HomeMy WebLinkAbout04-22-2013 Council Minutes 3
� MINUTES OF THE
- ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING
Monday,Apri122,2013
7:00 o'clock p.m.
ROLL CALL
The Orono City Council met on the above-mentioned date with the following members present: Mayor
Lili Tod McMillan,Council Members Cynthia Bremer,Aaron Printup, Lizz Levang, and Kristi Anderson.
Representing Staff were City Administrator Jessica Loftus,Assistant City Administrator for Long-Term
Strategic Planning Michael Gaffron, Planning Coordinator Melanie Curtis,Finance Director Ron Olson,
City Attorney Soren Mattick, Public Works Director/City Engineer Jesse Struve, Consulting City
Engineer David Martini, and Recorder Jackie Young.
Mayor McMillan called the meeting to order at 7:00 o'clock p.m., followed by the Pledge of Allegiance.
APPROVAL OF AGENDA
1. CONSENT AGENDA
Item Nos. 6, 8, and 10 were added to the Consent Agenda. Item No. 2 was removed from the Consent
Agenda.
Levang moved,Bremer seconded,to approve the Consent Agenda as amended. VOTE: Ayes 5,
Nays 0.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
2. REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF APRIL 8,2013
Printup requested the minutes be revised on Page 10 to read as follows: "Printup stated he personally
tends to stay away from environmentalism and chemicals."and on Page 18 Printup requested the minutes
be revised to say, "Printup stated while he has some concerns, it does seem to be a fairer way to do road
maintenance and be protective of the City from legalities."
Anderson moved,Levang seconded,to approve the minutes of the Apri18,2013,City Council
meeting as revised. VOTE: Ayes 5,Nays 0.
PUBLIC HEARING—7:00 P.M.
3. WELLHEAD PROTECTION PLAN,PART 2
Martini noted a Wellhead Protection Plan is a requirement of the Minnesota Department of Health and is
a method of preventing contamination of a public water supply well by effectively managing potential
contaminant sources in the area which contribute water to a public water supply well. Developing this
plan was a two-year process that was started by Orono Public Works and the Department of Health back
in early 2011.
Page 1 of 18
MINUTES OF THE '
ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING f
Monday,Apri122,2013
7:00 o'clock p.m.
(3. WELLHEAD PROTECTIONPLAN,PART 2, Continued)
Phase I of the plan requires communities to delineate the wellhead protection area, identify the drinking
water supply management area boundaries,and perform the well and drinking water supply management
area vulnerability assessment. Due to the size of Orono's system,the state provided assistance to
complete Phase I. Cities with public water systems are required to delineate inventory and manage an
inner wellhead management zone,create a formal wellhead protection plan. Part I has already being
completed by the City.
Part II involves the creation of the wellhead protection plan itsel£ In order to complete Part II of the
City's Wellhead Protection Plan, a public hearing is required to be held. The purpose of the hearing is to
allow members of the public to comment on the report before it is submitted to the Minnesota Department
of Health for final approval.
Wellhead protection is an ongoing process,the plans need to be periodically reviewed and updated by the
City. It is mandatory that every ten years the City update its plan to make sure it reflects current
conditions. Other required amendments include if another public well is added or if there are overlapping
boundaries with the wellhead management area and an adjacent jurisdiction.
The purpose of the plan is to provide some specific action or controls that the City intends to take to
control potential contaminant sources. In broad terms,the City is required to educate its citizens about
how well water is used and how wells can impact local water supply and quality. It also requires the City
locate any missing or unknown wells, seal unused or abandoned wells, raise well owner awareness and
prevent contamination of city water supply via private wells, identify new private wells for location
within the City's management area, identify new high-capacity wells that are proposed for construction in
the management area,effectively manage the inner wellhead management zone to reduce the likelihood
of contaminants from entering the well at a level that could cause human health impacts, effectively
manage the water supply system to minimize unaccounted for water, collect and tabulate additional data
such as ground water elevations,well driller logs, and data relative to the local ground water,report and
evaluate the data collected in order to ensure that the City's drinking water supply is protected, and then
make any adjustments to the plans as conditions change over time.
The City currently has three wells. Wells one and two are located in the Navarre area and well number
three is east of City Hall down by Willow Road and Old Highway 12. A hard copy of the draft report has
been provided for the public to view at City Hall and an electronic copy is available on the City's website.
McMillan asked how this might impact citizens.
Martini indicated it should not have any direct impact on the vast majority of the citizens unless their well
is connected to the City's drinking water supply. From a land use perspective, if a well is located within
the management areas,the City may be interested in knowing whether there is gasoline or chemicals
stored on the property,but in general there will not be any impact to the residents.
McMillan opened the public hearing at 7:11 p.m.
There were no comments regarding this item.
Page 2 of 18
� MINUTES OF THE
� ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING
Monday,April 22,2013
7:00 o'clock p.m.
(3. WELLHEAD PROTECTIONPLAN,PART 2, Continued)
McMillan closed the public hearing at 7:11 p.m.
Martini noted the deadline for approving the plan is June 7, 2013.
Anderson moved,Printup seconded,to approve the Wellhead Protection Plan,Phase II. VOTE:
Ayes 5,Nays 0.
PRESENTATION
4. EAGLE SCOUT PROJECT
Thomas Longe addressed the City Council regarding his design layout for the Veterans Memorial in front
of City Hall. Longe indicated his initial fundraising goal for this project is $10,000,with the current
amount of funds raised being$5,325. Longe indicated fundraising has slowed down recently and that he
is planning to send out letters to the local businesses to help generate funds as well as submitting another
article to the Pioneer Press to help generate interest in the project. Longe noted there is a$1,000
matching donation for Orono residents, which is currently at$500.
Longe displayed a picture of the current layout located in front of the City Hall building. There are
currently three hawthorn trees located in the area. The large circle is 30 feet across and the smaller circle
is 10 feet across. There is also a World War I memorial in that area as well.
Longe displayed his original display and stated that he has elected not to go with this design since it was
somewhat spread out throughout the area and somewhat disconnected with the six separate plaques.
Longe indicated he has been working with a granite company up in Duluth to incorporate all of the
military seals on one granite slab. The slab is eight inches thick,48' x 42', and can be seen from both
sides. The back of the slab will include an eagle and the words, "In Honor and Memory of all who served
in the Armed Forces of the United States of America to preserve our Freedom."The inset piece would
have"Land of the Free,Because of the Brave." At the bottom of the back side of the slab it will say
dedicated in 2013. Longe indicated the actual wording of the slab does not have to be decided until July
and that the members of the City Council can send suggestions to his website that he created for this
proj ect.
Longe stated he would also like to place three benches in this area as well which are four feet across and
six inches thick. Longe indicated the benches are made out of black granite but not exactly the same as
the slab. Longe stated the benches do not look like cemetery benches and will give the area a unique
look.
As it relates to the landscaping, Longe indicated he has been working with Outdoor Excapes to come up
with a plan. Longe indicated he would prefer to do this plan if he is able to raise enough money. Outdoor
Excapes will also be assisting with the removal of the trees and seeding the area. The plan depicts slow-
growing junipers called Gray Owl, which would provide some greenery.
Page 3 of 18
MINUTES OF THE `
ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING �
Monday,April 22,2013
7:00 o'clock p.m.
(4. EAGLE SCOUT PROJECT, Continued)
Longe noted the actual memorial will not have color in the granite because it would fade over time and is
more expensive. The flowers will be a combination of red,white and blue, and will consist of low
maintenance plants. The location of the existing sprinkler system will need to be determined. The area
will need to have new sod put in place.
Longe displayed a picture of the proposed landscaping.
Longe stated the World War I memorial that is currently there is fairly large and is somewhat difficult to
work around. Longe indicated he did speak with the granite company about possibly moving it
somewhere else but they said they cannot guarantee it will be preserved given its size. If it was removed,
it could be laid into the ground like a granite slab and beveled, but that is also a significant amount of
money and would take up a lot of space.
Long indicated he came up with two options: One is to keep it in place and working around it or,two,
relocating it to a different location,which is what he would prefer. Due to its size, it would compete with
the new memorial. Longe stated he is still in the process of figuring out where it could be relocated to.
The landscape design does not need to be decided tonight but that he would request permission to
purchase the granite.
As it relates to costs,the landscaping materials are approximately$2,900 and the rest of the memorial is
around$11,000. That cost would not include any sprinkler repair,refurbishment of the old memorial, or
additional lighting ofthe new memorial. Longe stated his new fundraising goal is$12,000 and that
currently he has enough money to purchase the actual granite memorial.
Longe stated he will provide another update in July and that he is hoping to receive approval for the
landscape design at that time. Longe indicated he will also have some options for the old memorial.
Anderson commended Thomas Longe for his efforts. Anderson asked when he expects the work to be
completed.
Longe indicated the granite is coming from India and that it will take three months to get here. Longe
stated that is why he is attempting to get approval tonight for the granite so it arrives by August.
Levang asked if the trees would be removed sometime this summer.
Longe stated those would likely be removed in August.
Printup commented the plans have come a long way since December and that his fundraising efforts have
been fabulous.
McMillan stated she did give some thought regarding the World War I monument and since it is a
veterans' memorial and contains the names of a number of Orono families, it should probably stay in that
area. McMillan encouraged Longe to work his landscaping in around it.
McMillan noted if annual flowers are going to be done, Staff should be agreeable with that.
Page 4 of 18
� MINUTES OF THE
� ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING
Monday,April 22,2013
7:00 o'clock p.m.
(4. EAGLE SCOUT PROJECT, Continued)
Struve noted the City currently utilizes Norling Landscaping and that there would probably be a small
upcharge to include this area.
Levang suggested that Longe give some consideration to incorporating a similar circular design around
the World War I memorial or possibly combining the two in the same area. Levang indicated she is in
agreement that it should stay where it is and that somehow the landscaping could be incorporated to bring
the two memorials together.
Bremer asked when the granite would be cut.
Longe indicated the granite will not be cut until July after the granite is received and that the final
wording does not need to be decided until then.
Bremer commented it appears the City Council is in favor of the purchase of the granite.
Mattick noted this does not require an expenditure of City funds and that Longe is looking for approval to
purchase the granite.
Levang moved,Printup seconded to approve the purchase of the granite as presented by Thomas
Longe for the new veterans' memorial.VOTE: Ayes 5,Nays 0.
PLANNING COMMISSION COMMENTS—LOREN SCHOENZEIT,REPRESENTATIVE
Schoenzeit stated he had nothing to report but would be available for questions.
PUBLIC COMMENTS
None
PLANNING DEPARTMENT REPORT
5. Permit#2012-00424-JAY AND ALYSSA KANIVE,950 WILLOW VIEW DRIVE—
APPEAL
Jay and Alyssa Kanive were present.
Curtis stated in May of 2012,the applicants submitted a permit application to construct a sport court on
their property located at 950 Willow View Drive. A Manage 3 wetland exists on their property. The
Willow View plat was approved in 1999-2000. It was at that time the wetlands on the overall site were
delineated. According to the Wetland Conservation Act, a wetland delineation is valid for a period of up
to five years.
Page 5 of 18
MINUTES OF THE '
ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING �
Monday,Apri122,2013
7:00 o'clock p.m.
(S. Permit#2012-00424-JAYAND ALYSSA KANIVE, 950 WILLOW VIEW DRIVE—APPEAL,
Continued)
The City's wetland regulations have built-in triggers for implementation of a wetland buffer. Staff
requested additional information be submitted with the permit application to evaluate whether or not a
buffer was required. The Kanives were notified that a Manage 3 wetland was located on their property
and additional information was requested, including an updated wetland delineation. It appears the
wetland had expanded since the 1999 delineation.
A new wetland delineation was conducted by Arrowhead in June and submitted to the MCWD for
approval. The Arrowhead delineation showed the wetland boundaries have expanded beyond the original
delineation and mitigation expansion areas established with the plat in 1999. When the homeowners
provided the Arrowhead delineation to the MCWD for approval,the MCWD noted that per MCWD
policy, because the original delineation conducted in 1999 and recorded with the plat was to be used for
regulatory purposes,they would not require the new delineation.
At that point the homeowners withdrew their Arrowhead delineation from the Watershed's approval
process. However, City Staff's interpretation of the City Code requirements is that the apparent
expansion in wetland boundary,coupled with the fact that wetland delineations are only valid for up to
five years, suggests that in order to determine the setbacks, a new delineation was needed in order to meet
City Code requirements.
The applicant provided more detailed calculations regarding the amount of disturbance resulting from the
project and it was determined to be less than 50 cubic yards. From the City's perspective, although their
project will only disturb 42 cubic yards and does not trigger establishment of a buffer,the Code requires
delineation of the edge of the wetland for setback measurement purposes. This measurement assures that
new structures are not build too close to the wetland resulting in a future nonconformity.
Just prior to the final permit approval, Staff became aware of a patio and a small fire pit which were not
shown on the survey. Based on the Arrowhead delineation,the fire pit and the seating area is potentially
located within the defined area that would be a future buffer. In an effort to not further delay permit
issuance, Staff indicated to the homeowners that both items should be included on the as-built survey.
Additionally,the Arrowhead wetland delineation should be approved by the MCWD and shown on the
as-built survey once the project is completed.
Absent the submittal of the requested information, it is unclear whether the fire pit is located within the
drainage and utility easement or within the wetland delineation boundary or buffer area for the wetland.
To expedite matters, Staff placed a condition upon the permit stating if the fire pit was found to be located
within the delineated wetland boundary, it would need to be removed or relocated prior to the release of
the escrow. If the as-built survey showed the fire pit located only within the drainage and utility
easement,the property owners would need to obtain an easement encroachment permit with the City prior
to release of the escrow. The Kanives have paid their permit fees but they are contesting the conditions
placed upon the permit and therefore have not obtained the permit.
Page 6 of 18
� MINUTES OF THE
• ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING
Monday,Apri122,2013
7:00 o'clock p.m.
(S. Permit#2012-00424-JAYAND ALYSSA KANIVE, 950 WILLOW VIEW DRIVE—APPEAL,
Continued)
It is the Kanives request that they would like the City to issue the permit for the sport court without the
conditions regarding the MCWD approval of the updated wetland delineation,without placement of the
updated wetland delineation on the as-built survey,without placement of the constructed patio and fire pit
areas on the as-built survey, and without relocating the fire pit should it be shown to be located within the
16.5 foot buffer from the updated wetland boundary.
Levang noted there are three triggers but they have not met all of those triggers.
Curtis indicated those three triggers together require the establishment of a buffer and Staff is not
requiring a buffer.
McMillan asked if it is normal to automatically require a delineation of a wetland.
Curtis indicated the answer is yes if there is not a delineation on file or approved by the Watershed
District within the past five years. Due to the proximity of the project to the wetland as well as the
apparent change in the wetland boundary, it is Staff's position that a wetland delineation is required to
show the edge of the wetland to make sure the project is not built within the wetland and to help ensure
that future nonconformities are not created.
Jay Kanive thanked the City Council for spending time addressing this matter. Kanive stated unless the
City Council has any comments about the submission already done as part of the appeal process, he has
received Staff's comments and he will go through their comments since there are some potential
inaccuracies.
Kanive stated the first paragraph in Staffls report says, according to the Wetland Conservation Act,a
wetland delineation is valid for a period of up to five years,which is false. Wetlands located in
residential subdivisions, per the Minnehaha Watershed Creek, are actually perpetually in place for a
residential neighborhood and the Minnehaha Watershed District perpetually relies on them.
Kanive indicated he does have an e-mail from Catherine Bach at the Watershed District that states,
"However, for developments like Willow View,the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District relies
perpetually on the location of the wetland boundary as approved with the development permit even
though it is over five years old." Kanive stated their properiy does have the approved delineation. Orono
approved the permit for the development of the entire Willow View neighborhood based on the
delineations for each property. What happened during the development is that these delineations were
never recorded on the individual plots that were sold off to individual residents.
After the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District informed us that there was this plat, Kanive indicated he
came back to the City and provided the delineation. The City did agree it was on file. Kanive indicated
he is a little confused as to why Staff is still claiming that the Watershed District says that in five years it
expires when in fact the Watershed District says it relies on them perpetually.
Page 7 of 18
MINUTES OF THE '
ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING •
Monday,April 22,2013
7:00 o'clock p.m.
(S. Permit#2012-00424-JAYAND ALYSSA KANIVE, 950 WILLOW i�IEW DRIVE—APPEAL,
Continued)
Kanive indicated he is disappointed to see the Arrowhead delineation being referenced again. Kanive
stated the Arrowhead delineation does not exist. Kanive stated they were told to obtain a wetland
delineation, and since they did not know any better,they went out and contacted someone for the wetland
delineation. A preliminary delineation was staked out. After that was completed, Catherine Bach walked
us through the process. Kanive indicated once they understood the process,they disapproved of the
wetland delineation that had been done and would have requested certain revisions be made. Since the
Watershed District said they already have one that they rely on, Kanive stated they went ahead and
cancelled it. The Watershed District did not approve this delineation and we, as the homeowners, do not
approve it either.
Kanive stated it was also a little frustrating to find out after that that the City already had a delineation
when they were told they did not. Kanive indicated they spent$700 for something they did not need to
do and also wasted months of time waiting for this to go through.
Staff has implied that the delineation was needed to determine setbacks for the sport court. The code for
Orono expressly states that no setback is required for sport court type structures. Section 78-1608(2)(a)
of the code specifically states that sport court structures and in grade patios do not need to be set back
from any wetland buffer. Clearly&om the location of the sport court, it was not anywhere close to the
approved wetland buffer that the Watershed District approved in 1999.
Kanive stated there is an incorrect distinction between disturbance and grading. You can disturb 5,000
square feet but that does not mean that you have graded it. You can move dirt, and then if you are not
changing the gade,that does not count. There is over 12 cubic feet of what Staff is calling a disturbance,
which is not grading and should not be included in the 50 cubic yard calculation. There was also a hint
that there would be some cumulative effect over time and that that 12 cubic yards should not count. All
of the houses in the neighborhood are graded since this was originally a flat wetland marsh. The
developer took out an unnatural earthen berm or part of a turn and returned the grade of the property back
to the original state rather than change the grading itself. Kanive stated by taking out that manmade hill,
he would contend whether they hit the 50 cubic yards since they were returning the grade to its natural
state and not performing new grading that adversely affects the wetland.
As it relates to the future nonconformity, if Staff's logic is followed about preventing future
nonconformities,the entire neighborhood and future houses would be a future nonconformity. The only
test for a wetland is if vegetation exists and the soil is wet. This is a low lying neighborhood in general,
so to continue to go back, according to the definitions of what is a wetland,you would just roll back and
eventually the neighborhood is a future nonconformity.
As it relates to the fire pit and patio,which are not part of this application,Kanive indicated they did ask
the City if permits were required for both of those projects and were told none were required. As a matter
of record, based on the verbal approval from the person in the City, Kanive stated he considers these
structures approved by the City and he is not going to debate it further tonight. Kanive indicated the
Watershed District knows that the back of the fire pit is in the buffer zone for the original buffer and they
are more than willing to work with us on a resolution,which he has no problem with.
Page 8 of 18
� MINUTES OF THE
� ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING
Monday,Apri122,2013
7:00 o'clock p.m.
(S. Permit#2012-00424-JAYAND ALYSSA KANIVE, 950 WILLOW i�IEW DRIVE—APPEAL,
Continued)
Kanive stated Staff also informed him of the satellite images they used to determine that a fire pit and
patio have been built. The expanded buffer would result in the fire pit being ripped out. When the patio
was installed,the city inspector came to the house while it was being built and approved the stairs that
were constructed because it was an engineered structure. That city inspector said nothing about the patio
being built or requested a permit. The sport court was in plain view since it already existed. The appeal
process is the first time they were hearing any issues about a fire pit or patio.
Kanive stated he has also been informed by other members who do this sort of survey work in the
community that it is highly irregular to ask for a full survey of a property that is not located in a hardcover
zone. That is why the fire pit and the patio and some of the other structures, landscaping in general,was
not included on the survey. Kanive indicated Staff did incrementally ask for these things to be placed on
the survey but he would question what the point is.
Kanive indicated they have spent over$1,500 in surveys as the requests came to update them. The other
factor was the time spent. Kanive commented he could never have imagined that a simple sport court
permit would come to this and that he is frustrated that a year later they are still dealing with this. Kanive
stated in his view a lot of these facts that are being put forth are not really facts but merely interpretations
that are loosely based on one following the other.
Bremer stated when you look at the overhead,the line that is on the approved survey appears to be right
within the wetland. Bremer asked if that would cause concern to him if he was sitting on the Council and
saw that. Bremer stated it appears to be an incorrect survey of what exists now. Bremer indicated she
attempted to visit the project but it was difficult to look at it given the weather.
Kanive stated it is a valid point when you see it in the satellite image. This wetland is bigger than what it
originally was but that he is not trying to build close to it. The sport court is being tucked behind the
garage. Kanive stated if they were building right up on it, it would change the optics but it does not
change the law. The law for the Watershed District is that their delineation is perpetually kept for a
residential neighborhood. Staff took a connection between a non-wetland delineation expiring after five
years versus a wetland delineation that does not expire. Given the optics of the overhead,Kanive stated
he can see where there could be issues,especially if they were pushing the envelope and building right up
into it.
McMillan noted this is one of those lots that the City is having some issues with relating to its wetland
buffer ordinance. Staff and the Planning Commission have started to look at those issues. McMillan
stated that discussion is not far enough along for this application. McMillan noted the City Council has
started to have some beginning discussion on the delineation issues and how the City's regulations differ
from the Wetland District's regulations. McMillan indicated she would like Mr.Kanive to know that the
City has taken his site under consideration.
Kanive stated he has spoken with Catherine Bach quite frequently about giving homeowners certainty as
to the boundaries within their own properties.
Printup asked where the location of the sport court is.
Page 9 of 18
MINUTES OF THE �
ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING •
Monday,Apri122,2013
7:00 o'clock p.m.
(S. Permit#2012-00424-JAYAND ALYSSA KANIVE, 950 WILLOW VIEW DRIVE—APPEAL,
Continued)
Curtis illustrated the location of the sport court.
Kanive pointed out the location of the existing landscaping and the location of the sport court. Kanive
indicated the landscaping will be taken out and the sport court will be placed in that area.
McMillan asked if the sport court has been constructed yet.
Kanive indicated it has not. Kanive pointed out the location of the fire pit and patio and the approved
buffer that was established in 1999.
Kanive noted they did not know about the buffer initially but that they have lots of room to do a buffer
and that they will be working with the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District on establishing that buffer.
McMillan asked when they would like to start construction of the sport court.
Kanive indicated they have already paid for it and that the contractor is ready to commence work as soon
as the weather permits.
McMillan noted sport courts do not need a 20-foot building setback.
Curtis indicated they just need to be located out of the buffer.
Kanive noted the original size of the sport court was larger and that it has been reduced. Kanive indicated
they did not want to file for a variance and that he was just looking for an easy permit. At this point in
time,he would leave it at the size that has been submitted and that he does not have any plans at the
present time to apply for a variance.
Levang moved,Anderson seconded,to issue a building permit for Jay and Alyssa Kanive,950
Willow View Drive,and to waive the conditions requested by Staff.
McMillan asked what her thoughts are regarding approving the application.
Levang stated as it relates to the Arrowhead delineation, since it was never approved and completed, she
is surprised the City would hold him to a document that does not exist. Staff is also talking about a buffer
in an area,according to Section 78-1608(2)(a)that is not required because there is no wetland buffer
setback. Levang commented she is sorry the City put him through what he went through.
McMillan questioned why there was a need for a wetland delineation if it did not trigger all three
qualifications.
Bremer noted that was for the creation of the buffer, which is a different piece.
McMillan stated the nonconformity piece is difficult to understand.
Page 10 of 18
� MINUTES OF THE
� ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING
Monday,April 22,2013
7:00 o'clock p.m.
(S. Permit#2012-00424-JAYAND ALYSSA KANIVE, 950 WILLOW VIEW DRIVE—APPEAL,
Continued)
Gaffron stated the code directs Staff to not allow or approve of any future nonconformity,which could be
something that exists without any approvals but is placed in a location where at some future date the
buffer is triggered and that item suddenly becomes nonconformity. Staff does not have a choice under the
current code to accept the fire pit when they see a delineation and a potential encroachment into the
wetland even though Staff believes the Watershed District would accept ultimately the new delineation.
Gaffron indicated they did not know that for certain because no one had surveyed the fire pit.
Gaffron stated it becomes a Conservation Act issue if there is an encroachment of a wetland. Staff
disagrees with the Wetland District's policy of using a 12 or 13-year old delineation that was done before
the development occurred based on a proposed drawing rather than actual plans. Gaffron noted the
survey is not an as-built survey. The Watershed District does not have an easement or a covenant for the
buffer based on the drawing that is before the Council, and from Staffls perspective,they did not have a
choice but to request a new delineation to determine if there was an encroachment of a buffer. Gaffron
noted Staff was reyuired under the current code to request the wetland delineation.
Gaffron noted at the April Planning Commission meeting,the consensus was to get rid of the City's
attempt to regulate future nonconformities. Gaffron stated if it was not in the City Code,they would not
be here tonight but that it will probably be a month or two before the code changes.
Levang asked if he is referring to the fire pit or the sport court as the nonconformity.
Gaffron indicated he is referring to the fire pit.
Levang noted Kanive was told by the City that he did not require a permit for the fire pit.
Kanive indicated his contractor was also told the same thing.
Levang questioned how the City can hold him responsible for something that he was told was a nonissue.
Curtis indicated she did not speak with him or his contractor.
Kanive stated it was Christine Mattson.
Curtis stated she discussed with Mr. Kanive the fact that a grading permit was required for any earth
disturbance of 0 to 500 cubic yards. A grading permit was not obtained for this work and they would
have been told a grading permit would have been required.
Kanive noted he did have a city inspector inspect his properiy when he applied for the deck steps and the
patio was being built at the same time.
Curtis stated they spoke about the patio and that the incorrect information was given to him by the city
inspector.
Kanive stated he understands he needs to deal with the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District on the fire
pit.
Page 11 of 18
MINUTES OF THE '
ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING •
Monday,Apri122,2013
7:00 o'clock p.m.
(S. Permit#2012-00424-JAYAND ALYSSA KANIVE, 950 WILLOW VIEW DRIVE—APPEAL,
Continued)
Mattick stated it is his understanding the fire pit is located in the City's easement and that the Council can
decide to have the applicant remove it or allow it to stay. Mattick noted if the Council allows it to stay,
Mr.Kanive should understand that it may have to be removed at some point in the future.
Printup asked if Mr. Kanive understands that the fire pit may have to be removed at some point.
Kanive indicated he does.
McMillan asked if buffers were required for this subdivision
Gaffron stated they were not required by the City but were required by the Watershed District.
Kanive stated the Watershed District's entire plat for this subdivision is on file with the City and that
actually Outlots B and C do have those covenants recorded on their plats even with the City.
McMillan asked if the motion included the fire pit to be allowed with Watershed approval as well as the
encroachment agreement with the City.
Levang amended her motion to approve Permit#2012-00424-Jay and Alyssa Kanive,950 Willow
View Drive,granting of a building permit for a sport court and waiving the conditions of Staff,to
require Mr.Kanive work with the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District to mitigate the location of
the fire pit,and to enter into an encroachment agreement with the City as to the utility easement.
Kanive asked if there is a standard encroachment agreement that the City has.
Mattick indicated they do. Mattick stated the agreement basically states if a structure is placed in a City
easement, upon 30 days' notice,the encroachment must be removed.
Kanive indicated he is not waiving his rights to speak on the easement at some point in the future.
Mattick noted it is the City's easement but that he can comment on it. Mattick indicated the agreement
does make it very clear that it is the City's easement and that the City typically does not seek out
comments on that kind of stuff but that a property owner always has the right to petition their
government.
Anderson seconded the amended motion. VOTE: Ayes 4,Nays 1,Bremer opposed.
*6. 2013-JOINT USE DOCK LICENSES—RESOLUTION No's 6216-6224
Levang moved,Bremer seconded,to adopt RESOLUTION No's. 6216-6224,a Resolution
Establishing Policy Regarding Certificate of Survey Requirements for Joint Use Dock Licenses.
VOTE: Ayes 5,Nays 0.
Page 12 of 18
� MINUTES OF THE
• ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING
Monday,Apri122,2013
7:00 o'clock p.m.
7. #13-3600-ESKUCHE ASSOCIATES ON BEHALF OF KATHRYN KALLAS,3048
NORTH SHORE DRIVE—VARIANCE AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
Peter Eskuche,Applicant and Sven Gustafson, Builder were present.
Curtis stated the applicant is proposing to construct a new home which will fully conform to the 75-foot
setback requirement and reyuests a variance to allow the new home to encroach up to 30 feet into the
average lakeshore setback with the northeast side of the home. The home to the northeast is located
approximately 180 feet from the lake where the adjacent neighbor to the southwest is 70 feet from the
lake. This results in an average lakeshore setback line at an approximate 45-degree angle across the
subject property.
Eskuche is proposing to locate the new home 39 feet further back from the existing home,resulting in a
setback 89 feet from the lake. The proposed location reduces the impact on both of the neighboring
properties. It does not appear that the proposed location will adversely impact views of the lake enjoyed
by the home to the northeast as their views are primarily to the east and north facing Noerenberg Park and
Maxwell Bay.
The proposed location improves the views to the northeast over the Eskuche property resulting in the
Guillaumes gaining new views toward he channel and Noerenberg Park.
The demolition of the home within 75 feet of the lake does not automatically trigger the need for a
conditional use permit. Eskuche is proposing to construct the new home and patio right at the 75-foot
setback, grading within the setback is shown on the applicant's plans. The City Engineer has reviewed
Mr. Eskuche's grading plan and did not identify significant concerns. The final grading plan will be
reviewed at the time of building permit submittal and the applicant will need to comply with the City
Engineer's requirements at that time.
At the April Planning Commission meeting,the Planning Commission voted on a motion to recommend
approval of the requested average setback variance and the conditional use permit but the motion failed
with a 2 to 3 vote. The Commission discussed tabling the application and a 15-foot adjustment was
suggested. Eskuche did not wish to have the application tabled and no motion was made regarding
tabling. A second motion was made to recommend denial of the application which passed 3 to 2.
The location of the Swenson home, substantially farther from the lake than the applicant's home and the
other homes along the shoreline, creates a practical difficulty unique to the applicant's property. This
location appears to artificially force the applicant's home away from the lake resulting in a tunnel effect
for lake views to the northwest across the Guillaume property. The average lakeshore setback provision
is intended to protect existing lake views enjoyed by adjoining property owners. The Eskuches plan does
not appear to adversely impact views of the lake from either properly and further improves the views of
the lake over the property for both adjacent neighbors.
The distance of the Swenson property from the lake, combined with the orientation of the Swenson's
. home, supports Staffls suggestion that the spirit and intent of the average lakeshore setback provision has
been met. The location of the new residence will result in an improvement of the average lakeshore
setback encroachment relative to the Swenson property to the northeast. Additionally,the Swenson home
is situated with views facing east and north, and only one side window of the enclosed pool wing appears
to face the proposed home.
Page 13 of 18
MINUTES OF THE '
ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING •
Monday,Apri122,2013
7:00 o'clock p.m.
(7. #13-3600-ESKUCHE ASSOCIATES ONBEHALF OF KATHRYNKALLAS,3048 NORTH
SHORE DRIVE— VARIANCE AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT, Continued)
Aerial photos show the existing tree stand between the Swenson home and the proposed home in the area
where the proposed home will encroach into the average lakeshore setback. Moving the proposed home
to the average lakeshore setback line, or even 15 feet closer to the average lakeshore setback line,puts the
homes more in line with each other and results in a loss of open space between the three hoes,pushes the
proposed home's lake yard directly adjacent to the Guillaumes' garage area, and results in minimal gain
for the Guillaumes' view.
Peter Eskuche stated he would like to mention that at the time of the Planning Commission meeting,there
were probably not enough visuals available to better illustrate the situation and that he might have failed
to communicate the situation sufficiently enough. Eskuche indicated this project is similar to a project at
3350 Fox Street that he received approval for approximately two months ago. In this situation,the house
has two conditions of water frontage and is therefore positioned well down the lot at a bigger distance
from the lakeshore,which,when you average the house on the other side, puts a pretty severe line across
for the average lakeshore setback. The Planning Commission documentation did not illustrate that clearly
and that might be why they did not fully support the application.
McMillan noted she attended the Planning Commission meeting and that she agrees with the
recommendation of Staf£ McMillan stated in her view there is a practical difficulty and on this
application the Planning Commission also did not have the comments of the neighbors,which would have
been helpful.
Eskuche stated the feedback from the neighbors was that they preferred it to be closer to the lake or in the
same location since it would actually block their views into the open space area if the house was moved
further back.
McMillan commented the average lakeshore setback line in this case is at a weird angle which makes it
difficult to work with.
Anderson stated the spirit and intent of the average lakeshore setback line is well intended,and in this
case the applicant is protecting the views of both of the neighbors. Anderson indicated she read the
minutes from the Planning Commission meeting and that it was a difficult decision. Anderson stated in
her view a practical difficulty does exist when you look at the proximity of the neighbors' homes.
McMillan noted both neighbors benefit from this proposal and if the house is pulled back too far, it would
impact them more. McMillan stated in her view this is a good compromise.
Printup stated if the applicant, Mr. Eskuche's home were remodeled in its current position,the neighbors
would really not gain anything. After reviewing the documentation, Printup indicated he ultimately came
to the conclusion that it is an appropriate fit.
Bremer moved,Printup seconded,to direct Staff to draft an approval resolution for Application
#13-3600-Eskuche Associates on behalf of Kathryn Kallas,3048 North Shore Drive,granting of a
variance and conditional use permit. VOTE: Ayes 5,Nays 0.
Page 14 of 18
' MINUTES OF THE
� ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING
Monday,Apri122,2013
7:00 o'clock p.m.
PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR/CITY ENGINEER'S REPORT
Struve reported they are anticipating a May 2 golf course opening depending on the weather. Some minor
work has been performed at the golf course and one of the boarded up doors has been removed and a new
door installed. Struve indicated he will be working with the volunteer group to redo some of the
landscaping. The weather has not cooperated for that type of work to date but hopefully they will be able
to finalize those plans in the near future.
Struve indicated the plows will be out clearing the roads early in the morning following tonight's
snowstorm. As it relates to Bederwood Park, due to the weather,the last two Thursday meetings have
been cancelled but there is a meeting scheduled for this Thursday so a cost estimate can be obtained for
the new equipment.
*8. CELL PHONE REIMBURSEMENT POLICY
Levang moved,Bremer seconded,to approve changes to the Employment Benefts section of the
Employee Handbook to allow for a cell phone reimbursement. VOTE: Ayes 5,Nays 0.
MAYOR/COUNCIL REPORT
Levang noted they have had several meetings regarding the franchise agreement and that good progress is
being made.
Anderson stated the Navarre residents are looking forward to the next Navarre Initiative meeting and that
the Council needs to look at the options for the streetlights and the crosswalk.
McMillan commented the Myst streetlights are very nice and that she was wondering why Spring Park
did not go with that style.
Bremer stated it likely was cost.
McMillan stated she will attempt to verify that.
Printup reported the pancake breakfast this past weekend had an average turnout.
Loftus stated the paper indicated approximately 800 people attended.
McMillan noted the Planning Commission has done a great job on the accessory use ordinance.
McMillan indicated the Planning Commission has had four discussions on it and that she was very
impressed with the amount of work and thought that has gone into it by the Planning Commission and
Staff. The Planning Commission would like the City Council to review it and provide comment on it.
McMillan noted the City's annual cleanup day is this Saturday,Apri127,2013.
Struve stated information concerning the type of items accepted is contained on the City's website.
Page 15 of 18
MINUTES OF THE '
ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING •
Monday,Apri122,2013
7:00 o'clock p.m.
CITY ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT
Loftus stated the City was notified by the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District that they are going to try
to do the milfoil weevil study in Veterans Cove this year. It is a three-year study.
The City also received notice from Hennepin County regarding their 5-year capital plan, and in 2015 the
County will be replacing Boy Scout Bridge on Tonkawa, in 2016 they will be replacing the bridge on
Brown Road, and in 2017 and beyond,they will be looking at reconstruction of Highway 112 or Old
Highway 12.
Loftus reported the security cameras have been installed around the City campus. The County Assessor
held an open book meeting on April 17 and there was one person in attendance. The assessors spent
approximately 20 to 30 minutes with that person.
Loftus noted Mr. Grube with the Department of Transportation has requested some work session time in
May regarding the Highway 112 project. The project advisory committee is coming to a conclusion and
he would like some feedback on their findings. Loftus recommended the City Council's work session
scheduled for May 28 start at 5:00 so they can accommodate Mr. Grube.
9. YEAR-TO-DATE GENERAL FUND BUDGET INFORMATION
Ron Olson, finance director stated the General Fund summaries for the first quarter are available. The
first quarter is typically the slowest period for both revenues and expenditures. Revenues are at 15.04
percent of budget with expenditures at 22.6 percent of budget. The low revenue percentage is normal for
the first quarter. The first property tax receipts,representing 53.7 percent of the budget, will not be
received until June. Various state grants will also not be received until later in the year.
For comparison purposes, in 2012,the first quarter revenues were only at 6.02 percent of budget. This
year's higher collection rate is the result of the Mound service contract.Under the terms of the contract,
Mound pays for the first half of the year in January. As a result,revenues related to the police service
contract are already at 43.9 percent for the year. The last three years the City has ended up at the end of
the year in good shape.
At 22.6 percent,the overall expenditure amounts are on target for the year. Both assessing and fire are at
49 percent for the year,which is the result of the timing of payments. Both departments will finish the
year around 100 percent. Olson noted the golf course was open at this time last year,but due to the
weather,that is not possible this year and revenues are down. The other General Fund department budgets
are in good shape for this time of the year.
Olson stated as it relates to investments,the City does not receive the statements until after the first week
of the month and that he has not had time to formally audit the statements. Olson stated to get some idea
of the economic climate, in order for a person to receive .74 percent interest on U.S. Treasury bonds,they
would have to go out five years, and to receive over 1 percent interest, and they would have to go out
seven years. The City does not really invest in treasuries but that is the base line. The City attempts to do
better with their investments than what treasuries will pay, but given the economic climate, a person has
to go out a long way to make anything on interest. As it relates to current CD rates,year one is at .2
percent,year two is at.6 percent,year three is at .4 percent, and years four and five average .85 percent.
Page 16 of 18
' MINUTES OF THE
• ORONO CITY COUNCII.,MEETING
Monday,Apri122,2013
7:00 o'clock p.m.
*10. LICENSES AND PERMITS
ON SALE LIQUOR AND SUNDAY
1. Orono Public Golf
265 Orono Orchard Road South
Levang moved,Bremer seconded,to approve the above listed license. VOTE: Ayes 5,Nays 0.
*11. CLAIMS
Levang moved,Bremer seconded,to approve payment of the All Funds Account. VOTE: Ayes 5,
Nays 0.
ADJOURNMENT
Bremer moved,Anderson seconded,to adjourn the Orono City Council meeting at 8:42 p.m.
VOTE: Ayes 5,Nays 0.
ATTEST:
� ,� � .�.�►'�./��
Rachel Dodge, City Clerk Lili Tod McMillan,Mayor
Page 18 of 18
MINUTES OF THE '
ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING -
Monday,Apri122,2013
7:00 o'clock p.m.
(9. YEAR-TO-DATE GENERAL FUND BUDGET INFORMATION, Continued)
Olson displayed a partial list of the City's current investments. The certificates of deposit are doing a
little better than the treasury bonds. On an 18-month CD,which was purchased in November of 2011,the
City was getting .7 percent,which is difficult to get currently. On a 4-year CD that was purchased a few
years ago,the City was making 3.2 percent, which is an example of how interest rates have fallen. If you
average it out,the City is achieving a little over 1 percent on the investments.
Olson noted the City is allowed to purchase Minnesota State College bonds,which is paying 1.35 percent
for five year and is a good yield given the current environment.
McMillan noted the revenues for this quarter as compared to the first quarter of 2012 are quite a bit
different and that she has some questions regarding that data. McMillan noted licenses and permits are
down as well as fines. McMillan asked if there is a reason for the decline.
Olson stated first quarter fines for this year was$5,600,which is one of the lowest fine months in the past
three years. Olson indicated the lower numbers could be because the numbers are unaudited at this point.
Last year the first three months were all over$10,000,which is a little higher than the average.
McMillan noted the difference is approximately$50,000 on fines.
Olson stated to his recollection the City did receive a special settlement but that he would have to provide
that specific information.
McMillan noted the interest income is 10,000 this year versus 63,000 last year.
Olson stated the sheet containing the first quarter numbers for the budget are not completely accurate.
The actual investment revenues through the first quarter in 2012 were approximately$10,050,which is
really close to this year's numbers. Olson stated he realized just prior to tonight's meeting that the wrong
information got inserted and that he will provide the updated sheet.
McMillan stated if he is interested in having an investment subcommittee formed to assist him with the
City's investments,the Council could look at that. McMillan noted the City did have an investment
committee at one point in the past.
The City Council took no formal action on this item.
CITY ATTORNEY'S REPORT
Mattick noted there was a hearing on the summary judgment motion regarding the wind generator and
that he hopes to get the judge's ruling in the next 45 days.
Page 17 of 18