HomeMy WebLinkAbout01-25-2010 Council Packet Agenda for Council Meeting Set for Monday, January 25, 2010, 7:00 P.M.
Orono Council Chambers, 2780 Kelley Parkway, Orono, MN 55356
Directions: www.yahoo.com/maps - 952-249-4600 / www.ci.orono.mn.us
Roll Call
Pledge of Allegiance
Consent Agenda
1. Consent agenda items, including (*) asterisk items, are considered to be routine items to be enacted
upon by one motion by the City Council under this section of the agenda. Items on the Consent
Agenda are reviewed in total by the City Council and may be approved through one motion with no
further discussion by the Council. Any item may be removed by any Council Member, staff
member or person from the public for separate consideration. If you wish to remove any item from
the Consent Agenda, please state the item number and description of the item. Memos regarding
each of the Agenda items are available in the Public Packet - located in the lobby near the sign in
sheet.
Approval of Minutes
* 2. Regular Council Meeting of January 11, 2010
Planning Commission Comments – Linda Feuss, Representative
Public Comments – (Limit 5 Minutes Per Person)
Zoning Administrator's Report
3. #06-3234 Bridgewater Bank, 4725 & 4731 North Shore Drive – Variance Renewal – Resolution
* 4. #08-3350 Frederick C. Peters, 3127 Casco Circle – Variance – Resolution
* 5. #08-3381 Barry Tanner (Navarre Lanes), 3435 Shoreline Drive – CUP Extension – Resolution
* 6. #09-3414 Patrick & Kathy Middleton, 720 Tonkawa Road – Variance – Resolution
* 7. #10-3439 Sean & Marie McLean, 25 Cygnet Place – Variance - Resolution
Mayor/Council Report
City Engineer’s Report
City Administrator's Report
8. Renewal of Contract for Prosecution Services
9. Amend the 2010 Fee Schedule Regarding Utility Rates – Resolution
10. 2010 Pay Equity Report
11. Authorization to Purchase 2010 Investigator Vehicle
12. Disposal of Forfeited Vehicle
13. Willow Drive Mill and Overlay
14. McCulley Road Guardrail Replacement Project
City Attorney's Report
Agenda for Council Meeting Set for Monday, January 25, 2010, 7:00 P.M.
Orono Council Chambers, 2780 Kelley Parkway, Orono, MN 55356
Directions: www.yahoo.com/maps - 952-249-4600 / www.ci.orono.mn.us
15. Licenses & Permits
* 16. Bills
Upcoming Issues and Events
2010
01/26 – Council Work Session, Tuesday, 6:30 p.m.
02/03 – Planning Commission Work Session, Wednesday, 5:30 p.m.
02/08 – Council Meeting, Monday, 7:00 p.m.
02/09 – Council Work Session, Tuesday, 6:30 p.m.
02/15 – HOLIDAY, Monday, Presidents’ Day
02/16 – Planning Commission Meeting, Tuesday, 6:30 p.m. (Council Liaison – Doug Franchot)
02/22 – Council Meeting, Monday, 7:00 p.m.
02/23 – Council Work Session, Tuesday, 6:30 p.m.
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING
Monday, January 11, 2010
7:00 o’clock p.m.
_____________________________________________________________________________________
Page 1
ROLL
The Orono City Council met on the above-mentioned date with the following members present: Mayor
James White, Council Members James Murphy, Lili McMillan, Cynthia Bremer, and Doug Franchot.
Representing Staff were Finance Director Ron Olson, City Clerk Lin Vee, City Attorney Soren Mattick,
Assistant City Administrator of Long-Term Strategic Planning Mike Gaffron, Zoning and Planning
Coordinator Melanie Curtis, Planner Evelyn Turner, City Engineer Tom Kellogg, and Recorder Jackie
Young.
Mayor White called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m., followed by the Pledge of Allegiance.
CONSENT AGENDA
Item Nos. 6, 7, 8, 9, 11, 12, and Item 14 were added to the Consent Agenda.
Murphy moved, Bremer seconded, to approve the Consent Agenda as amended. VOTE: Ayes 5,
Nays 0.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
*2. REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING OF DECEMBER 14, 2009
Murphy moved, Bremer seconded, to approve the minutes of the Orono City Council meeting of
December 14, 2009, as submitted. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0.
LMCD REPORT – ANDREW McDERMOTT, REPRESENTATIVE
McDermott thanked the City Council for reappointing him to the LMCD for another year.
McDermott stated this is the second year for a formal grant process request for the Save the Lake fund.
Twelve proposals were received and on Wednesday the LMCD will be voting on the recommendation
from the Save the Lake Committee. They are recommending funding the solar light program, the
Hennepin County Sheriff’s water patrol for safety equipment purchases, the chemical treatment program
for Carman’s Bay and Phelp’s Bay, the museum of Lake Minnetonka, and funding to assist in the
restoration of the Minnehaha.
PLANNING COMMISSION COMMENTS – KIM KANG, REPRESENTATIVE
Kang stated she had nothing to report but would be available for questions.
PUBLIC COMMENTS
None
Item #02 - CC Agenda - 01/25/2010
Approval of Council Minutes 01/11/2010 [Page 1 of 13]
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING
Monday, January 11, 2010
7:00 o’clock p.m.
_____________________________________________________________________________________
Page 2
PLANNING DEPARTMENT REPORT
3. #05-3164 CITY OF ORONO – CONSERVATION DESIGN ORDINANCE –
ORDINANCE ADOPTION NO. 67, THIRD SERIES
Gaffron stated this application relates to an ordinance drafted pursuant to the Rural Oasis Study. The
ordinance is called the Conservation Design Ordinance and adds a number of sections to Chapter 78.
The ordinance adds a conservation design master planning requirement that is applicable to all proposed
residential subdivisions or multi-unit residential developments that are greater than five acres in total area
or guided for urban density, which is considered to be greater than one unit per two acres.
The ordinance has a goal of preserving and enhancing the ecological and aesthetic character of the City
by requiring protection and enhancement of drainageways and water quality protection, enhancement of
ecological communities, reinforcement and establishment of ecological connections throughout the City,
identifying and preserving view sheds, including corridors and buffering, preservation and improvement
of views, and preservation of interpretation of local landmarks.
The City Council initially reviewed this ordinance back in 2005 but was not moved forward due to
concerns regarding density. Gaffron noted that two of the elements of the ordinance remain unchanged.
Item No. 1 relates to the MLCCS Classification System. While the MLCCS M-34X system of defining
the quality of natural communities is referenced in the text and is required to be used in the natural
resources inventory process, it has not replaced the 3-level management classification system that was
defined in the Rural Oasis Study. However, that management classification system has been re-titled
from “Ecological Quality Levels” to “Ecological Management Categories,” reflecting that the MLCCS
system identifies the quality and condition of a natural community, while the Ecological Management
Categories establish a management classification that takes into account additional factors and result in a
determination of whether a natural community should be preserved, enhanced, or changed. Staff sees
these two systems as having independent goals and views them as complementing each other.
Item No. 2 relates to Density Bonus standards. The City Council as early as 2005 indicated interest in
offering the possibility of density bonuses for urban development, but absolutely not for rural
development. The initial versions of the ordinance in 2005 attempted to define numerically the density
levels that a developer could expect to achieve by going above and beyond the Conservation Design
requirements in the urban area. The numerical expectations were subsequently removed from the
ordinance draft as the Council expressed a concern that leaving them in would reduce the level of
flexibility the City wished to maintain in site-specific density allowances. At the same time, the
ordinance limits the extent of a bonus by capping density at the high end of the guided density range and
does not guarantee density above the base level of that range.
The Planning Commission has reviewed this application previously on two separate occasions in 2009.
The review process has included two public hearings during which public comments were received. At
both public hearings, Jennifer Haskamp of Pulse Land Group, Inc., spoke on behalf of Susan Seeland.
Staff has met with Ms. Haskamp after the August hearing and subsequently made a number of revisions
to the text to address two of her concerns.
Item #02 - CC Agenda - 01/25/2010
Approval of Council Minutes 01/11/2010 [Page 2 of 13]
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING
Monday, January 11, 2010
7:00 o’clock p.m.
_____________________________________________________________________________________
Page 3
(3. #05-3164 CITY OF ORONO – CONSERVATION DESIGN ORDINANCE – ORDINANCE
ADOPTION NO. 67, THIRD SERIES, Continued)
There has been no apparent change in the Council’s intent regarding holding the line on rural density, and
the ordinance as presented does not provide for rural area density incentives. The ordinance as drafted
dictates that Conservation Design is a basic requirement for rural subdivision approval and is not an
optional process.
White asked why this process has taken five years.
Gaffron indicated the primary issue was whether there would be any incentives for the rural area and
whether the City was interested in specifying numerically the incentives that would be provided. There is
a performance bonus included for creating a development above what is required in the Code.
Approximately three or four years ago there was a significant discussion regarding the numerical values
to be assigned to incentives, and it was determined at some point that the numerical values should be
eliminated.
Gaffron stated in his view the ordinance offers the City a level of flexibility in interpretation that
developers will potentially see as an added required process that lacks incentives which would lead to a
predictable outcome. While the ordinance relies on the developer hiring qualified consultants, it also
establishes evaluation criteria by which an application will be judged. There have been three or four
successful developments in the interim that have followed the tenets of the ordinance voluntarily.
Murphy commented that in his view those interim developments have been instructive and should be used
as an example in approving future applications.
McMillan commented the City looked at smaller developments across the country and looked at creating
an ordinance that would have an emphasis on protecting rural oasis and rural themes that the City
identified. The traditional conservation design dealt more with larger parcels and increased densities.
McMillan noted there is a problem with clustering septic systems and that it is unclear whether that has
been resolved with this ordinance.
Bremer stated she is glad this ordinance is finally before the Council and noted that she was on the
Planning Commission when it was first discussed. Bremer asked what type of presentation was made at
the first public hearing.
Gaffron stated at the August public hearing the Rural Oasis Study was not discussed at great depth but it
was discussed in work session with more specificity.
Bremer asked what information is available on the city’s web site regarding the Rural Oasis Study.
Gaffron indicated to his knowledge the Rural Oasis Study is not on the web site currently.
Bremer recommended that be added to the City’s web site.
McMillan asked whether concrete standards could be developed from the Rural Oasis Study to help
provide direction to developers.
Item #02 - CC Agenda - 01/25/2010
Approval of Council Minutes 01/11/2010 [Page 3 of 13]
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING
Monday, January 11, 2010
7:00 o’clock p.m.
_____________________________________________________________________________________
Page 4
(3. #05-3164 CITY OF ORONO – CONSERVATION DESIGN ORDINANCE – ORDINANCE
ADOPTION NO. 67, THIRD SERIES, Continued)
Gaffron stated a natural resource specialist should probably be hired by the developer in order to help him
meet the requirements of the ordinance. Gaffron noted the developer will likely incur some additional
costs in order to meet the requirements of the City. The ordinance does contain a set of criteria for
determining whether an application meets the goals desired by the City.
McMillan commented she does have a concern that the ordinance will add costs to a development.
Gaffron stated one of the benefits of having an ordinance that is somewhat flexible is that it gives the
Council some leeway on applications.
Murphy noted the original Rural Oasis Study was done by DSU and AES, which is where a number of
these items were compiled from. Murphy commented the City needs a good pictorial presentation of
what is being requested, which is what was done by DSU as part of the Rural Oasis Study. The City is
attempting to basically create a series of rules that are flexible in the City’s Conservation Design
Ordinance.
Franchot stated there needs to be a good definition for invasive species and non-native species. Franchot
noted there are a number of species in this area that are not native.
Gaffron stated there are state regulations concerning invasive species. There are a variety of things that
are invasive that are required to be removed and a variety of invasive plants that are not regulated.
Jennifer Haskamp stated she is here on behalf of Susan Seeland and that she would like to share a few
comments with the Council. Haskamp indicated she worked with DSU at the time the ordinance was
drafted and is well aware of the process that was taken to create the ordinance. Haskamp stated she has
reviewed the ordinance and has expressed several comments during the public hearing phase and has
submitted written concerns.
Haskamp expressed concerns that the ordinance before the Council tonight will achieve exactly what they
are looking for. Haskamp stated she has a letter prepared for the Council’s review but would like to
summarize some of the key points contained in the letter.
The first concern with the ordinance is regarding the City’s 2030 Comprehensive Plan and the fact that
the 2030 Comprehensive Plan has not been formally adopted as a policy document at this point, which
raises some issues. State statute says that once a City’s comprehensive plan is adopted, you have nine
months after adoption of the document to update all of your official controls, which this ordinance would
be considered an official control. Haskamp stated she feels this ordinance is premature since they have
not had the opportunity to comment on the comprehensive plan, which is the policy document.
Murphy asked who the “we” is she is referring to.
Item #02 - CC Agenda - 01/25/2010
Approval of Council Minutes 01/11/2010 [Page 4 of 13]
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING
Monday, January 11, 2010
7:00 o’clock p.m.
_____________________________________________________________________________________
Page 5
(3. #05-3164 CITY OF ORONO – CONSERVATION DESIGN ORDINANCE – ORDINANCE
ADOPTION NO. 67, THIRD SERIES, Continued)
Haskamp stated she is speaking on behalf of her company, Pulse Land Group, and the property owner,
Susan Seeland. The second concern relates to the issue with the classification or how to identify what
constitutes natural resources. Haskamp stated she made the recommendation at one point in time that the
natural resources be classified according to the MLCCS since that is a pretty well respected way of
classifying natural resources. The management classifications that are proposed as part of this document
are at the discretion of the City to determine what constitutes high quality natural resources, which makes
it very arbitrary and very difficult for the developer to understand and does not define who will make the
final decision on a particular classification. That arbitrary process makes it difficult for common ground
to be reached.
The third issue relates to the ordinance itself. The ordinance does not give you any sort of parameters for
what documents need to be submitted in order for the application to be determined complete. This results
in a high level of ambiguity.
Haskamp stated the ordinance also discusses the standards for a density bonus. The language specifically
states that it is up to the discretion of the City Council whether a developer would receive the density
bonus; otherwise the developer would only be entitled to the base density. If the City would like smaller
developers to adhere to these principles, there should be some form of incentive for those developers;
otherwise how would you encourage a small developer to protect a large wetland and upgrade it.
Haskamp stated the ordinance basically only talks about density bonuses but there are a number of other
ways to provide incentives to developers.
Finally, the ordinance references a number of definitions, but there are also definitions that are missing in
the ordinance and some definitions that are quite subjective, such as view sheds and how that is
quantified. Haskamp stated in her view there is quite a bit in terms of the definitions that are not
completely accurate and not completely specified for someone reading the document.
Haskamp commented that low impact development is a very common thing discussed in the engineering
and planning world and is the foundation of almost every conservation ordinance, but yet it is not
identified at all in the ordinance. Haskamp stated the property owner and her company, Pulse Land
Group, are very conservation minded, but in order to achieve a great project, an ordinance has to be
created that allows collaboration with the land owner. Haskamp stated a set of specific rules would give
guidance, and this document falls short in that regard.
Mayor White stated he believes the comprehensive plan issue is not a huge factor and he is not going to
slow the process up due to that issue. There are some items that could be improved within the ordinance
and that this document is a work in process. White stated he liked the idea of compiling a list of required
documents, but that he is not willing to wait another two years for this ordinance to be adopted by the
City.
Murphy concurred that it is time to move forward with the ordinance and that in his view the ordinance
does give some guidance to the developers and land owners.
Bremer asked whether Mr. Gaffron feels any of the concerns raised by Ms. Haskamp tonight should be
addressed further in the ordinance.
Item #02 - CC Agenda - 01/25/2010
Approval of Council Minutes 01/11/2010 [Page 5 of 13]
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING
Monday, January 11, 2010
7:00 o’clock p.m.
_____________________________________________________________________________________
Page 6
(3. #05-3164 CITY OF ORONO – CONSERVATION DESIGN ORDINANCE – ORDINANCE
ADOPTION NO. 67, THIRD SERIES, Continued)
Gaffron stated the first page of Ms. Haskamp’s letter does not raise any issues in his mind. Gaffron
commented low impact development is just part of a variety of planning buzz words and processes that
the City has been professing for many decades and should be incorporated into a project. Gaffron
indicated those items could perhaps be added to the list if the Council desires. The ordinance could be
made more detailed if the Council chooses, but at this point he would recommend the City Council
approve it and amend it later if necessary.
McMillan expressed a concern that without the objectives being listed specifically and the ordinance later
being revised, that it may result in increased costs for the developer. McMillan stated she is very
concerned about adding objectives after the fact because it can create confusion for the developer. The
ordinance basically reflects the philosophy of the City but may not be down specifically in legal form for
the developers. McMillan reiterated she has a concern on the smaller subdivisions about the costs
increasing.
McMillan asked whether the five acres is buildable acres or total acres.
Gaffron stated it is five acres gross.
McMillan asked as it concerns a development that has six acres, one acre of wetland and one acre of hard
woods, whether three houses can be put on four acres. McMillan stated on the smaller subdivisions, it
can become difficult for a developer if stricter regulations are applied.
Franchot indicated he is in agreement with the majority of the concerns raised by Council Member
McMillan. Franchot asked if there is a specific reason for not defining a density bonus.
Gaffron stated the only bonus that has been brought to the City in the past by the developers is the
number of units that would be allowed. The City Council decided as part of this process that they were
not going to define a density bonus. Gaffron indicated he likes the idea of a collaboration process, which
is the nature of the ordinance.
Gaffron commented there are probably some philosophical differences with this ordinance and what the
developer would like. Gaffron stated they could make some changes to make it more of a give and take
process.
Franchot stated that goes to the issue of adding costs and asked whether there is a mechanism that can be
implemented to prevent that.
Gaffron stated a developer’s perspective will be different than a City’s perspective and that there will be
times when they will not be able to reach common ground.
Murphy stated in terms of dealing with past applications, there is a limited amount of collaboration that
the City generally gets from developers. Murphy stated in his view the City could do more collaboration,
but that collaboration requires an open mind on both sides. A number of developers come in with a set
agenda and they attempt to push that agenda. Murphy questioned how much honest collaboration they
can get from a developer in a situation like this.
Item #02 - CC Agenda - 01/25/2010
Approval of Council Minutes 01/11/2010 [Page 6 of 13]
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING
Monday, January 11, 2010
7:00 o’clock p.m.
_____________________________________________________________________________________
Page 7
(3. #05-3164 CITY OF ORONO – CONSERVATION DESIGN ORDINANCE – ORDINANCE
ADOPTION NO. 67, THIRD SERIES, Continued)
Gaffron stated that is a fair representation of reality, and that the more defined the process is, the less
likely there will be collaboration.
Bremer stated she would prefer to have a unanimous decision on the ordinance, but that she is not sure
how the ordinance can be improved.
Gaffron noted this ordinance has been reviewed by the Planning Commission twice in recent months, but
that this is the first time the Council has reviewed it since approximately 2006.
White stated in his experience the ordinance will not add any more costs for the developer but that the
City has an obligation to protect its natural resources. The ordinance mirrors the City’s current
Comprehensive Plan and he would prefer not to table the ordinance.
Franchot stated in his view the City Council should move forward on the ordinance and pointed out that
the first issue raised by Ms. Haskamp works both ways and that the City will have to revisit this
ordinance as soon as the City’s 2030 Comprehensive Plan is approved by the Metropolitan Council.
Franchot indicated he is in agreement with moving forward.
McMillan stated the opposite is also true if the City rushes through an ordinance. McMillan pointed out
that this is the first time the Council has reviewed this in a couple of years and that she personally feels
that some additional review would be beneficial. McMillan stated she is cognizant of landowners’ rights
and the need to protect the City’s natural resources, but that she does not want to make it cost prohibitive
for the smaller developments in Orono.
Murphy feels the comments by Jennifer Haskamp have been instructive and that he would welcome their
collaboration on how the ordinance can continue to be refined, but that he does not see any reason why
adoption of the ordinance should be delayed any further.
Murphy moved, Franchot seconded to adopt ORDINANCE NO. 67, Third Series, an Ordinance
Amending Chapters 78 and 82 of the Orono Municipal Code by Adding New Sections 78-1631
through 78-1640 and Section 82-300 regarding Conservation Design. VOTE: Ayes 4, Nays 1,
McMillan Opposed.
White moved, Murphy seconded, to adopt SUMMARY ORDINANCE NO. 67, Third Series, an
Ordinance Amending Chapters 78 and 82 of the Orono Municipal Code by Adding New Sections
78-1631 through 78-1640 and Section 82-300 Regarding Conservation Design. VOTE: Ayes 4,
Nays 1, McMillan Opposed.
Item #02 - CC Agenda - 01/25/2010
Approval of Council Minutes 01/11/2010 [Page 7 of 13]
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING
Monday, January 11, 2010
7:00 o’clock p.m.
_____________________________________________________________________________________
Page 8
4. #09-3433 RICHARD HANSON, 340 BIG ISLAND – VARIANCE AND VACATION –
RESOLUTION NOS. 5899 & 5900
Jeff Lambert, Attorney-at-Law, was present.
Turner noted on December 14, 2009, the Council tabled this application to allow Emeric Dwyer,
Attonrey-at-Law, who is representing several neighboring property owners, additional time to research
the situation. Staff has also researched some of the issues raised at that meeting and the findings are
outlined in Exhibit I.
Turner noted the map generated from the latest county surveyor’s maps show that Meta Comet does not
extend all the way to the lake. A copy of the deed given to Mr. Hanson’s father shows that Outlot G has
been in private hands since 1960. The maps from the county surveyor’s office for that period of time also
confirm that the land in question was privately owned.
Staff is recommending that the Council take action on the lot area variance, which is separate from the
vacation. In regards to the vacation, if the Council is satisfied that there is no perceivable purpose for the
right-of-way then it should be vacated, Jeff Lambert stated in his opinion Staff has addressed the
questions raised by the Council at the last meeting. Lambert noted he did submit a deed from Ms. Ude,
the previous property owner that was provided to Mr. Hanson’s father in 1960. The deed shows the
conveyance of Parcel 3, which is down at the very end of Meta Comet, and also shows that the land has
been in private hands since at least 1960 and possibly before.
Lambert stated in his opinion Meta-Comet Avenue should be vacated for the safety, security, and
enjoyment of the current property owner. At the time Massasoit Avenue was vacated, Meta Comet
became a dead end.
Emeric Dwyer, Attorney-at-Law, stated he has spoken with Mr. Lambert and that he has reviewed the
situation thoroughly with the Hennepin County Recorder’s Office. As it relates to the discussion at the
last meeting, there appeared to be an error on some maps with regard to a line that had been drawn in, but
that situation has now been clarified with the deed.
Dwyer pointed out that access to the island is very difficult at certain times of the year, particularly on the
east side, and while the public land does not reach to the beach, he would ask the Council to consider
access to Big Island for the neighboring residents.
Murphy moved, McMillan seconded, to adopt Resolution No. 5899 granting of a lot area variance
for the property located at 340 Big Island. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0.
Tom Esco, Delano, stated Mr. Hanson wants to sell his parcel, which is the reason for requesting the
vacation.
Item #02 - CC Agenda - 01/25/2010
Approval of Council Minutes 01/11/2010 [Page 8 of 13]
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING
Monday, January 11, 2010
7:00 o’clock p.m.
_____________________________________________________________________________________
Page 9
(4. #09-3433 RICHARD HANSON, 340 BIG ISLAND – VARIANCE AND VACATION –
RESOLUTION NOS. 5899 & 5900, Continued)
McMillan stated she understands the seriousness of vacating property. McMillan noted the City in the
past has vacated other land for public good, such as a portion of Bracketts Point Road in order to obtain a
better turn-around. As it relates to this application, there is some public good being done with the
vacation in that it would put an end to a public nuisance and help stop trespassing in this area. McMillan
indicated she is in favor of vacating that portion of Meta Comet Avenue.
McMillan moved to adopt the Resolution Vacating a Portion of Meta-Comet Avenue Within the
Plat of Morse Island Park, with the following amendments: 1. Eliminate the whereas language
stating that Hanson is the owner of all property abutting the right-of-way proposed to be vacated
and replace it with the language that the portion of land to be vacated has never provided direct
lake access dead-ending approximately 40 feet from the lakeshore; and No. 2, the following
language be added: “This portion of the road was used to connect with Massasoit Avenue.
Massasoit Avenue was vacated in 2002 pursuant to Resolution No. 47-96. This disconnected
portion of Meta Comet Road has the potential to create ongoing trespassing on the private land
between the lake and the right-of-way proposed to be vacated.”
City Attorney Mattick stated he does not have any issues with the two suggestions by Council Member
McMillan.
Lambert pointed out there is a typo in Paragraph 4.
Bremer stated she would like to retain Item No. 1 in order to identify who Mr. Hanson is.
McMillan moved, Bremer seconded, to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 5900, a Resolution Vacating a
Portion of Meta-Comet Avenue Within the Plat of Morse Island Park, with the following language
being added under Item No. 2 on Page 1, “That the portion of land to be vacated has never
provided direct lake access, dead-ending approximately 40 feet from the lakeshore. This portion of
the road was used to connect with Massasoit Avenue. Massasoit Avenue was vacated in 2002
pursuant to Resolution No. 47-96. This disconnected portion of Meta Comet Road has the potential
to create ongoing trespassing on the private land between the lake and the right-of-way proposed to
be vacated.” VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0.
*5. #09-3437 KENT AND SUSAN RICHEY, 3105 CASCO POINT ROAD – VARIANCE –
RESOLUTION NO. 5901
Murphy moved, Bremer seconded, to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 5901, a Resolution Granting
Variances to Municipal Zoning Code Section 78-350 (B), for the property located at 3105 Casco
Point Road. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0.
Item #02 - CC Agenda - 01/25/2010
Approval of Council Minutes 01/11/2010 [Page 9 of 13]
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING
Monday, January 11, 2010
7:00 o’clock p.m.
_____________________________________________________________________________________
Page
10
MAYOR/COUNCIL REPORT
Murphy commented that he drove by Dr. Ebert’s house and that the gates look great.
McMillan noted the LMA is advertising for a milfoil free Lake Minnetonka, which in her opinion is
probably not going to be achieved even with the chemical treatments.
Gabriel Jabbour stated in his opinion he does not feel the LMCD should be treating the whole lake until
they determine whether the chemicals are truly safe. The LMCD is not set up to levy money and are
being requested to fund this program when they cannot afford it, particularly in this poor economy.
White stated the cost of chemicals keeps increasing in price and that the milfoil has never been 100
percent eradicated on lakes that have been treated.
Jabbour expressed concern that the chemicals in the lake also are harmful to household pets that may
swim in the lake.
CITY ENGINEER’S REPORT
Kellogg stated he has nothing to report.
CITY ADMINISTRATOR’S REPORT
*6. EXTENSION OF HENNEPIN COUNTY ELECTRONIC PROPRIETARY DATA BASE
(EPDB) AGREEMENT – RESOLUTION NO. 5902
Murphy moved, Bremer seconded, to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 5902, a Resolution Authorizing
the City of Orono to Extend an Agreement for the Use of Hennepin County’s Electronic
Proprietary Data Base. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0.
*7. ANNUAL APPOINTMENTS – RESOLUTION NO. 5903
Murphy moved, Bremer seconded, to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 5903, a Resolution Designating
Selected Appointments for the Year 2010. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0.
*8. SELECTION OF DATE FOR 2010 LOCAL BOARD OF REVIEW
Murphy moved, Bremer seconded, to establish Wednesday, April 21, 2010, at 7:00 p.m., as the date
and time for the 2010 Local Board of Appeal and Equalization meeting. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0.
*9. AUTHORIZATION FOR DISPOSAL OF WEAPONS
Murphy moved, Bremer seconded, to authorize Striecher’s to purchase weapons from the Orono
Police Department and authorize Orono Public Works to destroy handgun/long guns. VOTE:
Ayes 5, Nays 0.
Item #02 - CC Agenda - 01/25/2010
Approval of Council Minutes 01/11/2010 [Page 10 of 13]
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING
Monday, January 11, 2010
7:00 o’clock p.m.
_____________________________________________________________________________________
Page
11
10. AUTHORIZATION TO PURCHASE 2010 SQUAD CARS
Franchot asked if the police cars need to be replaced every three years or whether the City should
consider doing it on a case-by-case basis.
Bremer stated this item was discussed by the Police Commission in previous years and those same
concerns were brought up. Bremer noted the cost to repair the vehicles does add up quickly, particularly
on older vehicles, which is the reason why the vehicles are replaced every two years.
Finance Director Olson concurred that once the vehicles get over two to three years old, the maintenance
costs go up substantially and there is also a frustration factor on the part of the police department when
the car(s) are not working properly.
Franchot moved, Murphy seconded, to approve the purchase of a 2010 Chevrolet Tahoe from Polar
Chevrolet for $28,309.55 plus tax, registration and other miscellaneous fees and a 2010 Crown
Victoria from Elk River Ford for $22,385.36 plus tax, registration and other miscellaneous fees.
VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0.
*11. ACCEPT DONATION – PAULUCCI
Murphy moved, Bremer seconded, to accept a $2500 donation from Gina Paulucci. VOTE: Ayes 5,
Nays 0.
*12. PUBLIC ENTITY WASTE ABATEMENT INCENTIVE FUND GRANT AGREEMENT –
RESOLUTION NO. 5904
Murphy moved, Bremer seconded, to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 5904, a Resolution Authorizing
the City of Orono to Enter into a Public Entity Waste Abatement Incentive Fund Agreement with
Hennepin County and Authorizing the Mayor to Sign the Agreement. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0.
13. RESPONSE TO PROPOSED MCWD RULE CHANGES
Murphy asked if Staff feels there should be more flexibility with the ordinance on the wetland issue.
Turner indicated Staff would like some more flexibility with the ordinance and that some sections should
have stricter regulations.
McMillan stated this does have a big impact on the City. There should be some face-to-face follow-up as
well with the MCWD.
Gabriel Jabbour, 985 Tonkawa Road, stated he does have some concerns regarding the ordinance.
Jabbour noted he has been involved with the City on a couple of occasions as it relates to litigation with
landowners who have removed vegetation/trees along the lakeshore. Jabbour expressed concerns with the
provision requiring floodplain mitigation for rip-rap and pointed out that it would be extremely difficult
for the landowners on Big Island to mitigate due to a number of issues.
Jabbour stated it is his understanding that Staff is also not in favor of mitigating rip-rap.
Item #02 - CC Agenda - 01/25/2010
Approval of Council Minutes 01/11/2010 [Page 11 of 13]
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING
Monday, January 11, 2010
7:00 o’clock p.m.
_____________________________________________________________________________________
Page
12
(13. RESPONSE TO PROPOSED MCWD RULE CHANGES, Continued)
Turner stated Staff does have concerns and that Darren Amundson with Bonestroo has reviewed the
proposed language. Turner indicated she did speak with the Watershed District staff regarding the
language.
Jabbour stated it is his understanding that the City’s Engineer has been discussing this with other cities
and to his knowledge the City of Mound and other cities will be responding in a similar fashion.
McMillan stated she is not sure whether it will reduce the amount of rip-rap.
Jabbour stated wing dams are not practical because they tend to float away if they are not deep enough.
Bremer stated she is in agreement with the response by the City.
Turner stated the requirements to obtain a permit are confusing and that the rule changes are adding a step
to the already confusing process. If the potential for erosion is high, the property owner is allowed to do
rip-rap, but for medium and low erosion potential, they are required to do other types of erosion control.
It was the consensus of the City Council to have Mayor White send a letter to the Minnehaha Creek
Watershed District regarding the proposed rule changes, with the final draft of the letter to be reviewed at
the January 12 work session
CITY ATTORNEY’S REPORT
Mattick stated he did provide some information on employee compensation to Staff but that he would not
be able to attend tomorrow night’s work session
*14. LICENSES & PERMITS
RESIDENTIAL KENNEL LICENSES:
1. Richard Gage
2180 Abingdon Way
2. Jane Kline & Steve Bell
4455 West Branch Road
3. Marty Paradise
825 Brown Road South
4. David and LuAnn Runkle
2684 Casco Point Road
5. Gregg Rutter
900 Dakota Avenue
Item #02 - CC Agenda - 01/25/2010
Approval of Council Minutes 01/11/2010 [Page 12 of 13]
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING
Monday, January 11, 2010
7:00 o’clock p.m.
_____________________________________________________________________________________
Page
13
ANNUAL LIQUOR LICENSES
6. Club On Sale and Sunday Liquor
Spring Hill Golf Club
Jeffrey Kringen
725 Sixth Avenue North
ONE DAY GAMBLING – RESOLUTION
7. Orono PTO (raffle)
Mid-Winter Fun Fest – Orono Middle School
12:00 p.m. – 4:00 p.m.
Saturday, February 6, 2010
Murphy moved, Bremer seconded, to approve the above listed licenses. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0.
*15. BILLS
Murphy moved, Bremer seconded, to approve payment of the All Funds Account. VOTE: Ayes 5,
Nays 0.
ADJOURNMENT
Murphy moved, McMillan seconded, to adjourn the Orono City Council meeting at 8:38 p.m.
VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0.
ATTEST:
________________________________________ _______________________________________
Linda S. Vee, City Clerk James M. White, Mayor
Item #02 - CC Agenda - 01/25/2010
Approval of Council Minutes 01/11/2010 [Page 13 of 13]
Item #03 - CC Agenda - 01/25/2010
File #06-3234 [Total Pages 36]
Item #03 - CC Agenda - 01/25/2010
File #06-3234 [Total Pages 36]
Item #03 - CC Agenda - 01/25/2010
File #06-3234 [Total Pages 36]
Item #03 - CC Agenda - 01/25/2010
File #06-3234 [Total Pages 36]
Item #03 - CC Agenda - 01/25/2010
File #06-3234 [Total Pages 36]
Item #03 - CC Agenda - 01/25/2010
File #06-3234 [Total Pages 36]
Item #03 - CC Agenda - 01/25/2010
File #06-3234 [Total Pages 36]
Item #03 - CC Agenda - 01/25/2010
File #06-3234 [Total Pages 36]
Item #03 - CC Agenda - 01/25/2010
File #06-3234 [Total Pages 36]
Item #03 - CC Agenda - 01/25/2010
File #06-3234 [Total Pages 36]
Item #03 - CC Agenda - 01/25/2010
File #06-3234 [Total Pages 36]
Item #03 - CC Agenda - 01/25/2010
File #06-3234 [Total Pages 36]
Item #03 - CC Agenda - 01/25/2010
File #06-3234 [Total Pages 36]
Item #03 - CC Agenda - 01/25/2010
File #06-3234 [Total Pages 36]
Item #03 - CC Agenda - 01/25/2010
File #06-3234 [Total Pages 36]
Item #03 - CC Agenda - 01/25/2010
File #06-3234 [Total Pages 36]
Item #03 - CC Agenda - 01/25/2010
File #06-3234 [Total Pages 36]
Item #03 - CC Agenda - 01/25/2010
File #06-3234 [Total Pages 36]
Item #03 - CC Agenda - 01/25/2010
File #06-3234 [Total Pages 36]
Item #03 - CC Agenda - 01/25/2010
File #06-3234 [Total Pages 36]
Item #03 - CC Agenda - 01/25/2010
File #06-3234 [Total Pages 36]
Item #03 - CC Agenda - 01/25/2010
File #06-3234 [Total Pages 36]
Item #03 - CC Agenda - 01/25/2010
File #06-3234 [Total Pages 36]
Item #03 - CC Agenda - 01/25/2010
File #06-3234 [Total Pages 36]
Item #03 - CC Agenda - 01/25/2010
File #06-3234 [Total Pages 36]
Item #03 - CC Agenda - 01/25/2010
File #06-3234 [Total Pages 36]
Item #03 - CC Agenda - 01/25/2010
File #06-3234 [Total Pages 36]
Item #03 - CC Agenda - 01/25/2010
File #06-3234 [Total Pages 36]
Item #03 - CC Agenda - 01/25/2010
File #06-3234 [Total Pages 36]
Item #03 - CC Agenda - 01/25/2010
File #06-3234 [Total Pages 36]
Item #03 - CC Agenda - 01/25/2010
File #06-3234 [Total Pages 36]
Item #03 - CC Agenda - 01/25/2010
File #06-3234 [Total Pages 36]
Item #03 - CC Agenda - 01/25/2010
File #06-3234 [Total Pages 36]
Item #03 - CC Agenda - 01/25/2010
File #06-3234 [Total Pages 36]
Item #03 - CC Agenda - 01/25/2010
File #06-3234 [Total Pages 36]
Item #03 - CC Agenda - 01/25/2010
File #06-3234 [Total Pages 36]
Item #04 - CC Agenda - 01/25/2010
File #08-3350 [Total Pages 13]
Item #04 - CC Agenda - 01/25/2010
File #08-3350 [Total Pages 13]
Item #04 - CC Agenda - 01/25/2010
File #08-3350 [Total Pages 13]
Item #04 - CC Agenda - 01/25/2010
File #08-3350 [Total Pages 13]
Item #04 - CC Agenda - 01/25/2010
File #08-3350 [Total Pages 13]
Item #04 - CC Agenda - 01/25/2010
File #08-3350 [Total Pages 13]
Item #04 - CC Agenda - 01/25/2010
File #08-3350 [Total Pages 13]
Item #04 - CC Agenda - 01/25/2010
File #08-3350 [Total Pages 13]
Item #04 - CC Agenda - 01/25/2010
File #08-3350 [Total Pages 13]
Item #04 - CC Agenda - 01/25/2010
File #08-3350 [Total Pages 13]
Item #04 - CC Agenda - 01/25/2010
File #08-3350 [Total Pages 13]
Item #04 - CC Agenda - 01/25/2010
File #08-3350 [Total Pages 13]
Item #04 - CC Agenda - 01/25/2010
File #08-3350 [Total Pages 13]
Item #05 - CC Agenda - 01/25/2010
File #08-3381 [Total Pages 3]
Item #05 - CC Agenda - 01/25/2010
File #08-3381 [Total Pages 3]
Item #05 - CC Agenda - 01/25/2010
File #08-3381 [Total Pages 3]
Item #06 - CC Agenda - 01/25/2010
File #09-3414 [Total Pages 29]
Item #06 - CC Agenda - 01/25/2010
File #09-3414 [Total Pages 29]
Item #06 - CC Agenda - 01/25/2010
File #09-3414 [Total Pages 29]
Item #06 - CC Agenda - 01/25/2010
File #09-3414 [Total Pages 29]
Item #06 - CC Agenda - 01/25/2010
File #09-3414 [Total Pages 29]
Item #06 - CC Agenda - 01/25/2010
File #09-3414 [Total Pages 29]
Item #06 - CC Agenda - 01/25/2010
File #09-3414 [Total Pages 29]
Item #06 - CC Agenda - 01/25/2010
File #09-3414 [Total Pages 29]
Item #06 - CC Agenda - 01/25/2010
File #09-3414 [Total Pages 29]
Item #06 - CC Agenda - 01/25/2010
File #09-3414 [Total Pages 29]
Item #06 - CC Agenda - 01/25/2010
File #09-3414 [Total Pages 29]
Item #06 - CC Agenda - 01/25/2010
File #09-3414 [Total Pages 29]
Item #06 - CC Agenda - 01/25/2010
File #09-3414 [Total Pages 29]
Item #06 - CC Agenda - 01/25/2010
File #09-3414 [Total Pages 29]
Item #06 - CC Agenda - 01/25/2010
File #09-3414 [Total Pages 29]
Item #06 - CC Agenda - 01/25/2010
File #09-3414 [Total Pages 29]
Item #06 - CC Agenda - 01/25/2010
File #09-3414 [Total Pages 29]
Item #06 - CC Agenda - 01/25/2010
File #09-3414 [Total Pages 29]
Item #06 - CC Agenda - 01/25/2010
File #09-3414 [Total Pages 29]
Item #06 - CC Agenda - 01/25/2010
File #09-3414 [Total Pages 29]
Item #06 - CC Agenda - 01/25/2010
File #09-3414 [Total Pages 29]
Item #06 - CC Agenda - 01/25/2010
File #09-3414 [Total Pages 29]
Item #06 - CC Agenda - 01/25/2010
File #09-3414 [Total Pages 29]
Item #06 - CC Agenda - 01/25/2010
File #09-3414 [Total Pages 29]
Item #06 - CC Agenda - 01/25/2010
File #09-3414 [Total Pages 29]
Item #06 - CC Agenda - 01/25/2010
File #09-3414 [Total Pages 29]
Item #06 - CC Agenda - 01/25/2010
File #09-3414 [Total Pages 29]
Item #06 - CC Agenda - 01/25/2010
File #09-3414 [Total Pages 29]
Item #06 - CC Agenda - 01/25/2010
File #09-3414 [Total Pages 29]
Item #07 - CC Agenda - 01/25/2010
Fil#10-3439 [Total Pages 23]
Item #07 - CC Agenda - 01/25/2010
Fil#10-3439 [Total Pages 23]
Item #07 - CC Agenda - 01/25/2010
Fil#10-3439 [Total Pages 23]
Item #07 - CC Agenda - 01/25/2010
Fil#10-3439 [Total Pages 23]
Item #07 - CC Agenda - 01/25/2010
Fil#10-3439 [Total Pages 23]
Item #07 - CC Agenda - 01/25/2010
Fil#10-3439 [Total Pages 23]
Item #07 - CC Agenda - 01/25/2010
Fil#10-3439 [Total Pages 23]
Item #07 - CC Agenda - 01/25/2010
Fil#10-3439 [Total Pages 23]
Item #07 - CC Agenda - 01/25/2010
Fil#10-3439 [Total Pages 23]
Item #07 - CC Agenda - 01/25/2010
Fil#10-3439 [Total Pages 23]
Item #07 - CC Agenda - 01/25/2010
Fil#10-3439 [Total Pages 23]
Item #07 - CC Agenda - 01/25/2010
Fil#10-3439 [Total Pages 23]
Item #07 - CC Agenda - 01/25/2010
Fil#10-3439 [Total Pages 23]
Item #07 - CC Agenda - 01/25/2010
Fil#10-3439 [Total Pages 23]
Item #07 - CC Agenda - 01/25/2010
Fil#10-3439 [Total Pages 23]
Item #07 - CC Agenda - 01/25/2010
Fil#10-3439 [Total Pages 23]
Item #07 - CC Agenda - 01/25/2010
Fil#10-3439 [Total Pages 23]
Item #07 - CC Agenda - 01/25/2010
Fil#10-3439 [Total Pages 23]
Item #07 - CC Agenda - 01/25/2010
Fil#10-3439 [Total Pages 23]
Item #07 - CC Agenda - 01/25/2010
Fil#10-3439 [Total Pages 23]
Item #07 - CC Agenda - 01/25/2010
Fil#10-3439 [Total Pages 23]
Item #07 - CC Agenda - 01/25/2010
Fil#10-3439 [Total Pages 23]
Item #07 - CC Agenda - 01/25/2010
Fil#10-3439 [Total Pages 23]
Item #08 - CC Agenda - 01/25/2010
Renewal of Contract for Prosecution Services
[Page 1 of 6]
Item #08 - CC Agenda - 01/25/2010
Renewal of Contract for Prosecution Services
[Page 2 of 6]
Item #08 - CC Agenda - 01/25/2010
Renewal of Contract for Prosecution Services
[Page 3 of 6]
Item #08 - CC Agenda - 01/25/2010
Renewal of Contract for Prosecution Services
[Page 4 of 6]
Item #08 - CC Agenda - 01/25/2010
Renewal of Contract for Prosecution Services
[Page 5 of 6]
Item #08 - CC Agenda - 01/25/2010
Renewal of Contract for Prosecution Services
[Page 6 of 6]
Item #09 - CC Agenda - 01/25/2010
Amend the 2010 Fee Schedule Regarding Utility Rates
[Page 1 of 4]
Item #09 - CC Agenda - 01/25/2010
Amend the 2010 Fee Schedule Regarding Utility Rates
[Page 2 of 4]
Item #09 - CC Agenda - 01/25/2010
Amend the 2010 Fee Schedule Regarding Utility Rates
[Page 3 of 4]
Item #09 - CC Agenda - 01/25/2010
Amend the 2010 Fee Schedule Regarding Utility Rates
[Page 4 of 4]
Item #10 - CC Agenda - 01/25/2010
2010 Pay Equity Report [Page 1 of 3]
Item #10 - CC Agenda - 01/25/2010
2010 Pay Equity Report [Page 2 of 3]
Item #10 - CC Agenda - 01/25/2010
2010 Pay Equity Report [Page 3 of 3]
Item #11 - CC Agenda - 01/25/2010
Authoirization to Purchase 2010 Investigator Vehicle
[Page 1 of 1]
Item #12 - CC Agenda - 01/25/2010
Disposal of Forfeited Vehicle [Page 1 of 1]
Item #13 - CC Agenda - 01/25/2010
Willow Drive Mill and Overlay
[Page 1 of 1]
Item #14 - CC Agenda - 01/25/2010
McCulley Road Guardrail Replacement Project
[Page 1 of 1]
Item #15 - CC Agenda - 01/25/2010
Licenses & Permits [Page 1 of 1]
Item #16 - CC Agenda - 01/25/2010
Bills [Page 1 of 8]Item #
Item #16 - CC Agenda - 01/25/2010
Bills [Page 2 of 8]Item #
Item #16 - CC Agenda - 01/25/2010
Bills [Page 3 of 8]Item #
Item #16 - CC Agenda - 01/25/2010
Bills [Page 4 of 8]Item #
Item #16 - CC Agenda - 01/25/2010
Bills [Page 5 of 8]Item #
Item #16 - CC Agenda - 01/25/2010
Bills [Page 6 of 8]Item #
Item #16 - CC Agenda - 01/25/2010
Bills [Page 7 of 8]Item #
Item #16 - CC Agenda - 01/25/2010
Bills [Page 8 of 8]Item #