HomeMy WebLinkAbout01-27-2014 Council MinutesMINUTES OF THE
ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING
Monday, January 27, 2014
7:00 o’clock p.m.
_____________________________________________________________________________________
Page 1 of 32
ROLL CALL
The Orono City Council met on the above-mentioned date with the following members present: Mayor
Lili Tod McMillan, Council Members Lizz Levang, and Aaron Printup. Representing Staff were City
Administrator Jessica Loftus, Assistant City Administrator for Long-Term Strategic Planning Michael
Gaffron, Finance Director Ron Olson, Planning Coordinator Melanie Curtis, Public Works Director/City
Engineer Jesse Struve, City Attorney Soren Mattick, and Recorder Jackie Young.
Mayor McMillan called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m., followed by the Pledge of Allegiance.
APPROVAL OF AGENDA
1. CONSENT AGENDA
No items were added to the Consent Agenda.
Levang moved, Printup seconded, to approve the Consent Agenda as submitted. VOTE: Ayes 3,
Nays 0.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
*2. SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JANUARY 6, 2014
Levang moved, Printup seconded, to approve the minutes of the Orono Special City Council
meeting of January 6, 2014, as submitted. VOTE: Ayes 3, Nays 0.
*3. REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JANUARY 13, 2014
Levang moved, Printup seconded, to approve the minutes of the Orono City Council meeting of
January 13, 2014, as submitted. VOTE: Ayes 3, Nays 0.
PLANNING COMMISSION COMMENTS – KEVIN LANDGRAVER, REPRESENTATIVE
Landgraver stated he had nothing to report but would be available for questions.
PUBLIC COMMENTS
None
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING
Monday, January 27, 2014
7:00 o’clock p.m.
_____________________________________________________________________________________
Page 2 of 32
PLANNING DEPARTMENT REPORT
4. #13-3636 LIXIAO WANG, 3059 FARVIEW LANE – VARIANCES
Lixiao Wang, Applicant, was present.
Curtis noted this application first appeared before the Planning Commissions in October where the
applicant proposed a 12-foot garage addition. The Planning Commission at that time tabled the
application and recommended the addition be reduced to six feet. At the November Planning
Commission meeting, the applicant proposed a 9-foot addition, which was subsequently denied by the
Planning Commission.
Curtis stated at the December 13 meeting, the City Council reviewed the applicant’s request to permit a
6-foot expansion of the existing garage. The Council tabled the application to give the Planning
Commission an opportunity to review the applicant’s revised plans.
The applicant presented his revised plans for the 6-foot garage addition to the Planning Commission at the
January 21 meeting. The applicant is requesting average lakeshore, lakeshore, and side setback and
hardcover variances. The Planning Commission reviewed the applicant’s request, heard testimony from
the applicant and an adjacent neighbor who opposes the variances.
The Planning Commission voted 4-2 in favor of a motion to approve the request allowing the 6-foot
expansion of the existing attached garage. The deck/porch area above the garage was not included in the
approval recommendation. The Planning Commission further recommended that future requests to add
additional hardcover to the driveway, particularly in the easement area, should not be approved.
Planning Staff continues to recommend denial of the variances.
Curtis stated she has some photographs from the applicant depicting the area behind the rear garage wall.
Curtis noted the 2001 plan shows the two-stall portion of the garage with a 23-foot depth while the
current plan suggests an 18-foot depth. It is Staff’s speculation that at some time since 2001 the rear wall
of the garage was relocated.
Levang asked if the City Council can view the photographs that have been submitted.
Curtis displayed the two photographs provided by the applicant.
Levang asked if the mechanical equipment is located behind the two double doors.
Wang stated yes the mechanical equipment is behind the two double doors.
Levang asked if the mechanical equipment is on the other side of that wall.
Wang indicated there is a small corridor that goes to the room but that the pictures show the mechanical
equipment.
Curtis asked if the configuration still consists of a walk-in closet and then the mechanical area.
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING
Monday, January 27, 2014
7:00 o’clock p.m.
_____________________________________________________________________________________
Page 3 of 32
(4. #13-3636 LIXIAO WANG, 3059 FARVIEW LANE – VARIANCES, Continued)
Wang stated the previous owner added the elevator, which eliminated the ability to park a car in that area.
Wang indicated the mechanical equipment is located behind the double doors.
Curtis stated this is the 2001 plan that was submitted as part of the application for the elevator installation
and it shows 23 feet from the front of the garage to the back of the garage where the double doors are.
The applicant’s current plan from his builder depicts an 18-foot depth which Staff has not been able to
reconcile.
Wang stated he called his builder prior to the meeting but he indicated he is unable to attend tonight’s
meeting due to an illness in the family. The builder also indicated that he would be willing to answer any
questions the City Council had when he returned.
Wang stated he would like a three-car garage so they can park their daughter’s car inside. Wang noted he
was not aware of the difference in the plans and that he has just recently purchased the property. Wang
stated due to the elevator, in order to park a vehicle in that area, they need to expand the area. Wang
stated the addition had to be added to the entire garage to preserve the integrity of the garage.
Levang asked if Staff can verify that the depth is 18 feet.
Curtis stated the 18 feet is shown on the builder’s plans, which Staff assumes is correct.
Levang asked if the applicant is requesting the 6-foot extension from the 18 feet.
Curtis indicated that is correct.
McMillan noted there is also another plan that depicts it as 23 feet deep, which is what is confusing.
Curtis stated Staff could inspect the garage and verify the depth.
McMillan stated she would like the applicant to have a functional two-car garage, which is basically 20’ x
24’. McMillan stated she is not in favor of a variance to simply allow a three-car garage. McMillan
stated she has a concern with what the actual depth of the garage is, which will need to be confirmed.
Wang indicated Staff put those numbers on there.
Curtis stated those numbers were determined based on the scale of the plan.
Wang indicated he was not present when the builder drew up his plans.
McMillan stated the applicant had indicated at a previous meeting that he was unable to fit a Suburban or
similar sized car in the two stalls and that the depth of the garage needs to be verified.
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING
Monday, January 27, 2014
7:00 o’clock p.m.
_____________________________________________________________________________________
Page 4 of 32
(4. #13-3636 LIXIAO WANG, 3059 FARVIEW LANE – VARIANCES, Continued)
Levang stated the Planning Commission reviewed the plan again and voted 4-2 in favor of the 6-foot
garage. Levang stated she would like the applicant to have a functional two-car garage but that she is not
in favor of granting a variance simply to allow a three-car garage. Levang stated the City Council should
set some sort of minimum, which would be 24 feet.
Printup stated his concern with that is that anyone who has a 23-foot garage would come in and request a
24-foot garage. Printup stated the problem he has with the application is that it appears to be benign
because they are only talking about a few feet, but that it becomes a slippery slope and could cause
problems down the road. Printup stated he is hesitant about setting a standard since there really is no
standard.
Levang stated if the garage is 23 feet and they would like 24 feet, they could move the interior wall if it is
structurally possible.
Wang indicated the Planning Commission stated cars could also be parked outside, which would block
the view somewhat, and that they are looking to park a small car in that third stall.
Levang stated the City Council understands that point, and that the City Council decides whether or not to
accept the recommendation of the Planning Commission. Levang stated the City Council is interested in
making sure the applicant has a functional two-car garage.
McMillan noted the Planning Commission was going off that 18-foot depth, and if the depth is truly 23
feet, the Planning Commission may have recommended otherwise. McMillan stated a motion could be
made conditional upon verification of the depth.
Printup asked if the true depth is 23 feet, whether he could expand it one foot.
McMillan stated if it is 23 feet, she would not allow it to be expanded at all.
Levang stated if it is 18 feet, the City Council would allow him to go to 24 feet.
McMillan noted the application would need to come back to the City Council again in order to approve
the resolution, which would allow Staff time to verify the depth of the garage. McMillan stated if the
depth is determined to be 23 feet, the application would be denied.
Wang stated at the last Planning Commission meeting, those numbers were not on there.
Levang noted the City Council needs to have that number verified.
Wang indicated that is fine.
McMillan stated the Planning Commission was going off a depth of 18 feet.
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING
Monday, January 27, 2014
7:00 o’clock p.m.
_____________________________________________________________________________________
Page 5 of 32
(4. #13-3636 LIXIAO WANG, 3059 FARVIEW LANE – VARIANCES, Continued)
Mattick stated given the time constraints, the resolution will need to be adopted at the next City Council
meeting, and asked what the exact parameters of an approval would be and what the parameters of a
denial would be.
Levang stated if the garage depth is 23 feet, the City Council will deny the variance, and if the garage is
less than 23 feet, the City Council will approve the variance and allow the garage addition up to 24 feet.
McMillan stated if the garage is 18 feet deep, the City Council will follow the Planning Commission
recommendation.
Levang noted the Planning Commission recommended the deck not be permitted and also recommended
any additional requests for hardcover to the driveway not be allowed.
Mattick asked whether it is 18 feet in depth or less than 23 feet in depth. Mattick stated he would like to
make sure that if the depth is somewhere in between those two numbers, that the motion would cover that.
Printup stated he agrees with half of the potential motion, but that he has an issue with the part that says if
it 23 feet or less.
Levang stated they are saying he should have a functional garage and the standard is 24 feet. If it is 18
feet deep, the garage is not functional.
Printup asked when the house and garage were originally constructed.
Gaffron indicated 1979.
Printup commented between 1979 and now, the garage was functional.
Levang noted the interior wall was potentially moved.
Curtis stated the elevator was added to that third stall in 2001.
McMillan stated 20 feet tends to be the minimum depth of a garage nowadays. McMillan noted the City
Council has a 23-foot depth from 2001 and an 18-foot depth from the builder for this application and that
the City Council is attempting to figure out which number is correct.
McMillan stated if the garage is substandard, then getting it to a standard, functional depth is what she is
concerned about. McMillan stated the garage appeared to be functional in 2001 and that she is less
concerned about the third stall because the focus by the Planning Commission and the City Council has
been that the main two-car garage is functional.
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING
Monday, January 27, 2014
7:00 o’clock p.m.
_____________________________________________________________________________________
Page 6 of 32
(4. #13-3636 LIXIAO WANG, 3059 FARVIEW LANE – VARIANCES, Continued)
Wang stated if they do not get the third stall, they will be forced to build a two-car detached garage down
near the road. Wang stated in his view the garage addition will not block anyone’s view. Wang
encouraged the City Council to think about the decision they make today, noting that if the City Council
denies this garage addition, he will build another garage near the road and that he will need to cut the
trees down in order to construct it. Wang stated in his view the garage addition is the right thing to do
and that a detached garage will increase coverage and will require the trees be cut down.
McMillan noted the City Council needs a practical difficulty demonstrated in order to grant a variance,
and if there is a substandard depth, that would make it nonfunctional and a practical difficulty. McMillan
stated a three-car garage is not a practical difficulty and the City Council is attempting to determine the
correct depth of the garage. McMillan indicated she is more concerned about making sure the main part
of the garage is functional.
Wang indicated he understands that point and that the issue is whether he can expand the current garage
or whether he will need to construct a detached garage near the road.
McMillan noted there is a discrepancy in the two numbers and that the City Council cannot make a firm
decision tonight due to that since it impacts whether there is a practical difficulty or not.
Wang stated he understands that.
McMillan stated the City Council is attempting to figure out a way to address both possible directions
depending on the verified number. City Council is attempting to find a way to address that discrepancy
and resolve the issue once and for all.
Wang noted he has attended a number of meetings and that he and the City Council are wasting a lot of
time.
McMillan stated the better the information is, the quicker issues can be decided.
Wang indicated his builder could verify it when he gets back and that he could have been asked to do that
prior to tonight’s meeting. Wang stated he understands what the Council has said, but that the neighbor is
complaining about the 75-foot setback.
McMillan stated the big concern tonight is the true size of the two-car garage.
Francine Delaney, 3051 Farview Lane, noted Mr. Wang keeps stating his cars do not fit in the garage but
the previous owner was able to park full-sized BMW sedans in the garage. When the home was
originally constructed, it was maxed out on footprint, which is why an easement was granted on their
property to accommodate additional driveway. Delaney noted the basketball hoop is actually on her
property.
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING
Monday, January 27, 2014
7:00 o’clock p.m.
_____________________________________________________________________________________
Page 7 of 32
(4. #13-3636 LIXIAO WANG, 3059 FARVIEW LANE – VARIANCES, Continued)
Delaney indicated she has been on that driveway and that if additional structure is placed on the driveway,
it will make it very difficult to turn around. Delaney stated their concern is that the applicant will come
back requesting additional driveway easement. Delaney stated to her understanding, the applicant has the
right to come back and request additional driveway.
Mattick stated it is difficult to know without seeing the easement.
Delaney stated their issue is constructing additional driveway space in the easement since that is their
only access to the lake. If you add six feet of additional structure, it will cause even more difficulty to
turn around. Delaney stated the applicant does have the option of constructing another structure by the
street. Once the leaves are down, the structure is in their view and that they continue to object to the
project.
McMillan stated without knowing the exact dimensions, it is difficult to proceed, but that she would like
to allow a 6-foot extension if the depth of the garage is only 18 feet.
Levang stated once the numbers are verified, the City Council at the next meeting would then be able to
approve either a denial resolution or a resolution approving the addition.
Mattick stated the denial resolution is clear and that the City Council has indicated if it is 23 feet in depth,
the variance would be denied due to the lack of a practical difficulty. Mattick asked whether the garage
extension would be approved if it measures less than 23 feet or whether it would be approved if it is 18
feet.
McMillan stated if it is 18 feet, the variance should be approved, and if it is anything greater than 18 feet,
it would be denied.
Mattick noted technically 18.1 feet in depth would equal a denial and 18 feet or less would equal an
approval.
McMillan and Levang agreed that anything greater than 18 feet would be a denial.
Printup stated if the garage is 18 feet, in his view that is functional.
Mattick stated the motion would be to bring back a resolution, and if the measurement on the depth come
back at 18 feet even or less, the City Council would approve it per the Planning Commission
recommendation. If it comes in at 18.01 or more, Staff will bring back a resolution for denial.
Levang moved, McMillan seconded, to direct Staff to draft a resolution approving Application No.
13-3636, Lixiao Wang, 3059 Farview Lane, if the depth of the garage is 18 feet or less per the
Planning Commission recommendation based upon Staff’s verification of the number, and subject
to elimination of the deck/porch above the garage and no further requests for additional hardcover;
and to direct Staff to draft a denial resolution if the depth of the garage is greater than 18 feet.
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING
Monday, January 27, 2014
7:00 o’clock p.m.
_____________________________________________________________________________________
Page 8 of 32
(4. #13-3636 LIXIAO WANG, 3059 FARVIEW LANE – VARIANCES, Continued)
Curtis noted outside of the 75-foot setback, it would be an administrative permit to add hardcover. Curtis
stated language could be included in the resolution that a request would not be approved for additional
driveway even if they are within the 25 percent.
Mattick stated in terms of denying a request, someone always has the right to petition for relief and that
he would suggest that type of limitation not be included in the motion.
McMillan stated she would like the resolution to also limit the height of the garage. McMillan stated the
resolution should also state that the goal is to make it a functional garage and not a three-car garage.
Wang stated the main issue is either they build the extension or a detached garage. Wang stated
restricting any additional driveway in the easement is a meaningless condition because his understanding
is that the easement originated before Mrs. Delaney bought her house. When she purchased her house,
she inherited the easement. Wang stated from his point of view, he cannot expand into that any further
since it is the neighbor’s property. Wang stated if he is limited to the 11 percent and the maximum is 25
percent that would not be fair.
McMillan stated as it relates to the variances, the City Council can include other conditions.
Wang stated he cannot expand into the neighbor’s property any further.
McMillan stated she was more focusing on the structural piece.
Levang stated she does not want any further expansion into the neighbor’s property.
Curtis noted the neighbor would need to consent to any further hardcover in the easement area.
Levang moved, McMillan seconded, to direct Staff to draft a resolution approving Application No.
13-3636, Lixiao Wang, 3059 Farview Lane, if the depth of the garage is 18 feet or less per the
Planning Commission recommendation based upon Staff’s verification of the number, subject to
the elimination of the deck/porch above the garage, and to direct Staff to draft a denial resolution if
the depth of the garage is greater than 18 feet. VOTE: Ayes 2, Nays 1, Printup Opposed.
5. #13-3637 WILLI ABBOTT ON BEHALF OF THE BROADWAY GROUP, LLC – 2350
WATERTOWN ROAD AND XXX WILLOW DRIVE NORTH – PRELIMINARY PLAT AND
RPUD REZONING
Willi Abbott, Applicant, was present.
Gaffron stated the applicant is requesting preliminary plat approval for a 7-lot single-family residential
subdivision to be known as Oliver Hill as well as rezoning to Residential Planned Unit Development.
The Planning Commission reviewed the preliminary plat at its November meeting and recommended
approval subject to a number of conditions. At the December 9 meeting, the City Council tabled the
application and requested the following information be submitted:
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING
Monday, January 27, 2014
7:00 o’clock p.m.
_____________________________________________________________________________________
Page 9 of 32
(5. #13-3637 WILLI ABBOTT ON BEHALF OF THE BROADWAY GROUP, LLC – 2350
WATERTOWN ROAD AND XXX WILLOW DRIVE NORTH – PRELIMINARY PLAT AND RPUD
REZONING, Continued)
1. A revised landscaping plan, indicating additional trees and screening along Willow Drive and
along abutting property boundaries.
2. Draft covenants for protection of wetlands and woodlands, maintenance of stormwater facilities,
etc., with an eye toward consolidating the conservation easements rather than having multiple
or overlapping easements.
3. Conceptual floor plans and site plans for individual lots indicating how they might or might not
fit a 15 percent lot coverage limitation. Gaffron noted the applicant has provided today a set of
floor plans, which is before the City Council tonight.
4. A plan showing how rain gardens might be located in single lots rather than straddling lot lines.
5. A plan showing positive measures for protection of wetlands, tree areas, etc., during
development and construction.
The applicant has submitted the following:
1. Lot by lot analysis of lot coverage percentages versus FAR.
2. Revised landscape plan showing additional buffering along Willow Drive.
3. Revised grading plans depicting rain garden relocations.
4. Site protection narrative.
5. Narrative in response to neighbor comments.
6. Conceptual floor plans.
Gaffron noted Exhibit A-1 is the lot-by-lot analysis. The intent of the lot-by-lot analysis was to look at
each lot in terms of massing potential and establish a standard for how much house should be allowed.
The lots range in area from 0.40 acre to 0.88 acre. Since the intent of a lot coverage standard is to limit
the overall visual density, Staff would suggest that visual density is a function of the overall site, such that
the entire lot area should be included in the analysis and not just the contiguous dry buildable.
The developer has suggested the maximum size of a 2-story house he intends for the site would be a 2,820
square foot footprint, including house, garage, deck, and screen porch, translating to a 5,180 square foot
floor area including finished interior spaces, basement, garage, and screen porch. For a rambler style
house, the potential maximum intended footprint would be 3,820 square foot and floor area goes up to
5,280 square foot. The applicant has indicated very few lots would have a rambler style house
constructed on it.
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING
Monday, January 27, 2014
7:00 o’clock p.m.
_____________________________________________________________________________________
Page 10 of 32
(5. #13-3637 WILLI ABBOTT ON BEHALF OF THE BROADWAY GROUP, LLC – 2350
WATERTOWN ROAD AND XXX WILLOW DRIVE NORTH – PRELIMINARY PLAT AND RPUD
REZONING, Continued)
Gaffron noted based on the total lot areas, use of the RPUD standard 0.50 floor area ratio yields allowable
floor areas ranging from 8,700 square feet to 19,000 square feet. Use of the 0.50 floor area ratio for the
development would potentially allow much larger homes than the developer anticipates. Staff does not
recommend use of the 0.50 floor area ratio standard.
Gaffron noted the average size of the house would be 4,100 square feet. The two smallest lots in Block 2
located on the south side of the road are the most able to accommodate the large rambler footprint since
they are the least constrained by setbacks, wetlands, and buffers, but they would have the most difficulty
meeting a 15 percent footprint limit.
Gaffron indicated he has laid out a number of options for the City Council to consider for the lot coverage
limit and those are contained on Page 3 of Staff’s report. Each one of them has impacts varying by the
size of the lot. The applicant’s preference is to establish the limit as the larger of 3,820 square feet or 15
percent. Under this scenario, house footprint limits would range from 3,820 to 5,700 square feet.
Gaffron noted the proposed grading for the site is to grade virtually the entire site south of the wetland
and southwest of the tree line adjacent to the creek. The applicant has indicated future buffering will
likely be new plantings or possibly transplants of existing, higher quality materials from the site. The
applicant is also proposing additional screening along Willow Drive and buffering to adjacent properties.
The applicant Mr. Abbott has revised the rain garden locations to be completely within each individual lot
and not straddling lot lines. The rain gardens would be protected via an expansion of the perimeter
drainage and utility easements. Gaffron noted the new landscaping plan suggests elimination of rain
gardens in favor of shallow swales, which would be a conflict between the new landscaping plan and the
new grading plan.
Staff has reviewed the various easements and covenants that would be required and considered the
possibilities for consolidating them into a more compact format. Gaffron stated the following easements
would be required: perimeter drainage and utility easements; other drainage and utility easements
devoted to stormwater facilities, ponds, rain gardens, and non-wetland drainageways; wetland flowage
and conservation easements; a trail easement; city sewer easement; tree preservation easement, and a
wetland buffer. Gaffron indicated the MCWD is requiring a 16-foot buffer bordering the wetland.
Gaffron noted if the road is to be private, it would be platted as an outlot over which the City historically
has required an underlying road, drainage and utility easement as well as a covenant establishing that the
neighborhood has maintenance obligations for the road. In the case of Oliver Hill, the road is proposed to
be platted as a public road, which automatically places the ownership and maintenance responsibilities on
the City and no easements are required.
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING
Monday, January 27, 2014
7:00 o’clock p.m.
_____________________________________________________________________________________
Page 11 of 32
(5. #13-3637 WILLI ABBOTT ON BEHALF OF THE BROADWAY GROUP, LLC – 2350
WATERTOWN ROAD AND XXX WILLOW DRIVE NORTH – PRELIMINARY PLAT AND RPUD
REZONING, Continued)
Gaffron indicated one option for consolidating documents may be for the developer to establish the
easements and restrictions within neighborhood covenants. The downside to this is that they may get
‘buried’ and are not as readily discernible to a buyer as separate documents. When incorporated into
neighborhood covenants, there must be language that makes them permanently applicable and not able to
be changed without City approval. Under the current plan layout, the individual easement documents
have to be filed in the title of each affected lot. If the wetlands and preservation areas were in an outlot
owned by a homeowners association, the complexity created by multiple documents would decrease. If
the wetlands and preservation areas were in an outlot owned by a homeowners association, the
complexity created by multiple documents would decrease.
Gaffron stated the simplest option might be for the wetland and tree preservation areas to be platted as a
single outlot to be owned by the City, in which case certain easements would not be required. However,
that would be a distinct departure from past City practice. The City’s philosophy has been for decades
that the City does not want to own wetlands or little snippets of conservation areas scattered around the
City. The wetland easement prohibits the developer and property owners from doing damage to the
wetland, while the drainage easement allows the City to maintain drainage through it.
Gaffron noted staff does not have a firm recommendation for consolidating the various easement
documents that will or may be required of this plat. Staff is willing to entertain a proposal by the
developer’s attorney to incorporate certain of the required elements into a neighborhood covenant, which
has been done with some past developments in Orono.
Gaffron noted one of the neighbors, Mr. Kelley, has submitted a letter dated January 10, 2014, in which
he suggests three specific actions he feels would make for a better development. In addition to the
applicant’s response, Staff would make the following observations:
1. “Increase setback from Willow Drive.” As noted in prior memos, the standard for RPUD is a
50-foot side street setback from Willow Drive. The applicant is proposing 25 feet. Kelley has
suggested 40 feet. Increasing the setback to something greater than 25 feet will reduce the
flexibility in house design while potentially allowing for better screening, especially if a trail is
someday developed on the east side of Willow Drive.
Gaffron noted of the Council Members asked what the existing setbacks are from Willow Drive. Gaffron
indicated the houses across the street in the Hackberry neighborhood are approximately 50 feet from the
street lot line. The one house that is furthest from the park is 30 feet. On the corner lot of Glendale Cove,
due to wetlands and drainage easements, that house is 45 to 50 feet from the street right-of-way. Gaffron
indicated the setbacks vary in depth and the question is whether 50 feet would be appropriate in this
situation.
McMillan noted Willow has a distinct setback look.
Gaffron noted the City is not creating a neighborhood of two acre lots with Oliver Hill and that they are
instead creating an urbanized neighborhood.
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING
Monday, January 27, 2014
7:00 o’clock p.m.
_____________________________________________________________________________________
Page 12 of 32
(5. #13-3637 WILLI ABBOTT ON BEHALF OF THE BROADWAY GROUP, LLC – 2350
WATERTOWN ROAD AND XXX WILLOW DRIVE NORTH – PRELIMINARY PLAT AND RPUD
REZONING, Continued)
McMillan asked whether the wetland in Glendale Cove is platted as an outlot.
Gaffron indicated it is privately owned by an association.
McMillan asked if it is contiguous to this other wetland.
Gaffron indicated it likely is but that there might be some higher ground separating the two due to some
trees in the area.
McMillan asked why the City would not want this wetland to be part of an outlot.
Gaffron stated Staff from the beginning has favored creation of an outlot for the wetland, which would
potentially include the proposed tree preservation area. Gaffron indicated this would be similar to the
development scheme of Glendale Cove to the immediate north. This would require establishment of a
homeowners association to own and manage those areas, which the developer does not favor.
Gaffron stated looking back at the minutes from December of 2005 and January of 2006, the discussion
focused on the density and the fact that there will be city utilities in the right-of-way. The City Council
had a consensus at that time that the road be a public road. The City’s Comprehensive Plan also contains
a statement which reads as follows: Under urban transportation policies, No. 1, local streets in the urban
area will be owned and maintained by the City. Because the land use and street use density for the urban
neighborhoods is relatively high, the City will provide public street access to all urban properties. The
City’s responsibility for proper maintenance levels will ensure passable all-weather streets available at all
times for emergency vehicles and for general public ingress and egress. Gaffron noted they are basically
following what the Comprehensive Plan says about urban development.
Levang stated she has a problem with that since the City would be responsible for all the maintenance and
upkeep in the future. Levang stated when the City is taking over another road, that means the City is
taking on all the responsibility for the maintenance and upkeep over time, and when they are talking about
serving seven homes and making that a public road, she has problem with that when so many of the
surrounding neighborhoods are all private.
Gaffron noted those are all two acre lots.
McMillan commented it is more expensive for the homeowners on the two-acre lots given the longer
driveways and road as well as fewer homes.
Gaffron stated the second suggestion from Mr. Kelley is to move the access road 15 feet north. The
proposed cul-de-sac abuts the northwest corner of Kelley’s property and includes a corridor segment that
would allow for potential future road connection to the Kelley property.
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING
Monday, January 27, 2014
7:00 o’clock p.m.
_____________________________________________________________________________________
Page 13 of 32
(5. #13-3637 WILLI ABBOTT ON BEHALF OF THE BROADWAY GROUP, LLC – 2350
WATERTOWN ROAD AND XXX WILLOW DRIVE NORTH – PRELIMINARY PLAT AND RPUD
REZONING, Continued)
Gaffron illustrated the location of the cul-de-sac on the overhead. Gaffron noted the City typically does
not like to maintain cul-de-sacs. It also drastically reduces the possibility of making this proposed public
cul-de-sac road into a through road if the Kelley property develops at some point in the future.
Staff has requested that that connection be shown on the plans. While Mr. Kelley’s suggestion moves the
road away from his property, it places the cul-de-sac so much further north that it has a huge impact on
the build ability of the lots to the north due to the location of the creek and the required setbacks from the
wetland. Moving the road and cul-de-sac northward has a significant impact on reducing the buildable
area and flexibility of Lots 1 through 4 in Block 1.
Gaffron stated the third suggestion by Mr. Kelley is 3 the creation of an outlot for the wetland, which has
been discussed previously.
Gaffron stated the City Council should reach a conclusion on each of the following items:
1. Confirm that development of this site should be as a Residential Planned Unit Development.
2. Nothing that lot sizes and proposed flexibility requests for certain lots regarding width,
contiguous. Buildable area and setbacks have not changed, does the Council have any further
concerns. Regarding the proposed flexibility?
a. Allowing the side street setback for the two lots abutting Willow Drive to be 25 feet
rather than the 50 feet setback required because Willow Drive is a collector road.
b. Allowing the substandard lot widths for Lots 3, 4, and 5 which abut the cul-de-sac.
c. Allowing Lots 1, 3, and 4 to contain a contiguous dry buildable area slightly less than
the required 15,000 square feet on the basis that the overall density is acceptable and
that there is sufficient area within the sites to allow homes to be developed.
3. Confirm acceptance of the new cul-de-sac road as a public road, with the understanding the City
will ultimately maintain the road and municipal sewer system that the developer constructs.
4. Given the pros and cons of establishing an outlot for preservation of the natural amenities of the
site, confirm that the Council still prefers that each lot contain its share of the areas to be
protected via various easements. The Council may want to discuss the merits and methods of
consolidating easements if that is still an issue.
5. Is Council in agreement with the Planning Commission that the 10 percent recreation area
required by the RPUD standards is satisfied by dedication of easements for tree preservation
and a walking easement over the existing and proposed 20-footsewer easements? Gaffron noted
the easement would not be right up against the Glendale development.
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING
Monday, January 27, 2014
7:00 o’clock p.m.
_____________________________________________________________________________________
Page 14 of 32
(5. #13-3637 WILLI ABBOTT ON BEHALF OF THE BROADWAY GROUP, LLC – 2350
WATERTOWN ROAD AND XXX WILLOW DRIVE NORTH – PRELIMINARY PLAT AND RPUD
REZONING, Continued)
6. Are the revisions to the proposed landscaping plan acceptable? Are there any concerns regarding
the applicant’s proposal for vegetation preservation during site development?
7. Which of the presented options for establishing a massing limit on the individual lots does
Council prefer.
Planning Staff would recommend the following:
1. Process the subdivision via rezoning to RPUD.
2. Approval should be subject to the standard platting requirements, establishment of a developer’s
agreement for the public and private improvements, payment of park dedication fees,
stormwater trunk fees, granting of appropriate easements, etc., to be defined and enumerated
in a resolution for preliminary plat approval.
3. Approval subject to the current and forthcoming comments of the City Engineer and Fire
Marshal.
Levang asked if Staff could show the Council visually where the walking easement would be.
Gaffron stated it would start at Willow Drive and go all the way across the east end of the property. At
the east end, the sewer line would head directly south and the walking easement would be along that
corridor. Gaffron stated whether that makes sense is up for further discussion.
Levang asked how the area would be marked.
Gaffron stated in his view the intent of the applicant is that the 10 percent recreation area serves only the
residents within the subdivision and would likely not be marked. Gaffron stated the residents would be
aware that there is a walking easement there but that it would not be open to the general public. Gaffron
stated the close proximity of Hackberry Park should be taken into consideration on this development and
whether a recreation area is needed in this instance.
McMillan asked if the cul-de-sac has a 100-foot diameter.
Gaffron indicated the cul-de-sac as platted is 100 feet and that the City Code requires 80 feet. Gaffron
stated the Fire Department would like a 96-foot paved area but noted the City has never required that.
The outer 10 feet would not be paved and would likely be a ditch or contain portions of a rain garden.
McMillan stated it would be nice to have a paved section but that it does not have to be 100 feet of
pavement.
Gaffron noted part of the rain gardens are within the 50-foot corridor. Gaffron stated the lot located right
off of Willow to the right has a rain garden that is partially within the right-of-way.
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING
Monday, January 27, 2014
7:00 o’clock p.m.
_____________________________________________________________________________________
Page 15 of 32
(5. #13-3637 WILLI ABBOTT ON BEHALF OF THE BROADWAY GROUP, LLC – 2350
WATERTOWN ROAD AND XXX WILLOW DRIVE NORTH – PRELIMINARY PLAT AND RPUD
REZONING, Continued)
McMillan asked if each of the rain gardens have their own outlet.
Gaffron indicated the applicant will need to explain that.
Levang asked what the requirement is for trees.
Gaffron indicated it would be the same requirement as Bayfield and that there would be trees every 40
feet lining the road. What the applicant is proposing is not necessarily following that and it might make
more sense to have the trees scattered rather than methodically placed.
McMillan asked if the development will have curb and gutter.
Gaffron indicated that is being proposed.
Levang commented she does not like the uniformed approach for the trees and that she would prefer they
be scattered.
Gaffron stated to his recollection the landscape plan does not show the trees being placed uniformly.
McMillan commented she has a concern that the development is over-engineered. McMillan asked how
the City Council feels about the lot coverage.
Levang stated to her understanding this is supposed to be moderately priced homes on a small scale, but
that the homes end up being larger than that. Levang stated she would rather go with small lots with
small homes rather than small lots with large homes and that she would like to see some differentiation
between Glendale Cove and Oliver Hill.
Printup commented he also sees the resemblance to Glendale Cove.
McMillan noted the City holds other lots to the 15 percent lot coverage and that the idea of increasing
density does not mean they can have a large house on a small lot.
Levang stated she is in agreement with the 15 percent.
McMillan stated the other big issue is the setback from Willow.
Levang stated in her view it should be 40 feet and that 25 feet is too close.
McMillan stated it should be at least 35 feet, especially if a trail is ever constructed in that area at some
point in the future.
Levang stated she would also like the road to remain private.
Printup and McMillan stated they are in agreement that the road should be private.
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING
Monday, January 27, 2014
7:00 o’clock p.m.
_____________________________________________________________________________________
Page 16 of 32
(5. #13-3637 WILLI ABBOTT ON BEHALF OF THE BROADWAY GROUP, LLC – 2350
WATERTOWN ROAD AND XXX WILLOW DRIVE NORTH – PRELIMINARY PLAT AND RPUD
REZONING, Continued)
McMillan stated it might be 50 years before that area is developed but that the road should connect down
through Willow. McMillan stated in her view the road needs to be platted to avoid people becoming
upset should the road ever be constructed at some point.
Levang stated in her view the wetlands should also be put in an outlot.
McMillan stated a homeowners association may not be necessary unless the developer feels he would like
that. McMillan asked if a homeowners association is required.
Mattick stated it depends how the City would like the outlot held. Mattick indicated they have discussed
it at a Staff level and some of the complicating issues are all the different easements and the number of
restrictions on their lot. If it is made an outlot, it would not be part of their lot to begin with, but the issue
comes down to how it is maintained and who owns it.
McMillan stated the outlot would be very visible for Staff to observe since it is along the road and that in
her view it will not need a lot of maintenance. McMillan stated in her view it is in the best interests of the
landowners to preserve the trees and maintain the buffer and that she is not sure a tree preservation
easement is required. McMillan noted the middle lot on the cul-de-sac will have the most trees and that
she is not sure it is necessary to have a separate easement for that.
Gaffron asked if the portion of the wetland would be an outlot and then the creek going through Lots 3, 4,
and 5 would be a separate set of easements for each property.
McMillan indicated that is correct. McMillan stated as it relates to the walking easement, she is not in
favor of that, and if a trail is ever constructed, it will provide a kind of buffer.
Levang stated the one issue she is interested in relates to Mr. Kelley’s proposal about moving the
roadway. One of the issues that was raised at the Planning Commission was the possibility of headlights.
Levang asked if changing that roadway would help alleviate that.
Gaffron stated if you follow the south line of what used to be 2350 and go directly straight west from that,
you will come to a spot that is perhaps 15 to 20 feet north of the driveway serving the house at 65.
Gaffron stated the road coming down and going west would aim almost directly at the middle of the front
yard of the house at 65.
Levang asked if that is the revised proposal.
Gaffron indicated that is how it is depicted in the original proposal. If the City Council goes with Mr.
Kelley’s proposal, it would further limit the two lots to the north of the road. If there is an outlot plus
setbacks and if the road is moved north, the lots would be constrained even further. Gaffron stated if the
road moves north, the houses will get pushed back, especially Lot 2, and Lot 2 would not have room for a
deck.
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING
Monday, January 27, 2014
7:00 o’clock p.m.
_____________________________________________________________________________________
Page 17 of 32
(5. #13-3637 WILLI ABBOTT ON BEHALF OF THE BROADWAY GROUP, LLC – 2350
WATERTOWN ROAD AND XXX WILLOW DRIVE NORTH – PRELIMINARY PLAT AND RPUD
REZONING, Continued)
Levang stated she likes the planting buffer along the cul-de-sac and that in her opinion it should be put in
place to reduce the visual impacts.
Gaffron stated the question becomes whether a buffer like that can be accomplished without moving the
road. Gaffron stated if that area is preserved for a future road, it could also contain plantings in the
interim.
Levang stated she would like to see plantings in the cul-de-sac portion.
McMillan stated the landscaping plan is very good as it relates to the selection of plant material and that
the swales will be easier to maintain than rain gardens.
Willi Abbott, Applicant, stated by increasing the road setback, the buildable area on the lot would be
reduced to 40 feet for the width of a home, which would result in a long, thin home. Abbott stated what
they have created with this neighborhood is wider lots and that he understands the development is on a
collector street. Abbott stated they chose to use the RPUD standards for this development, which is a
give and take. The concept on the interior of the development was created in a layout that works and is
visually consistent and very appealing. Abbott noted this concept started way back last year and that if
the setback is increased to 40 feet, it will kill the project because it will result in a lot of garage with a
little bit of home visible from the front. Abbott indicated he would have to come back with a whole new
plan and that he does not support that decision. Abbott stated part of what they are building is homes that
have a connection to the front street and a sense of community. As it relates to the wetland outlot, Abbott
stated he does not totally understand why that needs to be carved out of a landowner’s land. Abbott stated
the wetland easement concept that has been around for a long time works very well. Cutting it out as a
separate piece, whether it is owned by a homeowners association or the private homeowner, would result
in small lots and that they are attempting to create larger lots with smaller homes.
Abbott stated that would necessitate them having to go back to the 15 percent lot coverage area concept,
which would not apply to this. The part that applies would be 50 percent FAR on a RPUD. Abbott stated
what they were trying to come up with was a plan that would meet the lot coverage for single family in an
RPUD and if they are now looking at 15 percent, that will result in a little house.
Abbott stated the next issue is the private road. Abbott asked if a public road is required on an urban
neighborhood under the City’s Comprehensive Plan.
Gaffron stated that is the City’s Comprehensive Plan policy.
Abbott noted the policy would then be changed.
Levang pointed out the Comprehensive Plan is a guide.
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING
Monday, January 27, 2014
7:00 o’clock p.m.
_____________________________________________________________________________________
Page 18 of 32
(5. #13-3637 WILLI ABBOTT ON BEHALF OF THE BROADWAY GROUP, LLC – 2350
WATERTOWN ROAD AND XXX WILLOW DRIVE NORTH – PRELIMINARY PLAT AND RPUD
REZONING, Continued)
Abbott stated if that is the case, the properties that are around there with public roads would pay the same
amount of taxes as the residents on the private roads. Abbott stated he is attempting to create affordable
housing, and if these property owners are required to maintain a private road, it would create an added
expense to the homeowners.
Gaffron stated Hennepin County, for the last 35 years, has been hit or miss on how they interpret the
underlying road easements the City has for the rural private roads. Some show up as an outlot and some
show up as a private road. Gaffron indicated he has attempted in the past to get that clarified but it has
not yet happened.
Abbott stated in speaking with Staff, it seemed that Staff wanted to go down the path of a public road. If
the road is private, Abbott indicated some items will need to be changed. Abbott stated under their plan,
they did what they heard Staff suggest and that in his view the public road makes the most sense. Abbott
stated the added taxes the City would receive would outweigh the maintenance costs.
Levang stated the City Council has expressed its opinions on the application and that the decision is up to
the City Council.
Abbott asked who would monitor the use of the 10 percent recreation area.
Gaffron stated the neighborhood would monitor it. Another RPUD in the City includes Stone Bay, which
has some areas designated for a neighborhood park. Gaffron stated when you look at Glendale Cove, the
City Council concluded that the public trail that connects from Glendale Drive across the church property
and becomes part of Glendale Cove Lane, is their private recreation area. Gaffron indicated there is a
little outlot to the north as you enter the road that was also attributed to the private recreation area.
Gaffron stated for a development of half a dozen homes, the idea of having 10 percent of the site
dedicated to a neighborhood recreation area, especially when it is across the street from a city park, did
not make much sense.
McMillan stated that requirement was designed for bigger developments.
Abbott indicated he is not in favor of doing it.
Levang noted the City Council is in agreement with that point.
Abbott stated the only other discussion is the decision on the FAR.
John Quinlan, Gordan James Construction, stated a comment was made that this development resembles
Glendale Cove. Quinlan noted the largest lot in Glendale Cover is just under a half acre and the smallest
lot in this development is over a half acre. If you average the lot sizes, these lots are much bigger than
Glendale Cover as a whole and will not have the same feel.
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING
Monday, January 27, 2014
7:00 o’clock p.m.
_____________________________________________________________________________________
Page 19 of 32
(5. #13-3637 WILLI ABBOTT ON BEHALF OF THE BROADWAY GROUP, LLC – 2350
WATERTOWN ROAD AND XXX WILLOW DRIVE NORTH – PRELIMINARY PLAT AND RPUD
REZONING, Continued)
Levang stated that may be true but what is being proposed in terms of houses will be very similar.
Levang stated while there may be a little more room on each side, essentially this development is a
duplicate of the Glendale Cove development. Levang noted Mr. Abbott referred to a small lot with a
large house.
Abbott stated they are trying to do larger lots with smaller homes, but by creating the outlot and
increasing the setback, that will result in a smaller buildable area.
Levang noted there are a number of wetlands on the site.
Abbott stated there are some wetlands on the site and that the creek separates it from the wetland.
Levang stated the house sizes are fairly large if you look at the square footages that are being proposed.
Abbott stated the worst case scenario on a rambler was 2,100, 2,200 square feet, and on the two-story was
somewhere between 1,000 to 1,500 square feet on one floor.
Levang stated when those are added together, it results in a significant amount of footprint. Levang noted
they are also proposing 3-car garages.
Quinlan commented that is pretty standard today.
Printup noted the City Council was discussing a little earlier tonight what is standard nowadays.
Quinlan stated he has not constructed a two-stall garage since 2004 and that all of the $400,000
neighborhoods have 3-car garages. Quinlan stated the litmus standard should be what they are seeing in
the market, and that what they are seeing in the market is 3-stall garages on new developments.
McMillan stated she understands that is the desire, but that a 2-car garage is considered to be a functional
garage in Orono.
Abbott stated a 2,000 square foot rambler is not that big.
Levang noted Mr. Abbott has indicated he will not be constructing ramblers.
Gaffron illustrated the house drawings on the overhead. Gaffron noted the drawings have been scaled and
some dimensions have been added to give an idea of the sizes.
McMillan stated what was confusing is some language in Staff’s report that said they would limit all
seven lots to 15 percent but then it said the home sizes would range in footprints between 2,600 to 5,100
square feet. McMillan noted the larger house sizes are not being proposed.
Abbott indicated that is correct.
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING
Monday, January 27, 2014
7:00 o’clock p.m.
_____________________________________________________________________________________
Page 20 of 32
(5. #13-3637 WILLI ABBOTT ON BEHALF OF THE BROADWAY GROUP, LLC – 2350
WATERTOWN ROAD AND XXX WILLOW DRIVE NORTH – PRELIMINARY PLAT AND RPUD
REZONING, Continued)
Gaffron indicated that was based on the whole lot.
McMillan stated Staff’s memo made it somewhat confusing and that it appeared he was proposing a 3,000
square foot perimeter.
Abbott stated their plan is to construct something between 2,500 and 3,000 square feet.
McMillan asked if that is the total amount of square feet.
Abbott indicated that would be for two floors. Abbott stated the 15 percent would create a large number
on a bigger lot, but that it is not their intent to construct a home that size.
Quinlan stated they have the ability on many lots to construct an 8,000 to 10,000 square foot home but in
their experience nobody is going to spend $200,000 on a lot and then construct a $1.5 million home.
Quinlan stated even though 5,700 square feet is allowed on some of the bigger lots, it is very unlikely the
people who will be purchasing these lots will be able to afford to construct a home of that size.
Abbott stated they also did not want the homeowners to come back and ask for a variance, so decks and
porches have been included in the calculations.
McMillan asked if the floor plans are for four-season living space except for the garage.
Abbot indicated that is correct.
Gaffron noted the plans do not show a deck or porch.
Levang stated the reality is that what is being depicted will not be constructed and that they will be
constructing what the landowner wants.
Quinlan indicated that is correct.
Levang stated the price of the home will also be dependent on what the homeowner wants to build.
Levang commented she feels a little duped by the phrase affordable housing.
Abbott stated he is not attempting to dupe the City Council and that he offered to allow any wording
restricting the size of the homes. Abbott indicated he is fine if the City Council wants to limit them to
3,000 square feet.
Levang stated he pushed back on the 15 percent, which has caused some confusion.
McMillan stated the issue was the dry contiguous.
Quinlan stated they will not be constructing homes that are 5,700 square feet in this development.
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING
Monday, January 27, 2014
7:00 o’clock p.m.
_____________________________________________________________________________________
Page 21 of 32
(5. #13-3637 WILLI ABBOTT ON BEHALF OF THE BROADWAY GROUP, LLC – 2350
WATERTOWN ROAD AND XXX WILLOW DRIVE NORTH – PRELIMINARY PLAT AND RPUD
REZONING, Continued)
Levang noted Mr. Abbott wanted the FAR rather than the 15 percent.
Abbott stated if an outlot is created, that would restrict the building envelop and would result in lots that
have no deck or screen porch. Abbott stated if the Council would like to restrict it to smaller homes, he
would ask that the City Council tell them how they should do it.
McMillan stated the floor plans are helpful but noted the City Council only received them tonight.
McMillan noted in the first example the lower level is 45 feet wide and the upper level is 38 feet wide, but
that he had indicated he did not want to construct a home that was 40 feet wide. McMillan stated in her
view he pretty much has it designed already.
Levang noted the reason it is 45 is because of a third stall garage.
Abbott stated 40 feet is pretty difficult.
Levang commented the garage could be limited to two cars.
McMillan asked if this is not what they want to build.
Quinlan stated if the house is moved over another five feet that would make a huge difference and reduces
the width of the front of the house.
Levang stated if it is a two-car garage, nothing would have to be moved.
Quinlan stated it is difficult to sell a new home with a 2-car garage nowadays.
Levang stated if they are talking about affordable housing, a two-car garage is more affordable.
McMillan noted there are other lots in the subdivision that could accommodate a 3-car garage and that
there are perhaps only two lots that would have to have a 2-car garage.
Levang stated the City Council knows a 2-car garage is still workable in other developments.
Abbott stated they are attempting to create a consistent development for new families and that their
competition offers 3-car garages.
McMillan stated the floor plans depict something that is close to 40 feet wide and that those are decisions
that may need to be worked out.
McMillan indicated she is in agreement with not creating a wetland outlot and that it is probably better to
attach it to the individual lots. McMillan noted it would still be considered an easement but would allow
the developer to get to a certain lot size.
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING
Monday, January 27, 2014
7:00 o’clock p.m.
_____________________________________________________________________________________
Page 22 of 32
(5. #13-3637 WILLI ABBOTT ON BEHALF OF THE BROADWAY GROUP, LLC – 2350
WATERTOWN ROAD AND XXX WILLOW DRIVE NORTH – PRELIMINARY PLAT AND RPUD
REZONING, Continued)
Abbott asked if there will need to be permanent signage along the edge of the wetland. Abbott stated if
that is the case, it will not be such a gray area for the residents. Abbott stated they are attempting to
design a consistent neighborhood that will bring value to Orono.
McMillan stated the City Council is also desirous of a consistent neighborhood with the setbacks.
McMillan asked how engineered the rain gardens are, noting that she would prefer to keep things simple.
Marty Campion, Engineer, stated the rain gardens provide water quality and rate control. The rate control
would be through a 6-inch outlet pipe. Campion indicated without the pipe outlot, the rain gardens would
overtop and it will be difficult to control the discharge.
McMillan stated in her view the one rain garden near the cul-de-sac would need to be piped due to the
slope.
Campion stated the intent is on the upslope side of each of the rain gardens, since there is a curb line that
water will then go to the rain garden. Campion pointed out how the area from the house to the street is
tributary to the rain garden and noted that only a portion of the street would be tributary to it. Campion
indicated all of the rain gardens all relatively equally balanced with the amount of water they will take.
McMillan asked if the curb cuts are essential to control the runoff.
Campion indicated the curbs just added to the feel of the neighborhood.
Abbott commented they were also going with the concept of a public road.
McMillan stated unless the development has higher density, the City tends not to require curb and gutter.
Campion stated it would not be a typical rural ditch but more of a swale since there is not a lot of distance
from the edge of the road to the house.
Levang stated she has a concern with the maintenance of a rain garden since they may become
nonfunctional over time.
McMillan asked if they need to do the rain gardens.
Campion indicated they have to do something to meet rain control and that the soils in the area are not
real conducive to filtration. The rain gardens help create more of a filtration system and also provide
some storage. Campion stated if enough treatment could be achieved through the swales and they are
allowed to use the larger wetland as the rate control that would be one option, but that they have to
demonstrate treatment before discharging to the wetland. Campion indicated the wetland is large enough
to provide rate control but that they have to provide some type of treatment.
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING
Monday, January 27, 2014
7:00 o’clock p.m.
_____________________________________________________________________________________
Page 23 of 32
(5. #13-3637 WILLI ABBOTT ON BEHALF OF THE BROADWAY GROUP, LLC – 2350
WATERTOWN ROAD AND XXX WILLOW DRIVE NORTH – PRELIMINARY PLAT AND RPUD
REZONING, Continued)
Levang stated she can see the rain gardens functioning for the first few years but then after that she can
see them becoming a problem.
Campion stated the outlots will be like a quasi-rain garden and will basically be small basins/rain gardens
to provide some rate control.
Levang stated she would encourage them to come back with something other than a rain garden.
McMillan indicated she is in agreement.
McMillan noted Staff is looking for direction on the resolution.
Gaffron stated he is not sure whether Staff can draft a resolution at this point since there are enough
changes being proposed. Gaffron stated if an outlot is required, Staff would need to have new numbers
submitted on each of the lots. Gaffron stated if the City Council does not want an outlot, then perhaps
Staff could bring back a resolution.
It was the consensus of the City Council to require no outlot, a 40-foot side setback, 15 percent coverage,
and to make it a private road.
Gaffron noted all the roads in the neighborhood are private with bump-outs for parking. Kelly Parkway is
a public road and Creekside is a private road and was done as a PRUD because it was in the two-acre
zone with the homes being clustered to preserve wetlands and uplands. Gaffron indicated those lots are
three-quarters to one acre on a private road with public sewer and water. The development on Watertown
Road was done as PRD due to the density. Gaffron indicated Stone Bay is unique because it is individual
pads with a big common area.
Gaffron noted the City Council has indicated they are looking for something a little bit different than
Glendale Cove. Gaffron stated to his understanding the parameters of the development are that the road
be made private, a 15 percent limit on all lots, a 40-foot setback for the two lots that abut Willow Drive,
no outlot for the wetland, the tree preservation area should not be an outlot, no designation of 10 percent
of the property for recreation, the developer should design something other than rain gardens, no curb and
gutter, and no walking easement.
McMillan indicated that is correct.
Gaffron stated given that direction, Staff can draft a resolution for the next City Council meeting.
Gaffron indicated he is not sure how the consolidation of easements should be handled.
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING
Monday, January 27, 2014
7:00 o’clock p.m.
_____________________________________________________________________________________
Page 24 of 32
(5. #13-3637 WILLI ABBOTT ON BEHALF OF THE BROADWAY GROUP, LLC – 2350
WATERTOWN ROAD AND XXX WILLOW DRIVE NORTH – PRELIMINARY PLAT AND RPUD
REZONING, Continued)
Mattick stated Staff can try to streamline them and that he will take a look at what is required and forward
the information to the City Council. Mattick stated he heard no tree preservation easement is required.
Levang indicated that is correct.
The City Council took no formal action on this application.
PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR/CITY ENGINEER’S REPORT
6. NORTH WATER TOWER REPAINTING PROJECT
Struve stated before the City Council tonight is a proposal from SEH to provide professional services for
a maintenance contract to repaint and maintain the City’s water tower for a 10-year period. Included with
the proposal is also a memo from Bolton & Menk providing a contrasting point of view since this is kind
of a new concept for the City of Orono to enter into a maintenance agreement rather than the standard
design/bid/build process. Struve stated in his opinion the maintenance contract is a better value for the
City of Orono.
Jason Spragg, Short, Elliot, Hendrickson, stated currently the City has two elevated tanks. The existing
water tower is a hydro pillar-style tank with a flute center column. The tower was originally erected in
1992 and is a 400,000 gallon facility.
Spragg stated today’s construction costs for a facility such as this range from 5 to 9 million dollars per
tank with a 400,000 gallon facility. Using that kind of a cost range, Spragg indicated to rebuild Orono’s
tank today would range between 2 and 2.5 million dollars. Spragg stated the good news is that once the
facilities are built, absent any metal fatigue, the facility should last in excess of 75 years.
Spragg stated similar to any other capital assets, such as a snow plow or personal vehicle, the City could
buy this asset and drive it into the ground or the City could purchase it and maintain it over time. Coating
or paint on a water tank is designed to last 15 to 20 years.
SEH is proposing basically a maintenance cycle, which would consist of cleaning, touching up the tank,
and monitoring the tank with the idea that the total cost of ownership will be less for communities such as
Orono. Spragg noted maintenance of the tank over that time ends up being almost twice as much as the
initial capital cost.
Spragg stated the north tower adjacent to City Hall is approximately 20 years old and is requiring
maintenance. Spragg stated basically there are two options available for water towers. They can either be
sand blasted and repainted or have an overcoat applied. Spragg noted he did inspect the tank with Staff
approximately a year ago, and based on that inspection, it was determined that an overcoat would be
appropriate and would allow the tank to last for another 15 to 20 years.
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING
Monday, January 27, 2014
7:00 o’clock p.m.
_____________________________________________________________________________________
Page 25 of 32
(6. NORTH WATER TOWER REPAINTING PROJECT, Continued)
Spragg stated typically cities would do a design/bid/build approach that is overseen by an engineer. Six
percent of the construction costs would go to the engineer to write the plans and specs. The City would
then award the project to the lowest bidder. An engineer would subsequently be hired to oversee the
construction or rehab work, which would amount to approximately 10 percent of the costs, which would
be based on the amount of time spent inspecting the construction work. Both the engineer’s costs and the
subsequent rehabilitation costs would be due upon satisfactory completion of the work. Spragg noted
there typically will be a one-year warranty on the tank. The City would have the option of adding either a
two or a five-year extended warranty as bid alternates but that that option can end up being very costly.
Spragg stated SEH has done a 40-year analysis with regard to total cost of ownership. A comparison was
done with the City of Cottage Grove showing significant savings by utilizing the design/build method. In
the comparison, the Cities of Arden Hills, St. Paul Park, and Vadnais Heights were compared to the
proposal from the design-build team of SEH/Classic. In the study, it was determined that Cottage Grove
would realize savings of $80,000 to $200,000 under the design-build method. Spragg indicated the most
typical size for this type of tower is 1,000,000 gallons rather than 400,000 gallons.
Spragg stated if the City is interested in the design-build method, the costs, with interest, can be spread
out over the life of the contract. The tank would be warrantied against defects for the length of the
contract, and if the coating fails, SEH would pay for that.
McMillan asked what type of failure he is talking about.
Spragg stated chipping or corroding would be included in the 5-year contract and that SEH would
perform routine inspections of the tank over the life of the contract. Spragg stated painting a 140-foot
structure that is exposed to the elements is not an exact science and that there are things that will occur,
such as chipping. The worst case scenario would be metal loss. Spragg indicated SEH would prefer to
address it when it is in the chipping stage. In addition some staining and streaking may occur.
McMillan asked what some typical interior failures would be.
Spragg stated they would be similar to the exterior. Spragg stated the wet interior is a very caustic
environment and there could be straining or corrosion as well. Spragg indicated SEH will perform
interior and exterior pressure washing of the tank, which will address the staining, and if there is spot
corrosion, they will also address that.
McMillan asked if that is also included in the costs.
Spragg indicated it is. Spragg stated in 2002, the MN Legislature amended Section 471.345 to allow for
municipalities to enter into multi-year professional service contracts for engineering, repair, and
maintenance of a water storage tank. The benefits of this approach are the contractor works with an
engineering firm on the inspection and review of the tanks, which allows them to have intimate
knowledge of the tank and allows them to include an aggressive price on the project.
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING
Monday, January 27, 2014
7:00 o’clock p.m.
_____________________________________________________________________________________
Page 26 of 32
(6. NORTH WATER TOWER REPAINTING PROJECT, Continued)
Spragg stated the biggest selling point of the design-build approach is the guaranteed use of a qualified
contractor. Spragg noted SEH has performed work down in Texas and west of the Rockies and works in
conjunction with Classic Protective Coatings, who is one of the top water tower painting companies in the
country. Spragg stated if the City elects to go with the design-build method, they would be protected
against costs associated with premature failure of the coating system.
McMillan asked if Classic would do the whole project or just the painting.
Spragg indicated Classic would be the contractor on the project and SEH would be the inspector on the
project. Classic would perform all of the necessary painting, electrical, and spot repairs. Spragg noted a
fair amount of rigging is required and that weather plays a significant factor for when the work can be
performed.
McMillan asked if Classic is busy enough that it is difficult to schedule them.
Spragg stated this coming summer they are quite busy but that it depends on the weather for when they
can start and when they finish. Spragg indicated premature failures typically are a result of moisture, and
that Classic will only perform the work when the weather is right.
Struve noted he has received assurances from SEH and Classic that Orono will be one of the first ones on
the list with a completion date of May 31. Struve stated that would be the ideal time before the peak
watering season commences.
McMillan asked how long the job would take to complete.
Spragg stated they cannot paint with winds over 20 miles an hour and that there are other very tight
weather conditions they can paint under. Spragg indicated they are looking at between five and six weeks
for the work to be completed. The blasting work will be on the inside of the tank. Spragg stated May 31
is the anticipated completion date assuming a normal spring.
Levang noted on Page 3 of the letter from Bolton & Menk, Point 2 under conclusions and
recommendations, Bolton & Menk is saying the City does not require as many inspections as outlined by
the contractor. Levang requested Struve address the items contained in Bolton & Menk’s letter.
Struve stated it is a possibility that under the traditional method, that there is potential savings. Based
upon the cost analysis, Struve stated in his opinion the prices that were submitted with the proposal are
quite fair and would be comparable to if the City bid the project out, but that he cannot be 100 percent
certain of that. Struve indicated he personally could not find any comparable 400,000 gallon hydro pillar
tanks, which makes it more difficult to estimate the costs.
Struve stated the other item of concern is that Bolton & Menk recommends a 10-year warranty. Struve
stated he has been unable to find another instance where there was a 10-year warranty and that the typical
warranty is one year with bid alternates of two years and occasionally five years. Struve stated based on
that, he is unable to provide the costs associated with bidding out a 10-year similar warranty.
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING
Monday, January 27, 2014
7:00 o’clock p.m.
_____________________________________________________________________________________
Page 27 of 32
(6. NORTH WATER TOWER REPAINTING PROJECT, Continued)
Struve stated in his view the $4,000 or $4,500 annually to do inspections is a very good value in order to
catch problems early on and that the City does not want to have a premature failure in year seven or eight.
Levang asked when the last time the tank was inspected previous to last year.
Struve stated to his understanding it has not been inspected previously. Struve indicated it may have been
inspected at year ten but that he has not found any formal reports to that effect.
Levang asked if they are surprised at the condition of it when they did inspect it.
Struve indicated he would defer to Jason on that.
Spragg stated the fact that they are just looking at an overcoat after 21 years is surprising and that they
were expecting the tank would have required reblasting and coating.
McMillan asked if the tank has ever been power washed.
Struve stated he is not aware of it happening but that he has not specifically asked Staff that question.
Spragg stated the American Water Works Association recommends a five-year inspection window.
Levang noted Point 3 of Bolton & Menk’s letter states that a three-coat epoxy system is commonly
provided in the design-bid-build industry as well as a zinc primer. Levang asked if what they are
proposing is different.
Spragg stated they are proposing a two-coat system and that three coats in their opinion would be overkill.
Spragg stated if they were dealing with a tank that was being blasted down to bare steel, he would likely
recommend three coats, but that they are not doing that in this case.
Printup indicated he is not in favor of the logo.
McMillan stated she would prefer it only be on one side.
Levang stated she would also rather not do the logo.
Struve stated the proposal is for block lettering similar to what is currently on there and that the additional
$4,800 was to put the city logo on both sides rather than the block lettering.
McMillan asked if the City is required to go with the lowest bid when they go out for bids.
Mattick stated the City must enter into the low bid system for work to be performed except for
engineering and professional services. Mattick stated the bidding process could require mandatory
qualifications, which would eliminate some bidders.
McMillan asked if Mr. Struve is recommending a five or ten-year warranty.
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING
Monday, January 27, 2014
7:00 o’clock p.m.
_____________________________________________________________________________________
Page 28 of 32
(6. NORTH WATER TOWER REPAINTING PROJECT, Continued)
Struve indicated he would recommend the 10-year warranty.
McMillan noted the additional five years would cost $80,000 more.
Struve stated the American Water Works Association has guidelines for maintenance of a water tower,
and they recommend at the 5-year mark that a pressure wash and inspection be completed, which would
be included in the cost of the contract. Struve indicated the cost might not be that high if they went out
for bid, but that it would be in that vicinity. The additional costs would be for the yearly inspections,
which perhaps could be scaled back to every other year. Struve stated the elimination of one or two
inspections is what the City would be saving by not going into a maintenance agreement.
Levang asked if the City would be able to enter into a new 5-year or 10-year contract after the first
contract expires.
Spragg indicated that is correct and that they would be happy if an overcoat lasts 20 years.
Levang asked if the Council could have some flexibility with the yearly inspections and modify the
contract.
Spragg indicated the annual inspection is SEH’s way of protecting themselves and that they attempt to
keep the inspection costs as low as possible.
McMillan asked whether the City would be able to enter into a 5-year contract and then later extend that.
Spragg stated the City does have that option but noted the costs are adjusted for inflation in year’s six to
ten and that he cannot guarantee the costs will be that.
McMillan stated if the City Council elects to go with SEH, she would recommend the 5-year contract.
Struve stated he would be fine with the 5-year contract and that the type of work to be completed in those
five years would not be altered under the shorter contract. Struve indicated the City could re-evaluate the
situation after five years.
Printup moved, Levang seconded, to approve a 5-year Design-Build Maintenance Contract with
Short, Elliot, Hendrickson, and to direct Staff to enter into the negotiation process for the north
water tower repainting project. VOTE: Ayes 3, Nays 0.
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING
Monday, January 27, 2014
7:00 o’clock p.m.
_____________________________________________________________________________________
Page 29 of 32
7. FUEL SALES AGREEMENT
Levang asked if Mr. Struve prefers to do it this way so he has a better grasp on what he will be paying for
fuel.
Struve stated that is correct and that the benefit of the fuel sales agreement is the City is locked into 85 to
90 percent of what the City’s annual consumption is. Struve stated they do not want to enter into an
agreement where they purchase too much fuel because then the City has to pay a penalty. Struve stated in
his opinion this agreement provides some flexibility and is a good value for the City of Orono.
Levang moved, Printup seconded, to enter into the price program sales agreement for gasoline and
diesel fuel with Yocum Oil. VOTE: Ayes 3, Nays 0.
PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR/CITY ENGINEER’S REPORT, CONTINUED
Struve reported the contractor has arrived with the chipping equipment but the extremely cold weather
has slowed down the work. The contractor is approximately half to three-quarters complete and the
Public Works Department has secured some chips for the residents.
Struve noted the Public Works Department is still accepting Christmas trees until the end of January.
MAYOR/COUNCIL REPORT
McMillan noted the Lake Community Coalition is looking at holding two forums, one in March and one
in April. March 6 has been tentatively scheduled for the relationship issues/domestic abuse forum and the
Orono and Minnetrista Police Departments are involved with that. McMillan stated the second session
will likely be held on April 3 and will cover marijuana use and medical marijuana. Both forums will be
held at the Gillepsie Center.
CITY ADMINISTRATOR’S REPOROT
8. JOINT MEETING WITH LONG LAKE CITY COUNCIL
Loftus noted in October a joint workshop was held with the Long Lake City Council and one of the items
raised was a request from the lakeshore residents in Long Lake to implement a no wake or slow down
ordinance during high water. Loftus indicated Orono did not have the same volume of calls or concerns
from Orono residents, but that Long Lake has requested another joint work session. Loftus stated it is her
belief the lakeshore residents and the Minnehaha Watershed District will be invited to the meeting.
Levang asked if the meeting would be held in Orono Chambers.
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING
Monday, January 27, 2014
7:00 o’clock p.m.
_____________________________________________________________________________________
Page 30 of 32
(8. JOINT MEETING WITH LONG LAKE CITY COUNCIL, Continued)
McMillan commented she has a couple of issues with a work session in March. McMillan noted
March 24 is spring break for Orono and that the suggested 5:00 start time is also a difficult time for
people to make. McMillan indicated she would like to have the work session videotaped and that she has
suggested to the Long Lake Mayor that the Long Lake City Council conduct a public hearing at one of
their Council meetings. The Orono City Council members could attend and the public hearing could be
advertised to Orono residents. McMillan indicated Long Lake will be holding a work session in the next
couple of days and that the mayor will see if that option will work.
McMillan stated in her view the public hearing is important for the Long Lake residents but that Orono
has not heard anything from Orono residents. McMillan stated she would prefer Long Lake hold the
public hearing and then make the draft ordinance available on Orono’s website.
McMillan requested City Administrator Loftus contact Long Lake’s City Administrator to see if it can
occur at a Long Lake City Council meeting and that the members of the Orono City Council would be
glad to attend.
Levang asked if some sort of link would be put on Orono’s website of the meeting.
McMillan stated that would probably be best. McMillan stated the first council meeting in March might
also work for a joint work session.
9. POLICE OFFICERS LABOR AGREEMENT FOR 2014-2016
Loftus reported Orono’s bargaining committee has met with the union and they have arrived at a 3-year
contract. The contract addresses wages and insurance over those three years. It is Staff’s
recommendation to approve the contract.
Printup moved, Levang seconded, to approve the Labor Agreement Between the City of Orono and
Law Enforcement Labor Services (Local No. 40) – Patrol Officers 2014-2016. VOTE: Ayes 3,
Nays 0.
10. MEMORIAL FOR WILLIE GIBBS
Loftus noted the City’s building inspector died suddenly this past December. While Staff has found a
number of internal ways to remember Willie Gibbs, they have also come up with a couple of public ways
to honor him. Loftus stated the Council has been presented with two different options. One would be a
bench with a plaque or a tree with a plaque.
McMillan stated she would like to see if the City can do all three. McMillan noted the tree would be
donated by Norling Landscape.
Levang asked what type of bench it would be.
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING
Monday, January 27, 2014
7:00 o’clock p.m.
_____________________________________________________________________________________
Page 31 of 32
(10. MEMORIAL FOR WILLIE GIBBS, Continued)
Struve stated there are a wide variety of colors and stone available to choose from. Struve indicated the
bench would look generally like patio stones that are glued and assembled together. Struve stated while
there is a pretty wide range of items that can be chosen, in his view the cost for the bench would be
between $400 to $500.
McMillan commented the bench should be comfortable and stone may not necessarily be that
comfortable. McMillan suggested the bench perhaps be located behind the lunch room.
Struve stated some other options are the recycled plastic benches. Struve stated wood does have some
long-term maintenance associated with it as well as replacement after a number of years.
Levang stated she would prefer wood over stone. Levang stated since Norlings is willing to donate the
tree, she would not say no to it, and if Norlings feel the tree will do well back there, perhaps the City
should accept the offer.
Loftus noted Norlings has suggested a couple of trees that will do well in wetter ground.
Levang moved, Printup seconded, to approve a bench, plaque and tree in memory of Willie Gibbs.
VOTE: Ayes 3, Nays 0.
CITY ATTORNEY’S REPORT
Mattick stated he had nothing to report.
*LICENSES & PERMITS
None
*12. CLAIMS/BILLS
Levang moved, Printup seconded, to approve payment of the All Funds Account. VOTE: Ayes 3,
Nays 0.
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING
Monday, January 27, 2014
7:00 o’clock p.m.
_____________________________________________________________________________________
Page 32 of 32
13. CLOSED MEETING (13d.05.3) FOR ATTORNEY-CLIENT PRIVILEGE (WILCOX VS
ORONO)
14. CLOSED MEETING FOR LABOR NEGOTIATION (13.D.03)
Levang moved, Printup seconded, to go into closed session to discuss Items 13 and 14. VOTE:
Ayes 3, Nays 0.
(City Council went into two closed sessions from 10:03 p.m. to 10:38 p.m.)
ADJOURNMENT
Levang Moved, Printup seconded, to adjourn the Orono City Council meeting at 10:38 p.m.
VOTE: Ayes 3, Nays 0.
ATTEST:
_____________________________________ _______________________________________
Rachel Dodge, City Clerk Lili Tod McMillan, Mayor