Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout16-3845 Recorded Resolution)~l/0~~ . lu--b845 111111111111111 II II I II Doc No A10354288 Certified, filed and/or recorded on Sep 1, 2016 4:30 PM Office of the County Recorder Hennepin County, Minnesota Martin McCormick, County Recorder Mark Chapin, County Auditor and Treasurer Deputy 47 Pkg ID 1442651 M Document Recording Fee $46.00 Document Total $4q.00 This cover sheet is now a permanent part of the recorded document. I • CITY OF ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL ... ..... _,.._ NO.-~~ ~6__._5,___,9.__· _ A RESOLUTION GRANTING VARIANCES TO MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 78-420 FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 1240 ARBOR STREET -FILE NO. 16-3845. WHEREAS, Timothy P. Druk and Julie A. Druk, husband and wife, (hereinafter the "Owners") are owners of the property located at 1240 Arbor Street within the City of Orono (hereinafter the "City'') and legally described as follows: Lots 6 and 7, Block 1, MAXWELL'S ADDITION TO CRYSTAL BAY, Hennepin County, Minnesota (hereinafter the "Property"); and WHEREAS, the Owners on July 6, 2016 made a complete application to the City for variances to Orono Municipal Zoning Code Section 78-420 in order to allow the construction of a new single family residence on a lot 16,796 s.f. in area where 87,120 s.f. lot area is normally required; on a lot 100 feet in defined width where a width of 200 feet is normally required; with a front street setback of 20.4 feet where a 50-foot front setback is normally required; with a north side setback of 25 feet where a 30-foot setback is nonnally required; and with a south side street setback of 23 feet where a so:..foot setback is normally required; and WHEREAS, on July 18, 2016 after published and mailed notice in accordance with Minnesota Statutes and the City Code, the Orono Planning Commission held a public hearing, at which time all persons desiring to be heard concerning this application were given the opportunity to speak thereon; and WHEREAS, on July 18, 2016, the Planning Commission on a vote of 6-0 recommended approval of the variances as presented; and WHEREAS, on August 8, 2016, the Orono City Council reviewed the application and the recommendations of the Planning Commission and City staff. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of Orono, Minnesota hereby approves the requested variances as described above based on one or more of the following findings of fact concerning this property: 1 CITY OF ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 6659 -------- FINDINGS OF FACT: Al. The analysis contained within staff memos and the exhibits attached to the aforesaid memos, all minutes from the above mentioned meetings, and any and all other materials distributed at these meetings are hereby incorporated by reference. A2. The Property is located within the RR-lB Single Family Rural Residential District which requires a minim.um lot area of 2.0 acres and a minimum lot width of 200' for construction of a single family residence. A3. The Property is 0.39 acres in area, being 100 feet in defined width. The Property is considered as legally nonconforming with regard to lot area and lot width. A4. The Property is located within Stonn Water Overlay District Tier 3 which allows 35% hardcover. The proposed residence construction will result in hardcover on the Property of approximatelylS.5%, well below the maximum hardcover allowance. AS. The Owners are planning to construct a new home o~ this vacant lot. The lot is just under 4/10 acre in the RR-lB 2-acre zone, and is a comer lot with the Arbor Street frontage defined as front. The Property has sewer available and was assessed for sewer in 1985, hence the· Property was assumed to be buildable as a combination of two lots at that time, as evidenced by City Council Resolution No. 1797. The Property will be served by a private well. The proposed 2-story home includes an attached garage and has an: overall footprint of approximately 1850 s.f. including deck and porches. The house is proposed as a 'lookout' rather than a walkout due to the relative flatness of the lot, and as proposed will have a defined height of just over 26 feet, meeting the 30' limit. A6. The Owners are requesting a number of variances, as the buildable envelope under RR-lB setback standards is approximately 20 feet in width and 60 feet in length and would not allow sufficient footprint area for a reasonably sized home. A7. The Property at 100' wide and less than 1/2 acre in area is typical oflots in the Crystal Bay neighborhood, the majority of which was platted in 1909 and 1915. Over the past century, individual lots as well as double lots and a few triple or larger lots have been built on with single f~ly homes. The RR-lB zoning of the Crystal Bay neighborhood is a reflection of the surrounding rural area, and has never been revised to reflect the actual neighborhood lot sizes created 100 years ago. Rezoning to more closely match the prevailing lot sizes has been discussed in the past but not acted upon. It is noted that Orono's. ½-acre zone standards :would allow for a 0.5 acre lot and 100' width, with setbacks of 30' front and rear, 10' sides, and 15' side street. 2 CITY OF ORONO REsOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. -~6___;;;6_5c...__9~_ AS. The Owners are proposing to meet the required 50' rear yard setback. The front setback variance is for a setback of 20.4 feet for the porch, with the bulk of the house being 26 feet from the street lot line. This setback is generally in line with the existing house to the immediate north, and is typical of many other lots in the neighborhood, which have front setbacks ranging from 17-18 feet to as much as 40-50 feet. The need for the shortened setback is in part due to the topography of the lot and its relation to the 'lookout' configuration. With regard to the side setbacks of 25' and 23 ', these place the house generally centered on the lot, which will avoid visual crowding in the neighborhood. It is noted that under ½-acre standards these would be conforming setbacks. A9. In considering this application for variances, the' Council has considered the advice and recommendation of the Planning Commission and the effect of the proposed variances upon the health, safety and welfare of the community, existing and anticipated traffic conditions, light and air, danger of fire, risk to the public safety, and the effect on values of property in the surrounding area. VARIAN CE ANALYSIS: Bl. "Variances shall only be permitted when they are in hannony with the general purposes and intent of the ordinance .... " Single family homes and the associated amenities are permitted uses in the RR~lB district. The requested variances if granted would allow construction of a single family home on the Property. The proposed residence is a single family home on a small lot in a neighborhood of similarly sized lots with similar setbacks. B2. ''Variances shall only be permitted ... when the variances are consistent with the comprehensive plan." The proposed new residence structure is consistent with the comprehensive plan guiding of this and surrounding properties for residential use. B3. "Variances may be granted when the applicant for the variance establishes that there are practical difficulties in complying with the zoning ordinance. 'Practical difficulties,' as used in connection with the granting of a variance, means that: i. The property owner in question proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner, however, the proposed use is not permitted by the official controls." ii. The plight of the landowner is due to circwnst.ances unique to his property not created by the landowner.,, iii. The variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality." 3 CITY OF ORONO REsOLUTION OF TIIE CITY COUNCIL NO.~_ ~-6 _6 _5 =9~ The Property owners are proposing to use the Property in a reasonable manner but the specific lot area, lot width and setback requirements of the Zoning Code result in the need for variances in order to build on the lot. The plight of the Owner is due to the lot having been created prior to establishment of zoning codes, and the application of area, width and setback standards more suited to 2 .. acre lots than the small lots in the Crystal Bay neighborhood; the landowner did not create the smaH lot situation, Constructing a single family residence as proposed is not anticipated to alter the characier of the n~ighborhood, since many homes in the neighborhood exist on similarly sized lots with similar setbacks. B4. "Economic considerations alone do not constitute practical difficulties." Economic considerations have not been a factor in the variance approval determination. BS. "Practical difficulties also include but are not limited to inadequate access 1o direct sunlight for solar energy systems. V arlances shall be granted for earth-sheltered construction as defined in Minn. Stat. § 216C.06, subd 2, when in harmony with Oronp City Code Chapter 78." This condition is not applicable. B6. ''The board or the council may not permit as a variance any use that is not permitted under Orono City Code Chapter 78 for property in the zone where the affected person's land is located." This condition is not applicable, as the use for a single family residence is an allowed use in the RR-lB District. B7. "The board or council may permit as a variance the temporary use of a one-family dwelling as a two-family dwelling." This condition is not applicable. B8. "The special conditions applying to the structure or land in question are peculiar to such property or immediately adjoining property." The substandard lot area and width are common in the Crystal Bay neighborhood, where many existing homes do not meet the RR-lB District setback standards. This is not the case throughout muc~ of the RR-lB District, but Crystal Bay is a neighborhood created long before the RR .. tB zoning standards were in effect. The conditions applicable to the Property are typical of the Crystal Bay neighborhood but are not typical of the overall RR-lB zoning district. B9. ''The conditions do not apply generally to other land or structures in the district in which the land is located." The conditions apply to many other 100' wide corner lots in the Crystal Bay neighborhood which as a result of the req~ed setbacks would have only a 20' wide buildable envelope under RR-1B standards; but do not apply to a majority oflots within the RR-lB district. BlO. "The granting of the application is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right of the applicant" . The Property is typical of single family lots 4 CITY OF ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL 6659 NO. _______ _ in the Crystal Bay neighborhood. Further, the Property was assessed for a sewer unit and provided with municipal sewer in 1985, hence the Property was assumed to be buildable as a combination of two lots at that time, as evidenced by City Council Resolution No.1797. B 11. "The granting of the proposed variance will not in any way impair health, safety, comfort or morals, or in any other respect be con1rary to the intent of this chapter." Granting of the area, width, setback and lot coverage variances would not impair health, safety, comfort or morals and would be in keeping with the intent of the zoning code. B 12. "The granting of such variance will not merely serve as a convenience to the applicant, but is necessary to alleviate demonstrable difficulty/' The lot size as compared to the RR-lB zoning standards is a practical difficulty, as adherence to those standards would result in a very narrow buildable envelope and a home that would be out of character with the surrounding neighborhood. Granting of the area, width and setback variances will solve a practical difficulty that otherwise would make the lot virtually unusable·for a single family home. CONCLUSIONS, ORDER AND CONDITIONS Based upon one or more of the above findings, the Orono City Council hereby grants variances to Orono Municipal Zoning Code Section 78-420 in order to allow the cons1ruction of a new single family residence on a lot 16,796 s.f. in area w)?.ere 87,120 s.f. lot area is normally required; on a lot 100 feet in defined width where a width of200 feet is normally required; with a front street setback of 20.4 feet where a SO-foot front setback is normally required; with a north side setback_of25 feet where a 30-foot setback is nonnally required; and with a south side street setback of23 feet where a so:.foot setback is normally required, subject to the following conditions: 1. Council approval is based on the survey/site plan and building plans submitted by the Owners and annotated by City staff, attached to this Resolution as Exhibits A and B. Any amendments ·to the approved survey/site plan and building plans which are not in conformity with City codes will require further Planning Commission and City Council r.eview. 2. Owners shall comply with the permitting requirements of the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District. 5 CITY OF ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. ____ 6"-46.P--Y-5 ....,,,_9 _ 3. Authorities granted by this resolution l1lll with the Property not with the Owners, but are permissive only and must be exercised by obtaining a building permit for the project and commencing construction of said project within one year of the date of Council approval, or the variances will expire on that date (August 8, 2017). 4. 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. 5. The undersigned Owners have read, understand and hereby agree to the terms of this resolution and on behalf of the Owners and the Owners' heirs, successors and assigns, hereby agree to the recording of this resolution in the chain of title of the Property. Adopted by the Orono City Council on the 8th day of August, 2016 . .1i -1fL~ ~ Lili Tod McMillan, Mayor &712~ Property Owner(s) l 6 STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN CITY OF ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL N0. _ __..6'"--\6,,_5__,,_9 _ The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this jJ_ ~y of.Al rAJ.d-. 2016, by Timothy P. Druk, husband of Julie A. Druk:. -~ MONICA A. FADNESS NOTARY PUBLIC· MINNESOTA My Commission Expires Jan. 31, 2017 STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this Jf';ky of ~~LM , 2016, by Julie A. Druk, wife of Timothy P. Druk. ~-:-~_:'""""""" NOT:~:~t~~~OTA m My Commission Expires Jan. 31, 2020 [!,..-.,:;. -- Notary Public' 7 CERTIFICATE OF SURVEY • BUILDER TO VERIFY HOUSE DIMENSIONS, SEWER DEPTH AND FOUNDATION DEPTH. • DRIVEWAYS ARE SHOWN FOR GRAPHIC PURPOSES ONLY. FINAL DRIVEWAY DESIGN AND LOCATION TO BE DETERMINED BY CONTRACTOR. -for-Tim Druk • FINISHED GRADE ADJACENT TO HOME SHALL BE 0.5 FEET BELOW TOP OF BLOCK f 1240 A b St O MN EXCEPT AT DRIVEWAY AND PATIO. ~o ~ r or ., rono, , , t~-. -----------· --~( ··· ... .~:;:~~SOclJJ ' .. \. ·········· .... , ..... •··....-'-. I ~ ' I / .-~~ I,;,<> • -~ .. . t/Z'IP-.,,:::. ...... ·1 f ,e. t .. ~.! : ~: "'Sl54,99 wgs♦.&IJ f f .,/ // ...... -·· I;~ .·· ............... f •GS2.Q9 / ~ ~ .... •····· ;-•ss.•• t t / I • •958 ..... -9""----_,_ ---, rr , I q,<; \ ;----,95s36 \ 7 ---/ / '; I i. \ h l ••56.37 j j \ q, I .. •95s.s2 r;ss.se ! l :J "'J l \ (P •955.SS : ch ~,tr/ / ~ cJ1 : Ol ...... GARAGE/HOOSE • x95~,45 ~ ~ ; j .. •, T :i ! .,._ / , .• ,, . :g ' ·---. --• ' /; ;--.~es•t§•·l9 ~ ........ •··'t9t.2IH(Jleas) ••ss~ i \ / - ····· tat~·-o (Plat) Q .. ,....-0 i \ / . \1-' . . ~·~ ;j~: ( / -,-;-;--7 .... -•··· ......... ·/ x;sfa.22 LOT / .. · LOT 7 ~, ·'54"' ':! •• s.. .. · •955. • • .,, . ., •• ss.,3 r ~~ ..,.,, erhJ.;&., f:I ,95.__ -+-duy.Arca•16.'796SQ,FT. \ . • ~ -- ••55.80 l •a,;,s~ --:.5:--. ..... / / / j-\~',,. 1..UI tJ _ .._ '.f--r"-~ 'M1l{ •••• ~-·· WC0Q 1'£J'!M~ , ................. 11955.)s "'-to-"!55. 74 ', ................. ..... ..., LOT M:!;55.56 ..;g5! .g55.g5 ~ ..... \ __ \.,'i'-?.:~ .. •iS!.70 •955.•UI \f::.:.":'.:., )(.'f.f!'lildit!}:ka -AlY.e. ................. ~~~~:~• ••ss.Js ····-.. :: .. ~.-1:---.,------~-.---"-:----- NOTES 6659 Resolution Exhibit A Field survey was complet~ Rud and Sons, Inc. on 06/13/16. Bearings shown are based on the Hennepin County Coordinate System NAD 83 (86 adj.). Vertrcol Datum: NA VOSS Builder/contractor to verify sonltory Sewer Depth prior to excoYCtion. This survey was prepared w!thout the benefit of title work. Additional easements, restrlction8 and/or encumbrances may exist other than those shown hereon. Survey subject to revision upon receipt of a current title commitment or an attorney's title opinion. • X 952.36 ,., <Q, IIl ~ .~ -w---,~-.,.., L __ :...J ~~~ ---s--- ® HARDCOVER AREAS: LEGEND DENOTES IRON MONUMENT FOUND AS LABELED DENOTES EXISTING SPOT ELEVAT!ON DENOTES HUB . DENOTES POWER POLE DENOTES TELEPHONE PEDESTAL DENOTES EXISTING CONTOURS DENOTES PROPOSED CONTOURS DENOTES TREE LINE DENOTES OVERHEAD WIRE DENOTES BITUMINOUS SURFACE DENOTES GRAVEL SURFACE DENOTES SILT FENCE DENOTES SANITARY SEWER MANHOLE DENOTES EXISTING SANITARY SEWER <lQzD DENOTES PROPOSED ELEVATION. X 1011.2 DENOTES EXISllNG ELEVATION. / DENOTES DIRECTION OF DRAINAGE. (See Hardcover Calculation Worksheet) 181 DENOTES WOOD HUB/METAL SPIKE AT 11 FOOT 28.3 i 21!.0 A " ll I 111 __ 21!.o __ 14.o s· 0110:0"1 ~ D ~l --.":.! JO.a -is:O'<::;f OFFSET. (UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED) •OFFSET DISTANCES F'ROM HUBS SHOWN DO NOT MATCH WHAT IS WRITTEN ON THE STAKES IN lliE FIELD. DIAGONAL: 32.00 X 74.00 = 80.62 (BASED ON A 12 COURSE BASEMENT) PROPOSED ELEVATIONS: TOP OF BLOCK = GARAGE FLOOR = LOWEST FLOOR • TOP OF FOOTING = 961.9 961.5 953.8 953.5. .Lots 6&7, Block 1, MAXWELL'S ADDITION TO CRYSTAL BAY, Hennepin County, Minnesota. ~ Denotes Iron Set Bearings shown are on I _hereby cert!fr that this pion, survey or re~ort was prepared by me or under my • Denotes Iron Found an assumed datum. direct supervision _and that I om a dul.Y Registered Land Surveyor under the laws of the Stote of Minnesota. Doted this 11th day of JtJI Y 2016. Scale 1''= 30' Drawn By: SNN t/1M_ ' Job No.: 1648$HS Project Manager: KDN ----.c.&-..1 License No. 45356 E(J~ G, IUQ I SBNS. INC, "" Professional Land surveyors -9so 5th Avenue SEJ Suite 2 Hutchinson, MN 50350 Tel._(~ 587--202S ~(:120) li87·21ie5 C c:, 0 0 O LEET ELEVATION =•t/1"-Nf' REAR ELEVATION l!IC:,IU:11/ ... 1'4 FOR BID PURPOSES ONLY 'S'r'I FF NOTE:S ~ ··-·-· . .••--~~~--~--------- ... ._.,:'.),!11:'.,;:t.,~J?~«~-.. ~P.r. ___ ._._:_; ___ ' ~FI.J!!fC...,-F/AJM.,. ~PK.'IDN:::, . -"~---.---~~Foo~i'N'r1>gp"'Te:""~-;;Ar•'--· .... .,;. .. ~SU~. . •.. ,.~----···· ~-·:2\~:~-~ .. ~~ ... ·-... ~~~-11.f.~-----···---·--· ~~ ·" ~IOG ~~ ~?,."\ ~·~k,<H:::£.,~-€-2' fd·•t;:e-ptr--. i . ~J ,. -· , 4t,--..., --9 11 11 11 11 II II II II II I _ __;··-~~L'j;,.fE ... ~~$U,tlUta:.¥~---·--•-·-j tz " ...:r.;:r'...,::r'...,::r'...:r.:!.,. 'I p~ ·-·~-. .., .. _. ,.,. .......... -.. ,·~•.-.. .............. ____ ... , ___________ .,,......_ ___ ._{ ____ ......... , ______ ,_.,. ____ . : 111'.'~~r:nCM ! FRONT ELEVATION ~•1, ... -.,-v-··•-••-----w;-aiy l.«t:t IIQ. rT. TOTAL +rMttUtsttm U:.Z:3a.l"T.TOTAL utm.rT.Clf"?,DeltUlftOOM l!l°lf 4/1% ~ ~ ~ 1 t::~PUtiklNOTOl.'letmrH.1.DM~ • ~~IW..L f'l,laelll TOWIIP'(KltXOIJT r,.,,,J5Klt, ~ INGT'JLI.Z.P PRl0ft TO l"INC51H •~ivrLAOHN.Leim::Rt«INIOll:!iNDOoatS ~ TO M.li IS& t:00!!: IQ:QU~ J':l!_ HlafllltAL NJ.-•• f . .' k:Z! & WA1Dt SHJll!LD AU. YALl.C'te IQ:&WA~81flSl.l)M1 \PAU..w.N..t.a ~MO!"~ "'-CNtl WH.L • AU,, ~ OM HALO !leW. ~lt..L£0 TMIOU .. ~ QJIIII •D•t1UCJTIC~1'ftlt.J..CO NO~W/IDIL~TO ~wm"WATl:ft~ • AU..~MUOTa::AL M.L.fl'll!te'QL\TIONll'TOIEX'Tl!IUOlll':OI" ~WltlNN«HCJt.#6NW.CU1'Cllll roamu.TXlN& ME~ • 'l"\..AaH N-'-WN:JOWO AJrO 000M 11:~r'UllHJNO TC lie lt,)e'f~m:, DY""""""" :t. ~ V...-oK eN11111:11!: AT N..LWM.1.l"ftAM ... TOex"nl:JIIIC!fll NIDON~Of'ALLTO,,l"U.'R:9 --~~ AU. Q.111'~ .::Qll!Nefte,. & ~IM6 Toee.~ 'II/ -.w,,-l>l"'t!R "ftlQft TO OIO»o, 1240 ARBOR STREET ORONO, MN. Jllllanclllll,.,_,Ol'll::ma' __ ~.,. I ' 6 6 5 9 ! Resolution z! ExhibitB c,a-i;· rn,i~ ~~~ I s~ l c0!/1~ c,;fg ~I!?; a:ji!h ·<:;~ ~itHI Q t) is~ ~~g -rs~~ h~ ~~~~ !-~~ "'~~~ o;,,.~ 05!!!\) U)_ ~ ::s 0 ~ ~ :::> ~ 0 ~ OA'II!, 6-2-1-10 --- ~ -""---CCIOL,.,, ..1lialL... •-NO. I ...------------------------------7r-i;;ii.mo659 ii~ NOreS• &.=-.. -:1=~== &L ..... ,. .... ,.. ... M1. ...... .. ~-=-..:?..:r'.J: &.IIIIR•IU~ ·•--•"'-.... ,..,. ---•'TJ.lnllllt ~-~= -a&-.Oftlffl~ta ~ i1 ;1<= ~ ~· 'MTE1Rrrrnr,:,ct111& ·~,1~~~-~~~~ 1 AU. f'L00M TO 15C L/410 f IR5T FLOOR PLAN .,,~,.,. ~1/41 •1'-0" ,...,. , ..... FOR BID PURPOSES ONLY ~ ftAL"' ii! ~ ll .. .. ~ 'J/41 Pl:O::IM& : ----~ -H Hl"1TIOOOQIII ·"11-r.m Fm" 1 ..... •1\, .. l' ..-- ~ ll 11 iii /411 ~-1~ WIW 1 ier:l:t::,~ l ~I ~, 1-1 ,, ... 1/41 ,,__ ... J/J.1 1'1'PC "X1 a'IP. !ID. ON l , .,.,,. mo.J"'l 1!11 -:,.oi,tt1 .. ~ r,I ifi l:li % ,, ; =! ~- I LL ~d J_l.t/1 ~ ~=tgr~, '>I,• cm-. l!IO. Q,J(Q.INI ~ ·~~ W-""IU ..... -~4 @ ~~~~ -;.:..-t-1-~ LIVING g efet,OJld \In -~~"t---n _ t l\11 ~ mt •i;;~~=f~:;f~f.~;;;;:t eDU111'"°'1J'IJl:!Qllle l r-----1111 iii "~ . '" ,.,.,. I 1)111» §:i,l 111/~W/dlA i 1 Im i:: ,s m,1: ----t-+---=tf:,,._ =} =~,... =J =.,t, I rill :f jll\j.. I lllfi"' li._111 l ,lli!i !1 !!! : m., ::1 ! Ill! ,.,:.i.~ .. •~~ m &nl ( ~ 1111 eeMW/Dll'U.'ft! II -~= J__ _ ..'.-~-~~~~"~~~l~~i~~:1ic:..~~-=-===:.ri I I I ~ !!~ ~L ...,. I .... ! ..... I """ n'" ·~ -~-""- ~ ~ .!!:L__ ~ ii .. 1, t \ ~ ~i i1 ' I I .... I·"" """ ~ ~ ~ 1240 .ARBOR STREET -2.~~}:!N..;.. __ ~l~ Resolution ~a1~i Exhibit B 0~...t,t ~ii I s~a. oO!!lj ,.,.;.,i :;::wf2 i~~~ a;~~E~ U....1g,1: OC.•il e ~~ ~~~ .. ~~ ;iii!~ !ii§~ ~!,!!ci;; o~l:h-a -!;>! ~<< 0§.!2 lf.J. ~ ~ 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ A ........ 6-2MC. ·-I ====l ----! ----! ____ , ----! D!lAWN ■Y, I -""---· COIM PIO. Jlilli.__ ltmrrNO. 3.2 .. STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The undersigned, being duly qualified and appointed City Clerk of the City of Orono, Minnesota, certifies that I compared the foregoing resolution adopted at the meeting of the Orono City Council on August 8, 2016, with the original thereof on file in m f.':~pe, and the same is a correct transcription thereof. ;-lf 12th day of August, 2016.