Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout11-27-2000 Council Minutes• ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES FOR NOVEMBER 27, 2000 ROLL The Council met on the above - mentioned date with the following members present: Mayor Gabriel Jabbour, Council Members Richard Flint, Charles Kelley, Barbara Peterson and Bob Sansevere. Representing Staff were City Administrator Ron Moorse, City Attorney Tom Barrett, Senior Planning Coordinator Michael Gaffron, Zoning Administrator Paul Weinberger, Assistant Zoning Administrator Wendy Bottenberg, City Engineer Tom Kellogg and Recorder Lin Vee. Mayor Jabbour called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. ( #1) CONSENT AGENDA Items 7, 8, 10 and 11 were added to the Consent Agenda. Items 4 and 13 were removed from the Consent Agenda. Flint moved, Sansevere seconded, to approve the Consent Agenda as amended. Vote: Ayes 5, Nays 0. APPROVAL OF MINUTES • ( * #2) Special Council Meeting of The Canvassing Board of November 13, 2000 Flint moved, Sansevere seconded, to approve the Minutes of the Special Council Meeting of the Canvassing Board of November 13, 2000, as presented. Vote: Ayes 5, Nays 0. ( * #3) Regular Council Meeting of November 13, 2000 Flint moved, Sansevere seconded, to approve the Minutes of the Regular Council Meeting of November 13, 2000, as presented. Vote: Ayes 5, Nays 0. PARK COMMISSION COMMENTS Park Commissioner Sherokee Ilse had no comments as there had not been a Park Commission meeting since the last Council meeting. Mayor Jabbour indicated that the City was planning a reception to recognize two residents who are making land donations to the City. E R ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING • MINUTES FOR NOVEMBER 27, 2000 LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT - LILI McMILLAN, REPRESENTATIVE McMillan stated that the issue of additional law enforcement on Lake Minnetonka was looking favorable. The City of Minnetonka has agreed to revisit the issue. Other participating cities will be discussing the issue at their upcoming Council meetings. The next LMCD Board meeting is scheduled for December 13, at which time the results of the participating cities should be available as to whether they will be contributing to the program. Two or three cities may not participate and there will be discussions as to how to make up the difference. Private contributions have been considered as an option. McMillan referred to the handouts in the Council's packet. She noted the shoreline count showed a slight increase, particularly in personal watercraft, and a decrease in fishing boats. She added that the Save the Lake letter was included for information. She has chaired the Save the Lake fund, made up of private donations, for the last two years. Mayor Jabbour stated that the City has asked the LMCD to support a water quality study in the Maxwell Bay and Stubbs Bay areas with the Watershed District. PLANNING COMMISSION COMMENTS - JAY NYGARD, REPRESENTATIVE • There were no Planning Commission comments. PUBLIC COMMENTS There were no public comments. ZONING ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT ( #4) #2637 William & Nadine McGuire, 315 Woodhill Road - Variance - Resolution No. 4570 Peterson asked for clarification of language in the resolution. She noted that the third paragraph on the first page referred to construction of private driveway. Bottenberg indicated that the resolution would be corrected to reflect the same language as found in the Conclusions, Order, and Conditions. Peterson moved, Kelley seconded, to adopt Resolution No. 4570 granting a variance to allow the proposed accessory structure to be located nearer the front lot line than the principal building where no accessory structure is allowed for the property located at 315 • Woodhill Road. Vote: Ayes 5, nays 0. L-11 • ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES FOR NOVEMBER 27, 2000 ( * #5) #2643 Patrick and Kristen Burton, 2601 Rainey Road - Variance - Resolution No. 4571 Flint moved, Sansevere seconded, to adopt Resolution No. 4571 granting a variance to permit the construction of a private driveway through a wetland where no fill is normally allowed for the property located at 2601 Rainey Road. Vote: Ayes 5, nays 0. ( #6) Edward and Carol Callahan, 2545 North Shore Drive - Appeal of Administrative Decision Edward Callahan, owner of the property at 2545 North Shore Drive, was present. Weinberger explained that the applicant was appealing the administrative decision regarding repair to an existing gazebo located on the lakeside of the residence. A building permit application was submitted on October 23, 2000 for repair of the gazebo. The applicants had indicated that the building was damaged in the storm of May 1998. Weinberger referred to the • observations made for denial in the Request for Council Action dated November 6, 2000. He noted the primary issue was that based on the existing condition of the building, the structure had extended beyond its useful life. The corner posts, which are required for structural integrity, are leaning and rotted. The rafters, shingles and interior of the building are also rotten. Weinberger explained that the building is comprised of four corner posts, a door and window on one side, windows on the back side, and the walls on the lakeside and opposite side from the lake are screened panels. The building contractor has indicated the entire building would need to be replaced as part of the repair. The permit was denied based on the interim procedures for handling storm damage as a result of the May storm. Buildings were allowed to be repaired if they did not go beyond 75% damage. Weinberger stated that it is staffs position that a variance would be required to allow the structure to be replaced. There are no records available as to the condition of the building prior to the May storm. The two options available to Council are to approve the appeal to allow replacement of the structure, or to deny the appeal. The applicant would have the option to apply for a variance if the appeal is denied. Weinberger added that the building is located 2'/2 feet from the residential property to the west and 12 feet from the lakeshore. Callahan stated that he felt approval of the permit is appropriate. He explained that the building was built at the time the house was built on a patio. He referred to photographs which show how the building was moved off the footings about one foot during the 1998 storm. The front part of the building contains electricity and phone lines. The screened sides are "fragile" and resulted in • tree damage from the storm. A tree branch also fell on the roof creating a hole. He questioned I* ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES FOR NOVEMBER 27, 2000 ( #6) Edward and Carol Callahan, 2545 North Shore Drive -Appeal of Administrative Decision - Continued what measurement was used as 75 %. He has talked to several contractors and an insurance claim agent. $8,000 was quoted as a replacement bid by the contractor while the insurance agent estimated $3,000 in damages. Callahan felt the repair could be done for about half of the replacement value. He noted the contractor was unsure of the structural replacement that might be required once reconstruction was underway. He indicated the surveyor may not have the correct lot line. Callahan noted that the neighbor believes the building should be replaced. He added that the support posts have continued to support the building even though they may be rotting. Jabbour asked if saving the front of the building and concrete slab would constitute more than 25% of the structure. Callahan replied he didn't know if the measurement was supposed to be 25% of the square feet of the structure, or cubic feet, or the economic value, or some other measure. 0 Weinberger stated that staff had not considered the concrete slab as part of the structure. They had looked at 25% of the physical structure. • Flint indicated that there have been other instances where trying to save part of the structure to meet code requirements have not been successful as projects have progressed, and the property owners were allowed to rebuild. He felt this could be a similar situation. Flint stated that he had discussed moving the structure with Callahan. Callahan had indicated that this was the least obtrusive place on the property for the structure. Flint stated he would be willing to override the decision of the building official and to approve the issuance of a building permit. Jabbour confirmed that the 75/25% standards were applied only to building projects as a result of the May 1998 storm. He added that Orono's code visualizes that all structures in the 0 -75' lakeshore setback would eventually be eliminated. Jabbour stated that there was a distinction between dealing with storm damage and everyday situations. He felt it was important to determine if 25% still exists and to base approval of a building permit on the same standards that other residents were held to as part of the May 1998 storm regarding building projects. Kelley commented that the 2 -year period had passed. Flint suggested extending the period for another year for all residents. Sansevere asked why it had taken over 2 years to start the repair project. Callahan responded that there is partial screening by trees and the damage was not visible from the house. The damage was not discovered until late fall, and then it has taken time to get the insurance • 4 ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES FOR NOVEMBER 27, 2000 ( #6) Edward and Carol Callahan, 2545 North Shore Drive - Appeal of Administrative Decision - Continued company and contractors to complete their work. He also needed to get a survey for the building permit application. Kelley asked why the building was being repaired. Callahan responded that he was getting ready to sell and it needed to be repaired. Sansevere asked if the City would require Callahan to remove the structure if he withdrew his building permit application. Weinberger responded that the City would not require its removal. Sansevere stated the building was an eyesore as it stands and he would prefer to see an extension of the 2 -year period for everyone. Weinberger stated that the 2 -year period is not a deadline and that the staff memo has referred to the length of time that has elapsed since the damage. Sansevere commented that if views from the lake are a concern, he would prefer to see the building replaced rather than remain as an eyesore. Jabbour stated that he would be willing to approve the appeal if Callahan could demonstrate that . 25% of the structure would remain. Sansevere questioned why the slab would not be considered part of the structure. Jabbour asked Callahan if there was a way that he could keep 25% of the structure. Callahan responded that he would like to keep the front since it has electrical and telephone wiring, and he would certainly keep the floor. Jabbour stated it was his opinion that 25% of the structure must be kept, and that keeping the front with wiring and slab would constitute 25% of the value, which is following the interim building permit procedures for storm damage from the May 1998 storm. Jabbour indicated he would not approve a building permit if the building was totally replaced. Callahan commented that he did not want to spend money needlessly, and felt that keeping the front part of the structure would be possible. Peterson asked Gaffron about structures along the lakeshore and having a value regarding building repairs. Gaffron responded that the 1975 code had a provision regarding non- conforming structures in the 0 -75' setback. It allowed structural repairs up to 50% of its value at the time it became non - conforming. The City has consistently used 1975 as the date that such types of structures became non - conforming. Peterson asked how staff would have responded to a building permit request prior to the 1998 storm. Weinberger replied that general cosmetic repairs like re- siding and re- roofing are generally allowed. Before shingles could be replaced, the rafters would have to be in good is condition. The support structures would have been reviewed to see if they could handle OP ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING • MINUTES FOR NOVEMBER 27, 2000 ( #6) Edward and Carol Callahan, 2545 North Shore Drive - Appeal of Administrative Decision - Continued replacement of the rafters and roof. Without knowing the condition of the building prior to the storm, it would be difficult to determine if total replacement would have been required. Jabbour asked if the hole in the roof from the storm could have accelerated deterioration of the rafters. Weinberger responded that it could be argued that it would have. Kelley questioned if the building inspector had looked at the structure to determine that it needed total replacement. Weinberger responded that both the building inspector and the contractor who drew up the plans were under the understanding that the entire building would be replaced, with the exception of the slab below the structure. Kelley did not feel the Council should disagree with the determination of the building inspector. Flint asked why the appeal process ,vas part of the code if the Council shouldn't disagree with opinions of the building inspector. Kelley stated his position was to accept the building inspector's opinion. Sansevere asked if it was clear that the building inspector determined that 75% of the structure could not be salvaged. He questioned if salvaging part of the structure had been considered. Weinberger replied that the visual inspection and conversations with Callahan had lead to the i understanding that the entire building would be replaced. He added that if it could be determined that 25% of the structure could be salvaged, it might fall under the interim building permit procedures for storm damage. Jabbour noted that in his opinion it is easier to rebuild the structure rather that repair it, and the contractor may have had a similar opinion. Kelley asked why Callahan would want to save any part of the structure. Sansevere replied that there was no other option. Kelley commented that a few years later the beams would need to be replaced. Jabbour suggested that Callahan discuss with his.contractor the possibility of saving the front portion of the building. He added that if the application was not the result of the May 1998 and 25% of the structure could not be salvaged, the building permit should not be approved. Callahan felt that the front and slab would constitute 25% of the structure since most of the rest of the structure is screening. Peterson asked if a cement slab had ever been considered as part of the percentage for construction. Jabbour commented that the floor /slab is acting as a foundation, and would be considered as part of construction. . I 0 ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES FOR NOVEMBER 27, 2000 ( #6) Edward and Carol Callahan, 2545 North Shore Drive - Appeal ofAdministrative Decision - Continued Mayor Jabbour moved, Flint seconded, that based on the City's existing rules regarding the May 1998 storm and the fact that the City has allowed all its residents to rebuild if 25% of their non - conforming structure still existed, that if the structure's front panel and foundation /slab is retained and it is determined that it constitutes 25% of the non- conforming structure, a building permit should be issued. Also, non - conforming structures should not exist in the 0 -75' setback, except this structure could be repaired based on damage from the May 1998 storm. Sansevere asked Gaffron if the slab could be considered structure in this case. Gaffron responded that it could. Vote: 3 Ayes, 2 Nays. Peterson and Kelley opposed. MAYOR/COUNCIL REPORT • Jabbour requested that the City send a letter to Ann Cosgrove and her family welcoming them back to the City of Orono, and encouraging her to become re- involved in city activities. He noted that she worked diligently on the Highway 12 project and was an asset to the City. Council agreed that a letter should be sent. Jabbour reported that the Planning Commission Chair requested that the opening created by Jay Nygard be filled as soon as possible. Moorse responded that application information would be in the next issues of the local newspapers. Flint commented that information from CMD, a group that does research on construction going on within the country, had been reviewed at a recent work session. In the research of 250 -300 fire stations, it appears that the replacement of Long Lake fire. station estimate of $2 million is reasonable. PUBLIC SERVICE DIRECTOR'S REPORT ( * #7) Request Final Payment - East Long Lake/Fox Ridge Sewer Project Flint moved, Sansevere seconded, to approve Request for Payment, East Long Lake/Fox Ridge Sanitary Sewer Project to Minncomm, Inc. in the amount of $86,123.00. Vote: Ayes 5, Nays 0. 7 -- ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES FOR NOVEMBER 27, 2000 ( * #8) GIS Data Base License Agreement with Metropolitan Council Flint moved, Sansevere seconded, to approve the GIS Data Base License Agreement with the Metropolitan Council. Vote: Ayes 5, Nays 0. CITY ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT ( #9) Acceptance of Land Donation - Resolution No. 4572 Moorse explained that a resolution accepting a land donation from Alan Carlson had been distributed prior to the Council meeting. The donation consists of 29 acres of property just north of the Crystal Creek development. The resolution also expresses the City's appreciation of the land donation. Kelley asked how much of the donation was dry land. Moorse thought it would be less than half once Mn/DOT acquires a portion of the property for right -of -way. Jabbour commented that the donation is a great asset to the City. 0 Sansevere moved, Peterson seconded, to adopt Resolution No. 4572 accepting the donation of the 29.2 acre property north of the Crystal Creek development from Mr. Alan Carlson. • Jabbour questioned if the land donation would go to the City first and then the park. Moorse confirmed that it would go to the City first. Vote: 5 Ayes, 0 Nays. ( * #10) Prosecuting Attorney Contract Renewal Sansevere moved, Peterson seconded, to approve the renewal of the contract for prosecution services with Ken Potts for the years 2001 and 2002 at the rate of $28,700 per year for each year of the renewed contract. Vote: 5 Ayes, 0 Nays. ( * #11) Volunteer Commission Vacancies Sansevere moved, Peterson seconded, to authorize staff to advertise for the vacancies on the Planning Commission and Parks, Open Space and Trails Commission. Vote: 5 Ayes, 0 Nays. l_J • ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES FOR NOVEMBER 27, 2000 0 • * #12) LICENSES Sansevere moved, Peterson seconded, to approve the licenses listed below. Vote: 5 Ayes, 0 Nays. Off Sale Liquor 12 Hi Liquor 2160 West Wayzata Boulevard Navarre Liquors, Inc. 3421 Shoreline Drive Club Spring Hill Golf Club 725 Sixth Avenue North Wayzata Country Club 200 Wayzata Boulevard Woodhill Country Club 200 Woodhill Road On Sale 3.2 Beer Lakeview Golf of Orono, Inc. 405 North Arm Drive Off Sale 3.2 Beer O'Sullivan's 2420 Shadywood Road O'Sullivan's II 3340 Shoreline Drive On & Off Sale 3.2 Beer Navarre Lanes 3435 Shoreline Drive ( #13) BILLS Jabbour commented that he removed the bills from consent because there were checks issued to him for expenses. Kelley moved, Peterson seconded, to approve payment of the All Funds Account. Vote: 4 Ayes, 0 Nays. Jabbour abstained. 9 ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES FOR NOVEMBER 27, 2000 MAYOR/COUNCIL REPORT - Continued Sherokee Ilse commended the City Clerk on the November election and judges' training. Council agreed with her concerns regarding the fact that registered voters are not required to show any form of identification. She indicated that contacting the Secretary of State's office would be an appropriate action to take. Vee commented that a debriefing session with Hennepin County was scheduled for December 6 and the issue would also be brought up at that time. Jabbour expressed concern that write -in votes were not marked properly and tabulated if the circle was not filled in with the write -in name. CITY ATTORNEY'S REPORT Attorney Barrett requested an Executive Session to discuss pending litigation.. ADJOURNMENT Flint moved, Sansevere seconded, to adjourn the meeting at 8:08 p.m. ATTEST: Linda S. Vee, City Clerk 10 Gabri Jabbour, May r 0 0 0