Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout11-08-2010 Council Minutes�rt U MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, November 8, 2010 ® 7:00 o'clock p.m. 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. 7 and 14 were added to the Consent Agenda. Murphy moved, Franchot seconded, to approve the Consent Agenda as amended. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. APPROVAL OF MINUTES • *2. REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 25, 2010 Murphy moved, Franchot seconded, to approve the minutes of the Orono City Council meeting of October 25, 2010, as submitted. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. *3. COUNCIL WORK SESSION OF OCTOBER 26, 2010 Murphy moved, Franchot seconded, to approve the minutes of the Orono City Council work session of October 26, 2010, as submitted. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. SALE OF BONDS 4. PUBLIC HEARING, 7:00 P.M. — APPROVE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN FOR BUILDINGS AND CONFIRM INTENT TO ISSUE BONDS — RESOLUTION NO. This item follows the LMCD report. 5. PUBLIC HEARING, 7:05 P.M., PROVIDE FOR SALE OF BONDS (STREET RECONSTRUCTION PLAN) — RESOLUTION NO. This item follows the LMCD report. 6. SALE OF GENERAL OBLIGATION STREET RECONSTRUCTION, STATE -AID AND • CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT BONDS — RESOLUTION NO. This item follows the LMCD report. Page 1 of 13 { MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, November 8, 2010 i 7:00 o'clock p.m. • LMCD REPORT — ANDREW MCDERMOTT, REPRESENTATIVE McDermott reported that the LMCD has prepared their 2009 annual report, which was compiled at the end of August. The LMCD began approximately a decade ago with the goal to clean up and regulate the use of Lake Minnetonka as well as to develop a comprehensive program to eliminate pollution. The organization has evolved throughout the years and it is now involved with BWIs, boat density regulations, prevention of the introduction of new AISs. In addition, since the early 2000s, regulations have been adopted for licensing and permitting of a number of activities. There are approximately 105,000 people around Lake Minnetonka, which consists of 125 miles, 14,000 acres of surface water, 42 bays, and 10 public access ramps. Boat inspections are being concentrated on nine of the public access ramps at the present time. The vision of the LMCD is to protect and preserve Lake Minnetonka. The Mission Statement of the organization is to provide leadership in protecting, improving and managing Lake Minnetonka. This is accomplished through administrative oversight and regulations, promotion of cooperation and partnerships; through innovation and education; and effective stewardship of public and private funds. The LMCD has a number of standing committees, consisting of the AIS Task Force, Ordinance Review Committee, Save the Lake Committee, Public Safety Committee, and Environmental Committee. One of the 2009 programs and activities include the harvesting program. In 2009, 227 loads were harvested on approximately 309 total acres. The milfoil budget was approximately $100,000 in 2009, which was • reduced somewhat in 2010. In addition, in 2010 the LMCD helped coordinate the herbicide treatment program and a report should be received from the Army Corps of Engineers by the end of the year on how the program is going. The LMCD has also implemented watercraft inspections to prevent the introduction of new AIS into the bays. The LMCD has contracted with the MN DNR since 2002, with the goal being to reduce the amount of new AISs in Lake Minnetonka. Approximately $35,000 was spent on this project, with some money coming from the DNR, LMCD, and LMA. I McDermott noted the LMCD did have a video monitoring program on some of the docks, which was dropped this year since it did not prove to be effective and the LMCD had no authority to prosecute people. The LMCD also helps to ensure that its ordinances and policies are relevant and enforceable. The LMCD is actively trying to enforce regulations regarding watercraft storage. There have been a number of complaints regarding multiple docks in 2010. The LMCD will typically send a maximum of three letters to the property owner asking them to comply with the regulations. If no action is taken by the property owner, the LMCD will file an action in court, with court and prosecution fees being' requested to cover expenses. It is the goal of the LMCD to maintain a strong financial foundation. The main funding arm for the LMCD after municipal funding is the Save the Lake Fund and grants. The LMCD will be pursuing more grants in 2011. McDermott stated safety is a primary focus on the LMCD and they work closely with the water patrol. • Patrol hours on Lake Minnetonka were up from 3280 to 4000. Boating while intoxicated arrests were up substantially in 2009, along with careless boating arrests and personal floatation violations. Page 2 of 13 MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, November 8, 2010 . 7:00 o'clock p.m. (LMCD REPORT, Continued) The LMCD is also expanding the solar light program, which lights all the navigation buoys on the lake. The program has been highly successful, and the LMCD is in the process of increasing the number of buoy lights on the lake. Steps are also being taken to improve public awareness of the LMCD through newsletters, LMCD's website, and broadcasting of LMCD Board of Directors meetings. 2010 goals include reducing the levels of existing AISs, preventing the introduction of new AISs, ensuring that LMCD ordinances and policies are relevant and enforceable, maintaining a strong financial foundation, promoting public access to Lake Minnetonka, and ensuring that Lake Minnetonka is safe and protected. McDermott reported the dam has been closed a little earlier this year due to the water level. SALE OF BONDS 4. PUBLIC HEARING, 7:00 P.M. — APPROVE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN FOR BUILDINGS AND CONFIRM INTENT TO ISSUE BONDS — RESOLUTION NO. 5986 Olson stated action is required by the City Council to refinance the bonds that were used to finance the Navarre Fire Station. These bonds were originally issued by the Orono Housing and Redevelopment Authority. Because the first station is currently owed by the HRA, the City will need to exercise its • purchase option under its lease agreement with the HRA. Mayor White opened the public hearing at 7:18 p.m. There were no public comments regarding this item. Mayor White closed the public hearing at 7:20 p.m. Franchot asked whether the $35,000 is the total amount of anticipated savings. Olson indicated it is the total amount for the four years for this bond. Bremer moved, Murphy seconded, to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 5986, a Resolution Approving Capital Improvement Plan for Buildings and Confirming Intent to Issue Bonds. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. 5. PUBLIC HEARING, 7:05 P.M., PROVIDE FOR SALE OF BONDS (STREET RECONSTRUCTION PLAN) — RESOLUTION NO. 5987 Olson noted the reconstruction of Orono Orchard Road is included in the 5 -year street reconstruction plan that was approved by the City Council in January 2009. As part of the street reconstruction plan, funding for the project is identified as being through the issuance of $1,500,000 in bonds. Mayor White opened the public hearing at 7:21 p.m. • There were no public comments regarding this item. Page 3 of 13 MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, November 8, 2010 7:00 o'clock p.m. . (5. PUBLIC HEARING, 7.05 P.M., PROVIDE FOR SALE OF BONDS (STREET RECONSTRUCTION PLAN), Continued) Mayor White closed the public hearing at 7:21 p.m. McMillan asked when the road would be completed. Olson indicated the plan is that the road would be completed by 2012. Olson noted they are working with the Metropolitan Council on the improvements. Murphy noted the Metropolitan Council has expressed interest in doing some infrastructure work at the same time, which will help offset some of the costs. Bremer moved, Franchot seconded, to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 5987, a Resolution Providing for Sale of Bonds. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. 6. SALE OF GENERAL OBLIGATION STREET RECONSTRUCTION, STATE -AID AND CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT BONDS — RESOLUTION NO. 5988 Olson stated this is a combination of the projects included in the first two public hearings along with the Old Crystal Bay Road project. Funding for both of these projects will require the issuance of bonds and will increase the overall debt level of the city by $3,200,000. In addition to these bonds, the City can realize interest savings of $35,000 by refunding the 2004 fire hall/equipment bonds. The issuance of capital improvements bonds will not increase the overall debt of the City. By combining all three bond issues into a single larger sale, the City can reduce issuance costs and attract more buyers, which should result in better interest rates. Murphy noted he spoke with Mike Bash earlier today and was advised that the Orono School District has found a way to fund the sidewalk on the west side of the road. Murphy moved, McMillan seconded, to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 5988, a Resolution Providing for the Sale of $1,500,000 General Obligation Street Reconstruction Bonds, Series 2010A; $1,700,000 General Obligation State -Aid Bonds, Series 2010B; $1,275,000 General Obligation Capital Improvement Bonds, Series 2010C. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. • I 4 PLANNING COMMISSION COMMENTS — DENISE LESKINEN, REPRESENTATIVE Leskinen stated she had nothing to report but would be available for questions. PUBLIC COMMENTS None Page 4 of 13 MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, November 8, 2010 • 7:00 o'clock p.m. CITY ENGINEER'S REPORT *7. REQUEST TO OPT OUT OF ASSESSMENT FOR NORRTH FARM ROAD SEWER IMPROVEMENTS Murphy moved, Franchot seconded, to approve the request from Philip Kaufman, 1680 North Farm Road, to opt out of the North Farm Road Sewer Improvement assessment. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. 8. FOREST LAKE DRIVE/FOREST ARMS JOINT DOCK — DRAINAGE AND SILTATION ISSUE Gaffron stated the siltation problem was first brought to the attention of Staff in February 1993 and was discussed approximately one month ago. A city storm sewer carries sediment -laden runoff from Forest Lake Drive toward the lake through a pipe along the boundary between two private properties, and where the pipe discharges, the sediment settles out in a small delta and is causing some problems as it relates to the docks. In 1993 this became an issue for the Forest Arms Association because the LMCD would not approve their request to expand the sizes of their joint dock slips. The alternative was to reconfigure the docks to take advantage of the area near the shore, but this is where the water depth was reduced due to siltation. It was determined that a two -part solution would be necessary: First, to remove the accumulated sediment • from the lake bottom and constructing a sedimentation basin on land, requiring easements from the association and/or the adjacent neighbors. It was noted that this type of project was not currently funded, but would be a candidate for funding if the City created a storm water utility at some future time. Council reviewed the matter on April 12, 1993, and tabled it for additional information. By July 1993, the Association's concern waned due to high water levels and because they had reached an agreement with the LMCD regarding dock layout. The issue again arose in 1998, brought forward by the Kalweits, the adjoining property owners. The City responded by suggesting that the neighborhood petition for an assessment project as there was no city funding available. No petition was submitted. Kellogg noted the City recently received final approval for their Surface Water management Plan from the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District. In the SWMP is a 10 -year CIP that includes storm water improvement projects to be completed over the next twenty years. The estimated cost of those improvements exceeds the funding the City currently anticipates generating from their storm water utility fund over that time period. For that reason, the City will need to prioritize the projects they complete over the next years. At this point it is difficult to determine an estimated project cost without further investigation. It appears that the City does not own any land outside of a street right -of -way in the area and that any BMP installation would require cooperation from the Forest Arms Association or neighboring properties. Additionally, dredging will require permits from the Minnesota DNR, LMCD, the MPCA, and the MCWD. It is likely testing of the sediments will also be required and it may turn out that the dredging will need to be disposed of at a regulated landfill depending on the testing results. • Previously funding for an improvement project to resolve these issues involved assessing the residents within the drainage area. Since this item was last reviewed by the Council, the City has created a storm Page 5 of 13 MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, November 8, 2010 7:00 o'clock p.m. (8. FOREST LAKE DRIVE /FOREST ARMS JOINT DOCK— DRAINAGE AND SILTATION ISSUE, Continued) i water utility. Funds in this utility are meant to be used for storm water improvement projects of a regional nature. It is likely this project could be funded form the storm water utility and/or assessing for the improvements. I Kellogg noted that while the storm water and sediment issues related to the Forest Arms Homeowners Association have previously been brought to the Council's attention, further work is needed to quantify the limits and cost of the project. That work would include surveying, quantifying the volume of sediment removal, testing the sediments, and preparing a preliminary design to establish a cost estimate. Once that work is completed, the City should review this project along with the storm water projects previously identified in the SWMP CIP to prioritize what projects should be completed sooner than later. Kellogg noted no survey work has been completed to date and that the estimated cost to complete the further work would not exceed $3,500 in consultant's time. Laboratory testing of sediments would be an additional fee based on actual lab charges. • Murphy asked whether the homeowners association is in favor of the project. Tom Barrett, 941 North Arm Drive, requested the City Council move forward with the work to identify what the contaminants are and to conduct survey work. Barrett asked whether the pipe is coming off of • County Road 151. ' Kellogg indicated he does not believe so, and that when they looked at the manhole; they found one discharge point going downstream. The Public Works Department is not aware of anything upstream. Barrett noted the drawing shows a drainage easement all the way down. Kellogg pointed out the drawing depicts rights -of -way and not easements, but that those are questions that would be answered with the survey work. White noted this expenditure will come out of the storm water utility fund. Gaffron stated the current fund balance is approximately $600,000 and that approximately one -third of those funds would be allocated for various street projects. Franchot asked if the $3500 consulting fee would be similar in nature to the other projects or whether this is an unusual charge. Kellogg indicated it would depend on the project and that some of the other projects identified in the CIP could possibly be funded with grants. Kellogg stated the survey work is necessary to identify the scope of the project. McMillan asked if there is enough land down by the lake that can be used to remediate the problem. Kellogg stated if the Forest Arms Homeowners Association is willing to work with the City, they would be able to construct a 90' x 30' swale with a dry retention basin. That swale and basin would need to be Page 6 of 13 MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, November 8, 2010 . 7:00 o'clock p.m. (8. FOREST LASE DRIVE /FOREST ARMS JOINT DOCK — DRAINAGE AND SILTATION ISSUE, Continued) maintained every five years. Another option would be to install a catch basin upstream to help eliminate some of the sediments. McMillan moved, Murphy seconded, to direct Staff to conduct further survey work, not to exceed $3,500. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. (Tom Kellogg leaves the meeting at 7:42 p.m.) PLANNING DEPARTMENT REPORT 9. CITY OF ORONO — POLICY FOR JOINT USE DOCK SURVEYS Curtis stated since 1984, the City of Orono has required that all users of a joint use dock obtain an annual joint use dock license. In 2008, Staff conducted as assessment of the license information on file for each of the joint use dock users which revealed a number of the files containing very old, incomplete or inaccurate sketches, site plans, or surveys. The decision was made to require a current survey showing the existing conditions of the property and dock configuration for the 2009 license year. The requirement for a survey . dating 2007 or newer was based on the City having already received a 2007 survey from one of the licensees. In the 2009 license year, the licensees were notified of the new survey requirement. The current surveys would provide the City with an inventory and a record of what exists on the land. Staff inspections will be conducted in subsequent license years to assure compliance with this survey. If changes are observed, depending on what those changes are, updated information will be requested. In order to clarify the survey requirements, Staff is proposing the adoption of the following survey policy. An updated survey dated 2007 or later shall be required for approval of an annual JUD license. Upon receipt of the acceptable survey, a site inspection will be performed annually, in the fall, and photos will be taken to document the site. This survey will be acceptable for licensure of the JUD. Subsequent updated surveys will be required in 10 -year increments. However, if, upon inspection, the conditions on the site have changed, an updated survey will be required for the upcoming license year. Changes constituting the need for an updated survey include, but are not limited to: new structures; change in location of structures or storage area; additional, new docks or change in docks; slips; buoys, launching ramps; parking areas; access areas; steps; pathways; new hardcover; an increase or change in existing hardcover; fencing and/or landscaping activities which require a permit. Changes that are acceptable and would not require an updated survey are: planting trees; plants; shrubs; picnic tables on grass and fire rings, with no increase in hardcover. If changes are noted during the fall inspection, the JUD Association contact will be notified that an updated . survey will be required before the next boating season or a JUD license will not be issued. In February each year the JUD license applications will be mailed for the current boating season with a deadline of March 15. Page 7 of 13 MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, November 8, 2010 7:00 o'clock p.m. • i (9. CITY OF ORONO — POLICY FOR JOINT USE DOCK SURVEYS, Continued) i Franchot asked why Staff is recommending an updated survey every 10 years. Franchot commented if there are no changes and Staff is inspecting the site every year, it may not be necessary to have the survey updated every 10 years. White commented he is in agreement with that recommendation. r Franchot noted the property owner could also be required to submit a new survey earlier than 10 years if there are changes and suggested Staff incorporate language that would allow some flexibility in the survey requirement. I Bremer indicated she also is in agreement with that. Franchot moved, McMillan seconded, to delete the language requiring updated surveys every 10 years from the policy, and to amend the policy to allow leeway in the requirements for a survey when deemed appropriate by Staff, and to adopt the proposed language policy for joint use dock survey requirements. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. ; 10. #10 -3483 CITY OF ORONO — ZONING AMENDMENT — COLUMBARIUM — ORDINANCE NO. 79, THIRD SERIES Curtis stated at the October 25"' City Council meeting, the Council reviewed two options for the ordinance; • one which allowed a 5 -foot setback for columbaria on all properties or a 5 -foot setback from city -owned parks. The application was tabled to allow more time for Staff to research above - ground columbaria with respect to setbacks and height limitations as well as look closer into the year -round screening requirements proposed. At Council's direction, Staff has researched the issue of height, setback and screening. Staff is now proposing additional language which is attached as a draft ordinance. The new language will address height limitations, a definite setback from the street, and screening where it is deemed appropriate. The new requirements are as follows: I j 1. Columbaria will have a limitation of eight feet in height; 1 2. A 10 -foot setback would be required from property lines and from streets for all above ground columbarium elements; A 5 -foot setback would be required from property lines for any below ground columbarium elements; 4. Columbaria will have a 50 -foot setback from adjacent principal structures; 5. Appropriate levels of screening could be determined on a site by site basis with the CUP review. McMillan asked whether a 50 -foot setback is required for an in ground columbarium. • Page 8 of 13 • MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, November 8, 2010 7:00 o'clock p.m. (10. #10 -3483 CITY OF ORONO —ZONING AMENDMENT— COL UMBARIUM, Continued) Curtis indicated that is correct. , McMillan asked what the reasoning was for changing that. Curtis stated Staff's interpretation of the discussion at the last City Council meeting was that the at -grade or below grade gardens did not rise to the level of screening as an above ground structure. Mattick indicated Staff looked at approximately 10 other communities and that those communities do not specify columbaria. They basically define cemeteries as a use and columbaria are considered part of that definition and would require typical structural setbacks. It was Staff's understanding that the City Council wanted something more specific to columbaria and they have drafted the ordinance accordingly. Mattick stated they have included a height limitation of eight feet. The eight foot height limitation was taken from the City's non - encroachment portion of the ordinance. Mattick noted that monuments are limited to eight feet. If eight feet is not sufficient, that can be changed. Mattick stated the final change was the differentiation between below or at grade columbarium versus the above ground. Staff decided that above or below ground should require a 5 -foot setback and the screening requirement for below ground columbarium has also been eliminated. • Franchot asked whether the screening requirement.would apply to all columbaria. U Mattick stated the screening would apply to all above ground columbaria and that the City Council could require screening through its conditional use permit process for at -grade or below grade columbaria if they deem it appropriate. Franchot commented he would like the ability to require screening if the conditions warrant it. McMillan stated in her view the 50 -foot setback from residential structures should be maintained for both in ground and above ground columbaria since there will be memorial services and visitors to the site. Mattick noted the language reads: "Columbaria, provided that all portions of columbaria located at or above ground shall be located at least five feet from any adjacent property line," and suggested that the language contained in letter B be inserted into (18), which would then result in only four criteria in that section. Mattick noted the ordinance requires the same conditions for each zoning district. Franchot moved, Murphy seconded, to adopt ORDINANCE NO. 79, Third Series, An Ordinance Amending the Orono City Code to Provide for Columbaria in Residential Districts R -1A, R -1B, LR- 1A, LR -1B, LR- 1C,.LR -1C01, RR -1A, RR -1B, RR -111-1, with the language contained on Page 1, Item (18) (b) being moved into the section under (18) following the first sentence, with the understanding that the requirement of a 5- foot setback from any adjacent lot line and a 50 -foot setback from any principal residential structure would remain as requirements for all columbaria. VOTE: Ayes 4, Nays 0, Bremer Abstained. Page 9 of 13 MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, November 8, 2010 7:00 o'clock p.m. 11. #10 -3493 GOOD SHEPHERD CHURCH — REQUEST TO HOLD PUBLIC HEARING Curtis stated the Good Shepherd Lutheran Church has submitted an application for a conditional use permit in order to construct an in- ground inurnment garden on their property. The applicant chose to delay making an application until the draft ordinance appeared to be in fmal form in order to have an understanding of the anticipated conditions of approval. The proposed ordinance allowing columbarium has been tabled a number of times since it was introduced in August for changes. At this time the applicant is requesting that the City Council waive the review of the Planning Commission and hold the public hearing at the November 22 "d Council meeting. The Council may waive Planning Commission review with a unanimous vote. Waiving the public hearing would allow Good Shepherd to begin construction before the end of the year. In order to do this, Staff recommends approval of the applicant's request to waive the Planning Commission's public hearing and hold the public hearing to renew the CUP at the November 22 "d Council meeting. In anticipation of the Council's approval, the legal notice has been sent to the newspaper for publication. McMillan asked whether the 350 feet notice would still apply. Curtis stated all the public hearing requirements would be met but that the public hearing would take place at the City Council level rather than at the Planning Commission level. Curtis noted the words CUP renewal is a typographical error and that this is not a renewal. • McMillan asked whether this would create a precedent with people attempting to fast track applications at • the end of the year given the fact that there is no Planning Commission meeting in December. Curtis stated in her view this is a unique situation and that the City Council does have the ability to decline to hold the public hearing at the City Council level. Mattick stated in his opinion it would not create a binding precedent on the City Council and that City Code allows applicants to request the public hearing be held at the City Council level rather than at the Planning Commission level. Mattick stated the City Council is not bound to approve that request. McMillan commented she does not want applicants to routinely request that the public hearing be held at the City Council level. McMillan noted this application has been discussed a number of times in conjunction with the ordinance that was adopted earlier this evening, but that she wants to avoid a number of similar requests in the future. Franchot stated the decision to hold the public hearing at the City Council level is incumbent upon the City Council and that it would not be a precedent. Franchot noted the Planning Commission actually did look at the ordinance twice. Franchot asked whether this application would cause concern among the Planning Commission members. Leskinen indicated in her view it would not since the Planning Commission was involved in the discussion of the ordinance on a couple of occasions. Bremer noted she plans to abstain from voting on any substantive matters as it relates to Good Shepherd • Church, but that in her opinion this is more of a procedural matter and that she would be voting on it. Page 10 of 13 • MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, November 8, 2010 7:00 o'clock p.m. (11. #10 -3493 GOOD SHEPHERD CHURCH —REQUEST TO HOLD PUBLIC HEARING, Continued) Mattick indicated since Council Member Bremer does not have a financial interest in Good Shepherd Church, it would not be a conflict of interest. Mattick noted Bremer does not sit on the Board of Directors for the church. McMillan asked how the City Attorney felt on whether the public hearing should be held before the City Council on applications that the Planning Commission had not heard. Mattick stated the reason for having a Planning Commission is to allow them to ask questions and for Staff to get an idea of what they would like to see in an ordinance. Mattick noted the church is an existing use and will not create additional traffic. The Council is not excluding the public since there will be a public hearing at the City Council level. If there is a significant amount of public opposition, the City Council does have the option to refer the matter back to the Planning Commission. Curtis noted the Code Section is 78 -912 rather than 78 -122 as stated in the report, but that the same provision applies to conditional use permits. McMillan asked whether Good Shepherd has a contractor who is ready to proceed on the project. . Dave Owen indicated they do have a contractor who is ready to commence work. Franchot moved, White seconded, Application No. 10 -3483, Good Shepherd Church, 3745 Shoreline Drive, to approve the request to waive the public hearing for the Conditional Use Permit review at the Planning Commission and to hold the public hearing at the November 22 "d City Council meeting. McMillan commented she is hesitant to approve this and would like reassurance that this is not a precedent setting action. McMillan noted the City has been discussing this ordinance for the past few months. Mattick stated in his opinion there is no legal precedent that the City Council has to grant a waiver of the public hearing at the Planning Commission level and that the City Code does have a provision that allows the waiver based upon Council discretion. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. 12. #10 -3494 WJM PROPERTIES, LLC — REQUEST TO HOLD PUBLIC HEARING Bremer moved, Murphy seconded, Application #10 -3494, WJM Properties, LLC, 2605 Wayzata Boulevard, to approve waiving the public hearing for the conditional use permit renewal at the Planning Commission and to hold the public hearing at the City Council's November 22, 2010, meeting. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. MAYOR/COUNCIL REPORT • This item follows Item No. 14. Page 11 of 13 MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING j Monday, November 8, 2010 j 7:00 o'clock p.m. • I CITY ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT 13. CONTINUED PARTICIPATION IN METROPOLITAN LIVABLE COMMUNITIES PROGRAM Murphy noted this item was tabled to allow the City to contact the Metropolitan Council to have some questions answered. Murphy indicated he had wanted to avoid a situation where the City signs on to a program and then later on down the road be tied into the program. Murphy stated the response the City received from Guy Peterson has addressed his concerns. i McMillan noted a couple of cities have backed out of the program and that she is not sure whether it is worth it for the City of Orono to participate. Bremer commented it is difficult for the Council to know what projects may come before them in the future and that it is possible the City will utilize this program at some point in the future. White stated it conveys the message that the City of Orono supports the overall goals of the Metropolitan Council. Bremer recommended the letter from Guy Peterson be retained in the City files. Gaffron stated he would bring back an approval resolution to the City Council at their next meeting. • The City Council took no formal action on this item. i *14. DISPOSAL OF UNCLAIMED PROPERTY Murphy moved, Franchot seconded, to approval the disposal of a men's gold ring as scrap through Albers Jewelry for $138.22. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. MAYOR/COUNCIL REPORT Murphy congratulated Lili McMillan on being elected to mayor of Orono. CITY ATTORNEY'S REPORT The City Attorney had nothing to report. *15. LICENSES AND PERMITS There were no licenses. *16. BILLS Murphy moved, Franchot seconded, to approve payment of the All Funds account. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. Page 12 of 13 • ADJOURNMENT MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, November 8, 2010 7:00 o'clock p.m. Bremer moved, Murphy seconded, to adjourn the Orono City Council meeting at 8:25 p.m. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0. ATTEST: Linda S. Vee, City Clerk • • *Jaes-M'L . White, Mayor Page 13 of 13