Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
10-10-1988 - Agenda Packet City Council - regular meeting
I el PUBLIC ATTENDANCE /1 CITY OF ORONO MEETING DATEI In Jo, 7 PLZASZ FILL OUT THE INFORMATION REQUESTED BELOW FOR OUR CITY RECORDS. NAME OR NUMBER W Ms (please print) ADDRESS PRESZNT FOR (from agenda) YejVr 3. C ( c.3 w� 9. G. �. �...�• ,.., .� f 3o 6�01VI lMleo�VkA'41 7167 4. 7 ?c ICkt -� ,Z AL, /)P. -Q "� 1 Li OL.Zi1. k c l - 13'33 L f 9 xv PETITION FOR A SAFE HIGHWAY 12 The undersigned believe that the 1 1/2 mile section of Highway 12 between the Luce Line and downtown Long Lake is an extremely dangerous stretch of road because of: 1) the high traffic volume, 2) the relatively high speed and, 3) the numerous residential streets connecting with this section of highway. Therefore, this petition propoies the following steps and measures be instituted immediately to provide SAFE access to Highway 12 for all residents of Long Lake that live between Luce Line and eastern downtown area of Long Lake. 1. We propose increased law enforcement of all driving laws and specifically the speed limits. 2. We propose the speed limit to be reduced from 45 mph to 30 mph. 3. We propose a yellow flashing light with caution sign at Luce Line and Billy's Light House. 4. We propose additional signage for dangerous entrance. 5. We propose to restrict the extra lane running from Glenmoor Lane to Greenhill Lane (easterly traffic) to right turn cnly lane. There have been too many serious accidents and unfortunately three fatalities in the past few months. These minimal actions should provide a safer highway. However, this will only be if these proposals are enforced. THESE PROPOSALS WILL ONLY PROVIDE A SHORT TERM SOLUTION TO A SAFER ROAD. WE MUST LOOK TO THE F0TURE A1D SOLVE THE LONG TERM PROBLEM FOR A SAFER HIGHWAY 12. Rtic 4,, tZOM)� B PETITION FOR A SAFE HIGHWAY 12 _Address Telephone N�unber Name CA-) �/SZ-Lc%��C/ !' f �) ✓�-^'J 3Q.� L.,l�s cc�� "1J )ti., IU&9 ��a�- �•�t,� F �l7 - �-�l `/' %Zl 5 Flo /Ovl ��y )6 �dr� cAZL , ;/;� - a,y Name J r� "PETITION FOR A SAFE HIGHWAY 12 Address ,p Telaphone NMber 3 3S ficCA- y 7 3 4175=3 6 7,7 Imp FuSscll LIJ• L •L. . 473— Bi�S,q � 3 - n C,-2-- y7s- yn 7p LJ7&-9-7y1 17C-Z7z3 %f73-7i>c�y rr Name �I KUR-rZr�iry PETITION FOR A SAFE HIGHWAY 12 Address Telephone Number q 4S w• IVA 4�3z�45 1LW 7 / 0u 0Q yL 4i- 9 % o Y )- ci, . ova y z4 ;A �(- -�.57 PETITION FOR A SAFE HIGHWAY 12 Address onn q L �r Telephone Number ,V7 3 - 734/i 472- 751-2.9 N7z_�p7 q76 rla'7/ u?-o8�y egg? 17 d 4��=onq � 73�— k-v�, - —( cvi -as 4(-7 9 9 7111 YES- -o Y39 �-o �l1 Name 7 s" QC �1 'y 1/1 PETITION FOR A SAFE HIGHWAY 12 Address JZ3 3 a of Telephone Number y73 -1oz1 y -7 3 - 3 -J- 5'6- i/ 74 - yes-- 0.�,3� XI;r aS117 4:7s-k-?sa kit. 9 PETITION FOR A SAFE HIGHWAY 12 Address / Z 70 T6Vz-ttw t2 ye%e Z ala Telephone Number 4-;Is - l 0.?Z y 2 3- Y-23 3 11f3 - 7p.Zy Z1175 // 06 q7(- g2wl �47s- U 775 413, y 7 3 L4 - -3 3 t, s � Lr3 174� 7 ►i % � 4, O J =1 l' 4' o l/01 i PETITION FOR A SA'` HIGHWAY 12 Name Address 1 2 7v '1A 11 aCcl 37, S 9a " Iawp") 0. %ko" (�)tc a 7 Telephone Number V7S- 9r.-33 i7�-7s'Y� �. '' a 9 w - 3e'l-12 p, i3 161b6 17A, 1-4-1 Al"r, 9 3 (r- a l c) 3fw CAw/mw, j" Vw. f d 4--1 c..u, t' 7 3 ( v, c) c ,3--) 0"-, c /" yyJ 4"Wv A- •.Fl dill..�Ew._ LVCT�Wcr� D/ <(')3-Cr-)I 4011 k'4 Mo, — -/7-5, .11"- 1 /, [ maut � a chmoA, lvomv NIF c x PETITION FOR A SAFE HIGHWAY 12 Address 00,aiLt, , M n s-27N 09M y o0l F Mont P[9//v /"A/ tiISS v,.,,„.H / —k Lcoh y C k� Aut to 1gldkR, Mn Telephone Number 1175-- 3970 It -?a . 3% it /teM� • H�9•J��9�1 p 47Gv3gg ?(, - raw 473-3'Cfi Ll76 v 11 l _ 21 10 �� 231 GCEIVI"Id ' ogW9 y S -Z 2 69 12, 1?, Mom- ejAd �4s G�cau�' �G/1t �5 ��57 1171 - q7$# �i 3558% PETITION FOR A SAFE HIGHWAY 12 Name Address Telephone Number L"j ( ,. ,lurk ss� �i73 ' F3 0-0 990 3.2 � 1tiG � C 1L f5.osfl I���°'�"- mayo / . Al 1k.1d S A 44*- r le Pk ?A 7 w `U m q 7 U55 (f' U r�_ I Ay'70). -�—Xo)� - PETITION FOR A SAFE HIGHWAY 12 Address 1176 a mom,-ett Telephone Number Y) �- (t I 3 gl7�- 10oy e 7A V cLt� �K IJ4-w2►�i :,.�zr �•C a 0 o k/ }<<�It l� t f 7.3 0 3 - f o'j 9 PETITION FOR A SAM HIGHWAY 12 Address �;2 o7lnd,4 wood Pam wo L �� Telephone Number `i.73-t3;az �l �15- 2995 �173 -Vo9/ -260 L;n � ,.,e- y73- 7Yob PETITION FOR A SAFE HIGHWAY 12 N Address / D �.l.GGcL/ rty22 �zz S C 1, 4 Telephone Number V7� c �% so (< << 7, 7-3 - 6 e''' Name PETITION FOR A SAFE HIGHWAY 12 Address Telephone Number f'f/- �6)04� cot -q-4 e - a �aa -1 ?3 - 66oa bus „ %,pLe-- y73- 03 yo ✓ v tll� -lV� L' on r wasd (ne 413—(�1 *Z ,Pw � cx v`�L �( -7 3' Z`c. to `� D- 6 �- ���o � y173 - a��� �`i 5 ��h�� �,.��� �_4..a LlI S. -Iu 1? S q A,,p c�ler R� 4?3- 6 ,, ( ? Z Z Sr L ,.*gWc,a) L-1 c173— 070 PETITION FOR A SAFE HIGHWAY 12 Name Address Aj� 640nlr� Hec/he.- 1.4ne. ob,t 3 ZS 22- or Telephone Number q73-d3�/3 y73 -ez.3 y,3 -41 76 -o (Iy; `f7.3-1 Q1-/8 g73_8 7iu CITY 00: ORONO PUBLIC.HEARINCI, NOTICE The City Council will hold a Public Hearing in the Council Chambers at 1275 Brown Road South on Monday. October 10, 1988 at 7 00 p m on the proposed assegsMent In the total amount of $6 399 40 `or hazardous bullding removal on two properties legally described as Poll .,ws 1 1929 Fagerness Point Road -Lot 19, Fagerness PID 17-1 17-23 23 001 1 2 3960 Sixth Aven,je North - Part of the Southwest v. of Southwest ,,• of Section 29. Township 118, North Range 23 and part of Section 32, Township 118, North Range 23 - P I D 32 1 18.23 22 0001 The proposed assessment roll is on file with the City Clerk at '`i Administrative offices. 1335 Brown Road Su 'n Written or oral oblec tions will be coaisidered No appeal may be taken as to the amount of any assessment unless a signed. written objection is filed with the Ciry Clerk prior to the hearing or presented to the presiding officer at the hearing An appeal to the District Court may 5e made by serving notice upon the Mayor or City Clerk. within 30 days af- tAr adoption of the asses.,tment and filing such notice with the District Court within ten days af- ter service upon the Mayor or City Clerk The City has adopted a special assessment defer meet ordinance based on the applicant rneeting ape, ownership occupancy and income guidelines By Order of the City Council /a/ Dorothy M Heltin City Clerk jopMlShed In The Laker and P,oneer Sept 19 Q8_n d Sept. 28, 19881 -� AGENDA FOR COUNCIL MEETING SET FOR MONDAY, OCTOBER 10, 1988, 7:00 P.M. (*) %sterisk items are considered to be routine items to be enacted upon by one motion by the City Council under the Consent Item* on the agenda. Discussion will be held upon request. Memos regarding each of the Agenda items are available in the Public Packet whiO4 rn4ty -a pained upon request from the Recorder. `°. " ROLL CALL PUBLIC HEARING - SPECIAL ASSESSMENT 1. 1929 F'agerness Point Road 3960 Sixth Avenue North 2. C'Mgi,NT AGENDA* APPROVAL OF MINUTES * 3. Regular Meeting of September 28, 1988 PLANNING COMMISSION COMMENTS PUBLIC COMMENTS - (Limit 5 Minutes Per Person) ZONING ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT r^T 1019': s owr 4. Highway 12 Zoning Amendment - John Shardlow 5. #1305 Washington Scientific Industries, 2605 Wayzata Blvd - Conditional Case Permit - Resolution 6. #1340 Washington Scientific Industries, 2605 Wayzata Blvd - Conditional Use Permit - First Phase - Resolution 7. #1306 Metro Waste Control Commission, 3280 North Shore Drive - Conditional Use Permit - Resolution 8. #1331 Metro Waste Control Commission, 3280 North Shore Drive - Preliminary Subdivision - Resolution 9. #1321 Tom Haislet, 950 Old Crystal Bay Road North - Preliminary Subdivision - Resolution 10. #1324 Mr. and Mrs. William Gregory, 1099 Tamarack Drive - Conditional Use Permit - Resolution 11. #1325 Lakeview Golf of Orono, Inc., 405 North Arm D ive - Conditional Use Permit - Resolution 12. #1332 Marcelo Gumucio, 980 Ferndale Road West - Variance - Resolution 13. #1333 Sidney Rebers, 715 North Brown Road - Rezoning - Ordinance Amendment 14. #1338 Duane & Connie Schibilla, 3235 Crystal Bay Road - Variances - Resolution 15. #1241 Daniel R. V3ughan & Todd Ziesmer, 3440 Bayside Road - Variance - Resolution 16. #1342 David & Valerie Peterson, 1125 North Arm Drive - Variance - Resolution MAYOR'S REPORT * 17. Orono/Long Lake Discussions 18. Appointment Park Commission Members CITY ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT 19. Recycling Proposa'.s 20. Budget Adoption/1989 Tax Levy 21. City Facilities - Site Criteria AGENDA FOR COUNCIL MEETING SET FOR MONDAY, OCiOBER 10, 1988, 7:00 P.M. CCITY ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT Continuted 22. Amend Council Salaries - Ordinance 23. Highway 12 Task Force 24. Property Tax System 25. Animal Permit Ordinance 26. Rules for Depository * 27. Navarre Crosswalk • 28. Crystal Bay Road • 29. Bohns Point Feasibility Study * 30. Hazardous Building Proceedings - 2180 Prospect • 31. Mound Fire Contract * 32. Assessment Roll - Delinquent Charges/Payments - Resolution - Hazardous Buildings - Reso `_ion - Utility/Septic Charges - R,.. lution * 33. Administrator's Information Woodhill Avenue County 15 Progress Orono/Minnetonka Beach Interceptor Progress 3508 Ivy Place County 15 Beautification Michael Kirnyczuk Goal Setting CITY ATTORNEY'S REPORT LICENSES (34*) BILLS (35*) ADJOURNMENT Affidavit of Publication State of Minnesota, County of Hennepin. Pill Holm, being duly sworn, on oath says that he is an auth. rued 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 �4?'04 hr ti1- which is attached was cut from the columns of said newspaper, and was printed and published once each week for Z- successive weeks. It was first published Monday, the I 1 day of _�k , 19 O I . and was thereafter printed and published every Monday, to and including Monday the 2 b day of 14rd 0_1. . 19 f : Authorized Agent _ , r w. w++avw.+.:•w w o.+wa.vr.N.,w.wao.,9 MARIETTA A. ``TRAUS C TY 3 My Comm. as.on Ext,.-se Jan. 27, 19PU • NNN11�M •� • N Subscribed and sworn to me on this d L dry of _._� . 19 V . By m 46 4 Notary Public Nate JR001 w OOR ( t l Lowest classified fade paid by commercial users for compara bte spacer $7 84 per inch (:'i Maximum rafe allowed by law for above matt-( $4 54 per orwh t.il Rale actuaNy charged for above matter $4 54 per uK-h Each ,iddtfK)naJ sut)cesslve week $3 03 per •1K:h AGENDA FOR COUNCIL MEETING SET FOR MONDAY, OCTOBER 10, 1988, 7:00 P.M. CITY ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT Continuted 22. Amend Council Salaries - Ordinance 23. Highway 12 Task Force 24. Property Tax System 25. Animal Permit Ordinance 26. Rules for Depository * 27. Navarre Crosswalk * 28. Crystal Bay Road * 29. Bohns Point Feasibility Study * 30. Hazardous Building Proceedings - 2180 Prospect * 31. Mound Fire Contract * 32. Assessment Roll - Delinquent Charges/Payments - Resolution - Hazardous Buildings - Resolution o - Utility/Septic Charges - Resolution 6* 33. Administrator's Information Woodhill Avenue County 15 Progress Orono/Minnetonka Beach Interceptor Progress 3508 Ivy Place County 15 Beautification Michael Kirnyczuk Goal Setting CITY ATTORNEY'S REPORT LICENSES (34*) BILLS (35*) ADJOURNMENT Affidavit of Publication State of Minnesota, County of Hennepin. Bill Holm, being duly swurn, on oath says that he is an authorized agent and employee of the publisher of the newspaper known as THE LAKER, Mo;jnd. Min- nesota, and has full knowledge of tho facts which are stated below. A ) The nev, paper has complied with all the require- menis constituting qualifications as a qualified newspaper, as provided by Minnesota Statute 331 A 02, 331 A.07, and other applicable laws, as acne: sued B ) The printed 9N4?04 nr *•,1- P- A • jA%\rtjr which is attached was cut from the columns of said newspaper, and was printed and published once each week for Z- successive weeks It was first published Monday, p the I 1 day of _�k 19 �a and was thereafter printed and published every Monday, to and Including Monday, the Z b day of 1�d, 19 Authorized Agent crr�r.vaw��ww+h•9 MAR!ETTA A. S'TRAUS '�T i�• NOT;,:�Y F'" :'.OTA CAA-'V%:; C-- ;Ty 3 ��:-` 161y Cam.-98-On Eap.rss Jrn. 27, too OV00044- off* 0#0-r-04 Subscribed and sworn to me on this OC �- day of 1990 . By ?0. e'66 Notary Public Rah Mfor~000 11) Lowest clamfied rate paid by corwnerctal users for com arA We space 37 84 per inch 121 Maxinuim rate slowed by law for above matter :4 54 oei rich 1.31 Rate actwtfy charged for above matter $4 54 per -rr_h Each additional %uccesnive **" S3 03 per ,rh h MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUtiCIL MEETING HELD SEPTEMBER 28, 1988 ATTENDANCE 7:00 P.M. The Council met on the above date with the following members present: Mayor Grabek, Councilmembers Peterson and Callahan. Councilmember Nettles arrived at 7:40 p.m. The following City representatives were present: City Administrator Bernhardson, Zoning Administrator Mabusth, Public Works Director Gerhardsen, and City Recorder Scheffler. Assistant City Attorney Whitney was also present. CONSENT AGENDA* City Administrator Bernhardson requested the removal of items #3 and #23 from the Consent Agenda. It was moved by Councilmember Callahan, seconded by Councilmember Peterson, to approve the Consent Agenda. Motion, Ayes=3, Nays=O, Motion passed. Mayor Grabek made special mention of #10 of the Consent Agenda which appointed Mr. Philip Bradley as the new Park Commission Chairman. Mayor Grabek welcomed Mr. Bradley and thanked him for his previous service as a member of the Park Commission. APPPROVAL OF MINUTES* It was moved by Councilmember Callahan Councilmember Peterson, to approve the Minutes of 12, 1988 Council Meeting. Motion, Ayes=3, Nays=O, PUBLIC COMMENTS There were no comments from the public. ZONING ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT: #1303 ALLAN REZABER 1989 FAGERNESS POINT ROAD VARIANCE* The applicant was not present for this matter. seconded by the September Motion passed. City Administrator Bernhardson explained that at the time the meeting information was sent to the Council members, he had not yet received any word from the new property owners. Mr. Rezabek delivered a letter to the City indicating that he would like to withdraw his application. It was moved by Councilmember Callahan, seconded by Councilmember Peterson, to confirm the withdrawal of application 01303, per the request of Mr. Allan Rezabek. Mayor Grabek pointed out the fact that in previous discussion and voting on this matter he removed himself from the Council due to a personal association with the parties involved. He did not feel there was a need to remove himself in this case where there was no controversy, only a withdrawal. Motion, Ayes-3, Nays-O, Motion 1 MINUTES OF REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING SEPTEMBER 28,1988 #1303 RE7ABEK CONTINUED passed. #1311 JOHN PURDY 1975 FAGERNESS POINT ROAD VARIANCE' It was moved by Councilmember Callahan, seconded by Councilmember Peterson, to refer the revised proposal of John & Susan Purdy for additions at 1975 Fagerness Point Road, to the Planning Commission for further recommendation. Motion, Ayes=3, Nays=O, Motion passed. 1312 WILLIAM LAUER 3165 NORTH SHORE DRIVE VARIANCE - RESOLUTION #2504 The applicant was present for this matter. City Administrator Bernhardson explained that the applicant was requesting a hardcover variance to perform some home improvements. The existing amount of hardcover in the 75-250' zone is 29.2% where 25% is allowed. Applicant is asking to increase that by .3% in that zone and will compensate that by reducing hard -over in the 250-500' zone. Mayor Grabek asked Mr. Lauer if he had any questions or concerns pertaining to this matter. Mr. Lauer stated that he would fallow through as the City had advised him to do. It was Roved by Councilmember Callahan, seconded by Mayor Grabek, to approve #11312, as set forth in Resolution #2504. Motion, Ayes=3, Nays=O, Motion passed. #1301 FREDERICK WHITE 180 NORTH SHORE DRIVE WEST PRELIMINARY PLAT APPROVAL RESOLUTION #2508 The applicant was not present for this matter. City Administrator Bernhardson explained that matter was a request for a subdivision in order to conform with a judicial finding and settlement of a land dispute. The lot containing the existing house will be known as lot 1, and the balance of the parcel shall be designated as outlot A. It was moved by Councilmember Callahan, seconded by Councilmember Peterson, to approve #1301, per those conditions and recommendations set forth in Resolution #2508. Motion, Ayes-3, Nays=O, Motion passed. MINUTES OF REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL KEETING SEPTEMBER 28,1988 #1318 SUAD AZHARI 1745 PDX STREET VARIANCE RESOLUTION #2505 The applicant was present for this matter. City Administrator Bernaardson explained that Mr. Azhari was requesting a variance in order to construct two pillar monuments in the front of his property. The pillars will form a part of an entrance gate. The pillars and entrance gate will require a height variance of 4-1/2' and a 50' street setback variance of 39.7'. It was moved by Mayor Grabek, seconded by Councilmember Peterson, to approve #1318, per the recommendations and conditions set forth in Resolution #2505. Motion, Ayes=3, Nays=O, Motion passed. MAYOR'S REPORT: LAKE 14INNETONKA REGIONAL PARR City Administrator Bernhardson updated and nformed the Council that this matter went to Court Thursday, September 28, 1988. The case was heard and the Judge indicated to the two parties that she would like this matter negotiated and settled. The parties met in the Judge's chambers for such discussions. Mr. Tim Thorton, the attorney for Minnetrista, will possibly continue handling this matter. The City of Shorewood has joined Minnetrista in this suit. The alternate attorney for the City of Orono has a conflict of interest in that the State of Minnesota is one of the main defendants in this matter. Bernhardson recommended that the City of Orono join as a named party in the lawsuit, which should not cost the City more than $300.00. Councilmember Callahan asked for clarification as to whether the case had been tried. City Administrator Bernhardson stated that the first hearing had occurred. Direction was given at that hearing as to the parties beginning negotiation discussions. Bernhardson added that the case may be settled in the next two weeks. Mayor Grabek suggested postponing any action until further developments take place. It was moved by Mayor Grabek, seconded by Councilmember Ca l iahan, to table this item. Motion, Ayes=3, Nays-O, Motion passed. ORONO/LONG, LAKE REPRESENTATIVES' DISCUSSIONS/OCTOBER 5, 1988* It was moved by Councilmember Callahan, seconded by Councilmember Peterson, to accept to information as it relates to the discussions between Orono and Long Lake. Motion, Ayes-3, Nays-O, Motion passed. MINUTES OF REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING SEPTEMBER 28,1988 APPOINTMENT - PARK COMMISSION CHAIR* it was moved by Councilmember Callahan, seconded by Councilmember Peterson, to appoint Mr. Phil Bradley as Park Commission Chair effective September 28, 1988. Motion, Ayes=3, Nays=0, Motion passed. CITY ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT: CRYSTAL BAY ROAD City Administrator Bernhardson explained that the July, 1987, "Super Storm", damaged the shoreline for a length of 300' to 400' on Crystal Bay Road. The City of Orono does not have a right-of-way on Crystal Bay Road, only an easement that covers the travelled portion of the road. O-riginally, the Public works Department was trying to seek a solution whereby they could get joint restoration of the bank and the road. In August, 1987, the City Engineer brought forward recommendations for either restoring the bank by laying down a matting, restoring the bank by the use of cribbing, or moving the road back 12' and reducing the slope of the bank. It was determined that moving the road was not feasible because of limited fr- t yard areas which the residents were unwilling to give up. There was a problem due to a lack of easement control as to getting coordination and acceptance for payment of one of the other two solutions. One of the options was $90.00/lineal foot, the other was $120.00/lineal foot. During this time frame, Public works Director, John Gerhardson, was in contact with residents on the road. There was not any progress being made so an alternate solution was proposed in April which involved placing sheathing within the area the City could claim as right-of-way. The City could not finance the restoration of anything but public property. For safety purposes, a temporary guardrail would be placed along the portion of the road where the bank needed restoring. This proposal was taken to the Planning Commis:;ion in July. At that time, the residents indicated that they wanted to close the road. Minnetonka Beach informally indicated back in December, 1987 that they would not agree to close the road. One of the issues involved is the fact that the street is currently a through street and public safety access would be a concern. If the road is closed in the front, there may be a need for access for the properties on the east end of the road. It was requested at the July 18, 1988 Planning Commission Meeting that the City of Minnetonka Beach be reapproached on the issue of closing the road. Minnetonka Beach discussed this matter at their September 12, 1988 Council Meeting and determined that they were still not in favor of closing the road. City Administrator Bernhardson stated that the City would like to conclude this ongoing problem by proceeding with the sheathing. This would restore the road now and allow the residents to deal with the dead-end/cut -de-sac issue at a later time. NINUTES OF REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING SEPTENBER 28,1988 CRYSTAL BAY ROAD CONTINUED Mrs. Lorraine Moss stated that she had lived on Crystal Bay Road for 42 years and was not in favor of closing it. The residents requesting the road be closed had alternative access or their garage placed behind the road. Mrs. Moss stated that there are tn^ few roads that allowed a lake view. qhe also added that dead -ding the road would mean that City maintenance for util _es and street cleanina would discontinue. Mrs. Moss stated that the road Belo: ,s to the resident:, on the street. She suggested that the bank be repaired and each resident on the road be assessed a portion of the cost. Mr. Schupp introduced himself as being the individual who circulated the proposal to close the road. He said that the proposal was self-explanatory and that any efforts to dead-end or close the road ought to be tied into the efforts to repair the road. Mr. Schupp informed Mrs. Moss that their proposal did not include dead -ending the road in front of her house. Mrs. Moss stated that she would have to go three miles out of her way to get to friends' houses in Minnetonka Beach. Mr. Schupp felt that closing the road would benefit all the affected property owners. A petition was circulated and Mrs. Moss was one of the residents chat did not agree with closing the road. The road was meant to be a "local traffic only" road, not a public through street Mayor GrabPk indicated that the Mayor of Minnetonka Beach confirmed on Se?tember 28, 1988, that the City was not in favor of closing the road. Councilmember Callahan expressed his agreement with Mrs. Moss, in that the road had always existed as a through road and it should remain that way. Mr. Duane Schibilla disagreed by stating that the road was never intended to be a through road. Callahan stated that the road was a through road in that you could begin at one end and come out the other. Mrs. Moss stated that the road was always used by local residents to go to the Beach and to the Club. Mr. Schibilla stated that his proposal was not restricting the original intent of the road. Callahan stated tLit he could understand the position of the residents. It was I,— Dinion that the property values of the residents on the road wouiL- go up considerably if the road were closed. Historically, however, the road has been uEed by the Public and has been a connection with Minnetonka Beach. Mrs. Moss asked Mr. Schibilla if he would be in fav(, ^f allowing some of his property to be used for an a 1 ternate acces . Mayor Graben interjected that there could be many alternatives proposed, but the issue of repairs and closing or not closing should be addressed for the time being. Councilmember Peterson asked Public Works Director Gerhardson for a definition of "local traffic only". Gerhardson replied that the purpose of those signs was to reduce the through traffic on the road. It also enabled the speed limit to be redi:ced to 15 miles per hour. Paterson asked on whose property the dirt road behind the residents was located? Gerhardson stated that a r� MINUTES OF REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING SEPTEMBER 28,1988 CRYSTAL BAY ROAD portion of it was on the railroad right-of-way. Mr. Schupp concurred with this and added that he had been trying to obtain a public easement from the railroad. Mr. Schupp felt that if a right-of-way could be obtained, it would solve the problem of an emergency access. Northview could be exterled and a railroad crossing could be installed which would zJlo,,. Minnetonka Beach their access. Mr. Schupp stated that he was willinr to pay the cost of the acquisition of the public easement. Schupp also stated that the Minnetonka Beach Council had indicated that this issue was really of no concern to them, it was more a problem for Orono. Mayor Grabek stated that should the road be closed, another access would need to be available for certain parts of the street. Mayor Grabek stated that the question is whether the road is to be closed or repaired? Grabek also asked whether the City would still need to repair the road if it were closed. Public Works Director, Gerhardson, statea that would depend upon where the road was closed. If it were closed east of the damage, the City could vacate that portion as a public roadway and dedicate the land to the abutting property owners, then they could make the repairs themselves. The City would still have to obtain utility easements because there are sanitary sewer and gas lines under the road. It would be difficult to obtain enough property to make the road into a cul-de-sac. Mayor Grabek asked if there was still enough time left before the winter to fix the road? Gerhardson replied that it would be close, but they could get the job done. Mr. Bill Wolf stated that this had been ? long, drawn out process. All the residents were asking was to 4et 8-10 pieces of property fixed up, while taking the City of Orono into consideration as well. He hated to think that this matter would be passed by 4 or 5 people who were really negative about this matter. He cautioned the Council to carefully examine this matter from all aspects. Leesa Anderson stated that she obtained the signatures on the petition and that the petition should stand for something. She said there were people in her area that were willing to go out of their way just so the road could be closed. She stated that the value of their property was not as much an issue as safety. The residents all met at her house to prepare the proposal and had to move their cars so that a dump truck cou id get through. City Administrator Bernhardson stated that the issues at hand did not naed to be decided that evening. The proposal for the conditional use permit for the repairs will be before the Planning Commission on the 17th of October. The Panning Commission's recommendation from that meeting could then be taken T MINUTES OF REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL !MEETING SEPTEMBER 28,1988 CRYSTAL BAY ROAD CONTINUED to the Council on the 24th of October. Mr. Lee Erger, another resident on Crystal Bay Road, stated that he had some discussions with Public works Director Gerhardson concerning repairing the bank. It was Mr. Erger's understanding that there would be nothing done with his property, only the "S" curve. If that was the case, why were there flash, ' lash'. g yellow lights and snow fencing in front of his house. Gerhardson replied that the area is damaged beyond the edge of the blacktop and the City cannot legally repair beyond that point. Mrs. Moss inquired as to what the cost would be to repair the bank. Ms. Schibilla stated that there was a gas line exposed on a very dangerous corner. Mayor Grabek stated that this was a difficult situation. He reminder: the public that a full Council was not present and unable to contribute to this matter. The Mayor's main concern is that if the road is being used, it should be repaired before the winter sets in. If action to close the road were taken, Minnetonka Beach would need to be considered. There was a contrast between wh,t tre Mayor of Minnetonka Beach had told him and what the residents were told. Schupp clarified that as long as Minnetonka Beach was bein xed for their input, they did not want the road closed. Howes er, they did not feel that the issue of closing the road was their concern, it was Orono's. Public Works Director Gerhardsor� stated that Minnetonka Beach was being asked because closing the road would have an impact on them. Leesa Anderson stated that in her opinion, Minnetonka Beach was concerned about the homeowner's insurance liability should the road be deadended. She had been informed by two different insurance companies that because the fire hydrants were located hind the properties that would not be the case. Councilmember Callahan asked Mr. Wolf if he had attended the Planning Commission meeting in which this topic was addressad. He stated that the Manning Commission recommended that this matter be discussed with Minnetonka Beach and that the residents work with City staff to get this matter resolved. Mr. Schupp stated that he had tried to work with the Zoning Department and was told that nothing could be done without talking to Minnetonka Beach first. Counci lmember Callahan stated that the day after the Planning Commission meeting he received several phone calls and a visit from citizens of Minnetonka Beach that were concerned about closing the road. Callahan also added that this matter had come to a "catch 22" situation in that the City wants to work out a solution for closing the road, but in the meantime, repair work is necessary, however the City and residents do not want to spend money on repairing the road if the road is going to be closed. Mayor Grabek que3tioned Mr. Schupp about his statement regarding a lack of interest on the part of City staff. Mr. MINUTES OF REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING SR.PTEMBER 28,1988 CRYSTAL BAY ROAD CONTINUED Schupp said that he had contacted Zoning Administrator Mabusth and she had just said that the road could not be done. Zoning Administrator Mabusth stated that she informed Mr. Schupp t'.at the City would need to obtain input from Minnetonka Beach before a proposal to c::ose the road could be considered by the City. Public Works Director Gerhardson attended the Minnetonka Beach Council meeting. Gerhardson informed Mabusth of the negative reaction of Minnetonka Beach to close the road. Mabusth also informed Mr. Schupp that if Minnetonka Beach agreed the road should be closed, then a Petition from the land owners would be the next appropriate step in addition to a proposed road plan for the closing of the road as a through road. Discussion ensued as to the number of residents that lived on Crystal Bay Road. Counci lmember Peterson stated that she had counted from top to bottom and there were 33. Mr. Schupp stated that they received late notice of the fact this matter would be discussed before the Council. The residents had done all they could to be adequately prepared for the meeting. City Administrator Bernhardson explained that the reason for the short notice was due to the fact that this matter had just gone Before the Minnetonka Beach Council two weeks ago. This matter: was due to be heard before the Planning Commission on October 17, but Leesa Anderson had called, indicating that they were not getting adequate attention to this matter. Mayor Grabek said that there was a need for mere information before a determination could be made as to closing the road. He requested that staff get a public statement from the City of Minnetonka Beach substantiating their reason for wanting the road opened or closed. The Mayor would also like to see a report showing what needs to be done to the road to bring it up to safety standards. City Administrator Bernhardson added that an indication would also need to made as to where to close the road. Mr. Richie Anderson stated that reg.irdless of what the City decided to do with the road, he wanted the snow fences removed. The fences have been up for over a year now. Mayor Grabek inquired as to the cost of repairs so the snow fencing and lights could be removed. Public Works Director Gerhardson said it would cost exactly what had been proposed to the Planning Commission. However, if the City and residents could work together so that the City could go beyond the edge of the road, there would be a change in that estimate. Mayor Grabek stated that if the road is being used, the City of Orono has an obligation to bring the road up to the City's safety standards. The issue of closing the road should be an issue to be dealt with later and given a deadline and criteria that has to be met. Mayor Grabek asked what else could be done to repair the goad and remove the snow fencing. Gerhardson stated that there} was nothing else that could be done than what 0 MINUTES OF REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING SEPTEMBER 28,1988 CRYSTAL BAY ROAD CONTINUED had been proposed. Grabek inquired as to how much that would cost. Gerhardson replied, approximately $15,000.00 to put down the sheathing and install the guardrail. The Mayor asked if that would be acceptable to the applicants? The residents indicated that they would not like to look at the guardrail. Mr. Anderson asked if it would be possible to place a more permanent "road closed" sign at each end of the street? That would allow the snow fence to be taken down. The Mayor stated that it was unfortunate that a guardrail would need to be temporary installed, but if it was necessary to make the road safe, so be it. Mr. Schupp stated that he did not think the City could legally place a guardrail where they are intending. Mr. Schupp stated that in lieu of the guardrail he would either work with the City to bring his bank back up to a safe level; or he would give the City a little bit or extra room so a shoulder could be installed in that location. Public Works Director Gerhardson explained that the guardrail was only temporary until such time as Mr. Schupp repaired his bank. The posts for the guardrail would then be cut off below ground level. Mr. Erger rroposed another plan wherein the City be granted an easement for e purpose of working on the property until such time as a retaining wall is built. The easement would then be vacated. Rather than bringing the blacktop right to the edge of the cliff, why not comply with the normal grade by adding a dump truck of dirt and create a more gentle slope. Then the residents could bring their banks up to par. If there is a 20' retaining wall, Mr. Erger is afraid that it would be impossible to bring in enough dirt to sufficiently bring the bank back up. Public Works Director Gerhardson stated that he would like the opportunity to work out those details at a later time. Councilmember Callahan interpreted his understanding that this matter was to return to the Planning Commission to get their input. Callahan suggested that Gerhardson and the residents work together to reach a resolve before the Planning Commission meeting. Councilmember Peterson inquired as to whether the road would be made into a private road if it is deadended. Gerhardson replied that the road would not become private. He added that if access off of the cul-de-sac was needed, from that point on, the road would be private. Peterson asked about the 6 people with the dirt road. Gerhardson replied that it would be those same people. Peterson: stated that she was talking about 2 different roads, the dirt road and Crystal Bav Road. The property owners with the dirt road. Gerhardson stated that those people would have 2 accesses at this point. the road were closed they would just have a hack access. , residents did not obtain their right-of-way from Dakota Rc. hen they would not have a legl access. KINUTkS OF REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL 14EETING SEPTFj4BER 28,1988 CRYSTAL BAY ROAD CONTINUED Mayor Grabek asked whether the Engineering staff had determined what the bank requirement was? Public Works Director Gerhardson stated that they had made such a determination. Mayor Grabek questioned the financial arrangement of working with the residents to build up the bank. Both Bernhardson and Gerhardsoni indicated that it would not cost any more to proceed in that manner. Bernhardson stated that the City may need to obtain additional easements from the residents. Mayor Grabek reiterated his earlier suggestion of fixing the road now and reserving the issue of closing the road for later. He did not feel that fixing the road would be a waste of money because of the safety aspect. Mr. Schupp stated that he was afraid that by fixing the road now, the issue of closing the road would become a dead issue. Mayor Grabek stated that the solutions to all of the aspects of this issue needed to be further addressed. He could not vote on whether to open or close the road at the present meeting. It was moved by Mayor Grabek, seconded by Councilmember Callahan, to accomplish a resolve to fix the road and remove the snow fencing and lights in the most expeditious manner to address the oncoming winter. That proposal would be heard by the Planning Commission. The City would work with the homeowners to build up the bank at the same time the road is repaired. Staff and possibly the City Attorney would determine what criteria would need to be addressed to close the road. This would include alternate access, public health, safety and welfare, as well as neighboring Cities and neighboring residents. This should all he brought back to the City Council no later than January 1, 1989. Councilmember Callahan asked the City Attorney what legal steps would need to be taken and whether the City could close the road. Motion, Ayes=4, Nays=0. Zoning Administrator Mabusth added at it would be important to notify every property owner on Crystal Bay Road of the Planning Commission Meeting on October 17, 1988 and establish a specific time for the review. PARKING COUNTY ROAD 51 Mr. David Singer was present for this matter. City Administrator Bernhardson explained this matter involved the issue of parking along County Road 51. Mr. Singer had written a letter to the Mayor, City Council and City Administrator setting forth his concerns in that respect. This matter stems back to 1985 when the issues of lake access and parking were being discussed. It was determined by the LMCD that Orono provide 169 parking slots and the 60 slots in the landing were "committed". Orono chose not to commit the remainder of the 10 MINUTES OF REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL !MEETING SEPTEMBER 28,1988 PARKING COUNTY ROAD 51 CONTINUEr 109 slots and nothing more was done. Mr. Singer felt that safety was far more pertinent than convenience and parking. Trespassing is another problem. Mr. Singer had a guest that severely cut his foot on a bottle thrown in the lake. Mr. Singer is proposing that the City eliminate approximately 6 parking slots along County Road 51 to provide better sight distance. The City is also exploring the possibility of widening the road in that area to allow for a safety zone between the parking space and travelled portion of the road. The City would like input from the City Council and take those ideas to the County for their review and consideration. Mayor Grabek stated that this was not the first occurrence of such a situation. Mr. Dan Regan, who was also present, had previously relayed incidences of people using his private dock. Grabek stated that the City was more or less forced into the parking situation along County Road 51. Counci lmember Callahan recalled that the City had to conform to parking space allotments. Callahan stated that there seemed to be a shift in the parking from the opposite side of County Road 19 to along the lakeshore side of the County Road 51. Public: Works Director Gerhardson interjected that there had been "No Parking" signs posted to the west of the boat landing. Callahan asked why that was done? Gerhardson responded that it was due to traffic problems. Mayor Grabek asked if there had been any fatalities in that area? Bernhardson stated that the records indicate that there have been no personal injuries in the last 2-1/2 years between County Road 19 and Tonkawa Rcad. However, the potential for pedestrian accidents in that area does exist. Counc4.lmember Callahan inquired as to whether the City could remedy the problem on their own? Bernhardson stated that the County would need to perform whatever tasks necessary for the parking areas on County Road 51. Callahan asked about involving the DNR. Bernhardson replied that the DNR would probably intercede because the City would be reducing the number of available lake access parking slots by 6. It may be possible to find 6 alternate parking slots within 1500' to remedy that. Mr. Singer questioned with whom in the County the City would be working? Bernhardson replied that it would probably be someone in the Transportation Department. Mayor Grabek stated that he had asked the Police Department if there had been any accidents in that area. Mr. Singer indicated that the City should not wait for a fatality before they do anything about this situation. Mayor Grabek stated that he was very concerned about the safety aspect of this matter and was only requesting statistics for the benefit of tha County. Mr. Singer restated his desire to know who within the County the City would be working. Mayor Grabek stated that the City would inform Mr. Singer of that person, once a contact was determined. It was 11 MINUTES OF REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING SEPTEMBER 28,1988 PARKING COUNTY ROAD 51 CONTINUED suggested that the City have an accident reconstruction ist determine exactly what the visual, timing and stopping elements are along County Road 51. Mr. Singer pointed out that there is a clear line of sight within the passing lane when there are no cars parked along the side of the road. However, that condition changes drastically when there are parked cars. He walked around the area after he was nearly hit and does not understand why there is not a "No Passing Zone" in that area. He questioned whether the County had done their homework with respect to safety. Mayor Grabek stated that the County probably had not examined all possible safety problems for that area. Grabek explained to Mr. Singer that the County may be under tremendous political pressure from the State of Minnesota if access to Lake Minnetonka is eliminated. It was moved by Mayor Grabek, seconded by Councilmember Callahan, to take this cause to the appropriate persons in Hennepin County. Mr. Singer will be advised as to who those persons are so he can present his case to them as well. Motion, Ayes=4, Nays=O, Motion passed. Mr. Dan Regan stated that he had waited for this matter to be discussed and because of the time element involved with the Crystal Bay Road matter and a previous commitment, it was necessary for him to he leave for a bit. He questioned what the motion was that the Mayor had made. Mayor Grabek explained the proposed motion to Mr. Regan. Mr. Regan observed that the only location for cars with trailers to turn around was to drive through the gas station. There is no safe way to get turned around. He stated that making "U Turn" in that area would be illegal because to do so would require 150' of clear view. Mr. Tom Anderson of 3550 North Shore Drive stated that his two children have nearly been hit by cars in last year. He felt that there were some real strong safety issues that needed to be addressed. He observed that most of the vehicles parking in that area were pick-up trucks and campers. He also stated that there are two slight curves, one in front of his house and one by Mr. Singer's house, that added to the sight distance problem. He said that even the Orono Police squad cars were a concern when answering an emergency because of the high speeds at which they travel through that area. Mayor Grabek assured the concerned parties that the City would do all they could. to remedy this safety problem. CLEAN WATER GRANT/M.C.W.D. RESOLUTION 12506* City Administrator Bernhardson explained that the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District was proposing to undertake a grant application for doing a pollution abatement project on Long Lake. 12 MINUTES OF REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING SEPTEMBER 28,1968 CLEAN WATER GRANT #2506 CONTINUED The M.C.W.D. has indicated that they would probably go ahead with the grant application based upon their own funds, but they would welcome support from the City of Orono. Apart from the grant application, the funding for this project, should it proceed, would be 50% from the State, with another 20% possible. The balance would need to come from the District as a whole. Bernhardson had asked what percentage of the District would apply to Orono, but that information had not yet been determined. Bernhardson estimated the percentage to be under 10% of the tax base. Orono's tax burden share of this project would be fairly low. Councilmember Cil_'ahan asked whether making a contribution now would commit Orc no to the project? Bernhai d son stated that the grant would cover the first portion of the project. It would be possible to stip,slate that Orono only supports the grant as far as the monitoring and diagnostic phase, but would require updated informatio,.i before it supports the actual clean up phase. It was moves. by Councilmember Callahan to adopt Resolution #2506, seconded by Councilmember Peterson, indicating Orono's support for the grant application. This would be subject to renotification prior to undertaking any cr,rrectional or clean up efforts. The City of Orono will contribute $500.00 to the M.C.W.D. to assist them. Motion, AyeF=4, Nays=O, Motion passed. CITY FACILITIES City Administrator Bernhardson stated that he was presenting the various site criteria that would need to be taken into account for the purpose of building a new facility. This site criteria would be evaluated and rated. The ratings in the criteria are a combination of City staff and Planning Commission input. He requested that the Councilmembers and Mayor Grabek review the site criteria and provide their suggestions for additions or deletions. It was moved by Councilmember Callahan, seconded by Councilmember Peterson, to table this item to allow for further review. Motion, Ayes=4, Nays=C, Motion passed. PARKING LOT - SUMMIT PARR City Administrator Bernhardson explained that during the summer months, the current parking lot fills to capacity and overflow parking occurs on Old Long Lake Road and East Long Lake Road. There are up to 20 additional vehicles parking along these road locations which are narrow. The City has rec-jived complaints from neighbors in the area. Public Works Director Gerhardson has a proposal that would increase the capacity for parking in the lot from 10 to 20. The cost to accomplish that project would be approximately $2800.00. Councilmember Peterson asked Gerhardson if the additional 13 !MINUTES OF REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING SEPTEMBER 28,1988 PARKING LOT -SUMMIT PARR CONTINUED parking area would come from space that had been reserved for the volleyball area? Gerhardson replied that there would still be room for volleyball. It was moved by Mayor Grabek, seconded by Councilmember Peterson, to approve the expansion of the Summit Park Swimming Beach from ten to twenty vehicles and to pay for the improvements from the Park Dedication Fund. Motion, Ayes=4, Nays=O, Motion passed. 1989 BUDGET PROCESS City Administrator Bernhardson asked whether the Council had any further questions concerning the budget. If so, these questions could be addressed individually or in a meeting to be held in advance of October loth. It was moved by Mayor Grabek, seconded by Councilmember Nettles, to table tLie 1989 Budget discussion until October 10, 1988. Motion, Ayes=4, Nays=O, Motion passed. MEDIA ARTICLE'S RESPONSE City Administrator Bernhardson explained that a request for public input had been included in the last Mayor's Article. Bernhardson inquired whether the Council or Mayor had received any feedback. TAX LEVY 1985 - SEWER BOND RESOLUTION #2507* It was moved by Councilmember Callahan, seconded by Councilmember Peterson, to adopt Resolution ##2507, a resolution to levy taxes for bonds issued for Sanitary Sewer Project 85-1 and 85-2, Improvement Bonds of 1985 Debt Service Fund. Motion, Ayes=3, Nays=O, Motion passed. SPECIAL ASSESSMENT CASH FLOW REPORT* It was moved by Councilmember Callahan, seconded by Councilmember Peterson, to accept the Special Assessment Cosh Flow Forecast Report by Pannell Kerr Forster as presented. Ayes=3, Nays=O, Motion passed. SPRING HILL CONFERENCE CENTER - CLOSURE* It was moved by Councilmember Callahan, seconded by Councilmember Peterson, to accept the information from staff as it relates to the Spring Hill Conference Center. Motion, Ayes=3, Nays=O, Motion passed. FALL CLEAN-UP DATE* It was moved by Councilmember Callahan, seconded by Councilmember Peterson, to designate October 15, 1988 as Orono Fall Clean-up Day. Moton, Ayes=3, Nays=O, Motion passed. 14 MINUTES OF REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING SEPTE14BER 28,1988 TEMPORARY TRANSFER STATION* It was moved by Councilmember Callahan, seconded by Councilmember Peterson, to accept the staff information on this matter directing staff to monitor the situation keeping Council apprised of the situation. Motion, Ayes=3, Nays=O, Motion passed. ANIMAL PERMIT ORDINANCE Councilmember Callahan did not agree with this item being placed on the Consent Agenda and passed without further review. Callahan inquired as to what would have resulted had this item been approved. City Administrator Bernhardson explained that the City has Ordinances requiring animal permits. However, there is no system in place for regulating or issuing permits to comply with the ordinances. This item would allow the City to systemize a process for animal permits and would allow persons owning animals before April 1, 1984 could be "grand fathered" at their current level of animal ownership. A time limit would have to be determined for renewing the permits. Councilmember Peterson asked how the permits would be monitored once the process is functioning? Bernhardson replied that those persons the City knew were not complying with the animal ordinance would receive a letter advising them to come in a obtain a permit. Otherwise the City would depend upon complaints. Callahan asked whether the persons were being asked to comply with respect to the zoning codes. Bernhardson answered affirmatively. Councilmember Nettles asked about the cost involved with enforcing such an ordinance. The licensing would be approved on an inspection basis. Councilmember Peterson asked how many complaints the City had received in this regard? Bernhardson stated that there had only been a few, but that the City either had to have a process for is-_ing permits or repeal the ordinance requiring the permits. It was moved by Councilmember Peterson, seconded by Mayor Grabek, to table this item for further review. Councilmember Nettles inquired whether as to how a zoning ordinance was the basis for this. Councilmember Callahan explained that the zoning ordinance set forth the acreage required to have certain animals. Nettles asked whether the permit process would include the health and welfare of the animals. Bernhardson replied in the negative. Motion, Ayes=4, Nays=0, :4otion passed. ADMINISTI:ATOR'S INFORMATION* It was moved by CouncilmemberCallahan, seconded by Councilmember Peterson, to accept the City Administrator's Information regarding: Woodhill Avenue; County 15 Progress; 1960 Shoreline; 1950 Shoreline; Crystal Bay Hookup Status; Long Lake/Lake Level; Sculpture; Highway 12. Motion, Ayes=3, Nays=O, Motion passed. 15 MINUTES OF REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING SEPTEMBER 28,1988 CITY ATTORNEY'S REPORT: Assistant City Attorney Whitney stated that Mr. Barrett wanted him to provide the Council with details concerning the Art Center litigation and requested that the Council go into executive session for that purpose. LICENSES* None BILLS* It was moved by Councilmember Callahan, seconded by Councilmember Peterson, to approve payment of the All Funds Accounts. Motion, Ayes-3, Nays-0, Motion passed. EXECUTIVE SESSION - 8:55 P.M. Mayor Grabek requrested that the Council go into an executive session at 8:55 p.m. ADJOURNMENT 9:13 P.M. It was moved by Mayor Grabek, seconded by Councilmember Peterson, to adjourn the Regular Council Meeting at 9:13 p.m. Motion, Ayes=4, Nays=O, Motion passed. ATTEST: Dorothy M. Hallin, City Clerk James R. Grabek, Mayor If� To: From: Date: Subject: Mayor Grabek & Orono City Council City Administrator Bernhardson Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building & Zoning Administrator October 5, 1988 #1305 Washington Scientific, Inc. 2605 West Wayzata Boulevard - Conditional Use Permit - Resolution List of Exhibit: Staff Memo Staff Memo Exhibit A Exhibit B Exhibit C Exhibit D Exhibit E Exhibit F Exhibit G Exhibic H Exhibit I Exhibit J Exhibit K Exhibit L Exhibit M Exhibit N Exhibit O Exhibit P Dated 7/14/88 Dated 9/28/88 - Application - Property Owners List - Plat Map - M.C.W.D. Permit - M.C.W.D. Letter Dated 6/27/88 - Washington Scientific Inc. Letter - Cook Letter Dated 7/12/88 - Municipal Wetlands Map - Watershed Map - Original Grading Plan Dated 7/21/88 - PLanning Commission Notice of Action Dated 7/21/88 - M.C.W.D. Preliminary Memo Dated 7/15/88 - M.C.W.D. Permit - Hydraulic Report by McCombs Frank Roos Associates, Inc. Dated 8/4/88 - Vogt Corporation Letter Dated 9/16/88 - Final Grading Plan, McComb Frank Roos Associates, Inc. Dated 8/4/88 Please review the enclosed staff memos dated July 14, 1988 ana September 28, 1988 that cover the review of two presentations before tt+? Planning Commie won. At the October 3rd special meeting of the Planning Commission, the members approved the conditional use permit for the applicant. The Planning Commission adopted staff's approval recommendation in the staff memo dated September 28, 1988. The attached approval resolution has been drafted per the Planning Commission recommendation. Brief review of the application: In January cf this year., Council granted permission tc the applicant to stock pile approximately 10,000 cubic yards of excess soil retrieved from the excavation of the new addition to the principal structure until final resolve of the formal conditiona; use permit application. The applicant troposes the placement of 10,000 cubic yards of fill along the +est and southern parts of the property. The application was tabled by the Planning Commission until t1-p Mirnehaha Creek Watershed District completed their permit review provid n • the final determination on the size of the retention pond as a resul)f the new addition to the structure. The M.C.W.D. will reqaire retention on the property and the applicant's engineers have proposed a storage pond that will hold approximately 20,500 cubic feet of rur.-off. Please review Exhibit P. M.C.W.D.'s main concern for this review has not been quality of run-off but the quantity of run- off. The City has received no comment-i from adjacent industrial property owners nor from the City of Long Lake. A RESOLUTION GRANTING A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT PER MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 10.03, SUBDIVISION 19 FILE #1305 WHEREAS, Washington Scientific, Inc. (hereinafter "the applicant") is the owner of the property located at 2605 West Wayzata Boulevard located wit..in the City of Orono (hereinafter "City") and legally described as follows: See Exhibit A, attached, (hereinafter "the property"; and WHEREAS, the applicant has applied to the City of Orono for a Conditional Use Permit to permit the filling and grading of approximately 10,000 cubic yards of fill per Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.03, Subdivision 19. Minnesota: NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono, FINDINGS 1. This application was reviewed as Zoning File #1305. 2. The property is located in the Industrial Zoning District. 3. On October 3, 1988, the Orono Planning Commission reviewed the application as amended and recommended approval based on the followinc findings: a. The proposed filling and grading of the property will be it accord with the intent of the zoning chapter and the purposes of the district in which the site is located and the Comprehensivc- Municipal Plan of the City. b. The filling and grading of this property has been found tc be not detrimental to the public health, safety or welfa-e, or bF materially injurious to property or improvements in the vicinity. C. The proposed conditional use permit complies with each of the applicable conditions of the zoning chapter, requiring nc %ar.ance to the required standards. Page 1 of 4 V 4. The City Council has considered this application including the findings and recommendations of the Planning Commission, reports by staff and comments of the applicant and the effect of the proposed use on the health, safety and welfare of the community. 5. The City Counci 1 f inds that granting a Conditi ona 1 Use Permit to allow the filling and grading of approximately 10,000 cubic yards of fill will not I- detrimental to the health, safety or general welfare of the publi-, would not adversely affect light, air nor pose a fire hazard or other danger to neighboring properties, nor will it depreciate surrounding property values and that the proposed level of use of the property will be in keeping with the intent and objectives of the Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan of the City. CONCLUSIOi ORDER AND CONDITIONS Based upon one or more of the above findings, the Orono City Council hereby grants a Conditional Use Permit per Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.03, Subdivision 19 Lo permit the filling and grading of approximately 10,000 cubic yards of fill on the property, subject to the following corditions: 1. The area where fill is placed must be seeded .s soon as the final gravies are approved by the City. 2. All work shall be performed per the specifications set forth in the approved plans, prepared by McCombs Frank Roos Associates dated 8/4/88 and revised plans showing typical cross ction of dike, rip - rap sections and restoration plan and by conditions set Fortr 1.?y the M.C.W.D. and the City of Orono. 3. Violation of or non-compliance with any of the terms and condi- tions of this resoluti,_.. shall constitute a violation of the zoning code, shall automatically terminate any authority granted herein, and shall be punishable as a misdemeanor. 4. The undersigned owner has read, understood and hereby agrees to the terms of this reso'Aution and on behalf of Washington Scientific, Inc., its successors and assigns, hereby agrees to the recozding of this resolution in the chain of title of the property. Page 2 u_` 4 V Adopted by the Orono City Council on this loth day of October, 1988. ATTEST: Dorothy M. Hallin, City Clerk Property Owner(s) James R. Grabek, Mayor Page 3 of 4 RESOLUTION NO. Exhibit A ��*�_f,�,. .. r. .. a. —•=moo :!.'•• •�-.•�.mil- ,l4'.j .. _ •• - , .JJ1,TY t�T. =low.,• Y- I.LZOAL 'DESCRIPTIOPit- s.YfR4s'_ � •• ... si'i.a �- ii ii�•i• .� :- ... ._ -•r —.r-� ...T •�....r�'-'�+.r.y.r+ L:PARCEL A: `Lots 1 : th .rough.,;12 ..inclusive, Block 1, --r ORONO INDUSTRIAL �accordin to:= -the --recorded plat thereof Hennepin Count Minnesota, including allj".of vacated Lincoln Drive within said .. ' ORONO INDUSTRIAL PARK."; PARCEL B: s(from Book 36`19�af Mtg. Pg. 456)9;`' ,All that part -.of the South =,1/2 of the Northeast 1/4r;of .Section `33,- Township -118, % North "Range 23, West -.of ..the ._5th principal- ^Meridiar_;''-.described as :follows: - Commencing `-,at ., a . point :on -`_the ,&South ; line _of -.said said Northeast =1/4 -=^at =-its --point ,of. 'intersection _ ;with :the West'.line of —the_-East .66 :rods- thereof,�..said point' being distant Y1550'78 feet East of- the west., it "4--`of South:.'1/2 `.of ._: . Northeast _ 1/4; thence North `along the' West 41ine"of-''the said =East .�x66 :rods. to the .North Line..of'-the South =1/2 of t_said .Northeast;1/4, : being -a- point -on said North 'line distant-1547:45;.feet*iEast of _the West.`iine--of ;-said Northeast- 1 4; :.thence West;�alon said_ North -,&line';460.5 -feet; / ,,..„ 9 `_ ,4 -1 _ - •thence7-South =to a :point Z W the :South dine =of . � said =Northeast =•1/4 -460. 5 zfeet - West rof -the �pgint, �.oi'Jbegil Ong;; .thenc_.aE_ East j66.5 -feet ,to'ahe :point .of _beginning; 'including any . +portion of-any�street-o_r, all_ ey'iajacent-to_=_said .premises:vacazed,7T; nor. dto e'vacated. .b j-iarsa! �r•,��2C- _ �" •+��` -'."• ..�=ii.}-�S.r,trr-�f—�S+aa+ I'lerr.Tit-4'.17%. _ •'tiJ.iC_:SU•_�—.. -•r .-. Jw'_. ..._... '1- �sY!��..-� ...::*ii-_ .w1 i.� •�T. c:... To: Planning Commission Chairman Kelley Orono Planning Commission Members City Administrator Bernhardson From: Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building & Zoning Administrator Date: July 14, 1988 Subject: #1305 Washington Scientific, Inc. 2605 West Wayzata Boulevard - Conditional. Use Permit - Public Hearing Zoning District - Industrial Zone Pertinent Ordinances - Section 10.03, Subdivision 19 Applicant seeks place 10,000 cubic yards of fill to the west property. Preliminary soil testing showed that proposed addition recently approved by the City used as replacement soils. The Council granted to stock pile the excess soils until resolve of Permit application. List of Exhibits Exhibit A - Application Exhibit B - Property Owners List Exhibit C - Plat Map Exhibit D - MCWD Permit Application Exhibit E - MCWD Letter 6/27/88 Exhibit F - Pallansch Letter 7/1/88 Exhibit G - Cook Letter 7/12/88 Exhibit H - Municipal Wetlands Map Exhibit I - Watershed Map Exhibi.: J - Grading Plan for Site Exhibit K - Site Plan a Conditional Use Permit to and southern parts of the the underlying soils of the were poor and could not be permission to the applicant the formal Conditional Use Review of Application - On January 12, 1988 WSI had a formal ground breaking ceremony for the 175' by 187' addition already approved by the City. As applicant advised in that review, they sought permission to stock pile approximately 10,000 cubic yards of fill to be excavated from the sub area of the proposed addition. The approximate area of the stock piling per the submitted grading plan, Exhibit J covers approximately 100' by 600' along the west border of the property. As Mr. Vogt, the architect for the applicants noted the area to receive the fill slopes abruptly from the west property line. The abrupt bank will be made into a more gentle slope and would improve the drainage in the rear portion of the site which applicant claims is now poorly drained. An inspection at this time of year, given the very dry season, nothing apreirs i�)orly drained at this point. The more grAduated slopes will indeed slow up drainage during heavy run-off. As Glenn Cook asked in the earlier review of the grading plans, the berming has been shown to the east of the stock pile and continues along the south border to the drainage outlet at the southeast corner. Note the drainage from WS' drains down to the railroad track eastward to the outlet at the lake, review Exhibit I. Zoning File #1305 Page 2 of 3 The applicant's grading plan shows that a 10' level grade will be maintained along all sides of the stock pile. Staff would note that additional erosion control measures must be maintained while the 10,000 cubic yards is stored in the stock pile. Erosion control should be maintained at a minimum along the east, south and north of the stock piles. Applicant may select either staked hay bales or silt fence. In Glenn Cook's report, Exhibit G, he also advises that silt fencing should be placed near the southeast corner of the property to protect the downstream waterway. This should be installed prior to the commencement of the land alteration. Planning Commission members may remember that the applicant was advised to file the reauired MCWD permit application, Exhibit E, Mr. Larson noted the usual districts concerns in developments of this type. Briefly to review, he states the quality and quantity of run-off shall not be changed, erosion control to prevent transFort of sediments off -site during and after construction and prompt restoration of distu.bed areas with seed and mulch or sod. In Mr. Pallansch's letter, Exhibit F, he notes no real concern on Mr. Larsons part regarding the effects of the proposed addition on the site and suggests no major requirements will be made of the applicant as a result of the improvement. He also notes that they will follow all rules of the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District. We will ask Mr. Pallansch for any preliminary directives given to him by Mr. Larson at our meeting. Cook's report suggests the need for a siltation pond at the southeast corner of the property. The engineer has not suggested a specific size for the pond in his report, but has noted to staff that it should be approximately 1/2 to 3/4 of an acre and noted in addition, that it would be very advisable for both Cities to construct a retention or sediments pond between the shared lot lines. Staff would suggest that the City and the applicant work closely with the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District to determine the appropriate size of such a retension pond. Staff Recommendation To approve the Conditional Use Permit application of Washington Scientific, Inc. for the property located at 2605 West Wayzata Boulevard that would permit the temporar • stock piling of 10,000 cubic yards to be used in the final grading of the western elevations of the property per grading plans by the Vogt Corporation dated 5/19/88, revisions 6/29/88 based on the following findings: 1. The proposed temporary stock piling and alteration and grades proposed by applicant will be in accord with the objectives of the Zoning Chapter and the purposes of the district in which the site is located and the Comprehensive Municipal Plan. 2. That the proposed temporary stock piling of fill and the final grading plans proposed wou'9 not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. 3. The proposed Conditional Use Permit complies with each of the applicable provisions of the Zoning Chapter requiring no variances to the required standards. Zoning File #1305 Page 3 of 3 Approval is subject to the following conditions; 1. Silt fencing to be placed at the southeast corner of the property prior to construction in order to protect the quality of the run-off entering the downstream waterway. 2. Stock piles to maintain 10' level area around base ana ,lace additional erosion control along south, east, and north sides of the stock pile. 3. The area where f i 11 is p laced must be seeded as soon as the f ina 1 grades are approved by the City. 4. Applicant to work with the City and the MCWD to determine the approximate size of sediment pond to be installed in the southeast corner of the property. To: Planning Commission Chairman Kelley Orono Planning Commission Members City Administrator Bernhardson Fzoak: Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building & Zoning Administrator Date: September 28, 1988 Subject: #1305 Washington Scientific, Inc. 2605 West Wayzata Boulevard - Conditional Use Permit - Second Review Please review your previous staff memo dated July 14, 1988 prepared for your Jule Planning Commission meeting. The conditional use permit involves the: temporary storage and filling and grading of approximately 10,000 cubic yards of fill from the recent excavation for the new addition at the northwest corner of the existing structure. The City was advised that the soils were poor and could not be used as replacement soils. The Council granted permission to the applicant to stock -pile the excess soils until the formal conditional use permit application was resolved. At your July meeting, Planning Commission tabled the application pending resolve of the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District permit. You may remember that the City Engineer requested a 1/2 to 3/4 acre retention pond to be installed at the southeast corner of the property to account for any of the additional hardcover from the new addition -nd proposed filling and grading along the west and south boundaries of the property. The City required no hydraulic information dealing with facts on 100 year storm event and the need for a specific retention area on the site. It appeared that the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District was to ask for a more complete review. The Planning Commission delayed all action on the application until the M.C.W.D. permit review was complete. List of E_xchibits Exhibit A - Planning Commission Action Notice Dated 7/28/88 Exhibit B - M.C.W.D. Preliminary Memo Gated 7/15/88 Exhibit C - Original Grading Plan Exhibit D - M.C.W.D. Permit Exhibit E - Hydraulic Report by McCombs Frank Roos Associates, Inc. Dated 8/4/88 Exhibit F - Vogt Corporation Letter Dated 9/16/88 Exhibit G Final Grading Plan, McCombs Frank Roos Associates, Inc. Dated 8/4/88 Zoning File #1305 September 28, 1988 Page 2 of 4 Review of Application - Please review Exhibit F, a letter from Robert Sorenson, Architect of the Vogt Corporation representing the applicant advising that the stockpiled earth was re -graded by the contractor in error. The contractor was stopped as soon as it was realized but at least 85% of the work was completed. The final grading has not been realized nor has the swale along the base of the newly graded are- along the west lot line been installed. Staff has inspected the site on September 21st and can confirm that nothing has been done since the original inspection of the week of September 12th. Please review Exhibits B, D, and E, as staff noted in the first review, the quality of the run-off was not going to be a major concern as a result of the new addition and proposed grading. In light of the very sensitive drainage area that the property is located within, the Watershed District did ask for an analysis of the effects of the additional hardcover based cn the 100 year storm event (pre and post development). The applicant was then advised that they would then be responsible for following the guidelines and standards of the District, which was that based on the pre and post calculations, with the new improvement, run-off could not leave the property at a greater rate than prior to the new improvement. McCombs Frank Roos Associates have prepared the necessary hydrolic information and have prepared the final drainage plan for the M.C.W.D. permit review. The final approved drainage plan calls for the construction of a storage pond, constructed within along the proposed swale to the east of the re -graded area along the west side of the property, approximately 200' east of the west property line. The storage pond will be constructed by cleaning out and lowering the bottom of the existing drainage ditch in the area shown on the attached plans (Exhibit G). The retention pond shall flow along the south border to the southeast corner and outlet to the drainage ditch and finally to the railroad tracks. The drainage pattern is still the same as approved on the original plans (Exhibit C) except that we will not ask for a retention pond in the southeast corner. Approximately 90% of the drainage from the hardcover from the new addition is located in the 8+ acre watershed to the west and south of the building. Zoning File #1305 September 28, 1988 Page 3 of 4 The applicant and the applicant's architect will be present at the meeting to answer any questions you may have concerning the revised drainage plans. Staff would request a to -scale copy of the final drainage plans by McCombs Frank Roos Associates, Inc. and for a copy of the revised plan showing typical cross sections of the dike, rip -rap specifications and restoration. Staff Reco=endation - To approve the conditional use permit application of Washington Scientific, Inc., for the property located at 2605 Wayzata Boulevard, that would permit the filling and re -grading of approximately 10,000 cubic yards of fill to be used in the final grading of the western elevations of the property per grading plans by the Vogt Corporation dated 5/19/88 revised 6/29/88, hydrolic analysis for 100 year storm event by McCombs Frank Roos Associates dated 8/4/88, revised grading/drainage plan by McCombs Frank Roos Associates dated 8/4/88 and revised play, of typical cross section of the dike, rip -rap specifications and restoration by McCombs Frank Roos Associates, based on the following findings: 1. The proposed filling and grading of the property will be in accord with the intent of the zoning chapter and the purposes of the district in which the site is located and t►e Comprehensive Municipal Plan of the City. 2. The filling and grading of this property has been foun,'A to not. be detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare o: be materially injurious to property or improvements in the vacinity. 3. The proposed conditional use permit complies with each of the applicable conditions of the zoning chapter, requiring no variances to the required standards. This approval is subject to the following conditions: 1. The area where fill is placed must be seeded as soon as the final grades are approved by the City. 2. All work shall be performed per the specifications set forth in the approved plans by the M.C.W.D. and the City of Orono. Zoning File #1305 September 28, 1988 Page 4 of 4 3. Prior to scheduling this application before the City Council, the City staff must be in receipt of a to -scale drawing of the final grading and drainage plans showing the ponding site prepared by McCombs Frank Roos Associates, dated 8/4/88, and the revised plan showing a typical cross section of the dike, rip -rap specifications and restoration plan. 305' CITY OF ORONO - GENERAL LAND USE APPL�QN -------------------------------------I�--- -------------- PROPERTY LOCATION Site Address 2 West Wayzata Boulevard Orono, !.Ir Property Identification Number (P.I.D.) 1 M'" Please check one - Property abstract or torrens? (for Conditional Use Applications only) Please attach legal description to application if not included on required survey. (on survey) --------------------------------------------------------------------------- APPLICANT Phone (home) 286-2448 Name Joe Pallansch Phone (wcrk) 473-1271 Address 2605 West Wayzata Boulevard City Long Lake MN Zip 55356 -------------------------------- OWNER (if different than applicant) Phone (home) Name Address Phone City Zip Date Property Acquired (month/year) I (do) (do not) also own the adjacent parcels of land. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- FEES - CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS - Renewal Fee - 1/2 Current Fee After -the -Fact Fee - Double Current Application Fee $100.00 a) Residential accessory Use $150.00 b) Institutional (church, school, etc.) $150.00 c) Duplex Credit/Bldg $250.00 d) Commercial/Industrial Use ,. $200.00 f) Land Alteration Grading and filling - designated wetland o: floodplain Grading and filling - 101 cu. yd. or more Grading, seawall, retaining walls withim 7! of Lakeshore it 'aim41lw1 yl ! tLL PRD/PID - see fee schedule `V,6VV%VV 1 JJV►VV\"V\' is �; t'�":'.: OTHER APPLICATIONS $150.00 Commercial Site Plan Review (+ con sultan, ;�#"Jtf4 +K• 'fai $250.00 Vacationvyv $150.00 Easement Vacation1 '1"' ,.:v•` $ 50 00 Easement Vacati with S bd"�� on u ivision $250.00 Rezoning $100.00 Appeals Other - see fee schedule PRESENT USE OF PROPERTY Present Zoning District 1 Present Use of Property Residential Y Other (specify) light manufacturing --------------------------------------------------------------------------- DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST Describe request in detail? T-snrPad nplirnximarely In,nnn r•11 ;ui of excavated earth - resultine from soil rorrPcrinn npPrarinnc - nlnno rho w=y_ edge of the existing property in order rn improve urfarca rjr�inaoo i„ that orn_ of the -----slre------------------------------------------------------------------ REQUIRED SUBMITTALS 1. Completed Application Form. 2. Certified Property Owners List of owners within 350' (you can obtain this list from Hennepin County Department of Finance A-603 Government Center 348-3271) 3. Stamped, legal sized envelopes (#10) pre -addressed to each of the names on the above list with no return address. 4. Certificate of survey. 5. Topographic survey (existing and proposed contours) if land alterations involve changes in elevation (grades). 6. Construction plan, if applicable (see staff for requirements). 7. Plat Map. 8. As an addendum to this application, please attach a separate list of any other persons you wish notified of this application. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- 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 correct to the best of his/her knowledge. Applicant's signature t-( a-`, Date /�- OWNERS SIGNATURE J / The owner hereby acknow-fedges and agrees to this application and further authorized reasonable entry onto the property by City staff, consultants, agents, commission members, and Council members for purposes of investigation and verification of this request. Owner's signature Date Applicant must have all submittals into the City offices 25 days before the Planning Commission Meeting. Planning Commission Meetings are held on the third Monday of each month. Applicants must be present at all scheduled review meetings of the Planning Commission and Council. If an applicant is unable to attend a scheduled meeting, please make arrangements to have an authorized agent attend in your place and advise the Building & Zoning Office of this change prior to the meeting. RUN DATE 05/19/88 HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORMATION SYSTEM PROPERTY OWNERS LIST BATCH 006 38 33-118-23 11 0003 38 33-118-23 13 0001 PFOP ADDR 02605 WAYZATA BLVD OWNER NAME ORONO PLAZA WASH SCIENTIFIC IND TAXPAYER REIERSGORD LAW FIRM WASHINGTGA SCIENTIFIC INC NAME/ADDR 4945 HALIFAX AVE S SUITE 7 C/O B E KINNEY EDINA MN 55424 LONG LAKE MH 55356 _ 10 38 33-112-23 13 0009 38 33-118-23 13 0010 ' PROP ADOR OWNER NAME biSH SCIE"TIFIC INDUST INC WASHINGTON SCIENTIFIC IND IN TAXPAYER WaSHINGTOk. SCIENTIFIC IND ) WASHINGTON SCIENTIFIC IND NAME/ADDR -"WY 12 P 0 BOX 340 _'_NG LAKE MN 55356 LONG LAKE MN 55356 • 33-118-23 13 0012 38 33-118-23 17 0013 PROP ADDR OWNI, NAME VEDA INC VEDA INC TAXPAYER VEDA INC VEDA INC NAME/AOOR BOX 115 ROX 115 LONG LAKE MH 55356 LONG LAKE MN 55356 38 33-1!8-23 31 0010 PROP OWNER GN RY CO TAXPAYIR GH RY CO NAME/AQDR 72 33-116-23 14 0005 PROP ADDR 00401 WILLOW OR 10 010;ER NAME CHURCH OF ST GEORGE TAYPAYzR CfioRCH OF ST GEORGE NAME./ALOR LONG LAKE MN 55356 72 33-118-23 14 0018 PROP ADDR 0111ER NAME LARTCH DEVELOPMENT CO TAXPAYER LARTCH DEVELOPMENT CO NAME/AOOR 17630 BRECOt" RO ' — WAYZATA MN 5S10' 38 33-118-23 41 0014 GEORGE L OSGOOD ET AL GEORGE L OSGOOD 365 WILLOW DR N LONG LAKE MN 55356 72 33-118-23 14 0011 LARTCH DEVELOPMENT CO LARTCH DEVELOPMENT CO 17630 BRECONWOOD RD WAYZATA MN 55391 72 118-23 14 0019 LARTCH DEVELOPMLNT CO LARTCH DEV ' 1PMENT CO 17630 BRECONWOOO RD WAYZATA MN 55391 REPORT NO. PI435401 PAGE 8 38 33-118-23 13 0002 02687 WAYZATA BLVD VEDA INC VEDA INC P 0 BOX 115 L3UG LAKE MN 55356 38 33-118-23 13 0011 02765 WAYZATA BLVD VEDA INC ETAL VEDA INC BOX 115 LONG LAKE M 55356 38 33-118-23 13 0014 02705 WAY7 71 BLVD VEDA INC VEDA INC BOX 115 LONG LAKE y5356 38 33-118-23 42 0001 00320 OLD CRYSTAL BAY RD N R 0 MEYER i P M MEYER MICHAEL HILDELINOC 85 GOLDEN VIEW DR LONG LAKE MN 55356 72 33-118-23 14 0015 LARTCH DEVELOPMENT CO LARTCH DEVELOPMENT CO 17630 BRECONW00D RD WAYZATA MN 55391 72 33-118-23 1v 002J LARTCH DEVELOPMENT CO LARTCH DEVELOPMENT CO 17630 BRECON4'000 RD WAYZATA MN 55391 i 4M DATE 05/19/68 BATCH 006 72 33-118-23 14 0021 1 PROP ADOR 0WJER NAME LARTCH DEVELOPMENT CO TAXPAYER LARTCH DEVELOPMENT CO NAME/ADOR 17630 BRECOHW000 RD 1 WAYZATA MN 55391 i HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORMATION SYSTEM ;Z,rORT t- PI435401 PROPERTY OWtERS LIST PAGE 9 TOTAL BATCH 006 00019 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 PROPERTY TAXATION. TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE AND BELIEF.) DATE I W BY i �EHA1fA C9 . t i. � C� f D Ohs MINNEHAHA CREEK WATERSHED DISTRICT P.O. Box 387 Wayzata, Minnesota 5539: (See Reverse Side For Instructions) (FOR OFFICE USE ONLY) Permit Application No. _ Date Received Notice Sent Agenda Date APPLICATION FOR PERMIT It (Do Not Write Above This Line) 1. Owner: Washington Scientific Ind. I12C Owner's (Print or lypel Representative Joe Pallansch 2605 West Wayzata Blvd, PO Box 340 260E W. Wayzata Blvd. (Add,ssl (Cdy( -- — — (AAd,essi iCdyt Long Lake MN 55356 473-1271 Low Lake MN 55356 (Telephone) IZrpt ITeieptwnel 2ip) i (owner sognaturo) --- PE. R.L.S. ❑ L.A. Other 3. Permit Requested For: (Check All Appropriate Boxes) B. Stormwater Management Plan ❑ Commercial ® Industrial ❑ Institutional or Highway ❑ Resir'-,ntial C. ❑ Floodplain Alteration D. U Wetland Alteration E. [.! Dredging F Shoreline/Bank Improvement G Stream/Lake Crossing 4. Project Location: Long Lake I Hen 1S } of NE 33 ' 8N __ __ _.__ L__ 2 3W_ (Gty) (County: c. Coo (sect ,Townsh-pi fRangel 5. Describe the Project: Add 32,000 sq. ft. addition to present .juilding 6. If This Project Rw,u)res Municipal Apprcval Review, Attach Documention of Municipal Review 7. Body of Water, Stream or Wetland Affected by Sunoff From Tnis Site: I ong Lake From Project. ____ 1 } - 2 miles _- 8. Schedule For Construction, Implementation of Temporary Erosion Controls, Substantial Completion and Restora tion: Building permit July_)_8/88 for City of Orono - — Complete date October 1/83; _— __ Iow Please call (612) 473 a22,i if assistance in comhlw mq thts foam is required In submitting this form the af+plicant d. i nowledges all requirements for permit approval as determined by the published Ruies dated February 20. 1966 Form rM f^ 7 4UN DATE CS ' ". s: 66 P BATCH — 31-116-23 14 0021 PROP AR":' 001ER IuAmf :agTCH DEVELOPMENT CO TAXPA.0; L-zTCH OEVELOPtENT CO HAnE/A'JOR 1 030 BRECONWOOC RD W QATA MN 55391 1 1 i 0 HENNEPIn COUNTY PROPERTY INF:1NliA-Tt SYSTEM PROPERTY OWAERS LIST TCTAL BATCH 006 00019 REP01. 40. P1435401 4!-X 9 Y THAT TT+° FACTS REPRESENTED ARE AN A,CCtAND TRUE ATION Ct INFORMATION AS IT APPEARS THI'. i:4 THE RECQROS 0. HENNEPIN COUNTY DEPARTMENT PF PROPERTY TA.4TLON TO THE PEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE AND BELIEF. I/� DATE )o '_ AAIl ""'u AUUNUANI / L ��'fi `may- �. {/ , �.,Lt f f� M I N N E H A H A C A E F-■ ` TARE All NNETONRA WATERSHEr DISTRICT P.O. Box 387, Wayzata, Minnesota 55391 MINM!'U'" At" e0W OF MANAGM Camille D Andre. Res. • Albert L Lehman • John E rbomas lames R Spensley • Richard R Aer • Robert D. Erickson • C Woor•row Love - -- --- -- ---- - --- — — is Mr. Joe Pallansch, Facilities Engineer Washington zic'entific Industries 2605 W. Wayzata Boulevard Box 34U Long Lake, Minnesota 55356 RE: Building Addition -,gar Mr. Pallansch: June 27, 1988 ` JUN 2 8 G88 ll1• I have reviewed the information you submitted concerning your building expansion in Long Lake. The project will require permit review and approval by the Board of Managers of the MCWD. Some of the District's concerns in developments of this type include that: 1. The rate of stormwater runoff from the site shall not increase as a result of the proposed development.. This criteria shall be analyzed and met for runoff producing events w.th return frequencies from orie to 100 years. 2. The quality of stormwater runoff leaving the site after develoomer` zhall be equivalent to runoff quality for the existing condition. 1•hi s criteria shall be analyzed and met for runoff producing events wit return frequency of one year. k riate iosion control methods are in place to prevent the transport of Jiments off s4te duting and after construction. Prompt restoration of the listurbed area be completed with seed and mulch or sod. The dealdine for the Jot's meeting i� July 11, 1988. I have included a copy of the rules for your information. If you have any questions, please feel `ree to contact me at 473-4424. Sincerely, EUGLNE A. PICKOK AND AScr ,TES Eny eers for the D'st cc: Board L ...Srni th ,C1 ty of Orr Kevin C. Larson, Engineer _--- ter. !^'• ' . July 1, 1988 Mc. Tom Jacobs City of Orono P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay MN 55323 Dear Tom, I've been on the phone with Mr. Kevin Larson of Hickok and Associates on our Watershed District permit. The Vogt Corporation and myself have a meeting July 6 to go over requirements. We will. apply by July 11 deadline for their July 21 review. I have spoken with Mr. Larson on two occasions and he see no large requirements for our site because of our property size. Washington Scientific will follow all of the Rules of the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District. Sincerely, Joellansch Yacilities Engineer /mjf Attachments cc: E. A. Hickok b Associates Inc. Vogt Corporation WASHINGTON SCIENTIFIC INOUSTRIES, INC. _ 3W W. Wsynft Oft. 0 ftx 340 0 Long Lake, MmneWtO SUDS -OW 0 Mrone 61214MI271 0 TWX 910.576 7742 Ii JA Bones t roo © Rosene Anderlik & ,Associates Engineers & Architects July 12, ''988 City of Orono Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 Attn: Jeanne Mabusth Otto G. Bonestroo, PE. Robert W Rosene, PE Joseph C. Anderhk, PE Bradford A. Lemberg, PE Richard E. Turner, PE. James C Olson. PE, Glenn R. Cook, PE. Thomas E Noyes, PE Robert G Schunicht. PE. Marvin L. Sorvala, PE. Re: 139-1305 Washington Scientific Inc. 2605 West Wayzata Blvd. Dear Jeanne: Keith A. Gordon, PE Richard W Foster. PE Donald C. Burgards, PE Jerry A Slourdon. PE Mark \ Hanson. PE Teo K Field, PE. Michael T Rautmann, PE Robert R Pfefferle, PE David O. Loskota. PE. Thomas W Peterson, PE. Michael C Lynch. PE. James R Maland. PE. Kenneth P Anderson. PE Keith A Bachmann, PE Mark R. Roils, PE Robert C. Russek, A I A Thomas E. Angus. PE. Howard A Sanford. PE. Chaves A 'nckson Leo At Pawelsky Harlan M Olson Susan M Eberon Mark A Serp We have reviewed the plan submitted on the Washington Scientific project. The plan provides for placement of excavated material along the West side of the property. The material can be leveled out and left in this area in accordance with an approved plan. In our previous review we indicated that drainage should be improved away from the proposed building addition. We would also recommend that a siltation pond be construr•Led at the Southeast corner of the property. The area where fill is placed should be seeded as soon as possible after the work is completed. Silt fence should be placed near the southeast corner of the property to protect the downstream waterway. Yours very truly, BONESTR00, ROSENE, ANDERLIK 5 ASSOCIATES, INC. "-4 Glenn R. Cook GRC : k j 968of no 2335 Viest Hlgnway 36 • St. Paul, Minnesota 55113 9 1 .' 636-4600 .t t wo �F•, —yam-- •'� • .� . j :'� I I � 1 ix; 3830 GC 12 Cr Ica ZZ Loge y eH f, £ 'J £,csfi �rl,•:' .^/St Georic 1 M 11 jr ► : j mmmlw zw;I -u His. .. RAILWAY "NORTHERN Nw 1/4 ,:S :a Mw A sw I ,ItL se NM ?'A Y.[ T SE • -_� i A t. T 140.14 140 :fl 4 • !i 4^ 14 1 ��i..lw,�wr>An+�, - �sae��.:r�or�r.��s .■so+ - -��- 1 i IV /TrI LL-2 00100 J-100.1'' ` Co. LL -5 a LAKE LC- 1 / CLASSE Q / LL - 3 \ o 271 3.5t.r S. 8 ` 5 t-r.S. ; LONG 07 -\ 1 c . r. s. `w L C'/?� — ^� mow• \ '*I 01 1 LC-3 ` ,/ � ELM ANE • AYE \\ _ �t / • 1 1 TL-2`rs/ 100 MAPLE •• 1.0 c.. S. 1 1 / f �. LANE / DR \ C. s ,/ f R L- 1 ST•-5 ` LC-4/ ` / fRl 3 TL- 13 3.4c.r.s. 37. r. \ 1 58.4 c.r.s. S. --.. �.. T L - 10 ` \ / FRL- 2 14.6c.r. / `1 C 4,3 c.r. 20.6c-r.s. sol-e i i ' TL -14 ` TL-16 TL 15 �' 71 Liil!�I!!_i:6+ sfl ii`'1 �1 ----_-i - - KKK .. j .. .. .ti• ..�. ZONING FILE NO. 1305 CITY OF ORONO NOTICE OF PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 473-7357 Date of Notice: 7/28/88 --------------------------------------------------------------------------- TO: Joe Pallansch COPIES TO: Washington Scientific Inc:. 2605 West Wayzata Blvd. Long Lake, MN 55356 TYPE OF APPLICATION: Conditional Use Permit ----------------------------------------------------------- DATE OF MEETING: 7/18/88 VOTE: 6 For 0 Against Planning Commission recommends the following: Tabled for reasons noted below NOTES AND SPECIAL CONDITIONS: To table Washington Scientific's conditional use permit for filling and grading subject to the resolve of the appropriate method to treat the additional run-off from the recent proposed addition to the existing Washington Scientific structure. Staff is aware that the City Engineer has asked for a specific size retention pond in the southeast corner based on the additional run-off from the addition and the grading application. In the current review, staff feels it more appropriate to wait until the Minnehaha C*-eek Watershed Diszric.t has had ample time to review the hydraulic information sought in their Permit review process. The City will accept the Watershed District's recommendation concerning treatment of run-off. If this is acceptable to you, please advise and we will await final notice from the Watershed District concerning the issuance of a permit to Washington Scientific. Permit Application No. 88-103 July 15, 1988 Owner: Washington Scientific Ind. 2605 W. Wayzata Blvd. Long Lake, MN 55356 Location: City of Orono, Sec. 33AD Project: Stormwater management plan for a building addition to an existing commercial site. Applicable Rules: Rule B: Stormwater Management Plan for Individual Projects Exhibits Reviewed: 1. Permit Application 88-103 received July 5, 1988. 2. Site survey prepared by Advance Surveying and Engineering Co. dated May 26, 1988. 3. Site plan prepared by Vogt Corporation dated May 19, 1988. 4. Minnehaha Creek Watershed District Permit File 87-153. Staff Review Summarj: The project involves an addition to an existing commercial building located in Orono. The building addition will add approximately 33,000 square feet of roof surface to the site which presently contains 6.5 acres of building and bituminous parking area. The addition of the building will increase the runoff rates by approximately four percent. The total site area is 25 acres. The runoff generated from the roof of the building addition will be of generally better water quality, therefore staff recommends that water gt!;lity treatment not 5e required for this site. however, runoff rates for a 100-year storm event will increase which does not meet District standards for rate control. Runoff from this site enters subwatershed designated LLLC-14 in the District's 509 plan. This is the same watershed which was reviewed extensively by the Board and the City of Long Lake several years -go. Recommendation: Table pending receipt uf: 1. 1(ydrologic analysis for a 100-year .,corm event including pre- and post - development. 2. Revised plan and calculations demonstrating conformance with District standards for rate control. Project Review Status by Other Governmental Units: The City of Orono Planning Commission granted preliminary approval for this project in June 1988. AAAHA r �MEO DES MIIVIVEHAHA CREEK WATERSHED DISTRICT P.O. Box 387, Wayzata, Minnesota 55391 SOARO OF MANAGER& Camille D. Andre. Pies. • Albert L. Lehman • John E. Thomas Jaynes R Spensley • Richard R Miller • Robert D. Erickson • C. Woodrow Love Permit Application No. 88-103 August. 26, 1988 Owner: Washington Scientific Ind. 2605 W. Wayzata Blvd. Long Lake, MN 55356 Location- City of Orono, Sec. 33AD Project: Stormwater management plan for a building addition to an existing commercial site. Gentlemen; Receipt is acknowledged for the following which you have submitted as part of the above permit application: 1. Revised plan shoiwng typical cross section of the dike, rip rap specifications and restoration, received August 23, 1988. This plan and letter are in accordance with the action taken by the Board of Managers on August 18, 1988 in reference to the above permit. This letter is your permit from the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District. Permit approval is based upon the following exhibits: 1. Permit Application No. 88-103 received July 5, 198' 2. Site survey prepared by Advance Surveying and EnginLt.ing Co. dated May 26, 198C . 3. Site Plan prepared by the Vogt Corporation dated May 19, 1988. 4. Minnehaha Creek Watershed District Perlpit File No. 87-153. 5. Letter from the District to the applicant informing them that permit application was tabled at the July 1988 meting. 6. Hydrologic analysis for a 100-year storm event including pre and post- Jevelopment prepared by McCombs Frank Roos Assoc. received August 8, 1988. 7. Revised Site Plan showing on -site ponding area prepared by McCombs Frank Roos Assoc. received August 8, 1988. 8. Revised plan shoiwng typical cross section of the dike, rip rap specifications and retoration, received August 23, 1988. This permit is valid for one (1) year. if construction is not complete within one (1) year, an e::cension must be requested. Please contact the District at 473-4224 when the project is about to colmience so an inspector may view the work in progress. EUGENE A. HICKOK AND ASSO IAiES cc: Board Engineer f th D' tr' L. Smith City of Orono T cr a izer. �l _ bat- -of 11,y ek �L t1 McCombs Frank Roos Associates, Inc. i' tTwin Cities ik 15050 23rd live N Telephone rr'y"" St. Cloud Planr 612/476-6010 Plymouth, MN Sun 55447 August 4, 1988 M. Joe Pallansch 01. Washington Scientific Industries, Inc. 2605 West Wayzata Boulevard r..'.. P.O. Box 340 Long Lake, MN 55356-0340 SUBJECT: Washington Scientific Industries, Inc. Storage Pond 100 Year Storm Run-off MFRA #8749 Dear Mr. Pa_lansch: Encloscd are seven copies wilich show the contours of a storagealsoshondtto store run-off from a 100 year frequency storm. drainage area in blue, from which this run• )ff will occur and include approximately 90% of the proposed new addition to your building. Basically this is the only portion of your property that will have increased run-off due to the proposeu addition iand therefore, wen -off in this have area computed the required storage e volume from tchanges The total area that we are concerned with is 8.3 acres. It is estimated that the coefficient of run-off changes from 0.53 to J.56 due to the addition of the roof area as a result of the new coristructinn. This will increase the run-off from this drainage area from 20.7 cubic feet per second (CFS), to 21.9 CSF. The rate of flow allowed from this area is the original r n—offrate beforoff construction and that was 20.7 CFS. In order to maintain this from the area, it is required to construct a storage pond which will oe constructed aloe,., :, existing swale approximately 200 east of the west property line. The storage pond can be constructed by cleanir,g out and lowering the bottom of the drainage ditch and putting in a small dam in the area arshown 2onithe flow from the drainage h RCP accompanying maps. To regulate the A wil! ;.,+• placed in the dike to drain the water out of the swiillgallow d13.5oCF5e ditcr, uownstream. It is estimated that this 21 inch pipe to flow through it thus backing water into the storage pond as the run-off from a 100 year storm will be 21.9 CFS after construction of the proposed addition. Our computations show that a storage volume of 17,726 cubic fetis required. The ponding area that we show will hold a volume of approximately ,500 cubic feet at the 1,013 contcur elevation. The invert of the upipe rvecshould becioat 1,010.5. We are also including with this 1• computed by the rational method. Copies of this Lrifurmation should be (jeliverad to Mr. Kevin Larson, of Eugene A. Viickock and Associates, b), the e,xi _)f the day on August 8, 1988. ,be Pallansch St 4, 1988 Two If you have any questions, please let me knew. Very truly yours, McCOMBS FRANK ROOS ASSOCIATES, INC. Rodney Gordon, P.E. RG:aju Enclosure A. I �f 1 ITY INFLOW VOLUME VOLUME OUTFLOW STORAGE �r1lh/HRI (CFS) (C'S-HR) (CU-FT) (CU-FT) (CU-FT) 0 L 2d d. Jd d. dN 0. dd 0.0N 1. _f 4 .e 1•r,�, 3S .888..uD :ee72.s5 7 9. .... _. 49 23:9:. 73 1 '. 1:9. 73 6.1 ::1. 42 9.38 33764. 49 16d.'s8. dN 17726. 29 . d,c0 c3.30 11.63 41?3',.a0 24300.i,>N 17632.ud K a. 57 . 1 ?. 113 12. 8r 4075. 76 32S52. X 12513. 76 d.33 3.5 16.31 13.53 48725.91 40338.0 8387.91 1..10 3.1 14. 44 14.44 51' '16. 57 &864. 00 3396. 67 1. 5d �. 3 1d. 72 16. 07 57867. 25 12900. a0 0. k4 2.00 1.3 8. 85 0,70 63737. 86 972M. 00 0. 00 2.10 1.55 7.22 18.05 64995.83 121500.�10 0.m 3..10 1. 35 6. 23 18.67 67931. 13 14 B&. ;d 0. dd SK10.98 1944d0.t1d 0.'IV 5..10 .3 4.15 c0.97 75479.03 2430Vr0.0N 0.0d 6. d0 .78 3. 53 21. 8 78438. c0 291 "odd. k4 0. 0d 570RAGE 40Lt,.I.- 8EUUI, �D = 177ES CLB1C r-E2` 21" RCP Iry DIKE /rntiflc IV CALCL",AT I ONS A AREA = 8.32 ACRES ENT OF RL1NOFF - .36 EOUBCY = 100 TEAR E FLOWRATE = 1-.5 C.S DURATION INTENSITY INFLOW VOLUME VOLUME OUTFtOW STORWA 1hR) QN/f'R) (CFS) (CFS-HR) (CU-FT) (CU-FT) (CU-FT) 49 2s:9:. 73 ^:'S:.:t0 15119.73 0. 33 5.1 as. 42 1.38 33764. 9 .8. a0 17726. 29 it. 5a `_ e3. sa 11.65 41532. tt0 24330. 00 17632. 813 0.57 0. l0 12.89 46a7`. 76 32`_52' lv Q513. 76 0.33 3.5 16.31 13.53 48723.91 403?8. it d387. 31 1. 3.1 14.6 14.44 519%. 67 w1c,00. 0? :,336. 67 1.5a 2.3 10.7c 16.07 51867.26 729a0.N0 0. 00 2. m 1.3 6.85 17.71 63737. 86 3720a. 00 1. % 2.50 1.55 7.22 16.65 64995.83 121`N.N0 0.00 3. Ja 1. 3:; 6.:9 18.87 67'331. 13 : 4to-' .�• NN 5^ �.. � _ �_. 3s �� 1 5 0a t� : �44 . N a. 4.13 c'a. 97 754o9.03 '0. N0 0.00 6.a0 .78 3.9 21.81 78438. 0 r.Na 0.04 "-CRAGF ',OLL`(E REGU1°ED = :77.5 CL•81C rEE? 0 THE VOGT CORPOF ATION ARCHITECTUR .\� ENGINEERING September 16, 1988 j 919g Mr. Tom Jacobs Building Inspector City of Orono 1335 South Brown Road Orono, MN Dear Mr. Jacobs: Re our discussion of yesterday regarding grading at Washington Scientific Industries, you will recall that I contacted you with the information that the contractor had begun grading the stock- piled earth at the west of the site, and that this is the area subject to a pending Request for Conditional Use Permit for grading. In our discussion at the sit,. i Joe Pallansch, I indicated that I had stopped all grading wor site immediately when I discovered the grading in progress. I est '.;.e that the grading was perhaps 85b completed when stopped. Apparently this work was begun because of i miscoiiimunication between architect, owner and contractor. The contractor was not aware that the work was not to be carried out immediately. At present it is clearly understood by all parties that no work is to be carried out in the west are& until the City's review of the permit application. I indersLand that the owner's positron remains as before, that the stockpiled earth will be removed if the permit is not granted. Please call if you have any questions. Sincerely, TH GT G4f(PORAT Robertgam#s Soren>ion, Architect RJS/dj _V St %TE 260 CARI. SON CENTER -ONE CARLSON PARKWAY • MINNEAPOLIS MN 55447 • 1612) 475 2926 l.kp CIL PAS ETING To: Planning Commission Chairman Kelley r JT 101908 Orono Planning Commission Members f OR940 City Administrator Bernhardson From: Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building & Zoning Fdministrator Date: September 28, 1988 Subj*ct: #1340 Washington Scientific, 2605 Wayzata Boulevard - Conditional Use Permit - Public Hearing Pertinent Ordinance - Section 10.03, Subdivision 19 - Conditional use permit required for land alteration activities in excess of 100 cubic yards. The application is two phased. The first phase will involve the excavation of a trench 24' deep for the purpose of treating contaminated soils. Pumps will !De installed within the trench draining ground waters up to treatment chambers that will eventually enter the sanitary sewer system. The second phase involves the placement of over 100 cubic yards of contaminated soils excavated from the recent aldition to the structure and from soils excavated from the proposed tench construction. The M.P.C.A. is in the process of reviewing a plan to p -ace 1 inch width of contaminated soils on existing grade to eval ora!: a waste substance "air stripling". List of Exhibits Exhibit A - Application Exhibit B - Property Owners List Exhibit C - Plat Map Exhibit D - Cook's Letter. Dated 9/27/88 Exhibit E - Pallansch's Letter Dated 12/29/87 Exhibit E - M.P.C.A.'s Letter Dated 3/11/88 Exhibit G - M.P.C.A.'s Letter Dated 6/15/88 Exhibit H - Delta Environmental Consultant's Health Dated 6/1.5/88 Exhibit I - Delta to M.P.C.A. Dated 9/1/88 Exhibit J - M.P.C.A.'s Letter Dated 9/28/88 Exhibit K - M.W.C.C..'s Letter Dated 9/28/88 Exhibit L - Delta's Report Entitled "Remedial or Letter to Delartment of Action Plan" Zoning File #1340 September 27, 1988 Page 2 of 5 Review of Application - As with all industrial type operations within this State, WSI is under a continual monitoring program of operations under the P.C.A. guidelines. In May of 1987, Pace Laboratories was asked to sample soil borings conducted on the WSI site for construction of a new parking lot for the facility. In the process of analysing those soil borings, the findings indicated the potential for contamination cf soil and perhaps ground water with volatile organic compounds. In the Summer of 1987, WSI contracted with Delta Environmental to conduct a full scale program of sampling, analysis and investigation for the purpose of correcting the problem and with a recommendation for remedial action. Review Exhibit L, Delta's Remedial Action Plan, to the rear you will find several site plans. In those site plans, note the location of various monitoring wells that have been installed on the site in addition to locating the contaminated area to the south cf the parking lot and on another, the propos3d location of the filtering trench. The contaminate has been classified as organic solvent. In discussions with 1•. . Pallansch, it would appear that the hazardous substance was found in possibly the chemicals used by the company years ago, and twenty to thirty years ago, it was the misguided practice to throw these out into the adjacent field. There is no other explanation for it as the substances do not exist naturally in soils. WSI has worked closely under the direction of the M.P.C.A. Please review the coorespondence enclosed in your packets (Exhibits E through K). They briefly define the many interactions between the agencies that have taken place since 1987. The M.P.C.A. has approved Delta Environmental's recommendations which involve the installation of monitoring wells to determine the extent of the contamination on the site and through the groundwater. Note monitoring wells have been placed on St. George's cemetary property to the east of the subject property. The City of Orono's formal responsibilities entered the scene as a result of the land alterations involved. The trench construction will allow a slow filtering ;rocess of the groundwaters and a flushing system that will be closely monitored by the M.W.C.C. and as both letter from Mr. Cook and M.W.C.C. (Exhibits D 6 K) ruggest, it must also be monitored by the City of Orono before it enters the sewer system. In that same packet prepared by Delta Environmental, you will find engineering diagrams of that trench, pumping chambers, filtering systems, etc. zoning File #1340 September 27, 1988 Page 3 of 5 The second phase of the current conditional use permit application involves the placement of 1" thick contaminated soils excavated once again close to a doorway where possibly workers had dumped chemicals onto the soil. It was located within the area of the new addition. It is interesting to note that the preliminary investigations did not find this contaiminated area, but with the pattern of past disposal, the company suspected that they would find contaminated soils when the addition was excavated. Mr. Pallansch has advised that the sophisticated equipment used to detect these substances will be brought to your meeting so that you may be able to observe and question the engineers who will also be present at the meeting. The approximate 100 cubic yards are stored to the south of the parking lot with black plastic coverage and large pieces of sheeting to keep it self contained. Materials to be excavated from the trench which will also be contaminated with the same organic solvent and will be spread out over an area of the property to a 1" dep�, and then turned over and respread. I halve been advised by Mr. Pallansch that it will take approximately 2 to 3 months to rid the soils of the solvent. The process of evaporation will remove the contaminate. In Cook's letter, he recommends that small earth dikes may be desirable if there is a failure in the system. Such failure would result in contaminates going directly into Long Lake. Staff will include this in the Planning Commission recommendations. Members should question why the City has never been informed of the problems dating back to May of 1987. As Mr. Pallansch's letter dated 12/29/87 (Exhibit L) notes, WSI deals directly with the P.C.A. with all environmental issues and is subject to a monitoring program as part of a comprehensive environmental protection program. The P.C.A. is always the first agency to be advised of any problem. It is the company's responsibility to provide the necessary data and remedial action for the P.C.A.'s review, comment and approval. Staff has not had the opportunity to contact an agent from the P.C.A. but prior to the meetingstaff plans to discuss this application with the agents of the P.C.A. The curpose of my call would be to ask if it was not part of the normal process of the P.C.A. permit review to contact the local jurisdiction when there is proof presented that a property has been found to contain hazardous ma aerials. The conditional use permit with the City is merely based on the fact that there will be excavations in excess of 100 cubic yards of fill. Cook's letter even notes the time lag in notifying the City. Zoning File #1340 September 27, 1988 Page 4 of 5 In the future, WSI will be required to keep the City apprised of all exploratory work, monitoring results, and in general, all activities dealing with the hazardous condition. Once again, Cook's letter suggests that the contaminates appear to be contained in a relatively small area on the twenty-five acre site. Mr. Pallansch has advised that his architects and engineers will be present at the meeting for you to pose any questions you may have regarding this project. It is of the utmost importance that we proceed as rapidly as we can with this application so that WSI can begin the trench installation before the winter months. The second phase of this application must be delayed until the M.P.C.A. has formally responded and approved the proposed treatment of contaminate. (If members have any questiciiis of the Orono staff, please contact my office prior to the meeting.) Staff would p•-opose the following approval recommendation for your consideration: To approve the first phase of the conditional use permit application of Washington Scientific, Inc., for the property located at 2605 Wayzata Boulevard, that would allow the installation of a 24' deep trench for the purpose of filtering underground contaminiated soils through a flushing process with final deposition into the M.W.C.C. sewer lines, based on the following findings: 1. The applicant and its consultants have contacted all appropriate State agencies throughout the P.C.A. permit review. The City staff and its consultant confirm tilat it would appear that the applicant has complied with all conditions set forth by the P.C.A. and that the remedial plan of action appears to meet all of the State standards. 2. In order to prevent further hazard to the public health, safety and welfare, it is important that the approved remedial action plan be instituted as soon as possible. 3. The proposed plan of action will prevent further risk and ^ontamination of the run-off entering Long Lake and throughout the major watershed. Zoning File #1340 September 27, 1988 Page 5 of 5 This approval is subject to the following conditions: 1. The applicant is hereby advised that the City must be notified immediately of any changes in the present condition of the hazardous substances on the property or of any new areas found to contain hazardous substances. 2. The City is to review and approve the monitoring information on the discharge water from the filtering devices before they enter the City sewer system. This responsibility shall be shared with the M.W.C.C. 3. Earthen dikes to be constructed as deemed necessary by the City as a protection against the failure of the system to prevent contamination from getting into Long Lake. 4. This approval reconfirms all conditions set forth by the M.W.C.C. in their approval letter dated 9/28/88. 5. Contaminated soils excavated from trench installation must be contained/stored per approval by M.P.C.A. guidelines. The second phase of this application review will be tabled until the M.P.C.A. has completely approved the air stripping method for excavated contaminated soils. The Orono staff would ask for the following information and/or submittals to complete this phase of the review: A) Temporary/interium grading plan to show area designated for filling or contaminated soils; B) Method to physically confine or treat direct surface run-off from site while under the evaporation s:3ge; C) Provide time schedule for turn -over and regrade process; D) Establish the length of time to complete the evaporation process. E) City Engineer to determine need for additional information on this phase. Additional Comments and Planning Commission Recommendation - Zoning File #1340 October 6, 1988 Page 6 of 6 The Planning Commission unanimously moved the staff recommendation approving the first phase conditional use permit for Washington Scientific and tabling the second phase of the application. The enclosed resolution has been drafted per the above approval recommendation. In addition, it should be noted that after conversations with the City Engineer and the M.W.0 " , it is appropriate to ask the applicant to provide a meter for the discharge into the sewer system as the City has not been able to receive accurate information as to the volume of that discharge. It is necessary that the City require the meter at the time of the installation of the trench/pumping/treatment system. A RESOLUTION GRANTING A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT PER MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 10.03, SUBDIVISION 19 FILE #1340 WHEREAS, Washington Scientific, Inc. (hereinafter "the applicant") is the owner of the property located at 2605 Wayzata Boulevard within the City of Orono (hereinafter "City") and legally described in Exhibit A, attached to this resolution, (hereinafter "property"); and WHEREAS, the applicant has applied to the City of Orono for a Conditional Use Permit per Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.03, Subdivis'on 19 to uermit the excavation of a trench 24' deep for the purpose of treatint soils contaminated with organic solvents. Pumps shall be installed within the trench with two above -ground treatment chambers that will eves.*wally drain discharge into the sanitary sewer system. Minnesota: NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council o` Orono, FINDINGS 1. This application was reviewed as Zoning File #k1340. 2. The property is located in the Industrial Zoning District. 3. on October 3, 1988, the Orono Planning Commission reviewed the application as proposed and recommended approval, based on the following findings: A) The applicant and its consultants have contacted all of:propriate State agencies throughout the P.C.A. permit review. The City staff and its consultants can confirm that the applicant has complied with all conditions set forth by the P.C.A. and that the remedial plan of action meets all of the State's standards. B) In order to prevent further hazard to the public health, safety, and welfare, it is important that the approved remedial action plan be instituted as soon as possible. C) The proposed plan of action will prevent further risk of contamination of the run-off entering Long Lake and throughout the major watershed. Page 1 of 4 4. The City Council has considered this application including the findings and re^ommendations of the Planning Commission, reports by staff and comment of the applicant and the effect of the proposed use on the health, safety and welfare of the community. 5. The City Council finds that granting a Conditional Use Permit to allow the excavation of the trench as part of the remedial treatment plan for the purpose of eliminating the presence of organic solvents within the property 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 objectives of the Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan of the City. CONCLUSIONS, ORDER AND CONDITIONS Based upon one or more of the above findings, the Orono City Council hereby grants a Conditional Use Permit per Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.03, Subdivision 19 to permit the excavation of a trench as part of a remedial treatment plan for the purpose of treating organic solvents located within the property, subject to the following conditions: 1. The applicant is hereby advised that the City must be notified immediately of any changes in the present condition of the hazardous substances on the property or of any new areas found to contain such hazardous substances. 2. The City is to review and approve the monitoring information on the discharge from the filtering devices before they enter the City sewer system. Applicant must apply for the appropriate permits from the City of Orono for meters that will monitor volume of discharge into sewer system. This phase of the operation shall also be monitos!d with the M.W.C.C. 3. Earthen dikes to be constructed as deemed necessary by the City as a protection against the failure of the system in order to prevent contamination from getting into Long Lake and the surrounding major watershed. 4. Contaminated soils excavated from trench installation must be contained/stored above ground per standards set forth by M.P.C.A. guidelines. Page 2 of 4 5. In granting approval of this conditional use permit, the City also reconfirms all conditions set forth by the M.W.C.C. in their approval letter to the applicant dated 9/28/88. 6. Violation of or non-compliance with any of the terms and condi- tions of this resolution shall onstitute a violation of the zoning code, shall automatically terminate any authority granted herein, and shall be punishable as a misdemeanor. 7. The undersigned owner has read, understood and hereby agrees to the terms of this resolution and on behalf of Washington Scientific, Inc., its 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 loth day of October, 1988. ATTEST: Dorothy M. Hallir, City Clerk Property Owner(s) James R. Grabek, Mayor Pa(Ie 3 -1,f 4 RESOLUTION NO. Exhibit A '.�i-Ea1►L QESCRZPTZONt PARCEL :Lots. 1 . through ;12 .inclusive, Block 1,-:.ORONO -INDUSTRIAL ;PARK, -.according to --: the recorded plat thereof, Hennepin County,' "Minnesota, including all of vacated Lincoln Drive within said ORONO INDUSTRIAL PARK." xPARCEL B: '(from Book 3619of Mtg. Pg. 456)y' All that part -of the South : 1/2 of the Northeast 1/4 :o! Section 33, Township 118, North,:Range 23, West �.of -.the .5th .Principal- T Meridian," -described as follows: Commencing at a point-.on.'_the -3outh ,line ;of :said Northeast z-1/4 at -its =point 'o! Tintersection ._ ;with the _West -line of �the�East r66 .rods thereof, -=said point :being _s distant 1550:78, tset East »ot sthe - West aini_.;of :':South r'1/2 Hof Northeast :1%4 ; =thence North . along the West�l in 'of the "said 'East 16.6 rods..to the _North Line"ol-the South;-1/2 :of _said .Northeast 1/4, 21being 'a`point -on said North T ins distant;:1547 45 rfeet _East of -the-- --line---of West_ -said Northeast--1/4; thence West along ,said. North -Y-line a460. S feet; thence'"--South--to a -point ;on .the South sine of - v� .._,. _ -said Northeast -1/4 460.5 -:teat Wash _of 'the point = af. beginnoBin Ithence rEast '460.5 feet to!'the point .of -" inning; �' ncludfnq.any� portion -of street-street-orsaid —premisesd Porto be _vacated •a+ w (%' r� •rl 14rrlr. CITY OF ORONO - GENERAL LAND USE ATIO* . `r�"-'ter 1� �•I -------------------------------- --------�+' ^--- -1----+'i:ai-- PROPERTY LOCATION Site Address 2605 West Wayzata Blvd. _ Property Identification Number (P.I.D. ) 3 ;;"C� G,�rTEE - ,1r-WO -_ cvvvry Please check one - Property X abstract or _ torrens? n;q (for Conditional Use Applications only) Tt z`v,"v Please attach legal description to application if not inc 1ud_ ed`;yt, L.vC� � �� TL,q: on required survey. ----------- ----------------------------------------------------------------- APPLICANT Phone (home) Name Joe Pall:.insch Phone (work) 473-1271 Address 2605 West Wayzata Blvd City Long Lake Zip 55356 ------------------------------------------------------------ ---------- OWNER (if different than applicant) Phone (home) Name Corporation Phone 473-1271 Address 2605 West Wayzata Blvd City Long Lake Zip 55,356 Date Property Acquired 1950 approx. (month/year ) I (do) (do not) also own the adjacent parcels of land. ------ &_W� ----------------------------------------------------------------- FEES - CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS - Renewa.l Fee - 1/2 Current Fee After -the -Fact Fee - Double Current Application Fee $100.00 a) Residential accessory Use $150.00 b) Institutional (church, school, etc.) $150.00 c) Duplex Credit/B...dg X $250.00 d) Commercial/Industrial Use $200.00 f) Land Alteration _ Grading and filling - designated wetland or floodplain Grading and filling - 101 cu. yd. or more Grading, seawall, retaining walls within 75' of lakeshore PRD/PID - see fee schedule OTEM APPLICATIONS _ $150.00 Commercial Site Plan Review (+ consultant. fees) _ $250.00 Vacation _ $150.00 Basement Vacation $ 50.00 Easement Vacation with Subdivision $250.00 Rezoninq $100t00 AppRals Other - see fee schedule PRESENT USE OF PROPERTY present Zoning District Present Use of Property Residential x Other (specify) _ industrial -------------------------------------- :------------------------------------ DESCRIPTTION OF REQUEST Describe request in detail: Comply wit4l0-87-200 Remedial Action Plan ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- REQUIRED SURKITTAIS 1. Completed Application Form. 2. Certified Property Owners List of owners within 35G' (you can obtair this list from Hennepin County Department of Finance A-603 Government Center 348-3271) 3. Stamped, legal sized envelopes (#10) pre -addressed to each of the names on the above list with no return address. 4. Certificate of survey. 5. Topographic survey (existing and proposed contours) if land alterations involve changes in elevation (grades). 6. Construction plan, if applicable (see staff for requirements). 7. Plat Map. 8. As an addendum to this application, please attach a separate list of any other persons you wish notified of this application. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- 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 correct to the best of his/her knowledge. / / Applicant's signature Date 9 PP 9 OWNERS SIGNATURE The owner hereby acknowledges and agrees to this application and further authorized reasonable entry onto the property by City staff, consultants, agents, commission members, and Council members for purposes of investigation 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 hold on the third Monday of each month. Applicants must be present at all scheduled review meetings of the Planninq 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 advise the Building i Zoning Office of this change prior to the meeting. " DATE OS/19/80 SATCX 006 36 33-118-23 11 0003 / Pow A00R WWR MAME: MM PLAZA TA101AlEp REIERSGORD LAW FIRM MAME/AOM ♦94S HALIFAX AVE 5 SUITE ' EDINA MN 554Z4 38 33-116-23 13 0009 Pleop AOOR Q" p NA1E WASH SCIENTIFIC INDUST INC TAX►ATE4 WASHINGTON SCIENTIFIC IND ws/ADOR HWY 12 +ONG LAKE MN 55356 • 38 33-118-23 13 0012 PROP AMR O"m ►.AMf VEDA INC T"PATEG VEDA INC NAME.ADOR BOX 115 LONG LAKE MN 55356 36 33-118-23 31 0010 PROP 400 OWNER 0" GH NY CO TAXPAYTR ON NY CO 7t 33-116-23 14 COOS PROP hoop 00401 WILLOW OR O"N NAM CHURCH OF ST GEORGE TAXPAYER C^ACH OF ST GEOR6E MAttf /ADON LOG LAKE MN 55356 72 3)-118-23 14 0018 F9;:�I A:iOf LA"* NARK LARTCH DEVELOPMENT CO TArvATEf t YTCH DEVELOPMENT CO mot /ADON 170,30 lotcabo000 RD ' MATZATA MI SS391 HENNEPIN COLO(T`. PROPEkfY INFORMATION SYSTEM PROPERTY OWNERS LIST 38 33-118-23 13 0001 02605 WAYZATA BLVD MASH SCIENTIFIC IND WASHINGTON SCIENTIFIC INC C/O B E KINNEY LS, 0 LAKE MH 553 3S--33- 18-23 :3 0010 WASHINGTON SCIENTIFIC IND IN WASHINGTON SCIENTIFIC IND P O BOX 340 LONG LAKE MH 55356 38 33-118-23 13 0013 VFOA 'NC VEUA :NC BOX 05 r.JG LAKE MI 55356 38 33-118-23 41 0014 GEORGE L OSGOOD ET AL GEOCGE L OSGOOD 365 WILLOW DR N LONG LAKE MI 55356 72 33-118-23 14 0011 LARTCH DEVELOPMENT CO LARTCH DEVELOPMENT CO 17630 BRECONWOOD RD WAYZATA MN 55391 72 33-118-23 14 0019 LARTCH DEVELOPMENT CO LARTCH DEVELOPMENT CO 17630 BRECONW000 RD WAYZATA MN SS391 REFJRT 110. P1435401 PAGE 8 V i8 33-118-23 13 0002 J2687 WAYZATA BLVD VEDA INC VEDA INC P 0 BOX 115 LOt,G LAKE MH 55356 J 38 31-118-23 13 0011 02765 WAYZATA BLVD VEDA INC ETAL VEDA INC BOX 115 LONG LAKE M1 55356 a 38 33-118-23 13 0014 "" r 02705 WAYZATA BLVD VEDA INC VEDA INC 3OX 115 L01.J LAKE MN 55356 38 33-118-23 42 D001 00320 OLD CRYSTAL BAY RD N o D MEYER A P M MEYER CHAEL HILVELINK 85 GOLDEN VIEW OR LONG LAKE MN 55356 P 72 33-118-23 14 0015 LARTCH DEVELOPMENT CO LARTCH DEVELOPMENT CO 17630 BRECONWOOD RD WAYZATA MN 55391 ilk- fit•" _ to 72 33-118-23 14 0020 y.'.ix� LARTCH DEVELOPMENT CO LARTCH DEVELOPMENT CO 17630 BRECOW300 RD WAYZATA MN 55391 i RU1� DATE 0S/19/88 BATCH 006 72 33-11R-23 14 0021 PVOP AOOR Wag NAttE LARTC,H DEVELOPMENT CO TAXPAYER LARTCH DEVELOPMENT CO NAME/AGOR 17610 BRECONWOOO RD WAYZATA MN 55391 HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORMATION SYSTEM PROPERTY OWNERS LIST TOTAL BATCH 006 00019 REPORT NO. PI435401 PAGE 9 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 PROPERTY TAXATION. TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE AND BELIEF. Il,,,, BY / DATE d� 9 - Otto G Bonestroo, PE Keith A Gordon. PE Bonestroo Robert W Rosene. PE Richard W Foster, PE Joseph C. Andenik, PE Donald C. Burgardt. PE. Rosene Rradford A Lemberg, PE Richard E turner. PE Jerry A Bourdon. PE Mark A Hanson. PE C� AnderIlk & James C Cook, E Glenn R Cook. PE Ted K Field. PE ut PE mi'Robe" i t gaffed,, Thomas E. Noyes, PE P Robert R Pleffene, PE. Associates Robert G Schumcht. PE David O Loskota, PE Marvin L Sorvala. PE Engineers & Architects September 27, 1988 City o' Orono Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 Attn: Ms. Jeanne Mabusth Re: File No. 139-1341 Washington Scientific Dear Jeanne, Thomas W Petersnn PF Michael C Lynch. PE James R Maland. PE Kerneth P Anderson, PE Keith A Bachmann. PE Mark R Roils. PE Robert C Russek. A I A Thomas E Angus, PE Howard A Sanford, PE Charles A ErKkson Leo M PaAelsky Harlan M Olson Susan M Fbe,kn Mark A Seip We have reviewed the information submitted for the Washington Scientific property. The company has been working with the PCA and the cleanup work is progressing. The information provided indicates that the contaminants appear to be con- tained in a relatively small area. The plan would provide for construction of a recovery trench and treatment of the water collected. The treated water would then be discharged into the City sanitary sewer bystem. The City should request that all new information come to the City for review as soon as possible. The time lag has been significant in the past. The City should control the discharge into the sanitary sewer along with MWCC. The protection of the area with small earth dikes may be desirable in that failure of the system would allow t' contaminants to ge, into Long Lake. We have made a very general review of the treatment proposal. If the City desires a more specific review of the chemical analysis and the potential hazard I will have to involve our environmental engineers as discussed. if you have any questions, please contact this office. Yours very truly, BONESTR00, ROSENE, ANDE:ZLIK i ASSOCIATES, INC. Glenn R. Cook GRC:li 24 10 233S West Highway 36 • St. Paul, Minnesota SS113 • 612 636-4600 WSI December 29, 1987 Ms. Lee Ann K. Johnson Hazardous Waste Section Hazardous Waste Division Minnesota Pollution Control Agency 520 Lafayette Road St. Paul, Minnesota 55155 - Dear Ms. Johnson: I would like to take this opportunity to inform you of recent developments in our on -going investigation and comp�iance activity here at Washington Scientific Industries. Since your last inspection of February 12, 1986 we have maintained a continual monitoring program of our operations. As part of that program, in May of 1987, we invited Pace Laboratories to take samples of soil borings being conducted for the construction of a new parking lot for our facility. Analysis of soil borings at that time indicated the potential for contamination of soil and perhaps groundwater with volatile organic compounds. As soon as these analyses became available in the summer of 1987 we contacted Delta Environmental to conduct a full-scale program of sampling, analysis and investigation, with an eye toward recommendations for the company to implement. As a result of this study, Delta has determined than there is some contamina- tion of soils and a shallow groundwater aquifer in the vicinity of the plant buildings which can be corrected by an appropriate groundwater collection system to be designed by Delta. This plan is more fully explained in Delta's report. The company is prepared to implement Delta's recommendations in an appropriate time schedule, depending on weather, conditions and other factors discussed in the report. I assume that the MPCA will concur in the plans to correct this potential problem at the earliest possible time consistent with good engineering practice. I believe the attached report fully explains the situation here at WSI. If you have any questions, I will be happy to address them. Technical quettions will, of course, be referred to our consultants, Face Laboratories, Inc. .-%ad Delta Environmental Consultants, Inc. I will be happy to discuss our plans in this regard at your convenience. Yours verity truly, if J(e Pallansch WASHINGTON SCI<NTIFIC INOUSTRIaSI INC. 7l�0} w W*Yf1U •rvd • LAM9 VYe, MMMsorn SS.M 0 ►!q/M•ty17)1211 V 41kow; 2 CW March 11, 1988 Minnesota Pollution Control Agency Mr. Joe Pallansch Washington Scientific Ind., Inc. 2605 West Wayzata Boulevard P.O. Box 340 Long Lake, Minnesota 55356 Dear Mr. Pallansch: Re: organic Solvent Contamination Investigation Report for the Washington Scientific Ind., Inc. (WSI) Facility located in Long Lake, Minnesota (WSI Report) The Minnesota Pollution Control Aqency (MPCA) staff received the above referenced report on January 4, 1988. The MPCA would like to compliment WSI for moving forward in an expeditious manner in orde -velop a plan to remediate the contamination at your facility. The MCP.A staff have completed their review of the .,,I report. The report is well stated and contains accurate and concise information. However, the MPCA staff feel that there is some amount of incompleteness with regards to the definition of the contaminant plume at Site 2 and possible problems with the proposed remediation scheme. Following are specific comments and possible alternatives for addressing the ccmments: Although no remedial action may be appropriate for Site 3, as proposed, continued monitoring of MW-5, MW-7, and the New Plant Well is recommended in order to monitor future horizontal and/or vertical movement of the contaminants at Site 3. 2. Considering the screen placements of MW-6 and MW-4, and the high contaminant concentrations in MW-L'D, the conclusion that "it i. not likely that contaminants have spread laterally beyond the area of MW-6" appears prematurE. Placement of a well screen and sampling at an elevation comparable to that of MW-2D adjacent to MW-6 and/or KW-4 would more properly address this question. Phone: 520 Lafayette Road, St. Paul, Minnesota 55155 Heritonal Offices - Dui tit hiBiainerdlDettoil Lait@SiMa►shalI/Rochest& Mr. Joe Pallansch Page Two 3. The proposal for an interceptor trench is appropriate in this type of hydrogeological regime. However, the proposed depth to which the interception trench will be installed does not appear to be deep enough to intercept the contaminated ground water detected at MW-2D. Modification of this proposal should be considered after a more complete definition of the contaminant plume is attained. If you have questions regarding the above review and comments please contact Joseph Julik (612/296-7753) or Crague Biglow (612/296-9626) of my staff at your earliast convenience. _ Sincerely, •.�_--- L rry C istensen Chief, azardous Waste Section Hazardous Waste Division LC/JKJ : njd G Minnesota Pollution Control Agency June 15, 1988 Mr. Joe Pallansch Washington Scientific Industries, Inc. 2605 West Wayzata Boulevard P.O. Box 340 Long Lake, Minnesota 55356 Dear. Mr. Pallansch: RE: Proposed Work Plan for the Washington Scientific Industries, Inc. (WSI) racility Located in Long Lake, Minnesota (WSI Work Plan) The Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) received the above referenced report on May 26, 1988. The WSI Work Plan was submitted in response to the MPCA's March 11, 1988, letter to you regarding continued site investigation. The MPCA staff have completed their review of the WSI Work Plan and find it to be accurate and appropriate. As one of the wells which is proposed is a double cased well through an area of contamination, Minnesota Department of Health approval will be needed before this well can be installed. The MPCA staff request that you proceed with the recommendations outlined in the WSI Work Plan. If you have any questions regarding the above review and comments please contact Joseph Julik (612/296-7753) or Crague Biglow (612/297-1782) of my staff at your earliest convenience. Sincerely, j t,w a.,. arry Christensen Chief, Hazardous Waste Section Hazardous Waste Division LC: jcj cc: David Ronnei, Delta Environmental Consultants, Inc. Phone:__-- 520 Lafayette Road, St, Paul. Minnesota 55155 Regional Offices • Duluth/Bratowd/Detroil LakesJMar shalli%(,hester Equal Opportunity Employw Delta Environmental Consultants, Inc. 1801 Highway 8. Suite 123 St. Paul. MN 55112 612 636-2427 June 15, 1988 1e Minnesota Department of Health Water Supply and Engineering Department 717 Delaware Street SE Minneapolis, MN 55440 Attention: Mr. Roman Koch Subject: Monitoring Well Installation Washington Scientific Industries, Inc. Long Lake, Minnesota Delta No. 10-87-200 Dear Mr. Koch: As part of our investigation of the subject site, we are proposing the installation of a 50 foot monitoring well. We will be drilling through a confining unit between 10 and 25 feet below the ground surface. We are seeking a permit from your department to install this well. Details of our proposal are discussed in the enclosed report entitled "Proposed Work Plan". The monitoring well, designated MW-10, will be installed by GME Consultants, Inc. (GME). Their proposal for the well installation is included in Attachment I. We are scheduled to begin well installation on June 27, 1988. As summarized in the enclosed report, MW-10 (the 50 foot well) will be constructed with a two inch diameter stainless steel -screen and two inch low carbon steel riser. The well will be finished at a depth of 50 feet. We propose to drill the first 35 feet with a 6 1/4 inch I.D. hollow stem auger with rubber seals between auger flights. The remaining 17 feet will be drilled with a 6 1/4 inch tri-cone bit and bentonite drilling fluid. The reason for selecting this drilling method is that this is a known area of solvent contamination as noted in the enclosed report. We believe that this drilling method will enable us to seal off the above strata and effectively sample the 45 - 50 foot inter-1. For your information, a boring (MW-7) was drilled very near the location of the proposed :ell. The log of this boring is included in Attachment 2. Pracncai SOlutton7 to Envi onmental Co wems Mr. Roman Koch June 16, 1988 Page l Please review this information and respond as soon as possible. If you have any questions regarding this information, please call me at (612) 636- 2427. Sincerely, DELTA ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTANTS, INC. David M. Ronnei Project Hydrogeologist DMR/clo Attachments cc: Mr. Jim Nye, Minnesota Department of health Mr. Joe Julik, Minnesota Pollution Control Agency Mr. Joe Pallansch, Washington Scientific Delta Environmental Consultants, Inc. 1801 Highway 8, Suite 123 St. Paul, MN 55112 612 636-2427 September 1, 1988 I/A Minnesota Pollution Control Agency 520 Lafayette Road St. Paul, Minnesota 55155 j v 110, Attention: Mr. Joseph Julik, Hazardous Waste Section Subject: Washington Scientific Industries Remedial Action Plan Long Lake, Minnesota Delta No. 10-87-200 Dear Mr. Julik: Enclosed please find one copy of our proposed "Remedial Action Plan' for the subject site. The plan includes a discussion of recently obtain data and presents our proposed remedial activities. Washington Scientific Industries (WSI) would like to proceed with the proposed Remedial Action Plan (RAP) as soon as possible. Therefore, we are asking the MPCA to review this plan at the earliest convenient time. Our current work plan schedules work to begin during the last week of September. Our schedule will be dependent upon authorization from the MPCA, Metropolitan Waste Control Commission and local government. If you have any questions, please call me at 612-636-2427. Sincerely, DELTA ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTANTS, INC. 04�- . David M. Ronnei Project H ydrogeologist DMR:klw Enclosure cc: Larry Christensen MPCA Grague 9iglow MPCA Joe Pallansch WSI Prectic*1 Sokitions to Environmental Concams 111t-L-1 I ,_ , ��- 09i29; 96 01: j 41qmo�o� Minnesota Pollution Control Agency qW September 28, 1988 Mr. Joe lallansch Veshington Scientific Indu*trie4, Inc. 2605 Vast Vsysata Loulevard P.o. fox 34U Long Lake, Minnesota $�3S6 Dear Mr. Fallsnscht REt Remedial Action Plan Lonr the Lakes aMinnesotaSc(pjIi�cp)Industriea, Inc. (VSI) facility Locatedg The Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCThetRAP the above your referenced document on September 2, 1964. sWSIubmitted ed details behalf by Delta Invironaantal Consultants, Inc.he(Delta). The the findings°fthe contsslinatedInvestigations vtedate bene•chaakes yvur faoilitydationa for remedistion of the The MPCA staff have completed their review of the YSI RAP and have the following comoentsi 1. As findings of the investigation indicate that there is ground water contamination down to a depth of 24 last, the propo4od interception trench should be installed to a depth of at least 24 feet, not 18 feet as was specified in the Y61 RAP. Tn a septomber A, 1980, telephone conversation with Joseph Julik of my staff, David Ronnei of Delta stated that titers may be practical problems, such as caving, theyciated would asks everylliattemPtttonch installathestrench•tooanei deptthioft24t fast. Kr. Ronnei also stated that if the use of piles were necessary in order to allow the trench to be installed to 24 feet, the coats illotovaldepthaofb24Ufeeptralternative methodstfor`h will capturingtbe contaminald my ed ground water should be proposed. Phone:_— - A20 Lafayette Rood, 8t. Paul. Minnesota "166 r%glonel Otr!cet • Duluthlprein-drt)etro►t takplMarrrheUll ,spit+++ Evual OPOM)""Alty IMP'oyw Mr. Joe tallanseh Page 1 2. The MPCA Air Quality staff will have to review and approve, if appropriate, the air stripping system which has been proposed for handling the contaminated ground water which is to be extracted from beneath this site. A copy of the Air Quality information form is enclosed with this response letter. Mr. Ronnei also indicated on Septem�sr 8, 1988, taut WdI may be able to bleed the contaminated ground water into their discharge stream to the MWCC sanitary sever system. If this alternative ie selected a copy of the MWCC approval for this discharge must be submitted to our office. 3. The MPCA staff request that you resolve the above concerns and submit final plans and specifications for the (proposed) remedial action alternative within 30 days of the date of this letter. If you have any questions regarding the above review and comments plsase contact Joseph Julik $12/296-7753 or Crave Siglow 612/297-1782 of my staff at your earliest convenience. Sincerely, C4�� arry hristensen, Chief easer ous Waste Section Hasardous Waste Division LC/JKJakm Inclevure cci David Aonnei, Delta Invironmental Consultants, Inc. e F1 Metropolitan Waste Control Commission Mears Park Centre, 230 East Fifth Street, St. Paul, Minnesota 55101 612 222-8423 September 28, 1988 Mr. Joe Pallansch Washington Scientific Industries, Inc. 2605 West Wayzata Blvd. Long Lake, MN 55356 Re: Discharge Approval for Contaminated Groundwater Geneiat.ed During Cleanup operations at 2605 West Wayzata Blvd., Long Lake, MN Dear Mr. Pallansch: The Metropolitan Waste Control Commission (MWCC) hereby approves the discharge of contaminated groundwater to the Metropolitan Disposal System (MDS). The approval is conditional based on the following: 1. The approval commences as of November 1, 1988 and expires on November 1, 1989. 2. The discharge location shall be the manhole located along the east property line. 3. The proposed discharge location and pumping rate of 5 GPM to the MDS shall be ,pproved by the City of . lr -*- r 4. The discharge volume shall be measured and reported on a quarterly basis to both MWCC and the City of 670-sA Billing for sewer use shall be arranged through the City. 5. The contaminated groundwater shall pass through the proposed air stripping system prior to disposal to the MDS. This system shall be designed to ensure that no slug of contaminants may be discharged directly to the MDS without adequate pretrj2at- ment. 6. The system shall be run long enough to obtain a representative sample, then shut down. The sample shall be analyzed for the parameters listed in item V . The results of this analysis shall be sent to the MWCC for approval. Discharge shall not continue at this site until further approval has been obtained. Results may be reported verbally to hasten app►-�jval, with a col of the lab results to follow as soon as they are received. 1 t N i 1► ,t Mr. Pallansch: Page 2 September 28, 1998 7. During the first month of operations, representative samples shall be collected at 1 day, 10 days, and 30 days. Thereafter, representative samples of the discharge shall be taken on a monthly basis and analyzed for the following parameters: Dichlorodiflcuromethane, Methylene Chloride, 1,1-Dichloroethy- ene, 1,1-Dichloroethane, Trans-1,2-Dichloroethy a ee,_1,1,1-- Trich oroethane, and 1,1,2-Trichloroeth lene. Analytical and sampling methods shall meet EPA protocol (Code of Federal Regulations Part 136). B. The discharge shall be regulated so no single toxic organic in the discharge is present in a concentration greater than 5 mg/1 and no combination of toxic organics shall exceed a concentration of 15 mg/l. These limits are subject to review. If the limits are exceeded ky more than 10%, or by 0-10% on two successive reportings, the discharge shall cease until such a time when concentrations can be made acceptable. 9. Reports shall be prepared and submitted L% the MWCC on a quarterly basis. Report sheets are included with this letter and shall be filled out thoroughly. Laboratory data sheets shall be submitted along with the report sheets. 10. The MWCC shall be notified a8 hours in advance of discharge commencement. Notification must also be made if substantial changes to the proposed plan occur, or if the system is tem- porarily or permanently shut down during the approval period. 11. This discharge is subject to all applicable provisions of the MWCC Waste Discharge Rules (5900.1600 - 5900.7500) and the MWCC Strength Charge System. 12. If this discharge continues after the one year approval period, It will be necessary to determine the feasibility of rerouting the discharge to the storm sewer or surface waters via a NPDES Permit. if the sanitary sewer is the only feasible alternative, an extension must be applied for and granted prior to the expiration date. 13. This discharge approval is not exclusive. The approval does not release you from conditions of the Minnesota Pollution Contrcl Agency, Minnesota Department of Health, Minnesota Department of Natural Resources, and the. City of ive"g--Lake. O•re-,.,O The MWCC reserves the right to inspect the pumpout/disposal of con- taminated groundwater at any time, and to revoke this approval due to adverse MDS effects or non-compliance with approval conditions. Mr. Pallansch: Page 2 September 28, -J88 The applicability of Service Availability Charges (SAC) to long term discharges of this type has not been finalized. However, please be aware that this discharge will be subject to SAC in the future if the discharge duration exceeds three years. If the appro, conditions contained in this letter are acceptable, please sign the signatory statement below on both copies of this letter. One signed copy of this letter shall be returned to the MWCC Industrial Waste Division within 15 calendar days of receipt of this letter. It questions arise, please contact me at 229-2077. Respectfully, Mark Pierson Staff Engineer Industrial Waste Division cc: Leo Hermes, MWCC Lynn Holly, MWCC Joseph Julik, hPCA .mac h, C i t y o f "I UNDERSTAND AND AGREE TO COMPLY WITH THE APPROVAL C014DITIONS AS SET FORTH BY THE MWCC FOR THE SUBJECT DISCHARGE." gnature Date Name (type or print) Time _. y�1 `��0 J 1////Ak L'j:�t- L Remedi: Long La Delta Nc Delta Environmental Consultants, Inc. WASHINGTON SCIENTIFIC INDUSTRIES Remedial Action Plan Long Lake, Minnesota Delta No. 10-87-200 Prepared by: Delta Environmental Copsultants, Inc. 1801 Highway 8, Suite 114 St. Paul, MN 55112 (612) 636-2427 WASHINGTON SCIENTIFIC INDUSTRIES Remedial Action Plan Long Lake, Minnesota Delta No. 10-87-200 1,0 INTRODUCTION 1.1 Purpose and Scooe The objective of this report is to present a Remedial Action Plan (RAP) for the clean up of contaminated soil and ground water at the Washington Scientific Industries (WSI) facility located in Orono, Minnesota. The report also presents data obtained from three newly installed monitoring wells at the site. The new wells have allowed us to further define the vertical and horizontal extent of contamination. Based on site conditions which have been cutline in Delta Environmental Consultants, Inc. (Delta) reports entitled "Organic Solvent Contamination Investigation", December 23, 1987 and "Proposed Work Plan", May 24, 1988, we recommend that a recovery trench system be installed to remediate- contaminated ground water identified at the site. The trench will contain a large diameter sump which will be equiped with a single total fluids submersible pumping system. Contaminated water will be routed from the sump to an aeration system for pretreatment of volatile compounds and then be discharged directly to the sanitary sewer system. 1.2 Site Description Washington Scientific Industries is located on the south side of the highway, immediately west of the city of Long Lake, Minnesota. The site is within the city limits of Orono and is located in the SW 1/4, NW 1/1" Section 33, TI I8N, R23W. The WSI facility is shown in the United States Geological Survey topographic map in Figure 1. 2.0 BACKGROUND 2.1 Previous Work Fourteen monitoring wells have been installed at the WSI facility in Orono, Minnesota. The monitoring well locations are shown in Figure 2. The results of the initial phase of this investigation are presented and discussed in the Delta report entitled "Organic Solvent Contamination Investigation", December 23, 198' After completion of the initial site report, one additional monitoring well was inst_"Cd and additional round of sampling was conducted. Results of the well installation (MW-4D) and sampling are discussed in the Delta report entitled "Proposed Work Plan", May 24, 1988. Volatile organic s compounds (VOCs) were identified in monitoring well MW-4D. The presence of VOCs in MW-4 prompte installation of three additional wells proposed in the May 24 work plan. 3,0 ADDITIONAL PROJECT RESULTS 3.1 General Three additional monitoring wells were installed during June 1988 to further define the extent of VOC contamination. The locations of the new wells (MW-10, MW-11, and MW-12) are shown in Figure 2 along with the locations of previously installed wells. After installation, the new wells were developed and sampled. 3.2_ Soil Borings and Monitoring Wells Three additional soil borings were advanced at the site and were completed as monitoring wells. The boring well locations are shown in Figure 2. The subsurface geology of the site consists of heterogeneous mixture of clay, silt, sand, and gravel. The stratigraphy consists of silty clay with intermittent medium to coarse grained sand lenses which are generally less than two feet in width. The sand lenses do not appear to be laterally extensive. Complete lithologic boring logs for the three soil borings are included in Appendix A. Borings MW-10 and MW-1 1 were each advanced to a depth of 25 feet below existing grade. Boring MW-12 was advanced to a depth of 55 feet below the existing grade. Each of the three borings were completed as monitoring wells. The wells are constructed of low carbon steel risers with five foot stainless steel screens. Complete well construction details are given in Appendix B. 3.3. Contaminant Conditions 33.ISoil Contamination Soil contamination was pre,. iously identified in the vicinity of MW-4 and MW-4D; therefore, the upper 21 feet of soil was not sampled during the installation of MW-12. Low contaminant concentrations, as detected by the hNu photoionization meter, were detected in an interval between 23 and 36 feet below the ground surface during the drilling of MW -12. A summary of hNu results for borings MW-10, MW- 11, and MW-12 is included in Table 1. Ionizable gases were not detected in any of the samples after opening the split -spoon. Headspace checks revealed some volatiles in borings MW-11 and MW-12. However, the concentrations (Table 1) are at the lowest detection limit for the hNu which is approximately one part per million. At these concentrations, interferences with water vapors are common and the concentrations must be viewed in this context. TABLE 1 HNu Photoionization Results Borings MW-10, MW-11, MW-12 Washington Scientific Industries Long Lake, Minnesota Delta No. 10-87-200 MW-10 MW-11 MW-12 Intervals {feet) sample Headsuace sample Headsnace samvle Headsoace 4- 6 0 0 0 0 NS --- 9 - 11 0 0 0 2.0 NS --- 14 - 16 0 0 0 1.0 NS --- 19 - 21 0 0 0 1.0 NS --- 23 - 25 0 0 0 2.0 NS --- End of Boring End of Boring 29-31 0 1.0 34 - 36 0 2.0 39 - 41 0 2.0 53 - 55 0 0 Concentration reported as parts per million (ppm). Sample concentration recorded on sample after opening split -spoon. Headspace recorded in sample jar. clo.81 1 3.3.2 Ground Water Contamination Monitoring wells MW-10 and MW- I 1 are free of EPA 601/602 parameters. Monitoring well MW-10 had a detectable concentration of 1.1 microgram per liter (ug/1) of benzene. This low concentration is suspect due to the ubiquitous nature of this compound in our environment. Monitoring well MW-12 contained very low concentrations of xylenes, I,1-dichloroethylene, 1, 1 -dichloroethane, and toluene. The concentrations of these parameters are all below recommended allowable limits for drinking water. Sample analytical results from MW-10, MW-11, and MW-12 are provided in Appendix C. 4.1 Hvdro¢eolo¢v The water table of the unconfined aquifer at the site generally occurs eight to ten feet below the ground surface. Flow in this surficial aquifer is toward the south-southeast as discussed in our December 23, 1987 report. Monitoring wells MW-4D, MW-10, and MW- I I are all screened at the same approximate elevation and are 25 feet below the ground surface. Together, these wells show that flow in the 20 to 25 foot interval is toward the north-northwest. This apparent reversal in flow direction is suspected to be due to the influence of the drainage trench and buried sewer line along the eastern edge of the WSI property line, between monitoring wells MW-10, MW-11, and monitoring well MW-413 and therefore is thought to be very localized (Figure 2). We believe that shallower wells would reflect this same pattern and that ground water flow in the 20-25 foot intervai is similar to shallow ground water flow observed across the site. 4.2 Extent of Soil and Ground Water Contamination Soil and ground water contamination are primarily restricted to the area between monitoring wells MW- 2 and MW-4. Contaminant conditions identified in this area are discussed in our December 23, 1987 report. The aerial extent of soil and grot.nd water contamination is outlined in Figure 3. The vertical extent of VOC co^tamination is restricted to the upper 25 feet or the site. Boring logs of monitoring well MW-41) (Delta's May 24, 1987 report) show the presence of a sand unit between 21 and 24 feet. It is likely that the contaminants are moving through sand lenses such as this one. Our objective for remediation will be to intersect as many of these sand lenses as possible with the recovery trench. 5.0 RECOMMENDATIONS 5.1 General Delta recommends that a ground water recovery program be initiated due to the contaminant concentrations identified at this site. Based on site hydrogeologic conditions, we believe that a recovery trench system would yield the best contaminant volumes. We propose to install a recovery trench pump out system at the WSI site as shown in Figure 4. The effectiveness of the trench system will be evaluated. Modifications to the system and/or the need for additional recovery systems will be assessed. 5,2 Conceptual Design The east end of the recovery trench will contain a large diameter sump which will be equipped with a single total fluids submersible pump. The pump will route water from the trench sump to a diffused aeration system for treatment of volatile organic compounds. The treated discharge water will then flow into the sanitary sewer system. The conceptual design of the recovery system and the anticipated TCE mass balance of the system are shown in Figure 5. 5.3 Recovery Trench Design The recovery trench will extend from near monitoring well MW-2 toward the east to MW-4 (Figure 4). The total length of the trench will be approximately 250 feet and it will have a depth of approximately 18 feet. A cross -sectional sketch of the trench is provided in Figure 6. The width of the trench will be dependent on the slope stability encountered during the excavation. Drain tile will be placed near the bottom of the trench to enhance drainage toward the sump. The trench will be aackfilled with coarse washed gravel to a depth of approximately five feet below the existing ground surface (Figure 6). A plastic liner will be placed over the washed gravel to inhibit surface water infiltration and to prevent fine grained materials from entering the drainage bed. The top five feet will be backfilled with clean soil removed during the trench installation. Soil removed during the trench installation exhibiting contaminant concentrations above five parts per million (ppm) total organic vapors, as detected by the hNu photoionization meter, will be stockpiled and covered on -site. The recovery sump will be located at the eastern end of the recovery trench and will extend to a depth of approximately 18 feet below the ground surface. The top of the sump will be sealed with a lockable well cover. The sump will consist of a 12 inch casing slotted with 1/8 inch wide by three to six inch long slots cut at 45 degree angles. A cross section of the proposed sump is provided in Figure 7. 1,4Pumping and Treatment Operations We anticipate relatively low yield from the recovery trench, on the order of one to three gallons per minute. It is likely that the pumping system will operate intermittently. The recovery sump will contain a single 220 Volt, 1 /3 horsepower Grundfos submersible pump. The pump will be equipped with on/off floats to compensate for intermittent pumping. The floats will maintain a drawdown water level in the recovery trench of approximately 17.0 feet. The pump will route contaminated ground water to the surface and into an aeration system for treatment of dissolved volatile constituents. The aeration system will consist of a 220 Volt, three horsepower direct drive blower and two 200 gallon tanks in series. As water enters into the top of the first tank, it is exposed to approximately 350 cubic feet per minute (cfm) of forced air. Water drains from the first tank into the second and receives an additional 350 cfm of forced air. Discharge frorr the second diffusion tank will be directed to the sanitary sewer system (Figure 5). Discharge approval from the MWCC will be obtained prior to installation. The recovery sump and aeration tanks will be enclosed inside a locked wood security fence. 5.5 Recovery Svstem Monitorine and Sampline Proper system operation will be ensured by regular site visits by Delta personnel. We anticipate that a minimum of two site visits will be made during the initial month of operation. Af,:er the initial month, site visits will be conducted every month. Recovery system influent and effluent will be sampled immediately after the system begins operation. After collection of the initial samples, the system will be shut-off until the results are returned and reviewed by Delta, the MPCA, and the MWCC. The system will be activated after approval has been granted by the MWCC to discharge to the sanitary sewe, system. The influent and effluent will be sampled again 30 days after continuous operation begins. Samples will be analyzed for EPA 601/602 parameters. We anticipate that total VOCs discharged to the sanitary sewer system will be less than one part per million (ppm). After the first two rounds of sampling have been completed, we propose quarterly sampling of discharge. We also propose quarterly sampling of welis in the vicinity of the trench system (MW-I, NIW-2, N,!W-2D, MW-6, MW-4. MW-dD, MW-10, MW- I I and MW-12) during the first year of operation. A., other wells at the site will be sampled semi-annually. Reports of discharge sampling will be forwarded to the MWCC and the MPCA. Reports of monitoring well sampling will be forwarded to the MPCA for re,*iew and comment. 5_6 Soil Treatment and Samolin¢ We propose to thinspread contaminated soil excavated during the trench installation. An ideal area for thinspreading is along the southern edge of the proposed trench (Figure 4). There are no residential buildings or industrial buildings within 200 feet of this area. In addition, the prevailing winds are westerly across this area and there are no downwind dwellings or structures for approximately 2,500 feet. We anticipate that approximately 500 to 700 yards of contaminated soil will be excavated during the installation process. The soil will be stockpiled on -site and covered with plastic immediately after excavation. Samples will be collected and `orwarded to PACE Laborcories for analysis (EPA 601/602). The soil will be spread along the southern eon a of the trench approximately six inches thick. The soil will be aerated with a field disc or comparable equipment one time each month until it becomes frozen. Aeration tillage would resume again the following spring. Soil samples will be collected 30 days after thinspreading has been completed. After the initial month, we propose sampling quarterly. Samples will be analyzed for EPA 601 / 602 parameters. After the first year the sampling schedule will be reevaluated. All analytical and operational reports will be forwarded to the MPCA for review. 6.0 METHODS AND PROCEDURES 6.1 Soil Samolin¢ Soil sampling was done in accordance with ASTM:D 1586-84. Using this procedure, a 2 inch O.D. split barrel sampler is driven into the soil by a 140 pound weight falling 30 inches. After an initial set of 6 inches, the number of blows required to drive the sampler an additional 12 inches is known as the penetration resistance, or the "N" value. The "N" value is an index of the relative density of cohesionless soils and the consistency of cohesive soils. 6,,,1_; oil C a-sification As the samples were obtained in the field, they were visually and manually classified by the crew chief in accordance with ASTM:D 2488-84. Representative portions of the samples were then returned to the laboratory for further examination and for verification of the field classification. Logs of the borings indicating the depth and identification of the various strata, the N value, water level information and pertinent infot oration regarding the method of maintaining and advancing the drill hole were made. Charts illustrating the soil classification procedure, the descriptive terminology and symbols used on the boring logs were also made. 6.3 Water Level Measurements All ground water level measurements are obtained by using an electronic measuring de,/ice which indicates when a probe is in contact with the ground water in the well. Measurements are obtained by lowering the device into the well until it indicates that the water surface has been encountered and by measuring the distance from the top of the inside pipe to the probe. All of the measurements are recorded to the nearest 0.01 foot; however, the manufacturer's reported accuracy for the instrument is 0.04 foot. 6.4 Water Sampline All monitoring wells were sampled from suspected cleanest to most contaminated according to the following protocols. Field Protocol Step 1: Measure water level. Step 2: A stainless steel bailer was used to develop each monitoring well. A minimum of three to five well bore water volumes were evacuated from each monitoring well prior to sampling. Step 3: Collect water samples. Water samples were collected using a stainless steel. A field blank was collected during the sampling program. Step 4: Store water samples and transport to PAGE Laboratories, following all documentation and chain of custody procedures. Step 5: Clean equipment. Water level measurement equipment was :leaned with clean tap water followed by deionized water rinse. Upon completion of a soil or ground water sam Ring a chain of custody was init,ated. Chain of custody records include the following information: project, project number, shipped by. shipped to, suspected hazard, sampling point, location, field identification number, date and time taken, sample type, number of containers, analysis required, and sampler signature. As few people as possible handle the samoles. The chain of custody records were shipped with the samples to the laboratory. Upon arrival at the laboratory, the samples were checked and signed in to the appropriate laboratory personnel. Laboratory identification numbers were noted on the chain of custody record. A copy of the chain of custody was turned over to the project manager. NKIMil3larA�i The recommendations contained in this report represent our professional opinions. These opinions are based on currently available information and are arrived at in accordance with currently accepted hydrogeologic and engineering practices at this time and location. Other than this, no warranty is implies or intended. This report was prepared by DELTA ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTANTS, INC. Dater/7 1 David M. Ronnei Hydrogeologist Reviewed by: Date: I t u c Daniel L.Sinville Geological Engineer/Project Manager n oo �� Date: Robert M. Karls Midwest Regional Manager _ r- 'f 21. l� 0 I• a 978 am 9 . 0 - 3 000 . 5 Stubbs Bay • _�_� /�_V -, �9S �� 1 -----�._� ors y' .= Maxwell Bay La ke # ���': -_ o� �' jam/ J9y0i .�d�`1-l_ •s�� bo — ( o EXCE_SIOR QUADRANGLE FIGURE 1 MINNESCTA SITE LOCATION 7.5 MINUTE SERIES (TOPOGRAPHIC) f-IASHINOTtO/N� SCIENTIFIC INDUSTRIES NQA LAKI MIl1N[TCNKA '! OUADRANaLS LONG LAKE. MINNESOTA DELTA NO. 10-57-200 MINN f 0 N C�'!• t DUA00AN4lE .OUT" ONa �wwr.ww..w.M W n 6 Z I n m 0 w I x WEST SCALE. HORIZONTAL 1" 30' FIGURE 6 RECOVERY TRENCH CROSS SECTION WASHINGTON SCIENTIFIC INDUSTRIES LONG LAKE, MINNESOTA DELTA NO. 10-87-200 EAST -_ _•Ar-NT Dwlt• E n v ironwnbl COn*W=19, Ine 0 BACKFILL ip C 1.0' N O m I 0 0 1.6' WASHED ROCK FIGURE 7 RECOVERY SUMP CROSS SECTION WASHINGTON SCIENTIFIC INDUSTRIES LONG LAKE, MINNESOTA DELTA NO. 10-87-200 12" DIAMETER �----- CORREGATED STEEL CASING GROUND SURFACE '/7 BACKFILL PLASTIC LINER 118' WIDE x 3' TO V LONG SLOTS 1.6' WASHED ROCK STEEL MESh TREN Wimit4arX �. The recommendations contained in this report represent our professional opinions. These opinions are based on currently available information and are arrived at in accordance with currently accepted hydrogeologic and engineering practices at this time and location. Other than this, no warranty is implies or intended. This report was prepared by DELTA ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTANTS, INC. David M. Ronnei Hydrogeolog ist Reviewed by: J Daniel L.S3nville Geologica: Engineer/Project Manager Robert M. Karls Midwest Regional 'Manager Date: Date: 611 Date: 8 'In `tg, -, Trinity Ch. 29 '8 to;, oo—� 2 7 C7, D11 L a A 7 0 Lake Classen rono 'If — — : — , I il -! i000 gh Sch S TE 1026 ;11021 a m 4 0 'o MM O"V 133 (a 81) NORTHERN 4 31� rono gh S�'h - 4-tEEj 1000 7 Stubbs BAY ov 000 93 ci a- S 3tubbs Bay 0- 01R"o calvin'm .4' 0 Maxwell Bay "C Take EXCELSIOR QUADRANGLE FIGURE I MINNESOTA SITE LOCATION 7.5 MINUTE SERIES (TOPOGRAPHIC) WASHINGTON SCIENTIFIC INDUSTRIES P1114 LAKE MIr414ET0NKA 5' GUADRA14GU LONG LAKE, MINNESOTA DELTA NO. 10-87-200 N Scats —1 Poet QUAD004C.LE 40CATION on- Aw 'm LOG OF BORING MW-10 PROJECT SUPPLEMENTARY MONITORING WELL INSTALLATION SITE WASHINGTON SCIENTIFIC INDUSTRIES LONG LAKE, MINNESOTA CLIENT DELTA ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTANTS, INC. ARCHITECT -ENGINEER W a `� W 2w s� O caif 7 W LL 1gg- 3 DESCRIPTION OF MATERIAL of �' W In 2 m < i UNLONFWED COMVRESSTVE STRENGTH I IONS FT 1 -O- t 2 7 4 5 —t--� -{ ��— WATER CONTENT% STMOAFDOENETMTIONALVMSFODn 10 20 300 40 SURFACE ELEVA?ION IAS Dark brown to gray silty sand, trace roots - ISM - OL) �Ss Dark grayish brown silty sandy clay, trace gravel - stiff - (CL) 9 )SS Bluish gray and strong brown silt; clay, seams light gray silty fine sand - firm to stiff - (CL,seams SM) 6 9 I E� I I I I JSS Dark gray silty sand, true Travel - medium dense - wet - (SM) 5SS Dark gray sandy clay, little silt, trace gravel - stiff - (CL) 1 I� :3S Bluish gray silty sandy clay, trace gravel -firm - (CL) 6 End of boring at 25 feet depth Hollow stem auger used full depth Monitoring well MW-10 installed in borehole i I i I i I I r I wATEII LEVEL OBSERVATICIVS GME CONSULTANTS, INC. .. o . mmonno . bwix� h 140OD 2lit A+enl Nu �; 'i Mr�wnas MN 55" 7 � �9 �? 195fi Tag BORMrC+STAATED 6-29-38 BOgemG COMPLETED 6 - 29 - a 9� w L: not encoun �__.rounQwR_C-Um w L while drilling Cyt SSO OFrIIER FRL wL DFLONN DJW APaAOvEO WC!( pgprECT a 13' 9 C I SHEET 1 a f i The soata."l,on !,nos TeWese'I the a00ronmale DO�nOanes »been coif Types nsnu The 'Tans,l,on may oe graawl MI IA* - n6 LOG OF BORING MW-il _ PROJECT SITE WASHINGTON SCIENTIFIC INDUSTRIES SUPPLEMENTARY MONITORING WELL INSTALLATION LONG LAKE, MINNESOTA CLIENT I ARCHITECT- ENGINEER DELTA ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTANTS, INC. W ww LL Cr a� w !'uwW'��J > j w 4 ss S in DESCRIPTION OF MATERIAL U 7 N 0 9 m Z LWIWCOK#W*O C060*ESFrvE STW-W.TM I IONS FT I 2 _ J 4 5 --*---_� yyATER CONTENT % 1tMUM41MM11MtW}, IWt UW�/W II In 20 JO 40 so SURFACE ELEVATION 1AS 4 Dark brown to gray silty sand, trace roots - ISM - OL) 2SS 5.5 Light yellowish brown and brownish yellow silt clay- stiff - (CL) 9 9 Black peat, trace roots - stiff - (Pt) i 3SS 14 Bluish gray and yellowish brown silty clay, seams fine sand - firm - (CL-Ctl, seams S;4) 5 I �9 4SS 18 I Bluish gray silty sandy clay, some gravel - stiff - (CL) 9 SSS 23 Gray sandy silt, trace clay, gravel - loose - (ML - SM) 9 9 II -! 6SS Dark gray silty clay, little sand, trace gravel - stiff - (CL) I End of boring at 25 feet depth Hollow stem auger used full depth Monitoring well MW-11 installed in borehole) I I I II I I I I I i wil LEVELOBSERVATIONS OMt^ONS/LTAIM,INC. r�'^d • "� • F'""�"'s`� ,4000 Zit[ A� Na Mnntspcea MN 55WIn7 1 161219541859 9OtiNGSTARTED 6-29-di j6�gCpy�D CE-29-is wL AIL Groundwa_ter not encountered wtiili ari-Ilinq RIG CME 550 DRILLER PRL DRA0 DJW A?�`JVED MCK PRU.,W:CTs, Tq IS,,EET 2 of ] Tne stlaUhCal,pn Imes roorwent Ina appr0•,me10 oournfanes Del,.een su,I typos �nanu In* Irans,l,on -,av De �aesOwl LOG OF BORING Mw-12 PROJECT SUPPLEMENTARY MONITORING WILL INSTALLATION SITE WASHINGTON SCIENTIFIC INDUSTRIES LONG LAKE, MINNESOTA CLIENT DELTA ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTANTS, INC. ARCHITECT•ENGINEER w w LL tau O Cr z w wa <<O ul< > w rrg S in DESCRIPTION Of MATERIAL w 1- JH WIN (L LL � g m w j Z IMCW NED COMPF*SSVE STREW rH (1d6 FT 1 WATER CONTENT % STIwDMDofIETMTUNIR01MSfO0� t0 -0 SURFACE ELEVATION IAS q Dark brown to gray si:.ty sand, trace roots - (OL) - topsoil 2AS 9 Dark gray sandy silt - medium dense - (ML) 1AS 21 Gray silty clay - soft - (CL -CII) JAS 24 Gray fine to medium sand, trace silt - loose - wet - (SP) SSS Gray silty clay, trace gravel, seams liqht gray silty fine sand - stiff -• (CL, seams SM) 1 1 1 1 1 ;!-3) I I i 6ziS 9SS SS End of boring at 55 feet depth Hollow stem auger used full depth Monitoring well MW-12 installed in borenole I I i i wATEP LEVEL JOSEPWATIONS GMECONSULTANTS, INC r Cnae.+a . rw�rwu . brrvY*t.. ul a0pp2Ts � W kfteWepaft !we 55e4' (et2155wltiu SOFNIG STARTED 7-1-64 COMPLETED 7-1-• 60- w i sa wL I 0' ie cn while saaplLn _P_ wL I de 0.7' th after auger FMG CME 550 Ote-AA FRL W L removal DPgNN 11.I1i APPROVED WICK --- ►Ar ACT81179E ,SHEET 7 of 1 The Sl NithCat Nln bnea reOresenl the aOOroximale DOUROanM 0*Iwv*n Son tYDel. inSllu the transition MSY De gra0ual ------_—_-- eUtW—ti UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM (NSTM: D 24371 htelor divisions Grouroup p Typical nornoss Laboratory das,ifleatbn atbris 0 E GW Well -graded Revels, grovalserrd au ID30)7 Cu`grssrter than 4; Cc- Dstwssn t and 3 nwrturss, little or no fines _ Di o pI OXD60 Sn c Z u GP Polly Podrf grovels. pnvd• Not retesting off predation requlrsnWnts for GW sand mixtures, little or no firws c �v al z ` Z c n ? d Silty gravels, gravelsandsih -y 3: a N Atterberg limits b•tow"A" -C £ .5 GM mixtum t lirw or P.I. Ism than 4 CR y • • u t •` C Above "A" line with P.I. 4 7 0 isZ between and we bor, drrllne ° u= L37 v "A" "A" taws s requiring u Q i " GC grovel -sand -clay Clayey grovels,above a Attarberg limito ab of dual symbols : g trtinrturw IirW with P.I. greener than 7 Wall -graded sands, gravelly : Dbb I'D30i7 SW sands. little a no firWs ' - j� C greater than B. C betvvow t and J u Dlo c DIOXD6O • �a `aa—-- o sMI C ti SP Poorly grad. g ded sands, c Not meeting all gradation requirement- for SW sands, little or no fines p O C c c c o 2 `CE Y d Atterberg limits below "A" yc c O a C c SM Silty Yndf, sand -tilt mixtures uk 3 �(^ line or P 1. Is then 4 Limits pitting In hatched is 1E • i u d Oo� c c zorw with P.I. between 4 and 7 ere borcivIIiM case g Y Clayey L ° "A" requiring use of dual rym s Sc sands. Yid cl mix- ey h Atterberg limits above P.I. 7 bola. rues$ O O line with greater than Inorganic tilts and very fine Sands• rtxit flour. Silty Or day- ML ey fine sands or clayey silts fib c with slight plaabcity C i for Inorganic clays of low to nw• _ s y v y CL dium plasticity, gravelly clays. Esandy clays, silty clays. lean days hatched See ore ttordxlirW deal. N JI Z 40 C. .7 OL Organic tilts and organic silty v c clays of low n planclty s r Inorganic silts, mncaceout or Oonid MN dutomscaout fine sandy or N MM GENERAL NOTES SYMBOL HSA _FA _HA _DC _.RC PO CS D i,1 i\r SB _L _T 1TP _ TO w B P _Q CR 1,mR M DRILLING AND SAMPLING SYMBOLS DEFINITION 3 1/4" I.D. Hollow Stem Auger 4". 6" or 10" Diameter Flight Auger 2"• 4" or 6•' Hand auger 2 1/2" 4". S" or 6" Steel Drive Casing Size A B. or N Rotary Casing Pipe Drill or C!eannui Tuhe Cor+itnunuv Split Barrel Samnlmg Drilling mud lenrng Water 2"' 0 0. Split Barrel Sample 2 U.— or 1 1/2" O D SB Liner Sample Y" or 3" Thin Walled Tube Samn!e 3" Thin Walled Tuhe !Pitcher Sampleri 2" or T Thin Walled Tuhe lOsterherg Samplers Wash Samnle Bag Samnle Test Pit Sample 8Q. NQ. or PQ Woreline Svstem AX. 8X or NX Onuh a Tube Barrel Core Riii - Percent No Sample Recovered. claysaticat,nn haled on action of drilling Pqu:pment andrnr material noted n drilling rlwd or on sampling !',tf. No MPa+uremerst Recorded. pnmanly due to nre•ence or dnilink or coring fluid Wafer Level Svmnni TEST SYMBOLS SYMBOL DEFINITION W Water Content • : or Dry Wt. • ASTM 0 2216 D Dry Density - Pounds Per Cubic Foot LL. PL Liquid and Plastic Limit - ASTM D 4318 Additional Insen.r;ns in last Column Qu Unconfined Comp Strength•pst • ASTM D 2166 Pq Penetrometer Reading • Tons/Square Foot Ts Torvane Reading - Tons/Square Foot G Specific Cravity - ASTM 0 834 SL Shrinkage Limits - ASTM 0 427 OC Organic Content • Combustion Method SIP Swell Pressure - TonsiSQuare Foot PS Percent Swell FS Free Swell - Percent pH Hydrogen Ion Content. Meter Method 5C Sulfate Content - PansiMlilion, same Is mg'L CC Chloride Content • Pans;%!lion. same as mg L C' One Dimensional Consoiidatton - AST vi 0 2435 Qc' Trlaxial Compression D S. Direct Shear • ASTM 0 3G80 K' Coefficient or Permeability • cm,sec 0' Dispersion Test OH' Double Hvdrometer • ASTM D 4221 MA' Part,c'e Size Analvsrs - ASTM D -122 R Laboratory Resistivity. in ohm - cm - ASTM G 37 E' Pressuremeter Deformation .Modulus • TSF PM' Pressuremeter Test VS' Field Vane Shear ASTM D 2373 IR' Inriltrometer Test - ASTM 0 3385 RQO Rock Quaiiry Designation - Percent WATER LEVEL See attacned data sheet or graon Water levels shown on the boring logs are the levels measured in the borings at the time and under the conditions indicated In sand, the indicated !eveis may be considered reliable ground water levels. In clay soil, it may not be possible to determine the ground water level within the normal time required for test borings. except wnere lenses or lavers or more pervious waterbeanng iod are present Even then, an extended period or time may be necessary to reach equilibrium Therefore, the position of the water level symbol for conesrve or mixed texture sods may not ndicare the true level or the ground water table. Percned water rears to water above an impervious laver. thus impeded in reaching 'he water facie. The available water level inrormanon -s given at the bortom or the log sheet DESCRIPTIVE TERMINOLOGY DENSITY CONSISTENCY Lamination Up to 1/2" thick stratum TERM "N" VALUE TER.M Laver 1/2• to 6" thick stratum Very Loose 0.4 Sort Lens 1:2" to 6" drscontrnous stratum pocket Loose 5.8 Medium Var.rd Alfemahng laminations or clav silt and or •ine Medium Dense 9.13 Rather Stirs grained sand. or colon thereof Dense 16-30 Surf Dry Powdery no noticeable water Very Dense Over 30 Very Slid Mo-u Below saturation Standard "N" Penetration' Blows Per Foot or a tap Pound Hammer Wet Saturated. above 'iqurd limit Falling 30 inches on a 2 inch 00 Spirt Waterbearing i'enrous sod below water Barrel Sampler RELATIVE GRAVEL PROPORTIONS RELATIVE SIZES C0%DITIO14 TERM RANGE Boulder Over 12" Coarse Crarned Sorts A mile gravel 2 ti% Cobble Y* • 12" With gravel 3 49 ; Graver Coarse ya"" • 1" Fine Grained Sods Fine ea - La•" 13.29% • No 200 A INtle grave; 2 ' : Sand 1 S•29% - No. 200 With gravel a :91. Curse ea e10 30% • No 200 ♦ little Crave 2 1a . Hea um eto - can 30% • No 200 With 4r4.el 13 . 24 : I F.re e40 #Zt30 30% • b 210 Gra.erh iS 40% 5"1 S Cair — e2*30 ia"d on limaur4h SE-4 ,eLCI GEOLOGIC TERMINOLOGY The geologic description indicates the apparent depositional origin or stratigraphic name. Geologic identification is interpretive and suhject to error. General categories of geologic deposits, and descriptive information is as follows: ALLUVIUM COARSE ALLUVIUM: Sandy (and gravelly). Stratified. Deposited from fast moving waters in streams and rivers. (Includes glacial outwash.) FINE ALLUVIUM: Clayey and/or silty. Stratified. Deposited from slow moving waters in streams, rivers, lakes, and ponds. BEDROCK Wide range of characteristics: from hard, dense, consolidated rock; to soft, compressible, and uncon- solidated soil -like material. FILL CONTROLLED: Compact, uniform material; inorganic; no debris. UNCONTROLLED: Loose or variable density. Mixture of soil types. Often contains debris and organic material. TILL Normally contains a wide range of grain sizes, from boulders through clay. Usually non -stratified. Deposited directly from glaciers. LOESS Silty. Non -stratified. Upper layer. Deposited from wind. SLOPE WASH Organic and/or inorganic material washed from slopes and redeposited. SWAMP DEPOSITS Peat, muck, and marl, and organic soil. Formed through accumulation of organic material under water. TOPSOIL Contains both inorganic and organic material. Upper, black layer of soil. Formed by weathering of inorganic soil and accumulation of organic material. TUMBLEROCK Dominantly gravel, boulders and rock slabs. Deposited from gravity flow down hills or cliffs. WEATHERED BEDROCK Bedrock which has been substantially weathered through disintegration or decomposition. Texture and composi- tion grades into he.drock. WEATHERED SOIL Texture. compositi-)n, and position is intermediate between topsoil ann non -weathered soil. DNS• l„..hw.wlntM � "� VMW.. r.. •. ins r '4onitoring Well Log Washington Scientific Ind. Long Lake, Minnesota Delta Envi.rormentol Consultants A = total length of well 27.4' MONITORING WELL MW- 10 6- 28-88 B = length of well screen 5.0' DATE INSTALLED DRILLER/RIG FRL/CME-550 C - length of riser pipe 22.4' GROUND SURFACE ELEVATION 4. D - stick-up at surface 2.4' WATER LEVELS Minnesota Unique Well No. _ 446944 Groundwater not encountere� 6-28-88 ELEVATION OF TOP OF RISER PIPE PROTECTOR PIPE THICKNESS AND TYPE OF SURFACE SEAL DIAMETER AND TYPE OF RISER PIPE TYPE OF BACKFILL AROUND RISER PIPE THICKNESS AND TYPE OF SEAL DEPTH 10 TOP OF FILTER SAND 1•.'_ �}- TYPE OF FILTER AROUND SCREEN 1. TYPE OF WELL SCREEN SLOT SIZES 1' '•i DIAMETER AND LENGTH OF SCREEN 1' DEPTH TJ BOTTOM OF MONITORING WELL DEPTH TO BOTTOM OF FILTER SAND 1--,1 J= THICKNESS AND TYPE OF SEAL �(--, DIAMETER AND DEPTH OF BOREHOLE GME CONSULTANTS, INC. 14000 21st Ave. No. MINNEAPOLIS. MINNESOTA 55447 0.Jw WCK '-'-3t3 1379- 9A. d'7 4" Lockina steel pipe with 3-4"x4" wooden guard posts 1'/Cnncrete 2"/Low Carhnn Steel Neat Cement Grout 2'/Bentonite 18' 430 Coarse Flint San Jnhnson Fnvirnnmenta .019" Continuous 2"/5' 25' 25.5' None 8"/25.5' A = total length of well 2 7 . 8 ' MONITORING WELL MW- 11 B - length of well screen 5.0' DATE INSTALLED DRILLER/RIG 6-29-88 F RL/CME--550 C - length of riser pipe 22,8' GROUND SURFACE ELEVATION 93.cg' D = stick-up at surface 2.8' WATER LEVELS Minnesota Unique Well No. 446942 Groundwater not encountere �- - ELEVATION OF TOP OF RISER PIPE PROTECTOR PIPE THICKNESS AND TYPE OF SURFACE SEAL DIAMETER AND TYPE OF RISER PIPE TYPE OF BACKFILL AROUND RISER PIPE ,THICKNESS AND TYPE OF SEAL DEPTH 10 TOP OF FILTER SAND �}-- TYPE OF FILTER AROUND SCREEN 1• TYPE OF WELL SCREEN SLOT SIZES B 1:. '•1 �• DIAMETER AND LENGTH OF SCREEN 1 -�--- DEPTH T:i BOTTOM OF MOPITGRIUG WLLL DEPTH TO BOTTOM OF FILTER SAND 1 —�1 THICKNESS AND TYPE OF SEAL 1—� 96.37 4" Lockinq steel pipe with 3-4" x 4" wooden guard posts Neat Cement Grout 2"/Low Carbon Steel Neat Cement Grout 21/Bentonite 18' #30 Coarse Flint San Johnson Enviro=..enta 0.010" Continuous 2"/5' 25' 26' _ None . �--- DIA�tETER AND DEPTH OF BOREHOLE CONSULTANTS, INC. '*nitoruvg :*11 Log GranE Washington Scientific Industries 14000 21st Ave. No. Long Lake, ;41nnesota ..,� MINNEAPOLIS. MINNESOTA 55447 Delta Envirorrental i:onsultants ""�r_ D.JW 11 -7-18 13' - A = total lengtb of well B = length of well screen IC length of riser pipe D stick-up at surface 1 Minnesota Unique Well No. S2 6' MONITORING WELL MW- 12 5.01 DATE I NSTALLED 6- 2 8- 8 8 4.6' _ DRILLER/RIG FRL/CME 550 2.6' GROUND SURFACE ELEVATION 9' WATER LEVELS 446943 10' measured below ground surface while sampling 6-28-8$ ELEVATION OF TOP OF RISER PIPE PROTECTOR PIPE THICKNESS AND TYPE OF SURFACE SEAL DIAMETER AND TYPE OF RISER PIPE TYPE OF BACKFILL AROUND RISER PIPE THICKNESS AND TYPE OF SEAL 96.82 4" Locking Steel pipe with - x " wooden guard posts iV • 9 - 2"/Low- Carbon Steel Neat Cement Grout 2'/Bentonite K4--� DEPTH 10 TOP OF FILTER SAND 4 8 ' - -- TYPL OF FILTER AROUND SCRCEN #30 Coarse Flint Sand 1• TYPE OF WELL SCREEN Johnson Environmental SLOT SIZES 0 .010" Continuous 1; 1 I , ' DIAMETER AND LENGTH OF SCREEN 2 "/5 1' -�-- DEPTH TO BOTTQM OF MONITORING WELL 50' DEPTH TO BOTTOM OF FILTER SAND 54' 1_ THICKNESS AND TYPE OF SEAL None 1—� �— UTAMETER AND DEPTH CF b0ig1:H0Lc _- 12'/54 Monitoring well Log �., GIVIE CONSULTANTS, INC. Washington Scientific Ind. 14000 21st Ave. No, Long Lake, Minnesota MINNEAPOLIS. MINNESOTA 55447 Delta Enviromm tal Consultants �"� • C.JW WCIt - ace Offices: REPORT OF LABORATORY ANALYSIS Minneapolis, Minnesota Tampa, Florida bborc tones. nc. Coralville, low. ,I 1 July 21, 1988 t Mr. Joe Pallansch Washington Scientific Industries, Inc. 2605 West Wayzata Blvd. N.O. Box 340 Long Lake, MN 55356 Dear Mr. Pallansch: Enclosed is the report of laboratory ana)ses for samples received 07/01/88, 07/08/88. If you have any questions concerning this report, please feel free to contact Bill Scruton or me. Sincerely, R �r, Ph.D. Jir tor, Laboratory Services Enclosures 1 713 Douglas Drive North o Mlnn, apolis, MN 55422 O Phone (612) 544•SS43 an nvuaO opport '"'N emowyer aca REPORT OF LA$ORATORY ANALYSIS boratories, r. Offices: Minneapolis, Minnesota Tampa, Florida Coralville, Iowa Washington Scientific industries, Inc. July 21, 1988 2605 West Wayzata Blvd. PACE Project Number P.O. Box 340 Long Lake, MN 55356 Attn: Mr. Joe Pallansch GW Well Sampling I Date Sample(s) Collected: 07/01/88, 07/08/88 Date Sample(s) Received: 07/01/88. 07/08/88 PACE Sa... ,e Number: Parameter linitc m-Xylene ug/L o-Xylene ug/L p-Xylene ug/L Chloromethane ug/L Bromomethane ug/L Dichlorodifluoromethane ug/L Vinyl chloride ug/L Chloroethane ug/L Methylene chloride ug/L Trichlorofluoromethane ug/L I,]-Dichloroethylene ug/L ],I-Dichloroethane ug/L trans-1,2-Dichloroethylene ug/L Chloroform ug/L 1,2-Dichloroethane ug/L 1,1,1-Trichloroethane ug/L Carbon tetrachloride ug/L Bromodichloronethane ug/L 1,2-Dichloropropane ug/L cis-1,3-Dtchloro-l-propene ug/L 1,1,2-Trichloroethylene ug/L Benzene ug/L Dibromochloromethane ug/L 1,1,2-Trichloroethane ug/L trans-1,3-Dtchloro-l-propene ug/L 7-Chloroethylvinyl ether ug/L 870427202 T 173320 173330 17335'J MD[ MW-10 Blank MW-10 MW-11 1.0 NO NO NO 1.0 NO 'D NO 1.0 NO NO NO 1.0 NO NO NO 1.5 NO ND NO I 1.5 ND ND NO 1.5 NO NO NO 1.0 NO ND NO 1.0 1.1 NO NO 0.4 NO NO NO 0.3 ND NO NO 0.2 NO NC NO 0.3 NO NO NO 0.5 NO NO NO 0.2 NO NO Nr 0.5 ND NO P. 0.3 NO NO Nu 0.2 NO NO NO 0.2 NO NO ND 0.5 NO NO NO 0.5 NO NO NO 1.0 NO 1.1 NO 1.0 NO NO NO 1.0 NO NO NO 0.3 NO NO NO 5.0 ND NO NO MDL Method Detection Limit NO Not detected at or above the MOL. 1710 Douglas Drive North C Mina 1pok. MN S5422 Ph- no (512) S44-5543 art OouN oupoa400•ry emoroyof Offices: cc REPORT OF LA130RATORY ANALYSIS Minneapolis, Minnesota P0 Tampa.,Iowa Florida CoralvilleIowa hboratones, ric. Mr. Joe Pallansch July 21, 1988 Page 2 PACE Project Number: 870427202 T PACE Sample Number: Parameter t Bromoform 1,1,2,1-Tetrachloroethane i,1,2,2-Tetrachlol-oethylene Toluene Chlorobenzene Ethyl benzene 1,3-Dichlorobenzene 1,2-Dichlorobenzene 1,4-Dichlorobenzene Specific Conductivity (Field) pH (Field) Temperature (Field) 173320 lint s _ma MW-10 Qlank_ ug/L 1.0 NO ug/L 1.0 NO ug/L 1.0 NO ug/L 1.0 NO ug/L. 1.0 NC ug/L 1.0 NO ug/L 4.0 NO ug/L 4.0 NO ug/L 4.0 NO umhos/cm2 10 units C.1 Degrees C 0.5 MDL Method Detection Limit NO Not detected at or above the MDL. 173330 173350 j4W-10 MW-11 NO NO NO NO NO NO ;,J NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO ND 1200 1500 6.9 6.8 1.0 11.0 +Ito Douglas Ortve North n Minn*apolis, MN 55422 r Phono (612) 544-SS43 an spual awtotundy smpiovw Offices: AIIIIIIIIIIIII, Ask AWAIIII111110 REPORT OF LABORATC)NY ANALYSIS Minneapolis, Minnesota Tampa, Florida j oratones, Inc Coraiville, Iowa Mr. Joe Pallansch July 21, 1988 T Page 3 PACE Project Number: 870427202 PACE Sample Numbe•: 180440 180450 P a r a mp t p r l en s tc MLI.L_ MW-12 RIXILrs- MW-1 1 m-Xylene ug/L 1.0 NO 1.4 o-Xylene 1.0 NO 1.1 p-Xyl�� /. 1.0 NO 1.7 Chlorenethane ug/L 1.0 NO NO Bromomethane ug/L 1.5 NO NO Di0 1orodifluoromethane ug/L 1.� NO NO Vinyl chloride uy/L 1.5 NO NC Chloroethane ug/L 1.0 NO %in Methylene chloride ug/L. 1.0 NO Trichloiof.uoromethane uri. 0.4 ND hu 1,'-Dichloroethylene jtqL 0.5 ND 0.7 1-Dichloroetliane ug/L 0.2 NO 6.4 tans-1,2-Dichloroethylenr u0/L 0.3 NO NO Lir 1 oroform ug /;.. 0.5 NO ND 1,2-Dichloroethane G'/L 0.2 NO NO 1,1,1-Trichioroetharp c:r;L 0.r NO NO Carhr '-e-rachloride uq/L NO NO Bromod,chloromethane ug/l. :'. NO NO 1,2-Dlchloropropane ug/L 0.2 ND NO cis- ,341 chloro-l-propene ug/L 0.5 NO wI 1,1,z-Trichloroethylene ug/L 0.5 NO ND Benzene ug/L 1.0 NO NO Dibromochloromethare ug/L 1 0 NO 1,7,2-Trichloroetharle g/L 1.) NO trans-1,3-Dichloro-l-pr1•pene ug/L 11.3 NO 2-Chl,iroethylvinyi ether vg/L 5.0 NO I,J Bremofcrrm ,,q/L 1.0 0 NO ' ,2,2-Tetrachloroethane rq/L 1.0 NO NO 1 , 1 ' Z-Tf-trach!oro t-thylene 1 .0 NU NO T nrre 1.0 NO 1.6 Chlc.obefizene ug/L 1.0 NO NO r: thy i ben7ene uq/1_ 1.0 NO NO MCI Method Oetectioi, L' MO Not detected at or 1711 Douglas drive Nwth n Minnsapolis. MN 55422 Phrxt• (612) 544-5541 an pusO opowrunrry *I„POO,rr Offices: ace REPORT OF LABORATORY ANALYSIS Minneapolis, Minnesota Tampa, Florida boratories, m. Coralville.l°wa Mr. Joe Pallansch July 21, 1988 Page 4 PACE Project Number: 870427202 i PACE Sample Number: 1,3-Dich'orobenzene 1 , 2-Di ch (-robenzene 1,4-Dich robenzene Specific Conductivity (Field) pH (Field) Temperature (Field) 180440 180450 tlnitt Mf)f MW-12 Blank MW17 ug/L 4.0 NO NO ug/L 4.0 NO NO ug/L 4.0 NO NO umhos/cm2 10 - 780 units 0.1 - 7..'_ Degrees C 0.5 - 12.0 MDL Method Detection Limit NO Not detected at or above the MDL. The data cohtarned n this report were obtained using FPA or other approved logies. All analyses were performed by me or ender my direct supervision. W41alSkuo- "� Organic Chemistry anager 1710 Oouglas Drive North c Mlnneaoolls, MN 55422 0 Phone (612) 544.5543 an souai opppnunny empave� p= h-1--)orotor'eSt inc- 1 710 Uuugaas Dime North Mrnneapolls, MN 55422 612 544 5543 CHAIN -OF -CUSTODY RECORD i NO. 6210 • PROJECT LOC/ATIO�NlNAME OF CLIF\NT PROJECT TELEPHONE NO. NUMBER ,rPPRO�JECT AR 102- Q a W W to ui TRANSFER NO. d CHECK ITEM -Witt NO e0 TIME MO OF COMTAIsiERS ¢ W J W O ¢ H f H SAMPLE DESCRIPTION 2 3 4 5 6 % I 3 14Atj 3 4 5 6 i 8 PERS RESPONSIBLE FOR SAMPLE COLLECTION AFFILI?"ION f'r TRAtZVER NUMBER ITEM NUMBER TRANSFERS REl INOUISHED BY ACCEPTED BY DA E TIME rJ 1 v TE TIME uRPOS OF NAEYSIS (use tHck of Irons sheet itnaededl 3 I � ! 4 " 5 6 (MIGINAL II 7 p��boratories, nc. l 710 Do..yu� f]rlve Noon Mrnnrpobl. MN S5422 6125445543 PROJECT LOCATION NAME OF CLIENT zp/� Z 7 N J a W 0 W a W J lEM Ir Y►11 TIME MU OF Q 1 O Z ~ NO MQ COMIAM[AS '" ft ¢ ~ Q W W O 2 09sz -3 3 mzc� I v 4 3 1 3 5 ►� `� 1Qs A86 g",l PERSON RESPONSIBLE FOR SAMPLE COLLECTION __10, r DAIS TIME /1O10 PURPOSE OF ANALYF, '.so Wck of Iron) "81 If n**dVlI ORIGINAL CRAM -OF -CUSTODY RECORD NO. 10134 PROJECT TELEPHONE NO. PROJECT NUMBER TRANSFER NO. & CHECK SAMPLE DES,:RIPTION 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 / I Tim aN lit c✓ — /0 / AFFILIATION TRANSFER ITEM i"RANSFERS ACCEPTED DATE TIME NUMBE9 NUMBER RELIN I E By 2 3 4 1 —' 5 6 7 To: Mayor Grabek & Orono Council Members City Administrator Bernhardson From: Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building & Zoning Administrator Date: October 6, 1988 Subject: #1306 Metropolitan Waste Control Commission, 3280/3286 North Shore Drive - Conditional UFe Permit/Variances - Resolution List of Exhibits Exhibit A - Application Exhibit B - Property Owners List Exhibit C - Plat Map Exhibit D - Cook's Letter Dated 7/1.2 /88 Exhibit E - M.W.C.C. Letter to City Dated 6/23/88 Exhibit F - M.W.C.C. Letter to Toberman Dated 5/6/88 Exhibit G - Original Site Plan Exhibit H - Fee Title Purchase Sketch Plus Description Exhibit I - Prepetual Access Easement and Temporary Construction Easement Sketch and Description Exhibit J - Elevation of Lift Station Exhibit K - Site Plan/Profile Lift Station 44 Approved in Application #1256 Exhibit L - Notice of Planning Commission Action Dated 7/28/88 Exhibit M - M.W.0 C. Response Letter of 9/16/88 Exhibit N - Rendering Exhibit O - Elevations Exhibit P - Planting Schedule/Landscape Plan Review of Application - Please review the enclosed staff memo of July 13, 1988 and September 27, 1988. These review the application through two Planning Commission meetings. The application involves approval of a conditional use permit and setback variances for the construction of a pumping station/lift station on a substandard parcel. At a special meeting on October 3rd of the Planning Commission, the applicant had satisfied all conditions set forth by the Planning Commission at their first review. The Planning Commission adopted the approval recommendation of the staff in the September 27th staff memo. The enclosed resolution has been drafted for ycur review and consideration based on the Planning Commission's approving recommendation. A RESOLUTION GRANTING VARIANCES TO SECTION 10.20, SUBDIVISION 3 (D) AND SECTION 10.25, SUBDIVISION 6 (B) AND PER MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 10.20, SUBDIVISION 3 (D) GRANTS A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FILE #1306 WHEREAS, the Metropolitan Waste Control Commission (hereinafter "the applicant") is the owner of the property 'located at 3286 North Shore Drive within the City of Orono (hereinafter "City") and lega-ly described as Outlot A, Moeller's Addition, Hennepin County, Minnesota, (hereinafter "property"); and WHEREAS, the applicant has made application to the City of Orono to permit the installation of a pumping station/lift station as required by Section 10.20, Subdivision 3 (D), and has applied for additional setback variances per Section 10.20, Subdivision 3 (D) requiring a 40' or 80% setback variance from the east lot line and a 25' or 50% setback variance front the north line where a 50' setback variance is required from all residential lot lines, and per Section 10.20, Subdivision 6 (B) seeks approval of a 25' or 83% street setback variance where 30' is required for the proposed pumping station/lift station, and a rear setback variance of 5' or 17% where a 30' setback is required for the structure. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono, Minnesota: FINDINGS 1. This application was reviewed as Zoning File #1306. 2. The property is located in the LR-1C-1 Lakeshore Residential Sub - District requiring a minimum of 1/2 acre in area. 3. The property is approximately 3,099 s.f. or .07 acres. 4. The p-operty i3 designated as Outlot A and is not intended for residential development but for the exclusive use by the M.W.C.C. as a public utility structure. Page 1 of 5 5. The Orono Planning Commission reviewed this application on October 3, 1988 and recommended approval of proposed setback variances to Sections 10.20, Subdivision. 3 (D) and Section. 10.25, Subdivision 6 (B) and per Section 10.20, Subdivision 3 (D) recommends approval of the granting of a conditional use permit for the construction of a pumping station/lift station, based oi, the following findings: A) The applicant has tiled the necessary subdivision application with the City to allow the legal *zansfer of the outlot to the M.W.C.C. B) The amen4ment of the original improvement plan (Application #1256) for the upgrading of the existing sewer lines owned by the M.W.C.C. is required and is considered an important, integral part of the proposal. C) The proposed structure will have no major impar-t on the surrounding residential property nor on the use of the adjacent commercial property. 6. 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 variance would not adversely affect traffic conditions, light, air nor pose a fire hazard cr 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 diiiiculty; is necessary to preserve a subs,_antial property right of the applicant; and would h 'n keeping with the spirit and intent of the Zoning Ccde and Com. =s sive Plan of the City. 7. The City Council finds that granting a conditional use permit to allow the installation of a pumping station/lift station will not be detrimental to the healtY., safety or general welfare of the public, would not adversely affect light, air nor pose a fire hazard or other danger to neighboring properties, nor will it depreciate surrounding property values and that the proposed level of use of the property will be in keeping with the intent and objectives of the Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan of the City. Page 2 of 5 CONCLUSIONS, ORDER AND CONDITIONS Based upon one or more of the above findings, the Orono City Council hereby grants a conditional use permit per Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.20, Subdivision 3 (D) to permit the construction of a pumping station/lift station on the property, and per Section 10.20, Subdivision 3 (D) grants a setback variance from the east lot line of 40' or 80% and a setback variance from the north lot line of 25' or 50% where a 50' setback is required from all adjacent residential. zoned properties, and per Section 10.25, Subdivision 6 (B) grants a street setback variance of 25' or 83% where 30' is require-3 for all structures and a rear setback variance of 5' or 17% where a 30' setback is required from the rear lot line, subject to the following conditions: 1. Approval of a structure with a pitched roof with brick facia not to exceed 201x32' per plans by Bonetroo, Rosene, Anderlick & Associates entitled "Orr,o .nterceptor Improvements - Lift Station 44" dated October 19, 1988. cc,nn. 0612. 2. All access to the :,ite must be via the private driveway along the west side lot line, no direct access onto County road will be allowed. 3. Any proposed changes in use of this structure or a major intensification in use must be approved by the City of Orono. 4. 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 r.esolutior. will expire on that date (October 10, 1989). 5. 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 granted herein, and shall be punishable as a misdemeanor. 6. The undersigned applicant has read, understood and hereby agrees to the terms of this resolution and on behalf of the Metropolitan Waste Control Commission its successors and assigns hereby agrees to the recording of this resolution in the chain of title of the property. Page 3 of 5 Adopted by the Orono City Council on this loth day of October, 1988. ATTEST: Dorothy M. Hallin, City Clerk James R. Grabek, Mayor Property Owner(s) Pa9(> 4 of 5 To: Planning Commission Chairman Kelley Planning Commission Members City Administrator Bernhardson From: Jeanne Mabusth, Building & Zoning Administrator Date: July 13, 1988 Subj: #1306 Metro Waste Control Commission, 3280/3286 North Shore Drive Conditional Use Permit/Variances-Public Hearing Zoning District - LR-lC-1 [Proposed for B2 Zoning at the time a single owner comes under control of 2 acres in area]. Area of subject property equals 30,300 sq. ft. Pertinent Sections of Code - Section 10.20 Subd. 3d, Public Service Structures - MWCC requires a Conditional Use Permit to install a Lift Station on a residential property. Original Application 1256 of the Metro Waste Control Commission dealt with a underground wet well and valve vault with an above ground hatch and control panel on the adjacent marina property. The current Application involves an amendment of the original Application and asks for approval of a 32 x 20 pumping station/lift station to be placed to the immediate east of the marina property. Please note that the marina property and the residential property are under the same ownership. 5ectior 10.25 Subd. 6b [property is currently zoned LR-lC-1 and subject to the current standards listed below: Street Setback - Required = 30' Proposed = 5' Actual Traveled Roadway Setback = 40' Variance = 25' or 83% Rear Setback - Required = 30' Proposed = 25' Variance = 5' or 17% Section 10.41 Subd. 10b and 10c [B2 Zoning may be more appropriate since the current owner proposes to request rezoning as soon as he is is control of 2 acres of the LR-lC-1 area]. if so, the variances required would be as follows: Street Setback - Required = 50' Proposed = 5' Variance = 43' or 9C% Side/Rear Setback to Residential Lot Lines - Required = 50' Proposed = 25' N. Side/N. Rear Line Variance = 25' or 50% Proposed 10' Ea3t Side Lot Line Variance 40' or 80% Zoning File #1306 July 13, 1988 Page 2 of 3 List of Exhibits A - Appl:.cation B - Property Owner's List C - Plat Map D - Cook Letter E - MWCC Letter to City F - MWCC Letters to Tobermann G - Site Plan H - Fee Title Purchase Sketch plus Description I - Perpetual Access Easement and Temporary Construction Easement Sketch and Description J - Elevation of Lift Station K - Site Plan/Profile Lift Static:, 44 Approved in Appl. 1256 Re-iew of Current Application - As Applicants addendums E and F advise, the original proposal for an underground valve vault and pump station had to be discarded in place of current proposed pumping station/lift station 32, x 20'. The current owner of the marina did n,)t wish the r.,drina property to be cluttered at the soutY east corner of tha property and asked that it be placed in the southwest corner of the residential property adjacent to the marina property. Mr. Toberman has a contract for deed for the property with the current owner Mrs. Straley. The stricture will be approximately 11 feet high, located 20 feet from the residence tha.: is now located on the same property. The MWCC plans to remove the current gray structure in a serious state of disrepair, addressed at 3280 North Shore Drive, and will relocate the present resident's in another facility. For the review of the current application, Planning Commission has but two standards to review: j.. That the subject public service structure must be located 50 feet from residential. zor d property. 2. That than architectural design of the service structare be compatible with the neighbothond in which it is to be located. The difficult;, for this review is that the subject area is scher'uled for change in use and charge in zoning so that the current residential will be phased out. Is the 32' x 20' brick structure with an 11 foot height compatible with either the B2 or residential neighborhood? The staff would note that the current site plan does not show landscaping as the other site plans provided in An�,Iication N1256. The staff would suggest that the MWCC provide landscaping adjacent to the structure. Care should be given so that any landscaping proposed around the structure not create a view problem with access to the County Road. In the process o` reviewing the application with the Ci'y Engineer, the staff questioned the need for fee ownership. Indeed, if fee ownership was need..,4 f or parcel that the building is to rest upc: , ' hen we are dea 1 i na very uefinitely with a subdivision of the property. The entire parcel consists of 30,300 sq. ft. and the parcel to be divided off is 2,880 sq. Zoning File # 1306 July 13, 1988 Page Three of Three ft. Glen spoke with Kimberly Eckhardt of the MWCC and she advised that an easement could serve them temporarily and then file `or the subdivision later in the month. Glen also advised Ms. Eckhardt tha = the City would not feel obligated to approve a future subdivision of a substandard lot because of the original and earlier approval of the project over the easement area. Ms. Eckhardt followed up with a call direct to me the following da"•, advising that the attorneys of the MWCC noted that fee ownership was nece.,sary for this type of structure. Ms. Eckhardt will file a Subdivision application with the City. A public hearing would be scheduled for the August 15th meeting. The current Zoning District requires half an acre in area, or 21,780 sq. ft. Upon division of the land, the remaining property would consist of 27,420 sq. ft. The real issue for the subdivision will be the creation of the 2,880 sq. £t. parcel containing the lift station. The MWCC may be asked t-) execute special agreements wit:, the City that upon vacation of, or disuse of the structure that they would be responsible for removing the structure and that said land must be returned bark to the original underlying fee ownership. Such a resolution would deem the subject parcel unbuildable and for the exclusive use of the lift station by the MWCC. Ms. Eckhardt ha., been advised that we would require a formal plat of the property. Staff Recoa endation - The staff would suggest that the Planning Commiss4 table all action on the current Conditional Use Permit until th subdivision application is presented a` the public hearing for the August 15th meeting; then proceed with comprehensive action on both applications. The MWCC repre --ntative should be advised at your July 18th meeting as to Planning Commission members' concerns regarding either the proposed location, design, setbacks, etc., of the proposed Conditional Use Permit for the lift station and any other concerns not cite' b_ staff regarding the proposed suL"ivision. The timing of this project is n,,st important to the MWCC and any unnecessary delays may iiapede the commencement of the project this year 1. In regard to the Conditional Use P _mit f, the station, the Planning Commission may wish to relocate the structure more _.,an 5 feet off of the designated right-of-way of the County Poad. Applicant should be asked why it has been placed feet, although actually 40 feet from the traveled road right-of-way. 2. Should the parcel be larger and deeper providing a greater building envelope for the structure? A Landscape Plan should certainly be provided for our August 15th Rt. 1. 3. what about parxrng needs for this structure - how often will persons be responsible -or. visiting the site. Parking area has not hee- defined on the site plan? 4. Any other comments of the Planning Commission. To: Planning Commission Chairman. Kelley Orono Planning Commission Me^ibers City Administrator Bernhardson From: Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building & Zc ing Administrator Date: September 27, 1988 Subject: #1306 Metropolitan Waste Control Come;_ F.:hn, 3286 North Shore Dr Conditional Use Permit/Variances - Co:-t�r.sation of Public Hearing Review of Application - Application #1306 was tabled at your July Planning Commission meeting pending the M.W.C.C. fil;ng a formal subdivision applic-itior, with the City for the creation of approximately a 3,099 s.f. parcel for the future construction of a pumping station/lift st_.tion structure. In a,".ition, the M.W.C.C. was to address the concerns noted by the Planning Commission in the review of original application #1306. Please review the c,.iginal staff memo dated July 13, 1988 with Exhibits (A through K) inc-_-ded it vour August 18, 1988 packets. Additional List of Exhibits Ixhibit L - Notice of Planning Commission Action Exhibit M - M.W.C.C. Response Letter of 9/16/88 As o= th_,6 writing the M.W.C.C. has not submitted a revised site plan/building elevations that would Idress the concerns of the Planning Commission cited at your July 18th meeting and repeated agai: _.n the Notice of Planning Commission Action dated July 28, 198F (review Exhibit L). Rev= -w Exhibit M, the M.W.C.C.'s wr ' ten respo.ise to the Planning Com on for this review. Ms. Linde advises that there will be no noise or rq, _cia l odors that will be omitted from this structure. Any noise will result from the operation from the generator if there is an emergency or for 1/2 hou a week when the gerit. -ators are being exerci zed. The M.W.C.C. also suggests that lan(:scaping be resolve.! uy both staffs. Staff would certainly recommend tha ' :reening tvpp/I landscaping be provided along the east and north lot line where the :,ui 1 c'.i ng does not meet the required 50' setback from residential zoned properties. Low level rcr .-ping should be provided in the street yard because of the subst;�--?-trd se'':ack and the need to prevent viewing/sighting hazards at the inters .00 of the County road. Zoning File #1306 September 27, 1988 Page 2 of 3 Since receipt of the September 16th letter, staff has talked to both Ms. Linde and Mr. Keegan of the M.W.C.C. and advised that staff would have difficulty recommending approval of the conditional use permit for the pump station if the concerns of the City were not addressed at a minimuir with a redesign of the roof of the pump station. Prior to your meeting, the M.W.C.C. staff will submit a revised plan with elevations that show a pitched roof. They wish to retain the brick facia beca�lse of the maintenance -free aspect. Staff sees no problem with allowing the brick facia to remain. The applicant was advised that :he subject property is .-rounded by future B-2 zoned propert• scheduled for major upgrading and .it the property to the south is resiu�ntial (Bohn's Point). The parking area was actua'ly defined on the site plan in the original exhibits (original pack( Exhibit G). In fact, it :.`cows paving throughout the entire rear yard area. Staff would recommend that this be trimmed back to allow for the screening/plantings along the north side rear yard a minimum of -' to 81. Prior to scheduling this applic;_� n before the Council for action, staf f must be in receipt f a come letr site p lan ref lecting parking and final landscaping. The applicant should be advised that in dealinq with a cond' tonal use permit of this type for a substandp.rd parcel, landscaping becoa.ws an issue+ For the City to resolve and not r:..iely for the staff. Stiff Reco ndation - To -pprove a conditional u: e 1�_rmit and set;jack variances (see below) for a Fo=Qd ;:umping station/1ifI stut1-on structure on a newly proposed lot consisting of approximately 3,'?99 s.f. c.3sed on the follow;.{iq !4nd..ing-: 1. The applicant has fi l 9 the nece--sirs division -:pp lication to a 1 = = * the legal transfer r :and to the M.W.C.C. 2. The amendment of the origirdi improvement plans for the .gradinq of the existir ri sewer lin-s -weed by .-e M.w.C.C. is Mired and is considered an important, ir+t i l part of t nF -oposa l . 3. '"he prod used structure wi : : have no ma i ?r i rrj ^t surroundinq residential F roVert }, not, the use of the aei i St- t commercial Fr Zoning File #1306 September 27, 1988 Page 3 of 3 The setback variances required are as follows: Section 10.20, Subdivision 3 D Required = 50' East Lot Line 10' North Lot Line = 25' Variance East Lot Line = 40' or 80% Variance North Lot Line = 25' or 50% Section 10.25, Subdivision 6 B Street Setback: Required = 30' Proposed = 5' Actual Travelled = 40' Road Variance = 25' or 83% Rear Setback: Required = 30' Proposed = 25' lariance = 5' or 17% This approval is subject to the follow...14 conditions: 1. Prior to scheduling this conditional use permit application before the City CoF--ncil, the applicant must submit a revised site plan designating the following: a) Amend the parking area along the north side of tita Lui lding adjusting for planting area along the north property line. b) "Screening type" landscaping along the north and east lot lines adjacent to the residentially used property and Erovir'e lew type hanging vegetation/bashes within the front/street area. 2. Approval of a pitched roof for the brick facia structure, not to exceed 20x32 per plans dated 5/88 by Bonestroo, Anderlik and Associates. 3. All access to the site must be via the private driveway along the west side lot line, no direct access onto County road will be allowed. 4. Any proposed change in use of this structure or a mayor intensification of use must be al.E:roved by the City of Orono. 1 •50'.. I CITY OF ORONO - GENERAL LAND USE APP --- ION - PROPERTY LOCATION ' Site Address 3286 N SHORE DR., WAYZATA (ORONC 55323) 55391 Property Identification Number (P.I.D.) 8-117-023-44-0003 Please check one - Property X abstract or torrens? (for Conditional Use applications only) Please attach legal description to application if not included on required survey. --------------------------------------------------------------- ------------- APPLICANT Phone (home) Metropolitan Waste Control Name Commission Phone (work)612-222-8423 230 E. 5th Street Address ,t_ pa„lp N[N SSln] City Zip --------------------------------------------------------------------------- OWNER (if different than applicant) Phone (home) Name Rita M. Straley Address Suite 1460, 600 S. Co. Rd. 18 Phone 542-1189 City St. Louis ParkZip 55426 Date Property Acquired 12/4/8-4 (month/year) I KYE (do not) also own the adjacent parcels of land. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- FEES - CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS - Renewal Fee - 1/2 Current Fee After -the -Fact Fee - Double Current Application Fee $100.00 a) Res?.dential accessory Use $150.00 b) Insti`_utional (church, school, etc.) $150.00 c) Duolex Credit/Bldg $250.00 d) Commercial/Industrial Use $200.00 f) Lard Alteration Grading and fillin,4 - designated wetland or floodplain Grading and filling - 101 cu. yd. or more Grading, seawall, retaining walls within 75' of iakeshore PRD/PID - see fee schedule (rMKR APPLICATIONS $150.00 Commercial Site Plan Review (+ consultant fees) $250.00 Vacation $15C.00 Easement Vacation $ 50.00 Easement Vacation With Subdivision v_ $250.00 Rezoning $100.0C Appeals Other - st•P fee schedule ;C-4-) # r PRESENT USE OF PROPERTY Residential Quad Present Zoning District Present Use of Property X Residential Other (specify) ------------------------------------------------------•--------------------- DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST Describe request in detail: Request variance of SO' residential setback and 30' right-of-way setback for n. Exist --------------------------------------------------------------------------- REQUIRED SUBMITTALS 1. Completed Application Form. 2. Certified Property Owners List of owners within 350'(you can obtain this list from Hennepin County Department of Finance A-603 Government Center 348-3271) 3. Stamped, legal sized envelopes (#10) pre -addressed to each of the names on the above '_i_st with no return address. 4. Certificate of survey. 5. Topographic survey (existing and proposed contours) if land alterations involve changes in elevation (grades). 6. Construction plan, if applicable (see staff for requirements). Plat MaD. 8. As an addendum to this application, please attach a separate list of any other persons you wish notified of this application. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- The applicant and Property Owner st 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 expense- incurred in review of this application, and certifies that the information supplied is true and correct to the best of his/her knowledge. �1 Applicant's signature cecalt::Z�= Date 3 BPP g C.T ayne, Afsistant Director of Enginee ing OWNERS SIGNATURE The owner hereby acknowledges and agrees to this application and further authorized reasonable entry onto the property by City staff, consultants, agents, commission members, and Council members for purposes of investigation and verification of this request. Owner's signature Date Applicant must have all submittals into the City offices 25 days before the Planning Commission Meeting. Planning Commission Meetings are held on the third Monday of each month. Applicants must be present at all scheduled review meetings of the Planning Commission and Council. If an applicant is unable to attend a scheduled meeting, please make arrangements to have ar. authorized .agent .attend in your place and advise the Building 6 7oninI Office of this change prior to the meeting. �PUN / DATE 02/23/" • BATCH 004 30 06-117-23 41 0005 • AOW ADM 03240 NORTH SHORE OR OWNER NAME Q"U-H0RK-LT_AL` TA"ATER 4,LIE WWK N4m /ADDF 15109 JAMES AVE SO MPLSJIM SS419 • 36 06-117-23 41 0008 PWOP AT1DR 03262 NORTH SHORE DR OWNER NA -if V CARLSOtt i WIFE TAXPAYER NORMAN V CARLSON • NAME/ADDR 3262 NORTH SHCPE DR WAYZATA MH 55391 HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORMATION SYSTEM PROPERTY OWNERS LIST • 36 CO-117-23 41 0011 POOP ADOQ 03286 NORTH SHORE DR A,-� tA 0641,1[R NAME RITA M STRAL Y • TAXPAYER TANI.EY EASTRALEi NAME/AODR 3286 NORTH SHORE OR WAYZA,TA MN 55391 38 08-117-23 41 0014 rROP ADOR 03350 NORTH SHORE_ DR • OOWER NAME ,RttWANOEaSON I TAXPAYER IMAXWELL BAY MARINA INC NAME/AOOR :1460 INTERCHANGE TOWER 'MPLS MN 55426 38 08-117-23 44 0001 • PROP ADOR 03264 NORTH SHORE OR OWNER 1lAME HILEN A NOAU1 TAXPAYER HELEN A tKmUM HAMS/AOOR 3244 NO SHORE DRIVE • WAYZATA_MN _ S5391 • 38 08-117 23 44 0004 PROP AOOR 03302 NORTH SHORE OR Ot*4ER NAME MINNETONKA PROPERTIES INC TAXPAYER `MAXWELL BAY MARINA • NAME/AOOR i1460 INTERCHANGE TOWER MPLS MN-- S5426 - � SEKR`( Tw3Efznv�n1 Tot3E AAAt-j �ANA6EME� oo 5.,,,4(-- Co R.L 19 38',08-117-23 41 0006 03250 NORTH SHOPE OR OLLI- FiQRK ET AL OLLIE M60K 5109 JAMES'AVE S MPLS MN »419 38 08-117-23 41 0009 03268 NORTH SHOPE OR D_L-STAUFFER ETAL �DONALD L STAUFFER ,13268 NO SHORE DRIVE IWAYZATA MN 55391 38 08-117-23 41 0012 HININETONKA PROPERTIES INC MAXWELL BAY MARINA 146C INTERCHANGE TOWER MPLS MN 55426 38 06-117-23 41 0015 03330 _NORJH SHORE DRY 50Y B NEIKTEP IMAXWELL BAY MARINA INC j1460 INTERCHANGE TOWER' MPLS MN 55'426 38 08-11;-23 44 0002 03270 NORTH SHOPE DR PIT1. M STRALEY RI(A M 5TRALEY 1850 PALM CITY ROAD PAT 201 STUART FL 33497 38 08-117-23 44 0005 03300 NORTH SHORE OR MIN NETOIIKA PROPERTIES INC MAXWELL BAY MARINA 1460 INTERCHANGE TOWER MPLS MN 55426 REPORT NO. PI435401 PAGE 6 38 08-117-23 41 0007 03260 _-IORIH-SHORE iVERA M MARTIN �MAXWELL BAY MARINA INC 1460 INTERCHANGE TOWER MPLS hit{ 55426 34 08-117-23 41 0010 03NORTH SHORE OR RITA RALEY MAXWELL BAY,,MARINA 1460 INTERCHANGE TOWER MPLS MN 55426 38 08-117-23 41 0013 03332 NORTH SHORE OR S RAMBERG A M SCHOENEM S E PA ERG 4 M J CHOENEMAN 5108 WOOOLAWN BLVD MPLS MN SS417 38 08-117-23 41 0016 03342 NORTH S11ORE OR PtiYLLI,_B SPRAGUE ET AL PHYLLIS B SPRAGUE--` 3342 NORTH SHORE OR i WAYZATA MN 55391 38 08-117-23 44 OJ03 03284 NORTH SHORE DR RITA M STRALEY r� �Pfv�,rv` G. rGCtLY2� MAXWELL-DAY MARINA 1460 INTe0CH(INGE TOWER C I L f� MPLS MN 55436.ti Fir-- MS rPrn F30'. 7 38 08-117-23 44 0007 03230 BOHNS POINT LA M J MCENANY 9 0 MILLIAMSON M J MCENANY - 3230 BOHN'S POINT RD WAYZATA MN 55391 f L� RUN DATE 02/23/88 • SATCH 004 38 08-117-23 44 0008 . POOP ADOR 03260 BOHNS POINT LA OWNER ►4AME GERALD E HABECK TAXPArEp 1 CK NAt4E:ADOR 3260 BONN'S POINT LA • NAYIATA MN SS391 HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORMATION SYSTEM PROPERTY OWNERS LIST 38 98-117-23 44 0011 JOSEPH J t MARY K OOOLING RICHA06 0 ALLEN 3220 POHNS POINT LANE NAYZATA MH 55391 r REPORT NO. P1435401 PAGE 7 TOTAL BATCH 004 00020 I CERTIFY THAT THE FACTS REPRESENTED ARE AN ACCURATE AND TRUE REPRESENTATION OF INFORMATION AS IT APPEARS THIS DAT THE RECORDS OF THE H044EPIN COUNTY DEPARTME T OF PROPERTY T XAT , T THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE AN7 BELIEF. DATE � `V. ...' r�,.1`z C �.1:a.e:+iA�.- awl+ :ih da:7.a�i'.•S•.:.5.:.,a�ii:.e.�,r..,-{j'�Oiji6ws to ✓� � w�r..�.+- .---try-•�'.����..:�.w �..�,.>w•>..�sar+••�.�v's�a�r..o..•ga.p� 4y� s-...�..�....•v...yn.,..,tia,�•,,,; wr ELL- ^\ ' �� s•'= • •.;'E,'%sJ ie. — yw'•«ia� N'* Y :.t •i� i',i•�r•..►►�?:w' �!���o' i4:'fiEl:ar4#1'r 41 :r 12 -• n T „ i• • �/ 1• �' - .•�- torn �i1 I � 13 - - -- l io4o `� O • Q S f!!r "r ./ �' J . L t _ , (`tom] \ y� t t - 16) , 1 LA oV % I 6 yJl slf.t;� 0 o e y i _A I ❑ \ f71G0'>sd� -+ee T(4 lr `,-& GV. i.�. t �' ♦r i t' c 4.;- •Ln'.i; 1 r,�u n c 1 tr'f �/ ..jot I F =_ Otto G 8onestroo. PE Keith A. Gordon, PE Thomas W. Peterson, PE Bonestroo Robert W Rosene, PE Richard W Foster, PE Michael C Lynch, PE Joseph C Ande0k. PE Donald C. Burgardt. PE Jamei R Maland. PE Rosene Bradford A Lemberg, PE RKhard E Turner. PE Jerry A Bourdon. PE Mark A Hanson. PE Kenneth P Anderson, PE Keith A Bachmann. PE. Anderlik & Glenn R Cook. °E GlennELM Jimes C Olson, IE Rd K Field. ut Michael i Rautmann. PE Mark R Rods. k, Rotstr; C. ^asset. A I A Thomas Noyes. PE Robert R. Pfelferle, PE Thomas E Angus, PE Associates Robert G SchunKht, PE David O Loskota, PE Howard A Sanford, PE Marvin L Sorvala, PE. Engineers & Architects July 12, 1988 City of Orono Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 Attn: Jeanne Mabusth Re: 139-1306 Metro Waste Control Commission 3286 North Shore Drive Dear Jeanne: Charles A Erickson Lau M P&~]Sky` Harlan M Olson TU Susan M Ebemn Mark A Serp The Metropolitan Waste Control Commission (MWCC) has provided two plans for City approval. The one plan shows an easement for property access and an easement for construction purposes. The other plan provi3es for subdivision of the parcel. We informed MWCC that the subdivision process could not be handled as as part of this application. They then agreed to apply for an easement on the property at this time so that the project is not delayed. The MWCC will make application for the subdivision at a later date. Yours very truly, BONESTR00, ROSENE,, ANDERLIK S ASSOCIATES, INC. G.'enn R. Cook GRC:kj 9690f 2335 Writ Highway 36 9 St. Paul. Mltnnesolta 55113 a 612-636-4600 0 Metropolitan Waste Control Commission Mears Park Centre. 230 East Fifth Street, St. Paul, Minnesota 55I01 612 222-8423 June 23, 1988 1 �xt.o �'`t t•";� Jeanne Mabusth Re: Orono Interceptor Improvements Zoning Administrator MWCC Project Number 85-67 City of Orono P. O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 Subject: Conditional Use Permit/Variance Application and Supporting Information Dear Ms. Mabusth: Enclosed please find the completed application, relevant plans, half section map, star.ped envelopes, photocopy of previously submitted notification list, and surveys for the referenced project. This infor- mation pertains specifically to lift station L44 near Maxwell Bay Marine which was revised after the original permit application for this project was approved by the City of Oronc. The MWCC and its consultant for the project, Bonestroo, Rosene, Anderlik, and Associates, pursued all other options pertaining to the relocation of this lift station. Finally, on April 27, 1988 z meetirg was held with Mr. Jerry Toberman, who is in the process of acquiring the property by contract for deed from Rita M. Straley (sec attached 5/6/88 letter and 5/11/88 memorandum). With future business develop- ment in mind, Mr. Toberman asked that we locate the lift station in the farthest southwest corner, as represented on the revised plan sheets and surveys. It would be detrimental to the proposed design is not accepted MWCC appreciates your thoughtful while rev.'.:wing this application. necessary project schedule if this by the City of Orono. Therefore, the considerations of the issues at hand If you have any questions or require additional information, please contact the .roject Manager, Kimberly Eckhardt, at our office at 229-2170. Sincerely, C r� C. R. Payne Assistant Director, CRP:KBE:sma KBE-1,50 Engineering Enclosures -1 ! L ' May 6, 1988 Metropolitan i50 %ion, Square Building :f t:• I!� Waste Control Commission 7111 and R(lhvrl. SI Paul. \lmnc%otj 55101 •v �' 'I! ��' --- mill 4 Mr. Jerry Toberman Re: Orono Interceptor Improvements Toberman Enterprises, MWCC Project Number 85-67 Maxwell Bay Marina 600 South County Road 18 St. Louis Park, MN 55426 Subject: 4/27/88 Meeting at Maxwell Bay Marine Dear Mr. Toberman: As a result of our April 27, 1938 meeting about the siting of a pumping station for the referenced MWCC project, our consulting en i- r.eers are proceeding with the design. however, I wanted to confirm the specifics with you to verify our previous verbal discussion. The MWCC will move the designed location of a pumping station from the County Road 51 right-of-way onto the far scuthwest corner of your lot to the east of Maxwell Bay Marine in order to cause the least impact to your business investment. Presently, Jerry Goodwin is parking large boats in that. area. In order to accomplish this design change, our engineering consultants have to survey the corner and take one soil boring. As previously discussed, the MWCC will proceed with the ,rope-ty acquisition of approximately 3000 square _`eet as fee title purchase and 1200 square feet as a permanent access easement across the existing gravel goad. The project appraiser, Vince Wharton of McKenzie Metro Appraisals, should be in contact with you in about one month. The MWCC will coordinate the tenant requirements with the project negotiator, Stuart Storm of Von Klug and Associates, Inc. I thanx you for taking the time last week to discuss this issue with us and hope that your wife is doing better after her surgery. Please feel free to call me if you have any questions. 1 have attached the project fact sheet and map for your information. Sincer e W�t Kimberly B. Eckhardt Project Manager KBE:sma KBE-L43 Attachments cc: JoEllen Hurr, MWCC Jeanne Matross, MWCC Jim Rosenberger, MWCC l429 METROPOLITAN WASTE CONTROL COMMISSION MEMORANDUM TO: The File DATE: 5/11/88 FROM: Kimberly Eckhardt SUBJECT: Orono Interceptor Improvements MWCC Project Number 85-67 Record of Phone Conversation I c led Mr. Jerry Toberman to make sure he had re- cei-.4 my 5/6/88 letter, which he had. I asked if he had any problems with it and he said, "No". I also verified his mailing address with his receptionist and made the necessary changes. His complete correct address is the following: Mr. Jerry Toberman Toberman Management, Maxwell Bay Marina Suite 1460 600 South County Roaa 18 St. Louis Park, MN 55426 KEE: j�,EE►1 - 10I I rill ! �j �:► '�i�.Cr1V f IlIke 1"0101 ra .t ?-k l i 1 . ' •'l ..�'-"'?yam: _ __'1/ AI it li ,1 le Cie + �'` - E . t •_ j Ih � 1 ,4. jv ijF. , F r1✓l � 1 N . ' r piles C( i /1 1,NA • \ �, I ;�' .../ter ��� Rt � i 9 ' tip L',C L Flo 1 E lKCE W e /t11 2 VIA Sketch alms Decrl/O/10/,► s -for : Metro Wasle Cfonlrol Commission Orono In/ereeplor %)roJecl Mo. 85-C7 1� 4 "e, q 0. 1 - - O� easemenl across par` of' Gov'% Lo/ /, Sici,;5v7 W, 7-wo. 117, 4e.23, lltnnepin Ooun/y, Minnesola Property Idenlilt7 ack'on No D8-117-23-4'-0003 Mote.- This is no/ a fjoundarJ urvey, ,4rras have been eorr+puiPo' ur/1V scaled dlrnensJorls Pom coun/y macs alto plalr. Aarce/ alescrr;ollonC have been Jornvidedby the C'if✓ of 0r'on0. QN��A A�.l� Nn/ET ; 4rea oiAarce/ e 30,300 eSo•,611 Aron el' Fee Till* Archose � • U80 ` SQ. 1f• Qvo ]ntm"Vtor Wr rtvjaot fb, a5-61 Pdeaaert Duscrlyttan Nr. .815 Fa+ -wm-: Fdta'f. SUI%I y A NO title RrcNr la Malt pert of the cost sl fee' of tte west 67feet of the fo11tswuq dndibed property: 4e west 15.7 feat of Ue (act °39 fast of that pert of rotaTaatt lot 1 lyjM meth of rm1 all in S Uar 6, Thadtip 117, POW 21, +ald dlstAnM resin{ as ",W paaLlal rI th the east l IM of *add Seeder 6 and all that part of *N—"; nt tot 1. Sot lm 8, Tumrditip W, !rrW 23. dawribed AN rni lore: Jutaaadre at a palm areas a Una drat pw4L11s1 with am fLaLanL 539 ran Wat of tte awt lire of mW 9entdas 6 Urtarawta 1r rtwtferly lire of 03A2q ]bed, 'am.n r ft*v ila am ftQle Rain fmt; tlmm rarth parsila; with aadd 5wtian lice 956.0 fast to tin tan Or ftwmU's Bey, lake MUeetaMs; thetttoa saittvsstarly Alert Ue wwa of geld Iyea 1%.76 fast to a PAM .him in 71t1.1 feet Nest of said 3aatian 11m teirt aLao tie rwlh> Lwly aarTw cawvfed bw loaf ra w*W jr teat a66 4 [rands, p"m 37.. tlwro enrtler•ly ala% La eaetarly liaa of led r deeded in Born 966 or C>,rela, pop 117, 400 rest to Uw ruVerly lire Of ALIJ cLtarty 1osd, :add pa" be" 72• fist Wwt of the :3ot4an '.Us; mere zarthaastarly alvt aedd ..Yen Red to w polM Of agar—R; . I I th■ tent 711.0 not tharmt and further aompUrm Vet part ,: Ug .trim a0we dravdbW tam"am lydit nwfh of a lee diet at r1&Vrt Rl� to the tact lira of .earl awtiut at a W" e94.5 fact IPA& of 'hs weeder arnr of the eat :Uw of said Sotlm. a" fie tsuo pa+rteee lyU4 mm tt, of Va fbllu um heeo.-dMe Wns. @YpsW; a* a pour* m the Nast IIm of Ve Own dmn star ;owe •ty theta** "1 flat each n s tee rerVaowt oamw Uwraor. Urue ertVly 00 AaVaei*"ar A alit rase* I In. A dlatarra ct tc het ere Uum twvwot.ltt �' ,�spiE ,=ern •� ft"•, htn ftrlr/ Aei.. M•j ,svW ,r fyLarl Mrs ,drrpOrrti� '^e � r+w ^fi�rr' darts iuFlrW erg ti/lO` I/IpJ / Or►r U e>4cJY t.A✓D S{/OVE i'l7Rt i�' s.._......_.. , UrrfdfJ,e/rd rSiJ y9r' /AE JOw J: fray •1lo/e ai ,gyp LE rrryy!prf Atrt M 3r, CiifGYf Ands Min MOM AIM ��frmcs.; ��'�/• /re7n Mo �I _ 1t1. w -iks MdWOWems./ ... r..e r. .. w. ».- . ...�... : .mama.. ......M.Yv+ r --•.•..r.ar-� S�e�eh a,�d Deser��ofio� �or : Melro Was/t Conlrol Commission Orono Mlerceplor Aroiecl A1lo, ?S-07 o/': E7semenl gcr•o�s Par/ of Car'/ LollI Stlion O, 7Two.117� -�linncpirr--County � �//nr�cso/o• ,perfy ldenb4l cofion No. OB !l7 - ?3 - 44 -OX_1 Mole: This is rwl a boundary survey. Limos have been cornou/ed scaled din)ens/bns 11,riom county macs and p/a/r. ,C6rct/ desr_,,.plionc hour been vrovicled by fhe Oxx. oi' Orono . r p ^l,(A LA''��o Nf I , gdl) Arta or 00rGsi . JO, .100 fo- rlrea or KrOtlua1 Errr, f - /173' = JVP1 iirt o ql' 7cmp . Consl Cj'ml • l t I . i M YWOleS perpelua/ UMI L' (4,v/es temp. Cant% t'smf. r pap 1r16Apu r wS tto iwt rb. s4.67 l �.•>„c '1.ec Kpt.laat Ib. /71.y TM ,bear: fit a !1. amig, per Past a•1 uasont !or ••n, tary ..... •wd in0ru• •M "too• Our• . tot over. oad.r. end •coos• the loll "1+0 soar n set Par •perm �J T%o . La 11.1 Lott of the toot 51/ NH . .hat Part of Go orn- ..t Let 1, I wort. nt t-4 1 in . tlen t. T"n.h1p 111. 116.4. 21, sold dist..ea ee1.0 N.$.rred ;4•r•Ilol .,th the tort Ila. 'f Ned Soetiow 0 -Ad all that Part e! 6vwrnNnt Let I. ctrua •. Te.ns.lp 111, Ranee )1. M•cr a•o1 •• Poll"$• a G t&ronc l.� •t • pots' rhos• • :too Ir•rw Par•1ltl .1ts •M .i •&•tone 4N !ul wst of eha Nfl 1lN art said toeti•s • inter otctt tee Nn.trlt :Ina of G�r•tt seed. 4n"� a M:a.111• ens wop:e plain Ro•�: ihe.rt •ertn Parallel hie. art Metioo lino )N.0 foot to tso ..of. of wsawll'a eat. L .. w14w.t"n••: tho.ee so. L.ra4ef lT 'lent t.t 4hor• of 4•t1 Lt4o lft /r feel t0 \ • peI.t rn.eh is 11$.1 loot rut of Net toot is. 11no eo1n� •l4• \ aha ne.ewa4torlt 'Woof r.... Yod at and ,cot 14 Woo ar at Deeds, pave ))?. those• sert..rlt olen0 tha •aeon' 14ne of �\ m J :eM •• I000ed ,n coos /0J of flood', Pat' a11, 400 !ooa tom t"• ^ be` hor.horlf 11N of u1d Ce+net ■N/, Nil Mest Wu0 d feet `O sat of too $*a"" :too: tee.rt ooathaattrlt slat ued faeery flood to too Mint of ee•rtncoee.t: t•rtpt too rut 74.0 foot t eeroof •.d F"%%of ac gone that Part of he entire sN.e •ry1..� J/ dueriaed proouoo 1pes Nt to of • laoo drew as rapes •wdla .� to tee eat SaN ale Ni� "ealM at a peter 4e4.1 fee4 Spot.!& too we•sdor co= of LN •001 lIN of sat# tselloa. Dud porpo4Nl "&*"&a eo4N too Na 1/ toot of that part of lee •a"e MNrieed Palloftl :peM oeeu of lR" folleet::d Isaertbod 11eet poets," at e pets$ so the Not Iliad of two •Net dooerisd property dasawe lea toot swto from too wert"osa Mroor l.ofset& leeNe ed"tofil and Pafp"ndltelef to Nad Nat Its* • 41416.N N 61 toot aM there toes." I". Toeeaeer :"of. • lettpwetl eM•tfr'atew N•eYwt •r. owd'f ed "aree• shot par $ of 4ee east /1 feu of too .art N feu s1 too •o"• do".,6" p'ew a► ltlav be* -*"too last "eeeo NNnbed I= osd &ewe pore I -lot -its see IloteN II toot "was from' ooad lost wee d~t,wt ItN. Nat toeme•Wp "Motfo"ioo 460440064 to "Pass rew*ott is. loot v k /e• At / /IM/fbtW-8/1 0' Elf& A I Ile A "d' MiraM ran .avd', AMA pin 'ovary ei reosr 1 woo prttE. q quo i SON, t INC. ns AA o► d/ rrtr�trw ,pan aM/ J ant • 'Maul Lwmo tS�ouo�W ✓ •t`i yar-�� lA' f' 4NIN -t s'l li D L�FMR 0ON ZONING FILE NO. 1306 CITY OF ORONO NOTICE OF PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 473-7357 Date of Notice: 7/28/88 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- TO: Timothy F. Keegan COPIES TO: Jim Olson Metropolitan Waste Control Commission Bonestroo, Anderlik & Assoc. Mears Park Centre, 230 East 5th St 2335 W Hwy 36 St. Paul, MN 55101 St. Paul, MN 55113 ---------------- -----------------------------------------•------------- TYPE OF APPLICATII Conditional Use Permit ------------------- .1 ------------------------------------------------------ DATE OF MEETIING: 7/18/88 VOTE: 6 For 0 Against Planning Commission recommends the following: Tabled for reasons noted below NOTES AND SPECIAL CONDITIONS: The Planning Commission tabled all action on the conditional use permit for the MWCC seeking approval of construction of a building that would contain a lift station/generator as part of the upgrading of the existing Metro sewer lines, subject to the MWCC filing for the appropriate subdivision application that would divide off the 2,880 s.f. parcel from the existing 30,300 s.f. parcel. In a recent conversation with the MWCC, staff was advised that the subdivision application would not be filed for the upcoming meeting, but would make the deadline for the September 19, 1Qa8 meeting. Staff will re-scnedule the conditional use permit at the same meeting as the review of the subdivision application. It should be noted that the Planning Commission did have some comments regarding the proposed use of the property and would like the following items addressed by the MWCC: 1. Will there be noise, or any special odors emitting from this structure and the proposed use? 2. Provide landscaping - it was noted by the Planning Commission that all the other lift stations an3 improvements with the original upgi:ding plans provide_: landscap: ng. This application provided no such landscaping and we request landscaping for the structure. 3. The building design has been questioned by the members of the Planning Commission finding it not appropriate for the surrounding neighborhood suggesting a re -design of roof and making the structure look more residential rather than for public works type use. Note other similar structures, possibly in Eden Prairie, that have been designed for MWCC's use that would be more appropriate than the design plan of this structure. 4. Parking area shuuld be defined on site plan. Please see that your information is submitted at least two weeks before the scheduled meeting for the review of the subdivision application. It is staff's hope to get a comprehensive action and approval on the part of the Planning Commission at the September meeting. Tim, Flease contact my office at your earliest convenience as I would like to discuss the filing of the applications sometime within the fourth week of August as I will be out of town the first two weeks of September rr and it. would be best that I complete the review of this sj.ecific application since I commenced the review (473-7357). Metropolitan Waste Mears Park Centre, 230 East Fifth September 16, 1988 tr�oh�o mission St. p'aul, . riQ r I n lsi4 Ms. Jeanne A. Mabusth Re: Orono Interceptor - Building & Zoning Administrator MWCC Project Number 85-67 City of Orono Post Office Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 Subject: Conditional Use Permit and Plat Application This letter is in re3ponse to the city's concerns as summarized in the 7/28/88 notice, zoning file No. 1306. 1. Will there by noise, or any special odors emitting from this strutune and the proposed use? There will be some noise from the facility when the generator is operated in an emergency or when being exercised. We anti- cipate that :his would happen about 1/2 hour per week. We do not anticipate a problem with odors at this lift sta- tion. 2. Provide landscaping - it was noted by the Planning Commission that all the other lift stations and improvements with the original upgrading plans provided landscaping. This applica- tion provided no sut-h landscaping and we request landscaping for the structure. Commission staff will work with the City on a landscaping plan. 3. The building design has been qu_stioned by the members of the Planning Commission finding it not appropriate for the surrounding neighborhood suggesting a re -design of roof and making the structure look more residential rather than for public works type use. Note other similar structures, possibly in Eden Prairie, that have been designed for MWCC's use that would be more appropriate than the design plan of this structure. The design and type of cunstruction of the building was decided during bi-weekly review meetings with the Commission staff. The building has a brick facing and flat roof con- sistent with this type of facility. The facility has homes to the east and north and a marina to the west. Because there is a mix of building types, with the marina probably dominatinn, a commercial type building was designed. Jeanne A. Mabusth Page 2 MWCC Project Number 85-67 September 16, 1988 It is possible that the landscaping plan may incorporate trees and/or shrubs for the purpose of a screen. 4. Parking area should be defined on site plan. Off-street and off -driveway parking is provided on the north side of the building. This is now shown ^n the site plan. Dianne Wanner, the Commission's Public Relations representative for this project, will be giving a brief overview of the Commission and will introduce Tim Keegan, Staff Engineer, and Jim Olson, of Bonestroo, Rosene, Anderlik and Associates, the Consulting Engineer, at the meeting on the 3rd. Please contact me immediately at 229-2147 if you have any questions or concerns. Sincerely, _ ca�_L. Lin e Administrative Assistant Rights-of-Wal Section CLL.sma L78 cc: Jim Olson J. K. Matross T. F. Keegan J. Wanner IV, �, �� � . pN�• , �r rr � � tit � � � i '' 0j,n 1 ORONO INTERCEPTOR IMPROVEMENTS LIFT STATION NO. 44 • WEST- ELEVATION QO P--T H ELFWATI oN 54AL'a %8a= ILpll OKONO INTERCEPTOR IMPROVEMENTS l I T STATION NO. +A Sou-FH F-�Ev\TioN S(,A�-f� 1/611=11-011 F-A(D1- 10 N I 8o11eafr00 [w/oM•r. A ArSM *We Rosa,. A" Aa�oclocik sles oo Date cx.T I1P� Fig. No. Comm. 01012. FUNHTI Ala "rY f'� QUANT S1z� �t�-g0�-� I rAF, I'`r'fzArl l DAL. (a 5 � 011 l`(NUJA 0(,C,IbENTALIs) �Of�NT1LLR (SOLID DF-OF 1Z,3 PotENTll,l..� f �uTI�OSA) 601IM011 PUf-'PLE Ho (5Yr-I►•IUA VUL(4AF-I5 LUUT-IVAF-s) 7 LIFT STATION �F+ - PYf~AAM 1 DAL- , IF- o zV I TAf; BOLD DP -Of POT E N TI LLA ��� �oI`jMDr1 LIL1ti% Z UAL. 5 UAL. LANDJP FLANJ �LAL,r-- I = zoo — --� _- '/u Bcx��tlroo !"@##were Arefti#0440 ORONO INTERCEPTOR Aa..�. IMPROVEMENTS Aeoclml•: W. h.A Ylwwwrl• LIFT STATION NO. 44 LCOTl�T L Fig. No. To: Planning Commission Chairman Kelley Orono Planning Commission Members City Administrator Bernhardson From: Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building & zoning Administrator Date: September 27, 1988 Subject: #1331 Mztropolitan Waste Control Commission, 3280 North Shore Dr Preliminary Subdivision Class II - Public Hearing Zoning District - LR•-1C-1 Application - Subdivision application required by the M.W.C.C. in order to construct lift station structure. Variance to minimum lot requirements to subdivision within LR-IC-1 zoning district. Review Section 11.12, Subdivision 10 - Necessary findings for variance approval. Total Property Area - 31,177 s.f. Lot 1 = 28,083 s.f. Lot 2 = 3,099 s.f. Variance to Lot Area - Lot 2 - Required = 21,780 s.f. Proposed = 3,099 s.f. Variance = 18,681 s.f. or 86% Variance to Lot Width - Lot 2 - Required = 100' Proposed = 48.9' Variance = 51.1' or 51% List of Exhibits Exhibit A - Application Exhibit B - Property Owners List Exhibit C - Plat Map Exhibit D - Preliminary Survey Zoning File #1331 September 117, 1988 Page 2 of 2 Review of Application - Access to the proposed parcels will remain via an existing gravel drive along the west side of the subject property and should be designated as a ro d outlot q*ith a minimum width of 17+'. The owner of the road outlot must grant an access easement in favor of newly created Lot 2 in addition to the exception to the north of Lot 1. These properties are currently under single ownership. The need to address the creation of Lot 2 results in severe and intense variances. To suggest that Lot 2 is a buildable lot is the one difficult aspect of this subdivision review. Lot 2 .Should be labeled an outlot, suggesting that it is unbuildable at the time of the platting. This may create a problem for the M.W.C.C. if the lift station can not be built on an outlot. If Lot 2 cannot be labeled an outlot, then the City must ask that special restrictions be filed against the chain of title that wou'.d require that it be combined with the adjacent parcels if its use is abandoned by the M.W.C.C. at some time in the future. The M.W.C.C. should respond to the legal issue of the outlot at our meeting on October 3, 1988. In the future, this whole property may be rezoned and replatted to one parcel for combination with the adjacent B-2 properties. The current subdivision will have no negative impact on any proposed future subdivision by the current owner. Staff Recommendation - To approve the subdivision application of the M.W.C.C. for the creation of two lots, Lot 1 a residential buildable lot, and Lot 2 (possible Outlot A) seemed unbuildable for residential use and designated by the applicant f.._ exclusive public utility purposes, based on the following conditions: 1. Creation of a road outlot, maximum width to meet width of west corridor of Lot 1 at the intersection of County Road 15. 2. All access to the newly created parcels must be via the road outlot. 3. Approval of the variances noted above if lot cannot be designated as an outlot. Additional Comments i Planning Commission Recommendation - Zoning File #1331 October 5, 1988 Page 3 of 3 The applicant advised the Planning Commission that the designation of the small lot as an outlot presents no problem for the Waste Commission for the proposed use as fee ownership of the property was the main concern. Please refer to the definition of "Lot, Outlot" as follows: 26. "Lot, outlot" - A lot which is intended only for public or private roadways, open space or other use, which use must be restricted by the appropriate easement and which use must be approved by the City at the time of f ina 1 p lat approva 1. The use of the out lot will thereafter be restricted by the appropriate restrictive covenant or open space easement. The City will ask that the Waste Control Commission's attorney provide the appropriate restrictive covenant to be filed against the chain of title of the outlot that would designate the u,itlot for the exclusive use of the utility structure. The lot now designated as an outlot would never be mistaken for a buildable lot. If the Commission was to cease all use of the pump station at some future date, the structure would have to be dismantled and razed and the outlot offered for sale to the adjacent property owners for future combination purposes. The Planning Commission felt that the original purpose of the subdivision is satisfiel with the designation of the outlot and the remaining residential lot and that there was no need to define the access corridor as a separate outlot. The fee owner of Lot 1 must (7rant appropriate easements to the M.W.C.C. Access was to remain via the existing private drive. The enclosed resolution has been drafted granting approval of the preliminary plat of Moeller's Addition. A RESOLUTION GRANTING PRELIMINARY APPROVAL OF THE PLAT OF MOELLER'S ADDITION APPLICATION NO. 1331 WHEREAS, the Metropolitan Waste Control Commission hereinafter "applicant", on August 25, 1988 filed a Class II subdivision application with the City of Orono, hereinafter "City", for approval of a two lot plat of a property legally described on Exhibit A, attached to this resolution and hereinafter referred to as "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 Codes, the Orono Planning Commission held a public hearing on October 3, 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 October 10, 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 LR-lC-1 Lakeshore Residential Sub --district requiring a minimum of 1/2 acre. 2. The property contains a total of approximately 31,177 s.f. or .71 acres. Lot 1 consists of 28,083 s.f. and Outlot A equals 3,099 s.f. 3. Outlot A is intended only for pui3lic utility purposes by the applicant and is not intended for residential development. The approved use of this outlet will hereafter be restricted by an appropriate restrictive covenant filed against the chain of title of the outlot. 4. Access to existing properties and the outlot shall remain via the existing private drive along the west boundary of the property. 5. A single family residence already exists on Lot 1 and is not intended for new residential construction at this time. 6. The existing residence on he lot meets the required setback from the proposed shared 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 j;reliminary Flat application for the Metropolitan Wastee Control Commission per plat drawings by Ernest G. Rud of E.G. Rud 6 Sons, Inc., Land Surveyors, dated July 19, 1988, and further grants a variance to the continued use of a private driveway for access to the newly created outlot and existing residential lots, subject to the following conditions: Page 1 of 3 1. Prior to the issuance of a building permit for the construction of the lift station, the final plat must be filed with either the Hennepin Recorder's Office or the Registrar of Titles office. 2. 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. The applicant is hereby advised that approval of the preliminary plat is for one year from the date of Council's approval, October 10, 1989. Final Plat Submittals A) RECORD PLAT drawings in the form of two (2) mylar copies and one (1) copy reduced to 1"=2001. Drawing to include: 1. Lot lines platted per preliminary survey. 2. Dedication of "drainage and utility easements" around Lot 1, Block 1, 10' wide along all perimeter property lines and 5' each side of internal property lines. B) LEGAL DOCUMENTS required: 1. 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. 2. The applicant must provide certified copies of all recorded easements currently affecting the property. 3. Creation of a restrictive covenant to be filed against the chain of title of the outlot that would specify the exclusive use of the outlot for public utility purposes by the M.W.C.C. The easement should be submitted in a fully executed form, for filing by the City with the plat documents. 4. Executed access easement granted to M.W.C.C. by owner of Lot 1, Block 1, Moeller's Addition. C) FEES TO BE PAID: Total Due $150.00 1. Filing Flat and associated easements at $150.00. Page 2 of 3 Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota at a regular meeting held this loth day of October, 1988. ATTEST: Dorothy M. Hallin, City Clerk James R. Grabek, Mayor Page 3 of 3 ATTACHMENT A Legal Description: 1 The West 15.7 feet of the East 539 feet of that part of Goverrmert Lot 1, lying North of Road, all in Section 8, Township 117, Range 23, and all that part of Lot 1, Section 8, Township 117, Range 23 described as follows: Commencing at a point where a line drawn parallel with and distant 539 feet West of the East line of said Section 8 intersects the Northerly line of County Road known as Markville and Maple Plain Road; thence North parallel with said Section line 356.0 feet to the shore of Maxwell's Bay, Lake Minnetonka; thence Southwesterly along the shore of said lake 188.78 feet to a point which is 710.1 feet West of said Section line and also the Northeasterly corner of land con- veyed by Deed recorded in Book 488 of Deeds, page 237; thence Southerly along the Easterly line of land so deeded 400 feet to the Northerly line of said County Road, said pint being 724 feet West of the Section line; thence Southeasterly along said County Road to the point of commencement, except the West 70 feet thereof. Said 70 feet being measured at a right angle from the Westerly line thereof, except that part of the entire above described premises lying North of a line drawn at right angles to the East line of said Section; at a point 494.5 feet South of the Meander corner on the East line of said Section, sa'd last described line being designated as line "A", and except that part of the entire above described premises lying North of a line drawn at right angles tc: the East lirie of said Section to a point 394.5 feet South of the Meander corner on the East line of said Section. Also the West 15 feet of the above described premises lying Southerly of the above described line "A". 'Petit �r�r_ry CITY OF ORONO - SUBDIVISION APPLICATION ----------------------------------------------------------- PROPERTY LOCATION Site Address 3290 North. -Shore Drive, Orono CITY OF L`RNO Property Identification Number (P.I.D. ) 08-117-023-44-0003 ,-•c;1 ;4444' r j J41 250. a Please check one - Propert X abstract or torrens? ; : ,�'17, lzo.o( s tach legal description to application. Attachment A 6 ;PT-; rr4iYK YOU=; 15?0 ;OO, Rol T08-, ------------ ..— .� APPLICANT Phone ( home ) N/A' Name Metropolitan Waste Control Commissigrhor:e (work)6i2-222-8423 Address: 230 E 5th Street City: St. Paul Zip:55101 ----------------------------------------- ----------------- ----------------- ONNNR (if different than applicant) Phone (home) N/A Name Rita M. Straley Phone (work) N/A Windjammer Condos *Address: 19SQ Palm rity Rnad City: Stuart, FL Zip:33494 (attach list if more than one) *See Attachment B ------------------------ --------- ------------------------------------------ BZISTING LAND USE Number of Tax Parcels 1 Development Size •7 Acres Dry Land - Acres Wet Land Acres Total, all parcels Present Use (check) Residential Residential; no. of units 2 Other (specify) Present Zoning District LR-IC-1 --------------------------------------------------------------------------- PROPOSAL Division for Tax Purposes Lot Line Rearrangement Only (no new building sites) X Subdivision for New Building Sites Number of Building Sites: - Existing Units _ 1 _ New Units I Total Units Proposed Gross Density: 1 Units per.07 Acres Minimum Lot Size: 3,094 Sq Feet Dry Buildable Land Pro! l Use: (check) Residential Wastewater t other (specify)+ift Station To: Mayor Grabek & Orono Council Members City Administrator Bernhardson From: Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building & Zoning Administrator Date: October 7, 1988 Subject: #1321 Tom Haislet, 950 Old Crystal Bay Road - Preliminary Subdivision, Class III - Resolution List of Exhibits - Staff Memo of 9/2/88 Exhibit A - Application Exhibit B - Property Owners List Exhibit C - Plat Map Exhibit D - School District Letter Exhibit E - Section of Comprehensive Plan Amendment - Area 3 Exhibit F - Crystal Crest Plat Approved 5/2/82 Exhibit G - Original Metes and Bounds Division Presented for Planning Commission Meeting of 8/15/88 Exhibit H - Future Development Schemes Area to East Relating to the Proposed Division Exhibit I - Preliminary Plat Brief Review of Application - ^he school district plans to purchase the 50+ acre parcel to the west of the Orono High School (Albin Thies' property, Lot 1, Crystal Crest). The school plans to acgLA re the property over a ten year period. The school district cannot purchase land via contract but must purchase une-r fee title. Th's will require the division of the land into 4 parcels so that the school can purchase direct fee title. The school district will enter into a ten year contract with the current owner. At the August 15, 1988 meeting of the Planning Commission, members denied the proposed metes and bounds division, review Exhibit G, that required a variance to the subdivision regulations of the City. Members denied it on the basis that the applicant failed to demonstrate sufficient or acceptable hardships and that only with a plat could the City's future planning needs be met, regardless of the outcome of the final ownership patterns of this property. The applicant considered the Planning Commission's advise and iresented a formal plat for the review of the Commission at their September 1.9th meeting. r Zoning File #1321 October 7, 1988 Page 2 of 3 ,The original request for the metes and bounds division appeared a simple solution for the school's dilema. Based on guidelines and standards that direct the fiscal policies of the school district, the district could not purchase the property on a contract basis but had to purchase in fee ownership. The need to divide the property in order t- facilitate the sale also made it necessary to come before the City for subdivision approval. Review Exhibit D, Mr. Fenholt's letter that gives the background and purpose for the acquisition of the property. Please review the enclosed staff memo dated 9/2/88 that outlines the review of the four lot plat. Council Members should also review the minutes of that meeting in order to bet*er understand the School District and the City's concerns. The road outic,- was the major - ncern for the school aistrict as the property could no longer be used a school if a public road was to divide it. Planning Commission Memhers _..wised that the City would be willing to agree to delay all construction of a through road during the specified period of the sale contract for the scroll district. Several other issue. were reviewed by both parties and all agreed that it was necessary to set these down in a formal agreement prior to the final subdivision approval by the City. Those issues are as follows: 1. Establish deadline for th- total acquisition of the property by the school district. 2. City to define an interium planning policy regarding future development to the east in relation to the location of Outlot A. 3. Assurance that if road is to be c(-nstructed in the future, because of the failure of the school district to acquire all four parcels within a specified amount of time, that all owners of the four parcels at that time will share in the cost of construction of the road when required. 4. Define the various levels of development of the parcels that would require road improvements and specify degree of improvement required. 5. Define the types of security and aignage necessary when students commence (informal or formal) use of the property. 6. Indemnification of the City for any liability. Zoning File #1321 October 7, 1988 Page 3 of 3 7. Responsibility of City as a result of property. the applicant to bear all costs sL.tained by the this review and future dealings regarding the 8. City's responsibility to vacate all interest in the Access & Utility Easements to be taken over Outlot A at the time all four parcels are acquired by the School District. The Planning Commission unanimously moved to approve the four -lot plat application for Tom Haislet finding all standards of the RR-1B zoning district and pertinent standards of the subdivision regulations had been met. This approval was based on the following conditions: 1. Drafting of a Developer's Agreement by the City Attorney and the School District's attorney with City staff input that would address the concerns of both the school district and City regarding the subdivision. The Planning Commission, failed to address other conditions recommended by staff such as the waiving of payment of the park fee of $400.00 and the waiving of the road fee and the submittal of engineering plans for the road as the Developer's Agreement to be drafted by both parties will address all of these issues. Staff_ would also suggest that it is more appropriate that park fees be collected in the future if this property does not stay within the ownersr',, of the school district but would be collected at the time of future .residential development of the parcels. The enclosed resolution approving the preliminary plat has been drafted per the Planning Commission's approval recommendation with the addition of the waiving of the park and road fees at this time. If Council does not agree, the enclosed resolution can be amended. Staff recommends preliminary approval of the four -lot plat based on the findings and conditions set forth in the enclosed resolution. ev A RESOLUTION GRANTING PRELIMINARY APPROVAL OF THE CLASS III SUBDIVISION APPLICATION OF TON HAISLET APPLICATION NO. 1321 WHEREAS, Tom Haislet (hereinafter "applicant"), representing Albin F. Thies, the owner of the proi,,erty, on July 22, 1988 filed a Class III subdivision application with the City o` Orono (hereinafter "the City") for approval of a four -lot plat of property legally described as: Lot 1, Block 1, Crystal Crest, Crystal Crest, -according to the County, Minnesota lying eastly of "proper ty") ; and and that part of Lot 2, Block 1, recorded plat thereof, Hennepin the west 642' thereof, (hereinafter WHEREAS, after due published and mailed notice in accordance with Minnesota Statutes 462.358 et. seq. and the City of Orono Zoning and Subdivision Codes, the Orono Planning Commission held a public hearings on August 15, 1988 and S. ember 19, 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 October 10, 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-lB Single Family Rural Residential Zoning District requiring a minimum of 2 acres of contiguous dry buildable land within each newly created lot. 2. The property consists of 51.39 acres. Lot 1, Block 1 consists of 10.69 acres of dry contiguous land; Lot 2, Block 1 consists of 15.07 acres of dry contiguous land; Lot 1, Block 2, consists of 12.08 acres of dry contiguous land; Lot 2, Block 2 consists of 12.08 acres of dry contiguous land. Page 1 of 3 3. All access to the four proposed lots shall be via the approved Outlot A. No additional curb cuts will be allowed off of Old Crystal Bay Road or County Road 6. Additional curb cuts wi 11 be considered if property is to be further developed. 4. A single family residence can be constructed at some time in the future on all five lots without the need for further variances. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOL4 ED that based upon either one or more of the findings noted above, the City Counci 1 of the City of Orono hereby approves the preliminary plat application of Tom Haislet per plat drawings by Phillj.;. A. Nelson, Registererd Land Surveyor, dated 7/10/88 and further grants a variance to the standard tha : would require that all lots have frontage on a public road with the creation of the private road outlot, subject to the following conditions: Final Plat Submittals The following list of final submittals must be submitted to the Zoning Administrator two weeks prior to the regularly scheduled Council meeting on the second and fourth Mondays of the month. This preliminary approval will expire within one year of the date of Council approval (October 10, 1989). 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 platted per preliminary survey. B) Dedication of "drainage and utility easements" 10' wide along all perimeter property lines and 5' each side of internal property lines. 2. OTHER 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. Page 2 of 3 B) The applicant must provide certified copies of all recorded easements currently affecting the property. C) Owner to grant an underlying Road & Utility Easement over Outlot A to the City of Orono - the separate agreement between the City and Orono School District shall specify the limits on this easement. D) Execution of an agreement between the City and the Orono School District that would cover the issues defined in the staff memo dated 10/7/88 to the Orono Council - Application #1321. 3. FEES TO BE PAID: Total Due $300.00 A) Final plat fee - $150.00. B) Filing fee for plat and associated documents $150.00. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota at a regular meeting held this loth day of October, 1988. ATTEST: Dorothy M. Hallin, City Clerk James R. Grabek, Mayor Page 3 of 3 To: Planning Commission Chairman Kelley Orono Planning Commission Members City Administrator Bernhardson From: Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building Zoning Administrator Date: September 2, 1988 Subject: #1321 Tom Haislet, 950 Old Crystal Bay Road - Preliminary Subdivision, Class III - Request to Reschedule Before the Planning Commission for Review of Amended Application Zoning District - RR-1B, minimum 2 acres dry contiguous area required. Total area = 51.39 acres. Revised Application - Subdivision, Class III, plat of four lots Lot 1, Block 1 = 10.69 acres Lot 2, Block 1 = 15.07 acres Lot 1, Block 2 = 12.08 acres Lot 2, Block 2 = 12.08 acres Outlot A (Road Outlot) = 1.57 acres In light of the issues raised during the first review, the owner's representative, Mr. Haislet, has discussed the concerns of the City with representatives of the school district regarding their request for a variance to the subdivision regulaticns that would have allowed them to subdivide the property with a metes and bounds descriptions. The school district accepts the City's position and responsibility to insure the future planning needs of the City regardless of the disposition of the property in the future. The applicant has asked to re -schedule the subdivision application before the City, which now asks for consideration of a Class III subdivision of a plat of four lots, with an interior access road. Review of Four Lot Plat - Staff has met with the City Engineer on the site to confirm the location of the proposed future through road at the intersection of Old Crystal Bay Road. Cook confirmed that it meets all the safety standards for a 40 mph road. In review of the various development plans for Area 3 of the recent Comprehensive Plan amendment (enclosed in your previous packets), the proposed location of the curb cut is consistent with the approved schemes for future development and appears to be the most centrally located curb cut for the 50 acre site. Zoning File #1321 September 2, 1988 Page 2 of 4 All access to these lots must be via the approved access corridor, depending upon the level and type of use proposed by the school district will determine the amount of necessary upgrading of road and type of road to be constructed during this interim period. As there are no formal plans proposed for the property by the school, except for possibly playing fields, the City will have to ask for assurance/confirmation that the road would be constructed based upon a certain development level of the property. A Developer's Agreement will be filed against the chain of title of each of the four lots, advising any future ownez of the need to install a road to the current engineering standards of the City if one of these lots is to be developed. The share in the cost of the road should be defined. This will be the subdivider's responsibility to define and develop as part of the restrictive language within the Developer's Agreement. The City must require assurance that the road would be constructed at the time of development (for the City is being asked to waive the requirement that engineering plans for road and road fees be filed at the time of the preliminary plat). The need for plans anal review fees should also be set forth in the Developer's Agreement. Review of RR-1B Standards - Each lot clearly satisfies the two acre dry contiguous standard and 200 feet lot width at the rear of the front yard setback line. All lots can be served in the future by an interior road not requiring additional curb cuts along old Crystal Bay Road or County Road 6. Depending upon the overall scheme of development in the future and the final ownership patterns of these parcels, an access road may be designed to the north connr =.cing outlot A -:ith County Road 6. In the original platting of this property wits, the crystal Crest plat, a l l road dedications were made, and all wetlands were designated. Staff sees no need for topographic information at this level of review. In review of the minutes, it was • noted that a Planning Commission Member suggested the need for topographic information. Staff has reviewed the location of the road outlot and sees no need for topographic information at this point of the review. The school district has advised the staff that a member of the board has been in contact with each member and has discussed the current plan and has also been advised that no other additional information will be needed to complete this review. The septic testing has been waived as the lots all exceed 5 acres of dry buildable area. Septic testing will be required at the time c-f development of each of the four lots. Zoning File #1321 September 2., 1988 Page 3 of 4 The school district should be placed on notice that with the formal location of the through road, Outlot A, if a development application is received for the property to the east, the City would have to address the issue of a future through road to connect with the existing road Outlot A. The future plans of the school district to vacate the road upon the final acquisition of all four parcels, may not be feasible if development plans to the east have been approved by the City. Staff Recommendation - To approve the four lot plat application of Tom Haislet, finding all standards of the RR-1B zoning district and pertinent standards of the subdivision regulations have been met. This approval is based on the following conditions: 1. A Developer's Agreement shall be executed by the developer to insure installation of a future road that must meet all future engineering standards of the City at the time of construction. The developer shall draft restrictions/covenants within that agreement that will address the following concerns of the City: A) Development or use of either one of the four lots, shall require the installation of the through re--ddfrom the intersection of Old Crystal Bay Road to the east border of Outlot A. The developer may provide some clarification language regarding the limited use by the school for play fields or other activities not involving structural improvements. It should be noted that access to play fields must be via the approved corridor. The City Engineer shall define a standard of minimum improvement for the temporary access road to the clay field. B) A formula should be established providing guidelines for the share in the cost in the total upgrading of Outlot A. C) The agreement should also advise future owners that at the time road plans are su'-.ritted, additional fees will be required and appropriate security posted with the City in the form of a letter of credit to assure that road is completed to required standards. How shall these costs be shared? 2. Payr*ent of a park Fee in the amount of $400.00 ($100.00 per each lot). The Planning Commission may recommend to waiving payment of park fee at this level of development. 3. To waive the road fee and engineering plans for road usually required at the time of a subdivision application, because of the unique circumstances surrounding this subdivision application and the fact that the Developer's Agreement will address the need for fee payments and appropriate security to insure completion of road at the time development pressures require construction of road in the future. No Zoning File #1321 September 2, 1988 Page 4 of 4 4. All access to the four lots must be via approved Outlot A. No additional curb cuts will be allowed off of Old Crlsta 1 Bay Road or County Road 6. Additional curb cuts will be considered if property is to be further developed. 5. The developer and future owner is ?laced on notice that vacation of Outlot A may not feasibile if the development of the eastern parcel has proposed a future connecting link to Outlot A. �tiiA�a Gi r i wr viii.•iry CITY OF ORONO - SUBDIVISION APPLICATION :-cvvvvv PROPERTY LOCATION -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - V U6'14 6;V;:'.;;t Site Address OO(.(J 04 G.{' 94 r0Cl R01 TI +• Property Identification Number (P -.D.) o 0 -119 Please check one - Property abstract or torrens? Attach legal description to application. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- APPLICANT Phone (home) 4173 - 3O(iY .lam Name Phone (work) -----Address: yy fy94/---,��-------City:,'�,5 ��" /------Zip:s��-- --- OWNER (if different than applicant) Phone (home) Name Address: City: (attach list if more than one) -------------------------------------------- EXISTING LAND USE Number of Tax Parcels 62 Phone (work) Zip: Development Size Acres Dry Land Acres Wet Land 5/ Acres Total, all parcels Present Use (check) Residential; no. of units v Other (specify)_ i4q Present Zoning District --------------------------------------------------------------------------- PROPOSAL Division for Tax Purposes Lot Line Rearrangement Only (no new building sites) Subdivision for New Building Sites Number of Building Sites: _ Existing Units New Units Total Units Proposed Gross Densi�•,•: Units per Acres Minimum Lot Size: Sq Feet Dry Buildable Land Proposed Use: (check) Residential / . t Other (specify)/.4'.tif 2dj_._,�� MINIMUM MATERIAL NECESSARY FOR COMPLETE PRELIMINARY APPLICATION 1. Completed Application Form 2. Preliminary Plat information on Certificate of Survey. 3. Certified Property Owners List of owners within 350' (you must obtain this list from Hennepin County Department of Finance A-603 Govt Center 348-3271). 4. 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). 5. As an addendum to this application, please attach a separate list- of any other persons you wish notified of this application. Certification by Zoning Department that Preliminary Plat Application is complete. Zoning Official's Signature Date ---------------------------------------------------------------•----------- 1. Payment of fees (park fees, filing fee, sewer and water assessments). 2. Signed certificate of survey or mylar copies of formal plat. 3. Title opinion. 4. Easements, Covenants, etc. 5. Developers Agreement and Letter of Credit. Certification by Zoning Department that Final Plat Application is complete. Zoning Official's Signature Date --------------------------------------------------------------------------- FEES Sketch Plan Review (Class I, II & III) $150.00 Preliminary Review (Class I & II Subdivision) 250.00 Preliminary Review (Class III and all non-residential) 300.00 + 20.00/Lot Final Plat Review (Class III) 150.00* *(Plus any legal or engineering charges) --------------------------------------------------------------------------- The applicant hereby agrees to p-ivide all information required or requested by the Zoning Administrator, City Engineer, City Attorney, Planning Commission and Council necessary to process this application and further agrees to pay all additional fees established by ordinance. Applicant's Signature Date Owner's Signature ��.��-{N� T��� Date Applicant must hive all submittals inLo 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 Co;n.-A 1. If an applicant is unable to attend a scheduled meeting, please ma`— arrangements to have an authorized agent attend in your place and to advise the Building & Zoning Office of this change prior to the meeting. RUH DATE 07/2S/88 BATCH 001 38 26-118-23 31 OOOk PROP ADOR 02940 SIXTH AVE N OWNER NAME JOINT IND SCH DIST NO 287 TAXPAYER JOINT IND SCH DIST 287 NAME/ADDR 1820 NO XENIUM LANE MPLS MN 554,41 38 28-118-23 41 0004 PRCP ADDR 02500 SIXTH AVE N OWNER NAME R A S VICKERMAN TAXPAYER ROBERT 3 VICKERMAN H VNE/ADDR 2500 6TH AVE H LONG LAKE MN 55356 38 26-118-23 42 0003 PROP ADDR 02600 SIXTH AVE N pWWR NAME T P CARROLL i C A CARROLL TAXPAYER THOMAS P CARROLL NAME/ADDR 2600 6Tt AVE N LONG LAKE MN 55356 36 26-118-23 43 0005 PROP ADDR 00770 OLD CRYSTAL BAY RD N OMNER NAME NEW LIFE BIBLE CHURCH ET AL TAXPAYER ORONO COMMUNITY CHURCH NAME /ADOR 770 OLC CRYSTAL BAY RD N LONG LAKE MN 55356 38 33-116-23 12 0003 PROP ADOR OWNER ►NAME WILLOW PROPERTIES TAXPAYER WILLOW PROPERTIES NAMF/ADDR 'DINA PROFESSIONAL BLDG 4945 HALIFAX AVE 3 SUITE 7 MPLS MN 55424 HEtN►iEPIN COLXNTY PROPERTY INFORMATION SYSTEM PROPERTY OWNERS LIST 38 28-118-23 31 0002 SCHOOL DIST NO 278 SCHOOL DIST NO 278 685 OLD CRYSTAL BAY RD N LONG LAKE MN 55356 38 28-116-23 41 0005 T A C CARROLL THOMAS P CARROLL 2600 6TH AVE :N LONG LAKE MN 55356 38 28-118-23 43 0OC2 00950 OLD CRYSTAL BAY RD N ALBIN F THIES ET AL ALBIN F THIES 1442 HOMESTEAD TRAIL LONG LAKE MN 55356 38 28-118-23 44 0001 ORONO CENTER PROPERTIES ORONO CENTER PROPERTIES C/O RFIERSGORD LAW FIRM 4945 HALIFAX AVE S SUITE 7 EDINA 11 N 55424 38 33-118-23 21 0001 00765 OLD CRYSTAL BAY RD N SCHOOL DIST ►O 11 SCHOOL DIST NO 11 REPORT NO. PI435401 PAGE 1 38 28-118-2.3 34 0001 SCHOOL DIST NO 278 SCHOOL DIST NO 278 38 28-118-23 42 0002 4'700 SIXTH AVE N JOt.4 LEIN JOHN H LEIN 2700 6TH AVE N LONG LAKE MH 55356 38 28-118-23 43 0004 ALBIN THIES ET AL ALBIN THIES 1442 HOMESTEAD TR LONG LAKE MN 55356 38 33-118-23 11 0003 ORONO PLAZA REIERSGORD LAW FIRM 4945 HALIFAX AVE S SUITE 7 EDINA MN 55424 TOTAL BATCH 001 00014 41 - 3{3y; ` ( V 619 ;-o AVE- C // RUN DATE 07/25/66 HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORMATION SYSTEM REPORT NO. PI435401 DATE- 001 PROPERTY( OWNERS LIST PAGE 2 I CERTIFY THAT THE FACTS REPRESENTS ARE AN ACCURATE AND TRUE REPRESENTATION OF INFORMATION AS IT APPEARS THIS DATE ON THE RECORDS OF THE HENNEPIN COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF PROPERTY TAXATION, TO THE REST OF MY KNOWLEDGE AND BELIEF DATE. ) :\ BY O R O N O- S C H O O L I'D 685 Old Crystal Bay Road Long Lake. Minnesota 55356 (612) 473-7313 Independent School District 278 William A. Fenholt Ass't to the Superintendent July 22, 1988 Ms. Jeanne Mabusth Building & Zoning Administrator City of Orono P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 RE. PURCHASE OF 131 ACRE PARCEL AND LEASE OF 371 ACRES KITH OPTION TO PURCHASE Dear Jeanne: We have been advised by Haislet Realty to express in writing to you the reason for purchasing the 13# acres and lease of 37j acres, with option to purchase additional parcels, rather than all the land at one time on an installment contr�_rt. The school district cannot purcnase on an installment contract and is, therefore, exercising its right to purchase the tract in separate parcels. We have entered into an agreement to purchase Parcel A (13} acres) and also pre- sently intend to purchase Parcels B, C & D (121 acres each) separately as capital funds become available. It is the present intent of the Orono School Board to purchase all the land eventually. The lease/option agreement is for a ten-year period. No development of this land is contemplated at this time. Its acquisition is simply part of the long range planning of the schoo' district. Sincerely, William A. Fenholt Ass't. to the Supt. WAF:jm cc: Mark Bernhardson, Administrator Serving Independeace—Long Lake —Maple Plain —Medina —Minnetonka Beech —Orono An Equal Oprw+rfunm Ernplo%cr 3.4 Property Area No. 3 - Description - This area designated as Property Grouping No. 3, is the largest single property in the study area designated for change. Substantial portions of the 188 acre area were assessed originally for both water and sewer, however subsequent unit allocations resulted in severe limitations for development. Soils in the area for on• -site sewage treatment are very limited. The only existing development is a church in the western portion of this site, abutting Old Crystal Bay Road. Significant areas are designated wetlands. Discussion of Alternatives - The above alternatives are as follows: - Remain as 2-acre single family rural residential. This would entail leaving the property zoned as is (rural residential with the exception of a small B-1 zone), for possible development at 2 acre standards. Because of the concerns of soils, particularily on the southern portion, plus the proximity to Highway 12, it is doubtful that actual single family development would occur in the southern area. 1967 UTILITY ASSESSMENT AREA FI% 23 41 - Development within existing capacities. In developing alternatives for this area, the Consultant presented 4 0 schemes for development in this area. In addition, the most # affected property owners presented their own development scheme. The first 4 schemes provide for frontage road f connection between Old Crystal Bay Road and willow Drive and jother circulation to the site, together with retention of L appropriate wetlands. Such developments are within the realm of "existing capacities" without requiring substantial capital investment to any metropolitan systems. The first four schemes represent varyirg degrees of transition from commercial along Highway 12 --o multi -residential up to the wetlands with low density s-_ngle family between the wetlands and County Road 6. Scheme 5, as proposed by the property owners, would necessitate the construction of a new sewer line to the Long Lake plant, with resulting sewer units in the range of approximately 1,200. This may still be within existing metropolitan interceptor capacity but would put a greater burden on the system than the selected �1! alternative. J A 42 �i Scheme No. 1 - As the most intensive of the first four alternatives, this would provide for 24 units of residential development in the northern half of the site, 73 units of town homes, 144 units of multi-family/apartments and a commercial office development, totaling 215,000 square feet on 25 acres. The main feature of this would be a consolidated commercial/office site centered on a property, as opposed to Scheme No. 2 where there would be individual pads. Development on this site would be served by municipal sewer and water.n the northern part, single family may be grouped to take advantage of on -site sewage treatment Fib 24 43 possibilities given the limited soil conditions for such. As an alternative these could be grouped to allow for sewer should the soils be to found to be unsuitable. However, the density would remain at the 1 unit per 2 acres. The above mentioned alternative provides the appropriate transition to the properties both to the east and "the north developed or to be developed at the 2 acre standard. j Scheme No. 2 - ./ As indicated, this scheme should a variation in the commercial configuration and reduces the commercial/office space from 215,000 to 170,000 square feet. In addition this would eliminate the multi -residential but increaseS, the number of tow homes from 70 to 228. RII Fig. 25 44 • �i Scheme No. 3 - This scheme represents further reduction of office space down to 52,000 s.f., but adds 192 units of multi -family with 110 units of town houses. Scheme No. 3 differs from Schemes 1 and 2 in the frontage road area by having principally the single facing frontage road abutting Highway 12 as a means to buffer the expanded residential property from Highway 12. It allows for sate stacxing aisLance back from the intersections at Willow Drive, Highway 12, and Old Crystal Bay Road. 45 Fig 26 Scheme No. 5 - Property Owners Proposal - This scheme proposed approximately 270,000 square feet of commercial/retail/office with approximately 340 to 350 apartment units and 120 to 240 town homes with 34 unsewered single family 2-acre residences in the north part of the parcel. Jl S7, iM�Y WSTING SCHOOLS �. _7 i� i� LWARY-- - `o s OQ� -_ ��--So�nd�1�•_'�,a` u.L NCMwAr'R—a-i3 �. OF"CI RJIT MG ORIC! KAIONG STORMS Property Owner Proposal o Area 3 Fig. 28 47 Recommended Alternative - The wetlands and natural vegetation in the area provide an excellent transition between the more intense use planned for the south and single family 2-acre to the north. Utilizing this as a break, the area to the north will remain at the 2-acre rural residential standard. For the area south of the wetlands, the planning consultant has offered four development schemes, providing multi -family units (either town house or apartments) to the immediate south of the wetlands with alternatives for varied commercial uses abutting Highway 12. The four alternatives of development are considered at an acceptable level for projected sewer needs ranging from 300 to 450 sewer units. The configuration of the frontage road would be dependent on the type of development undertaken but would provide for access points at Old Crystal Bay Road and Willow Drive, approximately 300' back from their intersections with Highway 12. F1% r - EM C. 1 v �- Strtq twe of C.S.A.H. No.6, Plot 5, os detiweoted J'�17 `♦ in Book 3 of Hiphwoy Ptws, pope � 8' li f 12%.713 6 0 ' - 0e' E AY -TAT E AID HIGHWAY— $ COUNTY N 85 H COUNTY IGHW_ N 0.6 STATE HMnopu CoW*y r right of way ff W4~"f �1C 3 11 1pa1 3. 6 as established by,� v ;aRNlrSsianer S, r I , I _ West line of Southeast quarter of Section 28 N co m LOT I Co a m� J OG� 0 NIFn I 10, o z 33 Ig My iwnn~1 of the O corner of Section 28, ` n 1 wrth,Nen9e23Wn't I 1 r 9' 39 W 2 E:aet fbw of west 1/2 of Sm*Mml quarter of Sectlos 20 LOT 2 South 1#00 of soutrrOst Quarter of Section 28 69 ] w .51'00 N 63 ri � L0�'--+dratr+0ye f?ffrglM Eost 2i5D0 y�q ' O'1►` / 11 13 _t 2' 00 _. r drainage f0l�Mt Q , $ I� {�2■■� ,1■■Ia i • _ti ���■�� .:t[ !f ..ray .: _ I� 11s ii ]I t E � j .f.- ;1 f t l To: Mayor Grabek Orono Council Members City Administrator Bernhardson Froins Michael P. Gaffron, Asst Planning & Zoning Administrator Date: Octcber 5, 1988 Subject: #1324 Mr. & Mrs. William Gregory, 1099 Tamarack Drive - Conditional Use Permit - Resolution Zoning DisLAict - RR-lB, 2-acre, unsehared Application - Excavate an existing wetland area to create a pond. List of Bxhibits Exhibit A - Planning Commission Action Notice Dated 9/21/88 Exhibit B - Planning Commission Minutes Dated 9/19/88 Exhibit C - Memo & Exhibits of 9/15/88 Exhibit D - Proposed Resolution Discussion - Please review the memo and exhibits of September 15, 1988. The applicants are proposing to excavate a deeper pond in portion of a designated wetland on their property. At :heir meeting of September 19, 1968, Planning Commission recommended on a vote of 5 to 0 to approve the proposed grading project subject to the following conditions: 1. All grading work must take place within the property boundaries 2. All grading work shall conform to the grading plan proposed a.,a per any amendments that may be required by the Watershed District (Watershed District minutes attached). 3. Proper erosion control shall be maintained during all phases of the project until the area is revegetated. 4. Such revegetation, i.e. seeding or sodding and erosion control, shall be commenced immediately after the grading work is completed. 5. Per the current fee schedule, the applicants' contractor must obtain the normal $50.00 grading permit prior to commencement of the excavation work. As noted in the staff memo of F7e� !- 15th, the City Engineer has recommended approval subject to the rc,,,,mmendations of the Watershed District, and the Watershed District has approved the project. The proposal will open up additional water surface in this upper watershed wetland, while still maintaining the capability to maintain the 100 year rainfall event. Staff views this as a positive improvement to this -*etland area. Zoning File #1324 October 5, 19 Page 2 of 2 Staff recommends that a Conservation & Flowage Easement be required over the boundaries of the entire wetland. Staff Recomendation - Staff would recommend approval of the proposed wetland excavation project per the Planning Commission recommendation, per the attached resolution. ZONING FILE NO. #1324 CITY OF ORONO NOTICi OF PLAN-N-N G COMMISSION ACTION P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 5`z23 473-7357 Date of Notice: 9-21-88 TO: Mr. 6 Mrs. Gregory COPIR.� TO C.-ifford Reep 1099 TL arack Drive /o Mianetonka Portable Dredging Long Lake, MN 55356 500 west Lake Straet Excelsior, MN 55331 TYPE OF APPLICATION: Conditional Use Permit ---------------------------- -------------------------------- DATF. OF MEETING: 9-19-88 VOTE: 5 For 0 Against Planning Comission recommends the following: Appioval subject to conditions noted below NOTES ANO SPECIAL CONDITIONi: 1. All grading work must take place within the property boundaries. 2. A' ' _rading work shall conform to t',N 7• -..' i ng plan proposed, and per any amendments that may 'be required watershed DiFtrict. 3. Proper erosion controls shall be mair.d_ained during all phases of the project until the area is re -vegetated. 4. Such re -vegetation, i.e. seeding or sodding and erosion control, shall be commenced immediately after the grading work is co- eted. 51 Per the current fee schedule, the applicants' co.. jr must obtain the normal $50.00 gradinv permiL pr.,: to commence. c of the excavation work. Applicant's next scheduled meetir is confizmed as: City Council Monday, Octobt :988: meeting starts at 7:00p.m. It you desire certified zopies of the •vial Planni , •:ommission minutes, they are available from the Cit. ,order after review and approval by the Planning Commiss" in. No Dlanning Commission member Junnson ruestioned the pictures Mr. Keiser submitted. Mr. Keiser explained that the pictures showed neighboring properties with d•_cks extending more toward the lake than Mr. Papas's deck. Planning Commission member Bellows reiterated Hanson's explanatio.: of documents required with the submittal of a variance ar lication. M.L. Keiser asked if Mr. Papas would then have to sp...id $600.00 to have a survey done? Bellows replied that it would not be necessary to do another survey if there was an existing survey. Kelley stated that the certified propert o;aners list was also not included with the application. Assistant Planning a.-ld Zoni..g Administrator Gaffron stated that the list must have beeii misplAced b. the owner. City personnel could verify that envelopes and labels with neighboring property address3s had been received with the application. Gaffron verified that the notices were legally sent, but the list indicating those persons was missing. Johnson G'sited that he could understand the confusion on applicant'.- be^ if regarding the variances. dowever, had Mr. Papas applied fo.L a permit to build the deck he would have been informed of all the requirements. It was moved by Planning Commission member Cohen, seconded by Planning Commission member Hanscn, to table application #1323 to allow the applicant time to submit all required information. Motion, Aye -5, Nays=J, Motion passed. #1324 MR. AND MRS. WILLIAM GREGORY 1099 TAML ACK DRIVE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT PUBLIC HEARING 7:35 P.M. - 7:40 P.M. The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing were noted. The applicants -ere present for this matter, but were rep csented by M- tt :d Peep from Minnetonka Portable Dredging. Assistant Planning s Zoning Administrator Gaffron explained that the applicants were seeking a coneitional use permit for excavation within an existing wetland a a to create a pond. The designated wetland is approximately .6 of an acr 4. Excavation would occur at the northwesterly en.-i of the wetland and will create a pond approximately 120' in Length and about 60' in wid.th. The spoils would be placed a enq the east anu south side of, the existing driveway. The City Eng.ineer has reviewed this nppiic 'on and recci.imended approval The Minnehaha Creek 'paters istrict has also recommended °. ioval of this project subjec, to erosion control and rest, ion of the disturbed areas. Chairman Kei ley stated tha�_ at one time there was concern about soil recnoval from the prcferty. He inquirei whether there 23 was still concern it that regard. Gaffron replied that at this time the cuts and the fills were equal. Mr. Reep confirmed this. Planning Commission member Johnson inquired as to water existing around the 84 contour. Gaffron responded that it was presently wetland and the proposal is to make one end of the pc -id deeper and leave the other end at its present elevation. Mr. Reep explained that the wetland area is approximately 15" deep, which in not sufficient for wildlife habitation. Presently there are no cattails, only weeds. The purpose of this project is to add approximately 2' to the depth of the pond to maintain a level of water in that area. There should not be any changf- in the storage capacity. There were no comments from the public regarding this matter and the public hearing way closed. It was moved by Planning Commission member Johnson, seconded by Planning Commission member Hanson, to recommend approval of application #1324, for a conditional use permit for excavation in a wetland area, per staff recommendations. Motion, Ayes=5, Nays=O, Motion passed. #1325 LAKEVIEW GOLF OF ORONO, INC. 405 NORTH ARM DRIVE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT PUBLIC HEARING 7:40 P.M. - 7.42 P.M. The Affidavit of Publication an,, Certificate of Mailing were noted. The applicant was present for this matter. Assistant Planning and Zoning Administrator Gaffron apprised the Planning Commission of the applicant's intent to excavate 3 small ponds and create a new tee box within the golf course property. These proposed projects are all to take place within an area adjacent to County Road 19, at the west side of the golf course. The ponds would enhance not only the aesthetic quality of the course, but also the challenge ci the game itself. They should also aid in eliminating on -going maintenance problems in wet areas. The tee box is being relocated because of complaints from neighboring properties. The new location will place the tee box apFroximat,�ly 100' further away from the neighboring property. There will be some fill removed and the spoils will be deposited in a location where there will be no adverse effect on drainage. 71he City 3ngineer and the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District has reviewed and approved the proposal There were no comments from the public regarding this matter and tha public hearing was closed. Mr. Wenkstern explained that he was hopi - to eliminate some water problems by installing the ponds and re :sting the tee box should redirect the golf balls away fiom the road and passing cars. 24 To: Planning Commission Chairman Kelley Orono Planning Commission Members City Administrator Bernhardson From: Michael P. Gaffron, Asst Planning & Zoning Administrator Date: September 15, 1988 Subject: #1324 Mr. & Mrs. William Gregory, 1099 Tamarack Drive - Conditional Use Permit - Public Hearing Zoning District - RR-lB, 2-acre, unsewered Application - Excavate an existing wetland area to create a zond. List of Exhibits Exhibit A - Application Exhibit B - Letter of Transmittal Exhibit C - Plat Map Exhibit D - Property Owners List Exhibit E - Letter From Minnehaha Creek Watershed District Exhibit F - Letter From City Engineer Glenn Cook Exhibit G - Plat of Neighborhood Exhibit H - Topographic Survey of Property Exhibit I - USGS Topographic Survey Exhibit J Proposed Plan Showing Cut & Fill Areas Exhibit K - Calculations of Cuts, Fills, Storage Volume & Drainage Volume Exhibit L - Air Photo Showing Designated Wetland Discussion - The applicants' property contains a designated wetland approximately 0.6 acre in area. They propose to excavate the northwesterly end of that wetland to create a pond approximately 120' in length and about 60' in width, or about. 1/4 of the wetland area The grading plan indicates that spoils will be placed alor,, the east and south sides of the existing driveway. The applicants' designer has calculated the cut anu' rill volumes, each at about 1,000 cubic yards, hence it is unlikely that any significant amounts of fill will enter or leave the site. He has also calculated the before and after storage volumes and is noting that while storage will decrease by 9%, the 100 year rainfall eve.it will still be retained. Zoning File #132A September 15, 1988 Page 2 of 2 Note that only the northwesterly half of the wetland will be disrupted, and all work will occur within the property boundaries. The Watershed District has noted that they will issue a permit subject to erosion control being placed around the outlet culvert (which crosses the driveway) and upon submittal of a proposal for restoration of the disturbed areas. The Watershed District also has noted that they will issue a permit only upon approval of the City of Orono permit. Note additionally that the outlet culvert discharges to a relatively flat field to the west, so that if that wetland ever did discharge, there would be excellent filtration through this grassed area before any of the overflow became channelized downstream. City Engineer Glenn Cook has recommended approval of the project subject to the recommendations of the Watershed District. Staff Recommendation - Staff would concur with the City Engineer, and recommend approval subject to the following conditions: 1. All grading work must take place within the property boundaries. 2. All gr..ding work shall conform to the grading plan proposed, and per any amendments that may be required by the Watershed District. 3. Proper erosion controls shall be maintained during all phases of the project until the area is re -vegetated. 4. Such re -vegetation, i.e. seeding or sodding and erosion control, shall be commenced immediately after the grading work is completed. 5. Per the current fee schedule, the applicants' contractor must obtain the normal $50.00 grading permit prior to commencemen' of the excavation work. / ^ / CITY OF ORONO - GENERAL US8 LICATION!"" ', l / ------------------------------------------------ PROPERTY LOCATION�A �,,00 Site Address 10nn% -rAMt'ti•r ���� 6k- Z)/elyE Property Identification Number (P.I.D. ) 16P //6 23 31 �j�(jg'i" ��! _•!ct! ;G,n Please check one - Property abstract or ✓ tor-.ens?_.•'Y y0 (for Conditional Use Applications only) 01• 0 wv•. jL i .1 LV V • L'�: Please attach legal description to application if not includeif=L.1'F -.fWA IVU on required survey. `11 A G'.t 'rCJ1 ------------------------------------------------------- l�---•------------ APPLICANT Phone ( home ) `r13- g0/ 7 Name WA • A'N6 fmg,s . 4go?5:Y Phone (work) Address le9q Tff�lf Cie IDK(de City LONy L+oW_ zip 6�5-356 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ')WNER (if different than applicant) Phone (home) -- Name Phone Address City zip Date Property Acquired ! (month/year) I (do) (do not) also own the adjacent parcels of land. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- FEES - CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS - Renewal Fee - 1/2 Current Fee After -the -Fact Fee - Double Current Application Fee $100.00 a) Residential accessory Use '150.00 b) Institutional (church, school, etc.) $150.00 c) Duplex Credit/Bldg $250.00 d) Commercial/Industrial Use V $200.00 f) Land Alteration Grading and filling - designated wetland or floodplain y Grading and filling - 101 cu. yd. or more Grading, 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 $100,.00 Appeals Other - see fee schedule PRRSENT USE OF PROPERTY �� Q Present Zoning District �. /J Present Use of Property S/NGIE FAMIL - Residential Other (specify) ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST Describe request in detail: E 41647E AA/ 4-7XISRIV4 LOG✓��4ro APn0b,-= A-bb 17_A9Vi4L WA7VRc7B Vr4 T2✓ �4T€� BLS ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- RFQUIRED SUB14ITTALS 1. Completed Application Form. 2. Certified Property Owners List of owners within 350' (you can obtai: this list from Hennepin County Department of Finance A-603 Governmen- Center 348-3271) 3. Stamped, legal sized envelopes (#10) pre -addressed to each of the name: on the.above -list with no return address. 4. Certificate of survey. 5. Topographic survey (existing and proposed contours) if land alterations involve changes in elevation (grades). 6. Construction plan, if applicable (see staff for requirements). 7. Plat Map. 8. As an addendum to this application, please attach a separate list of any other persons you wish notified of this application. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- The applicant and Property Owner must sign '-his application. Please remember that your application is not complete if the above information has not been included. Certification by Zoning Department that Land Use Applicj,-ion is complete. Zoning Officials Signature Date APPLICANT'S SIGNATURE The applicant hereby agrees to provide all information, required C-_ requested by the Toning Administrator, agrees to pay fees and/or unusual expenses incurred in review of this application, a _ tifies t`iat the information supplied is true and correct to the of his/her knowledge. 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, consultants, agents, commission members, and Council members for purposes of investigation and verification of this request. Owner's -signature- ---------------------------------Date-------------------- applicant muFc have all submittals into the City offices 25 days before the Planninq 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 atteiid in your place and -idvise the Hui ldinq s Zoning Office of this change prior to the meeti no. WORK MINNETONKA PORTABI,f�DR(p ING, SEA WALLS BILL (MICK) NICM*t • t RIP RAPPING 500 West Lake " !r PILE DRIVING EXCELSIOR, MINNEA 55 474-9454 - 472-3457 8/9'/� - _ t�l.r'Y_oF 040A10 l✓/vt .2�1� oyc - C� �a ���we FiL41mcf i N L o r�✓L•4 �JA -- - t�FA I< j-FA,4pJi ; �IG�Gs r_ /S 4 P .erultq- ComperlLv-4 ncm/ FateNi. i Lam. /u OWNF+�'S AleE DA/ KA60 176el 4d?- S/4nJEi`- t-ff E Gee- l r I E A �-kr••1 EDWNFe.�S SST 116 S ee—opA/ X iP//// Lice (/E q- 70 ?/`/£ G/�/� i'//Ari^/ /r ,jiee 7M5 0',4"X7-Add #f45 dFt4 r-A//tXr/—, -7`o y/1e v*ICWt-' tom 14C 116,.1 Cn/ 4vl ,vrT /6 `�. 1;10vo v Y" IVi4-116' ANY e�vjr e,77 -/Sl to oir74 C 7` /1"I,E I+. 1j S93 (4) 3000 F=.A `1%, 17 PLAT DATE 0C/08/88 BATCH 003 38 26-118-23 31 0002 PROP ADOR OWNER NAME DU CAN N DAYTON TAXPAYER RON GROSS NAME/ADOR C/O DUNCAN N DAYTON 4122 IDS CENTER MPLS MN 55402 38 26-118-23 31 0006 PROP ADOR 01099 TAMARACK) OR OWK7CR NAME STANLEY B GREGORY TAXPAYER STANLEY B GREGORY HAME/ADDR 1099 TAMARACK DR LONG LAKE MH 55356 38 26-118-23 31 0012 PROP ADOR 01100 KNOLL MANOR RD OWNER NAME P i A INVESTMENTS TAXPAYER P I A INVESTMENTS NAME/ADOR 2095 WEBBER HILLS RD WAYZATA MN 55391 38 26-118-23 42 0005 PROM A: R OWNER NAME CONLEY BROOKS TAXPAYER CONLEY BRDOKS NAME/ADOR 510 BAKER BLDG MFLS MN 55402 HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORMATION SYSTEM PROPERTY OWNERS LIST il.rAi LA6cLS ETCH o03 0001O 38 26-118-2' 31 0004 01300 SIXTH AVE N JOHN R SHEEHAN ETAL JOHN F- SHEEHAN 1300-6TH AVE NO LONG LAKE MH 55356 38 26-118-23 31 0009 C1065 TAMARACK OR S i L PETERSON STEPHEN C PETERSON 1065 TAMARACK DR LONG LAKE MN 55356 38 26-118-23 31 0013 01000 KNOLL MANOR RD DON RODERICK i SON CONSTR INC DON RODERICK t SON CONSTR 1910 IROQUOIS DR LCAG LAKE MN 55356 TOTAL BATCH 003 00010 REPORT NO. PI435401 PAGE 4 38 26-118-23 31 0007 01111 TAMARACK DR JOHN D ALBERS JOHN ALBERS 1111 TAMARACK DR LONG LAKE MN 55356 38 26-118-23 31 0010 01330 SIXTH AVE N W E BOHACH i 5 BOHACH WALLACE E t SUSAN BOHA--H 1330 COUNTY RD 6 LONG LAKE MH 55356 38 26-116-23 42 0004 CONLEY BROOKS CONLEY BROOKS 510 BAKER BLDG MPLS MN 55402 I CERTIFY THAT THE FACTS REPRESENTED ARE AN ACCURATE AND T14UE REPRESENTATION OF INFORMATION AS IT APPEARS THIS DATE ON THE RECORDS OF THE HENNEPIN COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF PROPERTY TAXATION. jp THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE AND BELIEF. / r. _ /7 DATN" / / fBY Wit ENANA �. � iz�y 'WED MINNEHAHA CREEK WATERSHED QISTRI P.O. Box 387, Wayzata, Minnesota 55391 BUM Of MAIIA RL Camille U Andre, Res • Albert r_ Lehman • John E Thom ,James R Spensley • Richard R Miller • Robert U Erickson • C Woodrow Love Permit Application Nc. 88-114 August 22, 1988 Owner: William Gregory 1099 Tamarack Drive Long Lake, MN 55356 Location: City of Orono, Sec. 26CA Project: Regrade an existing on -site pond to provide additional water depth. D:jr Mr. Gregory: At the regularly scheduled August 18, 1988 meeting of the Board of Managers, the subject permit applicatiot was reviewed. Action was taken allowing the District staff to issue your permit only after receipt and staff approval of the following: 1. Revised plan showing erosion control placed around the c,,tlet culvert for the ponding area and a method of restoration. ' Review and approval by the City of Orono. Please be advised that the project is not authorized until the above has been submitted to me and you have been notified of permit issuance from the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District. Should you have any questions regarding this matter, please contact me at 473-4224. very truly yours, EUGENt A. HICKOK AND ASSOCIATES Engineers for the District Kevin C. Larson, Engineer cc: Board L. Smith C ., -Beep L,ei ty of Oronu Bonestroo r� Rosene Anderlik & Associates Engineers & Architects September 9, 1988 City of Orono Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 Attn: !like Gaffron Re: 139-1324 William Gregory 1099 Tamarack Drive Dear Mike: Cato G. Bonettroo, P.E. 01th A. Gordon, P.E. Thomat W Robert W Rosen. ►E Richard W Potter, RE. Michael C. Jovph C. Anderkk, PE. Donald C. Burgardt, ►E. James R. N Bradford A. Lemberg. P.E. Jerry A. Bowdon, ►E. Kenneth ► Richard E. Turner. ►E. Mark A. Hanson, ►E. Kelth A. Fla James C. Olson. PE. Ted K. Field. ►E. Mark R. Ro Glenn R. Cook, PE. Michael T Rautmann, ►E. Robert C. R Thomas E. Noyet. ►E. Robert R. Pfefferte, ►.E. Thomas E. Robert G. ichunicht. PE Dawd O. Loskota, PE. Howard A. Marvin L Sorvata, PE PE ��SSussan M. E�{txrlm ' 1. PE J 2 Mr 71O0� AIA I We have reviewed the plan for a pond at 1099 Tamarack Drive. The excavated materials are propoped to be deposited within the existing vetlard areas. The storage area will not be significantly affected (-9I) by the proposal. The drainage area is relatively small (11.9A) so the area can still retain a 10G year rainfall event. We would recommend approval of the plan subject to the Watershed recommendations. If you have any questions, please contact this office. Yours vera truly, :.,ONESTROO, ROSENE ANDERLIK 6 ASSOCIATES, INC. Glenn R. Cook GRC:ci 01 233S West Highway 36 • St. Paul, Minnesota 55113 • 612-636-4600 tic • LONG LAKE, M/NNESO M 4n*Am Man monumonf •;n9s Shown Opp psounrod I /ssr.d4 --- -- --- --''fir --- -- — — — con lee O/',SP ien la, /Vei/!. �eunioryy e/ Mf 4i e! JM'!4 a/ Sorfion if 7iTdwn�/r:p /II wnritip IN Arbr/h, Ren9e is Jwi/ e/ !/Ara/. Ner//r, 116, Ren90 Js M+r/ WVA oN ' ,UT Parallel // and 4:d.t %o/ .noot�.vd f e/ iv9A/ on9/or JoulA Of Ne, /ii iewrdorf "' Exeip/.on ........ oP�l'I N of JW 14 W Sichen 2s`Ts.tirr/�ip Q)1 J) its I r/b, Abn90 21 Wor/ e! r.. Ne7oI ... 1 I1'E ' rso.J7 " J o h �- z o. /J K W Jlv A ,.. Ar o llj#o IA, NA R M. e%sl . IA end r/J /on' I ei N / onq/e., /e 10 of JW r-'J of A" /// MirIA. Al,n,o eI J-7wJ 17 A'J7JAtI � �� 86 Mwer. Ce. r /•ei*hty •+wnvmenh - Lrc�phon .. TTBIL— 2 I Z - r. I i ' , 2 w I " 3 " e MI I Ar/ /.nw olJN'Atl elJrc%rn Ps, 3rwe.{y /A/Alrr 14 Ajn'r lJ' Hi.{[ X I,.4 Iw,y J. F I +.may /.ni eiNCJAN Mr t. 1 P e/ i • of ,110./br in $ow.4 -, 1 low • i, s/' N - +v R/e/r w �rc+npib/ 1 I in � elfrcr � Rkyitror o/ T,//or- 1 AMw, Co \ / I rev esv- •.0.0, Con/W'/d,r of i1ir46 /Md+Ibw" A P&W �I i .e -iwr An+� air Cn.r../J. .^s./ AII. 41 �•� I 4- s. lw s ..,•,1% A)O. /3 , w. r / ff-' - � ;� flan ' •� � a. tt \ 1 � .[.., { .foss /...{ \ V . 1 « 6402, 1 P \, .a.., it Iaa•• Q ,4k i COW • — M _ `"�'-•erg. '�' � -'• �-'= i 1s:�'tiC .•[,. '+�-.%'►- -y���11P:1��� �v � 'o- •JL_ W, sf aw m c. ce me .�� _� i - •`• � t / fi `� / ir,- G ref ; �+,__ � _ =. , '•p �i t --r I l� • , .o t n, - — ) - - Trauq - w Y` • L 0 1 ^� — � j 25 -' 1 .r�!! I Moosey Lq FN D fk ^, -' /� �+ t •r � � ` � � O x t irk �, 44 96 104� ><. �v.• �. '� j x�. !•.i}h;ft;�a��F�'"'��-r ' =•9".�'• - t�%,�`-7 �i�.�%J r `� o•• p �`ey g * J l • - �T' .11 i IBMJ9B1) e j �' ,� ` f�/ •' C' s 1- •( '00 N oRIMERM —.� •- . �..." _ r- RED G = ��'�%•. 1 `. •�' CT .�fr !� ! . �. ` . 1 NOR 115T/�-+.�'�� - •• •�• t•. • �' ~ • • �' v tvi; a 2; - r' '» - I •i\ ,� a� • cu to clue ~ - _ •• ��� './• �• •71 a »�i y r IL a CD 4 o o I A \ a N / p 000 FlfAIC16 !Oi! iilawc.r�cT �7 !C ? � 1 r 11A FAMARA C •M / �/E FOAM 6A9 �iNy f AAI w"" 600 WEST � STREET r o�T �►/M. Gib EXCELSIOR., MINNETONKA PORTABLE RED, ING DOCK WORK BILL ( IICK) NICCU 7. �. op SEA WALLS 500 West Lake Streit RIP RAPPING PILE DRIVING EXCELSIOR, MINNESOTA' 55331 M ` 474-9454 - 472 1457 �- - ( 6 Tt A Or- r - vOL M — --1-- ---; - -8 i�1�o3 i� �� ,d►5 I Pl�l 1 is 04 -07 _-- 031 ,�+ ► s1 2 5 , _ 4S I-1 i_ c►► 1,0�; Ii . oq I I i . i - I b4 1 , es L_ z 043, , y I I ,_Si .o 3 t I- I� ,o t6' MINNETONKA PORTABLE DREDGING DOCK WORK BILL (MICK) NICCUM SEA WALLS 500 West Lake Street RIP RAPPING PILE DRIVING EXCELSIOR, MINNESOTA 55331 474-9454 - 472-3457 16 oa =1 b , o _Lei v_ I _ FA-I�i_ �4C.�r m�e�I►� FT. AR a•A� �ij', �7oPi46�: c. —r - e7 — I PtMi d HI (#1 r7_+F TOP-t - -+T_t. I 1 I I i CArr���E � �kkG�,vn/� A 1QQ �:,. lA.v��b��I _ 7.7►8 /�F�- T _.� t OAS MINNEHAHA CREEK WATERSHED DISTRICT P.O. Box 31r7 Vftpitts, Minnesota 55391 (FOR OFFICE USE ONLY) Permit Application No. DiAe Received -- Nonce Sent _ Agenda Date _ APPLICATION FOR PERMIT (See Reverse Side For Instructions) !Do Not Write Above This Line) 1. Owner: WM - Y 2. Owner' --- 1Pf"+a �oei Repre-AJl ONKA PORTABLE DR_jdQ, T/1111IAA14(k- iXiVe- 5M-wESTTAKE IAddreee► Icon - ----- (Ada..s.) 474-9494"" LOA) k MAI 1 »i IZ411 — — Te eononp — of Iowna Si9nawe1 3. Permit Requested For: (Check All Appropriate Boxes) B. Stormwater Management Plan ❑ Commercial ❑ Industrial ❑ institutional or Highway ❑ Residential C. ❑ Floodplain Alteration ❑ PE. ❑ R.L.S. ❑ L.A. �' Other D. ❑ Wetland Alteration E. ❑ Dredging F. ] Shoreline/Bank Improvement Stream/Lake Crossing a�o�/D 4. E�rgect Loe�ion: I f-Er .'IJ I �W �rG I ;�7 (- I %/r- I 03 (C"I 1CdwMti Iw 9eci ism) IR»awal Iaen"I 5. Describe the Project: 1` .,!F �'A r1 r:E r-.Yi ; ? iU 'r-K�o V/ LF_ 44)2d T/on//'lf— �t/�? t Fig= � �=f'Tf1. ,E"STirl/? ""�� ic.'�; � 4',:L;��I Rr�S CUT f).✓L F/�%. 6 If This Project Requires Municipal Approval or Review Attach Documention of Municipal Review. 7. Body of Water, Stream or Wetland Affected by Runoff From This Site GC'r117 ✓A`' � _—___.__ G 5co __ Distance From Protect 8 Schedule For Construction, Implementation of Temporary Erosion Controls. St, Ustantial Compdtwn and Restora RM Please call (612) 473-4224 if ass sta, ice in completing this form is required In submitting this form, the applicant scknowted0es all requirements fc r permit approval as determiner] by the published Rules dated February 20.. 19M. j " t' 1 di. r ,� V-01 d• rr i iy • t - : lam!•02 wr a ! r r `►: l'V A. L7T.S �i •.. _ ♦_ j�� L; �y 7•� y, iti' I•. '� .r ` lt�+4rFj�;. l >.. � • "'i.• t`Q Ry Y r f a ,-�-S.�ir is Y _ •!Y w *' +1•s �i R . !�` yt •._ 'r�`t, �5 - 'i1AGE J OF MF Y��_�S f: 1 r{ j ,', ,•:y���j k; 1�\� c�►1�r[ �'r� i •�. 2r. ft C_��,� s f \ der �� ' �. �� 1 ��i 4 { `. f.; - .• j ;era .�-. �J _ _.--_.s''%�►•. r. ��.}�. ��• � _ '�2"��� �� �'►� .•\• � `J t. n• 1'' 4� �� A • aD2�ti \ +'.� .h, �. �- -r%a* .j y '4r 3 i�. XV \I•i��._Y�!�.ia _ �f�Y ' �. '�.'•.' _ 17'��'�:i�� ^����: `~ ut�' '};•.: �'7 -i r 'j �:. ', w: •'w �`R�l •^ `�\fin � i�' ��}- '�` '/ t}� ' hrrr ;'.�5. • ~ �f Y- • :i'�'.. _ 1- O `blt� ; ii'�` • ,-`' - - T ' Lk i v+: ''•` s. t .4.: s ism,,: +1 ` 1 .tr j�',��`w _ . �.r:,�%_ _: 1. t : •re m r ir:�.., y7� '1 ] •C-•. r`f�2f ►`: w,r •`fa.��,{" a # •j !R" + • •�.�;}fi. : �: , e' �r. l"_ � 'yi�y s<yy�yr-'• ►'..-�fy J w � R��L tKt ��Z � �i.'.� •��•�h� J, ��� *t �- �� '`� `N .. .�-1� • ieJ.. • - ` .A�.Y 2� T /. _ ,�_ X _� j., ►. C"., tywi "t ,`.i�i'i..\�� �1`•�` �'� •/t - ��' t '�`` �t •�� �'i.��^ M'a - ci. . _ :':ice - '��✓ � - '�� I _, \ � \\�'� �` .� v to +r Lt • • �� ?! • � � • ' /T � ' A t_�. • ii .t.� '* \. �'•"�� �,5"- _ •�.'• Yq.. sir .'� �. � • . •.•- •' `�. ,.,,, 4 �. .� T :-Y• . �.n.{ �: �l«a„} :•r L, f.; 4�.�h: ; S• -.? i ��- •. JS�� j � �s3 Cr .� : �;ti"''►. M ,�' �- -�� r �, � f 2 ` "' sry• {� , � �- Un Aoft ♦ ,' J 1 .1�� �, ? , S,�►?i; . :�.a. _l. � s .Try'l�K.�'•"' fa : �' _ i'��;� ':R.�, �. ,t, .'.- r fre • at .r� 7 ,,—�•`+�} j� • •«• a axilr,i'y .r•� 'Iry �, ►•r. '�' '..�` "�` r � � yD�''�� �� '.t '-_., -►sue=� !:�.• '- �;=- - �,' _ �- _ - �'.�• �.. 'Q •� � - .,,r- b;�"'•'.i•�'>."'�i� ����;`k '�• jai" 't�•- � r - ::1 •w� � .•, • � � � " - =+I {2 HOC. .= . �-: - _= •-t,� - _____�r.. •: � ,. � 'Ki'V^ J• tl� ,.,�'`.,�¢��'fi t .,.• ! „i- #�� � ; 't'.t�. �� i f••- -. �, �K' .�'�i� q. 1 � ,ram �' •`. ;.• ,,,��.r--�/,, �� �t~ •'7 J'f � `i /� -. •.� � '� ' 1;�'`"��.��1-.Ar�_� f,��.�J►�y �♦ i �` �t �s . �J !. (rt: �[,;':. i•. k .^f ,ma,�yy,, r 1 •�� M-• �`' q ,M�'���yY� ► 1 1 n• �. Cie. ' Y �I' -'� ••�'�'Y- vw--"q�'�S _1 ` •i,�! ,� r;' 'lt.-�`;_• tt. •yc 1\ll� `f, 1 •�i .•.7r « -�••. •e`. f`: 1 *.Q�r;.M; �" .`�: r^ c.�j•f � -.t• ,"�_ r s'.s.r- 1• d ���f. T f f `• ��!�\� t ;�V� �' �� �[i%j��• ~ f'.+► ' '•T7°'�1�~��r �'��i�� ! `.i'•� '. ,t �-� .j �� ��i,�1 3 �+l f �'!•l i' - .v �J 3I�MY, i'i:•i .�� s�,►• .�' fit. :`- j� �::j. fi 441 . t- .y�� � ,�� � , t;:]eL;"'�r�=:-J,-T ..�''•h. ' ` L,�•t' J C' iyi N•*����� :J •K *� • •i ` • ►� , L�a•S•.r.. r> , t. < - 1' 1� rye. ,'�. y- r •` _ �..J \, t *Ica: �..} •r�7}.q-%,'t ; .rs .a ,�. , ,Y ,� - T�tt- • ---- -_ .�f^"� c � i`rIi- L/fw ��-i��"��- —_ _ i c7 \, .\•\ , �� }♦ .��'� a � .t ��yt �, 1ST J�r h�, v `.-_- ', ;'+ =. ���Li t ..�� ...' - �.t�.��' .�.' � �1�,' �• •�� i ��j�i J �. i"lass T'r' i�. •.s- 'o :.r�vi�% ��� •/ sir. .� �''!'Y'���' �i� •f. � � �.. �� f , �1 • \ i`,) •I F, ll�� ' I��.�• N �„r: '�-4 •► ..� - s rs. •y�iY _ -'` � 'si �. r `�il.,it * t_ �+ 0 ♦ �' r r �. . 1�1r '� ' d - rf� • r • ��rr - M •'••f -` h) a i .,� -, +...la- 1J '.. - .'pja •� T• -1r _h' .:t�' f 4' �i'C+',�/fo�''� -OF��•-(�_L`�" �► eo � u �'-• � �a :.- _�:. >. fir• �. , { f �`��.•�aX ,r `~• ._a t� _cif -�'t��, '• �+�: �y ] � '�`)" - _ �. ~ t'' ►k�+.. - • 1 T u„�f / •'.Lr r ~ Q � r ` faf7 ti� ,. ,_,i�•r � : .S r � . i� •�' 4 �' � cr��.1. • �` � ti ,� � � _ + � � � �' ( � '_ r •sty �� �..x f�.l�x^"r •rA �"''yi-�.5 . ; r� � ��1''���Y Minutes of Regular Meeting August 18, 1988 Page 10 meeting. The applicant now requests an amendment to this permit allowing construction of a rock jetty adjacent to the channel entrance and extending into the lake to inhibit the movement of sediment along the shoreline and into the entrance channel. The Engineer recommends the denial of the permit for the same reasons as discussed in relation to application 88-106. Following discussion, it was moved by Thomas, seconded by Andre, to table the application to permit the gathering of additional information from the DNR concerning potential alternative solutions to the movement of sediment problem. Upon vote, the motion carried. 88-110 - Rockv3rn Boat Yards -- Dredging to remove 40 cubic yards of material from boat ramp area, West Arm Bay, Lake Minnetonka, Sec. H DA, City of Spring Park. Mr. Cliff Reep was present on behalf of the applicant. The Engineer explained that the dredging project is to remove material that has for!iied a ridge lakeward of a boat ramp thereby limiting acces.,. the proposed b�-ttom depth for the project is 924.1. Mr. Peep explained that the problem has been cau ed by boat propellers, and the low lake level. The dredging to the level of 924.1 is nece,,sary in order to permit the safe removal at the proper angle of boats onto the trailers. Following discussion, it was moved by Erickson, seconded by Andre, to approve the application based upon the unique boat removal conditions presented in the application. Manager Love did not participate in the discussion, and abstained from voting. Upon vote, ti,2 motion carried. 88-114 - Williarn Gregory -- Regrade an existin site pond to provide additional water depth, Sec. 26CA Cit f Orono. Mr. Cliff Reep was present on behalf of the applican The Engineer explained that the entire project site lies on Mr. Gregory's property. The excavation will create an additional water depth in the ponding area and will not alter local drainage patterns or have a significant impact upon storage available at the site. Following discussion, it was moved by Thomas, seconded by Andre, to approve the application upon the receipt of the following: (1) a revised plan showing erosion control placed around the outlet culvert for the ponding area and a method of restoration; and (2) revitw and approval by the City of Orono. Upon vote, the motion carried. A RESOL. £JN GRANTING A VARIANCE AND COMPITIONAL USE PERMIT PER MUNICIPAL 70NTNG CODE SECTION 16.03, SUBDIVISIONS 19 & 20 AND SECTION 10.55, SUBDIVISI 8 FILE #1324 WHEREAS, Mr. & Mrs. William Gregory (hereinafter "the applicants") are the owners of the property located at 1099 Tamarack Drive within the City of Orono (hereinafter "City") and legally described as follows: Lot 2, Block 1, Underhill Farms, Hennepin County, Minnesota (hereinafter "property"); and WHEREAS, the applicants have made application to the City of Orono to permit the excavation of a Fond within a designated wetland area, requiring variances and conditional use permit per Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.55, Subdivision 8 and Section 10.03, Subdivisions 19 & 20. NOW, THEREPORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono, Minnesota: FINDINGS 1. This application was reviewed as Zoning File #1324. 2. The property is located in the RR-lB Single Family Rural Residential Zoninq District. 3. The property is approximately 3.5 acres in total area. 4. The Orono Planning Commission reviewed this application on September 19, 1988 and recommended approval of the proposed variance and conditional use permit based on the following findings: A) The wetland area to be excavated is a designated wetland of 0.6 acres per City Wetland Maps. B) Approximately 25% of the wetland area is intended +.o be excavated to create a pond approximately 120' in lenqth and 60' in width. The spoils will be placed along the east and south sides of the driveway which exists to the north and west boundaries of the wetland. Page 1 of 4 C) The watershed area draining to this existing wetland iS relatively small, comprising 11.9 acres. The proposed pond after construction will still retain the 100 year rainfall event. Storage area will not be significantly affected by the proposal. D) This project has been reviewed and approved by the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District, who found that the excavation will not alter local drainage patterns or have a significant impact upon storage available at the site. E) Calculations hav- been submitted by the applicants' engineer indicating that th amount of spoils to be excavated is equivalent to the amount of the proposed fill, hence no extraneous fill will enter or Leave the site. 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 variance would not adversely affect traffic conditions, light, air nor pose a fire hazard or other danger to neighboring properties; would not merely serve as a convenience to the applicants, but is necessary to alleviate a demon- strable hardship or difficulty; is necessary to preserve a substantial property right of the applicants; 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 proposed pond excavation will ict be detrimental to the health, safety or general welfare of the public, would not adversely affect light, air nor pose a fire hazard or other danger to neighboring properties, nor will it depreciate surrounding property values and that the proposed level of use of the property will be in keeping with the intent and objectives of the Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan of the City. CONCLUSIONS, ORMU4 AND CONDITIONS Based upon one or more of the above findings, the Orono City Council hereby grants variances and a conditional use permit per Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.55, Subdivision 8, and Section 10.03, Subdivisions 19 6 20 to allow excavation of a designated wetland area to create a pond area within that wetland, subject to the following conditions: Page 2 of 4 1. Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the property owners shall grant to the City a Conservation & Flowage Easement over the boundaries of the wetland area. The legal description for such easement shall he provided by applicants and approved by City staff. 2. All grading work mus take place within the property boundaries. 3. All grading work shall conform to the grading plan proposed, and ter any amendments that may be required by the Watershed District. 4. Property erosion control shall be maintained during all phases of the property until the area is revegetated. 5. Such revegetation, i.e. seeding or sodding and erosion control, shall La commenced immediately after the grading work is completed. 6. Per the current fee schedule, the applicants' contractor must obtain the normal $50.00 grading permit prior to commencement of the excavation work. 7. 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 (October 10, 1989). 8. Violation -f or non-compliance with any of the terms and condi- tions of this volution shall constitute a violation of the zoning code, shall auL.,matically terminate any authority granted herein, and shall be punishable as a misdemeanor. 9. The undersigned applicants have read, understood and hereby agree to the terms of this resolution and on behalf of themselves, their heirs, successors and assigns, hereby agree to the recording of this resolution in the chain of title of the property. 1988. Adopted by the Orono City Council on this 10th day of October, ATTESTS Dorothy M. Hallin, City Clerk James R. Grabek, Mayor roperty Owner(s) Page 3 of 4 u TO: Mayor Grabek Orono Council Members City Administrator Bernhardson FROM: Michael P. Gaffron, Planning & Zoning Administrator DATE: October 6, 1988 SUBJECT: #1325 Lakeview Golf of 1rono Inc., 405 North Arm Drive - Conditional Use Permit - Resolution Zoning District - RF-1B, ? acre, unsewered Application - Conditional use permit for excavation of Fond areas and tee box construction within golf course. LIST OF EXHIBITS: Exhibi_ A - Planning Commission Action Notice Dated 9/21/88 Exhibit B - Memo & Exhibits of 9/16/88 Exhibit C - Proposed Resolution DISCUSSION - Please review the memo and exhibits of September 16, 1938. This is a request for a conditional use permit to construct some ponds and relocate a tee box on the Lakeview Golf Course property, generally along the east side of County Road 19. None of the work is in a designated wetland area. City Engineer Glenn Cook has review the *:roject and has recommended approval. The Minnehaha Creek Watershed District likewise has approved this project. The applicant completed some grading work in 1985, for whirr. Application #961 was filed after -the -fact in 1985. Those projects were review by staff and Planning Commission in 1985 and Planning Commission recommended approval. However, the application was never finalized pending Watershed District review. Later discussions with the Watershed Distict determined they felt the project was mostly maintenance grading and had little effect on the watershed. The Citv Engineer in 1985 reviewed those projects and recommender' approval. Those projects are documented on Exhibit G of the September 16th memo and locations of those projects are shown on Exhibit D of that memo. Staff would recommend that the current approval resolution reflect after -the -fact approval for those previous projects, so that File 0961 can be closed. The Planning Commission reviewed this application on September 19, 1988 and recommended a formal after -the -fact approval for the grading and drainage projects completed in 1985, and recommenced approval of the construction of ponds and tee box along the County Road 19 area of the golf course, subject to the following conditions: 1. Spoi is shall be transported to the site designated as "Spoils Dispose', Site" on the proposed Elan, suc'i spoils will be immediately graded and seeded upon comple+ion of the Fond excavation work. Proper erosion controls, including silt fence, shall remain in place until the spoils site is re -vegetated. Zoning File ##1325 October S, 1988 Page 2 of 2 2. Per the cur:-ent fee schedule for grading projects involving more than 1,000 cubic yards of fill or excavation, applicant's contractor or alplicant shall obtain a $100.00 land altere i.on permit prior. to ;ommencement of the work. STAFF 'RECONKMOAT10N - Staff recommends approval of the requested conditional use permit for excavation of pond areas and tee box constructio,i within th,. golf course property along County Road 19, and further recommends after -the -fact approval for past projects rev'.ewed under Application ##961 in 1985, subject to conditions noted in the attached proposed resolution for approval. Due to the small size of the proposed po.ids and because they are not within designated wetland areas, staff is recommending that those new ponds not be subject to a Flow2ge & Conservation Easement at this time. A RESOLUTION G! , PING A CONDITIONAL US:, MMIT PER MUNICIPAL ZO' rG CODE SECTION 10.03, SUBDIVI. .INS 19 a 20, AND GRANTING AN AFTER-•T' fE-FACT VARIANCE AND CONDITIONAL US& PERMIT PER SECTION 10.05, SUBDI fISION 8 .'AND SECTION 10.03, SUBDI1,1'SIONS 19 i 20 FILE #1325 i 961 WHEREAS, Lakeview Golf of Orono Inc. (hereinaf :er "the applicant") is the owner of fhe propert., located at 405 North . rm Drive within the City of Orono (hereinafter "ity") and 'Legally des(ribed as follows: Exhibt A attached (hereinafter the property"); and WHEREAS, the applicant has ma i application to the City of Orono for a conditional use permit to allow rading work in excess of '00 cubic yards for the purpose of creating thre : smal.1 ponds and a new t e box on the golf course property and has applies for an after -the -fact valiance and conditional use permit for two ditch ma itenance projects and cree:ion of a small pond which occurred in 1985. Minnesota: NON, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOIfED by the City Council cf Orono, FINDII ;S 1. This application was reviewed 2. The property is located Residential Zoning District. 3. The property is approximately Zoning File 01325 and File 1961. he RR-1B Single Fami y Rural acres in area. ;. The Orono Planning Commiss on reviewed Application #961 on September 16, 1985 and recommender approval of the proposed variance for maintenance of a ditch area 1 rated within a designated wetland, and recommender approval for the i _quo, .ed after -the -fact co 1ditional use permit for maintenance gradin of _he above mentioned Citch and one other ditch, as well as creat.'..�-. r a 0.08 acre pond in fairway area, based on the tollowinq fincii, Is: A) The City Engineer recomme +ded approva 1 of the profit .-to. Page 1 c 5 B) The two ditch projects were merely maintenance of existing ditchs. C) The proposed 0.08 acre pond was not in a designated wetland area. D) The proposed projects had no significant impa;-t on the quality or quantity of run-off to Lake Minnetonka. 5. Discussions with the Minnehaha Creek Watershed Distict subsequently indicated that the Watershed District had no concerns or problems with the work that had been completed in 1985. 6. The Orono Planning Commission reviewed Application #k1325 on September 19, 1988 and recommended approval of the proposed conditional use permit for grading projects, including a new tee box and three small pond areas, based upon the following findings: A) None of the proposed excavation/fill sites are within a designated wetland area. B) The pones are proposed for aesthetic purposes and to create a more interesting and challenginq golf outing, while potentially eliminating on -going maintenance problems in wet areas. C) Construction of the new tee box is partially the result of a request by the neighboring property owner to move the tee further away from his residence where he is occasionally bothered ',y golfer:, near his hcuse. The new tee box location will also potentially reduce the number of golf balls interfering with traffic on County Road 19. D ) The ponds will be 4' in depth with 3:1 side slopes and the bank areas left as grassed area. E) The project will leave a net spoil amount of approximately 1,600 cubic yards. The spoil disposal site is located on higher ground south of the northern most proposed pond and will yield a fill area approximately 50' wide, 275' long and about 2V deep, which will blend in with the existing hill contours of that area. F) The proposed projects will have no significant impact on the quality or quanitity of runoff enterin.; Lake Minnetonka. A minor amount of additional upper watershed storage capacity will be created. Page 2 of 5 7. 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 variance would not adversely affect traffic conditions, light, air nor pose a fire hazard or other danger to neighboring properties; would not merely serve as a convenience to the applicant, but is necessary to alleviate a demon- strable hardship or difficulty; is necessary to preserve a substantial property right of the applicant; and woull be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan of the City. 8. The City Council finds that granting a conditional use permit to allow the proposed and previously completed grading projects 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 objectives of the Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan of the City. CONCLUSIONS, ORDER AND CONDITIONS Based upon one or more of the above findings, the Orono City Council hereby grarts a conditional use permit per Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.03, Sub vision 19 & 20 and grants an after -the -fact variance and conditional use permit per Section 10.03, Subdivision 19 & 20 and Section 10.55, Subdivision 8 to allow grading projects including three ponds and a tee hox currently being requested, and after -the -fact approval for two ditch maintenance projects, one of which was within a designated wetland area, and creation of a small pond in a fairway area, subject to the following conditions: 1. For the currently proposed projects, spoils shall be transported to tli,^ site designated as "Spoils Disposal Site" on the proposed plan, such spoils will be immediately graded and seeded upon completion of the pond excavation work. Proper erosion controls, including silt fence, shall remain in place until the spoils site is re -vegetated. 2. Per the current fee schedule for grading projects involving more than 1,000 cubic yards of fill or excavation, applicant's contractor or applicant shall obtain a $100.00 land alteration permit prior to commencement of the work. 3. Authorities granted by this resolution with the applicant, but are permissive only application for a building permit within Council approval, or the special conditions expire on that date (October 10, 1989). run with the property not and must be exercised by one year of the date of of this resolution will Page 3 of 5 4. 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 granted herein, and shall be punishable as a misdemeanor. 5. The undersigned applicant has read, understood and hereby agrees to the terms of this resolution and on behalf of himself, his heirs, successors and assigns, he,Leby agrees to the recording of this resolution in the chain of title of the property. Adopted by the Orono City Council on this loth day of October, 1988. ATTEST: Dorothy M. Hallin, City Clerk James R. Grabek, Mayor Property Owner(s) Page 4 of 5 ZONING FILE NO. #1325 CITY OF ORONO NOTICE OF PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 473-7357 Date of Notice: 9-21-88 --------------------------------------------------------------------------- TO: Lakeview Golf, Inc. COPIES TO: c/o Grant Wenkstern 710 North Shore Drive West Mound, MN 55364 TYPE OF APPLICATION: Conditional Use Permit -------------------------------------------------------------- DATE OF MEETING: 9-19-88 VOTE: 5 For 0 Against Planning Commission recommends the following: Approval subject to conditions noted below NOTES AND SPECIAL CONDITIONS: Planning Commission recommends approval of the construction of ponds and tee box and recommends formal after -the -fact approval for the minor grading and drainage projects completed in 1985, subject to the following conditions: 1. Spoils shall be transpor_ed to the site designated as spoils disposal site on the proposed plan, such spoils will be immediately graded and seeded upon completion of the pond excavation work. Proper erosion controls, including silt fence, shall remain in place until the spoils site is re-vegetatr *�,., 2. Per the current fee sche6,.' or grading projects involving more than 1,000 cubic yards of fill excavation, applicant's contractor or applicant shall obtain a $100.00 land alteration permit prior to commencement of the work. Applicant's next scheduled meeting is confirmed as: City Council Monday, October 10, 1988; meeting starts at 7:00p.m. If you desire certified copies of the official Planning Commission minutes, they are available from the City Recorder after review and approval by the Planning Commission. was still concern in that regard. Gaffron replied that at this time the cuts and the fills were equal. Mr. Reep confirmed this. Planning Commission member Johnson inquired as to water existing around the 84 contour. Gaffron responded that it was presently wetland and the proposal is to make one end of the pond deeper and leave the other end at its present elevation. Mr. Reep explained that the wetland area is approximately 15" deep, which in not sufficient for wildlife habitation. Presently there are no cattails, only weeds. The purpose of this project is to add approximately 2' to the depth of the pond to maintain a level of water in that area. There should not be any change in the storage capacity. There were no comments from the public regarding this matter and the public hearing was closed. It was moved by Planning Commission member Johnson, seconded by Planning Commission member Hanson, to recommend approval of application #1324, for a conditional use permit for excavation in a wetland area, per staff recommendations. Motion, Ayes=5, Nays=O, Motion passed. #1325 LAKEVIEW GOLF OF ORONO, INC. 405 NORTH ARM DRIVE CONDITIONAL USE PERMI'^ PUBLIC HEARING 7:40 Y.M. - 7:42 P.M. The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing were noted. The applicant was present for this matter. Assistant Planning and Zoning Administrator Gaffron apprised the Planning Commission of the applicant's intent to excavate 3 small ponds and create a new tee box within the golf course property. These proposed projects are all to take place within an area adjacent to County Road 19, at the west side of the golf course. The ponds would enhance not only the aesthetic quality of the course, but also the challenge of the game itself. They should also aid in eliminating on -going maintenance problems in wet areas. The tee box is beinq relocated because of complaints from neighboring properties. The new location will place the tee box approximately 100' further away from the neighboring property. There will be some fill removed and the spoils will be deposited in a location where there will be no adverse effect on drainage. The City Engineer and the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District has reviewed and approved the proposal. There were no comment `rom the public regarding this matter and the public hearing was 3ed. Mr. Wenkstern explained that he was hoping to eliminate some water problems by installing the ponds and relocating the tee box should redirect the golf balls away from the road and passing cars. 24 It was moved by Chairman Kelley, seconded by Planning Commission member Cohen, to recommend approval of application #1325 for a conditional use permit for excavating pond areas and a tee box. Planning Commission member Bellows inquired as to whether it would be beneficial to re;.ocate the green to avoid road traffic. Planning Commission member Cohen interjected that the present location of the green should not be a prob'_em once the tee box is relocated. Kelley added that it would be very costly to relocate a green. Motion, Ayes=5, Nays=O, Motion passed. #1329 THOMAS MCNELLIS 355 WOODHILL ROAD VARIANCE PUBLIC HEARING 7:52 P.M. -8:12 P.M. The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing were noted. The applicants were present for this matter. Assistant Planning and Zoning Administrator Gaffron explained that applicants were seeking- variances to a front yard setaback and 26' wetland setback. The Lot was originally created from the Woodhill Ridge subdivision anc accesses through Woodhill Road. Originally the lot was platted with full knowledge of the existing wetland and drainage easement. There is a 50' front setback and 30' side setback and a 26' wetland setback. 'he applicants may not have been aware of the 26' wetland setback. Kelley inquired as to when the subdivision was completed. Gaffron replied 1986/1987. Gaffron showed the Planning Commission a topographical view of the! area and stated that the property contains a steep slope going down to the wetland area. The space left for the building envelope is approximately 65' in depth and 200'-250' in length. The proposed setbacks for the house would be 37' and 28' where 50' is required. The deck, retaining wall and a corner of the house would all encroach into the wetland area. The applicants are also proposing to place fill east of and at both ends of the retaining wail, which is within the boundaries of the Drainage and Conservation and Flowage Easements. Staff's Initial reaction to this was that a linear concept house would be more appropriate for this particular lot. The applicants are proposing an "L" shaped house. Gaffron questioned whether there was a hardship that would justify granting all of the setback variances. Planning Commission member Johnson inquired as to the length and width of the house, from front to back, top to bottom. Gaffron responded that the proposed length south to north is about 120' with the east -west dimension at the garage area about 90'. Mr. McNellis stated that the variances would differ 25 To: Planning Commission Chairman Kelley Orono Planning Commission Members City Administrator Bernhardson From: Michael P. Gaffron, Asst Planning & Zoning Administrator Date: September 16, 1988 Subject: #1325 Lakeview Golf of Orono, Inc., 405 North Arm Drive - Conditional Use Permit - Public Hearing Zoning District - RR-lB, 2-acre, unsewered Application - Conditional Use Permit for excavation of pond areas and tee box construction within golf course. List of Exhibits Exhibit A - Application Exhibit B - Plat Map Exhibit C - Property Owners List Exhibit D - Survey of Entire Property From Application #961 Exhibit - Topographic Survey Showing Currently Proposed Land Alteration Exhibit F - Letter From City Engineer Glenn Cook Dated 9-9-88 Exhibit G - Documentation From Application #961, Prior Excavation Work Completed in 1985 Exhibit H - Minnehaha Creek Watershed District Minutes Pertinent Facts - 1. The aprli^ant is proposing to construct 3 small ponds within the golf course property, and construct a new tee box, all within an area adjacent to County Road 19, at the west side of the golf course. The Fonds are proposed for aesthetic purposes and to creace a more interest�.ng and challenging golf outing, while potentially e.Liminating on -going maintenance problems in wet areas. 2. None of the proposed excavation/fill sites is within a designated werland. Zoning File #1325 September 16, 1988 Page 2 of 4 3. Per City Engineer Glenn Cook's comments, the spoils will be place on the golf course to flatten slopes southeast of larger pond. Also, the ponds have a fairly small drainage area and would enhance run-off storage in the area, however, Glenn feels there may be a question whether the ponds will have enough inflow to maintain a water surface. This is only a problem for aesthetics of the golf course. The City Engineer has recommended approval of the proDect. 4. One of the reasons for construction of the new tee box is to move it away from the neighboring property owner to the south, who has complained to the golf course on occasion regarding "unruly golfers". This new location will move the main tee area approximately 100' further away from the neighbor them the current tee. 5. A review of our files indicates that a previous application for grading on the golf course in 1985 had been recommended for approval by the Planning Commission on September 16, 1985, but never was finalized pending Watershed District review. Staff would note that later discussions with the Watershed District determined that they felt the earlier projects were mostly maintenance grading and had little effect on the Watershed. The City Engineer, in 1985, reviewed those projects and recommended approval. Staff would recommend that if the current land alteration project is approved, the resolution reflect after -the -fact approval of the projects approved in 1985. 6. The typical pond design as proposes; will be 4' deep with 3:1 side slopes and the bank areas left as grassed area. 7. Staff has estimated the amounts of cut and fill as follows: Small Pond 200 cubic yards cut Medium Pond 800 cubic yards cut Larger Pond 1,000 cubic yards cut Proposed Tee 400 cubic yards fill This leaves a net spoil amount of about 1,600 cubic yards, which would leave a spoil disposal site about 50' wide and 275' long, about 2�' deep, which should blend in nicely in the proposed spoils site. Zoning File #1325 September 16, 1988 Page 3 of 3 8. Note that the proposed spoils area is planned to be protected by a silt fence, which would remain in place until the site is re - vegetated. Discussion - You may find some old fill in the area of the proposed tee box. That work was commenced and halted in 1985 or 1986 pending a comprehensive land alteration proposal. During the earlier projects which resulted in application #961 in 1985, applicant was unaware that grading work such as this required a conditional use permit. The current proposed ponds have not been constructed and work is not intended to commence until the appropriate permits are obtained. Applicant has received approval from the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District for the proposed work, per the attached minutes of their August 18th meeting. Staff Recomendation - Staff recommends approval of the construction of ponds and tee box on the Lakeview Golf Course, and recommends formal after -the -fact approval for minor grading and drainage projects completed in 1985, subject to the following conditions: 1. Spoils shall be transported to the site designated as spoils disposal site on the proposed plan, such spoils will be immediately graded and seeded upon completion of the pond excavation work. Proper erosion controls, including silt fence, shall remain in place until the spoils site is re -vegetated. 2. Per the current fee schedule for grading projects involving more than 1,000 cubic yards of fill or excavation, applicant's contractor or applicant shall obtain a $100.00 land alteration permit prior to commencement of the work. CITY OF ORONO - GENERAL ,Z ZY PROPERTY LOCATION - „ Site Address Property Identification Number (P.I.D. //,7- Please check one - Property abstract or �_ torrens? (for Conditional Use Applications only) Please attach legal description to application if not included--- - on required survey. --------------------------o---------------------------------==-------------- APPLICANT G' ��Q, e,,,e; L�hone ( home ) Name Weiylel r /ref• Phone (work) Address �/d S,L o E l/�'�f City c. ids Zip L r -------------- ----------------------------------------------- ---- -_- - OWNER (if different than applicant) Phone (home) - Name Phone Address City I Zip Date Property Acquired (month/year) I (do) (do not) also own the adjacent parcels of land. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- FEES - CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS - Renewal Fee - 1/2 Current Fee After -the -Fact Fee - Double Current Application Fee $100.00 a) Residential accessory Use $150.00 b) Institutional (church, school, etc.) $150.00 c) Duplex Credit/Bldg $250.00 d) Commercial/Industrial Use $200.00 f) Land Alteration - �_ Grading and filling - designatod_Netland'or floodplain Grading and filling - 101 ca: yd. -ear more Grading, seawall, retaining walls within 75' of lakeshore PRD/PID - see fee schedule OTHER APPLICATIONS $150.00 Commercial Site Plan Review (+ ccnsultant fees) $250.00 Vacation $150.00 Basement Vacation $ 50.00 Basement Vacation with Subdivision $250.00 Rezoning $100%00 Appeals Other - see fee schedule PRESENT USE OF PROPERTY Present Zoning District Present Use of Property _(�u�-s-2Z Residential Other (specify) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST 2 Describe request in detail: 4lew/ee , Q,�0_'� REQUIRED SUBMITTALS 1. Completed Application Form. 2. Certified Property Owners List of owners within 350' (you can obtai this list from Hennepin County Department of Finance A-603 Governmen Center 348-3271) 3. Stamped, legal sized envelopes (#10) pre -addressed to each of the name on the above list with no return address. 4. Certificate of survey. 5. Topographic survey (existing and proposed co ntoursl if land alterations involve changes in elevation (grades). 6. Construction plan, if applicable (see staff for requirements). 7. Plat Map. 8. As an addendum to this application, please attach a separate list of any other persons you wish notified of this application. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- 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 "PLICANT'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 supplie is true and correct to the best of his/her knowledge. Applicant's signature Date OWNERS S I GNATURB The owner hereby acknowledges and agrees to this application and further authorized reasonable entry onto the property by City staff, consultants, agents, commission members, and Council members R urpgses of investigation and ve ficat. ielal�_ io f 1 es _ . r- .�: Owner's signature .Data 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 advise the Building i Zoning Office of this change prior to the meeting. `�: 7^-- �-•r�: •_�^ °�i,• .�..� n�.. .:,.j: !! �.. ;'14 �+"• r: Lam. 1 x'. _�A- '� � a, � . •-.. .� '�!9e � � rl-r •'•� -, to +i �J� � � � �• 1.ORTN rw � 1 OJ f '. �• .�• wi ,r • fl ., h 1 f W .oe ! •'•A& • 1 '•. Iasott •11 ' • ' ..rnl. ,y�yi [aft .'• '• iM111 ,pp 1 _ � • f. i-- •,! I I . 1 -- 00op M M f; - — x t -' •w Q� �,O OF • ' 1 hVr .. -- 110 �}y •' ��F �'�J f c� E 1, ��• I •�•��'' r\I w \ E �-�• —_ _•1` I~ 1 �-•r 'N •a�� No �j� 1toNK►� r,+ AN., + BRANCH ;1 ` HILI MR► 1" 117 .. 1 -+4:. - : I' � � i � - � I w tt .c•1 b eY �1� •M�` `----� U.___ a 1 IT-- • Tj � . 4 ... I L-4 RMR DATE 9V93/90 HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORMATiDN SYSTEM REPORT NO. PI435401 PROPERTY OWNERS LIST PAGE 17 BATCH 9K 36 41-117-24 14 N04 36 01-117-24 14 0005 36 01-117-24 1C. 0006 PRO' ADORN 003YS CO RO NO 19 00425 CO RD NO 19 04670 NORTH ARM DR OM"Ill MMME JAMES A EMLERS A WIFE J C A 0 L MIT_ CORRICK J J A R M LUCKING TAXPAYER JAMES A EMLERS JOHN C MC CORMICK JEROME J LUCKING NAME/AMR 525 COUNTY RD 19 425 CO RD NO 19 4870 NORTH ARM DR MO)1O Mi 55364 MOUND MN 55364 MOUND MN 55364 34 01-117-24 41 0001 36 01-117-24 41 0002 36 01-117-24 41 0003 PROP ADOR 04" 1 NORTH ARM OR 00505 CO RD NO 19 00036 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED OWNER IM/E 6REGORY P NADEAU DOROTHY E NELSON HARRY R SMITH ETAL TAXPAYER GREGOiRY P NADEAU SCOTT A PATRICIA HE.OM: MARK A CHRISTINE SASS NW/AMR 4801 NORTH ARM OR 505 CO RD 19 22690 MURRAY ST MINNETRISTA MN 55364 MINNETRIZZIA MH 55364 SHOREWO0O MH SS331 PROP ADON 36 01-117-24 41 0009 00605 36 01-117-24 41 0011 36 01-117-24 41 0012 CO RD NO 19 00635 CO RD NO 19 00665 CO RD NO !9 t� OWNER HAMS J.)NH P BERGTOLD ET AL STEVEN R POST:,UMUS 6 M HEJNA A K M HEJNA TAXPAYER JOHN P BERISTOLD STEVEN A DEBBIE POSTHUl7S GARY M i KATHLEEN M NEJNA NAME/AI= 60S CO RD NO 19 635 COUNTY RD 19 665 CO RD NO 19 MOUND MH S5364 MOUND MH 55364 MOUND MN 55364 36 01-117-24 44 0001 36 01-117-24 44 0002 36 01-117-24 44 0004 PROP ADM 00705 CO RD NO 19 00805 CO RD NO 19 00695 CO RD NO 19 OWNER MiAME EDMUND P MEEHAN ET AL OU1HE C MANSK ETAL JAMES S STUOEE TAXPAYER EOMUMD A JUOITH KEHAN DUANE C MANSK JAMES S STUOEE NAMIE'ADOR 71)5 co RO 19 805 COUNTY RD 19 695 CO RD 19 MINNETTRISTA MN 55364 MOUND MN 55364 MOUND MN 55364 38 06-117-23 23 T'005 38 06-117-21 23 0006 38 06-117-23 23 0007 `may PROP A" 06"9 NAME 04640 NORTH ARM DR W D A L IVERSON 04680 NORTH ARM OR W K 04700 NORTH ARM OR N- L A H A PETERSON R A 0 MAIJALA i TAXPAYER DANIEL A LINDA IVERSON KEE L A HARRIET A PETERSON RAYMOND 6 A DOROTHY MAIJALA �= NAME 'ADM 4440 Mk1RIN ARM 00 4650 N ARM DRIVL W 4700 NORTH ARM DR •- MOUm MN 55364 MOUND MN 55364 MOUND MN 55364 30 06 117-Y3 23 0008 38 06-117-23 23 0009 38 06-117-23 23 0010 PROP AM 04740 NORTH ARM DR W 04760 NORTH ARM OR W .ANNER MAIN 'AIPATER ADMIM OF VETERANS AFFAIRS J A J HEOBERG ADMIN Or VETERANS AFFAIRS Mr.1RMAN f A LINDA OESTREICH JOHN A A JANICE HEDBERG NORMAN F A LINDA OESTREICH NAft,'AODS 4760 NORTH ARM OR 4740 NORTH ARM DR W 4760 NORTH ARM OR MOOD MN $6344 00" MN 55364 MOUND MN 55364 PUN DATE 00✓O3/00 HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORMATION SYSTEM REPORT NO. PI435401 OWNERS LIST PAGE 18 MPROPERTY 30 06-117-23 23 0011 t8 06-117-23 23 Onl2 38 06-117-23 24 0006 PROP ADDR 00350 NORTN SHORE DR W 04780 NORTH ARM OR W 04590 NORTH ARM Do V OMEO NAK A V i S L Bb.XSTVEOT GORATH'; FORCIER D C OLSON A V S OL' T "PAYIN Alf IN V SLAXSTVEOT DORATHY F FORCIER DONALD C OLSON NAME/AODR SSO W NORTH SNORE 00 S43 HEATHER LA BSE APT 4Z90 NORTH ARM OR W 107" MH 55364 LONG LAKE MN 55356 MOUND MH SS364 36 06-117-21 24 0008 39 06-117-23 24 0011 38 06-117-23 31 00U1 POW ADM 00370 NORTH ARM LA 00366 NORTh '9M LA 00420 NORTH ARM OR 0WWF9 HAMS R A H SMITH H A M LARSON _ L M OUNSMORE A B J OUNSMO?E TAAPATER ROSCOE S t HARRIET C SMITH MARK J i M LARSON LAVERNE M A BARBARA OUNSMORE 1 +A11[/ADD0 370 NORTH ARM LANE 366 NORTH ARM LA 420 NORTH ARM DRIVE MOUND MN S5364 MOUND MN 55364 MOUND MN 55364 11 38 06-117-23 31 0003 38 06-117-23 31 0004 38 06-117-23 31 0005 vw.')p ADOR 40440 NORTH ARM DR :*0p t1AME R A P STER14AU T J A S J WAtoIER P t L HANSSEN 4-PAVER RFHE t PATRICIA STERNAU THCIMAS J t SUSAN J WA44ER PAUL t LEANN HANSSEN ikME.ADD* "0 NORTH ARM 00 1920 SMITH CIR 300 MEAOOWVIEW OR MOUND MN 55364 WAYZATA MN 55391 MOUND MN 55364 38 06-117-23 31 00" 38 06 117-23 31 0007 38 06-117-23 3! OOOo WtlP ADM 00560 NORTH ARM OR 00500 NORTH ARM DR L",* a NAME DAVID E CATLIN T A S MAZEF MICHAEL L LUNENSCHLOSS l ZAAPATER EZZAT MOUSSA THOMAS 0 t SUSAN S MAZER MICHAEL L LUNENSCHLJiS k+AME/AODR 7102 TEAKWOOD LIP 560 NORTH ARM OR SJO N ARM DR MAPLE GROVE MH SS369 MOUND MN 55364 MOUtn MN 55364 38 06-117-23 3: 0002 38 06-117-23 33 0001 38 06-117-23 33 0002 POW ADDR 004OS NORTH ARM THT 00660 NORTH SHORE DR W 04760 WEST BRANCH RD LAAHIN IIAME IAJXEVIEW GOLF OF MTKA INC J t M BARUTH R A D WAAG I&APATAR LAKEVIEW GOLF OF MTKA INC JAMFS E t MARGIE T BARUTH ROBERT S WAAG NAI!/AOte 466 RED OAK LANE 660 NORTH SHORE OR W 4760 W BRANCH PO MOUND MN SS364 HOUND MN SS364 j MOUND MN 55364 30 06-117-23 33 cool 58 06-117-23 33 0004 38 06-117-23 33 0005 PROP ADM 00710 NORTH SWIPE DR W 04700 WEST BRANCH RD '.A" 9 NAME 6 t v WENR:STER► JACK 0 A JUCT A KRAHL LAKEVIEW GOLF MTKA 'AxrATEO GRANT R NENM " t N JACK 0 KRAHL LAKEVIEW GOLF OF MTKA INC tiUl;'ADOR 710 N SHORE 0.4 W 4700 W BRANCH RD 855 RED OAK LANE MOUND MN SS364 MONO MN 55364 MONO MN FS364 RUN DATE OA/03/8A HE.NEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORMATION SYSTEM REPORT NO. PI435401 PROPERTY OWNERS LIST PAGE 19 CATCH 805 38 06-117-23 33 0006 PROP ADOR O'�680 HEST BRANCH RD &W* R NAME JOHN E BAKER TAi.PA1ER JOHN E BAKER !LAME/ADDR 4660 W BRANCH W MOUND MN 55364 38 06-117-23 34 0001 FRCP ADDR 04580 WEST BRANCH RD 'PWtER NAME DUNN^ E HAGER T►�PANER DONNA E HAGER NAME/ADDR 4580 W BRANCH ROAD MOUND MH 55364 38 06-117-23 42 0005 iT,OP ADDR 00580 NORTH ARM DR i;.44ER NAME 8 V JOHNSON A P R JOHNSON !AAPAYER BRYCE V A PAULA R JOHNSON NAME/ADOR 580 NORTH ARM DR MOUND MN 55364 38 06-117-23 43 0002 f PROP ADOR 00680 NORTH ARM DR (AJiER NAME RICHARD D HOLLANDER TAXPAYER RICHARD 0 HOLLANDER NAME/ADDR 3548 C3LFAX AVE S MPLS M14 55408 38 06.117-23 43 0005 HuOP ADOR 00710 NORTH ARM OR C44ER NAME JEORY 0 OLSON ETAL TAXPAYER JERRY t) OLSON NAKE/AOOR 710 NO ARM DR MOUND MN 55364 38 06-117-23 33 0007 LAKEVIEW GOLF OF MTKA INC LAKEVIEW GOLF OF MTKA INC 855 RED OAK LANE MOUND MN 55364 38 06-:17-23 34 0002 LAKEVIEW GOLF OF MINNETONCA LAKEVIEW GOLF OF MINNETONKA 855 RED OAK LA MOUND MN 55364 38 06-117-23 42 0006 VICTORIA ESTATES HOMEOWNERS VICTORIA ESTATES HOMEOWNERS C/O THOMAS MAZER 560 NORTH ARM OR mr)U ND MN 55364 38 06-117-23 43 0003 00700 NORTH ARM OR GREGORY M HARTY GREGORY M HARTY 700 NORTH ARM OR MOUND MN 55364 38 06-117-23 43 0006 00740 NORTH ARM DR E G E HAGBERG ETAL E G HAGBERG 740 NO ARM OR MOUND MN 55364 38 06-117-23 33 OOOR 04640 WEST BRANCH kO M L A J F SCHULTE MICHAEL L SCHULTE 4640 W BRANCH RD MOUND MN 55364 38 06-117-23 34 0003 04520 NEST BRANCH RD R H MADDEN ETAL R H MADDEN 4520 WEST BRANCH RD MOUND MN 55364 38 06-117-23 4i u001 00650 NORTH ARM DR J BRAUCHLE A E SCHOONOVER JEFFREY R BRAUCHLE AN) ELISA M SCHOONOVER 650 NORTH ARM GR MOUf1D MN 55364 0 38 06-117-23 43 0004 00720 NORTH ARM DR MIKE R REJSA MIKE R REJSA '! 720 NORTH ARM DR MOUND MN 55364 v 38 06-117-23 43 0007 00750 NORTH ARM OR WILLIAM L SCHMITT W L SCHMITT 750 N ARM OR MOUND fMN 55364, .58 06-117-23 43 0008 38 06-117-23 43 0009 38 06-117-23 43 0010 FPOP ADDR 00760 NORTH ARM OR 00770 NORTH ARM OR 00780 NORTH ARM DR U4iLR NAME WALFRT) LARSON ETAL LARRY W JOEL ET AL 0 A CARLSON A M C RAY TAXPAYER WILLIA:i SCHMITT LARRY W JOEL D A CARLSON A M C RAi t.AME/ADDR 750 N04TH ARM OR 770 NORTH ARM RD 780 NO ARM DR MOUND „fN 55364 MOUND MN 55364 MOUND MN 55364 s ,-'lN DATE 08/03/88 BATCh 00S M 06-117-23 43 0012 PROP ADDR 00645 NORTH ARM OR UWiER HAMS KEITH E WEEKS TAXPAYER KEITH E WEEKS t4AME/AD0R 645 NORTH ARM DR MOU1O MN 55364 M 07-117-23 11 0008 PROP ADDR 00835 WINDJAMMER LA OW{ER NAME MARGARET A BLAZEK TAXPAYER MARGARET A BLAZEK !LAME/ADDR 835 WINDJAMMER LANE M01►O AN 55364 38 07-117-23 12 0005 PROP ADDR 00830 FOREST ARMS LA G;gdcR NAME T K SAMUEL A A SAMUEL TAxPAYER T K A A SAMUEL NAME/ADDR 830 FOREST ARMS LANE MOUND MN 55364 38 07-117-23 12 0008 PROP ADDR C'.#NER NAME FISCHER OEVELOPMEN7 CO — I TAXPAYER FISCHER DEVELOPMENT CO — I NAME/ADOR 6801 W 150TH ST APPIF VALLEY MN 55124 38 07-117-23 12 0011 PROP ADOR 01,71ER NAME J A M BURCH TAXPAYER JOHN C A MARION BURCH NAME/ADDR 625 FORREST ARMS LA MOUND MN 55364 38 07-117-23 12 0030 PROP ADDR 00875 WINDJAMMER LA OWNER NAME MARY J VOGEL TAXPAYER MARY J VOGEL NAME/AGOR 875 WINDJAMMER LANE MOUND MN 55364 HENNEPIN COMITY PROPERTY INF —ATION SYSTEM PROPERTY OWNERS L1:.i" 38 06-117-23 44 0001 00790 NORTH ARM DR V H LARSON A S A LARSON VINCENT H LARSON 790 NORTH ARM OR S MOUND MN 55364 38 '-117-23 12 0001 LAK�VIEW GOLF OF MTKA INC LAKEVIEW GOLF OF MTKA INC 855 RED OAK LANE MOUND MH 55364 38 07-117-23 12 000E 00860 FOREST ARMS LA ROYETTA I MARCOTTE ROYETTA I MARCOTTE 860 FOREST ARMS LA MOUtO MN 55364 38 07-117-23 12 0009 T D WIRT A P A WIRT THOMAS D WIRT 8C5 FOREST ARMS LA MOUND MN 55364 38 07-117-23 12 0028 00865 WINDJAMMER LA GERALD R HELGREN A WIFE GERALD R HELGREN 865 WINDJAMMER LANE MOUND MN 55364 38 07-117-23 21 0014 S K GRAND A C I GRAND STEPHEN K GRAND 4505 WEST BRANCH ROAD MOUND MN 55364 REPORT NO. PI435401 PAGE 20 38 06-117-23 44 0016 OC800 NORTH ARM DR R M FRANZEL ET AL RICHARD M FRANZEL 800 NORTH ARM OR MOUND MN 55364 38 07-117-23 12 0004 R W BONNEMA A J P BONNEMA ROBERT W A JANIS R BONNEMA 800 FOREST ARMS LA MOUND MN 55364 38 07-117-23 12 0007 D J FARLEY A E C FARLEY 0 J FARLEY A E C FARLEY 890 FOREST ARMS LA ORONO MN 55364 38 07-117-23 12 0010 M A M MC ELLIGOTT MICHAEL A MARY MC ELLIGOTT 815 FOREST ARMS LA MOUND MN 55364 38 07-117-23 12 0029 00860 r.ORTH ARM OR R A J OAVISSON RONALD A JUDITH OAVISSON 860 N ARM OR MOUND MN 55364 38 07-117-23 21 0015 044SS WEST BRANCH RD F A F GNAUCK FELIX A FLORENCE GNAUCK 4455 WEST BRANCH RD MOUND MN 55364 07 C, i1; RUN DATE 06/03/SA HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORMATION SYSTEM REPORT NO. PI435401 PROPERTY OWNERS LIST PAGE 21 6ATCH 005 38 07-117-23 22 0014 -POP ADOR 04625 WEST BRANCH RD -a4ER NAME J A A J D RUCE TAXPAIER JOHN A A JOYCE D RUCE `GAME/ADDR 17950 FAIRHOMES LA WAYZATA MH 55391 38 07-117-23 22 0015 04665 WEST BRANCH RD T A C TURNER MARK BARTIKOSKI 4665 WEST BRANCH RD MOUND MN 55364 TOTAL BATCH 005 00074 •r �1 I I CERTIFY THAT THE FACTS REPRESENTED ARE AN ACCURATE AND TRUE REPRESENTATION OF INFORMATION AS IT APPEARS THIS DATE ON THE RECORDS i OF THE HENNEPIN COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF PROPERTY TAXATION. TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE AND BELIEF. DATE BY ��J�tJ�yl&f'(T(AA-) v E �. CL-EAN N�,�, NL4T OF SURVEY FOR t J'PAALL fe b / N L AKEVIEW GOLF OF M/NNE TONKA, INC. F A ► Lc-W * f /N THE SOUT.Y //7 OF SECTION 6-i/7- 3 tc.EAN 73 AND . ,� Yy o r TH£ NORTHEAST //4 OF SECT/ON-23 c�bt-T 4 .� �.�..'MJI ti 1 J/Y.•1 � � f g 04TE ' 7-9-)I i It CORDON q COFFIN SUR&CrOR AND PLANNER { {( LONG L4R£, Y/NN£SOTA yr Of 15 PP) +— L 00P v Y - N DO r 21 3, `{ ' c A E AM S IKAt-L i%VU b S M AAA040AAf e$&d' i tip +l I I -.,� 1 11vvL—J I I/"+ OF SEC. • 6 -117-23 HENNEPIN COUNTY) MINNESOTA FIX# n•1 My ry•.1 ISA v• tl.I.y' / ' fn.•� wwiw •1 Cleff ;s<�„w. ,.a•I ti fh•I/ Yam•.. •r. • I r� N�rw IF /MY•I.ry hw.•, SCALE -I- IMI R-M"Zt- DATE 7-6-" COFFIN a GRONBERG, INC. o IRON MARKER ENGINEERS, LAND SURVEyDRS AND pLANNERS EXISTING CONTOUR LONG LAKE, MMESOTA CX- 14 F Ono G Ronestroo, PE Bonestroo Robert W Rosene. PE Joseph C Andertrk. PE . PE Bradford A Lner Rosene ii' Richard E turner, PE MEMJames Anderiik & C Olson. PE Glenn R Cook. PE. Thomas E Noyes, PE. Associates Robert G Schumcnt. PE Marvin L Sorvala, PE Engineers & Architects September 9, 1988 City of Orono Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 Attn: Mike Gaffron Re: 139-1325 Lakeview Golf Course Dear Mike: Keith A Gordon. PE Thomas W Peterson. PE Charles A Erickson Rrzhard W Foster, PE gbae"—I�Tcj�E'I Leo M Pawelsky O dY �rFnl� Magnd, PEA Harlan M Olson J d lCW _ nntth P Anderson. PE. Susan M Ebenin 11 -- Rrttfi C Bachmwm. PE Mark A Serp f � 0. PE Mark R Rolls. P.E. M Rautma PE Ro �q(f elle � off R usse N A 'Ab�Anq,, P��I oskotT PE Howard A sanrb►A. Mpg We have made reviewed the Lakeview Golf Course Site grading. The proposal provides for excavation of three ponds and extension of a tee box. The spoils will be placed on the golf course to flatten slopes. The ponds have a limited drainage area and may not be maintained with normdl rainfall. This is not a serious problem except for the aesthetics of the site. We woul' recommend that the plan be approved. The OwnEr should set up a precon meeting with the City and Contractor prior to starting work. If you have any questions, please contact this office. Yours very truly, BONESTR00. ROSENE, ANDERLTK & ASSOCIATES, INC. Glenn R. Cook GRC:ci 01 233S West Highway 36 • St. Paul, Minnesota 55113 • 612 636'-4600 �r u Nn- (3F'— � GENERAL LAND USE APPLICATION CITY OF p 1 -------- PROPERTY LOCATION ---------------------------------------------------------- ' G Site Address1c7 lta,r y yoo4j�f ? 4 Property Identification Number (P.I.D. ) ��-//CO�.. Please check one - Is the property abstract cr (for Conditional Use Applications only) torrens? Please attach legal description to application if not included o. required survey. APPLICANT------------------------------------------------------------ Name l.5A.w �' J P"i /r'�� Phone `� � / ,��/ Mailing -Address- �Q -- O� OWNER----------------------01C ------------------ Name c< « I/i P(,!/ Phone ,� Y 7 Mailing Address 117 l/ v /- �/� I� M C wy Y Date Property Acquired �' 4 (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/Bldq .00 d) Commercial/Industrial Use w l /A) e- L" Q CES�N Ai1b'& T4fr- ?1AC-r- pa 'S S .00 f) Land Alteration (grading, filling) PRD/PID - see fee schedule Other Applications $250.00 Vacation $250.00 Rezoning .�._.__ ZeVG,rGA 1�f►f�a•.i l s �. aa,.... uther - see fee schedulr PRESENT USE OF PROPERTY Present Zoning District Present Use of Property Residential Other (specify) ///•C- -------------------------------------------------------------------------- DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST Describe request, in detail: �ee / ,lei r•• i / G..�v✓�ian _ r -------------------------------- ------------------------------------------ REQUIRED SUBMITTALS 1. Completed Application Form. 2. Certified Property Owners List of owners within 350' (you can obtain this list from Hennepin County Department of Finance A-603Government Center 348-3271) 3. Stamped, legal sized envelopes (t10) pre -addressed to each of the names on the above list with no return address. 4. Certificate of survey. 5. Cc,nstruc-tion pl;.ns, if appli:.351e. 6. 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. -------------------------------------------------------------------------- APPLICANT'S SIGNATURE The applicant hereby agrees to provide all information required or requwsted by the Zoning Administrator, agrees to pay all fees and/or unusual expenses incurred in review of this application, and certif ies that the information supplied is true and correct to the best o his/her know l dge. Applicant's signature / ✓s-- Date p� OWNERS SIGNATURE The owner hereby acknowledges and agrees to this application and further authorises reasonable entry onto the property by City staff, consultants, agents, commission members, and Court it mejn r�r., for purposes of investigation and verification of h s rque��PF Owner's signature l �,•.-.3' - Date O J Applicant gust have all submittals into the City offices 25 days before the ?I Ann. nq Comm ssion Meet 1ng. Planning Commission Meetings are held on the third 'a,r.cl.&y o: ,,.,ch month. 4INUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD SEPTEMBER 16, 1985. PAGE 8 7958 VOYAGEUR SERVICE CENTER INC. continued Kelley stated that he would approve of the mixed use, but would have a problem approving the variances. Senior Building Inspector Jacobs stated that he would like the City Engineer to review the traffic flow. The Commission briefly discussed the traffic flow and parking spaces. The Commission noted that because of the incomplete application it is difficult to approve at this time. It was moved by Rovegno, seconded by Sime, to table this matter upon submission of a complete application. Motion, Ayes 6, Nays 0. The Planning Commission gave the applicant come direction regarding their views of granting the mix use and setback variances for his consideration. '959 GEORGE E. JOHNSON 165 WORTH OLD CRYSTAL BAY ROAD 'ARIANCE 'UBLIC HEARING It was moved by McDonald, seconded by Sime, to table this matter in order for the ,p?licant to appear before the Commission to answer questions. Motion, Ayes 6, Nays 0. 960 a 4963 LAEEVIEN GOLF COURSE '09 NORTff-ARM DRIVE 'ARIANCE i CONDITIONAL USE PY.RMIT 'UBLIC HEARING 11:28 - 11:30 Grant Wenkstern was prL-sent for this matter. The certification of mailing and affidavit of publication was noted. The purpose of this public hearing was to consider the request 1) for a variance to construct a storage building in excess of 1C00 s. f . located 47 feet from a lot line 2 ) for a After -the -fact Conditional Us Permit to clean &. wider.. an existing ditch area, excavate i. _ow area to create a 410' x175' pond, and excavate a E,<,rtion of a designated wetland t� solve f a drainage problem. 7.oning Administrator Mahusth stated that Key Peterson, a neighbor, e.:110-ft! voice his app-oval of this propoual. There were no perbons pre::ent objecting Ar-1 the puLlir hearing was closed. Per Commission's request, Mr. Wunkatern agreod to locates thv proposed building 50 feet trom the lot lins rather than the propoNctl 47 feet. i 5 MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD SEPTEMBER It,, 1965. PAGE 9 1960 i #961 LAKEVIEW GOLF COURSE continued It was moved by McDonald, seconded by Sim", to recommsend approval to construct a storage b-ailding in excess of 1000 s.f. 50 feet from the l.Jt lines. lotion, Ayes 6, Hays 0. t Regarding the After -the -fact Conditional vse permit request, Mr. Wenkstern presented pictures of the work he has done to improve the drainage problems. It was moved by Callahan, seconded by McDonald, to recommend approval of the After -the -!act Conditional Lae permit. Motion, Ayes 6, Nayu 0� 0964 STBPH= i JAN WATSON 880 PARTBYNOOD ROAD VARIANCE PUBLIC HEARING 8:54 - 8:57 Jan Watson was present for this matter. The certification of mailing and affidavit of publication was noted. The purpose of the public hearing was to consider the variance request of hardcover tradeoffs in order to construct a garage addition, making the existing garage into living space. Applicant has proposed a reduction from 39.! hardcover to 38.8% hardcover in the tradeoff. Commission questioned applicant on the necessity of the hardcover for the dog run, which compri&es of approximately 31 hardcover not being traded off. Mrs. Watson stated that the clog run hardcover is really needed. There were no persons present objecting and the public hearing was closed. It was moved by Sime, seconded by Goetten, to recommend approval of the variances as proposed. Motion, Ayes 6, Mays 0. i9b5 JOHN S. PILLSBURY JR. 1280 BRACRkr'iTS po I NT ROAD CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT PUBLIC HEARING 8:04 - St13 Mr. i Mrs. John S. Pll lshury Jr. were present for this utter . Also present was applicant'b architect, Garth ROckcastle, and landbcaper, Herb Baldwin. The certification of moiling and affidavit of publication was noted. The purr,osv of this public hearinq was to consider a reu+..asv, 47-g , �4 Minutes of Regular Meeting August 18, 1988 Page 11 -115 - Lakeview Golf -- Construction - a golf course as water hazards Sec. 6CC, City\c Orono onds on The Engineer reviewed the project, explaiiln—that the three proposed ponds are all smaller than 0.5 acres, and that excavation of these ponds will not affect the drainage patterns on the site and will provide some detention storage. Following discussion, it was moved by Thomas, seconded by Andre to approve the application upon receipt of a revised plan showing erosion control installation detail and restoration. Upon vote, the motion carried. 88-103 - Washington Scientific Ind. -- Stormwater management plan for a b di7rg_,addition to an existing commercial site, Sec. 33AD, Cit Orono.�� The Engineer reviewee the application, explaining that the project will aid approximately 33,000 square feet of additional roof surface to the site which presently contains 6.5 acres of building and bituminous parking area. The building addition will increase the runoff rate from the site by approximately 4%. The runoff generated from the roof will be of generally better water quality and therefore water quality treatment should not be required for the site. Runoff rates for a 100-year storm event, however, will increase and the applicant has proposed an on -site ponding area. The Board tabled this application at its July 1988 meeting pending receipt of additional exhibits demonstrating conformance with the District's rate control standards. Following discussion, it was moved by Andre, seccnded by Thomas, to approve the application upon receipt of the following: (1) a revised plan showing erosion control and restoration, and (2) a typical cross-section of the proposed dike and specifications for the riprap at the culvert outlet using MN/DOT classifications. Upon vote, the motion carried. 88-109 - City of Mound -- Dredging to remove 40 cubic yards of material from municipal boat_r_amp, Cooks Bay,v Lake Minnetonka, Sec. 23AD, City of Mound. The Engineer reviewed the application, explaining that the project involves removal of material from the lake bottom that had formed a ridge and inhibited access to a public boat raiip. The spoil material excavated from this site will be e_ To: Mayor Grabek & Orono Council Members City Administrator Bernhardson From: Michael P. Gaffron, Asst Planning & Zoning Administrator Date: October 5, 1988 Subject: #1332 Marcelo Gumucio, 980 Ferndale Road West - After -the -Fact Variances - Resolution Application - After -the -fact height variance for driveway entry pillars in excess of 3h' in height, in conjunction with setback variance for such pillars. Zoning District - LR-lA List of Exhibits Exhibit A - Notice of Planning Commission Action Dated 9/21/88 Exhibit B - Planning Commission Minutes Dated 9/19/88 Exhibit C - Memo & Exhibits of 9/15/88 Exhibit D - Proposed Resolution Discussion - Please review the memo and exhibits of September 15, 1988. The applicant constructed driveway pillars on the property on either side of the driveway, being 5.5' in height, or 2' higher than the 3.5' normal height limitation for such structures. The Planning Commission at their September 19th meeting voted 4-1 to approve a height and setback variance for the pillars that have been constructed, finding that: A) The pillars do not create a hazard to the users of the public roadway nor .Ae private driveway because of the 15-20' setback from the actual travelled roadway, and will not impede road maintenance. B) Separation distance between the pillars provides adequate clearance for emergency vehicles that may have to service the property. C) The pillars contain integral lighting fixtures to provide for safety of this driveway entrance. The Planning Commission recommended the following condition: 1. Applicant is placed on notice that if at some future date, light fixtures are placed on *op of the pillars, such lighting must be directed downward and tl')e intensity must be at a level so as to not create vision problems U--7- the users of the public roadway. Staff would note that the applicant has paid double the normal variance fee because this is an after -the -fact application. if the Council approves the requested variances, applicant will be required to obtain the appropriate building permit. Zoning File #1332 October. 5, 1988 Page 2 of 2 The Planning Commission Chairman was the minority opinion t.iis recommendation, his reasons being that no hardship was demonstrated to allow a variance for the height of these pillars. Staff Recommendation - Per the majority Planning Commission recommendation, staff recommends after -the -fact approval of the height and setback variances for driveway entrance monuments at 980 West Ferndale Road, per the attached proposed resolution. ZONING FILE NO. #1332 CITY OF ORONO NOTICE OF PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 473-7357 late of Notice 9-21-88 -------------------------------------------------------------------------- TO: Marcelo Gumucio COPIES TO: Arteka, Inc. 980 West Ferndale Road 5800 Baker Road Wayzata, MN 55391 Minnetonka, MN 55345 Attn: Kevin Keenan TYPE OF APPLICATION: Variance ----------------------------------------------------------- DATE OF MEETING: 9-19-88 VOTE: 4 For 1 Against Planning Commission recommends the following: Approval subject to conditions noted below NOTES AND SPECIAL CONDITIONS: Planning C •; ssion recommends approval of the height and setback variance for t..... pillars that have been constructed at the residence located at 9g0 West Ferndale Road, finding that: A) The pillars do not create a hazard to the users of the public roadway nor of the private driveway because of the 15 to 20' setback from the traveled _oadwa, and will not impede road maintenance. B) Separation dista: between the pillars provides adequate clearance for emergency vehicles that may have to service the property. C) The pillars contain intergal lighting fixtures to provide for safety of this driveway entrance. Approval would be subject to the following conditions: 1. Applicant is placed on notice that if at some future date light fixtures are placed on top of the pillars, such lighting must be directed downward and the intensity muust be at a level so as to not create vision problems for the users of the pL is roadway. Applicant's next scheduled meeting is confirmed as: City Council Monday, October 10, 1988; meetinq starts at 7:00p.m. If you desire certiflad copies of the official Planning Commitsion minutes, they are available from the City Recorder after review and approval by the Planning Commission. setback. He explained that a portion of the lot was shaped like a deep dish, that would decline and then incline. The proposal is to have a portion of the deck that would be 20' above t.ie runoff area. It seemed to him that the 26' setback would apply to different topography, as there would be no restriction of water running upstream or downstream. Planning Commission member Bellows stated that the retaining wall was the problem, not the deck footing. Mr. Dickey, the applicants' architect explained that there was a necessity to retain the earth. Bellows acknowledged that fact, but added that it should be retained outside of the 26' setback. Mr. Dickey said that the narrow width of the lot was a hardship the planning Commission overlooked. 65' was not a lot of space in which to build the proposed house. Planning Commission member Cohen stated that the applicant should have been aware of the restrictions prior to buying the lot. Mr. McNellis agreed, but said he did not understand all of the variances. The 26' setback from the 10' easement came as a surprise to him. Mr. McNellis reiterated the fact that the house would be virtually invisible. Bellows explained to Mr. McNellis that the Planning Commission's concern was how the land works, not who rzn see the house. It may be true that the proposed house had very little visual impact, however, it does present quite a bit of environmental impact. The applicant requested the Planning Commission table this matter and allow l.im the opportunity to do more study of how to approach the variance problems. It was moved by Planning Commission member Cohen, seconded by Planning Commission member Bellows, to table this itEm. Motion, Ayes=5, Nays=O, Motion passed. #1332 MARCELO GUMUCIO 980 FERNDALE ROAD WEST AFTER -THE -FACT VARIANCES PUBLIC HEARING 11:27 P.M. - 11:30 P.M. The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing ws e duly noted. The applicant's architect was present in lieu of the al,plicant . Planning Commission member Bellows stated that the architect should be fined for his lack of compliance with the City's variance requirements. She felt that the language setting forth the requirements was perfectly clear. She did not think that the applicant/owner si:ould be perslized for the unprofessionalism of the architect. The architect stated teat he thought_t ridiculous to have to come before the Planning Commission for the type of pillars he was proposing. The guidelines were not specific as to those items. b y P 11 A rtA-€q Rt0Y i14ji }'i 9 A N4&rh $ g rC amin� il,° member °rson prafdommeov f #1332, per staff recommendations. Chairman Kelley inquired as to the hardship in this instance. The architect indicated that safety was a factor in that the lights on the pillars were necessary to light an inadequately lit d-iveway. Motion, Ayes=4, Kelley -Nay due to a lack of hardship. APPROVAL OF MINUTES It was moved by Cohen, seconded by Johnson, to approve the minutes of the August 15, 1988 Planning Commission Meeting. Motion, Ayes=5, Nays=0, Motion passed. ADJOURNMENT 11:30 P.M. The Planning Commission meeting adjourned at 11:30 P.M. k� To: Planning Commission Chairman Kelley Orono Planning Commission Members City Administrator Bernhardson From: Michael P. Gaffron, Asst Planning & Zoning Administrator Date: September 15, 1988 Subject: #1332 Marcelo Gumucio, 980 Ferndale Road West - After -the -Fact Variances - Public Hearing Application - After -the -fact height variance for driveway entry pillars in excess of 3�' in height, in conjunction with setback variance for such pillars. Zoning District - LR-lA List of Exhibits Exhibit A - Exhibit B - Exhibit C - Exhibit D - Exhibit E - Exhibit F - Exhibit G - Exhibit H - Application Plat Map Property Owners List Letter of Request & Hardship Statement Survey John Gerhardson's Letter of 1/6/88 Gaffron's Letter of 1/25/88 Plan & Elevation Views of Pillars Pertinent Code Sections - A) Section 10.03, Subdivision 15 (C): The pillars are considered' an encroachment since they do not meet the maximum 3h' height limitation to be considered as a non -encroaching type fence. Existing height -df— pillars is 516" requiring a variance of 21. Applicant notes that no lighting Fixture or other upward extension of the pillars is anticipated at this time, however they would prefer to reserve the right to add a light globe if they determine additional driveway lighting is necessary. B) Section 10.28, Subdivision 5 (B): Since the pillars exceed 316" in height, they would normally be required to meet the minimum 50' front setback from the right-of-way, hence a setback variance is required. The existing pillars are within the property but abutting the front lot line. Discussion - The architect on this project, on two occassions, discussed these pillars with staff prior to their construction. In both instances, those discussions resulted in a letter to the architect confirming the City's position on the matter. Somehow, the architect managed to misinterpret the statements in both of thos<, letters and went ahead with pillar construction inside the property boundaries. Staff invites Planning Commission to read both those letters, and make your judgement. I believe the architect made incorrect presumptions about the definitions of right-of-way and front yard. Zoning File #1332 September 15, 1988 Page 2 of 2 The proposed pillars are 5.5' in height, approximately 30" on a side. Additionally, the pillars are approximately 15 to 20' back from the traveled pavement, and will have no effect on nor be affected by road maintenance, and will not pose a hazard to traffic or maintenance vehicles. The apparent need for hese monuments is mainly for aesthetic purposes, and the property owner has no intent tc place a gate between them. The pillars are approximately 18' apart and would create no problems for emergency vehicles. Staff Recommendation - Staff recommenuz! approval of the height and setback variances for the pillars that have bee,. constructed at the residence located at 980 West Ferndale Road, finding t.iat: A) The pillars do not create a haza-d to the users of the public roadway nor of the private driveway because of the 15 to 20' setback from the traveled roadway, and will not impede road maintenance. B) Separation distance between the pillars provides adequate clearance for emergency vehicles that may have to service the property. C) The pillars contain intregal lighting fixtures to provide for safety of this driveway entrance. Approval would be subject to the following conditions: 1. Applicant is placed on notice that if at some future date light fixtures are placed on top of the pillars, such lighting must be directed downward and the intensity must be at a level so as to not create vision problems for the users of the public roadway. U -P -1 3 3 c3L— CITY OF ORONO - VARIANCE APPLICATIO 2 Initial Application Fee $150.00 ." �L's:�✓' ($50.00 per each additional variance) Renewal Variance Fee $75.00 (no change from original application) After -the -Fact Fees (Double application fee) PROPERTY LOCATION Site Address i wv - vV, V,:. iV9 i//i�� .! �Llt !L vVV.e NV V i1f I LV Property Identification Number (P.I.D. ) 02--//7 -73 - y51-061/V op 0 Please check one - Property abstract or torrens? Attach legal description to application if not included on required survey. APPLICANT Phone (home) �e -,'3z.� Name o'CAa,%n C.C' f"�" Phone (work) �SL f aoo Address: c2 .-,< City., Zip: _ Zip:�3Yf' --------------------------------------------------------------------------- OWNER (if different than applicant) Phone ( home) S-Y/ -Xa6 -L- .I Name ! , tl �G�tc Phone (work)— — d w �� Address: 1L1t.7 �i�ZLc� X'l City: of:",* 0 Zip:sTnI— Y Date Property Acquired ��=lJ (month/year) I (do) �notalso own the adjacent parcels of land. PRESENT USE OF PROPERTY Present Zoning District Present Use of Property f��i -i ��;t{ �t,�•.,4- • Residential Other (specify) -------------------------------------- ------------------------------------- i DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST Estimated Construction Cost Describe ------------- VARIANCES REQUIRED Lot Area Lot Width Hardcover Setback Variances ( Front / Side Rear) Other �A 4�?�.[d..-e. _ L /s,LZ- gyp,YA, J, . HARD S III P Describe undue hardship or practical difficulty resulting from strict enforcement of zoning regulations: See attached DESCRIPTION OF UNUSUAL PROPERTY CONDITIONS Describe unusual property conditions Code Requirements: See attached preventing compliance with Zoning --------------------------------------------------------------------------- REQUIRED SUBMITTALS 1. Completed Application Form 2. Certified Property Owners List of owners within 150' (you must obtain this list from Hennepin County Department of Finance A-603 Govt Center 348-3271). 3. Stamped, legal sized envelopes (#10) pre -addressed to each of the names on the above list with no return address (use address labels obtained with property owners list). 4. Certificate of survey including hardcover calculations as required. 5. Topographic survey (existing and proposed elevations) if any changes in existing grade are proposed. 6. Plat Map (obtained with property owners list). 7. As an addendum to this application, please attach a separate list of any other persons you wish notified of this application. 8. Additional items as may be requested by city staff. -------------------------------------------------------•--------------------- The Applicant and Property Owner must sign this application. Please remember that your variance application is not complete if the above information has not been included. Certification by Zoning Cepartment 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 $n review of this application, -°.nd certifies that the information supplied is tr and correct to the best of his/her knowledge. Signature Date Applicant's OWNERS SIGNATURE The owner hereby ackowledg 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 cu_j_k Date 9 l rTd --------------------------------------------------------------------------- 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 i Zoning Office of this change prior to the meeting. RUN DATE 08/29/88 HENRIEPIN COUNT' PROPERTY INFORMATION SYSTEM REPORT NO. PI435401 PROPERTY OWNERS LIST PAGE 14 BATCH 006 38 02-117-23 43 0001 PROP ADDR 00038 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED OW41P NAME THE NATURE CONSERVANCY TAXPAYER NATURE CONSERVANCY NAME/ADDR 131? STH ST S E SUITE 314 MPLS MN 55414 38 02-117-23 43 0024 PROP ADDR 01045 FERNDALE RD W ONNER NAME HENRY M SKARP TAXPAYER HENRY M SKARP NAME/ADDR 1045 W FERNDALE RD WAYZATA MH 55391 38 02-117-23 44 0018 PPOP ADDR 00038 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED C"iER NAME THE NATURE CONSERVANCY TAXPAYER NATURE CONSERVANCY NAME/ADUR 1311 STH ST S E SUITE 314 MPLS MN 55414 38 02-117-23 43 0002 01070 FERNDALE RD W GOODRICH LOWRY ETAL GOODRICH LOWRY 1070 W FERNDALE RD WAYZATA MI 55391 38 02-117-23 44 0016 00038 ADDRESS URIASSIGNEO THE NATURE CONSERVANCY NATURE CONSERVANCY 1313 STH ST S E SUITE 314 MPLS MN 55414 38 02-117-23 44 0019 00980 FERNDALE RD W M A GUMUCIO A C GUMUCIO MARCELO A A CAROLE GUMUCIO 980 W FERNDALE RD WAYZATA MN 55391 38 02-117-23 43 0003 01070 FERNDALE RD W HENRY M SKARP HENRY M SKARP 1045 W FERNDALE RD WAYZATA MN 55391 `- 38 02-117-23 44 0017 00960 FERNDALE RD W C A J FLOYD rr. DR A MRS CHARLES P FLOYD 960 WEST FERNDALE RD R WAYZATA MN 553Q1 TOTAL BATCH 006 00008 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 DEPARTI:E T OF PROPERTY T XATIONr TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE AND BELIEF. i DATE v' r� August 31, 1988 r 'p Ciii Orono 4?'w Description of Request: I am requesting an after -the -fact variance for the height of the brick entry pillars at 980 Ferndale Road West. Initially a concept plan was reviewed with the City of Orono (January 1988) showing elaborate 6' tall bric-k entry "gates" located within the street right-of-way. After discussing this concept with City officials (see attached letter January 6, 1988 from John Gerhardson), I choose not to apply for a variance for these structures but rather simplify the design and slide the brick pillars back, thereby removing them from within the street right-of-way. They are now on private property. I felt this redesign and relocation of the brick entry pillars negated the issue and thus the need for the variance procedure. In John Gerhardson's letter to me dated 1 /6/88 he states (Paragrap;, 21 "according to Orono ordinances, we would not allow the brick surface drive approach or the 6' high monuments in the street right-of-way. If the monuments are adjacent to the right-of- way they cannot exceed 3.5'. It also appears that there is a sanitary sewer line in the driveway," I interpreted that as saying if I obtain approval via a variance, the monument could in fact be in the right-of-way, but not taller than 3.5', in other words they are standing firm on the fact anything within the right-of-way could only be 3.5' tall. In closer analysis of that statement there is still much ambiguity. Adjacent to the right-of- way means what? Is 1' adjacent or is 10' adjacent? Again, I interpreted it as stating if the monuments were on private property, out of the way of snow plows, utilities, etc... then it is O.K. to proceed with my plan. In the early design scheme the monuments were closer to the street for structural reasons. I presumed the soil conditions closer to the road bed would be more secure than 20' back on the private property. By placing diem back on private property it also puts you closer to the two existing ponds that flank the driveway. By following the City's initial requests I moved the two pillars back onto private property, consequently closer to the ponds and I chose to set these brick pillars on pilings that were dri: en down approximately 25'. Michael Gafron's letter dated 1 /25/88 also mentions the height of the originally designed monuments. (Noie the second sentence). "The proposed monuments 6' in height in a front yard area (or within street right-of-way) certainly requires a variance from the municipal zoning code". I interpreted that sentence and the phrase in parentheses as clarifying the previous statement. In other words. I read it to mean: in a front yard area or in other words within the street right-of-way. Both of the letters I received from the City weighed heavily in my understanding of the regulations and my decision to simplify the design and move the brick pillars onto private property. The tone of both letters seems to highlight the right-of-way and location of these pillars more so than the height of these pillars. I discussed the simplified brick pillar scheme with John Gerhardson prior to proceeding with it and the issue of height was never mentioned. I never asked, he never offered. The City in fact came out 14) locate the underground sewer line so that I would not puncture or destroy it when we drove the piling for these new brick columns I thought I was following the letter of the law. For several months we have had open communication about revising the design, the location of the pillars, the soil stability in that area, the sewer lines adjacent to the pillars, etc. I thought that by moving back onto private property I resolved all of the concerns the City originally had in reference to these new brick entry monuments. Now (after the fact) while discussing this issue in a phone call with Jeanne Mabusth, she mentioned that this entry monument issue is becoming increasingly more common. She also stated that many of the variances applied for, for these entry monuments, are after the fact. This leads me to believe that I am not alone in my interpretation of the existing ordinances and perhaps more attention should be given to clarifying the !aiiguage in your ordinances for these particular site elements. hardship and Unusual Property Conditions _ , -, 2 The practical difficulty resulting from strict enforcement of the regulations is that for several months out of the year (the winter) 42" high entry monuments could conceivably be under snow and not visible. By placing these address pillars back on private property I felt the 5' 6" height was needed for visibility. This portion of Ferndale Road is very dark at night. For safety and to adequately light the driveway as well as the house numbers, the 5' 6" height was decided upon. CITYof ORONO Post Office Box 66 • Crystal Bay, Minnesota W23 • Municipal Offices On the North Shore of Lake Minnetonka January 6, 1988 Arteka Land Planners Kevin Keenan, Landscape Architect 5800 Baker Road Minnetonka, MN 55345 Dear Kevin, Recently, you and I reviewed a landscape plan for 980 Ferndale Road west. Items of discussion were: 1. Brick surface drive approach in street right-of-way. 2. Monuments 6' high in street right-of-way. 3. Proposed aeration of pond adjacent to driveway. 4. Location of sanitary sewer lines and lift station. 5. Length of process for acquiring variances for all of the above. According to Orono ordinances, we would not allow the brick surf�,.ce drive approach or the 6' high monuments in the street right-of-way. If the monuments are adjacent to the right-of-way they cannot exceed 3.5 feet. It also appears that there is a sanitary sewer line in the driveway. In regard to the aeration pump for the pond, it is advised that you discuss this with the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources. If you are interested in pursuing variances for all of the above, the normal process requires approximately 6 weeks. Be advised that this is an informal review of your proposal. If you have any questions please feel free to call me at 473- 7357. Sincerely, , ohn R. Gerhar son Public Works Director JRG/pp 106.3 cc: Jeanne Mabusth, Zoning Administrator sCll 1)1%1, & lntil-,l, - 473-73$7 0 ADMINISTRATION a FINANCE - 473.7358 0 PUBLIC WORKS - 173.7399 CITY of ORONO Post Office Box 66•Crystal Bay, Minnesota W23•Municipal Offices On the North Shore of Lake Minnetonka January 25, 1988 Arteka Land Planners Attn: Kevin Keenan, Landsc -chitect 5800 Baker Road Minnetonka, MN 55345 Dear Kevin: Per our phone conversation of January 22nd, I am enclosing a copy of the zoning variance application for proposed improvements to the property at 980 West Ferndale Road. The proposed monuments 6' in height in a front yard area (or within street right-of-way) certainly requires a variance_ from the municipal zoning code. The brick surface drive approach in the street right-of-way is governed by Section 6.05 of the municipal code (copy attached), which requires thcit a permit first be obtained for work within a right -of -F.,ay. Although i am led to believe that the brick surfacing will not receive staff support, i is appropriate that you include a request Zor same in your var=Ance application for the :monuments. The variance application and required submittals should be in this of f no later an _Fruin order _o e niTT�te `h'Marr'T- sst'- a Planning Commission m etkn . - a wo=u pe exct final Council ac�tiont en on April Ilth-,_ 1988. Please contact me or Zoning Administrator Jeanne Mabusth at 473-7357 if you have any questions. Sincerely zc Michael P. Gaff o , Asst Planning & Zoning Administrator MPG/tln cc: Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building & Zoning Administrator John R. Gerha_.dson, Public Works Director OUR DING ♦ IONV4G - 473-7 317 • ADMINISTRATION i FINANCE - 473•7358 a PUBLIC WORKS - 473-7339 or ASSkSSING r�rr�rr�r�. r r R1�1�r�r�ir �i 'Ywrwl', , wY'liwrslip IOw`arr o 1 .�r. J .i -t � ~ • I J � l W O / do l rl Z _ ONOw O ,M , k �' V .,u, Fl ie /1i '-„,,.- • 1L.' . S. �r /�. .. I Ira ,A 18 NO tv � • / r VOO A 11 � ay F .s. s05 1 � � • - �: Cej r in o 0zz Gotfull A 47 u ►� trn `V Irks'" c c `o V ° o th �, 4 P 6• . J irlfl M i 1 I f -Entryate Elevation S, A:E 'A'- 1�-J'. I 64W AO _late SCJU L.Go-'1--v xj aal*" a 73f, rartr A RESOLUTION GRANTING A VARIANCE TO !MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE .;ECTION 10.03, SUBDIVISION 15 (C) AND SECTION 10.28, SUBDIVISION 5 (B) FILE #1332 WHEREAS, Marcelo Gumucio (hereinafter "the applicant") is the owner of the property located dt 980 West Fernuale Road within the City of Orono (hereinafter "City-) and legally described as follows. i.:hibit A, attached (hereinafter "the property"); and WHEREAS, the applicant has applied to the City for after -the -fact vat 'ances to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.03, Subdivision 15 (C) and Section 10.28, Subdivision 5 (B) to permit the construction of driveway entrance monuments exceeding the maximum 3.5' height _imitation and located less than 1' from the property line where a 50' minimum front setback would normally be required for such structures. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RRSOLVFD by the Citv Council of Or�-,no, :Minnesota: FINDINGS 1. This arrl.ication was rev --wed as Zoning File #1332, 2. p. erty is lc,catP-i in the LR-lA Single Family Lakeshore Re iai Zoning Dis' :icy. 3. _ne Orono Planning Commission reviewed this aprlication on September 19, 1988 and recommendr:d apuroval of the proposed variance teased upon the followin- findings. A) The pillars do not create hazard to the users of the publi, roadway nor of the t;rivate dri%_wav because of the 15-20' setback from the travelled roadway, and %'11 not impede road mainten.:nce. B) Separation di:, -re between the pillars provides adequate clearance for emer- ..:y . ehicles that may have to servi(:e the property. ,-.) The pillars contain integral lighting f.,.,:tures to pr. e for safety of ch;s driveway entrance. Pa•je 1 of 4 or 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 I.rorerty in this zoning district; that granting tie variance would not adversely affect traffic conditions, light, air for 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 Comrrehensive Plan of the City. CONCLUSIONS, ORDER AND CONDITIONS Based upon one or more of the findings noted above, the Orono City Council hereby grants after -the -fact variances to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.03, Subdivision 15 (C) and Section 10.28, Subdivision 5 (B) to permit the construction of driveway ent . a..c_e monuments 5.5' in height where such structures are nOL nally allowed to exceed 3.5' in height, and which structures are less n 1' from the front property line where such structures are normally regaired to be set back at least 50' from the front property line, subject to the following conditions: 1. 'lpplicant is placed on notice that if at some future date light fixtures are placed on top of the pillars, such lighting must be directed downward and the intensity must be a level so as to not create vision problems for the users of the public roadway. 2. Applicant shall obtain the appropriate after -the -fact building permit for the pillars. 3. Authorities granted with this resolution run with the property not with the applicants, 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 v _iance will expire on that date (October 10, 1989). 4. Violation of or non-compliance with any of the terms and conditions of this resoi-7tion shall constitute a violation of the zoning code, shall auto tically terminate anY authority granted herein, and shall be puniLiiable as a misdemeanor. Page 21 of 4 5. The undersigned applicant have 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 loth day of October, 1988. ATTEST: Dorothy M. Hallin, City Clerk James R. Grabek, Mayor Property Owner(s) Page 3 of 4 ti:• All of the followinq described tract: Lot 24 in Country Club Estates, Hennepin County, Minn., according to the plat thereof on file or of record in the office- of the Registrar of Titles in and for said County, except that part of said Lot described as follows: Commencing at the most Southerly corner of said Lot 24; thence Northwesterly along the Southwesterly line of said Lot a distance of 26.6 feet; thence Northeasterly deflecting to the right at an angle of e9 degrees and le minutes to the North line of said Lot 24; thence East along the North line of said Lot to the most Northerly corner of Lot 23 in said Country Club Estates, Hennepin County, Minn., thence Southwesterly along the line between said Lots 23 and 24 to the point of beginning. Which lie_ Southerly of a line drawn from a point on the West line of said Lot distan_ 205 feet South of the Northwest corner of said Lot, through a point on the Southeasterly line of said Lot distant 300 feet Southwesterly of the Northeasterly corner of said Lot. .j f; : To: Mayor Grabek & Orono Council Members City Administrator Bernhardson From: Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building & Zoning Administrator Date: October 7, 1988 Subject: #1333 Sidney Rebers, 715 North Brown Road - Rezoning - Resolution List of Exhibits Exhibit A - Application Exhibit B - Plat Map Exhibit C - Public Hearing Notice Exh'.bit D - Legal Description for Area to be Rezoned Exhibit E - Letter From Platteters at 809 North Brown Road Exhibit F - Shardlow Memo Exhibit G - Intent R-lA Code Section Exhibit H - PRD Code Exhibit I - Map of Zoning Boundaries Exhibit J - Map of Zoning Boundary Lines Exhibit K - Sections of Comprehensive Plan Amendment Exhibit L - Residential Development Plan of Property Application - Rezoning From RR-lB (Rural, Non-sewered, 2 Acre Lots) to R-lA (sewered, 1-Acre Lots). Review Exhibit I, note that 55' of RR-lB remains for future rezoning to either existing B-1 commercial or another zoning classification at some future date. Total area to be rezoned = 32.6 acres. Brief Review of Application - On August 15, 19:18, the Planning Commission reviewed the sketch plan for the comprehensive proposal of Sidney Rebers and conceptually approved the development plans. The Planning Commission held the formal public hearings for the required rezoning and the subdivision,'PRD for the development phase of the application. The rezoning phase of the application was approved by the Planning Commission and the subdivision/PRD was tabled pending resolve of the concerns of the Planning Commission. Please review Exhibit Y, John Shardlow's review memo for the public hearing, specifically Pages 1, 2, 3, 4, and 6 as they pertain specifically to the rezoning request. As Shardlow's memo notes on Page 2, although the Planning Commission has reviewed and approved the zoning ordinance amendment required as a result of the passage of the Comprehensive Plan Amendment, the standards of the proposed ordinance amendment are not applicable in the review of this application. Shardlow's review comments deal predominantly with the relation of the application to the rezoning application to the proposed ordinance amendment. Staff's report will deal solely with the review of the application based on the recently approved Comprehensive Plan Amendment and the pertinent sections of the current zoning cu::e that are applicable. Zoning File #1333 October 7, 1988 Page 2 of 3 Please review Exhibit K, sections of the Comprehensive Plan Amendment that deal with proposed changes for the Subject property. Note on Page 37 where it specifically references areas slated for change or considered for change and designates the property as Area 4. On Pages 50 and 51 you will find two alternative plans for future development of the property. Page 52, the recommended alternative by the City, approves future rezoning of the 55' corridor north of the existing commercial line be rezoned to commercial and the rema_.ning residential was to receive sewer and to be developed at 1 and 2 acre single family densities. Sewer was to serve all residential development. Please review Exhibit G, the intent of the R-lA code. In order for the applicant's rezoning request to be approved, the property must be sewered. Review Exhibit H, the PRD Code, in ozder for the applicant to satisfy the current PRD Code of the City and the direc'-ives of the Comprehensive Plan Amendment No. 2, the rezoning to R-lA is necessary. Review PRD Section 10.32, Subdivision 2 that reads as follows: "Submission of plans. Land owners may submit land subdivision plans for any R District without adherence to minimum lot size requirements for each building lot, provided that the total number of building lots, or dwelling units, shall not exceed the number of such lots or units permissible under the minimum lot size requirements if the zoning district or districts which such land is situated." In order for this developer to receive approval of a mixed 1 and 2 acre or 1 acre density PRD, the underlying zoning district has to be amended to fulfill the requirements of the Comprehensive Plan Amendment. The present PRD subdivision application seeks appr vat of 25 units based on the R-lA zoning density allowance. Alternative 3 as shown on the Comprehensive Plan Sections, Exhibit K, Page 51., shows a formal conventional plat format. The current p' _�k, rider consideration is a PRD format with an open space outlot surround -_i `.e PRD providing a buffer and lessening the impact on the surrounding rural residential properties. Please review the Planning Commission minutes of September 19, 1988 enclosed in your Council packets. Some of the reasons noted for approving the rezoning to the 1 acre zone were as fol lows: 1. Topographical and physical characteristics of the site: Variations in topograi;hy ranging from 1,044' at its highest point to 994 at its lowest, resulting in over 50' of grade separation. Mature maple and other deciduous trees. Heavy clay and clay loam soils and associated problems with installation and maintenance of on -site sewage disposal system. 2. The proposed division satisfies all of the special minimum requirements for rezoninq under the proposed zoning ordinance amendment for the Highway 12 :orridor. Zoning File #1333 October 7, 1988 Page 3 of 3 3. Sanitary sewer will be provided as confirmed by the City Engineer's preliminary review. Sewer to be provided either through Long Lake by the Joint Powers Agreement or by constructing a new interceptor along the Highway 12 corridor. 4. The rezoning will allow single family residential development. 5. The property is immediately adjacent to a commercial corridor along Highway 12 and the proposed 1 acre zoning would provide an excellent buffer to the surrounding rural residential districts. G. The Comprehensive Plan Amendment included this property within the hi,JSA district and approved Municipal services for the area. 7. The current code will require rezoning to R-lA in order to allow the 1 a^re densities recommended in the Comprehensive Plan Amendment. The issue of sewer remains unresolved at this point, but the City Engineer confirms that there are available alternatives for servicing the property with sewer. The question remains how the property will be serviced by sewer either via the Long Lake system or the extension of Orono's Municipal sewer lines. The owner is aware of his obligation to pay for any extension of Municipal sewer to the property. Planning Commission Recommendation - The Planning Commission approved the rezoning of the northern portion of this property from RR-lB to R-lA based on one or more of the findings noted above in the staff memo. The minority opinion denied the rezoning based on the precedent setting aspect stating that they were fearful that the surrounding rural areas would request the same kind of rezoning. The surrounding rural residential properties were not included within this Comprehensive Plan Amendment and as a result were not included within the newly aligned MliSA district. There can be no rezoning from RR-1B to R-lA wit- ut sewer. In order to allow the rezoning to a greater density, the City would have to initiate a new Comprehensive Plan Amendment. The en iosed resolution has been drafted approving the rezoning as requested by the applicant authorizing staff to prepare the necessary ordinance amend- ment for formal action by the Council upon final resolve of the extension of sewer to the property. A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE REZONING APPLICATION OF SIDNEY REBERS THAT WOULD REZONE CERTAIN PROPERTIES FROM RR-lB TO R-IA FILE NO. 1333 WHEREAS, the City of Orono is a municipal corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of Minnesota; and WHEREAS, per Minnesota Statute 462.357, Subdivision 4 and Section 10.10 of the Orono Municipal Code, the City Council of the City of Orono (hereinafter "City Council") is resronsible for reviewing and acting on all applications to amend the official zoning map of the City; and WHEREAS, the City Council has considered the application for rezoning by Sidney Rebers (hereinafter "the applicant") to rezoning from RR-lB to R-lA the property legally described in Exhibit A, attached to this resolution (hereinafter "the property"); and WHEREAS, on May 23, 1988, the City Council adopted Comprehensive Plan Amendment No. 2 that aprroved certain zoning changes and the extension of municipal services to the property; and WHEREAS, on September 19, 1988, the Planning Comm;ssion of the City of Orono recommended approval of the rezoning application of the applicant finding the proposal consistent with the objectives and goals of the Comprehensive Plan Amendment No. an' WHEREAS, the City Council -:ev:.ewed the comments of the Planning Commission, reports and oral commen`Ls of the City staff, the written and oral comments of the consultant/planner, John Shardlow, and the comments of the applicant's consultant, and the comments of the affected neighbors noting the -,ollowing findings: 1. The property consists of 32.6 acres in area. 2. The variations in topography on the property range from 994' to 1,044' with over 50' of grade separation. 3. The property contains a mature forest of maples and other deciduous trees along the northwest and mature nursery stock of pines and other evergreens along the east portion. 4. The Hennepin County Soils Survey defines the soil profile of the property as predominately clay to clay loam. This type of soil profile presents several limitations for the installation and maintenance of on -site sewage iisposal systems. r acre , of 3 5. The property was designated as Area 4 in the Comprehensive Plan Amendment No. 2. Tn the land use section of the plan, this area was selected for change in land use/zoning and for the extension of municipal services. 6. The property is now located within the Metropolitan Urban Service Area (MUSA). 7. The extension of sewer can be furnished either from existing sewer lines in Long Lake to the southeast of the property or from the existing sewer lines within the City of Orono to the west of the property. 8. As a part of this rezoning application, the applicant has formally petitioned for connection to municipal sewer and has agreed to pay the cost of the improvement. 9. The recommended alternative for development of this property was for single family densities at I to 2 acre. Section 10.32, Subdivision 2, Planned Residential Development states, "the total number of building, lots or dwelling units shall not exceed the number of such lots or units permissible under the minimum lot size requir•-•- ments of the zoning district or districts in -ili.ch such land is situated." Rezoning is necessary to meet the agre upon density set forth in Comprehensive Plan Amendment No. 2. 10. The one acre single family residential zone acts as an excellent buffer or transition zone between the commercial corridor along the Highway and the surrounding 2 acre rural residential properties to the ncrth, east and west. 11. The proposed rezoning of tho property would meet the intent of the principal goals set forth in Comprehensive Plan Amendmenl- No. 2 entitled "Compatible Uses and Transitions", which states as follows: "A significant concern is to develop land uses that provide appropriate transitions between the traffic and noise associated with Highway 12 and quality single family neighborhoods beyond. More intensive commercial uses were judged to he appropriate adjacent to the highway, but these uses should not extend so far back from the highway corridor so as to adversely affect any established neighborhoods. Any development should be limited by the location of existing natural features and the capacity within the available t, ility systNms. Page 2 of 3 y 1'e. In reviewing the alternatives in relation to the established goals and objectives for the study area, it was determined that it would be appropriate that the significant areas of land in the corridor be developed as something other than the 2 acre single family rural residential. Such development would need to be of a density that improvements to the transportation and utility systems could be paid for by such development. . 13. In a memo prepared for this rezoning application dated 9/19/88, Page 2, entitled "Comprehensive Plan Relationships, Zoning Issues" John Shardlow notes the following: "The Highway 12 Corrdor Study anticipated the development of single family residential lots on the northern portion of the site and that is what is being applied for in this request. T h t recommended alternative states that the density should not exceed 25 lots, which is the number shown on the proposed plat. Therefore, at the most basic level, this request is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan." 14. The adjacent surrounding rural zoned properties cannot be considered for higher density, urban zoning because these areas were not included within the Highway 12 study nor relocated within the Metropolitan Urban Service Area. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that based upon. one or more of the findings noted above, the City Council approves the rezoning application of Sidney ReLers that would rezone the iroperty legally described above from RR-lB to R-lA, at 1 further directs staff to publish in the official news-aper of the City the ordinance amending the official zoning map of the City as specified above, subject to the condition that the applicant shall enter into an agreement with the City to pay without appeal for City aut.iorized sewer service to the property. c1-icted by the City of Orono Council on triis loth day of Octobe_ 1988 ATTEST: Dorothy M. Hallin, City Clerk James R. Grabek, Mayor Page 1 of 3 I ►. /333 i JUL I ---------- , CITY OF ORONO�-; GLNER L L U. S I T N ►!°'t41i/ L� PROPERTY LOCATION i Site Address Ilwy 12 and Drown Road, Orono Property Identification Number (P.I.D.) 34 11823210001 Please check one - Property x abstract: or torrens?' (for Conditional Use Applications only) Please attach legal description to application if not included on required survey. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- APPLICANT Phone (home) 471-9375 Name Robert Kost/BRw Phone (work) ` 370-0700 ' Address 700 South Third Street City Iis Zip 55415 -------------------------------------- ------ OWNER (if different than applicant)'' Phone (home) Name Sidney Rebers Phone 920-6996 '' • Address 3525 Webster Avenue City StAouis Park Zip 55416 Date Property Acquired 1970 (month/year) I (do) (dwxxmt) also own the adjacent parcels of land. it. ---------- FEFS - CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS - Renewal Fee - 1/2 Current Fee After -the -Fact Fee - Double Current Application Fee _ $100.00 a) Residential accessory Use $150.00 b) Institutional (church, school, etc.) $150.00 c) Duplex Credit/Bldg $250.00 d) Commerci: ' 'Industrial $200.00_ f) Land Alteration Grading and filling - designated wetland u f loodplain Grading'and filling - 101 cu."yd. or more Grading, seawall, retaining walls within 7 of akeshore PID - see fee schedule OTHER APPLICATIONS $150.00 Commercial Site Plan Review (+ cinsultant fees) _ $250.00 Vacation $150.00 Easement Vacation _ $ 50.00 Easement Vacation With Subdivision x $250.00 Rezoning/ $100.00 Appeals see fee schedule PRESENT USE OF PROPERTY Present Zoning District ggl-d and B1 Present Use of Property Vaca,it Land Residential Other (specify) DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST Describe revues'- in detail. Rezone 32.4 acres of RUB to RI -A ---------------------------------------- ----------------------------------- REQUIRED SUBMITTALS 1. Completed Application Form. 2. Certified Property Owners List of owners within 350' (you can obta. 1 this list from Hennepin County Department of rinance A-603 Government Center 348-3271) 3. S-amped, legal sized envelopes (110) pre -addressed to each of the names on the above list with no return address. 4. Certif icatr• of survey. 5. Topographic survey (existing and proposed contours) if land alterations involve changeF in elevation (grades) 6. Construction plan, if applicable (see staff for requirements,. 7. Plat Map. 8. As an addendum to this application, please att_,ch a separate list of ar.y other persons you wish notified of this appi cation. The Applicant and Property Owner must sign this application. ]?lease remember that your application i, not complete if the above information has not been included. ------ %-------------------------------------------------•-------------------- Certification by Zoning Department that Land Use Application is complete. Zoning Officials Signature Date APPLICI NT' S. SIGNATURE , The applicant hereby agre-s to provide All information required or requested by the Zoning Adw.nistrator, agrees to nay all Lees and/or unusual expenses incurred in review of this applicat:sun, and certifies that the information supplied is true and cor ect to the best of his/her knowledge. Applicant's signature �'4�_ _ _ Date e/26/89 OWNBRS SIGNATURE The owner herei>y a --knowledges and agrees to this application and further authorized reasonable en f onto the property by City staff, consult ts, agents, coTmission members, and Council members for purposes of irivesti(lation arc er.ificatlon of this request. Owner's signature �/�� ['ate A/26 88 -------------------------- Applicant must have all submittals into the City iffices 25 days before the Planning Commission Meeting. Planning Cc--:,ission Meetings are held on the third Monday of each month. Applicants must W% present at all scheduled review meetings of the Pl%nning Commission. and Ct.uncil. If an applicant is unable to attend a scheduled meatio:g, please make c- rangements to hav,1 an authorized agent attenA in ,olir place and advise the Building i 8r.ning Office of this rhange prior Co tll-% meeting. CITY OF ORONO NOTICE The P%nr*p Commiselon will hold a pubkc at 1275Q, Brown Road on onday, S *mbrs Brown Roed on Monday, September IQ, 1 g6e INh Affidavit of Publication at 5.48 p m on the matter of -1333 Sidney Re• bars' application for the rezoning from RR 10, Rural Residential ZWVV requkkp a minkeum of 2 acres in area. to R• 1 A, Skiple Famly District State of Minnesota, County of Hennepin repairing a minimum of 1 we In Was and saw - or. of the pro,ierty located In the East half of the Northwest% of Section 34, Township IIa, Bill Holm, being duly sworn, on oath says that he is Rang. 23 that pen"North of a une drawn an authorized agent and employee of the publisher rth 1,170 feet Noand 1,260 test west of e d per" to the North line of tM East 'A of sec• of the newspaper known as THE LAKER, Mound, Min- "- 34. Township 11S. Range 23. nesota, and has full knowledge of the facts which are AN Par—* wishing to be heard" appearat tfw tide written corfwnenta re solicited. Plana stated below. are avaNable In the City offloes for review, by appointment city of Orono A ) The newspaper has complied with all the require - Sy Planning Cornrri"son ments constituting qualifications as a qualified Jeanne A. Mebusth, newspaper, as provided by Minnesota Statute __ _ �lkfiN a zo" Administrator 331 A.02, 331 A 07, and oth`?r applicable laws. as �f� b_-h ~In The Laker and Plonser Sept. 51 1g861 — f/ amended. /Ly� -- /n3s rc 8The purled4 �Ufrl lu-msaid ar whhs attLaChed of newspaper, anwas printed and published once each week for / successive weeks It was first published Monday. the day of d// ��. 19 0 a . and was thereaf!er print and published every Monday, to and including Monday, the day of . 19 . Authorized Agent Subscribed and sworn to /me on this� .1 u! day of _ 7/'��lC/ 19Q a By Notary Public lJN9MN Rate Information )UR w(1) Loest Classified la's Paid byc:am"Wcu i ueerafor�:Q- s` C�` ae Npat:e f7 94 Ter M1fh'121 Ma,�.m rate afiwed alawfor aoo+e mattefa '3a tier +fd+i3l Rate a0uaN� er 'Wgod for above matter f4 St pWW" Each at"ticino YleDeserve we" 53 0-3 per -Cat #27, 5-8825.2 Together with that part of the East Half of the Northwest Quarter of Section 34, Township 118 North, Range 23 West of the 5th Principal Meridian described as follows: Commencing at the northwest corner of said East Half of the Northwest Quarter; thence on an assumed bearing of South 0 degrees 22 minutes 23 spc'nnds West, along the west line of said East Half of the Northwest Quarter a distance of 1311.29 feet; thence South 81 degrees 18 minutes 37 seconds East a distance of 345.78 feet; thence North 2 degrees 41 minutes 23 seconds Fist a distance of 188.93 feet; thence North 87 degrees 18 minutes 37 seconds West a distance of '200.00 f� , to the point of beginning of the land to be described; said point of beginning to be hereinafter known as point A, thence North 51 degrees 56 minutes 40 seconds West a distance of 193.70 feet to a point on said west line distant 1010.00 feet southerly from said northwest corner; thence southerly along said west line to the northerly right-of-way line of U. S. Highway No. 12 as described in Document No. 142811; thence southeasterly along said northerly right-of-way line to the intersec- tion with a line which bears South 2 degrees 41 minutes 23 seconds West from the point of beginning; thence North 2 degrees 41 minutes 23 seconds East to the point of beginning. except that part lying southerly of the following described line: Beginning at said point A; thence north 87 degrees 18 minutes 37 seconds West 153.42 feet to a point on said west line and said line there terminating. September 16, 1989 To the Planning Commission and the City Council of Orono: We are concerned about the proposed development and rezoning of the property located at 715 Nort, Brown Road. Our concern centers around the negative influence of so many homesites immediately adjacent to our property and the increased traffic on North Brown Roar. We believe the addition of 25 homes in the ar.:ea will decrease u"r ability to use our property and increase the risE. of injury or damage to our property, Our - horses or trespassers. We moved to Orono in 1977 and were assured several times by the City that Oronc was then, and intended to remain a rural residential community. We chose the area because of the requirement for 2 acre minimum lots. though 5 acre minimums would do more to ensure the rural environment. We have scr?n the traffic use of North Brown Road increase dramatically over the ast 10 years. We believe the addition of 25 homes will i n:=rease the traff i c to sit, i a point that we can no longer ride ovr horses or walk along Brown Road. Thus we will have no access to the park or trails. Such high density o+ hoissing will generate an additional 25 to 75 _ors per day on Brown Road. The solution, no doubt, will be to upgrade and widen the road and assess the landowners; a solution we would strongly oppose. It would generate yet more traffic and lessen our ability to enjoy our property, our horses and our neighborhood. We believe Orono must hold fast to its goals --or become another Bloomington with high density housing. We are also concerned with the plans to locate five to sip: lots adjacent to our south property line. We chose the area so we would have privacy ---at least 2 acres per homesite. Locating so many homes so close steals our priuicv and increases the risk of children, dogs, etc. trespassing and injuring our horses or themselves. Ouito frinkly, we do not need increased liability. If the property known as 715 North Brown Road is to be developed, we believe several conditions should be met with NO cost to they adjacent landowners. First, North Brown Road should be revamped to include a path safe from vehicular traffic for horsebact riding and walking. Nort�i Brown Road should also be studied for ways to reduce the number of vehicles and, increasingly important, the excess speed of the vehiLies using North Brown Road. F'age Second, wo believe come permanent non -penetrable barrier needs to be installed to prevent trespass by children, dogs, etc. on our property. The harrier should be non -offensive and blend in with the woods and brush in keeping with the rural nature of the area. Mr. Rebers should also be required to obtain and maintain sufficient liability insurance at his cost to endemnify and hold us harmless for all damages to trespassery eminating from the development at 715 North Brown Road. We understand this land use changes in the name of progress. However we don't believe that increasing the housing density of Orono is prugress. We don't believe the rezoning of property from rural residential to allow such high density development is progress for- the community of Orono. We are opposed to the rezoning of any rural residential property to single family district of 1 acre minimum in Orono. Sincerely, DennisL. and Marni R. Flatteter 809 North Brown Road Orono PRESENTERS PUBLIC HEARING Peter Jarvis, Bob Kost, BRW, Inc. ITEM Request for rezoning from RR-1B to R-1A, Preliminary Plat Approval of a Subdivision Consisting of 25 Single -Family Lots and Related Outlots, and Approval of a Conditional Use Permit for a PRD, for the 32.6 acre Rebers Property, Located in the Northwest Quadrant of T.H. and Brown Road. BACKGROUND This application was reviewed by the Planning Commission as a Sketch Plan on August 15. Although there was considerable discussion about the details of the proposal and the relationship between this application and subsequent stages of the development of the adjacent property and the remainder of the Highway 12 Corridor, there was general support for the application. The Planning Report prepared for the Sketch Plan review contained considerable background material and some recommendations for design modifications from the applicants. To facilitate the Commission's review of this application, the background information has.been summarized in this report. The recommendations suggested in the previous report are also noted in appropriate sections of this report. Summary of Existincr _Conditions A. Natural Characteristics: The applicants have submitted an exhibit entitled "Site Forces" that includes a graphic summary of the existing conditions on the Subject Property. As this exhibit shows, the prop.-rty contains rolling topography and varies in elevation from 1,644 feet near the center of the site. From this point it slopes (steeply in places) to relative low points along the edge of Brown Road, along its east ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION September 19, 1988 Page 2 side to the northwestern corner of the property, where it is the lowest (992.0 feet). The site contains predominantly heavy clay and clay/loam soils. These soils present severe limitations for the installation and maintenanct- of on --site sewage disposal systems. The majority of the site is covered by mature maple forest, although a significant stand of coniferous trees are also present which were planted by Sid Rebers. B. Comprehensive Plan Relationships, Zoning Issues: As the Planning Commission is well aware, the Subject Property is located within the Highway 12 Corridor Study Area. Since that study was adopted by the City as a formal amendment to the Comprehensive Plan, the Planning Commission should refer to that document for review of pertinent comprehensive planning issues. This property is discussed on pages 49 through 52. This application includes only the northern portion of the Lebers site, although some preliminary sketches have been shared with the City that illustrate the future development of the southern portion as well. The Highway 12 Corridor Study anticipated the development of single-family residential lots on the northern portion of the site and that is what is being applied for in this request. The recommended alternative states that the density should not exceed 25 lots, which is the number shown on the proposed plat. Therefore, at the most basic level, this request is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. The remainder of the discussion in the Corridor Study focused on traffic and stormwater management issues. Both of those issues will be addressed at the point at which the southern portion of the site is developed. Zoning Issues The area contained within the Highway 12 Corridor Study is subject to the proposed Special Mini..um Requirements for Rezoning that have been reviewed by the Planning Commission and will be reviewed by the City Council at an upcoming meeting. Although these minimum requirements have not yet been formally adopted by the City Council, they are summarized in the Following paragraphs, along with a discussion of how they are proposed to be met by this request. ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION September 19, 1988 Page 3 A. Minimum Area As currently drafted, the special requirements for rezcning in the Corridor Area call for a minimum of five acres. There has been some discussion about the increase of this minimum to 10 acres. However, since the subject application includes 32.6 acres, it is well in excess of the minimum area requirements. B. Access and Circulation Plan As noted above, key access and circulation issues will be resolved when the specific alignment of the proposed frontage road is determined. The section on the recommended alternative for this area states that the residential area would be served by a cul-de-sac or circular road off Brown Road with no connection to the west, if the frontage road is installed. Consequently, the proposed design would meet this standard, provided that appropriate commitments can be negotiated for the location and construction of the proposed frontage road. C. Sanitary Sewer Availability The City's engineering consultant has reviewed this application and states in his report that the site can be served with sanitary sewer through Long Lake (joint powers agreement), or by constructing a new interceptor line as described in the Trunk Highway 12 Corridor Sanitary Sewer Study prepared by his office. D. Stormwater Management. The City Engineer indicates that a storm drainage plan will need to be developed to serve the area. The proposed ponding area will be located near the intersection of Brown Road and Trunk Highway 12. The applicants are aware of the need for stormwater pond and the City's concern about the quality of runoff to area lakes. They have agreed to prepare detailed plans to meet these standards. E. Available Zoning Districts This proposal is for a rezoning to R-1A, One Family Residential District through the PRD, Planned Residential Development process. Both of these zoning districts are listed among the available zoning districts for rezoning with the Highway 12 Corridor Area. ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION September 19, 1988 Page 4 F. Building Design and Construction These standards are intended to control the development of multi -family residential, commercial and industrial uses, and are not intended to apply to single-family residential development. G. Requirement of Development Agreement It is anticipated that a development agreement will be drafted and executed prior to the completion of the approval process. DEVELOPMENT SUMMARY Site P_rea: 32.6 Acres Single -Family Lots: 25 Homes Per Acre: .76 Private (shared) Open Space: 8.4 Acres Average Size: 35,000 Square Feet (0.8 ac.) Area in P-ivate Roadway: 2.2 Acres DISCUSSION DEVELOPMENT ANALYSIS This proposal is consistent with the Highway 12 Corridor Study, therefore, it is consistent with the Orono Comprehensive Plan. It also appears that all of the necessary requirements for rezoning that apply to this area can be met. When the Planning commission reviewed this application as a Sketch Plan, there was one issue that stood out among the others. That issue was the length of the proposed cul-de-sac and various alternatives for mitigating tr.is concern. As you will rezall, the proposed cul-de-sac is in excess of 2,000 feet in length. The City Code indicates a maximum length for public streets of 1,000 feet. It does not state a maximum length for private streets, which is the nature of the roadway in this development. From discussions with the Planning Staff we also understand that the City has allowed private cul-de-sacs in excess of 1,000 feet in previous cases, without requiring a variance. ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION September 19, 1988 Page 5 We have discussed this matter with the City Attorney and he acknowledges that the Code does distinguish between private and public streets and that no length maximum is stated for private cul-de-sacs. He also notes that a literal reading of the Code would indicate that the City will allow private cul-de-sacs of any length, with no consideration for public safety, or even the Community's Transportation planning objectives. Clearly that would be an unreasonable interpretation. As you know, this is an application for approval of a PRD. That section of the Ordinance does permit some flexibility in lot size and contains some provisions related to private open space. It does not authorize the departure from the strict interpretation of the other performance standards (setbacks, height limitations, etc.). The proposed PUD Chapter that the Planning Commission recommended to the City Council at the last workshop meeting would permit design flexibility of this nature, if they presented certain desirable opportunities for the community. From the discussion presented above it is clear that the City should act on this application with the understanding that the proposed cul-de-sac length does not require the approval of a variance. we recommend that the Planning Commission and City Council not only consider this request on its merits, but also in the context of the standard that you wish to set for subsequent requests. Because you should always strive to act consistently in similar factual situations. What is very important to unde:ftand, however, is that since this application does Ilot require a variance, you do not need to find a hardship present in order to approve it. Rather, you could cite other findings to justify the approval, and if these findings are prepared carefully, the problem of creating a precedent can be mitigated. The applicants have analyzed the suggestion of looping the proposed street. They plan to make a complete presentation to the Planning Commission and City Council and fully explain why they have chosen not to follow that suggestion. Basically, they have found that because of the topography in this area, the grading required to complete the loop would be extensive. They find that approximately 3/4 of an acre of additional woods would have to be cleared and that much of this street extension would be constructed at approximately 8 percent gradient. ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION September 19, 1988 Page 6 They also point out that the project is to be developed at a very low density and that the statistical probability of the combination of events that would need to occur to prohibit passage in an emergency are very small. They may have additional arguments in favor of their proposal, but we believe these to be their main points. Clearly, no one involved in this process wants to clear any more trees and understory than is absolutely necessary. It is also true that the statistical probability of blocked access to remote lots in this subdivision are very small. But, the problem lies with the fact that we are dealing with the set of rules that apply to the entire c;'mmunity and to the standards that you feel are reasonable throughout the City. It is also unfortunately true that we do experience tornadoes and wind storms in this area and given the narrow width of the proposed streets and the densely wooded nature of the property, a tree could blow over in a storm and block the street. The statistical probability may be low, but the down side risk could also be very high if a resident needed emergency treatment. SUMMARY/ RECOMMENDATION We recommend that the Planning Commission approve tree proposed rezoning of this portion of the Rebe:s property. This request can be developed in a manner that is fully consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and from all representations it appears to be a very high quality development. We would recommend acting on this portion of the request as a separate motion. We also recommend that you approve the proposed PRD (conditional use permit) and subdivision and we Luggest three alternative actions for your consideration. They are by no means suggested as all of the reasonable actions that you may choose to take, but we believe that there is a rational basis for each approach. 1. Accept the Applicants Plans as Presented Since the proposed cul-de-sac length does not require a variance, you do not legally need to find a hardship to approve it and the arguments advanced by the proponents do provide a rational basis for this request. If you choose this alternative, we recommend that findings be prepared before final approval is granted to acknowledge the uniqueness ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION September 19, 1988 Page 7 of this proposal and protect the City's ability to enforce reasonable limitations on private street lengths in the future. 2. P.ectuire the Street to be Looped or the Connection With the Stubbed Street to the West 2,100 feet is more than two times the ordinance maximum length for public streets and there is clearly sufficient justification for either of the options stated above. It may be possible to refine the grading plan to take fewer trees. Perhaps a short stretch of very steep grade and the use of retaining walls could make a significant difference. 3. Rewire the Construction of an Emergency Vehicle Only Access Another alternative would leave the lot configuration as is, thus saving as many trees as possible. An emergency access could be provided along the short stretch of the propo,�d private trail betw�pen Pine Ridge Trail and the interior street. The specific nature of this connection could be studied in greater detail. In its final form it could be greatly camouflaged and be designed to preclude trespass by recreational vehicies. We would want to talk to both the City Engineer and the Fire Department about this facility, but there is no reason why it could not be desiqned co be attractive and to fit into the proposed development. In summary, this application requires that the Planning Commission and City council carefully reevaluate the issue of maximum cul-de-sac le:igth for private streets. It also demanr a careful review and consideration of its unique merits. Whei this review has been completed, the City will be in a position to take an action that is reasonable both to Mr. Rebers and to future applicants. G S 10.20 - SEC. 10.20. R-1A ONE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT. Subd. 1. Purpose. The "R-1.A" One Family Residential District is intended to provide a district which will allow a combination of low density residential development and limited agricultural activity. Planned residential developments may be allowed by conditional use permit. The district shall have immediate access to highways and public sanitary sewer. Subd. 2. Permitted Uses. within any "R-lA" One Family Residential District, no structure or land shall be used except for one or more of the following uses: A, One family detached dwellings. B. Public owned oarks and playgrounds- C. Municipal buildings. Subd. 3. Conditional Uses. within anw "R-IA" One Family Residential District, no structure or land shall be used for the following uses except by conditional use permit: A. Schools. Public schools and parochial or private schools which teach a curriculum similar to a public school provided no building shall be located within fifty feet of any lot line of an abutting lot in an "R" District and that a fence be erected fifteen feet or more from all street lot lines where the abutting use is for open play, and nursery schools providing fifty square feet of playground space per pupil. B. Churches. Churches including those related structures located on the same site which are an integral part of the church proper, convents or homes for persons related to a religious function on the same site provided no building other than a residence shall be located within fifty feet of any lot line of an abutting lot in an "R" District. C. Clubs, Camps, etc. Golf courses, country clubs, tennis clubs, public swimming pools serving more than one family, scout camps, YMCA camps, YWCA camps, church camps, or private non- profit parks, playgrounds and other similar uses. The principal structure for any of the above listed uses shall be 100 feet or more from any abutting lot in an "R" District, and accessory structures shall be a minimum of fifty feet from any lot line. D. Public Service Structures. Public service structures, including but not limited to electric transmissiCn lines, buildings such as telephone exchange stations, booster or pressure regulating stations, wells, and plumbing stations, elevated tanks, lift stations and electrical power substations, provided no building shall be located within fifty feet from any lot line of an abutting lot in an "R" District. prior to granting such permit it shall be found that the architectural design if ORONO CC '9 (4-1- ,j. § 10.31 F. There shall be no setback exceptions permitted for any horizontal building addition or hardcover increase of any kind within 75 feet of the shoreline or within 26 feet of any wetland. G. There shall be no setback exceptions permitted without a Council apprc,ed variance in cases where any existing building is being replacel by a new building, or where tho proposed addition, remodeling and/ renovation work constitutes 50 percent or more of the aasessar's fair market value for the existing building. In these situations, the new work shall conform to all required setbacks. H. The exceptions authorized by this Subdivision apply only to setback requirements and do not authorize variance of any lot area, hardcover, building height, building area or any other zoning or building code performance Standard. Subd. l9 Future amendments. The "RS" District regulations adopted by this Section represent an innovative attempt to solve the unique problems relating to historic use and previously platted substandard lots on the islands while at the same time assuring the property owners of continued reasonable use of their property. It may be found by subsequent City Councils that yhis Section was not restrictive enough to protect the health, safety and welfare of the citizens and that new development potential granted to property owners by this Section may have to be modified. Therefore, no new development rights granted by this Section shall be deemed to be vested property rights but shall remain subject to future -codification by the City. Source: Ordinance No. 246 Effective Date: 1-13-83 SEC. 10.32. PRD PLANNED RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT. Subd. 1. Purpose. This Flan is available to land subdividers subject to Council approval, as alternative to standard minimum lot size subdivision of land. The purpose of this plan is to enhance the appearance of neighborhoods through preservation of natural open spaces, to counteract the efFects of urban congestion and monotony, to provide cohesive structure to neighborhood design, to offer recreation opportunities close to home, and to aid in improving the welfare in general of City residents. Subd. 2. Submission of Plans. Land owners may submit land subdivision plans f,)r any "R" District without adherence to minimum lot size requirements for each building lot, provided that the total number of building lots, or dwelling units, shall not exceed the number of such lots or units permissible under the minimum lot size requirements of the zoning district or districts in which such land is situated. (IR(aN0 CC 330 (4-1-64) 5 10.32 Subd. 3. Council Discretion. The dwelling units permitted may be, at the discretion of the Council and subject to the conditions set forth by the Council, in detached, attached or multiple family dwelling structures; subject to the limitations provided for in each zoning district. Subd. 4. Open Space, Etc. The dedication, ownership, use and maintenance of open spaces created by the application of the Planned Residential Development shall be subject to conditions deeme' necessary by the Council to assure the preservation of such open spaces for their intended purposes. Subd. 5. Dedication of open Space. The dedication and ownership of such open spaces may be through: (1) Homeowners Association; (20 Landlord Maintenance; (3) Special Service District; (4) Municipal Ownership; or 5) any other method deemed appropriate by the Council to accomplish the purposes oc ;his plan. Subd. 6. Site Plan. The proposed site plan, including location, spacing and basic design of proposed buildint:3, street and parking plans, water and sewer (public or private) Llans, and plans of ipen space available for park or recreational purposes, shall be submitted for approval by the Planning Commission and the Council. Subd. 7. Hearings. The Council may direct that a public hearing be held to review such plans. Subd. 8. Final Approval. Final approval shall not be granted until all conditions set by the Council a:i met; and, further the Council shall not approve any such Planned Residential Development prior to the legally binding establishment of the open space ded.car-ion, ownership and maintenance provisions, such provisions to be guaranteed by bonding or other means satisfactory to the Council. Subd. 9. Subdivision Requirements. All provisions of subdivision procedure established by the City Code except as modified herein above, shall govern applications under tlis plan. Source: Municipal Code Effective Date: 9-14-67 (Sections 10.:33 through 10.39, inclusive, rFserved for future ex-)ans ion. ) ORONO CC 3 3 1 (4-1-44) PRESL. RS PUBLIC HEARING Peter Jarvis, Bob Kost, BRW, Inc. ITEM Request for rezoning from RR-1B to R-1A, Preliminary Plat .*Xpproval of a Subdivision Consisting of 25 Single -Family Lots and Related Outl.ots, and Approval of a Conditional Use Permit for a PRD, for the 32.6 acre Rebers Property, Located in the Ncrthwest Quadrant of T.H. and P.-rown Road. BACKGROUND This application was reviewed by the Planning Commission as a Sketch Plan on August 15. 11.ithough there was considerable discussion about the details of the proposal and the relationship between this application and subsequent stages of the development of the adjacent property and the remainder of the Highway 12 Corridor, there was general support for the application. The Planning Report prepared for the Sketch Plan review contained considerable background material and some recommendations for design modifications from the applicants. To facilitate the Commission's review of this application, the background information has been summarized in this report. The recommendations suggested in the previous report are also noted in appropriate sections of this report. ummarY�f Existing Conditions A. Natural Characteristics: The applicants have submitted an exhibit entitled "Site Forces" that includes a graphic summary of the existing conditions on the Subject Property. As this exhibit shows, tLie property contains rolling tDpography and varies in elevation from 1,044 feet near the center of the site. From this point it slopes (steeply in places) to relative low points along the edge of Brown Road, along its east. ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION September 19, 1988 Page 2 side to the northwestern corner of the property, where it is the lowest (992.0 feet). The site contains predominantly heavy clay and clay/loam soils. These soils present severe limitations for the installation and maintenance of on -site sewage disposal systems. The majority of the site is covered by mature maple forest, although a significant stand of coniferous trees are also present which were planted by Sid Rebers. B. Comprehensive Plan Relationships, Zoning Issues: As the Planning Commission is well aware, the Subject Property is located within the Highway 12 Corridor Study Area. Since that study was adopted by the City as a formal amendment to the Comprehensive Plan, the Planning Commission should refer to that document for review of pertinent comprehensive planning issues. This property is discussed on pages 49 through 52. This application includes only the northern portion of the Rebers site, although some preliminary sketches have been shard with the City that illustrate the future development of the southern portion as well. The Highway 12 Corridor Study anticipated the development of single-family residential lots on the northern portion of the site and t1,at is what is being applied for in this request. The recommended alternative states that the density should not exceed 25 lots, which is the number shown on the pi )osed plat. Therefore, at the most basic level, this req"est is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. The remainder of the discussion in the Corridor Study focused on traffic and stormwater management issues. Both of those issues will be addressed at the point at which the southern portion of the site is developed. Zon'n _lssues The area contained within the Highway 12 Corridor Study is subject to the proposed Special Minimum Requirements for Rezoning that have been reviewed by the Planning Commission and will be reviewed by the City Council at an upcoming meeting. Although these minimum requirements have not yet been formally adopted by the City Council, they are summarized in the following paragraphs, along with a discussion of how they are proposed to be met by this request. ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION September 19, 1988 Page 3 A. Minimum Area As currently drafted, the special requirements for rezoning in the Corridor Area call for a minimum of five acres. There has been scme discussion about the increase of this minimum to 10 acres. However, since the subject application includes 32.6 acres, it is well in excess of the minimum area requirements. B. Access and Circulation Plan As noted above, key access and circulation issues will be resolved when the specific alicment of the proposed frontage road is determined. The section on the recommended alternative for this area states that the residential area would be served by a cul-de-sac or circular road off Brown Road with no connection to the west, if the frontage road is installed. Consequently, the proposed design would meet this standard, provided that appropriate commitments can be negotiated for the location and construction of the proposed frontage road. C. Sanitary Sewer Availability The City's engineering consultant has reviewed this application and states in his report that the site can be served with sanitary sewer through Long Lake (joint powers agreement), or by constructing a new interceptor line as described in the Trunk Highway 12 Corridor Sanitary Sewer Study prepared by his office. D. Stormwater Management The City Engineer indicates that a storm drainage plan will need to be developed to serve the area. The proposed ponding area will be located near the intersection of Brown Road and Trunk Highway 12. The applicants are aware of the need for stormwater pond and the City's concern about the quality of runoff to area lakes. They have agreed to prepare detailed plans to meet these standards. E. Available Zoning Districts This proposal is for a rezoning to R-1A, One Family Residential District through the PRD, Planned Residential Development process. Both of these zoning districts are listed among the available zoning districts for rezoning with the Highway 12 Corridor Area. r ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION September 19, 1988 Page 4 F. Building Design and Construction These standards are intended to control the development of multi -family residential, commercial and industrial uses, and are riot intended to apply to single-family residential development. G. Requirement of Pevelopment Agreement It is anticipated that a development agreement will be drafted and executed prior to the completion of the approval process. DEVELOPMENT SUMMARY Site Area: 32.6 Acres Single -Family Lots: 25 Homes Per Acre: .76 Private (shared) Open Space: 8.4 Acres Average Lot Size: 35,000 Square reet (0.8 ac.) Area in Private Roadway: 2.2 Acres DISCUSSION DEVELOPMENT ANA! This proposal is consistent with the Hlgiiway 12 Corridor Study, therefore, it is consistent with the Orono Comprehensive Plan. It also appears that all of the necessary requirements for rezoning that apply to this area can be met. When the Planning commission reviewed this application as a Sketch Plan, there was one issue that stood out among the others. That issue was the length of the proposed cul-de-sac and various alternatives for mitigating this concern. As you will recall, the proposed cul-de-sac is in excess of 2,000 feet in length. The City Code indicates a maximum length for public streets of 1,000 feet. It does not state a maximum length for private streets, which is the nature of the roadway in tnis development. From discussions with the Planning Staff we also understand that the City has allowed private cul-de-sacs in excess of 1,000 feet in previous cases, without requiring a variance. ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION September 19, 1988 Page 5 We have discussed this matter with the City Attorney and he acknowledges that the Code does distinguish between private and public streets and that no length maximum is stated for private cul-de-sacs. He also notes that a literal reading of the Code would indicate that tae City will allow private cul-de-sacs of any length, with no consideration for public safety, or even the Community's Transportation planning objectives. Clearly that would be an unreasonable interpretation. As you know, this is an application for approval of a PRD. That section of the Ordinance does permit some flexibility in lot size and contains some provisions related to private open space. It does not authorize the departure from the strict interpretation of the other performance standards (setbacks, height limitations, etc.). The proposed PUD Chapter that the Planning Commission recommended to the City Council at the last workshop meeting would permit design flexibility of this nature, if they presented certain desirable opportunities for the community. From the discussion presented above it is clear that the City should act on this application with the understanding that the proposed cul-de-sac length does not require the approval of a variance. We recommend tha` the Planning Commission and City Council not only consider this request on its merits, but also in the context of the standard that you wish to set for subsequent requests. Because you should always strive to act consistently in similar factual situations. What is very important to understand, however, is that since this application does not require a variance, you do not need to find a hardship present in order to approve it. Rather, you could cite other findings to ji,stify the approval, and if these findings are prepared carefully, the problem of creating a precedent can be mitigated. The applicants have analyzed the suggestion of looping the proposed street. They plan to make a complete ►;resentation to the Planning Commission and City Council and fullv explain why they have chosen not to follow that suggestion. asically, they have found that because of the topography in this area, the grading required to complete the loop would be extensive. They find that approximately 3/4 of an acre of additional woods would have to be cleared and that much of this street extension 11 ild be constructed at approximately 8 percent gradient. ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION September 19, 1988 Page 6 They also point out that the project is to be developed at a very low density and that the statistical probability of the combination of events that would need to occur to prohibit passage in an emergency are very small. They may have additional arguments in favor of their proposal, but we believe these to be their main points. Clearly, no one involved in this process wants to clear any more trees and understory than is absolutely necesr--y. It is also true that the statistical probability of block. access to remote looms in this subdivision are very small. But, the problem lies with the fact that we are dealing with the set of rules that apply to the entire community and to the standards that you feel are reasonable throughout the City. It is also unfortunately true that we do experience tornadoes and wind storms in this area and given the narrow width of the proposed streets and the densely wooded nature of the property, a tree could blow over in a storm and block the street. The statistical probability may be low, but the down side risk could also be very high if a resident needed emergency treatment. SUMMARY/ RECOMMENDATION We recommend that the Planning Commission approve the proposed rezoning of this portion of the Rebers property. This request can be developed in a manner that is fully consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and from all representations it appears to he a very high quality development. We would recommend acting on this portion of the request as a separate motion. We also recommend that you approve the proposed PRD (conditional use permit) and subdivision and we suggest three alternative actions for your consideration. They are by no means suggested as all of the reasonable actions that you may choose to take, but we believe that there is a rational basis for each approach. 1. Accept the Applicants Plans as Presented Since the proposed cul-de-sac length does not require a variance, you do not legally need to find a hardship to approve it and the arguments advanced by the proponents do provide a rational basis for this request. If you choose this alternative, we recommend that findings be prepared before final approval is granted to acknowledge the uniqueness ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION September 19, 1988 Page 7 of this proposal and protect the City's ability to enforce reasonable limitations on private street lengths in the future. 2. Require the Street to be Looped or the Connection With the Stubbed Street to the West 2,100 feet is more than two times the ordinance maximum length for public streets and there is clearly sufficient justification for either of the options stated above. It may be possible to refine the grading plan to take fewer trees. Perhaps a short stretch of very steep grade and the use of retaining walls could make a significant difference. 3. Require the Construction of an Emergency Vehicle Only Access Another alternative would leave the lot configuration as is, thus saving as many trees as possible. An emergency access could be provided along the short stretch of the proposed private trail between Pine Ridge Trail and the interior street. The specific nature of this connection could be studied in greater detail. In its final form it could be greatly camouflaged and be designed to preclude trespass by recreational vehicles. We would want to talk to both the City Engineer and the Fire Department about this facility, but there is no reason why it could not be designed to be attractive and to fit into the proposed development. In summary, this application requires that the Planning Commission and City Council carefully reevaluate the issue of maximum cul-de-sac length for private streets. It also demands a careful review and consideration of its unique merits. When this review has been completed, the City will be in a position to take an action that is reasonable both to Mr. Rebers and to future applicants. 3. AREAS FOR CHANGE �) 3.1 Introduction The areas in which changes are anticipated has been broken down into 5 areas, as shown on Figure 21. City of Orono HIGHWAY 12 CORRIDOR STUDY Westem Portion AREAS FOR CHANGE Fig. 20 The following discussion will highlight each area's significant features, the alternatives that were considered and the recommended alternative. Fig. 21 37 3.5 property No• 4 under two Introduction - This 45 acre grouping is currently the majority of it zoned rural residential single ownerships with way 12 are currently family- 10 acres abutting High_ Approximately l out approximately 3 zoned B-1 reside All business district. Typical concerns for acres of this are under a single owner. include access to Highway 12 and North Brown Road i this property together with the concern for safety at the North Brown Road an Highway 12 intersection. Discussion of Alternatives - Alternative No. 1 - Present Zoning uided f this property were to develop as it is currently g I of commercial uses and zoned, it would result in a narrow strip will be Highway 12• However, since these businesses along Highway 12some form of Hig , restricted from direct access off were to be Provided- If this area frontage road will need to be p Highway 12, it would served by a frontage e road adjacent to Hig problem since this road represent an p solution to this p expensive P`` �•, be developed on one side.: would only / i .. Area 4&5 Fig. 30 Alternative No. 2 - Alternative 2 would allow for business/commercial abutting Highway 12 to be served by a remote frontage road that would eventually extend over to Willow Drive. The north side of this would provide for multi -residential with the bulk of the northern site developed at the unsewered 2-acre residential. Connection of the single family to Pine Ridge Lane is optional, and would be eliminated from consideration in exchange for frontage road between North Brown Road and Willow Drive. Area 4 SO Alternative No. 3 - Property Owners Proposal At the beginning of the process, the owner submitted a scheme for development of the property, which was subsequently amended by the owner during the process which provides as shown in Figure 32 for: A) A combination of land 2 acre single family lots on the north portion utilizing municipal services. The two acre single family are used to buffer the 2 acre unsewered lots to the north and west. B) The southern portion does provide for a remote frontage from Brown Road west to the western edge of the property. s/ 4 \ ► s I \ Yn 4 ' 7 � _ • • tw a , `� SOWY RESERS r 1. Property Owner Proposal Area 4 F1% 32 51 K Recommended Alternative - The recommended alternative, which is includes a further extension of the limited/office commercial business district back from Highway 12, with a remote frontage road on the back portion of this district similar to figures 31 and 32. Prijr to the development of the commercial portion of this property, the existing intersection at Brown Road and Highway 12 shall be improved so that safety concerns associated with the current use and future increased use of this intersection are addressed. Configuration of the frontage road and North Brown Road would be determined at the time of development. Frontage road access to Highway 12 could either be opposite Brimhall Avenue in Long Lake, and/or on Willow Drive opposite the frontage road between Willow Drive and Old Crystal Bay Road. The property north of the commercial area would be single family with sewer and water planned for the area. wi.tn sewer anu waL=ithe property, the owner could submit a 1 and 2 acre mixed single family densi-Ly alternatives for Council consideration. The maximum allowed density acceptable would not exceed that outline in the alt:�rnati-:e 3, subject to utility availability, appropriate density, buffering, etc. The residential area would be served by a cul-de-sac or circular road of f Brown Road with no connection to the west if the frontage road is instal 52 To: Mayor Grabek & Orono Council Members City Administrator Bernhardson From: Michael P. Gaffron, Asst Planning & Zoning Administrator Date: October 5, 1988 Subject: #1338 DuWa;.,n2 & Connie :chibilla, 3235 Crystal Bay Road - Variance - Resolution Application - Request for hardcover and accessory structure area variances to construct a new garage. Zoning District - LR-lC, Single Family, 1/2 Acre, Sewered List of Exhibits Exhibit A - Notice of Planning Commission Action Dated 10/5/88 Exhibit B - Title Documents in Question Exhibit C - Memo & Exhibits of 9/30/88 Exhibit D - Proposed Resolutioi. Discussion - The applicants are proposing to construct a two car garage at. the rear of their property. Due to the topography of the - , te, this garage will have a storage area below it, with the total floor area of the structure being 1,248 s.f. (624 s.f. on each floor). At their October 3rd meeting, Planning Commission recommended approval of this size variance based on the proposed non -obtrusive appearance and proposed use of the structure, finding that the space underneath is necessary to support the structure and there is no point in making that space unusable for storage. The garage foot print and dimensions are 24'x26'. The garage and its associated driveway at the rear of the property, accessing to a private driveway on the railroad right-of-way, will increase the existing 29.6% hardcover in the 7:)--250' zone, up to 39.6%. The property formerly did contain a garage in this location, but that garage was removed after it sustained major damage in the 1987 super storm. Planning Commission recommended approval of the requested hardcover variance, subject to no future additional hardcover on the property. Please review the memo of September 30, 1988. You will note that a 33' public easement for highway purposes shows up on the survey, and the prol.oseci garage would be located on this apparent easement. The applicants have gt,estioned the validity of that easement, and their attorney is currently attempting to verify the validity of that easement. Based on documer is which have been reviewed by staff and the City Attorney, there may be some question as to whether that easement correctly should be recited on applicants' title, however, it is in the title hence the City Attorney's opinion is that until such tame twat easement is no longer of record, the City would be remiss in issuing a building permit for a structure on that easement. It is likely that the property owners will have to initiate a "proceeding subsequent" to have the easement removed from their title. If during that Proceeding it is determined that the City has a legal interest in this "public easement for highway purposes', at that time the City may have to determine whether the public interest would be best served by allowing that easement to be extinguished. "71 Zoning File #1338 October 5, 1988 Page 2 of 2 Staff Recommendation - Based on the above concerns, and in conjunction with Planning Commission's rect-,Lmendation, staff recommends approval of the hardcover and accessory struc• -� floor area variances to construct the proposed garage, subject to conditi,ins as noted in thA attached proposed resolution, including the condition that no building permit be issued until such time thc.t the 33' public easement for highway purposes is determined to be no longer in effect. A RESOLUTION GRANTING A VARIANCE TO MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 10.03, SUBDIVISION 9 (C) AND SECTION 10.22, SUBDIVISION 2 FILE #1338 WHEREAS, DuWayne and Connie Schibilla (hereinafter "the applicants") are owners of the property located at 3235 Crystal Bay Road within the City of Orono (hereinafter "City") and legally descrih;ed as follows: Exhibit A, attached (hereinafter "the property"); and WHEREAS, the applicants have applied to the City for , variance to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.03, Subdivision 9 (C) to permit the construction of a detached two stall garage with storage space below it, such garage and storage space totalling 1,248 s.f. in floor area where only 1,000 s.f. of floor area is normally allowed in an accessory structure, and a variance to Section. 10.22, Subdivision 2 to permit hardcover in the 75- 250' zone in excess of the 25% hardcover normally allowed. Minnesota: NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono, FINDINGS 1. This application was reviewed as Zoninq File #1338. 2. The property is located in the LR-IC Single Fam-ly Lakeshore Residential Zoning District. 3. The Orono Planning Commission reviewed this application on October 3, 1988 and recommended approval of the proposed variance based upon the following findings: A) A detached garage previously existed on the property and that garage was demolished after major damage occurred to it as a result of the 1987 Super Storm. The proposed garage will be in approximately the same location as the former garage. Page 1 of 5 B) The proposed garage of plan dimensions 261x24' will. contain a storage area below it due to topography of the site. Each floor will comprise 624 s.f., for a total of 1,248 s.f. This floor area variance is justified from the standpoint that the structure below the upper floor is necessary to support the structure above it, and the lower storage area will be approximately 50% below grade. The garage will not be obtrusive visually in the neighborhood. The lower space will be used only for storage and not for dwelling purposes. The existing residence on the property has only a partial basement, hence this additional storage space in the garage will allow for needed storage space. C) Pre-existing hardcover on the rty currently_ is 29.6% in the 75-250' zone. Staff estimat hat hardcover associated with the yrevious garage and driv,�way was approximately equivalent of the currently proposed o3ra,;e and driveway. The proposed 75-250' hardcover of 39.6% ca•.iriot be easily reduced by removing unnecessary minor hardcover areas on the property, since .such areas do not exist. 4. The City Council has considered this application including the findings and recommendations of the Planning Commission, reports by City staff, comments by the applicants and the effect of the proposed variance on the hF 'th, safety and welfare of the community. 5. The City Council finds that the conditions existing on t"is 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 applicants, but is necessary to alleviate a demon- strable hardship or difficulty; is necessary to preserve a substantial property right of the applicants; and would be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan of the City. CONCLUSIONS, ORDER AND CONDITIONS Based upon one or more of the findings noted above, the Orono City Council hereby grants a variance to Municipal Zoning Cede Section 10.03, Subdivision 9 (C) to permit the construction of a detached two car garage with storage space below, comprising a total of 1,248 s.f. floor area where only 1,000 s.f. of accessory structure f loor area is normally allowed, and grants a variance to Section 10.22, Subdivision 2 to allow 39.6% hardcover in the 75-250' setback zone where only 25% hardcover is normally allowed, subject to the following conditions: Page 2 of 5 1. Hardcover on the property is allowed only as follows: 75-250' Hardcover: House Sidewaik Deck Garage Driveway TOTAL (Area = 10,700 s.£.) 1,514 s.f. 91 s.f. 1,570 s.f. 624 s.f. 442 s.f. 4,241 s.f. or 39.6% No additional hardcover will be approved for this property, and property owner is advised that any future proposal to increase hardcover on the property will not be approved, but might be approved only in conjunction with concurrent removals of existing hardcover, resulting in no net increase in hardcover on the property. 2. The storage space underneath the garage is approved under the condition that the garage and attached space below it may never be used as a dwelling unit, cannot be rented as a dwelling unit, may not have plumbing installed, and the applicants are advised that the property does not meet the criteria for granting of a guest house conditional use permit. 3. A building permit for the proposed garage shall not be issued by staff until such time that the "33' public easement for highway purposes" is determined to be no longer in effect. 4. Authorities granted with this resolution run with the property not with the applicants, 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 (October 10, 1989). 5. Violation of or non-compliance with any of the terms and conditions of this resolution shall constitute a violation of the zoning code, shall automatically terminate any authority granted herein, and shall be punishable as a misdemeanor. 6. The undersigned applicant have read, understood and hereby agrees to the terms of this resolution and on behalf of himself, his heirs; successors and assigns, hereby agrees to the recording of this resolution in the chain of title of the property. Page 3 of 5 Adopted by the Orono City Council on this loth day of October, 1988. ATTEST: Dorothy M. Hallin, City Clerk Property Owners? James R. Grabek, Mayor Paqe 4 of 5 ZONING FILE NO. 1338 CITY OF ORONO NOTICE OF PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION P.O. Box 66 Cry:,tal Bay, MN 55323 473-7357 Date of Notice: 10/5/88 --------------------------------------------------------------------------- TO: DuWayne & Connie Schibilla COPIES TO: 3235 Crystal Bay Road Wayzata, MN 55391 TYPE OF APPLICATION: Variance ----------------------------------------------------------- DATE OF MEETING: 10/3/88 VOTE: 6 For 0 Against Planning Commission recommends the following: Approval subject to conditions noted below NOTES AND SPECIAL CONDITIONS: 1. Recommended approval of hardcover variance to allow 39.6% in 75-250' zone,::ubject to advisory that no additional hardcover in excess of 39.6% will be allowed on the proeerty. 2. Recommended approval of accessory structure floor area variance to allow garage to contain 624 s.f. f loor area on each of 2 levels, for a total of 1,248 s.f., subject to condition that the structure shall not have plumbing installed and may not be used as a dwelling unit of any sort. 3. Recommended that no permit for the proposed garage be issued until such time that the "33' public easement for highway purposes" is determined to be no longer in effect. Please keep staff informed as to your efforts regarding removal of this easement from your title. I would again advise you for the record that it is the property owners responsibility to initi -te the legal procedures to have the title cleared. Additionally, be a e that, if it is detezmined through those procedures that the City does have a legal interest in this corridor, the City has not yet taken a position regarding whether it would release that interest. Applicant's next scheduled meeting is confirmed as: City Council Monday October 10, 1988; meeting starts at 7:00 P.M. If you desire certified copies of the official Planning Commissions minutes, they are available from the City Recorder after review and approval by the Planning Commission. ' Cr.l11�-1�v` of �t1 r8T �c-.A s i r,�t;tQ66 vt /N aFjrlo�l -- - �. •{ DISTRICT COURT NaAs) 6369 Transfer from Nos. 506207 & 506208 Originally registered the 15th day of September A. D. 1944 volume 286 Page 88M8 STAn of MWSCTk REGISTRATION coxy of HENN M. This is to certify that Du Wayne L. Schibilla and Connie L. Schibilla, husband and wife, as joint tenants of 3235 Crystal road, Ci'y of Orono, County of Hennepin, State of Minnesota are now the owner(s) of an estate in fee simple of and in the following described land situated in the County of Hennepin and Stag of Minnc:ota, to wit: Par 1: 'rhat part of Lot 1, Block. 2, Townsite of Langdon Park including portion of Northern Avenue, now vacated, described as io aws: Commencing at the point of intersection of the Northerj+line of the right-of-way of the Great Northern Railway Company with the Southerly extension of the dividing line between Lots 1 and 2 in said Block 2, Townsite of Langdon Park; thence North- westerly alon; the dividing line between said Lots 1 and 2 and same e:_tenned, a distance of 213.14 feet; thence Northeasterly deflecting right at an angle of 82*55'from last described course, a distance of 90 feet to the actual point of beginning of the tract of land to be described; thence continuing Northeasterly on the extension of said last described line a iistance of 30 feet; thence Southeasterly in a straight line 234.2 feet to a point in the Northerly line of said right-of-way of :he Great Northern Railway Company distant 70 feet Northeasterly measured along the Northerly line of said railway right-of-way from the initial point of commencement; thence Southwesterly along said Northerly right-of-way line 17.5 feet; thence Northwesterly in a straight line to the actual point of beginning; also including all that part of Lot 1 in said Block 2 lying between the Northwesterly line of the premises hereinabove described and the shore of Lake Minnetonka and between the Northerly extension of the Northeasterly and Southwesterly side lines of the premises hereinabove first described, according to the plat thereof on file or of record in the office of the Register of Deeds in and for said County. Subject to a public easement for highway purposes over the southeasterly 33 feet, said 33 feet being the southeasterly J -3 feet of the highway formerly laid out as Northern Avenue. Subject to a public road now across said premises, as shown in deed Doc No. 318647, Files of Registrar of Titles; Par 2: That part of Lot 1, Block 2 and of that part of Northern Avenue now vacated, Townsite of Langdon Park described as follows: to -wit: Commencing at the point of intersection of the Northerly line of the right of way of the Great Northern Railway Company with the .,outherly extension of the dividing line between Lots 1 and 2 in said Block 2, Townsite of Langdon Park thence Northwesterly along the dividing line between said Lots 1. and 2 and same extended, a distance of 213.14 feet; thence Northeasterly deflecting right at an angle of 82°55' from last described course, a distance of 1-20 feet to the actual point of beginning of the tract of land to be described; thence continuing from said actual point of beginning Northeasterly on the extension of said last described line, a distance of 60 feet; thence Southeasterly in a straight line 247.7 feet to a point in the Northerly line of said right of way of the Great Northern Railway Company, which point is 105 feet Northeasterly measured along the Northerly line of said railroad right of way from the initial point of commencement; thence Soutnwesterly along said Northerly right of way line 35 feet; thence Northwesterly in a straight line 234.2 feet to the actual point of beginning. Also including all that part of Lot 1 in said Block 2 lying between the Northwesterly line of the premises hereinabove described and the shore of Lake Minnetonka and between the northerly extension of the Northeasterly and Southwesterly side lines of the premises hereinabove first described. Subject to a right to create a public easement for highilay purposes over the Southeasterly 33 fe hereo , said 33 feet r� being the southeasterly 33 feet of the highway formerly laid out as Northern Avenue, as shown in deed Doc o, 1o8675, -les of Registrar of Title; D n c-, ;4� ) 9 aeo "S.7 \Ve, . s D.rd. E-opf A..eemnnts. M,r,drtd le Joint Tenants.` �IJig �l�iac»ture, I bri awc n of fhr ('080lily of of thr Jirr/ purl, ,anal �• *T weer.^�,. _ Form No. 6.M. Mlnneaats Uwifnm rnnrr r.weln. @Ian►. 110311. •1/,ul, t/sin . 15th tiny of September , /0" Oeori;e Beaverson and Jos-,.: ' ne Beavars.)n. L laLand and wife, Hennepin ,nd State of YInn asota , par•t 1e4 Einar C. Hacberstad and Olga C. Ha beret ad, husband and wife. of (fir Cor,nly of Hennepin mud Stutr of L41oil ego ta le,erllc• Of the aarnrtd pttrf, Ithincosetb. That Ihr rO,d nnrl lee of the lirat lwrri, in rnr,aelrraltnrt .,f flrr aunt of One Dollar (f1.00) and other valua:le consideration I101.L.4.RY. ,n hnret/ lend bee rhr e.nrl lwrr/tca of the are-rond prerd, tier Ircrilrt Il•hra•rnf is lerrebq arkrrnnJ- l�r,l. •1„ herrhef /irnrrl, 11,1rr,11n, .Cell, and ('enrol untn tier, a;eul lwtreeir.. of fler e,•rnral 1r,trf as fntnt I /rnnrrl. and „•,/ ne /rnnnt.t art ,•urn nine. Iheer nasirnA, the .v ry •r rnr of an ul lrn r•lir••, nnJ Ihr hre re Hurl near Ma � .f tier .rru•rfe•nr. F,p,t•cr, veil tier fr„rt no- pnr•rl of bleed lrlinr "I'd hrirr,I in the Cnrvurtl of Her...enin and 1�Ynlr of .1/,nnrr•,In, elrer,ilrrd no fnllnn•a, fr1•r00 That part of Lot One (1) in Block Two (2) tend Of that part of Northern Avenue now vacated, Townsite of Leeadon Park described as follows, to wit: Commencing at the point of Intersection of the Northerly line of the rir t of wa. the Grent Nort ern Railway Company with the Southerly extension of the dividing line between Lots One (1) and Two (2) in said 'Block Two (2). ;bt.nsite of Langdon Park: thence Worth- weeterI7 along the dividing line between said Lots One (1) and Two (2) and sane extended, a distance of 213.4.4 feet; thence Northeatterly deflecting right at an eagle of 82i0 551 from last described course, a distance of 120 feet to the actual point of beginning of the tract of land to be described; thence continuing from said actual point o: beginn'ng Northeasterly on the extension of said last described line. a distance of sixty (60) feet; thence Southeasterly in a straight line 247.7 feet to a point in the Northerly line of said right of wad• of the Great northern Railway Company. which point is 105 feet North- easterly, measured along the Northerly line of said railroad right of way from the initial point of commencement; thence Southwesterly along said Northerly right of way line 23 feet: thence Northwesterly in a straight line 234.2 feet to the actual point of beginning. 'Also including all that pest of Lot One (1) in said 'Block Two (2). lying between the Northwest- erly line of the premises hersinabove described and the shore of Lake Min.-otonka and be- tween the northerly extension of the Northeasterly and Southwesterly side lines of the premises herelnabove first described. Together with all rips/rian rights. accretions and rellctions apt teu_ant to the above described rosd now across said promilLslAuhject also to the following restrictions which shall be 21ndintr upon the Vendee@, tie it heirs and assigns, for a period extending to the first day of January, 1960. ."hat ssld tract when unproved shall be with one singla family dwelling at a cost of not less that. $15O0.00 when completed. That it @hall be of brick, stucco or wood construction and shell not be of what is catinonly known as tar paper exterior -ad that it may have on attached or detached garage for not more than two automobiles. 2eeo" ing a right to create a public easement for higbw&y purposes over the Southeast*rl thirty-three (33) feet thereof. sai•! thirty-three (33) feet being the Southeasterly thirty-three (33) feet of the tiighwAV formerly laid out as Northern Avenue. 7Io cjeExTtr A P,.4e w(_ ��;li'M�J►`As �7fQr:tC/:�L r SJ` ; -:'•� � l� O C u :.^ � aT � ,FJ/ p-j-) � �-st -i'7� of N �'/�:cw/ n.1 G �i N 1, -7 /TZ r E!27 s t! G-F lot A,,tj C ,LCeWL%VUr avp4t_ Pa4.ce L > �. yr= / 2 coiVTtl To: Planning Commission Chairman Kelley _ Orono Planning Commission Members City Administrator Bernhardson From: Michael P. Gaffron, Asst Planning & Zoning Administrator Date: September 30, 1988 Subject: #1338 Duane & Connie Schibilla, 3235 Crystal Bay Road - Variance - Public Hearing Application - Request for hardcover and accessory structure area variances to construct a new garage. Zoning District - LR-lC, Single Family, 1/2 Acre, Sewered List of Exhibits Exhibit A - Application Exhibit B - Plat Map Exhibit C - Property Owners List & Neighbor Acknowledgements Exhibit D - Survey Submitted by Applicant Exhibit E - Survey From City Files Exhibit F - Applicant's Hardcover Calculations Exhibit G - Selected Garage Plans Submitted Exhibit H - Neighborhood Survey Compilation Pertinent Facts - 1. The applicants are requesting variances to replace a garage which was removed after damage occurred during the 1987 super storm. That garage was located in approximately same location as the proposed garage. (Note that the pre-existing garage does not show on any survey). 2.. The proposed garage will consist of 2 stories due to the topography of the site. The upper story will be a garage space exiting to the south. The lower space is intended for storage. Total square footage of each floor is 624 square feet for a total of 1248 square feet, exceeding the 1,000 square foot floor area maximum for accessory structures by 248 square feet or 25%. 3. Per the applicants hardcover calculations submitted and as revised by staff, current hardcover is 29.6% in the 75-250' zone, and construction of the new garage and its associated driveway will result in a 75-250' hardcover of 39.6%. Note that the rear driveway that serves a number of these residences (along the railroad) is actually within railroad right-of-way. Hf6e.i_-crvt* (44_curA-r1e1.$). 4. The topography of the site would suggest that a 2 level garage structure is appropriate for this property. In order that the structure not exceed the 1,000 square foot maximum floor area, the garage would have to be reduced to 500 square cent per floor (dimension3 of 20x25 or 22x22). 5. From a site � lanning standpoint, the garage would be appropriately located at the proposed site. Garages serving neighboring properties exist on either side, and this garage will line up with those garages. Zoning File #1338 September 30, 1988 Page 2 of 2 6. There is an existing 201x20' gravel parking area in the 0-75' zone adjacent to Crystal Bay Road. Planning Commission may wish to consider whether the applicants need this parking once a garage is constructed, or whether this parking area can be re-woved and revert to grass. A large share of the hardcover on the property is made up of a wood deck area around the north and west sides of the house. There would not appear to be significant amounts of additional hardcover that could be removed in the 75-250' zone. 7. Staff is currently working with the Schibillas to determine whether the "33' easement for public highways", which shows up on the survey staff had on file, as well as in applicants torrens title,is in effect. If so, staff must recommend that any Planning Commission recommendation for approval include the condition that no garage permit may be issued until that easement is removed, which would to a degree depend upon whether the City or County had any current or future interest in use of that easement for right-of-way purposes. 8. The proposed garage will use the existing driveway access location, and there are no sight distance problems associated with this location. Staff Recommendation - Staff would recommend approval of the proposed garage location, finding that the location is consistent with evistinq garages in the neighborhood, and meets the 10' rear and side setbacks that would be in effect. Note that although this and 6 or 7 adjacent properties access to a private road on railroad right-of-way, technically the legal access for this property is to the north on Crystal Bay Road, hence the railway right-of-way line is considered a rear lot line. The 30' setback for garage doors facing a street does not specifically apply. Staff would recommend approval of the hardcover variance. Staff would ask Planning Commission and the applicant to consider whether a strict need for an over size garage exists, and what hardships would be presented if the length and the width dimensions of the garage decrease. Given the topography and the logical 2 story configuration, limiting the useable second f loor garage space due to excess space below might not be reasonable; is there the possibility that the garage can be constructed with a half basement ? If the Planning Commission recommends approval of the floor area variances requested, such approval would appropriately be granted under the condition that the garage and attached space below it may never be used as a dwelling unit, cannot not be rented as a dwelling unit, may not have plumbing installed, and the applicant should be advised that the property does not meet the citeria for granting of a quest house conditional use permit. 1`gain, any approval would have to be conditioned on a resolution of the easement issue. `y ? uate Rec'a Fee ,,,� --Receipt U_ -1 1 Initials OF ORONO - VARIANCE APPLICATION y � i„J i.AJ Initial Appl;.catib'�Fe� $150.00 ($50.00 per each additional variance) Renewal Variance'Pde 05.00 (no change from original application) After -the -Fact Fees (Double application fee) ----------- ---------------------------------------------------------- PROPERTY LOCATION Site Address J.T (2/S �sT,s C��► R1 Property Identification Number (P.I.D.) Please check one - Is the property abstract or Y_ torrens? Attach legal description to application if not included on required survey. --------------------------------------•------------------------------------- APPLICANT Phone ( home) /71- 7c j 9 Name Phone ( work) Address 3yLa y,-S,6aAeDR, City: Zip: 1!3 ------------------------------------------------- OWNER (if different than applicant) Phone ( home) �UU,N •ter;; J:'}��:��_�.� Name xdv..!/Nl;e 'i eC Se /�J �i � Phone (work) Address: 3o3S C4,v 4.sv, IQ/, City: 4,V-vy�,d74 Zip: Ss�3 9/ Date Property Acquired (month/year) I (do)t'(do� n t also own the adjacent parcels of land. ---------- :.,..L-=--------------------------- --------------------------- PRESENT USE OF PROPERTY Present Zoning District r, Present Use of Property perty 'r, t Residential v Other (specify) ---------------------- --------------- -------------------------------------- DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST Estimated Construction Cost $ g 00 0 2 Describe request in detail: 01 (7•yaA --------------------------------------------------------------------------- VARIANCES REQUIRED Lot Area Lot Width _ Hardcover Setback Variances ( Front Side Rear) Other HARDSHIP % Describe undue hardship or practical difficulty resulting from strict enforcement of zoning regulations: DESCRIPTION OF UNUSUAL PROPER Describe unusual property Code Requirements: PROPERTY CONDITIONS conditions preventing compliance with Zoning ------------------------------------------------------------------------- REQUIRED SUBMITTALS 1. Completed Application Form 2. Certified Property Owners List of owners within 150' (you can 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. 4. Certificate of survey including hardcover calculations as required. Plat Map. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ The Applicant and Property Owner must sign this application. Please remember that your variance application is -not complete if the a�ove 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 incurro& in review of this application, and certifies that the information supplied is true and correct to the best of his/her knowledge. (2 %� Applicant's Sigtature - �-9 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 membe� `y, and Council members fo•: purposes of investiga- tion and verificaticn o_ �ais requ�st. Owner's Signature llftiu1 ,�!Lf �f�� Date --------------------- 1---- ------------------------------------------------ Applicant must have -l: ,.'-mittals into the City offices 25 days before the Planning Commission t9et Planning Commission Meetings are held on the third Monday of each tn^nt'_�. Applicants must be present at all scheduled review meetings of tt-.e Planning Commission and Council, And, if an applicant is unable to i4-:s.7' a scheduled meeting, to please make arrange- ments to have an authori_�� , gent attend in yo,..r place and to advise the Building & Zoning nffi�_: is change prior to the meeting. I RUN DATE 0"G/86 BATCH 007 38 17-117-23 41 0001 PROP ADDR 02130 KEHWOOJ WAY OWNER NAME DONNA KABANUC TAXPAYER DONNA KABA► UK NAME/ADOR 6931 DALLAS RD BROOKLYN CTR MN SS430 38 17-1'7-23 41 0010 PROP ADO( 0321S CRYSTAL BAY RD Cp41E4 NAME T A J SCHUPP TAxPAYER TIMOTHY R A JEANETTE SCHUPP HAME:ADOR 321S CRYSTAL BAY RD WAYZATA MN SS391 38 17-117-23 41 0014 PROP AMR 0326S CRYSTAL BAY RD OWNER NAME LEROY J ERGER A WIFE TAXPAYER LEROY J ERGER t"M /ADOR 3Z6S CRYSTAL BAY RD WAYZATA MN SS391 82 16-117-23 3Z 0054 PROP ADOR 00082 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED OW&ER NAME OR H 6 MIKKELSON ETAL TAxPAYER RICHARD ANDERSON NAME/ADOR BOX 135 MINNETONKA BEACH MN 55361 HE44EPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORMATION SYSTEM PROPERTY OWNERS LIST 38 17-117-23 41 0008 00038 ADDRESS INJASSIGNED R A J BERSIE ROBERT D BERSIE 3159 NORTHVIEW RD WAYZATA MN 55391 38 17-117-23 41 0011 03205 CRYSTAL BAY RC R A ANDERSON i L K ANDERSON RICHARD ANDERSON BOX 135 MINNETOi-iKA BEACH HN 55361 38 17-117-23 41 0015 0328S CRYSTAL BAY RD THOMAS E MC MUF ETAL THOMAS E MCCUE 3285 CRYSTAL SAY RD WAYZATA MN 55391 82 16-117-23 32 0060 03159 NORTHVIEW RD R A J BERSIE ROBERT 0 BERSIE 3159 NORTHVIEW RD WAYZATA MN 55391 REPORT NO. PI435401 PAGE 16 38 17-117-23 41 0009 03235 CRYSTAL BAY RD DUWAYNE L SCHIBILLA AND WIFE OUWAYNE L SCHIBILLA 3235 CRYSTAL BAY RD WAYZATA MN 55391 38 17-117 23 41 0012 03255 CRYSTAL BAY RD C WILLIAM WOLFE AND WIFE C WILLIAM WOLFE 3255 CRYSTAL BAY ROAD WAYZATA MN 55391 82 16-117-23 32 0014 00082 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED Hk9BERT G MIKKELSON RICHARD A i LEESA K ANDERSON 32C5 CRYSTAL BAY RD BOX 135 MINNETONKA BEACH MN 55361 TOTAL BATCH 007 00011 I CERTIFY THAT THE FACTS (REPRESENTED ARE AN ACCURATE A'C TRUE REPRESENTATION OF INFORMATION AS IT APPEARS THIS DATE N THE RECORDS OF THE HENNEPIN COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF PROPERTY TAXATIO TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE AND BELIEF. DATE � � 9Y U.1 AdjacenttdPropertp Owners' Acknowledgement Form � Cic yyls�� �g,s y .ro•�D I (we) of �;5/I1/ .Pone print/name(s)] Tprint address] have reviewed the plans for the proposed improvement or proposed use of the property located at ,also referred to as Land Use Application No. 7. (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 proposed neighbor's project or use requires Council approval. Date Dat If you have any information that may assist the City in the review of this Land Use Application, please submit your comments to the Building i Zoning Office at least 10 days prior to the scheduled meeting date. ,4.e P:. Ck�a ^J 3Y; o009 P tat o t Suarvsy h ? \` for DuWbywe Seti I M& 0r.c°qi- f it Lot I, BlecK 2 3 To-vorite of l.a►redev Pa.Tic Annepin County, Mtrh. - P A O N � � / �- •i for •, -0 ir J i ( 0, S Vk \ iy� :.ti D ��•1 � . 1 6' r 4 CorJen R. CoMn Lard Suryeywr and Planner Lonr L&4, Mpreteta i Plat of Surrey for Duwa;me Schibilla 40 in t 1 -Block 21— Townsite of Langdon Park .4-5 Hennepin County, Minn. to:" 41 0e, ;/ Ir Fm;v 3.. A "st *41 Scale: 1" = 401 Date : 6-4-715 0 : Iran marlmr A. ti Gordon R. boffin Land Surve7or and Planner Long Laks, Minnesota i{ARDCOVF_R CALCULATION WORKSHEET ack ^e: tc:r:_;e one) 0-75' �75-250' 250-500' 500-1000' ExiStir::, Hari —ver in Zone r _ S.f. length width X . 6.f. x _ S.f. x S.f. b. Garage x S.f. e. Driveway x S.f. : S.f. d. Sidewalk _ x � �G �/ _ S.f. Ot A«� 03 x /.2 Y !Y . Deck IV r� f. Landscape x s.f. areas underlain x s.f. by plastic sheeting x S.f. -----_— x . S.f. f. Other > S.f. v Y � a•f. TOTAL x EXISTING HAPDCOIER . S.f. IN ZONE . 3 / %S' s.f. (1) Existing Hardcover 8 _Total Existing Hardcover x 100 Lot Area Within Zone 3/ , .fQ s. x 100 t 2 1 i IPo �oO.f. Additional Hardcover to be added in zone: Item Length x Width TOTAL S.f. /7 J/ n x x x TOTAL S.F. TO BE ADDED s.ft (2) �1 Existing Hardcover to be Removed, if any: _ .r' Item Length x Width TOTAL S.f. k a S.f. x e S.f. x — s.f.�� x S.f. 0 TOTAL S.F. TO BE REMOVED Final Hardcover Proposal: (Line (1) + Line (2 `;Line (3)) Existina T P aAa.,a T b o e Remuveo Proposed Hardcover t Line (4) x 100 s.f. ine (1) S.f. �C) (3) l� zfl 111 Final x 100 To: Mayor Grabek & Orono Council Members City Administrator Bernhardson From: Michael P. Gaffron, Asst Planning & Zoning Administrator Date: October 5, 1988 Subject: #1341 Daniel R. Vaughan/ Todd Ziesmer, 3440 Bayside Road - Variance - Resolution Application - Lot width variance to construct new house. Zoning District - LR-lA, Single Family Lakeshore Residential, 2-Acre, Unsewered List of Exhibits Exhibit A - Planning Commission Action Notice Dated 10/5/88 Exhibit B - Memo & Exhibits From 9/28/88 Exhibit C - Proposed Resolution Discussion Please review the memo and exhibits of September 28, 1988. Applicants are req:lesting a lot widt'n variance to construct a new house on this 2.3 acre property. The existing lot width is 118' where 200' is required, for a variance of 821. The proposed house location meets the required 30' side setbacks for the I.R-lA district. This house will be located 104' back from the front lot line, and is not considered a lakeshore lot, hence no average lakeshore setback requirement is in effect. The applicants have provided information for construction of a complete septic system to serve the property, however he notes that if sewer to this area is intended in the near future, he would prefer not to construct an entire septic system that would be abandoned after only a short period of use. The applicants neighbor to the east has discussed a relocation of applicants' proposed house, to move it northward approximately 10-15' in order that the neighbor's existing views of the lake are preserved. The Planning Commission did not feel compelled to make that house relocation condition of their approval, since nothing in the Zoning Code woul- disallow the originally proposed location. Hardcover is well within the prescribed limits. Staff Recommendation - :staff recommends approval of the requested lot width variance per the Planning Commission recommendation. A resolution for approval is attached. ZONING FILE NO. 1341 CITY OF ORONO NOTICE OF PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 473-7357 Date of Notice: 10/5/88 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- TO: Todd Ziesmer COPIES TO: Daniel R. Vaughan 10890 South Shore Dr 1265 Shoreline Dr Plymouth, MN 55441 Wayzata, MN 55391 TYPE OF APPLICATION: Variance ----•------------------------------------------------------- DATE OF MEETING: 10/3/88 VOTE: 6 For 0 Against Planning Commission recommends the following: Approval as submitted NOTES AND SPECIAL CONDITIONS: Applicant's next scheduled meeting is confirmed as: City Council Monday October 10, 1988; meeting starts at 7:00 p.m. If you desire certified copies of the official Planning Commission minutes, they are available from the City Recorder after review and approval by the Planning Commission. Note. Have you applied to Hennepin County Department of Transportation (935-3381) for a driveway access permit? (Neighbor to the west notes you will not be using his driveway.) TO: Planning Commission Chairman Kelley Planning Commission Members City Administrator Bernhardson FROM: Michael P. Gaffron, Asst. Planning & Zoning Administrator DATE: September 28, 1988 SUBJECT: #1341 Daniel R. Vaughan/Todd Ziesmer, 3440 Bayside Road - - Variance - Public Hearing ZONING DISTRICT: LR-lA, Single Family Lakeshore Residential, 2 acre, Unsewered APPLICATION: Lot width variance to construct new house. LIST OF EXHIBITS: Exhibit A - Application Exhibit B - Plat Map Exhibit C - Property Owners List Exhibit D - Survey Exhibit E - Survey With Site Plan Exhibit F- Applicant's Hardcover Calculations (See Hardcover Calculations by Surveyer on Exhibit D) PERTINENT FACTS: 1. This property previously contained a single family residence which the previous owner started to renovate, then demolished. The location of that structure is shown on the survey. Applicant wishs to construct a new residence on the property, and since there is currently no principal structure, the lot technically requires approval of a lot width variance. Lot width required - 200' Existing - 118' Variance - 82' or - 41% 2. The applicant is proposing to construct a residence 57' in width, located approximately 105' from the front lot line and about 225' from the lake. This proposed residence will meet the required 31' side setbacks for the LR-lA zoning district. 3. Note that ':his is not a lakeshore lot, nor is the property to the east a lakeshore lct, hence the structure is not subject to the average lakeshore setback requirement. Except for lot width, the proposed construction would appear to meet all pertinent requirements. The lot area is 2.35 acres excluding the County Road. Hardccver proposed in the 75-250, zone is approximately 6% where 25% is allowed and in the 250-500' zone is about 22.4% where 30% is allowed, based on the surveyor's calculations. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff would recommend approval of the requested lot width variance, finding that there is no additional land available to make this lot wider, and finding that the proposed residence on the property will meet the normal required 30' setbacks for the LR-lA zoninq district. Zoning File #1341 September 28, 1988 Page 2 of 2 Note that this property is within the Stubbs Bay Sewer Study Area, but since the City has made no determination as to whether City sewers will be installed in the area, a fully conforming septic system is proposed for this new construction. If during construction the City determines that the property will be served with sewer within a reasonably short time frame, the City Council would be asked at that time to consider a request for an interim holding tank system rather than force the property owner to construct a complete septic system that would have to be immediately abandoned upon connection to sewer. CITY OF ORONO - VARIANCMiatriance) `i "i Initial Application Fee ($50.00 per each addi Renewal Variance Fee $75.00 (no change from original application) After -the -Fact Fees (Double application fee) ----------------------------------------------------------- PROPERTY LOCATION Site Address Property Identification Number (P.I.D. ) OS -) 1 7 - .7 3 /-:k ^TE 5FFATTE VVV %i irLit� .ice, , J� t r., ' �'� A.V n4 Rol T. � 00)3 Please check one - Property A- abstract or torrens? Attach legal description to application if not included on required survey. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- APPLICANTPhone ( home) 5,j 1 - q fg-p Name Zact.4 Phone (work)- R ,� S -OG Address: 10g90 5•2 wU-v-Q City: Zip: ------------------------- OWNER (if differeni1t than applicant) Phone (home) 0 Name u It" C Phone (work) Address: L-5 5��Jl—a u"Z City: '-tz- Zip:_S -3 Date Property Acquired A(month/year) I (do not lso own the adjacent parcels of land. PRES OF PROPERTY Present Zoning District L(L-I A Present Use of Property \j PJ- - \ Residential Other (specify) --------------------------------------- ------------------------------------ DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST Estimated Construction Cost $ Describe request in detail: Lcrr W i>r4 itAk . -M COWTX,40- Nr+-.j k4n#-C- . VARIANCES REQUIRED Lot Area Lot Width Setback Variances ( Front Other Hardcover Side Rear) HARDSHIP Describe undue hardship or practical difficulty resulting from strict enforcement of zoning regulations: tA^,,ZW U, V, d,t."d _toy ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- DESCRIPTION OF UNUSUAL PROPERTY CONDITIONS Describe unusual property co ditions preventing compliance with} Zoning Code Requirements: ���,� D h, �, e i41A a -�vuu- ----- ---_V------------------------------------------------------------------ OIRED SUBMITTALS Completed Application Form Certified Property Owners List of owners within 150' (you must obtain tbi-s I from Hennepin County Department of Finance A-603 Govt Center tamped, •legal sized envelopes (#10) pre -addressed to each of the names on the above list with no return address (use address labels obtained with property owners list). Certificate of survey including hardcover calculations as required. Topographic survey (existing and proposed elevations) if any changes in existing grade are proposed. Plat Map (obtained with property owners list). As an addendum to this application, please attach a separate list of any other persons you wish notified of this application. Additional items as may be requested by City staff. -=------------------------------------------------------------------------ The Applicant and Property Owner must sign this application. Please remember that your variance application is not complete if the above information has no- 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 suppan correct to the best of his/her knowledge. Applicant's Signature 6 / Date , �S8 OWNERS SIGNATURE The owner hereby ackowledges and agrees to this application and further authorizes reasonable entry onto the property by City staff, consl1-tants, agents, Commission members, and Council members for purposes of investiga- tion and verification of this request. .rxfi - 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 schedule] review meetings of the Planning Commission and Council. If an applicant is unable to attend a scheduled meeting, please make arrangements to have an authorized agent attend in your place and to advise the Building & Zoning Office of this change prior to the meeting. 41 41 �y _R.EIGISTERED LAND SURVEY NO 843 .49 �y 32 3�31 13, 23 t�►i J - e i � i� � I +'1:J' ! ..•w �.'s a d_.4., � � d . a r p�^ � �^// �- i �G 2't�1�7+1, V.• ~ �j� �L � �_ v1 �,�1 I, a 1 � ' +s ' 3. I.. ,•a .s� `$ _ � n � t+ _w_ w � �. ♦�� !�• ,.'+1 W' 9 I ! I .yam . � � `r_.. _ r —'•'' J44 A ;>; (�L'afAS�S ' 3)j' N �•*� !�'s .)• �-�_ -fie i :.. R;RI DATE 07/01/88 HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORMATION SYSTEM REPORT NO. PI435401 PROPERTY OWlIERS LIST PAGE 1 BATCM 001 38 05-117-23 12 0015 38 05-117-23 13 0002 38 05-117-23 13 0003 rPOP ADDR 00038 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED 00215 TONKA AVE 00038 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED OWNER NAME STATE OF MlFfJ MICKY OLSGARO FLORIAN J STERNER ETAL TAXPAYER STATE OF MINN MICKEY OLSGARD FLORIAN J STERNER NAME/ADDR P 0 BOX 1016 5429 ALDRICH AVE SO MPLS MN 55458 MPLS MN 55419 38 05-117-23 13 0004 38 05-117-23 13 0012 38 05-117-23 13 0013 T°ROP ADDR 00038 ADDRESS UNAS516HED 03420 BAYSIDE RD 03440 BAYSIDE RD ,WffP NAME 6 l GUSTAFSON ETAL R A W AIIDEPSON DANIEL R VAUGHAN TAXPAf[P 6ERALO L GUSTAFSON ROBERT F A WENDY S ANDERSON TODD M A MARIE T ZIESMER HAMT/ADDR 200 BEDERWOOO OR 3420 BAYSIDE RD 1265 SHORELINE DR LONG LAKE MN 55356 LONG LAKE MN 55356 WAYZATA MN 55391 38 05-117-23 13 0014 38 05-117-23 13 0023 38 05-117-23 13 0024 PROP ADOR 03470 BAYSIDE RD 00225 TONCA AVE 00038 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED OWNER NAME DARYL R CARLSON R D LAFAVOP A R A LAFAVOR E B TALBERT ETAL TAXPAYER DARYL R CARLSON ROBERT D A REBECCA A LAFAVOR TAXPAYER TO LET FORFEIT NAME/ADOR 3470 BAYSIDE RD 225 TON(A AVE LONG LAKE M! 55356 LC'1G LAKE MH 55356 +. 38 05-117-23 13 0025 38 05-117-23 13 0026 38 05-117-23 13 0027 PROP ADDR 00038 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED 00245 TONCA AVE 00245 TONKA AVE t�{ 0I04C0 NAME E B TALBERT ETAL ESTHER M ADDISON ESTHER M AODISON y' TAXPAYER TAXPAYER TO LET FORFEIT ESTHER M ADDISON ESTHER M A,DISON A NAME/ADDR 3382 BAYSIDE RD 3382 BAYSIDE RD LONG LAKE MN 55356 LONG LAKE MI 55356 38 05-117-Z3 13 0028 38 05-117-23 13 0029 38 05-117-23 13 0030 PROP ADDR 00295 TONKA AVE 00038 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED 03400 BAYSIDE RD OWNER NAME H A R SCHMITZ ESTHER M ADDISON D A S ESTERS TAXPAYER HENRY A ROSIE SCHMITZ ESTHER M ADDISON VANIEL A SANDRA ESTERS NAME/ADDR 245 TONKA AVE 3382 BAYSIDE RD 3400 BAYSIDE RD ?.\ LONG LAKE MN 55356 LONG LAKE MI 55356 LONG LAKE MH 55356 38 05-117-23 13 0042 38 05-li7-23 13 0045 38 05-117-23 13 0046 PROP ADOR 03464 EASTLAKL ST 00038 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED 00038 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED OWNER NAME M A N HUNSLEY DARYL R CARLSON ET AL D A MONGE A N A MONGE TAXPAIFR MARK A HUIISLEY DARYL R CARLSON DEAN A A NANCY A MONGE HAhE,A^DR 3464 E LAKE ST 3470 BAYSIDE ROAD 3444 E LAKE ST S LONG LAKE MN 55356 LONG LAKE MN 55356 LONG LAKE MN 55356 PUN DATE 99/01/68 HFANEPIH COUNTY PROPERTY INFORMATION :YSTEM REPORT NO. PI435401 PROPERTY 0WERS LIST PAGE 2 BATCH 001 38 OS-117-23 14 0049 PPOP ADOR 00330 TOWA AVE 0WNE9 NAME STATE OF MINH TAWPAYFP STATE OF MIMI 4AMF/A0OP tt� TOTAL BATCH 001 00019 I CERTIFY THAT THE FACTS REPRESENTED ARE AN ACCURATE AND TRUE REPRESENTATION OF INFORMATION AS IT APPEARS THIS DATE ON THE RECORDS OF THE HENtlEPIN COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF VROPE TY TAXATION. T THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE AND BELIEF DATEX��BY, D. HARDCOVER CALCULATION SUMMARY A. B. C. D. E. P. - -...---.------------------.........----------._...---------------------------------- Existing Final Lakeshore Existing Hardcover Proposed Hardcover Allowed Setback Lot Area Hardcover Percentage Hardcover Percentage Hardcover Zone In Zone In Zone (B/A)x100 In Zone (D/A)xlOO Percentage 0-75' _(�Lgsf_sf1_sf 0 1 i 75-250' ,�C,�� of sf _ (t �QOe sf ��.5-� a 25 t a i 250-sf _ sf �j�� _: I �C sf 30 t 500-1000' ✓"� tv sf _sf t _ sf _t 35 t HARDCOVER LIMITATIONS HARDCOVER INCLUDES: I - Structures with roofs - Decks, even if slatted - Sidewalks - Driveways (paved or gravel) 15; - Decorative landscaping areas underlain by ` plastic sheeting i - Tops of retaining walls, rock walls Z`'r• - Any other surface that does not allow direct absorption of rainfall into the ground ROAD E. OTHER LAKESHORE REGULATIONS SEC. 10.22, REGULATIONS FOR 'LR-lA', 'LR-IA-1', 'LR-1B', 'LR-lC' AND 'LR-lC-1' ONE FAMILY LAKESUORE RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT. within any "LR-lA", LR-lA-1", 'LR-1B', 'LR-1C', or 'LR--lC-I* One Family Lakeshore Residential Distric the following regulations shall apply: Subd. 1. Lakeshore Set Back Regulations. The set back from the shoreline for lakeshore lots shall be at least 75 'eet and no buildiny may he located closer to the _d shoreline than the average distance from 'he shoreline of existing residence i� buildings on adjacent and nea:ty lots. Subd. 2. Lakeshore Hard C4 slat ions. within 75 feet _.)f shoreline there +hall be no excavating, filling cover, temporary or permanent strictures. Within 75 to 250 feet of the shoreline there shall be no greater than 25% hard cover. within 250 to 500 feet of the shoreline there shall be no greater than 301 hard cover. Within 500 to 1,0OG feet of the shoreline there shall be no greater than 35% hard cover. Subd. 3. Tree Removal Requ!ati<-,ns. No trees within 75 feet of .he shoreline with the diameter of six (5) int- -s or more ,h, 1 be removed without first obtaining 1 permit from the Coui.:i 1. RAR OVER-I&GULATI&MS WO HERT A. RARDCOVER ORDINANCE - In 1975,J the OrWAO.City-Council *tfepteo4w ordinance limiting the percentage of lot area that can be covered with impervious surfaces ('hardcover') such as roofs, driveways, sidewalks, etc. on properties located wit'` _:jj feet of a lake. Studies have shown that sediments, ails, and debris carrit . into the lake im highly urbanized areas have a detrimental impact on the quality of water in the �e. The intent of Orono's ordinance is to ensure that rainfall run-off will be cleansed by filtering through grassed or vegetated yard areas before entering the lake. B. HARDCOVER SETBACK ZONES - PERCENTAGE ALLOWED I. 0--751: in the area within 75' of the lakeshore, No Hardcover is allowed (0%). -- -- 1I. 75-250': in the portion of the lot located between 75' and 250' from the lake, 250 of that portion of the lot may be hardcovered. III. 250-5001: in the portio of the lot located between 250' and 5001feet from the lake 301 of that portion of the lot may �_-e hardcovered. IV. 500--1,0001: in the portion of the lot located between c�00' and 1,000' feet from the lake 351 of that portion of the lot may be hardcovered. E: These regulations apply even i f you have a lot that does no: abut the lake but is within a lakeshore zoning district. C. HOW TO DETERMINE LOT AREA WITHIN RACH SETBACK ZONR (To 5e used is denominator in all hardcover percentage c;.lculations) I. 0-75' Zone Area - 75' x (Average width of lot in 0-75, zone) �measure parallel to shoreline J 75, x 5n ft. . X 3 / s.f. (1) (Avg width) Area of 0-75' zone II. 75-250' Zone Area - '175'cr avg lot depth in zone) x(Avg width of lot in 75-250' zone\ measure parallel to shoreline J 175' x �lq, 5 ftb s.f. (2) (Avg width) Area of 75-250' zone III. 150-500' Zone Area - (250' or avg lot depth in zone) •,g width of lot in 250--500' zone). measure ,-arallel to shoreline / 250' x I / . G /,ft. - 'I 9, (c .$ s . f . ( 3 ) (Avg width) Area of 250-500' zone Iv. 500-1,000' Zone Area . (500' or ave lot depth in zone) x Avg width of lot in 500-1000' zane� measure parallel to shoreline ' x _I yam/ fc. - 3.f. (4 (Avg width) Area of 500-1,000' zone 1tM DATE 01/01/AA SATr• "I 36 05-117-23 14 44A; PWOP ACV 7033s TONKA AVE OWNER !": 5TATE OF ifv.il TAXPA—P STATE OF MINN NA ".iAINM t`FtEPTH COUNTY PROPERTY TNFOPMATION SYSTEM PROPERTY 04 ' LIST TOTAL BATCH 001 00019 RFPORT NO. PI435401 PAGE 2 'tTIFY THAT THE FACTS REPRESENTED ARE AN A' " AND TRUE FENTATION OF I14FORMATION AS IT APPEARS 1.,- rE ON THE RECORDS HfUNEPI',J COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF PROPE TY A(IONP TQ7THE BEST' PHOWIEDG_ AND BELIEF DATE��,l ;IARDCOVER CALCULA''. ON WORKSHEET 5—Lack Zone -rcle one) 0-75' 75-250' 250-500' `.00-1000' Existing Hardcover Cin Zone a. House _ 7 x s.f. length width x s.f. x s.f. x S.f. x s.f. b. Garage x . (uD s,f, c. Driveway x Sid - 7s.f. d. Si: x _ s.f. x _ s f. e. Patio/ s.f. Deck x s.f. f. Landscape r'l x . 22q s.f. areas �-7� underlain x n s.f. by plastic sheeting _, x s.f. _._ x s.f. f. Other x a s.f. x s.f. x r- e :hI51ING HARDCOVER IN ZONE Existing Hardcover i - Total Existing Hardcover x 100 Lot Are, Within Zone S.f. x 100 s.f. Additional Hardcover to be added in •cones Item Length x Width_ _ TOTAL s.f.zf. 5 7 x 37 _ o .2,1 s. f ssa,,, ?�L_ x 7_ s . f x SV �. :;�00 s . f . x - s.f. F 0 ff TOTAL S.T. TO BE ADDED 2 ) Existing Hardcover to be Removed, if any: Item Length x Width • TOTAL s.f. x a _ S.f, x a s.f. x S.f. x TOTAL S.F. TO BE REMOVED (3) Final Hardcover Proposals (Line 11) + Line (2) -Line (3)) + f - 1 _ S G�s.f. (4) Existing To be,Added To be Removed Final Proposed Hardcover t a Line (4) x 100 s•f• x 100 a Line (1) s.f. vv A RESOLUTION GRANTING A VARIANCE TO MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 10.23, SUBDIVISION 6 (B) FILE #1341 WHEREAS, Todd Ziesmer (hereinafter "the applicant") has an interest in the property located at 3440 Bayside Road within the City of Orono (hereinatter "City") and legally described a, follows: Exhibit A, attached (hereinafter "the property"); and WHEREAS, the applicant has applied to the City for a variance to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.23, Subdivision 6 (B) to permit the construction of a single family residence on a ' of of 118' in wid`_h where a 200' lot width is normally required for construction of a single family residence. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVES by the City Council of Orono, Minnesota: FINDINGS 1. This application was reviewed as Zoning File #1341. 2. The property is located in the LR-lA Single Family Lakeshore Residential Zoning District. 3. The Orono Planning Commission reviewed this application on October 3, 1988 and recommended approval. of the proposed variance based upon the following findings: A) A residence previously existed on the property and was only recently removed due to its poor condition. B) The property is 2.35 acres in area. C) The pro�;osed residence meets the required 30' side setbacks and greatly exceeds the regt•4 -ed 50' minimum front setback for construction of a single famil; residence in the Ll:-lA zone. D) Applicant has provided septic testing to verify that i primary and alternate drainfield site can be developed within the property boundaries. Page 1 of 4 E) No additional land is available to make this lot conform to the 200' width standard. 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 sr.irit and intent of the Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan of the City. CONCLUgIONS, ORDER AND CONDITIONS Based upon one or more of the Bindings noted above, the Orono City Council hereby grants a variance per Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.23, Subd.Lvision 6 (B) to permit the construction of a single family residence on a lot of. 118' in width where 200' width is normally required, subject to the following conditions: 1. The proposed residence shall meet the required front, rear, and side setbacks of the LR-lA zoning district. 2. Authorities granted with this resolution run with the property not with the applicants, 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 (October 10, 1989). 3. Violation of or non-compliance with any of the terms and conditions of this resolution shall constitute - violation of the zoning code, shall automatically terminate any aut`ority granted herein, and shall be punishable as a misdemeanor. 4. The undersigned applicant has read; understood and hereby agrees to the terms of this resolution and on beh if of himself, his heirs, successors and assigns, hereby agrees to the recording of this resolution in the chain of title of the property. Page 2 of 4 EXHIBIT A RESOLUTION NO. That part of government Lot 3, Section 5, Township 117 North, Range 23 West of the 5th Principal Meridian, described as follows: Beginning at a point distant 1658.25 feet West of the East line of the Northeast quarter of Section 5, Township 117, Range 23 and distant 1056.0 feet North of the South line of the Northeast quarter of said Section 5; thence East and parallel to the South line of said Northeast quarter a.distance of 235.73 feet; thence South and parallel to the East line of said Northeast quarter a distance of'373.9 feet; thence West and parallel to the South line of said North- east quarter a distance of 117.87 feet; thence South and parallel with the East line of said Northeast quarter a distance of 259.15 feet to the center line of County Road; thence Westerly along center line of said road a distance of 117.9 feet to a point distant 1658.25 feet West of the East line of said Northeast quarter; thence North and parallel to the East line of said Nor.h- past quarter a distance of 627.75 fee: to the point of beginning. EXCEPT that part oz the above described tract describe: as follows: The Sc:tti 100 fe=t of the North 373.4 fee= of the Ea:-, half LZt 20, AuditDr' s Subdivision Numb.?r 20'3, Hennepin Coun'�v, Minnesota. Aeopted by the Orono City Council on this 10th day of October, 1988. ATTEST: Dorothy M. Hallin, City Clerk James R. Grabek, Mayor Prol.erty Owner(s) Page 3 of 4 r To: Mayor. Grabek & Orono Council Members City Administrator Bernhardson From: Michael P. Gaffron, Asst Planning & Zoning Administrator Date: October 5, 1988 Subject: #1342 David & Valerie Peterson, 1125 North Arm Drive - Variance - Resolution Application - Request for side setback variance to construct detached garage. Inherent in this application is a request for a conditional use permit to construct an accessory structure on a through lot, and allowing a garage to be located nearer the front lot line than the house. Zoning District - LR-lB, 1 Acre Minimum - Sewered List of Exhibits Exhibit A - Planning Commission Action Notice of 10/5/88 Exhibit B - Memo & Exhibits of 9/30/88 Exhibit C - Proposed Resolution Discussion - The applicants are requesti.ig ti construct a garage as sear as 1' from the side property line. Their claimed hardships are configuration of the property, steep topography at the edge of the existing driveway, and the need for a reasunable backup apron. This property was the subject of a lot line rearrangement some years back, which decreased the size of the applicants' property but placed -:he neighboring house within its own property boundaries. Both applicants' house and the neighboring house are skewed somewhat with the property lines, and applicant wishes to keep his garage squared with the structures in the area. However, in order to meet the 10' setbr would have to move the garage north into the parking area or nor` west into his front yard adjacent to the house. With the proji..e, configuration, applicants feel they have a straight -in access to 'che garage which could not be easily accomplished with a different configuration. The Planning Commission at their October 3, 1988 meeting had no problem with construction of the garage nearer the road than the house, nor did they have any problem with granting a conditional use permit for an accessory structure on what is technically a through lot. Planning Commission did however feel that the applicants' hardships did net jus�ify the request for a 1' setback, but felt that a 5' property line setback would be appropriate while still accomplishing the applicants' purposes. At the Planning Commission meeting, the applicants expressed that a 5' setback would allow them to pivot the garage so that it still would be functional for them. The neighbor to the youth expressed that he has no probl'sm with the garage location as proposed by the applicants. The Planning Commission recommendation leaves an even greater setback to the applicants' property r than was acceptable to the neighbor. Zoning File #1342 October 5, 1988 Page 2 of 2 Staff Recommendation - Staff recommends approval per the Planning Commission recommendation, per the attached proposed resolution. ZONING FILE NO. 1312 CITY OF ORONO NOTICE OF PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 473-7357 Date of Notice: 10/5/88 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ TO: David & Valerie Peterson COPIES TO: 1125 North Arm Drive Mound, MN 55364 TYPE OF APPLICATION: Variance & Conditional Use Permit ----------------------------------------------------------- DATE OF MEETING: 10/3/88 VOTE: 6 For 0 Against Planning Commission recommends the following: Approval subiect to conditions noted below NOTES AND SPECIAL CONDITIONS: 1. Recommended approval of conditional use permit for construction of an accessory structure on a "through" lot, and approval of a variance to allow such structure to be constructed nearer the street lot line than the front line of the house. 2. Recommended approval of a side setback variance to allow construction of the garage less than 10' from the side lot line, subject to the condition that the garage (except normal roof overhang) must meet a 5' setback from the side lot lin.^. Applicant's next scheduled meeting is confirmed as: City Council Monlay, October 10, 1988; meeting starts at 7:OU p.m. If you desire certified copies of the official Planning Commission minutes, they are available from the City Recorder after review and approval by the Planning Commission. To: Planning Commission Chairman Kelley Orono Planning Commission Members City Administrator Bernhardson From: Michael P. Gaffron, Asst Planning & Zoning Administrator Date: September 30, 1988 Subject: #1342 David & Valerie Peterson, 1125 North Arm Drive - varianc_e - Public Hearing Application - Request for side setback variance to construct Cetached garage. Zoning District - LR-lB, 1 Acre Minimum - Sewered List of Exhibits Exhibit A - Application Exhibit B - Plat Map Exhibit C - Property Owners List Exhibit D - Neighbor Acknowledgement Forms Exhibit E - Applicants' Hardcover Calculations Exhibit F - Survey Exhibit G - Sel-_ted Garage Plans Pertinent Facts - ., r 1. This property is approximately 0.6 acres in area, and is not a lakeshore lot. Hardcover on the property is approximately 23%, with no anticipated change (250-5e0' zone). 2. Applicants are proposing to construct a 22'x34' (24'x36'??) detached garage over the existing driveway. 'I:-ey are proposing to construct that garage approximately 1' from tha side property line from trQ southwest corner of the garage and 6.33' from the side property line at the east end of the garage. There are no trees or other amenities that prohibit the proposed garage from being constructed to meet the required 10' side setbacks, in staff's opinion. There are some topographical concerns, however, staf' feels that there ,vou l d be ample room to locate the garage in the existing driveway area without_ requiring a side setback variance Zoning File #1342 September 30, 1988 Page 2 of 2 3. Note that te, hnically this also requires a variance for a garage in a front yard (Zoning Code Section 10.03, Subdivision 9 (D) ). However in this case where the house sits far to the rear of the lot, with the long driveway, and slopes to the • -t of the existing house, the location nearer the street than the house is certainly justified. 4. Additionally nr-Lz that this is a "through" lot, and per Section 10.03, Subdivision 10, a conditional use permit is required for construction of an accessory building on this property, hence e.en though the hardcover standards are met and even if the garage is moved to meet the side setback requirements, this still r(:quires a variance/conditional use permit application. Discussion - This property does not currently have a garage, and the request to construct a garage is a reasonable request. The proposed location of the garar^ may be related to the applicants' wish to keep the buildings on this property and the neighboring property all square to each other, and th- applicants may be better positioned than staff to describe to the Planning Commission what specific hardships with the existing driveway and apron force the garage to be located so close to the side lot line. The neighbors have been :Wade aware of this application by the applicants, however staff has received no comments from the neighboring property owners. Staff has reviewed the applicants' hardcover calculations and finds them to be correct. The prope y is in the 250-500' lakeshore setback zone where 30% hardcover is allowed, and the current proposal results 3nly in 23% hardcover, hence no hardcover variance is necessary. Staff Recos ndation - Staff would rec•otmend approval of a conditional use permit to place a garage on this "through" lot, and would recommend approval for A variance to allow construction of that garage nearer the street lot line: than the front line of the house. Further, staff would recommend that Planning Commission ask the applicants to clarify the hardships that result in phis reque�-t for a 1' - de setback where 10' side setback ' = norma'_ ly required. If the Planning Commission reels that the presented harlsni•:s adequately justify granting of a side setback variance, then a recommendation for approval would be ;n order. I CITY OF ORONO -VARIANCE APPLICATION Initial Application Fee $150.00 !r �„ ($50.00 per each additional varia r, 2 r� Renewal Variance Fee $75.00 (no change from original application TTT• f it !1 ,, t i, After -the -Fact Fees (Double application fee) `'�� F r ----------------------------------------------------------- ,YR,^�L� ; rr ALl. PROPERTY LOCATION v wv � i•1 vt,� iui.. v�• Site Address ►� Z bor-t�x fi-r n, r fr Property Identification Number (P.I.D.) 0-7- (17-i3 Please check one - Property abstract or torrens? v.7, Vv. Attach legal description to application if not included on required survey. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- APPLICANT I J Phone (home) Name ` e r �Pt r-Pr S P r. Phone ( work) 4 *7 Z - j'c'O � Address: 112_� LH, km rrLe City: 0-OnC Zip: 5-Y, 36f --------------------------------------------------------------------------- OWNER (if different than applicant) Phone (home) Name Z 0. vl" 0 Phone (work) Address: City: Zip: Date Property Acquired (month/year) I (do) (do not) also own the adjacent parcels of land. PRESENT U83 OF PROPERTY Present Zoning District Preser* Use of Property sidential Other (specify) -------------------------------------------------------------------- -- --- DESCRIPTION OF KBQMT Estimated Construction Cost $ 7 'J Describe request in detai_ ��� 2t� y��a�a (� corNt���• ------------------------- - -- -•----- - - - - - - - - - -----------CK--4 VARIANCES REQUIRED Lot Area Lot Width Setback Variances ( Front Other Ha rdcc ,ier Side Rear) HARDSHIP Describe undue hardship or practical diffi ult4 resultir, Qnforcement of zoning requlations :i �/ 1 C r G yQr L�tS�iKG�rlvtw•.�/ i��-u✓1 der T��/iv�CJ4ara�rQ_ c� O V-4 -- --- L-------------- ---- ---------------------------- DESCRIPTION OF UNUSUAL PROPERTY CONDITIONS Describe unusual property condition prevent'ng complianj Code Requirements: er ., I I da u 4R- r �2cta from strict t. with, Zoning I_�' . l__.... 4rP �- REQUIRED SUBMITTALS 1. Completed Application Form x Certified Property Owners List of owners u. t;dn 156' (you must obtain this list from Hennepin County Department ot. 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. CertificaLt 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 sepa-ate 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 ap�l.ication 4_s 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 Thee applican- hereby agrees to provide all information required or requested by the Zoning Administrator', agrees to pay all fees anal/or unusual expenses incurred in review f this application, anO certifies that the informatior supplied is true nd correct to the r. t of his/her knowiedge. Apr ^ant_' s Signature --- [ _`+d.� E v: Datp -_`7- 7-E`� 0441b SIGNATURE The owner hereby ackowledges and agrees to this application anc! f,,-ther authorizes reasonable entry onto the property by City staff, consultants, agents, Commission memters, nd 'ouncil memters for pur► -ses if investiga- tion and verification of 'h's req est. owner's Signature i Aa t.C. - Date C - 7-3 4 Applicant must have all submittals in L, the City offices ) days before the Planning Commission Meeting. Planning Commisn,.r..n Meeti;,,s are held cn the thir6 Monday of each mont.h. Applicants must be presert at all scheduled review meetings of the Planning Commission and Cour.j�il. If an applicant is unable to attend a scheduled meeting, please na4e arr.7gements to have an uthorized agent attend in your place anu : u advise th<• Hu- lding i Zcni.nq, office of this chancie prior to the •ert.ng. � 5 In N O /1 vt, Sal nt RUN DATE 9"I/M BATCN 0" 30 07-117-23 14 0O0i POW ARRR 01001 LOMA LINDA AVE OWNER KW GILMAN 6 SORENSON TAXPAYER GILMAN 6 SORENSON NAfR /AROR 1001 LOMA LINDA MOUND MN 55364 M 07-117-23 14 0027 PROP ADOR OWNER tam GMT E BEITO ETAL TAXPAYER GARY E BEITO mum /AOIN 1169 NORTH ARM DR MOUND MN 55364 38 07-117-23 14 0052 PROP ADDR 01151 NORTH ARM DR OWNER NAME R A PLITZ ETAL TAXPAYER R A KUTZ '+AME/ADOR 1151 NO ARM DR M0J D MN 55364 38 07-117-23 14 0062 9(7;P ADOR 01160 NORTH ARM OR ;"DER NAME R A C GUBMAISEN TAXPAYER RICHARD A CHARLENE GUDMUKSEN IAAMt: AMR 1160 NORTH ARM OR MOUND MN 55364 36 07-117-23 14 0065 PROP ADOR 01125 NORTH ARM DR OWNER NAME DAVID J A VALERIE J F'ETERSENi TAXPA'IER DAVID J A VALFRIE J PETERSEN NAME/AODR 1125 NORTH ARM DR MOUND MN SS364 HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORMATION SYSTEM PROPERTY OWNERS LIST 38 07-117-23 14 0023 01101 ELMWOOD AVE T A K KAUL THOMAS C KAUL 1101 ELMWOOD AVE S MOUND M1 55364 38 07-117-23 14 0028 01153 ELMWOOD AVE RICHARD JAMES HEIT RICHARD JAMES HEIT 1153 ELMWOOD AVE MOUND M1 55364 38 07-117-23 14 0057 00038 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED RICHARD C TIEGEN ETAL THOMAS C KAUL I101 ELMWOOD AVE S MOUND MN 55364 38 07-117-23 14 0063 01121 ELMWOOD AVE JAMES DESPLINTER JAMES DESPLINTER 1121 ELMWOOD AVE MOUND MI 55364 TOTAL BATCH 004 00013 REPORT NO. PI43%01 PAGE 7 38 07-117-23 14 0026 01137 ELMWDOD AVE HANS 6 WEILER ETAL HANS 6 WEILER 1135 NORTH ARM OR MOUND MN 55364 38 07-117-23 14 0037 01153 ELMWOOD AVE RICHARD JAMES HEIT RICHARD JAMES HEIT 1153 ELtW00D AVE MOUND MN 55364 38 07-117-23 14 OO A 01140 NORTH ARM DR TIMOTHY L BRO TIMOTHY L SRO 1140 NORTH ARM DR MOUND MN 55364 38 07-117-23 14 0064 01135 NORTH ARM OR HANS 6 A EMILIE E WEILER HANS 6 A EMILIE E WEILER 1135 NORTH ARM OR MOUND MN 55364 Adjacent Property Owners' Acknowledgement Form prinv names) print address] have reviewed the plans for the proposed improvement or proposed use of the Froperty located at I Z-1 k 4r-wx Or, also referred to as Land Use Application No. I (we) understand that in executing this acknowl:agement, I (we) am (are) not asked to declare approval or disapproval of the property or use but merely to confirm for the City Council that I (we) am (are) aware of the improvement plans and that the proposed neighbor's project or use requires Council approval. perry Owner Property Owner Da�.� 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 Building & Zoning Office at least 10 days prior to the scheduled meeting date. wY w �Y+q I Adjacent Property Owners' Acknowledgement Form I (we) l p—-� of —%/_Of C iw► wco Ti}t�' S rint names) print address have reviewed the plans for the proposed improvement or proposed use of the property located at Arm Or- also referred to as Land Use Application No. _ I (we) understand that in executing this acknowledgement, I (we) are, (are) not asked to declare approval or disapproval of the property or use but merely to confirm for the City Council that I (we) am (are) aware of the improvement plans and that the proposed neighbor's project or use requires Council approval. i `C nn Property Owner Property Owner Date A S--) 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 Building Zoning Office at least 10 days prior to the scheduled meeting date. Adjacent Property Owners' Acknowledgement Form print names) print address] have reviewed the plans for the proposed improvement or proposed use of the property located at \ N• /¢r,n �%Y also referred to as Land Use Applicat,_cn 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 proposed neighbor's project or use reoifLres Council approval. A q (n A Prop rty Owne Dat 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 Building & Zoning Office at Least 10 days prior to the scheduled meeting date. 1(ARDCOVER CALCULATION WORKSHEET SetL.ack Zone: (circle one) 0-75' 75-250' (2'50-500' 500-1J00' Existing Hardcover in Zone J/ / A. House )"2.. , S-_ x I q. I s.f. length width x s.f. x s.f. x • s.f. x s.f. 1 1 b. Garage 70�grf CL c. Driveway I S b x t7 s.f. J x �Z s . f . ✓ / / r Jd. Sidewalk x ~. �� s.f. x • s.f. x s.f.� e. Patio/ �_ x Deck x f, Landscape x arias underlain x s.f. by plastic sheeting x s.f. x s.f. f. Other x 6.f. x s.f. x o.f. l f C7AL EXISTING HARDCOVER IN ZONE s.f. (1) r Existing Hardcover i • rotal Existing Hardcover x 100 Lot Area Within Zone s.f. x 100 Additional Hardcover to be added in zones - Item Length x Width TOTAL s.f. x S.f. x S.f. } i x S.f. TOTAL S.F. TO BE ADDED (2) Existing Hardcover to be Removed, if any: Item Length x Width • TOTAL S.f. x s.f. x • s.f. x S. x s.f. TOTAL S.P. TO BE REMOVED (3)_- Final Hardcover Proposal: fLine (1) + Line (2) -Line (3)) _ f + ) s.f. (4) Existing To be Added To be Removed Final Proposed Hardcover t • Line (4) x 100 • s'f. x 100 Line (1) s.f. v�l c - Z t `" N 89' 59105"E I309.19 Meas. ' 1 (310.00 per plot) zI`^OD RC L o S �' ate•- �N'<° " s RCEL t34��� .i PROPOS1-. N N B9 309. O_ 41y r Z-ui -'r o `ouf owFRAmCD 0 (AUSE z �,,.,t.- PAR EL 1 v u► p ` o V, � !^1 0 y PROPOSE A• GAII 2'.E - 44 PAR 7t �' p Q O 1 WEST 309.78 Moos. 0 1 - : �' V10.00 per plat) ?,�} a 0 N i A/- r _. _-.�-_��..�.-_�--_�_._�-__._ __�_:.-_r.-.�.��_...=-._-.-.. :ram.-.•... .. ._�-.__ _.- ..-�-.. _. S�v vre_ 9 Ir Ile Cv r ' 1 A RESOLUTION GRANTING A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT PER MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 10,,03, SUBDIVISION 10 AND GRANTING VARIANCES TO MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 10.03, SUBDIVISION 9 (D) AND SECTION 10.03, SUBDIVISION 15 (F) FILE #1342 WHEREAS, David & Valerie Peterson (hereinafter "the applicants") are the owners of the property located at 1123 North Arm Drive within the City of Orono (hereinafter "City") and legally described as follows: Lots 23, 30 and that part of Lots 22 and 31 lying North of the South 14.5' thereof "Skarp and Lindquist's Fernhill Lake Minnetonka" according to the recorded plat thereof, Hennepin County, Minnesota (hereinafter "property"); and WHEREAS, the applicants have made application to the City of Orono to permit the construction of a detached garage located less than the required 10' from the side lot line, requiring a variance to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.03, Subdivision 15 (F), and which structure is technically located on a through lot, requiring conditional use permit approval per Section 10.03, Subdivision 10, and such structure being located nearer the street lot line than the front line of the house, requiring a variance to Section 10.03, Subdivision 9 (D). NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council Df Orono, Minnesota: FINDINGS 1. This application was reviewed as Zoning File #1342. 2. The property is located in the LR-lB Single Family Lakeshore Residential Zoning District. 3. The property is approximately 0.6 acres in area. Page 1 of 5 4. The Orono Planning Commission reviewed this application on October 3, 1988 and recommended approval of the conditional use permit for an accessory structure on a through lot, finding that the proposed garage location will be in keeping with similarly situated garages in the neighborhood, and will not alter the character of the neighborhood. The Planning Commission further recommended approval of the proposed variance to allow construction of a garage nearer the street lot line than the front line of the house, finding that the existing house on the property is located near the west end of the property, at the end of a long driveway accessing at the east end of the property, hence the proposed garage location near the house will be approximately 160' from the front lot line, and will have no effect on the character of the neighborhood nor block any views enjoyed by traffic or neighboring property owners. The Planning Commission further recommended �proval of a side setback variance of 5', to allow the proposed detached garage to be constructed 5' from the side lot line, based on the following findings: A) Topographical concerns and the contours and layout of the existing driveway and parking area are adequate hardships to justify a setback less than the 10' minimum setback normally required, due to the applicants' need for an adequate back-up apron. B) The Planning Commission fends no jusification to allow the requested 1' side lot line setback, finding that the garage can be 11ned up with the lot 11ne at a distance of 5' and sti1' accomplish the applicants' objectives. Furthermore, ti requested 1' setback would potentially create a drip line from the garage roof onto the property line or onto the neighboring property, in effect transporting drainage directly to the neighboring property. 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 variance would not adversely affect traffic conditions, light, air nor pose a fire hazard or other danger to neighboring properties; would not merely serve as a convenience to the applicants, but is necessary to alleviate a Demon- strable hardship or difficulty; is necessary to Freserve a substantial property right. of the applicants; and would be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan of the City. Page 2 of 5 6. The City Council finds that granting a conditional use permit to allow the accessory garage structure to be constructed on this through lot 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 'seeping with the intent and objectives of the Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan of the City. CONCLUSIONS, ORDER FIND CONDITIONS Based upon one or more of the above findings, the Orono City Council hereby grants a variance to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.03, Subdivision 9 (D) to allow the detached garage structure to be constructed nearer the street lot line than the front line of the existing house, and grants a variance to Section 10.03, Subdivision 15 (F` to allow such garage structure to be located 5' from the side lot line where a 10' side setback is normally required, and grants a conditional use permit per Section 10.03, Subdivision 10 for construction of an accessory structure on a through lot, subject to the following conditions: 1. The proposed garage shall be located at least 5' from the side lot line, and the grading around the garage shall be such that no additional drainage is directed to the neighboring property. 2. Authorities granted by this resolution run with the property not witn the applicants, 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 (October 10, 1989). 3. 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 granted herein, and shall be punishable as a misdemeanor. 4. The undersigned applicants have read, understood and hereby agree to the terms of this resolution and on behalf of themselves, their heirs, successors and assigns, hereby agree to the recording of this resolution in the chain of title of the property. Page 3 of 5 Adopted by the Orono city Council on this 10th day of October, 1988. ATTEST: Dorothy M. Hallin, City Clerk James 1.. Grabek, Mayor Property Owner s Paqe 4 of 5 10688.2 TO: Mayor and City Council T FROM: Mark E. Bernhardson, City Administrato N � DATZ: October 6, 1988 SOBJBCT: Orono/Long Lake Discussions ISSUE - Presentation to Councilmembers of information relating to representatives meeting held Wednesday, October 5, 1988 with the facilitator. INTRODUCTION - The Mayor and myself met -it.h the facilitator Barbara Arney together with Betsy Swartwood, iwen 3meby and Arlo Vande Vegte at the Orono School District offices at 7:00 o'clock on October S, 1988. Barbara Arney will be within the next week sending summaries of the information to all the Councilmembers and each of the cities will be attempting to establish by Friday, October 7th a d,a`_e for a joint meeting of the two Councils. PROPOSED MOTION - Moved by ,, seconded by _, that the Council accepts the information regarding the Orono/Long Lake discussions. • 1 `J �e 0488.2HD To: Mark E. Bernhardson, City Administrator From: John R. Gerhardson, Public Works Director Date: October 4, 1988 Subject: t Commission Appointments In January of 1985, the Orono Council decided to in,-rease the member of Park Commission Members from seven to eight. This action was taken due to the qualifications of the applicants wanting to serve the community. In order to accomplish increasing the number of Commission Members an ordinance amendment would have to be done as the current ordinance mangated a maximum number of members at seven. Council directed staff to amend the ordinance. Somehow the ordinance did not get amended. Due to three resignations in the last year, the Commission is at a current membership of five. I have received letters and comments from three residents that are interested in serving on the Park Commission (see attached) to fill the vacancies. Two of the residents previously applied for the vacancy on the Council and one resident is interested is serving on the Park Commission because of a very strong interest in developing safe Bike/Hike Trails in the City. All three residents are interested in serving on the Park Commission. Option 1. Appoint all three of the residents keeping the total number of members to eight and amending the ordinance as necessary. 2. Appoint two of the residents thereby adhereing to the language of the ordinance which allows for seven members. Discussion - The Park Commission is a recommending body to the Council. I believe the reason for an odd number of members for Commissions or Council is to eliminate the possibility of a tie vote. RE_ommendation - To appoint two of the three applicants to the Park Commission thereby eliminating the need to amend the ordinance. Proposed Motion: Moved by , seconded by , to appoint two of the three applicants to the Park Commission thereby eliminating the need to amend the ordinance. Ayes , nays TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Mark E. Bernhardson, City Administrate Forwarded recommendino approval. Mr. Richard N. Flint 1405 County Road 6 Long Lake, Minnesota 55356-95 September 22, 1988 Mr. Mark Bernhardson City Administrator City of Orono P. O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, Minnesota 55323 Dear Mr. Bernhardson: Please place my name in nomination for appointment to the current vacancy on the Parks Commission. My family and I have been residents of Orono since 1984 when we moved here from Minnetonka. I am a life long resident of the State of Minnesota except for three years in law school and three years in the U.S. Army. I am married and the father of four children, two of whom attend the Orono public schools and two of whom have graduated from high school. I am an attorney and a principal with the law firm Gray, Plant, Mooty, Mooty & Bennett, P.A. I have had a long interest in parks and the preservation of open space. While in the city of Minnetonka, I worked on several projects to preserve wet lands and open space. I have also been active for a number of years in various environmental organizations. During the 1970's, I served for two years as chairman of the Minnesota Chapter of the Sierra Club and three roars as its Conservation Chair. In this capacity, I was active in the effort to preserve the Boundary Water Canoe Area Wilderness which resulted in the 1978 Boundary Water Canoe Area Wilderness Act. If you need any further information, please contact me at my office (343-2818) or at my home (473-5585). Sincerely curs, Richard N. Flint RNF:cja 3651a JAMES H. GILBERT 955 Tonkawa Road Long Lake, MN 55356 Home: 471-0809 Work: 339-9121 September 26, 1988 Mr. John R. Gerhardson Public Works Director CITY OF ORONO P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 Dear Mr. Gerhardson: Pursuant to your letter of September 14, 1988, and our recent telephone conversations, I am writing to formally inform you that I would be interested in being appointed to one of the two vacan- cies on the Orono Park Commission. Although I was very interested in having a City Council position, after due consideration of the present make up of the Council, I decided that there was no real motivating factor for me to file for election at this point in time. However, I am still interested in serving the City of Orono and would be interested in the Park Commission position. If you need any more information, or wish to discuss this further, please call me at your convenience. Thank you for your interest. Yours truly, -- James 9. Gilbert JHG/nj 1 ►� wow ALEXRaDE2 C-r. VON6�Ei �9 10488.3HD To: Mark E. Bernhardson, City Administrator :; ��."6 E NG From: John R. Gerhardson, Public Works Director Date: October 4, 1988 L: I 1 Subject: Recycling - Curb -Side Pick Up "e As everyone is well aware, recycling has become a major issue in the past few years. Hennepin County has mandated, by the passage of Ordinance #13, that all municipalities shall have a recycling program in effect by 1990. The ordinance mandates that if a municipality does not have a recycling program, they have the authority to set up a program in the City and assess the costs for doing so. The main reasons for recycling is to reduce the garbage being dumped in landfills, in addition to the construction of the garbage burn plant in Minneapolis. For the above reasons, the City of Orono became a member in the West Hennepin Recycling Commission in 1987. The participating communities are Orono, Long Lake, Independence, Loretto, Maple Plain, Medina, Greenfield, and Minnetonka Beach. The goals of the Commission was to develop a recycling program for all participating communties that would satisfy the intent of Ordinance #13, to recycle 16% of the residential waste stream by 1990. The Commission developed and maintained drop-off sites in all communities to accept recyclables such as aluminum, tin, glass and newspaper. Most recently, the Commission contracted with Polka Dot recycling from Buffalo, Minnesota, to operate the drop-off sites on a once a month schedule at each site. The Commission has been very active in education about recycling and has sent out several mailings to all residents in the eight communities participating in the Commission. However, it has become very obvious that as productive as the drop-off sites have been, we will not meet the 16% goal by 1990 unless a curb -side recycling progrma is implemented. in August of 1989, Carolyn Smith, Coordinator of the West Hennepin County Recycling Commission, and myself met with four companies and conducted a tour of the areas to be considered for curb -side recycling. We submitted Request For Proposals to the four companies and received those RFP's on August 30, 1988 from only two of the companies. Super Cycle of Minneapolis and Polka Dot Recycling of Buffalo, Minnesota. Waste Management did not submit a responsive proposal and Browning Ferris Inc. (BFI) did not submit a proposal at all. Recycling - Curb -side Pick Up October 4, 1988 Page 2 of 3 The cost breakdown is as follows for curb -side pick up: Super Cycle of Minneapolis: * Twice monthly pick up - cost per month $2,225.00 = .84 per home per month * Plus 55.00 per ton for each additional ton in excess of 24.3 tons which is the base tonnage per month Container cost each 7.00 - Hennepin County pays 2.00 = 5.00 Polka Dot Recycling of Buffalo, Minnesota: * Twice monthly pick up: Urban or cluster areas 2,032 homes = .50 per home per month Rural aria 606 homes 1.50 per home per month * Container costs each. 7.00 - Hennepin County pays 2.00 = 5.00 If we decided not to distinguish between urban/cluster and rural homes, the cost per home per month is .73 The above costs do not reflect administrative/billing costs or Orono costs to remain in the West Hennepin Recycling Commission. Because a neighboring community has been provided, a recycling curb- side program by Super Cycle that picks up the recyclables at the point where refuse service is provided, I have asked for the costs of a similar program for the City of Orono from both companies as follows: Super Cycle of Minneapolis: * No change * Plus conta�«er costs (as noted above) Polka Dot Recycling of Buffalo, Minnesota: * Urban or cluster areas 2,032 homes = * Rural area 606 homes * Plus container costs (as noted above) If we decided not to distinguish between urban/cluster and rural homes .84 per home per month 1.00 per home per month 1.50 per home per month 1.11 per home per month Recycling - Curb -side Pick Up October 4, 1988 Page 3 of 3 In reviewing the proposals, it should be noted that Super Cycle does not require label to be removed but Polka Dot does. Polka Dot will pick up all aluminum plus cardboard, batteries and used motor oil, Super Cycle does not. Discussion - It is very obvious that we must begin at least a curb -side service as it is evident that it works. The City of Maple Plain started a curb -side program recently and is recycling 20% of their total solid waste. Attached for review only is a sample ordinance mandating recycling. We are reviewing the ordinance for changes that may be more appropriate for Orono. This information is being submitted at this time for review and comment only. Recommendation - To accept the information as presented and to direct staff to submit for Council action at the October 24th Council meeting a recommendation as the type of recycling program and a draft ordinance for review. Proposed Motion: Moved by , seconded by , To accept the information as presented and to direct staff to submit for Council action at the October 24th Council meeting a recommendation as the type of recycling program and a draft ordinance for review. Ayes , nays To: Mayor Grabek & Orono Council Members From: Mark E. Bernhardson, City Administrator V Forwarded recommending acceptance of the information presented. The County will reimburse between 50% and 80% of the cost of operation depending on the percentage of total that was collected. MODEL CITY ORDINANCES ORDINANCE NUMBER AN ORDINANCE REGULATING THE SEPARATION OF RECYCLABLE MATERIALS AND yARD WASTE FROM MIXD MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTE BY GENERATORS, BEFORE COLLECTION OF SUCH MATERIALS WITHIN THE CITY OF AND REGULATING THE COLLECTION OF SUCH MATERIALS, ESTABLISHING PROCEDURES, PROVIDING FOR ENFORCEMENT. SECTION I DEFINITIONS The following words and phrases, when used in this ordinance, unless the context clearly indicates otherwise, shall have the meanings ascribed to them in this section. Subsection 1 "Aluminum Recyclables" shall be deemed to include all dispos- able containers fabricated primarily of aluminum and commonly used for soda, beer, or other beverages. Subsection 2 "Collection" means the aggregation of waste from the place at which it is generated and includes all activities up to the time when the waste is delivered to a "waste facility". Subsection 3 "Collector(s)" means any person(s) who owns, operates or leases vehicles for the purposes of collection and transportation of any type of mixed municipal solid waste, recyclables and/or yard waste. Subsection 4 "Compostible Material" means a humus (organic portion of soil) made from yard waste and used as a soil conditioner. Subsection 5 "Department" means the City of Depart- ment of (insert city department to regulate WzO enforce such programs . Subsection o "Facility" means any resr+:rce recovery facility or related transfer station or similar facility to which waste is required to be delivered. Subsection 7 "Garbage" means animal and vegetable wastes resulting from the handling, preparation, cooking and consumption of food. Subsection 8 "Generation" means the act or process of producing waste (as defined in Minn. Stat. Sec. 115A.03, Subd. 11). 1 Subsection 9 "Generator" means any person who generates waste (as defined in Minn. Stat. Sec. 115A.03, Subd. 12). Subsection 10 "Glass Recyclables" shall be deemed to include jars, bottles and containers which are transparent or translucent and primarily used for pack- aging and bottling of various matter. Subsection 11 "Hauler" means a collector or transporter of mixed municipal solid waste, recyclable materials, and/or yard waste. Subsection 12 "Metal Recyclables" shall be deemed to include all disposable containers fabricated primarily of metal or tin. Subsection 13 "Mixed Municipal Solid Waste" means garbage, refuse and other solid waste from residential, corcial, industrial and conuunity activities which is generated and collected in aggregate, but does not include auto hulks, street sweepings, ash, construction debris, mining waste, sludges, tree and agri- cultural wastes, tires and other materials collected, processed and disposed of as separate waste streams. Subsection 14 "Paper Recyclables" shall be deemed to include paper of the type commonly referred to as newsprint. Expressly excluded, however, ace all magazines or similar periodicals. Subsection 15 "Person" means any human being, any municipality or uther public agency, any public or private corporation, any partnership, any firm, association, or other organization, any receiver, trustee, assignee, agent or other legal representative of any of the foregoing or any other legal entity. Subsection 16 "Recyclable Materials" means materials that are separated from mixed municipal solid waste by the generator and include all items of refuse designated by the Hennepin County Department of Environment and Energy to be part of an authorized recycling program and which are intended for transportation, processing and remanufacturing or reuse. Subsection 17 "Recycling" means the process of collecting and preparing recyclable materials and reusing the materials in their original form or using them in manufacturing processes. Subsection 18 "Source Separation" means the separation of recyclable mater- ials and yard waste from mixed municipal solid waste at the source of generation. Subsection 19 "Solid Waste" has the weaning given it irI,-,:,n. Stat. Section 116.06, Subdivision 10. Subsection 20 "Recyclable Materials Processing Facility" means a facility established and used for the receiving, storage, preparing and/or processing of recyclable materials for sale or reuse. Subsection 21 "Waste Tire" means a pneumatic tire or solid tire for motor vehicles as defined in Minn. Stat. 169.01. and included in the Solid waste Management Plan pursuant to Minn. Stat. 115A.46. 2 Subsection 22 "Yard Waste" means organic material consisting of grass clip- pings, leaves, and other forms of organic garden waste. SECTION II. PRE-MLLEC'TICN AND COLLEMCN Subsection 1 Pre -Collection. All persons who are owners, lessees, and occupants of any building, commercial or residential, within the City of which generates mixed municipal solid waste, sepnra a from a so waste the designated recyclable materials and yard sMllwaste before disposal, removal or collection: a) Paper recyclables, which shall be bundled separately and/or secured in such a manner as to prevent them from being blown or scattered, and shall be maintained in a dry condition free of any other substance and shall not be placed in plastic bags. b) Aluminum recyclables shall be clean of all contents and such recyclables shall not be placed in plastic bags. c) Glass recyclables shall be clean of all contents and such recyclables shall not be placed J# plastic bags. d) Metal recyclables shall be clean of all contents and such recyclables shall not be placed in plastic bags. e) Yard waste compostibles shall be placed in separate containers. All aluminum, glass, metal and yard waste shall be placed in separate containers and not mixed with other forms of solid waste or mixed muinicipal solid waste in a manner consistent with the rules, regulations and procedures adopted by the city. Subsection 2 Container Requirements. Containers shall be provided by all persons who are owners, essees, or occupants of any building, commercial or residential, and shall be: a) maintained in a clean and sanitary condition in accordance with all pertinent health statutes, ordinances, rules and regulations; b) located in such a manner so as to prevent them from being overturned or obstructing pedestrian or motor vehicle traffic or being in violation of any statute, ordinance, rule or regulation; and c) adequate and substantial enough to contain the recyclables or yard waste therein. (Such further specifications relating to containers may be adopted by the city.) 3 Subsection 3 Collection. The collection, removal and disposal of recycla- bles and yard waste shall be supervised by the city, which shall have the power to establish the time, method and routes of service. Special times for large itm pick-up may also Le established. Collection provisions shall include but not be limited to the following: f a) Notice of dates and times of collection will be published or otherwise made available to persons affected herein. b) The Department may establish drop-off or collection sites where any person may deposit recyclables and/or yard waste at such times and locations as determined. c) It shall be unlawful for any person other than employees of the Department, or authorized persons, collectors or haulers to distribute, collect, remove or dispose of recyclable materials after said materials and/or yard waste have been placed or deposited for collection. d) Nothing in this Ordinance shall abridge the right of any person to give or sell their recyclable materials and/or yard waste to any recycling and composting program lawfully operated for profit, non-profit or charitable purposes. e) Nothing in this Ordinance shall abridge the right of any authorized recycling or composting program " lawfully operate within Hennepin County, subject to such other licenses or other regulations as may be required by law. f) It shall be unlawful for a person to collect, remove or dispose of mixed municipal solid waste which consists of recyclables and/or yard waste combined with other forms of mixed municipal solid waste. SECTION III. VIOLATION AND PENALTY (**This section shall be drafted by each city individually to reflect the respective municipal enforcement provisions.) kiAmote • .,. �a (**This section shall be drafted by each city individually to reflect the respective municipal enforcement provisions.] SECTION V SEPARABILITY It is hereby declared to be the intention of the city that the several pro- visions of this ordinance are separable in accordance with the following: 4 Subsection 1 If any court of competent jurisdiction shall adjudge any provision of this ordinance to be invalid, such judgment shall not affect any othe )ravision of this ordinance not specifically included in said Judgment. SECTION VI PRWISIONS ARE ACCUMULATIVE Tfie provisions of this Ordinance are actizoulative to all other laws, ordi- nances and regulations heretofore passed, or which may be passed hereafter, cavering any subject scatter in this Ordinance. BPAN T ] OPDCI17 ES To: Mayor Grabek & Orono Council Members 1i From: Mark E. Bernhardson, City Administrato, Date: October 3, 1988 Subject: 1989 Budget Adoption/1989 Tax Levy ATTACHMENT - Resoluion Adopting 1989 Tax Levy ISSUE - 1. Establishment of a tax levy for 1989. 2. Adoption of a General Fund Budget for 1989. 92688.2HD ("T1019o3 INTRODUCTION - At the Council's Budget meeting on September 20, 1988, staff reviewed the significant revenue and expenditLi.res for 1989 together with possible changes. DISCUSSION - At the meeting, staff suggested the following changes made to the proposed 1989 Budget: 1. Inclusion of $100,000 in the budget frorr. the General Fund undesignated fund balance in order to create the possibility for increasing the City's levy limit to recoup part of the reduction from 1987. This could be designated to a capital budget fund such as equipment outlay or building. None of this money could be spent without specific Council approval. 2. Conversion of the recorder from a part-time to a full-time position using funds presently budgeted in the contingency under personnel. The staff continues to work on a break down regarding citation and gross m*sdemeanor activity over the past 3 years and hopes to send it out either Friday or present it Monday. ALTERNATIVES - I. ISSUE 1. 1. Set the tax le,.y. 2. Table for October 24th, 1988 meeting. 3. Reduce the levy indicating other sources of revenue for increase if budget not decreased. II. ISSUE 2. 1. Adopt as presented. 2. Incorporate proposed changes for -ecorder position and levy limit adjustment. 3. Further amend. 4. Table to October 24th, 1988 meeting. 1"W 1989 Budget Adoption/1989 Tax Levy October 3, 1988 Page 2 of 2 RECOMMENDATION - It is recommended that the Council adopt a tax levy for 1989 at $1,352,690 plus $30,000 for the Crystal Bay Sewer Project Bond Levy together with adopting the budget as amended with the two proposed changes. PROPOSED MOTION: Moved by , seconded by , that the Council adopt a tax 'levy of $1,352,690 together with $30,000 for the deficit for the Crystal Bay Sewer together with adopting the 1989 Budget as amended. Ayes , nays cc: Tom Kuehn, Finance Director A 0 92387.1 d Tt)s Mayor and City Council ; 1EONs Mack Bernhardson, City Adroinistrato V DATES September 22, 1987 SUBJECTs 1998 Budget Approval and Establiahment of Tax Levy Attachment: A. Departmental Revenues and Expenditures Summary B. Revised 1999 Summary of Revenues and Expenditures C. Proposed Tax Levy Resolution ISSUE - 1. Adoption of the 1988 Budget. 2. Adoption of a resolution establishing the tax levy for 1988. INTRODUCTION - During the special budget meeting held on SeptemVsc TI, 1981, the staff ocesented the 1988 budget to the Councons Based together rectionigivenwbying t a Counicil at that tthameeting, y may hae a d. staff prepared Attachments A and C together with preparing this memo for budget adoption at the regular September 28, 1987 meeting. Subsequent to the budget meeting staff is meeting with the one Councilmember who was unable to attend the budget meeting on the 17th. DISCUSSION - On the same evening that the Orono Council was Favrn9 ita budget meeting, the Long Lake Council wis conducting another budget session. During this budget session it was determined because of their $49,999 short fall in revenues that one of the actions they would need to take la reduction of officers npecificslly assigned to Long Lake as part of the contract from the current three, down to two officers. (This reduces their spacifically assigned weekly coverage from 75% of the time down to approximately 59% of the time.) The impact of this reduction reduces the Orono expenditures budget by approximately $40,900 and likewise reduces the revenues by a substantial similar amount, as reflected in Attachment B. While Long Lake may subsequently reconsider their decision in advance of 1988, it is fult that any such budget ad)ustment (back to the original 1988 proposud budget) could be done at that time. in f the taff has preparednaedepartmentalthe `coiepatisills on uof ocev•nues tand the exp nditures for those departments that earn a substantial amount from specified lion -tax revenues. It should be noted however, that curtain of thebw depactmenta are not charged directly in their rhead itemu for them being part of the budget to[ certain ove organization including City Council expenditures, Administration, Finance and Government Buildings. The comparison however should Gummu., OWL" OLNM6t. AM aP6M1T7165 6t1)6)c l"I Qswlmaw 6ttXWP US. 19d6 mtlls6R 6130= t of 1967 1967 low 1966 midget 1966 midget Adorted Aeended ►rasceed pier (t n*-rl Over (1Mde[) l DVL%L Mw It et 11-aget 1947 midget 1917 budget OCPAR7t24T city caucil S 61.795 S 61,795 s 67.656 s 6.155 !.)t A i nlstratlon 126,715 126,715 136.111 7.195 5.7 Elections 3.033 31635 11.6s6 7.615 291.E Assessing 52.975 52.675 53,996 1.91s 3.7 Penance 111.996 111,H6 117.GM 6.766 S.7 Legal 80.666 66,666 163.50 2),166 26.7 Garernetnt 6uildnngs M,6lS 66,615 64,= 3.265 6.6 6Uaan Services 6,915 6.915 It,@" 2.16s 26.1 Police 670,946 679,940 •896.1" 25,120 2.9 fire 153,395 151,39s 166.639 (6,765) (5.7) Planning 6 tonliq I". De 1".IM 215.s56 2S,I20 13.) Deergerey Preparedness 21s6S 2,sas 2,266 1125) (12.6) Anlial Control 6,825 6.925 7,630 13951 (6.91 fsglrdeering 6.710 6,716 COW (66a) (16.1) Street PYtntenanoe 617.1" 417,195 636,2041 17.NS 4.1 ►arts 6 aecreatton 5913" $9.1" 61.I011 1.7" 2.9 Special Fro)ects/Conting 61.566 al.3" 64.N6 (17,5116) (21.5) Cqutpvent Outlay had 64,916 66,916 66.250 1,348 3.6 Nut ld ing Outlay PLrd 26,966 20,6410 MAW - - Total General rutd 2,322,593 2,322,596 21421--a 99,210 6.1% SMIAL WJC:2 VIRM Part Pod 3,266 3.202 + (7,20D) 1166JIt Lepr uaret+t Equtpcent Outlay 66.202 t ._ a 65.906 (22.190) /)2.6) BucLltnq Outlay - _ -0- -6- -0- -- total Special ll u flads 71,496 71,6M 6S,96a 21 5,s10) )I s.616 CP1AATINr FUkM Liquor 121.836 121,819 -6- 1121.6)61 (166.Mliguor "rat/an di1ttlnurd S/31/57 toter 14).125 163,125 129,919 411.1951 (9.2) Seer 171,666 371,469 3%.SN 114,966) I4-21 Golf 113,9N 111.9N 161,196 (12,758) (11.21 Total Cpmatlnq fud 756,)SS 756,3Ss 567,666 1162,67S)2� 1.7)t 7UML GOU" SPFl1AL 6L11!]6= AND (!9)MT71t3 rtb" $3.166, 41.161,415 S3.gss,l" s(69,6ss) (2.8)11 e Ad).nstmint for Log Late Police officer reduction II . ••r: tee.: wr.4 661R}AL rwD RivffNMM ' 1957 SSTIIIATS VS. 1S55 SSTIMATS REVENUE ESTIMATE 19SS EST OV[R/ I SOnderl 1957 tat 1907 it-BoAwrat 1 Tasest Ad valorem - Levy Limit Ms• $1.199.39S 51,251.i2i S(125.969) 182 97S7S 19.111 Levy Limit Sass Cut by City ISI S7S i- S r.T6S S689861 Met Ad valor.• Levy er•te.•'•' ►saaliles s Interest on 21,590 18,664 (2.6]6) (12.1) Delinquent Tales Incenses and Permits 94.199 99,185 S.iii S•1 Iaterg wtrnsental Grants and Aids i,iii L,Sii Sir 8.1 Emergency preparedness Aid li6.12i 1i.9ii (225) 1.11 Local Government 41.500 Si.Sii 7,980 li_1 Police Town Aid r1SA Street Mintenanct 11.570 11.575 -- Police Training Rela. 2.105 2.195 _ Charges for Services 1,515 l,iii -- Services tees Generaln plan checks/Site Esam reel 15,959 12,Sii 2,Si5 .1 11.1 .ond Use, variance. Subdivision 15.95S 20.680 25.099 21,000 2,SS5 1,555 S.5 Septic program rees Contracted Police Services 495.259 •46S,S75 6.265 1.7 Contracted Inspection Services 19,986 16,958 _ fsltt Alarm Zees Other rands 1.9SS 6,7Si 1,955 4.414 -- I2,3e9l (14.71 Alain. Charges to S.iSS 6.880 1,5/5 25.9 Assessment Searches Special Services/Reports - Police 1.069 2.559 1.996 195.9 Fines and Forfeits SS.iii iS.iii li.iii 15.2 court routs Sii ]ii (2i51 N S.i) . pug Impound refs Special Assessments 2,556 -S- (2.565) 1155.5) Street Lighting miscellaneous 1)8.900 142.551 12.Si/ 9_2 Interest Income Rent - O.S. Post office 5,469 5.406_- Receipts in Lieu of Tales S.094 1.955 S.iii 1.955 -- -. Other Transfers In - ■und Salance - Reserved from 1957 5- S .-Yr .we -5- S , . e" -i- -i- Z 5� .... l.......... .......... ........ a Adlustaeut for Long Late Police officer reduction � III L . 9308; k714rn�xr�- A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE 1988 TAX LEVY COLLECTIBLE IN 1989 BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Orono, County of Hennepin, Minnesota, that the following sums of money be levied for the current year, collectible in 1989 upon the taxable property in the City of Orono, for the following purposes: For the General Fund $1,352,690 BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Improvement Bonds of 1985 Debt Redemption Fund Levy of $30,000 for 1989 adopted September 28, 1988 by Resolution #2507 is necessary and is hereby ordered collected. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Improvement Bonds of 1980 Debt Redemption Fund Levy of $18,100 for 1989 adopted Nove!tiber 20, 1980 by Resolution #1228 is unnecessary and is hereby ordered cancelled. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota at a regular meeting held Octoer 10, 1988. James R. GrabEk, Mayor ATTEST: Dorothy M. Hallin, City Clerk 92988.4 TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Mark E. Bernhardson, City Adniinistrato DATE: September 29, 1988 11 SUBJECT: City Facilities Site Criteria Attachment: A. City Facilities Memo Dated 9/23/88 ISSUE 1. Determination as to the types of site criteria and appropriate weightings that the Council would feel appropriate for site analysis. 2. Determination as to whether the Council desires to have another site explored as either an alternate or additional site. INTRODUCTION - At the Council meeting on September 28, 1988 you requested that this item be tabled for your further consideration. DISCUSSION - As noted in Attachment A the staff in addition to the site criteria raised the issue of an alternate site for consideration. Should the Council desire to have this site explored staff would contact the owner to determine whether they would allow us to analyze the site. If so the City based on preliminary site analysis would recommend that the site be substituted in the analysis for the current City Hall site. PROPOSED MOTION - Moved by , seconded by , that Council adopt the site criteria for the site analysis of_City facilities and that Council directs staff to explore substituting the site at the southwest corner of Old Crystal Bay Road and Highway 12 for the site on Brown Road. Ayes _, Nays l� TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Mark Bernhardson, City Administrator DATE: September 23, 1988 SUBJECT: City Facilities - Site Criteria Attachment: A. Site Criteria B. City Facilities Memo Dated 4/l/88 ISSUE - 1.Deterinination as to the types of site criteria and appropriate weightings that the Council would feel appropriate for site analysis. 2. Determination as to whether the Council desires to have another site explored as either an alternate or additional site. INTRODUCTION - As noted in Attachment B the Council directed that Phase II, site analysis be undertaken of the two sites outlined. The consultant, in April, developed a list of site criteria after working with staff on the matter and this was submitted to the Planning Commission in May. The staff received responses from the Planning Commission on these and Attachment A is a summary of the criteria and weightings from both staff and Planning Commission. DISCUSSION - In addition to review and comment on the criteria weighting factors which is step 5 outlined in attachment B, the staff would request that you consider the possibility of analysis of a non owned city site at the SW corner of Highway 12 and Old Crystal Bay Road. The staff has not discussed this with the owner but several years ago the staff had discussed possible acquisition of the site ;with the owner. Tnis analysis could either be done as a substitute for one of the current Iwo or as an additional one for an additional amount of about $4,000. ALTERNATIVES - ISSUE 41 Criteria 1. Adopt as presen Amend and adqp �t,� � Table i "j Take no action QQ- ISSUE 42 Additional site 1. Substitute 2. Add as an additional site 3. Remain at two sites 4. Table 1 RECOMMENDATION - It is recommended that the site criteria apart from any amendments that the Council may feel appropriate as to types of criteria for consideration or the relative weights be adopted in order for the consultant to complete Phase II and that the Council table discussion of the additional site to its October 10,1988 meeting. PROPOSED MOTION - Moved by _, seconded by _, that the Council adopt the appropriate sitc criteria for site analysis for the City's facilities in order to determine a realistic projection, of costs rel�l ed to the site together with the issues related to any altered facility and site and that the Council table discussion of an additonal site to its October 10, 1988 meeting. Ayes _, Na.ys _ 4188.4 TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Mark Bernhardson, Ci*y Administrator ar\ DATE: April 1, 1988 SUBJECT: City Facility Study Attachments: A. Facilities Memo Dated 9/15/8G ISSUE_ - 1.- Present information regarding curr-ez+t steps being taken in relationship to the site evaluation. 2. Presentation of a review -,,r,Dcess of the site evaluation and criteria development. INTRODUCTION - At the Council's February 8, 1988 meeting the Council accepted the information regarding the first phase of the study and undertook the second phase of the study which was a site evaluation of two alternative sites. The firm doing the site analysis has reviewed both sites and in light of the space study, has been developing block diagrams to see how they coordinate with the site together with selected setback and site needs. Staff has presented the cor„ultant with as much documentation as it has available on the two :rites. DISCUSSION_ - The primary focus at this meeting is on Issue 2 to determine a process that the Council would like to have undertaken during this site analysis phase. The principal goals of this review are the following: a. Development of criteria for site analysis of the facility (regardle:; of location). b. Review of the preliminary sites taking comments from the persons involved in the process as to particularly land use issues and zoning requirements. In addition to Council and staff participation in this matter there has been expressed desire on the part of the Planning Commission, with concurrence by Council and staff, that Planning Commission be involved in this site evaluation process to lend particularly their land use expertise in the siting criteria. The consultant is developing draft criteria plus layout block schemes on each of the sites being studied which will be the subject of the reveiw at this point by those involved. ALTERNATIVES - i._Informat_ion presented a. Accept b. Table 2. Process adoption Process Elements 1. Draft criteria/site layouts - consultant 2. Review by staff 3. Commentary by Planning Commission - Focusing on criteria and )_arid uce/zoning site issues 4. Council commentary based on draft layouts plus staff and Planning Commission commentary 5. Consultant revise site criteria and layout to accomodate issues 6. Consultant do further work related to general layouts, building estimates, construction estimates including all site costs 7. Staff and Council review Options A. Adopt as presented B. Amend and adopt C. Table RECOMMENDATION - It is recommended that the Council accept the information presented as to site evaluation progress to date. Additionally it is recommended that the Council adopt the process that is presented in Issue 2. PROPOSED MOTION - Moved by , Seconded by —, that the Council accept the information regarding the progress of the site evaluation together adopting a process for development of the criteria for the site and specific commentaries on the sites currently being analyzed. Ayes _ , Nays __ cc: David Kroos, Boarman and Associates 91586.1 TO: Mayor and City Council I ►J FROM: Mark Bernhardson, City Administrator,,` DATE: September 15, 1986 1 SUBJECT: Facilities Assessment - Request for Fund Allocation As indicated at the last meeting I am requesting permission for allocation of $8,000 out of existing monies in the building fund for the Engineer, to conduct an: a.) Analysis of existing buildings as to repair and bring into code compliance b.) Analysis of space needs for all City facilities. This request is made as in house City staff does not possess the expertise to do the appropriate analysis. The request is made to give Council the needed background for a decision as to whether there is a justifiable need to undertake a significant rehabilitations or rep 1acemen: of all City facilities (Public Works, City Hall, Police, Council, etc.) Below is a list of steps for consideration of such a decision. This represents the third step in the process which is a refinement of the process in attachment F from the March 20, 198E memo in facilities assessment. 1. In house facilities assessments 2. Preliminary analysis of needs, financing, etc. * 3. Analysis of needs * 4. Determination of need - Council * 5. Analysis of possible site costs and preliminary design * 6. oeterm:ne appropriate method of financing * 7. Select preliminary site(s) 8. a.) If funding requiring referendum - Informational - Referendum * b.) If funding through other me -ins - Public Hearing - Council decision 9. If approved * - Acquire site Additional shared tenants commitment * - Facility final design * - Bid project * - Arrange financing * - Award project Complete Transfer * Indicates points requiring formal Council action 1C .. TO: Mark E. Bernhardson, City Administrator ;- FROM: Tom Kuehn, Finance Director• DATE: October 3, 1988 SUBJECT: Ordinance Amending Council Salaries Attachement: Ordinance Amending Council Salaries DISCUSSION - Attached is an ordinance amending City Code, Section 2.17. The purpose of the amendment is to adjust the Mayor's monthly salary from $300.00 to $320.83 and each Counci lmember's monthly salary from $241.67 to $258.33. The changes will be effective January 1, 1989. Under Minnesota law the salaries of the Mayor and Council may be changed by ordinance at anytime, but the change does not take effect until after the next municipal election. Thus the salaries are set for at least Iwo years. The ordinance must also be published before th, election (November 8, 1988). The Mayor and Council salaries were last adjusted in 1986, effective January 1, 1987. TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Mark E. Bernhardson, City Administrate( DISCUSSION - The proposed increase of 7% is less than the cost of levy over the past 2 years and is equal to staff increases the past two years. The amount to cover is included in the proposed budget. ALTERNATIVES 1. Adopt 2. Amend amount and adopt 3. Choose not to alter salaries RECOMMENDATION - It is recommended the Council adopt the proposed increase ase to maintain Council compensation in terms of real uninflated value. PROPOSED MOTION - Moved b� , seconded by , to adopt Ordinance No. . second Series. P.n Ord finance fife 1 at i ng to Salaries of the Mayor and Councilmembers and providing for adjustment of the Mayor's salary from $3,b00 to $3,850 annual ly and each Councilmember's salary from $2,900 to $3,100 annually, effective January 1, 1989. Ayes _, Nays i 93088.5 ORDINANCE NO. , 2ND SERIES AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ORONO, MINNESOTA, AMENDING ORONO CITY CODE CHAPTER 2 ENTITLED 'ADMINISTRATION AND GENERAL GOVERNMENT AND ORDINANCE NUMBER 8, 2ND SERIES AND ORDINANCE NUMBER 23, 2ND SERIES BY CHANGING A PROVISION RELDiING TO SALARIES OF THE MAYOR AND COUNCILMEMBERS; AND, BY ADOPTING BY REFERENCE ORONO CITY CODE CHAPTER 1 RELATING TO DEFINITIONS AND GENERAL PROVISIONS. THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ORONO ORDAINS: to read: Section 1. Orono City Code Sec. 2.17 is hereby amended SEC. 2.17. SALARIES OF MAYOR AND COUNCILMEMBERS. Subd. 1 Salaries of the Mayor and Councilmembers, effective January 1, 1989, and which amounts are deemed reasonable, are hereby fixed as follows: A. The salary of the Mayor sha 1 1 be $3, 850.00 per year, paid monthly. B. The salary of each Councilmember shall be $1,100.00 per year, paid monthly. Subd. 2. In accordance with Minnesota Statutes, Section 415.11, any changes in the foregoing shall be by ordinance and shall not take effect until after the next succeding City election. Section 2. Orono City Code Chapter 1 entif'.ed "General Provisions and Definitions Applicable to the Entice City Code Including Penalty for Violation" is hereby adopted in its entirety, by reference, as though repeated verbatim herein. Seciton 3. This ordinance shall take effect ,nd be in force from and after the date of its passage and publication. Passed by the City Council this 10th day of October, 1988, by a vote of ayes and nays. A'1'TES'T': James R. Grabek, Mayor Dorothy M. Nallin, City Clerk Published in the Laker and Pioneer newspaper the week of C2tober 17, 1988. O 10688.4 � 3 TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Mark E. Bernhardson, City Administratoy�� DATE: October 6, 1988 UF �'NIAU SUBJECT: Highway 12 Task Force Attachments: Mayors Letter Dated 10/6/88 ISSUE - Determine if Council can support a request to MnDOT via Leonard Levine, Commissioner of Transportation regarding development of alternatives. INTRODUCTION - As you are probably aware the Task Force has been meeting to determine a direction for eventual improvement of Highway 12. As noted in the attached draft letter the most recent meeting of the Task Force was with Mr. William Crawford, District Engineer for MnDOT District 5. He indicated that in order for MnDOT to do any work for the group it would require authorization from the central office. He felt an indication of support from the communities along Highway 12 would be needed to get that undertaken. DISCUSSION - As a result of this the next meeting of the group will be held Monday, October 17, 1988, will attempt to determine which communities are in support of the request to MnDOT to: A. Spend MnDOT engineering time to determine graphically the maximum highway that could be developed within the existing right-of-way. B. Determination by MnDOT of the layout of a four lane road along the current alignment and what physical impact that would have. As noted in the letter this would assist in determining whether there is a need for a corridor study or if those yield solutions which could be undertaken without a corridor study. ALTERNATIVES 1. Indicate Orono's willingness to support such a request. 2. Indicate Orono's desire to support one of the two requests. 3. Indicate Orono does not desire to support any of the requests at this time. 4. Indicate Orono's opposition to these requests. 5. Table for further discus -ion. RECOMMENDATION - It is recommended that the Council, since these 1 are exploritory options at this point and ones for which there is no support apart from the previously indicated support that there is a need for safety along the corridor. Should the Council choose to table this matter until the next meeting that would still be enough time in advance of the meeting with the Commissioner for the City to determine whether it desires to support it or not. PROPOSED MOTION - Moved by _, seconded by , that the Council indicate its support for the request as such a request does not in any way bind the City to support of any particular option, but only to gain information as to options that may be realistic. Ayes _, Nays _ �_TAL N-wL¢ '_ October 6, 1988 This Letter Was Sent to the Follow Mayors: Delano, Independence, Maple Palin, Medina, Orono and Long Lake Subject: Highway 12 - Directions for Improvement Ad Hoc Task Force Meeting Monday, October 17, 1988 Dear Mayor Smeby, As you may be aware representatives from Delano, Independence, Maple Plain, Medina, Orono and Long Lake have been part of a Task Force to explore options regarding Highway 12. The Task Force has reviewed the steps for a corridor selection process and also discussed the issue of short-term verses long- term solutions. At the Task Force's most recent meeting on September 19, 1988 Mr. William Crawford, Chief Engineer District 5, was in attendance and indicated that it would be appropriate for the Task Force to take their case to Commissioner of Transportation Leonard Levine. At this point the Task Force would like to have the Minnesota Department of Transportation indicate the maximum that could be done within the existing corridor and what impacts a four lane road would have along the existing alignment. As this is not work Programmed by MNDot, Mr. Crawford indicated it would be the Commissioner of Transportation who would be needed to authorize such unprogrammed work by MNDot Engineers. For the Task Force's meeting on the 17th, the Task Force members are requesting that you attend if possible. The meeting will be held at the Delano City Hall, at 7:00 P.M. It would be helpful at the meeting if you could indicate whether your community could support such a request of the Commissioner. If in support it additionally would be helpful if you or your designated representative be able to be in attendance with the meeting with Commissioner Levine. A tenative date for the meeting will be discussed on the 17th. It would be held at the Department of Transportation Headquarters in St. Paul. On behalf of the Task Force, should you have any questions please feel free to call Gordon Wetter Mayor of Delano or myself. Please contact us if you a not able to attend. Sincerely, Mark E. Bernhardson City Administrator 10688.6 TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Mark E. Bernhardson, City AdministratOwl' DATE: October 6, 1988 SUBJECT: Local Property Tax System and State Aids Attachments: A. A.M.M. Letter Dated 9/21/88 Re: Property Tax Data Base System B. Brooklyn Park Resolution #1988-183 Dated 8/8/88 ISSUE 1. Determination as to whether Orono wants to contribute monies for development of a property tax base system to be used in analyzing reform proposals. 2. Determination as to whether the Council wants to go on record by way of a resolution to reform the State's property tax and municipal State Aid system. INTRODUCTION - Recently the City had received the request, as had the other 66 member cities of the A.M.M., to commit funding for the development of a property tax base that could be used to better analyze the property tax proposals put forward. In addition Councilmembers had indicated concern with the changes made in the '87 and '88 Legislatures which will result in additional property tax burdens in the Metropolitan suburban area together with the shift of State funds to "Greater Minnesota Communities". r)TS,^f1SgTnM Issue 1. Property Tax Data System. As noted in Attachment F, the coalition is trying to put together financial committments in order to develop a comprehensive property tax data system. The problem in the past has been that various proponents of various proposals have developed their own in-house limited systems which give them some indications of the impacts of their system and yet are either not trusted or not comprehensive enough or are not accessible to proponents of other approaches. The purpose is to develop enough of a data base that can be used in the 1984 session. Which the coalition of Cities can then use to refine proposals and develop one acceptable to all and documentable as to effects. As you may be aware the principal way property tax reform bills are voted upon are not on the principals of the bill, but on what the computer runs indicate happen in each of the jurisdictions of Legislator's district. (An additional problem with the most recent runs are that the proposals that made the changes took into account only the effects on the municipalities and did not take into account any impacts on the school districts and counties, which often total 2/3's to 3,'4's 1 of the total property tax bill.) While not specified in Attachment B the guideline for communities under 10,000 is that its been requested they contribute uo to $500. Issue 2. - As you may be aware the current state property tax system is based on prior expenditures and property tax values as expressed in assessed value. This system perpetuates high spending communities receiving the most state funds. A typical comparison of services made between the City of Virginia and the City of Booklyn Park. The City of Virginia, which has a career fire department of currently 28 indi-iduals they used to have 43 and have an ambulance service (is a community of 11,000) and currently has a fire cost of $107 per capita most of which is picked up by the State. Brooklyn Park a community of 46,000 has 75 member volunteer department that costs them about $5.00 per capita. ALTERNATIVES ISSUE 1. 1. Make a contribution. 2. Choose not to make a contribution. 3. Tatle for further discussion and consideration. ISSUE 2. 1. Adopt 2. Amend and adopt 3. Table for further consideration 4. Take no action RECOMMENDATION - ISSUE 1. It is recommended that the Council contribute up to $500.00 from the City's 1988 undesignated fund balance as the City has a stake in any of the proposals generated both as a City and for its tax payers in general. It should be ncted that the City has no made no committment one way or the other to the A.M.M. at this point. ISSUE 2. It is recommended that the staff draft a resolution in a similar format to Brooklyn Park's and that be communicated to the City's Legislators. PROPOSED MOTION - Moved by _, seconded by , that the Council agree to contribute up to $500.00 for "he funding of a Property Tax Data System development together with the adoption of Resolution # urging the legislature to take a comprehensive review of the property tax system in the State of Minnesota. Ayes _, Nays �I$ as ociation of metropolitan municipalities P R O M P T A C T I O N R E Q U E S T E D September 21, 1986 Dear City Administrator/Manager: 11 The Association of Metropolitan Municipalities and the Municipal Legislative Commission have been working for sometime with the League of Minnesota Cities Coordinating Committee discussing property tax computer analysis for 1989• The LMC has committed to developing computer analysis capability for the 1990 legislative session but a transition year is necessary to be able to react and participate knowledgeably in the 1989 session. The Coordinating Committee has been negotiating with the Coalition of Greater Minnesota Cities for development of a property tax reform proposal for 1989, a key element of which, will be retention of the principles of a Homestead Credit. Additional background data on the research elements and product are enclosed. This effort will cost approximately $185,000 for computer data update and proposal development. To raise this amount, Minneapolis, St. Paul, the Coalition of Greater Minnesota Cities, the Small City organization, and the Metro Area suburbs are being asked to make contributions. The suburbs share of funding has been targeted for between $35,000 and $50,000, which will be raised voluntarilyZ not through any type of mandatory assessment by either the AMM or MLC. Thus, a request for financial contribution is being made of all suburban cities. The larger member suburban cities are being asked to commit $2,000 each to this effort. Your city, taking into consideration its smaller population and budget limitations is being asked to contribute what ycu feel is appropriate. This financial pledge is contingent upon two factors: 1) AMM ana MLC Boards approval to proceed with this project, and 2) Sufficient funding from the suburos to raise the required amount of dollars. It may be imperative for all cities, especially suburban cities to 183 university avenue east, st paul, mmnesota 55101 (612) 2274008 develop a common proposal for the 1989 legislative session. Based on the 1987 and 1988 tax and school funding bills, counties and school districts are committing to a significant effort for additional funding in 1989, probably zt the expense of cities. This is primarily possible because of the elimination of Homestead Credit in 1990 in favor of an aid type program. Since the suburbs are at the greatest risk if Homestead Credit is exchanged for aid, it is paramount that a strong effort be made to restore the Homestead Credit. The data base or information which should result from this one time effort will help assure that the professional staffs of AMM and MLC 'that represent the suburban cities will be on an equal footing with other city lobbyists in the state during the 1989 session. Without the availability of this information and a unified position supported by all cities, success in protecting the suburban interest is in doubt. Please, strongly consider this request with your council and reply using the enclosed pledge sheet or verbally no later than Wednesday, October 5, 1988 to the AMM Office. If you have any questions, call Vern or Roger at 227-4006. Respectfully, Gary Bastian, President Association of Metropolitan Municipalities Richard Wedell, President Municipal Legislative Commission TO: ASSOCIATION OF METROPOLITA14 MUNICIPALITIES MUNICIPAL LEGISLATIVE COMMISSION 183 UNIVERSITY AVE., EAST ST. PAUL, MINNESOTA 55101 FROM: CITY OF YES, OUR CITY WILL PLEDGE $ IF THIS EFFORT CONTINUES. NO, OUR CITY WILL NOT CONTRIBUTE. CITY ADMINISTRATOR/MANAGER LEAGUE CJORDINATING COMMITTEE RECOMMENDED RESEARCH PROGRAM FOR OCTOBER THROUGH JA14UARY The major research tasks recommended for the League Coordinating Committee through January 15, 1989 are briefly described below. The research tasks have be ganized into tnree major, areas of research work. 1. Data Base Additions and Modifications - Add data on homeowner income related to home value and tax burden, and develop analytical model for using this data in conjunction with the property tax model. - Enhance ability to do regional totals and averages, constituency group totals and averages and average impact by property type. - Add county welfare data. - Add State Auditor's data on city revenues and expenditures for 1987. Update data base with estimated 1989 data when available from the Department of Revenue or House Research. Most recent information indicates that valuation data will become available in late October, and levy data will be available one or two months later. II. Background Research _and Analysis of the 1990 Law The first major researcn task is the analysis of the 1990 law, including its structural features and estimated impacts on property tax burdens. This research work may include analysis of the fiscal characteristics of cities in different regions of the state, and how those characteristics play a role in deuermining the impact of the 1990 law. III. Research to Develop Specific Proposals for Consideration by the ee�isiature The primary objective of this work plan is to aevelop two specific proposals that are acceptable the Constituency Groups. One of the proposals woi>>d a homestead credit and the other would not. The research involved in developing specific proposal is difficult to describe in detail. 't is gencrdily an interactive process where alternative proposals and their impacts are described to the Committee, the Committee reacts to those proposals and provides direction for further research to refine or redirect those alternatives. Dozens or even hundreds of individual computer runs may be needed in order to design a specific proposal that is acceptable to the participants. the elements of the system that will be considered in designing a proposal may include the fc.luaing: - Classifications and assessment ratios. - LGA, disparity aid, and other equalization formulas. - The homestead credit, other credits, and, in the case of the alternative proposal, transition aid payments or other programs that replace the homestead credit. - CatEgorical aids, such as the welfare takeover that are eiti,er in addition to or in lieu of other state -paid aids. - Fiscal disparities or tax base sharing programs. - Income adjusted property tax refunds or an income adjusted homestead credit. Extensive computer analysis is needed to assess the inter -related impact of changes to all elements of the system. It will be necessary for the Constituency Groups to focus the research effort very early in the process. without some initial policy agreements, the research effort could become unfocused and would more likely be unproductive. The research work for the first several meetings would be designed to help the members of the Committee reach a preliminary agreement on the direction that the proposals should take. The research needed to develop specific proposals may include some of the more specific research tasks already suggested by Committee members, assuming that the Committee agrees that these specific research tasks are needed. Some of the specific items suggested so far include: - Analysis of impact and appropriateness of using city size as a basis for distributing aids. - Elimination of split classifications; impact on tax buraens and on thr ' Atribution of aid. - Research on th., :, of new property taM systems that do not require or enco�ijge mill rate buy -downs or mill rate equalization. - Research on single aid programs that could replace the multiple programs in current law. Research or, modifications to 1990 law to refine aid programs and classification system. Analysis of property tax burdens by income class. Research on impact of property tax system changes on the existing education aid formula and on school district levies. Analysis of projected school levy changes for 199C. Analysis of ways to reduce tax burden differences due to differences in tax base. These items illustrate th. types of specific research that would be undertaken for the Committee. This research is consistent with the general structure of the recommended research program. The Committee would have to decide as the negotiations and meetings progress on the specific •esearch to be done. Membership of the Leaj-ue Coordinating Committee would in include three members from each of the following groups: Minneapolis St. Paul Coalition of Greater Minnesita Cities Association of Metropolitan Municipalities Municipal Legislative Commission Associaticr. of Small Cities 5800 85th AVENUE NORTH / BROOKLYN PAH,'IN. 55443 /G12 424 BONG RESOLUTION #1938- '63 RESOLUTION CALLING FOR A t-,)M, z:, F.NGIVE LOOK AT MINNESOTA'S PROPERTY T`'." :•!_!D SPATE AID SYSTEMS WHEREAS, the 1988 Omnibus Tax Bill significantly changed the mechanics of property tax administration and implemented new fora ilas for the distribution of Local Governm^nt Aid (LGA),- 17,1:+- did not resolve any -.existing property tax and LGA inequ'~' 4r,,i WHEREAS. the Tax Bill did not simplify the prope_ ax syste:n administratively nor did it. ic!)ieve any major goals of property tax relief, and WHEREAS, the Act significantly aggravated the metro/oiitstate shift nf state aid dollars and dramatically reduced future property tax relief targeting capabilities, and WHEREAS, LGA and property tax prov�si,-,s of the 1988 Omnibus Tax Bill continues to have a devi-_,,e ffect on local gove*-nmental units, pitting communities lair:,•_ one another, and WHEREAS, the fi lork for the r. :.sent LGA, property tax system, and Levy lim ions was crear.ed by the 1971 Minnesota Legislature as part of a major restructuring of state/local f;.scal relations. and WHEREAS, this 1971 refo_-m, The Minnesota Miracle, was intended to make the state aides system more cogni-ant. r.` he differences in "need" among local governments, and WHEREAS, the Legislature arbit--aril- letermined c.c .nd townships payable 1971 tax levies and •-tatf aid amounts were to bt., the foundation of the r,ew I erty tax system, and WHEREAS, gross inegt,tie in tax levying capabilities and iqh disparities I.,. LGA amount ed successive Legislatures to ,acrensa LGA funding and aify or implement new LGA .4trihution formul.r.s, and WHEREA-, each conser.utive LGA ••)ula change included provisions that grandfathered, establis:. iriimums and maximums, a%id rachets there.>y neq, tr:a imp-ict .f any real change and perpetuating 1971 levy a' '.:4' Lion disparities, an-' WHEkE., .: , property. did not address sys'- property tax structu property's market vA- e +..- TwFrEFORE, u.. iITY JF &'')OKLYN PARK: r i the 1988 Omnibus Tax Bill but rather )vr.rhauled the uY or fixers percentages of a -SOL'IED BY THE CITV.JCOUNCIL OF THE 01988-1q' The Minnesota Legislature be requested to take a comprehensive look it refor ng the property tax and state aid system to identify municipal fiscal need and fiscal capacity and establish state aiLl distribution formulas which encourage efficiency in the delivery of mt,icipal services. BE IT YURTHER RES(, 'IED that municipal spending be a major focus of t1.is study. The -egoing reso.L-tion was introduced by Council Member Slack and aiy seconded by Council Member Marshall. The following voted in favor of the resolution: Kr-autkremer, Marshall, Slack, Engh, Pearson, Gustafson and Dix. The following voted against: None. The following were absent: None. Whereupon the ._esolut.on was adopted. A PTED: AUGUST 8, 1988 ES K UTKREMER, M'.YOR CERTIFICATE STATE OF MINNESOV. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN CITY OF BROOKLYN PARK I, the undersigned, being the duly qualified and acting Clerk of the City of Brooklyn Park, Minnesota, hereby certify that the above resolution is a true and correct copy of the resolution as ado'oted by the City Council of the City of Brooklyn ParK on August 8, 1988. WITNESS my hand officially seal of the City this 9th day of (SEAL) as such Clerk and the corporate August, 1988. MYRIyA MAI KKULA, CITY CLERK I11)qq-14; 92988.5 (/ TO: Mayor and Citv Council 1, it . ' 0 �ij � FROM: Mark E. Bernhardson, City Administrator DAT9: September 29, 1988 SUBJACT: Animal Permit Ordinance Attachment: A. Animal Permit Ordinance Memo Dated 9/20/88 ISSUE 1. Determination as to whether the City Council desires to require animal permits for the keeping of horses, cattle and other undomestic fowl together with exotic animals not including dogs and cats or other small household pets. 2. If an animal permit system is desired adoption of an ordinance to implement it. INTRODUCTION - At the Council's September 28, 1988 meeting this item was tabled until the Oc:oher. 10, 1988 meeting. RECOMMENDATION - It is recommended that the Council c-on:--.inue the permit system to better control the larger an' r.a.is in the community without making it overly restrictive. PROPOSED MOTION - Moved by _, seconded by _, that the Council adopt Ordinance No. _ 2nd Series an amendment to Ordinance 9.13. Ayes , Nays cc: Mel Kilbo, Police Chief ke To: Mayor Grabek 6 Orono Council Members From: Mark E. Bernhardson, �1 City Administrato4 Date: September 20, 1988 Subject: Animal Permit Ordinance ATTACHMENTS - A. Animal 'ermit Ordinance Memo Dated 9/7/88 ISSUE - Determination as to whether the Council wants to adopt the Ordinance as proposed. INTRODUCTION - At the Council's September 12th, 1988 meeting, staff presented the attached amendment for Council consideration and omment. DISCUSSION - The amendment was presented tonight to see if there is and further comment together wi*h request for adoption. ALTERNATIVES - Same Altei:iatives as the 9/7/88 memo. RECOMMENDATION - It is reccmmended that the Council adopt the ordinance for the regula,Lon of permits for animals. PROPOSED MOTION: Moved by , seconded by , that the Council adopt Ordinance Second Series, as an amendment to Ordinance 913. Ayes , nays cc: Melvin Kilbo, Chief of Police 9788.4 62 TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Mark E. Bernhardson, City Administrato DATE: September 7, 1988 SUBJECT: Animal Permit - Ordinance Amendment Attachments: A. Animal Control Regulation Memo Dated 5/3/88 (Memo Only) L. Proposed Ordinance Amendment C. Draft Permit Form D. Proposed Fee Ordinance Amendment E. Orono Ordinance 9.13 ISSUE - 1. Determination by the Council whether they desire to amend the current ordinance to es}.ablish the basic requirements for a permit, currently required by the ordinance. 2. Establishment cf a fee for inspections for such permits. INTRODUCTION - This past May the issue of the City requiring animal permits was raised by one of the residents when the City was attempting to have his dogs licensed. He pointed out that the City required animal permits on horses and other types of farm animals, but the City had no permit process in place. DISCUSSION - After a review of -he ordinance by staff and development of a permit system Attachment B was developed and outlines the issues that the staff would like to have addressed by crdinan -e in order to implement this permit system. 1. Defining which are required to be licensed. 2. Addressing the issue of those who automatically received a permit based on their established usage level prior to 1984. 3. Indicate that no pF-rmits will be issued witnout inspection. 4. Indicate who is required to review permit prior to permit issuance. 5. Indication that the permit shall be for a maximum type and number and not by individual animal. 6. Cross-reference to zoning chapter regarding various animals. Length of time fog permit. 1 In addition Attachment D outlines the fey: for inspections for these types of permits. A follow up inspection would only be conducted upon failure to meet the appropriate criteria on the initial inspection or upon a follow-up inspection where on a complaint basis violations were found. ALTERNATIVES 1. Adopt -Is presented 2. Amend and adopt 3. Delete requirement for the permitting the animals apart from dogs 4. Table for further consideration gECOMMENDATION - It is recommended that the Council discuss with staff initial concerns they may have and that this matter be tabled until September 26, 1988 Council meeting. PROPOSED MOTION - Moved byV, seconded byY, that the Council fcllowing discussion table his m er until the September 26, 1988 Council meeting. Ayes 4, Nays\ 1 . cc: Mel Kilbo, Police Chief 4TIIAQAAteIIIT- 4 TO: Mayor and City Council Mark Bernhardson, City Administrator -- ----- )�AFROM: DATE: May 3, 1988 SUBJECT: Animal Control Regulations Attachment A. Orono Police Report #88-002367 B. City of Orono Ordinances 9.12 and ^.13 C. Orlinance #157 (repealed) D. Ordinance #239 (repealed) E. John Hollander Letter Dated 4/29/88 ISSUE 1. Review of the City's dog licensing ordinance and its applicability. 2. Review of the City's kennel licensing ordinance and its applicability. 3. Review of the City's farm animal regulation and its applicability. INTRODUCTION - On Thursday, April 28th C.S.O. Dennison was called to 200 Hollander Road by the resident regarding live trapping of a raccoon. When C.S.O. Dennison arrived the owner was not home, but in his search for the owner he noted several violations on the property acid issued warning tags for the fact that the three dogs on the property are not currently 'icensed and that there was no kennel license in existence together with the fact that - there was substantial feces `hat evidently had not been cleaner up for several days. He did remove the raccc.,- aad been trapped for release near the Orono schools. Iol'Lander claims he drowned it.) The owner has said that he had never licensed the dogs nor been required to have a kennel for the dogs and that there was a gentlemen's agreement with the City regarding this. The City is unaware of that and even if the City instituted its licensing arrangements for these substantially after the owner had his practice in existance since 1956 and did not require a license, it is staff's position a license is st.,ll required. While in the land use area the provision of grcndfathering is subject to a conditional use permit does have some precedence, as a legal non- conforming use, a licensing statute generally has immediate applicablity to all persons who ta'.l under the catagory. Mr. Hollander .ndicates Mr. Dick Benson, former City Administrator and Emerson Dressel, former Orono Police Sgt. indicated he did not need them. Mr. Hollander additionally has a problem in being able to 1 determine when his dogs had their most recent rabies shots, as the veterinarian to whom he had last had them, is currently in a dispute with Mr. Hollander regarding unpaid fees on some other animals and will not release information. The concern by Mr. Hollander is that if rabies shots are given in less than a year's period, there is some danger to the animals. The City has made attempts to get in contact with the veternarian, but to no avail at this point. At this point Mr. Hollander is alleging that his neighbors are also guilty of the regulation under which he was gives, u iag. His claim was that the C.S.O. would not take action on that. Lt. Cheswick did investigate the matter as it relates to the other neighbors but found no basis for a violation. Mr. Hollander is also inquiring as to the City's permitting process reguarding farm animals under Subd 7 of Section 9.13. While this �,as adopted as part of the recodification in 1984, no system was eve developed. The requirement does not make a distinction for animal keeping by urban or rural however the zoning code requires 1 acre per animal unit (1 horse, 1 cow/steer, 3 sheep, 50 fowl) p1ns 1 acre for the prinicipal structure (2 acres if horses are involved.) Such a process would not be a license such as a dog license of the animal but a permit to the resident regarding keeping of animals. (Prior to 1984 there was prevision for a Village Livestock Commission relating to permits for horses b1t no requirement for such permits. It was eliminated by the recodification.) ALTERNATIVES Issue 1. Dog Licensing a. Amend the ordinance to allow for grandfathering. b. Require a licensing of all dogs establishing a date by which the licensing has to be accomplished. c. Table d. Amend the ordinance to delete the licensing requirement. e. Amend the ordinance as it relates to the 24 hour feces requirement removal. (9.12 Subd 11/6) Issue 2. Kennel Licensing a. Amend the ordinance to allow for grandfathering. b. Regaire a licensing of all dogs establishing a date by which the licensing has to be accomplished. c. Table d. Amend the ordinance to delete the licensing requirement. Issue ?. Farm Animal Regulation a. Amend the ordinance not to require permits. b. Direct staff to develop a permit system. c. Table for further discussion. d. Amend ordinance to require permits only in the urban section of the community pr.�vided ali zoning amendments are met. RECOMMENDATION Issue 1. It is recommended that the Council require that all the dogs be licensed and that such be done by May 31, 1988. Issue 2. Kennel Licensing - Let Mr. Hollander apply for a residential kennel license and that such be completed no later than May 30, 1998. Issue 3. Farm Aninal Regulation - The City establish a permit system for farm animals. PROPOSED MOTION - Moved by _, seconded by , that the Council direct Mr. Hollander to apply for and receive a dog license no later than May 31, 1988 together with a residential kennel license and that staff be directed to develop a permit system for farm animals. Ayes __, Nays __ cc: Jchn Hollander 9788.1 ORDINANCE NO. , SECOND SERIES _ AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 9.13 SUBDIVISION 7 ADOPTED APRIL 1, 1984, AND ENTITLED "ANIMALS AND FOWL - KEEPING, TRANSPORTING, TREATMENT, HOUSING" The City Council of Orono ordains: Ordinance No. 9.13 Subdivision 7 adopted April 1, 1984, and entitled "Animals and Fowl - Keeping, Transporting, Treatment, Housing" is amended to read: Subd. 7. Permit Required. It is unlawful for ally person to keep a farm animal in any portion of the City without a permit therefore from the City. All residents with animals, as defined by Ordinance in Section 9.13, Subdivis .on 1 B, C and D, before April 1, 1984 will be allowed to continue keeping animals at that same level but a permit is required in all case. Inspection will be made to insure compliance with this ordinance and -11 other applicable ordinances including but not limited to Section 10.83 Subdivision 3 W. All residents who acquire animals, as defined by Ordinance in Section 9.13, Subdivision 1 B, C and D, shall apply for a permit, be inspected by zoning officials, reviewed by the Police Chief and be issued a per;nit if all ordinance criteria is met. Ther permit shall list the maximum type and number of animals to be permitted on the property. A permit is good for ' ,yearss unless a shorter period is specified in this ordinance. A subsequent return inspection for ordinance compliance shall require• payment of an additional permit fee. The permit fee shall be established in the City's current Fee Schedule. This ordinance becomes effective after its passage and publication. ATTEST: Passed by the Council this 12th day of September, 1988. James R. Grabek, Mayor DorotFy M. Harlin, Cit' CCT7-- r c--r Publish in the Laker and Pioneer newspapers ------------- ------------- - -_— ^, - Y' the week of DATE: TYPE OF ANIMAL: Animal/Farm Animal ANIMAL OWNER'S MAKE: ADDRESS: PHONE: »FR! 525.00 ANIMAL PERMIT APPLICATI0N Dangerous Animal (1 Year +Permit) _ $100,000 Certificate of Insurance or $100,000 Surety Bond Attached (Section 9.13 Subd 9(G) (DANGEROUS ANIMALS ONLY) PROPERTY OWNER'S NAME, ADDRESS AND PHONE IF DIFFERENT FROM ABOVE: NUMBER AND TYPE OF EACH ANIMAL TO BE KEPT ON PREMISES/PROPERTY: SIZE OF PROPERT_: r**,►*,r*rr,r**,►*,r****rr,r*,rw****,►,►,r*,r,r*s,r,r,r,►**,r*****,►,►,r,►,r,►*,r,r,r.,r*,r•,►,r,► t,►,►,r**.,►,►• POLICE CHIEF'S REVI:'W: APPROVED DENIED Signature COMMENTS: Date 9788.2 ORDINANCE NO. , SECOND SERIES AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 44, SECOND SERIES ADOPTED DECEMBER 14, 1987 AND ENTITLED 'AN ORDINANCE ADOPTING THE 1988 FEE SCHEDULE.' The City Council of Orono ordains: ')rdnance No. 44, Second Series adopted December 14, 1987, and entitled "An Ordinance Adopting the 1988 Fee Schedule" is -mended to read: LICENSES AND MISCELLANEOUS CHARGES Fee Applicable Code Section ANIMAL PERMIT $25.00 9.13 Each subsequent re -inspection $25.00 each This ordinance becomes effective from and after is passage and publication. Passed by th^ Council this 12th day of September, 1988. James R. Grabek, Mayor ATTEST: Dorothy M. Hallin, Ci,y Clerk Publish in the Laker and P'-r.eer newspaae's the week of j m� E less than five regular business days. A "regular business day" is one during 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 thre months of age or over was received; and, (5) 'lie name and address of the person to whom any animal three mont t:, 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 Minresota Statutes, Section 35.71. Provided, however, that if a tag affixed to the animal, or a statement by the animal's owriet after seizure spe-;ifies that the animal should not be 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 Fariod. 0 Subd. 11. Other Unlawful Acts. It is unlawful for the owner of any dog to (1) fail to have the license tag issued. by the City f4.rmly attached to a collar worn at all times by the licensed dog, or (2) uwn or keep a dog which is dangerous (any quch dog which has caused injury to persons or property shall '-P deemed "dangerous"), or (3) interfere with any police officer, or othe-- City employee, in the performance of his duty tc 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 uoon public property or `.he premises of another, or (6) permit silid waste of a dog `o accumulate on his premises for more than twenty-four houra. 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 dog catcr:er may use a so-called tranquilizer gun or other ir. trument for the purpose of immobilizing and catching a dog. Subd. 13. Wari,ing of Vicic•is Dogs. Th , owner of any dog ,.awn to be of vicious habits sha. _. place in plain view of the ance to his premises a s'_qn no smaller than 12 inches by 14 _n 2s which shall read: "aewa, a of Vicious Dog". SEC. 9. 13. NNIM AI s AND FOWL - KEEPING, TRANSPORTING, TREATMENT, HOUSING. Subd. 1. °inittions. As used in this "ection, the following definitions shall app'_. A. "Owner" - Any person who owns, har'.ES, fee(1s, boards, keeps, or otherwise possesses an animal, ar, who is the head of the hcusehold of the residence, or the -)wner or manager in ORONO CC �,U3 (4-1-34) f § 9.13 charge of the establishment or premises at whic,i 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, domestic cats, gerbils, hamsters and caged household birds. D. "Dangerous Animals" - Any wild mammal, reptile or fo«1 which is not naturally tame or gentle but is of a wild nature or disposition and which, because of its size, vic�- Nljs nature or other characteristics would constitute a danger to human life or property it is not kept or maintained in a safe manner or in secure quarters. The term "dangerous animal" alsc means anO includes an? domestic mammal, reptile or fowl which becau-, of its size or vi � ^iot!s propensity or other c)itaracterictic, would constitute a danger to human life or pr-3perty i� it is not kept or maintained in a safe manner or -n - -ure 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 ider the City Code, or, (3 animals used in a parade for which a permit has been issued, or. (4) animals kept ir. a laboratory for scientific or experime : -al purposes, or, (5) animals kept in an animal hospital or clinic for tree. rment by a licensed veterinarian. Subd. 3. Animals in i ;it. It is unlawful for any person to transport "imals unles_ aey are (l) confined within a vehicle, cage or :-=her means of c nvevance, or, (2) farm an:,*als '-ping transported in a portion. of �':.he City zoned for :�;rai I.pos-s, or. (3) restrained by means of bridle=, halters, ror,ts or o•',er means individual restraint. Subd. 4. Treatment. It is unljw: L any person t_.reat an animal i cruel or inhumane manner. Subd. 5 Housing. I► i3 unla-: fu- for any person to keep a." n i �--il :.n any structure infested b� : - dents, verrair., flies or insects. Subd. 6. Trespas3e Lt is unlawful for ar.,, c;er3orl `-o h¢rd, drive or rile any-n*.mai over and ion any gr:i,,s, t':rf. �p bvu:-*lard, City park, ce. . :ory, garden o� .�_t w thr,.c ec.f ... peraibsion therefor from t.. r owner. Subd. 7. Permit Requi_ed. It is unlawful for any ers- to keep a far- animal in any iortion r' the ;ity witholt 3 , er'nit therefor from the City. ORONC -C 209 ; - 4 § 9.13 Subd. B. 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 maintain 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 specify the conditions under which such animal shall be kept. The Chief of Police shall issue a special permit for the purpose o' 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 tc 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 mainteiance of such animal. Proof of liability to respond in damages may lie gl,�en 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 (4-1-34) 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 tti Council by ordinance, provided that such permit shall not be issued for the keeping of more than two dangerous animals at any single location. Subd. 12. Exception. The provisions of this Se,,'_ `.on shall not apply 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 3rive 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 unlawfu' for any person to ride or drive a horse in any public park, berth, golf course or other public property, except within the r ght-of-way of public streets and highway.3, and in areas duly de.'gnated as a trailway or hitching area. D. The City Administrator shall designate and sign- post those areas in public lands, parks and beaches where horses may be ridden and driven. drawn vehicle provisions of vehicle, except application. ORONO CC E. Every person riding a horse or driving a horse - upon a public street shall be subject to those the City Code applicable to the driver of a mctor those provisions which by their nature can have no 211 (4-1-84 ) S 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 of Fifteen. It is unlawful for any minor person under the age of fifteen 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 or 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 day. 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 lair. 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, inclusive, reserved for future expansion.) ORONO CC 212 (4-1-84) TO: Mayor and City Council f� FROM: Mark Bernhardson, City Administrator DATE: May 3, 1988 SUBJECT: Animal Control Regulations Attachment A. Orono Police Report #88-002367 B. City of Orono Ordinances 9.12 and 9.13 C. Ordinance #157 (repealed) D. Ordinance #239 (repealed) E. John Hollander Letter Dated 4/29/88 ISSUE 1. Review of the City's dog 'licensing ordinance and its applicability. 2. Review of the City's kennel licensing ordinance and its applicability. 3. Review of the City's farm animal regulation and its applicability. INT_RODUCTION - On Thursday, April 28th C.S.O. Dennison was called to 200_Hollander Road by the resident regarding live trapping of a raccoon. When C.S.O. Dennison arrived the owner was not home, but in his search for the owner he noted several violations on the property and issued warning tags for the fact that the three dogs on the property are not currently licensed and that there was no kennel license in existence together with the fact that there was substantial feces that evidently had not been cleaned up for several days. He did remove the raccoon that had been trapped for release near the Orono schools. (Mr. Hollander claims he drowned it.) The owner has said that he had never licensed the dogs nor been required to have a kennel for the dogs and that there was a gentlemen's agreement with the City regarding this. The City is unaware of that and even if the City instituted its licensing arrangements for these substantially after the owner had his practice in existance since 1956 and did not require a license, it is staff's position a license is still required. while in the land use area the provision of grandf.athering is subject to a conditional use permit does have some presedence, as a legal non- conforming use, a licensing statute generally has immediate applicablity to all persons who fall under the catagory. Mr. Hollander indicates Mr. Dick Benson, former City Administrator and Emerson Dressel, former Orono Police Sgt. indicated he did not need them. Mr. Hollander additionally has a problem in being able to 1 determine when his dogs had their most recent rabies shots, as the veterinarian to whom he had last had them, is currently in a dispute with Mr. Hollander regarding unpaid fees on some other animals and will not release information. The concern by Mr. Hollander is that if rabies shots are given in less than a year's period, there is some danger to the animals. The City has made attempts to get in contact with the veternarian, but to no avail at this point. At this point Mr. Hollander is alleging that his neighbors are also guilty of the regulation under which he was given a tag. His claim was that the C.S.O. would not take action on that. Lt. Cheswick did investigate the matter as it relates to the other neighbors but found no basis for a violation. Mr. Hollander is also inquiring as to the City's permit'_ing process reguarding farm animals under Subd 7 of Section 9.13. while this was adopted as part of the recodification in 1984, no system was ever developed. The requirement does not make a distinction for animal keeping by urban or rural however the zoning code requires 1 acre per animal unit (1 horse, 1 cow/steer, 3 sheep, 50 fowl) plus 1 acre for the prinicipal structure (2 acres if horses are involved.) Such a process would not be a 1 ir•?nse such as a dog license of the animal but a permit to the resident regarding keeping of animals. (Prior to 1984 there was provision for a Village Livestock Commission relating to permiLs for horses but no requirement for such permits. It was eliminated by the recodification.) ALTERNATIVES Issue Dog Licensing a. Amend the ordinance to allow for grandfathering. b. Require a licensing of all dogs establishing a dat by which the licensing has to be accomplished... j�;;oll c. Table d. Amend the ordinance to delete the licensing requirement. e. Amend the ordinance as it relates to the 24 hour feces requirement removal. (9.12 Subd 11/6) Issue 2. Kennel Licensing a. Amend the ordinance to allow for grandfathering. b. Require a licensing of all dogs establishing a datA� by which the licensing has to be accomplished. c. Table d. Amend the ordinance to delete the licensing requirement. Issue 3. Farm Animal Regulation a. Amend the ordinance not to require permits. b. Direct staff to develop a permit system. c. Table for further discussion. d. Amend ordinance to require permits only in the urban section of the community provided all zoning amendments are met. RECOMMENDATION Issue 1. It is recommended that the Council require that all the dogs be licensed and that such be done by May 31, 1988. Issue 2. Kennel Licensing - Let Mr. Hollander apply for a residential kennel license and that such be completed no later than May 30, 1988. Issue 3. Farm Anfhal Regulation - The City establish a permit system for farm animals PROPOSED MOTION - Moved b, seconded by , that the Council direct Mr. Hollander to appl for and receive a dog license no later than May 31, 198,8 t gether with a residential kennel license and that staff a dir ted to develop a permit system for farm animals. AyesNays cc: John Hollander i UHUNU FULK:t ULFARTMENT MESS KEY CONTROL NUMBER IOC.A) - CONT. AGENCY NCIC (DENT ICAG) ATE�IME REPORT MADE y 7b 1 cc E C 1/ M O / N 0 2 7 L NOR DATE REPORTED (APO) TIME RPD (TRP) LOCATION G O NBR (LIiN) [DAY: ISN, ITI VVI Tel F S PLACE COMMITTED (PLC) IZ D � HRD Codes to ^ L NB^ HAD SQUAD OR BADGE l (SBN) TIME ASIG. (TAS) TIME ARA (TAR) TIMF CLR. (TCL) D SYhone� /I(3 � R—sdto a pFFICER ASSIGNEO ASSISTED 8% A— Alarm L NOR ISN UOC_ UCS /� L NOR rJ UCS M — Mail I�I/ �/ /, _I `/ T — Other OFFENSE�j O jNITIAL COMPLAINT QTJ:�R_PAINCIP L: r f� � rlt �Ci cal �t7�r i1�^ a COMPL.• INT Q OFFENDER FV ICTIeA Q O O.B. BUSINESS ADDRESS BUSINESS PHONE HOME ADDRESS HOM PHONE )cal-u� /�4�cfe 2 �vo ��!/ �t�,� 76 - OTHER REPORTS I NCLUDEED Impound Q Prop Inventory CJ Implied Consent r Accident Report Q Togs In}IuenCe ReOort Q PhOtoii Q REPORTING PERSONQOFFENOERQVICTIMQ D.O.B. BUSINESS ADDRESS — BUSINESS PHONE HOME ADDRESS HOME PHONE SEE CASE FILE ROLL CALL Warn & Release Dept. Assist -T- i Message Deliver I Treated & Transported Advised I Citation Issued I I Detail Completed I G.O.A. COPY TO CC) ATTNY Q CIT" ATTNY L COURT ❑ CHIEF ] OTHER DISPOSITION Unfounded Cleared by arrest Ref. other agency Inactive Other �7 \ SUPERVISOR'S SIGNATURE FFI !c V I_UJA (A Pol1C'(' Del )III'(T17E=I1( FOLLOW-UP CASE FILE 8800 2167 BADGE 565 OFFENSE Animal Problem DATE 4/28/88 PRI14CIPLE (S)_ DATE TYPED 4/29/88 John Hollander TYPED BY SAB On 4/28/88 upon my arrival to the office, I found a phone message awaiting from Mr. John Hollander of 200 Hollander Road, had called stating that he had a racoor. in a live trap at his residence. I arrived at 1742 hours, found no one at the residence. I knocked and also yelled outside the residence but no one came to the door. I looked around the residence and was unable to locate the trap anywhere. On the property, I did find a dog kennel that had three dogs inside. The dog kennel was made of chain link fence with a wooden house attached. Also inside the kennel were several Piles of defacation inside the cage, a^pearing as if it hadn't been cleaned for several days. Also the doq food was dumbed upside down., lvinq on the cement floor in a Pile, not in a dish. Knowing that this was in violation of city ordinance. I took several pictures of the area inside the cage, showing all three dogs and the mess which was inside. I then cleared the residence and ca..me back to the office to do Paoerwook . At 1853 hours, I received a radio call to Mr. Hollander's residence. He had returned and wanted the racoon Picked uo. I arrived at 1858 hours, met with Mr. Hollar�der who showed me where the racoon way . I brought this trapped racoon back to my car and advised Mr. Hollander I would take care of it. I then asked Mr. Hollander who owned the dots that were on his property and he stated that they were his and that he also had one more inside for a total of four. He stated that he had owned the dogs for a couple of years now. I asked Mr. Hollander if he had current licenses for the dogs and he stated that ves , but did not know and was unsure of when he had purchased license for them last. I asked Mr. Hollander if the four dog licenses were the onlv thing that he purchased at this time and he stated ves , it was. I advised him that he was in violation because the dogs were not registered at the time with having dog licenses in the dog licensing book. I also advised that he was in violation because he did not have a dog kennel license which is required if you have more than two dogs on vour property. I also asked him then when the last time that he had cleaned out the cage where the doas were outside. He told me that it was two weeks ago, and thev had gotten new dishes at the same time the cleaning was done. I had a coov of the ordinance with me and showed Mr Hollander that it said that you are not all -ow solid wastes of a doo to accumulate on the Premise for more than 24 ?yours. By the amount of defecation that was built uo in the fence, you could tell that it had been more than 24 hours as the Page 2 88002367 Pictures will show. I issued Mr. Hollander a warning tag which gave him 7 days to obtain a kennel license and also for doc license from the city of Orono. I also issued Mr. Hollander a citation for allowing the solid waste to build up on his property more than 24 hours. Mr. Hollander then cave me a list of names of people who lived on Hollander road that he was sure of who were: �.n violation of the same ordinance and wished that I act upon this immediately. I advised him that I had to take care of his racoon and had other things pending at the time and would not be able to respond immediately_ to this. He got very upset and questioned why I would not go over right away and also stated to me that if I did not, he would file a suit against the city for harrassment the following day. I told Mr. Hollander that he was free to do so, but that I still would not be able to get over tc the residence of the other parties on Hollander Road to take action right away. I advised him that I would make a report and followup on this as soon as possible. I then advised him they there was no ordinance governing the control of racoons and that I ald not have to take the racoon off of his property. I told him I would, but I just wanted him to underst2nd that I did not have to do this. He said it was un to me if i wanted to, or if I wanted to leave it, he would call the DNR to pick it up. I advised him that I would, but we are not going to make a habit of it and I was not goi.na to keep coming back and forth, taking the racoons which he is trannina. It should be noted that Mr. Hollander sooke to one of the other officerE c'_ this department about a black cat which he is missing and has beer. missing for the past 14 days. mr. Hollander is setting two live traps on his pr perty with cat food attempting to trap his cat that he has lost. The wild animals are going into these traps after the catfood ar.c ar^ being subsequently being trapped in them. I advised him that the police department will not continue to Iet these racoons loose if this continues on a reaular basis. CSO Denneson ORONO POLICE DEPARTMENT VIOLATION WARNING Date Time Officer r Location < ld- jtk�__Comm Code DRIVER ADDRESS CITY STATE ZIP 0 / L NO. DOB OWNER / PARENT - GUARDIAN ADDRESS CITY !! AT _ I VEHICLE Veh. Make Type VIN Color Yr. Model Uc. No. Yr.. State Trlr. Make _ _ __. 1VPe VIN _— Color Lic. No. _Stale You have violated the laws of Minnesota a follows ❑ Traffic C, Equipment ❑ Dnver's Vicense ❑ Rogistration M.S.S.11 VIOLATION t: N 00 an r so. to " w" -% Mw-ed two above rorew�^ fT%AI to co-ect" we'' 7 eairs The pprart N. nk r Or RWMC%W 1w a w grrrorcfMrM'll ofhCF T/* r. emac*f-w+f . oprrr Mw sMq^ ert 10VwN .,Oaw n A kf'^ C Mf"'KD "w CD"*C1r0^ -f "%am 041LUXt TO DC SC VVIL . A!'1f ' Od CITATK)k 9E'Wi ISSUED HC &W (101071 UNIFORM CMATION NO. 388-052092 3 i STATE OF YIMost"'A C7UNTY Oft NEMMBpMs DIaTRICT COUNT The Aw.np omew ua• MW BIIs tltrson rW~ oview commilep fly 0lte>%fte anoww&/ In v4solmn of . uls owt.on Iflolcanw DRIVER S LICENSE NUMBER STATE A E — LAST FIRST. MIDOLEMAIDEN AOORESS CITY E STATE ZIP0=1E DATE OF BIRTH E, Fs wEIGNT WEIGHT SBX MO DAY Y:AR I VIOLATION IMFORMATl011 TIME METER MUsOW VOATEOPOFFE.4SE VEMtCLE LICTE STATE rEAR 1 MAKEOOLO M� 1 y R LOCATION ! CtTY l i I - -4 STATUTE OR ORDINANCE NO i DESCRIPTION ; L' S40 � 1 � W 57 Q A EN ANGER LIFE ❑ ACCIDENT 0"AFE CO DMONs ; SADGE N M R CW V M P agree to resoona to tries citation ana understand lest If I toot to ao to wlthln I days. Increalaw Penalties will be assessed AMC a warrant well be Issued lot my arrest. If a M -mil to la&Ned. a penalty Of i30 will be &Good t0 trio fine DEFEIIOANT'y WMATURE COURT COPY • 00 NOT WRITE ON REVEnE § 9.11 limits for trapping, location, number of traps and approved maintenance procedures of trap lines. Applications for limited permits shall be made to the Chief of Police and shall be accompanied by a written statement of proof of hardship and a certified property owners list of property owners within 500 feet of trapping area. Property owners shall be notified that such application is being considered by the City. The permit fee shall be as set by resolution of the Council. SEC. 9.12. DOG REGULATION AND LICENSING. Subd. 1. Defiinition. For the purpose of this Section, "owner" means a person who owns, harbors, feeds, boards or keeps a dog. Subd. 2. Running at Large and Biting Dogs Prohibited. It is unlawful for the owner of any dog to permit such animal to run at large. Any dog shall be deemed to be running at large with the permission of the owner unless it is on a durable leash secured to an object which it cannot move and on the premises of the owner, or on a leash and under the control of an accompanying person of suitable age and discretion. Any dog, having bitten a person or other animal, shall be forthwith impounded for the period of incubation. Subd. 3. License Required. It is unlawful for the owner of any dog, six months of age or more, to fail to obtain a license therefor from the City, except as follows: A. Dogs confined to a City licensed commercial kennel need not be individually licensed. B. Dogs confined to a City licensed residential kennel shall be individually licensed but need net wear the license tag while they are confined in the kennel. C. Dogs currently licensed by another jurisdiction may be temporarily kept in the City for a period not to exceed thirty days provided the dog wears a tag or other identification from such licensing jurisdiction, and provided that a current City license is obtained if the temporary stay extends beyond thirty days or otherwise becomes permanent. Dogs licensed by other juris- dictions are not exempt from the kennel licensing requirements or from any other provision of this Section. Subd. 4. Application. Application for a dog license shall be upon a form supplied by the City and accompanied by a certificate of a veterinarian, duly licensed to practice veterinary medicine within the State of Minnesota, which certificate shall state that the dog f-)r which application fir a license is made, has been innoculated against rabies within six months of the date of the application. No more than two dog licenses shall oe issued to ORONO CC 206 (4-1-34) 5 9.12 any one person or for any one lot, property or address at any one time unless there shall first have been issued a current residential or commercial kennel license for said person, lot, property or address. Subd. 5. Fees. All licenses and impounding fees provided for in this Section shall be issued only upon payment in full of fees fixed and determined in accordance with City Code Section 1.05. License fees shall be due for the full two-year license period except that licenses issued in even -numbered years may 5e prorated to one-half of the two-year license fee. No other prorating shall be permitted. Subd. 6. Tag Required. All licensed dogs shall wear a collar and have a tag firmly affixed thereto evidencing such license for the current year. A duplicate for a lost tag may be issued by the City upon presentation of the receipt showing the payment of the license fee for the current license period, and payment of the fee for a duplicate license. Tags shall not be transferable, and no refund shall be made on any dog license fee because of leaving the City or death of the dog before tt expiration,of the license. Subd. 7. License Period. All dog licenses shall be issued and he valid for the whole or unexpired portion of two year periods beginning on January 1 of each odd -numbered year. All dog licenses regardless of the date of issuance shall expire on December 31 of each even -numbered year. Dog owners shall apply for license renewal prior to the license expiration date. Subd. 8. Notice of Impounding. Upon the impounding cf any dog, the owner shall be notified, or if the owner is unknown, written notice shall be posted for five days at the City Hall describing the dog and the place and time of taking. Subd. 9. Release From Animal Found. Dogs shall be released to their owners, as follows: A. If such dog is owned by a resident of the City, after purchase of a license as aforesaid, and payment of the impounding fees. B. If such dog is of the City, after immunization payment of the impounding tee for impounded. owned by a person not a resident of any such dog for rabies, and the period for which the dog was Subd. 10. Animal Pound. Any dog found in the City without a tag, or animal running at large, shall be placed in the Animal Found, and an accurate record of the time of such placement shall. be kept on each animal. Every animal so placed in the Animal Pound s:iall be held for redemption by the owner for a period of not ORONO CC 207 (4-1-84) 5 9.12 less than five regular business days. A "regular business day" is one during which the Pound is open for business to the publ'c for at least fou: 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 persca 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 jpecifies that the animal should not be uses for research, such anima: shall not be made available to any such institu*ion but may be destroyed after the expiration of the five -dad peri"d. Subd. 11, Other Unlawful Acts. It is unlawful f-- the owner of any dog to (1) fail to have the license tag issued 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 whininQ_, 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 hour:. Subd. 12. Immot �lization of Dogs. For the purpose of enforcement of this Sectic, any peace office:, dog catcher or other person assisting a peace officer or dog catcher may use a so-called tranquilizer gun or other i.,strument for the purpose of immobilizing and catching a dog. Subd. 13. Warning of Vicious Dogs. :he 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 than 12 inches by 14 inches which shall read: "Beware of Vicious Dog". SEC. 9.13. ANIMALS AND FOwI, - KEEPING, TRANSPORTING, TREATMENT, HOUSING. Subd. 1. Definitions. As used in this Section, the following definitions shall apply. A. "Owner" - Any person who owns, harbors, feeds, boards, keeps, or otherwise poF.5esses an animal, and who is the head of the household of the residence, or the owner or manager in ORONO CC 2C8 (4-1-34) 5 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, reptile id feathered birds or fowl except dogs, domestic cats, gerbils, h�- ters 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 Dr in secure quarters. Subi:. 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 scientific 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 to keep a farm animal in therefor from the City. ORONO CC Required. It is unlawful for any person any portion of the City without a permit 209 (4-1-84) 9 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 tc keep or maintain 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 shill specify 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 t::e 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 i consult with and seek the advice of the Society for the Prevention ORCNO CC 210 (4-1-84) § 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. Subd. 12. Exception. The provisions of this Section shall not apply to the keeping of dangerous animals in the following cases: A. The keeping of suz. animal for exhibition to the public by a traveling circus, carn:Lval 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 ,,edical 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 unlawful 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, parks and beaches where horses may be ridden and driven. drawn vehicle provisions of vehicle, except application. E. Every person riding a horse upon a public street shall be the City Code applicable to the those provisions which by their or driving a horse - subject to those driver of a motor nature can have no ORVNO CC 211 t4-1-84i § 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 Qr 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 017 water. SEC. 9.14. CURFEW. Subd. 1. Curfew - Minors Under the Age of C fteen. It is unlawful for any minor person under the age of fifteen 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 or 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 day. 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 v •:l_E.+:ion of this Sen-t_ifln unless such minor is accompanied by a persc 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, inclusive, reserved for future expansion.) ORONO CC 212 (4-1-84) ORDINANCE NO. % 3- % AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND THE MUNICIPAL CODE OF ORONO BY AMENDING SECTION 34.037 AND ADDING A CHAPTER 110 RELATING TO THE KEEPING AND MAINTAINING OF CERTAIN DOMESTIC ANII'_--LS WITHIN THE; VILLAGE OF ORONO AND ESTABLISHING A LIVESTOCK. COMMISSION. THE VILLAGE OF ORONO ORDAINS: Section 1. The Municipal Code of the Village of Orono is amended by adding Chapter 110 as follows: 110. ANIMAL REGULATION 110.10. Animals Defined. As used in this chapter, except in Section 110.100, animal shall mean any specie of cattle, horse, ass, mule, sheep, se*inc, goat cr any other UUlILQSt1CaCed animal which would normally not be housed in the residence of its owner or in a kennel. 110.20. Animals at Large. No person shall permit any animal of which he is the owner, caretaker or custodian to run at large within the Village. Any animal shall be deemed to be at large if said animal is: (a) Not picketed, confined in a corral or otherwise restricted by.a properly constructed and maintained legal fence, (b) Off the premises owned or rented by the animal's owner and not accompanied by the owner or an agent or employee of the owner, (c) Herded upon any land over the protest and against the will of the owner of said land. 110.30. Impoundment. The Village may innound any animal found at large and shall provide proper sustenance for any and all animals impounded. The police chief or his designated agent shall give notice to owner (if known to him) within 24 hours, Sundays excepted. If owner is unknown, written notice shall be posted in two conspicuous places in the Village and published once in the official newspaper describing the animal and stating that said animal has been impounded. 110.35. Taking Impounded Animal a Misdemeanor. No legally impounded animal shall be released except to a person displaying a receipt frcm the Village Clerk showing payment in full of the applicable costs listed in Section. 110.60. If any person, without authority of law, and without first paying the costs due, shall take any impounded animal out of the enclosure in which he is impounded, with- out such receipt, he shall be guilty of a misdemeanor. 110.40. Disposition of Animal. If any animal is impounded and not redeemed within six days after notice is posted or four days following published notice, whichever is later, the Village Chief of Police or his designated agent shall give three days posted notice of the time and place where the animal will be sold at public auction. D coeds do cf lc "hall 110.45. rc_..._�� cf Sale. Prcccc.... ., ;.n, J�l.. .. be used to pay the total of costs and fines as listed in Section 110.50. The balance of the funds :received for the sale of the animal shall be retained by the Village Treasurer and if not claimed_ by the owner �.rithin one year from the date of sale, the _money shal_ be paid into_ the Village General Fund. 110.50. Schedule of Fees. The following schedule shall be used in determining the total cos=s due on any animal determined to be at large within the Village: Fine for animal at larva: 1st offense 2nd offense 3rd offense Care of Impounded Animal Trace and catch animal at large Trailer Charge $ 5.00 $25.00 (if is occurs within ona- year of first offense) $50.00 (if is occurs within one •rear of first offense) $ 1.50/day $10.00/dour $10.00 plus .25 per mile for total. di3tance involvc,l 0 110.60. Nuisance. No person shall keep any animal in a manner creating a public or private nuisance. 110.70. Conditions Not Allowed. No person keeping animals shall permit or allow any of the following conditions to exist: a. Land upon which the animals are kept is unsightly or is a harbor for rodents, flies, and insects. b. Win -ter accumulation of manure which is not removed from the premises or disposed of in an approved manner prior to May 15 o` each year. C. Othe- accumulation of manure which is not removed so as to prevent an unreasonable amount of objections''Lle aroma. d. Failure to make a reasonable effort to keep the animals under control and within proper fencing. e. Animals have been treated cruelly or inhumanely. f. A public nuisance exists on that property. 110.80. Regulation of Horses. As used in this section "horse" shall refer to any specie of horse, ass or mule and in addition to the general provisions of this chapter the following regulations shall apply specifically to horses: a. No person may ride or drive a horse after the hour of sunset and before the hour of sunrise alone, or crossing any public way without appropriate lighting or re lecto- rized clothing. b. No person may 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 trail way or hitching area. c. The Village Park and Recreational Director shall designate and properly post those areas in public lands, parks and beaches where horses may be ridden and driven. d. Every_person riding a horse or driving a horse drawn vehicle upon a public road- way shall be subject to those provisions of the Village Code applicable to the driver of a motoz vehicle, except those provisions which by their nature have no application. e. No person shall interfere with any horse being ridden, driven or kept in a lawful manner. 110.90. Livestock Commission. The Village Council hereby authorizes the establishment of a Livestock Commission to assist the Village Clerk in inspection of the premises of those seeking a horse permit, to receive complaints from chose aggrieved by animal owners or keepers, to investigate complaints, to advise animal owners against whom complaints have been lodged and to advise ti-le Village Council as to appropriate action. The Village Council shall appoint three persons to the Livestock Commission, including, when possible, a repre- sentative of the largest local horse -oriented association or club, a veterinarian, and any other person the Village Council feels is qualified to serve. Each member shall serve a two year term without compensation and shall be eligible for reappointment at the end of that term. The Livestock Commission sliall make recommendations to the Village Council on requests or other matters re- quiring Council action, which arise under this Chapter or other applicable Ordinances or Statutes. 110.100. Cruelty to Animals. Minnesota Statutes 346.21-346.26 relating to cruelty to animals are hereby adopted and incorporated herein by reference and made a part hereof. 110.110. Violations. Every person convicted of a violation of any of the provisions of this Ordinance shall be guilty of a misdemeanor and punished by a fine of not more than $300.00 or by imprisonment for a period of not more than 90 days or both, but in either case the costs of prosecution may be added. Section 2. The Municipal Code of the village of Orono is amended by amending Section 24.027 as follows: 34.037. Animals. The keening of domestic animals for non-commercial purposes including horses for the use of the occupants of the premises, provided that any accessory building used for housing such animals shall be located not less than 150 feet from the nearest lot line. A minimum of two acres of open pasture must be available for a single horse and one additional acre must be available for each additional -horse. When th(; horses are kept stabled and do not require pasture fcc feed purposes, the minimum pasture requirement may he adjusted at the discretion of the Council. Such minimum pasture acreage shall be exclusive of minimum lot re- quirements and shall not include low lying lands unusable for pasture or grazing. Any person keeping such animals must comply with the provisions of Chapter 110. Section 3. This ordinance shall be published in the Mound-11estonka Minnetonka Sun and shall be effective upon publication. Passed by the Orono Council 1), / ,, . , 197 by ayes anti c nays. Mayor Attest.: Administrator this day of a vote of Published in the Mound-W�stonka Minnetonka Sun on the I Iday of 197_ ORDINANCE y0. 239 Section 3. Chapter 63 of the Municipal Code of the City of Orono is hereby amended by amending Section 63.030 and by adding Sections 63.031 and 63.032 to read as follows: 63.030 Dog License Duration. Dog licenses shall be issued and be valid for the whole or unexpired portion of two-year periods beginning on January 1 of each odd -numbered year. All dog licenses regardless of the date of issuance shall expire on December 31 of each even - numbered year. Dog owners shall apply for license renewal prior to the license expiration date. 63.031 Dog License Requirements. Not more than two dog licenses shall be issued to any one person or for any one lot, property or address at any one time unless there shall first have been issued a current residential or commercial kennel license for said person, lot, property or address. Dog licenses shall be issued by the City Clerk upon presentation of the following: a) Applicant's information including the dog owner's name, address, mailing address and telephone number. b) Description of dog including breed, color, sex and name. c) Veterinarian's signed certificate identifying the dog and attesting that the animal has been vaccinated for rabies within six -months of the date of license application. d) Payment of a dog license fee as setforth in Section 63.032. 63.032 Dog License Fees. Dog license fees shall be in the amount prescribed in the current City fee schedule. The basic license fee shall be for a license issued in odd -numbered years. Licenses issued in ever -numbered years shall be one-half of the basic fee amount. License fees shall not other•,aise be prorated. Licenses and License `ees are not transferrable to other owners or other doss, and dog license fees are not refundable. Section 4. Chapter 63 of the Municipal Code of the City o` Orono is hereby amended by amending Section 63.180 and by adding Sections 63.131, 63.182, 63.183, 63.184 and 63.185 to read as follows: 63.180 Kennel License Required. It shall be unlawful for any person to own, operate, use, maintain or allow to exist any kennel on any property in the City without being licensed to do so according to provisions of this Section. a) It shall be unlawful for any person or persons to own, harbor keep or house three or more dogs over six months of aqe on any one lot or property without a valid residential or commercial kennel license. 1)) It shall be unlawful for any person or persons to operate any kennel for business or commercial purposes including sale, boarding, breeding, grooming, training or medical care without a valid commercial kennel license. V ORDINANCE NO. 239 AN ORDINANC AMENDING CHAPTER 63 OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE OF ORONO RELATING TO DOG AND KENNEL LICENSING THE CITY COUNCIL OF ORONO ORDAINS: Section 1. Chapter 63, Section 63.010 of the :•iun-cipal Code of the City of Orono is hereby amended by repealing the existing definition of the word "kennel" and by adding the following new definitions to read as follows: ';ennel, Commercial. A place or premises where three or more dogs over six months of age are kept or roused at any one time for commercial purposes including sale, boarding, breeding, grooming, training, or medical care. Kennel, Residential. An accessory residential use or place :where three or more dogs over six months of age are kept or housed for the sole non-com.ercial use, benefit or en;oyment of the property owner or occupant. Kennel Structure. A dog house or enclosure of any kind including a fenced pen or dog run constructed, maintained or used for purposes of keeping, housing or restraining one or more dogs in a limited area. A fenced -in yard area amounting to 600 square feet or ,;.ore per dog shall not be defined as a kennel structure. Section 2. Chapter 63, Section 63.020 of the Municipal Code of the City of Orono is hereby amended to read as follows: 63.020 Dog License Required. It shall he inlawful for any person to own, harbor or keep a dog over the age of six months unless a c"Irrent City license for such dog has been obtained and the license tag is affixed and worn by suc.i dog at all times, except as follows: a) Dogs confined to a City -licensed commercial kennel need not be individually licensed. b) Dogs confined to a City --licensed residential kennel shall be individually licensed but need not wear the license tag while they are confined in said kennel. c) Dogs currently licensed by another jurisdiction may be temporarily kept in the City for a period not to exceed 30 days provided the dog wears a tag or other identification from such licensing jurisdiction, and provided that a current City license is ob.iined if the temporary stay extends beyond 30 days or otherwise becomes permanent. Dogs licensed by other jurisdictions are not exempt from the kennel licensing requirements or from any other provision of :his Chanter. 'fi$. 1�;a,.d 8av �.-� 4; 7L'o �< -/vj n FY6 TO: Mark E. Bernhardson, city Administrator FROM: Tom Kuehn, Finance Director -rw- DATE: October 4, 1988 SUBJECT: Draft Statement of Investment Policy -:rents: A. City of Orono Investment Policy Draft B. Resolution No. 2105 Regarding Crediting Investment Interest Earned by Fund C. Resolution No. 2089 Designating City Officials Authorized to Initiate Wire Transfers of City Funds D. Propsoed Resolution Authorizing the City Treasurer to Designate Depositories DISCUSSION - The draft investment policy is presented herewith for discussion and review by the City Council and Administrator. It is written to establish objectives, reporting requirements, permissable investment vehicles, selection of banks and dealers, maturity and diversification guidelines, level of risk, prudence and ethics, and responsibilities for the investment function. As this is a first draft I would request comments from you and the Council as to the completeness or additional requirements needed to finalize the investment policy. I would expect to incorporate any changes, additions or deletions needed for presentation at the next available Council meeting. TO: Mayor and City Council p PN FROM: Mark E. Bernhardson, City Administrato Forwarded as an information item recommending review and discussion and/or written comments. PROPOSED MOTION - Moved by _, seconded by —, to accept the draft Statement of Investment Policy for the purpose of review. Ayes Nays 0-1 1 10488.7HD �74Q�Mle;, ti CITY OF OkONO Investment Policy DRAFT October 10, 1988 CITY OF ORONO INVESTMENT POLICY DRAFT I. INTRODUCTION The purpose of this investment policy is to establish: -the City's investment objectives -investment reporting practices to management and the Council -investment instruments that are appropriate for the City -criteria for selection_ of banks and dealers -requirements regarding ma'Curities and diversification -investment principles of risk, prudence and ethics and -responsibilities for the investment function II. SCOPE The investment policy applies as accounted for in the City's annual - the general fund - the special revenue funds - the debt service funds - the capital projects funds - the enterprise funds o the City of Orono's fu report and include: Unless specified by City Counci action., investments of City monies will be pooled and invested in the Pooled Investment Trust Fund with the resultant `nvestment income accruing to the benefit of the various City funds as provided in Resolution No. 2105. III. INVESTMENT OBJECTIVES A. The primary objectives of the City's investment program are: 1. To preserve principal eac-n investment transaction shall seek first to insure the preservation of capital in the overall portfolio. 2. To remain sufficiently liquid to meet expenditure requirements. It is essential that cash is available when needed, therefore the City's investment goal is to maximize yield while matching maturity dates with expenditure needs. 2 3. To diversify the investment portfolio by individual financial institution, government agency or by corporation in the case of commercial paper to reduce the exposure to risk of loss. 4. As custodians of the public trust all participants in the investment process shall seek to act responsibly and avoid any transaction that might impair the credibility of the City. IV. Reporting The investment reporting function shall include requirements for: budgetary reporting, interim/internal reporting, and annual reporting. A. Budgetary Reporting. As part of the annual budget, interest income shall be estimated for all budgeted funds based on a cash flow forecast. B. Interim/Internal Reporting. The Finance Department shall maintain the investment portfolio on the LOGIS Financial Investment Management System on a monthly basis and provide to management or the Council at any time. Management shall be provided investment portfolios monthly. C. Annual Reporting. The Treasurer shall prepare a written fiscal year report on the investment program and investment activity. This report shall include a summary of the investment activity and rate of return for the fiscal year then ended and a comparison to the budgeted amounts. V. Instruments Cities in Minnesota are all restricted to the same permissible investments under Minnesota Statutes 475.66. These instruments are summarized with pertinent information as follows: A. Direct U.S. Government- Ohligations (treasury bills, notes, bonds and certificates of indebtedness). B. Federal agency issues (not directly guaranteed by the U.S. government such as Federal Home Loan Banks, Federal National Mortgage Association, Federal Land Banks, etc) C. Repurchase Agreements (Repo's) - Repo transactions are restric!-ed to: O (1) A primary reporting dealer in U.S, government securities who reports to the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, or (2) National or state bank in the U.S. which is a member of the Federal Reserve system and whose combined capital and surplus equals or exceeds $10,000,000. (3) A securities broker -dealer having its primary executive office in Minnesota and licensed pursuant to Chapter 80A, or an affiliate of it, registered by the SEC and maintaining a combined capital and surplus of $40,000,000 or more, exclusive of subordinated debt. (4) The City shall receive a confirmation/safekeeping receipt with a complete description of the collateral on the repo. D. Money market funds shall consist solely of instruments in which Minnesota municipalities are permitted to temporarily invest monies pursuant to Minnesota Statues and shall be consistent with the City's objective of preservation of principal. E. Bankers' acceptances of U.S. banks eligible for purchase by the Federal Reserve System. Bankers acceptances should be restricted to the top 40 banks in the U.S. (as measured by deposits) and 1st Banks of Minnespoiis or St. Paul and Norwest Bank Minneapolis. (Bankers acceptances should not be purchased from the above banks if news leads to concerns over the financial condition of the bank.) The broker, dealer or bank shall ver � fy that the bankers acceptance is eligible for purchase by the Federal Reserve System. F. Highest quality commercial paper issued by U.S. corporations or their Canadian subsidiaries when the paper matures in 270 days or less. Highest quality shall mean that two of the three rating agencies (Standard & Poors, Moodys and Fitch) rate the paper of the highest quality (Al, P1 an,' F1 respectively). Commercial paper based upon a letter of ` should be restricted to the same bankE listed in E. above. G. Certificates of deposit, interest bearing checking and savings accounts, and money market savings accounts secured by 4 F.D.I.C. or F.S.L.I.C. insurance. Amounts in excess of $100,000 (maximum insured) shall be secureu by collateral as required by Minnesota Statutes. VI. Banks and Dealers Investment procedures include controlling the level of bank balances and selecting depository institutions. At the beginning of each year, the City Council approves depositiories and investment firms. A. Banks and Savings Banks outside of the Twin Cities seven -county metropolitan area shall be restricted to those having a minimum capital and surplus of $10,000,000 and an asset to net worth ratio minimum of 3.0%. B. Investment firms shall be restricted to those regulated by the SEC and having a minimum capital of $10,000,000. C. A current annual statement shall be kept on file for each bank, broker or dealer with whom business is done. D. Only brokers and dealers of government securities that report directly to the New York Federal Reserve Bank shall be utilized. E. Receipts are required from any depository holding securties for the City within 3 days of receipt by the depository. VII. Maturities and Diversification This investment poolicy addresses both short-term funds and long-term funds. A. Short-term investments are made in securities which wi 11 mature very close to the date on which the monies are expected to be needed to pay for recurring operations. B. Long -teem investments are made for debt service requirements and from excess monies available from 5 the various other funds as permitted from time to time; and an opportunity to extend maturities and achieve higher yields may exist. Maturities should not be extended beyond five years and the Treasurer may yell the longer term securities if it is advantageous in his/her opinion to do so. It is the policy of the City to diversity its investment portfolio. Investments shall be diversified to eliminate the risk of loss resulting from the overconcentration of assets in a specific maturity, a specific issuer or a specific: class of maturities. VIII. Risks, Prudence and Ethics The City recognizes that investment risks can result from issuer defaults or market price changes. The Minnesota Statutes governing permissible investments and the diversification guidelines are designed to control risk to some degree. The Treasurer is expected to display prudence in the selection of securities, as a way to minimize default risk. In the event of a default by a specific issuer, the Treasurer shall review, and if appropriate, proceed to liquidate securities having comparable credit risks. The treasurer in exercising due diligence shall be relieved of personal responsibility for an individual security's credit risk or market price changes provided that reasonable action is taken to control a-1verse developments. Any officer or employee involved in the investment process shall refrain from personal business activitiy that could conflict, or gives the appearance of a conflict, with proper execution of the investment program or impair the ability to make impartial investment decisions. IX. Delegation of Authority The City Council hereby delegates the management of the investment program to the city treasurer. In his absence, the deputy treasurer or the city administrator shall exercise the same authority. The treasurer shall also have full authority as stated in Resolution No. 2089 to initiate necessary wire transfers or interbank transfers as may be necessary to accomplish the investment objectives as stated herein. The treasurer shall further be authorized to designate depositories on behalf of the City Council as provided in Resolution No. at times other than the beginning of the year and will provide to 6 the Council the identity of each new depository and the investment purchased from each new depository at the next available Council meeting. City of ORONC RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 210 5 A RESOLUTION TO AMEND THE BASIS OF CREDITING INVESTMENT INTEREST EARNED BY FUND WHEREAS, the Orono City Council did establish by Resolution #1464 adopted on Febraury 28, 1993 the Pooled Investment Trust Fund for the purpose of investing idle monies of the various City funds, and WHEREAS, the interest earned on the invested monies has been credited based on the ending monthly cash balances of those funds having positive cash balances, and WHEREAS, the City has been using a computerized financial investment management system for the past year but has found the current basis of crediting interest income requires recording that interest in the next following month's financial records, and WHEREAS, it is advantageous that the interest be recorded in the month in which it is earned. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that effective January 1, 1987 the interest earned on invested monies of the City shall be credited based on the beginning monthly cash balance of those funds having positive cash balances. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota, at a regualr meeting held December 8, 1986. ATTEST : i Dorothy Hallin, City Clerk • Mary C. tler, Mayor 112086.5 City of ORONC RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL �"iT�c-u. NiL e1UT A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE USE OF, AND DESIGNATING THE OFFICIALS AJTHORIZED TO INI`PIATE WIRE TRANSFER OF CITY FUNDS BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota as follows: 1. The City does hereby approve the use of wire transfer of City funds for transactions related to the investment (purchase, sale, collection of interest) of the City's funds; and for the payment of the various bonded debt issues of the C:.ty. 2. The City does hereby authorize the City Treasurer, Deputy City Treasurer, or the City Administrator to initiate such wire transfers as needed for the transactions related to investment of the City's funds or for the payment of the City's debt. Adopted by the City Council of the CiL-y of Orono, Minnesota, at a regular meeting held November 24, 1986. Mary C. tler, m ayor ATTEST: Arothy M. llin, ity Clerk 10688.3 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE CITY TREASURER TO DESIGNATE DEPOSITORIES OF CITY FUNDS WHEREAS, Minnesota City Council to delegate the depositories of public funds Financial Officer; and 7-�bE Ml�UT State Statutes do authorize the responsibility of designating to the City Treasurer or Chief WHEREAS, the investing of City funds does, on occasion, occur prior to the formal adoption of the institution as an approved depository. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota, that the City Treasurer is hereby authorized to act on the City's behalf and designate additional depositories of City funds upon concurrence of the City Administrator or Acting Administrator. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota, at a regular meeting held on October 10, 1988. James R. Grabek, Mayor ATTEST: Dorothy M. Hallin, City Clerk To: From: Date: Subject: Mark E. Bernhardson, City Administrator John R. Gerhardson, Public works Director October 3, 1988 Crosswalk Navarre Business Area 10388.2HD Prior to the reconstruction of County Road 15, the City maintained a crosswalk adjacent to D'Vincis Pizza, Z420 Shorplitne Drive, ar6 crossed to the MTC shelter in the Keaveny Drug Store parking lot. D--ie to delays of right-c"-way acquisitions, it was not dete=mined until: well into the project as to whether or not the bus shelter would have to be relocated. At this time we are sure that the she lte-. will not be placed in the same location due to the loss of parking spc-.es in Keaveny's parking lot dine to right-of-way acquisition. Representatives of the MTC are meeting with property owners in the area to relocate the bus shelter but have not received approval as of this date. The bus shelter location will somewhat determine if and where a crosswalk is needed. Because it is uncertain as to the location of the bus shelter, we have not been able to tell the Navarre business people whether or not there will be a crosswalk and if there is, if it will be at its present location. On September 21, 1988, the City received a petition from the Navarre Retail Council requesting that the crosswalk be established at or near its present location. RECOMMENDATION - To direct staff to notify Hennepin County that the City of Orono is requesting that a crosswalk be allowed at or near its present location in the Navarre BL siness Area dependent upon t_0e location of the MTC bus shelter. PROPOSED MOTION: Moved by _, seconded by , to dii�ct staff to notify Hennepin County that the City of Orono is requesting a crosswalk be allowed at or near its present location in the Navarre Business Area dependent upon the location of the MTC bus shelter in the Navarre Business Area. Ayes , nays TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Mark E. Bernhardson, City Administrato Forwarded recoiuliending approval. STATT1 .ARM l®1 00 JANET S. SYMONS WE APPRECIATE REFERRALS! INSURANCE Auto -Life -Health -Home and Business _ PO BOX 6. 3600 SHORELINE DRIVE NAVARRE. MN 55392 PHONE 5612) 471-0491 September 20, 1988 TO: Mark '-arnhardson City Administrator -City of Orono FROM: Navarre Retail Council Janet Symons -Chairperson RE: Navarre Pedestrian Crosswal DATE: September 19, 1988 The business people and residents of Navarre request that the City of Orono leave the pedestrian crosswalk in Navarre at its present. or approximately the same location, upon the completion of the County Road #15 projaect. Additionally, wi request that the City of Orono and Hennepin County place Yellow flashing warning lights at the crosswalk. Attatched are 577 signatures of concerned citizens supporting this request. Our next meeting of the Navarre Retail Council is Thursday, September 29th, at 7:30 am, at Navarre Ceramics. He would appreciate any input, concerns and or comments, you ma / have. August 25, 1988 The following sio_nators, who include area business people and res)dents, request that the City of Orono leave the pedestrian crosswalk in Navarre at its present, or approximately the same, location, upon the completion of the County Road #15 project. Additionally, we request that the City of Orono and Hennepin County place flashing yellow warning lights at the crosswalk. August 25, 1988 - C .following signators, who include area business people and residents, est that the City of Orono leave the pedestrian crosswalk in Navarre ts present, or approximately the same, location, upon the completion he County Road #15 project. Addit,onally, we request that the City of Orono and Hennepin County place _flashing yellow warning lights at the crosswalk. MW Alt AA eqj 16 Pit. PA ✓ ' = I FA m2a; 7r"'amol 111MIM j WIW W�A FM `Auggu 2F,/ 1988 The.following signators, who include area business people and residents, request that the City of Orono leave the pedestrian crosswalk in Navarre at its present, or approximately the same, location, upon the completion of the County Road N15 project. Additionally, we request that the City of Orono and Hennepin County place flashing yellow warning lights at the crosswalk. August 25, 1988 _ The.following signators, who include area business people and residents, request that the City of Orono leave the pedestrian crosswalk in Navarre at its present, or approximately the same, location, upon the completion of the County Road N15 project. Additionally, we request that the City of Orono and Hennepin County place fla1hing yellow warning lights at the crosswalk. 12 Md .y �� 01 .� August 25, 1988 The.following signatory, who include area business people and residents, request that the City of Orono leave the pedestrian crosswalk in Navarre at its present, or approximately the same, location, upon the completion of the County Road #'I'; project. Additionally, we request that the City of Orono and Hennepin County place flashing yellow warning lights at the crosswalk. r r i August 25, 1988 i The.following signators, who include area business people and residents, request that the City of Orono leave the pedestrian crosswalk in Navarre at its present, or approximately the same, location, upon the completion of the County Road #15 project. Additionally we request that the City of Orono and Hennepin County place flashing yel ow warning lights at the crosswalk. 1 C. ` 7 c� kt (-A� v G '�- _� , ��: August 25, 1988 The.following signators, who include area business people and residents, request that the City of Orono leave the pedestrian crosswalk in Navarre at its present, or approximately the same, location, upon the completion of the County Road #15 project. Additionally, we request that the City of Orono and Hennepin County place flashing yellow warning lights at the crosswalk. w 0�0 August 25, 1988 The.following signators, who include area business people and residents, request that the City of Orono leave the pedestrian crosswalk in Navarre at its present, or approximately the same, location., upon the completion of the County Road #15 project. Additionally, we request that the City of Orono and .;fI17hig' yy lto warni lights at the cro '01 'e'�'-�' 04� --�4 , unty place 2L��L F August 25, 1988 The.following signators, who include area business people and residents. request that the City of Orono leave the pedestrian crosswalk in Navarre at its presert, or approximately the same. location, upon the completion of the County Road #15 project. Additionally, we request that the City of Orono and Hennepin County place flashing yellow warning lights at the crosswalk. L �� l I I The.following signators, who include area business people and residents, request that the City of Orono leave the pede..trian crosswalk in Navarre at its present, or approximately the same, location, upon the completion of the County Road #15 project. Additionally, we request that the City of Orono and Hennepin County place flashing yellow warning lights at the crosswalk. AN AM, In s� ��� WA / ,WA AOL i I`' •. , i 10588.4 1� ^g TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Mark E. Bernhardson, City AdministratorX A6 DATE: October 5, 1988 SUBJECT: Crystal Bay Road Attachments: A. Notification to Residents - 10/17/88 Planning Commission Meeting B. Letter to City of Minnetonka Beach Dated 10/5/88 C. Traffic Criteria for Closure ISSUE - Provision of information to Council regarding progress on repair of Crystal Bay Road together with framework for determination of closure. INTRODUCTION - At the Council's September 28, 1988 meeting following discussion by residents and the Council the staff was directed to continue the application for repair at the Planning Commission, informing abutting residents of the proposed repair, request from Minnetonka Beach a written statement of thin position regarding closure and work to develop the criteria for a decision framework. DICUSSION - As noted in Attachment A the residents have been notified of the meeting indicating that because of the fact that no specific plan has come forward from the residents as to where the road is to be terminated that the road road repair proposed by the staff should be processed through the Planning Commission so the Council can make a decision regarding the road repair and the closure in timely fashion in order to take the necessary steps this year to complete the work. The staff is looking on alternatives to the repair and the snowfence to provide for adequate safety yet this fall. As for the draft criteria for closure the staff is circulating that to the attorney and engineer together with further consideration by itself and would appreciate any input from the Council or the neighborhood. ALTERNATIVES 1. Accept 2. Comment on process or criteria 3. Table for futher discussion 4. Take no action RECOMMENDATION - It is recommended that the Council accept the information and following any discussion they may have on the process or closure that the item be placed on the October 24, 1988 agenda. PROPOSED MOTION - Moved by _, seconded by _, that the Council direct staff to place the item for discussion on the October 24, 1988 Council meeting. Ayes _, Nays 1058: -F"eN Mir A October 7, 1988 To All Crystal Bay Road Residents: The Orono Planning Commission will continue their review of the City of Orono's conditional use permit/variance application (#1302) that would allow the Public Works Department to undertake repairs to the roadbed of Crystal Bay Road which was damaged in the rain storm of July 1987. The application involves filling, grading and the placement of hardcover within 75 feet of the shoreline of the lake. The City Engineer, Glenn Cook, will respond to any questions you may have concerning design standards and specifications. .John Gerhardson will also be present to discuss the issue. As you may know some of your neighbors have joined in the signing of a petition that would ask the City to close the road as a through road connecting Minnetonka Beach with the City of Orono. As they have not indicated specifically where they desire to terminate the road, the proposed repair may be needed regardless of whether it remains a through road or is terminated as such. The Planning Commission's responsibility is to give Council a recommendation on the proposed conditional use permit and variance application for repairs to the road. Road vacation is a responsibility of the Council. Persons desiring to restore their banks will have to submit separate applications for such restoration. At the Council meeting of September 28, 1988, following discussion of the issue by interested residents on both sides of the issue the Council directed staff to contact you all so that Council is made aware of everyone's interests in this mrtter and develop a criteria in order to make a decision by year's end - one way or the other. In order to fulfill the Council's directive, staff would suggest the following outline: 1. Determination of property owners' opinions 2. Submission by residents and review by the City of the residents' plan for providing access upon closing of the road 3. Review of land use application procedures for individuals who plan to restore Lakeshore yards All Crystal Bay Road Residents October 7, 1988 Page 2 Staff has scheduled this item for 9:00 P.M. on the October 17, 1988 Planning Commission agenda. Please contact your neighbor to assure their attendance at the meeting. If you have any questions concerning the matters noted above, please contact Mark Bernhardson at 473-7358, John Gerhardson at 473-7359 or Jeanne Mabusth at 473-7357. Sincerely Jeanne A. Mabusth Building and Zoning Administrator JAM/dh C IT7 Post Office Box 66 • Crysta► Bay, On tha North Shore of Lake Minnetonka October 5, 1988 Mayor Brian Be,,--1 City of Minnetonka Beach 2945 Westwood Road Minnetonka Beach, MN 55361 Re: Crystal Bay Road Dear Mayor Bedell, At your Council meeting of September 12, 1988, the City of Orono requested whether or not the City of Minnetonka Beach would agree to the neighbors desired closure of Crystal Bay Road as a through road. (Such a closing would probably entail the serving of 5-7 Orono homes by a private street abutting railroad right- of-way on the south side of -hese homes to be connected to Minnetonka Beach's Northview Road.) At the meeting your Council indicated their opposition. The Orono Council has asked if you could provide this to us in written form. Your rationale for the decision would be helpful in assisting the Orono Council with ther considerations. S cer,ely, r Mar E. Berm rdson City Administrator MEB/dh 'DING R ZONING - 473.7337 • ADMINISTRATION A FINANCE - 473-7138 • PUBLIC WORKS - 473-7359 ASSESSING 10588.5 AT-TIAZ I VM k-0T- C_ CRITFPTA FOR CLOSING/DEAD-ENDING PUBLIC STREET Public Hearing - Notification - All residents directly effected - between intersections - Affected jurisdictions/services - Schools (Bus) - Cities - U.S. Postal service - L.M.C.D. (if appropriate) M.C.W.D. - M.W.C.C. Metro Council Level of Concurrence - Writ` agreement of all residents directly affected (between intersections) - Written agreement of affected jurisdiction - Written concurrence of all affected utilities 1. Specific plan for road configuration 2. Public Safety impact of plan on surrounding area for (5 blocks) Police access Fire access EMS access 3. Transportation Public/Private Standards for roads (zoning) width/length/c;ul-de-sac number cf residents served General traffic flow through Alternate flow impacts Impact on public service provision (snowplowing maintenance) - To end of public portion - Priority of service Current ability to maintain 4. Utilities (Public/Private) - Location - Easements 1 - Access to service in emergency - Concurrence of all utilities 5. Land Use - Road type/si.ae/length/cul-de-sac - Hardcov,:.c - Types of use - Frontage on public/private streets - width - Property access to developed/nei�jhbaring property - LaKe impact - Planning Commission input 6. Legal - Roa.: Rights/Easements - Disposition of vacated land - Ability to vacate - Process to vacate developahlp 7. Financial - Agre-inent to bear administration and lega, costs - Agreement to pay all physical alteration costs S. Responsibility - Who bears burden to carry through all non -City work 10388.1HD To: Mark E. Bernhardson, City Administrator From: John R. Gerhardson, Public Wr -ks Director Date: October 3, 1988 Subject: Bohn's P nt Feasibility Id At the September 12, 1988 Council meeting, there was discussion regarding the feasibility study for upgrading Bohn's Point Road. It was the intent of the Coui.cil to determine the feasibility of a 24' road. The petitioners' request was a feasibility study for a 22' road and they did not wish to participate in the cost of the feasibility study if 24' was even to be considered. Following the September 12th meeting, we determined that tr_are should be a more defined right-of-way width requested the City Engineer to identify the center a;ne of the right-of-way. Once the line was established, Glenn Cook, Jeanne Mabusth and myself met with Mr. Winslow to walk the road and try to determine the impact of the wiacning to 24' to trees, shrubs, etc. However, after further research, it was determined that what was actually identified by the Engineer was the east section line and not the center of right-ci way. Wich that being the case, the east side of Bohn's Point Road is encroaching on all properties on the east side, therefore any widening would have to take place on the west side see attached). Mr. Winslow understands the situation and therefore wi!.hes to withdraw the request for the feasibility study (see attached). City forces will perform repairs to the road as necessary. RECOMMEN'TION - To witr--aw + feasibility study for the upgrade of Bohn's Po:i .it Road. PROPOSED MOTION: Moves , seconded by to withdrawn the feasibility study for the upgrade of Bohn's Point Road. Ayes __, nays Mayor and City Council FROM: Mark E. Bernhardsun, Citv Administrator�\��J1( Forwa_ recommending approval. � (13 /66- . • /'' �� L' ` ACC+-�r3� � --«- �y�c,� ��-4-4-6-'- �VL �� 30 To: Mayor Grabek & Orono Council Members From: Thomas J. Jacobs, Building & Fire Inspector Date: October 5, 1988 Subject: 2180 Prospect Avenue - Hazardous Building Proceedings Attachment - Proposed Resolution Issue - Determination as to whether Council desires to initiate Hazardous Building Proceedings at the above address. Discussion - Staff is requesting that the Council review the above subject property for hazardous building proceedings. After receiving complaints regarding the unsafe condition of the unoccupied building, stuff conducted an inspection which revealed that the building is in a damaged and deteriorating state, is left in an unsafe condition arid is subject to collapse, which constitutes a definite hazard. Attempts have been made by staf f to contact the new owner of the above subject property with no results. Major items of concern by staff are as follows: 1. Unsecured h�A lding, open to treaspassers and children playing therein. 2. Struct»ral collapse of foundation wall leaving unsafe condition. 3. Hazardous conte„-s within the structure left unsecured. Alternatives - There are four options that can be taken: 1. Table proceedings. 2. Adopt resolution as writte. 3. Adopt resolution with amendments. 4. Deny resolution. Recommendation - Staff recommends adopting resolution as is and commencing with the Hazardous Building Proceedings. Proposed Motion: Moved by , seconded by , that the urono city Council adopt Resolution 0 initiating Hazardous Building Proceedings at 21b0 Prospect Avenue. Ayes , nays City of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. A RESOLUTION ORDERING ABATEMENT OF HAZARDOUS BUILDING PROCEEDINGS AT 2180 PROSPECT AVENUE, ORONO WHEREAS, the City of Orono is a municipal corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of Minnesota; and WHEREAS, James Thompson, taxpayer, and Frederick Curtis, fee owner of record, of property located at 2180 Prospect Avenue, Orono, Minnesota, herein referred to as "the property", and legally described as follows: Property Idenri£icatIf * n Number: 10-117-23 31 0019 Commencing 515.0625 feet North of Southwest corner of Northeast 1/4 of Southwest 1/4 thence North 130 feet thence East 208 feet thence South 130 feet thence West 208 feet to beginning, Jnplatted 10 117 23, Hennepin County, Minnesota and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Orono, having duly conside -ed the matter pursuant to Minnesota Statutes Sections 463.15 to 463.26' , hereby finds that the above described property is uninhabitable and contains unsanitary and hazardous conditions which constitute a public nuisance and which makes this property hazardous to the public health, safety and welfare based on the following findings: Interior Basement 1. Dirt floor causing moisture problem. 2. Foundation walls are caving in and are structurally unsafe. 3. Beams are undersized and supports are bad. 4. Joists have ;oor supports. 5. No rim joist insulation is provided. 6. Windows/Frames are weathered, one is broken and out of place, wood rot has started. 7. Cellar door is rotten, 1. 2. 1. 2. 3. 4. Basement Stairs Treads/Risers - winder stairs - tread width too narrow. Handrails are not provided. Electrical Service Panel: wiring is bad. 60 Amp service must be replaced. Wiring type is greenfield. Receptacles are in poor condition. Page 1 of 6 City Of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. Plumbing 1. Waste pipe is a health hazard because it is open to building in basement. 2. Vent hood/pipe is too long - improper clearances to combustibles. 3. T & P relief valve - none is provided. Heating System 1. Flue vent pipe and connections are to long of run - improper clearances to combustibles. 2. Main trunk and branch duck pipe is rusted through. Rear/Side Entry 1. Floor is worn and in bad condition. 2. Walls have a dirt and grease film on them. They are also deteriorating. Kitchen 1. Floor is dirt- and worn. It is a health hazard. 2. Walls are dirty. 3. Ceiling paint is pealing from moisture problem and possible leaking roof. 4. Windows have dry rot. 5. Exterior door is in poor condition. 6. Countertops and cabinets are in poor condition. Kitchen Plumbing 1. Faucets and trap are in poor condition. 2. There is no vent provided. Dining Room 1. Floor is in poor condition and there holes in the f loor. 2. Paint is pealing off the walls and ceiling. 3. Windows are weathered. Living Room 1. Floor is buckling. 2. Paint is pealing otf the walls and ceiling. 3. Receptacles in improper locations. Main Entr 1. Floor is in poor condition. 2. Walls and ceiling are rotting because of the moist --re problem. Page 2 of 6 "r City of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. Bathroom - North Side of House 1. The floor, walls, ceiling, windows, and door are all bad condition. 2. The bathroom plumbing for the sink, faucet, trap, vent, tub/shower, vent, toilet, anti -siphon ballcock, float assembly, seat, and shut of f va 1 ve are a 11 bad. Bedroom Northeast Side of House 1. Floor is buckling. 2. Walls and ceiling have moisture damage. Paint is pealing off of walls. 3. Windows have dry rot. They do not meet fire egress. 4. Re^eptacles are improper spacing and have poor wiring. Attic 1. Rafters are 2x4 and are an improper size. 2. There is very little insulation, if any. Exterior_ 1. Foundation is caved in. 2. Ground slope at foundation to building. 3. Siding is weathered. 4. There is no wall insulation. 5. Roof design: rafters are undersized (2x4). 6. Roofinq is weathered and leaking. 7. The motar joints are falling apart on the chimney. 8. Entry steps do not have a handrail provided. Building is in a state of deterioration and dilapidation, thus it is a safety and health hazard pursuant to Minnesota State Building Code/Uniform Building Code, Section 203. Orders to remove or repair the structure were issued by the Buildinq Official on September 3, 1988 and September 21, 1988. These orders have not been complied with. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED as follows: A) That the Citv Council of the City of Orono, pursuant to State Statute 463.251, hereby orders the owner(s) to board -up and secure the structure within ten (10) days. The City Cou►icil further orders that unless corrective action is taken within ten (10) days from the date of service of this order, it will result in the City properly securing the building and the cost 'hereof will be charged against the real estate as provided in State Statute Section 463.21. Paqe 3 of 6 City of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. B) The City Council of the City of Orono, pursuant to the foregoing findings and in accordance with Minnesota Statutes Sections 463.15 to 463.261 hereby orders the owner(s) of the property to make the following repairs in order to correct the hazardous condition: Interior Basement 1. Install a new floor over the exiting dirt floor. 2. Remove and replace foundation walls. 3. Remove and replace undersized beams. 4. Install proper supports. 5. Provide and install rim joist insulation. 6. Remove and replace broken windows. Repair the windows if necessary. 7. Provide new cellar door. Basement Stairs 1. Remove and replace treads/risers. 2. Install handrails. Electrical 1. Service Panel: remove and replace. 2. Provide 100 amp service panel. 3. Reci,ove and replace greenfield wiring. 4. Remove and replace receptacles. Plumbing 1. Seal up waste pipe. 2. Remove and set furnace closer to chimney. 3. Install a T & P relief valve. Heating System Move furnace closer to chimney and remove combustibles. t Remove and replace main trunk and branch duct pipe. Rear/Side Entry 1. Remove and replace floor. 2. Clean and remove and replace walls as needed. Kitchen 1. Clean and replace floor as needed. 2. Clean and replace walls as needed. 3. Repair roof to control humidity, scrape paint and re -paint ceiling. 4. Remove ar.d replace windows. 5. Exterior door needs paint to preserve wood. 6. Countertops and cabinets need to be removed and replaced. Page 4 of 6 City of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. Kitchen Plumbing 1. Faucets and trap must be replaced. 2. Install plumbing vents. Dining Room 1. Repair floor. 2. Repair roof to control humidity. scrape paint and re -paint ceiling. 3. Remove and replace windows. Living Room 1. Remove and replace floor. 2. Re -Paint the walls and ceiling. 3. Provide outlets per NFPA 70. Main Entry 1. Re -surface floor. 2. Remove and replace walls and ceiling, Bathroom - North Side of House 1. The floor, walls, ceiling, windows, and door are need to be! replaced. 2. The bathroom plumbing for the sink, faucet, trap, vent, tub/shower, vent, toilet, anti -siphon ballcock, float assembly, seat, and shut off valve are need to be replaced. _Bedroom Northeast Side of House 1. Remove and replace floor. 2. Remove and replace walls. Repair the ceiling. 3. Remove and replace windows. 4. Install new receptacles. Attic 1. Remove and replace rafters. 2. Provide minimum insulation R-38. Exterior 1. Foundation must be repaired. 2. Regrade after repairs to the foundation. 3. Siding must be repaired. 4. Provide minimum insulation R-20. 5. Roof design: remove and replace. 6. Remove and replace roofing. 7. Remove and replace motar joints in chimney. 8. Install handrails for the entry steps. Paqe 5 of 6 City of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. If the repairs are not completed or unless an answer is filed within twenty (20) days from the date of service of this order, the City shall move the District Court for summary enforcement of this order. If an answer is filed that contests the hazardous building action, the matter shall be tried and decided by the District Court. If the order is sustained by the Court, the Court shall fix a time after which the building shall be destroyed or repaired as set forth in Minnesota Statues Section 463.20. If the Court's Judgment is riot complied with in the time prescribed, the City may make the ordered repairs, raze or remove the hazardous condition or building, or acquire the building and real estate on which the building or hazardous condition is located by eminent domain. The necessary costs of such repairs, razing or removal, including but not limited to attorney fees, witness fees and filing fees, shall be a lien against the real estate on which the hazardous condition exists and will be levied against the property as set forth in Minnesota Statutes Section 463.21 and 463.22. That the City Cou:icil of the City of Orono hereby authorizes and directs the Mayor, City Clerk, City Attorney, and other officers and employees of the City to take such action, prepare, sign and serve such papers as are necessary to comply with this order and to assess the co:. thereof against the real estate described above for collection along with taxes. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota, this loth day of October, 1988. APPROVED: ATTEST: James R. Grabek, Mayor Dorotiy M. Hallin, City Clerk Page 6 of 6 • 10388.1 TO: Mark E. Bernhardson, City Administrator IM: Tom Kuehn, Finance Director r�<- DATE: October 3, 19%;3 SUBJECT: Revised Joint Cooperative Agreement and Contract for. Fire Service with Mound Attachment: Revised Contract for Fire Protection with Mound DISCUSSION - The City of Orono has an on -going contract with the City of Mound for fire protection services that is automatically renewable unless cancelled in writing by either party at least one year in advance. The City of Mound has presented a revised contract beginning with the 1988 contract year. The last revision was in 1981. I have reviewed the present and proposed contracts and find that the gain changes have to do with substituting the terms "contracting city" or "contracting cities" for mention of the specific "City of it. T`;s language simplifies the contract. The other changes have to do with the effective ate, January 1, 1988 from January 1, 1982; specifying "fire calls, rescue calls, and mutual aid ca 1 1 s", from "fire and rescue calls"; deleting specific references to the dollar amounts paid to the Fire Department Relief Association; and deleting specific reference to "purchase a ladder truck" with the substitution "to purchase any capital equipment". We also have the 1989 fire contract budget proposal from Mound. The projected cost to Orono for 1989 is $53,425 vs $49,647 in 1988, ar increase of $3,778 or 7.6%. The revised contract and 1989 proposal are presented for Council approval and adoption. TO: Mayor and Ci_y Council FROM: Mark E. Bernhardson, City Administrate Forwarded recommending app.,-al. PROPOSED MOTION - Mcved by , seconded by , to approve the revised language for the Contract for Fire Service with the City of Mound and to approve the 1989 cost to Orono of $53,425. Ayes _, Nays _ JOINT COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT AND CONTRACT FOR FIRE SERVICE 1 THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into this day of 2 19 , by and between the City of Mound, a 3 municipF! corporation of the County of Hennepin and State of 4 Minnesota, party of the first part, and the City of 5 a municipal corporation of the County of 6 Hennepin and State of Minnesota, party of the second part, 7 'ITNESSETH: 8 That, WHEREAS, the City of is 9 desirous of having fire protection service furnished by the 10 City of Mound Fire Department, and 11 WHEREAS, the City of Mound has the facilities and 12 equipment and is willing and able to provide fire 13 protection: service to the City of 14 and 15 WHEREAS, the City of Mound has prepared for the City 16 of an annual financial budget 17 covering truck bonded inde'-)tednez;s, fire equipment 18 capital outlays, annual operating costs and Fireman's 19 Relief Association. 20 NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the p, uses and 21 the mutual covenants of the parties hereto, i} �-s agree. as 22 follows: 23 1) Definition of terms For the purpos=. of 24 this Agreement, the terms in this ion shall have the 25 following meanings given to them. 26 A. "Contract year" s a 12 month period during 27 which fire protection serv: are to be rendered or were 28 rendered to the City of by the City of 29 Mound. The contract year shall commence on 7anuary 1 and 30 terminate on the next December 31. 31 B. "Contracting Cities" means any city which is a 32 party to this contract or a. similar contract which by its 33 terms is interrelated with this contract for the purposes of 34 determining total cost for the contract4ng cities are 35 Minnetonka Eeach, Minnetrista, Orono, Shorewood, Spring Park 36 and Mound. 37 C. "City of Mound Fire Budget" shall inc:L''•: all 38 preliminary estimated and actual costs of operating the Fire 39 Department of the City of Mound for a given contract year, 40 including but not limited to: 41 Chief's Salary & Cfficer's Pay 42 Fire Drill Fay 43 Salaries 44 Office Supplies 45 Copy Machine 46 operating Supplies, General 47 Motor Fuels 48 Cleaning Supplies 49 Safety Supplies 50 tire Prevention Service 51 Professional Service, 52 Audit and Financial Services 53 General Maintenance 54 Communications (Radio Replacement) 55 Postage 5:6 Telephone 57 Printing 58 Insurance 59 Electricity 60 Gas Service 61 Other Equipme— Repair 62 Building Repair 63 Rental of Equipment 64 Miscellaneous 2 65 Conferences & Schools 66 Dues & Subscriptions r7 Other Contractual Obligations 68 Capital Outlays 69 Shop & Store Transfer 70 Fireman's Relief Association Payments 71 D. "Fire Service Area" of each contracting city shall 72 ti. that area within the City shown on Exhibit A attached 73 hereto. -74 2) Area Protected. In accordance w:_th the other 75 t 3 provisions hereof, the City of Mound shall provide 76 fi. -action service for the City of 77 in the Brea legally descri.bed on Exhibit A, and as shown on 78 the Fire Service Area Map Exhibit B. 79 3) Level of Ser% .e. The City of Mound, through 80 its Fire Department, shall endeavor to protect and s:-s life 81 and property from destruction by fire in saic rea to the 82 same extent as it does within the City of miund. C3 4) Administrative_Responsibil_ The lire 84 protection services renderer to the contracting cities shall 85 be under o sole direction of she City of Mound. The 86 degree of-^rvices z %--lered, the standards of performar-a, 87 the firing and disci�:)'.ine of the personnel assigned, a 88 other m:;).''ers relating to regulation and policies, shall 89 remain in the control it the City of Mound. Any disputes 90 cetween th. rt.' .a 'a this agreement as to the of 91 functions and duties to be rsndered hezeunder, r the level 92 or .t.1n:, _r of performance it such service shall be resolved 93 by the Citl -: ,-,ager of: the City of ind. If the 94 contracting city disagrees with the resclution, it may 95 appeal, within seven days, in writing, to the City of Mound 96 asking for arbitration as provided ;.- )aragrap! The 9: City Manager of the City of Mound s'F: Submit tc r 98 cont_acting cities a monthly report of service-s rt._,de. ? to 3 99 the contracting city as well as suggestions regarding any 100 changes that may be helpful. 101 5) volunteer Firemen of the City of Mound. 102 Personnel assigned to provide fire protection services in lea the contracting city shall be volunteer firemen of the City 104 of Mound which City shall assume all obligations with regard 105 to worker's compensation, Fireman's Relief Association., 106 withholding tax, insurance, etc. for such volunteer firemen, 107 if any. The contracting city shall not be required to 108 furnishany of the foregoing fringe benefits or assume any 109 other liability of employment to any employee or other 110 person assigned to duty within the contracting city unless Ill the contracting city employs such employee or person 112 directly, independent of this agreement, to provide fire 113 protection services in the contracting city. In such event, 114 all obligations and liabilities with respect to employment 115 of such employee or person shall be the complete responsi- 116 bility of the contracting city. No such direct employment 117 shall be entered into by the contracting city without first 118 obtaining the written approval of the City Manager of the 119 City of Mound. 120 6) Termination. This agreement shall remain in 121 full force and effect from January 1, 19c'8, and be renewed 122 annually automatically hereafter for a successive contract 123 year unless cancelled by either party by serving written 224 notice upon the City Clerk of all contracting cities by, 123 January first of the current contract year. 126 7) Coot to the City of 127 A. Base Cost for and in consideration of rendition of 128 Fire Protection Services under this agreement, the City of 129 shall pay base costs determined by the 130 formula, as illustrated below, for each contract year. 131 1) assessed valuation of the Fire Service area 132 of Each Contracting City: The assessed valuation of the 4 133 Fire Service Area of each contracting city is based on taxes 134 due end payable for the year immediately preceding the 135 budget year. The Source of the assessed valuation data 136 sha'_l be the official figures of the Hennepin County 137 Assessor's Department. 138 2) Level of service for Prior Calendar Year. 139 The level of service shall be determined by the number of 140 fire calls, rescue calls and mutual aid calls based on man 141 hours. The formula of assessed valuation and levels of 142 service used by the contracting city will incorporate the 143 assessed valuation of the year preceding the budget year and 144 the three previous years average of the man hours provided 145 to the contracting city. These will then be valanced 146 equally giving each participating city its percentage share 147 of the budget for the upcoming year. 148 3) By September 1 of each year during which this 149 contract remains in effect, the City of Mound shall notify 150 each contracting city of the preliminary cost estimates for 151 the next contract year. By October 3 of each year, the City 152 of Mound shall notify each contracting city of the estimated 153 costs for the next contract year. The final estimated cost 154 shall be paid in equal quarterly installments on January 1, 155 April 1, July 1 and October 1 of the next contract year by 156 the contracting city to the City of Mound. 157 The contracting city understands and agrees 158 that it is impossible to project with complete accuracy the 159 actual costs for labor and equipment as well as the service 160 to be required by each city for the forthcoming contract 161 year, and therefore hereby agrees to a yearly audit to 162 adjust the prior year's estimated cost of service as set 163 forth above to the actual costs incurred by the City of 164 Mound. On or before April 1 of each year, the City of Mound 165 will tabulate the actual cost of the Fire Department Budget 166 for the prior contact year and will submit to each 5 167 contracting city a summary of actual costs. The actual 168 costs set forth for the prior contract year may result in 169 either a credit or a debit to'each contracting city. If a 170 surplus is carried over from the prior year, paid monies 171 shall be placed in a reserve fund. Said reserve fund shall 172 be accrued until a fund balance equal to ten percent (10%) 173 of the prior year's operating budget is arrived at. Once 174 the reserve fund level is established, the contracting 175 cities will decide whether to reduce their annual operating 176 contribution to offset the operating fund balance or 177 contribute to keep it at the ten percent (10%) reserve fund 178 level. The fund may be utilized to pay any increase for 179 service if a majority of all contracting cities approve. If 180 a majority does not approve, the annual cost payments shall 181 be paid in an amount to lower the 100% of that years final 182 estimated costs. The allocation of the credit or debit 183 shall be made pursuant to the basic cost formula set forth 184 above. 185 4) In order to facilitate the accounting and 186 reporting of all fire funds, a special Fund called "Area 187 Fire Service Fund" is hereby created. All operating 188 expenses shall come from this fund. Other separate Funds 189 already in existence include, Fire Department Capital 190 Outlay Fund (Equipment Reserve); Firemen's Relief 191 Association Fund; and Fire Truck Bonded Indebtedness Fund. 192 Reports on each of these Funds will also be provided to each 193 contracting city by the City of Mound, annually following 194 the contract year. 195 5) If any of the above mentioned Funds, for 196 whatever reason, shall become delinquent and require 197 additional funds prior to the next contract year, each 198 contracting city shall be notified of such shortage in 199 estimated revenue and the contracting parties, by majority 200 of all of the contracting cities shall vote to transfer from 6 201 the reserve fund or to pay as a part of the current year's 202 quarterly costs set forth in paragraph 3 above. 203 B. Arbitration. If the contracting city is aggrieved 204 by the determination of the City of Mound as to the alloca- 205 tion of the actual costs of the prior year's service, the 206 contracting city may appeal said determination within 30 207 days after receipt of the City of Mound's audit. Said 208 appeal shall be made in writing and shall be addressed to 209 the City of Mound asking for arbitration by a Board of 210 Arbitration. The Board of Arbitration shall consist of 211 three persons: one to be appointed by the City of Mound; one 212 to be appointed by the appealing contracting city; and the 213 third to be appointed by the two so selected. The name of 214 each arbitrator selected shall be submitted, in writing, to 215 the other party. In the event that the two arbitrators so 216 selected do not appoint the third arbitrator within 15 days 217 after their appointment, the Chief Judge of the District 218 Court of Hennepin County shall have jurisdiction to appoint, 219 upon application of either the City of Mound of the 220 appealing contracting city, the third arbitrator to the 221 Board. The third arbitrator selected shall not be a 222 resident of either contracting city, and shall be a city 223 manager or city administrator. The arbitrator's expenses 224 and fees, together with other expenses, not including 225 counsel fees, incurred in the conduct of the arbitration, 226 shall be divided equally between the parties to the 227 arbitration. Arbitration shall be conducted in accordance 228 with the Uniform Arbitration Act, Chapter 572 of the 229 Minnesota Statutes. Said arbitration shall be binding on 230 bath parties. 231 C. Capital Expenditures and/or Interim Increases in 232 the Funds. Not withstanding any of the above, the 233 contracting cities shall have the right to be heard 234 regarding any proposed capital expenditures which are not in 7 235 the annual estimated cost budget and which exceed $5,000.00 236 and/or interim increases in the Funds not otherwise included 237 in the annual budget. Notice of such proposed and non- 238 budgeted capital expenditures and/or interim increases in 239 Funds shall be in writing to the contracting cities prior to 240 actual expenditures for such items and the contracting 241 cities shall thereafter have ten days in which to approve or 242 disapprove the same in writing and if there is no response 243 which disapproves the expenditure, it is agreed that such 244 proposed expenditures may be made and the cost thereof shall 245 be included in that year's budget. 246 D) Fire Department Relief Association. The 247 contracting cities agree that it is important that the 248 volunteer firemen of the City of Mound have a relief 249 association that will provide retirement benefits after 250 retirement to compensate the firemen for all the volunteer 251 hours they contributed. The contracting cities also realize 252 the wisdom of contributing to this fund on a pay as you go 253 basis. The contracting cities also recognize that as 254 retirement levels increase that additional contributions 255 will be required beyond the present 1988 contribution level. 256 The retirement costs paid to the Relief Associaticn shall be 257 considered as a part of the prior years operating costs. 258 The contracting cities amount being paid for relief benefits 259 will be paid until and unless a majority of the contracting 260 cities approve increased benefits and increased contribu- 261 tions to the fund. 262 E. Prior Contract. If Mound cancels this contract 263 under the provisions of section p=@ or if a contracting city 264 cancels the contract for the express purpose of establishing 265 its own fire department, then the capital expenditure to 266 purchase any capital equipment as provided for in the 267 amendment to the previous contract dated December 2, 1971, 268 and amended December 5, 1978, shall govern the contributing 8 269 city's capital investment and/or any refunds provided for in 270 the prior contract. 271 Notwithstanding any language herein to the 272 contrary, or in prior contracts between the parties, any 277 credit or debit due to a contracting city or to the City of 274 Mound on account of prior agreements and contracts for fire 275 protection between the parties shall be payable in the year 276 following pursuant contract currently in force. CITY OF CITY OF MOUND By: BY: Its Mayor Its Mayor and and By: By: a 93088.7 �- ?l's CI . UCT10192J TO: Mark E. Bernhardson, City Administrator V FROM: Tom Kuehn, Finance Director IWIEI - DATE: September 30, 1988 SUBJECT: Adopt Assessment Roll for Hazardous Building Actions - 1988 - 1929 Fagerress Point Road 6 3960 Sixth Avenue North A:!.?chments: A. Resolution Adopting Assessment Roll B. Proposed Assessment Roll C. Memo Dated 9/9/88 to Set Public Hearing Date DISCUSSION - The attached proposed resolution and assessment roll is derived from the Court approved costs as noted in the memo for setting the public hearing on the hazardous building actions. As also noted the costs are to be collected in one year at an interest rate of 8%, as provided in Minnesota State Statutes. It is recommended that Council adopt the resolution and assessment roll as presented. TO: Mayor and City Council `` FROM: Mark E. Bernhardson, City Administrat- Forwarded recommending approval. PROPOSED MOTION - Moved by _ , seconded by , to adopt Resolution t adopting the assessment roll f—or Hazardous Building Actions - 1988. Ayes _, Nays Mier ll h-'aeµneeUr 4 A RESOLUTION ADOPTING THE ASSESSMENT ROLL POE HAZARDOUS BUILDING ACTIONS - 1989 WHEREAS, pursuant to proper legal notice given as required by law, the City Council has on October 18, 1988, held a public hearing on the proposed assessment of costs incurred in removal of hazardous buildings located on properties as named and described on the attached assessment roll; and WHEREAS, Hennepin County District Court has approved and ordered collection of the amounts described on the attached assessment roll as reimbursement to the City for expenses incurred in these hazardous building proceedings. NOW, THEREFORE, BR IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Orono, Hennepin County, Minnesota: 1. The Assessment Roll is hereby accepted and shall c-astitute the special assessment against each tract of land as named and attached hereto. 2. Such assessment shall be payable in one installment and shall bear interest at the rate of 8 percent per annum from October 10, 1988. 3. The owner of any property so assessed, may at any time prior to the certification of the assessment to the County Auditor, through November 15, 1988, pay the whole of the assessment, with no charge for interest, to the City Treasurer. 9. The City Clerk shall forthwith transmit a certified duplicate of this assessment to the County Auditor to be extended on the proper tax lists of the County, and such assessments shall be collected and paid over in the same manner as other municipal taxes. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota at a regular meeting held October 10, 1988. ATTEST: .lames R. Grabek, Mayor Dorothy M. Hallin, City ec p SPECIAL ASSESSMENT CERTIPICATIOM ROLLS KUNlr CODE NO. 3c HAZARDOUS BUILDING ACTIONS 1988 Interest Rate 8% LEVY NO. PROJ. NO. P.I.D. NO. ADDH NO. TOTAL ASSESSMENT LOT BLOCK UNITS MISCELLANEOUS 11239 17-117-23 23 0011 42220 $4,848.60 1929 Faderness Point Road 11239 32-118-23 22 0001 41332 S1,550.80 3960 Sixth Avenue North W 9888.3 ATrAtameur Q- TO: Mark E. Bernhardson, City Administrator FROM: Tom Kuehn, Finance Director DATE: September 9, 1988 SUBJECT: Set Public Hearing Date for Hazardous Building Assessments Attachment: A. Public Hearing Notice The City has finalized costs incurred for two properties under the hazardous buildings proceedings. The City Attorney has obtained Court hearing dates and presented the costs to the Court for approval and has obtained an Order and Judgement and Decree from the Court. The City must now set a public hearing date to consider adoption of the proposed special assessment rolls for the affected properties. The properties and costs approved for assessment are: 1929 Eagerness Point Road $4,848.60 3960 Sixth Avenue North $1,550.80 The assessments are to be collected in one year at an interest rate of 8%, as provided in Minnesota State Statute. I have attached a copy of the public hearing notice for your information. TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Mark E. Bernhardson, City Administra t vk Forwarded recommending approval. PROPOSED MOTION - Moved by _, seconded by , to set a public hearing for October 10, 1988 at 7:90 P.M. at tie Council Chambers to consider the special assessment roll for the 1988 hazardous buildings. Ayes _, Nays _ 9888.2 CITY OF ORONO PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE The City Council will hold a Public Bearing in the Council Chambers at 1275 Brown Road South on Monday, October 10, 1988 at 7:00 P.M. on the proposed assessment in the total amount of 86,399.40 for hazardous building removal on two properties legally described as follows: 1. 1929 Fagerness Point Road - Lot 19, Fagerness - P.I.D. 17-117-23 23 0911 2. 3960 Sixth Avenue North - Part of the Southwest 1/4 of Southwest 1/4 of Section 29, Township 118, North Range 23 and part of Section 32, Township 118, North Range 23 - P.I.D. 32-118-23 22 0001 The proposed assessment roll is on file with Lie City Clerk at the Administrative Offices, 1335 Brown Road South. Written or oral objections will be considered. No appeal may be taken as to the amount of any assessment unless a signed, written objection is filed with the City Clerk prior to the hearing or precented to the presiding officer at the hearing. An appeal to the District Court may be made by serving notice upon the Mayor or City Clerk within 30 days after adoption of the assessment and filing such notice with the District Court within ten days after service upon the Mayor or City Clerk. The City has adopted a special assessment deferment ordinance based on the applicant meeting age, ownership, occupancy, and income guidelines. By Order of the C.ty Council /sl Dorothy M. Hallin City Clerk 92487.3(47) `v TO: Mark E. Bernhardson, City Administrator FROM: Tom Kuehn, Finance Director DATE: October 3, 1988 SUBJECT: Certification of Delinquent Septic Inspection Fees and Sewer and Water Utility Accounts Attachments: A. Resolution Providing for Colloction of Delinquent Sewer, Water and Septic Accounts DISCUSSION - Each year the City certifies to the County all unpaid annual service charges for the septic inspection program and all delinquent sewer and water accounts of $28.88 or more, to be collected with the following year's taxes. In addition to the outstanding amounts delinquent the City adds 88 interest to all accounts and an administrative fee to the septic accounts. At this time the amounts to be assessed include $41,867 for sewer and water utility accounts and $3,388 for septic fees exclusive of administrative charges. These amounts are expected to be decreased considerably before the final payment date of November 15, 1988. A copy of the assessment roll is available for your inspection. TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Mack E. Bernhardson, City Administratovl, Forwarded recommending approval. PROPOSED MOTION - Moved by _, seconded by _, to adopt Resolution !_ providing fir the collection of delinquent charges for 1988 sewer and water utility services and annual septic inspection program fens. Ayes _, Nays 92487.1 A RESOLUTION PROVIDING FOR THE COLLECTION OF DELINQUENT 1988 SEWER AND WATER UTILITY SERVICE CHARGES AND ANNUAL SERVICE CHARGES FOR THE ON -SITE SEWAGE TREATMENT (SEPTIC) INSPECTION PROGRAM WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota has enacted certain ordinances under the Minnesota Statutes, therefore pursuant to Chapter 3 and Chapter 12, Orono City Code pertaining to payment and collection of sewer and water charges and annual service charges for the On -Site Sewage Treatment (septic) Inspection Program, the following properties are delinquent in nature. 1. WHEREAS, the City has obtained from Hennepin County Auditor Levy Number 11240 for the delinquent Sewer, Water and septic accounts. 2. That the Hennepin County Auditor be and is hereby authorized and directed to extend upon proper tax lists of the County and further collect said assessments thereon in the manner provided by law. 3. That eight percent (88) be added to the amounts due. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota at a regular meeting held October 19, 1988. James R. Gra e , Mayor ATTEST: Dorothy M. Mallin, City Clerk 93088.1 TO: Mark E. Bernhardson, City Administrator FROM: Tom Kuehn, Finance Director` DATE: September 30, 1988 SUBJECT: Certification of Unpaid Developer's Fees and Alarm User Fees Attachments: A. Resolution Providing for Collection of Delinquent Developer and Alarm User Fees B. Proposed Assessment Roll DISCUSSION - The City has a policy of billing developers for legal, eRgineering or other additional costs incurred in the process of reviewing, icvestigatinq and administering applications, licenses and permits, .s provided in Orono Municipal Code, Chapter 1. addition, the code provides for certification of unpaid costs in Section 1.05, Sublivision 5. The ordinance regulating the use of alarms provides for charging a fee for each false alarm in excess of three alarms per calendar year. All delinquent alarm fees are to be certified to the County and assessed against the properties served and collected with the taxes for the subsequent year. We have obtained a levy number for collection of the unpaid accounts. It is recommended that the City add ten percent (101) to the amounts listed for administration and carrying costs. TO: mayor and Councilmembers FEOM: Mark E. Serrbardson, City Administratorl`," Forwarded recommending approval. PROPOSED MOTION - Moved by seconded by _, to adopt Resolution 1_ providing for tte collection of delinquent Developers' Peas and Alarm Users' feel In the amount of $1,957.69 and to add 19.0% interest to the amounts due, effective November, 1998. Ayes _, Nays _. 93088.2 A RESOLUTION PROVIDING FOR THE COLLECTION OF DELINQUENT 1987 DEVELOPER FEES AND ALARM USER FEES WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesot as enacted certain ordinances under the Minnesota Statutes ierefore pursuant to Chapter 1, Orono City Code pertaini to payment of fees and additional costs and collection, and pursuant to Chapter 9, Orono City Code as amended pertaining to payment and collection of Alarm User Fees, the attached list of properties are delinquent in nature. 1. WHEREAS, the City has obtained from Hennepin County Auditor Levy Number 11241 for the delinquent Developer and Alarm User Fees. 2. That the Hennepin County Auditor be and he is hereby authorized and directed to extend upon proper tax lists of the County and further collect said assessments thereon in the manner provided by law. 3. That ten percent (10%) be added to the amounts due effective November 1, 1988. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota at a regular meeting held October 10, 1989. James R. Grabek, Mayor ATTEST: Dorothy M. Hallin, City Clerk HC 1210 (1-79) MUNICIPALITY Orono MUNIC CODE 38 LEVY NUMBER 11241 PROJECT NUMBER SPECIAL ASSESSMENT RATE CARD ADD CHANGE DELETE DOCUMENT M AUTH. BY DATE LEVY DESCRIPTION 1988 Delinquent General Fees & Charges TOTAL PROJECT ASSESSMENT $1,957.69 SERVICE CHARGE .05 per parcel LUMPED/SPREAD CODE INTEREST RATE 10.0% COST PER UNIT NO. YEARS PAYABLE One FIRST YEAR PAYABLE 1989 MO. INT. FIRST YEAR 14 FIXED CHARGE PERM. SPEC. CODE 93088.3 SPECIAL ASSESSMBNT cBBTIPiCATiOM BOLLS MUNIC CODE NO. 38 LEVY NO. P.I.D. NO. 11241 20-117-23 34 0017 11241 02-117-23 32 0003 11241 36-118-23 31 0910 11241 03-117-23 42 9008 11241 04-117-23 12 0005 11241 35-118-23 34 0012 11241 20-117-23 11 0002 11241 09-117-23 32 0903 11241 10-117-23 31 0004 ADDN. NO. TOTAL ASSESSMENT 43300 S 857.19 41302 55.00 01324 55.00 01138 110.00 02550 202.50 09394 319.00 41320 284.50 42160 55.00 41310 19.50 $1,957.69 MISCELLANEOUS ------------- Parade Homes 1987 False Alarm 1987 False Alarm 1987 False Alarm 1987 Application #816 Application #1211 Application #958 False Alarm 1988 Plan Review 1987 10588.2 53 TO: Mayor and City Council n'p/il -'" -' AG FROM: Mark Bernhardson, City AdministratWyA4 DATE: October 5, 1988 - SUBJECT: Administrator's Information WOODHILL AVENUE - At this t.` � it had been expected that the final aving course would hav, been laid on the road. This has not been done, however, as the electric utility has not finalized the moving of the two poles, once completed the contractor will complete the work on the road. COUNTY 15 PROGRESS - The majority of the bituminous base course has been placed on County Roads 15 and 19, concrete curbing is 99% complete. Storm sewer catch basins are now being brought up to final grade as well as sanitary sewer manholes and municipal water valve boxes. Hennepin County is optimistic that the final wear course of bituminous will be placed this year but sidewalks and final restoration may not be completed until spring/summer of 1989. Street lights should be installed and working this fall. ORONO/MINNETONKA BEACH INTERCEPTOR PROGRESS - To date the work near Gayles Marina to North Shore Marina is underway with pipe laying being done towards Norenberg Bridge. It is anticipated that this road will be under construction until November 15th. The reason for the road closure is the need to place pilings on which to set the pipe near Crystal Bay Service. To date the City has received only one complaint from a resident along the project regarding the closure. This indiv tur•?, who lives near the Norenberg Bridge, felt that having '"o , ute himself through Minnetonka Beach to get to Navarre wo..-. -arse him considerable delay. The timing matter has been re :awed with the resident. In addition Metro Waste Control Commission did have a meeting with the Marinas on September 29, 1988 and other interested citizens, at which point initial construction problems were addressed. As noted on the agenda Metro Waste is coming forward with an outlot subdivision and the necessary permit for construction of a lift station for the project. 3598 IVY PLACE - Attempts to meet with the owner and his attorney have n6 of been successful, howe,ier a meeting has bees. scheduled for October 7, 1988. COUNTY 15 BEAUTIFICATION - John Gerhardson is attending a County 15 Facelift Beautification Committee as the representative. This group is looking to see what amenities can be added to the project including, aggregate planters and benches. It is anticipated that this will probably be a joint public/private 1 effort with donations coming from the private sector for the benches and for the planters. Given the progress of County 15 it is anticipated that a grand opening would be held next spring. MICHAEL EIRNYCZUE - Mr. Rirnyczuk, who has remained on an injured on duty status since his injury in February of 1987 from which there has not been full recovery so that he has not been able to return to work as a patrol officer, is obtaining a job in the private sector with Dayton Hudson Corporation. This job offer has come about rather quickly and the City is currently working out the details with P.E.R.A., the workers compensation carrier and Mr. Eirnyczuk's attorney regarding the completion of his role as a City employee. Mr. Rirnyczuk has been an excellent patrol officer and the City regrets having to lose his excellent services. GOAL SETTING - (See Attached) OOmt. BaPI1G D66PT 6R8/N 5/61M CM R OMD 5/31M 6/36/08 ]/29M 8MM MD 9/15M Hrir for 'N Coel Srti.g 9/m/88 iwN R 8Y891®1 CR! a00LL9f96'Ri l IBIS 19N - M 6PR1L 19N '87 VO - 1r1 Council ettat"ic Plamicg S Tao Objctiva 'N 310 - IM S t T Obja tiw -69 m - IN9 Short Teo Objctiva a0 faaL 1® ®1RTIH66 1. CoteaY['R C69GaHmlt Higra 11 '87 M 6. Co .r iva Plr krMrt 92 (5/9l) 6 ive back from Het Comocil Pinal plan yprral toning r nta Draft - Planning dt C®trim mridrat - Council meidetetim rgotlacion m utllltir 11ag faRe-Hmdinai 'N NO B. Coctidor 8elstim su* M Hoc Tank Porn -89 NO Crplw Pbar 1 5/15/88 ettension to 5/15 gtrod to Harm Council follri:g 6/9M mteti:g re: 0tban ] dude 5/12M apptovd b/ Mtro Camcil mtto Concii 6/15M Pirl Coewcil approval 5/23M 6/15/88 7/lM 0/19/88 contacted wM 9 rdlr 5/23/88 Dtaft frr Sbatdla to Cooccll to PC - 6/i!M 7/6M wotk aarim m draft 8/1M to M Sod went oar im mtieduld 9/11M Public Hrriog - P.C. racordatim to Co ocil. Mticipata Council 10/10 e iv it, frr Hdir o: rn arr/r9otimtlor 6/26M erpmdd with lettat 7/21M to Hdlr 16/1M m Hm T.* Poto - lat artim 5/19M 5/19M rtiog Mld 1/16/N rating Mid 8/18M Ming Mld - MDo Mp to tmMtt MDot 9/19/88 renting Mid -MDot Dint. 5 Praert ea: rt up,In octant mttidor 19/17 Hlgbry 12 wticg of Ha9gra - pry for aretinn 41th +*rirortntim Coririaet I ao � aAdK 1. C0a9NIw nsVF2UPoMrr Cont. may. eadwelopaenl •88 Bro -89 m V M C my 15 p elalsant 69 sm B9 S .87 Bi0 Casallty Transpottatim Plan '88 sm 89 m 'c SM B[ou Nate Nanagm Plan 66 m 99 SA 99mage .1tants 3/25/88 tegmted qy tlon - Plansfng To he dotmined frns J. snavilw tegatdfng met w - legal do oter plan d elop®nt for Initiate GoalNbjective 16/1/M 3/11/80 ptaposal adoptd Betting pcocess Ccaplets lYetar Plan Study 7/89 peteraim Bttata y to IRlmmnt 6/99 Consider lW f.tim 6/15/88 2/88 Regxat attorney a211ne Solicitm idam/propoeale ptacar requited to escablish Caaaa if IWA& in do 9/l/68 3/l/se taceivd wtli. for eatabliiaaalt of M. Staff teviavilg for cmrt netermine dnitd 5/39/80 Issue of ligMiM to 2/22/M local acwpanyiny Council ametirq iaproveeants 2/22/86 Council cvmidns lighting 5/23/80 C it elptovaa lighting ri.i, plan 5/30/88 Con ptwl spptwal 12/14/97 Financial revision wwnad 2/22/88 3/28/M takW rn 5/23/86 5/23/88 a .p financing Special asseesmtnt Mariam 1/89 Complete construction 12/1/88 To ®eaa 4/15/98 Anticipate all mrb a gutter, first 'lift' paving, lights this fall. Spring 189 belanca of sid lks, final ,aving ad restoration Wine capital iaptw m/l/M 8/11/88 ati, rwieed rwiad draft prior® prior to 09 budget oetemine Midge replacement 8/1/88 proposal ircld in rwistl draft pragran capital budget. Osglut for fudinq nails rn be devataped/sutaittad. C ntinued ansl"is FvblicN ivate 8/89 evaluate Cty 116 7/1/88 3/13/88 rareived t.9 t frns N ins 4/25/88 Ciuncil elects rot to vi8mpor[ Beanlutlon L, A® m A681 1. @ ITY oNH4Pey1 ton. cte 4 - oi[a'tiun stl prog[ess Be sw '69 m 2. EwlY]MQN1N. PImTH.TIa .82 sw stubne say '88 sw '99 sm solid Idea. lwr9rit -89 sm i61LT1V6 ZIMS RATE Bwigv advig /Policy bodies 7/68 4/11/86 presented to Cw il. To be ole/Pepuuibilities reviteod by Planning Cs:ecim Aevi« A I. as naaese[y 11/BB anticipate 7/11/88 distmsim vita staff/adgit /polity body Councii/BC reps. peauss for deselapastt review Tabled w e/9/48 eating A a ttim wikieg toweds F trdulad for 11/BB xrvim A .1. oriented Rio surprise' P. En a effective tmtol on 12/88 miens Cmplew made asxaeamtt 2/88 Project feasibility-tvimenx 5/88 Review wised Feasibility 18/88 mtemim aaaeaement area 8/88 interent Financing aptiom 10/98 oetauim 12/88 Corider dexlopaet mratorim 2/89 ,fInitiateipojxc - Project bid 3/89 - Goys P[ojea 6/89 - Arises pcojwt 10/09 - Caplw projwt 10/89 Aeneas r.cyCling efforts to gwl 6/88 aeeeaa utlwar severe w want gmla 6/FB including 1.1 tvpmtim wibiide Bay ling 18/86 Pwiav regulations regarding 8/89 solid vases 11w1sv organised mllwtim 9/89 it naiad Mticipete made assessment mpletim 2/88 2/W/88 Infomtim preened suteittwd tvgrat for feasibility 'vdace mt Feasibility study approved 6/13/88 Anticipmta m 18/IB/88 in, 0/2e/00 awaiting 8/8/98 Ming - Cuacil [aeived City in tonjmctlm vita lint ilempin swat 187 goal Currently exploring mete of enlected mrteids pick W - 8/17/88 staff bee Coen vita potential contractors Pigmented to Cameil 18M UM 3. OMGiIIiITIOML DB9eQurrt INS C ,ii Firl 8ettim 7/80 9/11/BB aorting held - '09 raaisima Cuplate 9/m Awrx 9/12/BB INS 9idot Proses Aasnrit Board a D i. 8/BB 8/2I/M initial rating Aald. Mticipate carclalm on 5/9/BB 5/19/M Board cmcludad Capita 4tdwt Adoptim B/M Budget Adoptim 9,26/88 7/11M 1989 budget ..g./ fbidali. m C it Budget r.tiDg art for 9,WN eodget adoptiauLill rate to 10/10/a 1989 Lagislatiue Prmra Complete 12/BB Ts Building Staff 11/08 C Dil - Cgtaider Pormata 2/89 IAdertake if desired 3/89 A. ■Y M DMIVYT '87 M Facilities Study 'lb Fleming Co.laaim fur rey 5/18/58 •y S3D PBara 11 capietim 6/BB Site criteria to Murcil 9/26/89 IRlemint an, rxmatlatioa l/Be '83 VW iotg Rena Fi.ial Policy Draft policy to courcil ]/BB 2j22/M initial draft capital AtdWt 89 SA diaaasad Cavell dDpti. BM Oolf (bur. DrmlopAnt of khai[a. 3/81 atrateg8• Mirl Cmtrol Mlato progrr 8/98 0ttr I I. to Lag IAka/Bpria2 Park/llimatmtra Fasdr1960 S. MMW YLAtiY[6' 6. MaBaL IW C[aprmstirn 6¢lora Parformsita 8/98 Porml plan m 2/88 Intantiw as addaraam eorml Plan " dJostaenre to or p ticn Plan pf.ted 2/22/W 3/25M plan adopted 8/W" r sKth rapott m ittW to state C nity Informtim/ M or'a articles (noun ibm1K[er evaluation of sys[® 8/38 m,ors's article formt to wntiooe to 8/88 for next evaluation 8n2/B8 Sutmitta revlav to r....-il 8/22/88 Council dire continua of s t. LIST OF LICENSES FOR COUNCIL APPROVAL, FOR MEETING OF October 10, 1988 HOME OCCUPATION LICENSE - Patricia R. Fitzpatrick 2845 Watertown Road Long Lake License No. APPLICATION FOR HOME OCCUPATION - $20.00 fee Date Received Orono Municipal Code Section 10.20 Date Expires CITY OF ORONO 1335 BROWN ROAD SOUTH GTTY OF ORONO C BOX 66 FiaANC£ GFFTC£ r/ '6TR1cK rf�'V' STAL BAY, MN 55323 ;' 01 60 20.00 N£GY Ti :Q.00 Name: ie OTn,.jnzPATPlRII QwXLe-Phone y7:i�+:' °d4 dNdNK yW Address: 'ter q C,L n92D/T /COVO -5,T.B5_6 dll1?eC C001 k01 T15:1 C 0°i:Y �Wmber of Employees within operation "✓c SELF Provide list of Names of Employees on back of this application. Type of Business to be operated )�!nOl pPe,•.c S�j/N + r-,r-e Vic,c S %FPLCLnr/ee) PERMIT MAY EXPIRE IF ANY VIOLATION OCCURS. CITY STAFF SHALL HAVE FIVE (5) BUSINESS DAYS IN WHICH TO INVESTIGATE AND MAKE A RECOMMENDATION PURSUANT TO ORONO MUNICIPAL CODE. IF A SITE INSPECTION IS REQUIRED BY CITY STAFF, THE REVIEW TIME WILL BE EXTENDED TO TEN (10) BUSINESS DAYS. -------------------------------------------------------------------------- ORONO MUNICIPAL CODE REGULATIONS ON HOME OCCUPATIONS PURSUANT TO MUNICIPAL CODE SECTION 10.20 SUBD 4(C) Prohibited Home occupation Practices. A. It is unlawful for any business operating as a home occupation to engage in operation without proper licenses. B. All persons engaged in the business must reside in the dwelling. C. No commercial signs permitted other than signs permitted in a residential zone. D. No excessive stock in trade may be stored on the premises. E. Over the counter retail sales is not allowed. F. Entrance to the home occupation must be gained from within the structure. -------------------------------------------------------------------------- The undersigned hereby agrees to the conditions quoted above from the Orono Municipal Code and any additional requirements the City staff may have. Signature of Applicant: TiFL..:�� if '� Date: _____________________________________ ___ __________________ FOR CITY USE ONLY: After review of application, staff recommends the following: Approval of application Denial of application Signature of Zoning official Date: Signature of Fire Inspector: Date: __________________________________________________________________________ (OVER) CITY OF ORONO ► A Y R 3s • ACKERMANN_ AJ 17_ _ AHDERSOA BL 31 11707.41 1464.55 • ANDERSON PM 13 16.00 10.00 - - ..'�in�C I• ANDERSON OF 13 05.00 05.00 SERNHARD60 ME I2 39940.52 2044.08 I0 SOSZIEN SA_. 31 17477_41 909_00 _ BOSMA JL It !l36.25 556.73 _.. u BOYLAN BD 73 3502.79 191.25 BRINKMAUS JF 42 29300.09 1390.31 1+ BUTLER.. FIC 13 ,4 CARLSON M0 35 737.39 49.90 Is CARRUTHERS C 13 93.50 93.50 CHESWICK 09 31-26343.49 1410.00 CORNICK JL 31 25601.10 1136.63 DENNESON RJ 35 3293.38 261.41 ESLHLER_--fl7-f7-05:60-i!<:ZO DICKEY NJ 13 05.06 $5.00 I' DICKEY NJ 13 0.00 0.00 EHF.BERC EJ 13 -_ 65.00 - __ 63 _ _ 00 •' ENCLISH 1I IN 31 26267.67 1361.46 I ERICKSON BE 13 65.00 05.00 l*A is ERIC1480N -DJ-93 -1354-:91- --0.-Of- +0 ERICKSON KR 31 26794.66 1273.92 PARR PS 33 2021.00 0.00 I+7 e• FERRIL EL 13 05.00 65.00 FISCHENICH DT 31 13699.79 IE6E.91 FRITZLER JM 31 27395.60 1404.55 h� AFFRON - NO 33. 2369VIIS 12f3.60-- _ CA OF 13 93.90 93.S0 p CERHARD00N_ JR 42 32709.56 1#36.00 IT9 ii _ CRECORY JO 411 ARM T1 MC _ 4f ++ HALLIN ON 12 20598.01 1030.80 >a HANSEN SC 42 20046.97 999.20 » ANSINC_._._CJ-3f--941l:6T-44"W-- r HOFFMAN RM 13 $5.01 93.91 JACOBS TJ 33 2362S.03 1113.60 _ JOHNSON DO 11 25642.91 1342.89 •+ JOHNSOti JM 13 05.00 05.00 JOHNSON MI 13 93.50 93.50 IL90 - -MH 31 35146.79 1750.00 KIRNYCZUK M 31 5095.63 133.7E I« KNUTSON CA 15 14551.82 695.44 _ KUEHN TM 15 32445.25 t646 64 •+ LAUER DA 13 57.50 57. 50 LINDSTROM OJ 93 291 14 0 00 • RABUSTH----JA 33 28345.91 1418.24 --- MADDEN RM 13 45.00 05.00 + MARQUARDT 9J 93 09.26_ +� _ MEYER MA 35 _ -257.05 _S7_.30 6.44 - + MIKEL60N MA 1S 17311.I9 464.64 CITY OF ORONO P A Y 1 1 Y-T-O • - - - - -- - Div -_ 0658-0068 FWALL01 HILLS JR WH 93 2200.50 171..00. MORAN MF 31.20709.05 1421.34 MOROWCZYNS J 31 27911.03 1541.99 MORROW JS 31 7705.95 4E3.50 NICHOLLS E 13 05.09 $5.00 OAS-_-_00 93,., 961.69 0.00 JBRIEN IIL 9!_ 4750.00 800.00 OLSON BJ 13 85.90 05.90 OMAN LE 33 19429.26 1017.60 PALMER --- --F11-31--509.00 -- 0.-Of— PEASLEY C 13 95.00 85.00 PETERSON RY_93 0.00 0.00 OVABT WA 9! 22740 .83 1229.30 RATHBUN BJ 92 5309.62 822.40 RAUSCHEHDO 0 13 95.A0 85.00 RO$5--- -M 03 539.25 56.iE - SASS JJ 42 20161.49 959.20 SCHAUB$ CR 31 19114.59 998.32 SCHEFFLER LK 18 3536.45 993.7E BKREEN DS 42 20185.80 999.21 _ STEFFENH_A_G_ RE 93 21443,49 1072.80 ST VENN 116 01 1242 50 180.66 STUBBS C 13 85.00 85.00 _ STUBBS L 13 85.00 85.00 ._ THOMTON MR 31 22004.03 1132.54 TOMCHECK LF 31 22386.51 1214. 41 TOMCZYK MU 31 25722.60 1331.IS TURNHAH-- 9-13--- 09.66 65.61-- WALSH KL 35 BB3.6S 94.3E COUNT NEAN6- ------ 0-01*3.$7---- PAID 09073 TOTAL 09081 TOTAL --TOTAL FICA TAX ONIONS -w - 2N"i�S.O� WOVEN* he A a GROUP HEALTH B a PHYBICIAV'B HEALTH PLAN b a BLUE CR06S/BLUE SHIELD D = MEDICAL CENTER PLAN E . PRUDENTIAL F • COORD. HEALTH -CARE G • MINNESOTA HMO H - TRANS-AMERICA OCC I BANKERS LIFE TY OF ORONO P A Y R 0 C EMpL=NO NIM IV 4ROSS GROSS EXP/ALLOY I r CALLAHAN E7 11 2416.70 241.67 GOETTEN J II 206.70 241.67 GRABEK 7 11 3000, 00 300.00 NETTLES AR 11 725.01 241.67 " PETERSON BA 11 2416.70 241.67 COUNT GRAND 1,266.66 lu PAID 00005 I;^' TOTAL 00005 TOTAL TOTAL FICA TAX GROSS .00 EMPLOYERS FICA C A = GROUP HEALTH I'^ - B = PHYSICIAN'S HEALTH PLAN C = BLUE CROSS/BLUE SHIELD I•+ D m MEDICAL CENTER PLAN E m PRUDENTIAL 1 " F a COORD. HEALTH CARE .,I G m MINNESOTA HMO H m TRANS-AMERICA OCC. I m BANKERS LIFE .1 = MUTUAL SERVICES K • MUTUAL OF OMAHA L • EMPLOYEE'S BENEFIT I++ A m AETNA I^ N m NICOLLET EITEL 0 m LEAGUE OF CITIES I,• P - METROPOLITAN HEALTH PLAN I•+� O . SHARE Z • HEALTH CARE MAINT ACCT. +•+� MISSING HOSP CODE FOR SOME EMPL'S i l 19M CIT SP SESM CN9CN RMIBTM 10-10-M PASS I cmm M. Is AMOUNT _- 9aom- -----TTMM DESCRIPTION- "COUNT M. INV._ -A P.O. 0 RMAL[ -- MNM - I VM/M 50.06 A-1 MINRETOISIA MNT EMIP BMTAL 77-/331-261-92 M-56 264006 10/BVM H1.10 ACRD-MINNESOTA INC OFFICE SUPPLIES O'-1111-039-12 PB4086 16~4111 0.07 ACRO-MINNESOTA INC OFFICE SUPPLIES 01-4210-059-14 2N006 IVOVM 4 06 ACRD-MI NNES OTA INC OFFICE SUPPLIES 01-4210-069-IS 284006 /6/05/00 1.05 ACRO-MINNESOTA INC OFFICE SUPPLIES 01-4210-129-31 284006 16/611/4.6 06.31 ACRD-MINNESOTA INC OFFICE SUPPLIES 01-4210-174-33 284006 10/05/M 6.06 - Aao-MINMSOTA INC OFFICE SUPPLIES 01-4210-249-42 331.T1 28.010 10/05/88 4.99 AT&T IN" STAY" TELEPHONE 94-4320-590-93 ..H . 26.030 10/05/88 I9_/3 AT + T IIIF'C SYSTEM DATA PROCESSING 01-4340-039-19 284030 10/05/86 19.43 AT 6 T INFO SYSTEM DATA PROCESSING 01-1310-OS9-11 284030 10/05/86 19.43 AT 6 T INFO SYSTEM DATA PROCESSING 01-4340-•069-IS 284030 10,05/04 /0.60 AT -& T IWO SYSTEM DATA PROCESSING 01-4316-129-31 294030 IR/OS/88 19.43 AT 6 T INFO SYSTEM DATA PROCESSING 0/-1310-171-33 2B4030 10/OS/88 19.43 AT 6 T IWO SYSTEM DATA PROCESSING 01-4340-249-42 137.75 . _--ANCHOR 2H 034 10/05/88 95.16 PAPER OFFICE SUPPLIES •1-4210-039-1i 264031 10/05/81 H_N ANCHOR PAPM OFFICE SUPPLIES VI 810-B69 284034 10/05/U l90.!! ANCHOR PAPER OFFICE SUPPLIES- _ CI-.B10-A1-]] 20403♦ 10/45/98 1.H ANCHOR PI OFFICE SUPPLIES 01-K10-SN- 28.01. 10/OS/98 4.97 ANCHOR P, OFFICE SUPPLIES 73-/216-M-918"t _ _ 6l6.M -T --.- - _ 284BT0 10,04/88 40.00 BOANMAN 6 ASSOCIATES SPACE STUD 15-4306-GSO-00 264070 10/04/88 - 17.43 BOARMAN 6 ASSOCIAT5S SPACE STUDY 15-4399-650-44 --T:17 7 26. u3 Oi0599 ♦.50 COMMERCIAL LIFE IUD LIFE INS OCT 01-115E-039-12 2841.3 10/OS/88 E.70 COMMERCIAL LI PE INS LIFE INS OCT 01-058-069-15 2E41.3 10/05,88 - 1./t COMMERCIAL LIFE INS --LIFE INS OCT 01-4152-121-31 26.143 10,05,88 3.60 COMMERCIAL LIFE INS LIFE INS OCT 01-1152-126-31 284u3 10/OS/BB _ _ 9.90 COMMERCIAL LIFE INS LIFE INS OCT OId152-129-31 26.u3 10/05/ 3.60 COMMERCIAL LIFE INS - LIFE INS OCT - --- 61-41SB-171-33 264143 10/05/GoSS 6.30 COMMERCIAL LIFE INS LIFE INS OCT 41-4152-249-42 26.143 10/05/88 .7! LIFE INS LIFE INS OCT TL-.152-5.9-91 2641.3 10,05,88 _ _ _ - I.90 _COMMERCIAL COMMERCIAL LIFE INS LIFE INS OCT _ - 73-1152-St9-92 2S.u] 10/OS/BB .96 COMMERCIAL LIFE INS LIFE INS OCT T. 4IS2-590-93 ...-CNS ...-CNS o-CNS ...-CNS ...-OHS 1146 CITY OF ORONO CMSCM REGISTER I"9-K FACE R CHICK NO DATE ANOYIR Mmm Iam KMI►TIOM ACCOUNT me. INV. 0 P.O. 0 NgWE 70.04 —_ 0o-CIIS 2941H 10105/00 T{ f0_ CTS NGI►ORNS CLOiNING N-Nl1�IB-71 __ __ _ - T{.94 ON-wRt _-- _ -- _ 29.16. 10/05/06 104.315 DAY TINIRS OFFICE SUPPLIES 0/NS10-Iss-st o0.On •or.• 244t99 t,0/K/K -- 4i.00 [ M S0MON {SONG - ---MINT [OYI► 01-4]42-019-{I --- 45.44 244190 L/OVM-- 1.08 _EARLY3AY & KNG-- -MINT SYMl2[2 74-42]1-590-9) 1.04 2Hx12 10/46114 11.0E IM►REKNG/KNGER POSTAGE 01-4321-174-33 — 294251 12/K/K 197.10 GMIM PARTS CO EQUIP PARTS 01-4232-249-49 2442G6 19/K/K 27.77 GENUINE PARTS CO__ MINT EQUIP _ _74-4342-590=93 N0-CIF 20424? IVK/K 496.04 GOLF CAR NIDVIST EQUIP MEGIAL 74-473I-590-93 426.62 9u.-CMS 294241 I9/49/K - --- -SK.06 GOVT TRAINING SIRV SMOCK. 01-4356-129-31 90.90 u.-C25 264275 10/05/94 406.17 "OW MIRLTM_INC NOW ING OCT 01-415I-121-)1 26.2TS 10/05/99 --Tf3E-- —KOUF IMLTN INC -- _ _ UKG-ING OCT 01-4151-126-01 29427i 10/05/9{ 741.1E CROUP MEALTN INC NGM ING OCT 41-4151-t29-3I 264276 10/05/99 75.05 GROW NMALIN INC NDS► INS OCT 01-4151-t74a3 294275 10/0S/SS -- - 076.61 -- -gpONp-bjMTN INC ------MOM INS OCT----T4-4151-590-9] 1,275.29 0 29.201 10,06/64 MMKIVES YOODNIL. AK EST 0/ E4-67b41T-00 _171M9.96 13.969.44 • _ICE -_. - __ .... ....CNS •rrr.. _. _ _ _ _ It" CITY OF one" Cullm RNIORR Ih1S-4NB rA 7 CIEN SS_MTE YIOYMT yESSM ITEM DESCRIrTIOM ACCOINR W. INV. 0 P.O. E MESSAGE _ u1R9i LIZVO/Jt 1T0,$ EGUI► 11—/EI f-00 - 170.95 . •N••. ••.-CKt - ---� 8043" 16/0E/SS SS9. t0 HER CTY SHERIFF SET JAIL CHARM AUG 01-I254-04016 1N233 10/i9/SS - -Si.t7 ICMA RETRMMT CORP ICKA 9/1hi3/t- a.07 . --:..... - -- - - -- -------- - -- ----- .. .-c11G — -- _7.57 KEAVENYS DRUG SUPPLIES 91-IR19-IRS-3t 3.57 T - ---01-1356-109-3t ...-CKS 8147011 OWN/" 31.77 KILOO-MELVIM MEETING 94.73 NN•. ...-CKS Rt1797 10/0i/00 50.5E KUENN-tISHNS MILEAGE SEPT 01-4791-009-IS SS1797 IS/S9/SS 7.01 KUEM-TKOMO MILEAGE SEPT 01-4M1-17437 89097 U/06/SS 10.13 KIEIN-TNOMAt MILEAGE SEPT 77-I34I-569-9E •••••• __ .-CKS _ 281102 to/Os/00 11,915.46 LAKEIITKA COIN DIST NEIENSMvt 0"306-029-/1 .... ...—cics ..tl5 10/06/99 166.76 LOCI! - SUITE 300 COMPUTER CABLING 01-4232-129-31 284g5 10/06/94 19R.91 LOCI$ - SUITE 300 LOGIS ADMIN AUG 01-9352-069-t5 28.43S I L06/99 191.tT LOGO - SUITE 360 LORIS ADMIN A" 01-4352-129-31 29113S 10/06/00 — 246.47-- LOGIS - SUITE 3-0 LOCI! ADMIN AUG 01-1352-17I-33 284435 10/06/64 410.OR LOCI! - SUITE 300 DATA rROC AUG 91-135S-069-15 261135 10,06,04 616.9E LOCI$ - SUITE 300 DATA rROC AUG 01-4355-129-31 204.3S 10,06/09 331.67 _ LOCI$ — SUITE 300 DATA FROG AUG 01-4355-174-33 284435 10/06/88 98.59 LOCI! - SUITE 300 LOCIS AGAIN A" 70-1352-519-91 28.435 10/06/86 23. 19 LOCI! - SUITE 700 MIA PROC AUG 72-1355-S19-91 204435 10,06,84 147.64 - L051! — SUITE 300 LOGO ACMIM AUG 28.435 t0/06/08 39.1E LSSN - SUITE 300 MIA FRDC AUG 77M355-569-92 2.775.53 • __-__ ...... ...-CKS 961(J7 10/05/AB 64.66 _ -CITY OF -LOIN LASE- -- - -WINT LS A" - -- --77--1311-569-92 SSG. GG • low el" OR 0110w mm Kntom I9-96-60 PAW ma M. Mtn f1110UINIyoom JIM 09809PTION ACCOUNT W. Iw. 0 P.O. 0 11E9SAw N.N. ...-aY e44491 10/w/w {f. TO LONG LAKE TIRE MINT AUTO EQUIP f1-1711-20949 wMEf 19/fLM 19.71 19.71 . MNH7N-J[MINE MEETING tl-1Rf-111-73 - N.N. o.-CKI 7 If(9E/M t!f 4f MCI* HEALTH CAKE - NOEP INS OCT _- -INS 0"151-439_te weM{T IOZWOS 76.40 tlES CTR KEALTM CARE HOOP OCT tl-Ilit-IfY/E - 20M 7 IO/w/w 74.O4 RED CTII HEALTH CARE HOSP INS OCT 91-1151-126-71 966N7 WOS/SO Iw.11 RUED CIE HEALTH CARE HOOP INS OCT ft—efil-129-01 —66/417- -UHL/w--- - - 176.91 MM_tTS-HEALTH CARE WISP INS OCT ---O"f5/=TT(=33- -- - !SHOOT IO/w/w 312.w RON CIO HEALTH CAKE NOW INS OCT 0"15 49-1! 1. wf.TO NN.. .N-eKt METRO AREA MCMT ASSN---CMWIMEDNY ----- lN07O 101011/O11, 05.09 METRO AREA MORT AESN COMPES939a 91-9156-129-31 toff . - .—1iJ771�i7(i/p 14.{ DO�FtTEZWITEOL OCT twVltE- 17TE1691YZ9 --- li w.1. 11 A N• - - N.N. ...-EKE y. 101e9te Ww/w 7.38 NSWK" CD UTILITIES --S"4$f -li/w/N - -tw.TI NIWEOASCD-- UTILITIES—-7f=gl/-i/Yfl- E64/99 le/w/w 3.611 NINKEOASa UTILITIES 73-0224-E61-94 163.74 .. -7w7ii --IO/it/w %-E7KN7[KLF:7-AtEN�1K[ INS- •1-I1il=1Ec=7t. _ Ow " I"WON 74.99 RM aLLN.w TOLE TELEPHONE_ 004M 19/w/w 117.69 W1 DIST CO MAINT EQUIP 74-4342-590-93 284M le/w/w IT.N KTI 01ST CO MAINT EQUIP 74-4342-590-93 ...... ...-aS j I9w CITY OI M/M CHECK ageismIr1P-w PAN P CN[M NG. wY[ ANOINT 95N20E ITOI G[SMIPTIM ACCWNT NG. 1NG. • P_0. • N[�tM[ _ + _iO1E31 wK31 • 2w531 1}/65/w_ 16%ei/w IP/w/w 52.s0. 167.51 11/.0/ PPTONOL�JW MTMOLA INC MTMOLA INC [WIP PMTP MINT [W[P MINT EMIP ef-/[32-ITI_IS Ol-13/2-YIl-12 72-43/8-5/9-91 - M_O.R • P6/575 10/15/60 12.411.81 CITY OF Makes ITN GTE PTO[ 6/-1717-I32-32 b -.-- ...-MS 264562 284512 264562 284562 284562 284562 284562 10/05/68 10,i&/88 10,05/99 10/09,89 10/05/98 10,05/89 10/05/62 - -- 312.69 295.Se 2.73 226. 17 743.76 87.00 56 91 NSP -- -- -- - - NIP NSP _ _ HIM NSP NSP _ NSP UTILITIES UTILITIES UTILITIES _ UTILITIES UTILITIES UTILITIES UTILITIES 01-4324-099-17 01-4321-129-3t 01-4321-17S-34 Ot-0369-249-42 01-4324-290-61 73-4321-S69-92 71-13E6-590-93 - - - 1,686.19 . .... CRS.. 264590 IB/OS/e9 13.60 :, ----- 13.60 264621 10/05,68 7w.w 264621 10/05/90 204621-- 10,05,04 - — tU 55 224621 1*/015/68 269,65 211621 10/OS/BS 1,171.85 284681 10/0S/86 250,55 261621 10/OS/SG SWIG 264621 10/OS/28 63.64 264621-- 1VOS/w -- ---- 12S.46 4,233.69 . 291620 4/46/16 1,100.65 a6.,1101 IO/06/86 12.330,81 281626 14/06/60 1,966.95 964620 10,01/08 573.55 -- ---157.22 264626 10/04/60 264626 10/06,89 3,3e6.05 26.520 10/0,184 1/4.00 264528 10/06/88 -- 1,364.00 281628 10/06/18 136,00 224626 10/06/46 31. --27.20 00 2G4628 10/06/14 294626 19,06,60 306.00 204698 10/06/62 w.SO 264626 10,06/08 - -- -91.37 21.560.94 . OTTER BROS TRAINING SUPPLIES_ -01-ePU_1P9-31 PHYSICIANS HEALTH HOSP INS OCT 01-3978-800-00 PHYSICIANS HEALTH HOSP INS OCT 01-4151-039-1E PHYSICIANS HEALTH HOSP INS OCT - 01-1151-069-15 PHYSICIANS HEALTH HOSP INS OCT 01-4151-126-31 PHYSICIANS HEALTH HOSP INS OCT OI-I151-IH-3I PHYSICIANS HEALTH HOSP INS OCT _ 01-1151-171-33 PHYSICIANS WEALTH HOSP INS OCT 01-1151-219-I2 PHYSICIANS WEALTH NOSP INS OCT 72-4151-549-91 -73-4151-569-92 PHYSICIANS HEALTH HOSP INS OCT POPHAM NAIN S ASSOC RETAINER JULY_ 01-4301-060-16 POPHAM MAIN • ASSOC _LEGAL PROSECUTION! JULY 01-4302-000-16 POPHAM MAIN S ASSOC LEGAL CONSULT JULY 01-4303-090-16 POPHAM MIN S ASSOC LEGAL SALE LAND 01-/303-090-16 POPHAM MAIM S ASSOC _ LEGAL CONSULT JULT 01-4303-129-31 POPHAM MIN S ASSOC LEGAL CONSULT JULY 01-4303-510-71 POPHAM_MIR S ASSOC LEGAL CONSULT JULY 01-4306-010-13 - _ POPHAM NAIN S ASSOC LEGAL CONSULT JULY 21-4301-400-00 POPHAM MIN S ASSOC LEGAL CONSULT JULY 1I-4399-407-00 POPHAM MAIN S ASSOC LEGAL CONSULT JULY _ _ 2I-4399-411-00 POPHAM HAIR S ASSOC LEGAL CONSULT JULY 24-4399-412-00 POPHAM HAIR S ASSOC LEGAL CONSULT JULY 21-4399-415-00 POPHAM HAIR S ASSOC LEGAL CONSULT JULY 2S-1303-132-00 POPHAM HAIR S ASSOC LEGAL CONSULT JULY 73-4303-569-92 ...-CRS 19N CITY N NON 80" 3 IV05/N S9M0__H/9VN �2M{l �9/95/N 2S0N] I0/9S/N N07N 10/05/041 1, 097.13 CIHN RNISTSR ST TRfA-ST Nf SUM NIT NRCNNN Of-/Nf-fN-01 10-/0-N ►AN i ...... ....CNS N9Y4{ 18/6/N N.10 STREICNR! SNIP PNT! 01-0232-181-31- ---- - - 95.99 . 2N751 19/9VN 347.76 NNDIAL RN N11VIC5 JAIIITNIA. SEPT 01-4349-099-17 FNi751�9/9VN --- ——2Na1�UNDIiU.-lCDS KRV[C[-- IAMITOR[Al NPT 01-.N9-129-31 - -- --- ---- �- 656.39 . uuu 2047941 10/05/00 05.00 TWIN CITIES DICTN Sy TAPES Ot-4210-039-12 284IIS 10/05/60 00.99 WR WEST COMMON TELEPHONE 01-4320-039-12 204916 10/OS/08 48.96 U0 WEST COMMON TELEPHONE 01-4320-OS9-11 284115 10/OS/O N.2i U0 WEST COMNUH TELEPHONE -01-4390-069-1S 204015 10/OS/G0 177.35 US WEST COMMUN TELEPHONE 01-4320-129-31 204916 10/05/641 40.50 US WEST COMMUN TELEPHONE 01-4320-174-33 26.015 _16105166 A9.53 USWEST COMMUN _ TELEPHONE _ _ 01-4320-17S-04 264015 16/09/N 44.50 U! WEST COMMUN TELEPHONE 01-4320-249-42 ' 26401S 10/05/041 1.71 US MST COMMUN TELEPHONE 91-1120-549-91 NAtS --�0/05/N- 97I _ Ul MST COMMUN - --TELEPHONE 91 M]29-N9-11 20401S 16/09/00 9.71 U! MST COMMUN TELEPHONE 72-63E9-5/9-91 2840t5 16/05/ff_ 10.95 U! MST COMMUN TELEPHONE 73-/320-569-99 28.815 —10/05/N St.9f us WEST COMMON - ---- —TELEPHONE 74-13f9K90-93 -- - - - - - ----- 244Rt5 14/05/64 53.37 U! WEST COMMUN TELEPHONE 7/-/3f0-590-93 284015 10/05/M iN.00 US WEST CONNUN ADVERTISING 71-0323-590-93 _ - - i91.11 . -- -- tfONi u.u. 10/05/N 002.00 0M.99 . WISNR was ....Cue MINT MIKE MIN -- 71-9305-549-91 N.-CN ISY CITY OF Yo" MM R[OItTes I0-10-Y Pest 7 WC[ NE. "To ANO1O7 VERNON ITEM DESCRIPTION ACCOUNT Y. INN. 0 P.O. D MYASE y t9NK 10L9E/Y L19 NE[YT NE111N t TI U-1 h Itlt _ • 0.N .o-GAIN 894901 N/o/Y 67.I2 [YINERHINE WY MIT it PLANE 01-13Y-07s-12 8es9es 10/41/06 7.es ST[MSEN DIAN TY 9747 REFUND 01-]1]0-0110-00 • 094993 10 wo I6I.09 UK" VEHICLE DERVIC PINT [QUIP 01-1710-1[9-]1 ' 211I964 IS/GEwY 62.611 MYTH STY TURF INC NE[NT [QUIP 74-134E-590-93 Y.es • __ _ _- -_.. • 804905 tO/GUNS {]O.N ALEXANDRIA INCH SCHOOLS 9IM35{-129-]1 oNN N..Me u ZS1907 10%0VY M99 AMR PLANNING ASSOC N[MSYYIIPf GIZA IT& ]M • K..09 e919N 10wK/N ]. NO.N .iDH11 A tCNEENINE EWI► R[MTAL 01-1]7/-t1}It -iN9ii�'iw/�tiY� ON�� NtT7O-MYT[ CYTRD� t[PT-CMML[S 0�-t[t{ITS=O� - . II N/.OS . - ,• 864919 19/OVY AS. At CITY OF WOW Mp tNE SI-IIif-1 f-It tSNtO so/owes 39.94 CITY OF YOMO Yp INE ot-1151-It{-]1 tN911 19wo/es 1.4]5.5] ORM COMMUNITY E0 SUMNEN NEC PROGRAM 01-1757-E96-61 • NNN ...-CNG 59,019.93 01 GENERAL FUND -, IT0.99 _ _FUND _TOTAL _ FUND 11 TOTAL _ IMPROVE { EQUIP OUTLAY F .. 77.13 FUND 15 TOTAL tU ILONG CAPITAL OUTLAY F 15,111 A9 iUND t/-TOTAL - PENM IMPROVE REVOLVING F _ .• SE.li FUND K TOTAL 1965 IMPROVEMENT FUND 9E7.90 FUND 72 TOTAL WATER OPERATING FUND 1E.9[S.6I FUND 71 TOTAL GEWER OPERATING FUND • --- -- - - --- 1.{33.5l -FUND-T/-TOTAL -- GOLF -COURSE OPERATING FO TOTAL-_- GONRTS FINLMICIAL SYSTEM 10/601" PARE 1 on 9. 1946 CITY OF ORONO 1RIISQ M SLPDATS N YPDATE DESCRIPTIONS 9 FINARCIAL RRORTS IYND IF AWES • WINARr FIu • ECItDNIIiD RIIN BITE •na0 _ EIRElR OF RECORDA PAYROLL D ARPORT DATE N01•• - LEVEL 1 we WITIT ACCRUAL L[V6 S 9 ACTIVITY REPORT_ _ • ACTIVITY REPORTS LEVEL D 0 CNECR REGISTER 3 SCHEDULED REI DATE INOAR LEVEL R 9 TRIAL BALANCE • RpO�T DATE �Y�SS LEVEL _E _ E4 BALANCE MEET _ • _ LEVEL S 0 REVENUE STATEMENT • PAYROLL POSTING DATES 0.0.11 LEVEL T • OPERATING STATEMENT T 09.19• LEVEL G E14 RUOCET WORKSHEETS _ LEVEL 9 0 CLEAR-CURB-PONTH 0 •QG9• LEVEL 0 2 CITT FILE OPTIDN� HH•1 PROJECT DEPARTMENT II _ TOTAL 1,492 CNART OF ACCOUNTS �. CDAC -ARWM - TEAR TO DATE PERIOD S9- SUIGET RECORDS CREATED 1 .: j! ot MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING SEPTEMBER 19, 1988 ATTENDANCE 7:00 P.N. The Orono Planning Commission met on the above date with the following members present: Chairman Kelley, Johnson, Bellows, Cohen and Hanson. The following represented the City staff: Building 6 Zoning Administrator Mabusth, Assistant Planning 6 Zoning Administrator Gaffron, Planning Consultant John Shardlow and City Recorder Scheffler. Council Representative Grabek attended and Councilmember Goetten was also present. 11326 RONALD D, LAUER 200 WAYZATA BOULEVARD CLASS II PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION PUBLIC HEARING 8:15 P.M-8:19 F.M. The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing were duly noted. The applicant was not present for this matter. Planning Commission member Johnson stated that he would like to vote on this matter. Chairman Kelley disagreed and stated that there would be some debate involved with this matter. Bellows suggested hearing the public comments. Kelley disagreed and stated that the applicant should be present. One person from the public indicated that he would be willing to come back at any time to participate in the discussion of this matter. Another gentleman indicated that he would be out of town for the October 3rd Planning Commission meeting, but he could attend the October 17th meeting. Another concerned party inquired as to how many meetings the applicant could miss. Kelley reiterated his belief that it would not be effective to have the public comments of record without the applicant being present. There were no comments from the public regarding this matter and the public hearing was closed. It was moved by Chairman Kelley, seconded by Planning Commission member Hanson, to table #1326 until the October 17, 1988 Planning Commission Meeting. Motion, Ayes�5, NaysmO, Motion passed. 11328 HOMARD B. JOHNSON 1635 a 1675 CONCORDIA STREET SUBDIVISION OF A LOT LINE REARRANGEMENT CLASS I PUBLIC HEARING 7:15 P.M. - 7:50 P.M. The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing were duly noted. The applicant was present for this matter. Assistant Planning and Zoning Administrator Gaffron explained that this matter involved changing an existing lot MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING SEPTEMBER 19, 1988 ZONING PILE 81326-HOWARD JOHNSON CONTINUED line. The lot line rearrangement is necessary because the neighboring property, owned by the Trainors, encroaches approximately 1' over the property line onto the Johnson property. The proposal entails moving the lot line to allow a 5' setback for the Trainor house. Gaffron asked why the Trainor property should not not comply with the 10' setback standard? Mr. Johnson responded that he is giving the land to the Trainors as a result of a torrens proceeding that occurred back in 1968. After discussion with the Trainors, there had been a mutual agreement that Mr. Johnson would go ahead with the lot line rearrangement. He obtained Council approval for his proposal, but the documents showing the change in the lot line were never recorded. Planning Commission member Johnson noted that if such documents were not recorded they became null and void after 6 months of being executed. Chairman Kelley told the Planning Commission members that they would need to make a determination between a 5' setback or a 10' setback. Planning Commission member Johnson stated that in his opinion, the 10' setback standard should be upheld. Planning Commission member Cohen agreed with Johnson. He added that what happened 20 years ago cannot be of any concern at this point. Kelley stated that the applicant was requesting approval for 5'. Mrs. Trainor spoke and indicated that their house was built in 1951 and there have been no additions since that date, except on the south side. There were no comments from the public regarding this matter and the public hearing was closed. It was moved by Chairman Kelley, seconded by Planning Commission member Johnson, to recommend denial of a 5' sideyard setback variance as requested in application 11328. Assistant Planning and Zoning Administrator Gaffron interjected that denial of this application would disallow Mr. Johnson from revising this matter and coming back before the Planning Commission. However, tabling this would provide him with that opportunity. Kelley asked Mr. Johnson if he would prefer to have the matter tabled. Mr. Johnson responded affirmatively. Kelley withdrew his motion, Johnson withdrew his second of the motion. It was moved by Kelley, seconded by Johnson, to table 01328. Motion, Ayes-5, Nays-0, Motion passed. #1330 FULLERTON PROPERTIES, INC. 800 TOMNLINE ROAD CLASS III PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION PUBLIC HEARING 8s20 P.M.-8:13 P.N. The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing were noted. MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING SEPTE14BER 19, 1988 ZONING FILE i1330-FIILLERTON PROPERTIES CONTINUED The Mr. Joseph Franks was prese.it for this matter. Assistant Planning and Zoning Administrator Gaffron explained that the subject property is located within the 5-acre minimum zone. Applicant is proposing a 7 lot residential subdivision with a private road. The lots would be served by an interior private road. There would be no access off of Townline Road. There would be three lots that would require a variance to the 300' width standard. Lot 2 would have a defined width of 285' at the setback line; Lot 4 would have a defined width of 175' and Lot 5 would have a defined width of 150'. The proposed road length is 1,000' with a 50' outlet with a ' ^' cul de sac. The paved road section is proposed as urban, which would provide curbing as opposed to shoulders. A 24' paved width is proposed, but Orono code does not specify requirements for seven lots. The City Engineer has suggested 28'. The point where the private road would access Townline Road is directly across from a private road in Independence. Lots 3 and 4 are proposed ,.i cross Painter's Creek. Staff recommends a single shared creek crossing point adjacent to the cul de sac, at the shared lot line. The applicant was now requesting 2 driveway entrances for Lots 3 and 4. Mr. Mark Gronberg, the applicant's surveyor, explained that the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District installed a weir on the property. The flows coming through the property are only 9 cfs and the culvert requirements are much less than the size of the culverts that currently run under County Road 6. The MCWD has no objections to the proposed 2 creek crossings. Chairman Kelley asked if the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District maintained that area. Gronberg replied affirmatively, and added that the MCWD has certain rights and an easement from the County to access that location. Kelley inquired as to the maintenance performance of the MCWD. Gronberg stated, "it looks pretty good in there". Gaffron showed were the Watershed District's easement was located in respect to the proposed subdivision. Gaffron asked the Planning Commission members to refer to a letter from the City Engineer wherein he requested that the storm sewer outlet be 958 rather than 961.0. Buildability of each lot was the next concern. Gaffron stated that each lot contains 1 1/2 - 2 acres with slopes of 68 or less. Mound -type septic systems would be necessary on most of the lots, due to high water table soils. Gaffron is concerned about Lot 2 because the Soil Survey may be incorrect in its depiction of where Hamel -type soils are located. Gaffron requested that soil borings be completed to better determine the soil content of Lot 2. Chairman Kelley asked Mr. Gronberg if he had any other plans prior to this proposal? Gronberg responded, that there were, but one of the main things they wanted to do was access eirectly MINUTES no THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING SEPTEMBER 19, 1988 a c r,,.q FILEml ltha woad in IndeppendenceES NTfoorr�traffic reasons, a NI'.4G ff h ot'ierwise they would come too close to Highway 5, which would create a bad intersection". Kelley asked how many other plans had been looked at? Gronberg replied 2 other ones. Zoning Administrator Mabusth asked if that access also lined up with the acce?s coming from the west side? Mr. Gronberg answered affirma'.ively. Gaffron stated that one of the concerns of that road is that the City Engineer has suggested that there not be an Island at the entrance. with respect to future road extension co siderat:ons, Gaffron said that he and the City Engineer looked a,, where the neighboring properties might develop or whether they would develop. Due to the layout of the land and t:,e existing wetlands, there would be no apparent need to provide a corridor for future access to the east, south or north. Planning Commissior member Bellowz Fated that in light of other applications be`cre the Plannirg Commission, she •would like to see more exploration done to determine what the actual 1—ilding envelopes would be. Bellows i� concerned about the combination of topography, soil condition and lot shape. Planning Commission member Hanson said he was especially concerned about the location of the Ha^el soils. Chairman Kelley said that the proposed access across •m the street to the west made a lot of sense, but that he had a same concerns about the building envelopes as Bellows had. banson stated that basically he liked the layout, and hopefully the soil borings would be helpful in clearing up his concerns. Chairman Kelley addressed the issue of frontage on Lots 2, 4 and 5. He wanted to know if the Planning Commission members would be in favor of the width variance required to meet the required 300' width? Planning Commission member Johnson indicated that he would be in favor of the proposed layout. Bellows stated that she was more concerned with how the entire subdivision worked, rather than any one particular variance. She added that before an intelligent decision could be made a: the variances, the soil borings and building envelope issues would need to be addressed. Chairman Kelley inquired as to the proposed size of the culverts for Painters Creek? Mr. — onberg responded that 24" was the proposed size. Kelley asked if the plan was to put 2 of those in on Lot: 3 and Lot 4? Gronberg answered in the affirmative. Kelley asked how he would feel if the Planning Commission indicated they only wanted one? Gronberg said that decision would not cause him to abandon the entire project, but having individual driveways would be better than shared driveways. Kelley asked him how he woleld feel about a 28' roadway as opposed to a 24' roadway? Gronberg responded that with only 7 houses, 28' would be overkill. Johnson indicated that he agreed with Mr. Gronberg's opinion. MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING SEPTE344BER 19, 1988 ZONING PILE #1330 FULLERTON PROPBRTIBS-COMTINUBD Chairman Kelley stated that this matter would probably be tabled, but the Planning Commission should provide some direction for the applicant. Kelley said that they were looking for a definition of the natural building envelope in each lot. Kelley asked if primary and alternate sectic systems should be indicated for each lot? Assistant. Planning and Zoning Administrator Gaffron responded that if there is Hamel soil predominately in the 5-acre zone, it would be helpful to have the proposed septic systems designated. Kelley asked if Gaffron wanted to use his discretion as to which lots required septic system designation. Gaffron replied that yes, he would like to make that determination. Gaffron said he would look at soil borings first and then decide if they need to do further testing based on the boring results. Kelley asked if the Planning Commission wanted to give that discretion to Gaffron so there would be no confusion as to who would handle that aspect of the application. Mr. Franks expressed his desire to have the building envelope defined as soon as possible so they could proceed yet this Fall. Bellows stated that the determination for the septic system and the building envelope define whether or not the project would be acceptable. Mr. Franks stated that he could not determine exactly where, on a 5-acre lot a house would be required to be built. He felt that should be left up to the lot -owner's discretion. Bellows asked Mr. Franks to look at the topography of Lot 2. Mr. Franks said that the front part of the lot was clear, but the back part was all woods. His jreference would be to build near the woods, but that may not be the wishes of the person actually building on the lot. Bellows explained that the concerns with Lot 2 involved the soil being designated as Hamel for nearly the entire lot. Hamel soil is worthless and useless. Mr. Franks stated that he was willing to accept that restriction readily. Bellows responded that there would be no suitable location to build a house on that Lot. There were no comments from the public regarding this matter and the public hearing was closed. It was moved by Chairman, Kelley, seconded by Planning Commission member Cohen, to table this application, pending the outcome of the definition of buildability of each lot and the taking of soil borings for Lots 2, 3, 4 and 5. Based upon the soil borings, the City Staff will determine which lots would require percolation tests. The issues of culverts and variances would be deferred until the buildability of the lots was determined. Motion, Ayes-5, Nays-0, Motion passed. #1333 SIDNEY REBRRS 715 NORTH BROWN ROAD REZONING PUBLIC HEARING 8:45 P.M.-10:00 P.M. The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing were noted. MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION METING S' 'ni-13ER 19, 1988 ZONING FILE i1333-REBERS CONTINUED Mr. John Shardlow, a Planning Consultant fJr the City of Orono, presented this matter on behalf of the City of Orono. He stated that this item had been reviewed at the previous Planning Commission Meeting as a sketch plan. The subject property is part of the Highway 12 Corridor Study and is consequently to be reviewed in relationship to that study. The plan will also be required to meet the special minimum requirements for rezoning along the Highway 12 Corridor. Shardlow pointed out that there is over 50' of grade separation on the proposed site. There is a large hill with an elevation of approximately 1044' in the center of the site, dropping off to the east along Brown Road and in the extreme northwest corner of the site. The only other characteristic of the site, other than the fact that it is wooded with mature maple trees, is that it has a heavy clay and clay -loam soils. These soils can present some severe obstacles for on -site sewage disposal systems. Chairman Kelley asked if the soil type had actually been verified through soil borings. Shardlow stated that the soil type was determined by a Soil Survey. There are special minimum requirements for zoning along the Highway 12 Corridor. There is a requirement that the minimum area request for rezoning be 5 acres or 10 acres. The Rebers land area is 32.6 acres so they would meet that requirement. Another requirement would be an access and circulation plan to insure that it precludes direct access not only to Highway 12, but that it also facilitates the movement of traffic through the area. The Highway 12 Corridor Study talks about the need for a frontage road, whether it be a standard frontage road or a remote frontage road between Brown Road and Willow. That will be accomodated once the southern half of the area is developed. The sanitary sewer availability is one of the key issues. The City's Engineering Consultant has reviewed the Reber's application and stated that this requirement could be satisfied one of two ways: Either through Long Lake, by the joint powers agreement, or by constructing a new interceptor along the Highway 12 Corridor. There is a great deal of concern about the impact of this project on Take Minnetonka. There is a need for ponding on the southeast corner of the property. The applicants re aware of that requirement and have included a ponding area in the preliminary sketches that have been done for the southern area. The ponding issue will be dealt with when the southern portion of the area is addressed. The special minimum requirements also talk about available zoning districts within the Corridor. The Rebers' proposal is for rezoning to R-lA through the PRD, Planned Residential zoning category. Both of those classifications are listed among the available zoning districts within the Corridor. Finally, the special minimum requirements include a development agreement, which will be entered into and signed by the applicants. MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING SEPTEMBER 19, 1988 ZONING PILE f1333-REBERS CONTINUED With regard to development analysis, Mr. Shardlow has determined that the Rebers' proposal is consistent with the Highway 12 Corridor Study. When this matter was reviewed as a sketh plan, one of the key issues that was discussed to a great degree was the length of the cul-de-sac that is proposed on the private street within the subdivision. The proposal calls for a road that is in excess of 2,000' in length. The City's subdivsion regulations identify a maximum length of 1,000' for a City street, but no maximum length has been established for private roads. The approval of the length of the cul-de-sac does not formally require approval of a variance. The necessity for the cul-de-sac relates back to the topography and vegetation and Mr. Reber's desire to retain as much trees and minimize the on - site grading as much as possible. In summary, the aprlication has been reviewed for a considerable length of time throughout the entire Highway 12 Corridor Study. In his opinion, the general planning issues and consistency with the comprehensive plan and zoning have been met. The one issue that stands out at this point is the length of the cul-de-sac. Mr. Shardlow pointed out what he considers to be the three reasonable alternatives that the Planning Commission could consider. The first would be to accept the applicant's plan as presented. Since the cul-de-sac does not require a variance, the Planning Commission could find that the applicant's reasons in favor of the cul-de-sac could adequately justify the departure from the standard subdivision requirements. The second alternative could be requiring the street to be looped or to connect with Pin= Ridge Lane. Another alternative would be to construct an "emergency vehicles only" access to try to offset the length of the cul-de-sac. The least disruptive location for such an access would be to extend Pine Ridge Lane to an area that is already being proposed as a trail area. There would be relatively short stretch between that and the interior road that could provide access for an ambulance or firetruck. Chairman Kelley inquired whether Mr. Shardlow was working for the City of Orono and whether the City was responsible for Mr. Shardlow's fees to attend the Planning Commission Meeting. Zoning Administrator Mabusth answered affirmatively. Planning Commission member Bellows asked why there was an exception to the policy of receiving Staff's comments with the packet. Bellows did not receive a copy of Mr. Shardlow's presentation with the other agenda information she received. Kelley informed Mr. Shardlow that he was havl.nq a difficult time ascertaining who Mr. Shardlow represented. Mr. Peter Jarvis, an Associate of BRW, introduced himself as a representative fer Mr. Sid Rebers. He stated that it was Mr. Rebers' intention to build single family homes on approximately 1 acre lots with san?_tary sewer. The property is located east of the Pine Ridge subdivision area, immediately west of Orono and MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING SEPTEMBER 19, 1988 ZONING FILE #1333-REBERS CONTINUED North of Wayzata. There is a heavy maple forest that is preeominant over 75% of the site. The present proposal only encompasses the northerly 2/3 of the property, not the southern portion which borders Wayzata itself. There are steep slopes on the property. The high point of the land is located roughly within the center and is approximately 1044'. The low point is 994', and is located in the n' rthwest corner of the site. The overall functional plans of the City, as well as the particulars of the site, require that any drainage that occurs as a result of the development of the Rebers' property drain to the lowest point on the site into a retention pond. The proposed }es for the property range from attached to detached residential, sewered to non-sewered uses. The present proposal is for rezoning to a single family classification that does allow one acre lots, along with a Planned Residential Designation (PRO) to accomodate some design features that Mr. Jarvis intends to incorporate. The rezoning would require provisions that would allow for the proposed 25 lots to have sanitary sewer. This would require the execution of an agreement with Long Lake, or the actual implentation which has already been feasibly studied by the City Engineer, and would eventually be assessed to the benefiting property owners by the City of Orono. The reason for the rezoning is so that sanitary sewers could be used as opposed to mound systems, which would preserve more of the natural vegetation in the area. Chairman Kelley asked Mr. Jarvis to outline the current and proposed zoning for the Rebers' parcel. Mr. Jarvis stated that the current zoning is RR-lB. The proposed zoning would be R-lA with a PR overlay, as well as a commercial/retail use classification that currently exists along the southerly 1/4 of the site. Kelley stated that when this matter was previously discussed, there was concern about having sufficient room behind the Little Oak Store to build an east to west frontage road. Mr. Jarvis felt that he had adequately anticipated the future needs for Orono in that regard. Jarvis asked if the City had determined whetner there would be enough room to place a frontage road in that area, as opposed to placing it parrallel, and adjacent to the Rebers' parcel? Zoning Administrator Mabusth stated that 50' would `,e required. The applicant is proposing to take some area from the Weee property to meet the 50' requirement for the road outlot. The proposal includes a shared commons area, which would need to be reduced in size to accomodate the requirement for the road. Kelley asked how many feet from the store the road could be placed? Mabusth responded that there would be at least a 50' setback. Kelley stated that the requirement then would be 100' feet from the store. Mr. Jarvis interjected that there is approximately 130' to the outlot line. Kelley observed that all of the commons area would be used, except for 30'. Mr. Jarvis stated that the road was one of the reasons for the extra depth in the out 1, �. Kelley stated that this was one of the areas the Planning Commission had asked Mr. Jarvis to further research. Mr. Jarvis stated that it was his understanding that the City Staff had been directed to evaluate to see if the City concurred with the proposal. He did not think he was asked to propose the location of a specifically dedicated right-of-way, but rather to show that if the frontage road was to be installed that there would be sufficient distance in the corridor to do so. Planning Commission member Bellows asked if the road would interfere with the proposed trail system? Jarvis responded that the boundaries of the trail system could be moved accordingly. Dennis and Marni Platteter distributed a letter they had prepared which set forth their concerns about the rezoning. Mr. Platteter stated that their property was immediately to the north of the development. The total increased density that would result from the subdivision involved two major concerns. Increased traffic was a concern in that 25 new homes could generate an additional 75 cars that would travel on North Brown Road. There has already been a drastic increase in traffic in that area. Mr. and Mrs. Platteter can no longer safely walk or ride their horses on North Brown Road. Liability is another concern that would arise from the increased density. The Platteters live on the lake and fear little children walking through their property to the lake. The Platteters also have a pool and horses. Mr. Platteter stated that Mr. Rebers was kind enough to visit their home and discuss his proposal with them. He thought that the subdivision was aesthetically pleasing, but did not feel it corresponded with the rural, residential atmosphere of Orono. Property to the west, north and east is rural, residential. Mr. Platteter stated that the rural, resicential atmosphere was the reason he and Mrs. Platteter moved to Orono in 1977. He felt that the subdivision was not an attribute, but rather a detriment to the area. Mrs. Platteter stated that she would require a non-penetratable barrier in the location where their property abuts with the commons area, should the development be approved. Chairman Kelley read the letter submitted by the Platteters. Zoning Administrator Mabusth stated that the Comprehensive Plan Amendment opened up the possibility of rezoning for certain properties if certain standards are met. However, the property to the west is now zoned rural residential, 2-acre minimum and was not involved in the Comprehensive Plan Amendment. Planning Commission member Bellows agreed that the door has definitely been opened by the comprehensive plan to the possible rezoning of this area. In light of that, a proof of hardship is not necessary. Planning Commission member Bellows stated that there were some misconceptions that have been presented in this proposal. One of those being the mound sewer vs. sanitary sewer. She and other Planning Commission members determined that a mound system on a 2-acre site would cause an almost equal amount of tree removal au would be required for 2 1-acre sites with sewer. MINUTES OF THE PLANNING CONNISSION MEETING SEPTEMBER 19, 1988 ZONING PILE #1333-REBERS CONTINUED Bellows added that it's not the concept of rezoning that wEs offensive but the manner in which the proposal is being presented. The Planning Commission is being told that the proposal involves a rezoning to 1-acre with a PRD overlay. Bellows felt that typically when a PRD is proposed it is for a unique use of the land in order to save natural characteristics. Bellows said that the more thought she gave to the issue of tree preservation for the Rebers' proposal, the PRD is not performing the function of preserving a maximum number of trees possible. In looking at an aerial photo of the area, she would be inclined to suggest that the housing be clustered on the east side which would save the "the whole bloody forest". Proceeding in that fashion would be considered more of a PRD than what Mr. Jarvis is proposing. However, that would create high density housing. Bellows surmized that what is actually being proposed is a fairly standard subdivision. The net product is not a PRD, it is a rezoning to 3/4 of an acre. Mr. Jarvis reminded Bellows that the parcel is just over 32 acres, of which approximately 8 acres remain undisturbed in prepetuity as part of the outlot that is separate and distinct from and devoted to not only the trail system, but as a complete buffer surrounding the project. There are 2 acre lots to the west, which in each case have a one for one relationship as opposed to the one and one-half for one relationship being proposed. The northern properties have a one for one and five for one, but the five for one is along a space that is in excess of 1,000'. There is a trail system that is well in excess of a mile proposed for the site, there are 8 acres of space that would be commonly owned. Mr. Jarvis was unaware of any subdivision that has ever been executed in Orono where there are landscaped islands in the cul-de-sac, or a trail system such as they are proposing implemented. He also has not seen any further restrictions placed upon the building pad, over and above the standards for a straight subdivision, for the purpose of maintaining vegetation. Mr. Jarvis stated that it would be overreationary to cluster development only on the eastern portion of the parcel. Jarvis added that Mr. Rebers was more than wi 1li,q to build a multi -family unit, rather than a retail building. t was their feeling that would be more appropriate in light of the adjacent 2-acre zoning. Mr. Jarvis whole heartedly disagreed that the Rebers' development was not a unique proposal. They looked at the proposal from a marketing standpoint, not just a planning process and political process standpoint. Mr. Jarvis responded to the earlier observation regarding tree removal for septic vs. sewer. After the soils had been examined by the engineers, it was determined that the mounded systems would require somewhere between a minimum of 8,000 s.f and a maximum of 10,000 to 11,000 s.f, depending upon the specific conditions of each site. If you considerer the 8-10 thousand s.f on a 2-acre lot, plus a 3,000 s.f footprint for the MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING SEPTEMBER 19, 1988 ZONING PILE #1333-RBBERS CONTrNUED house, multiply that by 2, you would get a total of 6,000 s.f. for 2 houses with no mounded system. Using the mounded system with the same building footprint, 50% of additional vegetation would be given up. Kelley asked Gaffron if 8,000 s.f. to 10,000 s.f for a mound system was accurate. Gaffron stated that those figures were not unrealistic. Kelley asked Jarvis how many lots, including the road, there could be if the 32 acres was zoned 2- acre. Jarvis responded that they could get 16 lots. Kelley did some calculations as to how the 2-acre mounded system would compare to the 1-acre sewer. Kelley asked Mr. Jarvis if he had performed those calculations. Jarvis answered in the negative. Kelley asked the City Staff whether or not they had compared the two possibilities? He questionned whether making that determination would be a part of the examining process? Mr. Jarvis stated that they had not received any direction from the Planning Commission to present a 2-acre proposal. Mr. Jarvis asked why the Planning Commission did not indicate that they wanted to see that when this issue was previously presented? Planning Commission member Johnson responded that was because a month ago the Planning Commission was comfortable with the PRO. Chairman Kelley asked if what the proposed lot size was, including the open space. Mr. Kost responded 1.12 acres. Kelley stated that he wanted to confirm that the lot size exceeded one acre, because in a typical PRO, in that particular zoning district, the actual size of the lot, plus open space, has to be over the size of the zoning district. Planning Commission member Bellows reiterated the fact that she had no problem with the concept, it was the execution that was a problem. She added that she did not disagree with the idea of the property being zoned 1-acre. She did not like the way the parcel was being divided. Maggie Roderick, a resident at Dickey Lake Drive, expressed her concern to be the emergency vehicle access proposed for Pine Ridge Lane. She stated that Pine Ridge Lane was never intended to be a through road. It was to remain a stub road for the purpose of being an access onto Highway 12. Zoning Administrator stated that the road was supposedly scheduled for a through road through the Rebers' property, through a residential subdivision. Mrs. Roderick said that she had discussed that possibility at the time their property was sold and she had been told that the chances of that Road going through were vague. Mabusth stated that she would not have made such an affirmative representation until the Rebers property was developed. Chairman Kelley asked Mrs. Roderick if she had a specific concern regarding the subdivision. Mrs. Roderick stated that the Planning Commission had dore an excellent job in upholding the rural, residential aspect of Orono. She was sure that Mr. Rebers' development would be beautiful, but it would add more traffic to Brown Road. If Pine Ridge Lane were made a through street to Dickey Lake Drive, is could potentially become an access for the public to willow. :I MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING SEPTEMBER 19, 1988 ZONING FILE #1333-REBERS CONTINUED Mr. John Shardlow, indicated that he was not an advocate for the Rebers' proposal. His purpose for attending the meeting was to review the proposal as a Consultant for the City of Orono. This process started with the assumption that the City would look at whether or not the comprehensive plan should be amended first. After the comprehensive plan was in place, it would act on specific requests for rezoning, based upon the conditions and standards established. The Rebers' proposal is consistent with the comprehensive plan. Mr. Shardlow said that statement is not an opinion on his part, it is a fact. He was aware of the fact that there were members of the Planning Commission that disagreed with the comprehensive plan. Therefore, if there is opposition to Mr. Rebers' proposed subdivision, it is actually opposition to the comprehensive plan. The "plan" was in place first and Mr. Rebers' developers tailored their proposal to the comprehensive plan. Mr. John Rick, a resident at 730 Dickey Lake Drive, stated that his concern was similar to Mrs. Roderick's in that if the the subdivision were to create a thoroughfare of Dickey Lake Drive, Pine Ridge and the proposed cul-de-sac, there would be a significant public safety issue to be addressed. Mr. Gerald Pettis, another resident of Dickey Lake Drive, stated that he was suspicious of what could potentially happen should Pine Ridge Lane be opened for a firelane. He was concerned about the City going through Dickey Lake Drive for the purpose of installing sewer lines. Mr. Pettis said that he did not have the property to give for the purposes of a sewer line. Chairman Kelley said that was a good point .n that was the next logical step should the sewer be expanded to the west. Mr. Pettis also wanted to know if there were proposed covenants for the development. Kelley answered that a .etter had been sent setting forth those covenants. Mr. Pettis asked if they were anything like the covenants for Morningside7 If so, he would be very concerned about his property if homes of that calibur were to be put in his area. Mr. Robbin Sentell, residing at 736 Dickey Lake Drive, agreed with concerns raised by his neighbors. His main concern was whether any form of traffic regulation had been proposed for Brown Road and Highway 12, should the Rebers' development be approved. Mr. Shardlow responded to Mr. Sentell's question by stating that one of the mainstays of the Highway 12 Corridor Study is to preclude any direct access from the frontage of Mr. Rebers' property that is currently zoned commercial. There would be an opportunity for local traffic to get across tnat location without having to go onto Highway 12. The present plan requires the installation of a frontage road before the southern portion of the Rebers' property is developed. Mr. Sentell asked for turther information regarding specific proposed traffic regulations for Brown Road and Highway 12. Mr. Shardlow replied 12 MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING SEPTEMBER 19, 1988 ZONING FILE #1333-REBERS CONTINUED that there is a plan for a signal light at Highway 12 and Brown Road. However, he did not know the exact schedule for installing the light. Chairman Kelley asked if anyone knew the schedule for the light. Zoning Administrator Mabusth stated that there had been some recent input from the State Highway Department. Supposedly a left -turn lane was going to be installed by the traffic light at Highway 12 and North Brown Road all the way up to Old Crystal Bay Road. Mabusth had nothing definite on a traffic light at Brown Road, however there had been discussion about a traffic light on Willow. Mabusth added that the subdivision did not include plans for a connection to Pine Ridge Lane. The only concern is the length of the cul-de-sac and that Pine Ridge Lane could be opened up with very controlled access only in a case of an emergency. Planning Commission member Johnson interjected that access of that road had always been intended. Mabusth stated that throughout the entire planning process for that area, the idea of having Pine Ridge as a through road linking the residential areas had been abandoned in favor of a road through the commercial area. Chairman Kelley asked Mr. Jarvis to address the issue of the Highway 12 and Brown Road traffic regulation. Mr. Jarvis stated that he knew nothing more than the City Staff. When they started master planning on the property some 13 months ago, he asked the Minnesota Department of Transportation for their perspective of that area. MN DOT responded that nothing was presently planned and there was not enough traffic on Brown Road to warrant a traffic signal in that area. Chairman Kelley asked whether any consideration had been given as to who would be responsible for snow removal on the emergency vehicle access? Mr. Shardlow did not address that particular question, but answered that there were creative ways to design the access without it being a blacktopped through road. Planning Commission member Cohen expressed his opinion about approviuq the project without the cul-de-sac going all the way around and connecting all the way through. He added that so far there had not been a single explanation or alternative offered that meets any standard of public safety. If Pine Ridge was chosen, they would then have to contend with the expressed concerns of the residents in that area. Planning Commission member Hanson said that he was absent from the previous Planning Commission Meeting, and asked Mr. Jarvis why the cul-de-sac was not corrected. Hanson surmized that it would be easier to market a home on the end of a cul-de-sac. There were no comments from the public regarding this matter and the public hearing was closed. It was moved by Planning Commission member Johnson, seconded by Planning Commission member Bellows, to recommend approval of rezoning the property to R-lA from an existing zoning MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING SEPTSMBER 19, 1988 ZONING PILE #1333-REBERS CONTINUED classification of RR-1B. Motion, Ayes=3, Nays, Cohen and Kelley, Motion passed. Kelley stated that he agreed with the neighbors to the north. He believed this project was a total infringement upon the 2-acre residential zoning within the City of Orono. He is afraid that a precedent would be set. #1334 SIDNEY REBERS 715 NORTH BROWN ROAD CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT-PRD CLASS III PRRLIMINARY SUBDIVISION PUBLIC HEARING 10:00 P.M. - 10:45 P.M. The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing were duly noted. Mr. Peter Jarvis continued to present this matter on behalf of Mr. Sid Rebers. Mr. Jarvis began by addressing the issue of connecting the cul-de-sac. He stated that connecting the street would not be a project -killer. There are several solutions to this concern, however, connecting the road in his mind is the least efficient solution for several reasons. one reason is because of the requirement to remove more mature maple trees. Secondly, there is a slope condition in excess of 500'. Third, a 25 lot subdivision would not produce enough emergency situations to warrant an emergency vehicle access road. Mr. Jarvis elaborated on a development he was doing in a suburb of Detroit that had many more houses on a cul-de-sac with no secondary access road. He also felt that a cul-de-sac provided more security in that potential burglars would know there was only one way in and one way out. Mr. Jarvis hoped to elicit a positive response from the Planning Commission because the City's ordinances do not impose a 1,000 standard on private streets. City Staff had requested that the street be plotted as a 50' outlot. He would have not problem doing so. Planning Commission member Bellows stated that she took pride in the fact that Orono did take public safety into consideration. All it would take was one incident to justify having the road available. Bellows inquired was to why the proposed main access is being placed in a location that even Mr. Jarvis did not feel was a safe location, due to poor visibility? Mr. Jarvis stated that they purposely did not place the road further to the north because it would affect a larger number of properties on the east side of the roadway, as a result of traffic driving along Brown Road for a greater distance. Mr. Jarvis showed where the optimum location of the intersection would be. Planning Commission member Hanson estimated that there would be 50% or greater of the people in the development that would not travel south to Highway 12, but rather travel north to Highway 6. Jarvis stated if 12 vented north and 12 vented south, from a numbers standpoint, the access location would not be an issue. They did not locate the road farther to the south because they did not want to interfere with any accesses for the 14 MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING SEPTEMBER 19, 1988 ZONING PILE {1334-REBERS CONTINUED commercial area. They worked with the City Engineer and slid thr� intersection 50' to the south to provide for better sight distance. Bellows inquired whether the proposal had always called for an island at the opening of the road. Mabusth stated that she had not received a copy of the Engineer's report. Mr. Rost indicated that the City Engineer was aware of the existence of the island in that location. Bellows stated that she would prefer to see the access moved to the north, to the top of the hill. She would still like to see the road looped. Mr. Jarvis stated that they had looked at other possibilities, but all with a cul-de-sac theme. Bellows state that the Planning Commission had provided some clear direction to Mr. Jarvis that they wanted to see alternatives to the cul-de-sac. Mr. Jarvis stated that in his mind the cul-de-sac was the better approach. Bellows stated that the directives and requests of the Planning Commission had been totally ignored. Mr. Jarvis asked for an explanation as to what other matters the Planning Commission had given direction at the last meeting. Planning Commission member Johnson stated that the expressed alternatives were either the looped street or a connection to the west. The connection to the west was not favorabl looked upon by the Planning Commission as a whole. That left only the alternative of the looped street. Bellows stated that the other concern was the tree removal caused by installations of swimming pools and tennis courts. Bellows stated that including those items in the mound system calculations, it would "blow them out of the water". Jarvis interjected that the square foot calculations for the mound systems did not include the possible requirement of a secondary system should the first one fail. Bellows stated that she had requested specific guidelines that would address tree removal. Planning Commission member Johnson indicated that he thought the proposal worked well and that it was in line with the comprehensive plan. His concern is that the PRO is a trade-off for the 2-acre zoning. In other words the trail system was being used to support the basis for the one -acre lots. He did not like the fact that the trail system would be available only to the immediate property owners. Mr. Jarvis stated that any of the neighbors in the area of this development would use the trail system if they so chose. His concern is making it part of an overall trail system. The comprehensive plan includes a major trail corridor and there will be an easement along the Raters' property to fit in with that plan. Planning Commission member Hanson expressed a favorable opinion toward the overall proposal. However, he did have strong reservations about the location of the access, he would like it on top of the hill. Security may be a problem , ice the trail system will &butt the backyards of the houses. One acre lot size was not a concern. Hanson would prefer a looped street, but felt 15 MINUTES OP THE PLANNING COlC:ISSION MEETING SEPTEMBER 19, 1988 ZONING PILE i1334-REBERS CONTINUED Mr. Jarvis's arguments were persuasive in favor of a cul-de-sac. Mr. Jarvis stated that if the Planning Commission wanted the access located or. the top of the hill, he would comply. Moving the access to the top of the hill would shorten the length of the cul-de-sac approximately 400'. Planning Commission member Cohen stated that he was not favorably impressed with the proposal. He did not like the one acre aspect.. He believed that the trees be removed for the installation of pools, tennis courts, , ys, e'_c. He also believed that saving one life would just,., either looping the street or having an ec:ergency vehicle road installed. Mr. Platteter suggested moving the subdivision south for the purpose of accessability from Willow where there will be traffic control. If the east/west road were installed behind Little Oak Store development, that road could be used to access the Rebers' subdivision. Mr. Shardlow stated that that plan had been considered. However, that alternative was discarded because the area had always been zoned for commercial use. It was their intention to keep the commercial traffic and residential traffic separate. Chairman Kelley stated that the same argument should be made when dealing with Willow and old crystal Bay Roads where commercial property abuts residential property. W' h respect to the PRD, the through road is not a requirement. However this application, in his mind, does not meet the requirements of a PRD. A PRD is designated by the uniqueness in topography requiring special attention to benefit the entire parcel. He agreed with Planning Commission member Bellow's observations in that the PRD is being used to create the trail system. Kelley asked if specific conditions could he placed on the PRD? More information and specifications would need to be considered before the PRD could be approved. If the PRD were approved, the applicant would come back to the Planning Commission with a set of conditions. As Mr. Shardlow noted earlier in the meeting, Mabusth reminded Kelley that they were now functioning under the new PRD, so it would come back before them automatically. Mr. Shardlow stated that there was a timing issue involved with this. The reason why this matter was being considered under the current PRD conditional use process, as opposed to the new planned development zoning district, is because it is not on the books yet. The PRD regulations for Orono only allows for flexibility in lot sizes and provides for the private open space that is the outlots. Planning Commission member Bellows asked Mr. Shardlow if the City and Planning Commission would have as much cont-.' under the current regulations as they will under those being p'.'osed? Mr. Shardlow explained that there is a cc ditional use permit 16 MINUTES OF TEES PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING SEPTEMBER 19, 1988 ZONING PILE 41334-REBERS CONTINUED opportunity available through the current PRD. This would allow reasonable conditions to be attached to the approval. There is a rezoning issue with the PUD. This would mean that the applicants would not come back before the Planning Commission with the new PUD classification. The property has been r^zoned R-IA, and the subdivision will be approved through the PRD/Conditional Use Permit. This matter would not come back for a final development plan approval of the PUD, because the applicant did not apply for that. Zoning Administrator Mabusth advised the Planning Co) ssion to table this matter until they can develop further conditions, because this would be the last review of the preliminary subdivision and conditional use permit. Bellows requested an opportunity to meet with the City staff that is more familiar with the conditional use permit process so that proper definitions can be made. Mr. Jarvis asked Chairman Kelley if they could proceed to the City Council with the rezoning portion of the proposal. Jarvis also stated that he would like notice of the conditions in advance of the City Council meeting so they can be prepared. Kelley suggested giving some conception of the Planning Commission's opinion of the PRD. Planning Commission member Johnson stated that he would be in favor of the PRD, providing the aspect of a private trail system versus a public trail system was addressed. He would like to see the land given back to the Community since the trail system is a trade-off for the lack of 2-acre lot sizes. Chairman Kelley doubted there would be much that could be done in that capacity since the land was private land. Bellows asked about the aspect of park dedication? Bellows also stated that she would not be in favor of the PRD as it stands. She would only approve it if there was an alternative to the cul-de-sac and she did not feel that this was a PRD. Kelley was not fully opposed to the idea of the PRD or the cul- de-sac. The issue of the island will need to be addressed. Planning Commission member Hanson indicated that he was at a e08/408 status in favor of the plan. It was determined that the conditions and directions from the Planning Commission would be discussed during the October 3rd Planning Commission Meeting. It was suggested that the applicants have a representative present at that meeting. There were no comments from the public regarding this matter and the public hearing was closed. It was moved by Chairman Kt seconded by , to table 01334, until the October 17, 1588 ning Commission Meeting. Motion, Ayes=S, Nays-0, Motion passed. :7 MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING SEPTEMBER 19, 1988 i1301 FREDERICK C. WHITE 100 NOR", SHORE DRIVE NEST PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION -SECOND REVIEW CONTINUATION OF PUBLIC HEARING The applicant was present for this matter. Assistant Planning and Zoning Administrator Gaffron rem Lnded the Planning Commission that this matter had been discussed at the August 15, 1988 Planning Commission Meeting. At that time the proposal involved a configuration for 2 lots and an outlot. The Planning Commission had requested a topographical map to aid in the division of the property. The applicant has now revised the lot lines to create only a single lot, dividing the existing house from the whole parcel. Staff has reviewed access possibilities with Hennepin County. Originally it was surmised that an access site could be at the very south of the applicant's property. It has since been determined that the best access location would be off of Bayside Road at the northeast corner of the property. Tne Planning Commission alsc had requested information concerning future plans for development of the neighboring properties. Gaffron depicted on a sketch where the possible road placements could occur to access these potential new developments. However, Hennepin County has indicated that 2 of those possibilities would be undesireable due to accessing near high -traffic areas. It is likely that accesses would not be determined until such time that the properties are individually subdivided and the City required a dedicated interior road. One of the concerns of this matter is whether the large becomes an outlot with devr lopment stipulations or merely bee Lot 2. An outlot with stipulations could disallow auy construction until the lot became subdivided. This would allow the City to consider whether a proposed development fit the scheme for future subdivisions. If this other lot was considered Lot 2, presumably development could occur in any location within that lot. Chairman Kelley inquired as to how many acres consisted in Lot 1 and the undesignated Lot. Gaffron respor •1 that Lot 1 was 2 acres of dry and approximately 1.5 acres of • Lot 2, or the Outlot, has approximately 10 acres of dry. panning Commission member Johnson asked whether Orono would grant a building permit on an outlot. Gaffron stated that if the lot were designated as an outlot, the City would request conditions be established for development. Planning Commission member Bellows asked what the purpose was for accomplishing the subdivision at this point. Gaffron explained that the applicant had a contract to sell his house with a parcel of property that meets the City's standards f.,r a 2 acre lot. Kelley stated that he would be in favor of this proposal 'f 18 MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION NESTING SEPTEMBER 19, 1988 ZONING PILED f1301-WHITE CONTINUED the City could regulate development of the outlot. Planr-.,,g Commission member Cohen expressed his preference for "Option AN of staff's recommendations as opposed to "Opt -ion B". Kelley asked Mr. White what his preference would be. Mr. White indicated that he 146.' no objection to the terms set forth in "Option A", making the large lot an outlot. It was moved by Plannin, Commission member Cohen. to recommend approval of this applic,ton, per staff's recommendations and conditions of approval which included the terms of "Option -," rather than "Option 3". Upon further review of staff's reconmendations and cundi: _cs, Cohen questioned paragraph 2 concerning a 17' right--,f- _�, for County Road 19. Cohen wi hdrew his motion until. ::r:is was clarified. Gaffron explained this would allow a consistency with the City's 100' right-of-way corridor for the McCully Road connection between County Roads 19 and 6. Bellows asked how the right-of-way would affect the applicant's dry buildable. Gaffron stated that sight have an effect. Kelley asked about setbacks ar, otic tanks. Gaffron stated that the 17' right-of-way would 11 allow for tha required 50' setback for tlee existing house. I,. -.re should be no interference with the septic tanks located on the property. Kelley asked if the northerly lot line could be moved enouc:'. to offset the 17' right-of-way should it create a deficit in t'�,e required dry buildable? Gaffron answered affirmatively. Gaffron clarified for Mr. White what. the City would need to do in light of the 17' right-of-way. Applicant questioned how that would affect the 150' corridor an,.( the possibility of turning ' a- into a lot in the future. It_ w-- his understanding that 150' was the maximum. Gaffron r_-pried that there was actually a 200' standard for the Distric':, and noted that the width of that corridor necessa-ily decreases as the 2 acre requirements for Lot 1 is satisfied. There would be no other alternatives if applicant wished to obtain the 2-acre dry buildable requirement where the house is now located. Bellows added that the wetland does not extend to the property lir- there would be no way to make it contiguous going the ethr Cohen asked why the City was considering the County's requ. the 17'. Gaffron stated that normally the C. y denies any r-- _- of -way requests for County road, list are rrt heavily travelled. Due to the fact that the City ha, a 100' corridor to the north, and 6�cause the road is a major ,necting point for Highway 12 and Mound, the City Staff felt > Id be appropriate to grant rl-^ t°ght-of-way. It was moved by Cohen, seconded - , llows to re., "end approval of application 61301, per at -recommendations and conditions. The Planning ",mmiS^ion c ommended "Option A" because it would be a rlanr 'A, a future develnpment in that +rea has not yet ben Paragraph 6 would be omittad entirely at this t roval would also be based MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING SEPTEMBER 19, 1988 ZONING FILE 41301-WHITS CONTINUED upon the stipulation that applicant's let line be moved as necessary to meet the "-acre dry buildable requirement should the 17' right-of-way create a deficit. Motion, Ayes=5, Nays=O, motion passed. #1310 HOWARD F. EISINGER 3245 WAYZATA BOULEVARD RENEWAL CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT SECOND REVIEW Chairman Kelley stated that the applicant requested tabling this matter because personnel fr..m Park Construction were unable to attend. Zoning Administrator Mabusth confirmed that and added that all c.:ncerned parties would attend the October 3, 1988 Planning Cor fission Meeting. 4131q SUAD H. AZAHARI 1745 FOE STREET VARIANCES CONTINUATION OF PUBLI1 HEAPING Applicant was present for t,.is matter. Zoning Administrator Mabusth explained that this matter involved a height variance for d wall/fence. The highest p-rtion of the wall is 8-1/2 feet where 3-1/2 feet is the raximum allowed. The wall creates no si _. -- distance problems. Zhairman Kelley questioned if the gate was for security purposes. Applicant answt-ed affirmatively. Kelley wanted to know why there was a rail fence along the lot line to the east. Mabusth interjected that it was for the purpose of keeping unwanted Lraffic off of the applicant's property. Kelley asked why a 3- 1/2' fence would not be sufficient to keep traffic out? The applicant stated that a 3-1/2' fence would not work as well, and the fence was already nearly completed. Planning Commission member Bellows stated that she had no objection to such a proposal when it did not interfere with vision of the road. The gates were suitable for the property. Bellows knew of a similar situation wherein the 3-1/2' fence did nothing to curtail traffic. A 8-1/2' fence seemed more intimidating. It was moved by Planning Commission member Hanson, seconded by Manning Commissinn me r Bellows, to recommend approval of 41JIS. Motion, A, N. -0, Motion passed. #1319 KAREN FULLFJ1 4055 ELM STREET RENEWAL VARIANCE CONTINUATION OF PUBLIC HEARING The applicant was not present for his mat.-r. It was moved by Chairman Kelleysecond d by Planning 20 MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING SEPTEMBER 19, 1988 ZONING FILE }1319-FULLER CONTINUED Commission member Hanson, to table #1319. Motion; Ayes=5, Nays=O, Motion passed. #1321 TON HAISLET 950 OLD CRYSTAL BAY ROAD NORTH CLASS III PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION SECOND REVIEW The applicant, Tom Haislet was present, as was LUCY Taylor from the School Board, Bill Fenholdt from School Adr.inistratlon, and Tony Leung, the Attorney for the School District. Mr. Leung presented this matter on behalf of the School District. Mr. Leung explained that the School District was acquiring the parcel as proposed because of the lack of capital funds available to purchase the entire parcel at once. In addition, the sellers wanted to sell the land in installments to avoid an unne:essary tax burden. Further, the City of Orono prohibits the School District from entering into an installment contract. It was determined that the best procedure for purchasing the parcel would be a lease with an option to purchase. Mr. Leung reiterated the concerns expressed by the Planning Commission as to the School District failing to purchase all of the lots. The School District is in favor of placing an easement in favor of the City of Orono for the purpose of a road on the property. Mr. Leung's concern about the easement is that once the School District has purchased the entire parcel, they would need to come back before the City to obtain a vacation of the sasment. He suggested filing the perpetual easement contingent upon the filing of the deed of conveyance for the parcel. Once that deed of conveyance was filed, it would automatically trigger a vacation of the easement. Chairman Kelley asked how difficult it would be f-r the School District to come back before the City for its v-cation. Planning Commission member Bellows interjected that it was her impression that the School District's presentation was strictly for the purpose of obtaining direction to proceed as the City requested: Zoning Administrator Mabusth stated that since the time that was determined, the School District had become concerned about the road easement in the future. Mabusth stated that depending on development pressures to the east of the property, the City could envision that road platted to the east lot line. Ms. Taylor stated that she had not been warned about the possibility of any development to the east disallowing the School District to vacate the road. That would hamper the School District's purchase of the parcel as a whole and would also jeopardize the City of Orono's public safety standards. She had not seen any instances where school districts have public roads running through the school property. Kelley asked about the possibility of the road being developed to the .ast. Cohen asked whether a developer would take into account the fact that the 21 MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING SEPTEMBER 19, 1988 ZONING PILE i1321-EAISLET CONTINUED City would agree to vacate the road. Planning Commission member Bellows observed that actually the developers to the east were being put on notice that the road may not be a through road. She told Ms. Taylor that it was their intent to do well by the School District, as well as the City overall. When development to the east begins, the City would take into consideration its agreement with the School District. Bellows suggested that a road proceeding east would best protect the School District. Planning Commission member Cohen asked why the City does not just reserve the right to the road, subject to the understanding that it remain reserved until such time as the School District satisfies the agreement to purchase the property. Zoning Administrator Mabusth reminded the Planning Commission that the right-of-way requirements is similar to that taken by the City in the Woodhaven, Peterson Addition and Second Addition plats. Ms. Taylor told Kelley that having a perpetual easement for a road on the property would make the property unusable to the School District. She would prefer to see the easement run for 11 years, after which a vacation would be granted should the School District purchase the entire parcel. .Attorney Leung reiterated his desire to have an automatic vacation of the easemeaL xben the conveyance dee9 is filed. Cohen stated that the school Board was dealing with the City, they would have to come back to the City to vacate the road. Ms. Taylor asked if the proposed agreement would include the provision that the road would remain undeveloped? The Planning Commission members all concurred that the road would not be developed. Cohen stated that the City would reserve the right to develop the Load one day after the 11 year deadline. Kelley asked whose responsibility it would be to install the road should the School District decide to develop it? It was determined that those concerns would be spelled out in the Developer's Agreement. Chairman Kelley was concerned about the safety aspect of the road at the time students make use of the property. Ms. Taylor said that the road would be near the High School, not the Elementary School. Kelley suggested a tunnel under Old Crystal Bay Road. Ms. Taylor thought that to be an excellent idea. Planning Commission member Johnson observed that any other use of the property would be a conditional use permit and the City would have an opportunity to review the use. Ms. Jo Haislet asked if there would be a way to rejoin the four lots to make one parcel? .9ellows stated that -he City would probably require the parcel be shown as one large parcel. MaDusth noted that this would involve a simple clerical procedure for lot combination once the vacation of all public interest is realized. Attorney Leung, asked that the Planning Commission approve 22 MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING SEPTE24BER 19, 1988 ZONING FILE i1321-HAISLET CONTINUED the application, provided that Outlot A be an easment, either privately or publicly dedicated so that when the School District filed the deeds of conveyance it would automatically trigger the vacation of the easment. He added that the School District would have no problem adhering to the conditions for developing the road as set forth in the Developer's Agreement. He would like the Developer's Agreement to also expire upon the filing of the deeds. Robert Floyd, an interested party, inquired about liability for the easement should n accident occur in that area? Attorney Leung stated that it would depend upon whether the City dedicated the easement to be private or public. Cohen stated that the Developer's Agreement would indicate that the School District indemnify the City. Chairman Kelley asked what would happen to the road should the School District not purchase all four lots in 11 years? Mabusth stated that would need to be addressed in the Developer's Agreement. It was moved by Planning Commission member Johnson, seconded by Planning Commission member Cohen, to recommend approval of #1321, subject to the prep.. ration of a Developer's Agreement by the City Attorney and the School District's Attorney with City Staff input. Zoning Administrator Mabusth added that the agreement should be drafted in time for the October 10, 1988 City Council Meeting. Kelley clarified that the motion involved four lots with the outlot being an easement for a period of 11 years. The Developer's Agreement would address the specifics of indemnification and development. Attorney Leung added that the road would be vacated upon the showing of a deed so that it would be an automatic process. Chairman Kelley responded "absolutely". Motion, Ayes=5, Nays=O, Motion passed. #1323 JON PAPAS 3369 CRYSTAL BAY ROAD AFTER -THE -PACT VARIANCE PUBLIC HEARING 7:25 P.M. - 7:35 P.M. The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing were noted. Applicant could not be present for this matter. Mr. Jay Keiser, a neighbor of the applicant's was present and distributed a letter written by Mr. Papas to the Planning Commiss_on. Chairman Kelley read the letter for the benefit of the Public record. Assistant. Planning and Zoning Administrator Gaffron explained that the applicant was seeking an after -the -fact building permit and is in need of a number of variances to complete the construction of a deck. The entire deck is within. 23 MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING SEPTEMBER 19, 1988 ZONING FILE {1323-PAPAS CONTINUED the 0-75' lakeshore setback area. An average lakeshore setback variance is also required. There is a garage on the east side of the property with a deck above it and the property to the west has a second story deck. Mr. Papas's deck will extend 10' beyond the average setback line. The existing house is located in the 0-75' setback zone. without the deck and excluding the paved road, hardcover is approximately 20%; with the deck it increases approximately 200 s.f. and would increase hardcover to 27.4%. The hardcover existing within the 75-250' zone is 39.6% and will not change. All existing hardcover is legitimate (house, garage, driveway) and there are no reasonable feasible removals. Planning Commission member Cohen expressed the need for a survey. He was sympathetic to the fact that the survey would cost nearly as much as the project, but felt a precedent would be set should an exception to this requirement be made. Cohen suggested tabling this matter to allow the applicant time to submit a survey and avoid having to resubmit the $150.00 fee. Planning Commission member Hanson explained to Mr. Keiser that at this time, the Planning Commission was not denying Mr. Papas's application, they were merely requesting compliance with the required application documents. Mr. Keiser stated that at the present time, the deck was an eyesor- and had remained half finished all summer. Planning Commission member Johnson questioned the pictures Mr. Keiser submitted. M . Keiser explained that the pictures showed neighboring properties with decks extending more toward the lake than Mr. Papas's deck. Planning Commission member Bellows reiterated Hanson's explanation of documents required �-,ith the submittal of a variance application. Mr. Keiser askea is Mr. Papas would then have to spend $600.00 to have a survey done? Bellows replied that it would not be necessary to do another sure: - if there was an existing survey. Kelley stated that the certified property owners list was also not included with the application. Assistant Planning and Zoning Administrator Gaffron stated that the list must have been misplaced by the owner. City personnel could verify that envelopes and labels with neighboring property addresses had been received with the application. Gaffron verified that the notices were legally sent, but the list indicating those person:; was missing. Johnson stated that he could understand the confusion on applicant's behalf regarding the variances. However, had Mr. Papas applied for a permit to build the deck he would have been informed of all the :xquirements. There were no comments from the public regarding this matter and the public hearing was closed. 24 MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING SEPTEMBER 19, 1988 ZONING PILE #1323-PAPAS CONTINUED It was moved by Planning Commission member Cohen, seconded by Planning Commission member Hanson, to table application 01323 to allow the applicant time to submit all required information. Motion, Ayes-5, Nays=O, Motion passed. #1324 MR. AND MRS. WILLIAM GREGORY 1099 TAMARACK DRIVE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT PUBLIC HEARING 7:35 P.M. - 7:40 P.M. The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing we.-e noted. The applicants were not present for this matter, but were represented by Mr. Clifford Reep from Minnetonka Portable Dredging. Assistant Planning a Zoning Administrator Gaffron explained that the applicants were seeking a conditional use permit for excavation within an existing wetland area to create a pond. The designated wetland is approximately .6 of an acre. Excavation would occur at the northwesterly end of the wetland and will create a pond approximately 120' in length and about 60' in width. The spoils would be placed along the east and south side of the existing driveway. The City Engineer has reviewed this application and recommended approval. The Minnehaha Creek Watershed District has also recommended approval of this project subject to erosion control and restoration of the disturbed areas. Chairman Kelley stated that at one time there was concern about soil removal from the property. He inquired whether there was still concern in that regard. Gaffron replied that at this time the cuts and the fills were equal. Mr. Reep confirmed this. Planning Commission member Johnson inquired as to water existing around the 84 contour. Gaffron responded that it was presently wetland and the proposal is to make one end of the pond Peeper and leave the other end at its present elevation. Mr. Reep explained that the wetland area is approximately 15" deep, which in not srffirient for wildlife habitation. Presently there are no cattails, only weeds. The purpose of this project is to add approximately 2' to the depth of the pond to maintain a level of water in that area. There should not be any change in the storage capacity. There were no comments from the public -egarding this matter and the public hearing was closed. It was moved by Planning Commission member Johnson, seconded by Planning Commission member Hanson, to recommend approval of application #1324, for a conditional use permit for excavation in a wetland area, per staff recommendations. Motion, Ayes=5, 9s MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING SEPTEMBE.R 19, 1988 ZONING FILE #1324-GREGORY CONTINUED Nays=O, Motion passed. 41325 LAKEVIEW GOLF OF ORONO, INC. 405 NORTH ARM DRIVE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT PUBLIC HEARING 7:40 P.M. - 7:42 P.M. The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing were noted. The applicant was present for this matter. Assistant Planning and Zoning Administrator Gaffron apprised the Planning Commission of the applicant's intent to excavate 3 small ponds and create a new tee box within the golf course property. These proposed projects are all to take place within an area adjacent to County Road 19, at the west side of the golf course. The ponds would enhance not only the aesthetic quality of the course, but also the challenge of the game itself. They should also aid in eliminating on -going maintenance problems in wet areas. The tee box is being relocated because of complaints from neighboring properties. The new location will place the tee box approximately 100' further away from the neighboring property. There will he some fill removed and the scoi is will be deposited in a location where there will be no adverse effect on drainage. The City Engineer and the Mi.nnehaha Creek Watershed District has reviewed and approved the proposal. There were no comments from the public regarding this matter and the public hearing was closed. Mr. Wenkstern explained that he was hoping to eliminate some water problems by installing the ponds and relocating the tee box sho,,ld redirect the golf balls away from the road and passing cars. It was moved by Chairman Kelley, seconded by Planning Commission member Cohen, to recommend approval of application #1325 for a conditional use permit for excavating pond areas and a tee box. Planning Commission member Bellows inquired as to whether it would be beneficial to relocate the green to avoid road traffic. Planning Commission member Cohen interjected that tt: -resent location of the green should not be a problem once it, ae box is relocated. Kelley added that it would be very cos, y to relocate a green. Motion, Ayes=S, Nays=O, Motion passed. #1329 THOMAS MCNBLLIS 355 WOODBILL ROAD VARIANCE PUBLIC HEARING 7:52 P.M. -8:12 P.M. The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing were ,u,ted. 14 MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING SEPTEMBER 19, 1988 ZONING PILE /1329-MCNELLIS CONTINUED The applicants were present for this matter. Assistant Planning and Zoning Administrator Gaffron explained that applicants were seeking variances to a front yard setaback and 26' wetland setback. The lot was originally created from the Woodhill Ridge subdivision and accesses through Woodhill Road. Originally the lot was platted with full knowledge of the existing wetland and drainage easement. There is a 50' front setback and 30' side setback and a 26' wetland setback. The applicants may not have been aware of the 26' wetland setback. Kelley inquired as to when the subdivision was completed. Gaffron replied 1986/1987. Gaffron showed the Planning Commission a topographical view of the area and stated that the property contains a steep slope going down to the wetland area. The space left for the building envelope is approximately 65' in depth and 200'-250' in length. The proposed setbacks for the house would be 37' and 28' where 50' is required. The deck, retaining wall and a corner of the house would all encroach into the wetland area. Tha applicants are also proposing to place fill east of and at both ends of the retaining wall, which is within the boundaries of the Drainage and Conservation and Flowage Easements. Staffs initial reaction to this was that a linear concept house would be more appropriate for this particular lot. The applicants are proposing an "L" shaped house. Gaffron questioned whether there was a hardship that would justify granting all of the setback variances. Planning Commission member Johnson inquired as to the length and width of the house, from front to back, top to bottom. Gaffron responded that the proposed length south to north is about 120' with the east -west dimension at the garage area about 90'. Mr. MCNellis stated that the variances would differ depending upon the location of the front of the ' in looking at adjacent property, what has been determined .. the front of the lot is different from the McNellis property. The proposed McNellis house would face the private road that accesses the old Pillsbury house. There is an adjacent lot which was plotted so that the back of the lot is on the road, which is also where the utility lines cunnect to that property. The McNellis lot is an unusual piece of land; it is 3 1/4 acres, but only 11% is suitable for building. Planning Commission member Bellows inquired whether the Carpenter property accessed off of the same private "Pillsbury Road". Gaffron explained that property actually accessed off of Russell, but at one time there was a connection. Chairman Kelley stated that when the subdivision off of Woodhill was done, the developers were told to close off that connection. MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING SEPTEMBER 19, 1988 ZONING PILE #1329-MCNELLIS CONTINUED Mr. McNellis explained the topography of the lot to the road; the property slopes and then levels out. This level spot would be the natural building location. The property then slopes again to the drainage easement and where it goes back up, there is another level spot where the septic system for the proposed house would be located. Mr. McNellis stated that Mr. Dickey was asked to design a house that would not only accomodate their living needs, but that would also adhere to the irregular shape of the lot. He was especially concerned about preserving the mature trees on the property. The proposed home should blend in with the lot and should not create much disturbance of the surrounding area. Because of the private road that comes into the lot, there is no parking area. As the road comes up the hill at an elevation of 84, that would be the proposed location of the driveway. This would allow for very little excavation for a nearly level driveway and sufficient off-street parking. There is a strip of land that was sold to Mr. Prudden when the Pillsbury property was sold. Over part of this strip there is an easement fGr driveway access, and that strip, together with the setback, leaves more than 50' from the road. The proposed plan was presented to Mr. Prudden, who indicated that he liked the plan. The layout of the land lends itself perfectly to a walk -out style home. There is a 10' slope to the back of the proposed house which will only require "notching in" the house to the hillside. Planning Commission member Johnson asked Mr. McNellis if all of the trees on the property were mature maples. Mr. McNellis replied that there are oak trees as well, but maples are predominant. Planning Commission member Bellows asked about the Prudden easement. Zoning Administrator Mabusth stated that there could not be a connecting road, although there accesses have been located around the Prudden property. There is a section of Ian - that is supposed to serve the lower lot that had to be acquired through the Prudden parcel. The parcel is land -locked in a sense. The access is around the northern side of the Prudden property, but the McNellis property is blocked on their side. However, Mr. McNellis is referring to another easement. Mr. McNellis stated that the Prudden easement Bellows was referring to was to come through his lot. The driveway would come in through the Prudden property by way of an easement. Planning Commission member Johnson asked whether another subdivision would be possible in the future. Gaffron and Mabusth concurred that would be possible. His concern is that the subdivision was just before the Planning Commission a year and a half ago. At that time, the Planning Commission tried to allow adequate building envelopes ar,d now one of the first houses built in the subdivision is asking for variances. Mr. McNellis stated that there is enough room to build vertically which would be more obtrusive to the neighboring property. Planning 28 MINUTES OP THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING SEPTEMBER 19, 1988 ZONING FILED #1329-MCNELLIS CONTINUED Commission member Bellows interjected that there could be other ways to design an adequately -sized house as a one story house. Planning Commission member Cohen stated that if Mr. McNellis were to buy the strip of property from Prudden, he would conform to to that setback. Planning Commission member Hanson stated that is somewhat compell'_ng that the "oddball chunk of Prudden property" could rationalize beyond the 50'. Chairman Kelley asked Mr. McNellis if he now owned the property. Mr. McNellis answered affirmatively. Kelley explained that .,:re is no hardship. Mr. McNellis stated that the trees would be a hardship. Bellows pointed out that the present proposal would kill 19 trees. She also corrected Cohen and Hanson with regard to the Prudden easement. It would apply only to the southern end of the property, not the 28' at the top. Zoning Administrator Mabusth confirmed Bellow's observation and indicated that a lot line rearrangement would be necessary for applicant to obtain a portion of Prudden's property. Chairman Kelley addressed the issue as to where the front of the lot was located. Bellows stated that the definition of "front" as being that frontage which faces, is on or parallel to the road. Mr. McNellis argued that the road was actually a driveway. Bellows responded that it was Mr. McNellis' access and these was no qu:stion as to the location of the front of th; lot. Bellows said that she agreed that the site was not easily buildable, but there were no hardships presented. She would have a difficult time granting the number of variances requested. Planning Commission member Hanson asked about the septic system. Assistant Planning and Zoning Administrator Gaffron replied that the septic system would be placed across on the high ground, west of the drainage easement. Hanson asked if applicant would need to pump uphill. Gaffron responded in the affirmative. Cohen asked if that was a feasible project. Hanson responded that it was feasible, but undesireable. mere were no comments frog the public reg?rding this matter and the public hearing was cl 2ed. Mr. McNellis expressed his desire to address the 26' rear setback. He explained that a portion of the lot was shaped like a deep dish, that would decli..e and then incline. The proposal is to have a portion of the deck that would be 20' above the runoff area. It se.-'. ad to him that the 26' setback would apply to different topography, as there would be nc restriction of water running upstream or downstream. Planning Commission member Bellows stated that the retaining wall was the problem, not the deck footing. Mr. Dickey, the applicants' architect explained that there was a necessity to retain the earth. Bellows acknowledged that fact, but added that it should be retained outside of the 26' setback. Mr. Dickey said that narrow 19 MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING SEPTEMBER 19, 1988 ZONING FILE i1329-MCNELLIS CONTINUED width of the lot was a hardship the Planning Commission overlooked. 65' was not a lot of space in which to build the proposed house. Planning Commission member Cohen stated that the applicant should have been aware of the restrictions prior to buying the lot. Mr. McNellis agreed, but said he di< not understand all of the variances. The 26' setback from the 10' easement came as a surprise to him. Mr. McNellis reiterated the fact that the house would be virtually invisible. Bellows explained to Mr. McNellis that the Planning Commission's concern was how the land works, not who can see the house. It may be true that the proposed house had very little visual impact, however, it does present quite a bit of environmental impact. The applicant requested the Planning Commission table this matter and allow him the opportunity to do more study of how to approach the variance problems. it was moved by Planning Commission member Cohen, seconded by Planning Commission member Bellows, to table this item. Motion, Ayes=5, Nays=O, Motion passed. #1332 MARCELO GUMUCIO 980 FERNDALE ROAD WEST AFTER-THS-PACT VARIANCES PUBLIC HEARING - 11:27 P.M. - 11:30 P.M. The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing were duly noted. The applicant's architect was present in lieu of the applicant. Planning Commission member Bellows stated that the architect should be fined for '.iis lack of compliance with the City's variance requirements. She felt that the language setting forth the requirements was perfectly clear. She did not 'kink that the applicant/owner should be penalized for the unprc .sional'sm of the architect. The architect stated that L.e thoug„t is ridiculous to have to come before the Planning Commission for the type of pillars he was proposing. The guidelines were not specific as to those items. There were no comments from the pL. c regarding this matter and the public hearing was closed. It was moved by Planning aission member Johnson, seconded by Planning Commission member peon, to recommend approval of 11332, per staff reco_endatlona. Chairman Kelley inquired as to the hardship in this instance. The archir.sct indicated that safety was a factor in that the lights on the pillars were necessary to light an inadequately lit driveway. Motion, Ayes-4, Kelley -Nay due to a lack of hardship. 30 MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING SEPTEMBER 19, 1988 APPROVAL OF MINUTES It was moved by Cohen, seconded by Johnson, to approve the minutes of the August 15, 1988 Planning Commission Meeting. Motion, Ayes-5, Nays-0, Motion passed. ADJOURNMENT 11:30 P.M. The Planning Commission meeting adjourned at li:30 P.M. LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DIS I IICT NEWS RELEASE Contac4,^�ene o ;e Execve D cso ft Phoney -7033 Date 0-5- SUBJECT. New Officers Elected by Lake Minnetonka Conservation District The 1988-1989 officers of the Lake. Minnetonka Conservation District Board of 'sirectora were elected at its regular September 28 Board meeting, according to Executive Director Gene Slrommen. Chairperson is JOEllen Hurt, 930 Partenwood Road, Orono. Appointed tn •4^ LMCD Board in October 1981 by he City of Orono, Hu:r st.rted her service as vice chair of the Water Struct s and Environment Committee. She .,aa later appointed committee chair. She simultaneously served as board secretary 1982-84, and en as board rice chair 1985-88. Hurt is the planning and zoning administrator for the City of Medina, a position she has held since 1980. She is a Metr.,p litan Mawte Control commissioner, representing western Hennepin, S , Carver and a portion of Dakota Counties. She has sirvad on three suocoealttees. She is also a curter. ..embt. of the Metropolitan Council Systems Committee. Her service on the Orono City Council was reinfcrced by membership ou the Ltv'- Marina Commirr�e, Planning and Park Commission. An arc f cnmmunity pride is her involvement with he 4wen's Associa- tion of the Minnesota Symphony Orchestra, and ten ye,,-*' service on the Symphony Ball Committee. She has also served on county, church, and polit,.Lsl party comif Lacs. Vice Chairperson is Tom Reese, 5641 Bar.latt Blvd., Mound, completing the last two years of the. unexpired ter. John Elam. Reese is vice LAKE MiNNETONKA CONSERVATIVN DISTRICT News Release, 10-5-88, Page 2 chair of LMCD's Advisory Committee, which is the review group of regional and state representatives working with the Lake area cities on the Comprehen- sive Management Plan Study. He also chairs a newly -formed task force on combating Eurasian Water Milfoil, an aquatic weed re,:ently identified in the Lake. Reese is senior prejzcL manager, capital projects, for General Mills. He serves as chairperson of the City of Mound Planning Commission. Secretary is Jan Boswinkel, 2922 Northview Road, Minnetonka Beach. Boswinkel is starting his second three-year term as director. A retired senior vice president and controller for the Bank Wayzata, he is a 20-year Lake resident. He sees the LMCD as the needed force to ►seep the Lake at its best, encouraging public and resident cooperation. Treasurer is Mark Westlund, 324 :,ushaway Road, Wayzata. His service on the Wayzata Planning Commission and subsequently city council resulted in his selection to the LMCD Board in 1986. He was elected secretary that same year, and then electec, treasurer in 1987. Westlund is principal shareholder of Sterling Laboratories which manufactures subcutaneous implants, and Magic Courtyard which provides cleansing material for thoracic prosthesis. He also operates Sterling Group, a holding company for developing future health care products. He serves on the National Health Care Board for Implantology, and the Natural Surgical Board for Maxial Facial Surgeons. Officers will b- at the next regular LMCD board meeting on Wednesday, Octobe- 27, 1988. The LMCD is the governing body for regulatin, the use of Laks Minne- tonka, preserving; water quality and improving, the Lake through comprehensive planning and management. X X A 92988.1HD To: Mark E. Bernhardson, City Administrator From: John R. Gerhardson, Public Works Director Date: October 2, 1988 Subject: Westonka Seniors' Breakfast Meeting September 29, 1988 On Sei=a:^ber 29, 1988, I attended a breakfast meeting of the Westonka Seniors. The reason for the meeting was to up,'ate the communties of Orono, Mound, Spring Park, and Minnetrista as to what the Westonka Seniors are doing to project future funding of the organization. The members of the organization are well aware that funding sources now available will not be available in the future. Therefore, the organization has developed the "Westonka Seniors' Center Foundation". The establishment of the foundation will allow donations from several sources to build a large fund which will be invested and earn interest. On behalf of the City of Orono, I commended the group on their efforts. I will continue to attend the scheduled meetings a -id keep you up to date on the activities of the Westonka Senior Center. h�C�[ OM( I�< � MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF THE SCHOOL BOARD SEP 2 81W OF ORONO INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 278 HELD ON SEPTEMBER 12, 1988 L1 `l - - The regular meeting of the School Board of Orono Independent School District No. 278 was held on Monday, September 12, 1988. Present: Dave McKown James Franklin Thomas Mich Don Anderson John Maresh William Fenholt Kitty Crosby Lucie Taylor UPON MOTION by Lucie Taylor, seconded by Jim Franklin, the consent agenda was approved as follows: - approved the minutes of the August 8, 1988 regular meeting; - approved the minutes of the August 29, 1988 special meeting; - approved the following variance requests: Ethan Mackey, grade 11, to complete his education at Wayzata Schools Jennifer Kallstrom, grade 2, and Joseph Kallstrom, grade 1, to attend Eden Prairie Schools Siri Vikan, grade 8, and Maren Vikan, grade 6, to attend Delano Schools Joshua Miller, grade 2, and Derek Miller, kindergarten, to attend Westonka Schools Keith Painter, II, kindergarten, to attend Wayzata Schools Mark. Zambreno, grade 11, to continue his education at Orono Schools for the 1988-89 school year Jeremy Schultz, grade 11, to attend Orono Schools for the 1988-89 school year Heather Brown, grade 9, to attend Orono Schools for ttie 1988-89 school year Tyson Morss, grade 8, to attend Orono Schools Brent Kastner, grade 5, and Nicole Kastner, grade 2, to attend Orono Schools for the 1988-89 school year Daniel Schroeder, grade 5, to attend Westonka Schools; - approved the appointment of Robert Doetsch as grade 3 teacher at Schumann Elementary School; - approved the appointment of Michael Wilder as grade 3 teacher at Schumann Elementary School; - approved the appointment of Shannon Wiseman is 4/10 time speech -language clinician at Schumann Elementary School; - approved the appointment of Diane Dingmann as physical education teacher at Schumann Elementary School; - approved the appointment ()f Nels Chel'en as grade 4 teacher at Orono Intermediate School; - approved the appointment of Kathleen Hiniker as 4/10 time English teacher at the Orono Middle School; - approved the appointment of Cheryl Nikko as health secretary at Orono Primary School; - approved the appointment of Audrey Zelley as library secretary at Orono Primary School; - approved the appointment of Kristin Holm as non -instructional management aide at Orono Primary School; - approved the appointment of Bob Stabnow as part-time night custodian at Orono High School; - approved the appointment of Paul Odenthal as part-time night custodian at Orono Middle School; - approved the appointment of Marcia Frost as short hour cook at Orono Primary School; - approved the appointment of Susan DeBoer as short hour cook at Schumann Elementary School; - approved the appointment of Lesley Anderson as short hour cook at Orono Middle School; - accepted the resignation of Mary Monson as short hour cook effective August 10, 1988; - accepted the MedChoice bid for health insurance and the Sun Life bid on dental insurance; - appointed Kay Sause as representative to the ECSU advisory groups; - approved the following new class offerings for the Early Childhood Family Education program: Approved by the Orono Board of Education - September 12, 1988 Orono Community Education Fall ECFE Offerings: 1. Parents as Teacher Workshops 0 session each) for Infants (birth to 12 months) One Year Olds Two Year Olds Three Year Olds Four Year Olds Five Year Olds 2. Guest Speaker: Dr. Steven Tate - "Creative Discipline that Teaches Responsibility" 3. "Moms Morning Out" Book Club 4. "Making Music Together" Parent/Child Workshop 5. "Planning Ahead for Holiday Fun!?! 6. !eld trips: Como Park Zoo Lowry Nature Center James Ford Bell Museum "Touch and See" Museum - ipproveo the Activity Fund Annual Report; - approved the Treasurer's Report for June, 1988; - approved the bills as covered by vouchers 059407 through 060016. Dr. Mich reported that the Orono Primary School opened on schedule, thanks to all (faculty, staff, custodians, soccer/football teams, volunteers organized by Lucie Taylor) who played a major role in this accomplishment; that the majority of the middle school remodeling is kompleted; that the 1988-89 school year has started successfully with initial enrollment at 2,083; that there are transpor- tation difficulties which administration is addressing and will be d`scussed later in the agenda; that he had received a tally of the results from thy. ciony- mous survey which was in the PIONEER - 88 surveys were returned representing about 5-6% of the parents in the district and these will be shared with the Board and the task force authorized by the Board for the purpose of studying the school day schedule/day care needs; that the task force will be comprised of five parents from the primary/elementary schooi, two parents from the inter- mediate school, three parents from the middle school, one parent from the high school, Bill Fenholt, one principal, four teachers and John Maresh will repre- sent the Board; that the Association of Stable and Growing School Districts is preparing a law suit against the State which would require equalization of school funding across the State and that AMSD (of which Orono is a member) will be reviewing its options and will probably intervene in that law suit; that he wanted to present to Kitty Crosby, chairperson of the curriculum committee, the completed K.-12 curriculum; that he wanted to present to Lucie Taylor, chairper- son of the staff development committee, FOCUS '88, which is the staff develop- ment brochure on courses available to our staff during this year; that a Board workshop will be held following the September 26 meeting with the primary topic being open enrollment. Lucie Taylor and John Maresh expressed appreciation to the custodial staff who did such an outstanding job in preparing the Orono Primary School for its opening. Kitty Crosby brought to the attention of the Board that Steve Melander, graduate of Or -no in 1988, was on the All Star Metropolitan Baseball Team representing the West Metro area and he had given Mrs. Crosby a booklet that he wanted her to share with the School Board. Dave McKown expressed appreciation to Lucie Taylor for her part if, the coordination/organization of the move into the Orono Primary School. During Community Members Questions and Comments, parents expressed concerns regarding class size, validity of the task force study, language choices for middle school students and academic time for each class, etc. Dr. Mich addressed the difficulties connected with bussing the students this school year and provided background information/options available in making adjustments/route changes in order to accommodate the problem. He assured the audience that administration has been monitoring the busses every day and has met several times for the purpose of discussing adjusting/adding routes, adjusting starting times, and gathering information which will allow them to make timely decisions once the bussing operation has settled into more of a routine. He stated that decisions should be finalized within the next few days and informed them of the immediate decisions that have been made. Parents expressed their concerns and asked questions of Dr. Mich and the School Board regarding the bussing issue/school schedules. Dr. Mich stated that the task force, formed for the purpose of studying the school schedule/day care needs of the district, will be formed as quickly as possible and will be provided with all the necessary information/resources in order for the task force to develop a recommendation to the School Board. Ron Gilbert provided the Board with a sheet of information detailing for them classes provided, enrollment, staff, etc. on the summer school program and requested that the Board grant approval for continuance of the summer school program for 1989. UPON MOTION by Don Anderson, seconded by Lucie Taylor, the Board of Education authorized administration to proceed with the planning and implementation of a 1989 summer school program. Bill Fenholt updated the Board on building and grounds summer projects/land purchase. Dar Whitman reported to the Board on the opening of the school year at the Orono Primary School stating that the potential for that school for the future is exciting. She stated that they are facing multiple issues/problems in a variety of areas whi& presents a challenge but they are working toward solutions as quickly as possible. Mrs. Whitman expressed appreciation to the Board of Education, Lucie Taylor, administration, Marvel Bongart, the Orono Primary School faculty and staff for the support/contributions they ave made in establishing the Orono Primary School. In a written report, bill Fenholt informed the Board that the district had appealed for a review of the E.A.R.C. values which resulted in a reduction. Savings to the taxpayers in our district will be over S50,000 annually as a result of this reduction. UPON MOTION by Lucie Taylor, seconded by Jim Franklin, the meeting was adjourned. Approved: Dave McKown, Chairman Don A. Anderson, Vice Chairman The class of 1992 entered Orono High School this fall. They entered as others have and will, i.e., a little nervous, a little cocky, and with a good deal of excitement. Trying not to be different from anyone else, they appear to have gone to a single "back -to -school" sale. As classes before them, they create a kind of school uniform by their group conformity. But try as they will, they are different from one another. Most noticeably they are different by size. Those difrcrences appear mere pronounced in early adolescence. Some have completed wild growth spurts adding four or five inches in a relatively few months. Others are still waiting for that goddess of growth to visit. But in any event ihey are leaving behind the appearance of children and looking ever more like young men and women. To be sure, there are anxieties over appearance. Pimples, braces, or an unacceptable hair do/hair cut can ruin an otherwise perfect day. If there is an adolescent's prayer it probably goes like this: "Dear God, please make me like everybody else - only a little better." With all of the physical changes occurring to them and the anxieties about the schedule of changes, it seems almost cruel that we are going to expect even more from them, and we are. They are entering high school. For years they have heard teachers begin a lesson or assignment with the phrase "when you get to high school you will need to be able to..." Now the time for accounting has come. Academic expectations increase; competition in the classroom and on the playing field is stiffer. There is more homework and it's tougher. And everything seems to count - at least for a grade if not for life. The trade off to this hard work, responsibility, and pressure is the magic of high school. It is a unique social setting filled with excitement, apprehension, and fun. These young men and women, these members of the class of ORONO SCHOOL BOARD David McKown, Chairman 479-1692 Don Anderson, Vice Chairman 479-1810 Lucie Taylor, Treasurer 473-1189 Kitty Crosby, Clerk 478-6037 Jim Franklin, Director 479-2130 John Maresh, Directog 475-3197 1992, are different in more ways than physical appearance. Each brings to his/her high school career an individual personality, a personal background, a set of expectations, likes and dislikes, goals and plans. Yes, the class of 19' ' is comprised of unique individuals. Our task is to see them as the class of 1992 sharing the characteristics of young men and women and simultaneously as individuals. We want great things for the class of 1992 and we are dedicated to working with them, one by one. Dr. Thomas B. Mich Superintendent -;' _rc its yt Orono Welcomes Seven New Teachers Back Row: Shaanon Viiwmann, Nridi Mohagen, Kathy Hiniker. Front Row: Bob Doetack. Mike Prebk, dill Roaati, Mike wilder New teachers were treated to a luncheon during workshop week by the Orono Teachers Association Executive Board and Cou rwd Chairpersons. A brief overview of the Association was explained by Pat Shoop, OEA President. I Orono Primary School The Orono Primary School opened its doors to students and parents on Friday, September 2 in ,utticipation of the first day of school September 6. Located in the Maple Plain School site, the Orono Primary School houses all of the District kindergarten s:,idents and most of the District first graders. By bringing these students together in a single setting, the District has the opportunity to better focus its resources and expertise on young learners as they begin their school careers. The Orono Primary School is under the able leadership of Mrs. Dar Whitman, long time Orono teacher. Special cranks are due to all of the volunteers who pitched in to help pack teacher materials, transport equipment and furniture to the new school, and who assisted teachers in getting classrooms ready. The new Orono Primary School is an exciting place. Please drop by and visit your newest school. Bridge West: Looking for Prospective Volunteer Shelter Homes BndgeWest is a new program expansion from Lie Bridge. It's specifically set up for runaway youth in the West Hennepin Suburbs. BndgeWest offers 24 hour crisis in',!r•;,ntion services to runaway and homeless youth and their families. BndgeWest serves adolescents between 10 and 18 years of age and provides safe shelter as well as free individual, family and group counseling. Educational and prevention services are also available ftw schools, churches and community groups. The youth has an imtwl m ing with BndgeWest staff before going to a shelter home in their community. The avet,.oe stay of a youth in a shelter home would be less than five days. During the school year, the you are expected to attend school. After school hours they are transported u) an individual and family counschng session by the BndgeWest staff Concluding their stay in emergency shelter care, appropriate individual and family aftercare counseling referrals are made. For more information and to obtain an application form please contact Bill Liss, 377-8800. Guidance at a Glance SENIORS: Upcoming Test Dates: ACT: Oc`-%her 22, 1988 Registration Deadline: 9/23/88 SAT: Noit, �tr i1tr 5, 1988 Registration Deadline: 9/30/88 SAT: Dectmhb • 3, 1988 Registration Deadline: 10/28/88 JUNIORS: PSAT Testing - The Prelimi, Scholastic Aptitude Test/National Merit Qualifying Ex., _.11 be given on Saturday, October 15, 1988. Check in time is b:ut) am. The preparation bulletins are available for distribution on October 1st and at any time after that date students who signed up last spring may pay the $8.50 fee and receive their bulletAns. HTI Goes to Credit System Hennepin Technical Institute has converted all clock -hour, continuous program.; to the more familiar course -credit system that colleges use. With "credit -for -courses", students have more flexibility, more options, and more opportunities for specialized education. in addition, there is a "common currency" > i transferring credits to or from other post secondary institutions. Students who complete specific portions of a program will receive an Occupational Certificate. Individuals who complete the credit requirements for a program will receive a diploma and, in some programs, start working toward an Associate of Applied Science (4.A.S.) Degree. All course work will be evaluated with grades of A,B,C,.D, and N/C (no credit). Because competencies and performance levels are set by industry, students compete against standards rather than other students. The credit system will make it easier for students to attend on a part-time basis. Each quarter credit is equal to approximately thtty-su hours of student effort This includes classroom, lab, and outside study. Part-time students are those who carry less than twelve coedits per quarter (12 weeks). Most courses earn three or four credits. Full-time and part-time students receive free counseling, are eligible for financial aid, and receive free placement upon completion of their education. Program advisors assist students in selecting courses. Hennepin Technical Institute awards proper recognition to students who excel and to those who complete entire programs. A grading report is issued each quarter. Hennepin Technical Institute has campus sites in Brooklyn Park and Eden Prairie, as well w. numerme off -site iocations. 2 North Shore Gymnastics/Aerobics Open New Facility The Notch Shore Gymrr-stics Association has opened its doors to the public in their new facility. The complete NSGA program will be housed in this facility which is located on West Industrial Blvd. in Long Lake (next to Safeway Mini Storage on Highway 12). The building which was designed especially for NSGA includes many things such as an in ground trampoline, ha/vault and tumbling in ground resi pits, a separate pre�chool/aerobic area, parent waiting room and a student locker. The association which has been operating out of the Orono Middle School for the past 14 years is P. non-profit, parent directed organization. Programs offered include: a Parent -Child Gym Class (for 18 month to 3 years of age, Preschool Motor Learning Classes (for the 3 to 5 year old) and Pregre%sive Gymnastics Classes for boys and girls ranging in age from 5 to 18 years old. NSGA has a strong USGF team program for the competitive athlete and an Aerobic Conditioning Program for teens and adults. The newest program is a Sport Fit class for the high school athlete. Sport Fit is designed to condition the high school female athlete in order to achieve top performance in competition. Non competitive athletes are welcomed tL join also. Workouts will focus on aerobic circuit (non weight) training, fitness assessment, nutrition and other related topics. The next session will begir, the end of November. For more information call, 471-Od97, 475-3197 or 476-1652. � � iIF ilE jk � >� � � � CIE ilE ilE �I(• �6F CIE CIE # =# CIE # jl(31E � School District is Now Debt Free 1988 is a banner year for the Orono Schools! During this calendar year all bonded indebtedness on school buildings will be fully paid and there will be no Debt Service levv his fall for the first time in the 38 year history of the school :t. None of the Lake Area schools and only two out of fifty-s. .istricts in the Metro area are in a similar position. Over the years bond issues have been passed to construct buildings on four sites -- Orono Primary School (housing 286 students in grades K-1) with 17 classrooms on 12.5 acres in Maple Plain, Schumann Elementary (housing 395 students in grades 2-3), the Intermediate/Middle School (housing 705 students in grades 4-8), and the Senior High School (housing 621 students in grades 9-12). Each building is in excellent condition and contains the basic core facilities such as cafeterias, libraries, tunchrooms and gymnasiums. The main campus consists of 110 acres. An important factor contributing to the debt -free status of the district is that all additions and major improvements to the buildings and grounds since the high school was built in 1968 have been completed without incurring any bonded indebtedness. For example, all costs for the entire athleuc complex, which includes eight tennis courts, football, baseball and soccer fields, track and stadium, were offset through reguLir capital levies over a period of years during the mid 1970's. The 1971. eight classroom addition to Schumann Elementary, housing the ungraded program and the library, was paid from funds realized from he sale of the Stubbs Bay, Long Like, Hill, and former Maple Plain school buildings. The 1981 school auditorium was financed through surplus debt service funds accrued through investment earnings at no additional cost tc taxpayers. Major building improvements, such as the complete replacement of all windows at the Middle School, have been and continue to be paid from capital and maintenance levies. The reproduction value of all district buildings and equipment, as set by the districts insurance appraisal film, is currently at $27,662,017. The community has good reason to he extremely proud, not only of its educational program, but also of the wonderful facilities that are available to the students. William A. Fenholt Parent '.Meet and Confer Parent Meet and Confer consists of parent representatives from all buildings, two Board members ana the Superintendent. We review parental concerns apd ideas, investigate the background of the concems and help find solutions. The suggestions are made to the Board or appropriate pLace. The group was formed to give parents a place to go with their ideas and concerns when other methods either do not work or are inappropriate. We meet four times a year apd welcome all parents. The next meeting is scheduled for October 17, at 7:00 pm. Please watch the Ne--deuer for future meeting dates, or call one of us. Board Members: Don Anderson 479-1810 Lucie Taylor 473-1189 Superintendent: Dr. Thomas Mich 473-7313 ECFE Special Event v For parents and caregivers of c�sTRoN� F young children Early Childhood Family Educacon proudly announces a visit by Dr. Steven Tate to discuss the topic "CREATIVE DISCIPLINE THAT TEACHES RESPONSIBILITY". There will be time for questions. Don't miss this - he's terrific! Tuesday, Ocmber It, 7-9 pm., Orono High School Cafeteria. $2 donation at door appreciated. AHYou A hrg THANK YOU to all the families who participated in the Early ChcldluxA Family Education Kxis' Clothing and Etc Sale. Youi donatuuos and suptx)rt are appraiated Watch '.or the '_nd Annual Sele nett vear' 3 Nick Coult, National Merit Scholarship Semi- finalist from Orono National Merit Scholarship Semi-finalist Dr. Kent Winter, Principal of Orono High School, is proud to announce that Nick Coult, son of Mr. and Mrs. Harry J. Coult of 3010 Lindgren Lane, Maple Plain, has achieved semi-finalist standing in the National Merit Scholarship competition. This honor is the result of his outstanding performance on the Preliminary Scholastic Aptitude Test/National Merit Scholarship Qualifying Test (PSAT/NMSQT) which was administered nationwide to high school juniors in October 1987. A program sponsored by the American Association of Teachers of German honored Nick a with a fow week all expense paid trip to West Germany. Nick received this first prize award by competing with German 11 level students in the five state area. He also placed in the top 90 percentile in a test given by this same association. Nick spent the last 3 months of his junior year as a participan in the Minnesota - Baden - Wurtenberg Student Exchange Program. On September 20th Nick was honored as one of nine Minnesota All State High School Journalists. This honor waq given by the Minnesota High School Press Association at weir Fall Convention. In ninth grade he received an award from the Hennepin Conservati-n District Essay contest Nick is among 15,000 nationwide who qualified and represent the top half of one percent of each state's graduating senors. Semi-finalists, the highest scoring students in each state, are named from o er one million students enrolled in 19,000 high schools dwougt out the country. To be considered for Ment Scholarships, semi-finalists must advance to finalist standing by meeting further requirements. Finalists Merit tcholarstups will be awarded to 6.000 students next Apnl. The scholarships range from one-time S1000 awards to renewable, fc ur-year packages. Seven Orono Seniors Commended Students Orono High School has been notified by National Merit Scholarship Corpotation (NMSC) of Evanston, Illinois that the following students have been designated Commended Students in the 1989 National Merit Scholarship Program and will receive a Letter of Commendation :n recognition of outstanding academic promise: Anthony R. Hughes, son of Mr. & Mrs. Randal Hughes Aare+ Fit. Kyllander, son of Mr. & Mrs. Lynn Kyllander David S. Marrield, son of Mr. & Mrs. Samuel Marfield Ulimn A. Rice, daughter of Mrs. Sally Rice Kristen C. Richard, daughter of Mr. & Mrs. David Richard Jennifer L. Smith, daughter of Mr. and Mrs Ted Smith Mark A. Taylor, son of Mr. and Mrs. Paul Taylor The principal, Dr. Kent Winter, announced today that on the basis of performance on the qualifying test for the 34th annual Merit Program these seniors place in the top 50,000 of more than one million participants. An office of NMSC, which conducts the program, stated, "The very high test performance of the young men and women who are honored as Commended Students in the Merit Program is indicative of exceptional scholastic ability. We hope the NMSC's recognition of these high school students will increase their motivation to make the best use of their talents and to develop the skills that will be needed by the future leaders of our nation. Being named a Commended Student in this keen competition is a credit to these young citizens as well as to their schools, which play a key role in their development." Class of 1989 Commended Students Back row: Anthony Hughes, David Marfield, Aaron Kyllander. Front row: Jennifer Smith, Allison Rice, Kristen Richard, Mark Taylor - qb 4 • Dave McKown elected chairperson, Don Anderson elected Vice -Chairperson, Kitty Crosby elected Clerk, Lucie Taylor elected Treasurer. • Set yearly salary for Clerk as $500 and yearly salary for Treasurer as $100. • Authorized the use of thz signing plates for officers for 1988- 89. • Approved the appointment of Michael J. Preble as second grade teacher at Schumann Elementary School. • Approved the appoinunen, of William Rosati as second grade teacher at Schumann Elementary School. • Set the coordinator stipend at $7,500 and $4,000 for th-, positions of computer coordinator and staff development coordinator respectively. • Approved continued membership in E.C.S.U. for the 1988-89 scho-A year. • Approved continued membership in AMSD for the 1998-89 school year. • Agreed to participate in Chapter I and authorized an LEA representative in conjunction with the District Advisory Committee and School Advisory committees of the District to execute and file application for the school district and to otherwise act as authorized representative in all Chapter 1 related activities. • Approved continuatior of membership in the Minnesota State High School League. • Approved the following variance requests: Annette Murphy, kindergarten, to attend Orono Schools; Joshua Brooke, kindergarten, to attend Wayzata Schools; Kelly McEnany, grade 11, to complete her education at Robbinsdale Schools. • Accepted the low bid of M & S Roofing for replacing roof section F on the Orono Middle School. • Accepted the low bid of McBroom Construction, New London, MN for 1 1/2" overlayment and 1/2" latex surface on the senior high school track. • Accepted the bid of Context, L.T.D. for carpe, installation as per bid taken on June 21, 1988. • RESOLVED: That William Fenholt, Business Manager, on behalf of Orono Independent School District No. 278, is hereby authorized to enter into and designated to sign a contract for public school energy conservation investment loan funds as authorized by Laws of Minnesota, 1983, Chapter 323, and approved by the Energy and Economic Development Authority. BE IT ALSO RESOLVED that Orono Independent School Distract No. 278 guarantees it will annually levy or otherwise collect an amount sufficient to make annual loan repayments of the inter!st and principal due on the loan amount approved,which is not to exceed the S5,293 requested in the accompanying loan application. • Approved the adoption of the Harcourt Brace Jovanovich language arts text for third grade. • Approved the Mission Statement/instrucuonal Ooalr policy. • Approved the continued use of STS Consultants, LTD for engineering services relating to Phase 11 underground fuel storage tank contamination exploration. • Estrbluhed the Board nteeung dues for 1988-89 • Approved the olfi� id depositories and investment depositories. • Designated the LAKER/PIONEER as the official School District publication. • Designated the School District office as the official office of the Clerk. • Approved the continued use of Froehling, Anderson, Plowman and Egnell, Ltd. as school auditors. • Approved the surety bond coverages. • Approved Board members to committee memberships. • Approved the Early Childhood Family Education Coordinator Contract. Special Meeting -duly 21. 1998 • Rejected the offer of purchase by Woods Academy for the Maple Plain School site. • Gcected administration to develop a primary school, grades Y.indergarten and first, to be housed on the Maple Plain ske and to begin operation for the 1988-89 school year. • Approved 3 change ir. the school day schedule to a- commodate the elementary program and the addition of a primary school. Regular Meeting - August 8. 1988 • Apprc vcd the appointment of Betty Heitke as k:nd.. 3arten wacher a: Orono Pnm3r;,/ School. • Accepted the -es�gnation of Joyce Lenz who has been a teacher in the elementary school for the past two years. • Directed the Superintendent to approve teacher contracts from August 9, 1988 to September 12, 1988 Lin order to help assure a full component of qualified teachers for the 1988-89 school y%,ar. • roved the following variance requess: Cleve Munson, grade i2 to attend Orono Schools; .'if iney Taylor, grade 7, to attend Orono Schools; Ayla Turnquist, kindergarten, to attend Orono Schools; Kristen Decamp, grade i i, to complete her education at Orono Schools; Celeste Jundt, grade 12. to complete her education at Edina Schools. • Accepted the low bid of Meyer Bros. Dairy for furnishing milk for the 1088-89 school year • Approved the 1988-89 ice arena lease for lure 198E-89 school year. • Directed administration to certify to the State Demographer the population estimate- for Orono District No. 278 which will & rve as the basis for the Community Education levy. • Requested bids on heaith and dental insurance for 1988.89. • Approved the ,:ontmued ,rse of the Community Resource Pool for 1988-89. • Approved the development and implementatson of an after school activities program for primary and elementary school age children. • Defeated a motion to change the schedule umes therefore, rot schedule adopted at the July .1I, 1988 Board meeting remains in effect. • Directed administration to undertake the daycare needs through a task force study in conluncuon with a survey regarding school schedule tunes with a report to be made to the Board no later than March 1989. !. f 1 ' P� n Task Force District Activitie:) 10/3 Homecoming Coronation ....................7:30 10/10 Board Meeting, MS Vocal Music Room ........ 7:130 10/10 Columbus Day 10120 NO SC►.00L MEAT-.JF' 10/21 NO SCHOOL MEA/MFT 10/24 NO SCHOOL Teacher Inservice/Workshop 10/24 Board Meeting, MS Vocal Music Room ........ 7:00 10/30 Standard Time Begins 10431 Halloween Elementary Activities 10/4 Primary & Elem. Aug. B.D. Party 10/13 Cheepskate PTA Family Fun Night............ 6:00 10/18 Primary & Elem Oct. B.D. Party Intermediate/Middle School Activities 10/3 " PAC Meeting ................ .... .... 7:1' 10/17 1J/MS Stanford Test 10/18 MS PAC Meeting ......................... 7:30 ISMS Stan ford Test 10/19 ISMS Stanford Test 10/210 7th & 8th Grade Washington D.C. Trip 10/216 IS Reward Day High School Activities 10/1 Volleyball at Sauk Rapids .... ..... ........ 9.30 10/3 Homecoming Week Boys Soccer at St. Bernard's..................4:00 10/4 Boys Soccer at Minnahaha .................. 4:00 Girls Soccer at Blake .......................4:00 Volleyball at De Ia Salie ...... ............ 7.00 10/6 Boys Soccer - Brec:k .......... ............ 7:00 Girls Soccer - Mahtomedi ...................4:00 Volleyball - Brooklyn Center ............. .. 7:30 Cross Country Tn-Metro at Como ..... ...... 4:1 S lOn Homecoming Dance Football - Farmington ...................... 7:00 10/10 Boys Soccer - Blake ....................... 7:00 Girls Soccer at Eden Prairie ................ 5:00 10/11 Girls Soccer - Minnehaha ...................7:00 Volleyball at St. Bernard's ........ .......... /:30 10/13 Boys Soccer - Centennial ............... c 7:00 Girls Soccer - St. Bernard's .................. 4:00 Volleyball at St. Agnes ..................... 7:30 Cross Country Tn-Metro at Como ............ 4,15 10/14 Football - Minnehaha ...................... 7.30 10/1 S ?SAT, H.S. Cafeteria .....................8:OOam Boys Soccer Section Playoffs Girls Soccer 6AA 10/18 Volleyball - Minnehaha .....................7:30 Cross Country at Shakopee Inv. Cross Country Reg►un 6AA ................ 3:00 10/19 Football at St. Fernard's . .................. 7:30 Girls Soccer Se.:ii Finals 10M Football Section IV t o/29 Football Sec lion IV 1or-7 Volkyhall Delano ........................7:30 The .x)ard of education approved the formation c � a task force fth the purpose of reviewing the existing schoo day schedule. Prompted by some dissatisfaction with the re% ised school day schedule for 1988-89, the board and admutistrauon have directed thf- task force to seek parental opinion as t,ie- review the srh Jules. The task face will be comprised of eleven pare, lts, selected by PTA and other school organizations, four .eachers, two adr,inistrators, and school board member Dr. Joh 1 Maresh. It is amicipated that the task force will n ake specific re(:)mmendations to the administration and school board. Infionnation about the progress of —k force ar d opportunities foo oarenW input will be mailed to all paren_ Youth Basketball Registration Oc)no Community Edocation will hold its yo ith basketball re istration from 7-8 pni on Tuesday, October 11 Ind from 9-11 art+ on Saturday, October 15 at the Orono High Sch/ of gym. Tl program is open to boys and girls in grades / -6. Last year o%.r 200 g0s and boys participated in the prograr . This years pfins include leagues for each grade level, bo rs and girls. V6 lunteer coaches are needed. Mike Blanski, the Orono High School Varsity Boys Basketball Coach will be holdi ig a" linrc for coaches on Mondays, October 3, 10, 17, and 24 from 7-8 pm at th- the Orono High School. All basketball coaches are invited to at end. For more information call Brian Bergstr. ,m at Orono C immunity Education, 473-4 `9. NEWSLETTE 120 .DYIMISTIIATIOM OtFKf to OLD Ca"TAL May NO" MOW" / 0 %'JNG LAXII, MIMM/AOTA SNfA C. 3 � City of Orono P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay MN 55323 "� 6 WARNING OPCRG TIC': UL ORONO CRIt"E PREVENT10% & CRIr,,,,NLkl ArF REH NES,fir, F ut,'' September 30, 1988 Mr. Walter R. Benson 4365 North Shore Drive P.O. Box 167 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 Dear Dick, Thank you for your generous donation to the Reserve Fund. One o`_ the Reserve Officers will go to an advanced driving school with this donation. This City is lucky to have a dedicated group of volunteers to serve the police department. Sincerely, Melvin Kilbo Chief of Police MK:sb