Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout03-28-2005 Council Minutesb. • MINUTES OF THE 2 MINUTES ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, March 28, 2005 7:00 of clock p.m. ROLL The Council met on the above mentioned date with the following members*present: Mayor Barbara Peterson; Council members Jim Murphy, Bob Sansevere, Jim White, and late arrival Lili McMillan; City Attorney Thomas Barrett; Representing staff were, City Administrator Ron Moorse, Planning Director Mike Gaffron, Plaiuiers Janice Gundlach and Melanie Curtis, Public Service Director Greg Gappa, Engineer Tom Kellogg and Recorder Kristi Anderson. . Mayor Peterson called the meeting to- order at 7:02 P.M, followed by the Pledge of Allegiance. CONSENT AGENDA 1. Approve /Amend Items 12, 13, 14, 16, 18, and 19 were added to Murphy moved, Sansevere seconded, to 4, Nays 0. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Consent Agenda. Item 2 was removed. 2. Regular Council Meeting of March 14, 2005 the Consent Agenda as amended. Vote: Ayes White moved, Murphy seconded, to approve the Minutes of March 14, 2005, as submitted. • VOTE: Ayes 3, Nays 0, Mayor Peterson abstl ined. PARK COMMISSION COMMENTS — Michael Huddy Huddy reported that the Park Commission would be meeting next week to discuss setting up a tax free status Park Foundation able to accept donations on behalf of the City parks. In addition, Huddy stated that the Commission would begin adding park information to the City website to increase awareness and use of the City parks. White suggested the Conunission set a fundraising goal that people could donate to for a specific purpose. Sansevere pointed out that the Commission has and grant/aid opportunities. Huddy mentioned that several new members h dollars for the parks, provided a tax free entity leadership of a chair well versed in fundraising voiced interest in campaigning for fundraising be set up. PLANNING COMMISSION COMMENTS ; Roland Jurgens Jurgens stated that he had nothing to report, PUBLIC COMMENTS • There were none. remain for questions. PAGE 1 of 14 MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, March 28, 2005 7:00 o'clock p.m. ZONING ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT 3. #04 -3066. WILLIAM AND ANITA ROUSE, 4051 MGHWOOD ROAD — REVIEW; REMODEL VS REBUILD STATUS Gaffron explained that the applicant's entire home was being remodeled with a new half story being added above the newer east wing, when it was determined that the foundation under the west wing was in unacceptable condition and must be replaced. As a result, the extent of the removals along the west lot line will exceed the extent anticipated during the variance review, which begs the question whether the project should be considered a rebuild and be required to meet the 10' setback. While the Planning Commission spent considerable time discussing as to whether the intended extent of construction should be considered a remodel or rebuild, Gaffron stated that the Planning Commission concluded that the removals did not appear to quite rise to the level of a total rebuild and the variance was granted. Since it is now obvious that the existing foundation of the west wing is virtually worthless and beyond repair, other options must be considered, such as constructing a new foundation within the existing foundation and cantilevering support to the perimeter walls. Gaffron stated that staff stopped the job in order to review the project and reach a conclusion in the timeliest manner for the homeowner. • Gaffron noted that, although the property owner would like the City to allow his project to be completed within the envelope and setbacks as shown on the approved plans without having to redesign at this time, staff is requesting Council's confirmation that the project can go ahead as currently approved. However, if the Council concludes that the house should be redesigned to meet is setbacks, and that this is the time to eliminate the nonconformity rather than expand it and give it extended life, then the approvals should be reconsidered. Murphy stated that he had been the liaison to the Planning Commission meeting at which time they discussed this application at great length. Though the rear portion of the home and the perimeter walls stay, Gaffron questioned whether the new roof, removal of the floor, and unusable foundation put them beyond the 50% threshold for rebuild vs. remodel. Mr. Rouse stated that he had purchased the home in August, and at that time had examined his options, corning to the conclusion that the remodel was his best bet and that the foundation would be repaired as needed. Prior to construction, Rouse explained that he had invited two engineers to the site to evaluate the foundation and make their recommendations, neither of whom had anticipated the condition of the west foundation after demo began. He noted that the wall is 6 -10' from the property line at each corner, supports a load bearing wall, and contains a stone chimney which he wished to preserve. Rouse pointed out that the current foundation could be reinforced by tying in with a new structural foundation as one option where replacement is necessary. Murphy stated that if the foundation could be reinforced in the same location, he would continue to view it as a remodel. • PAGE 2 of 14 as c! • • n u MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, March 28, 2005 7:00 o'clock p.m. (3. #04 -3066 WILLIAMAND ANITA RO Rouse questioned where it is written what the within the City ordinance. 4051 HIGHWOOD ROAD, Continued) is between a remodel versus a rebuild Gaffion explained that the Planning Commission had been wrestling with those definitions over the past several years. While Gaffion indicated that the code doesn't allow expansion of a nonconformancy, admittedly this was a difficult situation that he felt must be presented to the Council for their opinion. I Sansevere agreed with the applicant's suggestion that he be allowed to shore up the existing foundation with the assistance of a structural engineer, or be forced to remove 210 s.f. to be in compliance. Rouse stated that he would be willing to lose the `bump' out on the side of the home which at 4.3' is the closest point to the property line. Murphy agreed, stating that he would not reconunend the west wall be completely moved if the applicant could firm it up where it stands. He asked that this be added to the existing resolution. Attorney Barrett stated that this could be added'as an amendment to the Resolution. Rouse stated that he would remove the small bump out and repair /rebuild the foundation at that point tying the point into the foundation. Murphy moved, Sansevere seconded, to allow the project to proceed as approved, with the caveat that the `bump out' be removed on the west wall and that the foundation be replaced under the supervision of a structural engineer and approval'by the City Engineer. VOTE: Ayes -4, Nays 0. Council member McMillan arrived at 7:37 p. 4. #05 -3074 SEAN AND MELISSA WAMBOLD,1379 PARK DRIVE — VARIANCE AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 11 Curtis explained that the applicants recently purchased the property and were notified that the retaining walls and hardcover in the lakeshore yard was installed by the previous owner without proper city permits. As it was their intent to do! some remodeling including a small addition in the future, they wished to bring the property into compliance. The applicants have provided a revised proposal with removals resulting in 25% hardcover in the 75 -250' zone and 268 s.f. of hardcover in the 0 -75' zone. Curtis indicated that the applicants feel that by allowing the current retaining wall, existing vegetation and path to the lake to remain within this zone there would be less impact on the lake and would allow for uninterrupted use of their lake yard. Curtis stated that staff recommends denial of au after- the -fact hardcover variance for the 0 -75' setback zone for hardcover in excess of the square footage that would be allowed for a permitted stair access. Staff would also recommend approval of a conditional use permit in order to re -grade the lake yard, including an erosion control plan and timeline for implementation. PAGE 3 of 14 MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, March 28, 2005 7:00 o'clock p.m. (4. #05 -3074 SEANAND MELISSA WAMBOLD,1379 PARKDRIVE, Conthiued) • Mr. Wambold stated that the neighbor next door was present this evening and had voiced his support for maintaining the retaining walls in an effort to control the excessive erosion which was previously caused by their property to his. Wambold pointed out that he had only recently purchased the property to which the landscaping contributed to the parcel, and was unaware of any problems with the yard until he was contacted by the city. He did not anticipate spending an additional $50,000 to remove and relandscape the property when he bought it. Scott Marorz, the landscape architect, interjected that the removal of the retaining wall and boulders would not be a good solution for the lake with regard to erosion and runoff. Steve Sigel, 1399 Park Drive, the next door neighbor stated that if the Wambolds were forced to regrade the slope, a number of large trees would have to be removed, further adding to the erosion problem he faced residing next door to the site. He urged the Council to allow the retaining walls to remain, since they slowed the velocity at which the runoff flowed from their elevation to his property, which was roughly a severe 30 -40' hillside slope. Mayor Peterson asked how long the walls had been in place. Sigel stated that the previous owner had spent two years on the project, with the city inspecting it at various phases. He questioned why the City red tagged the property now, only after the new owners have taken possession. Attorney Barrett asked if the new owners were aware that the property had been red tagged. is Wambold stated that he was unaware of the red tag until three days after he had taken possession when the City called him out of the blue after having been contacted by a realtor down the street. Curtis concurred, stating that the City was not aware that the work had been completed by the previous owner until that same realtor contacted them. Vang, the building inspector, had red tagged the work that it not proceed, therefore, nothing was on file at the City. Wambold stated that it was their intent to bring the property into as much compliance as possible, but would like some leniency since some of the walls are necessary to control erosion. Murphy viewed two distinct problems, though nothing should exist in the 0 -75' zone, the erosion problems, seem to warrant their need so as to cause no further problems for the neighbor. He asked for the City Engineer's comments. Engineer Kellogg stated that it was his opinion that all of the hardcover be removed from the 0 -75' zone except steps. He was unsure whether the mature trees would be removed, but admitted that a great deal of fill would be necessary to obtain the 3:1 slope up to the lake edge. Since the boulders at the top of the path were aesthetic, he recommended they be removed also and that an erosion control plan be submitted. He did not indicate that all of the boulders must be removed. McMillan asked whether the sloped hillside within the boulder retaining walls is landscaped. • PAGE 4 of 14 . • • • MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, March 28, 2005 7:00o' 'clock p.m. (4. #05 -3074 SEANAND MELISSA W Sigel stated that they contain beds of flowers erosion control. Wambold stated that he was willing to aid in the erosion control for the yard. Sansevere stated that staff should look at the Attorney Barrett suggested that the Council has an opportunity to review the side wall. White moved, Sansevere seconded, to table, Engineer review of the side retaining wall. 1379 PARK DRIVE, Continued) hostas, as well as mature trees which aid in any of the unnecessary boulders and keep those that retaining wall also and make a recommendation. the application until staff and the City Engineer ation #05- 3074,1379 Park Drive, for : Ayes 5, Nays 0. *5. #05 -3075 MITCH AND KIM OLSON; 3275 CARMAN ROAD — VARIANCE — RESOLUTION NO. 5293 1 Murphy moved, Sansevere seconded, to ad( granting hardcover variances, lake setback variance for property located at 3275 Carm *6. #05 -3077 BARRY AND ROBIN O'R VARIANCE — DENIAL RESOLUTION N Murphy moved, Sansevere seconded, to ai denying the after -the -fact side and rear se Sixth Avenue North. VOTE: Ayes 4, Nays *7. #05 -3078 GARY AND LYNN RESOLUTION NO. NO. 5295 Murphy moved, Sansevere seconded, to adc allowing construction of a half story attic ac average lakeshore setback, 40' from the eas the north side lot line to the existing noncol nays 0. RESOLUTION NO. 5293, a Resolution riance, and an average lakeshore setback Road. VOTE: Ayes 4, Nays 0. 2300 SIXTH AVENUE NORTH — 5294 RESOLUTION NO. 5294, a Resolution k variances for a lean -to horse shelter at 2300 ,3560 IVY PLACE — VARIANCES — RESOLUTION NO. 5295, a Resolution Lion with a steeper pitched roof in front of the n OHWL of Lake Minnetonka and 8.25' from rming home at 3560 Ivy Place. VOTE: Ayes 4, 8. #05 -3080 INTERSPACE WEST, 2060 WAYZATA BOULEVARD WEST — COMMERCIAL PUD CONCEPT PLAN — RESOLUTION NO. 5296 Though she had nothing new to add to the app and take action on the Concept Plan Approval the past three meetings, as well as Planning G White indicated that he found the attached in, Gundlach encouraged the Council to discuss ution incorporating the recommendations of sion recommendations. satisfactory. PAGE 5 of 14 MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, March 28, 2005 7:00 o'clock p.m. (8. #05 -3080 INTERSPACE WEST, 2060 WAYZATA BOULEVARD WEST, Continued) • Gina Carlson, of Interspace West, stated that they had met with the neighbors and clarified the proposed heights and addressed their concerns. Philip Carlson, of Interspace West, inquired whether construction of a surmountable curb between this and the neighboring strip mall was mandatory, since he did not know if the other owner would agree to this as a condition. Gaffron stated that, although the Fire Marshall would prefer to see a left turn lane into the site constructed, a curb at the location noted would suffice for now if possible since a left turn lane into the site is unachievable. Murphy indicated that, with the impending turnback of Highway 12, the construction of a left hand turn lane would not be out of the question in the future. Jackie Ricks, 2108 Sugarwoods Drive, urged the developer to preserve as many of the large pine trees on the site between the development and the homesites as possible. - Evelyn Schommer, 2106 Sugarwoods Drive; the resident directly behind the pine trees, was concerned that the removal of the first several rows of large old pine trees would open up her backyard to highway noise, lights, and view of the furthest west building. She encouraged the Council to recommend that the developer do their best to preserve these trees. Gaffron stated that the developer does not know at this point how many trees would be impacted • until they get into the project. Schommer explained that the 60' pine trees were originally planted when the property was an old farmstead. Furthermore, she felt preserving more of the trees would also enhance the views from the development's windows, as well as her own. Sansevere questioned whether the trees had to be removed. Gina Carlson stated that some would need to be removed to make room for sewer, grading, and retaining walls. She also stated that they would take a look at further preservation when doing the survey work and retaining walls. White suggested that an inventory of trees that are present now and an indication of which of those would be removed would be helpful r Murphy encouraged the two sides to continue to talk and keep the lines of communication open. While he agreed that it would be a shame to lose the trees, Sansevere commended the developer and neighbors for working together to address each others concerns. He encouraged the developer to do their best to preserve as many of the trees as possible, though he would understand if the removal of some was necessary. • PAGE 6 of 14 C] • U MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY dOUNCIL MEETING Monday, l 4arch 28, 2005 7:00 o',clock p.m. (8. #05 -3080 INTERSPACE WEST, 2060 W. AYZATA BOULEVARD WEST, Continued) McMillan pointed out that once the land is landscaping is the first phase of the develo White moved, Murphy seconded, adopting discussed regarding page 5, item 3, that a s northerly portion of the western property 1 for the property located at 2060 Wayzata I 5, Nays 0. 9. #05 -3085 JULANN, INC., 3455 REVIEW and the retaining walls constructed, the amended RESOLUTION NO. 5296, as ountable access shall be `researched' along the idary, also granting Concept Plan Approval ;yard for Interspace -West, Inc. VOTE: Ayes DRIVE — COMMERCIAL SITE PLAN Gundlach explained that, based on the lack of on -site parking and the existing parking shortage of 2.5 stalls before the addition of the proposed use, the Planning Commission voted to deny the request for a commercial site plan. The applicants have submitted a shared parking space license agreement with the Keaveny property, as a means for acquiring additional parking. Gundlach encouraged the Council to review the ingress and egress agreement currently existing for the site and the shared parking space license agreement including the Keaveny amendment for access to those spaces, and determine if the site will be negatively impacted by the introduction of this new use. In light of the serious parking deficiencies at the site, Murphy pointed out that the Planning Commission held a long discussion regarding this application at its last meeting. Sansevere stated that, if he was the applicant, i the license agreement for any reason he would whether the applicant fully understood the ram would concern him that if the Keavenys terminate ►ave to vacate his place of business. He questioned acations of this agreement to his/her business. Murphy cautioned the Council that here they were once again examining the Navarre area, after having just received a letter from the Planning Commission urging the Council to develop a plan or set of standards for the Navarre area before allowing further piece -meal development. He stated that he saw no reason not to grant approval to proceed, as long as the applicant understood the implications of the license agreement. Attorney Barrett renunded the Council that it is they will willingly vacate the premises, than it arise. He stated that the City should require the lessees to this effect. The owner of Liza Jane's Hair Design, 3445 that the mall is already severely short on par would be placed, up or down below. She voi paying a premium for street frontage with lit mall owner should be required to add additic exist. one thing for the applicants to state at this time that for them to actually do so if the circumstances rpplicants to write an occupancy permit with the )reline Drive, stated that while maintaining the fact ;, she questioned where the additional 8 spaces her concern that, as a street side business, she was I parking as it was. She asked whether the strip spaces up top, or at minimum stripe those that do PAGE 7 of 14 MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, March 28, 2005 7:00 o'clock p.m. (9. #05 -3085 JULANN, INC., 3455 SHORELINE DRIVE, Continued) • Paul Overson, representative and son of Aleck Overson the Mall owner, stated that he could look into the parking issues further. As a transient business clientele, he stated that he would be happy to stripe the lot. Gundlach pointed out that the site already has a hardcover issue and she believed the watershed would not allow the installation of additional parking. Murphy stated that he felt they had heard some of these same issues before. The owner of Liza Jane's questioned why, since both salons' doors would be located next to one another at the street frontage, would JulAnn's customers park below when there is an entrance up top. Julie Kreslins indicated that she would be reminding her clients to park below. Leisel Cox, of Minnetonka Mudd coffee shop, voiced her concern with regard to the limited parking as well. Sansevere stated that, in his opinion, many of the current tenants' concerns ought to be addressed by the landlord. He indicated that if he were Liza Jane's Salon, he would be very upset with the landlord allowing a second salon to rent space in the same building. Murphy urged the landlord to stripe the parking lot and clean up the site. • Overson promised to do so. Sansevere asked whether the landlord could designate spots for the various businesses as one alternative. He questioned why any landlord would not strive to keep current tenants happy. Attorney Barrett that spaces could be designated for each business. Roland Jurgens of the Planning Commission interjected that, if the Keavenys would be willing to grant a parking easement as opposed to a license agreement, the parking issue would be eliminated. White moved, Murphy seconded, to direct staff to draft a Resolution approving the Commercial Site Plan with the addition of the attorney's language that the applicant must vacate the premises at the time the shared parking space license agreement is terminated, and pay additional legal fees if necessary according to the conditions outlined within the Occupancy Permit for the business to be located at 3455 Shoreline Drive. Approval is also conditioned upon striping the existing parking lot. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. • PAGE 8 of 14 • • • I MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, .March 28, 2005 7:00 o'clock p.m. *10. #05 -3090 TIM LATTERNER OF DOCK AND LIFT, INC. ON BEHALF OF JEFF ENGLER, 2760 SHADYWOOD ROAD — CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT — RESOLUTION NO. 5297 1 Murphy moved, Sansevere seconded, to adc granting a CUP to allow construction of a p VOTE: Ayes 4, Nays 0. RESOLUTION NO. 5297, a Resolution nanent piling dock at 2760 Shadywood Road. *11. #05 -3096 MINNETONKA PORTABLE DREDGING ON BEHALF OF BEN FAUS, 550 BIG ISLAND — CONDITIONA4 USE PERMIT — RESOLUTION NO. 5298 Murphy moved, Sansevere seconded, to ai granting a CUP to allow construction of a Ayes 4, Nays 0. MAYOR/CITY COUNCIL REPORT RESOLUTION NO. 5298, a Resolution nanent piling dock at 550 Big Island. VOTE: Sansevere suggested the City post on its website that potential property owners are encouraged to check with the City before purchasing a parcel to ensure that there are no stop work orders or red flags against the property. Attorney Barrett stated that the City does have 'an obligation to put notice on the title of a property in violation to forewarn future property owners of the parcel's violations. With regard to LMCD news, McMillan denied and that Minnestrista had passed the name to "Six Mile Marsh" and was 1 PUBLIC SERVICE DIRECTOR'S *12. PUBLIC WORKS STEEL TOE Murphy moved, Sansevere seconded, to for Public Works personnel to purchase CITY ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT *13. EXPIRING TERMS ON THE PLAI that Mound had gotten their dredging permit ices for Six Mile Creek limiting access, changing to establish a zoning overlay. REIMBURSEMENT POLICY gyve a maximum annual reimbursement of $125 toe boots. VOTE: Ayes 4, Nays 0. COMMISSION Murphy moved, Sansevere seconded, to direct staff to contact those Planning Commission members whose terms are expiring to determine their interest in serving an additional term on the Planning Commission. VOTE: Ayes 4, Nays 0. PAGE 9 of 14 MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, March 28, 2005 7:00 o'clock p.m. *14. ADOPTION OF MINNESOTA STATE BUILDING CODE — ORDINANCE NO. 24, THIRD SERIES ' Murphy moved, Sansevere seconded; to adopt ORDINANCE NO. 24, THIRD SERIES adopting the Minnesota Building Code that shall perpetually include the most current edition of the Minnesota State Building Code and optional Appendix Chapters relating to fire sprinkler requirements that'are similar to previous codes. VOTE: Ayes 4, Nays•0. 15. AMENDMENT TO VERIZON WATER TOWER LEASE AGREEMENT Sansevere questioned why the City is only getting an additional $2,000 from Verizon, if they are virtually doubling the number of antennas. Moorse stated that the City charges a heavier upfront cost to the lessees, and reduced fees for additions. He noted that the City is comparable in its fees to other communities. Sansevere moved, White seconded, approving the amendment to the Verizon lease agreement to allow twelve antennas on the Navarre water tower, and to increase the annual lease rate to $20,400. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. ' *16. AWARD OF 2005•LI4,BILITY AND WORKERS COMPENSATION INSURANCE PACKAGE Murphy moved, Sansevere seconded, to award the 2005 insurance package effective January • 1, 2005 to the League of Minnesota Cities Insurance Trust for worker compensation coverage, $72,723; comprehensive municipal property and casualty package, $69,980; umbrella excess liability, $16,699; petrofund reimbursement, $208; open meeting law, $469; boiler and machinery, $2,012; surety bonds, $827; and golf course liquor liability, $563. VOTE: Ayes 4, Nays 0. 17. PURCHASE AGREEMENT FOR THE ACQUISITION OF THE BIG ISLAND VETERANS CAMP PROPERTY Moorse explained that the City had worked out a final purchase agreement with the Board of Governors, which includes a number of contingencies, not the least of which is that of obtaining matching outside funding for the purchase. s The purchase price is $5,700,000. The purchase agreement calls for the payment of earnest money in the amount of $50,000 at the time the purchase agreement is signed. The earnest money is refundable if the contingencies are not met. White inquired whether the City had acquired an ALTA Survey which identifies all utilities and other details on the site. Moorse indicated that the City had received a survey which delineated the wetlands etc., but would need to check to see what level of detail it provided. is PAGE 10 of 14 • • OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, March 28, 2005 7:00 o'clock p.m. (17. PURCHASE AGREEMENT FOR THE ACQUISITION OF THE BIG ISLAND VETERANS CAMP PROPERTY, Coatinccedj Murphy moved, Mayor Peterson seconded, io approve the purchase agreement for the acquisition of the Big Island Veterans Camp' property, and to authorize the Mayor and City Administrator to sign the agreement. John Gehring; 1687 Concordia Street, stated that his major concern was what the financial implications of this purchase would be to the City, and what further cost impacts there would be to get the camp up to standards. He pointed out that he had voiced many of the same concerns to the Council in previous Council meetings, and since has contacted each of them to obtain their positions regarding the land use. Gehring stated that, as a citizen, it concerned hire that there was no clear vision for the purchase of this parcel, in fact, each Council person expressed differing views on how it should be used. II McMillan stated that, while each Council member has their own ideas regarding uses, the City has not determined a specific use. Gehring maintained that the City has not taken additional expenses into consideration, including attorney fees, caretaker fees, maintenance issues, insurance, garbage, police protection, improvements, trails, and public use — nor where the funds for these added expenses would come from. Gehring stated that, Wbile he would be willing to volunteer to work on a group to investigate the costs, he would first urge the Council to estimate costs before they proceed with the purchase agreement. Gehring reiterated that he would, at least, like to see a consensus among the Council of how the land should be used, or several proposed scenarios. He offered up his services in the process, on the condition that the purchase agreement is held off until the costs could be further defined, so that taxpayers were better informed. I Although White agreed with the thought process that a group of volunteer citizens should be formed to evaluate the land uses, he questioned Gehring's motive. Gehring stated that he was a business person and citizen with no vested interest. White pointed out that the City could not put together a cost benefit analysis for this project at this point; however, he stated that he had no trepidations moving forward and would not stop the momentum at this time. Gerhing again requested a cost estimate, noting that he objected to paying taxes for something with no objective. White urged Gehring to participate in the process, when the time comes; however, pointed out that they were still in the beginning phases of the acquisition, which may or may not happen yet. He reiterated that the camp property is a jewel worth preserving for perpetuity, and that the Council was confident that this was a fiscally prudent move. Sansevere acknowledged that the Council was trying to purchase the property and that each member had various views of its use at this time. !While he indicated that he would like to see a portion put aside for•the vets, he didn't know how much or what portion yet. Sansevere believed PAGE 11 of 14 MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, March 28, 2005 7:00 o'clock p.m. (17. PURCHASE AGREEMENT FOR THE ACQUISITION OF THE BIG ISLAND • VETERANS CAMP PROPERTY, Continued) that obtaining the parcel was the most important first step, and should be put to rest before the City spends a lot of time deciding what it should do with it. Gehring indicated that he believed there should be greater accountability to the tax payers than the opinion that we think the City should obtain the property at any price. Based on his public contact, Sansevere pointed out that Gehring had been the only person to step forward to disagree with the direction the City was headed with the property. White maintained that any community would move forward with this purchase, when it is so evident that this is for the community good as a whole, for perpetuity. He argued that this is a once in a lifetime opportunity to save this property and keep it in the public domain as opposed to losing it to development for good. Jeff Pattison, 4340 North Shore Drive, indicated that he was in attendance as an observer to learn more about the acquisition. Gehring asked to see the true costs broken out now before proceeding. Sansevere stated the City Council works very hard to keep taxes low, in fact, Orono has one of the lowest tax rates in the state. He maintained that the purchase was not a frivolous decision by the • City and pointed out that past Mayor Jabbour had been very diligent in lending his assistance to this matter. Murphy acknowledged that Gehring had many excellent questions which, he pointed out, would be addressed as the City proceeds with the process. He noted that abandoning the purchase to development was a poor option to the city, noting that, at this time, the purchase could even fall apart at the legislature. Murphy stated that he objected to wasting time and taxpayer resources to break out cost details when the City may not be successful in acquiring the property. Gehring asked whether there could be a potential conflict of interest having past Mayor Jabbour involved in the purchase. While he admitted that this was no small undertaking, Murphy stated that, as a Council member, he felt authorized to proceed for the greater good. Since the City was unsure of how the process was going to pan out, Murphy stated that they could not answer all of Gehring's question to his level of satisfaction at this time. He reiterated that it was clear to him that virtually everyone, except Gehring, the Council had heard from felt it was very important that Big Island be kept in the public domain. White interjected that, as with any of the City parks, there are not always visions for use when they are obtained and there are always costs involved with their maintenance. Nevertheless, the City still feels those are worthwhile endeavors, as is this scenario. White reiterated that, once in the public domain, the City would love public input. r� U PAGE 12 of 14 J • • MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, ]March 28, 2005 7:00 o,'clock p.m. (17. PURCHASE AGREEMENT FOR THE ACQUISITION OF THE BIG ISLAND VETERANS CAMP PROPERTY, Condnued)� Gehring objected, indicating that this is where the fundamental differences lie between him and the City. He believed the public should have input 1 7 -i07- to the purchase of the property; whereas, the City feels the public should not have any involvement until after its purchase. Murphy disagreed, stating that the City has been forced to act quickly since the market is moving faster than the bureaucracy can afford to delay. Mayor Peterson took offense to Gehring's posit she stated that Mayor Jabbour had been a valua pointed out that, while Gehring kept belaboring property, he missed the fact that the City views, the property for future generations. Having enc( City's position to the Council meeting this even was present, she concluded that few support his Gehring reiterated that he'd like to see the City Mayor Peterson questioned Gehring's ultima only if the City chooses to table the purchase once the agreement has been obtained, as his Murphy read into the record the headlines from which read `New parks may quench thirst for gi the article, Murphy pointed out that it would be coming and various communities have been.chE This, in his opinion, was exactly what the Oron !on that Jabbour posed a conflict of interest, in fact, )le resource to the City on many occasions. She his position that the City has no `plan' for the :his as a once in a lifetime opportunity to purchase ,uraged Gehring to bring others who opposed the ing for. a discussion, to which none but Gehring position. more people in the broader process. presented earlier that he offer up his involvement ;ement. She invited him to be a part of the process vs may be valuable to the process. ie Metro State section of a recent newspaper en space' and urged others to peruse the article. In istructive to understand that the parks crunch is ;ed with preserving space for future generations. City Council was trying to do. McMillan concurred, pointing out that this is a community investment, involving a unique partnership between the City, State, and the veterans. The state recognizes'this effort to establish public land while providing a trust fund for the vets, whose funding has been severely cut over the years. Once this grant has been obtained at the State level, McMillan indicated that the City would have the opportunity to establish a committee to 'set up a management plan for the park. She was very optimistic,, from what she had been hearing; that this be kept in the public domain. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. Sansevere thanked Gehring for his input, comments. *18. AUTOMATIC ELECTRONIC Murphy moved, Sansevere seconded, to appr the purchase of three AED's and to purchase of $2,495 per unit, less trade in value, if the C Ayes 4, Nays 0. him that the Council was listening to his TOR GRANT APPLICATION pursuing the Center Point Energy grant for ee Cardiac Science AED's at the retail cost -r Point Energy Grant is awarded. VOTE: PAGE 43 of 14 MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, March 28, 2005 7:00 o'clock p.m. CITY ATTORNEY'S REPORT Attorney Barrett had nothing to report. *19. LICENSES SPECIAL EVENT PERMIT 1. Applicant: Gear West Event: April Fool's Race — 5 Kilometer Foot Race Location: Start and finish at Holbrook Park, Long Lake. To cover Brown Road, Fox Street, Willow Drive, Grand Avenue and Orchard Lane. Parking for all runners will be Gear West (1908 West Wayzata Boulevard) Date: April 4, 2005 Time: 8:20 a.m. — 9:30 a.m. RESIDENTIAL KENNEL LICENSE 2. Don Lindall 666 Tonkawa Road Murphy moved, Sansevere seconded, to approve all Licenses and Permits. VOTE: Ayes 4, Nays 0. *20. BILLS Murphy moved, Sansevere seconded, to approve payment of the All Funds account. VOTE: Ayes 4, Nays 0 i1 • J� , L1O1 �I Murphy moved, Mayor Peterson seconded, to adjourn the Orono City Council Meeting of March 28, 2005 at 9:56 P.M. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. ATTEST: r� Linda S. Vee, City Clerk PAGE 14 of 14 to,19,4- Barbara Peterson, Mayor �v • •