The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About11-08-2010 Council Packet PUBLIC ATTENDANCE MEETING DATE ��— � � � � � COUNCIL ❑ PLANNING COMMISSION ❑ OTHER Please complete the following information for City records. PRESENT FOR(from agenda) NAME (please print) ADDRESS NAME OR NUMBER � , ; 1. . ., � �, .j 9 G,/ ^ �� - L�;��,, . � ';�" �;��- , . , - z. � � _ � �; ,- .�: - '�� ; �� , 3. ��;�;��.�� % �i�i��;�. J �/i S � , �,,,y ,,'f �,t'r� �. ! —r—, / �' 7 �_ �� , 4. ,-�J<"�X.s � t'("/��`.u, � �` �� s7�f��i�J� �� 5. � v `� ��►�-�'+�-t� �-�.,��--'� i / ( , 6. �- 7� /✓ � �i� �� t �� :�j�4'( ��y �� '�� 1 / � � ) 7. G � c C' �� i �� 6,..,-'�, Sl ('"� �� C..�lL� �j �� x �4�. � �, aL � I� r` � ' , � ` 8. �.,. 1 � _ �. .-, :�- ' ,�v � � -� ��` ,�' �r � i:._ 9. --,, t ��` �� v � � i ' _ ?`�� 9 /G' . t,l � 7 � , , �,� , � �o._ �Jti� � �,��•. '� ��.� ��'y � �'� �� (r;�� -;�-�� ,� ,r ' ' 11._ U 1 c�� .;�.W .��r�:.�•��- �,� � °, ' �i� 1 � r..�I u.L�� w� ` 12. J J"Y��L�-'� (�'i�-'�l' �� c: ��4�„� .` � r'�"-� �:r— _�-----� 13._ � �-�-y� �I�`� � �,,�„�'� �`-�/ M�� . � 2 �� J,,, �� ,�-�,,. 14. i�� C'�t.,(,�� _�2.� %?��, �(.� �� r��, � � C�-�j��'7 � . , ,.� � , 15. " / / 7 7�j ( ��,, � , ,�r , ` .., �� <��, C� �, J'=z-r.. f 1-� 1 3 ,S %� � ;.- ', �� J, �`t �1-r" y�...__.�.... � � . > � - � ;; y � - _� V:\�LEGAL�ORMS)\�FORMS)1PUBLICATTENDANCE.DOC � �" �L`" y�- �� ' �-��` � �"�� PUBLIC ATTENDANCE p - MEETING DATE _� "�� ❑ COUNCIL ❑ PLANNING COMMISSION ❑ OTHER Please complete the following information for City records. PRESENT FOR(from agenda) NAME (please print) ADDRESS NAME OR NUMBER 1. �K�;,,� _ �! ,��' ��1� rz,� -- �,r_ �c`y a � 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. V:\�LEGAL FORMS�\�FORMS)1PUBlIC ATTENDANCE.DOC Agenda for Council Meeting Set for Monday, November 8, 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 October 25, 2010 * 3. Council Work Session of October 26, 2010 Sale of Bonds 4. Public Hearing, 7:00 p.m. – Approve Capital Improvement Plan for Buildings and Confirm Intent to Issue Bonds – Resolution 5. Public Hearing, 7:05 p.m. – Provide for Sale of Bonds (Street Reconstruction Plan) – Resolution 6. Sale of General Obligation Street Reconstruction, State-Aid and Capital Improvement Bonds – Resolution LMCD Report – Andrew McDermott, Representative Planning Commission Comments – Denise Leskinen, Representative Public Comments – (Limit 5 Minutes Per Person) City Engineer’s Report 7. Request to Opt Out of Assessment for North Farm Road Sewer Improvement 8. Forest Lake Drive/Forest Arms Joint Dock – Drainage and Siltation Issue Planning Department Report 9. City of Orono – Policy for Joint Use Dock Surveys 10. #10-3483 City of Orono – Zoning Amendment – Columbarium – Ordinance 11. #10-3493 Good Shepherd Church – Request to Hold Public Hearing 12. #10-3494 WJM Properties LLC – Request to Hold Public Hearing Mayor/Council Report City Administrator's Report 13. Continued Participation in Metropolitan Livable Communities Program 14. Disposal of Unclaimed Property Agenda for Council Meeting Set for Monday, November 8, 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 City Attorney's Report * 15. Licenses & Permits * 16. Bills Upcoming Issues and Events 2010 11/08 – Planning Commission Interviews, Monday, 6:10 p.m. 11/08 – Canvassing Board, Monday, 6:45 p.m. 11/08 – Council Meeting, Monday, 7:00 p.m. 11/09 – Council Work Session, Tuesday, 6:30 p.m. - Cancelled 11/11 – HOLIDAY, Observance of Veterans Day, Thursday 11/15 – Planning Commission Meeting, Monday, 6:30 p.m. (Council Liaison – Mayor White) 11/22 – Planning Commission Interviews, Monday, 6:20 p.m. 11/22 – Council Meeting, Monday, 7:00 p.m. 11/23 – Council Work Session, Tuesday, 3:00 p.m. – 7:00 p.m. 11/25 – HOLIDAY, Observance of Thanksgiving Day 11/26 – HOLIDAY, Observance of Thanksgiving Day 12/01 – Planning Commission Work Session, Tuesday, 5:30 p.m. 12/06 – Council Meeting/Truth-in-Taxation Hearing, Monday, 7:00 p.m. 12/13 – Council Meeting, Monday, 7:00 p.m. 12/14 – Council Work Session, Tuesday, 6:30 p.m. 12/24 – HOLIDAY, Observance of Christmas, Friday 12/31 – HOLIDAY, Observance of New Year’s Day, Friday MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, October 25, 2010 7:00 o’clock p.m. _____________________________________________________________________________________ Page 1 of 17 ROLL CALL The Orono City Council met on the above-mentioned date with the following members present: Mayor James White, Council Members James Murphy, Cynthia Bremer, Lili McMillan, and Doug Franchot. Representing Staff were City Administrator Jessica Loftus, City Attorney Soren Mattick, Finance Director Ron Olson, City Clerk Lin Vee, Assistant City Administrator of Long-Term Strategic Planning Mike Gaffron, Planning Coordinator Melanie Curtis, City Engineer Tom Kellogg, and Recorder Jackie Young. Mayor James White called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m., followed by the Pledge of Allegiance. CONSENT AGENDA Item Nos. 13, 14, 16 were added to the Consent Agenda. Item No. 2 was removed from 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 MEETNG OF OCTOBER 11, 2010 Bremer moved, Murphy seconded, to approve the minutes of the Orono City Council meeting of October 12, 2010, as submitted. VOTE: Ayes 4, Nays 0, McMillan Abstained. PUBLIC HEARING – 7:00 P.M. 3. CERTIFICATION OF DELINQUENT UTILITIES – RESOLUTION NO. 5979 Mayor White noted the affidavit of publication for tonight’s public hearing has been filed with the City Clerk. Mayor White opened the public hearing at 7:06 p.m. There were no public comments. Mayor White closed the public hearing at 7:06 p.m. McMillan asked if the certification is for one year since some of the amounts vary. Bremer noted it is for 2010 delinquent utilities. Olson stated the delinquent water charges vary. Item #02 - CC Agenda - 11/08/2010 Approval of Council Minutes 10/25/2010 [Page 1 of 17] MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, October 25, 2010 7:00 o’clock p.m. _____________________________________________________________________________________ Page 2 of 17 (3. CERTIFICATION OF DELINQUENT UTILITIES, Continued) Bremer moved, Murphy seconded, to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 5979, a Resolution for the Collection of Delinquent 2010 Water and Sewer Utility Service Charges, Recycling Program Fees, On-Site Sewage Treatment (Septic) Inspection Program, Storm Water Charges. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. 4. CERTIFICATION OF UNPAID SERVICE CHARGES – RESOLUTION NO. 5980 Mayor White noted the affidavit of publication for tonight’s public hearing has been filed with the City Clerk. Mayor White opened the public hearing at 7:07 p.m. There were no public comments. Mayor White closed the public hearing at 7:07 p.m. Bremer moved, Franchot seconded, to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 5980, a Resolution for the Collection of Unpaid Service Charges. Murphy noted that $38,250 of the $58,292 consists of two properties. Olson stated one of those properties will be paying the majority of his delinquency prior to the 25th. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. PRESENTATION 5. HENNEPIN COUNTY UPDATE – HENNEPIN COUNTY COMMISSIONER JAN CALLISON Jan Callison, Hennepin County Commissioner, gave an update to the Orono City Council on the activities of Hennepin County. Callison reported Hennepin County started its budget process back in early September when the maximum levy was set. A series of hearings will be held on the budget, with the truth-in-taxation hearing scheduled for November 30th. The final budget will be adopted on December 14th. The maximum levy amount is set to cover three separate entities: the general Hennepin County budget, the Hennepin County Rail Authority, and the Housing Redevelopment Authority. The increase of 7.2 percent is the most that can be levied for 2011. None of the increase is allocated toward the general county operating levy. While Hennepin County is not increasing the amount of property taxes being collected, that does not mean that individuals’ tax bills will not go up. Some homeowners will see an increase, some will stay the same and some will decrease. Hennepin County’s budget is being decreased again in 2011 by an anticipated 5.2 percent or $86 million. Of that amount, $25.6 million consists of operating expenses and $60 million in the capital budget account. That has resulted in a 9.9 percent Item #02 - CC Agenda - 11/08/2010 Approval of Council Minutes 10/25/2010 [Page 2 of 17] MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, October 25, 2010 7:00 o’clock p.m. _____________________________________________________________________________________ Page 3 of 17 (5. HENNEPIN COUNTY UPDATE – HENNEPIN COUNTY COMMISSIONER JAN CALLISON, Continued) reduction in general government expenditures, a 4.2 percent reduction in human services, less than a 2 percent reduction in public safety, and less than a 2 percent reduction in libraries. Callison stated at the same time, however, Hennepin County is experiencing an increased demand for public services. From June of 2009 to June of 2010, Hennepin County saw a 17 percent increase in food stamps and a 5.8 percent increase in medical assistance. To help offset costs, Hennepin County has frozen county salaries and asked staff to take voluntary time off without being paid. In addition, the Hennepin County Board decided to go with a smaller increase in recognition of the burden on property owners. Callison indicated the impacts being felt from two years of shrinking the county budget are becoming more apparent. One impact is that the accuracy and timeliness of work in the public assistance area is becoming more of an issue due to the limited staff and increased work load. There has been a 25 percent reduction in staff at service centers and wait times have increased from 12 minutes to 40 minutes, with waits of 60 minutes not uncommon. In addition to Hennepin County looking at their budget for 2011, they are also looking forward to future years going out to 2030. The staff at the county and research and planning department has done a two page summary based on the Bookings Study which evaluates metropolitan cities. That summary says “The economic and social future of the Twin Cities will hinge in part on the ability of its institutions to move a more diverse population for post secondary educational success and ready them for wok in high value added occupations. Callison indicated she would leave a copy of the summary with the City Council. White thanked Callison for the water patrol hours that have been devoted to this area and noted that the number of incidents out on the lake has decreased as a result. Murphy asked what direction the Rail Authority is going in converting rails to trails. Callison stated in terms of the corridors that are programmed for light rail, the southwest area is the next corridor they will be looking at. That corridor will go from Minneapolis, St. Louis Park, Hopkins, Minnetonka and then into Eden Prairie. They are also looking at the Botto corridor, which goes to the northwest. Other counties are also looking at developing other lines and Hennepin County is in discussion with those counties. The biggest activity for the county is the interchange project, which is the area in downtown Minneapolis by the new stadium. Murphy asked Callison what she feels the difference is between local city government and government at the county level. Callison stated the relationship with the State of Minnesota is different in the fact that Minnetonka and other cities receive virtually no financial assistance from the state. Hennepin County is a social service arm for the state, which sets certain restrictions on what can and cannot be done. Currently the state is not willing to reimburse the county for certain expenditures. As a result, the relationship has deteriorated between the county and the state versus the state and local cities. Callison stated she would like to see a mutual understanding of the issues the state is facing but that the state should allow more flexibility on Item #02 - CC Agenda - 11/08/2010 Approval of Council Minutes 10/25/2010 [Page 3 of 17] MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, October 25, 2010 7:00 o’clock p.m. _____________________________________________________________________________________ Page 4 of 17 (5. HENNEPIN COUNTY UPDATE – HENNEPIN COUNTY COMMISSIONER JAN CALLISON, Continued) the part of the cities to chart their own course than what they currently can do. In a number of cases, the requirements by the state make it difficult at times for Hennepin County to meet its budget and harder to enact changes. McMillan asked how the County feels the Dakota Rail has progressed. Callison stated the County recognizes that it has been a huge success, and as they look at other corridors, they are looking at how they can best maintain easy public access. Bremer stated one of the things she has noticed is a movement to relocate social services to some of the other suburbs rather than keep them centralized in Minneapolis. Bremer asked what the status of that is currently. Callison stated the County is looking at regionalization or decentralization and that they do recognize it is easier for people to access those services at satellite offices. Hennepin County is looking at how to make the services more efficient and easier to access. Staff believes four hubs should be created, but the transition is slow as a result of trying to find the right facilities. They are looking at approximately a $30 million price tag to move into those hubs, so currently Hennepin County is looking at ways to spend money more effectively and still achieve their objectives. PLANNING COMMISSION COMMENTS – LINDA FEUSS, REPRESENTATIVE Feuss stated she had nothing to report but would be available for questions. PUBLIC COMMENTS None PLANNNG DEPARTMENT REPORT 6. #10-3483 CITY OF ORONO – ZONING AMENDMENT – COLUMBARIUM Curtis noted the Orono City Council reviewed the proposed ordinance at its October 11th meeting. According to City Code Section 78-43(a), a two-thirds vote is required to amend the zoning code. Council Member Bremer stated since she was a member of Good Shepherd Church, she would abstain from the vote, and Council Member McMillan was absent. Therefore, the Council voted 3-0 to table the ordinance, while directing Staff to revise the ordinance language to better accommodate existing places of worship with Orono. At this time Staff is presenting Council with two options which address the setback of a columbarium. Option 1 suggests a 5-foot setback from all property lines and does not have a distinction based on the adjacent property’s zoning classification. Option 2 proposes a 10-foot setback from residentially zoned Item #02 - CC Agenda - 11/08/2010 Approval of Council Minutes 10/25/2010 [Page 4 of 17] MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, October 25, 2010 7:00 o’clock p.m. _____________________________________________________________________________________ Page 5 of 17 (6. #10-3483 CITY OF ORONO – ZONING AMENDMENT – COLUMBARIUM, Continued) property, a 5-foot setback from non-residentially zoned property, and a 5-foot setback from City-owned parks. The other components, such as a minimum 50-foot setback from adjacent properties and year- round screening, remain the same with both options. White stated the presentation at the last City Council meeting showed that the 5-foot setback would work better for Good Shepherd so they can utilize some flatter ground and avoid the need to remove a large number of trees. White indicated he would support the 5-foot setback. Franchot asked what the restriction is as it relates to height. Curtis indicated the above ground columbaria would follow the same setback requirements of a fence or a structure. If the columbarium is over six feet in an area where a fence could be six feet high, it would require a 5-foot setback. Franchot asked what the difference is between a structure and a fence in terms of definition. Franchot indicated he has a concern that the structure may get too big. Franchot asked if there is a maximum size allowed for the columbarium. Curtis stated the maximum size of the columbarium has not been identified since each structure would be different. If the structure exceeds six feet, it would need to meet the structural setbacks. The minimum setback for a shed would be ten feet. McMillan asked if the structure could go 30 feet high. Curtis stated the amendment does not contemplate a maximum height of the columbarium. McMillan asked if other cities have a height limitation on this type of structure. Murphy commented typically columbaria are designed so that people can read or touch their relatives’ remains and the structures are not overly high. Franchot asked whether Staff has a concern regarding the height. Curtis stated Staff has looked at this under the accessory structure standards and that she is aware of taller columbaria in other areas but that Staff felt the accessory structure limitations would address that. McMillan noted she did visit the Good Shepherd site and that an above ground structure is very different from an in ground memorial garden. A 5-foot setback would not provide enough room for year-round screening. McMillan asked if an in ground memorial garden would need to be screened year-round and that it would be nice to have some vistas versus a fence. McMillan stated that perhaps there should be a distinction between in ground and above ground columbaria. Curtis stated the Planning Commission wanted to be able to provide some screening for privacy. McMillan stated she would prefer the applicants have the prerogative to provide year-round screening or leave it more natural. Item #02 - CC Agenda - 11/08/2010 Approval of Council Minutes 10/25/2010 [Page 5 of 17] MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, October 25, 2010 7:00 o’clock p.m. _____________________________________________________________________________________ Page 6 of 17 (6. #10-3483 CITY OF ORONO – ZONING AMENDMENT – COLUMBARIUM, Continued) Murphy stated given the fact that columbaria house people’s remains, the ordinance needs to be done right and that he would not be opposed to tabling this to allow Staff to look at that issue. Bremer stated Council Member McMillan makes a good point. Since the city park adjoining the Good Shepherd site is a fairly wooded lot, it already serves as screening. Bremer stated in her view the requirement for year-round screening is not a fence since it will not serve the purpose of shielding the neighbors. The ordinance addresses that by incorporating a 50 foot setback. Curtis pointed out the fence was an option and not a requirement. Evergreen trees could serve as year- round screening. Bremer stated the memorial garden is the equivalent of patio pavers. Bremer commented there are a number of families who would love to get this process over with and that she would prefer the ordinance not be tabled. Loren Davis, pastor of Good Shepherd, stated one of the things he spoke about with Council Member McMillan was that it would be good to distinguish between in ground memorial gardens and above ground structures. Good Shepherd is looking at constructing a 5-foot memorial wall with a bench surrounded by a garden where the cremains would be placed. The property slopes down and is fairly wooded. It would be helpful if there was a distinction between above ground and in ground. Davis asked whether any structure over six feet would need to be 50 feet away from an adjoining property. Curtis indicated structure setbacks would depend on the size. Davis stated in his view anything over six feet would be 50 feet. The wall or columbaria are created to be at a level where people can touch them. Good Shepherd has been planning this for five or six years and that there has been a lot of thoughtful planning that has gone into their memorial garden. The garden is set in a very natural setting and the woods located on the city-owned property create a good barrier. Murphy asked whether Pastor Davis considers memorial gardens to be a natural sanctity area and whether they want to have a peaceful experience for the people who visit the garden. Davis stated part of the peacefulness of a memorial garden is that it is set in a natural setting. Approximately one-third of the church property consists of wetland and that they have attempted to locate it away from residential properties in order to achieve a degree of privacy. Murphy asked Pastor Davis to describe how the remains will go into the ground. Davis indicated there will be a sidewalk coming out from the church, which goes into the garden. The sidewalk turns into a cross, with circular bands of grass or soil that are approximately 1.5 feet wide going around the sidewalk. Franchot stated his concern is that the ordinance broadly addresses every church property. Franchot asked how many churches there are in Orono. Gaffron indicated there are eight or ten. Item #02 - CC Agenda - 11/08/2010 Approval of Council Minutes 10/25/2010 [Page 6 of 17] MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, October 25, 2010 7:00 o’clock p.m. _____________________________________________________________________________________ Page 7 of 17 (6. #10-3483 CITY OF ORONO – ZONING AMENDMENT – COLUMBARIUM, Continued) Franchot stated he is still somewhat confused about the maximum size that will be allowed for a structure and that he is interested in defining in ground memorial gardens to have more flexibility but that they cannot automatically allow that for all columbaria. Murphy asked whether a CUP can be brought into this process. White stated one option is to require a 5-foot setback for in ground memorial gardens and a 10-foot setback for above ground structures. Linda Feuss stated one of the reasons for the year-round screening is that there will be services involved, and that out of respect for the neighbors, there should be some type of barrier. White stated this will need to be determined on a case-by-case basis. McMillan asked whether any additional research should be done on above ground columbaria. White noted this is the third time the draft ordinance has been discussed and asked whether the City Attorney has any suggestions to help speed up the process. Mattick stated the draft ordinance does allow for a CUP, and if the ordinance is adopted, there would be a conditional use process that the churches would need to go through. The City Council would have the authority to add other controls or conditions they feel appropriate and that the ordinance contains the minimum standards. McMillan stated aesthetically above ground columbaria resemble a cemetery and that this is where the setback and height restrictions become more important. In the case of an -above ground columbaria, additional screening is more desirous. White noted additional conditions could be set for each application depending on the situation through the conditional use permit process. McMillan commented she would like to see some additional research done by staff on above ground columbaria. Bremer asked whether anything can be passed tonight that would allow the Good Shepherd Church to move forward with their application. Murphy suggested the Council adopt Option 2, with a conditional use permit being drafted for Good Shepherd. Gaffron asked whether Good Shepherd has submitted an application yet. Curtis indicated they have not. Gaffron noted it would be approximately a 60-day process once the application is submitted. Item #02 - CC Agenda - 11/08/2010 Approval of Council Minutes 10/25/2010 [Page 7 of 17] MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, October 25, 2010 7:00 o’clock p.m. _____________________________________________________________________________________ Page 8 of 17 (6. #10-3483 CITY OF ORONO – ZONING AMENDMENT – COLUMBARIUM, Continued) McMillan reiterated she would like Staff to have some additional time to look at above ground columbaria. Mattick noted a 2/3s vote is required for the ordinance and that he would point out that there is an issue with the City Code as it relates to the 2/3s vote. The state legislature changed the statute approximately four or five years ago and that routine amendments now only require a simple majority vote. Regardless of what happens tonight, the City Council will need to amend their City code at some point in the future as it relates to the 2/3s vote. Murphy stated in his opinion, regardless of what the code is, it is important that the City Council be in agreement on this. Murphy commented he would be in favor of tabling the ordinance. Bremer asked why the ordinance should be tabled. Murphy stated he would be willing to support tabling the ordinance to allow for some additional research on above ground columbaria McMillan moved, Franchot seconded, to table Application #10-3483, Zoning Amendment, Columbarium, to allow Staff to research above ground columbaria and year-round screening requirements. Franchot asked whether Good Shepherd could move forward with their application while Staff does the additional research. Mattick stated Staff could accept a conditional use permit application, which would allow a public hearing before the Planning Commission next month. Curtis noted their application would need to be submitted by Thursday in order for proper legal notice to be given. Franchot stated he would be comfortable waiving the Planning Commission public hearing since this ordinance has been discussed in great detail at a number of City Council meetings. VOTE: Ayes 4, Nays 0, Bremer Abstained. 7. #10-3484 CITY OF ORONO – AMENDMENT TO ZONING CODE SECTIONS 78-1 AND 78-1434 (HISTORIC BUILDINGS) Curtis stated a resident requested that he be allowed to move an existing oversized historic barn to a new property as an accessory structure. Staff advised the resident that due to the accessory structure size limitations and the Krummenacher Supreme Court ruling on variances, the request would likely be denied. This situation triggered Staff to bring forth a zoning code amendment. A code amendment was discussed at the August Planning Commission meeting. The Planning Commission expressed a desire to adopt changes to the City Zoning Code which would allow for the preservation of buildings deemed as having local historic value when considered as an accessory structure. Item #02 - CC Agenda - 11/08/2010 Approval of Council Minutes 10/25/2010 [Page 8 of 17] MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, October 25, 2010 7:00 o’clock p.m. _____________________________________________________________________________________ Page 9 of 17 (7. #10-3484 CITY OF ORONO – AMENDMENT TO ZONING CODE SECTIONS 78-1 AND 78-1434 (HISTORIC BUILDINGS), Continued) The Planning Commission indicated that an amendment to the current codes was an appropriate method of providing a preservation tool for buildings deemed by the City to have historic significance. The Commission also desired a means of keeping the historic building “historic” once the exception to the size limitation was made rather than allowing a new, oversized building constructed in its place. The desire to keep the historic building “historic” posed a new challenge which the adoption of Interim Use Permit standards would seem to solve. At the September 20th meeting, the Planning Commission recommended approval of the proposed amendment and IUP ordinance with a 5-0 vote. Murphy noted on page one of the draft ordinance, a historic building means any building or collection of buildings. Murphy asked what standard would be applied to determine what is historic. Franchot commented it was his understanding the City Council would have the ability to declare it historic. Gaffron noted the City does not have any buildings that are on the National Register of Historic Places or other historic registers. The City does have a list that the state historic office had compiled approximately 20 or 30 years ago of buildings that they believe have historical significance. Curtis stated if the building has not been put on a historic register, then the City Council can determine whether it is historic. Murphy stated an example of an old building is the red barn that was torn down a few years ago. Murphy indicated he also has an old red barn and asked whether that would be considered historic. White commented that typically buildings have to be older than 70 years to quality as a historic building. Murphy commented he would like to avoid unintended consequences by any language in the ordinance. Mattick stated the ordinance language is somewhat broad to allow for Orono to compile some historic standards that they would like to utilize. Murphy stated he has a concern with the process that any city council at any given time could make a determination that something is historic. Bremer stated any future city council could give themselves that power if they so desired. Bremer noted this ordinance is fairly limited. Mattick pointed out it only goes to the relocation of a historic building. McMillan commented the ordinance also opens the door to IUPs and that the City Council should look at interim use permits more thoroughly. McMillan asked whether this would be an IUP for historic buildings or other things in general. Item #02 - CC Agenda - 11/08/2010 Approval of Council Minutes 10/25/2010 [Page 9 of 17] MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, October 25, 2010 7:00 o’clock p.m. _____________________________________________________________________________________ Page 10 of 17 (7. #10-3484 CITY OF ORONO – AMENDMENT TO ZONING CODE SECTIONS 78-1 AND 78-1434 (HISTORIC BUILDINGS), Continued) Mattick stated it would only be for historic buildings. White asked whether the person who requested permission to relocate a historic building on to his property is present. Curtis indicated he is not and that it is her understanding the resident is no longer interested in relocating the building on to his property. Curtis stated she has not personally spoken to the resident. Bremer moved, McMillan seconded, to table Application #10-3484, City of Orono, Amendment to Zoning Code Sections 78-1 and 78-1434 (Historic Buildings), and to direct Staff to see whether the resident is still interested in relocating the historic building. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. *8. 1820 FOX STREET – TERMINATION OF CUP Murphy moved, Bremer seconded, to terminate the conditional use permit for 1820 Fox Street. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. MAYOR/COUNCIL REPORT McMillan asked if Orono’s Conservation Design Ordinance specifically states before a project is started that all sensitive areas need to be delineated and fenced. McMillan stated if that is not included, it should be added to the ordinance in the near future. White commented at a minimum the areas should be staked. McMillan stated the areas should be delineated prior to any work being done on the property. Gaffron stated it is his understanding on the McKinnon property that they delineated areas that were safe and legal to work in. The defined areas protected by easement are generally restricted by the limits of grading. CITY ENGINEER’S REPORT 9. LONG LAKE-ORONO WATER SYSTEM Kellogg stated the purpose of this study is to respond to the letter from Terry Post of Long Lake and to inform the City Council of the water needs of the two cities and the discrepancies in the amount of water being pumped and the metered amount. Kellogg indicated they will need to resolve the discrepancies in the near future to figure out why they are pumping so much water and not all of it is accounted for. Murphy commented the capacity issue was a red herring. Kellogg stated their analysis assumed there was no sharing. Item #02 - CC Agenda - 11/08/2010 Approval of Council Minutes 10/25/2010 [Page 10 of 17] MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, October 25, 2010 7:00 o’clock p.m. _____________________________________________________________________________________ Page 11 of 17 (9. LONG LAKE-ORONO WATER SYSTEM, Continued) Murphy stated the fact of the matter is that there is sharing of water. Kellogg stated the interconnects were installed in 2003 or 2004 and were basically left wide open. There was a significant amount of unaccounted water at that time and there were no meters on the interconnects. The Orono tower is 6.5 feet taller than the Long Lake tower so no water can go from Long Lake to Orono until the water elevation in the Orono tower falls below the water elevation in the Long Lake tower. After the discrepancy in 2005-2007, the decision was made to completely shut those automatic valves. Following further discussion, it was decided not to completely shut them off any longer and that the water would only be needed for firefighting purposes. Murphy stated another issue is those interconnects were installed at a time to help bolster the relationship between the two cities. Murphy asked what impact this has on Orono’s long-term need for additional water in this area of town once the buildings in the industrial park become occupied. Murphy stated they also need to know where the water is going. Kellogg stated there are some likely explanations but they need to be investigated. Murphy asked what those explanations generally are. Kellogg indicated they are in the process of replacing meters at the school. Unless the schools were running a fixture that was drawing more than seven gallons a minute, the meters were not registering the water. The Public Works Department is in the process of helping the school district replace their meters. Kellogg stated in reviewing well pumping records for the 10-year period from 1998 to 2007, it appears there are some peculiarities that need further investigation. For planning purposes, it is generally accepted practice to assume a water use of 100 gallons per capita per day. Based on the pumping records over the 10-year period, the north Orono water system averages nearly 200 gcd. It is also generally accepted practice to assume the ratio of the maximum day demand to the average day demand to be 3.0. This average ratio over the 10-year period noted above is 5.94 or nearly twice the industry accepted number. Following a review of the system, Kellogg indicated that the results using these conservative practices somewhat overstate the needed storage for the Orono and Long Lake water systems. This is especially true in the Minnesota climate where the negative affects of freezing water in storage tanks and ice damage need to be weighed against the benefits of having a conservatively large volume of water storage. At the present time there are two automatic interconnect valve locations along Old Highway 12, one at Brimhall Avenue and one at Shaughnessy Avenue. These valves are currently set at a pressure such that the two systems do not normally share water and are only active in the event of a low pressure in either Long Lake or Orono. The interconnect valves could be set up in a manner that all of the water between the two communities could be shared except for the top 6.5 feet of the Orono elevated tank. This would be advantageous to both communities from a firm capacity supply standpoint. The installation of Well #4 is dependent on variables such as performance of the existing well, future development and associated demand, and the ability to share water with Long Lake. The capacity of the existing well serving the north Orono water system has been declining over time. Originally the capacity Item #02 - CC Agenda - 11/08/2010 Approval of Council Minutes 10/25/2010 [Page 11 of 17] MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, October 25, 2010 7:00 o’clock p.m. _____________________________________________________________________________________ Page 12 of 17 (9. LONG LAKE-ORONO WATER SYSTEM, Continued) of the well was 800 gpm. Currently the capacity has fallen to 500 gpm due to infiltration of sand when pumped at higher capacities. The improvements identified for 2016 and shown as North Well Pump Maintenance would redevelop the well and hopefully restore some of the lost capacity. Kellogg stated the water tower was built in 1995 and the painting of the tower is a routine maintenance item in order to protect the City’s investment. They will need to determine the extent of the necessary repairs. In order to plan for the future ultimate service area, they will also need to determine where the water is going. The required storage for fire is added to the storage needed for maximum day demand. In addition, the fire storage is based on 3,500 gpm for three hours. This number is chosen because it is the number that the ISO gives the maximum allowable points for the distribution system portion of the overall fire rating. For small communities in Minnesota, this results in an often unrealistic volume of storage. In this situation, the resultant volume of 630,000 gallons will often cause winter freezing problems. Many smaller communities choose a lesser fire flow in an attempt to serve the customer base and at the same time prevent winter freezing. This lesser number usually falls between 1,500 gpm for two hours to 2,500 gpm for three hours. This would result in required storage volumes of 180,000 to 450,000 gallons. In 2009, the Orono Public Works Department went through an exercise to develop a 7-year CIP. The CIP included identifying the water distribution improvements necessary for the north water distribution system. Based on that study, there is a potential significant cost in the next seven years to complete the recommended CIP work. Some of the work is higher in priority than other work. The water tower inspection work is to identify the timing of the repainting and rehabilitation of the north water tower. This work should be done soon so that the water tower work necessary and associated costs can be further refined. Water tower rehabilitation and repainting is generally planned for on a 15 to 20 year cycle. The north water tower was constructed in 1995. Doing the inspection work now will not only help refine the estimated improvement costs but will help identify the timing of the project. Kellogg noted attached to the report is a graphic of the existing water system. White stated over the years more information has been gathered on the city’s overall infrastructure, which has been a major improvement and assists in determining what projects should be undertaken. The City Council took no formal action on this item. 10. OLD CRYSTAL BAY ROAD RECONSTRUCTION FEASIBILITY STUDY – RESOLUTION NO. 5981 White noted the preferred option by the members in attendance at the road meeting was Option 2. Franchot commented that what is done in that area will be what will be there for a number of years and that he is disappointed the school system does not have more ability to partner with the City but that he understand their constraints. Franchot indicated he would prefer Option 2 with three roundabouts and a wider median. An objective could be set to make the median a reasonable barrier without spending a considerable amount of money on it. Franchot stated in his view Option 2 will best meet the needs of the community and offers the Item #02 - CC Agenda - 11/08/2010 Approval of Council Minutes 10/25/2010 [Page 12 of 17] MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, October 25, 2010 7:00 o’clock p.m. _____________________________________________________________________________________ Page 13 of 17 (10. OLD CRYSTAL BAY ROAD RECONSTRUCTION FEASIBILITY STUDY, Continued) opportunity to make this a welcoming center for the community and improve the functionality of the road. Franchot stated he would like to find some funding that does not negatively impact the finances of the City and perhaps leave some of the minor items to the end of the project to see where the costs are at. McMillan stated she would like the school to assist the City in obtaining grants. McMillan noted the City has other MSA roads that will need improvements in the near future so the Council should be cognizant of that. The maintenance and landscaping issues on Old Crystal Bay Road need to be looked at and a determination made on who will have final responsibility for maintaining that. McMillan noted the school board liked the roundabout but that the Council needs to discuss the entrance to city hall and where the main entrance will be. It makes sense to have the entrance off of Kelley Parkway since that is the address for the City offices. White noted they did discuss that at the previous road meeting and that it was the general feeling the entrance to the police department should be separate and that the city offices should have their entrance off of Kelley. McMillan stated she does have a concern with the costs associated with Option 2, especially if a third roundabout is added. Bremer stated she has learned quite a bit about roundabouts over the past month and that the simulation demonstrated that roundabouts work quite well. Bremer indicated she would prefer Option 2 but that she has a concern with the costs associated with the landscaping. Bremer stated the City does not want to create two tunnel effects down the road and that it is unrealistic to plan landscaping for 50 years down the road. Bremer indicated she would like to delay some of the landscaping and take steps to ensure that the crosswalks are in the right location. Bremer commented it was helpful to wait on Casco Point for the final coat of asphalt and that the City could perhaps look at that for this road. Kellogg indicated it would be his preference to delay the final coat of asphalt in order to address any settling issues. Other reasons to delay the final coat are to ensure that the drainage is correct and that there are no issues with snow plowing. Murphy stated in his view Option 2 is the best solution and that in his view this project is a great opportunity to build a solid relationship with the school district. Murphy agreed that a portion of the landscaping can be delayed. White commented he also prefers Option 2 and that the school district should be responsible for the sidewalk. White concurred the City should wait with some of the landscaping and look further at the options. Franchot commented the City tends to look at this project with the perspective of what currently exists and pointed out that Option 1 requires a wider road along with curb and gutter. McMillan asked whether there are any issues with the right-of-way. Item #02 - CC Agenda - 11/08/2010 Approval of Council Minutes 10/25/2010 [Page 13 of 17] MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, October 25, 2010 7:00 o’clock p.m. _____________________________________________________________________________________ Page 14 of 17 (10. OLD CRYSTAL BAY ROAD RECONSTRUCTION FEASIBILITY STUDY, Continued) White indicated there are no problems with the right-of-way. Kellogg noted a couple of issues that were discussed at the last committee meeting dealt with the need to obtain some additional right-of-way from the school district if the roundabout option was chosen and expansion of one of the storm water ponds. They will attempt to keep the road as narrow as possible to minimize the hardcover and to keep the speeds lower on the roadway. Murphy moved, Franchot seconded, to adopt the Old Crystal Bay Road Reconstruction Feasibility Report, and to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 5981, a Resolution Ordering Preparation of Plans and Specifications for the Old Crystal Bay Road Reconstruction Project for Option 2. McMillan asked whether there should be alternates for the width of the median. Kellogg asked if the wider median is to be utilized for future plantings. Murphy indicated it is, with the width of the median not to exceed 12 feet. Franchot asked if the bids would also include the cost for a third roundabout. Kellogg stated that would be a good way to find out the actual cost of adding a third roundabout. VOTE ON THE ABOVE MOTION: Ayes 5, Nays 0. Murphy moved, Franchot seconded, to direct the City Engineer to prepare plans and specifications utilizing Option 2, with price alternates being obtained for different widths of the median, not to exceed 12 feet, to allow for future landscaping, and to obtain a bid on Option 2 with and without a third roundabout on the north end. McMillan asked what widths the median could be. Kellogg stated if any landscaping is going to be done down the road, the 8-foot width would be the minimum width of the median. Kellogg stated if the median is four feet wide, they would not be able to put any landscaping in there and that it would encourage people to cross at areas other than at the crosswalks. Kellogg indicated they could do a short fence or plantings to encourage people to cross at the crosswalks. White commented the 8-foot versus the 12-foot width for the median is largely for aesthetic purposes. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. Item #02 - CC Agenda - 11/08/2010 Approval of Council Minutes 10/25/2010 [Page 14 of 17] MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, October 25, 2010 7:00 o’clock p.m. _____________________________________________________________________________________ Page 15 of 17 CITY ADMINISTRATOR’S REPORT 11. CITY OF ORONO – SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN (SWMP) ADOPTION – RESOLUTION NO. 5982 White noted the City needs to adopt a resolution approving the surface water management plan and to approve the memorandum of understanding. Murphy stated the City Council needs to look at how to finance some of these items over the long-term and pointed out they are relying on grants, which are difficult to obtain, to fill some of the gaps. McMillan asked if the Forest Arms Homeowners Association project is part of this and whether that would be considered a storm water project. Kellogg indicated it partially is a storm water project and that they are planning on bringing some information before the City Council at its next meeting. Gaffron stated the Forest Arms situation has been ongoing since approximately 1993. The City has had at least three or four requests from the residents in that neighborhood and that the primary focus of the CIP is phosphorus reduction. Staff is looking at whether the residents should pay additional money for this project. McMillan asked if there are a number of other similar situations in the City. Gaffron stated to his knowledge the City might have a handful of other similar situations but that the Forest Arm situation has been going on for a number of years and involves their joint dock area. Kellogg stated for the last 14 years, the storm sewer improvement projects have also included sediment removal upstream. McMillan moved, Franchot seconded, to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 5982, a Resolution Adopting the City of Orono 2010 Surface Water Management Plan. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. Gaffron stated formal adoption of the 2010 SWMP by the City includes execution of a Memorandum of Understanding between Orono and the MCWD. A draft MOU was provided by MCWD. Staff and the City Attorney have proposed a number of minor revisions to t he MOU in order to pave the way for future City assumption of permitting authority in the areas of Erosion Control, Floodplain Alteration, Wetland Protection, including WCA responsibilities, and storm water management for land development. Council is asked to review the MOU and authorize its execution by the appropriate City representatives. Staff is looking at the costs associated with assuming those responsibilities. Staff recommends that Council authorize execution of the Memorandum of Understanding. Murphy moved, Bremer seconded, to authorize execution of the Memorandum of Understanding between Orono and the MCWD. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. Item #02 - CC Agenda - 11/08/2010 Approval of Council Minutes 10/25/2010 [Page 15 of 17] MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, October 25, 2010 7:00 o’clock p.m. _____________________________________________________________________________________ Page 16 of 17 12. YEAR-TO-DATE GENERAL FUND BUDGET INFORMATION Olson noted the third quarter financial reports for the General Fund represents 75 percent of the year. Overall expenditures are currently at 69.4 percent of budget. Revenues are at 58.3 percent of the annual budget, but are expected to finish at or above budget by the end of the year. At the present time, the expenditure budget is projected to be under budget by $58,559 on 12/31/2010. This projection is based on a combination of factors. The first is the percent of the year, another is comparison to previous year’s expenditure timing, and the final is a review of significant purchases that have already been made. Five departments are currently projected to be over budget at year end. Human services is over budget but will have no other charges for the year. The Law/Legal services budget and the Public Works Department are also expected to exceed the budget. Revenues through the third quarter are currently at 58.3 percent of budget. The most significant revenue source, representing 65.6 percent of the General Fund budget, is property taxes. Tax collections have only been received for the first half of the year, but when delinquent collections and interest are included, they are on pace to be a 100 percent of budget. Other revenue sources are also projected to be at or above budgeted levels. It is projected that expenditures will finish the year under budget. Revenues are expected to finish the year at or over budget. The Finance Department will continue to monitor both revenues and expenditures in the upcoming months. The City Council took no formal action on this item. *13. ACCEPT DONATION OF PROPERTY USE – RESOLUTION NO. 5983 Jamie Honour voluntarily donated the use of his property located at 1720 Bohns Point Road, to the City of Orono for police training exercises. The Orono Police Department and the Lake Area Emergency Response Unit used the property for training on September 2, 2008. Murphy moved, Bremer seconded, to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 5983, a Resolution Accepting Donation of Property Use. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. *14. ACCEPT DONATION – RESOLUTION NO. 5984 The Orono Police Department received a $100 donation from William J. Sime. The money was given to the police department as appreciation by Mr. Sime for assisting his family during a recent call at their residence. The donation will be used toward upgrades on the department AED’s. Murphy moved, Bremer seconded, to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 5984, a Resolution Acknowledging a Donation from William J. Sime. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. 15. ESTABLISH DATE AND TIME FOR 2011 ANNUAL CITY GOAL SETTING Bremer moved, Murphy seconded, to schedule the 2011 goal setting meeting for Tuesday, November 23rd, at a time to be determined, and to reschedule the November 23rd City Council work session. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. Item #02 - CC Agenda - 11/08/2010 Approval of Council Minutes 10/25/2010 [Page 16 of 17] MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, October 25, 2010 7:00 o’clock p.m. _____________________________________________________________________________________ Page 17 of 17 CITY ATTORNEY’S REPORT None 16. LICENSES & PERMITS ONE DAY GAMBLING – RESOLUTION NO. 5985 1. Orono PTO (raffle) Mid-Winter Fun Fest – Orono Middle School 12:00 p.m. – 4:00 p.m. Saturday, February 5, 2011 Murphy moved, Bremer seconded, to approve the above listed license and to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 5985, a Resolution Approving the Minnesota Lawful Gambling Application for Exempt Permit of the Orono PTO for a One-Day Gambling Permit. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. *17. BILLS Murphy moved, Bremer seconded, to approve payment of the All Funds Account. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. ADJOURNMENT Franchot moved, Murphy seconded, to adjourn the Orono City Council meeting at 9:11 p.m. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. ATTEST: _____________________________________ _______________________________________ Linda S. Vee, City Clerk James M. White, Mayor Item #02 - CC Agenda - 11/08/2010 Approval of Council Minutes 10/25/2010 [Page 17 of 17] Orono City Council Committee of the Whole October 26, 2010, 6:30 p.m. Orono City Council Chambers Page 1 of 1 Present: Mayor Jim White, Council Members Cynthia Bremer, Doug Franchot, Lili McMillan and Jim Murphy; City Administrator Jessica Loftus, Finance Director Ron Olson, City Clerk Lin Vee 1. 2011 Budget Discussion Finance Director Ron Olson presented information on the enterprise fund budgets. Operating expenditures include chemicals and administrative charges, as well as the final year of replacing manual read meters. Water rates are based on a tiered system of water usage. The recent utility rate study recommended an increase in water rates of 5.5%. Capital expenditures for 2011 include pump maintenance and rehabilitation of an Ion Exchanger. Council agreed to consider reducing the water rate increase to approximately 3% and spreading the difference into future years. Water Fund Metropolitan Council Environmental Services (MCES) fees are increasing 12% for 2011. The utility rate study recommends a 4% increase in sewer rates. Orono’s sewer rates are higher than many cities because of a high number of lift stations for a relatively small system. Capital expenditures include upgrading two lift stations, adding a generator and a rehab project. The city pays a surcharge for I & I, but will receive credit for I & I work that is done by the city. Council agreed to the proposed 4% sewer rate increase. Sewer Fund The rate study suggests a 10% increase per year indefinitely. Another alternative is to bond for storm water projects. The SWPPP identifies projects, required funding and a timeline for implementation. Council agreed to the proposed 10% storm water rate increase. Storm water fund Council discussed operating losses and revenue for the golf course operation. Council agreed to move the golf course from an enterprise fund to the general fund to be considered as a recreation program that Council supports. Golf Course 2. Comments Regarding Information Updates There were no comments. 3. Other Issues of Current Interest The interview schedule for Planning Commission applicants was discussed. Three interviews will be scheduled prior to the November 8th and November 22nd Council meetings. The 2011 goal setting work session will be scheduled for Tuesday, November 23rd from 3:00 p.m. – 7:00 p.m. 4. Closed Session – 2011 Union Negotiations Council closed the work session to discuss police officer negotiations. The meeting closed at 7:38 p.m. ATTEST: ________________________________________ _______________________________________ Linda S. Vee, City Clerk James M. White, Mayor Item #03 - CC Agenda - 11/08/2010 Approval of Council Work Session Minutes 10/26/2010 [Page 1 of 1] Item #04 - CC Agenda - 11/08/2010 Public Hearing 7:00 p.m. - Approve Capital Improvement Plan for Buldings & Confirm Intent to Issue Bonds [Page 1 of 16] Item #04 - CC Agenda - 11/08/2010 Public Hearing 7:00 p.m. - Approve Capital Improvement Plan for Buldings & Confirm Intent to Issue Bonds [Page 2 of 16] Item #04 - CC Agenda - 11/08/2010 Public Hearing 7:00 p.m. - Approve Capital Improvement Plan for Buldings & Confirm Intent to Issue Bonds [Page 3 of 16] Item #04 - CC Agenda - 11/08/2010 Public Hearing 7:00 p.m. - Approve Capital Improvement Plan for Buldings & Confirm Intent to Issue Bonds [Page 4 of 16] Item #04 - CC Agenda - 11/08/2010 Public Hearing 7:00 p.m. - Approve Capital Improvement Plan for Buldings & Confirm Intent to Issue Bonds [Page 5 of 16] Item #04 - CC Agenda - 11/08/2010 Public Hearing 7:00 p.m. - Approve Capital Improvement Plan for Buldings & Confirm Intent to Issue Bonds [Page 6 of 16] Item #04 - CC Agenda - 11/08/2010 Public Hearing 7:00 p.m. - Approve Capital Improvement Plan for Buldings & Confirm Intent to Issue Bonds [Page 7 of 16] Item #04 - CC Agenda - 11/08/2010 Public Hearing 7:00 p.m. - Approve Capital Improvement Plan for Buldings & Confirm Intent to Issue Bonds [Page 8 of 16] Item #04 - CC Agenda - 11/08/2010 Public Hearing 7:00 p.m. - Approve Capital Improvement Plan for Buldings & Confirm Intent to Issue Bonds [Page 9 of 16] Item #04 - CC Agenda - 11/08/2010 Public Hearing 7:00 p.m. - Approve Capital Improvement Plan for Buldings & Confirm Intent to Issue Bonds [Page 10 of 16] Item #04 - CC Agenda - 11/08/2010 Public Hearing 7:00 p.m. - Approve Capital Improvement Plan for Buldings & Confirm Intent to Issue Bonds [Page 11 of 16] Item #04 - CC Agenda - 11/08/2010 Public Hearing 7:00 p.m. - Approve Capital Improvement Plan for Buldings & Confirm Intent to Issue Bonds [Page 12 of 16] Item #04 - CC Agenda - 11/08/2010 Public Hearing 7:00 p.m. - Approve Capital Improvement Plan for Buldings & Confirm Intent to Issue Bonds [Page 13 of 16] Item #04 - CC Agenda - 11/08/2010 Public Hearing 7:00 p.m. - Approve Capital Improvement Plan for Buldings & Confirm Intent to Issue Bonds [Page 14 of 16] Item #04 - CC Agenda - 11/08/2010 Public Hearing 7:00 p.m. - Approve Capital Improvement Plan for Buldings & Confirm Intent to Issue Bonds [Page 15 of 16] Item #04 - CC Agenda - 11/08/2010 Public Hearing 7:00 p.m. - Approve Capital Improvement Plan for Buldings & Confirm Intent to Issue Bonds [Page 16 of 16] Item #05 - CC Agenda - 11/08/2010 Public Hearing 7:05 pm - Provide for Sale of Bonds (Street Reconstruction Plan) [Page 1 of 4] Item #05 - CC Agenda - 11/08/2010 Public Hearing 7:05 pm - Provide for Sale of Bonds (Street Reconstruction Plan) [Page 2 of 4] Item #05 - CC Agenda - 11/08/2010 Public Hearing 7:05 pm - Provide for Sale of Bonds (Street Reconstruction Plan) [Page 3 of 4] Item #05 - CC Agenda - 11/08/2010 Public Hearing 7:05 pm - Provide for Sale of Bonds (Street Reconstruction Plan) [Page 4 of 4] Item #06 - CC Agenda - 11/08/2010 Sale of General Obligation Street Reconstruction, State-Aid and Capital Improvement Bonds [Page 1 of 8] Item #06 - CC Agenda - 11/08/2010 Sale of General Obligation Street Reconstruction, State-Aid and Capital Improvement Bonds [Page 2 of 8] Item #06 - CC Agenda - 11/08/2010 Sale of General Obligation Street Reconstruction, State-Aid and Capital Improvement Bonds [Page 3 of 8] Item #06 - CC Agenda - 11/08/2010 Sale of General Obligation Street Reconstruction, State-Aid and Capital Improvement Bonds [Page 4 of 8] Item #06 - CC Agenda - 11/08/2010 Sale of General Obligation Street Reconstruction, State-Aid and Capital Improvement Bonds [Page 5 of 8] Item #06 - CC Agenda - 11/08/2010 Sale of General Obligation Street Reconstruction, State-Aid and Capital Improvement Bonds [Page 6 of 8] Item #06 - CC Agenda - 11/08/2010 Sale of General Obligation Street Reconstruction, State-Aid and Capital Improvement Bonds [Page 7 of 8] Item #06 - CC Agenda - 11/08/2010 Sale of General Obligation Street Reconstruction, State-Aid and Capital Improvement Bonds [Page 8 of 8] Item #07 - CC Agenda - 11/08/2010 Request to Opt Out of Assessment for North Farm Road Sewer Improvement [Page 1 of 8] Item #07 - CC Agenda - 11/08/2010 Request to Opt Out of Assessment for North Farm Road Sewer Improvement [Page 2 of 8] Item #07 - CC Agenda - 11/08/2010 Request to Opt Out of Assessment for North Farm Road Sewer Improvement [Page 3 of 8] Item #07 - CC Agenda - 11/08/2010 Request to Opt Out of Assessment for North Farm Road Sewer Improvement [Page 4 of 8] Item #07 - CC Agenda - 11/08/2010 Request to Opt Out of Assessment for North Farm Road Sewer Improvement [Page 5 of 8] Item #07 - CC Agenda - 11/08/2010 Request to Opt Out of Assessment for North Farm Road Sewer Improvement [Page 6 of 8] Item #07 - CC Agenda - 11/08/2010 Request to Opt Out of Assessment for North Farm Road Sewer Improvement [Page 7 of 8] Item #07 - CC Agenda - 11/08/2010 Request to Opt Out of Assessment for North Farm Road Sewer Improvement [Page 8 of 8] Item #08 - CC Agenda - 11/08/2010 Forest Lake Drive/Forest Arms Joint Dock - Drainage and Siltation Issue [Page 1 of 37] Item #08 - CC Agenda - 11/08/2010 Forest Lake Drive/Forest Arms Joint Dock - Drainage and Siltation Issue [Page 2 of 37] Item #08 - CC Agenda - 11/08/2010 Forest Lake Drive/Forest Arms Joint Dock - Drainage and Siltation Issue [Page 3 of 37] Item #08 - CC Agenda - 11/08/2010 Forest Lake Drive/Forest Arms Joint Dock - Drainage and Siltation Issue [Page 4 of 37] Item #08 - CC Agenda - 11/08/2010 Forest Lake Drive/Forest Arms Joint Dock - Drainage and Siltation Issue [Page 5 of 37] Item #08 - CC Agenda - 11/08/2010 Forest Lake Drive/Forest Arms Joint Dock - Drainage and Siltation Issue [Page 6 of 37] Item #08 - CC Agenda - 11/08/2010 Forest Lake Drive/Forest Arms Joint Dock - Drainage and Siltation Issue [Page 7 of 37] Item #08 - CC Agenda - 11/08/2010 Forest Lake Drive/Forest Arms Joint Dock - Drainage and Siltation Issue [Page 8 of 37] Item #08 - CC Agenda - 11/08/2010 Forest Lake Drive/Forest Arms Joint Dock - Drainage and Siltation Issue [Page 9 of 37] Item #08 - CC Agenda - 11/08/2010 Forest Lake Drive/Forest Arms Joint Dock - Drainage and Siltation Issue [Page 10 of 37] Item #08 - CC Agenda - 11/08/2010 Forest Lake Drive/Forest Arms Joint Dock - Drainage and Siltation Issue [Page 11 of 37] Item #08 - CC Agenda - 11/08/2010 Forest Lake Drive/Forest Arms Joint Dock - Drainage and Siltation Issue [Page 12 of 37] Item #08 - CC Agenda - 11/08/2010 Forest Lake Drive/Forest Arms Joint Dock - Drainage and Siltation Issue [Page 13 of 37] Item #08 - CC Agenda - 11/08/2010 Forest Lake Drive/Forest Arms Joint Dock - Drainage and Siltation Issue [Page 14 of 37] Item #08 - CC Agenda - 11/08/2010 Forest Lake Drive/Forest Arms Joint Dock - Drainage and Siltation Issue [Page 15 of 37] Item #08 - CC Agenda - 11/08/2010 Forest Lake Drive/Forest Arms Joint Dock - Drainage and Siltation Issue [Page 16 of 37] Item #08 - CC Agenda - 11/08/2010 Forest Lake Drive/Forest Arms Joint Dock - Drainage and Siltation Issue [Page 17 of 37] Item #08 - CC Agenda - 11/08/2010 Forest Lake Drive/Forest Arms Joint Dock - Drainage and Siltation Issue [Page 18 of 37] Item #08 - CC Agenda - 11/08/2010 Forest Lake Drive/Forest Arms Joint Dock - Drainage and Siltation Issue [Page 19 of 37] Item #08 - CC Agenda - 11/08/2010 Forest Lake Drive/Forest Arms Joint Dock - Drainage and Siltation Issue [Page 20 of 37] Item #08 - CC Agenda - 11/08/2010 Forest Lake Drive/Forest Arms Joint Dock - Drainage and Siltation Issue [Page 21 of 37] Item #08 - CC Agenda - 11/08/2010 Forest Lake Drive/Forest Arms Joint Dock - Drainage and Siltation Issue [Page 22 of 37] Item #08 - CC Agenda - 11/08/2010 Forest Lake Drive/Forest Arms Joint Dock - Drainage and Siltation Issue [Page 23 of 37] Item #08 - CC Agenda - 11/08/2010 Forest Lake Drive/Forest Arms Joint Dock - Drainage and Siltation Issue [Page 24 of 37] Item #08 - CC Agenda - 11/08/2010 Forest Lake Drive/Forest Arms Joint Dock - Drainage and Siltation Issue [Page 25 of 37] Item #08 - CC Agenda - 11/08/2010 Forest Lake Drive/Forest Arms Joint Dock - Drainage and Siltation Issue [Page 26 of 37] Item #08 - CC Agenda - 11/08/2010 Forest Lake Drive/Forest Arms Joint Dock - Drainage and Siltation Issue [Page 27 of 37] Item #08 - CC Agenda - 11/08/2010 Forest Lake Drive/Forest Arms Joint Dock - Drainage and Siltation Issue [Page 28 of 37] Item #08 - CC Agenda - 11/08/2010 Forest Lake Drive/Forest Arms Joint Dock - Drainage and Siltation Issue [Page 29 of 37] Item #08 - CC Agenda - 11/08/2010 Forest Lake Drive/Forest Arms Joint Dock - Drainage and Siltation Issue [Page 30 of 37] Item #08 - CC Agenda - 11/08/2010 Forest Lake Drive/Forest Arms Joint Dock - Drainage and Siltation Issue [Page 31 of 37] Item #08 - CC Agenda - 11/08/2010 Forest Lake Drive/Forest Arms Joint Dock - Drainage and Siltation Issue [Page 32 of 37] Item #08 - CC Agenda - 11/08/2010 Forest Lake Drive/Forest Arms Joint Dock - Drainage and Siltation Issue [Page 33 of 37] Item #08 - CC Agenda - 11/08/2010 Forest Lake Drive/Forest Arms Joint Dock - Drainage and Siltation Issue [Page 34 of 37] Item #08 - CC Agenda - 11/08/2010 Forest Lake Drive/Forest Arms Joint Dock - Drainage and Siltation Issue [Page 35 of 37] Item #08 - CC Agenda - 11/08/2010 Forest Lake Drive/Forest Arms Joint Dock - Drainage and Siltation Issue [Page 36 of 37] Item #08 - CC Agenda - 11/08/2010 Forest Lake Drive/Forest Arms Joint Dock - Drainage and Siltation Issue [Page 37 of 37] Item #09 - CC Agenda - 11/08/2010 City of Orono - Policy for Joint Use Dock Surveys [Page 1 of 4] Item #09 - CC Agenda - 11/08/2010 City of Orono - Policy for Joint Use Dock Surveys [Page 2 of 4] Item #09 - CC Agenda - 11/08/2010 City of Orono - Policy for Joint Use Dock Surveys [Page 3 of 4] Item #09 - CC Agenda - 11/08/2010 City of Orono - Policy for Joint Use Dock Surveys [Page 4 of 4] Item #10 - CC Agenda - 11/08/2010 File #10-3483 [Total Pages 92] Item #10 - CC Agenda - 11/08/2010 File #10-3483 [Total Pages 92] Item #10 - CC Agenda - 11/08/2010 File #10-3483 [Total Pages 92] Item #10 - CC Agenda - 11/08/2010 File #10-3483 [Total Pages 92] Item #10 - CC Agenda - 11/08/2010 File #10-3483 [Total Pages 92] Item #10 - CC Agenda - 11/08/2010 File #10-3483 [Total Pages 92] Item #10 - CC Agenda - 11/08/2010 File #10-3483 [Total Pages 92] Item #10 - CC Agenda - 11/08/2010 File #10-3483 [Total Pages 92] Item #10 - CC Agenda - 11/08/2010 File #10-3483 [Total Pages 92] Item #10 - CC Agenda - 11/08/2010 File #10-3483 [Total Pages 92] Item #10 - CC Agenda - 11/08/2010 File #10-3483 [Total Pages 92] Item #10 - CC Agenda - 11/08/2010 File #10-3483 [Total Pages 92] Item #10 - CC Agenda - 11/08/2010 File #10-3483 [Total Pages 92] Item #10 - CC Agenda - 11/08/2010 File #10-3483 [Total Pages 92] Item #10 - CC Agenda - 11/08/2010 File #10-3483 [Total Pages 92] Item #10 - CC Agenda - 11/08/2010 File #10-3483 [Total Pages 92] Item #10 - CC Agenda - 11/08/2010 File #10-3483 [Total Pages 92] Item #10 - CC Agenda - 11/08/2010 File #10-3483 [Total Pages 92] Item #10 - CC Agenda - 11/08/2010 File #10-3483 [Total Pages 92] Item #10 - CC Agenda - 11/08/2010 File #10-3483 [Total Pages 92] Item #10 - CC Agenda - 11/08/2010 File #10-3483 [Total Pages 92] Item #10 - CC Agenda - 11/08/2010 File #10-3483 [Total Pages 92] Item #10 - CC Agenda - 11/08/2010 File #10-3483 [Total Pages 92] Item #10 - CC Agenda - 11/08/2010 File #10-3483 [Total Pages 92] Item #10 - CC Agenda - 11/08/2010 File #10-3483 [Total Pages 92] Item #10 - CC Agenda - 11/08/2010 File #10-3483 [Total Pages 92] Item #10 - CC Agenda - 11/08/2010 File #10-3483 [Total Pages 92] Item #10 - CC Agenda - 11/08/2010 File #10-3483 [Total Pages 92] Item #10 - CC Agenda - 11/08/2010 File #10-3483 [Total Pages 92] Item #10 - CC Agenda - 11/08/2010 File #10-3483 [Total Pages 92] Item #10 - CC Agenda - 11/08/2010 File #10-3483 [Total Pages 92] Item #10 - CC Agenda - 11/08/2010 File #10-3483 [Total Pages 92] Item #10 - CC Agenda - 11/08/2010 File #10-3483 [Total Pages 92] Item #10 - CC Agenda - 11/08/2010 File #10-3483 [Total Pages 92] Item #10 - CC Agenda - 11/08/2010 File #10-3483 [Total Pages 92] Item #10 - CC Agenda - 11/08/2010 File #10-3483 [Total Pages 92] Item #10 - CC Agenda - 11/08/2010 File #10-3483 [Total Pages 92] Item #10 - CC Agenda - 11/08/2010 File #10-3483 [Total Pages 92] Item #10 - CC Agenda - 11/08/2010 File #10-3483 [Total Pages 92] Item #10 - CC Agenda - 11/08/2010 File #10-3483 [Total Pages 92] Item #10 - CC Agenda - 11/08/2010 File #10-3483 [Total Pages 92] Item #10 - CC Agenda - 11/08/2010 File #10-3483 [Total Pages 92] Item #10 - CC Agenda - 11/08/2010 File #10-3483 [Total Pages 92] Item #10 - CC Agenda - 11/08/2010 File #10-3483 [Total Pages 92] Item #10 - CC Agenda - 11/08/2010 File #10-3483 [Total Pages 92] Item #10 - CC Agenda - 11/08/2010 File #10-3483 [Total Pages 92] Item #10 - CC Agenda - 11/08/2010 File #10-3483 [Total Pages 92] Item #10 - CC Agenda - 11/08/2010 File #10-3483 [Total Pages 92] Item #10 - CC Agenda - 11/08/2010 File #10-3483 [Total Pages 92] Item #10 - CC Agenda - 11/08/2010 File #10-3483 [Total Pages 92] Item #10 - CC Agenda - 11/08/2010 File #10-3483 [Total Pages 92] Item #10 - CC Agenda - 11/08/2010 File #10-3483 [Total Pages 92] Item #10 - CC Agenda - 11/08/2010 File #10-3483 [Total Pages 92] Item #10 - CC Agenda - 11/08/2010 File #10-3483 [Total Pages 92] Item #10 - CC Agenda - 11/08/2010 File #10-3483 [Total Pages 92] Item #10 - CC Agenda - 11/08/2010 File #10-3483 [Total Pages 92] Item #10 - CC Agenda - 11/08/2010 File #10-3483 [Total Pages 92] Item #10 - CC Agenda - 11/08/2010 File #10-3483 [Total Pages 92] Item #10 - CC Agenda - 11/08/2010 File #10-3483 [Total Pages 92] Item #10 - CC Agenda - 11/08/2010 File #10-3483 [Total Pages 92] Item #10 - CC Agenda - 11/08/2010 File #10-3483 [Total Pages 92] Item #10 - CC Agenda - 11/08/2010 File #10-3483 [Total Pages 92] Item #10 - CC Agenda - 11/08/2010 File #10-3483 [Total Pages 92] Item #10 - CC Agenda - 11/08/2010 File #10-3483 [Total Pages 92] Item #10 - CC Agenda - 11/08/2010 File #10-3483 [Total Pages 92] Item #10 - CC Agenda - 11/08/2010 File #10-3483 [Total Pages 92] Item #10 - CC Agenda - 11/08/2010 File #10-3483 [Total Pages 92] Item #10 - CC Agenda - 11/08/2010 File #10-3483 [Total Pages 92] Item #10 - CC Agenda - 11/08/2010 File #10-3483 [Total Pages 92] Item #10 - CC Agenda - 11/08/2010 File #10-3483 [Total Pages 92] Item #10 - CC Agenda - 11/08/2010 File #10-3483 [Total Pages 92] Item #10 - CC Agenda - 11/08/2010 File #10-3483 [Total Pages 92] Item #10 - CC Agenda - 11/08/2010 File #10-3483 [Total Pages 92] Item #10 - CC Agenda - 11/08/2010 File #10-3483 [Total Pages 92] Item #10 - CC Agenda - 11/08/2010 File #10-3483 [Total Pages 92] Item #10 - CC Agenda - 11/08/2010 File #10-3483 [Total Pages 92] Item #10 - CC Agenda - 11/08/2010 File #10-3483 [Total Pages 92] Item #10 - CC Agenda - 11/08/2010 File #10-3483 [Total Pages 92] Item #10 - CC Agenda - 11/08/2010 File #10-3483 [Total Pages 92] Item #10 - CC Agenda - 11/08/2010 File #10-3483 [Total Pages 92] Item #10 - CC Agenda - 11/08/2010 File #10-3483 [Total Pages 92] Item #10 - CC Agenda - 11/08/2010 File #10-3483 [Total Pages 92] Item #10 - CC Agenda - 11/08/2010 File #10-3483 [Total Pages 92] Item #10 - CC Agenda - 11/08/2010 File #10-3483 [Total Pages 92] Item #10 - CC Agenda - 11/08/2010 File #10-3483 [Total Pages 92] Item #10 - CC Agenda - 11/08/2010 File #10-3483 [Total Pages 92] Item #10 - CC Agenda - 11/08/2010 File #10-3483 [Total Pages 92] Item #10 - CC Agenda - 11/08/2010 File #10-3483 [Total Pages 92] Item #10 - CC Agenda - 11/08/2010 File #10-3483 [Total Pages 92] Item #10 - CC Agenda - 11/08/2010 File #10-3483 [Total Pages 92] Item #10 - CC Agenda - 11/08/2010 File #10-3483 [Total Pages 92] Item #10 - CC Agenda - 11/08/2010 File #10-3483 [Total Pages 92] Item #11 - CC Agenda - 11/08/2010 File #10-3493 [Total Pages 1] Item #12 - CC Agenda - 11/08/2010 File #10-3494 [Total Pages 1] Item #13 - CC Agenda - 11/08/2010 Continued Participation in Metropolitan Livable Communities Program [Page 1 of 8] Item #13 - CC Agenda - 11/08/2010 Continued Participation in Metropolitan Livable Communities Program [Page 2 of 8] Item #13 - CC Agenda - 11/08/2010 Continued Participation in Metropolitan Livable Communities Program [Page 3 of 8] Item #13 - CC Agenda - 11/08/2010 Continued Participation in Metropolitan Livable Communities Program [Page 4 of 8] Item #13 - CC Agenda - 11/08/2010 Continued Participation in Metropolitan Livable Communities Program [Page 5 of 8] Item #13 - CC Agenda - 11/08/2010 Continued Participation in Metropolitan Livable Communities Program [Page 6 of 8] Item #13 - CC Agenda - 11/08/2010 Continued Participation in Metropolitan Livable Communities Program [Page 7 of 8] Item #13 - CC Agenda - 11/08/2010 Continued Participation in Metropolitan Livable Communities Program [Page 8 of 8] Item #14 - CC Agenda - 11/08/2010 Disposal of Unclaimed Property [Page 1 of 2] Item #14 - CC Agenda - 11/08/2010 Disposal of Unclaimed Property [Page 2 of 2] Item #15 - CC Agenda - 11/08/2010 Licenses & Permits [Page 1 of 1] Item 16 - CC Agenda - 11/08/2010 Bills [Page 1 of 10] Item 16 - CC Agenda - 11/08/2010 Bills [Page 2 of 10] Item 16 - CC Agenda - 11/08/2010 Bills [Page 3 of 10] Item 16 - CC Agenda - 11/08/2010 Bills [Page 4 of 10] Item 16 - CC Agenda - 11/08/2010 Bills [Page 5 of 10] Item 16 - CC Agenda - 11/08/2010 Bills [Page 6 of 10] Item 16 - CC Agenda - 11/08/2010 Bills [Page 7 of 10] Item 16 - CC Agenda - 11/08/2010 Bills [Page 8 of 10] Item 16 - CC Agenda - 11/08/2010 Bills [Page 9 of 10] Item 16 - CC Agenda - 11/08/2010 Bills [Page 10 of 10]