Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout08-25-1997 Council MinutesORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES FOR AUGUST 251 1997 • ROLL The Council met on the above mentioned date with the following members present: Mayor Gabriel Jabbour, Council Members J. Diann Goetten, Charles Kelley, and Barbara Peterson. Richard Flint arrived at 8:15 p.m. during agenda item 49. Representing Staff were City Administrator Ron Moorse, City Attorney Tom Barrett, Senior Planning Coordinator Michael Gaffron, Planner /Zoning Administrator Elizabeth Van Zomeren, Public Services Director Greg Gappa, City Engineers Glenn Cook and Tom Kellogg, and Recorder Sherry Frost. Mayor Jabbour called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. ( #1) JIM DANIELS - LAKE MINNETONKA COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION - 199S BUDGET Tim Daniels, Administrator for the Lake Minnetonka Communications Commission, was present to update the Council on the activities of the Commission as well as answering questions regarding the proposed budget. He indicated Chair Pattrin was unavailable to attend the meeting. Daniels said monthly updates are sent to the Mayor for his review. Daniels informed the Council that the Commission has gone through filings with the FCC relating to Triax submitting for small provider status. A disagreement on fees resulted in an extensive filing. The FCC decided in favor of the Commission, and the fee reimbursements will be retroactive and total about $150,000 in savings. He noted there • is a 60-day appeal allowance in the process. Daniels asked the Council to move forward regarding an ordinance regulating the use of public rights -of -way in compliance with the recent legislative directive ruling in favor of cities. He said Moorse has received the draft information. Jabbour asked Moorse about this information. Moorse said he was reviewing it and has received additional information from the League of Cities for adoption of a City ordinance. Daniels indicated there is some difference in the language that should be paid attention to between the draft from the Commission and from the League of Cities and asked the City to make a comparison. Daniels said the opening of the north studio has been successful. The Long Lake Chamber of Commerce is using it, and the studio is receiving good recognition. Training sessions have also been popular. Daniels noted the 1998 Commission budget has been received by the Council. He said they are working on an early franchise renewal with Triax. It is scheduled to expire in mid 1999 but would like to rebuild it sooner than that. • MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD ON AUGUST 25, 1997 ( #1 - Lake Minnetonka Communications Commission - Continued) • Kelley asked how many new subscribers there were for 1997 over 1996 and what is the growth rate for hook ups. Daniels said while not having the exact figures on hand, there has been a steady growth. About 1000 new subscribers signed on last year bringing the total to about 8000 current connections. Daniels informed Kelley that projections are completed by Triax. Their marketing plan is to add about 100 new connections each month. Kelley asked if the Commission received funding through franchise fees and how it is calculated. Daniels said a fee is received from the gross revenues of Triax. Kelley asked if with increased subscribers the fee is reduced. Daniels said the extra subscriber fees received are used to open new facilities and fund other growth options. Jabbour noted that the use of the fees is for building equity and providing additional services. Daniels cited technical standards which need maintaining and increased customer service. Kelley was informed by Daniels that the viewing percentage of subscribers is difficult to measure. Daniels did cite an example of receiving calls on viewing of the Chamber meeting. Kelley informed Daniels that he has asked questions in order to understand how the Commission's services are funded. Jabbour asked about the contingency amount in the budget. Daniels indicated reserves • are available to be used in cases of significant unforeseen expenses. Goetten moved, Peterson seconded, to approve the 1998 Lake Minnetonka Communications Commission 1998 budget. Vote: Ayes 4, Nays 0. (x #2) CONSENT AGENDA Items #5, 8, and 10 were added to the Consent Agenda. Goetten moved, Kelley seconded, to approve the Consent Agenda as amended. Vote: Ayes 4, Nays 0. APPROVAL OF MINUTES (*#3) REGULAR MEETING OF AUGUST 11,1997 Goetten moved, Kelley seconded, to approve the Minutes of the Regular City Council Meeting of August 11, 1997. Vote: Ayes 4, Nays 0. L' 2 MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD ON AUGUST 25,1997 • PARK COMMISSION COMMENTS Commissioner McDermott informed the Council that work is proceeding on installation of new playground equipment at Antoine Park. The buildings on the property have been demolished and site work is currently taking place. McDermott said each Commissioner has been visiting assigned parks checking on maintenance and areas requiring attention. Gappa has been asked by the Commission to determine the cost of adding a sprinkler system at Old Crystal Bay Park to assist in the upkeep. McDermott asked the Council to consider approving a name change for the Commission to the Park and Open Space Commission. The Park Commissioners believe this name is more in keeping with the comprehensive nature of the board. Commissioner Welles said the Commission was unaware of the administrative process required to change the name. Jabbour informed him it would take some time and consideration. Jabbour said he has seen more work being done at the parks this year to the credit of Gappa and the Commission. He informed McDermott that he would like to see Old Crystal Bay Park seeded soon. • Goetten inquired when the work at Antoine work would be complete. McDermott said they had planned for a dedication some time this fall. Gappa said the work should be completed in about three weeks. PLANNING COMMISSION COMMENTS Commissioner Smith had no new comments to make. She reminded the Council of the upcoming work session scheduled for the PIanning Commission to discuss home occupation and tree preservation. PUBLIC COMMENTS Gary Hart, 3580 North Shore Drive, said he called the City offices two months ago to inquire whether he would need a permit to add a temporary dock section. He said he was told it was not necessary. He proceeded to build a 12'x12' dock on the lakeshore, and the building inspector stopped and informed him it was illegal to build a dock in this area. Jabbour informed Hart that a dock on the shore is considered a deck. He informed him of the Shoreland Ordinance amending the City code in 1975 where no structural coverage or hardcover is allowed in the 0-75' setback from the lake, and exceptions are rarely made to that ordinance. He said docks are regulated by the LMCD. Hart said he has encountered many examples of similar structures on Lakeshore properties that have been • constructed since 1975. MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD ON AUGUST 259 1"7 (Public Comments - Continued) • Jabbour told Hart that a survey would be required and hardcover calculations made for his property for the changes as proposed. He said the Council would be happy to review his application for variance. Goetten apologized to Hart for his having received incorrect information from City Staff. ZONING ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT (#4) #2238 CHIC DWIGHT AND FRED GUTTORMSON,1220 TONKAWA ROAD - VARIANCES The applicants were present. Gaffron reported that the application is in two parts; one being an after- the -fact lakeshore setback variance and 0 -75' hardcover variance for an enclosed room below the existing deck. The second part includes a 75 -250' hardcover variance for a 32x34' garage. Gaffron explained the location of the property. The deck enclosure was approved two years ago subject to removal of the 8' gravel driveway to the lake and removal of the lakeshore deck. These removals would allow the applicant to enclose below the deck and repair the deck as well as grading for a walkout • doorway. The resolution was not signed and the work was done without the required permits and removals. The work in progress was stopped by the building inspector. This after -the -fact renewal application also now includes a new garage, which would meet the setbacks, and hardcover removal in both the 0 -75' and 75 -250' setback areas and removal of two sheds. The Planning Commission reviewed the application and unanimously recommended approval of the deck enclosure with hardcover removals as noted. The approval is subject to bringing the enclosure into conformance and removal of sheds, 8' driveway and the Lakeshore deck. The Planning Commission determined that the removals suggested by the applicant were insufficient to offset the increase of structural hardcover for the new garage. They requested the loop driveway located in the 0 -75' setback be removed. The applicant did not agree to this removal, and the Planning Commission unanimously recommended denial of this portion of the application request. Guttormson said he installed pop -in, pop -out, type windows without any frost footings under the deck. He also did not do the digging as he had requested or enlarge the deck- He felt he then was not required to make the removals. Jabbour verified that Guttormson screened in what was existing below the deck. Guttormson said Bruce Vang informed him the work must be done to code. It was suggested to him at that time that he split his • application requests into separate parts. 4 MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD ON AUGUST 25,1997 (#4 - #2238 Chic Dwight and Fred Guttormson - Continued) • Jabbour told Guttormson that he believes it is appropriate to have a garage in this State but the applicant must work with the City. Gaffron noted that the applicant does have an existing garage as well. Goetten noted that the lot was beautiful. Guttormson said he was at a standstill regarding the improvements. He said his lakeside deck is unique to the property. He indicated he has removed grating, shed, and dumpsters full of debris and would not have done so if he had known these items could have been used as bargaining tools. Kelley asked Guttormson if he had added new gravel to the driveway to the lake. Guttormson said he has had it graded and added gravel, which was dragged down to the lake. Guttormson said he would be able to move the proposed garage forward if it would help. Goetten noted that the Planning Commission wanted to see the turnaround eliminated, and the applicant wants to keep it. Chic Dwight said it is difficult to move a car to the .correct angle to leave the driveway. Guttormson said it is difficult to make a left turn • from the property and noted the road is posted for no parking. Guttormson said he needs the additional storage space. Dwight reiterated the clean up measures that they have taken on the property. Peterson received confirmation from Gaffron that the gravel driveway to the lake was to be removed as part of the screening in of the area below the deck. Guttormson responded that he only screened in the deck that is existing and did not make it a 3- season porch. Peterson asked Guttormson why he did not remove the gravel as he had agreed to do. Guttormson said he didn`t because he did not complete the improvements as proposed. Jabbour said the applicant had been unhappy with the Council's decision at that time and had originally planned on adding frost footings. Jabbour noted the applicant and City were back to where they started if no agreement is reached. Gaffron confirmed that was true. Jabbour asked Guttormson if he would cut down the circular driveway to address the Planning Commission's concerns. Guttormson said he has allowed a portion of it to grow in with vegetation to narrow it. Goetten was informed that 50 s.f was proposed to be removed and vegetated. Jabbour suggested using the portion of the driveway out of the 0 -75' setback. Dwight said there are trees located in that area; Guttormson confirmed there are 12 trees located there. Jabbour asked what would be done with the gravel. Guttormson said he would add black dirt and is restore the vegetation. 5 MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO CM COUNCIL MEETING HELD ON AUGUST 25,1997 (#4 - #2238 Chic Dwight and Fred Guttormson - Continued) • Jabbour asked if there was any way to reduce the hardcover to off -set the new hardcover. Gaffron suggested the garage be moved forward. Gaffron also said he thought the loop could be eliminated with the ability for maneuvering within the large pad out of the 75' setback. He said the options had been explored, but the applicant's recreational vehicle would be difficult to maneuver. In comparison to other similar properties, Gaffron indicated that the loop is overbuilt. Dwight questioned whether other properties are able to park on their streets. Jabbour informed her that it was possible for the Council to allow parking again on the street. Jabbour informed the applicants that the Council rarely allows hardcover in the 0-75' setback and views the application similar to the Planning Commission. He noted that if the application was denied, the applicants could not submit a further application for six months. Peterson said she would support the screening of the deck but saw a problem with the extensive hardcover and the turnaround. She said she agrees with the Planning Commission recommendations on the trade -offs, especially in light of the fact that there is already a 2-car garage on the property. Guttormson asked, if he eliminated the screened porch and requested the garage, whether • he would be allowed to keep the road to the lake and lakeside deck. Kelley informed him that the road to the lake must be eliminated. He told Guttormson that he was upset that the applicant was back before the Council after having previously approved improvements and felt taken advantage of He indicated the applicant did not uphold the terms of the resolution and proceeded to perform the work. Kelley said the applicant was aware of the rules that had been established through the process. Guttormson said he got the permits for the work that was done. Goetten informed the applicants that she would like to see the Council and applicant come to a mutual agreement but did feel the loop driveway must be eliminated. She said the applicant should comply with the options presented by Staff and supports the garage with removals as noted. Jabbour asked the applicant if he wanted to have a motion on the application or if he preferred the application be tabled. Guttormson asked that the application be tabled. Jabbour said changes to the application would require review by the Planning Commission. Jabbour moved, Goetten seconded, to table Application #2238 until the applicant is ready to take further action. City Attorney Barrett will draft a dated letter to that effect and send to the applicant. Vote: Ayes 4, Nays 0. • 6 MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD ON AUGUST 25,1997 • ( * #5) #2255 RICK RICE, 2700 KELLY AVENUE - VARIANCE - RESOLUTION NO. 3945 Goetten moved, Kelley seconded, to approve Resolution No. 3945. Vote: Ayes 4, Nays 0. (#6) #2264 JANET KIERNAN,1491 SHORELINE DRIVE - VARIANCES - RESOLUTION NO. 3946 The applicant was present, along with Alan Christy. Gaffron reported that an application for additions to the existing residence was reviewed and approved one year ago, but plans have since been revised. The Planning Commission recently reviewed the application as well. The property located by Bracketts Point was planned for remodeling with additions to the garage. Existing structure and hardcover were reviewed. At the time of applying for the building permit, applicant proposed to remove the entire structure and begin anew with new construction. The plan included encroachment of the side and 75' setback. The Planning Commission had recommended that this new construction should include moving the house back from the 75' setback. The current revised plan will make use of some portion of the existing structure. The applicant will make use of 40% of the existing structure. After the additions, the new • structure will be 80% new and 20% existing. The plan was reviewed with the building inspectors. Gaffron noted that the code does not specify a percentage of existing building that must remain to be considered as a remodeling. The plans include a side setback encroachment. The 75' encroachment will remain as exists. The average lakeshore setback encroachment will change as the nature of the bulk and mass of the structure will increase in that setback. Gaffron indicated that the Planning Commissioners felt this change would not impact the neighboring properties due to its relation to and topography of the land. Staff recommended approval of the application subject to the conditions previously recommended by the Planning Commission. These conditions include no change to the side setback, a change in the driveway, addition of a garage stall, meeting the 15' street setback, and 27.6% hardcover in the 75 -25V setback for a 0.1% increase. The applicant presented a computer scanned photograph of the area depicting what the improvements will look like. Tree coverage was removed to allow the residence to be viewed. However, the actual tree coverage will remain. Alan Christy said no additional encroachment will occur into the setback of the footprint and only in volume for the second story. 0 Jabbour was informed that height was not an issue. 7 MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD ON AUGUST 25,1997 (#6 - #2264 Janet Kiernan - Continued) • Kiernan showed pictures of the property. Christy said the resolution as proposed is acceptable to Kiernan. He noted if the municipal sewer easement is included in the resolution, the easement should be restricted to a 20' width. City Engineer, Tom Kellogg, said the sewer easement referred to is one being negotiated for the extreme northeast corner of the property to allow a directionally bored 8" pipe to be installed to provide service to the property east of Kiernan. A back hoe would be used for the sewer installation otherwise, resulting in a 20-25' deep hole with a steep bank. The easement would decrease that digging to 10`. Christy said he has not seen the legal description for the easement and would approve it in the extreme northeast corner but would like it clarified. Jabbour said the sewer easement should be independent from the application. Barrett agreed with Jabbour. Kelley said he was concerned with the 801/6/20 1/6, new /old, structure percentage. Gaffron clarified that the 40% of the current structure would remain. Kelley said he opines that the construction would result in a new structure. He would support the front and side • yard setback variances. He would not support encroachment of the 75' setback. Goetten noted that the code does not specify a policy regarding how much of an old structure is required to remain in order to be considered as a remodel instead of new construction. Peterson remarked, that without this policy, she supported the application. Jabbour acknowledged that the City should make a policy determination on this issue. Goetten indicated that if foundation was removed, the structure should be behind the 0- 75' setback; but without a policy regarding the foundation in place, she would support the Planning Commission recommendation. Jabbour moved, Peterson seconded, to approve Resolution No. 3946 per the Planning Commission recommendation, but excluding the condition regarding a sewer easement. Gaffron indicated that a 10' corner of the house would remain in the 0-75' setback. Jabbour verified that no additional structure would occur in the 0 -75' setback. Gaffron said the construction would be remodeling only and no expansion of the footprint in the 0-75' zone and in the south side setback area. Most of the foundation is being used in that area. Vote: Ayes 3, Nays 1, Kelley. • 8 MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD ON AUGUST 25,1997 ( #7) #2267 JOHN O'SULLIVAN, 2380 SHADYWOOD ROAD - COMMERCIAL SITE PLAN APPROVAL Jabbour moved, Peterson seconded, to table Application 92267 due to the absence of the applicant. Vote: Ayes 5, Nays 0. (*#8) #2268 ROBERT CALLAN, 2995 DEER RUN TRAIL - VARIANCE - RESOLUTION NO. 3947 Goetten moved, Kelley seconded, to approve Resolution No. 3947. Vote: Ayes 4, Nays 0. ( #9) #2272/2277 WYATT MOE,1230 SPRUCE PLACE - SUBDIVISION OF A LOT LINE REARRANGEI%IENT - VACATION - VARIANCES - RESOLUTION NO. 3948, 3963, AND 3950 Nancy Moe was present, along with JoEllen Hun. Gaffron indicated that Staff has prepared a final resolution for approval for Council review, instead of conceptual approval only. Huff said she has not read the resolution, but applicant agrees with the discussion, • conditions, and the Planning Commission recommendation. Gaffron said the application is a metes and bounds subdivision. It includes vacation of a dedicated portion of right -of -way and park with another portion to be rededicated. It also includes a subdivision of a lot line rearrangement to balance out the size of the two lots. Required are lot area, lot width, and hardcover variances for the southern lot. The two lots are sewered and are separate tax parcels. The cabin on the southern property will be replaced with a new home. The vacation will accommodate Spruce Place, and provision will be made for a sewer line easemeaL is The lot to the south will increase to about 112 acre. The northern lot will decrease down to 2/3 acre. While the setbacks for the south lot will be met, hardcover will be at 37.7% in the 75 -250' setback, where 25% is allowed. This is not unusual in this LR -1B Zoning District. The Planning Commission was in agreement with the tradeoffs. The resolution provides the findings and conditions and includes the vacation and rededication. 9 MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD ON AUGUST 25,1997 (#9 - 92272/2277 Wyatt Moe - Continued) • Kelley asked if the existing house on the north will provide for an easement for access to the southern lot. Gaffron informed him that the access easement could be abandoned and a driveway built instead. Kelley asked if this would be allowed. Gaffron said yes, but it would be dependent on the hardcover. Kelley questioned whether this Council would make that approval. Gaffron indicated the driveway relocation could be accomplished without a variance but not if the northern house is expanded. Kelley questioned whether the property owner would use the driveway as a hardship. He said he was attempting to visualize what might occur in the property in the future. Hurr reiterated that the lots are two separate parcels. She also indicated that the applicant is granting a drainage easement, for facilities which were built at their expense The application will result in a 15' easement and tie together some loose ends. (Flint arrived at this time, 8:15 p.m.) Goetten said the subdivision is an improvement for the property. 7abbour asked that the record note to future ownership that this approval might self - impose a firture hardship if it does not have utilization of the driveway. Gaffron clarified for the record that if a long driveway is created, it may create a self - imposed hardship. Peterson mov-J, Goetten seconded, to approve Resolution No. 3948 per subdivision of a • lot line rearrangement. Vote: Ayes 4, Nays 0. Peterson moved, Goetten seconded, to approve Resolution No. 3963, for lot area, lot width, and hardcover variances for Wyatt and Nancy Moe at 1220 Loma Linda Avenue and 1230 Spruce Place. Vote: Ayes 4, Nays 0. Peterson moved, Goetten seconded, to approve Resolution No. 3950, a vacation of dedicated public roads and park with rededication as noted. Vote: :Ayes 4, Nays 0. ( * #10) #2274 BRYCE AND MARY PAT PETERSON, 2829 CASCO POINT ROAD - VARIANCES - RESOLUTION NO. 3949 Goetten moved, Kelley seconded, to adopt Resolution No. 3949. Vote: Ayes 4, Nays 0. ( #11) #2282 TOM TERRY FOR VALERIE PETERSON, 1125 NORTH ARM DRIVE - VARIANCE - PUBLIC HEARING 8:21 -8:27 P.M. - RESOLUTION NO. 3951 The Affidavit of Publication and Certificate of Mailing were noted. The applicant was represented by Tom Terry. 10 40 MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD ON AUGUST 25,1997 • ( #1 I - #2282 Tom Terry for Valerie Peterson - Continued) Gaffron reported that the public hearing was to review an application requiring Iot area and lot width variances for construction of a new residence to replace one that was destroyed by fire. The 26,292 s.f property is in the LR 1B Zoning District, where 43,560 s.f is required. Lot width of 85' is substandard to the 140' required. The survey shows the garage and driveway and proposed house. The residence will meet the I Y side setback on the north and be at 12' to the south. Setbacks are met. Hardcover in the 75- 254' setback needs to be confirmed at 30 0/6. Gaffron believes the 0.04% overage is resolvable. Staff recommended approval. Tom Terry said he thought the hardcover requirement was met as area was removed from the driveway. Jabbour asked that this occur. Terry indicated that the old house did not meet the requirement. There were no public continents, and Jabbour closed the public hearing. Kelley moved, Goetten seconded, to approve Resolution No. 3951. Vote_ Ayes 5, Nays 0. Terry asked the Council to waive the variance fee. Jabbour said this would require review and verification of the occurrences. He asked Moorse whether the facts would justify the waiver. Moorse said there was a delay in determining the need for a variance, but, the fact remains that variances are required. Jabbour opined that the applicant should pay the fee for the variance. Terry said the delay cost about two weeks of additional time and cost noting the variance fee of $225. Jabbour indicated that any waiver of the fee would require a thorough investigation and did not support the waiver. Peterson, Goetten, Flint, and Kelley supported the variance fee. No motion was made for a variance waiver. ( #12) VARIANCE FOR DAVID AND JODI RAHN,1385 REST POINT ROAD David Rahn was present. Gappa reported that the variance was previously approved for remodeling and addition of the subject residence. The building inspector brought concerns forward regarding the work in progress. The existing cabin is located in the 0 -75' setback, and the variance was for an addition to square off the residence and add a second story. It called for the residence to be slab -on- grade. Floor plans were shown as well as pictures as the property was viewed at the time of inspection. It was felt that the amount of removals was more extensive than projected, the building was jacked up, and more courses of block were • being added to the foundation. 11 MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD ON AUGUST 25,1997 ( #12 - Variance for David and Jodi Rahn - Continued) • Gappa indicated that the two additional courses of block were added after the stop work order was issued. He said the stop work order was issued because the construction was not occurring according to what was permitted under the building permit. Jabbour inquired about a problem that arose with the fireplace. David Rahn said a tree fell on the fireplace during the July 14 storm and showed the resulting pictures. Rahn said he attended the meeting to hear the discussion regarding the issue. He questioned the stop work order. He indicated that the concrete company did not see the stop work order posted. Jabbour informed him that this issue was with the Building Department and not the Council. The Council can only discuss the house, its location, and its size. Rahn explained that the two courses of block was only added where it went into the porch as the floor joists were only inches away from the ground. He received a recommendation to elevate it two courses to obtain a separation from the grade. He said this recommendation came from his engineer. Rahn said the letter from his engineer, dated 8/7/97, showed two courses of block were being added. The engineer had made the point that, in order for the existing foundation to be in conformance, core fill would have to be added. Jabbour said he saw the issues as being the existing residence is located in the 0.75' • setback and the other land on the property being in the flood plain. The two considerations were the location and what exists. Jabbour indicated that based on the major rehabilitation taking place, it would be difficult to save any portion of the residence. He considered the residence as being new construction. Bruce Vang said Staff did not feel Rahn was intending to deceive the City but there was nothing worth saving on the residence. Jabbour said Rahn should not attempt to save a few pieces of wood for the sake of trying to preserve what the City sees as use of existing structure. Jabbour informed Rahn that the Building Inspector feels there is no house left. Rahn said he disagreed but would work with the Building Department. He said he thought what remained of the residence was what was to remain but would do all that was necessary to allow the project to continue. Goetten noted that she did not vote for the project initially and thought problems would occur. Goetten said the occurrences result in a major change to the application and should be reviewed again by the Planning Commission. 12 MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD ON AUGUST 25,1997 • ( #12 - Variance for David and Jodi Rahn - Continued) Jabbour asked Counsel if the resolution allows the applicant to continue as he is doing and remain in compliance. Barrett said the Council needs to determine whether the premise of the resolution, which is allowing additional structure to the existing residence, is occurring. He noted that if it is determined to be new construction, a lot area variance would also be required in addition to the variances approved. Kelley noted the difficult issues at hand and differing viewpoints. Jabbour said the discussion is not to review the application but to determine whether the approved application is being diverted from. Kelley said he believes it has changed. Peterson said she does not believe that was Rahn!s intention. Rahn noted that to a certain extent, the City required the engineering that occurred. He sees the only issue as being the two courses of block added. Kelley stated that this brings up the issue that engineering should occur prior to approval of an application. If the facts had been known prior to the approval, he questioned • whether the decision would have been different. Kelley said these facts should have been known. C7 Vang said he would like to correct the order of events. According to the resolution, the Council directed an inspection of the foundation. Staff required the engineer to review the foundation and found it to be structurally sound but not meeting the 42" depth. A plan was developed to provide additional underpinning. Kelley said that issue should have been discussed before the Planning Commission and Council review and may have changed the judgments made. Jabbour said he feels the process should be done in the building permit process as it creates an added burden on the property owner. He noted surveying is expensive and with the engineering, the applicant could pay a large sum and then receive a denial. He feels conditions should be placed on the approval in terms of what checkpoints need to be met. Kelley said the issue is what occurs when these problems are found during the project that Staff says is different from that approved by Council resulting in the Council becoming caught inbetween. 13 MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD ON AUGUST 25,1997 ( #12 - Variance for David and Jodi Rahn - Continued) • Jabbour suggested no building permit be granted until the conditions to be met are known eliminating creating the problem. He said the question remaining is not whether the project should be approved but whether what was approved is what is there. Kelley responded that in that scenario, what was approved is being met. He indicated that Rahn is attempting to gain the residence within the footprint and on blocks. He feels the applicant is trying to meet what the Council wanted. Jabbour responded that removing three quarters of a house is not the same. Jabbour said he is not saying the owner should not get what the building code asks for, but the Council has to make a determination of its original intent and whether the applicant diverted from that intention. Jabbour asked Rahn when the storm occurred that resulted in damage to the fireplace. Rahn said it occurred about the time he had received application approval. Rahn said when the floor joists were opened, he determined the floor had to be elevated to be in compliance with code. Without doing this step, he would not have been in compliance. Rahn said any further delays would create a hardship for him, and he is willing to do whatever is necessary to be allowed to continue. He indicated that he disagrees that only a small piece of floor remains. • Jabbour indicated that Staff will continue to monitor the construction. Jabbour said the Council will not get involved even if it would like to. He indicated that it is Staffs duty to monitor the situation to protect the Council viewpoint. He noted that the Council would most likely not change the approval due to the need to preserve the flood plain. Jabbour moved, Peterson seconded, to approve the continuation of the construction with further removals if required to assure proper completion of the residence at that location. Jabbour said he wants Rahn to be able to remove all of the building if necessary. Flint clarified that this would meet option #2 given to the Council. Jabbour concurred. Option #2 states: "Allow work to proceed. under Resolution #3926 with further removals as deemed necessary by the building official to assure the best possible end product." Kelley asked to review the motion noting that the property is sewered, the building location is the best spot on the lot for a residence, and questioned whether this would have received a variance. He questioned whether the applicant would have received a variance if all of the building was required to be torn down. With the house being found unsatisfactory, he questioned whether the work would be allowed to continue even if the entire residence was removed. is 14 MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO CITY COUNCIL. MEETING HELD ON AUGUST 25,1997 • ( #12 - Variance for David and Jodi Rahn - Continued) Flint said he would support the motion as the facts laid out show the applicant acted in good faith. He indicated there was a mutual misunderstanding of the facts and an act of God occurred. If this had not happened, he would recommend the Planning Commission again review it. Vote: Ayes 4, Nays 1, Goetten. Goetten said she felt the decision was outragts. If the residence has to be demolished, Goetten said the Council has always required the residence to be moved back behind the 75' setback line. She feels this decision erases that stance and allows people not to be held to that requirement. Jabbour asked that the record show that the majority of the remaining portion of the property is in the flood plain. (The meeting was recessed for five minutes.) (Mayor /Council Report precedes the City Attorney Report.) (Engineer's Report, items #13 -15, follow the City Administrator's Report.) • CITY ADMINISTRATORS REPORT L� ( #I5) CASCO COVE ROAD MAINTENANCE UPDATE Moorse reported that this item was being discussed as a result of public comments made at the July 28 Council Meeting regarding the poor condition of Casco Cove Road. Mike Barrett had requested at that meeting that the City take responsibility for ownership and maintenance of the road. Staff reviewed the matter and identified the issues as related in the memo by Gappa. According to the Comprehensive Plan pertaining to Urban Transportation, urban streets are to be maintained by the City. Moorse spoke with City Attorney Barrett regarding legal responsibility. He indicated that he would generally believe in cases as this that begin as a private road and become acquired by the City, the City would not be required to take over maintenance as the road has always been maintained privately. Shore Hills Drive and Dakota Avenue are two other urban roads that are not maintained by the City. Residents along Dakota Avenue have requested the City to take over maintenance. All other urban streets are maintained by the City. 15 MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD ON AUGUST 25, 1997 (#15 - Casco Cove Road Maintenance - Continued) asked for the explanation on how the C" came into ownership of the road. • Jabbour as xp City F Moorse said the piece of property with the road on it became tax forfeit, and Staff had to decide whether to acquire it or let someone else. It was decided that the City should take ownership to preserve access to properties. Jabbour questioned whether this same situation could occur with outlots designed for future roads. Kelley said he also had this question citing the example of the outlot for his property- Moorse indicated a two part answer. The City is attempting to have the County properly classify the private roads as a "K" classification, where taxes are not all allocated to the roads, to avoid what happened to the road outlot in Lafayette Ridge neighborhood_ The City did not take that property as the subdivision needed it for their road. Jahbour stated that the City had taken the stand that roads will not be taken over unless it is built to City standards, in an urban area. With other similar outlots in the same situation, Jabbour said the City should have a definite policy. Goetten asked when tax forfeit parcels arise, if the cities have to make a policy to take or give the property back Moorse said the cities have a 90-day period to decide and then it goes for sale. Moorse said the City requested the County to put a hold on the Lafayette • Ridge property in order to work with the homeowners association. Otherwise, it would have been made available for purchase. Jabbour asked what the life expectancy would be for a road like Casco Cove that was built to 1997 standards. Moorse indicated it should last about 20 years with good maintenance. After a total of 40 years, reconstruction would most likely be. necessary. Kelley cited an example of the private road his residence is on having had to be overlaid twice in the last 15 years and only used by 11 homes. Moorse said the Council may want the engineer to do a more in -depth construction review of private roads to ensure at least a 20 year life span. Kellev received confirmation from Moorse that roads are supposed to be built to City standards. It was noted that there are different standards for roads within the City as they have been built in different time periods when different standards were in effect. Cook indicated that there are examples of different bases used and soils result in differences as well. Kelley said he would support the City taking over the maintenance of the three roads mentioned. • 16 MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD ON AUGUST 25,1997 • ( #15 - Casco Cove Road Maintenance - Continued) Moorse asked Council to discuss the roads noting Dakota Avenue is new and Shore Hills Drive residents may not wish the City to take over maintenance as it is in good condition. Casco Cove, in its poor condition, may require not only maintenance but significant upgrade and correction to some portions and overlay elsewhere. Moorse said the cost would be significant. He noted there is no program in place for major reconstruction of existing streets. The road would be added to the list of roads requiring work. He indicated there are other roads in similar condition on the list. Flint said he is of the opinion that the City should not take over roads that are not built to City standards. He noted Dakota Avenue will be to standards but paid for by assessments. Jabbour said the road work was City subsidized. Flint suggested Casco Cove be brought to City standard and then taken over by way of assessment. Jabbour indicated the Comprehensive Plan is binding in its action or an amendment will be required noting the distinctions made regarding rural and urban roads. He cited the incident of Old Beach Road. Jabbour agreed the City should not take on a liability, but should have brought the road to City standard in 1987 when it was taken over. He noted it could not be brought. to current standard in the wooded area. Cook concurred. Flint said he was in agreement with the explanation made by Moorse on why the road • was taken over in order to protect access for residences. He indicated the road is still that of those residents and should not be taken over by the City for maintenance without being brought to standard. He noted the ownership was done to protect the interest of the residents. Jabbour said he agreed with Flint but is of the opinion that the 10 years of subsequent use should be considered and value depreciated. Peterson said she believes 50% of the fife span for the road has been used_ Goetten asked if the next step should follow that train of thought. Peterson inquired what the prior standard was for that road. Moorse indicated that not all roads are built to the standard width but should have a good base and 3" of bituminous. Kelley noted that the road would then not be to City standards. Flint concurred that the standard was different than what currently exists. Gaffron indicated that the standards adopted with the subdivision code only go back to 1980. Jabbour asked, if the road was taken over in 1987 and built to City standards, what . would have been the cost and what depreciation would have occurred. Peterson, while agreeing with this thought, noted the standards would have been different. Moorse • indicated the road would have been about 8" of Class 5 and 3" of asphalt but not to the current width requirements. 17 MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD ON AUGUST 25, 1997 ( #16 - Casco Cove Road Maintenance - Continued) Kelley asked what the condition is of the road. He was informed that the low area would • require drainage improvements and excavation. The remaining portion would need an overlay. The sewer was installed in 1966 and road rebuilt at that time. The road is now coming close to the end of its fife expectancy. Kelley clarified that the road was assessed in 1966 as part of the sewer project. Kelley opined that the City should do what marginally can be done and add the road to the list of roads for repairs. He suggested Staff classify the needs and fix any major potholes. Goetten asked where the decision is made to fix a road. Jabbour questioned whether the City should take the road only if brought up to standard, or as is. He believes it should be taken somewhere inbetween due to its use since time of City acquisition. Gappa reported that a contractor quoted an estimated $20,000 to repair the road. Jabbour questioned whether the residents would be interested in an assessment of one - half that amount or whether they would prefer a temporary patch and the road be added to the road repair list_ • The $20,000 would not be a total reconstruction. It would include replacing the base in the low area and overlaying the entire street. The overlay would last about 10 years. Gappa told Jabbour that the road could be blade patched at a cost of about $500. The road would then be plowed by the City and added to the major repair list. Gappa said the road could be fixed now as suggested by Jabbour earlier with a portion paid by the City and assessed back to the residents. Jabbour reiterated there would be a 50% depreciation by this time from when it was acquired. He noted there were only 8 homes on the road. Kelley suggested the Council make a determination whether the road should be a City road and allow time for the homeowners to talk about what they would like to see occur, whether to patch or totally repair as noted above. Jabbour noted an assessment hearing would be required if the road repair was done and assessed. He reiterated the distinction in the Comprehensive Plan regarding urban roads and maintenance by the City. Goetten said the distinction should then be made on all three roads. Jabbour indicated that the other two roads are not in need of repair. Goetten questioned whether the determination taking over the road in 1987 was of a different criteria. r1 U 18 MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO CITY COUNCIL. MEETING HELD ON AUGUST 25,1997 • ( #16 - Casco Cove Road Maintenance - Continued) Kelley moved, Jabbour seconded, to take over Casco Cove Road as a City road for snow plowing and maintenance. Minimum maintenance would occur unless residents are willing to be assessed for major repair. Flint said he is not in favor of taking action and then deciding what should occur_ He said the road should not be taken over unless it is brought to City standard. He indicated he understands the ambiguity of the situation and would not object to some agreement but a determination of some cost should be made to bring to the budget table. Flint noted that the City does not tax for new roads as a policy, only patch. He feels residents will be misled into thinking the road will be improved. Jabbour agreed but noted the Comprehensive Plan must be considered as well as the fact that the road was taken over in 1987. It was suggested that the cost should be established to repair the road and prorated in order to allow the residents to know the cost and accelerate the repair if they so desire through assessment. Jabbour said he feels it was a mistake taking the road over in 1987. Flint said he did not believe that is what occurred. He believes ownership was taken of the land but not the roadway. Goetten noted if residents have a private road and want to see improvements made, and turn it over to the City, they must bring the road up to City standard. • Moorse said several items have been discussed regarding maintenance of a private road, and if the road needs to be brought to City Standard before being taking over. However, he noted that is in reference to a private road in the rural area of the City, and Casco Cove Road is not in the rural area. is Barry Glassman, 2914 Casco Cove Road, indicated that the State took over the road in 1981. The City received the deed in 1987 when it requested the road for City street and sewer. Glassman said he moved into the neighborhood six years ago. He indicated the road was in good condition 10 years ago and has since deteriorated. He was told the City owned the road. The residents felt they did not have the right to maintain it as it is not their road but the City's. Glassman said he feels the road looks more like an alley. He would like to see it comparable to other roads on Casco Point, such as Ivy Place, which is 16 wide. Glassman said he cannot speak for the neighbors and would have to talk with them regarding an assessment. He feels the road should be maintained by the City in a manner comparable to other roads in the area. 19 MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD ON AUGUST 25,1997 ( 916 - Casco Cove Road Maintenance - Continued) Jabbour informed him that the City policy must be followed. He reported that if it is • taken over, it must be to City standard. He suggested the possibility of vacating the road and becoming a private road. Jabbour asked Glassman and neighbors to consider his viewpoint of using the cost and condition of the road in 1987 as a guideline. Glassman said he would speak with others in the neighborhood. Jabbour indicated that the comments made by Flint are accurate. Glassman referred to the comments regarding the road made by Gaffron. He noted that there are public utilities in the road. Jabbour said that can continue through the use of utility easements. He informed Glassman he did not want to create false hopes. Glassman said he would like to see the road snowplowed. Jabbour noted that rural roads are all plowed by the residents. The vote for the motion to take over responsibility for the maintenance of the road was: Ayes 4, Nays 1, Flint. Jabbour reiterated that only blade patching would occur at this point. Kelley suggested there be a one month period in which the residents must respond if major repair is desired. By the end of that time period, if Staff has not heard from the neighbors, the road will be blade patched and snow plowing will occur during appropriate times. ( #17) CITY POLICY REGARDING BURNING PERMITS • Moorse reported that a discussion ensued at the last Council meeting regarding the policy on brush burning and burning permits and how it relates to State requirements and other cities' regulations. Moorse said he found that historically the WCA had authority over burning permits and was very strict in its regulations. The City followed the guidelines set by the MYCA regarding the burning of brush, remaining strict in its regulations regarding burning. The DNR then took over authority. Their viewpoint is more liberal. Other cities have followed in loosening their regulations but Orono has not done so. Jabbour inquired whether the fire department is aware of the changes that were made. He said he has discussed the topic with the Long Lake Fire Chief, who has indicated that the City does not need to be as strict in their regulations. Jabbour noted that this contradicts the recommendations made by Staff. He feels there is a major distinction between what should occur in urban vs. rural areas. Jabbour said brush burning should only occur in rural areas if the regulations once again allow this to occur. Goetten said she would like to see burning approved noting the need for the activity in emergency situations. Goetten would like to see residents have the opportunity to burn. She noted there were 97 requests for burning permits this year. 0 20 MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD ON AUGUST 25,1997 • (#17 - City Policy Regarding Burning Permits - Continued) Kelley said he feels allowing burning would be very dangerous and should be at least 59 from any building. Jabbour indicated there are differences in the sizes of properties. Goetten indicated that an inspector used to come to the properties and inspect the areas. Kelley questioned whether inspections should still occur with a burning permit. Goetten said inspections should occur. Kelley asked if the building inspector has standards. Moorse said they are Iaid out in the application form. Kelley said he feels the conditions on the application form are not strict enough. He noted that Orono has become reforested and is concerned with trees being burned down and brush fires occurring. It was noted that an 8'x4' area is presently permitted for burning. He noted it is not stipulated how big a circumference around the pile should be free of debris. He questioned how the building inspector is to make that determination. Peterson also questioned who would police the fires. Kelley indicated there will be many more fires if permits are more easily obtained. He does not want to see Staff involved in making the many determinations and would like to see more definite standards and conditions, such as wind velocity. Kelley said he is • concerned with the fast spreading of fires. Goetten asked Kelley what conditions he would like to see in effect. Kelley said he is not an expert. He also indicated he is not totally against allowing burning but wants to be sure that there are adequate standards and conditions. Kelley said he would like to see the policy format redone. Jabbour saw the problem with not allowing burning and people doing it anyways. He would like to encourage residents to ask for permission and enable the City to provide expertise on the issue to the residents. It noted that a fire could burn for several days if confined to an 8' circle. A time limit was suggested. The fire code should determine the fire separation without requiring a fire wall with a 50' setback for so many feet. He feels the size of the fire should be in direct proportion to the distance from the building. Jabbour asked the Council if they were willing to amend the burning ordinance and allow Staff to study the issue further. Bob Gehrman suggested there were two issues to consider; the potential for loosening the rules regarding open burning; and for those who are unable to burn due to lot size, the need to provide for some type of disposal site or burning site. 21 MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD ON AUGUST 25,1997 ( #17 - City Policy Regarding Burning Permits - Continued) • Jabbour acknowledged the need for an emergency program to deal with as an exception to the rule. He said the City should probably consider a site that would coincide with the clean -up days. Peterson said she is in favor of a change but is not sure what the change should be. She questioned whether it would be appropriate to have a distinction between rural and urban. Jabbour said he would like to see the distinction related to the distance between the property line and adjacent buildings. Kelley said, while he is in favor of reviewing the policy, he is not necessarily in favor of changes. He does not want the responsibility left to the building staff to deal with. Kelley said he would like to see a fire marshal hired as previously discussed, who would be better able to handle such situations. He would like to see the work contracted out and paid by an hourly rate for buildings, marinas, and burning. Jabbour noted that Staffs recommendation is to maintain the current policy. He indicated it would be necessary to let Staff know why Council feels otherwise to allow them to come back with another recommendation. Moorse indicated to Goetten that people are not charged for burning. Peterson voiced • concern with residents going ahead and burning while others make the request and are denied. Goetten said that is why she asked if there would be a charge for burning. She said she would not be against a possible charge. Moorse indicated that this could become a workload issue. Jabbour indicated that he does not see this issue becoming large as he feels there will be limited desire for such burning. Goetten agreed that there probably won't be slot of requests for burning but acknowledged there are emergency situations where burning is needed. Bob Gehrman suggested the inspector could inspect the wood to ensure it is dry for a quicker burn and cleaner burn. Goetten suggested monitoring how many more permits are requested. Flint said he world like to further investigate the matter noting its complexity. He indicated the time of year is very critical. He would like to see if there are rules that would make sense. Goetten agreed with Flint. Bob Gehrman asked the Council to review the potential of providing a refuse site for those than are unable to burn or prefer not to bum. Jabbour suggested this occur during clean up days and adding additional clean up days to the calendar. 22 NUNUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD ON AUGUST 25,1997 • ( #17 - City Policy Regarding Burning Permits - Continued) Goetten indicated that residents will tend to stock pile their brush if they have to take it a long distance. Goetten said she feels the drop off site has been reasonable in cost. Kelley said he felt the City should make that provision. Bob Gehrman indicated that he is referring to waste wood and not construction material. ( #18) APPEAL OF AN ADMINISTRATIVE DECISION FOR A DRAINFIELD LOCATION Steve Weckman, Septic Inspector, reported that the review is an appeal of an administrative decision regarding a drainfield location for the replacement of a septic system Theresa and Michael Eastman have applied for a building permit in order to build a garage and small addition to their residence. During the review of the septic, the septic system was found to be non - conforming due to the lack of a 3 foot separation from the seasonal ground water level. Weckman said Staff s decision was the best solution for the septic, and the septic system work should be done in conjunction with the improvements. Weckman said the Eastman's are asking for the septic system to be placed in front of the residence instead of the rear. The front site is classified as experimental due to the soils. • The wetlands were found to have been filled with 3 -112' of clay fill. Underneath that clay is peat which, along with fill, cannot be used for septic site material as it is unpredictable how it will work. Due to its compacting, it is difficult to determine the long range acceptance of waste. Weckman also noted that the soil is mottled within 6" of the surface indicating saturation. He indicated that it takes one foot of unsaturated soil to treat sewage. Weckman said the preliminary work performed with a designer shows the area in back of the residence having good soil. It is close to the residence and the well but the soils should be able to accept the sewage. Weckman expects the remaining standards will be met. Mrs. Eastman indicated there are substantial differences in cost between the septic sites for the back and front of the property. She presented the Council with a handout with this information. She indicated that the location as requested by Staff would be financially difficult. Flint remarked that the Eastman's should not be forced to put m a new septic system if their system is only non - conforming but not failing. Weckman responded that the Council reviewed where sewering might better serve residents and this resulted in the 10 hot spots. He indicated that the area where the • Eastman's reside is not included on this list. 23 MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD ON AUGUST 25,1997 ( #1S - Appeal of Administrative Decision for Drainfield Location - Continued) h stem is non- conformin • Kelley asked why the system . Weckman informed him that it is due to g the lack of a 3' separation. The residence is within 1000' of the lake, and so it has a two- year time period to replace the system. Properties outside of the 1000' shoreland district have a 10 -year period in which to replace non - conforming systems. Mrs. Eastman noted their property is near the Saga Hill area being considered for sewer. Weckman responded that the property is at least one -half mile away depending on where sewer would come in. Goetten acknowledged that the Eastman property was not within the hot spot areas. Weckman noted that the parcels are also larger in this area. The Eastman property is 1.22 acres. Jabbour asked Weckman if the building permit triggered the need for a new system. Weckman noted that if the system was discharging to the surface, the system would be required to be replaced immediately. The Shoreland Ordinance is a separate entity that triggers the upgrade automatically if not maintained. Jabbour noted that the building permit is what triggered the resulting action. Mrs. Eastman asked where the septic system would be located if the prior owner had complied with the need for a new system. Weckman said they would probably have had to use the experimental area and the system would likely have failed. Weckman said he would not recommend that area for the septic when he cannot say it will work. He indicated the result may be the Eastman might have to have their system pumped out • about twice monthly, which is not prudent. Weckman said he looks for the best site first and an experimental site is the last option. Weckman said he believes the septic system as suggested would work. Mrs. Eastman responded that their contractor felt their experimental site would work with additional sand added. Jabbour clarified with Weckman that the need for the new system was due to the lack of a 3' separation and not because of a failing system. Jabbour noted that the State has considered changing the 3' separation requirement to 21 . He noted that properties outside of the 1000' shoreland area has received a 10 year moratorium on septic system replacement in these cases. Jabbour said he has changed his opinion regarding this issue and believes those within the shoreland area should be allowed the moratorium as well. Weckman responded that the 2' suggestion was a legislative decision and not a scientific one. Kelley said the issue is one of treating the residences in the 0 -1000' shoreland area the same as the 1000+' area and give them the same latitude of a 10 -year period for conforming. Mrs. Eastman informed Kelley that half of her lot is outside of the 1000' shoreland area. Weckman indicated that the house and septic are within the 1000' shoreland area. 24 • MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD ON AUGUST 25,199? Vml°o - Appeal ofnulrdydstr tive Decision for Drairifield Location - Continueu} • Kel!e;, asked ivh,»t the f »L-tg tuPrP a »d —bW Staffbelievess those within the g}inreiAnr ZrP^a, should conform. Gaffron responded that the DNR informed the City to make sure that the systems be upgraded and allow one year to comply. Kelley asked where the DNR now stands on the issue. Gaffron said he did not know. Jabbour indicated there are more failing systems in the out -state area. He said all of the residences should be allowed the 10 year grace period. Weckman responded that there is not mesh debate regarding the 3' separation and is only a f nancial matter. He. indicated it is Council's prerogative to change the code but noted that the 1000' shoreland regulations were to protect the lake. He indicated the code has always stipulated the 3' separation but allowed those not meeting it to be grandfathered in. Goetten asked how often the septic systems would be checked for sewage entering the lake if the code was changed in the shoreland area as suggested. Weckman said he has reviewed all systems installed prior to 1973 and is continuing on the remaining systems, in checking for the 3' separation. Goetten asked what would trigger Weckman to take the next step in checking for discharge. Weckman said he inspects all systems every 2 -3 years for failing systems. Jabbour noted that the Eastmans have a non - conforming system, not a failing system. Weckman indicated that it may be a matter of semantics as the State considers a system not meeting the 3' separation as failing while the City calls • that non-conforming. A system that is disch— arging is callod a imminent health hazard according to the State and called failing by the City. is Tabbn»r pc,Ll?ri the Co��r±c1 and �c�Pgtionpd whether the policy rc�iring a two -y?ar period for septic system replacement in the shoreland district could be changed at this time. Gaffron informed him that revising the Shoreland Regulations are part of the Zoning Ordinance requires Planning Commission review and a public hearing. Kelley said the City should go ahead with the zoning ordinance amendment process. He indicated the City is sewering more and more, and people are being caught up within the noliev &% the 1000' line goes through their properties. Goetten acknot pledged that the cost of a new system would be tremendous for the Eastmans, though acknowledged that economics should not be a consideration. Gaffron asked to clarify to the Council that there is no connection between the property in question and sewering Saga Hill area due to the distance and topography. Jabbour suggested the Eastman wait on installing a new system. Kelley noted that the same concern will occur elsewhere. 25 AMNUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD ON AUGUST 25, IM ( #I8 - Appeal of Administrative Decision for Drainfield Location - Continued) • Goetten noted that a building permit would not be issued until the decision regarding amending the shoreland ordinance was finalized. Mrs. Eastman noted it will be expensive to replace the system no matter where it is located. Kelley noted that the Eastman will eventually have to comply with the requirement fora new system and should be sure to inform a future buyer of the system's non - conformity. Staff was directed to begin the process of changing the ordinance. Mike Schulte, said he lives within a couple of miles of the Eastman. He said the Council has failed to see that the Eastmans had been notified that their property was substandard when they purchased it and it resulted in their purchasing additional property. If they had not purchased the additional property, Schulte said the new system would have been placed in the experimental area where they requested it to be located. They also would not have been required to have a variance. Jabbour clarified that the additional land was bought to bring their ,lot into conformity to standards, and they would otherwise not have had to go through this process. Schulte said he feels they should not have been required to do so. Jabbour informed him the Council must look at the land that is owned. He indicated that the Eastman acted in the spirit of Orono. • Schulte said the trigger to bring this issue to the forefront should have occurred earlier. Jabbour indicated that the title opinion should have presented the issue, but it is not the City's responsibility to report it. Schulte said the shed should have triggered it. Mrs. Eastman confirmed that a shed permit was taken out in 1995, and the survey done at that time indicated an addition was planned. Jabbour indicated that the prior owners were informed that they were to have conformed with a new system by December, 1995. He suggested the issue could be deferred at this time. Kelley noted that the Council was attempting to save the Eastman the money that would be spent on a new system at this time if they are willing to go through the process to change the ordinance. Mrs. Eastman reported there were foundation problems that need to be resolved as soon as possible and were planned for repair during the addition. Council suggested the Eastmans work with Staff regarding these issues_ CJ 2s MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD ON AUGUST 25,1997 • ( #18 - Appeal of Administrative Decision for Drainfield Location - Continued) Donna Hager, 4580 West Branch Road, who lives nest door to the Eastman, reported that Weckman came to her residence the day after the storm on July 15. At that time, there were four trees down and no electricity. Weckman took a soil sample and informed her the ground was saturated and a new septic system was required. She was informed that she had 10 years in which to comply. She questioned what this decision was based on due to the testing done immediately after a storm. Hager said she does not wish to replace the system if it is not necessary. Kelley noted that she has 10 years in which to comply and reported that he is in a similar situation. Jim Steffenson said he did not believe it was fair that the Eastmans had to go through this process as it should have been taken care of when the shed permit was issued. Jabbour reminded that the Eastman will not have to conform at this time. Jabbour said notification will occur in the future that they have 10 years in which to comply. A man identified by Jabbour as Rick questioned if the Planning Commission did not agree with allowing the shoreland area the 10 year grace period, whether this process will have to be gone through again. Jabbour informed him that he directed Staff to begin the process to change the ordinance, and the process involves both the Planning Commission and Council. • ENGINEER REPORT (Items 413 and 14 follow item #15.) ( #15) AMENDMENT TO PLANS FOR STUBBS BAY SEWER PROJECT Gappa reported that Mr. & Mrs. Terp were present, whose driveway is a concern as a result of the Stubbs Bay Sewer Project that was completed in 1992. The Terp's had a blacktopped driveway prior to the project. The driveway was on DNR right -of -way The City was unable to obtain a permit to do work on the DNR right -of -way which resulted in the driveway not heing allowed to he repaved. The TegA are requesting their driveway be repaved. No resolution has occurred. Gappa said he met with Martha Reger of the DNR, who said they were willing to give a long -term lease to the Terp's for a driveway, but have to have mitigation as federal funds were used. Gappa said agreement has been reached for moving the driveway location over and building a berm. The applicant has agreed to landscape and maintain the berm. Gappa said the question is whether the City should be. involved in the matter. • Jabbour noted that the parcel had been obtained from park funds and is glad to see it being resolved. 27 MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD ON AUGUST 25,1997 ( #15 Amendment to Stubbs Bay Sewer Project Plans - Continued) • Gappa reported that there is I W of right -of -way at this location. He asked Council if the City should move ahead to fix the driveway. He indicated he has spoken with a neighbor along Bederwood who has concern regarding the project and has asked to give public comments. He informed the neighbor that a public hearing was required for the berm. Goetten questioned that the public hearing was necessary because of both the change in the plans and the berm being over 100 c. y. Jabbour indicated, and all members agreed, that the Council is obligated to pay for the repair of the driveway as part of the sewer project. He directed Staff to hold the public hearing at the September 8 Council meeting. Mrs. Terp said her husband is a landscape designer and will make the berm aesthetically fit in with the area. Jabbour asked that the plan be given to Staff for use at the public hearing. ( #13) CHANGE ORDER #1 BAY RIDGE/BRACKETTS POINT SEWER PROJECT Kelley moved, Goetten seconded, to approve Change Order No. 1. Kelley asked who pays for the increases. Cook said the amount could be assessed as the residents waived • their rights to appeal the assessment amount. Kelley withdrew his motion Jabbour moved, Kelley seconded, to approve Change Order No. 1, Bracketts Point/Bay Ridge Sanitary Sewer Project, in the amount of $55,538. Staff was instructed to add this amount to the original special assessment subject to review by City Attorney Barrett. ( #14) CHANCE ORDER #5 NORTH LONG LAKE SEWER PROJECT Jabbour moved, Kelley seconded, to approve Change Order No. 5, North Long Lake/Long Lake Country Club Sanitary Sewer project, in the amount of $10,208. Vote: Ayes 5, Nays 0. MAYOR/COUNCM REPORT Jabbour said he received a notice from Shorewood Mayor Howard Bennis that he will be hosting the meeting regarding the MCWD. Flint reported attending the Ferndale Road public hearing. He indicated there was a lot of support for the trail. It was noted that the trail will be funded by MSA funds and the cost will be shared with the City of Plymouth. • 28 MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD ON AUGUST 25,1997 (Mayor /Council Report - Continued) • Flint indicated there was an issue from Plymouth residents regarding the road be' gar g being three lanes wide. Flint said Orono residents would probably prefer three lanes as the road carries alot of traffic. He feels it would be a mistake to upgrade the road inadequately. Kelley clarified that the desire is for a middle turn lane_ He questioned whether the cost sharing should be negotiated with Plymouth due to the amenities being included. Flint noted that the Orono residents also want the trail to be constructed. He had noted that the residences on the Plymouth side are closer to the road and appreciate the trail being located there. Gappa indicated that the cost share requires Council_ approval. He suggested a possible joint public hearing for comments and for approval by both Councils. Jabbour noted there are many smaller lots in Plymouth than in Orono. Kelley said the intersection at CoRd 6 is of most importance to him. He noted there is a steep slope at the intersection and asked how much of it will be regraded. Gappa indicated that the entire approach to Ferndale will be regraded. He said CoRd 6 is not part of this particular project. Kelley asked if fill would be required to be brought in. Gappa said it would for the landing zone. Kelley was informed that the landing zone • would be about 50.75'. Cook said it would depend on the impact on the area. Gappa noted that the road improvement would affect 100 homes in Orono and 300 homes in Plymouth. Kelley felt additional traffic would be traveling to the golf course. Flint said the western portion of Wayzata would also use this road. Gappa indicated the next step in the process is the feasibility report. Jabbour asked Moor.Se to speak with members of the Plymouth Council to determine the appropriate time for a joint meeting to be held as soon as possible. Jabbour noted the engineers and Mn/00T will be in attendance at the Thursday meeting regarding stormwater management. CITY ATTORNEY'S REPORT City Attorney Barrett had no report. ( * #19) LICENSES • There were no license applications. 29 MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD ON AUGUST 25,1997 (',20) BILIS Kelley seconded to approve payment of the All Funds Account. Vote: • Goetten moved, FF F 5'm Ayes 4, Nays 0. ADJOURNMENT Mayor 3abbour adjourned the meeting at 11:03 D-m. ATTEST: Dorothy M. Paulin, City Clerk Gabr; dabbour, NJ. — r 30 0 0