CHERYL HUMPHREY 669 MINNETONKA HICHLAND LANE VARIANCES PUBLIC HEARING 9:37 P.M. - 9:55 P.M. Mr. and Mrs. Humphrey were present for this public hearing. The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing were duly noted. Assistant Planning and Ironing Administrator Gaffron explained the applicants' proposal. The applicant is proposing to increase hardcover in the 75-250' zone to 42.2%. Existing hardcover in the 75-250' zone is 37,1% which includes the existing driveway, roc' and plastic areas. The applicant has indicated that some of the rock has no plastic underlining and some of the plastic that does exist is deteriorating. The applicants wish to replace their existing deck at this time, and add a pool at a later date. The applicants are aware of the fact that should they not add the pool within one year from the approval date of this application, they will need to seek a renewal. The applicants also require an average lakeshore variance. Mr. Humphrey apprised Gaffron earlier of an error in a survey of the house on an adjacent lot. Mr. Humphrey contends that the house was actually placed closer to the lake than the file survey shows. This would move the average lakeshore setback so that the Humphreys pool would only encroach 10' rather than 30' into the lakeshore setback area. Gaffron said that there have been no adverse comments from neighboring property owners regarding this application. Acti’^g Chairperson Bellows said that normally an inground Dool is not considered to be a significant average lakeshore -encroachment because it does not impede sightlines. Mr. Humphrey said that it was important to have the pool area at a later time because they have young children. The deck they are proposing to construct at this time is 370 s.f. Mr. Humphrey said that there is a large open field that collects and distributes most of the runoff so that it is not directed toward the Lake. Mr. Humphrey said that when the pool is constructed, they will not construct the stairway or landscaping now shown in their plans. He said that the pool would be located approximately 5' closer to the house than indicated on the plans. Acting Chairperson Bellows asked Mr. Humphrey what exactly he wanted the Planning Commission to approve. She said that he had indicated that the pool plans as presented were not what he intended to do. Bellows said that she could not recommend approval of the pool under that circumstance. Bellows obseryed that the applicants' driveway and turn-around area were quite NIVDTBS OP THE PIAMNIIIG COMMISSION MBETING JUNE 19, 1989 Z0VIM6 PILE «1415-HUMPHRET COETIMUED large and suggested that they be reduced to allow hardcover in the 75-250* zone to remain unchanged. It was moved by Planning Commissioner Hanson, seconded by Planning Commissioner Brown, to recommend approval of the hardcover and average lakeshore setback variance to construct only the decks, subject to no net increase in hardcover. The hardship in this matter is the need for the applicants to replace an unsafe, deteriorating deck. There was discussion regarding the fact that the actual location of the neighboring house structure had not been determined. Planning Commissioner Hanson withdrew his motion due to the fact that the average lakeshore setback had not been documented in light of applicant's discovery regarding the location of the neighboring property. It was moved by Planning Commissioner Johnson, seconded by Planning Commissioner Brown, to recommend approval of the average lakerhore setback to construct a deck only with no net increase in hardcover. Gaffron noted that the hardcover percentage being approved, 37.1%, would not include the future pool since the pool was not being approved at this time. Motion, Ayes>»4, Bellows, Nay do to insufficient information. Motion passed. (Planning Commissioner Cohen departed at this time) #1416 JEFFREY ECCLES 3025 SIXTH AVENUE NORTH VARIANCE PUBLIC HEARING 9:55 P.M. - 10:00 F.M. Mr. Eccles was present for this matter. The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing were duly noted. Assistant Planning and Zoning Administrator Gaffron explained that Mr. Eccles was requesting a side setback variance to construct an attached 2 car garage. The applicant currently has an attached one car garage. Mr. Eccles indicated that his neighbor, Jim Swanson, had provided a letter stating that he had no objection to the proposed garage being 11.1* from his property line. Acting Chairperson Bellows asked the applicant to explain his hardship that requires him to have a garage 30* wide. Mr. Eccles replied that he had a boat, motorcycle and many other items that required storage. In addition, the existing garage leaks. Planning Commissioner Hanson stated that in his opinion, the applicant really had no hardship for requiring such a large garage. T* 1 anning Commissioner Johnson said that he had a problem with the aspect of an attached garage as opposed to a detached NimiTBS OP THE PIAIIHIIIG COHMISSIOH MBBTIKG JUNE 19, 1989 S0HIS6 FILE #1416-BCCLES COETIMUED garage that could be placed so as to meet the setbacks. At this point the applicant indicated that he intended to vary the garage from what he was currently proposing. There were no comments from the public regarding this matter and the public hearing was closed. It was moved by Acting Chairperson Bellows, seconded by Planning Commissioner Brown, to table this application to allow the applicant an opportunity to bring back the actual plan for construction of the garage. Motion, Ayes*3, Johnson, Nay, due to his preference to reach a compromise now with the applicant regarding size of the garage, and allow applicant to proceed. #1417 MORTHERM STATES POHBR CO. 3960 SIXTH AVENUE NORTH CONDITIOKilL USE PERMIT PUBLIC HEARING lOsOS P.N. - 10:50 P.N. Mr. David Fisher, Mr. Roger Hargreaves and Mr. Marlow Peterson, Representatives for Northern States Power, were present for this matter. The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing were duly noted. Zoning Admini&rrator Nabusth explained that the applicant is seeking a conditions' use permit to construct an electric power substation. The property contains 15 acres of which approximately 5+ acres are dry. A front/rear setback variance of 15* will be required. Mr. Fisher said that the substation was required in order to meet the growing demand for service in this area. He said that staff's recommendation to relocate the access drive, posed a problem. He said that the substation will require regular meter readings which would be done by a vehicle similar to a pick up truck. However, should there be a major problem, another vehicle would be brought in on a "low-boy" which will require a vrry shallow slope and maximum turning radius. Mabusth asked jw often this situation may occur? Mr. Fisher said hopefully tt would never happen, but should it happen, it would be necessary to access the substation in order to restore power. Acting Chairperson Bellows questioned why the slope of the land would be so important when the service vehicle must cross a railroad crossing in order to access the substation property. Mr. Roger Hargraeves said that the change in elevation would be difficult due to the curve in the driveway and the fact that the driveway '^uld not have the same qualities as a highway. Bellows question>^ whether the access coula be straightened out. Mr. Fisher said that facing the substation as proposed would facilitate hook up to the existing lines. If the driveway were Mivims OP TIB PLMmiVG COMMISSIOH NBBTIIIG JTBB 19, 1989 S0MIB6 PILB «1417-BSP COMTIVUBD straightened out the substation would face i different direction. Planning Conmlssl^r c Johnson questioned whether there would be a need for addltlor^^i overhead lines? Mr. Fisher responded that the current single phase line extending along County Road 6 would need to be upgraded to three-phase line. Zoning Administrator Mabusth asked Mr. Fisher to confirm the actual height of the pole. Mr. Fisher said that the pole would be 40* high with a lightening rod that would extend an additional 10*. Ms. Bileen Basse1-840 Hunt Farm Road, questioned how the land being used by NSP was zoned for this type of use in the midst of residential zoning? Mabusth explained that NSP*s use of this property was a permitted use in this zoning district with a conditional use permit. MLl W11liam Fraser-830 Hunt Farm Road, said that the proposed structure would be an eye sore and wouTd have a negative impact on Ms property value. Acting Chairperson Bellows asked about the noise impact? Mr. Hargraeves replied that a hum would be audible, but that the screening would reduce the impact on neighboring properties. Bellows asked what other properties NSP had looked at as ves to this particular site. Mr. Hargraeves replied that two sites near the Luce Line were considered. The site had to be one that currently had a heavy duty line and was in the area where service needed to be increased. Ms. Basse1 asked why the Luce Line and Baker Park locations were not chosen? Mr. Hargraeves replied that the DNR would not allow the substation to be built along the Luce Line. He was uncertain as to why the Baker Park location was omitted. Mr. Stephen Pflaum interjected that to the best of his knowledge Baker Park was government land and it would take nearly an act of Congress to allow the park land to be divided. Mr. Fraser questioned whether there would be any possible contamination of Painters Creek Watershed District? The issue of PCB*s was also discussed. Bellows asked why an environmental impact study had not been done for this substation? Mr. Fisher replied that such studies were only required for high voltage stations. Bellows directed staff to work with the concerned residents due to the fact that irreversible damage to the area could occur. Planning Commissioner Hanson indicated that he too was concerned about the possibility of decreasing real estate values and the noise. Planning Commissioner Brown said that the noise of Highway 12 itself would be louder than the hum from the substation. MIVUTBS OP THB PIAlOlIliG CONKISSIOIf ISSTIPO JOHB 19, 1989 S0VIV6 FILE «1417-IISP CX)MTHIOBD Planning Comniasloner Johnson Indicated that he had cixed feelings about this application in that the environment was a concern, but the proposed use was low intensity for this area. He asked how the Highway 101 substation compared to this one? Mr. Hargraeves explained that the Highway 101 substation was larger. Brown suggested visiting the site to get a better understanding of the level of noise that would be generated. Mr. Fraser asked to be provided with data that would prove that the substation was needed. There were no further comments from the public regarding this matter and the public hearing was closed. It was moved by Acting Chairperson Bellows, seconded by Planning Commissioner Hanson to table this application and allow the applicant time to work with staff to fully answer and document the concerns expressed by the Planning Commission and the residents. Motion, Ayes«4, Mays»0, Motion parsed. #1418 OROHO IHDBPBHDBHT SCHOOL DISTRICT #278 685 OLD CRYSTAL BAY ROAD NORTH COHDZTIOIIAL USB PBRNIT/COMMBRCIAL 81TB PLAN RBVlBlf PUBLICB HBAR1N6 10:50 P.M. - 10:52 P.M. Ms. Lucy Tayor, Mr. William Fenholdt and Mx. Paul Hagen were present as representatives of the School District. The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing were duly noted. Building Official Jacobs provided the Planning Commission with a brief synopsis of the School District's proposal to construct an addition connecting the Middle School with the Elementary School. There were no comments from the public regarding this matter and the public hearing'was closed. It was moved by Planning Commissioner Brown, seconded by Planning Commissioner Hanson, to recommend approval of a conditional use permit for school use. Motion, Ayes«4, Nays*0, Motion passed. #1419 J.K. BOWERS 2905 CASCO POINT ROAD VARIANCB PUBLIC HBARIN6 10:52 P.M. - 11:0S P.M. Mr. Bowers was present for this matter. The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing were duly noted. Assistant Planning and Zoning Administrator Gaffron informed MIHUTBS OF TBB PIAMNING COMMlSSI(»i MBBTIMG JUNE 19, 1989 ZONING FILE «1419-BONBRS CONTINUED the Planning Commission that the applicant was requesting variances for hardcover^ side setback and average lakeshore setback in order to construct an addition and decks. Hardcover in the 75-250* setback area would increase to 34.2% from the existing 32.4%. Mr. Bowers noted that an existing patio and step had been removed and were not included in the hardcover calculations. Gaffron advised that the applicant had several alternatives for reducing hardcover. There is a stone patio near the garbage rack beside the garage and a stone walkway along the west side of the house. Planning Commissioner Brown indicated that he would prefer to see hardcover percentages remain the same. Mr. Bowers explained that the walkway served as a drainage path that allows runoff to occur to the north rather than toward the neighboring property. If a major portion of the driveway were removed, It would make accessing the garage difficult. Planning Commissioner Hanson said that he was satisfied with Mr. Bowers' proposal as is. It was moved by Planning Commissioner Hanson to recommend approval of the hardcover, average lakeshore setback and side setback variances subject to removal of the front fireplace. The hardship being that the house is located in such a way that placing the addition in any other location is precluded. There was no second to this motion. It was moved by Planning Commissioner Brown, seconded by Planning Commissioner Hanson, to recommend approval of application #1419 provided that hardcover does not exceed 32.4%. Motion, Ayes«4, Nays»0, Motion passed. #1422 DAVID BREITNER 2755 CASCO POINT ROAD VARIANCE PUBLIC HEARING 11:10 P.M. - 11:40 P.M. Mr. and Mrs. Breitner were present for this public hearing. % The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing were duly noted. Assistant Planning and Zoning Administrator Gaffron explained that there is an existing house on this property that was abandoned 15 years ago. The applicant is proposing to build the house closer to the lake, however there will be no need for an average lakeshore setback variance. This is due to the adjacent property owner,Mr. Putnam being granted an average lakeshore setback variance for a gazebo. The applicant is not proposing to have a back up apron. Gaffron had spoken to the Public Works Director who indicated that there is quite a bit of gravel area in front of the existing garage on the right-of-way which could serve as a back up apron if necessary. There is a retaining wall that is shown to extend 2* into the Peterson's MIVOTBS or TBI PLAimiBG COMMISSICBI MBBTI1I6 JUMB 19, 1989 IO0IW5 PILB «1422-BREinaDt CONTIMUBD property and drainage onto that property la a concern due to its lower elevation. The City wants to make sure that drainage continues along and does not have any negative impact on this property. Assistant Planning and Zoning Administrator Gaffron asked the applicant what he intended to do with the higher portion of the lot? Mr. Breitner replied that they intended to take the knoll off of the top of the hill which is approximately 1-1/2*. Gaffron asked about tree preservation. Mr. Breitner said that they were going to try and preserve the trees which was one of the reasons the attached garage was more preferable. Gaffron provided hardcover information for the existing house. In the 0-75* zone there is a boathouse and concrete sidewalk. The applicant wishes to save the boathouse and remove the concrete sidewalk. In the 75-250* zone, the existing is 25%. The applicant*8 proposal for the house, deck, and driveway would increase hardcover to 34.3%. Planning Commissioner Johnson asked whether the existing garage would be removed? The applicant responded that it would be removed. Planning Commissioner Johnson questioned whether the applicant had tried to keep hardcover within 25%? The applicant replied that they had looked at other alternatives, but felt that the present proposal was best. In order to maximize the views of the lake, the house had to be brought forward to the average lakeshore setback line. Due to the fact that a detached garage would have to meet a 30* setback from the road and the location of Putnam*s garage, an attached garage would better fit the scheme of the property. Mr. Breitner further noted that hardcover would be approximately the same for a detached garage as they are proposing for an attached garage. Mr. Breitner said that the hardcover proposed is very close to what currently exists. Brown obser *ed that the new driveway is proposed to be 1,000 s.f. The Planning Commission requested information pertaining to the hardcover percentages of the driveway, house and deck individually. Gaffron calculated that the deck was 350 e.f., the house was 2150 s.f. and the driveway wou ' ^ be 1080 s.f. It was moved by Planning Commiss ■ ' Hanson, seconded by Planning Commissioner Brown, to re»- n and approval of the hardcover, lot area and lot width variai.ces under the following conditions : 1) The proposed hardcover envelope shall not exceed 34.26%. 2) Approval is contingent upon removal of the non- conforming, detached garage and sidewalk. MIVOTBS OF TEB PLIOnilHG COMMISSION MBBTIMG JUMB 19, 1989 10M1M6 FILE «1422-BRBITHBR COMTIHOBD 3) A grading plan must be submitted. The hardship in this application is this is an existing developed lot with no additional available land to increase the lot size. Planning Commissioner Brown asked what the total lot coverage was? Gaffron replied that it was 15.625%. Bellows said that she usually had difficult/ approving these substandard conditions, but she felt that the applicant had tried his best to keep everything to a minimum. Motion, Ayes»4, Nays"0, Motion passed. #1423 NDMAKD BRONN 355 STUBBS BAT ROAD NORTH VARIANCB PUBLIC HBARING 9il5 P.M. - 9:17 P.M. The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing were duly noted. The applicant was 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 Cohen, seconded by Planning Commissioner Hanson, to recommend approval of this application, subject to a survey showing the location of the barn being submitted. After discussion, it was further recommended that no after-the-fact permit be required, hence no survey would be required. Motion, Ayes-4, Nays*0, Brown Abstained, Motion passed. MISCBLIAHBOUS (ZONING FILE #1420) Acting Chairperson Bellows stated that the Planning Commission had been asked by Mr. Norwood to reopen and reconsider application #1420. Mr. Norwood discovered after the Planning Commission's vote to table this item that he would be out of town at the time he would be scheduled to reappear. It was moved by Planning Commissioner Johnson, seconded by Planning Commissioner Brown, to reconsider this matter. Motion, Ayes*4, Nays»0, Motion passed. It was moved by Planning Commisisoner Johnson, seconded by Planning Commissioner Brown, to deny this application. Motion, Ayes«4, Nays«0, Motion passed. MimiTBS CMP T9B PLAMMIB6 COMaSSIOS NBBT1W3 JUNB 19, 1989 IKfOKIATKHAL ITEM #1334 SIDUnr RBBBKS 715 EOKra BtOWH ROAD FIHAL SUBDIVISIOR/PRD COMDITIOHAL USB PERMIT RBSOLOnCNIS Acting Chairperson Bellows suggested that any further comDents or concerns be done in written form. PLAMRIMG COMMISSICm APPROVAL OF MAY 15, 1989 MIIIUTBS It was moved by Planning Commissioner Hansonr seconded by Planning Commissioner Johnson, to approve the minutes of the May 15, 1989 Planning Commission Meeting. Motion, Ayes-4, Nays»0, Motion passed. PLAEMIEG COMMISSICm REPRESENTATIVE It was agreed that Planning Commissioner, Jim Hanson, would represent the Planning Commission at the July 10, 1989 City Council Meeting. ADJCXJRMMENT The October i, 1988, Planning Commission Meeting adjourned at 10:05 p.m. 1 3U)i M. 7b89 M by Legislative Oontactm Alert July 6, 1989 IMPORTANT: TAX BILL STRATEGY Dear Legislative Contact: The AMM annually sponsors a series of five ’dutch treat* breakfasts held regionally in the metro area to seek input on issues for the policy development process and the yearly work program and agenda. The announcement letter is sent to Mayors and Managers or Administrators with a suggestion that the invitation be extended by them to interested councilmembers. Those of you who are Mayors, Managers or Administrators either have or will soon receive your regional notice. Because the Omnibus Tax Bill was vetoed, this years series of meetings take on a special significance. The vetoed bill provided a significant amount of property tax relief for the metro area, especially for higher valued homes. Outstate and the Governor may work hard to undermine those gains. It is important that the AMM develop a strategy for metro legislative lobbying to protect and enhance, if possible, our position. Attached is a list of the meeting places and AMM cities grouped by regional breakfast. If you are unable to attend the one in your area, please try to make one of the other four. All breakfasts start at 7:30 A.M. R.S.V.P. to Carol Williams at 227-4008 by noon at least two days prior to the breakfast you plan to attend, (i.e. Monday noon for Wednesday breakfast). We look forward to seeing you at one of the meeti<i^ >. Most Sincerely, Walt Fehst, AMM President Robbinsdale City Manager 183 university avenue east st paul, minnesota 55101 (612) 227-4008 awniM ‘3.1989 , McGuires Restaurant - Continental Room B '1201 W. Co. Rd. E, Arden Hills (N.U. corner of Co. Rd. E and Lexington 1/2 mile south of the 1-694 and interchange.) CENTRAL - TUESDAY - July 18. 1989 Sheraton Park Place Hotel - Seasons Restaurant - Autumn Room 5555 Vayzata Blvd. (Hwy. 12), St. Louis Park (S.W. quadrant of Hwy. 12 and Turners crossing which is the 1st. light west of Hwy. 100). EAST - WEDNESDAY - July 19, 1989 Holiday Inn East - Tarton III room. 2201 Burns Ave., St. Paul (S.W. quadrant of the 1-94 and M'**'night Road interchange.) WEST - THURSDAY - July 20, 1989 Hopkins House - Executive Room 1501 Hwy. 7, Hopkins (North side of Hwy. 7 1 1/2 miles east of 1-494 and 1/2 west of old Co. Rd. 18.) SOUTH - TUESDAY - July 25, 1989 Burnsville Holiday Inn - Board Room 14201 Nicollet Ave., Burnsville (N.W. quadrant of the I-35E and Co. Rd. 42 intersection.) EAST (12) Bayport Cottage Grove Mahtomed i Newport *Oakdale St. Paul ParK Stillwater Woodbury •Maplewood North St. Paul •St. Paul H istings WEST (15) •Bloooraington Deephaven Eden Prairie Edina •Hopkins •Minnetonka Mound •Orono Richfield Shorewood Spring Park Wayzata Woodland Chanhassen Chaska OUTREACH BREAKFAST OSOttFlHG (1989) NORTH (IS) Arden Hills Anoka Blaine Circle Pines Columbia Heights Falcon Heights Coon Rapids •Fridley Ramsey St. Francis Spring Lake Park Mounds View •New Brighton St. Anthony Roseville SOUTH (12) Apple Valley •Burnsville Eagan Inver Grove Heights Lakeville •Mendota Heights Roseraount South St. Paul West St. Paul Prior Lake Savage •Shakopee CENTRAL (13) Champlin Brooklyn Center •Brooklyn Park Crystal •Golden Valley •Maple Grove •Minneapolis New Hope Osseo Plymouth •Robbinsdale St. Louis Park Dayton •Denotes Board Director Ci"y LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT EUR.A.SIAN WAT^.R MILFOIL has played a trick with our harvesting machine . The arrival has been postponed and thus our launching ceremoney is rescheduled to: r^[i©iD^[L 8:30 am, Monday, July 17, 1989 We will meet at the SPRING PARK PUBLIC ACCESS Hennepin County Road 15 (Immediately East of Water Patrol Hqs.) Please Join us in launching the HATTIE MAY Eurasian Water Milfoil Task Force Chairman Tom Reese and LMCD Chair JoEllen Hurr will conduct ceremonies with major uipment investors and you, the supporting public. Schmidt Beer/C. Heileman Brewing Co., Inc. now a part of the "Weed Buster" team will assist in the "christening" % o DATE: June 23, 1989 TO: Officer Kurt ' FROM: Chief Mel Kilbo '.on SUBJECT: Letter of Commendation WMottsmt JIHIOIW ctnrwgmn I am writing to make formal my appreciation for determined efforts and persistence in pursuing Mark Alan Woolery through many jurisdi ctions and challenging the findings of the Assistant County Attor ney successfully while presenting convincing evidence to gain issue. Your diligent work involved in interrogation, preparation of the search warrant that resulted in return of $33,000 worth of valuable guns to the rightful owner, all represent excellent follow-up work. The victim, Mr. John Prudden, was most appreciative of your work. His letter is attached. I wish to further commend your follow-up on the juvenile credit card case that was assigned to you. As you are aware, this case was brought to us on 3-3-89 with little follow up after then until you were given the case. You successfully pursued all aspects of the case to a suc cessful end, obtaining both issue and restitution. The last case, a theft of two tables from a lakeside bar was given to you to follow up on 6-12-89. Using the arresting officer’s report, you executed a search warrant, not finding the tables but finding the work location of a possible thief. Upon meeting with the thief, the thief stated "can I bring the tables back?" He did so on 6-14-89 and was charged with misdemeanor theft - two days from theft to recovery. I am please to commend your actions in all of the above solved cases. yf.T33M JWU03 OHOfK) 30 .John D Pki ddkn :n*s \%fx>OHii I K«)Ai> Wavzata. Minnksota June 19. 1989Chief Melvin Kilbo Orono Police Department P.O. Box 86 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 Dear Chief Kilbo: My purpose in writing is to make you aware of my feeling of great satisfaction with the manner and expediency with which Officer Kurt Erickson investigated the burglary at my home. The individual, believed to be responsible, has been arrested and a significant portion of the Items stolen have been returned to me. This result was made possible through Officer Erickson's efforts and his management of the co-operative efforts of a number of supporting municipal and county law enforcement resources. I am very pleased that Orono has the benefit of such an individual within its police department. Sincerely, 0 League of Minnesota Cities University Ave. East M. Paul. MN 55101-2526 (612) 227-5600 (FAX: 221-0986) COUim MiTMG JULIO 1989 cmroFORDW June 23, 1989 Mr. Melvin Kilbo Chief of Police P. O. Box 86 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 Dear Mr. Kilbo: I want to take this opportunity to thank you for yom^ .ecent participation in the League of Minnesota Cities annual conference. Your contribution to the program was excellent. Many city officials commented on the quality of presentations. If the evaluations are an accurate reflection, and I'm sure they are, this year's program was truly a tremendous success. Again, on behi.lf of the Board of Directors and our city officials, please accept our gratitude for your contribution. S^cerely, Donald A. Slater Executive Director DAS:ctd 1^; ‘ ■ ■■ lfe> ■S- “>":W \. The 1990s _ MtfiSeyorirf the future of Minnesota aties > y' " nhual Conference ifeasue of Minnesota / Cities \ 7/ June 6-9,1989 Minneapolis , . .• ; .•s—- •. Ctmlerence Program, Thuri>d«v, continued Concurrent Sessions V (Choose one) LEADERSHIP FOR THE Fl'TLRE Building Better Community Partnerships Through Collaborative Planning 10:45*12:13 p.m.. NtcoUct C Succeufui ccUabomioa among ones mi sennce agencies can mean better services at lower costs for anaens. Howeier. coBab- ontrfoa may be tricky. When it it ^propiwe.’ Wluch types at agencies are the best m work with.’ How does the fiscal process work? Presenters will address these questiom and othen in dts* cussBig their experiences. Partictpants wdl learn four wavs to cofiaborate. when and when ntx to coil^iorate. and what to do when things go wrong. • Karen Ray, President. Karen Ray .Associates • Betty McCollum. Councilmember. North St. Paul • William Bassett, Manager. Mankato • Dean .Massett. Council .Admiiustrator. Red Wing .\I.A.VAG1NG THE EMPLOYEE OF THE FLTLRE Changing Values and Employee Motivation 10:45-12:13 p.m., Nicollet D An increasingly diverse work force combined with different worker values creates a major challenge for those •managing em ployees today. Who is today ’s worker, and what do.*s he or she want? This session examines the current population of city em ployees. illustrates how it is different than the past, identifies various forces at work within diherem personnel groups, and offers suggestions on how management can respond. • Cyrus Sm> the. President. Labor Relauons Associates, Inc. M.ANAGING THE E.MPLOYEE OF THE FLTURE What Cities Need to Kholv About Section 89 10:45-12:15 p.m., Greenway F-H Take your first step toward cutting through the complexities and misinformation surrounding Section 89 by making plans to attend this presentation. Due to the confusing nature of the topic, the presenter has gone to great lerigths to make certain the informa tion will be covered in a clear and understandable fashion. Discus sion will focus on purpose and intent of law, current guidelines, summary of requirements, benefit plans that must comply, where aties are now. and what they need to know in the future. • Ardy Prekker, Vice President, Marketing and Consulting, DCA Management Group • Ann Houle, LMC Research Analyst CttALLE.NGES FOR TDDAl’ AND TOMORROW Providing Police Protection for Small Cities 10:45-12:15 p.m., Greenway A-D What types of police protection are available to small aues? How does a small mumcipality determine which type of protecuon is best? Finally, who has control over the police force—the maypr, city council, or police chief? These issues form the focus of this two-pan session. Pan one examines the structures (types) avail able to small cities: chscussion will include in-house protection, city helping another city, county providing services, and consor tium. Presentaaon will Inghlight citv case studies illustrating spe cific types of pnnection. A panel of elected officials and police chiefs wUl explore the issue of control in pan two. Discussion wiO focus on hiring, licensing, managing the force, temunation and mayor as police chief. • Chai les Pavlish, Mayw. Chatfield • Dtiani* Kntif^ufi Mnyon V Melvin Kilbo. Chief ot P xsJDft——^ '• Jamfi Lhalle^ Chief of Hanhassen • Craig .Anderson, Police Chici. wi. Bomfacious/.Minnetnsu Terry Goddard Mayors’ Association/ Mini-Conference Luncheon Importance of Forming a National-Local Partnership in the 1990s 12:30-2.00 p.m., .Nicollet A-B Terry Goddard, third-term mayor of Phoenix, .Arizona, belie\es ■ when cities work. America works. When cities fail, America fails.” In his presentation. .Mayor Goddard will stress the impor tance of federal leadership committing to a partnership with local government in order to sol\-e national problems impacting cities. He will outline a handful of key concerns facing cities that are national problems, i.e. education, drug abuse, housing, infra structure. and environmental protection. These problems require national solutions that can only be carrieu out tluough a federal- local partnership. • Terry Goddarjj^, President. National League of Cities; Mayor. Phoenix. .Arizona LMC Annual Conference LMC Annual Conference o INTEROFFICE MEHO DATES TOs FRCB^s REs Jun« 29, 1989 Officer Chuck Schaus* R»«arv» Dfficar* Tarry Kutz, Karan Drahoa, and Trjy Dannason Chief Nal Kilbo Raaarva Thank You O On June 17, 1909, the Raaarv# group listed above performed a task at the Dexter Apartments. The owners of Dexter Housing had a problem with vandalism and youngsters being unsupervised in the area. At a meeting with apartment tenants with the police and Long Lake Mayor, it was suggested the swing set be moved from its location to another so that the set would be away from parking lota and in full view of tenants so they could better supervise their children. □n June 17, Chuck gathered the group together and moved the swing set but could not finish it due to footing problems. Subsequently, however, former Hennepin County Park Commissioner Neil Webber and former County Board Candidate Dale Clausnizter commented to both myself and City Administrator Mark Bernhardson as to how they appreciated the work of the Reserves in this effort. □rono City Council Long Lake City Council m LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT jllT-:!.V JX I 0 Public Hiarinoi Presentt Action Report o^t Cardinal Cove Beach Association new docli license 4or 5 BSU on Halsted's Bay, LHCO Area 1 Wednesday, June 28, 1989, 7:00 p.n. Tonka Bay City Hall Jan BosMinkel, Minnetonka Beach; David Cochran, Greenwood; Bert Foster, Oeephaven; Jaees Grathwol, Excelsior; JoEllen Hurr, Orono; Douglas Babcock, Spring Park; John Lewean, Minnetrista; Thomas Martinson, Wayzata; Robert Pillsbury, Minnetonka; Robert Rascop, Shorewood; Thomas Reese, Mound; Robert Slocum, Woodland. Chair Hurr convened a Public Hearing to consider the application of the Cardinal Cove Beach Association for a new dock license for five (5) Boat Storage Units off Lot 7, Block 2, Cardinal Cove, Halsted's Bay, LMCD Area 1. ^erry Lueck, 6821 Cardinal Cove, Mound, President of the Cardinal Cove Beach Association, explained that the purpose is to provide Lale access for tlree lots, number i, 10 and 11, not riparian to Lake Minnetonka. The dockage for these three lots is to be on Lot 7, an Outlot, platted for boat dockage. A total of 11-1/2 Watercraft Storage Units has been requested for the five BSUs, on three docks, each the responsibility of the representative lot. The Outlot qualifies for five BSUs based on 239.3‘of shoreline and can accommodate three separate docks. The application was prompted by the City of Minnetrista requesting an LMCD permit before issuing its city permit, as it has in the past. There were no further comments from the Public. Lueck explained the other lots in the subdivision have lakeshore and the subdivision is fully developed. It is noted that at the present time, water level is not adequate for normal boat dociage at the requested slips and there is no intention to ask for dock extensions. All interested parties having been given an opportunity to be heard, the Public Hearing was closed at 7:22 p.m., the application referred to the July Bth, 7:30 a.m. Hater Structures meeting at the LMCD Office. LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT REGULAR MEETING TONKA BAY CITY HALL Junt 28, 1989 1. CjULL tfl. Ordtr The regular eeeting oi the Lake Hinnetonla Coniervatian District hsi called order by Chair JoEllen Hurr at 7:30 p.a. Wednesday, June 28, 1989. 2. Roll Call Present: Jan Boswinkel, Minnetonka Beach, Secretary: David Cochran, Greenwood; Bert Foster, Deephavenj Janes Grathwol, Excelsior; JoEllen Hurr, Chair, Orono; Douglas Babcock, Spring Park; John Lewnan, Treasurer , Mi nnetr i st a; Thomas Martinson, Wavcitta; Robert Pillsburv, Mif-nstonka; Robert Rascop, Shorewood; Thomas Rsese, Vice Lhair, Mound; Robert Slocum, Woodland. Also present: David ArndorTer, Consultant; Sqt. Mm. Chandler, GheriH i Water Patrol; Charles LeFevere, Counsel; Eugene Strommen, Executive Director; Fran! Miua, Consultant. Absent: Marvin Bjorlin, Tonka Bay, John Malinka. Victoria the minutes ok the May 24, 190? 3. Readinq of Minutes Boswinkel moved, Grathwol seconded, approval of meeting. Motion carried unanimously. 4. Public Comments Ellsworth Peterson, 45 Fairhope, Tonka Bay, commented on the IlN Natural Resources rules on dredging, suggesting sludge removal the Board support dredging at least to a depth ok eight feet. Department of and requesting Hurr explained that LMCD does not deal with dredging permits but the Management Plan being prepared will consider overlapping responsibilities for dredging among various units of government. Petersons name was given to Arndorfer with the suggestion Peterson follow the Advisory Committee activities. There uere no other comments from the Public. 4. Reports A. Chair Hurr 1) The June 10 Board Lake inspection was well attended. The July Board Lake inspection will be waived in light of this trip. There will be a Public Officials' Lake Tour August 5 from 12:30 p.m. to 3:30 p.m. leaving from the LaFayette Club dock. t.tt.C.D. lQ«rd - Junt 2§, 1989 2) On Auqu'ft U Hurr Mill conduct th® Lfgislative CoaoiiUef of th# Minn«iot« Futurt Rtiourcti CoMoiifiiDn on a tour of Lake Minnetonka. 3) On July 19 there Hill be a eayors aectinq at 7i30 p.e. at the • t the Sho'-enood City Hall, Hurr urged attendance to hear Mhat the eayors will be discusiing, L.H.C.D. expected to be aeong the topics. Ll Financial Reports, Treasuer Lewean, 1) Letrean presented the Financial Condition Report for May 31, 1909 cailinf attention to receipts of 183,213 to the Eurasian Water Milfoil account shoNing total received to date of 1663,977. Stroeeen corrected the report to shoe Eurasian Water Milfoil Save the Lake interest of 110,164. 1) Lewnan eoved, BosMinlel seconded, approval of bills in the aaount of 142,428.19 by Checks Nos. 5493 through 5547. Motion carried uraniaously. 3) The Board received the 1990 Froposed Budget. The proposed budget shoes an increase of approxiaatel v 20*i over 1999, most of it because of Eurasian Water Milfoil control. The 1990 ta?t lewes to the cities have increased aore than the *0X because of increased valuations and the inclusion of f60,000 for Eurasian Water Milfoil Operating et-penses, an itea not budgeted in 1999 but funded by voluntary contributions of 183,000 froa the cities. The 1990 budget of 160,000 represents a reduced share of the 1990 ueed harvesting cost. The Board reviewed the aajor nen expenditures as folloMsi » Salaries. It is proposed an administrative intern be hired, funded half froe the general fund and 1/2 from the Eurasian Water rlilfoil special project fund. * Professional Services. Continuation of the Contract Secretarial Service for Board/comeittee Beetings, temporary office help, assistance in preparing quarterly financial reports, and dock inspector. * Office Rent. Anticipate 15*1 increase * Consulting Services. Complete Management Plan contract and services of Consultant Frank Hixa. ♦ Eurasian Water Milfoil Program. One-half of the 1230,000 budget, as page 5, will be provided by the U. S. Army Corps of Engineers. iPC 1uded Detail of the budget was provided in a memo from the E;<ecutive Director with proposed budget detail, including levies breafdoMn to the cities. Board members requested a cover letter to the cities with the budget, giving detail. Hurr suggested Boaro members participate in the presentation at their City Council review of the budget. She also offered to attend each Council meeting with the Executive Director. L.n.C.0. Board - June 28, 1?8? Retie eovtd, L»w««n ipronrted, acproval the 1990 LMCD budget, diitribution of expenie to the Municipal itlef and 1990 Eurasian Mater Hilfoil budget as iubeitted, to be fornarded to the cities nith a detailed cover letter. notion carried unanieously. 4) The Board received the 1988 Fiscal Year Audit of 1-1 to 12-31-83 and written coaaents froa OuMayne L.Echibilla, C.P.A., Auditor. Rascop noted the need for a eanageaent letter and requested one be included. Lewnan Moved, Boswinkel seconded, approval of the 1988 Audit and order it filed. A Management Letter is to be requested from the Auditor. Motion carried unani Mousl 5) The Board received a proposal from DuWayne L. Schibilla I Associates, at the request of the Treasurer and Executive Director, to assist in preparation of quarterly financial statements. The initial cost will be 1310 for start-up and 1190 for the quarterly service. If required to attend meetings the fee will oe billed at 170 per hour. The quarterly reports would cover 1987 operations starting 1-1-87. Rascop moved, Grathwol seconded, approval of the services of DuMayne L. Schibilla & Associates per their proposal of June 24, 1?89. Motion carried unanimously. S. C. Standing Committees 1) MATER STRUCTURES, Chair Cochran a) Cochrar. moved, Grathwol seconded, approval of the minutes of June 10, 1989 as submitted. Motion carried unanimously b) Cochran moved, Grathwol seconded, acceptance of the Committee recommendation for approval of a Special Density and new doci: license for Minnetonka Boat Marks (Qrono) to increase 6 8SU on Browns Bay and 42 B5U on Tanager Lake; based on amenities as submitted. Strommen read the list of amenities as detailed in the Public Hearing report. Responding to a question from BahcocI', Strommen stated the amenities are confirmed annually as license stipulations when application is made for renewal. Motion carried unanimously. c) Cochran moved, Pillsbury seconded, approval of the committee recommendation *.0 approve a variance, Special Density,and new docF license to allow Minnetonka Boat Morks (Nayzata) to add 12 permanent BSU, based on amenities as submitted. Grathwol stated his opposition to the proposal as he cannot find any basis for granting a variance. He believes it is in defiance of the Ordinance. Rascop supported his position and further stated an Envi ronment ■*! Assessment Morksheet would appear to be necessary. Foster spoke in support of the motion because e hardship is created by the unusual nature of the shoreline. Martinson noted this marina has the lowest density on the lale at 1:14. Reese spoke in favor, flexibility being his reason. The motion carried, Grathwol and Rascop voting nay. L.H.C.0. Board - Junt 28, 19S9 d) Cochran rtported that thp Committee has recommended approval ^or addinq 22 BSU at Lighthouse Island ior thi Minnetonka Yacht Club/Lake Minnetonka Sailing School and presented evidence that an EAM ii not required. The aeenities submitted by the applicant included figned pub 1ic reetrooms and telephone at the Carson Bay facility. A letter from the 'appiicant offered substituting a gift to the City of Deephaven of a "eake ready" dock public launch in Carsons Bay. Discussion folloned on what would happen City did not accept the dock. The applicant indicated they would revert original amenities. at the if the to the The Board received an opinion from Counsel and DNR that the applicant is using 17,380 square feet of lake surface, and thretore being under 20,000 square feet an EAW is not needed. Cochran moved, Pillsbury seconded, approval of a Special Density Permit and New Dock License for adding 22 BSU at Lighthouse Island with the amended stipulation that the applicant proceed with the "male ready" dock in e*«change for relief from providing signage for a telephone and restroom at the Carson Bay facility, with the understanding that if the dock is not forthcoming, they will provide the signage. Motion carried unanimously. e) Temporary Dock Extensions Cochran moved, Fillsbury seconded, approval of a temporary dock extension permit to allow the LaFayette Club (Minnetonk? Beach) to extend their dock complex 24 further out, a total of 107' from shore, provided it is not a navigational hazard and subject to Water Patrol inspection. Motion carried unanimously. Cochran moved, Foste** recorded, a temporary dock extension permit for West Beach Apartments, Midwest Management (Spring Park) to allow an extension of 64 for a total of 176* from shore, provided it is not a navigational hazard and subject to Water Patrol inspection. Motion carried unanimously. Lewman moved, Pillsbury seconded, a temporary dock extension permit fur Herzog Acres (Minnetonka) to extend their docks from 88 to IIC , the east lot line setback to be observed and providing there is no interference with navigation and subject to Water Patrol approval. Motion carried unanimously, e. Renewal without Change Rascop moved, Foster seconded, the renewal without change of the multiple dock license of Shorewood Yacht Club (Shorewood). Motion carried unanimously. Chair Hurr amended the agenda to proceed to the Advisory Committee Item 5.C.4) L.N.C.D. Board -Jun« 28, 1989 C. 4) ADVISORY CQNHITTEE, Chair Reese, Consultant Arndorfer. a) Arndorfer presented the Nanagenent Plan Status Report as of June 8, briefed belOM, stating fourteen eonths of the twenty-four eonth project are coepleted, having used 58X of the tine allocated and 57X cf the money. a Lake Inventory. Has been completed and will be updated as changes occur. Haps will be located in L.H.C.D. headquarters. a Use Monitoring. Summer 1988 is complete and summer 1989 will continue with further information on what types of uses the Lake accomodates such as sailboats, large power boats, water skiing, etc. a Fishing. Completed with plan to protect habitat, improve monitoring, study of fishing contests, exotic species. a Wetlands. Purpose is to improve regulations both above and below the high water mark, improve acquisition within the Lal.e using grant programs, active management, better enforcement of dredging permit restrictions. . The Watershed District and DNR are very limited in •resources to inspect and enforce permits granted. a Water Quality. Provide standards and criteria for hard cover, aid control nutrient run off. a Public Safety. Increased presence of the Water Patrol start quarterly meetings with Public Safety Officials, increase boat safety education, and Hater Patrol performance monitoring. a Shoreland Management. Develops standards and criteria for the first one thousand feet from the Lake. The DNR does allow specific rules for lakes such as Minnetonka. a On-Shore Facilities. Emphasis shoreland use consistent with boating and coordination with other agencies such as Suburban Hennepin County Parks. a Upland Protection. Control of shore development and control of density in certain areas of the Lake. a Intergovernmental Relations. Suggest broadened lake management and formalize procedures among involved agencies. a Institutional Arrangements Internal review of the LMCD operation. a Funding. Will examine poential sources of future funds. Andorfer distributed a Status Report handout of a statistical nature and the project status, which is made a part of the file. The Board expressed appreciation to Frank Hixa for the background information he has supplied for the Plan. l.n.C.D« loiri - Junt 2t| 19B9 5. C. 2) CWA8IM MATER HILFOIL TASK FORCE, Chair Rttit a) Rttit rtporttd dtlivtry of tht first harvtster hat bffh dtlaytd until July 7 btcaust of Mtathtr conditions at tht factory nhich prohibittd outsidt sandblasting. Tht plan is to btqin harvtsting by July 10. b) Rttst subnitttd a proposal frot Sttvtn R. McCotas, Blut Wattr Scitnct, St. Paul, to ttst stall-scalt hand tools and projtcts nhich hottotntrs could ust to rttovt EMW ntar tht short. A bookltt would bt publishtd on tht ust. HcCotas outlintd fourtttn techniguts to bt studitd at a cost of 15,000. Rttst stattd ht has a cooaitatnt frot a fallow Gtntral Mills ttploytt to itlp suptrvist tha projtct. Rttst tovtd, Cochran stcondtd, tht txptnditurt of 15,000 to contract with Blut Natir Scitnct for prtparation of a bookltt to bt availablt to individuals who wish to do thtir own ratoval in tht artas not covtrtd by tht harvastars. As part oftht discussion, Stroiatn rtcotttndtd a todifitd prograt including six of tht ittts suggtsttd by Blut Water Scitnct as having tort dirtct application to Lakt Minnttonka's wttd probltt, at an astinattd cost of t2,200. Upon a call for the question, there were four ayes and tight nays. Tht failed. notion Hurr tovtd, Babcock seconded, that the Board negotiate a contract with Blue Water Science calling for a todifitd list of six ittns at a cost of 12,200. There were four ayes and tight nays and the notion failed. Brathwol tovtd, Foster seconded, to authorize the expenditure of up to 15,000 for a suitable prograt as deternined by the officers of nethods for aquatic weed rtnoval by hand tools. Motion carried, Reese voting nay. 5. C. 3) LAKE USE COMMITTEE, Chair Pillsbury Pillsbury reported the Connittee net on June 19th and forwards no reconnendations as there was not a quorun present. a) Pillsbury noved, Grathwol seconded, approval of their annual liquor license for Tht Queen of Excelsior Charter Boat, noting the Hennepin County Sheriff reports no problems on record for the applicant. Motion carried unanieously. b) Pillsbury moved, Grathwol seconded, renewal of the charter boat registrations for Choral C, Karob I, and Miss Minnetonka. Motion carried unanitously. Pillsbury moved, Grathwol seconded, a new charter boat registration for Jacks R Wild. Motion carried unanimously. 6 L.n.C.0. Board - Juna 2B, 1989 c) Pillsbury aoved, BosMinkel seconded, approval of inipectioo rtporti, fte dapoiit refunds for: ffinnetonka Crossing, 6/3/89, Hayzata to Excelsior Hinnetonka Bass Club 6/3/89 Aeerican Scholarship Foundation,6/4/89 bass tournaaent Notion carried unanieously. d) Bert Foster agreed to Chair a Personal Watercraft ■anuficture'/dealer study group requesting input froe other board eeebers, eith a fall date for recoeeendations. e) There s^s no Water Patrol Report as the representative was called anay because of an emergency on the Lake. f) Rascop took exception to a remark made by Howard Tripp of the Bass Federation at the Lake Use meeting regarding removal uf spawn from the Lake by the DNR, requesting a review of the response to a letter to be sent to John S. Daly, Hound, about bass tournaments during the spawning season. 3. C.5) EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR'S REPORT a) It was moved by Hurr, seconded by Grathwol, to approve the hiring of J le Franta, Wayzata, as a Bookkeeper/Clerk effective June 16, 1989 at $8.00 per hour with a six month probationary period. Notion carried unanimously. b) Strommen reported Joan Nansk has agreed to split her vacation, taking June 30 -July 7 and July 24 - July 29. Strommen will be on vacation August 14 - 18. c) Board/Coamittee Recording Secretary Julie Weidner was commended for her prompt and thorough preparation of the minutes. d) The Board accepted and ordered filed Strommen's report of Outside Government, Business and Community Contacts-. 3/23-6/28/89. e) Strommen reported he will make a presentation on Eurasian Water Nilfoil Weed Control, A Lake Preservation Priority of the LNCO at a ’'reshwater Foundation Seminar at the Gray Freshwater Biological Institute, July 8, 1989. 6. There was no Unfinished Business 7. There was no New Business 8. Hurr declared the meeting adjourned at 10:30 p.m. See Page 8 - Signature Page LN.C.O. Board - June 28, 1989 Subaitted by Jan BorMinkel, Secretary Approved bv: JoEllen L. Hurr, Chair 8 i;.: / - V , : "M nu Ul la 1 1 1 •« T 1 ? 5 ? ^<9t 'i 'tl 1 1 i ? itC? P 115 f\ !~ r\* r 1<r iiii5r> ^ R «I t-iiMiias^ I ?s i -5 ^ Oi o — —• n -♦> rr> •>» u> ^ O (1) ■»• 3 •« 3 a oc 7 00 VC 5* *'o u>•» o rp <p SS = 5?=c?5r?^ S,S“5'<tf5rp-j3-.ip«3r».-, as* ^rroas rpcrtc^ o *:i/MOSrtvi(p 3-nn <p n rp o m o 0) ft« O 3 -♦» -1 O-s-'sss.-'„<r5'- io-=IIEI resist-? s*" ---^^-vr.ssr^si: oi 09 a. N-.-0 -♦» _ 3 O A <*1 «< ^3*0.01 3 r-tn A AO 3 M A <n r« ^^-- • ^3T0*Q. a 3 2^21? 2 A A fit A -P 3 ftiC3ft3 — rfft^. .r»-i-> ii5f:i=°issBSs 3 A O Q. «-► (A O S"::oS.S,!!i»S,i,”:S = " s?;-icv."i:5 ‘“»- ^:: |s|l“?*“s.°|r-* * - 2. * ? ® ><3 ’<(tt S’ a !!r ^ S 2! ^ 1•$ u. t ^^ S;. "■ H Jx 1, <? ^ 3) ■ M ? 2 fr rf ^ h 1* S i; ; V) »! i i: %r»' 1 .d- #'•mm mm rnmm^ 1/b/l' W r -m |;1;,' * mm Vi K:'"' '-m m.^ ■ rjy.\ ' -r-J ■V>^i '■V; r*> “O *- — ><-► — 0-0 O OJ — 0*01 ►-•*< < o**— rp » “♦to /Pna^OOOrf-) Q.O* -17TI033 ev X r* r* O 0» t/M0Cr^4AA O ' 0*1 OOOOO -*i a» O O* CL O 3 -h -5 o* • n^oon-^ 0’i‘< O. O r»3r+ 0<00 — oOf-«a r-xocno 33-100 00rf03r»0 iOattr+Or+-^r+OOQ. n M •-. 33- 3rfO-Jr^ r*>3«0 O ^ to 4/) O -5 O •— Or 040 ODO 0> 00 *-0.^*0 -*t 30 ••>C4/I3 O O-l^c O. rt r*>3'O.Qi3f-MO — OnOO 34AQI u»rt OO 03-10*0. ?T003* r40r+f+4/i.OO 010^301 3*fti2r ^ r+»o. r^r*- O rto-»o 0« •—-I cnir-ft -1»- 03->)OCA03‘OH>4-I> •O-ltOC/l OOtAOrf^^* <30«* r-3 4AT o — — n , o Ot. <-► . O «> 3 4A lA o c fil -hK:iA.3:^ .00 ^ ^ . O D» . 0» >♦ > - O — O* Q.fc-H' ^r* < -hiA •lOiO/ 3*30. - 00» 03CX^0«» >*< 3 3 < tt . C.4A 3 V (A 3 a» n:r»o O «A <-»■ CLO**"*(/)^Onr^3 C-1. -IXO'OO.rftt 0«rt-JC O—r^nOOr+O »<3<0 »4A •- 30-D4A«»Qf0 “ ^ Q. -^3 rf«< 04 0.40 O .•X 4?' ITv. ''.. • ' '' '. '*' * - .• ' , ■ : tUb'- ' ■: i .. ■ t ».i'- ■i' ■' ■.r' ,-. .. * . ■• ■ > ' • • . '^Jt ' 'V w r ;•tft /•■■■■•>v^-- ■ ■; ^;Sv/:v ‘ ■ .-■ ■ '■-■■- »;:■•■ J. 'v'v: ' ' i • i .■ y r a#:'*,-?; ■■'■▼v ; Viit - wmmm^ ;v;:5;^;. V,-- ’'■' ■ . ■ Li-.. 0. ml; ■ '■ • ■ r-