Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
03-28-1988 - Agenda Packet City Council - regular meeting
AGENDA FOR COUNCIL MEFTA.NG SET FOR MONDAY, MARCH 28, 1988, 7:00 P.M. (*) Asterisk items are considered to be routine items to be enacted upon by one motion by the Cite Council under the Consent Item* on the aSenda. Discussion will be h(-ld upon request. Memos regarding each of the Agenda items nre available in the Public Packet ,4.cI,h may be obtained upon request from the Recorder. � u�isj j flfTit ROLL CALL 14AR 2 819�8 to PLANNING COMMISSION REPRESENTATIVE - Edward Brown, III * illy, 1. CONSENT AGENDA �• {�- "ROAM 2. 7:00 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING - C.D.B.G. YP.Ar xIV Proposed Funding APPROVAL OF MINUTES * 3. Regular Meeting of March 14, 198( PUBLIC COMMENTS - (Limit 5 Minutes Per Person) ZONING ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT 4. 11223 John B. Waldron, 1951 Concordia Street - Conditional Use Permit 5. #1244 Dale C. Palm, 1710 Shadywood Road - Variance - Resolution 6. #1247 Robert Post:,umus, Record Lot #40 - Variances/Conditional Use Permit - Resolution 7. #1248 Thomas Williams, "4127" Oak Street - Renewal Variances - Resolution 3. #1250 Dana Wells, 1397 Orono Lane - Variance - Resolution 9. #1251 Audrey Schultz, Partial Vacation of Forest Boulevard - Resolution 10. #1253 B. John Lindahl, Jr., 1406 Bohn's Point Road - Variance - Resolution 11. #1257 Catherine A. Cram, 3760 Watertown Road - Preliminary Subdivision Approval - Resolution 12. Rollie Lacy, 2655 North Shore Drive - Amendment of Original Hardcover Approval F.NGINBBR'S PMOORT 13. 0-r, Textile Fabrics :. Storm Sewer - Highwood Road *15. Feasibility Study - MAYOR'S REPORT By -Pass Lift Station #10 CITY ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT 16. County Road 15 - Financing/Lighting 17. Orono Compensation Plan 18. 1972 Shadywood Road 19. Forest Arms Purchase Agreement 20. Peddlers/Solicito7s 21. Cab'e TV - "Cit+es Magazine" '22. City/SchJol Intervention Agreements *23. Step Increase - Larry 'romcheck *24. Step Rate Longevity - Mike Rirnyczyk *25. Historical Buildings *26. 1987 Summary of Receipts, Disbursement, *27. Administrator's Information vacilit.ies Study and Balances CITY ATTORNEY'S REPORT LICENSES (28*) BILLS (29*) ADJOURNMENT TO: Mayor Grabc_k, G70NCL 'WEETING nrono Council Members r4AR Mark Bernhardson, City Administrator ? �locj Ili � FROM: John R. Gerhardson, Public Works Director j�"-�qq U V DATE: March 23, 1988 SOBJErT. Public clearing Year XIV Community Development Block Grant Program For Year XIV, 1968 the City will receive $23,053 cf Community Development Block Grant Funds. A requirement for receiving these funds is to conduct a public hearing to receive citizens inpact. The City published notice of the Public Hearing in the legal newspaper. The City has participated in the Block Grant Program for twelve years and have allocated monies to park development and improvements, comprehensive planning, handicaps ramps at voting precints, sanitary sewer assessments and rehabilitation of private property to just name a few. There seems to be a constant need for housing rehabi 1 itation. This program allows residents in the lower income brackett to have repairs to there dwelling such as roofing, plumbing, windows, insulating, etc. We have also been advised that we can allocate monies to the Highway 12 Corridor study. Recommendation - To allocate S7500 to the Highway 12 Corridor stud, and $15,553 to Rehabilitation of Private Property. Proposed motion moved, _second, to allocate $7500 to the Highway 12 Corridor study and $15, 553 to Rehabilitation of Private Property from year XIV Community Development Block Grant Funds. TO: Mayor Grabek, Orono Council Members FROM: Mark Bernhardson, City AdministratO�� Following the Plubic Hearing it is recommended that the funds he allocated as listed above. If any or al 1 funds for the Highway 12 Corridor Study are not used they can he reallocated to rehabilitation of private property without a formal puhlic hearing. Allocation to a new catagory that may come up during the year would requrt-,., another public hearing. City of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. RESOLUTION APPROVING 1ROPOSED PROGRAM FOR YEAR XIV URBAN HENNEPIN COUNTY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT FUNDS AND AUTHORIZING ITS SUBMITTAL WHEREAS, the City of Orono, through execution of a Joint Cooperation Agreement with Hennepin County, is a cooperating unit in the Urban County Community Development Block Grant Program; and WHEREAS; the City of Orono has developed a proposal for the use of Urban Hennepin County CDBG funds made available to it, following a public hearing on March 28, 1988 to obtain the views of citzens on local and Urban Hennepin County housing and community development needs and the City's following proposed use of Year XIV Urban Hennepin County Community Development Block Grant funds. (Projects) (Budget) Highway 1.2 Corridor Study $7,500. Rehabilitation of Private Property $15,553. $231053. BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of Orono approvP- the proposed use of XII I Urban Hennepin County Development Block Grant funds and authorizes submittal of the proposal to Hennepin County for consideration by the Citizen Advisory Committee end for inclusion in the Year XIV Urban Hennepin County Community Development Block Grant Statement of obj-cti ves and Project Use of Funds. Date CIeck------------- ---------- --------------- Mayor City of. ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. RESOLUTION APPROVING PROPOSED PROGRAM FOR YEAR XIV URBAN HENNEPIN COUNTY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT FUNDS AND AUTHORIZING ITS SUBMITTAL WHEREAS, the City of Orono, through execution of a Joint Cooperation Agreement with Hennepin County, is a cooper ting unit in the Urban County Community Development Block Grant Program; and WHEREAS; t:ie City of Orono has developed a proposal for the use of Urban Hennepin County CDBG funds made available to it, following a public hearing on March 28, 1988 to obtain the views of citzens on local and Urban Hennepin County housing and community c'eve:_opment needs and the City's following proposed use of Year XIV Urban Hennepin County Community Development Block Grant funds. (Projects) (Budget) Highway 12 Corridor Study Rehabilitation of Private Property Westonka Intervention $23,053. BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of Orono approves the proposed use of XIV Urban Hennepin County Development Block Grant funds and authorizes submittal of the proposal to Hennepin County for cor:sideration by the Citizen Advisory Comr1ittee and for inclusion in the Year XIV Urban Hennepin County Community Development Block Grant Statement of objectives and Project Use of Funds. i\depted by the City Council of the City of Or his 28th day o' March, 1988. ATTEST: Dorothy M. lia1 en, City Clerk James R. Grabek, M for ��� rl�il �n BOB WESTONKA INTERVENTION "FOIL YEARS I HAD FELT THERE WAS NO HOPE FOR OUR FAMILY. AFTF). THE ADVOCATES FROM WEPTONKA INTERVENTION CAME OUT TO MY HOME ANL SPOKE WITH ME,_ I REALIZED THAT OUR PROBLEM WAS NOT UNCOMMON AND THAT. THERE I_S HELP FOR US. M1' PRAYERS HAD FINALLY BEEN ANSWERED.' A WESTONKA RESIDENT Dear Council Members of Orono: When we think of family, we would like to think of a place filled with love, the foundation an which our society is built. However, many of our families are being torn apart by violence. Domestic abuse knows no F--onomic or social barrier. It, not only destroys the family, but it harms each member of the family in such a way that they are not able to live up to their full Potential. Domestic violence affects all of us because it weikenK the base of our society. It. is not only a social issue, but. a community problem that continues to repeat itself in frequency and se%erity, rarely correcting itself without outside help. In order to build a better society, communities need to t.akv aot.ion against domestic violence. he &tonka Int.ervention provides full-time domestic abuse intervention and support, services which are reHponr;i%e to the needs of the tvemtonka communities. Victimn of domestic violence no lotige.,r need to go outside of the community for help. The problem has become it community problem that the police, l-)cal Service agencies and family providers are working on jointly. Because of this effort, repeated incidents of domestics abuse have s i Kn i f i cant 1) lessened for the Westonk.i area police department w . Weytonka family sNry i c.e+ providers now ciin refer clientt c, a local aeenc % West.onka Intervention is a tool to aid fami 1 iea in swl.t. ing help from their own community. It is a mean:, of helping ftwp1y members to feel leas isolated and alone in their problems. the purpose of the project is to build stronger families and a strongi-!r West.onka Community. Wi1I Nou ,join in this Effort and meet our request of $1000.00 from Orono's Urban Hennepin County Community Tievelopment Block Grant Funds? Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, / Valerie 4essburV Director Westonka Intervention WESTONKA INTRRVENTION AN OVERVIEW - IN NOVEMBER OF 1984, THE wkbTuNKA i1'�:::t?l'FNTl.nN FOR DOMESTIC VIOLENCE BEGAN SERVICING THE CITIES OF MOUND AND MINNETRISTA. WESTONKA INTERVENTION BEGAN BECAUSE OF A NEEL EXPRESSED BY SOME 15 PROFFSSIONALS WHO WORK WITH FAMILIES IN THE WESTONKA AREA. HEALTH CARE PROVIDERS, POLICE OFFICERS, AINISTERS, SOCIAL WORKERS, TEACHERS AND HUMAN SERVICE. PERSONNEL WERE ALL OVERWHELMED ►s i TH THE MANY CASES OF UOMES'F IC VIOLENCE THEY ENCOUNTERED-111HOUGH THEIR WORK WITH CLIENTS. A STEERING COMMITTEE WAS I) TO RESEARCH AS TO WHAT EXACTLY, IF ANYTHING, COULD BE DONE TU L.�_A?TAI1. THIS PROBLEM. THE WESTONKA INTERVENTION 1W.I.1 WAS BORN AS A RESULT OF THIS RESEARCH. W.I. IS A COMMUNITY BASED, NONPROFIT CORPORATION. THE. GROUT' RECEIVED ITS' TAX EXEMPT NONPROFIT LICENSE I1; NOVEMBER OF 1985. PRESENTLY IT IS WORKING WITH THE POLICE DEPARTMENTS OF MOUND, ORONO, ST. BONIF'ACIUS AND MINNETRISTA. BECAUSE THE CITIES SO CLOSELY BORDER ONE ANOTHER, THESE POLT(-v DEPARTMENTS OFTEN WORK AS A TEAM. THE PURPOSE OF W.I. IS TO TAKE OVER WHERE THE POLICE LEGAL OFF — SIMPLY BECAUSE THEY DO NOT HAVE THE TIME NOR THE MAN POWER TO GIVE ONGOING SUPPORT TO VICTIMS. WHEN THE POLICI' DEPARTMENTS MAKE AN ARREST IN A DOMESTIC ASSAULT CALL, "'HE. POLICE DISPATCH GALLS THE PFtMARY VOLUNTEER CRISIS ADVOCATE ON A )EEPER. THE PRIMARY ADVOCATE CONTACTS HIS/HER PARTNER AND THEY GO TO THE: HOME 01• THE VICTIM TO OFFER SLPPORT , SAF'E'll AND LEGAL t iPT I ONSI . THE ADVO'.'ATE IS TRAINED TO PROVIDE KEY INFORMATION ATD ASSIST THE VICTIM THROUGH THE PROCESS OF PROSE;,'UTION. THE. A.)VOCATE GIVES CONTINLED SUPPORT WHETHER AN ORDER OF, PROTEC rim IS OBTAINED OR NOT. WHENEVER POSSIBLE:, THE ASSAILANT 1S ALSO INFORMED OF THF CONSEQUENCESHE:/SHE SOM FACES AND THE. TREATMENT PROGRAMS %%'A I LABLE : (� HELP '1 HEM CHANGE THEIR BEHAVIOR. 'I HV POLICE CHIEFS FSI HAVE COMMITTED THE I k DEPARTMENTS 10 THIS 1NTERVENTION PROCESS. THE POLICE RESPONSE INCLUDES: CLEAR DEPARTMENTAL GUIDELINES O\ ARRESTING WHEN PROBABLE: CAUSE EXISTS; toNTACT(NG W.I. WHEN AN ARREST IS NAVE; AND REFERRING VICTIMS -TO '1111- PROJECT EVEN IF' AN ARREST HAS NOT BEEN MADE. W . l . ARkANUE S (_'H I LD CARE. A%V TRANSP()R TATIU;O WHENEVER NECESSARI IN ORI) It TO MAXIMIZE THF, ACCESS(IBlLIT) OF COt.RT SEk%ICES FOR ICTIml. 'i'NF: Plrc)JECT WILL hSCORT VICI'lN's A'.D OiFENDENS To St P!'()kT 6Akt►t'Pti. 1Rk.aNG1:'ME%TS AND TR.ANSPORTAT10% TO SHELTERS. HOSPITALS AND HOt Sl I VG 14 ALSO Pt?O%I D1.!J. EIF.( 4U4F: 01- THF. SI'PPOR7 a.1 . uEFFRS+ To VICTIMS. THE P01.It.4, HAVE I FkY FEW kill+ Vl ( 11.I,S ON( F: h . I . IS l%%uI.VED. W . I. IS 'I'llL RESULT OF Ul. It COMMUN 1'I' I ES' COMMITMENT TO PROV I DE NEEDED SERVICES TO ITS PEOPLE. THROUGH A STUDY CONDUCTED BY THE WEST HE:NNEPIN HUMAN SERVICES PLANNING BOARD, IT HAS BEEN NOTFD THAT MOUND IS ACTUALLY A (;ENTER FOR HUMAN SERVICES FOR MANY OF THE WE:STERx COMMUNITIES. IN ORDER TO MEET PHE NEEDS OF THEIR MANY CLIENTS, THE HUMAN SERVICES PROGRAM NETWORK PROVIDES SUPPORT TO ONE ANOTHER. W.I. IS AN INTEGRAL PART OF THIS NETWORKING, WORKING CLOSELY WITH THE COMMUNITY EDUCATION PROGRAM, HEALTH CENThNS, POLICE DEPARTMENTS, CITY OFFICIALS, THE MOUND WESTONKA SCHOOL DISTRICT, WESTONKA CHRISTIAN SERVICES, CHRYSALIS AND WEST HENNEPIN HUMAN SERVICES PLANNING BOARD. PRESENTLY, THE GROUP HAS SOME 25 VOLUNTEERS. FUNDING HAS BEEN RECEIVED FROM THE CITIES OF MOUNT) AND MINNETRISTA, LOCAL. BUSINESSES AND CHURCHES, AND SOME PRIVATE INDIVIDUALS. DURING THE FIRST TWO AND A HALF YEARS OF OPERA7iiON, 300 FAMILIES HAVE BEEN HELPED THROUGH INTERVENTIONS AND SUPPORT SERVICES. MANY MORE PEOPLE HAVE GAINED A BETTER LNDERSTANDING AND AWARENESS OF THE PROBLEM ON DOMEST IC V IOLENCE THROUGH W . I . ' S COMMUN I TY OUTRFAtAH. THIS WAS ACCOMPLISHED THROUGH 10 SPEAKING ENGAGEMENTS, A DISTRIBUTION OF SOME 400 BROCHURES TELLING OF SERVICES AVAILABLE: TO VICTIMS, AND 6 IN-SERVICE TRAINING SESSIONS FOR VOLUNTEERS. WESTONKA INTERVENTION PROJECT A total of three hundred (300) people have been assisted since Westonka Intervention's inception in 1985. Presently the Project has some twenty-five (25) volunteers and a fifteen (15) member board of directors. In October the Prt;ect started it's expansion into the City of Orono. The effects of this expansion will, most likely not be fully felt until at least the first or maybe second quarter of 1988. WESTONKA INTERVENTION PROJECT MOUND, MINNESOTA 55364 Victims Assisted by Westonka Intervention Project from January 1, 1987 through October 31, 1987. Married with children 15 Married without children 4 Single women with children 5 Single women without children 4 Married men with children 0 Married men without children 0 Siblings 0 Parent Sibling 3 Alcoh.l related incidents 73 Repea',, calls 19 Anonymous calls i TOTAL ASSISTED 80 CP1`i���P,CE MISSION: Westonka Intervention is a community based project committed to reduce the incidents of domestic violence through intervention. GOALS: I. To intervene in domestic abuse situations offering options and support to the victims. a. to provide victims with information on their rights and options b. to accompany victims during legal procedures c. to provide transportation to appropriate services d. to provide safe surroundings for victims H. To assist social services and law enforcement agencies in dorectic violence situations. a. to provide twenty-four (24) hour response services to victims involved in domestic abuse situations b. to refer victims and offenders of domestic violence to the appropriate social service agencies c. to foster relations with other like organzationi d. to orovide advocates who will personally meet with victims after an arrest has been made for domestic violence and offer ongoing support e. to keep confidential and accurate records of ;ail cases III. To heighten communitrLawarenes� of domestic violence. a. to promote public speaking engagements on domestic violence b. to provide literature, flyers and oosters on domestic violence c. to develop and offer en updated list of resources to citizens d. to offer workshops, inservice training and community forums on domestic violence e. to network with other currunity based social service organizations 4, 0 3., i, t vTriW :� '.'�Af 0 MOUND, MANESOTA 5536.1 0 472 laC") 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. CWCOoRtca C[Nojoccil 1988-89 ACTION PLAN ANC GOALS To have an office located in the Westonka area. To have a cart -time director. To have a part-time secretary. To provide recognition to staff, advocates, law enforcement organizations, or citizens for outstanding service. To have an active board of directors that is representive of the Westonka Communities. To develop sound, community based financial support. To develop an ongoing evaluation process of Westonka Intervention. 472.2742 0 3490 LYIHRUM WAY • MOUND, MINNESOTA 55364 0 472 48i WESTUNVII t t-P-1 1-N' J 11 :: 04 11 FINANCIAL F_FtOJECTION. EXPENQI'fUF?E_?: 19"IS Igor?, 1990 Administrative Director (full --time) 314i0,11BC+(" Secrut:-4ry (full --time) 10,•100 - benefits (health i nss) 4.000 - worker's compensation 2.000 - Medicare, Social 2 ,Lal. (.0145 - 452; .0715 $40, 682 Capital Outlay Typewriter G / PC; printer; screen 3.000 Desks 600 Chair!3 (2) •too Phone system :i,000 Waiting chairs (d) 00 File cabinets (2) 400 Pagers (10) 1,500 Softwar a 1,000 Miscellaneous t2 $13,600 Supplies Cleaning I 7i! Po:;t aye 00 Stationery; envelopes 30U Printing :30(.) Office space 600 Utilities 500 Mi scel 1 anOOL15 r' � ! $1 2, 62t:. Ser vi r_es Mileage; meals; child care $ 3,500 Payers; (1u) - 1 irnl+ usty 8010 Patter llug! T r a i. n i rn y Servi cr:_ Contractt,/Other Phone InSAArar rC:Ct, Liability 5, Ooc) M1 f:Cel 1 CI1CUUf5 tid�!si 7"112" YEAR L" 5; 71.1, 1.O.A I10. UUit,. $300 E:.10. $2Uc:J r..::as': $8/m*1nt.h •1 FAR 3 • .j t! 6 1 'r. PUBLIC SAFETY DEPARTMENT Craig A. Anderson Public Safety Offices Chief of Police Police/Fire/Ambulance 7701 County Road 110 West Emergency: 911 Minnetrista, Minnesota 55364 Dispatcher: 544.9511 612-446-1131 Crime Stoppers: 45-CRIME February 2, 1987 Valerie Hessburg Director Wastonka Intervention Project PO Box 34 Mound. ?1N 55364 REt LETTER OF SUPPORT Dear Director Hessburgt It has come to my attention that the Westonka Intervention Project is in need of funding in order to continue providing assistance to victims of family violence in our communities. On behalf of the St. Bonifacius and Minnetrista Public Safety Department, I want you to know we whole- heartedly support the efforts of the project and encourage citizens, community organizations and businesses to provide financial support. The project has played a major role in assisting victims of family violence. A family crisis brings out deep emotions, when violence becomes a part of that crisis scars are left that may last a lifetime. This is when the Westonks Intervention Advocates are called upon. They are ready and willing to respond on a 24-hour basis. I believe because of the project's ability to respond during this critical time, victims have been able to find the help they need. Without the project our communities will lose these special people, the Advocates. When those victims cry out for help, who will respond? Law enforcement will always take care of the immediate concern, but the follow-up is when the band -aid is removed and the true healing process takes place. I trust that once the community becomes a objective and accomplishments, the finar facing will be resolved. Si 9701, . Anderson of Police CAA sA ah of the project's goals, --risis the project is "SEE IT, HEAR IT, REPORT IT" MOUND POLICE LEN HARRELL Chief of Police Mrs. Valerie Hossburg 3490 Lythrum sda,y Minnetrista. 11N 55364 Re: Westonka Intervention Program Dear Valerie, 5341 Maywood Road Telephone 472.3711 Mound, MN 55364 Dispatch 544-9511 EMERGENCY 911 January 22, 1987 I am writing this letter in support of the Westonka Intervention Program. During the year of 1986, the Mound Police responded to 101 domestic situations. In 59 of those domestics there was a reported assault that had taken place. The availability of the intervention counselors greatly reduces the amount of time officers are needed at the scene. Officers can clear the scene with the knowledge that an intervention counselor will be making a contact with the victim and offering assistance. The counselors are very knowledgeable in services available ana are able to offer infor- mation to victims needing further help. The WesAonka Intervention Program offers a very worthwhile and needed service to the citizens of Mound; and I thank you for your assistance. Sincerely, w Len Harrell, Chief MOUND POLICE DFPARTm .NT LH/sh CITY Of 01110100 NOTICS OF PUIR tC N[AIII000 YEAR All, i to el L1111AN -414NEMN COUNTY C Ora O M1O011AM NOT C[ to 1t"" ;-9- thr tyertrta,;.- Oet Wt WWMte oAy M O►ene. wweuartt ►c t n,• t at Mtn 1'_8011r and OWVOWtey Oeretepww O Apt d W4. as etllenilled. are epmew- a pus tmeraq e1 heath W 1 W at 7 to p rn e1 W$ beee Quad somm, owtt. Ca1ne/ Cher" eere to 0660t the VWWS dt a1N11rr art 10cel and Wean CotntY rCues, aril oawv%owy devews tttor Matta Urbw r -. -sv Sad" W" of 0ryac rhea and th CWv .1 Orono a vapoeed ur .,1 'to Year Klv Wear. AWVWper c4wrwy conlMWd hot OerelaeRrrll Btoca arelnt pdr111rq reoenon of 923 003 rho Cay or Orww a proderr to And 11te tcl tptret0 ac-lretee. Wo Year xrV ureen ►btoew CwFW1' (_ O e411.1111111111110 SIWWp on or o aA,My 1, 10m Ac►trRy etr�.1 rlehaer►eaon a+ A+.MaY 1116.Mi 00 ►eprnvay 12 comder study $?.NO 30 Per adebonol WOO rehon on prgeeed wql aatl lever of ko r prograiw aele:tareo ate per tMAe s oweect the Coy of orwoo 1 J36 et eat Read Ootrrlt a 73 t367 r 01e taWWWV� 0alenti OMae of Pto w and Oevelno a , at Ae0-11• no rtMc how tp a bWV NW in accord wan We~ I to-- WN County Jew Mar' A0ro8r 0 009wan to Me 471 M aft cleft t WW~ in TM Law alntf Pkmw et Melt Cl311INN, MEETING Affidavit of Publication MAR `? 8 19c{8 State of Minnesota, County of Hennepin. e� NT���JO �Jk�� eJ Bill Holm, being duly sworn, on oath says that he is an authorized agent and employee of the publisher of the newspaper known as THE LAKER, Mound, Min- nesota, and has full knowledge of the facts which are stated below: A.) The newspaper has complied with all the require- ments constituting qualifications as a qualified newspaper, as provided by Minnesota Statute 331 A.02, 331 A.07, and other applicable laws, as amended. B.) The printed —C D R /-l-awlt %ihich is attached was cut from the columns of said newspaper. and was printed and published once each week for __ ____— successive weeks: It was first published Mondd8Y. the _,_ day of - _.—/ . 1 - •//w` _. 19. -# and was thereafter printed and published every Monday, to and including Monday, the — — day of 19 — — - _ AutWzed Agent Subscribed and sworn to me on this _ day of ,,y r . - 19 00 c�vice Iittltry Public Mite how -matte" 11 Lawest classlfted rate pad by Ctxnrnerclel user tOr CO'"Wa ble space $7 84 pet t-h 12) Maxtntum rote Mowed by WW fa above rnottw N 54 per inch 1.11 Rate ,dually charged la abOve matter $4 54 per wu_-h Each aAdtlonal atxxedslve *"G% $3 03 per inch MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING' *V10.�iIAlt�H•+','%, 1988 ATTENDANCE 7:01 P.M. The Council met on the above date with the following members present: Mayor Grabek, Councilmembers Sime, Peterson, Callahan, and Goetten. The following represented the City staff: Public Works Director and Acting City Administrator Gerhardson, Building & Zoning Administrator Mabusth, Building Official Jacobs, and City Recorder Peterson. City Attorney Barrett was also present. CONSENT AGENDA* It was moved by Councilmember Sime, seconded by Councilmember Peterson, to approve the Consent Agenda subject to removal of the following item: N18-Proposed Compost Program 1.988 (requested by Councilmember Goetten) Motion, Ayes 5, Nays 0. .FLPPROVAL OF MINUTES* It was moved by Councilmember Sime, seconded by Councilmember Peterson, to approve the minutes of the February 20, 1988 Special Meeting as submitted. Motion, Ayes 5, Nays 0. It was moved by Councilmember Sime, seconded by Councilmember Peterson, to approve the minutes of the February 22, 1988 Regular Council Meeting as submitted. Motion, Ayes 5, Nays 0. PLANNING COMMISSION COMMENTS Planning Commissioner Cohen reported on the special meeting to address the issue of an accessory structure amendment which resulted in a very productive planning session. He noted that the Planning Commission hopes to schedule special planning :meetings two times per year and encouraged Council participation in the meetings. MESTONKA SENIOR'S REPORT: Dotty O'Brien reported that the membership has increased 30% since 1986 and now serve over 13�00 seniors. She thanked the City of Orono for their sul,,-it. Cathy Bailey introduced other staff members present: Case Manager Counselor, Bev Abbott, stated she works with seniors who still live in their own home which they try to encourage. MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL N2ETING HELD MARCH 14, 1988 WESTONKA SENIOR'S REPORT CONTINUED Transportation Coordinator, Susan Wilkens, stated last year over 12,000 rides were provided to seniors giving them transportation to the grocery store, medical appointments, etc. The ride program is in conjunction with trying to keep seniors independent and remain living in their own homes. PUBLIC COMMENTS Cathy Bailey stated they were very proud of the many hours served by the well elderly foi the Senic,r Center. She explained their goal to set up a E,enior foundation planning for future seniors twenty years to come. She announced that thev • ill be celebrating National Senior Center Week in May ,.,;. r 'i a breakfast anc the Council will be invited to att iL: n' . -Allison Felland stated she received a letter from the Minnesota State Highway Dept. informing her that they will be installing a temporary flashing light at the intersection of Willow Drive and Highway 12. She noted that the letter from the Highway Dept. was in response to a letter she sent them regarding the dangerous intersection at which she was involved in an auto accident last year. Acting City Administrator Gerhardson stated that staff has not yet received this information from the State Hwy. Dept. Ms. Hel lanJ stated she would send the City a copy of the letter she received. -John Hollander, 200 Hollander Road, stated he felt the City was not doing anything to restore and save historical landmarks. He noted his building (which the City deemed hazardous and required its removal) was founded by Samuel Lyd.iard and William Dickey in 1857. Mayor Grabek stated that the City has no formalized program but is in regular contact with the Pioneer Museum in Long bake. Council directed staff to rontact Jim Dillman of the Pioneer Museum fo: moie information on historical landmarks. MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD MARCH 14, 1988 ZONING ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT: BIG ISLAND STATUS REPORT Alan Wisdorf submitted and reviewed an update of the Big Island Veteran's Camp. He explained that the Board of Governors has revised its philosophy of the camp projectinn it to be a ^amping facility minus the dining facilities. He noted that 32 of the 4" tsilding structures have been demolished. The 11 remaining buildings have been secured to prevent illegal entry. He explained their intent for some of these remaining buildings. He noted that they have removed much of the brush and old furnishings from the island but are not being being held up by the ice thaw. They plan to open the camp to day and overnight tent camping in May. He also noted that the water system has been updated in accordance with the State well code (Minn. Health Dept.). Staff noted that they inspected the camp two weeks ago and were pleased with the work accomplished. Mayor Grabek advised that the Board of Governors submit plans as soon as possible for Council and Planning Commission review so as not to delay their projected May opening. Councilmember Callahan inquired about the Board's intent to sell some of the camp property? Mr. Wisdorf stated that the Board of Governors has notified the Commissioner of Veterans Affairs of a possible intent to sell a portion of the camp (not to exceed 25% of the camp acreage) to a compatible neighbor in order to help finance the renovation of the camp. He noted that the Board has talked with the Hennepin Park District about selling up to 15 acres to them. 11242 KATHY i ANDY DUNCANSON 690 NORTH BROWN ROAD CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RE&JLUT I ON # 2 3 7 9 Applicants were not present for this :natter. Acting City Administrator Gerhardson explained the request for a conditional use permit for a non -rental caretaker apartment within the principal residence. Planning Commission unanimously recommended approval as proposed. It was moved by Councilmember Sime, seconded by Mayor Grabek, to adopt Resolution 12379 approving the conditional use permit.. Motion, Ayes 5, Nays 0. 3 MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD MARCH 14, 1988 #1244 DALE C. PALM 1710 SHADYWOOD ROAD VARIANCE DENIAL RESOLUTION Acting City Administrator Gerhardsor stated that the applicants could not attend this meeting and have requested the application be tabled at this time. It was moved by Councilmember Sine, seconded by Councilmember Goetten, to table Application #1244. Moition, Ayes 5, Nays 0. #1246 WALTER WHITE 1100 OLD CRYSTAL BAY ROAD SOUTH PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION RESOLUTION #2380 Mr. & Mrs. Walter White were present fcr this matter. Acting City Administrator Gerhardson explained the proposed two lot division of a 25+ acre homestead parcel in a rural area. The property is sewered and will have a shared access. It was moved by Councilmember Goetten, seconded by Councilmember Sime, to adopt Resolution #2380 approving the Prel.Lminary Subdivision as proposed. Motion, Ayes 5, Nays 0. 4BETZ BUILDERS, INC./CLEMENT C. KROLL 60/100 STUBBS BAY ROAD ROAD NAME REQUEST It was mo, ed by Counci lmer:ber Sime, seconded by Mayor Grabek, to approve the plat road name of "Christine Drive" for Betz Builders Inc./Clemont C. Kroll. Motion, Ayes 5, Nays 0. MAYOR'S REPORT: APPOINTMENT OF PLANNING COMMISSION CHAIR AND VICE CHAIR Mayor Grabek reviewed the recommendation to re -appoint Charles Kelley as Chair and Maureen Bellows as Vice Chair to the Planning Commission due to the fact that the balance of the members have served a minimal amount of time on the Commission. Planning Commissioner Cohen stated the recommendation was agreeable to the Planninc Commission. It was moved by Councilmember Sime, seconded by Counci lmember Peterson, to appoint Charles Kel ley as Chair and Maureen Bellows as Vice Chair of the Planning Commission from March 1988 to March 1989. Motion, t,ves 5, Nays 0. 4 MINUTES Ok THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD MARCH 14, 1988 APPOINTMENT OF PLANNING COMMISSION CHAIR AND VICE CHAIR CONTINUED Cohen noted that the Planning Commission is short one member at this time and recommended appointment of another member as soon as possible. Acting City Administrator Gerhardson noted that staff is working on submitting a list of interested applicants to fill the vacancy created by Paul Taylor's resignation. Councilmember Goetten recommended placing a notice of the vacancy on the Planning Commission in the paper. Council commended Planning Commission for their extensi a volunteer time serving on the Commission. CITY ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT: HAZARDOUS BUILDING PROCEEDINGS - 2339 OLIVE AVENUE - RESOLUTION #2381 3017 NORTH SHORE DRIVE - RESOLUTION #2382 3960 SIXTH AVENUE NORTH - RESOLUTION #2383 525 TONRAWA ROAD - RESOLUTION #2384 Acting City Administrator following four properties for building proceedings: Gerhardson reviewed the commencement of hazardous; 2339 Olive Avenue -Single Family dwelling - The owner has indicated plans to remove the building. Staf f 1 recommends adopting the Hazardous Bui l._';ng resolution j and hold in abeyance until June 1, 19R8. l It was moved by Mayor Grabek, seconded by Councilmember' Goetten, to adopt Resolution 02381 Ordering Abatement of Hazardous Building Action at 2339 Alive Avenue, subject to holding the action in abeyance until June 1,1988.1 Motion, Ayes 5, Nays 0. 3017 North Shore Drive -Greenhouse - The owner has! indicated plans to remove the building as soon as weather permits. Staff recommends adopting the Hazardous Building resolution and hold ir, abeyance unt i l June 1, 1988. It was moved by Councilmember Sime, seconded by Councilmember Peterson, to adopt Resolution #2382 Ordering Abatement of Hazardous Building Action at 3017 North Shore Drive, subject to holding the action in abeyance until June 1, 1988. Motion, Ayes 5, Nays 0. } 3960 Sixth Avenue North - Out buildings - Ttif owner has indicated plans to remove the buildingr- by April 15,1 1988. Staff recommends adopting the hazardous Building . resolution and hold in abeyance until that datr-. S MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD MARCH 14, 1988 HAZARDOUS BUILDING PROCEEDINGS CONTINUED It was moved by Mayor Grabek, seconded by Councilmember Goetten, to adopt Resolution #2383 Ordering Abatement of Hazardous Building Action at 3960 Sixth Avenue North, subject to holding the action in abeyance until April 15, 1989. Motion, Ayes 5, Nays 0. 525 _Tonkawa Road_- Basement house - Owner, Roger Koehnen., was present and explained that he is in the process of selling this property which is being delayed by the necessary torrence process. He stated that the new owner intends to demolish the structure and build a new house. Building Official Jacobs noted that there are some item being stored in the building which is to be removed. He recommended adopting the Hazardous Building resolution and hold in abeyance until June 1st and if another 30 days is needed, the owner must request a 30 day extension in writing to the City. Mr. Koehnen had no object-un to this reconunendation. It was moved by Councilmember Sime, seconded by Mayor Grabek, to adopt Resolution 12384 Ordering Abatement of Hazardous Building Action at 525 Tonkawa Road, subject to holding the action in abeyance until June 1, 198A. Motion. Ayes 5, Nays 0. MOBILE FLOWER SALES Acting City Administrator Gerharson noted the petition submitted signed by local busineses against peddling on streets in Orono In particular complaining about the "Rose Man" that is selling flowers from his truck on County Rd. 15 across from the Calvary Church. He noted that this same issue was brought before the Council in 1985. The Councils decision at that time was not to amend the ordinance as long as the person selling was complying with the ordinances. He stated that staf` as not received any other complaints and that the 'Rose Man" is in compliance with City ordinances. Council found no problem with the carrent soliciting ordinance and took no Action. 'ROSSWAI.K UESIGMATION rROCEDURES - CJUNT2 15* It was moved by Councilmember Sime, seconded by Councilmember Peterson, to accept the information regarding crosswalk procedures and direct staff to continue efforts to maintain the MT:' shelter in its present location. Motion, Ayes 5, Nays 0. 6 MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD MARCH 14, 1988 HIGHWAY 12 CORRIDOR SELECTION* It was moved by Councilmember Sime, seconded by Councilmember Peterson, to appoint Mark Bernhardson and John Gerhardson as representatives of the City of Orono to the ad hoc committee for the Highway 12 Corridor Study. Motion, Ayes 5, Nays 0. METRO WASTE/ORONO INTERCEPTOR PROJECT 85-67* It was moved by Councilmember Sime, seconded by Councilmember Peterson, to accept the information as presented and to direct staff to monitor the construction to assure proper procedures are followed. Motion, Ayes 5, Nays 0. 1988 MOUND FIRE CONTRACT* It was moved by Councilmember Sime, seconded by Councilmember Peterson, to approve the fire service contract between the City of Orono and the City of Mound. Motion, Ayes 5, Nays 0. SPRING CLEAN-UP* It was moved by Councilmember Sime, seconded by Councilmember Peterson, to designate April 30 and May 7, 1988 from 8:00 AM t:,� 4:30 PM as Orono Spring Clean-up Days. Motion, Ayes 5, Nays 0. PROPOSED COMPOST PROGRAM 1988 Councilmember Goetten inquired about the appi-:.ximate c01.3t for one day's clean-up in prior years. Acting City Administrator Gerhardson stated it was approximately $150.00 and felt additional yard waste clean-up days would be worthwhile. It was moved by Councilmember Goetten, seconded by Councilmember Sime, to designate one Saturday per month from 8:00 AM - 12:00 Noon from June through October to accept yard waste from Orono residents. Motion, Ayes 5, Nays 0. FINAL PAY REQUEST 1947 SEAL COAT PROJECT* It was moved by Councilmember Sime, seconded by Councilmember Peterson, to approve the 2nJ and Final Payment to Allied Blacktop Co. in the amount of $6,107.86 for 1987 Seal Coat Project: Motion, Ayes 5, Nays 0. CITY AUCTION OF CONFISCATED VEHICLES* It was moved by Councilmember Sime, seconded Ly Councilmember Peterson, to authorize a public auction on April 16, 1988 at 10:00 AM at Martin's 66 station in Navarre to sell abandoned, seized, or unclaimed vehicles. Motion, Ayes 5, Nays 0. 7 MINUTES OF TUB REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD MARCH 14, 1988 PLANNING COMMISSION RESIGNATION - PAUL TAYLOR* It was moved by Councilmember Sime, seconded by Councilmember Peterson, to accept the resignation of Mr. Paul Taylor as Planning Commission Member effective March 1, 1988, and to direct staff to prepare a resolution of appreciation for Council review and ival at a later date. In addition, staff is ted to review the files for residents who have essed an interest in serving on the Planning Cumm.Lssion and to submit those names to Council at a later date. Motion, Ayes 5, Nays 0. UTILITY RATE INCREASE - LONG LAKE CUSTOMERS IN ORONO* It was moved by Councilmember Sime, seconded by Councilmember Peterson, to adjust the water rates to Orono customers served by the Long Lake water system from $2.25 to $2.50 per 1000 gallons effective January 11 1988. Motion, Ayes 5, Nays 0. ADMINISTRATOR'S INFORMATION* It was moves by Councilmember Sime, seconded by Cou,.:ilmember Peterson, to accept Acting City Administrator Gerhardson's Information regarding: 4635 Tonkaview, 1160 North Arm Drive, 4220 Sixth Avenue North, 200 HoLlande- Road, Comprehensive Plan N2 Status Report, and Goal Se-.:ting. Motion, Ayes 5, Nays 0. CITY ATTORNEY'S REPORT: 1972 SHADYMOOD ROAD (Gehring) City Attorney Barrett reported that the Nehring matter is currently in trial. The prosecutions case was presented today and the defense will present its case tomorrow. He noted that the prosecution had a wildlife expert witness from the University of Minnesota who testified that this type of feeding of animals is not good in terms of animal health or safety. He expects a verdict in the next day or two. Councilmember Sime asked if there was ary discussion of the effects of human hea3+.h involved? City Attorney Barrett stated that r-ention was made regarding creating "swimmers itch". COMMENDATIONS: Mayor Grabek noted for the press the letters of appreciation and commendation regarding the i)olice force from residents included in their Cruncil meeting ;az.•ket. MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD MARCH 14, 1988 ADDITIONAL INFORMATION Regarding the issue of legislative activity of the Hennepin County Park Board in relation to taking over the imminent domain proceedings, Councilmember Callahan suggested that the City officially express its position to their members of legislature. LICENSES* Mayor Grabek felt this was a good idea. Councilmember Goetten stated she has talked with State Representative John Burger and Vern Peterson of the Association of Metropolitan Municipalities (AMM), and also with the League of Minnesota Cities; and has learned that this was a specific issue that passed regarding the Regional Park in Minnestrista only and will not carry over to anything any other City will do. She felt it was important to provide a directive regardi.rg Oiono's strong feelings in this issue. Councilmember Goetten clarified for Council that the legislature passed the issue of asking the legislature to agree to override Minnetrista's veto regarding the regional park there. Acting City Administrator Gerhardson stated he spoke with Senator Gen Olson today and he presented Council with information sent by Senator Olson regarding this matter. Council will review the material from Senator Olson and contact City staff with their directional input. It was moved by Councilmember Sime, seconded by Councilmember Peterson, to approve the following licenses: On -Sale Non-Intoxicatinq Mali Liquor Licenses - Lakeview Golf of Orono, Inc. City of Orono Golf Course Cigarette License - Orono Golf Course Special Events License - Easy Race VIII - The Bank Wayzata One-half marathon Sunday, April 24, 1988 9-11 AM Residential Kennel License - Shannon Brogan, 2240 W. Wayzata Blvd. 9 MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD MARCH 14, 1988 LICENSES CONTINUED BILLS* Septic System Installers - Widmer Inc. Jerry Johnson Exc. Thompson Plumbing Sullivan's Services, Inc. Volkenant & Sons, Inc. Patnode Bros. Sewer & Water Hayes Excavating Motion, Ayes 5, Nays 0. It was moved by Councilmember Sime, seconded by Councilmember Peterson, to approve payment of the All Funds Accounts. Motion, Ayes 5, Nays 0. ADJOURNMENT 8:02 P.M. It was moved by Councilmember Sime, seconded by Councilmember Goetten, to adjourn the regular Council meeting at 8:02 P.M. Motion, Ayes 5, Nays 0. ATTEST: Dorothy M. Hallin, City Clerk James R. Grabek, Mayor V Own" A4- To: Mayor Grabek & Orono Council Members City Administrator Bernhardson MAR 81�F+8 From: Michael P. Gaffron, Asst Planning & Zon d�tm�inistryyattor t Date: March 23, 1988 u1s� Subject: #1223 John B. Waldron, 1951 Concordia Street - Conditional Use Permit/Variance - Revised Proposal Note: This item was referred back to the Planning Commission at its February 8th, 1988 meeting for review of the revised proposal. Planning Commission review took place on March 21st, 1988 List of Exhil its Exhibit A - Memo and Exhibits of March 8, 1988 Pertinent Facts - Applicant's revised proposal requires a conditional use permit for work within the 0-75' lakeshore setback zone, and requires the following variances: A. Variance to allow grading and filling within the 0-75' lakeshore setback zone. B. Variance to allow deck structure within the 0-75' setback zone. C. Variance for additional hardcover within the 0-75' setback zone. D. Average lakeshore setback variance for the deck. Existing 0-75' Hardcover: 19.95% Proposed 0-75' Hardcover: 21.36% Proposed Net Hardcover Increase: 1.41% or 79 s.f. Encroachment. cf Proposed Deck Past Average House Setback: 22' Encroachment of Proposed Deck Past Average Deck Setback Line: approx. 1' Discussion - Please review the memo and exhibits of March 8th, 1988. This item was reviewed by the Planning Commission at their March 21st, 1988 meeting, resulting in a vote of 3-1 to recommend: A. Denial of the 3' deep proposed cut extending to the foundation wall of the existing residence. B. Approval of a variance for the average lakeshore setback for the deck. C. Approval of the additional deck hardcover subject to removal of an equal amount of existing 0-75' hardcover, resulting in no 0-75' hardcover increase. Zoning File #11.223 March 23, 1988 Page 2 of 3 D. The Planning Commission did not address approval or denial of the method of piping roof drainage directly to the lakeshore bank in their recommendation. The majority of the Planning Commission generally felt that the additional excavation to create a 3' deep cut extending to the foundation wall was not appropriate. It was sugges=ed that a less extensive cut that would blend with the grade to the property to the north might be appropriate visually. The minority opinion was that since the impact on lake water quality is neutral and that the visual impact with this method was relatively minor, and that this method is supported by the Hennepin Soil and Water Conservation District, that this was an approp-iate method. Staff has noted in its memo of March 8th that from a technical standpoint, the ultimate effect on lake water quality and run-off quality is essentially neutral with this proposed method as compared to other possible methods of bank restoration. The issue then comes down to one of visual impact and general character of the shoreline. The majority of the Planning Commission members present felt that the impact would be significant, and they obviously felt: that the visual impact was a significant issue. The visual impact issue is validated in the Community Management Plan in the General Lane Use Policy No. 6 and Urban Land Use Policy No. 13 (both appear on page 4 of the previously proposed denial resolution), which discuss shoreland areas as "sensitive environmental features with significant impact on . . . aesthetic values", and "espouse limiting the impact of urbanization as visible from the lake." Regarding the roof run-off question, you may recall that applicant has extended a solid pipe from the outlet of his rain gutters to the edge of the lake: pore bank, which is intended to remove the roof run-off from his yard area and avoid a recurrence of the major erosion caused by saturation of the soil at the top of the bank. From a technical standpoint there is no reasonable way to measure the relative value of the reduced propensity for soil to become saturated versus the reduction in run-off water quality by not having it percolate through the flat yard area. From a policy standpoint, it has been the City's philosophy that maximizing ground infiltration of run-off waters will enhance lake water quality. However, because applicant's roof run-off water did soak into the ground, his Lake- shore bank slumped into the lake, having a negative impact on lake water quality probably equivalent to many years of normal run-off carrying its normal sediment lrad. Presuming whatever "pollutants" from the roof run- off may have absorbed into the yard area over the years, some of them ended up in the lake anyhow. Zoning File #1223 March 23, 1988 Page 3 of 3 Staff Recommendation - Staff has no problem with the average lakeshore setback for the proposed deck, finding no impact on the existing views enjoyed by neighboring properties. Staff recommends approval of the deck hardcover per the Planning Commission's recommended condition that existing hardcover in the 0-75' zone be removed, resulting in no net hardcover increase in the 0-75' zone. This is consistent with the City's past actions on similar lakeshorA properties where the existing 0-75' hardcover is of a relatively large magnitude. In order to accomplish that, applicant will have to remove the concrete half circle near the outer deck, and will have to slightly reduce the square footage of the proposed deck. (Not!-. also that the footings or foundation of the existing deck at the lakeshore bank probably had a positive effect in keeping that portion of bank from eroding.) Given the Planning Commission recommendation, staff recommends that the 3' cut *ending all the way to the foundation wall be denied. Because from a technical standpoint the long term lake water quality impact of the proposal is neutral relative to other possible bank restoration methods, the basis for denial. should rely on the negative visual impact created, and on the fact that applicant has not demonstrated a hardship that specifically supports the need for the majority of the 3' cut extending to the foundation wall. Staff recommends that the drain tiles directing roof run-off past the lawn to the bank be allowed to femain in place. The alternative would be to direct them to the east side of the house, which might have a detrimental effect on neighboring properties. If the Council chooses to deny the 3' cut as proposed, it would certainly be appropriate for Council to give applicant some direction as to which of the alternative methods may be acceptable. Staff will draft a resolution reflecting Council's action for your next. meeting. To: Planning Commission ChairmE.n Kelly Orono Planning Commission Members City Administrator Bernhardson From: Michael P. Gaffron, Asst Planning & Zoning Administrator Date: March 8, 1988 Subject: #1223 John B. Waldron, 1951 Concordia Street - Conditional Use Permit & Variance - Referral Back From Council for Revi-w of Revised Proposal This item originally was reviewed by the Planning Commission on November 16th, 1987. The Planning Commission recommended denial of the deep cut to create a walk -out while . c commending approval for a ground - level deck area in exchange for removal of the existing patio deck near the lakeshore. In January 1988, the Counc 1 voted 4-0 to deny the walk -out excavation, finding no valid hardship to support its approval. The Council failed to address the issue of additional hardcover associated with the ground -level deck. Applicant then submitted a revised proposal for grading, which would cut approximately half of the lakeshore yard down to a depth of 3' below the existing surface. This revised proposal has been referred by the Council back to the Planning Commission for review. List of Exhibits Exhibit A - Applicant's Letter Dated 3/2/88 Exhibit B - Applicant's Most Recent Hardcover Calculations as Revised by Staff 3/10/88 Exhibit C - Diagram Showing Average Lakeshore Setbacks Exhibit D - Applicant's 2/29/88 Letter with Grading Plans, Elevation Views, Cross Section, Plan View of Deck Exhibit E - Applicant's Photo of Lakeshore Area Exhibit F - Applicant's Photo of 1360 Cherry Place Cut Exhibit G - Staff Sketch on Photo of Relative Visual Impact Exhibit H - Staff Sketches of 9 Optional Methods Exhibit I - Previous Meeting Minutes Exhibit J - Consultant Letters: A. City Engineer Glenn Cook P Hennepin S.W.C.D.'s James Piegat C. Applicant's Engineer Letter Exhibit K - Applicant's SBA loan Worksheet Zoning File #1223 March 8, 1988 Page 2 of 8 Discussion - During the review of this application, applicant asked the City to consider its policy on lakeshore grading in light of what seems to be incon,istent action in similar past cases. In fact, on at least one occasion on Cherry Place in 1983, the Council approved a cut to create a walk -out that is very similar to wrat Waldron originally proposed. P photo submitted by Waldron of that Cherry Place property indicates that such a walk -out cut does have a potential for detracting from the natural character of the lakeshore. The applicant's revised proposal sugqests that a 3' deep excavation from the house to the lakeshore bank will have a beneficial effect on the stability of the lakeshore bank as compared to other methods. Staff has wrestled with various ways to delineate and quantify the valid public concerns relating to this lakeshore bank project. To this end, staff has devised a "point system" that attempts to assess the visual and environmental impacts of the various bank restoration methods available for use. The attacheC table is the result of that assessment process. What constitutes a valid public concern? Certainly, environmental protection is a valid concern, and the Environmental Plan section of the City of Orono Community Management Plan suggests that the visual :mpact of a project as viewed from the lake or from other properties is a valid public concern, in addition to the concern for lake water quality. The economic feasibility of a private ptoj-.:t is not necessarily a valid public concern, but may become a valid public concern if such a project that has negative public impact if not completed, cannot be feasibily completed due to the financial capabilities of a property owner. I am not suggesting that the City subsidize lakeshore bank restoration, but am suggesting that the City should not Aecessarily force a homeowner into the most expensive restoration method if less expensive methods are available that will accomplish the same goals. Staff has sketched nine various methods for restoration of the applicant's lakeshore banks, most of which have been discussed to a certain degree by the Planning Commission and Council, and each of w:lich has both advantages and disadvantages for both the property owner and the public in general. There are some und-rlying physical principals that apply to eacr of the methods: Zoning File #1223 March 8, 1988 Page 3 of 8 A) In general, a 2:1 slope (50% slope or l' vertical drop for every 2' of horizontal distance) is considered as adequate for stabilizing the slope in the clayey soil types present. B) If site factors make it unfeasible to create a continuous 2:1 slope, then artificial structural methods must be employed to provide adequate stability. These would appear to fall into two catagories: 1. Providing the bank with interior stability so that steeper s lopes can be created that wi 11 have less of a tendency to fai 1. OR 2. Providing exterior vertical support, such as retaining walls, that will allow the removal of excess overburden soil so that shorter lengths of flatter slopes can be employed. In either case the goal is to decrease the ability of the soil to move sideways as a result of forces from above it. A brief description of the nine options considered by staff is as follows: A. Backfill and grade the existing bank to a uniform slope with no stabilization measures. This would result in about a 1.4:1 slope which would have stability characteristics no better than what originally existed, if not worse because there would be disturbed soil in place of what was natural soil originally. This method would likely have little visual impact from the lake, but would be relatively troublesome for the re-establishment of vegetation. The short term potential impacts on lake water quality would be relatively low compared to other methods, presuming that the prime short term concern is the area of vegetated surface that will be laid bare for a period of time and subject to surface erosion. Note that use of proper erosion control methods (silt fence, hay bales, seed mesh, etc.) with each of the nine options will make the actual short-term impact relatively equal for all the options. 'oning File #1223 March 8, 1988 Page 4 of 8 B. This method proposes to excavate the bank slope area, build a cribbed interior stabilization structure and then refill the bank to the original (1.4:1) grade. The interior cribbing becomes invisible because it is covered with soil, hence allows the steeper slope to be maintained while making it much more stable. In order to construct the cribbing, a large amount of soil must be excavated and stock piled on the site, but this is merely a short-term concern. There would be slightly greater area of bare soil during the re -vegetation period as compared to Option A. This method is relatively expensive due to the materials and excavation involved, but would allow for a relatively stable restoration of the approximate original grade. C. Layered fabric stabilization system. This system results in a slope similar to Option B, but involves the use of parallel horizontal layers of soil backfill separated by a geotechnical fabric, which acts to greatly reduce the vertical mass movement of soil. The amount of excavation needed and both the short-term and long-term effects are very similar to those of the cribbing method, as are the greater expenses involved. D. This method make use of a total retaining wall system, with nearly vertical faces ar.3 nearly level beds for planting of landscape and screening materials. This system would have a major visual impact from the lake, and the trac,: record of similar installations on the lakeshore has shown that they are rarely screened so as to be unobtru::i.ve. Depending on the method of construction and design, this system would have fair to good long term stability. The potential short-term effects of erosion due to bare ground would be relatively minimal as compared to other methods. E. This system makes use of a single 3-4' height retaining wall at the edge of the flat lawn area, which al lows the slope from the base of the retaining wall to the lakeshore to be somewhat flatter than Options A through C. Another ver-ion of this option would be to construct a retaining wall of a greater height so that the slope from its base to the lake would meet the 2:1 standard desired. Obviously, the greater the height of such a wall, the greater the visual impact it will have from the lake. Stability also decreases as the height of such a wall becomes greater. The short-term and long-term effects on lake water quality are Simi li.r to those of Options Band C. Zoning File #1223 March 8, 1988 Page 5 of 8 F. This is the applicant's original proposal to create a 6-8' deep walk -out excavation, which would allow for the desired 2:1 slopes along the major portion of the lakeshore and would decrease the weight of soil tending to cause the slumping effect that occurred in 1987. However, with the deep cut proposed, the visual impact from the lake would be significant. The short 'srm surface erosion potential would be relatively high due to the large s, ice area exposed with no vegetation. Once the re -vegetation is c, _?ete, the long term impact on lake water quality would be no better and no worse than the majority of methods proposed. Again, the primary environmental impact of this option would be the visual impact of creating at unnatural topography along what exists as a relatively uniform lakeshore bank in the neighborhood, as is shown on the photos submitted by applicant. The copies of that photo show the relative magnitude of the original and revised proposals. G. This is the applicant's revised proposal that suggests excavation of about half of the lakeshore laws area to a depth of 3' br low existing surface, which would then allow a lesser slope down t,, the lake. Again, the short-term potential impact for surface erosion is somewhat greater because a greater area of ground will be disturbed and remain unvegetated for a period of time.* The visual impact from the lake will be not nearly as severe as the original proposal, as can be compared using the two photos. I would suggest that you compare Option G with Option E. Bssentially they accomplish the same purpose, with the advantages of Option G being that the stability may be enhanced slightly due to 3' less of overburden uphall from the slope, and the visual impact of option G may be somewhat less obtrusive given the additional distance of the wall face (in this cAsc it is the basement foundation wall rather than a retaining wall) from the shozeline. * ArPcICA.-J r rrl ^P^ �t � 1G �lt•;� _LI 4 r � f � �L. 'i Ht f �" 1`_ DI.r+�R C+�L �Q : CwJ l r t t, Zoning File #1223 March 8, 1988 Page 6 of 8 H. This option has not been previously discussed at length, because it involves a severe reduction of the applicant's useable lakeshore yard area, and would have a potential negative impact because it would not blend into the adjacent properties 'well. The option involves -. total regrading of the slope to meet the 2:1 desired slope, and we .d inv -' removal of a large portion of the vard. It would seem that this approach would h;-. a severe impact on the practical use of the applicant's property and would not be in character with the neighboring properties, even though it technically accomplishes the desired stable slope. The long- term lake quality effects would not be significantly better or worse than most of the other methods but note that the method would reduce the flat absorption area of lawn to a degre,.. I. This is another option t.nat has not been propose,:: and suggests that a retaining wall loc.: I-ed at `he base of the slope would allow the filling behind it to appr..ximate thr iginal ,rule. Similar walls were original', in place on the lakeshore bank in question. Stability of such a method is questionable given t .at there would be a fF-rly large bulk of t:istur:.e:i soils placed above it. The visual impact from the lake voul,� again da:per - ,.ri the height of the exposed face and of the vegetation able :-) Lt.- tsta'+1;shed as screening. In attempting to assign a `^-at i_ ve value to the concerns of short- term and long-term impact cn lak , . i ( tar q� 3l ity as we l l as the permanent visual impact of the various options, staff askel these questions: A) Does the method result in a s;gnificant visible change in the topography and character of the lakeshore bank relative to the neighboring properties? e) Is there a significan,: detrimental short term impact on lake water quality during the time the excavation is underway and during the period of time prior to reestablishment of revegetation on the site? I- •'-.is short term potential impact controllable with erosion control so as to minimize the short term impact? C) Does the method provide adequato stability for the bank on a lonq term basis, so 'tiat future occurrences of major erosion will be minimized cr eliminated? COMPAR.,ON OF BANK RESTORATION OPTIONS "F"."•M FINAL SLOPE EXPUSED RET. MALL RELATIVE AMOUNT SHORT-TERM SURFACE LONG-TERM RUNOFF FINAL VISUAL AT OANR? OF DIRT MOVED AREA EXPOSED IMPACT BASED ON FTAHILITY IMPACT• kROUNL RELATIVE AMOUNT OF FLAT APEA MA I NTA: NF.D r--aa-------:---w-ww�--------s--s-----as-------------- ate—s- ------- ---- ♦ 1.4:1 (701) No Low ._x30-1950 :, Low Neutral Poor 0 N 1.4:1 (701) No High 65x40-2600 Hied Neutral GooA 0 C 1.4:1 (701) 'go Hiah xc.an��cnn •--� _ _ �.cu Neutral I Good 0 D (Terras»d)(31) Yes Medium 65x30-l.5O Low Beneficial i Not as Good 2 E 1.7:1 (59%) Yes Low 65x30-1950 LOCI Neutral Not as Good! 1 F 2.0:1 (501) Partial High (65x30)+(3Ox48)-33!? Nigh NeIItrtl Good 1 1.5 (Sidevall) SI G - 6:1 (630) No Medium (65x30)+(3Ox48)-33W sigh Neutral Not as Good'; 1 H 1.8-2.0:1(56-5C%) No Medium 65x40-2600 Ifad Detrimental Good .5 I 1.6:1 (634j) Yes Medium 65x30-1950 LOW Neutral Poor .5 • 0 Least �i,C r F /) ) S G pTt� t3� Cj4tSF /"45V,4W cu'% 13 AAAA'Oe- 'M� S DJP LIU� 1 Some 2 most (These are VERYI subjective, but help to establish a relative impact for each option.) Factors And Relative Values A Visual Impact from Lake (Long -Term) Least Intermediate Most 0 1 2 B Final Bank Stability Good Not as Good Poor 0 1 2 C Short -Term Environmental Impact Using Proper Erosion - Control Methods (Runoff water quantity and quality) Minor Impact Medium Major Impact 0 1 2 D Long -Term Environmental Impact -Runoff Water Quantity & Quality (Relative as compared to other options, based on amount of flat absorbtion area maintained) Beneficial Neutral Detrimental 0 1 2 E Potential Short -Term impact if erosion controls are not in 171ace. This is based on two factors: E-1 Relative amount of dirt moved around on slope area Little Medium Large Amount 0 1 2 9-2 :relative amount of total disturbed surface area (s.f.) Low Medium H !h 0 1 Z K-3 Duration of work Shortest time Medium Longest time (Us- average of E-1, E-2, and E-3 fur E factor, in place of C factor) FACTORS TOTAL AVERACL" TOTAL OPTION A B C D A,B,C,D B-1 E 2 E-3 B A,B,D,B A 0 1 1 4 0 .33 3.33 1; ! 2 1 1 Z 1 2 1.67 2.67 3 1 2 1.67 2.67 1 �? 0 3 1 C 2 1.0 4.0 t 1 4 0 0 1 .33 3.33 1 1 2 1 1.33 3.83 1 4 1 2 1 1.33 4.33 i 3.5 1 1 0 .67 3.17 4 . `, 1 1 . 6 7 4.17 " Zoning File #1223 March 8, 1988 Page 7 of 8 D) To what degree does the project decrease the area of relatively level ground surface that will absorb rainfall rather than allow swift run-off? Staff would note that while the City's philosophy has been to maximize the flat area in lakeshore zones for increasing the absorption of rainfall and snow melt, it is significant that the reason the current erosion occured was that the ground was saturated and the weight of the saturated earth caused the bank to shear. The Watershed District suggested to Mr. Waldron that he reduce the amount of water from the property that would absorb into the ground by piping it directly to the lake, thereby decreasing the chance for a recurrence of the ground saturation. Given that the erosion that occurred had a significant detrimental impact on lake water quality, (arguably a much greater impact than the normal run-off from the surface over a large number of years), it would seem that we might need to redefine and reconsider the ramifications of our current philosophy as it impacts properties such as this one. Summary - A. From a short-term environmental and •.e water quality impact standpoint, applicant'; revised proposal is not significantly better or worse than most of the methods proposed, because the impacts can be minimized through the use of proper erosion control methods during the grading and revegetation process. B. From a long ronmen,:al lake water quality standpoint, once the area is rev 1 there will be no significant impact on the lake water qua: _,iative to other options. C. From the standpoint of slope statility, the proposed method will make the R�cpe somewhat more stable than if the bank was merely regraded to its original contours, but may not be as stable as it could be it some type of interior structurai stabilizer (such as cribbing or fabric layering) were employed. 1). From the standpoint of visual impact, the revised proposal will have less of an impact than the original deep walk -out cut proposal. Topographically, a 3' cut will likely be less distinct from across the lake than the 6-8' cut originally proposed, and depending on the degree of vegetation established, could be relatively unobtrusive Compared to methods that use retaining walls. Zoning File #1223 March 8, 1988 Page 8 of 8 A3 we have stated before, given that the environmental impacts are neutral, Council and Planning Commission should consider this application based on the visual impact of the project on the character of the neighborhocd, remembering that the applicant certainly has a hardship to the property in that some degree of excavation work is necessary to restore the lakeshore bank. Planning Commission and Council must determine whether or not it is appropriate based on the restoration method proposed to allow additional excavation all the way to the house. Regarding the related issue of a deck on the lakeside of the house, applicant proposes a 5'x29' deck area located at the existing grade, which would be 3' above the proposed grade. There would appear to be no significant view encroachment on neighboring properties' views of the lake, however a variance would technically be required for the encroachment in the average lakeshore setback, since the dec': would need a railing. The increase in hardcover in the 0-75' zone with this proposed deck would be from 19.95E existing to 21.361, if the deck near the lakeshore remains in place. The net hardcover increase in the 0-75' zone would be approximately 79 s.f. or about 1.41%. Planning Commission previously recommended approval of a ground -level deck for the property, subject to removal of the deck at the lakeshore. Staff would note that applicant does not wish to remove the lakeshore deck because it is still functional, and suggests that the foundation of that deck structure gives the existing bank some added stability, considering that this is one of two areas where erosion did not occur (the other is under the stairway structure). City Engineer Glenn Cook feels that the stability is enchanced due to the depth of the posts and Oe_ fact that they are structurally tied together as a unit, but the decking itself may be of little consequence. Planning Commission and Council are left to determine whether the advantages or the deck structure outweigh the effects of the hardcover increase of 1.41% (or increase of 0.64% if the deck stays but the concrete half -circle iof questionable value) is removed). Applicant's grading plan would change slightly if the deck was removed. The point appl ican : makes in his letter regarding decks not being valid hardcover is a concept we have reviewed before but hive never accepted f,-)r various reasons. SAU T COUREY ROBERT P SCHWINN GEORGE R MODADEK JOHN p WALDRON COUREV, SCIIWINN tit KODADEK A PROFESSIONAL ASSOCIATION ATTORNEYS AT LAW SUITE 300, 400 MARQUETTE AVENUE MINNEAPOLIS. MINNESOTA 55401 TELEPHONE 1612) 339-0441 February 29, 1986 Michael Gaffron Assistant Planning and Zoning Administrator City of Orono P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, Minnesota 55323 Re: John and Lynn Waldron Property 1951 Concordia Street Dear Michael: As we discussed, I am enclosing herewith copies of the following: 1. Sheet one: site plan/grading plan; 2. Sheet two: section/elevation; 3. Sheet three: site section; and 4. Sheet four: ground level plan. LAWRENCE R ALTWAN CAROLC SHE PPARD SANORA F GILOERT These plans essentially show a three-foot deep excavation over a portion of the lake side of the property, with the addition of a balcony over the excavation next to the house. It is antici- pated that no retaining walls or other unnatural structures will be necessary to remedy the bank erosion problem if this plan is approved. To follow will come a sheet showing hardcover calcula- tions and a longer letter setting out our argument in support of this plan. Should you have any questions upon receipt of this letter and its enclosures, please give me a call. Also, please call if you feel any other information is necessary other than as enclosed or described herein. Ioh corn B. Waldron Encl. cc: Harlan M. Olson SAM T COUREY ROBERT P SCHWINN GEORGER KODADEK JOHN B WALDRON COURFY, SCHWINN & KOd A PROFESSIONAL ASSOCIATION ATTORNEYS AT LAW SUITE 300. 4GO MARQUETTE AVE MINNEAPOLIS MINNESOTA 554 TELEPHONE 16121 339•0441 March 2, 1988 Michael Gaffron Assistant Planning & Zoning Administrator City of Orono P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, Minnesota 55323 Re: John and Lynn Waldron Property 1951 Concordia Street Dear Michael: "S K MAR _ 3 OH LAWRENCER ALTMAN CAROL C SHEPPARD SANDRA F GILBERT This letter sets forth our arguments in support of the most recent proposal of ours to remedy the bank erosion problem created by the July 23, 1987, storm. As you can see from the sheets enclosed with my letter of February 29, we are no longer proposing a walkout cut but rather are proposing a regrading of the lakeshore yard to reduce the elevation of the yard three feet over the area in front of the house where the severe erosion occurred. Thus, we would be cutting back the lakeshore slope at its crest, which is one of the recommendations of the Hennepin Conservation District as outlined in their Memorandum of August 14, 1987, a copy cf which was attached to the Staff Report of December 9, 1987. First, and foremost, we continue to maintain that the July 23 storm created a severe physical hardship on our property within the meaning of the city ordinances. In other words, our plight is due tc circumstances unique to our property and not created by us. Although other properties on the lake suffered bank erosion problems, this fact does not destroy the unique character of the occurrence. The uni:rueness stems from the fact that the situation is not one generally prevailing in the locality. Cre of the reasons for the Planning Commission recommending denial of our walkout proposal was that the walkout cut was not related to the bank erosion stabilization needs. Our present proposal is clearly related in that it is one of the recommendations specifically made by the Hennepin Conscrvation District to deal with a bank erosion problem such as this. As you know, the City Engineer has stated that our present proposal is neutral from an engineering standpoint with the other proposed methods of bank restoration suggested by the City Mr. Michael Gaffron March 2, 1988 Re: John and Lynn Waldron Property page 2 1951 Concordia Street Engineer. As such, there appears to be no argument that our proposal will adversely affect the quality or quantity of runoff into the lake. Thus, as you correctly noted in your December 9 Staff report, "The problem appears to boil down to one of philosophy." While I understand and agree with the City's philosophy that the lake and lakeshore must be protected, as a practical matter, the specific means by which the City seeks to "Protect" the lake and lakeshore must be rationally related to that objective. If they are not, they can be successfully attacked in a court of law. As a result, our proposal should be analyzed in terms of the criteria suggested by the ordinances and those criteria themselves should be examined critically as to whether they are rationally related to the objec"ive of preserving and protecting the lake and lakeshore. One potential issue in this regard is the issue of hardcover. As our enclosed hardcover calculations indicate, the proposed balcony will result in a .23% hardcover increase in the 0-75, zone. It is our position that this slight increase in hardcover is insignificant. For example, it is less than half of the percentage hardcover increase approved by the Council at its August 24 meeting with respect to the Jack Swenson property. Moreover, as the staff itself has admitted, there is a serious question as Co whether the hardcover restrictions in the City's ordinances are really rationally related to the City's objectives of protecting the lake and lakeshore. A balcony is considered hardcover since, in the language of the ordinance, hardcover is any structure or other material which interferes to any degree with the direct absorption of rainfall into the ground. I ass•ime that the hardcover restrictions were meant to have the purpose of preserving the lake by making sure that structures are not placed close to the lake which increase the quantity of runoff and the speed of runoff, thereby transporting more sediment more quickly to the lake. However, some structures, such as a balcony, which are, by definition, hardcover, can actually have a beneficial effect by slowing down rainfall or runoff and increasing its chinces for absorption before running into the lake. 4e submit, that, if anything, a balcony such as the one we are proposing actually has a beneficial effect. It is not an unbroken flat surface such as a concrete patio which would have the undesired effect, but rather is a series of spaced boards, between, which the rainfall falls to the ground. The wood of the deck also has the effect of absorbing a certain amount of rainfall which would otherwise :each the ground. We submit that there is no scientific proof whatsoever that our proposed balcony would have a negative impact on the quality or quantity of runoff flowing to the lake, which is the only rational basis for the hardcover restriction in the first place. Mr. Michael Gaffron March 2, 1988 Re: John and Lynn Waldron Property page 3 1951 Concordia Street Aesthetically, our proposed balcony has no negative effects either. First of all, it does not extend beyond either end of the house. In other words, it does not obstruct any natural areas which are presently unobstructed, as viewed from the lake or either adjoining property. The Planning cu,"mission pieviously recommended approval of a ground level deck. The only difference with our proposed balcony is, aside from being much smaller, is that it has a railing. As you i,ave indicated, the only issue that the railing presents is whether it constitutes a view obstruction from either adjoining property. As the enclosed plate shows, the proposed balcony will fit almost entirely within the average deck setback area. As such, it should not constitute a view encroachment for the adjoining property owners. In any event, during the time of year when the adjoining property owners would be using their lakeside yards, there is thick vegetation on either side of our property which obstructs their view through to our property anyway. The only other difference between our balcony and a ground level balcony or deck is that there is not the absence of sunlight which prevents the growth of soil - retaining vegetation as is the case with ground level decks. The balcony is also in keeping with the surrounding properties since both properties on either side of us have a substantial wooden planked area extending for a distance from the back door of their houses. Thus, there is no rational basis for recommending denial of the balcony itself. Of course, the balcony is necessary to provide a means of exit from the rear of the house and for maintenance of the rear of the house given our proposed reduction in elevation of the lakeside yard. In analyzing the balance of our proposal, we have already pointed out that the proposal is at least as good as the others proposed by the City from an engineering point of view. In other words, it will not have a negative effect on the quality or quantity of runoff into the lake. This criterion is probably the most significant one to examine in deciding whether a given restriction is rational;y related to the City's objective of preserving the lake and lakeshore. One of the other concerns expressed by the City is whether a proposal such as this one is the least intrusive method of resolving the bank erosion problem. The City Engineer has estimated that the quantity of earth to be removed from the site as a result of our proposed plan is 150-200 cubic yards. We would not dispute this estimate. On the other hand, our engineer has estimated that the quantity of earth to be moved for a stabilization fabric reinforced slope system would be approxirately 500 cubic yards or 600 cubic yards for a cribwall system. See Service Engineering letter currently on file. In addition, the stabilization fabric reinforced slope system and the Mr. Michael Gaffron March 2, 1988 Re: John and Lynn Waldron Property page 4 1951 Concordia Street cribwall system would involve excavation much closer to the lace since the work would have to start right at or below the lakes',iore level in order to ensure a proper system. By contrast, we :ire removing only three feet of soil at the top of the slope and, with proper bales and other barriers in place during construction, no further silt should reach the lake. With the other two propos-ls for stabilization fa.iric or cribwall, degradation of the lake during construction would be unavoidable. Further, the City Engineer has admitted that the stabilization fabric method has not been time -proven and that cribwalls are subject to rot over time. This, neither of these methods can claim to be as permanent as the excavation we propose. Of course, a series of retaining walls would not have this disadvantage although they would present a less aesthetically pleasing view from the lake. Surely, a series of retaining walls is much less in conformity with the neighborhood than the ground excavation which we are proposing. Our measurements indicate that the Ragatz property is approximately 29 inches lower than the lakeside portion of our property. As the enclosed photographs indicate, the general slope of the land on the lakeshore outside of the homes in our neighborhood reaches a low just north of the Ragatz property and climbs gradually to a high point at the Gempler property. The photographs show, to the left of the stairs, a black line and, to the right of the stairs, a black plastic sheet, both of which depict the area of earth which would be removed. To the right of the black sheet is a yardstick which was inserted for measurement and reference purposes. Thus, if our proposed excavation is view d from the lake, one can see *)y comparing it with the land immediately to the north of our existing deck and the land immediately tc the south thereof, that it will merely appear to be a continuation of the gradual upward slope of the land from the Ragatz prooerty to the Gempler property. Thus, our excavation would still keep our property in character and conformit} with the neighboring residences. The fact that earth will be removed rather than regraded under our proposal should not be objectionable. If the proposal does not harm the lake or lakeshore and creates an aesthetically pleasing result, it is difficult to see % t rational objection there could be. Again, the City has alloyed much more significant removal of earth in the 0-75' area with the James Hoff property in 1985. In allowing that regrading, the City notes it has allowed regrading of lakeshore lots because of serious erosion problems. Such is exactly the situation here. Furt:er, our proposed excavation, would be in cumplete accordance with the goals set forth in Orono's Community Management Plan. Specifically, our proposal would retain natural Mr. Michael Gaffron March 2, 1988 Re: John and Lynn Waldron Property page 5 1951 Concordia Street vegetation rn the lakeside slope and would protect the slope from further erosion by taking away the steepest top portion of the slope and allowing us to revegetate the balance. As stated in C.M.P. 4-6, "Retention of natural vegetation ... will be promoted. Shorelines will ;ie protected from erosion and alteration." We submit that we are not altering the shoreline. However, if the "shoreline" is deemed to be any portion of the land within 75' cf the lake, then it is our position that this "shoreline" has already been significantly altered through erosion and that our proposal is the best practical means of alleviating any future erosion or alteration. C.M.P. 4-13 also states that "Natural vegetation in shoreland areas will be preserved insofar as practical and reasonable in order to retard surface runoff and soil erosion ...." Our proposal furthers this objective as well. C.M.P. 4-15 states that "Preservation of natural views, vegetation ... always produces more aesthetic results...." By avoiding retaining walls, we are preserving natural views and vegetation and are producing a more aesthetic result in accord with this goal. C.M.P. 4-19 echoes this thought by stating that "Natural vegetation will be preserved on slopes and retaining walls will be discouraged except when absolutely necessary to prevent erosion...." As James Piegat of the Hennepin Conservation District has stated, "We cannot overemphasize that retaining walls do not solve slope problems that are caused by groundwater conditions similar to those encountered h-re. Retaining walls are a solution to landscaping problems, not drainage problems." The top of the slope at present is too steep to be revegetated. It is our plan to revegetate the remaining slope with plants having long tap roots and otherwise good root systems such as sumac and day lilies. We know of no argument that our proposal would hive an adverse effect on t�-P public health, safety, or welfare. On *' contrary, by reducir .he height of the slope where it accessible, we will be enhancing the safety of the slope for ourselves, our children and the children of the neighborhood, well as rather members of the public who may be on our property. The other criterion deemed important by the ordinance is the effect on property values. Our proposal will only have a positive effect on property values by remedying the storm damage in an aesthetically pleasing way. The balcony will enhance the usefulness of the property and therefore increase its market value also. In summary, the following findings could be made regarding uur proposal: Mr. Michael Gaffron March 2, 1988 Re: John and Lynn Waldron Property page 5 1951 Concordia Street vegetation on the lakeside slope and would protect the slope fr<m further erosion by taking away the steepest top portion of the slope and allowing us to revegetate the balance. As stated in C.M.P. 4-6, "Retention of natural vegetation ... will be promoted. Shorelines will be protected from erosion and alteration." We submit that we are not altering the :shoreline. However, if the "shoreline" is deemed to be any portion of the land within 75' of the lake, then it is our position that this "shoreline" :zas already been r.gnificantly altered tarough erosion and that our proposal is the best practical means of alleviating any future erosion or alteration. C.M.P. 4-13 also states that "Natural vegetation in shoreland areas wail be preserved inso.'ar as practical and reasonable in order to retard surtace Yuncff and soil erosion ...." Our proposal furthers this objective as well. C.M.P. 4-15 states that "Preservation of natural views, vegetation ... always produces more aesthetic results...." By avoiding retaining walls, we are preserving natural views and vegetation and are producing a more aesthetic result in accord with this goal. C.M.P. 4-19 echoes this thought by stating that "Natural vegetation will be preserved on slopes and retaining walls will be discouraged except when absolutely necessary to prevent erosion...." As James Piegat of the Hennepin Conservation District has stated, "We cannot overemphasize that retaining walls do not solve slope problems that are caused by groundwater conditions similar to those encountered here. Retaining walls are a solution to landscaping problems, not drainage problems." The top of the slope at present is too steep to be revegetated. It is our plan to revegetate the remaining slope with plants having long tap roots and otherwise good root systems such as sumac and day lilies. We know of no argument that our proposal would have An adverse effect on the public heeltn, safety; or welfare. i the contrary, by reducing the height o: the slope where it accessible, we will be enhancing the safety of the slope for ourselves, our children and the children of the neighborhood, as well as other members of the public who may be on our property. The other Grit^rion deemed important by the ordinance is the effect on property values. Our proposal will only have a positive effect on property values by remedying the storm damage in an aesthetically pleasing way. The balcony will enhance the usefulness of the property and therefore increase its market value also. In summary, the following findings could be mdde regarding our proposal: Mr. Michao-t Gaffron Ma*c' 2, 1988 Re: John and Lynn Waldron Property page 6 1951 Concordia Street 1. There will be c significant or material increase in hardcover; 2. Lakeshore banks will be at a grade for easier maintenance and the potential for erosion of lakeshore banks will be decreased; 3. Thera will he no adverse impact on the duality . a quantity of runc.Of to the lake as a result of the proposal; 4. The propose' alt. *..:n does not adversely affect the neighboring properties slice it presents no view encroachments, n advnrs drainage effec*s, and does not r«aterially chang.. the surrounding topogriphy since a gradual rise in elevation from the Ragatz property to the Gempler property will be maintained; and 5. The proposed plan will allevie e the re- o install less aest'ietically pleasing retaining wall abilizati iat is or cribwall rz••stems the latter t�. �ch would involve significantly mor_ :arth moving a,i(. ificantly grater pon3ibility of legradation to the during construction and afterw.irds. These findi. -,• J condit'ons ar,3 substantially identical to those found by + y ?r, its approvai of the walkout for the Wi111-M Sinclair rty 4r. 1983. The Sinclair project involved removing three times as rth and involve1 no real hardszip sin, _')e fokindation cot' d ',avo easily been i ced wit'iuut creating a walkout. Des.- -�r additional l,.ving area has not a hards'.ip ei* Also, thf. ;t that most of the Sinclair grading took place -_* 4c' `,r -t A.com the shoreline whereas ours ; ;.es place w signifi^ant unle-s it can be shown that our exr.� , .it in de.jraaation to the _lake. The sinclai•. uch more obvious aesthetic impact as well. see en F. , v :•.,%vc ; •vestigated the cc. _ of stabilization fabric, • :-et6.n:ng walls i.r,.4 mod fief retaining w,l? systea.s. a!, pr_c-)iLitively expei-;ive and, as a pract-cal matter, we therefore simply cannot implement them. Therefore, we see no other on -ions open to us that. -he present on cere Y�I Jbhn B. dron JBW:cy Enclosures Existing Hardcover (0-75') _1 + proposed removal 1a:-4�4's.f. 30.2s i4-.44 30.2E concrete stoop (outside eaves) 1 _ splash blocks _ .00 s.f. 8.00 steps to lake ��c = 79.78 s.f. 23.15 house (18.1 x 46.1)834.41 s.f. deck (1412-1/2" x 8'11") = 126.69 s.f. concrete half circle (3.14 x 63"2) 43.28 s.f. 2 ]f1.A6.6 s.f. J`Q —'6 1)1a67s 5625 existing hardcover proposed addition percentage balcony 59 8 s.f. (outside eaves) _ c 59.38 s.f. - 45.59 s.f. pOT hardcover net gain 13.79 s.f. = 25.5" x 312" 7 956 i6.5" x 18" x 1 594 85 00 - 144 - 59.38 7 9 ' •<< `•� _ 1106.6 + 13.79 19.9% 5625 new hardcover percentage 19.9 - 19.67 .23% percentage hardcover increase KD re-rjC. tlAl or - r',et LF r.;I E vc�t LL c�lrec� CpMOf.�a �I,fIN6 SEC T I OIL(_ - - ---may 16i5i C4n1Co1Q�j�q �T, 0 q 'o jyo L"i 5 /N,T Ki N(w cxorinb_�j - - - - - - --------- -- bA*06E .l 1AEISJa bgoldc- FR6eerC) Ar(f�NfsS Nt u FL n rf rC 00K EGrs'✓, Gi - < ' &V-r�6n r Fc,xr? U 10 r-EEr CACA FrOA in rc b° 7r �o S iTE S6CTION /'' = /0' 0If 1..11�LDa0N h°�Sr17En(CE I°l: CO&((oK(1119 cT, I ex,SrrNc wiricows I . it�. /z — — .6 K v o 6Xlfit(#y6 14001E t'msrfm & LiInaowf ItI oow F)fljrfiy& L'41roow �►Nc�Kb BEM ev'� S took All AAOUN4 LEW& PL�I� EX�Sfin 6 - y6. I CAt; TING 31, H ou>E S�TEPLnnJ 0 p o-rreA c i tons uiic'T CLC vArroN 69ACIO K rS -S my^5 EXi�TJNG �EW� Y,gKt tct ✓q-r'oV = 1.50 New /AaPo%EO CONTOURS dq } • . F f , __� ' i i ems' 4 R _. .,...... .. _ -trir� `.:rrL.�,��ral�--� ��„ :�li. �_--mot" ����' `�'� •. .�.�` `' � _-� �� - - .��i _ _ � - ��- _� ti 4ft -dc- ;.e-- V-O-. NV Z7 RC,111.Set� r"V*-ofloSAL �oec ��c 5 •, 1 10 IA of•-700 A . F'o uc.Ft� [_ Tn GI n, �oQ w� S PEr i •- bf-no" B . 1--ItJk L e rLALC- AS IAA r Ti6P ! I Tt� 0PnoN G. to, F/&At- &&*U r- Aar AAN e e 4 r to s 4L2- S L aorto FAsaa c- NAo4r ,4.s SThrAI L r z. ffyt.� . 310 1 �10 100-00, , ooe ToT*4 �� N /" � W Au. �'7 STPr"l �L Q. acPOS�A GR- 12? it f ©f'rl°tJ jr=7' fi n A plVi A0 � N( U,'�-� L Sy w ► T-H 6 g4ou S / tj vwP� off` 1000, sow )40 &AMO OPnnN F. Ga aAr'' ����� era v�N+Fo�• r I,o�P€ , F Sc-opow-! Yi 4Lb PVT, wAI'L s Akot*t) 0PVO#JA-- . ,j*U 7 s Q,e c&I JtJA.t— Fle0loo-EAL 1000" 1000, 6 lb w 4010 00.-- 4 -�:gA-tLZUO CfAT- rK--tj T&vtAt!!- As F. ,J 14' k 1• v 9S o / �--1--- 400, /IF / 0 awl C s ISO 140 �LofE 10P7-1DM I Kt'TA'r"tN C, CA-'A'i-C. P,_A-c �r,L> -mE of S co P "r"o DCcgr,A,SCr Or StoPr- - -r T#� f S Lpc N►"t� w+o� I.0 �/t`►Z`t t`Y .= u►y t� NPrC - LA SC of DQ�.r- S Nct T ('roNGS A 1rfiO3'n^ K,j*r w©uALD t:n W.V, �t t'7't�fs✓f: t F MINUTES OF THE REGUi.AA ORONO COUNCII. MEETING HELD FEBRUARY 8, 1988 01223 WALDRON CONTINUED Council indicated to Mr. Waldron that they needed more information to make a decision based on City policy and City Administrator Bernhardson delineated the 5 alternatives that should be analyzed for the Planning Commission and Council. It was moved by Mayor Grabek, seconded by Councilmember Sime, to table this application pending review and iQcommendation from the Planning Commission. Motion, Ayes 5, Nays 0. BETZ BUILDERS/CLEMENT C. ]KROLL 6' ^TUBBS BAY ROAD PREa.li . NARY SUBDIVISION RESOLUTION # 7164 Thomas Betz and ClewenL Kroll t•:ere Present for this matter. City Administrator Bernhardson explained the proposed S- lot division of 2 parcels. All five lots will be served by a private road. Zoning Administrator Mabusth noted that on -site testing has confirmed that four lots have adequate area for on - site sewage treatment systems (septic testing is not required for one lot because it exceeds 5+ acres in area). Staff has recommended an outlot extension be provided to serve the property to the east when it is developed. Councilmember Goetten recommended that the fact that the tennis court is a non-cor.forming structure that does not meet the require3 setbacks be noted in the resolution. Zoning Administrator Mabusth stated it would be incorporated in the final subdivision resolution. Mr. Kroll noted that his name appeared incorrectly in the drafted resolution. He also questioned the status of the existing tennis court. Zoning Adminis'-rator Mabusth explained that the tennis court is a non -conforming structure which requires variance appi::jval to allow any improvements to the structure. She noted that this would have been the case even withoc,t this subdivsi(Dn action. Councilmember Callahan asked staff about t1;e best alignment for the outlot extension. 4 MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD JANUARY 11, 1988 f1223 JORN WALDRON 1951 CONCORDIA STREET CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT/ VARIANCE John and Lynn Waldron were present for this matter. City Administrator Bernhardson explained the request to repair the lakeshore bank that was damaged during the 1987 storm by lowering the grade to create a walkout from the existing house, construct a retaining wall along that cut up to the house, and regrade the slope and seed it along the lakeshore. Planning Commission recommended denial of the walkout cut, feeling it was not related to the stabilization of the bank erosion, and finding that allowing the walkout cut would set a precedent in conflict with current City philosophy. He cited two previous applications where a walkout and/or grading were allowed within the 0-75' lakeshore setback zone, however unique hardships were present in these cases that are not present in the Waldron application. Per staff memo, Planning Commission recommended approval of the ground level deck as proposed subject to concurrent removal of the existing platform structure near the lake. Staff generally agreed with Planning Commission's recommendation. Mr. Waldron submitted photos of his property and explained that 2 to 4 feet of level ground at the top of the slope was lost during the storm, and he would like to restore that area. Addressing the City's concern on the effect of the quality and quantity of runoff into the lake, he stated it has been established that his proposal would not adversely effect the lake. In response to Mr. Waldron's statement, City Engineer Cook stated there would be very little difference in the actual quality of the runoff water with any of the options used. Mr. Waldron explained that grading would be required with any option used. Aesthetically, he felt his proposal is preferable to the other options. He stated than_ his proposal would involve less earth disturbance. As .a safety issue, his proposal would provide a better view of the lakeshore from the house. He noted that based on estimates he has obtained, the amount of his disaster loan would not afford the options of stabilization fabric, cribbing, or retaining wall that would stand up for years. Regarding setting a precedent, he felt that the storm damage issue deemed his application unique. 6 MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD JANUARY 3.1, 1988 i1223 WALDRON CONTINUED Councilmember Callahan asked Mr. Waldroz, if the storm damage could be repaired using his proposal without c7 eation of the walkout. Mr. Waldron stated it could b� done to a certain extent but would create less useable 7lat yard area. Mayor Grabek felt it was inappropriate to allow the creation of the walkout in conjunction with repairing storm damage. It was moved by Mayor Grabek, seconded oy Councilmember Callahan, to deny the conditional use permit and variance as proposed. Councilmember Peterson asked Mr. Waldron if he would have made the request for the creation of the walkout had the storm damage not occurred? b,r. Waldron stated he would not have made the request based on the fact that the previous owner made a similar request for a walkout and was rejected based on the fact that there was no physical hardship. He felt in his case at this time, the storm damage presented a definite physical hardship. Councilmember Sime also felt that a complete alteration was inappropriate in conjunction with restoration of storm damage. Motion, Ayes 4, Nays 0. #1229 RICHARD RANSON 3826 CHERRY AVENUE VARIANCE RESOLUTION #2344 City Administrator Bernhardson explained the request for a variance to construct a 3-season porch and deck within the 75' lakeshore setback area. Planning Commission recommended approval subject to redesign allowing a sliding door on th#• south side of porch only. Applicant has complied with Planning Commission's recommendation to redesign plan. Richard Hanson was present for this matter and had no cotueents or questions. It was moved by Councilmember Callahan, seconded by C'ouncimember Peterson, to adopt Resolution #2344 per Planning Commission recommendation as drafted. Motion, Ayes 4, Nays 0. 7 MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD DECEPa3ER 14, 1987 1223 011N I3. WALDRON 1 ONCORDIA STREET 'ONDITIONAL USE PERMIT/VARIANCF, John Waldron was present and requested that this application be tabled pending submission of additional information from him. It was moved by Councilmember Sime, seconded by Councilmember Peterson, to tables this application per applicant's request. Motion, Ayes 5, Nays 0. i1_225 JAMES GILBERT 955 5 TONRAWA ROAD VARIANCE RESOLUTION i2322 James Gilbert was present for �:ni_; m.:tter. City Administrator Bernhardson explained tl-.e request for average setback and hardcover variances to replace an existing dilapidated deck with a somewhat larger deck and patio system with a future proposed gazebo on the lakeshore side of the howe. Staff finds that there is little or no extraneous hardcover on the property that could feasibly be removed to offset tre hardcover increases proposf�d. In response to Councilmember Goeatten, Mr. Gilbert stateu he does not intend on cutting into the bank to accomcdate the new deck. Councilmember Goctten noted that the neighbor to the south has not voiced any objection to the gazebo and put applicant on notice that variance apprc 1 was valid for one year only. It was moved by Mayor Grabek, seconded by Councilmember Sime, to adopt Resolution #2322 approving the variance as proposed. Motion, ,ayes 5, N,sys 0. 11226 WINTON MOI.0 4650 NORTH SHORE DRIVE VARIANCE RESOLUTION 1232? City Administrator Bernherdson Explained the request for a lot area variance to construct a residence on Tract H of RLS 1036. Planning recommenled approval subject to a 20' wide acre ^asoment to be located entirely within Tract D. S notes that locatirq the 20' driveway easement ent.Lt.y in Tract D reduceu tl,e defined buildable area of that lot and therefore, recommends that. the 20' driveway easement be moveli further south and be sr)lit be'ween Tracts A, s, i D. b MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD NOVEMBER 16, 1987 C1223 JOHN A. WALDRON 1951 CONCORDIA STREET CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT PUBLIC HEARING 9:25-10:06 The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing were noted. Gaffron explained the request for a conditional use permit to repair the lakeshore bank that was damaged during the "super storm". Applicant wishes to repair the damage by lowering the grade to create a walkout from the existing house, construct a retaining wall at that cut up to the house, and regrade the slope and seed it along the lakeshore. Proposal also includes a deck extending from the west side of the house where no deck previously existed. Applicant proposes to reduce some house hardcover by installation of gutters and a sealed pipe straight to the lake. This direct transportation of roof runoff water to the lake through a pipe is directly contrary to the City's philosophy that all roof and other hard surface runoff should travel over and through the ground surface for filtration purposes prior to reaching the lake. Join Waldron was present for this matter and explained that the storm was the impetus of this proposal. He explained the conditions of the SBA loan to be used for repairing the lakeshore and house improvements. He stated the damage to the steep lakeshore bank is a serious physical hardship that must be remedied and believes that his proposal to reduce the slope is the test solution. He submitted a letter from Hennepin Conservation District which he feels addresses the slope problem and s pports his proposal as the best solution. In general, he felt that the proposal can only have a positive effect on the health, safety and welfare of the community, by protecting the lake from future t,ollution as a result of erosion and other runoff; and by adding a walkout and deck to the property, the proposal will only have a positive effect on the values of the property in the surrounding area. Regarding the transportation of roof runoff -hrough pipe, he contended that runoff from the roof is clean, therefore, would not be detrimental to lake quality. He noted that he would use perforated pipe if necessary. Manson noted the three other alternatives to applicant's proposal and suggested tabling this application in order to review the alternatives. MINUTES OF THE. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD NOVEMBER 16, 1987 11223 WALDRON CONTINUED John Waldron noted the drawbacks of retaining wall and stabilization fabric alternatives: Retaining walls involve extensive cost, are less aesthetically pleasing than a naturally vegetated slope, and do not guarantee the stabilization of steep slopes from a "super storm" event. Stabilization fabric would also require some grading to soften the steep slope. lie addressed the many issues outlined in his 'letter dated October 22, 1987 included in staff's packet. Bellows noted that the City has an ordinance and guidelines regarding grading within the 0-75' lakeshore yard. She noted the three alternatives within the conformance of City guidelines to solve the erosion damage. She did not feel there was any connection with repairing the storm damage and the neccessity for a walkout. Johnson voiced concern with controlling the erosion until the storm damage is repaired. John Waldron stated that he has placed hay bales at the top of the slope but the bales have since been pushed down the slope which he intends to replace. Staff suggested installation of a silt fence at the bottom of the slope at the lakeshore. Cathy Lee, 1965 Fagerness Point Road, stated they had a similar problem with a different property they owned, and the only method that was found effective was cutting back the slope. As a neighbor, they found the proposal less objectional than "cribbing". Taylor noted that none of the alternatives offered by the City Engineer or Hennepin Conservation District included a walkout. Brown noted that the City has not .-llowed alot of grading in the lakeshore yard &nd found very little difference in the City Engineer's recommendation vs. the recommendation of Hennepin Conservation District. He would therefore agree with staff recommendation of denial. Hanson felt he would need to study the information further before making a recommendation, and recommended tabling the application. There were no other comments from the public and the public hearing was closed. 12 MINJTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD NOVEMBER 16, 1987 11223 !4ALDRON CONTINUED It was moved by Bellows, seconded by Brown, to recommend denial of the proposed grading cuts to create a walkout and recommend that applicant submit a revised proposal for grading in order to repair and maintain his lakeshore bank; and recommend approval of the lakeshore deck proposal near the house as proposed conditioned upon concurrent removal of the 9'x 14' deck at the edge of the slope, resulting in a net increase of 37 s.f. of 0-75' hardcover - per staff recommendation. Motion, Ayes 4, Nays 0, Abstention 1. Hanson abstained. #1224 MINNETONKA BOAT WORKS 1449 SHORELINE DRIVE AFTER -THE -FACT CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT/VARIANCE PUBLIC HEARING 10:08-10:12 The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing were noted. Byron Heimark was present for this matter. Mabusth explained the after -the -fact conditional use permit/variance request for upgrading and expansion of the boat lift at Minnetonka Boat Works. The Orono facility will service 3 of the larger boats currently stored at the Wayzata facility. Council conceptually approved the request at their November 9th meeting. Bellows asked why the Orono facility must store the larger boats at this point? Byron Heimark explained that the Orono facility needed to replace their boat lift with a safer style which are wider than the old style; and with the remodeling of the Wayzata ficility, they can no longer store the larger boats and meet the parking requirements. There were no comments from the public regarding this matter and the public hearing was c-osed. It was moved by recommend approval Ayes 5, Nays 0. a Bellows, seconded by Johnson, to per staff recommendation. Motion, MINUTES CP THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING IiELD NE 16, 1986 #1035 ROBERT KOEHNEN CONT. Planning Commission concurred with staff's interpretation. No one was present from the public regarding this matter and the �)ublic hearing was closed. It was moved by Goetten, seconded by Chairman Kelley, due to the Planning Commission's interpretation that this is an alley, not a street, that no variances are required if structure is reduced to no more than 1000 s.f. and maintains the 10' setback from the alley and doors open to the side; and staff be instructed to refund the application fee. Motion, Ayes 7, Nays 0. #1037 JOHN BUSSE 1951 CONCORD CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT POBLIC HEARING 8:28 - 8:40 The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailina_ was noted. Assistant Zoning Administrator Gaffron explained the request for ccnditional use permit and variance to regrade lakeshore yard to create a walk -out basement configuration. He noted that City Engineer Cook, per his letter, indicated that he felt disruption of the bank could result in a negative impact on Lake Minnetonka and does not recommend approval of the grading plan. John Busse was present for this matter and stated the purpose of creating a walk -out was mainly to finish the basement, provide light, and to try and solve the water problem by means of releasing the hydraulic pressure on the foundation. He submitted a letter from Engineer Mark Gronberg which explained the measures that would be taken in order to prevent erosion into the lake. Kelley stated that he was not in favor of this because of his ncern of creating a chain reaction in this type of rea Rovey. suggested that this application be table for more review. Goetten agreed with Kelley and Rovegno. Taylor stated that he felt water damage was a legitimate hardship. No one was present from the public regarding this matter and the public hearing was closed. 4 / ,MINUTES OF THE PLANNING CO^!MISSION MEETING HELD JUNE 16, 190 rf 11p37 JOIN B. BUSSE CONT. It was moved by Rovegno, seconded by Goetten, to table this matter so that applicant can provide additional hydraulic/hydrologic information for the City Engineer to review, and also review impact on lake ano neighbor's properties, and neighbor's opinions. Motion, Ayes 7, Nays 0. #1038 GORDON N. NELSON 1310 ELMWOOD AVENUE VARIANCE PUBLIC HEARING 8:41 - 8:47 The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing was noted. Assistant Zoning Administor Gaffron explained the hardcover variance request to'construct a detached garage (2.9% increase in hardcover in the 75-250' from 32.9% to 35.8%). Gaffron noted that applicant does not have an exisiting garage and proposes to remove 2 existing storage sheds. He also noted that removal of a 3rd existing shed would reduce the hardcover to 1.6% increase. He explained the grading work that would be required consisting of approximately 90 cubic yards which does not require a conditional use permit. Gordon Nelson was present for this matter and stated that he will remove the 3rd shed also (resulting in a 1.6% hardcover increase in the 75-250' - total 34.5%). Goetten stated that she felt the-3 was a real hardship involved with the severe slopes of property. No one was present from the public regarding this matter and the public hearing was closed. It was moved by Goetten, seconded by Kelley, to recommend approval of the variance, subject to staff's hardship findings and conditions and subject to removal of all 3 sheds and no additional hardcover will be allowed. Motion, Ayes 7, Nays 0. f �^ MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD JULY 21, 1986 (i�103 JOHN BUSSE CONCORDIA STREET VARIANCE/CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT - SECOND REVIEW John Busse was not present for this matter and the Planning Commission waited until 11:40 P.M. for his presence to act on his request. It was moved by Bellows, seconded by Chairman Kelley, to recommend denial of a conditional use permit and variance to regrade lakeshore yard to create a walk -out basement configuration per staff recommendation. Motion, eyes 5, Nays 0. i1042 THOMAS J. MAXWELL 3685 WATERTOWN ROAD CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT PUBLIC HEARING 7:57 - 8:05 The Affidavit of publication and Certificate of Mailing was noted. Assistant Zoning Administrator Gaffron explained the request for conditional use permit for guest house use of second existing residence, in conjunction with combination of 2 parcels of + 5 acres each into a single parcel. Mr. Maxwell's aunt, Arlie Thorpe, owns the adjacent property and will deed the property to Maxwell in exchange for a life estate. This will allow construction of a new 6 stall barn meeting the 150' setback from all property lines, and allow 7 horses maximum. Jack Ebert was present representing Mr. Maxwell and stated that he had the signed deed in hand. No one was present from the public regarding this matter and the public hearing was closed. Callahan stated that he was opposed because it was bad zoning & planning to combine the property just for the purpose of allowing 6 horses. Bellows and Goetten agreed with Callahan. Assistant Zoning Administrator Gaffron noted that once the properties were combined they might not be allowed to subdivide again because the properties would be substandard in the required 5 acres zoning area. Taylor stated that the applicant has complied with the Planning Commission's direction at the last meeting. McDonald agreed with Taylor. 6 MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD FEBRUARY 8, 1988 ZONING ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT: #1214 RICHARD ZIMINSRI 1095 NORTH BROWN ROAD PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION PESOLUTION #2363 City Administrator Bernhardson explained the revised plan which defines the paved area in relation to the proposed dividing line. It was moved by Mayor Grabek, seconded by Councilmember Goetten, to adopt Resolution #2363 approving the preliminary subdivision. Motion, Ayes 5, Nays 0. #1223 JOHN WALDRON 1951 CONCORLiA STREET CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RESOLUTION City Administrator Bernhardson explained that Council denied the proposed walkout excavation cut at their January 11, 1988 meeting. Applicant has subsequently submitted a revised plan showing a 3' deep flat-bottomed excavation on the lakeshore yard; and a balcony from the main floor of the house, with retention of the existing deck near the lakeshore bank. Staff recommended that the revised plan be sent back to the Planning Commission for review. He noted that this plan does not indicate applicant's plan for restoration of the lakeshore bank. John Waldron was present for this matter and explained the intent to create a more level lakeshore yard area. He then explained that in trying to eliminate the need for costly retaining walls, he proposes to repair the lakeshore bank by removing 3' of the lope where the severe erosion took place and plant the remaining bank with sumac and day lilies to prevent future erosion. He noted that cribbing would involve 500-600 cubic yards of soil disturbance, whert— his proposal would involve approximately 150 cubic yards of soil disturbance. He requested Council give some direction regarding this proposal before referring it back to the Planning Commission. Mayor Grabek stated that he needed more information from the City Engineer before he could offer any conceptual approval of the plan. Councilmember Goetten concurred with Mayor Grabek noting that grading plans and more information on 1 disturbance ar,.: needed. Bonestroo Rosene Anderlik & Associates Engineers & Architects February 1, 1988 City of Orono Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 Attn: Ms. Jeanne Mabusth Re: File No. 139-1223 John Waldron Dear Jeanne, Otto G Bonestroo. PE Kedh A Gordon, PE Thomas % Peterson, ►E Charles A Fnckson Rr.ben W Rosene. PE RKhard W Foster. Pk MHhael C Lynch, PE Leo M Poweloy Joseph 4- AnderlM, PE Donald C Burgafdt. PE James R Naland. PE Harlan M Olson Bradford A Lemberg, PE Jerry A Bourdon, PE Kenneth F Anderson, PF Suun ArtEberlin RKhatd E Tufnef, PE Mark A Hanson, PE Kedh A kachmann. PE Mark A Se,p James C Olson. PE Ted K Freld, PE Mark R RpKs, PE Glenn R Cook. PF Mi(ha*I T Rautmann. PE Robert C Russell. A I A Thomas E Noyes. PE Robert R Pfeffele. PE Tl—,r . Angus. PE Robert G Rhunr(% PE Day.d O Loskota. PE Howard A Sanford, PE Marvus L Sorvala. PE The revised plan submitted on tho John Waldron property indicates an excava- tion of 3 feet in the Lakeshore Yard area. The proposed excavation would be in the 0-75 foot lakeshore setback area. It is estimated that 150 to 200 cu.yds. of material would be removed. The proposed plan revision does not significantly change the concept of the previous submittal. There would not appear to be a significant improvement in the water qualicy or a reduction in the water quantity discharged as a resalt of this improvement. If you have any questions, please contact this office. Yours very truly, BONESTROO, ROSENE, AANDERRLIK L ASSOCTATES. TUC. e 4-O- Glenn R. Cook GRC:Ii i ,r 133F) West Mighvv.iy 36 • St Paul Minnesotan 55113 • 612 636-4600 Otto G sonestroo. PE Keith A Gordon. PE Thomas W Peterson, PE Charles A Erickson Bonestroo J.�tt W Kosene. PE Richard W Foster. PE Michael C lynch. PE M Pawels � k lu seph C Anderlrk. PE Donald C Brrgardt PE James R Maland, PE Harlan n Harlan M Olson Rosene Bradford A Lemberg. PE Rchard E Turner. PE Jerry A Bourdon. PE Mark A Hanson, PE Kenneth P Anderson. PE Keith A Bachmann, PE Susan M Lterlin Mark A Seip Anderlik & James C olenn R Olson. PE � E Ted K Field. PE Michael T Rautmann. PE Mark R RobertCR RusseYE A I A Associates Thomas E Noyes. PE Robert G SchunKht. PE Robert R plefferle. PE David O Loskota. PE Thomas E Angus. PE Howard A Sanford, PE Marvin L Sorvala, PE Engineers & Arcliltects November 10, 1987 City of Orono Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 Attn: Jeanne Habusth Re: File No. 139 - 1223 John Waldron Dear Jeanne, We have reviewed the John Waldron request for reconstruction of the lakeshore banks at 1951 Concordia Street. The lakeshore banks were seriously eroded during the summer rain storms and should be repaired as soon as possible. Silt fence and/or other erosion control procedures should be placed along the lakeshore as a temporary protection. The property owner is requesting permission to construct a walkout basement as a part of the shoreline restoration work. We reviewed a similar application from the previous c-wner which was denied. The restoration of the lakeshore banks can be completed without constructing the walkout basement. The property owner should be requested to submit a plan for restoration of the lakeshore banks. This can be accomplished by cribbing, stabilization fabric or camouflaged retaining walls. There was a signiticanc amount of soil iust when the la►e shore banx tailed which will allow for a flatter slope after reconstruction. We would recommend that the lakeshore bank be restored back to near its original condition con- sistent with city policy. If you have any questions, please contact this office. Yours very truly, BONESTR00, ROSENE, ANDERLIK i ASSOCIATES, INC. Glenn R. Cook GRC:li 24 V Nov 13 W 233S West Highway 36 9 St. Paul, Minnesota SS113 • 612-636-4600 ,Irpe Am — Hennepin Conservation District Memorandum TO: City of Orono FROM: James Piegat, Ph.D. DATE: 16 November, 1987 SUBJECT: Proposed repairs to the John Waldron property Mr. John Waldron has asked the Hennepin Conservation District to comment on his proposal to repair damage done to his Property during the heavy rains of July of this year. The District has three concerns in this matter: 1) aesthetic considerations, 2) effects on water quality, and 3) prevention of recurrence. 1. Aesthetic Considerations We believe that slopes vegetated with native species of plants would present the most aesthetically pleasing landscape to neighbors and users of the lake. The use of retaining walls should be minimized for aesthetic reasons. Mr. Waldron's proposal would regrade the existin& slope and vegetate it. This is the best remedy to alleviate the existing problem provided that the concerns mentioned below are satisfied. 2. Effects oil Water Quality We are not convinced that enough is known about the effects of urban and suburban land uses on water quality, although consi('erable money has been spent toward that end. In terms of su `ace runoff, a balance must be struck between the filtering effect of grass during t,)w intensity rainfalls and the erosion of physical and chemical materials duringhigher intensity events. The kcy threshold is whether the surface produces runofthat reaches the lake. A surprisingly small percentage of nd actually contributes to surface runoff. Also, a balance must be struck between the transport of solids and dissolved substances by surface water to the lake and the transport of dissolved substan. es by ground water. We believe that Mr. Waldron has already taken a positive step in dealing with runoff from his rooftop. By piping that water directly to the lake, he has avoided all of the materials that runoff could entrain if it were diverted to the streets or even his lawn. Mr. Waldron must maintain the cleanliness of tAis system to prevent expensive cloggin of the underground pipes and will thereby remove most of the material that wou d otherwise be carried to the lake. 2U',; Ndgie Plaza Bldg 12450 Wayzata Boulevard Mimielonka Minnesota 55343 Telephone :61 1 544 85- Mr. \Viddron's proposal includes the construction of terraces around a cut for a walk -out basement to minimize the sloping land on the property. It is important that this area not be paved and increase the hard cover. however, The improvements in the quality of surface runoff may be offset by &gradation of the water that infiltrates and reaches the lake as ground water. Perhaps the best solution, given the state of knowledge, is to choose the most aesthetically pleasing design that avoids an increase in impervious surfaces. Mr. Waldron's proposal also includes a deck that would be installed at the level of the first floor. 'I'hus would improve the surface runoff situation by intercepting and retaining rainfa'.l much as trees do. however, it is important that the area under the deck not be paved or made impervious. 3. Prevention of Recurrence The erosion damage done to Mr. Waldron's property in July probably did more damage to Lake Minnetonka than twenty or more years of normal conditions. We believe that the best thing that can be done to maintain water quality is to avoid a recurrence. This can be done by installing subsurface drains, controlling surface runoff, and avoiding retaining walls where possible. This problem occurred because rains had saturated the ground prior to a very large rain. During the latter event, excessive ground water pressure caused the slope to fail just above the level of the lake. With this support removed, the rest of the slope quickly failed. The most important step to prevent recurrence is to regrade the slope to a grade no steeper than 50%n, revegetate, and install subsurface drains at the bottom of the slope. The drains will prevent excessive ground water pressure. Next, surface water runoff must be controlled to minimize the velocity of flow at any point. One way to do this is to install gutters on rooftops and pipe tii � water to an area where it no longer has the energy to erode or the opportunity to entrain other materials. Other landscaping can be clone to avoid the channeling of flow. Finally, we cannot ever -emphasize that retaining walls do not solve slope problems that are caused by ground water conditions similar to those encountered here. ketaining walls are a solution to landscaping problems, not drainage problems. Subsurface drains must be placed behind all retaining walls and the walls must be properly designed. 4. Summary In conclusion, we believe that Mr. Waldron's proposal will remedy his erosion problem and will prevent a recurrence. The keys to this are regrading to slopes less than 50%, installing subsurface drains, avoiding retaining walls, and controlling, surface runoff. We do not believe that the proposal will create any new water quality problems. Hennepin Conservation District MEMORANDUM TO: John Waldron FROM: James Piegat, Ph. D. DATE: 14 August, 1987 SUBJECT: Repairing Erosion Damage Enclosed is are some general recommendations about repairing damage caused by rains earlier this month. Naturally, there may be F_dditional concerns on a site - by -site basis. Solution of lakeshore problems should begin at the shoreline. Stabilize the shore and then work upslope. Retaining walls needed for structural support should be designed by an engineer. Such walls should be supported by both tie -backs and vertical posts. Prevention consists of controlling surface runoff and ground water seepage. Subsurface drains should be placed behind all retaininro walls and at the toes of all regraded slopes. Please contact our office if you have any further questions. We would be happy to discuss particular solutions with your contractor, if you see the need. 70S i ,dW Plata PAdq 124'>o Wayzata R* ulevard Minnvtooka M+nne"a 55343 Teiepho-to (CA2) 544-8572 Hennepin Conservation District Repairing Erosion Damage 1.0 Slope Restoration Eroded areas can be restored by regrading existing material. Clean dirt fill should be used where additional material is needed. The regraded surface must have a uniform slope with a level gross -section; it must not have any depressions or bumps. The fill should be covered with four inches of loamy topsoil for the vegetative cover. Where possible, eroded areas should be regraded to slopes no greater than 1 on 2 (50% grade). This can be achieved by extending the regraded slope at the toe, cutting the slope back at the crest, or c•,,* structing a retaining wall at the top of the slope. Six-inch diameter draii 1s must be installed along the toe of all affected alo .. 's and behind all retaining walls. Corrugated polyethylene perforated tubing is recommended. Drains shall be laid to a neat line and grade in a trench excavated into undisturbed soil. There should be no void spaces between the tubing and the walls of the trench after backfilling. Turn both ends to provide outlets. Except for outlets, drains must be three feet below the final graded surface. A rodent guzrd must be placed over all outlets. Retaining walls can be used to shorten the regraded slob: . The retaining wall shou'd be places: at the top of the slope and not exceed five feet in height. Six-inch drains must be installed behind all retaining walls using specifications cited above. Drains should be placed at the same elevation as the bottom of the expes:-d wall and four feet behind the wall where possible. An engineer must be consulted for the design of retaining walls needed to .nrotect structures. 205 Ridge Pura Bldg 12450 Wayzata Boulevard Minnotunka Minnesot 1 55343 Telephone i6l.) 544-8572 I 2.0 Prevention P -e erosion problems can be prevented by controlling three factors: 1) rooftop c+ . 2) surface runoff from lawns and yards; and 3) seepage of ground water at of steep slopes and at the base of retaining walls. Roofs should be guttered and the drainage directed, as much as possible, toward the street. Where grading permits, rooftop drainage from the rear of the house can be carried to the street in shallow subsurface drains. In special cases, drains can carry rooftop drainage down slope. Subsurface drains should be six-inch diameter corrugated polyethylene unperforated tubing. Surface runoff from lawns, yards, or unguttered portions of roofs must be controlie,j to minimize water volume and velocity at any single point. Landscaping should be modified to prevent channelling of surface water. Low walls cr berms an be constructed along the :.ope crest. Water ponded behind the walls must be drained through subsurface storm sewers. Eight -inch diameter corrugated polyethylene linogrforated tubing can handle drainage from approximately 10,000 square feet if it slopes greater than 1 on 2 (50% grade). Inlets must be protected from trash, leaves, etc. Outlets must discharge oni:o riprap. Vents must be placed in the line where there are significant changes in grade. Many slope failures are caused by excessive pressure exerted by ground water at the toes of slopes. Subsurface drains running along the contour at the toes of slopes and behind retaining walls will relieve the excess pressure and prevent slumping. Standards for subsurface drains are given above. 3.0 Seeding and Mulching It is important to develop a good vegetative cover cn steep slopes as cuick:y as posssible. The work to be performed for seeding disturCed areas includes: 3.1 This item shall consist of furnishing all seed, fertilizer, mulch, netting, tabor, and equipment required to prepare the seedbed, seed, fertilize, and mulch the critical areas as described in Items 3.1 through 3.7. 3.2 Each site shall be seeded and mulched as soon as practical upon completion of shaping and seedbed preparation. 3.3 All disturbed areas designated for seeding and mulching shall be shaped tc uniform slope of 2:1 or flatter and seeded within 1 day after seeded preparation. 3.4 The fertilizer shall be applied at the following rates of available plant food per acre: Nitrogen (N) Phosphoric Acid(P2O5) Potash (K2O) Ground Limestone 10C Ibs (2.3 Ibs/1000 sq ft) 100 Ibs (2.3 Ibs/1000 sq ft) 100 Ibs (2.3 Ibs/1000 sq ft) 3 Tons per Acre (14Q Ibs/1000 sq ft) (as determined by soil test) 3.5 A minimum of 4 inches of topsoil shall be applied. Topsoil shall be friable, loamy material (loam, sandy loam, silt loam, sandy clay loam or clay loam) and shall be free of debris, trash, stumps, rocks, roots, noxious weeds or any substance potentially toxic to plant growth. Topsoil shall have an organic matter content of not less than 3% by weight and shall have a pH of 6.0-7.5. Topsoil containing soluble salts greater than 500ppm shall not be used. 3 6 Seed shall conform to the quality requirements of Federal Specification ]]]-S- 181 and State of Minnesota seed laws. All seeding rates will be based on pure live seed. 3.7 The following seed mixture and rates of pure live seed shall be used: ecies PLS ibslac. Ibs/1000 4 Smooth Bromegrass 15 0.34 Kentucky Bluegrass 5 0.11 Birdsfoct Trefoil 3 0.07 Perennial Ryegrass 3 0.07 3.8 After construction is completed to design grade and shape, fertilizer shall be applied uniformly over the area to be seeded. Surface tillage to a depth of 2 inches shall be done to incorporate the fertilizer and lime if needed as determined by soil test. The site shall be reasonably smooth and free of debris such as rocks, roots or tree branches before seeding. 3.9 The seed shall be spread uniformly on the surface. Broadcasted seed shall have an approximate earth cover from 1 /8 inch to 1 /4 inch (between 1 /2 and 1 inch on most sands) by dragging or hand raking before the mulch is applied. a. Broadcasting - Seed shall be uniformly distributed by a mechanical or hand operated seeder. Cover the seed by cultipackmg, harrowing or hand raking. b. Hydroseeding - Apply the seed alone or seed and fertilizer in slurry form uniformly over the area. Hydroseeders shall provide continuous agitation and be capable or supplying a continuous, non -fluctuating flow of slurry. Cover the seed by cultipacking, harrowing or hand raking. 3.10 Mulching shall be done immediately after the seed is sown. The mulch shall consist of clean hay, straw, or long fibered wood cellulose blown or hand applied at a rate of 3,000 to 4,000 lbs. per acre for hay and straw, or 1,500-2,000 lbs./ac. for the wood cellulose. The contractor will provide a method satisfactory to the engineer for determining the weight of mute,, i furnished. 3.11 On slopes steeper than 3:1, the mulch shall be anchored by a netting securely stapled into place. The netting shall be a black polypropylene extruded rectangular mesh with 3/4" x 1" opening and having a weight of 2.6 pounds per 1,000 square feet (± 0.5 Ibs.). Netting shall be equivalent to Economy Erosion Control Netting from Conwed Corporation, 332 Minnesota Street, St. Paul, MN 55101. All netting will be secured by staples on 4 to 5 foot staggered centers, except on the ends of the netting where staples will be placed at 1 to 2 foot spacings along the entire width. Adjacent or end to end nets will have a 4-6 inch overlap with the net on the upstream side of any lateral water flow on top. Staple will be 1" by 6" long, 11 gauge wire staples inserted flush with mulch or ground surface. 3.12 When construction is completed between May 15 and July 1 and August 1 and September 15 all sites will be seeded to the permanent mixture listed in 3.7. No dormant seedings will be made when using this permanent mixture. If construction is completed during the period of September 15 to November 1, the area will be seeded with a temporary seeding consisting of 10 pounds per acre perennial ryegrass planted with a grass drill or hand seeded and harrowed. After these dates a dormant seeding rnuy be made. a. Dormant seedings are made after soil temperatures are cool enough to prevent germination. Procedures for applying needed lime and fertilizer, seedbed preparation, seeding and mulching are the same as during other seeding periods. b. An alternate method of dormant seeding is to apply neede lime and fertilizer, prepare a seedbed, and apply and anchor mulch. Sow seed as a dormant seeding over the mulch during the time period shown in the Optimum Seeding Period Table. Do not seed on ice, or snow deeper than 2 inches. Double seeding rates when using this method. 3.13 Optimum Seeding Period urassluegume 5 ecies Spring Summer Dormant Cool Season Grasses 4/1-5/50 8/1-9/15 11/1-4/1 Warm Season Grasses 5/15-6/20 - 11/1-4/1 Alfalfa; Red Clover 4/1-5/20 8/1-8/20 11/1-4/1 Birdsfoot Trefoil; Crownvetch 4/1-5/20 - 11/1-4/1 3.14 Establishment Management: a. Control undesirable broadleaf weeds, weedy grasses and woody plant growth as needed. Clipping should be done before the weeds begin to compete for moisture and prior to weed seeds maturing. b. Herbicides may be used to control some species of weeds. Optimum control will be obtained when weeds are in early growth stages. Herbicide applications should be delayed until grasses reach the three -leaf stage. Do not apply herbicides to seeding mixtures that include legume. Herbicides shall be applied in accordance with authorized, registered uses and directions on the label. The individual who applies herbicides is responsible for complying with federal,state and local laws and regulations governing the use of herbicides. 4.0 General Recommendations In The Establishment Of Grass: Seedbed Preparation - Area to be seeded should be well worked: the same as for a standaru lawn seeding. Harrow or pack the seedbed prior to seeding to break up large c,cds and firm the seedbed. The prepared seedbed must be scft encugh to permit covering the seed and anchoring mulch yet firm enough to prevent burying seeds too deep. For example, the soil should be firm encugh to support the weight of a person without sinking into the soil more than 1 /2 inch. The entire seedbed should be uniform, friable and well packed. In some cases, heavy land roller or culti- packer may be needed to get the desired compaction. Perform all cultural operations across slopes where possible. Areas inaccessible to equipment shall be scarified by hand. 4.2 Method of seeding- Proper placement of grass seed is very important. The most desirable method is to use a grass type drill that will plant the seed about 1 /2" deep in well packed soil. If such a machine is not available, the seed can be broadcasted on the surface. If this method is used, then the entire area should be harrowed twice immediately after seeding. On slopes steeper than 3:1 this will generally mean hand harrowing etc. 4.3 Time of seeding - If warm season grasses are recommended the most desirable time to seed warm season grasses is after the soil has warmed up over 60 degrees. This usually will correspond with the average seeding date for sudan grass. At the 450 latitude, this would be approximately from June 1 to June 30. If these grasses are seeded too early or in the fall, they generally do not perform as desired, and will often result in a failure of the planting. Grass other than warm season grasses should be seeded before May 20 and from August 1 to September 15. 4.4 Seed sources - Most large seed companies can get the warm season grass seed if you will place you order with them well in advance of your planned seeding date. The Sexaur Company of Brookings, South Dakota; Miller Seed Company of Lincoln, Nebraska; Sharp Bros. Seed Company of Healy, Kansas; and Peterson Seed Company, Savage Minnesota usually have these seeds on hand. 4.5 Seeding rate and mixture - Our goal to seed approximately 100 live seeds per square foot. One other important item is to order your seed on a Pure Live Seed Basis (PLS). This will help guarantee that you will get 1C0 live seeds planted per square foot. 4.6 Management - All competition (weeds, etc.) should be kept cut as often as needed. Normally the cutting will help weaken the competitive plants and give the newly seeded grasses adequate sunlight and a chance to increase. Supplemental watering can be beneficial during July and August in the establishment period. To rz-X%ST IN 5�5QF�� 1 � Cam✓ L / �i W13LL , d "V SX,�. S vQ04 l✓L V . S�+�sypA�tc �-c` L 7?LNm - jet uk.,emw - a: PU- _ _ .� powit loll l:xtSi1� ��-[C1�L� �ySVaPA�I[ .i 1, ToE OQMrI tFxAt 8 /--7•$a SERVICE EMWEERNWG PAS roeONn . W. CAUL W WM4W ;�-•s �o; ivwti�9 analysis is basso :n tn• at 1g� Cuncord:a Avenue on yak* Minnetonka. was asked t d*tr .-m i .ie an estimate of ;,oats for two a , t*rna t z as wh i cn are beini ccnsidereO to repair a failed 51ope. :w0 alternati•ies are i` ;ecgrle reinforced 310,.G sribwall system. ..nc reinforced slope alternative uses colymer grids whiW, are did horizontally into t`'e embanhmert tc rsinfcrce the so,' a. 1? 6 slope :s d*iin4a :o •' ::,:rate :h• fa.:ure w'an* a :roJs create a stable sloo3. ',w *..:sting slope is renb,.sC to .!i* lines shown in the attached sketch and if the material removed is suitable it is repla,_6d 'n d inch compacted efts .� ; -r• the grids between the layers. ..ocn completion 4he Vace sac.• is covered with topsoil an: f ztrclankst anti. natural ~:� _ • 03 sst1C sn r'a' .:. Tea _ zoe cesi grid assumed a .•'c,�al ur; ,';:rltOn'3� y@6:.:Gt:. ,:�:'J�r sect,ons are of being design with the front face using a wrap arounc gr*: -r,-edur• tc nolo in ;rig soi' . `'•s -r=a wall alternative consists of installing timber, .:nsra:s or a steel crib. The c, •,a are similar to Lincoln 'cgs on a gran0•r 3ca+e. The .r•c interior is fil':' with a J,a*Q''a1n1n; ;ranular r , a5 t.-m- wall is Th* =ron: `-ice aoe left as it is or covered. with a facing that :w•'�r :.: a'ers. N3tura l grcAt--, wi i 1 evertuai ly **tabl ter ` zmers S . -•:9 is* ;. _ _.. • . c:, t` . ::�L y3: :' �• .a f ivndat _ .. •- _ ....,3G''i3'. a' _. .. � ;,• ;'it`s :-,;�;. .:r�G��'• .�m�r�.. 1 pr•11 w. J *s.�'Yt* fCr i -erns 5s. SERVICE EWNVEEIi/NQ PAILMUM Al ernativ• A R3 �nforcod oleo& EA•;&- atian xu ,arc. s '2SC.30 Oria 445 yarns = 4245.00 Rtz 1 acement 51iO yarta : 2500. y0 Cleanuo joa = ;Ga0.30 Profit and cont:njanco 3 1350.00 ---------- ieta : i 10345.00 ::c� :rtiLCf.- e . ,s00 yard Prcr-- ono ;--ntingoncy Z4EC.J0 = 225!:. �O ----------- 3 'i .:.0 A SERVICE oftw.M.W&GIN"Imm pam0 R.Paw6m Mesa"! tn At --.-a any i —nsnj,sz in !:ho �- I' -' lat* ns 'gar — , fl3ra f:',.I;r %'.V: �Std *o *-.-,as& r3oo- .;narg-3 tho W4*S1jr*- :t 'a that O&C.- r a .0 vol't;-lowz Z&s*rr*nt and t,:ay alai aro a Esau,bl* 2 d ', t T*,3. co wa a 4�b we one 3 .he --ariova' :�f t. n it -e: j -n VA and reduce tto :oarco can a-torrtatv--4 , FOUIREMENTS RELATIVE TO COLLATERAL A. Borrower will submit to SBA evidence of title to collateral and of SBA's lien position and of payment of appropriate fees prior to the disbursement of Loan funds in excess of $5,000.00. Such evidence will be in a form satisfactory to SBA Counsel and will be at Borrower's expense. B. Borrower will not sell or transfer any collateral described in paragraph 2 hereof without the prior written consent of SBA. MFORUTIMP •k 6 Borrower will use the proceeds of this Loan solely to rehabilitate or replace. property of Borrower located at 1251 Concordia Street Orono Minnesota 55391, damaged or destroyed by disaster occurring in the month of ]ulv_ 1987. Borrower will apply all Loan proceeds to the following specific items or areas: A. Approximately 3700.000 to repair/replace disaster damaged personal property in similar kind and quantity. B. Approximately S2.800.00 to repair/repaint disaster damaged walls, ceilings, doors, etc. C. Approximately SI.500.00 to replace carpeting, pads, etc. D. Approximately S1.000.00 to repair/replace disaster damaged landscaping. E. Approximately _5j.,KO.j Q to fill and regrade 4isaster eroded areas. F. Approximately S50000 for disaster clean-up and debris removal expenses incurred at 1951 Concordia Street Orono Minnesota 55391, G. Approximately S3.800,00 to repair/replace other disaster damaged land improvements, including rctainintt wall with file; H. Approximately S400.00 to repair/replace other disaster damaged land improvements, including wood pier. I. Approximately S700.00 to repair/replace other disaster damaged land improvements, including Stairs. 5. F FOUIREMENTS FOR USE OF LOAN PROCEEDS AND RECEIPTS A. Borrower will obtain and itemize receipts (p..id receipts, paid invoices or cancelled checks) and contracts for all Loan funds spent and retain these receipts for 3 years from the date of the final disbursement. Prior to each subsequent disbursement (if any) and whenever requested by SBA, Borrower will submit to SBA such itemization together Kith copies of the receipts. 11, Borrower will make the damaged, repaired or replacement property(ies) available to SBA for inspection and verification of the use of Loan proceeds when so requested. rm 1191 (7-84) 211&QO612 P.)ge 2 Ref 50 30 ZONING FILE: NO. 1244 CITY OF ORONO �����'� MEET"ICE OP' COUNCIL ACTION P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 473-735-IAAR 2819c,48 Date of Notice: 3/16/88 -------------------------- -------------------------------------------------- TO: Mr. & Mrs. Dale C. Palm�y 1710 Shadl-wood Road c r Wayzata, MN 55391 --------------------------------------------------------------------------- TYPE OF APPLICATION: XX Variance --------------••-•------------------- DATE OF MEETING: 3/14/88 VO': 5 For AgiA nst COUNCIL ACTION - !NOTION: Variance Application #1244 was tabled by the Orono Council at your request. Also at your request, your application will b^ scheduled before the Council at their meeting of 3/28/88. If you plan to present information for the Council's consideration, please see that this information is submitted to the Building & Zoning office no later than Wednesday, March 23, 1988. 6/ To: Planning Commission Chairman Kelley Orono Planning Commission Members City Administrator Bernhardson From: Thomas J. -Jacobs, Senior Building Inspector Cary of Date: February 11, 1988 I" V rl 0 Subject: #1247 Robert Posthumus, Big Island - Record Lot 40 Variances - Public Hearing List of Exhibits Exhibit A - Application Exhibit B - Property Owners List Exhibit C - rlat Map Exhibit D - Notice of Public Hearing Exhibit E - Proposed Sice Plan Exhibit F - revised Site Plan Exhibit G - Mike Gaffron's Letter Dated 1/19/88 Exhibit H - Hardcover Results Exhibit I - Amended Survey/Site Plan Loving District - RS Application - Applicant is proposing to construct a 3-bedroom lake home on Big Island. Approxima'A size of th. :1-ructure is 32'x48' or 1,536 s.f. Applicant i . requesti - 3 variance to the side setback, well location within 7ti' of lake, •...d conditional use permit. Applicant's first proposal (Exhibit E) was r,-viewed by staff and found to he not acceptable (see Exhibit G). .herefore, an alternate plan was discu£Red which addressed the concerns of Mike Gaffron's letter dated 1/19/93 (Exhibit G'. •" c variances requested are as follows: 1 ) Si dl�• Se.'_rac1:: Required ;t(� Propose? Variance 66% 2) Well Location Within 75' of Lakeshore: Required = 75' Proposed - 50' Variance - 25' or 33% 3) Conditional Use Permit - to install well within 75' of lake. Pertinent Code Sections - Conditional Use Permit required - Section 10.03, Subdivision 19 Side Setback Variance - Section 10.31, Subdivision 8 (D)(2) Well Within 75' of Lakeshore - Section 10.31, Subdivision 8 (A) t:rviow of Conditional Use Permit - This permit is required due to excavation within 75' of the lakeshore. Staff recommends you approve the conditional use rc�rmit if variance for well location . approved. Zoning File N1.247 FebcuF.ry 11 , 1988 Page 2 of Review of Variance - Well Location - Required = 75' from lakeshore Proposed = 50' Variance = 25' or 30% During staff's review of the proposed project, considerable research was done on the location of the septic system (Exhibit F). It was found that the location would he best on the west and south sides of the lot (Exhibit F). Orono Ordinance requires that well locations not be closer than 75' from the sewage disposal system, therefore, the proposed location is the only acceptable location. Side Setback Variance: Required = 30' Proposed = 10' Variance = 20' or 66% As per the well location variance, the location of the structure was also affected ' ;• the septic system location. It is felt by staff that by moving the septic system to the proposed location (Exhibit F), less of a hazard to the lake wi 11 be created, and the proposed plan wi 11 not create a hardc er problem (Exhibit H). Staff Recoo ndation - Staff .:.ommends approval of a conditional use permit and variances subject to the following findings: 1. No other land is available. 2. Topography restricts the location of the septic system to the proposed location. 3. Location of septic system restricts the location of the well and lake home. Approval is based on the follow'ng conditions: 1. A new certificate of survey with proposed location of lake home, well and septic system as shown must be submitted. 2. New sewage disposal system testing must be provided and approved by staff. Additional Comments and Planning Commission Recommendation - March 23, 1988 Page 3 of 3 Planning Commission unanimously approved the conditional use permit and variances required to allow construction of the seasonal residence on the subject property, Record Lot #40, Big Island. Applicant has already provided the amended survey, review Exhibit I, and the new sewage disposal system test information. Planning Commission accepted the new information submitted with the second review and based their approving recommendation on the hardships and findings cited in the staff recommendation noted above. The enclosed resolution has been drafted per the approving recommendation of the Planning Commission. City of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL L NO. -- A RESOLUTION GRANTING VARIANCES TO MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 10.31, SUBDIVISION 8 (C) AND (D)(2) AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT PER MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 10.03, SUBDIVISION 19 FILE #1247 WHEREAS, per Section 10.31, Subdivi .ion 6 (F), Robert Posthumus (hereinafter "the applicant") having an interest in the property indentified as Big Island, Record Lot #40 within the City of Orono (hereinafter "City") has filed a building permit application for the proposed construction of a 3-bedroom, seasonal dwelling of approximately 1,536 s.f. in area, an approved use, on the property legally described as Lots 58 and 59, Morse Island Park, Hennepin County, Minnesota (hereinafter "the property"); and WHEREAS, the applicant has been required to file a land use application with the City that would seek approval of a side setback variance for the seasonal dwelling of 20' or 66% where Section 10.31, Subdivision 8 (D)(2) requires a 301 -tback, a setback variance of 25' or 33% for the well where Section 10.31, ibdivision 8 (A) would require a 75' setback from the lake, and per Section 10.03, Subdivision 19 a conditional use permit is required for land alterations within the 75' lakeshore protected area. NOW, THEREFORE, BE 1T RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono, Minnesota: FINDINGS 1. " ication was reviewed as Zoning File #1247. 2. Niff property is located in the RS, Seasonal Recreational Zoning Die,=_ric:. The property is approximately .54 acres in area, and per Section 10.31, Subdivision 6 (F) approved on nuary 13, 1983, the property was classified as a substandard -buildable record lot and was granted a permanent lot area variance and recognized by the City Council as a buildable lot. The property is approved for a single seasonal dwelling. 4. The Orono Planning Commission reviewed this application on March 21, 1988, and recommended approval of the proposed variances and conditional use permit based on the following findings and hardships: Page 1 of 4 City of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. A) There are no additional adjacent lands available. B) Topography restricts the location of the mound septic system to the more gradual gentle elevations at the proposed location. C) The required location of the septic system and the depth of the lot !olace severe restrictions on the location of the well and the seasonal dwelling. D ) The proposal appears cons:.stent with the current pattern of development of undeveloped properties on Big Island. 5. The City Council finds that the conditions existing on this pro- perty are peculiar to it and do not apply generally to other property in this zoning district; that granting the variances would not adversely affect impact light, air nor pose a fire hazard or other danger to neighboring properties; would not merely serve as a convenience to the applicant, but is necessary to alleviate a demon- strable hardship or difficulty; is necessary to preserve a substantial property right of the applicant; and would be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan of the City. 6. The City Council finds that granting a conditional use permit to allow the installation of the well at the proposed location will not be detrimental to the health, safety or general welfare of the public, would not adversely affect light, air nor pose a fire hazard or other danger to neighboring properties, nor will it depreciate surrounding property values and that the proposed level of use of the property will be in keeping with the intent and objecti, -�s of the Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan of the City. CONCLUSIONS, ORDER AND CONDITIONS Based upon one or -lore of the above findings, the Orono City Council hereby grants variances to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.31, Subdivision 8 (C) and (D)(2) to allow th-a seasonel dwelling to be constructed 10' from the side or internal lot line and the well 50' from the lakeshore and grants a conditional use permit per Section 10.03, Subdivision 19 to allow the installation of the well within the 75' lakeshore protected area, subject to the following conditions: 1. 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 the special conditions of this resolution will expire on that date (March 28, 1989). Paqe 2 of 4 City of OR ONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 2. Violation of or non-compliance with any of the terms and condi- tions of this resolution shall constitute a violation of the zoning code, shall automatically terminate any authority rranted herein, and shall be punishable as a misdemeanor. 3. The undersigned applicant has read, understood and hereby agrees to the terms of this resolution and on behalf of himself, his heirs, successors and assigns, hereby agrees to the recording of this resolution in the chain of title of the property. Adopted by the Orono City Council on this 28th day of March, 1988. ATTEST: Dorothy M. Hallin, City Clerk ,lames R. Grabek, Mayor Property Owner(s) Pace 3 of 4 CITY OF ORONO - VARIANCE APPLICATION Initial Application Fee $150.00 '? -_-N .7 ($50.00 per each additional variadalcdl Renewal Variance Fee $75.00 ( no change from original applicat' n ) After -the -Fact Fees (Double application fee)' ----------------------------------------------------------- PROPERTY LOCATION Site Address a 1 Property Identification Number (P.I.D.) •7 4o Please check one - Property abstract or torrens? Attach legal descr4-ption to application if not included on required survey. ---------------------------------------- --------------1-I----------------- APPLICANT Phone (home)-- -[ `p ( — 2-L/7 3 Name _90F36-1e_ .J6,4 k) 49ST7,4U,4A tjS Phone (work) 4% / — P56q Address:2-42400 M(Vle.-41-2A7�, City: L Ai6d ��� Zip: 'S'j�� ------------------------------------------------------- ---�------------ OWNER (if different than applici-nt) Phone (home)%� �L�Q Name F1R4 11) R, t�21L �jrJ�� Phone (work) Address: �� .3 S /! �:�,1�� �_LL:. City: _Zip: Date Property Acquired 7 (month/year) I (do) (dQ ate) also own the adjacent parcels of land. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- PRESENT USE OF PROPERTY Present Zoning District _ S Present Use of Property , Sr Residential Other (specify) --------------------------------- DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST Estimated Construction Cost $ Describe request in detail: ------------------------------- VARIANCES REQUIRED Lot Are-: Lot Width Setback Variances ( Front ✓ Side Other `� r .� Hardcover Pear) IIARDSITIP ✓ Describe undue hardship or practical difficulty resulting from strict enforcement of zoning regulations: 5c,,j._ ty �'«,r?Fs R Doud�£ MnuNt) SfPr1c �ySi?al It �JlCN �N TLt(Z^1 '1«�fLSS 1! 1. �uf. Jit✓CF.� /1�2 A �L1Q P.2��eE-�� �u��r�t•-`----------------------•--- ------------------------------------------- DESCRIPTION OF UNUSUAL PROPERTY CONDITIONS Describe unusual property conditions preventing compliance with Zoning Code Requirements: SM('tL_� L-c)'T" SIZE --------------------------------------------------------------------------- REQUIRED SUBMITTALS 1. Completed Application Form 3�-' 2. Certified Property Owners List of owners within X50' (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 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 supple is true correct to the best of his/her knowledge. -7 Applicant's Signature y f' Date 2- 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 member: for purposes of investiga- tion and verification f t4i request Owner's Signature Date - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Applicant must have all submittalsr 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 6 Zoning Office of this change prior to the meeting. RUN DATE i1/27/88 HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORMATION SYSTEM REPORT NO. PI435401 PROPERTY OWNERS LIST PAGE 1 BATCH 001 38 23-117-23 23 0003 PROP ADOR CWNER NAME C A A MADSON TAXPAYER CARLISLE A ARLEEN MADSON NAME/ADDR 209 SHADY OAK RD HOPKINS tiN 55343 38 23-117-23 23 0033 PROP ADDR O::NER NAME E HALES A A SAAR TAXPAYER MRS FRED HALES t1AME/ADDR 3711 ARBOR LA S M'-t3lETONKA MN 5534T 38 23-117-23 32 0012 PROP ADDR OWNER NAME GERTF'JOE V NELSON TAXPAYER HPS H R NELSON NAME/A30R 3115 CEDAR AVE SO A;T 3 MPLS MN 55407 38 23-117-23 32 0015 PROP ADDR CW14ER NAME SAMUEL A MC CLOUD TAXPAYEm SAMUEL A MC CLOUD NAME/ADDR 533 PARKDALE PLAZA 1660 S HWY 100 MPLS MN 55416 38 23-117-23 32 0020 PROP ADDR C;4NER NAME C A A MADSON TAXPAYER CARLISLE A ARLEEN MADSON NAME/ADDR 209 SHADY OAK RD HOPKINS MINN 55343 38 23-117-23 32 0028 PROP ADDR G;4NER NAME V SNIDER ETAL TAXPAYER ROY E AHERN NA11E/ADDR 1500 INDUSTRIAL RD MINNETONKA MN 55345 38 23-117-23 23 0004 C A A MADSON CARLISLE A ARLEEN MADSON 209 SHADY OAK. RD HOPKINS MN 55343 38 23-117-23 23 0034 J A A I ISAAMAN JACK A ISAAMAN 5308 W HIGHW000 DR EDINA MN 55436 38 23-117-23 32 0013 SAMUEL A MC CLOUD SAMUEL A MC CLOUD 533 PARKDALE PLAZA 166f S HWY 100 MPLS t1N 55416 38 23-117-23 32 0018 T A P H %NNA TED R HANNA 14115 FNOLLWAY OR S MINNETONKA MN 55343 38 23-117-23 32 0023 D W PRATT A C A PRATT FRED A BRUNTJEN 430 OAK GROVE SUITE 203 MPLS MN 55403 38 23-117-23 32 0029 ROY E AHERN ROY E AHERN 1500 INDUSTRIAL RD MINNETONKA MN 55345 38 23-117-23 23 0027 K W SAARI ETAL KENNETH W SAARI 2243 VANIR COURT NW ROCHESTER MN 55901 38 23-117-23 32 0001 CAROLINE C ECK MRS H R NELSON ® ' 3115 CEDAR AVE SO APT 3 MPLS MN 55407 38 23-117-23 32 0014 SAML:EL A MC CLOUD SAMUEL A MC CLOUD 533 PARKDALE PLAZA 1660 S HWY 100 MPLS MN 55416 38 23-117-23 32 0019 EUGENE A NELSON EUGENE A NELSON 2115 E 36 1/2 ST MPLS MN 55407 38 23-117-23 32 0027 A R STROUTH A T STROUTH A R A T STROUTH 6083 WOODY LA FRIDLEY MN 55432 38 23-117-23 32 0044 VIVIAN J NELSON ETAL VIVIAN J NELSON 6009 W 34TH ST MPLS MN 55416 PUN DATE 01/27/83 BATCH 001 38 23-117-23 32 0046 PROP ADDR 0:424ER NAME J A J CAMPE III TAXPAYER ROY E AHERN NAME/ADDR 1500 INDUSTRIAL RD MINNETONKA MN 55345 38 23-117-23 32 0049 PROP ADDR OWNER N:,ME T N TRAFF i J L TRAFF TAXPAYEP ROY E AHERN NAME/ADDR 1500 INDUSTRIAL RD MI184ET0)0<A MN 55345 HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORMATION SYSTEM PROPERTY OWNERS LI' 38 23-117-23 32 0047 ROY E AHERN ROY E AHERN 15001 INDUSTRIAL RD MINNETONKA MN 55345 38 23-117-23 32 0059 LE014APD R SHARE LEONARD R SHARE 9117 WESTMORELAND LA MPLS MN 55426 REPORT NC' 31435401 PAGC 2 38 23-117-23 32 0048 R D COX i B E COX ROY E AHERN )500 INDUSTRIAL RD MINNETONKA MH SS345 38 23-117-23 32 0061 JOHN 5 DEAN JOHN S DEAN 837 N 63PO ST WAUWATnSA WI 53213 38 23-117-23 32 0064 38 23-117-23 32 0071 PPOP ADDR OWNER NAME FRED W HALES ET AL ROBERT M MCAULIfFE ET Al TAXPAYER FRED W HALES TOTAL BATCH 001 00025 NAME/ADDR 3711 S ARBOR LA W L& P A THORKELSON MINNETONKA MN 55343 4851 DAWNVIEW TER GOLDEN VALLEY MN 55422 I CERTIFY THAT THE FACTS REPRESENTED 7E AN ACCURATE AND T7UE REPRESENTATION OF INFOPMATION AS IT APPEARS THIS DATE ON THE RECORDS OF THE HENNEPIN COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF PROPE TY TAXATION, JO T);E BEST OF MY K14GWLEDGE AND BELIEFF / DATE/ AffBY J D CITY OF ORONO NOTICE The Planning Commission will hold public hearings in the Council Chambers at 1275 South Brown Road on Tuesday, February 16, 1988, on the matter of reviewing the following land use applications: 1. #1242 Kathy Duncanson of 690 North Brown Road seeks a conditional use permit to allow the installation of a non -rental, caretaker apartment within the existing residence. 2. #1243 .lane Slaughter of 4545 Wayzata Boulevard seeks a conditional use I-ermit to allow the installation of a non -rental, caretaker apartment within the existing residerce. 3. #1244 Dole C. Palm of 1710 Shadywood Road seeks approval of variances to allow existing hardcover improvements such as a detached garage and portions of a cement c.riveway originally scheduled for removal as a condition of approval of a previous variance application. i1245 Hennepin County Department of Transportation/City of Oronu seek -a tondi tiona 1 use permit and variances to the requite' ,#%tback from the lake and a designated wetland for filling and ear. ig the road and road bed of County Road 15 within the Navarre area. ,5. #1247 Robert Posthumus, owner of Record Lot No. 40 on Big Island, seeks a side setback variance and a variance to the required setback for a proposed well that would serve a new seasonal dwelling. All persons wishing to be heard will appear at this time. The meeting starts at 7:00 P.M. Written comments are solicited. Plans are available for review in the City offices, by appointment. By: Planning Commissior ,9 J nnA A. Mabusth, Building 6 Zoring Administrator To be pub'lshed the week of February 1, 1988. 0~ [T _i of ORONO Yost Office Box coi liny, Minnesota 5532:' • Municipal Off.cea On the North Shore of Lake Minnetonka January 19, 1988 Robert Pesthumus 24200 Natches Lakeville, MN 57,044 Re: Lots 58 and 59, nurse Pear Mr. Posthumus: rk - Septic Concerns I have further r viewed '-.he site plan and septic system design for the property on Big Islaijd. In addition, I have discussed various , oncerns about the system design and layout with Dr. Roger Machmeier of the University of Minnesota Agricultural -xtension Servo^e. Dr. Machmeier is a nat4.onally recognized authority on septic sys'-cr d is like1 v the most knowledgable individual in the State of Minner ;arding the design of such systems for residential usage. eased on his commc.ts ad a further review of the pertinent ordinanc- s, i wo,.1.,] make ti_E .,llowing comments and deterr:..Lnations: 1, The p-,opt design !r not acceptable as -is because the rock beds are skewed i tion to she contours and therefore the asjummptions used in cre: aa% configuration are not valid. Mr. Parke- ::sed a literal inter, .tior the codes to cr- -`-- this design but it does not in my opinion fi.• t ,in the design 1 . ..,eters a_enerally accepted ' rin the industry. 2, If t system had ^n located in the portion of the property contain' in test and if '_hat percolation test hae.. been equi t #5 a- 11 mint-tes per inch, the basal width pert.,.., antour lines would be defined as approximately 25' 4 it downslope area of 12' required in addition to the d,awnhill. area re-quired to maintain the necessary 4:1 purpc.,es. That would have rut the ultimate boun tae d,- tem outsid ..F vou- property bount'aries. 3. Given _tia,. it was determined that the prcposei system would not be acceptable, I then layed nut the necessary constraining setbacks for this property to determine if there was any chance ::hat the pro' erty could contain a well, a residence structure and a primazy and alternate draLnfie.d site, given the teed for mound systems due to a goasonal perched water tale. The limiting criter_a are as follows: a) For the structure, t etuacko on this lot are 75' f; om the lake, 30' from eitnnr side and 30' frcm the rear lot line. M'llDING •IONING 473'13 • AOMr4:STI._PIN aCI PtBtR WORKS -471-71S9 ASU SSIM; Robert Posthumus, Lots 58 & 59, orse Island Par). January 19, 1988 Page 2 of 3 b) For the mound systems, t), : setbacks are 75' from the lake, 75' from the pond, 20' from any structure, 75' from any well. c) For the well the required setbacks are 75' from the lake, 5' from the prope _ ty line, 3' from any portion of the house or overhang, 75' irom any portion of the d.rainfield system, and 50' from the septic tanks (note that the State of Minnesota Standards allow the well to be 50' from the shoreline and 50' from any portion of tha septic system or tanks). 9. Haviazg drawn all of those constraints onto a copy of your proposed site plan, with your proposed house location and size, in my opinion the required primary and alternative sites cannot be fitted within the property boundaries. 5. Howe% , it is also my opinion that with a number of variances and careful ..ite planning, perhaps in addition to a reduction in the size of the proposed house, this lot may in fact 1)e suitable as a building site. The revisions that I see being potentially feasible are as follows: a) Place t;,e well at a location 5' f the southern side lot: line and 50' from the lakeshore (this z ..ires a conditional use permit and variance approval from the City Council). b) Move the hLise nearer to the southeasterly lot line to a point as near as 10' from that lot line (this also requires a viriL cc approval from the City Council). ,,) Reduce the footprint area of the structure so that setbacks of 20' from the mound systems ^an be maintained. The :sigr.ate:d primary and alternate drainfield sites then world be on the f'_at portion of the top of the hill, and near the base o;` the hill -year the lot corner as shown (-z the attached conceptua:_ diagram. .used on my discussion with Dr. Machme , the point from which moun system setbacks are measured would be defined by the required bas. 1 dimensions of the mound syste - (i.e. for the primary site on top of the hill for z 21 minute p-r inch pert: rate and slopes lest- than 3%, the defined edge of the tree* ment area is 5' outside :he rock bed, and we would still expect to see a 10' side lot line tback and 20' house setback from that be ndary). Also, for th iternate site downhill, wi,ich because of a s .e.:�per slope and faste_ pert rate has a defined tr- :tment area u• --ath and downhill f i o,n the rock bed, we would again expect that prop?rty line setback be maintained along with the 20' house s,. k. Thesn are also show; on the attached diagram. This configuration would appear to meet the re-,, :red setbacks from property l iaes ..id from the lakeshore and tho pond. In this configuration we would al.loa addition of fi11 material,; outsi,'e • e . esian,+ed treatment area up to the lot 1 ines (but no-_ outside them). Robert Posthumus, Lots 58 & 59, Morse Island Park January 19, 1988 Page 3 of 3 6. Under this configuration it might still be feasible to construct a lake home on the property without a side setback variance, but it would restrict the size of that home to approximately 1/2 of what you have proposed. It would not appear feasible to locate the well a distance 75' from the lake and still meet the 75' setback from sewage systems, hence under this configuration the conditional use permit to place the well in the 0-75' setback zone is still necessary. Given the above concerns, comments and determinations, if you propose to construct a lake home on this property, you would appear to have two options: A) Construct the lake home with no plumbing and less than 800 s.f. in floor area, and construct an outhouse meeting all pertinent code standards. B) '1r,)ply for the necessary variances and conditional use permit to %..:'1Struct your residence near the lot line in a somewhat smaller envelope than originally proposed, and locate the well 50' from the lakeshore. I will be pleased to meet with you ay.,in to discuss this property. Please feel free to call me at 473-7357 if yo/hha a any questions. Sincere Michael P. G /fron,Aset Planninning Alministrator MPG/tln LAKESHORE SETBACK ZONE 0-75' 75-250' 250-500' 500-1000' Directions: A. Existing lot area in zone ORONO HARDCOVER CALCULATION WORKSHEET B. Existing C. Existing D. Proposed E. Proposed hardcover hardcover hardcover hardcover in zone percentage in zone percentage ( (B:A) x 100] ( (D:A) x 1001 ZI 4 sf 0 sf e�__) % C-) sf a `/1 •`sf sf sf F. Allowed hardcover percentage 0 /, O sf n 9, i }-OF, sf 1\ % 25 sf sf Y. sf 90 30 °� sf "% _ 35 A. Existing Lot Area in Zone - includes the total square footage of dry buildable land within the specified zone. B. Existing Hardcover in Zone - includes the square footage of existing roofs, decks, sidewalks, driveways (gravel or paved) and other rain -impervious surfaces within the specified zone. C. Existing Hardcover percentage - divide the number in B by the number in A and multiply by 100. D. Proposed Hardcover in Zone - includes the existing hardcover plus all proposed additional hardcover. E. Proposed Hardcover Percentages - divide the number in D by the number in A and multiply by 100. F. Allowed Hardcover Percentages - if the percentages in column E for any setback zone exceed the allowed percentages in column F, you should contact the Zoning Department at 473-7357 to discuss the possibilities of obtaining a variance. Generally, if a concurrent removal cf existing hardcover matches the additional hardcover proposed, resulting in no net increase of hardcover in a specified zone, a variance may not be necessary. �11 Ws 1 , I I I I I I To: Planning Commission Chairman Kelley Orono Planning Commission Members City Administrator Bernhardson From: Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building & Zoning Admcihto rorV ��!!'' Date: March 10, 1988 0 ?0ND Subject: #1248 Thomas R. Williams, Jr., "4127" Oak Street - Variances - Public Hearing Zoning District - LR-lB Pertinent Ordinances - Section 10.24, Subdivision 5 (B) Lot Area Required = 43,560 s.f. or 1 acre Proposed = 24,400 s.f. .56 acres (additional 6,500 s.f. within Lot 1, Block 4, divided by unimproved platted right-of-way of Ridge Place) Variance = 19,160 s.f. or 43% Lot Width Required = 140' Adjacent or Road = 75' Variance = 65' or 46% Adjacent to Shoreline = 95' Variance = 45' or 28 List of Exhibits Exhibit A - Application Exhibit B - Property Owners List Exhibit C - Plat Map Exhibit D - Council Minutes of 7/28/69 Exhibit E - Council Minutes of 7/10/79 Exhibit F - Original Survey Submitted With Application No. 460 Exhibit G - Updated Survey Submitted With Current Application Exhibit H - Map/Survey of Variance Applications Issued to Adjacent Properties Exhibit I - Map of Unimproved Right -of. -way of Oak Street Exhibit J - Hardcover Analysis Review of Application - The current application has been filed by the sole and legal owner of the property. The application involves a lot area and lot width variance and does not propose a formal building plan or profile. As in the 1969 and 1979 reviews, this is merely a variance review to allow the sale of the lot as a buildable lot. The approval should specifically provide the limitations for a future developer of the site. Staff is aware that this is a problem for members of the Commission where we are not dealing with a final plan of development and are merely asked to deal with the physical character of the site. The City has approved in the past lot area and lot width variances without formal building plans and has continued to do so even within the past few months. Review Exhibit G, the building envelope has been described on the updated survey noting the average lakesh�re setback lines, side setback and street setback for the principal structure. It should he noted that a building onvelope is also shown on the accessory lot divided by Ridge Place.. The average lakeshore setback line will be staked prior to Planning Commission inspection of the rite. Zoning File #1248 March 10, 1988 Page 2 of 3 It a future developer plans to construct an accessory structure on Lot 1, Block 4, the owner would have to execute a special lot combination to allow for the credit of the principal structure on Lots 1 and 2. Exhibit J designates the various lakeshore setback zones and the allov.ed hardcover amounts within each one of those zor.es. Development of this lot would appear quite consistent with adjacent property at 4125 Oak Street, variance review approved by the City 4/11/83. Alsc review Exhibit H, the proposal appears consistent with recently approved building sites in the immediate Summit Park neighborhood. Access to the Property is via the umimproved platted section of right- of-way of Oak Street. Three existing residences are served by the roadway now maintained by residents (review Exhibit I). The current application would now add an additional unit for a total of four. In a recent review, Planning Commission members stated that they could not continue on with this review until the final improvement of Oak Street was resolved. It is the City's position that there will be no improvement or upgrading of Oak Street until the City receives a petition from all four property owners asking for that upgrading. The City will not initiate a public improvement project unless all involved property owners also seek the improvement. I have been contacted by at least two of those property owners who conten3 that they do not want anything changed within the area. For the official record, the applicant does not own the property to the north. The property to the north remains in the ownership of the: former Mrs. Williams. Applicant has no control over the parcel to thf! north. Staff Recommendation - To approve the lot area and lot width variances renewal application for Thomas R. Williams based on the following findings: 1. The property received approval by the City in 1969 and 1979 for the same variances. There have been no addition or amendments of the Zoning Code that would alter the findings of the 1979 review. 2. The property has been assessed one sewer unit and a sewer stub has been provided for the property. 3. The development of this site is consistent with recent lot area and lot width variances granted to lots within the immediate surrounding neighborhood. 4. 6,100 s.f. of additional ar-a is provided in Lot 1, Plock 4, Minnetonka Summit Park, although cannot be credited because it is divided by the umimproved right-of-way. Zoning File #1248 March 10, 1988 Page 3 of 3 AF roval is subject to the following conditions: 1. Lots 1 and 2, Block 5, Minnetonka Summit Park must be legally combined prior to iss»ance of a building permit. 2. If accessory structures are proposed for Lot 1, Block 4, Minnetonka Summit Park at some time in the future, the owner must apply for a special lot combination to seek credit of the principal structure on combined Lots 1 and 2. 3. Future owner is placed on notice that no variances will b.: granted for the residential development of this property based on this current review finding no difficulties with the physical development of this property. 4. Access to the site shall remain via the private drive located within a public dedicated right-of-way to continue to be maintained by the property owners served by such driveway and it is the future owner's responsibility to share in the upkeep and maintenance of that driveway. Zoning File #1248 March 23, 1988 Additional Comments — March 23, 1988 Staff reviewed the proposed building envelope of the subject property locating the average setback line. Planning Commission members noted that they located the staked building envelope at the site. Members once again questioned the use of the private driveway now to be served with a total of 4 residences. Staff advised that the City had no intention of upgrading the public road way unless all benefitting property owners F �titioned for the improvement. Mr. Hommeyer, an affected neighbor, was in attendance at the meeting, and advised that he completely supported no change from the current private driveway. Hommeyer asked for confirmation that current driveway be allowed to remain and the private maintance to continue. The minority opinion of one based disappoval of the application on the City's position to not address the issue of the road way and the lack of a comprehensive policy that would deal with such road uses in public dedicated rights of way. The majority opinion approved the staff recommendation. The approving resolution has been drafted per the Planning Commission re :emendation. 0 City of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE ITY COUNCIL NO. A RESOLUTION GRANTING VARIAI:(_ES TO MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 10.24, SUBDIVISION 5 (B) FILE #1248 WHEREAS, Thomas R. Williams (hereinafter "the applicant") is the owner of the property located at 4127 Oak Street within the City of Orcno (hereinafter "City") and legally described as Lots 1 and 2, Block 5, a,-d Lot 1, Block 4, Minnetonka Summit Park, Hennepin County, Minnesota (hereinafter "the property"); and WhERF.AS, the applicant has applied to the City for renewal variances to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.24, Suadivision 5 (B) to confirm the buildability of the property consisting of 24,400 square feet or 0.56 acre-- in area instead of the required 43,560 square feet or 1 acre, requiring an area variance of 19,160 square feet of 43% and measuring 75 feet in width at the rear c` the street yard setbac;, line instead of 140 feet requiring a 60 foot or 46% variance. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono, Minnesota: FINDINGS 1. This application was review 1 as Zoning File #1248. 2. The property is locate--' in the LR-'-B Lakeshore Residential Zoning 7.1strict. 3. 7'w Orono Planning Commission reviewed this application on Marc 21, 11)8'? a• + •ecommended approval of the proposed variances bases upo tie fol low- ridings: A) The property received approval from the City in 1969 and 1979 for the same area and lot width variances. There h-a heen no additions or amendments of the zoning code that. would .r the findings of the 1979 review. B) The property has bean as3essed one sewer unit and a --ewer stub has been provided for the property. C) The development of this site is consistent with recent lot area and lot width variances granted to lots within the immediate surroun('ing ;neighborhood. Page 1 nf 4 „ A City of ORONO � RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. -- D) 6500 squpre feet of additional area is provided in Lot 1, Block 4 , Minnetonka Summit Park, although cannot be credited against the area requirements because the lot is divided by the unimproved right-of-way of Ridge Place. 4. The City Council has considered this application including the findings and recommendations of the Planning Commission, reports by City staff, comments by the applicant and the effect of the proposed variance on the health, safety and welfare of the community. 5. The City Council finds that the conditions existing on this property are peculiar to it and do not apply generally to other prcperties in this zoning district; that granting the aariances would not adverse_y affect traffic conditions, light, air nor pose a fire hazard or other danger to neighboring properties; would not merely serve as a convenience to the applicant, but is necessary to alleviate a demonstrable hardship or difficulty; is necessary to pre- serve 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 C'ty. CONCLUSIONS, ORDER AND CONDITIONS Based upon one or more of the above findings, the Orono City Council !ereby grants variances per Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.24, Subdivision 5 (B) to confirm the buildability of the property that requires an area variance of 43% and a lot width variance of 46%, s ict to the following conditions. 1. Lot 1 and Block 5 must be legally combined prior to the issuance of a tu, Wing permit for new ^.onstruction. 2. If accessory structures are proposed fo Lot 1, Block 4, Minnetonka Summit Park, at :-ome time in the futur.., the owner must apply for a special lot co,abination to seek credit of the principal residence on combined sots 1 and 2. 3. Future owner is placed on notice that no variance wi'1 be granted for t1.e residential development of this property based on this current review which found no diffic;.lties with the physicai development of this site. 4. Access to the site shall remain via the pr i vale 'rive located within the public dedicated right-of-way and to coneinuA tc be maintained by the property owners served by suc', driveway. It is the fut..irt, propert. owner's responsibility to sh3r in the upkeep and• ma i n, viiance of that driveway. Page 2 of 4 a Cit3r of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL n NO. -----.,— f� 4 S. Authorities granted by this resolution run with the property not with the applicant, but are permissive only and must be excercised by an application for a building permit within one year of the date of Council approval or this variance app. 1 will expire Dn that date ',March 28, 1989>. 6. Violation of or ncn-compliance with any of the terms and conditions of this resolutior shall constitute a violation of the zoning code, shall a I-omatically terminate any auti—rity granted herein, and shall be pi—ishable as a misdemeanor. 7. The -ndersigned applicant has read, understood and hereby agrees to the te..,is of this resolution and on bmb- I f of himself, his h,.Ars, successors and assigns, hereby agrees t, the recording cf this resolution in the chain of title of the oropercy. Adopter] by the Orono City Counc in this 28th day of Merch, 1988. hTTEST- - ----------- --- -- -- ----- -------------------- -- ------------ Dorothy M. Hall�n, City Clerk James R. G:abek, M;�o� - ----- --------- Prop!-ty r neri9}------- Page 3 of 4 CITY OF ORONO - VARIANC PLIC ''ION '�� �•,;,�`� r'" Initial Application Fee $150.00 ($5U.0U per each additional variance) Renewal Variance Fee $75.00 (no change from original application) After -the -Fact Fees (Double application fee) ---------------•------------------------------------------ - CITY OF ORON0 PROPERTY LOCAT.'.ON FINALE OFFICE "A.11-21 . 1W".00000 N Site Address XXXX Oak Street, Orono 01 CEN 75.00 06-111-23-41-0029, LL 75.00 Proper+ antification Number (P.I.D. ) 06-117-23-41-0033, 06-117 ( N,k' YOU Please cherck one - Property X abstract or torrens? R0040 C001 R01 715.03 012/,2.1/36 Attach legal description to application if not included on required survey. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- APPLICANT Phone ( home ) 473-2631 Name THOMAS R. WILLIAMS, JR. Phone (work) 473-1536 Address: 1831 Yuma Lane North City: Plymouth, Mn. Zip: 55447 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- OWNER (if different than applicant) Phone (home) Name SAME Phone (work) Address: City: Zip: Date Property Acquired (month/year) I (do) (do not) also own the adjacent parcels of land. -------------------------------------------------------------------------- PTi ESEZIT USE OF PROPERTY Present Zoninq District Present Use of Property vacant Residential Other (specify) _ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST Estimated Construction Cost $ Describe request in detail: variance requested for minimum buildable lot size --------------------------------------------------------------------------- VARIANCES REQUIRED X Lot Area X Lot Width Hardcover Setback Variances ( Front Side Re-+r) cat her HARDSHIP Describe undue hardship or practical difficulty resulting enforcement of zoning regulations: cannot be sold as buildable without variance for lot size from strict lot --------------------------------------------------------------------------- DESCRIPTION OF UNUSUAL PROPERTY CONDITIONS Describe unusual property conditions p:.eventing compliance with Zoning Code Requirements: none other than size --------------------------------------------------------------------------- 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 size' envelopes (()10) pre -addressed to each of the names on the above -ist 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 applica A on 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 Signat uDate OWNERS SIGNATURE The owner hereby ackowledges and agrees to this application and further authorizes reasonable entry onto the property by City staff, ccnsultants, agents, Commission members, and Council members for purposes of investiga- tion and verification of this request. owner's Signature Date Applicant must have all submittals into the City offices 25 days before the Planning Commission Meeting. Planning Commission Meetings are held on the third Monday of eac;i 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 Auiiding & .'.oninq office of this change prior to the meeting. Burnet MINNETONKA OFFICE 19400 HIGHWAY 7 EXCELSIOR. MN 55331 (612) 4742525 January 28, 1988 City of Orono 1335 South Brown Road Orono, Mn. 55391 Attention: Jeanne Mabusth Re: Thomas R. Williams Vacant Parcels 06-117-23-41-0029 06-117-23-41-0033 06-117-23-41-0034 Dear Jeanne: Pursuant j ctir ^hore conversation, please be advised that Merrill Lynch Realty Burnet, and I, as its agent, represent Thomas R. Williams in the sale of the following property: 06-117-23-41-0029 06-117-23-41-0033 06-117-23-41-0034 commonly known as 41xx Oak Street, Orono. Thomas R. Williams is the sole owner of the subject property per decision of the Court rendered December 22, 1987. Please forward to me a);?ication for variance for the purpose of constructing a home on said property, and any other pertinent information. SU/me cc: Mr. Thomas R. Williams 6l1: Very truly yours, Susan Dailey Realtor RUN DATE 02/08/88 BATCH 001 HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORMATION SYSTEM PROPERTY Ob01ERS LIST REPOT; NO. PI435401 EMM It I CERTIFY THAT THE FACTS REPRESENTED ARE AN ACCURATE AND TRUE REPRESENTATION OF INFORMATION AS IT APPEARS THIS DATE ON THE PECC^DS OF THE HENNEPIN COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF PROy�RTY TAXATION, TO THE EEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE AND BELIEF. 7 Ll't 1� DATE,LI! Y� BY =/ 1 IV o a r; :%ACT C �. TM ES TES 'J - - S •� 3 TAIRD-�',�;_.� U Qa� (3J _ . °. . .-• _ •• -. _- 1� .� ur�.a l_ � _�• � 1^•J4 C ADD. • ~' ��`�'- �� � w ^ r` TRACT "A IUADEVE O D 1 ` p Q 14 i _ 2(WO) °Ml C ) 13 6oti %-I D�It' 10, 12 DAM {. ` 1_I _' ZI St; `,. jG`s�q') (dl g/ _ l36' ,, yam,_ ..�,• 2 Q \\ � �111� is �- •-T �, (�?�'S:'-- � ••� 1 (X') � 3 Z s I�7 _) 1�0_ O r , , � 13 13 00 L4 V ELM. ; r .,x 1r 1 •R y �.. 11 ... yt5 � .e � �j.,� .� r•� ., 1�l1• • 1 a Iry Y _ (s. , ONK4 kip 1 p 11I1:'1T:7' CP /. PEGULAII MEETING HELD JULY 28, 1969 Pa re 2 0, '. 1, s r..wcci, rrnnZ:I seconded, that the BUILDING PERMIT rc u^..t of the Ton':-t L'cst Dcvolopn: nt 2475 Shad,oaood no^d C- '-.7 for s buillinr permit for an office 1i•ildinr at 247S Shadyaood Road, be t u.., proved. V.otion, Ayes (4) - flays (0). -^rles moved, Franzol seconded, that the •t^.mot oa LJ�!rott Geyen, dba G. f,.s. }nnt-, 3S�0 Slv)rcline Drive, for a ia:tee to erpand the cabinet shop onto tot 1S be approved. Motion, Ayes (4) - M-75 (b�. c roved, Stubb,, seconded, that the t t o: Everett Geyr_n, dba G. t, S. `:::tsg to use Lots 11 C. 1.2 at 3599 Lyric -:nuo as a parking lot, be approved. ",tic", Ayes (4) - Nays (0). rr-nacl roved. Scirloz s"r_onded that tho r -tort of Joh7 Gunararud, 465 'ark Lane ^r'rtne Lots 1 4 2, Block S, MinnetonN I'r7l: for n building lot, with tha I:.: .:;ic n that ►itrnIcipal rarer be hooked i provided, be approved. t•icrtion, VARIANCE 3S96 Shoreline Dri.•r:t �AnritiG LOT 59�, Lyric Avcnu^ i C071ITfi.Tl0i! 465 Prrl: Lnno --d, rrnr.2c1 •-CV-rdod, that t' Loj!nr tiattson, 1074 Loran Litt: 1074 Loca Lindn Avcnuo fcr a front vr,ri once frGn ' to 21•, and a side cctbaek fron 10' to l 3' , be approved. ltotion, Ayes (4) - fIn ys (0) . i . 1 rev!; -I, rtut,bs ecconrInd, that the CUILDIN'; Pia;►+IT I 't: of tho Chill Oil Conpany for n Z420 ",itr.riywood Rord 1 1,1ing vrnit to con::truct a stcraro sheu L *: r 21 .S;t tdyu Sod Road, b? approved. ►+ation, Ayes (4) •Nays (f). Ecarics raved, Frenzel socorWed, that OPT)T? ;, !-fl. NO.106 `) Ordinance 'j.106, An Ordinance To Amend Chappter CO Cf 71.e ltunicil�nl Code Of Orcr 7•o itcrticttc Th^ uze Of fircnrms, be ,7 adoptckl. lotion, Ayes (4) - flays (0). Irt1nT^I r d, f�(`arIC3 YrCrnU .'r1 thlt Orrlln,�"� `n.lf+/, !!tt Arr111t••T,r., �'n Prnvi'� • i,u. Guwn t:_;;1'I1'i; C? 'i C,: ,' O CC- 17., JUL'! 10, 157) I1urr'r. r.-:d, t1r.7or V.-n 1' ., cccon•'-A, to a, ~).-ovQ tho v.^.7:ir1c2 rC .. ; c c : zac- na Milli,_ 10, :3 ; Tonl:--,:a RoA, :,,:r the Plc.nninq C.r:.iincion recom- /r-nclatien3 of Jung 11, 1970, aro: co-.bined lot n fit.: ro:^cl no a Luildinq Oita l:f council on auly 21J, 1^:2i loth r..-Untatncl co r_c., araL,) parc-,lol tcu,:-nf^ro 3ot nnl cu'ajnct rcc erty r.r^ dlvid^[! by .;, J lin:m I,R-]A to the north and -1'3 1-3 1'..r routht lots acrvod by .c:::r. !lotion, Aycz (3) 1.. _... (0) . V rc,-rad, Purr acr:nnrl^.d, to approve the r-,-.-,^t of Ch^rles CenY.l. .,, 21ri6 :hady,00d Rend, ...r. -I-:I of 617" ci,`: pnrd and 2715" front y r. for tl•n r , :: ;e or conr.crl atinq a ' �•' ' ;` : 3a, eu',jcet to no other varianccc, I:tiUwi, Ny%f j (3) - Maya (0). P,,r,i I, 455 P,tic Lnn^ 0400 Thon Yilli. me vii i1IM CL 2166 Shadywood Ajad C403 1.7..,. Burr C^con'^d, to tnlol o tl'-� r"nD^/ ' .71::t/::.. 1 ,.. ..L, 1410 r^`inn Point ro.'rl, C .. . 'L f, . . • _'AI rr,)ro in2orm ation in 1' 10 C .lrn. P,,in : r t ^••r • V: i 1'oot moved, llurr r.ccon•.ed, to table the Uhl••^y Avon I'.ocnhrtion until the n:::a tl;.) rr-lv-� ,t of Mr. Louin D. :y for Jci.;.o 1%;C1cary. !lotion, (3) ,y, (0). l' r Ili- i I' ^ : r:^Qd, Iturr r .cone'nd, to table tho :+ 1 .l 1 •:Lm lic-nno r-atil tll. , nc::t rc.,ulnr I'Aicn, Ayca (3) - I1ayu (0) . I 1, tt worw:y for I1T. harry Vorl: oZ v-•7 rranent to dincu- ;ion c,;;ic -, .;-_ 1 r _,:;.;.... _.i c :t a c-.voy ch-i- ing prroent t %:), 4 ' o1c✓atic-to 11r. Dauflan prc-ii•,cd to send to the City a trrittcn r,c *.I 0C t1r: 1(:?a) and factual airy :ntn to Lu;. -,rt hin r.rgr .;it for r::vinioa o: ordimiry hit li c:at^r mark. 1' jar Vr •t 1:..A r..-. ,4, 11nt3conlaim nc-,7nnad, to t1.-2 Vorth Coro Drl.vo tlarina ur,:.il a full Council is prorrmt. ttotion, Ayes 13) - llays (0) . tlayor Van 11cot m,acd, !!sect::: ;-to c::c�,id d, to t lblo t1t1 Gaylen Larina M. a no V-itil a fti1.1 Couticil in pi:c-;ent. ttotion, t,yvJ (3) - 14;17: (0) . SIUDY P' - 8T()BD C, MY N1'IM LICEirl. Comil Blom on" I1MIM LICE" i C1YL!::; t:.1MNA LICii1138 f Op rortlflrvto or ;'urv•r• for Rior'.1n k. kllilttrn, Jr. of ►rots 1 and ?, Mock. 5, r:icn.•tt,nku :,urp! t i t►r:r Honnar-in Count.., Virnnua',t, gm DAM � n �Ft 1\) w ,� � e t �fo .� i6d 2R1� Prat 7e�ti w,cls n' � 1 hnrnhv corti!~j Vwt Ulm l:, % iruo i.r•d rnrrar; r. rr.r., t.L.tlrn. t: b 0urvn) of On boimaMne or ..o,.0 1 t+nd 2, l4nrk 5, Ylr at"In's :'uan►t. httK. It Jnp6 rnt r':rpnrt t i r•!:av lrrrelw`:-crtm or onei-r2p ciatt. Unr on It. (u: l l r ii^,.. r.. tr •6 C�.119i 1" r 50 Rlvir !'.. ..•►r:,,r Ia. , ..•.1::y5 :"tt• s 4-1• 72 i.r urt SKETCH FOR THOMAS R. WTI.LIAMS, JR. r:' LOTS 1 & 2. BLOCK 5, AND LOT 1 BLOCK 4 MTNNETONKA SUMMIT PARK llr'NNFPlN COUNTY. MINNFSOTA 314 it qFc 35 le il -*�- 15 4J UATL : 1z-23-bi r4-vi z;--td t cw adjoining hvus--s 2-19-B." COFFIN A GRONBERG, INC. ENGINEERS, LAND SURVEYORS & PLANNERS LOW', LAVF*. MTNNI-�(�T'� 1:1 I, =yrlAC _ W h- i.ra��C W � a � �- IK w a:at �v Iq i+ a 01&II... !h M l `r / If U;, ln3• � J �y ,� e+r+e+ •err+eye•e�e.e•e.f»,••••rrff��rorf>�► - Lllri'+.��.�1e.� • / / J'• � tii ,,%, � ( ,'ate \ � _i ' ✓ �,�y •{ .. y �t Awl- � �• �` - a •`t, r, I yam" %� ' �r r • • of it it Sl • J ? •, 4 • 8 ♦ �• Ol r it s ....+ a� ♦ i t �+ C � � r I.1 Y r - / v.• r V � r J r "_-`coUINZM r!1NKAWA --40Ap -#40, 4-35 Rai- oil 1 7. ' i SKETCH FOR Y1 THOMAS R. WILLIAMS, JR. ,••E��,�' �;07) OF LOTS t 3 2, BLOCK 5, AND LOT 1 , BLOCK -i MINNFTONKA SUMMIT PARK } N i}�-.) HENNF.FIN COUNTY, MTNNF,SOTA x u � ' i d (� ° b to SI hlS o - - _ fio.f liwt.f-i, I.�� 3S �I 4Ir/�f — t S. •� �� ~N 1. R M UA t!: 11-L 3-t1 i COFFIN 6 GitnNRFRC,, INC. r-,%•:s-d to chow adjoi- ENGINEEkS, LAND SUR`:FYORS L F'L.Yt:tif:F 2-19-88 LONG 1..AVF, MTNWrcf-" TO: Planning Commission Chairman Kelley Planning Commission Members City Administrator Bernhardson FROM: Jeanne Mabusth, Building 6 Zoning Administrator DATE: March 10, 1988 SUBJ: #1250 Dana M. Wells, 1397 Orono Lanvv", s1�,._�, Public Hearing F • #NG Zoning District - LR-lA 14AR 2 8 19;13 To` 1 Area = 31,540 s.f. CITY Of Jij Uij1U Pertinent Ordinance - Section 10.23 Subd. 6(B) Required side yard = 30' Proposed side yard = 14' (existing side yard setback 11' for principal structure) Variance = 16' or 53% Review of Hardcover - Existing Hardcover 0-75' setback area = 0 s.f. 75-250' setback area: Allowed = 4,871 s.f. or 25% Existing = 4,134 s.f. or 21% 250-500' setback area: Allowed = 1,011 s.f. or 30% Existing = 2,000 s.f. or 59% Variance = 989 E.f. or 29% Proposed Hardcover 0-75' setback area = 0 s.f. 75-250' setback area: Allowed = 4,870 s.f. or 25% Proposed = 4,787 s.f. or 24.5% 250-500' setback area: Allowed = 1,011 s.f. or 30% Proposed = 975 s.f. or 29% No variance required with improvements List of Exhibits - A - Application B - Addendum C - Property Owners list D - Plat Mat? E - Adjacent Owner's Acknowledqment form F - Elevation G - Plan View H - Site Plan - Existinq I - Site Plan - Proposed Application N1250 March 10, 1988 Page 2 of 2 The applicant proposes a 22'x 21.5' garage addition to the :forth side of the existing residence. As applicant's addendum notes, the retaining walls adjacent to the driveway were destroyed in the storm of July 23rd of this past year. Applicant has restored the retaining walls in hopes of using the new walls as part of the structure of the new garage. As Ms. Wells points out, the existing ho:..e is 11' from the west side property line and garage addition will not encroach any closer within the substandard setback area. The improvements appear consistent witn the setbacks of other garage, and accessory structures within the adjacent Orono Lane properties. Certainly the required emergency separation of 10' is satisfied even with the encroachment of the adjacent house on the west side. The garage as it extends from the house is 14' from the side property line and as it moves northward it measures 15' from the side property line. ;'he applicant is in the process of major upgrading of the yard Ereas and the existing residence. During the review of the hardcover facts please note that almost the entire yard within the 250-500' setback area was gravel parkincj area. With the new plan there is more of a controlled access onto Orono Lane and a complete reduction in the driving and parking area, and will no longer require hardcover variances. Both adjacent neighbors have been notified of the proposed improvement and the City has received no negative comments from either property owner. The placement of the garage in relation to the adjacent higher elevation along the west property line will shield the proposed structure and lessen the visual impact. The existing vegetation also helps to lessen the impact. Staff Recommendation - To approve side setback variance of 16' or 53% for a proposed garage addition for the property located at 1397 Orono Lane based on the following findings and hardships: 1. The property is 106' wide and contains a total of 31,540 s.f. or .72 acres and is subject to the LR-lA lot standards that would require 2 acres in area and 200' of width. The current structure does not satisfy the 30' side setback on either the east or the west side. 2. The proposed structure does not ancroach any further into the substandard side setback area. 3. The elevations and plantin<Is along the west side property line lessen the visual impact of the proposed structure. 4. The applicant has reduced the hardcover within the 250- 500' setback area, thereby reducing hardcover by approximately 1,025 s.f. or 30%. 5. The improvement appears consistent with the pattern of development within the immediate neighborhood. Zoning File #1250 March 22, 1988 Page 3 of 3 Additional Comments and Planning Commission Recommendation - Planning Commission unanimously adopted the staff's approving recommendation of the variance application of Dana Wells. The enclosed resolution has been drafted per the Planning Commission recommendation. City of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. A RESOLUTION GRANTING A VARIANCE TO !MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 10.23, SUBDIVISION 6(B) FILE #1250 WHEREAS, Dana M. Wells (hereinafter "the applicant") is owner of the property located at 1397 Orono Lane within the City of Orono (hereinafter "City") and legally described as follows: Exhibit A (hereinafter "the property"); and WHEREAS, the applicant ;as applied to the City for a variance to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.23, Subdivision 6(B) to permit the construction of an attached garage located 14' from the side property line instead of the required 30'. Applicant seeks approval of a 16' variance or 53%. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono, Minnesota: FINDINGS 1. This application was reviewed as Toning File #1250. 2. The property is located in the LR-lA Lakeshore Residential Zoning District and requires a minimum of 2 acres in area and 200' of lot width. The property consists of 31,540 s.f. or .72 acres and 106' in width. 3. The Orono Planning Commission reviewed this application on March 21, 1986, and recommended approval of the proposed variance based upon the following findings and hardships: a) The property is 1r wide and contains a total of 31,540 s.f. or .72 acres a subject to the LR-lA lut standard that would requirt acres in area and 200' of width. The current structure d(- s not satisfy the 30' side setback on either the east or the west side. b) The proposed structure does not encroach any further into the substandard side setback area. c) The elevatiGns and plantings along the west side property line lessen the visual impact of the proposed structure. Page I of 4 City of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. d) The applicant has reduced the hardcover within the 250- 500' setback area, thereby reducing hardcover by approximately 1,025 s.f. or 30%. e) The improvement appears consistent with the pattern of development within the immediate neighborhood. 4. The City Council has considered this application including the findings and recommendations of the Planning Commission, reports by City staff, comments by the applicant and the effect of the proposed variance on the health, safety and welfare of the cor,,munity. 5. The City Council finds that the conditions existing on this property are peculiar to it and do not apply generally to other property in this zoning district; that granting the variance would not adversely affect traffic conditions, light, air nor pose a fire hazard or other danger to neighboring property; would not merely serve as a convenience to the applicant, but is necessary to alleviate a demonstrable hardship or difficulty; is necessary to preserve a substantial property right of the applicant; and would be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan of the City. CONCLUSIONS, ORDER AND CONDITIONS Based upon one or more of the the above findings, the Orono City Council hereby grants a variance to the Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.23, Subdivision 6(B) to permit the construction of an attached garage to the existing residence that will be located 14' from the west side property line instead of the required 30' subject to the following conditions: 1. Authorities granted by this variance run with the property not with the applicant, but are permissive only and must be exercised by application for a building permit within one year of the date of Council approval, or this variance will expire on that date (March 28, 1989). 2. Violation of or non-compliance with any of the terms and conditions of this variance shall constitute a violation of the zoning code, shall automatically terminate any authority granted herein, and shall be punishable as a misdemeanor. }'aCJr' 2 of 4 City of ORO O RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 3. The undersigned applicant has read, understood and hereby agrees to the terms of this resolution and on behalf of herself, her heirs, successors and assigns, hereby agrees to the recording of this resolution in the chain of title of the property. Adopted by ti c Orono City Council on tkAs 28th day of March, 1988. ATTEST: Dorothy M. Hallin, City Clerk James R. Grabek, Mayor Property Owner(s) EXHIBIT A RESOLUTION NO. l,ot 9, Hocees on Brown's Bay, ru:ei that. part of (kwernnwnt Lot. 3, Section 2, Township 117, Range 23, described n,; follows: Ile -ginning at the Southwesterly cornt.r of Lot. 9 in Homes on brown's Bay, r:hich said Southweaterly corner is the point of intersection of the Westerly line of said I,ut 9, with the shore line of dike Minnetonka; thence Northerly along the Westerly line of said I.ot 9, seines on Hroe:n's• &ay, to the Southerly line of the Wayzata :uld Spring Park Rozul; thence Westerly along said Southerly line to a point. which is I08.00 feet due rw t form the West line of Said G wernrraent Lot 3; thence Southerly learnl lel to the west line of said Goverrunmt l,ut 3 to the, shore of bike Minnetonka; t.hvnre Easterly slung the shore of said lake to Iwizirming, according to the map or plat thereof on file arai of record in the off ice of the Register of Deedx in and for the County of Hennepin aril State of Mirviesot.a including any part or lx)rtion of wiy street or alley adjacent to the premises herein convevM heretofore vat-nted. Also Ti-not A, Reegistored hail Sua•ey No. 191. lL CITY OF ORONO - VARIANgJ*PI. , TIJg"; Initial Application Fee,$150.00 ($50.00 per each additional variance) Renewal Variance Fee $75.00 (no change from original application) ".fter-the-Fact Fees (Double application fee) PROPERTY LOCATION Site Address � `( '1 L ► „r, Lca s IE._ Property Identification Number (P.I.D.) Please check one - Property I_ abstract or �_ torrens? Cirr of orfox FINMEE OFFICE 0 01 ra 150.00 CHECK . TL 150.00 RECEIPT -THANK YOU ttO&W C001 R01 T10:1 0114S/1( Attach legal description to application if not included o;: required survey. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- APPLICANT Phone ( home o. I d %r1 Name T) A N h w c-_ ( c _ Phone ( work) 'i 1 S - " c�• Address: i')`T'l f' t'(14- -• L AR City: Wu. L, t,.I J-1 Zip: ----------------------- - OWNER (if different than applicant) Phone (home) Name Phone (work) Address: City: Zip: Date Property Acquired Fig,+ G (month/year) I (do) (do not) also own the adjacent parcels of land. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- PRESENT USE OF PROPERTY Present Zoning District Present Use of Property V0007ftsidential Other (specify) --------------------------------------------------------------------------- DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST Estimated Construction Cost $ Describe request in detail: --------------------------------------------------------------------------- VARIANCES RNQUIRED Lot Area Lot Width Setback Variances ( Front Other Hardcover A R. Side Rear) HARDSHIP Describe undue hardship or practical difficulty resulting from strict enforcement of zoning regulations: S-e- e ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- DESCRIPTION OF UNUSUAL PROPERTY CONDITIONS Describe unusual property conditions preventing compliance with Zoning Ccde 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. $. Topographic survey (existing and proposed elevations) if any changes in existing grade are proposed. )F. Plat flap (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. dditi nal_items as may be requested by City stiff. ------DA.4.& ------------------------------------------------------- The Applicant and Property Owner must sign this application. Please remember that your variaice 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 Zo-..ing 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 t 1� ��� ` �_C� Date OWNERS SIGNATURE The owner hereby ackowledges and agrees to this application and further authorizes reasonable entry onto the property by City staff, consultants, agents, Commission members, and Council members for purposes of investiga- tion and verification of this request. Owner's Signature Date a ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Applicant must have all submittals into the City effices 25 days before the Planning Commission Meeting. Planning Commission Meetings are held on the third Monday of rach month. Applicants must be present at al I scheduled review meetings of the Planning Commission and Council. If an applicant is unable to attend a scheduled meeting, E•lease make arrangements to have an -iuthorizeci agfnt attend in your place and to advise the Puilding 6 Zoning Office of this change prior to the meeting. +JL `se`ct�t C Kee t.ct a (LTC cat c FI Q l C. LA 5 tAA 4� t }• 1L (g 1't •�l �}t }Lc l m t O. , r� l t l� �cf. Q Q 3 C (A ���L�y �CL<<',1& I r�rC�U '.�► rs t't it C I (e' apt tt ��� c� c��v ct u 4 �t_� c{'v cw 116-al kL ��Q `c tl `� O t tc� c� C►Y CJC7a �1 �Y.Q e� - sa , h I aTa I r,,,� t. t7t_a_�� - `N V, a k u- h`� n t vi n a� -" ea x �ttt.'I-f,c t C otA uLI et (�c t �(� �C,��'� o •tea. Vt uLIt`t 4-tAa4� lA-t_ .max t.)tt�� t�Ptl"Po IL k- Vs Inc 11(" 0 t t. ({. I) I . tI., e(, I� RUN DATE 02/19/88 BATCH 003 38 02-117-23 31 0011 PROP A'')OR 06W 9 NA II E DWARO H A JEAN HAM TAOPAYER EDWARD H A JEAN HAM NAME/ADOR 408 ST PETER ST ST PAUL Mr 55102 36 02-117-23 34 0807 v ADCR 01317 ORONO LA —to HAtE DANA M WELLS TA. -PATER DANA M WELLS NA'& /ADOR 1397 ORONO LANE WAYZATA MN SS391 PROP ADCR .:.EC NAME TA-PA.E7 TOTAL BATCH 003 00006 14AME.'ADCR HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORMATION SYSTEM PROPERTY OWNERS LIST 38 02-117-23 34 0005 01389 ORONO LA HENRY W SEE ETAL HENRY W SEE 1389 ORONO LANE WAYZATA MN 55391 38 02-117-23 34 0008 013" ORONO LA MARIAN LOMAX KELLEY .1IAN LOMAX KELLEY 1399 ORONO LANE WAYZATA MN 55391 REPORT NO. PI435401 PAGE 6 38 02-117-23 34 0006 01395 ORONO LA KOPWEST BK MPLS-NTL ASC TRST NORWEST BK MPLS-TP.UST RE DIV 8TH ST A MARQUETTE AVE MPLS MN 55479 38 02-117-23 34 001,', 01355 SHORELINE DR D A M JOHNSON DOUGLAS D A MARY M JOHNSON 1355 SHORELINE OR WAYZATA MN 55391 I CERTIFY THAT THE FACTS REPRESCNTED ARE AN ACCURATE AND TRUE REPRESENTATION OF INFORMATION AS IT APPEARS THIS DATE ON THE RECORDS OF THE HENNEPIN COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF PROPERTY TAXATION, T HE B«T OF MY KNOWLEDGE AND BELIEF. DATr�42 "BY 1� Af _oz 5 }-. ' //////jam � •.,'`�� - / � ` �. �. -�. — -- _ — QROovo a os 4 es _„� _ • ' iP S BOY L XE •c _� Z MC 304 4( s "1 s wi 0- Adjacent Property owners' Acknowledgement Form I (we) have reviewed the plans for the proposed improvement or proposed use of the property located at ( 3 q -7 6 RQ Up L AV E also referred to as Land Use Application No. I (we) understand that in executing this acknowledgement, 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 pro- posed neighbor's project or use requires City Council a;proval. n Prop rty ner Date ele f rw1 Property Owner Date If you have any information that may assist the City in the review of this Land Use Application, please submit your comments to the Buildinq 6 Zoning Office at least 10 days prior to the scheduled meeting date. F9 :�� :, path. W. flr EXISTING STRUC 22-0 EXISTING STOOP ........ ................................. ................................... ........ ......................... ........ .............................. . ............. .......................... ........ ................ .............. ........... ........ ......... ........ ...... .... ................... ... ... .................... ..... .......................... ............................ ...... ... .......................... ......... , , , * .... .......... ....................... ........... . ......... ..................... .. ........... .............. ......... .................. * * * " , ........... ................. ............... .......... . ...... ................... ..... ..................... ow. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . APP .'GRADE.`.- WX ...... ................... .............. ............... .... ................. .......................... .. ............. .................... .................................. . ..................... ............ . ................... ............... ..................... ............ 6.. .................... .................................... ............... .. ........ I .............. ............... ................... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . e % e eVe % e%o % t . . . . . . ... . . . . . ------_---- ......................................................... WEST ELEVATION GARAGE FOR: DANA WELLS 1397 ORONO LN ORONO MN k,,�j C, I') (F 'LAW uiEuj RUBBER MEMBRANE OYER 3/4" TAG PLYYD � =NSu.LAr�o*t GARAGE FOR: DANA WELLS 1397 ORONO LN ORONO MN Ex�r�" ` L q -- - -,a6. / B f I _ .Slorg9G '� 7 • _ Bo . • �14r:c.� y�,o1 1 �� I r � r 16ywj �I Y li e 3 I V h 298 _ — N J ^ h No4sa / . --3- n.� � __ .�! a• tv � Peck � Q kn tnn f, o �s " � I r o a L V� •:; I I c� h I tit—. J L M dOd46------------- I I 1* rN 10 t ^ Shore! BRoI✓N'5 BA Y LAKE MINN ETONKA tossO I M ew N E , Q �0 Slog9e Y y \ k \0 J e � TB c p1 T ' IN 3•�� �� at's I N I \ r about I, 1 Y a 81143 ' f A% P V ti 190 tv „ ^ .1 ! Kl p � , D [ • �h y x•o l Ex + ' Nouea kn o h OOl o h oe •_� I I , .. 4b e --- } -i--�' - - - - --- -- Z--1 • _ I - - t t _ ,l4 90_ • Ex,ef� _J l M l�o...t /,nc BROLI/N "s BAY LAKE MINNETONKA _ ORONO N E r • N N I p i0 /f !T ip -,CALC IN FEET •tr. BROW✓ "5 BA Y LAKE MINNErONKA I 1 #'Ir L.�G Pore HARDCOVER w 0-75 ION£' TOTAL .50 FT. a 0 75' ZLNr£ = O,ttu HARDCOVER 75'-isO ION£= 4,707 st 1t - .•7 TOTAL 50 FT .•• 75-250 ZONE' 1Y, 185 HARDIOVER ^� 250 F..s 10/J£ : 971 T5 OTAL 0 FT . .5o 0.jp i3vE - -3371 TOTAL s0 FT — PAR<.CL ° 3I,540 1 Mrrty .,rttfy Imt th- iw w t— rd fur f r.PFM.t�l rra. .,I _. tturv.r of tM Rwadwrtrnr of: Int !, Mar•': •• Arm'• W', —1 tw P-1 serum 2. r.,.et•ntP t17, R.r.rtr• zi. •+•..�rto.n .. t If•ttrvrtnt H tJrr lre.f h.e rl) r:n+rY of lint 1 to 14 . r • �• !y, rn t.�h *w:d 4wrtAr•wterl) rr:nrr • Utv 1^ ., r,r-. of tM Y•w4 rlY ILM of rtd lot 'i, rtlJt 1M t x nl In- :-•• Mtnrinrtla; tl.nrra N 0-1Y wl.•W tlr y.wrpl JI.rr .I •nt,r 7, Rw tw Ar.wn'* P.Y. "' lM 4{.rtn/ FrTlt Rrrt; tMne• Yr•trrl )' wlr•y rrd .-,t!-r t:. r r. - p..nt MtAt t• Iplt.110 Iret .hu ! t fwr. t/.I. .t Irn 1 -.. G..•nrvt Ixt !; tivm• N.ut Mrl) lrrwl lrl t .• i :+ •wrd linwltF•nt Int J to tl..- .hrr•' of IwA• , •• r. •n^-' F.ut.•rlY I.W thr dur. of —111 • to bi.,... :-t•-. tM wnP w pint tfutwpf m ftl• wr.e ef' t••r .a r:. .r. t iWt•ter td 6.dw to wl•t t.rr v+• rata/Y ..} r+, •• .. . . Nitrr•wnu in'Irtttl/ rtn•' P. •x Itarl t�•r wd,J.—t Ur ft� tR•�rrM Mr Trwrt A, tt.•trr••: :.ud ;,m.Y AM of tJr Irwattm .:t wtl hrt ldiM•, tlr'r'n•,n. 111h dwy of Iww.mb. Iirtt.terM 1A d 1 , tlttrr++at� I.tr. to. : To: Planning Commission Chairman Kelley 1 a"`n'� ' Orono Planning Commission Members '1 City Administrator Bernhardson jf,AR 2 8 191,.9 From: Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building & Zoning Administrator Date: March 14, 1988 CITY Ot undNO Subject: #1251 Audrev Schultz, Vacation of Vine Place & Forest Boulevard - Public Hearing Pertinent ordinance - Section 10.12 - Vacation of Streets, Alleys, and Public Grounds. Partial vacation of Forest Boulevard, the remainder of Vine Place and portion of a park, Saga Hill Revised, plat. List of Exhibits Exhibit A - Application Exhibit B - Plat Mao Exhibit C - Property Owners List Exhibit D - Petitior for Partial Vacation Exhibit E - Legal Descriptions Exhibit F - Engineering Report Exhibit G - DNR Report Exhibit H -- Nelso. Letter Exhibit I - Plat Dap of Area to be Vacated Exhibit J - Wetlands Map Exhibit K - As -Built - Sewer Exhibit L - Survey of Vine Place/Forest Boulevard - Location of Shoreline Review of Application - Per Section 10.12, the City has published the required two legal notices for the proposed partial vacation of Forest Boulevard, the remainder of Vine Place and portions of a park of the Saga Hill Revised plat. The vacation is a partial vacation involving nine properties. Staff has no knowledge as t.c why owners of Lots 4, 5, 6, 7, and 8, Block 15, Saga Hill Revised, refer to Exhibit L, did not wish to be included in current application. Staff finds no public purpose in maintaining the undeveloped or unimproved portions of the subject areas, review Exhibit F. The vacation of Forest Avenue in an earlier planning decision would prohibit_ the _nstallation of a public roadway - at least a connecting through road not to mention the steep topographies and the lake that occupies the majority of the defined road bed. Staff has enclosed as-builts of the existing sewer lines (Exhibit K) and the wetlands map (Exhibit J) confirming no wetlands or existing utility lines within the subject area. The DNR Department of Public Waters advises no concern with the propose4 vacation and in a telephone conversation with Jim Lawler of the DNR Bureau of Lands, he also confirms no concern with the proposed application as long as there is no construction proposed within the subject area. Orono staff advised that based on our setback standards of 751, there could be no new construction within the subject area. Zoning File #1251 March 14, 1988 Page 2 of 3 Staff has cuwiewod the proposed application with the City Attorney's office and asked if there was any problem with vacating portions of the unimproved right-of-way rather than asking for a total vacation. The Attorney's office advised that State Statute does not establish standards for partial or total vacations and that the City coul_! approve the partial vacation of the applicants or indeed the total vacation of Forest Boulevard citing that it would be more efficient and create less problems in the future if the total vacation was approved by the City. In reviewing Mr. Nelson's concern (Exhibit H), clearly this current application would create no problem for Mr. Nelson. R view Exhibit I, technically, the only legal access to Nelson's property ?_s via unimproved Forest Boulevard. At the time Oak Place was vaca'=ed, the access to Lot 3 was a private driveway within Oak Pace right-of-way. Nelson was not granted easements prior to the vacation. It is intereat_ng to note that in Mr. Nelson's previous application in 1986, that sought a variance for the construction of a detached garage, that this issue was not raised, as part of that application did indeed involve the difficult access via the current driveway that serves the property. If the current application is approved as proposed, Mr. Nelson's problem may have to be resolved via other means. The City actually has three options of action involving the present request for vacation, as follows: 1. Approve the current partial vacation. 2. Approve also a partial vacation but include Lots 4, 5, 6, 7, and 8, Block 15 and table formal action by the Planning Commission until staff is able to advise the specific owners - we do not want to create another problem as was created for Mr. Nelson in the previous vacation of Oak Place. 3. Total vacation of Forest Boulevard, vine Place and the park of Saga Hill Pevised. Staff would then recommend that we once again table action on the current proposal in order to contact each of the subject properties in order to resolve any access problems that may result with the complete vacation. Note that the City will not vacate that portion of Buff Street or Summit Avenue but would maintain the 50' corridors to the lakeshore as fire lanes. This action is consistent with previous vacations. Staff Reco® ndation - Staff would recommend approval of the proposed vacation based on the following findings: 1. The steep topography and location of the shoreline of Forest Lake within the platted right-of-way would prohibit road construction. 2. There are no existing utilities within the subject area nor are any utilities planned within this area in the future. Zon:.ng File #1251 March 14, 1988 Page 3 of 3 3. There are no drainageways or protected wetlands within the subject area. 4. The areas of Forest Boulevard, Vine Place and the park of Saga Hill Revised serve no current public purpose and not futLre public purpose or need. 5. The vacation of Forest Avenue prohibits installation of Forest Boulevard as a through road. If Planning Commission recommends the partial vacations as proposed, the application may be acted on and presented for Council's formal action. If Planning Commission wishes to expand on the present application, staff would suggest that we table action until all affected property owners have been contacted. If total vacation of Forest Boulevard is proposed, then indeed problems such as Mr. Nelson's must be resolved prior to scheduling it before Council for final action. Additional Comments and Planning Commission Recommendation - 3/23/88 Planning Commission listened to the comments of other property owners with lots that abut Forest Blvd. and not included with the formal application. They questioned whether the City would consider all of Forest Blvd. exclusive of the 50' fire lanes (Buff St. and Summit Ave.). Staff advised that Forest Blvd. no longer served any public purpose and that the City could consider both the proposed partial vacation or the complete vacation, but that if a total vacation is considered, staff would have to table the application to allow additional time to review the impact on the adjoining properties. In addition, start would have to determine the need for legal publication., survey information, and need for additional fees. It was clear that the majority of property owners present did not wish to do any additional survey work or pay fees. The applicant, Audrey Schultz, advised that she represented one of the nine applicants who had been prohibited from making additions to their home because the mortgage company refused to approve the refinancing because of the Forest Blvd. issue. She advised the Planning Commission that she had contacted as many neighbors as she could but she soon realized that there were some that had no intention of entering into the application and asked the Planning Commission to please act on the proposed application rather than delay her client any longer. Planning Commission agreed and advised the other remaining property owners to continue to work with staff so that the total vacation of Forest Blvd. could be realized at some future time. Planning Commission Recommendation - Planning Commission accepted the staff findings and conclusions regarding the proposed vacation, and approved the partial vacation as presented by Ms. Schultz. The enclosed nine resolutions will be filed against the chain of title of eacti of the subject properties upon official approval of the Council. City of ORO O RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. A RESOLUTION VACATING AN UNUSED PORTION OF FOREST BOULEVARD WITHIN THE PLAT OF SAGA HILL REVISED, SECTION 7, TOWNSHIP 117, RANGE 23 IN THE CITY OF ORONO, MINNESOTA WHEREAS, the City of Orono is a municipal corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of Minnesota; and WHEREAS, on February 26, 1988, Peter H. Lanpher and Diane Lanpher filed a petition with the City of Orono requesting the vacation of a portion of Forest Boulevard originally dedicated in the Plat of Saga Hill Revised legally described as follows: That part of vacated Forest Boulevard as dedicated in the plat of "Saga Hill Revised, Hennepin County, Minnesota" which lies between the Northwesterly extensions across it of the Southwesterly and Northeasterly lines of Lot 8, Block 6, "Saga Hill Revised, Hennepin County, Minnesota"; and WHEREAS, after due published and posted notice, a public hearing was held before the City Planning Commission on March 21, 1988, regarding said vacation -Lnd all interest-d persons were given an opportunity to be heard; and WHEREAS, after due standing and consideration, the Planning Commission recommended approval of the requested vacation and the Council of the City of Orono finds that said vacation as proposed, is in keeping with the public interest in consideration of the following findings: 1. The vacation does not affect the access or the use of adjoining properties. 2. The City has not and does not intend to develop, improve, or use the dedicated right-cf-way of Forest Boulevard for road purposes. 3. The City has not and does not intend to maintain or install utilities within the dedicated right-of-way of Forest Boulevard. 4. The unimproved dedicated .ight-of-way as it exists serves no public purpose. Page 1 of 2 City of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL m NOW, THEREFORE BE IT ABSOLVED, that the petition of Peter H. Lanpher and Diane Lanpher is hereby granted and that the portion of Forest Boulevard legally described above is hereby vacated. The granting of the petition is subiect to the condition that upon vacation, applicants must combine vacated adjacent portion of Forest Boulevard with their property (Already combined Lot 8, Bl.,ck 6, ' t 9, Block 7, and a portion of vacated Oak Place, Saga Hill Revised, Henr . County, Minnesota). Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota, at a regular meeting held on March 28, 1988. ATTESTED BY: Dorothy M. Hallin, City Cleric James R. Grabek, Mayor City of OR ONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. A RESOLUTION VACATING AN UNUSED PORTION OF FOREST BOULEVARD WITHIN THE PLAT OF SAGA HILL REVISED, SECTION 7, TOWWSHIP 117, RANGE 23 IN THE CITY OF ORONO, MINNESOTA WHERizAS, the City of Orono is a municipal corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of Minnesota; and WHE.tEAS, on February 26, 1988, Edward G. Newton and Marlene Newton filed a petition with the City of Orono requesting the va -)n of a portion of Forest Boulevard originally dedicated in the Plat of Saga Hill Revised legally described as follows: That part of vacated Forest Boul�-,varO as dedicated in the plat rf "Saga Hill Revisea, -�nnepin County, Minnesota which lies between the Northwesterly extensi�-, s acru-s it of t h•. vr. : terly portion of the Northeast`rly line c -it 2, Block 1, Sidwell Addition, and the westerly poicion of the Southwesterly line of said lot 2; and WHERunS, after due published and posted notice, a public hearinc, was re'.n before the '.y.ty :Tanning Commission on March 21, 1988, regarding said vacation an i it ` interested persons were given an opportunity to be heard; and WHEREAS, atit.=:_ due standing and consideration, the Planning CoR:mi ssien recommende,:' Apprc:va 1 of the requested acation and the Council of the City of Orono finds that saie vacation as proposed, is in keeping with the public interest in consideration of the following findings: 1. The vacation does nvt affect the access or the use of adjoining properties. 2. The City has not and does not intend to develop, improve, or use the dedicated right-of-way of Forest Boulevard for road purposes. 3. The City has not and does not intend to maintain or install utilities within the dedicated right-of-way of Forest Boulevard. 4. The unimproved dedicated right-of-way as it exists serves r.c publi purpose. Page 1 of 2 City of ORCONO PESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. --740 MT1' THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the petition of Edward G. Newton and Marlene Newton is hereby granted and that the pr--tion of Forest Boulevard legally described above is hereby vacated. The granting of the petition is subject to the condition that upon vacation, applicants must combine vacated adjacent portion of Forest Boulevard with their property (Lot 2, Block 1, Sidwell Addition, Hennepin County, Minnesota). Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota, at a regular meeting held on March 28, 1988. ATTESTED BY: Dorothy M. Hallin, City Clerk James R. Grabek, Mayor I'-Igf- r t Cite of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. A RESOLUTION VACATING AN UNUSED PORTION OF FOREST BOULEVARD WITHIN THE PLAT OF SAGA HILL REVISED, SECTION 7, TOWNSHIP 117, FANGE 23 IN THE CITY OF ORONO, MINNESOTA WHEREAS, the City of Orono is a municipal corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of Minnesota; and WHEREAS, on February 26, 1988, Ronald W. Bertagnoli and Sylvia Bertagnoli filed a petition with the City of Orono requesting the vacation of a portion of Forest Boulevard originally dedicated in the Plat of Saga Hill Revised legally described as follows: That part of vacated Forest Boulevard as dedicated in the plat of "Saga Hill Revised, Hennepin County, Minnesota" which lies between the Northwesterly extensions across it of the Southwesterly tine of Lot 3, Block 15, "Saga Hill Revised, Hennepin County, Minnesota" and the Northeasterly line of Lot 2, said Block 15; and WHEREAS, after due published and posted notice, a public hearing was held before the City Planning Commissi -n on March 21, 1988, regarding said vacation and all interested persons were given an opportunity to be heard; and WHEREAS, after due standing and sideration, the Planning Commission recommended approval of the requested vacation and the Council of the City of Orono finds that said vacation as proposed, is in keeping with the public interest in consideration of the following findings: 1. The vacation does not affect the access or the use of adjoining properties. 2. The City has not and does not intend to develop, improve, or use the dedicated right-of-way of Forest Boulevard for road purposes. 3. The City has not and does not intend to maintain or install utilities within the dedicated right-of-way of Forest Boulevard. 4. The unimF.-oved dedicated right-of-way as it exists serves no public purpose. Page 1 of 2 City of OR,ONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the petition of Ronald W. Bertagnoli and Sylvia Bertagnoli is hereby granted and that the portion of Forest Boulevard legally described above is hereby vacated. The granting of the petition is subject to the condition that upon vacation, applicants must combine vacated adjacent portion of Forest Boulevard with their property (Already combined Lot 3, Block 15 and a portion of vacated Park Drive, Saga Hill Revised, Hennepin County, Minnesota). Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota, at a regular meeting held on March 28, 1988. ATTESTED BY: Dorothy M. Hallin, City C13rk James R. Grabek, Mayor E', �e 2 C-f 2 Cite of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. A RESOLUTION VACATING AN UNUSED PORTION OF FOREST BOULEVARD WITHIN THE PLAT OF SAGA HILL REVISED, SECTION 7, TOWNSHIP 117, RANGE 23 IN THE CITY OF ORONO, MINNESOTA WHEREAS, the City of Orono is a municipal corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of Minnesota; and WHEREAS, on February 26, 1988, Douglas C. Johnson and Tricia A. Johnson filed a petition with the City of Orono requesting the vacation of a porticn of Forest Boulevard originally dedicated in the Plat of Saga Hill Revised legally described as follows: That part of vacated Forest Boulevard as dedicated in the plat of "Saga Hill Revised, Hennepin County, Minnesota" which lies between the Northwesterly extensions across it of the Northeasterly line of Lot 16, Block 6, Saga Hill Revised, Hennepin County, Minnesota" and the straight portion of the Southwesterly line of said Lot 16; and WHEREAS, after due published and posted notice, a public hearing was held before the City Planning Commission on March 21, 1988, regarding said vacation and all interested persons were giver an opportunity to be heard; and WHEREAS, after due standing and consideration, the Planning Commission recommended approval of the requested vacation and the Council of the City of Orono finds that said vacation as proposed, is in keeping with the public interest in consideration of the following findings: 1. The vacation does not affect the access or the use of adjoining properties. 2. The City has not and does not intend to develop, improve, or use the dedicated right-of-way of Forest Boulevard for road purposes. 3. The City has not and does not intend to maintain or install utilities within the dedicated right-of-way of Forest Boulevard. 4. The unimproved dedicated right-of-way as it exists serves no public purpose. I%1a 1 cf 2 O OR City of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the petition of Douglas C. Johnson and Tricia A. Johnson is hereby granted and that the portion of Forest Boulevard legally described above is hereby vacated. The granting of the petition is subject to the condition that upon vacation, applicants must combine vacated adjacent portion of Forest Boulevard with their property (Already combined Lot 16, Block 6 and a portion of vacated Forest Avenue, Saga Hill Revised, Hennepin County, Minnesota). Adopted by the City Council of the City of Oroni, Minnesota, at a regular meeting held on March 28, 1988. ATTESTED BY: Dorothy M. Hallin, City Clerk James R. Grabek, Mayor Paqe 2 of 2 City of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. A RESOLUTION VACATING AN UNUSED PORTION OF FOREST BOULEVARD WITHIN THE PLAT OF SAGA HILL REVISED, SECTION 7, TOWNSHIP 117, RANGE 23 IN THE CITY OF ORONO, MINNESOTA WHEREAS, the City of Orono is a municipal corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of Minnesota; and WHEL EAS, on February 26, 1988, Charles H. Fairbank and Patsy Fairbank filed a petition with the City of Orono requesting the vacation of a portion of Forest Boulevard originally dedicated in the Plat of Saga Hill Revised legally described as follows: That part of vacated Forest Boulevard as dedicated in the plat of "Saga Hill Revised, Hennepin County, Minnesota" which lies between the Northwesterly extensions across it of the Southwesterly line of Lot 15, Block 6, "Saga Hill Revised, Hennepin County, Minnesota" and the Northeasterly line of Lot 13, said Block 6; and WHEREAS, after due published and posted nctice, a public hearing was held before the City Planning Commission on March 21, 1988, regarding said vacation and all interested persons were given an opportunity to be heard; and WHEREAS, after due standing and consideration, the Planning Commission recommended approval of the requested vacation and the Council of the City of Orono finds that said vacation as proposed, is in keeping with the public interest in consideration of the following findings: 1. The vacation does not affect the access or the use of adjoining properties. The City has not and does not intend to develop, improve, or use the dedicated right-of-way of Forest Boulevard for road purposes. 3. The City has not and does not intend to maintain or install utilities within the dedicated right-of-way of Forest Boulevard. 4. The unimproved dedicated right-of-way as it exists serves no public purpose. Page 1 of 2 City of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL m NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the petition of Charles H. Fairbank and Patsy Fairbank is hereby granted and that the portion of Forest Boulevard legally described above is hereby vacated. The granting of the petition is subject to the condition that upon vacation, applicants must combine vacated adjacent portion of Forest Boulevard with their property (Already combined Lots 13, 14, and 15, Block 15 and Lots 14 and 15, Block 7, Saga Hill Revised, Hennepin County, Minnesota). Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota, at a regular meeting held on March 28, 1988. ATTESTED BY: Dorothy M. Hallin, City Clerk James R. Grabek, Mayor City of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. A RESOLUTION VACATING AN UNUSED PORTION OF FOREST BOULEVARD WITHIN THE PLAT OF SAGA HILL REVISRD, SECTION 7, TOWNSHIP 117, RANGE 23 IN THE CITY OF ORONO, MINNESOTA WHEREAS, the City of Orono is a municipal corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of Minnesota; and WHER::AS, on February 26, 1988, John S. Ludington f i led a petition with the City of Orono requesting the vacation cf a portion of Forest Boulevard originally dedicated in the Plat of Saga Hill Revised legally described as follows: That part of vacated Forest Boulevard as dedicated in the plat of "Saga Hill Revised, Hennepin County, Minnesota" which lies between the Northwesterly extensions across it of the Northeasterly line of Lot 9, Block 15, "Saga Hill Revised, Hennepin County, Minnesota" and the straight portion of the Southwesterly line of said Lot 9; and WHEREAS, after due published and posted notice, a public hearing was held before the City Planning Commission on March 21, 1988, regarding said vacation and all interested persons were given an opportunity to b heard; and WHEREAS, after due standing and consideration, the Planning Commission recommended approval of the requested vacation and the Council of the City of Orono finds that said vacation as proposed, is in keeping with the public interest in consideration of the following findings: 1. The vacation does not affect the access or the use of adjoining properties. 2. The City has not and does not intend to develop, improve, or use the dedicated right-of-way of Forest Boulevard for road purposes. 3. The City has not and does rot intend to maintain or install utilities within the dedicated right-of-way of Forest boulevard. 4. The unimproved dedicated right-of-way as it exists serves no public purpose. Page 1 cf City of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. SOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the petition of John S. Ludington is hereby granted and that the portion of Forest Boulevard legally described above is hereby vacated. The granting of the petition is subject to the condition that upon vacation, applicants must combine vacated adjacent portion of Forest Boulevard with their property (Lot 9, Block 15, Saga Hill Revised, Hennepin County, Minnesota). Adopted by the City Council of the City of uroro, Minnesota, at a regular meeting held on March 28, 1988. ATTESTED BY: Dorothy M. Hallin, City Clerk .Tames R. Grabek, Mayor City Of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY CCUNCIL 1 t. fd NO. Low 5•W11� � A RESOLUTION VACATING AN UNUSED PORTION OF FOREST BOULEVARD WITHIN THE PLAT OF SAGA HILL REVISED, SECTION 7, TOWNSHIP 117, RANGE 23 IN THE CITY OF ORONO, MINNESOTA WHEREAS, the City of Orono is a municipal corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of Minnesota; and WHEREAS, on February 26, 1988, Frederick J. Shearer and Karen Shearer filed a petiticn with the City of Orono requesting the vacation of a portion of Forest Boulevard originally dedicated in the Plat of Saga Hill Revised legally described as follows: That part of vacated Forest Boulevard as dedicated in the plat of "Saga hill Revised, Hennepin County, Minnesota" which lies between the Northwe-,'-erly ex,:.ensions across it of the Southwesterly line of Lot 1, Block 15, "Saga Hill Revised, Hennepin County, Minnesota" and the straight part of the Northeasterly line of said Lot 1; and WHEREAS, after due published and posted notice, a public hearing was held before the 'ity Planning Commission on March 2.1, 1988, regarding said vacation and all intere: ted persons were given an opportunity to be heard; and WHEREAS, after due standing and consideration, the '-lanning Commission recommended approval of the requested vacation and tYe Council of the City of Orono finds that said vacation as proposed, is in keeping with the public interest in consideration of the following find4ngs: 1. e vacation does not affect the access (-t the use o' adjoining prop ties. 2. The City has not and does not intend to p, Improve, or use the dedicated right-of-way of Forest Boulevard for road purposes. 3. The City has not and does not intend to maintain or install utilities within the dedicated right-of-way of Forest Boulevard. 4. The unimproved dedicated right-of-way as it exists serves no public purpose. Fagot 1 of 2 City of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the petition of Frederick J. Shearer and Karen Shearer is hereby granted and that the portion of Forest Boulevard legally described above is hereby vacated. The granting of the petition is subject to the condition that upon vacation, applicants must combine vacated adjacent portion of Forest Boulevard with their property s %lready combined Lot 1, Block 15 and a portion of vacated Park Drive, Saga All Revised, Hennepin County, Minnesota). Adopted �y the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota, at a regular meeting held on March 28, 1988. ATTESTED BY: Dorothy M. Hallin, City Clerk James R. Grabek, Mayor 7t _�►,' Clty,Of° ORO - '(y RESO•-UTION OF THE CITY ,UNCII NO. rI. L A RESOLUTION VACATING AN !_NU,'??D PORTION OF FOREST BOULEVARD TJI THltl THE PLAT OF SAGA HILT. REVISED, SECTION 7, TOWNSHIP 117, RANGE 23 IN THE CITY OF ORONO, MINNESO? WHEREAS, the City of Orono is a municipal corporation organized and exist-ny under the laws crr the State of Minnesota; and WHZiREAS, on Februar. 26, 1988, Richard M. Hatch and Peg Hatch iled a pet i*ion with the C!'v of Orono requasting the vacation of a portion of Forest Boulevard originally dedicated in the Plat of Saga Hill Revised legally described as follows: That part -)f vacated Fc_-est Boulevard as dedicated in the plat of "Saga Hill Revised, Hennepin County, Mi nesota" which lies bet -.aeon the N-rthwesterly cxtensicns across it of the couthwrs- line of L-'- 1, Block 1, Sidwell Addition, and t� Orly portion of the Northeasterly line of said L. 'i WHEFRAS, rftei due r .,lished and poste' notice., a public hearing was helG before, `tie -ity Yl nT.ing Commission on March 2_, 1988, regarding said vacation r , ill 4_nter:sted persons were given an opportunity to be heard; and WNZRW !er due standing end consideration, the ' anning Cotarission recon al-provC 1 of the request-A-acation and the Council of the City of Or, .in(' t said vacatic _ proposed, is in keeping with tn,w public interest ideration of the following findi.-gs: . 'ihe vacation does affect the access or the use of adjoining properti, . 2. T A does not intend to develop, improve, or use the f-way of Forest Boulevard for road purposes. 3. nd does not .mend to maintain or inst i 1' utii im. iedicated right-of-way of Forest ii4.ulevard. 4. Thu le li--ated right- .-}--way as it exi n is serve nc) publ it purpose. Vage ] rf City of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. NOW, THEREPORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the petition of Richard M. and Peg Hatch is hereby jranted and that the portion of Forest Boulevard legally described abov= is hereby vacated. The granting of the petition is subject to the condition that upon vacation, applicants must cc.mbine vacated adjacent portion of Forest Boulevard with their property (Lot 1, Block, Sidwell Addition, Hennepin County, Minnesota). Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota, at a regular meeting held on March 28, 1988. ATTESTED BY: Dorothy M. llin, City Clerk James R. Grabek, Mayor I' Ic;f, c f City of OR ONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. _ A RESOLUTION VACATING AN UNUSED PORTION OF VINE PLACE AND A PORTION OF A PARK WITHIN THE PLAT OF SAGA HILL REVISED, SECTION 7, TOWNSHIP 117, RANGE 23 IN THE CITY OF ORONO, MINNESOTA WHEREAS, the City of Orono is a municipal corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of Minnesota; and WHEREAS, on February 26, 1988, Theodore O. Metz and Mary J. Metz filed a petition with the City of Orono requesting the vacation of a portion of an undeveloped park and a portion of Vine Place originally dedicated in the Plat of Saga Hill Revised legally described as follows: That part of vacated Vine Place and vacated Park as dedicated in the plat of "Saga Hill Revised, Hennepin County, Minnesota" which lies between the Northwesterly extensions across there of the Southwesterly line of Lot 2, Block 16, Saga Hill Revised, Hennepin County, Minnesota, and the strai '-- portion of the Northeasterly line of Lot 1, sai :clock 16; and WHEREAS, after due published and posted notice, a public hearing was held before the City Planning Commission on March 21, 1988, regarding said vacation and all interested persons were given an opportunity to be heard; and WHEREAS, after due standing and consideration, the Planning Commission recommended approval of the requested vocation and the Council of the City of Orono finds that said vacation as p -oposed, is in keeping with the public interest in consideration of the following findings: 1. The vacation does not affect the access or the use of any adjoining property. 2. The Ci#-y hr ; not and dues not intend tc develop, improve, or use the dedicated right-of-way as a road. 3. The City has not and does not intend to maintain or install utilities within the dedicated right-of-way of the road or tree park a:ea as described above. 4. The unimprove -•dicated right-of-way and park as it exists serves no pl,h" is E.urpoa s the majority of the area is inundated with Forest La k Page 1 of 2 City of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CI fY COUNCIL NO. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the petition of Theodore O. Metz and Mary J. Metz is hereby granted and that the portion of Vine Place and the park legally described above is hereby v-cated. The granting of the petition is subject to the condition that upon vacation, app icants must combine vacated adjacent portion of Summit Place and the park with their property (Already combined Lot 1, Block 16 and Lot 2, Block 16). Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota, at a regular meeting held on March 28, 1988. ATTESTED BY: Dorothy M. Hallin, City Clerk ,7a.mes R. Gra9c_1k, Mayor I + f 4I ac d ar7AI&Af_ is Q CITY OF ORONO AD -----------------= --`'3--GEL I._I.----OSE !1PPLICATION------------------------ PROPERTY LOCATION Site Address�- Property Identification Number (P*.I.D.) Please check one - Is the property abstract or torrens? (for Conditional Use Applications only) Please attach legal description to application if not included on required survey. ------------------------------------------------------------- ---- --- )PPLICANT Phone ( home ) Name Phone (work) Address `�✓ 1�'Y City C�'//(? Zip --------------------------------------------------------------------------- OWNER (if different than applicant) "'' ` Phbh4i ome) Name Address Date Property Acquired Phone _City. Zip (month/year) I (do) (do not) also own the adjacent parcels of land. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- PEES - CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS $100.00 a) Residential accessory Use $150.00 b) Institutional (church, school, etc.) $150.00 c) Duplex Credit/Bldg $250.00 d) Commercial/Industrial Use $200.00 f) Land Alteration Grading and filling - 101 cu. yd. or more Seawall, retaining walls within 75' of lakeshore PRD/PID - see fee schedule OTHER APPLICATIONS $150.00 Commercial Site Plan Review (+ consultant fees) $250.00 Vacation $150.00 Easement Vacation $ 50.00 Easement Vacation With Subdivision $250.00 Rezoning $200.00 Appeals Other - see fee schedule PRESENT USE OF PROPERTY Present Zoning District G 'S 6 Present Use of Property Rhsioential 'Other (specify) --------------------------------------------------------------------------- I`ESCRI PTIOtd OF REQUEST Describe request in detail:- / �ifvo�l tf/11.d7 Xzt.4.". ------•------------------------- RE9UIRED SUBMITTALS 11 Completed Application Form. Certified Property Owners List of owners within 350' (you can obtain this list from Hennepin Colanty Department of Finance A-603 Government Cernter 348-3271) -,3'. Stamped, legal sized envelopes (#10) pre -addressed to each of the names on the above list with no return address. Certificate of survey. ion plan, if apFli cable•. y! Plat Map. ----------------------------..--------------------------------------------- The applicant and Property Owner must sign this application. Please remember that your application is not complete if the above information has not been included. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Certification by Zoning Department that Land Use Application is complete. Zoning Officials Signature Date APPLICANT'S SIGNATURE The applicant hereby agrees to provide all information required or requested by the Zoning Administrator, agrees to pay all fees and/or unusual expenses incurred in review of this application, and certifies that the information supplied is true and :orrect to the best cf•his/her knowledge. 7- Applicant's signature ( ,� _.�/ / /' Date OWNERS SIGNATURE The owner hereby acknowledges and agrees to this application and further authorized reasonable entry onto the property by City staff, consLltants, agents, commission inem bers, and Council members for purposes of investigation and verification of this request. ez Owner's signature Date --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Applicant must have all submittals into the City offices 25 days before the Planning Commission Meeting. Planning Commission Meetings are he'd on the third Monday of each month. Applicants must be present at all scheduled review meetings of the Planning Commission and Council, and, if an applicant is unable to attend a schedulcd meeting, to please make arrangements to have an authorized agent attend in your place and to advise the Auildind & Zoning Office of this change prior to the meeting. dorm ORONO — v Tfl7p R 23 MOUND — 200 400 feet TmCmi 4 el ORES T LAKE (NO r MEANDERED 1 � ; ;; � / � ��?` -kit) All VOL 10 as . . . . . . ..... 'AGA lft�.L 44 4Q 41 zz so '43 so W, I e . O 0%0 t4 0 40 I'k, f 'a 7-) 4 (41, 09 11—/5 so I -,-: )41 1 r4 V RUN DATE 01/22/88 HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INrORMATION SYSTEM REPORT NO. PI435401 PROPERTY OWNERS LIST PAGE 1 BATCH 001 38 07-117-23 41 1021 38 07-117-23 41 0030 38 07-117-23 41 0031 PROP ADDR 01310 ELMWOOD AVE 01305 ELMWOOD AVE 01305 NORTH ARM DR O"'NER HAt1E GORDON N NELSON ETAL KEITX E SIMONS/PENSONAL REP ROBERT E ANDERSON TAXPAYER GORDON N NELSON TIMOTHY PLAZIAK THEODORE A ANDERSON NAME/ADDR 1310 ELMWOOD 1305 ELMWOOU AV 1405 NORTH ARM DR MOUND MN 55364 MOUND MN 55364 MOUttD MN 55364 38 07-117-23 41 0032 38 07-117-23 41 0066 38 07-117-23 41 0067 PROP ADDR 01317 NORTH ARM DR 01361 NORTH ARM OR 01355 NORTH ARM DR 0�4'.ER NAME Atli L CARSON G P GATZ L E A GATZ GEORGE J POLTA TAXPAYER ANN L CARSON GEORGE P i ELIZABETH A GATZ G J POLTA NAME/ADDR 1317 N ARM DR 1361 NORTH ARM DR 1355 NORTH ARM OR MOUND MN 55364 ORONO MN 55364 MOUND tit 55364 38 07-117-23 41 0068 38 07-117-23 41 0069 38 07-117-23 41 0070 PROP ALr,4 01376 PARK OR CW`4ER NAME GEORGE J POLTA VINCENT JOHNSON FRANK S LANE ETAL TAXPAYER G J POLTA VINCENT JOH14SON FRANK S LANE NAME/ADDR 1355 NORTH ARM DR PO BOX NO 8 1376 PARK DR MOLII:D flN 55364 MOUND MN 55364 MOUt7D MN 55364 38 07-117-23 41 0071 38 07-117-23 41 0072 38 07-117-23 41 0073 PROP ADDR 01388 PARK OR 013QO PARK DR CL:NER NAME M i G RASMUS WAYNE M HOLMES i WIFE GEORGE J POLTA TAXPAYER M i G RASMUS WAYNE M A MARY HOLMES G J POLTA NAME/ADDR 1388 PARK DRIVE 1390 PARK DRIVE 1355 NORTH ARM DR MOUND MN 55364 to" MN 55364 MOUTA MN 55364 38 07-117-23 41 0074 38 07-117-23 41 0075 38 07-117-23 41 0079 PROP ADDR 01400 PARK OR 01375 PARK DR 0:r14ER NAME P i T 4NDERSEN JAMES LA14G i ARDIS NIEMANH RICHARD M HATCH i WIFE TAXPAYER TONI F ANDERSEN ARDIS M NIEMAN81 NOONAN RICHARD M HATCH NAME/ADDR 1400 PARK OR 364 N OWASSO BLVD 1375 PARK OR MOUND MN 55364 ST PAUL MN 55126 MOUtm MN 55364 38 07-117-23 41 0080 38 07-117-23 41 0081 38 07-117-23 41 0082 PROP ADDR 01365 PARK DR C1331 NORTH ARM DR 01359 PARK OR O::NER NAME EDWARD G NEWTON i WIFE A P FRIELER i A B FRIELER PETER H LANPHER FT AL TAXPAYER EDWARD G NEWTON ALLEN P i AM Y B FRIELER PETER i DIANE LANPHEP tiAttE/ADDP- 13'�5 PARK. OR 1331 NORTH ARM OR 1359 PARK DR f' MN 55364 CRONO MN 55391 DRCN.O tW 55364 RUN DATE 01/22/88 BATCH 001 38 07-117-23 41 0083 PROP ADDR 01300 LOMA LINDA AVE OWIJER NAME M A N KULENKAMP TAXPAYER MARK A A NANCY L KULENKAMP NAMC/ADDR 1300 LOMA LItMA AVE ORONO MN 55364 38 07-117-23 41 0036 PROP ADDR 01345 14ORTH ARM DR C:."JER NAME FRED S RYAN ET AL TAXPAYER FRED S RYAN NAftE/ACDR 1345 NORTH ARM DR MOUND MN 55364 38 07-117-23 42 0012 PROP ADDR 01399 PARK DR O:;NER NAME JOAN Y BLOOM TAXPAYER DOUGLAS C A TRICIA A JOHNSON HARE/ACDR 1399 PARK DRIVE ORONO MN 55364 38 07-117-23 42 0015 PROP ADDR 01462 PARE: DR C:.^iER NAME LORENZ H KUTZ ETAL TAXPAYER LORENZ H KUTZ NAME/ADDR 1462 PARK DR MOUND MN 55364 38 07-117-23 42 0018 PROP ADDR 01415 PARK OR O.7JER NAME RONALD BERTAGNOLI ETAL TAXI AYER R:,HALO W BERTAGNOLI NAME/ADDR :.15 PARK DR MOU'lD MN 55364 38 07-117-23 42 002: PROP ADDR 01447 PARK DR 0J24ER NAME L D SOLBERG A M M SOLBERG TAXPAYER LARRY D A MARY M SOLBERG NAME/ADDR 1447 PARK DR ORCNO MN 55364 4ENNEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORMATION SYSTEM PROPERTY OWNERS LIST 38 07-117-23 41 0084 01350 NORTH ARM DR B A OLSON A C M KROLL BRUCE A OLSON AND CONCORDIA M KROLL 1350 NORTH ARM DR ORONO MN 55364 38 07-117-23 41 0086 01304 E LMWOOD A'!E RICHARD J JOHNSON ET AL RICHARD J JOHNSON 1304 ELMWOOD MOUND MN 55364 38 07-117-23 42 0013 01422 PARK DR D J ANDRYS A T L PEDERSEN D J ANDRYS A T L PEDERSEN 1422 PARK DRIVE ORONO MN 55356 38 07-117-23 42 001 01405 PARK OR F A K SHEARER FREDERICK J SHEARER 1405 PARK DRIVE MOUtM MI 55364 38 07-117-23 42 0019 01423 PARK DR R T HOWELLS ROBERT T HOWELLS 1423 PARK DR MOUND MH 55364 38 07-117-23 3022 01453 PARK ! ,, JOHN S LUDINGTON JOHN S LUDINGTON 1453 PARK DR MOUND MN 55364 REPORT NO. P7435401 PAGE - 38 07-117-23 41 0085 01360 NORTH ARM DR E T A E L JOHNSTON EDWAPD T JOHNSTJN L501 BLAISDELL AVE SO MPLS MN 554u4 38 07-117-23 42 0001 01310 VINE PL MAXINE A OLSON FRANCIS A MARY SLOAN 13:0 VINE PL MDUND MN 55364 38 07-117-23 42 0014 01442 PARK OR G L SCHU:TZ ETAL GEORGE ! SCHULTZ 1442 PARK DR MOUND MN 55364 38 07-117-23 42 0017 01415 PARK DR RONALD BERTAGNOLI ETAL RONALD W BERTAGNOLI 1415 PARK DRIVE MO'.:O MN 55364 38 07-117-23 42 0020 31435 PARK OR M ' KELLEN A L C KELLEN MICHAEL J KELLEN 1435 PARK DRIVE ORONO MN 55364 38 07-117-23 42 0023 04300 NORTH SHORE DR THEODORE 0 METZ A WIFE THEODORE A MARY J METZ 4300 NORTH SHnRE DRIVE MOUND MN 55364 A fa RUN DATE 01/22/88 HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORMATION SYSTEM REPORT NO. PI435401 PROPERIr OW14EPS LIST PAGE 3 EEACH 001 38 01-117-23 42 0024 PROP ADDR 04330 NORTH SHORE DR 0::`:ER NA'tE 0 i M STRELOW TAXPAYER DOUGLAS t MARLENE STRELOW N'.'tE/ADDR 4330 NO SHORE DR MOUND MN 55364 38 07-117-23 42 0027 PROP ADDR 0:::."cR NAME .17SEPH LABOVSKY TAXPAYER .SEPH LABOVSKY N4tS--/AODR o075 LINCOLN DR $207 KPLS t?N 55436 38 07-117-23 42 0025 04340 NORTH SHORE DP JOSEPH LABOVSKY JOSEPH LABOVSKY 6075 LINCOLN OR 8207 MPI.S MN 55436 38 07-117-?3 42 0026 WILLIAM THE0009E SCHOENING WILLIAM THEODORE SCHOENING 4380 NORTH SHORE DR MOR4D MN 55364 38 07-117-23 42 0026 JOSEPH LABOVSKY JOSEPH LABOVSKY 6075 LINCOLN OR 9207 MPLS MN 55434 38 07-!17-23 42 0029 04380 NORTH SNORE ER WILLIAM THEODORE SCHOEHING WILLIAM T SCHOENING 4380 NORTH SNORE DR tw"m ttti 55364 38 0: 117-23 42 0030 38 07-117-23 42 0031 38 07-117-23 42 0037 rpOP ADDR 01350 VINE PL 01340 VINE FL 01360 VINE PL C:,'NER NAME S V NICHOLSON ETAL RICHARD J CHERBA ETAL EARL B i GAILENE J NORWOOD TAYPAYER STEPHEN V NICHOLSON RICHARD J CHERBA EARL B i GAILENE J NORWOCD NAME/ADDR 1350 VINE PLACE 1340 VINE PLACE 1360 VINE FL MOUND t:H 55'.6=- MOUND MN 55364 MOUND MN 55364 38 07-117-23 42 0038 38 07-117-23 43 0001 38 07-117-23 43 0002 PROP ADOR 01379 PARK DR 04198 NORTH Si3ORE DR CS-;!:p tIA`1E C H FAIRBAIIK. JP ET AL TRUSTEES F J HARDIN III ETAL A i A PALESOTTI T4\PAYER C H FAIVBAN( JP/P R FAIRDAN( FRANKLIN .1 HARDIN ANiNCNY L PALESOTTI NtVIE/ADDR 1i60 PAFK DR S W 1496 PARK DR RT 1 4198 NORTH SHORE DR ORONO " 55364 MO(RiD MN 55364 MOUND MN 55364 39 07-117-23 43 0013 38 07-117-[3 43 0014 38 07-117-23 43 0P'8 0141)6 PARK OR 04240 NORTH SHORE DR 04395 NORTH S14fWi OR FRANKLIN1 J HARDIN III SANDRA J SWANSON WILLIAM C WALTEP FRAtJ<!-;N J HARDIN SANDRA SWANSON KENT 0 WARDEN 1496 PARK, OR PT 1 4240 NORTH SHORE DRIVE 4345 NORTH SHOP H MWQ M11 55364 MOUND Y.N 55364 MOU1iD MN 553 38 07-117-23 43 0019 38 07-111-23 43 0020 3d 07-117-23 43 0024 P^OP ADDR J43.,5 NORTH SHORE DR 04345 NORTH SHORE OR 01535 ORCHAPD BEACH PL CL:'IER t:artE DOPOTHY R HANSON DOR0 HY R HAIISIN NANCY F DELTON -A'>,AIER WALTER R BENSON GEORGE A HANSOM NANCY F DELTON N'1I-I-DOR LOX 167 C/O ALICE ROSErM(RAN- 1535 ORCHAPD DEACI' PLACE CRYSTAL BAY MN 55323 456 ARLING1O17 CIRCLE IIZUND MN 55764 WAYZATA M 55391 RUN DATE Vl,'.-.'88 BATCH 001 38 07-117-23 43 0025 PROP ADDR 015SS ORCHARD BEACH PL CWNER NAME PATRICIA H WYSOCKY TAXPAYER PATRICIA H WYSOCKY NAME/ACOR 1555 ORCHARD PARK PL MOUla MN 55364 RPOP AOCR C:: ;ER NA"E TAXPAYER TOTAL 6ATCH C01 00057 N ANG/Ann0 HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORMATION SYSTE►i PROPERTY OWNERS LIST 39 07-117-2- '47, 0027 LORRAINE E JOHNSON eT AL STEPHEN J HOWELLS 1448 PARK DR hOUND MN 55364 WEPORT 40. PI43S401 PAGE 4 38 07-117•:3 43 0026 g4315 NORTH SHORE DR A M WILLIAMS ARf J b:' LIAMS NORTH SHORE DR MOU40 MH 55364 I CERTIFY THAT THE FACTS RtPRESENTE.D ARE AN ACCURATE AND TRUE -tFRESEniATION OF INFORMATION AS IT APPEARS THIS DA' IN THE RECORDS Of THE HENNEPIN COUNTY LlPARTrIENT OF PROPERTY TAXAT1d0, TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE AND BELIEF.. f L-� rL OWNERS SIGNATURE THE OWNER HEREBY ACKNOWLEDGES AND A(XFS TO THIS APPISCATIOM AND FURTHER MMORIZED REASONABLE ENTRY ONTO THE PROPERPY BY CITY STAFF', CONSULVNM, AGE M, Cot44ISSION MMERS, AND COUNCIL HMM Fit PURPOSES OF INYP :'TGATION AND VERIFICATION OF THIS FMQUEST. r DATE 3 9 j �h--N" r ��' , ! <,' 5 J / A-- o ,&- , M o-w -rn.<- 1757,74f Y• DOFF & GRONBER6, INC. ' i `• e11jave IN0, DINEERINO AND LAND PLANNING 492•A TAMARACK AVENUE LONG LAKE. MINN. 55350 •73.4141 February 24, 1988 Pioposed road vacation descriptions 1� HATCH That part of vacated Forest Boulevard as dedicated in the plat of "Saga Hill Revised, Hennepin Co. Minn." which lies between the Northwesterly extensions across it of the Southwesterly line of Lot 1, Block 1, SIDWELL ADD- ITION, and the Westerly portion of the Northeasterly line of said Lot 1. LANPHER That part of vacated Forest Boulevard as dedicated in the plat of "Saga Hill Revised, Hennepin Co. Minn." which lies between the Northwesterly extensions across it of the Southwesterly and Northeasterly lines of Lot 8, Block 6, "Saga Hill Revised, Hennepin Co. Minn." SHEARER That part of vacated Forest Boulevard as dedicated in the plat of "Saga Hill Revised, Hennepin Co. Minn." which lies between the Northwesterly extensions across it of the Southwesterly line of Lot 1, 131-A 15, "Saga Hill Revised, Hennepin co. Minn." and the straight part of the Northeasterly line of said Lot 1. JOHNSON That part of Vacated Forest Boulevard as dedicated in the plat- of "Saga Hill Revised, !lennepin Co. Minn." which lie3 between the Northwesterly extensions ac-ess it of the Northeasterly line of Lot 16, Block 6, "Saga Hill Rcvis.j, Hennepin Co. Minn." and the straight portion of the Southwesterly lire of said Lot 16. LUDINGTON That part of vacated Forest Boulevard as dedicated in the plat of Saga Hill Revised, henneoin Co. Minn." which lies between the Northwesterly extensions across it of the Northeasterly line of Lot 9, Block 15, "Saga Hill Revised, Hennepin Co. Minn." and the straight portion of the Southwesterly line of said Lot 9. METZ That part of vacated Vine Place and vacated Park as dedicated in the plat of "Saga Hill Revised, Hennepin Co. Minn." which lies between t!,e Northwesterly extensions across them of the Southwesterly line of Lot 2, Block 16, "Saga Hill Revi.ed, Hennepin Co. Minn." and the straight portion of the Northeasterly lire of Lot 1, said Block 16. FAIRBANKS That part of vacated. Forest Boulevard as dedicated in the plat of "Saga Hill Revised, Ffennopin Co. Minn." which lies between the Northwesterly extensions across it of the Southwesterly line of Lot 15, Dlock 6, "Saga 'fill Revised, Hennepin Co. Minn." and the Northeasterly line of Lot 13, said [::ock 6. NEWTON That part of vacated Forest Eoulevard as dedicated in the plat of "Saga Hill Revised, Hennepin Co. Minn." which lies between the Northwesterly extensions across it of the t,'esterl portion of tL3 Northeasterly line of Lot 2, Block 1, SIDWELT ADDITION, and the Westerly portion of the Southwesterly lire of said Lot 2. BERTAGNOL2 ','hat part of vacated Forest Boulevard as dedicated in the plat of "Saga Hill Revived, Hennepin Co. Minn." which lies between the Northwesterly extensic-e across it of the Southwesterly line of Lot 3, Block 15, "Saga tfill Revised, Hennepin Co. Minn." and the Northeasterly line of Lot 2, said Pluck 'S. r Bonestroo NEW Rosene Anderiik & Associates En�lneers i Architects March 7, 1988 City of Orono Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 Attn: Ms. Jeanne Mabusth Ono G Boneurno. PE Keith A Gordon, ►E Thomas W Peterson. PE Charles A ErKYson Rouen W Rosene. PE RKhard W Ecuer. PE Michael C LyrKh, PE Leo M ►aWel{ky Joseph C AnderlA. PE Donald C Burgardt, PE James R Maland, ►E Harlan M Olson Bradford A Lemberg, PE Jerry A FWurdon, PE KenrMh ► Anderson, ►E Susan M Eberlm RKhard E Turner, PE Mark A Hanson, PE Keith A Bachmann. PE MUM A Serp James C Olson. PE Ted K Ereld. PE Mars R Rolfs. /E Glenn R Cook. PE Michael T Rautmann, PE Roden C Russeh. A I.A. Thomas E Noyes. PE Rouen R Preffene. ►E Thomas E Angus. ►E RWen G Sthunc.ht. PE 00111 O toskota. PE Hs.Naw A Sanford. PE Marvin L Sorvala. PE. Re: Application No. 1251 - Audrey Schultz Our File No. 139-1251 Dear Jeanne: We have reviewed engineering concerns for the vacation of portions of Forest Boulevard. There is no intent to construct a street or place city utilities within Forest Boulevard. We therefore find the vacation of the property to be s; ceptable. Yours very truly, BONESTROO, ROSENE, ANDERLIK 6 ASSOCIATES, INC. Michael G. Lynch MCL:df 8181f 2335 West H STATE Of rf D U\JUV��C.� DEPARTa1ENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES PHONE No. 296-7523 1200 WARNER ROAD, ST. PAUL, MN 55116 FILE NO March 11, 1988-=- -. I� Jeanne A. Mabusth ' U + Q 8W 't Building 6 Zoning Administrator CITY OF ORONO Post Office Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 RE: APPLICATION #1256 METROPOLITAN WASTE CONTROL COMMISSION CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT/VARIANCE APPLICATION #1258 JOHN 6 XATHY EHLERT, 1785 CONCORDIA STREET APPLICATION #1251 AUDREY SCHULTZ - VACATION OF ROAD Dear Me. Mabusth: Thank you for sending Lnformation for our review on the above referenced permits. Our comments on each application follow. The upgrading and replacem.._4t of sewer lines is mainly a concern of the DNR Lands Bureau. The Division of Waters will have a chance to comment through the Bureau of Lands license procedure. Preliminary indications are that impacts to protected waters will be minimal because the sewer line is mostly beneath the existing roadway. According to the plans received March 3, 1988, the Ehlert house addition does not encroach below the 931.0' elevation. Since the Flood Insurance Rate Map (enclosed) and the City of Orono's Flood Ordinance consider elevation 931 the 100 year flood elevation, we have no floodplain concerns. (We understand however that the Minnehaha Creek WSD uses 931.5 as the 100 year flood elevation.) �''� The application for vacation of roads along the southeast shore of Forest Lake does not raise any protected waters concerns. /� Thank ::r. again for the opportunity tv review these projects. If you have am, questions, please feel free to call. Sincerely, Tom Hovey Staff Hydrologist METRO RECION DI:'ISION OF WATERF, Enclosure cc: Jack Anderson J1/dv AN EQUAL Of'' U<<! Tv EMPLOYER 0 March 10. 198E Closinq of Furest Blvd. At this time I must object to the closing of Forest Blvd because it could land -lock: my property. In 1972 Orono closed Oat; Place so that I an. nuw driving or, property belonqinq to four different proper-t)r owners. Thi-_: was done without notifying me. This problem must be solved before Forest Blvd can be closed. I would litre Forest Blvd closed in front of my property wf:.•n this problem is solved. �ey� 40,t� Joe n --P-- / d k F 8 �6 -son su FO�RES T L A K_ E• Yoe..+,► I ! • . , •�� 4 u •� f • I e =i i<f•� }i} • (NDr MEANDERED) DOI ; • v i .., ` • i �, `� �' ifs �ii V��a �� � t'•, + � Etii�� 'L.., '�a +� A � � •. a� +• � � .r Dar ��a.nsa• �70 C� � v P�� 1i : " ,� :� �' `• �` •� ��) p•} tit �� r or �,�1s r ao .<< �) �t r w `! •, w y �pvo151 ,, % (fir ► f'� I`\•� eo n • ` ALA- • (1 • t' \ ` }�'�, • `� �t i (�►� 1 to a+ oil A, a to 0 [ .n 0 41 Ac JIt-.s» µ II -LIL too - Ls ,,cr , •� c (li • • f011," ao 6� �)(It•• of _ ) a • `It y • I 1 Into 43 43 43 IP« `� l � "•• Sao, fwOl7x-ST LAKE 47: - -- - �.;'r.a t,`: ; hOT ""rEAIvC`RED I :�I m .fc lc' 's. .��°, �3— �.,� ,ens. �_�� r. �� C. '�`.i4� K �� �4••/ rJ�j • . r• flSe1�r `� j� r�r4r .t� � ` d � 2 � \ -- --- - _ F t`, ; f• , ', 46 CC point �N•1 eOj rit1,,\p'Ac i" C 1 —10 tl °; ems".''• �'• � „, -s' 9 \ � � ,, s�' = Eaftir0 i4- _SAM 18 r ir- i ) �' •1•°� s � r a h j._ s r 1 p / 10 p r, vlo ,SQL ,G HO• 7 LNG 5 0+2atiG 22.0, 30A / J / Q O �`%� A o Epp pT 0110 ,Z6.0 % m 350.. .. % 2so GAR. G _ <' • / G �_ G _ _ _ — — G �G �i G M{445 r 11 1 �_..—. OR' N! o o - 1 Q 445 Ppc 1 1 I 1 1 i 1 3 2 � is 2•i5 I — -- � 6 5 3 NC. 1 •� /1 26 um SEe GAR 25 L C.o� !s E o 40 e SHEEP 40 lon6 415 6 . 36• cy� F r _73.3 cast. 2010 } MH MH 353 iEVERGREEJ: :� "'I" t \ \ pp 354 0 i 9 J Ll too 3 z 26LAW6 PARK .1 - A :36J, \ ?G •" _.. 1, 25 N ss.a 20 Low, � ' :-soo �8 "� 6.69 I I 30 LM j - PARK _D?"E Ll WYE Mo. 349 H 3481 -Ad mot= 348 a 1 .24 225 953.05 w-�E ,C C�• 3AS W-N ` 52.06N _. AT 0.46 - :2.G5 To: From: Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building i Date: March 11, 1988 Subject: #1253 B. John Lindahl, Jr., Variances - Public Hearing Zoning District - LR-lB Lot Area = 22,475 s.f. Existing Hardcover = 15.1% Proposed Hardcover = 23.7% Allowed = 35% Pertinent Ordinances Planning Commission Chairman Kelley Orono Planning Commission Members City Administrator Bernhardson a/�V AP Zoning Adminintrat.or C/7)fOF�l po 1406 Bohn's Point Road - Section 10.03, Subdivision 9 (C) - Area r..)f Acce:.,;rory Strueturt Allowed = 1,000 s.f. Proposed = 1,086 s.f. (grade fly,,,.r ievel 792 a.f., attic art• 294 s.f.) Section 10.24, Subdivision 5 (B) - Street Yard Setback Required 35' Proposed variance 17' or 48% List of Exhibits Exhibit A - Applfcatior Exhibit B - Property Jwners List Exhibit _ - Plat Map Exhibit O - Applicant's Addendum Exhibit E - Survey:'Site Plan _x`ibit F - Flccr Plan/E1e•.3tions =x*-it:_ _ - ^eta._e'_ Site Plan/Landscaping Review of Application is in the midst of savor ipgra+ding %f his res109*erva and prop-oses t" removal :f the existing shed and ei ;ara;e replace the* with a s:1;:! 22'x34' d�tachod garage wltfe :-:i: area = rovi:fng needed storage as tee prestAt resi4te--_0 :asks storage area. _-__ :arrt�-saezta wi:- 3-=: :_ _:• the wi�tt�s-g, :e�gtr.:ng, ans :f 31-41' of t6w ss:e:w -.21 3:e ofthets4trolv_'t 4fie•.•r F:sas • of _ __ 'E F.."t �.:�: :e:�•3e -`_ _. .lr, f ! _.tf ve+sicl0 0+11 -=:, = xa-e_-rerat:e area aj arn! w..1 :-_a_a _3_F-.'j t.2=4rf r:t`-_.A96� •$$� 3ed�.• «: '• tsLfarsre •3r• --a :- ts-s' `:C:3t. _".3.! i' 3. :4'3 ;.�.' :� `�!' ea`"AA"Ci� w.•• ..w, .gr.a 4e __ _..:'rg �lrt: _ 3s' SC Sitarir _ '� _ R _�i :_.__: 3.: i•3«'�a'' a•: �:_� 's '' 3 $'j s.!!fa!i�w =/Rftl! _52.�'. --3`i. g•e33e _e7.few ?i _. _ _-• at •.tI hi,i aAot0 Zoning File #1253 March 11, 1988 Page 2 of 3 The applicant has asked you to consider a variance setback for the proposed garage citing the following hardships: 1. Limited flat yard area and need to preserve that limited yard area. 2. Interior design of structure and location of view windows would prohibit the attaching of the garage on the east side of the house. 3. Location of mature maple tree within the northeast yard area. 4. Location of neighbor's house at the east side property line. Garage in its proposed location will lessen the impact on the adjacent neighbor. 5. Moving the garage further north provides the much needed turn- around area between the house and garage. 6. There is no visual imp ct along the County Road because of the mature, dense screening that exists along the roadway and the garage will be installed so as nc: to disturb the existing screening. At the time of the filing of the application, the applicant was not aware that the accessory structure would also require an area variance. In recent applications it has been the City's policy to include not only ground floor area but to also include levels that are inhabitable or usable - 294 s.f. of attic space had to be added to the accessory structure area. The applicant has advised that there is no storage area within the principal structure and that the attic area was needed to provide the storage space. As applicant's addendum points out, the structure has been designed to blend in with the existing residential surroundings. The 20' high structure will be screened by the csrrounding natural plantings along the north boundary line. The proposed structure will be constructed of the same exterior finish as the principal residence (redwood siding). The City staff has receives no comments from the neighbors noti:ied for this review. Staff Recouendation - To approve the variances application of B. John Lindahl, Jr. for the residence located at 1406 Bohn's Point Road that would approve a 86 s.f. area variance and 17' street setback variance for a proposed detached garage based on the findings cited in applicant's addendum and repeated ahove. Approval is subject to the following conditi)ns: 1. Applicant is to obtain a land alteration permit for the regrading of the drive and the placement of the retaining walls adjacent to the drive. 2. Applicant must obtain a demolition permit prior to the removal of the existing garage. Zoning File #1253 March 11, 1988 Page 3 of 3 3. Applicant to deed the travelled portion of Bohn's Point Road that intersects the subject property to the City of Orono. 4. Plumbing shall not permitte ithin the detached structure nor shall this structure be used as a L_.cond, non -rental residential unit without first obtaining the appropriate approval ...�d permit from the City of Orono. Additional Com ents - March 23, 1988 Planning Coa:ssion Recommendations: The applicant was concerned with the condition in the staff recommendation that would prohibit the plumbing of cold water to the detached structure as the applicant advised the structure is to be used as an interior kennel for the dog and as a potting area. The staff advised the Planning Commission that this would be no problem as the customary notice to the applicant would be placed in the final resolution that would state that the detached structure could never be used as a second residential unit without appropriate approvals from the City. In addition, the applicant asked if the requirement of a quit claim deeding the portion of the traveled road within his property be substituted with an easement for road purposes. The staff advised the Planning Commission that this would also be appropriate and acceptable tc the City. The staff would recommend to the Council that the City staff work with the applicant to determine the appropriate width of the easement to be acquired for road purposes. The Planning Commission unanimously approved the variances application o� John Lindahl based on the findings and the hardships set forth by the applicant and subject to the amendment of the conditions as originally piopubed by Staff. The enclost-d approving resolution has been drafted per the Planning Commission recommendation. Please note this is registered torrens property and that the resolution will not be accepted for filing per State Statute cannot be accepted for filing against a chain of title. The resolution as with all resolutions approving variances for torrers properties will be kept with the official files of the City. City of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. A RESOLUTION GRANTING VARIANCES TO MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 10.93, SUBDIVISION 9 (C) AND SECTION 10.24, SUBDIVISION 5 (B) FILE #1253 WHEREAS, B. John Lindhal, Jr. (hereafter "the applicant") i. the owner of the property located at 1406 Bohn's Point Road within the City of Orono, (hereinafter "City") and legally described as Tract I, and the West 28.5 feet of Tract H, Registered Land Survey 269, Files of Registrar of Titles, Hennepin County, Minnesota (hereinafter "the property"); and WHEREAS, the applicant has applied to the City for a variance to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.03, Subdivision 9 (C) that would allow the installation of a accessory structure 1086 square feet in area where only a 1000 square feet is allowed and per Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.24, Subdivision 5 (B) seeks a street -yard setback variance of 17 feet or 40% for the accessory structure where 35 feet is required. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono, Minnesota: FINDINGS 1. This application way, reviewed as Zoning File 11253. 2. The property is locat-d in the LR-1B Lakeshore Residential Zoning District, requiring a minimum of 1 acre or 43,560 square feet in arez. The subject property consists of 22,475 square feet or .51 acra-. 3. The Orono Planning Commission reviewed this application on March 21, 1988, End recommended approval of the proposed variances based upon the following findings and hardships: A) The predominate, steep L.;poy raphy resulits in a limited flat ,,aid area and a need to preserve the limited yard area. B) The interior design of the structure and location of view windows would prohibit the attachment of the garage on the east side of Ouse. C) The location of a mature maple tree within the northeast yard area limits the plac-f-ont of the structure within the northeast yard are- Pale 1 (,f 4 City of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. D) The location of the neighbor's house is at the east side property line. The garage in its proposed location will lessen the impact on the neighbor to the east. E) Moving the garage further north provides the much needed turning around area between the house and garage to lessen the hazards of backing out onto the public roadway, and decreases the element of hazard. F) There is no visual impact along the County road because of the mature dense screening that exists along the roadway and the garage will be installed so as not to destroy the existing screening. 4. The City Council has considered this application including the findings and recommendations of the Planning Commission, reports by City staff, comments by the applicant and the effect of the proposed variance on the health, safety and welfare of the community. 5. The City Council finds that the conditions existing on this property are peculiar to it and do not apply generally to other property in this zoning district; that granting the variance would not adversely affect traffic conditions, light, air nor pose a fire hazard or other danger to neighboring property; would not merely serve as a convenience to the applicant, but is necessary to alleviate a demon- strable 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 d variance per Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.03, Subdivision. 9 (C) and Section 10.24 Subdivision 5 (B) to permit the construction of an accessory structure by 86 square feet and located 18 feet from the right-of-way line of North Shore Drive, subject to the following conditions: 1. The applicant is to obtain a land alteration permit for the regrading of the drive and the placement of the retaining walls adjacent to the drive. 2. The applicant must obtain a demolition permit for the removal of the existing garaga and shed. Page 2 of 4 City of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 3. The applicant is to grant a road and utilities easement to the City of Orono over the traveled portion of the roadway known as Bohn's Point Road that intersects the subject property. 4. The plumbing of cold water is permitted to the new detached structure. Such structure shall not be used as a second, non -rental residental unit without first obtaining appropriate approvals and permits from the City of Orono. 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 (March 28, 1989) . 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 punishable as a misdemeanor. 7. The undersigned applicant has read, understood, and hereby agrees to the terms of this resolution on behalf of himself, his heirs, successors and assigns. Adopted by the Orono City Council on this 28th day of March, 1988. ATTEST: Dorothy M. Rallin, City Clerk James R. Grabek, Mayor Property Owners) Page 3 of 4 CITY OF ORONO - VARIANCE AF 4TIO:Y Initial Application Fee $150.00 ($50.00 per each additional variance) Renewal Variance Ft:e $75.00 (no change from original application) Aft -th -F ct Fees (Double application fee) -r/, er e a ----------------------------------------------------------- CITY DF riMn PROPERTY LOCATION FINANCE OFFICE Site Address 1,106 &bus i40N—,Ko.4 0 Ol CEN 1190.00 GMEGC TL 2V 00 Property Identification Number (P.I.D.) o`1 - // - a 3 - 3 3 - oar SMCEIPT-TP,ANi' YOU #063170 C001 h01 T15:49 Please check one - Property V abstract or torrens? 011:1:1618° Attach legal description to application if not included on required survey. APPLICANT -------------------------------Phone (home)--- y�/ - Oa6 � ------- Name ���� /� ��� `"fz.. Phone (work) y4-/ - 006 8 Address: lyod �,.,h, lii, �� City: 040A/o Zip: ----------------------------------------- ------------------------------- OWNER (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. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- PRESQIT USE OF PROPERTY Present Zoning District Present Use of Property Residential Other (specify) ---------------------------------------------------------------------_--- DESCRIPTION OF RE;,UEST Estimated Construction Cost $ .300 coo � 5 00o Describe request in detail: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- VARIANCES REQUIRED Lot Area Lot Width Hardcover Setback Variances (_� Front Side Rear) Other HARDSHIP Describe undue enforcement of r_ hardship or practical difficulty resulting from strict zoning regulations:_ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- DESCRIPTION OF UNUSUAL PROPERTY CONDITIONS Describe unusual property conditions preventing compliance with Zoning Code Requirements- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- REQUIRED SUBMITTALS l� 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). (3., Stamped, legal sized envelopes (110) pre -addressed to each of the -J 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. t Topographic survey (existing and proposed elevations) if any cL ages in existing grade are proposed. 46 ) 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 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 ' -- true Zrect to the best of his/her knowledge. - _ . Applicant's Signature Date '� %� F �' OWNERS SIGNATURE \ The owner hereby ackc ges and agrees to this application and further authorizes reasonable .--y onto the property by City staff, consultants, agents, Commission members,, and Cou I_ m7bers for purposes of investiga- tion and verifipation this re st. Owner's Signature - _ Date _ _ Applicant must have all submittals into the City offices 25 days before the Planning Commission Meeting. Planning Commission Meetings are held on the third Monday of each month. Applicants must be present at all scheduled review meetings of the Planning Commission and Council. If an applicant is unable to attend a scheduled meeting, please make arrangements to have an authorized agent attend in your place and to advise the Building & 7oning Office of this change prior to the meeting, RUN DATE 02/10/88 HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPCRTY INFORMATION SYSTEM REPORT NO. PI435401 PROPERTY OWNERS LIST PAGE I BATCH 001 38 Ot-117-23 41 0001 PROP ADDR 03200 NORTH SHORE DR OWNER NAME LILLIAN K BONANDER TAXPAYER LILLItN K BONANDER NP "'/ADDR 3200 2•3RTH SHORE DR WAYZATA MH 55391 38 08-117-23 44 0006 PROP ADDR 03220 BOHNS POINT LA OWNER NAME R & S ALLEN TAXPAYER RICHARD D ALLEN NAME/ADDR 3220 BOHNS POINT LANE WAYZATA MH 55391 38 09.117-23 33 0002 PROP ADDR 01430 BOHNS POINT RO OWNER NAME WM J LAUER ET AL TRUSTEES TAXPAYER WILLIAM J LAUER NAME/ADDR 15409 WAYZATA BLVD WAYZATA MN 55391 38 09-117-23 33 0016 PROP ADDR 03185 NORTH SHORE DR 0:?JER NAME T A S ENLOW TAXPAYER THOMAS C A SUSAN S ENLOW NAME/ADDR 3185 N SHORE OR OPONO MN 55391 38 08-117-23 41 0003 03202 NORTH SHORE OR JOHN T MURPHY JR JOHN T MURPHY 3202 NORTH SHORE DR WAYZATA MN SS391 38 09-117-23 32 0011 03188 NORTH SHORE DR T O ALBERS A R P TOURNAT TERENCE D Jl ROXANNE ALBERS 3182 NORTH SHORE DR WAYZATA MN 55391 38 09-117-23 33 0003 01420 BOHNS POINT RD M A V MAGENER MA .7ICE J WAGENER 1420 BOHNS POINT ROAD WAYZATA MH 55391 TOTAL BATCH 001 00010 38 08-117-23 41 0004 03224 NORTH SHORE DR OLLIE HORK ET AL OLLIE HORK 5109 JAMES AVE SO MPLS MH 55419 38 09-117-23 32 0012 co 03190 NORTH SHORE DR DONALD THARALSON DONALD THARALSON ". 3190 NORTH SHORE OR WAYZATA MN 55391 38 09-117-23 33 0015 01406 DO 143 POINT RO t- B J LINDAHL JR t S B LINDAHL B JOHN LINDAHL �.. 1 06 BOHNS POINT ROAD URONO MH SS391 ''1 r I CERTIFY THAT THE FACTS REPRESENTED ARE AN ACCURATE AND TRUE REPRESENTATION OF INFORMATION AS IT APPEARS THIS DATE ON THE RECORDS OF THE HENNEPIN COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF PWOPERRTl!Y(TAAXXAT'ION/. TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE AND BELIEF. II BY�'1�( DATP I s I \o � y t• j .�%�' � ti 1�� •'J / r � �\ � \`sue, `' t0� i ^�� � �'.\ mot• 1� p v 7/ N , � 1 1 ,N� ,� i 0 S � ',� U 1 11 �Si pM �T/ N • • :'� t�: 4=.• 0�:5 ylt sop A1•'r,k RNO. 1113 . Ic 0• �26 •I • S, r H•sfE , •frNE •q• E . / � JLM 14 I �lY 'aS , .lY JlM list �Izlo) Cal j;.. u•.c7: M ;u. I1f1u' j PO, `IZ40) lie ON;\' a �.' •a L;w 2:o (Iz ILI 00 p0 a -- � ti L u 1 T �. w, r rl Ito LL .�J'�.ii�/i.S� /N SIc.� //!J�%7H sJjt i✓+�s G.✓itN/�t,. /hfit G1SIhp rvk4 �i��,SriJt. Cd.QI%'�e...s /uc 77PV.i�+�SiArt.��' o? /yG6 �i+1.c�f ✓: /) f ?D T7fr� brx a �. /l-4� /�' e1 y'i U�,` .2 ✓/l ry'sG%J aZPl iZ T011r:�.J 1 Al W►+r: k �t + ..v�7 c cl�fK:IiI D.'1✓fir, . I n , 6>t : I / wI v 1 61 T/ TNo. d�a- I . -44r w-S -7-N.r1 �iC Da7vfh�S lJ0.,"AW7 +7/ JN >� /�t�C.•'k7t�r� riaT4 si�� Gwt•ti7e«c%—r•,J�� J/cri�C o,v 13c�•us �� irhS it -mot rj crc �t Ar a �C. , :t ''�, .1 y`�n �- i.� L y ►.:k 40" I rK;L.ti.. �. Td rMrwrit -Z -'?W- f IA--c— /*- v7— 07t 77yf� eC 7W �++,}�N7i► ••cJ iiHt '71AL ram, e,:.r-o,,,,;+c.12 w� // BE. R �.Io Gr?7E A c�v � �;i/t ���r.:•c. � /t,1r .�./ �pliswT7.�'s S JA sr. f� L %D /�Sr.motQ✓�. wsnoP� , 6vin., G£, G S;*� iW�Ob-.tJ � �R.vbTA�t.V� �' iP�,.G�tr+,0� �;�o�Y, o % �O�c i✓�. �✓i+ N+E. M/ Ca.��s 77�..cc�7tr.v 0�7 fJ po «`3 � G r,•�r, a Q. w� �+ 7r� Z.. ! 1 C 40 51 P_ Road Co�rl4y 'rye( b Z, +... IMP ....... . t. WJSO /•nr of to,., I /, y *�I f hereby c.rtify that this in a true and correct ropresentalion of a eurvey of the boundarive of Tract I and the Weet 28.5 feet of Tract H, R«gistar.•d Laoso Survey Ito. 269, files of Registrar of 7'ttles, County of Hennepin, and the locatl�•n .•f all 4•xistl,ng buildings. if- any, thereon, an.] the proposed location of a pro{rrsed building. tt duas nut purport to show other isq+r.rv,~nts or ercrrwchments. I �1.1 1': S •?ROI.I•' ! INt . 11.:, mark., �+u ,.:r.•nl.,-.f act f Y 1l7h1 ♦.0 Dnr . •••rien 6 :•�.fnru��•: Ip ^0 Pri, • ATpe, sTop. MO � � 1 _ter "OL ti 4 - OT GARAGE PLANS____ wltrom I cop, etcc#- wf4 W/ ;19A I it- — 10 C40r* OFT "I vr4 T"Paie" arm r-)4P M*WMCH ' F vow* aim" low Wk. I ass ,.:..e•r.eaT.a� -- � cr -- leQl r i a w Mdb SITE PLAN TO: Planning Commission Chairman Kelley � Planning Commission Members City Administrator Bernhardson FROM: Jeanne Mabusth, Building & Zoning Administrator DATE: March 14, 1988 COUPY, P¢ °?CMG SUBJ: 1i12D7 Catherine A. Cram, 3760 Watertown VnALd Preliminary Subdivision - Public Hearing98 ZoningDistrict - RR-lA CITYJ Total Area - 71.99 Acres V Application - Subdivision -'plat 3 _.ots - Type III Classification Lot 1, Block 1 = 22.27 acres Lot 2, Block 1 = 30.1 acres Lot 1, Block 2 = 18.6 acres Outlot A = .95 acres Pertinent Ordinances - Section 11.03, Definition 66c - Class III Subdivision - Designated wetland, dedication of public road. Section 10.27, Subd. 2 - One -family deta^hed dwelling allowed - 2 principal residences existing - non- conforming use. Section 10.20, Subd. 3(N) - Barns used for domestic purposes require 75' setback from adjacent lot lines and 150' setback from adjacent residences. Barns = 75'+ Existing residences = 200'+ Section 11.03, Definition 26 - OutlotA - unbuildahle lot - covenant required to confirm unbuildability. Section 10.L3 Subd. 9(A) - Barns, accessory structures :oc:Ated on proposed Lot 1 wit'iout principal structure. List of Exhibits - A - Application B - Plot Map C - Property Owners list D - Engineers Report E - Preliminary Plat The applicant proposes the division of her 72 acre homestead into three lots. Each lot meets the lot standard requirement of tt. RR-1A Zoning District. All existing residential structures meet the required 50 and 100' setback. The barns as noted above meet the minimum 75' setback from the adjacent rssidentia 1 lot lines and also the required 150' from existing residence structures. The new barns can only be used for the domestic keeping of animals at the '. 5' setback. The final resolution approving the plat should note this for future owner of Lot 1. It is staffs' understanding that Lot 1 is the only lot that will Zoning File #1257 March 14, 1988 Page 2 of 3 he sold for new residential development. Per Section 10.27 Subdivision 2, the two residences on proposed Lot 2 remain a non -conforming use. Applicant at this time does not wish to divide off the rental house. In review of the current proposal (relation of proposed lot lines to existing improvements) the house with five acres can be subdivided satisfying all RR-lA standards at a future date. Staff would recommend if proposed Lot 2 i-, further subdivided in the future -hat a determination be made regarding the rental unit. The fi,.al resolution should include this notice to the applicant. Per Section 10.03 Subdivision 9 (A), in creating Lot 1, Block 1 the City is asked to approve creation of a non -conforming use. The accessory structures/barns cannot receive the credit of the principal residence. Once again, staff has been made aware that this is the lot that will be sold for immediate development but the city may wiph to establish a 1 imit on the duration of the time the structures :.emain non -conforming. Staff would suggest if the property has not been sold within a year that the appl icant would have to legally combine Lots 1 and 2 (or, if the new owner has not obtained a building permit for a pri.:^ipal structure within I year, the barns would have to be remc.:ed). This again may also be a restriction to be included in a final resolution for the plat. Per Section 11.03 Definition 26, the outlot consisting of 0.95 acres is unbui ldable and may be considered for combination with an adjacent property on the south side of Luce Line. The City will ask for appropiate dedication of Stubbs Bay Road and Watertown Road. The designated wetlands within the east portion of the property will be defined in angles and bearings on the final plat. In addition the c:.ty will ask for a Flowage and Conservation Easement over the wet -and area. The City Engineer has reviewed the suDd iv ision in regard to access and finds adequate area to define safe access to the proposed lots. The City Engineer does caution that Lot 1 Block 1, because of the curve, early care be given in contacting the city for safest location of a future access to Lot 1 Block 1. Septic testing has not been required foi proposed lots because they clearly exceed 5 acres in area. The existing septic systems that serve the residences are conforming and meet all sethack standards from newly proposed lot lines. We have not required alternate septic testing because of the 30 acre area. Zoning File #1257 march 14, 1988 Page 3 of 3 "f Recommendation - To approve the 3 lot plat application of Brine Cram of the property located at 3760 Watertown Road cling all standar-Is of the RR-lA Zoning District and the on- �i t,- soptir code have been satisfied. This approval is subject to the following conditions: 1. Dedication of right-of-way for Watertown Road and Stubbs Bay Road as shown on the preliminary plat. 2. Define the wetlands in angles and bearings and applicant to grant Flowage and Conservation Easement over the defined wetland area. 3. Payment of $200.00 for park fees for Lot 1 Block 1 at 5100.00 and Lot 1 Block 2 at $100.00. 4. Applicant to be placed on notice that any future subdivision of Lot 2 Block 1 must address the issue of the second residential unit by providing a 5 acre parcel for second reside ntial rental unit or a conditional use permit for a non -rental caretaker unit. 5. If Lot 1, Block 1 has not been sold within a year of the approval date of the final plat, applicant shall either legally combine Lot 1 Block 1 with Lot 2 Block 1 or remove the barns. If the lot has been sold and a building permit has not been issued for a principal residence within a year of the approval date of the final plat, the new owner will be asked to remove the subject structures. Planning Commission may wish to amend expiration date. 6. Outlot A to be designated as an unbuildable lot and may be combined with an adjacent property on the south side of the Luce Line as part of a future buildable site. 7. Future owner of Lot 1 Block 1 is advised to contact City prior to site development in selecting the location of a future access. 8. Future owner of Lot 1 Block 1 is hereby advised that the setback of the barns wi l l only allow the use of t` - barns for the non-commercial keeping of ani^:1F-. Additional Comments and Planning Commission Recommendation - March 24, 1988 Page 4 of 4 Staff advised the Planning Commission that they did not have the opportunity to discuss the condition of approval that dealt with the accessory structures on Lot 1, Block 1. Unfortunately, the applicant has been out of town and her representative at the meeting •rdon Coffin, also did not have a chance to discuss it with her. Staff a ;ed the Planning Commission that Ms. Cram would be back in town that evening and that she would have the opportunity to discuss it with staff prior to the Council's action. Staff has not heard from the applicant as of this writing and had scheduled subdivision approval for the Council meeting of March 28th. The Planning Commission had no problem with the review comments of staff nor of the staff recommendation and voted unanimously to approve the application per the staff recommendation. The enclosed resolution has been drafted per the Planning Commission's approving recommendation. City of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. A RESOLUTION GRANTING APPROVAL OF THE PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR CATHERINE A. CPhM IN THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 32, TOWNSHIP 118, RANGE 23, HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA APPLICATION NO. 1257 WHEREAS, Catherine A. Cram (hereinafter "the applicant") filed a formal subdivision application with the City on February 29th, 1988 for the purpose of platting three lots of the property legally described as follows: See attached Exhibit A (hereinafter "property"); and WHEREAS, after due published and mailed notice in accordance with Minnesota Statues 462.358 et. seq. and the City of Orono Zoning and Subdivision C des, the Orono Planning Commission held a public hearing on March 21st, 1988, at which time all persons desiring to be heard concerning this application were given the opportunity to speak thereon; and WHEREAS, at their regular meeting held on March 28th, 1988, the Orono City Council considered the subdivision application of the applicant, noting the following findings of fact: 1. The property is located within the RR-lA Single Family Rural Residential zoning district requiring a minimum of 5 acres of dry land and 300' of width within each newly created lot. 2. The property contains a total of 71.99 acres of dry contiguous land. 3. Each of the three lots created in this subdivision shall be served by individual curb cuts off of Watertown Road. 4. All lots meet the rek.,uired 300' width at the rear of the front yard/street setback line adjacent to an approved public road. 5. A single family residence can be constructed on all proposed lots without the need for further variances. 6. Septic testing has not be required with this subdivision application as each lot contains well over five acres in area, as fellows: Lot 1. Block 1 = 22.7 acres in area Lot 2, Block 1 = 30.1 acres in area Lot 1, Block 2 = 18.6 acres in area F _ q - 1 of 3 City of ORrONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. The existing septic systems that serve the residences on Lot 1, Block 1 are conforming and meet all setback standards from the newly proposed lot lines. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that based upon either one or more of the findings noted above, the City Council of the City of Orono hereby approves the preliminary plat application of Catherine A. Cram per plat drawings by Mark S. Gronberg, dated February 19, 1988, subject to the following conditions: 1. Prior to the issuance of building permits for new construction, the final plat must be filed with either the Hennepin County Recorder's Office or Registrar of Titles. 2. Applicant is advised that the final resolution approving the three lot plat that will be filed against the CLiains of title of the property will ccntain the following conditions: A. Any future subdivision of Lot 2, Block 1 must address the issue of the second residential unit by providing either a five acre lot for said unit or a conditional use permit for a non - rental caretaker unit. B. If Lot 1, Block 1 has not been sold within a year of the approval date of the final plat, applicant shall either legally combine Lot 1, Block 1 with Lot 2, Block 1 or remove the barns. If the the lot has been sold and a building per►^.-- has riot been issued for a principal residence within a year of the approval date of the final plat, the new owner will be asked to rerove the subject structures. C. Future owner of Lot 1, Block 1 would be further advised that the setback of the barns will only allow the use of the barns for the non --commercial keeping of animals. 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: FINAL PLAT SUBMITTALS 1. 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 per preliminary plat drawings. h) Describe wetlands within Lot 2, Block 1 with angles and bearings and define as drainage easement. Page 2 of 3 'F City of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL 5 c: NO. c) Dedication of "drainage and utility easements" 10' wide along all perimeter property lines and 5' each side of internal property lines. d) Dedication of road right -of —day for roads shown as Watertown Road and Stubbs Bay Road. 2. LEGAL DOCUMENTS required: a) Title opinion addressed to the City. All owners, mortgage holders or others with property interest indicated therein shall sign the plat and all other documents affected by such interest. b) The applicant must provide zertified copies of all recorded easements currently affecting the property. c) Executed Flowage & Conservation Easement (see copy attached). Legal description to be filled out as follows: The drainage easement as shown in Lot 2, Block 1, plat name , Hennepin County, Minnesota. 3. FEES TO BE PAID: Total Due $500.00. a) Park dedication fee per current schedule: $100.On for each newly created lot. Total Fee: $200.00. b) Final plat fee: $150.00. c) Legal fee for plat and asscciated documents: $150.00. Adcpted by the City Council of -:he City of Orono, Minnesota at a regular meeting held this 28th day of Marzh, 1988. ATTEST: Dorothy M. Hallin, City Clerk Jares R. Grabek, Mayor Page 3 of 3 EXHIBIT A Resolution No. EXISTING LEGAL DESCRIPTION That part of the Sou'heast Quarter of the Southwest Quarter, Section 32, Township 118. Range 23, described as beginning at a point on the East line of said Southeast Quarter of the Southwest Quarter distant 449.62 feet South from the Northeast corner of said Southeast Quarter Of the Southwest Quarter. thence West, at rlght angles to said East line, a distance of 165 feet; thence South, at a right angle to the center line of Orono Road No. 45, (also known as Minneapolis and Watertown Road); thence Southeasterly :long said center line to the tast line of said Southeast Quarter of the Southwest Quarter; thence North along said East line to the point of beginning• according to the Government Survey thereof. That part of the Southwest quarter of Section 32, Township 118 North, Range 23 West of the 5th Principal keridlan, described as follows: ceglnning at a paint on tee East line of said Southwest quarter distant 409.32 feet South, as measured along said East line, from the Northeast corner of said Southwest quarter; tr,ence West parallel with the North line of said Southwest quarter a distance of 575.00 feet; thence South parallel with said East line of the Scuthwest quarter a distance of 350.U0 feet; thence West parallel with said North line of the Southwest quarter a distance of 445.00 feet; thence Nortn• parallel with said East line of the Southwest quarter to said North line of the Southwest quarter; thence West along said North line to a point 990.CU feet East, es measured along said North line, from the Northwest corner of said Southwest quarter; thence South parallel with the Welt line of said Southwest quarter a distance Or 439.31 feet; thence West parallel with said North line of the SOuthwe,L quarter a ul,'-.nce of 3,;d.:,u ii•Gt: uLti,e :--. ". ia:ail:1 wl?h :.;Id :c;t line of tie Sx*Jwst quarter a dirt.-xe'of 439.31 feet; thrice I1Kt parallel with said IlLr h lire of tie SNtJw!SL quarter to a point 520.5 feet East measw ed along said paral let line from the West line of said Southwest quarter; thence South parallel with said West line to the South line of said Southwest quarter; thence Last aier,g said South line to the Southeast corner of the Southwest quarter of said Southwest quarter; thence North along the Last line of said SOuthwest quarter of Me SOUL"west quarter to the Conterllreof Watertown 'toad; thence Southeasterly along Elie center line of said road to the East line Of said Southwest quarter; thence North along said East line of the Southwest quarter to the point of beginning, EXCEPT that part of said Southeast quarter of the Southwest quarter described as beginning at a point on the East line of said Southeast quarter of the Southwest quarter distant 449.62 feet South from the Nortrea,L corner of said Southeast quarter of the Southwest quarter; thence West, at right anyles to said East line, a distance of 165 feet; thence South, at a right angle. to the center line of Watertown Road; thence Southeasterly along said center line to the East line of said Southeast quarter of the Southwest quarter; thence North along said East line to the point of beginning, ALSO EXCEPT that part of the Southwest quarter of Section 32 lying within railroad right of way as described in Book 742 of Deeds, Page 612, as Document No. 6030SO, ALSO EXCEPT that part of said SoutNest quarter of the Southwest quarter described as follows: Beginning at the Southeast corner of said Southwest quarto, of the Southwest quarter; thence North along the East line of said Southwest quarter cf the Southwest quarter to the center line of Watertown (toad; thence Nurthwesterly along said center line to its intersection with a line drawn parallel with and IU9.10 feet Westerly, measured at right angles, from said East line of the Southwest quarter of the Southwest quarter; thence South along said parallel :ine to the South line of said Southwest quarter of the Southwest quarter; thence East along sued 5outh Illy to the p0!nt of beginning. Date Rec'd By # o- Fee Rec' d �SU CITY OF ORONO SUBDIVISION APPLICATION PORN ---- --------------------------------------------------------------------- APPLICANT Name C,4Tft,4e-/rl/g 4. G',eg Telephone 47.3 - 966g Mailing Address —1760 :✓4rEe7'OWA✓ ,�7Ost10 Mn/ S53S9 PROPERTY Name S . A. Telephone OWNER Mailing Address (Attach list if more than one) -------------------------------------------------------------------------- PROPERTY LOCATION �J M-4Pc.! A-�iN MAI Street Address 3760 MIgTg-r-TOWAj TOAD SS3S7 Property Identification No. (P.I.D.) Complete Legal Description to be attached to application --------------------------------------------------------------------------- EXISTING LAND USE - Number of Tax Parcels 2 Development Size 71.49 Acres Dry Land 0.5 o Acres Wet Land 71.99 Acres Total, all parcels Present Use (check) ,/ Residential; no. of units / Other (specify) Present Zoning District 1— A ---------------------------------------------------------------..ClIYl;'FI1:�^�ti PROPOSAL Division for Tax Purposes FINAXE OFFICE 1350200000 Lot Line Rearrangement Only ( no new building si$legb�r ✓ Subdivision for New BuildingSites CHECK R 250.0% RECEIPT-THANA• YOU Number of Building Sites: Existing Unit#06323O CX1 R01 TJC,= 2 New Units 01r1�0 3 Tot -al Units Proposed Gross Density 3 Units per 709 Acres Minimum Lot Size:' r 131 zt.ZIAe- 3 114-1100 L La 51 S L 1 13 L Ig•bb e.L Proposed Use: (check) Square Feet Dry Buildable Land Residential Other (specify) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- (OVER) MINIMUM MATERIAL NECESSARY FOR COMPLETE PRELIMINARY APPLICATION 1. Application Completed 2. Preliminary Plat information on Certificate of Survey. 3. Certified Property Owner's list of owners within 350' (this list can be obtained from the Hennepin County Department of Finance A-603 Government Center 348-3271) 4. Stamped, legal sized envelopes (M10) pre -addressed to each of the names on the above list with no return address. Certification by Zoning Department that Preliminary Plat Application is complete. Zoning Officials Signature Date -------------------------------------------------------------------------- MINIMUM MATERIAL NECESSARY "OR COMPLETE FINAL PLAT APPLICATION 1. 2. 3. 4. 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. 00 2 SO t 5. Developers Agreement and acceptable form of security. Certification by Zoning Department that Final Plat Application is compicte. Zoning Officials Signature Date --------------------------------------------------------------------------- FEES Sketch Plan Review (Class I, II & III) $150.00 Preliminary Review (Class I & II Subdivisions) $250.00 Preliminary Review $300.00 plus (Class III and all non-residential) 20.00/lot Final Plat Review (Class III) $150.00* *(Plus any -------------------------------------------------------------------------- legal or engineering charges) Applicant has read the above and hereby agrees to provide all information required or requested by the Zoning Administrator, City Engineer, City Attorney, Pla.ning Commission and Council necessary to process this application and further agrees to pay all additional fees established by ordinance. -------------------------------------------------------------------------- Applicant' s Signature . � c_f „r ,,2 A __ Date Z/ZS,/A,a Owner's Signature f �.` ,tom. �, ( L Date 0/,'5/88 Applicant must have allAsubmittals into the City office 25 days before the 71anning Commission Meeting. Planning Commission Meetings are usually held on the third Monday of each month. RUN DATE 02/25/88 BATCH 003 38 05-117-23 21 0002 PROP ADDR OWNER NAME JOHN BURGER ETAL TAXPAYER JOHN BURGER NAME 70R 3750 BAYSIDE RD LONG LAKE MN 55356 38 05-117-23 22 0007 PROP ADDR 03960 BAYSIDE RD OWNER NAME M G 6 S R FILBRANDT TAXPAYER MICHAEL FILBRANDT NAME/ADDR 3960 BAYSIDE RD MAPLE PLAIN MN 55359 38 32-118-23 23 0008 PROP ADDR 00460 ORCHARD PARK RD OWNER NAME ROBERT J A LORRAINE E RODEN TAXPAYER ROBERT J i LORRAINE E RODEN NAME/ADDR 460 ORCHARD PARK RD LONG LAKE MH 55356 38 32-110-23 31 0003 PROP ADDR OWNER NAME E C i J H BROWN TAXPAYER EDWARD C i JUDY H BROWN NAME/ADDR 355 STUBBS BAY RD N LONG LAKE HN 55356 38 32-118-23 32 0002 PROP ADDR 03980 WATERTOWN RD OWNER NAME ORCHARD PARK FARM INC TAXPAYER ORCHARD PARK FARM INC NAME/ADDR 3980 WATERTOWN RD MAPLE PLAIN MN 55359 38 32-110-23 33 0002 PROP ADDR 03785 WATERTOWN RD OWNER NAME JAMES F BROOKS TAXPAYER JAMES F BROOKS NAME/ADDR 3785 WATERTOWN ROAD MAPLE PLAIN MH 55359 HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORMATION SYSTEM PROPERTY OW74ERS LIST 38 05-117-23 21 0015 03750 BAYSIDE RD JOHN BURGER ETAL JOHN BURGER 3750 BAYSIDL +D LONG LAKE MN 55356 38 05-117-23 22 0009 03830 BAYSIDE RD BETTY MINER ET AL RICHARD F i KATHLEEN A KYLE 3360 BAYSIDE RD WAYZATA MN 55391 38 32-118-23 ;4 0004 LISLE VICKERMAN JR ET AL ORCHARD PARK FARM INC 3980 WATERTOWN RD MAPLE PLAIN MN 55359 38 32-118-23 31 0004 03760 WATERTOWN RD CATHARINE A CRAM CATHERINE A CRAM 3760 WATERTOWN RD MAPLE PLAIN MN 55359 38 32-118-23 32 0004 03955 WATERTOWN RD P A C OGLAND PAUL d CYNTHIA OGLAND 3955 WATERTOWN RD MAPLE PLAIN MN 55359 38 32-118-23 34 0001 CATHARINE CRAM CATHARINE CRAM 3760 WATERTOIRM RD MAPLE PLAIN MN 55359 REPORT NO. PI435401 PAGE 4 38 05-117-23 22 0004 M G i S R FILBRANDT MICHAEL FILBRANDT 3960 BAYSIDE RD MAPLE PLAIN MH 55359 38 32-118-23 23 0006 STEPHEN 0 TOWLE STEPHEN D TOWLE 5003 MIRADA OR TAMPA FL 33624 38 32-118-23 31 0001 00385 STUBBS BAY RD N PAMELA F GREGORY PAMELA BUTTERFIELD C/O HOLLYBROOK E CO 510 BAKER BLDG MPLS MN 55402 38 32-118-23 32 0001 03940 WATERTOWN RD ROBERT TAYLOR ETAL ROBERT TAYLOR 3940 WATERTOWN ROAD MAPLE PLAIN MN 55359 38 32-118-23 33 0001 03925 WATERTOWN RD LOREN BUTTERFIELD LOREN BUTTERFIELD RT 2 BOX 43 MAPLE PLAIN MN 55359 38 32-118-23 34 0002 00095 STUBBS BAY RD N NORMAN E WALKER ETAL NORMAN E WALKER 1649 COLLEGE SOUTH BEND IN 46628 a . I RUN DATE 02/25/88 HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORMATION SYSTEM REPORT NO. PI435401 PROPERTY OWNERS LIST PAGE 5 BATCH 003 38 32-118-23 34 0003 PROP ADDR 00075 STUBBS BAY RD N OVINER NAME SORINA RASMUSSEN TAXPAYER SORINA RASMUSSEN NAME/ADDR 75 STUBBS BAY RD N MAPLE PLAIN MN 55359 38 32-118-23 34 0010 PROP ADDR 03765 WATERTOWN RD OWNER NAME GERDA L KENNEDY TAXPAYER LARRY L COOK NAME/ADDR 3765 WATERTOWN RD MAPLE PLAIN MN 55359 38 32-118-23 42 0002 PROP ADDR 00350 5rJBBS BAY RD N OkNER NAME ALBERT W DRAVES JR i WIFE TAXPAYER ALBERT W DRAVES JR NAME/ADDR 350 N STUBBS BAY RD LONG LAKE MN 55356 38 32-118-23 43 0002 PROP ADDR 03520 WATERTOWN RD UWNLk NAME G d G YCi1::z TAXPAYER GP.EGORY YOUNG NAME/ADDR 3520 WATERTOWN RD LONG LANE MN 55356 38 32-118-23 43 0006 PROP ADDR 03565 WATERTCWN RD OWNER NO17E 0 M DLR04 ET AL W/L EST TAXPAYER DORALINE M DUNN NAME/ACDR 3565 WATERTON ROAD LONG LAKE MN 55356 38 32-118-23 34 0004 00065 STUBBS BAY RD N R E A KROEGER RICHARD G KROEGER 65 N STUBBS BAY RD MAPLE PLAIN MN 55359 38 32-118-23 34 0011 03685 WATERTOWN RD THOMAS JOHN MAXWELL THOMAS JOHN MAXWELL 3685 WATERTOWN RD MAPLE PLAIN MN 55:8 38 32-116-23 42 0003 00200 STUBBS BAY RD N WELCON Q PETERSON A WIFE WELCON Q i ELEANOR PETERSON 200 N STUBBS BAY RD RT 2 BOX 442 LONG LAKE M11 55356 38 32-118-23 43 0003 03580 WATERTOWN RD MICHAEL G FILORANOT ETAL SHIRLEY FILBRANDT 3580 WATERTOWN RD LONG LAKE MN 55356 38 32-118-23 43 0012 G 6 E MACKINNON GEORGE 6 ELIZABETH MACKINNON 5329 US COURT HOUSE WASHINGTON D C 20001 38 32-1/8-23 34 0009 03743 WATE.:?0'WN RD G F BUTTERFIELD ETAL - NED BUTTERFIELD 3745 WATERTOWN RD MAPLE PLAIN MN 55359 38 32-1 42 0001 00400 STUBBS S BAY RD N MARGARET M STUBBS MARGARET M STUBBS 400 N STUBBS BAY ROAD LONG LAKE MN 55356 38 32-118-23 42 0004 �.�. 00220 S i U7BS BAY RD N C i G BOLLIS CHRISTOPhER BOLLIS 220 STUBBS BAY RO LONG LAKE MN 55356 38 32-118-23 43 0004 CHERRY C STUBBS CHERRY STUBBS 2920 FOX ST LONG LAKE MN 55356 TOTAL BATCH 003 00032 RUN DATE 02/25/88 BATCH 001 HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORMATION SYSTEM PROPERTY OWNERS LIST REPOR f rev. OT435401 PAGE b I CERTIFY THAT THE fNCTS REPRESENTED ARE AN ACCURATE AND TRUE REPRESENTATI—, `F INFORMATION AS IT APPEARS THIS DATE ON THE RECCRDS OF THE HEt4NEP. COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF �OPE Y11AXATION TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLE' AND BELIEF. DATE Z% �� _ BY Sonestroo Rosene y Anderiik & Associates Engineers & Architects Otto G Bonestroo. PE Kerth A Gordon. PE Thomas W P1e:erson, PE Charles A Er-ckson Robert W Rosen. PE Richard W Foster, PE Michael C Lynch. PE Leo M Prwetsky Joseph C Andeflk. PE Donand C Burgardt. PE James R Maland, PE Harlan M Olson Bradford A Lemberg, PE Jerry A Bourdon. PE Kenrseth P Anderson, PE Susan M Ebe,l,n Richard E Turner. PE Mark A Hanson, PE Keah A Bachmann, PE Mark A Se.p James C Olson. PE Ted K Field. PE Mark R Ro11s, PE Glenn R Cook, PE Michael T Pautmann. PE Robert C Russek, AIA Thomas E Noyes, PE Robert R Plefferle. PE Thomas E Argus, PE Rohen G Schunicht. PE David O Loskota. PE Howard A Sanford. PE Marvin L Sorvala. PE MAR - 81988 March 7, 1988 City of Orono Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 Attn: Ms. Jeanne Mabusth Re: Application #1257 - Catherine A. Cram Our File No. 139-125- Dear Jeanne: We have reviewed the proposed 3 lot residential subdivision. The preliminary plat as presented is acceptable. Yours very truly, BONESTR00, ROSENE, ANDER (�414�� Michael C. Lynch MCL:df 8177f 2335 West Highway 36 • St. Paul, Minnesota 55113 • 612-636-4600 PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR CATHARINE A. CRAM IN THE SW 1/4 OF SECTION 32-118-23 HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA b�* 1. .f swr< ' .f-,-. 31-1—s S. It. EXISIING LEGAL UESCRIPIIGN (hat part of the Southeast Quarter of the Southwest Quarter, Suction 32, township 110. Range 23, described as beginning at a point on the East line of said r Said Westi.eattrol ghtten9l angles he saldhEast west IlneCea distancs ante of 16Sff0et thence eet Snuth South,the Na[taer lyht angle to the ceast corn nterallnnst woftl)rano Road Noer of the e.h45. (also west tknwn as Minneapolis and Watertown Road); thence Southeasterly along said center line to the cast it he of said Southeast Quarter of the Southwest Quarter; thence north along said East line to the point of beginning; according to the Goverment Survey thereof. Ihat part o! the Souttwest quarter of Section 32, Tosmsnlp t10 North. Purge 23 West of the Sth Principal Meridian, tlesc rl0e0 as follows: Beginning et a point on the East Ilse of satd Southwest quarter distant 489.32 feet South, as measured along said East Ilne, from the Northeast corner of said Southwest quarter; thence West parallel with the -North line of Said Southwest quarter 0 distance of 575.00 feet; thence South parallel with said East line of the. North Southwe estwquaithrtersa East distancee of of the 00 feet; thence Westr to parallel with saide of Norththe line of thequaSouthter;thenceuWestralongssariduNorth4 5.00 line toea�pointc990 00 feet paralEast, as measti-d along said North line, from the Northwest corner of said Southwest quarter; thence South parallel with the West Ilne of Said Southwest quarter a distance of 439.31 feet; thence West parallel witn satu north i nr: of the Southwest quarter aapoint oidistance o7 346.50 feet; urea ui*edSWU- Lalohq n.Id said parallel IIR efthe rpa the estal OII SofU Souof l west quarter9.31 feet; : ithence al let with South parallel 1d North line Of the when said Hest lne to st quarter rSoutn linenOF sold Southwest quarter; thence said palongel sold South Ilse to the Southeast Corner Of the Southwest quarter of sold Southwest quarter; thence North along the Last line o! said Southwest quarter of the Southwest quarter to the Centerline of Watertown dead; thence Southeasterly along the center line of :old road lu line East Ilse 0! said SoU[hwCSL quarter: tbance North along 5altl fast floc of tlhe Southwest quarto to the point of beginning, t%CEPI that par[ of said Southeast quarter of the Southwest Vuarlbr described as Degtnning at a point on the East Ilnc of sa ut Southeast quarter of the Southwest quarter distant 447.62 loot South from the Northeast turner of said Southeast quarter o! the 10utlwest quarter; thence West, at rlyht angles to said East to of a distance of 16s feet; thence South, at a right angle. to the center Ilne of Watertown NOaJ; Uence Southeasterly along said center Imo to the East line or said southeast quarter of the Southwest quarter; thence florin along said East line to the point of begs 1119, ALSO EXCEPI that part of the Soutfwest quarter of Section 3'L lying within railroad right Of way as described In Book 742 o! 0eeds, Page 612. as Document nu. 6030SO. ALSO LXCLPI that part o! said Southwest quarter of the Southwest ruarter described ns follows: Beginning at the Southeast corner of salt Southwest quarter of the Southwest quarter; thence north along the East iron of said Southwest quarter of tie Soutwest 4uarlor to the urnler 1 me of Watertown ttoad; thence, Northwesterly along said center Ilne to Its intersection then with Uh a line Jr awn parallel with and IU'3.10 /cot Weslorly, measured at n yht angles, from salt Last line of the SeutlhwCst quarter of the Southwest quarter; thence Said Parallel tine In the South Ilne of sold Southwest quarter of line Suutbwos t, quarter, thence List along Said Suite nth Ivy^ [0 the Do,,. beginning. 1 h0reby certify that this survey was prepared by me or under my direct Scale: 1 Inch . 200 feet —� Superrl sl nn, and Lhat I am a July It tile Land Surveyor under lhr laws U4lC ICUruary tg. 1'lIR! of tlhe State of Munntsut0, 0 . Iron marker COFFIN 8 WIOhOEior INC...ne CUEFIN b GI<O, INC. K'iy�A.•// //a Engke ineers, Land Surveyors. Planners Long La. Mlnnesuta Mark S. Gronberg MN. LIC. no. le ws Coumm, qqFE17NG X� To: Mayor Grabek 14AR 2 Orono Council Members ��� City Administrator Bernhardson OF QR040 From: Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building & Zoning Administrator Date: March 24, 1988 Subject: Rollin Lacy, 2655 North Shore Drive - Request to Amend Structural Hardcover Within 75-250' Setback Area 75-250' Setback Area = 36,900 s.f. Allowed Hardcover = 9,225 s.f. or 25% Original Hardcover = 11,100 s.f. or 30.1% Excess Hardcover = 1,875 s.f. or 5.1% Approved in Resolution No. 2295 11,987 s.f. = 12,995 s.f. or 35.2% (increase of 5.1% of hardcover) Request to amend structural hardcover within the 75-250' setback area: Proposed With Amendment = 12,825 s.f. or 34.7% Variance With Amendment = 3,600 s.f. or 9.7% Original Variance Approved in Resolution No. 2295 = 12,995 s.f. or 35.2% Reduction in Structural Hardcover = 130 s.f. or .4% Mr. Lacy has as. for special consideration to keep the 14x16' shed scheduled for removal Ah Application #1213. He proposes to not install structural decking within the 75-250' setback area to off -set the retaining of the structure. Planning Commission was asked to review Mr. Lacy's request and found no problem. Tne subject structure consists of 236.16 s.f. and the lakeshore decking area that Mr. Lacy will not install is 366 s.f. resulting in an overall reduction of proposed hardcover at .4%. If Council agrees to Mr. Lacy's request to amend the original :roval, staff will advise Mr. Lacy in writing of Council's directive. 2655 North Shore 'Drive Wayzata, Minnesota 55391 March 9, 1988 Ms. Jeanne Mabusth City of Orono P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 Dear Jeanne: �fly 0AW , I /1 The purpose of this letter is to request that we be allowed to retain the 'guest house' and remove other proposed hard cover which had previously been approved. The 'house" has historical value to the property 1 am told. In fact, it apparently was the first structure on this property. It will continue to be used as a hobby shop, etc. The actual dimensions of that building are 14 ft. 4 in. by 16 ft. 4 in. The proposed offset of hard cover is to remove the deck on the west and south sides of the house shaded in yellow on the attached plat. We would retain the deck shaded in black. The amount of deck being removed more than offsets the square footage covered by the outbuilding. The hobby shop is obviously considerably well back from the 75 ft. setback line with the lake and it also complies with side lot setback requirements. Thank you in advance for your positive consideration of this request. Please call me should you have any questions or need any additional information. Sincerely, Rollin L. and Sharon M. Lacy r 73 it Mn To: Mark Bernhardson, City Administrator coui+ ETING 218.1 PROM: Jeanne A. Mabusth, Zoning Administrator MAR 2 819eB DATE: February 18, 1988 MY AF Qt1t2 SOBJ: Geo Textile Fabric - Presentation by City E g'i at Council Meeting of February 22, 1988 Mike Lynch, from Bonestroos office, presented information and samples of geo textile fabrics before the Planning Commission at their February 16, 1988 meeting. Lynch confirmed that if a fabric and appropriate, adequate stone cover is provided, the surface is more permeable than grass in bed of clay soils. As for control of weeds, Lynch noted grass shoots will manage to weave through the fabric but certainly the system will provide a desired level of weed control. Staff feels this is a more acceptable way to the control of weeds than the using of chemicals. The concern of the majority of the Planning Commission was the suggestion that the areas installed with a permeable geo textile fabric system not be considered as hardcover. Planning Commission felt enforcement problems would outweigh the positive aspects of the policy, feeling the enforcement demands would be a strain for the limited existing inspection staff of the City. Planning Commission asked how the City could maintain an inventory/record and provide routine inspections of all approved geo textile areas classified is non -hardcover -- and the means by which the City could insure that contamination of the permeable system does not occur? Glenn Cook will make a similar presentation to the Council at your February 22nd meeting providing information on the many different types and uses of these fabrics. Note that it is a specific geo textile fabric that is used with the fabric stabilized enbankment system recently recommended by the engineering staff for properties with severe eroding steep lakeshore banks. Staff Recommendation - To continue to recommend the use of the fabrics in the control of weed growth and stabilization of banks and to delay adopting a policy that would define the permeable geo textile fabric system used in landscaping as non -hardcover until the City staff can present a system of permitting, inspecting, and enforcement that would provide the necessary controls for lakeshore properties with excess hardcover for Council's review, amendment and action. TO: Mayor Grabek and Councilmembers FROM: Mark Bernhardson, City Administrator Forwarded recommending approval. PROPOSED MOTION: Moved by _, seconded by _, that the City Council allow the continued use of geo textile fabric in the control of weed growth and stabilization of banks and to delay adopting a policy that would define the permeable geo textile fabric system used in landscaping as non -hardcover until the City staff can present a system of permitting, inspecting, and enforcement that would provide the necessary controls for lakeshore properties with excess hardcover. Ayes _, Nays 4 Sonestroo Rosene 0 Anderlik & Associates Engineers a Architects March 24, 1988 City of Orono Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 Attn: Mr. John Gerhardeart Re: File No. 139 Landscape Fabric Dear John, Otto G Boneuroo. PE Ke" A. Gordon, PE Thomas W t4lerstn, PE. Robert W Rosen.. PE. RKhard W Foster, PE Michael C. lynch, PE. Joseph C. Anderl•k. /E Donald C Burgardt. PE. James R Maland. PE. BrLem",ford A Lem, PE krry A Bourdon. PE Kenneth P Anderson, /E RKhard E Turner, PE Mark A. Hanson. PE. Keith A Bachmarsn, PE James C. Olson. PE. Ted K. Relc, PE Mark R. Rafts. PE. Glenn R. Cook. PE. MKhael T Rautmann. PE Robert C. Russell. A.IA Thomas E. Noyes. PE Robert R Pfeffene, PE Thomas E. Arqu•. PE Robert G SchunKht. PE David O loskota. PE. Howard A. Sanford, PE. Marvin L. Sorvala, PE A Erickson �f Leon M PaMlelsky/^J Marian M. Olson Susan M Eberkn Mark A Selp Enclosed please find information on fabrics for use in landscape work. We will have fabric samples available at the council meeting Monday evening. The fabric material to be used for landscape work should have a permeability of at least 0.15 cm/sec. This allows water to flow through the material at about 3.5 inches per minute. The City should also be concerned about the materials used for cover over the fabric when hard cover is an issue. Mate- rials that break down are not suitable as they will fill the pores of the fabric and reduce the permeability. We will be pleased to review these issues with the city council and attempt to answer any questions. Yours very truly, BONESTROO, ROSENE, ANDERLIR 6 ASSOCIATES, INC. JCljl Glenn R. Ccok GRC:li Encl. 24 2335 West Highway 36 • St. Paul, Minnesota 55113 • 612-636-4600 TerraTop LS Weed Control Fabric For Landscaping Effective weed control in landscaped areas and around trees and shrubs has long been a problem. TerraTop LS has been specifically designed to reduce weed growth while allowing plants to be watered and the soil to bieath. MULCH TERFIkto TerraTop LS is a modern day fabric utilizing ad- vanced textile and polymer technology. It is vastly superior to other type materials, such as polyethylene sheeting, which have been used for this application. Advantages offered by TerraTop LS are: • Weed growth suppression resulting in reduced maintenance and reduced water thievery during dry periods. • Easily cut to desired shapes, and simple to install. • Made from a non -toxic polymer which is rot Fabric Description: TerraTop LS is a woven cap coated fabric made from polypropylene polymer. It is rot proof and resistant to practically all soil conditions. The black and brown pigments used to color the fabric also act as an inhibitor to ultraviolet degradation. However, prolonged exposure to sunlight should be avoided as this will cause gradual deterioration of the fabric. proof, unaffected by weather conditions, and will not tear like polyethylene sheeting. • Has colorings which blend with many mulch materials. • Has a surface texture designee to hold mulch material and resist its movement due to water or casual traffic. • Lets the soil breath by allowing natural water evaporation through the fabric. Roll Width .........3 Ft 11/2 In or 6 Ft 3 In Roll Length ...................360 Feet Area ...........1125 or 2250 Square Feet Weight. .................41 or 82 Pounds Color ................... Black or Brown (Depending on Availability) The facts starod and tho recommendations made horein are offered free of chargo and are accwate to Ow Nett of out 1mowNdge. However, no guarantee of their accuracy is made and the products mentioned are disftuted without warranty, expressed or implied. Final detennAration on the use of any information or materiel, of how if Is used, and whether the use inf^nges any patents is fhe 8010 nspons"ty of the us*r- - Installation Instructions For TerraTop WC Landscaping Fabric 1. Gather necessary tools. Z. Prepare area by removing debris, level ground, cut fabric to size. 3. Using edge of hoe, scrape a groove 4. Lay fabric edge in groove, replace S. Fold fabric back into area to be *ad on outside perimeter of area. soil and compact by foot. covered. 6. Make "X" shaped -rat in fabric where new plant is to be . (stalled or so fabric will fit over existing plants. 7. Overlap adjoining sections of fabric s• Ai ,. ':', - large wrinkles and by at least three inches. completely cover the fabric with mulch materials. Check periodically to insure that fabric is covered by mulch materials. Direct sunlight is harmful to the fabric and proton's exposure will cause deterioration. Distribution and Manufacturing TerraTop WC is marketed by WEBTEC, Inc. through a network of local distributors. For further information contact: WEBTEC Inc or local distributor P O. Box 240302 Charlotte, N.C. 28224-0302 Phone (800) 438-0027 or (704) 552-6722 LOCAL DISTRIBUTOR: L TerraTop WC weed Control Fabric For Landscaping Effective weed control in landscaped areas and around trees and shrubs has long been a problem. TerraTop WC has been specifically designed to reduce weed grown while allowing plants to be watered and the soil to breath. MULCH ' ' C-1 TERRNtOP TerraTop WC is a modern day fabric utilizing advanced textile and polymer technology. it is vastly superior to other type materials, such as polyethylene sheeting, which have been used for this application. Advantages offered by TerraTop WC are: • Weed growth suppression resulting in reduced maintenance and reduced water thievery during dry periods. • Easily cut to desired shapes, and simple to install. • Made from a non-tcxic polymer which Is I Fabric Description: TerraTop WC is a non woven fabric made from polypropylene polymer. It is rot proof and resis- tant to practically all soil conditions. The black pigments used to color the fabric also act as an inhibitor to ultraviolet degradation. However, prolonged exposure to sunlight should be avoided as this will cause gradual deterioration of the fabric. proof, unaffected by weather conditions, and will not tear like polyethylene sheeting. • Has colorings which blend with many mulch materials. • Has a surface texture designed to hold mulch material and resist its movement due to water or casual traffic. • Lets the soil breath by allowing natural water evaporation through the fabric. • More cost effective than heavier weight r^ped fabrics. Roll Length (ft.) .. 36C 360 360 Roll Width ....... 37" 6'3" 12'6" Area (sq. ft.) ..... 11 225 2250 4500 Weight (lbs.) ..... 25 50 100 Color .......... Black The facts sieted and the recommendations made herein are offered tree of charge and are aceuratn to the boat of our knowledge However, no guarantee of their accuracy is made and the products mentioned are distributed without warranty, expressed or implied. Fine, determina- fion on the use of any information or material, of how it is used, and whe'her the use infringes any patents is the sole responr'biiity of the user. Installation: TerraTop LS is easy to install. A ruler, scissors, a hoe and a shovel is all the equipment normally needed. Outlined below io a general procedure for instailing TerraTop LS (actual steps may vary • Using edge of hoe, scrape a groove on out- side perimeter of area. With fabric extending away from area, lay its edge in groove with the fuzzy size down. Replace soil and compact by foot. If a water ring is desired, mound auditional dirt over groove and compact. Walk on outer edge of fabric to insure com- paction of soil in groove and that fabric is properly creased. Remove any large wrinkles so,. _031 lies flat on the ground. Completely cover the fabric with ground cover. Pine needles, bark and r' �rative stone are examples. Caution: • Care should be taken not to get soil on top of the TerraTop LS during or after installation. When seeds get in soil on top of the fabric, they can grow. Should this happen, the weeds are easily removed but may he such a nuisance that the fabric will have to be removed and shaken clean of the soil. • Foot traffic directly on fabric should be kept to a minimum, as there is a potential for the capping Distribution and Manufacturing TerraTop LS is manufactured by Synthetic Industries, Inc. and marketed by WEBTEC, Inc. through a network of local distributors. For further information contact: WEBTEC, Inc. or local distributor P.O Box 240302 Charlotte, N.C. 28224-0302 from project to project). After preparing the area to bt: covered by removing debris and leveling the ground, measure area and cut fabric to size, then: • Fold fabric back onto area to be covered. Fuzzy side must be up. Cut fabric from the back to the point where it will lay at the base of the plant. Cut a cir- cle a minimum of six inches in diameter to fit are.:; ; the plant stem. Whey than one fabric section is used, overlap mem by at least three inches. filaments (fuzz) to be pulled from the fabric structure. This is more pronounced with fabric placed on slopes. • Check several times a year to make sure the fabric is covered by the ground cover. Ultraviolet rays in sunlight are harmful to the fabric, and prolonged ex- posure will cause deterioration. LOCAL DISTRIBUTOR: NO 1 Phone (800) 438.0327 or (704) 552.6722 CL..S 11/84 coluNcJ, �Iyr L TO: Mark BeLnh,ardso►:; t � y Administrator '44R w� lnv 2 8 19�� FROM: John R. Gerhardson, Public Works Director! ry DATE: March 23, 1988 �� ®�lJ SUBJECT: Highwood Storm Sewer Fc sibility Report In August 1987 the Orono Council directed the City Engineer to ,erf.>rm a feasibility study for storm sewer in the Highwood area. '..he reason for the study was due to a petition by Highwood residents requesting a solution to a storm water ponding problem. Attached for review is the feasibility study performed by the engineer. On page 5 of the report i^ a recommended schedule to follow if we wish to proceed, I feel April 11 is too soon to hold a public hearing due essary notification to residents and publication of notice legal newspaper. Recommendation - To accept the story; sewer feasibility report for tl.z Hl(j1:WOod area r-.j presented and t-j designate April 25, 1988 as the public hearing date. Proposed motion moved, second, to accept the Corm sewer feasibility report for the tIighwoe area as presented and � ., cignate April 2r 11188 as the public .gearing date. TO: Mayor Grabek, Orono Council Members Maik Bernhardson, City AdministratoW7� '.VtACHMEHT: A) Highwood storm sewer memo dated August 31, 1987 B) Excorpt of council minutes 8/24/87 and 9/10/87 C) Highwood storm sewer resolution Forward recorimending approval. At the public hearing staff will address the issues of -oad and storm water drainage, estimated costs by lot, an alternative to raising the road grads and areas where temporary and permanent easemens-s are needed. cc: John Gerhardson MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD AUGUST 24, 1987 MINNEHAHA CREEK WATERSHED DISTRICT APPOINTMENTS City Administrator Bernhardson noted the vacancies on the Minnehaha Watershed District along with a letter from the Lake Minnetonka Conservation District with three individuals named that would like to fill the vacancies. City Attorney Blatz explained the reasons for the the two vacancies. Mayor Grabek suggested that the Executive Director of the Lake Minnetonka Conservation District, currently Frank Mixa, serve as the LMCD represenative on *',e Minnehaha Creek Watershed District. No formal action was taken. PUBLIC INFOf(MATION - EVALUATION City Administrator Bernhardson explained the issue of determineing whether the City of Orono will continu, with the "Mayor's Article' on a monthly basis or buds for a different format for its monthly "newsletter" to the community. He felt that the current format has .proven r be a timely means in most cases of the primary informe to the community. Counci.L thanked the Weekly News and Pioneer representatives in attendance for their assistance in this matter. It was moved by Councilmember Sime, seconded by Mayor Grabek, that the "Mayor's Article" format for communication of inforamtion to the community be continued in the weekly newspaper, soliciting ideas from Councilmembers and the public as to topics they would like to have addressed and the system be evaluated next August in the budget meeting. Motion, Ayes 4, Nays 0. HIGHWOOD STORM SEWER REQ,EST Council tahlcd this matter until the Highwood residents could be notified to attend -the Council meeting to discuss �.,is issue. 1950 SHORELINE - SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT* It was moped by Councilmemb-r Sime, seconded by Councilw.:mber Goetten, to tabl his matter until the Septer' 14, 1987 Council meeting. Motion, Ayes 4, Nay BID AWARD - FAIRWAY MOWS_ It was moved by Councilm-mber Szme, seconded by Coun^ilmember Goetten, to award the b d to Kromer Co. for Alternate Bid #2 for one used Long Tractor with Roseman Hydrogang Model 445 Fairway Mower for an amount not to exceed $14,794.00. Motion, Ayes 4, Nays 0. 12 MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD SEPTEMBER 14, 1987 MAYORS REPORT CONTINUED -Regarding the previous issue brought up in Application #1176 regarding the dedicated vs. traveled portion of Casco Point Road. Councilmember Callahan recommended that this issue be cleared up with the affected property owners and possibly require hold harmless agreements. City Administrator Bernhardson stated he would follow-up on this issue and the cost involved. CABLE TV REPORT- 1988 CABLE TV COMMISSION BUDGET RESOLUTION #2258 Councilmember Callahan stated that although the City has little control over the Cable TV franchise, wanted it noted that being presented a budget to approve over which they rave no authority to use the money was not sufficient information for public bodies to justify that substantial an increase. It was moved by Councilmember Callahan, seconded by Councilmember Goetten, thG�: Council adopt Resolution #2258 giving its approval to the 1988 Lake Minnetonka Cable Communication Cotrmission budget. Motion, Ayes 5, Nays 0. TRANSPORTATION REPORT The,--- was no Transportation Report. CITY ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT: HIGHWOOD ROAD STORM SEWER FEASIBILITY RESOLUTION #2259 City Administrator Bernhardson stated that a petition was received from residents in the Highwood Road area requesting a storm sewer to handle the drainage problem that particularly effects the Sauer and Baxter properties. 'eased on evidence submitted with the petition, sta.f recommends undertaking the necessary feasibility study for an approximate cost of $3, 500.00 to determine if it is appropriate for a storm sewer project to be undertaken in the Highwood Road area. Glen Sauer, 4104 Highwood Road, and David Baxter, 4108 Highwood Road, were present for this matter. Mr. Sauer stated that the drainage problem has existed ever since the City serer came through and destroyed the drainfield. Mr. Baxter confirmed that there is a problem and it should be fixed. Public Works Coordinator Gerhardson indicated that the destroyed line in question was a private line. MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD SEPTEMBER 14, 1987 HIGHWOOD ROAD STORM SEWER CONTINUED It was moved by Mayor Grabek, seconded by Councilmember Sime, to direct the City Engineer to perform a feasibility study to determine the appropriate remedy to limit the storm water runoff which causes a problem in the Highwood area. Motion, Ayes 5, Nays 0. 1988 BUDGET MEETING - SEPTEMBER 17, 1987 - 7:00 P.M. It was moved by Councilmember Goetten, seconded by Mayor Grabek, that the Council acknowledge September 17, 1987 at 7:00 P.M. as the date and time for the 1988 Budget meeting. Motion, Ayes 5, Nays 0. 1988 COUNCIL GOAL SETTING It was moved by Mayor Grabek, seconded by Councilmember Goetten, to establish October 7, 1987 at 7:00 P.M. as the special meeting of the Council's strategic planning process for 1988. Motion, Ayes 5, Nays 0. MINNEHAHA CREEK WATERSHED DISTRICT APPOINTMENTS It was moved by Mayor Grabek, seconded by Councilmember Peterson, that the City Council direct staff to draft a letter of endorsement of the three candidates to the Hennepin County Board together with indicated the .desirability of an ex officio position for a representative of the Lake Minnetonka Conservation District. Motion, Ayes 5, Nays 0. in" BSSBH 2648 CASCO POINT ROAD BERM IB RIGHT-OF-WAY City Administrator Bernhardson reviewed the issue tabled at the Augurt 24, 1587 Council meeting pending a recommendation from the City Engineer regarding the safety of a double curb cut. He explained that in this particular case a review of the file indicated that the Public Works Coordinator had reviewed and deleted the double curb cut with the plans giving no indication of an intended berm, however, the document with the deletion was not appropriately transmitted to the contractor which led Mr. Essen to believe that the double curb cut was approved. City Engineer Cook reviewed the plans and recommended approval of the double curb cut citing no safety concerns; and recommended that the berm be moved back to provide at least a 6 foot shoulder along Casco Point Road. Public Works Coordinator Gerhardson stated that Mr. Essen cut back the brush which was a major obstruction and no longer felt there was a safety concern subject to moving the berm back as recommended. 9187. 3 /O TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Mark Bernhardson, City Administrato DATE: August 31, 1987 SUBJECT: Highwood Roan Storm Sewer - Feasibility Study Attachment: A. Storm Sewer Request - Highwood Dated 8/20/87 B. Map of Anticipated Study Area C. Storm Sewer Project Process D. Proposed Highwood Storm Sewer Resolution E. Letter to Residents Dated 9/l/87 ISSUE - The Council to determine if they want to undertake the necessary feasibility study for an approximate cost of $3,500.00. Thq feasibility study would assist in determining if it is appropriate for a storm sewer project to be undertaken in the Highwood Road area. INTRODUCTION - At the Council's August 24, 1987 Council meeting Council at staff's request tabled the item until the Septemer 14, 1987 Council meeting. As noted in Attachment A some of the residents in the neighbcr';ood have expressed an interest in a storm water sewer study. (At present the size of the district and number of property owners effected has not been determined.) DISCUSSION - While the storm of the mil lenium brought the issue to a head particularly as it relates to Mr. Sauer's property, (annotated on Attachment P) there is a problem in this area when there is any 3 to 4 inch rain. Intent of the feasibilit,- �;tudy is to determine; .:�.) the extent of the poblem, b.) the inadequecy of the current system if any, c.) the cost of s ,-h a project and d.) if the benefit-3 gained are worth that cost. At that point it would be z:cpropriate that the City decide; a.) if a project would be undertaken, b.) if so, how ttiw project would be financeri, c.) whether the C zy would be willing to participate, d.) if once the cr;.;ts are known the people in the area are still i.nterr�st:ef in the project. The City does have recent r_;:oerience with property owners who desire service, but who do ^mot feel that the cos of that service is in direct proportion o` t:hr-ir benefit as .1idenced with the Crystal Bay project. At in the sewer ation all of the property owners do receiv;: Vim-. direct ben.-f.. For storm sewer projects the usual methoA i- t.e determine a1, the persons in the drainage district and that then those persons are assessed on an area basis as to what they contribute to the drainage runoff. The problem is that the people on the high ground generally do not consider the water to be a problem and it is only the people on the low ground that would receiie a direct and obvious benefit from such a project. At the point that the feasibility study is completed and it is determined chat the benefits do outweigh the costs and those to be assessed are not willing to sign a 100% petition waiving assessment of those costs, staff will present possible alternatives for either City participation if deemed appropriate by the Council or establishment of a general fund levy to use to fund all storm sewer projects that the Council deems appropriate. The advantage of going with the general fund levy is that this is not appealable, however to the extent only limited isolated projects are undertaken the general populous does not benefit from the levy. This is particularly the case in an area where it is anticipated most or a substantial amount of the properties particularly those located on the lake or next to wetlands are not in need of any future storm water work. RECOMMENDATION - Based on the concern as evidenced in the petition together with staff's recommendation that the problem is appropriate to undertake a feasibility at this point. PROPOSED MOTION - Moved by , seconded by_, to direct the City Engineer to form a feasibilft—y study to determine the appropriate remedy to limit the storm water runoff which causes a problem in the Highwood area. Ayes _, Nays _. July 27, 1987 TO: City of Orono PO Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 FROM: Glen Sauer 4104 Highwood Road Mound, MN 55364 To Whom It May Concern: I would like to have the city look into a storm sewer system to handle the water that flows through Glen's back yard from natural runoff , for about a four block area. In Glen's yard there is a 20 inch culvert which runs under HIghwood Road. And on the other side, many years ago, people ran a 10 inch tile down to the lake instead of having a drainage ditch which kept washing out to cross to get to their house. The water gets to 8 feet deep in pla s of Glen's yard and floods through other yards. The house at 4108,•�hich is next to Glen's, had water in the basement from this last flood. On the lake side of Highwood Road and County Road 19, three more families had their yards, trees, and shrubs washed out by this water also. There is a fire lane across Highwood Road from Glen's yard that a storm sewer could be run down to the lake between 405� _and 4075 Highwood Road and still leave the regular drain in use. I have talked to some of the neighbors and they have agreed that this would take care of the problem. Below are their signatures and addresses so you can verify that what I say is true. Enclosed please find pictures taken after this last storm tha: prove the need for this sewer system. Please keep me informed on any decisions made. Thank you. Sincerelyy,, Glen Sauer Enclosures j Neighbor's Signature �z e Address 4o2-01 � s36 S ,!UN _ swu itsrN OF 1 3l fool42 CM 06 OMM04, SLs1y1T ST LAKE ,. ,�:1.��r.;. - •. FORE (N07 MEANDERED 1 I s •:y't 4 ,w' % o I : ' ,( . ' `• • S .I 1� .Iry ly,� - >< l+�) r 7•A(t ti,. I,! a N • 11•.I l - . . - y'� t` f �• 1 f�N �•,• s / 1 / .� �=� `ill l. (��� 1 ♦. f `•9 a'•'f,r • �• •.�•"a `` • Jam- ../ ail �•• ' ''\.. ,611'. .•.,�•�•• : ••• ..; '�o`�':• •`,, �£ .l_ r`+- j r ' � • ti ti _ It � P f• • �`1 � �(. i 1r� •,,1 + ti� f • �� , �'. �• a `F,T `<' f• f �+ f'• J � h • n�i,! ` f t 'b9•' �, ' (i�) �s •P. J~I��• ' ��v ,,,,,•v . r,. f • r ?! (►L• h lbYi'} '..� ZY : } ; ` ' • 1_?-. r LQ'FI �r+� of lJ� �p • y •Cr<l 1,1.. I ...L, �•r-y ;` . �L -r'i� Ni E 3 ••"'"•" '► `�) o S -y ,,•, r:/j ` u'•; „e •Y Z7 --J•L `�-,. -`F•� ,`�.. y. ` • .i` • • •y. 1 ��r � /a ��♦\.r Qi �b••(i7-•• �•;•;• `• �a1���o�•• �1af'- ' A. •!' }.11 \` 'Point i .. ��-0 s •� v ; r �A sst ; , ` dt` �,,, w �'✓'Y % • ` S gWo ! (Ira ides l0 (0 t •}� ��i �� iS• • (�^ (h7% , / " 1 y y , .0• Ol , ._Mu-:� t3 J� //r .- i `S. ��1�} • `: • %` -a i x(�"�/' a) • / r 4�` `�+�o ♦• `'� �� \` pl r �'�,� {' (1� .. + w �( • • �i .1 1•J� .• r' ,, �t+�'�;• �`�i t-' d/ • ('a tii .:`. • r s } ���•�' I° fn,' ;r�j, // 131 •:I ,t111 t'I I• .- Y• w • , ' V k�.�• u i .y�' 1 '"j11� 1 •� . i , i,l ..�, �•\f = �l:F`a • I\ r ' •° p9 1 Iw' `. • •• '�'� ( •.GA".1q�✓'7Wj/ j)1 ti I'•�i` t_:-_... 11' 31 i$` ��i� y' 4` \ ^` ° •. u ( Ip '• �` a %. M �• 9 � A t�M�• .nl ..�I �,� �f .-� �/ I IF( ; 1,: �y� ! .ice '•, 1 % \ . y • ' -+• / -;ram • f..„ � r ' i...+ - i.�: �� ��.-..�.�. '� IfflowIF I ) M yct 1 1 Ir) • ,,� • •��. y R� r •, t' O ,� �� •' - I) ^ � -11 Val i \ � .•• n w t` O C' i• to•c T • wEsr AR,w� rOy*41- ( 1••r•w..wf.r�w.. »r``' ,���r' �, r�•, i4 I (�) ; •1(►)� M1a % 9 (I to 'I i f aa. 34 SEC.I$,T.117,R23- O 44 Alfif•'L f2fidAM COUNTY SURVEYOR • - HENNEPIN COUNTY,M:NN �c.ed future condition of city finances and he t �ying capability of the property ow ers . make such an economic study, the ouncil shout firs: prepare or have prepared report contai 'ng the following information. 1. T e boundaries of the area de med bene- fit 2. The otal market valuation f all lands in the b nefitcd area plus the arket value of each i ividual parcel or to . 3. The kin s of land use i the area and the percenta a of land used for urban purposes. 4. The estima d cost of he improvement and the amount to be aid from the general fund. 5. The total a ou payable from special assessments an a estimated levy against each parcel of I d. 6. The ratio of s e ial assessments to market valuations for tli area as a whole and for each individ I pa el, and also the ratio of all outstan ing a unpaid prior assess- ments plu the pro d one to the market value for II land in the area and for each individu parcel. 7. The imated increase n market value for each arcel of property the improvement ism de. 8. trtotal amount of bonds o be issued and eir proposed maturity. \ The purpose of such a report to indicate wheth r the proposed assessment w uld b2 too heav a financial burden on the prop y civmers invo ed and whether the prepared asse mer:-s are wit in the limitations imposed by the rul Mn the Ifiancial sment on a parcel cannot exceed the ar.-unt ncreased market value as a result of �c i; �- ement. It also should give some idea _ie burden which would be placed upe '!;s itself, in terms o` both the demand ..on ey in the general fund and the impact en ' e city's borrowing capaci _y. Summary of Steps in Sp.:eial Assessment Proceedings In general, the local improvement code con- templates the following steps: l 11 1. Initiation of proceedings. This may be done either by the council or by petition of affected property owners. If a petition is used, it must be signed by the owners of at least 35% in frontage of the property bordering on the proposed it provements. Even if the council acts originally on its own initiative, an extraordinary majority is not needed to initiate the proceedings. In initiating proceedings, or in accepting a petition requesting proceedings, the council should simultaneously order a feasibili1� report on the proposed improvement. 2. Preparation of a report. The law requires that a report on the feasibility of the proposal be prepared by the city engineer or by some other competent person select- ed by the council. This report should, but need not, contain the data suggested above under the heading "Determining Economic Feasibility." It waist cover such factors as the need for the project, the availability of necessary money in the general fund to pay the city's share of the cost, an estimate of that cost, a.•.J any other information thought pertinent and neceyry for complete council considera- tion. 3. Public hearing. This step may be omitted when a petition requesting the improve- ment has been siFnrd by 100016 of the affected land owners. Notice of the hearing must be published twice in the official newspaper with each publication appearing at least a week apart. At least three days must elapse between the last publication date and the date set for the hearing. Furthermore, a notice must be mailed to each property owner in the area to be assessed 10 days prior to the hearing stating the time and plac^ of the hearing, the general nature of the improvement, the estimated cost, and the area proposed to be assessed. At the hearing, the interested reNons should have a chance to be heard, 07 - whether or not they arc liable to be as- sessed .l4 4. Ordering the improvement and preparation of plans. The resolution ordering the improvement may be passed by a mere majority of the council if proceedings were originally commenced by petition. If not, the resolution must be adopted by an affirmative vote by at least four -fifths of the council. It is after this that the city engineer should prepare the necessary plans and specifications. At this point the council should decide how the work is to be dq?e and, if necessary, issue a call for bids. Time limits for local improvements. When a city council determines to make a public improvement, it must let the contract for all or part of the work, or order all or part of the work, done by day labor or other- wise, no later than one year after the adoption of the resolution ordering the improvement, unless a different time Is specifically stated in the resolution order- ing the improvement. 6. Performance of work under contract or by day labor. The work may be done by day labor if the estimated cost does not exceed � 5,000, if th.:.. , are no bidders on the project, or if tree only bids received exceed the estimated cost of the project. The term "day labor" refers to a procedure whereby the city carries out a public improvement with its own employees or with persons specifically hired for that purpose. No contract is given under this system; the city itself assumes full responsibility for the work. Even under this system, however, purchases of more than $5,000 must be obtaine� from the lowest responsible bidder. 6 (See Chapter 21.) 7. Preparation of proposed assessment rolls. These must contain the information listed in the next subsection of this chapter. Theji� prep��ation is the clerk's responsibili- ty. It may be desirable to conduct before and after market improvement valuation studies regarding property to be assessed to determine the amount of special benefits. (See discussion of market value, above). 8. Public hearing on the proposed assessment The purpose of this second hearing is to give affected property owners an op- portunity to be heard on the matter of the actual assessments being levied. Notice must be published one or more times in the official newspaper and mailed to each property owner at least two weeks prior to the hearing date. Finally, the total cost of the improvement project must be published in the city newspaper or, if none, in a county seat newspal er.18 It may be advisable in light of recent court decisions, to make available to the property owner an adversary proceeding at this hearing where evidence of market value improvement will be considered and made a part of the assessment determination. The hearing notice should contain a state- ment that those who wish to dispute tneir assessment as determined in usual formula fashion may notify the council, and the council can then arrange for a hearing before an impartial hearing officer. The property owner could then put in such testimony as he thinks is relevant con- cerning the improvement in market value of this property, and the city could do likewise. A detailed record of this evidence shou!d be made. The city could than adopt the assessment roll, including assessments determined on a conventional formula basis and also including those determ in adversary proceedings. 9. Approval and certification of assessment rolls. After the ► ,lblic hearing, the council must approve assessment rolls in their 4'nal form : the clerk can certify thnio the co,, auditor for collec- tion. T' u icil should examin: their assess- or; Its in a very practical way to de,- a whether or rot an appeal is liker; to result from a particular assessment and _,ther that assessm:nt is realistic in view s;; the real estate market in their city. 10. Isstrma;c of obligations to finance the impro��!r,cnt. (This topic is discussed further i:i the subsection entitled "Borrow- ing for �7 pccial Assessment Purposes.") For a of these steps, plus a full set of model four.:, s= League publication "Local Improvemcnt Cuid:. - 408 - City of ORONOr-) RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COLINC: NO. RESOLUTION ORDERING STORK SEWER FRESIBILITY REPORT FOR STORK WATER IN THE HIGHWOOD/NORTH SHORE DRIVE AREA WHEREAS, the City of Orono has received a petition frnm seven Highwood Road area residents requesting the City to rev i, w a storm water ponding problem, an.; WHEREAS, the City staff has reviewed the petition and has determined that further study of the area is necessary to determine the extent of the storm water problem, and WHEREAS, the City Council has reviewed the information presented to them and received comments from the affected property owners, and WHEREAS, the Orono City Council feels that more information is needed to determi-n the extent of an existing storm water ponding problem and if the existing storm sewer system is inadequate, and WHEREAS, the most efficient ma;-r-er in whir:: to obtain this information is to perform a fear- •ility study, which will determine the extent of the proble:A, if one exists, number of acres included in the drainage area &nd -he most efficient and cost effective manner in which to proceer: if it is determined to be a significant probl^m involving City c` Dr, o action. :VOW, THEREFORE BE IT ?SOLVED, -'-at the City Council Of the Cif-y of Orcro that the City Enginc cr b- *.nstructed to study and report to the Cc •? 1 with all conve::'.s.it speed, advising the Council in a prelimi_.At:y way as to t''_,, fez:;;ibility and estimated costs to benef fitted properties in the water run-off area. Adopted by the City Cou•-cil c2 2.a City of Ororo this 14th day of September, 1987_ James R. Grp l:ci:, Xiayor ATTEST: --------------------- ---------- Dorothy ri. Ei�ll.in, City c:lerK September 1, 1987 Dear Highwood Road Resident: On July 27, 1987. the City of Orono received a petition from seve.. Highwood Road residents requesting the City to look ir.:o a stony sewer in your -:zea. Please be advised that th;=, ,Orono Citv Council will review this matter at the regular Council meeting n September 14, 1987. The meeting starts at 7 " p.m. Yor,r comments this meeting will determine whether or not the Council will pi 1�d with a feasibility study regarding the stot-R+ water ponding (Loblem. If you have any questions, please call me at 473-7357. Since--ely, John R. --hard son, Public wo,:::a rector (RG/tln -�k Iq h 1 hq ���G :. R 2 810�8 Ott Report for Highwood Storm Sewer Improvements . Orono, Minnesota 1 Sf�B File No. 13933 IJ Bonestro t oRosene Anderlik & Associates Engineers a Architects St. Paul, Minnesota L L Bones t roo Rosene Anderiik & Associates Engineers & Architects February 23, 1988 Otto G Boneshno. PE Keith A Gordon, PL Thomas %V Petersnn, PF fharle+ A Erickson Robert W Rosene, PE. Rkhard W Foster. PE Mkha•1 C Lynrh, PE Leo M. P~lsky Joseph C Anderlrk, PE Donald C. Burgardt. PF James R klrland. Ill Harlan M t)lson Bradford A Lemberg. PE. Jerry A. Bourdon, PF Kenneth P Ar irri'm, PE. Susan M Eberkn RKhard E turner, PE Mark A, Hanson, P.E. Keith A Bachmann, PE. Mark A Seip James C Olson, PE. Ted K. Field. PE Mark R Rrlts, PE Glenn R Cock. PE. Michael T Raulmann, PE. Robert t Russek, A I A. Thomas E Noyes. PE. Robert R. Pfefferle. PE. Thomas F. A•rgus. PE Robert G SChunichl. P.E. Dime! O. Loskota, PF Howard A. Sanford, PE. Marwn L. Sorvala. P.E. Honorable Mayor and City Council City of Orono Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN °5323 Re: Highwood Storm Sewer improvement Project No. 87-4 Our File No. 13933 Dear Mayor and Council: Y E::1 MAR 2 31988 Transmitted herewith is the feasibility report for the c_onstiuction of storm sewer in the Highwood Lake Minnetonka Subdivision west of County Roan 151 along County Road 19. The report provides a detailed cost estimate of the work tieing considered and a plan of the area. We would be pleased to meet with the City Council at your convenience to review the proposed project. Respectfully submitted, BONESTR00, ROSEN'E, ANnERLIR i ASSOCIATES, INC. Glenn R. Cook GRC:li I hereby certify that this report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Registered Pr-fessional Engineer under the laws ofthe State of Minnesota. Glenn R. Cook, P.E. Date:_ February 23L 1988 __ Reg. No. 9451 Rpt13933 2335 West Highway 36 • St. Paul, Minnesota 55113 a 612-636 4600 TABLE OF CONTENTS LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION DISCUSSION PROJECT COSTS AND ASSESSMENTS CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS APPENDIX - COST ESTIMATE DRAINAGE PLAN 2 Rpt13933 Page No, 1. 2. 3. 3. 4. 5. INTRODUCTION The City of Orono has requested this report to determine the feasibility of constructing storm sewer in the Highwood Lake Minnetonka Subdivision. The existing storm sewer system does not provide adequate capacity for the drain- age area. The residents in the area experienced significant flooding during the July rain storms. Two alternates are provided to upgrade the storm sewer system. Alternate I would provide for constructing the storm sewer down an existing alley east of Lot 11. Alternate II would provide for constructing the storm sewer along the alignment of the existing pipe. The storm water runoff from Highwood Road drains to the lake between lots causing erosion problems. Modification of the crown on Highwood Road and the placement of a berm curb is also proposed as a part of this project. DISCUSSION The Highwood storm sewer drainage area is approximately 8.6 acres as shown on Figure 1. The park area north of County Road No. 19 drains to the north across County Road No. 3.51. The drainage area is currently served by an inadequate storm sewer sys- tem. The outfall line consists of a conglomerate of pipe types and sizes put together as development occurred. The construction of a rev storm sewe• sys- tem is desirable to solve the current problem. 3 - Rpt13933 Two alternates are provided for constructing the outfall line. Alternate One provides for followin3 the existing alignment and Alternate Two provides for moving the outfall line west to an alley. The area where the outfall line is proposed for either alternate is congested. Construction will result in considerable disruption of existing driveways and yard areas. The outfall line should be constructed as 21 inch reinforced concrete. The street modifications on Highland Road would consist of placing a var- iable thickness (1/2' to 31) bituminous surface with a berm curb to control the runoff. The storm water runoff would be directed northeast into the new storm sewer system. The proposed street modifications will raise the street grade. This could exacerbate some current grade problems between the street and the garages. PROJECT COST AND ASSESSMENT The project cost and assessment rates foL cne storm sewer improvement are outlined in this section with a detailed cost estimate provided in the Appen- dix. The indicated prices are as projected for the 1988 construction season (ENR 4500). Estimated Project Cost Alternate I Alternate II Street Modifications 4 - Rptl3933 Total Cost Coat/S.F. Cost/L.F. $19,500 $0.07 --- 25,000 0.10 --- 8,250 --- $ 13.75 LIN The project costs are proposed to be assessed to the benefiting property owners in the drainage area on a square foot basis. The street modifications are proposed to be assessed to the benefiting property owners along the street on a front foot basis. The estimates do not include costs for temporary or permanent easements necessary to construct the proposed storm sewer system. CONCLUSIONS PaM RECOMMENDATIONS The project as reviewed herein is feasible as it relates to general engineering principals and consLL:_...-on procedures. Based on information contained in this report, it is recommended that: 1. This report be adopted by the City of Orono as a guide for con- struction of the storm sewer improvements in the Highwood area. 2. The City conduct a legal and fiscal review of the project prior to a public hearing. 3. A public hearing be held to determine further action to be tak- en. The property owners in the drainage area which are proposed to be assessed should be notified for hearing purposes. 4. The following schedule be followed if the project is to proceed: Receive Preliminary Report March 14, 1988 Hold Public Hearing April 11, 1988 Order Plans and Specifications April 11, 1988 Approve Plans and Specifications April 25, 1988 Receive Bids May 13, 1988 Award Contract May 23, 1988 Start Construction June 6, 1988 Complete Construction June 30, 1988 Rpt13933 - 5 - .. OWN a APPENDIX COST ESTIMATES HIGHWOOD STORM SEWER IMPROVEMENT ORONO, JINNESOTA STORM SEWER_- ALTERNATE I 280 Lin-ft. 215 R.C.P. @ $30.00/lin.ft. $ 8,400.00 2 Each Catch basins @ $1,000.00/each 2.000.00 1 Each 21' R.C.P. Apron @ $1,000.00/each 1,000.00 280 Lin.ft. Restoration @ $10.00/lin.ft. 2,800.00 Subtotal $14,200.00 10Z Contingency 1,400.00 Total Construction $15,600.00 252 Legal, Engineering, Admin. 3,900.00 TOTAL PROJECT COST ................................ $19,500.00 STORM SEVER - ALTERNATE II 390 Lin.ft. 214 R.C.P. @ $30.00/lin.ft. $11,700.00 2 Each Catch basins @ $1,000.00/each 2,000.00 I Each 214 R.C.P. Aprons @ $1,000.00/each 1,000.00 390 Lin.ft. Restoration @ $10.00/lir.ft. 3,900.00 Subtotal $18,600.00 10Z Contingency 1,860.00 Total Construction $20,460.00 25Z Legal, Engineering, Admin. 5,120.00 TOTAL PROJECT COST ................................ $25,580.00 STREET MODIFICATIONS 600 Lin.ft. Street Overly @ $8.00/lin.ft. $ 4,800.00 600 Lin.ft. Restoration @ $2.00/lin.ft. 1,200.00 Subtotal $ 6,000.00 101 Contingency 600.00 Total Construction $ 6,600.00 25Z Legal, Engineering, Admin. 1,650.00 TOTAL PROJECT COST ................................ $ 8,250.00 Rpt13933 - 6 - ] iI PARK N Scale I 200 �-- Drainage Boundary 0:31n LAKE MINNETONKA HIGHWOOD STORM SEWER PROJECT NO. 87 - 4 c z Q O Cr } z D O U ' "III I `. xi$ting Y Proposed Storm Sewer Street Construction 80NESTROO. ROSENE. ANDERUK & ASSOCIATES. INC. Engineers & Architects St. Paul, Minnesota Dote: Ccmm. 13933 Figure. I /5- CRUNC11 3 , 1 r�IYG TO: Mark Bernhardson, City Administrator "AR 2 8 V V FROM: John Gerhardson, Public Works Director CITY DATE: March 22, 1988 ORONO SUBJ: Feasibility Study - Lift Station #10 By -Pass In August 1988, construction will begin on the metro waste Orono interceptor project. project will be completed in two construction seasons. The project is being constructed so as to allow the City of Orono to by-pass Lift Station #10, a major lift station in the Orono system. So that we may possibly take advantage of contract prices established in the metro bids, I feel it is appropriate that the City conduct an independent feasibility study now to determine the feasibility and costs for the actual by-pass of Lift Station #10. The feasibility study costs will range from $1,500 to $2,500 and can be paid from the sewer operating fund. Recommendation_- To direct the City Engineer to perform a feasibility study for a sanitary sewer by-pass of Lift Station #10 for an amount not to exceed $2,500.00. PROPOSED MOTION: Moved by , seconded by , to direct the City Engineer to perform a feasibility study for a sanitary sewer by-pass of Lift Station #10 for an amo,int not to exceed $2,500.00. Ayes , Nays - TO: Mayor Grabek, Orono Council Members FROM: Mark Bernhardson, City Administrator ATTACHMENTS: Memo - Letter of Agreement 12/9/87 Forward recommending approval. The current lift station is soon do for a substainial overall and it was recommended to replace with a gravity line made possible by the Metro Waste Project. The change will pay for itself by eliminating the cost of overall plus the ongoing electric and maintenance costs. 12987.3 0' TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Marie berni�didsoii, City Administrato�� DATE: December 9, 1987 SUBJECT: Letter of Agreement City of Orono/Metro Waste Control - Orono -Minnetonka Beach Interceptor Project Attachement A. Orono -Minnetonka Beach Interceptor Memo Dated August 5, 1967 (Memo without Attachments) B. Draft letter of Agreement ISSUE_ - Approval of letter of agreement outlining the conditions under which the City of Orono approved the project for the upgrade of the Orono -Minnetonka Beach Interceptor Project. INTRODUCTION - As noted in Attachment A the Council agreed in principal to the terms outlined for the Orono -Minnetonka Beach interceptor project. Because of the desire to document in a letter of agreement those issues between the City and MWCC together with putting Metro Waste officially on notice as it relates to various permit requirements the City felt it appropriate that letter of agreement be transmitt,•d to Metro Waste Control. The one change has been that the loc :ion of the new lift station is on City rather than County owned property. RECOMMENDATION - It is recommended that Attachment B be alopted as a letter of agreement submitted to Metro Waste Control by the City Administrator on behalf of the City Council incorporate the terms under which the City has approved the construction of the project. PROPOSED MOTION - Moved by _, seconded by _, that the Council direct the City Administrator to transmit the attached letter to Metro Waste Control regarding the terms under which the Orono - Minnetonka Beach interceptor construction has been approved subject to other appropriate land use control reviews. Ayes Nays __ 12987.7 Metropolitan Waste Control Commission 350 Metro Square St. Paul, MN 55101 Attn: C. R. Payne, Assistant Director of Engineering Dear Ray, The following is our understanding of the . nditions for the MWCC to construct alternative 3B of the Orono Minnetonka Beach Interceptor project 86-51. Orono will allow MWCC to construct a lift station in City right-of-way adjacent to Hennepin County North Arm boat landing. Lift station will be set at an elevation to allow gravity flow from the west for future elimination of City's lift station #10. Orono will donate a permanent easement to MWCC for lift station. Orono will acquire temporary easement from property owners to the west to allow construction of the lift station. Orono will accept maintenance of gravity sewer lines no longer needed by MWCC. Orono will accept maintenance of two grinder stations constructed as a result of project 86-51. Grinder stations shall be of the type specified by the City of Orono. Orono will contribute to MWCC $3,500 per year for 20 years to offset the cost of placing the lift station at a location requested by the City of Orono. Orono will assist MWCC in the public hearing process. MWCC must apply for the necessary conditional use permits for the construction of Project 86-51 as required in Orono zoning codes. Sincerely; Mark E. Bernhardson City Administrator J G1287.4 TO: tiayor and City Council FROM: Mark Bernhardson, City AdministratoKk DATE: August 5, 1967 SUBJECT: Metro Waste Control Commission - Orono - Minnetonka Beach Interceptor Improvements Attachments A. Bonestroc Letter Dated 4/9/86 B. Orono Council Minutes Excerpt 4/14/86 C. Bonestroc Letter Dated 8/7/86 D. Orono Council Minutes Excerpt 8/11/86 E. Orono Council Minutes 10/27/86 F. Bonestroc Letter Dated 11/13/86 G. Orono Letter Dated 4/28/87 H. Metro Waste Control Commission Letter Dated 5/13/87 I. Metro Waste Control Commission Lette: Dated 7/27/87 ISSUE - Determination as to whether the City of Orono would accPpt the conditions proposed by Metro Waste to the project to construct the alternative originally recommended and approved by th City of Orono. I14"..RODUCTION - As noted in Attachment A, the City of Orono gave its initial approval with Alternate 3B to Metro Waste Control Commission on August 11, 1986. Subsequently on October 27, 1986 the Council agreed to the conditions noted in the minutes. Subsequent to that, Metro Waste Control Commission determined that their desired alternative was alternative "3A" which would cost them about $230,000 less in capital costs to construct. The reason the City of Orono desired to go with 3B was it allowed the City to replace a force main and primp with a grav ity line for about the same cost and at new pump which must be done in the next 1-2 years. It would eliminate annual pump maintenance costs of approximately $3,500 per year. In addition it would eliminate another replacement of that pump again in 20 years. During these discussions, the City indicated that they would be willing to trade off this annual cost for a portion of the difference in the capital cost to help defray Metro Waste Control Commission going with alternative 3B. As noted in Attach -,.sent C, however, the Metro Waste Control Commission felt that there is a $10,500 per year annualized cost difference of going with 3B, which results in no benefit to either party. Staff negotiated with MWCC and had the payment somewhat reduced bit still not to an agreeable arrangement. DISCUSSION - The Metro Waste Control commission has now offered to install alternative "3B" - the one a nk:oved by the City last fall if the City will agree to the foll A) Accept gravity lines for Cit. _ntenance (Previously agreed to 10/864 B) Accept 2 gr inder stations for City maintenance ( 1 U previously agreed to 10/86) 3���1�yQ C) Contribute $3500 per year for 20 years (The equivalent cost of eliminating the pump) 1s�JJ D) Obtain property from Hennepin County for location of lift station E) City assistance in processing of necessary variance and conditional use permits for system construction, to be in accordance with City Ordinances. (Previously agreed to 1©/86) As noted, this is a significant change from the MWCC's position in May and is one that staff feels appropriate in recommending subject to the project receiving the necessary permits and the ability to obtain the land from Hennepin County on reasonable terms. This change has been in part brought about by extensive work on the matter by the Metro Waste Control representative from this area, JoEllen Hurr. PROPOSED MOTION - Moved byll:�—!, seconded by i that the City Council of the City of Orono agree to accept the terms of the agreement that the City in exchange for the construction of alternative "3B", will take over the gravity lines and grinder stations specified, obtain property from the County Department of Tranportation and direct staff to assist Metro Waste Control Commission in seeking the appropriate conditional use permits in order to construct the interceptor. This is contingent on Hennepin County transfering the appropriate proper t0-1tgtro Waste on terms deemed acceptable to the City. Ayes 14 Nays cc: JoEllen Hurr, MWCC Representative L13 \� ` \ SUBAREA 4 5� 1 FUTURE REPLACEMENT � EXISTING GRAVITY SEWER TO L45 ( BY CITY OF ORONO). FUTURE ABANDONMENT L44 OF EXISTING LIO B FORCEMAIN CO. RD. 19 H 151 �> L45 V i SUBAREA 3 W / REVERSE DIRECTION OF FLOW FROM MH•29 to MH-33 33 W / B" Pvc. IB' RCP ABANDON EXISTING L45 I! FORCEMAIN .� =I�T>!CI►OglIa ``V oxmlo� ORONO INTERCEPTOR IMPROVEMENTS MWCC PROJECT 85-67 BONESTROO, ROSENE, ANDERLIK Q ASSOC., INC. ENGINEERS d ARCHITECTS ST.PAUL, MINNESOTA LEGEND ---- FORCEMAIN GRAVITY SEWER ❑ LIFT STATION LID LIFT STATION OWNED BY CITY L43 LIFT STATION OWNED BY MWCC M42: MWCC METER ALTERNATIVE 313 ALTERNATIVE 3A WITH RELOCATION OF L-45 FIGURE 4-41 TO: Mayor and City Council \\ FROM: Mark Bernhardson, City Administrator DATE: March 21, 1988 SUBJECT: County Road 15 Lighting and Financing Attachments: A. County Road 15 Memo Dated 2/8/88 B. County Road 15 Memo Dated 10/22/87 C. City of Mound County Road 15 Memo D. Resolution for Feasibility 32288.1 14AR 2 819 p8 Wf. dill �o /lr ISSUES Issue 1. - Street Lighting - A. Determination as to the type of lighting the City would like on County Road 15 B. Means to finance the lighting C. Selection of design engineer to undertake the project if the City desires to do project Issue 2. - County Road 15 - Financing - Determination as to method of financing the project. INTRODUCTION - At the Council's February 22, 1988 meeting the issues regarding lighting and financing were discussed. The issues were tabled at that time as Councilmembers wanted more time to consider the issues related to lights, together with more time to think through the ramifications of the financing. In a review of the financing on the project as to appropriate dates regarding required actions, the staff has come to the determination that the City will not be able to use special assessments for the portions being done by the County as the contract has been awarded before the City held its first formal special assessment hearing. This limits the City's options on that portion to General Fund and Municipal State Aid monies (which was originally contemplated as noted in Appendix B) together with an impact on bonding and special levies. The City could still use special assessments for the lighting if it chose to do such. DISCUSSION - ISSUE NO . 1 - STREET LIGHTING - A. Joint City Project - There is a savings of approximately $1,000 per City should the City of Spring Park and Orono jointly use the same design engineer for their project. The City of Spring Park is interested in such an arrangement and at their March 21st meeting they decided to go ahead with such a project. County Road 15 Lighting and Financing March 21, 1988 Page 2 of 4 B. Design Engineer - As noted before the City has cc.itacted Mr. Robert Eller, Consult:ng Engineer, to do the electrical design. His initial indication for the City of Orono that it would cost $5,500 to do the design. A joint effort of the two Cities of Spring Park and Orono would save approximately $1,000 for each one. The cost to have the engineering work done by Bonestroo is in the range of $6-7,000 as opposed to the $4,500-5,500 figure we are looking at from Mr. Eller. Mr. Eller is also the one that did the design layout for the Mound system. C. Financing - The cost of the lights can either be done by a special assessment or could be done through general or MSA financing. The City of Mound assessed 50% of their cost of street lights, which totaled approximately $127,400 for their project of whici. approximately $64,000 was assessed at a cost per foot of $14.58 for commercial property and $9.72 for residential property. (This is for a 100 foot spacing between lights.) The adopted proposal would run the lights from Commerce Boulevard to Fairview. They did not choose to run it from Fairview to Bartlett although they are now contemplating additional lights by Sefton Bridge. Comparable costs for Orono is $97,000 which would result in a commercial assessment of about $3.50 for -residential and $7.00 for commercial at the 50% assessment level. (The 100% assessment for this project would alternatively be $7.00 and $14.00 for the project.) The higher cost in Mound is due to the closer 100 foot spacing versus the 140 foot proposed here together with the fact that approximately 30% of the front footage to be assessed was owned by the City and therefore not assessed. The City of Mound used MSA funds for their share for the balance of the 50%. D. An example of the current lighting exists both on Commerce Boulevard in Mound together with Carlson Parkway north of Highway 12. Utilization of this lighting system would remove 7 of existing wooden poles along County Road 15. The poles remaining would the north side of County 15 between Navarre Avenue and the City limits. Issue No. 2 Financing - To the extent the City is no ;ping to specially assess for its expenses on County Road 15 to at least 20% level financing will have to come from internal or MSA sources. Should the Council choose to assess the $97,000 amount, the range of options are as follows (other combinations within the range are also possible): County Road 15 Lighting and Financing March 21, 1988 Page 3 of 4 (Annual Cost/General) Special General Fund (10 r 6.5%) Assessment #1 384,000 53,500 97,000 #2 284,000 40,435 97,000 #3 184,000 25,600 97,000 #4 100,000 13,900 97,000 #5 0 0 97,000 ALTERNATIVES - Issue 1 Street Lighting a. Citv owned street lightinq Adopt Amend and adopt Table Reject b. Consulting design engineer Appoint Table c. Financing Adopt recommendation Amend and adopt Table Reject Municipal (Est. State Aid Net Loss of �) 0 0 100,000 (14,200) 200,000 (21,750) 284,000 (30,800) 384,000 (42,000) Issue 2. Method of Financing - County Road 15 Sources Adopt recommendation, order feasibility, and set hearing schedule Allocations Amend and adopt Table Means of Financing Finance through MSA Internal sources RECOMMENDATION - Issue 1 - Str=.et Lighting a. Type of Lighting - It is recommended that the City go with the City owned lighting to replace the existing wooden poles. b. Consultant - Consulting Design Engineer - It is recommended that the City go with Robert h1 lers in conjunction with the City of Spring Park to do the design of the project. C. Method of Financing - It is recommended that the City assess the total of > 7`� 000. County Road 15 Lighting and Financing March 21, 1988 Page 4 of 4 Issue 2 - Method of Financing A. Sources of Revenue - The following is recommended as a source of revenue for the project: Project Costs - $481,000 Financing - General Fund 184,000 Municipal State Aid 200,000 Special Assessment 97,000 $481,000 PROPOSED MOTION - Moved by _, seconded by _, that the Council direct staff to make the necessary preparation for City owned lighting project on County 15 and finance the project by $ from General Fund - internal sources and $ from its MSA monies directing the feasibility study and setting a hearing date. Ayes _, Nays __ RESOLUTION ORDERING STREET LIGHTING FEASIBILITY FOR COUNTY ROAD 15 WHEREAS, the City of Orono has entered into an agreement to upgrade County Road 15 from Navarre to Mound; and WHEREAS, it is the City staff's determination that ornamental street lighting is appropriate for installation at this time; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Orono agrees that this is the appropriate time to consider ornamental street lighting for that section of County Road 15 in Orono that wi 11 be upgraded; and WHEREAS, Eller and Associates is an electrical engineering consultant; and WHEREAS, Eller and Associates is performing the installation of ornamental street ligthing in the cities of Mound and Spring Park which cities are also included in tche upgrading of County Road 15. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Orono does hereby contract with Eller and Associates to perform a feasibility study for the installation of ornamental street lighting on County Road 15 beginning just east of County Road 19 on County Road 15, westerly to the Orono/Spring Park boarder and report to the Orono Council with all convenient speed advising the Council as to the feasibility and estimated costs for the installation of ornamental street lighting on County Road 15. Adopted by the Orono City Council on this 28th day of March, 1988. ATTEST: Dorothy M. Hallin, City Clerk James R. Grabek, Mayor 2988.2 b ��ii�IClt MEETING TO: Mayor and City Council rLa 2 2 19' 19 FROM: Mark Bernhardson, City Administrator`, DATE: February 8, 1988 J'� OF ORONO SUBJECT: County Road 15 Financing Attachments: A. County 15 Memo Dated 11/17/87 B. County 15 Memo Dated 12/9/87 C. Memo Regarding Decorative Street Lighting ISSUES - 1. Determinar,ni as to the type of lighting the City would like he\ County Road 15. 2. Information regarding the process for bonding for costs for the project. 3. Information regarding the net estimated costa. 4. Determination as to method for financing the project. INTRODUCTION - At the December 3, 1987 Council meeting the recommendation was that the County 15 project generally be financed as follows: - General tax funds - $218,000, Special Assessments $126,000 and Storm Sewer establishment of a storm sewer district - $84,000. At the time the staff also indicated that it would be looking at the costs of an improvement in street lighting. The City has in the interim discussed whether it would be more advantageous to bond for the costs of this project than to finance it internally. In addition the City has received better right-of-way estimates, which has been reduced from $162,000 to about $135,000. The numbers however at this point are still estimates and subject to change. The bids have been received and the apparent low bidder is approximately 6% under the estimate given the City. DISCUSSION - Issue #1 - Street Lighting A.) The current project anticipates relocation and/or replacement of the present lights standards which currently are affixed to the electrical poles. B.) As noted in Attachment C NSP submitted a proposal that would have more extensive street lighting and I although these would still be on the wooden electrical poles. It would be based on a monthly ongoing cost of $6,835 per year that the City would have to pay. C.) A_lt.rrna_tiv_e Lighting - NSP itself does not participate in or install any decorative lighting prograrr,7�. The C: ' ; ::on' -acted the same contractor that has been awarded the bid by Mound a,,u is being considered at by Spring Park. The cost in total for the program at 140 feet is $97,560 in capital cost and at 110 feet apart it is $120,300. (This does not include any possible credit for not replacing current ones.) These costs do not include the ongoing electrical costs that the City would have to pay. with Alternative II it would be 3,137 per year, Alternative III it would be 4,181 per year. Attachment C also includes a layout to show lighting impact of the . 140 ft spacing on a typical section of County 15. Issue 2. - Bond Financing - issues related to use of bonds to finance at least a portion of the project are as follows: a. Determination of total amount of project (either including or excluding street lights.) b. Determination of the amount to be financed. C. In order to bond without a referendum a minimum of 20% of the amount bonded would have to be assessed. (Assuming the City chose to bond for $500,000 of the project then the City would have to assess at least $ 100,000 of the project.) d.' Bonding Process _ - The following would be steps to be undertaken for the bonding process. 1. Estimated amount to be bonded and assessed. 2. Preliminary assessment hearing 3. Determination of preliminary assessment 4. Bond preparation 5. Bond sale Issue 3. Estimated Costs - As noted in the November 17th --------- ----- estimate, the project total was about $427,000 (not including change in the street lighting project). Right-of-way expenses have been estimated to be reduced from about $162,000 to $135,000. The construction co:-t low bid is approximately 6% under the estimate. This translates in Orono's case to a reduction from $427,000 to $384,000. With lighting Alternative II it would be $482,000. Issue 4. Sources_ of Revenue - The entire procedure for establishing a storm sewer district is rather involved and is probably not beneficial for only $85,000 but would be for projects of $250,000 and larger. Comparison of previous recommendations are as follows: 11/28/87 12/10/87 City/MSA Funding 248,000 218,000 Special Assessments 108,000 126,000 Storm Sewer Dist. 72,000 84,000 TOTAL 428,000 428,000 Special assessment possible proration Commercially used - $18.00/front foot $18/front ft Residentially used - $9.00/front foot $9/front ft Method of Financing - The City has the option to fund the project internally or to bond for the project. Given the current low rate for bonds (6.5 fcc AA), the fact that the City can invest its own funds at a higher rate than what it bonds for, and the advantage to b. nding as the tax levy to pay off bonds and interest is ou side the levy limit. The City had looked to see if there was a means by which the tax levy for this could be taken out outside the levy limit without having to bond and was not able to come up with an affirmative response. ALTERNATIVES Issue 1. Street Lighting - Adopt - Amend and adopt - Table - Reject Issue 2. Bond Financing Accept Information Issue 3. Estimated Costs - Accept- - Utilize initial estimates Issue 4. Method of Financing 3 Sources - Adopt preliminary allocations - Amend and adopt - Table Means of Financing - Set preliminary assessment date and commence bonding procedure - Finance through MSA or internal sources RECOMMENDATIONS Issue 1. It is recommended that the City as part of the means to upgrade the appearance in the Navarre area install the decorative lighting system at a space of 140 ft per light for a total cost of approximately $100,000 and that this be financed as part of the overall project. Issue 2. Should the City decide to bond for the proceeds that it establish April 11, 1988 as a preliminary assessment date for the project. Issue 3. Current Estimates - It is recommended that the Council accept the information and that adjustments be made for in the method of financing estimates for these changes. Issue 4. Method g _ of financing A.) Sources_ of R_even_ue_ - The total project including County street construction is over $1.5 million just in Orono (The entire a:aount both City and County costs for all three communities is about $4.5 million.) As part of this it is recommended that the City assess about $130,800 of the project tc the abutting residents at a rate of $7.00 per front foot for residentially used property and $20.00 on non -residentially used property. B.) Means of Finance - It is recommended that the City finance approximately $485,000 through bond proceeds and that the balance of the lighting 584,000 be funded internally. The abutting residents share is less than 10% of the total construction cost and about 20% o' the City's share of the costs. Should the right-of-way costs be reduced below $135,000 and construction costs not increased, the City could reflect a prorata reduction of the assessment so long as it doesn't in total go below 20% of the amount bonded. Issues involved in the assessment are- a.) Total assessed b.) Proration of assessment c.) Length of assessment d.) Interest ra— (this generally is 1-1.2501, over the rate of the bonds.) This is the total, plus sources of revenue recommended as follows: Base Project (Revised) $384,000 Street Lighting 97,500 $481,500 Approximate Bond Amount $485,000 Financing Means General Fund 354,200 Special Assessment Commercially Used($20/Ft) 107,000 Residentia-ly Used ($7/Ft) 23,800 130,800 TOTAL $485,000 PROPOSED MOTION - Moved by __, seconded by __, that the Council directs the staff to undertake the necessary preparation to bid for decorative lighting project on County 15, that the City establish April 11, 1988 for the preliminary special assessment hearing and that the City take the recessary steps to be ready to bond for the project by the first meeting in May. Ayes Nays r TO: Mark Bernhardson, City Administrator FROM: John R. Gerhardson, Public Works Director DATE: February 17, 1988 SUBJECT: Street Lighting Cost Co. Rd. 15 Recently I met with a private consultant regarding street lighting costs for County Road 15. The attached sheet indicate three options availab'.e. Option one shows the cost if NSP were to perform the lighting. It shjuld be noted that NSP does not provide decorative light pole's. It should also be noted that the annual costs from NSP are considererally higher as they build in the construction costs in the electric rates. Plan A of the attached sheet shows an engineers estimate of the costs for installation and :-inual costs and seems appropriate for the City of Orono. If approved the consultant would prepare plens and specifications for bidding the street lighting for insta i _;..tIon during the reconstruction of County Road 15. The consultants fee for the above is $5500. Plan A is the same lighting plan and design as the City of Mound and is being considered by the City of Spring Park on March 7th, 1988. TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Mark Bernhardson, City Administrator DATE: November 17, 1987 SUB, County Road 15 - Final Plan Approval and Financing ATTACHMENTS_ A. County 15 - Final Plans B. Preliminary County 15 Approval Dated 10/25/84 C. County 15 Upgrade/Approval of Change Dated 10/31/86 D. CSAH 15 Financing Dated 10/22/86 E. Gerhardson Memo Cty Rd 15 Dated 10/22/87 F. County 15 Plans Dated 11/5/87 ISSUES - 1. Review by the Council of the final plans CSAH 15 taking comment:- from the public and identifying the issues related to the plant . 2. Review of financing alternatives and discussion of issues related to those financ ng alternatives. INT_ROD_U_CT_ION - The County 15 project was initiated by the County in about 1967. Over the next 15 years the communities considered various alternatives with the County principally desiring to go with a four lane configuration as that was what was needed to meet the County/State Aid Highway standards in order to use CSAH money on the upgrade. Because of the concern relating to the four lanes west of 19 and the impact that would have on Shoreline Drive east of 19 the project was stalled until late 1983 early '84 when the Orono Council gave its conceptual approval to an essentially two lane design with turn lanes which would amount to some widening principally at the intersections for the design. This conceptual approval was followed by preliminary approval of the plans submitted by Hennepin County on October 29, 1984, The County wanted the prelimin: ry plans approved by each of the communities prior to the submission of the plans to the State's Variance Board for County/State Ai6 Highways. This variance was considered during the summer of 185 and approval given for the variance in late summer or early fall 1985. In the fall of 1986, as noted in Attachment C, the County approached each of the Cities to see if two of the changes, one in Spring Park and one in Mound, would be acceptable changes to the prelimir.,-•ry plans. The Council on November 10, 1986 agreed with those change:, as noted in Attachment C. (When the original variance had been granted the program was placed on t'.ne five year capital budget for 1989. Through the efforts of the local communities the County moved the priority on it so that construction would take place in late '87 or early '88.) The Countv has been in the process of drafting final plans during the past year based on the approvals previously given and is now submitting the final plans for approval. In advance of the final approval the City has been considering its financing as noted in Attachment E and F. The total project cost for the entire three city project is $4.5 - 5 million. With the City responsible to provide funds for $428,000. This a new estimate that is down from the original $488,000. Issues identified at the Council's November 9, 1987 meeting included concern regarding sidewalk on both sides, the us- f special assessments for funding a portion of the project ante penalty the City would incur for utilization of MSA funds related to the use of MSA funds on a County State Aid Highway project. DISCUSSION - ISSUE 1 - FINAL PLAN _APPROVAL - The principal focus of concern in advance of people seeing the -final plans was the construction of sidewalks, the cost of which for the City of Orono would total about $47,000. Among those present at the November 9, 1987 meeting were individuals who expressed the opinion that there was not a need for sidewalks in their area, as there were few pedestrians and that there would be encroachment into certain properties. During the week of November 16th, John Gerhardson has been reviewing these plans with any parties who have been interested to call. The original inclusion of the sidewalks on both sides by the County was in response to an agreed to request by the three Cities because of the narrow width and relatively high volume for an essentially two lane road. Additionally although no objective data exist to indicate such, installation of sid-::walks along a fairly narrow route will tend to generate pedestrain traffic where none existed before because people did not feel it safe to use without sidewalks. Additionally the need for sidewalk on both sides is the fact that it is difficult to cross from one side to the other on a busy street in order to utilize a one sided sidewalk system. - Maintenance - Related to the installation of the sidewalk is the maintenance of that sidewalk. As this is a "regional" sidewalk and the fact that of sporatic snowplowing or removal by abutting property owners is a concern, the City could undertake snowplowing for a "regional" sidewalk system as the City does have the capability with its current equipment. It is expected the City would do this generally within a two to five day time period after a snowfall when all the streets have been opened up. Additional cost of this would be the time/overtime available or needed to undertake this, which once constructed the City will be better able to estimate the amount. (Probable under $2,000) other Highlighted Changes - Besides the installation of sidewalk on either side of County 15, principal changes are turn lanes particularly in the vicinity of: - Co. Rd. 19 & 15 plus revised signal light installation - Co. Rd. 15 at Casco Point Road - Co. Rd. 15 at Dunwoody Avenue ISSUE 2. FItIANCING - Types of Funding - While the City had conceptually considered utilization of its I4SA funds for its portion of the project, the fact that not all of the City's costs can be borne by the r-ISA f and (about $ 15, 500) and the fact that there is a penalty related to its use, the City has explored the following general means for funding. - A. General Tax Funds - This would be from the City's ------- --- ----- general tax budget that would be applied directly to payment of the cost related to this project. This would probably be lev ed over a 10 year period to pay off the bonds and interest for the project cost. While the City could internally finance it and charge interest the City would probably not be able to take the additional amount outside its levy limit. - B. Special Assessments - This would be after following the appropriate procedure for public hearings etc. This would be funded by levying an assessment against the benefitted property owners directly abutting the project. Payment would proably be over 10 years and would include both principal and interest. - C. '.Iunici2al State Funds - These funds are foL the construction and maintenance of the City's 10 miles of designated Municipal State Aid Roads. As noted, the use of these for a County State Aid Highway (CSAH) would result in a penalty for other MSA City projects. The City is currently updating the City's 14SA capital improvement plan to determine the impact of the penalty prior to a final recommendation. The net impact of funding this entire project from MSA is about $210,000 in lost money for the project- - D. Storm Sewer District - Because of problems that municipalities have experienced in the levying of special assessments for storm sewer projects where it was difficult to prove benefit to the person at the top of the hill who contributes storm water to the person at the bottom of the hill, the Legislature enacted legislation to allow Cities to set up storm sewer districts and have a general tax levy or user fee levied against properties in those districts. This is also 3 difficult to assess in built up areas especially for replacement of existing storm sewer. This fund would then be used to make storm sewer improvements within the established district. The City will be exploring more specifics prior to the Council meeting of December 14, 1987. Pr02osed Funding mElan _ - It is suggested that the City's costs as noted in Attachent G be funded as follows: ANNUAL PRINCIPAL + 8% (EST) COST PER INTEREST ANNUAL FRONT FT UNPAID TOTAL PRINCIPAL TOTAL —PRIN BALANCE ----------------------- ------ GENERAL TAX FUNDS 247,829 OR MSA Signals/ROW/Retaining Walls/Design and Contract Admin SPECIAL ASSESSMENT 107,747 Driveways/Curb & Gutter/ Sidewalks STORM SEWER DISTRICT 72,314 427,890 24,800 Residential $9.17/ft lst yr $.92 + $.73/ ft going to 100 front ft = $917 Last yr $.92 + $.07/ft Comm $18.35/ft 1st yr $1.83 + 1.46 Last yr $1.83 + .14 $7,200 Street Lights - In addition the City is currently exploring the cost and financing of a revised, coordinated street lighting system thru Orono and Spring Park to match Mound's planned lights. The City has just received the agreement that the County desires the City to enter into and this needs to be reviewed prior to acceptance of final plans. ALTERNATIVES ISSUE _1. -- PLANS - The following represent alternative actions the Council could take at the 11/23 meeting 1. Approval of final plans as presented. 2. Amendment of plans and approval. 3. Table for further consideration and/or information. 4. Rejection of final plans. A - IS_S_U_E2. - FINANCING - The following represent financing actions at this Council meeting. 1. Direct staff to undertake the recommended recommendation. a. Establishment of a storm sewer district. b. Undertake the special assessment procedure for that portion of funds as recommended. c. Prepare appropriate bond sale to be issued for 10 years between 1989 - 1999 with payment through general tax funds and special assessments. d. Finalize and undertake the MSA funding plan for the projects. 2. Table for further consideration 3. Amend the recommended mix plus initiate the steps to undertake that revised mix. RECOMMENDATION - It is recommended that Council consider the final plans and make any comments they have regarding those plans for final consideration at the Eecembe= 14, 1987 meeting. Additionally it is recommended that the issue of financing after the Council has discussed their ideas and issues that be tabled until December 14, 1987 for a recommendation and preliminary action on the financing. ("Final" action would be in a series of steps to implement the preliminary plan including special assessment hearings and bond passage etc.) PROPOSED MOTION - Moved by _ , seco-ided by , that the Council table until its December 14, 1987 meeting the -final plan approval together with the preliminary financing plan. Ayes __, Nays __. 5 12987.8 TO: Mayor and City Council , FROM: Mark Bernhardson, City Administrato�\l DATE: December 9, 1987 SUBJECT: County Road 15 - Financing Alternatives Attachment A. Municipal State Aid Street Capital Improvements Plan B. County Road 15 Memo Dated 11/17/87 (without attachments) C. County Road 15 Costs D. Zoning/Plat Map - Navarre E. Petitions ISSUES 1. Initial direction to staff regarding financing of project as it relates to types of funding to be utilizied and approximate amounts for each type. 2. Adoption of agreement with Hennepin County. INTRODUCTION - At the November 23, 1987 Council meeting approval was given Co the final plans for the construction of County Road 15. It was indicated at that time that staff would be bringing back further recommendations as to the financing. In addition the Attorney has been reviewing the agreement that had been received just prior to the last meeting. DISCUSSION - A. Apportionment of costs - The original allocation of costs did no: prorate the design and construction management costs to the individual construction items. This allocation does not change the total but does change the allocation amcng the three suggested financing types 11/28/87 Memo City/MSA Funding 248,000 Special Assessments 108,000 Storm Sewer Dist 72,000 428,00d 12/10/87 Proposed Allocation 218,030 126,030 1.) 64,000 428,0da 1.) The reason the per foot cost did not go up is ir:clusion of front footage around the corners at 19 and 15 where work is done. B. Municioal State Aid Streets_ - Upon staff request the City Engineer has developed an initial draft(s) of the capital budget for the City's Municipal State Aid system roads. As noted in the diagram attached to the program that the City is served in a grid system of "major" streets and arterials. This is composed of a State Highway, County roads and 14SA streets. The streets on the system have been the result of previous Council's actions and MSA program criteria. The dollar figure placed on each project in Attachment A and B is based on rough construction estimates. The plan is presented to indicate needs and funding sources. Projects proposed for c(-:tain years are not recommendations but are used to illustrate how such a plan would work. (As part of its overall goal in the transportation area (1988 Strategic Planning Goal #7) staff will, present for Council consideration during the next four months a more refined capital plan based on priorities, needs, and expectations.) Any "adopted" plan would be annually updated a.-� to costs/priorities etc. Based only on the MSA street system the City has over the next several years needs of approximately $5.4 million with approximately $1.8 million available to it in the form of funds from the State. Should the City choose to undertake a substantial amount of these projects the City will need to use its General Tax Funding together with assessments, developers agreements and other sources to make up the differe,ice. While all these upgrades do not need to be done in the next 10 years, the earlier the reconstruction work is done the less problem there will be for any attendant right-of-way acquisition. It is also anticipated that the relative cost of construction will be lower today than in the future. This layout of needs does not take into account needs that the City has for other City streets not on the MSA system that may need upgrades. Neither does it relate to needs on private, County or State roads the City may eventually take over. It is anticipated that private and County roads that may in the future come to the City would be at the standards to which the City would be build its streets. It therefore should not necessitate a substantial reconstruction amount. This may not be the case with City streets not on the MSA system. To the extent that they are not on a system however, they generally will not have the heavier traffic use that would be expected on MSA roads. C. ISSUE 1 FINANCING -- ----- ---------- 1. MSA/General Fund Financing - As noted above there are substan `ial needs in the cimmunity for the MSA funding apart from utilization of it in conjunction with County Road 15. The most immediate items would relate to the two bridges over Iillow and Old Crystal Bay together with work on Watertown Road. It is anticipated that most of the upgrading work on the streets would bring these roads to a 36 foot width which would provide minimum 32 foot width permitted by MSA funding together with a four foot bike oath for utilization with the overall community transportation system. Currently most of these roads are at a 2Z to 24 foot width. Actual design decisions would be made at the time specifications for each project were developed. Should the City choose to use the MSA funds for the construction of County Road 15 it will have a penalty of 5% each year for a total of 10 years or 50% of the total amount of the project. As an alternative the City could use a tax levy commencing in 1989 to fund the portion it feels should appropriately come from general tax funds. Funding from the General Fund would have an attendent interest cost which would either be the cost to bond or the interest lost from internal funds. Utilization of $230,000 in MSA funds would be a net cost to the City of about $28,000 in MSA funds over utilization of general fund sources over the 10 year period at 7% interest. This drops to about 17,000 at 88 interest. Current interest rates for AA rated improvement bonds are about 7%. Interest rate on City investments over the last six months have ranged from 6.7 - 9.9. Bonding or Internal Financing - Should the City choose to fund a portion of the project out of General Fund levies, the choice to bond or fund internally would be predicated on the following: a.) Fund Balance and desired uses of balance b.) Interest rates c.) Cost of bonding (about $12,000) d.) Amount to be specially assessed (G.O. Bonds for improvements must have a minimum of 20% specially assessed) e.) Levy Limits (If bonded to the levy would be outside the levy limit) This issue will be reviewed over the next few months should the City decide to use a General Fund levy rather than its MSA funds. 2. Storm_ Sewer District - The staff continues exploring whether a special taxing district or a utility rate approach to fund a $85,000 portion is most appropriate. It is recommended that this portion be funded from one of these two approaches, and not funded by MSA funds, assessments or part of the General City Tax levy. 3. Special Assessments - The major items as noted last time were for tht abutting property owners to fund the cost: - Curb and gutter - Driveway aprons - Sidewalks The costs for sgaare footage out1ine.3 last time were approximately: - Commercially zoned and commercially used property - $18.00 per front foot 3 Single family residential use property - $9.00 per front foot Generally the residential zoned properties are under 150 front feet with the majority being under 100. Exceptions to this include; a.) Balboa property which has 550 front feet, and is current- • undeveloped, b.) properties that are commercially used but hav, a residential structure on them, and c.) properties that have mope than one single family house on them. (Please see Attachment D') If the City were to fund one-half of the sidewalk costs for the single family used residential properties, it would lower their front foot rate from about $2.00 per foot to $7.00 per front foot. For a residence with 100 front feet the first year annual cost would be $70 principal plus $50 interest for a total of $120 the first year. This would be reduced to $70 plus $5 interest to 10th year. 4. Other Sources - The City has explored the use of other funding mechanisms to assist in paying for the regional cost of the sidewalks, such as charging the water customers in the Navarre area, use of a tax increment district, etc. Given the fact that the total cost of sidewalks for the single residentially used properties is a total of $13,000 it is probably not cost effective to further explore those routes. 5. Street Lights - The staff has not been successful in developing cost estimates with NSP for the project and would anticipate those would be available for January 11, 1988 meeting. D. ISSU_E_ 2. AGREEMENT ADOPTION The City Attorney has reviewed the County 15 agreement and recommends we negotiate certain recommendated changes with the County to bring back to Council for final approval. A_LTERN_AT_IV_ES - Issue 1 - Policy - 1. Accept staff recommendations. 2. Amend amounts or types of funding for the project. Meeting Action ------- ------ 1. Adopt the preliminary plan as outlined in the recommendations. 2. Amend the recommendations and adopt. 3. ':able for further consideration until the January 11, 1988 Council meeting. It is not imperative at this point that the Council determine the preliminary arrangement of funding. The earlier however such a decision is made, the more helpful it is as the City will have to explore whether it needs to bond for the project or not. ISSue 2 Meeting Action 1. Adopt. 2. Table RECOMMENDATION -------------- Issue 1. _ Financing - It is presently recommended; a.) That the City utilize a general tax fund levy instead of Municipal State Aid Funds for the portion the City decides to pay of the project, b.) That the City over the next four months work to more fully develop its MSA capital improvement program, c.) That the City undertake the storm sewer district to pay for the $84,000 portion as a special taxing utility area, d.) The City preliminarly allot $126,090 for the assessments to the properties with the City picking up approximately half of the cost for the residential sidewalk, e.) That the staff be directed to set a special asseGsment hearing towards the end of the project, but prior to September _,a order to certify for the 1989 taxes, f.) That the City determine over the next two months whether it should undertake financing out of internal funds or bond for the project, g.) That the City agree to undertake to the snow removal in the winter time on the sidewalks, h.) That staff be directed to do further work to determine if street lights should be constructed as part of the project. Issue 2 - Agreement - It is recommended that the agreement be tabled pending negotiation on d sired changes with the County. PROPOSED MOTION - Moved by __, seconded by , that the Council adopt the following preliminary financing plan: a.) That the City utilize a general tax fund levy instead of Municipal State Aid Funds for the portion 'he City decides to pay of the project, b.) That the City over the next four months work to more fully develop its MSA capital improvement program, c.) That the City undertake the storm sewer district to pay for the $84,000 portion as a special taxing utility r area, d.) V City preliminarly allot $126,000 for the ass,---ments to the properties with the City picking up approximately he if of the cost for the residential sidewalk, e.) That the st.aff oe directed to set a special assessment he,-i:ng to,iards the end of the project, but prior to September -,::der to certify for the 1989 taxes, f.) That the City determine over the next two months whether it should undertake financing out of internal funds or bond for the project, g.) That the City agree to undertake to the snow removal in the winter time on the sidewalks, h.) That staff be directed to do further work to determine if street lights should be constructed as part of the project. and table approval of the agreement until January 11, 1QQ9. Ayes Nays STREET FROM TO MILES CON-T. CONSTRUCTION REQVIREJ0;TS (x 1000) TYPE 1987 19 8 1939 19W 1991 1992 1993 1994 193S 1996 1937 C2i� 03 CO .'TY RD 15 SPRING PARK CSAH 19 1.00 RECONSTRUCTION 427 101-01 WILLD;: Or, FOX ST. O N INC ERIDGE 1.28 SEALCOAT 20 310 101-02 WILLOW DR. TH 12 CSAH 6 0.64 SEALCOAT 10 xr-'0 101-03 L'ILLOU DR. E.N. RR CRIOC' 0.01 RECONSTRUCTION 161-0s 61LLO4 DR. (a) TRAFF SIGNAL(TEMP) 0.01 NEW CON' -.TRUCTION 100 3J0 101-05 WILLOW DR.td) TRAFF SIGNAL(PERM) 0.01 WLW CONSTRUCTION 24 102-(-1 OLD CRYSTAL GAY RD CSAH 34 TH 12 I.S2 SEALCOAT )0 102-02 ODD CRYSTAL PAY RD TH 12 CSAH 6 0.60 SEALCOAT 102-03 OLD CRYSTAL GAY RD 8 N. RR BRIDGE 0 -, RECONSTRUCTION 450 103-01 W-,TERTO6'K RD OLD CRYSTAL BAY RD WILLOW DR. 0.5Y LAECONSTRUCTION :57 -Q 103-02 W-;TERTOVN RD STU683 BAY RD OLD CRYSTAL BAY RD 0.92 RECONSTRUCTION 463 665�"''� 103-03 WATERTW.4 AD MC CLILLEY RD STUBBS BAY AD 1.32 %RECONSTRUCTION 104-01 MC CULL.EY RD COUNTY RD 19 CSAH 6 0 ';3 SEALCOAT 15 252 105.O1 FOX ST. WILLOW DR. BROWN RD O.SO 6KEC'¢1STRUCTION 393 105-02 FOX ST. BROWN ROAD ORDNO ORCHARD LN 0.76 tRE'M STRUCTION 302 105-03 FOX ST OLD CRYSTAL BAY RD WILLOW DR. 0.60 itE.U43TRUCTION SS 4ik;-01 DRONO ORCHARD LN FOX ST SHORELINE DR. 0.11 .AECONSTRlKT10N 378 107-01 BRMJ RD CSAH 6 TH 12 0.75 RECONSTRUCTION 202 103-01 STUBBS BAY RD CSAH 84 WATERTOWN RD 0.40 .RECONSTRUCTION 353 100-02 STUG95 GAY AD WATER70WN RD TH 12 0.70 4VONSTRUCTION 272 109-03 FERNDALE RD CSAH 6 TH 12 0.S4 MCONSTRUCT"N 252 At FRWAGE RD N(b) BROWN, RD N. WILLOW DR. 0.50 4 cU CONSTRUCI.,A 2b2 Cl FRM47AG-c RD N(c) WILLOW DR. Q'-D CRYSTAL GAY RD O.S2 MCf*wTRUCTION "cW 146 Cl FRONTAGE RD S TH 12 00 CRYSTAL BAY RD 0.29 `11EV' RUCTION t.f',� 3`il� lli9 1��T FNID ECT FUBZ:)ING 1. TOTAL ANNUAL FUKZING NEEDS )^•A:ICIPN- STATE AID FUND 2. MGINNING YOUR MUNICIPAL STATE AID FUND BALANCE 3. Nl4)ICIPAL STATE AID CONSTRUCTION ALLOTMENT 4. r.)NICIPAL STATE AID BOND REPAYMENT S. KINICIPAL STATE AID BRIDGE OWING 6. YEAR END MUNICIPAL STATE AID FUND BALANCE OTKM F140ING SOURCES 7. ASSESNENTS 8. C00ZAL OB1.16A) IOh3 9. OTHER (a) WILLOW DRIVE SIGNAL. - SO% LONG U;a; (b) At 50% ASSESSED; (c) 61 75i ASSESSED; (d) WILLOW IhZl%E SIGNAL - MN/DOT SHARE � Q G> 427 72:2 S93 1401 S14 438 378 610 SSS 720 7S6 349 161, 91.0 0.0 ;33 IL6 1(, 166 166 0.0 0.0 0.0 166 166 166 0.0 0.0 0:0 166 166 166 en 35 - - 3sl: 350 ;t lfA 4' -427 -835 -349 -272 -212 -444 -3 9 -554 10; 126 46 377 759 50 197� 151 272 212 194 3S9 SS4 250 P NSA 5 2s�4 , � ir,41�, = i� ✓ A(77 r_. I Ow _t i �,....,•�a.a �. j 4a� (� !u� s•1L.y,�\ S ����_ It 'k, —••I! C' _,, t.Y a rJr - -- '� •.� ,y."% •;: '�_; - ; - `-3 - ((II rn a Li 1 ((,� - __ _ __ .� ��r 1 —'fir• Cl '^'H'.✓t �'7% 1 rr Al ELT tp \ Y OF -J l �' � '1 ice_. I � '�.�� .... w, `• /t - '.i - - - 'n '1 (may - 1,1 +iM"= • _� ' • .cam s i , - s- _ �• o •w, .,-„�'w:- i - ii"•--- � _ ; \ f,.Lpq ate• s,a•o t ( - [ - - � arc-1 ••, w - \ n' _ .'!% ♦ f s r ' �,,; :versa r•\ '' t."�,' = 1 �[, ` - - - . ' - ��?� � �`••(' - j... �,�a�wr;, _N;`` 121087.3 SAMM DWA T WA OR 00631AL drop IEW Cou rr 15 PFf I= $230,M 0Y 420,M PMIRT IUML (Figures in ibaurm vL-) Scenario 1 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 19i3 1994 1995 1996 1997 S23Q000 WA to Cty 15 Balance for 1999 after Lao S120.000 ; IS $12.000 verage balance' 12 " Fm allotment 166,v- Less 51 Penalty (230 s .05) 11,53° 1S4 ," Needs apart 350 350 350 356 359 350 350 359 359 350 $3.5 Million from Cty 15 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 $120,000 MSA Balance Avg. Balance 12 12 12 jg TWO THO 'T38 Me 338 19 154.5 154.5 154.5 154.5 154.5 154.5 154.S 154.S 154.5 ISM $1.545 Millial/MSA MA 183.5 103.5 183.5 183.5 183.5 183.5 183.S 183.5 183.5 $1.835 Millen/General Levy General 183.S tavy/Needs r 35� balance if Ga y.L.fzvies used en Cty 15 350,000 z 10 35,o0jyr for 10 years t:ecds 350 350 350 350 350 350 350 350 350 350 ion �350 O003.5 IMSA Balance M 0 m 5B TFS iI5 m JTS 15 T p„A 166 166 166 166 166 166 166 166 149 166 149 166 149 $1.66 Milli0n/M.SA $1.4�90t1jilion General Levy crncral Levy 149 149 149 149 149 149 149 �t cells 31 2S 28 26 24 �$317,000 G✓�L .`^n K+c '1! 39 37 36 34 33 t Co.tl l� Ntit Bonds an GIaw1 L3. WIbaJ � � terest (:4) 188 186 185 183 182 180 178 177 175 173 $1S07 Scenario 1 General Fund Costs $1,835,000 Scenerio 2 General Fund Costs 1,807.000 Difference 5 20,000 u 0 T,/PicAL L!CoHT'lN& PATTERN SIDE WALK (30ULF-U4 R D 21888.1 Candle Annual Type Power Captial Ongoing Cost 20 Year Cost Current System Wooden poles (assuming no rate increase) 10 overhanging N/A - 1 242 24,840 lights I. NSP proposals Wooden poles 1.4ft/candles - 6,835 136,700 39 lights -250 Watt High pressure (HP) Soduim City of Orono Decorative Lighting Standards II. a) 39-250 watt HP Sodium 1.4 ft/candle 97,560 3,137 160,300 140 ft spacing III. b) 52-250 watt 2.0 ft/candle 128,300 4,181 211,920 HP Sodium 110 ft spacing VL if At' • jr 1p -TV lb AL i�a t, •{1��� ' Ak� i �� 14 & - ��� CITY OF ORONO, MINNESOTA COUN`T'Y ROAD 15 FEBRUARY 12, 1988 Total distance ---- 5400 feet NSP Proposal 39-250 watt HPS units ist 140 foot spacing Light level 1.4 foot candles Construction cost none Annual operating cost $6,835.00 Wood utility poles Overhead wires Citv Owned- Plan A 39-250 watt HPS units at 140 foot spacing Light Level 1.4 foot candles Construction cost $92,060.00 Annual operating cost $3,137.00 Steel decorative poles Underground wires Citv Owned- Plan R 52-250 watt HPS units at 110 foot spacing Light Level 2.0 foot candles Construction cost $122,800.00 Annual operating cost $4,181.00 Steel decorative poles Underground wires ROBERT A. ELLER ASSOCIATES. INC. CONSi1LTING ENGINEERS (ELECTRICAL) VS13 VA1 LEY LANE. • F;1)(NA. MN MAW (019) 841.2HH6 Otto G eonewoo. PE Krnh A Gordon. PF Thnmat W Peterson, PE Bones t roo Rnbert W Ro—Anaro PE Faster, MKhael C lynch, PE JA Jo tepn C Anderuk, PE Donald Donato C Bur9,ardt. PE C l Jlmrt R 6laland. PE Rosene Bradford A Lemberg PE R,chard E Turner. PE Jury A Exvdcn, PE K—fielh P AnderSon, PE Mark A Manson, PE Krnh A Rxhmann, PE � Anderlik& Janes C Olson, PE Glenn R Cook. PE Ted K Field. PE 4hcharl T Pautmam,. PE Mark R Rolf%, PE RoCert C Russek. A I A Thomas E Noyes PE Roben R Pfenrnr. PE Thomas E Angus. PE Associates RC:ert G Schunicht. PE DMd O Loskota. PE Moward A Sanford, PE V \ Starvrn L Sorva'a, PE Engineers & Architects November 5, 1987 City of Orono Box 66 Crystal Bay Orono, MN 55323 Re: 13935 Co. Rd. 15 Reconstruction (Henn. Co.) Dear John: Cha-le% A Errkton Leo M Payseltky Harlan M Olson Susan M Eherfm fAxt A Selp We have reviewed various methods of funding the Co. Rd. 15 Street Recon- struction. The information we have provided herein is quite general but should be useful in developing a plan of action. The City of Orono's share of the project cost is $488,353.78 plus the penalty of $210,000 incurred for spending MSA funds off the system as previously discussed. The City could use MSA funds to finance the entire project. The City could assess the entire project costs to adjacent benefiting land owners. The City could provide for any combination of project funding in between these two options. The City does not have much history on assessment of street reconstruction projects. We did assess Blaine Avenue when it was reconstructed,to the commercial property adjacent the street. We would recommend that a portion of the project costs be assessed to property mers adjacent the street on a front footage basis. The trunk storm sewer cost not paid by State Aid should be assesed over the drainage area on a square footage basis. There is approximately 7500 lineal foot of properly abutting the roadway which is 57 percent commercial and 43 percent residential. The commercial property should �-le assessed -60 percent of the actual street costs and the residential property should be assessed 30 percent. This would result in an assessment of $32.00/ft. for commercial property and $16.00/ft. for residential property. This would generate $188,800 in revenue for the project. Page 1. letter 01 2335 West Highway 36 • St. Paul, Minnesota 55113 9 612-636-4600 The storm sewer trunk costs should be assessed over the area which will drain into the system. We have not as yet received the plans from Hennepin County so we cannot compute the trunk rates at this time. The storm sewer trunk assessment policy should have the City picking up 30 percent of the cast. The commercial property should be assessed at a rate equal to tvice the residen- tial rate. The policy we established for this project will also carry over to the Highwood storm sewer and other projects that mn7 come up in the future. If you have any questions, please contact this office. Yours very truly, BONESTR00, ROSENE, ANDERLIK 6 ASSOCIATES, INC. Glenn k. Cook GRC:ci Page 2. letter 01 y el o • _I v)�nl I • iv I w a , •c H lQ ;- ', 1 ` L5)' ya) i pR,,•�:. 12• I, C l9� { / ` •=y,• • a4 '• • I C3y) •N ra ° ` ' :� II I q �'F. �'^` S r°' 1 ./•. \�`�_,ti • (,):• v '' �s)N� f1 tc5) .O Ir � wy__, a /. h'qo� / •y --- rt••ii 9t (°� (51J _ - I a _� _� • << P` ' O /�: —� 4. - 'J. — I S + el/iXa` � b'� �r / L+1i CA}�Q�C•'ZJ �: ' e.IC:f.'s O.o t i m s e r e ,�,a i� ia'J mes 2s9,To. � , ti r I tl I Q 9,)� . ^ ,�i . �� �G `x� `_ a/ . !� (aa a1-+:.� �•� �) I) �s/z_ > t W" i •� yotp� �y � �'»' � Ti, 1' ..� , _ w- � `I \ \�; \ \\ .`�. _ .f,1,1 , �'^ ,pl,,,, . '^Op0 "n r,e 37' : z OdOilio I`� I } = I• •1 �� i\\\\ pc's ""0' NOW ERN �(,'v r' Iw .. •:;;,•:iir� � ,;,0' a2r> • ... 'S .1r.',e„ 1.•.. (11 . u�r� �: �� .^` rL(,)" : i�" n Irv_• l� Ill` �� ;il'�14� 90 aI ••y��ro u�, �• ;c s'I'4Pi`awr2 (24): a �q�,!,, �,(�' - I I �• 1rl,lyl I <'w. 1^II J� .!� C�+"7 • 'A i �_�'. I `Ir' ig:,:::.i+ pVE VRt,\NGt , i P ss?-tr�24 asepn'; i EpN 6 i ( t':+ . 0 q U• sr ) '. ' _ 4� i ca�°� ,i y. i ptNiuv1:+5 rQN'?c-.',;- ft•' • .ss Ii• u 1• ; n u e m yt , .') ' NO /ice) •. 1 I °' w • .. ?:. .,.c.a i I ' 'r IrV �'.y)'.r) 'S�1,LVs �- ll • ,••.oa as �.I `%� I �' a l -r {1A " uT . I - - e ..>r�i➢ �; C'1 t 1 a ae°° I r `' 3kV J< �y _ LlVINGSTON M AVE I r !S t � r" ` � 1 '�O � �:) s�,,.f: � d�fl�i..�.�:i"- •�`) fA�}+)�af•� ly:r1k1�1s1y�1�� ( �� �.I .la`�� � .I •;j•� .r' \ l • { I?s72 x' ..c: - �•n �`a • 1 a • Ib •• b 2 ' . Q • ` u P I w I • • a I • a • I a i' , •.. N;Q•. 1 1 J ( W •I+d� :t�'��I Ia1fc1),'.9. to C'),,. `.+�3 '¢1 • it) ,•.+ I ' A k �;9 y �:n;,r,.. `'' (��_�'+� ei(�, 4r �r i• '� ! Q '� I I '�" I Via,,.. O., ecvl '•t � '�\.T . F�.=-�., y (y}� h a ,•�,a • n • ni:o.zs:ua;.i• }ro;,• n n n x, `21a12•,Iza�a ri• •/'r O Ht�n. Co I = (si ', .'.. q .,; ' f`i., •n y 'S. '.'°,) . A. ;, t ) i oaf) t Sr) 1 •7 , Y' a z7. , $ I I : Lf a . lIP}t) z\.•. �. ,c. -`. i. 1=1., .v 61ec,. YRI o) r �� i j' •� j• ..w.. `4 - ` e. y r . . i '. �� _ Iw, to o.lOS! . 1• -1 - r I I r------'^^L.y ,7a :� i ^�n a •F•_'I' �,�. a�.� n•�la,:ln ,ol• s . +,�a :1' C� ; A ',' I,. I I I .,,•�ip.,e'.;,:�°i'„ ��)A _ `'I•'`41� (11�w1 (1tl pl :1`i�aN) •I�• Vol • IA ;•��` 1 I I C�) � r ' .'..�1„j :` x ar•'�'1•'n i olm) u a�z: to •In' i 1•izo s.. ;�a.� .i�il ztlr=ui: ��i .•2�'r r }a•.uI 'A SI .'LT1 I �..�•Y'` v o_.a tw�•t 'I If1' �', E�.. zr��� ,,E _ ,7::•) ',(,, r,,1 ;I I 1 • ;�' / a,it4 y ., i.r:p' 1,1 t., :�,' ��) a y. nl Sl `..1' r, •'• ''• !�} �+ (il Z1 ,, - . ,., :sa •`;•} :ir — ^ nvcY. _ CO RD ND IS 1 -- - • + • •ie --5 SR ---- ,�--i-Mt71>trr�'}d a T .ss.: .s 44 •rtial�� s +Ir 5•I',OI �\ t .. , /% • `!, �o »f"'•,� Y = C;11 /O ,ipO• L. �• e ,' 1pl/ CG ••('t +• ,.� s I .,` 2 scl;' ri te, b y� I ..+ a �a. fH'• " a�i a \ laA 00 i.L'•� 0 �� 6�V 35� 'v'24� c 1 _ to aaCO +I�G,� is \, .e O� - , ail ( •\ ��� '] 1 ° :•. °lu)• 1 .— y � ..::�`•'• ; .. AN •tvsite c _RA_ i \ r v _ '\ •( \ ,o tv" .� \1�\ •ts• 8� te`a•; - an.e• °.n° !•./ /,IemoJ•�\1i 'q coVE , wl C __. t1, _ ��c^/ - �¢l-._.:'sP'�O+ NPv �Opos'• —\ �i I• c�� I '. I .• • • ,A a `ri i I . I � / la"N� `' ,,, /)� `. • / � �•�+ . d tam ak.+`,; • .`1 Wit. } ++ � � � •+' �� t l �)� � Rid ".�'', R a �(, � �; J� ��jjpp; :'y'.`,�; �.. r C •• _ r - _ , _*�_'� _-b- << if/ :t`to� j���'r% v '1 }7 r- :��5�:, ;', • ::�j.�.., .t �' ✓ • . I .� 1 /j}) `� 'a.+Xi' Cis s v e:•3 , �) • j a e 3 ��1 .° t �� 'rle �) • Qd}f� t ;i • �5.,� \ `°' . �? !`�7 •7 1;: j.` { ~ �,� �.. !e aM• .- i "Is•!G� NOR ERN ; % C' �:u t. < • /•o» .• �, :'` , in t`+' ,a•a,r°i!i°", � .! � o••s., a2Ysf • e, zr z °•R,�� .l /fJ Ss psi' 1'�'c al�c �t'1�• :•i'', �-- ire t„f waa (1) • �; �. rr y•$t ^,..,i;•I':1 1 .l. ����Mj�2il'J•ialtill:� 3 (IQ � � • Sn {Stl -' ' z .p� r • Y7 �'�Q ,a a �.zn It ••• - - I I a ni 2 � . ,z /zq/x: / ti � is s:,>''n. ° ` ;., ', chi ,d elI p � ;d'� \ •'; . ..•��''��y .).1 �za, :�, ss � as .< T - '•e i � . �ntt}+f°• `: � y.lf z•/ .c, "../az ..yla ;% ,o./ ' li � .i tat. • ,ti.�� •. !Cd .� a Ida/,J,�. � �. ': � 'R 1:1a 1 n 0.11 ,IV �)'.d)I y,L`s •ya?'�` 'e: ' 4D,4 . X s'�a� `•R_G.._ '�`l•: I Q:%, - `— n LIVING5T7N AVE - r^ r • � 0 1•a '� r� '3:A.Q�`s�`, < • ,g�Y�'' N' '• _ A �a) .� ��_., n ,f•' <<il ' '� :) ,+�) etJ Ih� K1 �flti�N� .(r r � !tl �V v f p e' b'ie '0'•c 11n a • lIr •I`a! • \a z • u u wI• • •j• a • a :1r Q' -i' / .y``` .! p<l I uti ' :.? � I � I � •' ,`�� 14yadl I':s1h1),:'). a) ' !•')i. �• ;*"� Dy. � �� I J I I �I9 Lyt'� � •'•`> y):>v}`.k l'' -al l•an•n n r nJm.a.l�.��.:z• = ia;u,n n u a �tz.�aa,tz• za,ar r.`'y /.-E• \\ zz�. �'� :< .. Jy • ••+•�, •, - /�tre):'i41 fa)I �3•.)� i+) .fl).in7 >LlIm i1`i) .t) ;(I•) sj t(.t) Irl N - \ • a?.t -:a • ,., e • , a '♦,P `> L� (!� ji �? . •... r. °° `` Y i . . Ir _�w. ��?r IQ of I I - - - # ��'. • e ; it a t 'm,� • • 1 �r r, ' 3. a �s. lr\ ,•4n li l o w • • , col s z 1 1 TO . D ! 1 1 �t,•i9.d wl`3;;`. ' 7A .,!` •� �, ° i;l - (Vl"'nl(¢, :1 t:$)�I �N) .I,. '�} 1�¢0�« `•>> ,:Q-` I I �) ; '-+�"1" s`• I�'n v ia1n m: zi za�s: .ai • n u' n4:o 0 ,0 1n w+L,;l•�; 1}�.) /...:1�1 ���) • •a,��t,l'hy}L`P. '`• (=I;a#b'•<r rtv/Y.. CO RD NO IS 1 .r•t su i •a:'} � , a I �� z rah � Iz tE Y�r:.�,"'r '".•-. \ 21kQ 1' •`+,` '- --1 M�••�+ .•e. .'r��?b ° = �'� , \_ if l3� •,' oNi . U . \�a .0 : ` • -Z •rn - I�_ `' O t • ... p- RRE • Ll9' �i a :_ z�(x1) r.r... t COVE *•!t�� 9' g • �� 1 1 �` O\e14 Zr,`.;4",+< , ;• Is Sp I I,q ,- `�/<<� JYJ 0 f >`s R.1.4. +• i� • � o\eQ k\ el ` Ctl•.'�� caw1�r'�.- /�` _ �` - 1/129 � �\ `-:i, •;. •: Sol— ,RIf,<y �� `O s1\\.r 15 \\ as:' '� "�°.: a°w• r.°,o i. '• I„: 9aorr? °• �� Ir O T^ay5. Pg \\(Ll, A / • r •y, ` (3i j , �• APE .0 1• la Ile u n l mr (. I b Si) y 10 ;-a7 Dear Council Nemiers: Id0'd !387 LVII I, as a widow on a limited income am appalled (as well as my neigh- bors) that this village expects me to pay for a "Public" sidewalk. This is NOT a residential sidewalk on a residential street. It as a community sidewalk on a county road providing a "supposedly" safe pedestrian oath from one community to the next. This sidewalk is a community benefit, riot just a neighborhood improvement. I need documencet, proof snowing that this sidewalk is only an improvement only to my property. This sidewalk will be useC by touristE, py ALL Orono residents (as well as Mound and Spring Park) who use this main artery pathway to negotiate their trios to work, visit friends, conduct their business errands, and walk to the MTC bus line. I feel the sicewalk is a detriment to my property. It encourages people to walk in my yard. A public park adjacent to my bedroom windows Police records will document that the close proximity to the road has resulted in intruders and window peekers. The sidewalk will bring Deoole even closer to my home and make them seem natural standing or strolling so close to my house. I do not want this sidewalk nor do I feel it is an asset or improvement to the side yard of my property; but rather a detriment to my personal property and a dangerous attraction to children and pedestrians who would ordinarily use a sidewalk as a safe made of travel. If a public safety study was done = am sure it wculd concur that County read 15 between Navarre and Spring Park is an extremely dangerous 'rafficked road. To encourage pedestrians or children to frequent u tis area could be highly injurious to the -1 Fare. Conversely if tie village deeriis the sideweld try, the expense should be borne by all DroDerty ,_owners of the villau Pt a time w-e-! municioa'_ities and government agencies are scrutinizing exper,!itures or services, why should 'ands be spent on projects that citizens Don't want? Five or ten years ir., the future will tnese sidewalks be orr, uo tc, add more traffic lanes? Traffic lanes that the county feels are riceciec ricr-it now after vxnaustive traffic st ud t.es. If this noter,tial exists, certainly these SiCewalKS are not a iuLJ1C1oi_ts i_tst= of ".1nCs. r.arert Dridersori 241.3 Carman Str^eel. W&tyzata, r-N 55391 crass = Mark E. Bernhardson. City Administrator John R. Gerhardson, Public Works Director ai Data$ October 22. 1987 Subjects County Road 15 - Orono Couts !t 92487.tln ap Recently, the City of Orono received information from Hennepin County , Department of Transportation regarding Orono's share of the costs for the i rehabilitation of County Road 15 through Navarre. The cost estimate is the engineer's estimate only as the bidding i process has not been completed, therefore, the estimate is subject to change. 1 Orono's share of the costs is: $488,353.76 During all past discussions, it has always been considered to Orono's share of the cost from the monies received from the NSA account (Municipal State Aid). 1 The NSA funds will pay $472,989.70 leaving a balance of $15,364.00. ' The NSA account is funded from the tax on gasoline. At this time, (r Orono's annual allotment is approximately $177,000.00. Currently& there is a balance in the fund of i349,500.00. However, because this project is not on the City's NSA system, there i is a penalty for using those funds off the system. The penalty at this fj date is 5% or $5,000 for each $100,000.00 spent off the system. This t penalty is in effect for tan years resulting 1 total penalty of $210000.00. ,t s' The City has funded past projects off the City u NSA system such as Tanager Bridge replacement in i979, temporary traff.Le signal at Highway 12 and County Road 6 in 1981 and McCully Road in 1980. All of the above projects were constructed at a time when the penalty was just under 31• therefore, the impact of the penalty was not as severe. It should be noted that if we do not expend funds annually. a $1 penalty is invoked on all municipalities and any funds not used after two years, there is an additional 5• penalty. However, those penalty amounts are distributed to all communities soth is the 5% In not a real number. omay be for your information, the following projects review and approval in the near future and in which NSA funds will be useds Bridge replacement on old crystal. Bay Road south of Highway 12 over Burlington Northern Railroad. Permanent traffic signal at highway 12 and County Road G. Traffic signal installation at willow Drive and f;ighway 12. Pry.posed County Road 116. Frointage road or roads a long highway 12 from Drown Road west to Old Crystal [gay Read. � E ,m I r nnep� .,i County has advised us that they will be submittinq final plans =ur t:.d pre: joct very soon and would like approval of these plans at the November 23:•. Council meeting. Therefore it may be appropriate at this time to determine the number of propert}a affected in the event that all or part of t%soa costs are asnessed to determine the impact to an individual property owner. Recomsendationt To accept the information regarding Orrno's share of coi.sf0C ufgarUnq Shoreline Dr. (Cc Rd 15) and to diroct the City Engineer to determine number of property• affected in the project and to submit that information for the November 9, 1907 Council Meeting. SEER' S RhPORT: : AITY ROAD 15 COSTS OF •OCAL IMPROVEMENT City Engineer Cook reported an the information from Hennepin County Department of Transporation regarding Orono's shag- of the costs for the rehabilitation of County Road 15 through Navarre. He explained tte funding from the MSA account noting that there would be a penalty for using the MSA account to fund the costs jecause the project is not on the City's MSA system. He explained the option of assessing the balance of costs remaining and/or the penalty costs. It was moved by Mayor Grabek, seconded by Councilmember Peterson, to direct City Engineer Cook to repor' back to Counc-1 at the November 9th meeting regarding alternative ramifications, numbers of property owners involved, and different alterntatives and percentages. Motion, Ayes 5, Nays 0. CITY ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT: ASSE. '8NT REVIEW - 525 TONKAWA ROAD Acting City Administrator Gerhardson explained the request for a reduction in assessment from the property owner of 525 Tonkawa Road. The owner purchased three adjoining lots in 1978 and have since combined all lots into one buildable pa- - -1. and are now requesting removal of one sanitary se% assessemnt. Staff recommends approval of the ass( :,ent reduction per the formula AT outlined in staff memo dated October 22, 1987 in the amount of $2,619.66. Jeff Martineau, representing owner of property, requested clarification of the reduction amount. It was moved by Councilmember Sime, seconded by Councilmember Goetten, to direct staff to draft a resolution reducing the amount of assessment and sewer units for 525 Tonkawa Road by an amount not to exceed $2,619.66. Motion, eves 5, Nays 0. SNOW PLOW BID AWARD* It was moved by Councilmember Sime, seconded by Councilmember Petersc , to award the bid for •4 new reversible trip edge snow plows to Boyum Equipment Company for an amount of $16,720.00. Motion, Ayes 5, Nays 0. 11 &./1 November 25, 1986 RESOLUTION NO. 86- 173 RESOLUTION TO APPROVE A VARIANCE TO ESTABLISH A.BUILDABLE LOT FOR PART OF LOTS 1,2.,3 r 4, IN BLOCKS 1 • AND 2, REARRANGEMENT OF BLOCK 10', ABRAHAM LINCOLN ADDITION TO LAKESIDE PARK PiD 1 13-117-2431 0070 P b Z CASE NO. 86-554 WHEREAS,•Jean•Graff, owner of property described as a lot In Blocks 1 and 2, Rear-rahgement.of Block 10,.Abraham Lincoln Addition to Lakeside Park, has applied for a variance to`•establ ish a 14,0'D0± square foot parcel as a buildable. lot' since the parcel currently does not front on a•public right-of- way; and ' WHEREAS; the Mound Cl ty Code requires al lots to contain frontage on ' a public. r. ht-of-way;. and WHEREAS, the Planning Commi.sslon-reviewed..the request and recommended 'granting the' lance due to the fact that the City of Mound previously vacated Laurel Street -which provided access to the parcel thereby •establtshing•' hardship under;'Section 23.�r-.'.1 of the Mound Zoning Code. NOW, THEREFORE, 8E 17 RESOLVED, the Council of the City of Mound. Minne= sota,.does hereby grant th6 variance subject to review of 'the proposed Base- men t by the C i ty Attorney to prov i de access- to C I ty ut I 1 I t i es for: - That hart of lots 1 aad 2, Flock 2, and Lots 3 and. 4s Block 1p-aad of. ; • vacated Laurel Street, and of the vacated 12-root alley an'platted ' betv-een Lots 1, 2, 3, 4,.and 12 of said Flock 1, Reirrargement of j Block 10, Abraham Lincoln AAdilion to Lakeside ?ark, described as ' follows: Beginning at the poir t of intersection of tt.s' Mrthuevterly line of said Lot 29 Eiock 2, v.th a line dream parallel with and" 75 ' feet ?forth of the North line of, Lot 4 oP said Block 2, as measured at.; right angles to said Forth line; thence running Fortheasterly'along the Northwesterly line of said Lots 2 and 1, Block 2, to the most ;Northerly corner of said Lot'lj thence running;'Sou�Lheasterly along the lbrthsasterly line of said Lot 1, Block 2, and its' extension thereof to the most. Northerly corner of oxid Lot 3, Block 1; thence' • continuing Southeasterly along the. Northeaster is line of said tot 3, ?lock.l; to a point which is 82.5 feet •Southwesterly from the most 1 ortheriy corner of said -Lot 1, Flock 2, -as =awed along the- > orth asterly lines of said Lot 1, Block 2, ar- l,ot 3, block 1; thence -twining Southwesterly 106 feet more o: less to a paint in a line draam parallel with and 75 feet North of the !.ortb 21ne of Lot 4s Block 2, ex-tendod, as measured at : igl:t angles t,: said Ncrth line, said mint. also teing 15 feet East as r astred at right angles frcm t-he East line of Laurel Street; thence ring Nest prallel with the North line of said Lot 4, P1ock 2, to the point of t -&inninE, with a 50 foot setback at west, 50 foot setback at north, 10 foot setbacks at east and south property lines from the principal strv(_j-...e providing two off street parking stalls. Public Works shall app;ovt acuity connections. I-/-l-/ I COST ESTIMATE WATERMAIN REPLACEMENT FOR COUNTY ROAD 15 FAIRVIEW LANE TO FERNSIDE LA14E 8" WATEWIN 1270 L.F. 0 $ 15.00/LF = $ 19,050.00 8" GATE VALVES 3 EACH a 500.00/EA = 1,500.00 3/4" & 1" SERVICE CONNECTICN 20 EACH 0 40.0O/EA = 800.00 3/4" & 1" CURB STOP 20 EACH 0 100.00/EA = 2,000.00 1 1/2" SERVICE CONNECTION 3 EACH 0 200.00/EA = 600.00 3/4" COPPER SERVICE PIPE 700 L.F. 0 8.00/LF = 59600.00 1 1/2" COPPER SERVICE PIPE 50 L.F. 0 11.00/LF = 550.00 FITTINGS 3000 LBS 0 1.00/LB = 3,000.00 HYDRANT 1 EACH 0 900.00/EA = 900.00 6" GATE VALVE 2 EACH 0 400.00/EA = 800.00 6" HYDRANT LEAD 25 L.F. 0 12.00/LF = 300.00 GRANULAR MATERIAL 200 TONS 0 8.00/TN = 1,600.00 MOBILIZATION 1 L.S. LUMP SUM = 39000.00 CONTINGENCIES 4,300.00 TOTAL ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION COST $44,000.00 ENGINEERING, LEGAL, FISCAL & ADMIN. COST 11,000.00 TOTAL ESTIMATED PROJECT COST ....................$559000.00 1 V7(0 .r- CITY OF MOUND MOUND 5341 MAYWOOD ROAD MOUND, MN 55364 (612) 472-1155 75 YEARS May 21, 1987 TO: ED SHUKLE, CITY MANAGER FROM: JOHN NORMAN, FINANCE DIRECTOR fLINJ RE: WATER FUND CASH BALANCE The watermain extension on County Road 15 is projected to cost $55,000. The effect it would have on the Water Fund cash reserves if expense occured immediately is: April 30th Cash Balance $159,500 Less: Watermain Extension (55,000) $104,500 You also inquired about what this would do to the water rates. In my annual report and the audit the council has been informed about the status of the Water Fund. One of the problems that Greg Skinner and I have discussed, is the condition of a portion of our water system. Part of the watermain on County Road 15 was built in the 1930's. There are other areas of the city water system that are old and will also need to be replaced. The rate structure for the Water Fund should include an amount for capital Improve- ments to the water system. The past few years our water rates have not covered the operations of the Water Fund (the cash balance 12-31-84 was $400,000 and decreased to $220,000 at 12-31-86). In conclusion, we do have the reserves in the Water Fund to cover the watermain replacement on County Road 15. However, the cash reserve will be at the lo:,est level possible for the operation of the Water Fund. The future water rates must be able to maintain and, hopefully, build up the Water Fund cash reserves. We will be looking closely at the Water Fund rates during the 1986 budget process. cc: Greg Skinner JN:Is May 26, 1987 RESOLUTION NO. 87- RESOLUTION RECEIVING FEASIBILITY REPORT, ORDERING IMPROVEMENT AND PREPARATION OF PLANS FOR WATERMAIN REPLACEMENT IN SHORELINE BOULEVARD FROM FAIRVIEW LANE TO FERNSIDE LANE WHEREAS, pursuant to resolution #87-72 adopted by the Council on April 14, 1987, a report has been prepared by McCombs -Knutson A,asociates, Inc., the City Engineers, with refererr_e to the replacement of the existing watermain in Shoreline Blvd. between Fairview Lane and Fernside Lane; and WHEREAS, this report was received by the Council on May 12, 1967; and WHEREAS, the City Engineer has recommended replacement of said existing watermain; and WHEREAS, the estimated cost of $55,000 for said replacement would be paid from the City water fund, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Mound, Minnesota: 1. Such improvement is hereby ordered as proposed In feasibility report dated May 7, 1987. 2. McCombs -Knutson is hereby designated as the Engineer for this improvement and shall prepare plans and specifications for making of such improvements. Adopted by the Council this 26th day of May, 1987. Mayor Attest: City Clerk IV-7Y �® LL McCombs -Knutson Associates, Inc. PRELIMINARY ENGINEERING REPORT FOR , STREET LIGHTS COUNTY ROAD NO. 15 MOUND, MINNESOTA May, 1987 M, KA Engineer;. Planners Surveyors i loq '28001ndusvial Park Blvd.. Piymoulh, UN 554Z1 612/559-3700 1.800-328.8322 Exl. 7 84 McCombs -Knutson Associates, Inc. 128001ndusirial Park Blvd. Engineers Plymouth, MN 55441 - Planners 6121559-3700 Surveyors 149X0 32SMn EA 784 May li, 1987 Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council City of Mound 5341 Maywood Road Mound, MN 55364 SUBJECT: Preliminary Engineering Report Street Lights County Road No. 15 , MKA #8259 Dear Mayor and Council Members: As requested, we are submitting herewith a Preliminary Engineering Report for new street lights on County Road No. 15. If you have any questions, or require additional information on anything in this report, we will be pleased to discuss this further with you at your convenience. Very truly yours, MCCOMBS-KNUTSON ASSOCIATES, INC. John Cameron JC:jmj f Enclosures I I / �10 I pr C£NERAL This report will investigate the cost and feasibility of installing a new street lighting system on County Road 15 from Commerce Boulevard to the Seton . Bridge. At the present time, there exists eight (8) old style fluorescent street lights between Commerce Boulevard and the Post Office. These lights are obsolete and expensive to operate and maintain, in fact, the one in front *of Century Auto Body had to be removed and has not been replaced. Two of the lights are within the area of proposed reconstruction on County Road 15 and y probably will need to be relocated by the county's contractor. There are also 13 existing street lights mounted on N.S.P. poles at various locations between Belmont Road and Bartlett Boulevard. Most of these are located at intersections, but a few are in mid -block such as the two across from the apartment buildings. We believe these are all 100 watt high pressure sodium fixtures which were installed and are owned by N.S.P. LIGHTS The proposed lights would be a contemporary design to match the existing lights on Commerce Boulevard. The light standards would be 35 feet high with a 6 to 8 foot mast on the top of the pole. The lamps would be either 150 watt high pressure sodium or 250 watt high pressure sodium, the same as are in use talong :ommerce Boulevard. Electrical outlets would be provided for Christmas decoration lighting at a 20 feet height above the ground. This report will include two alternates for the City to review. Alternate No. 1 would Ce for thirty (30) new 250 watt high pressure sodium lights at 100 foot alternate spacing along both sides of the street .from Commerce Boulevard to Fairview Lane. If this Alternate is used, then the 6 existing N.S.P. lights between Fairview Lane and Bartlett Boulevard would remain in approximately the sane location. Alternate No. 2 will investigate the feasibility of i.r,stalling new lights the entire length of the street improvement from Commerce Boulevard to Bartlett Boulevard. For this Alternate, r e - 150 watt high pressure sodium and seven - 250 -•att high pressure soalum lights would bi� aoded to ++ Alternate No. 1 for the area from Fai--view Lane to Bartlett Boulevard, with the 10�+Er kattage lamps used in the residential area. I isting fluorescent lights provide approximately 1.7 foot candles at itreec level compared to an average of 2 foot candles for the 250 watt fixtures with 100 foot alternate spacing and approximately 1 foot candle for the 150 Fitt fixtures at 200 foot alternate spacing. The existing fluorescent lights cost the City $156.60 per fixture per year and the 100 watt high pressure sodium cost $115.20 per fixtures per year to operate. The new high pressure sodium fixtures would cost $54.60 for the 150 watt and $76.20 for the 250 watt per fixture per year to operate. N.S.P. will maintain the new fixtures at no additicnal expense, whereas they do not maintain the existing fluorescent lights. At the present time, the existing system from Commerce Boulevard to Bartlett Boulevard, which includes only 21 lights, cost the City $2,750.40 per year to operate. A new lighting system for this entire area, as suggested 2 under Alternate No. 2 with 46 fixtures, would cost $3,334.00 per year to operate and maintain. COST ESTIMATES As previously mentioned, two of the existing fluorescent lights are within the proposed construction limits for County Road 15 and would need to be relocated by the county's contractor. If the City installed new lights, the County would pay for two new bases and the wiring necessary for two lights. The total cost for each Alternate is as follows: Altern2*e No. 1 $ 127,353.00 Alternate No. 2 $ 202,373.00 The credit for the two bases and wiring to be paid by Hennepin C •,ty would _ to approximately $3,000.00 and would be deducted from each of Alter,,.! -as, if the existing lights interfere with the street constructiLAi. A breakdown of the estimated cost for each Alternate is enclosed. a 11 / yCVa- I i i COST ESTIMATE - ALTERNATE NO. 1 ITEM QUANTITY UNIT PRICE TOTAL Poles and Fixtures (250 Watt) 30 EACH $ 1,100.00/EA $ 33,000.00 Bases 30 EACH $ 550.00/EA $ 16,500.00 Wire 26,000 L.F. $ 1.25/LF $ 32,500.00 Conduit 600 L.F. $ 7.20/LF $ 4,320.00 Control Centers 3 EACH $ 2,100.00/EA $ 6,300.00 Contingencies $ 9,262.00 Total Estimated Construction Cost $101,882.00 Engineering, Legal, Fiscal and Administrative Costs $ 25,471.00 Total Estimated Cost Alternate No. 1 $127,353.00 COST ESTIMATE - ALTERNATE NO. 2 ITEM QUANTITY UNIT PRICE TOTAL Poles and Fixtures (250 Watt) 39 EACH $ 11100.00/EA $ 429900.00 Poles and Fixtures (150 Watt) 7 EACH $ 1,000.00/EA $ 7,000.00 Bases 46 EACH $ 550.00/EA $ 25,300.00 Wire 44,000 L.F. $ 1.25i1.F $ 559000.00 Conduit 900 L.F. $ 7.20/Li" $ 6,430.00 Control Centers 5 EACH $ 2,100.00/EA $ 10,500.00 Contingencies $ 14,718.00 Total Esti '-,d Construction Cost $161,898.00 Engineerir,._ °jal, Fiscal and Administrative Costs $ 40,475.00 Total Estimated Cost Alternate No. 1 $202,_13.00 /V�3 A ASSESSNENTS On the previous, street light project along County Road 110, approximatel: 1/3 of the total cost was assessed to the abuttingprivate properties. On this project, we would recommend that a minimum of 40% of the total cost be assessed :J to the private property abutting the improvements. The assessable f:y cage for each Alternate breaks down as follows: Alternate No. 1 Commercial Property 4,300 L.F. Residential and Multiple 100 L.F. City Owned and Unassessable 1,740 L.F. Total 69146 :..F. . 10 Alternate No. 2 Commercial Property 4,725 L.F. 01 Residential and Multiple 29875 L.F. City Owned and Unassessable 3,270 L.F. Total 10,870 L.F. 10 On the previous street light project, the commercial property was assessed 1-1/2 Z.imes the rate of the residential property. :` the same procedure is used, the proposed assessments for each Alternate JUL'as folloti -ETHOD A - 40% OF THE TOTAL COST ASSESSED TO PRIVATELY OWNLU F „Of ERTY Alternate No. I Amount to be Assessed Would be $50,491.00 Cost Per F.,ot for Commercial Property 11.67 Cost Per Frnot for Residential Property 7.78 Alternate No. 2 Amount to be Assessed Would be $80,950.00 Cost Per Foot for Commercial Property 12.19 'i �.� Cos' Per Foot for Reside-itia? Proper' 8.13 NETHOD 8 - 50% OF THE TO'A: I ASSESSED TO PRIi ATELY OWNED ;•RUPERTY L Alternate No. 1 Aiwa. ,t tc tie Assessed Would be 63,677.00 Cost Per riot for Commercial Property 14.58 Cost Per Foot for Residential Property 9.72 7-1 r, / 4� 6 (( Alternate No. 2 Amount to be Assessed Would be $101,187.00 Cost Per Foot for Commercial Property 15.24 Cost Per Foot for Residential Property 10.16 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS With '.he reconstruction that is scheduled for County Road 15, this is the ber- rartunity the City will ever have to install street lights in the Tema. of their downtown area. It is the opinion of the Engineer that the, proposed project is feasible, and can best be accomplished as described herein. vu f 6 7 McCombs -Knutson Associaies, Inc. 128001ndusunal Park Blvd. Engineers Plymout, MN 55"1 - May 22, 1987 Planners 612/559-3700 Surveyors 1-800-328-8322 E6d. 784 Honorable Mayor and Members of City Council City of Mound 5341 Maywood Rd. Mound, MN 55364 SUBJECT: Addendur j Preliminary Engineering Report for Street Lights - Co. Rd. No. 15 MCA File 08259 Dear Council Members: Enclosed is ali addendum to the Preliminary Engineering Report for street lights on County Road 15 which presents two more alternates for the Council's consideration. Alternate No. 3 is for 250 watt high pressure sodium lights from Commerce Blvd. to Belmont Lane and from Northern Road to Bartlett Blvd. For the remainder of County Road 15 from Belmont Lane to Northern Road, 150 watt high pressure sodium lights are proposed. Alternate No. 4 includes 250 watt high pressure sodium lights from Commerce Blvd. to Belmont Lane and 150 watt high pressure sodium from Belmont Lane to Fairview Lane. The remainder of County Road 15 from Fairview Lane to Bartlett Blvd. would stay the same as presently lighted with the 6 existing 100 watt high pressure sodium N.S.P fixtures attached to power poles. Also included are three methods of assessment for each alternate ranging from 40% to 60% of the total cost as an assessment against the privately owned property. If you have any questions or require additional information, we will be pleased to discuss this further with you at your convenience. Very truly yours, MCCOMBS-KNUTSON ASSOCIATES, INC. John Cameron JC:djk COST ESTIMATE - ALTERNATE NO. 3 ITEM QUANTITY UNIT PRICE TOTAL POLES & FIXTURES (250W) 16 EA ® $1,100.00/EA = $ 17,600.00 POLES 6 FIXTURES (150W) 20 EA @ 1,000.00/EA = 20,000.00 BASES 36 EA @ 550.00/EA = 19,800.00 WIRE 39,000 LF ® 1.25/LF = 48,750.00 CONDUIT 900 LF a 7.20/LF = 6,480.00 CONTROL CENTERS 4 EA a 2,100.00/EA = 8,400.00 CONTINGENCIES 12,100.00 TOTAL ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION COST $ 133,130,00 ENGINEERING, LEGAL, FISCAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE COST 33 280.00 TOTAL ESTIMATED COST ALTERNATE NO. 3 $ 66,4 0.0 PROPOSED ASSESSMENT METHOD A - 40% OF THE TOTAL COST ASSESSED TO PRIVATE PROPERTY AMOUNT TO BE ASSESSED $ 669564.00 COST PER FOOT FOR COMMERCIAL PROPERTY $ 10.02 CC'ST PER FOOT FOR RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY $ •6.68 METHOD B - 50% OF THE TOTAL COST ASSESSED TO PRIVATE PROPERTY AMOUNT.TO BE ASSESSED $ 839205.00 COST PER FOOT FOR CC..MERCIAL PROPERTY $ 12.54 COST PER FOOT FOR RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY $ 8.36 METHOD C - 60% OF THE TOTAL COST ASSESSED TO PRIVATE PROPERTY AMOUNT TO BE ASSESSED $ 99,846.00 COST PER FOOT FOR COMMERCIAL PROPERTY $ 15.03 COST PER FOOT FOR RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY $ 10.02 /4�l COST ESTIMATE ALTERNATE NO. 4 I ITEM POLES 6 FIXTURES (250 WATT) POLES be FIXTURES (150 WATT) BASES WIRE CONDUIT CONTROL CENTERS QUANTITY 7 EA 0 13 EA q, 20 EA fJ 25,700 LF 0 600 LF 0 2 EA 0 CONTINGENCIES TOTAL ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION COST UNIT PRICE $1,100.00/EA 1,000.00/EA 550.00/EA 1.25/LF 7.20/LF 2,100.00/EA ENGINEERING, LEGAL, FISCAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE COST TOTAL ESTIMATED COST ALTERNATE NO. 4 PROPOSED ASSESSMENT METHOD A — 40% OF THE TOTAL COST ASSESSED TO PRIVATE PROPERTY AMOUNT TO BE ASSESSED COST PER FOOT FOR COMMERCIAL PROPERTY COST PER FOOT FOR RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY METHOD B — 50% OF THE TOTAL COST ASSESSED TO PRIVATE PROPERTY AMOUNT TO BE ASSESSED COST PER FOOT FOR COMMERCIAL PROPERTY COST PER FOOT FOR RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY METHOD C — 60% OF THE TOTAL COST ASSESSED TO PRIVATE PROPERTY AMOUNT TO BE ASSESSED COST PER FOOT FOR COMMERCIAL PROPERTY COST PER FOOT FOR RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY TOTAL $ 7,700.00 13,000.00 11,000.00 32,125.00 _ 4,320.00 4,200.00 7,235?00 $ 79,580.00 19,900.00 $ 99,480.00 $ 39,792.00 $ 9.12 $ 6.08 $ 49,740.00 $ 11.39 $ 7.59 $ 59,680.00 $ 13.67 $ 9.11 t/ P0? May 26, 1987 RESOLUTION NO. 87- RESOLUTION RECEIVING PRELIMINARY ENGINEERING REPORT AND CALLING HEARING FOR STREET LIGHT IMPROVEMENT ON SHORELINE BOULEVARD WHEREAS, pursL'=nt to resolution #87-72 adopted by the Council on April 141 1987, a report has been prepared by McCombs -Knutson Associates, Inc., the. - City Engineers, for the improvement of Shoreline Blvd. by the addition of street lights between Commerce Blvd. and ; and, WHEREAS, this report was received by the Council on May 12, 1987; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the*City Council of the City of Mound, Minnesota: The Council will consider the improvement of Shoreline Blvd. by the addition of street lights between Commerce Blvd. and in accordance with alternate in the report and the assessment of abutting property for a portion of the cost of the improvement pursuant Lu Minnesota S'L?tutes Chapter 429 at an estimated total cost of the improvement of $ ;. A public hearing shall be held on such proposed improvement on the 23rd day of June, 1987, in the Council Chambers of the City Hall at 7:30 P.M. and the Clerk shall give mailed and published notice of such hearing and improvement as required by law. Adopted by the Council this 26th day of May, 1987. Mayor Attest: City Clerk 140 ® -- © McCombs -Knutson Associates, Inc. Engineers Planners Surveyors PRELIMINARY ENGINEERING REPORT FOR C'OUNTY ROAD 15 IMPROVEMENTS CITY OF MOUND MAY, 1987 i<(qv 12800 In:11i5irial Fart; Blvd.. Plyrrmouln. k N 55441 612/559.2-00 1-KC-32?-E222 Skl 784 LLi L___�L McCombs -Knutson Associates, Inc. 12800 industrial Park Blvd. Plymouth, MN 55441 612/559-3700 1-800-326-8322 Fed. 784 May 7, 1987 Engrnesf Ranners Surveyo's Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council City of Mound 5341 Maywood Road Mound, Minnesota 55364 SUBJECT: County Road 15 Improvements Preliminary Engineering Report WA File #8087 Dear Council Members: As requested, we a:•e submitting herewith a Preliminary Engineering Report for street improvements on County Road 15. If you have any questions or require additional information on anything in this report, we will be pleased to discuss this further with you at your convenience. JC:cah Very truly yours, McCOMBS-KNUTSON ASSOCIATES, INC. John Cameron /44 ) I Estim�,, _d Cost incl. Estimated Estimated Cost Incl. Hennepin County Construction Hennepin County Engineering & Add'1 Cost County Engineering City Expenses 1. Right -of -Way $ 40,000.00 $ 40,000.00 $ 40,000.00 2. Concrete Curb & Gutter 40,687.50 47,604.38 51,412.73 3. Concrete Driveway Aprons 15,000.00 17,550.00 18,954.00 4. Concrete Sidewalk 50,062.50 58,573.13 63,258.98 5. Storm Sewer 1039355.00 120,925.35 130,599.37 6. Timber Retaining Walls 21,600.00 25,272.00 27 293.76 $309, 924 .. 86 -r 1O%�—�-` %, $$3 84 * Please note that there is an error in the preliminary cost estimate furnished by Hennepin County, as the first item for concrete curb and gutter was not -included in the total. We have included this amount plus engineering and corrected Mound's estimated share to read $309,924.86. The additional City expenses include items such as engineering, legal, fiscal and administrative costs. In addition to the above costs, the City will have additional costs Lu replace a portion of the old watermain and the installation of new street lights, if those project are approved. Separate reports will be presented for these two projects. STATE AID FUNDS Each year a portion of the Minnesota gas tax is allotted for street construction and maintenance in cities with a population over 5,000. Each city is required to designate a State Aid street system. Mound's system was set up in 1962 and revised from time to time since then. Some of the State Aid streets in Mound are Tuxedo Boulevard, Three Points Boulevard, Wilshire Boulevard, Maywood Road, Cypress Lane, and Bartlett Boulevard. Each year a construction and maintenance allotment from State Aid funds is placed in a trust fund for each community. The amount of the allotment is based upon population, miles of streets in the city, and the estimated cost of upgrading 103 Iall the State Aid streets in the City to State standards. In 1987, the City of Mound received $173,352.00 from the State for street construction and maintenance on State Aid streets. The construction portion cf the allotment $148,352 may be used for construction on the State Aid system or on the county highway system. In the past few years, sane of this money has been used to pay Mound's share of the cost of bridge replacements and the recent County Road 110 1 construction. A11 construction done with state aid funds must be done to state standards of width, load limit, parking regulations, etc. At the present time, Mound has $180,469.00 in their construction fund with approximately $35,000 of this total set aside for remaining reimbursement on the Lynwood Boulevard Project, leaving a projected balance of approximately $145,000.00. Mound should receive close to the same construction allotment in 1988 (approximately $148,000) as they did this year, which if added to the projected balance would result in a fund balance of approximately $293,000.00 in 1988. Some of this money can be used to finance that portion of Mound's share of the cost for County Road 15 which is eligible for State Aid reimbursement. This would have to be negotiated with Hennepin County since it is their project and tt-,cy can also reed .- State Aid money. We have estimated that approximately $189,600.00 of Mound's share of the construction cost is eligible for State Aid reimbursement. IASSESS�£NTS Since the street construction program began in 1975, virtually all of the City's streets have been reconstructed with concrete curb and gutter and storm 1 sewer. With the exception of State Aid streets, the entire cost of this y construction has been assessed to the abutting property owners on these streets. Improvements on State Aid streets have previously been assessed on the same basis as residential streets, using the cost of a typical residential street as a determination of the amount assessed. The remainder of the cost is 1 paid with State Aid funds. 7 I - i4(4 �/ There are some items included in Mound's share of the County Road 15 construction that benefit the abutting properties in the same manner that similar construction benefitted properties abutting other streets in Mound. When County Road 110 was improved in 1981, a portion of that cost was assessed to the abutting properties, therefore, to continue with a fair and consistent policy throughout the City, these costs for County Road 15 should also be assessed. The items to be considered for assessment would be concrete curb and gutter, concrete driveway aprons, concrete sidewalk and storm sewer. Concrete Curb and Gutter & Driveway Aprons The cost of the curb and gutter and driveway aprons is assessed ,.o the properties abutting the improvement on a per lineal foot basis for the curb and gutter and a square yard basis for driveway aprons. The proposed assessment for curb and gutter would r $51,412.73 divided by 10,200 lineal feet which equals $5.04 per lineal foot. The proposed assessment for driveway aprons is $18,954.00 dividcd by 1,000 sniiare yards which equals $18.95 per square yard. A typical driveway apron is 16 feet wide by 10 feet r deep, resulting in an assessment of $336.89. Wider aprons would be proportionately more expensive. I Sidewalk r The cost of the sidewalk would be assessed to the properties abutting the improvement on a square foot basis. The proposed assessment for sidewalk would be 50% of Mound's share of the cost or $31,629.49 divided by 44,500 S.F. which equals $0.71 per square foot. For a typical 80 foot wide residential lot with a 16 foot oriveway, the proposed assessment would be $227.20. The portion of a sidewalk through a driveway is assessed as driveway apron. Stnrm CPwPr The cost for storm sewer on previous street improvements has been assessed as part of the street project. Prior to that, storm sewers in Mound were assessed cn a square foot basis to the entire watershed drained by the storm sewer system. In the past a credit has been given to properties previously �v�s assessed for street improvements which included storm sewer. We would recommend that the storm sewer cost for this project be assessed on a square foot basis to the properties abutting the street and that if any of these properties were previously assessed for storm sewer as part of a street project, they will be given credit against this project. On this basis, the estimated assessment for storm sewer is $l30,-r99.37 divided by 1,750,000 S.F., which equals $0.075 per square foot. Sewer and Water Services If during construction it is determined that sewer or water services need to be installed where none previously existed, the cost for same would be assessed to the b2nefitting property. Summary of Estimated Totals to be Assessed Concrete Curb and Gutter $ 51,412.73 Concrete Driveway Aprons 18,954.00 Concrete Sidewalks 31,629.49 Storm Sewer 13n;599.37 Tutdl........................................ $ 232,595.59 Of the total properties abutting the project, it is estimated that City owned property and the right-of-way of intersection streets account for 25% to 3051Z. Included in this figure is the railroad footage between Northern Road and Seton Channel. If 27% is used as the City's share of the assessment, 73% of $232,595.59 or approximately $169,794.78 would be assessed against private property. I If the recommendations for assessments contained in this report are followed, a typical 80 x 100 lot would be assessed $600.00 for storm sewer, ' $403.20 for curb ano gutter, $336.89 for a driveway apron and $227.20 for sidewalk for a total of $1,567.29. This compares with an assessment of $3,577.75 for the same size lot on the 1980 Street Improvement Project. CONCLUSIONS AND REC!OWENUATIONS I Hennepin County is in the process r preparing the final plans for this project which should be ready for the City's final approval in late summer or early fall. The project would then be bid sometime in the winter of 87-88 with actual construction to start in the spring. Mound would be bided for 90% of tneir share of the construction or approximately $243,000.00 at the time the contract is awarded. In the past, the City has.been invoiced separately at a t later time for their share of the right-of-way cost. The proposed assessments will not even begin to pay the City's share of the project; therefore, we would recommend the difference be maoe up with money fro^ !'ound's Str`e Aid Constiuctiui. Fuitd. It is our opinion that the project. is feasible and can be accomplished as described herein. Nq-7 DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION U 320 Washington Av. South HENNEPIN Hopkins, Minnesota 55343-8468 H Ll 935-33a bdd: T. J. Hoffman March 11, 1987 File 15/7924 Mr. Edward J. Shukle, Jr. City Manager City of Mound 5341 Maywood Road - Mound, Minnesota, 55364 CSAH 15 HENNEPIN COUNTY PROJECT 8024 Dear Mr. Shukle: As requested in your letter of March 9, 1987, I am sending preliminary plans for the aLove referenced project to John Cameron, City Engineer, and a preliminary project cost share for the City of Mound based on Hennepin County's policy. A copy of that estimate is attached for your information. Please call me if you have any questions about this project. Sincerely, A. W. Herzog, P.E. DeL-ail Design Engineer AWH:mak Enclosure cc: John Cameron HENNEPIN COUNTY /Wr on equcl oppCrlunitY employer PRELImwY ESTIKAU or COST PAPTICIPMA—A CSAN 1S 1rmin CSAN 116 TO SLRON CHANNEL) HEM. CO. Plw. 0024 ITEM UNIT ESTIMATED tKIT TOTAL t QUANTITY COST CSTIKATED PKNAID CCNC. CW/RB i GUTTER, DRIVES AND SIDCWAAZ e621 CURD a GUTTER LIR. rT. 10650.00 $7.50 U 1,315.00 50 CONE. DRIVEWAY rAV1Z3fr SQ. YD. 1000.00 30.00 30.000.00 SO CDJOC. SIDEWIA SQ. M 46SO0.00 1.50 66.750.00 73 STORK SEWER - CATCH BASINS 6 LCA00 12' PC PIPE SEWER L.IR. M 1450.00 25.00 36,250.00 50 CONST. CATCH BASINS, DES. C CR O LIR. rT. 260.00 160.00 41,600.00 SO CASTIHO ASSEMLIES EACH 52.00 275.00 14.300.00 50 STORM SLWFR = TRUNK LINE 11) IS' PC PIPE SEWER LII1. TY. 1250.00 27.00 '_3,750.00 6o 16' RC ►IPE SEWER LIN. PT. 450.00 30.00 13,500.00 s0 2d' PIPE SEWER LIN. Fr. 300.00 10.0p 12,000.00 •0 CONST. K&AtOLLS LIN. rT. 60.00 160.00 9.600.00 0o CASTING ASSEMU ES EACH 10.00 27S.00 2,750.00 PETAING WALLS TIMER RETAINO WALL SQ. rT 6000.00 2.00 43.200.00 50 lSTIKATED MDUND SHARE Or ROAFAW ITEMS ]0].700.00 PL115 176 roe mszGN t oDenmALT AEMKISTRATICN :1(2rr or WAY 80,000.00 TI?TAL ESTIMATED PDIIRD SNARE 11) 20% or "MM TR1BR LIRE ELIOINIZ FOR STATE AID $40,667.50 15,000.00 $0,062.50 11,125.00 20,600.00 1,150.00 27,Coo.00 10,000.00 9,600.00 7.680.00 2,200.00 21,600.00 1l0,017.50 32.302.97 S0.00 40,000.00 $"ayme +p Pl 3091 . t� rnu.c.0 l uuj I .:)u"*kn i COUNTY ROAD 15 IMPROVEMENTS N TREET LIGHTS PROPOSED FUNDED TOTAL ASSESSMENTS BY CITY PROJECT COST STREET IMPROVEMENTS $169,795 + $161,724 $331,519 STREET LIGHTS (ALT. NO.1 WITH METHOD A ASSM'T) $ 50,941 + $ 76,412 = $127,353 TOTALS $220,736 + $238,136 = $458,872 STATE AID REIMBURSEMENT $189 600 DEFICIT FUNDING 48,536 $35,801 IF ALT. NO. 1 WITH METHOD B ASSESSMENT IS USED FLR STREET LIGHTS. $93,547 IF ALT. NO. 2 WITH METHOD A ASSESSMENT IS USED FOR STREET LIGHTS. $73,311 IF ALT. NO. 2 WITH METHOD 8 ASSESSMENT IS USED FOR STREET LIGHTS. $71,970 IF ALT. NO. 3 WITH METHOD A ASSESSMENT IS USED FOR STREET LIGHTS. $55,329 IF ALT. NO. 3 WITH METHOD B ASSESSMENT IS USED FOR STREET LIGHTS. $38,688 IF ALT. NO. 3 WITH METHOD C ASSESSMENT IS USED FOR STREET LIGHTS. $31,812 IF ALT. NO. 4 WITH METHOD A ASSESSMENT IS USED FOR STREET LIGHTS. $21,864 IF ALT. NO. 4 WITH METHOD B ASSESSMENT IS USED FOR STREET LIGHTS. $11,924 IF ALT. NO. 4 WITH METHOD C ASSESSMENT IS USED FOR STREET LIGHTS. / 5 Oct May 26, 1987 RESOLUTION NO. 87- RESOLUTION RECEIVING PRELIMINARY ENGINEERING REPORT AND CALLING HEARING ON SHORELINE BOULEVARD (HENNEPIN COUNTY ROAD NO. 15) STREET IMPROVEMENT WHEREAS, pursuant to resolution G87-72 adopted by the Council on April 14, 1987, a report has been prepared by McCombs -Knutson Associates, Inc., the City Engineers, with reference to the improvement of Shoreline Blvd. (Hennepin County Road No. 15) between Commerce Blvd. and Seton Channel and WHEREAS, this report was received by the Council on May 12, 1987, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Mound, Minnesota: 1. The Council will consider the improvement of Shoreline Blvd. by Hennepin County in accordance with the report and the assessment of abutting property for a portion of the cost of the improvement pursuant to Minnesota Statutes Chapter 429 at an estimated total cost of Mound's share of the improvement of $331,518.00. 2. A public: hearing shall be held on such proposed improvement on the 23rd day of June, 1987, in the Council Chambers of the City Hall at 7:30 P.M. and the Clerk shall give mailed and published notice of such hearing and improvement as required by law. Adopted by the Council this 26th day of May, 1987. Mayor Attest: City Clerk tSo1 32388.1 To: Mayor Grabek & Orono Council Members From: Mark E. Bernhardson, City Administratov".1 � Wit. Date: March 22, 1988 vj�% ,p Subject: Orono Compensation Plan 1�q I2 r�(_14 R � H� Attachment - n81y�;S A - City of Orono Compensation Plan Revised 2/24` )f B - City of Orono Compensation Plan Memo Dated 2/11/41P (Selected Attachments) OR4%. C - Orono Pay Plan Adjustments D - Survey of Other Cities ISSUES - 1. Consideration of Attachment A, with possible adoption as a formal compensation plan for the City Employees. 2. If adopted, consideration of adjustments for implementation during 1988 for selected employees. 3. Consideration for adoption of formal plan for benefits for part- time employees as only a havoc system has previously existed. INTRODUCTION - At the February 22, 1988 Council meeting, Council considered the information presented in Attachment B and voted to grant selected increases for four individuals but chose to table consideration of the formal plan and other adjustments until there was more opportunity for study of the plan together with staff providing Council with additionally requested information. nTgrT7gqTnm - Since the plan was considered on February 22, 1988, there have been two changes made to Attachment A (changes are underlined) which are as follows: A. Market Condition Adjustment - Sub -paragraph C has been inserted to allow Council the discretion to alter the market internal equity mixture in order to attract qualified candidates when the market for a particular position is so substantially above the expected performance level for that position that the City is unable to attact qualified candidates. B. Positions Above Expected Performance - Language regarding phase -in for those above the line has been altered to indicate that anyone who is above the line will have any annual adjustments for their position that will generally be less than any overall adjustment to the plan on a percentage basis. Additionally, it is indicated that the degree that a position's pay is above the line will indicate the degree to which there is a difference between their adjustment and the pay plan adjustment, all of which is subject to Council approval. Orono Compensation Plan March 22, 1988 Page 2 of 3 In addition, for clarification purposes, Attachment C has been included to graphically illustrate what adjustments will be made by this plan for 1988 within each of the classes by position. (The dot for each position indicates their current pay for 1988. Those that have x's indicate the proposed adjustments during 1988. The horizontal line above a position indicates a maximum that position can go to, either because of the fact that it is a part-time position or has a market or adjustment that comes into play. Positions without any adjustments during 1988 are for those that are above the line. As the original graph was run on 1987 numbers, the "1988" figures in the scale backed by 3% in order to give the appropriate relationships.) Attachment D is a brief telephone summary of the adjustments that cities between 5,000-15,000 have granted as a general adjustment for 1988, separate from adjustments for the pay -equity plan. Another related note, the Legislature has had bills introduced this session that would place strict levy limits on cities who did not have their plans submitted and accepted by October 1988. There would be a reduction in State aids to local governments who did not implement their plan by 1991. In addition, there has been legislation that would mandate the use of a all -male and all -female line in requiring that the female positions be brought up to the male dominated positions. This would result in substantially higher costs for the cities. ALTERNATIVES - Issue 1. Formal Compensation. A. Adopt as presented B. Amend and adopt Major areas include - General internal/external framework Salary determination rules Phase in rules Annual adjustments Movement through the exptected performance range Salary determination and employment C. Table for further information D. Reject the proposal Issue 2. 1988 Selected Adjustments. A. Adopt as presented B. Table pending adoption of Issue 1 C. Amend and adopt Particular adjustments Retro activity D. Reject Orono Compensation Plan March 22, 1988 Page 3 of 3 Issue 3. Part -Time Proration A. Adopt B. Amend and adopt Schedule on the benefits Schedule on health benefits Phase in rules C. Table -until, -at --least, March 28th D. Reject RECOMMENDATION - Following discussion it is recommended that the formal compensation plan be adopted as presented and that the 1988 proposed adjustments be made effective as of January 1, 1988 with the Council also adopting the part-time proration rules for part-time regular employees. PROPOSED MOTION - Moved by _, seconded by _, that the Council adopt Attachment A as its formal compensation program, and that it further adopt Attachment B including Resolution # to implement the plan and that Council also adopt Attachment C by Resolution #_ for proration of part- time benefits. Ayes _, Nays 21188.5(50) Draft 2/11/R8 Revised 2/24/88 CITY OF ORONO EMPLOYEE COMPENSATION PLAN Appendix A. Expected Performance Regression Line Graph B. Classification Point Ranges C. Current Year Wages INTRODUCTION - The purpose of this plan is to `ormally establish the means for determination of wages and other benefits for employees of the City. DISCUSSION - Determ;nQtions of compensation are the result of the development of an ia'--. rnal equity analysis and external equity analysis together with the means by which the City chooses to blend those to d�•termine its compensation plan. Local governments in the State of Minnesota were mandated in 1984 to undertake the internal equity analysis study in order to determine reasonable relationships between jobs. The City of Orono in conjunction with 140 other municipalities through the Metropolitan Area Managers Association (MAMA) hired and developed what became known as the Control Data Corporation "FOCAS" study (Flexible Occupational Analysis System). This study broke down the occupation groups into six job types, providing 1,000 tasks per job type. It based the analysis on values assigned to those tasks together with the percentages of time spent by the employee on those tasks to determine the point hierarchy for that position. The tasks were rated on the basis of complexity, importance and undesireability. This study was subsequently sold to Personnel Decisions Inc. (POI) who now operates the system for the MAMA organization. INTERNAL ANALYSIS The City, through the "FOCAS" study was able to establish points for each of its positions, including jobs common to many of the units of government using the system. A regression analysis was then done using the position points and existing pay rates, including a 10% adjustment for "exempt" employees, and is reflected in Appendix A. (Exempt employees are generally technical and management people who are not eligible for overtime.) This hierarchy of points was then divided using a combination of numerical and natural groupings into classes which are also reflected on Appendix A. The regression analysis is expected to be updated on an annual basis, adjusting the expected performance line for any inflation together with changes in the regression that may result from changing relationships among jobs as they relate to both points and compensation. The system does provide that when appropriate select positions can he reclassified fallowing a review by completion of the task evaluation using the PDT system. These reviews should be done; a.) when there is a job change of a significant magnitude, b.) at annual review time or c.) when there is a change in the person in that position. EXTERNAL ANALYSIS Provision for establishment of a reasonable relationship in the 1084 legislation did provide for the utilization of external (market) analysis is. aeveloping the reasonal le compensation relationships. Although internal analysis/equity is required to be the primary element of a compensation plan, external analysis for this plan is utilized anytime there is more than a 5% difference between the market for that class and the class expected performa.ice pay maximums. If a 5% difference or more exists, the expected performance pay maximum will then be determined by a 55% weight for the internal equity and 45% weight to the external market analysis. MARKET The market for the bulk of the jobs will be the metro area as defined by the Stanton group study, principally communities in the range between 5 and 15,000. (This reflects the fact that Orono does provide contract services for other municipalities and the joint efforts serves a population in excess of 11,000). The best data currently available is Stanton Municipal Survey, it is generally available during the summer of each year. This data can then be analyzed to determine the market data for that year and any annual adjustment can be placed to adjust the market for the following year. DETERMINATION OF SALARY Salary maximums are for expected performance. Each class is determined by mid points of that class. This can be adjusted annually. The plan also provides that individuals who are new in positions or not fully performing in those positions will be at an amount less than the expected performance oaximum. The established steps have a range commencing at 85%, 90%, 95% and 100%. It is anticipated that a person with no experience will start at 85% and will be annually reviewed and if expected performance has been achieved, be eligible for the next higher level on their anniversary date. 1. Evaluation - All employees will annually, in advance of their anniversary/benefits eetermination date, receive an evaluation from their supervisor. A. If they are not at the top of the expected performance range and their evaluation reflects that they are performing at an expected range they will advance to the next step. B. If they are at the top of the expected performance range, they shall not move further in the range. C. If they are performing at less than the expected 2. ranee they will not advance, they will again be reviewed within 6 months and if still not to expected range they will not receive the next annual adjustment when it comes due. Market Condition Ad --justmeustment ---------------- A. If a person is within 5% of the estimated market for their job no further market consideration will be given. B. If they are not within 5% of the estimated market for the job the following steps will be followed: 1. Multiply the top of the class by 55% 2. Multiply the established top of the market by 45% 3. Add those together to determine the maximum total step allowed. Multiply by the appropriate percentage (85, 90, 95, 100) of the step they should be going to, to determine the appropriate step allowed. C. Should the City, be unable to attract and retain qualified employees for a position`witfrn the compensation estaablished by steps A or B, the Cif Council has the option to alter the Internal/External market mix for that position for qthat hiring in order to employ a ualified individual. - -- 3. Selected position Credit Adjustment - For selected positions an adjustmet is made because o- the uniqueness of those positions an6 once the maximum total step allowed has been determined the credit should be multiplied for these additional duties. Positions and percentages are as follows: a. Acting Administrator - 5% on the persons base rate b. Police Chief - 5% determined for duties as Police Chief and as Emergency Prepardness Director for other communities based as follows: - 2% Long Lake - 2% Spring Park - 1% Minnetonka Beach 4. Positions Above the Ex ected Performance Line_ If the top of the _position is above the top of the class, the phase in will be subject to efforts so that the base adjustments will be less than the annual expected performance adjustments. This _may varyhlC the percentage above the expected performance line and is sufiject Eo Counci3-determination. 5. Positions Less Than 40 Hours - The following maximums shall apply for part-time regular employees: - Under 20 hours (as established for the position) - 20 - 28 Step 1 maximum - 28 - 35 Step 2 maximum 3 These step ranges will be determined using 85, 90, 95 and 100% of these maximums. IMPLEMENTATION CRITERIA Initial criteria for determining the level of pay to commence the phase in is as follows: Those persons who have had at least 3 years of experience and are performing at an expected level will be eligible for the step above closest to their current salary in the class on their anniversary date (or re 'ew date established in the implementation plan.) If their performance is rated at the expected level it would bring them to that step. If they have less than three years of experience the same rules for those over 3 would apply, provided that it is not greater than what they normally would have received as a percentage based on years of service. ANNUAL COMPENSATION PLAN ADJUSTMENTS The following steps will annually be undertaken. A. Ex ected Performance Line Regression - Prior to budget determinations the City will submit to Labor Relations Associates the appropriate current year data to develop a revised regression line prior to budget d-termination. B. Determination of Proposed Adjustment - The City staff will for the budget purposes propose an adjustment for the following year. C. Position Adjustments - The City will also take into account any anticipated known position adjustments and/or adjustments for part-timers hours for budget purposes. D. Market Analysis - Based on the Stanton information the City will additionally develop the appropriate budget information to be utilized for the following year's setting of salaries. (This information will be adjusted by any proposed adjustment in the expected performance line.) E. Budget Estimates - Based on the following information the plan will develop the appropriate budget estimates for the following year. F. Establishing l ishing Following Years Plan - Following budget adoption inclu'ing any annual expected performance line adjustment the salary schedules for individuals will be determined to reflect the updated annual changes plus most recent market data as adjusted. 4 G. Annual Adjustments 1. Those who have received an expected performance rating or. above during the previous year will be given a notice of the increase they will be given as of January 1. 2. For those who have received less than an expected performance rating twice for the previous year will not be given any line adjustment. They will however receive not less than a one step drop for the following year. STEP MOVEMENTS On the anniversary date (benefits benchr;ark date) the supervisor will review with the employee including any appropriate goal setting and make the determination as to whether they have achieved the expected performance or not. As noted above those who achieve the expected performance will move through the steps to the next higher. Those that have not, will not. POSITION EMPLOYMENT It is generally expected that a person without any experience would be hired at the beginning step for the classification for which they are hired. The Administrator in conjunction with the department head will make a recommendation to Council the appropriate level for offering employment. Once that level has been established togethe- with any other review steps, the person will be subject to annual review, unless other considerations are made at the time of employment. TEMPORARY/SEASONAL Persons who are temporary or seasonal employees will have their pay established at the time of hire. 9 21188.4 TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Mark Bernhardson, City Administrator"'�l� DATE: February 11, 1988 SUBJECT: City of Orono Compensation Plan Attachment A. Proposed City of Orono Compensation Plan B. Proposed 1988 Compensation Adjustments C. Benefits Proration - Part Time Regular Personnel D. Compensation Memo December 1.0, 1987 E. Personnel Rules Section 3 F. Compensation Memo 11/20/86 G. Proposed Resolution - Part -Time Benefits H. Proposed Resolution - Implementation of 1988 Compensation Adjustments ISSUE 1. Consideration of Atteic;hment A for possible adoption as a formal compensation program for City employees. 2. If a formal compensation program is adopted, consideration of any adjustments to bring wages and salaries which had been initially set prior to program adoption in order Lc imF?t:im-nt the formal program. 3. Consideration for adoption of a formal program for benefits for part-time regular employees as only an ad hoc system has existed. INTRODUCTION - One of the strategic goals for the last two years has_been the establishment of a formal compensation program for City employees. Development of this proposal has awaited the completion of the internal equity study (better known as comparable worth) together with ramifications related to develcpment of plans based on that informati:�,n. During this time the City, based on best available information has been adjusting salaries the past three years in anticipation of a a formal compensation plan based, in part, on the internal equity study. The most recent adjustments were made in December, as noted in Attachment D. Presentation of a plan however, was delayed awaiting the mathmatical development of a computer regression line comparing internal equity point values with existing salary levels. This regreEsion is Appendix A of th proposed compensation plan. The center line represents the expected performance pay line. Issue 2 reflects the implementation of the compensation program adoption and Issue 3 is a formal program of non salary benefits for part-time employees. DISCUSSION - Issue 1. City of Orono Compensation Program Ex ected Performance Line As noted in Attachment A position points were determined on the internal equity study. A regression line comparing the "comp worth" internal equities study points and the persons salary was then derived. Follow the line establishment, individual positions are grouped into classes with similar points establishing the mid -point as the top for the class. The plan then has a four step phasing program using the percentages 85%, 90%, 95% and 100%. It is generally anticipated that a person new in the position would start on the first step and over the succeeding three year period, if achieving expected performance, the person would move to the top of the range class. Annual Adjustments On a annual basis the expected pay line would be adjusted to reflect any annual/"Cost of Living" adjustments and other adjustments that may result from the mathmatical development of the regression line comparing dollars to points. Salary Progression Movement through the expected performance range would be dependent on the person's evaluation meeting the expected performance. Performance Incentives Movement above the expected performance line is an element that will be presented to the Council for consideration later this year for possible adoption for 1989. Positions_ Currently Exceeding Class Maximum For the positions that are higher than 5% above the top of the class, they will be handled on an individual basis, partly through negotiation strategy. Under 5% -dill receive annual adjustments as outlined above. Issue 2. - 1988 Adjustments - Based on the decision rules inciuded in the compensation plan both generally and the phase in, Attachment B was developed to show those positions where upward adjustments are proposed at this time and the cost entailed in those adjustments. The 1988 budget provides for $25,000 for comparable worth adjustments. Of this 198£ ;,.mount $9,800 was used in adjustments made for 188 made in December of '87. The adjustments proposed here amount to $13,000 of this money. Issue_ 3. - Regular Part Time Benefits_ - Employees working more than 40 hours have their benefits established in the Personnel Rules in Section 3. The Personnel Rules do allow for benefits 0a for part-time employees who are working for the City on a regular on -going basis (not including temporary or seasonal part-timers), as noted in Section 304. This had been handled on an informal basis by the retired Assistant Finance Director and it was realized by current staff that a better means would more accurately reflect benefits in relationship to hours worked which should be the foundation for such benefits. As a result of that review Attachment C was developed to "take the guess work" out of the system. This system will be automatically effective for any new part-time regular employees hired after the 1st of January 1988. Provision is made for those hired prior such that when the number of hours that they may be working would dictate a percentage of benefit above what they are receiving in any catagory, they would then get that and from there on be treated as employees hired after January 1, 1988. ALTERNATIVES - Issue 1. A. Adopt as presented B. Amend and adopt Major areas include - General internal/external framework Salary determination rules Phase in rules Annual adjustments Movement through the exptected performance range Salary determination and employment C. Table for further information until, at least, March 28th D. Reject the proposal Issue 2. A. Adopt as presented B. Table pending adoption of Issue 1 C. Amend and adopt Particular adjustments Retro activity D. Reject Issue 3. Part -Time Proration A. Adopt B. Amend and adopt Schedule on the benefits Schedule on health benefits Phase in rules C. Table until, at least, March 28th D. Reject RECOMMENDATION - Following discussion it is recommended that the formal compensation plan be adopted as presented and that the 1988 proposed adjustments be made effective as of January 1, 1988 with the Council also adopting the part-time proration rules for part-time regular employees. PROPOSED MOTION - Moved by , seconded by , that the Council adopt Attachment A as its formal compensation program, and that it further adopt Attachment B including Resolution # implement the plan and that Council also adopt Attachment C Resolution #__ for proration of part-time benefits. Ayes Nays to by 4 .. w F- Q w is 3 J CL D 0 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 ORONO PAY EQUI-'l Y ANALYSIS INITIAL WAGES RAISED TO 100% LINE 40 5 J 60 �O 80 100 ' 120 POINTS 0 POSITION Q 21188.6 CITY OF ORONO COMPENSATION PLAN APPENDIX B POINT GROUPINGS GROUPING POINT RANGE MID POINT POSITIONS IN GROUPING 1 44 - 47 45.5 CSO 2 48 - 51 49.5 Laborer Clerical I 3 52 - 55 53.5 Clerical II LEO 4 56 - 59 57.5 HEO Police Secretary Sr. Accounting Clerk Deputy Clerk/Secretary Recorder 5 60 - 64 62 Utility Mechanic Asst. Finance Director 6 65 - 68 66.5 Patrol Officer Golf Course Supervisor (E) 7 69 - 73 71 City Clerk (E) Building Inspector 8 74 - 78 76 9 79 - 83 81 Asst. Zoning Administrator (E) Senior Building Inspector (E) Public Works Foreman (E) 10 84 - 88 86 Lieutenant (E) 11 89 - 100 95 Building/Zoning Admin. (E) Public Works Director (E) 12 101 - 110 105 Police Chief (E) Finance Director (E) 13 ill - 124 117.5 City Administrator (E) (E) - Exempt 21188.6 CITY OF ORONO COMPENSATION PLAN EXPECTED PERFORMANCE LEVELS 1988 APPENDIX C LEVEL STEP STEP STEP STEP I II III IV 1 7.616 8.064 8.512 8.96 2 8.058 8.532 9.006 9.48 5 8.576 9.081 9.585 10.09 4 9.103 9.639 10.174 10.71 5 9.716 10.287 10.858 11.43 6 10.557 11.178 11.799 12.42 7 11.382 12.051 12.72 13.39 8 12.257 12.978 13.699 14.42 9 13.218 13.995 14.772 15.55 10 14.45 15.30 16.15 17.00 11 16.55 17.523 18.496 19.47 12 19.44 20.583 21.726 22.87 13 23.035 24.39 25.745 27.10 21188.6 CITY OF ORONO 1988 COMPENSATION IMPLEMENTATION PLAN EXPECTED IF 5% ADJUSTMENT RECOMMENDED PERFORMANCE 1988 ESTIMATED DIFF£NENCE CHANGE ANNUAL/AFTER TITLE_(Budgeted-Hrs) CURRENT 1988 MAXIMUM MARKET VALUE MIXED MAXIMUM 8 CURRENT EVALUATION Finance Director 29.05 22.87 17.788 20.583 97.4 20.583 (06/14) Police Chief 20.946 22.87 20.96 22.91 95.9 20.957 x 1.05 = 22.000 (01/02) City Clerk 12.875 13.39 13.78 -- 96.1 13.39 (09/14) Build/Zoning Admin 17.72 19.47 16.594 18.176 97.5 18.176 ;39/15) Asst Zoning Admin 14.579 15.55 14.70 15.17 97.5 15.17 (07/01) Senior Bldg Inspector 14.579 15.55 14.79 15.17 96.1 15.17 (97/01) Building Inspector 11.95 13.39 13.266 -- 89.2 12.051/12.72 (09/01) Retro 9.98 to 8/15/87 Asst. Finance Director 9.656 11.43 N/A -- 84.4 �_10.28'7/10.858 (06/01) Deputy Clerk/Secretary 19.28 10.71 9.857 10.33 10.33/10.71 (07/01) Police Secretary 10.28 10.11 9.857 19.33 10.33/10.71 (07/01) Sr. Accounting Clerk 10.28 10.71 9.857 10.33 10.33/10.71 (07/01) Recorder - PT(1600) 7.89 9.63 N/A -- 81 F8.19/8.675 (07/09) Police Clerical-PT(1300) 7.855 9.103 N/A -- 86.3 8.193/8.648 (04/12) Clerical - PT(1500) 6.592 8.532 N/A -- 77 1�7.25/7.679 (07/01) Number of personnel adjusted 14 Total personnel strength 40 72887.5 TO: All Department Heads FROM: Mark Bernhardson, City Administrator DATE: February 12, 1988 SUBJECT: Benefits Proration - Part Time Regular ?.�rsonnel As you are aware Section 304 of the Personnel Rules en'itles part-time regular employees who work in excess of half time to prorated benefits if so approved b, the City Administrator. Positions which are considered to be part-time or full-time seasonal, part-time or full-time temporary, or part-time regular with working hours of less than 20 hours per week, are specifically excluded from all employment benefits covered in Section 304. The following represent the guidelines for accrual and use. BENEFI- TS_BENCHMARK DATE - The vacation accrued rate and severance wi 1176e dependent on the number of years a person has been earning benefits. The date therefore for determinir:, such shall be the date they initially began earning beneifts on a prorata basis. Any subsequent period that they do not qualify for benefits shall be subtracted from their time for earnings purposes. QUALIFICATION - In January and July of each year following the initial earnings rates a review of the previous six months average hours (including sick leave, holiday and vacation hours) will be conducted. If it varies outside the below listed averages the accrual rates shall be adjusted appropriately for the following six months. ACCRUAL RATES - The rates for accrual are as follows: VACATION - SICR LEAVE - HOLIDAYS Under 20 hours - 20-24 24-28 28-32 32-36 36-40 No accrual 55% of standard 65% 75% 85% 95% The vacation standard is the number of days accrual for that particular number of years of service (see benefits benchmark date) as outlined in the Personnel Rules Section 306; the holiday standard is outlined in Seciton 307; the sick leave standard is outlined in Section 308. USAGE Usace for vacation and sick leave will be based on the number of hours normally scheduled for that day. (i.e. If the person works 8 hours per day, 3 days per week, usage is to be 8 hours for days scheduled. If scheduled 4 hours a day 5 days a week, 4 hours for each day schLouled.) 3n the case of holidays falling on the persons regular work day, they shall receive the prorata amount earned for a holiday regardless of hours scheduled. If the holiday falls on a day not scheduled to be worked, they shall be paid the prorata holiday hours for that day or may take another day off with the prorata hours earned for that holiday, with the prior written approval of the department head. Holiday and work hours will not be paid for the same day. HEALTH-AND_LIFE_INSURANCE The City policy for health insurance for all qualified regular City employees is a contribution of 100% of the cost of employee only coverage for those selecting single coverage, or a maximum in 1988 of $176.00 per month toward the cost of family coverage, and the City policy for basic single life insurance is a contribution of 100% of the cost. For those part-time regular positions earning benefits the City contribution toward basic single life insurance is 100% of the cost and the City contribution rates for health insurance are as follows: City contribution rates: SINGLE COVERAGE FAMILY_ COVERAGE Under 20 hours - Not available Not available 20 - 24 - 100% 55% of maximum 24 - 28 n65% " 28 - 32 - 75% " 32 - 36 - 85% " 36 - 40 - 95% " Note: The base family insurance contribution rate is 55% of the actual cost or the highest single cost, whichever is greater. For example: the 1988 base contribution would be 55% x $176.00 = $96.80; but the highest single cost is $ 104.55, so the base contribution would be $104.55. EFFECTIVE DATE This policy is effective immediately upon adoption by the City Council for all hires after January 1, 1988. FOR ALL EMPLOYEES SIRED PRIOR TO JANUARY 1, 1988: The earnings rates for holiday, vacation and sick leave were esta'nlished at the time of hire as recommended by the office coordinator and no provision wa. made for future adjustments. 2 However, for those employees hired prior to January 1, 1988: If the semi-annual review reflects an earnings rate that whould be LESS than the originally established level then the rate will remain at the originally established level. If the semi-annual review reflects an earnings rate that should be 140_R_E than the originally established level, then the earnings rate shall be increased to that new level. NOTE! Once the earnings rate increases above the level originally established the employee is treated as if hired after January 1, 1988 and subsequent semi-annual reviews for benefits, as covered by this policy will determine the vacation, sick leave, and holiday. NOTE! The City policy for health insurance for all qualified part-time regular City employees is a contribution of 100% of the cost of employee only coverage for those selecting single coverage, or a maximum in 1988 of $176.00 per month toward the cost of family coverage, and the City policy for basic single life insurance is a contribution of 100% of the cost. This policy will remain unchanged for those elegible part-time employees hired prior to January 1, 1988. 21788.2(45) A RESOLUTION TO ESTABLISH SPECIFIC GUIDELINES REGARDING PRORATED BENEFITS FOR QUALIFIED PART• -TIME REGULAR POSITIONS WHEREAS, the City of Oro- ,.iministrative and Personnel Policies do provide in Section o4, that part-time regular positions scheduled at 20 or more hours per week are eligible for benefits on a prorated basis. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the following represent the guidelines for accrual and use. BENEFITS BENCHMARK DATE - The vacation accrued rate and severance will be dependent on the number of years a person has been earning benefits. The date therefore for determining such shall be the date they initially began earning beneifts on a prorata basis. Any subsequent period that they do not qualify for benefits shall be subtracted from their time for earnings purposes. QUALIFICATION - 1-1 January and July of each year following the initial earnings rates a review of the previous six months average hours (including sick leave, holiday and vacation hours) will be conducted. If it varies outside the below listed averages the accrual rates shall be adjusted appropriately for the following six months. ACCRUAL PATES - The rates for accrual are as follows: VACATION - SICR LEAVE - HOLIDAYS Under 20 hours - No accrual 20-24 55% of standard 24-28 65% 28-32 75% 32-36 85% 36-40 95% The vacation standard is the number of nays accrual for that particular number of year-- of service (see benefits benchmark date) as outlined in the Personnel Rules Section 306; the holiday standard is outlined in Section 307; the sick leave standard is outlined in Section 308. USAGE Usage for vacation and sick leave will be based on the number of hours normally scheduled for that day. (i.e. If the person works 8 hours F,r.r day, 3 days per week, usage is to be 9 hours for days scheduled. If scheduled 4 hours a day 5 days a week, 4 hours for each day scheduled.) In the case of holidays falling on the persons r'gular work day, they shall receive the prorata amount earned for a holiday regardless of hours scheduled. If holiday falls on a day not scheduled to be worked, they shall paid the prorata holiday hours for that day or may take another day off with the prorata hours earned for that holiday, with the prior written approva' of the department head. Holiday and work hours will not be pa;u for the sam, da;. HEALTH AND LIFT INSUK:'WCE The City contribution tow,:.,. basic single life insurance is 100% of the cost and the City contribution rates for health insurance are as follows: Ci;--v contributi,ir. fates: SINGLE COVERAGE FAMILY COVERAGE Under 20 ),•,3urs - Not available Not available 20 - 24 - 100% 55% of maximum 24 - 28 - 65% " 28 - 32 - 75% 32 - 36 - 85% " 36 - 40 - 95% " Note: The base family insurance contribution rate is 55% of the actual cost or the highest single cost, whichever is greater. For example: the 1988 base contribution would be 55% x $176.00 = $96.80; but the highest single cost is $104.55, so the base contribution is $104.55. EFFECTIVE DATE This policy is effective immediately upon adoption by the City Council for all hires after January 1, 1988. FOR ALL EMPLOYEES HIRED PRIOR TO JANUARY 1, 1988: The earnings rates for holiday, vacation and sick leave were established at the time of hire and no provision was made for future adjustments. The first semi-annual review is for the period July to December 1987 and is effective January 1, 1988. If the semi-annual review reflects an earnings rate that would be LESS than the originally established level then the rate will remain at the originally established level. If the semi-annual review reflects an earnings rate that should be MORE than the originally established level, then the earnings rate shall be increased to that new level. Once the earnings rate increases above the originally established level the employee is treated as if hired after January 1, 1988 and subsequent semi-annual review for vacation, sick leave, and holiday benefits, as covered by this policy will determine the semi-annual adjustment. The City policy for health insurance and basic single life insurance :or all qualified part-time regular City employees hired berore January 1, 1988 is the same as that for full-time regular City employees. Aaopted by the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota at a regular meeting held February 22, 1988. James R. Grabek, Mayor ATTEST: Dorothy M. Hallin, City Cler 121087.2 / I TO: Mayor and City Council rROM: Mark Bernhardson, City Administrator DATE: December 10, 1987 SUBJECT: 1987/1986 Compensation Attachments: A. Recommendation for 1987 Adjustments S. 1987/1988 Compensation Resolution C. City of Orono Compensation/Hand Out Dated 12/7/87 ISSUE 1. Consideration of 1967 compensation adjustments in light of internal equity study. 2. Approval of 1988 compensation adjustments. INT_RODUCT_ION - At the work session on December 7, 1987 background on City compensation and the general parameters for future compensation were presented. Progress on development of the compensation systems elements have not progressed as rapidly as had been hoped. (This is primarly because the mathmatical development of the appropriate analytic regression line to determine expected performance compensation is not yet complete.) Enough data is however available to renomm._, : certain adjustments for selected personnel. DISCUSSION - As discussed on :he 7th the development of a regression line to fit the internal study data is key in development of the pay line fcr the expected performance. Development of this has not progressed as satisfactorly as had been hoped. It will however be developed prior to formulation of a compensation plan in 1988. The initial cost of living adjustments that were budgeted for in 1988 together with incorporation of any '87 adjustments could be made now and these could the... be followed by any adjustments necessitated by development of the compensation plan in 1988. Development of the compensation plan for 1988 would also include the grouping of positions into classes,development of the expected pay line and a progression system through the initial pay program. Presented also for discussion at that tim,2 will be the means by which a person could receive compensation for performance above the expected level of performance. The market data provided is an approximation from the 1987 Stanton Data for cities. The mid -point data is not necessairly the average of the "expected performance" pay level, nor does it necessairly reflect any comparable worth adjustments made by cities during 1987. ALTERNATIVES - Organizational - 1. Adopt compensation as proposed -1987 -1988 2. Adopt as amended -1987 -1988 M_e_e_tin_g_ Action 1. Adopt 1987 and/or 1988 2. Amend 1987 and/or 1988 3. Table 1987 and/or 1988 It-ixs of assistance if -he 1987 adjustments were to be acted upon at this meeting for accounting and year end close out purposes. It would be helpful for 1988 payroll purposes that the initial 1988 adjustments be done with the understanding that there would possibly be other adjustments 'hen the full plan for compensation is developed in 1988. RECOMMENDATION - It is recommended that Council adopt 1987 compensation adjustments retroactive to the specified dates and adopt the initial 1988 adjustments based on the final '87 compensation plus the 3% cost of living that was budgeted for in the 1c , budget. The estimated total for the 1987 adjustments is abor 000 which is substantially under the $22,C'00 still av- for such adjustments in 1987. F.OrOSED MOTION - Moved by __, seconded by _, that the Council adopt Resolution # which adjusts selected 1987 wages and makes initial adjustments for 1988 based on the 187 adjustments together with the 3% budgeted cost of living adjustment for all persons not represented by bargining unit. Ayes _-, Nays __ CITY.OF ORONO 1987 COMPENSATION ADJUSTMENT RECONSIDERATION CURRENT 1987 POSITION SALARY/HOURLY RATE Police Chief $41,350 Public Works/ 40,556 Acting Administrator Finance Director 39,645 Building/Zoning 34,341 Administrator City Clerk 25,022 Secretary/ 9.31 Deputy Clerk Police Secretary 9.656 Dep. Treas/ 9.898 Acct. Clerk PROPOSED ADJUSTMENT $42,300 41,300 40,500 35,800 26,000 9.38 9.98 9.98 9.98 Bldg Inspector 11.043 11.60 Number of Personnel Adjusted 9 Total Personnel Strength 40 EFFECTIVE DATE OF ADJUSTMENT 01/01/87 01/01/87 01/01/87 01/01/87 01/01/87 01/01/87 09/04/87 01/01/87 01/01/87 09/04/37 MARKET_MIDPOINT $42,328 40,330 35,900 33,510 27,830 9.57 9.57 9.25 12.88 A RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING SALARIES FOR CITY EMPLOYEES FOR 1988 BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota, that initial salaries and wages for City employees be established as follows, effective January 1, 1968: NAME POSITION 1987 SALARY 1988 SALARY Mark Bernhardson City Administrator $50,138.00 (5/l/88 Review) Dorothy Hallin City Clerk 26,000.00 $26,780.00 Melvin Kilbo Police Chief 42,300.87 43,569.00 Gary Cheswick Police Lieutenant 35,794.56 36,868.00 Kurt Erickson Police Lieutenant 35,794.56 36,868.00 John Gerhardson Public Works Director 41,300.25 42,539.00 Jack Brinkhaus Street/Utility Foreman 31,904.25 32,861.00 Thomas Kuehn Treas/Finance Director 40,500.00 41,715.00 Jeanne Mabusth Zoning Administrator 35,800.83 36,874.00 Michael Gaffron Asst. Zoning Administrator 29,355.00 30,326.00 Thomas Jacobs Building Inspector 29,355.00 30,326.00 Ronald Steffenhagen Golf Course Supt. 27,079.88 27,892.00 Theresa Naab Depty City Clerk/Admin Sec 9.98/Hr 10.28/Hr Sue Bobzine Police Secretary 9.98/Hr 10.28/Hr James Gregory Street Dept. HEO 12.966/Hr 13.355/Hr Steve Hansen Street Dept. LEO 11.641/Hr 11.990/Hr John Sass Street Dept. LEO 11.641/Hr 11.990/Hr Dale Skreen Street Dept. LEO 11.641/Hr 11.990/Hr Wayne Quast Utility Mechanic 12.294/Hr 12.674/Hr Jerome Smith Utility Mechanic 12.305/Hr 12.674/Hr Charlotte Knutson Depty Treas/Account Clerk 9.98/Hr 10.28/Hr Robin Mikelson Finance Accounting Clerk 9.375/Hr 9.656/Hr Lyle Oman Field Inspector 11.60/Hr 11.95/Hr Carol Hansing Asst. Police Secretary 7.630/Hr 7.859/Hr Pati Peterson Recorder 7.660/Hr 7.890/Hr Jamie Bosma Copy & File Clerk 6.400/Hr 6.592/Hr BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that mileage for City use of private cars on City business be reimbursed at $.205 per mile. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota, at a regular meeting held December 14, 1987. ATTEST: James R. Grabek, mayor norO-Ehy 1. ilallin, City Clerk---------- CITY OF ORONO COMPENSATION 1987-88 I. Compensation Generally A. Internal Equity B. External Equity C. Compensation Determination D. "Suburban Municipal Compensation" II. Comparable Worth A. Legislation B. State Employee Relations Department C. Factors D. Control Data Study 1) Participation 2) Occupational Groups 3) General Framework a. Tasks (700-1000) b. Time Spent c. Value 4) Position Analysis 5) Bench Mark Positions 6) Hierarchy E. Compensation vs Salary F. Market Data 1) Utilization 2) Bias G. System Transitions III:. Orono Compensation A. 1985 Adjustments B. 1986 Comparable Worth Interim Adjustments C. Compensation Development 1) Internal Analysis Hierarchy 2) Graphing/Regression Analysis 3) Expected Performance/Compensation 4) Classification/Grouping 5) Progression to Expected 6) Cost of Living D. Adjustments 1) Below a. Length of Service b. Market c. Percentage Differnece 2) Above 50 45 40 35 v� 30 W Ch Q 25 J CY 20 15 10 5 0 BROOKLYN PARK PAY EQUITY ANALYSIS ORIGITIAL REGRESSION UNE 40 60 80 100 POINTS ° MALE x FEMALE 120 60 50 40 W Q 3 30 J LY 0 20 10 0 BROOKLYN PARK PAY EQUITY ANALYSIS ioxADDED m EXEMPT JOBS 0 A 0 A o � x i0C X 40 .60 60 , 100 POINTS o MALE x FEMALE 120 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10' 8 6 ORONO PAY EQUITY ANALYSIS INITIAL WAGES RAISED TO 100% LINE 40 7 60 -10 80 40 100 120 POINTS w x - pl <,• I�14 tl.rp6w 0 POSITION - �s�,, ►�'Xi is ! t LIB wfi j op oc two FLO C-iu: qr YR 12Kr��10AU3 SI-4m, To 14141 Ii• 3%t. TACK t,rj&- SURVEY OF OTHER CITIES (Excluding Police Contracts) CITY GENERAL ADJUSTMENTS PAY EQUITY ADJUSTMENTS POLICE SETTLEMENTS APART FROM PAY EQUITY ccc=c======--=====c=__ Robbinsdale a.ca==c.coc=cc.ac=cca.aaaaavcaaaer-sacaaacaaaacaasa:caaa:aeaa=c=oc=c==ac.z=roo====xc 3� 2• for those over median Not setled Three years 90-95-100% N/S Plan for those under Moundsview 3% 1 Adj-jstment 4.1 One Adjustment - 18% Police Chief Stillwater Not Separated Out 7-250 N/S One Adjustment Woodbury 4% Non -Supervised 8-1-87 Made all adjustments N/S 3% Supervised in one step North St. Paul Not Separated Out Average 4.4% had started N/S phase ins 3 years earlier Ramsey 1/1 3% Adjustment Maximum 240 Not settled for 1987 7/1 Additional 28 Shakopee 3.5% l/l/87 Adjustment Sgts - 31 Mixture - Internal 51% Market 49• Champlin Adjustments to 'Midpoint' N/S Mound Adjustments Pending Consultant Report to be 48 submitted to 3/28 Mtg Chaska No Response N/S Prior Lake 38 Adjustments based on N/S combination of Pay Equity up to 7% plus merit and longevity St. hnthony 2.5% Adjustments Pending N/S Mendota Heights 4% Clerical 1/2 Adjustments in 1987 N/c 3% Public works Balance of difference over 3 years 25% maximum increase Chanhassen 4% 3-4% over 3 years N/S Rosemount 3-12% Adjustments for Non- Anticipate plan 4% Union depending on position completion 6/88 Those over line 28 base increase plus 1.5% cash payment Savage 41 Adjustments up to 30% 48 Retro to 8/87 32388.2 To: Mayor Grabek & Orono Council Members c From: Mark E. Bernhardson, City Administrato)K'Q` 4�J IA � Date: March 23, 1988 V*r% 4f>Tll y Subject: 1972 Sha�-ywood Road 11AR 2 8 lg�g G .ttachments - 11'ii A. Fredrick Brown Memo Dated 11/28/77 I V4 B. 1972 Shadywood Road Memo Dated 2/4/88 ORONO ISSUE - 1. Provide Council with information regardinq the outcome of the jury trial for the violation of Ordinance 9.13, Subdivision 14. 2. Presentation as to further courses of action the City may choose to take. INTRODUCTION - The property at 1972 Shadywood Road has been the subjec- ;omplaints commencing in 1977 regarding the continuous feedinq of wa��-:owl by the resident at this addrass. At that time, the judge in the matter imposed one year sentence that would be stayed providing that the resident must not engage in any feeding during the stay or be charged with any other violation of public ordinance, as noted in Attachment A. In 1982, he was again cited for violation of the public nuisance ordinance, but in a stipulation signed in 1982 was given an amount that he was allowed to feed. In 1984, the City passed Ordinance No. 9.13, Subdivision 14 that limited the feeding of water fowl in a manner that it would precipitate their congregation, cause problems with excreme^t, or alter their migratory patterns. During the spring of 1987, the ty received complaints and during the summer of 1987 twice cited the ident of the above � Jperty for feeding the ducks. (The City only cites a violator twi.ce for a nuisance type complaints before they are taken to court as judges generally dislike a series of tickets for the same violation prior to it being heard in a court.) After a couple of preliminary motions in front of the judge during the fall and early winter this went to a jury trial on March 11, 1988 and the trial was concluded after five hours of deliberation on March 15, 1988. In a discussion with the jury foreperson, the City attorney was able to ascertain that neither the stipulation nor the fact of the congregation of ducks created a problem was an issue for the jury but the decision pivoted on the fact that there were only two instances cited for the feeding the ducks. The jury apparently did not feel that this constituted enough feedings to create the nuisance that exists. Th- City did on its behalf have three neighbors together with Dr. James Cooper, a noted migratory water fowl expert from the Univcrsity, testify indicating that the actions of the resident of 1972 Shadywood Road were detrimental to the properties owners with Dr. Cooper testifying as to the detriment to the birds themselves. 1972 Shadywood Roar March 23, 1988 Page 2 of 2 DISCUSSION - The pros lem of the ducks continues and at least one of the residents in the vicinity is, following the trial decis,* i, again asking the City to resolve the problem as the large congregation .As which is detrimental to the use of their property and to the lake in front of their property. ALTERNATIVES - A. Poli-y 1. The City ac this point could take the position that it is unable to < .-monstrate successfully to the judicial system that this is a problem that is creating a nuisance under its ordinance an3 do nothing further. 2. -..:e City could amend the ordinance to more clearly delineate that the violation is the feeding nc}. just the long term effect. 3. The City could further pvr•. criminal route by having several observations, citati warnings of the property owner continuing to feed the nu. _o establish the pattern of multiple ediu_ over an extended period r^ time. 4. The City could pursue the civil injunction route as it had done successfully with the person who was using the trailer in Na, -re to sla—Thter deer. This would involve arY:,ements in fi a judge and if granted violations would be _ the judges or Jstt r. than a City ordinar, 'irectly. 5. The City c,»:!_d look at other avenues for removing a nuisance such as havinq he University of Minnesota gather up the water fowl in the - and transport them to other places. This is general ly limi _.=d to geese ar-i the problem at 1972 was not only sc ),.I large -onrregation of ducks. This avenue as I does involve substantial C-ty expense for the f the birds and there is no guarantee that they or will not return to the site, particularly if the ;ntinues. :. pea- of Ordina._� - No. 9.13, Subdivision 14 as a ban on -owl fc,; ding. B. Meeting Action: 1. Direct staff to undertake one of the avenues listed above. 2. .able. RECOVMENDATION - It is recommended that this is-ue be tatted for further consideratior. y Council and staff before undertaking further action. PROPOSEDMOT7ON: Moved by _ , ser-onde , that the :ouncil c• ':le this item for further consideration. Ayes _ nays Cc: Scctt Richtor, City AttcrnF• POPF'AM, HAIK, SCHNOBRICH. KAUFMAN b. DOTY. LTO. WANE G POS HAV RAIMQND A I.A-K ROGER W SCNNG/AIC. DEN''�:R —Ur.AN DAV'D S 00" ROBERT ♦ MIN-SH ROLE A WOROEN G. MARC WHITEHEAD BRUCE O WILLIS EREOER•CK S. R,CHARCS RONALO C. ELMOUIST G ROSERT JOHNSON GARVR MACOMSEP ROSERT S. aRK c REOERICK C BROWN BRUCE O MALKERSON JAr ES R STEILEN JAMES B. LOCKHART ALLEN W. HINOERAKER CLIr EORO M. GREENE O. WI LL IAAI KAUr MA-4 OCSYL L. PETERSOM Mr. Lloyd Nehring 1972 Shadywood Road Wayzata, MN 55391 4 J 4 4 1 O S C E N T C R MI )NEAPOLIS, MN 55402 November 28, 1977 RE: State vs. Lloyd Nehring Dear Mr. Nehring: '6121 33S-9])1 TCLECOPIEN I6121 339-s4530 The City of Orono received complaints from one of your neighbors to the effect that you are cc ;ruing to feed wild ducks on your property. Ore of these :3.aints was received on the morning of November 25, 1977, ar :lie second complaint was received today. As you kn w, Judge Daniel Hart, after accepting your plea of guilty to maintaining a public nuisance, stayed the imposi- tion " a sentence for one year from September 21, 1977. Judge Hart stayed the sentence on the following conditions: (1) you must not engage in the feeding of any wild ducks on your property. during the period of the stayer'. sentence and (2) you must not be charged with the violation of the Orono Public Nuisance Ordinance. If ycu should violate either of these conditions, Judge Hart will order y)u to reappear before him at which time you will be asked to shcla cause why he should not revok - his star-d sentence. ?seedless to say, the City of Oronc, would like to resolve this matt,=r without returning to Nennepi:. County Municipal Court. POPHAM, HAIK. SCHNOBRICH, KAUFMAN & DOTY, LTD. Mr. Lloyd Nehring November 28, 197' Page Two Accoru.Lngly, I urge you to do everything within your power to keep the ducks from congregating on your property and on the ice adjacent to your property. Very truly yours, Frederick C. Brown Prosecuting Attorney City of Orono FCB/mcr cc: Walter R. Benson, 9*fy Administrator ✓ Chief Melvin Kilbo John T. Hartmann, Esq. Ronald Potas 2488.2 c:lv_( TO: Mayor and City Council A�� FROM: Mark Bernhardson, City Administrato DATE: February 4, 1988 SUBJECT: 1972 Shadywood Road Attachments: A. 1972 Shadywood Road Memo Update B. Ordinance Section 9.13 ISSUE - Provision of information regarding the citations issued at the above address. INTRODUCTION - The issue addressed by the resident at last meeting dates back to at least 1977. The City in 1982-83 proceeded to prosecute the case under a general nusiance ordinance. This was settled by the attached stipulation. Subsequent to the stipulation the City adopted Ordinance 9.13 Subd. 14 as noted in Attachment B. Following complaints in the spring of 1987 the City pursued a violation of this ordinance and as noted in Attachment A will also pursue violation of the stipulation related to efforts to discourage. The amount of feeding allowed in the 1983 stipulation appears excessive to try to accomplish the purpose of "efforts to discourage". In addition the subsequent ordinance is now being violated. The City's prosecutor is amenable to a negotiated settlement within the guidelines outlined in Attachment A. RECO14MENDATION - That Council accept information related to the citation at 1972 Shadywood. Staff will have the City Attorney reiterate the desire to settle the matter short of trial with the resident's Attorney if it is within the guidelines outlined. PROPOSED MOTION - Moved by , seconded by , that the OrDno Council accept Lhe information regarding the ordinance violation at 1972 Shadywood Road. Ayes Nays 1 DATE: February 3, 1988 TO: Mark Bernhardson, City Administrator FROM: Mel Kilbo, Chief of Police SUBJECT: 1972 Shadywood Road Update At the pre-trial hearing on September 29, 1987, the attorney for the resident and the attorney for the City attempted to see if there was common ground for a negotiated settlement that would cease the feeding of ducks from here forward. At the time it did not appear that the resident was amenable to a ne- gotiated settlement and it was agreed that the attorneys would argue the status of the 1983 stipulation in light of the pro- hibition on feeding the ducks that was passed subsequent to that stipulation. The judge agreed to that and gave the de- fendant a month to submit a brief and the City Attorney two weeks to respond. On January 6, 1988 the judge gave his decision, stating that the 1983 stipulation is admissable in evidence and shall be presented to the trier as fact. If the resident has violated the terms of the 1983 stipulation, then he has committed a vio- lation of the Orono Ordinance. The converse is also true. The resident was observed as late as the last week of January, bringing approcimately 200 lbs. of feed bags. This was called in by a neighbor and photographed by the police. The City has proposed the following guidelines: No feeding for one (1) year from date of agreement - Feeding only every third day - 8:00-8:30 am on one occasion - 1:00-1:30 pm on the next occasion - Feeding only cracked corn or a mixture of cracked corn, crushed oats and soybeans - Only one (1) pound of cracked corn allowed per feeding - No feeding after October 1st or before May 1st of any year - The matter will be heard on March 10, 1988 at 0900 at the Hennepin District Court in Ridgedale. STATE OF DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES 1-HONENO. ( 612 ) 296-5200 May 1, 1987 Mel Kelbo Chief of Police Police & Fire Administration 445 Willow Drive. Long Lake, MN 55356 Dear Mr. Kelbo, FILE NO Mike Grupa, Operation Officer for the Minnesota Departmert of Natural Resources Divison of Enforcement has asked me to write you concerning the Department's feelings on the feeding of waterfowl. Except urier extreme circumstances, the Department discourages the feeding of waterfowl. During the summer months there is generally plenty of natural occuring foods and supplemental feeding only serves to concentrate ducks and geese in a small area; often causing nuisance problems. Feeding waterfowl during winter months is a greater problemas it tends .o concentrate large numbers of waterfowl in very small areas and diseases brought on by harsh weather are easily passed from bird to bird. Also, waterfowl fed during winter months become totally dependant on daily handouts as most naturally occuring foods are not available. We know that many citizens enjoy feeding waterfowl, hcwever, it should be recognized the benefits derived from feeding are only to the citizen and not to ducks and geese. In situations where feeding will continue we recommend that it cease the first of September so that the bird will migrate to southern climates for the winter months. Sinc ely, Roger N. Johnson Regional Wildlife Supervisor Carlos Avery Game Farm 5463 W. Broadway Forest Lake, MN 55025 RNJ:jaa cc: Mlle Grupa Jon Parker AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EPAPLOYEP GUIDELINES FOR FEEDING DUCKS No feeding for one (1) year from date of agreement - Feeding only every third day 8:00-8:30 am on one occassion 1:00-1:30 pm on the next occassion Feeding only cracked corn or a mixture of cracked corn. crushed oats and soybeans Only one (1) pound of cracked corn allowed per feeding No feeding after October 1st or before May 1st of any year STATE OF MINNESOTA DISTRICT COURT COUNTY OF HENNEPIN a RTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT State of Minnesota, �a Plaintiff, J ,T4 Rl aAse� 3120737 v. Lloyd Nehring, Defendant. -000- The above -entitled matter came duly on for hearing before the undersigned Judge of District Court on December 4, 1987 upon motion of the defendant to introduce evidence to the trier of fact. John T. Hartman, Esq., appeared for the defendant. Scott E. Richter, Esq., appeared for the plaintiff. Based on all files, records and proceedings herein, the Court bei a thereby fully advised in the premises, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED: 1. That the 1983 stipulation is admissible in evidence and shall be presented to the trier of fact. Date: BY THE COURT I wl.�. eorge R. Adzick Judge of District Court i 1 Compliance or ncn-compliance with the specific terms of the 1983 stipulation is the dispositive issue in this case. The effect of the stipulation is to modify the ordinance in question by making more specific, at least as applied to this defendant. If the de- fendant has violated the terms of the stipulation, he has committed a per se violation of the ordinance. The converse is also true. The trier of fact must determine whether the defendant has violated the terms of the stipulation. In order to do this, the stipulation must be submitted in evidence. The stipulation will also form the jury instruction: If you find, beyond a reasonable doubt, that the defendant has violated any of the terms of the 1983 stipulation, you shall fins defendant guilty of violating of (the specific code sections and ordinances). GRA 10787.10 TO: Mayoi and City Council FROM: Mark Bernhardson, City Administrato t/ DATE: October 6, 1987 �1 SUBJECT: Administrator's Information 3536 LYRIC AVENUE - The resident continues to do some worn in putting a foundation under the property, however the work is not completed and staff will be further monitoring this project for hopefully having a completion within the next month. 1972 SHADYWOOD ROAD - At the pre-trial hearing on September 29, 1987 the attorney for the resident and the attorney for the City attempted to see if there was some common ground for a negotiated settlement that would cease the feeding of the ducks for here forward. At the time it did not appear that the resident was amenable to a negotiated settlement and it was agreed that the attorneys would argue the status of the stipulation in light of the prohibition on feeding the ducks that was packiec subsequent to that stipulation. The Judge agreed to that and ga•7e the defendents a month to submit a brief on that matter giving the City two weeks after that to respond. It is anticipated that a ruling on this matter will no:: be received until November or Dacember. 3946 SIXTH AVENUE NORTH - Despite promises by the ownar no progress has been made and the 1.,ity will be having its contractor initiate work on the property within the next week. 2160 WAYZATA BOULEVARD - The PCA did transmit the letter to the owner indicating certain actions that he must take and deadlines that he must meet with the feeling of the PCA at this point bei that the owner of the property is responsible based on the ass ton that the pollution is coming from his property. in a discussi .:: with the property owner he feels that the origin of the pollution is 'not on his property and that he will be working with PCA through his attorney on the matter. 200 HOLLANDER_ROAD - There is presently no further progr�-_ on the matter to report since last time. The representativ* from the estate has not been in contact with the City regarding possible voluntary development of the by-laws for the homecwners association as had been hoped. The clean-up on the property has not substantially changed since work earlier this summer. The City will be continuing to resolve the barn issue and clean-up during the r.ext month or so. 3405_SHORELINE DRIVE - During the past month Lice st,"` in conjunction with Hennepin County has reviewed the location, of a new road and sidewalk again for the owner of the property. It was hoped that this would allow him to make up his mind regarding the amount that he woilld have left for parkirg and balance that uNUNU PULILE DEPARTMENT MESS. K E V CONTROL NUMITER WCA1 CONT. AGENCY NCIC (DENT. (CAGI DATElTIME REPORT MADE E C 1 / -, , , �� /M , PI 0 .2 17 ' � DAY: S M T W I : � S L NBA DATE REPORTED IRPD) TIME RPD ( RP1 LOCATION GRID NOR (LGNI -..I- PLACE COMMITTED IPLC I I 77 Z S /f it n -r i L NOR MAD SOUAu OR BADGE III (SON) TIME ASIG. ITAS) / R / r / ` p TIME ARR. (TAR) TIME CLR. (TCL) / / HAD Coda+ P — Phone `{ R — Radio LNBR ISN UOC UCS OFFICER ASSIGNED ASSISTED BY j A — Alarm I — In Person C' I I U�C NOR /'� / 5 V — Visual M— Mail V L�� /I T — Other OFFENSE ❑ OR INITIAL COMPLAIN- O OTHER PRINCIPAL: r COMPLAINT ❑ OFFENDER QIVICTIM ❑ O.O.B. TT`` BUSINESS ADDRESS BUSINESS PHONE HOME ADDRESS HOME PHONE OTHER REPORTS INCLUDEC Impound ❑ Prop Inventory ❑ Implier Consent ❑ Accident Report ❑ Tap+ ❑ Influence Report ❑ Photo+ ❑ REPORTING PERSON❑OFFENDERQVICTIM❑ I D.O.B. I BUSINESS ADDRESS BUSINESS PHONE HOME ADDRESS SEE CASE FILE F+CME PHONE ROLL CALL L Warn & Release Dept. Assist Message Deliver Treated & Transported I G.O.A. Advised Citation Issued Deta;l Completed 1 Q ` T* Z L l..r !C r eq- L. f r"'4•YT7� L.i ►. i 1•i- IC. 1 r. - t-U hlC �� UG�LS�� t'`c� G ►• �) I=H �L-1►-�(�S ?� ( 11Z � � Ails t.x.�lzL F � �r�`�-c t �-" l L �• 1Y • c' L 1 I LC' w 1ti ..0 �.K CL�` _ l �v .•�/ ��C- .(•�', i �-c� �./�- l `. lid .�. C-y LJ Y� it N-v_\t.�t'.-ll ��•� Y'F ZL C� I l st' Ci�l V\ \ #. ,Y ILI i • SlR 1 I , `1r i'-•c>\/�� , , n _ 1 ,r. 4��. 7'�'.c ^� L k - K'� \ L •L. `� v c .i - 1G v �. a'� C� �k )� _ l . r�_Jn�- i •_ ✓� Q• • v �� wY i_,_ C { C] 1. C ` LA , 5 �.L._�l� �,,��t c�i �(' ��•i.liL. \`rw.',' ,+r-.,--.� '.T i�c.�.�<(', �•. •�r'r.�1 .,�, -- /1iA V. -4 COPY TO Lrsl CO ATrNY ❑ C;TV ATTNY ❑ COURT ❑ CHIEF U OTHER. DISPOSITION Unfounded Cleered by arrest Ref, other agency InaCtive Other =' F F ICE R'S SUPERVISOR'S SIGNATURE uKUNU PULILE DEPAKTMENT MESS KEY CONTROL NUMBER IOCAI CONT. AGENCY NCIC IDENT. (CAG) DATE/TIME REPORT MADE E C 1 / / M N 0 2 7 , / L NSA �DATE RE•ORTEO IRPCC) TIME RPD (TRP) LOCATION GRID NBA (I GNI DAY: IS M T W T F S / -())+ /� �Tl c� I / +� / /' PLACE COMMITTED (PLC) !e %% L NBR HPD SQUAD OR BADGE # (SBN) TIME ASIG. (TAS) TIME ARR. (TAR) TIME CLR. (TCLI 0/RJ/ l I l� -�/ .Za/ ) I i / f c L NBA UOC UCS ® L NSA I N CS o/ �/ /n OFFICER ASSIGNED r45515TED By DFFENSE ❑ OR INITIAL COMPLAINT U I OTHER PRINCIPAL- COMPLAINT ❑OFFENDER$ VICTIM❑ D.O.B. BUSIr 'DDRESS 1� HOME ADDRESS REP(JRTSINCLUDED V.• o ❑ ProD Inventory ❑ Impl+tid Consent ❑ Accident Report []Tags []Influence Report C] Photos [] FtEPORTINGPERSO'400FFENDERC•1VICTIMO I D.O.B. I BUSINESS ADDRESS SEE CASE FILE Warn & Release Advised Dept. Assist Char:+r Issued HOME ADDRESS Me' .a,e Deliver Detail Completed HRD Codes P - Phone R - Radio A- Alerm 1 - In Pertc v - va.,t, M- mail T - other BUSINESS PHONE �j HOME PHONE BUSINESS PHONE HOMLPHONE ROLL CALL L� Treated & Transported G.O.A. ' C c_L . _ S Y ���• e F-v �n C -►' L I _ ,.~� - 0 7J- 1`f 12 S � r+v� (.x �=� G'� � i _ �. t.,L• �_.< j�%..�� C..1; _ t _ :•t.i 1a� Y �-et` 'i_�. v- '�. -•�• -. 0. 4..) . �_' \y )...�'•Y t1.�� �.'\ r�.:. I�r12 i -C? L. > Y LI ' S �{ is � �' `�`) Sc r `C S - �I t y-�� F�l 1 - jLsX\ iT �_� � '•r-- ,� `•,.,,,e�� Itl fin ..J� ni` ~1 Crll 1��. `�::1A• }.•... L).� 41 ����.t�.�fJ 1 i 1 '`, < 1 �' (• ! C F' t , ."f--c "I -s. J �- �J ' �--{ J 1 . i r r L. Yea' t� . r- <^ �'.'• • /; _ t �.,.�• _+r�.ti r s �.J.r khr� tr F-��'-- t���'rc�;l •r ��.�----- I I`t K( C �•� X( r:�Cy 1.: C+j{['..` +�l �_ 1 �.Y. �'tl>-�`l '� �l•\c �'i�;C COPY TO Lis, CO < TNY ❑ CIT' AT-TNY ❑ COUrtT ❑ CHI[: ❑ OTHER DISPOSITION Unfo.,nded Cleale�''t wrest Aef. other agency Inactive Other OFFICER _ S'j'ERV;SOR'SSIGNNiVRE ORONO NOLICE DEPAR i MENT Form 3 FOLLOW UP/ CONTINUATION REPORT OFFENSE n D N COMPLAINANT 2 O ADDRESS r(` ADDIADDITIONALDEIL1.5OIO,Ftt,SE.PRIGR!65OFINVESTIGATIONS.(11C. n r, 0� c�r� �� L-1�ii b_+�_ C�v�__^c,w_• f�S��xs nc.c_ _w�iJl. d L•��i _ _ l c r : �•i C. �l W�i %� is fi- +rtiY.J ���✓ " 11 L-- S 1r 0 ..c3 J: c n C H-T�—i— C'A t• A_ `i J Uy+ \.. G i�Jtl S Vv� � „ �E r. YI Xn • tL y � Ic i•t.. CLL.fj � Si 12 SIGN(D� 1� \�': C� \ F-•' 1 �� �` Dail Off.". DISPOSITION U.(_d.A r-) F., fI,A f I R.1 00" HENNEPIN COUNTY MUNICIPAL COURT PROSECUTION SUMMARY CITY OF ORONO TO: City Administrator Chief of Police FROM: Thomas J. Radio Prosecuting Attorney DATE: August 15, 1983 -------------------------- Defendant: Lloyd Nehring Offense: Public nuisance (Orono City Code S 82.010); allowing accumulation of manure; public nuisance (State Stat., S 601.74(1); allowing public nuisance Date of Offense: 10/18/83• Arresting Officer: Thomas J. Jacobs, Orono Building Official Summary of Proceedin s: After extensive negotiations regarding this matter and after numerous rescheduling of the preliminary conference, the prosecutor and the defendant entered into the attached stipulation_ and the prosecutor agreed to dismiss the charges. This disposition was based on the overall factual background of this matter and the difficulties of proving a nuisance at a trial. The defendant considers his feeding ducks one of his main hobbies. Feeding ducks per se does not consti- tute a nuisance. It is only when ducks congregate in large numbers that the public health problems and nuisance problems result. Hence, since the city cannot totalling ban duck feeding under its current ordinances and state law, the prosecutor attempted to define what would constitute problem feeding and what would not. The numbers arrived at are only approxi- mations but, if anything, they are perhaps on the low side. The complaints regarding the ducks on this particular incident camp. from only one neighbor. This neighbor, Ronald Potas, has a particular dislike for the defendant and hence his complaints must be viewed as somewhat biased. Disposition: Judge McCarr agreed to the stipulation and signed it to approve it. This signature will mean that a violation of the stipulation will allow the city to go in on a contempt of court citation. STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN State of Minnesota, ) ) Plaintiff, ) VS. ) ) Lloyd Nehring, ) Defendant. ) ) MUNICIPAL COURT THIRD DIVISION STIPULATION WHEREAS, Defendant Lloyd Nehring has been charged with the violation of Sections 82.010 and 82.030(b) of the Orono City Code and Sections 601.74(1) and 609.745 of Minnesota Statutes, such charges stemming from and relating to alleged feeding and harboring of wild ducks; and WHEREAS, Thomas J. Radio, Esq. for the State of Minnesota and Defendant Lloyd Nehring and his_ attorney John T. Hartmann, Esq. have entered into discussions and negotiations regarding a disposition of the above -referenced matter and have reached an agreement regarding the same; NOW, THEREFORE, Plaintiff and Defendant Stipulate and 4gree upon the following disposition of this matter: 1. Defendant stipulates and agrees that on and between October 1 and December 15, and on and between March 15 and June 1 of each year, he will not put out more than twenty (20) pounds of feed per day for wild ducks on or about his property located at 1972 Shadywood Road, Wayzata, Minnesota; and that on and between June 1 through October 1 and on and between December 15 through March 15 of each year, he will not put out more than thirty-five (35) pounds of feed per day for wild ducks on said property. 2. Defendant will use his best efforts to discourage large congregations of wild ducks on his property through all reasonable, means at his disposal. 3. The State of Minnesota agrees to and does hereby dismiss the above -stated charges against Defendant. 4. Defendant agrees to pay Twenty Five Dollars ($25.00) as and for court costs in this matter. 5. The State of Minnesota is not precluded under this Stipulation from prosecuting the Defendant herein for any future violation of State law or Municipal ordinance. Dated this day of , 1983. STATE OF MINNESOTA By Thomas J. Radio, Esq. Lloyd Nehring, Defendant Judge of Hennepin County Municipal Court JTHC100 n Telephone 473-7:157 ' ' September 8, 1983 Mr. Ronald Potas 2032 Shadywood Road Wayzata, Minnesota Dear Mr. Potas: CITY of ORONO Post Office Boa 66•Crystal Bay, Minnesota W23•Municipal Offices On the North Shore of Lake Minnetonka 55391 Upon your complaint and City'inspection, Mr. Lloyd Nehring was tagged for a public nuisance, Orono City Code (82.010) allowing accumulation of manure; public nuisance State Statute (601.74(1), allowing a public nuisance. After extensive negotiations regarding this matter and after numerous rescheduling of the preliminary conference, it was agreed to resolve the matter by stipulation, which is attached for your information. The disposition was based upon the overall factual background of the case and the difficulities of proving a nuisance at a trial simply because feeding ducks per se does not constitute a nuisance. The City cannot totally ban duck feeding under its current ordinances and State law and is not prepared to do so at this time. Ron, 1 understand your frustration with the desposition of the matter but it is important for you to realize that the City received only one complaint which was from you, a neighbor six homes away, from the defendants residence. In review of the complaint and our inspections, the City is not prepared to spend taxpayers money on further action unless a violation of the stipulation causes a contempt of court action. Sincerely, Walte �RB son city/Administrator Enclosure § 9.12 less than five regular business days. A "regular business day" is one curing which the Pound is open for business to the public for at least four hours between 8:00 o'clock A.M. and 7:00 o'clock P.M. Impoundment records shall be preserved for a minimum of six months and shall show (1) the description of the animal by specie, breed, sex, approximate age, and other distinguishing traits; (2) the location at which the animal was seized; (3) the date of seizure; (4) the name and address of the person from whom any animal three months of age or over was received; and, (5) the name and address of the person to whom any animal three months of age or over was transferred. If unclaimed, such animal shall be humanely destroyed and the carcass disposed of, unless it is requested by a licensed educational or scientific institution under authority of Minnesota Statutes, Section 35.71. Provided, however, that if a tag affixed to the animal, or a statement by the animal's owner after seizure specifies that the animal should not b- used for research, such animal shall not be made available to any such institution but may be destroyed after the expiration of the five-day period. Subd. 11. Other Unlawful Acts. It is unlawful for the owner of any dog to (1) fail to have the license tag issue6 by the City firmly attached to a collar worn at all times by the licensed dog, or (2) own or keep a dog which is dangerous (any such dog which has caused injury to persons or property shall be deemed "dangerous"), or (3) interfere with any police officer, or other City employee, in the performance of his duty to enforce this Section, or (4) fail to keep his dog from barking, howling or whining, or from emitting loud or unusual noise, or (5) fail to prevent his dog from defecating in or upon public property or the premises of another, or (6) permit solid waste of a dog to accumulate on his premises for more than twenty-four hours. Subd. 12. Immobilization of Dogs. For the purpose of enforcement of this Section any peace officer, dog catcher or other person assisting a peace officer or dog catcher may use a so-called tranquilizer gun or other instrument for the purpose of immobilizing and catching a dog. Subd. 13. Warning of Vicious Dogs. The owner of any dog known to be of vicious habits shall place in plain view of the entrance to his premises a sign no smaller thf1 12 inches by 14 inches which shall read: "Beware of Vicious D,.. SEC. 9.13. ANIMALS AND FOWL - REEPII .RANSPORTING, TREATMENT, HOUSING. Subd. 1. Definitions. As used in this Section, the following definitions shall apply. A. 'Owner" - Any person who wns, harbors, feeds, boards, keeps, or otherwise possesses an r.Aimal, and who is the C head of the household of the residence, or the owner or manager in ORONO CC 208 (4-1-84) § 9.13 charge of the establishment or premises at which an animal remains, or to which it returns. B. "Farm Animals" - Cattle, horses, mules, sheep, goats, swine, ponies, ducks, geese, turkeys, chickens, guinea hens and honey bees. C. "Animals" - Includes farm animals and all other animals, reptiles and feathered birds or fowl except dogs, domc-' is cats, gerbils, hamsters and caged household birds. D. "Dangerous Animals" - Any wild mammal, reptile or fowl which is not naturally tame or gentle but is of a wild nature or disposition and which, because of its size, vicious nature or other characteristics would constitute a danger to human life or property if it is not kept or maintained in a safe manner or in secure quarters. The term "dangerous animal" also means and includes any domestic mammal, reptile or fowl which because of its size or vicious propensity or other characterictic, would constitute a danger to human life or property if it is not kept or maintained in a safe manner or in secure quarters. Subd. 2. Keeping. It is unlawful for any person to keep or harbor any animal, not in transit, except (1) farm animals kept in accordance with the Zoning Chapter, or, (2) animals kept as part of a show licensed under the City Code, or, (3) animals used in a parade for which a permit has been issued, or, (4) animals kept in a laboratory for scir itific or experimental purposes, or, (5) animals kept in an animal hospital or clinic for treatment by a licensed veterinarian. Subd. 3. Animals in Transit. It is unlawful for any person to transport animals unless they are (1) confined within a vehicle, cage or other means of conveyance, or, (2) farm animals being transported in a portion of the City zoned for rural purposes, or, (3) restrained by means of bridles, halters, ropes or other means of individual restraint. Subd. 4. Treatment. It is unlawful for any person to treat an animal in a cruel or inhumane manner. Subd. 5. Housing. It is unlawful for any person to keep any animal in any structure infested by rodents, vermin, flies or insects. Subd. 6. Trespasses. It is unlawful for any person to herd, drive or ride any animal over and upon any grass, turf, boulevard, City park, cemetery, garden or lot without specific permission therefor from the owner. Subd. 7. Permit Required. It is unlawful for any person to keep a Earm animal in any portion of the City without a permit therefor from the City. ORONO.CC 209 (4-1-84) § 9.13 Subd. 8. Impoundment. Any animal found running at large shall be impounded in accordance with Subdivision 10 of Section 9.12. All fees or expenses incurred for capturing and impounding shall be paid before release of any animal. Subd. 9. Special Permit Required. It is unlawful for any person to keep or m-.intain any dangerous animal without a special permit therefor from the City. No such permit shall be issued for a period exceeding one year and such permit shall spr iify the conditions under which such animal shall be kept. The Chief of Police shall issue a special permit for the purpose of keeping or maintaining a dangerous animal if it is found that: A. The animal is at all times kept or maintained in a safe manner and confined securely so that the keeping of such animal will not constitute the danger to human life or property of others. B. Adequate safeguards are made to prevent unauthorized access to such animals by members of the public. C. The health or well-being of the animal is not in any way endangered by the manner of keeping or confinement. D. The keeping of such animal does not constitute a nuisance and will not harm the surrounding neighborhood or disturb the peace and quiet of the surrounding neighborhood. ( E. The keeping of such animal will not create or cause offensive odors or constitute a danger to public health. F. The quarters in which such animal is kept or confined are adequately lighted, ventilated and are so constructed that they may be kept in a clean and sanitary condition. G. The applicant for such special permit proves his ability to respond in damages to and including the amount of $100,000.00 for bodily injury to or death of any person or persons or for the damage to property owned by any other persons which may result in the ownership, keeping or maintenance of such animal. Proof of liability to respond in damages may be given by filing with the Chief of Police a certificate of insurance stating that the applicant is, at the time of his application, and will be during the period of such special permit, insured against liability to respond in such damages, or by posting with the City a surety bond, approved by the City Attorney, in the amount of $100,000.00 conditioned upon the payment of such damages during the period of such special permit. Such certificate of insurance or bond shall provide that no cancellation of the insurance or bond will be made unless ten days written notice is first given to the City. Subd. 10. Investigation Required. The Chief of Police in investigating any applicant for a special permit under this Section or any enforcement of this Section, is authorized to consult with and seek the advice of the Society for the Prevention ORONO CC 210 (4-1-84) S 9.13 of Cruelty to Animals, the Humane Society, any representative of the Animal Control Center of the County if there be one, or any other individual, agency, organization or society which may be able to provide information and advice concerning the keeping of dangerous animals. Subd. 11. Permit Fee. Upon compliance with all provisions of this Section, a special permit shall be issued for an annual fee adopted by the Council by ordinance, provided that such permit shall not be issued for the keeping of more than two dangerous animals at any single location. 5,,IA. 12. Exception. The provisions of this Section shall not ppsy to the keeping of dangerous animals in the following cases: A. The keeping of such animal for exhibition to the public by a traveling circus, carnival or other exhibit or show holding a permit issued by the Commissioner of Natural Resources pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 97.6111. B. The keeping of such animals in a licensed veterinary hospital for treatment. C. Dangerous or poisonous reptiles may be maintained by a bona fide educational or medical institution for the purpose of instruction or study, provided such reptiles are securely confined and are properly cared for in a manner satisfactory to the Chief of Police. Subd. 13. Regulation of Horses. A. The term "horse" as used in this Section means any breed of horse, pony, mule or ass. B. It is unlawful for any person to ride or to drive a horse after the hour of sunset and before the hour of sunrise along or crossing any public way without appropriate lighting or reflectorized clothing. C. It is unlawfal for any person to ride or drive a horse in any public park, beach, golf course or other public property, except within the right-of-way of public streets and highways, and in areas duly designated as a trailway or hitching area. D. The City Administrator shall designate and sign- post those areas in public lands, park., and beaches where horses may be ridden and driven. E. Every person riding a horse or driving a horse- drawn vehicle upon a public street shall be subject to those provisions of the City Code applicable to the driver of a motor vehicle, except those provisions which by their nature can have no application. ORONO CC 211 (4-1-84) § 9.13 F. It is unlawful for any person to interfere with any horse being ridden, driven or kept in a lawful manner. Subd. 14. Feeding of Waterfowl. It is unlawful for any person to feed or provide feed for any non -domestic ducks, geese or other waterfowl in a manner that results in the accumulation of a sufficient number - of waterfowl so that the excrement of the waterfowl accumulates in such a way as to cause a danger to the health, safety and welfare of the public, or in such a way as to induce the waterfowl to alter their natural migratory pattern, or in such a way as to cause the waterfowl to congregate for extended periods of time on any neighboring or nearby property or water. SEC. 9.14. CURFEW. Subd. 1. Curfew - Minors Under the Age t f Fifteen. It is unlawful for any minor person under the age of ifteen years to be or loiter upon the streets or public places between the hours of 10:00 o'clock P.M., and 5:00 o'clock A.M. of the following day. Subd. 2. Curfew - Minors Between the Age of Fifteen and Eighteen. It is unlawful for any minor person over the age of fourteen years but under the age of eighteen years to be of loiter upon the streets or public places between the hours of 12:00 o'clock midnight and 5:00 o'clock A.M. of the following dad. Subd. 3. Curfew - Parents and Guardians. It is unlawful for any parent, guardian, or other person having the legal care or custody of any minor person to allow or permit such minor person to be or loiter upon the streets or public places in violation of this Section unless such minor is accompanied by a person of lawful age having such minor person in charge. Subd. 4. Curfew - Places of Amusement, Entertainment or Refreshment. It is unlawful for any person operating, or in charge of, any place of amusement, entertainment or refreshment, or other place of business, to allow or permit any minor person to be or loiter in such place in violation of this Section unless such minor is accompanied by a person of lawful age having such minor person in charge. This Subdivision shall not be construed to permit the presence, at any time, of any person under age in any place where his presence,is otherwise prohibited by law. Subd. 5. Exceptions. Such curfew shall not apply to any students under the age of eighteen years who are lawfully attending, going to or returning from school, church or community sponsored athletic, musical or social activities or events. Source: City Code Effective Date: 4-1-84 (Sections 9.15 through 9.19, inc'usive, reserved for future expansion.) ORONO CC 212 (4-1-84) 3-28-88 I enjoy wildlife and the out of doors very much, and have spent a large part of my adult life fishing, hunting and camping. The beauty of nature and the excitement of seeing the animals, birds and plants in their natural habitat has been and is still a real thrill for ■e. The excessive feeding of waterfowl on a regular basis attracts a large number of birds in a very concentrated area. This is not a normal or a healthy situation. Constant feeding, compounded by the maintenance of open water in the winter months, encourages these birds to stay all winter, instead of migrating South. Many neighbors on .rystal Bay have been subjected to the inconvenience caused by the large amount of droppings which are left ot; their docks and in their yards, and have complained to the City of Orono. They are looking to the City of Orono for help. Our residents have a right to expect the City of Orono to do away with this nuisance so that they can enjoy their property on the lake without the filth created by the abnormal concentration of ducks and geese. Aside from the unsightly appearance and foul smell, there is a very real health hazard which is associated with this problem. As you probably know, a malady called "swimmer's itch" is caused by mites which incubate in the excrement from these waterfowl. This is a very irritating disease. It is also expensive to property owners adjacent to this area as we must pay to have state licensed and approved operators treat the water so that we can use the lake. While this type of problem is not usually fatal, one other aspect of this situation can in fact be life threatening! In February of 1987, my wife had part of her lung removed surgically at the Mayo Clinic. The growth removed from her lung was a residual fungal infection, or, if you will, histoplasmosis. The doctors informed me that this problem could have been caused by spores from the concentrated droppings in our area. Since we live so close to this large concentration of waterfowl, there is no doubt in my mind the pain and suffering my wife went through is directly related to the actions which have attracted these birds. My wife has suffered permanent loss of part of her lung capacity. She has diffic,ilty breathing, and even after over a year of recuperation is not fully recovered. This council and the city staff are charged with the responsibility of protecting the health, safety, and welfare of the residents of this community. In order to spare other residents of our community the agony, disfigurement, pain and suffering ■y wife has endured, we must use every means at our disposal to eliminate this deadly health hazard. 32388.1 To: Mayor Grabek 6 Orono Council Members From: ark E. Bernhardson, City Admin C' YVt �� ETINA Date March 22, 1983 iilpk w 8 19frR Subject: Forest Arms Purchase Agreement Inpord ► N� Attachment - A - Amendment Language Dated 6/11/87 B - Forest Arms Purchase Agreement Memo Dated 6/30/87 (Without Attachments) C - Forest Arms Purchase Agreement Memo DatediEV28/87 D - Council Minutes Dated 6/22/87 and 7/13/87 E - Forest Arms Purchase Agreement Dated 3/21/81 ISSUE - Consideration of a :modification to the agreement to allow for reduction in quarterly payments by the prorated share of any amount of any prepay:ents. INTRODUCTION - In 1987, the Council had considered this issue but on a 2-2 tie on July 13, 1987 the amendment was not adopted and therefore the original language of the contract stood. At that time, the City was holding a payment for the third quarter in advance pending this City Council action on the matter. The City did go ahead and cash the check and received two subsequent checks which were cashed. nTRrITggTnM - It has been requested by Councilmember Peterson that this item again be placed on the agenda for consideration of the proposed modification. RECOMMENDATION - It is recom.,iended that upon reconsideration, that the language of the in Attachment A be adopted t-j allow for a prorata reduction of a quarterly amount by any prepayments in order that the share paid by each of the remaining property owners is equal to their original payment amount. It is recommended that this change no longer be tied to any division of legal costs but that the City which did not have the agreement of the property owners to initiate the legal work be responsible. PROPOSED MOTION: Moved by , seconded by , that the Council adopt the modification of the proposed agreement for incorpo- n in the purchase agreement in the Forest Arms Homeowners Associatic r-he City of Orono. Ayes , nays cc: Forest Arms Homeowners Association Tom Kuehn, Finance Director POPHAM, HAIK, SCHNOBRICH, KAUFMAN & DOTY, LTD. 3300 PIPER JAFFRAY TOWER MINNEAPOLIS. MINNESOTA 55402 TELEPHONE 612-333-4800 - TELECOPIER WATNEO.POPMAM MICMAEL CO. FRttMAN 612-334.2713 DOUGLAS P. SEATON TOOO M.JOMNSON RAYMOND A. NAIR HOWARD SAM MYERS, III THOMAS E. SANNER LOUIS P. SMITH ROGER W. SCMNOSRICH THOMAS C. O'AOUILA BRUCE B. MCPMEETERS FRANCIS J. CONNOLLY DENVER KAUFMAN LARRT D. ESPEL • SUITE 2400 GARY D. BLACKFORD BRUCE M. LITTLE DAVID S. DOT♦ JANIE S. MAYERON 1200 SOOVENTEENTM STREET SCOTT E. RIC TITER MARK F. PALMA ROBERT A. MONISM THOMAS J. BARNETT DENVER. COLORADO 8OZ02 PAUL J. LINSTPOTM RUSSELL S. PONESSA POLft A. WOODEN JAVCS A. PAYNE TELEPHONE 303.0o3.1200 SCOTT A. SMITH BRYAN L. CRAWFORD O. MARC WHITEHEAD DAVID A. JONES TELECOPIER 303-893.2104 ELIZABETH A. THOMPSON DAVID K. RYDEN BRUCE D. WILLIS LEE E. SMEEMY KEITH J. HALLELAND OWEN E. M'RRNSTADT FREDERICK S. MICMAMOS ALAIN FRECON SUITE 300 SOUTH MARK B. PETERSON MATTHEW E. DAMON O. ROBERT JOHNSON PATRICIA A. JENSEN IBOO M STREET. N.W. D. RANDALL BOYER JOHN W. PROVO GARY R. MACOMBER LESLIE GILLETTE WASHINGTON. D.C. 20036 ORIAN M. JOHNSON GREGORY G. BROOKER ROBERT S. BURR MICMAEL T. MILAN TELEPHONE 202.820-9300 TIMOTHY W. MUCK WILLIAM M. OJILE. JR. HUGH V. PLUNKETT. 11• ROBERT M. LYNN TELECOPIER 202-020•5310 CAROL B. SWANSON TERRANCE A. COSTELLO FREDERICK C. BROW THOMAS M. SIPKINS DIRECT DIAL NUMBER BRUCE A. PE'ERSON JOSEPH D. VASS TMOMAS K. BERG 9000ERT C. MOILANEN JULIE A. SWEITZER RRIAN W. OHM JAMES P. STEOLEN THOMAS F, NELSON THOMAS C. MIELENHAUSEN STEVEN A. CMELESNIK JAMES B. LOCKHART THOMAS J. RADIO KATHLEEN A. BLATZ GREGORYG.SCOTT ALLEN W. MINDERAKtR DAVID L. HASMMALL MICMAEL O. CHRISTENSON CLIFFORD M. GREENE KATHLEEN M. MARTIN J. MICMAEL SCHWARTZ OF COUNAt,, D. WILLIAM KAUFMAN JOHN C. CMILDS L.RAYE M, OSBORNE FRED L. MORRISON 334-2549 June 11, 1987 Mr. Mark Bernhardson City of Orono Post Office Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 Re: Forest Arms Country club Addition Dear Mark: Enclosed please find for your review, three copies of the Amendment to the contract for Deed between the City and the Forest Arms Country Club Association. If Council approves this document, the outstanding principal balance and amount of installment payments must be typed irT on page two and then all three copies must be signed and notarized. I will be out of the office from June 1.0 through June 15, but will contact you on June 16 to discuss any comments or questions you may have. NEH/jlp/3192j cc: KAAlatz Very truly yours, c-� Nancy E. Husnikj CJ I AMENDMENT TO CONTRACT FOR DEED THIS AMENDMENT FOR CONTRACT FOR DEED is made by and between the City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation (hereinafter known as "City") and Forest Arms Country Club Addition Homeowners Association, Inc., a Minnesota corporation, (hereinafter known as "Association"). WHEREAS, City and Association entered into a Contract for Deed, dated February 2, 1984, filed February 13, 1984 as Document No. 1562909, files of the Registrar of Titles, Hennepin County, Minnesota, legally described as: Lots 1 and 2, Block 3, Forest Arms Country Club Addition, according to the recorded plat on file or of record in the office of the Registrar of Titles in and for said Hennepin County (hereinafter known as a "Property"); and WHEREAS, the parties wish to amend the Contract for Deed to reflect their agreement with regard to the effect of prepayments; NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS AGREED AS FOLLOWS: 1. The terms of payment appearing on page 1 of the Contract for Deed are amended to read as follows: $100,000.00 with no interest to be paid in equal installments of $1,666.67 each The first such payment shall be due and payable at closing and subsequent payments of $1,666.67 shall be due and payable on April 1, August 1, November 1 and January 1 of each year until November 1, 1998 when the entire principal balance shall be paid in full. In the event the purchaser prepays any of the principal balance, either pursuant to paragraph 7 of the Addendum to Contract for Deed attached to this Contract for Deed as Exhibit A or otherwise, the amounts payable on any subsequent April 1, August 1, November 1 or January 1 shall be reduced to an amount which would fully amortize the principal balance by the final payment on November 1, 1998. 2. As of the date of this Amendment, the parties agree that the outstanding principal balance is $ 65,714.22 and that quarterly payments shall equal $ 1,428.57 until such date as the purchaser makes additional prepayments, at which time the quarterly payments shall be adjusted as described in paragraph 1 hereof. 3. Except as expressly amended herein the Contract for Deed is ratified and affirmed. 4. This Amendment to Contract for Deed shall bind the heirs, agents, executors, administrators, successors and assigns of the parties hereto. Dated: June 22 , 1987 City of Orono By Its Mayor By Its City Clerk FOREST ARMS COUNTRY CLUB ADDITION HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION, INC. By Its 3186j -2- 7187.1 TO: Mayor and City Council e, FROM: Mark Bernhardson, City Administrator DATE: June 30, 1987 SUBJECT: Forest Arms Purchase Agreement - Proposal Modification Attachments A. Forest Arms Memo Dated 5/28/87 With Attachments B. Council Minutes - Re: Forest Arms Matter 4/13/81 to 12/30/82 C. Applicable File Correspondence - Re: Forest Arms Matter ISSUE A. - Modification of agreement to allow for reduction in quarterly payments by the prorated share amount of any prepayments. B. - Proration of legal costs for modification. INTRODUCTION - At the Council's last meeting they considered and then tabled for further information the proposed modification regarding the Forest Arms Purchase Agreement. DIS_CUSS_ION - In addition to providing the information presented at last Council meeting the Attachments B and C represent additional background information to assist the Council in making their decision in regard to this matter. The information provided represents the most germane information that is available on this matter. It is recommended that if you have further questions that the participants in the decision including Mary Butler, JoEllen Hurr and Tom Frahm would be individuals to whom you may want to speak. The estimate of legal expenses to date is $480.00. .1ECOMMENDATION - It is recommended that the language of the Addendum that is Attachment C of Attachment A be adopted to allow for the prorata share reduction :f the quarterly amount by any prepayments in order that the sh paid by each of the remaining property owners is equal to the -iginal assessments. Since we were party to the agreement it is recommended that the City split the legal costs evenly for this change. PROPOSED MOTION - Moved by , seconded by , that the Council adopt the modification of the purchase agreement for incorporation into the purchase agreement between the Forest Arms Homeowners Association and the City of Orono dated _ _ , provided that the Association pays 50% of the legal costs incurred. Ayes , Nays cc: President, Forest Arms Homeowners Association 1 52887.4 TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Mark Bernhardson, City Administrator DATE: May 28, 1987 SUBJECT: Forest Arms Purchase Agreement - Proposal Modification, Attachment A. Forest Arms/City of Orono Agreements Dated 3/21/83 and 2/2/84 B. Forest Arms Letter Dated 5/15/87 C. Proposed Contract Language Amendment ISSUE - Modification of agreement to allow for reduction in semi- annual payments by the pro-rata share of any pre -payments. INTRODUCTION - In 1983 the Forest Arms Homeowner's Association and the City of Orono agreed to terms to allow for the purchase of the property used by the residents for dockage in that subdivision for $100,000.00. It was agreed that this ould be purchased over a fifteen year period in quarterly installments. The agreement also provided that any time any of the lots were sold that they would have to pre -pay the amount of the property's outstanding share of the agreement. The agreement did not however provide for any reduction in the quarterly amount to be paid by the Homeowner's Association by the amount of any pre -payments. For example if half of the lots were sold before the contract would be paid off the owners who were left as part of the Association would have to increase their share of the cost in order to make the equal payments thereby speeding up the , mount of time in .which the pay-off would occur by doubling the amount each individual would have to pay. DISCUSSION - In reviewing the matter in response to Attachment B it does not seem to be the intent of the agreement to speed up the payment by not allowing for a pro-rata reduction in the annual cost based on prepayments. If reduced those who do remain as owners still contribute equal shares regardless of pre- payments or not. RECOMMENDATION - It is recommended that the language of the addendum in Attachment C be adopted to allow for pro-rata share reduction of the quarterly amount b• any pre -payments in order that the share paid by each of the remaining property owners is equal to their original payments. PROPOSED MOTION - Moved by , seconded by , that the Council adopt Attachment C as an incorporation into the purchase agreement between the Forest Arms Homeowner's Association and the City of Orono dated Ayes , Nays cc: President, Forest Arms Homeowners Association MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD JUNE 22, 1987 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT #2 CONTINUED City Administrator Bernhardson stated that once the plan is adopted and sent to the Metro Council, staff will then start to work on language for the zoning standards in the corridor addressing, specifically, requirements to protect the residential from commercial areas. It was moved by Mayor Grabek, seconded Councilmember Sime, that the Council adopt preliminarily the Comprehensive Plan Amendment #2 as amended, including a statement concerning impact of re -zoning on Long Lake, Orono, and residents; and that it be forwarded to the Metropolitan Council and other affected jurisdictions for their review. Motion, Ayes 5, Nays 0. LONG LAKE REQUEST FOR ANNEXATION City Administrator Bernhardson explained the issue of determining the City's position reagarding annexation proposal_ offered to Orono by Long Lake regarding the following properties: -Highway 12 Corridor, north side of Highway 12 between North Brown Road and Old Crystal Bay Road. -Long Lake Sewer Plant property Attorney VandeVegte expressed Long Lake's desire to get together to discuss the issues further. It was moved by Mayor Grabek, seconded by Councilmember Sime, to direct staff to communicate to the City of Long Lake it's appreciation for the offer of a friendly annexation, but it is the Council's direction at this point that annexation be rejected and that should at some future time an annexation be deemed to be in the best interest of the City of Orono, that it then be considered at that time. Motion, Ayes 5, Nays G. CITY FACILITIES CONSULTANT SELECTION* TABLE UNTIL JULY 13, 1987 It was moved by Councilmember Goetten, seconded by Councilmember Peterson, to table this matter until July 13, 1987. Motion, Ayes 5, Nays 0. �OREST ARMS PURCHASE AGREEMENT AMENDMENT Mayor Grabek removed himself from the Council during this matter because of his involvement. He turned this matter over to Acting Mayor Callahan. City Administrator Bernhardson explained the proposed modification of the Forest Arms purchase agreement to allow for reduction in quarterly payments by the pro- rata share of any pre -payments. MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD JUNE 22, 1987 OREST ARMS PURCHASE AGREEMENT AME17DMENT CONTINUED Councilmember Peterson felt that the Forest Arms Homeowner's Association should be charged for the legal services to change the contract. Councilmember Sime disagreed with Councilmember Peterson because he felt the change was due to an oversight in the original purchase agreement. James Grabek, 960 Forest Arms Lane, explained the history of the property and events leading to the purchase agreement. Councilmember Goetten stated she could not make a decision without more background information and talk to others involved. She also noted that the Comprehensive Plan states this property is a public park, and should perhaps be amended. Acting Mayor Callahan felt that the background information would not effect this issue of method of application of payments. It wag moved by Councilmember Sime, seconded by Councilmember Peterson, to table this matter until the July 13th meeting for more information. Motion, Ayes 4, Nays 0. Mayor Grabek abstained from voting. APPROVAL, OF POLICE INTERNSHIP - JOHN ELDER It was moved by Councilmember Sime, seconded by Councilmember Goetten, to engage Mr. John Elder as an intern in the Police Department for a total of 360 hours between 1 July 1987 and 1 October 1987 to be done on a voluntary basis by Mr. Elder and not to conflict with his role as a Police Reserve or as a Community Service Officer. Moiton, Ayes 5, Nays 0. AUTHORITY TO HIRE TEMPORARY PARK MAINTENANCE PERSON It was moved by Councilmember Callahan, seconded by Councilmember Peterson, that Council acknowledge information regarding hiring of a temporary parks maintenance helper at their July 13, 1987 meeting. Motion, Ayes 5, Nays 0. AUTHORITY TO HIRE TEMPORARY SEPTIC i ZONING AIDE - MARY JO KNOTT It was moved by Mayor Grabek, seconded by Councilmember Goetten, to approve the hiring of Mary Jo Knott to serve as an aide for the Zoning and Septic Departments as a full-time temporary employee for the period t.eginning June 23, 1987 through October 2, 1987 at an hourly wage of $7.00/hour. Motion, Ayes 5, Nays 0. 10 MIN UThb Uk IU1, er."Ul.rut lratU►w L r.a......<I.v .. _ R' S REPORT: • - - . _ ` . Mayor Grabek asked the media to ta:ce into consideration the numerous recommendations of the Orono Police force for their service to the community and review with Chief Kilbo additional letters previously received, in order to give the Police Officers some credit where credit is due. CITY ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT: FOREST ARMS PURCHASE AGREEMENT Mayor Grabek removed himself from the Council for this matter and appointed Acting Mayor Callahan. Acting Mayor Callahan explained the matter regarding modification of the Forest Arms purchase agreement to allow for reduction in quarterly payments by the pro- rata share of any pre -payments. Tom Theisen, 4175 rarest Lake Drive, President of the Forest Arms Cou::try Club Association was present for this matter. Vc r,ated that they object and are not willing to pay of the legal costs for the agreement modification. They feel this is an expense the Council concurred on their own. Even though 50% of the costs ($240) is not a great amount, however, they feel they are already spending $100,000 for a piece of property that they rightfully owned. The City made the decision to get legal counsel on this matter, and if the seller (the City) felt uncomfortable with their contract, they should pay the legal costs for modification. He stated that they have no problem with the contract change. City Administrator Bernhardson reviewed the reason this issue came to light :•:ith the sale of the Dongoske property, as outlined in a letter to Mr. Theisen dated May 8, 1987 in reference to the oversight. Subsequently, Mr. Theisen, in his letter dated May 15, 1987, requested an amendment to their payment schdeule to reduce the quarterly payment paid to the City as pre- payments are made by individual lots. Because staff felt it should be legally reviewed, proceeded with the amendment. He noted that the legal costs were, however, more than he anticipated. Councilmember Sime agreed with the position of the Forest Arms Country Club Association. He recommended that the City pay the entire legal costs for the oversight in the contract. '1J 20 ST ARMS PURCHASE AGREEMENT CONTINUED Councilmember Peterson felt that it was not an oversight through discussions with several Councilmembers and others that were involved in the purchase agreement. She felt that the Forest Arms Homeowners Assocation asked for the change, therefore, should pay the legal costs. CouncilmPn:ber Goetten stated that although she felt the matter was somew;.-L confusing, in the best interest of the City, the person(s) that requested the change should pay the legal costs. Acting Mayor Callahan stated that based on the serious history of con`licting ownership he felt the change was necessary and that the City's Finance Director instigated the change in order to enforce the payment. City Attorney Blatz stated that she would have the legal fees charged reviewed. It was moved by Acting Mayor Callahan, seconded by Councilmember Sime, to approve the contract modifications and the City pay the legal fees involved. Motion, Ayes 2, Nays 2. Motion tied. Councilmembers Peterson anO Goetten voted nay. Councilmember Peterson stated it was in the City's best interest to get their money as soon as possible, therefore, would not vote to . change the amounts to a pro-rata amount. 4 l 4545 WAYZATA BOULEVARD City Administrator Bernhardson explained the issue of determining if the City wants to undertake the process to create a public easement across the railroad to provide access to 4545 Wayzata Boulevard and other properties in the area. He stated that the Slaughters were turned down by 13 different mortgage insurance companies, and were finally able to obtain permanent financing from the 14th based on a favorable opinion regarding the access and have undertaken their construction at this time. The Slaughters, however, feel that the issue regarding access remains and would like the Council to again address it. Jane Slaughter stated that she is pursuing this matter of easement for all four homeowners affected, however, she noted thLt the other homeowners feel the Slaughters will resolve the problem for them and have not actively been involved. 21 Foes T AeRs PURCHASE AGREEMENT THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into on the z / day of e�aC 1983, by and between the City of Orono (hereinafter referred to as "Orono") and Forest Arms Country Club Addition Homeowners Association, Inc., a Minnesota corporation, (hereinafter referred to as "Homeowners"). In consideration of the mutual covenants and premises of the parties hereto, it is hereby agreed as follows: �d 1. Sale and Purchase. Orono does hereby sell to Homeowners by contract for Quit Claim Deed all of the interest that Orono may have in Lots 1 and 2, Block 3, Forest Arms Country Club Addition (hereinafter referred to as Lots 1 and 2). 2. Purchase Price. Homeowners shall pay. to Orone as a total purchase price for the property interest described in para- graph 1, the sum of One Hundred Thousand and no/100 ($100,000.00) Dollars, without any interest due and payable thereon,lwhich amount shall be paid in the manner and'al..times as follows: $100,00040 .amortized equally over a 15 year period commencing on .the first quarter following the -:ate of closing, payable quarterly_on January 1 April 1 u u and November of each year in thol quarterly amount of.$1,666.67. 3. Closing. The ci sing herein, called "Date of Closing" shall take place within ten j10) days after all terms and con- ditions of this agreement have been complied with and the par!:ies hereto have notified the other in writing. The closing shall take place at the office of Wright, West 6 Diessner, 320 Manitoba Avenue, Wayzata, Minnesota 55391, or at such place as Orono and Homeowners hereafter agree. 4. Possession. Crono shall deliver to Homeowners at the date of closing, actual possession of the property provided that Homeowners have complied with all of its obligations hereunder. 5. Closing Documents. Subject to performance by Homeowners r , Orono agrees to execute and deliver on the date of closing, a Contract for Deed providing for payment of $100,000.00 as provided for herein. 6. Title. The Quit Claim Deed to be issued upon final pay- ment under the Contract for Deed shall transfer whatever interest the City of Orono might have, it being understood that this Purchase Agreement is in the nature of a compromise and settlement relating to a dispute between the parties as to actual beneficial ownership of Lots 1 and 2, and the Purchase Agreement in an attempt to avoid costly and protracted litigation. Therefore, the basis of title which is of concern to Homeowners is a representation and warranty by the City of Orono that it has not caused any liens, encumbrances or cliims to be asserted against the property as of the date of closing. 7. Orono's Cooperation. Orono shall fully cooperate in all matters necessary or incidental to the performance of this agreement. B. Conditions to Homeowners' Obligation. It shell be a condition of Homeowners' obligation to complete the purchase herein and this offer is contingent upon obtaining a permit from the LMCD and the City of Orono, and any other governmental bodies, for a multiple dock license which will allow for the mooring of no more than 14 boats as defined by the regulations of the LMCD, or City of Orono, whichever regulations are more restrictive. 9. Lots Entitled to Boat Slips. It is understood that application to the LMCD will be for 14 boat slips with the under- standing that there is a ngoing dispute relative to whether or not the owners of Lots/�,11� }tled to one or two slips. It is understood that the perm; will be reduced to 13 slips in the event that the owner of Lot /3V nsuccpssful in his application to the City of Orono and any final appeals that may y �� result in cbtaining a determination that both Lot / nd 4/ buildable. S 111T ' -2- / 10. 1:y. There will be a mortgage placed on each lot in Forest Arms Country Club Addition which benefit from ownership in Lots 1 and 2, ttlock 3 Forest Arms Country Club Addition in an 1W,11 amount equal to ,�ragraph 9 appeal is unsuccessful) of $100,000.00 or5. Such mortgage shall be payable to the Homeowners Association, and will provide that in the event of a sale or transfer of ownership in any of the beneficial lots, there shall be an acceleration and the mortgage debt as to that lot shall be due and payable from the proceeds of such sale. Upon partial payment resulting from sale, there shall be a release as to the mortgage covering that lot and the net proceeds applied in reduction of the Contract for Deed. Notwithstanding anything herein to the contrary, it is understood that there shall be no acceleration as a result of the sale of the vacant lot described as Lot 6, Block 3 in the transfer f MuhichJto her successor in interest, but that in any subsequent sale, there shall be an acceleration. 11. Administration of Payments. Periodic payments as pro- vided for shall be made to the Homeowners by its members and by the Homeowners to Orono. It is understood that if the Homeowners fail to make payments when due Orono shall have the right to cancel the Contract for Deed and the property and its title shall revert to the same state and condition as existed prior to the agreement. In the event of such cancellation Orono shall be obligated to give six months notice with an opportunity to redeem so as to parallel this transaction to a normal mortgage from the standpoint of redemption. A corporation will be established by the Homeowners which will accept deeds from all Forest Arms Country Club owners to all right, title and interest that the individual property owners may have to Lots 1 and 2, and the'i1fa�YlpOb�a�� •i"�iirn�ce' duicin"" "�S ndai�c �ot'�E1ii-i� ooiitis iii�ia.iorii"6i'ra'te r 01! AQ.- O af1iMOW1�F0;�fOt��Si��+L'_ To`d.� l ac�k r4 l�,c' '`°I'i ;r'"�ecs 'rc�'i "n -3- 12. Title. Title to the individual member lots shall be established based upon Orono requesting memorandum abstracts from the Title Insurance Company of Minnesota as to each lot, noting present fee owners and encumbrances. No original abstracts of title or registered property abstracts shall be required. 13. Dock Permits. It is understood that dock permits issued by the LMCD or the City of Orono operate only for the year in question and that no representations are made by Orono or the LMCD that,the Homeowners here will be allowed to continue to maintain 14 docks (13 depending on the results of paragraph 9) as a matter of right into the future. However, any future permits granted shall affect all common docks and treat the owners in Forest Arms Country Club Addition in the same manner as all other common dock owners in Orono or in the case of LMCD, on Lake Minnetonka. 14. Default. If, on the dace of closing, Orono is in default in any of the terms, covenants, or conditions to be kept or performed by them hereunder, or in any of the warranties and representations contain.=d in paragraph 10 hereof, tiken, in addi- tion to any other remedies which Homeowners may have either in law or in equity by reason thereof, Homeowners may either (1) de- clare this agreement null end void, in which event neither party shall be liable for damages hereunder to the other party, or (2) consummate the transaction contemplated by this agreement in the same manner as if there had been no default or breach, but withhold from the cash portion of the purchase price referred to in paragraph 2 hereof, the reasonable costs, as estimated by Homeowners and Orono for curing such default or breach, in which event the transaction contemplated by this agreement shall con- summate on the date of closing; and then when the default or breach is cured, an appropriate adjustment shall be made between the parties hereto to the end Homeowners shall be reimbursed Homeowners' reasonable costs of curing the default or breach. If, on the date of closing, Homeowners shall default in any of the terms, covenants, or conditions to be kept or performed by Homeowners hereunder, then Orono may, at its exclusive remedy, terminate this agreement. -4- 15. Notwi!hstanding anything herein to the contrary in the event of a default by Homeowners which results in the property being transferred to Orono, any individual.Homeowner who has paid monies in excess of their pro rats share shall have such e�.cess monies without interest refunded to them by Orono upon written application to Orono. 16. Notice. Any notice required or permitted to be given hereunder shall be sufficient if sent by certified mail, postage prepaid, with return rr requested. City C City ri P. O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 President Forest Arms Country Club Addition Homeowners Association, Inc. As reported to the City Clerk from time to time Homeowners Should be sent to the owner as disclosed by the Hennepin County Real Estate tax records. 17. Limited Use as to Lots 1 and 2, Block 3, Forest Arms Country Club Addition. No s-__ucture is to be built upon Lots 1 and 2, Block 3, Forest Arms Country Club Addition unless it is a single family structure with no common docks and • ,der those circumstances Lot 1 and 2 are to be combined into a single building lot and a sewer assessment paid. However, notwithstanding anything herein to the contrary, it is understood that the Homeowners Association shall be free to construct recreational structures which are common and necessary for a recreational lot attached to the common dock facility including, but not limited to playground and rec•-^ational equipment, all subject to the Orono zoning code in ef.ect at the time. 18. Time. Parties he•eto agree that time and time of pay- ment are of the essence of this agreement. 19. Headings. Paragraph headings are for convenience and shall not be deemed to be part of this agreement. -5- 20. Binding Effect. This agreement shall be bindi.,g upon and inure to the benefit of the parties hereto and their respec- tive heirs, legal representatives, successors and assigns, acid all of the covenants and agreements herein contained shall run with the land and bind the respective heirs, legal representatives, successors and assigns of the parties hereto. 21. Entire Agreement. This agreement contains the entire agreement of the parties hereto and it may be changed or modified only by an agreement in writing signed by the parties hereto. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this agreement as of the day and year first above written. CITY OF ORONO By Its Mayor By 4- Its City Clerk FOREST ARMS COUNTRY CLUB ADDITION HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION, INC. BY Its sident By 41 Its Secretaty -6- A T>tS 21greement, lfadedied enteisdinto this ZA&P- _ day of F1,e"0111-1 ,1984 byrandbeturen the City of Orono. a tY.corporation under the laws of the State of Minnesota , pay ey of the first part. and Forest Arms Country. C.11%bi Addition. Homeowners ...Asaociation,..Iac.._.... ..._ a!•linnesota._CG=p9ratii-,n .......... _.................... ....- _.___..._I part y of the second part: lZaltf)rfelb, That the said party of the Ilrst part, !n oonsideration of the covenants and agree- ment$ of said party . of As second part, hereinafter contained, hereby sells and a Irms to ccnrey unto said part y of the second part, its successors and assign., by a Quit Claim Deed, accompanied by an abstract evidencing r� title in party of the first part at the date hereof, or by an owner's duplicate oertific�te of title, upon the prompt and full performance by said port y of the second part, of its part of this a;rcement, the tract S . of lased lying and being in the County of t ticnnepin and State of Ati.nneeota, described a& follows, to-uit: Lots 1 and 2, Block 3, Forest Arms Ccuntry Club Addition, according to the recorded plat on file or of record in the office of the Registrar of Titles in and for said Hennepin County. Se^ Addendum to Contract for Deed attached hereto as Exhibit A for additional terms and conditions. And said pare y of the second part, !aoswsiieratiaw of the prsssim, iereby airs. to pay said party offist first part, at .... ..... _........................_...__......_.._._ .--- _............... . .. as and for tha purchase price of said premises, the sun&of ...One Hundred .Thousand and xx/ 100 ($100,000r001------------------------------------------------ _. _. . _ _.._.._.._..._ ...... ---Dolan, in mar ner rind at tines following, tie -tacit: $100,000 to be paid in equal installments of $1666.67 each; the first such payment shall be due and payaiie at closing; subs•aquent payments of $1666.67 shall be due and payable on April 1, August 1, November 1 and January 1 until the entire principal balance is paid in full. Said Part_y.__—oi the second par, further covenant-Z.end agree -.bias follows to pay before penalty attaches thereto, all teats due and payable in the year 144— and in subsequent years, and all special assessments heretofore or jhereafter levied,--------------•-.-•------ ..._. ........ .... _......... _.__._-_---.._._....._..........._._.__.....__.__..___.—....._.____—_�._—__—_ _.._._....._..._... XYa Niptee.XZY WXX XAA111=Mtxm1Kx0(x AW SIC Yr:MM7t0*AX SXSSjd tMdtit AXXk3t)CKX ltlx 1111=/e311 Xbsxatra MXbW [ XbLKAX Xx:CDCMJdK XbV=* [Wj(MtKCSK Xxlpxd(X1W1"K)V6KX.XW)%"X*X tla X N=tAx)1ad k x=t x xxkbyxc t Y K X K YXYetxXd(*M 1 I V N K)Lnd(XIxY]CX7C7C YfN11•Y011(cY)Qi{ iYaj{ xbra7QxrJSdS,1ftY AM =16, 17=X01)Lx X.7c Yac ICIOCAX xY A X M=N xtt Y X X XWW WK K a¢70>t amexa(YeeLptYtax 1a)NI ytltlslataldt s4K IiX yaF1y)i)t ICigEJC xmxxawcx.,txnAxAx)iwm Xtltxxbt)emc)ok--.---...__.--.---..._�.___._.._..._......... _._ i_............. _ _ _ _ — _._.._..--..... -----.._._ .... .........ilJitetiH� XiNlbtotl011111311d 313n AXbt)ftKV WX et7taLytt*]otlK MXA1k KXXr11 7GY Alas JIMAILARMA 09 XKMX Y,NIm{Kd6YKiLY Xbtxoc*xzmognx*mxmx=Ktokbm xxnk*zANKM=StKwKwaautMawm(xfirs,tare(.,teenswroaaxmsexatLY xockp7X-XXac"xkxscxx*xagxX%XXXXxxxxxi=WIKtitM=DM .,=&KV-it xDlXkkXXX=XXXXbexxx)errz 3tWctatx W)cxiA)kott xxz But should the second part.- fail to pay any item to be paid by said part, ._... under the terms hcreaf, same may be paid by first party and shall be forthwith payable, with interest thereon, as an additional t amount due first party under this contract. i But should default be made in the payment of principal sc' s, -pt due hereunder, or of any part thereof, to be by second partaV paid, or sheold_.f,�._....._.._6il to pay the taxes or assessments upon said land, premiums spool said insurance, at to perform any or either of the covenants, agreements, terms or conditions berein contained, to be by said secQr.d ;art..__ -kept or performed. the said party of the first part may, at its option, by written notice declare this contract cancelled and terwoustea, and all rights title and interests ,uired thereunder by said record part__......shal thereupon coast and terminate. and all Improvements made upon the premises, and all paymer.!s made hereunder shall belong to said party of the first part as liquidated damages for breach of this contract by said second ^art ..... _._ said j notice to be in accordance with the statute is such case made and provided Neither the extension of the time of pay - meat of any sum or sums of moaty to be paid hereunder, nor any waiver by the party of the first part of its righll to declare this contract forfeited by reason of any breach thereof, shall in any manner affect the right of said party to t cancel this contract because of ddaelts subsequently maturing, and no extension of time shall be vslid unless evi. dented b dd�enI ssipned instrument. Furtber, after "Mice of notice and failure to remove, within the period &Ilo.led by thL�X.at�e efauII Nersin specifies said part.__ -of the second pan hereby specifically &tree__ _., upon demand of said i pgarty of the first part. quietly and peaeesbly to surrender to it possession of said premises, and every part thereof, it berne understood that until such default. said part _. .__. of the second part.__...._. to have possession of said premises. I I Ji is !lhilwillp AUrtcb, Gp and between the 1x7rtoes hereto, that the tune of payntent shall be •n, p-withaI part of this carttract; anrt Ihnt aIt the cotenants and a free Pic nto hervin contained shall run i trlth the lead and bind the heirs, dentin.•, adeninisfrrtlors, successors and assi;ns of the respectity partial hr•efo. 31n Qettitnonp Mbtctot, The snul first parry has caused then /ncarnts to be e.Tetuled to its oo, po,ate :name by its Mayor ........_... Yftvt6t e K and its City Clerk. . and its oorporate scat is he hnrnnto aMreel, and said party of the second part ha S'd�W1, "if A-0"mjf��oef�y - ur,,-_ j?jj SBgvgnvr}Le ecretar the 0 C1TY OF ORON _ ..... _ �// let �yp=_.._._p. lTetRiistt Its ...City C.7,SFk ....... Forest Arma-Count.xy....Club .Addt..tfon._...... btate of Atnntoots, �u Homeowne 9-As i Ind J . _.-....... County f Tl,e fo►ejoinjitsetcNewent live acknouledfed before me Its President this 1 day of.. !-0A'Y?,7A' 1 , 19,84 _. by Mary C. Butler, Mayor Its Secretary traaan Of asss[u w AGeMT. TITta Of 0ei1CM a{ anGwi, and by Alberta M. Strome City Clerk INANe Of wncu w AGenT, line p Mlwpe N atelwTl _ of City of Orono ............ .... _...... .. ...... . 4-1 w cwrwAwwra Ae11111000Fle DIURGA municipal nr,r, oe rte,a o, wcOarw,i w+� D0110THY w. NALLISS • roTM. KMUC. �r�MwA NENNEPIN COUNTY M sselsssrs. Sow,lef STATE OF MINNESOTA 1 ss. COUNTY OF 1 ! • C<eir ......... _....... .. The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day ofL,�n�_fti, 19E_-b by James Grabek and �T the President 16"p"L:asly of Forest Arms Country Club Addition Homeowners Association, Inc., a corporation under the laws of the state of Minnesota, on behalf of the cor- ration. THIS INSTRUMENT WAS DRAFTED BY Popham. Haik, Schnobich, " Cl NAIcy E HUSDr Kaufman s Doty, Lbd..I i.,41��'i rorun'Pun:lc-u,w. 434d jnc t Pnrnr ss.,• I 4:06ry.HCa wnEwPn[vnsJOLIMinneapolis, MinnesotaSi5402�vs I II �I a c eLl, . $� cll c = � �C c b • S I Z I • Cc° C is zk 21 _ � b• v I Y� 4k �� o �`~. v� €ec � wt. e 14 C LYe at P Z 1 rya C ,C \ — D= c = ° `• a mV EXHIBIT A ADDENDUM TO CONTRACT FOR DEED THIS AGREEMENT is made and entered into as of the Z day of �_, 19B4, by and between the City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation, (hereinafter referred to as "Orono") and Forest Arms Country Club Addition Homeowners Association, Inc., a Minnesota corporation, (hereinafter referred to as "Homeowners"), and is intended to serve as an addendum to that certain Contract for Deec executed by the parties to which this addendum has been attached as Exhibit A. IN CONSIDERATION of the mutual covenants and promises of the parties hereto, it is hereby agreed as follows: 1. Title. The Q::it Claim Deed to be issued upon final payment under the Contract for Deed shall transfer whatever interest Orono might have. Orono represents and warrants that it has not caused any liens, encumbrances or claims to be asserted against the property as of the date of closing. 2. Orono's Cooperation. Orono shall fully cooperate in all matters necessary or incidental to the performance of this Contract for Deed. 3. Administration of Payments. Periodic payments as provided for herein shall be made by Homeowners to Orono. It is understood that if Homeowners fail to make payments when due, Orono shall have the right to cancel the Contract for Deed and the property and its title shall revert to the same state and condition as existed prior to the agreement. In the event of such cancellation, Orono shall be obligated to give six months notice with an opportunity to redeem so as to parallal this transaction to a normal mortgage from the standpoint of redemption. 4. Dock Permits. It is understood that dock permits issued by the LMCD or Orono operate only for the year in question and that no representations are made by Orono or the LMCD that the members of Homeowners will be allowed to continue to maintain 14 docks as a matter of right into the future. However, any future permits granted shall affect all common docks and treat the owners in Forest Arms County Club Addition in the same manner as all other multiple (noncommercial) dock owners in Orono or in the case of LMCD, on Lake Minnetonka. 5. Notice. Any notice required or permitted to be given hereunder shall be sufficient if sent by certified nail, postage prepaid, with return receipt requested. City Clerk City of Orono P. O. Box 66 Crystal Bay. MN 55323 President Forest Arms County Club Addition Homeowners Association, Inc. As reported to the City Clerk from time to time Homeowners should be sent to the owner as _inclosed by the Hennepin County Real Estate tax records. 6. Limited Use as to Lots 1 and 2. Block 3, Forest Arms Country Club Addition. No structure is to be built upon Lots 1 and 2, Block 3, Forest Arms Country Club Addition unless it is a single family structure with no common docks and under those circumstances Lot 1 and 2 are to be combined into a single building lot and a sewer assessment paid. However, notwithstanding anything herein to the contrary, it is understood that the Homeowners Association shalt be free to construct recreational structures which are common and necessary for a , recreational lot attached to the common dock facility including, but not limited to playground and recreational equipment. 7. Mortgage and Acceleration of Payments. Payments of the unpaid principal balance of this contract for deed :s additionally secured by mortgages upon each of Lots 1 through 5, inclusive, Block 1; Lots 1 through 4, inclusive, Block 2; Lot 6 and part of Lot 5, Block 2 as described in Certificate of Title #612705; and Lots 5 through 8, Inclusive, Block 31 all in Forest Arms Country Club Addition according to the recorded plat thereof on file or of -2- record in the office of the Registrar of Titles in and for Hennepin County, Minnesota (the "benefitted luts"). Each such mortgage is dated with an effective date of even date herewith. Each such mortgage provides that upon the conveyance of the real estate subject thereto (with the one-time only exception of Lot 6, Block 3, Forest Arms t.ountry Club Addition as held in fee title by Katherine M. Muhich): the mortgagor(s) shall pay to Homeowners an accelerates sum, interest free, as described in the said mortgages, which accelerated sun Homeowners shall pay to Orono, within five (`) days of Homeowners' receipt thereof, which amount shall be credited toward the unpaid balance of this contract for deed. 8. Deeds From Lot Owners. A coca_ jtion will be established by Homeowners which will accept deeds from all owners of the benefitted ' s for all right, title and interest that the individual lot owners may have to Lots 1 and 2. Block 3, Forest Arms Country Club Addition. 9. Liability Insuranc-. Homeowners shall maintain liability insurance during the pendency of this contract, while amounts are due and owing Orono, in amounts of not less than $100,000.00 and $300,000.00. Such insurance policies shall name Orono as an additional insured. 10. Time. Parties hereto agree that time and time of payment are of the essence of this agreement. 11. Headings. Paragraph headings are for convenience and shall not be deemed to be part of this agreement. 12. Binding Effect. This agreement shall be binding upon and inure to the benefit of the parties hereto and their respective heirs, legal representatives, successors and assigns, and all of the covenants and agreements herein contained shall run with the land and bind the respective heirs, legal representatives, successors and assigns of the parties hereto. -3- IN WITNESS WiiEPEOF, the parties hereto have executed this agreement as of the day and year first above written. CITY OF ORONO �t By Its Mayor By Its City Clerk FOREST ARMS CDUNTRY CLUB ADDITION HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION, INC. Its 1 c. By Its STATE OF MINNESOTA ) /) ss. COUNTY OF at U. - ] The foregoing instrument wacknowledged before me - this ) day off�-ts�ux'.y . 19 ets , by Mary C. Butler and Alberta M. Strom, the Mayor and City Clerk respectively, of the City of Orono a municipal corporation undbr the laws of the state of Minnesota, on behalf of the corp `ation. ary P lic STATE OF MINNESOTA ) /' 0 "nry'" UMUS s s ' N[NNEMN CO{Ni " COUNTY OF ) s►=+..sea- The foregoin in trument was acknowledged before me this 2- day of , 19dj, by James Grabek and , the President respective y of Forest Arms Country Club Addition Homeowners Association, Inc., a corporation un r the laws f e state of Minnesota, on behalf of the coc ion. Not y Pub is +M11�Y1 This Instrument Was Drafted By: "� f%�.C,v X• � ��� kot� n,alC ,"�i, �abtA Popham, Haik, Schnobrich, Kaufman 6 Doty, Ltd r 2f:y, `�'Ih'CbUti1V 4344 IDS Center ►y ,. xam.," �+��rw,vs♦.r Minneapolis, Minnesota 55402 3756j TAX STATEMENTS SHOULD BE SENT TOt Forest Arms Ccuntry Club Addition Homeowners Association, Inc. 960 Forest A::ms Lane Mound, Minnesota 55364 -4- To: i•:ayor Grabek & Orono Council Members From: Mark E. Bernhardson, City Administrato Date: March 23, 1988 Subject: Mobile Peddlers Attachments - A. Petition - Soliciting and Peddlers Memo Dated B. Ordinance No. 5.30 - Solicitors 32388.2 ujvr w� � Ns 4AR 2 8 1988 Ei �F 3/9/88 ISSUE - Consideration by the Council as to any additional action they may desire to take in the regulation of peddlers in the Community. INTRODUCTION - At the Council's March 14, 1988 meeting, the Council discussed a letter from Helen Skaret together with a petition that had accompanied that from the various Orono business people. At that meeting, the Council chose to take no action. The person who had sent the letter was unaware that it was going to be on the agenda and in a conversation subsequent to that meeting wondered when it would be considered. Based on the fact that they had not been contacted, it was indicated that it would he placed on the agenda again. DISCUSSION - As noted in Attachment A, this issue was discussed at the March 25, 1985 Council meeting. Concern expressed at the time was that the individual had a right to be able to peddle under the City's ordinance regarding licensing of peddlers provided they committed no violations of the ordinance. Consideration of this matter from a zoning standpoint, however, has not previously been done. The individual has been soliciting on property that has been zoned residential property (LR-lC-1) although it presently is used commercially as a non -conforming use. To the extent that the zoning ordinance does not allow for anything other than home occupations, which are not to show outside the home or road -side stands for produce grown on the property, it is an on -going business in an "established place" (refer to Ordinance 5.30 for the definition), and therefore would only be permitted in a commercially or business zoned area. To that extent, the individual could be licensed on an on -going ,Basis however, they would have to change locations and get the permission of the property owner of a commercially zoned property to conduct his business. ALTERNATIVES - A. Policy alternatives: 1. Leave ordinance un-amended. 2. Limit the peddler's license to number of days or number of renewals within a years time. Mobile Peddlers March 23, 1988 Page 2 of 2 3. Increase the fee for peddlers to compensate for the fact that they are not paying taxes on a commercial use. 4. Specifically, :.n the peddlers ordinance, restrict sales to commercially zones properties if they go for a certain time period in a place. (This is probably not needed as the zoning code already would restrict that.) 5. Limit the types of sales that could take place under a peddler's license. B. Action: 1. Renew the license at a specific location only in commercially zoned properties. 2. Amend the ordinance to further restrict peddling sales. 3. Leave the situation at the current status -quo. RECOMMENDATION - It is recommended that any solicitor permits of an on -going business nature be limited to commercially zoned properties requiring permission of the property owner. At this t:_me, however, the further limitations applied to the ordinance for at least this particular case (with the exception of limiting them to commercially zoned property for "on -going" bLsinesses) are not appropriate as there have not been other problems related to the business and it is probably not appropriate to unduly limit business competition. PROPOSED MOTION: Moved by , seconded by , that the Council direct staff that all solicitor's permits that are to be of an on -going nature are to be limited to commercially zoned properties, but at this time take no further action on an ordinance amendment. Ayes __, nays cc: Helen Skaret 3988.3 i;li-- TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: John R. Gerhardson, Art'ng Administrator DATE: March 9, 198F SUBJECT: Petition - Soliciting and Peddlers On March 2, 1988, the City of Oronc receiv I a petition f_om local :usinesses requesting the City to re its soliciting ordinance. In particular the complaint is use of the "Rose Man" that is selling flowers on County Road across from the Calvary Church by Dunwoody Avcrae. Also included is information from 1985 when this matter was brought to the Council. It was Council's decision at that time to not amend the ordinance as long as the person selling was complying with the ordinances. To date that person is still complying. For your information we have conducted a brief survey of neighboring communities and that information is included. De advised that the construction of County Road 15 will most certainly restrict this type of activity for the summer of 1988. At this writting I do not knc w if any of the petitioners will be in attendance at this Council meeting. Recommendation - To review the material included and to advise staff of the Council's wishes on the matter. 3988.2 TO: John Gerhardson, Acting Administrator FROM: Dorothy Hall4n, City Clerk DATE: March 9, 1988 SUBJECT: Survey of Neighboring Cities Re: Solicitors/Street Vendors In checking witri neighboring communities the following information is provided: MOUND - irdinance regulating solicitors/street vendors is mainly concerned that traffic flow is not interrupted. (City Clerk stated Helen Skaret had contacted a Mound councilnember regarding the "Flower Man" selling in Orono. SPRING PARK - No ordinance. Persons w,:hir., to sell are referred to Chief Kilbo. LONG LAKE - Gidinance r ires permit and vendors are rtluired to have an estaLiished place of business, such as owned or leased property w°whin 2 miles of the City. iNNE_TONKA BE_A_-11 - No ordinance. Their policy is to tell per s(-,rs I ),mit a request in writting to the Council. *.) Jate no one has submitted a written request. Cou-iciI review each request on a case by case basis. MEDINA - Ordina- sco.tec solicitors must he licensed. To_date City has never issued a license. MAPLE PLAIN - Ordinance regulating food vendors only. Discount Flowers also sells in this City and there have been no complaints regarding his business. f j! R�19 4J'10 :f/rtlr/iw�1iww A.x 117 .-ll.•and.. Minn. jSJ64 ! ram' / rtq r WIR 2 Imo$ February 195b Members of the Orono k;ouncil: This letter is in regards to Urono's mobile business person, ie "dose Peddler", who has taken up residency in front of the local Ice House across the street from Calvary Memorial Church, one mile from my shop. Are we such a lama community that people can support local small business plus local peddlers? I think not. Mould any of you like to si re your paycheck with him? Starting a business means an investme-it of thousands of dollars, many ran hours of labor, permits for signs, building permits, adequ?"a parking, employing people, paying taxes, donating to all .,ommunity projects, etc. etc. This parson, not even living in the community, is allowed to move in with a truck, hang out cardboard signs, while customers park on the highway --no taxes and all fcr 4120.00 a year...�hat a 'gal ! Is this the kiwi of community and business you are ..g for? I think this is unfair and would like to see something done about it. S �ely,rc� Ken & Helen Skaret FIC EP.S BY HELEN rrn W- . A4 A familiar site t s� , a n Al Penke, pictured here with his WwerAw 41149esI truck, has sold roses and camatons from the truck for almost throe years. His moveable shop is open year round on County Fio�ci 15 in Navarre. Wo~#,b iy J61'" mic AC-twi w V.►iw, : cx It . fff wx , ,#ixx - 5.5.164 LOCAL BUSINESS MEN AGAINST TiMLING ON STREETS IN CRCNO Mct i Al S /&.M ✓Are J� IAcrc ctEANEER, /nrz. ors 7jj�,,� � , .PLC ti-►�.i �S) 471 R 41%9 CLmUS , 1147-K 404J; `h V •Y�Io«M�a iy.7�f�hn 'f fe;pe f.!>0 .l�rl.l�is1� Xc.x 117 . rr..unri.. rl;nn.►i(i.Y6.d�� CITY 01= 0 ONO 4 /y VINUTES 01' THE ORONO COUNCIL. M1J.T1NG IIELD MARCH ll, 19115. PAGE I ATTENDANCE 7:00 PM The Orono Council met on the above date with the following members present: Mayor Eutler, Councilmembers Frahm, Tim Adams, and Lynn Adams. Councilmember Grabek was absent. City Attorney Radio and City Engineer Cook were also present. Building s Zoning Administrator Mabusth, Public Works Coordinator Gerhardson, Assistant Zoning Administrator Gaffron, and Recorder Sutton represented the City staff. Planning Commission Chairman Callahan was also present. CONSENT AGENDA* Councilmember Frahm moved, Councilmember T. Adams seconded, to approve the Ccnsent Agenda*, with all staff reports concerning these items to be attached to an original copy of these minutes on file in the City Clerk's office. Motion, Ayes (4), Nays (0). APPROVAL OF MINUTES* Councilmember Frahm moved, Councilmember T. Adams seconded, to approve the regular Council minutes of February 25, 1985, as submitted. Motion, Ayes (4), Nays (0). P;APPEARANCE HELEN SKARET , v FLOWERS BY HELEN Helen and Ken Skaret were present. Bolen Sk7:ret explained that she owns the f lower shop in Spring Park and is opposed to the selitors license issued by the City to a peddler that sells flowers on the street corners. Skaret felt that the City shouldn't want peddlers cluttering the streets selling their products. Skaret stated that the peddler puts up cF.rdboard signs which clutter the streets. Mayor Butler explained that the solicitor went through the City's normal procedure in applying for the solicitor's license. Butler noted that at the time the solicitor applied he did not state the location where he would be selling his flowers. Butler stated that the solicitor is allowed a piece of the free enterprise system too. Butler stated that if the solicitor is using signage, that he should be required to acquire a temporary sign permit. Councilmember T. Adams stated that the time limit on the license should be shortened. Councilmember Frahm suggested raising the fee charged for the solicitors application. Mayor Butler asked staff to ask other cities how much they charge for solicitor's licenses and %..hat the time limit is on the licenses. Butler stated that Council would discuss this issue further on March 25, 1985, after the additional information is received from staff. Butler directed staff to draft a letter to Helen Skaret informing her that the Council will be discussing the issue again on March 25, 19I'5. MINUTL:S OF THE OIZO140 COUNCIL. MEETING IIEI,D MARCH 25, 1985. L'AGf: 2 CONSENT AGENDA* Police Chief Kilbo asked that the Blue Bell Solicitor's License be removed from the consent agenda item #19. Mayor Butler moved, Councilmember Frahm seconded, to approve the Consent Agenda*, subject to : tem 119 being removed, with all staff reports concerning these items to be attached to an original copy of these minutes on file in the City Clerk's office. Motion, Ayes (4), Nays (0). APPROVAL OF MINUTES* APPEARANCE BY AL 6 MARGO PENKE - SOLICITORS LICENSE Mayor Butler moved, Councilmember Frahm seconded, to approve the regular minutes of the Orono Council meeting held March 11, 1985, as submitted. Motion, Ayes (4), Nays (0). Al and Margo Pen}:e were present to discuss their solicitor's license application to sell cut flowers. Al Penke stated that his current solicitor's license expires next week and he is here to renew the license. Penke stated that he learned about the complain from Flowers by Helen through the newspapers. Penke explained that the newspaper articles made him look like the bad guy when all along he has complied with the City's ordinances. Penke stated that he did not know that he needed a temporary sign permit and %..ill rer,,ove the signs. Penke felt that the complaint from a Sp) ing Park business owner should not have any bearing on the Orono business person just because he is creating competition for the Spring Park business. Penke stated that his own competition is Tyra's market. Margo Penke stated that their business is like a European Flower Market. Penke stated that they have been doing business in Maple Plain and Cokato and have never had any complaints. Councilmember Grabek moved, Councilmember L. Adams seconded, to approve the solicitor's license for Al and Margo Penke to sell cut flowers for 60 days. M-tion, Ayes (4), Nays (0). LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT REPORT Jo Ellen Hurr was not present and there was no Lake Minnetonka Conservation District Report. PLANNING COMMISSION COMMENTS Chairman Callahan and Planning Ccmmission member Rovegno were present. PUBLIC COMMENTS Police Chief Kilbo asked that the Council act on a limited firearms perc,it. Kilbc stated that a resident is having problems with raccoons. Kilbo states] that he just received the telephone call today. Kilbo stated that he reviewed the firearms permit and doesn't forcf,cc any problem!.. I AL 1POW Vp 2 51�85 ' AGEWA FOR RSGUL" COUNCIL PMNTr= SVT FOR PORDATr RRW 7100 V.M. I , (•) Asterisk items are considered to be rout. - items to be enacted upon by one motion by the City Ccuncil under the Consent Item• on the agenda. Discussion will be held upon request. I. ( IAOI.L CALL •} 1. 7t00 pn pUHLIC REARING - community Development Block Grant Program 2. 600 PH PUBLIC SEARING - racation of Manor Circle 3. CONSENT AGENDA* �I APPROVAL OF MINUTES •6. Regular Meeting of March 11. 1995 5. Appearance by Al s Margo Penke - Application for Solicitors License PARR COOMISSION CONKZWM u, TUE KrXXETONRA CORSER"TIOW DISTRICT REPORT - Jo Ellen Burr, Representative + PLANNING COMMISSION C SUCHN 9 PUBLIC C 90CEN" 9001 ADIQNISTRATOR'8 REPORT •6. Meco on Status of Tree Removal on Property Located at 3135 Casco Circle 7. 1884 Richard Eller, 2655 Shadywood Road - Variance •. 1889 Eugene Nelson, Big Island Record Late 116 i 122 - Final Subdivision - Resolution ,j CITY NEGIN® 88 REPORT 9. Accept Bids Crystal Bay Sewer Project - Resolution 10. Set Assessment Procedures - Crystal Bay Sewer Project ' 11. Assessment hearing April 22, 1985 Orono Middle School - Resolution NATOR'S REPORT 12. Employment - City Administrator CABLE TV REPORT TRANSPORTATION REPORT CITY ACAINISTRATOR'S REPORT •13. Bid Award Single Axle Dump Truck •14. 19S4 Police Department Operations •15. Year to Date Estimated Revenues Compared to Actual Revenues as of December 31, 1994 'I1 •16. Year to Date Budget Appropriation Compared with Actual Expenditures ( as of Dt-ember 31, 1986 (( 17. Non -Lethal weapon Review Police Department 19. Cy Smythe Report Salary i Benefit Review City Esrployees Impact of Proposed Salary Adjustments to 1985 Budget and Review of Annual Salary Adjustments 1977-1985 CIS! AMI*ISTRATOR'S LRTyM AND IIAR38 CITY ATTO02M'8 REPORT ■ TO Ir — ..,fit fit[FM Jeanne A. Kabusth. Building t Zoning Administrator rROl1e Thomas J. Jecobs, Building Official MBAR 2 S ms OhTas March 22, 1985 Gi .IF RM LOWNCT: Application for Solicitation - DiscGunt Flowers - AI Penke I have reviewed this application and spoke with r1r. Penk^. During our conversation, the following has been revealed: 1. Mr. Penke will be required to get a temporary sign permit unless his advertising is painted on the side of his truck. 2. He does have permission to sell flowers from the property owner. 3. Mr. Penke has been investigated by the Orono Police Department and approved for solicitation. At the last Council meeting, Council suggested that the 60 day license be shortened. This would require a change in the ordinances (attached). The Police Chief one myself will be looking into this matter and revising the ordinance as needed. Any suggestions are welcome. I.)( enst. NU. APFLICATION FOR SOLICITATION - $20.00 Lee Date Received IZ Date Er.pires CITY OF ORONO 1335 DHCWN ROAD SOUTH BOX 66 CRYSTAL BAY, MN 55323 Organizati Address: ) 1�r ti Z •,,'�7�' . i-'r Representative: Address: Phone ��[. - S`SI ( Phone S n(, to Check One: Business Solicitation k. / Contribution Solicitation Number of Fccple Solicitating within the City Provide list of Names of Solicitors on back of this application. Type of Product to be solicited J� �L-•. uti+ PER!AIT EXPIRES 60 DAYS FRCP. APPROVAL DATE. POLICE CHIEF SHALL HAVE FIVE (5) BUSINESS DAYS IN WHICH TO INVESTIGATE AND MAKE A RECOM PENDATION PURLUANT TO ORONO MUNICIPAL CCOE SECTION 5.30 SUBD 5(a). --------------------------------------------------------------- ------ ORONO MUNICIPAL CODE REGULATIONS ON SOLICITORS Subd. 3. Prohibited Solicitatior. Practices. 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, cr 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 the 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 unlawf ( -- any person to engage in business solicitation without a license as herein pr .ded. The undersigned hereby agrees to the conditions quoted above from the Oro::o Municipal r^de and any additional rggyirements the City staff may have. Signature of Applica„•. ,([�----------------Date---- --- -�--- ---------------------------------- FOR CITY USE ONLY: After review of application, staff recommends the following: c/ Approval or application 'al of application Signature of City Official: �''"01 *I Date: . NAMES OF SOLICITORS Name: flame •' - Address: Address: ?� _ Phone: - Phones License No. License No. Name: Address: Phone: Lir nse No. 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. Name: Address Phone: License No. Name: ..ddress: Phone: License No. tIf additional names+ please attach list) ell v OP ORONO N? ' 16934 P 0, "X " G ENE It TI.FC "MYSTAL IAV. WN 893" 47373" 1 Z,4,1 ;7 W-,tf,, cz, DOLIARS i S A/ I. A l!tETM !�'..AR 8 S 1985 -friCltty! /S/ /yf-5 Sr/ fly /4 !. 7 �� /t�Sr /fit: •: § 5.30 SEC. 5.30. SOLICITORS. Subd. 1. Purpose. This Section is not intended to in any way hinder, delay or interfere with legitimate business or organizational activities. The Council finds, however, that soli- citors have used public streets and their direct contact with residents of the City for the illegitimate solicitation practices of harassment, nuisance, theft, deceit, or menacing, troublesome or unlawful activities. This Section is intended to ferret out and control: (1) businesses and organizations using solicitation as a means of concealing unlawful activities; and, (2) businesses and organizations which, though its activities be lawful or even com- mendable, use such illegitimate practices in solicitation; and, (3) individual natural person; who, though they represent lawful busi- nesses and organizations, use such illegitimate solicitation practices; and, (4) businesses, though legitimate, which cause, o- are likely to cause, a traffic hazard or other inconvenience or danger to persons or property. The Council further finds that a laro:• -,-;mber of the residents of the City are employed as their livelihood and means of support by manufacturing plants and other businesses on shifts rotating between night and day, and to disturb them during their sleeping hours for the purpose of solicitation is a source of nuisance or even harassment ;%nd should be subject to control. Subd. 2. Definitions. The following terms, as used in this Section, shall have the meanings stated: A. "Solicitor" means any person making the solicitation, including such common terms as "peddler", "transient merchant" and "canvasser". B. "Solicitee" means the person sol cited. C. "goods" means any tangible thirg of value, but not including money, things in action or intangible personal property other than merchandise certificates or coupons as herein describe,. "'he term includes such chattels as are furnished or used at the time -)f sale or subsequently in the modernization, rehabilitation, repair, alteration, improvement or construction of real property so as to become a part thereof whether or not severable therefrom. The term also includes merchandise certificates or coupons, issued by a retail seller, not redeemable in cash and to be used in their face amount in lieu of cash, in exchange for goods or services sold by such seller. D. vices" means work, labor, or services of any kind. E. City owned, leased longer than sixty booth, compartment, length of an event "Established place" means real estate in the or occupied on a month -to -month or term -certain (60) consecutive days. The term includes a or area leased or assigned during and for the or occasion. ORONO CC 119 (4-1-84) S 5.30 F. "Business solicitation" means an attempt by a solicitor, engaging in transactions of the same kind, to sell or distribute for a consideration any goods or services primarily for personal, family, ,r household purposes, when either the solicitor or person acting for him contacts the solicitee by telephone or in person, other than at the established place of business of soli- citor, except: (1) an attempted solicitation in which the solicitee personally knows the identity of the solicitor, the name of the business firm or organization he represents, and the iden tity or kinds of goods, services or things of value offered; or, (2) an attempted solicitation in which the solicitee has first initiated the contact with the solicitor; or, (3) an attempted solicitation of a newspaper subscription in which the solicitor is a minor child engaged in both the delivery and sale of the news- paper; or, (4) an attempted solicitation for the sale of products of a farm or garden occupied or cultivated by the solicitor, when facts of such (,ccupancy or cultivation are proven by the solicitor. G. "Contribution solicitation" means an attempt by a solicitor to obtain money from a solicitee for any cause or purpose, when either the solicitor or person acting for him con- tacts the solicitee by telephone or in person other than at the established place of meeting, business, service, or activity of the organization represented by the solicitor, except: (1) an attempted solicitation in which the solicitee personally knows the identity of the solicitor, the name of the organization hz repre- sents, and the identity of the services performed or offered by the organization, or, (2) an attempted solicitation in which the soli- citee has first initiated the contact with the solicitor or the organization represented by him. Subd. 3. Prohibited Solicitation Practices. 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 the owner, lessee, 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. ORONO CC 120 (4-1-84) § 5.30 Subd. 4. Application. Applications for licensing or registration shall contain the name and address of the solicitor, the name and address of the business or organization for which solicitations are sought and such other information as may reasonably be required by the Council as a condition to registration or licensing or to permit investigation into the applicant's background and past solicitation practices. Subd. 5. Investigation, Approval or Disapproval. A. All applications for licensing or registration shall be immediately referred to the Chief of Police, and by him or other person acting in his stead, investigated as to the truth thereof, and as to any other factor which may result in a hazard or danger to persons or property. The Chief of Police shall have five (5) business days within which to investigate and make a recommendation thereon. B. If he finds no past history of the applicant indicating violations similar to those declared unlawful in this Section, and if he finds that to grant the application is not likely to result in a hazard or danger to persons or property, he shall recommend issuing a license or approving registration, as the case may be, and the City Clerk shall forthwith advise the applicant. The City Clerk shall issue a license, upon payment of the fee therefor, to the approved applicant for business solicitation, and shall approve the completion of registration by the applicant for a contribution solicitor. C. If the Chief of Police finds a past history of the applicant indicting violation3 similar to those declared unlawful in this Section, or if he finds that to grant the applica- tion is likely to result in a hazard or danger to persons or property, he shall recommend denial of the license or registration. In all matters of recommended denial the applicant shall be forth- with advised thereof, and the application shall be referre2 to the Council and considered by it at its next regular or special meeting occurring more than ten (10) days thereafter. The applicant shall be afforded an opportunity to be heard at such meeting. Subl. 6. Duration of Contribution Solicitation Registration. Registration of contribution solicitation shall expire sixty (60) days after registration is approved. Source: City Code Effective Date: 4-1-84 (Sections 5.31 through 5.34, inclusive, reserved for future expansion.) ORONO CC 121 (4-1-84) . � To: Mayor Grabek & Orono Council Members 32388.1 From: Mark E. Bernhardson, City Administrator Date: March 22, 1988vtr, 11 Subject: Cable TV - Cities Magazine ' S- 1�f, R 9 ISSUE - ;��''yj Determination as to the Council's level of`vfi eW ther with any issues they may have as to the City Administrator bee of a City Administrator/Manager-Cities Magazine or the local cable TV channel. INTRODUCTION - Initial efforts to have Ci•:y news on the I-ake Minnetonka Cable TV public access involved the Cite subm-tting a monthly summary of their activities which was then read over the air. This lasted for only a few months and it was determined that it was not an effective format. After some rethinking of that format, :he cable TV coordinator has developed a format which in,tolves using city administrators/managers, generally three to four at a time, from the Lake communities which would discuss recent activities and actions of their city together with a discussion of one particular issue of interest to the cities around the lake. nrcrttScrnN - This would be a monthly taping session and would focus on the individual community's activities, summarizing recent Council meetings and other pertinent events. This segment which would be approximately 5 minutes apiece for each city, totaling ;5-20 minutes would then be followed by one topic to be discussed by the all city managers and administrators present. Generally, the content portion of the city reports would be very controllable as it would be a summary of council actions. The discussion, however, of city items would be attempts by each of the city manager/administrators to reflect their council's approaches on those particular issues. For the most part, it is anticipated that these will not be controversial subjects but more on an informational basis. Opportunity does exist however for issues of controversy. For those I would work to reflect council opinion or indicate that the Council has not considered the matter. ALTERNATIVES - Alternatives in relationship to this are: 1. To authorize the City A3ministrator to participate. 2. Authorize participatiDn by the City with any suggested format changes. 3. Choose not to participate in :his matter. Cable TV - Cities Magazine March 22, 1988 Page 2 of 2 RECOMMENDATION - It is recommended that the City participate in this format with the other cities in order to further strengthen the information distribut-on to the community. PROPOSED MOTION: Moved by , seconded by , the Council authorize the Administrator to participat ie n the Cities Magazine on cable television. Ayes , nays . 32388.3 To: Mayor Grabek 6 Orono Council Members I� From: Mark E. Bernhardson, City Administratoit� Date: March 23, 1988 .AS. IL Munn Subject: City/School Intervention Agreements 11AR 2819,29 Attachment A. Chief Kilbo Memo Dated 3/23/88 P41TY OF ORONO ISSUE - Information to Council members regarding work by Police Department to strengthen school/police liason on alcohol and drugs under Chapter 295 Minnesota Laws 1987. nTcrnceTnu - Chief Kilbo continues to work with the Orono District to clarify any issues relating to exchange of appropriate data for purposes of this legislation as opposed to identifiable educational data protected under the 1974 Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act. while some districts were perhaps doing this on an informal manner, the passage of the legislation required all districts, many of them who were ignoring the problem to get involved to this extent. RECOMMENDATION - Council ac-- of "ie information and extend their thanks to the Police Depa_ at for executing agreements with Westonka and Wayzata together with the work done by Chief Kilbo in helping the Hennepin Count.y Attorney's office in formulating the model agreement. cc: Chief Kilbo DATE: March 23, 1988 TO: Ci-ty Administrator, Mark Bernhardson IROP1: Mel Kilbo, Chief of Police SUBJECT: City/School Intervention Agreement Important. new legislation dealing with youth, drugs, and schools was passed this past legislative session, Chapter 295, relati:.g to schools/ chemical abuse/preassessment and community advisory teams/reporting was enacated. This legislation places three new requirements on the schools: 1. Teachers ,nust now report incidences of possible drug use by students; 2. Each school must have a chemical abuse preassessme,.L ;.eam to which it's teachers must report any suspected drug use which the; either know or have reason to believe exists; 3. Each school district must establish a school and community advisory team which must develop a memorandum of agreement between the school district and law enforcement, defining which cases of drug use the school will report to the police. The Hennepin C: ty Attorney drafted a common form for schools in Hen- nepin County tc ,_�e. Both the Westonka Schools and the Wayzata School districts have adopted memorandums of agreements, copy of Wayzata's attached to this memo. The Orono Police Department has executed these memorandums with both school districts. The Orono School District has not of yet agreed upon a memorandum. James Franklin, Director of Public Safety for West Hennepin Public Saf- ety and Orono School Board Member, has written to the Orono Superinten- dent with some concerns about Chapter 295. To quote from his letter of February 12, 1988, he states "specifically, it appears that the legis- lation intention was for the school district and law enforcement officers to disseminate individual identifiable educational data concerning stu- dents. However, this appears to be in direct violation of the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act of 1974 (FERI,A). It would appear that the Federal law which would limit schocl districts dissemination of information to only the students name, in an effort to report alleged unlawful activity". I hove discussed this legislation with Director Franklin and I am of the opinion that we are NOT interested in educational data and as such have NO conf_ict with the Federal law. Also, Representative Randy Kelly, in the csrrent legislative session, is attempting to change, by legislation, any problems with Chapter 295. It is hoped that very soon, we can execute a memorandum of agreement with the Orono School District. , ta PUBI 'C SCHOOL S pendent Schocl District 294 WAYZATA SENIOR HIGH SCHOOL • 305 V.-KSBURG ;ANE • ?LYMOUTH. MINNESOTA 55447 3999 • Telephone 612 473-0400 LT Gary Cheswici,: Box 86 Orono Police Crystal Bay, MN 55323 January 20, 1988 LT. Gary Cheswick: Enclosed are two copies of the Memorandum of Understanding. You are to sign one copy and return it using the envelope provided and retain the second for your records. Please note that al I correspondence regarding the Memorandum of Understanding or advisories of investigations related to the Memorandum of Understanding need tc be mailed directly to my office at 305 VicKsburg Lane, Plymouth, MN 55447. 1 will pass the information to the appi uriate school and Chemical Abuse Pre -assessment Team. I have also enclosed a document entitled "Chapter^95 Drug and Alcohol Advisor y". Upon the return of the signed Memorandum of Understanding, this form will be used by building principals and assistant principals in communicating violations of the school district's chemical abuse policy to your office. This is being provided for your information and need not be returned. If you have any questions please call me at 476-3000. Sincerely, Gary Swedberg ` Chemical Health Coordinator ROUISORY MRILED TO: School Jurisdiction: ____Plymouth Police Department _Wayzata Police Department Hom Jurisdiction: Corcoran Police Department —Maple Groue Police Department _-Medina Police Department —Minnetonka Police Department Orono Police Department Plymouth Police Department Sheriff's Office (Medicine Lake) _.Wayzata Police Department Other. P duised that: (Home Street Address) (Data of Birth) (First) (Middle) (Last) (Cif•/) (tip) M/F (Sex) (Home Tel) (School or' Attendance) (Grade) has ulolated the Wayzata School District's Drug and Alcohol Policy inuouing the unlawful use, possession, or sale of drugs or alcohol. R brief outline of the Incident including a description of action taken follows: (School/Location of Violation) (3treet Address, City, State 21D) ay• (F •)ortinr, Person) (Date of Violation) (Title) (Telephone Number) ,opies to: Pero- '* gessment Team (Signature of Reporting Person) Parents/Guardians Tr•is Inrormatlon is being oravided �y the school district to the police department In comollar,ce with the Chemical Auuse Preassessment provisions of MN Chapter 295, the contents are not to be distribu:_d for any purpose that. is ;iot unsishont with th• nrnviainna nr Ini. rl,. ... 1/13/88 MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING WHEREAS, Independent School District s 284 (hereinafter, District) and the Police Department for the City of Orono (hereinafter, department) recognize that there is a drug proble•-n among our youth that interferes with their behavior, learning, and full-s* possible development; and HEREAS, the District has implemented - Orug and Alcohol and a chemical health program of prevention, intervention, t -fe— al and aftercare, thereby assisting in the prevention of chemical abuse among students and providing appropriate services to those students who become valved with drugs; and WHEREAS --recognizing that chemical dependency is a treatable illnes_ --student drug problems should be andled in the first instance within the school or community rather than through court intervention. unless the drug use is ec- -npanied by other criminal activities; and WHEREAQ, Court-orderc,: treatment of juvenile chemical abuse shoul:i be reserved for those individuals who commit crimes in cony on ✓ith tt,.e use of drugs or who require C.-N trt intervene& n tc enharc�� the likelihood of successful treat:nf�rit, • nd WHEREAS, enhanced prosecutorial efforts are appropriate where , +avenile having a history of chemical abuse commit crimin�..i acts other `1-.an drug or alcohol use, an(' tl-.;is an awareness el ; student's reputed chemical use is a rel(- ._int factor for law e- . en,A�-nt �,o conside,- in evaluating cases presented to them for investigation,- and WhERF,AS, Minn. Law-. 1987, Chapter 295, require the e! tablishm- ,* of a pre-assesment tean ° 7- each school within the 'District and, i..r ther requires the adol- jn of a Memorandum of Under--tanding between the vistrict and the Department providing for an exchange of information in order to farther the District's policies for the prevention, detection, and treatment )f chemical abuse and to facilitate n.utual c&pabilit, •r addressin- t:-i�ninal activity by students involved with drug: BE IT HEREBY AGREED between the District and the Department that, in accordance with the provisions of Minn. Laws 1987, Chapter 295, the following exchanges of information are agreed upon and authorized. The school administration representative on each school pre - assessment team shall give written notice to the Department with jurisdiction at the site of the school and to the law enforcement agency with jurisdiction at the student's residence, it the different agrncies involved are signatories to this agreement, of all violations o4 the District Drug and Alcohol Policy involving the unlawful use, issession, or sale of drugs or alcohol. II. The Department shall give written notice to the District for the student's school pre -assessment team whenever an incident occurs within the Department's jurisdiction in which a student is involved in a violation of: A. The provisions of Minn. Stat. Section 340A.503, Subd. 2 or 3 regarding the possession or purchase of alcoholic beverages, or B. The provisions of Minn. Stat. Section 152.09, Subd. 1, regarding the possession or sale of a controlled or simulated controlled substance, or C. The provisions of other statutes which are specified as reportable to the pre -assessment team in future -enacted amendment to Minn. Laws 1987, Chapter 295. These violations shall be reported to the appropriate school's pre - assessment team regardless of whether the it-ident will be referred to Court by Department personnel. With regard to a matter reported to the Department by a school pre -assessment team, upon determination that probable cause exists and unless the interests of justice require otherwise, the Department shall refer the matter to the Hen.iepin County Attorney's Office in the following instances: 2 ,, And case involving the illegal sale or distribution of drugs, simulated controlled substances, or alcohol. B. Upon a student's third violation of school regulations concerning use or possession of drugs or alcohol on school premises or at school -sponsored events. C. Upon a student's second violation of such regulations if there has been a previous failure of the student to cooperate with the District's drug and alcohol policies, or if other circumstances dictate Juvenile Court intervention to facilitate assessment or treatment. D. Upon a student's first violation of such regulations when, within the f_ evious year, the student has been adjudicated delinquent with regard to one felony -level offense or two or more misdemeanor or gross misdemeanor level offenses. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this Memorandum has been signed on the dates below -indicated by the following District and Department representatives, and will continue in effect until superseded by a new Memorandum or specifically rescinded in wnting: INDEPENANT SCHOOL DISTRICT 1284: Signed: Dr.David R. Landswerk Superintendent of Schools Independent School District +284 ORONO POLICE DEPARTMENT: Signed.. C 6.boi,l (Typed Name) teary Cheswick 3/28/88 (Typed Title) Lieutenant Orono Police 0 �3 Cgern u •'rl%G 3.3 �1 TO: Mark Bernhardson, City Administrator FROM: Mel Rilbo, Chief of Police pR 'Vu DATE: March 14, 1988 SOBJ: Step Increase - Larry Tomcheck Officer Larry Tomcheck will have been here two years on 4/7/88. I request he be granted the two year rate of $13.645 hourly ('87 rate) from the first year rate of $12.129 (187 rate) effective 4/7/88 in accordance with the L.E.L.S. labor agreement. TO: Mayor Grabek Orono Councilmemberrs FROM: Mark BernhardsAnl Forwarded recommending approval. PROPOSED MOTION: Moved , seconded , that Council approve the step increase for Larry Tomcheck effective April 7, 1988 from $12.129 per hour to $13.645 per hour in accordance with the L.E.L.S. bargaining unit labor agreement. Ayes _, Nays _ �y UJUNCIL MEETING TO: Mark E. Bernhardson, City Administrator MAR 2819?8 FROM: Mel Kilbo, Chief of Police J,Tv 1i OF ORONO DATE: March 14, 1988 SOBJ: Step Rate Longevity - Mike Kirnyczuk Officer Mike Kirnyczuk attained his eight year anniversary on February 15, 1988. He is on injury leave now, however he is eligible for step raise of longevity rate after eight years of service to 51 additional to base rate. The step at four years was 38 additional to base rate. These are both based on 1987 Labor Contract rate. TO: Mayor & Council FROM: Mark E. bernhardson Forwarded recommending approval. PROPOSED MOTION: Moved , seconded , that the Orono Council approves the longevity step increase for Mike Kirnyczuk, effective February 15, 1988, from $15.615 per hour to $15.919 per hour in accordance with the L.E.L.S. bargaining unit labor agreement. Ayes _, Mays TO: Mark Bernhardson, City Administrator it, FROM: John R. Gerhardson, Public Works Dirr�ecc,t/oh memo v: DATE: March 23, 1988 SUBJECT: West Hennepin Pioneers - Historical Buildings On March 14, 1988 Mr. John Hollander commented to the Orono Council regarding Historical Structures in the City of Orono. Mr. Hollander stated that he had talked to Jim Dillman president of the West Hennepin County Pioneers Association and that the museum would not go against the City of Orono. On March 15, 1988 I discussed this matter with Mr. Dillman and he recalls talking to Mr. Hollander and stated that the museum is definitly concerned about destruction of Historical buildings in the area but that it is also there feeling that rather than see the building left to disrepair and decay they would rather see them demolished. Mr. Dillman also stated that the museum does not have the personnel or the time to defend the historical value of a structure that is schehuled for demolition regardless of the community. TO: Mayor Grabek, Orono Council Members FROM: Mark Bernhardson, City Adminitstrato Forwarded for your information. Unlike some communities, the City of Orono does not have in either its ordinances or comprehensive plan a means to address historical buildings. If interested the options can be presented at a future date. Proposed motion moved, second, that the Orono Council accept the inf ormatioiF regarding Hi stroica1 Buildings and the West Hennepin Pioneer Museum. C�3Uft:n WESTING Tom: - TO: Mayor Grabek, MAR 2 8 Uc^? Frame Orono Council Members Date FROM: Mark Bernhardson, City Administzato �AITY OF ORONO Subj DATE: March 23, 1988 FACI SUBJECT: 1987 Summary of Receipts, Disbursements and Balances Attachment: A. 1987 Summary of Receipts, Disbursements and the Ba Lnces staf isst ISSUE - Receipt of information related to City's cash and cons investment balances and activity for 1987. step DISCUSSION - Attachment A represents the report of the cash balances for all City funds for 1987. Some minor adjustments between funds are possible to finalize the year end statements for audit. Notable is the $354,000 net increase in the General Fund cash and investments raising the balance to over $2.9 million. The increase is due to the actual revenues exceeding the budget, with the main items being; building and general permits revenues over budget by $45,100; grants and aids from the federal and state governments r»venues over budget by $50,000; court fines revenues over budget by $47,100; investment interest revenues over budget by $54,200; and the transfer of the liquor operating fund equity after the close out, $146,700. Proposed motion moved, second, that the Orono City Council accept the 1987 Summary of Receipts, Disbursements and Balances as information only. Ayes _, Nays m" 9. 6eDi 601099 Or 9lffum. w� 69O trtaoe m m 93m.9e ev33s ® N 31, in? ealvic 1/lro] x m99'IRIf CASH torAL 60a1C1 TINSer JFO) -WQ vC3IM 1989e1 [9 NID ---- - uul -- t2.St3p10 02.610Ib U2, III,Sm t333.190St.,S22 r.e etv e r o - v.rt. ns.p] IJ,322 23 u..00 cm,14.253 0 0 vmlp O.eI.Y Z"i 204,093 29.939 55.510 99,910 ele9 Cep 102,NJ 5.951 - 20.000 d Con. Fue et Aid l d Id N R Aid N N S.OS4 5J59 3.951 30,tl) 93JM 9.r lN,n0 JO,J20 - IDs,6n ors 5 nprw. as o p 6p Aue 96-16 639,9)0 1I1.732 Op Ate• I]2.)22 124,007 38 v3.o3e 92 0C Nu e5 239,921 102,391 57.22S 13,115 6p 05 101,291 1".911 121.830 59.115 r LS9ur op ITS.eSI (e) Po 33,339 53.593 139,556 ..i,= 3.i.w G., ou 227.123 106,w6 Golf Pool Op P.I II 10e, 191 113.9N I11.990 Isl I.. 9m1N Iv. 9r /eee S,ON1970 I5.010.9101 259,510 10.915.391 to9AL 600w9 le) 9 or SAN, Dism 1967 9w06r m $2.342,612 $2,322.590 Im.N 69.910 0 922 3017m t.-w %2.20 19.1S3 J6,293 N'm wit 9,166 23.379 - 1051643 0.197 63.SN IN.St MAN 19.401 S9.73S 312.050 312,195 100.0, 132.990 124,120 ".Is 9),S1) 99,305 99.01 1621139 116,M I"m 2N.622 121,00 (.) 18941 150,610 122.103 243.125 65.31 503,205 371,964 135.51 139,5n 113,940 1.1 112.6s 259,518 MIN Slnlm 0 111,M 0 25),056 120.936 (10.361) F.IFX 229,71Y (79.J26) 649,301 655,9u I19.629 I29,)]) 0 65.M 31).Ot I'm 12,265.923 (5,361.902) 5,361,602 1pTAY 65,010,9)0 819S.6)0 $4,170,431 63.631.115 $376,419 $10,915,391 S9.909.023 91.827.965 $376.411 $11,195.923 $56,696 $5,361,402 .AL L9 )19.959,036 i1w.311 15,185,005 01lw1696 t69.2]) 915,555,63S $5,175.972 93,9w,211 919,2]) O1S.N1,569 $145,670 95.M.910 631OSL r090 60Fw39 - 1987, 0w v5p005 e00w9 ,NCR - Il. tl. 101.61 Llecwu. • rtr.lt• 138.092 IJ9,299 94.300 99J00 122.61 amr, Ia.rpr. 94.7I5 396,691 112.10 arr Togo for e.ry 5g3." s55,500 Ioi79 104.224 SF/.7% lot. let. m 2.t..0. 1e9,229 30,000 110, 000 391. )s 9tN, rs otnts 9me. 197,395 o owe 45,418 e,9e0 swot 9(9w 99VO09 Y--- $2,191.990 92.))2,990 118.19 tb) t09Y. 1987 We 6 1NY9100•l 90 I2/31/67 S5,91e,0s0 9019 (a) Layeer eve Solt .,.rots., tone. oao9ets 00 .ot molad...p..t. ter ....h.... for r ..1. o Attu W mlimt9d/r.NttN 19t r•wlpts IroE9.t. projAtt mly grate prelate - .0t total raoalpts. 6o" (b) Weeul toed........ r.r.rd.d.122 vnt e9.•3 rtteapte mll.et•d em to rar.a.enle. billed 1e etntr .ceevetl.9 ,•coed. .ne ben-r..tnu• r.e.apt.. vO9e 1.) a.d9.t ..... t. a.rled. tch.d.l.d t.... rtr., do .et lntl.e. mod be 1L....... or .dmcam.. 32388.2 To: Mayor Grabek 6 Orono Council Members From: Mark E. Bernhardson, I1 City Adminiss1traton`���1 clww-o Date: March 23, 1988 Subject: Administrator's Information 1A kRdis-- FACILITIES STUDY - ci r of dfjlu David Kroos of Boarman and Associates has been out to do gathering of tha information for the alternative site selected for this study. The staff will be working with him over the next two weeks to develop further issues regarding site layout, etc. together with the process for consideration by staff, Planning Commission, Council and other processed steps that are felt to be appropriate. P3 COUNCIL MEETING MAR 2 8 icH3 CITY OF PAgp LIST OF LICENSES FOR COUNCIL AP FOR MEETING OF M... h 28. 19RR Solicitor's License - Dowden Cablesystems 2381 Wilshire Blvd. Mound, MN 55364 Septic System Installer License - Don's Backhoe S Excavating 11585 110th Street 'Mlonge, MN 55322 INTEROFFICE MEMO DATE March 23, 1988 TO: Dorothy FROM: Sue RE: Solicitors Permits The following names have been cleared for their permits: Larry Gregory Shekleton John Joseph Shekleton Tim John Shekleton Mark Bernard Louris Paul David Zinda Leigh Cameron Fredrickson Please make note on Zinda's permit, ne is not to drive due to suspended driver license. nC. i737 License No. APPLICATION FOR SOLICITATION - y20.00 fee Date Received 3-11-88 Date Expires CITY OF ORONO 1335 BROWN ROAD SOUTH BOX 66 CRYSTAL BAY, MN 55323 Organization: Dowden Cablesystems Address: 2— l�hi^e Blvd. Mound, MN 55 4 P�presentative:John Thomas P3dress: Phone 472- Phone Check One: Business Solicitation XX Contribution Solicitation Number of People Solicitating within the City 6 Provide list of Names of Solicitors on back of this application. Type of Product to be solicited Cable TV programming sales PERMIT EXPIRES 60 DAYS FROM APPROVAL DATE. POLICE CHIEF SHALL HAVE FIVE (5) BUSINESS DAYS IN WHICH TO INVESTIGATE AND MAKE A RECOMMENDATION PURSUANT TO ORONO MUNICIPAL CODE SECTION 5.30 SUBD 5(a). __________________________________________________________________________ ORONO MUNICIPAL CODE REGULATIONS ON SOLICITORS Subd. 3. Prohibited Solicitation Practices. 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 the 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 to the conditions quoted above from the Orono Municipal Code and any additional requirements the City staff may hava. Signature of Applicant: Date: 1-1(>� ______________________________ ______________________________ POR CITY USE ONLY: Afterreview of a lication, staff recommends the following: Approval of application Denial of application Signature of City Official: Date: NANPS OF SOLICITORS Name: William Hornsby Address: 1224 East Shakopee Ave___ Shakopee. MN Phone: 496-IS07 License No.(CA) ZGEH 773 Name: Larry Shek Address: 1560 E. Highway 23 St. C_o a Phone: ONT License NO.LEJ 241 Name: Phone: License Name: lddress. Phone: License Name: Mark Louris Address: 4615 Washburn Phone: (CONTACT ABOVE License No. NXB 409 _ Name: Vaal ZS da Address: :116 Oxford Street _ Honkins- MN _ Phone: 933-2709 License No. CBV 70 Name: Address- Phone - License No. Name: Address: Phone: License No. Name: Address Phone: License No. Name: Address Phone: License No. (I£ additional names, please attach list) CITY OF ORtM'0 FINANCE OFFICE 0 131190000 1 20' 00 CHECK TL 20.00 RECEIPT -THANK YOU A0010, Co01 Rol T10:49 1189 CITY of ORONO P4•I Off— aw 66•Crytl ] B-Y. 9Si•R4•m• 5&327.YueidpJ Om,s B . • • • On the North Shom o/ Lake Minnetonka DATA PRIVACY ADVISORY In accordance with M.S. 15.165, 'Rights of subjects of data*, we would like to inform you that ;our 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 that: 1. The information you furnish will be used to determine your qualification for the permit or license requested. 2. You may refuse to supply data, but refusal may require that the City deny the permit or license. 3. The information may be shared with other local, state or federal agencies to the extent necessary to process the permit or license. 4. If your requested permit or license reqires council action to approve, some information may become public. 5. You have tertian rights under M.S. 15.165 to review private data on yourself. 6. Your full name, and date of birth are required to process this application or permit. GYC First a Last Afi re 91I I/ 1� ✓1 :�1 C'O A 9(b Dace birth 3/� Phone I understand my rights as stated above. x /'`'1 4\. �1, Sign& uret BUILDING& ZONING -4])] I • ADMINISTRATION&FINANCE-4])])58 • PUBLIC WORKS -4])-])59 ASSESSING INSTALLERS CITY ®RONO m CATIO: RUMDINGAZONING-4737 7 ASSESSING All questions must be answered. License tee, bond, certificate of insurance, and evidence of MPCA Certification or Home Sewage Treatment Workshop attendence must accompany this application. All applications are subject to a t��e77n��110) day approval period. 1. Business or trade name Au.-`S E7RK ne %C.Xt'. 2. Business address J/ %/D� tf (�%�ou{e .'ALU. 31-3P2 3. Business phone y(o(o 9(A.11 Residence phone 6. Name of applicant or carg. rUIa.�tive holding MPCA certification eA7 iJct S. Type of certification held: _� Installer A6 Pumper Site evaluator System designer Is this a Provisiona Certificate? ,y,_ Certificate No. Z t 6. If no Certificate is held, provide evidence of attendance at one of the On -Site Sewage Treatment workshops held immediate) prior to the current construction season. 7. Have you ever held a Septic System Installer license in �I Orono before? 4u.,,. Most recent year 8. Have you ever had a license revoked? A- When? Where? _ 9. Do you do Municipal Sewer hook-ups? Yea_ Now � SUBMITTALS REQUIRED: 1. $25.or license application fee. v 2. $2000.00 license and permit bond naming City of Orono as obligee. The State Plumbers Bond will not be accepted.ur $10 50-100,000 minimum Certificate of Insance. 4 • Copy of current MPCA Certificate or evidence of a 6l�R1h7 _J au On -Site Sewage Treatment Workshop held ite mmedia vQ prior to current construction season. 1311500000 OFFICE ql LICENSES WILL NOT BE PROCESSED UNTIL ALL ITEMS ARE SUB EJ )Ell 25.00 PAY n 15.00 List persons other than applicant who �{'a authorized bj.1 $[IP NAVK YOU apply for permits under your license (7L�ey�y ,SS.{IAIA An.�EOt. I k01 110:03 The undersigned hereby makes application to the City of 03/11/86 Orono, Minnesota, for license to install and repair septic systems, and/or pump out septic tanks, subject to the laws of the State of Minnesota and the Ordinan of the ity of Orono. Date Applicants Signature CITY Staff recommendation Approva Denial Date USE Reason for denial: ONLY - City Council Action Date Approved Denied Date license mailed ORONO POLICE RSCORB9CHECK REPORT ME© CONTROL NUMEER gCAI COAT. AGENCY WIC (DENT. ICAGI E C I I I M N I 0 ] ) 1 E D O / LANA OIF DATE RESORTED IRMI TIME AND ITRPI / LOCATION GRIND NRR ILGNI I PUCE COMMITTED VLCI LNRR 1111D /© NAME NODANI TIME AeIG ITASI /® TIME ARA RARI TIME CLR. IWO /m XRD CeeN rO La /O I^I / r ! O I� ' 1 J Lp /a I� /o R.REfe IA.MP EMTEREDC.I.RA. ❑ V M_wu VNMI T OIM arum ClN*w �C)LJ'L7�J iaT.�P SI�C�e+^4 DOsr Aedw X. T Cry Du BCA DL MINCIS NCIC Debl of Public Health Hennepin Cty. WeneME Home County Warrants Home AOdrew Verified e1 Pe W" ^_. _ IS� Lnji Gvd9Drj 949k,W�K 09/VD mnl 6 Ir .131" 2'4pl, m4E� r31jl nd^.� h0ilr rS 4e;lf�l z/r / 34 lDl6A 2/! y/s� 6 /15-1 i 411 Z-� CITY OF ORONO EMPL-NO NAME DIV TONCHECK LF 31 IJI TOMCZYK MY 71 pp Jn UALSH KL 31 C' �U�y����1W e� PAID 0004E CRAMD "Y P A Y Y-T-D GROSS CROSS EXP/ALL 6209, 91 te30,49 7667. 74 1249.20 0.00 0.00 TOTAL 00054 TOTAL 12 13 OTAL PTCFTAX CRODD —E{a11 .1ED - EMPLOYERS F t� A vm CROUP HEALTN B • PHYSICIAN'S WEALTH PLAN is BLUE CROSS/BLUE SHIELD--- 41 0 ma MEDICAL CENTER PLAN isi _— -----__—.-- vl E a PRUDENTIAL :.; L+^—I—wL`DORD. HEALTN_CAlC— y is B a MINNESOTA HMO 9. a• N a TRANS-AMERICA CCC. 31 Ta &WKERS-LIME--._. '•I J w MUTUAL SERVICES 351 K a MUTUAL OF OMAHA 36 > L EMPLOYEE'8 BENEFIT N AIM ml 44 4. N NICOLLET EITEL -- D�'ACUE OF CITIES .a .s P METROPOLITAN HEALTH PLAN •>'i 0 SHARE Z HEALTH CARE MAINT ACCT. --- - MISSING HOOP CODE FOR SOME EMPL'S CITY OF ORONO P A ' Pr" 03aO8D Y-T-D 4 - EMPL-NO NAMES DIV GROSS GROSS EXP/ALt ANDERSON BL 31 8405 24 1273.52 BERNHARDSO ME 12 11570. 43 1928.41 BOBZIEN $A 31 4940 EP 0�2.40 BOSMA JL 12 E60E.3E 432.57 BRINKMAUS JF 42 9302.20 1607.55 CHESWICK GB 31 6491.47 1410.00 CORNICK JL 31 7802.81 1581.4E DENNESON RJ 35 1173. 00 224.40 ENGLISH 11 IN 31 7243.65 1258.36 ERICKSON DJ 93 0.00 0.00 ERICKSON kit 31 8499.74 1418.00 FISCHENICM DT 31 7071.0t 1101.75 FRITZLER JM 31 6362.04 1388.14 SAFFRON MP 33 6983.46 1166.40 GERHARDSON JR 42 9797.44 1636.06 GREGORY JD 42 7308.E7 1310.81 MALLIN ON 12 6168.01 1030.00 HANSEN SC 42 6435.90 IE2E.44) HANGING CJ 31 260E.18 401.45 HOOCENAKKC JE 31 312.00 0.00 JACOBS TJ 33 6983.45 1166.40 JOHNSON SP 31 7495 20 1249.E0 KILBO MM 31 10035.05 16T5.76 KIRNYCZUK M 31 31S1.36 SO4.63 KNOTT NJ 33 0.00 0.00 KNUTSON CA 15 4399.01 657.9E KUEHN TM 15 950T.71 1604.40 LINDSTROM DJ 93 0.00 0.90 MASUSTH JA 33 8492.93 141S.24 MEYER MA 35 EE.95 0.00 MIKELSON RA 15 5387.T4 6EE.16 MILLS JR UH 93 0.00 0.00 MORAN MF 31 C424.98 1277.31 MOROUCZYNS J 31 O,SE.47 1249_20 MORROW JS 31 2089.75 539.50 NAAB TL 1E 4924.80 82E.40 OAS DO 93 0.00 0.00 OMAN LE 33 S724.80 956.06 PALMER P8 31 475.00 135.00 PETERSON PL IE E772.23 445.54 PETERSON RU 93 0.00 0.00 PETRAN JC 33 0.00 0.00 QUAST WA 92 672T.2S 1251.56 ROBS JA 93 0.00 0.00 SASS JJ 42 6408.95 1219.98 SCHAUSS CR 31 5602.01 BZS.27 SKREEN DS 42 6439.20 1193.01 SMITH JR 92 S678.81 1013.92 STEFFENHAG RE 93 6424.29 t072.60 STILES RC 61 0.00 0.00 THOMTON MR 31 6407.11 1091.60 1188 CITY OF ORONO CHECK NO. DATE 098006 03/23/89 008006 03/e3/88 088011 03/23/88 OBBO82 03/23/88 A 086042 03/el/00 69 ... o. 0860T0 03/23/88 088074 03/23/08 - 008070 63/E3/86 08807/ 03/e3/88 • 088074 03/e3'SS 068074 03/e3/88 088074 03/23/80 • oso • 08B1e7 03/23/88 66BIE7 03/23/86 • • 088130 03/23/9 088130 03/23/96 • 088131 03/23/88 000131 03/23/86 is .0.... 098199 03/23/88 t 088199 03/23/88 O4,B199 03/23/68 A • 888212 03/23/88 l CHECK REGISTER 03-20-08 PACE I F AMOUNT VENDOR ITEM DESCRIPTION ACCOUNT N0. INV. R P.O. 0 MESSAGE 16 91 ACRO-MINNE50TA INC OFFICE SUPPLIES 01-4210-129-31 92. 95 ACRO-MINNESOTA INC CARD CABINET 01-4232-129-31 IY9.36 R u.-CNS P.56 AT 6 T COMM TELEPHONE 01-43e0-1e9-31 IS 2 5e .... CKS • 43. 80 ASPLUMD COFFEE MEETING ENP 01-4302-020-11 43. 00 ASPLUNO COFFEE MEETING ENP 01-4382-174-33 • 87.60 ...-CNB • 382.18 BONESTROO ROSENE AM "" 1907 PAYABLE 01-e040-009-04' 40. 00 BONESTROO R08ENE AM ENO RETAIN JAN 01-4394-1164-01 -1B S08.75 BONESTROO ROSENE ABM ENG CONSULT JAN 01-4105-904-01 559. 00 BONESTROO ROSENE ASH ENC BRIDGE INSPECTN 01-43C5-B41-60--- ---- 599.50 BONESTROO ROSENE ASH ENG CONSULT JAN 01-4305-646-71 • 121.50 BONESTROO ROSE" ASH ENC HACNBERRY WELL 1e-4305-399-00 461.51 BONESTROO ROSEME ASN ENC STUDDS BAT SEWER 24-43OS-408-00 2,672,44 . ...-CNB R SSA. 00 COFFIN BIOA G 91ANDY 01-4306-890-61 . 850.00 C10"TB 011011 a-_- -- - 85-0389-93R-99 1,734.00 ...-CBS ..� r� 61.25 COLONIAL LIP[ 11N CO LIPS INS MAR 01-0190-Iq-01 66. T5 - -ZOL.ONEOL-CEF['"IwM— rtlFf INS NA9 - 01-91ft-110-71 128.00 • '"IB 387,70 AIITOOTAL-BO►7BIf"—B1-4'790-0q-17 260.Go COINIERCM BLIB MOT JMITOBIAL BARN BRR 91-4309-119-31 156 30 . ...-ONE 01 22.50 ROLF E ERICKSON OFFICE SUPPLIES 01-4210-OS9-14 31918. 00 ROLF E ERICKSON ASSES SERV MARCH 01-4307-059-14 f 9.24 ROLF E ERICKSON POSTAGE 01-1321-059-I4 3,949,74 . A o.-CN6 11.85 EI►ABM IABBAIBER POSTAGE 01-4321-174-33 N 11.85 . o.-CNS 1 L 1988 CITY OF ORONO CHECK REGISTER 93-01-411 PAW t CHECK NO DATE AMOUNT VENDOR ITEM DESCRIPTION ACCOUNT NO. IW. R P.O. 9 1491111065 088256 03/23/68 99.50 GENUINE PARTS CO EQUIP PARTS 01-423e-249-08 OOOe56 03/23/88 111. 90 GENUINE PARTS CO EQUIP FARTS 01-6212-298-11F 2:E 9n r .I ru rrr 088269 03/23/00 125.00 COVT TRAINING MM WRINS CITY MT OWN _ t1M7[E-t79=1! 125. 00. ' FiR-CRS "b 088257 03/23/88 95.00 HENN CTT CLAWS PTAC SCHOOLS 4I-6356-Itl-71 ;y 95.00 irN-CRO r rrr.. .ate 088308 03/23/88 200.67 - HENN CITY 71YiPr"—?OICCRtRRf}�---7T-t7iWSht[---- ♦rr o• q a 883« 03/23/86 15. 00 IMTL CH OF POL PWIOOICALS of-ISA-129-31 AR r.r-CRS A 088363 03/23/88 A5.92 TOM JACOS9 MIL[AG[ 91-6701-17h73 N .5.9E • _ --_—__ _—_—__ - _.� 000-COS .A O08604 03/23/88 106.69 THELAMPPUBLISHING 088000 0]/2]/88 2fi.11 THE I"" PUBLI WIMG 91-17M-10-01 OB8906 03/23/88 55.25 THIS: LAN" PUSLI WIW_- 168.05 • ---- — --- - "-- .ou•NF-CRS 088635 03/23/88 985.K 'LOS79 - OITT[ 309 LOSS$ AWIN JW-F[S SI-A[I-EN-18 088U5 03,23/84 394.09 LOCIS - WIT[ 360 LOGOS TWIN JW-P87 91-4358-1t9-31 088435 03/23/86 092.94 -LORIS n"SUITE TO LOCIS ACHIM JM'PONS OB0035 03/23/88 ISO." LOGO - WIT[ 386 DATA PROS JAM-FU 6"355-069-15 OS8M35 03/23/88 1,117.22 LOCIS - WIT[ 300 DATA PROC JAM-Ft8 •1-055-129-31 .. 088435 03/23/88 596.27 Lf J18 -'WIT[ T9 DATA PROF JAM -FLAN _ ___01-6355-176-33 0S8 Q5 03/23/88 65.51 LOGS - WIT[ $06 1967 PAYABLE T!-9090-000-00 , 088935 013/23/60 197.Y LOGIN - WITT 300 LOGIS AWIN JAW ON 72-052-549-91 - 088935 03/23/68 59.71 - LOGTS-="WTT[ 795 DATA PROC JAM -FIN -- TS-635S-549-91 OB8935 0312316: 190.43 LOGIC - WIT[ 300 PAYABLE 1961 PAYABLE T3-9000-000-06 OBB435 03/23/88 e95.76 LOOit - Wl79 300 LOCIe JAM-Fp 7Y435t-569-92 088435 03/e3/88 69.57 _ LOCIS-=-1IR[79E DATA PROS JW-FR� - T-4355-569-92 s.e07.57 . ...-Cgs 086/37 03i23/88 59.60 CITY OF LONG LAN[ MINT LIFT STATIONS 73-8306-569-92 1999 CITY OF ORONO or CHECK NO. DATE 39 03/23/8 0604 008619 0]/2]/09 u lb 068445 03/23/88 O BBass 03/23/88 .j 000456 03/23/88 0 EBa62 03/23/89 088467 03/E3/88 086467 03/e3/08 i 088467 03/e3/66 068467 03/e3/88 088967 03/23/88 086667 03/93/00 088467 03/23/88 � •u u• 0880T0 03/23/88 08868s 03/23/59 - - 0S490 03/1131O4 9s9o. • . 0N500 OU23/88 6 CHECK REGISTER 03-1111-44 PASS ] f AMOUNT V[MOO ITEM DESCRIPTION ACCOUNT". INV. - - • P.O. 0 MSMN 59.80 • f .**-cgs R 3.0 LONG LN FORD TRACTOR EQUIP PARTS 01-4232-e49-4e 8 .10 LONG LR FORD TRACTOR EQUIP PARTS 01-423e-l90-61 - Oi.iO • � .... CN9 • 76.66 LYNAN LUMBER SERVICE BARAAR 76-IS20-590-11 - 76.86 ..•-CNS 660.18 MACGREGOR NLF CO GOLF SALLB 10-0606-591-90 600.18 65.I7 NASUSTH-JEANNE MMIM 01-4356-170-33 65.1? ...-CNB 908.63 ---METERS mvxm 66 _ _-9MIN1'NMIMIII' - H-0101-I111-3t 946.63 • _• ...-CNB 75.40 His CTR NEALTN CARE MOP INS HAS 01-R151-639-te 79.00 PIED CER IO wCARE NOS/ -IN MR 01-9151-069-15 291,51 NED CTR HEALTH CARE MOB INS PAR 01-0151-1e9-31 5 176.01 ME CTR HEALTH CARE N08P IMO MR 01-01S1-179-33 352.02 ME CTR HEALTH CARE HOSP ]N5 MR -" - 11-IISI-299-0E - 70.00 RED CIS HEALTH CARE H08P INS NM Tt-0151-569-91 t 105.61 NED CTO HEALTH CAM HQBP INS She 73-01SI-560-98 t _-01-0356-039-16 09 CRS 10.60 KTSO ARM MITT ANTI NAM IRS VARCM 10.00 . 29.00 --- -NPLrOITGOrCO-- -----ETICITIO— e9.90 . "w 'E 1,139.00 HIEESARCO OIIUTISS 41-43114-699-IT ~' -�— �- - 999-we 70.00 Him COIF PAGER mvim 01-07410-1N-31 __/ 1988 CITY OF OBLONG • CHECK NO. DATE voo 08e545 03/23/88 088552 03/23/88 OBBss2 03/23/88 08B559 01/23/88 008559 03/23/e6 088559 03/23/68 Oe9568 03/23/88 088568 03/23/68 • 03B569 03/23/88 088568 03/23/88 088568 03/23/98 • • 08859T 03/23/88 OSa59T 03/23/08 • 088597 03:e3/68 080597 03/B3/88 088597 03/23/88 • 080597 0.3/23/88 O BB597 03/e3/88 08OS97 03/E3/68 • 088597 03/23/BO OB8597 03/23/BB OB0597 03/23/85 • 080597 03/e3/BO 085597 03/e3/40 068597 03/23/88 • 08859T 03/23/88 60067E-'--Q/23/88 • 09871/ OL23/98 CHECK SSOIBTU 93-95-00 FACE 9 AMOUNT VENDOR :TEN DESCRIPTION ACCOUNT NO. INV. 0 P.O. 0 MESSAGE 70 00 o•-CMS M 20.96 WVAEN[ AUTO REPAIR MINT AY10 17-I301d69-1t •.•-CNS • 5.80 TENI NME-- MEETING{ 61-4356-039-12 .• 10.5E TENI NASS MIL[AU 91-4391-176-33 __.ow - -- — •••-CNS • 15e.59 UTILITIES 01-4304-091-17 • 918.21 NM STRUT LIMITS 01-43t5-CI9-I11 180.75 .NMI_ - ---UmtrU5 - - — 73-4324-569-79 1,25T.55 •••-CNS 40 92 NORTHWESTERN BELL TELEPHONE 61-17110-1211-31 19. 50 NORTHWESTERN BELL TELEPHONE 01-0t0-249-48 --- 20.72 NORTHWESTERN BELL DATA PROCESSING 01-4355-069-15 • 16. 57 NORTHWESTERN BELL DATA PROCESSING 72-055-549-11 24.86 NORTHWESTERN BELL - -- DATA PROCESSING 73-4355-569-st 122 57 • 75.14 PUBLIC EWL NET ASSN PERA 1/22 TO 3/6 01-/141-039-I2 3.44 PUBLIC EMPL MET ASSN REBA 2/22 TO L6 - '- -11-1111-QF13 - 2.33 PUBLIC EMPL NET ASSN PENA 2/22 TO 3/6 01-4141-059-14 •• 1.6.12 PUBLIC EWL NET ASSN PENA 2/2e TO 3/6 01-4141-060-19 6.67 PUBLIC EMPL NET ANSN PENA ■/RR TO 3/6 6T-Qtl-91f-1>r-- - 1.472.01 PUBLIC EMPL MET As" PERA EYRE TO 3/8 BI-N11-111-71 "• 55. 44 PUIL IC EML MET ASSM PERA 2/22 TO 3/6 61-41O1-115-31 404.15 PUBLIC EWL PET ASSN PENA t/tE TO 3/6 - - - 91-710T-1E1-31 I49.90 PUBLIC EWL RET AS" PENA t/BE TO 3/6 01-/Tfl-1t6-31 e53.02 PUBLIC EWL MET AM PENA t/tt TO 3/6 01-I141-174-31 . 179.84 PUBLIC EWL NET AM PENA t/EN TO 1/6 31.64 PUBLIC EWL EST AM PENA t/tt TO 3/6 fl-4I4I-[90-61 56.46 PUBLIC EMPL MET AMU PENA t/tt TO 3/S 70-/141-4If-91 95.e6 PUBLIC EWL NET AUK PENA [/Q TO 2/9 -- 77-/1A1-E41-9E - 67.63 PUBLIC EWL MET AUK PENA R/BS TO US 74-4/41-991-93 ",.• 3,303.11 • _ ...-CNN • 1,722.00 NOLLIIM-OIG LT----- ONLOnE---- —tl'-liiF79hT-' 1 .7ee. oo • _ � -_____ _.__ ___-_..._._ _ .___ -_ .- ••.-CNS I5. 00 STATE-1M DOCMRNTO @Do" 41-I1,10-03/-it 1988 CITY OF ORONO CHECK REGISTER 03-26-811 FACE 5 CHECK NO. DATE AMOUNT _ VENOM_-- - ITd DESCRIPTION ---------- ACCOOMT 00. Id. 0 P.O. 9 MESSAGE f 1s.00. ;e ...... ----- ---- -- --_ _ - ..6-018 08e739 03/23/88 236.1-3 _.OFFEL SCALE COMP OFFICE SUPPLIES 01-0210-i29-31 '. • e36.13 . ---------------- -----_. _ ----- _ a Be7.o 03/23/88 270.3E STREICNd FLASHLIGHTS 61-08311-1119-31.____ 088740 03/23/80 79.95 STREINNEEN NOTATIN LIGHT R1-IS]l-Id-71 08d))9 0 /23/88 E56.40 TRACY OIL CO OTILITid ThgN-S9M97 �•• 956.•0 ..o.. ...-CNG �• C68767 03/23,88 - -- SWISS ---- ---TUEp-90P►LT CO- ------FENrWr —7{-7dig9G=93— ---- -- - D 506.50 .�, A• ..hCKS . 088796 03/23/88 69.d NIFORN MLINITd CLOTHING 01-/GSI-101-71 "• 088796 03/23/88 0-Ou- -'--01TFORWUILT IIT50 - -CLOTHING-----01-Alplli=31----_. 088796 03/23/88 157.97 OMIFORN ELINITEY CLOTHING 01-01111-1G9-31 029796 03/23/88 50.9E UMI►ERd MLINITd CLOTHING 61-4932-IGS-75 _• 088796 03/23/89 - 17.d--" - VIII►pI1r0N:IN M -C:OTMW---0Tg39Nvrrr w .. _ d1.7G 08601T 07/03/SS 5.31 VENCO INC OTIL STEM MINT TI-N3/-589-01 �1 TIT _ - 08883E 03/83/04 069. s0 MINNIN LITER INC SSW RENTAL 01-0331-840-ft 0aB901 -07/57A5----__ 6fTS—__.-TvronA mrw-5O-.--w +i7Gi=69-T5'-._. a 88901 83M/66 69.75 19.d T51lONMId TO GO N AMOdG0N PFE "$S G1-0706-170-33 6 088902 O3/83/N "11.00 MEDICAL OXYGEN OXYGEN CAN 01-4m-Id-31 Iq.06 _ e 088903 OLE7/d 9.60 — 1E0ICI♦AU NENdWiq 01-076h07f-I! -� - -- 9.06 . a 088904 63/93/48 1.369.06 HEST MEN•PIM INNIAII DONATION 01-0305-190-51 G. 6 1988 CITY OF ORONO CHECK NO. DATE AMOUNT 1,369.00 068905 03/23/80 9.66 9.66 066906 03/23/86 142 02 142.02 RF•u• 25. 50G.60 121.5 461.51 $50. 473,16 1,063,02 1,587.57 30,065.36 CHECK NEGIOTER 03-EO-M PAGE 8 VENDOR ITEM DESCRIPTION ACCOUNT W. ENV. 0 P.O. E NGOAGE ' 01 MAC QUEEN EAUIPMENT EQUIP PARTS OI--LOiROFR CAROMS CONF CENTER SPRING CITY NCR CONF 01-A7ff�07Ffr-- --'•� FUND 01 TOTAL GENERAL FUND FUND 12 TOTAL PARK FUND FUND 24 TOTAL PERK IMPROVE REVOLVING F -- FUND 25 TOTAL 1985 IMPROVEMENT FUND FUND 72 TOTAL WATER OPERATING FUND FUND 73 TOTAL SEWER OPERATING FWD FUND 94 TOTAL GOLF COURSE OPERATING PD 10 -- Ze _ 41, r1 n• 6 ccr't.y�,-C�� PUBLIC ATTENDANCE CITY OF ORONO MEETING DATE 3 "dLa -&� PLEASE FILL OUT THE INFORMATION REQUESTED BELOW FOR OUR CITY RECORDS. NAME (please print) ADDRESS NAME OR NUMBER PRESENT FOR (from agenda) 3. \XecW 4. 6 �r 'b ,R S ed-in0 D r/A e � 9. iT Gp7C'rJI lit M..J r� #(o .0. H _u. ; 13'I 7 okr o Lai+E 4 .I. ,/ �dh i a ar )i, 3.S 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 0. L C)CL l)( CITY OF ORONO KFETIuO DATE e1 P E - SU PLEASE PILL OUT THE INFORMATION REQUESTED BELOW FOR OUR CITY RECORDS. NAME OR NUMBER NAME (please print) ADDREZ; PRESENT FOR (from agenda) 1. 2. C 11< 3. A065 4vge`? cK 4. / / r S. .✓ jc1t&— - -- 'Zoe.7t 3,1 7. -� 9 E. 1 ;2,) 9. 0. 1. 2. 3. 4. S. 6. .7. .8. .9. �0. E Coun << I Qu4VIL MEEtIHG taus z a isss MY 6F ORONO rn" V114ML MEETII MAR 2 8 jpq CITY OF D OW �F�„C'Rh. �/r�%LGs 1 fGrs2iiS; _ �/Occ, n�nv c2tii�Cf2�7on u� OGy�L�7Uf✓a�e... �hme6t/2VZOZ- iS .uCtia/o�sr�. d6�ca e 4+0 Qo Cc1e lc "7 ` �o QCC't s/r Oic2 iniri o2Cs�,*r 7arriil c�s/�i�ceurl�C�icfc�t¢n. Cl �F�r�, , r�2p-�r�•ow/ /i?,Z,v.ai, iy8do, �v %hc-tic/✓ ���; �..cu� ✓ llae.f��i ovl�lff a v m ti h m C[ -PNI WETING MEMO TO: Board of Managers 11,AR - B 1„c.a Minnehaha Creek Watershed District Ei11 OF ©if INAU FROM: Eugene A. Hickok and Associates DATE: March 17, 1988 RE: Lake Level, Flow and Precipitation Summary for February 1988. Lake levels in Lake Minnetonka have stabilized at approximately 928 in February as illustrated by the attached graph and lake elevations. There has not been any discharge from Lake Minnetonka to Minnehaha Creek since November 17, 1986. Creek flow at the Browndale Ave. dam in Edina is not measured during the winter months. The 30 year average precipitation for February at the National Weather Service station in Maple Plain is 0.78 inches. The actual precipitaiton recorded in Wayzata for February was 0.19 inches. A summary of precipitation follows. PRECIPITION SUMMARY Actual 30 Year Average Maple Plain February -- 0.78 Minneapolis -St. Paul Intern'l Airport February 0.30 0.85 Wayzata February 0.19 -- 930.00 929.80 929.60 929.40 929.20 929.00 928.80 928.60 928.40 92a.20 928.00 927.80 927.60 927.40 927.20 927.00 09-Jan-87 Date Elewtim alm 09-Jan-87 928.38 0.00 21-1an-87 928.37 0.00 3)-lan-87 928.39 0.00 05=e6-87 920.40 0.00 13- e6-87 928.35 0.00 264a6-87 928.31 0.00 06HIr-B7 73.35 0.00 13-W-97 928.34 0.00 2.-4r-87 928.37 0.00 O.-r-67 928.2B 0.DO 13-W-E7 920.25 0.00 2:-W-87 928.20 0.00 27-Npr-87 928.22 0.00 O',-NY-97 928.22 0.00 1:'-8a7-E7 928.23 0.00 21-Nr97 927.94 0.00 2FKay-87 977.93 0.00 0:-Jun-87 977.89 0.00 I:-3m-07 927.60 0.00 23-Jun-87 927.67 0.00 01-Jul-67 977.55 0.00 LAKE MINNETONKA W.br t...l. 1987-19aa NOHW(929.4) RUNOUT 21-Ma9-87 31-Ju1-87 21-S.p-87 05-Jan-68 DATE Date Elevatim Flow 06-Jul-87 927.48 0.00 14-Jul-87 927.43 0.00 16-Jul-87 927.37 0.00 21-Ju1-87 977.71 0.00 22-Jul-87 977.71 0.00 24-Ju1.97 93.62 0.DD 27-Jul-87 M.73 0.00 25-Jul-97 928.73 0.D0 30-Jul-97 93.79 0.00 31-Jul-87 M.81 0.00 03-44-V 92831 0.00 06-faq-97 928.78 0.00 10-eq-B7 928.79 0.00 11-Aug-V 93.77 0.00 17-Aq-87 92B.65 0.00 18fiq-87 928.83 0.00 19-Aq-87 928.79 0.00 24-Aug-67 928.72 0.00 26fiq-87 928.65 0.00 3I-Aug-87 928.65 0.00 01-Sep-87 918.64 0.00 Date Elevatim Flm Date Elevatim Floe DO-Sep-87 928.52 0.00 14-Sep-87 928.46 0.00 18-Sep-E7 928.53 0.00 21-Sep-87 928.47 0.00 25-Sep-7 M44 0.00 28-UP-7 TN. 42 0.00 05-0Ct-87 928.32 0.00 12-4t-87 928. 13 0.00 16-0ct-97 92B. 16 0.00 20-M-67 928.15 0.00 26-ect-B7 928.12 0.00 02Nov-01 93.06 0.00 094" 93.04 0.00 W WV 978.04 0.00 24-Hb V 928.00 0.00 01-Dec-07 928.10 0.00 07-OK-87 920.A 0.00 14-Dec-B7 928.08 0.00 05-Jan-BB 977.86 0.00 19-Jan-88 927.BB 0.00 03-Fe6-88 977.96 0.00 17-Feb-BB 727.94 0.00 25-Fe6-BB 927.96 0.00 07-1W-98 927.96 0.00 IS-IW-BB 928. 00 0.00 *NOTE: The zero elevation for the lake gauge was adjusted down 0.22 feet this adjustment was effective Jan. 1,1988 CITYof ORONO Poet Ofna Boa 66•Crysta1 Bay. Mia•row 55=-MvIudpd Omer • • • • • On the North Shore of Lake Afinnetoxka March 17, 1988 C1UHCIL MEETING 4 CJ MAR 2819H Long Lake Volunteer Fire Department Attn: Richard Perry, Jr. Chief U�TI OF n�91yA 1966 Park Avenue C F u v1NO Long Lake, MN 55356 Dear Rick: Recently, the Long Lake Fire Department conducted a practice burn on a single stall garage at the Orono Golf Course. The manner in which the Department conducted the fire was exceptional to say the least. It was very obvious that the fire was contained such that there was no damage to the surrounding area and especially the mature tree that had branches extending over the building. It is an asset to the City of Orono to have a volunteer department with personnel and equipment and with the expertise they have shown serving the Community. Many thanks for a job well done. Sincerely, 9 John R. Gerhardson, Public Works Director JRG/tln cc: Lyng Lake Mayor and City Council Members ✓Orono Mayor and City Council Members BUILDING A ZONIN G-4737357 • ADMI.NISnArON a FINANCE - 473 73SS • PUBLIC WORKS -Q3-7339 ASSESSING LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT A G E N D A Regular Meeting 700 p.m., Wednesday, March 23, 1988 TORKA BAY VILLAGE HALL 4901 Manitou Road (County Road 19), Tonka Bay UUN011 MEETING 1. Public wrings - 7s00 p.■., 1AAR f2t 81199By� A. Chapman Place Marina New Dock License CITY OF ORONO B. Executive Charters - Liquor Licensee 2. Call to Order - 7,30 p.m. 3. Roll Call 4. Minutes, January 27, 1988 5. Financial Condition, A. Monthly Financial Report B. Bills 6. Public Comments, Non -Agenda Items 7. Committee Reports A. Water Structures b Raviroament Committem (1) Committee Report (a) Mound Dock License (b) Public Hearing Report - Lakeshore Village- (c) 1988 Dock Licenses (d) Deicing Policy Review (e) Deicing Permits - Rockvam Extension (f) Future Public Hearings (g) Inspection Reports/Refunds (h) License Amendment - Drystack, Rockvam (1) .1 North Shore Drive Marina Q) Environment (k) Other (more) LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT Agenda March 23, 1988 Page 2 7. A. Water Structures 6 Environment Committee (cont) (2) Committee Action (a) Mound - Backlicense (b) 1988 Dock Licenses - Big Island Veterans Camp (c) Deicing Permit - Rockvam Extension (d) License Amendment - Drystaek: Rockvam (a) " " " North Shore Drive Marina If) Other (3) Other B. Lake Use Committee (1) Committee Report (a) Special Event Permits - New (b) Special Event Permits - Renewals (c) 1988 Charter Boat Registrations (d) Liquor License Public Hearing (a) 1988 County Lake Maintenance Program If) 1988 County Lake Improvement Program (g) Water Patrol Report (h) Inspection Reports/Refunds (1) Other (2) Comittee Action (a) Sp. Event Permits - Renewals (b) County Lake Maintenance Program (c) County Lake Improvement Program (d) Inspection Reports/Refunds (3) Other 8. Code Amendment: Recodified Code (third reading) 9. District Orders A. Surfeide - 1987 Dock License B. Surfeide - 1988 Dock License C. Rockvam Variance, Density Permit, and New Dock License 10. Other Business 11. Adjournment 3-17-88 LAKE MINNETONKA CON!ERVATION DISTRICT REGULAR MEETING TONKA BAY VILLAGE HALL Febru_.y 24, 1988 The regular meeting of the Lake Minnetonka Conservation District CALL TO was called to order by Chairman Rascop at 7.45 p.m. on Wednesday, ORDER February 24, 1988 at the Tonka Bay Village Hall. Members prer-nt: Carl Weisser (Excelsior), Robert Pillsbury (Minn- ATTENDANCE Conks), Jan Boawinkel (Minnetonka Beach), Tom Reese (Mound), JOEllen Hurt (Orono), Robert Rascop (Shorewood), Ron Kraemer (Spring Park), and Mark Weetlund (Wayzata). Communities represented: Eight [8]. MINUTES: Reese Moved, Weetlund Seconded that the minutes of the MINUTES January 27, 1988 meeting be approved as amended. Motion, Ayes 18). Mays (0]. TREASURER'S REPORT: Hurt Moved, Boawinkel Seconded that the :real- TREASURER'S urer's Report be approved. Motion, Ayes (7], Nays (1], Weisser REPORT voting Nay. Reese Moved, Boawinkel Seconded that the bills be paid after review by the Treasurer. Motion, Ayes (7), Mays (1), Pillsbury voting Nay. A review of LMCD Bylaws at the next work session on 3-19-88 is to be made, the Treasurer to submit in writing recommendation of changes for that session. PUBLIC COMMENTS, Will Washburn and Brad Moir of Executive Charters with attorney Ben Whitney wish to apply for liquor licenses for two boats, Small World and Arbitrage, berthed at Schmitt Marina. They expect to be picking up passengers mostly at Excelsior Bay Marina and at the Wayzata depot docks. They requested that the background investigation be initiated and the public hearing date set. Reese Moved, Pillsbury Seconded to proceed with the liquor license EXECUTIVE background invest'gation and schedule a public hearing for Executive CHARTERS Charters March 23. Motion, Ayes 181, Nays 101. C HEARING WATER STRUCTURES 6 ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE: Hurt Moved, Kraemer Seconded that the minute:; of the Water Structures and Environment Committee be approved as amended. Motion, Ayes (81, Nays (0]. Hurr Moved, Reese Seconded that the Rockvam shallow water variance ROCKVAM be granted to 128 feet from the 929.4 shoreline and based upon the VARIANCE 650 sq.ft. of dock -use -area per boat. Motion, Ayes (7], Nays ]0], abstains [11, Pillsbury abstaining. LMCD Board Minutes February 24, 1988 Page 2 Hurr Moved, Weisser Seconded that the Special Density Permit for ROCKVAM Rockvam from the old Greenhouse Eatery be approved (1) with addf- DENSITY Lionel parking; (2) that six motors be provided for the six fishing PERMIT boats; (3) with the amenities provided at the Greenhouse Eatery sire and not on the contiguous property; and (4) that the amenities be adequately signed on the property. Kraemer Moved, Rascop Seconded to amend the number of motors provided for the fishing boats from six to thr a motor,, for the six boats. Amendment, Ayes [6), Mays [2h Boswinkel, Kr:. . Pillsgury, Rascop, Reese and Weisser voting Aye, and Hurt and tLund voting Nay. Main Motion Ayes (8). Mays [O). Reese Moved, Westlund Seconded that the new dock license for Rockvam ROCKVAM Boat Yards be approved. Motion, Ayes [el, Mays [01. LICENSE The Rockvam deicing matter was continued to the next Dock meeting. Hurt Moved, Reese Seconded that the 1g88 renewal dock license appli- 1988 cations for Beane Greenwood Marina and for Crystal Bay Service be RENEWAL approved, including Orders and stipulations, and subject to village DOCK certificates. Motion, Ayes [8), Nays (0). LICENSES Hurt Moved, Pillsbury Seconded that the 1987 r nowal dock license application by Joel Essig for 43 boats at the Surfaide marina be SURFSIDE denied. Ayes, [e], Nays [0]. DOCK DENIALS, Hurt Moved, Pillsbury Seconded that the 1988 renewal dock license 1987, 1988 application by Joel Essig for 43 boats at the Surfaide marina be denied. Ayes [81, Mays [0]. Hurt Moved, Pillsbury Seconded that the deicing renewal application DEICING: by Crystal Bay Service be approved, subject to inspection and notice CRYSTAL Bay to neighbors; and that the deicing renewal application by Surfaide SERVICE; be denied. Motion, [e], Mays [U]. SURFSIDE DENIAL Hurt Moved, Boswinkel Seconded that the agreement with Gayle's Marina to provide for fencing the ends of docks to prevent unauthorizeu boat storage, and to provide acceptable operation of the deicing AGREEMENT installation be approved; that the 1988 renewal dock License be WITH GAYLS'S approved with any or all Orders and stipulations; and that the MARINA 1987-1988 deicing permit be approved subject to inspection and notification to neighbors. Ayes [8], Nays [0]. LAKE USE COMMITTEE: Weisser Moved, Reese Seconded that the Lake Use Committee minutes be approved. Motion, Ayes [el, Kays (0). CODE AMENDMENT: ilurr Moved, Reese Seconded that the adoption of RF.CODIHCATION the recodification be held for 30 days. Motion, Ayes (8), Nays [0]. OTHER BUSINESS: Pillsbury Moved, Reese Seconded that the employment BOOKKEEPER/ of Sheila Laughlin be approved as part time Bookkeeper/Clerk at the CLERK probationary rate of $8/hr. >fotlon, Ayes [7), Kays [1], Westlund voting Nay. LMCD Board Minutes February 24, 1988 Page 3 Hurt Moved, Weisser Seconded that the part time Bookkeeper/Clerk be hired on the condition of satisfactory coordination in working with the Treasurer. Motion, Ayes (8), Nays ]O]. fhe Water Patrol was asked to begin the liquor license background investigation on the new applicants, public hearing to be held in March. A draft letter to interested agencies requesting support for the management plan was reviewed and modified. Further review of the LMCD by the Metro Council is scheduled for 3-28-88 with the Parke and Open Space Commission, 4-5-88 with the Metro Systems Committee, and 4-14-88 with the Metro Council. The notice with updated schedule and attachments is to be given to all Board members. MANAGEMENT PLAN: REQUEST for SUPPORT A request by the Watershed District for clean lake grants and input LAKE concerning candidate lakes for possible lake protection and restora- PROTECTION tion was consider J; no action taken. REQUEST Th- Metro Access Program Report is being reviewed by the Lake Use Com-. t tee. ADJOURNMENT: Boswinkel Moved, Pillsbury Seconded at 10:07 p.m. that ADJAURNED the meeting be adjourn,d. Motion, Ayes ]8], Nays ]0]. Submitted by: Carl H. Weisser, Secretary Approved by:_ Robert Rascop, Chairman .ATT.kCEMES7 I REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION POLICY: MAKING DECISIONS NOW. ENSURING MOBILITY TOMORROW Metropolitan Council Chair Steve KeeWpNCII MFFTING State of the Region March 2. 1988 f�RR 2 819N8 Prepared Remarks CITY OF ORONO The meat important contribution planning makes to helping us do our work in government is not that it helps us to predict the future, frankly, we are not very good at that. Its real contribution is to warn us not to trust the trends of today to continue. There is no place that we sae that lesson more clearly than in transportation. It is perfectly apparent, from all we have heard today and all our work at the Metropolitan Council in recent years, that the solutions to transportation issues that have served us so well over the last 30 years are just plain not going to work in the future. Transportation demand is growing somewhere between three and five times faster than population, and substantially faster than our ability to most that demand. Miles of severe congestion have tripled in the last lk years and will triple again by 2010, affecting nearly half of our metro freeway miles by then. In the past, with 90 percent federal funding, we nave been able to build a regional highway system that offers us one of the most congestion -free automobile transportation systems in the country, and our people have come to expect that. But meeting those expectations is becoming harder and harder. With the completion of the interstate system our chances of getting that sort of federal support for future projects is substantially diminished. Even if we still had the same resources, the cost of maintaining the existing system would consume a growing proportion of them. Finances aren't the only deterrent. Even if we had unlimited resources, the social Costs of ever widening urban freeways and carving deeper and peeper gashes into the neighborhoods they pass through would prevent us from laying more and more concrete. Even if we didn't care about the damage we're doing to the fabric of our eeighborhwds, politically wa can't get away with it anymore. The success of neighborhoods all over the Twin Cities at stopping or whittling down proposed highway projects has set an example that all can follow if they will, and most will. The problem of inadequate resources t0 meet the needs is not just a fluke. It's the way of the world. Every gover mment program we deal with has more demand than it has resources. as all of us do in our private lives as well. Sure, we would all like to be like Prince Charles and be able to meet all our material needs, but few of us can. And from what we read in the Star -Tribune. even Prince Charles wants more meaning in his life. I wonder if he would like to be Chair of the Metropolitan Council. I think a trade could probably be worked out. He could have all the meaning that goes with siting landfills, and I could meet my transportation needs with an 120-foot yacht. But in real life it is never simply a quest'on of more or less resources for a given thing. The sum of resources in the world is limited, and an elaborate political balance has been struck whereby those resources are allocated to various kinds of government programs through taxes and to various private priorities through people's market decisions. Obtaining more resources for a particular area requires taking resources from something else. To a certain extent that is being done, and we at the Council support increases in the gasoline tax and the provision of more state and federal funds 'or transportation needs. I believe the people of this state support that too, and even those who don't probably 2 wok J if they knew the kinds of choices that we face in the future. But for now, many don't. partly because the transportation system is as yet relatively uncongested, and partly because they don't have confidence that we are using the money we have at effectively as we could. So what do wa do about this shortage of resources and this inability to meet demand in the way we always nave? There are two obvious strategies. First, we must use the resources wa have as efficiently as possible. That means getting the most use of existing facilities and making new investments as wise;y as possible. Second, we have t0 agree on some system of values for choosing priorities and that's a much tougher job. To be creative in getting the most out of existing facilities and new investments, wa need to agree on the purpose of the transportation system. which we believe is to move people, not just automobiles. (For the most part. the reason to move people is to communicate. which suggests sane interesting substitutes for freeway capacity.) That means when we face growing congestion on our big urban freewa, ,rridors, particularly Interstates 494, 35M, 94, and so on, we have too look at all possible ways to meet those demands and weigh the cost effectiveness and the social impact of each method. Take a corridor like 35W in South Minneapolis, for e>.ample, where demand is growing rapidly, ingestion is Increasing, and the amcunt of land available to expand the .xrsting freeway is severely limited my densely populated neighborhoods on both sides. we have to look at what can be provided within the existing corridor; how that capacity can be used most effectively. For example, we could use high - occupancy vehicle (w OV) lanes to encourage carpooling, metering to keep short trips from clogging the freeway for long trips, and light -rail transit to give people an alternative to the freeway tnat will attract them out of their cars. We also have to look at the impact on other transportation systems, such as the local streets in South Minneapolis, Richfield, and Bloomington. 3 Light rail transit in an application like this is particularly appe Y.ing because it offers immense capacity for moving people in an area where there are a lot of people to be moved. Many already are choosing to ride transit an the Nicollet bus lines and the jjw flyers, at a cost that is competitive and at a social impact that is substantially less than the noise and expense of equivalent freeway people -carrying capacity. It has been said, and it's true. that light rail transit has the same capacity for moving people as eight or nine lanes of freeway. But, as Curt Johnson of the Citizens League has correctly pointed out, that is its "poetic" capacity. It only has that capacity in real life if that many people are willing to ride It. If people were willing to ride four in an automobile, we wouldn't have to worry about freeway capacity in the metropolitan area. We can't expect light rail transit to be a sudden panacea. In the Twin Cities we have enough density in a few corridors (six to be exact) to justify light rail transit as a cost-effective alternative to the construction of other kinds of transit investment such as NOV lanes for freeways, which offer similar or better capacity or even additional freeway capacity. and even that justification is based on certain assumptions: that the ridership is high (which depends on adequate stops and feeder bus systems) and that the capital cost is kept at the low and of the typical range, which depends on a starter, well -designed and well -managed system. If either of these conditions is not met, light rail actually may be more expensive per passenger than other kinds of transit investments and not an efficient use of our dollars. But even using all the new methods we have talked about today to improve efficiency, there are not going to be enough resources to meet the ^,mand, and we are going to have to choose among worthy competing projects. To do that, we need a system of values upon which to base a decision, and there is no intrinsically right value for the transportation system. It is, after all, a 4 means to an end for our people. Nobody lives in the Twin Cities just because they like to drive on the freeways. They may enjoy driving on the freeways, although why is not apparent, but they need the transportation system to provide access to other more important opportunities. When we look at peoples values for the transportation system and what it does for them, the obvious facts are somewhat disturbing. frankly, people love their private automobiles. Even in Europe, which has wall -developed transit systems, the private single -passenger automobile is gaining at the expense of transit. If the people care about their automobiles s0 much and about uncongested driving to and from work, maybe what we ought to do is forget about all these cost-effectiveness Questions and raise the gas tax through the roof. I personally believe that if the Twin Cities were offered an understandable and convincing choice between a 50-cent gas tax increase and the kind of congestion that we are facing in the next 20 or 30 years on the urban freeway system, they would choose the 50-cent gas tax increase. The freeway system is not an and in itself, however. It is a means to an end, and our people also value the things they gat access to from the transportation system. At a regional level we have to think about things like educational opportunities, cultural opportunities, health care services, shopping, parks, access into and out of the metropolitan area, movement of goods as well as people, and so on. But the one type of access that dominates transportation planning decisions is access that is related to the support of the economy. This is true not because economic values are more important than other values; far from it. In fact, the economy itself is a means to an end, that Of a good life for the people Of the metropolitan area. But the strength of the economy is critical to our ability to provide for the other things we value, not the least of which is the transportation system itself. If we let economic growth be choked off, Our capacity to deliver those other services is going to be drained away, and people may love the transportation system they have here, but they will have to move someplace else to get a job. On the other hand, a growing economy provides the only real hope of making more 'esources available. Furthermore, the economy creates the greatest demands on the transportation system because of the critical importance of the rush hour .rip. We have to create so much capacity to meet rush hour demand, or even to come close to meeting it, that substantial excess capacity is available at other times of the day. This makes access to things like cultural facilities. health care services, shopping• access into and out of the metropolitan area. goods movement and so on much easier to prov!ds, especially when we plan the delivery of those other services with the transportation infrastructure in mind. The rush hour trip is not only critical to the transportation system, it is critical to the economy. If there is one critical factor -that is more important than any other in business location and relocation decisions, it� appears to be access to work force. Whatever else we do with the transportation system, we must be sure that it meets the basic needs of the economy so that the economy can, n turn, provide for our other basic needs. How do we best support the economy? It's not a perfectly !imple question to answer. On the one hand, businesses clamor for additional transportation capacity but, on the other hand, they cry out for Iowa- taxes. How do we strike a balance that is most effective in helping businesses not just to meet their perceived needs. but to meet their real needs to compete in a world environment? The Committee for Economic Development, a blue ribbon research and educational organization of over 200 business and academic leaders, has concluded that economic growth occurs most effectively in states and regions through the growth, prosperity and spin-off from existing businesses. rather than through government efforts to attract additional 6 business from the outside. t says further that the successful growth of local businesses shoultl be left to the private sector except that govermme-t should provide a high -quality infrastructure at the lowest possible cost. rhls is perfectly consistent with the experience in the Twin Cities where we have had strong economic growth in spite of relatively high taxes, at least in part because of a sound gover mlent infrastructure, including not only transportation but education, sewers, and other high -quality government Services that businesses need to grow and prosper. This critical relationship between transportation and the economy is why the 50-cent gas tax is not the best approach to this problem even if the people decided they wanted it. However much people love their cars, they need their jobs. The burden that excessive expenditures for transportation would place on businesses dependent on transportation would put them at a severe disadvantage to their competitors in other states. Of course that factor plays a key role in the debate over the gas tax where critics argue the comparison with taxes of other jurisdictions. But with businesses clamoring for a wide variety of transportation services all around the region and limited resources available to mast those needs, how do we set priorities? We believe, with the Committee for Economic Development. first and most critically, that we must protect the opportunities to grow for our existing Minnes,,ta enterprises as much as possible. This means assuring that we keep the lines open to the center cities, the 1-494 strip, and the regional business concentrations. If the businesses located in these economic concentrations don't have room to grow and spin off, they will have to relocate, and in doing so they may choose not just another part of the Metropolitan Area, but another metropolitan area altogether. Having that ability to grow means especially access to work force, and in the competitive economy of the Vat Century specialized job skills are going to be more and more critical. The access of growing businesses to a large pool of talent within which to find those specialized job skills will be an important factor, maybe the most important fsctor in their ability to grow. That's why we have to concan v ate on keeping the lines of transportation open between the largest business concentrations and the largest population concentrations. We cannot promise everybody in the Metropolitan Area a congestion -free ride to work, no matter how far out they want to build their dream house. If we short- change our economic needs, there won't be a job to go to. What we have to be able to do is promise the businesses in the Metropolitan Area that somebody will be able to get there to fill those jobs and that they will be able to choose that somebody from the largest possible pool. Almost as important, businesses need access to markets. That means protecting the goods movement of the region, making sure that adequate access in and out on the highway system and the airports system is protected. We've mostly talked about highways and mass transit, but if I were a high-tech, world market business of the future and I had to choose a town with no airport or a town with no highway, I'd take the town with no highway. Beyond that, what businesses need to grow is harder to predict. It varies from business to business and even with existing businesses it varies from time to time. The business that grows up around the airport may find that it needs access to the University of Minnesota research facilities, or downtown Minneapolis legal advice. Large economic concentrations have a certain critical mass of their own that is important to growth. If we are to stay a large metropolitan area competing in the league of large metropolitan areas, we I have to make sure that we keep the access open between key regional facilities and key economic concentrations. Otherwise, our economic concentratior will become isolated and much less able t0 take advantage of the expensive regional infrastructure we have created for them. And finally, we must protect them from disaster by providing diversified access so that if single -passenger vehicle lanes become too Congested. there are other ways to move quickly from place to place, whether they are high - occupancy vehicle lanes, light rail transit, or swathing also. We must protect then by not putting too many of our eggs in the highway basket. If energy availability in the future makes automobile traffic impractical or too expensive. we must provide )war -cost alternatives. and if electronic commuting makes the rush-hour trip much less important, we don't want to be stuck with a huge investment in infrastructure that we no longer need. In other words, in designing the infrastructure system for the regional economy, we need to keep as many options open as p%ssible so our businesses have scope for enterprise. The same applies in mest;ag the other key social values of the transportation system. It is true right now that most people prefer the single- .assongor private aut-mobile, but that is in the Context where the ride to work is 20 minutes of relatively uncongested driving. Whether people will still make the same choice if gasoline is $5 : gallon and the ride to work takes 45 minutes is a question we are unable to answer. In the past even dramatic increases in congestion and cost have not broken the love affair with the automobile. but that love affair is not shared b- every person. some Choose not to drive, and they should be encouraged because their burden on society is less because of it. Others can't afford to drive, and they not only need .o be helped, they need to have access to the jobs that keep them from becoming a greater burden on society than even the automobile driver. 0 We can't meet every option. There isn't the money available to provide congestion -free, single -passenger automobile drives for everyone from St. Cloud to Rochester. What we can do is make options available that different people can use to meet different needs in a way that suits them. If the private automobile and a hone far from your job are important to you and you are willing to pay the price of a 45-minute or hour-long congested drive to work, we can afford to provide that option without excessive burden on your fellow citizens. If getting to work quickly is important to you and you are willing to Choose transit and a home closer in, we can provide that too. We can do all these things best if, first, we have resources available to do them (for which the economy is critical) and, second, if our delivery of services is done in the most intelligent way possible. This means coordinating not only transportation services with .ach other, but transportation services with all the other important government services. .It means, in a sense, coordinating transportation planning with welfare planning so that di;advantaged people can have access to the jobs they need to lead them to independence and self-sufficiency. It means coordinating transportation planning with sewer planning so we don't put the transportation infrastructure in one place and the sewer infrastructure in another place (which has been done in the Twin Cities although, thank goodness, iot often). It means coordinating ,le planning of other facilities with the existing transportation infrastructure to make use of the access 'des, to make use of opportunities to provide government services — larger facilities with the economies of scale. The quality of a world -class University of Minnesota depends in part on large numbers of students being able to get to it. we are just this week releasing a draft of the new Transportation Policy Plan for the Metropolitan Area. Copies have been sent to the regional Transit Board, the Transportation Advisory Board, and will bs mailed out in a few days to local governments all around the region. The plan attempts to translate the diverse economic and social needs Of the people of the metropolitan area over the next 30 years into concrete priorities and plans for transportation development. The philosophy behind the plan, drawn from the Metropolitan Development and Investment Framework, is based on four key principles. First. to maintain the integrity of the region's existing transportation system; second, to place first priority on system improvements that support existing development; third, to provide further transportation investments that will permit forecasted development to occur and will be necessary to support future economic growth; and fourth. to protect the system to permit it to serve its function even in cases of una.:,cipatsd growth. The plan calls on regional decision -makers to use strategies canbin.ng highways and transit to provide the largest capacity for moving people with limited resource dollars. The plan greatly emphasizes the need to offer people attractive reasons to ride together rather than to drive alone. It calls for heavier emphasis on all kinds of t it from carpools to light rail, partly as a more cost-effective alternative. partly as a less socially in-ruslve alternative. and especially as a way of providing access for people for whom the single-passengor vehicle is economically burdensome, or even in some cases out of reach. Specific goals of the plan are: - To provide at least a five- to -TO minute travel time advantage in congested corridors or a 15-mile trip for those who share rides, compared with those who drive alone during peak hours. To increase regular -route trap- t ridership by over 30 percent between now and the year 2010. T9 increase the propor on of multi -occupant vehicles dur�ny peL. periods from . ant in 1987 to 27 percent by 2010. To Increase peak -hour auto occupancy throughout the region from 1.16 persons per vehicle in 1987 to I.} in 2010. The plan lists five major strategies proposed to achieve those goals. They are: To meter the western two-thirds of the metropolitan highway system to prevent short trips from clogging highways and slowing down the long trips to regional resources. To provide preferential access at metered ramps on the metropolitan highway system for multi -occupancy vehicles. r To add special lanes multi-occupar vehicles rather than general purpose lanes whs itional capacity is needed. -:, develop four to six LRT corridors focusing on the downtowns. To require traffic mitigating measures or travel -demand management trategies by local units of government shd the private sector as a prerequisite to apr,m`.ing new capital investments. plan recommends priorities for improvements in the most congested urban. _Ways but suggests that highways such as 169, 212. and 5. which are •ily int -city roads rather than commuter roads, not be forced to compete h. the more dersely congested urban freeways, which have traditionally always .11 out in the priorities process. Rather, they should be considered ecparately for _nt:r function of intercity goods movement. Although it is 12 tempting to think only about metropolitan highways, we are the market at one end of those farm market roads in greater Minnesota, and working with them to make sure that transportation system serves its purpose as effectively as Possible is in our best long-range interest. The plan calls for heavier use of city streets for short trips to reduce the demand for more expensive freeway construction. It also calls for a partnership between regional agencies, local units of government, and the Twin Cities' business community to find ways to make development opportunities available that will encourage growth without unnecessarily overstressing or raising the cost of regional infrastructure to support it. We think this approach, as exemplified by the work being done now by the communities along I-494 and I-394. offers an opportunity to create the best solution so far to the conflict between the tyranny of pure government planning and the chaos and sprawl -urely market -driven decision -making. This new draft of the transportation Policy Plan is intended by the Council to try to translate the complex needs and desires of the people of the metropolitan area into a coherent strategy to meet as many of those needs and desires as possible at the least appropriate cost. Mow successful it is at that depends most heavily, I believe, on the accuracy with which we have captured the values and desires of the community. All of you have sho , your intr--sts in and commitment to this problem by your presence here today and `y your conscientious work in the past At the public hearings to be head on the plan, the real test of its quality will be its acceptance by the thougrtful opinion leaders of the r munity like Yourself. We urgently s� lour involvement, your advice, and ultimately your support for a coor• so, regional strategy that helps deliver tr.a best transportation system at the least burden to the comptnity. 13 Lake Minnetonka Cable Communications Commission 443 OAK STREET • EXCELSIOR, MINNESOTA 55331 - (6121474 5539 i1W - 4 l44N !; To: LMCCC City Managers From: Holly Hansen Date: March ;, 1988 Re: Dowden Sale/PTL This memo is to alert you to the fact that Dowden Cable Partners, L.P. has reached an agreement to sell all of 1•s cable systems to Triax Mle:est Associates, P. Enclosed is a short article that appeared in Line Multi -Channel News for your background information. The LMCCC Is working on this with our attorney, Tom Creighton of O'Connor s Hannan, and I will keep you informed of developments regarding the sale. 1 have also enclosed a memo from Mary Smith regarding Dowden's discontinuat on of the PTL Network and replacement of PTL wih EWTN. 1 have received about a dozen telephone cal s regarding this change. If you are receiving calls :t your city offices from cable subscribers, you can direct them to me. Please contact me if you have any questions regarding the sale or this recent change in service. HH/pcw DowdE.z pn Cablesystems M E M 0 TO: Dowden Staff FM: Mary DT: 2-22-88 RE: PTL, Channel 33 CC: Lake Minnetonka Cable Communications Commission Cities of: Chanhassen Loretto Maple Plain Mound Waconia Wayzata Due to the overwhelming number of phone calls, letters, and petitions that we have received over the past 6 months requesting EWTN (Eternal Word Television Network), we have decided to discontinue PTL on channel 33 and replace it with EWTN. Both subscribers and non -subscribers alike have requested EWTN which is a 24 Hour Catholic Cable Network. PTL appears in part on other channels: (700 Club) Channel 32 CBN (Christian Broadcasting Network) 9:00 AM, M-F 8:00 PM, M-F 1:00 AM, Mondays Channel 29 RITN at 9:00 AM, M-F We do expect a limited number of inquires, so be prepared to respond that some PTL programming is carried on other channels. Managed By Dowden Cable Partners, L.R. 2381 Wilshire Boulevard, Mound, Minnesota 55364 (8121 472-6394 Mwtrhen.i, - ram"ary W, tO99 Dowden To Sell Two Units To Triax Communications ATLANTA — Dowden lible Pout. and Peachuen Cable Associstes, with about 50.000 Subscribers in the Midwest, reached So agreement to be Gold last week to Trian Com- munications for a price per sub I. the range of SI 3041,880, according to Tom Dowden, President and chief executive .friar of Dowden C noradi- cations, a general pence, I. both the companies mid. Mr. Dowden described the purchaee price in a range due I the various partnerships and pertindan involved. He mid the deal included a non-com- pne clause, an Dowden Com- municatlovs, whose hesd- querten staff nmalne inset, will Seek future acquisitions eleewhne and remain in the cable industry. The proposed closing data for the deal is June 30, he mid. In th, m..luirs, he mid. Dowden is pursuing various Rogers Announces Plans To Reduce Foreign 3wnership sequin.... in the cable indus- try. Bm:aton d Associates. a Boston -based company which I. also a geni part., with Dowden in Dowden Cable Partners, ah , will Shan in the proceeds how the Telex sale, he Yid. He and that four bide M the properties Wert IN, mived, including me from James Cnmmmicati-ne, and Tampa businessmm Steve Adam.. Communications Equity Associates was the bro- ker for the deal. ❑ TORONTO IFN51 — Can- Adim cable operator Rogen Commmicetkns Inc. mid it plans in reduce foreign own - reship of compmy .her. to below 20 percent a protect is broadcast license. President Ted Rogers mid the company has reduced foreign holdings of Clew A and Clam B ...on shares to 35 percent in 1987 from 75 pre - cent in 1986 through share se- quisition and further reduo Done arc planned this year. "1 would of be prepared to remmmevd b our board of directors any relaxation of our non -Canadian ownership poli- cies and restrictions until.. .ownership is suloan- tielly below the 20 percent level," he told shareholders al the company's ennui Heeling -_ r_L one System Sales GATEWAY • Get""Cablevirmn Corp., with headquarters In Amaundam, NY, add HIM Ver- montcable Cable L to Fhst Css1aM c.bl. TT a tIsYn- mos5.dterms. and 1.967P Serve 5.g5y Peek end .1 07 pay s00 icans, witersh pussirg0 ilea Manch with 1 strand. orient Mose In Manchester a Succors Mn FISn. - rasonin Gateway Rep was Corn 0atewaY In me deal ,Yee Cgmmui peso ns Equity An, ppleim vkY pmbsm John Long. MK)-ATLANTIC Atlin Retains Mid-Aaande COmmunk► dons line enduring West "W- gIters irls To Sell than and Ohro mmuniable yation horn Babe Communkationn. Corp. Sod EaHam Cable Two Stations Cai wah the help Of SM Mo subordinated ban PROVIDENCE, RI — Aain ;;.Peal try a P.~ix Cable Commmirstions I.e., an al- in, SBYIeb. The SYalems, Seth rdiaW of Outlet C-OMM=kA- time Inc., avnamad lap week that it her retained Morgan Stanley A Co. and Ifewil d F.. Stark to sell WATLI. Atlanta and WXIN in Indianapolis. Fell. Osineblewskl, vide president .rid cltlef financial officer for Outlet Coa mmies- tions, mid the aourpsai had retained both Mmgan Stanley and Mr. Stark becauw of is '9angeIn ding relationaMp with both of them," and be- auae the company had de - tided "il would be to our ad- vanl.g! to oak with both. W. Stark described both properties as ..mail indepen- dent UHF emfiom" with goad facilities and mid each wee "making progress" iS its IS, .penive market. Mr. Otiembleweki mid the Nations wen being Sold be- aus , "m a company, we arc fully leveraged' and need the ash to pay down debt. He also mid ma -of -the -an facilities had just been com- pleted for the Atlanta facility. Atlin tlommmications Inc. was formed in January 1987 by about 25M sutISeribea clualessd on born Sid" of the Ohio Rlrer, era going for s price of .bddl gL 5 million du! Inn!- 1. of the Speclfk nearby Sr l tams. Thomea Lo1M, a M pal of Mid Atlantic, has been e dl,,chn of the selling (mm- panbs since 1976. RIGEL • "I Communlcstb" =POIghI GCOMI CWNrlalon, serving 1,050 eu4 Milansenders In Arabi. G , Termsla, Milan and AraPl, a. Terms wlrin't disabled. SCRIPPS HOWARD • Assedeen Ltd. Cable 3.a Dames" Ammians ,,dad partnership, has Bold severel systems near Chattanooga. TN, to lknppa Howard. The syS- fema add 13. 0) subscribers to Scripps lfoward' .etev end llg bhe Chaaenw 8s "A Thu notice appears an a matter of reo January, 1988 FALCON TELECA has acquired CARTHAGE COMMUNICATIONS serving al proximately 7,400 basic s and passing approximately 12,800 homes lanche, and Carthage, 'I e The undersigned represented Carthage Co Ltd. in this transaction, sm.,ed as fines and assisted in negotiation Lake Minnetonka Cable CI ",l OAK STREET • EXCELSIOR, To: LMCCC Directors From: Holly Hansen Date: March 7, 1988 Re: UPDATE OR - $ am COUNCIL MEff= VAR 3 819e9 UITY OF OOONO Enclosed for your information are copies of the February minutes, miscellaneous articles, a memo from Mary Smith regarding a recent channel change, and Regional Channel updates. Since our February meeting, Dowden has agreed to sell its cable holdings to Triax Communications (see article). It is important for the Commission to become clear about Its position on the Regional Channel. While we have been receiving reports over the last few months which have helped to reduce the re -hashing of the same information on a month -to -month basis, nothing has effectively happened to date. With a pending sale, now is the time for the Commission to take a more active role in resolving this situation. The next regularly scheduled meeting of the full Commission is Tuesday, May 17 at 5:00 p.m, Please reserve this date on your calendar. It is likely that there may be an additional meeting due to Dowden's sale, but nothing has been scheduled at this time. Please feel free to contact me with your comments and questions. HH/pcw MINUTES LAKE MINNETONKA CABLE COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION 5:00 P.M., EXCELSIOR STUDIO 6 COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE FULL COMMISSION MEETING TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 16, 1988 ROLL CALL Directors Present Others Present Dennis Haggerty -Deephaven Mary Smith - Dowden Barb Brancel -Shorewood Holly Hansen - Administrator LMCCC Tom Anderson -Medina Shelly Quaas - Recorde Barb Peterson -Orono Tom Creighton - O'Connor S Hannan Carl Rosen -Spring Park Marietta Jacobsen -Greenwood Peggy Nelson -Deephaven Lynda Morrison -Minnetonka Beach Peter Berzins -Minnetrista Jim Olds -Excelsior David Stahr -Excelsior Jim Hillis -Greenwood Jerry Roehl -Medina M+.rgaret Clark -Minnetonka Beach Jerry Schmieg -Victoria Prior to the meeting being called to order Chairman Haggerty gave his report. OFFICERS: Chairman Haggerty felt the MACTA Conference was well planned and very informative. Some highlights discussed were: The Power of Access, and how to stand strong in your franchise. He also enjoyed Washington D.C. Attorney Nick Miller's speech, n couple of points discussed were the grasp of where cable is today, long S short term planning, and how to be informed and stand by your franchise. I. CALL TO ORDER Chairman Haggerty called the February 16, 1988 meeting to order at 5:17 p.m. II. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Motion 2.16.88.1: Olds moved, seconded by Brancel, to approve the minutes of January 19, 1988 as written. Motion carried unanimously. III. REPORTS A. TREASURER Motion 2.16.88.2: Just Claims - approve just claims as written unanimously. Roehl moved, seconded by Rosen, to on Appendix A. Motion carried B. ADMINISTRATIVE Administrator Hansen was involed in the planning of the MACTA Conference, she was pleased with the attendance. Hansen recommends Commission members to watch Nick Miller's (Washington D.C. Attorney - Keynote Speaker at the MACTA Conference) program entitled "The Cable Act Revisited" --From Promise To Reality" on Channel 20, in February. Hansen attended a meeting at the State Capitol with the Senate Media Services group. The Senate is planning a March I video programming start up date. They will be using Regional Channel 6 during daytime hours to program Committee Hearings and Legislat- � Reports. -I- FEBRUARY 16, 1966 PAGE TWO 111. REPORTS CONTINUED ADMINISTRATIVE M.F. Denny Company December 31, 1987, Motion 2.16.88.3: N.F. Denny Company $1,900.00. Motion has proposed to do LMCCC's for $1,900.00. Roehl moved, seconded by to perform the 1987 Audit carried unanimously. audit for Year ending Olds, to approve not to exceed Hansen reported that the Regional Channel 6 Board is considering a new bill which would require interconnection. Tom Creighton of I O'Connor S Hannan feels the Commission should support this bill if I it is written. Olds feels the Commission should support the bill but have a few stipulations protecting the Commission until the Commission can read the bill. Administrator Hansen has been invited to join the Excelsior Rotary Club. Hansen feels it would be a great opportunity to meet the Public. The fees involved with the Rotary Club are a annual fee of $120.00, a one time initiation fee of $50.00, and $7.00 a week for lunches; total yearly cost would be $534.00. Carl Rosen feels it would be an inexpensive way to advertise cable, he also feels that Administrator Hansen would represent LMCCC very well. Motion 2.16.88.4: Berzins moved, seconded by Stahr, to allow Hansen to join the Rotary Club and to cover the total yearly expense and to review on a yearly basis. Motion was discussed. Roehl is opposed to having LMCCC pay the full meal price. Motion carried - 14 ayes, to 1 nay (Roehl). Hansen would like more members of the Commission to become :nvolved in the Long Range Planning Committee, she would like at least two more volunteers. C. LEGAL COUNSEL Tom Creighton of O'Connor 6 Hannan explained to the Commission that he will be taking Mark Ayotte's place as LM^_CC's Legal Counsel. Ayotte transferred to a different firm. Tom Creighton also enjoyed the MACTA Conference and encourages Commission members to get involved with it. D. DOWDEN CABLE SYSTEMS Mary Smith handed out her montly report: New Connects 63 Total Disconnects 71 Reconnects 35 Total Connects 98 Net Gain Since Last Month 35 Smith informed the Commission that Dowden handed out direct mailers to those residents that are not hooked up to cable.' Chairman Haggerty asked Smith if Pay Per vi-v could be put on one of Dowden's channels. Mary Smith explained that in order to get Pay Per View the system must be an addressable system (controlled from a computer). This may be in Dowdens future. IV. DOWDEN SALE Dowden did have a buyer interested in the system, but the buyer did not meet Dowden's requirements. Since then a couple of companies have contacted Dowden but they must meet Dowden's requirements. The system will be sold as a complete package. -2- FEnROARY, 161, 198fl PAGE THREE V. REGIONAL CHANNEL 6 Mary Smith explained a few of the options that Dovden is looking at for an interconnect to Regional Channel 6. 1. A microwave hop from the Chaska Tower to the Mound Tower, an approximate cost of $94,500.00. This figure does not include rent and there may also be a signal problem. 2. Beam a signal from the IDS Tower, then Dovden would nave to rent space, add equipment and would hive to extend the Mound tower which may not be possible due to permit problems. 3. Microwave a signal north of the Mound Tower. VI. NEW BUSINESS ' Chair Haggerty advised the Commission that if a quorum is not met at a meeting the Just Claims cannot be approved. Every month checks need to be written, in the past if no quorum was met, a special meeting had to be called to approve Just Claims. Motion 2.16.88.5: Nelson moved, seconded by Anderson, to authorize officers to sign checks for budgeted montly expenses of Payroll, telephone, payroll taxes, and other pre -approved expenses. These claims would then be presented with other Just Claims at the next meeting. Motion carried unanimously. VII. ADJOURNMENT Motion 2.16.88.6: Roehl moved, seconded by Stahr, to adjourn the February 16, 1988 meeting at 6:30 p.m. Motion carried unanimously. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED, Shelly Quaas -3- .1. JUST CLAIMS 1/20/88 - 2/16/88 CHECK A DATE PAYABLE AMOUNT ACCOUNT 1 10062 2101 Holly Hansen $ 741.18 Payroll 1/16-1/31 10063 2/01 William Strohm 148.66 Payroll 1/16-1/31 1 10064 2/01 Patricia Ward 22.64 Payroll 1/16-1/31 1594 2/01 P.E.R.A. 85.94 P.E.R.A. 1595 2/16 CCmn: iSsioner of Revenue 124.24 Quarterly Taxes 1596 2/16 Commissioner of Revenue 135.26 January taxes 1597 2/16 Bank Excelsior 580.52 941 Taxes 1598 2/16 Cinequipt, Inc. 189.59 Misc. Video 1599 2/16 Voss Electric Supply Co. 85.84 Misc. Video 1600 2/16 Psych" 32.12 Sect'1. Svcs. 1601 2/16 Gross Office Supply 21.51 Office Supplies 1602 2/16 N.M. Bell 58.00 Telephone 1603 2/16 O'Connor 6 Hannan 195.00 Legal - thru 12/31/87 1604 2/16 Shelly Quaas 60.00 January Minutes/Sect'l. 1605 2/16 Holly Hansen 39.04 Mileage 1606 2/16 Holly Hansen 268.00 S.F. airfare -Conferences 1607 2/16 Radio Schack 79.39 Misc. Video 1608 2/16 Gross Office Supply 84.92 Office Supplies 1609 2/16 P.E.R.A. 9.OD P.E.R.A. Life 1610 2/16 P.E.R.A. 85.94 P.E.R.A. 2/1-2/15 10065 2/16 Holly Hansen 732.18 Payroll 2/1-2/15 10066 2/16 William Strohn 155.29 Payroll 2/1-2/15 10067 2/16 Patricia Ward 116.81 Payroll 2/1-2/15 1611 2/16 U.S. Postmaster 41.50 Postage TOTAL CLAIMS $4,092.57 BANK EXCELSIOR Beginning Balance $15,707.97 Total Claims (4.092.57) Interest 74.75 Dowden Tfr, Exp. reimburse 32.50 LMCIT Refund 14.o0 ENDING BALANCE $11,736.65 STATE CAPITOL CREDIT UNION Balance* $6,153.78 C�CC %%ff�' •"%,� I L. / /` l^ * Does not reflect Interest since 12/31/87 j. REGIONAL CHANNEL REPORT Report ante 2-16-88 Method of Interconnection Chaska Microwave Ho Time period of study, Oct 1987 -- present Estimated dosta_5r, aoy In sg q4, u 11. SL 1 NSF Factors Involved In cost c.. ntte.w.a Technical considerations See attarhad State Accepted Rejected XX Pending f rejected, please give reasons why rejected. Integrity of Sianal If pending, please state next steps to be taK,• on study and anticipate.; timellne. neo not include ordinary costs Involved in ..ead end and mic,c lave receiver. Muluchan„el News — February W, 1988 Dowden To Sell Two Units To Triax Communications ATLANTA -- Dewden Cable .N.initimrt in the cable indue- Panneo and Pochtree Cable try. Berinum A Associates, a Associate%, with about 90,000 Boston -based comps.. which subscribers in the Midwest, is d ae..rid partner with reached an agreement to be Dow. in Dowden Cable sold last week to Tri.a Co.- PMmers, dsu will share 1n the munications for a price per said, proceeds from the Tries sale, in the range of 111,830;1,880, he said. He said that four bids according to Tom Dowden, on the properties were iv, presidentand chief executive ceived, including one fmm officer of L :rden Communi- James Communications, and cations, a genesal partner io Tarots buefnessmm it e both the companies sold. Adams. C.mmunieatkns Mr. Dowden described the Equity A sane st" sass the bto- purchase prim in a range due I kee Jff the c A. D to the various partnerships and particulars involved. He said the deal included a noncom- peb clause, an D.wden Corn- municaliane, head- quarter, Mall r.maine :atect, will seek future m:mWtion. elsewhere and remain in the cable industry. '1'te pmpoeed closing dab for the deal is June 30, he said. in the mesmime. he mid. Lowden is pursuing various CBN To Cancel Swaggart Shows VI: ';[NIA BEACH, VA — CBN Cahlr Network will mnrcl its weekday -morning showings of TV esangelist Jimmy S..,gict s A Sm.A in the IF'ord, as well en the ^on - day -morning The Jtmm; Swaggan Telecast following Mr. Swagged. rem..] from the pulpit lest week by the Assemblies of Grid church, CBN spokesperson Earl Weirich mid. Me. Swap an mnfeeeed W "vine" in m rtionel a klmst N. his Bsum Rouge, LA, con- gregation , Feb. 21 following allegation. that he had been photographed with a prostitute at is motrl. The evangelic. Telecast we. scheduled !.ri CBN at 7 a.m. (ET) m Sunday trwun- ings, for 60 minutes, and A Stodv held the 6:30-7 a M. Jos s.ch weekday rooming. CBN plane to m,!I.w the da;ly program thmugi. Friday. March 4, but with Don Bvtnkel, the associate pastor of Mr. Swaggart. church, as host. R Final Telecast, featuring .r. Sw.ggsrt't ad- mission boy ,.- his congrega- tion, was taped Feb. 21 and was scheduled for W.... t Feb. 211, a. tk final showing of the props. a CBN• said bh. Wd th. hi, Weiricl..idCBN'sde- cialoo to pull the pmgr.mming vs. in keeping with Mr. Sw.ggsat'. •ublk an- n9uncemml and 'he rho: oh'. move to mmom him t . 7re¢hing for three niom ' said CEN had me da . -w on a replacement p.o gram for either time slot. Mr. Swagged. organisation paid CBN Inc carr:,—. Weirich said, but he would not elaborate on the prim paid, or B .. CBN'.. iase of rev- enue. in t•.c wA d the ahowe' caneelleiti.na 'could be substantial. Me Wehich said the shows would be canceled for "an indefinite length of time." Iwo v., t. CBN showed tape of Mr. bu,"gmr. Feh 21 Telrrmt ae pert of its pr ern The 700 Clrn I uverpuuurs, Kegu►ation Seen as Ops' Top Threat By undo Houyatead SAN ANTONIO, TX — Competition from overbuilders and scrutiny by legislators are the most pressing problems facing cable operators this year, according to panelists at a Texas Cable Show session, but .h- threr- can be turned away ,inning a good shop" L. eiiing the good wtessage aM,da cable to federal legislators before the naysayers do, the panelists said. Bill Strange, chief executive officer of Data Communica- tions Inc., told the session at tendees that this is "a silly season" with legislators run- ning for re-election and look- ing for issues that will help them. The best strategy will be to strike first by advertising to every member of Congress the good job being done by the majority of operators, he Raid. Mr. Strange added that mem- bers of the industry, when questioned on subscription rates, should point out that there has never been regulation of pay services, yet rates for those services have gone down. Larry Wangberg, chief ex- ecutive officer at Times Mirror Cable Television, added that in a free market, his systems have charged more for their services but have increased basic and pay penetration, meaning that customers pay more but they like what they area getting. Of more concern to the pan- fi)Alto JtANel Al ; Fe h; 2 t l '1 K Ef elkts is the threat of overbuilds and of competition from tele- vision services and other wire- less s<nurces . Mr. W angherg said he hoped authorities won't get involved in the over- building issue, but added that if they do he hopes that they will look at the long-term ben- efits to consumers of a stable cable market by subjecting overbuilders to the same access requirements, franchise fees and buildout terms as the in- cumbents. Ken Gunter, chief executive officer of Columbia Interna- tional Inc., added that the thought that if telephone com- panies get into the cable busi- ness, "They'll make lousy op- erators'. He predicted that if telephone companies crake a serinus foray into cable it will he through a switched broad- band technology, delivering movies through on -demand pay -per -view. "People always assume that if the telcos get involved the cable industry will always lay dowr and play dead," added Bob Rogers, chief executive of- ficer of TCA Cable TV Inc. "What's wrong with a little competition? We've been doing it for 30 years. We aught to know something. " The operators agreed that each cable company needs to look at the long-term impact of each element of its business: consumer service, technoiogi- cal upgrades and program- ming. As an example, Henry Harris, chief executke officer of MetroVision Inc. said Fr had been dead -set against the E.SPN deal to carry National Football League games be- cause he felt it was too ex- pensive for operators. But in retrospect, he said, it got a lot of .publicity for cable and created awareness of other pro- gramming the industry offers. "Look at the deals bringing Miami Vice and Cagney d Lacey to cable. Individually, it makes no one jump up and down but the cumulative effect will be good," Mr. Harris said. Not clt off -broadcast deals will be good however, he 'added. He said he's heard ESPN is considering obtaining the rights for the Masters golf tournament, which now airs on broadcast TV, or bidding for top college basketball games. Such deals do not add value to cable, he said. On other programming is- sues, the operators on the panel complained about the continuing disparity in the wholesale rates charged to large vs. small multiple sys- tems operators. Mr. Wangberg said the industry can't change what happened over the years, but can change the trend in the future by par- ticipating in deals such as the NFL package, in which opera- tors contribute the same amount. ❑ 32 Facts and Figures O M<WNCM - 7: '05� Cable Trends in 1987 SNlltr In Areraga Q,arler Maur D611—F Feurtn Quarter tee? — Feur1N Quarter 1994 =A 14"s MIAETII.T DAYTIME EANLY FFwGE LATE FRItICE WEFKC'.0 -1 625.000 s.6,r 456000 .275,000 -521 000 -300.000 •364 ^110 r'.!wc.w-1,2]1,000 -1, 10).000 pll �I,al•. • 1,507 000 3,293.000 ),IY I.000 AVERAGE QUARTER HOUR AUDIENCE FOURTH QUARTER 1997 vs. FOURTH OUARTER 1986 TOTAL TV HOUSEHOLDS Total Basic' Pay Independents" Netw'xlt Usage Cable Services Atflliates 24 HOURS Rating -39b +14% +24% -1% -8% HH Delivery -520,000 +454,000 +343.000 +10,000 -1,231,000 PRIMETIME Rating -3% + 35% + 25% + 7% -9 HH Delivery -1.138.000 +1,625,000 +685.000 +670,000 -3.492.000 DAYTIME Rating -2% +8% +314b -3% -5% HH Delivery -204.000 +275.000 +247,000 -61,000 -517.000 EARLY FRINGE Rating -34t +12% +26% NC -7% HH Delivery -514,000 + 591,000 + 311,000 + 104,000 -1.507,000 LATE FRINGE Rating -4% +14% + 18% NC -8% HH Delivery, -596.000 +388.000 +413.000 +62.DOD -1.183.000 WEEKEND Rating -911b +6% +14% -4% -16% HH Delivery -2,820,000 +364,000 292,000 -207.000 -3,293,000 Source: Cabletelevision Adve^lising BureaL 'Includes TBS analysis o1 A.C. Nielsen Data "Including Passive Superstations Basic Channels Averate number of Myaxr,anne' Ne,N1 _ February 99, 1998 Facts and Figures 33 Sant Cable Syst(m Retail Pricing Com,3a(13on A —age Coat to the Subsc nber Per Month NPJ Showtime Sm 51% s,u SS — WL to' a s' 1017 1111 11.0 ,964 19.66 U.41 .in ;is 1,0 111 Ss 1a. .a• roar :M uu,9.2110„ ac Disney 1e� Owr,My rlc iM.6" crwce a : Mn b re faneMYerlln .. _ ' a _, p,lnaata a,rlaalwrlu 1r0 over Mwy ABKENE. KS �aMaae.l.aaa 27 111500 S,200 $120-0 ALM)OUERGUE NY aarvr 77 +7 50 9 95 MrA 795 BATON PIOLOGE, LA 01r11a1a a Adam. 2e , 6 % 9 00 9 00 9010 DWX)WXLD CO J1r1ea 27 , -25 9 M 9 00 899 COLUYMIS. ON W_ Cable 2! 20 95 to00 9 00 9 00 DALLAr. TX "am". 60 •91 +0 95 10 95 a 95 DI1ri':�. CO. ATC so ,527 1.0 920 920 WNfDIN, it TO 71 770 ,055 1155 O55 I DURAft.0. CO TO 26 +s;5 1,95 95 �695 7. _AN. K. 71 16 25 a 95 a 95 6 95 NUNTSVO-LE. !+. t9wrrl 70 a so s 00 s 00 s 00 JUNCTM CITY/ N.:FaNfSMNID. OR TO 26 15oo +95 1,95 1095 MEKK��, fry i CearwM JO ,799 1, 17 ,060 6a3 NEW YOM, NY ATC 75 ,495 ,295 µA NA NORTH LfTTLE ROCK. AR 11ft— 25 1439 ,l so OMANA NE Co. ., a 95 a 95 195 a 95 ►ETALUMA.CA vlloawl ]2 ,ao0 1000 ,000 695 PMSBURON, PA TO a5 ,500 ,D 00 1000 1000 PORTL.AND, OR AeM.>t as , 7 eo 995 995 7 95 SALT LAKE CM. UT TO 27 15 oo 11 y, • 1 95 ,o 95 SIOUX CfTV, LAowlase.e.W 11 ,679 770 770 770 TOMANCE. CA ►radon s0 109, 995 9 % 995 OK T{KBA.EE W+AaA Calla 7, , 195 ,1 95 , , 95 1195 �E DR. TX 1aal,worr 12 +0 70 , , ;2 1. e 5, MOMIPMI, IMA Catwin.ny ae ,5 00 „ 95 „ 95 a 95 AVEMAOES: pow-1111. 111e 77 ta70 �0 a0 ,00a 90.7 wA - No A...A Dcout, ar ,n r,d.av at c Dad 07 wblk n eCkl*Nq IN we ana MOM "19 a9r1A `W ft 1 a9ss Fyn '4 25 Cat" It"t"s 1s:ae sours M,e Ar lsov 0, Lake Minnetonka Cable Communications Commission 443 OAK S', REET • EXCELSIOR, MINNESOTA 55331 • (612) 474 5539 To: LMCCC Cities From: Holly Hansen` Date: March 21, 1988 Re: PUBLIC HEARING Enclosed is a Notice of Public Hearing to be held by the Lake Minietonka Cable Communications Commission on Tuesday, Ap,il 12, 1988. This notice w,II be published in the following newspapers: SAILOR WEEKLY NEWS CARVER COUNTY HERALD CROW RIVER NEWS LAKER PIONEER Please post this notice in your City Offices. Thank you. HH/pcw NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING CONCERNING CABLE TELEVISION COMMUNICATIONS PLEAS- TAKE NOTICE THAT a public hearing will be held by the Executive Committee of the Lake Minnetonka Cable Communications Commission on Tuesday, April 12, 1988 at 6.00 p.m, or as soon thereafter as parties can reasonably be heard at Excelsior City Hall, 339 Third Street, Excelsior, Minnesota 55331• The Commission consists of the Minnesota cities of Minnetrista, Spring Park, Shorewood, Medina, St. Bonifacius, Excelsior, Deephaven, Woodland, Victoria, Tonka Bay, Minnetonka Beach, Orono, Greenwood and Long Lake. The hearing is called pursuant to the requirements of the Joint and Cooperative Agreement creating the Commission for the purpose of providing an opportunity for public input with respect to amendments to the Cable Communications Ordinance arising out of the transfer of ownership and transfer of the Cable Communications Ordinance as amended to Triax Midwest Associates, L.P. and the permanent designation for Public, Educational and Government Access Channels. Anyone having an interest in Cable Television Communications is invited to attend said public hearing. Copies of the proposed ordinance amendments are available for review during regular business hours at the Commission office. 2 WEEKLY NEW;. INC. March 17. 1988 'Huge increase' predicted Light, rail transit Tax revolt brewing in suburbs hOd dit, March By Michael Krause The city official from Edina said he had been fighting a property tax sys- tem and state aid form hat penal- izes the suburbs for25. .s. "I know this might sound crazy," Ise said, "but maybe the time has come when we should refuse to pay. What are they going to do? Arrest all of us?"' The comment came as Robert Ren- ner —former aide to Gov. Al Quie and now chief lobbyist for the Municipal Legislative Commission (MLC)—out- lined current proposals for changes in the state's property tax system at a meeting of about 75 local government officials at Minnetonka City Hall on March 10. Few state policies are as difficult to understand as the state's byzantine property tax system. The bottom line, however, according to Renner, is that every proposal under consideration in St. Paul to reform the system would shift tax dollars away from "property - rich" suburban communities to Minn- eapolis, St. Paul and the area outside the metropolitan area. MLC is a lobby for suburban inter- ests formed in 1983. It has 15 members with a total population of 550,000, in- cluding Minnetonka, Plymouth, Eden Prairie, Maple Grove, Bloomington, Edina and Brooklyn Park. The property tax system has his- torically been used by the state to equalize the level of services between jurisdictions with large and small tax bases. In 1987, Minnesota taxpayers Paid SZ55 billion in income and sales taxes that was then redistributed ac- cording to legislative priorities as various kinds of property tax credit_. Last year that system paid Ri.467 billion in school aids, $600 million for the Homestead Credit, $324 million in $42 million in miscellaneous credits. Existing formulas for dividing up that property tax assistance already penalize suburban areas in at least three ways. Because the formula for distributing the $324 million in local government aid is expense -driven, it penalizes cities with large tax bases and relative- ly -low city levies Under current law, MLC cities will receive an average of $27.58 per capita in LGA while the statewide average is $91.37. Even a- mong MLC cities themselves the dis- parities are great. lymouth, for ex- ample, will receive only $9.83 per cap- ita in LGA while Minnetonka will re- ceive $38.07. Second, the 1987 Legislature re- structured the state school aid formula to shift funds away from suburban districts. Districts which are levying what the state sets as an "excess" above what is set as the statewide average for educating a student will find that excess shifted to other diF- tricts. Finally, because the Homestead Credit is capped at $700 per home- owner, it penalizes homes of higher valuation. Currently the credit reim- burses the homeowner for up to 54 percent of property taxes or the $700 maximum. That means homeowner -- with taxes in excess of $1,296 will re- ceive no additional tax relief. A less controversial goal of the var- ious property tax reform me«=ures would reduce the more than 70 prop- erty tax classifications in current law to about five. However, most reform measure . also moving toward a change in i method of assessing the value of p►, erty. The current system places t?-, assessed value of a home at 17 percen, of the first $68,000 in market value and local government aids (LGA), $118 million in agricultural tax credits and 7o Page!) Water -Free Docks) In.:. Minnesota - California Manny Dgn* C wisull�nh. and Manuf"t -e ._1—__— 1 A public hearing on developing light -rail transit in the southwestern suburbs has been scheduled for Mon- day. March 21 at 7 p.m. at Eisenhower Community Center, 1001 Hwy. 7, Hop- kins. The hearing wil l be conducted by the county's Regional Railroad Authority. The seven members of the Hennepin County Board of Commissioners also are the governing body of the rail authority. The principal focus of the meeting will be a proposal to develop light -rail transit (LRT) from downtown Minne- apolis tr the southwestern suburbs. A southwest con-idor might leave downtown by going south along Nicol - let Ave. and then turning west and fol- lowing existing rail tight -of -way along 29th St. Continuing along existing right-of-way, the line probably would go to Hopkins and eventually the southwest corridor might continue be- yond Hopkins along one or more routes. The hearing will give citizens an opportunity to present their views on C LRT proposals developed during an eye intensive planning process over the Col past eight months. Additional hear- of. gents, and we're proud of the truly have. To register and for more informa- For more information, call Patty at tion, contact Doris Fall at 938-9532. 545-5794 or Judd at 473-1478. carefully selected to make certain )ersonable and dedicated to do the intensively trained right from the a continuing education program to all of the complex, rapidly-changi.- state industry. v thoroughly supported witn The services so necessary in real estate !I your home, or want experienced, dicated service in finding the right ents will be pleased to help you. it in a crowd. :ier endin ZEN-TORNS 1-7000 st Wayzata Blvd. Minnesota 55391 Property Taxes From Page 2 27 percent of any additional market value. One proposal would change that to 18 percent of the first$68,000 and 50 percent of market value above that amount That means, of course, communities with housing averaging more than $68,000 in value will Fee what Renner termed a "huge increase" in tax bills due to the increase in the assessed value of higher -priced homes. Proposed reform measures would also scrap the existing system of tax credits such as the Homestead Credit and LGA in favor of Tax Base Equal- ization Aid (TBEA). Tax Base Equalization Aid would be calculated using a complex formula based on a city's three-year average .L V11 1888 MITSUBISHI PICKUPS No Money Down 5-Speed, TintedGlas�,Double Wall Cargo Box, Tilt Wheel, Carpet and Seating for Three. Hurry for Best selection! Offer good while supp:y IasL. Pl- <= L hr to qu.I,hed b.y— levy, total assessed value and the num- ber of homes. Some suburban cities would actual- ly receive slightly more state aid in the first years of the program overexisting tax relief programs. But very soon that state aid to suburbs would decrease sharply as assessed values grew. In Burnsville, for which MLC ran a computer model, there would bn a small increase in property Lax relief fcr 1989 and 1990 but by the year 1998, the city would be receiving $6.2 million less in state aid than it would under existing law. The ov,�rall impact of the reform measures would be to generate $98 million for tax relief in Minneapolis, St_ Paul and the area outside the metro area. Only $2 million in additional tax relief would go to the suburbs, accord- ing to the MLC, and because of in- creases in assessed valuations, the suburbs could actuahy face an in- crease in taxes of $10 2 million !or 1989 alone. Commercial/industrial property would also pay higher taxes in the metro area. How much varies from one reform proposal to another, but non - metro areas would see a 12 percent decrease in commercial/industrial tax rates. As an alternative to the property tax reforms proposed by Gov. Rudy Per- pich at,d DFL legislative leaders, MLC plans to introduce its own tax pro- posals. "Chances of passage are slim," Renner said of MLC's alternatives, "but we needed to make a statement." MLC would rcuiin the Homestead Credit at one percent of market value UP to $70,000 or the same $700 cap. Other MLC proposals include a freeze in existing local government aid levels, 100 percent state -paid welfare costs and removal of levy limits on cities. � Ce�te� Gov r Zhe #G e ate leer Log aL. Towry - r I.►�..� �ii�:iiiil��iii�liili`ii�►�ii..��■�i� ��i�c�:i rim ttt��:.� jx l�:si� oila L �.e:Jv:jt�.i!Gri.•: _... f'.`, �"-i;:.�.^... •^+'4.1:.•!`�!',: •^A._ - i-r. C. 14 OFFICE ENTRANCE FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: The Shopping Center Group 2233 N. Harnline Ave. Suite 220 (612) 633-5996 Roseville, MN 55113 Information contained herein has been obtained from the owner of the property o, from other sources that we deem reliable We have no reason to doubt ill; accuracy. but we do not guarantee P R O J E C T D A T A RETAIL OFFICE PARK' Gross Lee-e Area 31,910 s/f Gross Lease Area 9,450 s/f Retc 154 spaces Service & Ccm= 1,740 s/f Corridor & Service 1,050 s/f Offc. 50 spaces Total Bldg. Area 33,6.50 s/f Total Bldg. Area 10,500 s/f Total 204 spaces Grand Total Lease Area 41,360 s/f Grand Total Bldg. Area 44,150 s!f WEST ELEVA'nON OFFICE ENTRANCE SOUTH ELEVAnOW Noah+ ELEVAnON RETAIL ENTRANCE EASE ELEVATION $7.00-$14.00p/s/f Net Prce 44,150 total s/f IL'el Sti0Pp�na Hwy 12 & Lake St. Long Lake, MN Henn. the nIy Office 10,500 s/f re d rre `a _ � Retail: 63' to 86' Depths Vie Subnut dby The Shopping Center Group nsmm - Dice. Suite 220 Southeast 2233 N Hamline Avenue Corner New Construction Roseville, MN 55113 "° °° 205 on site (612) 633-5996 DownPeynwnl Parking map Pap 5/19/87 _. _ Date— Usung —be fi tlmp Ke TERMS * Leases are triple net; base rent plus prorata share of operation expenses. * Lease length: 3 - 5 years * Base rent: See Leasing Agent Tt�r�aAted prorata share of operating expenses: 1988 - $1.50 p/s/f, 1989 - $2.00 p/s/f, 1990 - $2.50 p/s/f. Operating expenses include taxes, insurance, management, maintenance. IMPROVEMENTS Landlord will provide: Retail & Office Taped & sanded perimeter walls 2' x 4' recessed florescent lighting Bathrooms to code HVAC unit with distribution 2' x 4' acoustical suspended ceiling Electrical panel STATISTICS & AREA DATA Highway 12 is a major East-West route with daily traffic volume of 17,100 cars. Over 50,000 people in trade area with excellent future growth. 1986 estimated average household income $58,046 with over 63% of households having incomes over $35,000. ENTS Excellent corner location in downtown Long Lake, with easy left turning access. Speed limit by site is 35 m/p/h. Attractive and very visible center will have convenient parking. Early 188 occupancy. /A 0 Ole G Z OFFICE SPACE # 224 + 227 - PROPOSED METHODIST ' j4* �v CLINIC j ^�— # 233 - ACCOUNTANT OFFICE ��=' r t I..t. 81 I �� �•-=• COALITIONi\ 1 119 !4.1t Fa.M Arun REMAINING SPACES TO BE DIVIDED ' TO SUIT TENANTS N!� ® 0 x rl t �Q 1.1:IW99"10 w l©M• I � w 1 I I ® Q�nI '�Ci f-i-_ - -�' Y��r �� ; ���� r� 71, .a..te -w� aaa or�•� �1 _ ! C'DPv acne wi�,1- xGGND On C OD E O F G H K L O O Z -� ,sJ 'J '/ sJ w'•: /-.' - w'•J r/ a/•/ anJ sr/ ar•/ - •t./ w,•... � Z � u • � i— ` � y wJ .+• I •+— �"� r .I ..wt.. erl I y tl tr VI `.: l '�• ( ..i �, r� 1 ~ f ./Lj E7• — 1� ~ 2 LONG LAKE .TOWN CENTER .rs�� ' v� ��. .7-�.�t4+® ( Cr.trr+_'-.�� �M�i op..G • 1 t. �`a— 1�' I I 1 1 ... w. _ mil. `l. w ems. • •.. V ' RETAIL SPACES # 101 LAKEWAY CLEANERS/PIIOTG FACTORY 108 1,808 s/f 102 DRUG STORE 109 1,555 s/f 103 2,973 s/f 110 1,555 s/f 104 OLSON'S BAKERY 111 +/-1,300 s/f 104A 1,036 s/f 112 PROPOSED OUR OWN HARDWARE 105 1,036 s/f 113 PANNEKOEKEN RESTAURANT 106 1,060 s/f 107 520 s/f I -