Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout09-28-2015 Council MinutesMINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, September 28, 2015 7:00 o'clock p.m. ROLL CALL The Orono City Council met on the above-mentioned date with the following members present: Mayor Lili Tod McMillan, Council Members Jim Cornick, Jr., Lizz Levang, Aaron Printup, and Dennis Walsh. Representing Staff were Finance Director Ron Olson, Community Development Director Jeremy Barnhart, Senior Planner Michael Gaffron, Public Works Director/City Engineer Adam Edwards, City Attorney Soren Mattick, Consulting City Engineer David Martini, and Recorder Jackie Young. Mayor McMillan called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m., followed by the Pledge of Allegiance. APPROVAL OF AGENDA Item Nos. 7, 8, 12, 14, and 15 were added to the Consent Agenda. Levang moved, Cornick seconded, to approve the Consent Agenda as revised. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. APPROVAL OF MINUTES *2. REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF SEPTEMBER 14, 2015 Levang moved, Cornick seconded, to approve the minutes of the Orono City Council meeting of September 14, 2015, as submitted. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. PRESENTATION 3. ORONO POICE OFFICER OATH OF OFFICE City Clerk Diane Tiegs administered the oath of office to Police Officers Joshua Raze and Timothy Datwyler. 4. RESOLUTION SUPPORTING THE ORONO POLICE DEPARTMENT — RESOLUTION NO. 6543 Mayor McMillan stated the Orono City Council would like the Orono Police Department to know how much they support the work they perform by adopting a resolution expressing the City's appreciation and support as well as commending the excellent work they do. Printup moved, Levang seconded, to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 6543, a Resolution Commending the Orono Police Department for Excellence. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. 5. MEDIACOM UPDATE Theresea Sunde, Government Relations Manager, and Zach R.askovich, Area Operations Director, were present on behalf of Mediacom. Page 1 of 27 MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL, MEETING Monday, September 28, 2015 7:00 o'clock p.m. 5. MEDIACOM UPDATE (continued) Sunde stated they are here tonight to discuss Mediacom's buildout under the franchise agreement with the City. Sunde indicated Mediacom has met their contractual requirements and the map they have submitted shows the areas that have been built out. Raskovich stated the last segment to be activated was Wakefield Road. Sunde stated the majority of the infrastructure was already in place but two new areas were added. Sunde stated people are now able to have cable if they so choose in the buildout area. Mayor McMillan stated she has a couple of issues regarding service. McMillan stated one of the complaints revolved around having to drive down to the Mound office and finding the office closed. Suede stated they are well aware of that situation and the person was mistakenly sent to the Mound office. Sunde stated Mediacom did receive a letter from that person, and as a result of the misdirection, someone lost their job over it. Mediacom has apologized to the person and will be reaching out to them. McMillan stated she would appreciate that. McMillan asked if anyone in the audience would like to speak regarding this item. Loren Schoenzeit, 4480 Forest Lake Landing, stated he has a couple of questions for Mediacom. Schoenzeit stated he would like to get straight answers from Mediacom's sales department on what year two products cost. Schoenzeit stated everything that Mediacom offers on their website has the first year special price but the second year cost is difficult to obtain. In addition, the sales department cannot provide an answer to that question. Schoenzeit commented the majority of promotions are geared toward new customers but not existing customers. Schoenzeit suggested Mediacom offer some special prices for customers who simply have Internet service with Mediacom. Schoenzeit stated his second question relates to Mediacom's plans forl080P and 4K retransmission in the Orono area. Schoenzeit stated he would also like to know Mediacom's plans to transmit Super Bowl V in 4K. CBS and Sony both say the data will be available. The third question relates to Mediacom's plan to upgrade to Doxis 3.1 and offering gigabyte service in this area. Schoenzeit stated it is nice the rest of the community is wired but a number of Mediacom's services lag behind the rest of the country technology - wise. Schoenzeit stated gigabytes in areas where there is competition runs approximately $70 a month and Orono residents are paying more than that for 100 gigabyte. Schoenzeit stated without competition, pricing is difficult for the customer. Schoenzeit noted there have also been six major multi -hour outages for Internet service in the Orono area in September and that he hopes Mediacom can offer an explanation for that. Schoenzeit asked what mitigation work Mediacom has done to ensure equipment, personnel and policies that does not continue. The final question is whether there is a way that Mediacom could host a website with system status. Schoenzeit stated currently, if someone calls the 800 number, most of the time it tells you all circuits are busy and sometimes there is a message saying we have a problem in your area and we will call you back, which usually does not occur. Page 2 of 27 MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, September 28, 2015 7:00 o'clock p.m. 5. MEDIACOM UPDATE (continued) Schoenzeit stated he is not sure whether Mediacom hears the feedback from the residents, but in his view Mediacom only gets about a C grade. Schoenzeit stated nowadays digital infrastructure is a necessity and that he hopes by working with the City and the community that service can be improved. Schoenzeit stated he will provide a copy of his questions to Mediacom so they can answer them. Sunde stated Mediacom is attempting to keep up with technology and upgrade their equipment. Sunde stated they will respond to Mr. Schoenzeit's questions in the near future. McMillan thanked Mediacom for completing the buildout. McMillan noted the City's franchise agreement is for cable and video access but that the hope is that everyone will have better Internet access. McMillan stated the City appreciates Mediacom working on the Internet piece as well even though that is not part of the official franchise agreement. McMillan stated she receives tons of calls from citizens asking for faster Internet service and that she would appreciate any efforts by Mediacom to improve that. McMillan stated the City is glad to be partnering with Mediacom. Sunde stated it has been a pleasure working with the City as well. PLANNING COMMISSION COMMENTS — REPRESENTATIVE DENISE LESKINEN Planning and Zoning Commissioner Leskinen stated she had nothing to report but would be available for questions. PUBLIC COMMENTS Rich Anderson, 3205 Crystal Bay Road, stated he appreciates what the City Council did for the Police Department this evening. Anderson stated the reason he is here tonight is he was listening to the taped September 14 meeting and that he heard a comment that it was not Richie Anderson. Anderson stated the Council was talking about the lift station and the backup generator. Anderson stated he has not talked to City Staff about it, but that it was his idea to suggest that. Anderson stated he is trying to figure out what that statement was about. Anderson stated he will provide a little history on the marinas he owns and has owned. Sailor's World on Smith Bay was purchased in 1976 by himself and two other people. Sailor's World was originally called Paul's Landing. Anderson stated he eventually sold his interest in that entity to one of his partners in 1995. Anderson stated he also has owned North Shore Marina since 1994. After a period of time, Anderson indicated he bought Windward Marine and sold that. Anderson stated during that time he bought another marina on Brown's Bay. Anderson stated he also purchased another marina in 2011. Anderson stated over the years he has cleaned up the marinas and they are now a centerpiece of Orono_ Anderson stated he knows the marinas very well and that he has no idea why that comment was made about him. Page 3 of 27 MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, September 28, 2015 7:00 o'clock p.m. PUBLIC COMMENTS (continued) Council Member Levang stated the reason was because someone indicated that it was someone else whose name was on the letter in the City's file. Levang stated she was responding to what was on the City's document. The document mentioned and was signed by the Kirkland brothers. Anderson stated he then apologizes if he misunderstood Council Member Levang, but that the City is aware he owns 1955 Shoreline Drive. Anderson noted at the last Council meeting Mr. Edwards stated that he was willing to give the City an easement for a generator and that is not true. Anderson indicated he talked with Mr. Edwards about trying to figure out where the generator could go on commercial property rather than residential. Public Works Director/City Engineer Edwards stated he discussed the generator with the Kirkland brothers and that they were interested in hosting a generator on their site in order to get the backup generator. Anderson stated the City does not have an easement at this time but that hopefully one day there will be. Anderson stated there are parking issues and that he is allowed 48 parking spots, which they have to have. The City's concept was to get the okay to do the design so he could take a look at it. Anderson stated he does not want this thing to go too far down the road since the City does not have an easement currently. Anderson stated the minutes should be corrected to say that since he does not want it to be portrayed that he has already given the City an easement. Edwards stated he asked for the funding to move forward with the design and the engineering. Edwards stated they need the design work and the survey before the City can move forward with the easement. Anderson stated he would like to keep this process going forward but that the motion was also for the installation of a backup generator, which should not have been included in the motion. Anderson stated the motion should have only been for completing the design and engineering of same. Anderson stated the electrical panel should not be on top and that should be considered in the design. McMillan requested Mr. Edwards communicate with Mr. Anderson on this matter going into the future. Council Member Walsh stated he would like to thank Mr. Anderson for helping to solve this problem and that he hopes the City can work through this to minimize the impact. Anderson stated he could probably get a variance to the parking but that they really do need the parking spaces. Brad Erickson, Orono Shopping Center, 2160 West Wayzata Boulevard, stated he is here tonight to support Jay Nygard and that in his view the wind turbine issue has gone on way too long. Erickson stated he knows when Council Member Walsh was running that that was one of the things that was brought up and that he wanted to get on board so these issues would not get so drawn out. Erickson stated the lawsuit is over and the wind turbine is down. Erickson stated it was not a good day for the Nygards but that it is over and done with. Erickson stated there is now an issue remaining about a piece of concrete behind Mr. Nygard's house. Page 4 of 27 MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, September 28, 2015 7:00 o'clock p.m. PUBLIC COMMENTS (continued) Erickson stated he is not sure what difference it makes at this point, but given his experience with the City, there are other more important issues that could be addressed than the piece of concrete. Erickson stated he now has the wind turbine at his site at the 2120 location and that it is sitting next to a building. Erickson stated the reason he brought this up is that in his view the City has to ask themselves where their priorities are. Erickson noted there is a house on Main Street that was a converted chicken coop that people were living in until August of 2013 and the building should have been condemned 30 years ago. Erickson stated instead of the City spending all this time over a wind turbine and now some cement under the ground, they should be looking at other things. Erickson stated they have this building sitting there, and if they really want to do what is in the public's interest, it should be condemned. Erickson stated in his view the wind turbine issue is over, the City won, and they should leave the Nygards alone and let them live their lives. Erickson stated the walls in the store that he bought were mold from floor to ceiling and from front to back under the tile. Erickson stated instead the City is worried about a piece of concrete in someone's back yard. The City Council now has an opportunity to move the ball forward and put it behind them but that it seems like they are stuck on stupid, which does not make any sense. Erickson stated if the Council really wants to make an impact on the community, they should talk about getting rid of that house, developing the property with Dale Richardson, and working with the residents of the community. Erickson stated he has tried to make it clear that the people on the City Council work for the citizens and that he is not sure why the residents have to butt heads on every issue. Erickson stated no one has ever come down and met with him and that he has not met with the community development director once. Erickson stated instead he gets criticized and threatened. Erickson stated he is asking the Council to let the wind turbine issue go and to forget about the cement issue and get on with some more important issues. PLANNING DEPARTMENT REPORT 6. APPEAL FENCE VIEWER DECISION, CONTINUED HEARING McMillan noted this is a continuation of the hearing from the August 10 Council meeting. This is an administrative appeal of a fence and the original hearing was tabled to allow the City Council to look at some additional information submitted by Mr. Nygard. At the August 10 meeting, the City Council heard that the fence viewers' decision was that the fence on Peter Lanpher's property was not a partition fence and thus not subject to Minnesota Statute 344. Community Development Director Barnhart noted on August 17, Staff received additional information from the adjacent property owner, Peter Lanpher, who asked Staff to provide the information to the Council. Barnhart noted the Council received the information via e-mail and also in tonight's packet. McMillan stated she has reviewed all the additional information and that she is in agreement with the letter sent out by Mr. Barnhart recapping the fence review decision. Page 5 of 27 MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, September 28, 2015 7:00 o'clock p.m. 6. APPEAL FENCE VIEWER DECISION, CONTINUED HEARING (continued) Jay Nygard, 1386 Rest Point Road, stated he asked for the fence viewing and that he is asking for it to happen again. Nygard stated he is asking for the Council to actually do what they are supposed to do per state law, which is to have a fence viewing per state statute. Nygard stated this fence has been illegal from day one and has been under investigation since 2012, which is over three years. Nygard noted he did ask for a fence viewing hearing in 2012 as well but the City denied it as Mr. Gaffron's memorandum states. According to the counsel of Mr. Soren Mattick, Orono's City Attorney, the Council and Staff did not follow state law and should not have the statutory obligation unless it was requested again. Nygard noted that happened back in 2012. Nygard stated the frustrating thing is how this has been set up as adversarial from day one and made to appear that it is him against the City. Nygard stated he is not sure how many other times that has happened, but whenever the City has to do a grass viewing at a property, Mr. Mattick drives all the way out here and has a meeting with the people doing it first. Nygard stated it seems pretty obvious that he is being treated differently than everybody else in the City and that everybody has to walk on eggshells around him to make sure they do not do anything wrong. Nygard stated what the City should really be concerned about is moving forward and looking at the real problems in the community rather than running and hiding from their obligations. Nygard stated a couple of things came up as part of the recent packet that he has seen before but were not part of this until recently when his neighbor presented them. The information is from the State Court of Appeals and the District Court dealing with his lawsuit with the neighbor. Nygard stated he is glad Mr. Lanpher presented these, because in the District Court action, they talk about how he was not able to show that it was a partition fence, and in the appeals court it says, because the appellant failed to show it was a petition fence, we affirm the District Court's ruling. Nygard stated he happens to have in his hand the 1998 Minnesota House of Representatives information which shows that a partition can be on or near a property line. Nygard stated because he did not have that information, he lost those lawsuits. Nygard stated the information says that the District Court judge chose to rule against him based on the parties' stipulation that this is not a common fence. Nygard stated that is not true because he did state to the judge that it was a common fence. Nygard stated party stipulation and state law are two different things and that it is disappointing to have a judge decide that applying state law is not important. Nygard stated the City Council is required to follow state law but the City Attorney is not interested in doing that. Nygard noted Mr. Barnhart denied his fence hearing because he claimed it is not a partition fence. Nygard stated nowhere does his letter quote a state law, a state statute, or anything that is referred to, and that this is all stuff that is made up out of thin air. State law says fence viewers do not determine exactly on or near a property line a partition fence should be located. Nygard noted the letter also states, which Mr. Mattick counseled the City Council that the statute applies to rural areas only. Nygard noted it states in the brief that the statute generally applies to all property owners throughout the state and not just rural areas as the City Attorney is suggesting. Page 6 of 27 MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, September 28, 2015 7:00 o'clock p.m. 6. APPEAL FENCE VIEWER DECISION, CONTINUED HEARING (continued) Nygard stated it is the Council's duty to give him a fence viewing. Nygard stated it is a partition fence by where it is located; by where the people who put it there located it; by the function it serves, which is to separate the properties; and by the fact that the neighbor cannot maintain the fence on his side. Nygard stated the question is whether the Council is going to choose to follow state law as it has been presented to them or whether they are not going to choose to follow state law. Nygard stated the flyers that have been going around have something interesting in one of them, which is that City law cannot override state law. Nygard stated he has presented the City Council with state law and no one has presented anything different. Nygard stated if the Council chooses not to allow this fence viewing, they will be in violation of state law, and that choosing to violate state law would not be good for us as a city but will cause many complications down the road. McMillan noted a fence viewing was provided on July 6 and they determined it was not a partition fence. Nygard stated the Mayor apparently did not read the appeal he wrote, which said, due to the fact that the fence is falling over more since then that it needs another fence viewing. McMillan stated a partition fence is when two people get together and they decide to share a fence or share the costs of the fence. Nygard stated the Mayor is making that up. McMillan stated she has looked at all the law. Nygard asked the Mayor to show him where it says that. McMillan stated she is not going to get into an argument with him about it tonight and that fence viewers were provided by the City of Orono and they made a determination that it was not a partition fence. Nygard stated he was never provided a report. McMillan noted Mr. Nygard was on the property at the time of the fence viewing. Nygard stated he was denied a report and that in his opinion the fence viewing is not complete. McMillan stated Mr. Nygard is asking a lot from the City. Nygard questioned how asking the City to follow state law is asking a lot. McMillan noted the City did provide a fence viewing and that she is not going to get into an argument with him. Nygard asked where in the statute it says that two neighbors have to agree. Nygard noted the statute contains many references to when neighbors disagree. Page 7 of 27 MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, September 28, 2015 7:00 o'clock p.m. 6. APPEAL FENCE VIEWER DECISION, CONTINUED HEARING (continued) McMillan stated the fence viewing process has happened, that she has looked at all the materials on it, and that it was done according to state statute. The fence viewers' determination was that it is not a partition fence according to state statute and that she is in agreement with that. Kahler Stewart Nygard, 1386 Rest Point Road, asked if there could have been a mistake made during the fence viewing process. Nygard asked if the fence viewers were not made aware of all the facts regarding state statute. Nygard stated in light of the new information, in his view there should be another fence viewing and that will resolve or remedy the issue at hand. McMillan stated the City has done its process, made its determination, and that they need to move on. Nygard asked where in the statute it says that fence viewers can determine whether or not a fence is located on a property line. Nygard stated the only determination made by the fence viewers was the location of the fence in relation to the property line. Nygard stated the statute actually says that they are not to determine whether or not the fence is located on the property line. Nygard stated the fence viewers' findings contradict state law no matter how many times the City wants to ignore it. McMillan noted the letter states as follows: Based on the information gathered by the fence viewers, it has been determined that the fence in question does not constitute a partition fence and therefore is not subject to MN State Statute 344. Specifically the fence viewers noted the fence is located entirely on Mr. Lanpher's property, that the fence was not originally ordered to be viewed by the fence viewers, there was no agreement by the parties that the fence is a partition fence, and Mr. Nygard did not originally share in any costs with construction of the fence. Nygard stated none of those are set up as a basis for something being defined as a partition fence by the MN State Legislature. Nygard stated everything the Mayor just stated, especially as it relates to the property line, does not count according to state statute. Nygard stated his question is whether the City is going to follow state law or not follow state law. Nygard stated the City is obligated to follow state law. Printup moved, McMillan seconded, to make a determination that the fence located on the Lanpher property is not a partition fence and that the fence viewers' decision should be upheld. VOTE: Ayes 4, Nays 0, Walsh Abstained. *7. #15-3738 KUHL DESIGN BUILD ON BEHALF OF JOHN AND CYNDY BOWLSBY, 1025 SPRING HILL ROAD, VARIANCES — RESOLUTION NO. 6544 Levang moved, Cornick seconded, to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 6544, a Resolution Amending Resolution No. 6519 Granting Setback Variances from Orono Municipal Code Section 78-1279, for the property located at 1025 Spring Hill Road. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. *8. #15-3758 CITY OF ORONO AND CLIFFORD OTTEN, 2251 PINE RIDGE LANE AND CITY -OWNED PARCEL PINS 34-118-23 22 0019 (WELL #3) — LOT LINE REARRANGEMENT AND REZONING — ORDINANCE NO. 158 AND RESOLUTION NO. 6545 Page 8 of 27 MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, September 28, 2015 7:00 o'clock p.m. Levang moved, Cornick seconded, to adopt ORDINANCE NO. 158 , THIRD SERIES, an Ordinance Amending the Orono Municipal Code by Listing the Legal Description of the Properties at 2251 Pine Ridge Lane and 2250 Wayzata Boulevard as Rezoned from RR -1B to R -1A, File No. 15-3758. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. Levang moved, Cornick seconded, to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 6545, Approving a Subdivision of a Lot Line Rearrangement at 2251 Pine Ridge Lane and 2250 Wayzata Boulevard, File No. 15-3758. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. 9. #15-3768 MICHAEL AND LISA LARSON, PROPOSED ORDINANCE AMENDMENT RELATED TO DOG BOARDING AND GROOMING IN B-1 ZONING DISTRICT Barnhart noted at its September 14 meeting, the City Council reviewed the proposed text amendment that would allow indoor dog boarding, indoor dog daycare, and dog grooming as a conditional use in the B-1 zoning district. The City Council tabled action on the item in order for Staff to determine how other communities handle this type of business. Since the September 14 meeting, Staff has visited four area indoor dog daycare/boarding facilities, spoken with staff at those facilities, and spoken with the planners in those cities to get an idea of the uses in those cities. Barnhart indicated he has included a draft supplement to the draft amendment before the City Council tonight. In addition, the applicants have also submitted some documentation. One of the proposed changes is a zoning code issue in terms of what is an allowed use and the other is a licensing issue. Barnhart stated he will be proposing some changes to the licensing requirements that the Council can revisit in a couple of weeks. Barnhart gave a brief synopsis of the other indoor dog daycare facilities that he visited: Puptown in Medina is a large facility, having a 13,000 square foot outdoor play area. Puptown is in a commercial area. On site, Staff observed little dog barking. The adjacent Highway 55 may have drowned out dog noise. Medina recently approved an expansion of the number of dogs. Camp Bow Wow in Plymouth is in an industrial area. On site, Staff observed minimal dog noises. Adogo has two locations in Minnetonka, one near Ridgedale and another on Baker Road. Both sites have outdoor play areas. The Ridgedale location is new and is adjacent to residential uses, including single- family residential to the north. A large apartment building was recently built adjacent to the Ridgedale property. Adogo on Baker Road was their first location in Minnetonka. This is a commercial location. Minnetonka's planner noted no concerns or complaints for any of their locations. Barnhart stated there is also Wolf Central in Richfield. Page 9 of 27 MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, September 28, 2015 7:00 o'clock p.m. 9. #15-3768 MICHAEL AND LISA LARSON, PROPOSED ORDINANCE AMENDMENT RELATED TO DOG BOARDING AND GROOMING IN B-1 ZONING DISTRICT (continued) Barnhart noted the Council is not looking at a specific conditional use permit tonight but looking globally at a text amendment that would allow those types of uses. At the last Planning Commission meeting and City Council meeting, there was some concern from the neighborhood based primarily on noise. Barnhart noted Adogo near Ridgedale is located right across from residential and in the beginning there was significant opposition to it. That facility was ultimately approved and there have been no complaints. Barnhart noted Orono's B-1 district does back up to some residential and so there is some reasonable concern associated with the use. Barnhart stated predominantly the ratio used is one dog per X square feet. Medina has one dog for 60 square feet and Minnetonka uses one dog for 80 square feet. Richfield did not have a ratio but they limited it to 50 dogs based on the size of the building. Barnhart suggested imposing the same type of ratio at this facility. Cornick asked if they are all small dogs or bigger dogs at these other facilities. Barnhart stated Medina is not limited to small dogs. McMillan asked if this revised draft ordinance is attempting to do some moire refining of kennel locations. Barnhart stated the section provided tonight is not in the zoning code and is under the animal section of the City Code. The underlined language is the proposed new language. Barnhart stated he is not recommending approval tonight since it has not been fully refined unless the Council decides it is not an appropriate use. Council Member Printup noted last week the Planning Commission heard an application for a conditional use permit allowing dog daycare. Printup asked what type of comments were received during the meeting regarding the proposed use. Barnhart stated last week there was a review of a conditional use permit based on the approval of a similar ordinance. Comments were received from the neighbors in opposition to the project but the Planning Commission also received a comment in favor of the proposed use. Barnhart indicated there was quite a bit of concern expressed from the area property owners regarding noise and how that would impact their day-to-day life. Barnhart stated he attempted to address those concerns with performance standards. The biggest concern was that dog barking is a sharp intermittent noise. McMillan noted a number of the other sites are located close to freeways, which probably helps to mitigate some of the noise issues. McMillan indicated she did not make it up to Puptown today, but noted that facility is also pretty much surrounded by industrial. McMillan stated in her view the other facilities are located in noisy areas, which is different than the building located in Navarre. McMillan stated her concern in this instance is there was talk during the Planning Commission meeting of doing a $1 million renovation to the building with the soundproofing. McMillan stated given the amount of the investment, she would hate to have an issue with the neighbors. If the dogs are indoors all the time, it may not be an issue, but if the dogs are outside, that may impact the neighbors. Page 10 of 27 MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, September 28, 2015 7:00 o'clock p.m. 9. ##15-3768 MICHAEL AND LISA LARSON, PROPOSED ORDINANCE AMENDMENT RELATED TO DOG BOARDING AND GROOMING IN B-1 ZONING DISTRICT (continued) McMillan noted the City worked with the Narrows Saloon to have a double -door entry to help mitigate the noise and that may be necessary in this situation as well. McMillan stated she has a concern with the drop-offs and dogs going in and out creating an intermittent noise that might affect the surrounding residential area. Walsh stated he shares some of the same concerns, and that when the dogs are going out in groups of six or ten every 15 minutes and there are 60 dogs, different dogs will be out there constantly. Walsh stated the biggest times these facilities are being used are typically on the weekends and the holidays, which is when the neighbors will want to be out in their yards. Walsh stated he can hear dogs in his neighborhood four or five houses down and they are beagles. Walsh stated he has a concern with disrupting an entire neighborhood, especially given the amount of investment. Mike Larson, Applicant, stated they were tasked two weeks ago to come back and explain to the City Council what the sound impact will be on the neighborhood. Larson indicated he spent a lot of time Monday night going over the sound impacts with the Planning Commission. Larson stated their primary objection was sound, which they understand, but that they have put a lot of time, energy and resources to make sure those objections are overcome. Larson stated they have empirical evidence that shows these facilities are not a nuisance to the communities and that there have been zero complaints during the life of these establishments. Larson stated in his view there are a lot of assumptions related to an old -schooled kennel, which is not what they are building. Larson indicated they will be constructing a state-of-the-art facility that will mitigate sound to the best of their ability. Larson stated while they cannot eliminate noise entirely, no business in the B-1 zoning district can. Larson noted there are three gas stations at the intersection of Highway 15. Larson stated the City cannot tell him that his business will be louder than those businesses. In addition, there is an approved restaurant/bar that has music until 1 a.m. Larson stated they have data that proves otherwise for their proposed use. Larson stated they have come before the Council because they want to show the Council that they have done their homework. Larson commented he is not sure how much more they can provide the Council in this regard. Larson indicated they have made some changes to their plans in response to the concerns expressed by the Planning Commission and the neighbors. The lobby will be relocated to the back of the building and there will be a double glass door. In addition, the relief area will be moved to the south part of the building that is closer to Shoreline Drive and the indoor suites near the northern most part of the building have been moved further south in the building in an effort to remove any potential for sounds to the adjoining property. Lisa Larson indicated she did visit Wolf Central on Penn Avenue. Larson stated she walked into the facility and it was silent. Larson stated she is not exaggerating when she says silent. That facility consists of 11,000 square feet, with 5,000 square feet being indoor play space. Larson stated the owners of that facility have done some sound mitigation to the building so it is silent and not disruptive to the neighbors. Larson noted they have not received a single complaint. Page 11 of 27 MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, September 28, 2015 7:00 o'clock p.m. 9. #15-3768 MICHAEL AND LISA LARSON, PROPOSED ORDINANCE AMENDMENT RELATED TO DOG BOARDING AND GROOMING IN B-1 ZONING DISTRICT (confinued) Mike Larson stated he also drove to that building and parked his car between the building and the residential homes. Larson indicated he sat there for half an hour with his windows open and did not hear a single sound. Larson stated in his view that feeds into the assertion that there is not an issue with noise with these facilities. Lisa Larson noted the 13-1 district is a commercial district and not a residential district. Larson stated they are attempting to be sensitive to that but noted every business will generate noise. A restaurant will have traffic impacts, noise, and environmental smells. Larson stated they are not saying the facility will be silent all the time but that they are willing to spend a considerable amount of money to eliminate the sounds from going into the neighbors' homes. Larson noted people will not be in their back yards the majority of the year due to the Minnesota climate, and to think that the sound is going to travel from inside a sound -mitigated facility and travel across to the two neighbors and into their homes is not realistic. Lisa Larson stated she feels strongly about this and that they intend to have a 100 percent supervised facility. The dogs will never be outside without a person, and if a dog starts barking, it will come back into the facility. Larson stated dogs bark because they are stressed, dogs bark when they are alone or when they are looking for their owners. Larson stated dogs that are playing are a different kind of a situation with regard to barking. Larson stated the dogs will be worn out and will sleep at night. Lisa Larson noted they chose TWC because they are the best at what they do. TWC constructs dog facilities. Larson noted Adogo did not use a firm like TWC to construct their facilities but that they have chosen to pick someone who constructs dog care facilities. TWC has constructed hundreds of these facilities and they are willing to invest this kind of money in Navarre. Larson stated TWC knows how to mitigate the sound. Tim Parsons, TWC, stated over the past couple of weeks he has worked with the Planning Commission, Staff, and the owners to come up with a successful project. Since the Planning Commission meeting, they have been tweaking the site plan and floor plan to make it as inoffensive as possible. Parsons stated they have taken the comments from the neighbors and thought about how to alleviate those concerns, which included moving the vestibule further away from Shoreline Drive and creating a more attractive parking area. In addition, the relief area has been moved closer to Shoreline. Parsons stated they have tried to get some of the potential sound away from the neighbors to the north. Another revision is shifting the sidewalk in order to place some more conifer plantings in that area. Parsons noted closer to the property line there is an existing chain link fence and some trees and plantings. Parsons stated they could evaluate the quality of the plantings and perhaps place some more plants in that area. In addition, the fence could perhaps be a little more opaque. Parsons stated they are attempting to address the concerns that have been raised and in their view they have made some positive changes to the plan. McMillan stated she had a question about the waste management and how that will be managed. Page 12 of 27 MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, September 28, 2015 7:00 o'clock p.m. 9. #15-3768 MICHAEL AND LISA LARSON, PROPOSED ORDINANCE AMENDMENT RELATED TO DOG BOARDING AND GROOMING IN B-1 ZONING DISTRICT (condnued) Mike Larson stated solid waste will be immediately picked up, placed in biodegradable bags, and taken to a site that is designed for pet waste. The floor will have epoxy on it and an Aqua Air cleaning system will be installed to sanitize the place immediately. Larson stated the intent is to sanitize the entire facility every night. Walsh asked if there are OSHA requirements that must be met. Lisa Larson stated there are and that they regulate the chemicals used as well as the noise. Walsh stated he has been in these kinds of facilities before, and when you walk in the entryway, you do not know there are any dogs inside. Walsh stated in his view it is more of a concern with the very tight nature of the business district and the outside noise. Walsh stated if the dogs go outside every two hours for 10 or 15 minutes, if there are 30 to 50 dogs, they will be out there every hour on the hour for about 10 hours. Walsh stated he has more of a concern that it is too tight of an area and that this facility might be more practical in an industrial area. Walsh stated his concern is not the inside of the building. Lisa Larson stated today she drove to Adogo over by Ridgedale and their outdoor facility is between the German hospital and the Midas. Larson indicated she sat in her car with the windows down and recorded it with her iPhone. Larson stated there was a little bit of barking but that it was not constant even though there were probably 15 large dogs out there. Mike Larson stated they have been visiting these sites to see if their business model works and that there have not been any complaints from the residents. Lisa Larson noted they are also talking about small dogs. Larson indicated they are planning on hiring animal behaviorists that are trained to deal with dogs and are able to silence the dogs very quickly. Larson stated they are not planning on hiring 16 -year-old kids to watch the dogs and that they intend to hire professional people who are used to handling dogs and managing their behavior. Larson noted there are over 35 of these facilities in the Twin Cities area and they are successful. Larson stated none of those facilities focus on small dogs and none of the facilities have done the amount of sound mitigation they are proposing. Larson stated they will never let the dogs be outside and bark nonstop. Walsh noted small dogs are usually 25 pounds or under, but that this facility will take dogs that are overweight, which could mean 30 or 35 pounds. Lisa stated they will take overweight dogs. Mike Larson stated the average dog bark is 85 decibels, with the range being from 60 to 113 decibels. McMillan stated it probably depends on the breed and not necessarily the size of the dog. Page 13 of 27 MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, September 28, 2015 7:00 o'clock p.m. 9. ##15-3768 MICHAEL AND LISA LARSON, PROPOSED ORDINANCE AMENDMENT RELATED TO DOG BOARDING AND GROOMING IN B-1 ZONING DISTRICT (continued) Printup asked what protections the neighbors would have if the dogs are outside barking. Printup stated he is less concerned about the barking on the inside of the building. Barnhart stated in this situation, with a conditional use permit and a license being required, the City has more protection. Barnhart stated the conditional use permit is based on standards, which is where the weakness is with the City's standards and is why Staff added the license requirement. Chapter 62 talks about ratios and a number of standards in terms of noise mitigation. Barnhart stated the City Council would review a conditional use permit based on meeting those standards and also require license. Those would be renewed annually. Barnhart stated if the applicants are not meeting those standards, it is easier to revoke a license than it is a conditional use permit. Walsh stated if someone is investing $1 million in a business, it is difficult not to renew the license. City Attorney Mattick noted once the conditional use permit is issued, it runs with the land. A license provides the flexibility to address the concerns and make them a condition of the license. Mattick stated at the last meeting there were concerns about how to address the concerns and that Staff has been trying to figure out ways to move the application along. McMillan stated the amount of investment puts the City in a tough position to say there are too many dogs or too much play time since it would impact the business's economic viability. McMillan stated dog noise is hard to control but a noise caused by a human being is easier to place tighter conditions on it. McMillan stated the issue she has is controlling the dogs is difficult other than reducing the number, which then becomes an economic issue. Lisa Larson stated that is very true and that they have to stick to a certain number to make the business viable. Larson stated they do not want 60 square feet per dog and that they are looking at 85 square feet per dog. Larson noted these are small dogs and not large dogs and that they are willing to perhaps limit the number of dogs for the first year or two to prove that it can be done. Mike Larson stated in year one of the business they do not expect 100 percent occupancy. By the end of year one, they anticipate 50 percent occupancy. Larson stated they are talking about 25 dogs the first year. Lisa Larson indicated they have worked with a consultant out of Madison, Wisconsin, who owns a facility there and they know where they need to be with the number of dogs. Larson stated they are willing to make that number less than what other facilities have. McMillan asked if they will be occupying the entire building. Mike Larson stated they will have 6,241 square feet out of the 7,200 square feet. Walsh stated it is his understanding the owner of the building will occupy a small bay. Page 14 of 27 MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, September 28, 2015 7:00 o'clock p.m. 9. #15-3768 MICHAEL AND LISA LARSON, PROPOSED ORDINANCE AMENDMENT RELATED TO DOG BOARDING AND GROOMING IN B-1 ZONING DISTRICT {continued} Paul Johncox 2948 Casco Point Road, stated he owns the building in question here and that he currently runs a cleaning company out of the building. The building has been owned for a couple of years now and has been shown to numerous people. The building requires a lot of work. Johncox stated he has had four people look at the building that were interested in putting a restaurant in it but due to the limited parking, it did not work. The Larson's are willing to come in and are willing to spend the money to improve the building. The million dollars includes working capital and the amount of money being put into the property is $600,000. Johncox indicated he will be helping the Larson's out with some of the funding and that he does not think the risk is quite as much as the Council thinks. Johncox stated if this use is not approved, there is not much else they can do except tear the building down. If a restaurant comes in, it will cause more traffic and will be open later at night. Johncox stated in his view it will not bring more congestion to the area. Lisa Larson stated last Monday at the Planning Commission meeting the veterinarian down the road said that the City needs this type of business because she has had a ton of clients asking for this type of business and has not felt comfortable referring them anywhere. Larson stated the community does not currently have something like this. Walsh stated in his view it would be a very successful venture. Walsh noted he attended the Planning Commission meeting and heard the concerns of the neighbors but that he is not sure on how to get around the noise issue. Mike Larson stated there are 18,000 cars that drive up and down Shoreline Drive daily, which means an average of 1,000 cars an hour. Larson stated he did hear the neighbors' concerns about cars cutting through the neighborhood, but that is beyond their control and has no bearing on their business. Larson stated if they are at maximum capacity with overnight guests in the 55 suites and another 18 dogs are brought in for daycare, given the fact that the average stay in a dog boarding facility is four days, 55 dogs would come out to roughly ten dogs a day that are turning over. Larson stated they would be open from 7 a.m. to 7 p.m., which would amount to less than one car an hour that is visiting this facility. Larson stated the daycare is a little more fluid, and if they havel8 dogs in the morning with a 2 -hour drop-off window, they are talking about ten dogs an hour. Larson stated the amount of additional traffic that will be generated as a result of that on a road that has 1,000 cars an hour is statistically almost irrelevant. Walsh stated he was not concerned about Shoreline Drive but more about the neighborhood roads. Larson stated he does not see any data or evidence that points to their customers racing through the neighborhood. Walsh noted it was a concern that was expressed. Larson stated the reality is that these are people who simply want to drop their dogs off and then get on with their day. Larson stated he cannot see them doing that. Page 15 of 27 MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, September 28, 2015 7:00 o'clock p.m. 9. #15-3768 MICHAEL AND LISA LARSON, PROPOSED ORDINANCE AMENDMENT RELATED TO DOG BOARDING AND GROOMING IN B-1 ZONING DISTRICT (continued) Paul Johncox stated they will pull out the chain link fence and install a nice fence with landscaping on both sides. The exterior of the building will also be improved. Johncox stated it will be a nice piece of property when they are done with it. Printup stated he has warmed up to it a little bit more but that he would still like to hear about the residential areas that this building abuts up to. Barnhart stated the Council has the option to deny the application for a text amendment as is, they can recommend approval with any changes, or table the application until the Planning Commission recommendation comes forward on the conditional use permit. Printup stated he has heard a couple of times that some of these facilities are not necessarily in industrial areas. Barnhart stated when he visited the sites, a number of them were located in an industrial area and there was noise from the nearby roads. The Adogo in Minnetonka is adjacent to residential and adjacent to a condominium building. In that case the city planner indicated he has not received any complaints. There was similar concern to what was received at the Planning Commission but since it has been open, the City of Minnetonka has not received any other comments. Levang noted there is an ordinance amending Chapter 62 and then an ordinance amending Chapter 78-1. Levang asked which one Staff would want the Council to approve. Barnhart stated the applicant proposed an ordinance amendment to Chapter 78-1 and 78-644 and then Staff proposed the other one to help address the second layer of concerns. Barnhart stated he would propose bringing the ordinance amending Chapter 62 back before the Council in two weeks. Levang stated she does not have a problem with the application and that amending Chapter 62 makes sense. McMillan asked where the one dog per 85 square feet of gross floor area comes from. Barnhart indicated he used Minnetonka's number. McMillan asked if that is indoor or outdoor space. Mike Larson stated it is strictly indoor space and that typically there are no requirements for outdoor space. Larson indicated their outside play area will be between 700 to 800 square feet. Printup asked if people will be coming in the middle of the night once there is staff on 2417. Mike Larson stated they would like to get up to a 2417 by year two but that lobby hours will be 7 a.m. to 7 p.m. Page 16 of 27 MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, September 28, 2015 7:00 o'clock p.m. 9. #15-3768 MICHAEL AND LISA LARSON, PROPOSED ORDINANCE AMENDMENT RELATED TO DOG BOARDING AND GROOMING IN B-1 ZONING DISTRICT (continued) McMillan stated she personally would like more time to look at the various different pieces of the application. McMillan stated the extra landscaping would be nice but that it will not totally cut the noise. McMillan stated at the time the Highway 12 bypass was being constructed, MN/DOT indicated the only thing that really absorbs sound is dirt and that sound will go through trees. McMillan stated the landscaping would help improve the area but that she has a concern about allowing a number of small dogs in an area next to residential. McMillan stated she would like to think a little more about the idea of dog boarding and the types of standards that should be imposed. Walsh suggested the applicants also reach out to the neighbors to try to educate them on what will be done to the building as far as sound mitigation. Walsh recommended the Council zero in on the facilities that are close to residential and perhaps visit a few neighbors to get a better handle. Walsh stated he is very leery to pass something when there are neighbors that are very concerned about the proposal. Levang moved, Walsh seconded, to table Application No. 15-3768, Michael and Lisa Larson, Ordinance Amendment Related to Dog Boarding and Dog Grooming in the B-1 Zoning District, based on the concerns discussed this evening. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. 10. #15-3773 STEVE ELLIOT,1400 BALDUR PARK ROAD, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AND VARIANCE — PUBLIC HEARING — RESOLUTION NO. 6546 Barnhart stated the property owner is planning to demolish the existing home and construct a new family home on the property. The new home must be constructed to conform to all applicable laws and regulations. In order to conform to the floodplain regulation, the lowest floor of the home must be at or above the regulatory flood protection elevation. The applicant's proposal contemplates cutting and filling within the property in order to elevate the proposed home to meet the floodplain regulations. The City's floodplain regulations require all structures proposed to be elevated on fill material to have the fill material continue for a width of 15 feet around the perimeter of the structure to be elevated. The subject property is 50 feet wide and the proposed home is 30 feet wide. While the 10 -foot LR -1C district setback can be met, there is not sufficient room on either side of the home to fully comply with the 15 - foot perimeter fill requirement. As a result, the applicant is requesting a variance to this code provision. At its August meeting, the Planning Commission held a public hearing and reviewed the application. Following the public hearing, the Planning Commission voted 6 to 0 to approve the conditional use permit with the condition that the applicant submits evidence of MCWD permits prior to placement on the City Council's agenda for review. The applicant has submitted the required permits. Because this application was presented to the Planning Commission without the variance request, Staff has published a new notice for a public hearing relating to the variance at the Council's September 28 meeting. Planning Staff recommends approval of the conditional use permit and variance allowing for redevelopment of the property. Page 17 of 27 MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, September 28, 2015 7:00 o'clock p.m. 10. #15-3773 STEVE ELLIOT,1400 BALDUR PARK ROAD, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AND VARIANCE — PUBLIC HEARING — RESOLUTION NO. 6546 (continued) Levang asked if the applicants are essentially rebuilding in kind. Barnhart stated this application meets all other ordinances and that they are requesting the conditional use permit to fill in the floodplain and the variance. Levang asked if the Planning Commission reviewed the variance request. Barnhart stated they did not. Mayor McMillan opened the public hearing at 8:47 p.m. There were no public comments regarding this application. Mayor McMillan closed the public hearing at 8:47 p.m. Walsh moved, Printup seconded, to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 6546, a Resolution Granting Variances from Municipal Zoning Code Section 78-1119(x) and a Conditional Use Permit Pursuant to Municipal Zoning Code Section 78-1116(5), for the property located at 1400 Baldur Park Road. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. 11. #15-3775 CITY OF ORONO, TEXT AMENDMENT REGARDING TEMPORARY SIGNS Ordinance No. 159 Barnhart noted the City Council reviewed this text amendment at their September 14 meeting. The City Council expressed concerns with the ordinance as it related to the definition of content neutral and the signage changes proposed in the residential area. Barnhart stated the ordinance amends the sign ordinance in several ways and accomplishes the following: 1. Removes private signage from city right-of-way. 2. Allow additional signage for commercially zoned properties that provide signage for charitable organizations. 3. Give the City authority to display any sign within its own right-of-way or property. Staff suggests addressing the more pressing issues in the ordinance and revisiting the context neutral and signs on public property at a later time. The revised ordinance allows businesses an extra sign if they advertise for a community event and removes the opportunity for private signage on public property all together. Walsh commented he thought the ordinance looked okay. Page 28 of 27 MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCII. MEETING Monday, September 28, 2015 7:00 o'clock p.m. 11. #15-3775 CITY OF ORONO, TEXT AMENDMENT REGARDING TEMPORARY SIGNS Ordinance No. 159 (continued) Council Member Comick asked if the City is covered under this ordinance if someone wants to put out a temporary electronic sign. Barnhart stated he is sure the City is covered and that he has never seen a temporary electronic sign. Barnhart noted he is not proposing to change anything else in the code and that Staff will need to deny any application that requests something that is not allowed by current City Code. Barnhart stated in his view the ordinance is not opening the door to things the Council does not desire. McMillan noted on Page 1 of 2, the last sentence in the paragraph highlighted in red states, "For the purposes of this Chapter, community events shall include Orono Police and Long Lake events and Navarre Community Initiative and Orono School District events." McMillan stated she is assuming that means the Long Lake Fire Department. McMillan stated she would like to make that language a little broader since there is also the Westonka School District. McMillan suggested the language say, "Community events shall include local public safety events, community festivals, and local school district events." McMillan stated in her view that encompasses everything. McMillan noted Item b reads, "There should be no more than one temporary sign in any required yard area, and if separate multiple signs are proposed, the total area of the signs shall not exceed 32 square feet. McMillan stated in her view that language is confusing. Barnhart stated there is a distinction between a required yard, which is a setback of 35 feet, and the house or building setback, which could be 50 feet. Barnhart stated under the ordinance, there could be another sign in that second 15 -foot zone, which is the difference between a required yard and the front yard. Barnhart stated he is not proposing to change that at this time, but in his view the City will not run into that situation very often. McMillan stated as it reads, her understanding is that only one sign is allowed in the required yard area, but that the following language is confusing. McMillan stated she would like to make that language clearer so the code will be user friendly. Barnhart stated he can make any changes the Council would like to see, but that the Mayor is speaking to the heart of why the proposal was ramped down from a couple of weeks ago. Barnhart concurred the goal should be to make it user friendly and that he would like to hold off on that and revisit it later. McMillan stated she would also like to alert the businesses about this ordinance and that she would suggest Staff send a letter to them as well as a sign application. McMillan stated she would like Staff to look at some way that someone could fill out a permit for the entire year. McMillan stated the fee could perhaps be adjusted if they book all four temporary signs for the year at one time. McMillan stated she would like it to be as easy as possible for businesses so they do not have to keep coming up to City Hall and that the City could start enforcing it in 2016. Walsh stated the City does not have a lot of businesses so it should be relatively easy. Page 19 of 27 MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, September 28, 2015 7:00 o'clock p.m. 11. #15-3775 CITY OF ORONO, TEXT AMENDMENT REGARDING TEMPORARY SIGNS Ordinance No. 159 (continued) Cornick stated on Page 2 of the ordinance, Letter D, it says, "The City may, without notice, remove any temporary sign erected in violation of this section or any other federal, state, or local law or ordinance. Any signs not claimed within 15 days after removal may be destroyed by the City." Cornick asked if there is a state statute that says the City has to keep it a longer time. Mattick asked if Council Member Cornick is thinking about abandoned property. Cornick indicated he is. Mattick stated he does not know the answer to that question and that he thought the 15 days was specific to found property. Mattick stated this relates to signs placed within the City's right-of-way. Cornick stated the City does not want to supersede state statute and that it is worth looking into. Barnhart stated he switched it to 15 days due to storage issues but that he could leave it at 30 days. Printup noted a question was raised a couple of weeks ago regarding kids' sports signs. Printup asked if that is something that will be getting picked up or whether that falls into a different category. Barnhart stated Staff does its best with limited resources on enforcement and that Staff cannot catch all the signs. McMillan stated those type of signs are typically in residential areas and could probably be addressed at a future time. Levang moved, Printup seconded, to adopt ORDINANCE NO. 158, Third Series, an Ordinance Amending the Orono Municipal Code by Amending Section 78-1466 Regarding Signs subject to Staff making the changes discussed tonight. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR'S REPORT, CONTINUED Barnhart noted he attended the American Planning Association of Minnesota conference last week and he is working on a synopsis of some of the sessions he attended. Barnhart stated he hopes to provide that in the Council's packet in the near future. Barnhart stated he also hopes to be able to visit the local businesses in the very near future. PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR/CITY ENGINEER'S REPORT *12. LONG LAKE'S WATERTOWN ROAD FEASIBILITY REPORT Levang moved, Cornick seconded, to accept the Watertown Road Feasibility Study. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. Page 20 of 27 MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, September 28, 2015 7:00 o'clock p.m. 13. WATERTOWN ROAD PHASE 2 Edwards stated on May 20, 2014, Bolton & Menk presented a feasibility study for the rehabilitation of Watertown Road and Stubbs Bay Road. The Council decided to phase the project over multiple years and approved engineer services for survey, design and bidding for reconstruction of Phase I, which included Stubbs Bay Road from Watertown Road to Bayside Road and Watertown Road from Stubbs Bay Road to Old Crystal Bay Road. Phase I is now nearing completion. Edwards noted approximately 500 feet to the east of Willow to the Long Lake city limits is not eligible for state aid funds. That cost was inadvertently left out of the first update to the Council and a revised cost schedule has been distributed to the Council. Phase II has two sections and incudes Watertown Road from Turnham Road to Stubbs Bay Road and Old Crystal bay Road to Long Lake City limits. The scope of the project will consist of the reclamation of the bituminous pavement, subgrade corrections, and the replacement/improvement of the associated stormwater system. The project consists of two sections which abut the section of Watertown Road that was reclaimed in 2015. The estimated cost for Phase H is $1,509,283. The project will be funded with a combination of Municipal State Aid funds and the Storm Water Fund. The estimate from Bolton & Menk for Phase II is a cost not to exceed $155,000. A separate scope and fee for construction services will be presented at the construction award. Edwards stated in order to move forward with the project starting in 2016, it is necessary to conduct survey and engineering work this fall/winter, complete plans and specs for advertisement and bidding in the winter/spring, and commence work in the 2016 construction season. Walsh stated he has different opinions about which roads should be done and that the portion of Watertown Road between Kokesh and Orchard is actually pretty good. Walsh stated the only bad part of Watertown Road is starting at Stubbs Bay Road going west, which would be maybe a quarter mile or a third of a mile. Walsh stated as you go east on Fox from Old Crystal Bay Road to Willow Road, that entire stretch is as bad as the worst part next to Stubbs Bay Road and from Willow and Brown is even worse. Walsh stated the other sections have many, many years left and the City has a number of roads that are in worst condition. Edwards stated when they compare the MSA roads, as Fox Road transitions, the section of MSA road is the section between Willow and Brown. The other sections are regular city roads. Edwards indicated he does agree that that section of Fox Road is atrocious and that he receives constant calls on it. Edwards stated the Public Works Department can no longer patch it anymore. Walsh stated that section definitely needs to get done and that the City does not need to redo the entire road. Walsh stated as long as the equipment is close by, the City's money would be better spent going down to Fox and taking care of that really bad piece. Walsh stated in his view it makes more sense to get the really bad stuff done. McMillan asked how much money is in the City's MSA fund. Page 21 of 27 MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, September 28, 2015 7:00 o'clock p.m. 13. WATERTOWN ROAD PHASE 2 (continued) Edwards stated looking at MSA fund projections, after all bills are paid for the current project, it is estimated to be $547,000. Edwards stated he is also estimating that the City will have approximately $900,000 when both parts of the MSA funds are combined. Edwards noted the City just received last week the estimated revenue letter from the state and that he is expecting $348,341 will be added in 2016. Edwards stated the City's debt service is fixed and cannot be changed, but if the City completed Phase II of Watertown Road, based on current numbers, there will be approximately $11,800 left in the fund. Edwards stated the biggest projects on the agenda for MSA roads are Watertown Road, Fox Street, and a mill and overlay on Leaf Street. Edwards stated if the City spends down its budget on Watertown this year, it will take until approximately 2020 before the City will be able to improve Fox Street with just MSA funds and then complete Leaf Street the following year. Walsh suggested the City Council consider doing Leaf, Fox and the third of Watertown to get all the bad stuff done. Walsh stated there is no reason to do roads that do not need to be done and that the City is spending money for the sake of spending McMillan stated at some point Watertown Road will need to get done and it is a matter of prioritizing the roads. Cornick asked if the traffic count on Watertown is heavier than Fox. Edwards stated to his recollection it does have a higher traffic count, which is the reason the Council made the decision last year to redo Watertown Road. Edwards stated they took the most traveled portion first and left the worst section for the second phase. Edwards stated to his knowledge the entire length of Watertown has a higher traffic count than Fox. Levang stated that is her recollection and that Phase II, Section I, is really the worst section of the road. Edwards pointed out the section of Watertown that was recently completed. Edwards staters Phase II would basically pick up where the curbing ends that was redone several years ago, go down the hill, around the corner, and then into that bad section. McMillan stated that section is bad and should be done. McMillan stated the Council can certainly look at that section of Fox Street, but one of the frustrating things to the residents would be why that section from Willow to Old Crystal Bay Road was not done. Walsh stated the City is merely picking the worst sections, which is hard to argue with. Printup noted he was in favor of Watertown Road because the Council has been talking about Watertown Road for five or six years. Printup stated if it is reasonable to talk about completing Phase I, Section II, and the MSA portion of Fox, he would be open to hearing that, but that he does not want to delay any road projects. Printup stated in his view it is the City's responsibility to get it done but that they do need to get it done right. Page 22 of 27 MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, September 28, 2015 7:00 o'clock p.m. 13. WATERTOWN ROAD PHASE 2 (continued Walsh stated he does not want to spend money simply because it is in front of the Council and that he would prefer to fix the worst roads. McMillan stated she has received a couple of calls regarding Phase H, Section II, asking about when that section of the road will be done. McMillan stated the other thing the City Council can do is add the engineering for that section of Fox Street from Willow to Brown and then make a decision on which roads to do. Printup stated he would not be opposed to that since the engineering needs to be done at some point. Levang asked if those engineering costs would be lost if the road is not done right away. McMillan stated completing the engineering on those three sections of road would probably help prioritize the projects. Martini stated the Council can break up the projects any way they would like and that they can certainly look at Fox. Martini stated the most critical thing for completing a project next year is getting the wetland delineations done in the next couple of weeks and then completing survey work before the snow. Martini stated they can look at the worst sections on Watertown, Fox, and Leaf if the Council would like. Walsh stated they are not throwing away the engineering dollars unless something drastically changes. Edwards stated the wetland delineations are good for five years. Edwards noted the City's Pavement Management Plan rates the roads and was completed in the fall of 2014. Edwards stated the darker the red, the lower the index for that road and the green and blue sections depict better conditions. Edwards indicated the roads that are orange and red were recommended for reconstruction and that surface conditions are saying that there is something wrong with the structure of the road. Edwards stated there might be 200 feet of really good road and then 200 feet of really bad road but that it depicts the average of the road. The bluer and greener sections are still eligible for crack sealing or seal coating and eligible for preventative maintenance as opposed to rebuild. McMillan asked if the engineering fees come out of MSA fiends. Martini stated if it is eligible. McMillan asked if the engineering costs came out of MSA funds for Phase I. Edwards stated to his knowledge they have not received all the bills for that work but that MSA funds can cover eligible engineering costs. McMillan stated the Council could add on engineering for the Fox Street section in addition to the engineering for Watertown. Printup indicated he would be okay with that. Page 23 of 27 MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, September 28, 2015 7:00 o'clock p.m. 13. WATERTOWN ROAD PHASE 2 (continued Walsh asked if Leaf is an MSA road. Edwards indicated it is but that in the Pavement Management Plan it is listed as a mill and overlay. McMillan stated she is not sure whether Leaf needs to be done at this point given the low traffic counts. Martini stated if it is scheduled for a mill and overlay, they should not delay it for too long that the road deteriorates too much. Martini stated it is imperative to get the wetland delineation done this fall if the Council would like to have an MSA project next year. Edwards stated if the Council looks at this as an overall process, the intent is not to go ahead with. i decision on construction but to proceed forward with the engineering and design. Printup moved, Walsh seconded, to authorize the project development and design for Phase H of Watertown Road, approving the Bolton & Menk project development proposal for a fee not to exceed $155,000, and adding a wetland delineation for the MSA portion of Fox Street. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. *14. WATER TREATMENT SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS — PAY REQUEST NO.6 Levang moved, Cornick seconded, to approve Pay Request No. 6 to Municipal Builders, Inc., in the amount of $19,084.06 for the water treatment systems improvement project. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR/CITY ENGINEER'S REPORT, CONTINUED Edwards reported work on Baldur Park Road is still underway after a few delays. Paving is expected to be completed next week. As it relates to the water plant project, the water softener has been inspected and it looks good. The major item remaining to be completed is the interior painting and that they are waiting until early October for the humidity to go down. The Public Works Department has also performed some culvert repairs. The flushing of the sanitary sewer should be finished this week. The Public Works Department will then move to the City's storm sewer and examining culverts and ditches to make sure they are functioning appropriately. In addition, the Public Works Department provided some support in Navarre for the bike event and placed the newest donated table at Crystal Bay Park. Edwards noted the two new hires are now on board. Walsh asked for an update on Baldur Park Road. Martini stated they dug out the middle section of the road and placed the fabric. The area has not been expanded from what was originally planned on. Page 24 of 27 MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, September 28, 2015 7:00 o'clock p.m. PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR/CITY ENGINEER'S REPORT (continued) The contractor has been working on shaping the road to shed the water off as best as possible. Martini indicated they are attempting to get it away from the residential side of the street. Martini stated they have not encountered any surprises to this point and that the contractor plans to begin paving on Wednesday. McMillan asked if the Public Works Department is experiencing any problems with baby wipes in the sewer system. Edwards stated there have been issues with that off and on over the past several years but he did not hear about any issues with baby wipes with the latest flushing. Edwards stated the biggest thing in the sewer is gravel and root intrusion due to the pipes being old clay pipe. McMillan asked if they will be addressing any more I&I issues next year. Edwards indicated they are in the final phases of the I&I project for this year and that they will be using the information that is being gathered during the televising to identify next year's I&I target areas where sewer lining and manhole lining can be completed. MAYOR/COUNCIL REPORT Walsh stated he attended the Planning Commission meeting on Monday and that they are doing a good job vetting the applications. Cornick stated he has received a number of phone calls recently and they all related to issues with Mediacom. Levang noted the Navarre Community Festival was held last Sunday and that it was very successful. Approximately 200 people attended the event, with around 50 kids participating in the bike safety rodeo. Levang stated she received some very positive comments about the event. Cornick stated one of the things a parent did was to go and recruit kids in the neighborhood to come and get fitted for a helmet. Levang stated they had 20 helmets to give away. Levang stated she would like to thank all the Staff who helped on this event, the Public Works Department for bringing the tables and the port -a potty, and the Fire Station for the very nice open house. Levang stated at the next meeting the group will have a thank you for the major event planners. Levang reported she went with the Park Commission on Saturday with Gabriel Jabbour as they toured Big Island. The Park Commission was provided with information about all the projects that have been done on Big Island over the years by Gabriel Jabbour. Levang stated in her view the Park Commission was very impressed with the stabilization work that was completed. Levang stated the donation garden for this year has donated over 3,000 pounds of produce and that they have already received thanks from both agencies that the garden contributes to. Page 25 of 27 MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, September 28, 2015 7:00 o'clock p.m. MAYOR/COUNCIL REPORT (continued) Levang stated work is being completed on the next City newsletter, which should be out in the next two or three weeks. Printup stated Saturday was the Long Lake Fire Department event and that he has been hearing from people about how fun it was. Printup stated the fireworks were spectacular. Printup noted he attended the Navarre Community Festival on Sunday and that it was a very good event. Printup reported he was invited to meet with Justin McCoy, who he is coordinator for facilities and safety for the Orono School District, and that they talked about achievements and cooperation between the City of Orono and the School District, which they are very appreciative of. Also discussed were parental calls and concerns that have been voiced over the years. Printup stated they are taking those very serious and discussions were had on some practical solutions for Old Crystal Bay Road. Printup stated if the Council desires, they could talk about Old Crystal Bay Road at a future work session and invite Justin McCoy to join the Council to offer some solutions. McMillan stated the Navarre Festival and the Long Lake Fire events were very successful and well attended. McMillan stated she has received a number of very positive comments about both events and that she would like to thank all those who were involved. McMillan reported the Highway 12 group decided two temporary lanes would keep traffic moving and is the option that has been chosen. McMillan stated there is still a lot of concern about the overall construction project but that there will be an open house the first part of November to help address those concerns. McMillan stated the committee is temporary on hiatus until the next phase gets started. CITY ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT *15. ORONO POLICE GARAGE — PAY REQUEST NO. 13 Levang moved, Cornick seconded, to approve Pay Request No. 13 for the contractors working on the Orono Police Garage Project in an amount totaling $13,857.70. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. 16. PRELIMINARY BUDGET AND TAX LEVY — RESOLUTION NOS. 6541 and 6542 Olson stated before the Council tonight is the preliminary budget and tax levy. Olson noted once the levy is approved, it cannot be increased but it can still be decreased. The tax levy is increasing 3.84 percent. An additional levy of $183,000 has been added for pavement management and would be a future funding source for roads. Olson stated the creation of that fund is a good start and a sign that the Council is working towards maintaining the City's infrastructure into the future. Olson noted the tax levy for the General Fund budget is increasing 1.7 percent but that is being offset by increases in fees, specifically building fees. Olson stated in his view it is a fairly conservative budget. The Council needs to adopt the preliminary budget tonight. Olson noted it will need to be .certified by September 30. Page 26 of 27 MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, September 28, 2015 7:00 o'clock p.m. 16. PRELIMINARY BUDGET AND TAX LEVY — RESOLUTION NOS. 6541 and 6542 (continued) Olson noted the truth -in -taxation meeting is scheduled for December 14 at the regularly scheduled council meeting beginning at 6:30 p.m. instead of 7:00 p.m. There were no public comments regarding this item. McMillan noted she did not receive any comments on the preliminary budget since the last Council meeting and that she is fine with what is being proposed. Levang stated she also is fine with what is being proposed and that she is very happy with the pavement management levy. Levang stated it is critical the City starts putting money aside to fix the roads. Printup moved, Levang seconded, to adopt RESOLUTION NO. , a Resolution Adopting the 2016 Preliminary General Fund Budget, and to adopt RESOLUTION NO., a Resolution Adopting the Preliminary 2015 Tax Levy Collectible in 2016. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. *17. CLAIMS/BILLS Levang moved, Cornick seconded, to approve payment of the AU Funds Account. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. CITY ATTORNEY'S REPORT Mattick stated he had nothing to report. F4111911 :.101u fpl►Y—II Printup moved, Levang seconded, to adjourn the Orono City Council meeting at 9:41 p.m. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. ATTEST: �, J� Lz�- _ &J41, Driffilre Tiegs, City Clerk G41i Tod McMillan, Mayor Page 27 of 27