Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout08-10-1987 Council PacketAGENDA FOR COUNCIL MEETING SET FOR MONDAY, AUGUST 10, 1987, 7:.7 P.M. (*) Asterisk items are considered to be routine items to tie enacted upon by one motion by the City Council under the Consent Item* on the agenda. Discussion will be held upon request. Memos regarding each of the Agenda items are available in the Public Packet which may be c to ined upon request from the Recorder. ROLL CALL 1. CONSENT AGENDA* 2. Oath of Office - William Breimhorst Police Officer 3. Presentation of Police Officer Mark Moran - Resolution of Appreciation APPI40VAL OF 14INUTU * 4. Regular Meeting of July 27, 1987 PLANNING COMMISSION COMIQNTS - Charles Kelly Representative PUBLIC C0MMz1'!a - (Limit 5 Minutes Per Person) ZONING ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT * 5. 11128 Rainey Anderson, 789 Old Crystal Bay Road South - Preliminary Subdivision - Resolution 6. 11153 Erickson/Corty, 1295 Sixth Avenue North - Resolution * 7. 11155 Lloyd Draper, 3955 Webb Street - Variance - Tabled to 8/24/87 * 8. 11156 Lloyd Draper, 1929 Fagerness Point Road - Variances - Tabled to 8/24/87 9. 11165 Steven Fay, 3045 Casco Point Road - Variance - Resolution If. 11166 Hartmut Ginnow-Merkert, 1840 Lakeview Terrace - Variance - Resolution 11. I1 173 David & Theresa Gardel la, 1230 Orono Oaks Drive - Variance - Resolution 12. 1117E Richard Putnam, 2765 Casco Point Road - Variances *13. Zoning Ordinance Amendment - Emergency Restoration MGIM 18 REPORT 14. Sealcoating Bid Award MRTOR15 REPORT CITY ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT 15. City Facilities Study (Mailed to Council 8/5/87) 16. Jeff Essen, 2648 Casco Point Road - Berm in Right -of -Way 17. Recycling Commission Costs 1988 18. No Trucks Ordinance Amendment. 19. No Trucks Restriction Guidelines - Old Beach Road - Resolution - Townline Road - Resolution 20. Woodhill Avenue - Feasibility Study 21. Metropolitan Waste Control - Navarre Interceptor 22. Budget Meeting Session - September 17, 1987 23. Enforcement Authority - Non Police Employees AGENDA FOR COUNCIL MEETING SET FOR MONDAY, AUGUST 19, 1987, 7:0/ P.M. CITY ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT Continuer] *24. 1987-88 Assessing Agreement *25. Resolution of Congratulations - Mrs. Pillsbury - 100th Birthday *26. Block Grant Renewal Agreement *27. Willow Drive and iiighway 12 Signal •28. Resolution of Appreciation - Mark Moran *29. Dittrich Agreement *30. Marketing of City Objectives - Redraft *31. Administrator's Information 2695 Casco Point Road 200 Hollander Road 2169 Wayzata Roulevard 3946 Sixth Avenue North Purple• Loosestrife Eradication CITY ATTOMMY'S REPORT ICENSES (32*) BILLS (33*) ADJOURNMENT MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD JULT 27, ATTENDANCE 7:02 P.M. The Orono Council met on the above date with the following members present: Mayor Grabek, Councilmembers Peterson, Sime, Goetten, and Callahan. The following represented the City staff: City Administrator Bernhardson, Public Works Coordinator Gerhardson, Building & "oning Administrator Mabusth, Assistant Planning & Zoning Administrator Gaffron, Police Chief Kilbo, and City Reco~der Peterson. City Attorney Blatz and City Engineer Cook were also present. CONSENT AGENDA* It was moved by Councilmember Sime, seconded by Councilmember Goetten, to approve the Consent Agenda* subject to removal of the following item: #24-Water Rates - requested by Councilmember Goetten Motion, Ayes 5, Nays 0. RNCOGNITION - POLICE OFFICERS AND POLICE RESERVES Mayor Grabek read and presented Special Commendations to the following Officers for their excellent work leading to arrests on a break -it, off Orono Orchard Road on March 29, 1987: Patrol Officer Irving English Reserve Officer Nathalie Welch Reserve Officer Peter Achey Reserve Officer Rick Denneson Reserve officer C.J. Gonsior Reserve Officer Randy O'Brien Mayor Grabek read and presented: "The United _ ates Marine Corps Certificate of Appreciation Presented to Officer J. Marc Fritzler in Recognition of and Appreciation -or Outstanding Service Rendered the United States Marine Corps. This Public Spirited Assistance is in Keeping with the Finest Traditions of American Patriotism and Loyalty. Presented the Twenty --first Day of June 1987. T.P, Carter; Captain, United States Marine Corps" This Certificate was presented to Officer Fritzler for presenting an "outstanding" class to the Military Police Company on the firing of the 870 Remington Shotgun, the 9mm Pistol and assistance in the rractical application phase of the Military Close Combat Pistol Course. City Administrator Bernhardson commended the on -duty Police and Reserve Offcers for a job well done during the June 23, 1987 rain storm of which they received in excess of 100 calls. MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD JULY 27, 1987 APPROVAL OF MINUTES• It was moved by Councilmember Sime, seconded by Councilmember Goetten, to approve the Minutes of the July 13, 1987 Council Meeting as submitted. Motion, Ayes 5, Nays 0. PARK COMMISSION COMBIBNTS BACKBERRY SKATING RINK POOLIC INFONATIONAL MEETING 7:16-7:20 City AdministiaLut Bernhardson stated that recently the City received a petition requesting the installation of a recreational 'ice skating rink at Hackberry Park. The Park Commission has reviewed the request and recommended construction of a 65'x 140' recreational (non -hockey) skating rink. The proposed cost is $11,000 ($3,000 rink and $8,000 well). Public Works Coordinator Gerhardson reviewed the proposed location of the rink in Hackberry Park. This rink would be open to the public. There will be no warming house, but benches will be provided. Park Commission Chairman Robert Kost was present for this matter. Jim Dillman, 225 willow Drive, stated he was in favor of the proposed skating rink. There were no other comments from the public regarding this matter. It was moved by Mayor Grabek, seconded by Councilmember Peterson, to conceptually approve the construction of a recreational ice skating rink and well at Hackberry Park and to direct staff to draft plans and specifications to receive bids for the installation of a well. Motion, Ayes 5, Nays 0. LAKE NINNNTONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT REPORT -1960 LMCD BUDGET Lake Minnetonka Con3ervation District Representative Jo Ellen Hurr reported on the following: -Lake Minnetonka's lake level rose approximately 12" with the recent rain storms. -1988 LMCD Budget - she totally supports staffs recommendations. -She is continuing to work for additional charges for license fees from commercial type ventures. -She reminded the Council of the upcoming Annual Conference for Public Officials. They are scheduled to meet at the Lafayette Club docks on August 1st at 11 :00 AN; there will be two Al i Alma's boats and lunch will be served. Representatives from the State and DNR will be present. MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD JULY 27, 1987 I.MCD REPORT CONTINUED It was moved by Mayor Grabek, seconded by Counci.lmember Goetten, that the Council express its f.:elings and concerns in relationship to the 1988 LMCD Budget and direct staff to include in budget considerations the full assessment for the 1988 Budget. Council further directs their representative to undertake the recommendation in the budget specifically as they relate to the contingency amount and Public Informatior. program. Motion, Ayes 5, Nays U. Metropolitan Waste Control Commission Representative Jo Ellen Burr presented a map of the area of untreated sewage flowing into the river due to the pipe break during the July 23rd storm. Repair of the pipe will take approximately ten days noting that this is a critical disaster. PUBLIC COMMENTS There were n-^ comments from the public. ZONING ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT: #958 VOYAGEUR SERVICE CENTER INC. 2420 SHADYWOOD ROAD CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT/VARIANCES/ COMMERCIAL SITE PLAN REV I IW RESOLUTION #2229 Present for this matter were: owner/Applicant Erwin Smith, Partner John O'Sullivan, and Architect Jack Welch. City Administrator Bernhardson explained the proposed three additiins to the existing full service station building: 1. A carwash 16' x 45141" (725.44 s.f. ) to the rear of the lot. 2. A convenience store 43' x 6' (2,580 s.f.) 3. A 26' x 26' canopy angle (3,150 s.f.) and relocation of pretroleum tanks and pump island. The proposed usage requires variances for right and left street setbacks principally beca ise of the canopy. Staff has recommended closing off the two accesses closest to the intorsc ction, however, Hennepin Co.jity states that the traffic patterns and volumes do not appear to support_ the closing of the accesses. Applicant has agreed that if accidents occur because of improper use of thece accesses or future improvements, they would agree to cluse the accesses. Another issue is the three parking stalls short of the required 26 parking stalls. Tht re is a finding in the drafted resolution that given partial credit to the parking stall shortage from the short term parking under canopy and the additional stalls available within repair garage. ki MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD JULY 27, 1987. #958 VOYAGEUR SERVICE CENTER CONTINUED City Engineer Cook verified that the corner has a low density traffic level even during peak traffic. Jack Welch noted a change in the proposed exterior of the building. They propose to use a "stucco" that is composed of a hard surface epoxy which comes in many colors. This exterior is more economical and easier to maintain. He submitted a sample of the proposed exterior. Mayor Grabek recommended that staff make the final decision regarding the material to be used with the exterior finish of building. Councilmember Callahan asked if staff was satisfied with the canopy structure, noting that the Planning Commission had concerns regarding location of the structure. Zoning Administrator Mabusth stated that the Planning Commission was very concerned with the original plan that proposed a 10' setback which was changed to 20' and now acceptable to Planning Commission. Councilmember Sime asked if there would be any prorlem with the sewer line capacity from the car wash. Zoning Administrator Mabusth stated that there wes an improvement in that sewer line with the reallignment of Lift Station 7, which would allow for the increased capacity. Councilmember Goetten and City Administrator Bernhardson brought up the issue of the proposed mixed use of permitted uses under a conditonal use pernit. City Attorney Blatz stated that this proposal consisted of permitted uses and conditional uses noting that the code does not prohibit the granting of mixed uses. It was moved by Mayor Grabek, seconded by Councilmember Goetten, to adopt Resolution #2229 per staff recommendation, subject to staff approval of the exterior material. Motion, Ayes 5, Nays 0. 4 MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD JULY 27, 1987 #1128 RAINEY ANDERSON 780 OLD CRYSTAL BAY ROAD SOUTH PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION RESOLUTION Present for this matter were: Rainey Anderson, Surveyor Gary Gabriel, and Attorney Herbert T =1er. City Administrator Berrihardson explained the preliminary subdivision which was revised to include two additional lots, extension of the road portion to be developed, and inclusion of a 50' road outlot to connect to the Kumlin plat at some future time. Planning Commission voted 3-2 to recommend approval subject to changing the access location to directly across from Farview Lane. The majority vote of the Planning Commission felt that from a planning perspective, the access across from Farview Lane is more appropriate even though the proposed access over the existing driveway entrance does meet minimum safety standards. The minority vote did not feel it was appropriate to disallow an access that meets the safety standards, concurring with the opinions expressed by the City Attorney and City Engineer. Assistant Zoning Administrator Gaffron stated that the disadvantages to applicant in changing the access location is more road cost and less desireable lots. Councilmember Goetten questioned the status of Mr. Kumlin's concern of his subdivision having a substandard lot if the road outlot was required. Assistant Zoning Administrator Gaffron stated that the entire 50' corridor was taken from the Rainey Anderson subdivison, however, Mr. Kumlin is still not agreeable to this corridor because he feels it will lower the value of his property in addition to the potential of road surrounding two sides of Lot 3. Herbert Lefler stated applicant requests the Council pay particular attention to the fact that the proposed access meets the minimum Access s lards. It was moved by Mayor Grabek, seconded by Councilmember Sime, to conceptually approve the preliminary subdivison per the findings and conditions of the preliminary draft resolution and the location of the private road access onto Old Crystal Bay Road South shall be as proposed by the applicant at the existing driveway entrance serving the existing residence. Motion, Ayes 5, Nays 0. 5 MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD .IULY 27, 1987 #1136 DICK HASSEL* 840 HUNT FARM ROAD FINAL SUBDIVISION RESOLUTION #2230 It was moved by Councilmember Sime, seconded by Councilmember Goetten, to adopt Resolution #12230 granting final approval of Huntington Farm Second Addition. Motion, Ayes 5, Nays 0. #1148 ST. EDWARDS EPISCOPAL CHURCH 865 NORTH FERNDALE ROAD CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RESOLUTION #2231 Present representing St. Edwards Episcopal Church was Bill Martin. City Administrator Bernhardson explained the request for a c:onditonal use permit to allow day care/pre-school instrution by the Wayzata Home Base and Montessori School of Wayzata to be conducted within the lower level of the church building. The original application proposed 45-50 people (students, teachers, etc) and at that point Appendix E of the Fire Code would apply to this occupancy level requiring a fire suppression system. Subsequent, to that, the proposal has been reduced to a maximum of 29 people which does not require sprinkling of the building. Mayor Grabek was concerned about the liability to the City if the church exceeds the maximum allowed occupancy and a fire occurs, and how will this be monitored. City Administrator Bernhardson noted that there are ground level emergency exits from all classroom areas to be used by both agencies. Zoning Administrator Mabusth stated the Fire Inspector Jacobs and staff intend to conduct two or three unannounced inspe-tirns por year. Bill Martin stated that the maximum occupancy will be put in the leases and thf, church will monitor the use level. Mayor Grabek suggested requiring the City of Wayzata and Long Lake Fire departments to inspect and approve the property. Attorney Blatz, in response to Mayor Grat-,ek's suggestion, noted that as luny as the City places conditions in the resolution that neet the code and take some measure to enforce the condi cont, the City would not be liable if the conditions were '.Lolat*d. 6 MINUTES OF THE RRGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD JULY 27, 1987 #1148 ST. EDWARDS EPISCOPAL CHURCH CONTINUED It was moved by Maycr Grabek, seconded by Councilmember Peterson, to adopt Resolution #2231 approving a conditonal use permit for a day care/pre-school instruction class use at St. Edwards Episcopal Church. Motion, Ayes 5, Nays 0. #1150/#1170 TED Q. FRIG i TIMOTHY D. JOHNSON 627 - 629 NORTH FERNDAI.E ROAD SUBDIVISION OF A LOT LINE REARRANGEMENT DRAINAGE AND IITILI'.Y EASEMENT VACATiON RFSOLUTIONS 12232 i #2233 Assistant Zoning Administrator G -on explained the requests: #1150 Subdivision of 3 lot li— ruarrangemcnt to relocate lot line between the two properties to conform to the exis'.ing use/maintenance patterns. 01170 '.acation of existing drainage and utility easement along old lot line (in exchange for similar easement along new lot line.) It was moved by Councilmember Goetten, seconded by Councilmember Sime, to adopt Resolution #2232 approving a Metes and Bounds Subdivision of a Lot Line Rearrangement and; adopt Resolution #2233 approving Vacating an Unused Portion of a Dedicated Drainage and Utility Easement at 627 and 629 North Ferndale Road for Ted Q. Feig and Timothy D. Johnson. Motion, Ayes 5, Nays 0. #1153 RICHARD ERICIISON/JULIE FORTY* 1295 SIXTH AVENUE NORTH VARIANCE FINAL. RESOLUTION #2215 it was moved by Councilmember Sime, seconded by Councilmember Goetten, to table Final Approval of Resolution 02215 until the August 10, 1987 Council meeting per staff recommendation. Motion, Ayes 5, Nays 0. 11.I55/#1156 LLOYD DRAPRR* 3955 MEBB STirtRKT/1929 FAGERNESS POINT ROAD VAR I ANC: RS RIR.RO L.UT I ON It was moved by Counci lmember Sime, seconded by Councilmember Goetten, to table Applications 01155 and 01156 until the August 10, 1987 Council meet.inq per applicant's requev. . Mot i on, Ayes 5, Nays 0. 7 MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD JULY 27, 1987 #1160 WILLARD BURY/DAVID E. LEE 2695 CASCO POINT ROAD VARIANCE RESOLUTION #2234 Applicant/Owner Willard Bury and Applicant/Buyer David Lee were present for this matter. City Administrator Bernhardson explained that this matter was tabled at the last Council meeting so that the prospective buyer of the property could be present. Applicant previously submittel three alternatives to reduce hardcover in order to pave driveway. Applicant prefers Alternative 1 resulting in 35.1% 75-250' hardc Staff recommended Alternative 2 resulting in 34.0% ha o Ir. The buyer, Mr. Lee, requests approval of Alternative 4 which consists of Alternative 2 with the deletion of the requirement that 160 s.f. of the parking turn -around area be eliminated, which would result in 35.6% hardcover. David Lee, owner of the David Lee Funeral Home in Wayzata, stated that his business occasionally requires him to drive the limousine home, and more importantly, he would need the extra area for his two teenage daughters to park ane exit the driveway safely. He indicated that he could not purchase the home unless Atlernative 4 was approved. Larry and Correnne Yane, 2697 Casco Point Road, were present for this matter. The Kane's were upset about the City allowing the fill to be brought in in order to build the house on the property which has since upset the drainage. They do not understand the reason for a code when the City allows deviations from the code. They stated that during the last rain storm, water from the Swale flooded their basement. They indicated that drainage from applic.:rt's driveway was no problem. Councilmember Goetter stated that applicant's driveway was very narrow and relt there was a legitimate safety concern. She suggest staff work on solving the drainage problem. Therefor. for health, safety and welfare purposes, she would aonrove Alternative 2, but would not approve any more . ,i rdcover being allowed on this property ever. Attorney Blatz note 'hat the Kane's are currently in litigation w.ith ti,e -t.y regarding the drainage and recommend no further <-,ussion of the drainage problem. Mr. Bury stated tt.r4 reason he is withdrawing his previous agreement r► the City for driveway strips is for the sole reason .afety. 8 MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD JULY .27, 1987 #1160 BURY/LEE CONTINUED It was moved by Councilmember Goetten, seconded by Councilmember Peterson, to approve Alternative 2 per staff recommendation, with no further hardcover approved on the property. Mayor Grabek stated that tte Council must determine whether adhering to a previous agreement made to the City by applicant is appropriate in light of the health, safety and welfare issues. Mr. Bury noted that Mr. Lee will not buy the house if Alternative 2 is approved because he would r:c,t be able to turn around. Councilmember Goetten withdrew her motion because she misunderstood that Alternative 2 would not be a workable solution for Mr. Lee. It was moved by Councilmember Goetten, seconded by Councilmember Peterson, to approve Alternative 4 due to pr4.mari ly safety concerns. Motion, Ayes 2, Nays 3. Gr bek, Callahan, and Sime voted nay. Motion fails. Mayor Grabek did not feel safety was the major issue noting the need has not been consistently explained. Councilmember Callahan felt that the strips vs. paving the same area would ultimately result in the same amount of hardcover due to compaction, therefore recommended paving the existing driveway area. It was moved by Councilmember Callahan, seconded by Councilmember Sime, to approve Alternative 3 resulting in no net increase of hardcover from what has been allowed. Motion, Ayes 2, Nays 3. Grabek, Goetten, and Peterson voted nay. Motion fails. Mr. Bury noted that he would not be abl^ to get out of his driveway with Alternative 3. It was moved by Councilmember Goetten, seconded by Councilmember Sime, to approve Alternative 2 resulting in 34.0% hardcover iiue to safety concerns. Motion, Ayes 3, Nays 2. Grabek and Callahan voted nay. Motion carried. 9 MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD JULY 27, 1987 #1161/#1162 RANDY WEESTRAND* 525 ORCHARD PARK ROAD VARIANCES/CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FINAL. RESOLUTION #2235 It was moved by Councilmember Sime, seconded by Councilmember Goetten, to adopt Resolution #2235 granting variances and a conditional use permit for Randy Weestrand, 525 Orchard Park Road. Motion, Ayes 5, Nays 0. GREG PERT, 309 MESTLAKE STRSBT HOME OCCUPATION Greg Perl was present for this matter. City Administrator Bernhardson explained the Home Occupation licensed file with the City in December 1985. The City has since received complaints regarding parking of a semi -truck trailer on a regular basis. Citations were issued and the case was continued for one year due to Mr. Perl's pledge to maintain the property without further violations, however, the problem continues. Staff recommends denial of the Home Occupation License because of the continued violations. Prosecuting Attorney Richter concurred with staff's plan of action and awaits the staff recommendation regarding the re- opening of the original violations before the courts. Greg Perl was present for this matter and stated he does landscape work for a living. He stated that any large trucks parked c:n his property are there temporarily for repairs (welding, maintenance, etc.). He showed pictures showing that he stores his equipment behind the garage in a fenced area or in his garage. He noted that he does most of his work out of his father's garage in Plymouth and permanently stores his semi -truck at that same location. Mayor Grabek stated that if Mr. Perl kept an orderly residence, there should be no probl,im. City Administrator Bernhardson still recommended denial subject to Mr. Perl living within the City's guidelines. Councilmember Sime felt that since the last complaint was in June, the City should give Mr. Perl another chance to rectify the situation, recommending tabling at this time. Mr. Perl noted that -is father is expanding his business in Plymouth and he %.: 1 soon use that location entirely. 10 MINUTES OF THE RR3ULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD JULY 27, 1987 GREG PERL CONTINUED Staff. felt it this was the case, Mr. Perl may no longer need a Home Occupation License. I- was moved by Mayor Grabek, seconded by Councilmember Sime, to withdraw the Home Occupation License application, return the fee paid by applicant, and citations will be issued if any further complaints are received. Further, staff will monitor the situation and if no violation occur within 3 months, the pending legal charges against applicant will be dropped. Motion, Ayes 5, Nays 0. 815 FOREST ARMS LANE* DOCK INSTALLATION RESOLUTION #2236 It was moved by Councilmember Sime, seconded by Councilmember Goetten, to adopt Resolution #2236 Approving a Building Permit Application for Mike & Mary McElligott to Construct a Dock on Lot 2, Block 2 Forest Arms. Motion, Ayes 5, Nays 0. #1167 LEN BACBKES* 2813 CASCO POINT ROAD RENAL OF VARIANCES RESOLUTION #2237 It was moved by Councilmember Sime, seconded by Councilmember Goetten, to adopt Resolution i2237 approving renewal of variances previously approved in Resolution #2007. Motion, Ayes 5, Nays 0. MAYOR'S REPORT: Mayor Grabek had no report. CITY ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT: CITY FACILITINS STUDY It was moved by Mayor Grabek, seconded by Councilmember Peterson, to table this matter until the August 10, 1987 Council meeting. Motion, Ayes 5, Nays 0. ANIMAL CONTROL SERVICE EXTENSION - LONG LAKE City Administrator Bernhardson reviewed the issue of determining whether the City desires to extend its Animal Control Service to the City of Long Lake. It was moved by Mayor Grabek, s: conded by Coi: n, lmember Sime, that Council discuss fur -her modifications in the program and once mok.ified that they ve used as an interim program for :he balance of 1987. Motion, Ayes 5, Nays 0. 11 MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD JULY 27, 1987 MARKETING OF CITY OBJECTIVES City Administrator Bernhardson explained the issue of adopting a program to increase the City's "clout" so that the City can better achieve it's overall objectives. Staff has established a draft program which outlines three main areas: Organizations of Interest, Means to Accomplish, and Objectives to be Marketed. Councilmember Callahan recommended adding Hennepin Regional Park District and the Department of Natural Resources to the list of Organizations of Interest. Mayor Grabek felt it was an important program. It was moved by Mayor Grabek, seconded by Councilmember Goetten, that the Council adopt the draft program to implement its strategic planning to market its strategic objectives with other organizations during the upcoming months together with the establishment of the list of organizations. Motion, Ayes 5, Nays 0. INSURANCE SERVICE OFFICE - NOTICE OF CLASSIFICATION CHANGE Cites Administratrator Bernhardson explained the ISO rating classification change effective 1 September 1987. The portion of the community which is served by mains and hydrants has been reduce from a class 7 to class 6, which does not make an appreciable difference in the residential properties but does make: a difference in the commercial, retail, multiple residential properties. The balance of the community where there are not hydrants is about 30% in insurance premium between being in a hydranted area and a non-hyd*anted area. The reasons for the classification change are the improvements in the alarm hardling, improvements in equipment by the respective fi o departments serving the City and a change in the way the grading schedule is done. It was moved by Mavor Grabek, seconded by Councilmember Sime, that the Council accept the change in insurance classification and extend its appreciation to the fire departments serving the communities who assisted in achieving this !eduction in the hydranted are,.s, by written letter. Motion, Ayes 5, Nays u. City Administrator Bernhardson suggested that the Fire Chiefs come and neet the Council at a meeting. 12 MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD JULY 27, 1987 WATER RATES - WAYZATA SYSTEM Councilmember Goetten recomended that the Orono residents in the Chevy Chase -North Ferndale-Northgate Area be advised of the water rate increase to City of Orono for water purchased frog: the City of Wayzata and the City's efforts to keep the rates down. It was moved by Councilmember_ Goetten, seconded by Councilmember Sime, to approve; the contract water rates charged by the City of Wayzata for water customers in Orono Area #3 at $2.50 per customer and $1.19 per 1,000 gallons per quarter, effective with the September 30, 1987 billing. Further moved and seconded that an increase to the Orono consumers in Area #3 is not necessary at this time but the rates will be reviewed at the end of the year, as usual.. Motion, Ayes 5, Nays 0. POLICE OFFICER RECOGNITION* RESOLUTIONS #2223 TO #2228 It was moved by Councilmember Sime, seconded by Councilmember Goetten, that the Orono City Council adopt Resolutions 02223 to #2228 recognizing the excellent efforts of Police Officer Chip English and Reserve: Officers Peter Achey, Rick Denneson, '2.J. Gonsior, Randy O'Brien and Nathalie Welch for the excellent efforts leading to arrests following a break-in. Motion, Ayes 5, Nays 0. 2160 WAYZATA BOULEVARD - FUEL LEAKAGE* It was moved by Councilmember Sime, seconded by Councilmember Goetten, to accept staff's informantion regarding the fuel leakage at 2160 Wayzata Boulevard. Motion, Ayes 5, Nays 0. ENFORCEMENT POLICY - BOAT RAMPS* It was moved by Councilmember Sime, seconded by Councilmember Goetten, that Council accept staff's information regarding its enforcement policy as it relates to specifically boat ramps as hardcover in the 0-75' zone. Motion, Ayes 5, Nays 0. AUTHORITY TO HIRE PART -TINE OFFICER* It was moved by Councilmember Sime, seconded by Councilmember Goetten, that subject to successful completion of physical and psychological testing that Mr. William Breimhorst be hired at $6.50/hour plus prorata benefits effective as early as l August 1987. This would be for an average maximum of 24 hours per week and will terminate upon Officer Ki rnyezuk's return to work or December 31, 1987 which ever is earlier. Motion, Ayes 5, Nays 0. 13 MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD JULY 27, 1987 ADDITIONAL DEPOSITORY* RESOLUTION #2238 It was moved by Councilmember Sime, seconded by Councilmember Goetten, to adopt Resolution #2238 making additional depository appointment for 1987. Motion, Ayes 5, Nays 0. ADMINISTRATOR'S INFORMATION* It was moved by Councilmember Sime, seconded by Councilmember Goetten, to accept City Administrator Bernhardson's Information regarding: Traffic Control - Willow Drive/Hwy. 12, 200 Hollander Road, 3946 Sixth Avenue North, 4625 Tonkaview, MWCC Meeting, French Creek -Berm, Lake Minnetonka Lake Level, and MWCD Storm Water Management Plan. Motion, Ayes 5, Nays 0. CITY ATTORNEY'S REPORT: City Attorney Blatz reported that she will be subm.Ltting a brief summary regarding a recent Supreme Court opinion. STORM DAMAGE - JULY 23RD THRU JULY 26TH City Administrator Berhardson submitted a memo regarding the storm damage which occurred on July 23rd and July 26th. Attached to memo was a map indicating areas of damage noting that the most substantial damage in the community was along the steeper lakeshore banks where the intense rains resulted in parts of the lakeshore banks sloughing off into the lake. It was noted that the list of damage was incomplete. He noted the outstanding job done by the Police Dept, and Public Works Department during and after the major storm on July 23rd. City Administrator Bernhardson noted that staff will be video taping the shoreline to compare with a video taping done by the City Assessor about a year ago. City Administrator Bernhardson noted that the lake level rose approximate) 12 inches from these storms and according to Jim .hady, the lake level is only one - tenth of a foot _)w from the water going over the control structure at Grays Bay Dam. STORM DAMAGE - RESTORATION WORK City Administrator rernhardson reviewed staff's proposed temporary I:)1icy fur work restoration from storm damaqe. It was moved by Co. - -i lmember Sime, seconded by Councilmember Peterscf, that the Council adopt the staff policy for re-' Lation work as an ordinance amendment for declare emergency to restore existinq land. Motion, Ayes 5, - Y ; 0. 14 MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD JULY 27, 1987 LICBNSBS* BILLS* It was moved by Councilmember Sime, seconded by Councilmember Goetten, to approve the following license: Septic System Installer - Halstad Contracting Motion, Ayes 5, Nays 0. It was moved by Councilmember Sime, seconded by Councilmember Goetten, to approve payment of the All Funds Accounts. Motion, Ayes 5, Nays 0. ADJOURNNZNT 9:16 P.M. It was moved by Councilmember Sime, seconded by Councilmember Goetten, to adjourn the regular Council meeting at 9:16 P.M. Motion, Ayes 5, Nays 0. ATTEST: Dorothy M. Hallin, City Clerk James R. Grabek, Mayor 1% To: Mayor Grabek Orono Council Members City Administrator Bernhardson From: Michael P. Gaffron, Asst Planning & Zoning Administrator Date: August 3, 1987 Subject: #1128 Ranie Anderson, 780 South Old Crystal Bay Road Preliminary Subdivision - Resolution Attached is the revised resolution of preliminary plat approval as conceptually approves] by the Council on a 5-0 vote at the July 27 Council meeting. Motion , seconded , to approve preliminary plat approval Resolution No. fo7 Rainey Anderson at 780 South Old Crystal Bay Road. Ayes , nays Ott of ORONO '`'+• RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. A RESOLUTION GRANTING PRELIMINARY APPROVAL FOR A PLAT AT 780 SOUTH OLD CRYSTAL BAY ROAD APPLICATION NO. 1128 WHEREAS, Rainey Anderson on March 18, 1987 filed a formal subdivision application with the City of Orono for approval of a four -lot residential plat of property legally described as follows: P.I.D. No. 04-117-23 43 0004: The North 206.00 feet of the West 55 rods of Lot 26, AUDITOR'S SUBDIVISION NUMBER 229, HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA, according to the recorded plat thereof; and P.I.D. No. 04-117-23 43 ;,,,5: That part of the North 25 1/4 rods of the West 55 rods of Lot 26 AUDITOR'S SUBDIVISION NUMBER 229, HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA, according to the recorded plat thereof, lying South of the North 206 feet thereof; and P.I.D. No. 04-117-23 43 0006: The North 99.10 feet of the South 379.50 feet of the West 948.50 feet of Lot 25, AUDITOR'S SUBDIVISION NUMBER 229, HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA, according to the recorded plat thereof; ALSO The South 280.40 feet of the East `.69.00 feet of the west 948.50 feet of said Lot 26; and P.I.D. No. 04-117-23 44 0003: That part of Lot 26, AUDITOR'S SUBDIVISION NUMBER 229, HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA, according to the recorded plat thereof, lying Fast of the West 948.50 feet thereof. WHEREAS, after due published and mailed notice in accordance with Minnesota Statues 462.358 et. seq. and the City of Orono Zoning and Platting Codes, the Orono Planning Commission held a public hearing on April 20, 1987, at which time all persons desiring to be heard concerning this application were given the opportunity to speak thereon; and UNKRILAS, the application was revised to a six -lot residential plat on June 18th, 1987, and, whereas, the neighboring property owners within 350 feet of the subject property were duly notified of the proposed revisions and the additional Planning Commission review to be held on July 20, 1987, and the Orono Planning Con ission reviewed the revised proposal on July 20, 1987 at which time all persons desiring to be tienrd concerning the revised application were given the opportunity to speak thereon; and Page 1 of 6 of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL ' NO. • a a WHEREAS, at their regular meeting held on July 27, 1987 the Orono City Council considered the revisec' subdivision application of Rainey Anderson, noting the following findings of fact.: 1. The property is located within the RR-18 Single Family Rural Residential Zoning District requiring a minimum of 2 acres o` contiguous dry buildable land within each newly created lot. 2. 'Phe property contains a total of approximately 29.11 acres, )f which approximately 20.07 acres is considered dry buildable. 3. The proposed plat contains six lotG each exceeding the 2.0 cre minimum lot area requirement. 4. Proposed Lots 2 and 3, Block 1 and Lots 2 and 3, Block 2 rec.1ire a variance because they do not have frontage on a public roadway. 5. All six lots are proposed to front on F.� d access to F private road. Lot 2, Block 1 and Lot 3, Flock 2 require a variant: because they do not contain the required 200' lot width as measured at the 50' front setback line from the cul-de--sac, but do meet the 100' width standard if private road Outlot B is considered as part of the front lot line. Lot 3, Block 1 requires a variance because it does not have 200' of frontage abutting road Out 1 of B, but does exceed 200' in all dimensions. 6. The private road intended to serve the plat shall be constructed subject -to the c,,nditions of a developers agreemr to be executed between the City and the developer. c* andards f c. his road are as follows: Right-of-way Minimum Width: 50' Minimum Paved Width: 24' Base: 8" Class 5 106% Crushed Surface: 3" 2341 Bituminous Surfaces Cul-de-sac: 50' Minimum Pight-of-wz,�- Radius 40' Minimum Paved RaOi,l . 7. It is intended that the private : -ad be privately owned and maintained. The City will require the: the develop,-r execute the standard road and ut i 1 i t y easement ovc- he private road, and shal 1 execute the standard Declaration (if iva'e Road Easement and Declaration for Maintenance of Same. It intended that Outlot A be developed as a private road now, and tha. tit lot B sha11 be developed at such time that Lot 3, Block 1. is divi �nto 2 or more lots. Page 2 of f, ;, City of ORONO) b 'k RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 8. A separate right-of-way out lot shall be shown on the plat as Outlot C for purposes of providing for a future connection between the proposed private road and the plat road preliminarily approved for the plat of I.ot 2, Block 1 of Foxwood so that these two roads may be connected if deemed necessary in the future 9. Three distinct wetlands exist within the property boundaries and will be subject to Conservation 6 Flowage Easements. 10. Due to the future potential for grade changes to South Old Crystal Bay Road, it is appropriate to require the dedication of a total of 20' drainage and utility easement along the west line of Lot 1, Block 2, so that future potential road bank cuts do not interfere with utilities. 11. No additional right-of-way will be dedicated for County Road 64. 12. All four proposed lots of between 2 and 5 acres in area have been demonstrated to contain suitable sites for primary and alternate drainfields to serve the proposed single family residences. A suitable alternate drainfi.eld site has been demonstrated for Lot 2, Block 1 containing the existing residence. Lot 3, Block 1 exceeds 5 acres in area and is not required to be tested for drainfield sites. 13. Single family residences can be constructed on each of the new lots withoat the need for further variances. NOW, THEREFORE dE IT RESOLVED, that ba ed upon either one or more of the f indings noted above, the Ci ty Council of the City of Orono hereby approves the preliminary plat for Rainey Andersc.i at 780 South Old Crystal Bay Road per the survey attached as Exhibit A hereto by De -Mars -Gabriel Lard Surveyors, Inc. subject to the following condition.:;: 1. The location of the private road access ,;ito Old Crystal Bay Road South shall be as proposed by the applicant at the existing driveway entrance serving the existing residence. 2. A variance wi 1 1 be granted for I ots a,'d 3, Block I ar.r3 I c t r 2 and 3, Hlock 2 which do not front on a I,ubli.. roadway as required. 3. A variance wi 11 be granted t •1 the 200' ct width standard., for Lots 2 and 3, Block 1 and Lot 3, oak 2. 4. All six lots shall access to the private .•d. Page 3 of 6 C l t. ' of URONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 5. The private road shall be constructed to City private road requirements, subject to a developers agreement to be executed between the City and the developer. Private road construction can begin as soon as the engineering plans for the road have been approved by the City and the developers agreement has been executed. Plat road Outlot A is to be developed now to serve Lots 1 and 2, Block 1 and Lots 1, 2 and 3, Block 2. Outlot B is provided as corridor for future private road access to Lot 3, Block 1. At such time that Lot 3, Block 1 is divided into 2 or more lots, Outlot B shall be developed to private road standards. Outlot C is provided for future roadway connection to the plat road of the subdivision of Lot 2, Block i, Foxwood; this will stay as a private road outlot, not developed but available to create a "through" route if these private cul-de-sac roads ever become public roads. Outlots A an6 C shall be owned and maintained jointly by the owner of Lots 1 through 3, Block 1 and Lots 1 through 3, Block 2 and shall be included in the Declaration of Private Road Easement and Dedication for Maintenance of Same. 6. Standard road and utility easements and private road maintenance covenant to be filed with the plat. 7. Standard drainage and utility easements to be shown on plat along lot lines. Provi.,e a 20' wide drainage easement along swale at neck of Lot 1, Block 1. Provide a 20' wide drainage and utility easement along the west line of Lot 1, Block 2. 8. Conservation and Flowage Easements to be dedicated over the two major wetlands and over the low area below elevation 940' straddling the line between Lots 2 and 3, Block 1. 9. Payment of standard park fees of $200 each for Lots 1, 2 and 3, Block 2 and Lot 1, Block 1, and $100 for Lot 3, Block 1. Total - $900. 10. Payment of revised application fee for the revised proposal in the amount of $325.00 per staff memo of 7/8/87. 11. No building permits will be issued until the private road base work has been completed and been approved by the City. 12. The private road shall be allowed to access direcrly to County Road 84 subject to conditions for such access as imposed by the Hennepin County Department of Transportation in their required access permit. 13. The private road shall be privately owned and maintained per the appropriate access easement./maintenance documents to be executed by the developer. Page 4 of 6 City of OROB O RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 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: 1. RECORD PLAT drawings in the form of two (2) mylar copies and one (1) copy reduced to 1"=2001. Drawing to include: a) Lot lines platted per preliminary survey by DeM- and Gabriel Land Surveyors, Inc. attached as Exhibit A heret b) Dedication of "drainage and utility easements" 10' wide along all perimeter property lines and 5' each side of internal property lines, 20' along the west line of Lot 1, Block 2, and 20' in width along the drainageway in Lot 1, Block 1. c) Designation and dedication of the wetlands as drainage easements on the plat. 2. LEGAL DOCUMENTS required: a) Title opinion addressed to the City. All owners, mortgage holders or others with property interest indic-.ted therein shall sign the plat and all other documents affected by such interest. b) The applicant must provide certified copies of all recorded easements currently affecting the property. c) Signed and executed Flowage and Conservation Easements; blank area requiring description may be filled out as follows "over the drainage easements as shown on the plat of (plat name)". d) Signed and executed developers agreement and letter of credit for construction of the private road. e) Signed and executed road and utilities easement over the private road outlots. f) Signed and executed "Declaration of Private Road Easement and Declaration for Maintenance of Same". g) Completed "Application for Private Road Name" 3. FEES TO BE PAID: Total Due $1,525.00 a) Park dedication fee per current schedule: 4 new residential lots at 2-acre density - $200/lot. 1 new residential lot at 5- plus acre density - $100/lot. 'TOTAL $900.00. b) Final plat fee - $150.00 c) Legal review and filing fees of $150.00. Paoe 5 of 6 City of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. d) Additional fee for revised application - $325.00 Conceptually adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota at a regular meeting held July 27, 1987, by a vote of 5-0. Formally adopted by the City Council of the City of Oronc,, Minnesota at a regular meeting held August 10, 1987. ATTEST: Dorothy M. Hallin, City Clerk James R. Grabek, Mayor Fagg 6 of 6 Agenda Item #6 To: Mayor Grabek & Orono Council Members City Administrator Bernhardson From: Michael P. Gaffron, Asst Planning & Zoning Administrator Date: August 7, 1987 Subject: #1153 Richard Erickson & Julie Corty, 1295 Sixth Ave North - Variance - Resolution Applicant's landscape architect Herb Baldwin has provided staff with detailed plans showing the heights of the various portions of wall and stairway for this project. A plan for screening the stairway also was submitted, and includes ivy planted upon the structure and Japanese "'Vew" planted in front of it (this is a "shady area" plant of 18"-24" in height that will screen most of the visible wall portions). Baldwin notes that in order for evergreens to have been used, the existing extensive natural screening would need to have been removed to provide sunlight, defeating the purpose of low -profile structure blending into the hill. The stair and walls follow existin4 grades so that the average height of walls is 2'-3' with a maximum ` 4 Where downhill walls were intended to be higher than the tread 1 .l (to maintain the "blocky" feeling exhibited with the residence st ture), Baldwin has agreed to cut these down to match tread level to soft•-, *he appearance of the stair. Staff Rece� ndation - Staff recommends approval, finding that the proposed plans meet Council's intent of minimizing the visual impact of the stairway from across the lake. (A copy of the plans will be provided at the meeting if you wish to view them. Note that the resolution of approval was passed at your July 27 meeting subject to staff review of final plan.) To: Mayor Grabek Orono Council Members .:ity Administrator Bernhardson From: Michael P. Gaffron, Asst Planning & Zoning Administrator Date: August 3, 1987 Subject: M1155/#1156 Lloyd Draper, 3955 Webb Street - 1929 Fagerness Point Road - Variances - Table to August 24, 1987 Mr. Draper underwent eye surgery shortly after the Planning Commission review of this application, and his agent John Blumentritt requests that this be tabled again until Mr. Draper is able to attend the meeting. To: Mayor Grabek Orono Council. Members ' City Administrator Bernhardson Fron: Mary Jo Knott, Septic & Zoning Aide Date: July 29, 1987 Subject: #1165 Steven J. Fay, 3045 Casco Point Road - Variance - Resolution Zoning District: LR-lC Application - Front yard setback variance to construct a detached garage in front of the front line of the house. Pertinent Ordinance - Section 10.03, Subdivision 9 (D) List of Exhibits: Exhibit A - Application Exhibit B - Plat Map Exhibit C - Property Owners List Exhibit D - Survey Exhibit E - Hardcover Inventory Exhibit F - Garage Placement Alternatives Exhibit G - Notice of Planning Commission Action of 7/22/87 Discussion - The applicant is requesting a front yard setback variance to construct a detached garage. The proposed garage would be placed 10' west of the existing house and project 11' in front of the front line of the house. The size of the proposed garage is 24'x221. The building permit for the house was issued in 1974 and was under the 1967 Ordinance of R-lD (� acre) zone. It is currently in a LR-lC (� acre) zoning district. The principal structure on the lot currently meets LR-lC zoning standards. The percentage of hardcover is not an issue (see Exhibit E). This lot is hooked up to City sewer and water. The proposed detached garage will serve mainly for the storage of a boat and other equipment now stored in the open yard. The staff has offered two (2) alternative locations for the garage. Review Exhibit F, staff proposed attaching the garage to the front and side of existing residence. No setback variances would be required. This placement would disrupt the landscaping around the house. The second alternative site for the garage would be attached and aligned with the front line of the existing house. This placement would also disrupt the landscaping around the house. The windows on the west side of the house would be partially covered by the placement of an attached garage at this location. The applicant's proposed site would have the least impact on the landscaping surrounding the housco. Zoning File #1165 July 29, 1987 Page 2 of 2 Planning Commission Recommendation - The Planning Commission accepted the staff recommendation to approve the setback variance application of Steven Fay for the property at 3045 Casco Point Road. This recommendation was based on the following hardships and findings: 1) The proposed garage will provide much needed storage space for equipment now stored in yard. 2) The proposed site will have the least amount of impact on the surrounding landscape. 3) The hardcover increase will be minimal for the proposed site. The enclosed approving resolution has been drafted per the findings and conditions set forth in the Planning Commission recommendation noted above. Cit�� of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. A RESOLUTION GRANTING A VARIANCE TO MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 10.03, SUBDIVISION 9 (D) FILE #1165 WHEREAS, Steven J. Fay (hereinafter "the applicant") is the owner of the property located at 3045 Casco Point Road within the City of Orono (hereinafter "City") and legally described as Lot 57, Spring Park and part of Ivy Place, Hennepin County, Minnesota (hereinafter "the property"); and WHEREAS, the applicant has applied to the City for a variance to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.03, Subdivision 9 (D) to permit the construction of a detached garage to be located in front of the front line of the existing house and is approximately 62' set back from the front lot line. Minnesota: NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono, FINDINGS 1. This application was reviewed as Zoninq File #1165. 2. The property is located in the 1.R-1C Single Family Lakeshore Residential Zoning District. 3. The Orono Planning Commission reviewed this application on July 20, 1987, and recommended approval of the proposed variance based upon the fo:lowi.ng findings: A) The proposed garage will provide much needed storage space for equipment now stored in yard. B) The proposed site wi 1 1 have the least amount of impact on the surrounding landscape. C` The proposed garage and existing house and landscape will fall well below the current 30 percent hardcover allowance. 4. The City Council has considered this application including the findings and recommendations of the Planning Commission, reports by City staff, comments by the applicant and the effect of the proposed variance on the health, safety and welfare of the community. Page 1 of 3 City of OK,ON RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 5. The City Council finds that the conditions existing on tnis property are peculiar to it and do not apply generally to other property in this zoning district; that grantii•q 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, bit is necessary to alleviate a demon- strable hardship or difficulty; is necessary to preserve a substantial property right of the applicant; and would be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan of the City. CONCLUSIONS, ORDER AND CONDITIONS Based upon one or more of the findings noted above, the Orono City Council hereby grants a variance per Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.03, Subdivision 9 (D) to permit the construction of a detached garage to be located 10' in front of the existing house and approximately 62' set back from the front lot line, subject to the following conditions: 1. Authorities granted with t! s resolution run with the property not with the applicants, but are permissive only and must be exercised by application for a building permit within one year of the date of Coi nci l approval, or this variance will expire on that date (August 10, 1988). 2. 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. 3. The undersigned applicant have read, understood and hereby agrees to the terms of this resolution and on behalf of himself, his heirs, successors and assigns, hereby agrees to the recording of this resolution in the chain of title of the property. Adopted by the Orono City Council on this loth day of Auqust, 1987. ATTEST: Dorothy M. Hallin, City Clerk J.-ws R. Grabek, Mayor Property Uwner s) Page f 3 CI OF NO C-?ARIANCE APPLICATION UdLL: 1<uu Fee V 1,0.V✓ Receipt c Initials Initial Application Fee $150.00 ($50.00 per each additional variance) Renewal Variance Fee $75.00 (no change from original application) After -the -Fact Fees (Double application fee) ---------------------------------- ----------------------------------------- PROPERTY LOCATION Site Address i `t-{L, ejc PT, R0, Property Identification Number ( P. I . D. )/` Please check one - Is the property abstract or torrens? Attach legal description to application if not included on required survey. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- APPLICANT Phone (home) Ln l - Name11 yL;�y d , 1 �� �� Phone (work) 1u - 1 i `i d Address-c ------------ - -------------City--- - Zip - -�-��� ----------- 3( /----- OWNER (if different than applicant) Phone (home) Name t`T (- _ _ Phone (work) Address: City: zip: Date Property Acquire-: _ (month/year) I (do) (do not) also own the adjacent parcels of land. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- PRESENT USE OF PROPERTY Present Zoning District Present Use of Property `,. Residential Other (specify) DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST Estimated Construction Cost $ `f3 ,S0- Describe request in detail: l � -41.� `T . s „,,_(OL ct "��,tt (-4 V*4*fkLL to n11%] cY IC:..,.: ti�ast'�l �`i 1LIr. �:Y r", l+rli �liK•++�M ------------- b------- — -. ---- ----—�I-- r T-------------------- VARIANCES REQUIRBD47 —Ct . �tl' i t ...,• �c' .� h.�. N i� �r, ti►c t�• t Lot Area Lot Width Hardcover Setback Variances ( Front Side Rear) Other HARDSHIP Describe undue enforcement of hardship or practical difficulty res lting from strct zoning regulations: P.�o 1N --------------------------------------------------------------------------- DESCRIPTION OF UNUSUAL PROPERTY CONDITIONS Describe unusual property conditions preventing coin liance with Zoning Code Requirements: r�SY�•th pion , o� Y f tv� LL.,...r .J I: ♦ . "". c� (tea. a• Ln --------------------------------------------------------------------------- REQUIRED SUBMITTALS l;: Completed Application Form U2_ Certified Property Owners List of owners within 150' (you can obtain this list from Hennepin County Department of Finance A-603 Govt Center 348-3271). Stamped, legal sized envelopes (#10) pre -addressed to each of the names on the above list with no return address. 4. Certificate of survey including hardcover calculations as required. 'S. Plat Map. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- The Applicant and Property Owner must sign this application. Please remember that your variance application is not complete if the above information has not been included. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Certification by Zoning Department that Variance Application is complete. Zoning official's Signature _ Date -------------------------------------•--------------------------------------- APPLICANT'S SIGNATURE The applicant hereby agrees to provide all information required or requested by the Zoning Administrator, agrees to pay all fees and/or unusual expenses incurred in review of this application, and certifies that the information supplied is true and correct to the best of his/her knowledge. Applicant's Signature ' Date ' OWNERS SIGNATURE � The owner hereby ackowledges and agrees to this application and further authorizes reasonat)le 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 1VI ---------------•--------------------- ------------------ ovr---------- Appl4carit must have all submittals into- he City offices 25 days before the Planning Commission Meeting. Planning Commission Meetings are held on the third Monday of each month. Applicants must be present at all scheduled review meetings of the Planning Commission and Council, and, if an applicant is unable to attend a scheduled meeting, to please make arrange- ments to have an authorized agent attend in your place and to advise the building & Zoning Office of this change prior to the meeting. ORONO HARDCOVER CALCULATION WORKSHEET LAKESHORE A. Existing B. Existing SETBACK lot area hardcover ZONE in zone in zone 0-75' 75-250' 250-500' 500-1J00 Directi Ins: sf sf C. Existing hardcover percentage ((II -.!A) x 1001 sf v/_ v sf '„ D. Proposed hardcover in zone sf E. 'Proposed F. Allowed hardcover hardcover percentage ((D.A) x 100] Percentage 0 sf % 25 -/ 7C-S'(Y.Lsf % sf � 7,211 "- sf sf sf o 0 sf �u7• f `yo 30 Awe 3 5 A Existing Lot Area in Zone - inc'ides the total square footage of dry buildable land within the specified zone. B. Existing Hardcover in Zone - .:ludes the square footage of existing roofs, decks, sidewalks, driveways (travel or paved) other rain -impervious surfaces within the specified zone. C. Existing Hardcover Percent - divide the number in B by the number in A and multiply by 100. D. Proposed Hardcover in Zon includes the existing hardcover plus all proposed additional hardcover. E. Proposed Hardcover Perc• ages - divide the number in D by the number in A and multiply b,. 100. F. Allowed Hardcover Perc ages - if the percentages in column E for any setback zone exceeLl the allowed percentar in column F, you should contact. the Zoning Department at 473-7357 to discuss the posF pities of obtaining a variance. Generally, if a concurrent removal of existing har4 er matches the additional hardcover proposed, resulting in no net increase of hardcover in a specified zone, a variance may not be necessary. z r. ,) 74 ce ( [J1-,,C� as ?1>-//7-23 Avat RUN DATE OS/22/87 BATCH 007 38 20-117-23 34 0001 a+ PROP ADCR 03035 CASCO POINT PO CSd:ER NkME T BERTHI`U:tEiC KACHEtttEISTER TAXPAYER Tl-10MAS B BERTHIAUME HAMS/ADOR 3335 CASCO FOItlT ROAD 0q OpOtl0 ►34 SS371 ,a.. 38 20-117-23 34 0005 PRt?P ADCR ,.3095 CASCO POI►lT RD C:la:ER NAME CURTIS J Et:GLUt:D ETAL TA:.PATER CUPTIS J ENGLUt:O Oft RAML/tICDR 3095 CASCO POINT RD WAYZATA to 55391 38 20-117-23 34 0012 PROP ABDO 03045 CASCO POINT RD =4ER !!LME STEVE'4 J FAY TAXPAYER STEVE►l J FAY NAME/At= 30+5 CASCO POINT PD O otl0 tAl 55391 39 20-117-23 34 0020 PROP AM. R 03020 CASCO POINT RD i.• C:a:ER NAt'E JOSEPH E SPAUN ET AL TAXPAYER CAROL J KELLY NAME/AD3R 3020 CASCO POINT RD WAYZATA ttl 55391 I4 38 20-117-23 43 0035 �+ PROP ADOR 03940 CASCO POINT RD 0L44ER NAME J H HOGIJ: ETAL TAXPAYFP JOH►l i SUSAN MOGAN NAME/:,GDR 4632 EMERSON AVE S ,+w M; LS Mi 55409 HENNEPIN MJNYY PROPERTY INFORMATION SYSTEM PROPERTY OWNERS LIST 38 20-117-23 34 0002 03025 CASCO POINT RD HOUARD R/CAMILLA A ALTON JR ROBERT 6 ttCGAIN 3025 CASCO POINT RD S WAYZATA MN 55391 38 20-117-23 34 0010 030CS CASCO POINT RD GLORIA B COTZENROTH JOHN SMEDLUND 3085 CASCO PT RD WAYZATA ttl 55391 38 20-117-23 34 0017 03091 CASCO POINT PD VERN S WATERS ETAL TODD V WATERS At:D OCPIS J MOLITOR-VATERS 3061 CASCO POINT RD WAYZATA Ml 55391 38 20-117-23 34 CO24 JAMES R A CATHERINE HARTZELL ,;At1ES R A CATHERINE HARTZELL 127 WOODLAWN AVE ST PAUL MN 55105 38 20-117-23 43 0049 03309 CASCO CIR L i J BRUSTAO LAWREtXE L CPLt;TA0 3309 CASCO CIRCLE WAYZATA Col 55391 REPORT NO. PI435401 PAGE 16 38 20-117-23 34 0003 03015 CASCO POINT RD R G LAURIE ETAL R G LAU?IE 3015 CASCO PT RD WAYZATA ►N 55391 38 20-117-23 34 0011 03065 CASCO POINT RD R J JERDEE i J F JERDEE ROvERT 0 A JEAtt:E JERDEE 3065 CASCO POINT ROAD ORO;b tTl 55391 38 20-117-23 34 0018 03055 CASCO POI►lT RD JUIN P DE►NIS ETAL JC:itl P A EVY C DENIJIS 33S5 CASCO POINT ROAD WAYZATA MN 55391 38 20-117-23 43 0001 01,030 CASCQ FOINT PD L R MIGGINS A S H RANSOM LAPPY R MIGGTHS 3030 CASCO PT RD OPCt:0 tel 55391 TOTAL BATCH 007 00014 pk RUN DATE 05/22/ b7 Oft BATCH 007 HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORMATION PROPERTY OLVERS LIST REPORT NO. PI435401 PAGE 17 I CERTIFY THAT THE FACTS REPRESENTED ARE AN ACCUPATE AND TRUE REPRESENTATION OF INFORMATION AS IT APPEARS THIS DATE CH THE RECORDS OF THE HENI:EPIN COUNTY DEPARTTiENT OF PROPERTY T XAiION. THE -BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE AIZ BELIEF. > DATE ' Edge D{ 'SS �i.vlwOV �0�,'r.... off Certificate of !-:,.:rvpy for Joan. V. :,awr9nce of :.'Ut ','7, 3crir.b nr': and cart o;' ivy r'lis _e '� '=Anre-;in Socr:Ly , t•:i:.t.ea� a �o moo. ... Madxel in � 6/irk/off• 1 (1 N i O -Z -So `D 7... •... I her^by rortify that .=`s is a try:,! snc: ....•ruc•t r• :reser.t;i:! _ 5u:-ve o: the Of :..ot ;Z� -e?r'_r,c; Park, and tKat ;x,rt of :'!y ,card, 403- erS'ei 3eeirr.irt at the most `'crtherly corn- cf sai.: :,c'. ,%;---n,.e r•rth ;4'',•.' �ea;t along a stra'_Uht :ine bet-ween saki most anc thr' as'•Frlf c•:•rr."r of :.ot W, Spring Par.!, s distirce of 'ept; �h r:f' „'•i:tt. 37c1:' .c:s : a dir Lance of 14^.%:1 fee•, to ur. iror. %artier :,trers on ':-e cert-rlire n' said ?v ?ia^ei t} **r,re South 4(0'V :dr t therce South 25O7^-'13-r" :.69t of f-i-t r .. .. ;n+r,:-•r sit -)revi:;-..sly ty others -it t►:#i pnint of in'.Prsec•tion of syid r,mter,i::^ L:t''. .••i SouthweotArly exter.eior e," tf.e °.outhemsterly lire c: sH:_ :.cat 57; •.•e--e !rr'..1 .;isteriy to t.1e moat Sout-.orly corner of z>8id -4t i?; tiprre to t!•c :cot oesterly corner of !.u!3 :.ot 17; then^e "or!heusterl;r v' the no!•'t 1 bes:rning, and the loestion or uil existirg tu::.'ings 1t dces nit ournert tr s-.cu other imorcvements or enrro�,rhr rt!z. s .a: 1" - 4r' •Gcrd on h. Soffin .- Do•c : 9-1C-II1 ;:,nd Suneycr and ?larr.Pr e : Iron 7arkor found :.csng YInneaota 0 : Iran marker set 70.00 r Al. IA, 7:Y �, tl Hardcover Inventory Existing house A 16.66' x 25.08' = 417.8 s.f B 32.33' x 22.3' = 720.9 s.f. C 10' x 11' = 110.0 s.f. D 2' x 6.08' = 12.1 s.f. Patio in backyard 12' x 25' = 300.0s.f overhang of roof = 2.8' x 25.08' = 70.2 s.f. Landscaping stones = total 731 s.f. l' x 114' = 114 s.f. 1' x 90' = 90 s.f. 1' x 70' = 79 s.f. l' x 94' = 94 s.f. 2' x 120' = 240 s.f. 1' x 114' = 114 s.f. Side walk = total 560 s.f. 24' x 5' = 120 s.f. 16' x 5' = 80 s.f. 36' x 4' = 144 s.f. 54' x 4' = 216 s.f. Concrete wall l' x 55' = 55 s.f. Driveway 70' x 17' = 1190 s.f. Proposed Garage 24' x 22' = 528 s.f. Existing hardcover = 4167 s.f. Proposed hardcover = 4695 s.f. Total area = 17,477.5 s.f. Hardcover allowance (30%) = 5,243.25 s.f. r a CFrtiftcu'.o of ".rvAy !'or Joe r. 'J , - yrgnco -ind tort, n:' ::ry -:-nree• in :ot:nty , td'o e; `1 f' 0/1•✓Iw1� r 1 ♦ y _ herby rartiry Vut t=`s is a tr•..•r snd .-:-rucL rr�:resent.a:!^r. ,u:-%•e-- n: thN �`C..-IGar —!r, or :p6 :7, S,'r'J.t; °1rk, anJ tlat 3irt of LJc', Cs:^C, �#35- crVe..- ht !:o.s: Be61r.r.ir.t at t so`t `'orther:,' tern"r cf s:,ce Korth ^est along a atre_, .t _ine bet••cen su_;,' :jos' '; r.:..r r•:r and t':^ As frl., c-•rr-r of :4t 7c, Spring Par',, s di3:3nce of ". fevt;�'h.:r-e :utt 37c1:1 :ass: is dirt•ance of 147.1:; fse•. to ar. Iran Barker att -3rov!o•.s:; t- zthers or. '.`e rent-rllre said Tv;� 51e-a; th"r.re South 4�0c41:;" det 3 �'1•:� ��ar,� thence South <<o?^';"" ?r.st a cist.,nce of [�,'�� I �Nt t.= cs:. :S^.r. mr, •r :wt irevic,--sly ty 7thers -it Vio anint of in'.Prso*vt ion o:' s is r r.ter.ir,, u:t'% . SuuthuestArly exter.;r!or -" tl-.o Southeasterly line c: sxti_ • e- p tc the cost Sout--rly corner of laid .,ot 1 ; t►'^rce `ort l _p-' . . • tt tic -rat easterly corner of Wi -4t 57; ther^e "or!tirasterly t-- :h9 po;-' a' begicr.ind, and the loeat!on of all existing tull_'ings t`.ereor., 1t uc^es not our-icrt tr s .c:. other 1mn'rcverr!nts ar Set',* t 1" = 6^1 I GC (�r. ':• Co 1n at: s 9-IC-SI ::.rd Surveyor and ?lrrr.Pr • : Iron -arker found :&r4z L-1*(", N1nzesota e Iran mrker set � y. Certtficate of 7urvPv for Joar. V. :-iwrpncu of :.0 t ;7, Scrub pert of Ivy ?1,swoo ?Pare .In-.,)ur.ty , Yinixsctd farr4 s 0,1 �ernu4.z_ s.tr her^by rartify tt.at t}ls is a tr,... .ns: ..•reCt . SLV Ve o.. the `�c•s;:,r:-a or :,et ;�j Snr{r.L; °srk, and Vat ?6rt of :•rf ?L►c-, �•ca:^c, cri'�,i 9esirnir.t; at the suet `'ortherl corner of said :x'• �.-rth west along a stra'_,h.t .ine betvren '1ald -nose �: rt:.�:'., �'• r b.^.0 L!'o% .ES'F r1,/ C^. TC."r Of .o' 7c" Spring par 1, 9 ASS :9^.CC O. feo t i 37cl: , :ass : a di -Lance of 147.11 feel. to br. iror. ^ar;cer evt -�ruvio•:a.. t., :.there or. '.-e rert•,rlire or said ?v; - aIa ; thonr!e South U°C4' :?" ae t s s:i: L. --ce n �7. �'+a�,� t�erca SQUth <�O(^��i��, .�f!_tt 3 Qist.,nrR O� ;'1 ^. •3eL ::. ''.:. �.^r n.r r sit -:rev+c-..sly by others -it t'w point of in•.PrsRc•Lior, c:' suss rKrter:.in^ Suuthwest.+rly exte.^..ior. e r t�#t Southemsterly lire o: s%i_ ol. `,''. '-'s"P r;nra . as•erty tc• tie rost Sout-.erlj corner of said ..nt 57; Uerre to: t}c :rst "esterly corner or rL!d '-4t 117; therre t.� tte no±rt a begirninC, and the locst:on or all exictirg tuil.:ings V`ereor.. ?t Lines not our -pert tc s..cu nthPr ±innrevetmenta or en�mh^timer! �. i .Tl1e: 1" = 4CS ,ucHon !t. Coffin .'.^ `'r. ( Doi.: s 9-1"1 ::.rd C _r n or anc ?lamer • s Ire" corker foci :,ong Plnnesot.a e irr,n worker met W 1! / 4.11 0 6 e �V Yx'; o�J _f 11 Cal .� OS IL I Ir •` Tom, e�i -� 5 Xr ` e 1 J- J� 1y1 4 C- 1 �w 0 fib_ �.. Certificate ^f ^,.;rvpy for .loar. V. .,,vrnnco .md part 'la.:o n r. r e •, i n � o t:r: t; , Fa :.t.c: a � t.� : h6r^by rortlfy v.ut :='s is a tr,:r any n:!rrucL ',u:,ve;• o. the `Y ss,r' or ,r ;:, £ °•irk, anJ t-et :vArt of �LAc-, cs.rc, ?�ss- er1`e.: tit n ►t! zort !'ort`►e:•.'t eornor cf _-i.: mac'. west along a st ine best eer. t!:n Per*!, 9 e.W.arse or lepti 37r'1:' is;: 6 dir:.anee of 1/7. to ar. iron R 6cor sut or. "e rtht-rlire -r aaid ?v; thence ;ou:`: 4/0'%' .�" :Af • �•7;� r+af.� tf:erce South 2502^_1,, Ast A (7ist.�n�e 01. S'1 ^� ayt !- ^•n aa�r<•r aet wevtc..sly ty ethers Yt t►.o pnir:t of in'.prsprtion c: ss.c a Soutliwss+.Arly extere!or r`' t}.w outhesrterly lire of ss:_ .o: `,� e• ►'ter•.' '-Nsterly tc the rust Sout-.-rl;/ corner of said .pt 57; tierce b:'t` .Pr•t�>-:� to tFc -rat aesterly corner or eu:? :.ot ;7; therre "orthemsterl.v t.•• t. s po'-•t begirr.ing, and the location or all existing Lull:inGs therfcr. It aces nrt ournert tc s .c►. nt.hPr '.R0't•cvevwnta or enrroA -hmsnt.!-. seller 1. z 41;1 as tx : 9-1C-81 e r Iron aarker found 0 . Iran writer set i rdon it. .GE:: ::.nd surveyor ane mr.r.•r :ond L^_'ce, Minnesota u ZONING FILE NO. 1165 CITY 07 ORONO NOTICE OF PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 473-7357 Date of Notice: 7/22/87 --------------------------------------------------------------------------- TO: Steven J. Fay COPIES TO: 3045 Casco Point Road Wayzata, MN 55391 TYPE OF APPLICATION: XX Variance ----------------------------------------------------------- DATE OF MEE iNG: 7/20/87 VOTE: 5 For 0 Against Planning Commission recommends the following: XX Approval as submitted NOTES AND SPNCIAL CONDITIONS: Applicant's next scheduled meeting is confirmed as: City Council August 10, 1987; meeting starts at 7:00 p.m. To: Mayor Grabek Orono Council Me.,abers City Administrator Bernhardson Froa: Mary Jo Knott, Septic & Zoning Aide Dat- July 31, 1981 Sui !t: 41166 Hartmut Ginnow `4erkerL, 1840 La; •r Terrace Soutn - V".idnce - Resolution Eoniig District - LR-lA Size of Axea - approximately 43,328 s.f. 500-1., 000' Hardcove-: Allowed '5t or 15,165 s.f. Existing = 2,279 s.r. ur 5.2% Proposed = 2,696 s.f. or 5.7% Application - Front yard setback variance to c(nstruct a 2nd story deck. Pertinent Ordinances Section 10.23, Subdivision 6 (B) Required Setbacks - `,0' Exiting - 42' Proposed - 32' Variance - 18' or 36% vijxnance No. 22 (IU/i:/59) - reguiations existing at the time of '-hQ subs vision .-xhi. - E) List of R:hibits Exhibit A - Application Exhibit B - Plat Map Exhibit C - Proper*y Owners List Exhibit D - Survey Exhibit E - Ordinance hxhib : r - i ldina Ferrai.t Exh=.bit G Decic Plans Ex : t..it H - Notice of Planning Cc,mmi Discussion - sior Action. of 7/" 1 /87 The applicant is 7equest.iny o front yard setback r, to cvnstract a second sf- -y 3eck to the southwest si(.., The percentage of hardcover ;.a not ar• ia,Tje. The lot w st -1 -979 when the lot - in that rea were under .a one "I acre: . - ..t..iari. The proposed de-:x would 7.,e 10'x " and 2 feet cr, the we w,+l. l of •_he house. The prrr; :;erj ..reek :�a , cald have r:a,.,., i r cresning seasons out of 4. T' wpest sidft o.' the house has � we 1 1 2 feet from the 'ruse. The port' si already has patio. The east side has the rapt:.- syF`em papas cc...: I out -nm it. Both the bark arid the %st sides of the house could -^rex.,,iodate - ij xi0' deck withou i variance. It as noted ac th- Jul-')C. . Plaanirin Commission meeti. y and c.hese locat . ; were di,:-us-eJ. The applicant stated that the back side of the house was a less than aea 1 to at i of: for the pr :ed deck due to the r.oi se created by the traffic on Sixtn A :nL orth. he ape! icant also said that due to the layout of the .-,.,use, -.,e east aids- of the h• .use would -tot be. a goo:. location fo? a -z:. Tie bedrooms i • - cated r this side. Zoning File M1, July 31, 1987 Page 2 of 2 Planning Commission Boca mmendation - The Planning �Iommission accepted tn,� staff recommendation to approve the setback variance application of Hartmut "Pinnow-Merkert for the property of 1840 Lakevie.. Ter ice South, and added the condition that no additional front yard variances de granted in the future. This recommendation was based on the following hardships and findings: 1. The principal structures an the area were in accordance with the one acre zoning ordinance when they were subdivided. 2. The h-tdcover allowance is more than satisfied. 3. The proposed deck would have na•:ural screening ,ost of the year. 4. Sixth Avenue Mnrth can t,c hea•,(- t rom thr north s, of the house. 5. the interior layout of the .:,use has bedrooms on the eastern portion of the house. 6. The well is located 2 feet out from the west side of the house. The septic sy .is extend out fiom the north and east corner the house. The enclosed )� -ig resolution hz . been rafted per the findings nd conditions set to. .. in the Plai.ni.ng CommisF on recommendation noted bove. I. YbA City of ORONO F' RESOLUTION OF THE CITY C.raUNCIL NO. A RESOLUTION GRANTING A VARIANCE TO MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 10.23, SUBDIVISION 6(Bi FILE i1166 WHEREAS, Hartmut Ginnow-Merkert (hereinafter "the applicant") is the owner of the property located at 1840 Lakeview Terrace within the City of Orono (hereinafter "City") and legally described as: Lot 5, Block 1, Long Lake Country Club Addition, Hennepin County, Minnesota (hereinafter "the property"); and WHEREAS, the applicant has applied to the City for a variance to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.2 3, Subdivision 6(B) to permit the cc-istruction of a second story deck located 32 feet from the front/street setback line instead of the required 50 feet. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono, Minnesota: FINDINGS 1. Thi; application was reviewed as Zoning File #1166. 2. The property is located in the LR-lA, Lakeshore Residential Zoning District. 3. _he Orono Planning Commission reviewed this application on July 20, 1987, an('. recommended approval of the proposed variance based upon :.he following findings: 1) The principal struc . es in the a were in accordance with the one acre z•-;ning ordinance whey, they were subdivided. 2) The exist i r,,4 improvements on the property fall well he 1 ow the 35 percent allowance of hardcover. 3) The proposed decl. oald • ave natural screening most of the year. 4) The north side of the property abuts h Aver.ae North, a heavily trafficked noisy roadway. Page 1 of 4 City of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THI Y COUNCIL NO. 5) The interior layout of the house has bedrooms on the eastern portion of the house. 6) The well is located 2 feet out from the west side of the house. 7) The septic system pipes extend out from the north and east corner of the house. 4. The City Council has considered this application including the findings and reco mendations of the Planning Commission, reports by City staff, omments by the applicant and the effect of the proposed variance on the health, safety and welfare of the cor -++!pity. 5. a 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 necessar• 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 the the findings noted above, the Orono City Council hereby grants a variance to the Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.23, Subdivision C (B) to permit the construction of a second story deck 32 feet from the front/street property line instead of the required 50 feet sub-ject to the following conditions: 1. The applicant is plar..I on notice that the City may not consider future variance aPplications that would seek setback variances involving additional enc,oachment into the already substandard front yard. 2. Authorities granted by this variance run with the property not with the applicant, but are permissive only and must be exercised by application for a building permit within one year of the date of Council approval, or this variance will expire on that date (August 10, 1988). Page 2 of 4 City of ORUtVO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 3. 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. 4. The undersigned applicant has read, understood and hereby agrees to the terms of this resolution and or 'ahalf of himself, his heirs, successors and assigns, hereby agrees to the recording this resolution in the chain of title of the property. Adopted by the Orono City Council on this loth day of August, 1987. ATTEST: Dorothy M. Hallin, City Clerk Property Owner(s) James R. Grabek, Mayor Page 3 of 4 / 1 CITY OF ORONO - VARIANCE APPLICATION UaLI. AU ' U Fee t'JSe� Receipt r Init.. ils / /' . e Initial Application Fee $150.00 ($50.00 per -ch additional variance) Renewal Variance Fee $75.00 (no change from original applicatiorftn, OF wo After -the -Fact Fees (Double application fee) FINANCE OFFICE -LOCATION-------------------------------------------►;1'i71?l��fdd- ------ N PROPERTY Q! GEN 150.00 Site Address I `' tic �_�a ? �' r i ; t �= < r s > L ,-,�t I ! S,l iLl.00 L 1[ 1, Nk !UU Property Identification Number (P.I.D.)2��� 06/18/87 Please check one - Is the property abstract or torrens? Attach legal description to application if not included on required survey. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- APPLICANT Phone ( home) Name Phone ( work) Address: �:f L�� i '„_� �. �. City: , Zip: --------------------------------------------------------------------------- OWNER (if different thar. applicant) Phone (home) Name Phone (work) Address: pity: Zip: Date Property Acquirmd `_.i i (month/year) I QW (do not) also own the adjacent parcels of land. -------------------------•-------------------------------------------------- PRESENT USE OF PROPERTY Present Zoning District I- /<- - / X) Present Use of Property Residential — Other (specify) _ ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST Estimated Construction Cost $ tf( Describe request in detail: "-I ,sir ([- '-L" x If, VARIANCES REQUIRED Lot Area Lot Width Setback Varia:,ces (_ X Front Hardcover Side _ Rear) Other --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Seri ��C�C 1���,�,� �i � , l � cu ���1..•+ 40 dig L ) HARDSHIP Describe undue enforcement of hardship or practical difficulty resulting from strict k zoning regulations :_ol ' ; ,, 1. J'Is:_ , ---------------------- & OF UNUSUAL PROPERTY CONDITIONS Describe unusual property conditions preventing compliance with Zoning Code Requirements:�;vA;,l�i� :.i,111 ., (,. .�� it 1, ;� , ( ,,, � • ,, r ►� � LU < I Li . --------------------------------------------------------------------------- REWIRED SOBIrlITTALS 1. Completed Application Form Certified Property Owners List of owners witnin 150' (you car o,, this list from Hennepin County Department of Finance A-603 Govt C- 348-3271). 3* Stamped, legal sized envelopes (#10) pre -addressed to each of the names on the above list with no return address. �4. Certificate of survey including hardcover calculations as required. 5�. Plat Map. ---------------••---------------------------------------------------------- The Applicant and Property Owner must sign this application. Please remember that your variance application is not complete if the above information has not been included. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Certification by Zoning Department that Variance Application is complete. Zoning Official's Signature Date %PPLICANT'S SIGNATURE ,ne applicant hereby agrees to provide all information required or requested by the Zoning Administrator, agrees to pay all fees and/or unusual expenses erred in review of this application, and certifies that the information . olied is true and correct to the best of his/her knowledge. C , , Applicant's Signature-- Date ti OWNERS SIGNATURE Y 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 verifi(ition of this request. Owner's Signature ` r Date. --------------------------------- ----------------------------------------- Applicant must have all submittals into the City offices 25 days before the Planning Commission Meeting. Planning Commission Meetings are held on the third Monday of each month. Applicants must be present at all scheduled review meetings of the Planning commission and Council, and, if an applicant is unable to attend a scheduled meeting, to please make arrange- ments to have an authorised agent attend in your place and to advise the Building i Zoning Office of this change prior to the meeting. L) ' 166Certif►cat�, of Survey for Hartmut G►nnow Merk(rrt. of Lot 5, Block 1, \'\ LONG LAKE COUNTRY CLUB AUDITION Hennepin County, Minnesota QQ V O \ 9 �. K p Q I Nana v ' , D `o y �6 I 7o59'i3"E 9 `cale: t" _ 5U Date 5-12-67 6 0 ' o Iron marker I hereby certify that th►s is a true and correct representation of a survey of COFFIN & URONBERG, INC. the boundaries of Lo: 5, Block 1, L%,, LAKE COUNTRY CLUB ADDITION, and the lo- cation of all existing buildings thereon. o_:21e It. does not purport to show other im- provements or encroachments. Mark S. Gronbery ic. No. 12751_) Engineers, Land Surveyors & Plantwr5 Lony Lake, Pinnesota r I EAw MM DATE 04/27/67 BATCH 004 38 27-118-23 41 0002 ^ F'ROP ADOV 01805 SIXTH AVE N OWNER NA.'IE R Q OLSON ETAL TAXPAYER P Q OL`_!N NAM /A=-P 1F^S bTH AVE NO LONG LA' E I!'1 55356 is 38 27-118-23 �.2 Dole Prop ADCR 01840 LAKEVIEW TER M'.FR fulliE H G1'.%'OW-MERKEPT/1D MERKERT TAXP►YER H GIMSOW-MERKERT/D MERVERT • NA'1E,'ADOR 1840 LAKEVIEW TERR ORC`*10 MN 55356 38 27-118-23 42 0016 PROP AMP O1'%45 LAKEVIEW TER C: IER NAAE JANET K ASKE TAXPAYER JANET ASKE HAM/ADDR 1845 LAKEVIEW TERRACE 10r LAKE MN 55356 s+ w HENT.EPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFO: _jN SYSTEM PROPERTY OL04ERS LIST 36 27-118-23 41 0006 STATE OF MINNESOTA STATE OF MI2:ESOTA 38 27-118-23 42 "It 01830 LAKEVIEW TER DALE R PFEILSTICKEP DALE R PFEILSTIU ER 1830 LAKEVIEW TERR LONS LAKE MN 55356 38 27-118-23 42 0022 FREDERICK H STINCHFIELO ETAL FREDERICK H STINCHFIELD 3058 MINNEHANA COURT WAYZATA MH 55391 REPORT NO. P1435401 PAGE 19 39 27-118-23 42 0009 018i-0 LAKEVIEW TER R A KIDDER i J A KIDDER POI:'.1-0 A KIDDER 1660 LAKEVIEW TEPR LOI:G LAKE MH 55356 3R 7.7-118-23 42 OOIS 01865 LAKEVIEW TER K R ASKE A S K ASKE Kt,PL R A SHERRILYN 0 ASVE 1865 LAKEVIEW TERRACE LONG LAKE MN 55356 TOTA'_ BATCH 004 00006 I CERTIFY THAT THE rACTS REPRESENTED ARE AN ACCURATE AND TRUE REPRESENTATION OF ',FORMATION AS IT APPEARS TIiIS DATE ON OE RECORDS OF THE HENNEPIN CC,-TiTY DEPARTMENT OF PROPERTY TAXATION. -0 THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE AND BELIEF. Y. DATE +yo F... T Or ORONO ,ai db;8 5.. 5890-�,q ORDINANCE NO. 22 An Ordinance to Preserve the Public Health of the Citizens of Orono t.y Regulai.ng the Mini. mum Size of Raaidentiai 'Iuild- ing Lots WHEREAS, the Village of Or- ono has no community sewage system and depends upon septic tanks and soil absorption sys- tems for the disposal of waste; and W H E R E A S, such disposal methods are apt to create a ser- ious problem affecting the health of the community where applied in residential areas serving more th,.n one dwelling per acre; and IIEREAS, other communities have serious he.,lth problems by reason of the enlargement of res- idential areas with substandard lot sizes served by septic tank and absorption systems; and WHEREAS, the Planning Com- rr,ission of the Village of Orono has recornnicnded to the Council that regulations should be estab- lished now to prevent the same sort of serious health problem from arising in the Village of Orono; X. THEREFORE, for tl.c ..aki f the general we',fare and hearth of the residents of the Village o: Orono, it is ordained as follows: Sc:t After the effective date ac,,inance, no build- ing p.. tha . - e i sued for the erect ^" residence in any rezidenti . zone of the Village, except A,p>n a building lot cua- tainitt�" ,, inmtmq>jn_ of one acz sp, having a minimum w i&.h of M 7t t1R build ng LA& _ T-ction 2. It is recognized that there are several built up resi- de- teal areas in the Village which ar• substandzrd and overbuilt by the terms of this ordinance. In such areas, uuildtng permits may be issued for lots not meeting the minimum requirements estab- hs;•ed by this ordinance, it the Vil'age C+ouncil tcels that such bu!'dtng wil', conform tc the .gen- era character ►i tics of the ni•i`h- boi i.od and will net have an im- uiediate and specific advcr_e cffc,-t upon the pi ,iic health. Section 3. It is recognized that tho enforcement of the nimunum provisions required by this ordin- ance with respect to lots held in single, separate ownership at the tune of the passage of this ordn- ance might be an arbitrary dep: i- vation of a valuable right from said owners. Therefore, where a lot which fails to meet the mini- inum standards of this ordinance is he',J in a single, separate own- ership at the time of the pas- : itgv e' this ordinance, the Coun- cil i.aiir :ssur a building permit, pro%,ovd that there will be no munt,ii,.te or -specific adverse cf- fc+:t ..pon we public health. Soc,lon .4. This ordinance su- ,: erce ies and repeals any provi- oions in the platting ordinance or zcn:rig crd.nanccs of the Village wh.ch are inconsistent herck•ith, ex. -opt tliat provisions of prior ordini.nccs establishing higher standards than those prescribed by this ordinance are continued in c ."feet. Section S. It is recognized that the establishment of definite -t;indards for all lots in the entire Village is impossible, as there may be, in every case, rea."ns to relax the standards, or to en- L.rce stricter standards. The Council reserves .0 dscrctioa to increase or decrease the stand- crds hereby set for good cause, whenever the particular facts of the situation convince the Coun- cil t%at the public welfare, and pert:cularly the public health, re- quire such modification. Section 6. This ordinance shall he published in the Minnetonka Herald at Wayzata. Minnesota, and shall be effective immediate- ly upon such publication. Passed by the Village Council of the Vilage -t r`rono this 12th day of Oct"bei .9, by a tote of 4 yeas and No nays. H. R. ROSE, M"w Artea;t: (10-16-bo) - Al t ci cl ri — �---r - -- - -- - I 4 • Le | / -�- i ^ . , �. -__ _ _ —'--' .1 - - LA 4- • vmt am ZONING FILR NO. 1166 CITY OF ORONO NOTICE OF PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 473-7357 Date of Notice: 7/21/87 --------------------------------------------------------------------------- TO: Hartmut Ginnow Merkert COPIES TO: 1840 Lakeview Terrace Long Lake, MN 55356 TYPW OF APPLICATION: XX Variance ----------------------------------------------------------- DATS OF NESTING: 7/20/87 VOTE: 5 For 0 Against Planning Cassission recommends the following: XX Approval subject to conditions noted below NOTRS AND SPECIAL CONDITIONS: Planning Commission would recommend agains• ny further encroachment into the front yard of structure improvements to existing residence. Applicant's next scheduled meeting is confirmed as: City Council d41-y 27, 1987; meeting starts at 7.00 p.m. To: Mayor Grabek+ Orono Coun:,•il Members City Administrator Bernhardson From: Mary Jo Knott, Septic & Zoning Aide Date: July 29, 1987 Subject: #1173 David & Tresa Gardella, 1230 Orono Oaks Drive - Variance - Resolution Zoning District - RR-lB Application - Front yard setback variance to construct a detached garage in front of the front line of the house. Pertinent Ordinance - Section 10.03, Subdivision 9 (D) List of Exhibits - Exhibit A - Application Exhibit B - Plat Map Exhibit C - Property Owners List Exhibit D - Survey Exhibit E - Photographs (to be presented at meeting) Exhibit F - Notice of Planning Commission Action of 7/21/87 Discussion - The applicant is requesting a front yard setback variance in order to construct a garage in front of the existing house. The house was built on a 2-acie wooded lot (see Exhibit E). All the lots in the area are thick with vegetation. The proposed garage will be 24'x36'. The proposed location would be approximately 80 feet in front of the front line of the house. The proposed garage would be set back ten (10) feet from the lot line to the west. The property to the west has not been developed, but upon inspection, the lot was observed to have areas staked out for a proposed house and driveway. The steep topography to the west of the proposed garage will not affect the view of the future house site. The proposed garage site is level and devoid of trees and shrubs. If the garage were to be attached just west of the existing house, the applicant would need a side setback variance. Major land alterations would be necessary to accommodate a garage at north and east sides of house due to the steep slopes. The well serving the house is located to the immediate east of the house prohibiting construction. Once the vegetation would be removed in this area, it is perceived that the proposed garage would be visible from the neighbor's house to the east. If the detached garage could be placed east of the house, then no variance would be needed. The north side of the house is adjacent to steep slopes an., would need clearing and grading. The septic system is also located to the immediate rear of the house. Zoninq File #11173 July 29, 1987 Page 2 of 2 Planning Comission Recor ndation - The Planning Commission accepted the staff recommendation to approve the setback variance application of David Gardella for the property located at 1230 Orono Oaks Drive, based on the following hardships and findings: 1. The proposed garage location will have less of an impact on the property involving minimal amounts of land alterations. 2. The proposed site has natural screening three seasons out of four. 3. The steep topography of the north and west sides of the house makes these locations unfeasible. 4. The well is located on the east side of the house. 5. The septic system is located in the backyard. The enclosed approving resolution has been drafted per the findings and conditions set forth in the Planning Commission recommendations noted above. City of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. A RESOLUTION GRANTING A VARIANCE TO MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE SECTION 10.03, SUBDIVISION 9 (D) FILE 11173 WHEREAS, David & Tresa Garde 11a (hereinafter "the applicants") are the owners of the property located at 1230 Orono Oaks Drive within the City of Orono (hereinafter "City") and legally described as I.ot 5, Block 1, Orono Oaks, Hennepin County, Minnesota (hereinafter "the property"); and WHEREAS, the applicant has applied to the City for a variance to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.03, Su`.division 9 (D) to permit the construction of a detached garage to be located in front of the front line of the existing house. The proposed site for the garage is located approximately 80 feet in front of the existing house and set back approximately 195 feet from the front lot line. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono, Minnesota: FINDINGS 1. This application was reviewed as Zoning File #1173. 2. The-i-operty is located in the RR-113 Single Family Rural Residential Zoning District. 3. The Orono Planning Commission reviewed this application on July 20, 1987, and recommended approval of the proposed variance bares: upon the following findings: A) The pr+iposed garage location will have less of an impact on the property involving minimal amounts of land alterations. H) The proposed site has natural screening three seasons cut of four. C) Tt-- steep topography of the north and west sides of the house makes thesh locations uc•',. asiblc. D) vn- well is located on the east side of the: house. F.) The septic system is located in the backyard. 4. The City Council has considered this application including the findings and recommendations of the Planning Commission, reports by City staff, comments by the applicant and the effect of the proposed variance on the health, safety and welfare of the ccw4munity. Paga 1 of 3 City of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. 5. The City Council finds that the conditions existing on this property are peculiar to it and do not apply generally to other property in this zoning district; that granting the variance would not adversely affect traffic conditions, light, air nor pose a fire hazard or other danger to neighboring property; would not merely serve as a convenience to the applicant, but is necessary to alleviate a demon- strable hardship or difficulty; is necessary to preserve a substantial property right c-f the applicant; and would be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the Zoning Code and Comprehensive Flan of the City. CONCLUSIONS, ORDER AND CONDITIONS Based upon one or more of the findings noted above, the Orono City Council hereby grants a variance per Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.03, Subdivision 9 (D) to permit the construction of a detached garage located in front of the front line of the house. The proposed site for the garage is located approximately 80 feet in front of the front line of the existing house and set back approximately 195 feet from the front lot 14.ne, subject to the following conditions: 1. Authorities granted with this resolution run with the property not with the applicants, but are permissive only and must be exercised by application for a building permit within one year of the date of Council approval, or this variance will expire on that date (August 10, 1988). 2. Violation of or non-compliance with any of ;.he 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. 3. The undersigned applicant have read, understood and hereby agrees to the terms of this resolution and on behalf of himself, his heirs, successors and assigns, hereby agrees to the recording of this resolution in the chain of title of the property. Adapted by the Orono City Council on this 10th '.,y of P,,.OUSt, 1987.. ATTE I: 'F . Dornthy M. Hallin, City Clerk James R. Grat,ek, Mayor Property owner(s) Paele 2 of 3 LAA lu tel: L; u t _ Fee,) I,,L Receipt __-__- Initials ?. CITY OF ORONO - VARIANCE APPLICATION Initial Application Fee $150.00 ($50.00 per each additional variance) Renewal Variance Fee $75.00 (no change from original application) After -the -Fact Fees (Double application fee) --------------------------------------------------------------------------- PROPERTY LOCATION CI T' IF O RONO Site Address 1230 QLono Oaks DEJye. Long Lake. Mn.55356 Fltt.. ` OccICF Property Identification Number (P.I.D.) -i5-118-13-34-0010 "AVAN IS .Ot1 C,IrC1C--TI — 1 Jv . OO Please check one - Is the property abstract or s ib"Jr9,T WANK )OL' "1-45'0 COG'' R01 T15:20 Attach legal description to application if not included on required sur"ye6/97 --------------------------------------------------------------------------- APPLICANT Phone (home) ��- Name DAVID 'r. & TRESA GARDELLA Phone (work) ----------- Address: 1230 Ornnn (I-AL4 1)rivc, _ City: 1.onp. Lake. 'j1. Zip: 2535h --------------------------------------------------------------------------- OMNER (if different than applicant) Phone (home) Name ,*L1L Phone (work) Address: City: zip: Date Property Acquired _1y14j (month/year) -----I-14W (do -not) -also -own -the -adjacent -parcels -of- land ----------------- PRESENT USE OF PROPERTY Present Zoning District R R 11' Present Use of Property 101' yI -S — Residential Other (specify) _ MMOMPTION O/ Meauxi? Estimated Construction Cost $ 111_OOU 3 car garage for 3 vintage sports cars."iat, h liow,t , oiJar shake- root. ced.ir siding.drvr, nSL,i Describe request in detail: i1J, t,.,.,t PLEASE Nlyri-- - - - - - - - - - _ Lot A -ea Lot Width Hardcover Setback Variances ( Front Side Rear) Other ��..�s�-.F �� l l 'I f-:,'( L!ek A. ►-,. 4'`r "CA � -- ---------------------- —------ --------------------- ------------------ HARDSHIP Describe undue hardship or practical difficulty resulting from strict enforcement of zoning regulations: --------------------------------------------------------------------------- DESCRIPTION OF UNUSUAL PROPERTY CONDITIONS Describe unusual property conditions preventing compliance with Zoning Code Requirements: _i1viivi lv wooded surrounding home, Large t re vs, slopes on side of hc, t wlwie garj, v is suppose to hey ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- RNWIRED SUBMITTALS 1. ' Completed Application Form 2.\\ Certified Property Owners List _f owners within 150' (you can obtain this list from Hennepin County Department of Finance A-603 Govt Center 348-3271). 3. Stamped, legal sized envelopes (N10) pre -addressed to each of the names on the above list %ith no return address. 4. Certificate of survey including hardcover calculations as required. 5. Plat Map. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- The Applicant and Property Owner must sign this application. Please remember that your variance application is not complete if the above information has not been included. Certification by Zoning Department that Variance Application is complete. Zoning Official's Signature Date APPLICANT'S SIGNATURE The applicant hereby agrees to prcvide all information required or requested by the Zoning Administrator, agrees to Fay all fees and/or unusual expenses incurred in review of this apo,ication, and certifies that the information supplied is true and correct to the best of his/her kno pledge. - ` T.--.e� w Applicant's Signa Dc,te OWNERS SIGNATURE Tae owner hereby arkowledges and agrees to this application and further authorizes reasonab'e entry o-lto the property by City staff, consultants, Agents, Commission members, and Council members for purposes of investiga- tion anc- verification off this request. S Date - Owner's Signature - ------------------emendb ------------ ------------- ------------------------- Applicant must have all submittals into the City offices 25 days before the Planning Coemission Meeting. Planning Commission Meetings are held on the third Monday of each month. Applicants must be present at all scheduled review meetings of the Planrinq Commission and Council, and, if an applicant is unable to attend a scheduled meeting, to please make arrange- sfents to have an authorised agent attend in your place and to advise the Building 4 Zoning Office of this change prior to the tnee!t ing. ell _j 4p 141 Ile C.A , r IV ow Oro 04 7f 71- •NVO �46 It 40 NOV Sam RUN DATE 96/18/87 BATCH 003 38 35-118-23 34 0008 PGG? ADT?? Cl-l: L? rt'_' C 0 NOLAN i E M NOLAN Tt Y°- CHARLES 0/ELIZIZETII M NOLAN ►: r." 039 633 E I,'VIAN r•OL^.".) ST WAYZATA Mti 55391 38 35-118-:3 34 0011 P/OP ADOR 01200 OPONO OAKS DR R:IEY HUM M i S LEE TAXPAYER MYOUts LEE /4 NAME/ADDR 1200 OPOTIO OAKS DRIVE LONG LA-E MN 55356 ►2 38 35-118-23 43 0026 PPOP ADOR Ot-^IER NAME B+JRLTlGTOH NL`AT iFPN RY TAXPAYER ISURLIt•5TOH HORTIilLWA RY NI.M/ArOR ^. 72 35-118-23 3i 0040 Pt?OP ADDR 0C235 GLE`--IOOR LA o` 064,ICR NAME CLAIR T ROOD TAXPAYER CLAIR T rLOD tU,MiAOJR 2'S GLE?:TOR LA LCTZG U4t:E ttl 5r356 om 72 35-118-23 43 0005 Pl;OP ADOR 00189 GLE?:::OOR LA L" 7:FR t': 'tE RC?IALD M KALIF ENDERG A WIFE TAXPA/ER RONALD M KAUFEMERG N ;ME/AW7 189 GLEti t.00R LA LO?4G LAKE MN 55356 I- HENIEPIN COLItdTY FROPERTY INFORMATION SYSTEM PROPERTY OS?1ERS LIST 38 35-116-23 34 0009 R W ! J M CARLSON RAYMOND W CARLSON 3245 SCOTT AVE N MPLS MN 55422 38 35-118-23 34 0012 GERALD 0 N-SLUNO GERALD 0 N--SLtJtW 578 HARRINGTCN ROAD WAYZATA t?I 55391 72 35-116-23 3I 0037 00213 GLEtti'tMGR LA J J DUTCHER ETAL JAMES J DUTCHER 213 GLENt7CC2 LANE LONG LAKE MN 55356 72 35-118-23 42 0036 00205 GLEtfT004 LA BETTY J VOLNEY BETTY J VOLNEY Z05 GLEWOOR LANE LONG LAKE M 55356 72 35-118-23 43 0006 00181 GLENtIO02 LA D E BEHMER i A M BEHMR DALE i ARLENE BEH:TER 181 GLEE" TOO'4 LAKE LOtiG LAKE t24 55356 REPORT M. PI43S401 PACE 5 38 35-118-23 34 0010 01230 ORCtIO OAKS DR 0 i T GARDELLA DAV13 T 8 TRESA GAROELLA 1230 C":C:M OAKS DRIVE LC::L LAKE rN 55356 38 35-118-23 34 0013 01335 OPOtM OAKS OR CHEYEtflE LAt4) COMPANY CHEYENNE LAW COMPANY 742 TWELVE OAKS CENTER 15500 WAYZATA BLVD WAYZATA MN 55391 72 35-118-23 31 0039 COL31 GLEt2M- CR LA GUY ROBERT DETLEFSEN BRLICE 0 CALDUELL 233 GLE :?MOOR LUTE LMIG LAKE MI 55356 72 35-118-23 42 0037 00197 GLEtMOOR LA C PICHARD LIVERWRE i WIFE C RICHArO LIVERItORE 197 GLE: T'OOR LANE LCNG LAKE MN 55356 TOTAL BATCH 003 00014 !f m RUN GATE 06/16/67 HENKPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORMATION SYSTEM REPORT NO. PI435401 PROPERTY OWNERS UST PAGE 6 BATCH CHI ovi 04 1f r A I CERTIFY THAT THE FACTS REPRESENTED ARE AN ACCURATE AND TRUE REPRESENTATION OF INFORMATION AS IT APPEARS THIS DATE ON THE RECORDS OF THE HEWEPIN CODUTY DEPARTMENT OF PROPERTY TAXATION, TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE AND BELIEF.. Certificate of Survey for David T. Gardella of Lot 5, Block 1, Orono Oaks Hennepin County, Minnesota �q � s I �. 9f -i > NO • ` y •.L `.. KT l� / �.:�i o u 4 110 •f T.C�40 44s'ov „i,A•r • H � w � - —'� Cal♦q lwH / I hereby certify that this is a true and correct representation of a survey of the boundaries of Lot 5, Block 1, Orono Oaks, the location of all existing buildings thereon and the proposed location of a prop- osed garage. It does not purport to show any other improvements or encroachments. COFFIN & GRONBERG, INC. Date : 6-25-87 Scale: I° = 100' Mark S. GronBerg Mn. Lic. No. 12775 o Iron marker Engineers, Land Surveyors, Planners Long Lake, Minnesota ZONING FILE NO. 1173 CITY OF ORONO NOTICE OF PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 473-7357 Date of Notice: 7/21/87 --------------------------------------------------------------------------- TO: David 6 Tresa Gardella COPIES TO: 1230 orono Oaks Drive Long Lake, MN 55356 TYPE OF APPLICATION: YX Variance ----------------------------------------------------------- DATE OF MEETING: 7/20/87 VOTE: 5 For 0 Against Planning Co fission recommends the following: XX Approval as submitted NOTES AND SPNCIAL CONDITIONS: Applicant's next scheduled meeting is confirmed as: City Council August 10, 1987; meeting starts at 7:G0 p.m. To: Mayor Grabek Orono Council Members City Administrator Bernhardson From: Michael P. Gaffron, Asst Planning s 7ontng Administrator Date: August 6, 1987 Subject: i1176 Richard Putnam, 2765 Casco Point Road - Variance List of Exhibits Exhibit A - Survey With Staff Sketch of Average Setback Lines Exhibit B - Planning Commission Minutes of 7/20/87 Exhibit C - Memo & Exhibits of 7/17/87 Discussion - Please review the memo and exhibits of 7/17/87 and the Planning Commission minutes. Applicant requests variances for hardcover, side setback, and average setback to construct additions to his home. Planning Commission reviewed this request on 7/20/87. Their discussions led to the following conclusions: - Regarding hardcover variances - 4 approved, 1 disapproved - Regarding side setback variance - 1 approved, 4 disapproved - Regarding average lakeshore setback variance - concensus was that 2nd house to north (2745) should be shown on survey since it ultimately determines how far forward the immediately adjacent house (2755) will be rebuilt toward lake when existing seasonal (no plumbing) structure is torn down. Upon applicant's request to avoid a time-consuming tabling, Planning Commission voted 4-1 to deny the variances, noting that additional facts would be needed to fairly consider the average setback issue. Staff would refer to Exhibit A which discusses the average setback issue. If the house at 2755 moves inrward as far as it legally could, Putnam's proposed gazebo would requ. e a 9' average setback variance instead of 25'. Also review the issues as outlined in _he memo of July 17. Staff Rec-�sendation - Staff recommends that Council review the requested variances relating to the justification and hardships presented. Staff will draft a resolution reflecting Council's action for your next meeting. f,..2D 0 q'A I 70 No C! of 1 / e� ps'�r GOY27 F�Qn' W ° ;Wools 61D � .0/�i • Dim `��_ I k . 9�f bP� LSo'eme�i �;'r e!e✓ =943a a 4 4 •�" I /Qoc%9604 klrt!I• " n ��s� ` I 1 0 N I • �6•�q� � '9325 Gar 1 90 �I 2-7 5-5- N'A ' ��. U %L U rat � /N �a C• �t A. (' A' � ry i ) f S-7AW'r C�dtY2 �!V S 7/IUC• . ST dK /'�i?'�' S lv� TN /S NU`''.E I�cTL l ?�YS � 2'7cPs , Cis. �p ,a.: aJF QMAr'PEti>�� aIc Ft IT— w^'bc Ra 12'" So FkT-A, *A,- Lkx-.' ate fJ 5 F'4'n aS /gyp ' S ' KtST7-C, r+lt�NSF. lrYiC IS AC« I 4 4 l C2 1.` i c C r 0 V V t+G MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING nEI.D JULY 20, 1987 , 117 3 GARDELLA C ' I NUED .rec,a Gardella was present for this matter and stated the hardship was the need to house Mr. Gardella's sports cars. She felt that a 5 or 6 car garage was a legitimate need for a 5 bedroom large home. It was noted that the proposed garage was less than 1,000 s.f. in area. There were no comments from the public regarding this matter and the public hearing was closed. It was moved by Taylor, seconded by Johnson, to recommend approval per staff recommendation finding topography a hardship and the need for enclosed storage space for more than three cars. Motion, Ayes 5, Nays 0. 41175 WALTER AND NANCY ERICKSON 335 HOLLANDER ROAD PUBLIC HEARING Application Withdrawn at Applicants Request #1176 RICHARD PUTMAN 2765 G,SCO POINT ROAD VARIANCES PUBLIC HEARING 9:38-9:38 The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of. Mailing was noted. There were no comments from the public regarding this matter and the public hearing was closed. Assistant Zoning Administrator Gaffron explained the request for the following variances to construct an addition to the existing residence: Hardcover: 75-250' - Existing = 36.4% - Allowed = 25% - Proposed = 40.2% 250-500' - Existing - 85.7% - Allowed = 30% - Proposed = 48.5* Average Setback Encroachmcnt: - Existing - 6' - Allowed - 0' - Proposed - 25' Side Setback -Detached Garage (changed to attached): - Existing s 2' - Required - 1G' - Proposed 2' 10 MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD JULY 20, 1987 11176 PUTNAM CONTINUED Applicant proposes to attach hi ; c•x= .;tij,(] hous(: and detached garage. The gararle is currently 2' f rum the lot line. The applicant notes that the garale foundation may have to be replaced, but he does nut want to move the garage further from the lot line because that would force the removal of a large maple next to the proposed 3rd garage stall. Applicant has noted that the trend in the neighborhood is for garages to all be at the edge of the lot, so visual spacing is maintained. Richard Putnam was present for this matter and showed renderings of the proposal. Cohen, Bellows, and Johnson felt that hardcover was not a problem in light of the slight increase in the 75-250' and the proposed reduction in the 250-500'. Planning Commission majority felt that the side setback of 10' should be adhered to if the garage foundation is to be replaced. Johnson felt that the existing/proposed location of garage was acceptable. Mr. Putnam stated that the hardship was the need for more storage space for cars and outdoor recreational equipment. Assistant Zoning Administrator Gaffron noted that the adjacent house at 2755 Casco Point Road currently has no plumbing and is intended to eventually be removed and a new house built, which likely will be placed forward to conform with the rest of the neighborhood. Because of this fact, Planning Commission felt that the average lakeshore setback should take into consideration the house location north of 2755 Casco Point Road. Planning Commission felt this more accurate average lakeshore setback information was needed to act on the proposed porch addition. Planning Commission member Hanson's written comments as fol lows: "I have reviewed the applicant's pr -- posed project and generally feel the design is appropriate for that neighborhood. In general, I feel the lack of hardcover at 0-75' weighs favorably against. the change at 75-2501. A third sta 1 1 , integrated in the design as it is, is acceptable but tradable. Side setback at garage is 0.::. "• Mr. Putnam did not wish to delay the application pending additional information, therefore, askeri Planning Commission to make a recommendation. 11 MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD JULY 20, 1987 --,'3 • 11176 PUTNAM COt I NUEU It was muved by Chairman Kel ley, seconded by Cohen, to recommend d( nia 1 of the proposa 1 based on i nsuf f icent facts regarding average lakeshore setback. Motion, Ayes 4, Nays 1. Johnson voted nay. 11178 MICHAEL PLANK 4145 WATERTOWN ROAD SKETCH PLAN REVIEW Assistant Zoning Administrator Gaffron explained the sketch plan to divide off second dwelling from main --., house that is being required as a condition of - Resolution #2122. Applicant has been allowed to use the easterly access pending this subdivision request. Applicant is submitting two preliminary proposals review for: 1) Conceptual review of the proposed driveway access corridor; and 2) Conceptual review of the proposed lot line revision with the applicants westerly property. Ths boundary change is intended to give applicant more land in the easterly parcel by dropping the westerly parcel to the minimum of 5.0 acres dry buildable. Applicant prefers Proposal I, leaving 5.0 dry acres in Lots 1 and 2 and 14.4 total acres in Lot 3, a flag lot with a 30' access corridor to serve that house over the driveway that is in place (access point to be moved so it is within the 30' corridor). Staff has no problem with this access location on Watertown Road from a safety standpoint. Proposal II is essentially the same but leaves a 50' access corridor. Staff prefers Proposal II. The wetland in the westerly parcel (Lot 1) has what staff would call an "indefinite" boundary. Chairman Kelley felt it important to define the wetland prior to any approval. Mr. i Mrs. Michael Plank were present for this matter. Michael Plank stated that after the wetland is defined, Lot 2 will be adjusted to meet the minimum of 5.0 acres dry buildable. Assistant Zoning Administrator Gaffron noted that the adjacent neighbor, Joe Sawchuk, 4105 Watertown Rc.ad, has concerns with the access because it is so close to his house. Mrs. Plank stated that it is their intention to heavily screen the arress from the Sawchuk property to protect the privacy for both property owners. 12 TO: Mayor Grabek C �� Orono Council Members , Planning Commission Chairman Kelley Planning Commission Members City Administrator Bernhardson FROM: Michael P. Gaffron, 0 1► Assistant Planning S Zoning Administrator DATE: July 17, 1987 SUBJ: #1176 Richard Putnam, 2765 Casco Point :toad - Variance - Public Hearing Zoning District - LR-lC, 112 acre sewered Application - Hardcover, side setback, average lakeshore setback variances to construct an addition to existing residence. List of Exhibits A - Application B - Plat Map C - Property Owners List D - Conceptual sketch of proposed site plan - Survey of existing development F - Letter of iron -objection from C.W. Peterson, owner of property at 2755 Casco Point Road G - Hardcover calculations by applicant, verified by staff H - Conceptual elelvation sketches I - Floor elan J - Code Section 10.08 Subd. 3(A) Pertinent Facts Allowed or Existing Required Proposed Variance -Hardcover 0-75' 0 01 0 - 75-250 -)6.48 25% 40.2% _ ! 250-500' 85.7% 30% 48.51 1b.51 -Average Setback 6' 0' 25' 25' Encroachment -Side Setback 10' 2' 8' Detached Garage ( changed to attached) Discussion - Applicant proposes to attach his existing house and detached garage. The garage is currently 2.' from the lot line. He notes he miqht have to replace the garage foundation, but does not want to move the garage further from the lot line because that would force the removal of a large maple next to the proposed 3rd garage stall. He also notes that the trend in the neighborhood is for garages to all be at the edge of the lot, so visual spacing is maintained. The required setback for either a detached or attached garage is 10' from the side lot line in this zone. a. Zoning File #1176 July 17, 1987 Page 2 The proposed deck and screen porch on the lake side of the house will cause an encroachment of as much as 25' to the .verage lakeshore setback. However, the house that is located to the rear of the others in the neighborhood, 2755 Casco Point Road, is a unique building in that it has had all plumbing removed and is intended eventually by Mr. Peterson to be removed and a new rouse built, which likely will be placed forward to conform with the rest of the neighborhood. Petersen has stated he has no objections to the proposal. The hardcover variance is a result of the addition after hardcover removal and general revamping of the site. The wide parking access area will be limited, which will be a plus in the traffic's perception of road width in this area, perhaps slowing it down a bit. The hardcover involved with the house addition results in a 3.8% increase in the 75-250' zone. The hardcover removed in the 250-500' zone is significant. Net result is no net increase in hardcover on the property, but major trade-off of non-structural hardcover for structural hardcover. Hardships: Side Setback - Although the house additions all will meet side setbacks, the existing garage won't. The hardship is that it exists and is presumed to have met whatever code was in effect when it was built. If the garage foundation does need to be totally replaced, the hardship is the location of the tree in relation to the third garage stal 1. Is the need for a third stall legitimate? Average Lakeshore Setback - Perhaps the only hardship is that the neighbor ng House that forces the issue is not in line with the rest of the neighboring houses. Is this a reasonable hardship? Does neighbor's non -objection and the potential future relocation of the neighboring house create a justification for granting this variance? Hardcover - Staff notes that without the variances, applicant cannot accomplish his proposed home addition. Is this a hardship? Is the lot size a hardship? ;he lot is only 60' wide but is 300' deep for a lot area of 18,u00 s.f. or 0.41 acre in a half -acre zone. There is virtually no hardcover in the 0-75' setback area. This is typical of Casco Point. Is this a unique situation, or is it the norm? Is 25• in the 75-250' zone reasonable for this property (and others like it) or is a variance appropriate? 8ta f f Roecassseedat ion - Staff requests that Planninq Commission revi the application in terms of the provisions of Section 10.08 SuL". 3(A) and determine whether the conditions for granting of variances to side setback, hardcover, and average lakeshore setback are present. If so, a recommendation, for approval would be appropriate. UcA LI! I'W C U Fee I' Receipt Initials CITY OF ORONO - VARIANCE APPLICATION initial Application Fee $150.00 ($50.00 per each additional variance) Renewal Variance Fee $75.00 (no change from original applicatioIJITY OF ^re0#0 After -the -Fact Fees (Double application fee) FINANCE OFFICE PROPERTY LOGTION------------------------------------------ «,.L'Ot�d------- rya 01 CEN 2001.00 Site Address 21(.S GAScy 01�tUT )24-4 .P U-'4,'f o(tA �' Pl `G'C'f�0 F- YOU Property Identification Number (P.I.D. ) 10+11)t"l�,1 n` � , Please check one - Is the property --- abstract or torrens? Attach legal description to application if not included on required survey. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- APPLICANT Phone (home) �J%/--T.&A Z Name �T�SJ�wt Phone (work) �'Y� �0�0 Address: �•?jr�s Gro;,lj polwT12-4. City: �vGt _ Zip: �S / --------------------------------------------------------------------------- OMM ( if different than applicant) Phone (home) -.vO AA_a-. Name _�� Phone (work) Address: City: Zip: Date Property Acquired 84-&I (month/year) I (do) do not also own the adjacent parcels of land. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- P INUT USE OF PROPERTY Present Zoning District. L-rL —1 C� Present Use of Property J:i \ �,', t µ.HQ Residential Other (specify) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- DEMIPTION OF REQOEST Estimated Construction Cost $_' _ w Describe request in detail: VARIAIICEB REQUIRED Lot Area Lot Width ✓ Hardcover *A( Setback Variances ( Front ✓ Side-V Rear) ----------- � - - - - ---- - A - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - HARDSHIP Describe undue harship or practical difficu]ty resulting Isom strict enforcem nt of zonidng ;egulAtions: 5 v DESCRIPTION OF UNUSUAL PROPERTY CONDITIONS Describe unusual property �nti�eventing compliance with Zoning Code Requirements: •--------------------------------------------------------------------------- REQUIRED SUBMITTALS 1. Completed Application Form 2. Certified Property Owners List of owners within 150' (you can obtain this list from Hennepin County Department of Finance A-603 Govt Center 348-3271). ' 3. Stamped, legal sized envelopes (#10) pre -addressed to each c e names on the above list with no return address. 4. Certificate of survey including hardcover calculations as required. 5. Plat Map. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- The Applicant and Property Owner must sign this application. Please remember that your variance application is not complete if the above information has not been included. Certification by Zoning Department that Variance Application is complete. Zoning Offic'al's Signature Date APPLICANT'S SIGNATURE The applicant hereby agrees to provide all information required or requested by the Zoning Administrator, agrees to pay all fees and/or unusual expenses incurred in review of this application, and certifies that the information supplied is true and correct to the best of his/her knowledge. Applicant's Signature Date 4,'-26 - OWNERS SIGNATURE The owner hereby ackowledges and agrees to this application and further authorizes reasonable entry onto the property by City staff, consultantE, agents, Commission members, and Council members for purposes of investiga- tion and verification t�is r ue t. Owner's Signature �K. �-�- Date Z_ ' �7 Applicant must Have all submittals into the City offices 25 days before the Planning Commission Meeting. Planning Commission Meetings are held on the third Monday of each month. Appl icant s must be present at a 1 1 schedu 1 ed review meetings of the Planning Commission and Council, and, if an applicant is unable to attond a scheduled meeting, to please make arrange- ments to have an authorized agent &ttend in your place and to advise the Building & 7oning Office of this change prior to the meeting. CM I, 511177,G Ia It 1 .1,. y ��`N r..' 1 .. mail T� ■•�Sy:oS iMO�Y,R 04 il •� '� ' 'Q SM�tG Pa4r IUD L fION .eir S z+ lop ry ( j • I�l� a � too 1�46,\� CA tIrl 79 Oww /j �` • � Z i\ rrp r� lw � b 1 RUN DATE 06/23/87 HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORMATION SYSTEM REPORT NO. PI435401 el!TCH 007 PROPERTY OWNERS LIST PAGE 12 38 20-117-23 23 0006 r-,')P ADOR 02745 CASCO POINT RD C:: tv NtrnE 5 R PETERSON 8 K A PETERSON TA'FAYER STEVFN R PETERSON Nt!7F/A'JOR 2745 CASCO POINT RD WAYZATA M1 55391 38 ZO-117-23 23 0010 PROP ADOR C. lR tuT!E 5T LAND OEPT TA PAYCR CITY OROT10 ►.-IM/ADOR PA^X 4/13/79 DEED 156754 "T 117-23 23 0013 PPOP ADOR [ 'ASCO POINT RO CtT7ER ► .."E T 'IDEAU TL:CATta T nIOFAU NA!'E/ADOR 2. LASCO FOINT RD OFO'JO MN 55391 38,,20-117-23 23 0019 PROP APPR 0276% CASCO POINT RD `KR N's1F R A J'fUTNAM TA LAYER RICH/,RD\PUTNAM HA►!E/ADOR 2765 CA POINT RD WAYZATA MN \\SS391 36 20-117-23 23 0007 02755 CASCO PDIt1T RO CIARENCE W PETERSON ET AL CLARENCE W PETERSON 2959 JOPPA AVE MPLS 141 55426 36 20-117-23 23 0011 StW LAND DEPT CITY bF OROHO PARK I 4/13/79 S 156754 38 20-117-73 23 0017 02795 CASCO POINT RD B T C LAZEVIC A M K BLAZEVIC BPAOtFY T 8 MPPY K BLAZEVIC 2795 CASCO POIN; RD WAYZATA MN 5539i TOTA!_ SA,IH 007 00010 20-117-23 23 0009 STA LAND DEPT CITY OROM PARK 4/13/79 DEED 156754 38 20-117-23 23 0012 02776 CASCO POINT RI MEN A PRICE ETAL ROLEH A PRICE 2776 CASCO POINT RD WAYZATA ttl SS391 38 20-117-23 23 0018 02773 CASCO POINT RO ELAINE E OLSON ELAINE ELLEN ERICKSON 2773 CASCO PT RD 53 WAYZATA t'!7 A 55391 I CEPTIFY THAT TNF FACTS REPRESENTED ARE AN ACCURATE AND TRUE REPRESFNTATTON Ur INFORMATION AS IT APPEARS 711I5 DATE Ott THF, RECORDS OF THE HIPRILPIN COU11TY DEPARTMENT OF PROPERTY TAXATION. TD�aF1E BEST OF MY VJXMLEDGE AND BELIEF. 9 /l w �� 0 A I 84AI'MY Fli */ | ------------ t 00 •94s44 ple 24 "Dak . osn c M i• r � • L 24"Bos�s�� Op�oO �Oveanp�o 94 ," R-OO o pb / 40 ffp-- 6oSenrr�,01re:cv -4438 IQo rJa; 7l .rs / cl li S 492.16 i N Aq M1ry of A6. V i 0 N ; / 24"Ba s� o 9� _ 0 G o vt o 40 • &Semrn�Alielev 9438 C /Qoci;da/l � � V Opp 0 aaq� • 16V950 o 2 • 44s e r r l-'� M0 R. A. Putnam and Associates, Inc. t�1 14C C 7 �� J UM Mbb • "0 mark" Pin". I'"o Rifts U/fins Park. FAsn Prslns, Mlaarwtn SOW • MS) 941-4M �n s !7M Cnsoo Point Road, Waysata. M1neH80116 66M1 0 (012) 4?t-� r i HARDCOVER RRGOLATIONS AND NORKSSEET .sw A. RARDCOVER ORDINANCE - In 1975, the Orono City Council adopted an ordinance limiting the percentage of lot area that can be covered with impervious surfaces ('hardcover') such as roofs, driveways, sidewalks, etc. on properties located within 1,000 feet of a lake. Studies have shown that sediments, oils, and debris carried into the lake from highly urbanised areas have a detrimortal impact on the quality of water in the lake. The intent of Orono's ordinance is to ensure that rainfall run-off will be cleansed by filtering through grassed or vegetated yard areas before entering the lake. B. RARDCOVER SETBACK ZONES - PERCENTAGE ALL6NED 0-75's in the area within 75' of the lakeshore, No Hardcover is allowed (00). -- -- IZ, 75-250's in the portion of the lot located between 75' and 250' from the lake, 251 of that portion of the lot may be hardcovered. III. 250-50011 in the portion of the lot located between 250' and 500' feet from the lake 300 of that portion of the lot may be hardcovered. IV. S00-1,000•s in the portion of the lot located between 500' and 1,000' feet from the lake 350 of that portion of the lot may be hardcovered. NOTES These regulations apply even if you have a lot that does not abut the lake but is within a lakeshore zoning district. C. RON TO DETERMINE LOT AREA NITRIN EACH SETBACK ZONE (To be used as denominator in all hardcover percentage calculations) i. 0-75' Zone Area - 75' x (Average width 3f lot in 0-75' z,.ne) t measure parstlel to shoreline 75' x 6-L5 ft. - 4411.5 s.f. (7 ) (Avg width) Area of 0-75' zone . 75-250' Zone Area - (1751or evg lot depth in zone) x(Avg c 3th of lot in 75-250' zone\ \ measure parallel to shoreline J 175' x (oZ� ft. - �i1��ej7 �' e.f. , (Avg width) Area of 75-250' zones III. 250-500' Zone Area - (25C' or avq lot depth in zone) x(Avy t of lot in 250-SOO' zonel mtar parallel to shoreline LZ • x f ft. - l7Li'i� -� - -- Y s.f. (Avg width) Area of 250-500' roc 1 • � �� 1 � 4v1' Aft FIB• al' 7.dule IV. 500-11000' Zone &Anfvv Area - (500, or avq lot depth in zone) x�Avg ik of lot in 500-1000' zone\ l"As, %rallel to shoreline J 500' x _ fr.. a.f. (Avg width) Area of 500-1,00o' r: D. HARDCOVER CALCULATION SUMXRRY A. B. C. D. E. F. Existing Final Lakeshore Existing Hardcover Proposed Hardcover Allowed Setback Lot Area Hardcover Percentage Hardcover Percentage Hardcover Zone In Zone In Zone (B/A)x100 In Zone (D/A)x100 Percentage 0-75' -250' L5b -400' 500-1000, 4_ " of o I0.01315sf 4�5 I ,1�ib of N �4 of HARDCOVER LIMITATIONS '-0-Pi q �"`• �PwE tti�JJ� f f<� 1 09 d : ROA D 15to of \, t56. 1 % E. OTRER LARESHORE REGULATIONS O of 0 1 0 t '70 • 25 t of S-1% • 30 t t sf t 35 t Fi RDCO�iC INCLUDES t Structures with roofs Decks, even if slatted Sidewalks Drive%ays (paved or gravel) - Decorative lanasc&ping areas underlain by plastic sheeting Tops of retaining walls, rock walls Any cthe surface that does not allow direct absorptic of rainfall into the ground NBC. 10.22, REGULATIONS FOR 'LR-IA', 'LR-IA-1', 'LR-IB', *LB-1r:' AND 'LR-IC-I* ONE FAMILT LAENSNORE ROSIDNNTIAL DISTRICT. Within any "LR-IA', LR-lA-i', 'LR-190, "LA-1C', or 'LR-IC-1' One Family Lakeshore Residential District the following regulations shall apply: Subd. 1. Lakeshore Set Back Regulations. The set back from the shoreline for lakeshore lots shall be at least 75 feet and no building may be located closer to the shoreline than the average distance from the shoreline of existing residence buildings on adjacent and nearby lots. Subd. 2. Lakeshore Hard Cover Regulations. Within 75 feet of shoreline there shall be no excavating, filling, hard cover, temperary or permanent structures. Within 75 to 250 feet of the shoreline there shall be no greater than 250 hard cover. Within 250 to 500 feet of the shoreline there shall be no greater than 300 hard cover. Within 500 to 1,000 feet of the shoreline there shall be no greater than 35% hard cover. Subd. 3. Tree Removal Regulations. Mo trees within 75 feet of the shoreline with the diameter of six (6) inches or more shall be removed without first obtaining a permit from the Council. HARDCOVER CALCULATION WCRKSHEET Setback Zone: (circle one) 0-75' 75-250' 250-500' 500-1000' Existing Hardcover t - Total Existing Hardcover x f00 Saistlwq Rardcover in Zone Lot Area Within Zone y��� Ss'f' a. Rouse x _ . /4 s.f. - x loo -�� 1er.gth width x .—_ s.f. Additional Hardcover to be added in zone: x s.f. Item Length x Width TOTAL s.f. x •.f. — x x s.f. " x s.f. L. Garage x • y0O s.f. 1 x • _� s.f. ✓ c. Driveway x . %d L x A s-f.- s.f. — _-� _Sc�SL x • TOTAL S.F. TO BE ADDED (2) �/ d. Sidewalk x • 4� s.f. Fxistinq Hardcover to be Removed, if any: x • s Item Length x Width TOTAL s.f. s. f. (Jyz�t_ y x S Z s. f. x 33fit� • �e e. patio/ ------ x�( s.f. s.f. _ De- R _ x s.f. T� f . n Landscop* _ x �'bL� !f-T.�. f N areas x 170 s. •�.�i� unAeriair, x s.f. TOTAL S.F. TO BE REMOVED !Z Z� (3) by piast:c Sheetingx a.f. _ • Final Hardcover Proposal: x s.f. [Line (1) + Line (2) -Line (3)1 ' f. Other x • S.f.I/ K + iio�C� - -l�.O�ss.f. (4) Existing To be Added To be Removed Final Propose(' Hardcover 1 - TOTAL Ex1STiNG HARDCOVER IN ZONE �? s,f, (1) Line (4) x 100 s.f. x 100 • � ,� Line (1) f . fJ1aj wk.?rw,•�( caw"- — HARDCOVER CALCULATION WORKSHEET asafwct sw: (Circle owe) 0-75• 75-2SO' (250-5 SOO-1000, SoLatimm MNeawer in -some a. a)wee x lewgth width x s.f. x . s.f. x s.f. x s.f. b. Garage x _ • s.f. i c. Driveway x x • s.f. d. Sidewalk x a.f. x • s.f. x W s.f. e. Patio/ x s.f. Deck f. Landscape x s.f. areas 8"erlain x . s.f. by :lastic sheeting x • s.f. f. Other x • s.f. x • s.f. j''� x --- • s.f. J 7CTAL [XZSTI Nr HARD -OVER IN ZONE • i�� s.f. (1) txisting Hardcover t • _Total txistina Hardcover x 100 Lot Ar Zone s.f. x 100.E , a.f. Additional Hardcover to be added in xone: Item Length x Width • TOTAL s.f. Ave- x • s.f. 1A.— —' x • s.f. x . s.f. TOTAL S.F. TO BE ADDED (2) Existing Hardcover to be Removed, if any: Item Length x width • TOTAL s.f. x s.f. rl, l 27 x - Z14 .4P0_ s.f. hif► e�w 11 I s.f. x /-M s.f. TOTAL S.F. TO BE REMOVED to '(/ (3) Final Hardcover Proposal: [Line (1) • Line (2) -Line (3)) • [ a O -y7d )J05D s.f. (4) Existing To be Added To be Removed Final Proposed Hardcover • • Line (4) x loo - a•f• x 100 • 6, � Line (1) M50 HARDCOVEP. CALCULATION WORKSHEET setback fames (circ.e ow.)�o-ys� 'fs-2so� 2so-s00 sob-10000 Saint" marioe+rer i a ioae a. ■eee. tiq-5 a !n•3 • 1'937- s.f. length width f x _y_ • s.f. _1& x 17.1; - e.f. x s.t, b. Garage 71J x Zo �gZ s.f. e . Driveway _yQ� s_ x �_ _ ' p�:� _ s . f . —2jZ_ _ • —LZLS s.f. d. Sidewalk x • 41CO_ s.f. g f 3� x1,211.Fr Cw9Li_ ►pbm&x S&_ • s . f . e. Patio/ !_Z�_ x 57L s.f. Deck x .�— . a. f . f. Landscape OS_ x ) Z a.t. areas -Wi let^ z s.f. by 4wo"01�Ta��i.�wic,. gieNM* z • s . f . _ • a.[. vaLk. 4 Rx i.c Pr Awl 4yz. a.f. rotas sx s f'll uG KAtWmn IM sots; a ANA IF s . f . (1) lb%M" t4Vr MW wig• "* *. Existing Hardcover f Total Existing Hardcover x l0mCR-?4 Lot Area Within tone • Sz.S4, s . f . x 100 s.f. Additional Rardcover to be added in zones Item Length x Width • TOTAL a.f. *,7q, x 0 s.f. -2SA� x /LSD s.f. 24,-mow x O s.f. x • s.f. TOTAL S.F. TO BE ADDED (2) Existing` Hardcover to be Removed, if any: Item - L.:ngth x Width •VQTAL s.-f x - /LZ4 s.f� x 0-7 x 0 TOTAL S.F. Z Final Hardcover Proposals S.f. x s.f. BE REMOVED JAI `t (3 ) (Line (1) ♦ Line (2) -Line (3)) - t �� 5 . ILSO _ /b�� ) - 5z5z4 s.f. (a) Existing To be Added To be Removed Final Proposed Mardcover Line (4) x 100 $7 •Sa.fI x 100 - ?�D.�'`j4;* Line (1) f'I�3? 8.f. `-_-_---_---s r'1 1 � ,.,��.0 * 1 ! fir j • i J-T-- a T ilv,l -C-' J000. J. var lances; issuances. A. In considering applications for variance, the Council shall consider the advice an(] recommendation of the hoard and the effect of the proposed variance upon the health, safety and welfare of the community, existing and anticipated traffic conditions, light and air, danger of fire, risk to tho public safety, and the effect on values of property in the surrounding area. Before granting a variance, the Council shall hear request for variances from the literal provisions of this Chapter in instances where their strict enforcement would cause undue hardship because of circumstances unique to the individual property under consideration, and to grant such variances only when it is demonstrated that such actions will be in keeping with the spirit and intent of this Chapter. "Undue hardship" as used in connection with the granting of a variance means: 1. The property in question cannot be put to a reasonable use if used under conditions allowed by the official 1 controls. 2. The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to his property not created by the landowner. 3. The variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality. 4. Economic considerations alone shall not constitute an undue hardship if reasonable use for the property exists under the terms of this Chapter. 5. Undue hardship also includes, but is not limited to, inadequate access to direct sunlight for solar energy systems. Variances shall be granted for earth sheltered construction as defined in Minnesota Statutes, Section 116J.06, Subd. 2, when in harmony with this Chapter. 6. The Board of Appeals and Adjustments or the Council may not permit as a variance any use that is not pe-mitted under this Chapter for property in the zone where the affected person's land is located. 7. The Board or Council may permit as a variance the temporary use of a one-fam'ly dwelling as a two-family dwelling. — Section 6. Ordinance Section 10.08, Sub& —ision 3 (A) is hereby amended by adding the following: applying to the structure or (8) The special conditions to such property or land in question are peculiar immediately adjoining property. (9) The conditions do not apply generally to other land or structures in the distict in which said land is located. (10) The granting of the application is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right of the applicant. (11) The granting of the proposed variance will not in any way impair health, safety, comfort, mor•lr. or in any other respect be contrary to the intent of the _aning Code. (12) The granting of such variance will not merely serve as a convenience to the applicant, but is necessary to alleviate deACnetrable hardship or difficulty. F �� f Z4 2.� i y ��- KENNETH H. ERICKSON 2773 Casco Point Road Wayzata, Minnesota 5539' 471-7882 To C IT OF ORONO Re Femodeling plans of Dick & Jan Putnam 2765 Casco Point Road August 8, 1987 We have oone over the Putnam's remodeling plans w,th them 'We tnink they would result in a definite improvement in the appearance of our area and be an asset to this community it ,Aeould De a continuing upgrading and improvement in homes such as other recent remoleirng projects in the area Examining them in relation to other adjacent home` snowed tr+at their would be very much in a compareDle line lakeside with the two houses on their south side, and the second one on the north The yellow house adjacent is old and not a year -around facility, and is used only as a -•umier place part-time or week -ends We nave no objections to the Putnam's plans Pother we believe they would result in a distinct impro,,.lemerit to our immediate area This would be especially true for the appearance along Cased Point Poad 5incerel /1 k,enn�IHI�'ks n, 2773 Casco Pont Road To: Mayor Grabek and Members of the City of Orono Council From: Janet and Dick Putnam U 1 0 2765 Casco Point Road Wayzata, Minnesota Date: August 10, 1987 13e: variance Requests h"ecessary for Remodeling of Existing Home 2765 Casco Point Road Mr. Mayor and Members of the City Council, I would like to briefly explain our proposed improvements to our current residence on Casco Point, expecially since the 9 to 1 vote to deny our application at the July Planning Commission meeting. My family was surprised by the four commission members' objections, and the approach the individual members exhibited. To begin, 1 wish to compl,ment Mr. Gaffron of your staff for his help in explaining the city procedures and for his understanding of our project. Mr. Caffron has visited our home on three occasions to inspect and discuss our plans. The staff report of July 17 presents most of the issues in a fair and concise manner. The staffs recommendation suggests review of our application based upon the provisions of section 10.08 subd. (A), conditior for granting a variance. 1 would like to respond to those conditions as set forth in subd. (A). 1. The basic reason for granting a variance as stated in subd. (A) is that such a variance and the resulting improvements to the property will not adversely affect the public health, safety and welfare of the community, traffic safety, reduce surrounding property values, or create a danger of fire or public safety concerns. Our proposed plan %..,ill enhance public safety ana traffic on Casco Point Road by defining the roadway and reducing speed on the corner (referred to in staff report). .Also the proposed plan will narrow our existing driveway frontage from 60 : feet to 30f feet. Our proposed home additions will increase the value of surrounding properties by the improvement of our existing home. The existing garage is about 9" to 1 foot below the elevation of Casco Point Road, due to repairing of the street over the years without a —rmanent curb. The street's grade water nuts into our garage and has mined the floor and helped cock some foundation walls. The garage is not of an adequate size to allou parking for vans or utility vehicles without removal of the doors (one door is currently removed). The inability to lock our property no doubt contributed to the theft of items from the property in 1985. The current appearance of the 1810" X 1816" (interior dimension) garage without doors is not a positive neighborhood influence. Presently our refuse cans are kept in a three sited enclosure adjacent to the street on our south property line. Because these containers are adjacent to the street and not kept in a garage they are a constant source of delight for dogs and racoons. The resulting mess and the tutsightly visual aspect of reftare cans adjacent to the street, is not an asset to August 10, 1987 Page 2 the. neighborhood. If o:�r plan is approved, all refuse storage it -ill be in the added garage space. The current garage is 2 feet from our north property line and our south neighbors, Ken and Elaine Erickson's garage, is currently located 3 inches on our property. We have told Ken and Elaine to draft a deed for the property to convey the land under their garage to their lot. The garage on the property on the north, C.W. (Bill) Peterson's, is located on the other side of his lot (north side) and leaves ample space between our existing garage. Mr. Gaffron explained this unique circumstance in his report, unfortunately, four planning commissioners did not consider the existing conditions of the neighborhood. If we were to move our garage as recommended by the four commisioners, we would remove a 24" maple tree and have our lot frontage with only 171 feet from F:rickson's garage, and 10 "--.et from Peterson's property line. Basically, the home would not be visable from the 'reet, only the garage doors. Our architect and adjacent neighbors do not believe this would be of benefit to the neighborhood. 2. The lot is very well suited for the plan proposed by our architect due to its shape and location of structures. The 300 f foot deep lot allows our home to be located about 150 feet back from the lake, and the patio/deck area 130 feet back from the shore. No hardcover is proposed, or exists, closer than 125 feet from the shore. The issue of average Lakeshore setback was not clear at the planning commission meeting. Further study by Mr. Gaffron and myself, indicate that the Erickson horne and deck extend to our existing patio, and the nearest permanent structure north is located about even with our existing deck. I completeiy agree with Mr. Gaffron's anah:sis of C.VV. Peterson's plans and the unique condition of his cottage. I do not believe that a home which would not be given an occupancy permit should determine the average setback, when all adjacent permanent structures conform with each other. The distance our home and screen porch addition are :,et back from the lake shore, and the fact they are in line with neighboring properties, should provide ample reason for a variance, if indeed one is needed because of the non-habitatated structure. 3. The Last item of concern is the hardcover requirement in each of the zones. As Mr. Gaffron confirmed, the proposed plan -would result in an increase of 3.81r, in hardcover in the 75'-250' zone. His report states that no increase in hardcover on the property is proposed. In fact, we are reducing total hardcover by 225 sq. ft. on our lot. The staff points out that we are replacing non-structural hardcover with structural. Review of our hardcover worksheet points out that non-stnicturol hardeover is driveway, sidewalks and concrete patio or deck, no rock planting, etc. are included. Much of the proposed structure is located over the existing hardcover areas; driveway, patio cnd sidewalk areas. We are adding to our home between the existing home and existing garage, not within existing side yards or toward the lake (except for hr)rch). We believe removal of 30' of driveway and replacement with grass and plantings gives the neighborhood significant benefit. Summam,' I have been a resident of Orono for 40 *Nears and greu- up in the some area we currently are living in. We remodeled our home nine years ago b'v adding a basement and completeiv remodeling the Dome. Stoat, -'Logan Architects has prepared plans for our proposed remodeling and we Inds, believe that the proposed home design, and changes to the site pwn will greatly enhance our property and will enhance tho adjacent homes and ,general August 10, 1987 Page 3 neighborhood. Janet and I respectfully request that the City Council grant the variances required to allow remodeling plans to proceed through the city's building permit process. Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, I> L r, -� jq)?C--t WMp Dick and Janet Putnam 8687.10 TO; Mayor and C: i ty Council PROM: Mark Bernhardson, City Administrator���"� DATB: August 6. 1987 SUBJECT: Interim Ordinance - Emergency Land Resor-3tion Attachment A. Interim Ordinance Number , Second Series ISSUE - Presentation of language to the Council regarding interim ordinance adopted at the Council meeting July 27, 1987. INTRODUCTION - Attachment A is the language incorporating the Cl' OUnClS direction for an interim ordinance to allow restoration to original grade of property damaged in the storm of July 23, 1987. This is an interim ordinance specifically for the storm. An emergency provisions ordinance on a more general basis will be submitted to the regular process commencing with a public hearing at the September 8, 1987 Planning Commission meeting. PROPOSED MOTION - Moved by _, seconded by _, that the Council acknowledge receipt of the language regarding the interim l;,nd use ordinance for emergency repairs and direct a public hearing be establishel for a regular ordinance amendment at the September 8, 1987 Planning Commission meeting. Ayes _, Nays cc: Jeanne Mabusth, Zoning Administrator Michael Gaffron, Assistant Zoning Administrator ORDINANCE NUMBER , SECOND SERIES AN INTERIM ORDINANCE ALLOWING EMERGENCY RESTORATION FROM STORM DAMAGE COMMENCING JULY 27, 1987 THROUGH AUGUST 31, 1987 The City Council of Orono Ordains as follows: The municipal code of the City of Orono is amended by adding Ordinance Number , Second Series: SECTION 1. STATEMENT OF POLICY. The City Council shall waive certain standards 10.03 Subdivision 19 and Section 10.22 Subdivision 2 in order to allow emergency restoration of lakeshore and non- lakeshore yards damaged by the se ere storms that entered the City on July 23, 1987 and July 26, 1987. Staff is hereby directed to issue general permits for land alterations based on the following guidelines: a. Filling and grading in excess of 100 cubic yards to permit restoration to original grades when feasible. b. Filling and grading within 75 feet of the shoreline of all lakes to permit restoration to original grades, such restoration may require installation of retaining walls, the City Engineer shall review all permits seeking use of retaining walls. SECTION 2. This ordinance shall not be interpreted to include the restoration of structures damaged by these storms and located within 0 to 75 feet of the shoreline of al lakes, except for doc ; that shall be rebuilt per current standards of the Lake Minnetonka Conservation District. SECTION 3. The City shall waive the payment of fees for all general permits that involve land alterations. SECTION 4. A public hearing has been scheduled before the Planning Commission on September 8, 1987 to review a proposed permanent ordinance that would establish guidelines ar -,cedures for the City to follow in cases of natural disasters. SECTIO1 5. This ordinance shall be ve beginning July 27, 1987 and shall terminate on August 31, 1987. SECTION 6. This Ordinance shall be puc. fished in the Laker and Pioneer newspapers and shall be effective immediately upon publication. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono on the 27th day of July, 1987 by a vote of --- ayes and --- nays. ATTEST: James R. Grabek, Mayor DorotFy M. HaIlin,-City m erk -+ 1 TO: Mark E. Bernhardson, City Administrator Frame: John R. Ger:,ardson, Public Works Coordinator Date: August 6, 1987 Subject: Sealcoat Bid Award On July 31, 1987, the City of Orono receiverl and opened bids for sealcoating City streets in 1987. The bids are as f__lows: _C_itj Streets MSA TOTAL Allied Blacktopping $68,737.50 20,955.45 89,692.95 Munn Blacktopping 85,275.00 26,557.50 111,832.50 The costs for sealcoating City streets will be paid for from the 1987 street maintenance budget. The costs for MSA streets (Old Crystal Bay Road) will be paid from the MSA account. RECOMMENDATION: To award the 1987 sealcoat bid to Allied Blacktop For an amount not to exceed $89,692.95. .'ROPOSED NOT 1: Moved by �jl—.-, seconded by : to award the 1987 sealcoat bid to Allies lacktop for an amount not to exceed $89,692.95. TC: Mayor and City Council rj �l1 FROM: Mark Bernhardson, City Administrato:f��rj Forwarded recomniendinq approval. This is within the estimated budgeted amount cf $70,000 for the City streets portion. The MSA portion, while not budgeter. is within the amount received from the state for these purposes. TO: Mayor Grabek and Orono Council Members 7687.4 FROM: Mark Bernhard�-on, City Administrator 1ATE: July 6, 198 1 �'- I SUBJECT: Facility Study v Attachment: A. Facility Study Memo Dated 2/19/67 B. Facility Study Memo Dated 3/20/86 C. Kunicipal Service Delivery Survey Comparison Dated 7/27/87 Sonestrc City Hall Square cotage Study Alan Oi 11r_cr"i sqs - 5/82 "r . Consult Ana:.ysis Review Dated 7 ' !7/87 ISSUE 1. Council's determ4nation as to whether they want to proceed with the space study at this *ime. 2. If this space study is to be underta:en, sele-•'. -i of a consultant to undertake the study. 1. The amount of work authorized. INT1tODUCTION - The consultants made pre sent5tions tv the Council at the ^ouncil's March 23, 1 4P7 Cc inci l meeting. At that meeting the Council requested more information and staff has reviewed the product samples that the , asultants had done for other projects Additionally the staff under .uok its own m;.^s^_foal service delivery study as cutlinftA ,.n the Attachment C. This compde::,t� ?rono with other m,rnicipalties regarding staff size. DISCUSSION -SWR #1 MWNW [ING �PAC6 STUDY As noted in th* ias!.►es listed above, the iniiirl is to determine if, in fact, a space study should be conducted a i � —me t�.= determine both current and future nerds fir th• ett f As noted in Attachment B the staff had reviewed this issue a year ayo and nc.] summarized -najor deficiencies i►. the existing facilities, to �t %er with pi o jec:.i,►g City do partmenta 1 needs by the year 200(. As note in Attachment C the City did compare the functions that it ovides with those of other communities tt) determine if Orono's currant sLoffinq was in line Witt. that of rommuni-t'.es providing similar servi( na. Additionally a* noted in Attaci., ent D Bonestroo and Associates hae indertaken for another city a rough squ ro footage study fo_ facilities or othe, municipalities in relax..► -aship t .) s` )f f size. Thes ranged from approximately 218 to 800 eiqu•-re fact. while th x ;s no* defls4.%+.ve study it does in*licat�..l, for t— most •,art, sq tootage pe; per*on (which does include Council Chambers, bat :oc%.;, . A-! noted, the Ao c ti,rf-t..nit i es under at,)ut 400 s ti►, a ft-e*t per pets n rene r a l l •, indic,L _ei tssat they were not sati-fi. with the L ice a; -unt. (The compar- ion for Police were rather d* se a- ' probably does nc., indicite good i-ita tor comparison purpose-s.) Facility Study July 6, 1987 Page 2 of 5 Currently the City of Orono has about 185 gross square feet per person in the administrative areas. (This does include the City Council. Chambeis. Without thy- 1 -uncil Chambers it is 143 square feet gross.) This Ls substantie - ' y -*low the average of 560 square feet not id in the survey. While these communities surveyed a larger communities, k-he square footage per person does not appear to bear relationship to the population size. It is anticipatea that the space stu.., could not only 01-termine approximate square footage of each function/area but also work to determine the most effi ent arrangement of space to keep any change in the n.-s* economical manne 31lowing for some reasonable protected growth over the next 10 to 15 years. ISSUE /2 SPACE CONSULTANT SBLPDCTION havin3 reviewed the proposals and example documents submitted r.v each of the consultants for the study the following represent the major criteria by which to select a consultant: - Experience - This includes evaluation of experience with new city administrative buildings, po;=,�e buildings, public wcrks buildings together with experience in the area of remodelinil of existing facilities. Additional c-nsideration was given for e-- erience in t►oc private office and garage sector. - Methodology - This undertook a review of the process that each is going to employ to develop the space criteria together with the means employed to evaluate and recommends as to desireability and cost for various site proposals le d out. - Study Cost - While +1­ cost in any su--'% ud a consideration it must be viewed in of the prod ac delivered These include credits given any further ,getner with arcr tectu fees should further work be undertaken - Space Study Product - Basic elements ef the product to be delivered by each of them include the following. Space Study -- Each wi l l be • ucirg a list of spaces and estimated sq,sare 2ootages required t_ provide for the functions both currently and into the future. Site Anayl si s - Each wi 1 1 undertake a type of an& i.1 to determine TPms and opportuniti with each of the si _ Di�ag__r,� +i;c Ren, s - each w_Ll l be pre;�aring at le, one diagr" tt c ayosV_ of the building outline 3s part of a or site study (ex,+eple!- of diagramatiel. 3 of the 4 wi 1 1 aj up to rough floc:r plans and approximate building concept design. Facility Study July 6, 1987 Page 3 of 5 Recommendation - If alternatives are explored certain firms will provide recommendations. Staff/Council/Committee Work - At least some outline in ?.heir ,proposal inclusion of a working committee from the City to assist i development of the space study. (Any work not done in this area may lessen overall cost.) ISSUE #3 WORK AUTHORIZED This to determine if the entire project should be done prior to repor• `o Council or if just the space study portion should be completed and from there decide which alternatives should be selected for study. RECOMMENDATION ISSUE it SPACE STUDY As noted above and in Attachment B, current facilities have a number of deficiences not only from a working environment standpoint but also from a code standpoint that merit the City analize its current and future needs. As such, it is recommended that the space study be undertaken. As noted in Attachment C the staff, while perhaps larger than certain communitieb :�f comparable sire, are not out of line when considering the functions chat the City provides. Therefore, a reduction in staff would probably not reach a point at which the current facilities would be adequate from a space, functional working relationship or code standpoint. While staff is able to identify certain concerns it is not able to deal with: a) The issues of structural analysis; b) Industry standards for space in various settings; or c) Credibility when it comes to overall design and working relationships and necessary work flow design for such. While a ..-affperson could sit down and create alternate designs as noted in Attachment E, which was done b. Alan Olson, who was the City Planner and also an architect, this does not provide the objective research in detail needed for the City to do determine *^ace needs for the present or the future. I- addition the City is faced with significant expenditurUa in the next few years for: a) A public works building or rehabilitinq current structures; b) Hook-up of current facilities to sewer; c) Repair of Council roof; e) Expiration of lease of Police space from Long :e-19b` (they have indicated ac possible need of the space in the ,.ext 2-3 reara'. Facility Study July 6, 1987 Page 4 of 5 Gross costs, before credit, range from $10,000 to 30,000 with net figure ranging from $5,000-12,000. This would be funded from he $120,000 currently in the building construction fund. It additionally should be noted that oven if the City were to make the decision to do its own space study and then based on that study, select an architect to do future work that the aruhitectual firm would then have to undertake at least part of the space study. As noted above each of the firms does give credit in their architectual fees should the design and construction work go ahead and the City would receive credit in that for a portion of the work done in the space study outlined. ISSUE !2 CONSULTANT Attachment F represents a summary of factors of each of the consultants' proposals following a review of information submitted including examples of work. While still not an "apples anti apples" comparison it notes the differences in approach and method and it becomf an issue of selecting the methodology one feels will give you the best analysis on which to base a decision. Each of the consultants h,: d experience in the areas of space study for }oth City Hall/Police and gai-ge Public Wotks designs. Additionally, each firm, based on discussions with communities where they have done the projects, will have both strong and weak points. While each firm is similar to some degree in the basics outlined, it is recommended that the City Aelact Jack Boarman and Associates to undertake the space study portion of this project for the following reasons: Experience - While a11. have aignifi,.-ant experience in the areas the City is considering, Boarman together with Korsunsky Krank also Lindberg Pierce do have substantial experience in the private sector as the architectural and design area is principal focus of those organizations. Both Korsunsky Krank and Boarman have been able to 4uanti,r¢ this experience through computerization in the space study or t' ex;: office design layouts. +MethodolM - As noted above, each of the four have a methodology that thWy7 have used for developing their space study. The recommendation for Boarman and Associates is based on the fact that they are uti' ' zing the most objective design c _eria in working to economically develop spaces which reflect bc., public and private sector experience. Korsunsky, Krank, Erickson Architects also employs a computer based methodology, but it is felt that Boarman has greater experience in the municipal sector in utilization of its computer data base. Facility Study July 6, 1987 Page 5 of 5 Costs - While Boarman is substantially above the quotation from Bonestroo (which is correctly $10,500) and Lindberg Pierce at $16,000 it is felt that the difference in the more documentable objective criteria in developing the space analysis for both present and the future and the comparison of possible credit will, should the construction phase be undertaken, provide the best assurance of a product with which the City as an organization will be please. Product - While to some degree the products of all four will be similar it is anticipated that the product with the Boarman firm will be the best substantiated and provide the most understandable alternatives togeth!_,r with a recommendation as to the direction *he City should take. ISSUE i3 WORK TO BE UNDERTAKEN At this time it is fecommended that once a consultant is selected that the work to be undertaken at this point be for just the space Study itself and that the City await completion of that before determining whether all three of the alte-natives should be undertaken for study or selection of the ppropriate ones. PROPOSED MOTION - Moved by __, seconded by , that the Counci 1 agree to do space study and table for 2 weeks consideration of the staff's recommendation on the consultant and extent of work to the August 24, 1987 meeting. Ayes _`, ;Jays __ cc: Boarman 6 Associates Bonestroo Korsunsky, Frank Lindberg Pierce JULY 27, 1981 Alternates: B-Remcdel/Addition - present site C-City Hall/Police - present site Public Works - separate site D-All facilities - new site Credit to be credited to architectural fee if firm hired to do final design EXFSRIENCE/FPACTICE METHODOLOGY FEES (Maximum -Hourly not to Exceed) ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Bonestroc Significant experience/City Halls A.Space Study Space study $1,800 Public Works Bldqs. Recent private Review staff & equipment needs office work. Architect experienced Interviews Alternatives: Robert Russek in these fields school type, Comparison data B-(including $5,000 recreational, multiple family. Space allocation/utilization code analysis) (size/relationships) .Space diagrams C- $1,800 .Bubble diagrams Code analysis D- $1,800 Project program --------- Cost estimate Est. Total $1.,400 B.Alternatives Analysis of Alternatives Code/Structural Analysis Credit 1/4-1/2 $2,950-5,900 Site locat-on/character Architectural fees Diagramatic designs negotiated based on servied cost estimates approximately 7.5% Schematic diagrams (extra)/1-1.5iof project (to be reduced from architectural fee) Conclusion/-ecommendation Presentation 6XPURiENCE/PRACTICE METHODOLOGY FEES (Maximum -Hourly not to Exceed) Bcarmar. i Significant e"rience - municipal/ A.Space Study Associates private -ffices i municipal i Existing facilities inventory Space study $8,000 privy ehicle maintenance Document operating/aaintenance costs :i,k Boarman Pract 501 governmental Code compliance Alternatives: 50% private Operational work efficiency B- $4,000 ty services C- $4,000 .Review to determine facilities support to service D- $4,000 Municipal data base .Use computer aided drafting database $20,000 to develope space options (corrected) Work efficiency .Design/layout to maximize Credit $8,000 (bubble/block diagrams) Staff/space projection Architectural fees .Existing staff/equipment Approximately .Anticipated growth New City Hall 01 .Work flows/intera,-tion of staff New Public works 7.%;9. .Technical requirements Remodeled City Hall 9.0% .Public safety .Public works Effective matrix Estimated construction costs Recommendation B.Alternatives Analysis of Alternatives Each alternative .Incorporating space program to site alternative .Floor plan/bldg's ele.-ition .Technical issue evaluz•tion .Construction estimates Conclusions/Recossaendation Presentation EXPERIENCE/PRACTICE METHODOLOGY PEGS (Maximum -Hourly not to Exceed) ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Lindberg-Pierce Significant experience - municipal office/public works Bob Pierce private office/other A.Space Study Team formation/tole definition Goals/objectives Needs assessment .Multiple interviews .Existing facilties .Staffing needs .Interrelationships Define character/spirit/community issues Operating criteria Cost estimates B.Alternative Analysis of Alternatives Each alternative .Site analysis/evaluation .Conceptual designs - study boards .Costs estimates .Scnematic desicn Conclusion/Re. ndat'ons Presentation Space stud• $3,000 Alternatives: B- $5,500 C- $4,500 D- $3,000 s sax:aims $16,000 Credit $3,000 + alternative selection (i.e. if C selected $3,000 + 4,500 - $7,500) Architectural fees fixed fee negotiated based on services - approximately 8• EXPERIENCE/PRACTICE =orsumsky Frank Siqnifican, experience Erivate/wid• range of projects Rill Lawrence Including ofi:.si.enicle centers %unic:ipal - office design METHODOLOGY FEES (Maximum -Hourly not to Exceed) -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- A.Space Study Goals/objectives Space planning/functional use analysis .Assessment of spatial needs .Spatial relationships/deptartment interaction questionaire .Computer processing/check interation .Interaction report .Interaction diagram .Analysis/summary .Common area requirements Existing site analysis .Code ana;ysis .Feasibility of rehab .Preliminary construction cost B.Alternat.ve Analysis Site anotysis .Inventr.cy of site !actors -Physif.al properties -Regulatiers -F.xpan:ion capabilities .Composite drawings/site factors - development potential -Suitability for development .Site comparison Each alternative .Programmatic requirements - graphically illustrated .Conclusions/recommendations .Project budget/scheduling analysis (Amended) Space study $12,000 Site analysis $1,600-4,600 (1-6 sites) Alternative analysis 1- $6,000 2- $11,000 All 3 5111000 Example: Est. total 1. Space study + 2 sit_ analysis + 1 alterrative - $20.400 2. Space study + 2 sites + 2 alternatives - $25,400 3. Space study + 2 sites + 3 alternatives - $29,40u Credit all of space study + selected site & 1 alternative Approximate $19,6CC Fees negotiate fee dependent on project/services Estimate New 6 ;/2 - 61 Remodel a-1Ct - • �' 21987. 4 TO: `layer and City Council FROM: Mark i3ern;:arcison, City Ad1iinistrator - •,j�,� DATE: February 19, 1987 3 1SJ87 SUBJECT: Facilities Study E k-•�; .,� f;�, , rru Attachments: A. Facilities Study Memo Dates 10/21/86 B. Orono Municipal Facilities Request for Proposal Dated 12/24/86 C. Facilities Study Memo Updated 9/15/86 D. Proposal From Boarman & Associates Dated 1/20/87 E. Proposal Frcm Korsunskv Krank Dated 1/20/87 F. Lindberg -Pierce Dated 1/20/87 G. 9onestroo Proposal Dated 10/17/86 ISSUE - Presentation of proposals regardi g facility study together with adoption of procedure for those studies. INTRODUCTION - At Council's October 20, 1986 Council meeting staff presented a proposal fur a space study together with a conceptual study of three options for a new City facility as proposed by Bcnestroo. At that meeting Council directed that additional proposals be sought. Staff put together a request for proposal that was sent out to approximatply six other architectural firms who had indicated interest at, received back three additional proposals. (Attachments D, E and F) DISCUSSION - The request for proposal Attachment B sought a study s mlml 11ar to what had peen outlined in the Bonestroo proposal from the various architectural firms. As a request proposal this is not a bid therefore there is come flexibility in the services being proposed and no requirement that it go to "the lowest" quoting party. Funding -.or any such study would come from the City's Building Construction Fund which was initiated back in 1982 and which currently has a $120,000 fund balance. The proposals generally outlined as far a dollars are concerned are as follcws: ALTUntiATIVE t1 CITY IALI,'Po LICP! SPAC' PUBLIC WUR1.5 STUDY IRZSENT SIT£ Sentetcoe 1.000 1,800 11ostwan $too$ 4.800 SeIOwnby 12,000 1Sr00tt one alternate LladM0j- IN %.S00 /Nees AI"!:P11A': I Jr 1: ALTERNATIVE CITY IIALL.'POLICE CITY HALL/POLICE, PPI'SENT SITE IUBL:,' WORKS PUBLIC WORKS/ALTERNATIVE ..I- ALTEPNATI•/E SITE 1,8^0 2,800 �,euo I,oaa IS,008 71.00I 2 alt�tnatives 1 alternatives 4,5C0 1,000 TOTA'. {6,6CC Sum fog ai. I a it ef',Jt IVr9 i1,A7t ALL /SOPOSALO ARE ACTUAL WILA MY TO LOCM IIOAItW' The dollars however, reflect only a portion of the story and the services in each proposal need to be, outlined in more depth to Counci?merbers. As such, it is proposed that CounciI's last meeting in 'March allow time for each of the proponents to present about a 5-11 minute discussion of their proposal and answer any questions Council may have regarding those proposals. Following that there be consideration of these proposals at either the first or second Council meeting in April. As noted in Attachment C the general outline would incoprorate both steps 3 and 5. It is proposed that this portion of the study Le gone ahead with and that once t.je consultants have completed their work, that a citizens task fe,- of approximately 5 to 7 individuals be appointed by Coun t( :eview these studies and give to Council recommendat_on regarding the following issues; Determinatio. of the City need for altered facilities - If facilities are to be altered, which approach or alternative would be best - A means of financing any proposed alteration - Process to initiate recommendations Following this task force it would then be up to the Council to decide whether they want to go ahead with any recommended alteration or not and if the decision to go ahead is made, the appropriate method, may it be through an informational and public hearing route or through an informational and bond referendum route. RECOf111EN1), TICN - I` is s r -acoi, --ndation -hat the Council accept the inl-ormation and c. t. the .'em be t,ihled until the seeon-3 meeting in March at which time ti,e f,)ur proponents would present a short outline of their services in relationship to the study together with answering any questions Councilmembers may have. Following the presentation it is recommended Council table it until a subsequent meetir:g for possible selection of a consultant. PROPOSED MOTION - Moved by , seconded by , to accept the information regarding the proposals on facil y study and that the item be tabled until the last meeting in March at wtiich time the proponents would make a presentation. Ayes _, Nays _. Q^nettroo Boarman Lindberg Pierce Korsunsky Department 102186.2 /I 1 TO: Mayor an. ty Council FROH: Mark Bern► Json, City Administrator DATE: October 21, 1986 SUBJECT: Facilities Study - Consultant Analysis ISSUE - At this junction of the facilities study does the Council feel it appropriate to: A. Hire outside consultant to perform parts of the study B. what items does Council desire to authorize to study C. Is it appropriate to have the City's contracting engineering firm to do the work or does the Council desire alternate proposals from other vendors DISCL 3ION - Attached is the requested detail outline of the vaiic.. s os of the study that the consultant would undertake to determine the City's space needs together with determining alternate cost arrangements based on preliminary design sketches. As noted one of the proposals does include a complete review of the existing buildings however as noted they do not feel that the entire code compliance review is appropriate given their preliminary review of the buildings. At this point in the facilities study and given the nature of total project since this is under $9,000 it is st_aif's recommendation that the work be done by the City's consulting engineer and that should the City get to the point that they want to do further design work that at that point it be placed for request proposals from additional firms. RECOMMENDATION - It is staff's recommendation that the following items be contracted with the City's consulting engineer: A. Space program study $1,800. B.2 Adaptation and Re -use - current facilities $1,800. C. New Public Works building on City owned land $1,800. D. Combined City Hall/Public Works - new site $1,800. PROPOSED MOTION - Moved by _, seconded by __, to direct the city's consulting engineer to undertake items A, B.2, C and D as they next step in the City's facilities study. Ayes _, Nays — Bonestroo, Rosene, Anderlik & Associates, Inc. 2335 W. Trunk Highway 36 Engineers & Architects St. Paul, MN 55173 672.636.4600 October 17, 1986 Mr. Mark B.irnhardson City Admini%trrfor City of Orono Box 66 Crystal Bay, * r 55323 Re: Proposed S _es Municipal Buildings File No. 13929 Dear Mark, It was a pleasure meeting with you to discuss you ect. We would be very happy to work with you. Our perience in the building types you're talking about the Orono area. ,. r.n 1. P I M.hn . J•..p.A C R'ndJw,f A ..n.Ae., I' I MaAwd f hlvr. I• ! Id .n C Oil—. P I Lynn R C.-A. PI All", 4 th P I 1 Aom..! N.n.. I•I Me A..d M /mur Yl Molv.rL I. Arnw M. I'L tA.w./d C Ar.pN.. P t Jett/ A R..wd— P f AIwA A He+w.w. P I Aew A.rl T R..Iw.unw.nY I Nuhvl M Y/�//•n. I' l In,•w.ol AI /4.ww P L .14.. A..! C. L/+a A. P I Anew L. Alr/M, P[ J.... J R ALWwd. PI A".wok P Awd,,, w PI r. AnAA Iv.0PI AIr& R R..1/,. r f RuAen C X"MA. A 1 4 TAw ~ A AAg. I' ! 3.wr L ?—,I. P / t-AWVJ A Lt. A — Lea. V P.wiN, IIwAM. AI CA — &we b L C../.w r potential building proj- office has substantial ex - and are also familiar with At your request, we have broken our proposal down into four phases. Phase A would have to be done before any of the other three could be started. The other three phases, D, C and D, are independent of each other and could each be pursued separately. Our proposal IN as follows: PHASE A - PROJECT PROGRAM Our firm would prepare a Project Program for a City Hall, including Police Station and Public Works Building following standard architectural prac- tices. The program would include a list of required spaces (the net size and necessary equipment would be listed for each space); a statement of overall space requirements that includes an ..11owance for structure, cir- culation, space, etc.; a checklist of design c.iteria; a project statement su•nmarizing the overall project goals and objectives; a brief code analy- sis; and an approximate statement of probable cost based on square -foot costs of similar buildings. The Project Program would be based on input from you and y.-Iur staff and m r own experience with similar buil.ings. Our fee for this phase of the work wou'd be $1,900.00. Page 1. B201d 30 Year Anniversary City of Orono Orono, MN Octobq!r 17, 1980, PHASE B - _FEASIBILITY REPORT ON EXPANDING EXISTING FACILITIES This report would consist of two parts: PHASE B.1 - CODE AND STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS OF EXISTING BUILDINGS In this part of the project, we would address ourselves to the condition of the existing buildings. Building code compliance would be our first concern. The major issues would be: 1. Fire exiting. 2. Fire-resistant construction (where required). 3. Alarm systems. 4. Nandi -capped accessibility. 5. Energy code compliance. 6. Ventilation (especially in garage spaces). 7. Detailed requirements for the various occupancies. A structural analysis would also be performed. It would examine the con- dition and designed strength of all major components. The existing build- ings are largely wood and thus are especially vulnerable to problems from age, moisture, etc. It is also not unusual to find existing buildings whose structural systems do not meet current codes. Deficiencies must be identified early in the design process so that the cost of th.ir remedies can be included in feasibility analyses. Our fee for this ph,+se of the work would be $3,600.00. We would draft diagrammatic as -built drawings as part of this work. (NOTE: Based on a brief field trip to your facilities, we feel certain that they have serious problems with code compliance. These problems seem ohvious to us wi hout detailed study. We will be more than happy to per- form this study. However, you should be aware that many conclusions can be drawn without a detailed analysis.) PHASE B.2 - ADAPTATIC' AND REUSE This report would taE.• the Project Program developed in Phase A and apply it to the existing city buildings. The object is to see what, if any, city buildings could be -t orporated into the building program. Our re- port would define how muc r. adeling of existing buildings and how much new construction would b, -veded to accommodate the Project "rogram on this site. We would inch ,! approximate cost estimates based on square - footage costs. Diagrammatic sketches would graphically illustrate report conclusions. Our fee for this rhase of the work would be $1,800.00, PHASE t - NEW PUB' C WORKS BUILDING, ON CITY POND SITE This report would examine the feasibility of building a new Public Works Building on the land the city owns next to the settling pond. City office and police functions would be accommodated at the current city hall site. Page 2. 8201d City of Orono Orono, MN October 17, 1980 This report would be similar to Phase 13 in that a survey would have to be made to determine how much existing construction. could be used and how much new building would have to be done at the existing city hall site. All work in this report would be designed to mee-_ the Project Program de- veloped in Phase A. The report would include diagrammatic illustrations and square -foot cost estimates. Our fee for this phase of the work would be $1,800.00. PHASE D - COMBINED CITY HALL 6 PUBLIC WORKS BUILDING ON NEW SITE The focus of this report would be a totally new facility located on a com- pletely new site. City staff would specify a site to be used as a subject for the report. The building design would be based on the Project Program from Phase A. We would examine the advantages of a combined building ver- sus separate City Hall aad Public Works Buildings on the same site. One layout would be selected. It would be illustrated diagrammatically and accompanied by square -foot estimates. Our fee for this phase of the work would be $1,800.00. In closing, let me emphasize that the purpose of these reports is to examine possibilities, compare options and define approximate costs. We will not be developing detailed designs. Instead, we will be gathering together enough information on the various alternatives to choose one for further develop- ment. Please keep in mind that: 1. Phase A must be completed before Phase B, C or D could be pursued. 2. We plan to work closely with your staff throughout the design process but especially in Phase A to ensure that your needs are met. 3. All illustrations and designs will be diagrammatic in nature as is appro- priate for this stage of design. 4. Cost estimates will be based on square -foot figures (by necessity since detailed designs will not be prepared). This is a very exciting project and we would welcome the opportunity to work with you. All three of the proposed scenarios have some merit and we have no way of knowing at this point which is the proper course to pursue. But what- ever option turns out to be in the best interest of the citizens of Orono, our firm would be happy to carry it through to a successful conclusion. Respectfully submitted, BGAESTRG ROSENE, ANDERLIK 6 ASSOCIA MS, INC. ram.. Robert C. Ruseek, A.I.A. RCR:li Page 3. A201d 121886. 1. o .01Ic) flIM I C I PAI. VAC. 1 1,11r I :::; RhLUE!;T FOR PROPOSAL The City of Orono currently utilizes a number of spaces for its administration, police, and public works operations. At present, most of the buildings that the City occupies are not in compliance with current Codes together with the fact that the City is quickly reaching a point where it needs to expand. At this time, the City is evaluating alternatives to select the most appropriate course of action regarding its facilities in light of anticipated future development. As noted in the attached information, the City has done a preliminary facilities assessment of the buildings together with a brief analysis,- of its space needs projected over the next 15 to 20 years. The City is currently doing a request for proposal to undertake a project program analysis to determine approximate square footage needed together with a development and evaluation nf three alternatives together with approximate cost to undertake these alternatives. In brief, the alternatives are as follows: a) `xpansion of the Lxisting _Site - Undertaking the m necessary reod-e f-ing and new construction to accommodate the City project program on its current site in Crystal Bay for space needs for Public Works, City Offices, and Police Department. ')) New Public Works Building - Remodeled/Addition on Current Crystal_Bay_Site - This would involve constcuctron of a new public works building on a separate site, which for illustrative purposes is on a site the City currently owns on Old Crystal Bay Road. The balance of the project program for City Ha'l and Police would be a cur bination of remodeling and new construction of its building at the Crystal Bay site. c) New Facilities on New Site - This would be the construction of�a new facilities, either combined or connected, separate buildings for Public Works, and City Hall together with the Police. This would be on a site away from the current Crystal nay site. The reason for these alternatives is to allow the City t!) compare these options, both regarding design, function, and also cost to help it determine which directinn to go. ATTACHMENT A n;:OtlO 1113NICIVAL FACIL1'"U'S Pa9(' Request ror ProEosal: The request for proposal should include a pc ice for each prase delineated in the attached information. it is anticipated that these costs are not to exceed figures, and that should the f i rm getting the contract not expend the total amount that the City only be hilled for time spent, in the total contract not by each phase selected. Additionally it should be mentioned that the City may only choose to take certain phases. Is understood that the project program is the necessary first phase, but the City, once the dollars for this request are known, may desire not to have the full range of alternatives examined at this time. It is anticipatedi that the ;project program will follow standard architectural practices and that the level of detail for the various alternatives will give illustrative drawings supporting the recommendations together with approxime. costs. The style of ')ui lding the City is loop g for, to the extent a new building is chosen for City Nall, is one of a residential style nature t,at will fit in with the large residential structures that .re fould in the rural part of the Community. It is anticipated that the desired design for the public works building will be one that will be unobtrusive as possible, as it will be located in one of two residential areas. RFP Res2onse - Dates: It is requested that you respond by January 14, 1986 with the quotations that you would feel appropriate for the project outline for the attached information. If you have any further questions or comments, please contract Mark Bernhardson at 473-7357. ATTACHMENT A 01IO10 HUN I C I PAL F AC I L I TY 1I1,QUE-ST VOR PROPOSAL APPENDIX A PRASE A - PROJECT PROGRA14 Analyze City Hall to include Police and Public Works huildino. - List of required spaces (the net size and necessary equipment for each space.) Overall space requirements. Project Statement/summarizing overall project goals and objectives. Brief code analysis. '.pproximate statement of construction cost. This phase should include discussion with current staff regar:ing needs and desires for a new facility. PHASE B - FEASIBLITY REPORT - EXPANSION ON EXISTING SITE - Survey of structural soundness, energy efficiency, handicapped access and overall code compliance. - Level of remodeling and new construction to accommodate and meet Project Program on site. To include diagrammatic illustrations for support conclusions an] square foot cost estimates. PHASE C - FEASIBILITY REPORT - SEPARATE PUBLIC WORKS/CITY HALL - New public Works building on separate City owneJ site to Project Program. - City Offices and Police on current City Mall site combining remodeling and new construction as needed to fit project program. - To inclu,le k7iagrammatic illustrations anJ square foot cost estimates. PHASE D - FEASIBILITY REPORT - CONSIMMO CITY HALL AND PUBLIC WORKS - New facility for City Hall and Public Works on a complete now site. AT?AC1O1tf/T A "a(je 2 Appendix A - Examine advantages of combined building vs. connected separate buildings on same site. - To include diagrammatic illustrations and square foot cast estimates. ATTACNI MT A 91586.1 TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Mark Bernhardson, City Administrator",� DATE: September 15, 1986 SUBJECT: Facilities Assessment - Request for Fund Allocation As indicated at the last meeting i am requesting permission for allocation of $8,000 out of existing monies in the building fund for the Engineer,to conduct an: a.) Analysis of existing buildings as to repair and bring into code compliance b.) Analysis of space needs for all City facilities. This request is made as in house City staff does not posses-, the expertise: to do the appropriate analysis. The request is made to give Council the needed background for a decision as to whether there is a justifiable need to undertake a significant rehabilitations or replacement of all City facilities (Public Works, City Hall, Police, Council, etc.) Below is a list of steps for consideration of such a decision. This represents the third step in the process which is a refigent of the process in attachment F from the March 2a, 1986 memofacilities assessment. 1. In house facilities assessments 2. Preliminary analysis of needs, financing, etc. Analysis of needs * 4. Determination of need - Council * S. Analysis of possible site cost. d preliminary design * h. Determine appropriate method of financing * 7. Sf Iect preliminary site(s) 4 ti . r d. a.) If funding requiring referendum �} J - Informational 4- - Referendum • b. ) If funding through other rre ins - Public Heariny - Council deg-1 a ion 9. If approved * - Acquire site Additional shared tenants commitment * - Facility final design * - Hid project * - Arrange financing * - Award project Complete Transfer * Indicates points requiring formal Council action 2 CI FTL ' of OW KNO Post Office 11ox 660(:rystnl Ilay, Minnesota ;il323aMunicipal (Nficce On the North Shore of Lake Minnetonka December 24, 1986 Korsunsky Krank Erickson Architects 300 - 1st Avenue W)rth :Minneapolis, MN 55.131 Subject: Request for Proposal City Facilities Study Space Study Attachments: A.) Request for Proposal B.) City Facilities Assessment Dated March 20, 1986 Dear Architects: Vie City of Orono is currently at the beginning of a facility study Lo determine its space needs, both currently and the next 10-15 years. Attached is an outline which we would like you to use in developing a written quotation for a study together with an outline of our current facilities and anticipated needs as we see them presently. It is requested that all requests for proposal responses be returned by January l0, 19C,7 for consideration. Should you have any questions, comments or want to discuss this matter in person for expansion on material, please feel free to contact me. Sincerely, riark Bernhardson City Administrator Enclosure_ IK?ILN MCa 10UMti - 4717b7 • ADM PWTRATWOa VW A**'* - 4VJV?)SO • Nlot K' W(MILS - 411 7"t AMBBNW i 91586.1 TO: Mayor anJ City Council 14 , 1. FROM: Mark Bernhardson, City Administrator'k1 DATE: September 15, 1986 SUBJECT: Facilities Assessment - Request for Fund Allocation As indicated at the last meeting I am requesting permission for allocation of 58,000 out of existing monies in the building fund for the Engineer to conduct an: a.) Analysis of existing buildings as to repair and bring into code compliance b.) Analysis of space needs for all City facilities. This request is made as in house City staff does not possess the expertise to do the appropriate analysis. The request is made to give Council the needed background for a decision as to whether there is a justifiable need to undertake a significant rehabilitations or replacement of all City facilities (Public Works, City Hall, Police, Cov.icil, etc.) Below is a list of steps for consider_aLion of such a decision. This represents the third step in the process which is a refinement of the process in attachment F from the March 20, 1986 memo in facilities assessment. 1. In house facilities ass,-ssments 2. Preliminary analysis of needs, finan(-ing, etc. * 3. Analysis of needs * 4. Deter minatiuu -)f need - Council * 5. Analysis of E,osrible :;ite costs and preliminary design * 6. Determine appropriate method of financing * 7. Select preliminary site(s) 8. a.) If funding requiring referendum - Informational - Referendum * b.) If funding through other means - Public Hearing - Council decision i 9. If approved * - Acquire site Additional shared tenants commitment * - Facility final design * - Bid project * - Arrange financing * - Award project Complete Transfer * Indicates points requiring formal Council action To: Mayor Butler Orono Council Members 11 From: Mark Bernhardson, City Administrator t`\� Date: March 20, 1985b Subject: City Facilities Assessments Attachments A. Current Facilities Assessment B. Anticipated Organizational Development Scenario C. Project Budgetary Information Dated 2-86 D. Facilities Goal And Objectives E. Alternate Faciliti L-7ations F. Sample Timetable Alternative Facilities Consideration G. 1980 Alternatives For Existing Facilities INTRODUCTION The present city facilities began with the constrution of the current City Council Chambers as a town hall in approximately 1901. This was a replacement building for a previous town hall on the site. Prior to 1950 the city constructed the garages behind the Council Chambers together with acquisition cf the house and garage adjacent to the Chambers and the lumber shed which was previously used by Streeter Industries. In 1969 the City acquired the golf course together with the water plant that same year. The current administrative facility was acquired in 1974, moving from the house on Crystal. The garage on the water plant site for storage of utility vehicles was constructed in .978. In 1982 the Police department was relocated from the houre on Crystal its current location in Long Lake. While parts of the City facilitie3 represent a better situation than the City has had in the past, a number of the facilities are rapidly approching the need for substantial repair, if such is possible. Each of the buildings is deficient in numerous ways from our codes as noted in attachment A. ORGANIZATION DZVRWPMMT In light of the fact that significant expenditures need to be made in the facilities over the next five years it is appropriate that the City review its needs for the next 15 to 20 years. The reason this time frame is selected is its anticipated that Orono should be close to full development under the current zoning h%, 2005. City Facilities Assessments March 20, 1986 Page 2 of 2 Attachment B represents staff's best efforts to determine the development of the organization within that time period. This is broken down into a.) the present staff level, b.) the expected scenario of development and c.) with possibilities that may altar the expected s^enario. These City Facilities Assessment scenarios are an attempt to translated the development into numbers of people. (These are extremely -ough at this point.) The reason for the transla*ion into people is to be ,ble to develop an estimate on the amount of space needed in a facility. As you will note the development contains the alternaLives of both growth in staff size and the with possibility of contracting out those services in selective areas. The development is in part based on attachment C. That is the updated version of information given to the Council back in January which was originally develop for budgetary information purposes. ISSUES RELATED TO FACILITIES, In addition to the issues addressed in the goals and objectives in attachment D, the issues of significant are as follows: A. Organizational Development - The physical seperati.on creates numerous problems for an organization as small as the city. This increases having to make trips back in forth on a routine basis particularly between the Police Department and the City Hall. This not only expends energy and employee time, but also severely limits the ability to share appropriate resources among the departments. Additionally significant problems occur when the separated department feels that they are an independent group and not part of the overall organization. B. Convenience Of Location - It is strongly felt that any location should be centrally located in the community. One advantage to the current site is that it is not to far off "center." There are however other sites that would more closely approximate both the geographical and population centers of the community. C. Facilities Limitation To Productivity - As you are aware there is a significant link between an organization's productivity and the extent to which facilities will limit the productivity possibilities. This obviously increases the ongoing cost of city business. As an example the City ) as had to stay with short wheel based trucks which has not a 1 lowed the City tc, attain the productivity or flexibility which could be achieved with even slightly larger wheeled based trucks. The shorter wheel base is usedin large part because of the garages cannot accommodate anything bigger. Other restrictions that inhibit productivity in addition to the separation of sites and the problem of less productive equipment, include personel having to spend considerably amount of time working around the impediments present in the current facilities. These include working on equipment (1 maybe 2 at a time), having to lay in water or ice because of the lack of drains, having to "jockey" equipment around in order to repair or maintain the equipment. From an office standpoint, the current arrangement presents impediments to the management and technical people as they are interrupted on a routine basis by the public. They are reluctant City Facilities Assessments March 20, 1986 Page 3 of 5 to close their doors however because of the need to ensure the coverage under the present physical arrangement. D. Community Leadership - Appropriately the City should reflect its philosopy of a low governmental posture through its facilities. It appears however contradictary that the City would place requirements on other persons in the City through its zoning, building and other codes when the City itself although dealing with existing facilities, provides little leadership in compliance with its own codes. While attachment A does list some cf the significant deficiences ones, the list is a summary of over 20 pages of on the existing buildings. E. Ability to Provide Service - Because of the condition of some of the structures and th--e-fr susceptibility to vandalism and fire the City stands a good chance that of having significant part of it's street maintenance/vehicle fleet destroyed in a fire. While this maybe covered in part by insurance and replacements can eventually be gotten, the City could be severely hampered in its maintenancr, efforts particularily for snow removal if it occurs in the fall or winter. Options The primary options are as follows. (Other options maybe combinations of the major ones.) 1. No action- This option is to do nothing significant to 'fix up the current faceci=t es. we have not attached any dollar amounts to repair or bring up to code complaince as at this point as it would entail outside expenditures and represents only part of the issue. It is strongly felt however that something significant will need to be done with the public works facility in the next 5 years. 2. Construction and Relocation of Some of the Facilities - Construction of public works facility would probabTe mean relocation to a different site. Such a move would allow for some rehabilitatior and consolidation of the administration and police on the present site but would necessitate not only separating Public Works from the rest of the City but also constriction of some new facilities on the current site in Crysta 1 nay. 3. Construction/Relocation of All Facilities- This option would result in selection of ones to to located al 1 the major city facitities except utility, liquor and gol:. This would entail construction of perhaps one and at most two buildings to accommodate these major functions. Financing While some rehabilitation could be done within the annual budget through a tax increase, the followir represent general means to finance a significant new facility: City Facilities Assessments March 20, 1986 Page 4 of 5 1. Bond•_ng- The general means of developing alternative facilities is through the sale of general obligation bonds. These would be no different then the special assessment bonds that have been sold in the past. They would generally however have a lesser interest rate together with the fact that they would require that it be submitted to the electorate in order for such bonds to be issued. Participation by other organizations such as other communities, Post Office, Library etc, in a joint development may raise some questions under current the Grahm-Rudman Bill as to the tax exempt status of the bonds. 2. Lease -Purchase- In recent years legislation has been passed to allow for a community to acquire capital equipment or buildings through the use of a lease -purchase arrangement with a private finance company. This is structured so as not to require a vote of the public. The City would however need to keep current with lease payments or it would lose the facility. At the end of the term of the lease the City can generally purchased the property for a dollar. Financing in this manner would be favorable in part due to the depreciation credits available. Further investigation of this option is needed if the Council would be interested. (It maybe appropriate that the City buy the land on which the building is sited in order to firm up their interest in the lease.) 3. Sale of Property- The City does have a number of properties scattered through out the City. It maybe appropriate to sell these in order to generate additional cash which could be used to finance a facility. Even without a new facility it would be prudent to sell this property as the City has no interest in maintaining them. (Principal among these properties are 25 acres acquired for McCauley Road together with property in Crystal Bay the City would vacate if it went to a different facility.) 4. F.xistin Cash Balance- The City could look at utilizing its rather substantial cash balance as a means to fund a facility on the front end and utilize tax anticapati.on certificates for its cash flow until such as its restored through taxation. A variation maybe "Investing" the funds construction of a new facilities. RECOMMENDATION - Based on the issues above it is staff's recommendation that Orono relocate all its facilities to one site separate from Crystal Bay with one maybe two buildings. This would be located in the community on any number of possible locations shown on attachment E. In addition to the City relocating its facilities the City could explore with abutting communities such as Spring Park and Minne*onka Beach and see if they ha e any interest in sharing facilities. This would still be convenient o their communities without the City of Orono absorbing them. Additionally it may be prudent to discuss with the post office the development of a consolidated postal facility. Other cooperative options may look at providing maintenance space for agencies such as Hennipen County Parks for servicing the Norenberg property and pig Island nhould they ever attain it and LMCD for maintenance should LMCD became irvolved in operations with facilities on the lake. City Facilities Assessments March 20, 1986 Page 5 of 5 While no firm cost figures for space have been developed or an approximate cost for a financing recommendation, the staff brings this issue to the Council for discussion to identify issues related to exploring alternate facilities. Whatever the cost today it would probably be done at a much cheaper price today *hen in 20 years. This is not only because of construction costs but also because the increase in cost and decrease in the availability of alternate sites that would not be faced with conflicting uses. Attachment F is a tentative time table indicating the events that may need to take place in order to go from the current facilities to a new facility. Attachment G represents designs of alternative facilities done in 1980 on the present Crystal Bay site. T =y do not all address significant revamping of the Public Works facility. Proposed motion: Move 214D That the City Council accept the assessment report for disct-.ssion at its April 28, 1986 meeting. Ayes , Nays / MUNICIPAL � IN L1 RM - AppeaprLsls Measure w!A! - 7/27/r7 List of Public safety Public woz`s Cmmmnities Total iployees Admdaistretion Plrw. -e Police Fire Animal Sagimser Streets Parts Sever water Mechanics (87 Metro Council 0 of Fire Csatrol City/NSA Acres Mi/ Mi Population Est) AM- Calls Mileage Lift Stations Orono PT 37 2 ' 17 Contract Contract 9 - 3 San Serer - 7,212 PT 5 2 1 Long Lake Bngineer 1 - 15.5 aq ni AN is Mound 45 32.5/33 25.2 Reserves Wayzata - - - - - mple Plaim Medina PT 11 1 2 4 Contract Contract 3 2.967 PT 3 1 1 Usual Beginner 27 sq mi AM 4 Loretto 48/0 15 7/3 10 Reserves Long Lake Wayzata PT 33 3 7+1 - City Mqr 5 3 4 See Serer 3,654 PT 20 2 30 C90 3 aq ai AM 109 1" Contract 27/0 25+ 24/15 22 Fire Beginsers 2 cometaries (3) Som" Lake U:celsior Shorewod PT 33 3 2 13 ♦ 1 Fire Omatract 4,788 PT + 1 33 6 aq ai AM 13 mse V 431 i Mendota Ste PT 33 6 2 13+2 - 1 4 3 1 Maintem mce 8,195 PT 4 2 32 4 contract/St. Paul 11 eq al, AM 0 177 133 60 175 60/7 60 St. w*tbony FT 39 3 3 11*1 7 10 See Streets Sne Streets 1 7,70C PT 1 22 4 ( 3 eq al AM 6 426(140/2s6 33 33/2 33 weer— fire/asdicai) l Mlary PT 54 6 4 1441 Man profit 3 15 See see 2 14IS20 PT 4 0 5 45 Street street 36 q ad AM 374 94/6 64/7 69 Champlin PT 48 3 4 1342 contract s/ 13.261 PT 3/16 1 1 2 am" AM 1S Masan babbLesda" FT 74 4 6 19" - 14.21.2 PT 90 2 30 3.1 aq ai Y 14 193 26S puked up r Mersem 704 sofa List of CoMRaaities (87 Metro Council Population not) Inner Grove PT Heights 19,549 PT 27.5 aq mi AN Shoreview PT 22,S60 PT 13.4 aq ■i AN Crystal PT 23,009 PT S.d eq ■i AN Public Safety Animal Public Works Total Smployeen Adniaistration Finance Police Fire Control Smgiaser Streeta Parks Serer rater MecMnfrs NSA Ni Acres Mt/ Mi Lift 70 4 S 22a3 1 3 C8019 SG/vol 10 6SS Reserve SO 3 6 Contract Contract 1 Ramsay Lake MY Jobam 1-2.5 S7/lle1uateors squad 100 9 4 3046 1 PT 3 33 1S 346 Reserve list of Community Development Communities 8uildinq Planning L (87 Metro Council @of Single Zoning Population Est) Family Rouses Application/staff 86/Value Orono IrT 2 7,212 PT 55/11 nil 15.5 aq at AN 9P,'49 Contracts to 3 Commun i tI as Nadina PT Contract , 2,867 PT Metro/ +1 PT 27 eq a1 AN Nest 50/50 39/7 mil wayseta PT 1 0 3,654 PT + Orono Consultant 3 aq ai AN Contract Planner 6/lmil Shorewood PT 1 1 4.788 PT 1 1(.5) 6 sq ■l AN Contract 60/40 MetroNest Mendota Eta PT 1 Consultant 8,195 :'T 1 Planner 11 sq ■i r,M l of " iai 1 46 St. Anthony PT N/R s/R 7,700 PT 3 aq mi AM Woodbury IR 3+1 3+: 14,520 PT 36 aq ml AN 224/27ail 73/24 Caaaplin Pt 3+1 2+1 13,261 PT 2 AM 652/41ai1 "M A0061sMa16 R 2 3 24.222 i .s 3.1 M a/ M IS/lull 46/12 Mi•�-ellsneous Health Golf Course Liquor Electric Lich se Rureau Assessing Utility 1 No No no Coetract 4113 Parcels No No so so 1 PT 1,540.000 $96,000 On/Off 2 Pt. so so 12 Pt. Off 660,000 No so so ? 2 Ito X 3,690,0^0 On/off No sc- so no Nc, 760,000 Off • tin wr•n so all ia^ Contract 1653 Parcels Contract P—Cels contract 22i7 oer"els Dak to Coua t1 Handles 6100 Parcels List of Cosnunity Development Mis,ellanecus Communities nuilding Planning 6 Application Health Golf course Liquor Flectric Lf,ense R,reau Asat—sin (87 Metro Council Zoning ,staff Utility Fopulation Est) Inver Grove FT H/R w,lR Iin <<� �{c. `aku•a Heights -r'-nt r 19.549 PT Prz,v;rea 27.5 sq m1 AM Shoreview FT 1 3 No we 22.560 PT 1+Contract 13.4 aq mi AM 310/26mil 1 !Used 64/21 Insp) Crysta. FT H/R N/A Ko No No 23,009 PT N' ' 5.8 sq ei AM ' i ng 'Ianw 1. City H311 Acquired 1974 Address C1'.7'Y or ORM Cum IWILM26 m B119 Sq Ft Land Area Gxidition of Structure 1335 S. Brown 1299x2a 14.509 7.460 sq it 2. PFablic works- 1305 S Brawn Pd 6,785 *La-beryarJ Shed' sq it Acgwred pri.ar to 1950 39,433 -Building rat designed to ca r r y load -Structural rn')ers ratting in sele -ted area; -Missing exterior boards -Structural pets - s.:b;,•ct to equipment ab:a_-w -Foundation decaying -Roof leaks -Cross ties damaged Code Ccepl iance(Mlor ) Building -Stairs undersiae/allotatute hazard -No handicap bet!ud�a,/Acc*.ss 2nd f loot 1 -Ventilation poor -Structural hers undersized/ not proper for use -Lx i is often blocked improper -Inadequate fire separation throughout -Exposed w i r e ng/ I nade qua to outlets - KW_Au cap arss toning - Urr3crs i zed lot Inadequate setbacks - pr'..ably set wi,,hin Pra:pect,Brown rig!% -of- wuy - adequate parking - Pzrking separated by street Luiliing -"AA below grade - r ott inq -Required to have concrete/ asphalt floor-flamaAble materials trap -Rafters 6;dersized for si-.an -0ixupancy req.:red to be sprinklered (.3000) -Larger than permitted woad ct:....ture under state bidg. Qh (5160) Zon_trx -Sut--tarw!ard Lot (87,120 required) -In right-of-way Crystal ,'Brown (.51) -Inadequate setbacks iaenents -Nu conference 4.&-w -W privacy -Cramped offices -Technical,Mgt people continually have conic Interrupted by pubii� traffic -Poor storage facilities -No lonav'$r"k ra --Water supp 1 y,'Iaoks eexisp i Z sous -City :wage -Conflict with resiJer,tial area -Poor `leat.ng portal -No storage Vau", -rL le drawer Vie./traf f i_ co f Pict -Dareyeroas steps -Pedestrians sle+p right out an to street - PUX 11:91ht lines -duo recept:ori /wa.i t.iraq arms CJi'Lslbigna� watar leaks -CoM*rcialAI9ht Industrial use in Sense res:Jential -Kul ti use site -Bar'kout of front of building onto Brain Road -Isi nor fire could cause loss of building and aL' stored re:-ords and awipmsnt -in.>iegwta material storage/ �.uacilinq area -Pss t-"r cat,,"ieavy erq 409M traffic conflict -B1Jg blocks Crysta;,ILrrom sight distance -Inwfficient City Vehizie storage -Inadequate heated wrk space - Expensive to heat -Inadquate lighting 4iot bualt as mute lame facility ... '. i nr, `:arse 1. Pvl`lic Works Gf f i ce!sar age :Ooncr ete block Acr ared early 19a7's 3. Pudic Works of f ice, :+cqwred early S. Public 1Urks Garage Cor.5tx*u ted by City prior to 1' i0 Address Hlig Sq Ft Land Area Ccxxiition of Structure 1295 S. Bruwn 400 sq ft 6,250 sq ft 1285 S. Brown 923 sg ft 6,539 -Inadequate tespor.+cy 1st floor sq it structural columns -Second flow unusable structurally unsound 1281 S. Brown 11200 6,750 sq ft sq it Fa. Council Chambers 1275 S. Brown 760 sq ft 7,"0 sq ft Built 1904 6b. PW's Garage Constructed by City prior to 1350 -Rear landing - poor condition 1279 S. Broti 1239 sq ft (saes lot -Foundation crumbling as ommi1 Chambers) Code CcstpI iance (Ka Bldg Lon ra -Inaa 1p3te setback -Acressory structure without pri!%jry (lots not legally combined) N -I-,bdeguate lot,size alum -Inadequate ventilation -Inadequate fire separation - furnace -Inade"te stairs -Expe-_Ad electr icol;' Inadequate out'-,.; -Inadequate septic sy :t cr Zuni =lquate lot size -Ir►xic }oats setba.:� , Bldg -Impr«per exhaust vcnt ., tat i _n Zon i nq -Ir>a&xgtiate lot size -1r6t,-4ja,:s setback slag P►, bathroom -Ir.&3-ate lot size -Nu nvidicap parking (turf surfaces reguireu) -InxiegLAte exiting -Inadequate vent i lat ton Zan ing --inadequate side setts.:_K -Inadequate lot size, 8-lid -Inadequate exits -improper osY9ervAcetylent damnable liquids storage -Inproper fire separation -Ir dequate ventilation Z_.- . i ng -1,U1egJ9*e settz,--ks i osaent_ -Light Ir&:jstrial Traffkc -Recueiin; cLose P"Muuty to wooden structures -0ifice/Light l-d,.:strial ir, residential -f.kght Indistrial vMcrwnk.;al -Inedeguate safe empliyee protectlo+ - welding, yr.rd4ry etc. -Inadequate lighting -l..aoequate elsctr v-. . c-?fc=t f -Purl:_ sssemtly tatx Sit per code) -Roof laws" -Dwrgy 1:z4s -Inadequte speee/layout, seaat i ng -Difficult to was as poll oq place -Light Indust r1aLT-Aterko: storage -Insulation destroyed by water -Pmf leaks 0 yaars. -lleeed to wear r a. -, gear in rakn,` now melt (repaired 2 years :go; 1 nq Na:-e Address Bldg Sq Ft Land Area CmU t ion of Structure Code Crxg+l aaraoe (l�oz) Overall Public Works Comments 61N 41k) hdradi cap accbse 20min I-r-lots waG: ie -Inadmquate size -Tw mr,iy structures (primary/accesscxy) on >cx -Cc6? des not allow nixing commrrcial/indu::trial on flame lot Police Station 446 Willaw Dr 81119 Lang Lake-1nadmp ate bethroam facility =e: te•� :. _ -W, Handicap access 2 nib Lonq Lake 9. W3te_ ..-.nt 2345 Bla. -.o Ave - ialr3ye Tr e :itment Facility Water Tower ?. Li.;,iDr Store 3421 SHorciint! Dr Rm:ted 1%5 Cl�mernt s $tor a;,+ -Spay restricts acgais,tian of a�Vraprlrtr size OTAIps"t - l 'Batt ^sand wx k specs -Expensive to heat - i 4 simcesl -Y%1ner4ba►ity to fire? vandalism -Du)uirLtad spr:-�es; rort -W Want: $Lr.1[L./W water stop:-, -Floor drain two S5 ;alltm drums fail ui:/wter-iC* 1-20 in smops -Samrly lr.adaquate maintw%ance,'repail mpdop (1 at a Cue) res:ilcti aCguisltam of larger More &k"qu.te aquipma -Split material stara:e .cartes time (sewer FLant) -Inedeq::ate wale wi.lt.r: .GM%A -Sa 1 t Sand Six" in Vrr a i nq lot -:.ease empire,„ L/1.198 -5cparated from rest -f orgarusstla - caiaaes •arsmminicatlon prablemse -Irucfeq.aate hold"N facility (hancuffs.'evabo_t a.% vall,/an Chair; -Inadequate office s>pmae -lnadeq"mte perking -used far heated vehiCLe stcuaye to last officer/ veh .:: a chant ime -:nrdegwte lacuer/cuinginp facilities - Jfl_tW.tlai he1L ice dliap to r►.) outside 'vestibule* -Light :rdustrial in resident.9l —C,xwernc regarding cH ratim -Rented facility -i'U*glate flair soma - : .-aAeg6ste of t i Cr at a: a i ' 11 :Iny !Ralf 10. Past Office Vacant Gat 12. sever Plant Address Bldg SgFt Laid Area Condition of structure 1355 S. 1som ago sq ft 15,20J Uq ft Adjacent to S. Brown Rd 10W Old Crystal Bay Poad South 13,203 N/A ✓q f t (Bldgs awed t y Metro Waste) 13. Golf Course 265 Orcno House 40 Acres Not Evaluated orchard Road 1200 aq ft Coda r 1 T e 1tlei;f 4 8163 tani _ to parking -Parking !OM B 1AS L_�n_ � B LdI tonir� =CtTwlldable lot;'Pub'_ic road front ge -Metr-) waste/No public road frontage -Irua&-quate d-y buildlable Coments -lniadeaarte far Inve^._cxy atria( -Ire+ I #rate par k tng -1 !fsle .�..r V ac r�elrs -lnadr=lwte �tf1r� - uNd f x Lnventary -NE-!s new furnacs'Tndnaltla {�45W. month► -PurctNee .nth P rk Dad-,cat-jr. Rttids -Balance d 'hart• an its assm La tad e i t.1i bLdgs 1 e ! -No direct off street parkin0 solely for pas. 01 sliest pa,:kirp armc+ely r.acriread by rwLrrrm st:aet tais stcrage are4 4 SER009 17dIHCTI011 E04LW) YEAR 2M CURRI-W STAFF E)(PVCTE ) - T7r SV-r.rICFS F r / PT S ITIA t T 0 1' S FT / P4 :,17!inistratim Admin (1) Feeorder (1/2) Increasing Recorder to Ft Mgr (1) Clerk (1) Addition of Receptionist/ Clerk (1) I�c:,?ing Infr+rmation Deputy Clerk (1/3) Switchboard Operator Recorder (1) --id referral - plus Clerk (.S) Clerk nr .r.-zation31 Switchboard/ -3r:etinq) operator (1) Contract Legal (FTE=.4) Contract Legal (FTE■.4) ryo nc- Director (1) Anticipate Increased Director (1) Deputy Treas/Clerk (2/3) DesmW for accounting Deputy Tress (1) Account Clerk (1) information/ Some Account Clerk (1) increase in utility accounts - billings, (301) Bill processing Ass^5: n"' Contract - Private Contract - Private (Make office si•...::e available) .3naor-r_nt T-iformation Joint Powers/'LOGIS Joint Pon:rs%:17GIS (Climate controlled space for small :n hale coeput, r ) p hlic works 1. Building Maintenance Contract work If in one complex - City Hall (FTEa.3) either contract or - Police (FM-.2) hire one person - PW's - Street Dept. Personnel �. A-tnir.is'ration Public works May need to add Coordinator (1) Coordinator (1) selected clerical assistant 0 a Ix2i�ryIBi.:. SCENARIO Its FT / PT Should significant increase in available mnmicipal utilitit.s may increase by 3J1 Should a significant shift Clerk (.5) to local non-t.ir revenue sources occ" , maybe increase collection Provide Financial/ Clerk (.Si leamuntirg services for other oc w-nities CUICU!I" nVF FXPFX'1TI) FT / PT SC Wi!O Vs FT / PT SCENAMO 1. T_j inroring Contract service (.1-M-.2) Anticipate no significant Contract service (M,- .2) demand for service not funded by development fors May nerd filing/work space 1. Street Maintenance/ Park Maintenance S. Street Overlay Iding b. Ctiliti^-s Foreman (1) Anticipate moderate Foreman (1) lib (1) increase in Street/ HU) (1) LzJ (i) mile:.;s for public Lk:J (5) LED (1-2) Street Kaintenan-e maintenance Potential for combination with utility crew. Anticipate sore -productive- machinery inery Contract ('on t . act Poremin (1) Possible ination with Foreman %1) utility Streets. Modest increa,a utility Maintenance (2) in sewer/water Maintenen3x (1) a) Around service fringes/ currently zoned for utilities (593 connections) b) Stubbs Bay (53 connection:) c) Hwy 12 i`Jtii:BLF: -Shift of County to local 1'S PT / PT heads f (1) - S. Brain !Lz.1 (1.8) - Sayside (..9) - old Crystal Bzy/84 (.9) - Tankawa (1.7) - Borth Arm Drive (1.9) -Increase in City done maintenance -Contract se ry i ae to abutting coax—nitles Minnetonka Beach Spring P.0 k Lai4 ljire Maple Plain Tcnka Say -Increased park mainterAn;.e due to increa.�,nd park use -Activity in parks -Significant posh by LZJ (1) private road associat►oru 04a►nter-m" erjxnd.ture to either up markedly) a) Contract with City for selected maintenance b) Convert from private to public/especially in single family areas (/ of private miles ) -Significant increa;,, in utility extension a) Hater - Balance of Utility Maintenarxz (li croamrun: ty - Hydrants only - Service b) S,.wer - Significant Utility Mairt�.-rwu= (2) balance of community (730 corn tiros) - Contract service with Utility Maintenance (1) 2 l-URR^.T STAFF E anx"= POSSIBLE ;.: •^ SFR`:ICFS FT / Vr SCENARIO VS Fr / P'f SCEYAAIO VS !T / PT (Sol connections) Minnetonka Beach VeIii-1e Maintenance Contract to private If cost effective - Private contract on Space rewired City leased space - City mechanic,/Shop mochanic (1) P^li^e Servic- or:xn,1Cantrbct Chief (1) Increase in population Chief (1) -If lose all contracts Chief (1) Asst. Chief (1) of 36% will probably Asst. Chief (2) doubt if any significant Asst. Chie: (21 Sgt (1) require addition 1-2 decrease in numbers in Patrol (6-7) personnel together with fact possible increase Secretary (1) more senior force from 9-19 full time Reserves (20) Patrol (6) Patrol (8) or officers Investigator (1) -If specific assigned C!.ief (1) Patrol (7) patrols reduced Asst. Ct:ief (2) Secretary (1) Secretary (1) basic contract Patrol (11-12) or Secretary (1/3) Increase viability of Secretary (.5J, say increase by (3-4) Patrol (10-11i Reserves (15) Reserve FrNram Reserve (39) over year 202J+ Investigator (1) Secretary (1) Secretary (.5) Reserve. (32) -Addition of Cxtracts Patrol (4-5; - WayZJt3 - Cther Long lake Patrol (3) Anticipate the selected Patrol (3) Fpring Park Patrol (4) patrol for Spring Park Patrol 0) to decrease Tr,yrnenry Pr<")aredness Fir(, Servic- No significant charge Space - Conference ruin expected convertible to D ergercy Operating Center Contract Long Lake Possible construction of Mound small satelite station Maple Plain in Navarre area. May Wayzata be joint project with either Mound or icrg take Fire. Possible contract extension to Tonka Bay (if Lang Lake. Minnetonka Beach and Spring Park (.5-1) -'No-th Lake Fire' -Possible 'BLrf out' volunteers (42--45) of Long Lake Fire (or joint pro+ers) as Orono pays 831 of Clerical (.25) budget. Particularly if satelite station (contracts to Tonka say. Minnetonka Beach. Spring Park (.5) 3 SOMCCS fispatch Service C�mrnnty wc'opsrnt :znning/Z:x :ng *Contract' (no direct charge) Henn^pin County B i Z Admin (1) A_st. Zoning (1) Summer Intern ;.2i) SCF-%%R 10 Contract Hennepin County KISS 13U' t'S FT / PT SCENARIO VS FT / Pi Contract )4innetonka/.-.mother suburb -Anticipate oa ntlnued Dept head (1) de.aard for zoning the u 2000. Focus will go to Asst. Zoning (1) variances and zoning Part time Septic,- issues of developed Zoning (.5) property and away from subdivisinns -Septic inspections ,ors up by 40 % -If significant shift ArSt. Zoning '1) away from :.eptic (-50i) Part time (.25) -If contract with Asst. Zoning (1) Long Lake, M.rLnetcnkl Septic/Zoning il) Be.,;:h or Spr:ng park Building Inspection Building inspector (2) -9uildir4 activity .gilding Inspectors (2) -Contracts Cintra-t to continues within - l " of 14L.UWtonka Inspector (1) linnetonka Beach existing sewer Ca +.ity Beach Spring Park Spring Park Inspector (.5J -Addition of Lonq Lake • Inspects 1.151 (Fundl d by permit fees) P-m-sible Services Recreation Provided thru -If substantial &L :ortract or School Districts in public educatuo 4ecreation - require City to fill a, .54*rvisor (.5) a void ,rz^sportation MRC -Possible services related to -Local/Inter-rx-r- unity transit by contract Bu::-ing space (Post Cffice) -Provi3e space assw rated tal/Assnciated scrv. -e - Minrm;tonka ueach erviars - p:_ Park 4 ........ »... ........... �««.•�..... 194)0 .901 19BJ .«..».•. 198) «»�.�.�..�«....».......».. 1904 19611 I906 1901 198u 1') A 1990 -• rz;-16tlon Serer•0 4250 1340 ' «.�..•«�...«........, «.............w. Una•.rat•d 2370 S1L^-5700 Total 6820 6905 6747 7021 7159 2y'70 7240 7310 7370 74;3 7510 7600 3850 0700 metro Caeacll w20 64120 7020 � T000 -9300 1t100 fl�=�r severed 1650 i50/ ' Oou•aAolaa Oneewtvd Ml 1020 Total tea at 1f50 t 12/811 till 2361 2171 2613 2674 2526 2.66 26" 2647 26" 27.6 ItOJ 32SO taaLro Claeaell 3"1 2349 1662 1 26J0 2700 r+gla7aeet/ to us t2a .-I . no � •a7 900 1 •taa•ar to 31 31 42 Se S9 ` 40 40 c3 s0 as 90/Tr f.ay. 0rlam"T tild*a. Saw cmat. It1.1ar 20 30 3o 42 Ss S• 39 19 as 69 66 49 casiCeatial 0 Valve 02.590 2.600 4.819 8.030 30.000 11.0� 0.0 0.0 0.0 9.0 0.0 0.0,/'/r NOW/aver ttamr 0 1 1 0 1 s 1 1 1 1 1 1 lhr • ftlr • 6.210 .150 • .03.E .179 .:00 .100 .200 . ZW . i 00 t1uIlLose1 twaodsl/ !fir IS9 176 213 219 2" 770 250 Y6o 270 no ISO 300/pv Ad4ltloaa 0 valos 01.430 2.27• 2.67 1.70 6.397 3.0) 2.S 2.9 2.7 2.8 2.9 3.0 1a1131ona) Aas•aaar.ot/leer ra7eb1• (I! boils l0 128). its 00 1903 value) I Rartet valve 6:72.29 3(0.47 343.90 357.9 3M.13 3•S.70 I M.40 409.10 6t2.00 433.00 S•3.t: (ai11ices) I (trt •instated for LOOS )shoal AOaeaae0 ales Isllllve3 10.0 79.7 90.1 93.2 102.1 100.Saj 10t.6 IC4.4 10O.12 112.C2 i M.L swept ctPe1✓iwea 0a ,7eted 0 f Cata� 1.T91 1.<92 1.533 1.611 7 1.s0 1.92. I 7.19• Glcalative emu, 179 16.4 2.7 3.1 9.1 9.3 14.3 1.765 2.rtt:•i 0 fQa++ge I.:a2 11.399 Lacs 1.632 1.796 1.940 ' 2.190 22.51 12.6 .5 16.0 9.6 8.6 13.2 Co�aattl CroaR.9 • 3acroase in I 0aesaAolCa ttatiaated M 1.00 1.3 1.4 2.0 2'0 Croat) (hiaar7 2.3 1.9 1.0 1.6 1.6 1.6 1.6 Loeal t:--w (trios ZMai 119 24.50 2.bf ICrl1 2.If <t.Of 0.t1f l.Of Saw sorvice eatracts _ - Total (c n • OW Otc a Crora>t ' • 0ra COatre t Grow") 120 19.9% 4.04 0.14 O.Of 6.10 10.79 ' 0.N 6.09 C1umulattve res rtl •N• •.0• s.19 - Tar lacrease 9.9 lO.d 1..S01a1 Omelative Crah ut 0.9 30.0 11.7 ,S_3 0.• 1.02N1 t �ij1l t; �Yc 1� ! • Cron% 6ir0eaf hwtreeto 32686.2 GOALS/OBJECTIVES FOR ALTERNATE CITY FACILITIES - One Compound - Convenience - Compatibility - Productivity - Resource sharing - Turn Key Construction - Expandibility - Size of staff/contractor's staff - Services/Equipment - Other agencies/sharing - Flexibility - Within building(s) provide for significant rearrangement potential - Convenience/Accessibility - Public - Service to community/productivity (abutting 9 tom read) - Handicapped - Compatible/non-intrusive to surrounding land use - Utilities - Sewer - strongly desired - City water - preferred not essential T►PgCfi��F I N �,-!v I•.f C1 f 32686.2 POSSIBLE TIMETABLE FOR FACILITIES CH. ►NGE - Selection of design option - Development - Approximate cost estimates - Determine appropriate financing - Direct site selection (option?) (- Determine potential tenants) —If needed submit to voters, if not submit to public hearing If a go - Acquire site - Seek additional shared tenants commitment - Design facility - Bid project - Arrange financing - Award project - Cc 4ete - Transfer facility 6/86 7/86 8/86 10/86 11/86 2/87 2/87 3/87 5/87 5/87 6/87 7/88 7/88 Al AtvOrf'n �t OR Ars. 141 Q No _ A okr.m tb l T y Co. 4�571 Q C� A.J 40 ExISTip4.k EA1c16111LS— i a<egrtv�,aY� 19eo I iRYS fAt l3Av Peer Ofor7e: � Q I I 1. .i�.�,.w►is �ww saw Q I. 10tlti "R. " S. POLICE 0WX-10E o-c"e job��< µiv4r . r!:' j. e.R; •�_ i I d . P6�B�If WC/I!<'S 5*hVf-' +� � I � 7• Pl�BL/C 4,rC/1KS G.IQ4GE I 9. tcuivclt c UMSER.7 � � i q. Pusuc watKs S7bt4GE 16 —t I e° IN O ^R l lw�7E1<)c�� �CEMODfiGUG i /�cTI;TIevS_- cl� aeocf �,cw �RKWG toT i 1 j11 i V t O C �R/ok RF,A�IGi6EldItJG� AKTI s&way ►ssrAWti i I ` Il; ��_ Arm �• at L TEIWX1 TE No. 1. Pot ICE Olrr. MO✓ES %o B[OG A/ A{f[Cirrvl, Di,Pr. A(o!l£S rb LAG 0 S" R'41'C "WAT eOVoVP/A. AJfK %0: ,(1 7. .IDN/A,/f 7'117, nA. I. POLICC o[7r. ! Z. ADA+1M/S74AT OAJ j � 3- P�Bc�t s.✓n�Ks Equ/� Sres�awGt t� � � S. AtsEsswG (yusur 4.8�Arx; I % PU/SL I c rdOA'Ki !,r/QI6E j� ' cal. Cocwci� CN'IMSJ_.PS I � 9, Pu6t /� AtX!rlKs STa4gGE. No cHAAJOLC 1Q&Qp V �Q Awi rl &W �p9mosj I Aw"s f OAwo,nvW 4ee j - - -------------------- 4, FAWITTIC%;s- C"apmes wC14.1 PARicsiG LOT 7// J �� AM%= IARtRAM JL4wp. V4CATE SUCL'r PKS, IA ki Avo/7&w A#Aox cw CWP7-, JfAf A AV4&JC MMUCS 14 •X, '5'rlV�W, if 4 - 49A"44-4r 0 PAIL IC tVIVA-r 640141-41C .66 —%a M"jc4r~ Ad �YgoR .4✓t. Q V O � O � JLJ U p P A R vC • OLM wti w r. " s., E KZ vor ' f Anow A&mr -~ fs wd iwm—rs f AS* wnzrs S:Zwsav wars a+•�.►. O"WC .. • Ia t AM A46�r Rom+ 06- f Awa a oWit- C&bWA"S ra u7v M&A f &&Met,SF/ Ot0 NWP A W SVAIOMV5 • ft.L &on AmwrN OF fM7IL AK 0046owc. cry t; ZAsTM-CMtLT!!t!� twcerr tf:lC i op h/1 0 rasa —4--saf sCrw%t$ rasa r so Amu f+.j, ./� maw► .�.....T a..r..T A I am Tr. I espaA 714c ter CITY ADMINISTRATION _ POLICE STAFF AREA RAP.O STAFF AREA R , n0 W0008URY 22 4,800 SF 218 SF/Person * 18 3,200 SF 178 SF/Perun* (Pop. 14,C00) VAPLE ;,ROVE 4.0 (Pcp. 34,000) NEVV HOPE 25 (Pop 22,850) c3�,RNSV" LE 46 (Pop. 45,000) EAGA.N 44 (Pop. 41,000) P rIV 0L; TN 75 (Pop. 47,100) 19,590 SF 490 SF/Person ''S 21,000 SF 840 SF/Person 37 31,60C SF 687 SF/ Person 32 15,520 Sc' 353 SF/Person 25 23,000 SF 306 SF/Person * 25 7, ; c . SF 288 SF/ Perscr. 1,000 SF 568 SF/Pepsin 8,400 SF 263 SF/Person 13,770 SF 551 SF/Person 8.000 SF 320 SF/Person COTTAGE GROVE 12 4,800 SF 400 SF/Person = 10 1.800 SF (pop. 22,000) AVERAGE 39 21,928 SF 562 SF/ Person 30 12,590 SF 180 SF/Pe son • 420 SF/Ferson A?P L.E VALLEY 28 12,290 SF 439 SF/Person 23 6,330 SF 2 /Pe,son (Pop. 30.000) * 7hese communities indicated that their current spaces CITY HA' .L were iradquate. Average values are only for communities SPACE ANALYSIS that indicated their spaces weee adequate. BONESTROO A ASSOC. ENGINEERS/ ARCMITECTS Fig.10 .IRsot A✓t. — -z__ IYKT "uArA 1100 L&wcoi 10 ►data.-S ' ` I t dVaIOrUGS r + I Q J /w.....slllr.w I aq� Id..�..0.4— ,r C t r 1 Ar1s.c riO-0 La.r ;roww" IOtKi SORA44 r ` ""` r M ! /IDaKi O/iicL ...Li. /Y•i.t,. nM�4• I I t � � L. :YSaK r�ftrT f/4P �t IUSL tC ft4WACT GACW P CWmkRT O t t 7. laic rr I.rdtl{t s7L1t�fE 1t to �JPAV Lrj i r , ` /R ow Ave. .� I i i w � V rret�T+wrli - ws wrtS d ' � I ti low 1MMWAA Lof ! �M�If /OR RyrpjlllX: Owr owylps" fAboav rt S name ALY&wA-rc A.-L C Mtas awr. craws >i kK a/ j AfratAw rv. &. a • r A%Wm fir! nwrww�W anw S W Arco+ f 109PNOW Duct V"7. 1. rr�A/Ii7�/TNr�/ % /MIaK d~XT RIoon frA PSM awmew Moo" /�, /INLK rM�f 11ff�� A, �wMllri� C*Aok%%M 9. �vlsic mowr fwow- - co ��- iW MUDW 1 /irtsi � �/rt,M/Itf! IprtE+l AR/&A Avg t V ' 1 r �f4 1 • 1 r I Vie! �r « �T � aalft11a1q �P.,v _ —f J , L�inItNA I r N_o It f drq.v AUM 4 v 4uswc74~ s.oa A CyWPulari ,tat .Mrw. AMWPwf + L Ila..s aaq. flta/iiM/ A/Matt A KNL J ffl&qvj.,r ..wty ols'snr (r/cyoo. —/,t,J M—) v} j I ! N11itAC aot.K G,I/.ar.[ 9 I w.,r ,aa.t�rs stavAlGL t LLLr. ` nip ZTo,at�a t (.a aw�a it 3 •lzs•R + � Af Aso ' A R VL v -PAW gst ZI ew Qt772t MATE AA dw al`w ,a t.Oa.. ,c. • Aw Q•,ItKf tWAAWdWWS rf e/ry Mitt • V~LKF/ MV ..WO surer sc��o/AAiS • 04" : OM AAWTH a ieri't L Art . D&VILOt► LAVj>,.cAT•11;6 ! �;LGFj1p•}1k,7 PAR,, WNJN&J& C-V k JLAOLTH-iNELTtaJ> ' %&mow EF lCVJT wtR_. &ON • watt act"atn tab-m-M loam PM wok •t a i IW. fNrK frA"%anS -tt! — Ra &V G.Z✓ Y`A+I % •wgvw n tyt+an�e (s...8; r.uIp k r.•.w �!. awal Y�I►f1U S/asKat fwa.ut AIS &Do,,r wk mwwww l tea O'MI'rrMNf / pro'Art at Ara n r.0 %ftM T"W tre L TO: Mark Bernhardson, City Administrator 71+0i1: John R. Gerhardson, Public Works Coordinator DRTZ: August 5, 1987 SOeJ: 2648 Casco Point Road -- Encroachment on Right -of -Way and Double Curb Cut During the landscaping at 2648 Casco Point Road, the owner placed a 3' to 4' earth berm in the front of his property. The berm is approximately 90• in the City street right-of-way. On that section of Casco Point Road the City has a total of 100' of right-of-way. The property owner has indicated a strong desire to allow the berm to remain at its present location as per his master landscaping plan. The options are as follows: 1. Remove the berm entirely. 2. Allow the berm as is with a Hold Harmless Agreement. 3. Allow the berm at a reduced size to allow for a 5' to 10' shoulder and proper drainage and no plantings on the road side of the berm with the exception of grass. Hold Harmless Agreement. The property owner has also requested a double curb cut on the property. Because of the amount of traffic, traffic speeds, site distance and road design, it is my opinion that only one curb cut be allowed. RECOMMENDATION! To allow the berm to exist in the right-of-way but at a reduced size so as to allow a 5' to 10' shoulder, maintain proper drainage, no plantings allowed on the road side of berm with the exception of grass, enter into a hold harmless agreement, and one curb cut. PROPOSED MOTION: Moved by seconded by to a ] 1 ow the berm to exist in the right-of-way but at a reduced size so as to allow for a 5' to 10' shoulder, maintain proper drainage, no plantings on the road side of berm with the exception of grass, enter into a hold harmless agreement and one curb cut. Ayes nays i_ �rf'- �..., u / • • max` .� � ` �� .'�'! ., � �- ' '� � --' � . fir• —� Mr • '�4� ,�1, ' ' ,-.- I T • � f- 1 To. Mark E. Bernhardson, City Administrator From: John R. Gerhardson, Public Works Coordinator Date: August 5, 1987 Subject: Recycling Costs - 1988 In 1987, the City of Orono entered into a Joint Powers Agreement with several communities for recycling as mandated by Hennepin County through Ordinance No. 13. For 1987, the funding of the program was received through the Metropolitan Council and Hennepin County. All costs of the program were paid for from the grants received from the Metropolitan Council and Hennepin County. In kind contributions by each community were also acceptable. However, for 1988 the Cities will received only 50% of the total project cost. Therefore, the Joint Power Commission has drafted a proposed budget for the costs of operating the recycling program for 1988. For the eight communities involved, the total budget is estimated at $39,968.00. The formula used to determine each communities cost is $500.00 flat fee plus $2.50 per household. By using this formula, all communities involved will generate $20,470, which is 50• of the total 1988 budget. Orono's share using the above formula amounts to $6,917.00 Information received allows each community to exceed the levy limit to acquire these funds. The alternative to the above is as follows: 1. Withdraw from the Commission and develop and operate our own program. 2. Withdraw from the Commission and do not develop and operate our own program, in which case, Hennepin County has the authority to develop a program and assess the costs to us. It is recommended that the City budget the $6,917.00 for the 1988 budget. To: Mayer Grabek and Orono Council Members From% Mark F. Bernhardson, City Administrato �1,� Forwarded recommending approval. As all Hennepin County Cities are mandated to recycle and we could probably not do as cost effectively on our own, this would be the best alternative. PROPOSED MOTION: Moved , seconded that the Orono City Council desires to stay with the Joint Powers Agreement that involves, eight communties, and directs staff to budget an amount of $6,917.00 in the 1988 budget for Orono's cost -f the Joint Powers Recycling Agreement, A HEAwVIN RECYCLES W HRC WEST HENNEPIN RECYCLING COMMISSION GLASS *clear,green or brown *seperate by color *rinse *remove all metal and plastic caps, rings or lids NEWSPAPER *bundle and tie with string or *put in grocery bags or *put in closed cardboard boxes *phone books with covers remo-e; BATTERIES *must be clean *caps on tight How can I help to reduce our dependency on landfills? (By 1990 recyclables WILL NOT BE AI.IAWEU in landfills) RECYCLE: Please save the items which can be recycled and bring to a convenient site near you. REDUCE: Try to buy food and liquids in containers which may be recycled and reused. REUSE: Please find homes for good reuseable house- hold items and clothing at Goodwill, Salvation Army, garage sales or friends. TIN *rinse out *rerove ends (save,too) *flatten by stepping on *remove labels ALUMINUM *rounded bottoms *non ragnetic *rinse out *flatten by stepping on CARDBOARD of I atten *bundle with string *about 7 ft.s7. in size *;Newspapers also may be taken to the Orono Middle: ScY.00l parking lot at any time. -THANK YOU FOR HELPINIG TO KELP OUR MIROMOTr A SAFER PLACE TO LIVE - DAILY - Manday - Friday 8:00 AM - it: " Medina City pall toss ely Rd 20 f at Is east of w Ilow Ad 1st SATURDAY of the MONTH 9:OOAM .11:00 Noon Loretto - ISO Hallway St - It Peter 6 Paul Church may I Sept. S Feb. 7 June 6 Oct. 31 March 7 July 6 Nov. 7 April 6 AwS. 1 sec. S 2ad SArNAAY of the MONTH 1toem - 12:00 Moen Mille plain - Kept* Plain few Center - Hwy 12 I'd SATURDAY of the MONTH 9'060 - 12:00 Neon Oco� Middle Sc`,00l Parking lot - M+Y 12 t Old r.rvstal Say Rd May 16 Sept. it rob. 21 Jwe 20 act. 1T Mauch 71 July is ttor, 21 April 18 Auq, 15 Dec. 10 hth SATURDAY of the MONTH 4 Man - 12 " NDen Me.0, re - Alnq'a SWW, YaC t T 11.1 1'4 6 Ct. Ad May ! "Pt. 12 Jan. 31 May :I Soot 26 rob. 16 June II get. to Feb. to June 27 Oct. It, ibrah 16 July II Mee. /♦ April 11 A" . 1 (lee. I2 NarIS July 2ee.. I Apr II 2S Ave 22 N;. :6 8687.1 TO: Mark il,:rnhardson, City Administrator FROM: John R. Gerhardson, City Administrator DATE: August 6, 1987 SOBJWT: Ordinance Amendment #38, Second Series "Truck Route" On July 9, 1987 the Orono Council amended Ordinance Number 7.10 allowing the restriction of certain trucks on designated streets. It has come to our attention that one of the exceptions in Subdivision 2 (C) D Orono maintenance vehicles also restricts other municipalities from using those desiqnated streets. Because the streets to be designated are streets that are shared in ownership and maintenance with Orono it is necessary to amend the ordinance to read "City maintenance vehicles." TO: Mayor and City Council FAOM: Mark Bernhardson, City AdministratorO'J RECOMMENDATION - To adopt the attached Ordinance amendment restricting truck traffic on certain City streets as authorized by Council. PROPOSED MOTION - Moved by _ , seconded by tc adopt Ordinance Number , Second Series amending Ordinance Number 7.19 restrictf"ng truck traffic on certain City streets as authorized by the Orono City Council. Ayes _ , Nays 7687.la ORDINANCE NUMBER , SECOND SERIES AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE NUMBER 38, SECOND SERIES WHICH AMENDED ORDINANCE NUMBER 7.19 AND ENTITLED "TRUCK ROUTE' The City Council of the City of Orono ordains: Ordinance Number 38, Second Series and entitled "Truck Route" is amended to read: Subdivision 1. Repeals Section 7.10 in its entirety. Subdivision 2. Inserts the following language as Section 7.10: A. TRUCK ROUTE. It is unlawful for any person to drive a tractor, agricultural implement, truck over 9,000 pounds gross vehicle weight, truck -trailer, tractor -trailer or truck tractor in through traffic, upon any street except those which have been designated and sign -posted as truck routes or are State, County or improved Municipal State Aid streets. For the purpose of this Chapter, "through traffic" means originating without the City and with a destination without the City, as distinguished from "local traffic" which means traffic either originating or having a destination withir the City. B. POSTED NO TRUCKS. it is unlawful for any person to drive a tractor, agricultural implement, :1ck, truck -trailer, or tractor trailer over 9,000 pounds gross vehicle weight on any City owned and maintained streets that is posted "No Trucks" when such designation is approved by Council. C. The following motor vehicles are exempted from the provisions of this ordinance: A. School buses B. Emergency vet. C. Trucks servin:, ential properties on that street D. City maintenant c'es T'Ais ordinance becomes tive from and after its passage and publication on August 17, 1987. Passed by the Councii this 10th day of August, 1987. Jamey R. Grabek, Mayor-___Y_._._______ ATTEST: Dorothy M. Hallin`, Clay' Cferk� Published in the Laker and Pioneer Newspapers on the 17th day of August, 1987. TO: Mark Bernhardson, City Administrator FROM: ..:ohn Gerhardson, Public Works CoordinatorV DATE: August 6, 1987 SUBJ: Restriction of Truck Traffic - Old Beach Road and Townline Road Attached for review are resolutions for restricting truck traffic on Old Beach Road and Townline Road. These roads meet the criteria develo,�d by staff for the restriction of truck traffic. Recommendation - To adopt resolutions restricting truck traffic: on Old Beach Road and Townline Road and to direct the Public Works Dept. to post Old Beach Road and Townline Road "NO TRUCKS". PROPOSED MOTION: Moved by __, seconded by _ , to adopt Resolution # and # restricting "truck traffic" on Old Beach Road and Townline Road, and to direct the Public Works Dept. to post Old Beach Road and Townline Road "NO TitUCKS% Ayes Nays TLI Mayor and Council FROM: Mark R rnhardson, City Administrato I 113 Forwarded recommending approval subject to cooperative posting with the communities who also share these roads. TRUCK RESTRICTION CRITIMIA -- CITY STREM 1. City street rural or urban design. 2. S id limit is posted under 4�, mph. 3. 1 )rnAte route is available.. 4. Threat of damage to street as the street is not buil•, to a design standard needed for continued truck traffiz use. 5. Complaint from residents that truck traffic is creating public nuisance. 6. City staff has determined t:iat truck traffic is creating public nuisance/safety hazard. City of OR©No RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. A RP ITION RHSTRIMIHG 'r TRAT>rIc on t ..r BEACH ROAD NHRRCAS, the City of Orono has amended Ordinance No. 7.10 entitled "Truck Route"; and MHRRRAS, tht ..; mer ,�Nient to the ordinance allows the City Council to restrict truck tratxic on certain City streets; and WORREAS, City staff has developed criteria that would deter- mine ..hat trucks on certain City streets should be restricted; and NBRRRAS, the criteria for restricting truck traffic is as follows: 1. City street rural design; 2. Speed limit is 35 mph; 3. Alternate route is available; A. Threat of damage to street as the street is not built to a :.-sign standard needed for continued truck traffic use; 5. Comb.: nt fxom res' ttruck traffic is creating p iolic nuisance v. City staff has deter .0 that truck traffic creating public nuisance s-s.fety hazard; and MHRREAS, Old Beach Road in : City of Oron^ does qua 1 i f y as a City street that meets tr citeria developed by s F�.ff. MHRRRAS, City staff has received complaints of a nuisance because of continued :ruck traffic; and WWWwAS, the speed 1 4 mi t on Old Reach Ro, 3 posted 30 mE h; NBEttRAS, there iL the potential for damag- the street if truck traffic continues; and tHERRM, there an alternate route for trucks. Page 1 of 2 City of ORC NO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. NON, TERRs10RR, BZ IT Rl80LVSD that the Orono City Council does hereby restrict truck traffic on Old Beach Road as outlined in Ordinance No. 7.10. eR IT FORTHRR RS80LVED that the Orono City C _ncil does hereby direct the Public Works Department to post Old Bt-.:h Road "NO Truck Traf f is". Adopted by the Orono City Council on this loth day of August, 1987. ATTEST: Dorothy M. Hallin, City Clerk James R. Grabek, Mayor Faye 2 of City of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUN►:tL NO. A RBWWTION 1112MICTING MUCK 7RAT1rIC o/ TOMLI1M ROii1D WHEREAS, the City of Orono has amended Ordinance No. 7.10 entitled "Truck Route"; and WHEREAS, the amendment to the ordinance allows the City Council. to restrict truck traffic on certain City streets; and WHERRAS, City staff has developed criteria that would deter- mine that trucks on certain City streets should be restricted; and WHEREAS, the criteria for restricting truck traffic is as follows: 1. City street rural or urban design; 2. Speed _ .t is posted under 45 mph; 3. Alternate route is available; 4. Threat of damage to street as the street is not built to a design standard needed for continued truck traffic use; 5. The resident-e have submitted a petition indicating that truck traffic is creating public nuisance; 6. City staff has determined that truck traffic is creating public nuisance/safety hazard; and WHEREAS, Townline Road in the City of Orono does qualify as a city street that meets the criteria developed by staff. WHEREAS, City staff has received complaints and a petition from property owners as to the nuisance because of continued truck tra ic; and WHEREAS, the spo-ed limit on :ownline Road is E-)sted 40 mph; and WHEREAS, there is the potential for damage to the street if truck traffic continues, and WHBREAS, there is a alternate route for trucks. Fage 1 ()f 1 City of ORONO RESOLUTION JF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. NOW, TESRZFORE, sE IT ESSOLVED that the Orono City Council does hereby restrict truck traffic on Town 1 ine Road as outlined in Ordinance No. 7.10. •E IT TORTIER RSSOLVZD that the Orono City Council does hereby direct the Public works Department to post Townline Road "NO Truck Traffic". Adopted by the Orono City Council on this _n day of Aug,'st, 1987. ATTEST: Dorothy M. Hal in, City Clerk James R. Grabek, Mayoc Paqe of TO: Mark Bernhardson, City Administrator FROM: Glenn Cook, City Engineer DATE: August 5, 1987 SOBJ: Feasibility Study Costs - Woodhill Ave. The feasibility study for Woodhill Ave. from Orono Orchard Road to the cul-de-sac can be completed for an estimated amount of $2,000.00. One-half of the above amount will be for soil borings which must be performed to initiate the study. TO: Mayor and Council FROM: Mark E. Bernhardson, City Administrator, Forwarded recommending approval. At the July 13, 1987 Council meeting the Council approved the McDowell/Woodhill preliminary plat with access provided near an upgraded public portion of Woodhill Avenue plus a private road beyond the existing public portion. The preliminary approval was coriitioned on agreement being reached between the City and the Developer as to the developer's share of the upgrade costs. In order to determin3 the total amount, the developer's amount and the amount to be assessed; a feasibility study needs to be conducted in order to determine the total estimated costs. Once this is completed the City will negotiate with the developer as to his share. Then once negotiated bring the project and developer's con tributicn to Council for consideration. The cost of the study will be included in the project costs if the project is authorized. PROPOSED MOTION - Moved by _, seconded by , the Orono City Council authorizes the Engineer to conduct a feasibility study for the upgrade of Woodhill Avenue for an amount not to exceed $2,000.00, a cost which will be included in total project costs if the project is ordered to be constructed. Ayes _, Nays _ 61287.4 TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Mark Bernhardson, City Administrator DATE: August 5, 1987 SUBJECT: VSetro Waste Control Commission - Orono - Minnetonka Beach Interceptor Improvements Attachments A. Bonestroo Letter Dated 4/9/86 B. Orono Council Minutes Excerpt 4/14/86 C. Bonestroo Letter Dated 8/7/86 D. Orono Council Minutes Excerpt 8/11/86 E. Orono Council Minutes 10/27/86 F. Bonestroo Letter Dated 11/13/86 G. Orono Letter Dated 4/28/87 H. Metro Waste Control Commission Letter Dated 5/13/87 I. Metro Waste Control Commission Letter Dated 7/27/87 ISSUE - Determination as to whether the City of Orono would accept the conditions proposed by Metro Waste to the project to construct the alternative originally recommended and approved by the City of Orono. INTRODUCTION - As noted in Attachment A, the City of Orono gave its initial approval with Alternate 3B to Metro Waste Control Commission on August 11, 1986. Subsequently on October 27, 1986 tre Council agreed to the conditions noted in the minutes. Sequent to that, Metro Waste Control Commission determined that their desired alternative was alternative "3A" which would cost them about $230,000 less in capital costs to construct. The reason the City of Orono desired to go with 3B was it allowed the City to replace a force main and pump with a gravity line for about the same cost and a new pump which must be done in the next 1-2 years. It would ,.iinate annual pump maintenance costs of approximately $3,500 F year. In addition it would eliminate another replacement of t►.,t pump again in 20 years. During these discussions, the City indicated that they would be willing to trade off this annual cost for a portion of the difference in the capital cost to help defray Metro Waste Control Commission going with alternative 3B. As noted in Attachment C, howe,er, the Metro Waste Control Commission felt that there is a $10,500 per year annualized cost difference of going with 3B, which results in no benefit to either party. Staff negotiated with MWCC and had the payment soma 'hat reduced but st i 1 1 not to an agreeable arrangement. DISCUSSION - The Metro Waste Control Commission has now offered to insta'1l alternative "3B" - the one approved by the city last fall if the City will agree to the following: A) Accept gravity lines for City maintenance (Previously agreed to I0/86) B) Accept 2 grinder stations for City maintenance (I. previously agreed to 10/86) C) Contribute $3500 per year for 26 years (The equivalent cost of eliminating the pump) D) Obtain property from Hennepin County for location of lift station E) City assistance in processing of necessary variance and conditional use permits for system construction, to be in accordance vi.th City Ordinances. (Previously agreed to 10/86) As noted, this is a significant change from the MWCC,s position in May and is one that staff feels appropriate in recommending subject to the project receiving the necessary permits and the ability to obtain the land from Hennepin County on reasonable terms. This change has been in part brought about by extensive work on the matter by the Metro Waste Contrc: representative from this area, J oEllen Hurr. PROPOSED MOTION - Moved by _ , seconded by _ , that the City Council of the City of Orono agree to accept the terms of the agreement that the City in exchange for the construction of alternative "3B", will sake over the gravity lines and grinder stations specified, 0-1--'n property from the County Department of Tranportation and d staff to assist Metro Waste Control Commission in seeking -ppropriate conditional use permits in order to construct the interceptor. This is contingent on Hennepin County transfering the appropriate property to Metro Waste on terms deemed acceptable to the City. Ayes ,, Nays _. cc: JoEllen Hurr, MWCC Representative ip ran .. ...nA.1�//�� �/�^I.f. /�r+r�11 ��.. �„r.•/ LPA�('CACJ�t A/ Inc.�.. t.1. �r..•w. Il ('...a (.M. rf {.. .. .. ...,rN Q�f, f..i.. w.. J/ ..•...v.l..� /-i �J.fJ i f.Aw, r r..wr r r �.... (wwr. r • 33 612'WY-4vY3 April S, UCS City of C:cao tax G5 Cryst;21 Ecy. to 55323 Attn: 1:.. t:.-xk L:.M- crdsom City L�;:i:listrator Awr,•.l. Aaw"A. r l f+wrynlA t.Oft rr /....... f.ww pow. rL ' 0.4wI l /w.w. I t •. bn A 3.ti..4. r.f 4w,�rf ...... Swmftrt DNMWC Ow or A. It t i.- A 0 ,M^ r r /.tf t�trf •• APR1 ± i:3u n.r(r e,....art ^OMS „IWV.rt u..dU L.-. PA. _ Irwn w. Iw�,w•. ra. _ (/l1 % Ayr. a. aexyt r r "OMR A.AAr6 AmbA an•W'Ar[ w:.a a.�ali Mom. t try. tR Cytn A. tot. r In w h•ew'i ttra. Y t • •. 6000 v LU•f. Re: Out File 1:3. CS12 Crone Intercepter I.oprovamaote C.-:r N,: ,:k. t: -, a:n currcatty cc_ �" :ir,, the draft rc, ort of the L - : r '• _. t7 !' , t.. n I I• oacrr_�te for tha r:-'crcnolit:a t -:::a C- ._ C tl:sicn. i."a r:r:a�'IL* to infors L1:3 1%yn and City CG'.*,cil Ws 1S of ilnlim:s to be presv=1 vitt:in tho report: tt,s e:3i;l uc-:1 for analysis and solution altcroetives. It is accentisl that a aooporative effort be c:•'a l+ct: rya t! a t7TC a: -I tLa City c.: Croao so that the interceptor Ioproti•rr•_ncs =y r-!tve L( th in Lt.a kit paacit 10 canner. Tc a: a v:.ry truly, ROWM3, i diLGCU.'..::,, ICU. I.' :1 C. Ly^ch tool. 43054 1 W, r m� z � � � �� • � -'1 (, •y,'+ » ,/., r` a a.t a M ► _ \�.;_ .arrw.l �. �. � • • ,..�� i •fir,'. !�_\�. � I' I' SE ft jr LCA �'��� � �:1� •���� .�r.�.. 'ter 91�o�'cno. Motel Apt -t!'i Ast: i...` �• __� '� '...�.. — �. ... ........ ....:._ ,... ,!,-- r—i ir. e! l.:ea 1 90.C:3 Won f•.: 2 210.C:0 3308000 x: a 3 - 5.c : 3 326.0Q0 3 6 173.C.3 4960000 a 3 :D.C:.3 3648CO 0 a 6 ^ . r "f 5560009 S:3,c:3 row (f--4) Ll $3.000 63.C;0 132,000 g77.C�0 lao.t 00 C:.3 35.coo .tee. o 3•q. : o ',19.Cl0 1• T"'T1,T`"DTI'"'•/f.-..... { _.. ,. 78«GM�iw:,t'J ,,c . �. t77.c:. 4ea 1 t3,t:.9 agem 114.C�s 113,G:3 19 A O c 3,C30 117.040 W3.90 .a 3 =51Cv3 :,C:3 7.CC3 1240C Wit! 330ow 309,(3 :` ,C"3 C5,C'3 1936cce 119Rwo • G .1.2.1--1 :-.;8c:3 ,�• 714,L:.3 393,C�� 210,,C ) 611tow I ...: 1 314.C. 114,�0 46S.CC0 465,00 $40.036 343,t:J : 2 204C-1 397.000 1,1SS.[ 1.620.C33 1+3:i.C"0 1.A;3,C_. 3 3..C:i 430.CC3 13S.c�� 1.75S,C.3 iS7.C�4 2,d:1.C:. 4 2C;,G 13 610*)'"a S fS.C:.3 193,000 391.r- ") 3,:54,C33 4130 b lR.� ? t11,000 ;�,I 3,310.C:3 t' .^h e11.030 t?4 3,310.0C9 C;:i • 3 - . .1 TA" ' 9 �.•-.,1 174 1ri3 "3 114 �7 444 451 701 L•+s 415 !:5 432 631 7 ' 0 574 615 C'73 1,b25 7:3 776 C77 1,I& ,2� J l 7 194 •. 7 I m J 70 > 734 loll! 1.3i `;as (Lill sli 3.3 I,:-; " 1,43 2;C 14 :! f ' '1 i�...- ..... MINUTES OF THE REGULAR OPONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD APRIL 14, 198.i #1013 STEVE RATAINEN continued Because Council would like to see the final plans before giving f inr ? approval, it was moved by Councilmember Frahm, seco:-Jed by Councilmember Grabek, to grant preliminary approval of the Commercial Site Plan and upon receipt of the final plans for signage, lighting, landscaping, and exterior finish of building will grant final approval; and developers agreement to be provided before issuance of building permit. Motion, Ayes 5, Nays 0. 1986 JOINT USE DOCK LICENSE* SANDY BEACH PLACE RESOLUTION #1980 It was moved by Councilmember Frahm, seconded by Councilmember Hammerel, to adopt Resolution #1980 approving a Joint Use Dock License to Sandy Beach Place for the period of January 1, 1986 to December 31, 1986. Motion, Ayes 4, Nays 0. BNGINSER$S REPORT: ORONO INiCC INTERCEPTOR UPDATE City Engineer Glenn Cook introduced Michael Lynch of Bonestroo i Associates who is working for the Metropolitan Waste Control Commission on the Metro Waste Interceptor in Orono. Mr. Lynch reported that the infiltration/inflew study done in 1981 indicated that it would not be cost effective to eliminate the infiltration/inflow to extend the life of the interceptor system. At that time, Orono told MWCC to increase capacity or there would be a problem in the near future. He noted that in April 1985 they reached capacity in which 15,000 gallons of sewage overflowed into Lake Minnetonka. At this point, he was hired by MWCC to study the system to determine the areas that were under capacity and present a preliminary design report. Upon approval of the report by MWCC they anticipate improvements to begin in Spring 1987. Mr. Lynch explained the findings of the study which contained present and future daily wastewater flows, future flow summary, and lift staticn i interceptor analysis. He pointed out that most of the lift stations were currently over their respective rated capacities. He presented three alternatives to .improve the system taking into consideration cost efficiency and causing minimal disruption. Because this project is only at the preliminary stage, Mayor Butler requested Mr. Lynch to keep them informed on this natter. 9 MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HLLD APRIL 14, 1986 MCC INTERCEPTOR continued He stated that he would report back when the project is at the preliminary design stage. MAYOR'S REPORT: CABLE TV REPORT: Mayor Butler had nothing to report at this time. There was no Cable TV report at this time. CITY ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT: JOHM S. PILLSBURY, JR. 315 NOODRILL ROAD FINAL SUBDIVISION RESOLUTION #1937 Councilmember Adams reported that this item was previously presented to the Council at their March loth meeting in which Councilmembers Grabek and Hammerel were absent. He stated that before the Council took action, he made them aware that he was a trustee of the Woodhill Country Club explaining that he felt there was not a conflict of interest involved because neither he or Woodhill Country Club would benefit financially from approval of the subdivision. HowE%er, even though he felt there was no conflict of interest involved, he would abstain from voting if the other Council members felt otherwise. It was noted that this application would be delayed for a month in order to get a quorum vote. Due to the fact that City Attorney Barrett, Mayor Butle- and Councilmember Frahm agreed that there was no conflict of interest, the Council took action and voted 3-0 approving the Class I subdivision. Councilmember Adams stated that because there is now quorum present, he would abstain from voting if the Council felt it necessary to reconsider the motion, however he still felt there was no conflict of interest involved. City Attorney Blatz stated that she concurred with Attorney Barrett's opinion that there was no conflict of interest involved due to the fact that there was nothing in the subdivision resolution that stated that Pillsbury had to sell to Woodhill Country Club. After discus:,iorn, it was the Counc.il's unanimous opinion that there was no conflict of interest involved and felt no reason for Councilmember Adams to abstain from voting. In support of this, Council decided to ratify the vote in this matter. It was moved by Councilmember Frahm, seconded by Councilmember Grabek, to adopt Resolution 01937 approving a Class I "ohdi vision for John S. Pi I l chury, Jr. Motion, Ayes 5, Nays n. in 1�..���vlfY. 1, 1111+rf1i�iiYV/ Al vrt... 4.1 1...�rCf.,lCd! %.'iC. +''^U R..•.n.,•.rI fwY .__. w _-_.__ —_. ---_._.�_ _....___.___.__ __ r •.� R✓rrr r1 ..:.c...r..t 4 A r o 4-froc Of A.'LY, r a thwq.l �.,Y.• r e 1-C&O104 /rtMt I/ R+wI • Ia r.. /1 -� ——• Rr.va 1. Ir.,., I ! R: 'rr L !. �. Y�. R t - r• _ti... .. n Ir4.0 G4rAt/ Eaplt.c, rs rchitccts M,•.r! L...u.►t A,..NC Irt••'. PC r"!A /ow./( AuCunt 7. 1:.: i 'W'.dr awm&%PI Rd <q R F I'WV. / t N.MuC tpa4ll City of Orono r., A.•r.t r...Lps r C x (6 • y A-• '6 14./Irx •. PC Crystal Day, :J 55323 A^ `4 P'h0Q Y*.PI • :• • !� R.Ar.CA.w*.AIA. Attn: John Corhardson i''�e( ►...•.. PA c4•n A V-',Me Res"IBC Orono Interccp' r tom,+a•'"„ 'i1e No. 139 h.... u••.. Dear John: Thio letter provides a review of our meeting with on Atv�,t:;t /-, 1935. The 1:-trr', olitcn 1,11csto Control Co=ission has er•1nct(.d Altcrn3to 3 t o tha praret- red construction alipauont. The Collowin; is a brief summary of each alternate with the ezti--ted tan- str"::tion cc;:t and annaal cost. t.ltarr,ato 1 - Total replacec:ont of r :isti .t a; EL::a in ki .3. Cravit, extension to cii-:{nato L.S. 144. Cstir.-.ted construction Coat Y1.#492,174 Annual Coat $ 314,022 Altcrnito 2 - rerallal Force Hain - Vj"ld L- u- f<-:r normil flo,r'. L.S. C'+0 and L.S. t'-6 would 1:-va nev overflow stutic:3 Estim:tcd Constru tion Cast Annual Cost $ 3:.3.225 Alternati 3 - Co; 'J1natiou of Altrm- : ; 1 ,ad 2. Grr:vity OKLC-, >ion to elic.inate L.S. & •4. Rs im. cd Corstr,:-tion Annual Cost $ 2o,624 Alter:&ate 3A - Saco as Alternate 3 e :cf' pt L. ;` C45 d :a rclocataJ to allow alialnation of City 1..S. 010 in the future. tatimated Construetion Cost $2,415,729 Annual Cost $ 312.157 6993d Pas* 1. 0 %� 4 City of Orono Orono, yinnc::ota tie: t.:CC Orono Interceptor File No. 139 Aiignnt 7. L` &1 Ilia p!irposa of the project is to provi'! adequate flow capacity in tea MCC trunk sewer cyctca so that overflc:s into Lake Minnetonka do not occur in the future. The altoraatev proposed will all solve this problem. The host desirable altaraat! for the City is 3A as it would allow the City to eliminate L.S. 010 at sore tice in th,3 future. t:::CC has selected Altern:.re 3 as tt,o preferred alternate as it provides the least cost. Tho cow,)truction cw t increcsa to go with Alternate 3A is $233,439, which ti:JCC .+.•uld expc:t 'h-, city of Orono to p:!I. The I. -CC propoccd to return acveral seCrents of the ex_stin ; gravity aystc-a to the City of Orono under Altcrnuta 3. The return of tt:o!:e line* will result in so --a inerecsed c:aintcn•.acc costs for tho City of Orono. Ve Icel that thu City of O::ono sh4ald agree to tc%ing back the lines provid^_d !~::CC proceeds with Alt,..nr.te 3A Lt their expense. Tito city of u:oao do_6 not have authority to aceept or reject the a.It tc3 Alt :;: ►s:e. ; ,litically t:;'CC Would prefer the City'; con_-irrence and on that feel.: -:a eh :d try to get what is most beneficial to thn City. t, a; dr.s not 1.-.v, ::ny pr..-, 4znce for rcturninq lin^s and this ►:. y b« to th-1 city's cdvan- r,-. .. 1;.e: City of ;mono chould be loot;in; at incre,sin3 t!.i! ca��eity of oar c;r.tcra i.,i t-:.a sr,�r. of L.S. 910. Thu City t:-ts a::f,r-ricr.r: d prohlcr: with M. "n; in the cast as diacu.ced. The se1c,_tioi of Alternate 31. by 1::0C sou13 allow L.S. #10 to be eliminated na a part of u,,,radin& this syLtc:-i. a . c n.i that tl►e City of Orono pn's a r: )luci,n rcco-.� +ir., ta7: the ...:c:.: ith Altcrn:ta 31,. If y►u Criltact this offi... , .••tj very ttAy. L� . :•..'ro�� c:.:a:.:� i. ,:;.1.i1: i 1.:: jCIr.1'cs. INC. Gi _ I a. C1�11 Pago 2. Ef:�S3d MINUTES OF THE 1t1-',GUl" ORONO COUNCIL MFETI NG HELD AUGUST 11, 1986 11015 ERVIN F. KAMM* 755/763 NORTH FERNDALE REVISION TO DRAINAGIS & UTILITY EASEMENT It was moved by Councilmember Frahm, seconded by Councilmember Adams, to approve the revised drainage and uti 1 i.ty easement location for the plat of I.ydiard Hills. Motion, Ayes 3, Nays 0. CITY KWINEER'S REPORT: BID AWARD - 1986 SEAL COATING City Engineer Cook stated that the low bidder for the seal coating was Allied Blacktop $81,480.; second low bidder was Buffalo Bituminous $88,900.; and third low bidder was Bituminous Roadways, Inc $101,710. He stated that Allied Blacktop was very competent. It wAs moved by Councilmember Frahm, .seconded by Mayor Butler, to accept the bid from Allieu Blacktop in the amount of $81.480 and award them the job. Motion, Ayes 4, nays 0. Public Works Coordinator Geihardson stated due to the unused monies for sealcoating from last year and this year, he would like authorization to add the quantities of roads to be blacktop not te) exceed the budgeted amount of 14u,000. It was roved by Councilmember Frahm, seconded by Maycr Butler, to authorize the sealcoating of additional roads net to exceed the budgets: amount. Motion, Ayes 4, Nays 0. NAVARRE INTERCEPTOR REPORT City Engineer Cook rcv:ewed the the four alternatives for improvements from the Metropolitan Waste Conk--rol Commission. MWCC has selected Alternate 13 as the preferred construction alignment. Public Works Coordinator Gerhardson and City Engineer Cook recommend Alternate 03A as the preferred construction alignment because it P1iminates a main lift station 010 which can be very costly in repairs in the long term. It was moved by Councilmemt�er Frahm, s^corded by Councilmember Callahan, to approve Alternate t3A as recommended by staff, provided the City does not have to contribute payment for the improvemert. If. the City has to pay in the improvement, this mat,er will be brought back to the Council for review. Motion, Ayes 4, Nays 0. 13 MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIh MI:hTING HELD OCTOI3ER 27, 1986 11070 RICHARI) RINrHART 985 OLD LONG LAKE ROAD VARIANCE Richard Rinehart was present for this matter. City Administrator Bernhardson reviewed tlir� application for a side setback variance to allow construction of an attached garage to be 0.6 feet from the lot line noting the hardships to alternative locations. It was moved by Counci lmer►ber Callahan, seconded ty Councilmember Frahm, to direct staff to bring back a resolution of approval to the November loth Council meeting. Motion, Ayes 4, Nays U. ENGINEER'S REPORT: METROPOLITAN SEWER/NAVARRE INTERCEPTOR UPGRADE PROJECT City Engineer Cook reported that he met with MWCC. representative Fred Stenberg regarding the Navarre lift station upgrade project. He stated that the MWCC has agreed to follow Alternative 3A as recommended by the Council at their last review of the project, providing the City assists MWCC with the following: 1. Property owner notification 2. Assist with easement acquisition 3. Public Hearings 4. Take back the old sewer lines which would involve some maintenance cost 5. Conditional Use Permit for lift stations 6. Accept a grinder station He stated that lie is requesting Council authorization to send MWCC a letter confirming the City's acceptance of these six items. Councilmember Frahm voiced concerns regarding where the ;100,000 needed would come from for eliminating Lift Station 10 and bypass with a gravity line to the interceptor. Public Works Coordinator Gerhardson noted that unless Lift Station 10 is elirr hated the City may have to expend approximately $9 10 for pump rep.acement for that station. 7t was moved by Councilmember Frahm, seconded by Mayor Butler, authorizing staff to send a letter to MWCC confiming acceptance of the six items as outlined subject to the assurance by MWCC that tho linos are in working order. Motion, Ayes 4, Nays n. 8 Bonestroo, Rosene, Anderlik & Associates, Inc. 2333 W. Trunk Highway 36 St. Paul, MN 55113 612.636.4600 November 13, 1986 City of Orono Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 Attn: Mr. John Gerhardson Re: File No. 139 Orono `IWCC Interceptor Dear John, 01IPG R..wnrr.w, P! II..Drn N 'V ~_' P I J.,OA ( A. drlbk Y I. bwl/wd A I r.b,,g P I —' -� R. had ! r.r.e.. P 1 Engineers i Architecks /• P! u O A CUOA. P! A,,.. A G..•.A,-. Y ! 1 iw~ ! N-rr• P ! Kw herd W Iwir. P i Itww'l (. S. A... of. P 1. lk.. m r Rrrlydr P f ft e, A A..r.du., P ! "wi A Howm. P k red K PrAd. P P. At. 6.4 r R„dww... P F .r..lerl A YJr/Ina. I ! ►.w.y, N PI•.e•w. P L N. AyN C Ll.. A P 1 A.,.. L N dlu. P I JArwet A (lr/e.d P ! Ae..NA P A.Jr"o P I AedA A AL.. A.Wnn. P 1 N.rA A xufh. P! x..rm A.wA. A ! A A.fw. P ! l...n I f...f. P I ('bdn A LrAAw lw Af Py.eUAr lf.,ton At (.W— $"".N Lew'I'l The City of Orono should submit a setter to MWCC indicating our planned coop- eration in the Orono Interceptor project as previously discussed. The City would like 4WCC to follow plan Alternate 3B which provides for the relocation of Lift Station L45 to the Co. Rd. 19 and Co. Rd. 151 Intersection. This al- ternate would allow the City to eiiminate L.S. #10 at some time in the future. The City would agree to coopera'_e in the following issues in exchange for the relocation consideration: 1. Assist MWCC with easement acq•jisition temporary an3 permanent. Meet with property owners and respond to special requests. 2. Aasist 4WCC with conditional uSe process for lift 9tati3n can- struction. 3. Aasist with project publication by holding informational hearings on project. 4. Assist 4WCC in notifying property owners about changes in project status. (Scheduled start, road closures, specific property owner inconvenience, etc.) 5. l.ity to accept existing trunk system as a part of Orono collec- tion system. (Lines should be televised prior to takeover). 6. City to accept additional grinder pump station on Citv system. it is not anticipated that the city of Orono will experience say project costs other than staff time. If you have any questions, please contact this office. Yours very truly, SONESTROO, RO SENE, AN[)ERI.IK 6 A55c>t:tAfES, INS:. 30 Year Glenn R. ook GRC:Ii Anniversary 4 %CEMENT OF VITY SEWER CITY OF ORONOI TORE ABANDONMENT L44 EXISTING LIO 8 RCEMAIN / 12" F M/ REVERSE DIRECTION OF FLOW "45 FROM MH•29 to MH-33 33 W / 8" PVC r 18" RCP ABANDON EXISTING L45 / ( 8 FORCEMAIN \I I\ 3EMLgon �� o E�wolopoum ORONO INTERCEPTOR IMPROVEMENTS MWCC PROJECT 85-67 BONESTROO, ROSENE, ANDERLIK A ASSOC., INC. ENGINEERS A ARCHITECTS ST.PAUL, MINNESOTA LEGEND ---- FORCEMAIN GRAVITY SEWER LIFT STATION LIO LIFT STATION OWNED BY CITY L43 LIFT STATION OWNED BY MWCC ,V42; MWCC METER ALTERNATIVE 313 ALTERNATIVE 3A WITH RELOCATION OF L-45 FIGURE 4- ue � J1 SUBAREA 4 FUTURE REPLACEMENT OF EXISTING GRAVITY SEWER TO L45 (BY CITY OF ORONO) FUTURE ABANDONMENT / L44 OF EXISTING L 10 9 FORCEMAIN / � 12" F / X CO. RD 19 d ISI 'REVERSE DIRECTION OF FLOW L45 FROM M4-29 to MM-33 33 \ W/8"PV-- \ / r 18" RCP I 1 i +---ABANDON Ex STING L43 � I i 8 FORCEMA:N p / SUBAREA 3 �� � (:ITY of ()ROOD I'cl%t Office- Na ti6*('rvstat hay, Mtnneant.e 55.4'.2.i*Mumctpnl Offices Ur, the North Shore o/ Lake Minnetonka April 28, 1987 Mr. Louis Breimhurst Metro Waste Control. ommission 200 Metro Square Building St. Paul, MN 55101 Subject: Minnetonka Beach - Orono Interceptor - Reconstruction Dear Mr. Areimhurst, INTRODUCTION As you are aware the above referenced project has been budgeted at a level of $1.6 million for 1987 and was conceptual 1y approved by the Orono Council selecting Alternative 3B in October of 1986. This is the first time an Orono City Council has agreed to any Metro Waste project in the Cite at its first consideration without extensive contemplation and delay, if not legal action. The proposed project is to correct a capacity problem in the line that results in an occasional overflow polluting La :e Minnetonka. The present interceptor line not only provi(!(,l interceptor service for Minnetonka Beach and Orono, but also serves as a trunk line with direct connections into it from individual properties along the way. Part of the reconstruction will make the line more of an interceptor with substantial amounts of the current lines reverting back to the City of Orono for mainten.ence as loca; trunks. The construction alternatives have heen pared from the initial- six down to two. Tt is our understanding that MWCC currently feels that -)ptic, IA at c rost of $2.2 million is the mt,5t appropriate alternative. The City of Orono on the -then hand adopted 3B at a cost of. $2.4 million as it does al low the City to eliminate a force main and a lift station and install a gravity line. The diff(. -ence between the two alternatives is the result of the movement of an existing lift station about 500 feet to the north. The City presently is in the position of either ref.rbish and upgrade the lift station for 5115,000 or construct a gravity line for $110,000 if the lift station is moved. WN.wwG a ZON MG - 41).?Is? • 4WAPIS RATIM a ►pt 4W11 - 4r:-135e • n �t K 11t/lt rt • t 7 )5 AtSF SUNG Mr. Loui; Breimhurst Metro Waste Control Commission April 28, 1987 Page 2 If the lift station is moved the City takes over maintenance of an existing grinder station and a local line in the vicinity of Hendrickson Bridge. This would otherwise continue to be maintained by Metro Waste. DISCUSSION At a discussion held with Ray Payne, Fred Stentorg and Bob Isackson of your office together with Glenn Conk of Bonestreo; and John Gerhardson, Orono Public Works Coordi and myself it was indicated that the Metro Waste positio that 3A was the appropriate alternative and tha`. they coulc _)t justify the dollar difference to go to 3B with funding coming totally from Metro Waste. It was indicated bV Metro Waste staff that thAre should be some participation by the local municipality if 3B is constructed. Such participation would be in line with -he precedent set in the Lake Virginia/Lake Ann interceptor . sue. There the communities of F.den Prairie and Chanhassen contributed a portion of the construction cost based on their anticipated local benefit from the project. As the City of Orono understands the Lake Virginia/Lake Ann interceptor issue, it resulted in the selection of a gravity line routed through sections of Eden Prairie and Chanhassen to the Purgatory Creek interceptor rather than a forcemain through Minnetonka to that same interceptor. Ti.r. estimated capital project cost difference between the two a 1 tern? t i ves was about $6.5 million for the Lake Ann route of which she two cities paid about S2 rillion in total. Local benefits to the communities who did contribute included the tollowing: A. An interceptor designed to handle local flows eliminating *he need to construct and maintain certain truck 1igoE ir, -c:, two , nmmunitios. B. A greator development potential in those communities than would exit with the proposed forcemain. Tn the Lake Virginia ca::c a was expected that the financing of the locally benefitted portion of this would be from the future growth permitted in these communities by going this route ..:•ouPled with the foregone post of having to constrL.,t local trunks in that area. A SAC surcharge to so finance was specifically leline3ted in the agreement with at 1ea3t Chanhas.�en. Unlike thA Lake Virginia/Lake Ann situation where new lines are tieing constructed, the situatic:i .-.volved in this project is one for an upgr tde/replacement of an t xist ing line to allow for Mr. Louis BrPimhurst Metro Waste Control Commission April 28, 1987 Page 3 it to appropriately handle primarily existing capacity. While additional capacity has been designed in the line the City of Orono is not making a request for the change based on any substantial capacity increase or new properties service because of the shift from 3A to 3B. The funding of any local portion would come almost entirely from existing rate payers. Currently the City of Orono charges $51.00 per quarter for sewer. This is a rather high rate for municipalities. haut 50% of the rate represents Metro Waste charges. (If th 'i wasn't receiving current value credits this would be approximately 10R higher and the share of Metro Waste would rise to 55%.) The balance of this rate represents about 41% for operation and maintenance including administration and 9% for capital replacement. The Cit of Orono feels that it is appropriate to look to the local community when: there is an issue of local benefit for a more expensive alternative as in the Lake Virginia/Lake Ann interceptor. In the Orono case local benefit also exists, however, it is of a different nature than the local benefit found in Lake Virginia and is substantially more limited. For the City of Orono the choice is whether it spends $115,000 in upgrading the current lift station or be able to eliminate that lift station because. of the Metro lift station move by spending that $110,000 on a gravity 1. ine. That change in and of itself represents almost an equivalent expenditure of capital dollars, however, a limitei local benefit comes in the annual maintenance sa :•ings whirr amount to approximately $3,101 for the change. As noted above, the movement of the lift station results in Metro Waste being reli?ved of its existing responsibilities on a local line together with having the City of Orono undertake maintenance of a grinder station for that line. This is almost the opposite of the Lake Virginia case where Metro's line took on a local share. Given the fact that this situation regarding local participation is significantly different for a number of reasons, it is requested that Metro Waste develop a policy regarding local participation for replacement of existing lines in the existing corridor. A principal reason for differentiation is that the formula basis for determining the local share used is not rc levant in this cise. Such , policy could address: a.) Extent of Local benefit for a locally requested change b.) Obligations incurred by local unit in additional lines and equipment maintenance a, a result of the change Mr. Louis Breimhurst Metro Waste Control Commission April 28, 1987 Page 4 c.) Available local financing for cha age (existing rate payers vs. future development.) It is Orono's request that in this particular case that Metro Waste go with alternate 3B charging Orono the amount equivalent to its local benefit with Metro Waste funding the balance because of Orono's cost for additional lines together with any reduced maintenance costs for Metro Waste because of the reduced local trunk line responsibility. To delay this project awaiting resolution of this issue may not delay it just until 1988 construction season but perhaps past that into 1989 or 1990 because of the reconstruction of County Road 15. It would be in the best interest of all concerned that Metro Waste's construction occur prior to County Road 15 construction. If however, the issue as to local participation and the recommendation to go to alternative 3B is not resolved, this delay becomes a real issue. At your convenience I would be happy to sit down and discuss this issue with you for furtner exploration. At present the City staff has not received any approval from i.s City Council regarding the extent of local participation, however, the staff feels a determination by Metro Waste as to the extent of local participation for 3B is appropriate prior to reconsideration by the City Council of option 3A. Staff feels that a trade off for the annual maintenance cost could be recommended as acceptable to the Council. Anything over that however, does cause concern as it would have to be borne by increased rates. Sincere r i la k B ha son City Admi trator MEB /dh cc: Mayor and City Counc i 1 Jo Ellen Hurr, MWCC Representative John Gernhardson, Public works Coordinator Glenn Cook, City Engineer Fred Stenborg, Metro Waste Control Commission PLAY 2 21987 May 13, 1987 Mr. Mark Bernhardson City of Orono P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 Re: Orono Interceptor Improvements MWCC Project Number 85-67 Dear Mr. Bernhardson: Thank you for your letter of April 28, 1987 regarding thF City of Orono's position on the alternatives for improvements to the Orono Interceptor. I hav reviewed your letter and have evaiia', 3 the City of Orono's proposal. There is, at present, no format policy to decide what a local unit of government should pay for a locally requested sewer improvement. The cost sharing agreement adopted on the Lake Virginia/Lake Ann Interceptor is an example of local cost par- ticipation in a metropolitan sewer project, but has unique cir- cumstances and issues which differ from the Orono Interceptor project. The MWCC Commissioners, as representatives for local communities, can and have decided policy issues similar to those which we have on the Orono project. The two alternatives tinder consideration have an estimated annual cost dif�erence of abo�.t $14,000. That is, Alternative 3B costs more than Alternative 4A for the Commission and does not provide benefits to the Commission. The City of Orono on the other hand, can save approximately $3,000 per year for system maintenance under Alternative 33 and approximately $500 per year on the capital construction cost. This Means a total savings or local benefit of approximately $3,500 per year if Alternative 3B is built. That would leave a remaining cost difference of approximately $10,500 per year not covered by local benefit for an e�_juivalent interceptor system for MWCC. Mr. Mark Bernhardson MWCC Pro-tect Number 85-67 Page 2 5/13/87 Despite your offer of payment for local benefit to Oroio, I can- not recommend that the Commission pay an additional $10,500 per year for an equivalent system. My recommendation is to build Alternative 3A and our consultant will be directed in the very near future to complete the design on this basis. Please call'_ si:ould you have any questions regarding this letter. Very truly yojrs, C<li ��i+Z,r�ClGfi Louis J. Breim urst Chief Administrator LJB.FJS:pap L-17 cc: JoEllen Hurr, MWCC Commissioner MUROPOLITAC) WAlTE -�-�..•r . COmOI. July 27, 1987 Mr. John Gerhardson City of Orono P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 Re: Orono Interceptor Improvements MWCC Project Number 85-67 Dear John: J; 30 This is in regard to our recent conversations and your offer to help the Commission acquire rights -of -way for the Orono Interceptor. The MWCC intends to initiate the design to provide interceptor facilities in accord with Alternative 3B of the report and requests as part of this consideration, that your City acquire land from the County for the new lift station site near the intersection of County Highways 19 and 51 and Hendrickson Bridge. Please proceed to acquire the necessary land from the County for transfer to the Commission. Fred Stenborg is available to pro- vide the necessary details of the proposed site. Sincerely, C-4-2 C C.R. Payne Assistant Director, Enqineering CRP:pap L-6 c,. F.J. Stenborq, MWCC 84�,7.1 r TO: Mayor and City Council ; PROM: Mark Bernhardson, City Administrat4i'�` DATE: August 3, 1987 SUBJECT: 1988 Budget Meeting - Thursday, September 1.7, 1987 - 7:00 P.M. ISSUE - Establishment of an initial meeting for consideration of the 198E Budget by the City Council. TN_TR_OD_U_CTION - The past two years the City Council has held one budget meeting about mid -September to review the recommendations by staff as it relates to budget and make their determinations as to what they will authorize for a budget together with what they will levy as far as property taxes are concerned. As you may recall from the budget presentation, the budget has to be approved by October 10th of every year (this year because of the dates October 13th is the day by which these have to be certified to the Council.) DISCUSSION - Because of the newness of the Council to the budget process it is anticipated that the budget may actually take two or even three meetings prior to the Council's passage of this item. It is recommended that the Council schedule Thursday, September 17, 1987, at 7:00 P.M. for an initial meeting and that based on that progress any additional meetings can be set up from there. If the Council can complete review of the budget and decide the budget total and levy amount at a meeting prior to the Monday, September 28th Council meeting, the Council could ratify at that regular meeting. If, however, meeting dates are such that it can not be done until after that date, the budget approval mill rates should either be adopted at a special meeting or at the regular meeting on October 12, 1987 for submission the next day. It is anticipated that the budget will be transmitted to the Council at the Monday, September 14th Council meeting. Should you have any further questions, please feel free to contact me. PROPOSED MOTION - Moved by _, seconded by , that the Council establish September 17, 1987, at 7:00 P.M._ the Orono City Council Chambers for its budget review meeting. Ayes __, Nays Cc: Tom Kuehn, Finance Director 72287.6(43) TO: Mayor and City Council q ` FROM: Mark Bernhardson, City Administratoq DATE: August 6, 1987 SUBJECT: Ordinance Amendment - Enforcement Authority for Others Than Police Officers Atta,zhment: A. Ordinance Amendment B. Resolution ISSUE - Adoption of an ordinance amendment to give 013ilding Inspectors and other City officials specific enforcement authority. INTRODUCTION - As a result of a law change that was directed at IINK'ting the ability to issue citations of personnel other than police officers, the Legislature adopted a statute which became effective 1 August 1987 whereby persons other than sworn police officers would not be able to issue citations unless they are specifically granted that authority in municipal statute. DISCUSSION - The attached Ordinance amendment is recommended to Fe -passed in order that persons on staff who regularly issue tickets in selected areas be able to continue that authority. The authcrity is specifically spelled out by position in the attached Resolution. PROPOSED MOTION - Moved by _ , seconded by , that the Council adopt Ordinance Number , Second Series and Resolution 1 to allow for specific enforcement authority of persons other -than police officers. Ayes _, Nays cc: City of Minnetonka Bea City of Spring Park City of Long Lake ORDINANCE , SECOND SERIES An ordinance of the City of Orono adding Section 2.38, to the Orono City Code, providing for the City Council designation of employees and officers authorized to issue citations. Section 1. Chapter 2, of the Orono City Code is hereby amended by the addition thereto of a new section, to be Numbered SECTION 2.38 and to read as follows: SEC. 2.38. ISSUANCE OF CITATIONS. Subd. 1. Except as otherwise provided by statute, only a peace officer and part-time peace officer may: (1) Ask a person receiving a citation to give a written promise to appear in court; or (2) Take a person into custody as permitted by Minnesota Statutes §629.34 (1986). Subd. 2. The following City individuals may issue citations in lieu of arrest or continued detention for violations of the City Code. Areas of jurisdiction will be contained in City Policy as set forth in resolution form by the City Council. (a) Peace Officers and Part-time Peace Officers (b) Reserve Officers (c) Community Service Officers (d) Zoning Administrator (e) Assistant Zoning Administrator (f) Building Inspector (g) Public Works Director Section 2. Effective Date. This ordinance shall be in force and effective upon publication. Section 3. Publication. The City Clerk is hereby ordered and directed to cPr Ty the passage of this ordinance and to cause same to be published once in the LakQr, a newspaper of general circulation, circulated in the City of Orono, Minnesota. Adopted by the City Counci 1 of thy City of Orono, Minnesota on the 19th day of August, 1987. James-R. Gra6e'k,-Mayor--------------- ATTEST: 6orothy` M. -Na`f Iin; (�i£y ��Ier k - ----- City of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. A RESOLUTION GRANTING CITY OFFICIALS ENFORCRDRENT AUTHORITY WHEREAS, Chapter 334 to be codified as Minnesota Statutes 626.862 for the State of Minnesota prohibits persons other than licensed peace officers from enforcing ordinances through the issuance of citations without specific ordinance authority; and WHEREAS, other City officials have a need as part of their job to enforce such ordinances, and WHEREAS, Ordinance No. _ of the Second Series permits enforcement by others but requires jurisdiction be delineated in a resolution. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the following officials have the followinq enforcement authority in addition to authority granted under Chapters 1 and 2: Peace. Officers and Part-time Peace Officers - All Chapters of City ordinances plus all other applied 1;t4s they are otherwise authorized to enforce. Reserve. Officers - Chapter 6.03 through 6.30 Chapter 7.00 through 7.30 Chap*er 8 Chapter 9.10 through 9.14 Community Service Officer - Chapter 6.03 through 6.30 Chapter 9.11 through 9.14 Zoning Administrator, Assistant Zoning Administrator, and Building Official - Chapter 5 Chapter 6 Chapter 7.30 and 7.99 Chapter 8 r'Iiapter 9.01 through 9.09, 9.13, 9.30, 9.32, 9.34 through 9.52, 9.99 c ,iapter 10 Chapter 11 Chapter 12 Page 1 of 2 9.20 through 9.22, 9.55 through 9.56, City of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. Public Works Director Chapter 3 Chapter 6 Chapter 8 Chapter 9.30 through 9.33, 9.50, 9.55, 9.99 Chapter 12.06 through 12.08, 12.40, 12.99 Adopted by the Orono City Council on this loth day of August, 1987. ATTEST: Dorothy M. Hallin, City Clerk James R. Grahek, Mayor 868"7.6 TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Mark Bernhardson, City Administratoll,�r{y DATE: August 6, 1987 SUBJECT: 1987-1988 Assessing Contract - Attachment A. 1986-87 Assessing Services Contract ISSUE - Authorization for City to enter into a contract with Rolf Erickson for assessing services for the period 1 September 1987 - 31 August 1988. INTRODUCTION_ - Since 1984 the City has received its assessing contract services from the private contractors headed by Rolf Erickson. (Because of the routine for assessing, contracts run from September thru August.) The contract price for 1986-87 as noted :n Attachement A was $45,204 and Mr. Eirckson has indicated he is willing to contract 1987-88 for $47,016, a 48 increase. RECOMMENDATION _ - Based on the excellent work and working reationships with Mr. Erickson and Mr. Wilde it is recommended that the City contract with them for the period 1 September 1987 - 31 August 1988 for a fee of $47,316 paid in 12 equal installments. K PROPOSED MOTION - Moved by _ , seconded by , that the Or )no City Council authorize contracting its assessing services with Mr. Rolf Er icKson, Mr. David Wilde Ond Ms. Rita ter ian for the period 1 September 1987 - 31 August 1988 for annual fee of $47,016 to be paid in 12 equal monthly installments of $3,918.00 with no other changes in the contract. Ayen -,, Nays I ASSESSMENT AGREEMENT THIS AGREEMENT made this 1st day of September, 1986, by and between the City of Orono, a municipal corporation hereinafter referred to as "CITY" and Rolf E. Erickson, hereinafter called "ASSESSOR". 1. Employment. The City, which is a separate Assessment District in the County of Hennepin and State of Minnesota, does retain and employ the ASSESSOR to perform all functions required of local assessors by Minnesota state statutes, cooperate with the Hennepin County Assessor by supplying the needed information for each assessment year, and maintain a fair and equitable assessrr.ent for the CITY and its taxpayers. 2. Functions of Employment. Functions of employment shall include: 1) Effective communication with resident!�, business people, and city officials regardin agreement practices and policies. 2) Physically inspect and revalue 25% of the REAL property as required by law. 3) Physically inspect and value all new construction, additions and renovations. 4) Conduct valuation hearings prior to Board of Review. Approximate dates - March and April. C+ Attend Board of Review. Per Boar E request, mace All necessa- review appraisals. f>+ Keep upd.if i ':old card file - curtt ,t values, homestead and '—i-r,ification data. Print, mail and post full year homestead cards. Process midyear homestead applications. d) Respond to taxpayer rsfJarding assessment or appraisal problems or inquiries periodically during contract term. 9) Make divisions and combinations periodically during contract term. 19) initiate, for the taxpayer, abatement application periodically during contract term, as requested. 11) Make appraisals for, tastify or negotiate all district court or tax court filings, periodically during contract terms. 12) Post values from appraisal cards to assessment rolls. 13) Valuation of all parcels in the City each year. 14) Analysis of property sales. 15) Preparing assessment runs. 16) Reviewing properties at taxpayer's request. 17) Attend, not to exceed, three council meetings in addition to the Local Board of Review meetings. 18) Provide when requested appropriate information and/or referral for persons requesting property appraisal related information. Such may in conjunction with the City be provided on a fee for service basis. 3. Performance of Services. The manner and the method used in the performance of services to be provided by ASSESSOR shall be under the exclusive control and direction of the ASSESSOR. The ASSESSOR in performance of services shall not (1) be required to maintain office hours, (2) receive retirement benefits, (3) health insurance benefits, and (4) any other fringe benefits. 4. Equ�ent. ASSESSOR shall provide: 7 U 1) His own transportation as he deems necessary for performance of services. CITY shall provide: 1) Necessary filing area for purpose of maintair. required city assessment records. 2) All of the equipment and supplies necessary or required for performance of services set forth in this :'greement, including a 1979 or later set of aerial photographs. 3) Pay for all direct expenses, including those forms and supplies, film, aerials and other miscellaneous and homestead material and postage. 5. Compensation. The CITY agrees to pay the ASSESSOR for such services the sus of $45,294.00 for the assessment year of 1987. Payment shall be in 12 monthly installments of $3,767.99, commencing the last day of Septemeber, 1986, and continuing on the last day of each month thereafter through August, 1987. 6. Minnesota -Statutes. This Agreement has been entered into in consideration of the obligations and requirements set forth in Minnesota Statutes as the same apply to real estate assessing procedures. Both parties agree that any major changes in such requirements during the term of this Agreement shall necessitate a renegotiation of the compensation called for herein. 7. Representation by Assessor. 1) ASSESSOR represents that he is a Certified and Licensed Minnesota Assessor under Chapter 273 of Minnesota Statutes and that he is a qualified real estate appraiser; f,irther, that he will during all times this contract is in force maintain such licne5es and qualifications. 2) ASSESSOR agrees to attend t h- 1 Board of Review [Meeting on a date selected by the CITY, 3 plus attendance at not more than three other City Council meetings in any one year. 8. Effective Date of Agreement and Term. This Agree- ment shall be Pf fect i ve -as of September 1, 1986, and employment of the ASSESSOR to perform the services to be rendered hereunder shall commence as of September 1, 1986, for the perf -)rmance of the 1987 real estate assessment, and continue until August 31, 1987; subject, however, to extension as hereinafter provided. 9. Agreement Extension. This Agreement may be extended from year to year on terms to be agreed upon by the parties hereto by the parties agreeing in writing to the same on or before the first day of August, beqinning August 1, 1987, and on the 1st day of August each year t,:,!reafter. If this Agreement is not so extended and terminates according to its terms, ASSESSOR agrees to deliver to CITY forthwith such records as he has in possession concerning assessment of. the CITY's real estate. It being understood that such records are the property of the CITY. 10. Independent Contractor. It is agreed that nothing herein contained is intended or should be construed in any manner as creating or establishing the relationship of co-partners between 'Che parties hereto or as constituting the ASSESSOR as the agent, representative or employee of the CITY for any purpose or in any manner whatsoever. ASSESSOR is to be and shall remain an independent contractor with respect to all services performed under this Agreement. ASSESSOR represents that he has, or will secuLe at his own expense, all personnel required in performing services in .his Agreement. Any and all personnel of ASSESSOR or other persons, while engaged in the performance of any work or services required from the ASSESSOR under this Agreement, shall have no contractual relationship with the CITY and shall not b, considered employees of the CITY ind any and all claims that may or might arise under the Workers' Compensation Act of the State of Minnesota on behalf of said personnel or other persons while so engaged, and any and all claims whatsoever on behalf of any such person or personnel ,rising out of employment or alleged employment including, without limitation, claims of discrimination against the ASSESSOR, his or icers, agents, contractors or employees shall in nr, way be the responsihility of the CITY, and ASSESSOR shall defend, indemnify and hold the CITY, its officers, a(lents and employees harmless from any and all such claims regardless of any leterminaLion )f any pertinent tribuna., a agency, board, commission or court. Such personnel or other persons shall not require nor be entitled to any compensation, rights or benefits of any kind whatsoever from the CITY inclueing, without limitation, tenure rights, medical and hospital care, sick and vacation leave, Workers' Compensation, unemployment compensation, disability, severance pay and P.E.R.A. 11. Hold Harmless. ASSESSOR agrees that he will hold the CITY, its officers and employees harmless from any claims, suits or damages resulting from or caused by any act or omission of the ASSESSOR, his officers, agents, contractors or employees in the performance of the responsibilities provided by this Agreement. IN WITNESS WHEREOF she r+arties have executed this Agreement the year anr' Uate above stated. C. L C F ORONO Mayor Hy City Admin' a t o r `ASSESSOR IL TO: Mayor and City Council ' �l FROM: Mark Bernhardson, City Administrato4l,� DATE: August 6, 1987 SUBJECT: Resolution of Congratulations Eleanor i.awler Pillsbury Attachments: A. George Pillsbury Letter Dated 8/3/87 B. Resolution of Congratulations - Eleanor Lawler Pillsbury ISSUE_ - Adoption of a resolution of congratulations on Eleanor Lawler Pillsbury's 100th birthday on August 31st. INTRODUCTION - Through recent correspondence from George Pillsbury (Attachment A), the City was informed of the upcoming 100th birthday of Eleanor Lawler Pillsbury. While a brief survey of staff indicated that they were not aware of other residents in the community having reached their 100th birthday, the staff feels it is appropriate that such individuals in the community who have reached the milestone of 100 years, particularly ones who have spec- •o much of their life in the community, should be recognized wi. . a resolution of congratulations. PROPOSED MOTION - Moved by , seconded by , that the Orono Council adopt Resolution Number a resolution of congratulations honoring Eleanor Lawler Pillsbury on her 100th birthday. Ayes Nays __ cc: George Pillsbury GEORoE S. PILLSBURY 1300 TCA TOWER MINNEAPOLIS. MINNESOTA 55402-2872 August 3, 1987 The Honorable James R Grabek Mayor of the City of Orono Box 66 Crystal Bay, Minnesota 55Y3 Dear Jim: 612-�3d-3d7:f Thought you and possibly the Council would like to recog- nize my mother's 100th birthday on August 31st. From the enclosed copy of invitations for the weekend, you can see that we are going to have quite a party. If you and/or the Council were to send some communication, we could either read it at dinner Saturday evening, or at the luncheon on Sunday. We expect to have communication from other elected offi- cials, possibly even he President. Hope all goes well with the City. At the moment, 1 have not been hearing any complaints. So you and your Council must be doing your job well. With best regards. Sincerely, l r GSP/rpd Enclosures P.S. You might want to notify the Orono Police of this event because I suppose there will be heavy traffic, particularly on Sunday. 1887 Ki The faillih, ()f 1987 Eleanor Lawler Pillsbilry illvitc \.Olt to a cliallipaglic lilllcllemi in llc)I1Or OI* licr 100th Birthday 011 Sunday, Allglist thirl icI ll at ( )lip• OC 1Ocl( s()lit ilwa s 47 3-82..2 3 No 6ift, 4 7:343) 7 .24 Pl :ksc Planning Committee Eleanor George Jr. Kate Joan John R. Presentation Committee George Jr. Pr is Kate Tennis John R. Golf David Water Activities Ann Stewart Michael Saturday Evening Eleanor Mary Lucy Sunday Luncheon Ella Kitty P. fang George Photo Marshalir Jock Tommy C. • 0 • 190th Birthday Celebration August 29 and 30 A Family Celebration of Mema's I 00th Birthday Saturday, August 29 Tennis Round Robin 9:30-12 :30 Southways Day Camp 9:00-1:00 Picnic Lunch by the prx)l 11:3C can Tennis Finals at Mema's 2:0 Afterno,x)n at leisure water sports available Southways Celebration Dinner Dance 6:00 Sunday, August 30 Family pictures 9:30-11: 30 Group picture 10:30 Skit presentation "Mema's Life" 12:00 The Birthday Party Buffet Luncheon 1:00 8687.4 DRAFT CONGRATULATIONS TO ELEANOR LAWLER PILLSBURY IN HONOR OF HER 199TH BIRTHDAY WHEREAS, Eleanor Lawler Pillsbury was born on August 31, 1887, predating the formation of the Orono Township by two years; and WHEREAS, Eleanor and John F. Pillsbury, Sr. were married in 1911 and shortly thereafter began spending summers on Lake Minnetonka; and WHEREAS, Eleanor and John F. Pillsbury, Sr. acquired the family home Southways, from the junwoody estate, and started the construction of Southways prior to World War I; and WHEREAS, this work was interrupted by World War T and was completed shortly thereafter; and WHEREAS, upon completion of Southways the Pillsbury's spent their summers during the 20's at Southways caking permanent residency in Southways in the early 30's; and WHEREAS, Eleanor Lawler Pillsbury has been very prominent in the community throughout much of the existance of Orono Township and subsequently the vi i lage and City of Orono; and WHEREAS, Eleanor Lawler Pillsbury's children have contributed to the community, notably George as a State Legislator, representing the Lake Minnetonka area and John, Jr. as a long term member of the Orono School Board. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the Orono City Council congratulate Eleanor Lawler Pillsbury on the achievement of her 100th birthday. Thanking her for her long term residency and contributions to the Orono Community. Adopted by the Orono Council of Orono, Minnesota at 3 regular meeting held this 10t .i day of August, 1987. James R. Grabek, Mayor ATTEST: Dorothy-M. Na��in, City Clerk- -- To: Mark E. Bernhardson, City Administrator From: John R. Gerhardson, Public Works Coordinator Date: August 6, 1987 Subject: Joint Cooperation Agreement Community Development Block Grant As a matter of procedure so that we may receive Community Development Block Grant Funds, it is necessary to enter into an agreement with Hennepin County. Hennepin County serves as the lead agency with HUD and administers the funds to communities in Hennepin County. The agreement is for a three year period beginning October, 1, 1987. RECOMMENDATION: To enter into a three year agreement with Hennepin County to participate in the Community Development Block Grant. Program beginning October 1, 1987. To: Mayor Grabek and Orono ncil Members tram: Mark F. Bernhardson, City Administrator ]Attachments - A - Hennepin County Letter Dated July 17, 1987 B - Proposed Contract 070486 Forwarded recommending approval. This contract is similar to the ones previously entered into with the County as is the only means by which we would have access to these funds (about $25,000/year in past years). This does not commit a certain level to Orono, only a pro -ratio. PROPOSED MOTION: Moved , seconded , the Orono City Council approves entering into the agreement i70486 wiLh LIenner;n County in order to obtain CDBG monies through the County program t '.e period October 1, 1987 to September 30, 1990. Ayes , nays City of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUN4CIL NO. RESOLUTION CITY O! ORONO, MINNESOTA WHEREAS, the City of Orono, Minnesota and the County of Hennepin have in effect a Joint Cooperation Agreement, County Contract No. 40445, for the purposes of qualifying as an Urban County under the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development Community Development Block Grant program; and WHEREAS, the City and the County wish to terminate the Agreement and execute a new Joint Cooperation Agreement, County Contract No. 70486, to reconstitute the Urban County for purposes of the Community Development Block Grant program. BE IT RESOLVED,, that the current Joint Cooperatiun Agreement between the City and the County, County Contract No. 404 i, be terminated effective September 30, 1987, and a new Joint Cooperation Agreement between the City and, County, County Contract No. 70486, be executed effective Ot;tuc.er 1, 1987, and that the Mayor and the City Administrator be authorized to sign the Agreement on behalf of the City. The question was on the adopt . of the resolution, and upon a vote being duly take thereon, the .ollowing voted in favor thereof: and; the follow+'.ng voted against the same: WMRWPON SAID RESOLUTION WAS DOC! •-WMD DULT PASSED AND ADOPSW this 10th day of August, 1987. ATTEST: City of Orono By Its: MHENNEP OFFICE OF THE ADMINISTRATOR A-2300 Government Center Minneapolis, Minnesota 55487 INU U July 17, 1987 The Honorable James R. Grabek Mayor of Orono 1335 South Brown Road, P.O. Box 66 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 Dear Mayor Grabek: �nf (0SW The ,;,int Cooperation Agreement executed by and between Hennepin County �k,,u 43 communities to establish the Urban Hennepin County Community Development Block Grant program expires October 1, 1987. To continue the program which provided over 2.6 million dollars in federal funds for local community aevel- opment activities this year and over 40 million since the program began in 1975, it is necessary to execute a new agreement to cover the next three years. Provided all 43 communities execute the new agreement and therefore remain in the program, it is expected that at least another 2.6 million dollars will be made available to share in 1988. Please bring the option of participating in the program before your governing body. To do so they should act by resolution to authoriz.- the appropriate officials t, ecute the accompanying three copies of the Joint Cooperation Agreement and return ti,om to me as provided in Article III., paragraph C., along with a copy of the authorizing resolution by August 28, 1987. The Agreement is for the next three-year period for which Hennepin County qualifies as an urban county. Action on the Agreement at this time will therefore be binding for three years. Electing to execute it will make your community a partner in the Urban Hennepin County COBG program for federal fiscal years 1988, 1989 and 1990. Electing not to execute will preclude your community from participation for the same period. Other than some formatting, there are only a few changes from the Joint Cooperation Agreement in effect since 1984. One is the inclusion of the current administrative pol-,cy limiting the number of activities to three per community per year and each to a minimum of $7,500 (exceptions are joint activities and instances where the planning allocation is less than $7,500). The new agreement also includes a new provision for crediting program income back to the community from which it originates for reprogramming to eligible and fundable activities. HENNEPIN COUNTY or equal npporttnfty emplover July 17, 1987 Page Two Should you have any questions please contact your Hennepin County planning representative or Bob Isaacson at 348-4544. Sincerely, OR,,a A,@ A 91 q4r, Fkawow, %PWW%WNO%M* R� Bruce Kurtz Deputy County Administrator enc. cc: CDBC Contact Contract No. 7048E JOINT COOPERATION AGREEMENT THIS AGREEMENT made and entered into by and between the COUNTY OF HENNEPIN, State of Minnesota, hereinafter referred to as "COUNTY," and the CITY OF Orono , hereinafter referred to as "COOPERATING UNIT," said parties to this Agreement each being governmental units of tfie State of Minnesota, and is made pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 471.59; WITNESSETH; COOPERATING UNIT and COUNTY agree that it is desirable and in the interests of their citizens that COUNTY secure Community Development Block Grant funds as an Urban County within the provisions of the Act as herein defined and, therefore, in consideration of the mutual covenants and promises contained in this Agreement, the parties mutually agree to the following terms and conditions. DEFINITIONS The definitions contained in 42 USC 5302 of the Act and 24 CFR Part 570.3 of the Regulations are incorporated herein by reference and made a Gar', hereof, and the terms defined in this section have the meanings given them: A. "The Act" means the Housing and Community Development Act of 1973, Title 1 of Public Law 93, 383, as amended by the Housing and Commu- nity Development Reconciliation Amendments of 1985, 42USC5301ET.SEQ. B. "Regulations" means the rules and regulations promulgated pursuant to the Act, including but not limited to 24 CFR Part 570. C. "HUD" means the United States Department of Housing and Urban Devel- opment. 0. "Cooperating Unit" means any city or town in Hennepin County which has entered into a cooperation reement which is identical to this Agreement, as well as Hennepin Lounty which is a party to each Agreement. E. "Statement of Objectives and Projected Use of Funds" means the docu- ment bearing that title or similarly required statements or docu- ments submitted to HUD for authorization to expend the entitIc-cent amount and which is developed by the COUNTY in conjunr*i,,ri with COOPERATING UNITS as part of the Community Development Block Grant Program. II. PURPOSE The purpose of this Agreement is to authorize COUNTY and COOPERATING UNIT to cooperate in undertaking, or assisting in undertaking, community renewal and lower income housing activities, specifically urban renewal and publicly assisted housing and author;zes COUNTY to carry out these and other eligible activities which will be funded from annual Community Development Block Grants from Fiscal Years 1988, 1989 and 1990. III. AGREEMENT A. The term of this Agreement is for a period commencing on the effective date of October 1, 1987, and termirating no sooner than the end of program year sixteen (XVI) covered by the Statement of Objectives and the Projected Use of Funds for the basic grant amount authorized by HUD subsequent to the effective date. B. Notwithstdnding any other provision of this Agreement, this Agree- ment shall be terminated at the end of the three-year program period during which HUD withdraws its designation of COUNTY as an Urban County under the Act. C. This Agreement shall be executed by the appropriate officers of COOPERATING UNIT and COUNTY pursuant to authority granted them by their respective governing boales. and a copy of the authorizing resolution and executed Agreement shall be filed promptly b- the COOPERATING UNIT in the office of the Hennepin County Admen,. and in no event shall the Agreement be filed later than August Zb, 1987. IV. ACTIVITIES COOPERATING UNIT agrees that awarded grant funds will be used to under- take and carry jut within the terms of this Agreement certain projects involving one or more of the essential activities eligible for funding under the Act. COUNTY agrees and will assist COOPERATING UNIT in the undertaking of such essential activities by providing the services specified in this Agreement. The parties mutually agree to comply with all applicable require- ments of the Act and the Regulations and other relevant Federal and%or Minnesota statutes or regulations in the use of basic grant amounts. Nothing in this Article shall be construed to lessen or abrogate COUNTY's responsi- bility to assume all obligations of an applicant under the Act, including the development of the Statement of Objectives and Projected Use of Funds pursu- ant to 24 CFR 570.s00 et.seq. A. COOPERATING UNIT further specifically agrees as follow,: 1. COOPERATING UNIT will in accord with a COUNTY establisned schedule prepare and provide to COUNTY, in a prescribed form, an annual request for the use of Community Development 3lock Grant Fu-is consistent with this Agreement, program regulations and the Jrban Hennepin County Statement of Objectives. 2. COOPERATING UNIT shall use all funds received pursuant to the Agreement for each annual program within eighteen (18) months of the authorization by HUD of the basic grant amount. Expenditure period extensions may be requested in cases where the authorized activity has been initiated and/or subject of a contract. 3. COOPERATING UNIT shall use funds provided pursuant to Section V. of this Agreement to undertake no more than three (3) grant funded activities administered by the COOPERATING UNIT. Each activity shall have a budget of at least seventy-five hundred dollars ($7,500), or the total amount of the planning allocation of COOPERATING UNIT if less than seventy-five hundred dollars ($7,500). A COOPERATING UNIT may assign less than seventy-five hundred dollars ($7,500) to an activity when the activity is one that is programmed by at least one other COOPERATING UNIT and administered by only one COOPERATING UNIT on behalf of the others, provided that the total activity budget is at least seventy-five hundred dollars ($7,500). 4. COOPERATING UNIT will take actions necessary to accomplish the community development program and housing assistance goals as contained in the Urban Hennepin County Housing Assistance Plan. 5. COOPERATING UNIT shall ensure that all programs and/or activi- ties funded in part or in full by grant funds received pursuant to this Agreement shall be undertaken affirmatively with regard to fair housing, employment and business opportunities for minorities and women. It shall in implementing all programs and/or activities funded by the basic grant amount comply with all applicable federal and Minnesota Laws, statutes, rules and regulations with regard to civil rights, affirmative action and equal employment opportunities and Administrative Rule issued by the COUNTY. 6. CGOPERATING UNIT shall participate in the citizen participation process as established in compliance with the requirements of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974, as amended. 7. COOPERATING UNITS shall comply with all of the administrative guidelines of the COUNTY now in effect or as hereafter promulgated. 8. COOPERATING UNITS shall prepare, execute, and cause to be filed all documents protecting the interests of the parties hereto or any other party of interest as may be designated by the COUNTY. B. COUNTY further specifically agrees as follows: 1. COUNTY shall prepare and submit to HUD and appropriate reviewing agencies On do annual basis all plans, statements and program document-, necessary for receipt of a basic grant amount under the Act. 2. COUNTY shall provide, to the .naximum extent feasible, technical assistance and coordinating services to COOPERATING UNIT in the preparation and submission of the request for funding. 3. COUNTY shall provide ongoing technical assistance to COOPERATING UNIT to aid COUNTY in fulfilling its responsibility to HUD for accomplishment of the community development program and housing assistance goals. 4. COUNTY shall upon official request by COOPERATING UNIT agree to administer local housing rehabilitation grant programs funded pursuant to the Agreement, provided that COUNTY shall receive ten percent (10%) of the allocation by COOPERATING UNIT to the activity as reimbursement for costs associated with its opera- tion. 5. COUNTY will, as necessary for clarification and coordination of program administration, develop and implement Administrative Rules crinsistent with the Act, Regulations and HUD administra- tive directives. V. ALLOCATION OF BASIC GRANT AMOUNTS Basic grant amounts received by the COUNTY under the Act shall be allo- cated as follows: A. COUNTY stall retain ten percent (10b) of the annual basic grant amount for the undertaking of eligible activities- B. The balancE of the basic grant amount shall be apportioned by COUNTY to COOPERATING UNITS in accordan,-e with the formula stated in part C of this section for the purpose of allowing the COOPERATING UNITS to make requests for the use of funds so aportioned. The allocation is for planning purposes only and is not a guarantee of funding. C. Each COOPERATING UNIT will use as a target for planning purposes an amount which bears the same ratio to the balance of the basic grant amount as the average of the ratios between: 1. The population of COOPERATING 'JNIT and the population of all COOPERATING UNITS. 2. The extent of poverty in COOPERATING UNIT and the extent of poverty in all COOPERATING UNITS. 3. The extent of overcrowded housing by units it COOPERATING UNIT and the extent of overcrowded housing by units in all COOPERAT- ING UNITS. 4. In determining the average of the above ratios, the ratio involving the extent of poverty shall be ,ounted t►+ice. D. It is the intent of this section that said planning allocation utilize the same basic elements for allocation of funds as are set forth in 24 CFR 570.4. The COUNTY shall develop these ratios based upon data to be furnished by HUD. Ti-e COUNTY assumes no duty to gather such data independently and assumes no liability for any errors in the data furnished by HUD. VI. COUNTYWIDE DISCRETIONARY ACCOUNT A. In the event that any COOPERATING UNIT cannot commit, expend or does not request its planning allocation, or a portion thereof, pursuant to Section V of this Agreement, COUNTY will assign the unexpended or unallocated grant funds to the Countywide Discretionary Account. The assignment shall also include funds pursuant to Section IV paragraph A.2 of this Agreement. B. COUNTY will retain ten percent (10%) of all funds placed in the Countywide Discretionary +ccount to defray administrative expenses. C. COUNTY will, on or before March 1 of each year, inform each COOPER- ATING UNIT of the Countywide Discretionary Account balance and will provide each COOPERATING UNIT the opportunity to make a request for use of all or a portion of the funds. VII. FINANCIAL MATTERS A. Reimbursement to the COOPEPATING UNIT for expenditures for the implementation of activities funded under the Act shall be made upon receipt by the COUNTY of Summary of Project Disbursement form and Hennepin County Warrant Request, and supporting documentation. B. All funds received by COUNTY under the Apt as reimbursement for payment to COOPERATING UNITS for expenditure of local funds f(-r activities funded under the Act shall be deposited in the County Treasury. C. COOPERATING UNIT and COUNTY shall maintain financial and other records and accounts in accordance with requirements of the Act and Regulations. Such records and accounts will be in such form as to permit reports required of th!� County to be prepared therefrom and to permit the tracing of grant funds and program income to final expenditure. D. COOPERATING UNIT and COUNTY agree to make available all records and accounts with respect to matters covered by this Agreement at all reasonable times to their respective personnel and duly authorized federal officials. Such records shall be retained as provided by law, but in no event for a period of less than three years from the last receipt of program incoine resulting from activity implementa- tion. COUNTY shah perform all audits of the basic grant amount and resulting program incxme ds required under the Act anJ Regulations. E. COOPERATINC UNIT small return all program income derived from activities funded in total or part from the basic grant amount to COUNTY upon its generation, except as derived from activiti-S with approved reolving accounts. 1. MINTY will retain ten percent (10%) of all Grogram income to defray administration expenses. 2. The remaining 90 percent (90%) of the program income shall be credited to the grant authority of the COOPERATING UNIT whose activity generated the income and be used for fundable and eli- gible Community Development Block Grant activities consistent with this Agreement. F. Should an approved activity be determined to represent an ineligible expenditure of grant funds, the COOPERATING UNIT responsible shall reimburse the COUNTY for such ineligible expense. 1. All reimbursements for ineligible expenditures shall Le placed in the Countywide Discretionary Account, except as provided for in Section VII.F.2. of this Agreement. 2. When it is determined by the COUNTY that grant funds have been expended on an eligible activity and through no fault of the COOPERATING UNIT the project fails or is no longer eligible, the program reimbursement shall be treated as program income in Section VII.E. of this Agreement. VII. EXECUTION COOPERATING UNIT, having signed this Agreement, and the Hennepin County Board of Commissioners having dul) approved this Agreement on , 19 , and pursuant to such appro\al and the proper County official aving signed this Agreement, the part'es hereto agree to be bound by the provisions herein set forth. Upon proper execution, this COUNTY OF HENNEPIN, STATE OF MINNESOTA Agreement will be legally valid and binding. By: Chairman of its County Board And: Deputy/Associate County Administrator AssIstant County Attorney Date: ATTEST: Deputy County Auditor APPROVED AS TO EXECUTION: CITY OF: By: Ics Ks—sistant County Attorney DATE: And: Its CITY MUST CHECK ONE: The City is organized pursuant to: Plan A- aPT—n� 7e TETT TO: Mayor Grabek and Orono Council Members From: Mark E. Bernhardson, City Administrator :1 Date: August 5, 1987 Subject: Willow Drive - Highway 12, Traffic Control Attachment: A - Warrant Requirements & Comments - Willow Drive/Highway 12 Analysis ISSUE - Information to the Council regarding the current status of installati of a signal at Highway 12 and Willow Drive. INTRODUCTION - At the July 13th, 1987 meeting, the Council discussed the proposed County Road 116 extension from Medina across Willow Drive to Highway 12. The issue regarding the traffic control at Willow Drive and Highway 12 was raised. Consequently, :staff has reviewed with the Department of Transportation, District 5 headquarters in Golden Valley, the current status of that intersection as it relates to traffic warrants (please see Attachment A), and generally, the subject of what it takes to have installation regarding a traffic signal on a State -aid highway. DISCUSSION - As noted above, the intersection at present does not meet any of the warrants for a installation of a signal at that location. The ones most likely to be achieved are as follows: 1. Minimum vehicular volume; 2. Interruption warrant; 3. Minimum pedestrian volume; 4. Accident. The primary problem is that the volume of traffic from Willow Drive across Highway 12 does not reach the minimum. This is needed even for the accident warrant. For warrant t2, it must meet 53 cars per hour from either the north or the h leg (i.e. Willow Drive) during at least 9 ours a day. The most r sur.,ey from February 1987 only meets it on either leg for 3 hours. It is the policy of both tt, _e and Federal Government that there will be no permission to install lights on any trunk highways which do not meet the warrants for a sig. .. This is in part due to the fact that signalized intersections can have more accidents than non -signalized intersections when drivers perceive little reason for the signal. Once an intersection does meet the warrants, it is placed on a priority lisp-, which for District 5 includes about 45 projects. As the District generally only has enough money to fund 12 signals a year, it may be at least 3 to 4 years before projects towards the bottom of the priority list are funded. It may actually take longer if new signal installations of a higher priority are inserted in the priority list in subsequent years. Once it has met warrants, h.wever, and If it looks as if the funding is not going to be in the near term based of ►e priority, the City can go ahead and fund installation of such a project on its own with permission from MnDot. The approximate installation costs of the 3 alternatives are as follows: Willow Drive and Highway 12 Intersection August 5, 1987 Page 2 of 3 $ 45,000 Temporary 4-way conk of signals 80,000 Permanent signals Up to 250,000 Intersection control, including rased islands for channelization for traffic (right & left turn lanes). This would be somewhat less if channelization can be achieved through striping with a little widening of the actual road surface. The funding arrangements vary by the type of installation, needs of the intersection, etc. There are at least four (4) possible arrangements for fundinq ,at may come into play at this intersection. A. Installation in Advance of Priority Funding - Should the City decide to go ahead and have the light installed in advance of it reaching the appropriate point on the priority list of funding, the City would have to bear the entire cost and as such the project would be removed from the priority list with no possibility for re- imbursement. B. Normal Trunk Funding - If it reaches a priority on the list to be funded it could be funded at the normal course of events, the arrangement is generally 50-50 with the State paying 50% and the City and/or Cities funding the balance. C. Federal Primary Route Funding - If this would meet the criteria for primary route, the Federal Government could fund up to 70% with the '-)alance being split between the State and the City(s) on an even sha,-e basis. 15% for the State and 15% for the City(s). D. Federal High Hazard Location - If it met the criteria for a Federal hazard location, once the normal criteria and funding priority were met the Federal Government may fund up to 90% of cost. Criteria are on a cost ratio of the annualized accident history at that location versus the cost of the installation of the improvement. F. Replacement Funding - If a temporary light were installed, either (,n a mixture offfunding or on City funding alone, the signal would then be possibly placed on a replacement fund and in 5 to 10 years may be replaced with a permanent light with one of the funding arrangements listed above. In addition to the capital costs, the State does have main nance costs for control signals that it would take on with the City taking on maintenance costs of reiamping, painting, etc. RECOMMENDATION - At this point staff will be further exploring what it can done to assist in the intersection meeting a warrant, and absent that, work to have installation of a flashing light installed at tha ;,)cation. Actions may include further Willow Drive spot checks to see if minimum volume can be met, and if there may be other warrants achievable. Willow Drive and Highway 12 Inter..ection August 5, 1987 Page 3 of 3 FRUPG rD MOTION: Moc ,.d by , sec. - by , to accept staf f's information regarding Willow Drive and Highwp:y 12, and direct. Staff to continue efforts to assist in the intersection meeting warrantF;. Ayes , nays cc: City of Long 'sake City of Medina Glenn Cook, City Engineer An investigation of the ? for traffic signal control should include where applicable, at least ;,.. analy-is of the factors contained in the following warrants: Warrant I—Minimun. .ei,icula- olum^ Warrant 2—Interruption of continuous traffic. Warrant 3—Minimum pedestrian volume. Warrant 4—School crossings. Warrant 5—Progressive movement. Warrant 6—Accident c-pericncc. Warrant 7—Systcros. Warr. 8—Combination of warrants. Warra 9—Frur ' -tunes. Warrant 10—Pea Iv. Wai ant l 1—Pear time. 4C-3 WamE., 1, Minimum 'l-thi-ular Volume The Minir.6-d Vehicular ,e warrant is int(-l.ded for application where the v . uwc of intcr....ng traffic is the principal reason f r consideration of signal installation. The warrant is satisfied when, for each of an) 8 hours of an av:rage day, the traffic uniumcs given in the table below exist on ,he majr, r street and on 0 ,--cr-volume min. or - street approach to the intersection. An "ave. age ' day is defined as a weekday represcn.,ing traffic volumes normally and r:peat:dly found at .- locetion. 1%.M.41;IM VE111t-t:LAR VOLUMES FOR u'*.RRAtiT 1 Vehicle. twr 1 ,.ur qm tiumtwr of larw% for rrur. r ra.71c Vehu-ies per hour on hirherrvolum mr- un race. appn. major street (tut.al of nor-stn" appr%mch Mawr Sir—L Minor tit:Tit both apimm--h. sl tale '-n-cuon only ) I 1 54111 l:al nr nr,r I 6410 . Ir ur Inure 6W ! L ..r nwr, rAX) These major-strcct and minor -street volumes are for the same 8 hours. During those 8 hours, the direction c:f higher volume on the minor street may be on one approach during some hours and on the opposite approach during other hours. When the 85-percentile speed of major-strcct traffic exceeds 40 mph in either an rrhan or a rural area, or when the intersection lies within the built-up a..a of an isolated community having a population of less than 10,000, the %linimt,-n Vehicular Volume warrant :s 70 p�.cent of the regt: r�mcnts above. IV-43 (e) IV-20 (c) Rev. • use-. w, vies 4S ON VNI �YNn av+i wQ.. _T_ ��, I 1 1 ccs �M AuICt) 4C-4 W arrst 2, laterruption a! Continuous Traffic The Interruption of Continuous Tra,fic warrant .applies to operating conditions where the traffic volume on a major street is so heavy that traffic on a minor intersecting street suffers excessive delay or hazard in entering or crossing the major street. The warrant is sati�ficd when, for each of any 8 hou.,s of an average day, the traffic volt.- given in the table below exist on the major street and on the higher -volume :. ')r- street a,proach to the intersection, and the signa; installation will not seriously disrupt progressive traffic flow. N11N1Mt'.M VFHWULAR VOLI M.,:., FOR WARRANT 2 Vehwiv, 1w•r Nwr on \., nt+•r . 4 :.krw, fnr 17P.,v1ng tr-,Plc V,,,,,.1e% 1wr Lour ran higher-v.dum.• m1- ,n each alq,nueh r .4irret .tutaI or 11Ur-btrs-et appruaeh %l.,p,r -;tr.rt Mu,ur Street •uth appr,4,c1,.•.1 oair dlrrrUun (515) 7.. (54) ...•r r.p.rr I !NMI to •n• or nw)n- :MM, 1111 1101 Thcse major-st.ect and miacr-street volum. ire for the same 8 hours. Durir,g those 8 nours, the direziion of higher volume on the minor street may be on one approach dur:.tg some hotus and on the oppo:,;tc approach during other hours. When the 85-percentik speed of major -street traffic exceeds 40 mph in either an urban or a rma< area, or when the intersection lies within the built-up area of an isi,lal .d community having- a population of less than 10,000. the intcrruptv:.i of Continuous Traffic --ant is 70 percent of the requirements :.hove. 4C-5 Warrant 3. om Pedestrian Volume The Minimum t- . An Volume warrant is satisfied when, for each of any 8 hours of an average day, the following traffic volumes exist: I. On the major strtc.., 600 or more vehicles per hour enter the tnterscct-on (torn, of b'th approaches); or where there is a raised median island 4 feet ur more ,a width, 1,000 or more vehicles per hour (total of both approaches) enter tt '-tersection on the major street; and 2. !luring the same 8 . as in paragraph (1) there arc 150 or more pedes: tans per hour on the highest volume crosswalk crossing the major =I feet Whet; the 85-percentile speed of major -street traffic exceeds 40 mph in Ctther an urban or a rural arc:+, or hen the intersection lies within tl•c guilt -up arc:, of an Isolated co ..aunity having a population of Icss than 10,000. the Minimum Pedestrian Volume warrant is 70 percent of the requirements above. A signal installed under this warrant at an isolated i mersection should be of the traffic -actuated type with push buttons for pedestrians crossing the main street. If such a signal is installed at an intersection within a signal system, it should be equipped and operated with control devices which provide proper coordination. Sig als installed according to this warrant shall be equipped with pedestrian indications conforming to requirements set forth in other sections of this Manual. Signals may be installed at nonintcrsection locations (mid -block) provided the requirements of this warrant arc met, and provided that the related crosswalk is not closer than 150 feet to another established crosswalk. Curbside parking should be prohibited for 100 feet in advance of and 20 feet beyond the crosswalk. Phasing, coordination, and installation must conform to standards set forth in this Manual. Special attention should be given to the signal head placement and the signs and markings used at nonintcrsection locations to be sure drivers arc aware of this special application. 4C-6 Warrant 4, School Crossing A traffic control signal may be warranted at an established school crossing when a traffic engineering study of the frequency and adequacy of gaps in the vehicular traffic stream as related to the number and size of grouas of school children at the school crossing Fhows that the number of adequate gips in the traffic stream during the period when the :r six using the crossing is less than the number of .•es in the sa:re � �rsod (sec. 7A-3). When traffic control signals arc installed entirely u..der this warrant: 1. Pedestrian indications shall be provided at least for each crosswalk established as a school crossing. 2. At an intersection, the signal normally should be traffic -actuated. As a minimum, it should be semi -traffic -actuated, but full actuation with detectors on all approaches may be desirable. Intersection installations tha! can be fitted into progressive signal systems may have prctimcd control. 3. At non intersection crossings, the signal should be pedestrian - actuated, parking and other obstructions to view should be prohibited for at (cast 100 feet in advance of and 20 feet beyond the crosswalk, and the installation should include suitable standard signs and pavement markings. Special police supervision and/or enforcement should be provided for a new non -intersection installation. 4C-7 Warrant S, Progrra dve Mo•eaeat Progressive movement control sometimes necessitates traffic signal installations at intersections where they would not ,crwise be warranted, in order to maintain proper grouping of vehicle- effectively regulate group speed. The Progressive Movement war- itisfied when: 1. On a one-way street o• a street which has predominantly unidirectional traffic, the adjacent signals are so far apart that they do not provide the necessary degrm A vehicle platooning and speed control, or 2. On a two-way street, adjacent signals do not provide the necessary degree of platooning and speed control and the proposed and adjacent signals could constitute a progressive signal system. The installation of a signal according tc this warrant should be based on the 85-percentile speed unless an engineering study indicates that another speed is more desirable. The installation of a signal according to this warrant s .aid not be cor.sidered where the resultant signal spacing would be less than 1000 feet. 4C-8 Warrant 6, Accident Experience The Accident Experience warrant is satisfied when: 1. Adequate trial of less restrictive remedies with satisfactory observance and enforcement has failed to reduce the accident frequency; and 2. Five or more reported accidents, of types susceptible to correction by traffic signal control, have occurred within a 12-month period, each accident involving pers,)nal injury or property damage to an apparent extent of $100 or more; and 3. There exists a volume of vehicular and pedestrian traffic not less than 80 percent of the requirements specified either in the Minimum Vehicular Volume warrant, the Interruption of Continuous Traffic warrant, or the Minimum Pedestrian Volume warrant; and 4. The signal installation will not seriously disrupt progressi.c traffic flo" . Any traffic signal installed solely on the Accident Experience warrant should be semi -traffic -actuated (with control devices which provide proper coordination if installed at an intersection within a coordinated system) and normally should be fully traffic -actuated if installed at an isolated intersection. 4C-9 Warrant 1, Systems Warrant A traffic signal installation at some intersections may be warranted to encourage concentration and organization of traffic flow networks. The Systems warrant is applicable when the common intersection of two or k�Uun 4l. -il) Hsrrant S. ('ombinatir:n of 1larranls i Addcnduno p;igc 4C-12 Alter the last whscction. add the fi-tltiw ing as a new suyscc(ion. 4C-10.4 %.uT nt 12 Senior Ciduen and 111andicappvd I'cdestri;u. t'russi 1 �r kigning. mark wg, acid signal warrants and guidelines covering senior city. ,::.t handreapMd perlcstrian cro .tags xe Appendix A. Traffic Signal W irra; WV n.�nJ� S ��i M 0 I O.Yt. re; w%&.r t( �Sr f uroSS S'Ytur� oo♦) �cJt4�iCi�� �v hoar wf v o 1UrAtS C3 ti ¢vL �ncry SM�.v Ptak .P L.wt tG►a� d. Ko VD�JMel � -tom '�•.(► eie?^l hor~rs Nt flrJe �Jr10 pIt^Q tMai' Or 4-o a re J vk�vs-,1^ CwkAAt r V "TM ��->l Wi �14w �r� rc boat y+o+ *%A o ii...i� - ► i� till r r 4r.7�T Minnc,Avti Supplemcni Sliccl .% C-fb more major routes has a total exi:....,g, or immediately projected, entering volume of at least 800 vehicles during the peak hour of a typical weekday, or each of any five hours of a Saturday and/or Sunday. A major route as used in the above warrant has one or more of the following characteristics: 1. It is part of the street or highway system that serves as :he principal network for through traffic flow; It connects areas of principal traffic generation; 3. h includes rural or suburban highways outside, entering or traversi;tg a city; 4. It has surface street freeway or-xpressway ramp terminals; 5. 1: appears as a major route on an official plan such as a major street plan in an urban area traffic and transportation study. 4C-10 Warrant 8, Combination of Warrants In exceptional cases, signals occasionally may be justified where no sing.c warrant is satisfied but where two or more of Warrants 1, 2, and 3 arc satisfied to the extent of 80 percent or more of the stated values. Ad:quate trial of other remedial measures which cause less delay and inconvenience to traffic should precede installation of signals under this warrant. 4C-10.1 Warri:nt 9—F&ur Hour Volumes The Four Hour Vol: ine Warrant is satisfied when each of any four hours of an average day the plotted p -its representing the vehicles per hour on the major street (total of both ar•,.roaches) and the corresponding vehicles per hour on the higher volume minor street approach (one direction only) all fall above the curve in Figure 4-7 for the existing combination of approach lanes. W'hen the 85th perc.ntile speed of the major street traffic exceeds 40 mules per hour or when the intersection lies within a built-up area of an isol.itcd community having a population less than 10,000, the four hour volume requirement is satisfied when the plotted points referred to fall above the curve ir, rigure 4-8 for the existing combination of approach lanes. U 10.2 N%;,rrant 10, Peak Iluur Uclay The peak hour delay warrant is intended for application where traffic conditions arc such that for one hour of the day minor street traffic suffers undue delay in entering or crossing the major street. The peak hour delay warrant is satisfied when the conditions given below exist for one hour (any four consecutive 15-minute periods) of an average weekday. IV-43 Rw. 4 IV-20 Row. 4 The peak hour delay -warrant is met when: 1. The total delay experienced by the traffic on une minor street approach (one direction only) controlled by a STOP sign equals or exceeds four vehicle -hours for a one -lane approach and five vehicle hours for a two-lane approach, and 2. The volume on the same minor street approach (one direction only) equa!s or exceeds 100 vph for one moving lane of traffic or 150 vph for two moving lanes, and 3. The total entering volume serviced during the hour equals or exceeds 800 vph for intersections with four (or mare) approaches or 650 vph for intersections with three approaches. 4C-10.3 Warrant 11, Peak Hour Volume The peak hour volume warrant is alsc intended for application when traffic conditions are such that for one ho.ir of the day minor street traffic suffers undue traffic delay in entering or crossing the major street. the peak hour volume warrant is satisfied when the plotted point representing the vehicles per hou. on the major street (total of both approaches) and the corresponding vehicle per hour of the higher volume minor street approach (vnc direction or ly) for one hour (any four consecutive IS -minute periods) of an averai;e day falls above the curve in Figure 4-5 for the existing combination of approach lanes. When the 85th percentile speed of major street traffic exceeds 40 mph or when the intersection lies within a built-up area of an isolated community having a population less than !0,000, the peak hour volume requirements is satisfied when the plotted point referred to above falls above the curve in Figure 4-6 for the existing combination of approach lanes. 4C-11 factors Governing Selection of Type of Control The principal factors that may lead to the favorable consideration of traffic -actuated control in the selection of the type of signal control include: 1. Low, f1uc-tuat rig or unbalanced traffic volumes. 2. High side street traffic volumes and delays only dl!,inr the peak hours. 3. The pedestrian or accident warrant is the only warrant which is met. 4. The installation is to provide for one-way movement of two-way traffic. Section 4C-10 Warrant 8, Combination of Warrants (Addendum) page -12 At;cr the last subsection, add the following as a new subsection. 4C-10.4 Warrant 12 Scnior Citizen and Handicapped Pedestrian Crossing For signing. marling, and signal warrants and guidelines covcring senior citizen and handicapped pcdcstrian crossings sec Appem'ix A. Traffic Signal Warrant. 5. The installation is at a non -intersection location. Minnesota Supplement Sheet 4 ,4cc4'cJz" 62 po � I*c, it C,4 Kre cy-& It 1001 77 "rre- e- /A 6 (e 46t,; 4,is 7 or-" 1.4c, All -a . a,! Gay'✓ GAG wa �j oKe- �ear a, kvst nleQ -414 / 1, 7AW5 i., C/--H t t3 v e Volvtoe- ovarrAt opt r-e�, rcj ef -- - - . - . .._.. ... ��NS /n-�u-i� GJ�' o►a�- /6 c�- % i c awl !%l �S�-e'I�: i''�-.. -..._ ... %n c<„ o7lxa�lr �` oar Q ��r•% ' %J�'� / � �L' �'S� ��1�'j, �.t/�-� dux )` J� a. -! /� r� c yu.•�3-D orr-G � i�i.�. s /�.•-i, / -- _ ..._ _.- _.�pro�/e�.us C'xis� /,i� �(�l'es sum, li..r t?cc./s,:r✓ �S'lier<<..�.J! _ .. .. - /7tc blkael re ��s�.. is f A, i- a 5�.c,�� vo! ►... c �wj v a s�� _ - --fh.1l►����� LL'�-C/llf /� r yr QGYoSj /".c H/ J/7 �"'� G-�J 7�cv� 4 S. i c.//�! /�rr✓�.JG .%t� QiGGetSS. �7 L 6k<<!""`�1 - --- --�,...�.{-- r�c�.,. B d �-S y .G.t r Zvi �� �r/�� G✓'i c1 c.11 /7i •v w� a-»�, 3 .. ...� �`'f w►or< pt�p/t ll.✓t �C�i��cJ A.7�' Siena l/ �� fare �{/u rr a. (S 3 pa lv-c. lest Ll o u r >�� QV 4 f �7 At r C Gi L / ( as L4+ ltlt_ iJ.�-� d .(o •. Q % v� / �- � 44 � la w. cry GL! �..,o1 t 4 � �v : � r lh Grl A-S �J w v L Il Aw t,- re- `� t- 3 f' C �{ j n S (A- < < a- T7 ft1 � 44A D vc,r `�i� l'1 I GGaUt_ov� r1 C 1(1 1, eQ t•, l vf it 1- c. C.S. 2713 ( T.H. 12 ) _ At: WILLOW DRIVE In: ORONO, HENNEPIN COUNTY ! Major Street Minor Stree: (1) ;; Minor Street (2) i Warrant ! Warrant ! ! Warrant ! _ ;Volume; 1 2: 8 'Volume: 1: 2: 8 ;;Volume; l i t! 8_ A.M. Hour 350:525:420_: '105! 53: 64:! 11031 6 TO 7 : 950: X ; X X :' 17' ' 7 TO 8 : 1419: X X : X : 31' : 9 TO 9 i 897 ! X : X X : 47 : : : : (Z) E.n ! : Y i 10 TO 11 —� . 11 TO 1.. .. F.M. Hour 12 TO 1 1 TO 2 2 TO 3 ! 877: X X k : 49: i ! !: 341 _ 3% TO 4 S _1 216: X X X :: 54: i X i i S 35: 4 TO 5 1485: X X X 70' X' 49 :. : 5 TO 6 i 1408' X X X 41: ' _ 6 TO 7.. . . .. . . .. . . . -- 7 TO _8 TO 9 9 TO 10 Total 3958' 8 B 8 :: 347'@ O i 2: 0 :: 334' 0 i 1' 0::0:0:0: .5' C Traffic Counts (Hours) Manual 8 Hours Date 2/87 _ Major Street : Minor Street_ ADT 17020 1293 _Peak Hour 1485 70 Sth Highest Hour : 706 39 Approach Speed 50 30 _Lanes of Approach 1 1 Does not meet warrants 1, 2 or S. Minor Street (2) Warrant col ume '. 1 7 2 : 8 :105: 53: 84''.1'2:t,: 411 , di 3 9 : ' (rZ)60: i X 7 :Xl ' (i) 413 i 34' , , 35: :X' 49 :X 29' ' 334' 0 1 0 !0:0:(): :0:3'0: t.J�• � •'— Cup _ -?' c h4.r nt �IDI:u �_: e•_. �s ti.r• TNte, Z� �.v s a. r,r ti - IGt �, �, a• r �:' •.. CA.. 1uw�(� �C�C '�N♦h �t �wt c yr G 1',�1 n c ,• « l vv,* or C. 94* V DIY rM I i F l� rr ram• rlc' �� do IN* -,4t -iv Cttwr ►..ik.:� r.� :a�. to•"� _. 1 cS s 't+�► rtat ' lt�i..� '}'•�i: law vol j%.. , DISTRICT TRAFFIC ENGINEERING . RECORDER _ _ CONSTRUCTION DIST...,,f__ DT. E 776 KOR41WaWL MOTOR FRO�rI h�T�Ly-La-- r Ta Ta To HOUR �C.—_- �— �----- _ I Noe tucsT- Soul -- ? 00 ,- G - 3 -- i2: - 5 _-2 �0 1! I' -- 3 00 1300 - 3 i 5 _ _ ji— r3 30 _ 3-� i 3745 _---5 1 tI /%D iii 4_i5 _4 30 i!-' 119 _I 4 VEHICLE �/ TRAFFIC VOLUME ,FL_-I1�_l�_ AND -TURNING MOVEMENT Fif ..� FRSod-XtL�L1s1 �iZ .. � ITO TO TO TOTAL �cI �% 41. 10T L sr gip, sr ! -- - - ---_ -l_ a�at - - 1. !G 1 �3 _ a I W( —�- 1---1 -. Q- _2. /04 O TOTAL -- - --- - -- -— 1[0 As --- it l�t� it - -- TO _,d1ZM_ —�-- TO SST - - G - TO '—y �Q - �i_ � -- 1��1-_- i. -J i ----_ 1.149 11 2 4:30 -4 45 ii2. e 3 ! ?�� i�_ I �.1' / i. 1—t9 ----- 445 -500 II 5_00=5 15 'I_� ���:�. � 9 5:15 -53G �.�0 ( 5: 30 - 5 :45 !I__.�,�9 5 45 -6:00 ii 00 /0 600 -615 -- V 615 - 6:-7-rlll 6�30 -6�45 !� 6:45 -7:00 Aof .2.9Af s I /3 _._3.yld � G 0 Q t - _ 7 00 -7:15 7:15 -7,30 ;I — 7-30 -745 � - -- 1 - 745 -8:00 - 8,00 -8-15 815 - 8 30 8:30 -8-45 8 45 -9.00 900 -9 15 915 - -30 - 9 30 - 9 45 -- 9;45 -10,00 DISTRICT TRAFFIC ENGINEERING . -- STI-JION 711-11 av�.vc NSTRUCTION DIST. f D.T.E. O T Z CITY. CRA1a E TRAFFIC VOLUME AND TURNING MIOVEMENT FIF— l r?FPORT COUyTY hr� ,I ----- =- - so v _I&A4- .- --Sig TO TO TO SAW TO TO`� ► ;-��_ ,,� - TOTAL " J �/ �► TOTAL � - eAt o&Z -- ---- WesT : &Ndt _EAST _ - _- I KJtSj SouT/� EA.S7- -�--- 7 JI-0- -I -1�` - - - - s_ - �- l�- -�� Q- 18 z l0 365 G4 103leg 3 JAJJ rr 395 1113 to b 3 !- -T Afo go lqVI o I/ I // I /I- a 1-.7-- 399 � _ it --1--- - - - � -- --- -- - - DATE _Fs�i--�� - — DISTRICT r- c f_�=R1nG f�� COf�Drf� " --- -- CONSTRUCTION DIST _,,� - - D.T E_ /'lA %� h OMR VEf LE "{ Rf,,' HC VOl_UP,,',E AN TUt��;i:JG -= - _ F-Ror� Sos�T-4v�LA�aw s' FROM EASJ' ��-hZ_ ---rl-- TOROM (���T' T1Y:��.__ '--- w- - I- -- Ha TO TO 70 --- TOwo TO TUf/ TO HOUR TO TOTAL_ ^'� f A,r stiolt Wcs 7' Altj&T�J, f-A S 7- E 7)0 -6.15_ 9 �_ i !Z —4-- i l33 -- -�- 0 - •� 615 -630_ ��.�_ �� �� 4- - /99 �/ _.�00 ( 630=645 D �+ -1 �� �'- 1- a�T . _ 3 � � G 645 -7 OU I --1 _ G3 l4d� --2'-- 1 ; / 9 10 i 231 3 7 ►5 2, _ I Ro !.�_ _ A43 -�_�Z A77 :730 -7 45_ _9G I /Q �_ _ 279 i 7:45 -8 00 9�_ - � � Q _ ! 7 P _800 -815 7----I-- 8:15 -830 I-� G�- -- --- 1 17/- 830 --45 l.._- (_� I -�'--d -1--L co 2 `4 9 18 45 -9 00 60 �►_--.�1�_ - - -r-�.� _ J 93JAT —i oG 15 -912, 93C -9 45 ii i d IOS I_ i T /0L _. ! _ ---� - 3 10 Af 945 -1000 11000-10:15 - -Jlj i 10:15 -1030 to M. 0 3 �q __ �_ 1 10:45 -I100 II 00 -1115 Ir o L 1 11:15 -1130- 11:30 -1145 11:45 -12:00 - �I _ 12:00 -1215- 12:15 -12 30 - - 1 12:30 -12:45--- 12.45 -1:00 - ---- -- - - - - — I:00 -115 0- -- - -- - , ----�- -- -1=45 EtorINEE=RING - STA1 ION Ty-ZZ mf u/.4, s DIS1 hICT 1 - CONSTRUCTION DIST D.T. E.---Jh/A-rZ — /El LE -1 RA, i- iC VOLUTAE AND _TURNING MOVEMENT FIELD REPORT COUN T Y IVORT//Y: FROM �(/tSr Td ��_-'- FROM SOS/TiC.-GVil�tow ,� _ ? FROM- i.- W14"Cu ST I I 5l9 f� TO TO 70 TO TO TO - T�`--- - � 1 TO f� I TOTAL i/ I l (Ai_ -----� �� TOTAL'ST� _50tgkI �`A�T �ldl?"A FAST ��U7it. _ u1sT Ne/t_T_l� �T -� G---1--9 � --° - Q--- - �- ---1231 I 3 I 71 _ 1 179J _IS - _ 14 - ! I —q -- --'— ' 11410 ----1 // \ 1 7 1 12 f — i ! 4 1 3 o I I! _�__ - ;ply V4 3�{ ;09 �Ou ��z Igo G.90 II i® i 71 13Y7 —� I 8687.7 740: Mayor and City Cou. Eim.K: Mark Bernharlson, DATE: August 6, 1987 SUBJECT: Resolution of Commenda Administrator 1 - Mark Moran Attachement A. Resolution of Commeisdation ISUE - Recognition of Officer Moran for outstanding work. IF ODUCTION - Officer Moran who has been employed ' ')rono since Au4jst 1986 has proven again and again to be z. ,tstanding officer in the short period o, time with the City. previously was employed by the City of Medina for four years. Recently Officer Moran was able to place under arrest an individual who was in possession of "dealer" quantitie, of cocaine after having stopped the individual on an equipment violation. RECOMMENDATION - It is recommended that Officer Moran be formally recogni W76r his outstanding work. PROPOSED MOTION - Moved by , seconded by , that the Orono _ City Council recognize the excellent work of O7ficer Mark Moran by adoption and Presentation of Resolution / Ayes _ , flays cc: Mel Kilbo, Poli— Chief City of ORONO RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL NO. SPECIAL COMMENDATION MARK MORAN MHER n.;, Mark Moran has been a Patrol Officer with the City of Orono since A :.t 1986; and NIIRREAS, Mark Moran has been a Police Officer in Medina and Hazen, North Dakota since August 1980; and M®EREAS, Mark Moran has been involved in numerous burglary investigations, a criminal sexual conduct case, numerous theft by c':eck cases, narcotics arrests, etc., during the past year; and WERREAS, Mark Moran has received five letters of appreciation from the Police Department and the City Attorney; and WORREAS, Mark Moran, while on routine patrol, stopped a vehicle for an equipment violation, and subsequently arrested the driver, Gene Robert Zahl of Orono, for driving under the influence. A search of the vehicle prior to being impounded revealed a small amount of cocaine and drug paraphernalia. As a result of further investigation, Officer Moran put together and conducted a search warrant on the home of Mr. Zahl, and subsequently recovered 25.1 grams of cocaine. Cocaine of one gram weight sells for $100-$150 on the street, bringing value of this cocaine to approximately $$2,500 to $3,809. Through the efforts of Officer Moran, Mr. Zahl was charged by the Hennepin County Attorney's office with DWI, possession of a controlled substance - Schedule II, unlawful possession with intent to sell a controlled substance - Schedule II and will be billed about $10,00111 by the State Department of Revenue for not having appropriate tax stamps for the controlled substances. NW, T/iRQOti •! IT RWM.TED, that Officer Moran be commended for his dedication, investigative skills, and initiative if furthering the Department's objectives in making the Orono Police jurisdiction a secure community. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota, at a regular meeting held August 10, 1987. -- --- ------ --------- James ATTEST: Docot�iy-M. �HaTTin, -CTty CIec INTEROFFICE MEMO DATE: December 15, 1986 TO: Officer Mark Moran FROM: Chief Mel Kilbo SUBJECT: Letter of Apprecia* ion On or about November 14, 1986, you were given an assignment involving a criminal sexual conduct case. Your interview and subsequent statement were instrumental in obtaining CSC in the second degree on December 10, 1986. I appreciate your efforts and skill in bringing this case to a close. INTEROFFICE MEMO DATE: December 9, 1986 TO: Officer Mark Moran FROM: Chief Mel Kilbo SUBJECT: Letter of Appreciation - Case file 86-7559 I wish to express my appreciation for your action in this case file. You stopped this party for no registration on 12/7/86 and towed the vehicle until the owner could verify ownership and insurance. You gave this person approx. $4 of your own money for bus fare to his temporary address. He came in on 12/8/86 to verify his ownership and insurance and returned your $4. Your actions reflect a compassionate, caring person doing his ch osed profession. This is the imaqe we are all striving for. CC: Personnel file Daybook Council POPHAM, HAIK, SCHNOBRICH, KAUFMAN & DOTY, LTD. 3300 PIPER JArrNAT TOWER WAVNE O. POPMAL RAVMOND •_ MAIM ROOLR W. SCMNODRICM DCNV[N KAVrMAN DAVID S. DOTV RODENT A. MINISM ROLrC A. WOND[N O. MARC WM1I9MLAD ORUCC D. WILL-S r REDt R,CK S. RIC,+ARCS O.RODLRTJOMN&ON OARV R. MACO04090 ROSCOT S. DUNK NUOM V. PLUNK[TT III rococo.cg C. DROWN TMOMA&K.SCRO JAMCS N. STEILEN JAML& S. LOCKMANT •LLLN W. M,.IDLRAKLR CLIrrORO M. ORCCN[ 0. WILLIAM KAvr MAN MICMACL O rREEM MOWAND &AM M1906. UI 1MOMAS C. WAOUILA LARRV D. ES■EL JANIE S. MA1[RON TMOMAS J. DANNCTT JAMCS A. PAVNC DAVID A. JONCS LCC E SM[LMT ALAS% rRECON P.IRICIA A. JLNSCN LLSLIE OILLLTIC M CMACL T. N-LAN RODENT M. LVNN TMOMAS M SIP -INS RODENT C MOILANLN TMOMAS F. NLLSON 1»0MAS J� RADIO DAVID L. MASMMALL. .ATMLC[N M MAOI ft JOMN C. CM,LCS Officer Mark Moran Orono Police Department P.O. Box 86 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 Dear Mark: MINNEAPOLIS. MINNISOTA 55402 TCLEPMONE 6'2-333 4600 TELECOPIER 6,2.334-27,3 SUITE 240C ,ROO SEVCNTEEI+T,. ST ,4EET DENVER.COLORA00 •OR02 TCLCP»ONE 3C3-803-1200 TCLCCOPICR 303�093-7194 SUITC 300 SOUTH ,DOO M STREET N W WASHINGTON D.C. R0036 TLLEPMONE202-&[S-5300 TELECOPICP 202-D2D-53,0 DIRECT DIAL NUMBER DOUGLAS P ►LA'ON ♦MOMAS L SANNLR sauce a MSPMCLTLRS *ARVO.DLACKrONO SCOTT It RICMT90 PAUL J L,NSTROT„ &COTT A SM,TM tL 2ADC1M J. TMOMPSON •E 'M J. MALLELAND MAR. S. PC•EPSON O. RANOA: L 001[R So -Aft N JOMNSoN 1,M01»v W..Vc' CAROL a. SWANSO. SRUC[ A PETERSON JUL'C A SW[ITZCR MOMS C M'LLC%.Av StN .A1»LCLN A. SLA12 MICMAt, O. CMR STtN&ON J. Y1�MAEL SCMwA0T2 L.RA1[ M. OSSCRNt May 1, 1987 Re: State v. Thomas ?oJ Hedlund 1000M JOMNSON LOVES P S. TM rRANCIS J- CONNOLL1 DNUCL M. LITTLE MAR„ r. PALMA RUSSLLL S. PONESSA SRIAN L. coa.roPc CAVIDA 010tN OWCN[ MCOONS'ACT MA1'»C W [ DAMON JOMN W. PPCVD ORLOORVO.DRCOMER w'LL'AM M OJILC JR 19RRANCt A. CL. ,-. 0 ,Ott►M O VAS& SRIAN W. OMM S.C.C. A.C»LLL&N'a DRE DON, &. SCOTT or cowAdl rago L MOORSON Enclosed for your information, please find a copy of Judge Wolner's order denying the defendant's motion to dismiss in this case. Thank you for your assistance in arpparing on sjch short notice, and your highly professional worK both on this stc. and on testifying in court. It is cases like this that make .t Ii pleasure to work for your department. Very truly yours, Scott E. Richter 7-o Acutir•g Attor!iey SEi4/dn/A'%7c(I I ) ✓cc: Chief Melvin Kilbo 8487.2 TO: Mayor and City Council 1\ l V PROM: Mark Bernhardson, City Administrate ,l DATE: August 3, 1987 SUBJECT: Market:ng of City objectives With Other Organizations Attachment: A. Marketing City Objectives - Redraft At the Council's last meeting they suggested revisions to the City's program to market its objectives with other organizations. Based on suggestions including the add it i or of the Department of Natural Resources and Hennepin County is Reserve these have been incorporated into the body of the )gram together with the issues as they relate to program needs and the evaluation. At this point no f rther action is required, but just provided to you as an inform-tional item. PROPOSED MOTION - Moved by _, seconded by _ that the Council accept the redraft of the Council's program for marketing its objectives to other organizations. Ayes __, Nays __ 6&�?7.1 M M a C V August 3, 1987 CITY OF 8RONO PROGRAM TO MARKET CITY OBJECTIVES WITH OTHER ORGANIZATIONS IS_S_UE - Development of a program to increase the City of Orono's ability to achieve its stated objectives with other organizations it is involved. IN_T_R_O_D_U_C_T_IO_N - During the City Council's first strategic planning process, which occurred on October 8, 1986, one of the short term objectives that was felt important was that in order for the City to control its destiny in the future and accomplish its objectives as an organization we needed to develop a method by which those objectives that the City had, which entailed work with other organizations. This represents a program outline. It is the intent that this improvement in influence be accomplished by specifically outlining objectives for each of the organizations with whom the City wants to promote its viewpoint. Whale there may be other issues which those organizations may raise the City is always in a position to react with appropriate tools which it currently has available to it. This program will be used by Council and staff to focus their goals and relationships with these organizations ORGANIZATIONS 0_FINTEREST - The following represent organizations with whom the Citymaywant to express its influence. - Surrounding Communit ies Long Lake Spring Park Minnetonka Beach Wayzata Mound Maple Plain Medina Plymouth Minnetrista Independence Tonka Bay other [.ake Minnetonka communities - Lake Minnet i..a ^conservation District - Minnehaha Ci Watershed District - School Boards - Orono - Westonka - Wayzata - Minnetonka - Hennepin County - Hennepin Park Reserve District - Metropolitan Council - Metro Waste Control Commission - Minnesota State Legislature - Department of Natural Resources - Federal Government - Joint Powers Arrangements - LOGIS - Suburban Rate Authority - Lake Minnetonka Cable Commission - Membership Organizations - League of Minnesota Cities - Association of Metropolitan Munir-ipalties - Westonka Human Services - We 3tonka Chamber of Commerce - Long Lake Chamber of Commerce MEANS T_O_ACCOMPLISH - The following -epresent an example of ways in which the City is able to achieve its objectives in general with the various organizations. Efforts to Accomplish - Each of the specific objectives will be annotated as to the most appropriate way or ways that it should be accomplished and a brief objectives statement will be prepared for each of those items. use of Representatives 9 -- For those organizations which the City is a member and has a representative, the City will utilize the representative and the relationship with that representative to build a consensus, particularly on selected topics. Initiatives - The City on specific items can initiate proposals with these organizations and based on the specific proposal attempt to achieve it goals. Common Interests - Through utilization of common interests the City can build its general rapport with these organizations and use that rapport to get either general or specific issues accomplished with those communities. Demeanor/Cultivation of Relationships - The City generally, besides areas of common interest, can through its approach and demeanor with these organizations build credibility by positive influence to be used when the City desires to increase its ffecr_iveness and advance its objectives. Media - Through submission of news articles, press releases and invitations to news worthy events, information can be disseminated to assist in marketing the objectives with the community. PROGRAM IM_PL_F_ME_NTATION - The City following its Annual strategic plan will `develop �in additior to its legislative package an outline of general and specific objectives that it will seek to obtain with the carious organizations. During the year this may change but the list annually developed will serve as the work program with others to be added as needed. Appendix A represents an example of the format that could be utilized, this is developed for July 1987 to December of ' 88. PROGRAM EVALUATION - Prior to the strategic planning each of the specific objectives will be reviewed as to its status in light of the goals established for that objective. This report will be made to council so that background information is available for them for the development of rew strategic planning and subsequently for the marketing objectives for the following year. 868 7. 2 TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Mark Bernhardson, City Administratort� �} DATE: August 6, 1987 SUBJECT: Administrator's Information 2695 CASCO POINT ROAD - At the Council's July 27, 19F 'ouncil meetf_ng the Council approved the increase in hardcover f om 32.4% to 34.0% based �n Alternative 2. The property owner and prospective buyer subsequently reviewed Alternative 2 and have come up with a plan that has the same amount of hardcover with a different configuration, which results in further limiting of the hardcover in the driveway with a little more hardcover down by the garage to handle the turn -around. It is the opinion of staff that this does not represent a problem and this is provided as information only at this tim?. 200 HOLLANDER—ROAD - There has been no substantial progress in the last two weeks on the property and staff has sent out a letter reminding the personal representative of his commitment to secure the large barn pending the outcome of the court hearing in 60 days. Additionally the work regarding the access has been delayed because of cash f low needs and it should be taken care of in the next two weeks. While it was originally indicated that the ,.mall quest house would be taken down, it is now our understanding that the estate desires to leave it up, because of the marketablility of the property. (As noted before t~ building has been vacated by the previous renters a►S the plumbing has been iemoved.) Such a structure could be used for a workshop or other storage purposes. In a related item the staff has been working to try to get the necessary homeowners association activated. Because of the disputes within the neighborhood, however, this may not come about in a timely fashion. Appropriate declarations have been included in the property titles, now it is only a matter of the individual property owners agreeing to by-laws to establish the association. 2160 WAYZATA BOULEVARD - The PCA has become more active in the case and has interviewed the principal people involved in the original spill anti subsequent follow-up action. It is our present understanding that they are attempting determine responsibility in this matter at this time. The, a however not able to obtain the information they need as t._ )e able to assess the extent of the contamination until the bill to Bay West, the clean-up contractor has been paid. It is their present understanding however, that the amount of contamination to the ground water is limited to a shallow aquifer not generally used for water supply purposes and may be confined to the immediate vicinity of the Shopping Center. PCA has indicated that they r10 have the power to remove the barrels that have been l-ft on the site 4�nce they determine who the responsible party initially is they will do so. Long term - regarilq�ss of whether responsibility is fixed or not the Super Fund would be available to do as much clean up as is feasible. The State and Federal monies that could be used as part of matching grants however may not apply in this situation because the effective dates of the legislation were respectively 1 July and 1 August and apply to contamination found after those dates. The date of the spill was April 1, 1987. Settlement of responsibility and costs may well result in possible legal action in the future. 3946 SIXTH AVENUE NORTH - The owner now indicates that he has resolved his insurance problems and has asked the Maple Plain Fire Department to burn the structure by August 15, 1987. We will keep abreast of the situation. If not burned by the 15th, however, we will request Maple Plain Fire Department to undertake that action together with having a contractor take care of the foundation etc. PURPLE LOOSESTRIFE ERADICATION - The 1987 Legislature has �esigriate�-�'Purple-Loosestrfe�- as a noxious weed. Purple Loosestrife is a purple plant that begins to bloom in mid to late July and are found mostly in wetlands. The Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (MDNR) has had this plant designated as a noxious weed because they will eventually take over wetlands forcing out cattails and other plant material that is beneficial to wildlife. A10ough strict enforcement is not being undertaken this year, we must be prepared for eradication in the near future. Currently the DNR, State of Minnesota and Hennepin County are working with and experimenting with chemicals that will safely eradicate Purple Loosestrife. As more information becomes available, it will be presented to you. PURPLE LOOSESTRIFE ALERT! Purvio 1006""He is as ageresswe plant that Is Mm- ` our w*tImwds sad... Don't Be Confused By These Purple Loosestrife Look -a -Likes Blazing Star • replaci-ij valuable wetlafta Plasts: • enmimatim2fo-a 'toad sboker for wiWitiv, • cbohial watemayo. phol", a, 1,iqw: ojt-sL d A x - - . 'v 11 . Tcr✓— Y h,fi MN ()em Fireweed 110"Venuft 1tral Metheft lCendam" heibiddr MAv by rwc e%%mv fq w r k~, ii d I 10) p6nf, 1 tip 1() 4 at r^1 • M:!,?Vvv )td ,tailjw-, w4junt, ttvAt %fN Appik M4 q twrt* Ric t, , 'Ash T% , 4 ttu , 444, ryllp.t tj^%. i 0 It, 471 016 , I )vvm"Wyll - Atw", yt., I OTI , 4 t, . 4ettly"IiI4, .1 -11, c JSvd Itw"T'SN". A'Mhf.- AFI.i hUfftAfIS dt#'k -A A'1:11 A- " t: " if Wt4 M1144 thew tyVASkIft— DON T SPREAD LOOSESTRWEI .R.,, n-AXt"I &N&I 1" LIT" 1 11 Fw- *A hA, bv*-, c 4 .9 1 tlk T 1, )kJ I Al 'A.--" Id-VkC 1, —; 111W. t(. U-4. 'i -qTKrAIII1,I arwt% 11) •,If tw -AT, I(' - ' Tt)" "'tly )af wt- hwt. - j)Np t4E AD010AR I F RS I mAj 04t1, 1 OBONMW. I- K R-i kq% %4%Y,14- yYa 2'- 4N V, NFGDMM- fj,,, K"--T WGICH4 V: J'i 14, - 2W Ap t7l J4 5 KA 6 K di L f-UnK &4ent ESTRIFE ALERT' • replacbM •akobU •etlasd plaats: • fit" foe ' ash shaker fslr w"' N"'e; • Crohi" WOSOGNwaya. Photon and diagram courtev. ,t A - ' to Terra McDdl MNDept ,.f Frar„r—rat—• Fireweed Blue Vervais Itroll Methods (CoMilwd) herbicide May be necessary firm clusters In .! I IN ► plants (up to a acres) + "•1:nnesota Statutes require that anv applicator herbicide to waters of the state must have a mllt from the Department of Natural ,a k-. (DNR) To obtain ctmnmercta) ',.'Tht, Idk'-rppltcatton rectmnmendattons a 1 wir nft alspltk attrl,. or to determine, whether a ;%,rnttt I: required contact the DNR f icadyuartk'r: nearv-,i vtw L id "n, c thca' art'a: Gild therT ws- o, sated , u'Iltfhfe and humans are I.,a u,jll A'*' n-alt1.' laiMiny a IaTyt• area tr„m Itx„ -,tnfe In a vk'r% . �,,,'t�.Iv. Inl.i,rrtaknlq DON'T SPREAD LOOSESTRIFE! K,•, .,rtt M,rtnt'tiuLt IeyLlatt„n mako, it Illegal to it purpi.' I+>,,.estnty and It now has been Y !, •, }n.+tk d .f n„\join Aeed It y„u have purple ,a .mft yr, •w,Irx3,+tI your proiwrty contact Four !; > al a ✓.'• ` v y:jx'i toT f, tt ct •ntroi dd%nce l a+;il.,r1 to u-;k' a h„rt►cultuial varwty to your Ix- Duic to chtx,v otiv of the,*, four tit �r 1. n I'nIk I ►T,,prc<xe Fit Ik Rosk' Queen. and ]-I„ K, , k., t K mA vvt'T even thew should n. ,t he DNR HEADQUARTERS ccNI11AlOFF7.:E: aFAWMW- �, , �. r;• ,a.. .4241 r..,,. �r K . t,4x Rds S For arr.k rA MIN 'it-' �y�` 3 • �_ e �• F'. M% Y,14#, 1 I' xsE�OM Q11 W Q .. r a Y = W 2K {_, i 7 � ` tJ. C j ae t s : 3 K", hrn•"nt Fb a. I, K F = -6 1i.sn«1n 1NN`r,aii ',It iS411'+t, if) T • xZ )JAI 7V, t4, , ■EGIM Y- F'rl K.% f'247 in �!� Z O 1.'+flFeuHytua�I t rtn... FiaF•�i, MN =„ .1.� R, r i,ruvr Mt�;',� I t C S ^z iziM Z1641, 7410 12f�am-1 Rd a -j Ul M a 1t F"aUl MN; O(lit, V 4 N Q x tl to 2% 672 aN or contact yOUr kxal county extension aunt Q i1 F INVASION OF PURPL 1 1 ()OS DESCRIPTION FOR PURPLE LOOSESTRIFE ILythrum aMiearial 2 7 fr in height -h, ,d the boII-nr qww- -. en rgk snaeT rM lake.,urr -1 w WHEN 10 LOOK FOR Fr: snmk n daplarrg tM na•s• +etin' Mid July through the end of August when it is in Flowers on spike a vmyeq rate To date a hm ,marled bloom and easily recognised clowiv.nahed awateraMds „1 Nrw Yh Ttv,osar W�TOLOOKP m tr, net A,00eoa ae pia nel hah,na t.+b It is present on wet soils to shallow standing f 4 roam wetlands n , abvxlt ,nlrvrd water. wet meadows, pasture wetlands. canal _ marshes. stream and riverbanks. lake shores and ti` ,VI n In' n .mat ditches I S b petals per 11„wen , ,p of l o rsnde plant en grv.rt ar MUM ff LOOKSLUCFt ,,h ,n nth, noe gn"m9 `va.' '- t r• Growth hardy perennial. bushy, .. t -nhhatwd up to 7 feel tall Flowers. Purple magenta color Flowers - �e sA` The shaW.w w..dv n+a .v.lvm F.rm ddlw 11, �` it m.krrgr adult plant,uX pull numerous on a long spike. 5b petals per flower . •r¢ nr1 ,s inn Taken then a w,p reyr Leaves- Vary.ahhough usually opposite. linear directly a� y� "J 1 pin rs w ,loots are m,wed The arm tl e shape and smooth edges Attached [no v_ \ /)[rposrTv wnA �w new nrMs v,mNelk hn„nw stalk) to a four-sided stem 1 al IeartaTgemvo and hes}n row. nMrws Roots. Woody taproot with fibrous root system (stases these nor lell that forms a dense mat tiIdl four sled dem the, , ,,, 1-11 thwer +plan hn Me repeb!e To pd, IWW IR>l�� o, ,eels m a ssnyle r win TMv nerds rr It is a prolific wed _r. also grows from \..�. t�. +hen submerged 4. mar„ years whik underground root and sprouts from broken off • t b, Then dung plant pans � .urnmer these seeds grrmmaw swidrn u mes thesed, geo TM dnperal m such that the aredhngs h BEAUTYIS ONLY SKIN DEEP! apxttc .�, mmpMMh rpPr .. •.er... .. HOW DOES LOOSESTRIFF AFFE The attractive plumage of purple loosestrife conceals its menacing nature. +.a m,ny rn„ugh but tmoreone alu, e,, WHAT IS THE MAJOR IMPACT? i,derrtrrm wh. h.8 nff,i rise van ,nesour WHAT IS PURPLE LOOSESTRIFE7 The plant aggressively crowds out the vegetation • Munn, of dollars ha,e teen re,es requrred by wildlife. while having no value for weti od, tw M,nresou, arA fedvte Purple loosestrife is an aquatic plant that is wildlife nwff , rde, h, w~, watrrfeaw l pndur gaining a foothold in Minnesota The plant is wdely For esample. songbirds do not make use of the Rase area, are akeo o.et bs l ,. distributed in the northeastern United Statesand small hard seed Muskrat require canal to build efforts fineroe.l and,rhrrwnr w over the past five years low smile has in.reased their homes and they show a preference Io canal • The lens of waterfwl hdwa w,X c significantly in Minnesota. \bu may have wen the over kwsestrie for food Waterfowl. espec'a%y xreaye as alMok 1.+ hunnrg ell, plants magenta flowers which are stinkingly evident ducks, shun wellaods that have become dominated the hunl¢ra and them a ..nve.utrm throughout July and August by loosestrife In addition, overall waterfowl vs inn„mws of The nmmunnes thi This hardy Perennial has been introduced from production is decreased as habitat is eliminated • Fehvrea mat he edverel, Jf« w Europe. Mauw of us esotk origin. oosestrele has Finally, the plants growth n generally too compact pang ula "'ern h the n. ett" left behind all of its natural enemies and muhipkes In offer rove,. and cower may be as CrnCW rn f— quM .per dx spare,+g rrqur with no checks or balances in North America wildlife as food wetwids The fish ,s ear of its, m 4E INVASION OF PJRFLE IOOSE8TRIFE 2.7 it in height Flowers on spike. closely attached . to stem 5 b petals per fkmer �- Opposite� leaf arrangement Stiff. four-sided stem N DEEP! ,rife conceals as menacing IS THE MAJOR IMPACT7 slant aggressively crowds out the vegetation I by wildlife. while having no value for itself sample. songbirds do not make use of the ed seed Muskrat require cattail to build men; and they show a preference for cattail tsestrife for food. Waterfowl, especially :hun wetlands that have become dominated ,strife. In addirwn. overall waterfowl ion is decreased as habitat is eliminated. the plants growth is generally too compact cover, and cover may be as crucial to n food. tehmd the brilliant guise of Purple looscumfe "an ugh'strategy the takeover of wetlands .sewde is displacing the native wetland plants at alarmingiate To date.n has invaded virtually all Ire watersheds of New Y«k Thousands of acre, Minnesota are potential habitat for kwsesmfe. i many wetlands are already infested with the m When the conditions are right. a small isolated nip of loosestrife plants can spread and cover a arsh in only one growing season Once aabhshed. kimestrde is difficult to control The shallow woody root system forms a dense ,at making adult plants difficult to pull Ifthe Mne Tool is not taken, then it will resprout If ,lams are mowedthe stem pieces will actually .end out new Tools. eventually become anchored and begin new colonies Besides these vegetative maneuvers. each plants flower spike has the capability to produce M (MMl seeds in a single season These seeds remain viable when submerged for many years while waning for the opportunity to sprout Then during a dry summer, these seeds germinate suddenly Ohsn the dispersal is such that the seedlings have the capacity :o completely replace native vegetation HOW DOES LOOSESTRIFE AFFECT VOW The demmexal effects on mldWe habitat are '..arming enough, but there are also economic "asidetabons which will affect the state of Annesou, • Milloms of dollars have been invested -n wetlands by Minnesota and federal agencies in order to sustain waterfowl production Once these areas are taken over by loosestrife. the efforts - financial and otherwise -will be lost is The loss of waterfowl habitat will decrease acreage available for hunting. affecting both the hunters and their contribution to the local economies of the communities they sm • Fisheries may be adversely affected Of Particular concern is the northern pike which has quite specific spawning requirements for wetlands. This fish is one of the most popular HOW TO CON I R• POPULATIONS - rymir4 ,R bsevrAe an,!rhmv,v,a •. ... ,a.r. arras . ^cols IresR4r TM „ u,;pP" m. sp-ad -R his, in rer•gnv+rg dui pl•nr wMn n f n., •vpr• ar.! Brad+emg R M.,rr R Ire. .mr. a M+naumr part nl rho wetland x ws+wm B'. ,mp1ros,1., q rti k JLrwegmeesao-. we e, ..srm4e."Wb­­ 1, rBit A.ae - . Y,mgrr P...r.. nr. ... .. • (lldrr plots rsa+,db m,.,,.. , • R,w'. of older plans pan is 'rea.e� ..� wish • urull land r uYn N.+ • R,eJ, must „n hr hdw.,. resprswt is Doonsnw „.,. ., et,µ rasp„us I Jed it cut beke. dui men canarsWnr .a... • AN plan pans I e po'" 1rum.. aMwsar is Se see e,rM erYf MHI I'w'r. soon K,geltnl0 on ba MEMORANDUM TO: Mark Bernhardson City of Orono / FROM: Kathleen Blatz I� DATES August 6, 1987 REs Nollan Decision Enclosed for distribution is the memorandum which we discussed on the recent U.S. Supreme Court decision on the Nollan v. California Coastal Commission land use case. KAB/jmp/4398w Enclosure ccs Jeanne Mabusth Miko Gaffron MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor, City Council Members, Planning Commission Members, City Staff FROMt City Attorney DATE: RE: August 5, 1987 U.S. Supreme Court Decision -- Nollan v Coastal Commission California On June 26, 1987, thy= U.S. Supreme Court handed down another major land use decision, James Patrick Nollan, at ux., Appellant v. California Coastal Commission, U.S.L.W. No. 80-133 (June 26, 1987), which followed closely on she heels of First English Evangelical v. County of Los Angeles, 55 L.W. 4781 (June 9, 1987). Below 1 have briefly set forth the facts and the Court's analysis in order that you may be further guided in your review of land use applications. FACTS James and Marilyn Nollan were lessors of ocean front property with an option to buy. After years of rental use, the small bungalow that they were leasing had fallen into disrepair and could no longer be rented out. The Nollans decided to exercise their option to purchase. The option was conditioned on the Nollans' promise to demolish the 500 square foot bungalow and replace it with another structure. The building of a new house required that the Nollans apply for a building permit from the California Coastal Commission. Upon review of the building permit application, the Commission staff recommended that the permit be granted subject to the condition chat the Nollans allow the public an easement to pass across ! portion of their shorefront property on the beach. The condition was attached because the Nollan property was located between two public beaches and the condition would make it easier for the public to get from one beach to another. The Nollans protested the imposition of the condition and filed a petition for writ of administrative mandamus asking the trial court to invalidate the access condition. The court agreed that the condition not be imposed absent evidence that the new structure would have a direct adverse impact on public access to the beach. The case was remanded to the Commission for a full evidentiary hearing on that issue. On remand, the Commission held a public hearing, after which it reaffirmed its decision to attach the easement condition. The decision was based on the Commis•.ion's Findings of Fact that the new structure would incrsaee blockage of the view of the ocean and contribute to the development of "a wail of residential structures" that would discourage public usage of the public beaches. The findings also list the increased private use of the shorefront and the cumulative developments burden on the "public ability to traverse" to and along the beach as reasons supporting the easement requirement. Finally, the Commission also noted that it had similarly conditioned 43 out of 60 coastal development permits alonq the same tract of -2- ocean land and that of the 17 not so conditioned, 14 had been approved by the Commission and did not Pave administrative regulations in place allowing imposition of the condition and the remaining 3 had not involved shorefront property. ANALYSIS The Nollans proceeded to protest the imposition of the easement condition in the California Superior and Appellate Courts. The U.S. Supreme Court granted review of the California Court of Appeals' ruling that the Commission could condition its grant of a building permit on the transfer to the public of an easement across the Nollan's shorefront property. The California Court of Appeals had rejected the Nollans' claim that the imposition of the condition violated the Takings Clause of Fifth Amendment, as incorporated against the states by the Fourteenth Amendment. Upon review, the U.S. Supreme Court held that although a governmental unit's outright taking of an uncompensated, permanent public -access easement would violate the Takings Clause, conditioning the Nollans' rebuilding permit on their granting such an easement would be a lawful land use regulation if it substantially furthered governmental purposes that would justify denial of the permit. The Court reasoned that the government's power to forbid a particular land use in order t3 advance a legitimate police -power purpose includes the power to condition such use upon some roncession by the property owner. In the Court's view, the concession could include restrictions -3- on property rights, so long as the condition r^quired furthers the same governmental purpose advanced as justification for prohibiting the use. However, upon review of the Commission's purported reasons for adopting the access condition as part of the building permit process, the Court could not find any relationship between the condition and the original purpose of the building restriction. The Court was very critical of the Cali`ornia Coastal Commission's factual basis for the condition, noting that it was "impossible to understand" how an easement for walking from one public beach to another by people already on the beach related to reducing any visual obstacles created by the new structure. The Court cautioned that a condition abridging a property right through the police powers needs to be "substantially advancing of a legitimate state interest." Without such a connection, the Court was concerned that conditions would be less related to a stated police objective than to a method to avoid compensating the property owners. In its opinion reversing the Court of Appeals' decision, the Court concluded that while the conditions attached to the building permit were unrelated to the building permit, the Court did not preclude a governmental body from exercising the eminent domain powers from furthering the stated objective even if it wag unrelated to the building permit process. -4- CONCLUSION The opinion as a whole clearly articulates the City's need to fully understand the goals that it is seeking and to relate any land -use conditions to those ends. Neither the Nollan rase nor the First English Evangelical case hold that the property owner must be compensated for land use regulations that advance a legitimate state interesr. Rather, the opinions state the need for reasonable governmental regulations that are clearly connected to a stated public purpose, and do not deprive the landowner of reasonable use of the property. If a condition arguably furthers a governmental purpose, but is not related to the end that is sought at that moment, the appropriate action for the governmental unit is to acquire the property through an eminent domain proceeding. If you have any questions about this case, please do not hesitate to contact me. KA'1/ jmp/4 39Aw -5- Y LIST OF LICENSES FOR COUNCIL APPROVAL FOR MEETING OF August 10, 1987 *Solicitors License: Paradise Seafood Maria E. Wiese 114 South Division Street Northfield. MN 55057 * Contingent upon approval of selling location by Chief Kilbo License No. APPLICATION FOR SOLICITATION - $20.00 fee Date Received --i S % Date Expires CITY OF ORONO 1335 BROWN ROAD SOUTH BOX 66 CI,'Y OF 96'JN0 CRYSTAL BAY, MN 55323 FINANCE C FICE IM800000 N Organisation: i''>, Phone -c•✓rpt'irLr '7d_:V Address: "ir t t/_..vw-i��+ i"[ CAM IL 10.00 _ YOV Representative: ww l- 1 Phone, r 1£ �N 41 S111 Address: ,/✓ �.r- :� - ,r._/•,�.�� — ice---- Nd:ti-F1 C8: 03, 87 Check One: Business Solicitation v Contribution Solicitation Number of People Solicitating within the City Provide list of Names of Solicitors on back of this application. Type of Product to be solicited 1', �' -�� •,� - i.' 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 5.33 SUBD 5(a). ---------------..---------_-_--------------_------------------------------- ORONO MUNICIPAL CODE REGULATIONS ON SOLICITORS Subd. 3. Prohibited Solicitation Practices. A. It is unlawful for any solicitor to engage in solicitation for any unlawful business or organizational purpose or activity. B. It is unlawful for any solicitor to practice harassment, nuisance, theft, deceit, or menacing, troublesome or otherwise unlawful activities during the course of solicitation. C. It is unlawful for any solicitor to enter, or attempt to gain entrance, to residential premises displaying at such entrance a sign with the words 'Peddlers and Solicitors Prohibited" or *Solicitors Prohibited". D. It is unlawful for any solicitor to refuse to leave business premises when requested by the owner, lessee, or person in charge thereof. E. It is unlawful for any person to engage in contribution solicitation without completion of licensing or registration as herein provided. F. It is unlawful for any person to engage in business solicitation without a license as herein provided. -------------------------------------------------------------------------- The undersigned hereby agrees to the conditions quoted above from the Orono Municipal Code and any additi al requirements the City staff may have. Signature of Applicant: •"-" 4� —4 Date: 4'- ' - I -- PONCITINNNONLY: After review of application, staff recommends the follwin s Approval of application -_ Denial of application 819matere of City official: __.. -- - Dates _ Dates Silm6tutS of Pali,& Chid: c i r.... Al 1.4r Wa• - CITY OF ORONO P A Y R ' Y-T-D • - EMPL-NO•L NAME DIV GROSS GROSS EKP/ALLOW ANDERSON BL 31 20820.21 1345.16 BERNHARDSO ME 12 27954.12 1928 40 BOBZIEN SA 31 12SZ6.26 815.93 BOSMA JL 12 5666.18 461.87 BRINKNAUS JF 42 18932.93 1671.9S CARLSON UJ 92 23297.19 0.00 CHESWICK 98 31 20814.57 1376,72 CORNICK JL 31 16604.BS 1161. 35 DENNESON RJ 3S $71.69 163.20 ELDER JA 35 395.2S 0.00 ENGLISH It IN 31 18571.24 1419. 08 ERICKSON DJ 93 800.70 106. 55 ERICKSON KR 31 E0636.76 1376.72 FICHENICH OT 31 2183.04 1091,52 FRITZLER JM 31 20230.19 1273. 52 • GAFFRON M► 33 1692S.74 1129.OA GERHARDSON JR 6E 23383.IS 15S9 84 GREGORY JO 92 I6240.57 1076.17 HALLIN DM 12 14431.17 962.64 HANSEN 3C 42 14375 90 939 66 MAN51NG CJ 31 6499. 11 419 65 4 HENSEL M 31 15949 33 965.51 ' MOOGENAKKE JE 31 393.60 92. 00 ' JACOBS TJ 33 16931. 35 1127.04 ' JOMN30N OF 31 T9945.00 1366 3E ' KILBO MH 31 23896.90 1590 72 ' KIRN. CZUK M 31 1081T.71 529 35 ' KNOTT M! 33 IE35. 50 50T 50 KNUTSON CA 15 11378. TO T71 84 ' KUEHN TM 15 E2B69.68 1S2S.E0 1 MABUSTH JA 33 19806. 96 1321 20 ' MANUEL CM 90 0.00 0 00 ' MCGOWAN LR 90 21211.23 0 00 ' MIKELSON RA IS 10819. 55 750 00 ' MORAN MF 3I C1031. 76 1804 16 MOROUCZYNS J 3I 20144.30 1572.43 MROSS FT 61 12383. 00 NA 09 A NAAS TL 12 11327 31 744 88 A OAS DO 93 846 00 0 00 A OMAN LE 33 13326,68 983 IA A PETERSON ►L 12 6691. 50 500 20 A PETERSON RW 93 1017. 00 0.00 9 PETRAN JC 33 392 00 0 00 4 OUAST WA 92 IS675 46 14:6 86 I OUINN NIL 93 541 89 0 00 A ROSS JA 93 1207 77 310 25 A SASS JJ 42 14764 30 9/8 76 A SKREEN DS 62 14375 06 9S3 9S A SLIGO SR 93 0 00 0 00 A SMITH rR 92 15356 99 984 AO 4 STEFFENHAG RE 93 15613 70 t041 S2 CITY OF ORONO P A Y R I Y-T-D • - - - - - . . EM►L-NO NAME DIV CROSS CROSS EXP/ALLOY STEVENS BC 93 2147.01 109.25 STILES RC 61 400.00 400.00 THOMTON MR 31 13543,73 970.12 TOMCHECK LF 31 14715,24 1021.90 TOMCZYK MN 31 19636.29 1260.91 COUNT GRAND 46,609.00 5 PAID 000/7 TOTAL 00056 TOTAL TOTAL FICA TAX CROSS • 24,820.56 EMPLOYERS FICA A • CROUP HEALTH B = PHYSICIAN'S HEALTH PLAN C a BLUE CROSS/BLUE SHIELD D • MEDICAL CENTER PLAN E a PRUDENTIAL F a COORD. HEALTH CARE G • MINNESOTA HMO H • TRANS-AMERICA OCC. I a BANNERS LIFE J = MUTUAL SERVICES K w MUTUAL OF OMAHA L a EMPLOYEE'S BENEFIT M = AETNA N • NICOLLET EITEL 0 • LEAGUE OF CITIES P a METROPOLITAN HEALTH PLAN O m SHARE Z • HEALTH CARE MAINT ACCT MISSING HOSP CODE FOR SOME EMPL'S A 1917 CITY AP MSW O m MOIOTM 07-3I-87 PAGE 1 01[4 W RATE IIIIt1A1T OA I MOCSIFTIM ACCSDAT M. IN. S P.O 1 MESSAGE Mon/ 07/311/7 sN 13 191 OAM LYES •ICJ Ulf TO A/M 11-II41IT-O719-IR MANUAL No111 17/71I417 1111.07 TOT OAM LANES FICA f/IS TO {/M 51-11411-011-15 MANUAL 1ICsn1 07/21197 13 1/ IST DAA LAKES FICA 4/15 TO A/M 51-11Q-S11-17 MANUAL MCA 1 if 07/3110/ M I1 lST SAM LARKS FICA A/IS TO 61" 11-1111-111-71 MANUAL ACIIt1 57111/OT Y.TS IVY YNA LINDA flu A/15 TO UM /1-4115-115-31 MNU.L VACS.10 I1/71/47 IA 7! IST SARI LYE! FICA' WIS T1 A/M EI-IIQ-Is1-71 PANULL N1111/ NI)1/017 777N 1ST MA LANES FICA SIN TO AIM !1-IIQ-ITT-33 1ANULL NCAl11 6712S1O1 E.Y 1ST YIIEI LYM Flu AIMS TO A/Et U-MIA-tM-36 MANUAL mullo 471311117 37S 57 1ST SANt LYES FICA 6/15 TD NM 11-4tQ-1149-IE MANUAL MC1ll( 67,31,07 11 31 1ST NA LYEG FICA u's TO A/M /1-IIQ-[!S-A1 MANUAL MLEI1/ AL)vtl N U 131 AANE LANES of" ✓IS TD A/M 7E-1141tiQ-SI MANUAL Nu Its 07/11/57 1If N ITT SAINT LAIC FICA COIN TS A1M T7-IiQ-iA/-/i MANUAL we I! Ws, 117 15 5] 1!T MI{ LINES FICA VN TO A/M 7h114C-51E-13 MANUAL I.IYt 7) . .Coll' 17/31,07 Tt N AMPLE VALLEY IW AGENT Of RECORD 11-q11-1N-\t MANUAL NCSI11 N1)1/S7 N N AMPLE VALLtT IW AGENT OP "CORD 41-I371-Nl-IS MANUAL tFu 111 11131 /OT YI N APPLE VALLEY IM AGENT M' YCOwD •1-1711-tN-]\ MANUAL VACSI11 111711N 11 11 VALE VALL1T IRA AGONY L ACCORD 0I-1771-111-13 II.NUAL MCEI11 E7/3I/017 AN? Its APPLE VALLEY IY Amw OF ACCORD •t-1711-[1YQ MANUAL NC1n1 071311417 as N AMPLE VALLEY I AGENT OF RECORD 71-1371-SIS-I9 MANUAL N]An1 07111147 /1 N AMILI VALLEY IRA AGENT OF ACCORD T1-I371-549-11 M..UAI MCSI11 07/71/O7 It of .VhE VALLEY IM GENT OF ACCORD 13-1371-562-12 MANUAL NCAIII N/31 /tl IY N APPLE VALLEY IW AGENT OF ACCORD 71-1771i941-13 MANUAL 1.040 /S Nulls 07,31181 117 1f PCs-. .81ER POSTAGE /1-1311-131-I9 MANUAL MCSIIE 07131,11 N Al PUSTRAATER POSTAGE /t-A7il-/51-14 MANUAL 110115 17/31141 r1A_N POSTMASTER 103TAU 11-1711-469-15 MANUAL NC1111 6713t/97 17 Is POSTM*TM POSTAGE 51-1121-181-31 AMULL WSIIE 11131/E7 As* !E POATNAETM 10•1AEE E1-17111-171-)] ANULL IT411t $713I107 M.Y PSOTWTM P'.STAM 0I-1781-11I1-It ALNUu NI s1 ACSn. 17131I41 14 N IST YM LAMS 1E0A NM TS IIIt /1-41 AE-/s/ - II MANUAL Pool E1171111/ tLA Y IN YM LAR PENA US$ TO 701E N-NQ-S]1-le MANUAL moss". E7/31/07 IN 1/ IST YM LONDON PENA 11" TO llti 0I-414C-169-15 n.WN Noll. 11121101 )) N IST MA LAOSS IF.. 61N TO 111E 11-11Q-1M-17 MANUAL mW". 11131/87 31 of NT SN< LADY PEE. VN TO 7/It 11-11Q-111-)t MANUAL IIY11. 17131117 1// A It/ Yt LAr PENA A/M TO 711E /1-4144-115-31 MANUAL MAl1A OT1111A7 11 11 IN SOA LAB PER& UM TO Will 11-4140-1t1-31 MANULL NMI.• 07171,01 763.02 SOT Lam- 1ERs SIA TO Ills 41-II48-171-1) MMUAI II0114 171311111 i M IST w L� PER, A1M O Wit /t-414-IN-35 MANUAL AC llo 4713118, 111 N TNT SRAM LA� PENA A/M TO WIt 11-414-241-4 ANNUAL AMI14 17131197 Y N 'i ST OAA LA i PICs AIM TO 7118 11-IIQ-E11-A1 MNUK ""Its 071311OT T1 7V 11T OAM LI M FICA UM TS Wli 71-II411-511-/1 ANNUAL AN/S/ 11121/01 TIL 71 TIT SEAM LASS PIAA AID/ we Me 73-414-561-/1 ft NU Be 07,31,07 Y.A IVY SNA LAM IStl AIM » WlO 14-1111-S/1-11 SEAUAL 1.791 Y . fills 011311*7 1s.M T41SLlE A► M MA VM w 600 11-1111-131- 14 MANUAL. 1"7 CITY OF 040000 CHECK REGISTER 07-31-67 PACE 2 CHECK NO DATE AMOUNT VENDOR ITEM DISCRIPTION ACCOUNT NO INV 0 P O 0 MESSAGE r4CS+16 07/31/07 33 PUBLIC IMP RETIRE PERA 6/IS TO 6/28 01-4141-04:-13 MANUAL wC8116 07/31/47 6 07 PUBLIC COW RETIRE PERA 6/IS TO 6/24 01-4141-OS9-14 MANUAL 04CB116 97/31/017 14 62 PUBLIC IMP RETIRE PERA 6/IS TO 6/E9 01-4141-069-IS MANUAL 44C0116 67/31/S7 19 71 PUBLIC EMP RETIRE PERA 6/1S TO 6/88 01-4141-099-17 MANUAL "Call& 07/31/87 1,406 46 PUBLIC EMP RETIRE PERA S/IS TO 6/Ea 01-4141-111-31 MANUAL NC8116 07/31/07 S1 2S PUBLIC E11P RETIRE PERA 6/IS TO 6/20 01-4141-115-31 MANUAL 04CS116 07/31/07 460 69 PUBLIC ENP RETIRE PERA 6/1S TO 6/26 01-4141-121-31 MANUAL HCBl16 07/31/S7 S44 76 PUBLIC E11/ RETIRE PERA 6/1S TO 6/28 01-4141-126-31 MANUAL MC8116 07/31/97 222 52 PUBLIC IMP *IT PERA 6/1S TO 6/28 01-4141-174-33 MANUAL HC8116 07/31/87 223 18 PUBLIC IMP NET PERA 6/1S TO 6/28 01-4141-249-42 MANUAL HC6116 07/31/47 36 4S PUBLIC IMP MET PERA 6/1S TO 6/28 01-4141-290-61 MANUAL HC8116 07/31/67 145 74 PUBLIC EMP *IT PERA 6/15 TO 6/28 71-4141-SIS-90 MANUAL HCSI16 07/31/07 121 74 PUBLIC IMP MIT PER. 6/IS TO 6/28 T2-4141-549-91 MANUAL 14CS116 OT.''1t/07 !S7 20 ►UBLIC IMP MET PERA 6/IS TO 6/2S 73-4141-S69-92 MANUAL MC4116 07/31/87 49 S7 PUBLIC EMP WET PERA 6/15 TO 6/26 74-4141-S90-93 MANUAL 3 63• •.3 • MCB117 07/31/87 6,600 00 KENN CO PLAN REMIT RE:4A9 REFUND 13-46SO-000-00 MANUAL 6.600 00 • HCS11B 07/31/87 90 94 POSTMASTER POSTAGE 72-4321-549-91 MANUAL MC81/S O7/31/87 136 42 POSTMASTER POSTAGE 73-4321-S69-92 MANUAL 22' 36 • MC8119 07/31/07 0 00 LEAGUE MN CITY LEVY LIMIT SEMINAR 01-43S6-069 IS MANUAL u0 •••••• so*-CKS MCS121 07/31/87 i S6 UPo ►OSTACE 01-4321-129-3! MANUAL 56 • •••-CKS HC8123 07/31/87 875 19 !ST SANK LAKES FICA 7/13 TO 7/26 01-4142-03'•-12 MANUAL HC8123 07/31/47 192 82 1ST BANK LAKES FICA 7/13 TO 7/06 91-4142-069-IS MANUAL HCS123 07/31/67 26 90 IST DAM LAKES FICA 7/13 TO 7/26 01-4142-099-17 MANUAL HCS123 67/31/67 41 99 tST DAM LAKES FICA 7/13 TO 7/26 01-4t42-111-31 MANUAL HC8123 07/31/07 88 95 IST DAMS LAKES FICA 7/13 TO 7/26 01-4142-IIS-31 MANUAL MCS123 07/31/87 14 66 1ST DAME LAKES FICA 7/13 TO 7/26 01-414'-121-3c MANUAL »C8123 07/31/87 340 $I IST SAMI LAKES FICA 7/13 10 7/26 01-4142-174-33 MANUAL HC6123 97/31/47 2 37 IST BMW LAKES FICA 7/13 TO 7/26 01-4142-1SS-3S MANUAL MfS123 07/31/07 379 64 IST SAM1 LANES FICA 7/13 TO 7/26 01-4142-249-42 MANUAL NCS123 87/31/67 64.82 IST SAM LAMES FICA i/13 TO 7/24 01-4142-290-61 MANUAL HC8123 07/31/97 64 2S IST BAMI LAKES FICA 7/13 TO 7/26 72-4142-549-91 MANUAL 04CS123 07/31/47 191 61 1ST BANK LAMES FICA 7/13 TO 7/26 73-4142-S69-9e MANUAr MCS123 07/31/67 90 99 IST BAIBI LAKES FICA 7/13 TO 7/26 74-4142-S90-93 MANUAL LOSS 27 • 9•IS2 99 SI TOTAL GENERAL FUND 6.400 as 12 TOTAL CON" DEVIL BLOCK GRANT F 160 74 PW&.TI.TOTAL LIBUOR OPERATING FUND lt3. 93 rum T! TOTAL WTE11 OPERAT 1 NC FUND M.01 PWO V3 TOTAL SEVER OPERATING FUND 1987 CITY OF URONO CHECK REGISTER 08-10-87 PACE 1 CHECK NO CATE AMOUNT VENDOR ITEM DESCRIPTION ACCOUNT NO INV 0 P 0 0 MESSAGE 222006 06/OS/87 48 00 ACRO-MINNESOTA INC OFFICE SUPPLIES 01-4210-020-11 222006 00/OS/67 26 37 ACRC MINNESOTA INC OFFICE SUP►LIES 01-4210-039-12 222006 08/05"67 1 44 ACA,-MINMESOTA INC OFFICE SUPPLIES 01-4210-059-14 222006 CO/OS,87 1 44 ACRO-MINMESOTA INC OFFICE SUPPLIES 01-4210-069-IS 222006 Oh/05.87 1 44 ACRO-MINNESOTA INC OFFICE SUPPLIES 01-4210-129-31 222006 06,'O5.'87 SS 33 ACRO-MINNESOTA INC OFFICE SUPPLIES 01-4210-174-33 2=2006 00/OS/87 1 44 ACRO-MINKSOTA INC OFFICE SUPPLIES 01-4214-249-42 13S 46 • •••••• •••-CMS 222010 09/OS/87 17 ES AT&T INFO SYSTEM DATA PROCESSING 01-4340-039-12 222010 OS/CF/87 17 24 AT&T INFO SYSTEM DATA PROCESSING 01-4344-059-14 222010 00/0S/07 17 20 AT&T INTO SYSTEM DATA PROCESSING 01-4340-069-15 2e2010 06/OS/87 14 SO AT&T INFC SYSTEM DATA PROCESSING 01-4340-129-31 222010 09/05/87 17 2S Ar6T INFO SYSTEM DATA PROCESSING 01-4340-174-33 222010 00/OS/67 17 20 AT&T INFO SYSTEM DATA PROCESSING 01-4340-249-42 100 10 • lose** •••-CKS 222020 06/OS/67 12,-12 50 AMERICAN NATL BANK INT DUE 9-1-87 44-4620-907-00 222020 0a 05.,87 50.00 A,!ERICAM NATL BANK AGENT FEE 1-1-67 44-4630-907-00 222020 00/OS/87 2S 00 AMERICAN NATL SANK DESTRUCTION FEE 44-4630-907-00 111,767 SO • •••••• •••-CKS 22t03v 06/05/97 10 6S AT A T INFO SYSTEM TELEPHONE 01-4320-175-34 10 6S • 2E2031 OS/OS/87 10.0E AT & T COMM TELEPHONE 01-4320-129-31 22e031 CS/OS/Sv 96 AT 6 T CORM TELEPHONE 01-4320-174-33 10 96 - •••-CKS :c2034 40i0S/07 40 76 ANCHOR PAPER OFFICE SUPPLIES 01-4810-031-12 222034 0!/OS/87 1 as ANCHOR ►AP ER OFFICE SUPPLIES 01-4210-059-14 222034 00%05/47 S 63 ANCHOR PAPER OFFICE SUPPLIES 01-4210-069-IS 222034 04/6S/97 31 32 ANCHOR PAPER OFFICE SUPPLIES 01-4210-129-31 222034 06/OS/07 187 S3 ANCHOR PAPER OFFICE SUPPLIES 01-4210-174-33 22L034 00/OS/97 1 66 ANCHOR PAPER OFFICE SUPPLIES 01-4210-249-42 t1T.06 • ....•• •4•-CKS c2t0)9 !0/OSl07 434 SO EARL F ANOERSON ASSC STREET MAINT SUPPLY 01-4t33-249-42 434 50 • •••••• •••-CKS 222071 !O/iLl7 i�.99 9QfXlEfl\6M A UNIFORMS 01-4it1-121-71 M.M • .••-cxs 598? CI'r C� •?G:NC :HECK REGISTER 08-10-87 PAGE 2 CHECK NO DA E AMOUNT VENDOR ITEM DESCRIPTION ACCOUNT NO INV • P 0 • MESSAGE 222007 OB.•5.87 1,052 10 BURY A CARLSON INC STREET MAINT SUPPLY 01-4233-249-42 t 052 10 • i ••••.• •••-CKS ZE2111 06/0S/07 7 00 CHESWICK/GARY MEETINGS 01-43S6-129-31 7 00 • E22143 04/0S/97 4 50 COMMERCIAL LIFE INS LIFE INS AUG 01-41S2-039-12 ° 222143 08/OS/87 2 70 COMMERCIAL LIFE INS LIFE INS AUG 01-4152-069-IS 222143 00/OS/07 2.70 COMMERCIAL LIFE INS LIFE INS AUG 01-4152-121-31 222143 00/OS/07 3 60 COMMERCIAL LIFE INS LIFE INS AUG o1-4152-126-31 i1 228143 00/OS/07 9 00 COMMERCIAL LIFE INS LIFE INS AUG 01-41S2-129-31 222143 06/OS/07 3 60 COMMERCIAL LIFE INS LIFE INS AUG 01-4152-174-33 222143 00/OS/07 5 40 COMMERCIAL LIFE INS LIFE INS AUG 01-41S2-249-42 G 22t143 00/OS/97 90 COMMERCIAL LIFE INS LIFE INS AVG 01-4152-290-61 222143 OS/OS/07 72 COMMERCIAL LIFE INS LIFE INS AUG 72-4152-S49-91 2ZE143 08%0S/87 1 OS COMMERCIAL LIFE INS LIFE INS AUG 73-41S2-569-92 222143 06/05/07 90 COMMERCIAL LIFE INS LIFE INS AUG 74-4152-590-93 3S 10 • •••-CKS c2." 40 08/05 A7 40 00 EARL N DAY & SONS MAINT 9LDGS 01-4343-129-31 d ♦0 00 �••�•� •••-CKS i Pe_.7c 08/OS/87 13 56 EMRICH BAKING CO CONCESSIONS RESALE 74-4802-S91-94 73 S6 • i •••-CKS e2c25� Oe/•Si67 10 00 GERHARDSON/JOHN MEETINGS 01-43SG-249-42 22tt�7 08/0S/87 S 9• GERNARD80N/JONN PARKING 01-4301-249-4E 15 90 • •1 i 22226? 0•/OS%•7 704 00 GOLF CAR MIDWEST EOUI► RENTAL 74-4331-S90-93 TR4 00 • ••♦-CKj 222t7S 00%05/0? 330 t0 GROU► HEALTH INC HOSP INS AVG 01-41S1-121-31 • tttt7S 9S/0f/0T •00 7f GROUP HEALTH INC HOSP INS AUG 01-4151-1i9-31 ittt73 00/OS/07 69.6E GROUP HEALTH INC H08P INS AUG 01-4151-174-33 82t2T8 60/0S/67 166 6• GROUP HEALTH INC HOSP :118 AUG 74-4151-S90-93 a 96. 60 • •••s•• •••-CKS • a"3" O41i/OVO7 81_96 ICIRA RET~ CORP ICR1A 7-13 TO T-t0 01-4140-039-it 1907 CITY OF ORONO CHECK NO DATE AMOUNT 01.9� • •••••• P22143 08/OS/07 T5.43 TS.43 • tt237t 00/OS/07 10.46 10.1L • :::::?* OS/OS/07 T3 1t ttt397 00/OS/07 4 69 T9.01 • 43S 00/os/87 to 00 _ce43S 00/0s/07 0o of tt243S 00/OS/S7 at4.51 ttt43S 00/05/0T IR9.31 ttt43S o0/e5/07 044 15 ttt435 00/09/0T 307.40 tt243S o0/oS/07 se e0 ttt43S 0e/es/0T 10 00 tt143S 10/05/0T to -to ttt43S e$/0S/07 •S.34 ttt43S o0/015/07 1.09 tte43s e0/eS/07 15.00 ttt4311 00/oS/07 is 3e itt43s 00/oS/07 90 00 att43S 00/9S/sT 14.4t 1 . 9s4 at • ate.l. e&/es/$7 15,T34 7t IS,T34 Ta • ttl400 00/09/07 6,867 e1 0.K7 01 • a"490 wean? 3.14 aft"o 0Q/0i/Q7 S U - 70 Some 0Q/0i/ST 3.14 •4►�0 CHECK REGISTER VENDOR ITEM DESCRIPTION 08-10-87 PACE 3 ACCOUNT NO. INV. 0 P.O. 0 MESSAGE •••-CKS TOM JACO88 MILEAGE 01-4341-174-33 •••-CKS JOHN$ AUTO SUPPLY MAINT AUTO 01-4341-e49-42 •••-CKS KUEHN-THOMA$ JULY MILEAGE 01-4341-069-1S KU[HN-THOMAS JULY MILEAGE 73-4301-S49-9t •••-CKS LOCI$/XUITE 3t0 OFFICE SUPPLIES 01-4e10-069-1S LOCI$/St%TE ate MAINT OFFICE EQUIP 01-4340-069-1S LOCI$/SUI'E 390 LOCI$-ADMIN JUNE 0!-43Sa-069-IS LOCI$/8UIlt 3t0 LOCI$-ADMIN JUNK 01-43st-tell-31 LOOISISUITS ate DATA IROC-JUNE 01-4345-009-ls lUITI' 310 DATA ►ROC-JUNE 01-43SS-1119-31 OUITI 3t0 DATA ►ROC -JUKE 01-43SS-174-33 ,'SUITE 320 OFFICE SU►PLIES 7e- 4t10-S49-91 L:t.i/SUITE 3t9 MAINT OFFICE EQUIP 7E-4349-549-91 LOGII":4ITE 380 LOCI$-ADMIN JUNE 7t-43St-549-91 �041so WITS 3e0 DATA PROC-JUKE Tt-4355-S49-91 LOCI&/A`1TE 3t0 OFFICE SUPPLIES T3-4210-5&9-9t LO&IS/0U1'E 320 MAINT OFFICE EQUIP 73-4340-Se9-9t LOSI$/ WIT! 710 LOCI$-ADMIN JUNE 73-43St-509-9e LOCI&/SUITE 380 DATA PROC-JUNa 73-43SS-5&9-9t •••-CKS METRO WASTE CONTROL AUG CHARGES 73-1t&e-000-00 •••-CKS MIDWEST ASPHALT STREET MAINT MAT 01-4t33-249-42 •••-CKS ftwess 5C0 UTILITIES 01-43"-Iat-31 Mi Oem"C0 UTILITIES M-43104- 49-91 MIi=ffe SC0 i;TTLITIES 13-47t4-600-92 •••-CKS 1987 CITY OF ORONO CHECK NO DATE 2t?_49S 08/OS/87 •••.•• 22253: 68/Os/87 .••••• 22ES34 Os/05/87 222S34 08/OS/87 ••..•• r22ss9 04/0s/67 222SS9 o8/Os/87 822SS9 OB/Os/8i 222SS9 08/OS/87 Q?2ss9 o0,os.'67 222SS9 08'OS/e7 222SS9 06/OS/07 ...... 2c256s OB,'OS.'87 22ZS49 Os/os/87 2rps&$ 06/Os/07 222s66 08: Os/87 222568 08%0S,07 222S60 Os• 0S�87 222560 00/0s/87 222S60 06/OS/87 222560 08/0s/87 P?2560 08/0f/87 ec2568 00/OS/07 2i2569 08/05/07 cc2568 06/OS/07 22r57, Oi/pS-07 EE2ST1 Os/o5,07 .••••• 222537 00/OS/07 44AS97 00/0S/87 ttts97 O0/0S/S? rtts97 N/01/67 CHECK REGISTER AMOUNT VENDOR ITEM DESCRIPTION 7 00 MN BENEFIT ASSN LIFE INS AUG 7 00 • 08-:1-87 PACE 4 ACCOUNT NO INV. 0 P.O. 0 MESSAGE 01-41S2-129-31 IS 99 MOR01:CZYMSKI/DAMES MILEAGE 01-4381-It9-31 1S 99 • 15 5_ MOTOROLA INC EQUIP PARTS 72-4232-S49-91 23 30 MOTOROLA INC EQUIP PARTS 73-4232-S69-92 38 83 • 342 52 N8P UTILITIES 01-4324-099-17 261 04 NSP UTILITIES 01-4324-129-31 2S6 78 NSP UTILITIES 01-4324-249-4E 10 96 NSP UTILITIES 01-4324-290-61 1 630 11 NSP UTILITIES 7r-4324-549-91 907 94 NSP L-TILITIES 73-43E4-S69-92 130 23 NSP UTILITIES 74-4324-S90-93 3.779 S8 • SS 09 NORTHWESTERN BELL TELEPHONE 01-4320-039-12 S5 09 MORTHWESTERM BELL TELEPHONE 01-4320-OS9-14 27 S4 NORTHWESTERN BELL TELEPHONE 01-4320-069-15 190 43 NORTHWESTERN BELL TELEPHONE ft1-4320-129-31 SS 09 NORTHWESTERN BELL TELEPHONE 01-4320-174-33 64 23 NORTHWESTERN BELL TELEPHONE 01-4320-175-34 SS 09 NORTHWESTERN BELL TELEPHONE v1-4320-249-42 11 01 NORTHWESTERN BELL TELEPHONE 72-4320-S49-91 21 94 NORTHWESTERN BELL TELEPHONE 72-4320-S49-91 3t 91 NORTHWESTERN BELL TELEPHONE 73-4380-569-9E 16 S3 NORTHWESTERN BELL TELEPHONE 73-4320-569-92 11r t0 NORTHWESTERN BELL TELEPHONE 74-4320-S90-93 TOS 40 NORTHWESTERN BELL ADVERTISING 74-4323-590-93 802 SS • 27 393 75 MORWEST BANK MPLS MA INT DUE 9-1-67 43-4620-966-00 20 as NORWEST BANK MPLS MA AGENT FEE 9-1-47 43-4630-906-00 27 414 00 • 78 9t PUBLIC E14PL MET "ON PIRA 7/13 TO 7/r6 01-4141-039-12 1 33 PUBLIC E11PL NET A$BN ►EwA ?/13 TO 7/t6 61-4141-040-13 1 3s PUBLIC EIOPL RIFT "ON MA 1/13 TO 7/18 01-4141-*99-14 114.6t PUBLIC EM►L BET ASSN PERA 7/13 TO T/N 01-4141-"9-1S •••-CKS •••-CKS •••-CKS see-CKS •••-CKS •••-CKS 1997 CITY OF ORONO CHECK REGISTER 08-10-87 PAGE .5 CHECK NO DATE A"OUNT VENDOR ITEM DESCRIPTION ACCOUNT NO. INV 0 P 0 0 MESSAGE 222597 08/05/87 IS 99 PUBLIC EMPL NET ASSN PERA 7/13 TO 7/26 01-4141-099-17 222597 00/OS/07 I.S24 70 PUBLIC EMPL NET ASSN PERA 7/13 TO 7/26 01-4141-111-31 222S97 06/OS/67 52 51 PUBLIC EMPL *IT ASSN PERA 7/13 TO 7/26 01-4141-115-31 222S97 08,OS/87 389 33 PUBLIC EMPL MET ASSN PERA 7/13 TO 7/26 01-4141-121-31 222S97 00/OS/07 SO4 10 PUBLIC EMPL OCT ASSN PENA 7/13 TO T/26 01-4141-126-31 222S97 00/OS/07 EE1 90 PUBLIC EMPL OCT ASSN PERA 7/13 TO 7/t6 01-4141-174-33 222S97 00/OS/07 2ES 64 PUBLIC EMPL WET ASSN PERA 7/13 TO 7/26 01-4141-E49-42 22ES97 00/OS/07 47 01 PUBLIC EMPL OCT ASSN PERA 7/13 TO 7/E6 01-4141-E90-61 222S97 00/O5/87 SO 09 PUBLIC EMPL NET ASSN PERA 7/13 TO 7/26 72-4141-549-91 222S97 00/0S/07 113 09 PUBLIC ENPL WET ASSN PERA 7/13 TO 7/26 73-4141-569-92 C22S97 M'OS/07 49 S7 PUBLIC EMPL NET ASSN PERA 7/13 TO 7/26 74-4141-590-93 3,391 13 • •••-CKS 60 :::0:* 00/OS/07 4.010 00 PANNELL KERR FORSTER 86 AUDIT FINAL 01-4300-020-11 EEE606 0O/OS/07 35 00 PANNELL KERR FORSTER 86 AUDIT FINAL 71-4300-515-90 E22600 00/OS/O7 300 00 PA14NELL KINK FORSTER INVENTORY S/31/87 71-4300-515-90 EEE600 0O/OS/O7 E7 00 PANNELL KERR FORSTER 86 AUDIT FINAL 72-4300-549-91 222600 0O/O5/O7 1E 00 PANNELL KERR FORSTER 86 AUDIT FINAL 73-4300-569-92 222604 00/0S/07 13 00 PANNELL KERR FORSTER 86 AUDIT FINAL 74-4300-590-93 4.417 00 • •....• •••-CKS 222621 08,'OS/07 1.095 50 PHYSICIANS HEALTH HOSP INS AUG 01-38T2-000-00 222621 08/OS/67 608 SS ►HYSICIANS HEALTH HOSP INS AUG 01-4151-039-12 E2E621 08:05/87 270 SS PHYSICIANS HEALTH MOSP INS AUG 01-4151-069-IS 22E6E1 06/05:87 104 SS PHYSICIANS HEALTH HOSP INS AUG 01-415I-121-31 2226E1 08/oS/87 434 7S PHYSICIANS HEALTH MOSP INS AUG 01-4151-126-31 t2t6El 08/OS/07 976 7S PHYSICIANS HEALTH MOSP INS AUG 01-41S1-1E9-31 EE2621 00/OS/07 170 SS PHYSICIANS HEALTH MOSP INS AUG 01-4151-174-33 2226E1 08/O5/07 464 00 PHYSICIANS HEALTH MOSP INS AUG 01-4151-249-4E EttGtt 08/DS/87 104 SS PHYSICIANS HEALTH MOSP INS AUG 01-41S1-E90-61 E126E1 00%05/07 41 BE PHYSICIANS HEALTH HOST INS AUG 72-4151-549-91 eee6E1 00/OS/07 6E T3 PHYSICIANS HEALTH HOB► INS AUG 73-41S1-S69-92 4,6E0 30 • ..•.•. ••.-CKS 222643 06.OS.07 E S4 ►r:UDENTIAL LIFE INS AUG 01-4152-039-12 222643 08.1OS/07 11 61 PRUDENTIAL LIFE INS AUG 01-4152-069-IS 222643 0O/OS/07 4 OS PRUDENTIAL LIFE INS AUG 01-4152-121-31 122643 00/OS/47 0 •0 PRUDENTIAL LIFE INS AUG 01-4152-126-31 E2643 06/OS/07 42 00 PRUDENTIAL LIFE iNS AUG GI-4152-129-31 222643 00/OS,07 E 40 PRUDENTIAL LIFE INS AUG 01-415E-174-33 222643 00'05:87 S 40 PRUDENTIAL LIFE INS AUG 01-4152-249-42 77 70 • •••••. •••-CKS 2t2675 00/OS/07 3.377 30 ROLLINS OIL CO GASOLINE 01-1266-090-00 SAA675 0V OS/G7 4T3.44 ROLLING OIL CO GASOLINE 74-4RE0-S90-93 •.•••• •••-CKS 1987 CITY OF 040%0 CHECK NO DATE AMOUNT f 2226aa 04/!S/97 37 00 37 00 • • • 222693 09/OS/07 3,430 06 222693 Oa/OS/!7 3,450 00 6,la0 00 • i • 222719 ;)a/0S/87 160 00 160 00 • 222796 08/05/47 2'ess 0• 22Y T96 08/4S/87 206 70 222796 08/OS/87 S6 69 222796 Oa/OSi67 624 3S 0 2E2796 06/OS/67 34 15 222796 08/05/87 76.SS 3.2S0.T0 • • • P22814 04/OS/87 71 69 71 69 • 0 ••.••• 2229�5 Oa/OS/87 12 33 • 12 33 • zc2lu+ Oa/OS/a7 30 00 30 00 • • 2=4-902. 46.Os:8' 30 00 30 00 • w P2i90] 04/!:/47 4A Ts 44 7S • 21=9o4 W os/!7 it]. a] 1l!).!3 • w I&R90s Wes/1T 16 !6 • • 2tt966 N!!i/RT _._ _. _.. 1i73. is I ttilal R01/OS/i! _ 1i1. t! 4N CHECK REGISTER VENDOR ITEM DESCRIPTION PARK NICOLLET OTHER CONSULTING JOHN M SrHOENING JOHN M SCHOENING DIXIE PETRO-CHEM UNIFORMS UNLIMITED UNIFORMS UNLIMITED UNIF0RM8 UNLIMITED UNIFORMS UNLIMITED UNIFORMS UNLIMITED UNIFORMS UNLIMITED EQUIP RENTAL REMOVE GARAGE 08-10-87 PAGE 6 ACCOUNT NO. :Nv. • P O. • MESSAGE 01-4306-129-31 01-4331-249-42 24-4399-40T-00 UTILITY SYS MAINT 72-4234-549-91 SAFETY VESTS CLOTHING CLOTHING CLOTHING CLOTHING CLOTHING US VEST CELLULAR INC TELEPHONE WRIGHT HENN ELECTRIC UTILITIES 01-3R25-000-00 01-4221-121-31 01-4221-126-31 01-4221-129-31 01-4221-177-34 01-4221-165-3S 01-4124-129-31 01-4324-249-42 LENS WILLIAM SIGN R110T 01-2300-000-00 COFFIN 6 GRONRERG SIGN •11;3 01-2300-000-00 STEVENS WELL CO GROUNDS MAINT 01-4343-290-61 CMEMSEARCH SLDG MAINT SVPPLY 74-4831-S90-93 OFFICE ►LAMMING OEv ROOKS 91-4l46-1t1-31 ►ROCE68 SPECIALTIES PRO $"Or RERAL9 T4-4841 ili-94 "S CASLWT! INC CONSITU TOP 01-4343-*"-17 •••-CKS see-CKS *SO-CKS •••-CKS •.•-CK-_- •••-CKS toe? :ITV OF ORONO :"E ^ NC LATE 22z90e 00,OS/07 22?909 OB/OS/07 ° O utl 05l87 2£291t 04.OS/87 ,.22r12 oe/oS/07 4OUNT 123 00 • 10 00 10 00 • S0 O0 SO 0• • 50 00 SO 00 • 2.079 00 2 079 00 • .so 0o ISO 00 • 37,1es 99 3,4SO 00 FT, 414 00 2,707 SO 33S 00 11,419 •• 17,07S 71 2.80. 03 102 70< <7 CHECK REG:BTER VENDOR ITEM DESCRIPTION MN MAYORS ASSOC MEMBERSHIPS CRAGS J W SIGN 01144 DONALD WILDMAN SIGN 01143 METRO WASTE CONTROL JULY SAC CHARGES WALTER ERICKSON REFUND VAR 6117S FUND 01 TOTAL GENERAL FUND FUND 24 TOTAL PERM IMPROVE REVOLVING F FUND 43 TOTAL 1980 IMP BOND D/S FUND FUND 44 TOTAL 1902 IMP BOND D/S FUND FUND 71 TOTAL LIQUOR OPERATING FUND FUND 71 TOTAL WATER OPERATING FUND FUND 73 TOTAL SEWER OPERATING FUND FUND 74 TOTAL GOLF COURSE OPERATING FO 'OTAL 06-10-97 PAGE 7 ACCOUNT NO INV. R P.O. B MESSAGE 01-4300-020-11 01-E300-000-00 01-2300-000-00 01-2226-000-00 01-3502-000-00 •••-Ck', �I PUBLIC ATTENDANCE CITY OF ORONO MEETING DATE j `I " /C 1 J 7 PLEASE FILL OUT THE INFORMATION REQUESTED BELOW FOR OUR CITY RECORDS. NAME OR NUMBER NAME (please print) ADDRESS PRESENT FOR (from agenda) r L 2. 3 . 1 �� �� _ ,-) LL 6. 7. "d=1} 5 i �2-31 , � •- � . ,,- c � � . ,� / l % J �/� .2. .3. .4. l5. l6. — L7. L8. L9. 10. COu.nLto � 1 (Aceb 40 1 MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD JULY 20, 1987 ATTENDANCE 7:12 P.M. Orono Planning Commission met. on the above date with the following members present: Chairman Kelley, Johnson, Bellows, and Cohen. Taylor arrived at 7:15 P.M. Hanson and Brown were absent. The following represented the City staff: Building & Zoning Administrator Mabusth, Assistant Planning & Zoning Administrator Gaffron, Septic and Zoning Aide Knott, and City Recorder Peterson. Councilmember Sime was also present. #1170 THEODORE Q. PRIG AND TIMOTHY JOHNSON 627 i 629 FERNDALE ROAD NORTH VACATION PUBLIC HEARING 7:15-7:15 The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing was noted. Applicants request to vacate the existing drainage and utility easement located 5' either side of the lot line between Lots 1 and 2 of the Laurent Addition. The vacation request is in conjunction with the proposed lot line rearrangement which received recommendation of approval from the Planning Commission on June 15, 1987. Staff recommends approval subject to a new drainage and utility easement 5' either side of the new lot line being granted. There were no comments from the public regarding this matter and the public hearing was closed. It was moved by Chairman Kelley, seconded by Bellows, to recommend approval per staff recommendation. Motion, Ayes 5, Nays 0. #1169 WEAR PARTNERSHIP ENTERPRISES INTERSECTION OF OLD CRYSTAL BAY ROAD AND WATERTOWN ROAD CLASS III PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION PUBLIC HEARING 7:30-7:45 The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing was noted. Applicant proposes an 8 lot plat within a 18+ acre tract of which 3.35 acres are wetland per City's mapping. It is applicant's position that the area of the designated wetlands on the City's map is far too ambitious and with close inspection and testir,q these wetlands may be redefined. Bill Wear and his surveyor, Phi 1 Nelson, were present for this matter. Phil Nelson addressed the wetland issue in which the DNR has indicated to him that this is not a DNR designated wetland. 1 MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD JULY 20, 1987 #1169 NEAR PARTNERSHIP ENT. CONTINUED Chairman Kelley recommended that the wetland issue be resolved by DNR, staff and applicant before Planning Commission action. Phil Nelson reviewed the proposed preliminary plat, cul- de-sac and Outlot A. Planning Commission unanimously agreed that they found no problem with the preliminary subdivision as proposed contingent upon the wetland issue being resolved and the platting of 2 acre minimum lots. It was moved by Cohen, seconded by Chairman Kelley, to table this matter pending resolve of the wetland issue. Motion, Ayes 5, Nays 0. #1171 LANDMAR[ CONSTRUCTION INC. 3920 i 3830 BAYSIDE ROAD CLASS III SUBDIVISION PUBLIC HEARING 7:45-7:59 The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing was noted. Zoning Administrator Mabusth reviewed the application which applica is in the process of purchasing the beach house pr rty (Lot 3) and the farm house property (combined Lots 1 and 2) from Mrs. Miner. Applicant proposes a subdivision or platting to create one new building site. She explained staff's recommendation for alternatives regarding access. Paul Swanson, President of Landmark Construction, was present for this matter and explained his proposal, specifically his plan for rn access road. He noted that he would like the riparian lot to serve all three lots and noted that I.MCD allows one boat per 50 feet of lakethore. He stated tha, if the lagoon is included, there is approximatley 300' of lakeshore. Zoning Administrator r. ',is i stated that he would need at least 200' of lakeshu, satisfy riparian uses for one residential lot. Chairman Kelley stated Id more information regarding: -definition of wetlands, r,catlot n property -definition of dry build.z 'e for , s 1, 2 & 3 In addition, he felt only + 3 shou. have riparian rights. Paul Swanson states that th told him he could have three docks on the riparia:: 2 MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD JULY 20, 1987 #1171 LANDMARF CONSTRUCTION INC. CONTINUED Staff stated that the I,MCD was referring to the usage level of 1 boat per 50' lakeshore for single ownership and that applicant may have been misled by this fact. It was moved by Chairman Kelley, seconded by Bellows, to table this application pending more information and a larger detailed site plan. Motion, Ayjs 5, Nays 0. #1174 CRAIG ANDERSON 375 LEAF STREET AND 3300 BAYSIDE ROAD CLASS 1I PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION PUBLIC HEARING 8:00-8:21 The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing was noted. Assistant Zoning Administrator Gaffron explained the request to split a 5.7 acre parcel into two building sites of 2-plus acres each. -Lot 1 (west) is anticipated to access from Bayside Road. The proposed house site is to the rear of the lot where it widens out. The lot needs a width variance but does front on a public road. -Lot 2 will access from Leaf Street. The assumed house site is to the rear, overlooking the creek. This lot also needs a width variance. e noted that staff has concerns regarding the septic systems. Soil testing indicates that mound system- will be necessary. Staff is also concerned t:,c t the neigboring properties will have relatively little area for alternate septic sites because the southerly portion of Lot 1 (part of this subdivision) will no longer be viable as a potential future aco sition b- either neighboring property for use as dra .,.field. Tnerefore, staff would suggest that this divisio. may well seal the fate of the City's future determination of need t, extend sewers to some properties in the study are,-- ear of Crestview. Staff is concerned at •:t the drainage on this property only in that provip n must be made to protec* significant drainagewa,: ghat traverse the proper y. Henry Furchner, 360 Leaf Street, stated hr s concerned with disruption of a spawning area in the CL�ek which is DNR protected. Assistant Zoning Administrator Ga+ fron stated he would check into Mr. Furchner's concern. to response to Bel low's questi.:., Assistant Zoning Administrator Gaffron stated he 2t comfortable that the ? lot development could succe ,-fully Pti-ain mound cyst- hc-w •er, would like Bette refined locations. 3 MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD JULY 20, 1987 #1174 CRAIG ANDERSON CONTINUED Bellows felt that this was a problematic subdivison indicating concern with access and staff's septic concerns noting that there seemed to be many marginal issues. Cohen agreed with Bellows due to the "speculative" site plan submitted. Assistant Zoning Administrator Gaffron further explained the proposed plan pointing out the required setbacks (per Exhibit J). Planning Commission majority felt the access corridor width was the major issue and that lot width was adequate if all other standards were met. Mr. Furchner, again, indicated his concern with disruption of the creek and drainage. There were no other comments from the public and the Public Hearing was closed. j.t was moved by Chairman Kelley, seconded by Cohen, to table this application pending additional information and more detailed plan. Motion. Ayes 5, Nays 0. ZONING AIUNM ENT 8?ANDARDB FOR ACCESSORY STRUCTURES FIWJC GEARING 9:07-9:07 The Affidavit of Purlication was noted. There were no comments from the public regarding this matter and the public hearing was closed. It was loved Johnson, seconded by Cohen, to table this matter until the August Planning Commission meeting in order to provide more time for Planning Commission to review the proposed amendment. Motion, Ayes 5, Nays 0. #1056 OLAI MANSON 1390 BAIT-40" AV UR VARIAWN ALT)DI T I OVAL REVIEW It was moved by Chairman Kelley, seconded by Bellows, to table this matter until the August 17, 1987 meeting per applicant's attorney request. Motion, Ayes 4, Nays 0. (Taylor not present to vote.) 4 MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD JULY 20, 1987 #1128 RAINEY ANDERSON 780 OLD CRYSTAL BAY ROAD SOUTH PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION ADDITIONAL REVIEW Applicant's Surveyor, Gary Gabriel, was present for this matter. Assistant Zoning Administrator Gaff ron noted th-t the neighboring propArty owners were re -notified of this additional review. He explained that applicant revised the proposal to include 2 additional lots, extension of the road portion to be developed, and inclusion of a 50' road outlot to connect to the Kumlin plat at some future time. Regarding the access, Gaffron referred to City Engineer Cook and City Attorney Blatz' opinion that "the City would be hard-pressed to deny a plat with access location that meets the minimum standards even though we feel some other location would be better". From a planning standpoint, Bellows, Cohen, and Kelley felt the access should be lined up with Farview. Johnson felt the proposed access is adequate because it does meet the minimum access requirements. There was no one present from the public regarding this matter. Gary Gabriel stated that the building sites would be disrupted if the access were lined up with Farview. It was moved by Cohen, seconded by Chairman Kelley, to recommend approval per staff recommended amending Condition N1 as follows: 1. Access location shall be directly across from Farview Lane. Motion, Ayes 3, Nays 2. Johnson and Taylor voted nay finding the proposed access adequate. #1148 ST. EDWARDS EPISCOPAL CHURCH 865 F10kNDhLE ROAD NORTH CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT SNCOND REVIEW Zoning Administrator Mabusth explained the request for a conditional use permit for a day care/pre-school instruction class use by the Montessori School of Wayzata Bay and Wayzata Home Base at St. Edwards Episcopal Church. She reviewed staff's recommendation of approval subject to findings and conditions listed in memo. She noted that the use would be limited to a maximum of 29 occupants (students, teachers, aides, etc.) at one time; and the responsibility for monitoring the joint use operation shall be St. Edwards Church. She also noted that the fire exits are at ground level. 5 MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD JULY 20, 1987 #1148 ST. EDWARDS EPISCOPAL CHURCH CONTINUED Bellows encouraged a fenced play area even though the State and City has not required it. Zoning Administrator Mabusth noted that both agencies have confirmed that the children are never outside unsupervised. It was moved by Chariman Kelley, seconded by Taylor, to recommend approval per staff recommendation. Motion, Ayes 5, Nays 0. #1165 STEVEN FAT 3045 CASCO POINT ROAD VARIANCES PUBLIC HEARING 7:21-7:25 The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing was noted. Zoning Administrator Mabusth explained the request for a front yard setback variance to construct a detached garage partially within the defined front yard area. Staff has received no comments from the neighbors. Chairman Kelley asked why applicant is not attaching the proposed garage to the house. Steve Fay was present for this matter and explained the reason for a detached garage was in part the increased cost for an attached garage; and if attached it would not line up properly with the existing house and would require a side setback variance. He stated that he proposes to use the existing garage for storage and the new garage for car and boat storage. Staff notes that a side setback variance would not be needed if garage were attached to existing house. There were no comments from the public regarding this matter and the public hearinq was closed. It was moved by Cohen, seconded by Johnson, to recommend approval as proposed per staff recommendation. Motion, Ayes 5, Nays 0. 2 MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD JULY 20, 1987 #1166 HARTNUT GINNOW-MERRERT 1640 LAKEVIEW TERRACE VARIANCE PUBLIC HEARING 7:25-7:30 The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing was noted. Zoning Administrator Mabusth explained the request for a front yard setback variance to construct a second story deck. Staff recommends approval if applicant can resolve why the deck cannot be placed on the back and east sides of the house avoiding the need for a variance. She noted the locations of the well, septic system and existing patio which limits the placement of the deck. Hartmut Ginnow-Merkert was present for this matter and stated the main reason for not placing the deck in the back is the noise from County Road 6. In addition, he noted that the bedrooms were located along the east side of the house. Zoning Aide Knott stated that she talked to both the adjacent neighbors and neither objected to the proposal. Staff noted Planning Commission member Hanson's written comments as follows: "I would consider approval of this deck only if the projection would be no further than the actual setback of residences on either side and with r., objection from the said neighbors. However, I do not agree it is the best choice and recommend redesign." There were no comments from the public regarding this matter and the p-relic hearin,l was closed. It was moved by Bellows, se-c-nded by Cohen, to recommend approval per staff recomwendation subject to no additional front yard variances be granted. Motion, Ayes 5, Nays 0. #1167 LEONARD AND MARY AM BACEMES 2813 CASCO POINT ROAD RENaiAL VARIANCES PUBLIC HEARING 7:13-7:15 The Affidavit of Publicati ir.d Certificate of Mailing was noted. Applicant requests renews, variances to construct a granted on 6-9-86. :-.,lcover and side setback .�n to home previously 7 MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD JULY 20, 1987 #1167 BACHRES CONTINUED There were no comments from the public regarding this matter and the public hearing was closed. It was moved by Chairman Kelley, seconded by Johnson, to recommend renewal of the variances per staff recommendation. Motion, Ayes 4, Nays 0. (Taylor not present to vote.) #1168 RICHARD G. HELSTROM 2695 CASCO POINT ROAD VARIANCES PUBLIC HEARING 8:34-8:51 The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing was noted. Chairman Kelley read into the record a letter received this day from J.K. Bowers, 2905 Casco Point Road, asking the Planning Commission to consider his property in relation to the average lakeshore setback proposed by applicant, so that he is not deprived of lake views and lake breeze. Assistant Zoning Administrator Gaffron explained the request for hardcover and average lakeshore setback variances to construct a 2nd story three -season porch and deck as follows: -Hardcover 75-250' - Existing = 45.3% - Proposed = 45.7% -Average Lakeshore Setback Encroachment - Existing = u' - Proposed = 25' Applicant proposes to construct a 2nd story three -season porch and deck where only a ground -level loose concrete block patio now exists. The three -season porch is approximately 16'x 20' surrounded on two sides by a 9' deck. Bellows felt that, based on ;-he drawings submitted, it should be considered an "addition" to the house, not an average opaque porch structure-. Richard Helstrom was presen,.. or this matter and stated he did not feel the addition would obstruct Mr. Bowers' view, and there would be a m'.-imal view obstruction, if any, from Elson's (2879 Ca;;co Point Rd.) yard. He noted that the addition would be ll,' from the lakeshore. Dick Rail, 2915 Casco Paint id., stated applicant's house is downhill from his, therefore, the addition would not obstruct his vi -. 0 MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD JULY 20, 1987 #1168 BELSTROM CONTINUED There were no other comments from the public and the public hearing was closed. Planning Commission unanimously felt the addition was too :such of an intrusion into the average lakeshore. They felt the addition should extend no further than the exist.Lng patio. Planning Commission did not find hardcover an issue. Planning Commission member Hanson's written comments as follows: "I see no hardship, and am concerned with the view encroachment on neighboring properties. No; do a redesign." It was moved by Chairman Kelley, seconded by Bellows, to table thi4 application pending a revised reduced plan. Motion, Ayes 5, Nays 0. #1172 CHRISTINE BRC[ 3620 CHXRRY AVENUE VARIANCE PUBLIC HEARING This matter was held over until the end of the meeting (10:08) for applicant to be present. It was moved by Taylor, seconded by Cohen, to table this application until applicant can be present. Motion, Ayes 5, Nays 0. 117 3 DAV I D AND TRESA GAR1)E.LI.A 1230 ORONO GUS DRIVE VAIU ANCR PUBLIC BRAKING 9:08-9:12 The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing was noted. Zoning Aide Knott explained the request for a front yard setback variance to construct a detached garage 80 feet in front of the front line of the principal structure. Staff noted the following hardships - steep topography to north and east, location of well on east, and inadequate area to place garage on west. No major grading would be required in proposed location, and the garage will be naturally screened from neighboring properties by existing heavy vegetation. Planning Commission member Hanson's written comment concurs with staff recommendation. 9 MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD JULY 20, 1987 1173 GARDSLI.A CONTINUED Tresa Gardella was present for this matter and stated the hardship was the need to house Mr. Gardella's sports cars. She felt that a 5 or 6 car garage was a legitimate need for a 5 bedroom large home. It was noted that the proposed garage was less than 1,000 s.f. in area. There were no comments from the public regarding this matter and the public hearing was closed. It was moved by Taylor, seconded by Johnson, to recommend approval per staff recommendation finding topography a hardship and the need for enclosed storage space for more than three cars. Motion, Ayes 5, Nays 0. #1175 HALTER AND NANCY ERICKSON 335 BOLLANDER ROAD PUBLIC BEARING Application Withdrawn at Applicants Request #1176 RICHARD PUTNAM 2765 CASCO POINT ROAD VARIANCES PUBLIC BEARING 9:38-9:38 The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing was noted. There were no comments from the public regarding this matter and the public hearing was closed. Assistant Zoning Administrator Gaffron explained the request for the following variances to construct an addition to the existing residence? Hardcover: 75-250' - Existing = 36.4% - Allowed = 25% - Proposed = 40.2% 250-500' - Existing - 85.7% - Allowed = 30% - Proposed = 48.5% Average Setback Encroachment: - Existing = 6' - Allowed = 0' - Proposed - 25' Side Setback -Detached Garage (changed to attached): - Existing - 2' - Required - 10' - Proposed - 2' IFE MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD JULY 20, 1987 #1176 PUTNAM CONTINUED Applicant proposes to attach his existing house and detached garage. The garage is currently 2' from the lot line. The applicant notes that the garage foundation may have to be replaced, but he does not want to move the garage further from the lot line because that would force the removal of a large maple next to the proposed 3rd garage stall. Applicant has noted that the trend in the neighborhood is for garages to all be at the edge of the lot, so visual spacing is maintai•ed. Richard Putnam was present for this matter and showed renderings of the proposal. Cohen, Bellows, and Johnson felt that hardcover was not a problem in light of the slight increase in the 75-250' and the proposed reduction in the 250-500'. Planning Commission majority felt that the side setback of 10' should be adhered to if the garage foundation is to be r±placed. Johnson felt that the existing/proposed location of garage was acceptable. Mr. Putnam stated that the hardship was the need for more storage space for cars and outdoor recreational equipment. Assistant Zoning Administrator Gaffron noted that the adjacent house at 2755 Casco Point Road currently has no plumbing and is intended to eventually be removed and a new house built, which likely will be placed forward to conform with the rest of the neighborhood. Because of this fact, Planning Commission felt that the average lakeshore setback should take into consideration the house location north of 2755 Casco Point Road. Planning Commission felt this more accurate average lakeshore setback information was needed to act on the proposed porch addition. Planning Commission member Hanson's written comments as follows: "I have reviewed the applicant's proposed project and generally `gel the design is appropriate for that neighborhood. i t general, I feel the lack of hardcover at 0-75' wt-:lhs favorably against tht- change at 75-2501. A third s• 1 1 , integrated in the design as it is, is acceptable gut tradable. Side setback at garage is O.R." Mr. Putnam did not wl,}- , delay the application pendinq additional informat.•7-, therefore, asked Planning Commission to sake a • n.endation. 1.1 MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD JULY 20, 1987 #1176 PUTNAM CONTINUED it wly-, rz-,ved by Chairman Ke'_ ley, seconded by Cohen, to recommend denial of the proposal based on insuf f icent f;i:.cs regarding average lakeshore setback. Motion, Ayes 4, Nays 1. Johnson voted nay. #1178 MICHAEL PLANK 4145 WATERTOMN ROAD SKETCH PLAN REVIEW Assistant Zoning Administrator Gaffron explained the sketch plan to divide off second dwelling from main house that is being required as a condition of Resolution #2122. Applicant has been allowed to use the easterly access pending this subdivision request. Applicant is submitting two preliminary proposals review for: 1) Conceptual review of the proposed driveway access corridor; and 2) Conceptual review of the proposed lot line revision with the applicants westerly property. Ths boundary change is intended to give applicant more land in the easterly parcel by dropping the westerly parcel to the minimum of 5.0 acres dry buildable. Applicant prefers Proposal I, leaving 5.0 dry acres in Lots 1 and 2 and 14.4 total acre- in Lot 3, a f lag lot with a 30' access corridor , o serve that house over the driveway that is in place (access point to be moved so it is within the 30' corridor). Staff has no problem with this access location on Watertown Road from a safety standpoint. Proposal II is essentially the same but leaves a 50' access corridor. Staff prefers Proposal II. The wetland in the westerly parcel (Lot 1) has what staff would call an "indefinite" boundary. Chairman Kelley felt it important to define the wetland prior to any approval. Mr. i Mrs. Michael Plank were present for this matter. Michael Plank stated that after the wetland is defined, Lot 2 will be adjusted to meet the minimum of 5.0 acres dry buildable. Assistant Zoning Administrator Gaffron noted that the adjacent neighbor, jae Sawchuk, 4105 Watertown Road, has concerns with the access because it is so close to his house. Mrs. Plank stated that it is their intention to heavily screen the access from the Sawchuk property protect the privacy for both property owners. 12 MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD JULY 20, 1987 #1178 PLANK CONTINUED Because Lot 2 will most likely have a separate access, Planning Commission majority Felt that the 30' access was sufficent if the driveway served a maximum of. 2 lots. Johnson felt the 50' access was more appropriate in consideration of Sawchuk's concerns as well as protecting the applicant. Chairman Kelley recommended a written landscape plan to assure the neighbor of applicants screening intentions. Per Planning Commission member Hanson's written comments, he "favors Proposal I, but with a 50' corridor now". "PIMAL OF MINUTES It was moved by Cohen, seconded by Johnson, to approve the Minutes of the June 15, 1987 Planning Commission meeting as submitted. Motion, Ayes 5, Nays 0. PLANNING CONNIISSION RSPRSSENTATIVE Chairman Kelley was appointed to attend the August 1.0, 1987 Council meeting. RDJOO W=r 10t00 P.M. The Planning Commissicn meeting adjourned at 10:08 P.M. 13 Northwest Suburban Chamber of Commerce Box 192 • Hamel, MN 55340 The Northwest !suburban Chamber of Commerce works to advance the commercial, industrial and rive interests of the people in the trade areas of the cities of Corcoran. Loretto, Medina and Plymouth. August 3, 1957 Orono City Council 1335 S. Brown Rd. Crystal Bay, Mn. 55323 Dear Council Members; The Board of Directors of the Northwest Suburban Chamber of Commerce support the concept of extending Co. Rd. 116 south of Highway 55 to Highway 12. The reasons for our support are many; such as safety, convenience, relief of rural and residential roads, and for further growth of industrial and commercial possibilities. The Boards members look forward to your responsible decision regarding this matter. Sincerely, '.ark Scherino President MS/kl ei NWS C of C ALV 44W IIIDLPtti DiilT SCHOOL DISTRICT /21? ME S T OMRA PU& I C SCHOOLS 5600 Lynwood Blvd Mound, Minnesota 553164 EaRAR/01116MilATlONA1, 3CNM 1110M LIEET1116 I110110AT. ART iT. i11111 (Minutes to be approved August 10. 1"?) ATTMINIAKE/ The regular/organizational Meeting of the school board LOCATid6 was called to order at 8.05 p a in the lecture Nall of the Ueston.}s Community Center Present Board Members Fritz Fr*. w. Hallowell, PeChttf, Pltsch and s-.hmtdt board Mamf.er Gary Royer was absent Also pr.%enc wort Sup* rInle•K.enl %CAIth, Larry Litman, `:: 1- rvi(es Director. Sandra S(hmtdt, Bushes, Manager, -I-, klska, Facllltlr,/Tran%portat'c-% Director. Ivars. [rant. Olstrltt ktfo"ey, Staff. Newspaper Reporters Mr Pltsch welcomed Supefintendent. Or Joases Smith, and new Board Member Thomas Frahm OBGMIIATIONA[ Chairperson Pro Teo Fritsch called for nominations for PWIEO1NGS school board chairperson N..11owell nominated Pltsch Schmidt moved that nominations be (losed Seconded by Pechtel. All members voted a;s. Pltsch assume the chair and welcow,d all present to tTre meeting He announced that after the organizational meeting inere would be a short regular meeting 'ollowed by a closed meetir for negot:atloo purposes P'•tcn nomin.y,td Hallowell for vice chairperson Schmidt d that t-minstions be closed. seconded by Fritz members v,•tee aye with the ea(eptlon of Hallowell. abstained S,hmldl nominattu Pechtel for (I@,it Frahm moved nominations be closed, seconded by Schmidt Pechtel unanimously declared clerk. Na)lowo:l nominated Fritz for school board treasurer Schmidt moved nominations be closed, seconded by Pe,*L.; Fritz w1S ur- Ilmously elected Irtaswrer, whereupon Chairperson Pltsch administered the Treasurer s (lath of Office COMENT ACAMA/ Pachtel moved, seconded b� Scnmldt that the school board 0001I1ATIOW approve the Consent agenda Itimes 1) cownsation of IEETIRG school board members, 1) appointments and memberships, Unanimously approved COMMIT Aif!rP-'• 711-1,persoo P►ts(m adviseC that Items a and 6 would be B)U M RIEa-lib; deleted He then solicited coainents from the audience tarry Lltmam Inferike ❑resent that Or Smith led he heA atteafed t -here the superintendelit s Vic tt^. CM a r. .,br by the Sthouis d+struts of t;. mo an a att0.. !OGperatl.e prOQram wi►1. District Z! Ayr program Involves students '" Or •• emottonally Or behaviorally Jlsordered we wos.ld host '.he @Iementar, and Orono the high s(n+,oI the )a•Il r of the costs would be borne by 7NI Thi% enture for us Lonna Smith, Presldtet Of the Mou" feder•t•�.,i. of leathery welcomed Or Smith to the district the sp.,le :,f the Federatioll's ,(Ilvity In tte aftnnesote Federatfva, which Is now for Its edvcatlon -eform One of Helped Wstueka s fea.sers, Duane Fide. was one of the authors of a reform -t Ialled 'Striking a Better Bargain' One of the s -ngths to our district is Our currl(ulum Tile teoctNrs ark prqud of it She also welcomed Gretchen isalioa*t ' back or the board and Thomas franm as a newly elected meager C[ENe Pechtel a..:ed, SP(ondrr by Schmidt, that the t(hool board appri,ve as presenter Minutes of the regular school ,wet Ir of July 1 -bf A friendly omlen,lownI was Intro d to correct t agenda Item to read ter mirute,. of J( 8, seconded by Hall owe l ; Un A•I loco s l y Ol • uved by ^01: all vote �Og11TTE[ F1tSch asked the board members to indi(ate (heir v-:ferMre BIPMTS for committee assignments and give to him before Its v;wg the meeting Or Smith presented* plan fir the Adm(n strative leader* is of the kkstcnka Public r -bolt Ire 2wtile•;d a si■ month plan to be at ompitshed a ru Janiary I V" Pe(htel - Polley COgm There -ill be a School Board Study Session on July I be of teedlnce policy and buAtiet Maitre. Hal lowtll ret-urt,•d on the open ter •nl sit Wlio" Sake presented s_ow f y pros and (on of open ewrolimfeel Slid Sold —et nit *-%y of the metrolwlilam schools are involved with It Tt••. board will need to consider It in long range M anning •(r •e I; will affect stalling and funding TKA3MA'S Pechtel moved, seconded b well, that '+. s: +.,oi boa J KPORT approve as presented ., ,urrent flnan(is, dotumenls Including f-11 s paid after the last board meeting .-.d parmlrtt of current b Its and tISOM% and routine transfer u•' f.,wds for budget mstntenan(• ' 0011 call vote all ate to -tat P'ls(h who abstained �i i 87 CLOSED IEfT111i Pltsch announced that the school b,..-d would ateet in 1NEPENKN1 S[+1�LII T 01STRIC c os:d session row the purposes of negotiations Immediately Yestaw.ta Iti►ilc follow'nq the board mtetlnq and it will be taped pursuant AM IywMsd Bwlevard to Minn. Statute 471.705, .nd• 111nmrsot• SS364 PERSOM i Motion by techtel, seconded by SClaaidt that 'he school T>fARSK"C !+ P)oard approve the Personnel Transactions as staled in agenda item a5 with the addition of eapioytalent for Bendy Ehnert secondary 0 6 F T.E. Science Teacher" Unanimously approved by roll call vote CUI1110IC11lIN1 RETORT There was no curriculum report SCMDQ BOAND MINUTES '.PICIAI (iOUD fEETia+. COIM/Iltt Schmidt seconded the notion by Perhtel that the school July 13. 1981 SE WICES ADV. board approve the reappu+ntatent fcr two-year terns, of [Obit gamuts the following Coaaaunity Services Advisory Council members ATTENOAMCE/ Tlit awe tIm, s ,al led to o•der at g-a p st iP inr ie Iu•e Karol :ho.on. Jim Regan, Cathy Salley. Barbara Sidders, LOCATION Malt of th. P—tonta CoawK,r r.attr Gordon Tulberq David Ecklund's now had been withdrawn ,,revlous to the meeting In Attendance were Board _Abs,s r.••rs.. aritf, In,r,as Frahm, 810 ACCE/TANK( fbtton by Pe(httl• seconded by Schmidt that the school GrttcAtn Hallowell, Bonnie Pechttl, Nod P'ts,n and ;ue Schmidt Also board accept the Did of Valley contracting of White Bear pr*sent were Superintendent )awes iw,ih• Sandra Schwtnt, vict.,r Mists and Ivars lratts, attar ney Lake. for $73,460. amount subject to negotiations for additional asbestos removal not included to specifications 13nanitaously approved by roll call vote. LEASE AGKFPV RT Pechttl moved that the school board approve the short-terwi IEETIM6 Disc,ss+ons were hr - egarding negotiations to a closed school boarq miPlr^q wnirh was tape rt,orded to occupam ncy agreement with Intermiedlate School District u�•swnl applicable ltinnest'a statutes /?87 the motto" was seconded b; Schmidt. Noll call vote. all aye, notion approved ADJOUB NT The meeting adjourned at B 40 p w. Ap,101R1111111ERl Inc met It"( was •dtc•• rued at It 00 p w Bonn ie--p-e-chtel, Clerk `Dame Pp( htei, alert kOdnne) l Pit sclt• I:Aalnnan *Complete doc ~ Cation can be found In the perwanent Eoalwy-L _1%SCV._ ftTimiw- minute book. (:ITY of OK()N() his, Wfia• Nix (it)0Crywlal [ia; NIinnesuta •`>.`>:1'La•Municipal (Kfirex On the North Shore nj hake Minnec ka August 4, 1987 Chief Don Bryce Mound Fire Department 5341 Maywood Road Mound, MN 55364 Subject: City of Orono - ?SO Ratings Dear Chief Bryce, Recently you received a copy of a memo to the Orono City Council regar(4ing the change in the insurance classification in the City of 0. This letter is written to thank you, as one of the City':. _ :? departments, for the work you have done in the upgrading of you: fire department. This has assisted the City of Orono in going from a class 7 to class 6 in the hydranted areas. While this does not have an ;.ffect on insurance premiums paid by single family residential property, it does help with other classes of property. Your efforts in -quipment, training and tactics are all of assistance in this upgrade. On behalf of the Orono City Council I would like to thank you and invite you to attend `he Council's meeting on August 24, 1987 at 7:00 P.m. so the Council members can meet you as a representative of your department. Let me know if you can attend. Look forward to seeing you there. Sincerely, I+. 1� it I tk Bernhardson City Adminis'-ator MEB/dh cc: Mayor and Coun(.- i 1 Mel Kilbo, Police C►t--- Tom Jacobs, Building -:,ector BUILDING & LIWING 4717117 • ADMJNISrftA+"N %tiff - 4717158 • PV*Lk WORKS 473-7359 ASU SSI N4 i a (:ITY of ORONO Office NIX title( 'rystal liar. Minnesota S`OZfeMunic►pal Officer On the North Shore of Lake Minnetonka August 4, 1987 Chief Rz McCoy Maple Plain Fire Department 1645 Pioneer Avenue Maple Plain, MN 55359 Subject: City of Orono - ISO Ratings Dear Chief McCoy, Recently you received a copy of a memo to the Orono City Council regarding the change in the insurance classification in the City of Orono. This letter is written to thank you, as one of the City's fire departments, for the work you have done in the upgrading of your fire department. This has assisted the City of Orono in going from a class 7 to class 6 in the hydranted areas. While this does not have an affect on insurance premiums pail by single family residential property, it does halp with other classes of property. Your efforts in equipment, training and tactics are all of assistance in thiq „,grade. On behalf of the Orono City Council I would like to thank you and invite you to attend the Council's meeting on August 24, 1987 at 7:00 P.m, so the Council members can meet you a& a representative of your department. Let me know if you can attend. Look forward co seeing you there. Sincerely, Mark Bernhardson City Administrator MEB/dh CC: Mayor and Council Mel Kilbo, Police Chief Tom Jacobs, Building Inspector Bill MN(:& /ONINC 471 7137 • 4I)MINI$l`XAf10N & FI%A%(F 473 733A • ►l At.t( WORKS - 4'1•7JS9 ASUSSINI, CATY 4 ORO NO Post 01fi(v Nix (ifieCrystal Ni+y, Minnrxnta r),:iZieMunicipal Office." On the North Shore of Lake Minnetonka August 4, 1987 Chief. Rick Perry Long Lake Fire Department 1964 Park Avenue Long Lake, MN 55356 Subject: City of Orono - ISOC Ratings Dear Chief Perry, Recently you received a copy of a memo to the Orono City Council regarding the change in the insurance classification in the City of Orono. This letter is written to thank you, as one of the City's f ire departments, for the work you have done in the upgrading of your fire department. This has assisted the City of Orono in going from a class 7 to clzAss 5 in the hydranted areas. While this does not have an affect on insurance premiums paid by single family residential property, it does help with other classes of property. Your efforts in equipment, training and tactics are all of assistance in this upgrade. On behalf of the Orono City Council I would like to thank you and invite you to attend the Council's meeting on August 24, 1987 at 7:00 P.m. so the Council members can meet you as a representative of your department. Let me know if you can attend. Look forward to seeing you there. Sincerely, I� 1 Mark Bernhardson City Administrator 4EB/dh Cc: Mayor and Council Mel Kilbo, Police Chief Tom Jacobs, Building Inspector NVILDIN(: & IONING - 471 7 W • AI)MINISTRATION t FINANCF 471 715R • 1•I OLIO WORKS - 471 7139 ASist. ;1*41 A (:ITY 4 ORO NO Post Office Box 66*Cry4ta1 hay. Minnesota !63234Municipal Offices On the North Shore of Lake Minnetonka August 4, 1987 Chief Paul Klapprich Wayzata Fire Department 600 East Rice Street Wayzata, MN 55391 Subject: City of Orono - ISO Ratings Dear Chief Klapprich, Recently you received a copy of a memo to the Orono City Council regarding the change in the insurance classification in the City of Orono. This letter is written to thank you, as one of the City's fire departments, for the work you have done in the upgrading of your fire department. This has assisted the City of Orono in going from a class 7 to class 6 in the hydranted areas. While this does not have an affect on insurance premiums paid by single family residential property, it does help with other cl Gses of property. Your efforts in equipment, training and tactics are all of assistance in this upgrade. On behalf of the Orono City Council I would like to thank you and invite you to attend the Council's meeting on August 24, 1Q87 at 7:00 P.m. so the Council members can meet you as a repre. ative of your department. Let me know if you can attend. Look ward to seeing you there. Sincerely, I Mank Rernhardson City Administrator MEB/dh cc: Mayor and Council Mel Kilbo, Police Chief Tom Jacobs, Building Inspector 11111A)INC & /0%1'V(. 471 ? 157 • AIIMINISTRAnoN & FINANCt 471 7)SA • Ft'Blit WORKS 4737359 AWSSIN41 Lake Minnetonka Cable Communications Commission 443 OAK STREET • EXCELSIOR, MINNESOTA 55331 • (612) 474 5539 AUG 01987 i TO: LMCCC Conviii ssi oners FROM: Holly Hansen ,,ATE: August. 7, 1981 RE: Channel and Rate Channel Dowden Cablesystenls has recently mailed you a letter that is going out to all subscribers regarding rate changes and channel changes. The LMCCC will be dis- cussing this at our full Commission meeting caning up on Tuesday, August 18th at 5:Co p.m, Enclosed are the minutes of the July LMCCC Executive COITIII1ittee meetinT, a copy of a letter to Dowden Cablesystems, and a list of the current and proposed channel designations to give you some backgound information on this issue. As a result of the 1984 Federal Cable Act the LMCCC can ro longer regulate rates and cable services, provirian the mix, level, and quality of service remain the same. However, we sti 1 , authority over the access channels and I feel this is the appropriate time rify these channel designations and positions. It is important that the LMCCC take steps to protect the existence of the access channels in the interest of the public. !Please see 8/6/87 lette► to Dowden.) Our Franchise Ordinance requires three separately designated P.E.G. (Public, Educational, and Government) access channels, and this requirement is protected by both Federal and State law. State law also requires metro area cable operators to carry a uniform Regional Channel which has been designated by the state as VF " channel 6. Until all these channesl become operational, a cable operat, •y catr-y other programming services on these channels. The Regional Channel is t.. ,eted to begin progranuning on 10/4/87, and I feel that the need for the activation of the Government Channel will be forthcoming within the next 6 - 12 months. The five school districts in our CST (Cable Service Territory) are all beginning to generate more programming which translates into a need for their own channel in the not too distant future as well. Dowden currently, and in their new channel line-up only has two channels designated for P.E.G. access: channels 48 and 420. I feel that with the forthcoming channel line-up change now i - the appropriate time to have the third P.E.G. channel clearly designated. You will also note in the new channel line-up that no prov i c i on has been made for Regional Channel 6. The Commission has the authority to require the desi c- nation of these channels and I feel it should do so at the present time. Please feel free to contact me if you have any questions at all regarding these channels, as it is important for you to understand and protect their function. An Agenda, proposed 1938 Budget, Semi -Annual Budget Report, and proposed Travel Policy wi I be sent to v.-iij in the next few days p► r to our meeting on August IRt.h. Sincerely, Holly Hansen Administrator MINUTES LAKE MINNETONKA CABLE COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION 5:00 P.M., EXCELSIOR T.V. STUDIO TUESDAY, JULY 21, !987 I. CALL TO ORDER Chairman Haggerty called the July 21, 1987 meeting to order at 5:03 p.m. ROLL CALL Directors Present Jerry Roehl Tom Anderson Dean Johnson Lesley Hughes -Seamans Jim Olds Dennis Haggerty Others Present Holly Hansen Mary Smith Shelly Quaas II. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Motion 7.21.87.1: Olds moved, seconded by Anderson, to approve the June 16, 1987 m,.nutes as written. Motion carried unanimously. III. REPORTS A. TREASURER Jerry Roehl went over the semi-annual budget report. He suggested to the Commission that LMCCC should nk about setting up separate funds for specific purposes. Motion 7.21.87.2: Just Claims: Ro. ..oved, seconded by Olds, to approve just claims as written on ExhAb`t A. Motion carried unanimously. B. ADMINISTRATIVE Administrator Hansen informed the Commission that two new ..,zployees have started; they are sharing the 20 '*,our week; their names are Jeff Olson and Bill Strohm. Hansen Explai;►eJ to the Commiss?on that she has met wit►► some of the City Managers to discuss the development of governmental programming. Shorewood, Tonka Bay and Excelsior are interested in a start-up offer by the LMCCC to video tape their Council Meetings. Administrator Hansen would like to get a short-term Planning Committee organized to review topics such as the 1988 budget, Channel realign- ment and a new idea which is Community T.V. Hansen explained that the concept of Community T.V. is to offer video service at a nominal charge for Community Organizations that may not have the staff, volunteers or know how to produce a )rogram. Hansen feels that with the current staff this program •ould be started. Lesley Hughes -Seamans, Jerry Roehl and Jim Olds volu:iteered for the short-term Planning Committee. Administrator Hansen mentioned the NATOA (National Association of Telecommunications Officers and Advisors) conference coming up September 19 through the 23 in Milwaukee. Hansen sta*ed that there is not enough money budgeted for the NATOA conference and the MACTA conference also coming up. The cost for two people to atter:� the NATOA conference would be $1,488.00 and t►le MACTA conference would be $25.00 per persuu. LMCCC MINUTES page two III. REPORTS - cont. B. ADMINISTRATIVE - cont. Motion 7.21.87.3: Anderson moved, seconded by Johnson, t-, increase 'he conference budget by $300.00 from the unallocated funds to cover the upcoming conferences. Motion carried unanimously. Motion 7.21.87.4: Anderson moved, seconded by Johnson, to allow two Commission members to attend the NATOA conference to include the conference, airfare and hotel. Motion carried unanimously. C. DOWDEN CABLE SYSTEMS Mary Smith presented a subscriber statistics report to the Commission, it consists of beginning numbers of subscribers with basic, pay service connects, disconnects, percentage of non-i.Ays, and percentage of subscribers moving. January began with 3963 Subscribers to the end of June with 4206 subscribers. IV. BUDGET 1988 Hansen and Roehl hoped to have a preliminary 1988 budget prepared for the July meeting but Mill have one ready for the August meeting. Hansen would like th- shor`,;-term Pl-nning Committee to help in the preparation of the 1988 budget. V. AUDIT REPORT Jerry Roehl briefly went over the W.F. Denny & Co. 1986 Audit report. Roehl suggested that it would be a good idea to compare hog: the 1986 audit actually compares to the 1986 budget. VI. ASSISTANT TREASURER Jerry Roehl LMCCC's current treasurer asked Jim Olds if he would assist the Commission by becom; -, the Assistant Treasurer for the purpose of signing checks w„--n Roehl is not available. Motion 7.21.87.5: Anderson moved, seconded by Hughes -Seamans, to appoint Jim Dlds as Assistant Treasurer. Motion carried unanimously. VII. TRAVEL POLICY Administratcr Hansen proposed to the Commission a travel policy recommendation. Hansen feels it is important to have a travel policy for the Commission. Motion 7.21.87.6: Johnson moved, seconded by Olds, to refer the proposed recommended travel policy to the short-term Planning Committee to draw up a proposed travel policy fur the Commission to present it at the August Full Commissions meeting. Motion -arried unanimously. VIII. CONFERENCE REPORTS A. Madison Legal Conference Dean Johnson reported on the conference. A few of the topics covered were; Hist.or%, of Cable in the early 060's, Franchise legalities, aspects .,, finances in c 'e, k'.F.G. and more. Johnson found the conference to be comprei.ene. i % a and valuable. -2- VIII. IX. X. LMCCC MINUTES page three CONFERENCE REPORTS cont. B. NFLCP (National Federation of Local Cable ProgrammorsZ Chairman Haggerty was overwhelmed by the size of the conference. He felt that `:innesota was well represented at the conference, he also thanked Administrator Hansen for being so helpful ac the conference. Lesley Hughes -Seamans was impressed with the Key speakers, she felt that the conference didn't offer as many production oriented seminars this year, but it helped .ter to choose other topics that she otherwise may have overlooked. Administrator Hansen informed the Commission that Homework Hotline won a NFLCP award. Lesley Hughes -Seamans won a Metro area Slate award, for Community programming. UNFINISHED BUSINESS Mary Smith reported that Dowden will be increasing its rates on basic service and will collap a tier 1 service. Tier 1 presently includes channe:a 2 - ?` and -osts $7.35 per month. Tier 2 includes channels 26 - 3F r i 3dditional $5.00 per month. Existing subscribers wil. be graadfathered in at the original rate and tier structure for a period of time, and new subscribers will be charged the higher rate once it becomes effective. Tha actual dollar figure and the price increase has not been established; in addition to the increase, Dowden is considering lowering prices in premium packages, remotes, and second sets. Dowden is also r inning to add two new services to basic service: Cable Ad Chann, and Data Broadcast Corporation, a stock market reporting service. Ms. Smith also mentioned that Dowden is heading towards the Metro Area Uniform Charnel Line-up agreed upon by the cable consortium, but that the P.E.G. (Public, (8,19,20) Educational, and Government) access channels will stay where they are for now on the Lake Minnetonka system due to headend costs in these channels. Ms. Smith will meet with Administrator Hansen to d`coss the proposed changes. LMCCC Commissioners will be notified before notices qo out to the subscribers. ADJOURNMENT 4-,tion 7.21.6" Olds moved, sEconded by Roehl, to adjourn t'ie Jul, 21 , -. � - inq at 7:25 p.m. Motion carried unanimously. RESPECTFULLY SUBMI'rrED, Shelly Quaas LMCCC JUST CLAIMS 6/17;P7 - 7/21/87 CHECK # DATE PAYABLE AMOUNT ACCOUNT 1446 '3 NFLC" Cont( ror, $ 645.00 Conferences 1447 3 C hi c ago '' 1 ton Tower s 416 . <<4 Conferences 1448 27 O'Conr 'ianr, ri 6,617.61 Spec. - TFR 10020 6/30 Frederic uoul .er 130.59 Payroll 1:'021 6/30 Holly Hansen 687.42 Payrol i 1449 7/62 P.E.R.A. 79.06 P.E.R.A. 1450 7'02 Holly Hansen (Madison Cc .,ice) 70.00 Conferences 1451 7/02 Holly Hansen (NATOA entr 25.00 Miscellaneous 1452 71112 Holly Hansen (he'ath in,, %;P/ 221.46 Health ins. 1453 7/07 Weekly News Inc. 24.04 Spec. - TFR 1454 7107 Southwest Sub-,rban Publish 24.7C Spec. - TFR 1.455 7/07 Cinequipt, Inc. 47.-)2 Spec. - VIDEO 1456 7107 Hance Hprdware 136.1.3 Spec. - VIDEC 1457 7107 Paychex Inc. 25.7E Sect'l. Svcs. 1458 7107 Gross Office Supply 55.16 Office Supplies - 459 7107 N.W. Bell 58.00 Telephone 1460 7107 AT&T Communications 1.37 Telephone 1461 - 07 Skads Travel Service 456.00 Conferences 1462 i/O' Cablevision 36.00 Subscriptions 1463 7,1 Multichannel News 25.00 -bscriptions 1464 7/6, N.L.C./NATOA IOC.00 nberships 1465 7/14 Bank Excelsior 514.79 --d. Taxes 10022 %'15 Holly Hansen 678.42 Payroll 1,1023 7,' i', Jeffrey Olson 41.65 Payro l l !"V4 7/15 William Strohm 81 ?9 Payroll 1.F5 7/15 P.E.R.A. 82.94 P.E.-..A. 14(•-.' 7/15 Ralpt. Campbell (it. Commissions fdci1.) 40.00 `Aisic e11aneous 1468 7121 Tonka Printing Company 42.30 Repro. 1469 7121 Prentice-Ha11 3.00 Spec. - ":DEi" 1470 7121 N.W. Bell 61.43 Telephone 1471 7/21 Shelly quaas 60.00 Sect'l Svcs. ?472 7121 Holly Hansen (mileage) 23.94 Miscellaneous 1473 7121 Holly riansen ('.FLCP Conference) 9' 42 Conferences 1474 7121 U.S. Postma%ter _72.00 Postaqe 1475 7121 P.E.R.A. 9.00 P.E.R.A. Life 1476 7/21 Dean John:nn (airfare reimtiursemert) 40.00 Conferences TOTAL :.,.AI""1-. S11,683.06 BANK EXCELSIOR CT; -' :.APIT(N.. CREDIT UNION Bei-nnTi Balance 6/16/87 b 3,093.b,s 3 Nance 0,398. 2 Interest 38.88 Excelsior 0 5.000.00) Deposits: Into _st end quarter 435.86 Dowden Cable ;,artrers, L.P. (Tfr.) 6,212.24 ENDINC,, BALANCE St. Paul Capital Credit Unicn 15,000.00 Minneto-k 1-cnool District 1,000.00 Popher,. 26.50 Ad jus* heck i' ^014 .80 Claims 7/'' _L11_t683.W LNUING :. -NC $--ISA88.99 DOWDEN CA9LESYSTEMS CHANNEL LINE UP CHANNEL # CURRENT STATUS PROPOSED CHANGE " 2 KTCA KTCA 3 CNN Headline News CNN* 4 WCCO WCCO 5 KSTP KSTP 6 Electronic Program Guide/ Nickelodeon* Regional Interconnect 7 WTBS LIF* 8 Public Access/Government Public Access/Bovernme,z/Cmty. Ch. 9 KMSP KMSP 10 USA ESPN* 11 KARE KARE 12 P71 USA* 13 NickelU4eon WGN* 14 LIF WTBS* 15 C-SPAN I CNN HEADLINE* 16 CBN A&E* 17 KTCI KTCI 18 Weather Channel Weather Channel 19 Leased Access CAC/leased* 20 Public/Education Access Public/Educational Access 21 CVN CVN 22 Learning Channel WOR* 23 KX. L I KTMA* 24 KITN FNN/SCORE/G::�C* 25 VH-1 VH-1 26 MTV 27 Nashville Network Nashville Network 28 ESPN Learning Channel* ?9 WGN KI lN* 3C WoR C-SPAN 1* 31 A&E C-S.'AN 11* 3? KTMA CBS+* 33 CNN PTL* 34 FNN KxLI* 35 C 1 NEMAX C INE14AX 31 HBO HBO 39 DISNEY DISNEY 41 SHOWTIME SHOWTIME wepdrof by imccC) Lake Minnetonka Cable Communications Commission 443OAK STRUT • CXCELSIOR MINNI`;UTA!,5.1'i1 • 0,11,414Y,3'1 August 6, 1987 Mrs. Mary Smi th Dowden Cablesystems 2381 Wilshire Boulevard Mound, MPS 55364 Dear Mary, I am writing per our phone c(:nversation of ye,.terdav and the designatiLi of the P.t.G. Channels, the Regionai Channel, and leased Access Channels. In the channel changes recently pr,)pf ad by Dowden Cablesystems, 1 feel that this is the dpprcpriate time to clarify +he designations of ttve afore -mentioned channels. The access ..hannc,ls for P.E.G. (Public, Educational, and Government) purpose,_ -hould at this time be separately designated as -equired in the franchise Ordinance. I would recommend that these channels be designated as follows: Channel 8 Government Channel 20 Public Channel 21 Educational As I mentioned to you on the phone, it is up to the lake Minnetonka Cable ConVUF1ica- ti ons Corrmi ssi on to grant approval of these channel designations and my job as admin- istrator only to make recommendations. Dowden may program the unused channels (at this point in tine channels 8 and 21) until the Commission solely determines that the need exists to activate these channels a�, designated (Government and lducational). 1 tiv Reyiolydl Channel should be designated as Channel 6 as mandated by Minnesota State law and our Franchise Ordinance. Again, Dowden may program rhannel 6 until the kegicnal Ctkinne) becomes operative, which is presently scheduled for Xtober 4, 1987. As a resu, ;u Cable Act of 1984, leaked channel requirerents for the Lake Minot- tonka systerl are IQ of the active channels. With 31 active channels, this translates to 3.8 channels w►►i c h I hove been informed should be r�junded up to 4 desi Una ted leased (hannels. the leased channel numbers can be designated at. Dowden's discretion, and again, these channels may be used for othe- progrsr+ar+inct services unti 1 the need to provide leased access Lrises. The intent of this letter is to c larify the channel designations for P.E.G., the Regiun- ai Chonntl, and leased Access. These desicnations should next be for iali7ed and ;we- sented to the Camission for approval as I do not hove tx)licy-nrakiny auttorlty in 'hi 5 matter. It yru find these ctw�vl designations acceptable, 1 will proceed with hidvin, ► rrrsv- lution prepared for the August kith Colrwrission Meetif►q. Please contat t me rr,..-ard1r%:1 your decision on the above r tral C t14, 11 parr, "'!rll ;ir,1!fo l c I1�f It M!Aik Avo t t e -