Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout09-12-1988 Council Minutes• MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD SEPTEMBER 12, 1988 ATTENDANCE 7:00 P.M. The Council met on the above date with the following members present: Mayor Grabek, Councilmembers Goetten, Peterson, Callahan and Nettles. The following represented the City staff: City Administrator Bernhardson, Assistant Planning and Zoning Administrator Gaffron, Public Works Director Gerhardson, and City Recorder Scheff ler. City Attorney. Barrett was also present. - CONSENT AGENDA* It was moved by Councilmember Goetten, seconded by Councilmember Peterson, to approve the Consent Agenda. Motion, Ayes =5, Nays =O, Motion passed. RESOLUTION OF APPRECIATION - ROBERT KOST Mr. Kost resigned from his position as Park Commission Chairman in August of 1988. Mayor Grabek presented Mr. Rost with a plaque and expressed appreciation on behalf of 'the City of Orono for his years of service and accomplishments as the Park Commission Chairman. Mr. Kost accepted the plaque and told the Mayor and Councilmembers that it was his pleasure working with the City of Orono and he appreciated all the support he received from the City Council. • APPPROVAL OF MINUTES* It was moved by Councilmember Goetten, seconded by Councilmember Peterson, to approve the Minutes of the August 22, 1988 Council Meeting. Motion, Ayes =5, Nays =O, Motion passed. PUBLIC COMMENTS There were no comments from the public. PLANNING COMMISSION COMMENTS I Planning Commission Representative Cohen was not present for this Council Meeting. ZONING ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT: #990 WARD FERRELL 3405 WATERTOWN ROAD VARIANCE The applicant was not present for this matter. City Administrator Bernhardson explained that in February, 1986, the Planning Commission recommended denial of building two houses on applicant's three acres of land. They indicated that they may approve building one additional house. Mr. Ferrell's property is located within the RR -1B zoning area which requires a minimum two acre lot size for a. building site. When this matter was brought before the Council, it was again denied, but wasl •tabled before the resolution was drafted. These same events took place in May of 1987 after applicant requested to reopen this item. 1 MINUTES OF REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING SEPTEMBER 12, 1988 ZONING FILE #990- FERRELL CONTINUED • Mr. Ferrell is now requesting that this matter be reopened once more and has a revised plan for consideration. Applicant is seeking a variance on one of the two vacant lots. Bernhardson stated that there are some alternatives for this matter. One would be to combine the two westerly lots, which would create a parcel of approximately two acres, leaving the easterly portion with a little over one acre. Another option would be to do a lot line rearrangement so that the total three -acre parcel would be split exactly in half. The concern of approving Mr. Ferrell's request to develop only one of the lots is that both lots are substandard and it would be difficult to approve building on one lot and deny the other similar lot. In light of applicant's revision to the original application, staff is recommending that this matter be referred back to the Planning Commission. It was moved by Mayor Grabek, seconded by Councilmember Nettles, to refer #990, Ward Ferrell, back to the Planning Commission for review. Councilmember Goetten stated that she would hope this was the last time this matter was brought before the Council. She felt that the City Council had been very accommodating in trying to resolve this matter, but Mr. Ferrell had commented to the contrary. She suggested that should there • be any additional costs involved with the review of this new proposal, Mr. Ferrell should be responsible. Motion, Ayes =5, Nays =O, Motion passed. #1303 ALLAN REZABER 1989 FAGERNESS POINT ROAD VARIANCE RESOLUTION The applicants were not present for this matter. Prior to any discussion on this matter, Mayor Grabek removed himself from the Council, due to his personal association with the parties involved. City Administrator Bernhardson explained that the Council had previously given conceptual direction to the City pertaining to the approval of relocating a fence. At the August 22nd Council Meeting, it was discovered that the Applicants were in the process of selling this property. Assistant Planning and Zoning Administrator Gaffron had tried several times to contact applicants but had been informed that Rezabek's phone number had been changed. The Resolution, once drafted, will require the signature of the current resident at 1989 Fagerness Point Road. It was staff's recommendation that this matter be tabled for two weeks to ascertain who currently owns the property. Councilmember Goetten inquired as to whether the current • homeowners would be advised to attend the Council Meeting on September 26th. City Administrator Bernhardson stated that if 2 MINUTES OF REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING SEPTEMBER 12, 1988 • ZONING FILE #1303- REZABER CONTINUED indeed there are new property owners, the City would ask them to attend the Council Meeting so their intentions regarding the fence could be determined. If it is their desire to reinstall the fence, the Council could proceed as planned, otherwise the matter would be dismissed. It was moved by Councilmember Goetten, seconded by Councilmember Nettles, to table this matter. until the September 26, 1988 Council Meeting. Motion, Ayes =4, Nayes =0, Motion passed. #1311 JOHN PURDY 1975 FAGERNESS POINT ROAD, VARIANCE City Administrator Bernhardson advised the Council that the: Purdys were asking to renew and revise variances granted in 1985. The Purdys were seeking approval to construct an addition consisting of a 3- season porch and bathroom. They would require lakeshore setback, average lakeshore setback and hardcover variances. Mr. Purdy made reference toga written statement that.was included in the information given!to the Councilmembers. He did • not agree with the Planning Commisi sion's findings and asked the Council to reconsider their proposal. Applicant stated that their hardship was that the house was built 80 years ago and only has a bath and a half. Mr. Purdy did not f eel that their proposal was obtrusive to any of their neighbors and the addition would not be visible from the lake. There would be no drainage problem created by their proposed addition. 1 Councilmember Goetten stated that she would look at this application more favorably if it were for a bathroom only. She did not 'feel that a 3- season porch was a necessity. She also questioned the feasibility of putting the addition on the kitchen side of the house. She stated that she would have a difficult time approving the addition because it would be in the 0 -75' zone. t Mr. Purdy replied that the proposed location of the bathroom was the most sensible and accessible. The remodeling and addition they did in 1985 eliminated the screen porch they had. They now find that they miss the porch and wish to build one that would allow them a view of Lake Minnetonka. Placing the addition where they currently propose would eliminate the need to make any new accesses. In terms of minimumicosts, their present proposal is the most economical. Councilmember Goetten inquired as to the location of the previous screen porch. Assistant Planning and zoning Administrator Gaff ron indicated that the porch had been • located on the street side of the House. Mr. Purdy also volunteered to remove hardcover in the form 3 MINUTES OF REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING SEPTEMBER 12, 1988 ZONING FILE #1311 -PURDY CONTINUED • of a kennel and storage shed that were presently located within the 0 -75' zone. Councilmember Goetten expressed her concern to be that a 3- season porch becomes a room addition. Mr. Purdy stated that he had no such plans and asked if it would make a difference. Goetten stated that perhaps the applicants, would not turn the porch into a full-scale addition, but future owners of the property may do so. Councilmember Goetten asked' for the hardcover calculations of the shed and kennel. Assistant Planning and Zoning Administrator Gaffron stated that the shed was approximately 52 s.f. and the kennel area, which is partially underlain with plastic, was excluded from the current hardcover calculations because portions were removed as a result of the previous variance granted to the applicants. Mr. Purdy stated that his calculations totalled a net gain of 83 s.f. of hardcover in the 0 -75' zone. Gaffron stated that staff had calculated the net gain to be 101 s.f. Councilmember, Callahan asked what the calculations would be if it was presumed that the areas where permeable fabric was used were considered hardcover. Gaffron stated that if rockbeds and permeable fabric were considered hardcover, the percentage of hardcover would be 21.6% in the 0 -75 and 28.2% in the 75 -250. Mr. Purdy stated that their variance approval in 1985 was conditioned upon removal of the plastic • under the rockbeds. They complied with this request and replaced the plastic with permeable fabric. Gaffron referred to a Planning Commission Exhibit B that indicated that the kennel pad has had the block and plastic removed so it could not be used in the trade -off calculations. There is still 360 s.f. of fabric underneath the, trampoline pad that would be considered as hardcover. Councilmember Callahan aired his opinion that permeable fabric should be considered hardcover. Mr. Purdy replied that the only reason the fabric was installed was because the City directed him to do so. Councilmember Goetten stated that it was her understanding that the City had not taken a formal stand on the permeable fabric issue, and believed that the fabric was better than the plastic. City Administrator Bernhardson pointed out the fact that the Purdys already received "credit" for the removal of hardcover under the kennel and rockbeds. To include those areas again in this application would allow them "double credit" for hardcover. Mrs. Purdy responded that they did not add all of the approved hardcover in their construction in 1985. Bernhardson confirmed that fact and added that there would have to be a determination made as to the hardcover tradeoffs that actually occurred as a result of the Purdy's 5 -year plan. Assistant Planning and Zoning Administrator Gaffron clarified what the 5 -year proposal entailed. Mr. Purdy added • that the 5 -year plan involved a much larger addition and substantially more hardcover than their current proposal. 4 MINUTES OF REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING SEPTEMBER 12, 1988 • ZONING FILE #1311 -PURDY CONTINUED Mayor Grabek stated that the Council has to be very cautious of any variances for construction in the 0 -75' zone. If there are alternatives that could be utilized to avoid that area, he would prefer to proceed in that manner. The City has always taken a stand on construction in that area and they should not deviate from that policy. Mayor Grabek agreed with the Planning Commission's recommendation. Mr: Purdy expressed his belief that 83 s.f. was a minimal encroachment into the 0 -75' zone. Their addition would not inflict any hardship on anyone, it would not be visible to anyone, and it would not affect the drainage. He asked the Council who this plan would hurt, if approved. Mayor Grabek reiterated his concern involving precedent setting for construction in the 0 -75' zone. Councilmember Goetten did not see a hardship that required a 3- season porch. She suggested that the Purdys reconsider putting the addition on the side of their house as they initially planned. .Mrs. Purdy addressed the issue of cost involved with proposing a new plan. Councilmember Goetten replied• that financial considerations were not an allowable hardship in the Council's decision making process. Mrs. Purdy stated that their current proposal was the most logical and affordable. Mayor Grabek sympathized with the Purdy's situation, but added that he • could not ignore the issue of preserving the area within 75 feet of Lake Minnetonka. He would have to draw the line somewhere. Councilmember Goetten offered to have this matter tabled to allow the applicants time to revise their plans. She informed the Purdy's that should the Council vote against their plan, they would have to start the entire variance procedure again from the beginning. Mr. Purdy stated that -the present proposal was the only proposal they had. It was moved by Mayor Grabek, seconded by Councilmember Goetten, to accept the Planning Commission's recommendations and give conceptual direction to staff to prepare a denial resolution for the Council's consideration at the September 26, 1988 Council Meeting. Motion, Ayes =5, Nays =O, Motion passed. 1313 RICHARD ELLER 2655 SHADYWOOD ROAD VARIANCE - RESOLUTION #2491 City Administrator Bernhardson stated that the intent of the applicants was to replace an existing second story deck with a first floor level screened porch with a deck above it. The hardcover percentage would remain the same due to the Ellers removing portions of a concrete patio. Most of this property lies within the 0- 751zone because at one time the property was not considered part of the main Lake and the 75' setbacks did not apply. However, now the lakeshore setback does apply to this • property. There is currently 29.6% of hardcover in the 0 -75' zone and applicant will be removing an equal or greater amount of hardcover in this zone. 5 MINUTES OF REGDLAR'ORONO COUNCIL MEETING SEPTEMBER 12, 1988 ZONING FILE 11313 -ELLER CONTINUED • Assistant Planning and Zoning Administrator Gaffron gave more details involving this application and-showed the Council where the removals and replacements of hardcover would occur. Councilmember Goetten mentioned that she had visited the site and thought that.the applicant's proposal improved the present situation. She appreciated the fact that the Ellers were removing as much hardcover as they were installing. It wa.s moved by Councilmember Callahan, seconded by Councilmember Peterson, to adopt Resolution #2491. Motion, Ayes =5, Nayes =0, Motion passed. #1314 GERALD ROWLETTE 3775 BAYSIDE ROAD VARIANCE RESOLUTION #2492 Applicants were present for this matter. City Administrator *. Bernhardson explained that the Row lettes were seeking a street setback variance for the purpose of installing a sunroom. The sunroom would be located in an existing indentation along the north outer wall of the house. The main issue is hardcover and a patio that the Rowlettes were to have removed in accordance with a variance granted in 1976. • The Planning Commission recently recommended approval of this current application based on the removal of half of the concrete patio. 'Since that time, it had been determined that the patio was split into three sections rather than two. Assistant Planning and Zoning Administrator Gaffron indicated on a diagram the configuration of the patio. Councilmember Callahan questioned why the Planning Commission did not have any concern over the number of concrete slabs. Applicant stated that he had informed the Planning Commission that there were two slabs, but upon re- examining the patio, found there to be three slabs. Applicant stated that he would like to remove the outer slab, which would mean a removal of less hardcover than recommended by the Planning Commission. .Mayor Grabek asked applicant why he had not previously removed the concrete patio as directed by the City. Mr. Row lette stated that he had an ice build -up problem in that area. He could remove the ice from the concrete surface, but could not chip the ice from a wood deck. Mayor Grabek asked Mr. Rowlette if he would also find a reason for not complying with the City should they redirect him to ; remove a portion of the patio. Applicant stated that he and the Planning Commission had discussed this issue and the slab would have to be removed prior to the issuance of the building permit for the sunroom. City Administrator Bernhardson reiterated that applicant was • requesting that only one -third of the concrete patio be removed MINUTES OF REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING SEPTEMBER 12, 1988 • ZONING FILE #1314- ROWLETTE CONTINUED as opposed to one -half. Gaffron stated that the resolution could be revised to reflect the Council's decision as to the extent of removal. The resolution - currently directs that one -half of the patio be removed. It was moved by Mayor Grabek, seconded by Councilmember Goetten, to amend Resolution #2492, to direct that applicant remove the most southerly 7' x 20' section of patio, which will leave two remaining 7' x 20' slabs. Motion, Ayes =5, Nays =O, Motion passed. #1315 COUNTRYSIDE MANOR HOMEOWNER'S ASSOCIATION WILLOW DRIVE AND COUNTRYSIDE DRIVE VARIANCE RESOLUTION #2493 Mr. Phil Miller was present as a representative for the Countryside Manor Homeowner's Association. City Administrator Bernhardson informed the Council that applicant was seeking a variance to construct entrance monuments for Countryside Drive that `exceed the 3 1/2' height requirement. The City and Homeowner's Association previously discussed the • issue of signage on the monuments and determined that there would be none. Mr. Miller reported that the Homeowner's Association had prepared some elevations and drawings of what they were proposing. The Association had no plans to include any signage for the monuments and had no problem adhering to the City's determination. Mr. Miller also addressed the situation involving undesireable behavior on behalf of one of the Association members. During a Planning Commission Meeting, this person made rude comments pertaining to the Planning Commission. Mr. Miller stated that this person was out of line and he extended an apology on behalf of this individual. Councilmember Goetten thanked Mr. Miller for his apology and stated that she had been seated directly in front of the individual. Councilmember Callahan reiterated Councilmember Goetten's comments. It was moved by Councilmember Goetten, seconded by Councilmember Peterson, to adopt Resolution #2493. Motion, Ayes =S, Nays =O, Motion passed. #1316 GARY BARR 3034 CASCO POINT ROAD VARIANCE • Applicant was present for this matter. City Administrator Bernhardson explained that the applicant 7 MINUTES OF REGULAR ORONO�COUNCIL.MEETING SEPTEMBER 12, 1988 ZONING FILE #1316 -BARR CONTINUED • was seeking variances for hardcover, structure to structure setback and accessory structure floor .area. The Planning Commission recommended denial of this application for the construction of a garage. Since that time, the applicant had proposed a revised plan which the City Zoning Staff had not received or reviewed as of the date of this Council Meeting. Bernhardson asked Assistant Planning and Zoning Administrator Gaffron if that was still the case. Assistant Planning and Zoning Administrator Gaffron replied that he had not received any concrete revised proposals. Originally the applicant was proposing to use a common wall with an existing garage to construct an additional garage. This would create an extremely large accessory structure. There were also two alternate plans presented which would involve building the additional detached garage 51to 10' from the existing garage. The existing garage has a 2nd story, as would the proposed garage. The area above , the proposed garage would be used as a workshop area. Gaffron referred to a letter that was received from the applicant's builder, Mr. Clint Gables, wherein he mentioned that Mr. Barr would agree to reduce the size of the proposed garage so there would be no need.for a variance for floor area. However, the applicant- would still require a variance for hardcover. Mr. Barr explained that he was now proposing a garage approximately 26' x 30'. He reiterated his desire to have the extra area above the garage for a shop area. Mayor Grabek inquired as to the current use of the area above the existing garage. Mr. Barr replied that his stepbrother lives in that area and watches the property. Mr. Barr's occupation as an airline pilot causes him to be away extensively. In addition, Mr. Barr resides in Florida during the winter months. Councilmember Goetten asked whether Mr. Barr's stepbrother rented the area above the garage. Mr. Barr responded affirmatively. Goetten informed him that he would need a conditional use permit to allow him to rent that space. Bernhardson added that a variance would probably be required whether the area is rented or not. Mr.' Barr restated that his stepbrother was a security measure, in addition to a mechanic. Mr. Barr was requesting the garage for the purpose of storing classic cars that he collected. He said that Florida was not conducive to maintaining old cars because of the excessive salt in the air. Mayor Grabek suggested to applicant that he put together more information about his revised plan and come before the Council again. Mr. Barr asked about the need for a variance if he were reducing the amount of hardcover. Gaffron stated that if the total hardcover percent could be reduced below 25 %, a hardcover variance would not be required. Councilmember Goetten inquired as to why applicant decided not to attach the proposed 0 MINUTES OF REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING SEPTEMBER 12, 1988 • ZONING FILE #1316 -BARR CONTINUED garage to the existing garage: Mr. Barr explained that the existing garage is nearly 1,000 s.f. Attaching another structure to it would put him over the maximum 1,000 s.f. floor area requirement. He preferred to construct the additional garage in this fashion because it would be the least obtrusive. Councilmember Callahan stated that he would be inclined to agree with the Planning Commission's recommendation for denial. He can see no hardship in this matter. The applicant's lot is very limited. If Mr. Barr made revisions to his plan that would not require variances, that would be fine. However, he would not approve any other plan. Councilmember Peterson asked Gaffron what size limitations the applicant could meet without the need for variances. The current code allows multiple accessory structures as long as they are detached. Mr. Barr could have as many 1,000 s.f. buildings as long as hardcover area limitations are adhered to. The location of the structure and how much driveway would be needed to access it will determine the maximum size the building can be to conform to an existing or decreased level of hardcover. There was a brief discussion pertaining to areas above garage structures and the potential for them to be turned into. • living space. City Administrator Bernhardson suggested that the Council return this matter to the Planning Commission. It would be necessary for them to review this application since Mr. Barr had deviated from his original plans. Also, there would need to be a review for the possibility of an after - the -fact conditional use permit for the area being occupied above the existing garage. Assistant Planning and Zoning Administrator Gaffron stated that whether the applicant needed variance approval for his proposed construction, he would still need to apply for a separate conditional use permit for the dwelling above the existing garage. In light of that, this matter would have to be reviewed by the Planning Commission. It was moved by Mayor Grabek, seconded by Councilmember Callahan, to refer this matter back to the Planning Commission to address the revised plan and the after - the -fact conditional use permit. Motion, Ayes =5, Nays =O, Motion passed. #1320 DR. AND MRS. BRANDENBURG 719 MINNETONKA HIGHLANDS LANE VARIANCE RESOLUTION #2494 The applicants were not present for this matter. City Administrator Bernhardson apprised the Council that the applicants were seeking hardcover variances to reconstruct a • screen porch and existing deck on the lake side of their home. Currently there is 31.8% hardcover in the 75- 2501zone and would require an average lakeshore setback variance. Assistant W MINUTES OF REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING SEPTEMBER 12, 1988 ZONING FILE #1320- BRANDENBURG CONTINUED • Planning and Zoning Administrator Gaffron presented the plan as proposed by the applicants. He explained that the Brandenburgs were going to rebuild and slightly revise an existing second story deck and 3- season porch. They would also be revising the outside stairway. There will be no increase in hardcover and no further encroachment into the lakeshore setback area. It was moved by Councilmember Callahan, seconded by Councilmember Peterson, to approve this application per Planning Commission's recommendations and conditions, as set forth in Resolution #2494. Motion, Ayes =5, Nays =O, Motion passed. #1284 DOUGLAS KIRCHNER 1520 BOHNS POINT ROAD REQUEST TO AMEND HARDCOVER ALLOWANCE RESOLUTION #2503 The applicant was present for this matter. City Administrator Bernhardson explained that the Council had previously granted an after - the -fact permit for construction of a lakeside deck. There were to be some hardcover trade -offs made as a condition to the approval. While removing hardcover to conform with the Council's directives, applicant's son removed more hardcover than necessary in the 75 -250' zone. Mr. Kirchner • does have a shed and barbeque area in the 0 -75' zone that were slated for removal, but have not yet been removed. Applicant would like to retain those two items, which would cause a net increase in 0 -75' hardcover from 3.56% to 4.9 %. Mr. Kirchner stated that approval of the original application involved reducing hardcover by the amount they. intended to add in the lakeshore yard. Applicant planned to not only do that but to also decrease the hardcover back by the garage. When Mr. and Mrs. Kirchner returned home from their vacation, they discovered that part of the walkway to the lake was removed. Mr. Kirchner added that the walkway was a main source for water runoff to the lake. It was moved by Councilmember Goetten, seconded by Councilmember Callahan, to approve the amended request for hardcover removal, per staff recommendation. Motion, Ayes-.25r Nays =O, Motion passed. ADDENDUM TO ZONING ADMINISTRATORS REPORT #1275 DOUGLAS JOHNSON 1399 PARK DRIVE RESOLUTION #1275 The applicants were present for this matter. City Administrator Bernhardson explained that the Council • had previously approved the side setback and average lakeshore 10 k Y MINUTES OF REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING SEPTEMBER 12, 1988 • ZONING FILE 11275 - DOUGLAS JOHNSON CONTINUED setback for the construction of a house. At that time, it was indicated that the foundation would remain as it was and that the construction would be merely an addition to the existing house. The Engineer's direction was that the house be lifted and the top course of block on the outside existing and inside bearing walls be removed. The foundation could then be strengthened by placing a #5 vertical rebar every 16". It was assumed that there were adequate footings underneath the block wall. The variances were granted upon the premise that the foundation was not to be removed, only strengthened. During the week of September 5th, the work began on the site. The house had been totally removed, and only a small portion of the foundation remained. The question now before the Council is whether the proposed house must be relocated to meet the required setbacks. It had been determined by the City's Building Inspector that the footings under the remaining foundation were nonexist=ent and therefore could not support a new structure. Staff is recommending that the house be moved back to comply with Ae setbacks. However, the applicants have set the forms for the new footings on the property, but they have not yet been poured. • Mr. Johnson reiterated Bernhardson's explanation of the situation. He felt that he had complied with the City's directives and that the stop -work order was unnecessary. Mr. Johnson referred to the Planning Commission Minutes for the June 6, 1988 Meeting. The paragraphs referred to Chairman Kelley's inquiries and comments regarding the replacement of the existing foundation. The motion for approval of this item was conditioned upon the house being moved to meet setbacks should the foundation require removal. Mr. Johnson stated that he would not, have proceeded to the Council without the Engineer's approval or recommendations. Mr. Johnson apprised the Council of his proposal which included the addition of foundation in one location and the removal of a portion of foundation in another location. However, an additional portion of the existing foundation needed replacement because it cracked while the structure was being removed. The entire front portion needed a new 42" foundation to support the structure due to a lack of adequate footings. The structural engineer Mr. Johnson hired was referred by the City. Mr. Johnson made reference to paragraph #5 in Mr. Zimniewicz's letter dated June 29, 1988. This paragraph recommended that a 6" to 8" cap be poured on top of the outside and inside bearing walls. The engineer also recommended adding a 4" wall to the existing 8" wall and fill all voids in the existing walls. There were only two options available to accomplish the recommendations • by the engineer. One would be to lift the house and replace the block or tear off the existing and replace it with adequate support for the proposed structure. 11 MINUTES OF REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING SEPTEMBER 12, 1988 ZONING FILE 11275 - DOUGLAS JOHNSON CONTINUED Mayor'. Grabek drew the applicant's attention back to page two, paragraph D, of the Resolution which indicated that the applicants' intened to add to an existing structure. At this time there is no existing structure and the stipulation is that under that condition, the proposed house must be moved to meet the setback requirements. Mayor Grabek asked Mr. Johnson if he had revised his plans to conform with that stipulation. He also asked whether it was the applicants' intent from the very beginning to remove the existing structure. Mr. Johnson responded that per the engineer's recommendations, yes,, he did intend to remove the existing house. Assistant Planning and Zoning Administrator Gaffron told the 'Mayor that it was staff's understanding that applicant would try to retain as much of the old structure as possible. The key point is that the City Building Inspector had determined that there are not sufficient footings for the proposed structure. Mr. Zimniewicz's recommendations were based upon the assumption that those footings were adequate., The City cannot approve building a house with the existing portion of foundation -as is. New footings would need to be installed under that wall and that Cannot be done. The wall will need to be removed which would leave nothing of the initial structure. That would result in the proposed house being moved to meet the setback requirements as set forth in Resolution #2463. Councilmember Peterson asked if all the remaining wall would need to be removed? Gaffron replied that yes, due to a lack of sufficient footings, all walls would need to be removed. The applicant asked why the engineer did not notice this problem when he examined the property. Gaffron stated that Mr. Zimniewicz assumed that there were 12" x 24" footings, there were not. The City cannot allow a 2 -story structure to be built without proper footings. Councilmember Goetten added that Minnesota Codes dictate in this case, not the City of Orono. Mr. Johnson stated that he was just going by the findings of the structural engineer. Gaffron stated that the engineer's assumptions of what existed were found later to be incorrect and there was nothing that could be done at this point to change that. • City Administrator Bernhardson stated that the original application and plans were requesting a remodelling of an existing house. There was no mention of the foundation or redoing the joists. Mayor Grabek was alarmed by the aspect of this application being a request for remodeling only. Mr. Johnson objected to the implications that there was no existing house on the property. Councilmember Goetten explained to Mr. Johnson that in cases such as this, she would like to_ see the applicants' uphold the setback requirements. They are no longer remodeling an existing structure; there is no existing structure, • they are building a completely new house. She reminded the applicant that she had discussed this with him and warned him of 12 MINUTES OF REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING SEPTEMBER 12, 1988 • ZONING FILE #1275 - DOUGLAS JOHNSON CONTINUED the possibilities should the entire house and foundation be removed. The applicant expressed further reasons why he felt the setback variances should be granted. He would not be encroaching upon his neighbors. He was originally misrepresented as to the condition of the existing house and just what portions of the lot were his. Mayor Grabek said that they needed to address only the issue at hand, not the history of the property. That issue was that the applicants were unable to save the existing house. He was understanding of the fact that there was not much that could have been done to save the house, but nonetheless, it was entirely removed. The applicant referred to the Resolution, under the Conclusions section, paragraph #3. Mr. Johnson noted that there were no specific indications as to the amount of foundation that he had to retain. City Administrator.Bernhardson asked Assistant Planning and Zoning Administrator Gaffron for clarification as to how much wall remained and what would be removed. Gaffron replied that the foundation yet standing would need to be removed. There would be no way to support the walls while pouring footings underneath them. Mr. Johnson disagreed and stated that the wall • could be braced while the'footings were poured. Mr. Johnson went on to say that moving the house to meet the side setback would require the removal of a 150' Poplar tree. He had the house designed so that it would fit the lot. Councilmember Goetten stated that she appreciated that, but now they were dealing with a far more serious issue than the setbacks and that was the poor condition of the existing foundation. Mr. Johnson stated that there would be a lift station and well that would interfere with relocating the position of the house. Councilmember Callahan reminded applicant that he had agreed to relocate the proposed house if none of the existing house could be saved. Mr. Johnson stated that he made that agreement, but did not have all of the facts at that time. Councilmember Callahan stated that neither the house nor the foundation of the original house exists, therefore the applicants must meet the 0- 75'. lakeshore setback and 10' side setback. Applicant stated that he did not want to change the drainage of the lot. Moving the house 10' would not change the drainage of the house, but it would cause the removal of-the tree. Gaffron indicated that the current proposal places the new house within 10' of the tree. Councilmember Callahan inquired as to how far back the house would have to be moved. Applicant replied, "8 feet, if I build a deck, none of the house is sitting in the 0 -75." There is only a portion of the deck which encroaches into that zone. Councilmember Goetten stated that she had no problem with the • proposed deck, but reiterated her point that in a case such as this, the City requests that all setbacks be adhered to. 13 MINUTES OF REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING SEPTEMBER 12, 1988 ZONING FILE #1275 - DOUGLAS JOHNSON CONTINUED • Councilmember.Goetten asked Assistant Planning and Zoning Administrator Gaffron if. moving the house would impinge upon the lift station. Gaffron stated that the lift station would have to be replaced if the house were moved over. However, an examination of the lift station indicated that the current proposed location of the house would still allow access to the lift station. A portion of it would be under the line of the house. Applicant stated that he planned the design of the house with the lift station in mind. He did not know how large the cavity was. City Administrator Bernhardson asked Mr. Johnson if he would have gone ahead with this project if a determination was made from the onset that the entire foundation would require removal? Mr. Johnson stated that it would have changed his thinking as to the design of the house. He added that the farther back on the lot the house is placed, the more of an incline there would be to contend with. Councilmember Callahan surmized that the Johnson's neighbors chose to build their homes up on top of the hill, farther from the lake. If the Council were to insist upon the average lakeshore setback being met, the house would have to be built up on the hill. Mr. Johnson concurred and added that he could not use the existing house plan. He has already obtained a mortgage based upon the existing plan. • Mayor Grabek stated that he could not look at this matter in any other light than what had previously been agreed upon. It was moved by Mayor Grabek, seconded by Councilmember Goetten, that since the entire structure has been removed in order to meet Minnesota Building Codes, that the new structure be located so as to meet the setback requirements. Applicant asked for clarification that if he met the setbacks he could build the house as is? City Adminstrator Bernhardson stated that an average setback variance would still be required. Assistant Planning and Zoning Administrator Gaffron reported that the Building Inspector suggested some minor revisions to the proposed plan in light of relocating the house to meet the setbacks. Mayor Grabek reiterated what the motion entailed. Gaffron asked if the deck would need to meet the 0 -75' setback. The Council answered affirmatively. Gaffron acknowledged that the average lakeshore setback variance would still be granted.- Councilmember Peterson questioned the height variance. Gaffron stated that the height variance would still be granted because there would be no change in the height. Motion, Ayes =5, Nays =O, Motion passed. ENGINEERS REPORT: WILLOW DRIVE AND HIGHWAY 12 FLASHER* It was moved by Councilmember Goetten, seconded by Councilmember Peterson, to approve the maintenance agreement with • the Minnesota Department of Transportation for the flasher- light at Willow Drive and Highway 12, and to bill Long Lake 50% of the 14 a MINUTES OF REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING SEPTEMBER 12, 1988 • WILLOW DRIVE FLASHER CONTINUED cost. Motion, Ayes =5, Nays =O, Motion passed. PAY REQUEST #1- HARDRIVES, INC. It was moved 'by Councilmember Callahan, seconded by Mayor Grabek, to approve Pay Request #1, Woodhill Avenue Street Project, to Hardrives, Inc., for an amount of $13,569.00. Motion, Ayes =4, Councilmember Peterson, Nay, Motion passed. MAYOR'S REPORT: RESOLUTION OF CONDOLENCE -BRAD VAN NEST RESOLUTION #2495 Mayor Grabek read the Resolution commemorating Mr. Van Nest for his numerous contributions to the City of Orono. He added that Mr. Van Nest not only had a love for the City of Orono, but for Lake Minnetonka as well. Mr. Van Nest was a strong individual and there were many people who agreed and disagreed with him. Mayor Grabek said he did both, but respected Brad's commitment, time and effort he gave toward the conservation of the City and the Lake. It was moved by Mayor Grabek, seconded by Councilmember Peterson, to adopt the Resolution Commemorating William Brad Van • Nest and that a commemorative plaque be presented to the Van Nest family. Motion, Ayes =5, Nays =O, Motion passed. LAKE MINNETONKA REGIONAL PARR City Administrator Bernhardson explained that this item was being presented as "an information only item ". He had communicated with the alternate attorney and sent him letter requesting that he review the matter and determine the best method for the City to proceed. He expected a response from Mr. Soth by the September 26, 1988 Council Meeting. Councilmember Goetten reported that she felt this matter needed more attention and presented it to the Metropolitan Association 'of Municipalities Committee. The Committee showed interest in supporting the lawsuit and has referred this matter to the appropriate Policy Committee of the League of Minnesota Cities. Goetten is hopeful that she will receive feedback soon and will apprise Bernhardson of their response. It was moved by Councilmember Callahan, seconded by Councilmember Peterson, to. accept the information from the Administrator regarding the issues on the lawsuit, together with issue discussions with the Attorney, and directs that this item be tabled until the September 26, 1988, meeting. Ayes =5, Nays =O, Motion passed. • ORONO /LONG LAKE DISCUSSIONS City Administrator Bernhardson reported that following the individual discussions, the Facilitator recommended that 2 people 15 MINUTES OF REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING SEPTEMBER 12, 1988 ORONO /LONG LAKE DISCUSSIONS CONTINUED • from each Community meet to establish ground rules for the eventual joint meeting. It was recommended that Mayor Grabek and City Administrator Bernhardson be the persons to meet with the Faciltator and representatives from Long Lake. Councilmember Goetten asked when they were going to meet. Councilmember Callahan warned of the open meeting law. Councilmember Goetten understood that the agenda only involved discussion of this one item. She inquired as to what other items would be discussed. Mayor Grabek clarified that it was not agenda items that-would be discussed, but an agenda for the discussion of the one item. He suggested to the Facilitator that the Council as a whole partake in this pre- meeting discussion. However, the Facilitator thought it best if ground rules were established with a small group of representatives. There was no motion on .this item as a meeting date has yet to be determined. - PROCLAMATION OF CONSTITUTION WEEK RESOLUTION #2502 The Daughters of the American Revolution were requesting all local governments to proclaim September 17, 1988 through September 23, 1988 as Constitution Week. Mayor Grabek believed • that the Constitution deserved a week of observance. It was moved by Mayor Grabek, seconded by Councilmember Peterson, to adopt Resolution #2502. Motion, Ayes =5, Nays =O, Motion passed. CITY ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT: BOHN'S POINT FEASIBILITY REPORT City Administrator Bernhardson explained that the Council had previously discussed this matter at their August 8, 1988 Council Meeting. The Council indicated that they wanted the feasibility to include redoing the Bohn's Point Road at a 24' width. That directive was presented to the residents of Bohn's Point Road who indicated that they only wanted the Road 22' and would not fund the feasibility study if it were to include a 24' study. Bernhardson consulted with the City Engineer who said that the study could be done at either the 24' or 22' width. A determination could be made as to which width was desired prior to the plan specifications being drawn. Mayor Grabek inquired if the residents would still be liable to pay for the study if the Council decided against their wishes. City Administrator Bernhardson stated that an agreement would be made as to 24' or 22' prior to proceeding with the study. Mr. Clark Winslow was present and stated that he had met • with Public Works Director Gerhardson and the City Engineer. He 16 MINUTES OF REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING SEPTEMBER 12, 1988 • BOHN'S POINT FEASIBILITY STUDY CONTINUED and some of the residents measured to see what effect a 24' road would have on the area. It would require removal of some trees and would affect the roots of other trees. It would also bring the road within only a few feet of electric poles. Due to these problems and the fact that Bohn's Point Road has a unique characteristic, the residents prefer the road width to be 221. Mr. Winslow compared Bohn's Point with Woodhill and felt that there was a significant difference between the two roads. Woodhill was far less inhabited and had a lot of open, marshy areas. Bohn's Point had considerably more residences and trees. The residents are requesting freedom to redo the road and spend their money in a manner they feel would best suit their neighborhood. Councilmember Goetten asked if there was a concensus of the residents to do the road at 221. Mr. Winslow stated that .those residents who were asked, were emphatic about the road being 22', and would not even discuss the possiblity of the road being 24'. The residents felt that 24' would be too wide for a dead -end street and the penninsula characteristics. Mayor Grabek inquired of City Administrator Bernhardson as to what the 24' included. Bernhardson replied that the 24' width • would be from curb to curb and there would be an 8" berm curb beyond that. Councilmember Goetten stated that they had battled for months over the road width of Woodhill Avenue. There were trees that had to be removed. She explained to Mr. Winslow that the reason she would find it difficult to approve Bohn's Point at 22' was because 24' was now the standard width of roads in Orono. Mr. Winslow stated that there would be no point to doing the feasibility study at 24' because the residents on the Road would not pay for the study or the Road. There would be several mature Maple and Oak trees that would be lost. Councilmember Callahan advised Mr. Winslow that should the City Council decide to put in the Road at 241, it would be installed at 24' and the property owners would have to pay for it. Mr. Winslow stated that _ the residents would fight that decision in Court. Councilmember Goetten told Mr. Winslow that he and the residents had initiated this matter and brought it before the Council. Now that the Council was requesting the road be 24', he and the residents did not want to follow through. Mr. Winslow responded that the matter was brought on the premise that the road be 22'. Councilmember Goetten said" it was unfortunate that the road width standard was 241, but she would have to abide by that standard. Mr. Winslow asked how many times there had been a • request to vary from the standard and how long the 24' standard had been in existence. Mayor Grabek asked Mr. Winslow if the 2 feet would make that much difference? Mr. Winslow responded 17 MINUTES OF REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING SEPTEMBER 12, 1988 BOHN'S POINT FEASIBILITY CONTINUED • affirmatively. City Administrator Bernhardson reported that the City Engineer determined that widening the road from the existing 16' to 22' would require tree removal. However, the difference between 22' and 24' would not cause any significant tree removal. In response to Mr. Winslow's questions, Bernhardson replied that the 24' standard had been adhered to for both private and public roads in all -but 2 cases in the last 5 -6 years. Mr. Winslow stated that he would like Bohn's Point to be an exception to the 24' rule. He and the Bohn's Point residents would like the road no more than 22' because it would be safer and would not be as costly for the City of Orono. Mayor Grabek pointed out the options available for resolving this matter. It could either be tabled to determine whether 24' would be acceptable to the residents, or they could vote on the 24' road. Mr. Winslow indicated that there was no need to table the matter because the residents would not change their minds. Councilmember Goetten inquired as to whether the residents were aware of the fact that 24' was the standard. Mr. Winslow replied that the residents did know the standard, but widening the road to 24' would be unsuitable for the Bohn's Point penninsula. If the road were 24' it would be 2' from existing electric poles • running along the east side of the road. In addition, it would require the removal of large, mature oak and maple trees. The residents' mailboxes would have to be moved back and quite a bit of ' lawn and sprinkler systems would have to be moved back. If the Road was 22' none of these problems would occur. Councilmember Peterson inquired about the future burial. of the electric lines. Mr. Winslow responded that approximately half of the lines on the southern half of Bohn's Point have been buried,' but the lines on the northern portion have not. Councilmember Goetten asked about the impact construction trucks would have on the road. Mr. Winslow stated that the construction projects should be coming to an end. City Administrator Bernhardson stated that he would confer with the City Engineer, but it was his understanding that the .road would be built with the truck traffic in mind. It was moved by Mayor Grabek, seconded by Councilmember Goetten, to table this item so that further information could be obtained from the City Engineer with respect to alternatives. Motion, Ayes =S, Nays =O, Motion passed. 1989 GOAL SETTING City Administrator Bernhardson explained that he had drafted goal setting changes for41988/1989. He wanted the Council's ,comments and suggestions or for them to make a motion to adopt • his proposal. 18 MINUTES OF REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING SEPTEMBER 12, 1988 • . GOAL SETTING CONTINUED It Vas moved by Mayor Grabek, seconded by Councilmember Peterson, to adopt the attached material that is representing the Council's Goal Setting for 1989. Motion, Ayes =S, Nays =O, Motion passed. ANIMAL PERMIT ORDINANCE AMENDMENT FEE SCHEDULE ORDINANCE AMENDMENT City Administrator Bernhardson explained that this involved putting a permit system in place to efficiently handle the issuance of permits for the keeping, transporting, treatment and housing of animals within the City of Orono. It was moved by Mayor Grabek, seconded by Councilmember Goetten, to table this matter until the September 26, 1988 Council Meeting. Motion, Ayes =S, Nays =O, Motion passed. 1989 BUDGET MEETING - SEPTEMBER 20, 1988 - 7:00 P.M. City Administrator pernhardson reminded Mayor Grabek and the Councilmembers that there would be a budget meeting on September 20, 1988 at 7:00 p.m. ORONO /MINNETONRA BEACH INTERCEPTOR CONSTRUCTION City Administrator Bernhardson explained that this was "an • information only" item. WATER CONSERVATION REGULATIONS RESOLUTION 12496 City Administrator Bernhardson explained that this item entailed the removal of the odd /even watering ban but reimpose them April 15, 1989. It was moved by Mayor Grabek, seconded by Councilmember Goetten, to adopt Resolution #2496, removing the restrictions of the odd /even regulations, effective September 15, 1988, but re- imposing them April 15, 1989. Councilmember Nettles inquired as to the rationale of replacing the restrictions in April of 1989. City Administrator Bernhardson explained that to date, there has not been enough rain to replenish the system. Water levels may be critical in Spring of 1989. If water levels are satisfactory by that time, the restrictions would be withdrawn. Councilmember Callahan expressed the idea that removing the restrictions now would ease the task of reimposing them in the April. Councilmember Goetten stated that a water conservation /quality policy was desperately needed. She has been working with JoEllen Hurr of the Lake Minnetonka Conservation District in that capacity. Councilmember Nettles said that he had been receiving feedback from neighbors about this policy. Motion, Ayes =5, Nays =O, Motion passed. TEMPORARY TRANSFER STATION- HENNEPIN COUNTY City Administrator Bernhardson explained that there may be a temporary transfer station at the Hennepin County Public Works. 19 ,) 1 MINUTES OF REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING SEPTEMBER 12, 1988 • TEMPORARY TRANSFER STATION CONTINUED Indications so far have been that this location would be used as a weigh station. The City has concerns about that and will be sending a letter to that effect to the County. This was an information item and there was no motion. HAZARDOUS BUILDINGS -SET PUBLIC HEARING DATE RESOLUTION #2497 It was moved by Mayor Grabek, seconded by Councilmember Peterson, to set a public hearing for October 10, 1988 at 7:00 p.m. at the Councl Chambers to consider the special assessment roll for the 1988. - hazardous buildings. Motion, Ayes =S, Nays =O, Motion passed. LMCD REPRESENTATIVE . City Administrator Bernhardson explained that Representative JoEllen Hurr's term expired September 30, 1988. The City is recommending that Ms.,Hurr be reappointed as Representative. Mayor Grabek concurred with this suggestion and added that JoEllen Hurr was a very dedicated Representative. Councilmember Goetten felt that Ms. Hurr had done an excellent job in that capacity. It was moved by Mayor Grabek, seconded by Councilmember • Goetten, to appoint JoEllen Hurr as its Representative to the LMCD. Motion, Ayes =S, Nays =O, Motion passed. RESOLUTION OF APPRECIATION ROBERT KOST, PARK COMMISSION CHAIRMAN RESOLUTION #2490* It was moved by.Councilmember Goetten, seconded by Councilmember Peterson, to adopt Resolution #2490. Motion, Ayes =S, Nays =O; Motion passed. ADDITIONAL ELECTION JUDGES AND ELECTION JUDGES' SALARY RESOLUTIONS #2498 AND #2499* It was moved by Councilmember Goetten, seconded by Councilmember Peterson, to adopt Resolution #2498, appointing additional election judges for the Primary Election to be held September 13, 1988 and the General Election to be held November 8, 1988; and to adopt Resolution #2499 establishing 1988 Election Judge Salaries. Motion, Ayes =S, Nays =O, Motion passed... TEMPORARY EMPLOYMENT - GOLF COURSE* It was moved by Councilmember Goetten, seconded by Councilmember Peterson, to employ Brett Marquardt as temporary greenskeeper­helper at a rate of $4.25 per hour effective September 3, 1988. Motion, Ayes =5, Nays =O, Motion passed. 20 •• 4 MINUTES OF REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING SEPTEMBER 12, 1988 RESOLUTION OF APPRECIATION - LONG LAKE CHAMBER AND ST. GEORGE CATHOLIC CHURCH RESOLUTION #2500* It was moved by Councilmember Goetten, seconded by Councilmember Peterson, to adopt Resolution #2500, thanking the Long Lake Chamber of Commerce and St. George Catholic Church for the excellent work they did in sponsoring Corn Days on August 12, 13, and 14, 1988. Motion, Ayes =5, Nays =O, Motion passed: SALARY REVIEW - JAMES MORROW PART TIME PATROL OFFICER* It was moved by Councilmember Goetten, seconded by Councilmember Peterson, to approve a salary increase for part time Officer James Morrow from $6.50 per hour to $7.00 per hour, effective July 1, 1988. Motion, Ayes =5, Nays =O, Motion passed. 1989 CABLE T.V. BUDGET RESOLUTION #2501* It was moved by;; Councilmember Goetten, seconded by Councilmember Peterson, to adopt Resolution #2501, giving its approval to the 1989 Lake Minnetonka Cable Communication Commission budget. Motion, Ayes =5, Nays =O, Motion passed.' ADMINISTRATOR'S INFORMATION:* • It was moved by Councilmember Goetten, seconded by Councilmember Peterson, to accept the City Administrator's Information regarding: 3508 Ivy Place; County Road 15 Progress; LMCD Executive Director; 801 Tonkawa Road; and Goals and Objectives. Motion, Ayes =5, Nays =O, Motion passed. CITY ATTORNEY'S REPORT: City Attorney Barrett stated that with regard to the Art Center, he had not received an offer to present to the Council. There was to be a Court Hearing involving this matter. The Plaintiff was alleged that this matter had�been settled. Councilmember Callahan inquired as to the length of time of the settlement negotiations. City Attorney Barrett stated that a tentative conclusion had been reached in November of 1987. Councilmember Callahan stated that should the matter not be settled by the Court Hearing, the Art Center would have now gained a year of the five years while negotiations were ensuing. He suggested that the Art Center be advised that they now have four years. City Attorney Barrett stated that in light of their interpretation of negotiations breaking down, he placed the matter back on the Court Calendar. Mayor Grabek asked if the Art Center was having Ia successful. operation. It was Councilmember Goetten's opinion that'-they wereL not. It was her understanding that they were trying-to open up more for children and adults, but things are not going very well. Councilmember Callahan stated that the Art Center was a"positive institution to have in the City. 21 MINUTES OF REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING SEPTEMBER 12, 1988 LICENSES* It was moved by Councilmember Goetten, seconded by _ Councilmember Peterson, to approve the following licenses: Residential Kennel License: Septic System Installers: Annual Firearms Permit: Julia Kimball Whitney 4470 Forest Lake Landing G. James Spinner 940 North Arm Drive American Sewer and Water 108 Lakeview Circle Buffalo, MN K's Mechanical and Excavation 20880 Nowthen Blvd. Elk River, MN Dave Perkins Co. 15775 Juniper Ridge Drive Anoka, MN Park Gun Club 3660 Sixth Avenue North Trap Shooting Motion, Ayes =S, Nays -0, Motion passed. BILLS* It was moved by Councilmember Goetten, seconded by Councilmember Peterson, to approve payment of the All Funds Accounts. Motion, Ayes -5, Nays -0, Motion passed. EXECUTIVE SESSION - 9:15 P.M. City Administrator Bernhardson requested that the Council go into an executive session at 9:15 p.m. ADJOURNMENT 9:20 P.M. It was moved by Mayor Grabek, seconded by Councilmember Peterson, to adjourn the Regular Council Meeting at 9:20 p.m. Motion, Ayes =S, Nays =O, Motion passed. AT ST: D rotny Hallin; City Clerk 22 Jamo R. Gra ek, Mayor 171