HomeMy WebLinkAbout02-26-2001 Council PacketPUBLIC ATTENDANCE
MEETING DATE .7- ;2 b C
COUNCIL
PLANNING COMMISSION
❑ PARK COMMISSION
❑ OTHER
PRESENT FOR (from agenda)
NAME (please print) ADDRESS
PLEASE FILL OUTTHEINFORMATIONREQUESTED
BELOW FOR OUR CITY RECORDS.
NAME OR NUMBER
11'G
I - goo
�;4 cr-n
M
S.- ' " F. SiN /.L11 �7��(�(,hl Tel O S&I'4lU"
t3.
i..w...rvi.�.,uocroaNnrwx..n
i I '
AGENDA FOR COUNCIL MEETING SET FOR MONDAY, FEBRUARY 26, 2001, 7:00 P.M.
ORONO COUNCIL CHAMBERS, 2780 KELLEY PARKWAY, ORONO, MINNESOTA
(*) Asterisk items are considered to be ro,ttine items to be enacted upon by one motion by the City Council
under the Consent Item* on the agenda. Memos regarding each of the Agenda items are available in the
Public Packet - located on the counter near the sign in sheet.
ROLL CALL
1. Park Commission Interviews
COIAInn �A.CTINO
CONSENT ,'.GENDA FEB 2 b 2000
2. Approve/Amend
CITY err �.nvivU
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
' * 3. Regular Council Meeting of February 12, 2001
PARK COMMISSION COMMENTS - Rick Meyers
./LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT - Lili McMillan, Representative
,,4LANNING COMMISSION COMMENTS
PUBLIC COMMENTS - (Limit 5 Minutes Per Person)
ZONING ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT
JA�.' #2450 Glenn and Sandra Gronberg, 325 Willow Drive North - Extension of Preliminary Plat
Approval - Resolution
5l� #2550 Charles Van Eeckhout, 120 Brown Road South - Preliminary Plat - Denial Resolution
�6. #2631 City of Orono - Zoning Code Amendment - RPUD Residential Planned Unit
Development District - Ordinance
,7. #2639 City of Orono - Zoning Code Amendment - Section 10.52, Section 10.52: Add RPUD
to list of Allowable Zoning Districts in Highway 12 Corridor Study Area - Ordinance
#2640/2641 Orono Amber, LLC, 2060 Wayzata Boulevard - General Concept Plan Review (Action
to Continue)
4 #2650 Kirsten and Patrick Burton, 2601 Rainey Road - Variances - Resolution
,16 #2651 Robin and Jeremy Bupp, 2696 Caroline Avenue - Variances - Resolution
• 11. #01.2660 Keith Waters and Associates for Jeffrey and Leontyne Maxwell - 740 Willow Drive
South - Variances - Resolution
• 12. #01-2662 RVC Homes, 1080 Wildhurst Trail - Variance - Resolution
MAYOR/COUNCIL REPORT
PUBLIC SERVICE DIRECTOR'S REPORT
13. Bid Award - 2001 Materials and Equipment
6 I Approval of 2001 Park Mowing Contract
15, Revised Assessment Roll for St. Edwards Church Sewer and Water Service -Resolution
AGENDA FOR COUNCIL MEETING SET FOR MONDAY, FEBRUARY 26, 2001, 7:00 P.M.
ORONO COUNCIL CHAMBERS, 2780 KELLEY PARKWAY, ORONO, MINNESOTA
CITY ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT
+ W Appointment of Administrative Support Assistant
17. Planning Commission Appointments
18. Scheduling of Work Session
CITY ATTORNEY'S REPORT
• 19. LICENSES
Home Occupation
Kennel
• 20. BILLS
UPCOMING ISSUES AND EVENTS
wl
0226 -Council Meeting, 7:00 p.m.
03/05 -Park Commission, 7:15 p.m.
03/12 -Council Meeting. 7:00 p.m.
03/19 -Planning Commission, 6:30 p.m.
0326 -Council Meeting, 7:00 p.m.
PARK COMMISSION APPLICANT INTERVIEW
Criteria
Excellent
Good
Fair
Poor
Interest in serving on the Park Commission
Knowledge, skills abilities and experience
Familiarity with the following items:
a. The Park Plan section of the City's
Community Management Plan
b. The City's Park Dedication Ordinance
c. The City's bike/hike trail plan
d. The City's current park facilities
Support of current Programs/Policies and Philosophy
of City
Perspective on Council/Park Commission
responsibilities and relationship
Perspective on key issues facing the Park
Commission
�loarn utcE'fl�
FEB 2.6 20
Gttj ur unora
APPLICATION FOR CITIZEN ADVISORY COMMISSION
DEC i i 2ono CITYof ORONO
,�.
'1;�.� l4 OirY v, vri0i�0 Municipal Offices + Street Wren: Mellor{ address:
�Kp�' 2750 Kelley Parkway P.O. Box 66
JOrono, MN 55356 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 0066
Commission Applying For: 21 Parks Commission ❑ Planning Commission
❑ Community Task Force (Name)
Name Paul Kerr _
Address 4680 West Branch Road_0[1<7to
Post Office& Zip Code Mound 55364
Telephone (H) 952-472-6890 (W)612-685-8464
Resident of Orono ae of 8/1/00 years.
Work Experience:
I have anent 21 Years in the plumbing industry. T begannppras an
..ntlnm and wnrked my way up to a plumbing inspector with the
F58y of Minnwanolis T have designed and laid out plumbing
inatn'lln+inna
n lawma nuatnm hnmmg and larep rommercill sDflpeB.
(CO✓ahnuea()
Education:
iraduation from Cedar mane sigh School (Iowa) in 1979•
'Jpnnapin Toehninal rnilege r various small business courses.
Minwondy Instir a variety 17 plumbing, cusses and updates.
Civic and Volunteer Activ7*19s (past and present):
h I Is elsior I helped the Park and Recreation
C ittp, by selling bat ride tickets and oavine bricks during_
.red ..aiming events, I also helped with clean up after 4th of July
celebration. I regularly attended City Coo.ncil vnd Planning Coaimisi't.
meetings.
Telephuoe (612) 473.7357 a FAX 4734510
Please state your reasons for wanting to serve on this Commission. (Please be as
specific as possible. Use additional sheet If necessary.)
An a memher of the community and a father. I would like to be
i nvnlveA in the ma5nLen. d development f tho Qrnno Parks and
onen Rnanes, I artjyply tga _th 'ja ks system and would like to
halr provide my children And rnmn,nity wj+t cafe and fun nlenes
for rporAntinn. At thp hpgrt fwall functinningonmmiinit
you will find a park
What is your view of the role of the Commission?
T Valipvp the rol f thA park nmmmiggion should incl . Je rnwth,
ir•clude what they may want from our parks.
Other Comments: (Use this space to include any further Information you would like
the City Council to consider, or that you feel is relevant to the appointment you are
seeking. You may also attach other materials you would like the Council to consider.)
nrnnn h thA fin,Rt_p,r A parks in the etc Area.
one of the firgt biking:.. hiking trnilg r
Phase which III sad, T l
with no people outside enioyine recreation areas Open spaces end
parks Provide a vital sense of cgmmunity where adu" en___,,,_.Id h— id*w
CConhSiu�
I understand this appointment
ttAmay be discussed at a public meeting.
SlgnMwo Don
"NOTE: Volunteer commission member's name, address and phone number
will become public information.
owns a
Work Experience continued
My experience has also involved service, repair and remodel within
the industry. My tasks have allowed me to work closely with
customers and their plumbing and heating problems.
Other Comments continued
can interact. Trails provide a healthy alternative means of
commuting that helps to ease traffic and pollution. These things
are very important to me and I believe they are important to a lot
of people.
1 believe I work well with others and would do my best to strive
to accomplish the wishes of the community. I am a hands on and
driven person who wants the best for my neighbors and family.
Paul Kerr
PARK COMMISSION APPLICANT INTERVIEW
Criteria
Excellent
Good
Fair
Poor
Interest in serving on the Park Commission
Knowledite, skills, abilities, and experience
Familiarity with the following items:
a. The Park Plan section of the Cir♦•'s
Community Management Plan
b. The City's Park Dedication Ordinance
c. The City's bike/hike trail plan
d. The City's current ark facilities
Support of current Programs/Policies and Philosophy
of City
Perspective on Council/Park Commission
responsibilities ane relationship
Perspective on key issues facing the Park
Commission
_
—
1PPLICATION FOH CITIZEN ADVISORY COMMISSION
Commission Applying For:
❑ Con
CITY of ORONO
Mixsncipal Offices
Street Address: Milling Address:
2750 Kelley Parkway P.O. Box 66
Orono, MN 55356 Crystal Bay, MN 55323 0066
Parks Commission
Ity Task Force (Name)_
Lx: _
Telephone (H)yeAy"7y// d"6.::>Z
Resident of Orono 13 years.
Work Experience:
O Planning Commission
(W) 3 s;7/ (.) 2,�. o
Education:
Zx — L eti ✓�� --
�eZi::l/a--
M
TeNshow (612)
• FAX 473-0510
Pleas' state your reasons for wanting to serve on this Commission. (Please be as
specfJlc as possible. Use additional ;heat If ne;*Ssary.) . , / ,
M
e", 7.1l�
other Comments: (Use this space to Include any further Information you would like
the City Council to consider, or that you feel is relevant to the appointment you are
seeking. Youmaya/so attach other materiels you would like the Council to consider.)
I understand �this appointment may he discussed at a public meeting.
5ipnemre Date
--NOTE: Volunteer commission member's name, address and phone number
will become public information.
n.ouu
&
am mom• vres MIEKA—
AGENDA MR COUNCIL MEEPDIG SET MR MONDAY. F ERRUARY 21,201,7M P.M.
ORONO WUNCIL CRAMBERS.2M P.ELLEY PARKWAY, ORONO, MINNESOTA
(•) Auni:t nemt.t<owu;mN w m Iomine ioou l0 x <oxsse tyen br arc molim er Orc cin Gx a
nWn m<Cnnem 1rcm• nn me9¢.W.. M<nt« mR.ming emn nrme AgeW. � ae.vailMR a m<
hbtic P<ctel-IontM Dome wuvtm nev me siSn in<M1m.
ROLLCALL
1. Pak Cpmm;aimbf,M<nn, rySth •.n
CONSENT AGENDA �•{•p ae!lT19g�
2. ApxiAWAmme LO 26 ft
APPROVALOPMPNIS Of,
3. (a._
• R<gWar CouneilhlntMof Pebrvmn1Z2M1 L gft
PARK N' COSINUMiOWfIN[ENTS-RCk Merm •V
LAKE RIITT'EI'O\lC> CONSERVATION DISI'RICL- Lih MCMi1W. Repmssntatiax
PUBLICCO>OIESb-mwit5Minuto POP, w)
ZONING ADMINISPMTOWS REPORT
<. 02430 Gltwi S.MtaG r.WS.325WJ Otive NO-EnennonofP iimknu
A"p-Rralufi.
5. Q550 C:mIn V¢EeeFIwoL 120 Btoxn Rw6 Scum-PrtluvwryPlni Oevial R<viution
6, #2631 Ciq of Omoo - Ianing Co6< Ameomttem - RPM R ni ial P Uni,
Oertlopnm Mi ct- ONinance
7 ._ow li, of0taw-Zonin3 Co3,Amen]mm-5¢tirn 1051 Snc. 10.32 AEI RPI'0
w IiUdAIIoxMte Zoning Dletnm in Cijlr n 12CamEm SW, Mn-Qdinmuv
S. 126NV2611 0mmAnlbv.LLC,21160N'e5> SiWnW TiemWConz,ZPWlfn a (A:vm
In rlI
9. Q650 U..W]` rik BurmR 2MIgaian Rw1-1viwxa-ReWut;on
::1 Robin rN krcmY BW. 2696 Cmlirc Aaenm- Vmantts-P,,wl,Ww
• ) I. WI-^_660 Csim 3Ve.-y W A<wculn for SeRm' oW L[anryne SI-11 - )M Win. Drier
5num-V-nenm-Rmlutian
• 13. Wt2662 RVC IInma, IMO A'ildN. T-1-Vuvnce-Rn 1.
MAYOWCOCSCILREPORT
PUBLIC SERVICE DIRECTOR'S REPORT
U. Bid .9ty-0-MI DWe 3W Egwpmmt
14. APPmuW 01201 PN Mowing Conoco
I5. Knifed Aswfinea RWlfar5t FAxvN ChucM1 Seun WN'nb$min-pwiutim
CPTY ABMINISTMTOR'3 REPORT
16. AppainmenlofA:.'Wtwln4ve3t:pgn AaYmt
1). PYmio9 Cmnminkn Ai4o'nw�rc
IS 5[bWWkWof'oorcsm�an
Cl2V ATEOR.NTrS REPORT
• 19, LICENSES
NomeOrcnWio^
Eamel
a BILLS
UPCO\ONG ISSUTS AND EVENTS
0=6-Coivcil Ma,fo, ) M p.m.
03N3-Pak C<mm;<c[¢ ovlx.colaeae®a. MToo0)p—
pm
Dula .IISRuR C'oapjvim 6]0 p.w
o3ru-c9mM.ma P.mvm
PARK COMMISSION APPLICANT INTERVIEW
Criteria
Excellent
Good
Fair
Poor
Interest in servin on Ure Park Conunission
Knowledge, skills abilities, and experience
Familiarity with the following items:
a. The Park Plan section of the City's
Conununity Management Plan
b. The City's Park Dedication Ordinance
c. The City's bike/hike trail plan
d. The City's current park facilities
Support of current Programs/Policies and Philosophy
of City
Perspective on Council/Park Commission
responsibilities and relationship
Perspective on key issues facing the Park
Commission
APPLICATION FOR CITIZEN ADvlaune t;umMISSiON
04Q
� CITY of ORONO
.Y;L7 Nlunkipal ORiees
Street Address:
2750 Kelley Parkwa7
Orono, MN 55356
Milling Address:
P.O. Box 66
C',—o.x, B,' 55323 0066
Commission Applying For: Z Parks Commission ❑ Planning Commission
❑ Community Task Force (Name)
Name _T �ATR=C A of Ft _
Address --) Y71 `ASCa )�p-=Wr RnAD
Post Office& Zip Code WAY2ATA 5S39'
Telephone (H) '/ % / • V A 4O (w) ;( 7/ - 9 Y O 0
Resident of Orono I O + _ years.
Telephone (612) 47}7)S7 • FAX 4730510
Please state your reasons for wanting to serve on this Commission. (Please be as
Is your view Rf the role of the
Other Comments: (Use this space to include any further information you would like
the City Council to consider, or that you feel is relevant to the appointment you are
seeking. You may also attach other materials you would like the Council to consider.)
I understand this appointment mey be discussed at a public meeting.
I-V-01
Signetu•e Date
•`PIO . Volunteer commission member's name, address and phone number
will become public information.
a.t."e
PARK COMMISSION APPLICANT INTERVIEW
Criteria
Excellent
Good
Fair
Poor
Interest in servipj on the Park Commission
Knowledge, skills, abilities, and experience
Familiarity with the following items:
a. The Park Plan section of the City's
Community Management Plan
b. The City's Park Dedication Ordinance
c. The City's bike/hike trail plan
d. The City's current park facilities
Support of current Programs/Policies and Philosophy
of City
Perspective on Council/Park Commission
responsibilities and relationship
Perspective on key issues facing the Park
COmmiasinn
1PPLICATION FOR CITIZEN ADVISORY COMMISSION
CITY of ORONO
Mf rrlclpal Onices
'i Street Address: Malllnt Address:
2750 Kelley Parkway P.O. Boa 66
Orono, MN 55356 Crystal Bay, MN 553230066
Commission Applying For: IwParks Commission ❑ Planning Commission
may, ❑ Community Task Force (Name)
Name // 1 " �� m i) 64-4-fuli-)
Telephone (H) ,7.5.7 — N 73 7,20 7 M
Resident of Orono ii 1Z years.
x
24
Civic and Volunteer Activities (past and present):
ws'r"'^fi— z._,'7yi,_'_..,., J%,'A.,_ /!'W�z/S.a,.
TdepLone (612) 473.7357 • FAX 473 0510
Please state your reasons for wanting to serve on this Commission. (Please be as
speYiflc aq possible. Use additional sheet ft necessary.!
._ ..s.rr. L., w lev Jitir..ltiri r % 'jI••T G t
LNG AM
J
Wha le your ylew of the role of the Commisslon7 1
r 1 i'.J. 1 , / .. J i d.r,....,.... n_ w . ..J
the City Council to consider, or that you feel is relevant ro me appointment yUu YIV
seeking. You may also attach other materials you would like the Council to consider.)
1 understand this appointment may be discussed at a public meeting.
_)Irk
sir..m. ou.
--NOTE: Volunteer commission member's name, address and phone number
will become public information.
3
ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING
MONDAY, FEBRUARY 12, 2001
ROLL
The Council met on the above -mentioned date with the following members present. Mayor
Barbara Peterson, Council Members Jim White, Jay Nygard, Richard Flint. and Bob
Ransevere. Representing staff were City Administrator Ron Moorse, City Attorney Tom
lsirrett, Planning Director Michael GafTron. Zoning Administrator Paul Weinberger, City
Engineer Tom Kellogg, Public Services Director Greg Gappa, and Recorder Alissa
Wintembeuner. Jim White and rom Kellogg arrived at about 6:40.
Mayor Peterson called the meeting to order at 6:30 p.m. �" r"QETtN(a
FEB 2 6 24
1. Planning Commission Interviews Uu rW-utivryu
Mr. Jule Hanoaliord was the first interview. H stated that he has been a resident of
Orono for 2 years, has 3 children in the Orono school district, ages 14, 11, and 9. He was
interested in the position because he feels it's important to give back to the community
and he plans to live in Orono for a long time.
Sansevere asked if he was familiar with the City's government. Mr. Hannaford stated he
was not specifically familiar with Orono's government, but as a lawyer he was familiar
with government proceedings in general.
Sansevere asked if he was available to commit his time to the Commission. He stated he
was fine with the scheduled meeting times. but did have a conflict on the second Monday
of each month.
Mayor Peterson asked if he was familiar with the City's philosophy. He stated he was
not.
Flint asked what kind of law he practices. \Ir. Hannaford replied he is in corporate law,
primarily transactional law for financial institutes.
Nygard asked if he was familiar with the job of the Planning Commission. He stated he
was, and the Planning Commission reviewed proposals and made recommendations to
the Council regarding zoning and development.
Seasevere asked if he felt the Planning Commission should follow rules closely. or if
they have some latitude. He stated he felt they should mostly go by the book.
Sansevere asked if there were any important issues that he was concerned about. Mr.
Hannaford stated he enjoys the quality of life in Orono. He feels issues need to be
balanced.
ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING
MONDAY, FEBRUARY 12, 2001
I. Planning Commission Interviews —Continued
White asked about his leadership style. He stated he is a team builder and feels a group
should determine leadership, and he would look for a consensus.
Sansevere asked if he would be willing to serve as an alternate. He stated he would.
Mr. Ronald (Butch) Zelinsky was the second interview. He stated he has lived in
Orono for 4 '/A years, has a 12-year-old in the Orono schools, loves the area, and would
like to add his perspective to the Planning Commission.
Mayor Peterson asked if he was familiar with Orono's Comprehensive Plan. Mr.
Zelinsky stated he was through recently acquiring property along Highway 12.
Sansevere asked if he had an idea of the direction Orono should go in the future. He
stated he felt the future depends on the Highway 12 cor. idor and relations with Long
Lake. He would like to see a downtown area with services that are currently not
available to create a sense of community with shops and gathering areas.
Flint asked if being a realtor would cause conflicts of interest. Mr. Zelinsky stated he
would fully disclose any conflicts and step back when appropriate.
Nygard asked if he was familiar with the job and time commitments of the Planning
Commission. He stated he would have no problem visiting sites and attending meetings.
He said he added a pool a couple of years ago and worked with the Commission. He
enjoyed the process.
Nygard asked if he felt he had to be strictly guided b% the Comprehensive Plan. He
stated he feels there should be a dialogue when tough issues arise and the Commission
should come to a consensus.
White asked about his vision of the future. Mr. Zelinsky felt the 2-5 acre minimum lot
size was critical and believed the City should hold firmly to the 2-acre minimum. He felt
the community had needs for community centers, restaurants, ano other gathering places.
Sansevere asked if he would be .villing to sen a as an alternate. He stated he would.
Ms. Susan Moseley was the third interview. She stated she has been a resident since
1988. She has run a small business and been a stockbroker. She was involved with the
Orono schools while her children were attending. She felt she would bring her interest,
desire, and enthusiasm to the Commission. She felt a city must meet the current needs of
its residents, but also plan for the future.
ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING
MONDAY, FEBRUARY 12, 2001
1. Planning Commission Interviews —Continued
White asked what steps should be taken toward the future. She stated a government
needs to listen and focus on growth goals, then sell its plans to the residents so they
understand the City's objectives.
Sansevere asked what issues she would focus on. Ms. Moseley stated she uses the parks
and schools, bc' would have to be educated on other concerns. She has seen a huge
housing expansion and approves within reason. She likes living in a low -density area.
Flint asked if she would have trouble saying no to applicants. She stated she would not,
and the Commission makes decisions as a unit and with reasons for those decisions.
Sansevere asked if she would be willing to serve as an alternate. She stated she would.
Mr. Rick Windeuburg was the fourth interview. He stated that he has been a resident of
Orono for I year, has a background in construction, has dealt with planning issues, and
wants to be involved with the community.
Sansevere asked if he was familiar with the City's Comprehensive Plan. Mr.
" indenburg stated he was familiar with it from working in the area 5 years ago.
Sansevere asked if it would be difficult to say no to construction people. He stated it
would not be, and he is basically out of the field now.
Sansevere asked if there were any issues that he was concerned with. He stated there
were not at the present time.
Nygard asked if he was familiar with the job of the Planning Commission. He stated he
felt the Planning Commission reviewed applications for variances, etc. and decided if the
requests were acceptable, then made suggestions.
White asked about his leadership style. He stated he would bring his ideas to the table,
but also listen and learn. He wouldn't force or follow; but be open to others' input.
Sansevere asked if he would be willing to serve as an altematc. He stated he would.
Mr. Gary Welsh was the fifth interview. He stated that he has been a resident of Orono
since 1967, circulated a sewer petition in the 1960's, was on the City Council for 2 terns
in the 1970's when the Comprehensive Plan was first drafted. He tries to see the big
picture and is aware that small decisions affect the big decisions. He has studied the
ordinances and visited sites.
ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING
MONDAY, FEBRUARY 12, 2001
!. Planning Commission/nrerviews—Continued
Sansevere asked what issues he sees facing the Planning Commission. Mr. Welsh stated
he is concerned with runoff and sewer, small houses being tom down and big ones built
up, and people with large houses pushing for extras.
Flint asked what he saw as the relation between the Planning Commission and the City
Council. He stated the Planning Commission was an extension of City Council. The
Commission implements the big picture for the Council.
White asked what he saw as the relation between the Planning Commission and the staff.
Mr. Welsh stated the Planning Commission has oversight responsibility of the staffs
work as presented in the packets.
Nygard asked why he chose to get involved in government again. He stated he has an
interest in Planning issues and would like to see applications at the beginning of the
process.
Sansevere asked if he would be willing to serve as an alternate. He stated he would.
Mr. Marc Fritzler was the sixth interview. He stated that he has been a resident of
Orono for 18 years and is a retired officer from the Orono Police Department. He is
interested in the Commission because the attempt to consolidate with Long Lake made
him more aware of issues that affect Orono. He stated he has time to commit and is not
afraid to dig into regulations.
Sansevere asked if he was familiar with the City's Comprehensive Plan and felt there was
latitude. Mr. Fritzler dated the Commission should operate under the plan, but deal with
the specifics of each case. He felt ordinances were there to he adhered to.
Flint asked how he felt about the way the City has been run. Mr. Fritzler stated he lives
in a 5-acre minimum lot size area and enjoys the open space, but feels some areas of the
City could be improved, particularly the Highway 12 commercial area.
White asked how he would engage citizens in government concerns. He stated he would
make himself known to, and camas, the public.
Sansevere asked if he would be willing to serve as an alternate. He stated he would.
Mr. David Rahn was the seventh interview. He stated that he has been a resident of
Orono for 26 years and owns 2 residences here. He has a construction background and
was a contractor in Orono for 10 years.
ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING
MONDAY, FEBRUARY 12, 2001
1. Planning Commission /nte"iews—Continued
Sansevere asked if he was familiar with the City's Comprehensive Plan. Mr. Rahn stated
he is familiar with the City's ordinances, but not specifically the Comprehensive Plan.
Sansevere asked if there were any important issues that he was concerned about. Mr.
Rahn stated that he has an ability to problem solve and felt that with his background he
could help keep applications from reaching the Council before the T's are crossed.
Flint asked how he felt about the way the City has been run. He stated he was familiar
with the progress of the lake cities and feels they develop at the same rate as Orono. He
stated that due process takes time.
White asked what he saw as the relationship between the Planning Commission and staff.
He stated he doesn't see it as a large contact area. Staff present applications etc. to the
Commission.
Nygard asked if he would have trouble separating his roles of staff and Commissioner.
Mr. Rahn stated he would not and feels there are situations wh.re his background %could
be helpful to the Commission.
Sansevere asked if he would be willing to sen a as an alternate. He stated he would.
Mr. Robert Albertson was the eighth interview. He stated that he has been a resident of
Orono for 38 years. He is an inventor, owns 4 companies, is involved in communin
affairs with organi; ations such as the Minnesota Concerned Citizens Association.
Minnesota Public Utilities Commission, Mound School Board, and the City of Spring
Park. He is an idea person, handles his own legal cases, is fair and tough, can say no, and
has no conflicts of interest.
Sansevere asked if there were any changes he %%ould like to see in Orono. He stated the
nrea along County Road 15 in Navarre is an eyesore and it should be developed or
beautified.
Flint asked what he saw as the role between th. Planning Commission and the Cin
Council. He stated the Planning Commission works in an advisory capacity to the
Council. If the Council disagreed with his recommendation he would argue his point or
come with a new approach.
Sansevere asked if he would be able to take on a non -leadership role. He stated he
would.
White asked if he was familiar with smart gro"ih. He stated he was not, but feels
development should be reasonable and would like to see a light rail system.
ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING
MONDAY, FEBRUARY 12, 2001
1. Planning Commission Interviews --Continued
Nygard asked if he had ideas for the Navarre area. Mr. Albertson stated Navarre could
become a hub area to connect with Mo: nd.
Sansevere asked if he would be willing to serve as an alternate. He stated he would.
Ms. Jeanne Mabusth was the ninth interview. She stated she has been a resident of
Orono for 22 years. She has been impressed with the City's government over the last 4
years. She has worked for the City of Medina, and the City of Orono as the
Administrator of Building and Zoning Department.
Sansevere asked what she considered the role of the Planning Commission. She stated
she felt it was setup properly with a number of experienced members. The Council
liaison was important and she felt the Council should pay attention to the Commission's
recommendations and use the Consent Agenda more.
Flint asked what she considered her area of expertise. Ms. Mabusth stated she had years
of experience as City staff and a Planning Commission alternate. She has knowledge of
the City's codes and the Comprehensive Plan. She felt the best ordinances were those
worked on to reflect how times and the environment change.
Nygard asked if she would be able to separate her roles as staff and a resident advocate.
She stated she would, and it was important to create an atmosphere where applicants can
ask questions and the Planning Commission can explain the codes.
White asked if she had any pet peeves. Ms. Mabusth stated it was important for the
chairman to provide information to applicants and the neighbors concerned with a
project.
Sansevere asked if she would be willing to continue serving as an alternate. She stated
she would.
CONSENT AGENDA
2. Approve/Amend
Items 5, 9, and 14 were added to the Consent Agenda.
Flint moved, and Sansevere seconded, to approve the consent agenda as amended.
Vote: Ayes S, Nays 0.
ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING
MONDAY, FEBRUARY 12, 2001
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
"3. Regular Council Meeting of January 22, 2001
Flint moved, and Sansevere seconded, to approve the Minutes of the Regular
Council Meeting of January 22, 2001.
Vote: Ayes 5, Nays 0.
PARK COMMISSION COMMENTS —DREW MCDERMOTT,
REPRESENTATIVE
McDermott stated the Park Commission would be asking for donated hostas and daylilies
for Navarre Park in April. They ara trying to locate the remaining property comers at
Saga Hill. There was a bill in the House to try to block trails throughout the state; he sent
a copy to the National Rails to Trails group. The bill would affect the Dakota Rail,
Crystal Bay Road trail and others. They are taking more pictures of lake access points.
The Commission is considering putting an ice rink in at Crystal Bay Park that would
serve for skate boarding in the summer. They are planning on burning French Creek Park
this spring to promote the wildflower development. and are considering redeveloping
playground equipment at Hackberry Park. The Commission is looking into a recognition
board in the City office's lobby to acknowledge land donors. It would probably be a map
with plates that show who donated what parcels.
PLANNING COMMISSION COMMENTS
None.
PUBLIC COMMENTS
None.
ZONING ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT
4. f12631 City of Orono —Zoning Cod- Amendment—RPUD Residential Planned
Unit D, velopment District
Gaffron stated that when the City adopted its Comprehensive Plan and sent it to Met
t-ouncil, it planned to have 6 - 12 months to change ordinances to match the plan. Part
of the Plan included the reguiding of areas of the Cin for different types of residential
ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING
MONDAY, FEBRUARY 12, 2001
4. k1631 City of Orono —Zoning Code Amendment—RPUD Residential Planned
Unit Development District —Continued
use, i a.: for higher density use. The senior housing project has caused them to move
ahead on the ordinance changes.
The RPUD district would accommodate a variety of housing types. It would be
residential only with no mixing of commercial and residential. The district would allow
.a permitted uses of the R-tA basic residential zone and a mult;-family attached
dwelling, but only in the urban zone. There is a minimum site area of 5-acres, and a
height limit of 2 V. stories or 30', except on RPUD sites currently zoned/guided for
commercial use, which could be up to 3 stories. Ten percent of the site must be devoted
to private recreation area in addition to standard park dedication requirements, and there
are detailed landscapinit/bufferinp and architectural requirements. Currently
the RPUD rezoning .vould uut be allowed in the shoreland areas. The RPUD could
replace the M6 district.
The Planning Commission voted 4 — 0 to approve the ordinance.
Sansevere asked if the shoreland areas should be included in the RPUD areas. Gaffron
stated that some properties could be redeveloped using the RPUD, and there are benefits
to using the RPUD in the shoreland. Nygard stated he prefers to exclude the shxeland to
protect the cabin feel along the lake.
Flint stated he was concerned with density issues. Gaffron stated the RPUD district
could be used for apartment -type development only on land currently zoned for
commercial use. So the commercial area would become a higher density residential area.
Council would be creating a district to which properties could be rezoned, but the district
would never have to be used, as with the M-6. Flint stated he would like to keep M-6 on
the buoks, in addition to the RPUD, so that it remains as an alternative. Gaffron stated
that no residettial property could be rezoned to a higher density than it is guided in the
Comprehensive Plan.
Mayor Peterson suggested discussing the RPUD ordinance in a work session. Items 4
and 6 were continued to the next Council meeting.
Nygard nsosed, and Samsevere seconded, to taWc items 4 and 6.
Vote: Ayes 5. Nays 0.
ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING
MOND 1Y, FEBRUARY 12, 2001
*5. #2638 City of Orono —Zoning Code Amendment—B-6 District Landscaping
and Architectural Standards —Ordinance Adoption, Ordinance No. 201,
2nd Series
int moved, and Sansevere seconded, to adopt Ordinance No. 201, Second Series,
amending Chapter 10 of the Orono Municipal Code by amending Section 10.45,
Subdivision 6, B-6 Zoning District Design Requirements.
Vote: Ayes 5, Nays 0.
6. k2639 City of OronoZoningCode Amendment —Section 10.52: Add RPUD to
list of Allowable Zoning Districts in highway 12 Corridor Study Area
Item 6 was tabled with item 4.
Nygard moved, and Sansevere seconded, to table items 4 and 6.
Vote: Ayes 5, Nays 0.
7. #2640/2641 Orono Ambar, LLC, 2060 Wayzata Boulevard--- Highway 12 PUD
General Concept Plan Review
Frank Dunbar was present.
Weinberger stated that Orono Ambar requested General Concept Approval for a two -lot
plat of property at Highway 12 and Brown. The property is currently zoned B-1, general
business. They would rezone the property and subdivide it into 2 lots: a semor housing
unit on the east lot, and an office building on the west lot. The Planning Commission
recommended approval 4 — 0. Staff recommended approval subject to the noted
conditions.
Mr. Dunbar stated that he would like to eliminate the wall at the front of the property
along Highway 12 because it impacts the building, and neighbors indicated they did not
approve of it.
Jacqueline Ricks of 2108 Sugarwoods Drive asked why the service road was required in
front of the building. If it was removed there would be more room for landscaping.
Weinberger stated the road was included for the safety of residents using the parking lot
in front of the building. Gaffron stated that about half of the office building traffic would
enter the office lot by the service road from Brown Road because only west bound traffic
on Highway 12 can access the office lot's direct entrar.ce. Mr. Dunbar stated that all of
the residents would have underground parking. Primarily visitors would use the lot in
front of the building, mostly in the afternoon and on weekends. The S-curve in the
parking lot would help to slow traffic.
ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING
MONDAY, FEBRUARY 12, 2001
7. #264012641 Orono Ambar, LLC, 2060 Wayzata Boulevard— Highway 12 PUD
General Concept Plan Review —Continued
Carl Berg of 2102 Sugarwoods Drive stated his parents are in a similar complex and the
visitors' parking is barely used.
Moorse suggested office traffic could someday use Brimhall Road for access to the lot at
the north. Ideally a light would go in at Brimhall Road and Highway 12.
Mr. Dunbar stated that the neighbors would like to eliminate the fence on the north
border of the property by the office building and instead preserve the brush and foliage,
then use berms to screen headlights from the office traffic. Mayor Peterson agreed that
preserving existing vegetation was preferable to building a fence.
Sansevere moved, and Nygard seconded, to table item 7.
Vote: Ayes 5, Nays 0.
•8. 02649 Peter and Nicole Thomas, 1395 Orono Lane—Variances/CUP—
Resolution No. 4604
Flint moved, and Sansevere seconded, to adopt Resolution No. 4604 granting
variances to Section 10.22, Subdivision 2, Section 10.55, Subdivisioni u and Section
10.56, Subdivision 16(J) and (L) to allow hardcover in the 0 — 75 foot lakeshore
setback zone of 11.38% where 11.22% hardcover exists and no hardcover is
normally allowed and to allow hardcover in the 75 — 200 foot setback zone of
25.45% where 25.16% hardcover exists and 25% is normally allowed; a variance to
Section 10.56, Subdivision 16(C)(5) to allow retaining walls where they are normally
prohibited in the lakeshore setback zone; and a conditional use permit for lakeshore
alterations per Section 10.03, Subdivision 21.
Vote: Ayes 5, Nays 0.
*9. #2649 Charles Leekley, having an interest in 1525 Long Lake Boulevard —
Variances —Resolution No. 4605
Flint moved, and Sansevere seconded, to adopt Resolution No. 4605 granting
variances to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.03. Subdivision 9(D) to permit a
garage entrance 5 feet from the north property line where 30 feet is required; and
Section 10.24, Subdivision 5(B) to permit a 5 foot side setback where a 10 foot
setback is required for construction of a detached two stall garage.
Vote: Ayes 5, Nays 0.
01
ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING
MONDAY, FEBRUARY 12, 2001
10. 02650 Kirsten and Patrick Burton, 2601 Rainey Road—Variance/CUP
Herb Baldwin, landscape designer; Dick Peterson, attorney; and Bill Huntress, project
architect, were present to represent the Buttons.
Weinberger stated that the applicants have a 14-acre parcel with a lot of wetland area.
The applicants submitted a 4 part request: 1. CUP to permit a second residential unit on a
5.25 acre property; 2. CUP to permit the chimney height for the main residence to exceed
30 feet, at a height of 36 feet, 6 feel above the peak of the home; 3. variance to permit
construction of a 3 story Flat -roofed house where the Code allows a maximum of 2 V.
stories; 4. variance to permit a 30 inch high railing around the roof of ttk guest house,
that would exceed the 30 foot maximum height for a swcture, for safety purposes. The
Planning Commission voted 4 — 0 to allow the guesthouse and a motion to approve the
chimney height, 3-story house, and railing failed with a 2 — 2 vote.
Weinberger stated that the height of the guesthouse would be less than a 2 %: story house
at its peak because of the mid -gable measure. There are plenty of tall trees on the
property and no adjoining properties it would affect. He also stated that the City has
other houses with chimneys that exceed the permitted height due to requirements of the
Building and Fire Codes.
The Council agreed that they would allow construction of a guest house.
There was a consensus that the chimneys should not exceed 32 feel (2 feet above the
root) because the additional 4 feet was requested for aesthetic purposes. The Council felt
they should be consistent and referred to the art center in their discussions.
Mr. Huntress stated that the 3 story guest house has a smaller footprint than the 2 V. story
gabled design. Weinberger stated the Code says 2 %, stories or a 30 foot height is
permitted, whichever is more restrictive. Gaffron stated that the application was
precedent setting, and the architect made a compelling argument that 30 feet was more
restrictive because it would actually be shorter than the peak of a 2 'h story house.
Barrett stated the City was concerned with the massing and height of the structure, not
necessarily the number of stories.
Barrett stated he was concerned that allowing this structure would open the door foe
someone to request a much larger structure that is 3 stories high. He felt a variance was
required to permit 3 stories because of the ordinance. He asked if the design was saving
treer. Mr. Peterson stated it was. Mr. Huntress stated the house was designed to nestle
its occupants in the trees, so they intentionally used a small footprint and vertical
structure. Mr. Peterson stated that because of the required septic mounds and several
large oak and maple trees they want to preserve, there is very little room to place the
guest house. They only plan to remove about 5 poplars, which would regrow in a short
amount of time. Mr. Peterson stated they have used an arborist to hrlp design the house
and would use one during construction to insure the trees are not injured.
ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING
MONDAY, FEBRUARY 12, 2001
10. #2650 Kirsten and Patrick Burton, 2601 Rainey Road—Variance/CUP—
Continued
Sansevere asked about the size of the house. Mr. Huntress stated the vertical portion of
the house is 19.5 feet by 19.5 feet, and the first story is 20 feet by 30 feet. A similar 2
story house would be about 40 feet wide.
Flint stated the Council would want documentation about the trees and their drip lines,
also the resolution should reflect that the house would be constructed as such specifically
to save large trees.
Mr. Huntress stated that the railing around the roof was for safety purposes, and they
would use a special cable that was not visible from about 50 feet away. Mayor Peterson
stated she did not see a hardship for the railing.
Flint moved, and Nygard seconded, to allow a second residential unit on the
property.
Vote: A�- es 5, Nays 0.
Flint moved, and White seconded, to require chimney height on the main house to
exceed the roof peak by only 2 feet, at a height of 32 feet.
Vote: Ayes 5, Nays 0.
Flint moved, and Nygard seconded, to deny the request for a 30 inch high railing
around the roof of the guest house.
Vote: Ayes 5, Nuys 0.
Flint moved, and White seconded, to have staff draft a new resolution for the next
Council meeting that shows a 3 story structure would be permitted because its
design saves large trees on the property, reducing its impact on the land.
Vote: Ayes 4, Nays 1 (Nygard).
11. 02651 Robin and Jeremy Bupp, 2696 Caroline Avenue —Variances
Mrs. Bupp and Steve Longman, the builder, were present.
Weinberger stated that a building permit was issued to the Bupps in June 2000. The
Crouse was nearly complete when it was disecvered that the shoreline along the next door
neighbor's property bends inland and the 75 foot Lakeshore setback was not measured
properly by the surveyor. The proper setback reduces their hardcover area by
approximately 200 s.f. Currently, the applicants were at 100% of the allowed hardcover
in the 75 — 200 foot setback zone.
ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING
MONDAY, FEBRUARY 12, 2001
11. #1651 Robin and Jeremy Bapp, 2696 Caroline Avenue—Variances—'onlinued
The applicants have requested variances to permit additional hardcover on the property
for an expansion to the driveway and tc construct a lakeside paver stone patio. The total
hardcover request is for 350 s.f.
Staff has issued a temporary certificate of occupancy. The applicants are required to
provide swales around the house, add gutters to the northeast roof line to direct water
away from the neighboring house, and install draintile. The exterior improvements
cannot be completed until spring when the ground thaws.
Staff recommended denial of the application, and suggested a 3 foot by 8 foot landing
with a stairway could be constructed to the patio door to provide safe access instead of
the requested patio. The Planning Commission voted 4 — 0 to recommend denial of the
application.
Mr. Longman stated that the Bupps are in an unfortunate situation and feels that the shape
of the lot creates a unique hardship.
Gary Thompson, attorney for Joseph and lane Clemons of 2690 Caroline Avenue, stated
they believe the Bupps are already over the allowed hardcover. The Clemons'
independent contractor came up with different hardcover numbers from the city. He
stated the Bupp's hnuse will create drainage problems for the Clemons that won't be
revealed until the spring thaw. He stated the Bupps have a side door with no walkway
and air conditioner wiring with no intact unit that will require a concrete pad. He also
stated that the lot was overbuilt and the Clemons object to the retaining wall installed
where the patio was to go.
Joe Clemons of 2690 Caroline Avenue stated that he has asked for a written drainage
plan for a year and has not received one. Gappa stated they have met several times with
the Clemons and last Friday a letter was sent to them. Weinberger stated the City would
not normally provide that information to neighbors and did not recall the City providing
that information in the past. Mr. Clemons stated that the Bupps had agreed to put up
gutters before they occupied the house and it hadn't been done. Mrs. Bupp replied that
they signed documents with the City stating they would install gutters within 180 days.
Weinberger stated the City has provided copies of the plans, including drainage, on
several occasions to the Clemons.
Mr. Clemons claimed that the Bupps have removed well in excess of 501 cubic yards of
dirt without a CUP, and he had a printed article stating a CUP was required for
excavation. White asked if the 500 cubic foot limitation was in addition to dirt removed
for a basement. Weinberger stated that the Bupps removed a house, then prepared the lot
for construction of a new home and the grading on the lot has not changed significantly.
He also stated that the ordinance Mr. Cle,-ns referenced applies to construction absent
ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING
MONDAY, FEBRUARY 12, 2001
IL N26SI Robin and Jeremy Rupp, 2696 CaraiineAvenue—Variances—Cotniruued
the house. The ordinance allows normal and customary grading in the area of an existing
or a newly constructed building without requiring a CUP.
Mr. Clemons stated that the Bupps have put in retaining walls that are higher than
allowed. He stated the walls should be removed and fill put in, and they should install
stairs off their deck instead of off the sliding glass door. He also claimed their house
obstructs his view and has damaged his property. Mr. Clemons stated that the Bupps
improperly measured the silt line by walking out to the dock and then measuring back.
He stated that roof overhang has not been included in the hardcover calculations and
should have been.
Sansevere asked if overhang was typically included. Gaffron stated that the Code states
anything that impedes direct absorption of rainwater is hardcover and overhang is not
considered part of the hardcover unless it is supported by posts or a wall.
Nygard asked if the hardcover ordinance was a yard requirement. Gaffron stated it was
not. He stated the overhang was allowed to encroach 1 'h feet into the required yard, that
is, into the 10 foot setback from the property line.
Sansevere asked if the retaining walls were a hardcover issue. Weinberger stated that 45
s.f. have been included in the hardcover calculations for the retaining walls.
Mr. Longman stated that Mr. Clemons statements were unfounded and requested that
they not vary from the requests before Council.
Mr. Clemons reported that Peggy Kadlec of 2726 Caroline Avenue, quoted the builder as
saying, "You can try to stop me, but I'm building as fast as I can and once it's built all 1
have to do is get a variance from the City." He also stated that the first footprint was in
error and Lyle Oman, the City's Building Official, found that the lakeside structure was 3
feet wider than what the survey had indicated and extended 3 feet beyond the legal
setback line. Neither Ms. Kadhec nor Mr. Oman were present at the meeting to comment.
Sansevere asked if the retaining walls would remain, even if the 3 by, 8 foot landing were
allowed. Weinberger stated that the retaining walls would remain and were allowed with
the building permit. Mrs. Bupp stated that the retaining walls retain preexisting dirt, they
were not filled in behind as Mr. Clemons suggested.
Mr. Longman stated that Mr. Clemons' charges were fabrications. He agreed that he
hired the surveyor who made the mistake. He stated he did not see how the driveway and
patio would impact the neighbors. Mayor Peterson stated that it was a hardcover issue
and the City tries to never grant variances to hardcover for new construction or. a
conforming lot.
ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING
MONDAY, FEBRUARY 12, 2001
IL #2651 Robin and Jeremy Bupp,26%Caroline Avenue —Variances —Continued
Mayor Peterson stated she did not see a hardship to allow the extra driveway and the
patio. After some discussion, Council agreed that the Bupps should be allowed the 3 by 8
foot landing for stairs down from the sliding glass door for safety purposes.
Anne Wilbur of 1410 Cherry Drive asked if the retaining walls could be removed to gain
hardcover. They could not be removed.
Lome Rejzer of 2715 Caroline Avenue stated that she felt the Council was indulging the
applicants after -the -fact, and that the lot was overbuilt. Flint stated that the Council
believed the error was on the part of the surveyor and was not fraudulent. The Counci.
was trying to be fair in resolving a tough issue. White stated that the Bupps would be
denied their request and only granted a landing for some stairs so they could use their
door. He hoped that the neighbors would move on and try to be friendly with the Bupps.
Sansevere indicated he could not approve the variance because he did not see a hardship.
Nygard agreed.
Flint moved, and Mayor Peterson seconded, to allow a 3 foot by 8 foot landing with
stain from the existing door for safety purposes that would be behind the average
lakahore setback, and to deny the request to increase the size of the driveway.
Vote: Ayes 3, Nays 2 (Nygard and Sansevere).
*12. #2652 Ron Lauer for Dennis Anderson, 1720 Bohn's Point Road—
Varisuces—Resolution No. 4606
Flint moved, and Sansevere seconded, to adopt Resolution No. 4606 granting
variances to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.22, Subdivision 2 and Section 10.56,
Subdivision 16(L)(2) to allow 13,045 s.f. (48.7%) hardcover in the 75 — 200 foot
setback zone to construct a paver walkway and outdoor stair addition; Section
10.22, Subdivision l(B) and Section 10.56, Subdivision 16(C)(6) to allow a second
story addition to the existing residence to encroach 88 feet and 92 feet into the
average Lakeshore setback.
Vote: Ayes 5, Nays 0.
*Ci. 92655 Robert and Nancy Lux, 1209 French Creek Rive--Variance—
Resolution No. 4607
Flint moved, and Sansevere seconded, to adopt Resolution No. 4607 granting a
variance to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.56, Subdivision 16(C)(1) to allow
replacement of a deck and addition to the west end of the residence that are both
located within 150 feet of a Natural Environmental lake.
Vote: Ayes 5, Nays 0.
15
ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING
MONDAY, FEBRUARY 12, 2001
*14. #2657 Clifford Otten, 2350 Wayzata Boulevard —Easement Vacation —
Resolution No. 4608
Flint moved, and Sansevere seconded, to adopt Resolution No. 4608 approving the
vacation of a dedicated drainage and utility easement within Lot 2, Block 1, East
Willow Woods.
Vote: Ayes 5, Nays 0.
MAYOR/COUNCIL REPORT
Mayor Peterson stated that the Fire Department Committee was close to determining the
appropriate size of the new Fire Department. The Long Lake Fire Chief will be at the
next Council meeting to present drawings. Moorse stated that the determined size
depends on an accurate cost estimate and expected funds from Mn/DOT. Flint stated that
the size and cost we related and he would not approve the £rre station at an unreasonable
cost.
Nygard stated he was concerned about pedestrian crossings in Navarre along County
Roads 15 and 19 Necause of the parks and children running across the street outside of
crosswalks.
Nygard stated he was concerned about snowmobile safety on the lake. He suggested the
Park Commission look at the issue.
PUBLIC SERVICE DIRECTOR'S REPORT
None.
CITY ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT
15. Scheduling of Work Session
The Council agreed to hold its Work Session on February 22, 2001 at 3:30 p.m.
CITY ATTORNEY'S REPORT
None.
ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING
MONDAY, FEBRUARY 12, 2001
•16. LICENSES
Flint moved, and Sansevere seconded, to approve the following licenscs.
Vote: Ayes 5, Nays 0.
GAMBLING PERMIT —RESOLUTION NO.4609
Orono Ice Arena, Inc.
Bantam A Regional Hockey Tournament
Orono Ice Arena-1025 Old Crystal Bay Road
March 4, 2001
SPECIAL EVENT
Wells Fargo Bank Minncsota, N.A.
Half Marathon Race
Race Route: Start at Norwest Bank Wayzata, Lake Street to Ferndale Road to
County Road 15 to Orono Orchard Road to Fox street to Old Crystal Bay Road to
County Road 51 to County Road 19 to Northview Road to Lake road to County
Road IS to Old Beach Road to County Road 19 to Beehrle Avenue to the
Southwest LRT Trail to Water Street. Finish at Norwest Bank Excelsior.
Sunday, May 6, 2001
8:00 a.m. — 11:00 a.m.
CIGARETTE LICENSE
1. Kenneth Galloway
Wayzata Country Club
4. Daniel Scherven
200 West Wayzata Boulevard
Navarre Lanes, Inc.
3425 Shoreline Drive
2. Timothy Ivory
Spring Hill Golf Club
S. Grant Weakstem
725 Sixth Avenue North
Lakeview Golf of Orono, Inc.
710 North Shore Drive West
3. LeRoy Koehnen
Navarre Amoco
3360 Shoreline Drive
*17. BILLS
Flint moved, and Sanwere seconded, to approve payment of the All Funds
Account.
Vote: Ayes 5, Nays 0.
ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING
MONDAV, FEBRUARY 12, 2001
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting was adjourned at 1 I:30 p.m.
ATTEST:
Linda S. Vee, City Clerk Barbara Peterson, Mayor
LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATIL,.. ISTRICT
18338 Minnetonka Blvd.
�^ Deephaven, MN 55391
FEe 2 6 (952) 745-0789
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR NEWSLETTER
Gregory S. Nybeck
February 14, 2001
Increased Water Patrol Presence for 2001 Soa'lno Saascn: This rsst surnmiaf, uia L4100 forwarded::
to locrease Hennepin County Sheriffs Office Water Patrol presence on Lake Minnetonka, for the 2001 boating
season, by two full-time Deputies for five months. A two-year commitment, at $100,000 per year, has been seeked
for the proposal, with costs to be shared by Hennepin County (50%), LMCD Member Cities (30%), and the LMCD
'Save the Lake' Fund (20%).
To date, both Hennepin County and the LMCD'Save the Lake' Fund have appropriated the needed funds for the
.....-_-proposal for2D01...Additionally, nine LMCD Member Cities have agreed to voluntary payments of approximalely
$17,000 for the proposal in 2001. LMCD staff, working with LMCD Board leadership, either has made contact with
the remaining five LMCD Member Cities or has plans to in the near future. Any shortfalls in the 30% commitment
from the LMCD Member Cities will be addressed by the LMCD Board sometime in the near future. Further details of
this proposal will be provided when they are available.
Exotics Manactemenl: Similar to one year ago, the LMCD assembled a EWM Harvesting Program Working Group
to evaluate the Program to see if improvements can be made for 2001. This Working Group met on 111181D0 and
1/13101, and discussed a number of aspects of the Program. Some of the aspects discussed at these meetings
include: 1) establishing a rotating harvesting schedule, 2) establishing a harvester replacement schedule, 3)
improved radio's and communications, 4) possible modifications to the harvesting equipment, 5) improved hauling of
harvested vegetation, 6) addressing work vehicle needs, 7) improved maintenance of the harvesting equipment, and
8) addressing budget constraints. Recommendations from [..s Working Group will be presented to the LMCD Board
at its 2J28/01 Regular meeting. Further details will be provided when they are available.
Staff is currently preparing plans for the 2001 Zebra Mussel Program. Similar to 2000, efforts will be conlinued on
improving public education and awareness. Additionally, the LMCD would like to take a more aggressive approach
on the inspection and/or :leaning of watercraft that have come from infested waters prior to launching into Lake
Minnetonka. This was a problem area in 2000, with no watercraft washed by the LMCD's high-pressure sprayer.
The LMCD is currently considering hosting a public forum to get input from the public on how to better approach the
zebra mussel Issue. Further details will be provided when they are available.
2000 Boat Density & User: ,ttitude Survey's: Schoell and Madson, Inc. conducted these surveys in compliance
with the Management Plan for Lake Minnetonka. The Boat Density Survey is conducted every two years, with the
User Attitude Survey conducted every four years. This project is a joint effort of the LMCD and the MN DNR. A
presentation of these surveys is scheduled for the 3/14/01 Regular LMCD Board meeting. A copy of this survey will
be forwarded sometime in Pre near future.
• 2001 Board Officers I3 Board Appointments: Board Officers for 2001 were discussed at the 1110101 Regular
LMCD Board meeting. Board Officers for 2001 include: Bet Foster- Chairman, Craig Nelsen. 'Ace Chairman, Tom
Skramstad- Treasurer, and Lill McMillan- Secretary. LMCD member cities Deephaven, Minnetonka, Minnetonka
Beach, Minnetrista, Orono, Shorewood, Tonka Bay, and Wayzata. Discussion of these appointments is planned for
the 2128/01 Regular LMCD Board meeting.
§ 10.60
Subd. 7. Vibration. Any use creating periodic earth -shaking vibrations, such as may
be created from a drop forge shall be prohibited if such vibrations are perceptible beyond the lot line
of the site on which the use is located. The standard shall not apply to vibrations created during the
process of construction.
Subd. 8. Glare or Heat. Any use requiring an uperatiuu prudueiug :ut iwen.e heat ur
light transmission shall be performed with the necessary shielding to prevent such heat or light from
being detectable at the lot line of the site on which the use is located. Lighting in all instances shall
be diffused or directed away from "R" Districts and public streets. -
Subd. 9. Explosives. Any use requiring the storage, utilization or manufacturing of
products which could decompose by detonation shall be located not less than 400 feet from -ny "R"
District line.
Subd. 10. Screening Required. Screening shall be required in residential zones
where:
A. Any off-street parking area which contains more than four parking spaces
and is within 30 feet of an adjoining residential lot line, and,
B. Where the driveway to a parking area cf more than six parking spaces is
within 15 feet of an adjoining residential lot line.
Subd. 11. Screening, Type of The reening required herein shall consist of a solid
fence or wall at least 50% open, rot less than four feet nor more than five feet in height but shall not
extend within 15 feet of any street or driveway opening onto a street. The screening shall be placed
along the property lines or in case or screening along a street, 15 feet from the street right- of -way
with landscaping (trees, shrubs, grass and other planting) between the screening and the pavement.
A louvered fence shall be considered solid if it blocks direct vision. Planting of a type approved by
the ?fanning Commission may also be required in add'tion to. or in lieu oi, fencing.
Subd. 12. Maintenance. In all districts, all structures, required landscaping and
fences shall be maintained so as not to be unsightly or present harmful health or safety conditions.
Subd. 13. Exterior Storage in "R" Districts. In all "R" Districts, all mobile materials
and equipment shall be stored within a building or fully screened so as not to be visible from
adjoining properties, except boats and unoccupied trailers less than 20 feet in length, which are not
stored for ce^unercial purposes, if stored to the rear of the house and a distance of 10 feet or more
from any property line.
Source: Ordinance No. 172
Effective Date: 1-1-73
ORONO CC 378 (4-1.84)
§ 10.60
Subd. 14. Waste Materials. Waste material shall not be washed into the public storm
sewer system nor the sanitary sewer system without first having received a permit to do so from the
City. If said permit is not granted, a method of disposal shall be devised which will not require
continuous land requisition for permanent operation and will not cause a detrimental effect to the
adjacatt laud. Should the waste b of solid fomt mthar than fluid, the storage area shall W so located
and fenced as to be removed -jm public view. In all districts, all waste material, debris, refuse,
garbage, materials not currently in use for construction or otherwise regulated herein shall be kept
in an enclosed building or properly contained in a closed container for such purposes. The owner of
vacant land shall be responsible for keeping such vacant land free of waste material and noxious
weeds.
Subd. 15. Drainage. No land shall be developed and no .se shall be permitted that
results in water runoff causing flooding, or erosion on adjacent properties. Such runoff shall be
properly channeled into a storn drain, water course, ponding area or other suitable facility.
Subd. 16. Traffic Control. The traffic generated by any use shall be chamelized and
controlled in a manner that will avoid congestion on public streets, safety hazards, or excessive
baffic through residential streets. Vehicles backLig from a parking space shall not back into the
public street. No access drive to any lot shall be located within 20 feet of any two intersecting street
right-of-way lines.
Subd. 17. Radiation, Etc. No activities shall be permitted that emit dangerous radio
activity beyond enclosed a -as. There shall be no electrical disturbance adversely affecting the
operation of any point of any equipment including but not limited to radio and television reception
other than that of the creator of the disturbance.
SEC. 10.61. SPECIAL PROVISIONS.
Subd. 1. Signs as Accessory Use. Signs are a permitted accessory use in all
districts subject to the following regulations:
A. On Right -of -Way. Private signs are prohibited within the public
right-of-way or easements except that the Council may grant a conditional use permit to locate signs
and decorations on or within the right-of-way under their jurisdiction for a specified time not to
exceed ninety days. No conditional use permit for such a sign shall be issued by the Counc .1 if a
conditional use permit or temporary sign permit had been issued in the previous 24 months to that
property.
Source: Ordinance 55, 2nd Series
Adopted:7.25-88
B. Flashing. illuminated fisshing signs shall not be permitted in any district.
ORONO CC 379 (4.1-84)
§ 10.61
B. Parking Requirements Waived for Building Under Construction on
P:ptember 14, 1967. Structure or uses for which a building permit has been issued prior to
September 14, 1967, but for which %%ork has not been completed shall be exempt from the
hereinafter stated parking requirements if the structure is started within six months after Sentember
16, 1')67, and wuliuucs lu Wlllplctirnr.
C. Existing Parking Not to be Reduced. Off-street parking spaces and loading
spaces existing on September 14, 1967, shall not be reduced in number unless said number exceeds
the requirements set forth herein for a similar new use.
D. Floor Area. The term "floor area" for the purpose of calculating the number
of off-street parking spaces shall be the net usable floor area of the various floors, devoted to retail
sales, services, office spaces, processing and fabrication exclusive of hallways, utility space, storage
areas other than warehousing.
E. Seat. in stadiums, churches and other places of public assembly in which
patrons or spectators occupy benches, pews or other similar seating facilities, each 22 inches of such
seating facility shall be counted as one seat for the purpose of determining required parking.
F. Sin of Parking Spaces. Each parking space shall be not less than nine feet
wide a••.d twenty feet in length and each space shall be served adequately by access drives. For
purpos -: of calculating parking space requirements, one parking space for one vehicle shall equal
300 square feet of storage and maneuvering area including access drives.
O. Commercial Vehicle Parking. Off-street parking facilities accessory to
residential use shall be utilized solely for the parking of passenger automobiles. No motor vehicle
over 7,000 pounds gross capacity and no commercially licensed trailer shall be parked or stored in
a residential district except when loading, unloading or rendering a service, except that one such
vehicle may be parked at the residence of the owner or operator of said vehicle. Under no
circumstances shall parking facilities accessory to residential structures be used for open area storage
of commercial vehicles nor for open air parking for business purposes of automobiles belonging to
the employees, owner, tenant or customers of business or manufacturing establishments other than
the home occupation permitted for that property.
H. Location of Parking. Required off-street parking in the "R" Districts shall
be on the same lot as the principal building.
ORONO CC 383 (4-1-84)
manna srePT%%e
FEB 2 6 20 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION
O;r Y lJr URONO DATE: February 19, 2001
ITEM NO.: 11
Department Approval: Administrator Reviewed: Agenda Section:
Name Paul Weinberger Zoning
Title Zoning Administrator
Item Description: #2450 Glenn and Sandra Gronberg
325 North Willow Drive
Fxtension of Preliminary Plat Approval
Zoning District: RR -I B Two Acre Rural Residential
List of Exhibits:
A Resolution Extending Preliminary Plat Approval
B Resolution No. 4230 Approving Preliminary Plat
C Plat Map
Summary of Request:
The City of Orono approved a two lot Preliminary Plat for Glenn and Sandra Gronberg on January 25, 1999.
The property proposed for subdivision is land that is scheduled to be acquired by MnDot for the Highway
12 relocation. Because the property likely will be acquired for the Highway 12 project, Glenn and Sandra
Gronberg have determined they will defer to complete the subdivision until MnDot has made a final
determination on purchase of the property. Under the scenario the Highway 12 project would not proceed
the Gronberg's would then request Final Plat approval.
The City of Orono did extend the Preliminary Plat last year. Since MnDot has not begun acquiring property
in Orono the Gronberg's have requested Orono extend preliminary approval an additional year until 2002.
Staff has prepared a resolution extending the preliminary approval again with a preliminary plat expiration
date of February, 2002.
COUNCIL AOTION REQUESTED
Motion to adopt the attached resolution.
r
A RESOLUTION GRANTING AN EXTENSION OF
PRELIMINARY PLAT APPROVAL
FOR A PLAT PROPOSED AT 325 WILLOW DRIVE NORTH
FILE NO.2450
WHEREAS, on January 25, 1999 the City Council of the City of Orono adopted
Resolution No. 4230 granting preliminary plat approval of a plat proposed by applicants Glenn M.
Gronberg and Sandra L. Gronberg im olving the property located at 325 Willow Drive North; and
WHEREAS, the Council approved an extension for the plat approval to extend thru
the year 2000 until such time an extension could be granted thru 2001; and
WHEREAS, the applicants have advised the Council that they are not completing
the plat because the property proposed for platting is subject to MnDot acquiring the property for the
tew Highway 12 extension; and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of
Orono that the effective period of preliminary plat approval for Glenn M. and Sandra L. Gronberg's
proposed plat of property located at 325 Willow Drive North as originally approved per the
conditions of Resolution No. 4230, adopted on January 25, 1999, and extended to 2001, is hereby
extended to February 26, 2002.
Page 1 of 2
Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota at a regular meeting
held this 26th day of February, 2001.
ATTEST:
S. Vee, City Clerk Barbara A. Peterson, Mayor
STATE OF MINNESOTA
ss.
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this 26th day of February, 2001, by
Barbara A. Peterson and Linda S. Vee, Mayor and City Clerk of the City of Orono, a Minnesota
municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City.
Notary Public
Page 2 of 2
Q
CITY of ORONO
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
No. 4 J `+ fl
A RESOLUTION GRANTING PRELIMINARY
PLAT APPROVAL
325 WILLOW DRIVE NORTH
FILE NO.2450
WHEREAS, Glenn M. Gronberg and Sandra L. Gronberg, (hereinafter the
"subdivider") on December 16, 1998, filed a formal subdivision application with the City of Orono
for approval of a two lot residential plat of property legally described as:
Lot 3, Block 1, Spruce Acres, Hennepin County, Minnesota
WHEREAS, after due published and mailed notice in accordance with Minnesota
Statutes 462.358 et. seq. and the City of Orono's Zoning, Platting and On -Site Septic Codes,
the Orono Planning Commission held a public hearing on January 19, 1999, at which time all
persons desiring to be heard concerning this application were given the opportunity to speak
thereon; and
WHEREAS, at their regular meeting held on January 25, 1999, the Orono City
Council considered the subdivision application of Glenn M. Gronberg rnd Sandra L. Gronberg
notin.' the following findings of fact:
1. The property is located within the RR-IB Single Family Rural Residential
Zoning District requiring a minimum of 2 acres of contiguous dry buildable land
within each newly created lot.
2. The property contains a total of 5.07 acres, all considered dry buildable.
3. The proposed plat c,wsins two residential lots each meeting or exceeding the
2 acre minimum lot s;ze. Lot I contains 2.68 acres, and Lot 2 contains 2.02
acres.
4. Lot 2 currently contains a residence that was constructed in 1988.
5. Access to all lots shall be provided by the existing Outlet A, Spruce Acres
currently owned by the applicant. .37 acre Outlet A within the new subdivision
Page 1 of 5
CITY of ORONO
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
No. 4 2 ; f)
shall be joined with the existing outlot for the development of a private drive
to serve four lots. Lots 1 and 2 in the Spruce Acres subdivision and Lots 1 and
2 in the new subdivision. The existing private drive would not be required to
be developed until a building permit is issued for Lot 1 within the new
subdivision. Prior to a building permit being issued the private road shall be
developed to City standards and opened as a private road with the City being
granted access and utility easements over the entire outlot.
b. Primary and secondary septic sites have been identifi^d and recorded on the
Preliminary Plat dated January 25, 1999, by Mark S. Gronberg for Lots I and
2.
7. Lots 1 and 2 meet all lot area and width requirements, and are considered
buildable.
8. Non -Orono wetlands are located on Lot 1. Covenants for Type 11 and VI
wetlands shall be filed on the chain of title.
9. The lot is scheduled to be acquired by MnDot as part of the Highway 12
redevelopment. The site is planned to be developed into a stormwater retention
pond for stormwater runoff in the locality.
NOW, THEREFORE, HE IT RESOLVED, that based upon either one or more
of the findings noted above, the City Council of the City of Orono hereby approves the
preliminary plat application for Glenn M. Cr•.onberg and Sandra L. Gronberg for the property
located at 325 Willow Drive North per the survey dated January 25, 1999, by Mark S.
Gronberg of Coffin and Gronberg, Inc. attached as "Exhibit A", subject to the following
conditions: ,
Applicant to dedicate drainage and utility easements 10' along the boundaries of
the property and road outlot, and 5' along all internal lot lines.
2. Applicant to develop covenant for Type 11 and VI wetlands located within Lot
1. The purpose of the covenant is to alert all future property owners of the
need to protect the area if alterations are proposed to first obtain the necessary
approvals from the Corps of Engineers and Minnehaha Creek Watershed District
before applying for approvals from the City of Orono.
Page 2 of 5
3.
CITY of ORONO
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
N0. 4 � () _
Park dedication fee for Lot 1 shall be paid to the City.
4. Prior to filing the plat with Hennepin County the property owner would be
required to complete a title opinion on the lot proposed for subdivision.
5. Stormwater drainage and BMP plans sho_Id be reviewed and approved by the
MCWD and City Engineer prior to final plat approval.
6. A Letter of Credit written to 150% of the costs shall be issued by the applicant
to the City for any drainage and grading Flan required on the property, also for
the development of the private road for access to North Willow Drive.
7. Cutlot A shall be given a new road name, and address assignments for Lots I
and 2 as well as Lots 1 and 2 in the Spruce Acres subdivision at the time the
private road is completed.
8. Developers Agreement has been executed.
9. Prior to new construction, future owners shall be responsible for staking and
protecting the primary and alternate septic sites.
The following list of final submittals must be submitted to the Planner/Zoning
Administrator two weeks prior to the regularly scheduled Council meeting on the second and
fourth Mondays of each m,rth.
Record plat drawings in the form of two (2) mylar copies and one (1) copy
reduced to 1" = 200'. Drawing to include:
A. Lot lines platted per prelimina.-y survey by Mark S. Gronberg dated
January 25, 1999.
B. Dedication of "drainage and utility easements" 10' wide along all
perimeter property lines and 5' each side of internal property lines.
C. Name of plat.
Page 3 of 5
CITY of ORONO
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
N0. 4 2 0
2. Legal documents required:
A. Title opinion addressed to the City. All owners, mortgage holders or
others with property interest indicated therein shall sign the plat and all
other documents affected by such interest.
B. The applicant shall provide certified copies of all recorded easements
currently affecting the property.
C. Signed and executed Developer's Agreement and Letter of Credit for
construction of the private road and drainage improvements.
D. Signed and executed Road and Utilities Easement over Outlot A.
E. Signed and executed covenants defusing responsibility for construction
and maintenance of the road in Owlot A, defining future financial
obligations of affected property owners.
F. Signed and executed covenants for Type 11 and VI wetlands within Lot
1.
3. Fees to be paid: Total due: S2Q0.00*
A. Legal review and filing fees = S 200.00
B. •Pt,,'tt dedication fee of 8%, not to exceed $4,900, to be paid upon the
filing of the final plat and associated documents.
Page 4 of 5
CITY of ORONO
RESOLUTION OF TH E CITY COUNCIL
NO. 4 . E:
Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota at a regular
meeting held this 25th day of January, 1999.
ATTEST:
Linda S. Vee, City Clerk Gabrie Jabbottr, Mayor
STAIR OF MINNESOTA )
) ss.
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN )
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this 25th day of
January, 1999 by Gabriel Jabbour & Linda S. Vee, Mayor & City Clerk of the City of Orono,
a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City.
CAROLE AMP£.;..:
f Notary Public
h /�';.iry NJAA FMIC-M".•::AD
f.'yCcr iplcn EgIisj 7%N—, P
Page 5 of 5
i i
/ ,� 0N1
\ LEVERING' S WOODHAVEN
1
4l �L
_`� 0
1
1-.2s-?5
31
A e V
R y?�T�ufr�
I
INf��aYRI
ki3
Ow
6
v
trl
u'
j �.
,i
� 33-118'•23�1�
ra
z
� 4
T
i sr ¢cce
(S)
(61 u
(el
33'�18=23W- T
- ProPo5ed
rY ...........Am-
la5 I I
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIB
se yes s
- -- mnaoaarEa�
a7—!
pa1
a
���y4
aO
lm
4
w
n
w
A
ELM LA
U)
•
ID
to
-
(b)
i
t
S • (LI
ca 6Y
are��
EEB 2 6
20 REQUFST FOR COUNCIL ACTION
pU� ur uHpryO DATE: FebmaryL23, 2001
ITEM NO.: ✓'
Department Approval: Administrator Reviewed: Agenda Section:
Name Paul Weinberger Zoning
Title Zoning Administrator
Item Description: s2550 Charles Van Eeckhout
120 South Brown Road
Class III Subdivision
Conditional Use Permit for a PRD
Zonlne District: RR-1 B One Family Rural Residential
Lu' -T rthibin:
A Extcasion dated 12/18l00
B Denial Resolution
C Plat Map
D City Attorney Letter Regarding Property Access Issue (January 21, 2000)
Background:
The primary unresolved issue with this application was the applicant was to secure legal access acceptable
to the City Attorney for a proposed platting of the property. As of the date of this memo, no access to the
property has been secured by the applicant.
The applicant has reviewed two options for access:
I. Via a platted 40' corridor that is owned by an adjacent property owner.
2. Via access to Apple Glen Road which requires approval from the City of Long Lake.
Staff has made several unsuccessful artem , to contact Mr. Van Eeckhout about further extension to the
application deadline. The latest extension expires on 2/28/01. Staff has drafted a denial resolution attached
as Exhibit B.
COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED
Motion to adopt the denial resolution based on the findings noted in the attached resolution.
e4
X
,O ci`,
CITYof ORONO
p
f"/i niaatdpat omeea
street Address
2750 Malley Parkway
Orono, MN 55356
REQUEST TO EXTEND LAND USE
APPLICATION #2550
City of Orono
P.O. Box 66
Crystal Bay, MN 55323-0066
Mailing Address:
P 0. Boa 66
Crystal Bay, MN 55323 0066
I hereby agree to extend Zoning Application #2550 for subdivision requesting a seven Ir Planned
Residential Development located at 120 South Brown Road. The term of this extension -nall be to
February 28, 2001. 1 understand my Statutory obligation to receive action by the Orono ( try Council
within a timely manner.
This extended deadline is in addition to the extension previously granted!,, the City of Orono to
permit additional time for review of the road access issue
Property Owner/Applicant
Charles Van Eeckhout
120 South Brown Road
Long Lake, MN 5C5356 /
4-0
y61 G yn.
Telephone (952) 2494600 • Fax (952) 2494616
www.d.orono. us
d GC-
sse��
rnllxrr�
fE6 2 6
20 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION
Olt Ur U1i090 DATE: February 23, 2001
ITEM NO.: 3
Department Approval: Administrator Reviewed: Agenda Section:
Name Paul Weinberger Zoning
Title Zoning Administrator
82550 Charles Van Eeckhout
120 South Brown Road
Class III Subdivision
Conditional Use Permit for a PRD
Zonine District: RR-1 B One Familv Rural Residential
List of Exhibits
A Extension dated 12118.00
B Denial Resolution
C Plat Map
D City Attorney Letter Regarding Property Access Issue (January 21, 2000)
Background:
The primary unresolved issue with this application was the applicant was to secure legal access acceptable
to the City Attorney for a proposed platting of the property. As of the date of this memo, no access to the
property has been secured by the applicant.
The applicant has reviewed two options for access
Via a platted 40' corridor that is owned by an adjacent property owner.
2. Via access to Apple Glen Road which requires approval from the City of Long Lake.
Staff has made several unsuccessful attempts to contact Mr. Van Eeckhout about further extension to the
application deadline. The latest extension expires on 2/28/01. Staff has drafted a denial resolution attached
as Exhibit B.
COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED
Motion to adopt the den:_' csolution based on the findings noted in the attached resolution.
A RESOLUTION DENYING PRELIMINARY PLAT
FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 120 BROWN ROAD SOUTH
FILE NO. 2550
WHEREAS, Charles Van Ecckhout (hereinafter the "applicant') filed an application
requesting a Class III preliminary subdivision of property legally described as:
Tract H, R.L.S. No. 352, Hennepin County, Minnesota.
(hereinafter "the property"); and
WHEREAS, The applicant has applied to the City of Orono (hereinafter 'the
City") for a subdivision of property including a conditional use permit to penni the property
to develop as a Planned Residential Development (PRD); and
WHEREAS, after due published and mailed notice in accordance with Minnesota
Statutes 462.358 et. seq. and the City of Orono's Zoning and Subdivision Codes, the Orono
Planning Commission held public bearings on November 15, 1999, January 19, 2000 and
August 21, 2000, at which times all persons desiring to be heard concerning this application
were given the opportunity to speak thereon.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that based upon one or more of
the findings noted above, the City Council of the City of Orono hereby denies the request on
a cote of _ to based on the following findings of fact:
FINDINGS
The City of Orono had identified two primary concerns, determination of the
wetland boundary and road access, that would have required resolution prior to
preliminary plat approval.
2. On October 16, 2000 a Technical Evaluation Panel (TEP), with representatives
of the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District (MCWD), Hennepin Conservation
Page 1 of 4
District, and Board of Water and Soil Resources met on the property to review
the wetland boundary as delineated by Svobota Ecological Services (SES).
3. The TEP generally agreed to the delineation line as determined by SES.
4. The City of Orono has established an inventory of protected wetlands that are
not considered buildable and valuable natural resources. Those areas shown on
the 1974 wetland inventory are ➢9S credited towards buildable area for zoning
purposes. A total of approximately 14 acres of the 20 ± land area is considered
above the wetland boundary, based on the TEPs wetland review.
5. Access to the property has been proposed via a platted corridor through Tract
G, R.L.S. No. 352.
6. Since 1954 Tract H has an easement over Tract G for driveway purposes. It is
the City of Orono's position the easement is granted for driveway purposes, not
roadway purposes. Prior o approving a subdivision, using Tract G for road
access, the City must receive sufficient evidence that the owners of Tract G
consent to the plat or an easement for road purposes be acquired in favor of
Tract H.
7. The applicant has stated he has been unable to successfully negotiate an
easement for road purposes wrn...,a owner of Tract G.
8. A revised site plan was received by the City of Orono in July, 2000 that would
require access from Apple Glen Road in the City of Long Lake. The Cit}• of
Orono has made a request to the City of Long Lake to comment and determine
what right of access Long Lake would permit.
9. The applicant has not received approval for access to Apple Glen Road from the
City of Long Lake.
10. The Council has determined the preferred option for access is via Tract G.
Access through Apple Glen Road would have required the road be extended,
additional traffic for additional residences and formal approval from the City of
Long Lake had not been granted.
Page 2 of 4
11. Tract G would provide an access that would meet the requirements for street
width and provide a private road consistent with the City's policy that new
developments designated as properties in rural Orono be serviced with private
roads.
12. The applicant has not established evidence acceptable to the City Attorney that
road access has been secured to all proposed lots. The City of Orono cannot
approve the Preliminary Plat without the issue of legal access being resolved.
13. The City of Orono has a requirement all preliminary grading, storm water
management and drainage plans are approved prior to Preliminary Plat approval.
The City of Orono has not received revised drainage area maps and calculations
to determine the storm water management plan is feasible. The only calculations
that have been provided were submitted in January, 2000 based on the road
construction off Brown Road South, not Apple Glen Road.
Page 3 of 4
Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota at a regular
meeting held this 26th day of February, 2001.
ATTEST:
Linda S. Vee, City Clerk Barbara A. Peterson, Mayor
STATE OF MINNESOTA
W.
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this 26th day of
February, 2001, by Barbara A. Peterson & Linda S. Vee, Mayor & City Clerk of the City of
Orono, a Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the
City.
Notary Public
Page 4 of 4
tID Iial
n un it
1
Uoi
e• % l�n tam im a d �R" .. S 1 lei vc;it
it ` c� 0'9' ' LUf9iYIt
• tiv). nl ; C;n Sid \6 thl _I Iv: m .��•' d7IJiYISI
iro � lin � t0"t'. n d a7D sum
t$ic tm E� ,v, LFCiIti] 3
C2 Isl +Un _ fR) s. w Y• �' —n a /w
tali « Un
jj
t"� l It pn 437 '
tin
a j
_ v
It, AG
IN)
a —
nto
6�(
a 4
e - Rrgr
a
J 't
V) I
v� a 3
-
a
l; til
POD; ,a I
tie:-
6 a«
I
la
03-i/7 a3-i3
Charles E. Van Eeckhout
January 21, 2000
Page 1
HINSHAW & CULBERTSON
AresATOX.vnugxsn
rvaursx.vv roar
a%uM,• 6LLV013
l4tR )1%
aIC0.�CX0l0rra11�0a
Gf0VM�iVT15TAFeT
>OAW M1ORmA
\ROGIICOD. MaCM)q
.4UZVm15. K.11t30TA%V:
A0LMAYF2MSC0MLV
caAwuataunrou
1111:1]rR PDU.VA
CouCo.61A'ol+
nJnaa.
reouAua
V
QvieN.lAeJ
eppAC .lyy/%%
rX0 LV0e A116
OM A
IA R.CNQO.LLL rLOrA
K
a0W0a0. a1LV01'
01
IAQ]QW011 fLOIIIDA
R.I0U:f. r0f301'1:
IOIIIt,0f
fAVM CAIIIORViA
lAFaOM.'A WfCOMq
31MGMiQML0.0LLV015
L=al IS
7homv J. Barrett
uAVA no=m
wA1.u0A,v.¢ OU
Urea: 617.334-2676
T aarten�fiLuhanGw.eom
January 21, 2000
Charles Van Eeckhout
120 South Brown Road
Orono, MN 55365
Re: Proposed Plat for 12 South Brown Road, Orono
City File No. 2550
Our File No. 752031
Dear Mr. Van Eeckhout:
As you may be T..vare, we are the City Attorneys for the City of Orono. Paul Weinberger
has referred your pending subdivision application to us to review the City's concerns relating to
access. It is our understanding that vow subdivision proposal provides for access to the land
from Brown Road over a private easement for driveway purposes. This easement was granted
over Tract G, Registered Land Survey No. 352 pu-,swr1t to a N%mmarlty deed executed by Franc P.
Daniels and Marion B. Daniels in favor of Olive C. Case dated July 19, 1954, recorded August
24, 1954, as Document No. 432783 in the office of the Hennepin County Registrar of Titles
("Easement").
We have reviewed the Easement, your certificate of title and the certificate of title for
Tract G. Registered Land Survey No. 352 registered in the name of John F. Dun and MaryAnn
Dunn (collectively "Dunn"). We question whether or not the proposed means of access meets the
subdivision requirements of 8ie City or Orono.
The City of Orono ordinances clearly provide that when a private roadway is serving
three or more lots, that roadway shall be platted as an Outlot and the City may require an
Charles E. Van Eeckhout
January 21. 2000
Page 2
easement for road and utility purposes be granted over the Outlet to the public. In the
past, the City has always required an easement over Outlets which provide private
access to multiple lots. In this case, there is a private roadway proposed to serve three or
more lots and a portion of the private road cross,.a over land owned by Dunn. It is our
understanding that Dunn is not willing to join in the proposed plat to permit thr private roadway
to be platted as an Outlot, nor will Dunn join in an easement to the City for underlying roadway
and public utility purposes. As a result, the City must consider a variance from its ordinances to
pemtit access to the proposed subdivision over a private a semen.
The Easement is clearly granted for "driveway" purposes, not "roadway" purposes. We
question whether the easement, as granted, is sufficient to support access to six or seven lots.
Prior to approving the proposed subdivision, the City must receive sufficient evidence that Mr.
and Mrs. Dunn approve of the proposed development and the increased use of the easement area.
Such evidence may be in the form of Mr. and Mrs. Dunn's written consent to the final plat or,
preferably, an amendment to the current easement agreement that clearly reflects that the access
rights benefit and run with all of the new lots and identifies maintenance obligations for the
roadway.
As you and I discussed, the City will allow you to make a case that the easement
for driveway purposes is sufficient to meet to requirements of Orono's subdivision
ordinances, but the title commitment to the City of Orono which you provided to staff on
Wednesday evening was insufficient to resolve the problem. It merely guaranteed
Orono's interest in the easement as stated, but did not assure that either Orono's
interest In an underlying public easement, or that the access rights of the six or seven
lots which are being platted, can be derived from the easement for driveway purposes.
You have suggested that there is case law and other legal authority that either the Title
Company or your attorney would be willing to provide, and we stand ready to evaluate
that material. But if it should prove insufficient, then certainly some sort of undertaking
by Mr.'Dunn appears to be In order.
If you have any questions regarding the access issues relating to the pending subdivision,
please do not hesitate to contact me.
Very truly yours,
Thomas J. Barrett
cc: Paul Weinberger
To: Mayor Peterson and Councilmembers
Ron Moorse, City Administrator
From: Mike Gaffron, Planning Director �y,dy�
l�f►d FEB 2 6 2000
Date: February 23, 2001
GITY Of GflONO
Subject: #2631 RPUD Ordinance Final Draft for Adoption
List of Exhibits
A - Final Ordinance Draft in Adoption Format
B - Summary Ordinance for Publication
Council tabled this item on February 12 for additional review at the February 22 work session.
Councilmembers had a few concerns regarding ..pplicability of the RPUD District to Shoreland
properties, and about the potential RPUD impact on future development in the City. These were
reviewed in the memo of February 16 which was discussed at the work session. Councilmember
Flint also suggested some relatively minor changzs which were incorporated into a 6" draft that was
distributed at the work session. As a result of the discussions, since the February 12 version the
ordinance has been revised as follows:
1. Subd. 5(A)2 on Page 3: 5-acre Minimum. For the second potential finding which would
allow Council to allow a IUD zoning for a parcel of less than 5 acres, "public street" has
been substituted for "right-of-way" in terns ofdefining adjacency to an existing RPUD zone.
2. Subd. 5(A) on Page 3: Shoreland Applicability. Council concluded that no property nor
portion of a property within 250' of the shoreline of a protected lake or tributary may be
rezoned to RPUD. The language has been revised to allow RPRD development within the
Shoreland District but not within 250' of the shoreline.
3. Subd. 5(E) on Page 4: Incentives. The language allowing the use of incentives for
affordable and moderate cost housing has been revised to require a 20-year assurance rather
than merely a "specific period of time" for keeping units affordable.
4. Subd. 5(F) on Page 5: Hardst rface. Maximum hardsurface coverage for a "High -density
residential" (>6 units per acre) RPUD site has been reduced from 70%to 50%, matching the
standard for low/mediunidensity residential (the serioi housing site plan is currently at about
45% and may end up slightly lower depending on final road contigui.,iion).
5. Subd. 5(G)2 on Page 6 and Subd 5(H)8 on Page 7: Heigh- of Buildings. The height
standard language has been revised to omit the 2-1/2 story requirement, since the language
"30 feet or 2-12 stories" was confusing and difficult to interpret. For multi -tamely buildings
(Subd. 5(G)61 the height standard will be 30 feet, but for properties currently zoned or
guided in the CMP for commercial use, height may exceed 30 feet but may not exceed 3
stories. For single-family uses in RPUD (Subd. 5(H)81, building height will be limited to
30 feet. Note: Staff will be proposing a similar Code change to the height standard for all other
districts In the near future:
RPUD Ordinance
February 23, 2001
Page 2
6. Subd. 5(H)6 on Page 7: Side setbacks for Single-family. Language has been revised to
require the side yard setback for a RPUD single-family lot that abuts another residential
zoning district, to meet the side yard setback of that adjacent district.
7. Subd.5(N)2(a)on Page 10: Minimum Landscape Value. The Minimum Landscape Value
table has been replaced by a new table defining the minimum numbers of trees & shrubs
required based on the size of the building or site perimeter. This reduces the poscbility of
a developer meeting the landscaping obligation by installing a few high -value li ndscdping
amenities and leaving the remainder of the site under -landscaped. It also makes applica:inn
of the ordinance more objective and easier to interpret. The proposed numbers of trees are
similar to the numbers appearing in the zoning ordinances for Plymouth and Brooklyn Park.
8. Subd. 5(N)3(a) on Page 11: Parking Lot Landscaping. The threshold number of stalls at
which landscape islands must be installed in parking lots has been reduced from 150 to 100.
9. Subd.5(T) on Page 16: Lighting. Section SIT) on lighting standards has been added.. fhe
RPUD section merely references that the RPUD district is subject to the lighting
performance standards of the zoning chapter. Staff will very shortly be proposing an update of the
lighting standards in the General Performance Standards section of the Zoning Code, which will be
applicable to all districts.
10. Subd. 5(U) on Page 17: Trails. Section 5(U) requiring provision of trails at the developers'
expense has been added. Where required, trails will be required within development sites
andior within public rights -of -way at the City's discretion, will be 8' wide, and will be of
bituminous surface unless the City allows some other material.
11. Various Sections: re: Trails. Where appropriate, the word "trails" has been added to list
of required plan submittals or where trails are noted as a site feature similar to parking areas,
driveways, sidewalks, etc.
Staff Recommendation
Staff recommends adoption of the ordinance as amended, as it appears in Exhibit A. Staff also
recommends adoption of the Summary Ordinance for Publication as it appears in Exhibit B.
COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED
Motion to adopt the RPUD ordinance and the Summary Ordinance for Publication.
Proposed motion: Moved by _, seconded by _, to adopt Ordinance No. _ , Second Series, An
Ordinance Amending Chapter 10 of the Orono Municipal Code By Adding Section 10.33, RPUD
Residet.tial Planned Unit Development District: and further adopting the Summary Ordinance for
Publication of said Ordinance. Vote: _ayes, _nays.
exN . -4
ORDINANCE NO. , SECOND SERIES
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING
CHAPTER 10 OF THE ORONO MUNICIPAL CODE,
BY ADDING SECTION 10.33,
RPUD RESIDENTIAL PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT
The City Council of Orono ordains as follows:
Section 1. Municipa, Zoning Code Chapter 10 is hereby amended by adding Section 10.33,
RPUD Residential Planned Unit Development District, to read as follows:
"SEC. 10.33 RPUD RESIDENTIAL PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT.
Subd.l. Purpose. The purpose ofthe Residential Planned Unit Development(RPUD)
district is to provide a district which will allow for the implementation of certain residential
housing goals established in the 2000-2020 Orono Community Management Plan ('CMP' or
'Comprehensive Plan'). The RPUD District is established to accommodate the densities and
types of residential development contemplated in the CMP by incorporating the principles of
the Planned Unit Development concept. The RPUD District will encourage the following:
A. flexibility in land development and redevelopment in order to utilize
new techniques of building design, construction and land development;
B. provision of housing to meet lifecycle, and affordable and moderate
cost housing needs;
C. energy conservation through the use of more efficient building designs
and sitings and the clustering of buildings and land uses;
D. preservation of desirable site characteristics and open space and
protection of sensitive environmental features, including steep slopes,
poor soils and trees;
E. high quality of design and design compatible with surrounding land
uses, including both existing and planned;
F. sensitive development in transitional areas located between different
land uses and along significant corridors within the city; and
G. development which is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan.
Subd. 2. Permitted Uses. Within the RPUD District, no land or structures shall be
used except for one or more of the following uses:
Page I of 22
A. Any 'Permitted Use' as regulated in the R-IA District.
B. Multi -family attached dwellings only when consistent with the
Comprehensive Plan, and only within the areas of Ee City designated
as Urban Area in the Comprehensive Plan.
Subd. 3. Conditional Uses. Within the RPUD district, no land or structure shall be
used for the following uses except by conditional use permit:
A. Public Service Structures. Public service structures, including but not
limited to electric transmission lines, buildings such as telephone
exchange stations, booster or pressure regulating stations, wells, and
plumbing stations, elevated tanks, lift stations and electrical power
substations, provided no building shall be located within 50' from any
lot line of an abutting lot in an "It" District. Prior to granting such
permit it shall be found that the architectural design of service
structures is compatible to the neighborhood in which it is to be located
and thus will promote the general welfare. Public service structures as
defined above that have been approved by the City at required public
hearings for public improvement projects shall not require a
conditional use permit but such structures shall be subject to all other
appropriate standards set forth in this section; amendments to approved
plans involving design and/or placement of these structures will require
written notice by the City to all affected property owners 14 days prior
to the adoption of the amended plans by the Council. Personal wireless
services and commercial broadcasting antennas and lowers shall not be
considered public service structures. Uses allowed by conditional use
permit shall be reviewed for compliance with the PUD master
development plan and with the applicable conditional use permit
standards of this ordinance. Uses allowed by conditional use permit
shall also be subject to site and building plan review pursuant to this
ordinance.
Subd. 4. Accessory Uses. Within the RPUD District the following uses shall be a
permitted accessory use:
A. Any accessory use except for "Roadside Stands" as regulated in the R-
I A District.
Page 2 of 22
B. Privately owned buildings to be used for recreation or social purposes.
or for use as storage areas for maintenance equipment or rubbish.
Subd. 5. Development Standards. Within the RPUD District all development shall
be in compliance with the following:
A. Minimum Area; Shoreland District Limitation. Each site proposed
for rezoning to RPUD shall have a minimum area of five acres,
excluding areas within a designated wetland, floodplain or shoreland
district or right-of-way, unless the Council finds the existence of one
of the following:
1. Unusual physical features of the property itself or of the
surrounding neighborhood such that development as a RPUD
will conserve a physical or topographic feature of importance
to the neighborhood or community;
2. The property is directly adjacent to or across a public street
from property which has beendeveloped previously as a RPUD
or planned residential development and will be perceived as
and will function as an extension of that previously approved
development;
3. The property is located in an area where the proposed
development provides a transition between a commercial or
industrial area and an existing residential area or on an
intermediate or principal arterial as defined in the
comprehensive plan;
4. The property contains steep slopes or a substantial number of
significant trees that could be preserved through the clustering
of buildings or other design techniques not generally allowed
by the existing zoning district.
No property located within 250 feet of the OHWL of a Protected Lake
or Tributary as defined in the Shoreland Management section of the
Orono Zoning Code shall be rezoned to RPUD. However, for a
property that is partially located less than 250 feet from the OHWL and
partially located more than 250 feet from the OHWL, the portion
located more than 250' from the OHWL may be rezoned to RPUD at
the discretion of the City Council when all other requirements are met.
Page 3 of 22
B. Uses. Each property rezoned to RPUD shall only be used for the use
or uses for which the site is designated in the comprehensive plan.
except that the ciq may permit rezoning to RPUD on a site designated
for commercial use if the City Council finds that such use is in the best
interests of the city and is consistent with the requirements of this
section. If a commercial site is to be rezoned to RPUD, the city may
forward a copy of the request to the Metropolitan Council for review.
C. Sewer Availability. A site proposed to be rezoned to RPUD with
proposed density greater than 1 unit per 2 acres must be in the MUSA
and must be serviced by municipal sewer.
D. Density. Each development in the RPUD district shall have a density
within the range specified in the Comprehensive Plan for the specific
site. If the site is not designated in the Comprehensive Plan for
residential use, the appropriate density shall be determined by the City
based upon the City Council's finding that such density is consistent
with the intent of this ordinance and of the Comprehensive Plan.
Developments with proposed densities in excess of the densities
contemplated in the Comprehensive Plan shall be allowed only on
properties which are currently zoned and guided for commercial use.
in order to maintain the character and integrity of the areas zoned and
guided for residential use.
E. Incentives. The city may utilize incentives to encourage the
construction of projects which are consistent with the eity's Sousing
goals. Incentives may include modification of density (only for
properties currently zoned and guided for commercial use) and floor
area ratio requirements for developments providing lifecycle housing
and affordable and moderate cost housing. Incentives for affordable
and moderate cost housing may be approved by the city only after the
developer and city have entered into an agreement to ensure that the
low and moderate cost units remain available to persons of low and
moderate inc�-,P for at least 20 years.
F. Site Coverage. Hardsurface coverages and floor area ratios (FAR's)
shall be limited per the following table:
Page 4 � 22
Comprehensive Plan Designation
Maximum
Maximum
Hardsurface
Floor Area
Coverage(%)
Ratio'
Low or medium density residential
50
0.5
(up to and including 6.0 units per acre)
High density residential
50
1.0
(in excess of 6.0 units per acre)
•FAR - Total Building Floor Area / Total Lot Area
Individual lots within a development in the RPUU district may exceed
these standards as long as the average meets these standards.
G. Development Standards for Attached and Multi -Family DwelFug
Structures. Each site rezoned to RPUD and developed for attached or
multiple fwnily dwelling uses shall be subject to the following
standards:
Setbacks and Senamtion of Uses. Within the RPUD district the
setback for all attached and multi -family dwelling buildings
and their accessory buildings from any bordering or abutting
street line shall be 35 feet for local streets and 50 feet from
railroad lines or collector orarterial streets, as designated in the
comprehensive plan, except that in no case shall the setback be
less than the height of the building. The setback for all
buildings from exterior RPUD site lot lines not abutting a
public street shall be 35 feet except that in no case shall the
setback be less than the height of the building. Building
setbacks from internal public streets shall bedetermined by the
city based on characteristics of the specific RPUD site. Parking
lots and driving lanes shall be set back at least 20 feet from all
exterior lot lines of a RPUD site. The setback for parking
structures including decks and ramps shall be 35 feet from
local streets and 50 feet from all other street classifications
except that in no case shall the setback be less than the height
of the structure. Parking structure setbacks from external lot
lines shall be 50 feet or the height of the structure, whichever
is greater when adjacent to residential properties: 35 feet when
Page 5 of 22
adjacent to non-residential properties. Parking structure
setbacks from internal public or private streets shall be
determined by the city based on characteristics of the specific
RPUD site. Where industrial uses abut developed or platted
single family lots outside the RPUD site, greater exterior
building and parking setbacks may be required in order to
provide effective screening. The City Council shall make a
determination regarding the adequacy of screening proposed by
the applicant. Screening may include the use of natural
topography or earth berming, existing and proposed plantings
and other features such as roadways and wetlands which
provide separation of uses.
Property rezoned to RPUD shall be considered a residential
district for purposes of determining building and parking
setback requirements on adjacent high density residential,
commercial and industrial property outside the RPUD.
Height Limitations. For properties guided for residential use in
the Comprehensive Plan, a building height limit of 30 feet shall
apply. For properties current!v zoned or guided in the
Comprehensive Plan for commercial use, height may exceed 30
feet but shall not exceed 3 stories (not including underground
parking level) and shall maintain a residential character by
incorporating pitched or hipped roof structure. No mansard or
flat roofed multiple family buildings will be allowed.
3. Outside Storage Limitations. Outside storage of building
materials, recreational vehicles, boats, RV's, snowmobiles, and
other items of personal property shall not be stored outside
within any site used for attached or multi -family uses.
C. Development Standards for Single -Family Detached Dwellings in
the RPUD District. Each RPUD site developed for single family
detached dwellings at medium density (i.e. densities ranging from 1
unit per acre to 6 units per acre) shall be subject to the following
standards:
Page 6 of 22
Permitted locations: In areas of the City where smaller single
family detached dwelling lots will allow for clustering to
preserve significant natural features, or in areas where a
mixture of higher density attached dwellings and lower density
detached single family dwellings will result in a development
that does not exceed the overall guided density.
2. Minimum SFR lot size: 15,000 s.f.
3. Minimum lot width at the setback line: 90 feet.
4. Minimum lot depth: 125 feet.
5. Minimum front yard setback: 25 feet on internal streets within
the RPUD site. On exterior or through streets a setback of 35
feet must be provided on local streets and 50 foot setback on
collector or arterial streets as defined in the Comprehensive
Plan.
6. Minimum side yard setback: 10 feet along interior lot lines; 15
feet on lot lines along the exterior of the RPUD site. Sideyards
abutting streets must meet the minimum front yard setbacks as
noted abore. Structures in side yards abutting another
residential zoning district shall meet the side yard setback
requirement of the adjacent zoning district.
7. Rear yard setback:.airtimurn of 40 feet or 20 percent of the
depth of the lot, whichever is less.
8. Building height: maximum of 30 feet.
9. All dwelling units. including manufactured homes, shall have
a depth .`-:!east _0 feet for at leas: 50 percent of their width.
All dwelling units. including manufactured homes, shall have
a width of at least 20 feet for at least 50 percent of their depth.
10. All dwellings shall have a permanent foundation in
conformance with the Minnesota State Building Code.
Page 7 of 22
11. Accessory structures shall conform to the setbacks established
for principal structures, except as follows:
A. all accessory structures located more than 10 feet from
a principal structure may be located a minimum of 10
feet from a rear or side lot line, when that line does not
abut a street right-of-way.
B. no accessory structure shall be located ctoger to the
front lot line than the principal structure. regardless of
the principal structure setback.
12. No accessory structure shall occupy more than 30 percent of the
side or rear yard in which i. s located, nor exceea t.000 square
feet in area, nor exceed 12 feet in height.
13. Off-street parking shall be provided for at least two vehicles for
each single family dwelling. A suitable location for a garage
measuring at least 20 feet by 24 feet without a variance shall be
provided and indicated as such on a survey or site plan to be
submitted when applying for a building permit to construct a
new dwelling or alter an existing garage.
1. More Than One Building Allowed. More than one building may be
placed on one platted or recorded lot in a RPUD site.
J. Single Housing Type Permitted. Any RPUD development which
involves a single housing type shall be permitted prodded that it is
otherwise consistent with the objectives of this ordinance and the
comprehensive plan.
K. Private Recreational Area. Each RPUD development shall provide
a minimum of 10 percent of the gross project area in private
recreational uses for project residents. Such area shall be for active or
passive recreational uses suited to the needs of the residents of the
project, including swimming puuir ma115, nature areas. picnic areas. tot
lots and saunas. Private recreational area requirements are in addition
to the standard park dedication requirements.
Page 8 of 22
L. Ownership. All property to be included within a RPUD development
shall be under unified ownership or control or subject to such legal
restrictions or covenants as may be necessary to ensure compliance
with the approved master development plan and final site and building
plan.
M. Signage. Signs shall be restricted to those which are permitted in a sign
plan approved by the city and shall be regulated by permanent
covenants.
N. Landscaping, Screening and Buffering.
I. Landscape Plan Requirements. Landscape plans shall be
prepared by a landscape architect or other qualified person
acceptable to the City, drawn to t ie scale of not less than 1 inch
equals 50 feet and shall show the following:
a) boundary lines of t.... property with accurate
dimensions;
a) locations of existing and proposed buildings, parking
lots, roads, trails and other improvements;
b) proposed grading plan with 2-foot contour intervals;
c) location, approximate sin and common name of
existing trees and shrubs;
d) a planting schedule containing symbols, quantities,
common and botanical names, size of plant materials,
not condition and special planting instructions;
e) planting details illustrating proposed locations of all
new plant material;
t) locations and details of other landscape features
including berms, fences and planter boxes;
g) details of restoration of disturbed areas including areas
to be sodded and seeded;
h) location and details of irrigation systems; and
i) details and cross sections of all required screening.
Page 9 of 22
2. Minimum Landscaping Requirements.
a) All open areas of a lot which are not used or improved
for required parking areas, drives, trails or storage shall
be landscaped with a combination of deciduous and
coniferous species including overstory trees, underston
trees, shrubs, flowers and groundcover materials. The
plan for landscaping shall include ground rover.
bushes, shrubbery, trees, sculpture, foundations.
decorative walks or other similar site design features or
materials in a quantity, having a minimum value in
conformance with the following table:
Minimum Tree and Shrub Requirements
Vegetation Type sw
Quantity
Overstory Deciduous Trees
2.5" bb (Caliper)
I tree per 1,000 gross square feet of building footprint area or 1 zee
per 40 lineal feet of site perimeter, whichever is greater
Coniferous Trees
C height bb
Minimum of 300/6of required overstory, trees most be coniferous
Understory Shrubs
3 gal. patted or
I shrub per 300 gross square feet of building footprint area or i
18"
shrub per 30 lineal feet of site perimeter, whichever is greater
Ornamental deciduous trees
1.5" bb (Caliper)
Not required; but 2 omamental deciduous trees may be substimud
for 1 required overstory deciduous nee (maximum substitution=35%
of required uverstory deciduous trees)
Credits for Existing Trees: The City Council shall have sole discretion whether credit shall be granted for existing
healthy trees
In instances where healthy plant materials of acceptable
species exist on a site prior to its development, the
application of the standards in this section may be
adjusted by the City to allow credit for such material.
frovided that such adjustment is consistent with the
intent of this ordinance.
b) Areasonable attempt shall bemade topreserve asmam
existing trees as is practicable and to incorporate them
into the site plan.
Page 10 of 22
c) All new overstory trees shall be balled and burlapped or
moved from the growing site by tree spade. Deciduous
trees shall have a minimum caliper of 2%2 inches.
Coniferous trees shall be a minimum of six feet in
height. Ornamental trees shall have a minimum caliper
of 1'/2 inches.
d) All site areas not covered by buildings, sidewalks,
oarkine lots, driveways, trails, patios, or simih.r
hardsurface materials shall be covered with sod or an
equivalent ground cover approved by the city. This
requirement shall not apply to site areas retained in a
natural state.
e) In order to provide for adequate maintenance of
landscaped areas, an underground sprinkler system shall
be provided as part of each new development, except
one and two family dwellings and additions to existing
structures which do not at least equal the floor area of
the existing structure. A sprinkler system shall be
provided for all landscaped areas except areas to be
preserved in a natural state.
I) \ot more than 50 percent of the required number of
trees shall be composed of one species. The City shall
maintain a list of prohibited species which shall not be
used for landscaping.
3. Interior Parking Lot Landscaping.
a) All parking lots containing over 100 stalls shall be
designed to incorporate unpaved, landscaped islands in
number and dimension as required by the City. All
landscape islands shall contain a minimum of I80
square feet. Islands which are necessary to promote the
safe and efficient flow of traffic shall not be subject to
the " ; W stall" standard and shall be required by the city
when warranted.
Page I I of 22
b) Parking lot landscape areas, including landscape
islands, shall be reasonably distributed throughout the
parking lot area so as to break up expanses of paved
areas. Parking lot landscape areas shall be provided
with deciduous shade trees, ornamental or evergreen
trees, plus ground cover, mulch and/or shrubbery as
dete.-mined appropriate by the Planning Commission.
Parking lot landscape trees shall be provided at the rate
ofone tree for each 1= surface parking spaces provided,
or major fraction thereof. Parking lot landscaping shall
be contained in planting beds bordered by a raised
concrete curb or equivalent approved by the Planning
Commission.
Maintenance of Landscaping. The owner, tenant and their
respective agents shall be jointly and severally responsible for
the maintenance of all landscaping in a condition presenting a
healthy, neat and orderly appearance and free from refuse and
debris. Plants and ground cover which are required by an
approved site or landscape plan, and which have died shall be
replaced within three months of notification by the city.
However, the time for compliance may be extended up to nine
months by the city in order to allow for seasonal or weather
conditions.
Retaining Walls. Retaining walls exceeding four feet in
height, and staged walls which cumulatively exceed 16 feet in
height or involve more than 4 tiers, must be constructed in
accordance with plans prepared by a registered engineer or
landscape architect.
Landscaping Performance Security Required. When
screening, landscaping or other similar improvements to
property are required by this ordinance a letter of credit shall be
supplied by the owner in an amount equal to at least one and
one-halftimes the value of such screening, landscaping or other
improvements. The letter of credit shall be conditioned upon
reimbursement of all expenses incurred by the city for
Page 12 of 22
engineering, legal, contracting or other fees in connection with
making or completing such improvements. The letter of credit
shall be provided prior to the issuance of my buitdinc permit
and shall be valid for a period of time equal to amt n%o full
growing seasons after the date of installation of the
landscaping. The city may eccept some other form of security
in lieu of a letter of credit in an amount and under such
conditions that the city may determine to be appropriate. In the
event that construction of the project is not completed tsithin
the time prescribed by building permits and other apprm als, the
city may, at its option, wmPICt, the work required at the
expense of the awner and the surety.
The city may allow an extended period of time for completion
of all landscaping if the delay is due to conditions %%Leh are
reasonably beyond the control of the developer. Extensions
which may not exceed nine months, may be granted due to
seasonal or weather conditions. When an extension is granted.
the city shall require such additional security as r, deems
appropriate.
7. Screening and Buffering.
a) The following uses shall be screened or buffered in
accordance with the requirements of this subdi%ision:
Principal buildings and structures and any
building or structure accessory thereto ued for
residential uses at a density of greater than 4
units per acre shall be buffered from residential
lots located in any "R" district.
Off-street parking facilities containing six or
more spaces shall be buffered from streets
located within 50 feet. Parking facilities shall be
buffered with landscape zones.
Page 13 of 22
3. Loading docks shall be screened from all lot
lines and public roads.
4. Trash storage facilities shall be screened from
all lot lines and public roads.
S. Access roads serving multi -family buildings
shall be screened as necessary to eliminate the
impact of vehicle headlights shining toward
adjacent residential neighborhoods.
b) Required screening or buffering may be achieved with
fences, walls, earth berms, hedges, or other landscape
materials. All walls and fences shall be architecturally
harmonious with the principal building. Earth berms
shall not exceed a slope of 3:1, The screen shall be
designed to employ materials which provide an
effective visual barrier during all seasons.
c) All required screening or buffering shall be located on
the lot occupied by the use. building, facility or
structure to be screened. No screening or buffering shall
be located on any public right-of-way or within eight
feet of the traveled portion of any street or highway.
d) Screening or buffering required by this section shall be
of a height needed to accomplish the goals of this
section. Screening methods incorporating roofs over
storage, trash or mechanical facilities to screen from
higheradjacent propertiesor buildings may be requierd.
Height of plantings required under this section shall be
measured at the time of installation.
O. Architectural Standards.
It is not the intent of the City to restrict design freedom unduly
when reviewing project architecture in curmz::ion with a site
and building plan. However, it is in the best interest of the City
Page 14 of 22
to promote high standards of architectural design and
compatibility with surrounding structures and neighborhoods.
Architectural plans shall be prepared by an architect or other
qualified persons acceptable to the City and shall show the
following for all structures other than single family detached
dwellings:
a) elevations of all sides of the building;
b) type and color of exterior building materials;
c) a typical floor plan;
d) dimensions of all structures;
e) the location of trash and recycling containers and of
heating, Ventilation and air conditioning equipment.
2. Unadorned prestressed concrete panels, concrete block and
unfinished metal shall not be permitted as exterior materials for
residential principal and accessory buildings. This restriction
shall apply to all principal structures and to all accessory
buildings. The city may, at its discretion, allow architecturally
enhanced block or concrete panels.
3. Accessory buildings shall be architecturally compatible with
principal structures.
4. All rooftop or ground mounted mechanical equipment and
exterior trash and recycling storage areas shall be fully enclosed
or screened so as to be not visible with materials compatible
with the principal structure.
5. Underground utilities shall be provided for all new and
substantially renovated structures (substantially renovated shall
mean when the renovations exceed 30% of the pre -renovation
value of the structure).
Page 15 of 22
P. Flexibility. The uniqueness of each RPUD requiresth...specifications
and standards for streets, utilities, public facilities and subdivisions
may be subject to modification from the city ordinances ordinarily
governing them. The city council may therefore approve streets,
utilities, public facilities and land subdivisions which are n-t in
compliance with usual specifications or ordinance requirements if it
finds that strict adherence to such standards or requirements is not
required to meet the intent of this section or to protect the health, safety
or welfare of the residents of the RPUD, the surrounding area or the
city as a whole.
Q. Traffic Studies. The City may require a traffic analysis to be prepared
by a registered traffic engineer approved by the City to assess potential
traffic irr^acts on local streets. If impacts on service levels of
roadways and intersections are anticipated, the project will be approved
only contingent upon a traffic manag, ment plan that adequately
mitigates those impacts. The plan may include travel demand
management strategies, use of transit facilities or other appropriate
measures to reduce traffic generation, and necessary improvements to
road systems. The developer shall have the responsibility to install all
necessary road system improvements.
R. Building Permits. No building or other permit shall be issued for any
work on property included within a proposed or approved RPUD
development nor shall any work occur unless such work is in
compliance with the proposed or approved RPUD development.
S. General Regulations Applicability. The requirements contained in
this ordinance pertaining to general regulations for residential districts
and performance standards shall apply to a RPUD development as
deemed appropriate by the city.
T. Lighting Standards. All RPUD developments shall be subject to the
general performance standards for lighting per the Zoning Chapter.
U. Trails When any portion ofthe project is within 1000 feet of a public
trail .,stem, pedestri= access shall be provided to the trail system by
means of a public trail constructed at the developer's expense. Where
Page 16 of 22
public rights -of -way are are availahle,al the City's discretion the trail
may utilize the public right-of-way. Trails shall be of bituminous
construction, or such other material as may be approved by the City and
shall be not less than 8 fee! in width.
Subd. 6. Review of Application; Procedures.
A. Concept Plan Review. In order to receive guidance in the design of a
RPUD prior to submission of a formal application, an applicant may
submit a concept plan for review and comment by the planning
commission and city council. Submission of a concept plan is optional
but is highly recommended for large RPUDs. In order for the review
to be of most help to the applicant, the concept plan should contain
such specific information as is suggested by the city. Generally, this
information should include the following:
1) approximate building, road and trail locations;
2) height, bulk and square footage of buildings;
3) type and square footage of specific land uses;
4) number of dwelling units;
5) generalized grading plan showing areas to be cut, filled
and preserved; and
6) staging and timing of the development.
The comments of the planning commission and city council shall
address the consistency of tho concept plan with this section. The
comments of the planning commission and city council shall be for
guidance only and, ifpositive, shall not be considered binding upon the
planning commission or city council regarding approval of the formal
RPUD application when submitted.
B. Master Development Plan and Rezoning. Approval of a rezoning to
RPUD and approval of a master development plan shall be subject to
the procedures outlined in the Zoning Code for a zoning map
amendment. The masterdevempment plan shall contain the following:
1) building location, height, bulk and square footage;
2) type and square footage of specific land uses;
3) number of dwelling units;
4) detailed street ettd utility locations and sizes;
5) parking layout;
Page 17 of 22
6) drainage plan, including location and size of pipes and
water storage areas;
7) grading plan and drainage plan including 2-foot
contours;
8) generalized landscape plan;
9) generalized plan for uniform signs and lighting;
10) plan for liming and phasing of the development;
11) covenants or other restrictions proposed for the
regulation of the development;
12) renderings or elevations of all sides of buildings to be
constructed in the first phase of the development;
13) trail plan; and
14) lighting plan.
Approval of the master development plan shall indicate approval of the
previously listed items and shall occur in conjunction with rezoning of
the property to RPUD. After rezoning of the property to RPUD,
nothing shall be constructed on the RPUD site except in conformance
with the approved plans and this section. The procedure for
notification of and public hearing on the master development plan shall
be the same as required fora zoning map amendment by this ordinance.
Development Agreement/Financial Guarantee. Following the approval
of the Master Development Plan but prior to final plan approval, the
applicant shall enter into an agreement with the City relating to the
terms of the RPUD development, and shall also provide such financial
guarantees as the City requires or deems necessary. Such agreement
may take the form of: 1) a development contract; and/or 2) a Site
Improvement Performance Agreement; and/or 3) another form of
binding instrument as may be required by the City.
C. Final Site and Building Plan. Approval of a final site and building plan
for the entire RPUD or for specific parts of the RPUD shall be subject
to the procedures outlined in this ordinance. The final site and building
plan shall contain information as required by the city, including the
following:
1) detailed utility, street, grading and drainage plans:
2) detailed building elevations and Boor plans;
Page 18 of 22
3) detailed landscaping, sign and lighting plans; and
4) detailed trail plan.
D. Substantial Compliance. The final site and building plan shall be in
substantial compliance with the approved masc: development plan.
Substantial compliance shall mean:
I) buildings, parking areas, mid roads and trail s are in
substantially the same location as previously approved:
2) the number of residential living units has not increased
or decreased from that ;ppro%ed in the master
development plan;
3) the gross floor area of any individual building has not
been increased from that approved in the master
development plan;
4) there has been no increase in the number of stories in
any building;
5) open space has not been decreased or altered to change
its original design or intended use: and
6) all special conditions required on the master
development plan by the city ha- a been incorporated
into the final site and building plan.
Approval of a final site and building plan shall s:zni6 approval of all
plans necessary prior to application for a building permit, subject to
conformance with any conditions on the approval and subject to other
necessary approvals by the city.
E. Simultaneous Review. Applicants may combine the final site and
building plan review with the master development plan review by
submitting all information required for both stages simultaneously.
F. Basis For Approval; Conditions. In evaluating a site and building plan.
the planning commission and city council shall base their
recommendations and actions regarding approval of a RPUD on a
consideration of the following:
1) compatibility of the proposed plan with this section and
consistency with the goals, policies, and objectives of
the Comprehensive Plan and Surface Water
Management Plan;
Page 19 of 22
2) preservation of the site in its natural state to the greatest
extent practicable by minimizing tree and soil removal
and designing grade changes to be in keeping with the
general character and appearance of neighboring
properties;
3) creation of compatible relationships between buildings
and open spaces both on the site and adjacent to it,
incorporating natural site features and with existing and
future buildings having a visual relationship to the
development, giving spec?al attention to:
1) an internal sense of order for the buildings and
uses on the site and provision of a desirable
environment for occupants. visitors and the
general community;
2) the amount and location of open space and
landscaping;
3) materials, textures, colors and details of
construction as an expression of the design
concept and the compatibilin of the same with,
the adjacent and neighboring structures and
uses; and vehicular and pedestrian circulation,
including walkways, interior drives and parking
in terms of location and number access points to
the public streets, width of interior drives and
access points, general interior circulation,
separation of pedestrian and vehicular traffic
and arrangement and amount of parking.
4) promotion of energy conservation through design,
location, orientation and elevation of structures, the use
and location of glass in structures and the use of
landscape materials and site grading:
5) protection of adjacent and neighboring properties
through reasonable provisions for surface water
drainage, sound and sight buffers. preservation of
Page 20 of 22
views, light and air and those aspects of design not
adequately covered by other regulations which may
have substantial effects or, neighboring !and uses.; and
6) such other factors as the planning commission or city
council deem relevant.
The planning commission and city council may attach sach conditions
to their actions as they shall determine necessary or convenient to
better accomplish the purposes of this section.
Subd. 7. Term of Approval. If application has not been made for a final site and
building plan approval pursuant to the approved master development plan for all or a pan of
the property within a RPUD by December 31 of the year following the date on which the
RPUD zoning map amendment became effective or if within that period no extension of time
has been granted, the city council may rezone the property to the original zoning classification
at the time of the RPUD application or to a zoning classification consistent with the
comprehensive plan designation for the property. In the absence of a rezoning, the approved
master development plan shall remain the legal control governing development ofthe property
included within the RPUD.
Ifconstrnction on the property included within an approved final site and building plan has not
started by December 31 of the year following the date on which such final site and building
plan was approved or if building construction in a phase of a RPUD approved to be built in
phases has not started within this period or if within that period no extension of the time has
been granted, the city council may rezone the property to the original zoning classification at
the time of the RPUD application or to a zoning classification consistent with the
comprehensive plan designation for the property. In the absence of rezoning, the approved
master development plan and final site and building plan shall remain the legal control
governing development of the property included within the RPUD.
Subd.S. Amendments. Major amendments to an approved master development plan
may be approved by the city council after review by the planning commission. The
notification and public hearing procedure for such amendment shall be the same as for
approval of the original RPUD. A major amendment is any amendment which:
a) substantially alters the location of buildings, parking areas or roads:
2) increases or decreases the number of residential dwelling units;
c) increases the gross floor area of any individual building ;
Page 21 of 22
d) increases the number of stories of any building;
e) decreases the amount of open space or alters it in such a way as to
change its original design or intended use; or
f) creates non-compliance with any special condition auached to the
approval of the master development plan.
Any other amendment may be made through review and approval by a simple majority vote
of the Council.
Subd. 9. Exceptions. This section shall not apply to any residential PUD or PRD
which has received preliminary or final approval by the city council prior to the effective date
of this ordinance unless s tch is requested by the property owner and approved by the city
council."
Section 2. Adoption and Publication. A summary of this ordinance shall be published in The
Pioneer and The Laker newspapers, and this ordinance shall become effective immediately upon
publication.
Adopted by the City Council of Orono, Minnesota on this 26th day of February, 2001 by a
vote of _ayes and _nays.
ATTEST:
Linda S. Vee, City Clerk Barbara Peterson, Mayor
Page 22 of 22
SUMMARY OF ORDINANCE NO. ,SECOND SERIES gT B ,
ORDINANCE NO. , SECOND SERIES
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING
CHAPTER 10 OF THE ORONO MUNICIPAL CODE
BY ADDING SECTION 1033,
RPUD RESIDENTIAL PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT
The following is the official summary of Ordinance No., Second Series approved by the City
Council of the City of Orono on February 26, 2001.
Municipal Zoning Code Chapter 10 is amended by adding Section 10.33, kKJD Residential Planned
Unit Development District, to read as follows:
"SEC.1033 RPUD RESIDENTIAL PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT.
Subd.l. Purpose. The purpose of the Residential Planned Unit Development(RPUD)district
is to provide a district which will allow for the implementation of certain residential housing
goals established in the 2000-2020 Orono Community Management Plan ('CMP' or
'Comprehensive Plan'). The RPUD District i., established to accommodate the densities and
types of residential development contemplated in We CMP by incorporating the f.inciples of
the Planned Unit Development concept. The RPUD District will encourage the following:
A. flexibility in land development and redevelopment in order to utilize new
techniques of building design, construction and land development;
B. provision of housing to meet lifecycle, and affordaule and moderate cost
housing needs;
C. energy conservation through the use of more efficient building designs and
sitings and the clustering of buildings and land uses;
D. preservation of desirable site characteristics and open space and protection of
sensitive environmental features, including steep slopes, poor soils and trees;
E. high quality of design and design compatible with surrounding land uses,
including both existing and planned;
F. sensitive development in transitional areas located between different land uses
and along significant corridors within the city; and
G. development which is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan.
Page I of 5
Subd. 2. Permitted Uses. Within the RPUD District, no land or structures shall be used
except for one or more of the following uses:
A. Any 'Permitted Use' as regulated in the R-IA District.
B. Multi -family attached dwellings only when consistent with the Comprehc-=ive
Plan, and only within the areas of the City designated as Urban Area in the
Comprehensive Plan.
Subd. 3. Conditional Uses. Within the RPUD district, no land or structure shall he used for
the following uses except by conditional use permit:
A. Public Service Structures.
Subd. 4. Accessory Uses. Within the RPUD District the following uses shall be a permitted
accessory use:
A. Any accessory use except for "Roadside Stands" as regulated in the R-IA
District.
B. Privately owned buildings to be used for recreation or social purposes. or for
use as storage areas for maintenance equipment or rubbish.
Subd. 5. Development Standards. Within the RPUD Distr:cl all development shall be in
compliance with dte following standards which are detailed in the ordinance:
A. Minimum Site Area; Shoreland District Limitations.
e. Specified Uses Per Comprehensive Plan.
C. Sewer Availability.
D. Density.
E. Incentives for Consistency with Comprehensive Plan.
F. Site Coverage.
G. Development Standards for Attached and Multi -Family Dwelling Structures.
H. Development Standards for Single -Family Detached Dwellings in the RPUD
District.
1. More Than One Building Allowed.
J. Single Housing Type Permitted.
K. Private Recreational Area
L. Ownership.
M. Signage.
N. Landscaping, Screening and Buffering.
O. Architectural Standards
P. Flexibility
Page 2 of 5
Q.
Traffic Studies
R.
Building Permits.
S.
General Regulations Applicability.
T.
Lighting
U.
Trails
Subd. 6. Review of Application; Procedures.
A. Concept Plan Review. In order to receive guidance in the design of a RPUD
prior to submission of a formal application, an applicant may submit a concept
plan for review and comment by the planting commission and city council.
Submission of a concept plan is optional but is highly recommended for large
RPUDs. In order for the review to be of most help to the applicant, the concept
plan should contain such specific information as listed in this ordinance. The
comments of the planning commission and city council shall address the
consistency of the concept plan with this section, but shall be for guidance only
and shall not be considered binding upon the planning commission or city
council.
B. Master Development Plan and Rezoning. Approval of a rezoning to RPUD and
approval of a master development plan shall be subject to the procedures
outlined in the Zoning Code for a zoning map amendment. The master
development plan shall contain detailed site design plans per the list of
submittals appearing in this ordinance. Approval of the master development
plan shall indicate approval of the listed items and shall occur in conjunction
with rezoning of the property to RPUD. After rezoning of the property to
RPUD, nothing shall be constructed on the RPUD site except in conformance
with the approved plans and this section. Following the approval of the Master
Development Plan but prior to final plan approval, the applicant shall enter into
an agreement with the City relating to the terms of the RPUD development,
and shall also provide such financial guarantees as the City requires or deems
necessary.
Final Site and Building Plan. Approval of a final site and huilding plan for the
entire RPUD or for specific parts of the RPUD shall be subject to the
procedures outlined in this ordinance. The final site and building plan shall
contain information as required by the city, as specified in this ordinance.
Page 3 of 5
D. Substantial Compliance. The final site and building plan shall be in substantial
compliance with the approved master development plan, per the standards for
substantial compliance as enumerated in the ordinance. Approval of a final site
and building plan shall signify approval of all plans necessary prior to
application for a building permit, subject to conformance with any conditions
on the approval and subject to other necessary approvals by the city.
E. Simultaneous Review. Applicants may combine the final site and building plan
review with the master development plan review by subrnitting al I information
required for both stages simultaneously.
F. Basis For Approval; Conditions. In evaluating a site and building plan, the
planning commission and city council shall base their recommendations and
actions regarding approval ora RPUD on a consideration of compatibility of
the proposed plan with this section and consistency with the Comprehensive
Plan and Surface Water Management Plan; preservation of the site in its
natural state to the greatest extent practicable by minimizing tree and snit
removal and designing grade changes to be compatible with surroundings:
creation of compatible relationships between buildings and open spaces both
on the site and adjacent to it, incorporating natural site features and with
existing and future buildings having a visual relationship to the development.
giving special attention to specified characteristics: promotion of energy
conservation through design, location, orientation and elevation of structures.
the use and location of glass in structures and the use of landscape materials
and site grading; protection of adjacent and neighboring properties through
reasonable provisions for surface water drainage, sound and sight buffers.
preservation of views, light and air and those aspects of design not adequately
covered by other regulations which may have substantial effects on
neighboring land uses.; and such other factors as the planning commission or
city council deem relevant. The planning commission and city council may
attach such conditions to their actions as they shall determine necessary or
convenient to better accomplish the purposes of this section.
Subd. 7. Term of Approval. If application has not been made for a final site and building
plan approval pursuant to the approved master development plan for all or a nart of the
property within a RPUD by December 31 of the year following the date on which the RPUD
coning map amendment became effective or if within that period no extension of time has
Iven granted, the city council may rezone the property to the original zoning classification at
Page 4 of 5
the time of the RPUD application or to a zoning classification consistent with the
comprehensive plan designation for the property. In the absence of a rezoning, the approved
masterdevelopmenl plan shall remain the legal control governing development of the property
included within the RPUD.
Subd. S. Amendments. Major amendments to an approved master development plan may
be approved by the city council after review by the planning commission. The notification and
public hearing procedure for such amendment shall be the same as for approval of the original
RPUD.
Subd. 9. Exceptions. This section shall not apply to any residential PUD or PRO which has
received preliminary or final approval by the city council prior to the effective date of this
ordinance unless such is requested by the property owner and approved by the city council."
A printed copy of Ordinance No. _, Second Series in its entirety is available for
inspection by any person at the office of the City Clerk during regular office hours. This ordinance
becomes effective immediately upon publication.
Adopted by the City Council of Orono, Minnesota on this 26th day of Febmary, 2001 by a
vole of _ayes and _nays.
ATTEST:
Linda S. Vee, City Clerk
Barbara Peterson, h lay or
Page 5 of 5
To: Mayor & Council
Ron Moorse, City Administrator
From: Mike Gaffron, Planning Director
Date: February 26. 2001
Subject: #2639 - Add RPUD to Section 10.52 List of Available Districts for Highway 12
Corridor- MINOR REVISIONS
This zoning amendment is for the purpose of allowing the RPUD District as a zoning district to
which properties in the Highway 12 Corridor can be rezoned (background on the Highway 12
Corridor is attached as an exhibit to this memo). Since last week's memo, Councilmember Flint has
suggested a few additional minor revisions to the language of Sections 10.52 (Special Requirements
for Rezoning in the Highway 12 Corridor Study Area). These added revisions to 10.52 will serve
to better integrate RPUD into Section 10.52 and avoid any conflicts in intent that might otherwise
remain absent the revisions. A revised draft ordinance for adoption is attached.
The proposed additional revisions to 10.52 for review and adoption tonight include
10.52 Subd. 1: Add language referencing the RPUD exceptions to the 5-acre minimum area
for rezoning:
"Subd. 1. Minimum Area. To insure consistency with the goals and objectives of the
Highway 12 Corridor Study, applications for rezoning within the study area must
include a minimum of five acres, except that exceptions to this reouirement may
be yranted for certain properties being rezoned to RPUD per the conditions
established in the RPUD District standards. The plans submitted along with these
applications must also include enough information regarding the effect of the
proposed development on surrounding parcels to insure that the property can be
developed in a manner that is both compatible with adjacent properties and consistent
with the Highway 12 Corridor Smdy"
2. 10.52 Subd. 2: Add language that specifically requires the granting of rights -of -way for trails
as part of the "access and circulation plan" when rezoning in the Highway 12 corridor; this
makes such a requirement very explicit, although requirements that functionally accomplish
the same purpose are already in place in the Park Dedication and Subdivision codes. The
proposed language changes are:
"Subd. 2. Access and Circulation Plan. The plans submitted along with the
application most propose access to the proposed development which is consistent
with the Transportation Planning Objectives of the Highway 12 Corridor Study. All
public easements and road and trail right of way that is needed to allow the
construction of service roads, tnib and/or the expansion of Trunk Highway 12 past
the subject property, shall be dedicated to the City"
10.52 Revisions
February 26, 2001
Page 2
10.52 Subd. 5: Add that a finding of consistency must be made with respect to not only with
the Highway 12 Corridor Study but with Orono's Comprehensive Plan:
"Subd. 5. Available Zoning Districts. Due to the unique set of constraints and
opportunities that affect future decisions regarding development within the Highway
12 Corridor Study Area, applicants for rezoning are strongly encouraged to utilize the
planned unit development approach, outlined in Section 10 of the Orono Zoning
Ordinance. However, applications will be accepted for rezoning requests for any of
the following existing zoning districts within the City, consistent with a finding of
consistency with the Orono Comprehensive Plan and the Highway 12 Corridor
Study and subject to compliance with all of the additional requirements established
in this section:
B-6 Highway Commercial District
PRD Planned Residential Development
R-lA One Family Residential District
R-IB One Family Residential District
M-6 Multiple Family Planned Residential District
BLU Residential Planned Unit Development District
Any proposal which requires a modification to zoning or subdivision requirements
must be done as a Planned Unit Development.
Staff Recommendation
Staff recommends adoption of the proposed zoning amendment as revised per the attached
ordinance.
COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED
Adopt the attached ordinance.
Proposed motion: Moved by _, seconded by to adopt Ordinance no. Second Series,
Amending Chapter 10 of the Orono Municipal Code by Amending Section 10.52, Special
Requirements for Rezoning in the Highway 12 Corridor Study Area. Vote: ayes, _nays.
Attachments
— Revised Ordinance for Adoption
— Highway 12 Corridor Background Information
ORDINANCE NO., SECOND SERIES
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING
CHAPTER 10 OF THE ORONO MUNICIPAL CODE
BY AMENDING SECTION 10.52,
SPECIAL REQUIREMENTS FOR REZONING WITHIN THE
HIGHWAY 12 CORRIDOR STUDY AREA
The City Council of Orono ordains as follows:
Section 1. Orono Municipal Zoning Code Chapter 10. Section 10.52, Subdivision I is
hereby amended to read as follows:
"Subd. 1. Minimum Area. To insure consistency with the goals and objectives ofthe
Highway 12 Corridor Study, applications for rezoning within the study area must
include a minimum of five acres, except that exceptions to this reguirement may be
granted for certain properties being rezoned to RPUD per the conditions established
in the RPUD District standards. The plans submitted along with these applications
must also include enough information regarding the effect of the proposed
development on surrounding parcels to insure that the property can be developed in
a manner that is both compatible with adjacent properties and consistent with the
Highway 12 Corridor Study."
Section 2. Orono Municipal Zoning Code Chapter 10, Section 10.52, Subdivision 2 is
hereby amended to read as follows:
"Subd. 2. Access and Circulation Plan. The plans submitted along with the
application must propose access to the proposed development which is consistent
with the Transportation Planning Objectives of the Highway 12 Corridor Study. All
public easements and road and trail right of way that is needed to allow the
construction of service road., trails and/or the expansion of Trunk Highway 12 past
the subject property, shall be dedicated to the City."
Section 3. Orono Municipal Zoning Code Chapter 10, Section 10.52, Subdivision 5 is
hereby amended to include "RPUD - Residential Planned Unit Development District" in the list of
available zoning districts to which properties in the Highway 12 Corridor Study Area may be
rezoned. Section 10.52, Subdivision 5 shall henceforth read as follows:
"Subd. 5. Available Zoning Districts. Due to the unique set of constraints and
opportunities that affect future decisions regarding development within the Highway 12
Corridor Study Area, applicants for rezoning are strongly encouraged to utilize the planned
Page 1 of 2
unit development approach, outlined in Section 10 of the Orono Zoning Ordinance.
However, applications will be accepted for rezoning requests for any of the following
existing zoning districts within the City, consistent with a finding of consistency %%ith the
Orono Comprehensive Plan and the Highway 12 Corridor Study and subject to compliance
with all of the additional requirements established in this section:
B-6 Highway Commercial District
PRO Planned Residential Development
R-IA One Family Residential District
R-IB One Family Residential District
M-6 Multiple Family Planned Residential District
RPUD Residential Planned Unit Development District
Any proposal which requires a modification to zoning or subdivision requirements must be
done as a Planned Unit Development."
Section 4. Adoption and Publication. This ordinance shall he published in The Pioneer and
The Laker newspapers and shall become effective immediately upon publication.
Adopted by the C:ty Council of Orono, Minnesota on this 26th day of February, 2001 by a
vote of _ayes and _ nays.
ATTEST:
Linda S. Vee, City Clerk Barbara Peterson, Mayor
!,sge 2 of 2
Highway 12 Corridor Study Area Background
The Highway 12 Corridor Study Area as defined in Comprehensive Plan Amendment 42 (1988) was
04I redefined as part of the 2000-2020 CMP update. The original Highway 12 Corridor Study Area
included some 690 acres along Highway 12, from the Co. Rd. 6 intersection at the west end, east to
Brown Road, as well as a few properties along 12 south of the Luce Line bridge at the east end of
town. That 1988 study resulted in changes to the guide plan forjust a portion of the properties in the
study area:
— No changes to any properties west of Old Crystal Bay "Oad
— No changes to the Industrial Park
— Incorporation into the MUSA of the area east of Old Crystal Bay Road and west of Willow,
between Hwy 12 and Co. Rd. 6; and re -guiding the tier along 12 for commercial uses with
a transition of townhomes north of Kelley Parkway, with single-family homes further north.
— Incorporation into the MUSA of the area along the north side of 12 between Willow and
Brown for commercial use.:, and also including thresidential portion of Sugar Woods.
— Adding to the MUSA the properties at the SW quadrant of the 12/Luce Line intersection.
The 2000-2020 CMP references the 1988 Comp Plan amendments but does not change their
effective boundaries. It does, however, clarify and more strictly define what is planned to happen
for certain properties within that corridor, and it also re -guides the future planned uses for certain
properties outside that corridor.
The provisions of Section 10.52 apply only to those properties planned for change within the 1989
Highway 12 Corridor, as noted above. L3 ewise, the PUD provisions of Section 10.53 apply only
to that same limited group of properties. Sections 10.52 and 10.53 do = apply to the Dumas
Orchard or Hackberry sites re -guided in the 2000-2020 CMP for higher density residential uses.
Also. neither 10.52 or 10.53 allowed for the flexibility'.: density that is incorporated into the RPUD
ordinance for properties being rezoned from cormercial to multi -family. These are just two of the
reasons we needed to create the RPUD District, even though the Rebers site is within the 1988
Highway 12 Corridor, and i. subject to 10.52 end 10.53.
(Also note that Councilmember Flint has suggested a minor revision to Section 10. 53 to reference
the 2000-2010 CMP update. Staff had anticipated making such changes to i0.53 after the Met
Council approves the 1000-2020 CMP, as part ofa zoning code update to conform to the new CMP.
The suggested 10.53 revisions will be incorporated into such afuture amendment but are not strictly
necessary to accommodate the Senior Housing/Ofce project, because the current language of 10.53
already applies to the site in question. A separate public hearing will be held far the 10. 53 changes
when they are brought forward)
REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION
Date: February 23, 2001
Item No.:
Department Approval: Administrator Approval: .Agenda Section:
Zoning
Name: Michael P. Gafhon
Title: Planning Director
Item Description: #2639 Add "RPUD" to List of Available Zoning Districts under Sec. 10.52
pnn.,nn rreFTINO
List of Exhibits FEB 2 6 2000
A - Proposed Ordinance for Adoption
B - Planning Commission Memo and Exhibits 1-12-01 GI I r t!P OHONO
Summary
Section 10.52, the Special Requirements for Rezoning in the Highway 12 Corridor Study Area,
contains a list of zoning districts to which the corridor properties can be rezoned. The proposed
ordinance adds "RPUD- Residential Planned Unit Development District" to that list. For additional
background, please review Exhibit B.
Planning Commission Recommendation
On January 17, Planning Commission voted 4-0 to recommend approval of this ordinance as
presented.
Staff Recommendation
Staff recommends approval of the proposed ordinance. Adoption will require a 4!5 vote of the City
Council.
COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED
Motion to adopt the attached zoning ordinance.
ORDINANCE NO. , SECOND SERIES
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING
CHAPTER 10 OF THE ORONO MUNICIPAL CODE
BY AMENDING SECTION 10.52, SUBDIVISION 5
AVAILABLE ZONING DISTRICTS FOR
HIGHWAY 12 CORRIDOR STUDY AREA
The City Council of Orono ordains as follows:
Section 1. Municipal Zoning Code Chapter 10, Section 10.52. Subdivision 5 is hereby
amended to include "RPUD - Residential Planned Unit Development District' in the list of available
zoning disnicts to which properties in the Highway 12 Corridor Study Area may be rezoned.
Section 10.52, Subdivision 5 shall henceforth read as follows:
"Subd. 5. Available Zoning Districts. Due to the unique set of constraints and
opportunities that affect future decisions regarding development within the Highway 12
Corridor Study Area, applicants for rezoning are strongly encouraged to utilize the planned
unit development approach, outlined in Section 10 of the Orono Zoning Ordinance.
However, applications will be accepted for rezoning requests for any of the following
existing zoning districts within the City, consistent with a finding of consistency with the
Highway 12 Corridor Study and subject to compliance with all of the additional requirements
established in this section:
B-6 Highway Commercial District
PRD Planned Residential Development
R-IA One Family Residential District
R-IR ()ne Family Residential District
M-6 Multiple Family Planned Residential District
RPUD Residential Planned Unit Development District
Any proposal which requires a modification to zoning or subdivision requirements must be
done as a Planned Unit Development."
Section 2. Adoption and Publication. This ordinance shall be published in The Pioneer and
The Laker newspapers and shall become effective immediately upon publication.
Adopted by the City Council of Orono, Minnesota on this 26th day of February, 2001 by a
vote of _ayes and _nays.
ATTEST:
Linda S. Vee, City Clerk Barbara Peterson, Mayor
C
To: Chair Hawn and Planning Commission Members
Ron Moorse. City Administrator
yy��
Flora: Mike Oaffron, Planing Director
Datc: January 12, 2001
Subject: #2639 Proposed Zoning Code Amendment:
Add "RPUD" to List of Available Zoning Districts under Section 10.52
Note: This item was tabled without discussion at your November meeting.
List of Exhibits O/ Q
A - Zoning Code Section 10.52�
B - Map from CMP Amendment #2, May 23. 19SS
Background
In 1988 Ore City studied the Highway 12 corridor and made specific Comprehenske Plan (CMP)
changes for certain groupings of properties along Highway 12. Those changes carry through to the
2000-2020 CMP, and allow for future development of commercial or medium density residential
uses on those properties. The Highway 12 Corridor propertief -object to those changes are along
the north side of 12 between Brown Road and Old Crystal Ba, Road and are defined in CMP
Amendment #2 adopted May 23, 1988.
Subsequently, the City in 1989 adopted Section 10.52 "Special Requirements for Rezoning in the
Highway 12 Corridor Study Area', which sets out criteria, standards and requirements which must
be satisfied before rezoning of any of affected properties twill be approved. Section 10.52, Solid. 5
establishes a short list of zoning districts to which the Corridor properties can be rezoned, m follows:
Subd 5. Available Zoning Districts. Duz to the unique set of constraints and
opportunities that affect ftntre decisions regarding developmen, ;,bin the Highway 12
Corridor Study Area, applicants for rezoningare sirangly encouraget', 'n,:etheplanned
unit development approach, outlined in Section 10 of the Orono Zo,. Irdinance.
However, applications will be accepted for re-oning requests for any at 4lowing
existing zoning districts within the City consistent with a Ending of consistence b the
Highway 11 Corridor Study and subject to compliance with all of the addle,. -d
requirements established in this section:
B-6 Highway Commercial District
PRD Planned Residential Developmem
R-lA One Family Residential District
R-1 B One Family Residential District
M-6 Multiple Family Planned Residential Distric'
Any proposal which requires a modifiration to zoning or subdivision requirements must be
done as a Planned Unit Development.
#2639
January 12, 2001
Page 2
The proposed amendment is to merely add RPUD Residential Planned Unit Development to the list
of zoning districts available for the Highway 12 corridor properties. This amendment is consistent
with the 2000-2020 CMP which guides certain properties between Willow Drive and Old Crystal
Bay Road for medium density residential uses, which would be more appropriately developed
through the RPUD process than via the old PRD which has few procedural or performance standards.
In the future we may conclude that the PRD Planned Residential Developmem option should be
dropped from the list in favor of RPUD; but staff has not yet fully assessed the ramifications of that.
so we suggest leaving PRD in for now.
Staff Recommendation
Planning Commission should recommend approval ofthe proposed revision of Section 10.52, Subd.
5 to add "RPUD Residential Planned Unit Development" to the list of zoning districts to which
properties in the defined Highway 12 Corridor can be rezoned.
A
§ 10.52
SEC. 10.52 SPECIAL REQUIREMENTS FOR REZONING IN THE
HIGHWAY 12 CORRIDOR STUDY AREA.
Subd. 1. Minimum Area. To insure consistency with the goals and objectives of the
Highway 12 Corridor Study, applications for rezoning within the study area must include a minimum
of five acres. The plans submitted along with these applications must also include enough
information regarding the effect of the proposed development on surrounding parcels to insure that
the property can be developed in a manner that is both compatible with adjacent properties and
consistent with the Highway 12 Corridor Study.
Subd. 2. Access and Circulation Plan. The plans submitted along with the application
must propose access to the proposed development which is consistent with the Transportation.
Planning Objectives of the Highway 12 Corridor Study. All public casements and road right of way
that is needed to allow the construction of service roads and/or the expansion of Trunk Highway 12
past the subject property, shall be dedicated to the City.
Source. Ordinance 67. 2nd Series
Adopted: 5-8-89
Subd. 3. Sanitary Sewer and Municipal Water Availability. The at ailable sanitary
sewer and municipal water capacity to serve the development of this corridor is currently very
limited. Therefore, any plans to develop within this area most eithet demonstrate that it can occur
utilizing current sewer and water allocations or they most include impro%ements to increase the
capacity of the systems serving this area. If sanitary sewer or municipal water system improvements
are proposed as part of the application, then the feasibility of providing this service will also be
scrutinized along with an improvement financing plan to insure that the costs associated with
providing this additional capacity will be paid for by the development.
Source: Ordinance 78.2nd Series
Adopted: 1-22-90
Subd. 4. Storm Water Management. Site Drainage plans must be submitted to insure
consistency with the Storm Water Management objectives of the Highway 12 Corridor Study. Plans
will be carefully reviewed to insure both that proposed storm water punding areas contain sufficient
storage capacity and whatever additional measures are necessary to guarantee that the quality of
runoff from the site, meets or a-ceeds the City's standards.
Subd. 5. Available Zoning Districts. Due to the unique set of constraints and
opportunities that affect future decisions regarding development within the Highs ac 12 Corridor
Study Area, applicants for rezoning are strongly encouraged to utilize the pl atned unit development
ORONO CC 359 (4-1-84)
(i-8-89)
§ 10.52
approach, outlined in Section 10 of the Orono Zoning Ordinance. However, applications will be
accepted for rezoning requests for any of the following existing zoning districts within the City.
consistent with a finding of consistency with the Highway 12 Corridor Study and subject to
compliance with all of the additional requirements established in this section:
B-6 Highway Commercial Distrct
PRO Planned Residential Development
R-IA One Family Residential District
RAB One Family Residential District
M-6 Multiple Family Planned Residential District
Any proposal which requires a modification to zoning or subdivision requirements must be done as
a Planned Unit Development.
Subd. 6. Building Design and Construction. in addition to other restrictions of this
Chapter, the use, construction, alteration or enlargements to any building or structure within the
district shall meet the following standards:
A. All exterior wall finishes on any building shall be:
(a) Face brick, or
(b) Natural stone, or
(c) Specially designed precast concrete units if the surfaces have been
integrally treated with an applied decorative materials or texture, or
(d) Factory fabricated and finished metal framed panel construction,
if the panel materials be of any of those noted in items a, b and c above, or glass.
(e) Other materials as may beapproved by the Council. Combinations
of such materials shall be permitted.
B. All subsequent additions and outbuildings constructed after the erection
of an original building or buildings shall be constncted of materials comparable to those used in the
original construction and shall be designed in a manner conforming with the original architectural
design and general appearance.
C. No building or structure of a temporary character, trailer, basement, tent
or shack shall be constructed, placed or maintained upon the property except as accessory to and
during the construction of permanent buildings.
Subd. 7. Requirement of Development Agreement. All development permits
authorized within the Highway 12 Corridor Study Area shall be subject to the execution of a
ORONO CC 359-1 Ordinance 67, 2nd Series
Adopted: 5-8-89
§ 10.52
development agreement. Said development agreement shall clearly identify the timing of all of the
public improvements associated with the development and the developers' financial commitments
related to these improvements. The agreement shall also include any and all other conditions of
approval deemed necessary to insure compliance with the Special Minimum Requirements for
Rezoning the Highway 12 Corridor Study Area, as well as the goals and objectives of the Highway
12 Corridor Study.
Source: Ordinance 67, 2nd Series
Adopted: 5-8-89
SEC. 10.53. PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (PUD)
Subd. I. Authorization: Planned unit development authorization may allow:
A. Variety: Within a comprehensive site design concept a mixture of land
uses, housing types and densities.
B. Sensitivity: 'Through the departure from the strict application of required
setbacks, yard areas, lot sizes, minimum house sizes, minimum requirements, and other performance
standards associated with conventional zoning, planned unit development can maximize the
development potential of land while remaining bensitive to its unique and valuable natural
characteristics.
C. Efficiency: The consolidation of areas E;r recreation and reductions in
street lengths and other utility related expenses.
D. Density Transfer: The project density may be clustered, basing density on
number of units per acre versus specific lot dimensions.
E. District Integration: The combination of uses which are allowed in separate
zoning districts such as:
I. Mixed residential allows both densities and unit types to be varied
within the project.
2. Mixed residential with increased density acknowledging the greater
sensitivity of PUD projects, regulation provides increased density on the property if a PUD is
utilized.
3. Mixed land uses with the integration ofcompatible land uses within
the project.
F. Applicability: Utilization of this zoning district is limited to the Highway
12 Corridor as set forth in the City of Orono's Comprehensive Plan Amendment q2 adopted May 23,
1988.
ORONO CC 359-2 Ordinance 67. Ind Series
Adopted: 5-8-89
LL
1 Gq O' paa
.O
r Maple Plain -Long Lako Intorcoptor
— — Madlne-0rorw-Long Lake Interceptor
......... Water Mein
New Roads
IMMI Current MUSA
aasar Proposed Extension of MUSA
wry L4
City of Orono
HIGHWAY 12 CORRIDOR STUDY
Western Portion
Summary of Recommended
Changes
Fig. 34U
_ _ — . . _ _ .� �. .�. ..� w... r_ r• aaasl 101000 1^NO oar. a1
Application Date: 10/30/00
Deadline: 3/2/01
NG
FEB 2 610
ssr UrsUNU
Department
Name Paul H
Title Zonis!
REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION
Administrator
DATE: Februarryy/ 23, 2001
ITEM NO.: l�
Zoning
Section:
Item Description: Orono Amber, LLC.
2060 Wayzata Boulevard
#2640 Preliminary Subdivision/CUP-Rezoning/Comprehensive Plan Amendment
#2641 Site Plan Revieus
Summary:
Resulting from the February 22, 2001 Council Work Session discussion, Staff and the Council are reviewing
alternatives to the service road access and parking arrangement. Staff has requested the City Traffic
Consultant comment on a revised traffic pattern that would separate outgoing and incoming traffic in front
of the senior building.
The Developer and City Engineer will be reviewing the costs and feasibility of removing fill to lower the
building. An extension to the review period will be requested from Frank Dunbar to allow the General
Concept Plan approval to be adopted at a future meeting.
COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED
Motion to continue the application to a future Council ,among following resolution of the frontage road,
parking and grading issues, subject to the City of Orono receiving an extension to the application deadline
from Mr. Dunbar.
A RESOLUTION GRANTING
A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
PER MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE
SECTION 10.20, SUBDIVISION 3 (G) AND A VARIANCE TO
SECTION 10.28, SUBDIVISION 5 (A); AND
DENYING A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
PER SECTION 10.75, SUBDIVISION 1 AND
VARIANCE TO SECTION 10.28, SUBDIVISION 5 (A)
FILE # 2650
WHEREAS, Patrick Burton and Kirsten Burton, (hereinafter "the applicants") are
the owners ofthe property located at 2601 Rainey Road within the City of Orono (hereinafter "City")
and legally described as:
Lot 3, Trees to Be, Hennepin County, Minnesota (hereinafter "property"); and
WHEREAS, after due published notice and mailed notice in accordance with
Minnesota Statutes and the City of Orono Zoning and Planning Codes, the Orono Planning
Commission held a public hearing on January 17, 2001, at which times all persons desiring to be
heard concemin;; this application were given the opportunity to speak thereon; and
WHEREAS, the applicants have applied to the City for a conditional use permit per
Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.20, Subdivision 3 (0) for a guest house, a conditional use permit
per Section 10.75, Subdivision 1 to permit a 6' chimney height over the allowed 30' height limitation
for the primary residence, and variances to Section 10.24, Subdivision 5 (A) to permit a 30'. three
story guest house with 2.5' safety railing over the 30' height limitation.
Minnesota:
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono,
FINDINGS
This application was reviewed as Zoning File 02650.
Page 1 of 6
2. The property is located in the RR -I B Zoning District, where 2 acres is the minimum
lot area. The property consists of 14.06 acres ofwhich 5.25 acres are dry contiguous.
3. The Planning Commission reviewed this application on January 17, 2001.
4. The Planning Commission made the following findings of fact:
A. The guest house will not exceed the 2 acre per "dwelling unit" density for
properties in the RR- IB zoning district.
B. The guest house meets all required principal building setbacks.
C. Three septic sites have been identified by SP Testing and all building and
wetland setback requirements have been met.
D. The Planning Commission had a split cote on approval of the variances for
the full three stories and added height to the top of a safety railing above the
roof line of the guest house.
E. A house with a gabled or hipped roof, which is the standard house built in
Orono, can have an actual height over 30'. The defined height is the midpoint
of the gable not the peak of the roof.
F. The guest house is proposed to be constructed with natural earth tortes, with
a dark wood color as the primary color of the structure.
G. It is the intent of the applicants to construct the guest house before the main
house.
5. The Comprehensive Plan(CMP) addresses the issue of structure height and states the
rural character of the Community is to be protected. Structures shall be contained
within tree lines. The added height of the structure to permit a railing is not in
keeping with the height standards as addressed in the CMP and may set a negative
precedent to allow a structure to exceed a 30' defined height for the railing on the
guest house and to permit the chimneys on the main house to exceed 32'.
Page 2 of 6
6. The State Building/Fire Codes require chimneys to be located 2' above the highest
portion of a structure within 10' of the structure.
7. Section 10.28, Subdivision 5 (A) establishes the maximum building height for -
structures to be 2 '/2 stories or 30' in height. The building requires a variance for
height because a part of the house is 3 full stories. A '/2 story would be the portion
of living space within a gabled roof line, for example. Because the architectural style
has a flat roof, it leaves a full three story house 39 in height.
S. The Orono Code allows structures to ha-ve a maximum height of 2 %, stories or 30'
whichever is more restrictive. In this case the 2'h story height is the more restrictive
standard. Building height is defined as: The vertical distance between the highest
adjoining ground level at the building cr ten feet above the lowest ground level,
whichever is lower and the top of the cornice of a flat roof, or the deck line of a
mansard roof, or the uppermost point on a round or other arch type roof, or the
average height of the highest gable of a pitched or hipped roof.
9. A building could be 21h stories in height and exceed 30'. If the architect would build
a house with a gabled or hipped roof, which is the standard house built in Orono, a
building over 35' in actual height could be constricted. The defined height is the
midpoint of the gable not the peak of the roof.
10. The guest house is proposed to be located near a grove of mature ices. To avoid
removing several trees, the building was kept narrow but to gain additional square
footage. The height of the structure will be 30'. Requiring the third story of the
building to be removed and relocated adjacent to the narrow footprint would require
removal of trees. To preserve the trees the third story will remain as proposed.
11. The City Council finds that granting a conditional use permit to allow a guest house
will not be detrimental to the health, safety or general welfare of the public, would
not adversely affect light, air nor pose a fire hazard or other danger to neighboring
properties, nor will its use depreciate surrounding property values and that the
proposed level of use of the property will be in keeping with the intent and objectives
of the Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan of the City.
12. The City Council finds that the conditions existing on this property are peculiar to
it and do not apply generally to other property in tL., coning district; that granting
the variances would not adverseiy affect traffic conditions, light, air nor pose a fire
hazard or other danger to neighboring property; would not merely serve as a
Page 3 of 6
convenience to the applicants, but is necessary to alleviate a demonstrable hardship
or difficulty; is necessary to preserve a substantial property right of the applicants;
and would be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the Zoning Code and
Comprehensive Plan of the City.
13. The City Council has considered this application including the findings and
recommendations of the Planning Commission, reports by City staff, comments by
the applicants and the effect of the proposed variance in the health, safety and
welfare of the community.
CONCLUSIONS, ORDER AND CONDITIONS
Based upon one or more of the findings noted above, the Orono City Council hereby
grants a conditional use permit per Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.20, Subdivision 3 (G) to
permit a guest house on the property and grants a variance to Section 10.24, Subdivision 5 (A) to
permit a 30', three story guest house; and denies a variance to Section 10.24, Subdivision 5 (A) to
permit a 2 '/i railing over the 30' allowed height limustion in the RR•IB district and grants a
conditional use permit per Section 10.75, Suodivision I to permit a 2' chimney height over the
allowed 30' height limitation for the priman. residence denying the 6' chimney request, subject to
the following c,iditions:
1. The property owners shall file a restrictive covenant on the property agreeing the
guest house will not be used as a rental unit and will not be used for a home
occupation.
'_. The guest house shall be used and occupied by persons who would otherwise use the
primary residence on the property, such as domestic help, guests and relatives.
i No tree within 30' of the guest house is permitted to be removed without consent of
the City of Orono Orono is hereby approving variances to permit the added height
based on the hardshio that existing matur • trees would be removed if the guest house
were built oar Code requirements Should a tree be requested to be removed an equal
replacement shall be planted.
a. Authorities granted by this resolution we permissive only and must be exercised by
application for a building permit within one year of The date of Counci! approval or
this conditional use permit will expire on that date (February 26, 2002).
Page 4 of 6
Violation of or non-compliance with any of the terms and conditions of this
resolution shall constitute a violation of the Zoning Code, shall automatically
terminate any authority granted herein, and shall be punishable as a misdemeanor.
The undersigned applicants have read, understood and hereby agree to the terms of
this resolution and or. behalf of themselves, their heirs, successors and assigns,
hereby agree to the recording of this resolution in the chain of title of the property.
Adopted by the Orono City Council on this 26th day of February, 2001.
ATTEST:
Linda S. Vee, City Clerk Barbara A. Peterson, Mayor
Property Owner(s)
STATE OF MINNESOTA
ss.
COUNTY OF FIENNEPIN
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this 26th day of Febroary,
2001, by Barbara A. Peterson and Linda S. Vee, Mayor & City Clerk of the City of Orono, a
Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City.
Notary Public
Page 5 of 6
STATE OF MINNESOT . )
)as.
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN )
On this _day of--. 20_ before me a Notary Public within and for said
county, personally appeared _ known to me to be
the person(s) described in and who executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that
he(they) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed.
Notary Public
STATE OF MINNESOTA )
) as.
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN )
On this _day of , 20_ before me a Notary Public within and for said
county, personally appeared known to me to be
the person(s) described in and who executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that
he(they) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed.
Notary Public
Page 6 of 6
Application Date:
Deadline:
'.'a MF.Ei
tNO
FEB 2.6 '0
GN,('*r GRONO
12/20/00
4/19101
Name Paul Weinberger
Title Zoning Administrator
REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION
Item Description: #2650 Kirsten and Patrick Burton
2601 Rainey Road
Conditional Use Permit and Variances
Zoning District: RR -I B Two Acre Rural Residential
Lot Area: 5.25 acres (non -wetland area)
List of Exhibits:
Resolution
Building Height Comparison
Applicant Letter of Request
Main House Plans
Guest House Plans
Site Plan
Guest House Tree Survey
Summar) of Council Action:
DATE: February 19, 2001
ITEM NO.:
Agenda Section:
Zoning
On February 12. 2001 the Council directed Staff to draft a resolution approving a conditional use permit to
permit a guest house on the property and approve a variance to permit a three story guest house, subject to
the applicants providing documentation indicating trees would be preserved by constructing a small three
story house rather than a two story house requiring a larger footprint. This documentation is reflected as the
hardship in the resolution.
The Council directed Staff to amend the resolution 1, mf-'act limited approval of a Conditional Use Permit
to allow the chimney height for the main residence to exi:v,d allowed height per Section 10.75, Subdivision
1. Under this provision of the inning ordinance chimneys are permitted to exceed the 30' height limitation
by the CUP r,�ccss. The total proposed height of the chimneys was 36'. 6' above the peak of the house;
Council indicated the chimney would only be allowed 2' above the peaks, as required by the building code.
Council also directed Staff to emend the resolution tr indicate denial of a variance requesting a 30 inch high
railing around the root of the guest house exceeding the 30' height limitation.
COUNCIL ACTION REQUES'CED
Motion to adopt or amend the attached resolution.
A RESOLUTION GRANTING
A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
PER MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE
SECTION 10.20, SUBDIVISION 3 (G) AND A VARIANCE TO
SECTION 10.28, SUBDIVISION 5 (A); AND
DENYING A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
PER SECTION 10.75, SUBDIVISION I AND
VARIANCE TO SECTION 10.28, SUBDIVISION 5 (AN
FILE # 2650
WHEREAS, Patrick Burton and Kirsten Burton, (hereinafter "the applicants") are
the owners of the property located at 2601 Rainey Road within the City ofOrono (hereinafter "City")
and legally described as:
Lot 3, Trees to Be, Hennepin County, Minnesota (hereinafter "property"); and
WHEREAS, after due published notice and mailed notice in accordance with
Minnesota Statutes and the City of Orono Zoning and Plamang Codes. the Orono Plan^'ng
Commission held a public hearing on January 17, 2001, at which times all persons desiring to be
heard concerning this application were given the opportunity to speak thereon; and
WHEREAS, the applicants have appli.j to the City for a conditional use permit per
Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.20, Subdivision 3 (G) for a guest house, it conditional use pem.',
per Section 10.75, Subdivision I to permit a 6' chimney height over the allowed 30' height limitation
for the primary residence, and variances to Section 10.24, Subdivision 5 (A) to permit a 30% three
story guest house with 2.5' safety railing over the 30' height limitation.
Minnesota:
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono,
NDINGS
This application was reviewed as Zoning File k2650.
Page 1 of 6
2. The property is located in the RR- I B Zoning District. where 2 acres is the mini —um
lot area. The property consists of 14.0E acres of which 5.25 acres are dry contiguous.
3. The Planning Commission reviewed this application on January 17, 2001,
4. The Planning Commission made the following findings of fact:
A. The guest house will not exceed the 2 acre per "dwelling unit" density for
properties in the RR -I B zoning district.
B. The guest house meets all required principal building setbacks.
C. Three septic sites nave been identified by SP'resting and all building and
wetland setback r_quirements have been met.
D. The Planning Commission had a split vote on approval of the variances for
the full three stories and added height to the top of a safety railing above the
roof line of the guest house.
E. A house with a gabled or hipped roof, which is the standard house built in
Orono, can have an actual height over 39. The defined height is the midpoint
of the gable not the pea. „ f the roof.
F. The guest house is proposed to be constructed with natural earth tones. with
a dark wood color as the primary color of the structure.
G. It is the intent of the applicants to construct the guest house before the main
house.
5. The Comprehensive Plan(CMP) addresses the issue of structure height. nd states the
rural character of the Community is to be protected. Structures shall be contained
within tree lines. The added height of the structure to permit a railing is not in
keeping with the height standards as addressed in the CMP and may set a negative
precedent to allow a structure to exceed a 30defined height for the railing on the
guest house and to permit the chimneys on the main house to exceed 32'.
Page 2 of 6
6. The State Building(Fire Codes require chimneys to be located 2' above the highest
portion of a structure within 10' of the structure.
7. Section 10.28, Subdivision 5 (A) establishes the maximum building height for
structures to be 2 '/2 stories or 30' in height. The building requires a variance for
height because a part of the house is 3 full stories. A '/2 story would be the portion
of living space within a gabled roof line, for example. Because the architectural style
has a Flat roof, it leaves a full three story house 30' in height.
S. The Orono Code allows structures to have a maximum height of 2 %r stories or 30'
whichever is more restrictive. In this case the 2 %r story height is the more restrictive
standard. Building height is defined as: The vertical distance between the highest
adjoining ground level at the building or ten feet above the lowest ground level,
whichever is lower and the top of the cornice of a flat roof, or the deck line of a
mansard roof, or the uppermost point on a round or other arch type roof, or the
average height of the highest gable of a pitched or hipped roof.
9. A building could be 2 %, stories in height and exceed 30'. If the architect would build
a house with a gabled or hipped roof, which is the standard house built in Orono, a
building over 35' in actual height could be constructed. The defined height is the
midpoint of the gable not the peak of the roof.
10. The guest house is proposed to be located near a grove of mature trees. To avoid
removing several trees, the building was kept narrow but to gain additional square
footage. The height of the structure will be 30'. Requiring the third story of the
building to be removed and relocated adjacent to the narrow footprint would require
removal of trees. To preserve the trees the third story will remain as proposed.
11. The City Council finds that granting a conditional use pemtit to allow a guest house
will not be detrimental to the health, safety or general welfare of the public, would
not adversely affect light, ait nor pose a fire hazard or other danger to neighboring
properties, nor will its use depreciate surrounding property values and that the
proposed level of use of the property will be it. keeping with the intent and objectives
of the Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan of the City.
12. The City Council finds that the conditions existing on this property are peculiar to
it and do not apply generally to other property in this zoning district: that granting
the variances would not adversely affect traffic conditions, light, air nor pose a fire
hazard or other danger to neighboring property; would not merely serve as a
Page 3 of 6
convenience to the applicants, but is necessary to alleviate a demonstrable hardship
or difficulty; is necessary to preserve a substantial property right of the applicants;
and would be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the Zoning Code and
Comprehensive Plan of the City.
13. The City Council has considered this application including the findings and
recommendations of the Planning Commission, reports by City staff, comments by
the applicants and the effect of the proposed variance on the health, safety and
welfare of the community.
CONCLUSIONS, ORDER AND CONDITIONS
Based upon one or more of the findings noted above, the Orono City Council hereby
grants a conditional use permit per Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.20, Subdivision 3 (0) to
permit,. guest house on the property and grants a variance to Section 10.24, Subdivision 5 (A) to
perrni . 3V, three story guest house; and denies a variance to Section 10.24, Subdivision 5 (A) to
permit a 2 %r' railing over the 30' allowed height limitation in the RRAB district and grants a
conditional use permit per Section 10.75, Subdivision 1 to permit a 2' chimney height over the
allowed 30' height limitation for the primary residence denying the 6' chimney request, subject to
the following conditions:
1. The property owners shall file a restrictive covenant on the property agreeing the
guest house will not be used as a rental unit and will not be used for a home
occupation.
2. The guest house shall be used and occupied by persons who would otherwise use the
primary residence on the property, such as domestic help, guests and relatives.
3. Authorities granted by this resolution are permissive only and must be exercised by
application for a building perm;t within one year of the date of Council approval or
this conditional use permit will expire on that date (February 26, 2002).
4. Violation of or non-compliance with any of the terms and conditions of this
resolution shall constitute a violation of the Zoning Cort shall automatically
terminate any authority granted herein, and shall be punishable as a misdemeanor.
5. The undersigned applicants have read, understood and hereby agree to the terms of
this resolution and on behalf of themselves, their heirs, successors and assigns,
hereby agree to the recording of this resolution in the chain of title of the property.
Page 4 of 6
Adopted by the Orono City Council on this 26th day of February, 2001.
ATTEST:
Linda S. Vee, City Clerk Barbara A. Peterson, Mayor
Owner(s)
STATE OF MINNESOTA
ss.
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this 26th day of F�btuary,
2001, by Barbaro A. Peterson and Linda S. Vee, Mayor & City Clerk of the City of Orono, a
Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City.
Notary Public
STATE OF MINNESOTA )
) as.
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN )
On this _day of , 20_ before me a Notary Public within and for said
county, personally appeared known to me to be
the person(s) described in and who executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that
he(they) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed.
Page 5 of 6
Notary Public
STATE OF MINNESOTA )
) as.
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN )
On this _day of , 20_ before me a Notary Public within and for said
cowry, personally appeared known to me to be
the person(s) described in and who executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that
he(they) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed.
Notary
Page 6 of 6
t�l
------ ---8
-6 .32'Nl
/
pm.
--� PMMEt ICB
----
ND-PtlNI�
�-
n �XI-0
! RxOOT LCVCI
R._R.
.MIS
:r-r a-----.
— =
j
Ix � / /
ar V/,
1071
-,t
/ I�.L !-�
rdOC K-O WIL 0----
NIYRID tm
U-W
MTYP 2.5 STORY GABLE ROOF
27, CONSTRUCTION
Building Height Comparison -
Proposed Residence & Typical
Gable Roof Construction
SC E:1/D'. IW
SECOND LM
10•-r
011010141) LEVEL
PROPOSED
RESIDENCE
f
Y
C
Addendum #1
to
City of Orono
General Lr A Use Application
Submitted 12/20/00
Request for Cunditiooal Use Permit
Applicant: Richard B. Peterson, Attorney for Ownem
Owners: IGrsten and Patrick Burton
The Applicant, as representative of the Owners, and the Owners hereby request a
Conditional Use Permit from the City of Orono for the Owners' propem. legally
described as:
Lot 3, Block 1, Trees To Be
Address: 2601 Rainey Road
Orono, MN 55391
A Conditional Use Permit is requested for the following:
That the property be approved for two dwellings, one of which is to be the
guesthouse and that the Owners be allowed to construct the guesthouse first.
The site plan submitted with this application shows the location of the
guesthouse and the primary dwelling. The Owners are willing to subject the
property to Restrictive Covenants in substantial!•: the form attached hereto.
That the chimney of the primary residence and guardrail for the roof of the
guesthouse may be constructed as shown on the plans submitted herewith
notwithstanding applicable Building Height standards in the City Ordinance.
� � S. tin.
..+ `) �i{
ir
lolls ', 'I NONE 11
MAIN
®=-M
IN
19
MAIN �AO\)SE Pi," S
SWAP
MS&R D
Nffl
own
®=
DZ
WE
O ° ° °
B9FLOM
w w+
I
❑ ❑
P�
l e l e l n u l l u n; l e II l e
e l l l l II n l l n n y I A o l l
e l l l e u n e l u u II e l a e l
1 I e e 1 e n I I o o y e 6 e I I
s
a=r�rL�r-r-r�-r-r4-r-
tl II A 1 1 1 u e 1 1 1
A II tl 1 1 1 A A 1 1 1
A II 1 1 1 E n 1 1 1
1 Y 1 1 1 1 o e 1 e 1
I
GGuun■ a _�(. �e�11A,�
I II II it I
I II II II I
I II II II
dr��—
iy
I =.-
4
0DT-r- --T-rEi-r-rEi-r-rEi-r-
A n
u 1
e
0
I
1
A o l
0 1 1
l l
1 1
e l
0 1
l l
1 1
l!
1 i I
wm
II 1
1
1
tl 1 1
1 1
0 1
1 1
1
tl l
l
I
A I I!
1
1 1
1 1
1
A r
II ®O®
11
;I
11 11
�
—WPC
11 c1Op II
O II
0
MS&R
OS:
C)
ci D
kv
ffCpOlF6
RCCI1 ftAM
r
m� mu-u
w+
Gu
NORM ELEVATION
t .'-°
AST EELEVATION
I
GUEST } 005E 'PLA
4TION
MS&R
BURTON
GUEST
HOUSE
na
AN
T7�7ii ^'1
El
N
�7150UTNw EIEVAPON
NEST El; APON
cu yr r-r
-1EZ
A"ON
NJ LLYd
/EI i[4d
v<
- � by LL4d
Y9
00LL6d
Mf-r
M 1CY.6
YY-f
II09LLLLQ
W<
I141416Y
#a
� SECTION
K4 R
,Mm LL4-R
y-f
W0 LL6d
w!-e'
LLg4
uva
3
1NORTH-SOUIN SECTION
NORTH -SOUTH SECTION
--IE3
uvn+inn-n
(31 NORh1-SOUTH SECTION
YµG pf. FY
/y�NORTH-$WTH SECT"
m
w" Rd
wa .AN
�GSITE PI ..
� LAN
E `I
MS&R
•vµ�iw � y.a
ii �_
GGnneett
i�uJy� lee[
110/E B�HI�
S
BURTON
GUEST
HOUSE
Remy Rd
ono. MN
°ns
t
""'brmae
SRE RAN
A -WO
n
u
I
FIRST LEVEL �SECDRD LEVEL
:.... 4�•nr sv: �K.te'
U
SECOND LEVEL
1hw
0
-1�BASEMENT LEVEL
�q\ THIRD,LEL
e K • rVE<
FS
MS&R
BURTON
GUEST
HOUSE
Ruw Ad
o p. ACJ
Y �oes�
FLO PLANS
A-101
RUN DATE 12/18/00
HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORMATION SYSTEM
REPORT NO. PI435401
PROPERTY OWNERS LIST
PAGE 32
PATCH 512
38 03-117-23 33 0001
38 04-117-23 43 0012
36 04-117-23 43 0013
PROF MR
00038 ADDRESS UHASSISNFD
027U RAINEY RD
02685 RAINEY RD
OWNER NAME
HENNEPIN FORFEITED LAND
N F KANLER E E'RANIER
R S 2 3 S VICKERMAN
TAXPAYER
CITY OF ORONO
N F KANLER 0 E KANLER
R SCOTT VICKERMAN
NAME/ADDR
P O BOX 66
2725 RAINEY RD
SUSAN S VICKERMAN
AM MN 55323
WAYZATA M 65391
2665 RAINEY RD
.CRYSTAL
WAYZATA NW 55311
'
38 04-117-23 43 0015
35 04-217-23 43 0016
38 04.117-2'_ 43 0017
1'AW ADDR
02730 RAINEY RD
02690 RAIEEY RD -
00039 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED
ORAEN MIME
MARY SMART FOX
J T DUCHARME 1 3 M DUCHARME
TREES TO BE PRIVATE RD ASSOC
TAXPAYER
MANY SWART FOX
JNN T A SHERYL M DUCHARME
TRLES TO BE ASSOCIATION
.enBm.
MANE/ADDR
2730 RAINEY RO
2690 RAINEY RD
2770 RAINEY RD
WAYZATA MH 55391
WAYZATA HN 55391
WAYZATA NNW 55391
PNOP ADDR
36 04-117-23 43 0015
00938 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED
W 04-11-23 43 0019
000M ADDRESS UNASSIGNED
38 04-117-23 43 0021
00730 GANDER RD
1
,wWWA NAME
K M A P H BURTON
TREES TO BE PRIVATE ROAD ASC
MARIA 5 ANDERSON
fAXPAYER
KINSTEN A PATRICK BURTON
TREES TO Be PRIVATE ROAD
MARIA S ANDERSON
NAME/ADDR
91 OAKVIEV TER
ASSOCIATION INC
730 GANDER RD
SNORT HILLS W 07078
2770 RAINEY RD
WAYZATA HN 55391
WAYZATA MN 55391
QJ
38 04-1ADDRE
33 04-117-23 44 0002
SB 04-1RAINE 49 0004
PROP ADDR
S UNASSIGNED
9OASK. ADDRESS WASSIGHED
02555 FOX ST
02601 RAINEY RD
TAMER NAME
u F ET AL
P E EERLIME/M A ECREPLINE
K N a P M PURTON
TAXPAYER
DENNISFKUMLINK
f KUMLIN
R
PETER E ECKERLINE
ATRON
STENO"V B PTERI[K BURTON
MIME/ADDR
PO PDX 855
OBOX
FOX ST
91 TER
91
WAYZATA MN 55591
ORONO NN 55393
ORONO
SMDRT MILLS NJ 07075
SHORT HILL
30 04-117-23 44 0005
38 09-117.23 11 0007
38 09-117-23 it 0010
PROF ABDO
00710 GANDER RD
00598 04D CRYSTAL DAY RD S
ON65 FRENCH LAKE RD
OWNER NAME
0 L DANIELS A K 5 BURNS
CITY OF ORONO
ROBERT J a AM L DAYTON
TAXPAYER
DAVID L KATHLEEN DANIELS
CITY OF ORONO
ROBERT J A AM L DAYTON
NAME/ADCR
714 GANDER RD
335 BROWN RD
1 FRENCH LAKE RD
ORONO HN 55391
CRYSTAL DAY HN 55373
WAYZATA MN SS391
38 09-117-23 12 0001
36 09-117-23 12 0002
35 10-117-23 22 6002
)
PROP MR
O00 Se ADDRESS UNASSIGNED
00840 OLD CRYSTAL DAY RD S
00845 MILLON DR 5
DRAWER NAME
G A B MUST
A J ELLIS
G A A A E ANDERSON
TAXPAYER
GEORGE A MUST
A J ELLIS
GILBERT A ANDERSON
MAME/A➢DR
620 OLD CRYSTAL DAY NO
549 CRYSTAL BAY RD
NS 5 MILLW DR
T
WAYZATA MH 55391
WAYZATA MN 55391
•WAYZATA UN 55391
D3
1y
u
ell
7�
n yll IKAN
III m ARM
AM'II
'll
v
f ;, LEVE Y RcN • eID LE d.2;VEL
�f.3� .�
7
�1\BASEYExI LEVEL
n IM72 LEVEL
FS
7E1
•
�
i
r
/
r
/
I
c
r
r
r
GUEST }AovSE PLA
ra NptM 14nm
F." 4VI
BURTON
GUEST
HOUSE
) LA51 ttEVA"N
saTM a cwnw
7
w
r
�xtsr e�eviwx
tea-
-1EZ
�nu
1
4nxcna
8
�_
�
o0
�EAS�: SI�J�'
G
-1 k
u
LrAwj
u_ c
1
t _
L
MAIN }AovsE PLANS
®M M'AFaC M
DZ
Minnegasco
Steve Von Barger, Real Estate Specialist
700 West Linden Avenue
Minneapolis, MN 55440-1165
U.S West Qwest Communications
5910 Shingle Creek Parkway
Brooklyn Center, MN 55430
Triax Cable Co.
Attn. Robert Craig, Plant Manger
2381 Wilshire Boulevard
Mound, MN 55364
Excel EnergylNSP
Attu. Lisa Rainbolt
5505 County Road 19
Shorewood, MN 55331
i
' 1
Roost
-s
} ne[ou[ n[vrt P ._
as•r.'sr. n rw
_
n-
KY ♦Y.s .s
BOOR
PAGE
Lv
P:iELIN11nARY SITE PiAiY
rm.S m nn+u°
LtnR C.nVtf IOY M9
E D�
Nm�
woP.tYtlo.
P Eu
SHEET
vav''ixi[uYi�iPiYO
uYYmu.
fixGVEvs
mmvN
+nArswrA[
CERTIFICAT E OF SURVEY
...... GARAGE
r '
st
Pri
l'.,a �„' fib.. �•::i� .. i�/�,;nr' ��l y, i I� I
W �„ !ten J � ��\v'J.o..+ •S"� - l
N K w .. -✓Gur,i
}: Poet. i
PRELIMINARY SITE Pi-&. /
CERTIFICATE OF SURVEY - ..
J
,D@EYARD DEi MCR _
7MUND.DETMCK —
e� e
i 9N�N
`may •,M} T\q)bjx
T 9N.N]
tv" sa
� I
'i 9a1.9,1 '
�0
�93•b0
--- - -s 8e..
xa..
ypp� SCARE: :
P O:AND_
q 11 {I
.t%W +9aTn yg1y�\
x R t
>vN •' -N7e'�:
ERlDNO MAUOR NATIVE DECIDUOUS HARDWOODS _„F_ } H fA>'w.Ee>�.•4>r T'.'
CONSTM=ON ZONE
DRAM FlHD ZONE
W
' NEW TREE �LVlTING
p�coI HOUSE
SITE SECTION
W.>
TI;
b
�Mriw.�.PCu
9.•e a. eqv
,• ae.°sT
Application Date: 12/20/00 Ffe 2 6
60 Day Deadline 4/19/01 Clfy ph
REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION C110'0
DATE: February 19, 2001
ITEM NO.: 10
Department Approval: Administrator Reviewed: Agenda Section:
Name Paul Weinberger Zoning
Title Zoning Administrator
Item Description: #2651 Robin and Jeremy Rupp
2696 Caroline Avenue
Variance
Zoning District: LR-IC One Family Lakeshore Residential De,'rict (I/2 Acre)
Lot Area: 33,076 s.f. (0.76 acre)
List of Exhibits:
A Approved Site Plan
B Original Site Plan
C Deck/Stairway Plan and Dimensions
Application Summary:
The Council directed Staff to draft a re>.d..tlon da) ing variances requesting hardcover over 25% for a
lakeside patio and expansion to the drivewa% within the 75-250' Lakeshore setback. The Council did approve
a variance to permit a 3' X 8' landing outside the patio door to access the front yard from the main living level
of the house. Additional hardcover includes steps down from the landing to the ground level. The Council
voted 3 to 2 to approve a variance to hardcover to permit the landing and stairway subject to the requirement
no part of the landing encroach on the average lakeshore setback.
COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED
Motion to adopt the attached resolution approving a variance for me landing and stairway and denial of a
variance to permit the patio and expansion of the driveway.
A RESOLUTION DENYING
VARIANCES PER
MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE
SECTION 10.22, SUBDIVISION 2;
SECTION 10.56, SUBDIVISION 16 (L) (2); AND APPROVING
VARIANCES PER SEC"ION 10.22, SUBDIVISION 2 AND
SECTION 10.56 SUBDIVISION 16 (L) (2)
FILE #2651
WHEREAS, the City of Orono is a municipal corporation organized and existing
under the laws of the State of Minnesota; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to State Statutes 412 et. seq. and 462 et. seq., the City Council
of the City of Orono has adopted zoning regulations for the protection of the public health, safety
and general welfare; w,d
WHEREAS,Jeremy Bupp and Robin Bupp (hereinafter"the applicants") are owners
of the property located at 2696 Caroline Avenue within the City of Orono (hereinafter "the City")
and legally described as follows:
Exhibit A attached (hereinafter "the property"); and
WHEREAS, the applicants have applied to the City of Orono for variances to permit
construction of a lakeside patio and expansion of the driveway to exceed allowed hardcover in the
75-250' lakeshore setback. requesting the following approval:
Section 10.22, Subd. 2 and Section 10.56, Subd. (16) (2): To allow 5,975 s.f. (26.5%) hardcover
where 5,625 s.f. (25%) is normally allowed.
WHEREAS, the City Council has reviewed the application; the recommendations
of the City staff and the Planning Commission; and the comments and written statements submitted
by the applicants.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of Orono.
Minnesota hereby denies the requested after -the -fact ve^ ---- < as described above based on one or
more of the following findings of fact concerning this property:
Page I of 6
A building permit was issued to permit construction of a new residence on the
property based on a site plan that was submitted with the original building permit
application. A Temporary Certificate of Occupancy (T.C.O.) has been issued with
the requirements all the site grading and drainage plans are completed within 180
days.
At the time the building permit was approved, the submitted site plan met all
requirements of the zoning ordinances and building code. After additional review
of the site plan it was discovered the 75' lakeshore s.ctback was not measured
correctly. The site plan indicated a 75' setback to the Lakeshore Least side of the
property). However, it was discovered the lakeshore bends around an adjacent
property within 75' of this property. This resulted in more area of the property being
included in the 0-75' protected zone where no hardcover is allowed. As a result, the
area of the 75-250' zone is actually smaller than initially indicated, and the owners
have had to omit certain items of hardcover to remain at the 25% level.
3. When the setback issue was discovered, construction of the new home was nearly
complete. Since the house was nearly complete, it was not possible for the property
owners to reduce the size of the structure. To conform to the hardcover
requirements, the property owners had to reduce the size of the driveway, and remove
a concrete patio from the plans. Neither had been constructed.
4. Swales are being provided around the house to direct water from the road, driveway
and roof around the house and beyond the adjacent homes where the water will then
naturally Bow towards the lakeshore.
5. In addition to the drainage swales, gutters are being added to the northeast roof line
to direct water towards the from of the house and not towards the neighboring house.
Draintile will also be installed to take the water from the house around to the front
of the bank. Final grading and the draintile will not be completed until the ground
thaws in the Spring. Because the additional grading and drainage improvements
cannot be completed until Spring, staff issued a T.C.O. rather than a final Certificate
of Occupancy (C.O.). When the improvements are complete, a C.O. will be issued.
The City of Orono has routinely allowed individuals to occupy a home by a T.C.O.
without all the exterior work being complete subject to a defined time period to
complete the work.
Page 2 of 6
6. The property consists of 0.76 acre, or 33,076 s.f. in 1=2 area. The lot is a legal
building site in the LR-I C zoning district.
7. It is the intent of the Comprehensive Plan and 7onina Code to protect the water
quality of Lake Minnetonka by limiting the amount of hardcover a lot contains. No
hardship exists on this lot that would support approval of additional hardcover for a
paved patio or expansion of the driveway.
The granting of the requested after -the -fact %arlances would be contrary to the
provisions of Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.08, Subdivision 3 (A) with which
the applicants must first comply in order that %ariances be granted. The Council
finds that:
A. The property in question can be put to a reasonable use if used under the
conditions allowed by the official controls if the proposed after -the -fact
variances are granted. The driveway has 1,een approved as pan of the general
site plan as minimally acceptable for access to the property.
B. Granting of the proposed after -the -fact %yiances %%ould appear to serve as a
convenience to the applicants and the applicants have not demonstrated a
reasonable hardship or practical difftcult� acceptable to the City Council for
the patio and driveway expansion.
C. The conditions and Zoning Code limits imposed and existing on this property
generally apply to all other land and structures in the zoning district in which
this property is located as well as in adjacent residential zoning districts.
FURTHER BE IS RESOLVED, the Council hereby approves a variance to permit
36 s.f. of hardcover to permit a 8' X 3' landing and minimal stairway to access the
ground below the patio doors, based on the need to provide for a safe access at this
location. The house has a patio door entrance off the main floor that would have
provided access to the patio. Since the patio door was installed under the original
building permit, it was planned that hardcover %could be available to allow a stairway
and patio landing. Following the discovery that the entire 75' lakeshore setback was
not fully delineated on the original site plan, it did not allow a reasonable access to
the patio doors that have been installed.
Page 3 of 6
10. 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.
11. Authorities granted by this variance 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
(February 26, 2002).
12. 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.
13. The undersigned applicants have read, understand and hereby agree to the terms of
this resolution and on behalf of themselves, their heirs, successors and assigns,
hereby agree to the recording of this resolution in the Chain of Title of the properr.
Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono on this 26th day of February, 2001.
ATTEST:
Linda S. Vee, City Clerk Barbara A. Peterson, Mayor
Property Owner(s)
Page 4 of 6
STATE OF MINNESO'.'A
ss.
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this 26th day of February,
2001, by Barbara A. Peterson and Linda S. Vee, Mayor & City Clerk of the City of Orono, a
Minnesota municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City.
Notary Public
STATE OF MINNESOTA )
) ss.
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN )
On this _day of , 20_ before me a Notary Public within and for said
county. personally appeared known to me to be
the person(s) described in and who executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that
he(they) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed.
Notary Pub!ic
STATE OF MINNESOTA )
) ss.
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN )
On this _day of , 20_ before me a Notary Public within and for said
county, personally appeared known to me to be
the person(s) described in and who executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that
he(they) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed.
Notary Public
Page 5 of 6
EXHIBIT A
Lot 4, the Northwest %s of Lot 5; that part of Lot 3 lying Southeasterly of a line drawn parallel with
and distant 60 feet Southeasterly ofthe Northwesterly line of Lot 23 and the same extended, and that
part of Lot 23 lying Northerly of the Southerly line of said Northwest '/2 of said Lot 5 at
Southeasterly of a line drawn parallel with and distant 60 feet Southerly of the Northwesterly line
of said Lot 23 and the same extended all in Wessel's Subdivision of Spring Park Lots, according to
the plat thereof on file and of record in the office of the Register of Deeds of Hennepin County,
Minnesota.
Also that portion of unnamed alley which lies between Lots 1, 2, 3, 4 the Northweterly half of Lot
5 and that part of Lot 23 lying Northwesterly of an extension Southwesterly of the Southeasterly line
of the Northwesterly half of Lot 5, Wessel's Subdivision of Spring Park Lots, Hennepin County,
Minnesota, and Southeasterly of a line drawn parallel with and distant 60 feet Southeasterly of the
northwesterly line of said Lot 23 and the same extended.
Page 6 of 6
Cm of ORONO 911-------�
SITE PLAN 2 GRADINC MAN
7APPROVEO-/Uct-? (Z-'S
❑ APPROVED VhTH REVISIONS ' \
❑ DISAP VE
DA�1B'` •J
�p�y , 4A
ILT
EUC�yE-
75' SE K L
936
\ \e cxo)\
i EXIST HOUSE ,'T �.� .o� na ,vas / •� \ `Q'W �'fr. �• %•/
I
�7
HOUSE (UNDER 0PNST)
DIM. SHOWN ARE
'o m `` 95LO 951 S" �' v; \ AREA CALCULATU
I
�?1, ?x"w / \sari , LOT AREA (TOTAL ABOVE 95V g \ `gyp / 9`.w �: \ X 15% - 4960 S.F. AL
y 1 �(' o a,p a.�o 4194 S.F. a 84.5X OF
959'0 \ s LOT AREA (75-250 SB F
EXIST .HOUSE y,N X 25% - 5625 S.F. Al
5625 S.F. PROPOSED
HOUSE
— 952— L \p d'r+ FRONT STOOP
SIDE STOOP61P0!
PATIO STEP
RETAt" WALL
DRIVE
1 'AggS° y}a. SETBACK LOT AREA
=
( EA (<250 58 FF
f I 1 LIME 9 5 Z P 18 PO SSE A�
0
dIW 929� �\ �• 2�� �
` \ i 731�� Q:
Y
ILT
75' SE ....R L 1915AT7`'.'� \Jk
E >$` 16 1 x s -
2j4� \\\iE
\6� a
Y10�p y
> Pi O
u \
DO
/ !.. SCALE 1" = 30' (n 09
PROPOSE: ELEVATIONS a00 o A>
GARAGE =LOOR-951.0 Z
1� 944� 9�� TOP FO-\JATION-952.800 w Z.
LOWEST -LOOR- 944.0 ¢ U G o
V; AREA CALCULATIONS 11/28/00 (REV. 12/28/00) oo w
\ gM� LOT AREA (TOTAL ABOVE ONW) = 33076 S.F. / 0.76 ae J C m
\ X 15% = 4960 S.F. ALLOWABLE STRUCT. AREA Ln I 0 4194 S.F. - 84S% OF ALLOWABLE
'N'ggg ~ LOT AREA (75-250 SB FROM OHW) = 22500 S:. 0 !
E%IST .HOJSc �,.rf X 25% - 5625 S.F. ALLOWABLE HARDCOVER =REA =.
5625 S.F. PROPOSED _
HOUSE - 4194 S.F. uv 2aFr.s ��_g ' 3y�° yam•:
FRONT STOOP - 296 S.F. zv riau¢ ri2gim Y
SIDE STOOPBPOST-38 S.F. a -.sacr M
PATIO STEP - 6 S.F.
RJ9JwumGo�cn. auvc. «r n. w
- ftETAG WALL = 45 S.F. GR° 10/6ro n-<
DRIVE = 1046 S.F. 99US°
TOTAL = 5625 S.F.
LOT AREA (<250 SB FROM OHW) - 60 S.F. 1
X 30% - 18 S.F. ALLOWABLE HARDCOVER A.EA 1
9 S.F. PROPOSED - (50% ALLOWABLE)
/ EXIST HOUSE / (g52.0 ,Tq
y L/
gyp. yy_6
W51.0)10
// HOUSE (UNDER
DU SHOWN ARI
/ 1 70/ ae JlD
/ I GAR'
/ I QA $ vvE=951.0 (951.0) A
jb
1 � p
a,n
wo l�
SETBACK
1 1 LYE
S4°re
Are4. (jo{ inclu
'" 75' sefb�k� \9c
L 25D,.
— — 75' SETBACK LINE j / 51
y/ , '+(939^1
�- R1 �A0 / p•"� � /
6p
is'
EXIST HOUSE
259}S
AREA CALCI
LOT AREA (TOTAL AB(
% 15% - 4960 S.F.
,y�s\p 4194 S.F. - 84.5%
-d' \LOT AREA (75-250 SI
% 25% - 5625 S.F.
5614 S.F. PROPOSEI
HOUSE
STOOP -
RETM"
OPoVE -
TOTAL
5614 SI
LOT AREA (<250 SO
X 30% - 18 SF.
9 S.F. PROPOSED
/ •
�.......
I I
H ol-e boo,
p¢ .. 7
0
I 7S
I
elud y
�
Z
SI
/ y
/
75' SETBACK LIPS
16e-37
y/
DO
4
SCALE 1 " = 30'
1n
�40 /
PROPOSED ELEVATIONS
GARAGE FLOOR-951.0
Z
v i3 TOP FOUNDATION-952.8
LOWEST FLOOR= 944.0
O
H
AREA CALCULATIONS 11/28/00
0
H
•�' y�°�
LOT AREA (TOTAL ABOVE OH = 33076 S.F. / 0.76 cc
q.
LE STRUCT. AREA
X 15% .F 4960 S.F. ALLOWABLE
W
4194 S.F. = 84.5R OF ALLOWABLE
(A
c EXIST HOUSE ry
LOT AREA (75-250 SB FROM OHW) - 22500 S.F.
_
X 25% - 5625 SF. ALLOWABLE HARDCOVER AREA
"IA SF. PROPOSED - 99% OF ALLOWABLE
HOUSE - 4194 S.F. 6FV AREA6 11-e
STppppPP 265 S.F. 6EV x6u5E 7/24M
} RET Z WALL = 45 S.F. 6EV-AsaT 16E.
1p,M -100 i.i. DRIVE m 1114 S.F. oravF
6 TOTAL = 5614 S.F. MAD'+° 10161W
5614 SF / 5625 SF (99 R ALLOWABLE)
LOT AREA (<250 SB FROM OHW) - 60 S.F.
X 30R - 18 S.F. ALLOWABLE HARDCOVER AREA
9 S.F. PROPOSED - (50% ALLOWABLE)
•eETINO
Application Date: 1/19/01 pro 2 6
Completion Date: 1/19101 ko
24
60 Day Deadline: 3119/01 Gil r t y-
REQUESTFORCOUNCILACTION wfQVO
Department Approval: DATE: 2/22101
Name Wendy Bonenberg ITEM NO.: I
Title Zoning Adminstrator/Planner Agenda Section: Zoning
Item Description: #01.2660 Keith Waters & Assoc. for Jeffrey & Leontyne Maxwell
740 Willow Drive South
variances
Zoning District: RR-IB One Family Rural Residential District (2 acre)
Lot Area: 45,216 s.f. (1.038 acres)
List or Exhibits:
A Resolution
B Staff Report and Exhibits of2212001
Application Summary: The applicants own the subject property and are requesting lot area and
lot Width variances to construct a new residence on the lot. The existing residence that was
constructed in the early 1979s was removed per a demolition permit in December, 2000.
The lot is approximately 1.038 acres where 2 acres is the minimum required area and approximately
162' wide where 200' is the minimum required width to construct a new residence in RR-1 B district.
I. Section 10.28, Subdivision 5 (B): Lot Width: The lot is 162 feet wide where 200 feet is the
minimum lot width for the RR-1 B zoning district for new construction.
2. Section 10.28, Subdivision 5 (B): Lot Area: The lot is 1.038 acres where 2 acres is the minimum
lot area for the RR-1B zoning district for new construction.
PLANNING COMMISSION:
The Planning Commission recommended by a 4 to 0 vote to:
Approve the application as presented.
STA': :: COMMENDATION:
To approve the enclosed resolution.
COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED:
To adopt or amend the enclosed resolution.
A RESOLUTION GRANTING VARIANCE
TO MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE
SECTION 10.25, SUBDIVISION 5 (B),
FILE NO.2660
WHEREAS, Jeffrey G. Maxwell and Leontyne A. Maxwell, (hereinafter "the
applicants") are the owners of the property located at 740 Willow Drive South within the City of
Orono (hereinafter "the City") and legally described as follows:
Lot H, Block 1, Webber Hills, Hennepin County, Minnesota. (hereinafter "the
property"); and
WHEREAS, the applicants have applied to the City for a variance to Municipal
Zoning Code Section 10.28, Subdivision 5 (B) to permit new residential construction on a 1.038 acre
lot where 2 acres is required and having a lot width of 162 feet wide where 200 feet is required.
WHEREAS, after due published notice and mailed notice in accordance with
Minnesota Statutes and the City of Orono Zoning and Planning Codes, the Orono Planning
Commission held a public hearing on February 21, 2001, at which tirre all persons desiring to be
heard concerning this application were given the opportunity to speak ;hereon.
Minnesota:
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the C;ty Council of Orono,
FINDINGS
This application was reviewed as Zoning File #2660.
The property is located in the RR- IB Zoning District, where 2 acres is the minimum
required lot area. The property consists of approximately 1.038 acres.
3. TheOrono Planning Commission reviewed this application on February 21,2001 and
recommended approval of the proposed variance based upon the following findings:
A. The property has been developed with a residential use since at least 1970.
Page I of 5
B. The site plan indicated the proposed setback 30'to the side property lines, 50'
to the rear property line and 120' to the front property line, which meets the
minimum requirements of Lire RR-IB zoning district.
C. The lot can be developed without the need for further variances.
D. There is no additional land to combine with the property.
4. 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 will not adversely affect traffic conditions, light, air, nor pose a fire
hazard or other danger to neighboring property; would not merely serve as a
convenience to the applicants, but is necessary to alleviate a demonstrable hardship
or difficulty; is necessary to preserve a substantial property right of the applicants;
and would be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the Zoning Code and
Comprehensive Plan of the City.
5. The City Council has considered this application including the findings and
recommendations of the Planning Commission, reports by City Staff, comments by
the applicants and the effect of the proposed variances on the health, safety and
welfare of the community.
CONCLUSIONS, ORDER, AND CONDITIONS
Based upon one or more of the above findings, the Orono City Council hereby grants a
variance to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.28, Subdivision 5 (B) to allow new residential
construction on a 1.038 acre lot where 2 acres is required and having a lot width of 162 feet where
200 feet is required. Approval is subject to the following conditions:
Council approval is based on the site plan submitted by the applicant attached to this
resolution as Exhibit A. Any amendments to the site plan may require further
Planning Commission and City Council review.
2. It is the intent of the City Council that variances to develop the lot would not he
looked upon favorably.
Page 2 of 5
3. Authorities granted by this variance run with the property not with the applicants,
but are permissive only and must be exercised by application for a building permit
within one yearof the date of Council approval, or these variances will expire on that
date (February 26, 2002).
4. 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.
5. The undersigned applicants have read, understood and hereby agree to the terms of
this resolution and on behalf of themselves, their heirs, successors and assigns,
hereby agree to the recording of this resolution in the Chain of Title of the property.
Adopted by the City Council of the City or Orono, Minnesota at a regular meeting held on
the 26th day of February, 2001.
ATTEST:
Linda S. Vee, City Clerk
Property Owner (a)
STATE OF MINNESOTA )
) ss.
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN )
Barbara A. Peterson, Mayor
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this 26th day of February, 2001
by Barbara A. Peterson and Linda S. Vee, Mayor and City Clerk of the City of Orono, a Minnesota
municipal corpo-ation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City.
Notary Public
Page 3 of 5
STATE OF MINNESOTA )
) ss.
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN )
On this day of . 2001, before me a Notary Public within and
for said County, personally appeared known
to me to bethe peson(s) described in and who executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged
that he (they) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed.
Notary Public
STATE OF MINNESOTA )
) ss.
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN )
On this day of , 2001, before me a Notary Public within
and for said County, personally appeared
known to me to be the person(s) described in and who .:xecutcd the foregoing instrument, and
acknowledged that he (they) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed.
Notary Public
Page 4 of 5
CERTIFICATE OF SURVE ( FOR
KEITH WATERS & ASSOCIATES
OF I OT 11, 13LOCK 1, WLHULR HILLS
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA '
N 60°11'09" E 287.29..+.. 286.6.E-
1'
-1
1 e R
1 �f
l JAI'. 4r
rn
w
N w +all\ •� _ �, t� pOSFO�j `"11.� >
on
S
Jr, 1
tea/
5 60'10'47" W 279.81 ..,.. 279.6-11 I.12. OI
TO: Chair Hawn and Orono Planning Commission Members
Ron Moorse, City Administrator
FROM: Wendy Bottenberg, Zoning Administrator/Planner
DATE: February 15 .1001
SUBJECT: #2660 Keith Waters & Associates/ Jeffrey & Leontyne Maxwell
740 Willow Drive South
Variance -- Public Hearing
Zoning District: RR-IB One Family Rural Residential District (2 acre)
Lot Area: 45,216 s.f. (1.038 acres)
List of Exhibits
A
Application
B
Site Plani'Survey
C
Permit issued for Demolition
D
Residence Plans
E
Location Map
F
Plat Map
G
Permit Record
H
Propery Owner's List
Pertinent Code Section:
1. Section 10,28, Subdivision 5 (B): Lot Area: The lot is 1.038 acres where 2 acres is the minimum
lot area for the RR- IB zoning district for new construction.
2. Section 10.28, Subdivision 5(B): Lot Width: The lot is 162 feet wide where 200 feet is the
minimum lot width for the RR.I B zoning district for new construction.
Application Summary: The applicants own the subject property and are requesting lot area and
lot width variances to construct a new residence on the lot. The existing residence that was
constructed in the early 1970's was removed per a demolition permit in December, 2000.
The lot is approximately 1.038 acres and the minimum lot area requirement is 2 acres. A lot area
variance is required to construct a new residence.
The lot is approximately 162' wide where 200' is the minimum lot width required. A lot width
variance is required to construct a new residence.
This property is now included in the MUSA. The Webber Hills area was connected to city sewer
in the summer of 2000.
#2660 Keith Waters 6: Assoc Ueffrq A Leontyne Macwell
740 Willow !rive South
Variance
111512001
Page I
ANALYSIS
Lot Area and Yards
RR- IB District Standards
RR-IB
Lot Area
Lot Width
Required
2 Acres
209
Actual
1.038 Acres
162'
Statement of Hardship:
This is an existing lot which was platted prior to current zoning standards.
Issues for Consideration:
1. The lot was platted prior to current zoning requirements.
2. A residence previously existed on the property.
3. There is no additional land to combine with the property.
4.Other issues raised by the Planning Commission.
Staff Recommendation:
Staff recommends approval of the requested variances.
To obtain a building permit the new residence must meet all height requirements, setbacks, and
grading requiraueura.
02660 Keith Waters & Assoc /Jeffrey & Leuntyne Ala ell
740 Willow Drive South
Variance
111312001
Page 2
JHI-1e.-20b1 15:02 4]]I rH:
OI-- /
Application N G (VC 0
(late Received 'h9400
Amount Paid
CITY OF ORONO - VARIANCE APPLICATION
Initial Application Fee $250.00
($50.00 per each additional variance)
Renewal Variance Fee $150.00
(no change from original application)
Variant for non -conforming structures $250,00
After -the -Fact Fees (Double application fee)
PROPERTY INFORMATION
Site Address 71!V
Mi1Ipu_baN/0
�+ri-en
Property IdentScation Number (P.I.D.) rJ3 117
23 S-A 2'i7(p
Attach legal description to ap hcation if not included on required survey.
Date Property Acquired" .'Srj 71YYy (month/year)
1 10(do not) also cwn the adjacent parcels of land.
Present use of property: -)Lmsidential _other (specify)
- 1
Zoning District._ P t.. - I . ,
APPLTCA1l�T� Phone (home)_
Name (( Phone (home)
Address: City:_ Zin:5534fe_
I
OWNER Gf erent than ppli t) Phone (home)l,j%�-�j1�]•31�7�.,
Name J G r�jm �,{ Phone
{
`(w,o'
Addrsss:Q,OL P� City: ,( Zip: ,
DESCRIPTION O11 FREQUES���'/� Es�t ma�ted� nstr{µ,c�(o CgsttS��
Describe detay�
Y)
r/eq»est�rr
V CES REQUIRED
Cut Area _ Lot Width _ Hardcover _Lot Coverage
— Setback: Front _.Side _ Rear Averagclaeshore
Other (specify)
HARDSMIDESCRIPTION OF UNUSUAL PROPERTY CONDITIONS
Describe undue hardship or practical difficulty}' or unusual p�operty =didons
compliance w10 $orting,Pode re.quisemenls:-Y{y DI25QIdr6e LSrd.n cyl
cS
(attach additional sheets if p ecessary) r
°'� cvhAtJt G
Awl.(lrruinettzo 4, ►ued �ur 4 d4Ai^t
�
6
•.,,......, n. nncev a uva wv NfT" OOee •id ria XAA 1,9:11 100Z/01110
REQUIRED SUBMITTALS
All of the following information must he submitted I y�ie atyl_icution deadline date in
order for your unnlication to be considered complete:
t. _ Completed Application Form
2. Certified Property Owners List of owners within 1501, labels and plat map (you
must obtain this list, labels and map from Hennepin County Department of
Finance, A-603, Govt Center, 348-5910).
3. Certificate of Survey (signed by a licensed surveyor) and include hardcover
calculations as required. In addition, provide one (1) copy 8'/," x 11" for
reproduction.
4. _ Topographic survey (existing and proposed elevations) if any changes in existing
grade are proposed. In addition, provide one (1) copy 8'h" x I I" for reproduction.
5. _ Sketches or plans of flooi & elevation views (protide one (1) copy 8W x 11").
6. _ List of the legal names (include marital status) of all persons with an interest in
the property. This would include name(s) of applicants) if not current owner(s).
7. _ As an addeudura to this application, please attach a separate list of any other
Persons you wish notified of this application.
8. Additional items as may be requested by City staff.
The Applicant and Property Owner must sign this application. Please remember that your
variance amnlicatton is not somplete if the above information has not been included,
APPLICANT'S SIGNATURE
The applicant hereby agrees to provide all information required or requested by the Zoning
Administrator, agrees to pay additional fees (staff time not covered by original fee payment)
and/or consultant expenses incurred in review of this application; end certifies that the
information supplied is true and correct to the best of his/her knowledge.
Applicant's Signature Date
OWNER'S SIGNATURE
The owner hereby acknowledges and agrees to this application and further authorizes reasonable
entry onto the property by City staff, consuJilants, agents, Commission members, and Council
members for purposes of investigation an verification of this request.
Applicant must have all submitWs/mto the City offices ?i days before the Planning
Commission Meeting. Planning Co,••,•`IA",'tsion Meetings are held on the third Mondayv-f each
month. Applicants must be present at all scheduled review meetings of the Planning
Commission and Council. If an applicant is unable to attend a scheduled meeting, please
make arrangements to have art authorized agent attend in your place and to advise the Building
& Zoning Office of this change prior to the meeting.
7
coo/coop aoafv v axQrvv Wr iav ......
CERTIFICATE OF SURVEY FOR
KEITH WATERS & ASSOCIATES
OF LOT 11. BLOCK 1, WEBBER HILLS
^ HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
K
N 80°17'09" E 287.29..... 266.6.0+..
I _
1 i ,
1
NICI' _ --' - _� _ � ! 11 w�. �- .•`• j R'� y � .. �y �1 w
Q9 I
v w •� .. • ' � Oleo / �'' � 14 n
br 4s 1 /.� • � m
u �n
% ) 1 0
Az
r, A
S 60' 10' 47" W 279.94 ..,... 279.6 v.—
PERMIT
L
CITY OF ORONO
2750 Kelley Parkway - PO Box 66
Permit Number:
P03417
Crystal BayMinnesota 55323
Permit Type:
Demolition
(612) 249A600
Date Issued:
12n9120
SITE ADDRESS: 740 willow DrS
WAYZATA, MN 55391
PID: 03.117-23.33-0006
DESCRIPTION:
Proposed Use:
Census Code
645
Permit Class: Building
Permit Sub-type(s):
Demo -Principal Structure
Permit Type: Demolition
DETAILS:
Approved per resolution 0
Separate permits required:
NOTICESIREMARKS
Foundatioes'oll demo debris to be removed from ground & &postd of off site per PCA regulations. `.9e1's
mist be abandoned. Inspection before backfiliing.
=E SUMMARY: Permit Fee: $50.00 Valuation: S 0.00
State Surcharge Fee: $0.50
TOTAL FEE: $ 50.50
APPLICANT: Keith Waters&Assoc q Ty.000y OWNER: 3EFFREY MAXWELL
6216 Baker Rd Suite 110 740 WILLOW DR S
Eden Pmirie, 51N 55456 WAYZATA MIN 53391
THE UNDERSIGNED HEREBY REQUESTS PERMISSION TO MAKE THE REAL IMPROVEMENTS SPECIFIED
STATEOFEESTO OTABWORKOCODETCOMLIANiE. WITH ALL CITY OF ORONO ORDINANCES AND
1 EO BY SIC ArURE /
Copies: City, Applicant, Assessor, Finance
Pagel
4
1 oWcm LWri rt,14 MAvweLL ReJ lr�t_
l�
a
ME
MnxWELI Ara Cc _ L -
mr-
(7
Mi
w LANIU MI
m
S
E
ELM LA AW 100
9
ORAS
0
3
COrr[M
I oe
Z i WV LE LA t
t
E
OnOP
•.•�"
WEAK CIA 11
°
OT 9
0
a _
'sM �t svE
s
{
a
"'WATEATOWN .� co A00 TNOROUAN
°y
RED -
11!
�1ca
_
a�0•
r
;
s
o
U COUN OR
DEYIN IA \
/ Bilicb •. •'"•
� Golf
T
i ;
N ON M
;
LONOYIEW Got 9.i
/ ••...• ..
I course
DDD
EOYERSET
rMR
$lsE
a Wn6 •.•'-"
oFCI ,•• /
FOX RIDGE AD
5�, _..I
AYE HILL
-
"0929,11DEEP PUN
n
s
v
fine .-•'"•-
MINGDON WAY
6
�•'•.
............
.......
.„
..t
S
WHITE
40
pRON
W =
OyEN
EM
c
e acaruaa
u �
_ '4«Er AD 80r�
Noerenberg FAENCN LME a Tanagu
uwell Garden ; RD r
Ntk '3. gs, Lake
r {, -
✓ ?
LA 1
�� L Frcnch 4w ♦ r0`O CAEFNT REF
1 F t w/ ' RD
Bay \� --- -- Lake ���esrt U� a
Ar
3
r , ,f• �.�� tI-� Z NII� ) M
M
O R ONNrYA O
, eoo Bracknrs Point
Q
- i
BohnTPainr Crystal Bay ' z .J
. Lafayet
�.,:.. Country ub
I / r 000 be
_ N
-MINNETONKA
B FACH '' `�
Fmjw[nnep Coui Taxer Servicesepartment
1
Par J
Marcel 3
House
Street e
Cond r
0'dy,
-dy, m
Ji_wn
nformaVon
1723130UL
or 740
WILLOV I DR S
) t,
;n It a ,Mn s Man 1
SYars /oM aWNadisd _ I
C-
PERMIT RECORD
Permit No. Date Type of permit
v
WA
HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORMATION SYSTEM
PROPERTY OWNERS LIST
38 03 117 23 33 0001
38 03 117 23 33 0006
38 03 111 23 33 0007
PROP AVON
30 ADDRESS UNASSIGNE'
CONDMN 1
740 NILLDW DR S
COMDMI 1
680 WILLOW DR S
OWNER NAME
HENNEPIN FORFEITED LAND
J G MAXWELL 1 1. A MAXWELL
NORMAN . .NEISTE ETAL
TAXPAYER
CITY OF ORONO
JEFFREY 4 LEONTYNE MAXWELL
NOPNAN H THEISTE
NAME/ADDR
P O SOX 66
201 PAARVIEW TER
680 S WILLW OR
CRYSTAL BAY MN 55323
GOLDEN VALLEY HN 55416
WAYZATA !N 55391
38 03 113 23 34 0002
38 03 117 23 34 0004
36 03 111 23 34 0005
PROP ADDR
2185 WEBBER HILLS AD
CONDMN 1
2135 SHEVLIN DR
CON011I 1
2145 SHEVLIN DR
OWNER MAKE
MARGARET A GEPNUMDSEM
E HARTINU22I
WILLIAM M TOLES
TAXPAYER
MARGARET A GUUKUNDSEN
J NARTINUZZI
JAMES A DANIELS
NAKE/ADDR
2185 NEBBER HILL. RD
ERIC 4 JENNY MR MARTIHUEEI
C/O JILL T B DANIELS
WAYZATA IN 55391
2135 SHEVLIN DR
2145 SHEVLIN DR
WAYZATA HN 55391
WAYZATA IN 55391
38 03 111 23 34 0006
38 03 117 23 34 0007
PROP ADDR
2155 SHEVLIN DR
COMMON 1
2175 SHEVLIN DR
CONNO4 1
ONNBR NAME
J 4 J PAULSON
R P RREOS 4 M N GUSTAFSON
TAXPAYER
JEROME T 4 JUDY A PAULSON
A P MHOS I N K GUSTAFSON
WANE/ADDR
2155 SHEVLIN DRIVE
2175 SHEVLIN DR
WAYZATA NN 55391
WAYZATA MN 55391
PROP ADDR
OWNER MAKE
TAXPAYER
WAME/ADDR
I CERTIFY THAT THE FACTS REPRESENTED ARE AN ACCURATE AND TRUE
REPRESENTATION OF INFORMATION AS IT APPERARS THIS DATE ON THE RECORDS
OF THE HENNEPIN COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF PROPERTY TAXATION, TO THE BEST
OF MY KNOWLEDGE AND BELIEF
DATE •4W/BY
CON" 1
Mrnr..0 ueeTINO
FEB 2 6 2000
Application Date: 1/8/01 CITY OF ORONO
Completion Uatet ligNl
60 Day Deadline: 3/9/01
REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION
Department Approval: DATE: 212' 0'
Name Wendy Bottenberg ITEM NO.: 112,
Title Zoning Adminstmtor/Flanner Agenda Section: Zoning
Item Description: 401-2662 RVC Homes
1080 Wildhurst Trail
Variance
Zoning District: LR-IB One Family Lakeshore Residential District (I acre)
Lot Area: 43,376 s.f. (.996 acres) -
List of Exhibits:
A Resolution
B Staff Report and Exhibits of 221/2001
Application Summary: The applicant has purchased the subject properly and is requesting a lot
width variance to construct a new residence on the lot. The existing residence that was constructed
in the emly 1%0's and an accessory building will be removed.
The lot is approximately .996 acres and the min:,num lot area requirement is 1 acre. A lot area
variance is not required to construct a new residence, because the lot meets 80%of the rec.uired area
per Section 10.24, Subdivision 5(B).
The lot is approximately 100' wide where 14V is the minimum lot width required.:± lot "idtb
variance is required to construct a new residence.
1. Section 10.24, Subdivision 5 (B): Lot Width: The lot is 100' wide at the shoreline and 108' %tide
at the 75' setback where 140 feet is the minimum lot width for the LR-1B zoning district for new
construction.
PLANNING COMMISSION:
The Planning Commission recommended by a 4 to 0 vote to:
Approve the application a prcxurcu.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
To approve the enclosed resolution.
COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED:
To adopt or amend the enclosed resolution.
A RESOLUTION GRANTING A VARIANCE
TO MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE
SECTION 10.24, SUBDIVISION 5 (B),
FILE NO.2662
WHEREAS, Rick L. Vogelgesang on behalf of RVC Homes (hereinafter 'the
applicant") is the owner of the prop" located at 1080 Wildhurst Trail within the City of Orono
(hereinafter "the City") and legally described as follows:
Lots 5 and 6, Tonkaview Gardens, Hennepin County, Minnesota. (hereinafter `the
property"); and
WHEREAS, the applicant has applied to the City for a variance to?funicit Zonna
Code Section 10.24, Subdivision 5 (B) to permit new residential construction on a lot having a width
of 100 feet where 140 feet is required.
WHEREAS, after due published notice and mailed notice in accordance with
Minnesota Statutes and the City of Orono Zoning and Planning Codes, the Orono Planning
Commission held a public hearing on February 21, 2001, at which time all persons desiring to be
heard cone- wing this application were given the opportunity to speak thereon.
Minnesota:
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Orono,
FINDINGS
This application was reviewed as Zoning File k2662.
2. The property is located in the LR-I B Zoning District, where 1 acre is the minimum
required lot area. The property consists of approximately .996 acres.
The Orono Planning Commission reviewed this application on February 21.2001 and
recommended approval of the proposed variance based upon the following findings:
A. The property has been developed with a residential use since at least 1960.
Page 1 of 5
B. The site plan indicated the proposed setback 10' to the side property lines and
the house would be outside of the 75' Lakeshore setback. The entire house
would be located approximately 120' from the lakeshore, which meets the
minimum setback requirements of the LR-I B zoning district.
C. The lot can be developed without the need for further variances.
D. The lot size is consistent with that of other developed properties in the
neighborhood.
4. The City Council finds that the conditions exi .ting on this property ate peculiar to
it and do not apply generally to other property in this zoning dist-ict, that granting
the variance will not adversely affect traffic conditions, light, air, nor pose a fire
hazard or other danger to neighboring property; would not merely serve as a
convenience to the applicant, but is necessary to alleviate a demonstrable hardship
or difficulty; is necessary to preserve a substantial property right of the applicant:
and would be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the Zoning Code and
Comprehensive Plan of the City.
S Thn t-ih• f nnnrll huc r, _ cjAnmd thi< annljretjnq inrhldino T1'e flndinoc 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.
CONCLUSIONS, ORDER, AND CONDITIONS
Based upon one or more of the above findings, the Orono City Council hereby grants a
variance to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.24, Subdivision 5 (B) to allow new residential
construction on a lot having a width of 100 feet where 140 feet is required. Approval is subject to
the following conditions:
Council approval is based on the site plan submitted by the applicant attached to this
resolution as Exhibit A. Any amendments to the site plan may require further
Planning Commission and City Council review.
2. It is the intent of the City Council that variances to develop the lot would not be
Page 2 of 5
looked upon favorably.
3. 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 (February 26, 2002).
4. 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.
5. The undersigned applicant has read, understood and hereby agree to the terms of
this resolution and on behalf of himself, his heirs, his successors and assigns,
hereby agrees to the recording of this resolution in the Cnain of Title of the property.
Adopted by the City Council of the City or Orono, Minnesota at a regular meeting held on
the 26th day of February, 2001.
ATTEST:
Linda S. Vee, City Clerk
Property Owner (s)
STATE OF MINNESOTA )
) as.
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN )
Barbara A. Peterson, Mayor
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this 26th day of February, 2001
by Barbara A. Peterson and Linda S. Vee, Mayor and City Clerk of the City of Orono, a Minnesota
r.::mxipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City.
Notary Public
Page 3 of 5
STATE OF MINNESOTA )
) as.
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN )
On this day of , 2001, before me a Notary Public within and
for said County, personally appeared known
to me to be the person(s) described in and who executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged
that he (they) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed.
Notary Public
STATE OF MINNESOTA )
) as.
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN )
vu iiva day' of , 2001, bcfo:c me a Notary Public within
and for said County, personally appeared
known to me to be the person(s) described in and who executed the foregoing instrument, and
acknowledged that he (they) executed the same as his (their) free act and deed.
Notary Public
Page 4 of 5
f\ V V I IVIyIL_.!
OF LOTS 5 & 6. TONKAVIEW GARDENS
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
i
S 89°07' 25" E 164.94 -
1WA
E%STFW
i
;.E .All.
F N
�IM'N MI
1«.A S 83°41' S4" yl
EXISTING
HOUSE
37:
1
11
U"\
xn•S'
w\
YVNfx�O \
I
p�
1
--------'
;,,'�'� "-"""
- >\
SURVEY
1\
ENE y
308.96
PROPOSED ELEVATIONS :
rnnrcT
LAKE
999A CONTMr, CwE V
TO: Chair Hawn and Orono Planning Commission Members
Ron Moorse, City Administrator
FROM: Wendy Bottenberg, Zoning Administrator/Planner
DATE: February 15 , 2001
SUBJECT: #2662 RVC Homes/ Rick Vogelgesing
1080 Wildhurst Trail
Variance -- Public Hearing
Zoning District: LR-IB One Family Lakeshore Residential District (I acre)
Lot Area: 43,376 s.f. (.996 acre)
List of Exhibits
A Application
B Site Plan/Survey
C Enlarged Survey of Existing Residence
D Elevations/Floor Plans
E Hardcover Calculations
F Location Map
G Property Map
H Permit Record
I Property Owner's List
Pertinent Code Section:
1. Section 10.24, Subdivision 5 (B): Lot Width: The lot is 109 wide at the shoreline and 108' wide
at the 75' setback where 140' is the minimum lot width for the LR-lB zoning district for new
construction.
Application Summary: The applic: nts are in the process of purchasing the subject property and
are requesting a lot width variance to construct a new residence on the lot. The existing residence
that was constructed in the early 1960's and an accessory building will be removed. A demolition
permit had not yet been obtained as of this writing.
The lot is approximately .996 acres and the minimum lot area requirement is I acre. A lot area
variance is not required to construct a new residence, because the lot meets 80%of the required area
per Section 10.24. Subdivision 5(B).
The lot is approximately 100' wide where 140' is the minimum lot width required. A lot width
variance is required to construct a new residence.
This lot is a iakeshore lot and is sewered.
#2662 R✓CHomesBick ✓ngelgesing
1030 Wildharst Tr.d
Variance
1113,2001
Page I
ANALYSIS
LR-lB District Standards
LR-113
Lot Area
Lot Width
Required
1 Acre (800,o = 0.8 Acre)
14V
Actual
.996 Acres (No variance needed)
100', 108'
Statement of Hardship:
This is an existing lot which was platted prior to current zoning standards.
jTTlTM i I�iSITd7E
1. The adjacent lot to the north is vacant. Will the new residence impact its views of the lake?
2. The lot was platted prior to current zoning requirements.
3. A residence currently exists on the propem, and wU be removed.
4. There is no additional land to combine with the property.
5. Other issues raised by the Planning Commission.
Staff Recant epdation:
Staff recommends approval of the requested variances.
To obtain a building permit the applicant must provide an updated survey showing proposed
residence, adjacent residences and sewer easement.
The new resident: must meet all height requ::ements, setbacks, hardcover, structural lot
coverage and Grading requirements.
#2662 RYC HomeNRick Vogelgesmg
1080 Wildharsl Trail
Vnrmnce
1113,2001
Page 2
JAN-19-2001 09:e0 PN P.02
ApplicationeM�
Date Rutedved /
Amount PAW '75_QO
CITY OF ORONO - VARIANCE APPLICATION
Initial Application Fee $250.00
(E50.00 per each additional v' ianw)
Renewal Variance Fee $150.00
(no change from original application)
Variance for non -conforming structure& $250.00
,,.,a; -the -Fact Fees (Double application fee)
PROPERTY INFORMATION
Site Address go -
property Identif cation Number (P113 )
Attach legal description to application if not included on required au vcY.
Date Property AcquiredCinarYe��___(moothfyear)
1 (do) (do not) also own the adjacent parcels of land.
Present use of property: ✓tesidendel other (specify)
Zoning District: I P l tS
APPLICANT Phone (hrnne) Olil
Name (ZVC. 1'lor^" Phone(work) 4l2- 329-rrrO! _
Address:/-rro &Aom& dk✓ Salk/ao3 City: WMlzMdH Zip:47T"fj/
OWNER (if different than applicant) Phone (home)
'.._
Name Phone (Work)
Address: City:-- Zip:
DESCRIPTION OF AEOUEST Estimated Constm•.tion Cost E•�-SO.u�
-.T
Describe request in detell: (' n 1Jt Rags %1 Or n.arsTW4
^.�
(attach additional sheets if necessary)
y
VARIANCES REQUIRE
Width Hardcover T.ot Coverage
Lot Area Lot — -
_ Setback: Front _ Side _ Rmr Average Lakeshore
Other (specify)
HARDS®P/DESCRP'TTON OF UNUSUAL PROPERTY CONDIYIONS
Describe undue hardship or pmcn;al difficulty or unusual property conditions preventing
compliance with Zoning Code tequiremsnts:_ ,2a'• ,--arsdJu(tes"AL
!
arxts/tr r ax s 1 AjA, n .aR4
(attach additional sheen If necessary)
ter t: r l LJL; pi Sm r.i
for Roy E 0e41nn
It lcs 5 u'0 6, (OffKAt IEx OAROLAS
Nennenln county. xlnnesoce
i
p•.
}tom
sr,•ar!
•,t
i
t
4
�rY1:��M f7 �:.Y "' (Y.J•• ��C'.: TV C..! i`..
I n•rch. <ort L'y tn,, ^'t 11 a Erne an0 carroct repreteotlt,on of a
a' Loss 5 end 6, IO11wA l7iP WROERS. xeanepry ln [oen. Rl........ en0
i•tlnq he'lefn7% t no. •wt p"port to sno•, en+ other It,"ro
.enLa other Lnan ;lS101e •Ee rO[o+sr•,
t
4
�rY1:��M f7 �:.Y "' (Y.J•• ��C'.: TV C..! i`..
I n•rch. <ort L'y tn,, ^'t 11 a Erne an0 carroct repreteotlt,on of a
a' Loss 5 end 6, IO11wA l7iP WROERS. xeanepry ln [oen. Rl........ en0
i•tlnq he'lefn7% t no. •wt p"port to sno•, en+ other It,"ro
.enLa other Lnan ;lS101e •Ee rO[o+sr•,
Ce/t ✓, qte of Surer/
/Or ROY E 04atnn
et lIf 5 an! {, YenKAYIEY GAROEN5
Nennapin Ceunti. Nlnnesott
16
r'rew. GaFo:
\� C'norely C.rtlfr that L:: IIs a trve the Correct ropre{eat,t:en of
e and 6, TOOKAY:[l; GROfNS, Nennepin count,, filled. tt, me
ialny oundIll; :':HCo.: aoet not e,.rpert to Soar en• other Ind \ dents other then Visible •n Veco,vr•,
l _w
Certificateof Survey
for Roy E. Benson
of Lots 5 and 6, fONKAYIEN GARDENS
Hennepin County, Minnesota
1,
4
�y
a,
tl
Rw qa
t
I Sa_
1
�co
�
-3oadw
I
t hereby certify that this Is a true and correct repr
of Lots 5 and 6, TGHXAy:E4 GAkDEHS, Hennepin County,
isting buildings thereon. It does not purport to show
Bents other than visible 'hardcover'.
Scale : I' . 30'
Date 4-5-89
0 Iron marker
Cart l f icate of Survey
for Roy E. Benson
of Lots 5 and 6, TONKAVIEN GARDENS
Hennepin County, Minnesota
/086 WilC14U ->f l; (:'
IVAS 11E1A MS BEEN
OCppFUMEB
a-u'
naa Tkf
/to qQ.s
l.oK
rc )a,
H,erory..•r.e
feoy !
3)sK
rebv certify that this is a true and correct representation of a survey of the covrcaries
ots 5 and 6, TONKAV:E!l GAUENS, Hennepin County, iii nnesota, and the location 0- an, ea-
ng buildings thereon. It does not purport to show any other lop. ovements or er.c-oach-
s other than visible "hardcover".
e : O
. 30' COFFIN S GRONnERG, INC. = O
a-5-89
Iron marker
Engineers.
Land
Lonl Leers, land Surveyors and Planners
Lon lake, Ili nnesU is
IOM W NAlIUNST
ONONO
LM 5 & 0 WNNA VIEW OAMLNS
P
R 5 ELEVATION
Y/I.irvM10M1•f1Y,
=pr�ax e[br vel
v[
i ME
r•�
/
••.
�
n
NOTG9�
��ur�urnu•er
IY2n�mw -:•%r-ter r[
•r[w n�
a
}
urw..�ar
m9C.T�1lJ.^
�
v,• •c
r
NIIlmY1l iGCitrYf.'i•P'�Cl'[ �
4 •b •.t,y
CJ'i[
DLOLK FCIRMONGiNO LMMIT�
uY r�rtMw.fY�r
FTr.l..
dfld�L
VwYpll
�IM
fop y 5eLTON °A°
A
NB4.IICfd
Nr
I
f Tx•
nY
rr
rY mf
a
_
¢iSG
i
i _____ ___
I
I
pi
Y
V
P exx r nmY
PnyO
I
KQGCM
f
<�
TT
JAM'
•Y
nr Y✓
Y'f
.I
T'
`
WIWRWM
LAW3
�
• x•xex
�
1
Y
c
:E
y
./
'iY
+.rn 1mT Tnw
x•
1
____________
Z
ern
_
YmcM
�
xun
"ngtl
i
wrwa l
T+r
r7w
w
g I
mis 1
I
I
nrr�N
2
.,n•�
,f,Y
rY M
M I/
If
rN nT
'H
—
T�
' I W Yumnrtn e�T.nxl
N
MY
4
•Ym.I O,•wwn
MM
•,P ��m ws,•
m
,rY
._
___
_
FIRST
FLOOR FLAN
....vwry
a
OOR PLAN
h, ..
--
�tLei 0, 1
01
;;
�
I
II k� E
cur acc aaow
I
opr
r
I
%L I
* k
_
T.
�...�..�
k
----�—I
___—____- II
I
I I I
I
I I I
hk
---------- — --
z
3---�
M ,M fI
M.'
-- - - - -- 13ENT PLANANMENT FAT L N
HARDCOVER CALCULA 1VORKSHEET E
SETBACK ZONE: (CIRCLE ONE) 0.75' 5-250' 250-500' 500-1000,
P.XlqTING HARDCOVER IN ZONE
A. House _ x a S.F.
Length width
x . S.F.
x _ S.F.
x _ S.F.
B. Garage _ x S.F.
C. Driveway x S.F.
x - S.F.
D. Sidewalk x S.F.
_ x - S.F.
E. Patio/Deck x - HcYu S.F.
x = S.F.
F. Landscape x _ - L�o S.F.
Underlain x - S.F.
By Plastic x S.F.
G. Other x - _ S.F.
CA
TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE - ma's- S.F. A
TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE '3a.lfs L- S.F. B
A 11(0(f r B '3'1 x 100 - _ ';c•� %
A B x 100 - %
PROPOSED HARDCOVER IN ZONE /I
A. House x S.F.
oath wWih
x - _ S.F.
x - S.F.
x - S.F.
B. Garage 3) x -7, ILI S.F.
C. Driveway �OD x /L/ - 8`TC S.F.
x - S.F.
D. Sidewalk `lo x 910 S.F.
x &F.
P�JF
E. PatioMeck x 7 S.F. t�}'
x S.F.
F. Landscape i S`O x Z - cDJ S.F. V ki
Underlain x - - S.F.
By Plastic x - SYN"-
G. Other x - S.F. ((��
TOTAL HARDCOVER IN ZONE - A4 �0y S.F. A •?POOL
TOTAL PROPERTY AREA IN ZONE - —�� S.F. B .��7�/
A N 107. . B ou-
A OCi (. x 100 - °A I I.O
12
CITY of ORONO
\\ 'd •tip. ' Municipal Offices street Address: MallinY Address:
��E61ti0��+ 2750 Kelley Parkway P.O. Bar 66
Orono, MN 55356 Crystal Bay, MN 55323.0066
HARDCOVER ORDINANCE - In 1975, the Orono City Council adopted an ordinance
limiting the percentage of lot area that can be covered with impervious surface ("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 urbanized
areas have a detrimental 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.
Hardcover Zones - Allowed Percentages:
0-75 Oa/o
75.250' 25%
250-300' 30%
500-1000' 35%
Hardcover includes:
- Roofs
- Sidewalks
- Paved or gravel driveways
- Patios & decks (includes slatted decks)
- Tops of retaining walls & rock walls
- Decorative landscape areas underlain by plastic sheeting or fabric
- Any other surface that noes not allow direct absorption of rainfall into
the ground
INSTRUCTIONS FOR COMPLETING HARDCOVER CALCULATION WORKSHEET
1. Circle which setback zone (0-75. 75-250', etc.) the calculation is for.
2. For each item of hardcover within that zone, enter the length and width, and multiply
to get square footage (s.f).
3. Add up all the square footages to get total square footage of hardcover.
4. Divide by the total area of property within the zone and multiply by 100 to get
percentage of hardcover in the zone.
5. If changes in hardcover are proposed, you should do a "before" worksheet Md "after
worksheet. If either results in percentages greater than those allowed. contact City staff
before proceeding with your project planning!
Telephone (612) 2494600 • Fea (612) 2494616 11
N
sy
U Y-CMRSTI F OR
g Z
e EILEEN ST S a3 n
� � OV'O fit• R
< 0 i0
m
'-
ITM`� 400 E Y / t'. [A474 .Si ID
�4115 I EAT DE RO
etr e
d
Sr � tT ' SUEbbs. 9 uSsus.
FLN
FOX
$ �.WrS6
(ESi /RANCH RR'- y'ri 9lE 1
NO
151
Ab,F wa e` Nor t a� � 1lFaswelJ
on eOAHL RO �W\ **-
\\F4yIi1QSWe l, '.
0
�u 3A7 \ \1- C ;BQy
rFores'tERANDW�s o`
y ,
Lake'
SkogsbrrgPaint s•_� °'
99
•RCM NAOA a
West . 4
ORONO
0 Arm
y� Shad aad PAW
VO
ne.�wrao
P, SUWp
FagernusPdnf
e°exs•.
PONT'Q '
ILA
NL
' Crystal gp Bohn
O 1 .• •
Bay
ILRON
., � 'SprinAIIprin I • $ 7N F
g
.� Park u"a
Hennepin County Map Smer
Page 1 of 1
G,
Hennepin C-ounh. Minnesota
07-117-23.24-0011 1, 1321t. 43.376 sq.it. = 0.996
acres
/OS'D CJ,'/clAU45*
PERMST RECORD
Permit No. Date Type of Permit
/l.&A:1..4—
S797 -- --- a-/D -s-------�
r
Martin and Nan Nimerfroh
Mrs. Harriet Morgart
Mr. Michael McKenney
999 Wildhurst Poll
1003 Wildhurst Trail
1045 Wildhurst Trail
Orono MN 55364
Orono MN 55364
Orono MN 55364
Mr. and Mrs. Sieff
Mr. Harvey Schultz
John and Cindy Culliton
1080 Wildhurst Trail
1085 Wildhurst Trail
1131 ll'ildhurst Trail
Orono AN 55364
Orono .10!55364
Orono. ^'55364
Mr. and Mrs. Lyle Rahn
Brian and Sandra Rasmussen
Mr. Peter Martinson
1146 Wildhurst Trail'
i i 86 Wildhurst Trail
4460 Forest Lake Landing
OronoM7V55364
OronoMN55364
Orono.L1N55364
Mr. Jon Blackstone
Mr. and Mrs. Richard Walter ,�..'
Mr. Ray Hurley
4465 For cst Lakc Landing
4470 Forest Lake Landing
4475 Forest Lake Landing
Orono AN 55364
Orono MN 55364
Orono MN 55364
Mr. and Mrs. Loren Schoenzeit
John and Karen Prew
FrekdJill�I�ke4480
Forest Lake Landing
4490 Forest Lake Landing
41Drive
Orono MN 55364
OronoMN55364
Or4
Mr. & Mrs. Michael Wear
Mr. & Mrs. D. Timp
1134 Wildhurst Trail
1074 Wildhurst Trail
Mound, MN 55364
Mound, Mn 55364
r., ,.,,,,, •rct$t1N�
FEB 2 6 2000
REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION
Ott v ur
utliNrO DATE: February 26, 2001
ITEM NO.: / j
Department Approval: Administrator Reviewed: Agenda Section:
Name Greg Gappa Public Services Directors Report
Tale Director of Public Services
Item Description: Bid Award - Equipment & Materials Bid 2001
The City of Orono advertised for two successive weeks for street materials and equipment rental,
with bid opening at 1:00 P.M. Friday, February 9, 2001.
The enclosed tabulation contains a complete accounting of all bids. For comparison purposes I
have also included a copy of the 2000 bid tabulation.
The accepted low bids for materials are determined by availability and location of materials.
Traveling distance to a supplier is considered a cost factor when determining a low bid.
When renting equipment with an operator, we are guided by the type, size of equipment, and an
hourly rate. It is possible to award the low bid to more than one contractor when considering
materials and equipment.:r, order to stimulate enthusiasm frr the following year's work, we make
sure to divide the work accordingly among these low bidders.
In the event the low bidder is not available, the City reserves the right to purchase from the next
alternate.
COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED:
I recommend that the City Council accept the bids as presented for the calendar year 2001
rd
TO: Greg Gappa, Public Services Director
FROM: Jack Brinkhaus, Public Works Supervisor
DATE: February 26, 2001
SUBJECT: Bid Award - Equipment & Materials Bid 2001
The City of Orono advertised for two successive weeks for street materials and equipment rental,
with bid opening at 1:00 P.M., Friday, February 9, 2001.
The enclosed tabulation contains a complete accounting of all bids. For comparison purposes I
have also included a copy of the 2000 bid tabulation.
The accepted low bids for materials are determined by availability and location of materials.
Traveling distance to a supplier is considered a cost factor when determining a low bid.
When renting equipment with an operator, we are guided by the type, size of equipment, and an
hourly rate. It is possible to award the low bid to more than one contractor when considering
materials and equipment. In order to stimulate enthusiasm for the following year's work, we make
sure to divide the work accordingly among these low bidders.
In the event the low bidder is not available, the City reserves the right to purchase from the next
alternate.
I recommend that the City Council accept the bids as presented for the calendar year 2001.
rd
CITY OF ORONO
2001 BID TABULATIONS FOR STREFT M,iTERIALS & EQUIPMENT RENTAL
ALL QUANTITIES ARE BID IN TONS - EQUIPMENT IS BID PER HOURLY RATE
CLASS 5 GRAVEL
TON
PIT DEL.
CLASS 5 GRAVEL
TON
RECYCLED
PIT DEL.
FA-2 CLASS C
(SEAL COAT)
TON
PIT DEL.
FA-1
(WINTER SAND)
TON
PIT DEL.
Barton Sand & Gravel Co.
6.28
9.53
6.71
9.96
6.71
9.96
Buf£alb Bituminous
3.60*
7.75*
5.25
8.75
Midwest Asphalt Cor .
5.35
8.59*
SA -AG Inc.
--1
1
5.%•
William Mueller Est3
.66
8.66
1 5.05*
10.05
10.05*
I5.05*
3.26•
8.26
* Denotes low bid
CITY OF ORONO
2001 BID TABULATIONS FOR STREET MATERIALS & EQUIPMENT RENTAL
ALL QUANTITIES ARE BID IN TONS - EQUIPMENT IS BID PER HOURLY RATE
1 1/2' CLEAN
CRUSHED LIMESTONE
TON
PIT DEL.
1 1/2' MINUS
CRUSHED LIMESTONE
TON
PIT DEL.
3/4' CLEAN
CRUSHED LIMESTONE
TON
PIT DEL.
3/4' MINUS
CRUSHED LIMESTONE
TON
PIT DEL.
Soma Stand & Gravel
25.56
28.81
1
21.83
25.08
Bryan Rock Products
9.25
13.30•
S.90
9.95•
9.25
13.30•
5.90
9.950
William Mueller &Sons
9.05*
14.05
80 S.•
10.80
9.05'
14.05
5.80•
10.80
MC 30, 70, 250, 800
GALLON
PLANT DEL. &
PLACED
CRS - 1 & 2
GALLON
PLANT DEL. & PLACED
RC 250-800
GALLON
PLANT DEL. & PLACED
William Mueller & Sons
2.50*
Denotes low Aid
CITY OF ORONO
2001 BID TABULATIONS FOR STREET MATERIALS & EQUIPMENT RENTAL
ALL QUANTITIES ARE BID IN TONS - EQUIPMENT IS BID PER HOURLY RATE
2331 AC
2331 MC
PLANT
TON
DELIVERED
PLACED
PLANT
TON
DELIVERED
PLACED
Buffalo Bituminous
23.00*
26.25'
28.65'
Commercial Asphalt
28.06
Midwest Asphalt
26.00
27.50
30.50
William Mueller & Sons
26.64
31.64
34.95
2341 MC
TON
PLANT
D
PLANT
DELIVERED
PLACED
Buffalo Bituminous
23.00*'
U31.(A
Commercial Asphalt
28.06
Midwest As halt
26.00
William Mueller & Sons
26.64
* Denotes low bid
CITY OF ORONO
2001 BID TABULATIONS FOR STREET MATERIALS & EQUIPMENT RENTAL
ALL QUANTITIES ARE BID IN TONS - EQUIPMENT IS BID PER HOURLY RATE
MOZAC
PLANT ED
MOD. FINE MIX
2341 MC
TON
PLANT DEL. PLACED
50 - 50
2341 AC/MC
TON
PLANT DEL. PLACED
Bufdo Bituminous
24.10•
5•
commercial fthalt
29.39
Midwest Asphalt
26.50
28.00
31.90
WIIIWn Mueller & Sons
27.70
32.70
36.00
• Denotes low hid
CITY OF ORONO
2001 BID TABULATIONS FOR STREET MATERIALS & EQUIPMENT RENTAL
ALL QUANTITIES ARE BID IN TONS - EQUIPMENT IS BID PER HOURLY RATE
ALL PRICES TO
BE DELIVERED
12" CMP
16 GAUGE
15" CMP
16 GAUGE
18" CMP
16 GAUGE
24" CMP
14 GAUGE
24" CMP
16 GAUGE
36" CMP
14 GAUGE
48" CMP
12 GAUGE
60" CMP
10 GAUGE
All Steel Products
8.00*
10.00*
12.00*
20.00*
16.00*
30.00*
55.00*
86.00*
Johnston Ps
8.50
10.50
12.50
20.50
16.50
30.50
55.50
86.50
ALL PRICES TO
BE DELIVERED
All Steel Products
12"
APRON
39.00*
15"
APRON
49.00*
18"
APRON
65.00*
24"
APRON
96.00*
36"
APRON
270.00*
48"
APRON
670.000
60"
APRON
1t00.00*
Johnston Far o
40.50
50.50
65.50
100.50
300.50
700.50
1200-50
24"
BAND
36"
BAND
48"
BAND
60"
BAND
ALL PRICES TO
BE DELIVERED
12"
BAND
15"
BAND
18"
BAND
All Steel Products
luhnstot. Faro
9.00*
12.50
12.00*
15.50
15.00*
18.50
24.00*
24.50
46.50
45.50*
90.00
93.00*
129.000
129.50
* Denotes low hid
CITY OF ORONO
2001 BID TABULATIONS FOR STREET MATERIALS & EQUIPMENT RENTAL
ALL QUANTITIES ARE BID IN TONS - EQUIPMENT IS BID PER HOURLY RATE
TRUCK RENTAL
PER HOUR
CY RATE
TRUCK RENTAL
PER HOUR
CY RATE
TRUCK RENTAL
PER HOUR
CY RATE
TRUCK RENTAL
PER HOUR
CY RATE
No Bidders
• Dmfts low bid
CITY OF ORONO
2001 BID TABULATIONS FOR STREET MATERIALS & EQUIPMENT RENTAL
ALL QUANTITIES ARE BID IN TONS - EQUIPMENT IS BID PER HOURLY RATE
BACKHOE
BACKHOE
BACKHOE
PER HOUR
PER HOUR
PER HOUR
CY RATE
CY RATE
CY RATE
No Ridders
3/4 TON PICKUP
W/8 PLOW PER HOUR
No Bidders
WHEEL LOADER
PER HOUR
CY RATE
WHEEL LOADER
PER HOUR
CY RATE
WHEEL LOADER
PER HOUR
CY RATE
No Bidders
• Denotes low bid
CITY OF ORONO
2000 BID TABULATIONS FOR STREET MATERIALS & EQUIPMENT RENTAL
ALL QUANTITIES ARE BID IN TONS- EQUIPMENT IS BID PER HOURLY RATE
CLASS 5 GRAVEL
TON
PIT DEL.
CLASS 5 GRAVEL
TON
RECYCLED
PIT DEL.
FA-2 CLASS C
(SEAL COAT)
TON
PIT DEL.
FA -I
(WINTER SAND)
TON
PIT DEL.
Wm Mueller& Sons
3.66
9.26
4.60'
9.20
10.05•
14.65•
3.00
7.60
Barton Sand & Gravel Co.
5.01
7.61
5.54
8.14
4.47
6.50
Midwest Asphalt Co .
5.27
7.95'
SA -AG Inc.
2.02•
5.3G'
Buffalo Bituminous
3.40'
6.75•
5.35
8.75
• Denotes low bid
CITY OF ORONO
2000 BID TABULATIONS FOR STREET MATERIALS & EQUIPMENT RENTAL
ALL QUANTITIES ARE BID IN TONS - EQUIPMENT IS BID PER HOURLY RATE
1 112' CLEAN
CRUSIIED LIMESTONE
TON
PIT DEL.
11/2' MINUS
CRUSIICD LIMESTONE
TON
PIT DEL.
3/4' CLEAN
CRUSIICD LIMESTONE
TON
PIT DEL.
3/4' MINUS
CRUSIIED LIMESTONE
TON
PIT DEL.
_
Bryan Rock Produces
8.55
12.50
5.60*
9.55*
8.55
12.50*
W m Mueller & Sons
7.42*
12.02*
5.80
10.40
7.99*
12.59
5.80
10.40
MC 30, 70. 250, 800
GALLON
PLANT DEL. & PLACED
CRS - 1 & 2
GALLON
PLANT DEL. & PLACED
RC 250-800
GALLON
PLANT DEL. & PLACED
Wm Mueller & Sons
2.10*
Midwest Asphalt
4.00*
* Denotes low bid
CITY OF ORONO
2000 BID TABULATIONS FOR STREET MATERIALS & EQUIPMENT RENTAL
ALL QUANTITIES ARE BID IN TONS - EQUIPMENT IS BID PER HOURLY RATE
2311 AC
TON
DELIVERED
PLACED
PLANT
2331 MC
TON
DELIVERED
PLACED
PLANT
Commercial Asphalt
25.56
Wm Mueller & Sons
23.45
28.00
31.50
Midwest Asphalt
26.00
27.50
27.70*
Buffalo Bituminous
22.50*
26.25*
30.75
PLANT
2341 AC
TON
DELIVERED
PLACED
PLANT
2341 MC
TON
DELIVERED
PLACED
Wm Mueller & Sons
23.45
28.00
31.50
Midwest Asphalt
26.00
27.50
27.95*
Commercial Asphalt
25.56
Buffalo Bituminous
23.00*
26.75*
31.25
* Denoles low bid
CITY OF ORONO
2000 BID TABULATIONS FOR STREET MATERIALS & EQUIPMENT RENTAL
ALL QUANTITIES ARE BID IN TONS - EQUIPMENT IS BID PER HOURLY RATE
- MOD. FINE MIX
2341 AC
TON
PLANT DEL. PLACED
MOD. FINE MIX
2341 MC
TON
PLANT DEL. PLACED
50 - 50
2341 AC/MC
TON
PLANT DEL. PLACED
W m Mueller & Sons
24.45
29.00
32.50
Midwest Asphalt
26.00
27.50•
28.90•
Cummcrcial As shall
26.63
Buffalo Bituminous
24.00•
27.75
32.25
+ Denotes low bid
CITY OF ORONO
2000 BID TABULATIONS FOR STREET MATERIALS & EQUIPMENT RENTAL
ALL QUANTITIES ARE BID IN TONS - EQUIPMENT IS BID PER HOURLY RATE
ALL PRICES TO
BE DELIVERED
12' CMP
16 GAUGE
15" CMP
16 GAUGE
I8" CMP
16 GAUGE
24" CMP
14 GAUGE
24" CMP
16 GAUGE
36" CMP
14 GAUGE
48" CMP
12 GAUGE
60" CMP
10 GAUGE
Johnston Faro
8.00*
10.00*
12.00*
20.00*
16.00*
30.00*
55.00*
86.00*
All Steel Products
8.00*
10.00*
12.00*
20.00*
16.00*
30.00*
55.00*
86.00*
ALL PRICES TO
BE DELIVERED
12"
APRON
15"
APRON
18"
APRON
24"
APRON
36"
APRON
48"
APRON
60"
APRON
Johnson Farms_
All Steel Products
40.00
39.00*
50.00
49.00*
65.00*
65.00*
100.00
96.00*
300.00
270.00*
700.00
670.00*
1200.00*
1200.00*
ALL PRICES TO
BE DELIVERED
12"
BAND
IS"
BAND
181,
BAND
24"
BAND
36"
BAND
48"
BAND
60"
BAND
Johnston Faro
12.00
15.00
18.00
24.00
45.00*
82.50*
129.00*
All Steel Products
9.00*
12.00*
15.00*
23.00*
46.00
90.00
180.00
* Denotes low bid
CITY OF ORONO
20001111) TABULATIONS FOR STREET MATERIALS & EQUIPMENT RENTAL
ALL QUANTITIES ARE BID IN TONS - EQUIPMENT IS BID PER HOURLY RATE
TRUCK RENTAL
PER HOUR
CY RATE
TRUCK RENTAL
PER HOUR
CY RATE
TRUCK RENTAL
PER HOUR
CY RATE
TRUCK RENTAL
PER HOUR
CY RATE
Schoening Excavatinlp
12
44.00-
. Denies low bid
CITY OF ORONO
2000 BID TABULATIONS FOR STREET MATERIALS & EQUIPMENT RENTAL
ALL QUANTITIES ARE DID IN TONS - EQUIPMENT IS BID PER HOURLY RATE
BACKHOE
PER HOUR
CY RATE
BACKHOE
PER HOUR
CY RATE
BACKHOE
PER HOUR
CY RATE
Schoening Excavating
3/4
70.00•
1
75-00.
3/4 TON PICKUP
W/3 PLOW PER HOUR
Schoening Excavating 45.00/hr•
WIIEEI, LOADER
PER HOUR
CY RATE
WHEEL, LOADER
PER HOUR
CY RATE
WHEEL LOADER
PER HOUR
CY RATE
Schoening Excavatin
3
70.00•
- Denotes low hid
e111
N1,
REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION
„
6 10 DATE: February 26, 2001
FEB VMVMO ITEM NO.:
Department Approval: Administrator Reviewed: Agenda Section:
Name Gregory A. Gappa Public Services Director's Report
Title Director of Public Services
2001
In 2000, we solicited quotations for annual park mowing services from several area firms
Shaughnessy Lawn Services of Orono provided the lowest quote of $13,900 for this service. This
firm did an excellent job last year, and we were very satisfied with the service that a as provided.
They are interested renewing their quotation for another year with an increase of S400 to cover
increased fuel and labor costs. This is a very reasonable increase, and we are recommending
acceptance of the quotation of $14,300 from Shaubl:...,sy fawn Service for year 2001 park
mowing.
COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED:
Motion to accept quotation from Shaughnessy Lawn Service, Orono Minnesota for the 2001
season, park mowing in the amount of $14,300.
,.e�sN6 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION
FEB26W
U,,UNU
DATE: February 26, 2001
ITEM NO.: //
Department Approval: Administrator Reviewed: Agenda Section:
Name Gregory A. Gappa Public services Director's Report
Title Director of Public Services e12
Assessment for St. t'awarn's Cnurcn
In 1999. St. Edward's Church, located on North Ferndale Road, was connected to sewer and
water service from the City of Plymouth per the terms of an agreement approved by both Cities.
The church is billed directly by Plymouth for sewer and water service. in 1999. the City of
Plymouth assessed the church $3,696 for sewer and water connection charges. This assessment
was supposed to begin in the year 2000. It was recently discovered that this assessment was never
levied against the property by Hennepin County because the parcel is not in the City of Plymouth.
This assessment has to be levied by Orono because the property is located in Orono.
The City of Orono currently has an assessment of approximately $13,000 against the church for
costs to extend the se.,er across North Ferndale Road to the church property. This work was
completed in conjunction with the North Ferndale Road reconstruction project. The attached
resolution revises the original assessment to include the Plymouth connection charges beginning
in 2001. These charges will be assessed for four years at a 6.5% interest rate to match the original
assessment time period and interest rate.
There are two methods for Plymouth to recover their money from this assessment. One method
would be to send Plymouth a check every year, for the next four years, in the amount of the
principal and interest received from Hennepin County. An easier method would be to send
Plymouth a check for $3,696 for the entire amount of the connection charges, and then Orono
retains the principal and interest payment from the County every year. This method has been used
previously, as sewer connection charges to both the Cities of Long lake and Minnetonka Beach
have been paid up -front then assessed to the property owners.
We are recommending approval of the attached resolution adopting the supplemental assessment
roll and approval to send Plymouth a check for the entire $3,696 connection charge.
COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED:
Approval of the resolution adopting the supplemental assessment for St. Edward's Church Sewer
and Water Service to include the City of Plymouth Connection Charges.
Approval of payment of $3,696 to the City of Plymouth for Sewer and Water Connection Charges
for St. Edward's Church with this cost to be reimbursed to the City of Orono through m- St.
Edward's Church supplemental assessment for sewer and water service connection charges.
A RESOLUTION ADOPTING THE
SUPPLEMENTAL ST. EDWARDS CHURCH
SANITARY SEVER AND WATER SERVICE
ASSESSMENT ROLL
WHEREAS, the property owner has signed a petition for a local improvement requesting
completion of an assessment project for sauitwn sewer and water sen ice improvements.
WHEREAS, on November 8, 1999 the Orono City Council approved Resolution #4381
adopting Assessment Levy # 14807 beginning in theyear 2000 with a principal amount of$ 13,993.00
for five (5) years at an annual interest rate of 6.5 % for costs associated with sewer and water service
extension to the property.
WHEREAS, the City ofOrono wishes to amend Assessment Levy # 14807 to add $3,696.00,
as Project #2236 to this assessment for City of Plymouth sewer and water connection charges, to
be assessed beginning in year 2001. This supplemental assessment amount will be at the same
interest rate and time period as Assessment Levy 914807.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of Orono, Minnesota.
Such proposed assessment, a copy of which is attached hereto and made a part hereof, is
hc-iby accepted and shall contribute the special assessment against the land named therein,
and each tract of land therein includes is hereby found to be benefitted by the proposed
improvement in the amount of the assessment levied against it.
2. Such supplemental assessment shall be payable in equal annual installments extending over
a period of 4 years, the first of the installments to be payable on or before the first Monday
in January 2001 and shall bear interest at the rate of 6.5%per annum from January 1, 2001
through December 31, 2001. To each subsequent installment when due shall be added
interest for one year on all unpaid installments.
3. The owner of any property so assessed may, at any time, pay to the City Treasurer the entire
amount of the assessment remain -
a,; "paid, w;th interest accrued to December 31 of the
year in which such payment is made. Such payment must be made before November 15 or
interest will be charged though December 31 of the next succeeding year. Partial payment
Page 1 of 2
may be allowed in accordance with ordinances which are existing or which the City may
choose to adopt in the future.
4. The Clerk shall forthwith transmit a certified duplicate of this assessment to the County
Auditor to be extended on the property tax list of the County. Such assessments shall be
collected and paid over in the same manner as other municipal taxes.
Adopted by the City Council of Orono this 26th day of February, 2001.
ATTEST:
Linda S. Vee, City Clerk
Barbara A. Peterson, Mayor
Page 2 of 2
Supplemental Assessment
36Febroary-01
Municipal Code: 38
Municipality: ORONO
Project Number: 99-3
Levy Number: 14807
Levy Description: St. Edwards Church Sanimn Sewer and Watermain
Total Project Assessment:
53,696.00
Interest Ruts 6.5 % Number of Years Payable: 4
Levy 0 PID a
Total
Lot Block Name Street Property Address
Mailing Street Address --
Principal
d
Mailing City Address
14807 25-118-23 44
0002 53,696.00
St. Edwards Episcopal 865 Ferndale Road North
865 Ferndale Road North I
Church
Wayrata, MN 55391
53,696.00
1
Page I
„ear tP,
2 6 � REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION
FE9
tisst Jr
AH D DATE: February 22, 2001
ITEM NO: / f
Department Approval: Administrator Reviewed: Agenda Section:
Name Ron Momse City Administratofs
Title City Administrator b4 Report
Item Description: Administrative Support Assistant Appointment
The process of hiring a replacement for the Administrative Support Assistant position has been
completed. The top candidate is Denise Leskinen. Denise has worked for the City in a temporary
capacity perforating many of the duties of the Administrative Support Assistant position, and has
done an outstanding job. Staff is recommending she be appointed to the Administrative Support
Assistant position on a permanent basis.
COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED:
Motion to appoint Denise Leskinen to the position of Administrative Support Assistant at the pay
rate of S 13.70 per hour, which is Step I of Level 4 of the Administrative Support/Technical/Public
Works Employee Pay Schedule, effective February 20, 2001.
REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION
Department Approval:
Name Ron Moorse
Title City Administrator
Item Description: Plannir
DATE: February 23, 2001
ITEM NO: /'
Administrator Reviewed: Agenda Section:
G� City Administrator's
Report
::ommission Appointments
The City Council at its February 22 work session discussed the candidates who were interviewed for
the vacancy on the Planning Commission. The Council was impressed by the large number of high
quality candidates who air willing to volunteer their time sr.! talents to tie City through service on
the Planning Commission. The Council may at this tic ie formally make the appointment to fill the
existing vacancy on the Planning Commission.
The Council also discussed the appointment of several carob isles to serve as alternate members of
the Commission. The consensus of the Council is that three alte.mate members should be appointed.
Council may at this time formally appoint three candidates as alternate members of the Planning
Commission.
COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED:
Motion to appoint to fill the unexpired term on the Planning
Commission that expires on March 31, 2002.
2. Motion to appoint three candidates as alternate members of the Planning Commission.
Zoo
REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION
GIT cx C)NUNO
DATE: February 22, 2001
ITEM NO: /
Department Approval:
Administrator Reviewed: Agenda Section:
Name Ron Moore
/,�/ City Administrators
Title City Administrator
/f/ Report
Item Description: Scheduling of a Work Session
There are a number of issues for Council discussion at a work session. rhese include the following:
• Update regarding Highway 12 aesthetic design issues
• Update regarding the City's telecommunications antenna ordinance
• Update regarding the annual property revaluation process conducted for the City by
the County Assessor
• Review of goals for the year and action plans for accomplishing them
Scheduling options for the work session are:
— Thursday, March 8
— Thursday, March 15
COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED:
Motion to select a date and time for a Council work session.
REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION
,�rtZ�NG
r,,,,,,�• �O DATE: February 222, 2001
FE8 Abu UNp ITEM NO: 17
C"
Department Approval: Administrator Reviewed: Agenda Section:
Name Lin Vee Ili {'1�/� Licenses
Title City Clerk _ 1L
Item Description: List of Licenses for
HOME OCCUPATION
Paulette Pickard Stuurrnans
(Massage Therapy)
550 Orono Orchard Road
RESIDENTIAL KENNEL LICENSE
1. Robin A. Kilbane
495 Oxford Road
2. Jayne Paasch
2150 Kentwood Way
3. John T. Redmond
2695 Casco Point Road
4. Chris and Erin Tully
1355 North Arm Drive
COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED:
Motion to approve/deny the above listed licenses.
APPLICATION FOR ANNUAL HOME OCCUPATION LICENSE
CITY OF ORONO
2750 KELLEY PARKWAY, P.O. BOX 66
CRYSTAL BAY, MN 55323
PHONE:
street
BUSINESS NAME: Mo
TYPE OF BUSINESS TO BE OPERATED: 'm.n /hr �A
Number of Employees Within Operation' If (provide names of empl ees on back of application)
Check One: Initial Review Fee $50.00� Annual Review Fee S:t0.00 _ �, I OVZ
License may be revoked if any violation occurs. City staff shall have five (5) business days in which to
investigate and make a recommendation pursuant to Orono Municipal Code Section 5.02 & 5.03. If a site
inspection is required by City staff, the review time will be extended to ten (10) business days. The license
application with staff recommendation will be scheduled before the Council at the next regularly scheduled
meeting held on the second and fourth Monday of each month.
ORONO MUNICIPAL CODE REGULATIONS ON HOME OCCUPATIONS
PURSUANT TO SECTION 10.20, SUBDIVISION 4 (C)
Prohit A Home Occupation Practices
i. It is unlawful for any business operating as a home occupation to engage in operation without
proper licenses.
2. All persons engaged in the business must reside in the dwelling.
3. No commercial signs permitted other than signs permitted in the residential Zone.
4. No excessive stock in trade may be stored on the premises.
5. Over the counter retail sales is not allowed.
6. Entrance to the home occupation must be gained from within the strocture.
The undersigned hereby agrees to the conditions quoted above from the Orono Municipal Cade and any
additional conditions the City may require.
SignatureofApplirsnt•�� O TJa mrtGn� � Date: ��-/G -06aoo
FOR C USE ONLY: After review of application, staf: recommends the following:
z. Approval of application Denial of application
Signature of Zoning Official: Date:
Signature of BuildingOfficial Date: / - 23 - o I
Application Date: Date License Approved: Date License Expired:
LISTING OF EMPLOYEES:
ADDRESS:
CITY & ZIP:
DATEOFBIRTH:
ADDRESS:
CITY & ZIP:
DATE OF BIRTH:
ADDRESS:
CITY & ZIP:
DATE OF TH:
ADDRESS:
CITY & ZIP:
NAME:
CITY&ZIP:
DATE OF BIRTH:
DATE OF BIRTH:
NAME:
ADDRESS:
CITY&ZIP:
DATE OF BIRTH:
NAME:
ADDRESS:
CITY&ZB':
DATE OF BIRTH: DATE OF BIRTH:
IVe, i - n -DI
KENNEL LICENSE APPLICATION
Effective January 1, 200_ to December 31, 200_
Owner:
Property Address:��I OY�
£mch
Dtailing Address (if diffcrenq: �Y In
Phone:
X RESIDENTIAL Kennel License Fee: $25.00
,,--(payment must accompany application)
Maximum No. of dogs to be kept at one ti
(over 6 months of age)
Principal Breed: �--a�
Purpose for more than 2dogs: -Ndd-
Dogs normally kept: A inside
kennel structure
COMMERCIAL Kennel License Fee: $150.00
(payment must accompany application)
Name of Business:
Business Activities:
(example: boarding, breeding, veterinary we, remil, etc.)
Normal Business Hours:
After Hours Contact: (name)
De; runs/exercise areas are: _inside _outside _both
The undersigned hereby makes application to the Orono City Council for a Kennel License as
specified on this form; the undersigned acknowledges that a kennel license is permissive only and
does not grant any authority to violate any provision of any Ci:; Ordinance or rrhsr law or
regulation; the undersigned hereby erants the City permission to inspect the premises prior to
license approval and at any other reasonable time during the license duration; and the undersigned
agrees to abide by the requirements of Municipal Code Chapter 5.36 including any special
conditions imposed by the City Council as part of any kennel license approval.
Date
For City Use Only
Kennel inspected by
Recommends: Approval_ Denial_
Property
KENNEL LICENSE APPLICATION
Effective January 1, 200_ to December 31, 200_
00 Y V r
(include city and zip)
Mailing Address (if different):
Phone: (home) ?Sd- M - 231ob (work)_
RESIDENTIAL Kennel License Fee: $25.00
(payment must accompany application)
Maximum No. of dogs to be kept at one t
(over 6 months of age)
Principal Breed: Vo RkSf[l E —Y
Purpose for more than 2 dogs: to
Dogs normally kept:inside _kennel structure
COD4Bi IERCIAL Kennel License Fee: $150.00
(payment must accompany application)
Name of Business:
Business Activities:
(example: boarding, breeding, veterinary care, recoil, etc.)
Normal Business Hours:
After Hours Contact:
(phone)
Dog runs/exercise areas are: _inside _outside _both
The undersigned hereby makes application to the Orono City Council for a Kennel License as
specified on this form; the undersigned acknowledges that a kennel license is permissive only and
does not grant any authority to violate any provision of any City Ordinance or other taw or
regulation; the undersigned hereby grants the City permission to inspect the premises prior to
license. approval and at any other reasonable time during the license duration; and the undersigned
agrees to abide by the requirements of Municipal Code Chapter 5.36 including any special
conditions imposed by the City Council as pan of any kennel license approval.
a-3-dl
Appli ant Date
For City We Only
Kennel inspected by _ Date.
Recommends: Approval_ Denial_
KENNEL LICENSE APPLICATIONS
Dogs and dog kennels are regulated by Chapter 5.36 of the Municipal Code of Ordinances.
No more than two dogs over three months of age can be kept on any property unless a kennel
license is obtained. `
All dogs kept in residential kennels must also be individually licensed by the City.
Kennel licenses will not be granted unless the property is fenced or contains a proper kennel
structure to prevent the dogs from running at large.
Kennel structures (dog houses and/or fenced runs) must be located at least 10 feet from any
abutting property line and must otherwise comply with ail accessory structure zoning
requirements. Kennel structures located within 30 feet of any neighboring property must be
licensed even if used for only 1 or 2 dogs.
Kennel licenses expire on December 31st of each year. Annual renewal applications are due
on or before December 1st of each year.
Kennel licenses may be denied or revoked for cause including unsanitary facilities, keeping
more dogs than the license authorizes, keepice unlicenced dogs, allowing dogs to run at large or
other nuisance complaints.
DEFLNITIONS
KENNEL, COMMERCIAL. A place or premises where three or more dogs over six months
of age are kept or housed at any one time for commercial purposes including sale, boarding,
breeding, grooming, training, or medical care.
KENNEL, RESIDENTIAL. An accessory residential use or place where three or more dogs
over six months of age are kept or housed for the sole non-commercial use, benefit or enjoyment
of the property owner or occupant.
x:NPPnWPWIN6MWPOMSIFOMISSKE ELION
KENNEL LICENSE APPLICATION
Effective January 1, 200_ to December 31, 200_ .I:','< (t `/ [•���
�. /� n cures; U:40F0
Owner: (�c Inc 'tQY+
Property Address:,2LTS Casco �Q D✓Cn^U , lyllti S$3 1 f
(include city and zip)
Mailing Address (if different):f
Phone: (home) _ _ — (work) /--�A� \�
RESIDENTIAL Kennel License Fee: $25.00
(payment must accompany application)
Maximum No. of dogs to be kept at one time:_
(over 6 months of age) II (I I I
Principal Breed:
Purpose for more than 2 dogs: vim.
Dogs normally kept: —inside 2 kennel
COIN IERCIAL Kennel License Fee: $150.00
(payment must accompany application)
Name of Business: _
Business Activities:
(example: boarding, breeding, veterinary care, retail, etc.)
Normal Business Hours:
After Hours Contact: (name)
Dog runs/exercise areas are: _inside _outside [i6otn
The undersigned hereby makes application to Orono City Council for a Kennel License as
specified on this form; the undersigned acknowledges that a kennel license is permissive only and
does not grant any authority to violate any provision of any City Ordinance or other law or
regulation; the undersigned hereby grants the City permission to inspect the premises prior to
license approval and at any other reasonable time during the license duration; and the undersigned
agrees to abide by the requirements of Municipal Code Chapter 5.36 including any special
conditions imposed by the City Council as pan ofyeJ^kennel license approval.
1
Applicant Date
.'or City Use Only
Kennel inspected by Dare
Recommends: Approval__ Denial_
4NNEL LICENSE APPLICATION
Effeca.. January 1, 200 into December -'1, 200
Owner:
Property Address: 1 -�j�G I�1 n-VM,1 41 V--'
(include city and zip)
Mailing Address (if different): --
Phone: (home) 14i,4— LJ-7.g2 (work)
RESIDENTIAL Kennel License Fee: $25.00
(payment must accompany application) \)
MaxitnumNo. of dogs to be kept atone time:
(over 6 monde or age)
Principal Breed:-tf-
Purpose for more than 2 dogs: [ f'flir.i Maw CY—CA+t dnr , 1
Dogs normally kept: inside _kennel structure
COMMERCIAL Kennel License Fee: $150.00
(payment must accompany application)
Name of Business:
Business Activities,
(example: boarding, breeding, veterinary care, retail, em.)
Normal Business Hours:
After Hours Contact:
J�
Dog runs/exercise areas are: _ inside _outside _both
The undersigned hereby makes application to the Orono City Council for a Kennel License as
specified on this form; the undersigned acknowledges that a kennel license is permissive only and
does not grant any authority to violate any provision of any City Ordinance or other law or
regulation; the undersigned hereby grants the City permission to inspect the premises prior to
license approval and at any other reasonable time during the license duration; and the undersigned
agrees to abide by the requirements of Municipal Code Chapter 5.36 including any sNcial
conditions imposed by the City Counril as pan of any kennel license approval.
�p�L
e Date (T
phcan[
For City Use Only
Kennel inspected by _
Recommends: Approval_ Denial_
0,
a.eGT1t�
Pfe 26 ?d� CITY OF ORONO Frldav, February 23 2001
JT J„ENO Check Summary Register Page t of
Name
Chack Data
Chock Amt
♦�
10100 Primary Cash
Pail Chk# 070657
A. T.O.M.
22612001
525.00
Paid ChM 070658
AT B T -
2262001
$1579
Pak ChM 07D659
BUCKOWIAK 8 SON
2/262001
$296.93
Pak Chi# 070660
BONESTROO ROSENE 8 ASSOC
2261ZDOI
$19.949.85
Pak ChM 070661
Void
2262001
S0.00
Pak ChM 070662
BUDGET PRINTING
2262001
$409.61
Pak ChM 070663
CHAMPION AUTO STORES
2262001
SM 57
Paid ChM 070664
CITY OF ORONO PETTY CASH
22612001
$249.60
Paid ChM 070665
Void
2262D01
Saw
Paid ChM 070666
CITY OF WHITE BEAR LAKE
2126r"l
$37500
Pak ChM 070667
CONSTRUCTION BULLETIN
2262001
$107.58
Paid ChM 070668
DCA - WIRE ONLY
2282001
$2,970.89
Pak ChM 070669
DE BAERE, DON
2262001
555.00
Pak ChM 070670
DELL
212612001
$15874
Pak ChM 070671
DEPT OF ADM - INTERTECH GROUP
228I2001
$37,00
Pak ChM 070572
DNA WATERS
2262D01
$50.00
Pak ChM 070573
DRIVERS LICENSE GUIDE CO.
228/2D01
$29.95
Pak ChM 070674
E.S.G. COMPANY INC.
27282001
$68500
Pak ChM 070575
EARL F. ANDERSON 6 ASSOC.
226r1D01
$2,301.61
Pak ChM 07DS76
EHLERS AND ASSOCIATES INC.
226/2001
$1.260.00
Pak ChM 070677
ENGINEERING CONTACTS
2262001
$632.61
Paid ChM 070078
FEDEX
M62001
$70,76
Pak ChM 070679
FORTIS BENEFITS
22512001
S890.61
Pal: ChM 070680
G 8 K SERVICES
2262001
$22175
Paid ChM 070681
GALL'S INC.
2262001
$153.28
Paid ChM 070682
GENUINE PARTS CO.
2262001
$390.28
Pak ChM 070683
Void
2262001
$0.00
Paid ChM 070654
GEO ANALYRCS
2262001
4,9S152
Pak ChM 070685
GOPHER STATE ONE -CALL
2 M001
:d.00
Pak ChM 070686
HAWKINS CHEMICAL
W62MI
$1.659,20
Pak ChM 070687
HENNEPIN COOP SEED EXCHANGE
2262001
$42.39
Paid ChM 070668
HENNEPIN COUNTY INFOR TECH OPT
2262001
$44.25
Pak ChM 070659
HENNEPIN COUNTY TREASURER-GEN
Z282001
$358.00
Paid ChM 070690
HINSHAW B CULBERTSON
2262001
$15,24954
Pak ChM 070691
Void
2282001
$000
Pak ChM 070692
HUEBSCH RENTAL SERVICE
2rW2001
536.41
Pak Chi# 070693
HUMANE SOCIETY OF WRIGHT CO
211W001
$at 50
Pak ChM 07NN
IMC SALT
2282001
$2, 347,45
Pak ChM 070395
INTL ASSOC OF PLUM,MECH OFFIC
2262001
$150.00
Pak ChM 0706%
INTL CONF OF BLDG OFFICIALS
2282001
$85.00
Pak ChM 070697
KENNETH N. POTTS. PA
2282001
$2.391 66
Pak ChM 07MBS
LAKE COUNTRY CHAPTER
2262001
$25.00
Pak C•M 070699
LEAGUE OF MN CITIES
2282001
$3W 00
Pak Chk#070700
MALLOY MONTAGUE KARNOWSKI B CO
22612WI
$3,83000
Paid ChM 070101
MAMAGMC LABOR RELATIONS SERV
2282001
S2.748.00
Pak ChM 070702
MEOICA
2262001
S15.31378
Pak ChM 070703
Void
22&2001
511.00
Pak Chi# 070704
MET COUNCIL ENVIRONMENTAL SEA
22S2001
S1,13850
Pail ChM 070705
MET COUNCIL ENVIRONMENTAL SVCS
22&2001
$19702 07
Paid ChM 0707M
MILE
2262001
$22500
CITY OF ORONO Friday, February 23. 2001
Check Summary Register Page 2o12
Name Check Date Check Amt
Pail Cl" 070707
MINNEAPOLIS OXYGEN COMPANY
2/262001
S45.47
Paid ChM 070708
MINNESOTA SUN PUBLICATIONS
Z262301
$27720
Pahl ChM 070709
MN CHAPTER OF IAPMO
V2W(X)l
$30.00
Paid ChM 070710
MN DEPT OF REVENUE
Z262001
S457.00
Paid ChM 070711
MOROWCZYNSKI. JIM
22672001
S8.22
Paid Chid 070712
NAVARRE HARDWARE
22612001
$342 41
Paid ChM 076 13
Void
2262001
$0.00
Paid ChM 070714
Void
2262001
$000
PSM ChM 0707.,
t. ...
226/2001
$162.08
Paid ChkN 07: 716
OFFICE DEPOT
2262D01
51359.26
Paid ChM 070717
OFFICE ENVIRONMENT BROKERS
2262001
$236.38
Paid ChM 070718
PIONEER
2262001
$323,08
Paid Chid 070719
PRAIRIE. OFFSET
2262001
$901,20
Paid ChM 070720
PRECISION BUSINESS SYSTEMS
2262001
S98.00
Paid ChM 070721
PRUDENTLAL LIFE INSURANCE
Z282001
$571.20
Paid ChM 070722
PUBLIC SAFETY PRINTING SERVICE
2262001
$50.00
Paid ChM 070723
OWEST
226QW1
$927.15
Paid ChM 070724
SA -AG INC.
V26I2M1
$3,69848
Paid ChM 070725
SENIOR COMMUNITY SERVICES
2262D01
$3.793 50
Paid ChM 070726
SENSIBLE LAND USE COALITION
2262DOI
$80.00
Paid ChM 070727
SEW LIKE NEW
2262D01
s364.98
Paid ChM 07072E
SNYDER DRUG STORES
272S2001
$22.83
Paid ChM 070729
ST. JOSEPH'S EQUIPMENT INC.
2262MI
$307 52
Paid ChM 070730
STASAFE LOCKSMITH
226/2001
S69.59
Paid ChM 070731
STANTON GROUP
27262001
$51.00
Paid ChM 070732
STAR TRIBUNE - SERVICE
Z282001
S111.80
Paid ChM 070733
STREICHERS
2262001
$36450
Paid ChM 070734
SURMALINK
2262001
$71,22
1 aid ChM 070735
TALLEN AND BAERTSCHI
2262M1
$22200
'aid ChM 070736
TEMPORARIES -TO -GO
Z262001
$2.87900
Paid ChM 070737
TOLL GAS 8 MELDING SUPPLY
22820D1
$8.05
Paid CRKe 070730
TRACY TRIPP FUELS
2/262001
$3.520.02
Paid CMe1070739
TRANS -ALARM INC.
2262MI
$998.35
FaM ChM 070740
TREADWAY GRAPHICS
2262001
$98.02
Palo ChM 070741
TWIN CITY WATER CLINIC INC.
2282001
$55 W
Palo ChM 070742
UNIV OF MINNESOTA
2262001
$90.00
Paid ChM 070743
W.W. GRAINGER INC.
M2001
53623E
Paid ChM 070741
'NAr'-NING LITES OF CN
2282001
$10895
Palo ChM 070745
WAYZATA BAY CAR WASH
2262001
$21300
Paid ChM 070746
VIESTSIDE WHOLESALE TIRE
2262001
$30.so
Paid ChM 070747
WILSON, DAVIDA
2282001
$75.00
Paid ChM 070748
WINTERNHEIMER, AUSSA
2282001
6225.00
Paid ChM 070749
WRIGHT HENNEPIN ELECTRIC
22612001
338.70
Tolal Cheek. $125.655.02
CITY OFORONO Wednesday, February21,2001
Check Summary Register Page 1 of
Name
Cheek Data
Check Amt
10100 Primary Cash
Paid ChM 070646
CITY COUNTY CREDIT UNION
221101
$7,634.00
Paid ChM 070647
FIRST NATIONAL BANK OF LAKES
2/21101
$17.570.87
Paid ChM 070548
ICMA RETIREMENT TRUST - 457
221101
$300.00
Paid ChM 070649
LAW ENFORCMENT LABOR SERVICE
221101
5462.00
Paid ChM 070650
MN DEPT OF REVENUE
2)21MI
$3.514.62
Paid ChM 070651
ORCWIRD TRUST CO. TRUSTEEICUST
221KII
$1,074.68
Paid ChM 070862
PL-JCOIOBRA
221101
$8.77
Paid ChM 070553
PEBSCONS COIF OF MAYORS
221101
$2.317.00
Paid ChM 07'1654
PUBLIC EMPLOYEES RETIREMENT
2/21101
$10,138.50
Paid ChM 070865
UNITED WAY
221101
$24,00
Paid ChM 070558
WISCONSIN SCTF
2121MI
5184.62
Total Checks
$44.O29.O6
CITY OF ORONr Friday. February 23, 2001
Check Summary Re ;i: ter Page 1 Of t
Name
Chock Dab
Check Amt
10100 Primary Cash
SHOWN
Paid Chke M1925
COUNTRY CAKE CUPBOARD
102001
$21 00
Paid Chlco 061926
ENCHANTED GARDEN FLORAL
11812001
$31.95
Paid Chka 061927
UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE
1y180001
$38860
Paid Chico 061928
JUBILEE FOODS
113irMi
S19.88
Paid Chico 061929
BAYSIDE FLORAL
Wir"1
S35.68
Paid Chkt 081931
DOA -WORE ONLY
1.44R001
61,98a.83
Tobi Checks
$2,541,94
INFORMATION
ITEMS
COUNCIL MEETING
(yM.,nu enccTlNG
FEB 2 6 2WO
OFr yr UMUNU
02/23/2001 11:10 FAX 15078354567 ODIACOY
Mediacorn
u04 end Srmels.E.
Wasen, MN 5609J
Wad 2. 5
FE0 �09i Elected Officials,
taool/o01
Phone: 15071 835-2356
rax: (507) 8334567
It is sun outage time again. This Interference occurs tvnce a year, once in the
Spring and again in the Fall. A "sun outage" occurs when the sun is positioned in
alignment with the satellite and our receive antenna. The solar flares from the sun
are stronger than the transmitted signal and cause interference in receiving the
signal. The interference can vary from minor sparks in the picture to complete
channel outage.
This interference will occur between February 27th and March 8th this year, from
11:30 a.m. to 3:45 p.m. This is an approximate time and will not affect all satellite
channels at the same time.
Sun outages will affect digital signals differently than analog signals. Digital
signals will start to get extra noise in the audio, then go completely off (normally
less than five minutes). When it comes back on, the channel will appear suddenly
and with clear reception. With analog channels, the picture will get noisy and then
gradually fade completely away. When it comes back on, it will fade back s wly
until all the noise and sparkles are completely gone. Again this type of outak ;
normally only lasts a few minutes.
For more information, you may log on to the website,
htw://www.spacccom.com
There is a sun outage calculator at this web site that allows anyone to calculate
outage times for your local area and system.
If you have any further questions or concerns regarding the above, please call our
Customer Service Department at 1-800-332-0245.
Sincerely,
Theresa Sunde
Customer Relations Coordinator
North Central Region
Mediacom
�.lt
, a
' Z
January- 2001
Rapon
Data221/2001
ADDRESS
DATE
PERMIT
CONTRACTOR
OWNE'INAME.
VALUATION
Building Permib
,
930 Cox Farm Rd
122001
P03437
JACK & FREDA KLINGERT
514,400.00
•.1
4755 Beyside Rd
1/102001
P03414
RUDY WICKLANDEK HOM
RUDY WILDLANDER
$3,000.00
N
2135 ShevlinDr
I/182001
Po3459
TNT HOME IMPROVEMENT
& JENNIFER MARTINUIZI
525,000.00
m
2160 Shevlin Dr
1/192001
P03321
F G LARSON & I M LARSON
$75,000.00
i
s� i
240 Northgele Rd
1/=001
P03443
BOYER BUILDING CORPOR
ALAN S MCDOWELL
575,000.00
ZO $
2995 Deer Run Tr
1292001
P03475
RIGHT ANGLE BUILDING C
R T & J E CALLAN
$99,685.00
1020 Brown Rd N
1/312001
P03472
NORTHERN SUNROOMS
M J ROSE & D A KIRBY
$38,000.00
7
$320,085.00
1140 Lomn Linde Ave
1/192001
Po3463
VINTAGE BUILDERS INC.
G & G HOLDING CO LTD PTNRSHP
1
3645 Toga R� d
1/42001
P03445
ALL TYPE CONSTRUCTION
ANTONY M REED ET AL
54,835.00
1080 Brown Rd N
1252001
P03496
PTL CONTR INC
HAROLD F BOWER ETAL
$13,155.00
2
$17,990.00
New, snuctura�J��
1270 Slwutt I'1
1/2/.`lell
I4111.12
Al. IIIIISI'II A %I INS
K II & I P. I.I411'KSON
$265,31n 01
2507 KELLY AVE
1/122801
P03409
TIMBER RIDUE 11OME
BRADLEY HOYT
$721,000.00
1355 Tookawa Rd
122/20111
14)3327
PARAGON DESIGN & 0I81•
FASCHiNE
$650,01R1.00
1360 Vine PI
1252001
P03360
RVC IIUML'S
'TIMOTHY & AMY LANDON
$240.000.00
1140 Lome Linde Ave
1262001
P03464
VINTAGE BUILDERS INC.
G & G HOLDING CO LTD PTNRSHP
5247,500.00
5
52,123,800.00
PAGE: I
Report
�'r
January-2001
—ORO
e I U N r'
ISSUEDPORT
ate2212001
AOIIPESS
DATE
PERMIT
CONTRACTOR
OWNERNAMF.
VALUATION
General Permits
930 Cox Farm Rd
I/N2o01
P03438
JACK & FREDA KLINGERT
$6,000.00
3465 Eastlake St
1/32001
P03441
SUPERIOR CONTRACTORS,
DIANE M PEREZ
52,500.00
1150 LYMAN AVE
1132001
P03444
PLYMOUT-H PLUMBING &
D C & E D MOGEN
$9,390.00
1940 Country Club Rd
1/52001
P03367
DAVE"i APPLIANCE HEAT]
M J W SMITH & M F SMITH
$1,829.00
13% Baldur Perk Rd
1/52001
P03447
CITY VIEW PLUMBING
R J & M A WETT TRUSTEES
$1,000.00
925 Willow Or S
1/52001
P03449
FIRESIDE CORNER
PHYLLIS FADDEN
$1.100.00
2275 Longview Cir
1/52001
P03451
FIRE WORKS FIREPLACE 1
S W BUCHHOLZ & D A BUCHHOLZ
$2,000.00
2130 Shadywood Rd
1/8/2001
P03456
KLEVI. HEATING & AIR
DONALD F HAGEN TRUSTEE
$15,900.00
1005 Heritage La
1/162001
P03466
RESIDENTIAL HEATING &
S L & L I LARSON
$6,023.00
490 Sussex La
1/16/2001
P03467
HEATING & COOLING TWO
N W & D C WILDMAN
$12,000.00
3025 Sixth Ave N
1/1g2001
P03469
B A & F A MCKEE
$1,100.00
577 Park Le
11Ig2001
P03470
PMR MECHANICAL INC
DENISE L DUENOW
$15,000.00
2114 Sugarwood Dr
1/192001
P03471
ABEL B & C INC.
ROGER & ELIZABETH OLSEN
SI,800.00
1368 Nonh Arm Or
Irmool
P03474
FIRESIDE CORNER
L A & L L JAKUBIEC
$1.100.00
795 Old Crystal Bay Rd
1232001
P03480
N&'I MECHANICAL CONTR
SCHOOL DIST NO 278
$4,000.00
1150 LYMAN AVE
1252001
P03499
ALLIED MECHANICAL SYS
D C & E D MOGEN
$2,200.00
2125 Carriage La
I2S2001
P03499
FIRESIDE CORNER
Bohlend Development Inc
$2,200.00
240 Nonhgate Rd
1252001
P03490
VOGT HEATING & AIR CO
ALAN S MCDOWELL
$5,100.00
4000 Nonh Shorc Or
1252001
P03491
AUTOMATIC GARAGE & FI
R J & M TNICOSKI
$2,500.00
3532 Ivy PI
I/Mool
P03493
METRO AIR INC
GARY & SUSAN CABLE
$17,000.00
1875 Shadywood Rd
1292001
P03495
MARK & GINA KOSEK
$300.00
2130 Shadywood Rd
1202001
P03496
FIRESIDECORNER
DONALD F HAGEN TRUSTEE
$1,100.00
1225 Loma Lind. Ave
1/31/2001
P03500
JEFFREY DUDELL
$600.00
23
$111,632.00
1960 Fox Ridge Rd
1/0001
P03454
RITTER EXCAVATING
LUCIA T MORISON
1
raa�
1/182001
P03469
DAVID OSMONSON
3440 Shore-
PAGE:
LyY11YY7�Y]�i1L�r D1: �IYIfyF.Y.9tl�117t�dZ�7tiY
Rayon
D=2/21/2001
ADDRESS
DATE PERMIT CONTItACTOR
2601 Refine I/10.2001 P03431 BOLLIG & SONS, INC
OWNERNAME
K M & P M BURTON
VALUATION
PAGE:
RICITY t IERMITSTj.7u Vt/ RLr� m January-200I
eport
Date221/2001
ADDRESS DATI: PERMIT CONTRACTOR OWNERNAME VALUATION
Plumbing Petmtih
nnuru:aa.as.�+_�a
930 Cox Farm Rd
1/22001
P03439
JACK & FREDA KLINGERT
$2.000.00
583 Park La
10/2001
P03543
NORBLOM PLUMBING CO
GINA R NELSON
$900.00
1396 Beldur Park Rd
1/52001
P03448
CITY VIEW PLUMBING
R J & M A WETT TRUSTEES
$7.000.00
577 Park La
1/52001
P03450
CITY VIEW PLUMBING
DENISE L DUENOW
S6,200.00
583 Purk La
1/0001
P03455
PODNAY'S PLUMBING
GINA R NELSON
$10,000.00
25 Myrtlewood Rd
V92001
P03457
KCJ ENTERPRISES INC
SCOTT & SARAH LUSE
$500.00
75 Femdale Green
1/92001
P03459
KCJ ENTERPRISES INC
KENNETH R & LINDA L HOPKINS
S500.00
3532 Ivy PI
In 12001
P03460
GENERAL PLUMBING & HE
GARY & SUSAN CABLE
S15,800.00
1003 Co- Form Rd
I/122001
P03461
PARK PLUMBING
S SWENSON & C A BAIER
$500.00
2497 Kelly Ave
1/162001
P03462
CHERRY PLUMBING & HE
A H EVANS & D EVANS
$500.00
2130 Shdywood Rd
1/162001
P03465
LAKESIDE PLUMBING & H
DONALD F HAGEN TRUSTEE
$21.296.00
2500 Shudywood Rd
1/192001
P03473
FRESHWATER FOUNDATION
S7.800.00
1465 Fox Sr
1232001
P03476
MCGUIRE & SONS
K A BIRKELAND/C A BIRKELAND
$629.00
3264 North Shore Dr
1232001
P03477
NORBLOM PLUMBING CO
RUSSELL A NORUM
S400.00
3464 Eastlake St
1232001
P03479
THOMPSON PLUMBING
M & N HUNSLEY
$6,200.00
1380 Rat Point Rd
I/s732001
P03491
CULLIGAN WATER CONDI
GREGG & STEM IANIE LARSEN
S200.00
2135 She, lin Dr
1232001
P03482
MINNESOTA PLUMBING &
ERIC & JENNIFER MAR—NUZZ1
$500.00
4345 North Shore Dr
1262001
P03492
STEINKRAUS PLUMBING I
HAROLD & MARILYN CHRISTENS
S13,500.00
1245 Lakeview Ave
I/262001
P03494
WELD & SONS PLUMBING
KEITH NORD & VIRGINIA GRIFFIT
S2,400.00
19
$96,825.00
PAGE:
A RESOLUTION APPROVING SUBMITTAL OF AN APPLICATION FOR USE OF
2001 URBAN HENNEPIN COUNTY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK
GRANT PROGRAM CONSOLIDATED POOL FUNDING AND AUTHORIZING
SIGNATURE OF SUBRECIPIENT AGREEMENT WITH HENNEPIN COUNTY AND
ANY THIRD PARTY AGREEMENTS
WHEREAS, the City of Orono, through execution of a Joint Cooperation Agreement
with Hennepin lounty, is cooperating in the Urban Hennepin County Community Development
Block Grant Program; and
WHEREAS, the City of Orono has developed a proposal for the use of Urban Hennepin
County CDBG funds made available to it, consistem with local housing and Urban Hennepin
County housing and community development needs att. priorities.
BE IT RESOLVED, the City Council of the City of Orono approves the submittal of
the following application for funding from the Consolidated Pool of the Urban Hennepin
County Community Development Block Grant Program and authorizes submittal of the proposal
for review and inclusion in the 2001 Urban Hennepin County Community Development Block
Grant Program.
Activity Funding Request
Sixty-two unit Senior Rental Housing Project with
200% of units affordable to households with income $125,000
at 50% or less of the area medium income
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the City Council hereby authorizes and directs
the Mayor and its City Administrator tc execute the Subrecipient Agreement and any required
Third Party Agreement on behalf of the City to implement the 2001 CDBG Program.
Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono, Minnesota at a regular meeting held
on this 26th day of February, 2001.
ATTEST:
Barbara A. Peterson, Mayor
Linda S. Vee, City Clerk
Page 1 of 1
16_
A RESOLUTION APPROVING SUBMITTAL OF AN APPLICATION FOR USE OF
2001 URBAN HENNEPIN COUNTY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK
GRANT PROGRAM CONSOLIDATED POOL FUNDING. AND AUTHORIZING
SIGNATURE OF SUBRECI"PIENT AGREEMENT WITH HENNEPIN COUNTY ANr1
ANY THIRD PARTY AGREEMENTS
WHEREAS, the City of Orono, thi Hugh execution of a Joint Cooperation Agreement
with Hennepin County, is cooperating in the Urban Hennepin County Community Development
Block Grant Program; and
WHEREAS, the City of Orono has developed a proposal for the use of Urban Hennepin
County CDBG funds made available to it, consistent with local housing and Urban Hennepin
County housing and community development needs and priorities.
BE IT RESOLVED, the City Council of the City of Orono approves the submittal of
the following application for funding from the Consolidated Pool of the Urban Hennepin
County Community Development Block Grant Program and authorizes submittal of the proposal
for review and inclusion in the 2001 Urban Hennepin County Community Development Block
Grant Program.
Activity Funding Request
Sixty-two unit Senior Rental Housing Project with
2001a of units affordable to households with income $125,000
at 50% or less of the area median income
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the City Council hereby authorizes and directs
the Mayor and its City Administrator to execute the Subrecipient Agreement and any required
Third Party Agreement on behalf of the City to implement the 2001 CDBG Program.
Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono. Miunesotu at a regular meeting held
on this 26th day of February, 2001.
ATTEST:
Linda S. Vee, City Clerk Barbara A. Peterson. Mayor
Page I of I
LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT
18338 Minnetonka Blvd.
^" Deephaven, MN 55391
FE9 2 6 (952) 745-0189
„r�NO
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR NEWSLETTER
Gregory S. Nybeck
February 14,2001
Increased Water Patrol Presence for =1 ^--"-- "---- - "` ., "c L'1CC fc-,vard:' _ -
to increase Hennepin County Sheriffs Office Water Patrol presence on Lake Minnetonka, for the 2001 boating
season, by two full-time Deputies for five months A two -ye commitment, at $100,000 per year, has been seeked
for The proposal, with costs to be shared by Hennepin Count/ (50%). LMCD Member Cities (30%), and the LMCD
'Save the Lake' Fund (20%).
To date, both Hennepin County and the LMCD 'Save the L �s' Fund have appropriated the needed funds for the
._ proposal for2001. Additionally, nine LMCD Member Cities r..e agreed to voluntary payments of approximately
$17,000 for the proposal in 2001. LMCD staff, working with 0.101) Board leadership, either has made contact with
the remaining five LMCD Member Cities or has plans to in t"e near futura. Any shortfalls in the 30%commitment
from the LMCD Member Cities will be addressed by the L"^,D Board sometime in the near future. Further details of
this proposal will be provided when they are avai'able.
• Exotics Management: Similar to one year ago. the LMCC assembled a EWht Harvesting Program Working Group
to evaluate the Program to see if improvements can be me.e f;r 2001 This Working Group met on 11118100 and
1113101, and discussed a number of aspects of the Progra- Some r.`. the aspects discussed a• these meetings
include: 1) establishing a rotating harvesting schedule, 2) es _aishinp a harvester replacement schedule, 3)
improved radio's and coiemunicatmns, 4) possible modifica:: 's to the harvesting equipment. 5) improved hauling of
harvested vegetation, 6) addressing work vehicle needs, i 1,-cmved maintenance of the harvesting equipment. and
8) addressing budget constraints. Recommendations from.'- s World. g Group will be presented to the LMCD Board
at its P28/01 Regular meeting Further details will be pros .-: when they are available.
Staff is currently preparing plans for the 2001 Zebra MussE'i P:gram Similar to 2000, efforts will be continued on
improving public education and awareness Additionally, I-e 'CD would like to take a more aggressive approach
on the inspection and.br cleaning of watercraft that have cc -a from infested waters prior to launching into Lake
Minnetonka. This was a problem area n. 2000, with no wa•rrah washed by the LMCD's high-pressure sprayer.
The LMCD is currently considering hosting a public forum t: _ t input from the public on how to better approach the
zebra mussel issue Further details will be provided when Cey are available
• 2000 Boat Density & User Attitude Survey's Schoell are.: Cadson, Inc. conducted these surveys in corrr':ance
with the Management Plan for Lake Minnetonka The Boa:=;-sity Survey is conducted every two years, with the
User Attitude Survey conducted every four years This protest is a joint effort of the LMCD and the MY DNR. A
presentation of these surveys is scheduled for the 3/14101 F _•-jlar LVCD Board meeting A copy of this survey will
be forwarded sometime in t`e cear future.
• 2001 Board Officers fk Board Appointments: Board Office-, to. 2001 were discussed at the 1110d01 Regular
LMCD Board meeting Board Off:crs for 2001 include Be-, --osier. Chairman, Craig Nelson. Vice Chairman, Tom
Skramslad- Treasurer, and Lih McMillan- Secretary. LMCD r-ember cities Deephaven, Minnetonka. Minnetonka
Beach, Minnetrista, Orono, Shorewood. Tonka Bay, and Wayzata. Jiscussion of these appointments is planned for
the 2128101 Regular L61CD Board meeting.
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR NEWSLETTER, 2114100, PAGE 2
Ongoing Licenses/Permits: LrdCD staff has recently inspected all licensed de-icing installations on Lake
Minnetonka. Results of these inspections, with related correspondence, have been forwarded to the licensee and
the affected municipality. Staff is currently processing all new and renewal 01Ho-4 change appiic,,!,n� inr s,onsed
multiple dock facilities on the Lake. Additionally, staff has sent out new and renewal applications for charter boats
on the Lake, and is currently processing renewal intoxicating liquor, wine, and non -intoxicating mall liquor
appticafiors for these boats. For the 2001 season, the demand for intoxicating liquor licenses will exceed the
numbei the LMCD is allowed to issue by State law, similar to 2000.
LMCD Code requires that all liquor licensees on Lake Minnetonka, whether new or renewal, attend mandatory
training annually. Staff from the LMCD and the Hennepin County SherRrs Office Water Patrol will facilitate these
tr3ang sessions, which will be held sometime in late March and early April. The focus of these training sessions will
be on charter boat rules and regulations, related liquor regulations, and general discussion regarding feedback we
have received from the public.
Web Page: The LMCD's WebPage is currently under construction and should be updated by the end of March. The
address is: hllp:llwww.lmcd.org.