Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout11-28-1988 Council Packet7 l 7 l 1 7 PUBLIC ATTENDANCE CITY OF ORONO MEETING DATE , ' PLEASE FILL OUT THE INFORMATION REQUESTED BELOW FOR OUR CITY RECORDS. NAME OR NUMBER NAME Iplaasa print) ADDRESS PRESENT FOR (from agenda) 1 . r �� ?. � 6 m 4. CAk t ti.� Mvc s p�� 5 s .714 L y +h. C A -J o PUBLIC ATTENDANCE CITY OF ORONO MEETING DATE PLEASE FILL OUT THE INFORMATION REQUESTED BELOW FOR OUR CITY RECORDS. NAME OR NUMBER NAME (please print) ADDRESS PRESENT FOR (from agenda) 46 AlL' c 4 • ��'t,p T. • ` }- c t ., � ',i' , �� G t t C' -ry fl saC � jo6. 7. n /►� L...��keA 8. 9. 0. 1. 2. 3. 1. S. 6. 7. u � V 0. AGENDA ?,3 CJU:IC,:. IE3T�-IG 33T 713 AOIDAT. `13VE-4BE3 23, :?33. 7:00 ?.A. �) i3i:e:n3 Jr 20-1311drld to Jd-3ut:a9 .:3'n3 to J3 inaatdd ipin one :soti 3n by t.ne City Council und-tr the Consent on the 33'1 1 3. D:3:J33:•.)n will be held upon request. 'Ie:ao3 reg3ri:n3 each )f ta: a;end3 hams .are available in the ?ub'.ic Packet -rhi:h nay be obta:^e: upon request from the Recorder. 3OLL CALL APPROVAL OF MINUTES • 2. 1980 Canvassing Board Meeting of November 9, 1938 • 3. Regular Meeting of November 14, 1988 PARK COMMISSION COMME!ITS • 4. Park Survey LAKE MINNETONK• CONSERVATION DISTRICT REPORT - Jo Ellen Hurr Representative PUBLIC COMMENTS - (Limit 5 Minutes Per Person) ZONING ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT eeAPPLICANTSaa Immediately after the Council has reviewed your application please sign the three (3) original resolution copies. 5. I1296 Peterson/Stodola, 1395 Shadywood Road - Variance • 6. #1321 Tom Haislet. 950 Dld Crystal Bay Road A.) Final Subdivision - Resolution B.) Execution of Developer's Agreyment 7. 11329 Thomas McNellis, 355 Woodhill Road - Variance A. 01334 Sidney Revers, 715 North Brown Road - Conditional Use Permit/ Proli:ninary Subdivision i 9. 41356 ;e-ald 14eCDurtney, 1)55 nest Ferndale Road - 73rianeos 10. Zoning Amendment - Planned Development ENGINEER'S REPORT n 11. Seal "oat Payment N 1 MATOR'S REPORT e 12. Orono/Li ng Lake D13,a33i..)n3 CITY ADMINISTRATOR'S RE?ORT 13, Driveway Permit - 4,)0 )ii ;,)ng Lake Road 14. 1989 Legislative Prjgr3m 15. County Road 51 e16. Liquor Lioense Renewal/jff Sale 200 iollandtr 3:)34 - 3et 43313311ent Public Near in; ^ate ei8. 1989 Helith Insurance Tax F)rftit Property - 3e11 to AIjae4nt Property 32301ition - Drjinage 4 Conservation Resolution •20. Iquipm*nt Pur^hase - 3trtet Department AGENDA FOR COUNCIL MEETING SET FOR MONDAY. NOVEMBE■ 28. 1986. 7:00 P.M. CITY ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT Continued •-sal. 1989 Calendar 022. Uncollected NSF Checks - Resolution e23. Contract Renewal - Police Contract (Long Lake. Spring Park and Minnetonka Beach) 024. Contract Renewal - Fire Contracts (Long Lake, Maple Plain and Wayzata) e25. Animal Control Contracts (Long Lake, Spring Park and Minnetonka Beach) e26. Administrator's Information County Road 15 MWCC Interceptor Recycling Program Highway 12 Minnetrista/Hennepin County Park Reserve Lawsuit Crystal Bay Road CITY ATTORNEY'S REPORT LICENSES (270) BILLS (28e) ADJONANNENT O)WIL iVl '�TAif6 MINUTES OF THE 1988 CANVASSING BOARD MEETING HELD NOVEMBER 9, 1988 ATTENDANCE 5:67 P.M. The Orono Council met as the 1988 Canvassing Board on the above date with the following members present: Mayor Grabek, Councilmembers Nettles and Peterson. Councilmembers Goetten and Callahan were absent. The following represented City staff: City Administrator Bernhardson and Public Works Gerhardson. 1988 CITY ELECTION RESULTS It was moved by Mayor Grabek, seconded by Councilmember Peterson to certify the results of the November 3, 1988 City election as follows: Mayor - two year term, James Grabek receiving 1,378 votes. Councilmembers - four year terms, Barbara Peterson receiving 2,639 votes and Edward J. Callahan, Jr. receiving 2,300 votes and Councilmember - two year term, Alan Nettles receiving 2,124 votes. Motion, Ayes 3, Nays 0. APPOINTMENT OF ACTING MAYOR FOR NOVRMBER 14, 1988 COUNCIL MEETING As both the Mayor and Acting Mayor were not expected to be present at the November 14, 1988 Council meeting, Mayor Grabek moved and Councilmember Nettles seconded the appointment of Councilmember Peterson as Acting Mayor for the November 14, 1988 Council meeting. ayes 3, Nays 0. ADJOURNMENT 5:15 P.M. It was moved by Councilmember Peterson, seconded by Councilmember Nettles to adjourn the 1988 Canvassing Board meeting at 5:15 P.M. Motion, Ayes 3, N3ys 0. vr'rE5T: T r �-tgy—M. Hallin, City ClerW James R. Grabek, Mayor 1 MINUTES OF THE ORONO COUNCIL MEETING OF NOVEMBER 14, 1988 PARK SURVEY CONTINUED Commission survey and would not add to the mailing cost. It was moved by Councilmember Goetten, seconded by Acting Mayor Peterson, to table this item until the Council had the opportunity to review the Park Commission survey. Motion, Ayes-3, Nays=O, Motion passed. PLANNING COMMISSION COMMENTS Planning Commission Representative, Edward Cohen, was not present and there were no Planning Commission comments. PUBLIC COMMENTS There were no comments i rorr Public. ZONING ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT: i1218 ESTATE OF RUTH SMITH 387 ORONO ORCHARD ROAD FINAL SUSDIVISION RESOLUTION 12536* It was moved by Councilmember Goetten, seconded by Acting Mayor Peterson, to adc.jpt Resolution 42536, approving the Final Subdivision for Ruth Smith. Motion, Aves=3, Nays=O, Motion passed. i1323 JON M. PAPAS 3369 CRYSTAL BAY ROAD VARIANCE DMIAL RESOLUTION 12537* It was moved by Councilmember Goetten, seconded by Actina Mayor Peterson, to adopt Resolution 02537, denying the variance requested by Jon W. Papas. Motion, Ayes-3, Nays-0, Motion passed. f1329 THOMAS MCNELLIS 355 MOODHILL ROAD VARIANCE Mr. MCNe 1 1 is and Mr. Arthur Dickey, Mr. McNe 1 1 i s's Architect, were present for this mePtinq. A brief review of Mr. McNellis's application was provided by City Administra�-r Bernhard3on. In order for Mr. McNellis to construct h:s proposed new residence, he would need approval for a front setback variance and wetland setback variance. The proposed residence would encroach 4' into the 26' wetland setback. The easement line was determined by using the 964 contour line. The actual edge of the wetlands is actually 36' from the bui ldina artvelope. Mr. McNel lit's deck would be 32' from the edge of the wetlands, but only 22' from the edge of the easement. Bernhardson further reported that he haci met with Mr. Dickey and Mr. McNellis and the possibility of a lot line rearrangement was liscussed. If Mr. McNellis could obtain a I:OUNCII MEETING NOV 2 a 10pa MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD NOVEMBER 1.1, 1988 ATTENDANCE 7:00 P.M. The Council met on the above date with the following members present: Acting Mayor Peterson, Councilmembers Nettles and Goet*_en; Councilmember Callahan and Mayor Grabek were absent. The following represented the City staff: City Administrator Bernhardson, Building & Zoninq Administrator Mabusth, Public Works Director Gerhardson, Assistant Planning and Zoninq Administrator Gaffron, City Att-rney Barrett and City Recorder Scheffler. CONSENT AGENDA* It was moved by Councilmember Goetten, seconded by Acting Mayor Peterson, to approve the consent Agenda. '- lotion, Ayes=3, Nays-0, Motion passed. APPPROVAL OF MINUTES* It was mo,.4d by Councilmember Goetten, seconded by Acting Mayor Peteraon, to approve the Minutes of the October 10, 1a88 Regular Council Meeting. Motion, Ayes=3, Nayz=0, Motion passed. APPROVAL OF MINUTES* It was moved by Councilmember Goetten, seconded by Acting Mayor Peterson, to approve the Minutes of the October 24, 1988 Regular Council Meeting. Motion, Ayes=3, Nays=0, Motion passed. PAM COiMI SS ION COIMENTS PARE SURVEY Public Works Director Gerhardson reported that a more economical method of performinq the Park Survey had been found. By revising the method of mailing, the cost would decrease from S2,OCO.00 to 52,500.00, to an amount between $1,500.00 and 51,800.O0. The ono page survey would be printed with a return address and bulk mail stamp so it would he mailed out in a first class envelope, but returned as bulk mail. The survey would ask a variety of questions, many of which would pertain to the bike/hike tra11. Councilmember Goetten inquired as to whether the Park Commission would tabulate t6- resul*s themselves and whether `hey would be funAing the survey? Ger~,ardson rPFlied that thH Fark c'ommi.asion would *abulatA the surveys. The su-vev is n -in a I.owable expenditure for the use of the park delicstIr f-ps. the project would be funded by the Cit.y's Gerera 1 Fund. Councilmamber Goetten expressed her wish *o see the survey and Actinv Mayor Peterson and Councilmember Nettles concurred. City Administrator Bernharjson commented that the LMCD's brochure on Furaiian Milfoil would be mailed along with the Park MINUTES OF THE ORONO COUNCIL MEETING OF NCVF14BER 14, 1988 ZONING FILE 11329-MCNELLIS CONTINUED small portion of land from the neighboring property, he would not require the front setback variance. Acting Mayor Peterson asked Mr. McNellis how he felt about the lot line rearranaement. Mr. McNellis stated that if it was the only solution to she problem, he would not object. He went on to say that placing the house in any other way within the building envelope would greatly affect the drainage and consequently the wetlands. He said that only 9% of the lot was buildable. The proposed location for the house would ha•. a the least impact on the mature stand of sugar maDles on the property. Mr. McNellis explained how the house would "notch into" the hill on the property. By turning the house, he would not- be able to take advantage of a flat location that would aid in moving drainage water into the wetlands. The present proposal would allow for maximum preservation of the natural resources on the lot. Acting Mayor Peterson inquired as to Mr. McNel lis's knowledge of the buildahility of the lot at the time it was purchased. Mr. McNellis stated that the covenants and restrictions were quite lengthy. He added that Orono was one of the few cities that required 26' from the easement line of the wetland. He was not aware of that reauirement a- the time he purchased the lot. Assistant Planning and Zoninq Administrator Gaffron explained that, in his opinion, the easement line was determined arbitrarily. He added that no two topographical maps are identical and it was possible that the map used to determine the w• -land easement had varying alignments from other maps on file or this subdivision. Act.inq Mayor Peterson asked Mr. McNellis to define his hardship fcr the ^arianc-es. Mr. McNellis explained that they includes topography, the drainage easement and the particular location of a culvert on the property. When the building envelope was determined, the culvert had not been discoverers. Peterson felt that it was difficult to approve a variance for a piece of property that was recently platted. She added that it was the front yard setback variance that was the problem, not the encroachment into the wetlands. Peterson asked if there was anything that. could be done with the design of the house to alleviate the need for the front yard setback variance. Mr. Dickey explained that *he house •,.+ou l i fit within the Nui llina envelope if it were turned. However, turning it would create a ne(lat i ve impact upon t he wet lan :s. Ccunci lmember Goetl en expressed her priority to be ereservation of the wetlands, as opposed to concern for the front setback. Assistant Planninq anti Zoninq Administrator Gaffron showed the variou,i -;i­veys and where *he wet land easement was on each. Gaffron adder; -hat when a wet land boundary line was determined with an easemer * line, that 1 irN «ou lA be 1.,sed for measuring • o MINUTES OF THE ORONO COUNCIL MEETING OF NOVEMBZR 14, 1988 ZONING FILE #1329-MC RLLIS CONTINUED avoid discrepancies. Councilmember Nettles asked whether there would technically be any impact to the wetlands due to the height of the cantilevered deck? Gaf.fron answered that in his opinion, Mr. McNellis's proposal would have little, if any, impact on the wetlands. Councilmember Nettles brought forth the issue of the lot line rearrangement. Mr. MCNellis explained the ramifications of proceeding in that manner, and added it would cavise enough of a delay that he would be unable to build until Spring. City Administrator Be-nhardson suggested that the Council grant the variance for the wetland encroachment and indicate whether a lot line rearrangement would be an acceptable remedy. Gaffron suggested that approval be given for the application and the issuance of the building permit be contingent upon the filing of the subdivision application for the lot line rearrangement. This would allow Mr. McNellis to begin work immediately. It was moved by Councilmember Nettles, seconded by Councilmember Goetten, tc approve the wetland variance and require the applicant to file and follow through with a lot line rearrangement application it lieu of the front setback variance. Motion, Ayes-3, Nays=0, Motion passe-1. 11339 DAVID Lit 2695 CASCO POINT ROAD CONDITIONAL USE PERl1IT/VARIANCE RESOLUTION i2538 Mr. Lee and Mr. James Robin, Mr. Lee's Landscape Architect, were present for this meeting. City Administrator Bernhar-3scn gave a brief synopsis of the history of this application. It was determined at the last Council Meeting that Mr. Lee be required to remove certain timbers and fill so there will be some natural slope returned to the bank. Mr. Robin believed that it would be best to keep all of the timbers and plant vegetation that would eventually screen the wall fr^m view. He said that he could not guarantee the same kind of stability and screening by following the City staff's recommendations. He asked that the Council reconsider their decision to follow the Citv t:ngineer's r-(-ommen,?aeons and try to rea,.-h another compromise. Acting Mayor Peterson Stated that- she would be in(-1 :ned co stay with the City Engineer's recorrmendal—i—ns. Councilmember Nettles concurred, and added 'hat he. actui l 1%, was leaning more toward total restoration of the bank. However, since the project was already completed, he felt that the City Engineer's recommendations were a compr,)rr;ise. He said that any deviation from that recommendation would be an even greater stray.nq from 4 MINUTES OR THE ORONO COUNCIL MEETING OF NOVEMBER 14, 1988 ZONING FILE #1339-DAVID LEE CONTINUED the City's ordinances pertaining to the lakeshore. He did not want to send the wrong message to the citizens of Orono. Councilmember Goetten reiterated her concerns of informing the Public of those ordinances. She added that she had to rely on the information provided from the City Eng4.neer in trying to make the best of a bad situation. Mr. Lee explained that he had received numerous phone calls following an article that appeared in the Wayzata paper. He went on to say that his neighbors were most supportive of him improving his property. Mr. Lee also reiterated 'Mr. Rol in's arguments for keeping the timbers in place. Acting Mayor Peterson asked whether the completion date of April 30, 1989 was realistic? Mr. Robin and Mr. Lee felt it was not, due to the frost. Peterson suggested June 30, 1989. Mr. Lee agreed. Mr. Robin advised Mr. Lee to remove the timbers and do the grading and fill work and immediately establish some kind of grounc: cover for the bank. It was moved oy Councilmember Nettles, seconded by Acting Mayor Peterson, to adopt Resolution #1339, approving the conditional use permit, and amending the completion date to June 30, 1909. Motion, Ayes=3, Nays=O, :Motion passed. 01347 MICOAZL HALLEY HOMES, INC. 2715 FENr LANE VAS I ANCE RMSOLUTION 12S39 Mr. Bob Martinson, a representative for Michael Halley Hodes, and Mr. and Mrs. Dean Terry were present. City Administrator Bernhardson explainer that the original proposal had bee>> revised to address the concerns of Mr. Dailey and Mr. Skifter. The gateway would now be located approximately 14' from the west lot line and 20' from the north lot line. The 10' setback variance to the north lot line would still be required. A 12' by 12' backup apron has been included to alleviate traffic turning around in neighboring driveways. If the gate were moved back another 10' to 12' there would be no need for a variance. Mr. Martinsor reiterated Bornhar-iscn's explanat'on of the revised proposal. He said that in response to the emergency vehicle access iSsue, there ar- three ways to access the electronically controlled gates: (1) Activation from within the houses on the property; (2 Activation from the front by entering in a code, which will be given to both the Police and Fire Departments; and ( 3 ) a large mechanical pin could be pulled to manually open the gates should there be a power failure. These methods of access have been discussed and approv-d with the Police ind Ft rw. Departments. 5 MINUTES OF THE ORONO COUNCIL MEETING OF NOVEMBER 14, 1988 ZONING FILM 01347-MICKARL HALLEY HOMES CONTINUED Councilmember Goetten asked for the hardship in this case. Mrs. Terry and Mr. Martinson explained why they felt there was a need to keep trespassers out. The main issue was the loss of privacy. Goetten stated that there has been a lot of difficultN establishing appropriate guidelines for fences. She felt this was mainly due to the fact that citizens of Orono did not want the fenced -in, confined atmosphere. She questioned whether the City staff needed to take a comprehensive look at the issue of fencing. City Administrator Bernhardson acknowledged Goetten's concerns and said that he would be happy to proceed accordingly. Acting Mayor Peterson asked Mr. Martinson if the gate could be moved back so that a variance would not be required? Mr. Martinson replied that he preferred to crowd the front property line as much as possible. There would be a possibility of trespassers going around the gate should it be moved back. Further, the Terry's property line is very defined and it would be better, from a security standpoint, to place the gateway where the property begins. Councilmember Nettles expressed h.s opinion to be that the gateway was a convenience for the applicant, but not much else. He did not believe that there would be enough trespassing traffic to warrant the need for such security measures. He did not feel there was an adequate hardship for the variance for the gate. Acting Mayor Peterson reiterated Councilmember Goetten's suggestion of looking at the fencing issue as a whole. She said that she would be inclined to approve this application, especially in light of the fact that she had approved similar applications in the past. It was moved by Councilmember Goetten, seconded by Acting Mayor Peterson, to adopt Resolution 02539, approving the 10' setback variance and height variance for Michael Halley_ Homes. Motion, Ayes-2, Nettles, Nay, Motion passed. MAYOt'S ' RPORT2 Thee was no Mayor's report for this .aeetinq. CITY ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT: LIQUOk LICENSE RENEWALS City Administrator Bernhardson explained that the liquor licenses for Jimmies Lounge and Navarre Liquor were cominq up for renewal January 1, 1989. There have teen concerns with the on - sale operation. However, there have not been any charged violations. staff is recommendinq that the license holder be put on more stringent notice and if there were direct violations for which charges were issued, the matter would be brought before the Council. t+ MINUTES OF THE ORONO COUNCIL MEETING OF NOVEMBER 14, 1986 LIQUOR LICENSE RENEMAL-CONTINUED Councilmember Goetten asked for clarification as to whether the Council could review any violations at the time of license renewal or if it had to be reviewed immediately. Bernhardson stated that there was no time limit established. City Attorney Barrett confirmed Bernhardson's statement. Councilmember Nettles inquired as to the costs involved for any additional monitoring that was necessary by the Pole^e Department? Bernhardson replied that in actual patrol tine, there were no additional costs. The Officers had been advised to be especially attentive to potential violations. City Administrator Bernhardson explained that this was an information item and that it would be brought back to either the Council meeting on the 28th of November or the 12th of December. COUNTY ROAD 51 City Administrator Bernhardson explained that he had expected to receive additional information, but it had not arrived. This item was basically for the purpose of updating the Council as to the current standing with the County. Councilmember Goetten asked why this issue of sai.ry .,is dropped several years ago? Br - nhardson responded that the UNP and County were looking at parking in those areas and because of the possibility of the additional land being condemned, the City dropped it. When this issue was raised in 1985, it was the trespassing issue that was the major concern, not pedestrian safety, on which the City continued to work. ADMINISTRATIV1 ACT/ON City Admt,listrator Bernhardson stated that he was bringing this Tatter before the Council with the recommendation that a two-day suspension be given to Officer Larry Tomcheck. In addition, another day of suspension would be held in abeyance, pending no further violations before April 1, 1989. This recommendation resulted from two separate incidents whertin Officer Tcocheek exhibited behavior that was unprofessional and potentially hazardous. Bernhardson stated that ir a case •,there an employee union did not exist, the next step, should the Council recommend suspension, would to to appeal to the Council for a hearing it the employee chose such an appeal. However, Mr. Tomcheck is a rremter of the Po 1 ico Union so the appeal would go through the gr:evance process and an arbitrator. Acting Mayor Peterson stated that in her opinion, Mi. Tomcheck is now performing his work properly. She mentione' the fact that Mr. Tomcheck was asked to take two days off for an evaluation. Bernhardson explained that Tomcheck did receive sick pay for those two days. She felt that holding the day of suspension in abeyance for the past 10 months was more seiere than two days of suspension with no pay. In her opinion, it MIMUTW OF THE OROAO COUNCIL MEETING OF NOVEMRER 14, 1988 ADMINISTRATIVE ACTION -CONTINUED caused Mr. Tomcheck to question every move he made, everyday. Peterson observed that Mr. Tomcheck paid for the evaluation himself and asked if there were any problems discovered with the evaluation. Bernhardson said that in ligh': of the two incidences occurring back-to-back, the purpose of the observation period was to %sure them that there would not be a continuing pattern. Petet -n then asked whether Mr. Tomcheck had received any oral or writte,. -eprimands. Bernhardson replied that to the best of his knowledge there had not been any written reprimand, and could not recall any oral reprimands being given. It was moved by Acting Mayor Peterson, seconded by Councilmember Goetten, to take no further action on this matter at this time. Peterson felt that the 10 month waiting period was a sufficient penalty. Bernhardson explained that the I day suspension held in abeyance pending any further violations was the only fa:tor. That would have been the same whether the two- day suspension was assesed now or back in March. Bernhardson stated that the violations were very serious and felt that the recommended discipline was appropriate. He did not feel that the time delay in assessing the discipline had a significant negative effect upon Officer Tomcheck. Councilmember Goetten stated that there was no question that Mr. Tomcheck's violations were serious. She reiterated Peterson's concerns about the time delay in determining the disciplinary actions to be taken. She felt that proiso and discipline should be given immediately following the action. She observes' that all of the information she had heard or read concerning Officer Tomcheck had been exemplary. Bernhardson agreed with Goetten that discipline should be assessed quickly and felt that under the circumstances and the need to evaluate all of the factors involved, this matter had proceeded in a timely manner. He added that he would be flexible in dealing with the deadline for the extra one day of suspension. He suggested that February 1, 1989, may be more appropriate than April 1, 1989. Councilmember Nettles made, reference to the actual written City and Police Department Po,l`^its pertaining to employee behavior. He said that he was t&c.t c lean �n wrat the policy was for off -duty display of fire arms for police officers. Bernhardson replied that Officer Tomcheck was mainly in violation of the City's rules. Bernhardson stated that Tomcheck exhibited negligence in the performance of duty, as well as offensive conduct toward the public and took actions that were detrimental to the public's health, safety and welfare. Bernhardson further explained that Officer Tomcheck was involved in a situation that ,ould have been explosive, and had been asked not to participate, but continued to do so. His ticns consequently required additional police response, and because of the nature of the situation, those orficers were al-, endangered. [settles observed MINUPES OF THE ORONO COUNCIL MEETING OF NOVEMBER 14, 1959 ADMINISTRATIVE ACTION CONTINUED that the off -duty possession of fire arms is not prohibited. There was also no cross-reference made as to the use of intoxicants. Bernhardson explained that he was not solely using one or the other of those particular rules. He was relating the entire incident to various rules ^.oncerning misconduct. He further explained that Officer Tomeleck acted in an "on -duty" capacity even though he was off -duty. He caused such a problem by doing so, that had he not been carrying his service revolver, discipline would still have been forthcoming. Councilmember Goetten concurred with Nettles in that she could not ascertain exactly what rules Officer Tomr_heck had violated r-i-rnhardson reiterated the potential danger Officer Tomcheck plc,;ed not only himself, but the Officers called to assist him. His conduct was very inappropriate. If each of the violations occurred separately, they would not have been as much of a concern, however, put together, they constituted a very serious situation. The question on Acting Mayor Peterson's Motion was called. Motion, Ayes-1, Goetten, Nettles, Nay. Councilmember Nettles interpreted the situation as he understood it to be. He concluded that what actually needed to be done was to provide a written reprimand for Officer Tomcheck's file that the City would be on record as not condoning his actic Councilmember Goetten concurred with Nettles. She felt that City should perform some kind of reprimand, but the two- day s. �nsion seemed too severe. Acting Mayor Peterson asked about the length of time the written reprimand would remain in Officer Tomcheck's file. City Administrator Bernhardson responded that the Council could determine a time limit. It was moved by Councilmember Nettles, seconded by Councilmember Goetten, to issue a written reprimand to be placed in Officer Tomcheck's file, outlining the violations of the Police Department regulations, as well as the City Rules, and explain why Officer's Tomcheck's activities were undesireable to the City. In addition, the written reprimand would remain in his file permanently. Motion, Ayes-2, Peterson, Nay, Motion passed. APFOIVILt z OF AUDITOR PON 1948 It was recommended by City Administrator Bernhardson to appoint the audit firm of Pannell Kerr Forster, to perform the required audits of the 1988 fiscal year records. Councilmember Goetten inquired about receipt of the Certificate of Achievement. Bernhardson said he had not heard anything, but it takes 4 to 6 months to receive it. It was moved by Councilmember Goetten, seconded by Ccuncilmember Nettles, to appoint the audit firm of Pannell Kerr Forster to perform the required audits for the 1988 fiscal year at. an estimated cost of $14,000, plus direct expenses. Motion, 9 MINUTES OF TEE ORONO COUWIL MEETING OF /0VEl18ER 14, 1968 APPOINTMENT OF AUDITOR CONTINUED Ayes-3, Nays-0, Motion passed. EAZARDOUS BUILDING PROCEEDINGS 4545 *ATQTOMN ROAD RESOLUTION #2540 Mr. Jim Miller, the manager of the subject property, was present on Mr. Earl Freeman's behalf. City Administrator Bernhardson explained that the list of items set forth in the Resolution would need to be addressed before occupancy could resume. The City Attorney would file this matter with the court. The Court would set a schedule as to when the building must be repaired. If the owner fails to meet that schedule the building would be torn down. Mr. Miller asked whether he would need to have all of the items listed repaired? He cited, as an example, that the rooms are too small. He asked how he could remedy that item. Bernhardson recommended that Mr. Miller meet with Building Inspector Jacobs. He said that Mr. Jacobs could identify those items, if any that would not require repair prior to the Court Order being rescinded. Councilmember Nettles inquired as to whether the building would need to be enlarged before it would meet Orono's standards, or whether it could be "grandfathered"? Zoning Administrator Mabusth stated that would need further review. Councilmerber Goetten asked what time frame the owner would be given before the matter was filed with the court? Bernhardson replied that Mr. Miller would have approximately 10 days to determine which items needed to be addressed. However, if it appears as though the building cannot be repaired, the City would proceed with the court after that time period. It was moved by Counci lmember Nettles, Seconded by Acting Mayor Peterson, that they adopt Resolution #2540, initiating Hazardous Building Proceedings at 4545 Watertown Road. Motion, Ayes-3, Nays-0, Motion passed. PRO"ND ORDINAMCE AMSMDNMT DOG LICENSE ORDINANCE #59, 2ND SERIES City Administrator Bernhardson explained that the City was proposing to modifv the language pertaining to rabies certificates. The modification would specify that rabies certificates must be valid for the period of the dog license. Acting Mayor Peterson asked why the hours pertaining to barking dogs were 6:00 a.m. to 10:00 P.M. She observed that there were citizens in the community that worked various shifts and may be sleeping during those hours. Bernhardson replied that 10 MINUTRS OF THE 020*0 COUNCIL MEETING OF NOVaMBER 14, 1998 DOG LICENSE ORDINANCE -CONTINUED he would look into that issue further. It was moved by Acting Mayor Peterson, seconded by Councilmember Goetten, to adopt Ordinance #58, Second Series, amending Section 9.12 Subdivision 4 of the municipal code. Motion, Ayes-3, Nays-0, Motion passed. DRIVZMY PERMIT-490 OLD LONG LASE ROAD It was recommended by City Administrator Bernhardson that this item be tabled. The City has had difficulty in getting the owner to respond. It was moved by Acting Mayor Peterson, seconded by Councilmember Nettles, to table this item. Motion, Ayes-3, Nays-0, Motion passed. WESTONEA SENIOR CITIZEN'S FOUNDATION ABSOLUTION 02541* It was moved by Councilmember Goetten, seconded by Acting Mayor Peterson, to adopt Resolution 02541, declaring November 25, 1988, as Senior Citizen's Day and encourage Westonka Senior Citizens to establish the Foundation for the financial security of the organization. Motion, Ayes=3, Nays=0, Motion passed. DANGEROUS WEAPONS ORDIKAHCR AMZWDMENT ORDINANCE f59, 2ND SERIES* It was moved by Councilmember Goetten, seconded by Acting Mayor Peterson, to adopt Ordinance 059, Second Series, as an amendment to Ordinance Number 9.16 together with adopting Attachment B as a summary of that ordinance for publication. Motion, Ayes-3, Nays-0, Motion passed. MIGRATION OFFICZR MICHAEL EIRNYCZUR ABSOLUTION l2543* It was moved by Councilmember Goetten, seconded by Acting Mayor Peterson, to accept Officer Kirnyczuk's resignation effective October 3, 1988, and to adopt Resolution #2543, Motion, Ayes-3, Nays-0, Motion passed. SALARY ADJUSTNUNT OFFICER CRARLEB SCEAUSS* It was moved by Councilmember Goetten, seconded by Acting Mayor Peterson, to approve a step raise for Officer Charles Schauss, to $12.129, effective 10/26/88. Motion, Ayes-3, Nays-0, Motion passed. PLASHING MARKING LIGHTS WILLOW i HIGHWAY 12 ABSOLUTION 12542* It was moved by Councilmember Goetten, seconded by Acting Mayor Peterson, t,) adopt Resolution 02542, for the maintenance agreement for the flashing warning lights at Willow Drive and 11 MINU2118 OF Tn ORONO COUNCIL MSRAING OF MOVLMBRR 14, 1980 FLABRING LIGM CONTINUED Highway 12. Motion, Ayes-3, Nays-0, Motion passed. ADMINISTRATOR'S INFORMATION• It was moved by Councilmember Goetten, seconded by Acting Mayor Peterson, to accept the City Administrator's Information regarding: Crystal Bay Road; Woodhill Roads County Road 15; Orono/Minnetonka Beach Interceptor Progress; 1950 Shoreline Drive; Big Island Vets Camp; Cross Walk Petition/Cty-MTC Response; Sculpture Unveiling - Livingston Tower Park; and Goal Setting Status. Motion, Ayes-3, Nays-0, Motion passed. CITY ATTORNM'S RNPORT: There was no report from the City Attorney, however, City Attorney Barrett requested an Executive Session. LICENSRS• It was moved by Councilmember Goetten, seconded by Acting Mayor Peterson, to approve the following license: Septic System Inwtaller: Machtemes Construction P. 0. Box 275 Waconia, MN 55387 Residential kennel: Josh and Pam Uran 270° Watertown Road Long Lake, MN 55356 Notion, Ayes-3, Nays-0, Motion passed. BILLV Itwas moved by Councilmember Goetten, seconded b%, Acting Mayor Peterson, to approve payment of the All Funds Accounts. Motion, Ayes-3, Nays-0, Notion passed. zKX['UTIV2 8388I00 - 9800 P.M. City Attorney Barrett requested that the Council c;o into an executive session at 9:00 p.m. ADJOURNMRMT 9:14 P.M. It was moved by Acting Mayor Peterson, seconded by Councilmember Nettles, to adjourn the Regular Council Meeting at 9:14 p.m. Motion, Ayes-3, Nays-0, Motion passed. ATTEST: Dorothy Ha in, City C erl James R. Grabek, Mayor 12 L Nit'.,iA 11 ea 1988 ORONO PARK AND RECREATION RESIDENT SURVEIY,7V (Rt� A. In order to carefullly plan for the recreation neA� so �al't- no citizens, we ask for the following personal information. sous*hold Size/Pao Ages 6-1' 13-19 20-55 _ 55 and Over Street Address B. The following is alist of existing Park and Recreation sites in the City of Orono, pease indicate the approximate number of times that members of your household have visited these facilities. Orono Parks Number of Yearly Visits Casco Circle Park at the end of Casco Point Road Livingston Tower Park - Blaine Z Livingston Navarre Playround - Lyric i Shadywood Road Roberta Lee Antonie Playground - Corral i Fagerness Point Road Highwood Nature Trails - across from Highwood Road on North Shore Drive Bederwood Park - Stubbs Bar Road adjacent to Luce Line Trail Hackberry Park - Willow Drive just north of Watertown Road Crystal Bay Playground - Directly behind the City Administration Bldg Summit Park Swimming Beach - on East Long Lake Road Lydiard Swimming Beach - on Carmens Bay off Kelly Ave. Casco Swimming Beach - between 2871 i 2879 Casco Point Road - Sandy Beach Swimming Beach - on North Arm Bay off Maple Ave. 4 C. Recreation Facility Im ortance Using the numbers ,:, please indicate the level of importance to the members of your household for the following facilities. (3 represents the level of greatest importance) Tennis Courts Baseball/Softball Diamonds Ice Rinks - General Hockey Rinks Preschool Play Apparatus Play Apparatus - Older Picnic Areas Basketball Courts volleyball/Badminton Courts Football/Soccer Fields Swimming Beachs Swimming Pools Cross Country Ski Trails Snowmoblie Trails Nature/wildlife Areas Cross Country Bike/Hike Trails Fishing Piers Motorised Bike Trails Horse Riding Trails Golf Course Horeshoe Courts Sliding i Other Tobogganing Area Other D. Park Sueaestion Improvements Please indicate any changes, additions or improvements you or other household members would like to see in the Orono Parks. If you have any questions please call John R. Gerhardson, Public works Director at 473-73". Pease return within 2 weeks. CITY OF ORONO F.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 To: From: Date: Mayor Grabek s Crono Cour ci l Memoe= s I it Ut 1)iir,i: U Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building s Zoning administrator November 2' , 1,188 Subject: 41296 yerr1_t j. ?etarscn 6 Rick Stodo'-a, :39= 3:1.ad. Ncce'. ?.d - After -the -Fact variances - Third Review by Council List of Exhibits Exhibit A - Site Plan Defining Building Envelope Exhibit B - Appplicants' Proposal Exhibit C - L.M.C.D. Code Section 2.01, Subdivision 3 Section 2.02, Subdivisions 2 6 3 Exhibit D - Council Minutes of 8/22/88 Exhibit E - Sketch of Proposed Lot Line Rearrangement Exhibit F - Staff Memo of 6/17/88 Exhibit G - Staff Memo of 8/17/88 Status of Application - At the Council meeting of August 22, 1988, the applicants requested a tabling of all action on the variance application. The applicants requested additional time to discuss all available options of use of the property with the adjacent owner and the current owner of the remaining parcels within Registered Land Survey 1216, Mr. Gustafson. Since that time the applicants have staked the building envelope that now includes Parcel 0003, refer to Exhibit A. The lot could never be developed without the need for the approval of multiple variances. The magnitude of the variances needed for new construction would establish a negative precedent in dealing with other similar requests. Staff concurred upon inspection of the site and review of the actual land area, that it would not be feasible to develope Parcel 0003 with Tracts G & F as a buildable lot. Review of Applicants' Amended Proposal - (Refer to Exhibit B) The subject of the memo would suggest that the applicants propose maintaining a boat dock at the property located at 1895 Shadywood Road. In reality, the applicants, upon completion of a lot line rearrangement with '4r. Tillotson, propose the installation of a shared dock on the prcEer�. 3t 1875 Shadywood Road now cwned by Glen Tillctson. The dock L e _.ri*ed tc `our slips, *wc s'_,Fs fcr Mr. Tillotson's use and two slips fcr applicants' scle use. The applicants will purchase all rerrainina -9 9'^_ 1219 3^f7 o7irI!Al Qnn3 f:-m Gus~3fscn and le?a'_1lr comtinp 3s one unit. They propose no other improvement of the undeve.ol.er. land will use Tillotson's existing drive and parking area. Zoning File 01296 November 23, 1988 Page 2 of 4 • In the first cart of the applicants' memo, they review the concerns expressed by the City during the variance review: 1. Security problem for dock without principal structure. 2. Need for a new curb cut to serve proposed dock area on a stretch of road that is heavily trafficked and with limited sight distance. 3. The need to install new hardcover within the lakeshore protected area. 4. The unknown or planned use for the remaining tracts of RLS #1216. S. Negative precedent by allowing a secondary accessory structure to be built on property that does not have an existing primary structure. 6. Placement of dock by Glen Tillotson on property owned by Peterson and Stodola. Applicants' Response to the Concerns - Response to Item 1 - they note that the shared dock security problems will be minimized as the resident, Glen Tillotson, will have a vested interest in policing of the dock area. Response to Item 2 - the applicants propose no new curb cuts, but will share the driveway access via Mr. Tillotson's existing drive and no expansion is proposed. Response to Item 3 -- no additional expansion of the existing driveway is proposed, therefore no additional hardcover is anticipated with the shared »se. Response to Item 4 - the applicants propose purchasing all of the remaining tracts currently owned by Mr. Gustofson within RLS 1216 including Parcel 0003 and legall;, combining them as one unit. Resl;onse to Item 5 - a secondary or accessory structure - the residential dock will now be placed on a property that can now receive credit of Mr. Til lotson's I rincipal structure. 23, 1083 Staff has enclosed sections of the L.M.C.D. code, re, iew Exhibit C t3ec:.,on 2.0d'., Subd;.v:sions As aj.C1-.;ants no au :.n r e Cam�_c: rev`ew, the L.M.C.D. would have Lermitred an accesscr-. s-__'1cture cn �roLerty since it was cr?3t?d prior to 1979. If `!he t="C-s '.'%pre create'] after 1978, a principal residence would have been required. In Section 2.01, Subdivision 3, Common Use of Adjacent Dock Use Areas of the L.M.C.D. code, suggests that a principal residence is not required, merely a legal dock use area to be shared by both owners. The applicants also noted to str F that the likelihood of a lakeshore homestead owner agreeing to share a _.agle dock with an adjacent, undeveloped, riparian tract would be very rare, especially if that owner agreed to limit his dock use to two slips. Resl.or.se to Item 6 - the applicants rote that the lot line rearrangement will eleviate the violation of the setbacks of Mr. Tillotson's dock as the proposed shared dock will be located solely on Mr. Tillotson's property. Staff's Consents on Current Proposal - Clearly the L.M.C.D. code does not require a principal residence for accessory dock structures for lots created prior to 1978. The shared e,ck now located solely on Mr. Tillotson's lroperty would technically receive credit of the principal structure from the Tillotson residence. The Orono code does not distinguish between an accessory dock used as a single or shared dock. Staff would also add that this may not meet the true intent of the ordinance. If the Council concurs with the current proposal of the applicants, the subdivision of a lot line rearrangement will provide the City with the necessary authority to place restrictive controls on the future uses of the shared dock and the unbuildable properties to be combined as one unit. Staff would also agree with the applicants that the likelihood of a homestead, lakeshore lot owner giving up slips in a shared dock situation with an undeveloped, adjacent parcel would be most unusual. Council may wish to seek the opinion of the City Attorney regarding credit of the Tillotson lrincipal structure for the accessory shared dock in consideration of the pertinent sections of the Orono Zoning Code. zoning File 01296 November 23, 1988 Page 4 of 4 It should also be repeated for the record that based on Ben Whitney's memo of July 19, 1988 that the granting of a building permit for an accessory structure on a lot that does not sustain a principal residence would not be in violation of Minnesota Statutes 462.357 ("use" variance). Please review Exhibits F i G the staff memcs that provide the details and background on the present applicant. Review specifically the sections in the staff memo, Exhibit F, that deals with the background on riparian tracts created by the City in recent times. Options of Action Available to Council - A) To deny the current request of the applicantQ and to direct staff to amend the original denial resolution presented for Council action to include the removal of the existing dock on Tracts F i G, and to further deny the proposal that would allow the applicants to achieve credit for the principal residence on Tillotson's property that would provide them riparian access to Lake Minnetonka. Doi B) To approve the current proposal of the applicants based on the findings noted above and to direct the applicants to file the appropriate lot line rearrangement with Mr. Tillotson, and to further advise the applicants that the City will adort the following restrictive conditions in conjunction with the approval of pending subdivision. 1. Shared dock to be limited to four slips, two slips to be assigned to Mr. Tillotson and two slips assigned to the applicants. 2. Tracts B, C, D, F, and G, of RLS 1216 and Parcel 0003 are to be combinad. 3. All future improvements of the combined properties of the applicants must be reviewed subject and approved by the City of Orono. The City Attorney should advise whether a resolution denying the bui l iabi lty of combined Tracts B through G of RLS 1216 and Parcel 0003 is also required. T 1 �,egnne A building ana boning Acminst_,:a. City Of Orono F.;,m. Merritt ar ;_:x __ :z:a Date: October 23, 1908 Regaroinc VA-.ANCE REDi:_z, -9 01 ACE A ?:a' DOCK O,i °- PEP"' A7 1891f7 SHADv'4000 ROAC Concerns expressed by zoning administrator and City council 1. Security problems with unattended boats 2. Access con+estion caused by an additional driveway access onto Co road 19 3. Hard cover addition to accomodate vehicles on property 4. Multiple pieces of unbuildable property now owned by Ewald Gustafson that may create additional issues of dock and boat accesses in the future 5. Precedent of allowing a secondary structure to be built on property that does not hav3 an existing primary structure 6. Illegal placement of dock by Glenn Tillotson on property owned by Peterson and Stodla Proposal by Peterson, Stodola,and Tillotson to satisfy Orono City Concerns: 1. Share driveway access to property with Glenn Tillotson 2. Create no additional hard cover on property 3. Combine all property presently owned by Ewald Gustafson with property owned by Peterson and Stodola into a single deeded unit 4. Deed property defined as item #A on registered land survey to Glenn Tillotson to provide him legal access to the lake 5. Pursuant to the approval of the city of Orono and effected land owners, build a single common dock to be shared by Tillotson, Peterson, and Stodola, while adhering to LMCD rules A. With the shared dock security problems will be !rl-1,rized as the resident Glenn Tillotson will have a vested interest in policing of the dock area The above proposal is contingent upon the full approval of the City Of Orono and interested property owners, Peterson,Stodola, and Tillotson �1 / / �, ` .� �... v .r♦ tip.. are not expanded. 3u-nc rizea docx use aria, .n the case of :o _�e- in widzh or less in exi3tence on February 2, 1970, expanded to a side s_?ttac'! 1 _' m4- t 3t; 7n o f f e Foot , pr,),! idea that such se,:oac:< :n no way _.ipa_=s access _o neign- bor_ng c) M:esurement - Authorized doc.< use areas shall be mea- sured from toe point which forms the shoreline when the Lake is at elevation 929.4, National Geodetic Vertical Datum, 1929. d) Temporary dock extensions. During periods when the Lake level falls below 929.4 feet and when so declared by resolu- tion of the Hoard, the Executive Director may issue permits for temporary dock extensions beyond the authorized dock use area subject to the following limitations: 1) Need for the temporary dock extension must be demonstrated by the applicant. 2) The extension shall be a temporary, seasonal type dock. No extensions may be on pile driven or permanent yearround docks. 3) The extension shall meet all requirements of this Code other than the length limitation described in this section. 4) The extension shall only be permitted during the time the water level is below elevation 929.4 feet and, at any giver. time, shall be permitted only to the extent of the equivalent dockage and comparable depth existing at a Lake elevation of 929.4 feet. 5) Tt:e extension, together with the original dock, shall not be used to provide storage space for a greater number of watercraft than are authorized under this Code or for a greater number of watercraft than are licensed if a license for 1.00 the dock is required under this Code. If V Subd. 3. Common Use of Adjacent Dock Use Areas. Two or more adjoining site owners may by mutual agreement adjust these side setback requirements or ;nay use their combined authorized dock use areas for a single common dock or mooring area for their respective non-commerc.al private uses, but in any e':ent, must observe these side setback requirements at the outer site lines of the =nbine,j sites involved in such a joint use. A dock or 114:__. _?3 :3-„4 ^.^.�._'' ._"._ '' "1a:n---nel ;ndsr - 13 - :.Coring area �1;:iaSa SUCn �JC.t or mOOr_nC dtea i3 C^..^:S.r7Ct9(1 Jr :"alnt31ned ►oCr _::'a :3 _7r3res`_ricte,� wa-ercr3_- Section 2.02. Shoreline requirements. Suod. 1. General Rule. No ne•.,i doers or mooring areas s:,al_ be constructed or established which provide space for or are used for mooring or docking a ?re3t?r number of restrictec' watercraft than one for each 50 feet of conr_inuous shoreline in existence on May 3, 1978, unless authorized to do so by special density license pursuant to Section 2.05. For sites with contin- uous shoreline greater than 100 feet, when measurements deter- mining the number of restricted watercraft allowed result in the provision of a fractional restricted watercraft, any fraction up to and including one-half (1/2) shall be disregarded, and frac- tions over one-half (1/2) shall be counted as one additional restric ed watercraft_. Subd. 2. Special Rule for Sites in Existence on August 30, 1978. Unless a greater number is authorized by the provi- sions of Subd. 1 above, up to two restricted watercraft may be kept at any deck cr mooring facility which is located on a site its defined in Section 1.02) which was in existence on August 30, 1978. Volos"ubd. 3. Special Rule for Sites Established After August 30, 1978. Unless a greater number is authorized by the provi- sions of Subd. 1 above, up to two restricted watercraft may be kept at any dock or mooring area facility which is located on a site (as defined in Section 1.02) established after August 30, 1978, "ovi�ther s Bence on the site and dock and docking rights are owned solely y ,FFe rest ents of that site. Subd. 4. Additional Watercraft Allowance for Watercraft Owned by Residents. Three or four restricted watercraft may be kept at docks or moorings described in Subdivisions 2 and 3 above if all restricted wa-ercraft are owned by and registered to the residents of the site. Section 2.03. Multiple Docks, Mooring Areas, Launching Ramos and Docks ir, Excess of 100 Feet in Length. Subd. 1. License Required. No person may locate, con- struct, install or maintain a dock of more --han 100 feet in _angth or a muit:ple dock or mooring area ^r a c:mmer._3: dock or a launch:n: ramp on the shoreline of the sake, or in tie waters �_` the LaK.­� unless; licensed by the Hoard � do so. Subd. Z. Application for License. Application for a - 19 - HINUTUS Of RNGULAR ORONO COUNCIL NZBTXNG AUGUST 22, 1998 NWXNG PILL 01291-XVMMBOM Cxmmz URD �^ It was -moved by Mayor Grabek, seconded by Councilmember Goetten, to amend the present Resolution #2475 to indicate 39.40 hardcover was approved, provided that applicant offset any future increase in hardcover by removal of the same percentage. Approval is also contingent upon applicant providing a revised survey to show _the 19--hard8o-s4 increase. Motion, Ayes-5, Nays- 6nppwssed. 296 INl'RNI'1T J. PN22RSON/RICK STODOLA ,�t�s saD:M000 ROAD 'VARTANCi-DNNIAL - �_ 9LOYION addition to Mr. Ewald Gustafson and Mr. and Mrs. Tillotson were present for this matter. City Administrator Bernhardson explained that this matter had been considered and conceptually denied at the July 11, 1988 Council Meeting. This application involved the maintenance of a dock on a substandard lot. An issue had been raised as to whethez the granting of an accessory use variance when there was no p-imary use constituted a use variance. The City Attorney reseirched This issue and c.•ncluded that it is not a use variance which the ,..ty would not be allowed to grant, however a variance would be needed to allow dockage, be it a seawall or a regular dock. Subsequent to the last meeting, a letter was sent to Mr. Gustafson, one of the owners who sold the property to Mr. Peterson and Mr. Stodola. There are still issues which need to be -addressed, one of them being an easement granted to Mr. Tillotson across part of the parcel. Other items of concern are that sometime in the past there was a 32' x 32' corner of the property that was sold to Mr. Tillotson, as well as questions regarding instructions to pote::tial buyers as to the possible riparian fights on the lot. Ci•,r Adminictrator Bernhardson noted that the present Resolution for Denial only addressed the buildability of the lot. Due to the fact that the proponents have not shown a hardship for using the property for boat dockage, that 1ingnage would mood to be added should the Council choose to deny the accessory use. Zoning Administrator Mabusth stated that the applicant had conversed with Mr. Gustafson and that they would request tabling this matter until they had further opportunity to meet with all concerned parties. After such meeting, the applicants would appear again before the Council to present their propcsal. It was moved by Mayor Grabek. seconded by Coincilmember Peterson, to table this matter. Motion, Ayesa-, Nay&-O, Motion oassed. TO .-a:1nirg Commission ...:a,rman ae11ey Orono Planning Commission Members City Administrator :�ernhardson From: Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building & Zoning Administrator Date: ;une = - , 1 188 Subject: 41296 Merritt J. Peterson and Rick Stodola 1895 shadywood Road - After -the -Fact Variances - Public Hearing Zoning District - LR-1C Total Area - 5,500 s.f. (approximate building envelope - thin strip of land running south to Coffee bridge not included) - average width in the area is approximately 251. Application Illegal dock constructed in May of this year without building permits. The dock shall not be used by applicant until this matter is resolved, review Exhibit D. - No principal structure exists on the property - applicant advised to file for a lot area variance to determine buildability and if not what reasonable use can be made of the property. Pertinent Ordinances To determine the variance for lot area, Section 10.25, Subdivision 6 (B) Required - 21,780 s.f. Existing - 5,500 s.f. Variance - 16,280 s.f. or 75% To construct a residence on t::is property would require an average lakeshore setback variance (Section 10.22, Subdivision 1 (B), an excessive lakeshore setback variance (Section 10.22, Subdivision 1 (B), and even more excessive hardcover variances (Section 10.22, Subdivision 2 (B). Pertinent Ordinances Related to the Illegal Dock/Accessory Structuce Constructed on Property without a Principal Residence Section 10.03, Subdivision 9 (A) Time of construction - No accessory structure shall be constructed on any lot pr"or to the time of construction of the principal building to which it is accessory. Section 10.25, Subdivision 5 (A) Accessory uses - Any accessory use as regulated in the RR-lA district, any private docks subject to the City Code and other applicable regulations, including boat storege density regulations. List of R:hibits Exhibit A - Application Exhibit B - Property Owners List Exhibit C - Plat Map Exhibit D - Violation Letter to Applicants Exhibit E - Tillotsen Survev (1875 Shadvwood Road` Exhibit G - Wetlands Map Exhibit H - RLS-1216 Tracts F & G (0013 & 0014) June Exhibit I - RLS-i216 Tracts B, C, D & S 1,0009, 0010, 00.11, & 0012) Exhibit J - Legal Decription of RLS-1216 Exhibit L - Plans of Lcts Disc�.ssec in Lc•` 'Area Table Historf of the Properties All seven parcels within RLS-1216 have been under the ownership of Miriam and Ewald H. Gustafson for many years. It is staffs understanding that Miriam Gustafson is a member of the original Coffee family that owned the majority of the properties within the area. In fact, prior to their recent move to Excelsior, the Gustafsons lived across the street at 1890 Shadywood Road. Staff remembers meeting with Mr. Gustafson a few years back to discuss what potential the property had in its present configuation. This would :,tear, consideration of all seven lots combined as one unit. It should be noted that these lots were never legally combined, but remained single separate lots of record. It was staff's recommendation to file for the lot area variance as it appeared that parcel 0003 would have the greatest lot depth but without the necessary updated survey locating the present water line and county right-of-way it was difficult to give direction. At that time staff had no knowledge that Mr. Tillotsen's residence and driveway intersected the subject parcel, review Exhibit E. In fact, Mr. Tillotsen's dock is located cn Tract F, the same tract that applicants have installed dock. Review Exhibit I. The applicants have advised that it is their understanding that Mr. Gustafson has some kind of arrangement with Mr. Tillotsen to sell the encroached parcel to him at some time in the future. Without the "0003" property, the property is clearly not a buildable lot, review staff sketch Exhibit H. There isnobailding envelope and if the lot was deemed buildable, it would require the granting of multiple, excessive variances to all lakeshore ordinances. It is clearly not the intent or wishes of the present Applicants to apply for the lot area variance. The recent county road acquisitions have placed even more restrictions on the building envelope. Planning Commission members will note the stakes of the additional right-of-way in relation to the subject property. Staff has advised the applicant that in order to make any decision on an accessory structure or use of the property that the buildability of the lot must be resolveA by the City. Please review the table listed below of recent lot area variances dealing with lakeshore properties similar to this one. Pace 3 of 6 7eS1-- -_:n un building Lakesnore Zxl]t:.nc .:ce'' 'inr-LaK"f nor- Structure 7enIe'7 LaBresh - 5,300 s.f. Narrow lot der::.. Lakesnore Cabin !haz .t.1dg) Denied App1. 4999 :.A-iC excessive lakesnore assessed :or sewer 6-23-86 -.,'90 s.f. and wet -and ; _na cis, and ware: out not required with county roar rlgr.t- connected. 0tal of -way increased next replacement. to bridge. Pemberton - 11,130 s.f. Narrow lot depth, Lakesnore Existing residence Approved Appl. i983 '-: :axesnore 3etbac!: hooxed tc 3ewer. 21,780 s.f. on both east and west. Total replacement. ;squired Beintz 8,300 s.f. Narrow lot depth with Lakesnore Undeveloped. Not Denied LR-1B total of 1001- multiple, assessed for sewer 3-16-78 43,560 s.f. excessive variances required Never assessed as required for residence. baildable lot based on market valuation. Subject 5.500 s.f. Narrow depth of Lakeshore Undeveloped. Not Property LR••lc building envelope - assessed for •ewer 21,780 ■.f. multiple variances required and water. Never required to construct residence - assessed as buildable major portions of property lot bawd on market consist of wetlands. valuation. In addition, staff has reviewed the assessed market valuations for all seven parcels, they have been listed for your consideration below: ferpl as '07 1/6 1e5 184 0003 600.00 600.00 600.00 600.00 600.00 Done i00.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 0010 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 Cull 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 0012 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 0013 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 0014 300.00 300.00 300.00 300.00 300.0.: '93 '82 '91 's0 .7, '78 550.00 500.30 440.00 36C.00 330.00 300.00 110.00 100.00 60.00 40.00 30.00 50.00 50.00 50.00 30.00 20.00 10.00 30.00 50.00 50.00 30.00 40.00 30.00 50.0V 50.00 50.0c 30.00 50.00 40.00 40.00 110.00 100.00 60.00 4C.00 30.00 50.00 170.00 250.30 140.n0 100.00 80.00 70.00 The parcels have never been assessed as buildable lots. Parcel 0003 has been assessed for lateral sewer and a water unit, but the subject parcels have never been assessed for sewer or water (0013 and 0014). Staff Recommendation To recommend denia. of the lot area variance application of Merritt Peterson and Rick Stodola based on the following findizigs: 1. There is only approximately 5,500 s.f. of area within the defined building envelope with an average approximate 9epth of 100'. 2. There is not adequate ar?a to build a house and meet the 75' setback requirement, the front, reaz acid side yard setbacks and hardcover regulations. 3. The property has never been assessed :or sewer or water. 4. The property was valued frjr tax purposes in the past at a reduced amount to reflect the fart that these are substandard lots and not appropriate for residential construction. S. The lot is sub-ect to flooding and is In the nat::ral drainagewr% to the lake for the surroundinc watershed. There is no wav to build on the rroperty without diverting the surface water run. -or_` ir a manner contrary to the normal run-off cat -_err and onto the adjacent atz-eet. An'! construction would be sut-ect periodic floodinc. lots ir, the area upon which development has already been completed. 7. The grant:nc of a lot area variance for these Properties would result 1r. additional: Zoning File 41296 June 17, 1988 Page 4 of 6 a. Traffic congestion b. Surface water drainage problems C. Surface water pollution problems for Lake Minnetonka d. Congestion in the area e. Dimunition in value to the surrounding properties f. Parking problems in the area 8. The applicant has failed to demonstrate any hardships to warrant the granting of a variance which granting of variances would be adverse to the health, safety and welfare of the citizens of the City of Orono. 9. The granting of the requested variances would be adverse to the Comprehensive Land Use Plan and Zoning Code of the City. Once again, the lot area request for buildability was never the intent or purpose of the applicants. It was clearly the procedure to go through so that a reasonable use of the property can be decided when the property is formally deemed unbuildable. The accessory dock is located on a limited use channel and surrounded by large wetland/swamp areas. The only safe parking area available is the driveway on the parcel referred to as 0003 where Mr. Tillotsen's driveway has been constructed. The parking on the county right-of-way would not be allowed and the City would not encourage a curb cut within this section of roadway. Staff can recall other applications that dealt with the creation of lots for exclusive riparian use. Briefly to review; In 1985 the Marina Committee was kept busy working on the 10' by 20' riparian lots along the narrows to the south end of the City. In this case, the riparian tracts were created years before for the purpose of keeping the adjacent residence lot off the main lake and away from the narrow charnel area by providing a protected harbor for the docking of boats. When the covenants expired, some of the owners sold off the lots to other members of the public who did not necessarily reside in the City of Orono. These docks have existed for years and the recent variance and Conditional Use Permit applications were a means of setting up guidelines for the use of the severely limited dock areas. In recent years, in the Stubbs Bay area, staff can recall a subdivision (Balgaard/Norton) where the owner of a riparian tract separated from his homestead lot by the county road was allowed to divide off a 200' strip to provide riparian access for this next door neighbor, Mr. Balgaard. The only structures allowed on these lots were the accessory docks. The ap1roval was based on the fact teat Mr. Balgaard was immediately adjacent to the property on the opposite 9-de of the roadway. In the -division that created three residential lots of the old Stubbs Bay Mat property, the City approved substandard lots with less than the required 2 acres in area in adc?itien to a riparian tr3ct. The riparian outiot was limited to the future ownership of someone within a 1000' radius of the subject property. It just so happens that the neighbor across the 'oning File #1296 June 17, 1988 Page 5 of 6 street from the outlot purchased it ana continues to own the property now. Once again, the background and reason behind this subdivision was the owner was giving up a commercial marina and the City granted certain variances for residential use with the rezoning so that there would be no serious challenge of a taking. There have been subdivisions in the past, specifically the Greentrees and the Pink Palace Subdivisions where riparian tracts were created for the exclusive use of adjacent lot because of extensive lineal feet of shoreline that easily satisfied the required lot width of the specific zoning district. The RS district (island districts) the ordinances of the City allow for accessory docks without principal structures. This would be a reasonable use in consideration of the uniqueness of island properties and the intent of the City to minimize development. In the Heintz application noted above where the City denied Mr. Heintz the lot area variance for building. Heintz was told he couldn't construct an accessory dock and that the property was merely limited to picnic, tenting, possible fire place for picnicking and that a boat could be pulled up on the side of the shoreline, but not permanently stored on the property. The new members of the Planning Commission should be advised that the City does not allow an accessory dock to be constructed on a lot being developed until a Certificate of Occupancy is issued for the new residence. The reason for this is that someone is at home to supervise and protect the dock property. Docks, boats and boat equipment are always being burglarized. As with all accessory structures/uses, it is the resident of the principal structure that is there to watch out for their personal property. Prior to approving any use of these parcels, Mr. Gustafson should be asked as to how he is planning to dispose of the other tracts within this RLS. The applicants advised that Mr. Tillotsen has spoken for 0003, but what of 9, 10, 11 and 12. Review your wetlands map. They are all located within a wetlands area, except for 0003 and Tract G. Tract 0009 through 0014 should be legally combined as one parcel, depending upon the resolve of this issue, possibly for future acquisition by Mr. Tillotsen. Issues for consideration: 1. Does the physical character of the area have any bearing on your consideration - limited channel area, dock screened by natural vegetation. Tillotsen has a dock on Tract F, the same as applicants', is a shared dock more appropriate? 2. The City has approved the creation and use of riparian tracts where future owners live within a reasonable policing radius of the dock area. The applicants live in other cities. How does the Punning Commission feel on this issue? It is important on a limited channel area where the dock is shielded by natural vegetation and within visual scope of neighbor Tillotsen? How permanent? Zoning File 41296 June 17, 1988 Page 6 of 6 Alternatives for Planning Commission Action If you approve the request of the applicant and allow the existing dock to remain, staff would suggest the following conditions: 1. The current owner of Tracts 9, 10, 11 and 12 must transfer all interest to applicants and applicants must legally combine all six parcels. 2. Mr. Gustafson must also provide legal access to the dock area via 0003. 3. Dock limited to two slips only - it should be added that this property has a Grandfather status, per LMCD codes and the dock would be allowed without the principal structure. 4. No parking shall be allowed on the county road. 5. No other structures can be installed on the property. 6. No defined parking area with gravel or blacktop can be installed on the property. If denied, the following conditions should be considered: 1. Immediate removal of the dock. 2. Applicant can use the subject property for picnic purposes, mooring of a boat on the shoreline, but not kept there permanently. 3. Access to the site must be via parcel 003. Gustafson, the current owner, must provide access easement for applicants. How does Planning Commission wish to address the fact that Mr. Tillotson's dock is also located on Tract F. What plans does Mr. Gustafson have for Tracts B, C, D and E? Additional Coments and Planning Cosssission Recos endation July 7, 1988 Additional Rchibits Exhibit M - Planning Commission Action Notice The applicants were encouraged to submit additional information in support of their request (review Exhibit M) but have failed to do so. The Gustafsons, the owners of RLS 1216 and Parcel 0003, have failed to contact the City throughout the review although they were sent a copy of the staff memo prior to the Planning Commission meeting and a copy of the Planning Commission Action Notice after the meeting. Mr. Tillotser► called staff prior to the meeting to advise that he would like to purchase the portion of Parcel 0003 that his house and driveway encroach as that was all he could afford. when asked to comment on the fact that his dock was on Tract F, Mr. Tillotsen advised ttiat the Gustofscns had always allowed him to locate his dock at that location to facilitate navigation through the channel to the main lace. To: Mayor Grabek & Orono Council Members City Administrator Bernhardson Frc: Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building & Zoning Administrator Datos August 17, 1988 subject: #1296 Merritt J. Peterson & Rick Stodola, 1895 Shadywood Rd - After -the -Fact Variances - Denial Resolution List of luhibits Exhibit A - Ben Whitney's Memo Dated 7/19/88 Exhibit B - Letter to Gustafsons Dated 8/17/88 Exhibit C - Denial Resolution At the July 11, 1988 meeting of the Council, Council conceptually denied the lot area application of the applicants and directed staff to draft the appropriate denial resolution. That resolution has been prepared for your formal review and action. Prior to acting on the applicants' specific request for the maintenance of an accessory residential dock on the property, the City Attorney was asked to provide an opinion regarding the legal issue as to whether the City would be granting a "use variance" if the dock use was approved. Ben Whitney has prepared a memo responding to the legal issues raised by the Council (Exhibit A). Briefly, the memo advises that a variance that would allow an accessory use without a principal use is not a use variance since the dock use is an approved or permitted accessory use within the residential district, and is similar to the types of variances granted to standards set forth in the zoning code for certain uses such as the lot area variance that you dealt with earlier with this application. You will be asked to address not only the issue of the dock use but any future reasonable use of this unbuildable property. Please review the original staff memo that cited all the issues raised throughout the review in addition to the Planning Commission comments and recommendation. Upon resolve of the dock issue, direct staff to amend the enclosed resolution to to reflect the final action of the Council. A registered letter has been sent to the Gustafsons advising them of the final dispensation of this application at your next meeting. It also asks then to attend and if they were unable to attend, to schedule a meeting with staff so that we may resolve the many issues surrounding their remaining properties within RLS #1216 and the lot referred to as Exception or 0003 in the staff memos. Zoning File #)1296 - Add-n Comments to June 17, 1988 Memo Page 7 of 7 Staff would add to the factual findings presented for this review: RLS 1216 was filed on May 8, 1967. The half acre lot standard was established for this area and subdivision regulations were also established for the City (this is approximately the time that the Minnetonka Highlands Plat was being reviewed by the City). Staff has reviewed the 1967 Council minutes and can find no record of this division being approved by the City. It would be of interest to ask the Gustofsons, the original purpose of RLS 1216. Planning Commission Itecos ndation - Planning Commission recommended denial of the lot area application of Rick Stodola and Merritt Peterson for Tracts F 6 G of RLS 1216 based on the findings cited by staff on Page 3 of this memo and further advised the applicants that an accessory dock was not an acceptable accessory use for this property and noted the following findings: 1. The lack of a principal structure and the heavy natural screening that shields the dock area from public view, makes policing and protection of the dock on the private property difficult if not impossible. 2. An adjacent neighbor already has a dock located on the same property. 3. The property is not wide enough to provide adequate parking that would meet the required setback of 75' from the main lake (channel area). Parking is also not allowed along this section of County Road. 4. Approval of the use of an accessory structure, such as a dock, without a principal structure would establish a negative precedent in dealing with similar requests in lots of similar size. options of Action Available to Council - 1 . To table pending further review by City Attorney regarding the following issues. a) Question of taking? (Property was never assessed for sewer or water. Market valuat:.on of property suggested unbuildability.) b) Ability of City to question the Gustafsons regarding their plans for the remaining tracts within RLS 1216 and the claim by applicants that Gustafsons have a gentlemen's agreement with Tillotson for the sale of portions of Parcel 0003. c) Other issues Council may deem important for this review. 3. To deny and to direct staff to draft the appropriate denial resolution for presentation at the Council meeting of July 25, 1988. A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE PLAT OF ORONO SCHOOL EXPANSION WHEREAS, the City of Orono is a municipal corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of Minnesota; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Orono has adopted subdivision regulations for the orderly, economic and safe development of land within the City; and WHEREAS, the City Council has considered the application for a subdivision of a plat by Tom Haislot, the subdivider; and WHEREAS, the subdivision has been found to meet all standards of the RR-lB rural residential zoning district finding that each lot is of a size and configuration that will allow its use as a single family residence or another allowed use within the residential zoning district to be fully developed without the need of any variances; and WHEREAS, the subdivider has completed all requirements of the platting regulationj of the City, including: 1. Completion of all the requirements of Resolution 02513. 2. Creation of a new private road shown on the plat as Outlot A. 3. Concurrent with the creation of this private road, the Subdivider has dedicated to the City a Road and Utilities Easement granting to the City temporary access, improvement and utility easements over said Outlot. 4. Payment to the City for the legal review and filing of the plat,, easements and covenants in the amount of $150.00. 5. Payment to the k-ity for the final plat application fee in the amount of $150.00. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Orono hereby approves the plat of Orono School Expansion, Hennepin County, Minnesota; subject to the following conditions: Page 1 of 2 W TO: Mayor Grabek & Orono Council Members City Administrator Bernhardson Prom: Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building & Zoning Administrator Date: November 22, 1988 Subject: 01321 Tom Haislet, 950 Old Crystal Bay Road - A) Final Subdivision - Resolution B) Execution of Developer's Agreement The applicant has fulfilled all conditions of preliminary subdivision approval as set forth in enclosed resolution 02513. Staff recommends approval of the final plat, Orono School Expansion, subject to the findings and conditions set forth in the enclosed resolution. The Orono staff and City Attorney have reviewed the proposed Developer's Agreement and find that it satisfies all of the issues raised at the time of preliminary subdivision approval. The City Attorney has reviewed this agreement with the attorney representing the School District, Tony Leung. It is staff's understanding that the School District has also concurred with the conditions of the agreement. Staff recommends approval of the Developer's Agreement and further recommends that the Council direct the Mayor and Clerk to execute that agreement. 1. All persons with an interest in the plat (hereafter "Developers"), together with the City of Orono shall execute a Developer's Agreement that defines the guidelines for the future use of this property by the developers, and further restricts the City from requiring certain site improvements for a specified pericd of time if the developers fulfill all Pertinent conditions of this agreement, and upon the recommendation of the Orono staff and City Attorney confirming that this agreement does satisfactorily protect the City's interest in this matter further directs the Mayor and City Clerk to execute the Developer's Agreement on behalf of the City of Orono. 2. The aforesaid plat shall be filed by the City of Orono w-th either the Hennepin County Recorder's Office or the Registrar of Titles Office on or before May 28, 1989 together with a certified original copy of this Resolution and executed copies of the covenants and easements noted above. The approval granted by this Resolution shall expire if the plat has not been filed by the date specified above. In that event, it will be necessary to file a new application with the City of Orono for subdivision review. Dated this 28th day of November, 1988. ATTEST: Dorothy M. Hallin, City Clerk James R. Grabek, Mayor Page 2 of 2 City of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO, 2513 - '.N0 L � I i ..111.•I �;„VI - •yi,i Ci4L A RRIDDIMIONG N GRANTIPRELININART APPRMAL • '„" l or T= CLA88 III SuaDIVZSION APPLICATION Ot'" VA !'ill TM �SLIIT Y• JLII .J`_ . V APPLICATION No. 1321 . `• ` • ` ` v � va iuYevv �6k• 7` -�ti � ) MRSARAS, Tom Haislet (hereinafter *applicant '�)a..,4 rASOA ,tig Albin F. Thies, the owner of the property, on July 22, 1988,i`iad. al�laas III subdivision application with the City of Orono (hezeihdf`ter , City") for approval of a four -lot plat of property legally described as: Lot 1, Block 1, Crystal Crest, and that part of Lot 2, Block 1, Crystal Crest, according to the recorded plat thereof, Hennepin County, Minnesota lying eastly of the west 642' thereof, (hereinafter 'property'); and WXZRSAS, after due published and mailed notice in accordance with Minnesota Statutes 462.358 et. seq. and the City of Orono Zoning and Subdivision :odes, the Orono Planning Commission held a public hearings on August 15, 1998 and September 19, 1988, at which time all persons desiring to be heard concerning this application were given the opportunity to speak thereon; and WZRRMS, at their regular meeting held on October 10, 1908, the Orono City Council considered the subdivision application of the applicant, noting the following findings of fact: 1. The property is located within tho 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.Od acres of dry contiguous land; Lot 2, Block 2 consists of 12.08 ages of dry contiguous land. Page 1 of 3 cite of' ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 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 Hay Road or County Road 6. Additional curb cuts will 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 four lots without the need for further variances. SON, THRRSTORE SE IT RESOLVED that based upon either one or more of the findings noted above, the City Council of the City of Orono hereby approves the preliminary plat application of Tom Haislet per plat drawings by Phillip A. Nelson, Registererd Land Surveyor, dated 7/10/88 and further grants a variance to the standard that 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 S' 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 : terest. Page 2 of 3 City of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 2 513 8) The applicant must provide certified copies of all recorder easements currently affecting the property. C) Owner to grant an underlying Road i Utility Easement over Outlot A to the City of Orono - the separate agreement betweer the City and Orono School District shall specify the limits or this easement. D) Execution of an agreement between the City and the Cronc School District that would cover the issues defined in t.e staff memo dated 10/7/88 to the Orono Council - Application #1321. 3. FEES TO BE PAID: Total Du 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 reqular meeting held this loth day of October, 1988. ATTEST: rothy (A.1 Hallin, City Clerk Page 3 of 3 COUNCIL MEETING 'i TO: Mayor Grabek cITY OF Q COA- Orono Council Members City Administrator Bernhardson PROM: Michael P. Gaffron, Asst Planning 6 Zoning Administrator DATR- November 21, 1988 SUBJECT: #1329 Thomas McNellis, 355 woodhill Road - Variance - Resolution - Consent Agenda Attached is a formal resolution reflecting the conditional approval granted for a variance to the wetland setback requirement, in conjunc-icn with al;proval for issuance of the building permit only after a completed lot line rearrangement applicaticn is received. Motion: Ey , Seconded by , to approve resolution # granting a variance ror proj:erty at 355 Woodhill Road. Ryes, Nays. A RESOLUTION GRANTING A VARIANCE TO MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 10.55, SUBDIVISION 8 FILE #1329 WHEREAS, Thomas McNellis (hereinafter "the applicant") is the owner of the property located at 355 Woodh311 Road within the City of C=ono (hereinafter "City") and legally descr. follows: Lot 3, Block 1 Woodhill Ridge, Hennepin = -,nesota (hereinafter "the property"); and WHEREAS, the applicant has applied to the City for a variance to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.55, Sub?ivision 8 to permit the construction of a cantilevered deck which would encroach 4' into the required 26' setback from a wetland easement, and for a front yard setback variance to allow a 37' front yard setback where a 50' setback is normally required. Minnesota: NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono, FINDINGS 1. This application was reviewed as Zoning File #1329. 2. The property is located in the RR-lB Single Family Rural Residential Zoning District. 3. The Orono Planning Commission reviewed this application on October 17, 1988, and recommended on a vote of 4 to 3 to deny the proposed variances based upon finding no adequate hardships to justify granting of the variances. 4. The application was reviewed by the City Council on November 14, 1998, at which time the applicant agreed to proceed with a lot line .-arrangement with the property tc the east, thereby eliminating the necessity of the proposed front yard setback variance. 5. On November 14, 1988, the City Counc-1 voted 3 to 0 to grant approval of the proposed 4' cantilevered encroachment into the 26' wetland easement setback, finding that the actual wetland boundary in this specific case is not coincident with the easement line, and the actual setback from the proposed deck to the boundary of the wetland is approximately 32', which meets the intent of the wetland ordinance. Page 1 of 4 Furthermore, the Counci 1 voted in the same motion to a 1 low staf f to issue a building permit to applicant prior to completion of the lot line rearrangement subdivision, but only after the proper application, submittals, and fees, for that application have been submitted. 6. 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. 7. The City Council finds that the conditions existing on this property are peculiar to it and do not apply generally to other property in this zoning district; that granting the variance would not adversely affect traffic conditions, light, air nor pose a fire hazard or other danger to neighboring property; would not merely serve as a convenience to the applicant, but is necessary to alleviate a demonstrable hardship or difficulty; is necessary to preserve a substantial property light of the applicant.; and would be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan of the City. CONCLUSIONS, ORDER AND CONDITIONS Based upon the above findings, the Orono City Council hereby grants a variance to the Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.55, Subdivision 8 to permit the construction of a cantilevered deck that will encroach 4' into the 26' wetland easement setback zone, subject to the following conditions: 1. No front yard setback variance is granted, however, the applicant will be allowed to construct the residence at his proposed location subject to completion of a subdivision of a lot line rearrangement, for the purpose of acquiring additional land so that the new lot line will allow for the required 50' front setback. 2. Applicant will be issued a building permit only after thA complete subdivision application and fees have been submitted to the City. 3. Applicant shall install and maintain appropriate erosion control measures as may be required by the City inspector, during the construction period. 4. Authorities granted by this variance run with the property not with the applicant, but are permissive only and must be exercised by application for a building permit within o.ie year of the date of 1 Council approval, or this variance will expire on that date (November 28, 1989). Page 2 of 4 5. Violation of or non-compliance with any of the terms and conditions of this variance shall constitute a violation of the zoning code, shall automatically terminate any authority granted herein, and shall be punishable as a misdemeanor. 6. The undersigned applicant has read, understood and hereby agrees to the terms of this resolution and on behalf of himself, his heirs, successors and assigns, hereby agrees to the recording of this resolution in the chain of title of the property. Adopted by the Orono City Council on this 28th day of November, 1988. ATTEST: Dorothy M. Hal in, City Clerk James R. Grabek, Mayor Property Owner(s) Page 3 of 4 lli�oo.l TO: Mafor and :itv ;ouncil - ' , - NOV28 c'3UA: Aarx L. 3ar::,lar. .3on, .1 A,;,n nistr3cor1,. ,ArE: ovan.)ar .cos �1lYY OF .�3- Conditional Use Permit/Preliminary Subdivision itt3'....:4.'1`v$: A. ".i` )f Irma i:'..aw f ..ail .3::71 9. amity of jr')no iev:aw )ate,: 9/1ji3,3 C. :ity of Orono Memo Dated 10/17/38 - '15 lorth Sr.-wn 3i-id Rezoniig D. Robert Mitchell Letter 11/22/88 With Exhibits E. Preliminary Plans INTRODUCTION - The attached application is for the subdivision of the property at 115 North Brown Road together with the Conditional Use Permit in order to allow for the Planned Residential District (PRD) designation which allows for the open space as provided for in the subdivision. As you may recall this prooerty was grantel tie -toning r,�q-lest !ontln3-�nt u70n 3'�we" service by the City Council on October 10, 1988. DISCUSSIUJN - The subdivision was reviewed ana approved as amended by the Planning Commission on October 17. 1983. The only 31gnlfi,-,ant recommendation from the proposal tilat Planning Commission amended was the 11C3tion of the access to the property. (As you will note the proponent had in response to the Planning Commission made the road in the subdivision a loop road.) The access by b31n3 move's further north is lire^tly in front )f the property or ;COtt 3'11 . 33,^.'le .IaJJ3t .. k3 tae3a property owners have 3 ,oncern with that location and desire a further south location and in order to avoid a Conflict of interest the planning review of this matter is being handled for the City by John Shardlow. He outlines in Attachment B the review of the original proposal and Attachment A representing a review of the results of the Planning Commission action. The issue of sewer being finalized would be an appropriate condition to be met prior to final subdivision. approval Frith an agreement regarding the subdivision share of North Brown Road reconstruction. a�r�R�la:.vir� 1. approve as recam.lenieJ oy tae ?_ar;ning Com!o:s3io::. �a;J:. ..13 sever _e 'i131i zel ? -.or to _.1a, su:.-33..•1. �. Developer's agreement addr3ssing 3o"th Brown load jpjraJe RECOMMENDATION - It is re:ommended that the subdivision be approved as presented wi'.h 3 c:zangi in the location of the acc!ss resolution for approval at the December 12, 1988 Council meeting. 31so ka-i :oiatr'i)n ^ai:l: on 3rown 3oaj :o31rI-? I1:n the eventual paasan$er traffic further to the soitn. The applicant does not care which location is selected. Final plat approval should be conditionded on sewer anJ a Jeve`_oper's 3,res^1ent on 'lcrt:i Brown Io3J :'_nan:ing. PROPOSED MOTAL)l - Moved by _, seconded by _, that the Council Jirect staff to prepare a Resolution granting the subdiiision together with a conditional use permit for PRD for the property located at 715 North Brown Road for action at the Council's December 12, 1988 meeting. Ayes _, Nays _ `- � .I i CI'rY OF ORONO is 11WI PRESENTER Peter Jarvis, Bob Kost, BRW, Inc. 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. 12 and Brown Road. BACKGRO This request for rezoning has been the subject of considerable review and discussion over the course of this late summer and early fall. Although the basic concept for the use of this pruperty remains the same, some design modifications have occurred through the review process. All of the basic planning issues surrounding this application were reviewed in the planning report that was prepared for the Planning Commission's September 19 meeting. That report has been attached for your reference. This report focuses on the design modifications that have been made by the applicants in response to concerns and directives expressed by the Planning Commission. These modifications relate primarily to the location of the access point on Brown Road and the design of the internal street system. We have also been asked to respond to some concerns contained in a letter that has been circulated by former City Councilmember, Tim Adams. 5U?9lARY OF DESIGN MODIFICATIONS 1. Access Onto Brown Road The access point on Brown Road has been moved many times during the planning process. When the applicants presented their initial design, this access was shown in approximately the ORONO CITY CVNCIL November. 28, 1988 _:,e - sc4:hern third of tae 3rown Rcad inta-faca. T iJ locat_.,n was by -he City : :a f ;ind th? :41— 7 7,near ?nd 3 ".eq-1na was held with the applicants at the site. Based upon the sight distance along Brown Road, it was agreed ':'-a: acc?S_ _., nt c.:ld be p-r-_ximataly 5C f2et appl_ca, dmend2d _: a-- plans to conform with that direction. When the plans were reviewed by the Planning Commission, concern for sight distance was again expressed. The Commission recommended that the access be moved north to the location shown on the current plans. This point corresponds to the crest of the hill and would, in fact, be the best location for sight distance in both directions. In summary, sight distance has been a concern thrraghout the review process and this concern has been the main issue each time the plans have been revised to change the location of the access point. We have discussed this issue with the City Engineer and we agree that the location that is currently shown (at the crest of the hill) would result in the best sight distance. He also is quick to point out that the previous location also afforded adequate sight distance. 2. Design of the Internal Street System As you will note in your review of the attached September 19 Planning Report, the subject of the internal street system ---ign ►,as been reviewed and discussed extensively. The subject of the length of the proposed cul-de-sac led some members of the Planning Commission to recommend that the internal street be looped. Although the Commission was not unanimous in their resolve to see this road looped, the majority of the members were in favor of this change. The applicants were quite candid throughout the process in saying that they strongly preferred not to loop this road, but that they would do it if the City required it. Obviously the current plans include a looped road. This change eliminates the public safety concerns associated with a cul-de-3ac of excessive length. ,ORONO CITY COUNCIL Ncvember 28, 1983 Tim Adams raises questions related to the provision of sanitary sewer and water service to the subject property. He also asks what changes will be made to the acc-'sue cn:c T..1. '_�, wi'_= '_ ? -rontaae road acr7so the __,n: "_ Reber's property, and in all of these issues, who will pay for these improvements? We have attached a copy of the Special Minimum Requirements fob Rezoning in the Highway 12 Corridor Study Area for your use. As you know, these issues and others are addressed in these requirements. 1. Sanitary Sewer As noted in the September 19 Planning Report, a Feasibility Study has been completed that identifies two options for serving this property with sanitary sewer. We are not aware if a final decision has been made regarding the option that the applicants have chosen, although they may be able to shed some light on this subject at the meeting. Regardless the alternative selected, the Special t(inimum Requirements make it clear that the cost of extending these improvements will be borne by the development. The current plan is to serve these lots with private wells. 2. Frontage Road, Upgrading of Brown Road The frontage road across the front of the Rebers property will be a requirement of approval for the front portion of this site. A small amount of right of way was necessary from the portion of the site that is being platted to allow the proposed frontage road to be routed behind the Weir property to the west. The applicants have agreed to reser-ie that space for this purpose and this item will be addressed in the Development Agreement. :'he upgrading of Brown Rcad is neeJed wnetaer this deveicament proceeds or not. Clearly the addition of traffic onto this roadway adds somewhat to the prob_ems found there and hopeful'_1 hastens the day on which the necessary impro-ements will be made. Mr. Adams raises the question Df the cost for :nis improvement project and who will pay for it. 3rowr Rcad is a 'Local street, which means that the City can expect no county par-icipation in ORONO CITY COUNCIL November 28, 1988 ?age 4 Municipal State aid street (MSA) which reins that MSA Funds can be used to finance all or part of the cost. Obviously, there has been no feasibility study prepared for this project, and therefore, no specific financing alternatives have Steen considered by the Council. Of course, even at that point in the process the Council would have some discretion. It is relevant to point out that in City of Orono's past experiences with MSA projects, the improvements have been totally funded with MSA funds. Upon reviewing the feasibility study, if the City Council decided that a portion of this improvement should be assessed, you will still have some flexibility in determining the specific benefit of adjacent properties. M-Y of ORO vO . 10 PRESENTERS Peter Jarvis, Bob Rost, -,W, Inc. ITEM PUBLIC HEARING Request for rezoning from RR-lB to R-1A, Preliminary Plat A -roval of a Subdivision Consisting of 25 Single -Family Lots QA1_ .fated 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 Brcwn Road. 0.1611111 .� This application was reviewed by the Planning Commission as a Sketch Plan on August 15. Although there was considerable di3cussion 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. 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 property contains rolling topography and varies in elevat;on froze 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 -IoP 7 -..e nc" _.nwrSt- _ .'3_^ cF the - ..a.� •,.^are the _ _ ,est The site contains predominantly heavy clay and clay/loam soils. These soils present severe limitations for the install s :en in1 of sewage d4 sposal S.Jst?:ns . The :na7 orl`•' - - -ne _ - _ covered n .far .r3 maple (crest, although a significant stand of coniferous trees are also present which were plantid 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 Commissi^n should refer to that document for -eview 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 shared with the City that illustrate the future development of the southern portion as well. The Highway 12 Corridor Study anticipated the develcpment 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 L5 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 t`'e site is developed. Zoning Issues The area contained •.-thin -' •.&v 12 Corridor Study is subject to the proposed Soo gum Requirements for Rezoning that have been revie,. the Planning Commission and will be reviewed by the City Council at an upcoming meeting. Although these minimum requirements have not yet been form"lly_ adopted cy the City Coun,�:i , zney are surnar;zed in the following paragraphs, along wi--h a discussion or how they are proposed to to :net by this r 2quest. ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION September 19, 1982 mu- +r?a As currently arazzau, cne speciai requirements z3r rezoning in the Corridor Area call for a minimum of five acres. There has been some discussion about the increase of this ._nimum to 1 icrss'^ :io,�e_1er, since the subject _s �A _n exce_3 c 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. Conseq'iently, the proposed c?esign :could meet this standard, provided that appropriate commitments can be negotiated for the locat_on 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 S`udy prepared oy 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 Read 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. 71. Available Zoning �is_ricts This proposal is for a rezoning tc R-IA, One Family Residential District through the PRD, Planned Residential Ceve!ocment process. Both of these zoning d.str_cts ire listed arong the available --mina dis-::ricts °:)r rezcnincz with the AighNay 12 Corridor Area. CRONO PLANTIING COMMISSION September 19, 1988 These standards are intended to control the development of multi -family residential, commercial and industrial uses, and are not intended to accly to sinale-family residential :1evelonment. G. Requirement of Development Agreement It is anticipated that a development agreement w'_.11 be drafted and executed prior to the completion of the approval process. 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 Feet (0.8 ac.) Area in Private Roadway: 2.2 Acres DEVELOPMENT ANALYSIS .his 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 orw issue that stood out among the others. That issue was the length of the propored 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. Tt .ioes not state a :maximum length for pr_vete streets, which is the nature of the roadway in this develonment. From discussior2 :itti the Planninq Staff we also understand that the City ha3 allowed private cu.-de--ace in excess of 1,000 feet in prev.3us cases, without requiring a variance. ORONO PIANNINO COMMISSION September 19, 1988 P3go acknowledges that the Code does .list nguisrr between private and public streets and that no length maximum is stated for private cul-de-sacs. He also no —is that a lateral 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 Transport stion F'ann,ng 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 str: . interpretation of the other performance standards (setba, height limitations, etc.). The proposed PUD Chapter that the Planning Commission recommended to the City Council at Vhe last workshop meeting would permit design flexibility of this naturi, if they presented certain desirable opportunities for the ­inity. From the discussion ,resented above it is clear that the City sk,auld act on this application with the understanding that the proposed cul-de-sac l,igth does not require the approval of a variance. We recommer, that the Planning Commission and City Council not only consider this requt2st on its merits, but also in the context of the standard teat you wish to set for �ubseyuent req,;ests. Bpcause you should always strive to act consistentiy in similar factuN:-1-tuations. What is very important '. nder-i-ar.i, however, is that since this application dc�s .rot 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 prutlim of creating a precedent can be mitigated. The applz-.:ants have analyzed the suggestion of loop e proposed street. They plan tc m-ike a complete presen- co the Planning Commission and Cit:, Council and fully exp' l `•y they have chosen not to fol'ov that suggestion. Basicaily, they have fiund 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, 1983 :)a=2 : act -s _.. �3 zed at a �W densi`'I an(c t:?a7 the 5` _.3t�C3_ - ibabil. cf the combination or events that would need to occur to prohibit passage in an emergency are very small. They may have additional arguments in `'avor of their proposal, but we believe ,sse __ ho "e__ "aln 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 eery 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 unfort.iately 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 1cw, but the down si e risk could also be very high i.f a resident needed emergency treatment. SUMARY/ RECO-MKZ dDATION we recommend that -.he Planning Commission approve the proposed rezoning of this portion of the Rebers property. This request can be developed in a ma,iner 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 su.,jest three alternative actions for your :onsideration. They are by no means suggested as all of the reasonable actions that you may cho..se to ta'.a, but we believe t`at there is a rational basis for each approa-h. i. Accept the Applicants Plans is Presented S?nce the proposed cul-de-sac length does not require variance, you do not legally need tc find a hardship o approve it and the argumen`.a advanced by the proponents do L,rovide a rational basis for tr:Ls request. If you choose this a' .ernative, we recommen-_i ttit findings be preparei before final approval is grsnted to acknowledic the uniqueness ORONO P1XP1ING COMMISSION Septq:nber 10, 19;3 -= =•"-13 rprz_:sa, and reasonable;.imi:atitns on stree_ : a^c- :s in ne future. 2. Require the Street to be Looped, or the Connection With the �3t"Ibbed ",. -tie 'qes- 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 :nay 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 fo rn 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. SEC. 10 SPACIAL REQUIREMENTS FOR REZONING IN THE A. Minimum Area To insure consistency with the goals and objectives of the Highway 12 Corridor Study, applications for rezoning within the study area must include a minimum of five acres. The plans submitted along with these applications must also include enough information regarding the effect of the proposed development on surrounding parcels to insure that the property can be developed in a manner that is both compatible with adjacent properties and consistent with the Highway 12 Corridor Study. B. Access and Circulation Plan The plans submitted along with the application must propose access to the proposed development which is consistent with the Transportation Planning objectives of the Highway 12 Corridor Study. All public easements and road right of way that is needed to allow the construction of service roads and/or the expansion of Trunk Highway 12 past the subject property, shall be dedicated to the City. C. Sanitary Sewer Availability The available sanitary sewer capacity to serve the development of this corridor is currently very limited. Therefore, any plans to develop within this area must either demonstrate that it can occur utilizing current sewer allocations or they must include improvements to increase the capacity of the systems serving this area. If sanitary sewer system improvements are proposed as part of the application, then the feasibility of providing this service will also be scrutinized along with an improvement financing plan to insure that the costs associated with providing this additional capacity will be paid for by the development. D. Storm Water Management Site Drainage plans :gust be submitted to insure consistency with the storm water management objectives of the Highway 12 Corridor Study. Plans will be carefully reviewed to insure both that proposed storm water ponding areas contain sufficient storage capacity and whatever additional measures are necessary to guarantee that the e, • , ���m tha s4tameets or exceeds the City's standards. E. Available Zoning Districts Due to the unique set of constraints and opportunities that effect future decisions regarding development within the Highway 12 Corridor Study Area, applicants for rezoning are strongly encouraged to u,.ilize the planned unit development approach, outlined in Sec. 10. of the Orono Zoning Ordinance. However, applications will be accepted for rezoning requests for any of the following existing zoning districts within the City, consistent with a finding of consistency with the Highway 12 Corridor Study and subject to compliance with all of the additional requirements established in this section: HC Highway Commercial District PRD Planned Residential Development R1A One Family Residential District RIB One Family Residential District M6 Multiple Family Planned Residential District F. Building Design and Construction In addition to other restrictions of this Chapter, the us*, construction, alteration or enlargements to any buAlding or structure within the district shall meet the following standards: 1. All exterior wall finishes on any builling shall be: (a) Face brick, or (b) Natural stone, or (c) Specially designed precast concrete units if the surfaces have been integrally treated with an applied decorative materials or texture, or (d) Factory fabricated and panel construction, if of any of those noted above, or glass. 1) Other materials as may Council. Combinations be permitted. finished metal framed the panel materials be in items a, b and c be approved by the of such materials shalt 2. All subsequent additions and outbuildings constructed after ttiie erection of in or'-?inal matarlals comnaracle to those used in zneroriginal construction and shall be designed in a manner conforming with the or'_:inal architectural design and general appearance. 3. No tu:.lding or structure of a temporary character, trailer, basement, tent or shack shall be constructed, placed or maintained upon the property excep- as accessory to and during the construction of permanent buildings. G. Requirement of Development Agreement All development permits authorized within the Highway 12 Corridor Study Area shall be subject to the execution of a development agreement. Said development agreement shall clearly identify the timing of all of the public improvements associated with the development and the developers' financial commitments related to these improvements. The agreement shall also include any and all other conditions of approval deemed necessary to insure compliance with the Special Mi:iimum Requirements for Rezoning the Highway 12 Corridor Study Area, as well as the goals and objectives of the Highway 12 Corridor Study. APPLICATION NO. 1333 nOTIC3 OF COUNCIL ACTION 6e C__!st----:--MN---5- ----- ----------------57 -ace-of-Notice----1-_2-/88 ------- TO: Sidney Rebers COPIES: Robert Kost 3525 Webster Avenue 700 S 3rd St St. Louis Park, MN 55416 Minneapolis, MN 55415 Peter Jarvis 700 S 3rd St Minneapolis, MN 55415 Steven Pflaum Leonard, Street & Dienard 100 S 5th St, Suite 1500 Minneapolis, MN 55402 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- TYPE OF APPLICATION: Rezoning ---------------------------------------------------------------------- DATE OF MEETING: 10/10/88 VOTE: 4 For 0 Against COUNCIL ACTION - NOTION: To approve per the findings and conditions of the resolution sent to you prior to the meeting. The ordinance to amend the official zoning map of the city will be published in the official newspaper of this City within the next 30 days. Please contact the Building & Zoning office if you have any further questions on this matter. To: 'aa,•cr ^ronc Council 'aenbers Subject: #1333 Sidney Rebers, 715 North Brown Road - Re2cnina - Resclution List of 3xhibita Exhibit A - Application Exhibit B - Plat Mac Exhibit C - Public Hearing Notice Exhibit 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 - Mac ^f Zoning Boundary Lines Exhibit K - Sections of Comprehensive Plan Amendment ?'_an cf ?roper_- Application - Rezoning From RR-lB (Rural, Non -sew, -red, 2 Acre Lots) to R-lA Sewered, 1-Acre Lots). Review Exhibit I, no_e that 55' of RR-1B remains for future rezoning to either existing B-1 commercial or another zoning classification at some future date. Total area to be rezoned = 3 2. 6 a ors s. Brief Review of Application - On August 15, 1988, 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 nearizgs for the required rezoning and the subdivision/PRD for the development phase of the application. The rezoning phase of the acclication was accroved by the Planning_ Commission and the subdivision/PRD was tabled pending resolve of the concerns of the Planning Commission. Please review Exhibit F, John Shardlow's review memo for the public hearing, specifiesally Pages 1, 2, 3, 4, and 6 as they pertain specifically to t`:e rezonina -ecuest. As Shardlcw's memo notes on ?age 2, although the Planning C=M_43s1an has reviewed and acp_oved t^e zoning ordinance amen:'_^nent required 3s a res,,i_t of *_he passage of the Comprehensive Plan Amendment, toe s,:anuarls of zhe rr;Lose'.i ordinance amendment are nc- applicable in the review of this application. Shardlow's review comments t_e rez"..nin 3c;._:3t on to the 'proposed ordlnanc'! amendment. Staff's report Sri? 1 deal solely with the revie�-r of the acclication based on the recently approved Comcrehensi•:e Plan Amendment and the Zonin3 File 41333 October 7, 1988 Page 2 of 3 Pleasa review Exhi_--= X, sections c' t :e comprehensive Plan Amendment that deal with proposed c':anges for t' e sub ect property. *tote 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 ;!ins for future de•'e1 c;ment of the rrocert.l. Page the recommended alternative 'cV the C'_ty, approves future rezoning of the 55' corridor north of the existing commercial line be rezoned to commercial and the remaining 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 c.rder for the applicant's rezoning request to be approved, the property must be sewered. Review Exhibit H, the PRD Code, in order for the applicant to satisfy the current PRD Code of the City and the directives of the Comprehensive Plan Amendment No. 2, the rezoning to R-lA is necessary. Review PRD Section ?0.32, 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 recT.�irements for each building lot, provided that the total number of building lots, or dwelling un'_ts, shall not exceed the number of such lots or units permissible under the minimum lot size requirements of 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 de -pity PRD, the underlying zoning district has to be amended to fulfill ne requirements of the Comprehensive Plan Amendment. The present ?RD subdivision application seeks approval of 25 units based on the R-lA zoning density allowance. Alternative 3, as shown on the Comprehensive Plan Sections, Exhibit R, Page 51, shows a formal conventional plat format. The current plan under consideration is a PRD format with an open space outlot surrounding the 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 follows: 1. Topographical and physical characteristics of the site: Variations in topography ranging from 1,04%' 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 rezoning under the proposed zoning ordinance amendment for the Highway 12 corridor. ionina Fi_a 11333 octorer 7, i988 Paae 3 of 3 San:tary sewer wi! 1 be provided as con_F :�e: b- Enginesr'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 immediate]:: adjacent to a commercial corridor along Highway 12 and the cr­-.:;sed 1 acre zoning would provide an excellent buffer to the surr(• rural residentiaA. districts. 6. The Comprehensive Plan Az, nt included this property within the MUSA district and approved Muni. _.;al services for the area. 7. The current code will require rezoning to R-lA in order to allow the 1 acre 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 Recos endation - 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 MUSA district. There can be no rezoning from RR-lB to R-1P. without sewer. In order to allow the rezoning to a greater density, the City would have to initiate a new Comprehensive Plan Amendment. The enclosed 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. THE REZONING APPLICATION OF SIDNEY REBERS THAT MOULD REZONE CERTAIN PROPERTIES FROM RR-lB TO R-lA FILE NO. 1333 WNNNs11S, 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 Municita 1 Code, the City Council cf the Citv of Orono (hereinafter "City Council") is responsible for reviewing and acting on all applications to amend `_'^e official zonina gnat of the --ity: and fir rezoning by Sidney Rebers (hereinafter "the applicant") to rezoning from RR-ld to R-lA the property legal!, , 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 approved certain zoning changes and the extension cif_ :r-inicipal services to the property; and WHEREAS, on September 19, 1988, the Planning Commission 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. 2; and WHEREAS, the City Council reviewed the comments of the Planning Commission, reports and oral comments of the City staff, the written and oral comments of the consultant/planner, John Shardlew, and the comments of the applicant's consultant, and the comments of the affected neighbors noting the following findings: i. The property ccr.sists of 3Z.6 acres in area. 2. The variations in rotograph_• on t:ne tro._•ert_• rang-3 from 994' to 1,044' with over 50' of grade separation. 3. Thp proper--.., c-n-:a_ns a ma,!�•..re forest c.' maples and at -or deciduous trees along -ne northwest and nature nursery stop: of Fines and other evergreens alcrq the east portion. 4. The H• nnetin Count--,, -'-oils Sur-,,- defines the soil profile of the F_ctsr-,reicm_.:1=: •� cla_� ._a_ profile presents several limitations for :ns'3:laticr. and 23ge _ c f Has aes- Ina:-aa 3s .�z_2s _.. __.1L_35a73_i? .3n Amendment 4o.r2. In the land use section of the plan, this 3re3 was selects•:7 for change in land use/zoning and for the extension of municipal services. 6. The property is now located wi�.,Lll ".S Metropolitan Urtan Service Area (MUSA). 7. The extension of sewer can be furnished either from existing sewer lines in Long Lake to the southeast of th.2 property or from the existing sews- lines within the City of Orrno to the west of the property. 8. As a Fart or :his rezoning application, the applicant has for:�a_l peuc�cr.a. :or connect_-.. 32':er 3' nc3 agree:: to pay the cost of the improvement. 9. The recommended alternative for development of this property was for single family densities at 1 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 min_mum lot size require- ments of the zoning district or districts in 'oi.:icn s.ich land is situated." Rezoning is necessary to meet the ac_reed uran density set forth in Comprehensive Plan Amendment No. 2. 10. The one acre single family residential zone act. as an excellent buffer or transition zone between the commercial co,ridor along the Highway and the surrounding 2 acre rural residential properties to the north, east_ and west. 11. The proposed rezoning of the property would meet the intent of the principal goals set forth in Comprehensive Plan Amendment No. 2 entitled "Compatible ises and Transitions", which -tales as follows: "A significant=-nc?rn is to develop land -ises `hat provide 3Cpr-r _a'3 _=3"� ?G^. _-r3��:_ 3'_ _:? a330c:3_ed withJHighway 12 and quality single family neighborhoods beyona. Mo-a int-tnsiv4 commercial uses were fudged to be appropriate ac.-3cenr to t::a hi^.nwav, but these uses no- extend so far bac.: from the highway core_3or sc as --o 3d'%ersely af`ect any ist3bl4sned neignborhoods. :env develoF:^en- would be l:mitsd by the location of existing nat•.:ral fsatures and the capacity within --he available uti 1 j t• syst3r.s. ?age _ of 12_ rn 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 -.n the corridor be developed as somethi^g other than the 2 acre single family rural residential. Suck, 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 datee 9/19/88, Page 2, entitled "Comprehensive Plan Relationships, Zoning Issues" John Shardlow notes the following: "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. ^'he recommended alternative states that the density should not exceed 25 lots, which is the number shown on the zroposed plat. Therefore, at the most basic level, this request is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan." 14. The adjacent surrounding rural zoned properties cannot be consi, :red for higher density, urban zoning because these areas were not included within the Highway 12 study nor relocated within the Mdtropolitan Urban Service Area. SON, TEEREIORE BE IT RESOLVED, that based upon one or more of the findings noted above, the City Council approves the rezoning application of Sidney Rebers that would rezone the property legally described above from RR-lB to R-lA, and further directs staff to publi-' in the official newspaper of the City the ordinance amending the offic:.. zoning map of the City as spe(7iiied above, subject to the condition t!:a applivant shall enter into vn agreement with the City to pay witr� appeal for City authorized sewer service to the property. Adopted by "he City of Orono Council on this loth day of October, 1988. %TTEST: Dorothy M. Hallin, City -'lerk James R. Grabek, Mayor Paae 3 �,_ 3 ? I -:; n n -4 n c CcT _ss _ -^n Cha,-:^an __Ay Orono Planning Commission Members C4- -•, Administrator Bernharasor ?ron: Mi--haal P. Gaffron, ' _ Planning & 3cn4 ng Administrator Dat.: Settember 15, 1988 Sub;ect: *1333,'1334 Sidnev Rebers, 715 Ncrta Br�wr. Road - 1; Re -zoning, 2) Conditional Use Per:i_-iPRD List of Exhibits Exhi'r .t A - Application Exhibit B - Letter From Bob Kost Dated 8/25/88 Exhibit C - Legal Description Exhibit D - Plat Mac Exhibit E - Property Owners List Exhibit F - Declaration of Covenants, Conditions, Restrictions and Easements for Meyers floods Exhibit G - Preliminary Plan/Plat Sets The attached memo reviewing Items 413-_ and #1334 has been completed by John Shardlow, wi:o has been hired by the City as a consultant planner for this review. PRESc`MERS PUBLIC HEA-RING _r TEM Request for razoning from R.R-1B tc P.-LA, Preliminary Plat Approval of a Subdivision consisting of 25 Single -Family Lots and Related outlots, and Approval of a Ccnditional Use Permit fcr a PRD, for the 32.5 acre Rebers Property, Lccated in the Northwest Quadrant of T.H. and 3rown Road. _-is ap=__.73�Z_on was __.ie•.ied Sketch Plan on August :5. Although there was considerable �_scuss_= about a of _-a , roncza_ and reiaticnship between this app1._za=:On and Su seauent stagez of the development of the adjacent o_cperty and the remainder of the Highway 12 Corridor, there was genera: s�ppert :or tie application. The Planning Report prepared :"cr o :e .StietcZ Plan review contained considerable backgrcund -ateria_ and score recommendations for des_gn mcdif__.tions _`r m the applicants. To facilitate the Commission's review of this application, the background infcrmaticn has been s•.:=arized in this report. The reccmmendations suggested in the .revious repert are also noted _n apnropr*ate sect_ons of this ra�c_ A. Natural Characteristics: The applicant.; lave subml_:ad an exhibit entitled "'S t3 F:ross" that .:lc:odes 1 grzp:ic summary of the existinq ccn_'___cr.s zn _ne Sub-acw As thi3 exhibit shows, the property contains rollinq topography and varies in ele�tation front 1,044 feet -year the center of the s_te. Trt _..j5 : Olnt :: 3_^e3 3 t3ep_" _aces, t3 ,ca .^lets 3:cng a edge :: 3rown R=ad, a_zna lt3 east ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION September 19, 1988 p v_� -! 1, A. Minimum Area As currant v dra -?^ , the spec -a- re -u_raments for acres. There has been some discussion about tae increase of this minimum to 10 acres. However, since the subject ac-zlica ion -ncl u:les 22.i acres, _`. is well _ B. access and Circulation Plan As noted above, key access and circulati•)!L ;.a_iues will be resolved when the specific alignment of the proposed 2rontage 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, t:.e proposed design would meet this standard, provided that acortor'-ate com.nitme^ts _an 'ce negotiated for the location and construction of t:.e proposed frontage road. C. Sanitary Sewer Availability The Citv's engi.^.eerinq c=nsultant has reviewed this application and states in his report that the site can be se=ied with sanitary sewer through Long La:;e ( oint powers agreement), or by constructing a new interceptor line as described in the Tr•.:nk Hiahwav 12 Corridor Sanitary Serer St-dy prepared by his office.. D. Stormwater Management The City Engineer indicates that a storm drainage plan will need to be developed to ser-.,e 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 stor..�water pond and the Citv_'s concern about the quality of runoff tj area lakes. They have agreed to prepare detailed plans to meet these standards. E. Available Zoning Distriz'_s This proposal is for a rezcning to R-1A, One F3ni'_'✓ Res:cent:a l Dist:_ct through the BRD, Planned Rasidan..al Development process. Both of these zoning districts are -.3tad a:..cnq the avai�azla z:;:1:.^+q lis`..z _zt.a razoninyg ',4-h the Highway __ Corridor area. OP.^NC PLANNING CVC!IS310N September 19, 1988 side to the northwestern corner of the property, where it _he s_ta cor.-3_ s precc �_.._..t_.; heavy clay and clay/loa-m soils. These soils present severe limitations for the installation and maintenance of on -site sewage disposal 3'S r, 3 _''Or_`y c- _ e 5-te is ccve_s-. -v na`,_,rs J _•5Z .. . �.. ......J -,a::_a for:st, a_=hough a s: = __cant stand of conJfer=us -----es are also pre3ent which were planted cv Sid P.ebers. 3. 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, to Planning Commission should refer to that document for review of pertinent comprehensive planning issues. This property is discussed or. pages 49 throug.• 5Z . This application includes only the northern portion of the alt::ough some -el_..._nar s :et=tes gave been .. Site, shared with the City that illustrate the future development of the southern portion as well. The Highway 12 Corridor Study anticipated tte development of single-family residential jots on the northern portion of the site and that is what is being applied fir 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 forused 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. The area contained within the Highway 12 Corridor Study is subject to the proposed Special Minimum Requirements for Rezoning that have been reviewed by tte P:anninq Commission and be re•; iecaed by tte _it Ccunc_1 3t an upcom_nq meeting. Although these minimum requirements have not yet been forma =y adopted by the City Council, they are summarized in the following paraarapns, along with a dizc::saion of ::cw they are proposed to be met by this request. CRONO PLANNING COMMISSION September 19, 1983 r. F. Building Design and Construction These standards are intendea to contrai the :eveiopment of and are not intended to apply to single-fam--y residential development. s. _. _= 3'-- = -- -='; 3_ _ fie.^.t Aq_-9e=e^.= _- is anticipated that a development agreement w-11 ce drafted and executed prior to the completicn of the approval process. DEvE LO PMES Site area: 32.6 Acres Single -Family Lots: 25 Homes Per Acre: .76 ?rivata 'shared` Open Space: 8.4 acres Average Lot Size: 35,000 Square Feet �:- 3 a..) Area inPr_-,_t� PC3dwa.r; 2.2 h=res DISCUSSION DEVELOP"WEN'T NALYSIS Tzis p-occsai is consistent wit.. . e Hig ., ay -terefore, it is consistent with the Orono Comere-'-.ens ive Plan. 1= also aooea:s that all of the necessar_r requirements for rezoning that apply to this area can be =et. When. the Planning cc=ission 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 mitiaatinq this concern. As you will recall, the proposed cui-de-sac is in excess of 2,000 feet in length. The City Cade indicates a maxiaum length for public streets of ,000 faet. It does not stata a maximum Jangth for pr;va-_e - ♦ +etc :. . whi-h is the natre _ •`i roadway in this 1 r ae,ieiopment. From discusz:ans t:.a _ irniry staff understand that the Cit7 has allowed pr.vata cul-de-sacs in i�,_n URONO PLANNING COMMISSION September 19, 1988 a3Ce We have discussed this matter with the City Attorney and he �_..':Cilk -r-'l3�a and cuzllc straets and that no length maximum is stated for privata cul-de-sacs. 3e 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 C=—unit:'s T_ran.s=er~at__n planning ob;ectives. Clear__ t 3t would be an unreasonable interpretation. As you know, this is an application for approval of a PRD. That section of the Ordirance 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 move it is clear that the City should s=_ on `_`:_s a^^, __3t._.. t� t,e undJrstand_ng t-at 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 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 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 wouid have to be cleared and -.::at ;much of this street. extension would be ccnstrr.:cted at appr�x�.mataly 8 per:.en-, grad__er.t. ORONO PLANNING CZ:AC4rSSION Sentcmber 19, 1983 Page 5 They also point out that the project is to be developed at a and that a a-�t_st_c3i pr.car,__�- t e combination of events that Ncul•' need to cccur to prohibit passage in an emergency are very small. They may 'nave additional arguments in favor of their proposal, but we believe these to be their main points. Clearly, no one 'nvolved 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 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 res'_dent needed emer-:encv treatment. SUMMARY/ REC0?M%--`MAT10N 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 be a very high quality developmen`. We would recommend acting on this portion of the request as a separate motion. We also recommend that you approve the proposed PRO (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 air each approac". 1. Ad opt the rol-icants P ars as P-esented Since t`;e proposed cul-de-sac length does nct require a variance, you do not legally need to :ind a ars.^.ip to approve and *:no argument3 advanced the pr Ucr.e -s provide a rational basis for this request. 1f you e:cose tnis a.ternati✓s, we recommend that findings be prepared before final approval is grantad to ac;:ncwleage the uniqueness ORONO PLANNING CC,"ISSION September 19, 1983 P3 e of this proposal and protect the City's ability to enforce 2. Require the Street to be LCCMed, or the Connection With the Stubbed Street to the West for public streets and there is clearly sufficient Ji.stification fur either of the options stated above. It xay be possible to refine the grading plan to take fewer trees. Perhaps a short stretch of very s:,-�ep grade and the use of retaining walls could make a significant difference. 3. ReMaire the Cgnstruction 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 flora the sh--r- stretch of the =:cosed private trail between Pine Ridge Trail and the interior street. greater detail. In its final form it could be greatly camouflaged and be designed to preclude trespass by recreaticnal ve^icles. we would want to talk to bcz- the City Engineer and the Fire Department about this facility, but there is no reascn 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. rnz:;ZtTT USn OF PROPERT'I Present 'oning District ?g1-3 and 91 Present Use at Property /avant Land Residential Other (specify) --------------------------------------------------------------------------- DDSC3Z2T1uN OF ttEQUES.; Descri:oe reaue--� in detail: Rezone 32.4 acres of RR13 to RI -A -----------------------------•---------------------------------------------- ?-EQUI. ED SuvrilTTA.LS i. 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 (1110) 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 ar addendum to this application, please attach a separate list of any other persons you wish notified of this application. The applicant and "roperty Owner must sign this application. please remember, that your application is not complete if the above information has . not been included. -----1----------------.------------------------•-----•----------------•-------- Certification by Zoning Department that Land Use -Application is complete. Zoning Officials Signature Date --------------------------------------------------------------------------- "PLICAHT•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 8i �6/88 OWNERS SIGNATURE C The owner hereby acknowledges and agrees to this application and further authorized rea3enable entry onto the property by City staff, consultants, agents, commission members, and Ciuncil members for purposes of investigation and verification of this request. owner's signature y �L lc�' Date 8/26/88 -----------------•---------A-- --- -------------.---- ;----------------------.---- Applicant must have all submittals into the City offices 25 days before the Planning Commission Meeting. Planning Commission Meetings are held on the ttiird Mondry of each month. Applicants must be present at all scheduled review meetings of the Planning Commission and Coancil. If an applicant is unabl•+ to at ­end a schedulntl meeting, please mare arrangements to have an authorized agent attend in your place and advise the building i Zoniny Of`ics of thin change prior to the mwstinq. Wft CITY OF ORONO f �GENERAL LRND ..,v SIL�.I T? N -------------------=---------------------- PTIOPMT."Y LCCA.,Ult Site AGciress Hwy 12 ana drown rRoao, Jrano __cation `lumber (P. .D. -- (.for ,onditional Use Applications only) 711331 3 t2Ch 13al des...= ^~17n to 3tsU_: 3c1 ju : ey -------------------•------------------------------------------------------ APPLICANT Phone ( home) 471-9375 Name Robert Kost, sRW Phone (work) ` 370-0700 Address 700 South Third Street City Minns!ayolis Sip 55415 -------------------------------------------- UwNL'R (if different than applicant) Phone (home)' ' Name $ tdnev Rebers Phone 970-5995 • • ' Address ?525 'webs :er Ivenue Ci`.: �` ��• ^�.-4 Zio �_�. :late I (do) (doxmuk) also own the adjacent parcels of land. �•' -------------------------------------------------------------------------- FL'ES - CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS - Renewal Fee - 1/2 Current Fep After -the -Fact Fee - Double Current Application Fee $100.00 a) I%esidential accesscr1 Use $150,J0 b) institutional (church, sc.-,col, etc.) $150.00 c) Duplex Credit/Bldg $250.00 d) Commercial/Industrial Use $200.00 f) Land Alteration Grading and filling - designated wetland floodplain Grading and filling - 101 cu. yd. or more Gc3dinq, seawall, retaining wa'L',5 w-thin of lakeshore PRO/PYD - see fee sctledule OTU= APPL:C.ITSON8 $150.00 Cjmmercia: aon3u:t_ant Pies S150. J0 Vacat i )n S150.00 Easement 'vacation S 50.00 Easement 'vacation ',J—`h pub i3ion �2`•0.30 leaoninu_ y _ $100.00 Appeals . f A Y•/ �J s.wa aY ! j i -,- . •� Mal} ._ "�..3+ PROPERTY LOCATION S-- is Address rwv and 3rcwn ?cac. Or^ro, ''N Property Identification Number (?.I .D.) 34 11823210001 Attach legal description to appl-cation. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- APPLICANT Phone (home)%1-?375 Name Robert Kos`_ Phone (work) 370-0700 Address: lio scut'j zips 554.s -------------------------------------------------7------------------------- OWNER (if different than applicant) Phone (home) Name Sicnev Rebers - Phone (work; 920-6996 Address: 3525 Webster Avenue City; St.Louis Par►c Zip: 55416 3�t3C 1-3t !Z .T.Cz? .an ------._----.------.---------------------------------------------------j------ rv,s'^I�;c LAND USE %;umber cf Tax ?arcels 1 Develonment Size 22.i Acres Dry Land Acres Wet Land Aces Total, all : arcels Present Use (c:ieck) Residential; no. of units vacant Ut:ier ( specify) Present Zoning District 3-1 and RR1-9 ----------------------------------------------------- 7--------------------- PROPOSAL Division for Tax Purposes Lot Line Rearrangement Only (no new building sites) x Subdivis-cn for !Jew Building Sites N=.ber of HL'_l.ai ng S4taS . .JX1_ t_ny^ ti c. Total Units Pr^cosed ;r;ss Cenc_ :e: - acres min _:num Lit S. ze : 3 ; }Feaat Hu=. !aai$ Land MEYE.RS 'MOODS ----------- PRELIMINARY PLAT/PRO APFLICATION - =L' --�• FEE SCHEDULE _ =- --- --- 1 Rezoning: $250.00 - 'AA 2. Subdivision/PRD via Conditional use per-nit:- $300.00 + S30.00/lot - $1,050.00 - - --. �l� ✓vv _••. 3. Private Road fee ■ 600.00 + .50/L.F. ■ $1,625.00 -""A 4. Utility Plan Review (sewer): 250.00 + 5.00/lot - $375.00 rY• ..ter �.t• t�Y• TOTAL $3,300.00 .'MINIMUM MATERI.IL NECESSARY FOR COMPLZT2 PRELIMINARY APPLICATION i. (:,:�moleted Acolicstion Form ?roger :y �;wner3 L13 owners r� �n-a W SJ ' ,you :r.us : oota_.. this -list from Eiennepin County Department of Finance A-503 Govt Center pra-3 �reised to each 7Q t::� obtained with property owners list). 5. As an addendum to this application, please attach a separate list of Certi_icsc:.on by Zon_.ig Cepart.nen-: chat Preliminary Plat Apolicetion is comolete . Zoning Official's Signature Date ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. Pa;. -rent of fees (-ark fees, filing fee, sewer and water assessments). 2. Signed certificate of survey or mylar copies of formal plat. 3. Title opinion. 4. Easement3, Covenants, etc. 5. Developers Agreement and Letter of Credit. Certification by Zoning Department t:at Final Plat Application 4-3 comp.eta. ..cnina Cff_:_al's C_ -..3turi mat? ----------- -----------------------------------------_----_------------------ '?7r7.J Sketcn Plan Review (Class I, ii & 1ZI) $156.00 Preliminary Review (Class _ s IZ Subdivision) 250.00 Preliminary Review (Class .'.I and all non -resident' -al) 300.00 20.00/Lot Final Plat ?e•, iew ('Class I _5J. 410' ';?lus an, lezai or engineering. charges) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- :'he applicant hereby agrees to provide all information required or .requested by the Zoning ,administrator, City Engineer, City Attorney, Planning Commission and Council necessary to process this application and f,irther agrees to Tav a addi __cna _ fees establishe-j by cr�!inance. Applicant's Signature r 0,..�s��;� Date ''- 3tl ,wner's Signature /�,:..-.� �:✓r.�4.G- � Date :Qvlicant Nave 111 submtct:i 3 into the Cit•> 3ffices _5 9a^s before t':e 'ianninq Commission Meeting. planning Cosmmission Meetings are held on the -bird Monday of each mouth. Applioants most be present at all scheduled :ev.ew of c.:e 7-finning Cammission and _&n spp; Lc3nt i3 :r.able to a scheduled meet:nq, please ra.<e arrsnaspmenta to gave an •t. i_sd avant a_:snd in your p=acs and to ad-!ise t .3 aninq ::!ice of this change rr_or to the mostina. _ MEYERS WOODS PRELIMINARY PLAT/PRO APPLICA7:0.N FEE SCHEDULE 1. Rezoning: $250.00 Z. Suodivisicn/PRO via Conditional ise permit: S300.00 + $30.00/lot = S1,050.00 3. Private Road fee ■ 600.00 + .50/L.F. ■ $1,625.00 4. Utility P'3n Review (sewer) TOTAL $3,300.00 350.00 A, 5.00," of - S .1'5.00 . y ,, '►. W. a �vV&:,WVVW 01 0 173411:00mo avrv.VV W a _br.'. a..._tivvvV 01 z s'`. x v r'vvv . vL QV PI—ANNING 'AANSP j'RrArC`+ Ak,IITEC%PE ?F_NK*— � +G'Jr'SE Ar'L_�FWIZ •AP. i :nC .:.a •.r -UALM. c* .,1ae xI '64n S"1' !Odra • W"AWXS w ;6615 • ff"--* 5121r5al D August 25, 1988 .ieanne Maousth Zining Administrator City ;f Orono P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, Minnesota 55323 Dear Jeanne, Attached is our preliminary plat/PRO submittal for rezoning and subdividing the +41-acre sire owned by Reber's Homes at Brown Ro-A and Highway 12. The cr000sea ore!iminary _evelcrment plan/plat consists 3f two oit')ts adjacent to Highway 12, presently zoned B-1 and a 32.6-acy luxury single family planned residential deve'ocrnent ^Jr*i of :he 3-1 zone ad,.cent to grown Road. The concept for the P.R.D. is to Create a unioue sina'e family neignoornood con- sisting cf -5 wooded 'its i3/4 to li acres each), wh ch are bordered by a pr?- vatcly controlled, common woodland preserve. The preserve would be protected in perpetuity by restrictive covenants which would prohitit site grading, placement of accessary structures and tree removal (except for control of disease' and would contain a woodchip or gravel walking trail. Setbacks for the homes are proposed to be fifty fret for the front and rear yard and thirty feet for both side yards. me nave imposed these more restrictive setbacks in order to preserve mere trees than would be possible under :he Set- backs &'lowed for the R1-a zone. -hP tots would be served by i tvont/-eight foot wide private road w'th concrete curb and gutter which terminates in a cul-de-sac at the top of a heavily wooded sloop Oe have studied the impacts of extending the road down the slope to crew. a loop road as was suggested to the "ity Comsulta-It's sketch plan r!!Gort. The moscts on the existing, mature vegetation and tapogrto" y wnula be suostan- t•31. Consequently we are not proposing ca luoa the road. A review of the tr•l " is Counts ,n Brown road ina c]tes that the proposed plans mould not si9ni- fican-ly •ncresse the traffic patterns on either the growngh Road/Miwey Twelve o- ..,e nr,wn load/Ciunty ;dad Six intersec"Ins. The p,,•a call for serving meth lot with public serer and water; however, separate .ells could bt used in lieu of eater agreersent between yang -AA& and Oran*, Store drainage would be collected by a storm sewer systea ar-d rJuted to a r?t#nt'on pond loclted at the southeast corn*r of the --ommecial orwort_y At gr3rn RO&4 and N! "ay 1 . This retention aret would be sarntained yy the 41.+7 . N 11 -MO/�7M �K �+Ilri ► roles_ ►t p • -.K Ca v40+P rArt • .: �! . �Ma • AUA�� ..: f k:N� tiYb 1 AMMG v :�� M�11I1M� `C+•.+�Q : '^..1+. Y�►, NK Jeanne Mabotsh August 25, 1988 Page Z Meyers Woods Homeowners Association. We are requesting the current RR 1-8 zoning be changed to RR 1-A and that a conditional use permit be granted to allow the subdivision to be develjoed as a ?.R.C. We look foward to meeting with you and the members of the Orono V ar,ning Commission on September 19. If you have any questions or if 1 may be of further assistance, please call me. BENNETT-RINGROSE-WOLSFELD-JARVIS-GARONER, INC. Bob Kost, ASLA SK /mr Attachment cc: Sidney Refers John Shardlow #27, 5-3825.2 Sectior. 34, Township 118 Nortn, Range 23 'nest of the 5zn principal Meridian descr+bed as follows: C:Tme^Ci ng 3t ``1e !ort4wsst :orner o- si, ; Fast ,Hal ° of the �or••hwP.�` '.Jar.er; ..lenca on a:i 35��"?� :?3r1, _ -=jr 3'_'S -- .:::.:35 seconds West, along the west line of said East Half of the Northwest Quarter a distance of 1311.29 feet; thence South 87 degrees 18 minutes 1.7 sec?ncs '3st a di5.arc2 of 245.72 `Aet: `, ence Dior-:n L-v:sees 1: minU:as 23 seconds t3st a distance of 188.?3 feet; :fleece 'lortn 37 degrees 18 minutes 37 seconds West a distance of 200.00 feet, to the point of beginning of the land to be desc:-4bed; 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. 142911; 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 dart lying southerly of the following described line: Beginning at said point A; thence north 87 degrees 18 minutes 37 seco-ds 'Test 153.42 feet to a point on said west V ne and said line there terminating. �. vV ` �j-S�►. �. _ -; v :ii!•/ll�"mo�tp �r -! ... mom o'. � 7j) logo W" —ram .�� .M�'- s. ��•,� W RS W 00D 77 E i tea it n Wt •.y��y c • .. • •� Ili 01 1 • 1 Yy 1� '� t lji. i a La '•7-. 71/ ". s11 I►�IM• 1 a..r• � •y! `5 .:'1 ,i�:• L 'I., i": r , P'�;..1 •L- /'fir+?y} : `- jlj,M • , M Tor.:I . P+' . '.�.'i1 y I• ; �- r • .' T C ly .'• ,f;t„• :1!S M' • v' " .... rut - ._ '74Dy w � �•(• .,� • i +i le 0 FM *_ r t•h i ':��sl F�,i M ki'' � 1 ri • � � •��1�1 ,•, 4q'� .1 to;r• 1"1,•' Itlalf �'.� �r~.}� , i� �V' r �r1 t — 1p; TT O.. . 1. � • Mpa� f�. 1 11 „+� ray n� i 1� . • \ �'1 .I; t hl' �p "a ` �.1: 1 1 ! 7 fly!' s • `� j rrti `� \� •` j '1 •.:. �;}.''.fi,��.� �' � .-; *'�'� , tt,, iji, •.• ...: i� • rll�l•o.iS.►�/rtl: r .• �' Hill 11. It Otl/04/U8 IIl1M1EP311 COINIIY 1'RUNtRIY 11RORIIATI011 SYSILn PNOMNIV OIMIERS Wf I+Uvlltf 114S�4u1 A lI ll U04 PAGAG Ui E 38 27-118 23 33 0006 Hti of Al1UN 00/36 UI(-KEY LAKE DR (11,111H 11411E R A D UNltll IA I';ItN NUBUIH R A UEBURAII IL SF141ELL IW IL AbUR 116 UICKEI LAKE UR IOIIG LAKE INI 55356 35 27-110 23 34 0006 PROP AODR 00069 ORL404 RD H IIIMIIR IIAIIE J A 11 PIAIILUR IA'..I'A/tN U1111113 L IIARI(I R PLATTLIER IIAIIE,'ABUN 809 IIORTH BNOWI RO lUu(, IAKt lul 55356 38 14-Iltl 23 12 0001 PN,;r AI,UR L1ddk Il.11t KAIIINTH DINK:AIISO11 14 I'A 11R IV4 1,41111111111 DINICAIISOII 11 11t .OUR 14W) DllkUAli AVE 50 NlIY1L 101M A IMI 55345 38 14-118 23 12 0004 1 ail• AuUN 000,0 Lkldul NU 11 l,�dilk IIAIIE L A T RDLIII 1'.IlN 10k,111E 0 k11t111. h lit AOON C50 UR0W1 NU lull„ IAhL 191 55356 38 34-118 23 21 0002 I�.ur A1,UN 0?I60 UAIMA BIVD ufldll N HAM kill IA" 11 Alt AR A MIFF I. I'A,IN 1111119TERS ME/IHV DEPT II=111 �IIIIN 31 uu R 1 Ar l 9f IIVI S tMl 55416 16 314-116 23 22 0011 1'I114P AUUR 00110 Gil hE l IAKE OR 01-MN IIAIIE J A A N J 6A1t5 JR 1. I'AIIR JUL HAIVAIIIt 11-11t AUOR 211ti R LA#.L OF Ism BIVD IIPI5 PMl 554U5 38 21-116-23 33 0007 00744 UICKLY LAKE DR G L 111115 A A J PEITI9 GENAIO L A MICE J PET115 1282 Ilt l C011k OR I(NIG IAKE tMl 55356 38 27-118-21 43 0013 01995 WEST FARM RO P A t1 SWAHSOII PAUL U A HARGARE f C SNAIVbOII 1995 1,451 FARH RD 10416 IAKE IVI 55356 38 34-118-23 12 0002 00140 BROIMI RD 11 SCO11 A I/ABIISIII El AL 5LO11 A HABIISIIf 740 BNUM1 RUAU IfOR111 (INI(i IAhE IVI 551,,6 38 34 118-23 12 000s 00/44 URUWI RD 11 R A R FONUILL RICIIARU E FOROYCE 744 11 BN(HM1 ROAD 10111, IAKt IYI 55356 38 34-116-23 22 0001 02250 Plitt RIDGE IA J REIS JR A K Z RE19 JOSEPII A KAILIIEEII REIS 120 111(.1(tY IAht ON ((Mh: IAhk HII 55356 38 34-t18-23 22 0012 02251 PIIIF RIDGE IA CIIFFORO L OIIEH CIIFkORU L OIIEil BOX 249 I0116 1 AKE tiff 38 27-118-23 34 OouS 00619 13ROI111 NO 11 DOIMIA IAWNENCL A HAIW10 GRAY UOIMIA D LAWMICE 819 BNOINI Nil N 1014G IAIk IVI 553!,6 38 27-118-23 43 0014 01925 WEST FARH k11 J R OBERG I L A Dill Ho JAIIES ROBEF 1 OOLRG 1925 WIT PAWL RI) lO1IG LAKE h 1 553,0 38 34 118-, 3 12 OUu 3 KATIIRTH D(AICAI SMI KA1HR111 D(MI(:Al,iQl/ 14555 110RIIAII AV. HItM1E IUIN(A IUI 5- 1.." 38 34-118-23 21 Uoul 02060 WAILAIA UI'.0 HAZEL P HYtNS RESINS CO1151 INC 3525 WII)SfkN AVE tIPl9 IMI 55416 38 34-118-23 22 Ou04 00730 DICKEY IAKt ON J 0 RICK A J H RICK JOHAl11A11 0 RICK 730 U14.1,tY LAKE DR LOIS LAKE fMl 55356 38 34-118-23 22 oul3 C A n REIIGER CI ARI ES J A IIARY l IUIIGER 405 IIIIIOW ON S I OH G l Al k IMI 55 L',I, i DECLARATION i i ' s OF COVENANTS, CONDITIONS, RESTR:CTIONS AND EASEMENTS :CZ MEYERS WOODS THIS DECLARATION, made on the date hereinafter set forth by RESERS CONSTRUCTICN CO., a Minnesota corporation, hereinafter referred to as "Declarant"; WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, Declarant is the fee owner of certain property in the City of Orono, County of Hennepin, State of Minnesota, legally described as follows: Lots ?. through 25, and Outlots A and H, MEYERS WOODS [*** This is a tentative num- berinq of the lots based upon the preliminary development plan. It will be replaced with lots and blocks from the final plat. ***]; WHEREAS, Declarant desires to subject said property to cer- tain covenants, conditions, restrictions and easements for the benefit of said property; NOW THEREFORE, Declarant hereby declares that all of the property described above shall be held, sold and conveyed subject to the following covenants, conditions, restrictions and ease- ments, which are for the purpose of protecting the value and desirability of, and which shall run with, said property and be binding on all parties having any right, title or interest in said property or any part thereof, their heirs, successors and assigns, and shall inure to the benefit of each owner thereof. ARTICLE I DEFINITIONS Section 1. "Association" shall mean and refer to Meyers Woods Homeowneis Association, Inc., a Minnesota nonprofit corpor- ation, its successors and assigns. Section 2. "Owner" shall mean and refer to the record owner, whether one or more persons or entities, of fee simple title to any Lot which is a part of the Properties, but, if the Lot is being sold by a recorded contract for deed, then the con- tract vendee shall be deemed the "Owner" rather than the contract vendor. Section 3. "Properties" shall mean and refer to that real property —descz:bed in the first WHEREAS clause hereof. Wool UAIL O6,04/08 HEIlIEPIII COIAl1Y PROPERTY IIIFORIIATIO11 SYSILM 11111ORT I10. I lv3t,,il UAllll UU4 PROPLRIV 0I01LRS 1,151' PAGL U id 14—I1n YI 24 0001 Now AUUR O112J HAIZAIA BLVD IMNILII IIAIN Will IA" NI &R LFAL TA::P^ILR 11111IA" H It, AR IlAliftAOOR It, IUCKBLkkl IIILL I(Alu LAKL IYI 55I56 TOTAL BATCH 004 Ou0i9 I CERTIFY 111AT 111E FACTS RM41:5E14IED ARE All ACCURATE Alp 11,11IL REPRESEIIIAIION Do, IIIFO11LATIOII AS IT APPEARS 71115 UAIL till till RECORDS Of 111E IILI0ILPI14 LUTAITY 1APARIIiLH1 Of PROPERTY 1AXATIOII, IU IIIL BEST Of hY KIIOIII EOGE AIY) BEI I I f . %1 UAIL U-Im �}'0, Section 4. "Common Area " shall mean all real property (inclu ng any improvements thereon) owned by the Association for t::e c —.-Cn -use and enjoyment cf tie Owners. The Ccmmor. Area tc be owned by tie Association at the time of the conveyance or the first Lot is legally described as follows: Out'_ots A and H, METERS WOODS, Hennepin County, Minnesota. [*** For the purpose of this Declaration., Outlot A is the private road and Outlot H is the woodland prese:ve. When the final plat is prepared, these legal descriptions may have to be revised to conform to the final plat. ***] Section S. "Lot" shall meat and refer to any plot of land shown upon any recorded subdivision map of the Properties, except for the Common Area. Section 6. "Declarant" shall mean and refer to Rebers ConstructionCo., a Minnesota corporation, its successors and assigns if such successors or assigns should acquire more than one undeveloped Lot from the Declarant for the purpose of devel- opment. Section 7. "Member" shall mean and refer to the Owner of a Lot in its capacity as a member of the Association. Section 8. "City" shall mean and refer to the City of Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation. ARTICLE II PROPERTY RIGHTS Section 1. Owners' Easements of Enjoyment. Every Owner shall have an equalright and easement of enjoyment in and to the Common Area, which shall be appurtenant to and shall pass with the title to every Lot, subject to the following provisions: (a) the right of the Association to charge reasonable admission and other lees for the use of any recreational facility situated upon the Common Area; (b) the right of the Association to suspend the voting rights and right to use of the recreational facilities by an Owner for any period during which any assessment against his Lot remains unpaid, and for a period not to exceed 60 days for any infraction of its published rules and regulations; (c) the right of the Association to dedicate or trans- fer all or any part of the Common Area to any public agency, authority or utility for such purposes and subject to such condi- tions as may be agreed to by the Memoers. No such dedication or - 2 - transfer shall be effective unless an instrument agreeing to such dedication or transfer signed by sixty-seven percent (67%) of Section 2. Delecation of Use. Anv Lot Owner may delegate, in ac=oraanc? witzcne:_ass _: a .�►sacciic:.;: , :_s :� :_ enjoyment to the Common Area and facilities to the members of his Lot. Sec`icn 3. 3_, zht of =ncrsss and Earess. =3=:: Lot Owner shall nave an unrast__,:_ad rign= :ngrass a:.c e,:as5 tz :n_s from the private road on Outlot A, MEYERS WOODS.*'* Conform this legal description to the final plat. ***1 Such right shall be perpetual and shall pass to a new Lot Owner upon transfer or sale of the Lot. Section 4. Utility Easements. Easements for utility and drainage purposes are dedicatedn the plat of MEYERS WOODS along the perimeter of each Lot. The Declarant hereby grants to each Owner an easement for underground utility purposes in Outlot A, MEYERS WOODS [***VERIFY***], subject to the maintenance require- ments set forth in Article III, Section 2. ART - C' COMMON AREA MAINTENANCE Section 1. Private Road. The Declarant shall construct a private road on Outlot A, MEYERS WOODS [*** CONFOR.4 LEGAL DES- CRIPTION TO FINAL PLAT. ***] pursuant to plans and specifications satisfactory to the City and according to the &.-,;e table set forth in the development agreement between the Declarant and the City. The Association shall maintain the private road. Road maintenance shall include without limitation the following: plowing and removing snow from the road surface; clearing dirt, leaves and debris from the road surface; repairing the road; repairing the curbs; and replacing the road and the curbs. The Association may limit access to the private road to the Owners, their families, tenants, guests and invitees by appropriate means, including without limitation the following: signs, a gate, or a guard house. Section 2. Utility Lines. Lots in the Properties will be serves y undergroond ut: ity lines within Outlot A, MEYERS WOODS (***VERIFY***) and/or within the platted utility and drainage easement areas along the perimtter3 cf t:^e riots. The lines shall be owned and maintained as follows: (a) Telephone lines wi-- be owned and maintained by (*** name of company***J, its successors and assigns. - 3 - (b) Natural gas lines will be owned and maintained by Minnesota Gas C=-=ar.v, __s successors or ass:cns. by tc) ._ac::_c.ty lines ze owner anc ma_nz:a_nea r**** name of comoanv***?, its succes- :: asp ... . ....�-'-'_'':a_.;.: ---•?� ^fill- .'e .'•-�_ 3^- ':�-•.' tained by ("** name or czmpany successors or assigns. ryata: iris-ns and !a=e:aIs �.�_ ze by t: a and maintained by the Cite. Water se: _,ze lines .rcm laterals to homes w___ be owned by _n a res::e___ve Lot Owners and shall be .maintained by tne;i separately. ( f ) Sani-ary sewer mains and laterals will be owned by the City and maintained by the City. Sanitary sewer service :fines from homes tc the 'laterals will be owned by the respective Lczi Owners and shall be maintained by -nem separately. (g) Storm sewer facilities will be owned by the Asso- ciation and shall be maintained by the Association. sect cn ? +vc :dland ?-ese- •e The ;sscc_s-_zn shall tain the woodlan preserve within Outlot B, KEYERS WOODS and those =crt__ns cf Cut_ot a, MEEY?RS WOC:S that are not improved with t:ze private road. ; *** CONFOR:'. L-3d+:, DESCR.?T:ONS TO F.VAL PLAT **• Woodland maintenance shall include without limi:ation the fallowing: t: .-:ming and pruning of trees and bushes; thinning of trees and bushes; removal of dead, diseased and unsightly trees and bushes; removal of b:us:, leaves and debris; planting cf gees, bushes and otn er vege-ation; wate:_ng vegetation; treatin- diseased ve;etation; installation of 1.1nd- scaping structures; and cont:oi or erosion. The need for and timing of woodland maintenance shall be in the sole discretion of the board of directors of the Association, subject to govern- mental regulations concerning weed control, diseased trees and similar :natters. cec- r ,�..a Vic^ ^e TtiA Dec'_ara^.t shall erect one or two^ entrance' monuments on Outlot 3, ME':ERS WOODS (*** VER:FY ***J on either side of the intersection of the private road though the Properties anu the public road known as "Brown Road North". The Associati.)n s, I operate and maintain the entrance me numer.tcs operation and maintenance shall include .►:t..out :Nita::_.. _-, f�llcwing: Iigt:t:zg, - raj..__. renal.ng and replacing the monument(s). Each entrance monument snail Com- ply with municipal sign ordinances. Section 5. _vats 'e ss--_an T: ail The declarant s::a_- insta-I a reces-. -an -: 3__ 4 _.._n JUt -z: 3, KE.=RS WCC:S .1 those portions :f-Cutict A, wEYrRc aCODS 'hat are nct .ccucled t7 - 4 - the private road [*** i'ER:FV DESCRIPTION ***] for the private use and enjoyment of the Owners and their respective families, .�..3�t�.iuest3 3n. _.nv_7 ?es . T Assoc:at_::.n sna__ maintain "o tra.l. Trail ma.ntenance s.-iall include witnout limitation the following; clearing the surface of ice and debris;; repairing the tric•,cles and house,,cld pets, such as dogs and cats, are allowed ou the trail, but :.,cto_ •re:-_` Iles and horses are prohibited. Section 6. Other Common Facilities. The Association, acting _.._ :gn .,ca z a_tors, sna_'_ nav? _..e _ -; install additional facilities in t^e C::mmmcr. areas _..r the use and enjoyment of all the Owners; but no other group of Owners and no individual Owner shall have the right to instal'_ any facilities in the Common Areas, whether for the private use of one or more Owners or for the common use of all Owners. The Association shall maintain all facilities owned by the Association on the Common Areas. Section 7. Costs. The Association shall operate and main- tain the Common Areas and the Association's imnrovements thereon, at the cost of al: the Owners. Such costs &:e Common Exoenses included in the Common Assessments made by the association. How- ever, if the need for maintenance or repair of any part of the Common Area or time improvements thereon is caused through the willful or neglige^t acts of an Owner, or through the willful or ne ligent acts of the family, guests or invitees of an Owner, t. n the cost of such maintenance or repair shall be added to and become Dart of the assessment to wnicn the Owner's Lot is sub- ject. ARTICLE :V INSURANCE Section 1. Casualty Insurance on Insurable Common Area. The Association shall keep all insurable improvements an fixtures of the Common Area insured against loss or damage by fi:e or ot`:er casual,-,., and may obtain insurance against such other hazards that are normally covered by the standard extended coverage endorsement: and all other perils customarily covered for similar types of protects, including those covered by the standard "All Risk" endorsement. Such insurance shall cover 100% of the current replacement cost of the property covered. The Association may also insure any other property whether real or personal, owned by the Association, against loss or damage by f-re and sucn ctner hazards as the Asscciat:.on may deem desir- able, with the Asaociation as the owner and beneficiary of such insurance. The insurance coverage with respect to the Common Area snail be written i.^. the name of, and the proceeds there_f snail be payan.e to the association. Insurance rrz:ceeds snall be used by the Association for the repair or replacement of the property for wn:ch the insurance was carried. Premiums for s:_ insurance carried by the Association are Common Ex=eases included in the Com.^ncn Assessments made by the Association. Section 2. liaoili:v lnsurance. The Association snal: maintain 1 ability insurance for the protection of all Members !:a_n3Z _-.a_.?S .: :amaces sustained= on zr about the Common Areas in an amount of at least one million (3 ,000,00�) per dodo.:-ance or such higne_ amount as the Board deems appropriate. Sec 3 ♦y 3 z n e Association sna_I :^a_ ._-_.. bonds for a-_ Assz:c_3t_J:1 of_iceri, agents who handle or are responsible for the funds Jof the Association. T!:e bonds snail be in an amount e,:ua: to all finds in the possession of the Asso-__,at:on at any time and in no event less than three months assessments for all Lots plus the Association reserve finds. Section 4. Reolacement or Reoair of Prouerty. In tle event of damage to or destruction or any property or tide Association, the Association shall repair or replace the same °rote the insu- rance proceeds available. IF such insurance proceeds are insuf- ficient to cover the costs of repair or replacement of the Property damaged cr destroyed, the Association may Mae a Recon- struction Assessment against all Lot Owners to cover the addi- tional cost of re -a:- or replacement not covered by the insurance proceeds, in addition to any other Common assessments made against the Lot Owners. Section 5. Coverage, Loss Ad-ustment. The coverage and provisions of all insurance ootained by the Association shall be in conformity with FNMA requirements. Section 6. Ot.ier Insurance; Annual Review of Policies. The Association snall maintain any other insurance required by law or by the FNMA or that it determines desirable and appropriate. All insurance policies snall be reviewed at least annually by the Hoard of Directors of the Association in order to ascertain whether the coverage contained in the policies is sufficient to maKe any necessary repairs or replacement of property which may have been damaged cr destroyed. ARTICLE V : L4SERSH:P AND VOTING RIGHTS Sec` Zver,r L _3 3ao-ect assessment by _ne Association. Every Owner of a Lot seal, be a memcer of �::e Association. Membership shall be appurtenant to and may not be secarated from cwr.ersn.p ,g any Lot wnicn is s.o.ect to assess- ment. - 6 - Section 2. The Association shall have two classes of voting membership: Class A. Class A members shall be all Owners, with the except do of the Declarant, and shall be entitled to one ri:e:. ic:3 cnan cne ae:3:.:. :3 _ :a owner of a Lot, all such persons may be members and each 3nall -9 3.^.�..�_3C a ::3c-... i 7czz equa: _:e :e_- son's fractional ownership of the Lot. Class 3. The Class 3 meriter steal: be t^e -declaranz, votes for each Lot which snail be entitled to three �3) owned. The Class 3 membership shall cease and be converted to Class A membership on the happening of either of the following events, whichever occurs earlier: (a) when 75% of the Lots have been conveyed of record to Owners other than the Declarant; or (b) seven years after the first Lot is conveyed of record to an Owner other than the Declarant. ARTICLE VI COVENANT FOR ASSESSMENTS Section 1. Pu: ose of Assessments. The Association may levy assessments exclusively to promote the recreation, health, safety, and welfare of the residents in the Properties and for the improvement and maintenance of the Common Area, including reasonable reserves for future repairs, maintenance and replace- ment. Section 2. Creation of the Lien and Personal Obligation for Assessments. The Declarant, for each Lot owned within the ro- pert es, ereby covenants, and each Owner of any Lot by accep- tance of a deed therefor, whether or not it shall be so expressed in such deed, is deemed to covenant and agree to pay to the Associations (a) Annual Assessments per Section 3 of this Article; (b) Emergency Fund Assessments per Section 4 of this Article; (c) Sinking Fund Assessments per Section S of this Article; (d) Cavital Assessments per Section 6 of this Article; and (e) Specia: As3es3ment3 ;er 7 cf t.-13 Art__:*. Such assessments, together with late penalties, interest, costs and reasonable att=rne,,s' fees aCr the t"erecf and fir Lots and shall be a continuing lien upon Lhe against wnicn each such assessment is made. Each assessment against a Lot, attorneys' fees, -shall also be the personal obligation of the L8:5C. W;:0 adS - - :'a : a: :..a _ne -4n�- a3sesa- ment tell due. The personal obligation for delinquent assess- ments shall not pass to his successors in title unless expressly 358:.:"or? '�• t::c':':. _'? 3a13 s� s -..v 3^dam: ...',t ��.@:3:3 L c^a=;e :ne sel-z_ s -�ers';na_ Sectien 3. Annual Assessment:5. (a) The Association snail le,•y "Annual- Assessments" to defray those costs of the Association that occur annuall•i or more frequently, including without limitation: taxes, insurance, bonds, ^oerations, maintenance and minor repair3. (b) The Board of Directors of. the Association may fix the Annual Assessment I.- an amount net excess of the Maximum Annual Assessment determined pursuant to this suosection. Until .:anuar 1, _990, t^e Max_mun Anneal A=sessment shall be Dollars (s ) per :,Cr-. T::eraar _e: :ne Maximum AFT.; _ assessment -av ce increased each year not more than 5% above the Maximum Annual Assessment ce_cer.ta;e fs. -ne pre•. _pus year c_ by a cercentage nc_ 77cre :- a -the increase in the consumer price index for the Twin Cities Ketrooclitan Area published by the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, whichever is greater, without ;1 vote of -ne mericer- ship. The Maximum Annual Assessment may bw increased abcve this rate only by a ma:cri:y vote _ each class c: memz;ers wr.c are voting in person or by proxy, at a meeting duly called f-or tnis purpose. (c) Annual F.ssessments shall be due as to all Lots on the first day cf the month following the conveyance of the first Lot by the Dec:arant to any purchaser. ^!^e :first Annual Assessment may be adusted according tc t-e ...:mcer c' months remaining in the Association's fiscal year. The Board of _rects:3 shall is the ar.•..,un the Ar.-,a_ A s ssme.. a,a:^s' each Lot at lez.st thirty (30) days in advance of each fiscal year. Written notice of the Annual Assessment shall be sent to every Owner. The due dates shall be establisr.ed by the Board of rec-ors and may he nc more frequently tian monthly and no less _`re-ue^__j than seen_-ar.nua__.P. Section 4. Emergency Fund Assessment. ( a ) The Asroc:at:on snail *ti:3c _ _:5n a stpafatt :-.:ad t_ ne:- unforeseen exwenses or *meritnc- es -ne "E.-trgenc•, Fund"'). The Emergency ?und snail at all times ov e�:�_ t, t00 ( rcntzs tstimattd An..^.ual AS3/53:-e. fZf taC _ J':- t a11:.-..'3 Z.a�� - 4 - the Emergency Fund shall not be considered advance payments Annual Assessment3. (b) The Zmerg ency Fund sna;' be estaolisned )y "Enervencv Fund Assessments." Each Lot's share of the Emergency sn a__ oe C^.__?r �,� :n,? �--' 21 it ".-e _� i _y Ot t: a Sa_d of^the Lot from the Dec''_a:ant to the Owner. W_thin one year after the clo5i.ig of :ne sa'e cf :^e __-st Lit, Declarant steal_ pay each unsold Lc:'s share oc the Emergency Fund to the Association. Declarant shall be reimbursed for tnis payment from ..ends col. ected f:_.;, _na var..us Iot vwne:s at -,e safe of the Lots _rz:n the Declarant to the Cwner5. (c) Whene•:er :he Emergency Fund is deo:e_e4 oe'_ow t:-.e level set for--:. -:n Subsection (a), the Association shall renleni3h the Emergency Fund by levying additional Emergency Fund Assessments against all the Lots and their respective Owners. Section 5. Sinkina Find Assessments. (a) The Association snail establish, a sena.ate reserve fund ("Sinking Fund") to prov,de cash for :-!a.cr repairs and replacement of those improvements is the Commcn Area that will, after a numper of fears, need major repairs or rap:a-e-e.n.t. Suc^ improvements include, without limitation, the road, the storm sewer faci:.lies, the entrance monument and the pe:estrian trail. (b) The Board of Directors shall, in good faith, determine the iseful li.'e ct sucn imorovernents and an appropriate schedule of Sinking F•.:nd Assessment, such that each year the Sinking Fun(' Assessments are aperc9m" a-ely equal or gradually increasing and such that, wnen each major repair or replacement is expected to oc::ur, there will be sufficient cash in the Sinking Fund. (c) If for any reason the Sinking Fund is over inade- quate to fund 3 major repair or replacement, then the Association may levy a Capital Assessment (pursuant to Section 6) to defray the extra cost. Section 6. CaD_ta! Assessments. (a) Whenever the Beard determines that _ne S.LnK�.n- Fund is inadequate to fund a major repair or replacement and whenever the Hemoers decide to install additional capital improvements to.. tire Commcn Area, the A.33oc_at.^.n :nay levy a "Capital s3esgment." ( b ) Each Capital Assessment snarl be due and payable in such installments as -he 9carl of Directors shall determine, but no more frequently tean mcrtnly and no less frequently tnan semiannually, and in any event shall be fully paid witnin the excected useful life of the improvement. Section 7. Special Assessments. sible for maintenance or repair o: any part of the Common Area, the Association shall levy a "Scecia'_ Assessment" against that :.cc and -:z Owner. (b) Each Special Assessment shall be due and payable in such installments as the Board shall determine, but no more frequently than monthly and no less frequently than semi-annually and in any event sna_l be fuliy paid within one year. Section 8. Nctice and Quorum for Anv Acticn Authorized Under Sections 3 and 5. Written rictice of any meeting called for the purpose of taxing any action authorized under Section 3 or 5 of this Article shall be sent to ail members not less than 30 days, nor more than 60 days, in advance of the meeting. At the first such meeting called, the presence of members or of proxies entitled to cast a majority of all the votes of each class of membership shall constitute a quorum. If the required quorum is not present, another meeting may be called subject to t:ie same notice requirement, and the required quorum at the subsequent meeting shall be one-'.^alf (1/2) cf the required quorum at the preceding meeting. No such subsequent meeting shall be held more -than 60 days fc; .:wing ':e preceding meeting Section 9. Uniform Rate cf Assessment.all assessments shall a ixe3 at an equal rate for all Lots,except that Special Assessments sna'_l be levied against only those lots and Owners whom the Board determines (after notice and a reasonable opportunity to be heard) to be responsible. Section 10. Setbacks. (a) The recorded plat of MEYERS WOODS public utility and drainage easements have been dedicated along the perimeters of all lots (*** certain lots? ***;. Within said easement areas no houses or other improvements shall be built that would inter- fere with utilities or drainage. (b) Ordinances of the City of Orono prohibit con- struction of buildings within the front 50 feet, rear 50 feet and Gide 30 feet cf each Lot. Said ordinances may be changed by the City Council. For this purpose, front, rear and side yard set- backs are measured pursuant to municipal ordinances. (c) In addition to the setbacks described in subsec- tions (a) and (b), no clearing, grading or constrsct_on shall be condo_-ed within the `-:nt 25 Feet, rear 255 Feet and side 10 fee -- of each Lot. For tars purpose, for each Lot front yard setbacks arp measured from the Lat's common boundaries with Outlot A, rear vard setbacks are measured from the Lot's common boundaries with Outlet B and side yard setnacxs are measured From the ot's com- mon bcundar.e,� with other Lots. ;*** VERIFY ***i Notwit^- scand.na `ne f3regcinq prohibition, each !at may have one drive- - 10 - way leading from the private road to the garage, provided that the cleared right-of-way of the driveway shall not exceed 20 feet v.__... Section 10. Effect of Nonoavment of Assessments: Remedies within thirty ( -)days after the due date shall bear interest !:gym ::-,a da:e a: _:a :a --a aig.' -2:_en: (31, -: '-•- --''-- legal rate set by the Board of Directors. The Association may bring an action at law against the Owner personally obligated to pay Ine e.^.t:re unpaid po:.:on including costs o: at_o:aa;�s' less and interest, or foreclose :Ile !:an against the ;:;::e: ty, O: both, and the costs and reasonable attorneys' fees or any such action shall be added to the amount of such assessments and shall also be secured by the lien of the assessment. No Owner may waive or otherwise escape liability for the assessments provided for herein by the sale or abandonment of his Lot. Section 11. Late Pa ment. If an Assessment is not paid on or before ten (10) days a ter the date when due, the Lot Owner shall be obligated to pay, in addition to the interest required under Section 9 of this Article, a late Assessment service charge under the following schedule: llth to 30th day $25.00 after 30th day $50.00 The purpose of this fee is to compensate the Association for the expense and inconvenience of collecting 1:­ gsessments, bor- rowing to cover Association expenses and : _aer costs attri- butable to late payment. The Board shall act these fees on all late payments. The Board may increase, out may not decrease or eliminate, the service charges set forth in th:s section in the same fashion as is established for the adcpt:on of other rules and regulations. This penalty shall be added to the amount of such Assessments and be secured by the lien of '6::e Assessment. Section 12. Subordination of the Lien to Mortgages. The lien of the A- ssments provided or herein shall be subordinate to the lien of any first mortgage, provided the mortgage was recorded before the delinquent assessment was due. Sale or transfer of any Lot shall not affect the assessment lien. How- ever, the sale transfer of any Lot pursuant to mortgage fore- closure or any _ iceeding or deed in lieu thereof, shall extin- guish the lien of such assessments as to payments which became due prior to such sale or transfer. No sale or transfer shall relieve such Lot from liability for any assessments thereafter becoming due or from the lien thereof. ARTICLE VI: No building, fence, wall or other structure shall be com- exterior addition •to orchangeor alteration therein be made, nor other landscaping on any Lot be made, until the plans and speci- fications showing the nature, kind, shape, height, materials and l:,catior. f -- - o the same s`al ::a�:e been 3sbr.,i"sue t:. an approve_ wr:.._ng as to ha::nor.y of external des:3n and-;.caz:zn :a -a: - to surrounding structures and topography by the Board, or by an architectural committee composed of three (3) or more representa- tives appointed by the Board. In the event said Board, or its designat d committee, fails to approve, disapprove or request further information on such design and location within thirty (30) days after said plans and specifications have been submitted to it, approval will not be required. and this Article will be deemed to have been fully complied with. ARTICLE V1:1 RENTAL OF LOTS Section 1. Any Owner may rent his Lot subject to the terms and con itions contained herein: (a) Any rental of a Lot shall be by written lease. No lease shall be for less than thirty (30) days. Any lease for more than an initial term of six (6) months shall have the prior written approval of the Board of Directors. No lease shall be for less than the entirety of a Lot. (b) Each lease shall contain the following provision: The undersigned tenant(s) has (have) received a copy of the Articles of Incorporation and the Bylaws of Meyers Woods Homeowners Association, Inc., the Declaration of Covenants, Conditions, Restrictions and Ease- ments for Meyers Woods and the Rules adopted by the Association Board of Directors governing this property. I (We) agree to be bound by the requirements and conditions of those documents, including any other Rules adopted by the Board of Directors from time to time. (c) A lease may provide that the :esseets) anal: pay the Association asses3ment3, but no suc!% provision shall affect the personal liabili:y of the Owner to _ns Association for such as3essme^._s, nor tine ::en of such assessments as prov'ded herein. (d) Nothing in subparagraph (a) shall limit the ability of a first mortgagee in possession of a Lct, or its suc- _?___:z anz 3sz_ ns, Rollzwing a a de___ -_or a ?e'_ or other arrangement in lieu of foreclosur? from leasing the Lot for less t`:an six :ronths. ARTICLE '.X ADDITIONAL RESTRICTIONS Section 1. Residential Use. No Lot shall be used except for residential purposes, except that Declarant shall be entitled to maintain a business and sales office and have model units upon the Lots during the construction and sales period. Section 2. Obstruction of Common Area. There shall be no obstruction of the Common Area nor shall anything be stored in the Common Area without the prior written consent of. the Board of Directors of the Association. Section 3. Pets. Pets shall be allovea in c_n_`criity wi`_h the Rules of the Association. Section 4. Home Occuoations. Notwithstanding Section 1 of this ArzLc:e to the contrary, an Owner may engage in a home occu- pation. A "home occupation" is a use which is incidental and secondary to the principal use of the Let for residential pur- -,oses and does not change the character thereof including, but )t limited to, office and studio uses, weaving, dressmaking and such other uses which by custom are considered accessory to a dwelling. However, that no sign advertising such occupation shall be displayed on the Lot or elsewhere on the Properties, at a special meeting called for this purpose, votes to require the termination of a home occupation because of its objectionable effect on the Properties, the Owner shall immediately thereafter cease and terminate such occupation. Section 5. Clotheslines. No clothes, sheets, blankets or laundry of any kind or other articles shall be hung out or exposed in any part of the Common Area or on any Lot. Section 6. Signs. No sign of any kind shall be displayed to the public view on any Lot or on the Common Area; except that on each Lot the Owner may display one sign of not more than five (5) square feet advertising the Lot for sale, except that Declarant may erect and maintain upon the Propert_es such signs as it deems appropriate to advertise the Properties until the Declarant owns no Lot3 within the Properties. Section 7, Antennas. No television or other antennas visible trcm the private road within the Properties, Brown Road or U.S. Hignway 12 shall be erected or mainta_ned on any Lot - 13 - • except with the approval of the Hoard of Directors or arc!,itec- t:ral committee in acc=iance with Article X. Section 8. Trash. Neither the Common Area nor any Lot shall a used or maintained as a dumping ground for rubbish, ::as:., garnage _ ct::er •haste. No par_ of ar_., :.cc or cf t::e Common Area shall be used at any time for the storage of aban- doned automobiles, boats or other equipment. Garbage, rubbish and trash shall not be kept on any Lot, except in clean and sani- tary containers in the garage of the townhome located on such Lot. Section 9. Nuisance; Illegal Activities; Variation. Nothing snail be done or kept on the C:rimcn Area or on any Lot or on any part thereof which would (i) increase the rate of insurance on anv other Lot over what the Owner of such other Lot or the Association, but for such activity, would pay, without the prior written consent of the Association, or (ii) which would be in violation of any statute, rule, ordinance, regulation, permit or other validly imposed requirement of any governmental body. No damage to, or waste of the Properties or the buildings situ- ated thereon shall be committed by any Owner or any invitee of any Owner and each Owner agrees to indemnify and hold harmless the Association and the other Owners from and against all loss resulting from any such damage or waste caused by him or by his invitees. No noxious, destructive or offensive activity shall be allowed on the Common Area or on any Lot, nor shall anything be done thereon, either willfully or negligently, which may be or may become an annoyance or nuisance to any other Owner or to any other person at any time lawfully residing on the Properties. Section 10. Setbacks. (a) The recorded plat of MEYERS WOODS public utility and drainage easements have been dedicated along the perimeters of all lots (*** certain lots? ***l. Within said easement areas no houses or other improvements shall be built that would inter- fere with utilities or drainage. (b) Ordinances of the City of Orono prohibit con- struction of buildings within the front 50 feet, rear 50 feet and side 30 Feet of each Lot. Said ordinances may be changed by the City Council. For this purpose, front, rear and side yard set- backs are measured pursuant to municipal ordinances. (c) in addition tc the setbacks described in subsec- t_ons (a) and (b), no clear_ng, grading or constr•-icticn shall be conducted within the front 25 feet, rear 25 Feet an; side 10 feet of each Lot. For this purpose, for eacn Lot front yar,4 setbacks are measured fr^m the Lot's common boundaries with 0i!r A, rear yard setnacxs are measured from the Lot's common bout. .ies with Outlot 8 and side yard setbacks are measured from the Lot's com- mon boundaries with other Lots. (*** VERI_Ff ***; Notwith- standing the foregoing prohibition, each Lct may have one drive- - 14 - way leading from the private road to the garage, provided that t::e c_ea:ed right-.f +ay of the :i•.reway shall not exceed 20 feet y c�^_•'^r. 1' Rules and Rec•i'ations. in addition to the !zregc.::g anc. covenants �:,f:C3::.1 :y- G.-,a use of the Properties, reasonable riles and regulations (herein "Rui3s") ► not i.'1 JC .LCt and stlDDiamen zary tine:eto, may be promulgated and amended from time to time by the Board of Directors of the Association. Copies of the rules and regula- t_c^s snal_ be fu.-:is-ied bv_ the As_ scciat_on to eac- Lot Owner and occicant. ARTICLE X ADMINISTRATIVE PROVISIONS Section 1. Enforcement. The Association, or any owner, shall have t e right to enforce, by any proceeding at law or in equity, all restrictions, conditions, covenants, reservations, liens and charges now or hereafter imposed by the provisions of this Declaration or the Bylaws of the Association. Failure by the Association or by any Owner to enforce ar..: covenant or restriction herein contained shall in no event be deemed a waiver of the right to do so thereafter. Section 2. Severab�i'its•. -^validation of anv one of these covenants or o rest icti� nsy judgment or court order shall in no way affect any other provisions which shall remain in full force and effect. Section 3. Amendment. The covenants and restrictions of this �c aration shwa l run with and bind the land, for a term of twenty (20) years from the date this Declaration is recorded, after which time they shall be automatically extended for succes- sive periods of ten (10) years. This Declaration may be amended by an instrument signed by not less than 671 of each class of members and Slt of the first mortgagees of Lots who have requested that the Association notify them of any proposed action which requires the consent of a specified percentage of eligible mortgage holders ("Eligible Mortgagees"). Any amendment must be recorded to be effective. Section 4. FNMA Provisions. In addition to various other provisions of. this Declaration and the Bylaws, which meet the requirements of the Federal National Mortgage Association (herein "FWMA"), the following additional FNMA provisions are applicable to the Association, Lot Owners and the Properties. (a) No insurance on the Properties, including fidelity bonds, may be cancelled or materially modified without giving ten (10) days prior written nctics to any first mortgagee, any mort- gage so:- -ricer and to the Association. First mortgagees, upon - is - 4 written request, shall also receive notice of the lapse of any insurance pc-*--c,., maintained by the Association. (a) A mortgagee, upon request in wrir:ng, snall receive notice of (i) any condemnation or casualty loss that on the Lot securing its mortgage, (ii) any delinquency of sixty k 50 ) days or mc: a in paymenza assassmnen:s on t a I..:: se:::= :^g its mortgage or (iii) any proposed action requiring the consent of a specified percentage of the first mortgagees. (c) Nc sion c-' this Declaration or cite 3.�laws shall give a Lot Owner or any other person, priority over the rights of first mortgagees, their successors on assigns, under the mortgage to insurance or condemnation proceeds. (d) First mortgagees, their successors or assigns, shall have the right to inspect the books and records of the Association during normal business hours. tN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned, being the Declarant herein, has hereunto set its hand and seal this day of 1988. RZ3ERS CONSTRUCTION CO. By Its President STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of , 1988, by the President of RESERS CON. RUCTION CO., a Minnesota corpora- tion, on behalf of the corporation. Notary Public THIS INSTRUMENT WAS DRAFTED BY: LEONARD, STREET b DE:NARD (HMM) :00 South ?i:.n St:eot, Suite 1500 Minneapol:3, Minnesota 55402 612/337-=300 - _6 - RETURN RECORDED ORIG:NAL TO: LEONARD STREET & DE:NARD (HMM) 100 South Fifth Street, Suite i500 612/337-1500 - 17 - D ftf Oro w dOOr d 4 # a 43 *%*Aft // A3duoP& LAUR[SS V. ACRMAN DAVID J. DAVENPORT OEAALOC MAGNUSON MAMR R JOHNSON E INARO IL OLENNON RICMARD A. PRIMUTH MELVIN I.ORENST[IN R WALTER SACMMAN ROSERTJ.SHtRAN THOMAS L-FASCL ISRAEL C 1~11$[T( JCTFRtV R. SCHMIDT EU09 N[ At ATIF1O TIMOTHY H. SUTLER JAMS P. MARTINCAU ROSERT O.MITCHELL.JR. T11C"ARD J. FITtO(MAL. J MICHAEL OADV PHILIP J. ORTHUN J. KEVIN COSTLEY .O"N A. FORM ST NOSERT J. MARTMAN WILLIAM ( FOR JOSEPN O. KOHLER JOHN J CONNLLLT RICMARD D. MCNCIL J(RNOLD F. SEROFALK DONALD C, SWENSON DAVID—L[S[OOFF SNUCE A. SONJOUR JO"N H. STRO►"MAN JAMES P. MFCAMINT DAVID O. NEWHALL STCV[N J. JOHNSON 11U11TIS A OR[tNL.[Y RICMARD I"RIU ROS[NT V. ATMORE CAROL T. PIEOCN PATRICN O[. lA MA HOWARO JNAU[YMAk WILLIAM CVNN R9NALO O VANTINt MICHAEL S. MANGULIES J 3NN S.WIF 'TON THOMAS O. LOVETT Tr LAURANCE R. WALDOCM DAVID S. WLSCOt THOMAS H. OARRLTT M LYNN M. AND E"SON OARTLL L. UPHOF/ THOMAS t.OLENNON November 22, 1988 LINDQUIST i VENNUM 4200 IDS CENTER MINNEAPOLIS,MINNESOTA S5402-2205 TELEPHONE 16121 371-3211 TELEX 29 0044 TELECOPIER 16121 371-3207 CABLE, LJNLAW MINNEAPOLIS WAYZATA OFFICE 740 EAST LAKE STREET WAYZATA, MINNESOTA 55391 Orono City Council P. O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 WRITER S DIRECT DIAL NUMBER C22-473-4228 Re: Rebers Preliminary Plat Ladies and Gentlemen: T(RESA S. SONNER J. ROS[RT PAULSON. JR, JOHN A. HOUSTON JOSCPH A. THOMSON U[NNIS N.0 MALLET ANN L IIJIMA COWARD J. WE090SON ELIZABETH G. ART DANICL J. SM[RAN KATHARINE N. HCLMS DAVID A. AL LOEYCR WALLACE O. HILII[ TERR[NCE J. FLEMINO CHARLCS P. MOORSE ROLF ENO" PAT$ JO ►OFA"L RICMARD T. OSTLUND LURE ". TERHAAR OESORA" M. REOAN M$CNAEL J. YOUNG MARTIN R. ROSENSAUM KAREN L. SCHN[ISER ELINOR C. ROSENSTEIN CHARL[f J. LLOYD ROSAN NE M. WINTH WILLIAM P. MOTE DESNA K. PACE JAMES A LODOEN MICHAEL D. OLAFSON RANDY O. OULLIC$ISON JOCL N. GREEN SARAN DUFF HALVORSON DAVID L."ALL(TT CHAR .(S R. WEAVER. JR. DAVID L. SASSEVILL( DAVID A. DONNA DENISE D. 1'CILLY of couNwEl JONATHAN M. SVC LEONAPD E LINOOVIST MANY P. 149CONNELL NORMANL NEWHALL SALLY S. GROSSMAN TI"OTMT R. SAER w[Tiw[O TIMOTHM T f. .INTF[ TMOHAS of k"U" We represent Scott and Jeanne Mabusth who live at 740 North Brown Road, Orono, Minnesota. There is a small matter relating to the Rebers Subdivision which the Mabusths and their neighbors respectfully request be corrected in the preliminary plat before you. North Brown Road from Highway 12 to County Road 6 is an old road, a narrow road with narrow shoulders, a road which goes up and down limiting sight lines, and a road which has numerous and sometimes blind driveways (particularly at the north end) entering onto it. The land to the west of Brown Road is generally higher than the land to the east such that cars coming from the west, as from the Rebers Subdivision, will tend to shine their lights into the windows of the houses on the east side of the road. This will particularly be true with regard to the Kabusth residence. the Rebers Subdivision will bring 25 new houses onto Brown Road for access. The only other significant piece of undeveloped land along Brown Road is or, the easterly side of the road, just north of the Long Lake State Bank and opposite Rebers Subdivision, but that land will only generate another 9 or 10 houses. Generally one assumes that 25 houses will have 4 to 5 automobile trips a day per house, for total new traffic onto Brown Road of 100-125 cars per day. See the 2 diagrams attached. Based upon all of the foregoing the original Rebers subdivision proposal to Orono approved by Glen Cooke, (the city engineer), and by the city staff specified that the access road from the subdivision should join Brown Road about. 400' south of the top of the hill, well south of the existing driveways to the north and a little south of the location proposed by Rebers. This location LINDQUIST & V E N N U M City of Orono November 22, 1988 Page 2 is satisfactory to Rebers and the neighbors. This location had the following benefits: 1. A safe locat-ion, virtually as safe as a location at the top of the hill, sin,::e the sight line of 400' would satisfy a •10 mph speed limit when th!- present speed limit is only 30 mph and require only ?5(" of sight line. 2. Avoidance of rc.igestiun of acc,:sses at the northerly end of Browr Road. 3. Spread J.r,y out or t;:r local traffic accessing onto Brown Road mcce or le-s aqually along its length so as not to ever -burden an., one portion of the road so as to maintain the rural feel of the neighborhood. 4. Spaces this busy access more than the required 100 feet from the Mabusth driveway (which the top of the hill access fails to do). 5. Avoidance of 100-125 sets of headlights shining into the Mabusth house everyday and avoidance of the noise associated %ith that volume of traffic movement at the Mabusth house. 6. Complies with what the neighbors want and the neighbors, including the Mabusths, understood they would get from the Rebers subdivision. Therefore we respectfully ask you to approve the preliminary plat of Rebers Subdivision, but return the access road to the location 400' south of the top of the hill as originally proposed, properly engineered to best solve a" problems and as agreed and understood by the neighbors. Tl- access road location (at the top of the hill) suggested by the planning commission places the access road in a safe location also, but it unacceptably exacerbates all the other problems identified above. Respectfully submitted, LINDQUIST & VENNUM IL Robert G. Mitchell, Jr. RGM:hbs To: Planning Commission Chairman Kelley Cronc . _ar.r.-rt, Cor.•m;33_Cn 'Iemhers Cit;i Administrator 3ern;,ar.iscr. ?rom: .'eanne A. Mabus`_'^, 3ujiding & Cc.:_,c Ad-ninist_a'_ Date: 1,1(-.vemt-er 16, 1988 Subject: #1356 Gerald T. McCourtney, 1055 West Ferndale Road - Renewal Variance - Public Fearing Zoning District - LR-lA Pertinent Ordinances A) Section 10.22, Subdivision 2 - Excess hardcover within the 75- 250' setback area. 75-250' Setback Area = 15,870 s.f. Allowed Hardcover 3,968 s.f. or 25% Existing Hardcover = 1_,679 s.f. or 36% *-1 Proposed Hardcover (application 1184) = 6,048 s.f. or 38.1% *-2 Proposed Hardcover (current appl.) - 6,048 s.f. or 38.1% *-3 TOTAL HARDCOVER. INCREASE - 369 s.f. or 2.3% *-1 Existing Hardcover - Principal Structure = 3,954 s.f. Deck - 715 s.f. Sidewalk - 410 s.f. Driveway - 600 s.f. TOTAL - 5,679 s.f. *-2 Hardcover Approved $1184 - Principal Structure 4,608 s.f. Deck = 430 s.f. Sidewalk - 410 s.f. Driveway - 600 s.f. TOTAL - 6,048 s.f. *-3 Hardcover Current Proposal - ...� Principal Structure - 4,696.1 s.f. Derck - 590 s.f. Driveway 420 e.f. TOTAL = 6,048 s.f. i{ RESCLUTICN GRANTING 'IARIANCzS TO MUNICIPAL ZONING CODS SECTION 10.22, SUBDIVISION 1 AND SECTION 10.23, SUBDIVISION 6 (B) FILE #1356 WHEREAS, Gerald T. McCourtney (hereinafter "the applicant") is the owner of the property located ar 1055 Ferndal -ad west within the City of Orono (hereinafter "City") and legally descrihed as follows: Exhibit A, attached, (hereinafter "the property"); and WHEREAS, -he applicant has 3pp lied to the Cit•.7 for variances to Municipal Zoninq Code Section 10.22, Subdivision 1 and Section 10.23, Subdivision 6 3 to permit the constructicn of a master bat -oom, deck, ,iinnette, and laundry room additions to the existing structure resulting in an increase of -'.1 % or 369 s.f. of hardcover within the 75-250' lakeshore setback area where only 25% or 3,968 s.f. is allowed, and a side setback of 13'3" for the bathroom addition that will encroach 1'9" further into the existing substandard yard area at 15'. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVE✓ b,,: the Cit: Council of Orono, Minnesota: FINDINGS 1. This application was reviewed as Zoning File 41356. 2. The properly is located in the LR-1A Sina_le Family Lakeshore Residential Zoning District. 3. "he Orono Planning Commission reviewed this application on November 21, 1998 and recommended approval of the proposed variances based upon the `ollowing findings: A) over 50% of the area of this property is located within the 0-75' lakeshore protected area. e` The '6,M00 q.f. of arAssled lakeshore varri arpa pr­vi,?es adequate-R-atment Arta for the har lcc,.'er on the proper-. C) The C:t•, has received no negar:•.-R-7ommonts from the roost Woc--ol neighbors. Zoning File s 13 5 0 Ncv emher I , 1 tin ,; ace c. 2 B) Secticn 1C.23, 6 B) - Si -le set!:ack :ariance real —'red for bathrocm addit'_on on the north side of house. ?equi.-ed = 30 E':cist_ng - 15' Proposed `41134* - 13'.3" jr 57: Proposed (current appl..) - 13'3" or 57% List of Exhibits Exhibit A - Applicaticn Exhibit B - Property Owners List Exhibit C - Plat Map Exhibit D - Planning Commission ,Mir.,.tes of 9/8/87 Exhibit E - Council Minutes of 9/28/87 Exhibit F - Council Minutes cf 10/12/87 Exhibit G - Resolution 02279 Exhibit H - Revised Site Plan Exhibit I - Elevation The app l - , � , roEoses no major changes from the original application submitted a year ago. Review the hardcover facts noted above, specifically the ?ster:ck items #2 and 43. There is an increase of 88.5 s.f. for the princiEal residence resulting from the last minute re -adjustment of the master bathroom, resulting in a 178.5 s.f, of additional hardcover rasher than the 90 s.f. originally presented before the Council at their final review. The increase in the decks in, the current propesal results from the need to have a deck a- a propose(' door at the souti.,•+est corner of the lake sale of the house (review Exhib - the lake side elevation). Hardcover is still maintained at 6,048 or 38.1%, by reducing sidewalk and driveway areas. Staff recomn, us approval of the renewal var-ance application for Gerald McCourtney subject to the same conditions set forth in the original resolution 02279. Planning Coessission Recomine ndation - November 22, 1Q88 The Planninq Commission voted unanimously to recommend approval of the renewal variance application of Gerald T. McCourtney for the residence located at 1055 Ferndale Road West. Staff has drafted the appropriate resolution ref lectinq the Planning Commission's approval. The enclosed resolution is presented For Council's formal action. 4. The City Council has considered this ap::-ica:ion including the findi^ :ecommen,!a`_...3 : f t'- ?lanninq _�T^_3S_On, r'atCrt3 .C79 3nC � _ _ '� 3'3�., ,.�mme.^.-.s ^P atL__=3: _ anC� ^•� ���?C+ C_ ta? C OLOs?. variance on t-e he a t:, safety and welfare of the community. --unci et nd3 -..,at the ccnd:` Cns e.�. st nQ on this property are reculiar tc it and do not apply generally to other property in t:lis zoning district; t.iat v_rant_na the •7a«ancas would not ad?vl erse'; affect traffic conditions, light, air nor Lose a fire hazard or other danger to neighboring property; would not merely serve as a convenience to the applicant, but is necessary to alleviate a demonstrable hardship or difficulty; is necessary to preserve a substantial property right of the applicant; and would be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan of the City. CONCLUSIONS, ORDER AND CONDITIONS Based upon one or more of the findings noted above, the Orono City Council hereby grants variances to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.22, Subdivision 1 and Section 10.23, Subdivision 6 !B) to permit the construction of additions to the existing structure that require hardcover and side setback variances, subject to the following ^onditions: 1. The drainage swale along the west side of the property shall not be permanently or temporarily altered as a result of the proposed construction. 2. Authorities granted with 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 these variance will expire on that date (November 28, 1989). 3. 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. 4. The undersigned applicant has read, understood and hereby agrees to the terms of this resolution and on behalf of himself, his heirs, successors and assigns, hereby agrees to the recording of this resolution in the chain of title of the property. Page 2 of 4 Adopted by the Orono City council on this 28th lay of 'November, 1988. ATTEST: Dorothy M. Hallin, City Clerk James R. Grabek, Mayor Property Owner(s) Page 3 c` CITY OF ORONO - VARIANC3 APPLICATION _nitlal Ac-llcat_cn Fee S_=0.00 ss:• " ,� (no C.ha :ce :=--ni or' a_7 ac;licatic n, Afts--•the-Fact Fees (iouble applicatlon fee) ----------------------------------------------------------- PRCPMT° LCC.ATICN Site Address 10,55 _- ?rcperty !dent i=_ca t:on Please c eck one - P=zper=1 \t abstrs..= or ans' Attach legal description to application if not included on required survey. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- APPLICANT Phone ( home ) Name is eXLA40 T. ✓ti'1 `- C4,"JtL_r"-% `f _ Phone (work.) L-1- 3 3 1 Z_ Address: 10 5 5 YJ • FP-rwO44-4-- � City: C)MO,c Zip: s CI ----------------------------------------------------------- ------ OWNER (if different than applicant) Phone (home) Name !:S!Lr"O T. M C0QrL-'N4--w Phone (wcrk) Address: 10 55 W- Feat oA< - City: cgw,uo zip: Date Property Acquired _ �'� (month/year) I (do) (do not) also own the adjacent parcels of land. ------------------------------ ------------------------------------- PRESENT USE OF PROPERTY Present Zoning District Present use of Property L 2/A Residential Other (specify) --------------------------------------------------------------------------- DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST Estimated Construction Cost S Describe request in detail: U P(MMOU3 tJA-'Uaa+uC //cif 340nAE. 4 -------------------------------------------------------------------------- VARIANCES REQUIRED Lot Area Lot width X Hardcover i Setback Variances ( Front: Side Rear) Ct er EX _31 _ A That part of Tract B. Registered Land Survey Number 1372. Files of the Registrar of Titles. Hennepin County. Minnesota, lying westerly of the rollowing described line and its, northerly and southerly extensionsheasterly ;ommencing• at the northwesterly corner of said Tract B. thence along the northeasterly line of said Tract B a distance of 147.85 feet to 3n iron monument being the point of beginning of the- 1Lne•to be described; thence southerly deflecting to the right from the last described course oP degrees. 11 minutes, 10 seconds a distance extension o f to an iron monument; thence continuing southerly on the extension of the last described course to the shoreline of Lake Minnetonka and said line there terminating. Will OATS 07/27/87 BAIT 11 001 38 gE-117-23 43 s002 FRIA' AOOR 91070 FERWALE RO N GI::G,I NUIE GOODRICH LOIRY ETAL TA.:c,4ER GOODRICH LOIRY 1114L'AOOR 1070 N FERNDALE RI/ WAYZATA NO 55391 PROP AtTDR 38 OR-117-23 43 goes CH4.! d IIAHE DEIRY N SKARP TA: r .YIR 111.1111( H SKARP 11. ,.L; AUOR 1045 N FERNDALE RO WAYZATA NO SS391 38 0E-117-23 43 0021 PROD ADOR 01065 FERIDALE RD N 0.131; 11 111JIE R A C LI DSTROM TA;+i IiLR RICHANO L LIIDSTRON II .ii.; ADDR 1065 N FERNDALE RD HAYZATA NN 55391 38 0E-117-23 43 0024 FRUP AUDR 01045 FERIDALE RO II Waal? IIAIIE 11EIOI1 N bKARP TAXP:.YLR NEIONY N SKARP H;.1ii 1A00R 1045 N FERIDALE NO WAYZATA IN $5391 HE1OIEPIN COtNITY PROPERTY IHFORIIATIOH SYSTEM PROPERTY OWNERS LIST 38 or-117--23 43 0003 01070 FERNDALE RO 61 HENRY N SKARP IIEIRY 11 SKARP L045 N FERIDALE RD ItAYZATA Ni 55391 38 02-117-23 43 0006 GOODRICH LOWY ETAL GOODRICH Lamy 1010 11 FERIDALE RD WAYZATA NMI 55391 38 02-117-23 43 0022 01055 FERIDALE RD II GERALD T HCCOURTHEY ET AL GERAIO T HCCOLRTl1EY 1055 N FERNDALE ROAD OROIIO NO 55391 TOTAL BATCH 001 00010 RE14NIT IKI. PI435401 PAGE 1 38 02-117-23 43 0004 GOODRICH LOONY ETAL GOODRICH LOWRY 1070 lI FERNDALE RD WAYZATA NO SS391 38 02-117-23 43 0007 0 11 RITZ 0 J M kl1Z GOROON 11 A JOY(.L H IIITZ 1000 It FERIDAI L Id) ORONO NMI 55391 38 02-117-23 43 0023 O1O95 FERIDAIE RD IN BiKFOX 8 C 0 KATHERINE N FUX 10" N FERNDALE kU WAYZATA MN 55391 I CERTIFY THAT THE FACTS REPRESENTED AVE AN ACCURATE AND 1RIIE REPRESENTATION OF IIIFORIIATION AS IT APPEARS THIS DATE Off IIIE RLCOIf11S OF TINE DENORPIN COLA1TT UEPARTIIENR OF PROPERTY TAXATION. 10 111E IIL:,I OF MY KNOWLEDGE AID BELIEF Y DATE ,�() BTY�,� _._V \�s HARDSHIP :.aser_ce undue nards ip or pract_zal ----tl r:sulting from strict 1n_::_ :sment of ... nines recul3ticns DESC_Z_2TIrON OF UNUSUAL PROPERTY CONDITICNS = iscri!:e unusua _ _ =ert-7 condi:i:ns pre•;en i..ng ccmDliarce with Zoning _:de Requirements: ---- ---------------------------------------------------------------------- I SUBMI'""_'ALS 1. Campleted application Form 2. Cart find Propert•, Cwners List of :,wners within 130' (you must obtain this list from Hennepin County Cepartment 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. S. 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 ba requested by City staff. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- The Applicant ane Property Owner must sign this application. Please remember that your variance application is not complete if the above information has not been included. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Certification by Zoning Department that variance Application is complete. Zoning Official's Signature Date APPLICANT'S SIGNATURE The applicant hereby agrees to provide all information required or requested by the Zoning Administrator, agrees to pay all fees and/or unusual expenses incurred in review of this application, and certifies that the information supplied is true and correct to the best of his/her knowledge. Applicant's Signatur 6 _e''6✓` Date _ a MW SIGNATURE The owner hereby ackowledges and agrees to this application and further authorizes reasonable entry onto the property by City staff, consultants, agents, Commission members, and Council members for purposes of investiga- tion and verification of this request. owner's Signature Date Applicant must have all submittals into the City offices 2S days before the Planning Commission Meeting. Planninc Commission :4eet_ngs are held on the third Monday of each month. Applicants must to present at al.I scheduled review mootings of the Planning Comm►ssion and Council. If an applicant is unable to attend a scheduled meeting, pl 3ase :rake arrangements to have an tutor_:31 3 3 nd _n v ct -. _;i the Build-n4 s zoning a cur is z� s 3e :zzize o_ =.._s :nange pr.or to the me@L-:Iq. :411;U-::3 ; :33 ?:"AJN_-AG C:,:1:4__0313N :432TING 127LD 3Z2T-_--4B=t 3, i>37 )li i 5 I!C:L'u2ll ?UT'JA:1 27u5 C..ISCO POINT ROAD ti,3s - c . > : :' ac __ng Cna irman 3e 1 lc•.'1s, seconded `D•.? Cohen deny application 41176 for Richard Putnam of 2765 Casco Point Road, based upon the number of variances required for this ?ro, a_i o.` w::_za w'i a n cam; ,-:.negat.13_ .,-:,-nz:.L a: overly ambitious use of the land. Motion, Ayes 5, Nays 0. Cohen nc zee t.1at he secondec: _: e motion .: eca'.:z a he f ?e l s that if this application is approved it would be se zing a negative precedent. 11184 GERALD T. MCCOURTNEY 1055 FERNDALE ROAD WEST VARIANCES CONTINUATION OF A PUBLIC HEARING 7:05 — 7:07 he Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing were noted. Gerald McCourtney and James Cradit, his architect, were present. Building s Zoning Administrator Mabusth explained the applicant is seeking a hardcover variance for a bathroom, laundrette and dinette addition in the lakeshore yard. This is a 1.5% increase in hardcover in the 75-250' setback area. They also will require a 15' side setback variance; 30' side setback is required. The house currently does encroach into this setback and they will not be encroaching any more. There is no increase of deck space and the additions are actually over the existing deck area. Mr. McCourtney noted that the house is older and while they are doing these additions and remodeling they will a 1 so be replacing inadequate windows. This project should bring their home up to a closer valuation as others in the neighborhood. ':here were no comments from the public regarding this matter and the public hearing was clo,ed. Staff has received no negative comments from any of the surrounding neighbcrs. It was moved by Cohen, seconded by Hanson to approve the side setback and hardcover variances as proposed. Motion, Ayes 5, Nays 0. 01186 DOUG BUMGARDNER ' 3 0 0 .dA ." ATA 3CULZVARD CJNDITIONAL US3 PMM17/C0MMERCIAL S_TR :—*tN Afrl'_:754 W1TNDRAWN 27M771 APPLICANT'S RMUEST Q 41 s 04 ,ore And "Card.a? �� Q _ I record Plot. + 441 �+ Q / �. (1 Port of Lo `� l MINNETONKA 1WN5 BAY/ / �1 is p*proLwest IIM of -at 13 moral shore Carlos* Acres accordano to record plot. v M:".Ii;T:-:S OF 77E 22GULAR '.RCINO 33Z..7 S327=433Z 23, 1987 a ,_i Linustrom, 13.3 .400dhiil Ave, stated taac ;iis cper=_ abuts Wcod^i 1 _ Avenue and Orono Orchard Roar: and he could feasibiy access oJf Orono Orchard and therefore feels no responsibility toward paying for t;ie upgrading of Woodhill ►venue noting that it would not en^ancs or bezel__ Droperty. He noted that the upgrading ;.s sola-1 due to the Woodhill Ridge deg: a iopment . Mayor Grabek agreed that although Mr. McDowell seemed quite open regarding paying his fair share, it would be best for all concerned to settle the issue prior to road construction. City Administrator Bernhardson noted that should the settlement be drawn out, staff will present the issue again for Council reconsideration. City Administrator Bernhardson explained the issue of access for Lot 3 which is proposed to access through the private road serving Woodhill Country Club over the railroad tracks; and should the railroad access ever be cicsed off by the railroad an alternative access is planned across Woodhill Country Club and on to the public road. However, this is a very stringent agreement with Woodhill to protect the access for Lot 3. It was moved by Mayor Grabek, seconded by Councilmember Sime, to adopt Resolution #2263 approving the plat of Woodhill Ridge conditioned upon execution of a suitable agreement between the City and the applicants regarding payment for Woodhill Avenue upgrade; and combining Outlot with Woodhill Country Club property. Motion, l� Ayes 4, Nays 0. '1184 G$RALD MCCOQRTIiSY 1055 )>DALE ROAD NeST RRSOLDTION 12264 Gerald McCourtney was present for this matter. City Administrator Bernhardson explained the request to construct additions to bathroom, family room, dinette area and laundry room requiring a 1.5% increase in 75-250' hardcover and 15' side setback variance for bathroom addition. Planning Commission recommended approval and no negative comments from surrounding neighbcrs hake been received. _t was :hove-'_ by Councilmember Goet`.en, seconded by rcuncilmember Sime, ~_o adopt Resolution 42254 per staf. reccr4mendat_cn. Mc-_cn, A-.-F s 4, .la%-s 0. w,• ♦w }} 1wI...• AI•.t.. ww/..�.•A 1 �A-..� .1� . • -1w 1-AL .�.. ..J ..l.i .\.JVN L/�Z V{�V{�\/ V V V {iC J ..{ j ♦{ 3u.\ _ / #1134 GZIALD T. MCCCURTNEY 1355 .BEST FERNDALZ VARIANCE RLQOEST TO AMEND PREVIOUS APPROVAL AMENDED RESOLUTION #2279 City Aeminist_stcr 3er,nnar-aon -i;plained t:,e req--lest to amend the pr:viously approved add i=ion ?laps. The request involves an additional 90 a.f. hardcover in the 75-'-5J' zone; and -3113cament of tatnroom additicn 13'3" from side lot line instead of the 15' prev ious Iy approved. MAYOR'S REPORT: It was moved by Mayor Grabek, seconded by Councilmember Pet arson, to adopt Resolution 42279 approving the amended plan as proposed subject to no additional minor revisions. Motion, .oyes 4, "lays 9. Mayor Grabek had no report. CITY ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT: 1988 MEETING CALENDAR/ 1988 BOARD OF REVIEW DATE It was moved by Councilmember Callahan, seconded by Councilmember Goetten, that the Council review the proposed 1988 schedule for its meeting schedule together with establishing Tuesday, 'larch 22, 1988 as its Board of Review date for 1988 and refer the schedule to the Planning Commission for their input. Motion, Ayes 4, Nays 0. DEER HUNTING — BAKER PAR[ ORDINANCE AMENDMENT NO. 42, SECOND SERIES City Administrator Bernhardson explained the issue of amending the ordinance to allow for the use of shot guns to hunt deer in Baker Park for a period not to exceed three days per year. He noted that there were no complaints received during 'last year's hunt and close to 1904 of the hunters did get a deer. Staff recommends adoption of the ordinance amendment finding it the most effective way to limit the nuisance of deer to crop areas in that area. It was moved by Mayor Grabek, seconded by Councilmember ?nterson, ordinanci No. 42, Second Seri^s be adoptid as .,in amendment __ ordinance ''o. 25, .second Series :o 311ow for sal-c-id disc^arge of fire arnis in 3aker Park in accor.Jance wi ='i the ,ity hermit. Motion, A f1�3 4, Na;,•s 1. C-. City- Of ORO D RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL - NO. A -12SCLUTICN-RAAT--::G VARIANCES :O ,VN2ICI?AL ZONING CCDE S --T:ON _3. Z2', SUBDZT_S!ON 1 XND SZ CTICH 10.23, SUBDIVISION 6 (B) FILE #1184 WHEREAS, Gerald T. McCourtney (hereinafter "the applicant") is the owner of the 2roperty locata3 at 1055 West Ferndale Road within tie 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 for variances to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.22, Subdivision 1 and Section 10.23, Subdivision 6 (B) to permit the construction of bathroom, dinette, and laundry room additions to the existing structure resulting in an increase of 2.1% or 369 s.f. of hardcover thin the 75-250 feet lakeshore setback area where only 25% or 3,968 s.f. U allowed and a side setback variance of 13'3" feet for the bathroom addition that will encroach 119" further into the e::_sting substandard yard area than the existing structure. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono, Minnesota: FINDINGS 1. This application was reviewed as Zoning File #1194. 2. The property is located in the LR-lA Single Family Lakeshore Residential Zoning District. 3. The Orono Planning Commission reviewed this application on September 8, 1987, and recommended approval of the proposed variances based upon the following findings: A) Over 50% of the area of this property is located within the 0 to 75 feet lakeshore protected area. B) The 16,000 square feet of grassed lakeshore yard are'i provides adequate treatment area for the hardcover on the ?rc ert•l. C: The 'City has rec'31`. ed nc nag3t-': 9 commentz f r--n `_ ? ad-acent most al—.. c�r� neicThbors. City- of OR. ONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 4. The City Council has considered t' nolication including the findings and recommendations of the " Commission, reports by City staff, comments by the applicant effect of the proposed variance on the health, safety and welfar..i ..f the community. 5. The City Council finds that the conditions existing on this property are peculiar to it and do not apply generally to other property in this zoning district; that granting the variances would not adversely affect traffic conditions, light, air nor pose a fire hazard or other danger to neighboring property; would not merely serve as a convenience to the applicant, but is necessary to alleviate a demonstrable hardship or difficulty; is necessary to preserve a substantial property right of the applicant; and would be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan of the City. CONCLUSIONS, ORDER AND CONDITIONS Based upon one or more of the findings noted above, the Orono Citv Council hereby grants variances per Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.22, Subdivision 1 and Section 10.23, Subdivision 6 (B) to permit the construction of additions to the existing structure that requires hardcover and side setback variances, subject to the following conditions: 1. The drainage swale along the west side of the property shall not be permanently or temporarily altered as a result of the proposed construction. 2. Authorities granted with this resolution run with the property not with the applicant, but are permissive only and must be exercised by aprlication for a building permit within one year of the date of Council approval, or these variances will expire on that date (September 28, 1988). _. `i:o_at-on cnon-coT-::an(7, x_th any of t` e td condi :_ans of this r'3s alit: or. constitute a violation of the : Qnl.^.g :0C:2, a': i 1 3UtCT'13C1C� _ i,3rni ,3t,? an" .3ut.-larit:, r r ntec� herein, and ;hal! ',. :.nisaable ,s 1 mi3dem3ancr. __•- to the terms of this resolution ar.d on :.ehalf of himse'_ his heirs, S'iccessors and ] i�� jn8, her3�;' v�ri'tes t0 ` 1:_' i'?CCrd4 q Of thi9 risc l ution in the chain of `_it;* o.- the ^r �pA _•. ?3qe . o: 4 City Of Off,oN D RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL r NO. --ne Orcno City C:,.:nci'_ on t i 3 "z day of Gctocer, 1967. ATTEST: AD2315vothy M allin, City Clerk Jame R. Gr Property Owner(s)t ".2cl ' of (u bek, Mayor City- of oROND ! RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL { . NO -- - - STATE OF WrilNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) On this 16th day of 0ct1')ber 1987 before me a Notary Public within and for said county, personally appeared Kam mcC :J rtney known to me to be the nerson(s) described in and who executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that ne (~_hey) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed. NOTARY PUP*,IC 9i2;'92 MY COMM;SSION EXPIRES STATE OF MINNESOTX. ) )ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) On this _ ! 'la", of ✓ 198_ before me a 7otary Public within and for said County, personally appeared _� ► 0./q� i t1 �C' { .1 ' �� mown to me to be the person(s) described in and who executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that he (they) executed the same as his ! (their) free act and deed. : mam� 41sm J" i MY ' ' MM1 I S 5 N ., P I VS -- — _ to 3 nf S -ESOL•JT+ON NO.- 2271 ' C• LEGAL DE5RIPTION�_,� •.. hat part of Tract a. Registered Land Survey Number 1372, Files of the of tht! e3:strar of Titles. Hennepin County. Minnesota. lying 'ollowing described line and Its no-'-.erly and southerly extenslrn�. ommencing•at the northwesterly correc of said 'Tact B. thence southeasterly Tong the northeasterly line of said ,,Tact E adis;+nl inece rto4be8described; .n lron monument being the point of b_glnnir� of .hsnce southerly detlectinj to the right from L", Aast described course 52 degrees. 'II minutes. 'lO seconds a di3t, X-9 ot.lo0. feet to an iran fthe last described aonun+ont; thence continuing Lakatberly on Minr�etonkaha��dXsaidiline thereterrninating.. �oµrse t.o the shoreline of STATE OF MINNESOTA ) COUNTY OF H1VV9tAV ) CITY OF OROMO ) I Dorothy M. Rollin. City Clerk of the City of Orono. Hennepin County. Minnesota, do hereby certify that I have compared the foregoing copy of a resolution of the City Council of the City of Orono with the original record at such resolution in the Minutes of the proceedings of said'City Council at a meeting o: said City Council held on Oc _ok,:r 12 . 1987 . and that the same is a true and correct cc.py of said resolution was duly adopted by said City Council at said meeting. In Witnea•. Whereof. I have hereunto set my hand .nd seal this 19th day of October 1987 ';Dorothy M... llin. ity Clerk i 'J (39AL) 101388.3 i TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Mark Bernhardson, City Administrator DATE: November 22, 1988 SUBJECT: Comprehensive Plan Zoning Amendment NOV 2 81� >� OF ORrNt� Attachments: A. Comprehensive Plan Zoning Amendment Memo Dated 10/6/88 B. P.R.D./P.I.D./P.U.D. Comparison C. Excerpts from Highway 12 Corridor Study pages 57-59 D. Excerpts Orono Zoning Code PRD, P?D - M6 Planned Multiple Family ISSUE - 1. Presentation of issues and alternatives based on the October loth discussion. 2. Request for Council policy direction in each of the ereas identified. INTRODUCTION - The Council considered this matter at its October 10, 1968 Council meeting ann based on the excellent :b:zU331on by Council, staff has identified issues and alternatives for the Council to consider regarding the amendment. Based on direction this evening the -staff will then be able to revise the amendment to take Council policy direction into account. It should be noted that the Planning Commission had considered the amendment at their August 17, 1988 meeting and that the vote for approval was 5 to 0. At the request of Councilmember Goetten who had discussed the issue of PUD's with former Councilmember Norm Paurus, Council actions in the late 7013 related to Planned Unit Developments (19"5-31) were researched. The research indicated passage of the M-6 Multiple Family Planned DPvelopemnt District in 6/14/76. 1n addition the Council did consider a platting code revision in 1977 but no further action was apparent. (A review of the draft from that time period did not reference Planned Developments). In a phone conversation with Mr. Paurus on November 21. 1988, he thought it was done in conjunction with the development of the comprehensive plan prior to April 1980. His recollection was that they had discussed it but chose not to adopt it. He indicated he would see if he had anything in his files on it. Jeanne Mabusth was a member of the staff at the time and does not recall any PUD discussion during the comprehensive plan. DISCUSSION/ALTERNATIVES - The following represents an issue by issue breakdown of issues raised by Council at the October 1Gth meeting together with alternatives to address those issues. A. SPECIAL REQUIREMENTS FOR HIGHWAY 12 - The sole issue raised at the October loth meeting regarding the special requirements section for Highway 12 was the inclusion of a PUD/PRD (if continued) under the list of zoning types that could be used in the area. Alternatives 1. Include one or both 2. Not include B. HIG! iY COMM RCI,.L ZONE - B6 The principal issue addressed here was the limited listing of uses with the idea that other ises could be brought forward under L amendment to expand the use of Planned Districts from PRD and PID to a PUD. To the extent that the broadened is either not u..ed or limited to circumstances that would not entail the B6, this issue should be reviewed. Alternatives 1. Leave as is. 2. Definitive laundry list of uses. 3. Reference of available uses from other zoning classifications. C. PLANNED DEVELJPMENT MM SAI[L 00/0l/N SC IMP BG N SFX/ PROP[RTT ADORES! LOT MIX 0t-117-83 31 0036 0l3 01S 17-11's-13 34 0009 ON 000 TOTAL WA E of ACc01MTs SY famuc t s NENNEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORMATION SYSTEM REPORT NOs P1411101 LIST Of FORFEITED PROPERTY i PAGE It PREVIOUS OM/ER/DESCRIPTION DATE Of DATE OF BLDG MT JUDGEMENT FORFL17LME VALUE VALUE ORONO -_, 1--mg exu= CMARLDINJG M. w/l�/us too "MINNETOWA BLUFFS" INCL ADJ lit OF VAC ALLEY CHARLOTTE JUSTER 60f=e""A KJ�lfT1�AM/!V/iS Oi/tl/00 t.t0• TOMISITE OF LJINGOON PARK M i FT . �" ' • _• .•f♦ �.:_ %+i•�Iyy�-ill :��-.!,ytw'.. � i ,'1. t •/t .. ,�.5•'s.•'+�; �- +: t�"lL�~- .��5:'a��Vt'1 O1 ' I /? I{� dI Loc it '� ._ tar it O• .�i ' ; i �,.l�•.... t r v 0zoo) Q � YIYM[tONt�OIY//1 ,�• 'f � 1'Y'•�.�' i�''��•�a- L:.i.'ii:i �'— lZ! oil Af DICKENSON ST. 24 -e+ti,s a �� t ee • of [ , '51 4ui - t � G :. � •. • . �' �• .mil - - — -�- -� . It`� 10 cr Y 16 4 ... l3� ' ti t, • ,) m to I _ 14 /S"y0 I c ti` � •eon ,��3=� � — / / �► ST' —'. �� I V : • r y R s �i2400), U�rV v Awf 44N! ' :i.L . DEPARTMENT OF PROPERTY TAX AND PUBLIC RECORDS A607 Government Center /l � Minneapolis, Minnesota 55487-0067 HENNEPIN U I' 0a LFU r / Crossroads To Service LJ/ October 26, 1988 City of Orono Dorothy M. Hallin, City Clerk 1335 S. Brown Road P. 0. Box 66, Crystal Ray, 11n. 553L3 Dear Ms. Hallin: Enclosed is a classification list on non -conservation land lccated in your municipality. The described parcels forfeited to the State of Minnesota for non-payment of property taxes. As provided in Minnesota Statutes 282, we request that you either approve the parcel(s) for public auction, auction to adjacent owners if Minnesota Statutes 282.01, Subdivision 7A is applicable, or request a conveyance to your municipality for public use. We require a certified copy of the City Council Resolution authorizing any action taken. If you request that a parcel be conveyed to your municipality, we also require that the `orm " Application By .4 Governmental Subdivision For Conveyance of Tax Forfeited Land" be completed and mailed to this office. Only new special assessments which were levied after the forfeiture need be certified to this department. The remaining balance of any assessment levied previously will be picked up automaticaliy. Please be advised that if the City Council fails to respond within ninety (90) days of the date of this letter, the sale will be deemed to he approved. If you have any questions, you may contact the Forfeited Land Unit at 348-3734, or myself at 348-6989. Sincerely, Dale G. Folstad, Director Property Tax and Public Records Sharon J. Erion Tax Processing Section Supervisor HENNEPIN COUNTY DGF:SJE:be Enclosure an equal opporturnty ems over 112188.1 / �'� TO: Mark E. Bernhardson, City Administrator �r FROM: Dorothy Hallin, City Clerk DATE: November 21, 1988 SUBJECT: Tax Forfeited Property Attachments: A. Hennepin County Property Tax and Public Records Letter Dated 10/26/88 B. Proposed Resolution Sale to Adjacent Owners C. Proposed Resolution Conveyance of Tax Forfeit Lands for Public Use by the City of )rono ISSUE - Adoption of resolution for Hennepin County indicating Citiy of Orono's desire regarding tax forfeited properties. INTRODUCTION - As noted in Attachment A the City of Orono must indicate their desired settlement of these tax forfeited parcels. RECOMMENDATION - It is rerommeded that the attached resoluticns be passed as presented. TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Mark E. Bernhardson, City Administrat Forwarded recommending approval. PROPOSED MOTION - Movej by seconded by that the Council adopt resolution releasing tax forfeit parcel for private sale to adjacent owners and resolution # requesting conveyance of parcel for public use by the City of Orono. Ayes _ Nays 41)li DCA Center III()() HuuicVaril Minnetonka, Minnesota 41 � . (612) 541-7500 HEALTHCARE MANAGEMENT GROUI _ October 28, 1988 Tom Kuehn City of Orono P.O. Box 66 Crystal, MN 55323 Re: 198) Rates Dear Mr. Kuehn: In 1988, the insurance industry projected costs increases from 18% to 25% over prior year's experience, For 1989, costs are expected to rise at or above this same pace. The HMO marketplace is eApeciencing cost increases at or above the levels of the more traditional insurance field. The major factors in the dramatic rise are the general growth in the GNP, the rapid development of new technologies and treatment procedures, and patient utilization patterns. While increases f 40%, 50%, and 601 have been common in the HMO community, the LOGIS rates reflect. the more typical medical trend increases, showing an overall increase of 16% on single coverage and 231 on family coverage. The LOGIS Health Care Committe has reviewed the rates for 1989. At this point it was decided to proceed for Plan Year 1989 using the same three options. For the Plan Year beginning Janua-y 1, 1989, the participating rates are: Group Health PHP Med Center Single 93.34 li5.00 97.85 Family 254.70 266.00 291.25 Attached is a page showing the major benefit changes effective 1,r1/89 under each HMO coverage. Traditionally the month of Decembset is the -pen en, 1lment perir)ri during which your employees can eler'- par' vatic, in one of the three alternatives. we have been assurer' she three carriers that they have representatives avaiiable t,., assist you in open enrollment meetings and that solicitation materials will be provided. Innr11erllurts ul llrallh ('JfC 11411141� rrrrr !�ttNN1�At'l ►I.fti � !�tAl>t� ►�' HEALTH INSURANCE RATES GIVE YEAR COMPARISON Single 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 Group Health S 63.20 $ 68.35 S 69.65 $ 75.95 $ 93.34 PHP 97.51 99.57 104.55 104.44 115.00 Mod Centers 67.15 69.85 73.35 79.40 97.85 Family Group Health $169.83 $183.05 $186.70 $204.65 $254.70 PHP 204.70 211.07 221.62 221.62 266.00 Mod Centers 180.15 187.35 196.70 233.55 291.25 City Contribution 141.00 151.00 166.00 176.99 191.00 111788.6 "UNCIL OFF FING TO: '•lark E. Bernharlson, City Administrator O y 1, ,a FROM: Tom Kuehn, Finance Oire_•tor DATE: November 17, 1988 SUBJECT: 1989 Health Insurance Attachments: A. D.C.A. Letter of 10/28/88 page 1 B. Health Insurance Rates - Five Year Comparison We have recently received the health insurance rates for 1989. These rates have been reviewed by the LOGIS Health Care Committee. It has been decided to proceed for Plan Year 1989 using the same three carriers; namely Group Health Plan, Physicians Health Plan, and Med Center Health Plan. The single rates for 1989 have increased 10.a$ to 24.81 from 1988 while the family rates have increased 20.0% to 24.7% from 1988. The attached letter from D.C.R. Inc, the LOGIS Health Care Group Manager, points out the trends in health care costs. The 1989 Budget provides for an increase in the City contribution of $ 15.00 r !r month, from $ 176.00 pa- month to $ 191.90 per month, towarj i3;,,ily coverage. As the employee paid portion of the premiums are withheld in advance we should implement the new City contributions rates at this time. TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: H3r:c E. Bernhardson, City Administrato Forwarded recommending approval. PROPOSED MOTION - Moved by _, seconded by , to set the 1989 standard contribution rate for health insurance for the eiigibie non LELS Orono city employees at $191.00 per month while the contribution rates for Orono LELS employees is to be negotiated at a later date. Ayes , Nays 112188.3 7 c�U�1C1�, M. E� Eilft TO: Mark E. Bernhardson, City Administrator � FROM: Tom Kuehn, Finance Director/ k. -- DATE: November 21, 1988 SUBJECT: Set Public Hearing Date for Hazardou Bui Idinq Assessments Attachment: A. Public Hearing Notice The City has finalized costs incurred for three buildings on one property under the hazardous huildings 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 .ind Decree from the Court. The City must now set a publ is hearing date to consider adoption of the proposed special assessment roll for the affected property. The property and costs approved ;or as::essment are: 260 H.-)llander Road $3,581.50 :he assessments are to be collected in one year at an interest rate of 8%, is prov ided in N innesota State Stat te. I have attacned a :opy of the public hearing noti a for your information. TO: Mayor and City Council rWW: Mark E. Bernhardson, City Administrato Forwarded recommending approval. PROPOSE') MOTION - :loved by _, seconded by , to set a pub! i` hearing for Janaury 9, 1989 at 7:00 P.M. at the Counc1 ` ")am.hers to )nsider the special assessment roll for the 1984-2 n zar.ioa buildings. Ayes _, Nays _ 112'188.4 CITY OF ORONO PUBLIC HEARI4G NOTICE The City Council will hold a Pv'. - Hearing in the Council Chambers at 1275 Brown Road South . .•inday. January 9, 1939 at 7:00 P.M. on the proposed assessme•i ..•1 the total amount of $3,581.50 for hazardou, buildings re :o on one property legally described a_ follows. 200 Hollander Road — Outlot B, Holly Acres N.I.D. 25-113-23 44 0005 The proposed assessment roll is on file with the City Clerk at the Administrative Offices, 1335 Brown Road South. Written or ral objections will be considered. 4o appeal may be taken as to the amount of any assessment unless a signed, written objection is filed wita the City Clerk prior to the hearing or presented to the presiding officer at the nearing. An appeal to the District Court may be made by serving notice upon the Ma/,:Pr or City Clerk within 30 days after adoption cf the assessment and filing such notice with the District Court iithin ten days after service upon the Mayor or City Clerti. The City haj ado;; td a special assessment deferment ordinance based on th< appant meeting age, ownership, o cupanci, and income guidelines. By 'order of the City Council /s/ Dorothy M. Hallin City Clerk Publish the weeks of December 19 and 26, 1988 the T-dke.r Pioneer newspapeL. _'ersonal Informatior, - Part 11koff seie Intoxicating) Are you a registered voter? Yes, XNo If yes, where are you registered?. t lz , ti C4,,C Is your spouse a registered voter? Yes-_)K No_ If yes, where is spouse registered? tit VL 3 1. Address(es) at which you have lived during preceedina_ 10 years. (Begin with present or last address and work back.) NO. AND STREI'T CITY 6 STATE DATES yzzS �;�S�.•t� �.�c� o �. 1 Ya.- rtSLa. Zq3 b_ �t.tA st- 1,�t\nv . vUd Mo. 110 - -1T��, 2. Address(es) at which your spouse has live-1 during prec_eeding 10 years. (Begin. with the present or last address aid work bi-^k.) NO. AND STREET p CIT" STATE DATES Z�s c L: c t O�`�� 0 v u• �.- C�SL �. Kind, name and location of every business or e--uuatic�n you have been en- gaged in during preceding ten. years. (Begin w.,•_:, pre Ent or iast occupa- tion and work back.) BUSINESS OR OCCUPATION STREET ADDRESS CITY,STATE DATES SoAort So lz:� T-v �� _ ..L'sb . jj& v ��_ � �..�,d.► d �., o,�. try.. � tt ---�- 4. Kind, name and location of every business or occupation ""'' .-:u4e has boon engaged in during precedinj ten years. (Begim wit`: `_he present or last occ-r, •tion and work back. ) BU51"7-!�SS OR OCCUPATION STREET ADDRL CIn , ST AArE L:A 1 (continued) S. Names and addresses of your employers and partners, if any, for the preceec ing ten years. (Begin with present or last one first and work back) NAMES: EMPLOYERS OR PARTNERS STREET ADDRESS CITY, STATE DATES Q !►t C.O So\ Fwtw<\\ %a ,St, , 1►b\ My. al���- (t6 5�eQ.':��t�ti �c�o��c Stow ZwC SO\ F4�raL�\ Ayt R sa \ 6. Names and addresses of your spouse's employers and partners, if anv, for tj preceeding ten years. (Begin with present or last one first and work back T NAMES: EMPLOYERS OR PARTNERS STREET ADDRESS CITY, STATE DATES �1n� � St.Xto�o w � \��.5 � Apw�►!e\►� L.e � \1l�natr.�hl. 'A tTuvat 7. Have you, your spouse, parent, brother, sister, or child of either of vou, ever been convicted Of any felony, crime or violation of any ordinance, other than traffic? Yes. No If yes, give information as to the time, place and offense' oar wTich convictions were had. 8. Have you, your spouse, or a parent, brother, sister or child of either of you, ever been engaged as an employee or in operating a saloon, hotel, restaurant, cage, tavern or other business of a similar nature. Yes No If yes, give information as to the time, place and length o tim NO L_;wor 9. Have you been in military service? Yes No,—)L If yes, was discharge(s ever other than honorable' Yes No —copies of discharge papers may be required.) �0. Names, residence addresses, business addresses, and telephone numbers of *&ch person who is engaged in Minnesota in the business of selling, manu- facturing or distributing intoxicating liquor and who is nearer of kin to you or your spouse than second cousin, whether of the whole or half blood, computed by the rules of civil law, or who is a brother-in-law or sister- in-law of you or your spouse. Full Name Relationship Residence Address Phone_______---- (��$1. ..u1 irll Vi+�.Q La .i +. t"u.� ..�►V1� JVaC 1..LV l.�l,u ..11.y/ 10. (continued) Business Address 1. Phone Full Name Relationship _ Residence Address Phone Business Address Phone Full Name Relationship Residence Address Phone Business Address Phone 1. Are you a manufacturer or wholesaler of intoxicating liquor or interested directly or indirectly in the ownership or operation of any such business? Yes No__ 2. Are you directly or indirectly interested in other.establishments in the City of Orono to which a license of the same kind has been issued? (Refer to City Code, Section 4.01, Subdivision 19 for definition of "interest".) Yes No- If.yes, list names, addresses and interest. _ 3. Are you the spouse -of a person who would be ineligible for a license? Yes No_�c_ 4. What is the amount of investmgnt that you will have in the business, build ing, premises, fixtures, furniture, stock in trade, etc.? State the sourc of such money. (Ypumyst be prepared to furnish proof of the source of such money. 410. Il � �®�.�o ►11 Loamy _ `��t '�1..��C �.yt+��C�, 15. Have you had any interest in any previous intoxicating liquor license that was revoked, suspended or not renewed? Yes No X If yes, explain in detail. - 16. Have you ever individually, or with others, made application for an intox cating liquor license and had such application denied? Yes` No �[ If yes, state circumstances. 17. List the names, residences, and business addressed of three residents of Hennepin County, of good moral character, not related to the applicant or financially interested in the premises or business, who may be referred tc as the applicant's character. -4 On Sale and Pe:-sinal Information - Part 11(Off Sale Intoxicating) 17. (cont' } Name F Residence Address Business Address 1 a = ti Name Business Address Name v �' Business Address L- u Residence Address Residence Address sPhone ; gloo ` b Phoi.i L43 tu, F_. \� 415 - 7-9 67 Phone L113 -S 41 q ANY FALSIFICATION OF ANSWERS TO THE ABOVE QUESTIONS WILL RESULT IN DENIAL OF THE APPLICATION. A Financial Statement of net worth and a short autobiography must accompany this application for all persons who are recuried to complete a Part 11 Per- sonal Information form. (Exception - Manager, Assistant Manager, Food Manager, and Beverage Manager, provided these individuals are not partners, o f1'6* rs of an interest in excess of fi�ve_perce corporation or do not hold .) Y (signature of applicant) Subscribed and sworX to before mpI a Notary_ Public on this day of "'_s:1 ��• (Notary Signature) Commission Expires On SNI►AON RO8ENDAlE ' y MpTNlfr NI�LIC - IIMMIsipTA NEN!VEPIN COUNTY My Cannirron ENMN ti tt. tNt -5- Receipt No. Date Receive d By CITY OF ORONO APPLICATION FOR OFF SALE INTOXICATING AND ON SALE INTOXICATING LIQUCR LICENSE PART 1 - General Information Directions: This form must be filled out in duplicate with typewriter or by printing in ink. If the application is by a natural person, by such person; if ny a corporation, by an officer, thereof; if by a partnership, by one of the partners; if by an unincor- porated association, by the manacer or managing officer thereof 1 Nane of applicant (name of individual, partnership, corpr.ration or association): V� �- \� �, � -�_ 2. Business Name -r— 121 Business Address — LA -t l- 8S.,vrC Phone »j AV r L Y1-1 N IF BUSINESS IS TO BE CONDUCTED UNDER A DESIGNATION, NAME OR STYLE OTHER THAN FULL INDIVIDUAL NAME OF THE APPLICANT, ATTACH 2 COPIES OF THE TRADE NAMME CERTIFICATE, AS REQUIRED BY CHAPTER 333, MINNESOTA STATUTES, CERTIFIED BY THE SECRETARY OF STATE OFF1'C 3. Type of Applicant: `natural Person (:ndividual) Partnership _�/_Corporation Association Other 4.(a) If the applicant is a natural person (individual), state full name, residence and business address a-d telephone numbers. True Name Residence Address Business Address Phcr.e pp,c7:e (b) The full nave, residence address and telephone n,_i-le! of tt,.e acent in chance of the indi\,id:al owners pre-;ses at suc'-, time as the owner is abse7.t . Part 1 - General Information (off Sale Intoxicating) 4.(b) continued Residence Address Phone (c) The full name, residence ad3ress and telephone number of the assist- ant manager. 4ssistant Manager Phone Residence A+ddress (A Part 11 - Personal History form must be filled out and attached for each of the individuals in 4a, 4b, and 4c.) 5.(a) If the applicant is a partnership, state full names, residence and member business addresses, telephone nurrl-ers, and interest of each of the partnership. Interest 9 Full Name Phone Residence Business Addressr Phone Full Name Interest ! Residence _ Phone Business Address Phone _ Full Name _Interest e Residence Phone_ Business Address — Phone Full Name Interest Residence Phone Business Phone (b) The managing partner will be: Name Phone Address (c) The full name, residence ad,'ress and telephone nujr er of the assist- ant manager and any other indivic:ual with management responsibilities of the partnership's premiss to be licensed: Full Name Phone PeF i aence Address — -_-__- Part .1 - General Information (off Sale Intoxicating) 5.(c) continued Full Name Phone Residence Address Ful_ Name Phone (A Part 11 - Personal History form must be filled out and at- tached for each of the individuals in 5a, 5b, and 5c.) If the application is for a partnership, attach two copies of the Partner- ship Agreement and two copies of the Certificate of Trade Name under pro- visions of Chapter 333, Minnesota Statutes, certified by the Clerk of Dis- trict Court. 6.(a) If the applicant is a corporation or association, give the name of corporation or association, metropolitan address and phone number, and home office address and phone number. I State of Incorpor ion Name_' AV A'c lq - _ l? DO'S or Association_ Metropolitan. Ad-'ress ��y�� ��tV�1��'t- JC 1�,�►��� ��3�2. (street) (City) (State) (zip) Metropolitan Phone b `�— - — � ,l (area code and number 100 (b) The full names, residences and telephone numbers of all officers of said corporation or association. t,`1-1 `' ,s President ���,L� \ Phone CAI AI 11-44 3 (aref c(?de and No.) Residence Address UZ:vS ��lshrZtQa (street) (City) Vice President tate) 1 (zip Phone (area code and No.) Residence Address (street) (City) (State) zip Secretary Phone (area cocTe an No.) Residence Address_ (Street) (City) (Stat�i zip, Treasurer Phc;ne (a: �a co,;e and No. , Residence Address T treet) (C=tY) iSLate) (zlp) Part 1 - General Information (off Sale Intoxication) 6.(c) The full names, residence addresses, and telephone numbers of all persons who singly or together with their spouse and his or her par- ents, brothers, sisters or children, who own or control any interest in said corporation or association. Full Name Interest Residence Address Phone _ street (City State) zip) (area code & No Full Name Interest Residence Address Phone (street) (city) (State) zip (area code 6 No.) Full Name Interest Residence Address (SPhone street) (City) tate (zip) (area code s No.' Full Name Interest Residence Phone (street) (City) (State) (zip) area code b No.) (d) The full name, residence addresses and telephcne :l:,.bers of the mana- ger, and any other individual with management respDnsibilities. Full Name Residence A.:dress (street) .City) State) (zzp) Full Name Residence Address (street) (City) (State) (zip) Full %&ne Residence Address street (City) State) zip Phone area code & No.) Phone (area code 6 No. Phone (area code & No.) (A Part II - Personal History form must be filled out and attached for individuals listed in 6b, 6c, and 6d.) ATTACH : P\\ 0rr C J 1 ATTACH: %s 0 r k Vt) . O CJ44q_'1 1. Two copies of the Dr Association A Certificate of Incorporation 2. Three cc. ies cf the Article. of Inccrpor3tior. g- reement. 3. Three copies of the By -Laws to the application. 4. Foriegn Corporations shall attach two Certificate cf Authority, ar •iescribed in M.S.A. Chapter 303. S. Three copies of the Lease Agreement. 7. Do You hold an interest of ten percent or more in any other liquor establishment it the State of Minnesota? �• To �• K e „a-,ac' e.►a~_. ~er.t and Iccat.cn. No-__ �. i, .. On S :1 e a::.. Part*l General Information (Off Sale Intoxicating) 7. (continued) 4} Name of Establishment (F141114��«- Address of Establishment �V2� S�O�;�,, vt C 1 IIM (street) (City) (State) zip) e. List warehouse locations in which you store liquor off the licensed premesis, both in Orono and any other municipality. '1t wt. 9. State the exact legal description to be licensed. (Applicant must also submit a plot plan showing dimensions, location of buildings, street access, parking facilities or the closest point on a lot occupied by a public school.) �•� sy �wt � ��,, S SZ� i�- 10. How are the premises zon under the Orono zoning (-)rdinar.ce? l 1:.. State full names, residences, and business addresses and telephone n unbers of the owner or owners of the building wherein the licensed business wil be located, if the owner is other than the applicant. Full %, me �i►Y d Phcnt- �►5 Residence Address�� street (City) (State) `. (zip oe) Business Address ��-� S�'o« ��uE ��� `'d�"���q Full Name Phone Residence Address street (City) (State) zip co e Business Address 12. Whtre the building_ is owned by other than applicant, state in sur rary the conditions c_` lease arre:;ce7ent, such as tern of lease, monthly rental, renewal privileges, etc. VAS JCI1C aliu Part 1 General Information (off Sale Intoxicating) 13. If the building is owned by the individual applicant, partnership, corporation or association, state: (a)Date Purchased (b)Name and address of person purchased from (c)Purchase price Amount of down payment (d)hfio currently holds the mortgage - Name and Address W Amount of contract for deed (f)t,'ho currently holds contract for deed Name and Address (g)Term of mortgage (h)Term of contract for deed (i)Rate of interest on mortgage (j)Rate of interest on contract for deed (k)State the monthly payment at which the mortgage and/or contract for deed is b_ing liquidated (1)Are the payments on the mortgage and/or contract for deed up to date? 14. (&)State the total cost of assets acquired to start this business including the business premesis, if purchased, fixtures, furniture, equipment, merchandise for resale, cash for working capital, prepaid insurance and any other assets. (If acquired from predecessor, at- tach purchas agre ment.) Pazt 1 - General Information (Off Sale Intoxicating) 14. (b)Of the above cost of assets acquired, state the amount that is provided by the person(sA investing in this business. j� (Attach supporting proo of the source of such money. 15. Give full names, addresses, telephone numbers of all persons, other than the applicant, who have any financial interest in the business, buildi,gs, premises, fixtures, furniture, or stock in trade. State the nature of the interest, amount thereof, and the terms for payment or other reimbursement. (This shall include, but not be limited to any lessees, lessors, mortgagors, lendors, lien holders, trustees, trustors, and persons who have cosigned -otes or otherwise loaned, pledged, or extended security for an indebtedness of the applicant.) __..� �1►\1� jpy�A�"A Phone I. L��Ly�` Full Name! Address Nat4ia of Interest, etc. Fall Name Phone _ Address — Nature of Interest, etc. Full Name Phone Address Nature of Interest, etc. Full Nal^e Address Nature cf Interest, etc. Phone Part i - Uenerai information ('Jii bale Lntoxicatiny) IF THIS APPLICATION IS FOR P1,:MISES EITHER PLANNED OR UNDER CONSTRUCTION OR UNDERGOING SUBSTANTIAL ALTERATION, THE APPLICATION SHALL BE ACCOMDANIED BY A SET OF PRELIMINARY PLANS SH014ING THE DESIGN OF THE PROPOSED PREMISES TO BE LICENSED. IF THE PLANS OR DESIGN ARE ON FILE WITH THE ORONO BUILD- ING AND ZONING DIVISION, NO ADDITIONAL PLANS NEED BE FILED WITH THIS APP- LICATION. 16. State the floor number, general area, and rooms where intoxicating liquor is to be sold and stored. (Applicant shall attach a floor plan showing dimensions indicating and identifving all other rooms and other areas where intoxicating liquor is to be sold and stored.) 17. What permits required by the Federal government have been applied for or issued and what is the nature of the permit? 18. What permits applied for plied for or 19. 20. or licenses required by the State of or issued for the premises? In what issued and what is the nature of the Minnesota have been name were these ap- perrit or license? Have the necessary applications for Citv licenses (such as cigarettes, beverage or vendin machines) for this establishment been prepared for submission? Yes = Are any real estate taxes, personal property taxes, special assessments, or other financial claims of the City of Orono delinquent or unpaid for the premises to be licenses? NJN I If "YES give details. 21. Is the premises located within 500 ft. of anv pu.tlic school? (This distance is as measured in a straight line from t!:e parcel or lot upon which the business to be licensed is located to the nearest point of the parcel or lot upon hick the public school is located.) CITY OF ORONO IN. SUPPORT OF AN APPLICATION FOR ON -SALE INTOXICATING LIQUOR LICENSE AND OFF -SALE INTOXICATING LIQUOR LICENSE PART 11 - Personal Tnfnrmatinn Directions: This form must be filled out in duplicate with tvpewriter or by printing in ink by the sole owner, by each partner, by each officer, or director, by each manager, proprietor or other per- son with management responsibilities for the premises, by each person who by combined ownership or control has an interest inin a corporation or association in excess of 5%. Date sVty p�t��S - 'RUE NAME:(first) (filll middle) (maiden name) ! ast) �.ESIDZNCE ADDRESS: (Street, C tv, Sta, ) PHONE NUMBER) \\� p`kcrt. �. � (3Lyoc1 _ 3USINESS NAME: c 1k, ��',�e. �j Ay��t t► ��:„ �� 1— ��Sc► L► IUSINESS ADDRESS: (Street, C , State) (PHO?IE "DUMBER) r \S �,��� `�V4, I l 4�_ )LACE OF RTH: (City, 0ounty, State) DATE F 8 TH:(mo.,dav,y- r t o �' O ro N �aiW iEIGHT : WEIGHT: COLOR OF HAIR: CILOR OF EYES: :.S. CITIZEN? Yes_ NaturaliZed? Yes_ — "_ yes, give date and place: No No�� 4ARITAL STATUS: Married Single Divorced if married, true name, place and date of birth, and residence address of spouse: w�ov U �wlaSov Q'C 1 :RUE NAME: (first) u mi e, ma den name(last) OF BIRT 4. ty, C. Wl_ ,S N E AD— D S: t5treet, City, t to �- .f you have ever used or been known by a name or names other than the tzoe name liven above, list �such name(s) and information concerning dates and places used. Part 1 - General Information (Off Sale JIrtoxicating) 22. Names, resicir:nce addresses, business addresses, and telephone numbers of three persons, residents of Hernepii,. County, of good moral charac- ter, not related to the applicant or financially interested in the premises or business, who may be referred to as the applicants charac- ter. f Full Name � � 1 _ Phone _`z- (area code No Residence Address bb C street itv State c� zip Business Address o r ���� \� �� , Dhone d -So-%�I *c street City (State) (Arca—fie N Full Nanec ��o�Gb'L �pt NP Phone �z l-U8s (area code G No Residence Address Lv-ez N, . street) (City (State) ((zip) VBusiness Address �. Phone,_ _ (street (City) State (rrea cede N Full hane�� �► ` _Phone (area code I. No Residence Address (street) (City) (State) (74) hone Business Address (street) (City) (State (area co 6 ANY FALSIFICATION OF ANSWERS TO THE ABOVE MESTIONS WILL RESULT IN DE � 0 THE APPLICATION. A Financial Statement of net worth and a short autobiography accompany this application for all persons who are required to complete a :Irt 11 Per sonal Information form. (Exception - Manaoer and Assistant Manar-r provide these individuals are not partners or officers of corporation. x (sinature o app cscant Subscribed and sworn to be$pre me a Notary Public on this_-_,,' day of �. '1 19 (%otar•: s. -nature ; Commission Exi ires On -�� SHARON ROSENDAIE IL4 M0/MY PUGLIC "WWf30TA HEN%EPtN COUNTY My .,al..awNM1� t.D, NI 9.W Y� 112288.3 / b CQUHLIL MEETOG TC: Ma •or and City Council ;'r►V 28199 FROM: yarn E. B.rnhardson, :ity Admir►istrato DATE: Nov -imber 22, 1993 SUBJECT: Liquor L.zense Renewal.')ff Sale Attachment: 1. Liquor License 3enewa;3 - Navarre Liquor 4emo Datel ll,'1/33 Forwarded re.jmmending appr3va.. PROPOSED MOTIJN - Moved by se:on,i!i by that the City Council approves the 1i^en3e ragoTwai r ) r a ar Iicen3e for Navarre Liquor. Ayes , Nays INTEROFFICE MEMO PATE: November 4, 1988 TO: Mark Bernhardson, City Administrator FROM: Mel Kilbo, Chief of Police RE: Liquor license renewal - Navarre Liquor We have checked our records and find no problem with Navarre Liquor. I therefore recommend issuance of a liquor license, Off Sale, for Mr. Steven Corl, owner of Navarre Liquor. 111988.4 i TO: Mayor and City Council dlllz:� FROM: Mark Bernhardson, City Administrato DATE: November 13, 1988 •I SUBJECT: County Road 51 ISSUE - Updating Council regarding information on County Road 51. INTRODUCTION - Presently the staff has been in contact with the Hennepin County Department of Transportation but has not met to review the alternatives that they consider acceptable on that road. Once this has been determined staff will make a recommendation as to when this should be placed on the agenda and the affected property owners notified. At the present time it is not anticipated that this will be able to be considered for an initial review by the Council at its Decembar 12. 1988 meeting and then discuss with the neighborhood at the Council meeting in January 1989. ALTERNATIVES - 1. Accept the information. 2. Direct staff to bring back an initial package to the December 12, 1988 meeting for review before presentation to the neighbors. 3. Direct staff to notify neighbors fog- consideration either January 9th or January 23rd meeting as deemed appropriate. 4. Table until the next meeting for further discussion. RECOMMENDATION - It is recommended that the Council accept the information from staff and direct staff that if the County's package is prepared that it be presented to Council initially at yhe December 12th meeting for eventual presentation and g1scu331on with the neighborhood during a January 1989 Council c�eeting. PROPUSED MOTIJN - Moved by , seconded by that the Zouncil accept the information reg—arding County Road 51 and table discu-,sijn until December 12, 1983. Ayes _ , Nays _ crTY (! ORO D 198 , LEG1SIATIVE POLICIES Draft Adocted Update LEVEL OF OO7ERNy1EN RXwN ISSUE POLICY/CoMMEMS S' Ait's LEACUTE POLICY AW POLICY 1. 800 PHZ Trunkin,; EVlore teasibility of an N, A N 1% Radio Ckzmenication integrated oomlenications systan for all local govt. entities in Metro area Z. Solid Waste The penalty" approach of current -ty ordinance to achieve 10% recycle goal is short sighted 3. Light Rail Transit Have program financed --ty is selecting .4,A Metro principally out of users prelim routes. o approval appauthority. co munities,'ptoperties Issue or downtown. Should have apple directly benefitted and underground beir.< parkiix;. transit funding rather disc,.Lssed than. the ..,ereral county property tax base HENNEPIN PARKS 1. Park Acquisition Limit acquisition to le+cie N/A N/A that are better held as public park land or respond to a si nificant public reed LMm 1. Future of L M Revitalize L4M as an N/A X/A effective governing body on the lake in conjunction With :Mric_palities that :peke up the L14M Continue development of , ^aVrehers i •.r - =. plan:. 198 Q Ea=SfATWE POLI--nM LEVEL a !* R�ME:7" S• ATE ISSUE POLICY/CO*M".5 STA:TS 11. Ir.trastrxure = r. Given replacement vests of infrastructure are becomLng rare difficult to specially assess because of "benefit'' principal support preservation Of m111 leery xitside 1lruts to fund such replacement as an option Draft Mdcoted Update Lr 'E POLICY ;tins, nL:::y N, policy No policy LL'VM OF (OVMAKEW STATE ISSUE POLICY/COWEN75 ENVIRONMENT - LAND USE 1. Lake MinnetDnAa Access CITY or ca'n) 198 - LEGISLATIVE POLICIES S;A'1 US pdate LEAGF POLICY Adequate access exists 6 the Hennepin Parks No pol.cy City is opposed to additional 6 Minnetrista 3rc-ess worklr.c on compromise park development in Zone 5 City may participate in Lawsuit pending lawsuit User fees Appropriate Lse stickers/ fees to pay lake use costs 2. Solid waste Promote appropriate recycling 10/24/88 Council to limit use of landfills directs under- taking of curb- side recycling 3. Annexation Change law back to requiring both municipalities to concur in char.ne In Metropolitan. areas At-V POLICY No policy LUEET-2 Supports IV -I Recommends 'Effective planning =ountles cortir.ue 'Alternatives to landfill financial support •Comp,'Incentatives for and surtax plans Communities, Individuals assume *Clear -up hazardous responsibi:.sties wastes for abatement,' *Condemnation awards recycling when a polluted land city does not meet •Suppert to implement the goals with the Federal Superfund municipality Community right to keepirg authority know provisions to regulate *Deal with potential collection. Also antitrust supports several of League'3 policies LUEE•:-5 In part recommends review of 1985 -aw and at a power to the affected c Ities II-N Request3 review of 19a5 law ~har^e persutt_r.; Pr=perty owner Initiated annexation. At a nimu:m the affectea _hies should have a %veto Over the process or restDred pre 1985 statu LEVEL Ot aYVERNMERr FEDERAL ISS'.T POLICY/CaCE—I ^3 1. Federal. Deficit 2. International trade deficit,'balance o. payments C rM or oaorn 198 LEx;i iATIVE POLICDEs : ,""S Undertake appropraite measures NO slanificar.r through spending reductions pr-)..:ress anif needed, __x _..__-_�_- that do not negatively impact the economy in order to bring the budget deficit under control. It is anticipated that deficit control will strengthen the economy for the 1990's and reducing the impact of an impending recession. ISo poll. ^y Develop and implement a Monthly balance No policy strategy to reduce the of payments trade deficit without generally loner - resorting to protectionist still a concern trade legislation in order to improve the U.S. economy i,.k!,! rL.7 f No policy No Folicy l s crry D! aPOa 198 LEGMATM POLICIES LZ,71 CF MV-\ 4 7.^ ISSUE POLICY; CR4Lr^,,. 4. Property tax system Revamp systen 5. Lical .;overr:,ent Aidj Amend formula so the "needs f•-;r.ded are rot driven by past expenditures 6. Levy IL-iuts Eliminate 7. Truth in Taxation '&.dify " -ake feasible 8 CbrWaole '+north Not let essential erplxees binding a.-oltration dir-.e upward pay results of ether e •ployees 41th no Corp w•cr'_h control or. 'essentials 9. tax Ir. ra�ent _eser-.e -- -er.t authorlt•_: f.:r i.el p-er.t STATUS 10/10/88 Council adopts resolution for Legislature on Property Tax System plus participation in coalition study .aty fc r. ula adopter program submitted reports 4/ 88 raft Adopted Update LEAQJE POLICY AW POLI_Y RS-1 No position ID/D3 Undertake per.din1 coalition work study - phase -in D-4 restore home- stead credit RS-2 I-c ContLzue Ccxm atment *Continuation of progrs- _o -ccal mver:•-ent 'Increase in line with lncreaseing inflation funding an fair/equitable 'Piave D A take irto ac--mnt basis. Leqislature decreases In State Federal expicre creative means to re•.,en•.es address unique local RS-3 Elimirate le•.y li..its probes RS-4 Modify several LA- Elirunate levy limits specifics IC- :..-prove to make workable MP-3 Change interest arbitration to take into acct. or e1L-anate arbitration - plus a1low levy base adjust- msrt DB-1 No furhter change in current legislation that diminish cities ability ove to .:ake worcacle. Adjustments for :c-p worth t. a outs 1 ie levy limit 'not prohibit contracting 'No &Amms until current deadline 12/31,191 lapse III-B-4 Eliminate development _L^itati.xm Metro Brea leave nest as LrVF' CF SaATE ISSUE 10. :ax Exerpt Property 11. Geese Population 12. POliOe Pursuit Policy .�rouno and Surface k:ater 4anagevnt TRANSPO AncMiPHYSICAL SERVICES 10a. Higtway funning _.:t. H .hway .:urisdiction nirrraek, cr" or OItc�v 198 LWISIATIVE POLICIES POLICY/r 3*mkrs Tax 'jkeTpt institutions should Pay the" 'fair share" of all amicipal costs Fird appropriate ways to control population in humane ways Leave policies to local 3urlsdictions. If State policy adopted hold harmless for `.ties when. 3f : -er ceases -vase. ?rovide incentives to have local =»ities develop appropriate mgt. plans -',:se of sales tax cn motor vehicles plus ;rotor vehicle excise tax be used solely for transportatf x: purposes -Develop other f.aldirq mechanism to Provide for needed upkeep city Prohibited feeding 7,188 -:,aft red Update .a,,i PyLI-_ i�6-13 All tax exaTpt except churches pay cost Of Police. .ire S streets No policy 1988 Legislature required No policy su3mssior of policies to State - while the _Ity could prob&,;y do a acre effective mainterance job. no tu-•.bacrs should occur without appraPrlate rapltal and operations :-alnterar.-e funding Metro Funa - 'Jpprses :use of fiscal disparities to fink Me.ro Hi Thway pool L-TEr-a Establish incentives for local goverment LLWr-3 Supports MVEr dedication to transportation I.L,T£:-- 3uppn -a realiarrert of roads based or. functixral class- ification - Opposes any t.urnacks without 30propriate ."trdir.,7 A.W nLI"y ID/D-1 Sane a League No policy NO policy IV-H Ehaourage/ Legislature to provide funding to local govt. for incentives plus exaa•-W the weakness 1n Metro area :-M. V-8 Similar to Leagues and supports a arinatltutioral amendment to lock in °%-N apposes creation of Metropolitan Highway plaid V-Q Supports aRer-cirent or -arty whee-3ge t,x. V-F Siaalar to Leagues 1 Given State. Cty aoility to declassify and turnbaclk. Legislature should either a.) All— .-inicipaiity to refuse ),r o.) Have additional .Tdleage 'outside MSA it lt_s 111888.6 / 'f TO: Mayor and City Council leiILIAL FROM: Mark E. Bernhardson, City Administrat DATE: November 17, 1988 SUBJECT: 1989 Legislative Program �f •' Attachments: A. Draft 1989 Legislative Program ISSUE - Determination as to whether the Council wants to adopt a 1989 Legislative Program as proposed or amended. INTRODUCTION - For the last three years the City has adopted a legisl�t[ve program of items they consider key related to other governmental bodies. As in the 1988 program the appropriate policies are cross referenced to the League o' Minnesota Cities and Association of Metropolitan Municipalities policy's on the Name subject. (These policy documents are available to you with the AMM's policy document having been transmitted to you in Jcotober 1988.) DISCUSSION - The basic changes from the 1988 program are in the following areas: ADD ITI)NS State #4 - Property Tax System #6 - Levy Limits #1 - Truth in Taxation hl; - Ground Water/Surface Water Mgt. (:nunty Al - 800 MHL Trunking REASON Poor system made worse by lj) 38 Legislature 1988 Legislative change 1988 Legislative addition 1988 Weather provided impetus New technology (5 yrs old) being explored County 01 - County Computer Being installed Aided Dispatch ALTERNATIVES 1. Ad )pt . '. Amen I and a,Iopt 1. Iabie for further Iiscussion N. Choose not to adopt a program for 1989. RECU MMENDATION - After discussing any relevant issues the Council is concern-edwith, it is recommended that the policy be adopted for 1989. VROP03ED MOTION - Moved by _ seconded by _ , that the Coun,!il adopt the 1989 Legislative Program. Ayes Nays _ 0 I A9 �ys !C ice+ o ti .v \ 11 fog, 9 \ 300 �� p �L 222.6tM'l �T� c ` So 76—-------------- - STATION MMIT � •�0 V, ---fee °s; r 6 aw, � •pal,,. 0\ Z400 4% -- I C17v OF ORONO 1 A .a\ 5 15m illors eedificate SL%IWY FOR: kA%n laurent OtfCWD AS: lut I, Block 1, SIlNI1' STA,miN, City of draw, Ilemepin 6uinty, filmesota geld reserving easements of reculd. vale Ty of Fundlememme . -%1 r 404" f1tw . -11 • summew now • N It &Mal !rw sm"m M• . . olew"s ft".m. ' 6111110119 psssMssl usrw ~ Miss • N Call: 1 NM • as fN1 � !lTrfil 11LMAlI�iI1t! room — Ilniiis ws — Iss. — Mr•p !Ir - I awe" we 81101 ON mmm am a too" was POW" III MI me Im I . w. - 4108001 ."..Yr .r ON 1 401 a do% no~" MU 1 Is't Le010 w•.s. WORM r w Of r Nw of 1111100•••.0. /fir ems" A111,14palp sssrti \ i«n�• 46 ,... W.... wsw /. A , OCi !JJ LU October 13, 1988 Mr. John Gerhardson Public Works Director City of Orono 1335 South Brown Road Orono, MN 55323 Dear Mr. Gerhardson: The purpose of !nis letter is to request your approval for direct access from our lot (Lot 3, Block 1, Summit Station) to Long Lake Road. The attached Surveyor's Certificate drawings show how we propose to cut the access. We believe that access from the property onto Old Long Lake road would not cause any additional traffic or safety risk. To the contrary, the cut as we propose would facilitate the entry to the street in a forward motion. Please contact me at my home. 4176-0326, or office, 476-2002. Best Bards, ken RrGULAR 11ECTING OF THE ORONO COUNCIL, SEPTEMBER 26, 1977 Page i Mr. Alan Olson, Assistant Building i Zoning 1.e"IT STATION PRD Administrator, entered into the record the fallowing (Herrick Circle) memo concerning Summit Station PRD (Herrick Circle) 1152 dated August 16, 1977, which states: Completion of the replattinq of Herrick Circle, to be known as Summit Station, will require the following: 1. Council action to extend the May 1, 1977, dead- line of Resolution 1726, to allow the following steps. Final plats are now on file with the City and the sewer is in operation. The City Rngineer will supply a letter of final acceptance. 2. Planning Commission review of the proposed homeowner's agreement and open space easements over Outlots 1 6 2. Outlot 2 also should have an underlying access easement to the City as the proposed drive will be the only access to the six lots. 3. Planning Commission public hearing (scheduled for September 19, 1977) to be held concurrently on the land use plan amendment, rezoning and street vacation. 4. Council action, in order: a) Resolution amending the land use plan within the framework of the comprehensive guide plan b) Ordinance rezoning from RR-lB to R-lA e) Resolution vacating Herrick Circle Street d) Resolution approving the Summit Station Plat S. Staff collection of park fee and reimt,ursements, before signatures on the plat drawings. 6. Applicant recording of the plat. Council fleeting - kiquat 22, 1977 attended deadline date 90 days, to Novenber 22, 1977. Planning Comission Meeting - September 19, 1977 Reviewed proposal. Recommended approval of land Use plan amendment, rezoning ordinance, plat vacation and final plat drawinq. Recommended approval of Sam. Staff - September 20, 1977 Discuasior with Bruce flalkarson, City Attorney. Plat approval should await receipt of easement documents and title opinion. Council should review the Petitiow for plat vacation. (Continued) 110 To: Mark E. Bernhardson, City Administrator ''1'p' i� ,�i , jjig from: John R. GArhardson, Public Works Director Date: November _ 1988 Subject: Curb Cut Request - 490 Old Long Lake Road Mr. Larry Wiken is currently in the process of constructing a home at 490 Old Long Lake Road. The above address is in the Herrick Circle subdivision and is Lot 3, Block 1, Summit Station. Mr. Wiken is requesting a Irive.way curb cut on to Long Lake Road. The current ordinance allows one curb cut per lot. I have advised Mr. Wiken that the information in our files indicates that all lots on Herrick Circle will access to/ `rom Herrick Circle. Mr. Wiken states that traf f is f low as he has proposed wi 11 improve regarding safety concerns. It is my opinion that there is room on the property to construct a turn -around, therefore allowinq forward motion entering/existing Herrick Circle/Old Lona Lake Ro.' RECOMMENDATION - To deny access to/frc-n Old Long Lake Road from residence at 490 Old Long Lake Road and to direct Mr. Wiken to construct access to Herrick Circle. PROPOSED MOTION - Moved by , seconded by , to deny access to/from old Long Lake Road from residence at 490 Old Long Lake Road a-d to direct Mr. Wi`can to construct access to Herrick Circle. Ayes , nays I( MAYOR & `OUNCIL MEMBERS FROM: MARK E. BERNHARDSON, LiTY ADMINISTRATO of Forwarded recommending denial. This was platted as 3 PRD and so that setbacks were taken into account in the commons area between lots, there is an additional issue if Council desires to approve which is the owners right to cross the commons area with a driveway. CC: Mr. L.F. Wiken 111888.2 e, /r-f TO: Mayor and City Council 40 FROM: Mark E. Berniardson, City Administrato DATZ: November 18, 1988 SUBJ[CT: Orono/Long Lake Discussions ISSUE - Establishment of a date for the next joint meeting of the Councils. INTRODUCTION - Currently the Cities are working to establish a date which hopefully will be available at the Council meeting. PROPOSED MOTION - Moved by seconded by that the Council accepts the information and sets as the date for the next meeting of the two Council. Ayes Nays PROJECT PAYMENT STATUS CITY: Orono, Minnesota PROJECT: 1988 Seal Coat Project CITY PROJECT NO.: FILE NO.: 13944 CONTRACTOR: Allied Blacktop Company, 10503-89th Ave. No., Maple Grove, MN 55369 ORIGINAL CONTRACT AMOUNT $18.470.80 Date C.O. No. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. TOTAL AMOUNT OF C.O.'S Description Total Change Orders Above PROJEC' PAYMENT SUMMARY: Payment Period No. From To 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 10-1-88 10-31-88 Total Payment to Date Retainage for Payment No. 1 Equals Total Value Completed PR13944 Payment This Voucher $17,025. $17.025.99 $ (196.11 $17.922.10 REVISED CONTRACT AMOUNT Value Completed 17,922.10 Amount RetainaRe $896.11 Project: 1988 Seal Coat Project Orono, Minnesota Contractor: Allied Blacktop Company STATEMENT OF WORK Unit Contract Item Unit Price Bituminous material for seal coat Gals. $0.77 FA-2 seal coat aggregate in place Ton 14.88 TOTAL WORK COMFLETED TO DATE .............. Payment No: 1 File No: 13944 Date: November 14, 1988 Est'd Quantity Amount Quantity To Date To Date 12,200 11,642 $8,964.34 610 602 8.957.76 $17,922.10 REQUEST FOR PAYMENT DATE: November 14, 1988 PLACE: Orono Minnesota PROJECT: 1988 Seal Coat Project PROJECT NO.: FILE NO.: 13944 CONTRACTOR: Allied Blacktop Company ADDRESS: 10503 - 89th Avenue North MaDle Grove, Minnesota 55369 REQUEST FOR PAYMENT NO.: 1 SUMMARY: 1. Original Contract Amount 2. Change Order - ADDITION $ 3. Change Order - DEDUCTION $ 4. Revised Contract Amount 5. Value Completed to Date 6. Material on Hand 7. Amount Earned 8. Less Retainage 5 Z 9. Sub -Total 10. Less Amount Paid Previously 11. AMOUNT DUE THIS REQUEST FOR PAYMENT NO.: 1 OWNER APPROVAL: By By FOR PERIOD: From: Oct. 1, 1988 To: Oct. 31, 1988 SPECIFIED CONTRACT COMPLETION DATE: $ 18,470.80 $ 18,470.80 $ 17,922.10 $ 0.00 $ 17,922.10 $ 896.11 $ 17,025.99 j 0.00 $ 17.025.99 Approved By: BONESTR00, ROSENE, ANDERLIK 6 ASSOC;XTES , INC. By Date: Approved By: Allied Blacktop Company Contractor BY: PR13944 111796 . ] Tot Mark E. Bernhardson, City Admini:tratcr I! r r Frew: John R. Gerhardson, Public Works Director Dates November 17, 1988 Subjects Payment Al Sealcoat City Streets Attached for review and approval is Paymeent 01 for sealcoating City streets for 1988. We have retained 5% of the total amount until final quantities are determined. RECOMMENDATION - To approve Falyrt•rit f-1 t c Allied Blacktop in the amount of $17,025.99 for sealcoating City streets in 198R. PROPOSED MOTION - Moved by , seconded by , to approve Payment 01 to Allied Blacktop in the amount of $17,025.99 for sealcoating City streets in 1988. Ayes , nays To: Va%cr Crabek & Orono Council Members From: MELrk E. Bernhardson, City Administrate N Forwarded recommending approval. S 10.30 Subd. 3. Conditional Uses. Within any "M-6" Multiple Family Planned Residential District, no structure or land shall be used for the following uses except by conditional use permit: A. Any conditional use as regulated in the "R-1B" District and as further regulated in the "M-6" Multiple Family Planned Residential District. B. Multiple Family Planned Residential Project (MFPR Project). Subd. 4. Accessory Ises. Within any "M-6" Multiple Family Residential District, the following uses shall be permitted accessory uses: A. Any accessory use except for "Roadside Stands" as regulated in the "R-W District and as further regulated herein. B. Privately owned buildings containing recreation or social functions, garages, or storage areas for maintenance equipment or rubbish. Subd. 5. Area, Lot Width, Yard Requirements, Height and Hard Cover Requirements. The following minimum or maximum requirements shall apply to all buildings, including accessory buildings except that permitted, conditional and accessory sses of the "R-1B" District as allowed herein shall be regulated by the "R-lB" District requirements. Subd. 6. Minimum MFPR Project Area. An MFPR Project shall not be allowed on an area of less than five acres. Areas of less than five acres may qualify only if the applicant ca►1 -how that the minimum area should be waived because the proposed MFPR Project is adjacent to an existing Project which has been developed ender the provisions of this "M-6" District and is designed to create a larger, unified, physically integrated project, and will contribute to the amenities of the neighborhood. Subd. 7. Density in MFPR Project. The minimum platted Lot area per dwelling building in an MFPR Project and the maximum number and type of dwelling buildings allowed in a project are based on the following factors: i A. Minimum lot areas as set forth in Subdivision 9 of this Section. B. The area of :he platted lot whic'i is dry and buildable based on the Resource Component Analysis of 34.973(b), less public right-of-way. C. The number of bedrooms per dwelling unit. D. The number of each type of dwelling building. E. Required setbacks. ORONO CC 291 (4-1-84) S 10.30 F. Credits for housing for low and moderate income individuals and families. G. Required open space. H. Hard -cover areas. Subd. 8. Maximum Percentage of Dwellinq Buildings by Type in MFPR Project. Single Family 10 percent Two Family 40 percent Three Family 80 percent Four Family (maximum allowed) 80 percent Subd. 9. Each Dwelling Building in an MFPF. Project Shall be Platted to Meeting the Following Minimum Lot Requirements. Single Two Three Four Project Family Family: Family Family A. Lot 5 ac. 6,000 10,00( 16,000 20,000 Area (dry sq.ft. sq.ft, sq.ft. sq.ft. buildable area) B. Lot 300 ft. 50 ft. 65 ft. 80 ft. 10C ft. Width (on public (on public (on pL blic (on public (on pub - street) or private or private or private lic or street) street) street) private st=eet) C. Lot 300 100 120 120 120 Depth D. Front 35 feet 25 feet from public street right-of-way or Yard from private street easements. project boundary E. Side 30 feet Sum of side yards to be 15 feat, one of Yard from which may be 0 fe4t, but mininum distance project between principal structures must be 15 boundary feet unless attacied on separate lots. F. Side 35 feet 15 feet from public street ric;ht-of-wal or Street private street easements. Yard G. Rear 30 feet 30 feet 30 fee: 30 feet 30 feet 3RONO CC 292 (4-1-84) S 10.30 Single Two Three Four Project Family Family Family Family H. Building 15 feet between principal buildings and between Separ.a- principal building and accessory buildings on separate tion lots in project. .10 feet between principal and accessory buildings on same lot. Subd. 10. Minimum Platted Lot Area Required Per Dwelling Unit (DU) Based on Number of Bedrooms. Efficiency 4,500 sq.ft. (9.7 DU/ac. or 48/5 ac.) 1 Br. Unit 6,000 sq.ft. (7.3 DU/ac. or 36/5 ac.) 2 Br. Unit 7,500 sq.ft. (5.8 DU/ac. or 29/5 ac.) 3 Br. Unit 9,000 sq.ft. (4.8 DU/ac. or 24/5 ac.) 4 Br. Unit 10,000 sq.ft. (4.4 DU/ac. or 22/5 ac.) However, not more than 20% of the dwelling units in any one Project shall be efficiencies. Not more than 40% of the dwelling units in any one project shall be efficiencies and one bedroom units. Subd. 11. Height. No structure or building shall exceed 2-1/2 stories or thirty feet in height except as provided in Section 10.75. Subd, 12. Housing for Low and Moderate Income Persons and Families. In MFPR Projects containing fifty or more dwelling units in all construction phases, one dwelling unit of every twelve of the total number of dwelling units shall be provided for eligible persons or families in the low and moderate income range. This provision may be waived by the Council if: (1) the percentage cf existing lu w and moderate income housing in the City exceeds the percentage of such dwelling units in the Metropolitan area; (2) funds for subsidy program ari- not available within one year of application; and (3) the Council determines that the MFPR Project location is inappropriate for such dwelling units because of the lack of public and private support services. A. Density Credit. For all eligible MFPR Projects providing dwelling units For Low and moderate income persons and families. One additional dwelling unit will be permitted for each twelve dwelling units allowed under the standard lot area requirements of the "M-6" District. B. Procedure. In order to provide low and moderate income dwelling units, the applicant shall propose application(s) to the Federal Housir.g Administration (FHA) of the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development, (or other source of subsidy funds) under programs for home ownership (including condominiums), rental or cooperative housing. The proposal shall ORONO CC 293 A-1-84) 5 10.30 conform to the guidelines established by the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development with respect to cost limitations, construction and other standards for development of moderate income dwelling units under the applicable subsidy program(s). The applicant shall furnish any proposal and supporting documents in the form of exchanges of correspondence with responsible officials of the FHA (or other source of subsidy funds), together with affidavits by the proponent reporting its discussions with such officials, indicating, to the extent then possible, whether there are uncommitted funds available fog projects to develop low and moderate income dwelling units of the type proposed as well as for other type of units for low and moderate income persons and families. C. Satisfaction of Requiremen, Without a Subsidy. An applicant may propose to satisfy all or part of the low and moderate income dwelling unit requirement without utilizing a goverment subsidy program; provided, however, that prior to Final Plan approval by the Council, the applicant clearly demonstrates and warrants in writing that the proposal will benefit the same number of families at the same 'income levels, and for the same rentals or prices, which the low and :moderate income dwelling unit requirements are intended to assure. D. Architectural Design Requirement. The architectural design of low and moderate income dwelling units will be consistent with the design of the overall MFPR Project and shall not be physically separated, screened or in any manner made identifiable as distinct from the restof the development. Subd. 13. Hard Cover. The total hard cover on any one MFPR Project shall not exceed 35%. Subd. 14. Recreation and Open Space. MFPR Projects shall contain an adequate amount of land for park, recreation or local open space use which shall not be less than 10% of the Project area, or the sum of the minimum floor areas based upon the number of bedrooms in Subdivision 16, Subparagraph C below, whichever is greater. The recreation and open space shall be easily accessible to the dwelling unit(s) it is intended to serve. The Project area not eligible to meet thii requirement are driveways, parking areas, swamps, drainage areas, sumps, public sidewalks, required yard areas and required lot area required in Subdivision 9 of this Section. Subd. 15. Operating and Maintenance Requirements for Community Recreation and Open Space in MFPR Projects. Common open space (defined as that area of the pro)ect area set aside for the use and enjoyment of all residents in the Project, including residentz of lots within a Project which may be under private ownership and on which lots there may or may not be private open space) shall be subject to requirements in Section 10.32. ORONO C'.- 294 4-1-83 5 10.30 Subd. 16. Building and Site Design and Construction Requirements. A. A building permit for a multiple dwelling building shall not be issued unless the applicant's building plans, including the site plan, are certified by an architect registered in the State of Minnesota stating that the design of the building and site has been prepared under his direct supervision. Any building of Type I or II construction, as provided in the State Building Code, shall have its electrical, mechanical and structural systems designed by registered engineers. Provisions of this Subdivision shall in no way prohibit the preparation of the site plan by a professional site planner. B. Development within an MFPR Project shall contribute to the image and heritage of the City as a place of beauty, spaciousness and high quality. Proposed buildings, structures and site elements shall be in good proportion; have simplicity of mass and detail; there shall be an appropriate use of materials; colors shall be in good taste and not used for dramatic effect but in harmony ..ith themselves and their environment. The following building materials will not be allowed on exposed exterior blocks or other structural blocks; corrugated metal or fiberglass panels; asbestos or asphaltic siding materials; materials that are subject to rapid deterioration. C. Floor Area Requirements. 1. The minimum net floor area requirements per dwelling unit for multiple dwelling buildings shall be as follows: Efficiency Units 500 square feet One Bedroom Units 700 square feet Two Bedroom Units 850 square feet Three Bedroom Units 950 square feet Four Bedroom Units 1050 square feet Five Or More Bedroom Units 1150 square feet 2. For purposes of measurement, the net floor area of a l walling unit shall mean that area within a building used as a single dwelling unit, and shall be measured from the inside of outside building walls to the center of partitions on the interior of the building bounding the dwelling unit being measured, but shall not include public stairways, public entries, public foyers, public balconies, or unenclosed public porches, separate utility rooms, furnace areas or rooms, storage areas not within the apartment, or garages. D. Closets and Bulk Storage. Only closet space having a minimum clear finish to finish depth of 2 feet, 0 inches, shall be considered in determining the lineal feet of closet provided. The following minimum amounts of closet and bulk storage shall be provided for each dwelling unit: ORONO CC 295 (4-1-84' S 10.30 1. Efficiency Units - 8 lineal feet of closet space and 80 cubic feet of bulk storage. 2. One Bedroom Unit - 12 lineal feet of closet space and 100 c-ibic feet of bulk storage. 3. Two Bedre-c-m Unit - 24 lineal feet of closet space and 120 cubic feet of bulk storage. 4. Three or More Bedrooms -- For each bedroom in excess of two in any one dwelling unit, an additional 8 lineal feet of closet space and 20 eubi; feet of bulk storage volume shall be required. E. Sc-und. Party anc' corridor partitions and floor systems shall tie of a type rates by a laboratory regularly engaged in sound testing as capable of •:,ccomplishing an average sound transmission loan (using a g, trequency test) of not less than 50 decibles. Door systems betwea:i corridors and dwelling units shall be of s::lid cote constru-tiun and include gaskets and closure plates. Room relationFhips, hallway designs, door and window place msnts and F1uK,;.ing and ventilating installations shall be such that they assiac in the control of sound transmission from unit to unit. F. Projecting Air Conditioning and Heating Units. Air conditioning or heating units projecting through exterior walls or windows shall be so located and designed t`.at they neither unnecessarily generate or transmit sound nor disrupt the architectural amenities of the building. Units projecting more than four inches beyond the exterior finish of a building wall shall be permitted only with the written consent of the Building Inspector, which shall be given when building structural systems prevent compliance. G. Trash Incinerators and Garbage. No exterior trash or garbage disposal or storage shall be permuted. There shall be no exterio: incineration, and any stjr-:4e shall be completely enclosed by walls and roof. H. Accessory Buildings. Accessory buildings including structures for the storage of boats and recreational vehicles shall observe the same setback requirements established for the residence buildings. The Co•Zcil may require common walls for accessory buildings where common walls will eliminate unsightly and hazardous areas. Accessory buildings shall have the same exterior finish as the principal structure and shall be designed and located on the site in a manner which zomplements other site elements and facilities. I. The "M-6" District or may not be adjacent to any One Family District or within 1,000 feet of a lake, wetland. any e-velopment therein Lakeshore Residential or within 200 feet of a ORONO CC 296 tt-1-94i S 10.30 J. Elevation. No dwelling unit or any part thereof may be built at an elevation lower than the elevation of the ground at the base of the building. K. Entrances. Each dwelling unit shall have its own separate exterior access. L. Parking. There shall be provided on the lot occupied by the multiple dwelling building two off-street parking spaces per dwelling unit, one of which is an enclosed parking space which may be located in or under the multiple dwelling building; detached from the principal building if its location serves some beneficial screening, buffering or transitional function; or else completely underground. In addition, .25 parking spaces per dwelling unit shall be provided for guests, and shall be located conveniently for the units they are intended to serve. The main parking areas shall be surfaced with a hard, all-weather, durable dust -free surfacing material and shall be properl�r drained and landscaped and shall be maintained in a well -kept condition. No parking area shall occupy any required Project yard area, nor shall it be located closer than five feet to a side or rear lot line, nor closer than ten feet to any principal building. Each parking space shall have a minimum width of nine feet and a minimum depth of 200 feet exclusive of aisles and maneuvering space. All parking areas containing more than six spaces which adjoin either a public street or residentially zoned property shall have a solid wall or fence of not less than three feet nor more than four and one-half feet in height along such adjoining line. Such fences or walls shall be so designed that they are architecturally harmonious with the principal structures on the lot. A screen planting approved by the Council may be substituted for the required wall or fence. Guest parking stalls shall be easily accessible to or from the main entry of the multiple dwelling building. No street parking shall be permitted. M. Internal Streets. All minor internal streets shall be owned and maintained by the owner of the Project, by a Homeowner's Association or by any other agency or method deemed appropriate by the Council. Permanent easements fifty feet in width shall be provided as required by the Council for all private streets. Collector streets which may be required to maintain neighborhood continuity of circulation between MFPR Projects or with other adjoining development shall. be provided with a public right-of-way. N. Outside Storage. No boats, recreational vehicles over twenty feet in length, mainterince vehicles or other similar bulky objects shall be permitted on t:ie Project area unless completely enclosed in a building or in an area completely enclosed by a fence of such opacity and height to obscure the stored contents from any living :)r pedestrian areas on or around the Project area. Required garjges or parking areas shall not be used for the storage of such objects or vehicles. ORONO CC 297 (4-1-84' S 10.30 0. Landscaping. All open areas of the Project or individual platted lots within the Project shall be graded to provide proper drainage, and except for areas used for parking, drives or storage, shall be landscaped with trees, shrubs or planted ground cover. The natural landscape shall be utilized where possible and reinforced with additional landscaping that is compatible with and complementary to the various use areas and functions of the site, the structural additions to the site development on neighboring properties and the adjacent public streets and highways. Landscape materials shall be of adequate size to contribute to the environmental quality at initial planting as well as at maturity. Generally new plant material shall be of the following sizes: deciduous overstory trees - 3 inch caliper; deciduous ornamental trees - 2 inch caliper; evergreen trees - 6 foot height; evergreen shrubs - 24 inch spread or height, dependent on form; deciduous shrubs - 3 feet height. Lawn areas other than natural landscape areas shall be sodG- . Such landscaping shall conform with the planting plan approved by the Council at the time the building permit was issued. It shall be the owners' responsibility to see that this landscaping is maintained in an attractive and well -kept condition. All vacant lots, tracts or parcels shall also be properly maintained. Subd. 17. Application Review a.. Administrative Procedure. A. General Procedure. The general procedure for application, review and action on any Multiple Family Planned Residential Project shall be accord ig to t,.ie following outline, with more detailed requirements found in the remainder of this Subdivision. Single family detached dwellings are excluded from the review process. 1. Application, filing fee and Six copies of the Preliminary Plan are tr. be filed with the Planning Commission through the Zoning Administrator at least thirty days prior to the public Nearing date. 2. Public hearings shall be held by the Planning Commission for all Projects. 3. Planning staff reviews Preliminary Plan and transmits copies of review to Planning Commission members, City Administrator, Park Board, affected surrounding municipalities and other appropriate agencies and applicant at least Five days before public hearing before Planning Commission. 4. Planning Commi:,sion holds public hearings on Preliminary Plan. 5. Planning Commission makes recommendations for action on Preliminary Plan. 6. Council acts on Preliminary Plan. ORONO CC 298 S 10.30 7. pplicant submits Final Plan within ninety days of Preliminary Plan approval and fourteen days prior to Final Plan review at Planning Commission meeting. B. The Zoning Administrator transmits copies of the Final Plan to the Planning Commission, Park Board, Planning Staff, City Engineer, Building Inspector and Fire Chief 9. Planning Staff reviews Final Plan and makes recommendation to Planning Commission at least five days before meeting. 10. Planning Commission reviews Final Plan, recommends action to Council. 11. If Council approves Final Plan, Zoning Administrator changes the zoning classification on the Official Zoning Map, as required, and files the Final Plan for enforcement. B. Application for an MFPR Project shall be made by the owner of the property except t:lat an option holder may apply provided his application is accompanied by a signed statement iAdicating no otjections from the owner or owners of all properties involved in the application. C. Applicaticn for a Preliminary Plan shall be t ied with the designated Administrati%,e Official and shall be accompanied by six copies of the following plans and information: 1. Locatior_ maps showing location within City and more specific location on a half section plat map showing all surrounding property lines within 350 feet of the proposed plan. ' Re3ource Component Analysis (RCA). The purpose of the RC, to determine specific design features of a Project that will mite the detrimental effect of development on the natural and man-made environment. opportunities and constraints imposed by or on the site will be key considerations in the City's Project review procedures. (a) Natural Elements i^ the RCA shall include documentation and analysis of existing conditions and rela- tionships and a projection of the effect the proposed development will have upon: Vegetation (forests and woodlands, wetlands, and grasslands); Geology and Soils (bearing capacity, erodibility, and perm* ability); Slopes and To)ography (slope statility, landscape features, and development potential); Hydrologic Systems (surface and groundwater, wetlands, fiiod plans, and absorption); Wildlife (natural habit&_, variety, And preservation -protection). (b) Man-made Element- , the RCA include documentation and analysis of the factors tha effect development * ther providing opportunities or constraints, including Comm un'ty Ficilities (schools, parks and City services, such as fire and ORONO CC 29`a (4-1-14' S 10.30 police protection, etc.); Utilities (sanitary sewer, storm sewer, water, electric transmission lines, etc.); Circulation (vehicles and pedestrian); Surrounding Development (character transition/ buffers, orientation/access, scale/bulk, and building materials. 3. If platting of public streets or division of land are proposed, all information required in the Subdivision Reguiazions Chapter of the City Code for a Preliminary Plat. 4. General development plan with existing topography at two foot contour intervals indicating: (a) The proposed site and existing development on adjacent properties. (b) All types of uses proposed. (c) Proposed size, location and arrangement of buildings and preliminary architectural delineations including but not limited to schematic building plans and elevations. (d) Density or intensity of each type of use. (e) Parking areas and stall arrangement. (f) Entrance and exit drives. (g) Schematic landscaping showing tree massing, typical plant groupings, and screen plantings, etc. utility systems. (h) Park and open space lands. (i) Dimensions. (j) Proposed schematic drainage and 5. Summary sheet indicating: (a) Area of land in each use of each separate intensity of use. (b) Numb, r of dwelling units proposed including number of bedrooms in each :rea in Item 4(c) above. (c) Tabulation of parking facilities by type related to number and type of use ser•-red. (d) Number of acees and general intended use and ownership of open space. (e) Modifications of any provisions of this Section and any other City Code provisions or regulations of the City. 6. Phasing Plan indicating geographical staging and approximate timing of the Plan or portions thereof. ORONO CC 300 (4-1-84) 5 10.30 7. Written statement by the applicant indicating how his proposed development conforms to the stated objectives and purpose of this Section and the Orono Comprehensive Plan and why his proposal would be in the public interest. 8. Fee for filing an MFPR Project application which includes the fees, if required, for subdivision; newspaper publications of the public hearing; mailing of notices to owners within 350 feet and staff reports shall be as determined by resolution of the Council and may be varied from time to time. Subd. 18. Planning Commission Study and Review cf Preliminary Plan. A. The Planning Commission shall make its recommendations to the Council for Project approval, approval with conditions, or denial. Such recommendations shall be made within sixty days of the initial hearing unless the applicant files a written request to the Planning Commission fair delay. If the Planning Commission does not make its recommendations within the specified time period and a delay has not- been requested by the applicant, the Council may take action on the request by the applicant. A. The Planning Commission shall be responsible for evaluating the Project in terms of maintaining the desirable character of the City, the neighborhood and site. The Planning Comm:-asion shall forward to the Council its reccmmendations based upon evaluation of the following considerations: 1. Relationship to the Resource Component analysis. Are the features preserved, protected or enhanced; or are they diminished, destroyed or exploited? 2. Contribution to the Existing Desirable Qualities of the Neighborhood. Are the local factors of traffic movement, safety, convenience, appearance and general character strengthened? 3. Integration of the Various Site Components. Are the locations and arrangements of the various development elements functionally and aesthetically related to each other as well as to the neighborhood setting? 4. Implementation of the City's Comprehensive Plan and Specific Community Objectives. Does the Project help correct a deficiency i the balance of community or neighborhood development? Does it integrate or provide a transition between otherwise incompatible areas of existing or proposed development? 5. Compatibility With Characteristics of Adjacent Development. Are visual features, such as overall scale, bulk, height, building materials, landscaping, color, and open space in harmony with each other and with surrounding development? ORONO CC 301 (4-1-84) 5 10.30 Are essential but adverse building and site elements properly screened or obscured from neighboring property and public places? C. A finding that any of the above does or does not exist shall not solely be cause for a Project to be unacceptable, but further that it is of such a nature as to produce one or more of the Following harmful effects on occupancy of the proposed development or on immediate or neighboring areas: 1. Adversely desirability of occupancy; 2. Diminishes value; affects the benefits and the stabililty and taxable 3. Prevents the most appropriate use of real estate and resources and the most appropriate development; 4. Produces degeneration of property; 5. Produces adverse conditions on the public health, safety and welfare. D. The Planning Commission and Council may from time to time amend or vary the application and review procedures and the amount and type of documents to be presented. Subd. 19. Final Plan Review. A. Before a building permit is issued for any structures within the proposed site, Final Plan of one or more stages in accordance with building permit requirements and requirements contained in this Section, shall be submitted to the Planning Commission for review and recommendation and to the Council for approval. B. A Final Plan shall be submitted with an application for Final Plan approval within ninety days after Council approval of the Preliminary Plan unless a written request for an extension is submitted by the applicant. If an application for final approval or a request for an extension is not received within ninety days, the Pre.liruinary Plan will be considered abandoned and a new application for a Preliminary Plan must be submitted following the Preliminary Flan procedure. There shall be maximum extensions of not more than one year. C. The application for Final Plan (or for any stages of the Final Plan) approval shall be accompanied by a legal description of the total property together with copies of the following plans and data: 1. A plan with locations of all structures including placement, size and type with existing topography showing two foot contour intervals or spot elevations of a 100 foot gzid if such contours are over 100 feet apart. ORONO CC 302 (4-1-84) S 10.30 2. Final architectural plans as required for building permit application. Plans for detached single family dwellings may be submitted directly to the Building Inspector for approval unless part of an MFPR Project. 3. Elevations or sections through the site which will best indicate the relationship of the buildings with the various terrain features and site elements. 4. Grading and drainage plan at two foot contour interval or spot elevations on a 100 foot grid if the two foot contours are over 100 feet apart. Site and drainage plans shall be submitted by the applicant in such detail as required by the Council and those plans shall be reviewed by the City Engineer before submission to the Planning Commission and Council for approval. No Project shall be permitted that results in water runoff causing flood, ero3ion, or deposits on adjacent properties. Such runoff may be required to be properly channel3d into a natural watercourse, ponding area, storm drain or other public facilities. Any change in grade affecting water runoff whether onto adjacent property or otherwise must be in compliance with the Surface Water Management Plan and shall be consistent with other applicable regulations or City Code provisions and subject to the approval of other agencies having jurisdiction over the area affected by the drainage. 5. Utility plan for all public utilities and indication of private utility service. 6. Landscape plan showing species and sizes of all plant materials. 7. Legal descriptions of proposed zoning district boundary changes. 8. Deed restrictions, covenants, agreements, by-laws of proposed Homeowner's Association and other documents controlling the use of property, type of construction or development or the activities of future residents. 9. A Title Opinion by the attorney for the applicant addressed to the City showing that as of the date of the filing of the Final Plan the applicant has fee title to the property, subject to outstanding easements and mortgages, or showing that applicant has a right to fee title to the property pursuant to a purchase agreement. 10. The applicant certifies on the Final Plan and on any resolution adopting the Final Plan that the applicant agrepi to bind himself, his successors and assigns to the Final elan and to limit the development of the property in accordance with the Final Plan. 11. The procedures for approving and re-ording of final plats and resolutions shall be followed if the Final Plan involves platting or division of land or the platting of_public streets. ORONO Cr 303 (4-1-84) § 10.30 12. Any other information which is necessary to fully represent the intentions of the Preliminary Plan. D. The Planning Commission shall review the Final Plan at its first regularly scheduled meeting which occurs at least fourteen days after filing of the application for Final Plan approval. E. The Final Plan shall be in substantial compliance with the approved Preliminary Plan. Substantial compliance shall mean: 1. The number and location of the dwelling units has not been changed. 2. Open space has not been decreased or altered to change its original intended design or use. 3. All streets, utilities and other special conditions prescribed on the Preliminary Plan by the appl.icant or any of the reviewing bodies have been incorporated into the Final Plan. Subd. 20. Zoning Change. I ` the Final Plan includes a zoning change, the Final Plan is attached to and is therefore a part of the ordinance establishing the zoning change. The Zoning Administrator shall then change the zoning classification on the Official .Zoning Map if a zoning change was ;Wade and issue a building permit in conformance with the Final Plan as approved. Source: Ordinance No. 185 Effective Date: 6-14-76 SEC. 10.31. RS SEASONAL RECREATIONAL DISTRICT. Subd. 1. Purpose. The "RS" Seasonal Recreational District is intended to provide a district which will allow a low - density seasonal form of residfntial development or recreational activity on the three Lake Minnetonka islands within Orono. Big Island, Mahpiyata Island and Deering Island are totally surrot—Ided by water. Special problems exist because of their isolated location and because there is no direct access by land or bridge. Transportation is difficult, dangerous, and slow especially in fall or spring when the ice is forming or melting. Engineering, financial, administrative and practical difficulties prevent servicing the islands with sewer or water utilities, garbage collection, or complete police, fire, medical emergency or other municipal services. The islands have historically been used for summer cabins, camping spots, temporary boat landings and a disabled veteran's summer camp. As long as this usage remains minimal, public health and safety is reasonably maintained. But development forecasts indicate increasing pressures for more intensive usage that could easily exceed the City's public service capabilities. For these reasons, Orono's com)rehensive plans have ORONO CC 304 4-1-94) 5 10.29 Subd. 4. Height. No structure or building in a study and research center shall exceed thirty feet in height except as provided in Section 10.75. Subd. 5. Temporary or Permanent Residents. No study and research center shall at any time serve as a temporary or permanent residence for a number of persons in excess of that determined by multiplying by 2-1/2 the number of acres of land devoted to use as such study and research center without a special permit allowing a greater number of persons in such number and for such periods of time as the Council may deem appropriate, due consideration being given to the interests of health, safety and public welfare. Subd. 6. Use. No study and research center shall at any time permit more than 300 persons to be present by invitation upon its property, without a special permit allowing a greater number of persons in such number and for such periods of time as the Council may deem appropriate, due consideration being given to the interests of health, safety and public welfare. Subd. 7. Area, Height, Lot Width and Yard Requiremen,.g. (See Section 10.29, Subdivision 5.) SEC. 10.30. M-6 MULTIPLE FAMILY PLANNED RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT. Subd. 1. Purpose. The "M-6" Multiple Family Planned Residential District is intended to provide a district which will allow multiple dwellings in those areas where such development fits the City's Comprehensive Land Use Plan, where properly related to other land uses, where there is immediate access to adequate existing arterial highways and public sanitary sewer and in no case where located within 1,000 feEt of the Lake Minnetonka. Rezoning of an area to the "M-6" Multiple Family Planned Residential District shall comply with Comprehensive Land Use Plan or may -)e allowed only after the Comprehensive Land Use Plan is amended ro show the possibility of the future rezoning of that area to tie "M-6" Multiple Family Planned Residential District. Design aid development shall follow the spirit and intent of the land use objectives of Section III-5A of the Comprehensive Land Use Plan as adopted December 2, 1974, and the Guiding Principles of Section 10.01, Subdivision 1 of th°s Chapter. Subd. 2. Permitted Uses. Within the "*4-6" Multiple Family Planned Residential District, no land or structures shall be used except for one or more of the following uses: A. One family detached dwellings as regulated in the "R-lB" District. B. Public awned parks and playgrounds. ORONO CC 290 (4-1-84) A-T71V-*AM-,VT- 0 IU.aL F. There shall be no setback exceptions permitted for any horizontal building addition o: 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 approved variance ii cases where any existing building is being replaced by a new building, or where the proposed addition, remodeling and/or renovation work constitutes 50 percent or more of the assessor's fair market value for the existing building. In these situations, the new work shall conform to all required setbacks. H, The exceptions authorized by this Subdivision apply only to setback requirements and do not authorize variance of any lot area, hardcover, building height, building area or any other zoning or building -ide performance standard. Subd. 19. Future Amendments. The "RS" District regulations adopted ay this Section represent an innovative attempt to solve the unique problems relating to historic use and previously platted substandard lots or. the island3 while at the same time assuring the property owners Df continued reasonable use of their property. It may be found by subsequent City Councils that this 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 modification by the City. Sourcie: Ordinance No. 246 Effec,:ive Date: 1-13-83 SEC. 10.32. PRD PLANNED RRSIDENTILL DEVELOPMMff. Subd. 1. Purpose. This plan is avai;able 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 neighborhools through preservation of natural open spaces, to counteract the effects of urban congestion and monotony, to provide cohesive structUre to neightorhood design, to offer recreation opportunities cloEe to home, and to aid in improving the welfare in general of City residents. Subd. 2. Submission of Plans. Land owners may ssbmit 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 of the zoning district or districts in which such land is situated. ORONO CC 330 (4-1-84) S 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 th? Planned Residential Development shall be subject to conditions deemed necessary by the Council to assure the preservation of such open spaces for their intended purposes. Subd. 5. Dedication of Open Space. The dedication and ownership of such open spaces may be through: (1) Homeowners Association; (20 Land:ord Maintenance; (3) Special Service District; (4) Municipal Ownership; or (5) any other method deemed appropriate by the Council to accomplish the purposes of this plan. Subd. 6. Site Plan. The proposed site plan, including location, spacing and basic design of proposed buildings, street and parking plans, water and sewer (public or private) plans, and plans of open space available for park or recreational purposes, shall be submitted for approval by the Planning Commission and the Council. Subd. 7. 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 are met; and, further the Council shall not approve any such Planned Residential Development prior to the legally binding establishment of the open space dedication, 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 codified herein above, shall govern applications under this plan. Source: Municipal Code Effective Date: 9-14-67 (Sections 10.33 through 10.39, inclusive, reserved for future expansion.) ORONO CC 331 (4-1-84) 5 10.50 I. Storage. In addition to other restrictions of this Chapter, all raw materials, supplies, finished or semi- finished products and equipment shall be stored within a completely enclosed building; or shall be screened by a fence or wall not less than five feet in height and not less than 50% opaque; provided, however, that motor vehicles necessary to the operation of the principal use and of not more than three -fourths ton capacity may be stored within the permitted parking areas. J. Landscaping. All open areas of any site, lot, tract or parcel shall be graded to provide proper drainage, and except for areas used for parking, drives or storage, shall be landscaped with trees, shrubs or planted ground cover. Such landscaping shall conform with the planting plan approved by the Council at the time the building permit was issued. It shall be the owners' responsibility to see that this landscaping is maintained in an attractive and well -kept condition. All vacant lots, tracts or parcels shall also be properly maintained. .. Drainage. No land shall. be developed and no use shall be permitted that results in water runoff causing floods, erosion, or deposits on adjacent properties. Site and drainage plans shall be submitted by the applicant in such detail as required by the Council and those plans shall be reviewed by the City Engineer before submission to the Planning Commission and Council for approval. Such runoff may be required to be properly channeled into a natural water course, ponding area, storm drain or other public facilities. Any change in grade affecting water runoff whether onto adjacent property or otherwise must be in compliance with the Surface Water Management Plan and ihall be consistent with other applicable regulations or City Code provisions and subject to the approval of other agencies having jurisdiction over the area affected by the drainage. Source: Ordinance No. 172 Effective Date: 1-1-75 SEC. 10.51. PID PLANNED INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT. Subd. 1. Purpose. The purpose of this Section is to establish provisions for the granting of a conditional use permit to erect a multi -building industrial facility in relation to an over-all design, an integrated physical plan and in accordance with the provisions and procedures as provided hereafter. Subd. 2. Submission of Plans. The owner or owners o` any tract of land within an "I" District may submit to the Council for approval a plan for the development and use of such a tract of land for a Planned Industrial District for commercial or other uses permitted in the district within which the land is located by making an application for a conditional use permit authorizing ORONO CC 357 (4-1-84) 5 10.51 completion of the development in accordance with the plan. The plan for the development shall conform to the requirements of the district within which it is located except as herein amended. Subd. 3. Size Required. The tract of land for which a development is proposed and a permit requested shall not be less than five (5) acres. Subd. 4. Sewer and Water. The tract shall be served by the City water and sewer system when available and fire hydrants shall be installed according to a plan approved by the Fire Chief as to type and location. Subd. 5. Drainage. A surface drainage system shall be constructed according to a plan approved by the City Engineer. Subd. 6. Parking. The off-street parking spaces shall be painted on the surfaced area according to a plan which has received approval of the Planning Commission and the Council. Subd. 7. Roadways. Private roadways within the project shall have an improved surface of 24 feet or more in width and shall be so designed and constructed as to permit the City fire trucks to provide protection to each building. Parking on a 24 foot roadway is to be prohibited; parking shall be permitted on one side of a 30 foot roadway. Subd. 8. Variances. It is the intent of this Section, Industrial Unit Plan, to provide a means to allow substantial variance from the provisions of this Chapter including uses, setbacks, height, and similar regulations but not including parking requirements, off-street loading, necessary screening and the like. Variances may be granted for the industrial unit plans provided: A. Certain regulations contained in this Chapter do not realistically apply to the proposed development due to the un que nature of the proposed development; B. The variances, if granted, would be fully consistent with the general intent and purpose of this Chapter; C. The planned community unit would produce development and an environment of equal or superior quality to that which would result from strict adherence to the provisions of this Chapter; D. The variances will not constitute a threat to the pLoperty values, safety, health, or general welfare of the owners or occupants of adjacent or nearby land nor be detrimental to the health, safety, morals, it general welfare of the people of Orono; ORONO CC 358 (4-1-84, 5 10.51 E. The proposed development is of such a unique nature as to require consideration under conditions of the industrial unit plan; and, F. It shall be determined that the variances are required for reasonable and practicable physical development according to a plan and are not required solely on the basis of financial considerations. Source: Ordinance No. 172 Effective Date: 1-1-75 (Sectio is 10.52 through 10.54, inclusive, reserved for future expansion.) ORONO CC 359 (4-1-94) 5 10.29 Subd. 4. Height. No structure or building in a study and research center shall exceed thirty feet in height except as provided in Section 10.75. Subd. 5. Temporary or Permanent Residents. No study and research center shall at any time serve as a temporary or permanent residence for a number of persons in excess of that determined by multiplying by 2-1/2 the number of acres of land devoted to use as such study and research center without a special permit allowing a greater number of persons in such number and for such periods of time as the Council may deem appropriate, due consideration being given to the interests of health, safety and pudic welfare. Subd. 6. Use. study and research center shall at any time permit more than -ins to be present by invitation upon its property, without permit allowing a greater number of persons in such number a., such periods of time as the Council may deem appropriate, due consideration being given to the interests of health, safety and public welfare. Subd. 7. Area, Height, Lot Width and Yard Requirements. (See Section 10.29, Subdivision 5.) SEC. 10.30. M-6 MULTIPLE FAMILY PLANNED RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT. Subd. 1. Purpose. The "M-6" Multiple Family Planned Residential District is intended to provide a district which will allow multiple dwellings in those areas where such development fits the City's Comprehensive Land Use Plan, where properly related to other land uses, where there is immediate access to adequate existing arterial highways and public sanitary sewer and in no case where located within 1,000 feet of the Lake Minnetonka. Rezoning of an area to the "M-6" Multiple Family Planned Residentia District shall comply with Comprehensive Land Use Plan or may t allowed only after the Comprehensive Land Use Pl,n is amended to show the possibility of the future rezoning of that area to the "M-6" Multiple Family Planned Residential District. Design and development shall follow the spirit and intent of the land use objectives of Section III-5A of the Comprehensive Land Use Plan as adopted December 2, 1974, and the Guiding Principles of Section 10.01, Subdivision 1 of this Chapter. S-jbd. 2. Permitted Uses. Within the "14-6" Multiple Family Planned Residential District, no land or structures shall be used except for one or more of the following uses: A. One family detached dwellings as regulated in the "R-IB" :ct. B. Public owned parks and plavgrounds. ORONO CC 290 (4-1-84r S 10.30 Subd. 3. Conditional Uses. Within any "M-6" Multiple Family Planned Residential District, no structure or land shall be used for the following uses except by conditional use permit: A. Arty conditional use as regulated in the "R-lB" District and as further regulated in the "M-6" Multiple Family Planned Residential District. B. Multiple Family Planned Residential Project (MFPR Project) . Subd. 4. Accessory Uses. Within any "M-6" Multiple Family Residential District, the following uses shall be permitted accessory uses: A. Any accessory use except for "Roadside Stands" as regulated it the "R-IA" District and as further regulated herein. B. Privately owned buildings containing recreation or social functions, garages, or storage areas for maintenance equipment or rubbish. Subd. S. i%rea, Lot Width, Yard Requirements, Height and Hard Cover Requirements. The following minimum or maximum requirements shall apply to all buildings, including accessory buildings except that permitted, conditional and accessory uses of the "R-IB" District as allowed herein shall be regulated by the OR-1B" District requirements. Subd. 6. Minimum MFPR Project Area. An MFPP. Project shall not be allowed on an area of less than five acres. Areas of less than five acres may qualify only if the applicant can show that the minimum area should be waived because the proposed MFPR Project is adjacent to an existing Project which has been developed under the provisions of this "M-6" District and is designed to create a larger, unified, physically integrated project, and will contribute to the ameni.:ies of the neighborhood. Subd. 7. Density in MFPR Project. The minimum platted lot area per dwelling building in an MFPR Project and the maximum number and type of dwelling buildings allowed in a prod :t are based on the following factors: A. Minimum lot areas as set forth in Subd Sion 9 of this Section. B. The area of the platted lot which is airy and buildable based on the Resource Component Analysis of 34.973(b), less public right-of-way. C. The number of bedrooms per dwelling unit. D. The number of each type of dwelling building. E. Required setbacks. ORONO CC 291 (4-1-84) J . 3 0 F. Credits for housing for low and moderate income individuals and families. G. Required open space. H. Hard -cover areas. Subd. 8. Maximum Percentage of Dwelling Buildings by Type in MFPR Project. Single Family 1' percent Two Family 40 percent Three Family 80 percent Four Family (maximum allowed) 80 percent Subd. 9. Each Dwelling Building in 4,i MFPR Project Shall be Platted to Meeting the Following Minimum Lot Requirements. Single Two Three Four Project Family Family Family Famil A. Lot 5 ac. 6,000 10,000 16,000 20,000 Area (dry sq.ft. sq.ft. sq.ft. sq.ft. buildable area) B. Lot 300 f::. 50 fc. 65 ft. 80 ft. 100 ft. Width (on public (on public (on public (on public (on pub - street) or private or private or private lic or street) street) street) private street) C. Lot 300 100 120 120 120 Depth D. Front 35 feet 25 feet from public street right-of-way or Yard from private street easements. project boundary E. Side 30 feet Sum of side yards tc be 15 _)ne of Yard from which may be 0 feet, but mil distance project hetween principal structures must be 15 toundary feet unless attached on separate lots. F. Side 35 fset 15 feet from public street right-of-way or Street. private street easements. Yard G. Rear 30 feet 30 feet 30 fe-t 30 feet 30 feet URONO CC (4-1-34` S 10.30 Sing lc Two Tnree Four Project Fam_1_r Family Family Family H. Building 15 feet between principal buildings and between Separa- princl'pa' bu.:;' g and accessor- buildings on separate tion lots in c.roj. 10 feet between principal and accef- buildings on same lot. Subd. 10. ?Minimum Platted Lot Area Required Per Dwelling Unit (DU) Based on Number of Bedrooms. Efficiency 4,500 sq.ft. !9.7 DU/ac. or 43/5 ^.) 1 Br. Unit 6,000 sq.ft. (7.3 DU/ac. nr 15/5 aL.) 2 Br. Unit 7,500 sq.ft. (5.8 DU/ac. 'S ac.) 3 Br. Unit 9,OOC sq.ft. (4.8 DC/ac. or ac.) 4 Br. Unit 10,001 sq.ft. (4.4 DU/ac. or 22, ac.) However, not more than 20% of the dwelling units in any one Project shall be efficiencies. Not -tore than 40% of the dwelling units in any one project shall oe efficiencies and jne bedroom units. Subd. 11. He ght. No structure or building shall exceed 2-1/2 stories or thirty feet in neigh` except as provided in Section 10.-'S. Subd. 12. ' ),rsing ° L Low and Moderate Income Persons and Families. In MF'.'R Proje,-'_s containing fifty or more dwelling units in all construction phases. -:,re dwelling unit of every twelve of the total number of d.,elling units shall be provided for eligible persons or fami'-iei in the low and moderate income range. This provision may be waived by the Council if: (1) the percentage of existing low and moderate income housing in the Ci:r exceeds the percentage of such dwelling units in the Metrupolitari area.- (2) funds for subsidy program are not available within one year of application; and (3) the Council determines that the MFPR Project location is inappro-riate for such dwelling units because of the lack of public ar.d private support services. A. Density Credit. For all eli R Projects providin^ dwelling units F ,r lo- nd moderate _)erson.s and families. One idAith al d:-._1•.n unit will be pe,.. -ted for each twelve dwellin.. 'tit3 a- 4ed under the standard lot area requirement3 of 6" Di: ct. 8. -dure. in order to provide low and moderate in.;ome dwelling t..- applicant shall propose application(s) to the Federal -administration (FHA) of the United States Department of He., r a-• Development, (or other source of subs .dy funds) und_r prc for home ow!-':p 'includ.nl condomini�ss; , rental or A ive housing. afs proposal .;hail OROt:J 4C (4-1-84 S 10.30 conform to the guidelines established by the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development with respect to cost limitations, constr­:tion and other standards for development of moderate income dwelling units under the applicable subsidy programs; The applicant shall fuLnish any proposal and supporting aucuments in the form of exchanges of correspondence with responsible officials of the FHA (or other soarce of subsidy funds), together with affidavits by the proponent reporting its discussions with such officials, indicating, to the extent then possible, whether there are uncommitted funds available f-)r projects to develop low and moderate income dwelling units of the type proposed as well as for other type of units for low and moderate income persons and families. C. Sat: -faction of Requirement Without a Subsidy. An applicant may propose to satisfy all or part of the low and moderate ;.niome dwelling unit requirement without utilizing a government subsidy program; provided, however, that prior to Final Plan approval by the Council, the applicant clearly demonstrates and warrants in writing that the proposal will benefit the same number of families at the same income levels, and for the same rentals or prices, which the low and moderate ;.,:ome dwelling unit requirements are intended to assure. U. Architectural Design Requirement. The architectural design of low and moderate income dwelling units will be consistent with the design of the overall MFPR Project and shall not be physically separated, screened or in any! manner made identifiable as distinct from the rest of the development. Subd. 13. Hard Cover. The total hard cover on any one MFPR Project shall not exceed 35%. Subd. 14. Recreatiol and Open Space. 4FPR Projects shall contain an adequate amotiiL of land for park, recreation or local open, space use which mall not be less than 10% of the Project area, or the sum Of tra minimum floor areas based upon the number of bedrooms in S10(.ivision 16, Subparagraph C below, whichever is greater. Thr recreation and open space shall be easily accessible to the :we.,l ;ng unit(s) it is intended to serve. The Project a-ez .-.ot eligible to meet this requirement are driveways, parking areas, swamps, drainage areas, sumps, public sidewalks, required yard areas and required lot area required in Subdivision 9 of this Section. Subd. 15. Operating and Maintenance Requirements for Com ty Recreation and Open Space in MFPR Projects. Common open gpa defined as that area of the pro)ect area set aside for the se a,ld enjoyment f all re ; idents in the Proj act, including esidents of lots lithin a Pr^ject which may be under private ownership and on which lots there may or may not be F. ivate open space) shall be subject to requirement3 in Section 10.32. ORONO CC 291 (4-1-84) 5 10.30 Subd. 16. Building and Site Design and Construction Requirements. A. A building permit for a multiple dwelling building shall not be issued unless the applicant's building plans, including the site plan, are certified by an architect -egistered in the State of Minnesota stating that the design of the building and site has been prepared under his direct supervision. Any building of Type I or II construction, as provided in the State Building Code, shall have its electrical, mechanical and structural systems designed by registered engineers. Provisions of this Subdivision shall in no way prohibit the preparation of the site plan by a professional site planner. B. Development within an MFPR Project shall contribute to the image and heritage of the City as a place of beauty, spaciousness and high quality. Proposed buildings, structures and site elements shall be in good proportion; have simplicity of mass and detail: here shall be an approiriate use of :materials; colors shall be i.: good taste and not used for dramatic effect but in harmony with themselves and their environment. The following building materials will not be allowed on exposed exterior blocks or other structural blocks; corrugated metal or fiberglass panels; asbestos or asphaltic siding materials; materials that are subject to rapid deterioration. C. Floor Area Requirements. 1. The minimum net floor area requirements per dwelling unit for multiple dwelling buildings shall be as follows: Efficiency Units 500 square feet One Bedroom Units 700 square feet Two Bedroom Units 850 square feet Three Bedroom Units 9111, -quare feet Four Bedroom Units 1,; 0 square feet Five Or More Bedroom Units li50 square feet 2. For purposes of measurement, the net floor area of a dwelling unit shall mean that area within a building used as a single dwelling unit, and shall be measured from the inside of outside building walls to the center of partitions on the interior of the building bounding the dwelling unit being measured, but shall not include public stairways, public entries, public foyers, public balconies, or unenclosed public porches, separate utility rooms, furnace areas or rooms, storage areas not within the apartment, or garages. D. Closet= and Bulk Storage. Only closet space having a minimum clear finish to finish depth of 2 feet, 0 inches, shall be considered in determining the lineal feet of closet provided. The following minimum amounts of closet and bulk storage shall be provided for each dwelling unit: ORONO CC :.')5 (4-1-�4 S 10.30 1. Efficiency Units - 8 lineal feet of closet space and 80 cubic feet of bulk storage. 2. One Bedroom Unit - 12 lineal feet of closet space and 100 cubic feet of bulk storage. 3. Two Bedroom Unit - 24 lineal feet of closet space and 120 cubic feet of bulk storage. 4. Three or More Bedrooms - For each bedroom in excess of two in any one dwelling unit, an additional 8 lineal feet cif closet space and 20 cubic feet of bulk storage volume shall be required. E. Sound. Party and corridor partitions and floor systems shall be of a type rates by a laboratory regularly engaged in sound testing as capable of accomplishing an average sound transmission loss (using a 9 frequency test) of not less than 50 decibles. Door systems between corridors and dwelling units shall be of solid core construction and include gaskets and closure plates. Room relationships, hallway designs, door and window placements and plumbing and ventilating installations shall be such that they assist in the control of sound transmission from unit to unit. F. Projecting Air Conditioning and Heating Units. Air conditioning or heating units projecting through exterior walls or windows shall be so located and designed that they neither unnecessarily generate or transmit sound nor disrupt the architectural amenities of the building. Units projecting more than four inches beyond the exterior finish of a :.wilding wall shall be permitted only with the written consent of the Buildir,, Inspector, which shall be given when building structural systems prevent compliance. G. Trash Incinerators and Garbage. No exterior .rash or garbage disposal or storage shall be permitted. There ,iall be no exterior incineration, and any storage shall be completely enclosed by walls and roof. H. Accessory Buildings. Accessory buildings including structures for the storage of boats and recreational vehicles shall observe the same s,�thack requirements established for the residence buildings. The Council may requi_ common walls for accessory buildings where common walls will elim.-late unsightly and hazardous areas. Accessory buildings shall have the sane exterior finish as the principal structure and shall be designed and located on the site in a manner which complements other site elements and facilities. I. The "M-6" District or any development therein may not be adjacent to any one Family Lakeshore Residential District or within 1,000 feet of a lake, or within 200 feet of a wetland. OP.ONO CC 296 (4-1-84) S 10.30 J. Elevation. No dwelling unit or any part thereof may be built at an elevation lower than the elevation of the ground at the base of the building. K. Entrances. Each dwelling unit shall have its own separate exterior access. L. Parking. There shall be provided on the lot occupied by the multiple dwelling building two off-street parking space per dwelling unit, one of which is an enclosed parking space whicn may be located in or under the multiple dwelling building; detached from the principal building if its location serves some beneficial screening, tuffering or transitional function; or else completely underground. In addition, .25 parking spaces per dwelling unit shall be provided for guests, and shall be located conveniently for the units they are intended to serve. The main parking areas shall be surfaced with a hard, all-weather, durable dust -free surfacing material and shall be properly drained and landscaped and shall be maintained in a well -kept condition. No parking area shall occupy any required Project yard area, nor shall it be located closer than five feet to a side or rear lot line, not closer than ten feet to any principal building. Each parking space shall have a minimum width of nine feet and a minimum depth of 200 feet exclusive of aisles and maneuvering space. All parking areas containing more than six spaces which adjoin either a public street or residen`ially zoned property shall have a solid wall or fence of not less than three Feet nor more than four and one-half feet in height along such adjoining line. Such fences or walls shall be so designed that they are architecturally harmonious with the principal structures on the lot. A screen planting approved by the Council may be substituted for the required wall or fence. Guest parking stalls shall be easily accessible to or from the main entry of the multiple dwelling building. No street parking shall be permitted. M. Internal Streets. All minor internal streets shall be owned and maintained by the owner of the Project, by a Homeowner's Association or by any other agency or method deemed appropriate by the Council. Permanent easements fifty feet in width shall be provided as requir>d by the Council for all private streets. Collector streets which may be required to maintain neighborhood continuity of circulation between MFPR Projects or with other adjoining development shall be provided with a public right-of-way. N. Outside Storage. No boats, recreational vehicles over twenty feet in length, maintenance vehicles or other similar bulky objects shall be permitted on the Project area unless completely enclosed in a building or in an area completely encl-sed by a fence of Such opacity and height to obscure the stored contents from any living or pedestrian areas on or around the Project area. Required garages or parking areas shall not be used for the storage of such objects or vehicle_. OP.ONO CC 297 (4-1-84) S 10.30 O. Landscaping. All open areas of the Project or individual platted lots within the %roject shall be graded to provide proper drainage, and except for areas used for parking, drives or storage, shall be landscaped with trees, shrubs or planted ground cover. The natural landscape shall be utilized where possible and reinforced with additional landscaping that is compatible with and complementary to the various use areas and functions of the site, the structural additions to the site development on neighboring properties and the adjacent public streets and highways. Landscape materials shall be of adequate size to contribute to the environmental quality at initial planting as well as at maturity. Generally new plant material shall be of the following sizes: deciduous overstory trees - 3 inch caliper; deciduous ornamental trees - 2 inch caliper; evergreen trees - 6 foot height; evergreen shrubs - 24 inch spread or height, dependent on form; deciduous shrubs - 3 feet height. Lawn areas other than natural landscape areas shall be sodded. Such landscaping shall conform with the planting plan approved by the Council at the time the building permit was issued. It shall be the owners' responsibility to see that this landscaping is maintained in an attrActive and well -kept condition. All vacant lots, tracts or parcels shall also be properly maintained. Subd. 17. Application Review and Administrative Procedure. A. General Procedure. The general procedure for application, review and action on any Multiple Family Planned Residential Project shall be according to the following outline, with more detailed requirements found in the remainder of this Subdivision. Single family detached dwellings are excluded from the review process. 1. Application, filing fee and six copies of the Preliminary Plan are to be filed with t e Planning Commission through the Zoning Administrator at least thirty days prior to the public hearing date. 2. Public hearings shall be held by the Planning Commission for all Projects. 3. Planning staff reviews Preliminary Plan and transmits copies of review to Planning Commission members, City Administrator, Park Board, affected surrounding municipalities and other appropriate agencies and applicant at least fi-- lays before public hearing before Planning Commission. 4. Planning Commission holds public hearings on Preliminary Plan. 5. Planning Commission makes recommendations for action on Preliminary Plan. 6. Council acts on Preliminary Plan. ORONO CC 298 (4-1-84) § 10.30 7. Applicant submits Final Plan within ninety days of Preliminary Plan approval and fourteen da,.9 prior to Final Plan review at Planning Commission meeting. 8. The Zoning Administrator transmits copies of the Final Plan to the Planning Commission, Park Board, 2lanning Staff, City Engineer, Building Inspector and Fire Chief. 9. Planning Staff reviews Final Plan and makes recommendation to Planning Commission at least five days before meeting. 10. Planning Commission reviews Final Plan, recommends action to Council. 11. If Council approves Final Plan, Zoning Administrator changes the zoning classification on the Official Zoning Map, as rEquired, and files the Final Plan for enforcement. B. Application for an MFPR Project shall be made by the owner of the property except that an option holder may apply provided his application is accompanied by a signed statement indicating no objections from the owner or owners of all properties involved in the application. C. Application for a Preliminary Plan shall be filed with the designated Administrative Official and shall be accompanied by six copies of the following plans and information: 1. Location maps showing location within Cite and more specific location on a half section plat map showing all surrounding property lines within 350 feet of the proposed [-Ian. 2. Resource Component Analysis (RCA). The purpose of the RCA is to determine specific design features of a Project that will minimize the detrimental effect of development on the natural and man-made environment. Opportunities and constraints imposed by or on the site will be key considerations in the City's Project review procedures. (a) Natural Elements in the RCA shall include documentation and analysi.3 of existi.ig conditions and rela- tionships and a projection of the effect the proposed develoF,•_nt will have upon: Vegetation (forests and woodlands, wetlands, ind grasslands); Geology and Soils (bearing capacity, erodibility, and permeability); Slopes and Topography (slope stability, landscape features, and development potential); Hydrologic Systems (surface and groundwater, wetlands, flood plans, and absorption); Wildlife (natural habitat, variety, and preservation -protection). (b) Man-made Elements in the RCA include documentation and analysis of the factors that affect development either providing opportunities or constraints, including Community Facilities (schools, narks and City services, such as fire and ORONO CC 299 (4-1-84) S 10.30 police protection, etc.); Utilities (sanitary sewer, storm sewer, water, electric transmission lines, etc.); Circulation (vehicles and pedestrian); Surrounding Development (character transition/ buffers, orientation/access, scale/bulk, and building materials. 3. If platting of public streets or division of land are proposed, all information required in the Subdivision Regulations Chapter of the City Code for a Preliminary Plat. 4. General development plan with existing topography at two foot contour intervals indicating: (a) The proposed site and existing development on adjacent properties. (b) All types of uses proposed. Proposed size, location and arrangement of buildings and preliminary architectural delineations including but not limited to schematic building plans and elevations. (d) Density or intensity of each type of use. (e) ?arking areas and stall arrangement. (f) entrance and exit drives. (g) Schematic landscaping showing tree massing, typical plant groupings, and screen plantings, etc. utility systems. (h) Park and open space lands. (i) Dimensions. (j) Proposed schematic drainage and 5. Summary sheet indicating: (a) Area of land in each use of each separate intensity of use. (b) Number of dwelling units proposed including number of bedrooms in each area in Item 4(c) above. (c) Tabulation of parking facilities by type related to number and type of use served. (d) Number of acres and general intendAd use and ownership oL open space. (e) Modifications of any provisions of this Section and any other City Code provisions or regulations of the City. 6. Phasing Flan indicating geographical staging and approximate 'liming of the Plan or portions thereof. ORONO CC 100 ( 4-1--84 ) 5 10.30 7. Written statement by the applicant indicating how his proposed development conforms to the stated objectives and purpose of this Section and the Orono Comprehensive Plan and why his proposal would be in the public interest. 8. Fee for filing an MFPR Project application which includes the fees, if required, for subdivision; newspaper publications of the public hearing; mailing of notices to owners within 350 feet and staff reports shall be as determined by resolution of the Council and may be varied from time to time. Subd. 18. Planning Commission Study and Review of Preliminary Plan. A. The Planning Commission shall make its recommendations to the Council for Project approval, approval with conditions, or denial. Such recommendations shall be made within sixty days of the initial hearing unless the applicant files a written request to the Planning Commission for delay. If the Planning Commission does not make its recommendations within the specified time period and a delay has not been requested by the applicant, the Council may take action on the request by the applicant. A. The Planning Commission shall be responsible for evaluating the Project in terms of maintaining the desirable ^haracter of the City, the neighborhood and site. The Planning Commission shall forward to the Council its recommendations based upon evaluation of the following considerations: 1. Relationship to the Resource Component r.nalysis. Are the features preserved, protected or enhanced; or are they diminished, destroyed or exploited? 2. Contribution to the Existing Desirable Qualities of the Neighborhood. Are the local factor.: of traffic movement, safety, convenience, appearance and general character strengthened? 3. 'ntegration of the Various Site Components. Are the locations and arrangements of the various development elements functionally and aesthetically related to Each othez as well as to the neighborhood setting? 4. Implementation of the City's Comprehensive Plan and Specific Community Objectives. Does the Project help correct a deficiency in the balance of community or neighborhood development? Dees it integrate or provitie a transition between otherwise incompatible areas of ex 'rig o, proposed c,.:velopment? 5. Compatihi.ity With Characteristics of Adjacent Development. Are visual features, such as overall scale, bulk, height, building materials, landscaping, color, and open space in harmony with each other and with surrounding development? ORONO CC 301 {4-1-341 5 10.30 Are essential but adverse building and site elements properly screened or obscured from neighboring property and public places? C. A finding that any of the above does or does not exist shall not solely be cause for a Project to be unacceptable, but further that it is of such a nature as to produce one or more of the following harmful effects oyi occupancy of the proposed development or on immediate or neighboring areas: 1. Adverse.y desirability of occupancy; 2. Diminishes value; affects the benefits and the stabililty and taxahle 3. Prevents the most appropriate use of real estate and resources and the most appropriate development; 4. Produces degeneration of property; 5. Produces adverse conditions on the public health, safety and welfare. D. The Planning Commission and Council may from time to time amend or vary the application and review procedures and the amount and type of documents to be presented. Subd. 19. Final Plan Review. A. Before a building permit is issued for any structures within the proposed site, Final Plan of one or more stages in accordance with building permit requirements and requirements contained in this Section, shall be submitted to the Planning Commission for review and recommendation and to the Council for approval. B. A Final Plan shall be submitted with an application for Final Plan approval within ninety days after Council approval of the Preliminary Plan unless a written request f-)r an extension is submitted by the applicant. If an application for final approval or a request for an extension is not received within ninety days, the Preliminary Plan will be considered abandoned and a new application for a Preliminary Plan must be submitted following the Preliminary Plan procedure. shall be maximum extensions of not more than one year. C. The application for Final Plan (or for any stages of the Final Plan) approval shall be accompanied by a legal description of the total property together with copies of the following plans and data: 1. A plan with locations of all structures including placement, size and type with existing topography showing two foot contour intervals or %,)t elevations of a 100 foot grid if such contours are over 100 feet apart. ORONO CC 302 (4-1 34) 5 10.30 2. Final architectural plans as required for building permit application. Plans for detached single family dwellings may be submitted V ectly to the Building Inspector for approval unless part of an MFPR Proje^t. 3. Elevations rr sections through the sip which will best indicate the relationship of the buildings with the various terrain features and site elements. 4. grading and drainage plan at two foot contour interval or spot elevations on a 100 foot grid if the two foot contours are over 100 feet apart. Site and drainage plans shall be submitted by ~he applicant in such detail as required by the Council and those plans shall be reviewed by the City Engineer before submission to the Planning Commission and Council for approval. No Project shall be permitted that results in water runoff causing flood, erosion, or deposits on adjacent properties. Such runoff may be required to be properly channeled into a natural watercourse, ponding area, storm drain or other public facilities. Any change in grade affecting water runoff whether onto adjacent property or otherwise must be in compliance wiL:i the Surface water Management Plan and shall be consistent with othei applicable regulations or City Code provisions and subject to the approval of other agencies having jurisdiction over the area affectPid by the drainage. 5. Utility plan for all public utilities and indication of private utility service. 5. Landscape plan showing species and sizes of all plant materials. 7. Legal descriptions of proposed zoning district boundary changes. 8. Deed restrictions, covenants, agreements, b•,-laws of prcposed Homeowner's Association and other dociments controlling the use of property, type of construction or development or the activities of future residents. 9. A Title Opinion by the attorney for the applicant addressed to the City showing that as of the date of the filing of the Final Plan the applicant has fee title to the property, subject to outstanding ease;nents and mortgages, or showing that applicant has a right to fee title to the property pursuant to a purchase agreement. 10. The applicant certifies on tt,e Final plan and on any r--goluti.on adopting t. ! Final plan that the applicant agrees to I ,ri:i nimself, his successors and assigns to the Final Plan and t:, iimit the development o: the property in ar-ordance with the Final Plan. 11. The procedures for approving and recording of final plats and resolutions shall be followed if the Final ?Ian involves platting or division of land or the platting of public streets. 'NONo CC 303 14-1-{4 5 10.30 12. Any other information which is necessary to fully represent the intentions of the Preliminary Plaz. D. The ?Tanning Commission shall review the Final Plan at its first regularly scheduled meeting which occurs at least fourteen days after filing of the applicatir— for Final Plan approval. E. The Final Plan shall be in substantial compliance with the approved Preliminary Plan. Substantial compliance shall mean: 1. The number, and location of the dwelling units has not been changed. 2. Open space has not been decreased or altered to change its original intended design or use. 3. All streets, utilities and other spec,::l conditions prescribe.] on the Preliminary Plan by the applicant or any of the reviewing bodies have been incorporated into the Final Plan. Subd. 20. Zoning Change. if the Final Plan includes a zoning change, the Final Plan is attached to and is therefore a part of t.,ie ordinance establishing the zoning change. The Zoning Administrator shall then change the zoning classification on the Official Zoning Map if a Toning change was ;Wade and issue a building pe_mit in conformance with the Final Plan as approved. Source: Ordinance No. 185 Effective Date: 6-14-76 SEC. 10.31. RS SEASOMAL RECREATIONAL DISTRICT. Subd. 1. Purpose. The "RS" Seasonal Recreational District is intended to provide a district which will allow a low - density seasonal form of residential development or recreational activity on the three Lake Minnetonka islands within Orono. Sig Island, Mahpiyata Island and Deering Island are totally 4urrounded by wat-er. Special problems exist because of their isolated location and because there is no direct access by land or bridge. Transportation is difficult, dangerous, and slow espet-ially in fall or spring when the ice is forming or melting. Engineering, financial, administrative and practical diEficu..`ies prevent servicing the islands with sewer or water utilities, garbage collection, or complete police, fire, medical emergency or other municipal services. The islands h-ve historic -illy been used for summer cabins, c,ampir-, spots, orary boat la- gs and a disabled veteran's summer camp. long i this remains minimal, public health and safety is reaso- ably P-it ned. B,it development forecasts indicate increasing Frescuru.. for more intensive usage that could easily exce,+ the City's public: service c,tpabilities. Fo ~hese reason;, Orono's comprehensive plans have ORONO CC 31)A i4-i-44 lu.J.L 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 approved variance in cases where any existing building is being replaced by a new building, or where the proposed addition, remodeling and/or renovation work constitutes 50 percent or more of the assessor's fair market value for the existing building. In these situations, the new work shall conform to all required setbacks. H. The exceptions .. norized by this Subdivision apply only to setback requirement., a..: do not authorize variance of any lot at a, hardcover, building `ieight, building area or any other zoning or building code performance standard. Subd. 19. Future Amendments. The *RS" Distr ict regulations adopted by this Section represent an innovat.ve attempt to solve the unique problems relating to historic use and pre7iously 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 this 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 r-sy have to `,, modified. Therefore, no new development rights granted by this Section shall be deemed to be vested property rights but shall remain subject to future modi.ication by the .:.ity. Source: Ordinance No. 246 Effective Cate: 1-13-83 SEC. 10.32. PRD PLANNED RESIDRNTIAL . Subd. 1. Purpose. This plan is available to land subdividers subject to Council ,pproval, as alternative to standard minimum lot size subdivision --)f land. The purpose of this plan is to enhance the appearance of neighborhoods through preservation of natural open spaces, to counteract the `fects of urban congestion and monotony, to provide cohesive structu.e to neighborhood design, to offer recreation opportunities close to home, and to aid in improving the welfare in general cf City residents. Subd. 2. :- -~mission of Plans. Land ow,,iers may subm.t land subdivision plans for any 'R" District with adherence to minimum lot size requirements for eact. building lot, provided that the total number of building lots, or d+elling units, shall not exceed the number of :r ch lot-s or units permissible under the minimu,.i lot size requ. ..:ants of the zoning district or Jastricts in which sacn land is -s.cuated. ()R-,j40 CIC 3 3 G ; 4 -,L -f34 5 10.32 Suhl. 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 deemed necessary by the Council to assure the preservation of such open spaces fur their intended purposes. Subd. 5. Dedication of Open Space. The dedication and ownership of such open spaces may be through: (1) Homeowner; Association; (20 Landlord maintenance- (3) Special Servi _ District; (4) Municipal Ownership; or (5, any other method deemed appropriate by the Council to accomplish the purposes of this plan. Subd. 6. Site Plan. The F� ,pcsed site plan, including location, spacing and basic design of proposed tiuild:ngr. street and parking plans, water and sewer (public or private) plans, and plans of open space available for park or recreational purposes, shall be submitted for approval by the Planning Commission and the Council. Subd. 7. 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 ntil all conditions set oy the "nuncil are met; aid, further L,.e Council shall not approve any such Planed Residential Development prior to the legally binding establishment of the open space dedication, ownersnip and m&--tena ce provisions, such provisions to be guaranteed by honding or other means satisfactory to the Cot,nc i 1. Subd. 9. S ibdi on Requirements. All provisions of subdivision procedure e_ ished by the City C::de except as modifie<' rein above, sha_ ivern applications under this plan. Source: Municipal Code Effective Date: 9-14-67 (Sections 10.33 througt. 10.39, inclu-stve, reser-ed for '.iture expansion.) ORONO :'C 3' •4 " 'i S 10.50 I. Storage. In addition to other restrictions of this Chapter, all raw materials, supplies, finished or semi- finished products and equipment shall be stored within a completely enclosed building; or shall be screened by a fence or wall not less than five feet in height and not less than 50% opaQ,:e; provided, however, that motor vehicles necessary to the 3reration of the principal use and of not more than three -fourths ton capacity may be stored within the permitted parking areas. J. Landscaping. All open areas of any site, lot, tract or parcel shall be graded to provide proper drainage, and es=ept for areas used for parking, drives or storage, shall be landscaped with tries, shrubs or planted ground cover. Such landscaping shall conform with the planting pl,n approved by the Council at the time the building permit was issued. It shall be the owners' responsibility to see that this landscaping is maintained in an attractive and well -kept condition_ All vacant lots, tracts or parcels shall also be properl, -,.,intained. K. Drainage. No land shall be developed and no use shall be permitted that results in water runoff causing floods, erosion, or deposits on adjacent properties. Site and drainage plans shall be submitted by the applicant in such detail as r.equir,d by the Council and those plans shall be reviewed by the City Engineer before submission to the Planning Commission and Council for approval. Such runoff may be required to be properly channeled into a natural water course, ponding area, storm drain or other public facilities. Any change in grace affecting water runoff whether onto adjacent property or otherwise must be in compliance with the SlArface Water Management Plan and shall be consistent with other applicable regulations or City Code provisions and subject to the approval of other agencies having jurisdiction over the area affected by the drainage. Source: Ordinance No. 172 Effective Date: 1-1-75 SEC. 10.51. PID PLANNED INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT. Subd. 1. Purpose. The purpos^ of this Section is to establish provisions for the granting of a conditional use permit to erect a multi -building industrial facility in relation to an over-all design, an integrated physical plan and in accordance with the provisions and procedures as provided hereafter. Subd. 2. Submission of Plans. The owner or owners of any tract of land within an "I" District_ may submit to the Council for approval a plan for the development and use of such a tract of land c)r a Planned Industrial District for commercial or other uses peraitted in the district within which the land is located by making an application for a conditional use permit authorizing ORONO J57 (4-1-84) 5 10.51 completion of the development in accordance with the plan. The plan for the development shall conform to the requirements of the district within which it is located except as herein amended. Subd. 3. Size Required. The tract of land for which a development is proposed and a permit requested shall not be less than five (5) acres. Subd. 4. Sewer and Water. The tract shall be served by the City water and sewer system �.-`.en available and fire hydrants shall be installed according to a plan approved by the Fire Chief as to type and location. Subd. 5. Drainage. A surface drainage system shall be constructed according to a plan approved by the City Engineer. Subd. 6. Parking. The off-street parking spaces shall be painted on the surfaced area according to a plan which has received approval of the Planning Commission and the Council. Suod. 7. Roadways. Private roadways within the project shall have an improved surface of 24 feet or more in width and shall be so designed and constructed as to permit the City fire trucks to provide protect,.(-,n to each building. Parking on a 24 f,)ot roadway is to be prohibited; parking shall be permitted on one side of a 30 foot roadway. Subd. 8. Variances. It is the intent of this Section, Industrial Unit Plan, to provide a means to allow substantial variance from the provisions of this Chapter including uses, setbacks, height, and similar regulations but not including parking requirements, off-street loading, necessary screening and the like. Variances may be granted for the industrial unit plans provided: A. Certain regulations contained in this Chapter do not realistically apply to the proposed development due to the unique nature of the proposed development; 8. The variances, if granted, would be filly consistent with the general intent and purpose of this Chapter; C. The planned community unit would produce development and an environment of equal or superior quality to that which would result from strict adherence to the provisions of this Chapter; D. The variances will not constitute a thLeat to the property values, safety, health, or general welfare of the owners or occupants of adjacent or nearby land nor be detrimental to the health, safety, morals, or general welfare of the people of Orono; ORONO CC 358 i-1-83 5 10.51 E. The proposed development is of such a unique nature as to require consideration under conditions of the industrial unit plan; and, F. It shall be determined that the variances are required for reasonable and practicable physical development according to a plan and are not required solely on the basis of financial considerations. Source: Ordinance No. 172 Effective Date! 1-1-75 (Sections 10.52 through 10.54, inclusive, reserved for future expansion.) ORONO cc M (4-1-84; d-(TAC11MCOT -Q III. IWj,Z�TATION A31D CMWZ 1. INTRODUCTION This document represents the summary of the study phase giving the background, considerations, and conclusions for the alteration of land use patterns in the Highway 12 corridor. This document, submitted as part of the comprehensive plan amendment to the Metropolitan Council, has been reviewed at a public hearing held before the Planning Commission and by the City Council. The review of th:.s comprehensive plan amendment is in addition to the nine meetings that were held during the study phase. During the Metropolitan Counci l's review of this plan, the City will be working to develop the appropriate zoning implementation tools for this amendment. Implementation tools will break down into two groups. The first group is the standards which will have to be satisfied prior to a property being rezoned. The second set will be the actual zoning standards. Some will be new and others will be revisions of the existing Planned Unit Development (PUD), zoning standards incorporated within current ordinances. Upon review and subsequent approval by the Metropolitan Council, the comprehensive plan amendment will be brought back for formal ado; ion by the City Council. At that time the zoning amendments will be considered and adopted to allow for implementation of the comprehensive plan amendment. At the same time the allocation of existing sewer units currently assigned to Orono will be made. Upon adoption of all those items, the City will then be in a position to consider requests fr.r rezoning for properties in the corridor. 51 2. MINIMUM STANDARDS TO ACHIEVE ZONING In order to achieve the performance zoning classification a developer would have to meet certain performance standards which would include the following: a) Master Plan Layout - A preliminary design to demonstrate ability to meet major issues for performance zoning. b) Minimum Developable Area - This would be a standard to establish the minimum area that a person would have to develop in order to achieve the zoning. This would generate developments of significant size to effectively use performance type zoning, avoiding development on a lot by lot basis. c) Appropriate Development Schedule - A timetable of anticipated development. d) Utility Capacities - Demonstration of ability to have utility capacity for the development, plus an improvement financing plan. e) Storm water Management - Approximate layout to appropriately handle storm water. f) Traffic/Transportation - Adequacy of general circulation, capability and direction of plan. 3. PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OF THE ZONING DISTRICT 0 Types of Planned Unit Development - All zoning changes within :he corridor will be of the Planned Unit Development nature. Obese will be broken down as follows: - Planned Residential Development - Single Family - 1 Unit/2 Acre - unsewered and sewered up to 1 Unit/l Acre - sewered - !Multifamily - Up to 10 units per acre depending on square footage of units. - Planned Commercial Development - Development of retail and commercial areas including consolidated retail and limited free standing sites. *) Standards Within Each Planned Unit District - Issues that could be addressed by the actual performance zoning standards include the following: A. Site Development Calculation - In an effort to attain protection of appropriate environmental assets determine the amount of the site that is developable through a resource protection calculation. S. Ccm atibility of Uses - A listing of uses considered compatible within the established performance zoning. C. "Aesthetics" - Standards for development of property +could include: 1. Lands aping minimum requirements. 2. Lighting standards. 3. Signage standards. 4. Requirements for compatibility of building materials. so (g) A detailed site plan, suitable for recording, showing the physical layout, design and purpose of all streets, easements, rights of way, utility lines and facilities, lots, block, public and common open space, general landscaping plan, structure, including mobile homes, and uses. (h) Preliminary grading and site alteration plan illustrating changes to existing topography and natural site vegetation. The Plan should clearly reflect the site treatment and its conformance with the approved concept plan. (i) A preliminary plat prepared in accordance with the Subdivision Ordinance. (j) A soil erosion control plan acceptable to watershed districts, Department of Natural Resources, Soil Conservation Service, or any other agency with review authority clearly illustrating erosion control measures to be used during construction and as pernanent measures. 4. Development Stage: Development stage submissions should depict and outline the proposed implementations of the general concept stage for the PUD. Information from the general concept stage may be included for background and to provide a basis for the submitted plan. The development stage submissions shall include but not be limited to: (a) A final plat and information required by the city subdivision Title. (b) Ten (10) sets of preliminary plans drawn to a scale of not less than one inch equals one hundred feet (1"=100') (or scale requested by the Administrator containing at least the following information): (1) Proposed name of the development (which shall not duplicate nor b.: similar in pronunciation to the name of any plat theretofore recorded in the county where the subject property is situated). (2) Property boundary lines and dimensions of the property and any significant topographical or physical features of the property. (3) The location, size use and arrangement including height in stories and feet and total square feet of ground area coverage and floor area of proposed buildings, including mobile homes, and existing buildings which will remain, if any. (4) Location, dimensions of all driveways, entrances, curb cuts, parking stalls, loading spaces and access aisles, and all other circulation elements including bike and pedestrian: and the total site coverage of all circulation dements. (5) Location, designation and total area of all common open space. (6) Location, designation and total area proposed to be conveyed or dedicated for public open space, including parks, playgrounds, school sites and recreational facilities. (7) Proposes: lots and blocks, if any and numbering system. (8) The location, use and size of structures and other land uses on adjacent properties. (9) Detailed sketches and provisions of proposed landscaping. (10) General grading and drainage plans for the developed PUD. (11) Any other information that may have been required by the Planning Commission or Council in conjunction with the approval of the general concept plan. (c) An accurate legal description of the entire area within the PUD for which final development plan approval is sought. (d) A tabulation indicating the number of residential dwelling units and expected population. (e) A tabulation indicating the gross square footage, if any, of commercial and industrial floor space by type of activity (e.g. drug store, dry c-eaning, supermarket). (t) Preliminary architectural "typical" plans indicating use, floor, plan, elevations and exterior wall finishes ,f proposed building, including mobile homes. (g) A detailed site plan, suitable for recording, showing the physical layout, design and purpose of all streets, easements, rights of way, utility lines and facilities, lotE, block, public and common open space, general landscaping plan, structure, including mobile homes, and uses. (h) Preliminary grading and site alteration plan illustrating changes to existing topography and natural site vegetation. The Plan should clearly reflect the site treatment and its conformance with the approved concept plan. (i) A preliminary plat prepared in accordance with the Subdivision Ordinance. (j) A soil erosion control plan acceptable to watershed districts, Department of Natural Resources, Soil Conservation Service, or any other agency with review authority clearly illustrating erosion control measures to be used during construction and as permanent measures. I'L; (6) Approximate area devoted to, and number of, off-street parking and loading spaces and related acces,,. (7) Approximate area, and floor area, devoted to commercial uses. (S) Approximate area, and floor area, devoted to industrial or office use. (h) When the PUD is to be constructed in stages during a period of time extending beyond a single construction season, i schedule for the development of such stages or units shall be submitted stating the approximate beginning and c- mpletion date for each such stage or unit and the proportion of the total PUD public or common open space and dwelling units to be provided or constructed during a-ch such state and overall chronology of development to be followed from stage to stage. (i) When the proposed PUD includes provisions for public _r common open space or service facilities, a statement describing the provision that is to be made for the ;are and maintenance of such open space or service facilities. (j) Any restrictive covenants that are to be recorded with respect to property included in the proposed PUD. (k) Schematic utilities plans indicating placement of water, sanitar;, and storm sewers. (1) The Cdty may excuse an applicant from submitting any specific item of information or document requireA in this stage which it finds to to unn, sary to the consideration of the spe is proposal. (m) The City may require the submission of any additional information or documentation which it may find necessary or appropriate to full consideration of the proposed Pt1D. (2) Location, type and extent of tree cover. (3) Slope analysis. (4) Location and extent of water bodies, wetlands and streams and flood plains within three hundred feet (3001) of the property. (5) significant rock outcroppings. (6) Existing drainage patterns. (7) vistas and significant views. (8) Soil conditions as they affect deve 1 opme,it . All of the graphics should be the same scale as the final plan to allow easy cross reference. The use of overlays is recommended for clear reference. (f) Schematic drawing of the proposed development concept including but not limited to the general location of major circulation elements, public and common open space, residential and other land uses. (g) A statement of the estimated total number of dwelling unity proposed for the PUD and a tabulation of the proposed approximate allocations of land use expressed in acres and as a percent of the total project area, which shall include at least the following: (1) Area devoted to residential uses. (2) Area devoted to residential use by building type. (3) Area devoted to common open space. (4) Area devoted to public open space. (5) Approximate area devoted to streets. 5. The City may request additional information from the applicant cone rning operational factors or retain expert testimony at the expense of the applicant concerning operational factors. 6. The council may hold a public hearing after the receipt of the report and recommendations from the Planning Commission. If the Planning Commission fails to make a report within sixty (60) days after receipt of the application, then the City Council may proceed without the report. The Council may approve the concept plan and attach such conditions as it deems reasonable. Approval shall require a four -fifths (4/5) vote of the entire Council. C. Development Stage: Following general concept approval, if given, the applicant shall submit the development stage application and final plat. The application shall Droceed and the acted upon in accordance with Section 10. _ .F for zoning district changes. If appropriate because of the limited scale of the proposal, the concept stage and development stages may proceed simultaneously. D. Applications: Ten ('o) copies cr the following exhibits, analysis a-d plans shall be submittea to the City: General Concept Stage: 1. Preliminary plat and information required by subdivision Title. 2. General Information: (a) The landown?r's name and address and hi-, interest in the subject property. (b) The applicant's name and address if different from the 1,-ndowner. (c) The names and addresses of all professional consultants who have contributed to the development of the PUD plan being submitted, including attorney, land planner, engineer and surveyor. (d) Evidence that the applicant has sufficient control over the subject property to effectuate the proposed PIIG, including a statement of all legal, beneficial, tenancy and contractual interests held in or affecting the subject property and including an up-to-date certified abstract of title or registered property report, and such ether evidence as the City Attorney may r,iq.;re to show the status of title or coi,trol of th- ^ul;ject property. 3. Present Status: (a) The address and legal description of the property. L) The existing zoning classification and present use of the subject property and al' lands within one thousand feet (.,0001) of the property. (c) A . z) depicting the existing development of the property and all land within ore thousand feet (1,000') trereof and indicating the location of existing streets, property lines, easements, water mains and storm and san.tary sewers, with invert elevations on and within one hundred feet (100') of the property. (:j) A written statement general describing the proposed PUD and the market which i` is intended to serv«t and itq, demand showing its relationship to the _'ity's Comprehensive Plan and how the proposed PUD is to be designed, arranged and operated in order to permit the development and ust of neighboring property in accordance with the a�plicabli regulations of the City. ( e ) Site Conditions: Graphic reprod ict ionas of the oxist ing site conditions at a scale of ors inch equals one hundred Bret (10 - 1001). (1) Contours; minimum two foot intervals. SEC. 10. PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (PUD) SECTION 10. .A: Authorization 10. .B: Allowed Uses 10.^.C: Required Standards 10. .D: Coordination With Subdivisic;n Regulations 10. .E: Revisions and/or Changes 10._.F: Phasing and Guarantee of Performance 10. .G: Control of Planned Unit Development Following Completion 10. .H: Procedure for Processing a Planned Unit Development SECTION 10._.A AUTHORIZATION: Planned unit development authorization may allow: Subd. 1. Variety: Within a comprehensive site design concept a mixture of land uses, housing types and dr:nsities. Subd. 2. Sensitivit., Through the departure from the strict application of required setbacks, yard areas, lot sizes, minimum house sizes, minimum requirements, and other performance standards associated with traditional zoning, planned unit development can maximize the development potential of land while remaining sensitive to its unique and valuable natural characteristics. Subd. 3. Effi,:iency: The consolidation of areas for recreation and reductions in street lengths and other utility related expenses. Subd. 4. Density Transfer: The project density may be clustered, basing density on number of units per acre versus specific lot dimensions. Subd. 5. District Integration: The combination of uses which are allowed in separate zoning districts such as: A. Mixed residential allows both densities and unit types to be varied within the project. 8. Mixed residential with increased density acknowledging the greater sensitivity of PUD projects, regulation provides increased density on the property if a PUD is utilized. C. Mixed land uses with the integration of compatible land uses within the project. L. External loading and service areas must be completely screened from the ground level view from contiguous residential or commercial properties and adjacent streets, except at access points. M. The light from automobile headlights and other sources shall be screened whenever it may be directed onto adjacent residential windows. SECTION 10. B ALLOWED USES Subd. 1. Used within the PUD may include only those uses generally considered associated with the general land use category shown for the area on the official Comprehensive Land Use Plan. Specific allowed uses and performance standards for each PUD shall be delineated in an ordinance and development plan. The PUD development plan shall identify all the proposed land uses and those uses shall become permitted uses with the acceptance of the development plan. Any change in list of uses presented in the development plan will be considered an amendment to the PUD and will follow the procedures specified in Section 10. .F of this Title. SECTION 10. .0 REQUIRED STANDARDS Subd. 1. The City shall consider the proposed PUD from the point of view of all standards and purposes of the Comprehensive Land use Plan to achieve a maximum coordination between the proposed development and the surrounding uses, the conservation of woodlands and wetlands, the protection of health, safety and welfare of the community and residents of the PUD. To these ends, *he City Council shall consider the location of the buildings, compatibility, parking areas and other features with respect to the topogradhy of the area and existing natural features such as streams and large trees; the efficiency, adequacy and safety of the proposed layout of internal streets and driveways; the adequacy and location of green area- :he adequacy, location and screening of parking area,; ind such other matters as the Council may find to Nava a material bearing upon the stated standards and objec'_ives of the Comprehensive Land Use Plan. SECTION 10. D COORDINATION WITH SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS Subd. 1. Subdivision review under the subdivision regulations shall be carried out simultaneously with the review of the PUD. The plans required under this Chapter shall be submitted in a form which will satisfy the requirements of the subdivision ordinance for the preliminary and final plat. SECTION 10. .E REVISIONS AND/OR CHANGES Subd. 1. Minor changes in the location, placement and height of structures may be authorized by the Development Review Committee if required by engineering or other circumstances not foreseen at the time the final plan was approved and filed with the Zoning Administrator. Subd. 2. Changes in uses, significant changes in the location, size, or height of structures, any rearrangement of lots, blocks and building tracts, changes in the provision of common open spaces, and all other changes to the approved final development plan may be made only after a public hearing conducted by the Council. Any changes shall be recorded as amendments to the recorded copy of the final development plan. Subd. 3. All of the provisions of this Title applicable to the original district within which the Planned Unit Development District is established shall apply to the PUD District except as otherwise provided in approval of the final plan. Subd. 4. Review: If substantial development has not occurred within a reasonable time after approval of the PUD Zoning District, the City Council may instruct the Planning Commission to initiate rezoning to the original zoning district. It shall not be necessary for the City Council to find that the rezoning was in error. SECTION 10. .F PHASING AND GUARANTEE OF PERFORMANCE Subd. 1. The Planning Commission shall compare the actual development accomplished in the various PUD zones with the approved development schedule. Subd. 2. Upon recommendation of the Planning Commission and for good cause shown by the property owner, the Council may extend the limits of the development schedule. Subd. 3. The construction and provision of all of the common open space and public anO. recreational facilities which are shown on the final development plan must proceed at the same i. s the construction of dwelling units, if any. The re% t Review Committee shall review all of the building issued for the PUD and examine the construction w,.. as taken place on the site. If they find that the i of construction of dwelling units is greater than the rate at which common open spaces and public and recreational facilities have been constructed and provided, they shall forward this information to the Council for action. Subd. 4. A performance bond or letter of credit shall be required to guarantee performance by the developer. The amount of this bond or letter of credit, and the specific elements of the development program that it is intended to guarantee, will be stipulated in the development agreement. SECTION 10._G CONTROL OF PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT FOLLOWING COMPLETION Subd. 1. After the certificate of occupancy has been issued, the use of the land and the construction, modification or alteration of any buildings or structures within the planned development shall be governed by the final development plan. Subd. 2. After the certificate of occupancy has been issued, no changes shall be made in the approved final development plan except upon application as provided below: A. Any minor extensions, alterations or modifications of existing buildings or structures may be authorized by the Development Review Committee if they are consistent with the purposes and intent of the final plan. No change authorized by this Section may increase the cube of any building or structure by more than ten percent (10%). B. Any building or structure that is totally or substantially destroyed may be reconstructed only in compliance with the final development plan unless and amendment to the final developent plan is approved under Section 10._.F. C. Changes in the use of the common open space may be authorized by an amendment to the final development plan under Section 10._.F. D. Any other changes in the final development plan must be authorized by an amendment of the final development plan under Section 10._.F. SECTION 10._.H PROCEDURE FOR PROCESSING A PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT Subd. 1. Application Conference: Upon filing of an application for PUD, the applicant of the proposed PUD shall arrange for and attend a conference with the Zoning Administrator. The primary purpose of the conference shall be to provide the applicant with an opportunity to gather information and obtain guidance as to the general suitability of his proposal for the area for which it is proposed and its conformity to the provisions of this Title before incurring substantial expense in the preparation of plans, surveys and other data. Subd. 2. General Concept Plan A. Purpose: The general concept plan provides an opportunity for the applicant to submit a plan to the City showing his basic intent and the general nature of the entire development without incurring substantial cost. The pla.i shall include the following: 1. Overall maximum PUD density range. 2. General location of major streets and pedestrian ways. 3. General location and extent of public and common open space. 4. General location of residential and nonresidential land uses with approximate type and intensities of development. 5. Staging and time schedule of development. 6. Other special criteria for. development. B. Schedule: 1. Developer meets with the Zoning Administrator to discuss the proposed developments. 2. The applicant shall file the concept stage application and preliminary plat, together with all supporting data. 3. Within thirty (30) days after verification by the Zoning Administrator that the required plan and supporting data is adequate, the Planning Commission shall hold a public hearing. 4. The Planning Commission shall conduct the hearing and report its findings and make recommendations to the City Council. Notice of the hearing shall consist of a legal property description, description of request, and be published in the official newspaper at least ten (10) days prior to the hearing and written notification of the hearing shall be mailed at least ten (10) days prior thereto to owners of land within three hundred fifty feet (3501) of the boundary of the property in question. A. Any accessory use as regulated in the "B-1" Business District. Subd. 6. Area, Height, Lot Width, Setback Requirements and Design Requirements. The following minimum requirements shall be observed subject to additional requirements and exceptions contained in Section _ of this Title. A. Lot Area B. C. 0 E. two acres Lot Width 100 ft. Setback - Principal Structure Front Yard Side Interior Side Street Rear Yard 30 (35)* ft. 10 (35) ft. 30 (35) ft. 30 (35) ft. Setback - Accessory Structure Front Yard 30 (35)* ft. Side Interior 10 (35) ft. Side Street 30 (35) ft. Rear Yard 30 (35) ft. Setback - Parking Front 15 (20) ft. Side Interior 5 (10) ft. Street Side 10 (15' ft. Rear Yard 10 (1U) ft. Setbacks in parentheses apply adjacent to all residential districts. *30 feet or 1 1/2 times the building height whichever is greater. F. Drainage. No land shall be developed and no use shall be permitted that results in water runoff causing floods, erosion, or deposits on adjacent properties. Site and drainage plans shall be submitted by the applicant in such detail as required by the Council and those plans shall be reviewed by the City Engineer before submission to the Planning Commission and Council for approval. Such runoff may be required to be properly channeled into a natural water course, ponding area, storm drain or other public facilities. Any change in grade affecting water runoff whether onto adjacent property o= otherwise must be in compliance with the Surface Water Management Plan and shall be consistent with other applicable regulations or City Code provisions and subject to the approval of other agencies having jurisdiction over the area affected by the drainage. G. Height. No structure or building shall exceed 2-1/2 stories or thirty feet in height except as provided in Section 10.75. H. At least twenty five percent (25%) of the '.and area shall be landscaped with grass, approved ground cover, shrubbery and trees. At least three percent (3%) of the land area within a parking area shall be landscaped. The following minimum sizes shall be required at the time of planting: Overstory Deciduous Trees Ornamental Trees Coniferous Trees Major Shrub Plantings 2-1/2 inches in diameter 1-112 inches in diameter 6 feet tall 5 gallons I. All trash and trash handling equipment shall be stored within the principal structure, within an attached structure accessible from within the principal structure, or totally screened from eye -level view from public streets and adjacent residential properties. If accessory structures are proposed, they shall be constructed of the same building material as the principal structure and be readily servad through swinging doors. 7. Garages, accessory structures, screen walls and exposed areas of retaining walls shall be of similar type, quality and appearance as the principal structure. <. The ground level view of all mechanical utilities shall be completely screened from contiguous properties and adjacent streets, or designed to be compatible with the architectural treatment of the principal structure. SEC. 10.45 B-6 HIGHWAY COMMERCIAL DISTRICT Subd. 1. Purpose. the purpose of the HC Highway Commercial District is to provide a commercial district specifically tailored to accomplish the commercial development objectives of the Highway 12 Corridor Study Section of the Orono Comprehensive Plan. Subd. 2. Application. All applicants for a building permit in any "B-6" Highway Business District shall be reviewed by the Council and referred to the Planning Commission for review. Subd. 3. Permitted Uses. Within any "B-6" Highway Business District, no structure or land shall be used except for one of the following uses or uses deemed sim'.' r by the Council. A. Offices (business and professional). B. Banks and financial institutions. C. Libraries. D. Motels, and hotels. E. Restaurants (Class I). Subd. 4. Relationship with Chapter 10. _ Planned Unit Development. Other types of commercial uses and mixed use developments may be applied for through the piann,:J unit development process. Applications that ii,lude commercial uses within the Highway 12 Corridor shall assume the B-, District as the underlying zoning district. Subd. 4. Conditional Use A. Within. any "B-6" Highway Business District, no structure or land shall be used for one of the following uses except by conditional use permit: 1. Any business that includes a drive-thru function. Subd. 5. Accessory Uses. Within any "B-6" Highway Business District, the following uses shall be permitted accessory uses: 2. All subsequent additions and outbuildings constructed after the erection of an original building or buildings shall be constructed of materials comparable to those used in the original construction and shall be designed in a manner conforming with the original architectural design and general appearance. 3. No building or structure of a temporary character, trailer, basement, tent or shack shall be constructed, placed or maintained upon the property except as accessory to and during the construction of permanent buildings. G. Requirement of Development Agreement All development permits uthorized within the Highway 12 Corridor Study Area shall be subject to the execution of a development agreement. Said development agreement shall clearly identify the timing of all of the public improvements associated with the development and the developers' financial commitments related to these improvements. The agreement shall also include any and all other conditions of approval deemed necessary to insure compliance with the Special Minimum Requirements for Rezoning the Highway 12 Corridor Study Area, as well as the goals and objectives of the Highway 12 Corridor Study. SEC. 10 ._ SPECIAL REQUIREMENTS FOR REZONING IN THE HIGHWAY 12 CORRIDOR STUDY AREA. A. Minimum Area To insure consistency with the goals and objectives of the Highway 12 Corridor Study, applications for rezoning within the study area must include a minimum of five acres. The plans submitted along with these applications mist also include enough information regarding the effect of the proposed development on surrounding parcels to insure that the. property can be developed in a manner that is both compatible with adjacent properties and consistent with the Highway 12 Corridor Study. B. Access and Circulation Plan The plans submitted along with the application must propose access to the proposed development which is consistent with the Transportation Planning objectives of the Highway 12 Corridor Study. All public easements and road right of way that is needed to allow the construction of service roads and/or the expansion of Trunk Highway 12 past the subject property, shall be dedicated to the City. C. Sanitary Sewer Availability The available sanitary sewer capacity to serve the development of this corridor is currently very limited. Therefore, any plans to develop within this area must either demonstrate that it can occur utilizing current sewer allocations or they must include improvements to increase the capacity of the systems serving this area. If sanitary sewer system improvements are proposed as part of the application, then the feasibility of providing this service wil. also be scrutinized along with an improvement financing plan to insure that the costs associated with providing this additional capacity will be paid for by the development. D. Storm Water Management Site Drainage plans must be submitted to insure consistency with the storm water management objectives of the Highway 12 Corridor Study. Plans will be carefully reviewed to insure both that proposed storm water ponding areas contain sufficient storage capacity and whatever addit onal measures are nk:cessary to guarantee that the gLaiity of runoff from the site, meets or exceeds the City's standards. E. Available Zoning Districts Due to the unique set of constraints and opportunities that effect future decisions regarding development within the Highway 12 Corridor Study Area, applicants for rezoning are strongly encouraged to utilize the planned unit development approach, outlined in Sec. 10. of the Orono Zoning Ordinance. However, applications will be accepted for rezoning requests for any of the following existing zoning districts within the City, consistent with a finding of consistency with the Highway 12 Corridor Study and subject to compliance with all of the additional requirements established in this section: HC Highway Commercial District. PRD Planned Residential Development R1A One Family Residential District RIB One Family Residential District M6 Multiple Family Planned Residential District F. Building Design and Construction In addition to other restrictions of this Chapter, the use, construction, alteration or enlargements to any build:.na or structure within the district small meet the following standards: 1. All exterior wall finishes on any building shall be: (a) Face brick, or (b) Natural stone, or (c) Specially designed precast concrete units if the surfaces have been integrally treated with an applied decorative materials or texture, or (d) Factory fabricated and panel construction, if of any of those noted above, or glass. (e) Other materials as may Council. Combinations be permitted. finished metal framed the panel materials be in items a, b and c be approved by the of such materials shall 53 A11rA4-1"+A C'U -1 4 TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Mark Bernhardson, City Administrator DATE: June 22, 1988 SUBJECT: Zoning Ordinance Amendment - Highway 12 Corridor Attachment: A. Zoning Ordinance Amendment Drafts Prepared by John Shardlowl^ B. Council Minutes Nxepr`t Dated 5/23/88 ISSUE - 1. Acceptance of initial draft work by Shardlow as authorized on May 23, 1988 together with referral of these drafts to the Planning Commission for their consideration. INTRODUCTION - As noted in Attachment B the Council authorized contracting with John Shardlow to undertake the necessary ordinance amendments to implement the Highway 12 Corridor study. Attachment A ref lects the work he has done to date and the next step would be submission of these draft ordinances to the Planning Commission for their review. DISCUSSION - The process for zonir ordinance review as you are r�am iZar with, requires either initiation of the Planning Commission or referral by the Council. If initiated by the Council, the Planning Commission has a responsibility to review and make a recommendation. If however none is forthcoming after 69 days the Council then has the right to consider it without Planning Commission recommendation. Presently certain property owned in the corridor are interested in submitting their proposals for as least initial review. Any work and approval of these plans would await the completion of the Corridor Zoning Amendments. Development of Zoning amendments or at least the portions that are or would be applicable to their property will be closely followed by these individuals. The structure is such that it provides for an "unbrella" section incoprorating the preconditions for zoning. (Transportation, sewer, water, etc. as outlined in the comp plan amendment) and then incorporates much of the existing districts as the actual zoning with additions of a Highway Business District and PUD. Inclusion of existing zoning standards under this umbrella should minimize the extent of needed review to the "umbrella" section, the new two zoning sections and any special zoning provisuions applicable to thir corridor. ALTERNATIVES 1. irec the submission of %Aese drafts t', t^p Planninj Commission for their review and recommendation. 2. Amend and refer. 3. gable for further Council discussion. 4. Take no action. RECOMMENDATION - It is recommended that these be referred to the Planning Commission for their review and recommendation. It is anticipated that the Planning Commission will have the opportunity to conduct a work session with John Shardlow on July 6, 1988 to review background on performance zoning and the Corridor Study. It is tnen anticipated that the Planning Commission will consider further work on this and that a publi': hearing in relationship to these be held perhaps at the August 1, 1988 meeting if appropriate progress has been mad*. It is additionally recommended that the Council direct the Planning Commissionthat their review of this mat-er is to entail a recommendation on the zoning ameroments needed to the Corridor Study. PROPOSED MOTION - Moved by seconded by , that the Council refer the drafts prepared by Jahn Shardlow to the Planning Commission fer their consideration and recommendation and that they be directed to undertake the review of the ordinances as to to i.nplement the Compreheisive Plan following appropriate meeting(s) with John Shardlow. Ayes Nays _- cc: Planning Commission Members John Shardlow 19 10688.5 TO: Mayor and City Council lROM: Mark E. Bernhardson, City Administrator, DATB: October 6, 1988 SOBJBCT: Comprehensive Plan Zoning Amendment Attachments: A. Zoning Ordinance Amendment - Highway 12 Dated 6/22/88 B. Draft Ordinance - Revised ISSUE - Presentation of introductory Lemarks regarding the zoning amendment to implement the Comprehensive Plan Study. INTRODUCTION - At the Council's May 23, 1988 Council meeting the City had engaged John Shardlow to undertake the development of an ordinance to implement the city's Comprehensive Management Plan. The original draft was presented to the Council as Attachment A, and was initially heard by the Planning Commission at their meeting on July 18, 1988 and on a 3 to 2 vote adopte,-: by the Commission at their September 19, 1983 meeting. DISCUSSION - The new draft of the zoning amendment is presented for your consideration at this time, as John Shardlow will be able to be present to indicate concerns the Planning Commission had and how they have been addressed together with being available for any questions you, as a Council, may have regarding the introduction. ALTERNATIVES 1. Adopt the ordinance as presented. 2. Amend and adopt. 3. Table for further discussion. 4. Take no action. RECOMMENDATION - As the document is fairly extensive and is a lg in Cicant policy item the staff recommends that this be tabled for a minimum of two weeks in order to a11ow the Council to more fully study the matter, to discuss any further concerns or issues they have with it and that it then be taken for action at either the October 24 or November 14th meering. (At present the Rebers' plan, while following the guidelines contained in the ordinance, is actually proceeding under the current set of ordinances.) PROPOSED MOTION - Moved by , seconded by , that the Council table the matter until at lea_st October 24. 1988. Ayes _, Nays cc: John Shardlow 1 COMPARISON OF PRD/PID/PUD ATTACHMENT B PRD Type of Land Use Limited to Residential Density Same density but allows actual lot size flexibility Implementation Conditional Use Permit Platting Related to subdivision Goals Open space Design :ontrol Limtied to land configuration PID PUD Limited to Allows flexibility Industrial for all types of land use as outlined by Council in the Ordinance including mixed use Same as PRD Depends on standards set. Currently the most closely associated zoning district. C ional Use Rezoning Permit Can be independent Related to of subdivision subdivision Best property fit Best design to fit the City objectives and land topography Limited to land Allows standard from configuration desing manual plus negotiated design controls 9 Council desires and directions. RECOMMENDATION - The following recommendations are presented: A. SPECIAL REpUIREMENTS - Inclusion of a broader ------------------- Planned Development as an authorized approach in this zone. B. B6 COMMERCIAL - Leave as is with uses apart from those listed to be taken under a Planned Development ordinance. C. PLANNED DEVELOPMENT - 1. PLANNED DEVELOPMENT - Conceptual review and approval. 2. PRD/PUD/PID - Adoption of broader Planned Development ordinance with repeal of the PRD. PID and MFPRD because greater design control gains, vote required and the fact that it is a legislative rather than a ministered act. 3. DENSITY - Limitation in the unsewered areas for the PUD to prior existing densities. As for sewered areas this would be a density established by the Council based on Comprehensive Plan. Any increase .n density is subject to the applicant demonstrating there is no adverse impact together with a benefit to the City. u. CRITERIA - Standards to be applied would be included from the applicable zoning ordinance as modified and delinated in the rezoning together with a project specific development design manual based on a City developed generic framework out lining issues to be addressed and levels of detail. 5. MINIMUM ACREAGE - It iz recommended that the minimum acreage be left at 5 acres. 6. PROCESS - That the process De clarified to take into account Council and staff issues related to this matter. 7 It is further recommended that the Council based on these discussions directs staff to further define the ordinance and bring back an ordinance in line with direction given this evening. PROPOSED MOTION - Moved by —• seconded by that the Council having given staff direction on the matter request that it be incorporated in the Planned Development ordinance amendment for review at the Council's December 12. 1988 meeting. Ayes Nays cc: John Shardlow Jeanne Mabusth Michael Gaffron 9 1. Planned Development Concept - The principal concept underlying a Planned Development ordinance is to allow a City Council increased control on the type of development allowed in an area. Additionally it allows more flexibility as to direction it can undertake in land use. Any such development would need to be in line with the City's Comprehensive Plan goals and objectives. The City's current zoning code incorporates a Planned Residential Development (PRD), a Planned Industrial Development (PID) and an M6 Multiple Family Planned Residential (MFPRD), all of which are forms of planned development with reference to specific uses. For Orono, the bulk of uses are covered by those with commercial and mixed use the only exception. The present PRD and PID's however do not afford the amount of control that a more universal Planned Development zoning would allow. The concept avoids the cookie cutter approach of traditional zoning and allows proposals to take into account the needs of the community and the opportunities and limitations on a property. 2. PU_D/PRD/PID Co-1pari3on3 - The Council requested, as part of the discussion of this matter, a comparison of the present PRD's and the proposed PUD approach. Pertinent to the comparison is the Planned Industrial District (PID) ordinance the City has in its zoning code. As noted above the present PRD and PID are "subsets" of a PUD. The difference between these present types of PUD's and the proposal is outlined in Attachment 2. The present PRD is not a rezoning, but only a CUP which requires "Council Approval" which could be as minimal as 2 to 1 on a night with three Councilpersons are in attendance. The PID is similiar to the PRD. Both of these are to allow more flexibility within each of the underlining zones but no more control of development. any proposal that would hp•e a use or a density different than existing zonir juld require a rezoning in the same manner that you ..ould have rezoning to a Planned Development as proposed. Ire proposed amendment not only generalizes the uses of the "Planned" approach, it requires an actual rezoning and would require a 4/5's vote in order for it to be implemented similar to the current M-6 MFPRD. The advantage to this approach is not only that it requires an extraordinary majority of the Council to approve, but also it is a legislative act whi:h the Courts allow more discretion as to the decision by the Council than they would in a ministerial or administrative act that might be found in a "CUP". In order to condition any development as part of a CUP it must reasonably relate to the specific conditions listed under the CUP. This is not a limitation for a rezoning. Issues related to this are addressed below. The degree of flexibility allowed is subject to type of benefits gained by the rezoning. The burden of p-oof for a development is on the applicant for a rezoning does not adversely effect the community but is a benefit to the City. Alternatives 1. Adopt a broader Planned Development repealing PRD, PID and MFPRD sections. 2. Adopt a broader Planned Development leaving PRD, PID and MFPRD in place. 3. Leave PRD, PID and MFPRD as they are. 4. Combination thereof. 3. PROJECT DENSITY/AREAS FOR APPLICATION - As presented at the October 10. 1988 Council meeting the draft density was subject to the most closely associated district. For PRD's and PID's as presently incorporated in the Ordinance they were tied as an overlay district Into the underlining zoning. A Planned Development ordinance can be adopted in a various ways to address the density issues. Alternatives 1. Planned Development Ordinance with no density requirements. 2. Planned Development Ordinance subject to most closely associated district. 3, PUD only in selectea areas. a) sewered b) delinated areas 4 c) prior districts limitation 4. _DEVELCPMENT CRITERIA - The proposed ordinance as currently drafted references the most closely associated district for standards. Depending on the direction of the Council as to where and how density is applied the other standards will be made applicable in a similar manner. =n additioonn to the base requirements of the zoning code, through review process additional controls Z.*se would be included in a "project specific" design manual that becomes an additional requirement to be met by the development. (The City could have a generic framework developed to indicate issues and level of detail to be addressed in project specific w nual.) ALTERNATIVES 1. Criteria from other zoning standards. 2. Standards based on prior zoning/or most closely related use. 3. "Project specific" design manual development as part of developer's agreement based on a City developed generic framework for a Planned development specifying issues and level of detail. 5. MINIMUM ACREAGE - The minimum acreage to be brought in for development under a PUD was initially drafted at 5 acres. This parallels the 5 acre minimum found in the PID and MFPRD ordinance. This means that parcels of larger size can be brought in for development, but that smaller parcels under 5 acres cannot be used under the PUD ordinance. The density witlin this 5 acre minimum would be subject to Council c.ec13ion as to how to approach density and use. ALTERNATIVES A. Leave at 5 acres. B. Decrease. C. fncraase. SPOT ZONING - Related to the issue of minimum acreage is the issue of spot zoning. While to some degree this is in the eye of the beholder, the City has approved zoning areas as small as 1 acre. (Casco Run office property on Shoreline Drive.) 6. PROCESS AND REVIEW - While the process for PUD involves the staff in a more significant role than the current PRD or current PID does, the process also allows early Council involvement into significant design issues that would would not be under the purview of the Council in a standard rezoning or under the current PRD/PID setup in the ordinances. ALTERNATIVES 1. Further delinate the process. 2. Revise the process to meet Council goals. 7. FUTURE COUNC*LS - This issue was raised by both Planning Commission and Council. To the extent that the zoning and the zoning amendment require a 4/5's vote as does a Comprehensive Plan Amendment there is nothing that precludes a future Council (cr for that matter this Council) from altering the direct_on and utilization of these ordinances or similar types of ordinances or ordinances of greater concern based on following the appropriate process. The Council's implementation of a Planned Development will need to be within the scope of the City's Comprehensive Plan Amendment goals and objectives. Should this Council not adopt a broader Planned Development ordinance, future Council's could, rezor.e a property by the same vote that is required to adopt a Planned Development ordinance or rezone a piece of property to a Planned Development zoning. ALTERNATIVES - i Do not adopt a broader Planned Development ordinance. 2. Adopt a Planned Development that reflects 6 p32 l •.:..i.+.. 1 7t R.23 o ECElYE 1/1 11/%lost `` 31 i C Ttf or nOMM Gas ''a ` K�,,,;��r• �• ` l+r \ �41rr tip .� y S` ` i• Is/ w � � ... a�'o+t �+' , 'y 8 0 nri • �� PP�LyQ "r7 r ,M .. I. a ..r.. _ ....r a to.lit IN iA 10 519 ;'`, t � .t • T i jt Q' ..I ys I i y.a Yrl; to A//**Ar To' (CRYSTAL SAY) ••. i .ice• /1� ���� Imo' • /\ v(� ��;t'tt.w.,, +• • �.. .T�+ 'w 1 M.,.��, " 1 ) I »._ ~ ,h ��t�•' - Y ' r *}. ';-i . i �'f.�t. �_•Tlr' �f� , ,,.t r r• a • `' .y► t� ;I`'�� A - �i�Z: j��'. L'y°�tl� +l�• I f (f) I v •�1f,q Q � • •j� � � ♦h�> �•• Q �i'" , i� `.' Ns� `j t' � T ... w Ul I ; I • .. •f i �• � �1 t� A. • P' t�• �.. •+• i w.. '" , , yN.li _ � :_� tt• ravel Z �� .•' 4 -i ii `. iolda ��IiI/ t. • I i . . La I . .e�D tort 1--4•rr r .. sLow r rt..ri.. Mrt� LwM+.. •W t•wt � tu.� fir•• . �{N OA/t tll/t8/88 HENIIfPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORMA'I011 SYSTEM REPORT lK). PI433401 1958 TAX BOOK 38 OROlIO TAX LEVY/DESCRIPTIUBI HMSTOPRTYP RATE AMOUIIT 104-HON0 1EAP GEN TAX LAND BLDG MACH OWN% BASF1 BASE2 NHBASE NON-HMST N L 108.589 573.34 13,200 TOTAL TAX 513.34 5,280 TOTAL PAID .00 AMT UtIPAID 573.34 OIJfR MORT CODE/LOAII • TAXPAYER NAME/AOORESS ESCROW NAME/ADDRESS AOOITION NAME LOT BLK PLAT PARCEL PROPERTY I.O. METES AID B(IUIDS ACREAGE SCH WTR SEW PROPERTY ADDRESS SlI TWP PG QQ SUFX • DST SHn DST BAIBCA MIPRIESOTA CO CAIBOA 111NIIESOTA 1:0 TONIISITE OF LANGDOII PARK 003 009 42420 4420 17-117-23 34 0008 5311 TOPAHGA BLVO STE 300 000.00 271 3 3700 SIIOPELI14E OR WOOOLAID HILLS CA 91364 STATUS: CURRENT THAT PART OF LOT 3 LYING N OF 5 250 FT THEREOF CONSTRUCTION YEAR TAXABLE tIARKET 41,330 QUALIFYING AMT .00 DIVISION I10 r TAXABLE ASSESSO 16,520 FO SHARED ASSO DIVISION DATE RENTAL TAX FD AREA RATE .000 SEE ID S IF PROJ AMT IF PROJECT 110. TAX LEVY/DESCRIPTION HMSTOPRTYP RATE AMOUNT ti(I11-HOMESTEAD GEN TAX N L LAND B'')G MACH OWN% BASE BASE2 INBASE NON-HMST 108.589 16793.88 41.300 09C86 NAVARRE ITIL IMP 62-IB 990.38 16,520 09087 IIAVARRE STREET IMP 82.2 2.420.98 TOTAL TAX 5,205.24 TOTAL PAID .00 AMT UNPAID 5,205.24 CY44ER MORT CODE/LOAN R ,AAPA,ER NAilf/ADDRESS ESCROW NAME/ADDRESS ADDITION IIAME LOT BLK PLAT PARCEL. PROPERTY I.O. ` METES ACID BOUIDS !-^ AGE SCH WTR SEW PROPERTY ADI)WL�S SN TWP RG QQ SUFX DST SLID DST CHARLOTTE JUSTER ET AL LEONARD T JUSTER T014151TE OF LAIIGOON PAWK 004 009 42420 4455 17-117-23 34 0009 3412 OAK RIDGE RO 000.00 277 3 MIIRIETOfl(A 114 55343 STATUS: C')PRENT W 6 FT CONSTRUCTION YEAR TAXABLE MARKET 2.200 QUALIFYING AMT .00 DIVISION ILO EARLIEST OELQ YR - 84 TAXABLE ASSE550 880 FO SHARED ASSD OIVISI011 DATE RENTAL TAX FO AREA RATE .000 SEE ID S IF PROJ AMT IF PROJECT INI. TAX LEVY/DESCRIPTION HMSTOPRTYP RATE AMOUNT NON -HOMESTEAD GEN TAX 11 LAID BLDG MACH OWII% BASEI BASE2 NHBASE N014-HMST L 108.589 95.54 2.200 09086 NAVARRE ITIL IMP 82-IB 38.02 880 09087 NAVARRE STREET IMP 82-2 92.86 TOTAL TAX 226.42 - ^Iqp 0?88.: Hp r Tps Mark E. Bernhardson, City Administrator •lint *�= John R. Gerhardson, Public Works Director -'Ou 1 ,{ Dates November 23, 1988 OF Subjects Equipment Purchase Public Works For 1988 the Public Works Street Department budgeted for two hydraulic sanders for olir one ton pi•::k-ui�a. We have receie-0 two quotes as follows: MacQueen Equipment Company $2,249.00 Boyum Equipment Company 2,480.00 RSCO ffZ _AT10N - To purchase two hydraulic sanders from MacQueen Equipment Comyany for an &mauf:t of $2,249.00 each. PRO OSED MOrJON - Moved by , seconded by , to purchase two hydraulic sanders from MacQueen Equi;went Company for an amount of $2,249.00 each. Ayes , nays _- Tot Mayor Grabek i Orono Council Members Front Mark E. Bernhardson, City Administrator Forwarded recommending approval. The monies to purchase the two sanders will be paid from the 1988 Equipment Outlay Fund. 1\-eIr DAIS t-+rh'�S �. -- 1909 ,lantlary 1989 February 1989 S IAA tiN 1 F ;) S M T W T F S March 1989 April 111E1�) 1 �3 4 �; G 7 S M T W T F S S M T W T F S 11 12 13 14 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 15 Ilk (I, 7� 10 141 ?0 21 5 G � 8 9 10 11 5 G � p 9 10 11 1 22 ���j ,'4 25 21; 27 2(1 12 15 16 17 18 12 14 15 16 17 18 2 3 4� 5 6 7 0 19 1 22 23 24 25 9 11 12 13 14 1 �i 29 :10 1 26 28 19 20 21 2L 23 24 25 1 G 18 19 20 21 22 26 28 29 30 31 23 25 26 27 28 29 I 30 Orly S I� W 1909 'I F ;' June 1909 3 �1 5 G S M T W T F S 7 i 9 10 11 12 13 4� 7 1 8 2 9 3 10 14(1 211001 16 17 S13 24 111 19 `'�' :'G 20 21 1113 14 15 16 17 20 '' :�Q 31 1020 21 22 23 24 2592720 29 30 Seplemhor 1989 S M 11 I F 3 101i1 12 13 1415 1(,)17 1 19 20 .� 1 22 23 241 ;'G 27 2i1 ;'9 3O October 1989 S M T W T F S 1 2^ 4 5 6 7 8 10 11 12 13 14 15 17 10 19 20 21 221 24 25 26 27 20 29 30 31 July 1989 S M T W T F S 2 5 6 .7 8 9 1�12 13 14 15 16 7 18 19 20 21 22 �3 1 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 November k 1989 S M T W T F S 5 6 C 0 9-M 11 12 UM 14 15 16 17 18 19 21 28 22 29 X>Q 30 25 Atiousl 1989 S M W T F S 2 3 4 5 6 9 10 it 12 13 15 16 17 10 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 8293031 December 19B9 S M l- W T- r. c 1 3 4 [i 7 8 (J 10 U 12 13 14 15 16 17 10 19 20 21 22 23 24 31 X 26 27 20 29 30 UIPIA il. VIVO,, r t Tot Mark E. Bernhardson, City Administrator Frost: Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building & Zoning Administratcr Dates November 22, 1988 Subject: Planning Commission Schedule for 1989 The Orono Planning Commission unanimously approved the proposed schedule of meetings for the 1989 season. Staff would recommend that you present the 1989 calendar of meetings for Council's final review and approval. To: Mayor and City Council FROM: Mark E. Bernhardson. City Administrato t� Forwarded re(-ommending approval. 111788.4 TO: Mark E. Bernhardson, City Administrator FROM: Tom Kuehn, Finance Director �;^":�' �'� �1 1 3 D11?Es November 17, 1988 Nt?'•4 nr ov— SUBJECT: Uncollectable NSF Checks 1988 Attachment: Resolution to Declare Certain Checks Uncollectable and Removing them from the City Accounts The attached rezolution lists the two Uncollectable N.S.F. cheeks from the Golf Course operation for 1938, which total $36.50. These should be written off at this time. TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Mark E. Bernhardson, City Admin.strato o)'',- Forwarded recimmf !g approval. PROPOSED MOTION - Moved by , seconded by , to adopt Resolution t declaring certain N.S.F. checks uncol lectable and removing them from the City accounts effective November 30, 1988. Ayes Nays _ 111788.5 A RESOLUTION DECLARING CERTAIN CHECKS UNCOLLECTABLE AND REMOVING THEM FROM THE CITY ACCOUNTS As of November 30, 1988, the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota hereby declares the following checks uncollectable and directs the removal of same from the appropriate City accounts. Golf Course Fund Richard M. Elstad, Realtor $ 11.50 Recovery Plus 25.00 TOTAL $ 36.50 i Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota, at a regular meeting held November 28, 1988. James R. Grabek, Mayor ATTEST: Dorothy M. Hallin, City Clerk 112288.1HD To: Mayor Grabek & Orono Council Members From: Mark E. Bernhardson, City Administrato lvl�'J' Date: Novamber 22► 1988 Subject: Police Service Contracts 1989 ATTACHMENTS - A. City of Minnetonka Beach/City of Orono Police Service Agreement B. City of Spring Park/City of Orono Police Service Agreement C. City of Long Lake/City of Orono Police Service Agreement ISSUE - Adoption of contracts with the cities for police service in 1989. INTRODUCTION - The individual Councils together with Orono had adopted the police service budget based on the original recommendation. The police contract for 1989 is just an update for the most part with the financial data with some minor amendments that were housekeeping that were incorporated for the 1989 contract. 1987 was the first of a three year contract. RECOMMENDATION - It is recommended that the attached contracts be fox lally adopted for police service for the three communities by the City of Orono for 1989. PROPOSED MOTION: Moved by �, seconded by , that the Council approved the individual contracts with Minnetonka Beach, Spring Park, and Long Lake for police service for 1989. Ayes , nays cc: Melvin Kilbo, Chief of Police City of Spring Park City of Minnetonka Beach `:ity of Long Lake AGREEMENT AND CC` I-R\CT ?CR '.,\W 3YPCRC MEy^' -4TS AGRSEMENT AND CONTRACT ma,?e and Into `nia day of by and C:'^.' 0. :.:CNC, :•tlnnesota anc _ce C:71 CF 57'. _"G ?;??, is -ace under and by virtue of Minnesota Statutes 1965, Section 471.59. .4I TNBSSBTB : WBBRBAS, the City of Spring Park is desirous of contracting with the City of Orono for the performance of law enforcement services within the City of Spring Park, and WHEREAS, the City of Orono is agreeable to render law enforcement services on the terms and conditions hereinafter set forth, and MHERBAS, a contract such as this is authorized under and by virtue of the provisions of Minnesota Statutes 1965, Section 471.59, NOW, TBBREFORB, the City of Orono agrees that it will provide law enforcement services for the City of Spring Park on the following terms and conditions and the City of Spring Park agrees as follows: 1. Definition of terms. For the purpose of this Agreement, the terms in this section shall have the meanings given to them. A. "Contract year" means a 12 month period during which law enforcement services are to be rendered or were rendered to the City of Spring Park by the City of Orono. The contract year shall commence on Jaiivary 1 and terminate on the next December 31. B. "Contracting Cities" means any city which is a party to this contract or a similar contract which by its terms is interrelated with this contract for the purposes of determining total cost for the contracting cities, which are Orono, and Long Lake, and Minnetonka Beach, �.nd Spring Park. C. "City of Orono Police Budget" shall include all preliminary estimated and actual costs of operating the Police Department of the City of Orono for a given contract ;:ear, including but not limited to: Page 1. all insurance costs including ?ERA, GAS:, 'dorkers Comtensation Liabilit,..,. All Salaries, fr4_nce bene=ics, overtime. 3. All costs of equipment and apparatus acquisition and maintenance. 4. All non -prosecution consulting fees. 5. Holiday and severance Fay. 6. Unemployment benefits paid. 7. Utilities. 8. Telephone Service. 9. Gasoline and oil for police cars. 10. Books and periodicals. 11. Wearing apparel and bedding. 12. officer equipment. 13. Rental costs or estimated fair market rental value of building. 14. All other expenses normally and reasonably incidental to the operation of a ten officer, Chief included, police department. 15. Administrative overhead charge of 10% of all the above costs. 16. Contract charge of 6% of the net budget (budget and administrative overhead charge less town aid credit) divided among the contracting parties excluding the City of Orono. Page 2 2'1b :.naQenaz_L^. ^-r,- c-1 na 1-ak—?-'Iinns-_-_n!! a Beach -Spring Park Police Department" shall be affixed to the side al .,c I ..i ed h,r �:,o - ..n 'J.. -n7 r,�,..�.. .wp..♦ _,r,!er bhp -erms of t^:s ac: Bement and e Cat: Jc _ sac s::a 1 _-a'1se the designation of "Orono -Long La{e-M nnetonka beach -Spring Park Police Department" to be inserted in the appropriate telephone directories as may be distributed in the contracting cities. If another city contracts with the Cit.1 of Orono for service, its name may also be added to the above. 3. Level of Services. The level of services rendered to the City of Spring Park shall be the same as the services rendered to the City of Orono, except as hereinafter stated. There shall be three additional officers, identified as individuals, who when on duty shall be stationed within the City of Long Lake. These officers will respond to all necessary calls within the contracting cities, but their priority will be the City of Long Lake. There shall be four additional officers, identified as individuals, who when on duty shall be stationed within the City of Spring Park. These officers will respcnd to all necessary calls within the contracting cities, but their priority will be the City of Spring Park. 4. Administrative Responsibility. The law enfor.ement services rendered to the City of Spring Park shall be .der the sole direction of the City of Orono. The degree of services rendered, the standards of performance, the hiring and discipline of the officers assigned, ane Ether matters relating to regulations and policies, shall remain in the control of the City of Orono. Any disputes between the parties to this agreement as to the extent of functions and duties to be rendered hereunder, or the level or manner of performance of such service, shall be resolved by the City Administrator of the City of Orono. If the City of Spring Park disagrees with the resolution, the City of Spring Park may appeal within thirty days upon written notice of the resolution to the City of Orono asking for arbitration, as provided in paragraph 15B. The City Administrator of the City of Orono shall submit to the City of Spring Park a monthly report of services rendered to the City of Sorinq Park as well as suggestions :. o •ar• -` arcs `i a' �a . tiP • ••` _� Page 3 nese r-?r(-r-_3 •d-:i :ons_4s- 3Z zcn_4cS :- :ur?au Cr-m -naI Apprehension Criminal Justice Information summaries for law �a-.:gas _ .n.:__a. -•,-: - -- These reports shal- Ze sent -t:._n .sevan (7, days of racy -,r cy the City of Orono. 5. Jo?.^.t Ad,risor- Committer Each contracting city may annoint two volunteer memters to a joint advisory committee and the name of such appointees shall be furnished to the City of Orono Administration. These members shall be voting residents of each community. The Joint Advisory Committee shall meet the third Wednesday of each month to discuss and make recommendations, hear all evidence and arguments it deems relevant and shall make !-ritten recommendations for solutions of the problems raised to the City Administrator of the City of Orono and the City Councils of the Contracting Cities. Any recommendations made by the Committee shall be advisory only. 6. Officers, Employees of the City of Orono. Officers assigned to duty in the City of Spring Park shall be police officers of the City of Orono which City shall assume all obligations with regard to workers compensation, PERA, witholding tax, insurance, etc. to such officers. The City of Spring Park shall not be required to furnish any of the foregoing fringe benefits or assume any other liability of employment to any officer assigned to duty within the City of Spring Park unless the City of Spring Park employs officers directly, independent of this agreement, to provide special law enforcement services in the City of Spring Park. In such event, all obligations and liabilities with respect to employment of special law enforcement officers shall be the complete responsibility of the City of Spring Park. No such direct employment shall be entered into the City of Spring Park without first obtaining written approval of the City Administrator of the City of Orono which approval shall not be unreasonably withheld. 7. Enforcement Polices. Enforcement policies within the City of Orono shall prevail as the enforcement policies within the City of Spring Park. The enforcement policies of the City of Orono shall be provided in writing to the City of Spring Park. A. Enforcement of Ordinances of the City of Spring Park. The _.y -,rcnc r_ _...__ ass ~_c '.::~. _ ,c Scr:na Park shall enforce that City's Ordinances. 13age 4 - cars to :e _'__cars cr- =a<<.. officers assigned duty within the City of Spring Park shall be provi..eu aut..._ proper action to �:e taken the governin - counci 1 of the City of Spring Parr. The Chief of PolicA of the C:.ty of Orono s:.all furnish the names of all Orono police officers to the Clerk of _ S"r i g and all sl1C_' nF<i r±e q ¢ti1d ! bP appointed police officers of that city. 10. offenses. All offenses shall be charged in accordance with the ordinances of the contracting city in which the offense occurred in each case possible, otherwise, the charge shall be made in accordance with the laws of the State of Minnesota or the laws of the Federal Government. 11. Termination. This agreement shall remain in full force and effect from January 1, 1989 until December 31, 1990 and shall be automatically renewed annually thereafter for each successive contract year unless terminated by either party be serving written notice upon the City Clerk of all contacting cities by October first of the current contract year. In the event that the City of Spring Park terminates this agreement with or without cause, the Ci :y of Spring Park agrees to pay to the City of Orono any of the extraordinary costs incurred by or within the Police Department of the City of Oronc• an account of such termination; said costs include but are not limited to unemployment benefits paid because of the need to lay off existing police department personnel and the sale of squad cars, occasioned by the need to reduce overhead because of the termination of this agreement. Extraordinary costs shall not include the costs of day to day operations of the police department of the City of Orono at level of performance and quality of it's choice. PROVIDRO, 80MRV RR, that no such termination costs shall be imposed unless and until the parties hereto have met with authorized representatives from each and such termination costs have been mutually agreed upon. In the event the parties are unable to reach agreement, the matter shall be submitted to arbitration as provided in paragraph 15B of this agreement. i.. ':.mmuni-ar-Ions, zqu.:e n t in, d 3un_ es. :he shall furnish communication equipment necessary to perform the serviceswhich a=e to oe renaerad. the Jrono s::all provide ::,e recessar:., eau= .men,,- ar.d •le isles and `he Cit.i of Spring Park shall provide any necessary supplies such as ticket books and forms, which must be specifically printed for the City of Spring c'ar . 13. Cooperation and Assistance from the City of Spring Park. The City of Orono and the City of Spring Park shall have full cooperation and assistance from each others officers, agents, and employees. 14. Headquarters. Headquarters for the services rendered to the City of Spring Park under the agreement shall be located at offices owned or leased by the City of Orono, and the citizens of the City of Spring Park shall notify headquarters, or radio dispatch for services requested either in person or by some other means of communication. Services shall he rendered to the City of Spring Park on a 24 hour basis. 15. Cost to the City of Spring Park. A. Total Base Cost for and in consideration of rendition of Law Enforcement services under this agreement, the City of Spring Park shall pay total base costs determined by the formula, as illustrated below, for each contract year. Page 6 FORMULA FOR ALLCC.AT=ON OF COSTS BUDGET YEAR 1989 EXHIBIT A ORONO LONG MTKA SPRING TOTALS 7JEIG'r. LAKE BEACH PARK Population 7,212 11969 593 1,508 11,282 1 of Total 63.92 17.45 5.26 13.37 Weight Applied .1598 .0436 .0131 .0334 .25 Assesed Valuation 107,414,670 16,178,780 12,368,729 17,703,054 153,665,233 • of Total 69.90 10.53 8.05 11.53 Wt. Applied to Total .3495 .0526 .0402 .0576 .50 Miles of Roads 80.80 12.00 4.84 4.20 101.d4 1 of Total 79.34 11.78 4.75 4.12 Wt. Applied to Total .0992 .0147 .0059 .0052 .1250 Area (Sq. Miles) 15.86 3.00 .50 .35 • of Total 80.47 15.22 2.54 1.78 Wt. Applied to Total .1006 .0190 .0032 .0022 .1250 Composite 1 .7091 .1300 .0625 .0984 Total of Weiqhts Paga 7 1.000 DISTRIBUT,ON OF COSTS CITY OF ORONO POLIC3 DEPARTMENT 1989 ORONO - THONG LAKE - `4T'G? 3EAC3 - SPRING PARR TOTAL ORONO LONG MTKA SPRING LAKE BEACH PARK Composite $ Applied to All 100,000% .7091% .1300% .0625% .0984% Base Budget 676,907.83 479,981.41 88,017.82 42,305.23 66,603.37 10• Adm. Fee 67,690.78 47,988.14 8,801.78 4,230.52 6,660.34 TOTAL 744,598.61 527,979.55 96,819.60 46,535.75 73,263.71 Town Aid 35,100.00 24,888.69 4,564.03 2,193.67 3,453.61 (9 x 2,650) 9 officers Total 709,498.61 503,090.87 92,255.57 44,342.08 69,810.09 (NET Town Aid) Contract Charge 42,569.92 - 19,026.96 9,145.19 14,397.76 Contract Charge % 100,000% 08 44% 21% 33% Total Base Cost 752,068.53 503,090.87 111,282.54 53,487.27 84,207.86 Add'l Officers Cost - 110,488.20 - 176,138.82 Town Aid 27,300 - 9,750.00 - 15,600.00 (7 x 3,900) Net Town Aid 100,738.00 160,538.82 Contract Charge 6,044.29 9,632.33 Total Addr Others 106,782.49 170,171.14 GilA3W TOTAL 1,029,022.16 503,090.37 218,065.02 53,487.27 254,379.00 Page 8 The factors of the formula s::ail ce ceiined as f-!c:,1s: poou_ _on of ?"aca ntract`lq ty: .�e ;opu.a-_o: o: eac:. conr_sccing city cc-.ncuted as cf Apr__ ', or_cr each contract year from the then most recent Metropolitan Counci l's estimate except in a census year when there is a Lew census figure availacie ':D,- August 13t, `-her -i'a' �-'?•��� s ^a l l be used. Assessed Valuation of Each Contracting City: The assessed valuation of each contracting city is based on taxes due and payable for the year immediately preceding the budget year. The source of the assessed valuation data shall be the official figures of the Hennepin County Assessor's Department. Miles of Road of each Contracting City: The linear miles of roads, streets, highways, avenues, thoroughfares, and other public ways of a contracting city regularly or periodically patrolled by the police, as determined by a qualified engineer. Area (square miles) of each Contracting City: The dryland area, expressed in square miles, as determined by a qualified engineer. On August 15th of each year during which this contract remains in effect, the City of Orono shall notify each contracting city of preliminary cost for the next contract year. On September 15th of each year the City of Orono shall notify each contracting city of the estimated costs for the next contract year. The estimated cost shall be paid in equal quarterly installments on January 1, April 1, July 1, and October 1 of the next contract year by the contracting city to the city of Orono. Page 3 B. Arbitration. Ii the contracting c;.=y is aggrieved by the deter-niration cf -he Cit• ., Crono as to the allocation. o: `.he ac-:aI ^oats c` the pri __ ;•ear's service, ,he contracr_nv ci••, ma•f acoe3_ sai_4 de--�:.-ina*_i,;n %_thin -o days after receipt of the City of Orono's audit. Said appeal shall be in writing and shall be addressed to the City Of Orono askino '_)r arb,_t-rat_cn by a boar: o: arbitration. The Board of Arbitration shall consist cf three persons; one to be appointed by the City of Orono, one to be appointed by the appealing contracting city, and the third to be appointed by the two so selected. The name of each arbil - for shall be submitted in writing to the other party. --vent that the two arbitrators so selected do not app : third arbitrator within 15 days after receipt of ;.. Atten notice of appointment of either of the first two arbitrator's, the Chief Judge of the District Court of Hennepin County shall have jurisdiction to appoint, upon application of either the City of Orono or the appealing contracting city, the third arbitrator to the Board. The third arbitrator selected shall not be a resident of either contracting city, and shall be a city manager or administrator. The arbitrator's expenses and fees, together with the other expenses, not including counsel fees, incurred in the conduct of the arbitration, shall be divided equally between the parties to the arbitration. Arbitration shall be conducted in accordance with the Uniform Arbitration Act, Chapter 572 of the Minnesota Statutes, and any decision shall be rendered withiii 60 days of appointment of the third arbitza or. Said arbitration shall be binding on both parties. C. Contract Charge. The City of Orono has estimated that expenditures in the Police Budget occur in large sums at irregular times in the contract year. It is ..seessary to have a cont-act charge to assure that any contracting city is not subsidizing the others. Page There, ure, the Cic;. of Spring mar: anal _ ray an annual contract c"arae dorvrTina-I by the following for -nu la ' eich Contract gar. -.e _`actors o` -.,N , t_ , - !1, as _- Exnibit in Sec -ion, 15A, will ce -he same ie:<ciudi-J the City of Orono. The contract charge to the City of Spring Park for the next contract year shall be its percentage of the composite total cf all contrac-i^a cities mulcic lied by is of -ne -otal police budget, net of town aid, as illustrated or. Sx^ihit B, Section 15A. The City of Spring Park understands and agrees that it is impossible to project with complete accuracy the actual costs for labor and equipment as well as the service to be required by each contracting city for the forthcoming contract year, and there- fore, agrees to a yearly audit to adjust the prior year's estimated contract charge as set forth above to the actual contract charge used upon the actual costs for that contract year. On or oef ore Apri 1 1 of each year, the City of Orono wi 11 tabulate the actual cost of Police Department Budget for the prior contract year and wi 11 submit to the City of Spring Park a sumamry of said costs. The actual costs set forth for the prior contract year may result in either a credit or a debit applied to the estimated contract charge to the City of Spring Park, whether or not contracting city is still participating in this agreement, and if a credit, it shall be deducted one half from each of the third and fourth quarters from the estimated contract charge payments required of the City of Spring Park during the current year of services and if a debit, the City of Spring Park shall pay the additional sum to the City of Orono together with the estimated contract charge for the current year by adding oite half of the debit to each of the third and fourth quarter payment. The allocation of the credit or debit shall be made pursuant to the same formula set forth above. 15 D. Cost to Ling Lake - Additional nanpcwer. "he cost of additional manpower above the base cost contras to the City of Long Lake, shall be determined as follows: Page :1 .he actual salary of ;fficeri as3;.gned to, the Vona gate shall he ^cmnuted. To this ^...� • ar-1 figure Jvert_:ne budges for al off_cers divided by ti,e number of al: officers times the number of specific officers, 88 hours of holiday pay at the hourly rate, wearing apparel, hospita:_za-_.n, lire insurance , memberships, workers compensation and pensions calculated at the salary fiqures above. This total is then added to the total cost per c:.ntracring c ty (total net of town aid plus contract charge) for Long Lake to determine cost of service for Long Lake for the new budget year. This procedure is illustrated in Exhibit C. This cost will be an actual cost. :t is understood that the City of Long Lake may due to budget consideration in any contract year at the beginning of the contract year, adjust the number of additional officers in which event they shall pay all those extraordinary costs as outlined in paragraph 11. Page 1-- _989 3u%G 'I LONG LAKE PROPOSAL Swcrn 'Jf-7• . Projected. I'l-4 At a percentage of the total Holiday Pay 88 hours at hourly -_ate Wearing Apparel Workers Compensate-n r.E.R.A. .12 Hospitalization Life Insurance Membership icw• Ai, =' Sl,: cota 6% Contract Charge See Exhihit H - Base List Entire Cost of "ervice ?a�_ie :3 80,900 3,'50 1,439 824.19 5,266 10,549 5,700 60 $110,329 9,750 100,579 6,044.29 111,282.54 $218,065.02 is E. Cos- to oorin ?ar.c _ Audiciona1 ,1,aaoower. _-e cos ad(�'_•_� :'?a :ranrcwer above '' o !:ase cost- ^ontrac- to `_he Citv of _rrina ?-i-.e, 9^31: -)e -?e--?:-"ac3 as 10'LIMIS: The actual salaries of officers assigned to the City of Spring Park s!:a 11 be computed. To this sa lary f igure -will be adde(. at a percenraoe of :ne toca . �ver•.�me budget foi 11 officers divided by the number of al officers times the number of specific officers, 88 hours holiday pay at the hourly rate, wearing apparel, hospitalization, life insurance, memberships, workers compensation and pensions calculated at the salary figure above. This total is then added to the total cost per contracting city (total net of town aid plus contract charge) for Spring Park to determine cost of service for Spring ?ark for ie new budget year. This procedure is illustrated in Exhibit D. This cost will be an actual cost. It is understood that the City of Sr.ring ParY may, due to budget considerations in any e-nntract year, at the beg.nning of the contract year adjust the number if additional officers, in which event they shall pay all extraordinary costs as outline in paragraph 11. Page 14 1989 BUDGET SPRING PARK PROPOSAL '"MiBIT D 4 Sworn Officers Projected 1989 Salaries Overtime At a percentage of the total Holiday Pay 88 hrs x hourly rate wearing Apparel workers Compensation P.E.R.A. .12 Hospitalization Life Insurance Memberships Town Aid Credit 4 x 2900 Subtotal 6% Contract Charge See Exh .,'_* B - Base Cost Entire Cost of Service Page 15 129,180 6,000 5,435 1,300 8,331 16,793 9,020 80 15,600 176,140 9,632 84,208 $254,379 s:s=ass= 16. Hold Harmless and IndeMniZ'.car- ion. as par- ?dice 9udaet for each contract year, the City of :.rono purchases -r.surnr- - _ insure the Ci *', of Ornno 3:,a_nst bi 1 incurred in the rendering of law enforcement ser•ices to the City of Spring Park. However, the amount and extent of insurance coverage may not be sufficient to insure the City of Orono completely and to pay all expenses incurred by t*-e City of Orono, including attorneys' fees and judgements rendered against the City of Orono. Therefore, the City of Orono exposes itself to potentially underinsured and noninsured liabilities. Notwithstanding any language to the contrary herein, the City of Spring Park agrees that the City of Orono is faced with such an exposure and therefore the City of Spring Park agrees to hold harmless and indemnify the City of Orono, its employees and agents for any loss or damage of any kind whatsoever caused by the rendering of law enforcement services in the City of Spring Park to the extent chat The loss or damage and all expenses related thereto are not covered by the insurance policies of the City of Orono in effect during the contract year in which the act or alleged act giving rise to any claim for loss or damaged occurred. In no event shall this agreement be construed to fix upon City of Orono any responsibility or liability to the City of Spring Park or to third parties which are greater or different in kind then the responsibilities and liabilities borne by the City of Spring Park if it were providing such services through its own police department. without limiting the generality of the foregoing, the police chief of the City of Orono or his designee will have the sole discretion as to the officer and equipment that will answer such call, and it shall not be a violation of this agreement nor shall the City of Orono be held responsible to the City of Spring Park or to a third party for any loss which may result in the event that the City of Orono, in the exercise of reasonable judgment, is unable to respond promptly or to respond with only limited officers and equipment, or is delayed in responding to a call by reason of answering a previous call. The City of Spring Park agrees that it will hold harmless and indemnify the City of Orono for any judgement rendered against it or sums paid out by it in settlement, payment or defense of any such claims to the extent they are -ninsured or underinsured arising out of any calls for police services to be rendered in the City of Spring Park. Page 1,,; 17. Not withstanding any of t;ie abo•:e, the contracting cities shall have the right to acnr^ve any proposed capital expenditures ��� '' -.. �c aSc 'i �.. ... :1pr ..: .�cF. Curs -�� h�;'�o !•r1i QP 1;':C� JC�er in the annual budget. Notice of such proposed and non -budgeted capital expenditures and/oc increase in the number of officers shall be given in writing to the contracting cities prior to actual expenditure for such items and the contracting citi=�s shall thereafter have until their next Council meeting in which to approve and/or disapprove the same in writin(i or else it is agreed that such proposed expenditures may be made and the ccst_ therof shall be included in that year's budget. In the event the contracting cities shall disapprove such non -budgeted capital expenditure and/or increase in the number of officers, it shall not be liable to the City of Orono for any costs incurred by the city of Orono should the non -budgeted capital and/or increase in number of officers be made despite such disapproval. Furthermore, the lost of such disapproved capital expenditures and/or increase in number of officers shall not be computed in determining the "Base Cost" or "Contract Charge" herein above set forth for each contracting city for the years in which the disapproved expenditures) is/are made. 18. Prior Contract. Notwithstanding any language her?in to the ,:ontrary, or in prior contracts between the parties., any credit or debit due to the City of Spring Park or to the city of Orono on account of prior agreements and contracts for law enforcement between the parties shall be payable in 1990 as provided herein for credit or debit payments payable in 1990 and therafter. 19. Police Contract Service Explanation. Under the basic contract !-he City of Orono will deliver 24 hour patrol and response throughout Spring Park and Long Lake ar.J will conduct routine patrol throughout the city with the basic contract as needed, and will conduct periodic security checks of businesses (commonly called door rattling), and will conduct such duties as requested by the council. They will submit regular reports to the city officials and appear at council meetings or any other spacial meetings as required by the council. This can be the Chief or any other member of the 3epartment as required by the council. Page i - The department has a goo.i pubiic relations recce:: and as ,je-- *-a_ned officers. ?cur officers which were requested by Spring Park and which will be assigned t: Seri.-3 Par by mutual cons iderat:cn 'e,,:ween the �ronc ?c 1 ice Decar`ment a.^.d the Spring Park Council. The department has s good ruc:: _ re la :ions record anu trained officers. Three officers which were requested by Long Lake and which will be assigned to Long Lake by mutual consideration between the City of Orono Police Department and the Long Lake Council. The Department has very well trained officers especially in first aid. They are well trained in the technical aspects of the law and they have a good public relations history. Training is a continuing process as required by P.O.S.T. and is a requirement of the philosophy of this department. 20. Duration of Contract. Notwithstanding language in Section 1 (A) on Page 1, or Section 11 on Page 3 this agreement shall be effective January 1, 1987 and shall continue in full force and effect until December 31, 1989. However, the duration of this contract shall not exceed three years. All contract cities signing this addendum agree to participate in a pro rata share of all the operating costs of the departments total base cost based upon a 10 officer department. It is understood that the formula for allocation and the distribution of costs will be calculated yearly as stated in the contract in the last paragraph of Section 15 (A) on Page 9. It is further understood that the cities of Long Lake and Spring Park may, due to budget consideration in any contract year at the beginning of the contract year, adjust the number of additional manpower. 21. The City of Orono agrees that during the period of this contract, it will not, within the State of Minnesota, discriminate against any employee or applicanr for employment because of race, color, creed, sex, national oc-4in, or ancestry and will include a similar provision :.a all subcontracts entered into for the performance hereof. This paragraph is inserted in the contract to comply with the provisions of MN Statutes 181.59. Paqe CITY OF ORONO City Administrator Mayor CONTRACTING CITY Clerk City of Mayor The above agreement was reviewed and approved by the City Council of the City of by Resolution No. _ dated 19 The above agreement was reviewed and approved by the City Council of the City of by Resolution No. dated 19 Page 19 112288.1HD To: Mayor Grabek & Orono Council Members From: Mark E. Bernhardson, City Administrator Date: November 22, 1988 Subject: Fire Protection Contracts 1989 ATTACHMENTS - A. City of Long Lake/City of Orono Fire Protection Contract B. City of Maple Plan/City of Orono Fire Protection Contract C. City of Wayzata/City of Orono Fire Protection Contract ISSUE - Adoption of contracts with the cities for fire protection in 1989. INTRODUCTION - The individual Councils together with Orono had adopted the fire protection budget_ based on the original recommends*ion. The fire protection contract for 1989 is just an update for the most part with the financial data with some minor amendments that were housekeeping that were incorporated for the 1989 contract. RECOMMENDATION - It is recommended that the attached contracts be formally adopted for fire protection for the three communities by the City of Orono for 1989. PROPOSED MOTION: Moved by , seconded by , that the Council approved the individual contracts with Long Lake, Maple Plain, and Wayzata for fire protection for 1989. Ayes , nays cc: Melvin Rilbo, Chief of Police Long Lake Fire Department Maple Plain Fire Department Wayzata Fire Department CONTRACT FOR FIRE PROTECTION BETWEEN THE CITY OF MAPLE PLAIN AND THE CITY OF ORONO Definitions 1.01 Fire Protection. The protection of life and property from damage or destruction by fire together with such emergency rescue operations as may be authorized by the Maple Plain Fire Chief or designee. 1.02 Fire Customer. A municipality or other public agency to which Fire Protection is supplied by the City of Maple Plain including, without limitation, all or portions of Medina, Independence, Orono, Minnetrista, and the Hennepin County Park Reserve District. 1.03 Service Year. The year during which Fire Protection is actually provided. 1.04 Annual Consideration. The total cost of Fire Protection payable to the City of M-ple Plain by the Fire Customer for and during the Service Year. 1.05 Total Fire Protection Cost. The estimated cost of providing Fire Protection to all Fire Customers and to the City of Maple Plain during the Service Year. 1.06 Service Area. The land area of the Fire Customer described on Exhibit A hereof, to which Fire Protection is provided during the Service Year. Fire Protection Provided 2.01. In accordance with the terms and conditions hereof, the City of Maple Plain shall provide Fire Protection in that portion of the City of Orono described on Exhibit A which attached hereto and made a part hereo` by reference. The City of Orono shall pay to the City of Maple Plain for such Fire Protection, an annual consideration payable in femur equal installments on the 15th day of January, April, June and September of the Service Year. Calculation of Annual Consideration 3.01. On or before August 1 of each year preceding the Service Year, the City Clerk of the City of Maple Plain shall submit to the City Council for approval the estimated total fire protection costs for the Service Year, including, without limitation, the following factors: (1) Salaries of fire fighters; (2) Radio contract costs; (3) School, seminars, conferences and related travel costs; (4) Fuel, oil and automotive supplies; (5) Costs of maintenance and repair of equipment; (6) Cost of office operations, maintenance and supplies; (7) Cost of insurance and bonding; (8) Cost of dues and subscriptions; (9) Cost of professional services; (10) Cost of Firemen's Relief Association (11) Cost of publishing and printing; ,12) Cost of utilities, including heat, electricity 6 telephone; (13) Cost of housing, office and equipment, based upon reasonable estimate rental of similar quarters; (14) Cost of equipment, replacement, spread over a period of 15 years. 3.02. The Fire Customer shall calculate and provide to the City of Maple Plain on or before August 1st of the year preceding the Service Year, the total. Assesed Valuation of the Service Area to which Fire Protection is provided as shown on Exhibit A hereof. 3.03. The City Clerk of the City of Maple Plain shall calculate the ratio which the Assessed Valuation of the Service Area of each Fire Customer bears to the aggregate Asse ,sed Valuation of the aggregate Service Areas of all Fire Customers and the City of Maple Plain, expressing such ratio in per centum calculated to the nearest 100th of 1 per centum. 3.04. The Fire Customer shall pay to the City of 0 'e Plain, an Annual Consideration obtained by multiplying the per centum derived in Section 3.03 times the Total Fire Protection Costs. 3.05. On or before September 1st of the year preceding t,ie Service Year, the City of Maple Plain shall provide to the Fire Customer, the amount of the Annual Consideration together with a reasonably detailed summary of the calculations outlined in this subdivision. 2 Adjustments 4.01. On or before March lst of the year following the Service Year, the City Clerk of the City of Maple Plain shall tabulate the actual Total Cost of Fire Protection for the Service Year and recalculate the Annual Consideration pursuant to the formulas set forth in Section 3 hereof, using actual cost figures. If said recalculation indicates a credit is due to the Fire Customer, it shall be shown as a dedur.,.;.on, one-fourth thereof on each of the next four succeeding quart=rly payments, and if it is a debit, it shall be shown as an addition, one- fourth thereof, on e , of the next four succeeding quarterly payments, and if it is a debit, it shall be shown as an addition, one- fourth thereof, on each of the next _`our succeeding quarterly payments. 4.02. The Fire Customer hereby agrees to pay to the City of Maple Plain as additional Annual Consideration, any debit adjustment calculated hereunder and the City of Maple Plain hereby agrees to reimburse to the Fire Customer any credit adjustment calculate(: hereunder. Termination 5.01 This agreement shall commence on the first day of January 1989 and remain in full force and effect during the calendar year of its commencement and three 1J11 calendar years thereafter. It shall automaticlly renew each calendar year thereafter unless cancelled by any party. Such cancellation shall. b effective for the calendar year next succeeding the year during which notice of cancellation is given, only if the party desiring to cancel serves written notice upon the other party on or before August 1 of the last calendar year of operation of the agreement. 3 Miscellaneous Provisions 6.01. In case of concurrent fires, either within the several areas served by the City of Maple Plain or under any Mutual Aid Agreement, the Fire Chief of the City of Maple Plain shall weigh the relative risk of loss to life and property posed by the concurrent fires and shall make a final determination on the advisability of committing equipment and fire fighters to the concurrent fires. In making this determination, and in malting the same determination in the case of single fires, the Fire Chief shall also cc cider the feasibility of making the fire run in light of road conditions, weather conditions and all other conditions which shall effect the safety of fire fighters and equipment. aV IN WITHES: MHEREOP, the parties have set their hands this day of , 19 The City of Maple Plain Fire Customer, The Cit; of Orono By Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk Dated By Mayor City Clerk 4 The City of Maple Plain and the City of Orono, do hereby agree to the terms indicated in paragraph 2. This Exhibit B shaI1 be executed each year of service extension. follows: In consideration of term, paragraph 2, the parties agree as 1. The terms of said agreement shall expire at one minute after midnight, December 31s' 1989 unless further extended prior to that date by mutua., tre*?ment. 2. Orono shall pay to Plain the sum of $10,174.05 for fi.� protection rendered :'.-uring this period, payment of which may be made on a quarterly basis. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this agreement on , 19 CITY OF MAPLE PLAIN CITY OF ORONO By By___. Mayor Mayor And r And City Manager City Administrator . EXHIBIT A City of Orono, Wfimi 'a 4 J00%.E "'�. / f g f The City of Orono has contracts with i,%,ighborinq fire departments whereby all residents ha%e this on wig- -it resorting tc private contracts. IslandL not a:..asa:.: b Aqf? aro exclsd, from protection. 112298.1® To: Mayor Grabek k Orono Council Members proms Mark E. Bernhardson, City Administrates 1h Dates November 22, 1988 „ Subject: Animal Control Contracts 1989 ATTACHMENTS - A. City of Long Lake/City of Orono Animal Control Contract B. City of Minnetonka Beech/City of Orono Animal Control Contract C. City of Spring Park/City of Orono Fire Animal Control Contract ISSUE - Adoption of contracts with the cities for animal control in 1989. INTRODUCTION - The individual Councils together with Orono had adopted the animal control budget based on the original recommendation. The animal control contract for 1989 is just an update for the most part with the financial data with >o.se minor amendments that were housekeeping that were incorporated for the 1989 contract. In 1989 Long Lake is requesting hourly contract service. RECOMMENDATION - It is recommended that the attached contracts he formally adopted for animal control for the three communities by the City of Orono for 1999. PROPOSED MOTION: Moved by _, seconded by _, that the Council approved the individual contracts with Long Lake, Spring Park, and Minnetonka Beach for animal control for 1989. Ayes _, nays cc: Melvin Kilbo, Chief of Police City of Long Lake City of Spring Park City of Minnetonka Beach ANIMAL CONTROL CONTRACT AGRBRMRMT made t:*-.is day of , 19 , cy and betweeen the City of Orono, (herein referred to as ":ontractoT and the City of Spring Park, located in the County of Hennepin, State of Minnesota, (`erein referred to as In consideration of the covenants and agreements hereinafter set forth, it is mutually agreed by and between the parties hereto as follows: 1. This agreement shall be effective as of January 1, 1989 and shall continue in effect until December 31, 1989, unless cancelled pursuant to Paragraph 16. 2. Contractor agrees to patrol the public streets of the City in a vehicle especially designed for the transportation of small animals, in accordance with a schedule agreed upon by both parties. The vehicle shall have proper identification displayed on two sides including the words "Community Service". Contractor further agrees to insure, service, and maintain said equipment. 3. Contractor agrees that patrolling shall be done by competent personnel trained in the handling of animals. Said employees shall perform their duties only while in proper uniform and shall wear identification as to indicate employee's name, title, and place of employment. 6. The City ■hall authorize Contractor to apprehend and retain dogs, cats, and other animals, and/or issue citation tags for violations of the City Ordinances. However, Contractor will not invade the private property contrary to the wishes of the owner of said property nor forcibly take an animal from any person without the approval and assistance of a regular officer of the City. S. Outside of regular animal control officer availability in the community, the animal control officer may be called to the scene when deemed appropriate and is the sole discretion of a regular police officer: A. If an animal control officers is on patrol in another community, the community to whom he/she responds will have that time of patrol deducted from the monthly total. B. If not available in another community, this call will be charged on a special call -out basis. 6. In accordance with this Agreement, all impounded animals shall be transported to and confined at the Corcoran Pet Care Center located on County Road 116 and County Road 10 in Corcoran, Minnesota. Page 1 of 3 Contractor warrants that the Corcoran Pet Core Center has been and will be inspected by him periodically and that it conforms to all applicable regulations both as to the facilities provided for the impoundment of animals placed there. In the evert that it does not continue to conform to such standards, the Contractor shall immediately notify the City and shall recommend a different impound facility_. Hours of the facilit- at Corcoran Pet Care are 8 a.m. to 8 p.m, daily. 7. At the time impounded animal is confined at Corcoran Pet Care Center, Contractor is released of all interests and liability while animal is at Corcoran Pet Center. Corcoran Pet Care Center shall collect the impounding fee and boarding charge as provided by City Ordinance. Contractor and Corcoran Pet Care Center shall furnish monthly reports to the City as required as to the service or services rendered in connection with each animal impounded. All impounding fees, license foes, and/or penalty fees collected by Contractor or its agent and/or Corcoran Pet Care Center shall be remitted to the City. S. In the event an animal impounded and boarded by order of the City Health Officer or placed under quarantine by ruling of the State Board of Health, said animal shall be boarded an required by said order or ruling. At the and of such period, the City releases all its interests, right, and control over said animals which may then be disposed of at the discretion of Contractor. In the event that any dogs, cats, or other impounded animals are unclaimed after five (5) days, they shall become the property of Contractor and may be disposed of or sold at their discretion. All proceeds from the disposition of such animals may be retained by Contractor, including any proceeds from any animals disposed of in accordance to MN Statutes 35.71. S. The Contractor shall keep records of all animals impounded together with a description of the same. 10. The City agrees to pay Contractor for services in the performance of this contract as followst A) Price pe. hour - for scheduled patrol based on actual time in service for the City . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $12.00 B) Price per call - for unscheduled service during regular working hours of 7 a.m. to 6 p.m, weekdays. . . . . . . . . . . . $21.00 C) Price per call - for service during other than scheduled or regular working hours . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $21.00 0) Monthly administrative charge . . . . . . . . . . . . .$15.00 11. All payments shall be made by the City upon receipt of monthly statements by Contractor. Payments shall be made within ten (10) days of receipt of statement. Page 2 of 3 12. City agrees to pay for reasonable •veterinary cost for emergency care deemed necessary, unless the owner reclaims animal and the owner will Fay• 13. Contractor agrees that during the period of this contract, it will not, within the State of Minnesota, discriminate against any employee or applicant for employment because of race, color, creed, sex, national origin, or ancestry and will include a similar provision in all sub -contracts entered into for the performance hereof. This paragraph is inserted in the contract to comply with the provisions of MR Statutes 181.59. 14. Zither party hereto may cancel this contract within thirty (30) days written notice thereof to the other party. IN THE PRESENCE OF: CITY OF SPRING PARR By Mayor By Administrator CITY OF ORONO By Mayor By nlstrator Page 3 of CONTRACT AMENDMENT This Amendment is attached to and made a part of the Animal Control Contract dated I 19 between the City of Orono, Minnesota (the "Contractor and tee Citp oT Spring Park, Minnesota (the "City"). 1. In the event of any conflict between the provisions of this Amendment and the terms of the Animal Control Contract, the provisions of this Amendment shall control. 2. The parties to this Contract agree that the Contractor is an independent contractor of the City for animal control services. The City is interested only in the results to be achieved. The manner and means of conducting the work are under the control of the Contractor except to the extent they are limited by the express terms of this Contract. Personnel assigned to perform animal control services by the Contractor shall be employees of the Contractor and not employees of the City and the Contractor shall assume all obligations &rising out of the employment relationship, including but not limited to salary, worker's compensation, P.E.R.A., withholding tax, and health insurance. The City shall not be required to furnish or be otherwise responsible for fringe benefits or other such compensation of such employees. 3. The Contractor will defend, hold harmless, and pay on behalf of the City, any claims, judgements, demands or suits related to or arising out of the provision of services by the Contractor pursuant to the terms of this Contract. 4. The Contractor will keep and maintains A) Automobile insurance, including non -owned and hired autos in an amount not less than 100,000; 300,0001 100,000. B) Worker's Compensation insurance. C) Liability insurance in an amount not less than the Statutory limitation of liability applicable to the Contractor. The Contractor shall, if required by the City, furnirh certificates or other evidence of insurance. CITY OP SPRING PARR By Mayor CITY OF ORONO By City Administrator 11 :BSS dG OVPM M=f. N TOJi Mayor and City Counc:. DATA. lavv.naar 2.. :.,. SUNNCT: Administrator's Information CJUNI AJAD lg - Construction on County Road li Cos now caasaJ Tor the winter. The paving is complete as well as street lights. Sidewalk placement is 991 complete. Because the contractor did not oompl*tm the sidewalks, it to our intent to maintain only the sidewalk on the north aide throughout the project this winter. This will allow us time to experiment with different methods of snow removal this year before purchasing equipment for sidewalk nsiitenance for the 1959-11990 snow removal season. Completion of the prOj0Ot is scheduled for May -June 1989. MNCC/COUNTY ROAD 81 INTERCEPTOR - Construction of the tewr line on aunty'— 3oaJ is .1aa mama! jn;.: Ja.i.ary 1333. aor,: 11 Janoary will consist of sugaring Pi pea under the road and the installations of the lift stations at the North Arm goat Landing and. at Togo Road. RECYCLING PROGRAM - Currently the bids for a oontractor have been sent to t��ders and the bids close on December 9, 1988. The -se will be presented at the De1r.,aer 12. 1988 Council meeting. HIGHWAY 12 - COMMISSIIJER LEV INE MEETISJ - Trensmltted to you lost was the packet of inf`',rmation that was presented to Comissionor Lavine at the meetird held by the Ad Nock T•sk Force on November 16, 1988. Commissioner Levine has indicated his willingness to Meet with the group and other intorsted elected officials including Legislators in January. The reason for the delay until this timofrome is that the various MnDOT Districts are currently prepmring their 20 year plan and it was felt appropriate that we wait to determine where Highway 12 would rank as ■ priority before that Meeting. A copy of the letter that I will be transmitting to Comaissioner Levine as ■ follow-up to our meetind of Iovtibar 15th will be transmitted to you when available. PA.1A - As of ac:emoor 21, r ere as eon no apparent progr ua in talke over the sus u:: 0e: wa It ;14 :wa JA•:.v J. U nJ t I J oaC:'e :l anticipated that tie JuJ3e wt:: hays ;o 'anger a doci3lan in the fiddle of Doc maor, if not re a :veJ to t:e isti3fsati2n of both parties. lonlitiJnal �Jse perett far rvie,r was I113vssed st the Planning I4911:. J1'f I� rta f' ..f' tf•-._ _ a' 1' •1 1i::1 1•.' :anJl•• meeting. The neighbors reviewed with John Gerhardson ahead of the elsnning 7ommiss:on the latest optlans. aJ lestorat:on at road's edge witn gnarl posts in place until owners replace the bank. b.) Restore ; feet out from shoulder with nor* wall length, strength and exposed wall. Such a solution reduces neighbors cost to restore their Lakeshore. It would be appropriate they beer the additional cost. Please sae the attached letter from Glenn Cook. cos a attA rs. Sonestroo Ric sene =7 Areerifk 8t v 't iiuly Associates L` VIML I! «..wwa a.•! .W.... ta,..e..L Englnee•s g Architects November 18. 1988 City of Orono Box 66 Crystal Bay, KN 55323 Arco. Ms. Jeanne Mabusth Re: Pile No. 139 Crystal Bay Road Dear Jeanne. Vn•pv M.H ! new c. eu+wsL re 'F It Imwr a v �! ow.1 a .e.aa rL e4nL1 Y INpenL IL MINI :.fin �1 VYYY, •! W • Iwli °! Imw�' Ivuw .,w OM I ICLNM, Ir I CeNL1. I! „ 4NN Imo( tee N Ivey ors SUW v f.1in,:1A We have prepared a preliminary layout for the reconstruction work along C.Is- tal Bay Road. The plan revlays two options for repair of the failed lakesncre banks. dpcion One was proposed by the City as the minimum amount of work crcessary to restore the failed areas. Option Two was developed aftet meeting with the property owners and discussing the repair work. Option One would provide for construction of a retaining wall w:th City forces. The backfilling of the lakeshore bank and rip rap work would be completed by the property owners. Option One would leave the lakeshore bank in a condition similar to that which existed prior to the atom. There would be no wall area exposed after completion of the construction. The lakeshore bank would be expensive to repair under this option as the +:opo would be very steep (2:1 or greater). The propety owners would need to use additional reulning walls or fabric layers to retain the bank. The +urface would have to be voted with erosion control blanket. to stabilize the bank. Option Two would again provide for a retaining wall const rutted with City forces. The retaining wall would be extended to protect areas along the shore that have not failed. The property owners are cone mod about additional areas failing in the future. There is some surface cracking visible In these areas that indicate some type of subsurface movement. The vegetation (root growth) In these areas was adequate to hold the bank during the big storm. In addition to extending the wall some of the property omen have requested that portions of the wall remain exposed. This will require additional at mctural support to provide for the exposed vcl. The City work under this option would be greater but the property owners cost would be less. The slopes could be flattered out (3:1 max,' and restored by seeding or sodding. Pa{e . 25 2335 West M191Mway 36I Sr Paul. Mlrmefora SS1t3 1 612636-4600 The property owners should also rip rap the shore line along the entire length. This will help stabilize the shore line and prevent undercutting of the bank. The planting of shrubs and aumes should also be required under either option. There are four significant items that should be determined prior to proceadiag with the project dollar. and construction' 1. Should an exposed wall along a portion of the area be allowed? 2. Should the wall be extended as requested by the property ownsre7 3. Shat will be required for easements to allow for construction of the wall? a. tow will the project be funded? If you have my questions, please contact this office. Yours wry truly, SOMSTSOO, SOSMM. AMDSSLIR a ASSOCIATES. IMC. clam S. Cook oaa311 page 2. 2s License No. _ APPLICATION FUR SOLICITATION - $20.00 foe Date Received Date Expires CITY OF ORONO 1335 DROWN ROAD SOUTH BOX 66 ���/ Q CRYSTAL BAY, MN 55323 Organization: /rpy /r/b��L �n�t/!SL C^;t,:rtb Gra✓a. In C. Address: 2?/3 _llf. r Sd, a ink Sf`a+ Representative: ,f/pe•+L65�Caa✓RSS ���*� Address: S nr AGe,.r Phone 02-,�V-.4035 Phone SAI)IF si. iiEout Check One: Business Solicitation Contribution Solicitation Number of People Solicitating within the City L� Provide list of Names of Solicitors on back of this application. Type of Pzoduct to be solicited PERMIT EXPIRES 60 DAYS FROM APPROVAL DATE. POLICE CHIEF SHALL HAVE FIVE (5) BUSINESS DAYS IN WHICH TO INVESTIGATE AND MAKE A RECOMMENDATION PURSUANT TO ORONO MUNICIPAL CODE SECTION 5.30 SUED 5(a). -------------------------------------------------------------------------- ORONO MUNICIPAL CODE REGULATIONS ON SOLICITORS Subd. 3. Prohibited Solicitation Practices. A. It is unlawful for any solicitor to engage in solicitation for any unlawful business or organizational purpose or activity. 0. It is unlawful for any solicitor to practice harassment, nuisance, theft. deceit, or menacing, troublesome or otherwise unlawful activities during the course of solicitation. C. It is unlawful for any solicitor to enter, or attempt to gain entrance, to residential premises displaying at such entrance a sign with the words 'Peddlers and Solicitors Prohibited' or 'Solicitors Prohibited-. D. It is unlawful for any solicitor to refuse to leave business premises when requested by the owner, leases, or person in charge thereof. E. It s unlawful for any person to engage in contribution solicitation without completion cf licensing or registration as herein provided. F. It is unlawful for any person to engage in business solicitation without a license as herein provided. ------------------ -----_ the undersigned hereby agrees to the conditions quoted above from the Orono Nanicipal Cod• and any additio al requirements the City staff may have. Signature of Appli unt: r n Date: 11113122 ----------------------------------PP_-____---__.--------_____-__--------- FOR CITY USE ONLY: After review of application, staff recommends the following: Approval of application Denial of application Signature of C.ty Off:c�al: Data: S14ftut-re ..t P-: ... Date LIST OF LICENSES FOR COUNCIL APPROVAL FOR MEETING OF November 28, 1988 Solicitors License - MN Public Interest Research Group, In:. CIO Kenneth Webb 2512 Delaware Street S.E. Minneapolis, MN 55414 o- CITY OF ORONO N042813i+B P A Y /I/�t A L � EMPL�NO NAME DIV 5 C %P/L i ACkERMANN AJ 13 199 25 101 79 ANDERSON BL 31 33934 96 1973 12 ANDERSON PM 13 97 50 67 50 ANDERSON OF 13 92.50 7 50 BERG VJ 13 170.00 B5.00 BERNHARDSO ME 12 45972 76 2044.08 BOBZIEN SA 31 20224.53 905.00 BOSMA JL 12 11363 01 532 16 BOYLAN SO 93 3873 92 0 00 BRINKHAUS JF 42 33743 23 1500 91 BUTLER MC 13 165 00 80.00 CARLSON MB 35 897.60 40,80 CARRUTHERS C 13 203 50 110.00 CHESWICK GB 31 32597 49 1410 00 CORNICK JL 31 30064 62 1231 53 DESCHLER MJ 13 I•B.50 97.50 DICKEY NJ 13 191 CO 96.60 EISINGER RD 13 100 00 100 00 EKEBEAG EJ 13 175.00 90 00 ENGLISH 11 IH 31 31251 07 1322 84 ERICKSON BE 13 100 00 95 00 ERICKSON DJ 93 1354 53 0 00 ERICKSON KR 31 3139E 14 1384 07 FARR PS 33 2621 00 0 00 FERRIL EL 13 192 50 97 50 FISCNENICN DT 31 204613 53 1302 44 FRITZLER JM 31 32950. 00 1676.53 GAFFRON MP 33 272i6 66 1213 60 GARCIA 9 13 91 50 91 50 GASCH MF 13 200 75 107 2S GERHARDSON JR 42 31610 60 1636 00 GREGORY JD 42 R6342 50 1268 73 HALO N DM 12 23478.01 1030 00 HANSEN SC 42 23150 43 1632 S0 MANSIN6 CJ 31 11101 1B 563 85 HILLSTROM LM 13 So, 00 54 00 HOFFMAN RM 13 101.50 96_50 JACOBS 71 33 27R46 6S 1213 60 JOHNSON OR 31 3104: 61 1390 02 JOHNSON JM 13 176 SC 91 50 JOHNSON MI 13 1$9 75 96 25 KILBO NH 31 40426 79 1760 00 KIRNYCZUK K 31 6096 06 0 00 KNUT00N CA 1B 16790 R1 771 12 KUEHN TM 19 37389 17 1646 44 LAURA DA 13 147 90 94.00 LINDSTROM BJ 93 Rtt 14 0.00 MABVSTH JA 33 3*643 01 1410.24 MAOOEN RN 13 It R0 T 50 11AROUARDT BJ 93 09 RL 0 94 MEYEt MA 3E R03 0E 0 00 JA CITY OF ORONO P A Y EMPL -NO Y )-D 4 - - - - NAME I)IIGROSS GROSS EXP/ALL' MIKELSON RA 15 19917 OB 666.44 MILLS JR UN 93 2247.75 0.06 MORAN MR 31 34360 62 1427. 96 MOROUCZYNS J 31 33324 39 1693.07 MORROW JS 31 9376.35 49S BO NAAE TL 12 15096 53 1041 55 NICHOLLS E 13 172.50 87.50 OAS DO 93 961.59 0 00 OBRIEN RL 92 7545 00 955 00 OLSON BJ 13 175 00 90. 00 OMAN LE 33 22402 06 1017 60 PALMER PB 31 SOS 00 0.00 PEASLEY C 13 182.50 97.50 PETERSON RU 93 0 00 0.00 POWELL L 13 90 00 90 00 OUAST WA 92 25960 02 1013.91 RATHBUN BJ 92 6149 47 996.i1 RAUSCHENDO D 13 172 50 07.50 ROSS JA 93 BB2.00 0.00 GAS$ JJ 42 23317.86 t094 09 SCWAUSS CA 31 22094 SB :0416 74 SCNEFFLER LK 12 5291 50 SSS 20 SKREEN DG 42 23144. 33 1040.13 STEFFE..4AG RE 93 24661 99 1072.80 STEVENS BG 93 3406 00 0 00 STUBBS C 13 05 00 0 00 STUBBS L 13 92 SO 7 50 TNOMTON MR 31 26616 21 1447 61 TOMCWECK LF 31 27202 50 1415 63 TOMCZYK MU 31 30568 06 1329 40 TOWARD H 13 92 50 92 50 TURNNAM K 13 171 50 67 50 WALSH KL 35 1170 45 141 60 COUNT GRAND 61,245 54 PAID 00070 TOTAL 00094 TOTAL TOTAL FICA TAX GROSS • ES 421 45 EM►LOYERS F A • GROUP HEALTH 6 • PNYSICIAN'S WEALTH PLAN C • BLUE CROSS/BLUE SHIELD D • MEDICAL CENTER PLAN E PRUDENTIAL F - COORD WEALTH CARE 6 • MINNESOTA NMO N TIANL AMERICA OCC 1900 CITY 0i NOM CHICK NO OATS Mtal if MCA], C .Col 15 NC931S MC[]IS Mc[l a NC91 1 MC01f MCa11f local's BC011I w, STG MCS311 MCES19 .Cs111 .Col 1a MCI I• s MCOIIE MCNI s MC a III "Calls NC 0 T10 MC[ i1 .(Jill "Call* MCBJIO "Cal o KCU 11 "NIB MITI* K110VNT )11 9f is 96 all •• s s! to 99 it, 99 Is 91 14,39 •••.11 9 63 •OO 91 49 19 101 •1 17•. 9f 119 91 t.0)7 t0 . aft s0 "'so NO N •N to /A a• ON Is A 72 lE 1. OS I.] 91 0 II 1.569 Ol 00 of AN 66 NB.n all N 171 AE 39 97 N N lit I9 10 74 ),IN 91 A "MN ` CIIECN R9018TE11 10-31-19 PACE 1 VINDOR ITEM DESCRIPTION ACCOUNT NO INV • I D A M99SAGE HT SAM LAKES PICA 9/19 TO It/9 01-4149-039-11 MANUAL IST SANK LAKES PICA 9/tt TO IJn 01-4Ht-44O-tI MANUAL 1[] BANK LAKES II CA 9/19 TO 16/2 01-414I-069-10 MANUAL It? SANK LAKES PICA 9/19 TO 1011 01-0 49-/91-17 MANUAL IS' SANK LAKES PICA 9119 TO 10/0 OI-•148-111-11 ...UAL 1ST SANK LAK99 PICA 1109 TO I810 al-AIM-IIS-Il MANUAL I97 IRAN LAKES PICA 9119 TO 10/1 91-•1•t-111-n MANUAL 1ST MM LA99B PICA 9119 TO U/t It-4140-110-31 MANUAL Is, NM LN9s PICA 9/19 /0 IVt 01-4149-174-I3 "ANNUAL. 1sT SAM LAKES PICA Vt9 TO Hn al -•IN -IN -A MANUAL UT BANK LAMES PICA 9/19 TO 1011 11-4141-e49-44 XAVUAL ,or SANK _,n[: PICA 9119 to 10/I 01-41•1-190-il ...wL 191 SAM LAKES FICA 9119 /0 10n 1I-4140-I40-91 MANUAL 191 NM LAK95 PICA 0/19 Is H/t 1I-4149-969-N MANUAL III SANK IANEO PICA 9/1-9 To IVs 74-4148-/90-93 1..... POSTMMSTER POSTNt II-431Ir-III-11 MANUAL POITMAVIN PNTM9 01-4NI-N9-H XAMU.L POSTMASTER PS/TMI 01-4301-069-ts MANUAL POSTKASTN PNTAN 01-AM 1-11•-)1 ...UAL POSTMASTER Post N 01-AM 1-N1-•t MANUAL PNA PENA 9n TO 9/18 It-•HI-QO It MANUAL Flat, P911A VI TO 9/IS 01-4141-N9-13 MANUAL .an. PNA an TO P/10 11-414I-4*9-15 AII,.L ,IRA PRN a/s IQ all$ 01-41.1-099-17 .....L PENA PENA all T9 9/10 01-41.1-111-11 ...U., P90A PIMA 1n TI 9110 91-4101-115-31 'CPA VISA On /* 9/10 N-•t •t-I11-II ..NUu IRRA 09RA an TO 9114 91-PHI-Uad1 MA...L RNA PSMA an TO 9110 BI-•1•t-17•-A ..w.L ASK. P9NA is TO /nt tl-APES-t•9-N X.w.L L.N. nRA 9n TO ins *1-4Ht-990-61 MANUAL ANA SEEM 919 TO 1110 71-4H1-94h91 ..NU.L PIMA ma a/I TO Ins 11-41.1-969-1111 MANUAL AN. P90A Ole TO 9/10 T4-414I-90"3 ...U.L .in. .to. .NA RNA RNA I[9. AN. .NI 19: "no 9/19 TO 1018 PNA 9,19 T! I"11 PNA tilt N U/* PENA I'll Is Iva PEN 9110 TO On SERA *,It /0 IVs PIMA 1119 10 19/1 •IRA 1 11 TO 1.,8 ASIA 1111 r0 11+8 PIRA 9/I9 19 10/8 Pa" f'19 Vol 1011 A E.A 9,•1 TO 14,1 .(.A 1,11 Ta Il,a -60, L11 TO Is,t •p1A I.II TO 11,t 01-4141-019-19 MANUAL tl-H11-1.1-IB M.NV.L II-41.1-Nt-14 M.wLL 41-4141-NS-II MANUAL 01-41.1-099-11 MANUAL 01-41.1-111-II MANUAL tl-•HI-r 1I-BI ... PAL Br-•u1-1 t•m O1-u•1-ya-I1 *r-•1•I-I/•-A M.Iw.. 01-4 HI -NI-N Ir-•HI-lH-II .A1.. +I-.1.1-1•T.11 Tyu A1.N a-N l Adq A1-aft-lI NYV.L ION City 'Of OSNO CN9CK N DATE NCS719 11/17/06 MC01E0 11/11/08 "Coin 11/17/60 11/IT/N 11 n 9/N 11/IT/N CHECK REGISTER AMOUNT VENDOR ITEM DESCRIPTION 1.497 Of 100 00 RN 03-ICE 4 PEACE SEMINAR 100.00 47.00 POSTMASTER POSTAGE E/.00 N JB MET COUNCIL MEETING 19.00 . 14.00 IST DANK LAMES FICA 10/7 TO 10/1$ 199.T1 IST BANK LANES FICA I1/3 TO 10116 112 94 111 SANK LANES FICA 1011 TO 10/I6 00.16 IST BANK LAKES FICA 10/1 TO 10/16 71.76 1ST DANK LAKES FICA 10/7 TO I1/16 107. 71 IST DANK LANES FICA 10/7 TO 10116 7T.16 IGT BANK LAKE$ FICA 10/7 TO 10/16 ,a as IST BANK LAKES FICA 10/7 TO 10/19 491 90 0 FICA I0/7 TO 1//16 1 94 lot BANK LAKES FICA 10/7 TO 10/16 409 46 IST VANN LANE$ FICA 10/7 TO 10116 9S 91 IST BANK LAKES FICA 10/1 TO 10114 140 44 111 DAMN LAM14 FICA 14/3 TO 10/16 19.17 IST BANK LAKES FICA 10/7 TO 10/I6 99.to IST GANN LANE& FICA 10/1 TO 10/16 4.49E ET 9.o CONES REV SALES TAN SALES TAN KEPT Lo COMM REV SALES TAN SALES TAN 9901 40t.09 CON" 09V SALES TAN BALKS TAN KEPT OTL1/ 99. 14 POSTMASTER POSTAGE 14$ $f POSTMASTER POSTAGE 144 It IL BO POSTMASTER POSTAGE TI Sf . 499.o POSTMASTER POSTAGE ESl Jf . 111.99 TB FUND 01 TOTAL GENERAL FUND 404 79 FUMO TO TOTAL HATER OPERATING FUND Ttl 1. FUND 17 TOTAL oUIS OPERATING FUND 99. OL FUND 14 TOTAL GOLF COURSE OPERATING FD I].tTB 91 TOTAL -, . 10-11-04 009E 1 ACCOUNT NO INV 0 P.0 4 MESSAGE 01-4194-129-31 MANUAL 01-4]11-040-1] MANUAL 01-4394-019-11 MANUAL ...-CMS 01-4141-0E0-11 MANUAL 01-11.E-079-12 MANUAL 01-4149-069-19 MANUAL 01-4149-019-17 MANUAL 01-4149-111-31 MANUAL 01-4112-119-31 MANUAL 41-4149-191-11 "AM" 01-4142-196-71 MANUAL 01-111E-174-77 MANUAL 01-4141-I$9-19 MANUAL 01-414E-849-4t MANUAL 01-4149-990-61 MANUAL 71-4141-441-91 MANUAL T1-4141-569-99 MANUAL T4-4141-S/0-91 MANUAL el-INhOo-09 MANUAL T1-1171-009-00 "ANNUAL T4-1212-019-0t MANAL ....CNS 71-4781-949-11 "N L T]-41t1-Eft-1t MANUAL 01-4]11-440-I] MANUAL f1-4311-10-11 MANUAL .o-CNG GENUMIS FINANCIAL SYSTEM ACCOUNTING REPORT USER 00 190E CITY OF ORONO NUMBER OF REPORTS 92 UPDATE DESCRIPTIONS 0 NUMBER OF UPDATES 0 SUMMARY FILE 0 MURDER OF R[CORDE PAYROLL A LEVEL 1 997 BENEFIT ACCRUAL LEVEL 2 0 ACTIVITY REPORT 0 LEVEL D 0 CHECK REGISTER I LEVEL M 0 TRIAL BALANCE 0 LEVEL E 24 BALANCE SWEET 0 LEVEL 6 0 REVENUE STATEMENT 0 LEVEL T 0 OPERATIMS STATEMENT 0 LEVEL B 510 BUDGET VORMBNEETS 0 LEVEL 9 0 CLEAR-CUMR-MONTH 0 LEVEL 0 2 CITY FILE OPTION 0 PROJECT DEPARTMENT x TOTAL 1,099 CHANT OF ACCOUNTS N0. CHECK RECONCILE 1 YEAR TO DATE PERIOD IB BUDGET RECORDS CREATED 0 11/17/00 FINANCIAL REPORTS SCHEDULED RUN DATE 000000 REPORT DATE 000000 ACTIVITY REPORTS SCHEDULED RUN DATE I117B0 REPORT DATE 10310 PAYROLL ?OSTING DATES 090000 000000 000000 000000 1 PAGE "I 1 Itt6 CITY ORONO CHECK RECIS,OR II -tS-u PAS. 2 CHECK N0. DATE AMOUNT VENDOR ITEM DESCRIPTION ACCOUNT NO INV 0 P 0. 1 MESSAGE ]]7111 11/81/00 ]A .to CMESUICM/CARY MET IH\ 01-43S6-249-48 ]A 20 . •w..• •---CNl 7771]O 11/12/16 61.25 COLONIAL LIFE INS CO LIFE INS 01-4152-126-3I 337L10 11/22/40 63.36 COLONIAL LIFE IRS CO LIFE INS 01-6108-121-31 1E0 61 . ...o• ...-CN6 777141 11/81/04 N6. SS COPY OUP PR INC OFFICE SUPPLIES 01-1210-I9t-3I 690.49 ]]1141 11/29/64 . SO COMMERCIAL LIFE INS LIFE INS NOV 01-4158-0I1-12 777141 11/82/68 l.TO COMMERCIAL LIFE IN/ LIFE INS NOV 01-4158-061-IS 777143 11/f!/\\ t TO COMMERCIAL LIFE INS LIFE INS NOV 01-4158-121-11 ]7114] 11/82/4$ 7_60 COMMERCIAL LIFE INS LIFE INS NOV 01-4152-126-31 711103 11/4E/Y 1.10 COMMERCIAL LIFE INS Life INS NOV 01-4152-129-31 737147 11/111/66 1.60 COIIIIERCIAL LIFE INS LIEF INS NON 01-4152-174-11 777141 11/00/88 6.]0 COMMERCIAL LIFE INS LIFE INS NOV 01-6159-949-42 ]]]t A] 11,22//0 .Tf COMMERCIAL LIFE IRS LIFE INS NOV 72-4158-549-11 ]]]Iq 11/fs/66 I.Of COMMERCIAL LIFE INS LIFE I106 NOV 77-4158-561-19 1]]I43 11/12/64 10 COMMERCIAL LIFE INS LIFE INS NOV 7I-4158-910-11 ]6 00 . o..o ....CN6 ]]]9T 11/62g6 $Of_to OAHLGREII SMAROLOV COW PLAN MVY It Ot-4106-901-72 777117 11/!f/Y 1.716 11 OAMLGRIM SNANDLOU NAVARRE REDEVELOP 01-4106-990-78 1.091 11 . ...... ....CN6 133111 11/t2/66 93.f6 ROLF E ERICKSON OFFICE SUPPLIES 01-4110-OS9-14 777111 II/!!/Y 0.831.00 ROLF E ERICN/ON NOV SIRVICE 61-4307-050-I4 •, ni.so . D)fp 11/ft/Y 0 00 GOLDEN VALLEY CC METING 01-4396-111-71 a 06 . 1 1l7lT5 11/22/24 426.17 640W WEALTH INC 110SA IME Nov 01-A161-111-]1 7179Tf 11/22/06 71 1s CROUP HEALTH INC HOSP INS HOV 01-4151-126-31 3331T6 11/88/66 is1 It NOW HEALTH ..0 MOsP INS NOV 01-4I91-121-31 33MIS 11!!f/N 71.11 YOUR ItM ,N INC NOW INS WEV 61-4191-17N]] SALTS 11,92/46 176 61 CROUP ME LYN INC MOSP INS NOV 7I-41ft-110-03 ,.too to ]l X 1S 11/22/16 2.. E. HARMON :LASS N.INT AUTO 01-4141-I29-31 I946 CITY OF ORONO CHECK REOIeTIR 11-26-se 1*09 1 CINCH NO DATE AMOUNT VENDOR ITEM DESCRIPTION ACCOUNT NO INV 0 P 0 0 493SAGI 333006 11/0/69 77 IS ACRO-MINNESOTA INC OFFICE SUPPLIES TE-4E10-s4S-f1 333006 11/It/fs .S IS ACRO-MINNESOTA INC OFFICE SUF+LIES 77-4210-369-f2 R2.ss ...-CNS ]7]OOf 11.22/66 17.095 19 ALLIES BLACKTOP CO SEAL COAT RFP01 01-42]]-249-42 1T,0E5.ff 333010 IIItt/ss It. TS AT&T INFO SYSTEM TELEPHONE 01-6]20-175-]4 12.75 77]el. 11/tt/U 997 00 ALL STAR ELECTRIC PAINT EQUIP 21-4742-E49-42 ■1T 00 ...-CK2 •u.o 77767. 11/et/N 111.02 ANCHOR PAPER COPIER PAPER 01.1261-000-0e 333676 11/10/68 969.H ANCHOR PAPER COPIER PAPER 61-4210-I99-31 ]S7 A0 ]]]e76 11/02/09 6.]] ANDERSON-BRUCE MELTING 01-4396-I21-71 0 17 ...-CKS 77L6s 11/tt/N 100.00 BLACKOUTAK 6 SONS RAINY GROUNDS 01-4]4]-890-61 100.f0 ....CBS .N o. 7]]0/0 11/tt/ss Its 11 DOARIIAN 6 ASSOCIATES SPACE STUDY 15-4106-690-00 777000 11/82/80 49.66 BOARMAN 6 ASSOCIATES SPACE STUDY 1E-4399-6se-00 ISO. Tf ....CK6 ]]71eT{ 11/98/08 16S 2s BOUSTEAD ELECTRIC RAINY L 2 T3-4744-96t-18 its is . 777Ht IIIn/so Ist.06 BUREAU CRIMINAL APPN 300 OTR ICA 61-47Is-I89-71 150 00 ...-CAS ....... _ _ _. __-_ _ 333100 11/02/46 Tt 20 CASE PONE :. E01'[P EOUV.PTS 01-4232-949-48 2 26 Iles CITY OF ORONO CHECK REGISTER 11-20-06 PAGE ] CHECK NO DATE AMOUNT VENDOR ITEM DESCRIPTION ACCOUNT NO. INV. a R.O. 0 MESSAGE 244 2s . •..... •• .-CKe 377291 11/ee/6e 14.04 MALLIN/DOROTMY MILEAGE 01-4361-040-17 IA 0♦ • Dull w.-CKD 7]]]6] 11/te/SS 40 00 MEN" CTY FIN Div FOLDER$ 01-4910-031-14 3777tl II/e2/38 2.792.26 MEMN CTT FIN DIV JAIL CHANCES REP 01-4796-060-16 ■.7sm 16 ]]77H 11/2R/es 415.87 Hamm CTY KMERIFF OPT JAIL CHARGES OCT 01-4750-000-16 &IS.ST ...... ....CKS 7]2]70 11/22/941 06.87 ICRA AETRMIT CORP tCHA t0/71-I1/17 01-4144-070-12 ^' R6 aT 0•.•0 ...-CK6 ]]7404 11/22/66 ]0.65 THE LAKER PVSLISMtNG 01-4]ee-0]0-12 73414 I"me/as S2. ee THE LAKER PUILISHING 01-47ee-174-73 $a 97 ...... ...-CKa 233637 II am/N 11.60.50 CITY OF LONG LAKE 4T11 SIR FIRE 01-4]1$-1]0-M 737477 11/a2/N a.0$&.Ka CITY OF LONG LAKE OCT-DEC RENT 01-1332-111-31 772+3T 11/tE/SS ales&. 06 CITY OF LONG LAME OCT-DEC RENT 01-4]]a-I89-71 777477 11/99/94 8.056.04- CITY OF LONG LAKE OCT OEC RENT 01-4772-1e1-31 177437 11/males s6.7• CITY OF LONG LAKE KEPT HAIRY LS 7]-4]44-560-0e .HN• .... ]7)66T 11/20/64 196.66 MID CTR WEALTH CASE HOSP IN$ NOV 0t-61$1-071-12 7774AT 11/12/48 T$ .0 MID CTR WEALTH CAME MOBP INS NOV 01-I191-069-I5 77746T 11/22/011 76.40 IRO ITS HEALTH CARE Hoop INS NOV 01-4t41-126-I1 777661 11/811/611 179.11 IRO CTR HEALTH CARE MOSP INS NOV 01-61:1-129-71 377667 11/d//6 176 61 IRO CTO HEALTH CARE war INS Nov 01-61E1-1T4-77 773667 1"as/66 Ise. 62 NED CTA WEALTH CARE HOSP INS Nov 01-41EI-E41-62 1,616.T. --- ...-CKS 777660 11/18/64 36 10 METRO U INSP RERV OTHER CONSULTING 01-4366-174-33 773660 11/E2/66 • 06 METRO V INSP SERV OTHER CONSULTING 01-4306-174-33 .e of . ...... ...-CKS y 19U CITY line" CHECK NO DATE 11111E 11/81/60 u..w :A1U 11/21/40 D1Na 11/ti/a$ SI00U 11/21/96 �uu• 110E99 11/81/94 ]lutl 11 /et/N 333601 II/89/60 333UI 11/22/U 1I3621 11/90/00 S729t1 11/at/U III681 11/22/U 272S21 11/tt/as 112481 11/s2/s0 333421 11/lL00 117f2T 11/22/0 3II627 11/48/04 12360r 11/9a/Os 711Sn 11/2E/U Sun 11/eE/B0 uu•. E0143a 11/12/84 111439 11112146 CHECK UCIS,,k II-90-Q PAN- 1 .MOUNT VENDOR ITEM OESCRIPTION ACCOUNT NO. INV, 9 P.O. 9 MESSAGE II.61 WTI BAKING CO RESALE CONCESSIONS 71-1902-991-94 Il.f9 . .u-CNS I7.00 MPLB MALTH DEPT LAO TESTS 01-4394-I21dt 17.00 . ...-CNS e61.91 MINWCASCO UTILITIES 01-4321-091-1T ...-CIS$ 1.11 MIT DIST CO "At"? EQUIP 71-431E-590-91 1.11 . - ...-CKS - $0T.0f Nap STREET 1;at 01-43s$-219-43 BsT.Of . ...-CNS r96.69 PHYSICIANS HEALTH MSp INS NOV 01-3079-000-00 I96_. it PHYSICIANS HEALTH MSP tW NOV 61-IIEI-039-11 260.55 PHYSICIANS HEALTH HOSP INS MV 01-II51-069-1E nf.f$ PHYSICIANS HEALTH Hasp INS NOV 01-1161-Itf-11 1.868.10 PHYSICIANG HEALTH HOOP INS NOV 01-IISI-tt1-11 920.5$ PHYSICIANS HEALTH Map Ina NOV 01-II3I-111-11 699.5$ PHYSICIANS HEALTH MO INS NOV $1-II3I-3I1-6 41.61 PHYSICIAN$ HEALTH MSP INS NOV 72-41$1-E19-91 12E.I6 PHYSICIANS HEALTH MOP INS MV 73-If$1-599-9E 4.110.94 . .u-us a.T9 PITWY SOU94 POSTAGAE METER 01-4321-439-12 4.70 PITWY BONES POBTASW METER 91-1141-9$9-11 a.TO PITNEY BOW, POSTAOAE METER 01-4321-049-I9 a 79 PITNEY BOWS PUTAGA9 METER 01-17tl-171-11 8.79 PITWY SOMES POSTAGAE METER 91-4321-211-w 43.16 . ...-CW 940.$0 PRAIRIE OFFSET PRINTING 01-4122-I8$-1$ 540.54 . 9.1s PROEK PHOTO $UP PHOTO$ 01-4910-174-I1 0 9s . ...-CMS 1900 CITY OR Ono" CHECK REGISTER 11-e0-69 FACE S ... CMa W. OATE AMOUNT VENDOR ITEM OISCRIPTION ACCOUNT W. INV. I P.O. 0 MESSA•E 777647 11/tR/SS 20.41 PRUDENTIAL LIRE two NOV 01-41/8-061-19 777647 11/19/04 e.. CO PRUDENT tAL LIFE INS NOV 01-4159-196-11 " 777647 11 at/SS 17.47 PRUDENTIAL LIRE INS NOW Ot-0112-161-11 717507 11/tLes 9.70 PRUDENTIAL LIFE INS NOV 01-4tiR-174-I1 ' 777547 11/e!/SS G 00 PRUDENTIAL LIFE INS NOV 01-/ti8-149-49 01.so . •••-cts 377741 11/29/08 e1.10 STREICNENS !QUIP Ot-0219-121-31 11.90 _.sH. .a. - CEO 7777SS 11/te/so 4.85 TONCITR/MARK METING 01-43e6-I99-71 777784 11/42/00 G.ES TDNCZYM/MARN PARKING 01-1101-1e/-11 11.10 . ...... ...-CM 777115 11/e0/60 Ie0. 00 MIFOIINS UNLIMITED PERSONAL EQUIP 01-42e1-1E7-71 777714 11/22A4 216.00 UNIFORM UNLIMITED CLOTHING 01-Itt1-129-11 71i.Go .•.-CMS ]1SSIi 11loves 40J8 Ws NEST COMMWN TELEPHONE 01-4IRO-I99-71 _277et■ _. ._ 11/mum 11.90 VO NEST CONTAIN TELEPHONE 01-1790-249-40 ' 7770ts II lee/SS t1. T! Vs WIST COMVN WA PROCESSING 01-4399-001-I9 777e15 11/82/44 I6.57 VS MST CONMUN DATA PROCESSING 7t-079S-Se1-91 1VtR/Os _._t.JO Us MST Come DATA PROCESSING 77-4355-90/-/t 182.97 777041 11/!!/SS Qi. to WATER PRODUCTS CO WATER MUM 72-1e71-006-01 --777N1 IIlee/Os 700.16 WATER PRODUCTS CO MAINT L t 71-4704-901-18 1.11E IA -0.uo a. -CM 777901 I1/21/04 a SS GIL$ SHEET METAL MINT BLDG 01-1747-IRS-71 - _ .s.ss . 777f1! 11/2e/88 140.50 CMARLIES BODY SHOP MINT AUTOEWIP 01-4741-I89-11 • 144.50 . 777157 11/ee/08 74. 76 DENMESON RICH OTHER CONSULTING 81-4700-1H-11 3010. 771104 11/42/SS SSG 00 ■ILLMN ELECTRIC CO ST LITES CRIS MAV E4-.570-4e2-66 IWO* - OF ORONO 11-24-44 PAL- a ORION EaSKTO2 ISIS CITY CHECK 90. DATE AMOWT - VEMON - ITEM oEEd VTION ACCOUNT NO, INV. 0 A . 0 MESSAGE NCOTIf —N/16/N 341.86- IOT BANK LAN/O FIN fill To 10/1 01-4142-039-12 MANUAL K6311 IVI{/N 311.26 NOT BASIN LANES FICA Vita TO 10/1 01-414E-439-12 MANUAL MCS315 1111VN 46.96 NET 2FNN LAK90 FICA fill TO to/1 01-4142-040-10 MANUAL _. MCEII/ --LI/1{/N ..NJ{- - AST.RSIE LAKS FICA VIf TO 19/9 01-4142-I40-10 MANUAL MCQ If 11/t VII LIB." III BASIN LAN9O FICA $/If TO 14/2 01-4142-049-IS MANUAL IICSIla tl/ta/as 219.44- nT ONO LANES FICA 1/19 TO la/2 41-414E-469-I5 MANUAL --IlNtlf /1/1{/EB EJf+ 1ST SAMN LANK FICA f/Ot To Iva 11-414E-099-11 MANUAL NCKla II/1{/N 4.52 taT BANK LANES FICA Vila TO I112 11-4142-499-IT MANUAL NKllf 11/16/16 119.99- IET BANK LAMES FICA fill TO 11/S 11-414E-111-21 MANUAL _.-110RStf 11/I6/4,11 RS.La IET BANK LANK FICA Oita TO IOIll - -01-4142-111-I1 MANUAL ' I9311 11/IVN 141.49 1ST BANK LAKES FICA fill TO 101E 01-4142-1I9-31 MANUAL NC43I5 II/16/BS 191.E9- IET BATIK LAKES FICA 7/If TO 10/1 11-4148-119-71 MANUAL - NKOII 1111 AIDS 311.911- 1ST BANK LAKES FIN f/va TO 11/2 /1-4142-I81-31 MANUAL MCQ If 11/16/00 79.1E NIT BANK LAMES FICA f/If To IVa 41-4149-tatd1 MANUAL MCUtf 11/lA/14 14.31 1ST BANK LAKES FICA Siva To IVO 41-414E-ta6-31 MANUAL MCIIt■ IuIvoI 14.71- IST BANK LAKES FICA 9/I9 TO 11/2 11-4141-I86-31 MANUAL .11 • •o-CMS 09.1 FUND Ot TOTAL FUND IE0./f FUND If TOTAL :ENIDAL BVILOM4 CAPITAL OUTLAY F 884.44 FWD E4 TOTAL PERM IMPROVE REVOLVING F _ 2N.3/ FUND TE TOTAL UATER OPERATING FUN 1 .Ia1.80 FWD TI TOTAL SEWER OPERATING FUND 191.94 FWD 74 TOTAL GOLF COURSE OPERATING 10 • 61.301.13 TOTAL cbuwn ti I ot MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF THE SCHOOL BOARD OF ORONO INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 278 HELD ON OCTOBER 24, 1988 The regular meeting of the School Board of Orono Independent School District No. 278 was held on Monday. October 24, 1988. Present: Dave MCKown James Franklin Thomas Mich Don Anderson John Maresh William Fenholt Kitty Crosby Lucie Taylor UPON MOTION by Kitty Crosby, seconded by Don Anderson, the consent agenda was approved as follows: - approved the minutes of the October 10, 1988 regular meeting; - approved the minutes of the October 10. 1988 Board workshop; - approved the following variance reques s: Donald Hegedus, grade 1 to complete the 1988-89 school year at Westonka Schools, Benjamin Thies, grade 10 to attend Orono Schools; - approved Lynda Meador's request for a leave of absence effective December 1, 1988 for the remainder of the 1988-89 school year; - approved the request of Sally A. Nelson Wennberg, teacher at Schumann Elementary School, for early retirement effective at the end of the 1988-89 school year; - approved Christine Locker's request for a leave of absence effective October 26, 1988 for the remainder of the 1988-89 school year; - approved the bills as covered by vouchers 060834 through 060885 and 060256 through 060324. Dr. Mich reported that a staff developmelt day was held today, October 24, with Guy Doud, 1386 Teacher of the Year, giving the morning presentation and that a session was also given on parent conferencing; that he has ten people in his Elements of Effective Instruction class; that he has met with the chair - people of the curriculum subject matter areas and will be looking at the review chat takes place this year; that a press release will be given sometime the first part of November indicating Orono's Involvement in the open enrollment program; that the roof repairs are almost complete in the middle school; that the Parent Meet and Confer committee met on October 17, 1988; that a breakfast had been held for area ministers on October 13 at Orono Primary School; that he wanted to compliment the Orono Middle School on their 'Student of the North' program; that a workshop will follow the November le meeting for the purpose of the SuperintenJent's evaluation; that Tim and Mary Adams will be hosting an evening of appreciation at their home for contributors to the Orono Education Fund; tnat he wanted to express appreciation to Sally Nelson Wennberg, whose retirement request the Board approved tonight, for her years of service to the Orono School District. Don Anderson provided a brief report on the topics that were discussed at the Parent Meet and Confer meeting held on October 17, 1988. Kitty Crosby expressed appreciation to Or. Mich for the caliber of the Annual Report and stated that she has had many positive comments regarding the report. Dr. Mich reported on the Annual Report which was mailed to all households in the school district on October 14, 1988. He stated that this report is a way in which the district communicates to its constituents what has occurred over the past year. Dr. Mich expressed appreciation to Toni Bergland for her work on this report. Bill Fenno It updated the Board on the asbestos situation. He provided background information on the requirements/procedures involved for compliance plus maintenance requirements/monitoring that will be on -going. Bill Fenhol. reported to the Board on the progress of the School Day Schedule Task Force. He stated that a survey questionnaire is being prepared which will be mailed to parents the first week of November; that a public hearing will be held the latter part of November; that the plan is to have a recommendation to the Sch-nl Board by the first Board meeting in December. Warren Nelson reported to the Board on programs/activities in the middle school. He provided the Board with information on goals that had been established/fulfilled during the 1987-88 school year and goals that continue on or that were expanded on for the 1988-89 school year. The Board asked questions of Mr. Nelson with their major concern being the CAPS program. Mr. Pelson will provide the Board with suggestions/revisions/modifications that are being con- sidered/implemented in the CAPS program. Dr. Mich addressed the facilities needs of the school district which the Board discussed at its last workshop and which focused on the needs of the intermediate/middle schools. He stated that administration needs *directive from the Board tonight as he has a concern regarding the time factor and the Board's attention needs to be focused if any action Is to be taken during this school year. UPON MOTION by Don Anderson, seconded by Lucie Taylor, the Board directed admin- istration to examine the available options regarding facilities, report those options to the Board as soon as possible and make a recommendation for Board consideration. Dr. Mich stated that the recommendation will focus on the Intermediatet0ddle school but will inc.wde the entire district and will allow for flexibi my in the future. He stated that, in long-range planning, the instructicnal goals/desires of the district should dictate the planning/development of facilities and not vice versa. UPON NOTION by Jim Franklin, seconded by Lucie Taylor, the meeting was adjourned. t1t Ka ne ros y, Lierk Approved: i ave own, Chairman CITYof ORONO Pant 011ke Boa 9a acrygal BAY. Minnwww N *Ma opal Oman On the North Shon o/ Lake Minnetonka November 18, 1998 Mr. Paul D. Swanson, President Landmark Construction Company P.O. Box 248 Long Lake, MN 55356 Subject: 3050 Jamestown Road Dear Mr. Swanson, The City of Orono received an undated bi 11 from your firm for the amount of $5,577.59 for the repair of the septic system at the above referenced address. This was followed by a letter dated November 8, 1988. You had previously transmitted a letter to us on September 8, 1988 to which we responded immediately by forwarding your notice of claim to the City's insurance adjuster. The notice of claim, which was a request for participation in the cost of the repalts, was denied in a letter to you from G.A.B. Business Services Inc. dated October 19, 1998. As for the issue of septic systems, both elected officials and staff remain keenly interested in the sytems as there are over a 1990 in the community. T E determination of liability however, is required under the City's contract to be the determination of the City's insurer, the League Trust. G.A.B. Business Services is the renresentati-a of the League of Minnesota Cities Insurance Trust, which manes determinations on general liability for the City of behalf of the Trust. To the extent that you feet that the City is responsible for these costs, you should undertake the appropriate legal proceedings to attempt to adjudicate the claim. S nc�sly o s, k � bon Cl2 11ii�'• k S. nha dkon City Admin Utf or MS9/dh cct Japes and Penny Grabek, 3650 Jamestown Road Thomas M. hlcyn, Adjuster G.4.9. Business Systems Apple Valley Insurance Agency John R. Gerhordson, Public Works Director i Joanne A. M•busth, Building a Zoning Administrator esPlanning Michael P. Gaffron, At. Plannia Zoning Admin. a1Rla10e b(PONG - 014mT a AaMFmraAMBW • Pa1Ala7 - UDtmS a K'Klr WORKS - BI TmT A� bcv, 1'tty counri 1 Toz Mayor Grabek f Orono Council Members Planning Commission Chairman Kelley Orono Planning Commission Member■ City Administrator Bernhardson Orono Staff Members ►alms Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building & Zoning Administrator Dates November 15, 1989 8ubjectz December Planning Commission Meeting The regularly scheduled meeting of the Plaz.nino Commission for December 19, 1988 has been cancelled because of the Ciristmas Holiday@. 930.00 929.50 929.00 Q 928.30 928.00 O 9I7.50 F u 927.00 W 92550 926.00 LAKE r fIHE'roNKA water Levels 1987-1988 NON1Y(929.4) RUNOUT ELEVATION(9:6.6) LAKE ELEVATION 225.50 1 1'^'7^^^' 06-A0r-6721-Jul-8726-Aug-8709-No.-6701-Apr-8803-Jun-6821-Jul -8806-S.e-8830-Nu­so CATE ................................................................................................................................................................. KM MIN NNIUw - N.. M.... ..nn.uumnv.muu.....nu................ v.......................u..nn....n..........u.......mv...........................mu.....uu.... 1.11 IIN.IIY IIN NM IINIIIN IIP MI. III..IIY IIN MN II...IIY it. I'll III..IIM IIN N-M.-II 113Z I.M 1140i OP." 0.0 Il-!ri MY.M 6.10 M-y-N M.N I.M II-W-M N..M I.N I. W-41 IN.N 4.0 114WIS MI.% 0.0 M-IY-N 111.4 8.0 11Y11-0 M.N 1.0 N1Ni IM.N NM 11-I.N1 IN.11 4.0 w1w,-M W.M I.M M-lN-N W.M 1.N II-yi 1M.M 0.0 Ni.i IM.N 0.0 21 U, V 11.41 1.0 N-Wi 0.N 6.0 11-Iri MY.N 0.0 IFyi 1M.M I.II 2FN.11 MIA, LN 11-W-M M.M 0.0 11-MI-N 11Y.12 1.0 IIJNi 1M.N LM N-N.'11 1,1..2 I.Y N-Wi 1M.N 9.0 N-N.-N NI.N Ca 1.y.N Mt.N 0.0 I1-NI-II 11.31 4.0 N W M 1211.0 I.M 21.4.-Y N1.M 6.0 N-y-N M.N I.M 11 1,1-11 gLll 6.0 MW-N 1M.11 1.0 N-IYi NI.N I.M N-y-11 N:.O Ca Itil-M IILM 1.0 11.11.-M 911.11 0.0 N-Ne10 111.11 4.0 W.,.n 1M.N 6.0 N-RI-II NI.I1 9.0 91-W M NI." 0.0 N-N1i N1.M 1.0 M-W-N NI.4 0.0 :PMI'U IMU LN 1141-1. 1N.N 9.0 11-hpN "l.M I.N 12 U.0 qLA EN N-Wi1 1N.M LN 25 Wit IN.M I.N IPNPM "1.N 6.4 IT41-N N1'11 $.N Y-W-It Me" 4.0 .1 wM M.N 6.1111 13-Mli "Lle 1.0 11-MNN NI.I. LM II-W-11 1N.N 1.M Nny-N qLM LM 11-Mli 11LM 1.r M-y-M NLN LN :LY.-11 11.N LN NA.-N IM.M 1.0 NJNi 126N 1.0 IPyi IM.). 1.0 11'Wi1 IN.11 1.0 N'MI'N .N.0 1.M 11 M1-M 1M.N LN M-y-N N..A LN .1-W 11 11.N I.N @IYrM IN.N 1.0 N-NI-M IM.M LN Nilu0 U.2. 9.0 1.-W N IN.N 1.0 IFMrN IN." I.N N.MI-M @I.N LN I", IS 12I.24 LM 111r-M NI.M 4.0 11-Mr'N 121.N 8.0 IM.N I.M 011,1M 111.1. Ca IIJri 4111.0 1.0 IILrtl 121.N ..M 11-4'-M IM.II 1.0 N'tl-N 17I.11 I.M tl-IN N NI.% LN 1116r 11 IILII ..M N-yi 1M.1, LN 11>NDN pI.Y LM IMII IY :N. .IN.IIY IY W INI N9. u. JbNN Iw. ..21 IYI. Lu Ninlwl ua II INLN IiN11.11N. FE>IO TJ: Board of Managers linnehaha Creek :laterShed District FROM: Eugene A. Hickok and Associates DATE: November 17, 1988 RE: Lake Level, Flow and Precipitation Summary for October 1988. Lake levels in Lake Minnetonka have continued to decline through October as illustrated by the attached graph and lake elevations. There has not been any discharge from Lake Minnetonka to Ninnehaha Creek since November 17, 1986. Creek flow at the Browndale Ave. dam in Edina during October is shown below. The 30 year average precipitation for October at the National Weather Service station in Maple Plain 1s 2.06 inches. The actual precipitation recorded in Wayzata for October was 0.88 inches. A summary of precipitation follows. PRECIPITATION SUMMARY SEPTEMBER 1988 Actual 30 Year Average Maple Plain -- 2.06 Minneapolis -St. Paul Intern'l Airport 0.80 1.85 Wayzata 0.88 -- MONTHLY FLOW SUMMARY Grays Bay Browndale Ave. Dam (cfs) (Cfs) October 5 0 2.8 October 12 0 2.8 October 19 0 3.2 October 26 0 7.5 SIX MONTH PRECIPITATION RECORDED OCT. 87 NOV. 87 DEC. 137 JAN. 88 FEB. 88 MAR. 88 AFR. 88 MAY BE, J UN. 88 JUL. Be AUG. Be SEFT Be OCT. 29 a 4. 2. 0. 1111_Bid MA'f as dun. sa © MAKE PLAN A'/E. JUL. ss AUC as SEPT. ss uourR WAY7ATA ACTUAL F'RECIF'ITATION SUMMARY OCT. as MPLS. AIRPORT MF'LS. AIRPORT MAPLE PLAIN WAYZATA AVERAGE ACTUAL AVERAGE ACTUAL 1.85 0.60 2.06 0.84 1.29 2.07 1.46 2.37 0.87 1.25 0.86 0.79 0.82 1.37 0.64 0.96 0.85 0.30 0.79 0.19 1.17 1.33 1.52 1.31 2.01 1.58 2.35 3.20 1.70 3.93 1.46 4.07 0.22 4.93 0.10 3.51 1.17 4.65 2.34 1.64 4.29 4.09 3.75 2.Do 2.79 2.83 7.04 1.85 0.80 2.06 '.. Be 111788.3 TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Mark E. Bernhardaon, City Administrator DATE: November 18. 1988 SUBJECT: Sewer Plant Property - Revenue Generation Per our meeting of Tuesday, November 8, 1988 the following information is provided based on: Property Tax (1988 Rules) Estimated Market Value (10 homes) $1,650.000 Estimated Assessed Value 3TT.500 1988 mill rate - 12.05 mills .01205 $4.350. Expenses Police (increase due to coat shift) 1.000 Fire (cost shift) 500 (Increase due to cost shift) Streets - Estimated Maintenance 11180 - Sealcoating (annual) 620 Actual dollar out lay 3. 00 Difference between Orono 4,800 Jurisdiction and Long Lake Jurisdiction Sewer Revenue (51.15/gtrx4xlO houses) . 2.046 Gallons - 25,000R4x10 . 800.000 Eat Cost MNCC (845/million) . 6T6 Local 116 . 885 . 1000 1,000 1,6T6 Not Revenue 370 •u Water Revenue (2.75/1000x20000/gtrx4xlO) 2200 .6.70/gtrxexlo 268 2.468 Est Cost/Long Lake (2.5O/l000x20000x4x10) . 2000 Orono 8.203/1000x800,000 . 162.40 AdmLn Billing . 116.00 2,288 Net Revenue 180 � � .a�� ± ���+ •¢ -i t �� 1 / Rai; � � 1 off ♦ G / W i J 0 B ie�• � —�— ,•��NoRTN L1NC ..r Giv�. �.Or .'I I i J so �• •M i U ., o \� s Vie• ��jv / \ aCl d O J Q� on w • \ •' is \ �N • A W Y j 'Pox k r o a 1 of \ uq 3 g. o "Ile I:�l C-1ANNE� y 1; k,L i E X C E P T 1 0 1` Qy k LINE ex Gov'r. Ler 3, S(o- /7, T.ir7. R-23z i r L�f f+Ta"p t �u _ 2 y \ �}L/NE i O1` -1-rm �� t -LING PMAUEc \ WIYU LIMB W,rH ANa Hr,I OF rH \i:aml of Gov;: L. � L`uuG• OF t a of , 1 33 \ .°� II�qooO \ r m, 39 \ � d 10" ORONO SCHOOL i 1.0%y R;,N EXPANSION FOREST � re ='"A-! =—t a �7A?E ":ter ";n�1iH.N NNJP06'i-'�� ,Z I �',� LI!v li At - CT1J AJEt</� _� _ �� ��• la,ul Ail ,a R St>� [IltYlt/t rbt Wm L. 6DL]11P w a1aPr /. 9W111P. vll9 w IauDAtla, { � � at/� I � LWvtvA In W Btvwl� I,IveAAOtA. Ovnty o[ Mtlrpm� m v�[v v! W [vlleavq alltrll.e PDD9[q I6 ORINSr .mmtllnD m W [atdtl wt I •� 1DIt P[t of [DL x lYfm Pnt aT W vmt 6Ax.00 !wt tlrrva[, aYenu. f11fR. amN1A9 m W Imam wt <1,9aN. bu Q+tl W vo m b nvwy" w[ttl u Iaoo anm mMVSIOtl. Am ae brsDl' m,.m w :Y I I i Mimu m W pW11c tP pWlle o lmvwr W uC111tY w aWmm mvm�::a IllD.n m W D,AC. >e vftmu ,evm! YlG bm L. MLL311P W alamy /. 9Wl1lP. H[v w bveteau,IA•. t�.Ivlam n9t IO I a � •. I� z Q OU t LOT ---rA K zw/ �EvAI ettd Lf x,6u I, an6nl a T Iu rTW I ll I 1, d16TA1 CREST $ ' CRYSTAL ( I2i iiEE7 1 W lrta f91'!1'M•[ _{ —_I__—. SNs n.f_/t"�`----- 1Mw..I•tl�.l m0I —HI.lI SArY fou IT W Z. SWA I, CAVSrAL CREST LOw PROPERTIES B L4 C'r. i A^•:•IT!rJta Wlt AniN CD1n aq at 1%_, .m nAla Alnm y. clam w Wlo L. 1WP. IaADItl v:�—Qom,-�...t bPmm ut WY lmG. [W. Ny ai I I /Ia®I RI r I W L. Mf11fP AIWe y. )1vP a Y rb lltlsmDn m.u,.lnt r Aumvldgv6 bloP w mfn alr ,f yN111P w /lbi9Y /. yILL]llp, vlta w wltbna Aea AIGmT. rWP u�1m L. 1WY�. 7.WM m0L I Ily �1wtm 1IR— OaetY, WOPb 12 I h—w —ty Wt f Anw nm+tlwa ua p1Atm W Dtnwtr ar¢IDwI m m11 wt u aalD /Into. RRINIS", Wt IA'- wt ,.. npD.ct t9DASAmm••— s! .. a Pr.vp, tut vl�ai.uar .n tv[vcL1Y mt.e m I_` we m l..e r /wttlW et . emer W[ w e.�m n.w mlt.[ur D1sPa m W ~e .. P D ® 1,0 wball .� (�1 scow .. rlDaD, WL W v9mW9 bmNn llnr An oa.avr emismm, w W[ tl,o AP m aelic Dlp+n m b OPL/mlaa m Wa pA[. PAl AD A. b Lw 61vuYP. ,t1P. LICPP N. ,)Dx5 I c nA[s Q tm.®O . m /nr IS, • DvbAI, irin Irltla) IA. [b lavwln9 In.tnPmc o Aamnlla9.e bfo m t111A _ atY o! ,9—, -Y NLLl1aD Iltl1011. Wd aarrly:. Wasp Lllnmw Ab. 1)Dx6. Ay �lulor is tl.nty. miu v Deuur Ave anlmw mn�ncs .Dma ms.: ayy IS, Ilm, IID,®a TDU DLt D! aao /®tL mAmlm Au APID.tl w AmwD A' W aty I it W W aty of pan. W A. nt . IswlAr rnuq Want lrla CA19 _ ary vT L i! Al IR1 9. W lttm aka w tv�aAuml n! W aaAl_I v!'11rmIDPu� Iea txy ppmcy 9Lry W msv ,r.. ts, s.wlwa W e< W P9vtrfDla 30 Y NbI 9Lp�, Huwt ls.lp K sty, �I IL r.®a.ty um...s Pwle.a by Mt- arwer ss.Dx, 5 arc malls. or aaao. Im.ma „Arm ADIDtlISl1111[pt /—��L—_�__ x y.IDenr rA[ Alo ymsc � ®Anton. Imt[lsal Laafrr. „DVQ9Dl• SZ I brvtry mrt!!y [AaL tASAA pyWly m 19— w Plm ymtl DIu L.rn pLa !a llna Nna1DAa m m1A n9 0 !wt Il n .am. wlaal em9[vfu Niwt.­ lvafuU. — Wlvinlnp lat 1lwA. ud 10 wt. Nbd tWA _ Nr a1 19� [Nt In vlam AM IO)alvle0 It— lam. vA mr• D. YN/tAD. mMODI lnlMly AlElral M: DIPLy ,-" mvlln m W D1At. 61DIY/Y DT'I/Ia1. 1�➢I m,ar[r, ICNfDID[A JWPmnt m GnVW 610. ,IDwPu LIVI Dt ,%9. Wn plI[ 11Y Dun vppwst WA _ a y of t /OpYD tl. IJDL9i1. 10/�U LpAIlY 6alr/Ym W: BIIHDBYOHB i mover /taum, ®,®,a mlxir, nlalflorA I nlrlq DA[tllY WL W vlmm DLt e! IApA aaml."WAX9Im uI fllna lay nmla an maA If­mfr ys , R Ly of 19 -- R. Dttl .VD . ILIM'( R[fLID➢t ay. faatr ECKSTR M ADD,; AID LO G I., AKA N C C - AD fl —10 Do ARIA THE I'D 04 0 /mi7 60" - (41 S.. —C. 0. IL 0 C_ xt 1-0 6 F _C. IT N C, :0 1— 01 kp :ic 1P+ OLMLINIITON NORTHERN RAILROAD Ls ,� �'�riu'lafldmrtl■h t)�v�-_ i- i� r Ir. "i/ i / j. iI ' I -,'r � II, It �''���♦ `� 1 1\� i f \ ; � . ,� ; 1. I e � pk�11E. 1_ • I i \ `` �I `�` \c \\t\` �C \♦` t I ' \`' �' �' W w wm eesmal10y:-Cky /L• i �I,,.� 1 \ \ ♦ - 1+1111.1 i', R •""ty�k�_P�Ir�YNir r � • 1 :\ :� �.s •I ' � �� li iill ey`""''.e.ry • /' y1111 � it I ' i i � �/. I i •, _ - i �NI I Ihrl Ace / . eeii i till, . tI� •'• ' SITE I I 11, 3 �onip P�9' - -LAND PRESERVATION/ i GRADING LONE - / - J ' / / _PRIVATE ROAD "" - �- �/ / 7 oon `\ i r-- ��1. SITE DATA _ 9UILONG AREA 1,1 E..- J I � 1 I 1 —_— \ 1\- \ SINGLE FAMILY HOMES: 25 III��� Lam_ J • j__ SITE AREA _ x I 32.6 AC. I HOMES PER ACRE: 76 1 - --- - PRIVATE OPEN SPACE 6.69 AC. AVERAGE LOT AREA: — I = 38,000. S.P. � PRIVATE ROAD AREA: 2.47 AC. L \ OUTLOT 0.53 AC — _ REMAINING SITE AREA: 9.0 AC. If L - -ZJ WO(bLAND PRESENVE 8 PRIVATE TRAIL S ITEM PINE RIDGE LN. PRIVATE ROAD a \ o / - ? A. z OUT LOT X6RNO $ODTN LINE OF gESDENTVIL OWN TSIG NORTH ME OF R—) COMMER IO nyNP. CITY OF ORONO PUBLIC _— TRAL ,I CITY OF LONG LAKE ---_ CITY \ EXISTING RCIAL PROPERTY-- nrY pF LOOAOr� a, 'Ire fONIENTAi1ONl . . T.H. 121Po _1 Meyers woad-s.00LW V V�-, _ i11:11' -r cT 106 SURII TTA BY REBER$ HONES PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN