HomeMy WebLinkAbout08-12-1996 Council Minutes1
ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING
MINUTES FOR AUGUST 12, 1996
• ROLL
The Council met on the above mentioned date with the following members present:
Mayor Edward J. Callahan, Jr., Council Members J. Diann Goetten, Charles Kelley, and
Gabriel Jabbour. Council Member JoEllen Hurr was absent. Representing Staff were
City Administrator Ron Moorse, City Attorney Tom Barrett, Building and Zoning
Administrator Jeanne Mabusth, Assistant Zoning and Planning Administrator Michael
Gaffron, City Engineer Glenn Cook, and Recorder Sherry Frost. Mayor Callahan called
the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m.
( * #1) CONSENT AGENDA
Items #3, 6, 8, 9, 10, 13, 14, and 15 were added to the Consent Agenda.
Callahan moved, Kelley seconded, to approve the Consent Agenda as amended. Vote:
Ayes 4, Nays 0.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
( 42) REGULAR MEETING OF JULY 22, 1996
Callahan moved, Kelley seconded, to approve the Minutes of the Regular City Council
• Meeting of July 22, 1996. Vote: Ayes 4, Nays 0.
PARK COMMISSION COMMENTS
Park Commissioner Andrew McDermott thanked the Council for the Work Session
recently held. Key issues from the Work Session for the Park Master Plan were said to
be 1) evaluation of remaining large parcels of land for open space; 2) funding options to
include tax authority and outside funding for maintenance of parks and acquisition of
park land; 3) community play field for recreational needs and potential locations as well
as discussions with other west suburban communities regarding play field needs; and 4) a
tree planting program for parks and other property within the City. The Park
Commission will review trails for biking and walking at a later time to tie the trails
together in a general format. Park standards will also be reviewed.
McDermott reported that the Park Intern, Mike Schultz, has been doing an outstanding
job and would appreciate any extension of time available to maintain Schultz for further
review of the park system.
McDermott also reported that the Old Crystal Bay Road bike trail construction is now
out for bids. The Park Commission is concerned with the funding for the bike trail and
would like to see the curb and gutter paid for by other means than the Park Dedication
• Fund.
.-
1
MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO CITY COUNCIL
MEETING HELD ON AUGUST 12, 1996
(Park Commission Comments - Continued)
•
Callahan: said he recently spoke with Jim White of the Park Commission, who commented
on the outstanding members within the Commission.
Jabbour asked McDermott to consider other courses of action regarding funding for park
needs.
PLANNING COMMISSION COMMENTS
Commissioner Dale Lindquist was present but had no comments at this time.
Mayor Callahan expressed his regret over the resignation of Planning Commission Chair
Steve Peterson. Callahan moved, Goetten seconded, to appoint Dale Lindquist as Chair
of the Planning Commission_. Vote: Ayes 4,. Nays 0.. The Council will consider the
applicants for Planning Commissioner to fill the vacancy left by Peterson.
PUBLIC COMMENTS
Lloyd- Fairbanks; 90 Willow Drive, and neighbor, Ron Miller, asked the Council to
investigate the condition of the culverts on Willow Drive. Fairbanks said the road has
gotten progressively worse and has seen no improvements made since he spoke with
Gerhardson regarding the road last fall. He also suggested a stop sign be installed near •
Hackberry Park as there is clot of speeding of cars taking place when children are playing
nearby in the park.
Miller reported that the culverts near the park entrances and south of the bridge causes
cars to "bottom out ".
1Moorse said he would review the situation and phone the two gentlemen regarding
results. It was noted that the speed limit on Watertown Road is 40 mph. Fairbanks
suggested that the road be patrolled.
Kelley agreed that the speeding near the park was a problem and would appreciate the
matter being reviewed.
ZONING ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT
( * #3) #2153 BEN YOUNG, 3146 SIXTH AVENUE NORTH - VARIANCE -
RESOLUTION #3747
Callahan moved, Kelley seconded, to approve Resolution 43747. Vote: Ayes 4, Mays 0.
•
,t 2
MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO CITY COUNCIL
MEETING HELD ON AUGUST 12,1996
• (#4) #2131 LARRY KARKELA, 4149 HIGHWOOD ROAD - AFTER- THE -.FACT
VARIANCE - RESOLUTION #3748
Mabusth reported that the application is for an after - the -fact variance for an upper level
deck consisting of 65.5 sT The deck is an extension of a 3' wide walkway deck and is
located 21' in front of the average Lakeshore setback. The existing lower level deck is
31.6'. The upper level deck adds an additional 11.5 s.f. of new hardcover. There is a
slight structural coverage increase of 0.1% or 14.9 s.£ with the upper level deck.
The Planning Commission asked the applicant to reduce the lower level deck by 54 s.f
The proposed reduction is at 50.6 s.f. The applicant had asked that the reduction occur
at the corners of the lower level deck so as not to affect the existing supports. The
overall reduction in hardcover is from 41.6% to 40 %. Plastic underlayment was found
when inspecting the lower level deck and will be removed. Mabusth noted that the
neighbors on both sides of this property were in favor of the application.
The applicant had no additional comments_
Goetten was informed that a penalty fee was assessed as well as a building permit
penalty.
Callahan asked why the delay of time in the variance application from the time of deck
• construction. Karkela reported that he had been busy dealing with personal problems.
Jabbour moved, Kelley seconded, to approve Resolution #3748. Vote: Ayes 4, flays 0.
(#5) #2134 ROBERT ALBRECHT, 1810 SHADYWOOD ROAD - VARIANCE -
RESOLUTION #3749
Robert Albrecht and his attorney, Bob Mitchell, were present.
Callahan inquired if the applicant wished to await the arrival of Council Member Hurr
before proceeding with review of the application, which Mitchell declined.
Gaffron reported that the Council gave conceptual approval at their July 8 meeting. At
the July 22 meeting, the resolution for approval failed with a vote of 2:3. The application
was then tabled to allow the applicant to consult with his attorney. Gaffron said a denial
resolution was drafted, and the packet includes the approval resolution drafted prior to
the tabling of the application as well. Callahan noted the inclusion of two surveys, one
from the 1991 review and one provided by Mitchell.
CJ
.0 3
MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO CITY COUNCIL,
MEETING HELD ON AUGUST 12,1996
(#5 - #2134 Robert Albrecht - Continued)
is
Mitchell said the applicant is desirous of the deck and alluded to his letter written to the
Council informing them of why the deck should be approved. Mitchell noted the
correlation between the two surveys, the width of the driveway, the nearby homes with
similar decks, the approval of the neighbors, and the need for no additional variance and
lessening of the burden of hardcover on the City and it's ordinance. Mitchell said the
applicant did not grow up in the area and was unaware of the strict codes. He also noted
that the applicant was willing to make additional concessions and has agreed to reducing
the size of the lakeside deck.
Jabbour asked what the difference was between this application and the previous
application. Callahan noted that there was no additional hardcover proposed on the
Karkela application or any reference to limiting the hardcover on the property on any past
resolution as was present with this application. Mitchell commented that the total
hardcover would show a reduction with this proposal. Callahan reported that the
driveway was installed in 1991 for safety reasons. Mitchell deferred to the question of
pavers versus asphalt and the past was between the City and another owner. Callahan
informed Mitchell that this was the City's opportunity to correct mistakes made in the
past. Mitchell did not see why this owner should bear the consequences of differences
with a past owner.
Mitchell noted that the deck is located out of the lakeshore setback zone and the 0 -75' •
zone. Callahan responded that the applicant was in this particular situation because he
failed to apply for a building permit, which would have allowed the City to inform him of
the codes. Callahan said he had a difficult time requiring a property owner to remove
what has been built, but the rules were not followed and the 1991 Planning Commission
recommended that no additional hardcover be allowed. While agreeing that the property
was overburdened, Mitchell said if the issue was hardcover within prohibited zones and
no additional hardcover on the property, the deck is not in the protected zones and there
is a net reduction of 205 s.f of hardcover. Callahan responded that the deck was still
constructed against code and against past direction from the City in a resolution.
Mitchell again alluded to the pavers approved in the subdivision of 1985 and how this
accomplishes any reduction of hardcover. Jabbour said the idea would be tracks of
pavers rather than a continual block of pavers.
•
MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO CITY COUNCIL
MEETING HELD ON AUGUST 12, 1996
( 45 - #2134 Robert Albrecht - Continued)
•
Kelley said, if the intent of the 1991 resolution was not to increase the hardcover, the
application before the Council shows a reduction. Goetten agreed but was not in favor
how it was being handled by adding another deck and removing hardcover elsewhere.
Goetten did not believe the application would have been approved if brought before the
Council as a proposal before being built, Goetten said she was not on the Council in
1985 but was involved with the application in 1991. It was her understanding that there
would be no more hardcover allowed on the property. She added that the driveway, now
being proposed for reduction, was installed for safety reasons. Goetten said she agrees
with the conditions placed on the property in 1991 and would need to adhere to
principles and would not vote for approval. When Mitchell noted the decrease of
hardcover, Goetten responded that she was concern with continuing to approve
applications that involve what the Planning Commission said no to in 1991. She also
voiced concern with property owners constructing without permits and assuming it will
eventually be approved anyways. Mitchell noted that the applicant would not take this
same approach again. He also added that the sight lines were not affected by the deck for
the neighboring properties. Goetten said she did not like to say no to such an application
but would have to in this case.
Jabbour asked for the comparisons of hardcover on this property in 1991 and as it exists
now. Gaffron said 5080 s.f of hardcover was approved in 1991. There is 5037 s.f. of
. hardcover existing today. The proposal calls for a total of 4832 s.f of hardcover, which
is less than what was approved in 1991. Jabbour commented that the proposal was then
truly a reduction. He noted that the City does not inspect driveways. He also
commented that the lack of knowledge from not having grown up in the area was not a
valid excuse.
Callahan clarified that there was less hardcover today than what was allowed in 1991.
Gaffron concurred. Jabbour said this was a key issue. Kelley added that the applicant
was following the spirit of the ordinance. Callahan said he was troubled as seeing the
application as the applicant trying to get out of a bad situation. Albrecht commented that
the past owner had used the driveway for parking of vehicles for those renting boat slips.
Albrecht said the 22' of driveway width was not necessary.
Jabbour moved, Kelley seconded, to approve Resolution 93749. Vote: Ayes 3, Nays 1,
Goetten. Jabbour's motion to reconsider so application could not be brought back before
the Council received no second.
( - #6) #2136 GREENFIELD CORP., 180 NORTH SHORE DRIVE WEST -
PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION APPROVAL - RESOLUTION #3750
Callahan moved, Kelley seconded, to approve Resolution 43750. Vote: Ayes 4, Nays 0.
•
MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO CITY COUNCIL
MEETING HELD ON AUGUST 12,1996
( #7) BIG ISLAND, INC. - AMENDMENT TO 1496 JOINT USE DOCK LICENSE
- RESOLUTION #3751 •
Mark Scholle, secretary of Big Island, Inc., was present.
Gaffron reported that Big Island, Inc., currently has a joint use license for a day use
recreation area. The current 1996 joint use dock license allows for 2 docks on which
there are 14 slips in use. The CUP allows 15 slips at the shared joint use dock. The
proposal is for an additional 32' roll -in dock on a lower elevation away from the bluff
area to allow for handicap access. Staff determined that no revision is required to the
CUP but rather an amendment to the joint use license.
Jabbour asked if the water level was deep enough in this area and location of buoys.
Scholle said the buoy was located between the other two docks, and there was enough
depth in this area. Scholle was also asked if the boats would be docked for the day or if
the dock would be used as a drop off. Scholle said people would be dropped off only to
eliminate the need to climb steps, and the boat would be brought around to the other
dock areas. Kelley clarified that the use was not for the intent of acquiring another slip.
Gaffron informed Jabbour that there was approximately 1000 ft. of shoreline for the use
of Big Island, Inc.
Jabbour moved, Callahan seconded, to adopt Resolution 93751 directing Staff to issue an
amended Joint Use Dock License to Big Island, Inc., subject to conditions noted herein •
for the period of August 12, 1996 to December 31, 1996. Vote: Ayes 4, Nays 0.
MAYORICOUNCIL REPORT
Callahan noted receipt of information regarding an inspection of the lock -up facilities in
the police department by the Hennepin County Sheriffs Department. Compliance was
shown to be at 100°10. Callahan also commented on recent daily activity within the police
department.
ENGINEER REPORT
(* #8) BID AWARD - LIFT STATION #28 RENOVATION
Callahan moved, Kelley seconded, to approve the bid award for the Lift Station #28
Renovation to Ford Construction, Inc., in the amount of $69,872.00. Vote: Ayes 4,
Nays 0.
•
r_ 6
MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO CITY COUNCIL
MEETING HELD ON AUGUST 12, 1996
( *#9) PAY REQUEST #1 KELLY AVENUE SANITARY SEWER
• IMPROVEMENT
Callahan moved, Kelley seconded, to approve Pay Request #I for the Kelly Avenue
Sanitary Sewer Improvement in the amount of $22,717.83 to Widmer, Inc. Vote: Ayes
4, Nays 0.
( * #10) PAY REQUEST #1 AND FINAL 1996 SEAL COAT PROJECT
Callahan moved, Kelley seconded, to approve Pay Request #1 and Final Request for
Payment for the 1996 Seal Coat Project in the amount of $34,401.26 to Allied Blacktop.
Vote: Ayes 4, Nays 0.
CITY ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT
( #11) APPEAL OF LOCAL SAC AND WAC CHARGES FOR 3340 SHORELINE
DRIVE
Moorse reported that an amendment to the fee schedule ordinance was approved in April
of 1996. Local SAC and WAC charges are to be collected when non - residential
properties are changed to more intense usage. The fee amount is $900 per unit basis for
additional sewer flows and $900 per unit for additional water usage. This is a one time
• charge collected at the time the building permit is issued. The first case is now before the
Council as a result of the redevelopment project by John O'Sullivan at 3340 Shoreline
Drive. The projected increase in usage is dramatic due to the addition of a car wash
resulting in a significant charge due at this time. O'Sullivan was surprised when he was
apprised of the fee and is requesting an appeal of the charge. Staff did issue the building
permit with the understanding of the appeal being brought before the Council for
consideration.
O'Sullivan informed the Council that his application was first brought forward in January
of 1996 and approved in March of 1996. The amendment was approved at the April 22
Council meeting. At the time of finalizing paperwork for his mortgage closing,
O'Sullivan was informed of the fee. He was not expecting said charge. O'Sullivan asked
that the Council consider his appeal because the approval of his development was made
prior to the approval of the fee amendment. He also questioned why the City did not
inform him of the charge before the time of issuing the building permit.
O'Sullivan also said he was informed that the fee amounts came from a study of
comparable neighboring cities and challenged whether the cities shown in the study were
actually comparable as they are not part of the metropolitan waste system. O'Sullivan
presented to the Council information he gathered from other neighboring cities which he
felt were more comparable and found rates from $0 to $10,500. Some examples were
Plymouth at $1,000 and Spring Lake Park at a total including SAC, WAC, and building
• permit at $17,452.
r 7
MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO CITY COUNCIL
MEETING HELD ON AUGUST I2, 1996
( #1 l - Appeal of Local SAC and WAC Charges - Continued)
Jabbour responded that the comparison did not apply to Orono. He added that the
Council had made the decision that the burden of intensification of usage for water and
sewer should be bome by the user. Jabbour said comparisons could not be made with
cities where homes were row upon row. He did agree that O'Sullivan should have been
notified earlier but saw the schedule as a logical and reasonable way of raising the capital
to cover the costs.
Moorse noted a paragraph in the applicant's development approval resolution said the
development would be subject to local SAC and WAC charges but the amounts were not
known at that time.
Kelley commented that it was unknown at that time whether the charges would be
approved on April 22.
Callahan said the water and sewer finances were not in good shape and did not believe
the other taxpayers should have to make up the difference for such development noting
the extreme use for the car wash. Callahan said the unit charge in Orono was not out of
line, but the ability to finance such costs when it involves such a large number of units as
in this application and discovering it at the last minute does present a problem. He
suggested O'Sullivan be allowed to pay on an installment plan over several years to allow
the cash flow to assist in payment of these charges. Callahan did ask for some type of •
security but added that no interest would be charged.
Jabbour regretted the lack of communication but agreed that the fees were reasonable.
Callahan added that the amendment happened to be approved when it was, and
O'Sullivan!s application had not been held up.
Goetten said the costs, if not absorbed by the commercial application, would otherwise
have to be paid by the general population. She felt bad how it worked out but felt it was
fair to allow installments to be made. Goetten noted that all costs are born by the
applicant in zoning applications.
Kelley suggested the cost be spread out over a 5 year period. Callahan said some level of
security would have to be determined but did not wish it to interfere with the security of
the proposal. It was determined that O'Sullivan and Moorse would work out a plan for
the installment process.
Callahan moved, Kelley seconded, to deny the appeal and leave the amount owed as
shown in the fee schedule. Callahan directed the administrator and attorney to work out
an arrangement with O'Sullivan to permit payment over 5 years without interest with
security, preferably real estate. Vote: Ayes 4, Nays 0.
•
r 8
MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO CITY COUNCIL
MEETING HELD ON AUGUST 12, 1996
( #12) INTERNAL TRAILS IN OLD CRYSTAL BAY ROAD ADDITION
• (DICKEY PROPERTY)
Moorse reported that the Dickey property portion of the Crystal Bay Addition
Subdivision was to include a set of internal trails. The City has acquired the easements,
but the trails have not yet been constructed. There has been discussion over time on
what type of trails. In order to bring the topic to a conclusion and gain input, Moorse
planned to meet with Park Chair Flint, Dick Putnam of Tandem Properties, and Tony
Eiden, owner of the lots. It was discovered prior to the meeting that Putnam was under
the impression that the Council did not want internal trails. Putnam had then asked for
clarification. Moorse said the minutes from the meetings relating to the property and the
resolution indicated a system of public trails to be developed by the developer. He asked
the Council for clarification in order to move forward.
Callahan inquired if there were easements. Mabusth said the easements were shown on
the sketch and located 5' on both sides of the lot lines and cul -de -sacs. Mabusth showed
an overhead of the resolution viewing the designation of the internal trails.
Putnam referenced a paragraph in a memo by Moorse where it was indicated that Putnam
was of the opinion the trails would not be constructed. Putnam said this was not true
adding that he had said, "No one knew what the trails were going to be." Putnam then
referenced four resolutions directing him on proceeding with the trails and 'indicated that
• he had completed what was directed. Putnam said no one knew what was going to be
done with outlot A and the park. He said the agreement said he was to take the barn
down which has been done. Putnam said he asked to speak with Moorse to solve the
problem and was informed by Mabusth that the issue would be on the Council agenda.
•
Jabbour asked Putnam if he had informed the neighbors that the trails were going in.
Putnam replied that he had sold the property to Eiden. He said he did grading on the
private road, but the Council would have to refer to Eiden on this property.
Jabbour said there was major discussion over this issue when the property was plotted.
Kelley added that the discussion was held on how to mark the trails. Putnam commented
that there was nothing saying what was needed or what should be done. He said he was
told to put the trails in but not what to do.
Callahan said he was hearing two different stories from Moorse and Putnam. Callahan
said it was his understanding that the trails and easements were to be installed, but no
decision had been made on whether the trails should be paved. Callahan said the Park
Commission and Staff were of differing viewpoints on the surface and had come to no
conclusion. It was his point of view that Putnam was to pay for the trails and needed to
discuss with the City and Commission. Callahan said it was the desire of the Park
Commission to obtain a plan and construct the trails and had asked to consult with
Putnam.
9
MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO CITY COUNCIL
MEETING HELD ON AUGUST 12, 1996
( #12 - Dickey Property Internal Trails - Continued)
Putnam responded that he was now two owners removed, and the City needs to consult •
with those living there. Callahan and Jabbour disagreed. Jabbour alluded to the minutes
where it specifically stated that the trails were to be built. Putnam said the resolution
made mention of the barn. Jabbour said there were separate internal trails which were
public, not private, and the minutes state that Putnam would build and pay for these
trails. Putnam questioned why it was not in the resolution. He asked how it could be
done without knowing what kind of trail. He added that he had never seen the minutes
but had four resolutions and wants to do what is in the resolutions, which Putnam said
was to develop a grading plan.
When asked by Callahan, Putnam said it was his view that he has done what he was
suppose to do. Callahan said it was his view, as well as that of the Staff, that Putnam
was responsible for the cost of the internal trails.
Callahan asked Flint to comment. Flint said, as the development occurred, he was aware
of the trail not being constructed. He said the Park Commission tried to find out about
the trails and scheduled the item on their agenda at several meetings asking the developer
to attend. Flint noted that Putnam did not attend these meetings. Mabusth said the
developer was asked to attend. Putnam said he received a copy from the Staff of the
agenda of the Park Commission meeting but there was nothing saying he had to come.
Callahan commented that Putnam had responsibility at some point. Flint said the •
Commission then considered the trails and made a recommendation. Flint said the
problem was the new homeowners were moving in and it became difficult to distinguish
where the trails were located. Flint said the trail was to be public which would require
the maintenance by the City. A bituminous trail was considered as it would be less
maintenance but more of an impact. It was then concluded that the trail would be
marked with low monuments with a grass surface. This would allow access to the park
from the east and west for those in the development as well as a connection between East
and West Countryside. There would be low maintenance but the trails would be
distinguishable. Flint said there was difference of opinions on the trail surface but all
agreed that the trail be considered as a minor trail. Flint said the intent of the Park
Commission was to discuss these internal trails with the developer.
Greg Vitas, owner of lot 1, said he had no conception when he bought the property of
any internal trails. He views the area as a private and residential. Vitas said there were
trails all around this area with the Luce Line and the trail along Old Crystal Bay Road.
He sees no reason to make more trails and asked why now a private park.
Jabbour responded that the private park was there before Vitas was ever there. Jabbour
reviewed some of the history of the subdivision noting the major concessions made with
the City. He said originally the subdivision was to have been 2 less lots. Jabbour said the
residents of the neighborhood should be unhappy with what was portrayed by those
representing the subdivision. •
r_ 10
' MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO CITY COUNCIL
MEETING HELD ON AUGUST 12,1996
( #12 - Dickey Property Internal Trails - Continued)
Vitas asked the Council to listen to who is living there now. He noted the other paths
and asked why the public internal trails in the private residential area. Jabbour said it was
part of the plan. Callahan agreed the area was private but that the City had decided it
was an amenity to the City and movement of its citizens to the park area and to the Luce
Line. Callahan reiterated that the trails were on the plat maps. Vitas said the plat map
was not explained to him. Callahan responded that it is all the City can do to show the
trails on the plat maps in order to make potential buyers of the property aware.
Jabbour commented that the City paid for the trail and its ownership. Vitas asked if the
City was benefiting from the development. All of the Council agreed. Vitas said it was
an absurd rationale as the City was benefiting a thousand times over. Jabbour noted the
many hours spent on the plans for the subdivision noting the cost of the homes were not
discussed. Jabbour said the neighbors at large would own it. Jabbour said it would be
inappropriate at the time of the subdivision to say what certain prices of homes would be
appropriate. He added that the residents came after- the -fact of the trails being platted
and should have known of what was in the plans. Vitas took offense at a comment of
due diligence and how he should have been aware of the trails. Council noted the chain
of title would stipulate said trails. Callahan added that their real estate attorney would
make note of such encumbrance.
• Rick Dennison, a homeowner in the subdivision, asked for clarification on whether the
Council was immovable noting the governmental body should be about change for the
best. Dennison said trails should be for the benefit of those who live in the area. Jabbour
said decisions are made for the best for the people at large and hoped that the
homeowners also were not immovable.
Jabbour said the vision as seen today has been interrupted noting both the City and the
homeowners have paid for the vision. He added that the Council was entrusted with the
interest of all. Jabbour said not any minute detail was not spoken about in the review of
this subdivision and asked the homeowners to read the minutes regarding the subdivision.
Dennison responded that he would be willing to look at any new information that comes
to light.
Callahan said the vacation of an easement and abandonment of trails would require a
filing of a petition for a meeting to address the issue as it is not on this meeting's agenda.
The agenda item was to determine what is being done with the trail. The Park
Commission and Staff would decide on what surface is to be on the trail.
•
OIL 11
MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO CITY COUNCIL '
MEETING HELD ON AUGUST 12, 1996
( #12 - Dickey Property Internal Trails - Continued)
Dwight Seward, owner of lot 2, said he was shown the plat by Tony Eiden, but it was
never mentioned that internal trails were in the plan. He was notified in writing when the
title work was completed adding that it was after he had already applied $50,000 towards
his home. He voiced concern over additional trails than those already in the
neighborhood and people trespassing off the pathway. He added that the trail would
interfere with a neighbor's deck and trees planted by homeowners. He would like to see
the trail along Watertown Road and not into the subdivision.
Kelley asked the homeowners if their Realtors or developer did not inform them of the
internal trails, what recourse they might have. Those present said they had none.
Jabbour asked what could be done differently so such a misunderstanding would not
occur again besides filing on the deed.
Callahan noted that Countryside East and West were planned to have a road connecting
the two areas. Kelley said the outlots are there and are platted to the farthest east and
west sides. They have not been connected as the residents do not wish them to be.
Callahan said it would have been his prediction that the road would go through as it was
discussed when the development was planned.
Vitas noted that these decisions were made in the past, and asked why they have to be
carried out, as they may now not be a good idea.
Callahan suggested another meeting be scheduled with the full Council to debate the
issues as this agenda item does not relate to changing the plans. He asked that the
residents understand the background noting the plat, the number of homes, the internal
trails and how they fit within the City.
Barb Hite, 2475 Countryside Drive, a resident of the older area of Countryside, said the
residents expressed the same surprise when the developer discussed the plans with them.
She said she is delighted with the Old Crystal Bay Bike Trail. It was questioned at that
time that no other subdivision in Orono has internal trails. Hite added that others come
from areas outside of Orono to use the Luce Line. She questioned the need for a
bituminous trail to the Luce Line and the park. She sees sense in the Old Crystal Bay
Bike Trail and the trail into Baker Park.
Hite asked the Council to reconsider their decision and reasoning why a trail would be
put through the neighborhood. Without the current trails, she might question how
residents might get to the park. She would like to see the trail along Watertown Road.
•
r„ 12
p
MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO CITY COUNCIL
MEETING HELD ON AUGUST 12, 1996
( #12 - Dickey Property Internal Trails - Continued)
•
Callahan noted that he has used the term "bituminous trails" rather lightly noting the
difference of opinion on trail surface between the Park Commission and the Staff. He
also noted that the internal trails were not the idea of the Council but that of the
developer who thought they would be an amenity to everyone.
Gene Hite said he has lived in the neighborhood for 11 years. He said he was aware of
the trails being platted and the suggestion of the trails being an amenity to the residents
when the developer brought the plans to the Countryside neighbors. These neighbors
were surprised and questioned Eiden regarding the trails. Hite said he understood why
Eiden stopped promoting the trails and is surprised the Council feels they have to go
ahead with the trails. He suggested the Council rethink their decision. He added that 9
of the 11 Domes in their neighborhood were present at the meeting mentioned and all
were against the internal trails.
Kelley asked if it was an amenity to the subdivision with access to the Luce Line. Gene
Hite said no_
Jabbour reiterated that the concept of the trails were developer driven and said he was
dumbfounded that it has become a problem. He questioned why it was not disclosed. He
asked the homeowners to ask Eiden, who was present at this meeting. Eiden did not
• comment.
Callahan said the issue of whether the trails should be eliminated from the plat should be
rescheduled on the agenda for an upcoming meeting. He asked that the homeowners
notify Staff if they would like notification beyond the normal official notice.
Goetten said she believes the concerns are well founded but misdirected towards the
Council. She said the Council would be happy to discuss the issue but asked that the
homeowners be aware of the historical background on what has taken place.
Vitas said he was only informed of the trails 2 days ago. Callahan said the City was
unaware that the homeowners did not know about the trails.
Dennison said he was encouraged that the approval of the trails was seen as an amenity.
Mary Dennison added that she was concerned with people coming off of the Luce Line
noting her family consisting of four girls.
( * #13) APPOINTMENT OF ELECTION JUDGES - RESOLUTION #3752
Callahan moved, Kelley seconded, to approve Resolution #3752 appointing election
judges for the September 10, 1996, primary election. Vote: Ayes 4, Nays 0.
C]
.1 13
MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO CITY COUNCIL
MEETING HELD ON AUGUST 12,1996
(* #14) 1997 ASSESSOR`S AGREEMENT •
Callahan moved, Kelley seconded, to renew the contract with Rolf Erickson Enterprises
for city assessing services for the term September 1, 1996 through August 31, 1997 at a
cost of $78,000. Vote: Ayes 4, Nays 0.
( * #15) ADDITIONAL REPORTING REQUIRED - CRYSTAL BAY CITY HALL
SITE - MONITORING WELLS
Callahan moved, Kelley seconded, to approve the proposal from Braun Intertec for two
additional quarters of ground water sampling at a cost of $1,640.80 to be funded from
the building outlay fund, and to amend the budget to reflect this expenditure. Vote:
Ayes 4, Nays 0.
( #16) MCCULLEY ROAD PLAT PROPOSAL
Moorse presented the Council with two options regarding subdivision of the McCulley
Road plat for which Council previously authorized expenditure for the survey, plat, and
variance work for subdivision. The property will be sold for revenue. The property is
large but consists of mainly wetlands with approximately 3.1 acres of dry buildable land.
Moorse said option 2 allows for the creation of a separate parcel that possibly could be
sold to the DNR. Moorse asked for direction from the Council as to what subdivision
they would prefer. He noted that the creation of Outlot C did not necessarily require •
anything further be done with it.
Jabbour said he felt the outlot needed to be created to off set land taken for sewer in the
Stubbs Bay area.
Callahan asked what the one buildable lot was worth. Moorse estimated the worth at
about $120,000. Kelley suggested selling Outlot C and keeping the remainder of the land
as he was not willing to give up lot 1 for only $120,000. Callahan said it was a matter of
platting the property at this time.
Jabbour moved, Callahan seconded, to direct Staff to plot the property based on option 2
based on legal and appropriate naming of parcels. It was questioned whether that an
outlot cannot be sold or transferred so determination with the County will be made
whether outlot C would be called an outlot or a lot. Vote: Ayes 4, Nays 0.
( #17) SELECT DATE FOR WORK SESSION
The date for the work session will be set at a later time.
CITY ATTORNEY'S REPORT
City Attorney Barrett requested an Executive Session. 40
.0 14
A
MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO CITY COUNCIL
MEETING HELD ON AUGUST l2, 1996
(* #18) LICENSES
• Callahan moved, Kelley seconded, to approve the following license: Vote: Ayes 4, Nays
0.
r�
U
n
�J
One Day Liquor License: Smith College Club
Minnetonka Center for the Arts
2240 North Shore Drive
"Smith Day"
September 7, 1996
(* #19) BILLS
Callahan moved, Kelley seconded, to approve payment of the All Funds Account. Vote:
Ayes 4, Nays 0.
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting was adjourned to Executive Session at 9:36 p.m.
15
Z4, !/
ward J. Call an, Jr., Mayor