HomeMy WebLinkAbout01-27-2014 Council Packet PUBLIC ATTENDANCE
MEETING DATE � " 2.� " � �
I�- COUNCIL
❑ PLANNING COMMISSION
❑ OTHER
Assistive Listening Device available upon request.
Please complete the following information for City records.
PRESENT FOR(from agenda)
NAME (please print) ADDRESS NAME OR NUMBER
1. . � �` `i -r�,r . �'.�� .d t 4..-� �
2. _�.��t. � --��� �+` `� 1l. � � ���. � ������ 1��.�.._ .� ��. �����. ,f��� . .
- - • , � ,' , , . -
3. ' : ,f 1,- "` t L , } -,• ,
��.-�.... • _ . ,,. �
�L.kL. C„ %�
�r �
' E t. ' �
4. _ � 1 � 1
;
. 1 ��('� "_1:_-!-
�J. r V �- ✓ "'�'�� ���r �� �C-'L' �i(� (
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
V:1(LEGAL FORMS)1(FORMS)1PUBLIC ATTENDANCE.DOC
��-��-�d,
Agenda for Council Meeting Set for Monday, January 27, 2014, 7:00 P.M.
Orono Council Chambers, 2780 Kelley Parkway, Orono, MN 55356
952-249-4600/www.ci.orono.mn.us
Roll Call
JAN � 7 2pi�
Pledge of Allegiance
CI7Y OF ORONO
Approval of Agenda
1. Consent Agenda—Consent agenda items, including (*) asterisk items, are considered to be routine items to
be enacted upon by one motion by the City Council under this section of the agenda. Items on the Consent
Agenda are reviewed in total by the City Council and may be approved through one motion with no further
discussion by the Council. Any item may be removed by any Council Member, staff inember or person from
the public for separate consideration. If you wish to remove any item from the Consent Agenda, please state
the item number and description of the item. Memos regarding each of the Agenda items are available in the
Public Packet located in the lobby near the sign in sheet.
Approval of Minutes
2. Special Council Meeting of January 6, 2014 *
3. Regular Council Meeting of January 13, 2014 *
Planning Commission Comments—Kevin Landgraver, Representative
Public Comments—(Limit 5 Minutes Per Person)
This is an opportunity for the public to address matters not on the agenda. The council will not engage in discussion or
take action on items presented at this time. However,the council may refer issues to staff for follow up or
consideration at a future meeting. Speakers should state their name and home address at the podium before speaking.
Planning Department Report
4. 13-3636 Lixiao Wang, 3059 Farview Lane, Variances
5. 13-3637 Willi Abbott o/b/o The Broadway Group LLC - 2350 Watertown Rd. & xxx Willow
Dr. N. - Preliminary Plat &RPUD Rezoning
Public Works Director/City Engineer's Report
6. North Water Tower Repainting Project
7. Fuel Sales Agreement
Mayor/Council Report
City Administrator's Report
8. Joint Meeting with Long Lake City Council
9. Police Officers Labor Agreement for 2014-2016
10. Memorial for Willie Gibbs
CiTy Attorney's Report
11. Licenses &Permits *
-None
12. Claims/Bills *
13. Closed Meeting (§ 13D.05.3) for Attorney-Client Privilege (Wilcox v. Orono)
14. Closed Meeting for Labor Negotiation (§ 13D.03)
Agenda for Council Meeting Set for Monday,January 27, 2014, 7:00 P.M.
Orono Council Chambers, 2780 Kelley Parkway, Orono, MN 55356
952-249-4600/www.ci.orono.mn.us
Adjournment
Upcoming Events
2014
02/OS —Planning Commission Work Session, Wednesday, 5:30 p.m.
02/10—Council Meeting,Monday, 7:00 p.m.
02/17—Holiday—President's Day—Offices Closed
02/18—Planning Commission Meeting, *Tuesday, 6:30 p.m. (Council Liaison— Cynthia Bremer)
02/24—Council Work Session, Monday, 5:00 p.m.
02/24—Council Meeting,Monday, 7:00 p.m.
03/OS —Planning Commission Work Session, Wednesday, 5:30 p.m.
03/10—Council Meeting,Monday, 7:00 p.m.
03/17—Planning Commission Meeting, *Tuesday, 6:30 p.m. (Council Liaison—Lizz Levang)
03/24— Council Work Session,Monday, 5:00 p.m.
03/24—Council Meeting,Monday, 7:00 p.m.
Sign up for email notifications at www.ci.orono.mn.us—follow links for Stay Connected & Email Notification
�
MINUTES OF THE
SPECIAL ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING COUNCIL MEETING
Monda3�,January 6,2014
7:00 o'clock p.m. JA�J � ? �Q��
CITY OF ORONO
ROLL CALL
The Orono City Council met on the above-mentioned date with the following members present: Mayor
Lili Tod McMillan, Council Members Kristi Anderson, Cynthia Bremer, Lizz Levang, and Aaron Printup.
Representing Staff were City Administrator Jessica Loftus, Assistant City Administrator for Long-Term
Strategic Planning Michael Gaffron, City Attorney Saren Mattick, Consulting Planner Steve Grittman,
and Recorder Jackie Young.
Mayor McMillan called the meeting to order at 7:00 o'clock p.m., followed by the Pledge of Allegiance.
APPRO`'AL OF AGENDA
It was the consensus of the City Council to approve the agenda as submitted.
McMillan indicated tonight's meeting will start with a presentation by the City's Planning Consultant,
Steve Grittman, followed by a presentation by the Citizens for Lakeview Preservation and a presentation
by Source Lake Capital. The Council will then discuss the proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment
and make a decision on the merits of the application. McMillan stated after the vote on the
Comprehensive Plan Amendment,the City Council will discuss the proposed sketch plan for the property.
The City Council requests the members of the audience respect the deliberations and not interrupt the
discussion. McMillan noted this application was initially heard on November 11, 2013, and that the
Members of the City Council thank the citizens for their input on this item since that time.
PLANNING DEPARTMENT REPORT
1. #13-3638 and#13-3639 SOURCE LAND CAPITAL,LLC (PAT HILLER) OB/O GRANT
WENKSTERN (LAKEVIEW GOLF),405 NORTH ARM DRIVE—COMPREHENSIVE
PLAN AMENDMENT AND SKETCH PLAN REVIEW
a. Planning Report—Consultant Steve Grittman
Grittman stated the putpose of tonight's special meeting is to consider the approval or denial of the
Comprehensive Plan Amendment proposed by Source Land Capital to re-guide the Lakeview Golf
Course property from parks, recreational, and open space to rural residential.
Grittman stated there are a few generalized options available to the City Council on this proposal. The
City Council has the option to leave the property desib ated as open parks and recreation, approve a
change to the land use designation to rural residential, or change the land use designation to something
else such as rural or urban. Grittman noted all of those changes have different ramifications and are
supported by different City ordinances or policies.
Grittman stated if the City Council denies the request; a no vote will need to be sustained with findings
based on the City's Comprehensive Plan policies,and noted there is also the possibility of the applicant
bringing a legal claim against the City if his application is denied. Grittman indicated there are portions
of the City's Comprehensive Plan that can be read to support the denial and/or approval of the best long-
term land use for this property.
Page 1 of 27
MINUTES OF THE
SPECIAL ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING
Monday,January 6,2014
7:00 o'clock p.m.
(1. #13-3638 and#13-3639 SOURCE LAND CAPITtIL, LLC(PAT HILLER) O/B/O GRANT
WENKSTERN(LAKEVIEW GOLF), 40�NORTH ARM DRIVE—COMPREHEl�'SIVE
PLANAMENDMENTANDSKETCHPLANREVIEW, Continued)
Grittman noted the primary issues resulting from a denial and/or approval would be legal and budgetary
issues but that it is not impossible to read the Comprehensive Plan to say that it is best to leave it as open
space. A yes vote to the applicant's proposal would re-guide the property from its current open space
designation to rural residential and there are potential issues that would flow from that.
Grittman indicated the nature of development under this scenario is still uncertain at this point. The
applicants have proposed a series of sketch plans, and noted that the City Council,by simply changing the
land use designation, does not lock the City into any specific plat or development plan. The rural
residential designation is consistent with the existing zoning and there are several policies in the
Comprehensive Plan that would sustain this land use designation. Grittman stated the issues are primarily
based around issues relating to compatibility with the existing land use pattern in the area.
Grittman stated the final issue before the City Council would be development and design and what type of
development would result with a rural residential designation. Grittman stated the different land use
designations for the community have a number of aspects to them that are written in the Comprehensive
Plan. Grittman indicated if there is an approval,the Comprehensive Plan amendment would then be
submitted to the Metropolitan Council. The Metropolitan Council would then be obligated to make a
determination as to whether the proposed amendment is consistent with the regional planning documents
within its areas of jurisdiction.
Staff recommends approval of the Comprehensive Plan amendment and believes it is consistent with
existing zoning in the area. Grittman indicated the rural residential land use designation would
accommodate residential land use with two-acre lot zoning, which is consistent with this zoning district.
Grittman stated the City would avoid certain legal or budgetary uncertainties if this approach is taken.
The two-acre residential development would be consistent with the surrounding area, which Staff feels is
one of the strongest factors supporting this particular amendment proposal. In addition,the City's
platting requirements ensure that the area will be protected from environmental threats,traffic problems,
or engineering concerns. Grittman stated many of the other technical concerns that flow out of a
development proposal on land such as this would be really very well managed by the City's development
regulations, such as its subdivision regulations and environmental regulations. As a result, Staff is
confident that development on this property would not raise a threat to the environment, which is also a
supporting factor of the idea that a change to the land use plan can be made in that regard.
Following the decision on the Comprehensive Plan Amendment by the City Council, a discussion will be �
had on the sketch plan proposed by the applicant. The applicants have submitted a second alternative
sketch plan for review in addition to the Comprehensive Plan Amendment. Grittman noted the
applicant's revised sketch plan does rely on some Planned Residential Development by varying lot sizes
but does not provide the large open space component that was part of the ori�inal sketch plan.
In support of the revised sketch plan, the applicants have taken a series of soil borings and percolation
tests, prepared a generalized stormwater management plan, conferred with Hennepin County in relation to
road design and access, conferred with the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District regarding stormwater
management, and addressed the directives of the City's Conservation Design principles.
Page 2 of 27
MINUTES OF THE
SPECIAL ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING
Monday, January 6,2014
7:00 o'clock p.m.
(1. #13-3638 and#13-3639 SOURCE LAND CAPITAL, LLC(PAT HILLER) O/B/O GRANT
WENKSTERI�'(LAKEVIEW GOLF), 405 NORTH ARM DRIVE—COMPREHEI�'SIVE
PLANAMENDMENTANDSKETCHPLANREVIEW, Continucd)
The principal question on the sketch plan is whether the Council supports the use of an RPUD approach
or two-acre lots. The question for the applicants is the type of development that will then result based on
that density. The first alternative plan,which was considered by the Planning Commission, utilized an
RPUD approach with provided access to a central road from which several short spurs extended to
clusters of one-acre lots. The primary feature of that design was retention of just under half of the gross
land area as common open space. Grittman stated while the Planning Commission gave an informal
endorsement to this idea,the City Council was less favorable and preferred two-acre zoning.
Grittman noted the sketch plan review is basically advising the applicant on the general direction the City
would like the development to follow. Under a standard plat arrangement,the applicant would be
required to design a project that has the minimum width and lot area for each lot of public streets.
Levang thanked Grittman for the clarification of the two-acre averaging that is being proposed under the
revised sketch plan.
McMillan noted historically Lakeview Golf Course has been located in the City's two-acre zoning
district. McMillan asked whether other cities, when there is a difference between their zoning districts
and guidance under the Comprehensive Plan, whether they immediately go to the task of reconciling all
of those differences.
Grittman indicated the requirements of the Metropolitan Council's are to bring the City's official controls
into compliance with the Comprehensive Plan within nine months but that it is not a concrete deadline
enforced by the Metropolitan Council. Grittman indicated in this particular case,the guidance and the
land use or the zoning designation, given the historic use of the property, are consistent since golf courses
are allowed in the rural residential district and there are not necessarily any conflicts.
McMillan asked if it would be a separate process for reconciling those differences and whether the
property owners would be provided notice that their property may be re-guided.
Grittman stated if the City goes through the Comprehensive Plan process and decides to take an area and
designate it for a different land use designation than what the previous plan called for,that would be part
of the Comprehensive Plan public process. The City is not required to notice individual property owners;
although, some cities will do that if major changes are being proposed. Grittman stated at the zoning
stage, the City is generally required to individually notify any affected property, which would be similar
to any other zoning application.
McMillan asked if more detail is required when the City is changing the zoning ordinance and less detail
if they are chan,ing Comprehensive Plan guidance.
Grittman stated it would be a more administrative or technical process on the zoning side and more of a
policy process on the Comprehensive Plan side.
Page 3 of 27
MINUTES OF THE
SPECIAL ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING
Monday,January 6,2014
7:00 o'clock p.m.
(I. #13-3638 and#13-3639 SOURCE LAND CAPITAL,LLC(PAT HILLER) D/B/O GRANT
WENKSTERN(LAKEVIEW GOLF), 405 NORTH ARM DRIVE— COMPXEHEl�'SIVE
PLA1V AMENDMENT AND SKETCH PLAN REVIEW, Continued)
Printup noted the City's Comprehensive Plan came about in the mid-1970s, and that he is strubgling with
the stren�h of the Comprehensive Plan versus the land use and zoning of properties. Printup noted that
reconciling those two appears to be causing a number of people some issues.
Gaffron stated the zoning of Orono did not start until 1950. In November of 1950, the area where
Lakeview exists was zoned the Forest Lake District, which required a 15,000 square foot minimum lot
size and a 75-foot lot width. Over the next 10 years,the City required that all new developments have
larger lot areas and lot widths. In 1960, the requirements for the majority of the City became one acre lots
with a 140-foot lot width. In 1967,the City rezoned large portions of Orono, with roughly the northwest
half of the City being zoned R-1C,which consisted of single-family, one-acre minimum lot sizes and
145-foot lot widths. That zoning was changed again in 1975 to RR-1B, which is the City's typical rural
residential two-acre minimum. That two acre zoning exists today.
Gaffron stated in terms of the City's Comprehensive Plan,the first plan was adopted�in 1974, and shows
lakeshore residential lot for the southeasterly three-quarters of the properties and rural residential for the
northwesterly three-quarters of the properties. That 1974 plan also indicated recreation facilities of
metropolitan significance. Gaffron stated his assumption is that it means a recreation area that drew more
than just the local residents, such as the different golf courses.
In 1980,the City adopted a new Comprehensive Plan. The land use plan showed various areas as park
and recreation areas, including all public and privately owned golf courses. In the 2000-2020
Comprehensive Plan, it listed a category for park, recreation and open space. The City's 2008-2030
Comprehensive Plan had the same designation. Gaffron stated the City's Comprehensive Plans over the
years contained zoning that allowed residential development as early as 1950 and it has been zoned
residential ever since. Gaffron noted the City did not have a guide plan until 1974,but that guide plan has
always shown this property as a park and recreation area.
Anderson asked if a different type of weighting was aiven in 1995 to the primary land controls in the
Comprehensive Plan versus the City's zoning ordinances.
Gaffron stated she is probably talking about the Comprehensive Plan versus zoning and the hierarchy of
one over the other.
Mattick stated there was some discussion back then about which takes priarity-the Comprehensive Plan
or the City's zoning to the extent they are inconsistent. Mattick stated in some of the materials that have
been submitted tonight, it suggests that the Comprehensive Plan controls. Mattick stated in his view the
history of the City's Comprehensive Plans is important,but in terms of the hierarchy and which one
controls, that does not really matter at this point. Mattick stated in his opinion, based on the MN Supreme
Court and the state statutes, it is more important for the City to get them in alignment with each other.
Mattick stated whether that is accomplished by changing the Comprehensive Plan ar zoninb ordinances
does not matter but that they need to be consistent.
Page 4 of 27
MINUTES OF THE
SPECIAL ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING
Monday,January 6,2014
7:00 o'clock p.m.
(l. #13-3638 and#13-3639 SOURCE LAND CAPITAL, LLC(PAT HILLER) O/B/O GRANT
WENKSTERN(LAICEVIEW GOLF), 40�NORTHARMDRIVE—COMPREHEn'SII'E
PLAN AMENDMENT AND SKETCH PLAN REVIEW, Continued)
b. Presentation bv Citizens for Lakeview�Preservation
Bryce Johnson noted on November 12 the City Council heard the proposal presented for Lakeview Golf
Course and learned that there was a group of concerned citizens that wanted time to consider an
alternative. Ten days after that, Citizens for Lakeview Preservation was incorparated and began its
activities to seek broader support for this alternative, believing it to be eaactly what Orono's
Comprehensive Plan subgests they do.
Johnson commented the group has thoroughly enjoyed the encouragement and engagement with fellow
citizens. The group originally started as a neighborhood group but it has evolved into over 1,000
concerned citizens who have signed the petition. Johnson stated over 100 names were added on Saturday
alone and that less than 40 of those residents were notified as neighboring properties to this proposed
development. Johnson commented this proposed development has truly become a concern that has far
transcended the neighborhood and that there is a large group of residents who have become fierce
proponents of Orono, its philosophy, and the reasons that they have chosen to live in Orono.
Johnson stated their message consists of three parts: One, to preserve Lakeview as open space for all
citizens and future generations; two, protect the integrity of the Community Management Plan contained
within the City's Comprehensive Plan; and three, respect the property rights of the owner. Johnson noted
there are many people in their��roup who believe people have property rights.
Johnson stated he first would like to talk about what it means to protect the Comprehensive Plan and
respect the rights of the property owner. Johnson stated it was initially felt the plan was clear with its
references throughout to preservation and open space,but then it was pointed out that Lakeview was also
zoned residentiaL It was also later pointed out that everything in Orono was zoned residential, such as the
parks and other golf courses besides Lakeview.
Johnson indicated their b oup is concerned about facts and that they do not want to mislead anvone about
this application and that they have sought the best legal minds to answer questions and provide legal
opinions to the City Council. The same is true as it relates to property rights and that the group feels
tremendous empathy with the Wenksterns.
Johnson questioned what a change to the Comprehensive Plan really means, and asked whether anyone
can obtain a zoning change as a property right or whenever there is an opportunity to realize a special
profit. Johnson stated there is a huge range of beliefs concerning this property and that the group
instinctively felt the property owner should have the right to sell their property. There were also a
number of environmental issues that were raised by the City Council and the citizens at the November 12
meeting. Johnson noted the group has hired an environmental firm to speak tonight on those issues. In
addition, a concem was raised conceming the marketability of such a development, and the group has
sought experts to find out what that really means. Johnson indicated those are the people that will be
addressing the City Council tonight.
Page 5 of 27
_ . __ _ _ _ _ _ _
MINUTES OF THE �
SPECIAL ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING
Monday,January 6, 2014
7:00 o'clock p.m.
(1. #13-3638 and#13-3639 SOURCE LAND CAPITAL, LLC(PAT HILLER) O/B/O GRANT
WENKSTERN(LAKEVIEW GOLF), 405 NORTH ARM DRIVE—COMPREHEIVSIVE
PLA1V AMENDMEIVT AND SKETCH PLA1V REVIEW, Continued)
Tom Radio, Attorney-at-Law with Best &Flannigan, stated he has been practicing land use and
municipal law for approximately 30 years and that he has served as a city attorney to the Cities of
Minnetrista, Afton, and Orono.
Radio stated he is here tonight because the group has asked him to comment on the Comprehensive Plan
process,the importance of the Comprehensive Plan, and the legal tests involved with amending it. Radio
indicated he has provided a legal analysis to the City Attorney but that he wants to emphasize three key
points.
Radio stated the first point is that the City has broad discretion, authonty and responsibility to preserve
and protect the Comprehensive Plan. The courts will defer to the legislative determination of the City in
drafting and amending the Comprehensive Plan as long as there is a rational basis for that decision.
Radio noted he analyzed two key cases in his letter dealing with golf courses. In those cases, the
Minnesota Supreme Court was very deferential to the City Council and to its determination of what was
appropriate and what was in the Comprehensive Plan.
Radio stated comprehensive plans,particularly since the 1995 Comprehensive Planning Act, are
considered to be a fundamental planning document that reflects the goals and objectives, the dreams and
the long-term history and legacy of every community in Minnesota. Radio stated the Comprehensive
Plan is an important document to protect because it captures for a long-term basis the hopes and
aspirations of a community as they move through development,redevelopment,providing facilities and
recreational activities, as well as protection of property rights. Radio stated it is a fundamental,
constitutional document for the planning of any city.
Radio stated in this particular instance, and in every instance where there is a change to the
Comprehensive Plan, a careful analysis is required of the many factors involved, not only in this
application, but to any plan that may be adopted in the future. Radio indicated he would agree with the
City Attorney on the question of the conflicts between the Comprehensive Plan and zoning ordinances
and that it is largely a non-issue. The courts have basically said under the 1995 Act that the
Comprehensive Plan is the pre-eminent zoning document, and if there is a conflict, they need to be
brought into accordance with each other.
Radio noted in the Mendota Golf case,the Supreme Court stated if there is a discrepancy between the two
documents; the zoning regulations do not trump the Comprehensive Plan. Radio indicated that was the
law when he first started practicing law before 1995 but that there was a change by the Minnesota
Legislature in that re�ard. Radio stated to the extent there is a conflict here between the Comprehensive
Plan and the zoning ordinances,it really is a non-conflict and can be resolved through an amendment of
the Comprehensive Plan or an amendment to the zoning ordinances, but it does not provide a basis for
chan�ing the Comprehensive Plan.
Page 6 of 27
MINUTES OF THE
SPECIAL ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING
Monday,January 6,2014
7:00 o'clock p.m.
(1. #13-3638 and#I3-3639 SOURCE LAND CAPITAL,LLC(PAT HILLER) O/B/O GRA1`'T
WENKSTERN(LAKEVIELi'GOLF), 405 NORTH ARM DRIVE—COMPREHENSIVE
PLANAMENDMENT AND SKETCH PLA1V REi'IEW, Continued)
Radio stated in his view, the City's review process to date has been less than adequate and flawed. Radio
stated he says that with all due respect to the City's planning consultant and that it is difficult to deal with
such a complex issue. Radio stated the fundamental issue is what has changed since the adoption of the
Comprehensive Plan in 2010. The City Council should determine what has changed about the City's
goals, objectives, land use, codes, or anything that would justify this radical change from this property's
current desi�,mation to rural residential. Radio indicated he has not seen anything in the record to suggest
that there has been any change to justify this and that the only rationale that has been articulated is to
avoid potential litigation. Radio stated on the basis of the Comprehensive Plan, if the City Council denies
this application and follows the City's Comprehensive Plan, no court will substitute its judgment for the
City's on that point.
Radio stated there is no risk-free alternative and that the basic argument in making the change is to avoid
litigation. Radio indicated he has been doing this enough years to know there is no risk-free alternative,
and if the City is to change its Comprehensive Plan on this thin of a record without any substantiation,the
City's whole Comprehensive Plan would be at risk and would allow anyone to come in and request a
change to the Comprehensive Plan.
Radio stated he would urge the City Council to deny this application based upon no substantial change in
circumstances to justify the change in the Comprehensive Plan, that the reasons that have existed far
decades in the Comprehensive Plan have not changed in this particular matter, and that he would request
the City Council direct Staff to prepare a resolution of denial and establish a protocol to handle future
requests to amend the Comprehensive Plan. Radio stated it is very rare that a Comprehensive Plan
amendment comes up in the context of a land use application such as this.
Radio noted in 2010 the City had a very careful, analytical,thoughtful process regarding the
Comprehensive Plan and whether things should be changed. Radio stated in his view this would be a rush
to judgment and not result in a good decision.
Mark Thieroff, Attorney-at-Law with Siegel, Brill, stated his law firm has extensive experience in
litigating regulatory takings claims like the claim that has been suggested or implied in this case,
particularly in the context of redevelopment of golf courses. Thieroff noted his law firm represented
Wenzman and also represented the owners of the Parkview Golf Course in Eagan. Thieroff stated he
raised those cases because he would like the City Council to understand that his comments tonight are
based on his experience in litigating those cases.
Thieroff stated his first point is to clarify the legal standard that govems regulatory takings claims and
that his second point deals with the misconceptions about this area of law that appear in the Staff report
and in some of the written materials that have been presented to the City Council for consideration.
Thieroff stated in a regulatory takings claim, the courts apply a multi-factored test that is described in his
letter that has been provided to the City Attorney. The key question is; does the action of the City leave
the property owner without any reasonable economically viable alternative use of the property. Thieroff
indicated there are some other factors that are considered, but if a landowner cannot show that,it is
virtually impossible to prevail on a regulatory taking claim.
Page 7 of 27
MINUTES OF THE
SPECIAL ORONO CITI'COUNCIL MEETING
Monda��,January 6, 2014
7:00 dclock p.m.
(1. #I3-3638 and#13-3639 SOURCE LAND CAPITAL,LLC(PAT HILLER) O/B/O GRANT
WENKSTERII'(LAKEVIEW GOLF), 405 NORTHARMDRIVE— COMPREHENSIVE
PLA1V AMENDMENT AND SKETCH PLA1V REVIEi�T; Continued)
Thieroff stated the first misconception contained in the documents is the idea that the potential for a
takings claim turns on whether the current owner of the property can operate the golf course profitably.
Thieroff indicated that is not the test and noted the current owner is not the measure of whether this
property can be used in an economically beneficial way. Thieroff noted in the Wenzman case,there was
evidence before the MN Supreme Court that there was another golf course operator who was willing to
buy the property and operate it in an economically profitable way. The fact that a current owner may be
facing economic difficulties is not the test of whether this property has value as a golf course. Thieroff
indicated there are other factors, such as marketing factors and experience in the industry, where someone
would be able to operate the course in a profitable manner. Thieroff noted they did include in their
affidavit that the owner of this property did receive an offer from some members of the course who were
interested in taking it over and running it as a golf course, which establishes that there is value to this
property as a golf course.
Thieroff stated the second misconception is that there are no other possible alternative uses under the
current guiding and that it is either a golf course or it must be re-guided, which is not the case. Going
back to the Wenzman case,the Supreme Court has suggested that if someone is interested in purchasing
the property simply to hold it in the hopes that one day the guiding might change to allow development,it
would be an alternative economically viable use of the property to sell it to such a person. Thieroff stated
there is a vision in the community for putting this property to a different use but yet maintain the current
guiding on the property.
Thieroff stated the third misconception is a combination of the idea that the owner is entitled to a return
on his investment and the other is that the owner is entitled to the zoning that would make the land most
profitable. Thieroff commented there are lots of people who would like to have different zoning on their
property to make it more valuable, which is not the legal test. It has been established for over 100 years
that cities can constitutionally zone property even if it reduces the value of that property. Thieroff stated
he would like to point out,however, that return on investment is relevant, but in looking at a regulatory
taking claim, how much a person paid for the property is also relevant and is considered in whether an
alternative use or value would be reasonable.
Thieroff stated the last main misconception is the idea that all the landowner has to do is to tell the City
there is no economically viable use for the property and therefore the City must grant the application. In
the cases mentioned before, there is extensive information that is considered when considering a
regulatory taking claim. The owner has to show all the fmancials of the business and demonstrate that
everything has been done to run the business in an economically viable way. Those cases have involved
market studies and extensive appraisals. They have also involved expert opinions from golf course
management experts as to whether this golf course might be run differently and generate a profit.
Thieroff noted none of that evidence is before the City Council tonight and that there is literally nothing
before the City other than a suggestion that the current owner cannot do it anymore. Thieroff stated that
does not provide the basis for a regulatory taking claim and that the City Council should consider that in
discussing the application toni�ht. Thieroff stated based on the record before the City Council,there is
relatively little risk of a regulatory taking claim.
Page 8 of 27
MINUTES OF THE
SPECIAL ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING
Monda,y,January 6, 2014
7:00 o'clock p.m.
(1. #13-3638 and#13-3639 SOURCE LAND CAPITAL,LLC(PAT HILLER) O/B/O GRANT
WENICS'TERN(LAKEVIEW GOLF), 40�NORTHARMDRIVE—COMPREHEn'SIVE
PLANAMENDMENTANDSKETCHPLANREI'IEW, Continued)
Bremer asked if the City Council had never previously required that type of information in the context of
another application, if it would not open the City to a claim of dissimilar treatment in a very similar
circumstance. Bremer indicated she does not recall a time where the City Council required an expert to
say that this use warks better or that use does not work. Bremer stated she cannot recall a time in any
context as she sits here tonight where the City has required that type of detailed information.
Thieroff stated he would answer that question by saying that if there is a concern on the part of the City
Council about a potential for a takings claim, one approach they could take would be to suggest that the
60-day deadline for the decision be extended because you would like to receive additional information to
back up the statements made in the application that the property cannot be operated in an economically
viable way.
Bremer asked if the applicant agrees to extend the deadline and the City Council has requested that type
of information, if, after those 60 days have expired, whether their position would be that the City Council
has done sufficient homework that they would feel comfortable that the City is now exposing themselves
to a takings cause of action.
Bremer noted she has read the cited cases and that she has a slightly different opinion but that she is not a
real estate attorney. Bremer asked what Mr. Thieroff would do if he was in her position and the 60 days
have gone by and the information submitted by the applicant shows all those things are true that they have
told the City. Bremer asked if the information shows that the golf course is not viable and that there is no
way to make it economically viable, what the City should do in that situation.
Thieroff stated then the City Council should go ahead and approve the application,but at this time the
record does not show that information. Thieroff stated in his experience in trying these cases, he has
found that the golf course industry in the Twin Cities does not correlate to the economic performance of
the golf course alone but that it correlates to the real estate market and the profit they can make by
developing the land.
Bremer asked what exposure there would be to the City of a takings claim if the assumption is made that
the City Council approves the Comprehensive Plan amendment. Bremer asked if the City Council would
have the discretion to make that decision if they decide they can trust the information and representations
they have from the applicant even if the information is not as thorough as Mr. Thieroff thinks it should be.
Thieroff stated on the takings issue, there is not an inverse claim and there is not a claim the proponents
for the project could brin�against the City Council for accepting the risk of a takings claim in granting
the application if it is based on proper findings and rationale. Thieroff stated on the Comprehensive Plan
issue, the points raised by Tom Radio regarding judicia] discretion apply both ways and that it would be
difficult for the applicant to challenge the City Council's decision not to amend the Comprehensive Plan
if it is made on proper findings.
Page 9 of 27 _ . __
MINUTES OF THE
SPECIAL ORONO CITY COUNCII,MEETING
Monday,January 6,2014
7:00 o'clock p.m.
(1. #I3-3638 and#13-3639 SOURCE LAND CAPITAL,LLC(PAT HILLER) O/B/O GRANT
WENKSTERIV(LAKEVIEW'GOLF), 405 NORTH ARM DRIVE—COMPREHEIVSIVE
PLANAMENDMENTANDSKETCHPLANREVIEW, Continued)
Thieroff stated if the opposite decision is made based on proper findings; it would similarly be difficult to
make a claim, which is why the emphasis is on preserving the Comprehensive Plan. Thieroff stated the
risk on the Comprehensive Plan side is not whether litigation would result but it is the risk of opening up
the door to turning the Comprehensive Plan into something that is constitutional to something that can be
changed without going through all those steps.
Bremer commented it is more opening the door to a slippery slope.
Thieroff stated it would also go to the contribution of the citizens who have participated in the process of
creating the Comprehensive Plan and the vision that was adopted.
Kathy Sawicki indicated she is here tonight to offer her personal professional opinion and not the opinion
of Coldwell Banker Burnet or another real estate agent. Sawicki stated the opinions tonight are based on
her market analysis, which was based on an absorption rate analysis. Sawicki stated she is also a 27-year
resident of the City of Orono and live within one mile of Lakeview Golf Course.
Sawicki stated all markets are local and that what is happenin�in the Wayzata School District is not
necessarily indicative of what is happening in the Orono or Westonka School Districts. Sawicki stated
when real estate agents talk about absorption rate,that is the speed at which properties are selling within a
given market rate. The absorption rate is typically calculated on a one-year look back. That one-year
look back is based on the number of sales that occurred on a per month basis for the prior year. Sawicki
stated real estate agents also then look at the month's supply of inventory, which are the active listings
available to the market place. Sawicki stated historically a five to seven month inventory is characteristic
of a stable market and that when you drop below five months of inventory,you start to see what is
considered a seller's market consisting of increasing prices,multiple offers. Having an inventory of over
seven or eight months is considered a buyer's market.
Sawicki stated when she was asked to analyze this property; her information at the time was that there
would be single-family homes built in the $800,000 to $1.2 million price range. Sawicki stated when she
looked at what happened in 2013 for nonlakeshore properties, there were eight pendin�and closed sales
in 2013 in that price s�ament. There are currently eight listings on the market. Half of those are in
temporarily not available status, which typically happens during the holidays. Sawicki stated currently
there is a 12-month inventory in this market segment in the City of Orono and that she would also point
out that of those eight pending and closed sales, all were in the Orono School District and none were in
the Westonka School District, which is where Lakeview is located.
Sawicki stated as it relates to single-family lots available in Orono, she looked at one to four acre lots in
Orono in the $?�0,000 to $450,000 price range. There were two pending and closed sales in 2013 in that
market segment. Sawicki stated there were five active listings on the MLS but that she would found there
were more lots available that were not on the MLS. The McIntyre development,which is located in the
City of Orono, Orono School District,just north of Lakeview, there were lots available consistinb of.3
acre to 3 acres. Homes in that development have been available for purchase since 2011. One home has
been built and sold and a second home is under construction as a spec home but there are no offers on it.
Sawicki stated this demonstrates what the demand is for lots similar to these in Orono.
Page 10 of 27
MINUTES OF THE
SPECIAL ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING
Monday,January 6,2014
7:00 o'clock p.m.
(l. #13-3638 and#13-3639 SOURCE LAND CAPITAL, LLC(PAT HILLER) O/B/O GRANT
WENKSTERIV(LAI�EVIEW GOLF), 405 NORTH ARM DRII'E—COMPREHE?�'SIVE
PLANAMENDMENT AND SKETCH PLA1V REVIEW, Continued)
In the Bayside Meadows development, which is a six-lot development very close to the Lakeview Golf
Course but in the Westonka School District, Sawicki stated in talking to the developer,they have
indicated they do not have an offer on any of those lots. Sawicki stated based on her research, Orono has
an inventory of approximately 66 months based on the current rate of sales, which is indicative of a strong
supply and not a strong demand.
Sawicki stated if Orono adds 50 home sites within the Westonka School District, it will create in theory a
30-year supply of homes in that market segment, but noted that is assuming demand significantly
strengthens. Sawicki stafed she cannot predict what will happen with mortgage interest rates or job
creation,which affects the real estate market,but that history has taught us that the national housing
bubble was created when demand fell away and there was an extreme oversupply of homes on the market.
Sawicki stated the country is slowly coming out of the housing bubble but the price index reflects 2002
pricing. Sawicki stated in conclusion, she cannot predict what will happen with demand, but that there
currently is a large supply of housing available in Orono.
Brett Edmonds, Edmonds Resources, stated his firm is a small to medium sized firm that specializes in
environxnental assessments and water resources. One of the key points that should be brought out are the
impacts of converting an open space and what that implies in terms of demands and the burden put on the
area as it relates to infrastructure,natural resources, and environmentally sensitive areas. Edmonds stated
based on the information provided to date, it is likely there will be private wells put in as part of this
development. Edmonds stated an issue that has not been given a lot of attention is the sustainability of
the water table in this area. If private wells are drilled,the area might experience some draw down
effects, which needs to be looked at closer. Another issue that should be considered is the fact that
additional homes will reduce the ground water discharge that supports the local lakes and wetlands.
Edmonds stated there are still a lot of unanswered questions on what that will mean to the area.
Edmonds stated another factor that should be considered is that the change in land use will have the
potential to create a lot more runoff to the lakes and streams in the area. Edmonds noted the regulatory
standards are changing and that what is on the books currently may not be adequate for future demand.
Another factor that needs to be considered is the increased traffic and the impacts it will have on the area.
Edmonds stated there are significant constraints to this piece of land and not all the information has been
ascertained. Edmonds noted the regulatory agencies cannot check in the middle of winter to determine
where the wetlands are. There are a number of steep slopes on the site, which could imply the need for
some grading. Edmonds indicated he has not seen a �*rading plan yet and that he is not sure how the roads
will be constructed, but based on the steep slopes, it is likely some major grading will need to be
undertaken.
Edmonds stated there is also the issue of site grading. If there is going to be a septic based approach,
there will be the complicating factor of locating septic sites on land that has been disturbed. Edmonds
noted the golf course has been graded in the past and it is unclear whether that has had any effect on the
septic sites that are being proposed.
Page 11 of 27
MINUTES OF THE �
SPECIAL ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING
Monday,January 6,2014
7:00 dclock p.m.
(I. #13-3638 and#13-3639 SOURCE LAND CAPITAL, LLC(PAT HILLER) O/B/O GRANT
WENKSTERN(LAKEVIEW GOLF), 405 NORTH ARM DRIVE—COMPREHENSIVE
PLAN AMENDMENT AND SKETCH PLAN REVIEW, Cnntinued)
Edmonds stated some of the guidelines that were provided also suggest that this is a fairly dense
development for the land mass and that the City Council needs to focus on what is the actual buildable
area. Edmonds stated in his view the information is somewhat insufficient at this point to get a good idea
of what is beinb proposed and what the actual impacts will be. In addition, the wetlands are not well
defined. While the soil testing that has been provided suggest some small areas were suitable for septic
sites,they do not correspond with very many of the areas where homes are being proposed and is only a
very small fraction of the total area.
Edmonds stated in a conservation desibm, a person would expect to see more attention being given to the
stormwater and how the impacts will be managed. Edmonds stated at this point there are a lot of question
marks and a lot of issues that concern the residents. Edmonds stated in his view lack of information is a
common theme and that these issues should be addressed early on in the process.
McMillan asked if he sees ways that stormwater control can be effectively managed on this site.
Edmonds stated he has not seen sufficient soil borings to determine that.
McMillan noted the wells of the golf course are pretty intense and asked if Mr. Edmonds has done any
analysis on the water usage of a golf course versus a residential development.
Edmonds stated he did a quick check of the information provided and that it appears the data provided
from 2008 onward is very consistent and does not vary substantially. Edmonds indicated he would take
those numbers with a grain of salt given the similarity in the numbers for dry years versus wet years over
the past five years. Edmonds stated in his view that information needs to be analyzed closer.
Edmonds noted there is also a fairly large drainage area that flows through a big wet area in the middle of
the site and that what they use to draw water for the golf course could be partially surface water.
McMillan asked if he is familiar with Medina's regulation requiring stormwater ponds to provide lawn
irrigation.
Edmonds indicated he is not.
McMillan noted they have started to make that a requirement.
Dave Broden, 140 Crystal Creek Road, stated his perspective is as an avera�e citizen and the vision of the
community currently and into the future. Broden stated they are interested in protecting a legacy vision
that all people have when they move to a community and where that vision is going. Broden stated they
would all agree that Minnesota throughout its history has a vision of wanting to protect the environment
and the quality of life and open space, which is one of the strengths of this community. That vision is a
legacy statement intended for the ages and not to be changed to meet short-term needs.
Page 12 of 27
MINUTES OF THE
SPECIAL ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING
Monda3�,January 6,2014
7:00 o'clock p.m.
(I. #13-3638 and#13-3639 SOURCE LAND CAPITAL,LLC(PAT HILLER) O/B/O GRAIVT
WENKSTERIV(LAKEVIEW GOLF), 405 NORTH ARM DRIVE—COMPREHEI`'SIVE
PLA1V AMENDMENT AND SICETCH PLAN REVIEYT; Continued)
Broden stated one of the things he does besides bein�a technical person is to be part of a public policy
group called Civic Caucus. Every Friday morning the Civic Caucus gets together and interviews
someone involved in public policy. For the last nine months, Civic Caucus has been focusing on the
foundational competitive factors of Minnesota and what makes Minnesota strong and how it can be made
stronger.
Broden stated one of the things Civic Caucus found is that the quality of the local communities,the
quality of the environment, and the way the state protects and uses the land is a key part of the
foundational competitiveness of the State of Minnesota. Those elements add value and purpose and
strength throughout the state.
Broden stated to be changing those foundational visions at this time is a short-term vision and a short-
term action that will affect the long-term position that a number of people are trying to establish. Broden
indicated this is not just a decision that will affect Orono but it can reach out throughout the state with a
domino effect. Broden noted a number of people are watching this application and want to see what is
happening.
Broden stated in his view they are talking about a policy issue and not a management issue. Broden
commented it is very easy to mana�e a problem but it is difficult to discuss a policy issue, which is where
the City Council should be focusing on. Broden stated good government comes first with good policy
followed by how you implement it.
The vision that Minnesota has today has grown through a series of legislative actions. In the early 1970s,
green acre leb slation was put in place, which was said by some people to be for rural areas, but the
implications were state-wide. That legislation has since been amended, strengthened, and applied for 50
years. At the same time, Hennepin County established its county park system, which protects open
spaces and adds value to the local communities. That park system has evolved into Three Rivers. The
initial objectives of the Metro Council were to ensure good land use throughout the metro area. Broden
stated basic land use should be setting a vision.
Broden noted that recently several reports have come out about the quality of water in Minnesota. While
some people never thought that would need to be discussed in Minnesota,today it is one of the top
priority issues going on across the state. Broden stated by protecting and having visionary statements and
activities, Minnesota protects its foundational competitiveness and provide opportunities for generations.
Broden stated protectinb that vision is critical. While there have been a number of environmental changes
over the years, not all of them have resulted in positive changes. Broden noted at one time it was thought
that drainin�prairie pot holes would be a �ood idea in order to accommodate greater land use. No
consideration was given to the impact on water tables,water quality, soil conditions or water fowl habitat.
In addition, the use of agri-fertilizers has impacted the quality of water.
Page 13 of 27
MINUTES OF THE
SPECIAL ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING
Monday,January 6,2014
7:00 o'clock p.m.
(1. #13-3638 and#13-3639 SOURCE LAND CAPITAL,LLC(PAT HILLER) O/B/O GRANT
WENKSTERIV(LAKEVIEI�'GOLF), 405 NORTH ARM DRIVE— COMPREHEl�'SIVE
PLAN AMENDMENT AND SKETCH PLAN REVIEW, Cofitinued)
Broden stated the State of Minnesota recognizes the importance of land use management. Public policy
issues that impact Minnesota include continued involvement and interface with public policy
organizations and individuals and frequent dialogue with MN Ab cultural Commissioner Dave
Frederickson regarding topics including land use issues and water quality.
Broden stated preserving Lakeview is critical because changing the City's Comprehensive Plan will affect
all citizens of Orono not just for this generation but for future generations. The basic plan in place
recognizes that vision. Broden stated if it is put into the perspective of a vision for the future,he is not
sure how the City Council can make a change. Broden stated the strenb h of the group and the number of
people here tonight confirms that this is not a singular area issue but that it is a broader issue affecting
more than just the Lakeview neighbars. Broden stated the City Council needs to build on these issues and
fundamental guidelines and protect the quality of life in this area.
Bryce Johnson stated if a person looks at what might be created on this unique site, it will be the start of a
vision. Johnson stated the City needs to have such a vision. The residents see this land potentially as
having a nature history and education portion year-round, which is a concept that could still involve golf
with a difference. Those two concepts would protect the environment,maintain dark skies, educate and
inspire, honor Orono's cultura] heritage, there would be collaboration with other organizations, and access
to all.
In addition to a golf course, the land could be used for walking trails, cross-country skiin�, skating,
sledding, and observing nature throughout the year,and areas that would be returned to a natural habitat
consisting of prairies,trees, and wetlands, which would support wildlife such as birds and butterflies.
Johnson stated there could be other areas that could be open to creative landscapers to create arboretum
like areas as well as incorporating plaques devoted to the history of this land. Johnson commented
history and culture would play a bib role, especially since everyone is now learning about the genealogy
of this land ranging from when it first served as a park during the late 1800s and early 1900s, through
farming, and to its present state as a golf course.
Johnson stated the residents also learned that Source Land Capital was not the first to propose a
development on this site and that someone in 1892 proposed what appears to be a series of cottage type
lots called Gray Plant. Johnson indicated Native American history has also played an important part in
this area, aspects of whicb are described in the history of the land that has been included in the City
Council's packets. Johnson stated there is a rich teature of history and culture in this land that is perched
above the northwest corner of Lake Minnetonka, which is helpinc to inspire the residents to protect the
land for generations to club. Johnson stated the club house offers an opportunity to enfarce education
initiated by the outdoor experience and, with rehabilitation,the club house could become an education
center with rotating exhibits; serve as a lecture/meetin�area, and a small event venue.
Page 14 of 27
MINUTES OF THE
SPECIAL ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING
Monda,y,January 6,2014
7:00 o'clock p.m.
(l. #13-3638 and#13-3639 SOURCE LAND CAPITAL, LLC(PAT HILLER) O/B/O GRANT
i�'ENKSTERN(LAKEVIEW GOLF), 405 NORTH ARM DRIVE— COMPREHENSIVE
PLA1V AMENDMENT AND SIrETCH PLAN REVIEW, Continued)
Johnson stated one of their concepts as part of this vision is creating an area for golf with a difference.As
part of that the residents could create a business plan for a portion of this land, such as a 9-hole public
golf course that would address brand identity and marketing, historical context, a First Tee organization to
promote life skills and leadership through the game of golf, and harmony with nature. Johnson stated the
plan would also provide environmental planning, wildlife and habitat management, chemical use
reduction and safety,water quality and management, as well as outreach and education. Johnson stated it
would be compatible with the other dimension of their vision. Johnson stated these ideas are the results
of the input of hundreds of people and would help celebrate the history, the legacy, and the lake that is
near this course.
Johnson stated the citizens group would wark with the Wenkstern family to create a legacy as well as
involving private and corporate sponsors. Johnson stated in their view there would be a lot of interest in
this type of property and that they would leave it to the City Council's imagination of what this land could
become. The citizens would welcome the Council's input on creating a legacy for this area. Johnson
stated if they are successful in creating such a vision,the citizens b oup has identified a variety of funds,
grants, and foundations that could be approached for the management and development part of this
legacy.
Dean Mitchell stated he would like to tell a tale of three cities—Minneapolis, Hopkins, and Orono. All
three of these cities grew up at the same time and all had open space decisions that they dealt with.
Minneapolis chose to preserve Minnehaha Creek with the help of private funds, Hopkins chose to allow
development along Minnehaha Creek and Orono is now at a point where they have to make a decision.
Mitchell noted historically Orono was founded with the concept of open space.
Mitchell stated there was a letter to the editor in today's Star Tribune entitled one suburb gets it and one
does not. According to reports,Maplewood has been planning for decades to add 70 acres of prime bluff
land along the Mississippi River to its green space. Meanwhile, Orono shanked its chance to effectively
plan for the transition of the Lakeview Golf Course and somehow that land is being sold to a developer
over the howls of its citizens. Johnson stated while he does not live in Orono or Maplewood, all citizens
are vested in these decisions since they affect the quality of life in all the metro area. Mitchell stated once
the green space is gone, it's gone forever.
Mitchell stated he would just like to say that it comes down to what you want to defend. The City
Council has a choice to either approve a housing development or defend a legacy that will serve
generation upon generation. Mitchell stated he hopes the Members of the City Council vote for the long-
term legacy of Orono that will serve many generations to come.
Bryce Johnson noted their�roup initially started with 60 people in October and has now grown to
approximately 1,000 people. Johnson commented that while they have spoken for an hour tonight, if each
of the 1,000 people that signed the petition had five minutes each, they would be here for three and a half
days. Johnson stated the residents are motivated and engaged and will continue to be involved in this
issue. Johnson noted over 400 people have pledged their personal money to help with this cause and that
their group has identified other sources of funding. Johnson stated due to the time of the season, it did not
allow them to approach corporate sources.
Page 15 of 27
MINUTES OF THE
SPECIAL ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING
Monday,January 6,2014
7:00 dclock p.m.
(l. #I3-3638 and#13-3639 SOURCE LAND CAPITAL, LLC(PAT HILLER) O/B/O GRANT
WENKSTERIV(LAKEi'IEW GOLF), 405 NORTHARMDRIVE—COMPREHEI�'SIVE
PLAN AMENDMENT AND SKETCH PLA1V REVIEW, Continued)
Johnson stated this experience has provided a wonderful opportunity to meet new people and every day is
a new learning experience. Johnson indicated he spent two hours today with Dr. Glen Nelson and
Marilyn Carlson-Nelson,two residents of Orono who are very interested in what is happening with
Lakeview. Johnson stated at the end of the conversation, the Nelsons asked him to bring a note to the
Council which states as follows: They have become aware of the impending potential amendment of the
Orono Community Management Plan as it pertains to the Lakeview Golf Course. We believe that more
studies should be undertaken before undertaking the plan. We appreciate all you do to maintain the
character of our beautiful community and we also respect the rights of our respective Orono families.
Therefore,we urge you to declare a maratorium to provide further time to explore all options to achieve
an optimal outcome for the owners of the property and for the people of the community.
Johnson stated a moratorium may be another element of flexibility available to the City and is part of the
whole messa�e of caution and questioning by the residents on whether there is another alternative
available to the City.
Pat Hiller, Source Land Capital, stated at the November 12 meeting,the City Council indicated they
would like additional testing and more information submitted on the viability of a residential development
on this site. Hiller noted that information has been submitted to Staf£ At that time the City Council also
heard from the public a number of concerns ranging from traffic congestion, septic issues, stormwater
runoff, and impact from the water usage.
Hiller stated between then and now, another neighborhood meetin�was held on December 19,which was
attended by 20 to 25 residents. The meeting was held as an open house with nine different easels set up
containinb different information regarding their proposal and provided them with an opportunity to
answer the questions of the residents.
Hiller noted a few weeks back, pursuant to the request of the City Council, additional information was
submitted, including an updated concept plan, soil boring testing, a completed wetland delineation report,
with the field work being completed in September and October prior to the ground freezing,percolation
testing conducted on 141ocations, a survey, a traffic management assessment from Hennepin County, and
answers to an environmental assessment worksheet. Hiller stated he would also like to discuss a city
water solution for this property. Hiller stated in his view this is the information necessary to substantiate
the viability of the site.
Hiller indicated their updated concept plan shows 55 lots with a single access off of West Branch. Each
of the lots averages a little over two acres. Hiller noted the lots do vary in size, with some being closer to
one acre and some consistin�close to three acres. There are also areas that are proposed to be maintained
in a conservation easement. Hiller indicated they would like to dedicate a portion of the site to a
conservation easement and restore the land to native grasses and vegetation. Hiller stated the light gray
areas represent the approximate building pads and septic sites.
Page 16 of 27
MINUTES OF THE
SPECIAL ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING
Monday,January 6,2014
7:00 o'clock p.m.
(1. #13-3638 and#13-3639 SOURCE LAND CAPITAL, LLC(PAT HILLER) O/B/O GRANT
WENKSTERN(LAKEVIEW GOLF), 40�NORTH ARM DRIVE—COMPREHENSIVE
PLANAMENDMENT AND SKETCH PLAN REVIEW, Continued)
Hiller stated they elected to continue to propose a single entrance off of West Branch, which would take
the traffic off of North Arm. Currently the traffic is routed to the four-way stop and traffic from the
development would instead be diverted to West Branch. In addition, the revised plan does account far the
natural pathways. The first area of concern raised by the residents related to traffic. Hiller indicated they
spoke with Hennepin County traffic engineers and asked them to look at the combined elements of the
traffic from both the Lakeview and Red Oak developments. Hennepin County has indicated in an e-mail
that they prefer the one access on to West Branch and they are not suggesting any additional turn lanes or
modifications to what currently exists in the area of the four-way stop. Hiller noted there are
approximately 260 round trips per day currently through the two-way stop. Roughly that same amount of
traffic will be directed to the four-way stop.
As it relates to septic system viability,Hiller indicated they underwent a two-step process. Identified first
were zones of native soils and areas where the soil will percolate. Those areas were then incorporated
into the design. Hiller stated their septic expert identified 14 sites that were on the margin and those were
tested priar to the ground freezing. All of those sites passed except for one. Hiller noted they did not
have time to complete more testing prior to freezing.
In regards to stormwater management, Hiller stated he appreciates the concerns raised by the citizens'
environmental consultant, but noted they have not submitted a preliminary plat application and that they
are still at the concept stage. Hiller stated in his view they have provided considerably more information
than usual for this stage of the process in order to substantiate the viability of their proposal. Hiller
indicated their plan will include onsite filtering ponds, which will control the rate of runoff from the site,
and improve the water quality. Hiller indicated they have also been working with the Watershed District,
who has seen the progression of designs, and the Watershed District is generally on board with what is
being proposed. Hiller stated the idea is to continue to wark with them and utilize their expertise as it
relates to this development.
Hiller indicated they also looked at the typical water usage for 55 homes,which was determined to be
approximately 30 percent less than the golf course. Hiller noted the golf course is required to report to the
DNR every year the water usage from the aquifer on the site. The number the Wenksterns has been
reporting the last three years has been ri�ht around 20 million gallons, which is measured through the
meters on the pumps. Hiller stated if you look at the 55 proposed homes and take an average number of
300 gallons per day,tbere will be a decrease of approximately six million gallons from what is currently
being used by�he golf course.
Hiller stated their preferred option for water at this time is to work out a deal with the City of Minnetrista
to bring in city water to this development. Discussions have been held with the City of Minnetrista and
their initial thought was that they would consider it. Hiller noted a formal request needs to be made
before a final decision will be made by Minnetrista. Hiller stated given the development of the Red Oak
Golf Course, it seemed logical to extend the water to the Lakeview development as well. Hiller noted the
alternative would be to drill 55 private wells.
Page 17 of 27
MINUTES OF THE
SPECIAL ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING
Monday,January 6,2014
7:00 o'clock p.m.
(1. #I3-3638 and#13-3639 SOURCE LAND CAPITAL,LLC(PAT HILLER) O/B/O GRANT
WENKSTERN(LAKEVIEW GOLF), 405 NORTHARMDRIVE—COMPREHEII'SIVE
PLANAMENDMENT AND SKETCH PLA1V REVIEW, Continued)
In anticipation of a request for an EAW, Hiller indicated they have gone ahead and answered the
questions, which has been provided to City Staff and CounciL Hiller stated the EAW asks about the
nature of the soils, the environmental impacts,the native species, and the local impact of the plan. Those
questions have been formally answered in the EAW packet. Because the Council has broad discretion to
b ant this request, Hiller stated it is their opinion that no new information will be gathered to conduct a
formal EAW and will provide no additional information over what has already been provided. Hiller
stated from an ecological standpoint,their proposal will create a better lookinb area and the water runoff
will be cleaner.
Peter Coyle, Attorney-at-Law with Larkin, Hoffman, stated the residents have a right to speak up
regarding this property,but that he would caution the City Council to remember that they are only
opinions and not legally compelling evidence that binds the Council in any certain way.
Coyle stated they are in agreement with Staffs report. Coyle noted both sides agree there is a land use
conflict between the City's Comprehensive Plan and their zoning ordinances, which needs to be resolved.
In addition,both sides agree that if the property owner can demonstrate no reasonable economic use of his
property, he is entitled to be provided with a reasonable economic viable use. Both sides also agree that if
the property owner makes a demonstration that it is financially infeasible for him to continue to operate
the golf course,that the City has a constitutional obligation to either provide the property owner with a
remedy in terms of reasonable economic use, which this proposal does,or the City has a constitutional
obligation to make the property owner whole by compensating him for the loss of his use.
Coyle stated what the residents have asked the City Council to do this evening is to prevent this property
owner from converting his property to a reasonable economic use and to keep it in its current condition,
forcing the property owner,in essence,to operate at a loss for the benefit of the public. Coyle stated it is
quite clear that the City cannot impose a public burden on a private landowner. If the City Council
chooses to not act on the requested change and deny the request, Coyle stated that would be the easiest
solution for the residents,but that he would point out that it would be the hardest decision the City will
make for itself since the City will then need to find the money to address the compensation issue that is
addressed by the constitution. Coyle noted the residents' consultant confirmed that when the landowner
makes that presentation, the City Council is obligated to approve that use unless the City Council wants to
make him whole. Coyle stated there has been no evidence presented by anybody tonight that would
indicate the City has a check waiting for the property owner to substitute what the city taxpayers will have
to fund in the event of a denial.
Coyle stated the City Council has to deal with the facts that exist in the record. While the City Council
has heard from an environmental consultant who has offered his opinions,those opinions are not based on
any firm evidence. Coyle indicated Mr. Wenkstern will provide the information as to the financial
situation of the golf course. Coyle stated after four or six hours of public testimony and hundreds of
pages of documents,the City Council has an adequate record to make a decision.
Page 18 of 27
MINUTES OF THE
SPECIAL ORONO CITY COiJNCIL MEETING
Monday,January 6,2014
7:00 o'clock p.m.
(1. #13-3638 and#13-3639 SOURCE LAND CAPITAL,LLC(PAT HILLER) O/B/O GRANT
WENKSTERN(LAKEVIEH'GOLF), 405 NORTH ARM DRIi�E—COMPREHENSIVE
PLAN AMENDMENT AND SKETCH PLAN REVIEW, Continued)
Coyle noted one of the consultants this evening suggested that his professional e�perience was based in
part on golf courses located in the City of Eagan. Coyle stated what that consultant did not say is that
both of those golf courses went through very contentious processes and both of them are now under
development for residential development because the landowner could not make a go of it. The City had
no other option, did not have the resources to purchase the property, and the landowner was entitled to be
provided with a reasonable economic use, which is what is being requested this eveninb for the
W enksterns.
Grant Wenkstern, Lakeview Golf Course, stated he and his wife, through a family corporation, are the
owners of the Lakeview Golf Course property. Wenkstern indicated Lakeview Golf Course was initially
built by his father in 1956. Wenkstern indicated he started working at the business when he was a boy,
which continued through his school years and when he returned from Vietnam in 1968. The property was
eventually acquired from the family in 1979.
Wenkstern indicated he has earned a living operating Lakeview and Red Oak Golf Courses for his entire
adult life and that over that time he has paid substantial real estate taxes and have been good members of
the community. As most people know, the game of golf has been declining in popularity in recent years
across the nation. Golf courses, which were profitable,no longer are. Lakeview is no exception.
Wenkstern stated for the past five years, his wife has taken no salary and he has taken a minimal one.
Each year the losses have increased. Over the past few years, it became evident that using this property
as a golf course was no longer viable. Wenkstern stated they realized they would need to sell Lakeview
as well as Red Oak in order to derive the benefit of selling the land.
Wenkstern stated if they are not allowed to complete the sale of the property this spring, his family will
sustain substantial hardship because the golf course will continue to lose money and they will continue to
be required to make mortgage payments,pay taxes, insurances and other upkeep expenses associated with
the golf course. Wenkstern noted if the property is no longer used as a golf course,they will be required
to pay Hennepin County deferred open space taxes in excess of$9�0,000.
Wenkstern stated if they cannot complete this transaction, they will not be able to retire. To avoid that
hardship,Wenkstern stated they are askinD the City Council to take whatever action is necessary to allow
the buyer to complete the purchase of the land.
Pat Hiller stated as it relates to the other presentations tonight, when the 60-day extension was agreed to
at the last meeting, it was his understanding that a fairly detailed plan would be put together by the
citizens. Hiller noted it would require several million dollars to purchase the property,redevelop it to the
alternate vision, and then there would also be ongoing costs to run whatever it is in the future. Hiller
commented he sees no evidence that the money raised is anywhere near that amount. While it appears
that a lot of tbe wark has been done to convince the City Council to just say no, that creates financial
problems for the Wenksterns and for Source Land. Hiller stated he has seen the financial information for
the golf course and noted that Grant has offered to provide the financial information if requested.
Page 19 of 27
MINUTES OF THE
SPECIAL ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING
Monday,January 6,2014
7:00 o'clock p.m.
(I. #13-3638 and#13-3639 SOURCE LAND CAPITAL,LLC(PAT HILLER) O/B/O GRANT
WENKSTERIV(LAKEVIEW GOLF), 405 NORTH ARM DRIVE—COMPREHEI`'SIVE
PLANAMENDMENTANDSKETCHPLANREVIEW, Continued)
Hiller stated in terms of what has changed versus the 2010 Comprehensive Plan,the Wenksterns'
financial condition is a significant change and should qualify. Hiller stated it is also his understanding
that the City of Orono currently subsidizes its own golf course, which has been losing money, and that it
should not be hard to believe that Lakeview is also losing money. Source Capital has done its own
analysis of the market and in their opinion feel that this is a unique opportunity for a successful project.
Hiller noted they are using their own private money and that they have had a lot of unsolicited interest in
the site and about purchasing lots. Hiller indicated two entities were very interested in purchasing all of
the lots.
Hiller stated in light of everything that they have presented tonight,their request would be that the City
Council vote yes on the Comprehensive Plan amendment so they can begin work on the preliminary plat
application.
McMillan asked what step in the process they are at with Red Oak.
Hiller indicated they turned in their preliminary plat application last Friday and that their application
would be heard at a Minnetrista City Council meeting sometime in February.
Printup noted Council Member Bremer raised the potential of a slippery slope and asked what type of
precedent would be set by approving the Comprehensive Plan amendment.
Mattick stated a decision at this level does not necessarily set any broad precedent that the City Council
has to abide by each and every time. Mattick stated there is a request for a Comprehensive Plan
amendment and that the Council's decision should be based on the merits of what this applicant has
brou�ht forward on this site. Mattick noted this is one of the first times he has sat through a public
hearing where the developer's attorney and the applicant's attorney agree on the legal standard before the
City Council, which is that it is a legislative decision. Mattick indicated he is in agreement with that legal
analysis as lon�as the decision is based on a rational basis, which is the legal basis that must be met.
McMillan stated the City Council needs to make a determination on this application and that currently
there is an inconsistency between the historical zoning of this site and the Comprehensive Plan. While
people have stated they should hold Orono to its promise, McMillan noted in some ways Orono has two
promises going on right now. There is the promise of a future residential development that a property
owner is entitled to and another promise to preserve parks and open space under the Comprehensive Plan.
McMillan stated the City needs to reconcile that inconsistenc��, and that historically many of these priva�e
open spaces in the City have been located in two-acre residential districts. Under the last Comprehensive
Plan revision,the City acknowled�ed that the present land use was open land space and that there are
perceived public benefits from existing private open space scattered around the City. McMillan stated
while there is no immediate desire on the City's part to see this property developed, by declarin�the land
as private open space,the City is recognizing and respecting this as private land. McMillan stated
ultimately the City is sending a mixed message with the current Comprehensive Plan guiding and zoning
being inconsistent.
Page 20 of 27
MINUTES OF THE
SPECIAL ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING
Monday,January 6,2014
7:00 o'clock p.m.
(l. #13-3638 and#13-3639 SOURCE LAND CAPITAL, LLC(PAT HILLER) O/B/O GRAl�'T
WENKSTERIV(LAKEVIEW GOLF), 405 NORTH ARM DRIVE—COMPREHENSIVE
PLAl�'AMENDMENT AND SKETCH PLAN REVIEW, Continued)
McMillan stated according to a 1995 state statute, the City is required to do some housekeeping and
reconcile that difference, which is where the City is at tonight. McMillan noted the application in front of
them creates a strict 120-day time frame in which to make this decision. Given the past history and
information that has been provided,McMillan indicated she will be voting in favor of amending the
Comprehensive Plan. McMillan stated the reasons she sees for approving this include the long-term
history of this property being seen as a residential property,the fact that two-acre residential zoninb
continues to be compatible with the surrounding neighborhood, the fact that there exists adequate capacity
on this site for stormwater control, and that there will be traffic and buffering requirements that will be
required to be met as part of this development. In addition,the applicant will need to obtain proper
permits for septic and wells and the two-acre density will not overburden the City's public safety
capacity.
McMillan stated although this property has been open space for a number of years and that she feels
empathy for the neighbors that would lose the open space, this property does not have any unique natural
resources. McMillan stated it is a golf course and golf courses are not necessarily a unique natural
resource unlike 140 acres of woods or a particular lakeshore property that might serve a benefit as far as a
public beach or that type of amenity. McMillan stated she does recognize and appreciate the concern
about the open space, but noted there are no natural resources issues on this property that would make the
City think this is something they should keep and possibly compensate the property owner for.
McMillan noted there was no formal process that was undertaken by the City in guiding this property as
open space under the Comprehensive Plan, which is important to take into consideration. McMillan
stated if the City is thinking of changing the zoning of a particular property,there needs to be a process
where the property owner is notified and brought before the City Council to discuss that change.
McMillan stated there was not a thorough examination conducted by the City about changinb private
open space to public park land under the recent Comprehensive Plan, including possible ramifications to
the City or the property owner.
McMillan stated in her view it is important that private property rights are respected, which is good
government. McMillan indicated she did not really understand the Comprehensive Plan until she became
a council member and that it is a plannin�document that through the years has gained more and more
significance. When the first comprehensive plan was developed in the 1970s, it was considered more as a
broad philosophical plan. Throuah the years it has evolved into more micro-managing of individual sites
and density, especially as it relates to city sewer capacity. McMillan stated the basic philosophy of the
City's Comprehensive Plan is terrific but the City has had some struggles implementing it over the
decades in regards to what the City desires and what the Metropolitan Council would like the City to be.
__ _ __ -_ _
Page 21 of 27
__ __ ___ _ __
MINUTES OF THE
SPECIAL ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING
Mondav,January 6,2014
7:00 o'clock p.m.
(l. #I3-3638 and#13-3639 SOURCE LAND CAPITAL,LLC(PAT HILLER) O/B/O GRAIVT
WE.�VILSTERN(LAICEVIEW GOLF), 405 NORTH ARM DRIVE—COMPREHEIVSIVE
PLA1V AMENDMENT AND SKETCH PLAN REt'IEK; Continued)
McMillan stated changing the zoninb to park and open space may be considered a taking by the City and
noted there was some discussion earlier tonight about the legal ramifications of that. McMillan stated if
the City gets into that situation, it could turn into a situation that affects all of Orono. In the past Orono
has typically acquired park land through donation,purchase or as part of the development process. The
City has never acquired park land by changing the Comprehensive Plan. McMillan stated if the City gets
an opportunity to look at this property in a different way than as a golf course or park land, issues of
compensation need to be looked at,but the property owner has the right to decide what choices he would
like to make with his property.
Bremer commented she was hopeful she would have seen a more definite alternative presented tonight,
but at this point a real alternative has not been one presented,which is an important point. Bremer
indicated she has a lot of different feelings about different properties in Orono, which most people have,
and that this is not the only time the City Council has had to step back and think about the options for a
particular property.
Bremer noted the City currently only realistically has one option so far for this property. Since the
property is currently zoned two-acre residential,the City's options are to allow the zoning to stand and
change the Comprehensive Plan or change the Comprehensive Plan to some other type of residential
zoninb. Bremer noted this property historically has been zoned for two acres,which makes it consistent
with the surroundinb neighborhood.
Bremer indicated she has been struggling personally with not decidinc between those two options,but
that the option presented by the residents tonight is not a viable option. Bremer stated if five years ago
the City Council had this conversation and looked at different zoning for this property,the City would
have engaged in discussion with the private landowner about chan�ing the zoning and then the
Comprehensive Plan. Bremer stated the problem with that is it is random zoning not based on a real
applicant who has real property rights and not really planning for the future. Bremer indicated she loves
small developments and open space, which many people do,but pointed out that all developments were
open space at one time and there were people who were against it and people who were for it. Bremer
stated to impose after the fact five-acre zoning would be unfair to the landowner.
Bremer stated while that may be an option,two-acre residential zoninb or some other type of residential
development are realistically the only two options available to the City Council at this point. Bremer
stated she is hopeful it will be a residential development that has sufficient controls on it to make it a
wonderful development.
Printup stated he has thought a lot about this application over the past few months and about being born
and raised in Orono and the importance of open space. Printup stated as he was growin�up, he used to
see horses where there are now large homes and yards. Printup stated in regards to the comments made
by Council Member Bremer about protecting the rights of the property owner,those are important points
to keep in mind. Printup stated the City has to be being very cautious about protecting the community's
standards of open space but noted the City could overreach itself in this case and take away the property
rights of the landowner. Printup stated in light of that,he would support this application.
Page 22 of 27
MINUTES OF THE
SPECIAL ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING
Monday,January 6,2014
7:00 o'clock p.m.
(1. #13-3638 and#13-3639 SOURCE LAND CAPITAL,LLC(PAT HILLER) O/B/O GRANT
WENICSTERl�'(LAKEVIEW GOLF), 405 NORTH ARMDRIVE— COMPREHEl�'SIT'E
PLA1V AMENDMENT AND SKETCH PLAN REVIEW, Continued)
Anderson stated she wanted to come to this meeting and hear something more concrete by the citizens.
Anderson commented she can picture some of these things happening that were envisioned by the
residents but that it is not a concrete proposal at this point. Anderson stated the vision of the residents
contained a number of great sentiments that she would like to see come to fruition,but when you look at
the historic use of this site, it was guided as park and open space and zoned two-acre residential.
Anderson stated she is wrestling most with that guiding principle, but that it has to be weighed against the
rights of the property owner. Anderson indicated it is a hard decision for her and at this point she is still
undecided.
Levang stated she has met with the citizens group and she appreciates all the passion that they bring to the
community. Levang stated she is grateful the citizens have challenged the City Council and enlightened
the Council,which is good government in action. Levang indicated she ran for City Council because she
wanted to know who was making the decisions in the City.
Levang noted she was not on the City Council when the Comprehensive Plan was created but that it is not
in line with the zoning for this property, which is a problem that must be resolved. Levang stated in her
view this should not be kicked down the road any further. Levang stated the Wenksterns have allowed
the residents to have use of this piece of property for a number of years and that she is thankful to them
for that,but noted it is private property, which is what has to be taken into account. Levang noted the
Comprehensive Plan talks about private open space, which reminds us that it is private space and brings
into consideration the property rights of the landowner.
Levang stated she does not feel the City has the resources to compensate the landowner in this case and
that in her view the standards that are required by the City will hold the developer responsible and will
take care of the environmental issues that have been raised. Levang indicated she will vote in favar of the
Comprehensive Plan amendment.
Bremer moved,Printup seconded,Application Nos. 13-3638 and 13-3639, Source Land Capital,
LLC (Pat Hiller) on behalf of Grant Wenkstern (Lakeview Golf�,405 North Arm Drive,to direct
Staff to draft a resolution approving the Comprehensive Plan amendment. VOTE: Ayes 4,Nays 1,
Anderson Opposed.
Anderson stated she does not necessarily agree with changing the Comprehensive Plan even with the
discrepancy with the zoning. Anderson stated the Comprehensive Plan is there for a purpose and that
nothing else has changed in the City since the last time it was reviewed to justify changinb it.
(Recess taken from 9:31 p.m.—9:44 p.m.)
(Kristi Anderson is no longer present)
Page 23 of 27
__ _._._ __ __ ___ .
MINUTES OF THE
SPECIAL ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING
Monday,January� 6,2014
7:00 o'clock p.m.
(1. #I3-3638 and#13-3639 SOURCE LAND CAPITAL,LLC(PAT HILLER) O/B/O GRANT
WENKSTERN(LAKEVIEW GOLF), 405 NORTH ARMDRIVE—COMPREHEl�'SIVE
PLAN AMENDMENT AND SKETCH PLA1V REVIEW, Continued)
Hiller noted they have provided an updated sketch plan and that they would like to obtain the feedback
from the City Council.
Levan� stated she would like to make it clear that what the City Council is agreeing to is a two-acre
minimum and that what is being proposed is an averaging of the lots, with some lots being around one
acre. Levanb indicated she would not be in support of any lots that are below two acres.
Hiller asked whether 150-foot lot widths would be acceptable with two acre lots.
McMillan asked if that would be to accommodate cul-de-sacs.
Hiller indicated it would be helpful to have a little relief on the frontage to help with the shape of the lots
but that they could meet the two-acre minimum.
Bremer indicated she would be okay with that because without that option,they would be dealing with
straight lines, not meandering roads which would be unattractive and not good for the neighbors.
Hiller stated with the narrower lot widths, they would be able to lay out the homes more randomly, which
would be better visually.
McMillan stated she would be in favor of considering that if there is a solid aesthetic reason for the
narrower lots.
Levang stated she is having a difficult time comprehendinb the one entrance in and out of the
development, especially in light of the traffic counts.
McMillan stated in her view, given the number of homes and safety concerns, there should be two
entrances/exits to the development. McMillan indicated she does not have as big of a concern regarding
the intersection of North Arm and County Road 19,but that there should be an entrance on the northern
end of the development as well.
Hiller indicated they have attempted to be as responsive to the concerns raised to date as possible, but that
with the two acre minimums, the layout would need to be revised.
McMillan indicated she would prefer two acre lots,with a driveway right on to North Arm, and to avoid
cul-de-sacs whenever possible. McMillan stated her goal would be to have a rollin�countryside and not
have it look too urban contrived. McMillan indicated she is not particularly in favor of cul-de-sacs.
McMillan stated what she is interested in knowing by the time of the preliminary plat is whether there
will be covenants and conservation easements and whether a homeowners association will be managing
the conservation areas versus individual property owners.
Hiller indicated they have eliminated the club house under the revised sketch plan and that they platted
the conservation easement to get to the average two acre layout. Hiller stated alternatively, if those areas
are put into an outlot and maintained by a homeowners association; the lots would no longer be two acres.
Page 24 of 27
MINUTES OF THE
SPECIAL ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING
Monday,January 6, 2014
7:00 o'clock p.m.
(l. #13-3638 and#13-3639 SOURCE LA1VD CAPITAL,LLC(PAT HILLER) O/B/O GRANT
WENKSTERN(LAI�EVIEW GOLF), 405 NORTH ARM DRIVE—COMPREHENSII'E
PLANAMENDMEIVT AND SKETCH PLA1V REVIEW, Contiizued)
Hiller indicated there are two different ways to manage the land but that it would be impossible to get to
the two acre minimum if those areas are put into an association and they likely will have to be put into the
individual lots.
McMillan stated she has not looked at other developments where they allow the septic sites in
conservation easement but that in her view that would allow a little more flexibility. McMillan noted
right now the City requires wetland buffers,which is determined by the Watershed District,but the City
has some pretty strict rules far what is allowed in the buffers. McMillan stated she would like that further
refined at some point and that the Watershed District could provide some guidance in that area.
Hiller stated that has been part of the discussion with the Watershed District to date and that they will be
looking for their guidance on the type of vegetation that can be planted. Hiller stated he understands what
Mayor McMillan is saying and that they will work on that.
Hiller stated the important points he has gotten from the discussion with the City Council so far is that
they would like two acre minimum lots; two entrances into the development,and to maintain as much
conservation areas as possible but figure out how to better manage them. Hiller indicated a little
flexibility on the width of the lots would allow them a little more leeway in the layout. Hiller noted they
do have to keep the lots oriented within the septic zones that have been tested,which somewhat limits the
number of options and number of lots,but that they feel they can live with that.
McMillan stated if there are some odd lots that are unbuildable or are added to another lot after the
requirements are met from the Watershed District, the City Council would be open to discussing ideas of
further enhancements that are not necessarily a strict requirement but would add value to the site.
Hiller asked whether the City Council would be interested in seeing another set of sketches prior to the
formal preliminary plat application. Hiller noted the layout will be different than what has been presented
tonight based on the discussion so far.
McMillan stated because this is a large development for Orono that might be a good idea due to the
sensitivity of this development.
Hiller indicated they would prefer to do that rather than spending a bunch of money platting everything
out on the preliminary plat. Hiller stated they will notify Staff once they have somethin�developed and
then bring it to the Cit}�Council.
McMillan noted in addition to the need to filter the water, they will also have to deal with the rate of
water runof£ McMillan indicated the runoff goes pretty fast off the site given the elevation and that the
Watershed District could work with them to help slow that runoff down.
Hiller stated some of the natural pathways contain drain tile that will need to be redone, which will be part
of the rehabilitation of the site.
Page 25 of 27
MINUTES OF THE
SPECIAL ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING
Monday,January 6,2014
7:00 o'clock p.m.
(l. #13-3638 a�id#13-3639 SOURCE LAND CAPITAL,LLC(PAT HILLER) O/B/O GRANT
WENKSTERN(LAKEI'IEW GOLF), 405 NORTHAR.MDRIVE—COMPREHEI`'SII'E
PLANAMENDMENT AND SKETCH PLA1V REVIEW, Continued)
Levang indicated she is not in favor of the cul-de-sacs,but noted that by opening up that road, one
cul-de-sac has been eliminated. Levang asked if any thought has been given on how it can be designed
without cul-de-sacs.
Mike Gehr stated they have gone to reasonable lengths in reviewing and understanding the Conservation
Design easement ordinance, the Rural Oasis Study, Chapter 3 of the Comprehensive Plan, Orono's
Natural Resource Inventory and designed a concept plan that is approaching the goals of the Rural Oasis
and conservation. Gehr stated the reason for the two cul-de-sacs on the southwest of the parcel is a
drainageways and some steep slopes that they are attempting to avoid.
Gehr stated in terms of an alternative to a 120-foot or a 100-foot turnaround, as has been suggested here, a
T configuration might work in this situation. Gehr stated those sorts of things wark fairly well,but that it
is a matter of physical limitations in terms of going from North Arm down to the bottom of the ravine and
then ascending up again. Gehr indicated that might increase the site grading but they will look at that.
McMillan stated minimizinb the grading is important but noted there will not be the issue of tree removal
on this site.
Hiller stated it would also help minimize the�rading by staying on the plateaus but that may require some
cul-de-sacs.
McMillan asked if these will be custom style homes or whether there are any certain styles of homes that
will be built.
Hiller indicated they would be custom homes but there are no exact designs at this time.
McMillan stated if every home is going to be custom built,then it will not be necessary to bring in
designs, but if they are anticipating certain materials to be used, the Council would like to see those.
Hiller noted the Red Oak development will consist of lower priced homes.
Levang asked whether it is their intent to have both developments going at the same time.
Hiller stated the idea is to get started on Red Oak this summer and that he is not sure when they wil] be
ready to go ahead with Lakeview.
McMillan asked whether this development would be phased in.
Dave Nash indicated it would be partially dependent on what option is used for the water and that the
initial grading will be far the roads. Nash stated on this size site, even though it is 140 acres, it is the type
of site that would likely be designed and graded at one time, especially if there is a water main installed.
Hiller asked whether the Council prefers city water or wells.
McMillan asked if the site would have to be designed a lot differently with one option versus the other.
Page 26 of 27
MINUTES OF THE
SPECIAL ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING
Monday,January� 6,2014
7:00 o'clock p.m.
(1. #13-3638 and#13-3639 SOURCE LAND CAPITAL, LLC(PAT HILLER) O/B/O GRANT
WENKSTERN(LAICEVIEW GOLF), 405 NORTAARMDRli'E—COMPREHEl�'SIVE
PLAA'AMENDMEIVT AND SKETCH PLAN REVIEW, Continued)
Hiller stated in his view it would not impact the layout of the site and that both options cost
approximately the same. Hiller noted city water would also give the City the ability to put hydrants in.
Bremer indicated she would prefer the city water option. Bremer noted a number of residents have
approached her with concerns about water use with this development.
Gaffron asked what the source of Minnetrista's water is.
Hiller indicated he does not lalow where the well is but that the water tower is located down County Road
151. Hiller stated to his understanding they have three separate water systems but that they can look into
that.
Gaffron stated he is assuming Minnetrista's well is deeper than the aquifer.
Hiller thanked the City Council for their input on the development.
The City Council took no formal action on the sketch plan.
ADJOURNMENT
Bremer moved,Printup seconded,to adjourn the Special Orono City Council meeting at 10:08 p.m.
VOTE: Ayes 5,Nays 0.
ATTEST:
Rachel Dodge, City Clerk Lili Tod McMillan,Mayor
_ __ _ _ ._
Page 27 of 27
_____ _
._ __
_ ____
. �
MINUTES OF THE COUNCIL MEETING
ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING
Monday,January 13, 2014 ,Jq�i 2 7 2014
7:00 o'clock p.m.
CITY�F C�R�NO
ROLL CALL
The Orono City Council met on the above-mentioned date with the following members present: Mayar
Lili Tod McMillan, Council Members Cynthia Bremer, Lizz Levang, and Aaron Printup. Representing
Staff were City Administrator Jessica Loftus,Assistant City Administrator for Long-Term Strategic
Planning, Finance Director Ron Olson,Planning Coordinator Melanie Curtis, Public Works Director/City
Engineer Jesse Struve, Attorney Soren Mattick, Consulting City Engineer David Martini, 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
Item Nos. 8, 9, 10, 11, 13, 14, 16, and 17 were added to the Consent Agenda.
McMillan noted ltem No. 5 will only be a review of the Comprehensive Plan amendment and not the
sketch plan.
Bremer moved,Levang seconded, to approve the Consent Agenda as amended. VOTE: Ayes 4,
Nays 0.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
*2. REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MINUTES OF DECEMBER 9,2013
Bremer moved,Levang seconded,to approve the minutes of the Orono City Council meeting of
December 9,2013, as submitted. VOTE: Ayes 4,Nays 0.
PUBLIC HEARING—7:00 P.M.
3. GREEN TREES ROAD SANITARY SEWER EXTENSION—RESOLUTION NO. 6358
Struve stated at the July 22, 2013, City Council meeting, the residents on Green Trees Road petitioned the
City to do a feasibility report to extend a sanitary sewer stub down Green Trees Road to serve the existing
six properties which access through Green Trees Road. Initially five of the six residents signed a petition,
but the one person who originally voiced an opinion against has now indicated he is in favor of the
project. Struve stated it will cost approximately$21,000 per home to extend the sewer and the costs will
be assessed to the individual property owners.
Dave Martini, Bolton&Menk, stated the impetus of the project was a petition to the City from five out of
the six property owners on Green Trees Road. The City Council ultimately ordered a feasibility study to
take a look at the proposed project. Plans and specifications were also authorized to be prepared.
Page 1 of 17
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING
Monday,January 13, 2014
7:00 o'clock p.m.
(3. GREEN TREES ROAD SANITARY SEWER EXTENSION—RESOL UTION NO. 6358,
Continued)
The existing conditions of Green Trees Road consist of a private street that serves six residential projects.
Each property has an onsite sewage disposal system which consists of a septic tank and a drain field. The
existing municipal sanitary sewer system is located on Shareline Drive, and as part of the feasibility
study, the condition and capacity of that sewer line was looked at It was ultimately determined that the
municipal system does have the capacity to serve the properties on Green Trees Road.
The feasibility study proposes two alternates for extending sewer from the existing gravity sewer on the
eastside of Shoreline Drive. Alternate 1 proposes a 2-inch forcemain and Alternate 2 proposes an 8-inch
gravity sewer. Alternate 2 would eventually eliminate the need for the pump stations. Martini noted that
a gravity system is generally preferred over a forcemain due to the long-term costs associated with
maintaining the pump stations. Both alternates are proposed to be constructed by use of trenchless
construction methods to minimize the need for reconstruction
Martini indicated under the forcemain option, it is possible, even with the trenchless construction,to put
some curves in the alignment of the pipe. Martini stated the alignment of the sewer would stay within the
existing right-of-way until you get to the end of the cul-de-sac. Martini noted it would be necessary to
obtain an easement from the property owners to extend the sewer to each of the properties from the cul-
de-sac.
Alternative two is the gravity sewer option. The project would start essentially at the same point on
Shoreline Drive but would require straight lines and a manhole where the ali�mment would be turned.
Under this alternatie, the contractor would not able to follow the curvature of the road and would require
an additional easement.
Martini noted Alternative 1 is significantly less expensive than Alternative 2 and the directional drilling is
able to provide some curvature on the alignment of the road. Martini noted near the intersection of
Shoreline Drive and Green Trees Road there are some Indian burial mounds and that Staff has been in
contact with Indian Affairs to make sure the proposed construction is taking that sensitive area into proper
consideration.
Martini stated the proposed alignment was picked in an attempt to minimize the number of easements
required,but noted for the northern properties, it will be necessary to cross some other properties. Jesse
Struve will be working with those property owners in order to obtain the necessary easements. In
addition, Martini indicated they did look at setbacks and buildable areas and Staff does not believe the
proposed extension impacts any of the buildable areas on the properties. The estimated cost as presented
in the feasibility study for Alternative 1 was $123,600,with the idea that the costs would be 100 percent
assessed to the benefitting properties for an individual cost of$20,600.
Page 2 of 17
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING
Monday,January 13, 2014
7:00 o'clock p.m.
(3. GREEN TREES ROAD SANITARY SEWER EXTENSION—RESOL UTION NO. 6358,
Continued)
Martini stated if the City elects to assess these costs to the benefitting properties; certain steps need to be
followed. One option would be for the City Council to authorize the improvements by a super majority
or, in this case, since the project was offered as a petition by the property owners, the City has acted to
move forward with the project to this point based on that petition and requested a feasibility study be
performed and plans and specifications be prepared. Notice of a public hearing for considering the
improvements has gone out and the affected property owners have been individually notified. Tonight's
public hearing provides the public a chance to comment on the proposed improvements.
Martini stated the next steps in the process are to obtain public comment, adopt a resolution ordering the
improvements, approve the plans and specifications that have been provided, and then advertise the
project for bids. The assessment hearing would be held prior to the project being awarded to ensure the
property owners are still interested in moving forward with the project. Once the bids are received; an
assessment roll would be prepared based on those bids and a contract awarded to the lower bidder.
Martini noted the City would then levy the assessments and collect them either up front or added to the
property owner's property taxes. Martini stated with the assessment hearing being held ahead of the
improvements, it is possible that the amount could go down but noted it cannot go up at that point.
Levang asked if there is only one failing system.
Struve indicated there is one system that is in noncompliance.
Levang asked if all the property owners have now agreed to the proj ect.
Struve indicated five initially agreed to the project and that the sixth property owner has recently agreed
to the proj ect. Struve indicated all of the septic systems were installed in the early 1980s and all of them
are reaching the end of their useful life, which is one reason why the majority of the homeowners opted
for the project. Struve noted the property owner can hook up at a time of their choosing and that each
property owner will need to install a pumping station at a cost of$10,000 to $12,000.
Martini noted there are some costs that are associated with hooking up but those would not be due until
the time of connection.
Levang asked if any of the homeowners have indicated when they would be hooking up.
Struve stated the one property that has the noncompliant system is for sale at the present time but they
have the option of creating an escrow fund for those funds if the home sells prior to the assessment being
levied.
Levang asked what type of maintenance is required with a pumping system.
Struve stated private grinder stations require fairly minimal maintenance. Some homeowners will pull
them every so often to have them cleaned and inspected but many homeowners do nothing with them
until they fail.
Page 3 of 17
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING
Monday,January 13, 2014
7:00 o'clock p.m.
(3. GREEN TREES ROAD SANITARY SEWER EXTENSION—RESOL UTION NO. 6358,
Continued)
Martini indicated it would be similar to a sump pump.
McMillan noted the grinder stations do run off of electricity.
Struve stated all of the homeowners have been notified of that as well.
Martini stated to his understanding one of the properties has a pump from the tank to the drain field
currently.
Struve stated the homeowners have been informed of the potential downfalls to the system but they have
elected to move forward with the project.
McMillan commented it is usually better to have a gravity system.
Struve stated in this case the expense did not warrant a gravity system since it would require a lot of
manholes to make the corners, which would require a number of different setups for the directional
boring, or it would require an open cut in the roadway,which essentially requires replacement of the road
and adds significantly to the costs. There would also be some restoration and additional easement costs.
Struve indicated the City will be asking for voluntary easements and that the estimated costs are
predicated on the fact that the easements will be obtained for minimal or no cost.
Struve indicated there are still some details to be worked out prior to final approval but based on the
conversations he has had with the property owners, he is confident the City will be able to obtain those
easements.
Mayor McMillan opened the public hearing at 7:19 p.m.
There were no public comments regarding this item.
Mayor McMillan closed the public hearing at 7:19 p.m.
Printup moved,Levang seconded,to direct Staff to advertise the project for biddin�and to adopt
RESOLUTION NO. 6358, a Resolution Approving the Plans and Specifications and Ordering the
Improvement. VOTE: Ayes 4, Nays 0.
Page 4 of 17
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO CITY COUNCII,MEETING
Monday,January 13,2014
7:00 o'clock p.m.
RECOGNITION
4. RETIREMENT OF POLICE OFFICER JAMES CORNICK—RESOLUTION NO. 6359
McMillan stated she would like to recognize Officer Jim Cornick for his 28 years of service on the Orono
Police Department. McMillan noted Officer Cornick started service on January 1, 1986, and was
promoted to police sergeant in 2004. McMillan indicated she would like to recognize and commend his
service to Orono during that time period and noted that he also served as an auctioneer at the City holiday
parties.
Bremer stated he also did excellent work with the Citizens Academy over the years and took an active
role in making the police department accessible to the citizens.
Bremer moved,Levang seconded,to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 6359, a Resolution Recognizing
Sergeant James Cornick for his Twenty-eight Years of Dedicated Service to the City as a Police
Officer. VOTE: Ayes 4,Nays 0.
PLANNING COMMISSION COMMENTS—JOHN THIESSE,REPRESENTATIVE
Thiesse stated he has nothing to report but would be available for questions.
LMCD REPORT—ANDREW MCDERMOTT,REPRESENTATIVE
McDermott reported Lake Minnetonka is now frozen over and it is still debatable whether there will be
high or low water levels in the spring. As of right now, it appears to be an average year for snowfall.
McDermott stated the LMCD has received a report from the Hennepin County Water Patrol on various
violations this past year, such as DWIs, and it shows pretty much an average year. Hennepin County
Water Patrol has purchased a new air boat. McDermott noted the boat sounds like a jet engine and the
residents may initially wonder what it is. The air boat will be parked permanently in Spring Park and is
mainly for use on Lake Minnetonka.
McDermott noted the majority of the representatives to the LMCD will be reappointed this year but the
representative from Shorewood had elected to step down.
McDermott stated the City Council Members should have received an invitation to the Save the Lake
banquet being held this year in February and that he hopes they can attend.
McMillan asked what the advantage is for the air boat.
McDermott indicated stated it is mainly for rescues when the ice is just forming and when the ice is just
going out. This year the lake froze fairly smoothly and no ice ridges have formed yet so the Water Patrol
is able to patrol on snowmobiles. McDermott stated as the ice starts to get thinner,that is when the air
boat will be used.
_. __
_ __ _
Page 5 of 17
__ _ _ _
_ _ _
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING
Monday,January 13, 2014
7:00 o'clock p.m.
(LMCD REPORT—ANDREW MCDERMOTT,REPRESENTATIVE, Continued)
McMillan commented she understands the LMCD is working on the LMCC with televising their
meetings.
McDermott stated the LMCC has informed the LMCD that there will be an expense associated with
taping each of their meetings as well as live streaming them.
Levang asked if the LMCD would still be utilizing the Wayzata chambers.
McDermott indicated they will be for at least the next year.
PUBLIC COMMENTS
Jerry Hertaus, State Representative, stated the MN Legislature will be convening again at the end of
February in approximately 50 days. Hertaug stated he would encourage the members of the Orono City
Council and public to contact him if they have concerns about any upcoming issues.
Hertaus stated during the last session, one of the pieces of legislation that was passed affecting cities
makes it easier for organized trash collection. It was also determined that the Metropolitan Council will
be redistricted in years ending in three. The next redistricting will occur in 2023. In addition,there was
legislation passed with regard to Metropolitan Council wastewater treatment services that gives cifies the
ability to have some deferment of the costs, which would also include interest.
Hertaus stated he currently serves on the education finance, housing, and property tax committees.
Hertaus stated some of the things that happened in this last legislative session resulted in a fair increase in
taxes and spending, such as increasing the State's investments in infrastructure and education. Hertaus
noted there was approximately a 10 percent increase in all funds spending. Hertaus stated the generally
reported $2 billion increase is just referring to the increase in general fund revenues,but what are
typically not mentioned are all the extra fees and increases that were also passed far the all funds budget.
In actuality there was a$6.12 billion dollar increase, with fees being raised on real estate license renewals
as well as an increase for attorney, dentist and nursing licenses. A fourth tier of income tax bracket was
created from 7.85 percent to 9.85 percent, which means that single filers over$145,000 will be subjected
to that highest rate and married couples filing jointly with income over$250,000 will also be subject to
that new rate. In addition,the MN Legislature passed new cigarette taxes, new gift taxes. Hertaus noted
one of the provisions of that legislation was a claw back provision to allow the state to go back on
inheritances for two years and tax some of that.
Hertaus stated he has co-authored legislation that will be discussed this next session proposing to bring
the Minnesota inheritance tax exemption into conformity with the federal exemption. Currently in
Minnesota anything over$1 million is taxable and at the federal level it is $5 million.
Page 6 of 17
-__ __ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ __- __
� MINUTES OF THE
ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING
Monday,January 13, 2014
7:00 o'clock p.m.
(PUBLIC COMMENTS, Continued)
Hertaus stated the State's 2013 budget also included an increase on the repair tax for farm and business
equipment and a warehouse tax. Hertaus noted$90 million for a new senate office building was included
in the omnibus tax bill rather than in a bonding bill. Hertaus stated very few legislators knew about it at
the time the legislation was passed. In addition, $338 million of state aid was awarded to the Mayo Clinic
infrastructure improvements project, $26 million of assistance was given to the Duluth and St. Paul
teacher pension plans,there was a$60 million increase on certain property classifications to fund a
general education levy, $400 million of additional money is being spent on K-12, and an extra$15
surcharge on speeding tickets was also added.
Hertaus stated approximately$38 million was appropriated from the LCCMR, which involves the
Legislative Citizens Commission and the voluntary sales tax that was added a few years ago; $8 million
went into natural resource data information; $13 million for habitat restoration and recreation; $3.8
million for water resources; $10.9 million for aquatic and invasive species; and another$636,000 for
environmental education.
Hertaus stated he also authored a bill that modified the Save Schools levy, which was passed. Hertaus
indicated there are little different buckets of money in education that have to be saved for certain things,
and one of the things the Safe School Levy was about was for fire protection and mold remediation. The
modified bill changed the language to allow the school districts to use some of that money for security
enhancements at the schools.
Hertaus stated at the beginning of the session the citizens heard a lot of rhetoric about lowering the sales
tax rate and broadening the tax base. What this related to was the imposition of a broader tax base and
business-to-business taxes. Hertaus stated council members and mayors of communities are aware of the
modest budgets that cities have, and oftentimes if the city does not have in-house planners,the city ends
up paying quite a bit of money for legal and consultant fees,which typically ends up being around 25
percent of a city's budget. Hertaus indicated he asked House Research how much sales tax is collected by
counties, cities and townships. The fiscal impact of the business-to-business tax was approximately$250
million, which would mean that $250 million would have to be collected at the local level to pay the
business-to-business taxes. Hertaus indicated he subsequently co-authored some legislation which was
attached to the omnibus tax bill making cities and towns exempt from sales tax. Hertaus indicated the
savings probably averages out to be about $30,000 to $40,000 per million dollars for most cities.
Hertaus stated he also co-authored legislation modifying the Location Equity Funding Formula for the
local school districts. In Senate District 33A,there are eight school districts that service this area. Some
school districts, such as Buffalo, Rockfard, Delano, and Mayer,have their district office located just
outside of the county line but they serve well into Hennepin County. Because the district offices are not
located in Hennepin County, they do not qualify far the Location Equity Funding Formula. Hertaus
indicated many of the school districts were contemplating relocating their district offices to Hennepin
County in order to gain access to that money. Hertaus stated he co-authored legislation to change that to
allow those four districts to gain access to that money. Hertaus noted in some of the school districts, it
amounted to approximately$1 million.
Page 7 of 17
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING
Monday,January 13,2014
7:00 o'clock p.m.
(PUBLIC COMMENTS, Continued)
Hertaus indicated in addition, the MN Legislature approved$500,000 of funding for the Pioneer/Lake
Sarah Watershed District as well as the Three Rivers Park District to do some total maximum daily load
or TMDL mitigation. Hertaus noted that legislation made it all the way to the governor's desk but was
ultimately line item vetoed.
Hertaus indicated he will leave some business cards with his contact information if any citizen would like
to get ahold of him.
PLANNING DEPARTMENT REPORT
5. #13-3638 and#13-3639 SOURCE LAND CAPITAL,LLC (PAT HILLER) ON BEHALF
OF GRANT WENKSTERN (LAKEVIEW GOLF),405 NORTH ARM DRIVE,
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT AND SKETCH PLAN REVIEW—
RESOLUTION NO. 6360
Alan Brixius,Northwest Associated Consultants,noted a motion was passed at the January 6 meeting
directing Staff to draft a resolution approving the proposed land use change for the Lakeview Golf Course
from parks and open space to rural residentiaL In the Council's packet tonight is a copy of the resolution.
(S. #I3-3638 and#13-3639 SOURCE LAND CAPITAL,LLC(PAT HILLER) ONBEHALF
OF GRANT WENKSTERN(LAKEVIEW GOLF), 405 NORTHARMDRIVE,
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT AND SKETCH PLAN REVIEW—
RESOLUTIONNO. 6360, Continued)
Brixius stated he will briefly review the resolution and requested the City Council review the resolution
and determine whether any additional changes are necessary.
Brixius noted the first page of the resolution reflects that the City adopted its 2008-2030 Community
Management Plan in 2010. Brixius stated the Comprehensive Plan is basically what guides the City as far
as land use and land use patterns. The property in question consists of 142 acres,which was operated as a
golf course from the 1950s, which was well before the adoption of the first Comprehensive Plan and
zoning ordinances. The first Comprehensive Plan identified this area for parks, recreational and open
space,which encompasses all of the City's public parks as well as private golf courses and other
recreational facilities. Currently the property is zoned RR-1B, which is rural residential. The intended
purpose of that is to accommodate single-family rural residential as well as limited agricultural activities.
Within that district, 2-acre single-family lots are the dominant permitted use and golf courses are a
permitted conditional use.
Page 8 of 17
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING
Monday,January 13,2014
7:00 dclock p.m.
(S. #13-3638 and#13-3639 SOURCE LAND CAPITAL,LLC(PAT HILLER) ON BEHALF
OF GRANT WENKSTERN(LAKEVIEW GOLF), 405 NORTHARMDRIVE,
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT AND SKETCH PLAN REVIEW—
RESOLUTIONNO. 6360, Continued)
Brixius stated during this process,the applicant has provided information and made an argument that it is
no longer economically feasible for them to continue to operate their golf course and they are requesting
an alternative use consistent with the current zoning. The proposed development is an unsewered, 2-acre
lot rural residential development. The development is also intended to reflect the rural densities that are
currently allowed in the neighborhood. At the last City Council meeting,the Council specifically
indicated to the developer that no lot averaging will be considered and that he must meet the required two
acres of buildable land for each lot. Brixius noted to date there have been no formal approvals of any
development plans or subdivisions and these would have to subsequently be presented.
Brixius stated the proposed development will be an unsewered area and will depend on either private well
systems for each lot or possibly water coming out of Minnetrista, which is undetermined at this time.
Any new subdivision will be required to comply with Orono's current contemporary stormwater
management requirements that will address both rate control and water treatment. The development will
likely cause improvements in both of those areas. Information has been provided that the proposed
development will have similar traffic generation as the golf course, and through the subdivision design
will create alternative access points that will distribute the traffic in a variety of manners.
Brixius noted the City currently has in place contemporary management and regulations on stormwater,
septic systems,water supply, and road designs that will all have to be incorporated and addressed through
the subdivision process.
Brixius noted the findings of the City are that historically Orono has only chosen to acquire public land or
open space through dedication, donation, or negotiated purchase, and has not sought pubic acquisition of
property against the wishes of the property owner. In choosing to follow that current practice,the
designation of the property to an alternative land use would be appropriate.
Brixius noted that the City is also is making a finding that the application of the rural residential land use
category to this site appears to be the most viable and realistic alternative and is most consistent with the
surrounding land uses. In addition, the City is making the finding that the proposed use will not
overburden the City's public service capacity or infrastructure, and the City is also stipulating that the
conversion from open space to rural residential will not have a substantial impact and will be consistent
with the surrounding land use in the area.
Brixius noted that the Planning Commission voted in October on a 6-1 vote to approve the land use
change. If the City Council is satisfied with the findings contained with the resolution, the City Council
should make a motion to approve the Comprehensive Plan change. Brixius noted the Comprehensive
Plan change would be subject to Metropolitan Council review and approval.
McMillan noted many of the findings were discussed last week at the special meeting on Monday and that
the proposal was also discussed on November 12, including a public hearing, which was followed by a
60-day extension. McMillan stated in her view the City Council has had a fairly lengthy discussion on all
the issues regarding this amendment.
_ __ ____ __
Page 9 of 17
__ _ __ _
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING
Monday,January 13,2014
7:00 o'clock p.m.
(S. #13-3638 and#13-3639 SOURCE LAND CAPITAL,LLC(PAT HILLER) ONBEHALF
OF GRANT WENKSTERN(LAKEVIEW GOLF), 405 NORTHARMDRIVE,
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT AND SKETCH PLAN REVIEW—
RESOL UTION NO. 6360, Continued)
Bremer stated as it relates to Three Rivers Park and whether they would have been interested in this piece
of property, the City has received some pretty good information from Three Rivers that they are not
interested in a property like this in that location. Bremer stated she understands some members of the
City Council have received e-mails from the residents regarding that and that the City Council Members
have attempted to let the residents know that.
Printup moved,Levang seconded,to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 6360, a Resolution Granting
Preliminary Approval of Amendment No. 2 of the Orono 2008-2030 Community Management
Plan: 405 North Arm Drive(Also known as Lakeview Golf Course),Property Identification
Numbers 06-117-23-32-0003; 06-117-23-33-0005; 06-117-23-33-0007; 06-117-23-34-0002; and 07-
117-23-12-0001. VOTE: Ayes 4, Nays 0.
6. #13-3640 JAMES MURPHY AND SANDRA SMITH, 20 ORONO ORCHARD ROAD
NORTH, EASEMENT VACATION—RESOLUTION NO. 6361
Curtis stated in November the City Council approved a request for a lot line rearrangement between the
applicants' properties at 20 Orono Orchard Road and 30 Orono Orchard Road in order to move the
common lot line east approximately 94-98 feet so that the barn and the land around the barn would
become part of 20 Orono Orchard Road.
As part of the lot line rearrangement, the applicants granted new utility and drainage easements along the
new common lot line. Due to the publication timing, the necessary vacation of existing drainage and
utility easements currently shown on 20 Orono Orchard Road were not able to be vacated as part of the
lot line rearrangement approval.
Curtis noted the appropriate utility companies have been notified and there are no identified facilities
existing within the easements to be vacated. In order to move the common lot line, the applicants have
granted new utility and drainage easements along the new lot line. The City Council should open the
public hearing regarding the vacation of the easements and hear any testimony. The Council should then
adopt or amend the attached resolution regarding the vacation request.
Mayor McMillan opened the public hearing at 7:46 p.m.
There were no comments regarding this application.
Mayor McMillan closed the public hearing at 7:46 p.m.
Levang moved, Printup seconded,to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 6361, a Resolution Vacating a
Dedicated Drainage and Utility Easement for the property located at 20 Orono Orchard Road
North. VOTE: Ayes 4,Nays 0.
Page 10 of 17
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING
Monday,January 13,2014
7:00 o'clock p.m.
PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR/CITY ENGINEER'S REPORT
7. CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN (CIP)
Struve stated before the City Council tonight is the most recent update to the City's Capital Improvement
Plan. Struve noted at the last City Council meeting there were some changes requested and those chanbes
have been incorporated in the CII'.
Levang noted on Page 4 is the replacement of a building inspection vehicle if a second inspector is on
staff. Levang asked if that is simply a contingency that has been included.
Struve stated that is a contingency if it is deemed necessary to bring on a second building inspector.
Struve indicated otherwise that is an item that will get pushed back if it is not needed.
Levang stated in 2018, a veneer chipper is scheduled to be purchased, and asked if this is a replacement
for the existing one and or whether the Public Works Department is purchasing a chipper with bigger
capacity.
Struve indicated it is a replacement chipper and that a bigger chipper would result in substantially mare
money.
Printup asked how the equipment on the trucks with the brining solution holding up.
Struve indicated the City only has one three-quarter ton pickup with a tank attached for the brine solution
and that the tanks are not installed on the City's bigger trucks. Struve stated the City has experienced a
few more events this year that have shown the benefit of the brine solution but that he is not necessarily
sold on utilizing it to a greater degree.
McMillan stated she noted some has been put down today in anticipation of the snow.
Struve indicated tomorrow will be a good test of it and that the brine solution allows some additional time
for the Public Warks Department to get out there and plow.
Levang stated Page 5,under building CIP, the first item lists city parking lot replacement and
reconfiguration. Levang asked whether the City has applied for a grant or will be applying for a grant to
help with the costs of that item.
Struve indicated they will be applying for a grant and that he has a meeting with the Watershed District
scheduled in the next couple of days. Struve indicated he will be moving forward with applying for that
grant and noted the CIP does not reflect any grants and contains the full project costs.
Levang asked what is being contemplated as it relates to the reconfiguration.
Struve stated the flow through the parking lot is not very good at the present and that currently there are
three entrances. Some of the options being considered are to eliminate one of the entrances and to realign
the other entrance to an area across from the school to allow for better access and create a safer
intersection.
Page 11 of 17
_ __ _- _ ___ _ __ _ — _ _ _
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING
Monday,January 13,2014
7:00 o'clock p.m.
(7. CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN (CIP), Continued)
Bremer asked if that cost would also include the landscaping around the entrances or whether it is just the
hardscape.
Struve stated he does not know the full amount at this time but that it is his belief it does contain some
landscaping costs. Struve indicated he will need to look into that a little mare and get back to the City
Council on that item.
Levang asked if the 2016 public works parking lot is a full reconstruction or replacement.
Struve indicated it would be a full reconstruct of the road and that it is beyond the point of doing an
overlay. Struve stated the project may be able to be pushed back a year or two.
Levang asked if the seal coat in 2018 would be pushed back as well.
Struve indicated it is for the city hall and public warks parking lot and that typically you do a seal coat
within three to five years of putting new asphalt down.
Levang asked how the 2014 imaging project is coming along.
Loftus stated that is a project that has not moved forward given the retirement of the previous City Clerk
and that Staff will need to refocus on that project in 2014.
Levang noted Page 7 lists a replacement Chevy pickup for 2016, and asked if that is simply a reflection of
how old the current vehicle is and what will be needed in the future.
Struve stated that is based on the use of that pickup and to his understanding it is approximately 15 to 20
years old. Struve stated that vehicle does not get a lot of use so the useful life is able to be extended but
they are anticipating it will need to be replaced in 2016.
Levang asked if that is Orono's portion of the improvements under the Long Lake Fire CIP.
Loftus indicated Orono pays approximately 85 percent of those costs.
Levang asked whether the Public Works Department is looking at obtaining a grant for the sidewalk
proj ect.
Struve stated if grants and additional funding sources become available,that is a possible project that
could be done but it is dependent on obtaining outside funding sources.
Levang asked what the $12,000 for the Navarre Park-N-Ride project consists of.
Struve indicated that is stripping of the parking lot.
Page 12 of 17
___ ___ _._ _ ..._..... ----_ ___._ __ _---- -_-- _____ ___ ___.._ ___ ___
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING
Monday,January 13, 2014
7:00 o'clock p.m.
(7. CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN (CIP), Continued)
Bremer noted far the public that the CIP is a planning document and not a funding document and
typically changes on a somewhat regular basis.
McMillan thanked Staff for the 2013 historical information.
Bremer moved,Printup seconded,to approve the 2014 Capital Improvement Plan. VOTE: Ayes 5,
Nays 0.
*8. PAY REQUEST NO. 1—WILLOWBROOK DRIVE OVERLAY PROJECT
Bremer moved, Levang seconded,to approve Pay Request No. 1 for the contractor Omann
Brothers, Inc., in the amount of$21,368.83 for the Willowbrook Overlay Project. VOTE: Ayes 4,
Nays 0.
PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR/CITY ENGINEER'S REPORT, CONTINUED
Struve reported the wood pile should be chipped by the end of the week. The contractor has indicated the
machine is en route from Iowa. Struve stated depending on the weather,the machine should be out there
in the next couple of days,with work commencing later in the week.
Levang asked if it will only take a couple of days to complete the work.
Struve indicated that is correct and that the Public Works Department will be retaining some of the chips
with the majority of them being removed by the contractor.
Levang asked if the barriers will be put up again to prevent people from dumping there once the area is
cleared out.
Struve stated it will be used again for parking for the trail.
Levang asked if signs will be erected stating no more dumping.
Struve stated since the brush pile has been there, there has been an increase in dumping at that site,but
that he will look into erecting better signs to deter dumping at the site.
MAYOR/COUNCIL REPORT
Levang noted Jesse Struve had indicated the state variance commitment needed more volunteers and that
she has volunteered to serve on that committee. Levang stated she has attended her first meeting on that
committee and that she is getting a good education on how the state sets the standards for road
construction. Levang stated when it comes to Watertown Road, the City might be in the position of
having to ask for a variance and so it is good to become more educated on that aspect. Levang indicated
it is a small committee consisting of five members.
___ _ _
_ __ _
_ ____
Page 13 of 17
__ _ _ _ _ _ __ __
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO CITY COUNCIL,MEETING
Monday,January 13,2014
7:00 o'clock p.m.
(MAYOR/COUNCIL REPORT, Continued)
McMillan noted the City is live streaming tonight's meeting on the City's website. Testing was
conducted last week, with last week's meeting being live streamed as we1L McMillan indicated the
meetings are now available through the City's website and that she would like to thank Jessica Loftus and
the rest of the Staff for pulling this all together in the past couple of months. The residents will also be
able to download videos of the meetings from the website. McMillan indicated the Granicus software
will have the agenda and attachments for the meeting on the website and will also allow the residents to
download the videos of the meetings. McMillan commented the new software will allow the residents to
more easily access the meeting information.
McMillan noted back in December the Long Lake Fire Department hosted the United Firefighters
regional meeting, with a number of representatives from the various local fire departments attending.
McMillan indicated she was very impressed with the level of expertise the local fire chiefs have and that
the communities are very lucky to have a great group of volunteer firefighters.
CITY ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT
*9. ANNUAL APPOINTMENTS—RESOLUTION NO. 6362
Bremer moved,Levang seconded,to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 6362, a Resolution Designating
Selected Appointments for the Year 2014. VOTE: Ayes 4,Nays 0.
*10. WAYZATA FIRE SERVICE AGREEMENT
Bremer moved,Levang seconded, to approve the Wayzata Fire Service Contract with the City of
Wayzata and to approve payment for fire protection services. VOTE: Ayes 4,Nays 0.
*11. PHASED RETIREMENT OPTION PLAN
Bremer moved,Levang seconded,to approve the Phased Retirement Agreement with Ron
Steffenhagen. VOTE: Ayes 4,Nays 0.
12. MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING(MOL�FOR ORONO/LONG LAKE
REGIONAL TRAIL PROPOSAL
Loftus noted the City Council has been warking with the Hennepin County Transportation Department on
the turnback of Old Highway 12 and one element of the project is reviewing the trail system. Loftus
indicated Mayor McMillan and Long Lake Mayor Tim Hultmann have reached out to Three Rivers to see
if there were any opportunities to collaborate on the trail. Three Rivers has indicated they would like to
enter into a formal memarandum of understanding, which is basically a commitment to evaluate the trail
but is not a commitment to funding any project. Loftus stated the City Attorney is comfortable with the
memorandum and that Staff would recommend approval of the memorandum. Loftus noted some
maintenance and funding options may be available if the trail turns out to be feasible.
Page 14 of 17
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING
Monday,January 13,2014
7:00 o'clock p.m.
(12. MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING(MOU) FOR ORONO/LONG LAKE REGIONAL
TRAIL PROPOSAL, Continued)
McMillan stated Three Rivers indicated they would be interested in it if it would be beneficial on a
regional basis and how to connect to the Luce Line and Dakota Trail. McMillan noted the City is not
obligated to undertake any projects and that it is her understanding Long Lake is also in favor of the
memorandum of understanding.
Bremer moved,Printup seconded,to approve the Memorandum of Understanding with Three
Rivers Park District and the City of Long Lake to evaluate the feasibility of a potential new
regional trail along County Road 112 connecting Baker Park Reserve to the Dakota Rail Regional
Trail. VOTE: Ayes 4,Nays 0.
*13. ACCEPT RESIGNATION OF POLICE OFFICER MIKE SUSSMAN
Bremer moved,Levang seconded,to accept the resignation of Mike Sussman effective January 20,
2014. VOTE: Ayes 4,Nays 0.
*14. REQUEST TO HIRE FULL-TIME POLICE OFFICERS
Bremer moved,Levang seconded,to approve the hiring of Phil Spanjers and Joshua Needham as
Full-Time Police Officers,effective January 28,2014, for Phil Spanjers,and February 11, 2014,for
Joshua Needham. VOTE: Ayes 4,Nays 0.
15. GOLF COURSE DONATIONS—RESOLUTION NQ. 6363
Loftus stated this past year the City has had an active group of citizens who have taken an interest in the
Orono Golf Course. The group has recently sent out a fundraising letter, with the City receiving 15-plus
donations to date. Loftus stated the City needs to formally accept those donations to keep in compliance
with their audit requirements.
Staff is requesting the City Council adopt a resolution accepting those donations and a thank you letter
will be sent to each person recognizing their donation.
Levang asked how many times a year the City will be doing this. Levang asked if the City will wait until
there is a certain amount of money donated or how it will be handled from here.
Loftus stated it will likely be quarterly but that Staff is open to the Council's thoughts on it.
McMillan noted the letter just went out and that hopefully the donations will continue.
Page 15 of 17
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING
Monday,January 13,2014
7:00 o'clock p.m.
(l S. GOLF COURSE DONATIONS—RESOL UTIONNO. 6363, Continued)
Finance Director Olson noted the City is not able to deposit any of the money until the donations are
accepted formally and that the City does not like to hold on to the checks for a long period of time. Olson
stated the City did receive another check today in the amount of$300 that is not included in tonight's list.
Olson indicated he would like to see it happen monthly.
McMillan suggested Staff decide when it is appropriate to bring the donations to the City Council.
Levang moved,Printup seconded,to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 6363,A Resolution to Accept Golf
Course Donations. VOTE: Ayes 4,Nays 0.
CITY ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT, CONTINUED
Loftus noted residents are welcome to drop off their Christmas trees at a number of the city parks through
the month of January.
Loftus stated the City Council will be receiving the year-end financial information at the next City
Council meeting, but noted permit numbers have come in for 2013 and show that the City has exceeded
some of the numbers since 2008 and, in some cases, 2007. Loftus stated 2013 has been an active year for
construction projects.
CITY ATTORNEY'S REPORT
Mattick stated he had nothing to report tonight and noted there will be a closed session at the next City
Council meeting to discuss a pending piece of litigation.
*16. LICENSES AND PERMITS
Tobacco Licenses
1. Navarre Liquors
Richard Wood
3421 Shoreline Drive
2. Spring Hill Golf Club
Jeffrey Kringen
725 Sixth Avenue North
3. Navarre Amstar
LeRoy Koehnen
3360 Shoreline Drive
4. Wayzata Country Club
Lee Walters
200 Wayzata Boulevard West
Page 16 of 17
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING
Monday, January 13,2014
7:00 o'clock p.m.
(*16. LICENSES AND PERMITS, Continued)
5. O'Sullivans Holiday No. 546
John O'Sullivan
2420 Shoreline Drive
6. O'Sullivans Holiday No. 547
John O'Sullivan
3340 Shoreline Drive
*17. CLAIMSBILLS
Bremer moved, Levang seconded,to approve payment of the All Funds Account. VOTE: Ayes 4,
Nays 0.
ADJOURNMENT
Printup moved, Levang seconded,to adjourn the Orono City Council meeting at 8:16 p.m. VOTE:
Ayes 4,Nays 0.
ATTEST:
Rachel Dodge, City Clerk Lili Tod McMillan, Mayor
Page 17 of 17
__ _ __ --_ _ _ __ _ ___ __
�1� � �� �r Z : I e 7 A �� p. r, ""$ •S"ae. �' �"� ,...��- ,
A r '"�,^'.."(��� i .rc . ��.. �_Y ��-..� '.�� .. ,+8 �'�-�ap��g I - ��.�;,�,"� �,���iN�.
a e,"f� 't.�,� „� ��1 �,. �� �Iwd�aL.rm���` ���I y�.�.,,���r 'I�,�� ���{�6"�,����� �,�� �� �O "O
`fr r•�
d ;t A i �' ,.' t. p�Z �, 5 ` z'~ � i'�+e�a ♦,Yf,.n' 4 : S ��4.*,'h � ,P
�{«4' �„i�4 rF Y , � ` �, y�yT.,. '4'��.{ �.'�� ry T ..;�'_. It .� R'Y'°.'T���s �n ep`�q'�,•�"�, � y'.�. "�� y
"�� rs}r ��P:. ' . , �1 f{. * .�J—�0 �� rdV��pr d�y � r�Y+� ���&..°��� �s�
� ' �'M�. L �' �° J ���i g.�1�_. y �' I[� ' �k7 `�' �� 'S'8' G�
�' � �" .� Q '[ vJ � Y` � ..� .� ss1�. ��� �7'� ' �C'^�,.� ��� t� ,.� `qKfSH���
� F r"� + .J F� ` �! � � � p r� ww, ����,,,yyy��� ° �,i��a I
. d � � ��� �q� � �'� .�.?'t 1� ,��;r 6 � . �� j '� �r�'� �,������+J� .. *y .1hPw��, ��� �
�� � w �� r� U> � ;��, � ; � s 't �� � � �'��������'�� Legend
� .� � �� ��, �� x� � ,. � . i Y � � � '' � �r4� �
ni '^� � �n ' .*��`p. ,.'tiF- U ' o,`.Y ''+ i*w �`��� ��� R811fo2d
� �W,4TERTOWN I?D ' _
�' . _ -- _ .
-t .� k-
a , � '" �' , �'i .»..y� �. � ;� —— �v !' City Limitso
� .�
v ,
w (7, _ �
a .
:,: �
:;
' � - � . � � �
�" � �i I �
.y3 e r
: Z, r r ,�.; �" � � , t � � ', � P I 1 201 )
� � - -
m = ;< � '� ¢ i�horou hbred La" '� � �..x � "� � ❑ arce s(1 3
� 3.,, � -� � �,��_ a a�.� ��s� ���Y�T � } r i � *�� �� �.O11f3 � a
�A T � '.� �� Dev�n La ,,, ��`� � �
'� �- �`` �� °� � _} 5" .°� ��
R . �, f� {��ro M. p .�n,�i �n M1�.a.f �
Z' , . �
�'' � ��� 6 A�.i J _ f �R� Y�, f ��. . sa�` Y � �� � .,...ffi_.
�� 'bSomerset�a "' � '�''� t ��rr,y " ,;,� �
. �" �r""p � �; �� �on�U��� �V .
� � p � � ::� "" :� '� ��,`� ,��' _ '�� � '��� �k
� „fl;, � .3i: y.' �e^w� � �"r'�`�:!� � ' �r. - � � �� � � C" . ,.1'+"
. „
, , .
l„_ : '"# '6+�° yd�- 'e �-' .�;• � (R �+�e "�'� '�`/��� �; �
. • ; « �-
1 . `, ' . 'm94+ � __C�:. ,!°�:i+ � 1L��,� � r,y-• _7 �
�, . ... � ,�. F .
. '
.� �t. t . .. ..
�� .. .,� �e ^ � ,c� ;�'
� � 's* - .. : � � y4,� � J .. � � ' :��x �, �- .: r ,.. �_ � 'ri
' , t
� �,�-� � m UG
�( � �. �.. ,. -� � ,
}'=1!—� � � ,r`� �. , , ��-;� �..� , --� F : �., A � �• �c-�
� `� �� � � � � t �: '; � �_ �' , � �� � �
� � , � t U,-�— a�r
� tl n� ��.:i S 1 f� g t` 1 � � o�
_._. . . � � .
�
'
l� �Y ,� 1r 1F � xh "� 4 ,4' ,
.
, , . ,
, , . �
� ,.
�,
.
3 „ 'd
� ';,�, ±,�. '` � �rt ��F�� .. 'i'� ' - =�i�-�—�-r',Cr1 �, ..n�' '.��i� �� � ;'�" ili'� <
. , �:
S c �
a yT
.�4.ya �, • . . G.
•
� ' �S '� ��:�fi �-' e.=•� W�&. �:" .s-��.� . 'f
�
� . ' sex.,4 ^ ; c.� ' p „`° � p r.°� ;�
�.,�� �/ .:, � ,{ M.
Qt .w.. �-! � ,. �"
.b � _„� y .� �+"'9"°J` ���r ,� — � ��',;
� ..+Q�'•�Y «�� � � -3 2r '�O•M1'� �_9�I y� �P � �� +tl. ��' �: �
Q a � � �� � �� ,�,;� ,� �t-� � �' y,�t� � ,,��� ,� :^..: � ��
r a� �r. ` P � � "�- , .:, " � �''�S � - ,�e,a y��,� j�° •� ���
�� r '�, `� : ,..� � t (^ '� �,f r. � ^� X ,�i� � ��'�,,`` tr,� � `� �.4 ���..
�a _ ,�., -0 � � �' ,i ;�.k v�. i` � +g, ,�;A` �.�w �l,•�,, ,, �„�t .�',.
� Fnx St ; F.OX ST r p � x� g � � k �
'� �y �°. � � FOX ST° � .
� i t }r,F h •T�.Y � �II � 4 - i°��Y d � `�., ,o� �e�K ye � .5�;_t
¢ .-Xd5 �' d � i �� * � i �`m
�i" �� }�if'Y�'� '�.� � °4
..
I � ,
� �.. � �
( ,�.� � � ' +n `4.v� �'�`^ •�w' �' - . 1t' - �'�.'�5
,`
_ � .
`�
t.� � ,.� f, .�� �,,"q^ ���.. �F T _ �$' _ �� � — . . . .�� 4�;. �
` ._. , . . � V.
, , , .. Y�
> .
� ,;. �`� .;�� , ,�r a�zv�Ew ia. .��� � ��� � _ ��E�
�` W; '{ �, � -�" -���,��`� *� �K :�:� � �� !Y �,
ti- � �'� � �:°� �nel,Rd ` �. � �� ; � ,
��. � A . ^ t �q � `�w ,.z.`�I. f � _
�. ,r ✓`J�fi •f.'. yy'�f_. sY .:i � �
:` . � 4 4 ��'i-�'wIM�. 3�,.� +� � )''�
`�, '� ����� � .�,m'" � , �- .��
z,, t `g y�� � r�'� � �s $ �"
� .a , _ .�� . 01-27-2014
. ;: .
• � �T � � � -en�h L.ake �d ''���"� � Council Meeting
. � � � ,
; , r
. � � v z �
" h'� F r _ :
:i;,:�;�v.� � ��'��_ � �� �:_.i ;� r!' '�� ��,�. �
. . �.
' _ . 6
. .r ,
_ _�"_.` -..: �,_ ._.. �. ".'. . _i_ J ._ .. .. . :a3. �# . ''.i '7. >.� Disdaimer.
.. � T _—_ .� '1
_ _ _ __ —.. _.____ _ __ .. _ .
_ __.-_._. . .___. __._ .__. . .. -- This drawing is neither a legally recorded map nor a
urvey and is not intended m be used as one.This
drawing is a compilation of rerords,information,and data
0 1,222 FEEt e located in various ciry,county,and state offires,and
other sources affecting the area shown,and is to be used
for referen e purposes only.The Ciry of Orono is not
�O Bolton&Menk,Inc-Web GIS 1/24/2014 9:45 AM .P��.,���hiP r�.a����a«��.a��a�na.P�����ra��P�
� , ,
COUNCII.MEETING
Date Application Received: 09/18/13 JAN 2 7 2q14
Date Appiication Considered as Complete:10/04/13
Review Period Extension Expires: 02/il/14
CITY�F ORONO
REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION
Date: 23 January 2014
Item No.
Department Approval: Administrator Approval: Agenda Section:
Name: Melanie Curtis
Title: Planning &Zoning Coordinator
Item Description:
13-3636, Lixiao Wang, 3059 Farview Ln,Variances: Hardcove nd Side Yard, Lake, &Average Setback
Zoning District: LR-1A, One Family Lakeshore Residential, 2-acres/200'
Lot Area: 118,852 square feet (2.7 acres)
lot Width: 232 feet at OHWL& approximately 280 feet at the 75' setback
List of Exhibits:
Exhibit A. Survey
Exhibit B. Garage Plan (Current Proposal)
Exhibit C. 2001 Partial Floor Plan
Exhibit D. Photos(By Applicant)
Exhibit E. Planning Commission Staff Report& Exhibits—01/15/14
Exhibit F. City Council Staff Report& Exhibits—12/03/13
Exhibit G. Extension Request
Exhibit H. Draft PC Minutes—01/21/14
Exhibit I. Neighbor Comments
Background:
This application for average lakeshore, lakeshore, side setback and hardcover variances was first before the
Planning Commission in October, where a 12' addition to the attached garage was proposed. The Planning
Commission tabled the application and recommended the applicant consider reducing the depth of the
proposed addition by half. At the November 18th fo�low up meeting with the Planning Commission the
applicant opted to propose a 9' addition citing the need to accommodate each of his vehicles. The
Commission approved a motion to deny the applicant's variance request to allow the proposed 9 foot addition
to the attached garage.
At the December 13th meeting the Council reviewed the applicant's request to permit a (revised) 6' expansion
of the existing garage. The Council tabled application to give the Planning Commission an opportunity to
review the applicant's updated plans.
Update:
The applicant presented the revised plans for the 6' garage addition to the Planning Commission at the
January 215t meeting. Variances for hardcover, side yard setback, lake setback and average lakeshore setback
are requested. The Planning Commission reviewed the applicant's request, heard testimony from the
applicant and an adjacent neighbor who opposes the variances. The neighbor's comments are included as
Exhibit I.
#13,3636 �
23 Jan 2014
Page 2 of 2
The Planning Commission voted 4 in favor and 2 opposed on a motion to approve the request allowing a 6'
expansion of the existing attached garage. The deck/porch area above the garage was not permitted. The
Planning Commission further recommended that future requests to add additional hardcover to the driveway,
particularly in the easement area, should not be approved.
Floor plans for the garage portion of the house are attached as Exhibit B (the current proposal) and Exhibit C, a
2001 plan which is related to the building permit to install the elevator. The 2001 plan shows the two-stall
portion of the garage with a 23' depth while the current plan suggests an 18' depth. Staff speculates that at
some time since 2001 the rear wall of the garage was relocated. The applicant has provided photographs of
the area behind the rear garage wall.
Planning Staff Recommendation
Planning Staff continues to recommend denial of the variances.
COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED
The Council should consider the applicant's revised request and the Planning Commission's recommendations
and direct staff to draft a resolution reflecting the Council's decision.
ti /, '�� — - - -- - �1 \— / f .
♦' �
�-,j� \� 1� � '9,36 ` /�, drvcwa� Ci0U11C1�
- EDGE OF DFLINEArED �ND '� �l _ 1 � Exhibit A
per K�olhaug Env�rom .ata!-, '1 / ;� _ _
- — 5erv�ces located 9-9-2 /3 ,y /� �� �
� � /��.,�
� , � � / ��
� \ / ��
� 1 \ / // �
\ \ 1 , I /
\ � � �
\
\ ` '' I /
��1
.\ � � / � �J' �
� ,-75 Sc^TBACK L!,'JE F?.Otil Oh�i' 1 � � OOpC„�
� DRA /NAGE EASEti4ENT \�`��� i iI a u� _`
� .----� / �\� � v �
/
� � ��'� ���� � i � . _l - �,tio� - \
� '�. ,/ � �
��Ne�ghbors ehed anG electr�caf sernces _ � r� / \ �! ��
EBSBIffel7t 5I10Wrt pe!'�1!'CVIOUS SUNBy. �/� / �,�R� �,� / �` �'
� � No documentat�on rowded. � � ^� ��-- � '
i � '� G �� �� �'�' , i � ��
/ \ �\ r�� . / �� � - - � � / r
931. � ./�d e of wetl�nG per pf�t ,, � �i � - - / / � � \`
/ \ � i " / '�y ' � � - - i O• �---
X/ pl�etic�h�d \�i g � , �,,+ Edge of Pond� ���� �. � _ � ` � � � h f% \\��
\� � � \ \ \, ,`� '\` �' •� /
\\ /� �'\ : ��\ � � _ _ � � � ` ` ' � / / / / \
\ �� �,i �.+5���� ,g3� �
EDGE OP DELINEATED WETLAND . � �
p�ost cicc � per K�olh�ug EnNromental � �� -
r ���%�.�'�� � � -samp�ignal �� /� �.
�♦ �' . \�� Sernces located 9�9-2013 i'ond elev, �/���•�'� � � � �Q,� ,0 1 ��sump co� "'� - ��4�•
� � � '� 92j�= , � - - ' -_ ' `Z2�.`� 1`.g ���64.����W�.��'. � DrivcwayEasement per
�� •� �\ ,�.�� �� �_ _ � � � o � lLl ° - -
�� � � $�-� doc. nv. 5232986
� ^�, � � ,�-%�;- ' � � � , ,, � .� /
� �� 'y �� � �•_� '� _--� _ `��'� � ent- �s5. � . iT . � .�.��- � . � � � . - . .
� ��o �� ---- `�� ` � i'��'�"� - � stc� . �1 �y 936.6�, �•�' � , fL
� � �� ' c�� G� a�� � ' �� > ��
\�� ��9,SG2 \ \ ���\ .� //� o�!� ���x� ���..29•��,i� / N 11 m�nhde �(� (y��• -
`\ ��\, \ \ �"y� /����_ ` .... . � � �\\N •� 35'SFT6ACK . ' 934.8 /o��' � .
�c
� 2 0 '�,\ .r J!� 1 � .y� 947:7, �`-1gi `'o .�•� �fROMDELMFATfD' ` / � r
- `\ ,�S �i�-� o���" W i l � �'� �O �- iv�lkcut VYPTL4N� � 6.4 / U� ^ -
\\� �� f' 93Z 584 _ � �/ i/ � �� i,�.�o,� .,,,. � 937.� 5�de�Ge N1.3 � / � � _ .
�-r� � _ _ 9�a = , ' � \ �;\ � ... � Re 5g _ ,sa . �� 28 �� � -
�,\\ \\ � / � : / 936, 3� i � � � � .\ Np.3� d�rs��� � �m�xr��� ",��, 6'� �� ��
�� � � , � � '9 PA� �� � �'� •• . �, g�I:9 0a 't�� � " lll� � -
\��� �� ��:� r tim er�Erave�a f/�� 9k2 � .� . d, ��� � � /���
�♦ i � ' � � p,� Wjils
�\ �� � � , i �` I� _GpllG. , / h
�\ \ � � � � , a \ �o � � .� ��^
� ♦ \ � \ / �9�` \ �� � .� l2�"tre � �
��� � � � � � � �^ �5��� o � �G� 93b 4 ', 935� I � /�� _
. \\ � \ � � �brr��1 'L• -- c� g _ � � i/
�� . � , , � - , �. � o,� ,a. .—I � -, �f � �, Lot 6, Black 1, FARVIEW,
� ��� � � � � � _� l � 9_9-0.�r�l 943. �.*�,'` 9� �`Y � .
�� � � � � � tg 35�4 /1
- �� • � � � � i k q� P � Hennepin County,Minnesota.
,, • � � � 5 t o n� . ,�,n � r `�.�� � RECEIVED
�� � � � � � � I .`�o� �, r �`�g f! ati I� "�= S�' _ f i �
_ , / �� � � � � � � � � � 57��rc Q � �UeN "
�� `;:::;,�� , �� 4�� � �,� g�' DEC Q 201
�� �1 � \� � � � � � P I �� t U� �.g � m� � 3
�,�� � \ ���� oy� imbc R a�a , , . \ b ('. / 933.5 �
�� . . � , �� . � 9s . �-- 9.s�.i� � i �I CITY OF ORONO
Ed e of Shordrn�- � � � ♦ � � �� � � � i I,! �N - ��,f �� I I
, � \\ � \ \ \ \ � \ � I d ' .-./ .. i _
� � � � 2 � a \ i Well
��v, � � � ��� � v� N �� � 9 ��; ; ' �'' to be capp-d The only easements shown are from plats of record or information
c3, / � � � � � � � u'a O 1 g � I � �� � /� �N provided by client.
� - '�2 � ������`: :�s�`���2 � � / 3 �
� _..�.a,A_�'�-�66,"
r•L,�� • i
9� � ���� ` �`�' � ` I � 0�� N 89��0'�"w 5� I certify that this plan, specification,or reporl was prepared by me or
� �` � � � � 62�� i � � � under my di�ect supervision and that I am a duly Licensed land
v� QA �� � ` � � y` �42.�1� �� � i ,' � _ _Sucveyor under the laws of the State of Minnesota.
�� �/� �.� � \ � / r,� / / i �1
S � - shorelinc\� � ' `� � _ Q�� _ �
- r'� 9zs.4 �� 1�� ` � � , ,' 0�'��0 � �� Surveyed this 9th day of September 2013. V
. F � � � \ \ _ . .
� / ��/ /
�\ � \ \ / � � . . /`�
� \ \ � ,
� \\ � � \ : % ;�� '—'_ !� .
� \ \ /r �
�, � � \ / � r �'
�\� � \ � � . .� � 1
�..� ` . � , ;..!�; j �/
� . � � . S,r;�. _ �, 1 _—
� ' �� � � ..,�a n;,i� Dro��in By jJf I ��� � � Sign_d ---_'. : '
�"� --
-- -- -- �\ � � Gr 9,ry R Prasch,Minn Reg No 2d99?
� -- - - -- — - ��_ li=-------- , _ ..^
_ ,
�'F,l.: `i3^'e _...._._...
.
PC Exhibit C�
�
I„ J -
I �
ELEv.
.
ELEv 'cQUIP.
— (/ � — -
EXISTING-CsARA�-E SPAGE EXISTINCz CsA ACz'c PAGE
�� STOR.
lV
�
� -
��
�t
2
�
0
�
NEUJ CsARAC3E SPAGE
N�W IS'CsARAC!-E DOOR NEW 9' GARA E DOOR
k'
� 3k'-2" �
� RECEIVED
---� � N i UEC Q 2 2013
�) � " � C�il'OF ORONO
Zo/3
PROPOSED��RAGE LEVEL PLAN �
WANG RESIDENCE s �,����+_,�,��J� �
3059 FARVIEW LANE, ORONO,MN. 5�356 �
----- - _ _ _ -
�„�,�.,,,_� � .,,n.,�,,,_�,�.,�.,TT.. ,,,� ,
k n
? O
Q �
� n
� =
� Council
Exhibit B �
ELEv.
ELEv EQUIP.
EXISTINCz CsARACsE SPAGE EXISTING C�ARACsE PAGE
stoe.
N
�
�
NELU G�ARACsE SPACE �
NEW IS' CsARACzE DOOR NEW 9' CzARAC�E DOOR
� �il'ZII I
�� I
V
RECEIVED
DEC �? Zp i3
C�n'OF ORONO
PROPOSED GARAGE LEVEL PLAN
WANG RESIDENCE
3059 FARVIEW LANE, ORONO, MN. 55356 ;°-`��'� ��`-'�����'-
� � � � C
Z
EXISTING NOUSE
AGGESS NO ACC�SS
0
N�W ROO� D�GK �
39'-2��
PROPOSED MAIN LEVEL PLAN
WANG RESIDENCE
3059 FARVIEW LANE, ORONO, MN. 55356
SCALE: 1/4"=1'-0" CE • � �,�..�';_-r��� L�.�� . �
VARIAN SUBMITTAL. 1�/2/13 -- - ����
i
. � ,� G3
�
. . _ z
. o �
N
. . . . � . . . • . .. � . � � N X
� W
. . • � w
. . � z
PROPOSED ELEVA�ION
WANG RESIDENCE
3059 FARVIEW LANE, ORONO, MN. 55356 .�'' � , _�
SCALE: l/�"=1'-0" VARIANCE SUB�IITTAL: 12/2/13 �- j� �� ��'--����`��� � ''
f � -
__ ` A.,I ���' � - -
__ ..f:
� :;_ �
� i y .�,� • .r�t ia
��N;�`[�� '�' �., / - � �(,�� r�r .d -��n��t ��no�t �
� � ,\ !
_ �an�I�t= �/ [�
.< i ,-y�I 4� �
� '' r"'' � I
��,� oF�;� � i
:�'�•� 3 F� �� � �'a' .
'f�,� $ a:�`:� � � 1
+ � fnA - �
� ? � � � -
�,h . T� I L° .
� I� '�� � �;�, � � � ,� •:,rx��� �
n� � � ,�: �`i � t-YJCi� 7r�j 1 y ' ��_ 3r77ZiOlS �� \
•1, Y � �� 6 v � �d,�3
� �� � i� � p �� 3���-�: :, ,�33 �I? �� � /� \
� � !r , �"i' -5.- ��3� F � R_ - \
�� 5$ �€�i 'iaf.t 1w �/ �I
� i I . f �^� � I? \\
�\ ' , � a t � '�, T _ �--� --1 s. i;. ` ! ��\
r,� A � : ,L-:�J� ' E'7 1=?�9 3�'l''7f12l3'17t;� \
F.' r_rN.i c �r r�� � r+,- ;.��+�/r'Y�'�� -�' _ { .�>-.> �w 13�31 2J3c3df1'XL19i%C3 �
� _ ( .ill S ��y �L''7'FtS 2XJ1V�3"?3 h-'7!„7 \\ \
' � :7. _ � . , � %� f '�13�� i
�
x � � � �
_ °� �. �. . ., � j � \ i (� � �� ��
�� �_� l� - ,a-z,_�_ o , � �� ., ,
��� � , . - -";'��.�`�_ " . . -_____=_=+ �\ '=,_ %' / � \�
�_� �� _. ���� �� ., ��' � � �
Q , a;�.c>�_a cl si-vm � , � , �
� �s�ia�a s�-�a�:s:a� j `S� � /�� � �
� \
------ - ---- - — -� rra,-r,s��r�r� . �rlv�o� ��+ 1�' �
-- c��=a oi ax.a�is;x3 ��ly �
�
�
'� ' / �--_---_--; \
/� ----- \
S1N3W3LlIflO�i! 3U0� \
n a m,�ti0� �
� � \
/�� 133HS O3H�til1V 33S
�� � � -1V1�3ds � � �
, , "���� a� 310N �
� � � ;, C� �.
i � � � �
��' i�Spl� \ � � �
� ,- ! W-�7yR1 �� �
�'
\ � �� - C
� �
\ O�`= I �� �"� C1
� � �� `� � �
i�� n
�---
--�--- jl3Ny► 6:fy
��--'7!ui51r,3/fn l'T71n m3N N'JIT.+� /
��---K- _ � � -
�`.'� � �" �„ 8�° � f i III I
,
`�_� .. , �
����""'s�s� ° ' i ��
�,.- �
�^ � � . , .y�:� . .
� � �� � � � � - -w., �_ ,_ j
�:
t` ll',�
t:M
� > e � � 1,, � t 7�,�� t;: ��,"
���$"i r {
-�, �l+�I�""'� i _ '�� � #, a� �`"�4 `�';�
���� a � ��
� �.,.w�w. . �,N�„�,,,,IJi,i;�`M'��w , ` . ,,� C- f .. �� -
� � � � N1�� �r,,,��
�� n •�fs, +i��{ �}y / �� b
- ��� ��� � 1 8 � Y �` �� W� i�:
�„ � � ��' '� .�r a�_,. ..«...,. . ► ���", ��a
�4 �}� -: �i� .� " � . ��"x* � ,�
- �+ .�^� ?� � '; ,.. J�►` �t
4 K ,?� �" : I - `r � _�+r;,
� � ��;� �. � .rt q - T a��:
� �f�� .Y .xs�:... i�� i isY� a�M �' '�y, I�{
. �; t.. :' '...�.
.; .i
'.��"i:: � .:. x �.,:: � . r: � "y� xy.yy.� . ..w4'N�1tiM!
..,. r . . � ` �
£
�e . . � , � � ..
�' � ,.
i�; �' ;
.;�F S � � ,�. � I�; ��r�' ,�'
�.. -� ,. ''�'
f �r��;�i .�tr i�,:, t � �` .a,
< Y� i��' �� �� d� - `'z r+� � ' t, ��.<
� .. .... ..�..�. _, ,�...,. . ,.
�:� .. ' ; � .� ,
. �
,. x 5
. ��" . .., . � .
�
' �,.1 ° :+" e�rlrez �� - ��µm::� .
,��*`. ;s r -f
.�y �°„ }�..,; +, '-�„ ,
�
f '� ., � F
`��4� `�` a� ��,��4�x �.' . . T '�� ':3 A � ��Y
t
.
� � �' � �a
' .. `� . . ��, —
.� ,
,
r �. � � � I �
;a.� ""i # �' � � y
��� ��� . � ��f �� t�.�.' ���� {��f��jFr � �,<
M �; .c....� � r .}�r ���1 1��� .� �r 9
r- ,f^d. , . -y' '�S �f��)�f � .
�� � � ��, i. �' .-���� �Il'�)llfifi i°
, .
,
� • � �
� . ��,:.. � � �:��<w �� � � )t1t!I I+• � � a�
,
:
�,
.� �!i �t
� , �,� �
. � � � G��
u �,,` �_ � ,�,���-#� ,s•
( �":` r r
.:��,� ���' ---.-,»... . µ Y ....._. ... .. �,. � I ��I.
1 � � '�^, �_
� � m
c�,
� '� .. _ _ _.
.._ � �
.u�,.,���F� ���-,,.� , �- o
.
v �,�, ,.
���. �
, F,_ -_ _�.: _ .. _ c
.� � � � �, �� s� �
k { '�i 1� ; 1`r��: �,: �
� , � �� �.�� �' � ,t� '� � ; "'� p —
� • c r . ,>.
�_.. ._
� ,�
� _ � �� .. r -`vI;•,1� � �,,;+s.�n,
' V.���' .�� �"".�,�''�k s:�1 a�r.�.l'���v
. .� - .. . - . � �� - '� M �'�`�S.
. . . - . . .. ..._ . �1��3 .
, , Council
� � Exhibit E
Date Application Received: 09/18/13
Date Application Considered as Complete:10/04/13
60-Day Review Period Extension Expires: Ol/31/14
To: Chair Leskinen and Planning Commission Members
Jessica Loftus, City Administrator
From: Melanie Curtis, Planning&Zoning Coordinator p!� f� �
iV `
Date: 15 January 2014
Subject: 13-3636, Lixiao Wang, 3059 Farview Ln,
Variances: Hardcover and Side Yard, Lake, &Average Setback
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Zoning District: LR-1A, One Family Lakeshore Residential, 2-acres/200'
Lot Area: 118,852 square feet (2.7 acres)
Lot Width: 232 feet at OHWL& approximately 280 feet at the 75' setback
Application Summary: The applicant is requesting variances in order to construct a 6' x 34' one-level
garage addition to the home.
Staff Recommendation: Planning Department Staff recommends denial.
List of Exhibits
Exhibit A. Revised Survey
Exhibit B. Revised Hardcover Calculations
Exhibit C. Revised Garage Plan
Exhibit D. Applicant's Variance Justification—Revised 12/02/13
Exhibit E. Council Staff Memo 12/03/13
Exhibit F. Council Minutes 12/09/13
Exhibit G. Neighbor Comments 01/16/14
Background
The applicant has provided revised plans for the garage addition resulting in a 6 foot expansion of the
existing attached garage. Variances for hardcover, side yard setback, lake setback and average
lakeshore setback are requested.
This application was tabled by the City Council at the December 13th meeting to allow the Planning
Commission to review the applicant's latest revision.
In October, the applicant initially proposed a 12' addition to the attached garage, to which the
Planning Commission responded by tabling the application and recommending the addition be
reduced by half the depth. At the November 18th follow up meeting with the Planning Commission
the applicant opted to propose a 9' addition citing the need to accommodate each of his vehicles. The
Planning Commission questioned the applicant as to why the 9' addition was proposed when they
previously indicated there was support if the garage expansion was reduced to 6'. The Commission
approved a motion to recommend denial of the applicant's variance request to allow a 9 foot addition
to the attached garage.
FILE# 13-3636 r
15 Jan 2014
Page 2 of 2
LOT ANALYSIS WORSHEET
Lot Area/Width:
LR-1A Lot Area Lot Width
Required 87,120 s.f. (2 acres) 200'
Actual 118,852 s.f. (2.7 acre) 232' @ OHWL& 280' @ 75' SB
Structural Coverage:
The property exceeds 1.99 acres therefore, according to City Code Section 78-1685 structural
coverage or massing standards do not apply.
Hardcover Calculations:
Stormwater Total Area in Allowed Revised Proposed
Overlay District Zone Hardcover Existing Hardcover Hardcover
Tier
1,126
29,713 s.f. 14,050 s.f. 14,086 s.f. 1,149 w/in
Tier 1 118,852 s.f. � a � ( o � W��n (11.8%) 75'
25 /0 11.8/0 75,
Setbacks:
LR-1A Required Existing Revised Proposed
Rear 50' +200' No Change
East Side 30' 28.6' existing house 25.3' garage addition
West Side 30' 150' pool deck No change
178' house
Lakeshore 75' 61' pool deck �Z� garage addition
Wetland 35' 12' No change
Average Lakeshore The entire home is located ahead of the average lakeshore setback line.
Analysis& Recommendation
The proposed garage addition as revised will encroach 4.7 feet into the required 30 foot side yard
setback. The garage portion of the home currently meets the 30 foot side setback. As revised, the
addition will be approximately 72 feet from the lake where a 75 foot setback is required.
Approximately 14 square feet of additional structure within the 75 foot setback is proposed.
The applicant's revised detailed garage plans better clarify the existing usable space within the garage.
However, Staff continues to find that creating a more nonconforming structure is out of character
with the neighborhood. The revised addition adds mass within the eastern side setback area and also
within the average lakeshore setback. The applicant has failed to demonstrate that enforcing the
provisions of the Zoning Ordinance deprive them of the reasonable use of the property. Planning
Staff continues to recommend denial of the variances.
Action Requested
The Planning Commission should review and discuss the applicant's revised request as well as the
enclosed comments from the neighbor to the east and make a recommendation to the City Council. If
the Commission determines that practical difficulties exist which support granting the variances, those
practical difficulties should be clearly stated for the record.
� , . � — - \ �1— � / I
• � � --- \ 1 �l �`� brt:rm�nou9
ryy' \ �
936 � � drrvcway pC Exhibit A
EDGE OP DFLINEATED W�VD 1 �i _
Per K�olhaug Envrrom �tal-- .. '` l � � ,
- . Serv�ces located 9-9-2 /3 ,y �� ��c4 -
� � ���'�
� � � � �v
\ � � �� �J
� � V � �� � �
� 1 ' ! //
\ ` � /'1
� �
�� � � ��� ,��,—
\
� � � I � � ��0��„yv_
� .- �7 5�7s��CX LI,ti�E Faoti�onw �
DRAINAGE EASEMENT� ``I � � i
\ I�� � v �
� �i__�� � ��� 1 � � `
�\ � /�i �`��\ � � � \ � /�h�i1� - �
� � � r� � � � ���
�� Ne�ghbor5 5hed anc!eiectr�caf 5ernce5 _ � �
EaSerrlCnt SI10Wr1 pe!'p�BVlOUS SUNBy. �i / �?� �' ty ��
' � '` No documentation prov�ded. �� �.� °� � •� � \h��_ _�-'
� � '� � ,..►� _ �(�
/ �� \ \ � - _ _ _ �
�, i --� ' � r
/ \ \ '� � � _ � � � �i `�
, J/_.,•-,. — , /� h�. 1 ,--
93!. '� � Edge of wetl�nc!/�er pl�t , � ��� , , -- /' ��
� • \ ,/ � �� "�'� �. �
X plastic Sh�d\ �! , �,' � � Edge of Pond�. � �,i� � �. � _ � � �� ��
�� �, \. _ ,93`� ' �/ � / \�
'� � � � � .
�� �� � � .� �� EDGE OP DELINEATED WtTLAN� �. •� ������ _ - - � � � � � ` � �
�� '.�_ � � �� �
\ post elec �.\ � per K�olh�ug Ertvrromerttal r ���� � -svm�s�g.�al �! .
�'� � �� p � eump covcr � '�
� ��\ Se�v�ces iacated 9,9_20/3 92���';�� _ � �, ,_ ����:�-,�,,g ���6q D�pNW,_.��' �h D�ivewayEasement per
�
�� ��� �\ =.�� � , _ � o �� �_� o
� \ . � ,;;i���_ �� ,' _ ' � ' � � _ _��$�� doc, nv. 5232986
\\ �� \ `\_ _ .\ __;� ` �:,���t, �5 � ' � �._. / ^
� 4� -----��� � � i po�-e�" - ' S f `1 �y 936.6 . � /� fL
� ° � '� �� � � �caD�' ec avc ���.��� >
` ��� s ` .�, � °- — _` p p', �' �, ' (y
�\ 29 c.,L '� �� •� .�/ � i - � '~1�. �.�.;�.29• �,�• N j m�nhale �.� ry�
\ � �` ,\ \ � � /���y�J . . � c T��i� � � 35'SE7HACK �, 934.8 ���'' �
� !���c �, _�'� ��l � •{� � -- 947 7, �`:19. o .� �fROM DEL/NEA7PD�� � � •
♦ 27 �'. _ �'� � •, � � VYP71ftND 1 �� r
�� 8S ��-��.��r��� �/ � � / �.\ A �-1•.w�lkcut � 6.4 / l� ��
� A � 58p_ _ _ _ - i i � � o �•� . ;� 1.3
�� �� - - - � � � � d�.� ��o i m 937.1 e��e N � i Q�
� �� - g32 � � o ��'f � � Re5'd ,�3� - ,� o --
� � _ _ y�a " , , \ ���� �. � N 3p59 � � �, 28 � o�
�,\\ \\ � / � � / 936� 8 � � � � •� ' �. \ �' �r��i � .m�x�� 5 - � e, ' � �
♦� � ; � � � -93 PA� i� � �•\ . � 9Q� g � gtc1� 2 �ll� �
� � r d p
\��� �� �Y- .. trm crf frave�sy/9� �9A2 � •�.\ .. 6�� ��' ii5 ' / ���
�\\ �\ ' / � � / � / � ` i'' j conc• "'a � IN
`�� � � � � i a' \ ' �° •�' � , � 'l /�}�
` � � ' � � ,o��' �'1` ec° '°' �r 2'trc �, �,
� � \ � � � � ✓� � O � �G �` 93b 4 ' 935 � � / �
\
� /
� �\ C i
7 brrc r'�'-' 9 - � - a - ` /
- .\\ . ��; �� , _.. �� ry� -��''d � � � _ ��� Lot 6, Block 1, FARVIEW,
�� � � � � _� � 9_4A.�J 943. s�`. � 93 'Y' �"
��\\ \ `\\\ � \ � � �r ��� ��c g�`' ?"'1 35 4 �1I � Hennepin County,Minnesota.
`. �� ':. � .-�� �, ,��-,�. �,�� � ,�=- s3 ,� RECEIVED
— __ / � \� � ♦ /\ .�r`5 birc�l � i � Q ,�b ,
\� �� �\\ \\\\\ \` II . c 4���� �4YeH /• I g� UEI�
� � , �o a2 20�3
�^ �i � �\\\ � � \ �, I �� t�mi � u5 i mcr�
�\ �,�� � � ���� a}� �mbe R a�e :. , .\ b� i 933.5 �
�� . . � , �� . i 93 ., `— 9�''•'� ��• i "� CITY OF ORONO
Edge of 51-ore;me=� �� \� � � �\ � � � � �i /N \� ��� \ � �
� \ \ � � �s, �( I d J . � �
�� \ \ \ \ �. � � \ A \ �- / ��� _.��_WCII
N / � i ! � The onty easements shown are from plats of record or't�formation
�. � � � � c� � 9 . � to be capp�d
� / � � � ��� �o O �j �+ I i / �
_ a /� ��� � � � � . cr'p��9� � 12. o I ���/�p Q, Provided by client.
2� v �a:��`` `�, % ` ' �� 6 0 ' S � I certify that this plan, specification, or report was prepared by me or
s � � � � � \ � Q N 89��'�'�w � /
�� � �`� � � � � � 6'Z�� i � � urder my direct supervision and that I am a dufy Licensed land
"�� Q �� � ` � ' ' � �q2,��� �� � i � � _�u►veyor under the laws of the State of Minnesota.
� - - ��
� �C �\` ,�� � - - /
\\ � \�\ � � / � Surveyed this 9th day of September 2013.
s - snordinc�� `�, � r\ � \- v; � � i /�
N� � 929.4 ��C � � � � - � °�� �r�� �� ��((!!��/J
�F \ \ � � � �
�� \ \ � ` /
\\\ \ \ \ � ' � ��n'J� . . - —'_ /,~' .
. _ �\ � .� � / i � � . R .
\
' � � � � / - � ,�' . '1 �
, �. \ \\ � / � . � '!' . �,�' :. ..
/ �
\ � � f i �;
* r_ t,: ',�
I ` \ � _.' � t ------ -
Ca_ I ?i_ I ✓ i�ro n��r1 ���1Wf1 B� �.J�; � V � . ��gn'-� _ - - .
R��---- i �� � � Grog�ry R Prasch M�nn.R�g No 24992
, . . r ri' '� ,
- - ., „ ,� �
_ � _---�--
�------- -- -- —_ � ",? � - —____.r
�
.
� .. .. . . -� ----- .F!1-3 i�3 _ . -'-- -- .._�..------'- ____..____ —
, , " _��r ����� PC Exhibit B RE�FIVEp
� �;r;�
City of Orono � �2 2013
;-��o%vo, Hardcover Calculation Worksheet C1�oFOROMo
!,� � � Property Address: --� ,, � L���
� , � ���j rs9lz G�E L✓
`��'��`% Prepared by: �
�O� Sct�v �� Gn Date: /,t� �� , ��
S rlay District Tier: (Circle one) Tier� Tier 2 Tier 3 Tier 4 Tier 5
Step 2: PROPOSED H DCOVER �i�i� �j` SrTC�i4�� � �fi���
e followin , identify all items of proposed hardcover on the property, keyed by letter to
Certi ica e o Survey (survey must accompany this form). Include all existing hardcover items that are
intended to remain, as well as all proposed hardcover items that will be added. Use as many lines as
necessary to accurately depict proposed hardcover status of the property. For Tier 1 properties, identify
any features by letter which are split at the 75' setback line and calculate hardcover square footage
se aratel for each ortion.
Key to Hardcover Item (Describe) Length x Width Total
Survey (Square Feet)
Exam le Gara e 24'x 30' 720 S.F.
A �;,�iSri�" Tz�i�c�E S S.F.
B S.F.
C f"' v � a i� S.F.
D S.F.
E ' ,✓ ' ^vOQ� S.F.
F S.F.
� n� . �,� A���s << S.F.
H S.F.
� � FfL.�- �,'� S.F.
J S.F.
K ,� ,� S.F.
� S.F.
N� S.F.
N S.F.
O S.F.
P S.F.
a S.F.
R S.F.
S S.F.
T S.F.
U S.F.
U S.F.
�N S.F.
X S.F.
Y S.F.
Z S.F.
1 Total Pro osed Hardcover //� S.F.
Excludable Hardcover' See Cit Gode Sec 78-1684 :
S.F.
S.F.
S.F.
S.F.
S.F.
2 Total Excludable Hardcover �1/,4 S.F.
3 Net Pro osed Hardcover Subtract line 2 from line 1 S.F.
4 Total Lot Area ,��.? �� ` " 5��+�=-/�-- Y��j�= S.F.
Proposed Hardcover Percentage [(3)=(4)] ���� %
January 8, Z013
s « p ��� �� �,
City of Orono
;� �o�o. Hardcover Calculation Worksheet
i, `� y � Property Address: �
:�\; ' ; s�,� �iOT��/i�tz,/ �.o�t/�
''�'^�%�'�F``' Prepared by: Date:
_ G�'�T S«cf��"S ���� i/ • �G , �3
Stormwa it Overlay District Tier: (Circle one) Tier �� Tier 2 Tier 3 Tier 4 Tier 5
p 2: PROPOSED HARDCOVER
n the followin e, identify all items of proposed hardcover on the property, keyed by letter to
of Survey (survey must accompany this form). Include all existing hardcover items that are
intended to remain, as well as all proposed hardcover items that will be added. Use as many lines as
necessary to accurately depict proposed hardcover status of the property. For Tier 1 properties, identify
any features by letter which are split at the 75' setback line and calculate hardcover square footage
se aratel for each ortion.
Key to Hardcover Item (Describe) Length x Width Total
Surve (Square Feet)
Exam le Gara e 24'x 30' 720 S.F. '
A �.� " il� l � ' `���r?2 �1�n S.F.
B �r ��C� ' S.F.
C �,� � r� S.F.
� S � �/ '7;� S.F.
E i�' L � '�7 S.F.
F S.F.
G ��� ' �cG F✓�lia� "7 ' �A�- r u � Z� S.F.
H S.F.
I , A-G,�- .t/ '7 " S�Tf3/ac�t— Z"- S.F.
� S.F.
K S.F.
� S.F.
M S.F.
N S.F.
� S.F.
P S.F.
Q S.F.
R S.F.
S S.F.
T S.F.
� S.F.
U S.F.
W S.F.
X S.F.
Y S.F.
Z S.F.
1 Total Pro osed Hardcover ����7 S.F.
Excludable Hardcover See Cit Code Sec 78-1684 : -
S.F.
S.F.
S.F.
S.F.
S.F.
2 Total Excludable Hardcover S.F.
3 Net Pro osed Hardcover Subtract line 2 from line 1 /� �jG S.F.
4 Total Lot Area j/ %�� S.F.
Proposed Hardcover Percentage [(3)=(4)] ��.�i� °/a
January 8, 2013
� � �� ���N� �
3
City of Orono
-��o�;a Hardcover Calculation Worksheet
i,� � i Property Address: �
� � : 3�5� ��a�zv:��� G�ar��'
���'^��"���`-�'� Prepared by: Date:
�c�T S c�iz�"�Yr C� !n�3i� i�
;� ;:- -z4�.;j
Stormwater Quality Overlay District Tier: (Circle one) ier 1 Tier 2 Tier 3 Tier 4 Tier 5
Ste 1: EXISTING ARDCOVER ��L�
In t e following t e identify all items of existing hardcover on the property, keyed by letter to Certificate
of S ey (s y must accompany this form). Use as many lines as necessary to accurately depict
existing ardcover status of the property. For Tier 1 properties, identify any features by letter which are
split at the 75' setback line and calculate hardcover square footage separately for each portion.
Key to Hardcover Item (Describe) Length x Width Total
Surve (Square Feet)
Exam le Gara e 24'x 30' 720 S.F:
A t'S/vE��� / ��� c:� z �� J S.F.
B /�"c' ' r•( �� S.F.
C � � - r4c: '� �t '' 2- S.F.
� ' S.F.
E S.F.
F S.F.
G ti -r ' A- f,. � Z S.F.
H S.F.
I / ' � ' �j�., S.F.
� S.F.
K S.F.
� S.F.
M S.F.
N S.F.
0 S.F.
P S.F.
Q S.F.
R S.F.
S S.F.
T S.F.
� S.F.
� S.F.
W S.F.
X S.F.
Y S.F.
z S.F.
(1 Total Existin Hardcover / r�r� S.F.
Excludable Hardcover See Cit Code Sec 78-1684 :
S.F.
S.F.
S.F.
S.F.
S.F.
2 Total Excludable Hardcover S.F.
3 Net Existin Hardcover Subtract line 2 from line 1 i�k� � S.F.
(4 Total Lot Area i( �Z S.F.
Existing Hardcover Per�entage [(3)= (4)] �I �•� °!o
(Proposed Hardcover next page)
January 8,Z013
1 PC Exhibit C�
ELE1�.
ELEV EQUIP.
EXISTINC� CzARACs� SPAGC EXIS7INC� C�ARACsE PAGE
STOR.
N
�
n
NEW CzARAC�E SPACE �9
NEW IS' CsARACsE DOOR NELU 9' CsARAC�E DOOR
� 3�'_2" �
RECEIVED
��� �? ?Q13
C�n'4F ORONO
PROPOSED GARAGE LEVEL PLAN
WANG RESIDENCE
3059 FARVIEW LANE, ORONO, MN. 55356 ��- ������!�-��-�-
_ _ -- - -- ----
- -- - --- -_
-- _ -- .
�/�AT C. 714��-1i 11�� � V�DTA\T('R CiTAT,TTTTAT 1�/�/1: ' I
� � � � C
Z
Exisrir�� Nous�
ACCESS NO AGGESS
0
NcW ROOF DEGK �
3�'-Z��
PROPOSED MAIN LEVEL PLAN
WANG RESIDENCE
3059 FARVIEW LANE, ORONO, MN. 55356 � .�
SCALE: 1/4"=1'-0" VARIANCE SUBMITTAL: 12/2/13 �-��-` ���-L�-�����'-
I
. , ��
Z
o f=
- N
. . . . . . � . �. ' � . � N X
W
. . . . �
' � �
• � �
. • - Z
' � . . . �
, • " , .. I
PROPOS�D E�EVATION
WANG RESIDENCE
3059 FARVIEW LANE, ORONO MN. 55356
„_ „ -- � ��� � �� -'��'`._����',��
SCALE: 1/4 1'-0 VARIANCE SUBMITTAL: 12/2/13 - - --� "- -
I i
• � PC Exhibit D
TO: MEMBERS OF ORONO CITY COUNCIL AND MELANIE CURTISS
FROM: LIXIAO WANG
SUBJECT: 13-3636 LIXIAO WANG 3059 FARVIEW LANE VARIANCES
DATE: DECEMBER 2, 2013
The followings are the justification for garage addition (13-3636)
1. 9' garage addition requested was denied and 6' garage addition was recommended in
November planning committee meeting.
2. I now take the recommendation and request 6' garage addition.
3. Our three cars (a SUV, a Truck and a Midsized Sedan) can not fit into current 2 garages.
4. The 12' and 9' one—level garage addition were proposed in October and November
planning committee meeting. Reduction size/redesign is requested by the planning
commission. 6' is now reduced.
5. The 6' is now the new design. After 6' addition the two garages can fit the SUV and
Truck and the third car garage is 16.2' in length can just fit small sized two doors Sedan.
The width of the garages cannot be changed due to integrity of the house building. We
cannot reduce size anymore since the third car garage is no longer feasible. We prefer 10'
addition if it can be approved by the city.
6. The one story garage is designed to consider not blocking my eastern neighbor's view.
7. The two garage addition (not current three garage addition) is considered and it is not
feasible since it destroys the integrity of the house building.
8. The extension of garage to inside of house floor is considered and it is not feasible since
the elevator near the garage blocks the inward extension.
9. The possibility of the garage addition was explored before purchase of the property. The
answer from the city is that the garage addition is quite possible. This was one of the
factors to justify purchase of the house.
Thanks for all of you for considerations!
' � PC Exhibit E
Date Appiication Received: 09/18/13
Date Application Considered as Complete: 10/04/13
120-Day Review Period Extension Expires; O1/O1/14
REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION
Date: 3 December 2013
Item No. �f
Department Approval: Administrator Approval: Agenda Section:
Name: Melanie Curtis �
Title: Planning &Zoning Coordinator
Item Description:
13-3636, Lixiao Wang, 3059 Farview Ln,Variances: Hardcover and Side Yard, Lake, &Average Setback
Zoning District: LR-1A, One Family Lakeshore Residential,2-acres/200'
Lot Area: 118,852 square feet (2.7 acres)
Lot Width: 232 feet at OHWL& approximately 280 feet at the 75'setback
list of Exhibits:
Exhibit A. Revised Survey
Exhibit B. Revised Hardcover Calculations
Exhibit C. Revised Garage Plan
Exhibit D. Applicant's Variance Justification—Revised 12/02/13
Exhibit E. Neighbor Comments—Received 11/18/13
Exhibit F. Planning Commission Staff Report& Exhibits-11/15/13
Exhibit G. PC Action & Extension Notice—11/19/13
Exhibit H. Draft PC Minutes-11/18/13
Application Summary:
The applicant recently purchased the subject property and would like to construct a 6' x 34' one story garage
addition to the home in order to better accommodate vehicle parking. There is a small portion of the lake side
of the home which currently encroaches into the 75-foot setback but for the most part the home is situated
right at the 75-foot lakeshore setback. The entry retaining walls and the northeast corner of the home
currently encroach into the required 30-foot side setback. The applicant's home is situated entirely ahead of
the average lakeshore setback line.
The garage addition is proposed to be constructed over a portion of the existing driveway resulting in only 36
square feet of additional total hardcover or 11.8%total for the site where 25%is allowed.
Planning Commission Recommendation
On November 18th the Planning Commission voted 5 to 0 on a motion to recommend denial of the applicant's
variance request.
At their first meeting, in October, the applicant initially proposed a 12' addition, to which the Planning
Commission responded by recommending the addition be reduced by half the depth and tabled the
application. At their follow up meeting with the Planning Commission the applicant opted to propose a 9'
addition citing the need to accommodate each of his vehicles. As is detailed in the attached draft Planning
Commission minutes the Commission questioned the applicant as to why the 9' addition was proposed when
#13-3636
3 Dec 2013
Page 2 of 2
they previously indicated they would potentially be supportive if the garage expansion was reduced by half(of
12'). Following the Planning Commission's recommendation for denial they discussed the fact that they would
still be supportive of a 6' addition.
Planning Staff Recommendation
The proposed garage addition as revised will encroach 4.7 feet into the required 30 foot side yard setback.
The garage portion of the home currently meets the 30 foot side setback. As revised, the addition will be
approximately 72 feet from the lake where a 75 foot setback is required. Approximately 14 square feet of
additional structure within the 75 foot setback is proposed.
The applicant's revised detailed garage plans better clarify the existing usable space within the garage.
However, Staff continues to find that creating a more nonconforming structure is out of character with the
neighborhood. The revised addition adds mass within the eastern side setback area and also within the
average lakeshore setback.The applicant has failed to demonstrate that enforcing the provisions of the Zoning
Ordinance deprive them of the reasonable use of the property. Planning Staff continues to recommend
denial of the variances.
COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED
The Council should consider the applicant's revised request and the Planning Commission's recommendations
and direct staff to draft a resolution reflecting the Council's decision.
MINUTES OF THE PC Exhibit F
ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING
Monday,December 9,2013
6:30 o'clock p.m.
#13-3616 CITY OF ORONO, ZONING CODE AMENDMENT—ALTERNATIVE
EN GY SYSTEMS—ORDINANCE NO. 119 AND SUMMARY ORDINANC . 120
Gaffron note the November 25 City Council meeting Staff was directe draft a revised alternative
energy systems or ' ce that would prohibit wind energy conversio stems or WECS, prohibit
hydronic furnaces, and d prohibit ground mounted solar e systems.
Gaffron stated attached to the City cil packet i ordinance and summary ordinance that
accomplishes those purposes.
McMillan noted the City Council h ad quite a bt iscussion regarding this ordinance already.
Levang thanked Staff for ing the requested changes.
Levang moved derson seconded,to adopt ORDINANCE NO. 11 , Ordinance Amending
Orono M ipal Code Chapter 78 of the Orono Zoning Code by Adding 'on 78-1379,
Altern e Energy Systems, and to adopt SUMMARY ORDINANCE NO. 120, Ordinance
A ding Orono Municipal Code Chapter 78,the Orono Zoning Code by Adding e ' 78-1379,
ernative Energy Systems. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0.
8. #13-3636 LIXIAO WANG,3059 FARVIEW LANE—VARIANCES
Lixiao Wang, Applicant, was present.
Curtis stated the applicant recently purchased the subject property and would like to construct a 6' x 34'
one-story garage addition to the home in order to better accommodate indoor vehicle parking. There is a
small portion of the lake side of the home which currently encroaches into the 75-foot setback, but for the
most part the home is situated right at the 75-foot lakeshore setback. The applicant's home is situated
entirely ahead of the average lakeshare setback line.
The garage addition is proposed to be constructed over a portion of the existing driveway resulting in only
36 square feet of additional total hardcover or 11.8 percent total for the site where 25 percent is allowed.
At the October Planning Commission meeting,the applicant proposed a 12-foot addition. The Planning
Commission voted 5-0 on a motion to recommend denial of the applicant's variance request and
recommended the addition be reduced by half the depth. The application was tabled.
At the November Planning Commission meeting,the applicant opted to propose a 9-foot addition, citing
the need to accommodate each of his vehicles. The Planning Commission questioned why the applicant
proposed a 9-foot addition instead of the recommended 6-foot addition. Following the recommendation
for denial,the Commission discussed the fact that they would still be supportive of a 6-foot addition.
The proposed garage addition as revised will encroach 4.7 feet into the required 30-foot side yard setback.
The garage portion of the home currently meets the 30-foot side setback. As revised,the addition will be
approximately 72 feet from the lake where a 75-foot setback is required. Approximately 14 square feet of
additional structure within the 75-foot setback is proposed.
Page 10 of 35
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING
Monday,December 9,2013
6:30 dclock p.m.
(8. #13-3636 LIXIAO WANG, 3059 FARVIEW LANE— VARIANCES, Continued)
The applicant's revised detailed garage plans better clarify the existing usable space within the garage.
However, Staff continues to find that creating a more nonconforming structure is out of character with the
neighborhood. The revised addition adds mass within the eastern side setback area and also within the
average lakeshore setback. The applicant has failed to demonstrate that enforcing the provisions of the
Zoning Ordinance deprive them of the reasonable use of the property. Staff continues to recommend
denial of the variances. The City Council should consider the applicant's revised proposal.
Lixiao Wang, Applicant, stated he is proposing a 9-foot garage addition and that he has just recently
purchased the property. Wang indicated their first project was connecting to city sewer and that they then
decided that a three-car garage would better fit their needs.
Wang stated they initially proposed a 12-foot garage addition, which the Planning Commission
recommended be reduced. Wang indicated their revised plans call for a 6-foot garage addition, which
would allow them to fit a small vehicle inside the garage as well as provide space for their other two
vehicles.
McMillan noted she attended the November Planning Commission meeting and that a number of the
Commissioners recommended the garage addition be reduced down to six feet. McMillan stated she
understands that an 18-foot garage does not leave a lot of extra room but that she is not sure whether that
is a practical difficulty.
McMillan indicated one of the concerns she has is the rooftop deck since it is located in front of the
average lakeshore setback. McMillan stated allowing the 18-foot garage might be a practical difficulty
but that the rooftop deck is not.
Wang stated they would be willing to remove the deck.
Anderson stated she does not support this application whatsoever and that in her view the nonconformity
should not be increased. Anderson stated to a certain extent this is somewhat of a self-imposed hardship
since the applicant has just recently purchased the property and knew what type of vehicles he owned and
the size of the garage.
Anderson indicated she did visit the site and that in her view there is room up by the road for a garage that
might accommodate their needs. Anderson noted there currently is an encroachment into the average
lakeshore setback and the 30-foot setback.
Curtis indicated there is a spot up by the road that would be out of the wetland and meet the setbacks for a
detached accessory building.
Levang stated at the Planning Commission meeting the inability to have a turnout or an area for backing
out was also discussed.
Curtis stated part of the applicant's driveway exists via an easement over the property line. One of the
concerns Staff had is that expanding the structure gave them less maneuverability in that area.
Page 11 of 35
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING
Monday,December 9,2013
6:30 dclock p.m.
(8. #13-3636 LIXIAO WANG, 3059 FARVIEW LANE— VARIANCES, Continued)
Wang stated as it relates to that issue,he has measured the distance and that the current way to back out is
straight back. Wang stated in his view adding on to the garage would not affect that.
Levang noted that Staff feels it could be an issue.
McMillan asked where the driveway ends.
Curtis stated it is difficult to highlight it on the survey, but that there is a piece of the driveway that is
located on the neighboring property.
Wang pointed out the portion of the driveway on the neighboring property.
McMillan asked whether they currently drive over their well.
Wang stated if they park further away from the garage,they do not drive over the well.
McMillan asked if they will need to drill a new well.
Wang stated they will not if they go with the 6-foot garage addition.
Printup asked what the practical difficulty would be in this situation. Printup stated the way it sounds to
him is that the City has required more from other applicants, and if someone needs to park outside,they
need to park outside.
Mattick stated Council Member Printup is right on point, and that since there is a garage to begin with,
the question is whether it is a practical difficulty to not have a three-car garage. Mattick stated the other
question is whether the garage should be increased to accommodate certain sized vehicles, which
typically does not amount to a practical difficulty.
Levang indicated that is her feeling as well and that there is currently a garage on the property where
some vehicles can be parked in. Levang stated it is the homeowner's choice on what type of vehicle they
drive and that it is not the City's responsibility to ensure the garage is big enough to accommodate all
their vehicles. Levang noted she also is opposed to the deck.
Mrs. Wang stated her daughter is 16 and she also drives. Wang stated her daughter has to drive to
Wayzata High School every day and that is one of the reasons why they would like to be able to park all
the vehicles in the garage.
Levang commented the City Council understands that.
Bremer noted she used to live in this neighborhood and that she was aware the house was for sale.
Bremer stated she knew someone who was interested in the property but that they elected not to purchase
it because it only had a two-car garage. Bremer stated the price of the house was what it was due to the
two-car garage and that the size of the garage was likely limited initially because of the average lakeshore
setback. Bremer stated she has difficulty approving a third stall.
Page 12 of 35
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING
Monday,December 9,2013
6:30 o'clock p.m.
(8. #13-3636 LIXIAO WANG, 3059 FARVIEW LANE— VARIANCES, Continued)
Bremer noted the City has had applicants with one-car detached garages who have requested attached
garages, and that the City tends to be very strict with properties located on the lake and encroaching onto
the average lakeshore setback. Bremer stated if the other members of the City Council were supportive of
the garage addition without the deck, she might be more open, but that she has not heard that type of
support so far.
Wang stated they asked the City prior to purchasing the property if it would be possible to add on to the
garage. Wang noted the previous property owner constructed an elevator in the garage which prevents
them from parking a car in that stall. Wang stated the City indicated to them that it is possible to add on
to the garage so they went ahead and purchased the property. Wang stated they have done everything the
City requested, including connecting to the city sewer, and that they are asking for a little addition on to
the garage so they can fit a small car in there. Wang stated the difficulty they are experiencing is that
their daughter has to drive a car that is frozen and has to be cleaned of snow.
Bremer commented that is a life difficulty. Bremer stated she also lived in a house with a single car
detached garage and that one of the reasons she moved is because of the small garage. Bremer indicated
her current garage is only a two-stall garage.
Bremer noted this property is in a very restricted zone by Lake Minnetonka and that the City Council has
to protect the lake and uphold the restrictions wherever possible. Bremer stated she understands the
applicant's daughter may be upset if she is not able to park her car inside the garage.
Wang stated the elevator takes up space so they are not able to utilize that portion of the garage. Wang
stated he would like to increase the functionality of the garage.
Levang asked where an accessory garage could be constructed on the property.
Curtis stated on a lakeshore property, a detached garage less than 750 square feet can be located ten feet
from the road and the rear lot line when the doors are facing away to the side. If the structure is between
750 to 1,000 square feet, it has to meet a 15-foot setback. Curtis pointed out the location of the hill and
indicated a garage could be constructed in that area.
Bremer noted a number of trees would be lost if a garage is constructed there.
Curtis indicated the garage could also be pu(led toward the house somewhat.
McMillan commented a garage in that location would be more intrusive to the neighbors.
Bremer asked what the elevation of the road is.
Gaffron indicated it is at 959 at the road and that it would be about a 25-foot drop.
Page 13 of 35
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING
Monday,December 9,2013
6:30 o'clock p.m.
(8. #13-3636 LIXIAO WANG, 3059 FARVIEW LANE— VARIANCES, Continued)
McMillan stated a standard size garage now appears to be 20' x 24' for a two-car garage. McMillan
noted the house is also not in a conforming location for a number of reasons and would never be
conforming even if it was torn down and rebuilt somewhere else. McMillan stated the Council in the past
has found that not having a garage in Minnesota during the winter is a practical difficulty but that this
property does have a two-car attached garage already.
Printup stated the City Council's hands are tied given the City Codes and philosophy of protecting the
lake. Printup indicated he has a difficult time approving this application when other applications have
been denied for similar reasons, especially when there is another location on the property where a garage
could be built.
Wang stated they are going to follow the roofline of the house, which is grandfathered in.
McMillan stated if they were going to construct new, that would not be allowed.
Anderson noted the adjoining property owned has expressed a number of concerns about the proximity of
the garage and the current driveway. Anderson stated she has a difficult time approving an expansion that
is nonconforming and that she does not see a hardship.
Anderson moved,Printup seconded,Application Na 13-3636,Lixiao Wang,3059 Farview Lane,to
direct Staff to draft a denial resolution.
McMillan indicated she would be okay with the addition without the rooftop deck. McMillan stated the
six feet would help make it a more functional garage.
Levang noted the Planning Commission also indicated they would be supportive of a 6-foot addition.
Bremer stated she wished the applicant had gone forward with the 6-foot addition at the Planning
Commission meeting so they could have reviewed the proposal.
Wang stated he initially thought he would need nine feet and that after the meeting he measured the car
and found out that sia feet would work.
Levang asked whether the Planning Commission was unanimous in their support for a 6-foot garage
addition.
Curtis indicated they did not formally vote on it but that it appeared to be well received.
Printup stated he would prefer that the 6-foot addition go back to the Planning Commission.
Levang stated she is in agreement with Council Member Printup.
Page 14 of 35
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING
Monday, December 9,2013
6:30 o'clock p.m.
(8. #13-3636 LIXIAO WANG, 3059 FARVIEW LANE— VARIANCES, Continued)
Curtis asked whether the applicant would be agreeable to an extension.
Wang indicated he is.
VOTE: Ayes 2,Nays 3, McMillan, Bremer,and Levang opposed. MOTION FAILED.
Levang moved, Bremer seconded,to table Application No. 13-3636, Lixiao Wang,3059 Farview
Lane, and to send the application back to the Planning Commission. VOTE: Ayes 4,Nays l,
Anderson opposed.
9. #13-3637 WILLI ABBOTT ON BEHALF OF THE BROADWAY GROUP,LLC,235
WA RTOWN ROAD, AND XXX WILLOW DRIVE NORTH—PRELIMINARY SUBD SION
Willi Abbo Applicant, was present.
Gaffron stated the licant is requesting preliminary plat approval for a 7-lot sin amily residential
subdivision to be kno as Oliver Hill. The total site consists of 4.29 acres, of ich 1.24 is wetlands.
The area is currently zon R-1 B, which is a two-acre zone, but is guided ' e Comprehensive Plan for
low to medium residential de ' at two to three units per acre. Similar what was done with the
Glendale Cove subdivision to the rth, the applicant is proposing to a subdivision that would have an
overall density of 1.9 units per acre. re is not a zoning district rezone to other than the RPUD or
residential planned unit development dist . In addition, the a icant is requesting rezoning of the site
to Residential Planned Unit Development.
Gaffron noted the Planning Commission at its Nove meeting voted 5-0 to recommend approval.
The applicant is proposing a subdivision that i des an ope arcel adjacent to Willow Drive and then
to the east of that, there is an existing house a wooded parcel. e wooded parcel has a creek running
through it. The creek comes from the ar of the baseball diamond a ackberry Park and works its way
to the southeast. It eventually ends u own towards Watertown Road.
The applicant is proposing to pr rve an area to the northeast of the creek as a e preservation area.
This is proposed as a public r d situation. Due to the density,the lots would be ap ximately one-third
of an acre each. Similar to at was done with Glendale Cove,there would be city se . In other
similar situations, based the density,the City has created public roads rather than privat
Gaffron stated the anning Commission concluded that the RPUD is the right zoning for this pa 1. The
Planning Com ' sion also looked at a Conservation Design and Master Plan that was completed fo e
site. The ov 11 grading plan, including the proposed public road, development of the home site,
stormwat management systems result in a significant amount of removal of some of the trees on the si
The tre stand to the north is basically the only stand of trees that would remain. Based on that,the
Pla ng Commission recommended there be additional landscaping along Willow Drive.
Page 15 of 35
, , PC Exhibit G
Melanie Curtis
From: Francine Delaney[francine@theritterteam.com]
Sent: Thursday, January 16, 2014 8:15 AM
To: Melanie Curtis
Cc: djd471 @msn.com
Subject: 3059 Farview Lane Variance Request
�feCanie,
I'm sending this emaiCin regarcls to tFie'Wang's request to a�ldadditionaCgarage space to 3059�F'arview Lane. I�avidandl sti�!
oppose this request. '�VitFi tFie current driveway situation, it is d�cuCt to turn around w(zen tFiere is more tFian 1 car in tFie
cfriveway. If there is additionctCstructure addecC, it wiCCmake it nearCy impossi6Ce for anyone to turn arouncf once tFiey are in tke
driveway. It is a�ong way to 6ackout of t�iat driveway and many cars over t(ze years�iave s�ippecCoff and 6een stuckin the
snow. �avicfancCl Fiave assistedmore t(ucn one strandecCmotorist 6ecause of tkis.
3059�'arview currentCy has a cfriveway easement on our property. If aclditionaCstructure is added, it not onCy furtFier o6structs
our view to tFce lake, we are assuming tFie ne.�t request wiCC de for acCditionaCcfriveway,furt(zer infringing on our property and
it's va�ue.
�lr`Wang was aware of the garage situation wFien Fie purc(zased tFie home. I don't 6eCieve it to de a Fiard'sFiip when a home�ias Z
garage staC(s. 7�ie current Fiome is over 7,000 square feet. I 6eCieve that it couCd 6e mo��ecf to accommodate a deepergarage
without acfding on to tFie e.x,isting structure.
�Cease seriousCy consicCer our input when making your decision on tFie variance requestecl
7Fian�you!
rFrancine ancf lnavicf I�eCaney
612-750-9121
1
• , Council
Exhibit F
Date Application Received: 09/18/13
Date Application Considered as Complete:10/04/13
120-Day Review Period Extension Expires: Ol/j"�/14
REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION
Date: 3 December 2�13
Item No. �f
s�----
Department Approval: Administrator Approval: Agenda Section:
Name: Melanie Curtis �/
Title: Planning &Zoning Coordinator
Item Description:
13-3636, Lixiao Wang, 3059 Farview Ln,Variances: Hardcover and Side Yard, Lake, &Average Setback
Zoning District: LR-1A, One Family Lakeshore Residential, 2-acres/200'
Lot Area: 118,852 square feet(2.7 acres)
Lot Width: 232 feet at OHWL&approximately 280 feet at the 75' setback
List of Exhibits:
Exhibit A. Revised Survey
Exhibit B. Revised Hardcover Calculations
Exhibit C. Revised Garage Plan
Exhibit D. Applicant's Variance Justification—Revised 12/02/13
Exhibit E. Neighbor Comments—Received 11/18/13
Exhibit F. Planning Commission Staff Report& Exhibits-11/15/13
Exhibit G. PC Action & Extension Notice—11/19/13
Exhibit H. Draft PC Minutes—11/18/13
Application Summary:
The applicant recently purchased the subject property and would like to construct a 6' x 34' one story garage
addition to the home in order to better accommodate vehicle parking. There is a small portion of the lake side
of the home which currently encroaches into the 75-foot setback but for the most part the home is situated
right at the 75-foot lakeshore setback. The entry retaining walls and the northeast corner of the home
currently encroach into the required 30-foot side setback. The applicant's home is situated entirely ahead of
the average lakeshore setback line.
The garage addition is proposed to be constructed over a portion of the existing driveway resulting in only 36
square feet of additional total hardcover or 11.8%total for the site where 25%is allowed.
Planning Commission Recommendation
On November 18th the Planning Commission voted 5 to 0 on a motion to recommend denial of the applicant's
variance request.
At their first meeting, in October, the applicant initially proposed a 12' addition, to which the Planning
Commission responded by recommending the addition be reduced by haJf the depth and tabled the
application. At their follow up meeting with the Planning Commission the applicant opted to propose a 9'
addition citing the need to accommodate each of his vehicles. As is detailed in the attached draft Planning
Commission minutes the Commission questioned the applicant as to why the 9' addition was proposed when
#13-3636
3 Dec 2013
Page 2 of 2
they previously indicated they would potentially be supportive if the garage expansion was reduced by half(of
12'). Following the Planning Commission's recommendation for denial they discussed the fact that they would
still be supportive of a 6' addition.
Planning Staff Recommendation
The proposed garage addition as revised will encroach 4.7 feet into the required 30 foot side yard setback.
The garage portion of the home currently meets the 30 foot side setback. As revised, the addition will be
approximately 72 feet from the take where a 75 foot setback is required. Approximately 14 square feet of
additional structure within the 75 foot setback is proposed.
The applicant's revised detailed garage plans better clarify the existing usable space within the garage.
However, Staff continues to find that creating a more nonconforming structure is out of character with the
neighborhood. The revised addition adds mass within the eastern side setback area and also within the
average lakeshore setback.The applicant has failed to demonstrate that enforcing the provisions of the Zoning
Ordinance deprive them of the reasonable use of the property. Planning Staff continues to recommend
denial of the variances.
COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED
The Council should consider the applicant's revised request and the Planning Commission's recommendations
and direct staff to draft a resolution reflecting the Council's decision.
, � � `. � �� ,
. � � \—
--
' \ \ � �� � , b!t�mmou5 COUIIC.��
'��� � 1 936 � / dnvaway
~ EOvE OF DFLINEATED ND ti �i _ 1 a Exhibit A
per K�olhaug Envrror7 ,�ta!-- \ � �a�. ,
- Serr�ces located 9-9-2 /3 � ��(� — —
'�1 /
� / /ry,�0��
\ �
\\ ` \ \ � �,,J
. \ ` \ � /I 'J� .
\ ` , �/
�`_ �
\ l � �
l � �
\ � 1 �
/ �1y
� \ n,-,
\ ' � f // 7J vv� �`__
� - 75`S�TBACK LINE FROn;t vhW \��1 I I
�� DRAINAGE EASE�l4ENT 1��1 � �� � �
i---_ % 1�\ � �t���J ��' �
, �� ��' � �� i � � � � �.ry' __ \
� � �
� �' T, � � � f •� o
� Neighbor5 9hed and elect.��ca�serv�ce9 _ �
��-- EdSB/17BnC ShOWrt pBf r7l'CVIOUS SUNBy. �i� / �q��,� \� �
� � No documentat�on prowded. � � °� � � \�� _—��
�� ;� �� � � �, ���� ���"� _ — — � �� '� �/ � �n�\
� , _ � �
93 l.�/ \'� \� �dge of wetl�nd per plat , � �� � �'�� ' �'` , -' � l��� t ��
i • `� ��'� � � �
x i ' plast,c ah�t!\ \�� �� ,. ', + �dge of Pond� ' �� � . � _ � ' � � � . �� ���
�•
�/ ��,�•'� .� � � �, �.� �+��',"�:�� — , � .93`� / � �
�� /�' � � �.\ �� EDGF OP DEL/NEATED WfTLAND � � ' _ — — � � , '' �� ��
�
\ �nt dec � Per K�olh�ug EnwromGntal r ,�������_ �� � /1 —5vm�3ignal ��-� � .
� GI C�CV. ��r'i � / �`��'y�=� . ,O ��sump co� / /!�•
� �� Serv�ces loc�ted 9�9-20!3 i'a �� ' � _ . , .! � f� � Q p
� \ \ •� 92�,�, , � � � ��1,-'� �g�.� 6o p^W_.� � Dn�eavayEasement per
`� '� `� '� �� �`� . - , . ° �. �$0_. -
\ \ � ' N \ � doc. nn. 5232986
\\� �� \ \`\ -----",�� � ��,"�p�-�'���t' /l sC�S `1 ' ry 936.8w, � � : ,� —•' � � �
�� ��f �� •� �' / � o�cv�o' = p a�� ���:� � �, �°
�� ', s�2 •� . y i�� �j ,�� - � �� ^�-'x'�� .;29.0��'� N ,, manhole �(� n-0� --
�� c9••�� .. ,: .;� y�"�- � � N � \ � 35�s�cK : /�, ��
934.8 �, �
\� �`�E• \'�,� r g�y �rs:.�� {� � — 947:7, � .197 i o ..� � �fROM DELMEA7PD.',\ 1 ° •
\ r
♦ 2 �—. �� � � �( �'� K2TiRND l �`�
� �C� =��..�.�rrry��" W i l � /-•� 'O �!''w2lkeut � 6.4 ��
V�
� � '! 5 ��— — — � � a�, p " �- 937.J a Y.3
�� �-�' ' — — ' r � � � � �� �o m ,den�� N . �i ^c'�j
��_, - 9sz �.� � � ' � � f;:' ` � :� Re5 5g .,3� � 2� � �
�, �\ � , " 9' 36, i - '� .' �.\ N°.3� r��� � m��,fi��'� ' .�'i •s_ �! ry�
_ ��� � � / � � 9 •93a p� i� � � \ 4pO�:y � y���s y l II �
°i r d �
�; � \� ��— trm e,^�p�ve�s��� qA2 � \�\,\ ��� � 10;0� (15 � / 1
��\\ �� \ — / � � / � ' � � ` ' j co�� wa /l��
\\ � 1 � � a' � � .�Q •6� �, /�. /�^
�\� \ \ ` , � �9�` �.�--�""� ��0� � a' �!2Yrc �
� � � � � �� -� ' V � � o � �b� 936 4 '�� 935 � � 7��^
�'�� � � � � � � 7n�� ` i
� � 1 'L• - a�� g _ ' �, � �/
�� , � � . � , � o, �o � � -e� ; � Block l, FARVIEW,
�,
.\� � \ � . � � � � "9s�.� a�: �. � � r�-- ' i Lot 6,
`\\ \ \ \ \ \ \ ���,�,/ 943. ��� 9G� ,�ay��• .�,9357� �i Hennepin County, Minnesota.
�; �;�:,�;��� .-�� �. ,�� ���� °'� � ° '� � , � � RECEIVED
��� + o�� ti ,'�ia s� ,
� �� � � � � � � � �; 5b�rc � I Q< ,ya
, , , , , .> > �,�; ��,c,, ,. i �� DEC a 2013
/� . � � � �
1� �� \ \�� �\ \\\ � y, 1 ,\ tum"i��� s /� ��
♦ �� � � ��\� �� ,mbc E a c , � b y � 933.5 �
�� . � � � � , � 9,� .� •._ 9.s�a.�� , . � u�/ CITY OF ORONO
� , �.
�d e o`S,-ore;me � � � � � � � �� 1 � 1; lti \,l ` �,.. l I
9 �\ � � � � �\\ � �, I � I�.\ i �� t�!ri
� � ,..� �
� ` � � � � � ' — � ��� '- � The only easements shown are from plats of record or information
� � � � � \ \ t� � n� 1 I .9 � � � / � ---tc be capped
o /� � � � � � � v'a0 � � I � / 0� `N
'd2 � ������ ."�O\`�� ,t�� ° � �����p�,p,�p" pravided by ciient.
� � �,��
�- @� � � � . . ��, `i � i ,� 6 0�,�„ w� �� I csrtif}I that this pfan, specification,or report was prepared by me or
� � � '� 6 ��� N 89�
9�� � �`��. � � 28 i � � under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Licensed land
"'� Q �� � ` � � �42.��� � � � ,' _Surveyor under the laws of tfie state of Minnesota.
o � \ �,'� `\� \ � ,�0 i i � _
�o � � S�arveyed this 9th day o�September 2013. ��
S � . - 5nortl�nC\\ i� < � " P� / _.
r'�9 9ry9.4 �� � � � � � , i o�`� �
. A � \ \\ � � � �)� � �
\ � � � i 0� �, . . �
\ � � _ �
\�\ � � �' � : �' �.�' . __-- �l� .. � � .
` \ � � � / � - /� . � .
. �. \ � � / � . . `.
. \ �^�� �`'� .
/ / ,
�� \ � � S19rdG =t'� �i —���1---- --------
�- ! �- �� ��ro �,an Drawn By ;Z',=Jt' .
Rev j :� \� i GregDry R.Ptasch.Mmn.Ra6 No.24992
-: . �
a .7. �?.�� ,� -'r`i ,
^ i
.,
I ' -' -----Jl '
F-----�—' — — � �,F��1-:iid^''B � -
I .. _, ,. , . ,. � �� -- .__.—._._�_ -
i
, -. .. � . , . " _ ___�.._,_'____-� 1 ;H i�.f:� .. �
, - - �-�--- _:--•-- �, ., :``:,�, '.
� � d '��t r ��D`�� Council R'�CE/�/ED
Exhibit B� � �;,
City of Orono ' `�� 20�3
; �:��a Hardcover Calculation Worksheet �''�'oFoRo�o
Pro ert Address: .�
�;;�� � ; ' P Y
� . ���f--f1 r s9rzL�rE�n/ �/9��
�����'�°''� Prepared by: ,. Date:
�CTT' Sc�v �j� �-c� %1�� Zt� � i�
S rlay District Tier: (Circle one) Tier Tier 2 Tier 3 Tier 4 Tier 5
Step 2: PROPOSED H DCOVER �i�i�✓ 7�'� SrTc��� � ��`h�
e followin , identify all items of proposed hardcover on the property, keyed by letter to
Certi ica e o urvey (survey must accompany this form). Include all existing hardcover items that are
intended to remain, as well as all proposed hardcover items that will be added. Use as many lines as
necessary to accurately depict proposed hardcover status of the property. For Tier 1 properties, identify
any features by letter which are split at the 75' setback line and calculate hardcover square footage
se aratel for each ortion.
Key to Hardcover Item (Describe) Length x Width Total
Survey (Square Feet)
Exam le GBra e 24'x 30' ' 720 S:F.
A c�iSr�� jz,�s%c�c"it/"�%� S� S.F.
B S.F.
C �S t Cs j� S.F.
D S.F.
E ' ^va� S.F.
F S.F.
G n� . G,� >�G/�S � S.F.
H S.F.
I � rA[.�- �,' S.F.
J S.F.
K ,� ;� S.F.
L S.F.
M S.F.
N S.F.
O S.F.
P S.F.
Q S.F.
R S.F.
S S.F.
T S.F.
U S.F.
V S.F.
W S.F.
X S.F.
Y S.F.
Z S.F.
1 Total Pro osed Hardcover f/«G S.F.
Excludable Hardcover See Cit Code Sec 78-1684 :
S.F.
S.F.
S.F.
S.F.
S.F.
2 Total Excludable Hardcover it/�4 S.F.
3 Net Pro osed Hardcover Subtract line 2 from line 1 4- S.F.
4 Total Lot Area �iQ �F ` " 5�����- s f��' S.F.
Proposed Hardcover Percentage [(3)=(4)] ���Z %
January 8,2013
S tt� p ��� � �
City of Orono �
;���:oNot Hardcover Calculation Worksheet
�,; �� �� Property Address: �
:� � � 5�� �iOT 11iE�t,� C.,�O,�r/,�
�`°��ati�'� Prepared by: � Date:
�..c°�T S�rr��/S �`� i/ • ?.e� • i 3
Stormwa it Overlay District Tier. (Circle one) Tier,11 Tier 2 Tier 3 Tier 4 Tier 5
p 2: PROPOSED HARDCOVER
n the followin e, identify all items of proposed hardcover on the property, keyed by letter to
of Survey (survey must accompany this form). Include all existing hardcover items that are
intended to remain, as well as all proposed hardcover items that will be added. Use as many lines as
necessary to accurately depict proposed hardcover status of the property. For Tier 1 properties, identify
any features by letter which are split at the 75' setback tine and calculate hardcover square footage
se aratel for each ortion.
Key to Hardcover Item (Describe) Length x Width Total
Survey (Square Feet)
Exam le Gara e 24'x 30' 720 S.F.
A �.E 1 " f��c i �.l'c�� ��c.�r2 --�'?•c� S.F.
B ,� w� -, S.F.
C �� : 1-��K- '' ' �� S.F.
D S ,� r '7;� S.F.
E �r / !• 21�� S.F.
F S.F.
G c� ��G Wi7tli�,� "7 ' �T A� r' ;� 7 Z� S.F.
H S.F.
I i / '7 ` S�'/'�3AL.,K— 2` S.F.
J S.F.
K S.F.
L S.F.
M S.F.
N S.F.
O S.F.
P S.F.
Q S.F.
R S.F.
S S.F.
T S.F.
U S.F.
V S.F.
W S.F.
X S.F.
Y S.F.
Z S.F.
1 Total Proposed Hardcover % �f�� S.F.
Excludable'Hardcover See Cit Code Sec 78-1684 :
S.F.
S.F.
S.F.
S.F.
S.F.
2 Total Excludable Hardcover S.F.
3 Net Pro osed Hardcover Subtract line 2 from line 1 /�� �, S.F.
(4 Total Lot Area �/ %� S.F.
Proposed Hardcover Percentage [(3)=(4)] ,�,�� %
January 8,1013
' �r�,'q� �(�..Tl l��j �
3
City of Orono
���o%v�, Hardcover Calculation Worksheet
'.,1 , i Property Address:
:,�, �,�-� 3CJ�9' ��a2v�Ek/ G�ii/'�'
'^f�r`- ' Prepared by: Date:
��T Svrz�i'�Ys C� !o-3i �3
i� �r" "Z(.'>_i j
Stormwater Quality Overlay District Tier: (Circle one)f ier 1 Tier 2 Tier 3 Tier 4 Tier 5
'�._�
Ste 1: EXISTING ARDCOVER ����
In t e following t e identify all items of existing hardcover on the property, keyed by letter to Certificate
of S ey (s y must accompany this form). Use as many lines as necessary to accurately depict
existing ardcover status of the property. For Tier 1 properties, identify any features by letter which are
split at the 75' setback line and calculate hardcover square footage separately for each portion.
Key to Hardcover Item (Describe) Length x Width Total
Survey (Square Feet)
Exam le Gara e 24'x 30' 720 S.F-
A �t'S/c����-� i �.t'�'l i � ��,.-�i S.F.
B / �c �'( '�� " S.F.
C i,4c, , - u �� S.F.
� ' ' S.F.
E S.F.
F S.F.
G ' ^ ,r :' � rN -�, Z" S.F.
H S.F.
I / "� ,� . S.F.
� S.F.
K S.F.
� S.F.
M S.F.
N S.F.
� S.F.
P S.F.
Q S.F.
R S.F.
S S.F.
T S.F.
� S.F.
V
S.F.
W S.F.
X S.F.
Y S.F.
Z S.F.
1 Total Existing Hardcover i� ��r� S.F.
Excludable Hardcover See Cit Code 5ec 78-9684 :
S.F.
S.F.
S.F.
S.F.
S.F.
2 Total Excludable Hardcover S.F.
3 Net Existin Hardcover Subtract line 2 from line 1 I'�f� � S.F.
4 Total Lot Area i( "�2- S.F.
Existing Hardcover Percentage [(3) = (4)] �'� �J� °/a
(Proposed Hardcover next page)
January 8,1013
,
Council
Exhibit C�
ELE�/.
ELEv EQUIP.
�XISTIN�z C�ARAG� SPAG� EXISTfNCz CzARAC�sE PACE
STOR.
N
0
O
�
NEW C�ARACzE SPACE
NEW IS' CsARACsE DOOR NELU 9' CzARAC�E DOOR
� 3�'_2��
RECEIVED
DEC �? 2pi3
C�TY OF ORONO
PROPOSED GARAGE LEVEL PLAN
WANG RESIDENCE � �-��-���1� ��, �
3059 FARVIEW LANE, ORONO, MN. 55356 - -
_ ___ _ __ _ _____ _-- _ __----
--- --- __ _ ----
SCALE: 1!4"=1'-0" VARTANCE SUBMITT.4L: 12!2/13 �
. �
Z
EXISTING NOUS�
ACCESS NO ACCESS
0
N�W ROOF DEGK �
3�'-2'�
PROPOSED MAIN LEVEL PLAN
WANG RESIDENCE
3059 FARVIEW LANE, ORONO, MN. 55356
,�_ , „ -- - - ����
SCALE: 1/4 -1-0 VARIANCE SUBMITTAL: 12/2/13 �`�-
. , ��
Z
o �
- �
N X
ui
. • � � �
. , o �
• � - z
PROPOSED ELEVATION
WANG RESIDENCE
3059 FARVIEW LANE, ORONO, MN. 55356 �,, � � �, �
-- „_ ,_ „ -- - ----- ��_�;�� �� : P� � �-�
SCALE: 1/4 -1 0 VARIANCE SUBMITTAL: 12/2/13 - �-� -�-�-=--d �- �-
. Council
Exhibit D
TO: MEMBERS OF ORONO CITY COUNCIL AND MELANIE CURTISS
FROM: LIXIAO WANG
SUBJECT: 13-3636 LIXIAO WANG 3059 FARVIEW LANE VARIANCES
DATE: DECEMBER 2, 2013
The followings are the justification for garage addition (13-3636)
1. 9' garage addition requested was denied and 6' garage addition was recommended in
November planning committee meeting.
2. I now take the recommendation and request 6' garage addition.
3. Our three cars (a SUV, a Truck and a Midsized Sedan) can not fit into current 2 garages.
4. The 12' and 9' one—level garage addition were proposed in October and November
planning committee meeting. Reduction size/redesign is requested by the planning
commission. 6' is now reduced.
5. The 6' is now the new design. After 6' addition the two garages can fit the SUV and
Truck and the third car garage is 16.2' in length can just fit small sized two doors Sedan.
The width of the garages cannot be changed due to integrity of the house building. We
cannot reduce size anymore since the third car garage is no longer feasible. We prefer 10'
addition if it can be approved by the city.
6. The one story garage is designed to consider not blocking my eastern neighbor's view.
7. The two garage addition (not current three garage addition) is considered and it is not
feasible since it destroys the integrity of the house building.
8. The extension of garage to inside of house floor is considered and it is not feasible since
the elevator near the garage blocks the inward extension.
9. The possibility of the garage addition was explored before purchase of the property. The
answer from the city is that the garage addition is quite possible. This was one of the
factors to justify purchase of the house.
Thanks for all of you for considerations!
, � ��� � � '�,. /���� Council
� Exhibit E
Melanie Curtis
From: DAVE DELANEY
Sent: Monday, November 18, 2013 10:08 AM
To: Melanie Curtis
Subject: RE: 3059 Farview
Hi Melanie,
I understand that there is another meeting tonight regarding 3059 Farview Lane. I just want to
confirm that our position has not changed. We do not support the variances requested by Mr. & Mrs. Wang. If
approved the addition would affect our view of the lake. I do not believe Mr. Wang's request meets the legal
definition of hardship necessary for variance approval.
Sincerely,
David & Francine Delaney
3051 Farview
From:��
To: mcurtis@ci.orono.mn.us
Subject: 3059 Farview
Date: Thu, 17 Oct 2013 07:29:14-0700
Hi Melanie,
It is my understanding that the owners of 3059 Farview have applied to expand their existing home and seek several
variances. Our home is located at 3051 Farview and is the adjacent property that will be most affected by the expansion if
it were to be approved. As you know both of our properties are surrounded by protected wetlands and Lake Minnetonka it is
unlikely under the current wetland regulations that any house would be allowed to be built where Mr. Wang's house is today.
Our properties support a host of wildlife including Deer, Bald Eagles, Fox, Loons, Falcons, Herons and Trumpeter Swans.Mr. Wang's
proposed addition will effect these wildlife and obstruct our view of Lake Minnetonka.
Wang's property is too small and should not be granted the proposed variances for hardcover, lot setback and lakeshore setback
because he wants a larger garage.The property already has an easement on our land for a driveway.The drive way is already to
small and there is little to no room for delivery trucks to turn around and they have to back up the long driveway frequently. We
hear the beeping alert of the garbage truck early in the morning as it backs up on our property.
I do not believe approval of Mr.Wang's variance requests meet the definition of hardship because he wants a bigger garage
especially in light of the fact that he just purchased the home. If he needed a bigger garage he should have purchased a different
home.Approval of this request will have an unknown environmental impact, restrict my view and de-value my property.
Sincerely,
David& Francine Delaney
1
� . Councii
Exhibit F
Date Application Received: 09/18/13
Date Application Considered as Complete:10/04/13
60-Day Review Period Expires: 12/03/13
To: Chair Leskinen and Planning Commission Members
Jessica Loftus, City Administrator
From: Melanie Curtis, Planning&Zoning Coordinator ��
����
Date: 12 November 2013
Subject: 13-3636, Lixiao Wang, 3059 Farview Ln,
Variances: Hardcover and Side Yard, Lake, &Average Setback
Public Hearing-Continued
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Zoning District: LR-1A, One Family Lakeshore Residential, 2-acres/200'
Lot Area: 118,852 square feet(2.7 acres)
Lot Width: 232 feet at OHWL& approximately 280 feet at the 75' setback
Application Summary: The applicant is requesting variances in order to construct a 9'x 34' one-
level garage addition to the home.
Staff Recommendation: Planning Department Staff recommends denial.
�
List of Exhibits
Exhibit A. Revised Survey
Exhibit B. Revised Hardcover Calculations
Exhibit C. Revised Garage Plan
Exhibit D. Applicant's Narrative
Exhibit E. PC Staff Memo & Exhibits 10/15/13
Exhibit F. PC Action Notice
Exhibit G. Draft PC Minutes 10/18/13
Background
This application was tabled at the October meeting to allow for the applicant to consider a
revised plan reducing the size of the proposed addition from 12 to 9 feet. Variances from side
yard setback, lake setback, average lakeshore setback, and hardcover are still required.
They have provided a revised survey and a revised, more detailed garage plan which better
illustrates the interior of the existing garage and its dimensional limitations.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
LOT ANALYSIS WORSHEET
Lot Area/Width:
LR-lA Lot Area Lot Width
Required 87,120 s.f. (2 acres) 200'
Actual 118,852 s.f. (2.7 acre) 232' @ OHWL& 280' @ 75' SB
FILE#13-3636
12 November 2013
Page 2 of 3
Structural Coverage:
The property exceeds 1.99 acres therefore,according to City Code Section 78-1685 structural
coverage or massing standards do not apply.
Hardcover Calculations:
Stormwater Total Area in Allowed Revised Proposed
Overlay District Zone Hardcover Existing Hardcover Hardcover
Tier
29,713 s.f. 14,050 s.f. 1,126 14,086 s.f. 1,159
Tier 1 118,852 s.f. w/in w/in
(25%) (11.8%) 75' (11.8%) 75'
Setbacks:
LR-lA Required Existing Revised Proposed
Rear 50' +200' No Change
East Side 30' 28•6' existing 22.5' garage
house addition
West Side 30' 150' pool deck No change
178' house
Lakeshore 75� 71' house 72.5' garage
61' pool deck addition
Wetland 35' 12' No change
The entire home is located ahead of the average lakeshore
Average Lakeshore
setback line.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hardcover Variance
The applicant's property is 2.7 acres and including the proposal will remain at 11.8%. A small
portion of the proposed hardcover includes changing the nature of non-structural driveway
hardcover to structural hardcover within the 75 foot zone.
Side Yard Setback Variance
The proposed garage addition as revised will encroach 7.5 feet into the required 30 foot side
yard setback. The garage portion of the home currently meets the 30 foot side setback.
Lake Setback Variance
The proposed garage addition is to be constructed by extending the lake-side wall of the home
to the east. Due to the angle of the home and the lakeshore, the addition will be 72.5 feet from
the lake where a 75 foot setback is required. Approximately 23 square feet of additional
structure within the 75 foot setback is proposed.
Average Lakeshore Setback Variance
The applicant's home is located entirely ahead of the average lakeshore setback line. Any
expansion or structural additions to the home require approval of an average lakeshore setback
variance.
Discussion
Staff has not received updated comments regarding the applicant's revised plan from the
FILE#13-3636
12 November 2013
Page 3 of 3
adjacent property owner who provided initial comments. Those comments are enciosed in the
October staff report (attached as Exhibit D). The revised survey and detailed garage plans
better clarify the existing usable space within the applicant's garage. Staff continues to find
that creating a more nonconforming structure is not in character with the neighborhood. The
revised addition adds mass within the eastern side setback area and also within the average
lakeshore setback. The applicant has not demonstrated a reasonable practical difficulty
supporting additional structure within the average lakeshore setback or within the 75-foot
setback area. Further, the applicant has failed to demonstrate that enforcing the provisions of
the Zoning Ordinance deprive them of the reasonable use of the property.
As a lakeshore lot of 2.7 acres, the property is permitted up to a 1,200 square foot detached
garage on the street side of the property. This detached garage may be located 50 feet from the
rear/street lot line.
Issues for Consideration
1. Does the Planning Commission find that that the property owner proposes to use the
property in a reasonable manner which is not permitted by an official control?
2. Does the Planning Commission find that the variances, if granted, will not alter the
essential character of the neighborhood?
3. Does the Commission find it necessary to impose conditions in order to mitigate the
impacts created by the granting of the requested variances?
4. Are there any other issues or concerns with this application?
Staff Recommendation
Planning Staff continues to recommend denial of the variances.
� , , � � i �
ryi- � � /
' � � ` � 9 / � _ b�tum�nous PC EXhlbit A
EDGE OP DEllN�ArED NC `��' � / dnvewry
per K�olhaug Env,rom ntai- ` �� �
5en��ces loc�tad 9-9-2 /3 ,y l . �� � ' � _
\ /
� / ��D.��
� � � � � � �^\
_ � � � nd
.` \ 1 \ // y^
�� � �� .� � � ,
\ \ \ �, I /C
�� �
� 75 5�8ACK LiNE Pe���':�nbti� � �'� � � �� 1 S� ,�
\,t o�a ! N�a � E EAs �n.rFn,� � \��i � , , v� cv
� °Ooo,,-�\
\ \ l`� / /o °� ` �
\
�\ � / ��--, \\ � r��� � h 0� �
� - Nughnor�s'ned�nd eiectr�cal sen�ces � �� � �� � � �
/ rti�
��� � Easement shown per prewous survey. �' \r� � � \� � �� �`�
i
�� j' �\ � No�ocumentat�on prowded. �i� �� P'�2 �7 \ � ���L �'
/ /� � �., �. i �..� � �' , i � � J} -� _ ,�
/ 93 I. � � \\ E.age of wetland pCr plaG i � �� �' � � �� � � - L�`
X/ \ GlssGc sh�1\ \� \ i�; � �%��'.� � ' .I _ _ " �� � /� ��\
\\ ,�\ � � �\ � \ �� � �dgc of Pond- '' �-�=/'� � - _ , _ r � � � /// �\
•� /
� \� FDGE OP DEL/NFAT.FD WETLAND �1 '� ��=��� , _ ,93'� / !/ � � \�
� t elec ♦ r' � ' � � - - � \
� � pe�K�o/haug Evva�omenta! , �� �� � � � ` � �
�� � Serv�ces lecated 9�9-2013 ,�e�e,,. , '�� �- ,. � -semPsignai � � �
� � \� \ 9 9r.9- � �'� � _ � _ �Q� ,O � 3ump cover •/ �
�� .� �� � jr: _ , - ^ � � �0 2��; ., �g�-�"".--�4��p' IN �. �� Dr�veway Easement per
♦ � �\ �� �%��_. � � — — � i ' � ,� o � �
�� � � �___ � __-'�� ;'=' B„c- ', ' N � _ _.���-' doc. nc. 5232986
�\ ���'� s �.\ ----�-�'�.\ i�ii�P�'���- StcO' ""1 r5 9368� \ �� � � ►�
� 2^ �� � �•� i o� _ �c� �av� ,�.� � � 'r �� cy
� t7'1 �� � \ // / / f'4 • .... X� .,�.�e��� � ,i K ( r n�
��\ �� � \ - �_�-,% //�( ���,,,, C�Z1 x� � +�a � � N � m�nhole �.QO �'Y
�
�\ ?�� �• � ,�r�'"'��'{� � 947 7 ..�- 19� i o .� � �'. 35'StTBACK ' 93A.8 � �/
�•���' !w I � �� � '�.ROM D�LINEATFD�� �o�L �
�� �� ��—rJ. p0°��- - ' �l � � � � �' w�lkour N�t7CAN0 : 1 /�� _
O �.,.• �, _4 � /,
�� ���f' - _ - _ q32 _ � � � � d�.� �p � 937.l nGe ' �.3 - � f►�
� � _ - 93� � � � � � ;��.�.J � ;� ReS�d�5 . �s.� �' ,_2 /�� ��b
/
�\� �\ � / � - 936� b i � � � �^ \ ��•� 9 \ 'r'd`,� U Bs � �� '
\� � ( � _ � � ., � � �g3 9Ap i� � � � d��g��'� N �x'�5 n � i �
\\ � � � ✓ " �. d� 9�j'9 �-+ 5t� � �11 -
� � \ �� t�mberf Fraver s�ps� ak2 � \ 6; 10A,�-, ��
\ � i � � ,
\ �� � ` � � i � ' � '� �.\ k� ` nc. wati5 / /��
�\\\ �` ` 1 �i // /�kA � ` ,`p 6, c N �O �.. ✓l PJo�h
�� � � \ 1 " � �;...�` q0o Q' �.l 2Yr l���
�� � � � ♦ /^ , � i.> � D � C' ; 936'r 4 • � / I
\� � � � � � � 7b�r�ht� 'L•- �ap�A / �)r1�, 935r / �
\�\�� � � � � �\��� l � 94d.f�!� 943. ��,y'� �g���' ,y ' � � � i 8`t�c �/l
Lot 6, Block 1, FA.R�IIEW,
��� � � � � � � � 1 � �'�� -/'� ,�Y �t���'�`'��,�' � ._93.� �
� � � � � � � � 5 t o�e ;--,� T �j0 {� `r�, `` �� a Henne in Coun Minnesota.
� �� � � � �� ��� �� ��9 I � ���C V� / ��' � � � �'
\ \ �
� � \ � \ � \ � � � 5"brrc ' �'a��' S ll �
� � \ \ \ ��� � �4�.� . � a�;� �'�C;' ",_,
� � � � � � � � \ r / ?�: � 9 �-._. � �Q�
. J
�`� ♦ � ��\\ \ �pP � / 1 � r?r0�5 � �° _.._. .
� � � � � ,mbe4� � e s �\ n Y t u m i >m,
� 933.5 �/
� �ciae oi Snorerrne_ �\�� � � ���� `� � '� 93 tt �; 9.Yw.7/ i � ul/
�� � � \ � � ' To '!_ / 1
�\\ \ \ \ \ �� � �� � /� � `� /�. �f 1 �,� �
� �� � � � � � � � � � �: � 1 I ( �. / � / � Wet;
q� �j �\���� \\ "'� � � ,2h � t �9 � - � � � ,��y�vj "-tc be�po�e Tiie o�ly easements show�are from plats of recbrd or information
2 "/� �� p�� ,a'� o ! �_��� 3��p�0� provided by ctient.
� � � � � � � ,6
� � � � � • •� �;� �,. � 66�
� ���z �` � ` ` �� �� � �� , b 2a����� � N 89;60'00"W 5 ' i certify that this pfan, specification, or report was prepared by me or
��� � `��� ` � � \�� �,�2�?� � � �� ,' under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Licensed land
� `" 5�orenRe�� � i��� � ` - ' '"�� � i �� Surveyor under the laws of the State of Minnesota.
``� � 929.4 �\� � � � � �°� ,�e / i
- �T' ��` �\ � �� � _ � � ?�- T_� Surveyed this 9th day of September�013.
��, � ; � ; � _ _ - ,°�� �. FtECEIVED
�� . . , a`�
_ � � � .
� � � ' ' � NOV 15 2013 �
, , , '/�
Rev 9-F 3-1 3 site lan Drown By �;.�f' �:�� \� ` � �
I 0-3-20 I 3 ad o�rnn o��vnPrs � �`.� ` �� CITY OF ORONO s�9ned__ / ��
i O 30- I 3 reduce qaraae to 9 iF�ie Name � \�� �� � -�------
� -,� --� F-5-1 m v 9 1 8 8 3 o r�P c�,, \ — � Gr o�Prasch.Mmn Reg No 24992
!� � ,� � � �� •
✓ i ..� '1dfC-�:J✓.,r. .� ..f',�,:^
' � PC Exhibit B�
City o#4rono
��:QN�, Hardcover Calculation Worksheet
I Prap�rty Address: ��.�y �--���,�.��� �,���
` $�� ;
���r.s�,.�'` Prepared by: Date: s 3/ 3
_ Gc.�.' s`-�v.�1''s c� �. ./
5tormwater Quality Overlay District Tier. (Circle one) Tier 1 Tier 2 Tie�3 Tier 4 Tie�5
Step 1: EXiSTING HARDCOVER
In the following table identify ali items af existing hardcover on the p�operky, keyed by lette�to Certificate
of Survey(suroey must accompany this f�rm). Use as many lines as necessary ta accurately depict
existing ha�ticover status of the prope�ty. For Tier 1 properties, identify any features by letter which are
split at the 75 setback line and calculate hardcover sQuare foatage separately for each portion.
Key to Nardcover Item {Describe) Length x Width Total
Surve S uare Feet
F�acam le Gar� e ' 24'X 30� T20 S.F.
A G` fG4f^ib�+� / .�'�' �r' '.�' S.F.
B �r Y ! �"� S.F.
C �"�s C'� c! �v S.F.
p S.F.
E S.F.
F � G.G.. k�i '' �'�- � S.F.
G S.F.
H f � "' � S.F.
I __ _. S.F.
J S.F.
K S.F.
L S.F.
M S.F.
N S.F.
Q S.F.
P S-F.
Q S.F.
R S.F.
S S.F.
T S.F.
U S.F.
V S.F.
W S.F.
X ^ S.F.
Y S.F.
Z S.F.
��1 Total Existin Hardcover 1��' � S•F.
g --.._ ----- —.»..
Excludable Hardcvver See Gf Cod�Sec 78-1684 :
S.F.
S.F.
S.F.
S.F.
S.F.
2 Total Excludable Hardcover S.F.
3 Net Existin Ftardcover Subtract line 2 from line 1 � "�a S.F.
4 Total Lat A�ea ,� �"�- S.F.
Existing Hardcover Percentage [(3)=(4}] f� �;y °lo
�� (Proposed Hardcover next page}
lanuaryN,20I3 RECEIVED
N0l� � 5 2Q13,
C:ITY t'l�_�nr.en_
� ,
�
City of(�rono
;---���Q; Hardcover Caiculation 1f�lorksheet
.�� �7 Properry Address: �p�� r�(,�f//L��sr' LA.�1�.
'��,���*``�� Prepared by: �ate:
�oT �''��,�c�.�-' �c.�s /'o•.�� �
Stormwater Quality Overiay District Tier: (Circle one} Tier 1 Tier 2 Tier 3 Tier 4 Tier 5
Step 2: PROP�SEO HARDCOVER
in the foilowing table, identify ali items of proposed hardcover on the property, keyed by letter to
Certificate of Survey(survey must accompany this form). Include ali existing hardcover items that are
intended to remain, as well as all proposed hardcover items that will be added. Use as many lines as
necessary to accurately depict proposed hardcover status of the prope�ty. For Tier 1 properties, identify
any features by letter which are split at the 75' setback line and calculate hardcover square footage
se aratel for each o�tion.
Key to Hardcover ttem (Describe) Length x Width TO��
Surve S uare Feet
Exam 4� Gara 29`;x 30' 720'S.F.
A �t'si�".ti't,_ F D S.F.
B l�/ ii y S.F.
C L �� „_...._. ,� S.F.
p � ` S.F.
E 32.-- � S.F.
F S.F.
G � � � T - �e z ,� S.F.
H S.F.
I 1r .� ' �'�i.�' � ZG S.F.
J S.F.
K S.F.
L S.F.
M S.F,
N S.F.
O S.F.
P S.F.
Q S.F.
R S.F.
S S.F.
T S.F.
U S.F.
V S.F.
W S.F.
X S.F.
Y S.F.
Z S.F.
1 Total Rro osed Hardcover � ' �'� S.F.
Exctudabte Hardcover See Cit Crwd�,Sec 78-1684 :
S.F.
S.F.
S.F.
S.F.
S.F.
2 Total Exciudable Hardcover S.F.
3 Net Pro osed Hardcover Subt�act line 2 fram line 1 / S.F.
4 Total Lat Area � S.F.
Proposed Hardcover Percentage [(3}�(4)] l��;°!o
JanuaryB,2013 RECEIOf�:+-�
NOV 15 201�
_�.__ __ __ ___..__
_____ �_ _. _ .� _
_ _
�::.�
� Y
3
City ofi Orono
,,���wo., Hardcover Calculation Warksheet
(`:t� ,� PropertyAddress: 3� ��q����� ���
> > e
,��K�„�0.'�`�"
Prepared by: Date: �o, _�, �:�
_ �.vT �U'�l��-`�S ��
Stormwater Quality Overlay District Tier: (Circle one) Tier 1 Tier 2 Tier 3 Tie��4 Tier 5
Step 2: PROPOSED HARDCOVER /�'/T��i%t✓ �7�f S��'��' � '���
In the following table, identify all items of proposed hardcover on the property, keyed by letter to
Certificate of Survey (survey must accompany this form). Include all existing hardcover items that are
intended to remain, as well as all proposed hardcover items that will be added. Use as many lines as
necessary to accurately depict proposed hardcover status of the property. For Tier 1 properties, identify
any features by letter which are split at the 75' setback line and calculate hardcover square footage
se aratel for each ortion.
Key to Total
Surve Hardcover Item (Describe) Length x Width Square Feet)
' Exam le Gara e 24'x 3Q' 720 S.F. '''
A � � -�� _ �srv�v`�� s.F.
B ` S.F.
C v o S.F.
p S.F.
E �j' S.F.
F S.F.
G � � - � S.F.
H i S.F.
� � S.F.
� S.F.
K �y� S.F.
� S.F.
M S.F.
N S.F.
� S.F.
P S.F.
Q S.F.
R S.F.
S S.F.
T S.F.
� S.F.
U S.F.
W S.F.
X S.F.
�, S.F.
Z S.F.
1 Total Pro osed Hardcover I ,� S.F.
Excludable Hardcover See Cit Code Sec 78-9684 : ' ' "
S.F.
S.F.
S.F.
S.F.
S.F.
2 Total Excludable Hardcover /so'/i� S,F,
3 Net Pro osed Hardcover Subtract line 2 from line 1 S.F.
4 Total Lot Area �2u'4 v6 � �''�2.�2_ � S.F.
Proposed Hardcover Percentage [(3)=(4)] ..�'`9a' %
January8,2013 RECEIVE�
NOu 15 201�
�
Established in 196?
LOT su��EYs coMP�
LAND SURVE�'OR
_ REG(STERED L�tiDER THE LAWS OF STATb,
76t)I 13rd.A��enue North �
'vf;nneapolis, �tinne,ou 55�,g Fax.
�u��r ��.a�r� C�Pr
SITE PLAPJ SURVFY �OR
SCHRADER AND COMPANIES
\
Properry located in Section 4,Township 117,Raage 23, - � �
Hennepin County,Ntinnesota. � ;�
�� ; Res�dence
Property Address:3059 Farview Lane,Orono,M?� � No.3067
%--J 1
i L ,
i -___,,
'�
���;c� ..
i,x, ,
/ ��e i
� '
Basis for
bearings is � ���0�
� assumed �� !�X'
� ;�'��
�
--- �
_ /`
Proposed hardcover withm 75'setback i�/
Proposed Kardcover �,strng Res+denc� = 54 sq.ft �
Residenc� � 420/ sq.ft ft � '
Proposed Add�t+on = 308 sq.ft Proposcd Addition = 23 5�{. i �'
priveway = 5954 sq.ft Dr�veway = l99 sq.ft ___ _\ `
Pool, cfeck � wafks = 799 s�{.ft \
Pool, deck � walks � 3549 sq.� Stone Wali = 25 sq.�
5hcd = 49 sq.ft Shed = 49 sq.ft
Stone Wall = 25 sq.ft rotal hardcover = ! !59 sq•�t \���
rota!Nardcover = I�086 sq.�t Area of Port�on = 19385+ sq.ft \��
�_---_
Area of Parcel = I I 6852 sq.f� '---.
Percentage of Yiardcover = I 1.85°rb Percentage of(-lardcover = 5.98°l0
, ,
r�, �^
�O�O
.'� �
��
,0�^
I r `�'nj
PC Exhibit C
ELEv.
EL�V �QLIIP.
EXISTINCs CsARAC�E SPAC� �XISTING CsARACx� PAG�
ST�R
�
N�W CxAR.��CxE SPAG�
_�
s.
NEW 18' C=ARACxE DOOR NEW 9' C=ARAC�� DOOR
�
(, 39'_2" �
�
PROPOSED GARAGE LEVEL PLAN
�ANG RESIDENCE -� , -,
�� K
3059 FARVIEW LANE, ORONO, MN. 55356 -� ��I��'�R
SCALE: 1/4"=1'-0" VARIANCE SUBMITTAL: 10,�30/13
' ' PC Exhibit D
TO: PLANNING COMMISSION CHAIR, AND MEMBERS, JESSICA LOFTUS, AND
MELANIE CURTISS
FROM: LIXIAO WANG
SUBJECT: 13-3636 LIXIAO WANG 3059 FARVIEW LANE VARIANCES
DATE: NOVEMBER 3, 2013
The followings are the justification for garage addition (13-3636)
1. Our three cars (a SUV, a Truck and a Midsized Sedan) can not fit into current 2 garages.
2. The 12' one—level garage addition was proposed in last meeting. Reduction size/redesign
is requested by the planning commission. 3' is now reduced.
3. The 9' is now the new design. After 9' addition the two garages can fit the SUV and
Truck and the third car garage is 19.2' in length can just fit my mid-sized Sedan. The
width of the garages can not be changed due to integrity of the house building. We can
not reduce size anymore since the third car garage is no longer feasible. We prefer 10'
addition if it can be approved by the city.
4. The one story garage is designed to consider not blocking my eastern neighbor's view.
5. The two garage addition (not current three garage addition) is considered and it is not
feasible since it destroys the integrity of the house building.
6. The extension of garage to inside of house floor is considered and it is not feasible since
the elevator near the garage blocks the inward extension.
7. The possibility of the garage addition was explored before purchase of the property. The
answer from the city is that the garage addition is quite possible. This was one of the
factors to justify purchase of the house.
Thanks for all of you for considerations!
� � PC Exhibit E
Date Application Received: 09/18/13
Date Application Considered as Complete:10/04/13 1e,,:.
60-Day Review Period Expires: 12/03/13
To: Chair Leskinen and Planning Commission Members
Jessica Loftus, City Administrator
From: Melanie Curtis, Planning &Zoning Coordinator ��
Date: 15 October 2013
Subject: 13-3636, Lixiao Wang, 3059 Farview Ln,
Variances: Hardcover and Side Yard, Lake, &Average Setback
Public Hearing
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Zoning District: LR-1A, One Family Lakeshore Residential, 2-acres/200'
Lot Area: 118,852 square feet(2.7 acres)
Lot Width: 232 feet at OHWL&approximately 280 feet at the 75' setback
Application Summary: The applicant is requesting variances in order to construct a 12' x 34'
one-level garage addition to the home.
Staff Recommendation: Planning Department Staff recommends denial.
List of Exhibits
Exhibit A. Application
Exhibit B. Existing & Proposed Survey
Exhibit C. Proposed Plans and Elevations
Exhibit D. Submitted Hardcover Calculations
Exhibit E. City Engineer Memo
Exhibit F. Aerial Photos
Exhibit G. Staff Setback Exhibit
Exhibit H. 1991 Survey
Exhibit I. Past Resolutions
Exhibit J. Property Owners List
Exhibit K. Plat Map
Exhibit L. Neighbor Comments Received
Pertinent Zoning Ordinance Sections
Sec. 78-305.Area, height, lot width and yard requirements.
(aJ Height. No structure or building in the LR-1A district shall exceed 21/2 stories
and shall not exceed 30 feet in height except as provided in section 78-1366.
(bJ Lots. The following minimum requirements shall be observed:
Lot Area Lot Width Front Yard Side Yard Side Yard Adjacent Rear Yard(feetJ
(acre) (feet) (feet) (feet) to street(feet)
2 200 50 30 50 50
FILE#13-3636
15 Oct 2013
Page 2 of 4
Sec. 78-1279. -Placement of structures on lots.
When more than one setback applies to a site, structures and facilities must be located to meet
all setbacks. Structures shall be located as follows:
(6J Average/akeshore setback. No principal or accessory structure shal/be located closer to
the lakeshore than the average distance from the shoreline of existing residence buildings on
adjacent lots; except that this does not apply to stairways, lifts, landings and lockboxes. Further,
the average lakeshore setback shall apply only to classified lakes and shall not apply to
tributaries. The average lakeshore setback line shall be a straight line connecting the most
lakeward protrusions of the residence buildings on the immediately adjacent lakeshore lots.
a. In instances where the average lakeshore setback can not be met, administrative
approva/may be granted at the discretion of the planning director provided no lake
views of an adjacent lakeshore lot are obstructed and adjacent neighbors provide
written approval.
Background
The applicant recently purchased the subject property and wishes to make some structural
additions to better accommodate vehicle parking and storage. The applicant has stated that the
existing garage is undersized and will not accommodate larger vehicles. The home is situated at
the 75-foot lakeshore setback. A small portion of the southwest (lake) side of the home
currently encroaches into the 75-foot setback; the retaining walls at the entry and the northeast
corner of the home currently encroach into the required 30-foot side setback. The applicant's
home is situated entirely ahead of the average lakeshore setback line.
The proposed 12' x 34' one story addition will serve as an extension of the existing garage space
for vehicle parking and storage and is also shown to have a rooftop patio area above. The total
height of the home from grade to the top of the flat roof is 32.5 feet. The addition is proposed
to be 13.5 feet tall, including the railing. The addition is proposed to be constructed over
existing driveway hardcover resulting in only 36 square feet of additional hardcover or 11.8%
total for the site where 25% is allowed. A portion of the addition hardcover is within 75 feet of
the OHWL.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
LOT ANALYSIS WORSHEET
Lot Area/Width:
LR-1A Lot Area Lot Width
Required 87,120 s.f. (2 acres) 200'
Actual 118,852 s.f. (2.7 acre) 232' @ OHWL& 280' @ 75' SB
Structural Coverage:
The property exceeds 1.99 acres therefore, according to City Code Section 78-1685 structural
coverage or massing standards do not apply.
FILE#13-3636
15 Oct 2013
Page 3 of 4
Hardcover Calculations:
Stormwater Total Area in Allowed
Overlay District Zone Hardcover Existing Hardcover Proposed Hardcover
Tier
Tier 1 118 852 s.f. 29��13 s.f. 14,025 s.f. ?w/in 14,061 s.f. ? w/in
' (25 %) (11.8%) 75'* (11.8%) 75'*
*The hardcover calcutation sheets have not differentiated between hardcover in or out of the
75' setback as required and must be revised before the application moves forward.
Setbacks:
LR-1A Required Existing Proposed
Rear SO' +200' No Change
East Side 30' 28•6' existing 19.7' garage
house addition
West Side 30' 150' pool deck No change
178' house
Lakeshore 75� 71' house 72.1' garage
61' pool deck addition
Wetland 35' 12' No change
Average Lakeshore The entire home is located ahead of the average lakeshore
setback line.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hardcover Variance
The applicant's property is 2.7 acres and including the proposal will remain at 11.8%. A small
portion of the proposed hardcover includes changing the nature of non-structural driveway
hardcover to structural hardcover within the 75 foot zone.
Side Yard Setback Variance
The proposed garage addition will encroach 10.3 feet into the required 30 foot side yard
setback. The garage portion of the home currently meets the 30 foot setback. The existing
retaining wall and access stair are set back only 13 feet from the side lot line; a corner of the
home also encroaches 1.4 feet into the side setback area.
Lake Setback Variance
The proposed garage addition is to be constructed by extending the lake-side wall of the home
to the east. Due to the angle of the home and the lakeshore, the addition will be 72.1 feet from
the lake where a 75 foot setback is required. Approximately 42 square feet of additional
structure within the 75 foot setback is proposed.
Average Lakeshore Setback Variance
Due to the large wetland on the property, the applicant's home is located right at the lake
setback and entirely ahead of the average lakeshore setback line. Any expansion or structural
additions to the home require approval of an average lakeshore setback variance.
Practical Difficulties Statement
Applicant should be asked for testimony regarding the Practical Difficulties.
FILE#13-3636
15 Oct 2013
Page 4 of 4
Practical Difficulties Analysis
In considerinq applications for variance, the Planning Commission shall consider the effect of
the proposed variance upon the health, safety and welfare of the community, existing and
anticipated traffic conditions, liqht and air, danqer of fire, risk to the public safety, and the
effect on values of property in the surrounding area. The Planning Commission shall consider
recommending approval for variances from the literal provisions of the Zoning Code in
insrances where their strict enforcemeni would cause practical di�culties because of
circumstances unique to the individua/ property under consideration, and shall recommend
approval only when it is demonstrated that such actions will be in keeping with the spirit and
intent of the Orono Zoning Code.
The original house was built in 1979. There have been additions or modifications over the years,
but it seems apparent that the additions and modifications were done in an attempt to be
respectful of the lake and side setbacks. The existing garage has a total space of 32 feet in width
by 18 feet of depth. A large sedan may be 17 feet long; a standard, full-sized SUV is about 18
feet in length; and some heavy-duty pick-ups can be up to 22 feet in length. The 18 feet of
depth in the current garage may pose a challenge for storing lengthier vehicles, however
creating a more nonconforming structure is not in character with the neighborhood. There is a
small portion of the proposed addition that does not encroach into the side or lake setback, but
would still result in a new encroachment into the average lakeshore setback. The proposed
addition adds mass within the eastern side setback area and also within the average lakeshore
setback which may impact the views of the lake currently enjoyed by the adjacent property
owner. The applicant has not demonstrated a reasonable practical difficulty supporting
additional structure within the 75-foot setback area. The applicant has failed to demonstrate
that enforcing the provisions of the Zoning Ordinance deprive them of the reasonable use of the
property.
As a lakeshore lot of 2.7 acres, the property is permitted up to a 1,200 square foot detached
garage on the street side of the property. This detached garage may be located 50 feet from the
rear/street lot line. While not logistically ideal it may be a solution for storage of vehicles or
other materials and equipment...
Issues for Consideration
1. Does the Planning Commission find that that the property owner proposes to use the
property in a reasonable manner which is not permitted by an official control?
2. Does the Planning Commission find that the variances, if granted, wil� not alter the
essential character of the neighborhood?
3. Does the Commission find it necessary to impose conditions in order to mitigate the
impacts created by the granting of the requested variances?
4. Are there any other issues or concerns with this application?
Staff Recommendation
Planning Staff recommends denial of the variances.
PC Exhibit A
City of Orono
Variance Application
Street Addr�ss: Application# �3- 3
�Q� 2750 Kelley Parkway Date Received: G1 —1 —(3
O Orono, MN 55356
Staff:
Main: 952-249-4600 Fee: $700 �
� � fax: 952-249-4616 Renewal: $350
y � MailingAddress: After-the-fact: $1,400 Double Fee
``�� �L P.O. Box 66 Escrow Fee: $70 2
�KESNO� Crystal Bay, MN 55323-0066
This application form must be completed in full. Applicant will be notified within 15 days as to the status of the
application. fncomplete applications will not be placed on Planning Commission Agendas.
PROPERTY lNFORMATION:
SiteAddress: �G� �w�V�Cv.� E-►'1� V(t-G7�1v l �j 3S(�
Property Identification Number(PIN): �.� `� " ��;c� ..
Date Property Acquired (month/year): ❑ Yes, I own the adjacent parcels.
Zoning District: („����
APPLICANT INFORMATION: (Complete legal names and marital status required for each interested party)
Name: �.�K���� �1a,�s-�.c�► -
Phone (home): ��;3 - 3s'��-��.c:�i Phone (work):
Complete Address: ��,�� �i�k�;;�...' �b,s ��►��.;,.,.,.,,� I1-��
City, State 8�ZIP
Email: �`4�i�� tvc..��4, H 34 ° r��Sni, c�.�»
Cq��r : �d►��S�,�e,� C� a�a y e�,��.-�,�,�.c n i PS. c�n,
OWNER INFORMATION: (Comptete legal names and marital status required for each interested party)
Name:
Phone (home): Phone (work):
Complete Address:
City, State 8�ZI P
Email:
DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST:
Describe the request in detail (attach additional sheets if necessary): � � -��; � ,- ,,��
� � � �l?� V � `� .< � "h��-.ti
111 Gdr+�-,�t�ii���l�-c`�
R�CE�'���j
Packet Last Updated.� 09/1013
Page12of28 �� �. :� ��� 1 � ?���
�
s'�Nw �s ��'�,
�,�'; "' ,i ;' ����'0F ��OI'�I'J
� •
REQUIRED SUBMITTALS:
All of the folfowing information must be submitted by the application deadline date in order for your
application to be processed.
Not
Enclosed A licable
� ❑ Escrow A reement si ned
fl, ❑ Escrow{received
� ❑ Pre-A lication Form
�, ❑ A lication Form
i� ❑ Practical Difficulties Documentation
l�U ❑ Cert�ed Pro e Owners List �vwr,�• :
0 ❑ Surve meetin ALL re uirements v
� ❑ Pro osed Plans
�° ❑ Hardcover Calculation s
❑ 0' Se fic S stem Site Evaluation Re ort `
0 ❑ Wetland Defineation
0 0' Wetfand Buffer Evaivation
❑ � Buffer Im rovement Plan
0 ❑ _
APPLICANT AND/OR OWNER:
• Agree to provide all information required or requested by the Planning Department,
• Agree to pay additional fees (staff time not covered in the original fee payment) and/or consultant expenses
incurred in review of this application, and
• Certify that the information supplied is true and correct to the best of his/her knowledge. The applicant and
owner recognize that they are solely responsible for submitting a complete application being aware
that upon failure to do so, the staff has no alternative but to reject it until it is complete or to
recommend the request for denial of the request regardless of its potential merit
• Acknowledge the Escrow Agreement is completed and signed.
• The Owner hereby acknowledges and agrees to this application and further authorizes reasonable entry onto
the property by City Staff, consultants, agents, Commission and Council Members for purposes of
investigation and verification of this request.
• Applicant and/or Owner acknowledge they must be present at all scheduled review meetings of the
Planning Commission and Council. If an applicant and/or owner is unable to attend a scheduled meeting,
please make arrangements to have an authorized representative attend in ptace of the�applicant/owner and
advise the City Planner assigned to your project.
ApplicanYs Signature: /��,'� r��^ _ �ate: 9� � � / �' � �
�_�
Applicant's Signature: Date:
,
Owner's Signature: ` � ^ t.../j y- Date: -�nt l� � f��' ��
_ �' ��
� " ' ��..�� ;:%l (,
Owner's Signature: �'�����'-�����(_ 1 f��°,� � Date: � , � �?C �
.L- � ,�?� ��
/
�[-°��l�.¢w�
Packet Last Updated: 092013
S�/3age,a3 of-�8�1
h� j ,s �a:
CITY C9F OP�ONO
� , r'1' t` .1 \ -
> � •` /� ' '' � �
� PC Exhibit B
� � / brtum�nous
EDGE OP DELINEATED ND 1� 9`�6'� �/ . � driveway
per K�olhaug Env�rom ntal � - �
Se�vices located 9-9-2 /3� �
\ �� ,' �o°�° - _
� � ,' ` .��.��°'
� � � � ti
� � � ,
� �� � � . �i �
�
� �. �
�\ , , �' �,
DRA / NAGE EASEMENr � � 1 i � N�
.\\ ��\ 1 � ��/ � s��o�\ `
! �l '
�---� j /�� � �\
� Neighbors shed and electrica!services �i ��� . �,, ' ' � ,���'O�
/i �� Easement shown perprevious survey. ���� \�� \� / ��;�'�/ h���j � `
0
� � No documentation Prov�ded. _�
� � ��� �•� %�2 �?� /���,�
/ 93/. '� �� �Edge of wetland per plat _ _ � -�_�
�`I /� -%� � i / �� � ��� ��
X p/astre sh� � � � L� � �� - �i , � . /
�/ � \ '\� / �,�..-•�'�'�� _ � i � � Q J�
� �� � \ �� � i�i � � FdgeofPond ' ��!'��'� � � � �� � \���
., -� , - � _ _ - - .
h , �/,� ,
� \ \� EDGF OP DELINEArFD WtTLAND �
post e%c \ �� ���� _ - � �
�� \� per K�o/haug Enwromental r �� � �r '" - - - � � � � _93k jy � � � ��
� Servrces/ocated 9-9-20/3 ' �� � � - ' �
\� \ pond e/ev. �/%��'� - i�" � �� �
�\ � � � � �p0�..�- 'svmjTsigna! �.
�� '� \ 929�•`l'�� � � ' � _ i � � ��a O � sump coue� -� 0 ��
\ \ /. �
\�� Q \� \��- ---`��`-�� � _ �, , � �` - ' � ' �o � 22•�. �o���`���p„W .,:' //�� Drrueway Easement per
� �� '� � _- -- � ,� - ent� � � ^' 1 _.`,Z•�-•
� �7 S �\ ----- ! ��l i�poci-���_ steps � 'v+ �,.�._
doc. no. _5,�32986
`' � 936.8
�� �9 �� '� `,a /� pn�4��. �k � a�ers � � � . � � �
�\ /_ �.l �\ �i .�� / -��� '� X p � \ i' p' �,.�.
\ ! ` '� ��� /� / �� �� Q9.0 �.�' N 1 /� �/ /� �
\\� ����� \ ` � .�������/ ..'947.7 � `19.7� � �•��'�35'StTBACK �I 934.6e.,,.; �ao �� / "
�\ •SA `. �K. ��� W � •. ' �.� FROMDELlNEATFD �° �
-�` �J B� _ _ � �� � � "O WtTLAND I / �
� !� � - _ � � ., p�.�•r- � wa/kout ry�
�,r��\ 932 � � � � ��� � /� '� '. � 937.1 PrGe A_7.3 '�6.4 ' / � �/�
�� � , - - 93 � � � �/ � . � �e5�d-� ia i Cb
�� \ i 6' : � �c�9 �3J . �i � r� �
�� � � � 93 g8 • ��•/ � No.3 � a ,� �8 `� � � �7/�
���� �� c - _ - ' � � � '9�g�`� �,�/� � do�r s�l� N m�X���'S �. 6 /� Cti� � 1' /
d 9 tet� �� I� i.�
��� \ � , t�mber��aver s�ps �9Q2 � ... ' � 9A I. :a 5 �ll� �
�� ♦ � � � 10•� '
�� � �� � 1 � � i � i �` ��� IIs '� � ��
� � � � / � '� , �onc. wa /�00
♦\\\ � �\ 1\ + ` _ / '9pp 'lo .6, � /N��
\\ � � \ � \ � /^ � O. 1 S\�� � � l 2o'tr ���
�� � � � � ♦ / 7 bir l � q,• 0��' 936f 4 935 ��
�� ` � � � �a
\ / / �
\��� � � ♦ ��t\ \ � � �94�. 943. � 21 °jg36 9 ti ,`'� l t' e . �/
� `:�.:��:. i s t � --� ''� y����`'�o�o� °43s 4 ��� ��.� � � Lot 6. Block l, FARVIEW,
�� � . . . � � �
-� ,� � � . � � �� � � 5�b,��� � , �° �,�'�1•• � . � � � Hennepin County, Minnesota.
f� ��� ♦ � � � � �� 4�3 � Pa�'L �NeN /; I 00
� � � � � � � `�'. � O_
�� � � � �\� � ��� Gmbe/�pa e I '� b y t.0 m 'U 5 /i. '•_ ��
�
cdge of Shorehne�\\�� � � ��\�`� ( � 93 ,4 , 936 7/ �'� 933.5. o/
�� � � � � �\ - \ � ! /h � : I �u
�� � � � � � � 2 � � � � "` � .l � / I
o � �� � � � � �, w / �
9- ///� \ � � \ \ � �tr�o C�O 1 I <� l /' �� /i� Well
�� `�/ \\ \ \ \r� ` a � � �� i�0�0°� to be capped The only f,asements shown are from plats of record or information
2 `�� � � �
� 0 �� � �\�\ �`9 �2 c
-Q4---L--�_� 3ob0'� provided by client.
9�� �� � � `� � � �P. ` � i O„�6�� o�. 5 66•
w ,` ��� \� � � � � 4� $�J N 69� O'00"W
``� Q �\\ � � , �\ -,-��Q� 2 � ! � �� I certify that this plan, specification, or report was prepared by me or
�`� � \ � �J'42. � i � � under my direct supervision and that I am a dul Licensed land
� shorelrne�\ � � � � - � '��' � / � y
F � 929.4 �� \� �\ � \ _ �.°� �� i �' Surveyor�nder the laws of the.State of Minnesota.
� � �� �� i
��\\\\ \\ \ _ _ � a,� 2 , Surveyed this 9th day of September 2013.
� � . � r�3
\ �\ �� � 'i
� RECEl1PED
Rev 9-13-13 site plan Drawn By �j�� � �� �� �� ��
10-3-20] 3 adjoinin owners � �
� �
� � � � ; � Signed
File Name � O(�'f' r � L U i J
� 4 l:
�
F-6-tinv818B3prop.awq � - � Greqo R Pra h.Minn.Reg.No.24992
^sr•�f r,- ..,..,_
i
,�nvva
Established in 962
INVOICE NO. 81735/81883
LOT SURVEYS C MPANY, INC. F.B.NO. 1070-30
LAND SURV�YORS sca�E:r�__ o�
REGISTERED UNDER TIIE LAWS P STA'PE OP MINNESOTA • `�►
7W 1 73rd Avenue Nonh (�fi3)560-3093 • Oeno�es Found Iron Manumem ���
Minneapoli�,Minnesola SSd28 Fax No.<6U-3522 O �enoles Iron Monumanl '��
Su r v e y o r s e r t i f i c a t e __ --------oa�a,as E,,,,;�a�o�,��, �.� �
,��.0 Oenotes Exisling Elevalion
S�P�/�$�VEY�R: 61.6 ppp,� �enoles P�oposeA Elevetion
SCHRADER AND COMPANIES sse.e �oe�mess�,�a�eo�e�,�aa
\ .
Prupeny Iocated in Scaion 4.Township 117,Range 2?, � o � /�
Flennepin County,Minnesota. \�� �0 ��L
� /
Property Address:3059 Fnrview Lane.Orono,�iN �� � � Res�de CC �� ��
_J � No.3o 7 �
L �� \ q�s�\, ��
.
40,�� _ �^�b. G/i�\ `S�� 6���..; �
Qc 4
6'' p°� �"a\\ �6e
�P �,�G 5�OO ���F\ '��A'�
p �C�rch HaSrn
959.
/h^X ``
9
/ �\ �\
` 956.9
\�\ /
� /O I
W O O D E D A R E A / ` � `
6asis for i�
i �
benringsis Mocte�anteny� /� r7 ��
assumed c m r !(oe 6 �� / �� �
\ � � � b
�`� � �3
Proposcd Yfa�dcovcr � ), \ �
Rcsidcncc=4201�q.ft �s6.B� � ,�h `: � � � ��°�\
Propoeec7 Addihan=41 O sq.k .i � \ \ `
Onvcway-5852 sq.k �3S�'P i � \ �\ `
Pool,dcck<walks=3549 sq.k �---� � / � /� � ��h \ �
�\ \ \
SheC=49 sq.h `` '----- - �� i'�.it. � 3\� �
Total Fla�dcouc�_ l q06/sq.k �����\ �_-. �
Area olParcel= I 18B52 sq.k � � � � �� `� �� �
� � _����-� � �
Percentage of lYardcover= l 1.8� � \ �
�.` �� P� \ \ G
\ �\ � -'��� � � a�,c h�
, �\ � k, , �
yo
:_- '� \'� �` Dr>mage fisemen[ �-.. � q�� \� 1���
'\� i_��.�,�,,����Stp' \
1^ �. i �3�M�
� i :
� �O�O 1� \ /.. �. �(1 wG O
�l/� � � %:�� ��.��5� ° �f
,.^ I \` \�' / ./^P�\ �d:, �cc\
I
�� � � N � /y� " �w�
� � ' � �.\ \rn y3a �..�on ��$ N o
4 c.
� � ' I eegeorw�n��epo�,:e� �1 1 `; i:.�-.�� �rL � P�d'�
. �1 � i.a �:� �
. �
_ 1 �.` \ ��'.a��.��i
- � / , �i
\ � �
� / bifvmnov�
ED6EOfDfIMEArfD ND 1, \ \s36� � dnveway
per K�aliraug F�pl �/ _� ` 3
Sen.�ces loc�tee 9-9-2L�\3� /� ��.,/ �`_`
/ �O�
\'` �� i.� �����P�ury�
�\ 1 �\ /.... 'L
\ �� � i:..;.:�.�:: �� h
�� �. i /
�� 1 I ��
ORAINAGE E�SfMfNT � ! � � ..�� N�SYXj�
\I I �•\
�\ I �/ W
%J 11 �
� � ' ,T . , �y°d� �`
� Neignbon ehce ane Ncctnvl�crrc<e _ �` ` i
i �� Easement3hownperpcvrouesurvey. �'�/ \ T� � i ��:�/ y��� �
�� \ � Nn documentaGon pro�aed. ��� i �ti��� � �
�
931. �� � �/[dgeol wetl ndverplat • ��/ i� � 9 /. � //\h���
�\X� Fla�trc�h�d \ \\\/ �� i �� ��.-.�- _' � // .:_'�� 7�\ '
��/ � �♦ ♦ � fdgeo{Pod � � __-' h�' �
p�o�t elec\ \ fOGC OF OPLINEATPD WfRAND �'��. �_� f— j. �/
�� �� pVcr,nlhaug�E�n�omenbl � � / � _g3a' �\
� �' � Se �c laat d 9-9-20/3 92��'i=f_ � �� —�Q �p�_�� 9�� � � /� �\
♦
\ �'♦ �'�_� �-' _' ''' 21. 1`'o �sump ver �/� .
\\\\�� �4�a \'\ ��� _-___ '' �N� j �� ' N 2 10 _.��C70OOW�_i� � 0 Onvewayf»ement�er'
����� doc.no.5232986
�t p /
\�� ��?9,�'�- \�� ----- „=//��oo m � -� �ver3 s3s.e�' �, 1 ^
� /_2 �' �1��i� �''1� F �.�� ' . �� 1� rV
��\ '/�2'C'c '+'.=� i�,11 .�x,c 29.0 � N �1 �,� � O
�r- � i i / s4�> >s. ���3sst�ancR �nw� � /.c�ti.
\� e�$`�_ �.� �L�✓ / � / -e �.�' �ROMOELINfAI£D 1 �934 B /<���
�� p � $�--��/ / p ��- wal out o �nND . I � /�\
O �g
�.,r��\ '932 � 4 � ,//� ��.�p! ''.� 93 r ence p�7.3 16.4 /(� �%�
� ___93 . � `� ' Res�d ia . �i
5 � � ^
\\��\\ \�� `_ _I,,, 936 9g69��� �y Np.3�dacr e�il � 'm bxr�i,t1 <gC `'es.'. p°��
��� �;��n'",JNerSrf�" d q2��� � �� ypl.9 � �etep° y. ���
\`\\\\ // '9 c. . 10.0 '
, � walb / �
1 �P �
\� \ � \ � �/ b/ \ � �� � h
��� ` � � � l � 9A �� �� Nh
�`\�`\\ � ♦ � / ���'O, tf��f 12Yrc I�^
�\ ` \;\ ` � 7b / �9� P 9��4 935 ��y
���� � � � 94�. 943. � ' � �q9F ��a �/
� �`:�...:\�\ s�o�� M1 '3"� s3 4 �� I.ot 6,Block l,FARVIL'W,
�� ``.`, � r �'J�`�� �> _ � ? Hennepin Ceunty,Menneseta.
Y � . ��� \ �j.� 5'b��. � �� . � �1�
�� ���������\\ p/ � 4� 1 - /�[4\c // �O� �I� .
� �-�[�tOrt
���.� �� � m° ame�t , �,. 5 i e� �.- -- �'�
Ee�oi sno��i,����l���� `�\`\� i �,� ,��', ^. 3r.�� J �. i 533. �
9 � � ��/
� ��\�\� �� � / !�� / , . I
\����\ � 2` �n I 1 . / ���� � ��� I
a / v.�� � � �� N � � �, � ... r � \
� ����♦ � u�o O � .:�; . ,�.�1�Wen
�?S �j Z;�������"O�`fl� 1 12� o � 'i� �3�O�Q�'`N °o r��pp�e The only easements shown are trom plats ol rewrd or information
�z �� ���� ���: � 1 � ,��-�--1�-y 66;60' Provided by client.
`� �`���� . (, 8'$0� N 89'60'00"w
Q �\\� � , \ �42�� 2 � i � I certify�hat this plan,specilication,or repor�was prepared by me or
iI i under my direct supervision and thal I am a duly Licensed land
N,9 �� 929`4"�\�� � \ -' I y"p 6, i� Surveyor under the laws ol the State ol Minnesota.
� `
y r �� -r %� �- i� Surveyed lhis 9ih day ol Seplember 2013.
�� � —— °� ti�
. � ,� q�
. �. '
� � � ' ��
� � ' . /�
Rev 9-13-13 sde plan Drawn By ,p�� �\ \ � � ///��� / �
10-3-2013 ad�oirw� owners \ � i — �/�—_-
Fite Name � � Signed
F-6-11nvBIBB3propOwg � - Gregv Pra h,Minn.Reg.No.24992
�������IM�O
�JCT G4 'cJEJ
�rr�Q� ����vo
� PC Exhibit C
e
�
�
�
0
� �XISTINC� CsARACs� SPAC� cXISTING-� CsARACs� SPAC�
�
0
N=LU C�ARAC�� SP�`,CE `"
NEW IS' CsARA�s� DOOr"� NEW 9' CsARAC�E DOOR
R��'�/�6�� 3�'-2��
°C� �n� � � PROPO SED GA,RAGE LE�UEL PLAN
�� 2u 1J
�Y aF o�oN -�
� WANG RESIDEN�,E a
3059 FARVIEW LANE � ` ' �
, ORONO, ]vIN. 55356 �������.
----- -------- �
SCALE: 1/4"=1'-0" vautaurF crru�,rrrTer . ,n�,��,� �
�xisriN� Naus�
�cc=ss No acc�ss
N�W ROOr pcC;K
0
N
3q'-2��
PROPOSED MAIN LEVEL PLAN
WANG RESIDENCE
3059 FARVIEW LANE, ORONO, MN. 55356
SCALE: 1/4"=1'-0" VARIANCE SUBMITTAL; 10/4/13 ��
���1����
�
� �
�
_ Z
c' �
. . �` X
w
� � �
� , o w
. � • - z
. . . ,
� . �
.
PROPO SED ELEV.ATION
WANG RESIDENCE
3059 FARVIEW LANE, ORONO, MN. 55356
���� ,
SCALE: 1/4"=1'-0° VARIANCE SUBMITTAL: 10/4/13 �����
� i
EXISTING ELEV��TION
WANG RESIDENCE
3059 FARVIEW LANE, ORONO, MN. 55356 � ,
SCALE: 1/4"=1'-0" �r � � ��-� �
ARIANCE SUBMITTAL: 10/4/13 �-�����
I
' � PC Exhibit D
City of Orono
���ti��,, Hardcover Calculation Worksheet
� �� Property Address: -� rc- , i ,
,
i
�� � I _�G�h ? f�',��_��� ��r�.F - -
������%� Prepared 'by� < < Cate �;_ 1 � -�
�C-,, ,_.,E�,-v� c.yr c��_ �- �
Stormwater Quality Overlay District Tier: (Circle one) Tier 1 Tier 2 Zier 3 Tier 4 Tier 5
Step 1: EXISTING HARDCOVER
In the following �ablp identify ali items af existing hardcover on the property keyed by letter to Certificate
of Survey (survey must accompany this formj Use as many ifnes as necessary to accurately depict
existing hardcover status of the property. For Tier� properties. identify any features by letter which are
split at the 75' setba�k line and cafcufate hardcover square footage separately for each oortbn
Key to Hardcover Item (Describe) Length x Width ' Total
, Survey ' (Square Feet)
r (Exam le) I (Gara e) (24'x 30' � l720 S.F.I
i A I �t ✓A2- = �f�J S.F
� B %7�ClJ ,c � � 5.F-
C ��,�r ,�Q r' ,�2�.� S F.
D r p �� �- d� ,,Ac�c:. " t�A/'r�' ✓ �' � `" S.F.
E S.F.
F ' S.F.
G ; SF
H --- — -r- - ---S F
—. -;--
I i S.F.
I J ! S F.
K ! � S.F.
L I ' S.F.
M i S.F.
N I � S.F
p S.F.
P i ------ �— I S_F.
Q � ' SF
I R I S.F.
S S.F
T S.F.
I U I S.F.
V I ' S.F.
� W � S.F.
��- X i. I - --i S.F
----�--_—- - S.F
� � � �i S.F.
�(1j Total Existinq Hardcover_____-_--___----------_-__---- ---- / '2� S F
Excludable Hardcover(See Cit Code Sec 78-1684 :
1 ; S.F.
— I— ----
— -- � S F.
�-- -- S.F.
, S.F
i ; � SF I
i (2} i otal Excludable Hardcover i S.F �I
i (31 Nei Existing Fiardcover (Subtract Ime (2)from line (1}] � i5«'�=? S F (;
� r4t Total Lot Area !' //�'� L�-�I
-- i
Existing Hardcover Percentage [(3) ={4)] � !'/, �'�' % �%
� ;
(Proposed �iardcover ne� pagej
lanuary 5,Z�JI_>
i
t.�-,—__ ____—_ __ —_ __ _.._ ---- ---_ _-
, �
City of Orono
���tio Hardcover Calculation Worksheet
'.,\� ;� Property Address: �c� �-Af�L'�FK/ u4il.��
`A�•�°`�`' Prepared by: Date:
�'T S`a/z�/c�s G.'U- /�� 3 /3
Stormwater Quality Overlay District Tier: (Circle one) Tier 1 Tier Z Tier 3 Tier 4 Tier 5
Step 2: PROPOSED HARDCOVER
in the following table, identify ali items of proposed hardcover on the property, keyed by ietter to
Certificate of Survey(survey must accompany this form). Include all existing hardcover items that are
intended to remain, as well as all proposed hardcover items that will be added. Use as many lines as
necessary to accurately depict proposed hardcover status of the property. For Tier 1 properties, identify
any features by letter which are split at the 75' setback line and calculate hardcover square footage
se aratel for each ortion.
Key to Hardcover Item (Describe) Length x Width Total
Surve (S uare Feet)
Exam le Gara e 24'x 30' 20 S.F.
A .E iOc 1 " F.�,� Zl� S.F.
B � e' ` f0 S.F.
� 5' S.F.
� Ecdc AG�!S S.F.
E c S.F.
F S.F.
G S.F.
H S.F.
� S.F.
� S.F.
K S.F.
� S.F.
M S.F.
N S.F.
� S.F.
P S.F.
Q S.F.
R S.F.
S S.F.
T S.F.
�� S.F.
� S.F.
W � S.F.
X S.F.
Y S.F.
Z S.F.
1 Total Pro osed Hardcover / S.F.
Excfudable HaMcover See Ci Code Sec 78-1684 :
S.F.
S.F_
S.F.
S.F.
I S.F.
2 Total Excludable Hardcover / S.F.
3 Net Pro osed Hardcover Subtract line 2 from line 1 S.F.
4 Total Lot Area � S.F.
Proposed Hardcover Percentage [(3)=(4)] `� �j %
v
lanuary 8,2013
� , pC Exhibit E
Melanie Curtis
From: Robert Bean [bobbe@bolton-menk.com]
Sent: Tuesday, October 08, 2013 2:47 PM
To; Melanie Curtis
Cc: David P. Martini
Subject: RE: 3059 Farview Ln File#13-3636
Melanie,
I have completed our review of the attached plans, and the proposed design is satisfactory from an Engineering
standpoint. The applicant is proposing to extend the garage into the driveway to accommodate SUV sized vehicles.
Since the garage is replacing existing hard surface, the amount of stormwater runoff will not be increased. Also, the
applicant is not proposing any changes to existing ground elevations or drainage patterns. This appears to be the
minimum impact solution to provide adequate garage parking for the applicant. If you have any questions or comments,
please contact me to discuss.
Thank you,
Robert E. Bean,Jr, P.E.
LEED Green Assoc.
Bolton & Menk, Inc.
P:(952)448-8838, ext 2892
F:(952)448-8805
email: bobbe@bolton-menk.com
From: Melanie Curtis [mailto:MCurtisCa�ci.orono.mn.us]
Sent: Tuesday, October 08, 2013 2:11 PM
To: Robert Bean
Cc: David Martini
Subject: 3059 Farview Ln File #13-3636
Please see the attached plans for variances on the Planning Commission's October 215Y agenda. The request is for
setback variances to construct a garage addition to the existing home.
I know this is coming to you late. I finally received the last missing pieces today. Please review and let me know if, from
an engineering perspective, there are any insurmountable issues.
You should find attached the following:
1. Application form
2. Survey
3. Proposed plans
4. Hardcover—existing and proposed
If you could provide written comments by October 15"' I would appreciate it.
Thank you
Melanie
Melanie Curtis
Planning &Zoning Coordinator
City of Orono
2750 Kelley Parkway
Orono, MN 55356
Direct Dial: 952.249.4627
1
. x � •�- #�7•,.�-v.--7 . I.��yk,, �:;"':. t?.L.R""sa#-. "R, fY1 {$ � :� - �4 - �� �^ ���
' w' m �, �� , +� �� *� . ;.«r- • "Ji� � 1 � �1... `• �,. �' �
���� , � . . ., � � � .
^ . .:, ; + c r + i�!':'��,,�' �'': � � ' yt, a t
�; p y�`x.� -s� N,�{p �, ��" ��� �� �^�`�n�"��� ` ^ ��' � �i� +�.� �e", c� a�t�t
,
. , ,
"�, ,��
� � ��, ,� b ;R � w�� . ^ - l -. , ,� '` WT�, q ���A x�"; a �' � s.r, ��� ��"� � �"�
,�. �.� � _r e:.. ., ��\ �,. f„ �� -. t-r; 'i9t'�� t..� ��< � �4 ;:i .
� � , ,. } -' . . � • . � t
p. � ��� �y �"�,�arrJ j' �l f ���t . .MiT.� ���y -F":� � � t" _ i g�Y.� ��,�f �( at�,...
,�,, f u g� :�� �• ,/J�r k��� �.,��, _y�� .,�* ' ! y y �#i���str ��
� � :�` ,�",., y_,� " „� :;Y £, w r ,` {�% r� � ° ��.�} -•
�: ;
, ,
..��„ c.�� ��„, f .t � _ t�,j� �� �������� � 4��:M �-.� �� _
•L'� 4 �� #1 � ��'� � � � 4� k 1
r ' `
7'.
W .�' F
r. r ,4..
\ �' r S' +
. .f+... �,� , . ;.lr i ,v�" i� t� �¢ _.. ' . �� § .;,�} a,f�,". .�,x *8fY �
,{ ,. .. ' � � .x � � sv
$.. �, � �. ..�,a � V�..: r�✓'S �W� ~� � � �,.+� �%*�,^p� i"�' � J t°S � 3..��. iw �,„;��a!
' ' � ��?°u�v � .. ' ��1.t```1"'�.. ./. r � e S•• �% � ss, 4�� { „�f;`-s� +� 7.
r
'u �f —
�j .i.
..
� �� "Z ., �t'} ' p �_.: . 4 i� .! ^�r�af,.
R� f�. .,�'A� � '`> � f .�'�Y � � #�1 e,.:A� .. _ a. s,.;-w .:�� r�' 't. ��`' ��"�` ��
�+� �� ; _ � � r �v. � � y� � t ; �1 � �i� i�y,
S' •. ��a' . -� � '>f R� ,�+� �'l �+�y�y � .t�� y�4 • .u'' g���� 7'��. 9d `�I
: � , �
.
4 3
� �` ' � �� F�f' � �, �� �.f #�h � ; :�'r, ;r ,�w+Ir�yL d. ., �+'. .- � f��` - qr.-�d '"� `� �`Ys!�.� , �! � ,� �,
�:,5 's�:s �{1 —� � . ` . � 5. � ' '{ -$ y�W
t �..w� �.rw ', / � �53 -..��' e; f I s t'� ^� � 'Y..� ss�f '^��; r .;-, ,�F�' � -�'+dtr�:�
, �
� _ ,
'F +�" :. - ■� "td ,j. y' � ��p� � � a�.;� �,Li' �„s rau
4.F.�° � - � .. ti. ..f: ,Ra '�M�g 'i,(Y<'� „5�:�� ,.�3ie P�f . ... n �'� �.1t-t7[ � '� ..
�, ' �yy,;-.�„ �• � 1"�`' �*{� i . • tiTa '"� �Y'tsy
!f� ->> Yy�Si�� yE � �� � ��*'e}` S .�n�� � �.� �.'°�."�. y��3.. "� ��� �h
�'�' � � • " • �;� '. .. , .b��•� -.,+� ��$��M `"L � � l t� � �.. "�' Z ��.'���
'i
d
.� .�:: �" . . ,,. . .. „ .s�. �..�„. '+ .:'F+6 ,#'��t".' 'k� `���'• �a:�: � .,�,' �c+,�.+�^��'F - a�s��F �� . s
�
��, .�y, . , � •+' . ) �,.� +�.
,
f ` 'X . ...`I`t ' '� ...�t�u 5 }„ ��'" g��''�k.j�'y+F �'1�4.� �y �Sy _�; . '�F.. t � 1- �
.lc' "�`t. '.�,�:�f� �+J _ '3,�}Y",� `'Tr� A�" +f� 's� r�RS 4..1.. i 1���i; �_ :S'r� � T' t .�..
l. � ` � �f #'� $' � .� t 4 _ �y �. ,J '��( _�a
� �-� �{` y � ��g.� ; a�`s },:��,'�r�_ _�}}- • -.� �•w•, a��1�t�� � r' ��� ,�E
� � �� . '�.' � ?`#�.r�r p ; 4,� .a.� s�3 Foaf 3f ��qg ; , "4 �'y,_ �.�' � � � � � �
� ` t �h �U x'TF.♦ `+ � f�o�ir+'�.s �7�+ 1 - "`'� r��# E � ! '�h+."�� � � ��� � ��'.ar'7, '��#.,� 3 4�..�p��,•�,a"
��' � �.�`d� 'S:a _ ,'� t �°��-'• ��qb.y •, �fi.� .'b"af „s a�., ,#.„^fi" ; `w�M��;�� ' � �3 �� E � �. .
e, t
,
. k
� .. . , -ra:s �:' .�iy,i ,i i� "'.�. ai�l; �:i� r" rk, �. `s,.�e� '� �
� � j�t �
. ''�xl�,.� �_§',F ��J'�` � � .Ji'�" >;^... �`� � *x.� .T�tF.� �,3's
$� � •�� �, a `�� � � . .r�! 4, - a 'r, 1 4 "�, � .y
- _
�. �. M a' . `. 'F �� �,y �A ! � ' 11P .M ' �`�� ' +X �.
�"i#pn {., �� x. .,,,,, t ^� , } ; 'i �y .t'. �.`�4 �r,i'�;R^r `�k't .� ��r"„�� .J ��� ='�. i �tt. .�'r '
'�'`� 7 � .� rst� - a f �� F�� k � � y��j' ;�r� } �`',}�" ��#Y�. ,� �t�;-.•
�� r � ��i. `4;' �, e ,i,r _�. - #T .i� ��� ���,_ .. �.;,.t�'>t;���# ��}�. .�:�� .�'i.��e`t � t �'�r 1�.�`" �?,�'" ' _.:�!'?�` .i��
_ _ '(
, �
r t
r
�
,
'�e+� �cp �; _ :1. ^�'r..�. ,y_m,»'�._ ..-A �� ' .�.a � x ,.� � 'f �'�"�f" _ s.��i' :.� '���',° �a `"Mt;,}, .
qF' k,�
_ ,,_ . . t
,t , �.
��i �. .4 .�` i�-„�+�'+�� �'j.s. � ',i. a }�� �,'�,�"„� .,-1sr dlt wt��. � $ �"�;�.
E � ; '`�, ,�.� 4'� �ry ��^ �.
�� `�'� � �'#�"`" t"'p'i`� .� t� %��' �.� ` �`�'�' #�` '- , � - `r - R•� - -'jl "` -� � +
s' = '�". ��:: � � ^�"�,,� '�* ,�._�'� �,�,,,L`� C�'��i�;1�:% `� �,;`����. �:��1},, f,�»`'s * f ��',g e•� �y�, t wll
. .
; }
t, ' ,< '}
� . p
� /: ^ ;o,�� ��� .x...TcfS`� h-' �� gLf, R,. ���'��� ,� ��3�'b� .�:S � .7� 'S '' * ��JJ b e°t�ysa,....
t � R,
x �� rt ' ` � 5�.'� �{ j �f � , �y�,{ 3 r M y v r
.� 41.�9 �ps� 92 g�`,E �� . i Y f" ��b E [�r � 7� Y'
T i�
I�4
,. ,� f��,��° `,IM''��!"�`���
���` � ��:�. ,a!r, �� �'�,,h���iz' +-.3�� '� fy�i����y��� �� �� � �-� , t3' ,,�� �� ��� a` �:F
`'� *,� �a = A % � ',�., , � �i' ti f•� Ma ,'+�i . ��"���r�� � '�h
�yF �� ; ��� '�.u'h.� ,af *3'� } ..`f +.0 ,S#��,h# g.i. ; �K��-qh * . �4A'� '� .� ��1
�., .u`f^`Tro ���.� '<�' ' �. ` �.� �:A'� _ �` �.. �' ��1' ��1'•. � .L�¢� � 3�` Y� ' � ....�f '
w
. t' �
�, � �: � ` �_� . `� �t r1� T � Y'�`• ��1�&�;' U#� �„ � �;,
fi
Q � � � " . � .. . . } y � �5 x �.'.'i �J
�
< + \
�� t. , -�� �.. 1 S``+� - _ '`� �e ... if a
��� �`` 'u� `{ 1` x� �`�ti `� ,� `f� �"��
' � L f �� � _ ..�,-.��v y 'e �� � C S �i t �,F �� 1
n � ,� '''S.-: ' �ad � s G,:` . .. ,.���3 - �.hf � �}� � _.
� � ��_ ��} ��4b� �� � � ' ,�,�j:
" ' _
a � ,
3 r r . .. . �� . .�� .. i
,
� ` t . .v ij'a�c•
� .f i�x �,,,� ) .:�_ �� '' . '° � s'�'. e�
;+�f _y' ��/�t� i �.,���
a .: ��� + ' r���i�}� �` }� � �' �
+�� i X�€�-'�, k �„� ,s,� �s#� �',#'.a � '
� , :� .
,
_ •�" a'�� � �
' '. .. � � �.... {� � -r:.,... -..�-'� " . �$�� t •�a, 3:+
�� -- � '� d �� � wv�'
,.'` � _ r'', r+ y t2r.i;�`��-•
Y1��-c2 d Sr t. .���/���#` r f. ��f�.��.+A� 'e A ���.
qn q,�f � ��-'�l�{ �, � I� ' '
53.�3, `��4. �� � �� A n<. �����y� s ��� �
•.;.
,, - , � . �' i� I -'i'�
.t �e�, . �a. �s,o
"}� � ��,.a:.�� 1F� '
�._ d* � � :M1��. .- ..
�l �8% �,t�" ''irs�w �i
� �n. x ta.i ;.���� � ;,� .�t�" � �
���.M� .�;� . " rn
� � °�� r �, `t= _
,�� ���,�,. �,�u. �+. ' �' s
c��y"`�, '. , �� : �
°c'# �i"f( }��v� `�F��- r"F
��'�'a's- �,1 �1. !� �'+'•.'w T
� '��R i ��i� ��6a� ` w A
���p.�i, ' �k � ..
� � , �..
.r ! -! •�� �� �•�
� z+'�}��+ ?� ��� 3�`�� �
n�. .. 3. -.a _ ._"_. ...-._ . ._ . . .�. . .
~ ISF �Y' ,� s F g £ ��� K r . k�b Q �}"..� 4',q, . �_
}S' 4"P F a'��✓�'A'44°''yF��':A �r,�.�i �^��s T �Yt M fi��' J � il fY'� � ��� � E` ..` �-�P`
�W �
p+y'�l N:�^� , } .t a°' .�9�1� ,l r��.� 1 .�� ; .. � '}, #�> IE „ �f� f{y "
� � � -p � 7�p S 4 �y�'��k�'��k f�.„1e,�.. � �''" } a a�v,���f�� n
�3-��. . . '{.�- .. �^.�: , � �,tGR ., 1r.�. .f �;..3.. 98' . �"
yf+-• � f�.;• E �g°� c�t �� ��k�,yt�,� �-��,� :�?,,{'i a°� _.: Q, ,_�. .
��.� � i �� �� ,a��� � ;�Ca h �,����,�#�� .r �w� ` �'`�' ' 1 �,�, �
� � i�� p y .r• �'+�: +� �,� �+��+����# �j � '���'� .��*.�.
- �'� - � �p �,r+s �k '� b l_ s�s"'^.s�� .�< 'Jr' 7
;� � k y� � 6 Y� � � �4 E� �*�� � #� � ���,y t � .
� fv�.
� �i r �� '��1�' t � r. � e +�m� a
�� r�r'w�� t a� `S, ��}�:�� ;� ��t� .�* �Y'��������}' , . .
�� � � � -
� . �, �.f a`� #'��i � �„F,a '4f.i.� e � ;p'�-� �,�k '�.'�, �m���;.� �t' ;a�a,�,�2��.. �'.;
�
�;� � _a 7 t � 'S°�'�e 1 � a� �y���'-*�-� ��.» � s �''�
� �,'4 -�yi T �rj i�. t ��� `r"r �+v �'`x_ ,..�g: ��• Y� i
! y�, { s �
�� ,^4*�! ��{`'�t T4`y F:,9 _"#'� 4 �� $�'�.�'� ��
��°' -���4�'���� x;� , s'. ����h. � � {�
a �
�*g�'�`�`o ;� � £ �`' S �''�� �� s= #�° �� � s'" ��
p t��$,�"` '`�� a�;:� r `'. �,' l"-!�i� ��s��7� ��., � ^$ �.���% �, � .�L t� . _'�
+f.6.'�F x} y � � e , �j�'s q �.� � � A�:t .� `Y: R �} f
�#^ � ',� �`�' tc3"* K�� � 5 �. At ,� -..� �t �•�t�?�?::' ��
' �3 4 'W. .�i i
�4 � ��&� �� ti�����(� r a ;� ake` Y ,,,�[. t�'� .A � .F�1• k ���� ;.,
'�, °���� � ��.� �s��� � � r i .
3
'�' '�4`^ .�. } r �"�'��*��"� � �3'�,'.T � ,r ��� �� * �, � '� � �;�' r�t�''�� ` � iz
� � � 1�F �h y,�1 't..
r ��"'� �F�;•�'�r,yy." �` �--F ^�*'+� s'T ia' ..��'t��L:�' ''��ts�:"� ,,�.+. '�'.�� � .�:`
��k�R���"��t'�:,�' y rt� $ �' �..: � � �,w E�, �t - '� '
�y. I.. �q t �i..
� '��'t� , b, f' t-� �wY �..� � t �. �a ' .rW'S .
�� t"..M ��# �. ��� � ����,�� � �b+ 5 � .� 1 ����'��� # _
�c ! Yr � .r. `�f' ��� � �� ' �2 s . , �.6 �9
�"�-�,`�`'£ ` f-,�� � ._�, ` Rt- � - �r
Gk������ K {� �i .��� ���� ��` ggY 4t� g'.��
,�� � t . .ff .; i `�,:. ��r'} . ���R,4. �n �. ta. _
..'' '.tk<,�+ .-' � 3���� N'�� � ,� �y, .. f ' �y k I, E �
� ,�� � D�4�,2s#x"k�� �._� "� x �. t� �, s «�a � "�..�_ �, '"d'it.�� f
��,^'s 3,��y;-t�-�d �{ r}� �� ti,,• c `r . "�% {�.�.
§ w�y,
,�. 1,��,�c: Y '�t g�'"" "�.� �..��:� �'�p 1t�a � .1.�+ �.. . . y �t-.
, _ � n.
E+ � r: e y �.�;;� a. ,,;f� c�+,�sw , ; , �x � .� , ��
�� j 3�
r .e , - - .' � _ . .
� � � �{���u. �` �a�� „� ;<b'� y�.i � '�� .: � 51 . �y�� .
,. ` `� 4 . � ''A �. i ��,., .. � ,s �.` ,77��.-rE1ri §�:° __.' ; �� a1S �`
� �y.'�" , .. ' ,,�'� �ft� i F t F_
�K �
+ r�
.. , � �3� ; ,
�
� :... «�, ��'"1 �(
.;'��v► ,{,� aY s. 't � ::�.. _ �` £ .jt" �t ��'y�
� �
� _ . � � y
� - � -
E � � � �_ � -�. � y , � �r� �� �. .,�, , �'!�r' � � . '�� ,► , i.f"�.. � ��
f'�.{�1��'i�'P � � �, ,s.- �ll,"`� ' 1 e � ` � ?a:� �� � i p "�N
t�� �n° a w �" .�- ,yv r�{�•� - ,N { I ,s^3 y ,
4 r �^ t � .�. "4 eI.. f d +`��; : �p � ("'� �'� � �, ._�
�� � - ! � R . � ^ -1r ,L' '. � "€Sy H. .� .f'��'t, ` I �s 4 �r�� .;� � � � I � -
�, _
. . , � t s�
+, �
.r,,�"F���- '�'. } , 1�� .�r,� s.�.�M � . r. hy�.� ` a :�� �f � -+� �y,�? �1
}` � �: �` ,r,
.�,``' •'` .r ���..�� y���'} '�yY�'Fr� dy . ��)f.. �t'�S�R# L,q+-#. ' ,'�
..aj` `� t I•2 �� S � �� � -i� �F T � �.e+ _
'y. -_ �. �� '�f. �k''-,.+5.�.���i 'r.��'�.y� .�✓ .{ ���.,�,�',{: �� i��e�._ '
".. ,, � ' �'f.R. � #�'f-' '} "�d�� L � t 4:
� .t"Y P � k.`4L S`v� = ..� � - ��-p,,
,� . ���.. �t �:;. 4r• n �� �� ;�Q a
!w��.i t ..; �� �,.
..
„- . .
�
.,, ;���� � . � ` �� .� � �
„�y...:� ' �_ � . � ..,' t. . ,�, ��}�y ��s,� kg��,�R.,�� � � � :;., 4� ��..'i yz ,''��,, r.
�y �' TS i ; �'` .y�.., 4 �� � ..-� �#irNNt ,jh'-.' $ r .� t�.;+��,��e.k�'+y+�
� � 1,� d � ; `��y: 3 �, �,�.y� ���' �^h..���.� fp�,� �,.� �,�� •� a•, � '
�,�i:� ,�',. - " �� }x �$ �"^r $'��'� �s'�r�� .3� 41' }�{
�Tr' ``"p�€:y� ,eN+sS� `s� .#f fly. /♦'�^. ���i,p.��, `�$4,: i 4.. �,�; C�-,4''
} y� � / �_ z�`��-�z. � :.rta �
��` '"� y ,,,?{{{�... ; as�'..t „� , -�.�`,�� ��r,3� °
'4. 'f T�f �4R`�' ro� =r. i Y
�� .�n
4. '� f , k t .� ..�� . � �,� ' �rE
F�' S+� \ ` � t1 �" 5.E`. h'����� � ���+
x�p f '� f , i v -� . '"s�"�7 , +� y, •
.r °' � .'`- t�� ��� �µ► �`� "
� �gy� y, ,a �1 ��� - `�t S,, .�a ,,� �1 ��� xt R,L:��
. Y
� � s �,:,
�$�� 1 �� � +� �� �$� y � �'�� � �i� �
��� �� � �' j� � � , y �� r�i"� 4 �-_�1.ihf'� 4t���` °at ,� _
♦ q� ,�y. ��� *
}���i.. �y�, .. �Y! '3``: � 1 :'�" S:i""T 9 Y r' 1� ��` � t`.'�
. . *A��,�, `Y`� ai.�a� � ,a]� ` ��� . � " + r-� '�` �},�•�,,�^�` -
f" . t�� w.-_.77`i �` �, � � ���- �°+�,r � .�" � '�� 'y prt . �.'� ,r �S�.y�r .-�_
_ . ' .1 1 I , �a".�`"��' , _ t�, , � ��� .�� ~�� _d� �. ,.4 �.3 ap'� �E „s. ''.�' tTm,�"��+ _X �y.� i� ``t s ..._;' .
���,� �� V � i —` '__�� 'i �` �'`�� . .1.' �y: �,;`�' '��. � � �,�.. k ;. ,��x �� �,,� isb .�.,x
t .
� ' ( .t. �i.,4'3�� I � r� ��R�,,.�+�#� � ,�`� +�,e.. �`*`�*� -X �` i�i" . ...y �� ,
I �
r. �� ..� ''s�'+.,��. .n.. �'�"t '� �p��� ��� "Fa: �. 1." st ��^.'�EY-,�e i {� � ��.C�f #I'�;p�� ti��i
7¢7 . } �#'� � {F � . � i! " i` &-
� �� � a t +i'. �." 1`
���'�� ;"� ,�,f'" ��� � �`�'` Y��.. �+�'�K� �� Y � 'N , �„,� ', r; ��t�" ;;� �� 'e�.
*.,
>,a�F_� '�"'F�r" ''3,, h"z*,;e+ r v`�t s�"-���`°'"� .�... !`�"'�•. , . ��_,at , y�4r � � ��
�
.'0 �`" s = ,'� ' � .' �, _„ (��•'�, ��'�'� " '
. _ .
,..
£ . r �.- �.. .�. ; �� ��: ��: � ' _ _ . .,.__..��'���
. �p
�. t .
q --. � „� � � .., � wr�b ..
.i�.....a: � '.. ' � _.` .. � �,_ 1z..Z. " ' \ • �wh-� C wd..L'¢4 'M .. . '�..
� y�
. 2�- a 1 �.�.4� iY,�y...,,.�,��, � s %'.' a �
�4 j ;�,� y��yy�. sit �� �+� � ♦ f � ♦
� �-0� �_ 44 �,� � � *'!.�j 7�. ,:� ��*�.���� ..i l�Y�� ,p, � 3* ,� -.
�.����. ..- ..: ` j�
.� • ,. _ � . .�
. y a¢,, ,
� . m
�"a�`�'f1��.n���3 +f"�b !;�.�`�t :.d. r' � r�` '+v -i S w`'�' �,,+_
4 , ��". �r +
�,
�
, .� �� .� �.. '- r''i '
• � �._ }
. ,
_ �q �* y. �� �'^ t ��
.
k�'�,, �► � ►��,.. � �' � f
� �,� j,� ,� .� �.�, �� t. .��� �'�;�„��
i e.i ' i bf�� �� ,,� �}; �'1� C_�i*.._. .
;��
� �J`� .. •�. .t' � ,
�e�� +'°�• ��� ,.a� � t ,�t Y . i _ �3 ` � �^ �� �� J .�' . � �,I. �; .
*'�'re '"=yr. ..�, 1 , i ;' I �'8 � .��'�...,� � q,;� � .L j.f�
, t . i�i 7� y� rl"y�} �. 1���, - r�`' � � g � � r y�:!� ,y"� "� �, +* �,
s't"�¢'�i,�.�,�, 7: '�`- �: .s�� . '°r � ti� :o-��lp � �.
u � '� .(y�� �'� �_ �� �, r { • ��
{ ,�"'�'.'' :}� � ; ��5� , .;'_# �r.r� ` ..
j �B � �_ _ r,-"_'��:_ ��: ;. �� a � , w'1ni M� '�
.: ' p.y ' • � S � ,'.' yN' f �d,�.}
�^� ' �' :..* 0 \ k :r- .,.,�'}�.s -- � i �y�f}yr^ �7 5� h, � 1_�ay'k � Y�:�i.. 'y
i y� ' . £ _ .. �•�� `M.;. .y�."p'� ,� 1 `� j �t ���� � ,P,�i'���'f 4 y � t 1!%}y �4• . , a . ,t 1i
� . �� 7 j _ � ti.j} -,'� a�'ry+� �
x. � w `,�4. . �Y 4"� : v�
,� Fd � . , i .f� p,�[�`, � N r•� !A""4.f .. `�,� ,- L .f' +1 ��$
„� /'i� � �'�� _ ��� F t ��*�.��;.�^'R � y,J� ,� * `��� l��l �l� � '�'�` a �,` '4
'. # � -� 4�- �+ �2 , .� � � �..
.�yr-' '��`�.,�j�w �i 'Y, ��r�,.Y.� '.�" ��:� -- '� �'Y�.,t�' �.ibs� �*,,'','�.` ; �� �r q'�`f... � �j i,. c. .r+ 1, t' �:�
� r., i '" �,� an �."" Y��T'+��, �� t
».;+.� _ r ,�. � �` ,� «; �'. -� j " 3 * j � �� �`�
� - r '� � � � ;'.id��'a y.,°�. .+ ,�"�e5�,�+ �;,.F� t � �� �r x �
� . - �� ri�� t � ".' ° i � _ �, �i�l�` $•.!� �i. . �x� �! r � '� t,"�� � � � .
'� .4.�" `� �'�'� �'�t � .r +[ r. �
� � � � < � ��� ,* § ,>,, y r,�.•�t-��.R����""` ,•��� 4 �$4 :�{`'�r�,-�}�� r" s.'Y�I�..q h:: � tt� ��'��F�
!i- � �.... .� ; .-u�y i�'°� � '� � .t z, (7" - � "' �".�y'�,.
k 4�"�� f t K � ��t rT �',b- �1.�" ..{`:�_,�4�t.`.•1 'rYtr' tY'`�� i ki'��A � °S+(� •�`�;
. - � . � 1� a�',�{ ;� +��$' �...,r ,� , e"s� �} ". .���-_;.� ' �'�..
�.iu'� _j 7t,�, �«' - }��„� -� 1 ,� Y'� /�!�!� '. :�. '�
.
.
,, p� y�
� �t���.,�� -:�. �t < ' �,. d .Y r y i�'+�4�`�� a` 1.���i+"er� I? F"� �^� �'�.�
�, i-� •� y,. �r Y . ia� � _> �.' � �� ��� i
��s� �..M�� ����� i l� ;� �f�iF, �� � t �;��'! �..fi � �. _ ���� ?tY �.� ��� � �� t...
�� �. �y���.� w Y,rt_:' y:� • r> '�� ' v^+n,.,�i.{� �5.;'°�, _ � � ��� °^�"y�. , a 'i.� ��`'i^q7�N� �� � '�:• ��,�
� � � s.�
� ��
y
^� �p�� I i = +' � � 'k' '����•� L�=�;� # . . ,.:r� a. .-•, � y � , `� � � °�•.�' r�. - '�6g���� ��';f � . �
. r.. �y
�_
, . .. ..�. � ��.
. , . �� �
, > �'w,,�
+. ��
��i,wti;�. � ,.: +�e aF -.r ..� .� ���� `,*�"'°'I�P r,�;.�. '� ,_'#a�. :. . ` `f...��, �. '���. .�a�.,,,��'� t..�� M* i A�'
•.
.
i " �,y, r�
._
r ., a � ;g .:t� � �.Y. . _, ,.. . . ,. . { ^ �
tl
� � ..Y. . . �, , ' y� ;` ' .i a! �.., .
, , �.,�� Iy�,l, ( ;. � m�:p , n`' t � /.>:,t*y .:�`�,r," • ;=. �.� �r..
•'! - :�,� � ;
� ;.- -
_ � . _ r� /�,� �"�rya„c�,. ;,�
,. . -, � ,� r .-�.�': ,�.} �,}�x,• .. " ;.+ ''-`ia��' ' ;`r — � } '�;
�px � � �
`,. . '�',��'��{�-".��qjy, �,Y�`,>�.R•�'�r % y(�'. •":. �,�.t, �, t:��1"�g-v..- . ` �`. "`�,� rsy�"y.r`� � 'C"i�'►�`y-y�'i������(({^^^.""' ,,'. --•�.:�y,� �..�`�`�"Lr *:-.x,. �y;M
� ` t�YYb : yR :.�`..6A� ��.:.i.�+1 � " :1 • ;� Wc.�,/ .. �#' -� ` �...ry �` .�vt�Y."��, ',µ,�*�� , •,I�}{ �Y/ Ij�S,.. � -� ����� •���•
� '{!.. '� { j i �� ' �� � . �.�
{ �.,�;t.e�;�.�.�;�f AS *"r•'� ''���?` .�:rs��-^ ,!'���+,�`3�`r�""y "'",ji/T 4��. _ �.� 'P:, j� ������tl-�•i�y. �: �.,.�._ �� ��� ��� _ ,t.� �
.� .f�� . 3� �`� �,�+ �! .� .4� r' r ,. ��
�� �. ` Pr .�t� �� ` ��: �tb'�y f:�. v�r . .'`+� �;,..y `' -'- - �V,., i �-�e - �
�� � ,-�� s+�"4� - ' .��¢��l.:r' R��.c ..- -�.- ���`�. i '��� }z�t ' �.',�:•.�. .. ���'��.* ��' �,�'���o-�� '�' ,���� � �"�;,� .t"_ .S
-i �� '� �_+°- i � _,�,.,}'`.8'!� kf�i:-f`�" � .�,,.•,,.,t.��'��,•�,�-��,Y�. lt .r.7�••+t - •�'" L. -.�n�i t,,��� � �;;� s.7�`• .���� r'-..
h:-
��a � tr�r.�� _ R,r,r ,.�}' � �' -•'yff'.�+�:�:.�•i,. „c�y,�'+`f ',n;�,y �'?a-t,,,� t' �� t*��x`}� � �S'¢.{7. i ��� � `� d,a
��#' �a�; 3` i'< ��:t``.+�"" �q� ��«i�1•;!: �3"t..+2 L,t� �w� _ +'�.�r a t 'e.ti?�wa� .� i' �{, � p " � a r�}" �'.'a';.- -�.�'�..'r
c•r �t.�� �4.,t; yA� ,,a2�$,,,� ���_.?'�i `' . _{ ;'_ �, � �����s�}�. >� �._,,...,.,. `v ,a g""
`i ,� ^.s :k ;r �'y. �;..�(�s� �-, �;-�':t ,x• �. ` � 'x�y -n � �, ;�J ,�` �'"'
a, a 3�,.�Ft � +�;k '"` o !� FE, t,�� t A��� �� r�. � .. • .r ,�ti �r �.;�. �i'_�T x.'�r I.�A�:-��-r� �7'' �`��#'^.�' .w:
t ;,ti� s s� ,s a. �� ;c..,�''".F'„i,. �-`P ,�f. '�k.` �` . y ���. �� �; r 47` " .y 4` s�`*`�' � +��-� � .,.� .P ,�;., p y -s�
� .�; � ti� �A+.a � � .S, t .f� �' t ;"y;� ' 'Rj-,t� �,r, ',�,
�r' { � + ;f � � t
k ..j � �' •t�. � e'C;f,�^+� ��C'wh�T���e 4' �`� ,;f;i y�+`� �,� �, �;�n r �F.i y '�':{ �'�_`y "M� �`�'�a� �y�r "�'
§ '4 1 � t •���'" �f' F ":� � �1.�,� �F Jl,� `mit.
r S' � ;' 'F ��,��`}'"'�, i� Y�.�� �� �"r.i.: F ♦ jY' ��j.� � � !. d .vt�� . �s�:'lr y�K � � .a�
� .f .+tF � � : ,.!,i '�+;J�r Y � �l Y� 4� '.r .. ` .gt Ypr
7$} ;' �, i.�,�,y ��j�l� k� ��tp �'�v.:_ } }�� �� "� �'�� ~1 � f, �r '� ...r� �: Y..
�. � ' ��� a ag ���'C4 �°, a .d . �r .ti-�� I i ��� .� t� . _{� ,�t
f t � ��
�,�H rd. � ,rsF.t �� �� y �,.�{ +id�" ''�i� �i'-c � r i: �� ��.i . . � Y �'s;c,
�
Y � `�� ,� c_Aa w �.. Y�. j° �� � �-. I � x ..Yc.f a���� ' � �` -. � �'�.�,
.F .f� � . � �. y �'' a '�li}.�
! :L. � .- s e . r �� � �:�Y -r��,� v'i'1 ,k d -; . �, �, .�"y�l" - _7'...
s,°t `�� � ,i � j�`'':;N''+r � t yv,�'�� � " � p �,.14 .} 'y7; • •F� w� �?�`' �
��r i� � � � � :t �� y � �� f f ����� ,�1 'l � �.i�, _.{1
� ��q� y�,�g- }t.� x � � � j k. �� �• r :.
� ���`�' � � �+� . _ i �y3^ .t �� .� �f. �
<' .. � ... �. •'.��.�r `1 t � `. a , �,�... ,.� , .
I `�s"}i' � ,r � . J �� `. ' � 1�' � 3
� [ r� ,',�t,� ��.,. t i.h � � e , �1.� ? �� L.�' .'C. . '��,t �.- 3
�� F.�,e n .�. ����.�f.��: „ �� �,y�y,.! y ��- 4, ''� �d �J.2¢,' �" `.. . S � .:
yk�fw''6. t �� �r�• (�I} �°€`- M ` �
� x � i. 1 ,�„"� 4 �I ' �" .J� „i�
.� ,� �z � � +�w,. �>l �+� '�, .,..� '. � . �T�:°� . � �. ' �'� ��.
y�.' �w ;�� ��'" '� �t � ���+� '�
� �� a.lx y.� t" ..� ` � `� r+ �� ."' 4 ��` _ � ;r.
��p��'� _ �` .,�i?.�4 v� ,i•M ^'L �_ �� '�d,��..�� a�'��j
�iw"�5r �' ,",,. �; C=7 �z f°'`,'�# '�a�_ � ,F ,�`+ . *�,� . f"p ;F I i5•� ``, , .y
I H�. ' � '� kr t " ?�� � '���� A� ~'` + �Y� ct; �� Nx I I rk„ -. 7���..
y �y
�.�1 �. > /S� i: . r �^ +
.
� � {�,
, -� -e + ' , , ,t � , '"��' � �d� �• � - � � � r'�..( ' . �„y�'r, .��a��",'� �,
y�,s r: { . �: � :r i ► .�u:��b"t�^ •��` ��f�r''t�e t �,j. R'i�- 4,. '`r. �1-, 4.�i�'`_+f ..�.„µ �1;-� 'A'`.. --� �!r'�:1
� '
,
� �.
,
..
, ' . „ '�.'; . , ,. .:.� ,+
�
� , . � 6 .. ` � �.�. . � . . _. .. . . � ,. . . . . , .. . . .
Y~ ,�� T�,����y� , - . .. ,' � � {� , .�
��d'� � H . ..t •R „4�t �+ -. 'T�-^'L ��� J''m ! •.
�. .a t' i a+r�• �i� - s.''-� � �' l'L'� � �4 �` ' n��Ry`�'�f.lr �.d��•11 r ��� + ...a„ .
" �' .'�� y�, � .. . P �",
� � { 'J .,�,�� � � ii3"?�,`^T ,T " ' j s , � �d� ' M1 s •i`•�"�3ai_.
�
.. • � „� -
'�, 1 ►1 ' " t � rix' `.�x� � t s��,,yi t �� 4 ��'�� '' � �..
�,
-4.�.T �x i. .. - #ft,► _dF8 �.y � ,�. �. �„r� St�. b .
�� s - �.r �.. � -, aJ�e;�;c.�,., � i'ta K�. . ��'� a�i
� A-� t t�si ? y .., ... r .,� . ... _� ���
Y� i ' u�'N � �_t
� e , . � p� x� �- ����, �.VI'. °.`'i��l
• �
� � � 4 ..f'� {-.:,fi � r
' � ._,.. : �. �. .
• - w'�' �. � '� r
� Y y�
. . � .s f'rt .r �y-� , ,�- 4=."�`a��.
,
.�
. , h.��
-
� :.. i 1 � S� � �� • ��t'.t oy '� .
� ��� "'
, . i.� . . �, :� - . . � . t1r= � `� �� .t'° � � ''� Y
� -'� �: . - - �.� ��_, '�� .
�'4
.r� S '�,� �+�'l e.. !� r � e��3� �c�
F y�€.7 ���,����,' � r �i �; r� � �._.. ��
, ..: �
, . :
�`` '+�a`, ���� �t �'a � t�{ ``�r' ' ft� ,'
� ' ,� s
,, tl .. �, .� y d
1'., � : . �r �� ,_ `,� ���.', �� f
'k "� � � ... �•`��a� K� I �. � -'*J
,... � ���"
�i�r , !�.. ,�°�'1CQ�.�. � w e•�w t �s ->,. ,, * �';� q .
t : .
,. , i
�.\ . �, 'd:. '•... . �,k, . ,i� � - �t�.. � �Fk"+� T a'
. .� �' 'y . .� . �+. �y'� �.,, c . ♦,� � l+Sx � 3. .� .:
Y� , i `� :a -e ° . . � \'>�fK '�A;A.� ����..- �* ��' '�-.'
1 : i . W+ �',�`�Y R , �Y� �,� .. M � _ ��.
. , . \. ;�� �. 4 • . ,y.���s.t�������� �. �
�
� { _...r , e � .
' :� r '•w ' . �+i�E�� � a' ;�t ' �+�s�,� . ♦ • f `! a�` �f�4 �.�+ -
�" � n ' . r .ti ����y� �'� t: - �..�. .;�'s,p#' -°' n.,�.� �'f
,�n�. � �r ""'"e 2�."l"�''Yy ��.r'".:.5 r{t i,�g���'�=�i '����� L� a..���� � � `�» ~�I�� , �`�{>�'-'i ' it - .
. ,� .�: s '` ��r���,.� �� ft.�"."w+ ����['�"� �{ �'t �F�.? 3..k y.�+ � 'aM.
.
- _ . �
r �
� . !,"�,.;.,e�f��. !�d� ?( i•�a 1.f��} ip- �"* -.aw
,
�r, .
. . ,, ...J, .i�$�.�. �� 4,l.�n.�' �` :fi.�.
..
b
. ::. . . .? '�"ii*}� "kF,.' y'� �y.�. '� ►-•.�':I�er � .�!A{�.Y tr l •H,: �»4�''�� -.+ r. ��i .
� a 7� .
". �. �� ' � tiiRSb r ��* �� �w. . �
�y .«.^� .r n�.�;.,. ' . .�� �C.�� + ` :�3ti� r� ��s i��' l� �e ~��4 ,`"� �•r x �r
,. .' ' .
,_ ...' ,_ �.
.. ., :: .�:. . ,�. "'� . ,�.,,
;�; . . . . �';"p+;,e - `��+ Sy�� B ��i . "*Y�i.,,e ,�.� � � - '�!'-� ��i, ...-�,�
'� a�j` .h . �� '�!t * j r�/'r �.�`�, t� r i�� yyyMMM� . , � �7� i.
. y p�{ �� � w �F
,� � � >...1� . �T'" �., �FjAI`^ i : �r. . wM k. � - �J.'�' ♦ .
_�• �
y; ° , 'r "� x�?"i� '�'�����F� 5�+. � :c �a� i�>yF- i'+�, �" �.r-
�� „,�* ,�"`' , � i' � � , �,.! ;�
, .
; s
-.� U..,:� ��, r-�i� �+' * �r f� - �'v `r -
� � � �
'�� :�s x, ry� ..,��,,f y° ;r �<
,....
�,�i�� ..� ' (�4 s
3 ` -. 'r ' ` �7,r;� s �' ` _•a
� '., , � �
�t, ., �+''`;* •;�+ ��,� �.� �� ��. � �
<
qt . -,. z���y � 4� . �r
• `�� � `
4 �y, � �
��i N �., '� . �. �
��'1 a��(�,.��� t, . � � . . t ' 1•�'� �rt�< �ri� '3�. r��, 1
`�.../ �F .�.. ., . y . f � r,+r,,.� �;• IrIIF �". � •�� ,� �
` *�
�,3�i,��: �#�. ''-Y.''�j {. . . •5+�,+4. `:. � . . J" - �? �' �tr � }• i �.. . � e .:
�i* ���1 . :r �i�ad' :!'T F � e-.: / �°. a ��3� ��"" , y, • '��t�t./} � '"; � � -�a.
� u � s. �k t y �"' r i:�.p, ` �.- ` , �
. `� � • �'�!`; ' �s. .i�� '.r� . ����r`{ .. � °-� . �R.> .Y� '
� .!'_ ... � d . :i �e++' F�� ♦.
' .
r . _
'.. . '
,,,+, .,. ..r- R
� ,, � . �f ;� ,_ fs� i .� t � ����. �'.
a .. � � ,
a � «'.`'+''�} !ia,f`: � r' , r .i �„'�" k�,
;� � � :+ �` � t .�� � Y', "_ _
t
-fi f _ _ # T '_;� F
. �. ;�"... - ..y.� Y. .� .��i.. f e �� .�, �:
� �, � , j�t� t -_ ,�, ''.� _ � .�r +��. .. e�,..�"' �� �i � �y' �
t . •
,;
-
. . . • ,.a,,r'� ,- +�r ![4'?!� ; * , '�r �J,�a.«rL:;
: :, r, �. �,�� � is` �� � `�� ti ��L "`, '+�°e '+�� r
x r• �+� � ��►�(''T� ��'' .�+.�` ' � �� -» 6 � _
. . . 'P' . " ' , '#�.�.�i f'.� al�.� �.; ��±: #�', ��,Y �+�"a � s�� '��� � .�.� �..
�' .. '... . � . �"� �€ e � , �'� .��. ����. ,xa- .n;*,..
.r I ♦ �
. . :.� .. . .. �. 'if �t f�. � j/ � �:,Y'.� 1,� 1Ir- . ie�
.. ' .. .. . .. �.3 ' . ���`�lst'r •�jr�r _ � . �'�..k�,�
. .* �,e��`� n�`�i. � � .# �.r .1 � � �� -e eju�Y 4_ � r ' 9j �+�• s
. � . , +�''"' E 1,R�� V 4 i'�
. A�,c .�' Y �r 3� � � �'�1"'. }c�4tS,:T s�.1T'��' ��I :.�. ��R"��'� .:�!"�r L��`I�i't!'t.wx=. �'�y�v.:
y ,SY . '
.. . . . �.'.',.. '. � . • .� . ++' . y . � � +,
I. ..
,
..... ��, �� .,
.. � • � J �• � .* '` �)`�:�� ,�� y: :��c '�� �";�:
/�}(• .• � w �r�;" r .`,�; �°7'k} � �1�+��
. . . 'V h .:.::.- � e. .� �'. . � i ..a. �-'Y ��.• ;fl� Y �. ��T �f
�
. t r ,���!F . ��_ � _�� y �� L '
. � . . � . , . "r ._ -i�`�' ��• ��'=��s � � ��'rl�.t��,�►��+K,�Y.���Xy, r ";,�,,�L.'��� ��` �� i��•w.
�i,. � - .� � � 7►$ `. �. . 'c��.�v ., ,� •?,�L..,�t r,1,��`
,, -
,I.�� k . � �
�'r7 } ''4 �rl j ,� s+ •)_ �� r �eP,y+', e;y." ♦ ��3
` •,�
.. . � . .};.,�.� �.'�w. . >x+,�,:. ��;_. e k R¢�+i, ..�
: � , : . . :;. ': . ' .,.� ;'s
� '"'sk'` -� ii . � � � '
r'i' \ ` � ;. �
, "' \ 1 /
� \ � / ' bitummous
EDGE OF DELIN�ATED ND `� 9`3�� �� drrveway
per K�olhaug Env�rom ntal � -. �l � pC Exhibit G
1 i .
Serwces located 9-9-2 \3� // /00 00 _ � ` `
� �� _���/�' �
� �, � , � �ti
� � �
� �� � , ti
� � , � �/ �
�
\ � I
�\ � I //
D/ZA / NAGE EASEMENT � � � �� • �� � N�Sop o,\
��1 I
` ��� � �/ � � \
\ ��---,\ �Op
\ � ��\ �
� Ne+ghbors shed and elect��cal services /�� �\ � �
� � 7� _ � � � �
�
i �� Easement shown pe�prevrous suruey. �� �r� i / ��� /// �tiop� \
�� \ �\ No documentat�on prov�ded. —� ��� �.� �ti��� `�\\�
% �.
� 93!. '�. � fEdge of wetland per plat �i /,� ��� _ _ _ � �/�� // . 0 /� �����_ ��
X plast�c sh�d \\I n � � - - � � / Q ����`�
�\ ��\/ \ \\ \\\ I `� '\" Edcfe of Pond ���� / � � � � � � . � /i \�
� i�.�' � � :. . �. \
ost elec \'� � ED6E OF DELlNEATED WETLAND �; `� �� ��_ - � � \ � ` � � �� \��
�� p per K�olhaug Enviromental � ���� �•�� � - - - - � � ,93`� % � � ��
.\� / / _ /O \
� � Serwces located 9-9-20/3 �� - ' � � � �
� � �\ pond elev.� �/%� � � i ��� � -srom�signal - �. \
�� '� �\ 929��� _% �� � - i � � � ��� �O ��sump couer -��: / O �
♦�� �Q \'� \��__ _--�����,�-,, � - " � � 0 1 22.1� �o�������p"W :�:'� �� DrivewayEasement�er
� �° '� - _ __---- �r� .��� �,,,pme+�t � t s �_ � � - doc. no. 5232986
�\ �,� s^ _\\ --- /�� �i�oo�� 5e k -� v e r y 936.8 � � � .�.��- � �/
�� lYi � •� �i� �� /// /� ....• 1 p a `� � / ' N 1 /c
� /2\h .\ ///��� .,.� �� . � %� Zy• �. N , �. �'
•.�� � �• 1 `manhole /\� Q
\�� ��� \ �' � � .��'� / �� 947.7 c 19.7� �' �'�35'SETBACK 1 9 4 B ' �� �l/
�� �SS7 ��-�`�Q° �Q'�W .� / � � �,�•�� � FROM DEUNEATED � � �o� �
(7� -o
�\ !� _ _ - 5 8 - - / / � ' o�•�'.� 937.lt ' WtTLAND 6.4 /�\ /�
,,r�� - 932 � � � � � `O '• ro e A-7'3 �� . � � :� �
�\ �\ \ _ - - y3� � ���i � �r-� � :. J �e5�denc 7 i� , /� cb �
�� � 6� � /. : � �59 13• _, � � o
��� �� � _ � , � � ' 93 �93���p �� �� Np.3 doo�y�ll � m�l '�'g ��'��� � � ��
�\�� �V 1i'7 . timbe���a er s�p5�� �q2� � d . . • � g�}I.9 � e�s '.� I l
. — , ,o.o �„� � i
\��\\ �� 1` �1 I � � �� � � � �\ �� ! Go�� alis ' /� /Q�0 r/' _"�
\\\ � \ \ + l / 1 .9� �0 0( '�a+ / ���1� � .�- /'"���
� ,� ��� S/
\\ � \ \ � � f�'� l Zp'tre
�� ��� � � � � 7'bir � \ 2� �y0�� ; ' ��`� 935 ��(�
�� � � � � � t 94�. ,� o,�36' /�. /
.\\ � , � . � � \ 943. � �,. 9 �; � r e � Lot 6 Block 1 FARVIEW
� � � � �a• d K
���� � � �� 5 t o n e Totie I'�gP� °935 4 I/� � , ,
/ . �
�� `�� � � � � �� ��, �' � rc`? ti , ,� ��, � i � Hennepin County, Minnesota.
� � ♦ � � � � '� 5'birc � (�� �� � O
�i� ��� � ♦ � �\� r( ` 4�3 P,'�. �Nell ,.,` I O O
\ ' � � . : � p�
, � � � � � �� � y-� I � , us i. • �o
� � � � � � �� 0 tfmbe/�pa e b y t�m �� _ m O
Edge ofSnoreLne���� � � ��\� �� l � 9 j .4 / , ; .7/ , � y 933.5.f ._/
u
\��� \ \ \ \��� ��� � I I "' � .,j f / � �' �v
o �j �� � � � � � � � � N � � �W � '�! � �
q /J' �� � � � � � � c�� O � �0 9 . � �,� weN
�w� [/ ��� � � � � � �\�p � ,�2� o � � �� ,��%„�l to be capped The only easements shown are from plats of record or information
� � � � � ` ` ` ` � � � �dr-..L � 3�60�0� provided by client.
9 � �\ \ � � � � �lS \ / —�_� o
� � . . �o, � � „ .�y� 6 • � 5 6r�
5 d � ���� � � � � `�O N 89�C50'00"W �
�� O �;\ � � ; � �. �Q� 28� i � � I certify that this plan, specification, or report was prepared by me or
o � � � �42�� i i i � under my�direct supervision and that I am a duly Licensed land
� � shorelrne � � � � � - � �� � i �' Surveyor under the laws of the.State of Minnesota.
`9 929.4 �� \ � � � � ,��0 / i
F �\��\�\ \ - � �,% �p� ,� Surveyed this 9th day of September 2013.
'1�� � � � _ _ `� '�
� � � � ��
\ � � �
� \ � � /
Rev 9-13-13 site plan Drawn By ��� � �� \� �/ �� RE�EIVEp
� �
10-3-2013 adjouun owners � �
File Name � � �� O f�7' (? A L U I� Signed
� li f L `�
F-6-tinv81883prop.dwg � - � �T Grego R Pra h,Minn.Reg.No.24992
���v�� ��R: �Q��Q� �Iq��Q 6�770 • ���420•66 C4� •�13) .
° . . 20 40 60 Pre�are�d E3y:
� `" SCAL� IN �EET ' SCHOELL & MAUSON, INC .
� FN(:INFPl7C . CIIpVPVC][7C . PI .ANI,IGOC
Total Area within 0'-75' Shoreline Setback - 1 9,300 S F
,
� \` � ��r<..
��;���;�
. �,� i � �.,�`,;�
� ,: � Existing Conditions - (taken from Shoell & Madson survey dated 8/8/91)
, ; ,�
� ��� 160 S F
� Stairs from lawn to lake
DESCRIPTION: ����,�� ����" Stairs from deck to driveway 202 SF
Part of Lot 6 Block 1 FARVIEW accordi Brick Patio 506 SF
recorded pl at'thereof. � ' �Nood deck within 75' setback 315 SF
Wood deck beyond 75' setback 327 S F
Pooi 627 S F
� � � Boulder walls 110 SF
Bituminous driveway 109 SF
� o �° Planting beds w/ plastic within 75' setback - �a lakeshore 245 SF
N N �. west of deck 218 S F
south of deck 373 S F
east of deck 51 1 S F
-x ` � ,;: �� Planting beds w/ plastic outside 75' setback 1 ,755 SF
U : , �, ,
� � Y�" �.l, �i:, .,` �. �i
—� c>;.1._.: .
�—+ K,.:
x �
1 � � Total: 2,749 S F (14°/a)
�. �
� � a� �Y �. �.� ���� � ���,
� � 3 � cv o ���` O
rt.. ro cc� Q Q
�y � N
� 3 � � �� s
� N � �0 2 yovS� # oJ�
`—° � � l 3059 ��� � �
.�..
�
'� � ro � : ' � � '�J k`�`� �
-, _ `�,' .
� -� � > � " ' N �� �a� � �
�o � � � ��, , b e c�
� o -� � 29.� , �lo+ r� �� ��� ► 7s-�t
= o u� � 66 ( P►
U �n a� J� � � �.6�� �Fire ��-,� _-- �- °Q� o
� :_ � .. 1 � 1 C.�`iC�� ,�% r� �_1 ;�._! Sto i ,) ► �' DI r-
� � � � '\ ✓� ,.yql�C� �S�'��j //� J� � ;i / 1 '._ .+.
cu � � �O 3�� D 'A � / _ 'r' < ��I
� pp � i�- � �J : �"f��'F' �i� c�� ,i '�� � �Q�g �i-
>t L � � �j , O , ��F. �
� , < yF .
� Q i � ec k � � r� � G ,'� . �-`: ��`° �
� '��__ pld� p 5,� �d � � y�� . � �� ,, .-�
._
1 _ ^�-;�l8s�- 3�s � Q -� .�,� �.������ � ���- .
.
� --�--, G,, s '� , �� y-
s �, � s �t��� r�ck 5 �� N �.�
.� ,
' ^\ � `� � al j�F ���`���� t�c�� �•-r' I
1 �. �, pso6 �d���,, � ,a-,
� , , �. �_- —
11 j � e •-' - ��='�' 30.92-..- ►
. ,�
J✓ \ �/ /��
1 � r� � g .
' `✓` �, � � s�.a�c � � .
?� �,l �olk°n ,�%�� ' t,
a�
a1 �J� �� G�dSS ' �►�be�/ � � Pred � N
o J) � ��,c�-j e���,e��.-i �
! r
�� J � - `��s� �-� 1 �"=J
J� , �,/ �_ ���, o�ec� Co��p�r ���-
,��;
�� �- ���0 F S� F o 92q �. �/� '
/ � r�A�� .. N'� � //� S�d�� � i�—
)J7. '►Z� /�r-�.' �``� n pC�L � /.
.. �_ .}.� � _'' ' �1;' r� �_
�,��, P dl rik`�`� `�_ � � �� � ���99�
, _ A�g.
� d � / e n
� /�)�� Gr � ���� ho�e��n �
�� � 5 N��►
���� � ��� �
� � N N A�' �.�2
/"i M L1,. � q, ;qz
/ ���� �x�E ���. � , �9
�M Ele�� °�'
I�a�er �
�
' , m
� � � '; ' � s
'` " ' I hereby certify that this survey was �
�'� :' , i; prepared under my supervision and that =
` I am a Licensed Land Surveyor under the
la.ws of the State of Minnesota.
lhis drawiny has been checked and
r�eviewed tf�is 9}h ' 19d9y of John Gd agh
AV VS� �
�'y �a""` $ � -���� �SHEET 2 OF 2 SNEETS) �
D�ite: Av�. 8, 19�1� License No. 20260
'� :���, PC Exhibit I
� � ���� � c�t o� oRONo
� j F �� �
� �
��` t;}�'S N n �
� �k��r �.,
�������� r � RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
k'`� ����`� � ���,
,���,, ; �, NO. 2594
;i� �!�����`«, '``_
A RESOLDTION
APPROVING THE AMF�MENT OF A
DRAINAGE EASEMENT WITHIN
LOT 6, BLOCR l , FARVIEW
WHEREAS, the City of Orono, is a Municipal Corporation,
organized and existing under the Laws of the State of Minnesota;
and
WHEREAS, the Council of the City of Orono has adopted
regulations for the orderly, economic, and safe development of
land within the City; and
WHEREAS, per a recent survey of a property located at
3059 Farview Lane, owned by Dennis E. Evans and Mary Jayne Evans
(hereinafter "owners" ) , legally described as Lot 6 , Block 1 ,
Farview, Hennepin County, Minnesota (hereinafter "property") the
residence structure was found to encroach 5' into a drainage
easement as shown on a survey dated January 5 , 1989 , revised
March 8 , 1989 , by Theodore D. Kemna, a licensed Land Surveyor
(License �17006) of Schoell and Madson, Inc.; and
WHEREAS, the owners are in the process of selling the
property and have been notified by the title company for the
perspective buyer that this encroachment represents a serious
title problem that must be resolved prior to confirmation of
sale; and
WHEREAS, the City has agreed to amend the original
survey line of the drainage easement as it affects the property
with the granting of a quit claim deed of that portion of the
drainage easement involved with the structural encroachment,
finding the newly defined easement line does not encroach or have
any negative impact on the adjacent wetlands area.
NOW, �HEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of
the City of Orono hereby approves the amendment of the drainage
easement within Lot 6 , Block l , Farview, as described in the
legal description prepared by Harold E. Dahlin, licensed Land
Surveyor ( #8 414 ) , of Schoe 11 and Madson , Inc. , attached to thi s
resolution as Exhibit "A", and hereby grants a quit claim deed
that will release or vacate all interest in that portion of the
drainage easement to the owners and further directs its Mayor and
Clerk to execute the auit claim deed.
�r . .
f�' �����
,,s¢4���� '�a s rq .
�r� t�����������. c�t� o� oR,oNo
� 7� � �� ��_
�fi
#�
A Y�:
� f ���� �1'��
�� ;��^� '� ;: RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
{ 2594
� �' N O.
o; ����.
� � ���
��m �` ��� `.
Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono,
Minnesota, at a regular meeting held March 13 , 1989 .
,
Jam R. Grabe , r
ATT T: y
i
�
0 othy M allin, City Clerk
STATE OF MINNESOTA)
)ss.
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN)
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this
13th day of March , 19 89 , by James R. Grabek and
Dorothy M. Hallin, Mayor and City Clerk of the City of Orono, a
Minnesota municipal corporation, and said instrument was executed
on behalf of the City.
� �' � /)
l_!'f+i;'.i2�� C'-�'G�a' � c✓1.�;�.r
JOHR� R. t3eRt�aRDsot� �iotary Prublic
�►; qOTARY PU9LiG•MINNESQTlE
HENNEPI� COUNTt�
'�t`- �:ormmtsrlan��10�
ia �z-�J���
My Commission Expires
� ' Resolution No. 2594
EXHIBIT "A"
Descrintion For Easement To Be Vacated
That part of the drainage easement over, under and across Lot 6, Block 1,
FARVIEIJ, according to the recorded plat thereof described as follows:
Commencing at the most easterly corner of said Lot 6, thence on an assumed
bearing of South 23 degrees 48 minutes 37 seconds West a7ong the easter7y
line of said Lot 6, a distance of 240.89 feet; thence South 29 degrees 18
minutes 37 seconds West a distance of 50.00 feet; thence South 80 degrees
00 minutes QO seconds West a distance of 64.00 feet to the point of
beginning of the land to be described; thence North 10 degre�s 00 minutes
00 seconds West a distance of 10.00 feet; thence South 80 degrees 00
minutes 00 seconds West a distance of 30.00 feet; thence South IO degrees
00 minutes 00 seconds East a distance of 10.00 feet; thence North 80
degrees 00 minutes 00 second East a distance of 30.00 feet to the point of
beginning. ,
Date: March 6, 1989 �''���
Haroid E. Dahlin
Land Surveyor MN Lic. No. 84I4
y .._., ..P ._
.,_� . �,,.,- .._
�� < ,,� - _- , "
, .. , ,� .
�.. . �._.
� ��� �- r � ,� � '�`� -y E
�
, s f � .�g y-* �,� � ��
, � . � — : : � ��� � �� , z. .
� _ _
,.._-;. - ;_
� F5 3_2�"4?k�4 f S Yr��� * ±��t r#: � �'�.'"',,�����_g ,+'�j'§.:.n-. .��� w �
; � �;'��F��i_� 'kY-a..�:`��=a£'• h af � ."`_
�'-��'i°S`. ._ _ .. . _t � _ � - � ��t" i'E 'a 4 #,
.
- � �> �ar _._ � ..- . ..,� - ._ , ks
,..,
� k �_� �,x . S� �
� �� �`�. � b��� ' '
�- _���� ,� � �-�
- :�i���:'� � � _ ' �
�,Y,�rl' . . k � --. e �
<i'_'.����� • ', 'l � x .' ,��`��
�'� .�. �`ta'�.�. . �;-. . _ .' x'y -
i � �_-:,. . . � �� � � ,�
�, � '������ � � "�s�i`�
� �k,�
�) �t�e a�.. - �� � � � . �
.t c 4.:3,' � .. - � _ - �'?�
� �
r gi 'M �._ Y . . � -�i
- � � ��'.Y K . . � ''� �
� � � ��i�:. —' _.____._ —' " L �
d � //^�� "�
#_ �{�{i.�d-�y�,d�TM+ ;S" r.�� "l Nl/, ) ��.�� , . : . � .' � y�
d �� (�i _
y,�-Yrr ' • � �� ^ �.�� a.-y• �n, '?�
,_, t c:� �-��� $3"_j?�:. 0., �r a� )• � `�; a ;t
���b��~~ , V��.i� t i�_r�� _.. � � � � <�3 Q�
� -� l � , � y �
� �s ���,s �- '� , �, a..�.�i L"�
,: �.�� �� �� :� �?� g- ��d� �a �„� x�;
� ��",�^ ���`�'�t`w'�:� ,.. _.. ��+� � ��,;:
�r�- ``�"�'��a�' �� ��� � � �
� � ��
. � � � t .� v,eS tih �: ��� = ; i�
r� r`#� a-�; a3�o��.G Ailit��:LJ 71�v'�.z1� �� �� � i
� �-F� '�`�vr,i,7�� �a�3'Ns�� . � �� � .. �;.
� �'
,� ��,X��.+��'�x.. . � � �, -..�s.k �,�
4��'.�c �'� . � ... - - �
� > } �- . "
C ;r — � `L,�, �
,.:-.! ;�. r�t :
� t
�j K ' �
� �� � �
� ��} � _� -�
_ ��,� ��
r���',�°��,�� ~' ��
� �G:k J: t""_4�+';T - . �.'S 3 „
_ _ t T -
rrT ' .?� . •� . F �� ^-_
� v� . �
��_.� � ,� � >� 00�0 t z � L£Ezzfi�O 6£�S t 682kRl9""�" '" ���1 x
y`� j ,{+ '� �
�
� �
�
/��
�
/� � �'� ��
j ; F �.
� (� q'J/ (`�_
/ .V�IlVJ� � .� . . � . ' - �
. M ; . . . . . . ^�
�� � ���
Bx yq�_ ,�,��� (� �./ ;, �`
J ►
,�c�N�r�- ►�-�1 c/�
� �
, ,;-.=O\\
• � �\
/ �\
_ � O O
� '' CITY of URONO
i `-y
ti�� i�i
�� ,� �+��� `�y���" �"�j
��. ��5 r �t �.� c�,l j
���,�� ��i�k������i ���,,,� �'�'; � RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
��kESHO���� NO. 3 0 2 8
A RESOLIITION GRANTING
VARIANCES TO MIINICIPAL ZONING CODE
SECTIONS 10.22, SIIBDIVISIONS 1 AND 2r
AND 10.55, SIIBDIVISION 8
FILE �1685
i�HEREAS, Edward F. Baker (hereinaf ter "the app 1 i cant")
is owner of the property located at 3059 Farview Lane within the
City of Orono (hereinafter "City" ) and legally described as
follows:
Lot 6 , Block 1 , Farview, Hennepin County, Minnesota
(hereinafter "the property"); and
WSEREAS, the app 1 i cant ha s app 1 i ed to the Ci ty f or a
variance to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.22, Subdivisions 1
and 2 and Section 10.55, Subdivision 8 to permit the construction
of decks and stairways in the 0-75' lakeshare setback zone where
no hardcover or structure is normal ly allowed, and encroaching on
the 26' wetland setback line where no structure or hardcover is
normally allowed.
NOW, TH$REFOR�, BE IT 1�LSOL'4ED by the City Council of
Orono, Minnesota:
FINDINGS
1. This application was reviewed as Zoning File #1685.
2 . The property is located in the LR-lA, Single Family
Lakeshore Residential Zoning District.
3. The Orono Planning Commission reviewed this applicat�on
on September 16, 1991, and recommended approval of the
proposed variances based upon the following findings:
A. The existing pool already encroaches into the 26'
required wetland setback and has only a minimal
1'-2' walkway around 3 sides. The decking around
the pool and associated stairway to the lower
level are necessary for safety and convenience.
The proposed 10' encroachment of the normally
required 26' wetland setback is not of significant
magnitude to outweigh the safety issues.
Page 1 af 6
,
% � 'O \��
� �
n\/ O V' �
i� ;,����;�,,, .^ �, '; CITY of ORONO
� �
�`,'� ���� ',��°, �, ,�,%
`��'C� i�`���������� ���� G .' RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
�����kESHOg'��� NO. 30 2 8
,, ,�
B. A hardcover decrease from 14.2� to 6.5$ in the 0-
75' setback zone supports a recommendation to
allow construction of a new 647 s.f. deck to
replace a pre-existing 315 s .f . deck in
conjunction with removing portions of an existing
wood patio. The existing deck, patio area, and
plastic-lined landscape beds were constructed by a
previous property owner without any apparent City
approval.
4. The City Council has considered this application
including the findings and recommendations of the
Planning Commission, reports by City staff, comments by
the applicant and the effect of the variances on the
hea 1 th, saf ety and we 1 f are of the community.
5. The City Council finds that the conditions existing on
this property are peculiar to it and do not apply
generally to other property in this zoning district;
that granting the variance would not adversely affect
traffic conditions, light, air nor pose a fire hazard
or other danger to neighboring property; would not
merely serve as a convenience to the applicant, but is
necessary to alleviate a demonstrable hardship or
difficulty; is necessary to preserve a substantial
property right of the applicant; and would be in
keeping with the spirit and intent of the Zoning Code
and Comprehensive Plan of the City.
CONCLDSIONS, ORDER AND CONDITIONS
Based upon the above findings, the Orono City Council
hereby grants variances to Municipal Zoning Code Sections 10.55,
Subdivision 8 and 10.22 , Subdivisions 1 and 2 to permit the
construction of wood decks, walkways, and stairway, such work
constituting structure and hardcover in the 0-75' lakeshore
setback zone and 0-26' wetland setback zone where no such
structure or hardcover is normally allowed, subject to the
following conditions:
l. Construction shall adhere to the site plan attached to
this resolution as Page 3. Any revisions to that plan
shall be subject to further City review.
Page 2 of 6
"
RESOLUTION #30�8
'� ' ' �
, .
. �
, �
� Ytanung betls w/pla - utside 75'setback 1,755 SF � V � �
� �
� �
i ' ,) ;•
� Total: 2,749 SF (14";) � � .�. �
/
; c�., �. ,
.`
� ° °` ,� '
i � Q� � r_,jo / V
� Jg a;{�.. ' � � {
�
� � yO�se+Y .ro ' . 'l' �-�.
1 ' 3°59 <C� py� - :i
I 1 �J �lC l . f� "..... '" ,
� J � pC j N � _t I / _
/ -� .f Q� l� '` i , ' I
� �� NofT�pi� � `�� t '' �ti0 '=-�i� i� �€i� :i �
Jl v� Q �iFire , a9 p � `t' � K ,; n
y C F � �"
/ 1�o pool f , -- -_� = �i _ ,'1 �� e a:'s;h' - - ._ '=
) -')�, G19S �• ' 1 _,'�< `'. � ;+ 1tc�� r �•d_ =::::�'
'a`�i )' //sF�i '� 5�i , , - ��pe y_ Z l (f4� � � -,=
L .� �,°�,%G�o ,-5� � 4c�`.�9 �
1 �j y1� ` 7° � " " " /� t' 1 f �.
� ` P'o �ac " p 1 (,G�` �.,.` _ •1 ' i.rf�j _
L-� _I,` - _._;a�sF e - '�y �'�°\ ��, �y i,i�j j t rttf � �°
/ �,c�s� `�\__ � �k �y �N �h � ��,L �' �li f� !� j ��If .
• �:-., � pofio f k���f'��o5y 1 �� i i 1 f Iltpj frt i�`l�
� SD65 �0�73?. G �' _ 1 � �:f�l!a��, rr(r,
�� � �� Q, �.-' ..y�-�.�3092-. - � � . ' .
� J-... _ y �'�1C9 ��- 1 . , ��
�� '� --kona g �_� 1 ; � __
J,.-�'�� aI /� m '
)_� l� 6�°55 �iimb`�i�Y P�e� � � i �:;
�-V, �� _ .-�is�y�'�-a..� 1 ,, —, � �`"�-`'�
J _ E/ --�-� Oe }o�f � � %� .
0o Co� � i y
r� F ` 92`�'� i� �-- ♦ . ,i �
e��� /0 y,s� //D J�oll � ��' �.1 '
�_ i
" s-c�)... . s��' R°` �'� ;. -
�9 ` _ ' � Iq9, ..��, .
� � � ' _n Aug.Bi � ., �(���OS� ���-K.�
S ��
� ��C�snN G 1�EcK , ;
�"=z
J"=Z0' � � "�
--- - - �._ _. .- -
_.__.__--- -------- _
- Totai Area within Q'-TS' Shorelfne 5etback - 19,300 S F
Proposed Development-(laken Irom S&M survey 8 IvyCrest plan daled 8/22/91)
Existing Condlllons -(taken from Slioell&Madson survey dated 8/8/97) A Slairs from lawn to lake �so SF (unchanged)
g S�tirs Irom deck lo diiveway 238 SF
� �--- �Bndc Palio 0 SF
Q Slairs from lawn to lake 160 SF p Wood deck within 75'setback 647 SF
6 Stairs trom deck to driveway 202 SFC�BEE� EWood deck beyond 75'setback 675 SF
C Brick Patio 506 $f�QE,.��ED� FPool 563 SF
�Wood deck within 75'setback 315 SF GBoulder walls i�o sF (unchanged)
,�Wood d2Ck beyond 75'SBlbOCk 327 SF'� pl ����fl M Bituminous drivaway 109 SF (unclianged�
p Pool 627 SF YP���ing beds with plastic(ieduced 1,755 SF oufslde 75'J 0 SF
G Boulder walis 110 SF Tote�: �0_-lS' �p�E� : i,zsa sF (�^o)
N Biluminous driveway • 109 SF
S Planting beds w!plastic wilhfn 75'5elback- @ lakeshore 245 SF i� Proposad DevelopmenUWetland Sel6ack -��N'7j•2SD�Zo��E�
west ol deck 218 S F �2��
south of deck 373 SF S, • TBuiidinglPoaUDeck wl�hin 26'welland setbadc 232 SF (unchanged)
east of deck 511 SF gE Wood deck(30'wlde)canlilevered above lawn below ioo sF-�o�t.s..�
Plantin beds wl IasUc outslde 75'selback 1,755 SF 'f� Proposed Slairway wi�hln 26'welland selbadc �e sF
9 P �o`I� KP��ng beds wi�h plasllc within 26'wellantl selback 0 SF
ToteL• � � 410 SF
TotaL• 2,749 S F (14%)
� _ �� �
�c�:��I N G s��/N.a:e�cca vc�� �t PP�V�:Y� s�-r��Ar nc�V��2 Pc.�ti
Page 3 of 6
. � ,
---\�
�'" \`\
:�% � O����
�%�O O�`
�i; ;:r,��;�,, -^ �� C I TY of ORONO
,� � � �.,
��,� ;;a���� ������<< <,, �;;,
�� �� ��� ;����i�,x\���;1�^� Gti;; RESOWTION OF THE CITY COUNCI L
\�..� �6 V`,tl� h�"n�� //
� Np, 3028
���,�k�ESH�4.
2, Hardcover in the 0-75' zone is approved at a level of
6.5�. A1 I exi sting and proposed hardcover approved
with this variance approval is recorded in the
calculation worksheet and diagram enclosed with this
resolution as Page 3. The current property owner and
all future owners of this property are placed on notice
that hardcover shall not be increased above the
currently approved level and any proposed improvements
of this property that will result in additional
hardcover must be approved by the City. Such approval
may result in a requirement for concurrent equivalent
or greater removals of existing hardcover. All
existing hardcover scheduled f or removal as a condition
of this resolution must be removed prior to the f ooting
inspection for the new construction.
3. Authorities granted by this resolution run with the
property not with the applicant, but are permissive
only and must be exercised by application for a
building permit within one year of the date of Council
approval , or this variance will expire on that date
(October 14, 1992 ) .
4. Violation of or non-compliance with any of the terms
and conditions of this variance shall constitute a
violation of the zoning code, shall automatically
terminate any authority granted herein, and shal 1 be
punishable as a misdemeanor.
5. The undersigned applicant has read, understood and
hereby agrees to the terms of this resolution and on
behalf of himself, his heirs, successors and assigns,
hereby agrees to the recording of this resolution in
the chain of title of the property.
Page 4 of 6
�_
�--�
%� ���,
/ O��
, o
� = C ITY of ORONO
��
I� � ��t����;,��y ' � !'
� r ��'
��� �i�r4��� ���r« ��°� � �� RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
� ,, ',
�kESH�g��� NO. 30 2 8
��_
Adopted by the City Council of the City of Orono,
Minnesota at a regular meeting held on the 14th day of October,
1991.
AT ST:
s��� �� .------�__..
, ,. _,
. ,, _�
����� �� � . �.
. �_._.____.
othy allin, City Clerk Barbar : Peterson,,.�' yor
/�
��
Property Owner(s ) �
STATE OF MINNESOTA )
) ss.
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN )
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on
this 14th day of October 1991, by Barbara A. Peterson & Dorothy
M. Ha11in, Mayor & City Clerk of the City of Orono, a Minnesota
municipal corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf
of the City.
��/1�t�i U. , �i���J
Notary Public
Page 5 Of 6 CAROLE A. HASEMAN
NOTARY PUBLICr—FAINNESOTA
i' HENNEPIN COUNTY
'-'..a...-.:�� MV CAMMlSSION EXPIRES 8-23-9"0
= ---- �
�� ��,
%
j � 11�'��
� -' O a:: O\��
I �_ � ���� �i CITY of ORONO
� r��;� ,�� � �
,\;� �„ r��� �I;
tij.„
����_� ' �� i�.�� ��^� �,ti�! RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
� � �
�. �� ° �������.���,�
��kESHO'¢'�i� NO. 3 0 2 8
STATE OF MINNESOTA )
) ss.
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN )
On thi s ��'t'h day of �►�}'�h-e ►- , 19 9_L_
before me a Notary Public within and for said county, personally
appeared ua►-el �r+ �n►r► o �n er
known to me to be the person(s) described n and who executed the
foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that he (they) executed
the same as his (their) free act and deed.
Notary Yublic
STATE OF MINNESOTA .) CAROLE A. HASEMAN
; Noraar Puauc-�aaaEsor�
) S 5. HENNEPIN COUNTY
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) � � MY COMMISSION EXPIRES&23�98
On this �� day of �(► �h.PY , 199 I
before me a Notary Public within and for said county, person�y
appeared Gr'Pn r nih n �h�er,
known to me to be the person(s) desc ibed in and who executed the
foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that he (they) executed
the same as his (their) free act and deed.
r, �< Q�
Notary Public
CAROLE A. HASEMAN
` NOTARY PUBLIC--MINNESOTR
j' HENNEPIN COUNTY
MY COMMISSION EXPIRES&23-96
P.age 6 of 6
RESOLUTION #3028
STATE OF MINNESOTA )
) _
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN )
) .
CITY OF ORONO )
I Dorothy M. Hallin , City Clerk of the City of Orono , Hennepin
County , i�linnesota , do hereby certify that I have compared the
fore�going copy of a resolution of the City Council of the City of Orono
with the original record of such resolution in the Minutes of the
proceedings of said City Council at a meeting of said City Council held
on October 14 , 19 91 , and that the same i s a true
and correct copy of said resolution was duly adop�ed by said City
Council at said meeting .
In Witness Whereof , I have hereunto set my hand and seal this
15th , d a y o f October , 19 9}�_•
� '
Do othy^M . llin , City Clerk
( SEAL)
� �������
. e � O ' V
- 'V O
s��b- - I CITY of ORONO
� �
ti
�� G'�' RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
��kESH�4� NO. 3 0 8 7
A RESOLDTION GRANTING
VARIANCES TO
MIINICIPAL ZONING CODE
SECTION 10.22, SIIBDIVISIONS 1 � 2, AND
SECTION 10_55, SIIBDIVISION 8
FILE #1712
WHER$AS, Edward F. Baker (hereinafter "the applicant" ) is
owner of the property located at 3059 Farview Lane within the City of
Orono (hereinafter "City") and legally described as follows:
Lot 6, Block l, Farview, Hennepin County, Minnesota
(hereinafter "the property"); and
WHEREAS, the applicant has applied to the City for a
variance to Municipal Zoning Code Section 10.22, Subdivisions 1 and 2
and Section 10.55, Subdivision 8 to permit the construction of decks
and stairways in the 0-75' lakeshore setback zone where no hardcover
or structure is allowed and the encroachment of the 26' setback to the
adjacent wetland where no structure or hardcover is allowed.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Counci 1 of Orono,
Minne�ota:
FINDINGS
1 . This application was reviewed as Zoning File �1712.
2 . The property is located in the LR-lA Single Lakeshore
t'22�1.�Er1�1dZ /".�C�Aiiiy L1S�.ii�:� i�^-C3iiii:��iC� 2 3C�'�S ii. ���3• r?'='?�
property consists of 2 acres.
3 . The Orono Planning Commission reviewed this application on
February 18, 1992 and recommended approval of the proposed
variances as proposed based upon the following findings:
�������� .�s�a�RFo►
D�°T pr'4R����'TAX 8 PlipLICREC4ROS
Page 1 of 6
f�PR �9 199Z
,N ��M I�il�,
a,, � ,,/� �.
� � - � °�
� o 0
�,e� - CITY of ORONO
�`� . , �
ti
'�' RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
�t�kESH��'�G NO. 3 0 8 7
a) Portions of the existing pool and deck encroach into
the 26' reguired setback from the adjacent wetland.
Decking within the substandard setback is at a minimal
width at 1-2'. The expansion of decking will provide a
necessary level of safety and convenience for those who
use the elevated deck and pool . The additional
encroachment of the wetland setback area by the
impreved decks is not of a significant magnitude to
outway the safety issues.
b) Hardcover within the 0-75' setback area is decreased
from 14 . 2 � to 5 . 68 � . The proposed lakeshore
improvements consist of the construction of a deck
within the 0-75' setback area at 490 s.f. and 704 s.f.
of deck within the 75-250' setback area. The applicant
proposes concurrent removals of existing brick patio
and plastic lined landscape beds.
4 . The City Council finds that the conditions existing on this
property are peculiar to it and do not apply generally to
other property in this zoning district; that granting the
variance would not adversely affect traffic conditions,
light, air nor pose a fire hazard or other danger to
neighboring property ; would not merely serve as a
convenience to the applicant, but is necessary to alleviate
a demonstrable hardship or difficulty; is necessary to
preserve a substantial property right of the applicant; and
would be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the Zoning
Code and Comprehensive Plan of the City.
5. The City CoLr_cil h�s cor.s��er�d th�s apr iication ir_clu3i*�a
the findings and recommendations of the Planning Commission,
reports by City staff, comments by the applicant and the
effect of the proposed variance on the health, safety and
welfare of the community.
Page 2 of 6
RESOLUTION N0. 3087
,
,
,
� 1
.,-T
,
' � Ytanung beas w/pla - utside 75'seiCacic 1,755 SF V � '.I '� �
' j .
, 7ota1: � 2,749 SF (14':) :. .,I .
� oc`� i O�d' .' � i 1 !
� 4, 1 , ; ,
, , �, ;-
�`� ' � .• �
J �• H�uSe�3054 �..�� e t f �.
� 4� k�o� % ,�a � �
�' : �` \o� ' °' _ t'{ -
+ Q ° ... _ f... �- o ,
? NO�T�P;k � i? .FJ� ' . _ _ j� n`_
�a Q �iFlre . oy � ' - .
�'`o Fa'°��195F ;_--�--, .- � _ ' _�'' , :
;�� ,'"a '-__'.��� '-,� ^ . � , : ' ..
,�,rs:�; P5- , ' F::�� — � �.:;. . ,�=y= �_ I
�� Okc G ,•5F ' �'� � yt &y J �'�,:i =� �' :; �'m
pl° �a� �_ P'. � ,�,�,`. -• _ ;P_ � . .. I,
1,�� _ ;�rysF 4 �1 ''�}°,�o` ^,� '� � ',f r � ,�•• �- =h -.,.�.:,.i�
:.�vi c�' �..� 1� f- � �,.- •'��= �:_=• .
' o � -
j �`_� s� -.`Q��ick y g `" � a `�j�� � � -
► -.-. � po{io F k;�`�F;� ds �� f a \ _ : 1 rJ'�
-' � � �fD�S \O�'13 J. 'G� � _ Y � ' I 1
ry 1 j � Q. - �-�'-=�sa.9z- ' �/.`r �, _ 'jJ[f 1 ]�ll� \ �" y
� � '�' �1i_ � � r` .l �1 .
� .��� --- d gb�`'� � ,� . t 1 �ii lI 1� ��f�l �
J.. ' o�ko�,�� l o, 1 11�Il;)� j jkjl ,
-f w� Sg ���1 ti � ( i,lN!J1�! : r !
�_) 1,� G�f.�k�4�m�I,���- A�e� l � i � .
t��ff! r
1 e � —� � � � ,3 ��y ' .
l ��S�,�Qy�1 ` _ _,
y 1 1 � � y� �
__�'��• �—�'^optle� b CortoJ '�i � � � —
' F q. i ��-�l
/1��� YS �je�Fo�� r92 ''� � � L,�• �
1 � �_�=�.-'��C� Ro='�� � ` � �_,�-�„1 . � �vr g(s.�t.u. w'.,�'
.,... 1T � I9 • :+ � '
1F 11�l ..n�U�.Bi 9 2 � �
i�. , ,� ' '. � '
�j �,�CISTIN G �DEcKo, ; ± '� � ' p..�v�SEt� P1�-d� ��
I :,� �_
._—. :=`� , � I�'Ro�'oS�D D FcKS '
�tal Area wllhin 0'-75' Shareline 5elback - 19,��0 5F •,,;,j � :
`,� . �� �Z��
.�
dsUng Condlllons -(taken (rom Slioell &Madson survey dated 8/8/91)
I Slalrs Irom lawn to lake 160 5F Proposed Developmenl-(iaken Irom S6M survey&IvyCrest plan dated 8/22/91) '� �
t Stairs Irom deck lo driveway 2G2 SF��y�sE� _
gE \ q Slairs trom lawn to lake 160 SF (unchenged) �.
! R.1�k CZi,r� 50fi $F���+-�=+E9) �g;airs i:om dsck lo omewa�� , �=p� Sr � .
` N:ood de�k withlrs?�'S�t�c:.l: �'•� SF �E:ick'Fctio Vo SF ' -
�Woad deck beyand 75'selback 327 SP'ro '� ����� 0 Wood deck wilhin 75'setback 44a�e-t SF i,`'i
: ppo� ' 627 SF Eµlood deck beyond 75'setback �p�}-��9 SF •
; Bouiderwalls ��p gF FPooi ss3 sF i'�.; .
�/0iluminaus drivewa 109 SF caouiderwans t�o SF lunchanged) -,
Y •. NBlluminous driveway 109 SF (unchanged)�� .
- Planling heds wl plastfc wilhin 75'setback- @ lakeshore 245 S F SPtanling 6eds wilh plastic�ieduced 1,755 SF oufslde 757 o sF '
west al decic 218 S F �2��,� .
soWh ol deck 373 SF� S, • Totel: - �
east ot deck 511 5F gE � , .
Pianfing beds wJ plastic outsida 75'selback 1,755 SF ��_��p Proposed DevaloPment/VJelland Selbaek - ����SF a�'"S, (,� :
�j�" � '
T'BulidinglPooVDeck wilhin 26'watland selback 28�2--Bf(unchanged) �
Total• 2,749 S F (1 4%) Wood deck(JO'wide)canUlevered above lawn 6etow 496--fir-iott.b..c. ' �� Sf'
• � _ Proposed Stairway wilhin 26'welland selback � �B—�F ' � �
KPlanling beds wilh plaslic wllhln 26'welland setback 0 S F ��" �
� Tolel: ' � 410 SF' /3C /css !: '
loo .
.,, .. Omiert/ . . ,
�C/S-�I�u G 5 t�/�,a:e fl cc�ve��.
Pro QoS e p � �� /Lar�cove.r
� Page 3 of 6
� � °�
0 0 ,
��a z- C ITY of ORONO
� �
�
����� G'�' RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
�kESH�4� NO. 3 0 8 7
CONCLIISIONS, ORDER AND CONDITIONS
Based upon one or more of the above findings, the Orono City
Council hereby grants variances to Municipal Zoning Code Section
10.55, Subdivision 8 and Section 10.22, Subdivisions 1 and 2 to
permit the construction of wood decks, walkways and stairways, such
work consisting of structure and hardcover in the 0-75' Iakeshore
S�'CDdC1C zane ai1Q a-GO� K�E��:,^.� S���cClS ��^@ wh�_e Il0 SL'.C'� structure OY'
hardcover is allowed, approval is subject to the following conditions:
l. Construction shall adhere to the site plan attached to this
resolution as page 3. Any revisions to that plan shall be
subject to further approval of the City.
2 . Hardcover within the 0-75' setback zone is approved at a
level of 5. 68$ or 1 , 097 s.f. All existing and proposed
hardcover approved with this variance approval is recorded
in the calculation worksheet and diagram enclosed with this
resolution as page 3. The current property owner and all
future owners of this property are placed on notice that
hardcover shall not be increased above the currently
approved level and any proposed improvements of this
property that wi 11 resu lt in additiona 1 hardcover must be
approved by the City. Such approval may result in a
requirement for concurrent equal to or greater removals of
existing hardcover. All existing hardcover scheduled for
removal as a condition of this resolution must be removed
prior to the footing inspection for the new construction.
3 . Authorities granted by this variance run with the property
I20t SsTZL1'1 '�i'3�' �uTJD11C.?Tl'Cr b'1+ ar� raarmlcgl�T2 Oi71.1 aI1G� I?1ll8� b?
exercised by application for a building permit within one
year of the date of Council approval, or this variance will
expire on that date (March 9, 1993).
4. Violation of or non-compliance with any of the terms and
conditions of this variance shall constitute a violation of
the zoning code, shall automatically terminate any authority
granted herein, and shall be punishable as a misdemeanor.
Page 4 of 6
. � 1
.. � O�
O O �
��
' CITY of OR4N4
b_,-
� �
�
�� G'�' RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
��kESH�4� NO. 3 0 8 7
5 . The undersigned applicant has read, understood and hereby
agrees to the terms of this resolution and on behalf of
himself, his heirs, successors and assigns, hereby agrees to
the recording of this resolution in the chain of title of
the property.
Adopted by the Orono City Council on this 9th day of March,
1��� .
ATTEST: � �'
// -„'_��c—_._.
� ' �� �„/ •'--•-.__
� �I _ { /', /
�� � J�. `�� �-F�/'' i( �_�i r�%'�/-'1;!'—��
�.
C, �� t � ' /
�X�4XX��$$���X�X��tXl&��X� Barbara : Pe rson, .N'��vor ;�
n�a S. Vee , , Deputy C1 ` k �-`'� , :='"� �
(i� �r � � / / ��
� �
.: /� �/ ��� (.�"� ���� -�`
/ '� :`.' --
�operty O ner( s ) ;`
���
STATE OF MINNESOTA )
) ss .
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN )
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this
9th day of March, 1992 , by Barbara A. Peterson & �3��Xh4XX��$�Xf��
N�ayor & �§��*Clerk of tne City a� Cfrono, a �i':.nr�esota ���unici�.a?
corporation and said instrument was executed on behalf of the City.
l ��,�.Y,=/f�� �F /_,:� �� ���"�
�
Notary Public
*L i n d a S. V e e CAROLE A. HASEMAN
**Deputy ' �HENNEPI�N Cd1�W'T�YA
i..
�IY COYYISSIOf1 FXPiRE,�L2'iYb
Page 5 of 6
1 '
� I O�
O O
� CITY of ORONO
,A �
� � � �
�
��� G'�' RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
�kESH��� N O. 3 0 8 7
STATE OF MINNESOTA )
) ss.
COUNTY 0�' HENNEPIN )
�n this / g�� day of i��� , 199 �.
bezore me a t��tary Pu�✓c�i�ir: and �o� said county, personal ly
a p p e a r e d G.�r.�, �' �-�
known to me to be the person(s) �d cribed in and who executed tt�e
foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that he (they) executed
the same as his (their) free act and deed.
��,e�' , ���
Notary' �'ublic
STATE OF MINNESOTA , ) �' JAMIE L BOSMA
�%' MpTARI(PUBUCrMiNNESOTA
) s s . • : : HQ�IEPIN COUNTY
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) ''•,�.� MyComm.Expiresl2-19-97
On thi s
�a n� d a y o f Gt �.:� ..� ' 19 9 �� ,,,.�e..
before me a Notary Publlc within and fo said county, personal'1y
arreared r�n f <_ �` ` ,��-t � c�/�E.r-
known to me to be the person(s) scribed in and who executed the
foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that he (they) executed
the sarne as his (their) free act and deed.
���.�.� � C�-
LINDA S. VEE Nota y Publi c
�� NOTARY PUBLIC - MINNESOTA
�,;,� HENNEPIN COUNTY
My Commission explres 8-12�86
P.age 6 of 6
�� -
�, ,� 5���4��5 - -
�
��
— �:,,.;.�:-: — —_ � [�f'_� �.j�;.i4ii
., .. _ . _._ _ ._ �i�:�c_��'��_� � �h
c�F�c��F r..�_:�,�;°���cc�Ra�R
Htfi`���'��I�;!i�;i,I Y,F�i?�f:�SOtA
- �-.��•
r ;�::,
�f`__; ;.:<_...,_ =�1
��L .�U�� � � �i�I �' �rJ
�� L : "�.� •�' � ������k��
� t r < �_''.. �-. - ��7 Ii�C,e��:t!iIi
t/°i'-� .
�
G;` _..-__ _ J���'�;'"�'1�i
.
{��`��."(I— �'�� �__� > ,
� c.����� /
f���,i).:�_ ,'1� � _,.. �r
��l
�, � 5��64��5
�
.�
_ �:;:-;:�� - — C _ �1=i.i ii;
_ ... _ _. _ _ __ �`�:-��:_��`� 4�11:
(;��lCt i1F C.Q'.�lii�REC4RI3ER
HCf3���Fii�i.G�i€ifY,hil�?FtESOiA
i i:;' �t'��
I:��'�:. i..
, _ _�li�
�;_,,..........� .
�� Ji1�! !G �b�1 �� 3S
�,�� .:� :� 5��64�5
t , :_ _, ; �� r�c��c��
�` ,
-A,i-v
F,, ;_..�,� �
. ______ __•._�
��lr��t� l:�+ � � 1�.�� / _
C�
¢7r,i�'i�>;-<' J].ti. i3 ..•t l t
RUN DATE: 9/lg/2013 HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY INFORMATION SYSTEM(PROPERTY OWNERS L►ST)
, PC Exhibit J
38 04-117-23 33 0007 38 04-117-23 33 OOOR 3R 04-117-13 33 0009
JON D RAPPAPORT ET AL TRSTES KAREN HYDE BAKER D J DELANEY&F K DELANEY
3067 FARVIEW LA 3059 FARVIEW LA 3051 FARVIEW LA
)ON D�DIANE S RAPPAPORT F:AREN HYDE BAKER DAVID 1&FRANCINE K DELANEY
3067 FARVIEW LA 3059 FARVIEW LA 3051 FARVIEW LA
LONG LAKE MN 55356 LONG LAKE Mh 5�356 LONG I.AICE MN 55356
3R 04-I U-23 34 0013 3S O4117-23 34 0014
D&B SILUS A L SCHREINER&W R SCHWARTZ
3070 FARVIEW LA 3060 FARVIEW LA
DAVID&BARBARA SILUS AMANDA L SCHREINER
3070 FARVfEW LA WILLIAM R SCHWARTZ
LONG LAKE MN 55356 3060 FARVfEW LA
LONG LAKE MN 55356
1 CERTIFY THAT THE FACTS REPRESENTED ARE AN ACCURATE AND TRUE RE RESENTATION OF INFORMATION
AS IT APPEARS THIS DATE ON TH OF THE HEN E C TY XPAYER SERVICES DEPARTMENT.
DATE: I� �-� BY�� ° .-C
HENNEPIN C�OUNTY MAIL LABEL GENERATOR
� � PC Exhibit K
�� Hennepin County Mailing Label Map
Provided By: Taxpayer Services Department
aar�
ic,p �;�
_T__
..�_
I 'j#r
�1t� ,�,��5*
�
�
r f_� ,���
�
� _
C�4117-23-33 �+4-11�7-23-�4
- �
� pa�
�
` #E�i
i;. �
i
�
�� 1�+�
�,��
. � . . -_...,�,,. ..
�
�
�
�'�
a9-1T�-�3-22 '�,� ��� t�-117-2��2�
`,..
�
�. �
For more information contact: P�i�t Date: 9/18/2013
Hennepin County GIS Division Map Le��nd:
300 South 6th Street Map Scale: 1" = 184'
Minneapolis,MN 55487 Buffer Size: 150 feet
gis.infoC�co.hennepin.mn.us Y'fdtef � �ti�ior Roads
F'arlc hrtinor Ro�ds
Map Comments F'arcel ��
� Buffer P�gian \�I„'�,�.
3059 FARVIEW LA —+��.y
ORONO, MN 55356 Selec#ed Partels
a'� �LSSs
a�.,l -'�G ����
i�t[ i ��...
'�':
qiiRi�ni;
, • PC Exhibit L
Melanie Curtis
From: DAVE DELANEY
Sent: Thursday, October 17, 2013 9:29 AM
To: Melanie Curtis
Subject: 3059 Farview
Hi Melanie,
It is my understanding that the owners of 3059 Farview have applied to expand their existing home and seek several
variances. Our home is located at 3051 Farview and is the adjacent property that will be most affected by the expansion if
it were to be approved. As you know both of our properties are surrounded by protected wetlands and Lake Minnetonka it is
unlikely under the current wetland regulations that any house would be allowed to be built where Mr.Wang's house is today.
Our properties support a host of wildlife including Deer, Bald Eagies, Fox, Loons, Falcons, Herons and Trumpeter Swans. Mr.Wang's
proposed addition will effect these wildlife and obstruct our view of Lake Minnetonka.
Wang's property is too small and should not be granted the proposed variances for hardcover, lot setback and lakeshore setback
because he wants a larger garage.The property already has an easement on our land for a driveway.The drive way is atready to
small and there is little to no room for delivery trucks to turn around and they have to back up the long driveway frequently.We
hear the beeping alert of the garbage truck early in the morning as it backs up on our property.
I do not believe approval of Mr. Wang's variance requests meet the definition of hardship because he wants a bigger garage
especially in light of the fact that he just purchased the home. If he needed a bigger garage he should have purchased a different
home.Approval of this request will have an unknown environmental impact, restrict my view and de-value my property.
Sincerely,
David & Francine Delaney
1
� PC Exhibit F
NOTICE OF PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION
CITY OF ORONO
2750 Kelley Parkway ZONING FILE: 13-3636
PO Box 66
Crystai Bay, MN 55323
952.249.4620 DATE OF NOTICE: 23 October 2013
TO: Lixiao Wang COPIES Lixiao Wang
3059 Farview Ln via Andy Schrader
Long Lake, MN 55356 Email:
TYPE OF REQUEST: Variances
DATE OF MEETING: October 21, 2013
The Orono Planning Commission voted on a motion to table the application. The applicant was directed
to redesign/reduce the size of the proposed addition.
VOTE: 7 FOR 0 AGAINST
Revised plans and revised survey reflecting the revised, proposed plan should be submitted on or before
Friday, November 8t''for consideration on the Planning Commission's November 18th agenda.
Additionally, all existing and proposed hardcover should be correctly represented on the enclosed
hardcover calculation worksheets.
Applicant's next meeting is tentatively scheduled as: Monday, November 18, 2013
This is Planning Commission meeting. The meeting begins at 6:30 PM
If you desire certified copies of the official Planning Commission minutes,they are available from the
City Clerk after review and approval by the Planning Commission. If you have questions, please contact
Planning &Zoning Coordinator, Melanie Curtis at mcurtis@ci.orono.mn.us or 952.249.4627.
� ' PC Exhibit G
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO CITY PLANNING COMMISSION
Monday, October 21,2013
6:30 o'clock p.m.
Leskine ' icated she h s n issues with pplication.
hoe zeit m ved,T esse se nded, o reco mend ppr val of pl� ation . 1 -3635, le
P ter n and il L strom, 15 a d 3465 S th enue "orth, aca n of ock Kno D 've,
an recomm d oss-easem t e required. V TE: A s 7 a��s 0.
8. #13-3636 LIXIAO WANG,3059 FARVIEVG LANE,VARIANCES,8:21 P.M.—8:38 P.M.
Lixiao Wang, Applicant, was present.
Curtis stated the applicant is requesting variances in order to construct a 12' x 34' one-level garage
addition to the home. The applicant recently purchased the subject property and ��ishes to make some
structural additions to better accommodate vehicle parking.
Curtis noted there is a small portion of the southwest side of the home�hat currently encroaches into the
75-fot setback. The retaining walls located at the entry�and the northeast corner of the home currently
encroach into the required 30-foot setback. The applicant's home is situated entirel� ahead of the average
lakeshore setback line.
The garage addition is proposed to be constructed over existiil�driueway hardcover resulting in 36 square
feet of additional hardcover for l 1.8 percent total for the site where 25�percent is allowed. The proposed
garage addition at 19.7 feet will encroach ten feet into the required 30-foot side yard setback. The garage
portion of the home currently meets this setback. The existing retaining wall and access stair are set back
only 13 feet from the side lot line and a corner of the home also encroaches 1.4 feet into the side setback
area.
The proposed garagc addition is to�be constructed by extending the lakeside wall of the home toward the
east. Due to the angle of the home and the lakeshore,the resulting setback for the addition will be 72.1
feet from tl�e lake where a 75-foot setback is required. Approximately 42 square feet of additional
structure within the 75-foot setback is proposed.
Due to the large wetland on the propert}. the entire home is situated ahead of the average lakeshore
setback. Curtis stated it seems apparent that the additions or modifications that were done over the years
were done in an attempt to be respectfu1 of the side yard setback and lake.
The proposed addition results in more massing within the east side yard setback area and within the
average lakeshore setback. which may impact views of the lake currently enjoyed by the adjacent owner.
Staff finds that the applicant has failed to demonstrate a reasonable practical difficulty supporting
additional structure within the 75-foot setback area. In addition,the applicant has failed to demonstrate
that enfarcing the provisions of the Zoning Ordinance would deprive them of the reasonable use of the
property. For these reasons, Planning Staff recommends denial of the variances.
Andy Schrader, Schrader&Companies, stated he is here to answer any questions the Planning
Commission may have.
Lixiao Wang stated the current structure is 18 feet deep and was built many years ago. Wang indicated
the garage does not accommodate their vehicles and that he has to leave his truck and SUV outside.
Wang stated he also owns three cars and that he only has a two-car garage. Wang stated those are the
Page 20 of 42
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO CITY PLANNING COMMISSION
Monday,October 21,2013
6:30 dclock p.m.
reasons why he would like to extend the garage. Wang noted they are not extending the height of the
garage but just the length.
Wang stated in his opinion the proposal will not affect anyone's view on the east side. Wang stated he is
requesting the encroachment into the 75-foot setback area since the proposal would not work otherwise.
Chair Leskinen o ened the ublic hearin at 8:27 m. � �
P P g P� , �x-;
` � �-- t�
` ���
There were no public comments regarding this application.
�
� ������
Chair Leskinen closed the public hearing at 8:27 p.m. � °--
°����
Thiesse stated in his view an l 8-foot garage is a practical di�culty but that he is no1 sure v�hether
extending the garage 12 feet is the answer and that perhaps six feet would be more reasonable. Thiesse
noted a pickup or a Suburban will not fit in an 18-foot barage.
Leskinen indicated she visited the site and that in herview 12 feet is too much. Leskinen stated she is not
sure if there is any spot for a detached garage on the properly but that is one option that could be
considered.
Thiesse noted the existing garage is not practical in Ilis opiniorrand that extending the garage would help.
Landgaver asked whether a detached garage could �e located on�the property.
Curtis indicated the wooded area is dry buildable area and�hat the applieant could locate a detached
structure between the street and the house. Curtis stated there is ample room to locate a 1200 square foot
detached garage on the property.
Lemke asked if Staff would be fine with a b-foot extension and whether that would solve the problem.
Curtis stated in Staffs opinion it would not.
Leskinen stated the issue she is struggling with, given the fact that this is a new owner of the property, is
that perhaps the applicant should have thought of that prior to purchase the property. Leskinen stated she
is not sure ho� a person would be able to turn around with that large of an addition on the garage.
Curtis stated with the way the propert�� is currently situated,the applicant does have a driveway easement
that extends onto�`he property to�he east. Curtis stated even with the extension of the driveway, it would
be difficult to back up and turn around with another car in the driveway. Curtis noted the garage addition
does take up a portion of the driveway and reduces maneuverability. Curtis stated it is a long driveway to
back out of.
Thiesse commented it is also a long driveway to walk up to the garage.
Schoenzeit stated given the fact that the garage is a single-story,there is some reasonableness in the
request,but that he agrees 12 feet is too much. Schoenzeit concurred that an 18-foot garage is not
funetional and that perhaps an acceptable solution could be reached.
McGrann asked if the City has received any comments from the neighbors.
Page 21 of 42
�
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO CITY PLANNING COMMISSION
Monday,October 21,2013
6:30 o'clock p.m.
Curtis noted there is one comment from a neighbor included in the packet.
Leskinen asked how large of an addition could be constructed and still meet the setbacks.
Curtis indicated no matter what the property owner does, he would encroach further into the average
lakeshore setback, which would require a variance. Curtis noted tihere is a portion of the garage addition
that would meet both of the other setbacks. Curtis stated the applicants did not have the 75-foot setback
reflected on the survey and that she has outlined it as best she cauld.
Thiesse asked if a garage located anywhere along the driveway would meet the 30-foot setback.
Curtis stated it would not.
Landgraver stated in his view the Planning Commission will not reach unanimous consent on the
application and that there is no simple solution. Landgraver�stated he likes Commissioner Schoenzeit's
suggestion that there could be a compromise but that 12 feet is not realistic.
Curtis stated the only solution that would meet a11��setbacks and not require a variance would be to take up
some of the interior room of the home.
Schoenzeit noted the property is large enough t�replace the living space:somewhere else if the applicants
would like.
Curtis stated variances would be required.
Leskinen stated she is not in favor nf the application as proposed but that she is not in a position to
redesign it.
Thiesse asked�if there is a number Chair Leskinen would be willing to extend the garage.
Leskinen indieated ther`e'is�not.� � ��
Lesnke stated he understands the�praciical difficulty and that he likes Commissioner Schoenzeit's
suggestion of going six feet rather than 12 feet.
Thiesse noted that��ould result in a 24-foot garage, which is a reasonable expectation for a new garage.
Leskinen asked�whether the Planning Commission would like to table the application to allow the
applicant the time to�revise��his plans. Leskinen stated it appears it would not be approved as proposed.
Schoenzeit stated he would suggest the applicant bring back a more moderate proposal.
Leskinen asked how the applicant feels about tabling the application.
Lixiao Wang indicated that would be fine. Wang noted at an earlier time they had a three-car garage on
the property but that there is now an elevator taking up approximately one-third of the space in the garage
and that he cannot take out that element.
Page 22 of 42
� '
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO CITY PLANNING COMMISSION
Monday,October 21,2013
6:30 o'clock p.m.
Schrader stated the third stall could by extended 12 feet and that the 18 foot depth is on the double side.
The single stall extends maybe 9 feet, which is not shown very well on the overhead. The right-hand
corner has an elevator in it,which is why the 12-foot was proposed.
Leskinen stated that may also not be achievable but that a detached garage is another option.
Wang indicated he will make sure their next car will be smaller. � �
Lemke moved, Thiesse seconded,to table Application No. 13-363b,Lixiao Wang, 3059 Farview
Lane. VOTE: Ayes 7,Nays 0.
. /10. #13-3639 AND #13-3638 SOURCE LAND CAPITAL,LLC, ON BEHALF OF GRA
W STERN,405 NORTH ARM DRIVE, COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDME :38
P.M.— 5 P.M.
Leskinen asked ther the applications should be discussed separately. '
Gaffron stated the comp ensive plan amendr�enf portion of the application ould be discussed first.
Leskinen commented the public aring�vill likely i�lvolve bot�i applicat'�� s.
Steve Grittman, NAC, stated this a�pli ion involves�the conversi of the Lakeview Golf Course into
single-family residential. Grittman noted t e are five parcels t are depicted on the overhead,
including one parcel that is not_part ofthe pro sal. 'That par includes the current owner's home.
The proposal will convert the golf course into a rura ential development. The current status of the
property from a Comprehensive Plan standpoint is r e for park, recreational, and open space. The
propert�� is currently'zoned RR-1 B, which is the ing dis ' t in Orono that allows for two acre sized
lots in a rural residen#ial pattern. The property ' located outs� the MUSA district.
The formal approvals necessary�to take tl � project from its eurrent osal to an eventual end include a
Comprehensive Plan Amendment�hat ' under consideration this eveni as we11 as a preliminary plat,
final�plat, and possibly a zoning act depending on the nature of the pro ed plat that is presented. A
Planned Residential Developmen s onc option that could be pursued depen on the nature of the
design.
Grittman noted�the procc� will also require a series of reviews and applications over a mber of months.
A numbei-oi'other age ies will be part of the review process. Hennepin County will be � olved in
various aspects of tr sportation improvements as part of the project. Grittman noted Henne County
has authority for iew as it relates to access to county roads. There are two county roads that a t the
property, Cou Road 19 on the west and County Road 151 located to the south. The Minnehaha ek
Watershed trict will also be involved as they have review authority on stormwater management an
are also i olved in revegetation and landcover restoration that will potentially be part of this project.
In ad ' on, Metropolitan Council will be involved in the Comprehensive Plan Amendment to make sure
th is consistent with the regional plans that the Metropolitan Council has developed.
Page 23 of 42
Council
' Exhibit G
NOTICE OF PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION
CITY OF ORONO
2750 Kelley Parkway ZONING FILE: 13-3636
PO Box 66
Crystal Bay, MN 55323
952.249.4620 DATE OF NOTICE: 19 November 2013
TO: Lixiao Wang COPIES Lixiao Wang
3059 Farview Ln via Andy Schrader
Long Lake, MN 55356 Email:
TYPE OF REQUEST: Variances
DATE OF MEETING: November 18, 2013
The Orono Planning Commission voted on a motion to deny the application. The applicant was directed
to redesign/reduce the size of the proposed addition.
VOTE: 5 FOR 0 AGAINST
If you wish to submit revised plans for presentation to the City Council they must be received on or
before Monday, December 2"d for consideration on the City Council's December 9`h agenda.
Applicant's next meeting is scheduled as: Monday, December 9, 2013
This is a City Council meeting. The meeting begins at 6:30 PM
Additionally, the Orono Planning Commission initially reviewed your application for variances on October
21, 2013. The current deadline for City action on your application is December 3, 2013. Your application
will not be before the Orono Council until after the 60—day review period ends. Therefore this letter is
your notification that the City is extending the time period for City action on application #13-3636 under
Minn. Stat. § 15.99, subd. 3(f). The time period for action on this application is hereby extended until
Saturday,January 1,2014.
If you desire certified copies of the official Planning Commission minutes,they are available from the
City Clerk after review and approva► by the Planning Commission. If you have questions, please contact
Planning &Zoning Coordinator, Melanie Curtis at mcurtis@ci.orono.mn.us or 952.249.4627.
Council
MINUTES OF THE Exhibit H
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
Monday,November 18,2013
6:30 o'clock p.m.
OLL CALL
The o Planning Commission met on the above-mentioned date with the following members prese •
Chair Den eskinen, Commissioners Kevin Landgraver, Christopher McGrann, Jon Schwin , nd
John Thiesse. enting Staff were Assistant City Administraior or Lortg-Term Strat � lanning
Michael Gaffron, Plan Coordinator Melanie Curtis, and Recorder Jackie Yotm ayor Lili Tod
McMillan was present
Chair Leskinen called the meeting to or t 6:30 p.m., follo��ed h e Pledge af Allegiance.
CONSENT AGENDA
Landgraver moved,Leslcinen seconded,to a ove the Co nt Agenda as submitted. VOTE:
Ayes 5,Nays 0.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
*1. APPROVAL LANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES OF TOBER 21,
2013
Landgr moved,Leskinen seconded,to approve the minutes of the Orono Planning Comm� ' n
mee ' of October 21,2013, as submitted. VOTE: Ayes 5,Nays 0.
OLD BUSINESS
2. #13-3636 LIXIAO WANG,3059 FARVIEW LANE,VARIANCES,6:33 P.M.—6:49 P.M.
Lixiao Wang, Applicant, tvas present. = ��
Curtis nc�ted this application was zabled at the October Planning Commission meeting to allow the
applica�nt time to submit a revised plan reducing the size of the proposed addition from 12 to 9 feet.
Variances trom side yard setback, lake setback, average lakeshore setback, and hardcover are still
reguired.
The applicants have provided a revised survey and a revised, more detailed garage plan which better
illustrates the interior of the cxisting garage and its dimensional challenges. The applicant's property is
2.7 acres and, including the proposal, will remain at 11.8 percent. A small portion of the proposed
hardcover includes 23 feet of non-structural driveway hardcover to structural hardcover within the 75-foot
zone. The proposed garage addition as revised will encroach 7.5 feet into the required 30-foot side yard
setback. The garage portion of the home currently meets the 30-oot side setback.
According to the revised plans,the proposed garage addition is to be constructed by extending the lake-
side wall of the home to the east. Due to the angle of the home and the lakeshore,the addition will be
72.5 feet from the lake where a 75-foot setback is required. Approximately 23 square feet of additional
structure within the 75-foot setback is proposed. The applicant's home is located entirely ahead of the
average lakeshore setback line. Any expansion or structural additions to the home require approval of an
average lakeshore setback variance.
Page 1 of 35
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
Monday,November 18,2013
6:30 o'clock p.m.
Staff has received updated comments today regarding the applicant's revised plan from the adjacent
property owner who provided initial comments. The revised survey and detailed garage plans better
clarify the existing usable space within the applicant's garage. Staff continues to find that creating a
more nonconforming structure is not in character with the neighboi-hood. The revised addition adds mass
within the eastern side setback area and also within the average lakeshore setback.
The applicant has not demonstrated a reasonable practical difficulty supporting additional structure within
the average lakeshore setback or within the 75-foot setback�trea. Further, the applicant has failed to
demonstrate that enforcing the provisions of the Zonin�;Ordinance�leprive them of the reasonable use of
the property.
Planning Staff continues to recommend denial of the variances. '
Lixiao Wang, Applicant, stated they have downsized their proposal. 'Wang indicated they currently have
three cars,with two of those vehicles being a truck and an SUV which do not fit into the garage. Wang
stated if they do not do this project,they will have to continue to park the cars outside.
Wang noted the neighbor's house is up higher than his a�d that the trees currently block the view from the
neighbors. Wang pointed out the location ofthe trees on the overhead.
Wang indicated their new proposal has been reduced by thl�ee feet,which does not provide any additional
space for boats or other equipment and that they are basicall� asking for a basic three-car garage. Wang
stated if they reduce the proposed garage any further,their cars wi11 not fit in the garage. Wang stated this
is the best option they have.
Thiesse asked if there are three garage doors now.
Wang indicated there are two. �
Thiesse stated�he did vi��it the property and that he recalled a two-door garage and something else without
a barage door.
Wang�����indicated there are not three doors.
Chair Leskinen opened the public Yi�earin�� at 6:38 p.m.
There ��erc no public comments regarding this application.
Chair Leskinen closed the public hearing at 6:38 p.m.
Leskinen indicated her position has not changed from the last meeting and that in her view there is still a
considerable amount of massing near the shoreline.
Landgraver stated the other point is if fairly common vehicles do not fit in the garage that obstructs the
neighbor's view already and the cars will remain parked outside, that is worth some consideration. As
proposed,the vehicles will be put away inside a symmetrical building rather than sitting outside, which
seems to make sense.
Page 2 of 35
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
Monday,November 18,2013
6:30 o'dock p.m.
Thiesse stated that could be accomplished with six feet,which is what the Planning Commission had
directed at the last meeting. The applicant last time proposed 12 feet and is now proposing nine feet.
Thiesse stated in his view a standard sedan would fit in the 16.2 feet.
Landgraver asked if the City has a minimum garage depth.
Curtis indicated it does not.
Thiesse stated 20 feet would be tight and 24 feet is reasonable.
Schwingler commented he also owns a Suburban that'does not fit into his garage. ,Schwinger stated he is
struggling with moving the garage closer to the lake with���he set�ack variance and that it will alter the
essential character of the neighborhood. Sehwingler stated he understands it is a difficult property to
work with and that there are trees nearby. Schwingler stated the propertyr o��ner could still park cars in
the driveway even with a full-size garage and that parki�ig cars outside is�not���a hardship.
Leskinen noted the original proposal has only been reduced�by three feet and does not alleviate the
potential turnaround problems, which was also raised at the�.last meeting.
McGrann asked if six feet would be acceptabl�to the Pl�nning Gommission.
Leskinen noted six feet is what thc Commission dis��ssed last time.
Thiesse noted the applicant needs to demonstrate a practical difficulty and that an 18-foot garage is a
practieal difficulty. Thiesse indicated�a 24-foot garage�i�not�`�a practical difficulty.
Leskinen noted the garage is currently>�l8 feet.
Wang stated even if�they do��not do the addition,�they are already encroaching towards the lake. Wang
stated if they° are foi-ced to reduee the garage down by another three feet,they might as well tear down the
gara�e,and�rebuild a new one;'but that he does not have the money to do that.
Wang��atcd the current proposal will not make the situation any worse. Wang stated due to the tight
constra�ints with the land,their proposal will not make it any warse.
Leskinen asked�vvhy the applicant is proposing nine feet versus six feet after the discussion at the last
Planning Commissic�n meeting.
Wang stated their contractor indicated six feet would not be sufficient, which is the reason why they
stayed with the nine feet.
Landgraver asked if there is a time constraint on this application.
Curtis indicated the 60-day review period will expire on December 3 and that she is planning to take the
additiona160 days the City is allowed. The applicants have indicated they would like to take some time
before they go before the City Council.
Page 3 of 35
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
Monday,November 18,2013
6:30 dclock p.m.
Landgraver stated it sounds like the Planning Commission would support a small addition but not the nine
feet being proposed by the applicant. Landgraver noted if the application is denied,the applicant can still
go before the City Council.
Leskinen stated in her view tabling is not an option and that the Planninb Commission should entertain a
motion. Leskinen stated it does not appear the Planning Commission is will'ing to approve anything over
six feet.
Curtis stated if the Planning Commission is general ly favorable of the 6-foat addition,that,�iirection could
again be given to the applicant.
Thiesse stated he would like the applicant to have a useable garage and that a 24-foot garage is useable in
his view. Thiesse stated he is not convinced that l 6 feet is��not enough for a sedan and that in his view the
third stall for that type of vehicle may be sufficient. Thiesse stated if the applicant can prove differently,
he would be willing to reconsider the application.
Leskinen reiterated her position has not chanbed from last time and that she agrees a reasonable garage is
24 feet.
Thiesse noted the neighbars are also opposed to the proposal, which does�not help.
Landgraver moved,McGrann seconded, to recommend denial of Application 3059 Farview Lane,
with the stipulation that the specific request for nine feet is denied and that the Planning
Commission would recommeud six feet. VOTE: Ayes 5,Nays 0.
W BUSINESS
3. #13-3637 WILLIAM ABBOTT,2350 WATERTOWN ROAD, SUBDIVISION, 6:4 . .—
8:17 P.
William Abbo pplicant,was prescnt.
Gaffron stated the ap � ant is requestin��preliminary plat approval f seven lot single-family
residential subdivision to known as Oliver Hill as well as rez � g to Residential Planned Unit
Development. The property zoned RR-1B, one family ru esidential district,with a two acre
minimum,-
The property consists aftwo parcels. is a g lot and the other is a vacant parcel. Wl�en combined,
those two parcels equal 4.9 acres. Rough acres is dry buildable and 1.24 acres of wetland. The
aerial photograph sh���s a wetland in nort st corner and a small creek located in the trees that
flows to the southeast. As you lo owards the there is quite a bit of open and a line of trees along
the driveway. The easterly p on of the property als ntains quite a bit of trees.
The land use plan fo ts area in 2000 was re-guided from two re single-family to two to three units
per acre single f y. The property directly north and adjacent to ' site was developed as an RPUD
known as G ale Cove. Out of the nine lots that were approved, five ix of the lots have been built
on. Gaf n stated essentially this will mirror that development.
Page 4 of 35
� ' Council
Exhibit G
Formal Request for Extension of Review Period
With regard to Zoning Application #13-3636, 3059 Farview Lane, I hereby request an extension to
February 11, 2014 of the statutory application review period.
i I �',� l l 2 � � -v" � /
Lixiao Wang, Owner/Applican Date
Please return to City of Orono c/o Melanie Curtis by the end of the day on Friday,January 24, 2014:
Via email: mcurtis@ci.orono.mn.us
Fax: 952-249-4616
JAN ? � �014
�' e . � - � ��
' Council
Exhibit H
OLD BUSINESS
2. #13-3636 LIXIAO WANG,3059 FARVIEW LANE,VARIANCES,6:34 P.M.—7:00 P.M.
Lixiao Wang, Applicant, was present.
Curtis noted this application was reviewed by the Planning Commission at their October meeting. The
applicant at that time proposed a l2-foot addition to the attached garage. The Planning Commission
recommended the addition be reduced by half the depth and tabled the application. At the November
Planning Commission meeting, the applicant opted to propose a 9-foot addition, citing the need to
accommodate each of his vehicles. The Planning Commission questioned the applicant as to why the 9-
foot addition was proposed when they previously indicated there was support if the ��ara�e expansion was
reduced to six feet. The Planning Commission approved a mo�ion to recorr�nend denial of the applicant's
9-foot addition.
Curtis stated the applicant appeared before the City Council at their December 13 meeting and was
subsequently tabled to allow the Planning Commission the opportunity to review the applicant's latest
revision.
The applicant has since provided revised plans for tlie garage addition resulting in a 6-foot expansion of
the existing attached garage. Variances far hardcover, side yard setback, lake setback and average
lakeshore setback are requested.
The proposed garage addition as revised will encroach 4.7 feet into thexequired 30-foot side yard setback.
The garage portion of the home cui-rently meets the 30-foot side'sethack. As revised,the addition will be
approximately 72 feet from the lake where a 75-foot sethacl: is required. Approximately 14 square feet of
additional structure within the 75-foot setback is proposed.
The applicant's revised plans al�o better clarify the existing usable space within the garage. However,
Staff continues to find that creating�a more nonconforming structure is out of character with the
neighborhood. The revised addition adds mass within the eastern side setback area and also within the
average lakeshore setback. The applica�tt has failed to demonstrate that enforcing the provisions of the
Zoning Ordinance deprive them of the reasonable use of the property. As a result, Planning Staff
continue�s to recommend denial��af the variances.
The Planning Commission shauld review and discuss the applicant's revised request as well as the
enclosed comments from the neighbor to the east and make a recommendation to the City Council. If the
Planning�`�ommission determines that practical difficulties exist which support granting the variances,
those praetical difficulties should be clearly stated for the record.
Thiesse asked if there is documentation showing the garage at 18 feet currently.
Curtis indicated she is not aware if the packet contains that information.
Gaffron stated the deepest two stalls are at 18 feet.
Lixiao Wang, Applicant, stated he should have taken the Planning Commission's recommendation the
first time, but that he has since revised his plans to six feet when he went before the City Council. Wang
stated in his view he would be able to fit a Toyota Corolla or similar type car in that size garage but that
he cannot push the car any further forward due to an elevator located in the garage.
Schoenzeit asked if the current house is over 7,000 square feet.
Wang indicated it is.
Thiesse asked what room is located behind the garage and whether the elevator is part of the original
garage.
Wang stated to his recollection the elevator was installed because the previous property owner was old
and sick,which takes up a portion of the garage. -
Thiesse asked what room is behind the portion containing the two-stall ga�age.
Wang stated there is a furnace and air purification system in that area, which means the �arage cannot be
extended in that area. Wang stated he may not do anyt�iug with the gara��e if their application is not
approved.
Acting Chair Landgraver opened the public hearing at 7:41 p.m.
Francine Delaney, 3150 Farview Lane, stated the applicant knew what the garage was like prior to
purchasing the property and that the previous owner was alwavs able to park her cars inside the garage.
Delaney noted the existing easement is not being maaimized at the present time and that if the variance is
granted and more structure is added, in her view additional driveway will be requested due to the
difficulty they will have in turning around.
Delaney stated the structure would also be in her line of sight of the lake and that a hardship has not been
demonstrated.
Acting Chair Landgraver closed the public hearin� at 7:43 p.m.
Wang stated the City Council indicated��he could not have any deck on the top of the garage, which he is
fine with. As far as backing iip. Wanb stated he did make sure they would not have to come baek again to
request extending tbe�driveway. Wang indicated he backed his car up from the area where the addition
would be added on�o the garage and it was not affected.
Wang noted the neighbor's�building is three stories and the garage would be one floor with no deck.
Wang s��ted in his view it would not block her view.
Schoenzeit asked if Staff has been able to show a more acceptable footprint in a different location.
Thiesse stated it would have to be unattached.
Curtis indicated Sfaff has not do�e that but that the Code does allow far a detached garage. Curtis noted
it would be necessary to locate�it more towards the road.
Thiesse asked whether the Planning Commission could freeze the hardcover variance if this addition is
approved.
Curtis indicated every resolution includes language that states the approved hardcover level for the
property. Curtis stated any changes to the hardcover would need to come back before the Planning
Commission and City Council for a variance approval.
Landgraver asked if there is additional room in the easement for the applicant to use.
Curtis stated the dotted line illustrates the easement and pointed out the driveway is paved with a little
jog, which does enter the easement slightly.
Landgraver asked if the applicant could come back and request full use of the easement.
Curtis indicated that is correct.
Landgraver asked if that is being requested at the present time.
Curtis stated it is not.
Wang stated he does not plan on coming back for that. '
Thiesse noted the City does not have any regulations preventing people from parking in their driveway.
Lemke asked if the existing house is over the 75-foot setbaek.
Curtis indicated it is slightly and that the garage addition would be a slight-extension of the encroachment.
Curtis stated due to the topography,the garage addition would be a slightly bigger encroachment than the
house.
Landgraver asked what kind of feedback the City Council had on this appiication.
Curtis stated there was a discussion about the need for a reasonable ��arage space but that the City Council
did not feel the deck was necessary. Curtis stated to hei-understanding there was not unanimous support
for the addition and that the City Council instead wanted the Pla�ning Commission to relook at the
application. �
Thiesse asked if he proposed a 9-�foot addition at the City Council meeting.
Curtis stated the applicant brought forward a 6-foot addition to the City Council and that a 9-foot addition
was brought fo��vard to:the Planning Commission the second time.
Thissse stated he is conflicted�on this application given the fact that the design of a vehicle that the
transportation agencies use is 19 feet long, which is a practical difficulty in his mind. Thiesse stated an
additional si��feet would make it a 24-foot garage,which is a fairly standard garage, and that in his view
an 18-foot garage should never have been built. Thiesse stated he does not care if he can park a car in the
third stall, but�the fact that thebac�C�v�all contains mechanical equipment constitutes a practical difficulty.
Lemke asked if�tl�e mechanical equipment is along the entire wall.
Thiesse stated he does�n�t know,but that even if it is half of the wall,that would only leave a one-stall
garage.
Thiesse asked Delaney if the garage would really affect her view of the lake given the trees in the area.
Delaney stated when the leaves are down, it would, but in the summer the leaves block it.
Thiesse stated if the 6-foot addition is not allowed,the cars will be sitting out in the driveway and
blocking the neighbor's view to some degree. Thiesse stated he does see a practical difficulty.
� �
Lemke noted the garage addition is encroaching almost five feet into the 30-foot setback and also into the
75-foot setback, which makes it unacceptable on two different levels.
Schoenzeit stated there is a substantial amount of house footprint that could be converted into a garage if
so desired.
Thiesse noted cost is not considered a practical difficulty.
McGrann asked if the applicant would need a variance to e�pand his use into the easement.
Curtis indicated they would since they currently exceed the amount of allowablehardcover within the 0-
75 foot zone. The property currently contains 11 pereent total hardcover and the-�applicant can widen the
driveway to some extent, but that he would not be able to widen the drivewa��very much,on#he east side.
McGrann asked if the applicant could apply for additional hardcover::
Curtis indicated he could.
Thiesse asked if that would just require a permit
Curtis indicated it would require a permit for the hardcover outside the 75-foot area.
Gaffron noted Staff has also not seen the language contained i���he�easement to know what would be
allowed.
Landgraver stated the Planning Commission should take note of the fact that they had previously
recommended six feet,which should be taken into consideration, but that they need to take into
consideration the neighbor's concert�s and the increased eneroachment.
Schoenzeit stated an attached two-ear garage that is functional is reasonable use of the property and not
having a two-car garage�is a practical difficulYy here in Minnesota.
Landgraver stated the Delaneys have been pretty eonsistent about conveying their concerns with the
appGcation and that the applicant has made attempts to comply with the direction of the Planning
Commission. Landgraver noted the applicant could plant a row of evergreens along the property line,
which wouid block the neighbor's view�, and that he is inclined to grant the 6-foot variance.
McGrann commented there are no easy answers, but that he would be in favor of the six feet. McGrann
indicated he would have some serious issues if the applicant comes baek with a request to expand the
hardcovcr. which would increase the amount of outside parking and would be closer to the Delaney
property.
Curtis noted the Delaneys would need to consent to any expansion of hardcover in the easement area.
Lemke stated given the objections of the neighbor, he would not be in support of the expansion.
(Jon Schwingler arrives at 6:58 pm.)
Schoenzeit moved,McGrann seconded,to recommend approval of Application No. 13-3636,Lixiao
Wang,3059 Farview Lane,granting of a 6-foot addition to the garage without the deck on top,and
,
W �
to recommend no further approval of hardcover in the easement area. VOTE: Ayes 4,Nays 2,
Lemke and Schwingler Opposed.
� ����
��- �r��,�"�.
�.- � �
,� �
s �.
r�� � ,
'��,.
-,:;,�:
�, i
�
`������ ��--.
- �.
� '
u, :
f
�� "�
�.
_"d».
�
�YT �� �r
�
� ��:
��� �.,�..
v
�� � . ,
� � ,���' ���,��'.
�;'
=r �
y�,
�
�`�,_ ..s .,:. ;:,.
�� �N.
i 6,�
��� �
��
�
� � �� �
����5�
£
'.'.�� ; � �� .
" � � v z,a �.,,, � .
� !
r
��� ����':�
� �
'�� .:�y ���
� �:� �, r:..,:.
r- :`
� s ,Y �
��
� F `.
►
� Council
Exhibit I
Melanie Curtis
From: Francine Delaney [francine@theritterteam.com]
Sent: Thursday, January 16, 2014 8:15 AM
To: Melanie Curtis
Cc: djd471 @msn.com
Subject: 3059 Farview Lane Variance Request
�IeCanie,
I'm sending tFii.s emaiCin regards to tFce'Wang's request to adcf additiona�garage space to 3059�F'arview Gane. rDavid and I stiC�
oppose tFiis request. ZUitFi tFie current driveway situation, it is d�cuCt to turn arouncf wFien tFiere is more tFian 1 car in t(te
driveway. If there is additiona�structure added, it wiCCmake it nearCy impossi6�e foranyone to turn aroundonce tFiey are in the
driveway. It is a�ong way to 6ackout of tFiat driveway ancf many cars over t(ze years Fiave sCipped off and deen stuckin tFie
snow. �Davidancfl Fiave assistecfmore than one strancCecfmotorist 6ecause of this.
3059�F'arview current�y�ias a driveway easement on our properCy. If additionaCstructure is added, it not onCy furt(zer o6structs
our view to the Cake, we are assuming tFie ne.�t request wiCC 6e for additionaCdriveway,further infringircg on our property and
it's va�ue.
�Ylr`iNarrg was aware of the garage situation w(zen Fie purchasecf tFie home. I don't 6eCzeve it to 6e a FiarcCsFiip wFien a Fiome�i,as 2
garage staCGs. 71�ie current home is over 7,000 square feet. I 6eC�eve tFiat it coufd 6e modfied to accommodate a deepergarage
wit(zout acCdircg on to tFie e.xisting structure.
�1'Cease seriousCy consider our input wFien making your decision on the variance requested.
7hankyou!
�F'rancine and�David�De�aney
612-750-9121
1
R T
Date Application Received: 9/l8/13 COUNCIL M�ETING
Date Application Considered as Complete: 11/8/l3
Initial 120-Day Review Period Expires: 2/8/l4
Extended by applicant on 1/9/14 to: 3/l0/13 JAN 2 7 2Q1�
REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION CITY OF ORONO
Date: January 24, 2014
Item No.: �
Department Approval: Administrator Approval: Agenda Section:
Name: Michael P. Gaffron Planning Dept.
Title: Asst. City Admin. -Long Term Strategy
Item Description: #13-3637 Willie Abbott o/b/o The Broadway Group, LLC
- 2350 Watertown Rd& xxx Willow Drive North
- Preliminary Plat& RPUD Rezoning - Second Review
Zoning District: RR-1B One Family Rural Residential District (2 acre/200' width)
CMP Land Use Designation: Low-Medium Density Residential, 2-3 Units per Acre
Existing Lot Area: Dry buildable 160,307 s.£ (3.68 acres)
Wetland 53,938 s.£ (1.24 acres)
Total 214,245 s.£ (4.92 acres)
Proposed Overall Density: 7/3.68 = 1.9 units per acre
Summary of Request: Applicant requests preliminary plat approval for a 7-lot single-family
residential subdivision to be known as Oliver Hill; and rezoning to Residential Planned Unit
Development (RPUD).
Planning Commission Recorrimendation: Planning Commission reviewed the preliminary plat at its
November I 8 meeting and on a vote of 5-0 recommended approval subject to a number of conditions.
Staff Recommendation: Council is requested to review the additional materials submitted by
the applicant for this the subdivision proposal, and direct staff to draft a preliminary plat
resolution based on Council's conclusions.
List of Exhibits
A-Applicant's Additional Submittals
(1)Lot-by-lot analysis of lot coverage percentages vs FAR
(2) Updated Plan Sheets 1/4/5/6/7 Depicting Relocated Rain Gardens
(3) Revised Landscape Plan
(4)Narrative addressing: a) Site protection during construction
b) Response to Steve Kelley letter
B -January 10 Letter& diagrams from adjacent neighbor Steve Kelley
C -Easements Depiction & Potential Easement/Covenant Document Language
D -Notice of Council Action 12/11/13
E -Council Minutes of 12/9/13
F-Council Memo and Selected Exhibits of 12/5/13
At the December 9 meeting, Council tabled the application and requested the following
additional information:
r 1
#13-3637
January 24,2014
Page 2
l. 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% lot coverage limitation (as a percentage of entire lot or just the dry
contiguous area...). Show how the intended 3-car attached garages fit into these sites.
Staff to consider options for defining lot coverage and/or massing limitations, with a goal
of defining standards for all lots rather than for individual lots (example: "lesser of x s.f.
or x %").
4. Plan showing how rain gardens might be located in single lots rather than straddling lot
lines.
5. Plan showing positive measures for protection of wetlands, tree areas, etc. during
development and construction; i.e. barriers, fencing, signage, etc.
Additional Information Received
The applicant has provided the following additional information:
- Lot-by-lot analysis of lot coverage percentages vs FAR - See Exhibit A(1)
- Revised landscape plan showing additional buffering - See Exhibit A(4)
- Revised grading plans depicting rain garden relocations - See Exhibits A(3)
- Site protection narrative - See Exhibit A(2)
-Narrative in response to neighbor comments - See Exhibit A(2)
Additionally, staff received a comment letter on January 10 from adjacent neighbor Steve Kelley
of 2340 Watertown Road (Exhibit B) with diagrams of some suggested revisions. The applicant
has provided a response to those comments in Exhibit A(2).
Lot Coverage Analysis
Please review the lot analysis table provided by the applicant, Exhibit A(1). The intent of this
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. Because 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, not just the contiguous dry buildable.
The developer has suggested the maximum size of 2-story house he intends for the site would be
a 2,820 s.f. footprint including house/garage/deck/screen porch, translating to 5,180 s.f. floor
area including finished interior spaces/basement/garage/screen porch. For ramblers, the potential
maximum intended footprint expands to 3,820 s.f. and floor area goes up to 5,280 s.f.
Based on the total lot areas, use of the RPUD standard 0.50 FAR (Floor Area Ratio) yields
allowable floor areas ranging from 8,700 s.f. to 19,000+ s.f. Use of the 0.50 FAR for the
development would potentially allow much larger homes than developer anticipates. Staff does
not recommend use of the 0.50 FAR standard.
� T
#13-3637
January 24,2014
Page 3
2-story homes: Use of the City's standard 15% lot coverage limit would still allow for the
developer's intended 2-story homes of maximum footprint 2,820 s.f. on all but one lot. That
smallest lot would need 16.2 %to get to 2,820 s.£ For that lot, 15%= 2,615 s.f.
Ramblers: The four smallest lots would not accommodate the proposed maximum size rambler
under the 15% lot coverage limit. A 3,820 s.f. rambler footprint on the smallest lot translates to
21.9% lot coverage.
Consider that the total 4.38 acre (191,000 s.f.) site at 15% would yield a total lot coverage
footprint of 28,600 s.£ Divide this by the number of lots (7) equals an average lot coverage
footprint of 4,085 s.£ The developer suggests that perhaps only 2 of the lots lend thernselves to a
rambler configuration requiring a maximum of 3,820 s.£, and the rest would be 2-stories needing
only 2,820 s.f. each. The end result would be an overall lot coverage for the combined 7 lots of
about 11.5%.
An irony here is that the two smallest lots, both in Block 2, are the least constrained by setbacks,
wetlands, buffers, etc. and most able to accommodate a larger rambler footprint, yet would have
the most difficulty meeting a 15% footprint limit.
There are many possible options for a lot coverage standard. Staff would suggest consideration
of the following:
OPTION 1 - Limit all 71ots to 15%. The range in house footprints could be 2,600 - 5,700 s.f.
OPTION 2 - Developer has suggested establishing the limit as "the larger of 3,820 s.f. or 15%".
In this scenario, house footprint limits would range from 3,820 - 5,700 s.f.
OPTION 3 - Limit all 7 lots to 3,820 s.f. maximum footprint, disregard a percentage standard,
and let the lot shape, size and setback constraints dictate the style (2-story or rambler) and
ultimate footprint.
OPTION 4 - For each of the 7 lots, allow maximum footprint based on the style of house being
built: Two-story - 2,820 s.£ Rambler - 3,820 s.£ The risk in this is that a rambler built today
could add a second story later and exceed the two-story footprint limit, unless strict controls
disallowing such expansions were established.
OPTION 5 - Establish a maximum footprint standard for each lot based on something other than
total lot area.
Pending Council consideration, staff would note that each of the above options can be readily
administered once the standard is established.
Site Protection During Development
Applicant has provided a narrative description of how the site will be protected from damage to
vegetation that is intended to be preserved during construction. That being said, the grading
plans indicate that virtually the entire site south of the wetland and southwest of the tree line
adjacent to the creek will be graded, so that future buffering will likely be new plantings (or
possibly transplants of existing higher quality materials from the site, if any).
Rain Garden Relocations
The applicant has revised the rain garden locations to be completely within individual lots and
not straddling lot lines. The rain gardens would be protected via an expansion of the perimeter
drainage and utility easements. See Exhibits A(3). Note that the new landscaping plan suggests
elimination of rain gardens in favor of shallow swales. There would appear to be a conflict
between the new landscaping plan and the new grading plan...
T 1
#13-3637
January 24,2014
Page 4
Revised Landscape Plan
Applicant has revised the landscape plan to provide additional screening along Willow Drive and
buffering to adjacent properties. See Exhibit A(4). The new landscaping plan suggests swales
rather than rain gardens for stormwater management. This needs to be resolved.
Easements & Covenants
Staff has reviewed the various easements and covenants that would be required and considered
the possibilities for consolidating them into a more compact fortnat. A depiction of the various
easements required for this plat is shown on the map in Exhibit C. As a review, here is a list of
the standard easements and/or covenants that would be required of this plat:
Easement Description Comments Shown
on
Mylars?
1 Perimeter Drainage & Shown on the mylars but not accompanied by a document.
Utili Easements - 10' along exterior plat boundaries and roadways Yes
(no separate document) - 5' either side of interior lot lines
2 Other Draina�e & Utility Shown on the mylars, but potentially referenced in a separate document.
Easements These typically would be the areas devoted to stormwater facilities- Yes
(potentially a separate ponds, rain gardens, non-wetland drainageways.
document)
3 Wetland Flowage and Taken over the area of just the delineated wetland. Until the City
Conservation Easement discontinued requiring buffers,the Wetland F&C Easement description Yes
and depiction on mylars included the wetland as well as the required
(separate document) �'etland buffer. This easement area is normally shown on the mylars as
simply"Draina�e Easement" because County won't accept the term
Wetland Flowage and Conservation Easement on the mylars.
4 Trail Easement 10' wide along Willow Drive - in same location as Perimeter Drainage & No
(separate document) Utility Easement
5 Ci . Sewer Easement 20' wide(10' either side of existing sewer main)and ]0' either side of Yes
(separate document) proposed sewer extension up to the cul-de-sac. If not exactly coincident
with any other drainage and utility easement, will be shown on the plat as
a"Utility Easement"and described in a separate document.
6 Tree Preservation This is functionally a conservation easement document that contains a No
Easement description of the area being conserved and a set of conditions and
(separate document) covenants about how it is to be conserved.
* Wetland Buffer(MCWD) In this plat, MCWD is requiring a 16' buffer bordering the wetland. It
(separate document) would not necessarily show up on the mylars, although MCWD might No, but
request that it be described separately for the document and could be added Maybe
to the mylars as part of the"Drainage Easement" if MCWD requests that
City do so...
Note that if the road was to be private, it would be platted as an outlot, over which the City historically has required an
underlying Road, Drainage &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.
, ,
#13-3637
January 24,2014
Page 5
One option for consolidating documents may be for the developer to establish the easements and
restrictions within neighborhood covenants; the downside is that they may get `buried' and are
not as readily discernible to a buyer as separate documents; and 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 plat layout, the individual easement
documents have to be filed in the title of each lot affected.
If the wetlands and preservation areas were in an outlot owned by a Homeowners Association,
the complexity created by multiple documents would decrease.
The simplest option might be for the wetland and tree preservation areas to be platted as a single
outlot to be owned by the Citv, in which case certain easements would not be required.
However, that would be a distinct departure from past City practice. The City philosophy has for
decades been that the City doesn't want to own wetlands or little snippets of conservation areas
scattered around the City.
An added complexity in merely combining the documents into one is that while there is some
overlap in the easement language between the City's standard drainage easement and the
standard wetland F&C easement, they have somewhat different goals.
The City's standard Wetland C&F easement is intended to convey to the City "the right to
restrict and Declarant agrees to limit and preclude the use, improvement and development" of the
protected area per a set of listed conditions or covenants, and gives the City the right to
"remove...any structures, uses, materials, substances, or unnatural matter inconsistent with the
covenants".
The standard Drainage easement, on the other hand, gives the City the right to have water flow
across the easement area, and to "remove trees, brush, grass, dirt and other structures" and to
"construct, maintain, repair, reconstruct and use drainageways and other improvements" as well
as the right of entry to do so.
In other words, 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.
Quite often part or all of a wetland also functions for drainage purposes (which is the case for the
proposed Oliver Hill plat) and the wetland C&F Easement and Drainage Easement areas overlap
or are exactly the same area. However, if/when the wetland easement description includes
wetland buffers (a potential additional easement required by the MCWD now rather than the
City), the wetland, wetland buffer, and area needed for drainage might each have different sets of
restrictions or conditions attached, which makes for a more complex document when combined
into one.
As of this writing, staff does not have a strict recommendation for consolidating the various
easement documents that will or may be required of this plat. We are willing to entertain a
proposal by the developer's attorney to incorporate certain of the required elements into a
neighborhood covenant. This has been done with some past developments in Orono.
r �
#13-3637
January 24,2014
Page 6
Review of Neighbor Concerns
Mr. Kelley in his letter of January 10 (Exhibit B) suggests 3 specific actions he feels would
make for a better development. In addition to the applicant's response in Exhibit A(2), staff
would make the following observations:
l. "Increase setback from Willow Drive". As noted in prior memos, the standard for RPUD is a
50-foot side street setback from Willow Drive. Applicant proposes 25 feet. Kelley suggests 40
feet. Increasing the setback to something greater than 25' 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.
2. "Move access road 15 feet north". The proposed cul-de-sac platted bubble 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. This was done at staff's request. Kelley's suggestion of
moving the road 15' north is accompanied by a drawing that shows the road entrance
approximately 27 feet north of the applicant's proposed location, and cul-de-sac not touching
Kelley's parcel but also being approximately 30 feet north of applicant's proposed location.
Moving the road and cul-de-sac northward has a significant impact on reducing the buildable
area and flexibility of Lots 1 thru 4 in Block 1. It also drastically reduces the possibility of
making this proposed public cul-de-sac road into a through road if the Kelley property develops
in the future.
3. "Create an outlot of wetland". Staff from the beginning has favored creation of an outlot for
the wetland, to potentially include the proposed tree preservation area. 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 these areas, which the developer
does not favor.
Development Analysis
This is Council's second review of this application. Based on the additional information
provided, and the information contained in the prior materials, Council may wish to focus on
reaching a conclusion regarding the following topics:
1) Confirm that development of this site should be as a Residential Planned Unit
Development(RPUD).
2) Noting that lot sizes and proposed flexibility requests for certain lots regarding width,
contiguous buildable area and setbacks have not changed, does Council have any further
concerns regarding the proposed flexibility? Briefly, the items of flexibility include:
a. Allowing the side street setback for the two lots abutting Willow Drive to be 25 feet
(as it would be if Willow Drive was classified as a local street) rather than the 50'
setback required because Willow Drive is a collector road.
b. Allowing the substandard lot widths for Lots 3-4-5 which abut the cul-de-sac.
c. Allowing Lots 1-3-4 to contain a contiguous dry buildable area slightly less than the
required 15,000 s.£ (0.34 ac.) on the basis that the overall density is acceptable and
that there is sufficient area within the sites to allow homes to be developed.
� ,
#13-3637
January 24,2014
Page 7
3) Confirm acceptance of the new cul-de-sac road as a public road, and that 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 Council still prefers that each lot contain its share of the areas to
be protected via various easements. Discuss the merits and methods of consolidating
easements if that is still an issue.
5) Is Council in agreement with Planning Commission that the 10% 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' sewer easements?
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?
8) Any other topics the Council determines should be discussed.
Staff Recommendation
Discussion of the above issues and any conclusions reached by Council should provide applicant
and staff with direction as to whether or how the proposed plat should be revised. Any
remaining topics left unaddressed to date should be brought up for discussion.
Based on the above, staff recommends the following:
1) Process the subdivision via rezoning to RPUD.
2) Approval should be subject to the standard platting requirements establishment of a
developers 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.
COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED
Motion to direct staff to draft a resolution for preliminary plat approval, incorporating the
appropriate findings and conditions based on Council's review of the proposed preliminary plat.
Lot Coverage VS FAR
Sample 2 story New Contruction (1500 SqFt First Floor) Total W/Future screen Porch (300 Sq Ft)
Foot Print w/3 car Garage & Deck(12x20) 2520 Sq Ft 2820 Sq Ft
Total Floor Area (FAR) Calculation Basement 900 Sq FT & Garage 780 Sq Ft 4880 Sq Ft 5180 Sq FT
Sample Rambler New Construction (2500 SqFt First Floor) Total W/Future screen Porch (300 Sq Ft)
Foot Print w/3 car Garage& Deck (12x20) 3520 Sq Ft 3820 Sq Ft
Total Floor Area (FAR) Calculation Basement 1700 Sq FT&Garage 780 Sq Ft 4980 Sq Ft 5280 Sq Ft
Above samples assume all decks are high enough to count as coverage. The above numbers are high and should be considered worst case scenario.
This way future additions will not require variances.
2820 sq ft Suggested 3820 sq ft Suggested
Total Lot Total Lot 2 Story% of Sq Ft Rambler% Sq Ft 50% FAR 15% Lot
(acres) Sq. Feet Total Limit of Total Limit (Sq Ft) Coverage
Proposed Lot Areas
Block 1 Lot 1 0.88 38,333 7.4% 5,750 10.0°/a 5,750 19,166 5,750
Lot 2 0.8 34,848 8.1% 5,227 11.0% 5,227 17,424 5,227
Lot 3 0.53 23,087 12.2% 3,820' 16.5% 3,820 11,543 3,463
Lot 4 0.74 32,234 8.7% 4,835 11.9% 4,835 16,117 4,835
Lot 5 0.57 24,829 11.4% 3,820 15.4% 3,820 12,415 3,724
Block 2 Lot 1 0.4 17,424 16.2%', 3,820 21.9% 3,820 8,712 2,614
Lot 2 0.46 20,038 14.1% 3,820 19.1% 3,820 10,019 3,006
Over 15% Lot Coverage
mn
3 0
z D Q �
i � D � _
� , 2 - � z K�
PRELIMINARY PLANS FOR. LEGEND
� DENOlES MISCELLANEWS MANHOLE
OO DENOTES CURB STOP
0 L I V E R H I L L `� �+ot�s unun aaF
� DENOTES FlRE HYDRANT
Lr DENOlES UTl1TY BOX
>—DENOTES SANITARY SEWER
O R O N O, M N DENOTES STORM SEWER
—DENOlES WATERMAIN
SO DENOTES SANITARY SEWER MANHOLE
PROJECT LOCATION � DENOTES Ui1L1TY POLE
,,._ . . _. .. --- - . .-
' . `'� e �.;.: � . �.���'''.:� . ..� � � _.� � .ti;y�,o�,�.� ' �L 5 =��. ��j, ��� '�e��a x tOt•2 DENOTES EXISTINGNELEVATIOWN
. �.- �" ' ' � � _ .
� � �
. ; .. � . w� .__ - ` .,� , ' ',tr '
.�"S `� . ��':.� d ; .. :.� ...,:'.a= ., v � �i�i.rN 'r' �r�s �;.� " , � �' ��_.�'.�'.i+�"'�� 23
� � � �r �� � DENOTES EXISTING iF2EE
r `,
` *= � � � _
, �
� . . �4x' a r_.. n-,.. ;.. , `� !N ;. . �.y�'_ .'�,y��I 'q a y e DENOTES EXISTING CONTWR
�,� . . 'q :e �, �;... � ''���� r ` .
�
.
;
� i .._ �s;. .-.. . ;:
, JF . _. ' _ ,.
�
-. �. � .. -. . . 1
�
�` �z . d-, •:.,.'." �_�.. * ��.: � .�r. � `.. l. ` -� �� ry�».,�: g �'$•`-. 6 —m.�--DENOTES OVERHEAD WIRE
. ,
,. �... ,, . . ,,.
"� : � ���_.
� . . . :. - .:- .; ., �, . .
� t �
o- ,a, _
� �: � ��: .,: ,� , . � _ � _ •� . ,_3 �,: 4 ^� —`—DENOTES UNDERGRWND TELEPHONE
" . -
�'.�:,,�, ��3) 7 .�. _ ..;� . ...• "� .. , � _ ._ _- � ��. . «��'..� ' . —cns—DENOTES UNDERGROUND GAS
, �� �
� `x,. . . � .- ._ .�,_,
.. . � •�.� .;„� A � .
,, o � ,. � � _ �� ':
-.�s « .
�
� � .�.`.'y"' :�.. � � ' ' � ���"` �" '"'� ,�:,: -. —�.—.�-DENOTES EXISTING FENCE
�'.. . ...� .
r` _-:. �� �
� �, � _ , ,:; '.. �- ". - ..i . � I f ��'r`� _ � � � DENOTES CONCRETE
',� :-. : -. . �.+� .�.\ ' �^ � "�� ta� � h{.� �� � DENOlES BITUMINOUS
� � § i,r
', � ��� � '
ajp �„ '�..._ � � � ,�. _ ::� ,� 'rl � � �� 4 ;>. .. { vy.".-..,��a . � DENOlES GRAVEL
; . ._ .,.... �a � >. . ,
, .�
° - �,_ ., e �.y,� s,� �+'��d � � ��f;;�� DENOIES WATER MANHOLE
.,� r �� � ��' 1�
.. . ..�... - �,- � . 3� ,� . ENT
� =�
a . �:1 ------
� �r •
. ._, -. ,„,+ .� , ..� , ;'-:. ,; �.._ : . .. .. . _ ,��� � '-� � _ �� • OENOTES POSSIBLE WELL OCAlION M
.
� ,_� ,
* „' '.
,� - � _
,. . , . � �.; . ,... . Hx_x. � � . + ,:.
�., .._. . . _ _._ .,:,:.. ..�- �_�..:, .�.4� _._.....�. "..,..�: _,» _.: . ., �. _.. .. ��..�� � � . MARKER
- . _. . .. .. ....__�_. __� . _ � ..
_, i ,_ ,� ����r�
° _ __ __. ' _ _
� _ :.. .. _ .;�. . _.. .. .��....�-«a:. . ___ _.._.-.,:,...._.�_. -..r,..�..,•. ..-.-�::.,�....�,n. ..r G D GLIMITS
: � DENO7ES WETLAND BUFFER
-;., �•�. ..� c, �„*�' . ..- .. --0.._.-o--DENOTES SILT FENCE
- �- „ �� - -- - O—�-DENOTES RA IN
� �� r� �.� ;k_` .. �� - �
' •, �� � � � ' w +:.�,
. . ..;., . . .. ..� ` _
K. . � ..,. . . . :
� � �. _ � �+rs a,.,� � �_ '.��, � 1G '���� •s � �_ _.v '�'v.e" • �✓,b
� ' . : . ,� :. �` _
P � , �
� ,fY� x�� �d a _ . " .
� �
,
�� = � I. ' ��¢` � �
�� .. �n �1 �� ' :ti �i� "SB..
i
� � .,� d� r� �� ` -
,� . � �.� . ;-
, � �, ,y .
p - t�.��� � � �
` ' " " x - GOVERNING SPECIFlCATIONS:
. • ~ � r x 1. THE MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF
1'6 �° �6
\ � � � TRANSPORTATION "STANDARD SPEqFlCAT10NS
;:• "`�"��` FOF2 CONSTRUCTION" LATEST EDITION k
�` � SUPPLEMENTS.
� � I�� 2. CITY ENGINEERS ASSOCIATION OF MINNESOTA
(CEAM) STANDARD UTILITIES SPECIFlCATIONS.
� ; _ . � ; . � ,. j' (LATEST EDITION)
{, k 4 � 3 LAWS ANOCORDINAN�CERVALLSBE CO PLJED Wihl
; � � "- � °. „ +' IN THE CONSIRUCTION OF THIS PROJECT.
� .
.
�: �
�# �� �i I �� � - _ - i �.�a4. �
� � �� �� - � -�
, ; . . ..
; �_:
. � , .
y � " , ' + "' ' r
� �
_ ; ' ���� �'�_�,, :� .
� .
_� ,
� �x� '� �; t.,. .. � _ -- � �,
...
: �,
. x
+
, : . #, , ',,,
, . ,
.� ;.� INDEX
a - -��'� .,� �
_ � •�"�i� +� '
�
'�F �, . � 't ay � COVER SHEET
���^� �« f � ,�f 2 EXISTING CONDITIONS SCHOBORG LAND SERVICES
� �� e x ' � ,�r- !! �ii , I � PRELIMINARY SIREET & UTILITY PLAN & PROFILE
�
�`�� � � � �i� - � , .�`.`:t �r'-"= '�� t
k .,�. ���, ts. s I� �y . �;.
t ,.
' _,� '�II�� I � � � Q PRELIMINARY SWPPP
- .
: II r' -
,
Ilr.
�; �I - j «� �
��� ��� �, '� �k', �< ,, 6' �� � "��� .�
.�y�: DEVELOPER
I' ;��
�
�� � � � �� � - � `
-
,�
THE BROADWAY GROUP, LLC
@ Wx .
0
.
,'. '� .' e a . ' � '
; .:, III '. . '� :: ..•. . .. .� .
� � � � � , � WILLJAM ABBOTf
� ` a� � , . 1000 SOUTH BROWN ROAD
� ; _
.r .r�p, `. �i �;.. . ..,.: ' ,:��r; � .�_ . �.^ , . ,�.. WAYZATA, MN 55391
$ ;: ; � H: (612)75
'�'� ,� _ •�-f..�. . �' . EMNL: WILLJABBOTTOGMAILCOM
, .
�, . . i ' i
� +�, ;t ' y ..,.� � '; ��J ��'``,¢t �,F"�`'"� `� �� ' � :
Y , �+ a �� . �a� s�;�i� x f s �y �'- � ENGINEER
� �� �� �_ .�
rl a ` i� ■ q , CAMPION ENGWEERING SERVICES, INC.
.. ° �
� ' :r-_ i� � ,.! � I � f MARTI' CAMPION
�� ., . �' a .!
' s. �. ; .;.- TER
;. t' ,� , r -:' _ i ( MAPLEPPWNR MN 55359 N
;� - { F � PH: (763)479-5172
c , ._`� _. �
� F � �, i, .. . ,:� �- � EMNL: MCAMPIONOCAMPIONENG.COM
" SURVEYOR
�
,
,
,; ,
� ,._ '.
: SCHOBORG LAND SERVICES INC.
�_. ,
_ _-•
r,. _ , KELLY BROUWER
• .,; , 8997 COUNTY ROAD 13 SE
' z" � , . DELANO� MN 55328
_ ` r;
. ; �., ...: ��.:�.. � � .: >, ` �. .� � : , e,.:.. EMPJ RGLn_ND.GOIA
: ' ' _r � . .�.. ��,
PH: (763)972 3221
_ . _ L KFI I YOSGHOBO
._ �.. ,a�• .
�. _ , ; .r _ � ::. � . FM/IRONMENT� GONSULTANT
, _ .. ._
- • ' JACOBSON 0 SON NMENTAL
. a� . ��.. _m � . . - - WA E J
�� ^t , Cr Q rs 4 C � �: 4 ��� PHY(612)802-6619
�'
�,. � < � ':� +� EMAIL: JACOBSONENVOMSN.COM
1 11 25 2013 PER CITY REVIEW N •Ciw�ErvGiNEEHiNG�LnNo P�o.NrvwG I hxeby certify Nat thla plon, apedfication PROJECT N0:
2 01 22 2014 RAIN CARDENS � CAMPION or report haa been prepared by me a OLIVER HILL
,eoo P,o,,,,r c.,,k c,,,ta, ��,,,my,��c„P,rv,,,«, @,, cn,c COVER SHEET 13-037
ENGINEERING M•��Bp�Qin4yN 55359 � �a�r��«^w',^�+«�^�� Engineer THE BROADWAY GROUP, LLC.
N0. DAIE DESCRIPTION Fax��� 763-479-4242 ���� �� r�i Stats W Minneaota. DATE:
SERVICES, INC. �'��w��.�/.�'j�' o,/���zo,a I�JCCT C �` CC �^
RENppNs � E-Mafl: mcanplonOcanpioneng.com Martin P. Can��-Uc. 79901 oat�: ORONO� MN �r,L L I N O. � O I 7 J H L L�J 10/30/2013
� ; c Rim Out/ef=992.,3 �� � I
. � . � \
Rim 994.0 /�nv-992�1 � I Certificate O� ���Vy
� _ . . �
I � � � P�epored for: Broad way Group LL C
� � �
� � � I
� 9
,
�� S 89 20'34" E 181.O 1 �—• '
r \`�� I I 1
16in. PVC � �
� lnr-988.5
� 1 �)
I O . I
� \
I � � /� O �
�
�� r p O
+ I \\ � �/ I O �
� �
�
. � � Z
: I `,\ � �
I \��--Wetland----_�� 1
(delineoted by ✓acobson \`� �— N8921'00"W 321.28
Rim-995.5 � I En vironmen fal, PLLC on �
� : May 1, 2013) �� � ��\� - �
' rRim� 95.4 I � _ �� I \ .
1In�9 B.0 ���I
I � Rim-��� - I��
I lnv- � t �osement _ Rim=994.1 � I
n 99 20in. PVC . — — I � _ __ N lnv=976.2
Inr-992.4 � �\�' . — -- � — —
I s
I � — . — . \ � \\ `n
p�a;e 996.i i ! �\�--�: -� Treed Area�
a �i , � I
a n e � I _� 35 I �� \�_�-� `� � \ �
� ;I- � �..� — ��\. c Shed
1 / � � I �
/ / � � \ \ \ \ I
\ � . . _ . . � I � _ � �
I � '�, I I O
_�� � � ' � o
I � � _ Setbo�k' i i : \ �i �
� � � �We{land i i �\ i � ( i�� \ I = N
�� O � ��' _ / ! � �\ i��,.
� � � _1r— — — a°, i I � ,�� � I W
m o \ + ^
� - � ----�-�-
' --------------- ---
� � 3 � 2 .8 -�� � -t?��- O
O � N Existing House \ � 1 \ \ 0
� ��I � � FFE=1001.9 � �O I I
O � O � `' -\ ,' GFE=100 L 0 � r'p � \ \�\ Z
Z I� o \ � -��o.6 ;�- L o t 2, Blo ck �, � 6�� o � , ' �
i � Z K� H UN TER S GR.EE.��J � `�y � �
� � � o (2.24 Ac.) � � � \
� L o t 2, BlO Cl� �, � } , 97,553 S Ft � �
UL MER ES TA TES -��
� ) i N89 21'00"W 301.28 �'
+ � (2.68 Ac.) �
� � �. d Pteo
: 116,662 Sq Ft � Tree
D
��' Le-�
�
� p • Found lron Monument � Cotch Basin
� �L
I ���' � Soil Test (by other) � Manhole
0
� x 000.0 Existing Elevafion �, Power Po/e
o .
o �: SCALE
p� , 60 0 30 60 120
Z .
I � K,".�
� � _ 1 inch = 60 feet
_ �
im=1016.7 � ' � :. �
Q) `9' ' �
. � r'�: p�j Boundarv Description (supplied by clientJ
� O Lo! 2 Blcck 1, UL�AFp EST,a rcc c�� Lo± 2, Elc�k 1,
�'� � �
\ � � 1 � 1 HUNTERS GREEN, Hennepin County, Minnesoto.
� � � .• l.� Subjecf to any and oll easements of record.
i� 01�� � S 8920'34" E 181.01 j �`� o
'� ,, pO PlD Numbers: 34-118-23-33-0055
�
I : o N -;�. � 34-118-23-33-0058
I + ' �
0 Pro.perfy Address: 2350 Watertown Road
� � �� S89 20'34"E 20.00 orono, MN
Z �. i� � � Stormwafe� Quolitv Overla,v District: Exempt
Watertown Road Beorings based on ossumed dotum.
Job Number: 7523
S������� I ircreby c�ertify thaf fhrs certi/;cafe oT survey� wos
preporcd by �r,r or c�r�der rny riirecf supervision und Book/Page: LL
fhr�t I v�n u cluly Regrster<�d La��d Surveyvr undcr� tire
laws �f the State� f d.ainnesafa. Survey Dafe: 4�24�13, 4�30�13, 5�3�13, 5�8�13
� �� � ��������� � ����� � Orawing Name: obbott.dwg
(D "
,
' � t . �'
� ���. __ , i.__ <'��''- .r�.�:'� ���<''�'' _`"C" ��-`�=� �-�- -- D�awn by. KLB
._ _..._ - -
� f'aul L�. SG�hoL�rg -_�--_
Re vision s:
� 763-972-3221 8997 Co. Rd. 13 SE 1 -r � ,
_.
�'' tJc�{�,. - f �".'_ �- ' ��'l�_.3_ fceqistrafiori Nn. 1��7CJf1
v www.SchoborgLand.com Delano, MN 55328 --� -""- -
i �
I '
33 33 •
— S 89 20'34" E 181.O 1 )—.
� ` 91.00 _ 90.01
1 `���� 1 1� - - - --� l- - - - ��I ��
' ' PRELIMINARY PLA T
� � � I I 15 �
� N� � I � I � I � (Re—formatted for 1 �x17 sheet)
: � � �� � � �� � Prep ared for.�
� � � I� o Broadway Group LLC
I I`, I � �
� � � �� �
� I �� Monag� a Wetlond �i I Z
� ��--(delineate b� Jacobson-�� \
I � I Environmc�n �l, PLLC on �i
I '� I I May I1 2013) i ( �� �— — N89 21'00"W 321.28 —
I i I � ;� � 214.25 ! - 107.03
� N I �
� � I � 1� � __` oo�� — — — — — — � � — — — — — —�I �1
B , O -�09� - - - -� - - - �- - - - �
� L C _
q I I IO �o — � � \ — Ufility Easement N �
� �
Ma le � � �,I � I � 2 I � Z T -� \ \ —/ - - - - .� _ _ � �
P o IN I I o � � �5—_- 3 \ fos� ent � \ � � N
Lane � �I I o � I I � � � _ � �A
, � � � Z � � � � �r-_- o�� i � � \ � � o ;
I I `° � , '��� \ � y
� � � �--- i ° �
"� m � P�OPosed -� ' �/ o.\ I �� N
� �_ � � B/d9• Sife j � ��'Y' � � J -
. I etbock�� ^ 4(1768 S f � ,p� �
�
� '� � � I w
' I � I � . ' Wetlond I 1 /^ __ r3_.� � � �.'� �\ i �
��
�n � '- 1� � I � �'r- m^ � '� i �
� ,,� I � �� sed � rop. � / � �'� o-� > � �`' � � O
�I <}. I PtoP° Site �� 15 �5 Drive'� � y^��o`� �� � I ;
. � � 15 I I ��\ 8�5� sQ•ft�) I 1 � 2.� � � � ��9��� � �� o
a , �- � � o
� 3 �\(1 � � J �= 09.4 �� -o� � �� 4 � � � � I Z
� 240• � � o ���� / �' `l `� `� I
� D� o� -o�. � '
o O I I I \� P r o P�1 ��� R=S o,o o�- '�����%i ��/-�\ � ��� �m
0 0 � �------, � � ��D�'�e/ % W . ..� � � �� ;� m�, � 5� �s���I �-
ZI I � \ � � o�„ s s / � P�oP� �6i a o� \ � \.�r
� � � i � � I \ I 69�2 3 0 '��� I �� ri�e �a,,o�L� i
� Z �Prop�osed� \ � \ S� 500 � � �so�� I � D�� �N o � � � \
N �5 B/dg� S�te� I I � �� � p F, �o�cP� r�t-� ��� � � N'� � I. '•
i I (2080 .�q�ft.)i I o ' � _ �'����``L \�,7�� � �Z.�g"W � �� � �° ,� �
. � �o -� � a �� . ,��`1' . �` �N 3 ��,i'�� � I .�
t
: I I L I Drive I � � � � �� / �C, - 69.09 - �o — —`�`-7-232.19 — — — —�� a 1 I
"�� - -175.00 7�. i ` � i , »
� 20 �2� '� N89 21 00 W 301.28 �
� I �.-�5.0� N R,�38���� i��i � �
. o � �'Publlc Roa ; .g� �� '��0'�2
' � � - S90'00'00"W � � L=� 2 1 2 j � I Sp• �e-qend
� 1 �
� ` �75.C�0 N i ` . 1 � j s ��
� -�25 00 y /� '6'S 8� • Found lron Monument
o ; 75.0 = 25.09 �oP• \
� � �`` OO Cas t l�on Monum en t
: � � IProp.) � �j Or��%'`� \�
d
• .` r�v r oP�e� e \�--�- - 15 SCALE
in I I i- Proposed i I I \�� Br�d�28 \� I eo 0 3o eo izo
� I �5 � Bldg. Site � I I �-�� �2 {t•) � I I
. � � I ��1768�sq.ft.) � I � � sQ• ���� �
� i ��� � II
�___� � I N 1 inch = 60 feet
�
�I I W �
33 33 � Boundary Descripfion (supplied bv client)
o I Lot 2, Block 1, ULMER ESTATES, and Lot 2, Block 1,
� HUNTERS GREEN, Hennepin County, Minnesoto.
�I
' I W ^I � I Z � -�- I - 75 Subject fo any and al! easements of record.
� �
N'"� �5 � I I I � PID Numbers: 34-118-23-33-0055
� 34-118-23-33-0058
: i' I LJ L O I K r' I�� � ProperfY Address: 2350 Wotertown Road
�� ' ` �� I l.� Orono, MN
i � � - - - - �-- - - — J
1� �' �1, � )00.00 - - 101.01 1 O
i , „ O Stormwater Qua/itv Overlav District:
j � S 89 20 34 E 181.O1 'j �� � � po Tier 4 (limitation of 509' hordcover)
� � i
I �
'� � I I
C>� 0 5 -I � ,5 .,
f
AREAS �o
Lot Name Tota/ Area Total Drv Conti_quous Drv Hardcov�r 9* � o o y� I I �
81ock 1: ��v - - - 1 - - - J L - - - � - - -
L o t 1 38,235 s.f. 13,997 s.f. 13,997 s.f. 79 � �
Lot 2 34,878 s.f. 15,444 s.f. 15,444 s.f. 8q N
L o t 3 23,289 s.f. 19,156 s.f. 13,726 s.f. 10q 3 � o � �
Lof 4 32,415 s.f. 28,992 s.f. 13,768 s.f. 99" ^ ` � Drainoge and Utility Easements being 10 feet in width
Lot 5 24,627 s.f. 21,951 s.f. 18,343 s.f. 14% � �� c� and odjoining sfreet and rear lot lines, 5 feet in width
Block 2: p O ond adjoining side lot lines or otherwise as marked.
Lot 1 17,477 s.f. 17,447 s.f. 17,447 s.f. 14� p
L o t 2 19,971 s.f. 19,971 s.f. 19,971 s.f. 14� O J
Public Road: 17,889 s.f. Z �
o�t�ot ,a: s,4so S.f � � �
*Proposed hardcover co/culotions bosed on house and driveway only. 1 O �f �_ �_ i
� - 10 - �
� N
Wa tertown Rd.\� s892o'34"E � _--,o _ � �
� 20.oo �— � — �
� SCHOBORG N N �
CD �
� LA D SERVICES
�''� — Building Setbacks being 25 feet in width and odjoining �
� 'N�j, Revision Date: 10-30-13 front lot lines and Willow D�ive No�th, 35 feet in width�
�+, and adjoining rear lot lines ond 10 feet in width and ��
v Bearings bosed on ossumed dotum. odjoining side lot /ines, or otherwise as marked.
I-Z�-t�1'f 2 t>
' i � LEGEND
I � C DENOiES MISCELLMEOUS YANHq.E
� I � OO DENO7ES CURB STOP
QI .o e \�_� � DENOlES URRY POLE
�"sP I '�, t� DEN07ES FlRE HYDRANT
a�
wa� � � E ,s-R;Ps.xsE�R —t=—a: � < --- — -- ------�;r m ooro�strnurreox
-�> —,—>—>—> —— _> > z�z s —,——,—---------=_�
vs Fw�p c '�=!-- __ c.�s'•nco s�u sc�'—>—> —>—DENOlES SANITARY SEIMER
.-992� i � \� —� /——————————� e ?S� e Dal07ES STORM SEWER
, j
Ma p I � � �° �R"� ' �+r�m��� \ j�- ——� �vwuruce t � ir ir —�
La n e � ; � � se�ro oc � '`-�---- - �� unurr I —�r+o�s w��uNN
I d � i ; �w i��as �� �_ �\ �s�►ns, � '�I, r'"". �. ooro�s unu��SEWER MANHOI.E
- — — — � � II /� i i-----, � �___\ � ���I 4
I ' ' `--- /'/ , � l � • DENOIES IRON MONUMENT FOUND
° � � f�`-� �.z ppdOlES DOSTINC ElEVA710N.
--- � � \ I p ) 0.04' S.OS MqL .�o�
m ,__-,/I
i� I v I, , i i � 1
, , \ d
r I\ ' -- �/ i � --- '- ��i� / \ �--' � � MOUNTABLE�7E ��z3 DENOTES DaSTING iREE
I I � � I ..=' � �',, I --i i � ��/ � II CURB AND q1T1FR a�<DENOlES DOSTING CONiOUR
" I •PMC RAlf. _ ,, '� i ' ' � � \ � �I' —o�.—DENOiES OVERFIEAD MARE
+ I I •,�7�= i 3+t�'Y / ,; , \ � � I" t/Y-mnlrwdi5 M�E�rt COURg , DENOTES UNDQtCROUND TTD..EPHONE
1�S I ,�I -BITUnMOUs BASE CouRSE EP
I n � � � �� ,.� o �� , , � �' c� � � � e'C1ASS S AfiOltEOAIE —cns—DENOi6 UNDERGROUND GAS
+ I i i i <" , i ° �.,'`�, - _- -- � �\ �� i�� BAg(toat CRusiED) -o--o--DENOiES ElOSiING FENCE
I � I �� I �,� ii a �- � \\�n � � �DENOIES CON(xtETE
� 1 � , i � i � �"� �� � DEN07ES 817UYWW5
� I � �, �i i I C-PJC RAIN--'": �
� �� i � � �R�3'7� � -TaRDEH-dURE7` �\ � pp��� UENOTES GRAVEL
� h�CUf'fFR ' � � �pyC�r, � �---' MN"999$ �t, `_...% \\I v SFIOMN B TiE I�NYUY R6ODI71AL S7REET �DFNOlES WAIER NMHOLE
I • r---- --+-----' � , ._., t. ------
� � -�-- -- _ 4 ' REQUREMENT.
p DENOTES DRAINACE h UIWlY EASEIAENT
I � - - i �--� ��� — 2 nc s�secna+wr�Na�wsm e�n on sot caatiais
a-�� � i 4•SNA�ARY � DFNOiES POS98LE NE].L LOCA710N
� � r � sotacE, aos�wEu � r�soomru s�r sEcnoi+ � oaao�s wEiuwo eu�rt M�rtart
0+10o I , m + d i LOG710N.lYP I _p—p_DENOIES SILT FENCE
I � I
�,X� i � 6•� � —0--0--DENOiES GRADING LIMITS
f � �, ,, i OIJit.ET 1003.2
1_J ' I
r i r` 1 Y" � I
I i ( i i � 4 � . I ��,.
RELUNE fX1FtB A, I i_ ;r-----� � � ����
R�1 C�1RDE11 �
-- i
GI�DENS.NiSTAIJ�GR1ER j i �� �I `.9N+�1005.2 `.�i � F�OSIINC UILlIY NFORINTION PER SURVEY PIiEPARED BY SCFqBORG
OILLY.lYP I + I I �,, j �' "�i ',� � IAND SERVICES NC.AND d11'RECARD PLANS.
i . '•, ,-=" i - 2ALL SANRAitY SEYIQt SINIl BE 8" WC. SOR 35
1 I i --.----�,-c=-��k pp�t � . 4 pD J.S�NRARY SEM�EIt SERVICES SFiALL�4 PVC SDR 26.
I i �-10 iRNL�.�� EASEIENIS i 4.ElEVA710N OF EXIStRC U1tRIF5 SFNLL BE VfRFED WiIOR TO
I � I i r i .' dGPIfC fGIF N fEET
S.�SERVm BY PRNATE��c
� ��� 1015
1015
1020 1020
1010 t010
7015 1015
1
W
� PROPOSED CEHIE7t1.lE PROF'LE PROPOSED PilOF1E
W EMSIMIG CQlIE7i�E PROFILE 1 1005 ��'� 1003
10f0 1010
i.�z
� �
� � 1 �� � ._ 1000
1005 �- � 1005
�` � NH-3 �
YH-4 � \ RCk 1001.12 \
RIM:1008. N NW INV:9B8.00 �
NE MV�9Y4.00 \ � Sri INY.986.00 � pgs
1000 � — � 1000 \ `
Wi-2 �
►Ri-3 RIM:1000.80
RIM:1001.12 y� N INV�90.S00 I oY0
NW INN.BE0.00 SE NV�985.00 }"'-�E%611WC NH
995 SW tiV:086.00 � I RIY�9920
MH-1 Mti9T1.4
RIM:99230
. NE MV�77�.00 r
. .. -. . � - S INV:979.00 D85 �'
990 �
6Y of E'PVC O 1.50x
164' of 8' PVC S/WITARY gWER O 4.847[
DEUIL A
� 145 of 8'PVC O 4.157[ p�
Y85 �
21' of B'PVC O 3.72!
975 � Q 4 �P �,x
'� �� �� 4 dUR�C fCNE N iFEf '� ��
� �iS �i: ��3 $6 � $� ���", g�, a�rxFNrtfr
�� �� �� ��
0+00 t+00 2+00 5+00 4+00 -----------------��--- 1+00 2t00 3+00
------------- ---� DETAIL A
s m + ww+c�rsnois N CAMPION •�""�E"�'"EER'"��LANDPLANNING ���"'��br�a OLIVER HILL PRELIMINARY STREET& �aECT Na
�rs � t°°°P�"'�`°�`��`. """'r'"y d1ro°"'°"'"''°"aid ti'°� UTILITY PLAN & PROFILE 13-037
ENGINEERING P,�,��,,,,,�, i�+o arr�,rro�a�,or+•� THE BROADWAY GROUP, LLC.
unM-tM /w Stat�ot YYnuoto.
� �� �� � SERVICES, INC. F�` ��:i 2 _/�,,,,,,_ m�znm4 ORONO, MN SHEET N0. 4 OF 7 SHEETS DA 10/30/2013
� E-Yd: mm�pkn0eanpwn�q.eom MQthi P. Ion�Lk.tY901 Date
-2�-I Z S mR
' O O O � I RIM=995.4 9 I,Li'(i'E�
� v J � 0 O � O O (p v INV=978.0 ¢ ��
_ � � ? N O o pp ��_ � N 0 Cb _ OO DENOlES MISCELLMEWS YANHOtE
- - - - - - - - - - �__ __ -- __ _-- o-- \ �� -� �� �� 966 �- -- -- �66 -� o oa+o�s c�Rs sroP
�, �a, oo+ohs unnr va.¢
c�".�I _ __ � I � I o tb DENOiES FlRE HYDRANT
30 30 �0 3 ao 30 oe o� ec o�-oe o��oc oE oe o F---r-oE-oe oe oe m DENO7ES U11L1TY BO7f
' 1 / I >-DENOIES SANITARY SEMER
I y� I � ��, DENO'tE5 STORM SEWER
� i I � -- --- -- 'o � `? -�
o I I < DEN0IES WATERMNN
I � �� �� O DENOIES SANITARY SEWER MANFiOLE
--- - -- a� v i„c� �n, DENOIES U11lJiY POLE
i �-----r- --�- -- 7
�
I I ', I I � iQ��� -- - I I cp • DENO7ES IRON NONUMENT FWt�
� � - --�'� - I 25�� � RNN C�JtOEN, a v � � K ioit.z DENOIES DOSIING ElEVA710N.
� � �I �',' u� , � � � � �
�
o n � � �iz3 DENO7E5 DOSTING 1REE
� 1 � ,��'� k `- �- -----� � + o' �
� �� � ���� o � a s<DENOTES DCS7INC CONTOUR
i �
�� � �I � ' �o � � DENOIES OVERHEAD WIRE
-w�.-
kJ�' � � ; -I- � --- -- -- v Q � O �-DENOTES UNDERfi20UND T�..EPHONE
��N
I o I L --- 16'MkIUWD BUFFFR � � � � � -c.s-DENOiES UNDERGRWND GAS
--------
0\ -- - -- - - � � 4 � _ -�,-�DENOIES EIOSTWG fENCE
�'- OC 2----------- �- - - - -- - �+ � O� a �DENOiFS CONCRETE
� - --- -�__ -- \ , -- �\ Nc uns.r�a v� o �Q a oo+o�s e�n�wNous
� 1 \ �-� � �,i r� � 0 DENOTES GRAVEL
I p` �,�F��►��, \ �' � � �F��' \ z �`�°� ____� oEr+o�s w�hx wu�a.E
� `,� `�a \ � ` �i �'�, \ "� p tn -DFNOlES DRNNAGE�U�YJ7Y EASEMENT
� -� �$bml � i \� �O � �y ,�St� �v� � � � � OETIOTES POSSIBLE WFJl LOCA710N
�� tl� , � � �ro� �`� va � DFN07ES WEILAND BUFFER MARKER
� p , - " ,�m� ? �-T �� -o---o--oaro�s sa.T�wc�
� ;. X�o � � '� .Z� -��DENO7ES GRADING WI7S
i � _ - - - ---- - -� � � -'
� � -�" � ` � �_OC 1
- - -�--- ---- -- =�- ----- -- -- - �------- � -
OUT OT A L � � '°X0��°�
- ri ve wo- � � � ma�Qt sr��a�r��
- - - � u - -- -- -- --�-� � tww arr u���-u��art
� �F��; x � w.iau�i-aoo-asx-i ies
DOSIW CRAVEL DRNE SHNl ''- t01 ' t� �
BEIiClGI�RK: . .
w�oor��r rns�ri�oahn noo� �r�t vor�umoH 3 ��� ; ��� � � „ �
►arrni oF rHaEcr a�Nntnw wdvE. R 2 x � ��
aEv-iois.+oa TOP OF FOUNDAl10N � °; � ��{o,Q �_ ' I�v / � �. casr�ucna+srv�u ca�r wmi�u.�F ca�►+nc cooEs.
VARIES SO' ��E �,�" 2 T►1E CONTFGcrOR SHLLL TN�Nl PRECNn10tLs IIEC�RY 7D AwD PROPERIY MWGE 70 A6+�CENr PROPER►6 DURWG
� NG GR n�. � .( II i 1!E C0ISTRUCIIOH Ri�SEs of TFIS PROJELT.1FE IbNIRACIOR w0.1 BE HELD SOLELY RFSSP016B.E FOR ANY MWC6
S' TOPSOIL R READ 10 T!�/�DJ�CENf i'ROPEHfl6 OCCURPoNG DURNlC TNE C016IRUCtION RMS6 OF MS PRWECT.
\ � I � '/ S. THE CONtRAC10R IRUS�COHTACE N1 APPROPPoAIE UMT CDWAM6 AT LfAST�8 HWRS BEfDRE ANY DfCMATION TO
' °°� - `�+ � / � ,I' �` �a�sr oucr Fmn�rwna� ov oasrNc uixrrEs. rr s►�u ef n��sro�e�m oF t r�c o m w�c i a t i o
70' to' � ��� � � ��- -- - �tnrw�a.�utur�s wrea+ coHFucr wmi 1►�atoPosen�uPaouo�►ns sriowN a+n+E PtMs.nf wc�no�s oF
�,� � � / `" swu untrEs srwu eE oer�m er n��crae er rawNc oor�+Ert sr�h a+e cau(i-eoo-tsx-�iea).
0. � � .5 � 1' _ �� / � 4. SI�FEtt NOTICE TQ CONIRACfORS:IN ACCORQANCE MI1H CE]ERMLY ACCEPIm WNSTRUC�pN PRACtIC6.THE COMRACIOR
0.5' ao 0.5' �� , `
3 /r NLL BE SOLELY AND COIIPlE7ELY RFSPOHS�E FOR COlDflpliS Od 7HE JOB SfiE.lICWDING SAFEIY OF N.L PEX50l6
�, ` \ � �F�� \ �6 � ro nore�won�no�i�s.�artr oF W°�'o+a��oR��roEva.o�r�xx�YeroH�ero��a��w�
E
, •� � � n�� ` /'L6 , �/� n�canw�cioas r�neuM,cE s Nor�om�o x�cu��w oF n��oEouKx oF n�cormacroR�s s�r
� � � ��a`� �� �Rt a�oR�n�casrRucnoH srE
` ��' � /�" �I 5. 7FE CONfRACiDR SFMLL BE R6P0lSI�.E F'OR PR04DIWG MD 1WMAMlG ALL TRAFFIC CONIROL DEtlICES TO CONiROI
ASDAENT F�OR \� \� �-y \ � �' � I 1FIE NONDEM Cf 7RAFfIC 1YF�RE NEC6SARY.TRAiFIC COItIROL DEVIC6 SFNLL COIFOfiI 70 MPROf'IW7E I�li60fA
� \� � � \� \ �D I v�� I 8. �yCONTRACIOR�RESTRICT Nl C�(tAqNG A►m COl6TRUC110N ACIM1�5 TO ARFAS DESICNATFD ON 7FE Pl�t6.
7. ALL SpL TESIMIG.9FNLL BE CAIIPIEiED BY 1!�OWNER'S SOLS DICMIFEttt 1HE CONIRICTOR SFW1 BE RESPOf66lE FOR
y �� \\ � /\ I I O I COOROIN�TING hLL REOIMED Shc TESIES AIO NSPfC'11016 MRH iFiE SOLS ENGNEQL
20' HOID DOWN FROA1 TOP OF FOUNDA710N � I `� � � � "� & 7XE SrtE fMS NOf IEC�SIRLY BffN 061CNm TO 6�4MICE 11E ON-SrtE WiER�I.t AFIER 7!E 91E 6RADNG 5
CONTROLLm FlLL (PER FliA/HUD 79C) n � - \ o ' i �. �f� I� I (Q� F DC:E55 SOL W7ERML D4SI5.T!E CONlRAClOR SFMLL D�OSE OF NL D(C6S SOL W1EIiNl OFF-9TE N
I o � A YANER ACCEPUBIE TO 11E ONMER AND 1ME ROIXRA7ING AGF?ICI6.
TOP OF STABLE SUBSOIL(PQt SOIL ENGR.) �`� �W �I V v�m D. THE EXSIING 1DP90L 011 7 H S S I 1 E V A I t ff S N D E P I F L R B 1 H E CONIRACIOR'S RESP0161BIL1IY TlNT ALL SURFACE
TYPICAL RAMBLER FULL BASEMENT FB "" `-�'"" ' �I ' �� ; e��"wc70N�i��"�`s a�,o m�aF�o�orr`.'"�""�"�1N7°�"`�NO���TME
� � � ', �F�� � � I � �- t o. �►aoion w��nor a��n�s�r.s�T roa+r-oF-w�Y ae e�noric a�w�ws stwu ee�m
}�_ � � � „
1 i N ACCORMIICE�lIFI 7HE REOUROEMS OF 7HE OWLIIY COMPACtpN IIEI}IOD AS OURIED N N!/DOf 210SJF2 OR AS
1 D
R DRE1Ctm Bf 1F£SOLS EIiCINf�R.
u 8� � � "�� �J � I ». Exc.au�na+ �at n�runros�ov�o�+c uNsr�oe u�sur�sas sw�u e�c�u�o ws�a►�n�r n+e
/ �i I soxs oia►+�x. �►a�ttr w�m�w�cm N n�eut�wc w�u w�srw.�ae car�n�o�ciEo er n�
� � �\ / � I k so�s oiar�x.
VARIES 25' 25' OF FWNDA710N ��' �'
� ' � \ �-�� / / I u,I' I a ARFAS WMCIi ARE TO RECENE lOPS01L SFNLL BE GRAOED 10 WRMN O.JO FOOT ABOVE qt BELOq TFE REMIIRED
�' � F1EVA710N.UWLESS DR�CTm 9Y 1FE DiCNiEQt.
Z
10' ����e a� � \ \ � / � (�I I �s. �asr�u►�Ncm�s��ro�wmu�"p'�soc�oF��,s�No wux+�w�
.5' TOPSOIL RESPREAD I �� / \ � n I NATERm UtRI A iEAL7M'STMID OF CRASS 6 OBTNNFD.
� � o � : oa / a � �t / �Z I 14. FLDOR ELEYA�EXISIING COMqJ�ARE SFi0wN�2 NIERVALS. PItOPOSED CONfWNtS ARE SFIOrM AT�2�
ao 0 3o eo m 0.5' ' ad �5 U0�- / "'�'
.. ��' � � v� N I�I I 1S CONIR�CTOR SFMLl,ADJUSf AND/OR CllT E')OSIINC PAVV�EIR AS IECESS�R4 1D ASSURE A SIqO1H fR AMD CONTM10U5
I � 1� / � I A I ��K�������V�T������.
I / / � 1 Q �I I 16. 1}E CONTRACIOR 5FM11/SSURE POSffNE DRAlN6E AMAY FA011 1HE BIA.DNI6S FDR�11 IN7IJRAL MID PAVFD MtFAS.
0.5' 0.5' � i \ � I � t7. ifE�Srw1 rRormE o�uhrenc As Rmurt�n io ca�1E nE sr�cn�o�c cor�SrRucrarr at�s
DR�Cim BY 7Ff SOIS ENarE'ffi.
� i� � \ � �� I -� �a. oasnNc�srwi e��oveo rraoR ro r,a�oMc.
C�930.00 DFNOTES frVtM,E EIEV ASEMENT FLOOR � � / \ � O I �
h-�so3 no+a�fs ma oF rouanoN aFv � / � / \ \ J �� �
LL�9442.3 IDNiER LEVEL ELEV 25' HOLD DOWN FROM TOP OF FOUNDATION / / � _ �_ � - - - Ex�H
g �\ \� - � RIA1 99a.1 �
� ���������� CON7ROLLED FlLL(PER FHA/HUD 79C) �T '� - _ _ - u�_awasQ <��_�-=1-_-5----�NV 976.2
_-<-<
TOP OF STABIE SUBSOIL(PER SOIL DIGR.) --� < < -- -�--- J lFf CONtIGC10R 6 SPEL�ICALLT CAUIIONm 7W1T Tff LDG710N ND/OR ElEVA7pN OF EIOSING UILII6 AS SFiOMN d!THESE
-- - PIAILS B B\SED ON RETORDS OF 7F�VARIOUS UTRlIY COMPAIES NO.NM1ERE POS99LF.IFi�SUREMDlfS TAKEN N 1FE FE1D.
TYPICAL FULL WALKOUT (WO) � � ? ' ���������������
�� 1
���n�s , Q n��croR w�sr carr�cr�u n��orr�h un�rr cowr�r�s�r�wsr�e Houas effo��w,r oor�xaaaw m
H 0 U S E PAD I D DETAI L H OU S E PAD D ETAI LS v ��`�`�`�'�"�""��rt s�+�"�'►��`m o�TME�croa ro r���u o�n+c
unu�s wr�a+cas�ict�n�PRorosen�rao�wrs snorrr�oN ni¢auns n���ais oF s�u ummEs swu.�
BE OBTARIED BY TFff CONRtALROR BY CJUlNC COPFIER STA7E OIE GLL AT E00-2S2-1168 OR 657-454-OOQ2
Z � �. � �as m CAMPION •""` ="G'"F�R'"G•`""°P`"�"'"G ����bY'�'� OLIVER HILL PROJECT N0:
�eoo P�».c:..r c.�w. PRELIMINARY GRADING PLAN
r.o.ee.sso �mr m�.�t.,�r��a enat 13-037
ENGINEERING ��,,,,,,,,,9 �u�r a�»���+� THE BROADWAY GROUP, LLC.
N0. DA7E pES�p710N � SERVICES, INC. F�� ���� � /� ����4 �A��
� E�, ,�,�,,,,,,,p,,,,��,,, �P �,_� 190� � ORONO, Mrv SHEET N0. 5 OF 7 SHEETS 10/30/2013
,
. 2�l � 2 � o
�' O Q O O O \� O O O �O I RIM=995.4 LEGEND
�O � 0 O 0 O O (0 S INV=978.0
� � � N O W ��� {a .__ N44 �44 W ,_ �` �, „ OO DENOIES NISCELLANEWS MANHOLE
�. �u� cartRa�vo s�r�non corrtRa ru oo►ar Nm+ - - _ _ � _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - - - y66 � �, ma�s unm�
MINNESdfA'S BESf MAWICEN�lt PRACiIC6 IMNW�L MO REGUATI0115 OF \
c.,
2 TiE CCOHIRACfOR SFMl1 BE FM0.MR NArtH MID FOLLDW ALL REOINREdEMS �I ��� m DFNOlES UIILt HYDRAN
�TME �.����� ����� — — 30 �0 30 oe ac—oE oe—oE oc P DE oe— ' oe--oc ae c
MCLUDNG Bllf NOT LMRED N:WEFMY FROSION CONTROL!lSPECTIDNS� ! ` �,� I >—DEN07E5 SANITARY gWER
NSPECfION�FTQt 05" W�NFN.L OR MORE AND DOCUMENU710N OF ALL I � � DENOIES STORM SEWER
(�RRECTNE MEASUR6 BY 8EClNMC COl6TRUCIIDN�THE CONTRACfOR � �
8EC MC
ACI0�10'MLmG6 illE TFR16 OF TFffi PERYR AND u'.REE5 7D ABIDE Bi °� I m D�ENOlES SANI�TARY SEWER YANHOIE
TFffN. o `°
3. TFf COHIRALTOR SFiAL1 PERFDRM ANY CORRECINE YEASUR6 ORDEIttm BY '" ' -----T-------� �� v �n, OE?IOIES UiIUTY POLE
�- r- -----'— ����
T}�CI1Y OR Tf�PG Wrtl#N 24 HDURS OF NDTkIGipN. N50' ' b ��� • DENOIES IRON MONUMENT FWND
ADDIIIOPML EROSION CONTROI IffASURES DEn1ED IECESSAKY BY F1TFfR I-- , u u � -- -
7FE Cf1Y OR 1ME YPCA SFMLL BE MLSfALLID MfMN 24 F10UR5 OF I '
NQT�1G1TpN. i ,a - f'.� o o g p v .toti.z DD107E5 DOS7INC ELEVATION.
4. ANY DEPOSRHG OF SLT OR WD ON NEW OR D(tSfllC PAVE11ENf, N - --'� � N�"'' ' �t2s DFNOTES E1�511NG TREE
�� I
~ � �
TEI�f+OPARY SED�NUTION BASR�S� OR Yi DdStlliG SIORII SEIMERS OR r y� I
SYI�LE'S SFW1 BE RFl10Nm AFIER EACH W�ql AND AFFECIED AREAS � _-h +'�_� I ----------' o �, v
1 -- k > ;
CLEAlffD. m p ii ° ', `. ' ` o e a��DENOlES D05TNG CONTWR
5. 71£CO!lIRACIDR SFIALL ASSUIE COYPLETE RESP01618q1P! FOR O` �_ —°"•—DENOiES OVETt11EAD YNRE
CONIROLLNG ALL SQTATp1L COMRtOL SFNLL COYNENCE MIH GItAqNG AND �r � �` ��m � � �O • � --- � —' DENOlES UNDERGROUND TFIEPHONE
' ----- -- -
ODMHUE 1NROUp10UT 7HE PR0.1EC1'UNIL�CCEPGNCE OF 1HE INOli1C BY � o �c�n�"' . H � —cns—
7}f OWNERS.7HE CONITL1C10R'S R6PONSIBIIJIY RICLUD6 ALL OESICN � o -------------� � DFN07E5 UNDQ2CRWND GAS
AND YF�IEYENfAT10N AS REIXARED TO PREVENT ER0610N AND Tf
DEPOSI�NG OF SLT.7HE 01NlER WY.AT HS/FIER OPf10N DIRETT 1HE �'0 B OC 2 � v� � DFNOlES CONCREfE �
COMWICIOR N F6/HER AEl}i006 AS Dmm FR TD PROIEC�PNOPERIY `
6. AN1'DEPO�I�IG OF SLT Oft WD M SWNES SFMLL BE REMWm AFIER ,,--- � �pp9 � ROW SILT � DENOlES BIiUMMWS
EACH RAN AND AFFF�Tm ARFAS CLFi1tFD TO 1Fff SA76FAC110N OF THE _��T fENCE v�
OMRIFR.ALL AT 1HE E7IPE?LSE OF T!E fbNNTRACIDR 7►iE SLT FENC6 ',��u�`` � �r y� n 0 DENOiES GRAVFL
TRACI �'� "' 0 DENOlES WAIER MM910LE
SFW.L�REl10NED MD 7}�SILT REMWm Fltql THE PONDING AREAS BY 0` ��w���� � , �n n"_ `�v �Z ------DEN07E5 DRAINACE� UTILI7Y EASEMENT
7FE CONIRACIDR AF7E1t 1Fff TUftF 6 QTABL6Hm. ` �c�$�� i �_c "c v�
7. 7HE fbNIRA(TOR SFNLL�RE�6IBLE FOR COMPlL1NCE MrtIH AND - �a tr`� ' � `/ ` �U� ��r � � DENOiES POSSIBLE NELL LOCAiION
►�o►moRr�c nf�orr oF niE►iac��x►er. p �-'" �� '" O �, y�'�'o� '�
B. N.L D6NRBm AREAS, IXCEPf RONDWAYS AND BUA.DMG ARFAS SWLLL BE � � -X � � vA � DENOiES WETIAND BUFFER MARKER
R6TORED NRH A YOWN 8 IIICFfS 10P�ft,SEIDm A!�11lNf.Hm OC�,` � � � 'i� ` � � 94 �—�O--DENOiES SILT FENCE
WIIHNI 7 OAYS OF COYPLEIION OF SfIE fitADING. SEIDNlC SHML BE N � " ' s2 � �--O—DENO7ES ORADING L1MI15
ACCOR�WICE MIIH MDOT SPEdFIGTION 2575 O 100 LBS/ACRE(OR � , �'1
APPRONm EOIIAI) OORNMR S�MG ARFAS SF1M.L BE S�m MD �' , � � �
WhCHED N 11C�pINCE WRH MI�DOT SPECIFlCi17pN5.SIPo1W MRDFM�G °1 ,
owxnn stw.�eE iwo roNs aert u�, �xra�z�x�is-o-�o>sw�u ee � �. � _ ►i►+- OC 1
� - - ---�-------
AF'PLm AT A RA7E OF 100 PdJtlDS PER�CRE(GW BE OIItTm!1 ------------- ------- - ----- -- - N
w�nsr.wen�i►s F u�rosawEn s�aNc s oor�concure�►m�. 0 T A °' /
�ro N
9. CONSIRUCTION SIYILL PROCEID MI 1F#FDLLOWMOG SEOlF110E: . . . ��.� _ � � ' --- - /
af�NNfRACCTOR SFiN.L SCl�DULE A PRE�OISTRUCIION MFfIING NI1H THE � � . . . . i _ �
fRA D L
CIIY. i� �
d ��T , x
b.MISTALL EROSpI!CONIROL YEASUR6 AND ROCK COfSIRUC110N io A o�
a�6fALL TREE PROIECIION FENC�lO. 50.T FD10E.7'IP �`� � "'g"w /
UW'
dCONGCf qTf FOR APPROVAI OF EROSION CONiROL INSfNUTpN MID � •_ 1�Q
�_JO �
iREE PROlEC110N FE►ICMrG. � � /
a l�ll51RUC�TEIPORAItY SEDrQl�AION POIDS MD IqSfM1 7E11POttARY � � I I �
!S
OUIFALL NIT11 STMI�PIPE 66b6 I
f.WNSIRUCT TEIPORARY ORA4I�GE DIfdIF5/SwALES/SIORL SEIYEN TO `� �,�
DNERT SURFACE RUNOFF TO TDFORMt'SEDINENfAT10N PONDS. � 99g --- I
q.MANRNN ERO6qN IEASURE,LE SA�T FFNCE,ROCK COpSIRUCTpN i �� -- _� �
ENtRANCE � � -- / v�
A.IWNTNN ALL 7EMPORAHY SEqYFMATION POlDS.COYPLE7E SRE CRADRIG i �. �� ,�. � / y
TOL�AN(�1�. � d � �I
L I►LSTALL SEID AND YULCH ON AREAS TFNT ARE NOT 70 BE WJtD i �� `� � � i
SURFACES. � � � m,v �,�" \�" ^\ a�o rp , v
10. SLDPE PRO7ECIpN MD Q20SION CONIROL SINLL BE DONE N �� �� ��. �n n° / �
ACxOROANCE MRH SECTpN 02370 SLOPE PROTECIIDN. ERO610N COMROL � � m�6 �o
AND STORM WA7FR POLLUIION PREVENIION PIMI OF 7HE PRWECf WNWL HWp/00D dt � ` `` yo /� �I ��
/1. All SiORY SEIYER tYE15 NID RARED END SOC110N5 STMLL BE 4��0' StFF1 POSIS A Wl �� �� '"'',�',�^'
ADEOUAIELY PROlEC1FD BEF'ORE NA AF'tFR PAVDAENf CONSIRUCIION �__� OF r MO OXOUIO ` �� ��y I I
UIfIIL ALL DISR/2BED AREAS AAE SU�BILQm.COMRACIOR SlNLL PUCE I �� � r' � I N
YIRAR FABRIC A!D GWWEL OVER N.L GTCH B�ISIN GRATE HE15 UNI� � �ppppy� �� , � �O I I �
PAWC SURFAC6 ARE PAVED Mp 1FE IANDSGIPNG B COIPLEIID. 1rCrF)i BED1E7fTlE�E' � 3 ,,'� I O
12 SIOCI�ILE ARFA4 YIF�CH REYAIN ON THE SfIE FOR MORE iFNN SEVETI V e
MYS SHALL BE S�m�I�ILCHFD.AND SURROUIOm BY SILT FENCE SILT FENNCE � \ �
E
13. 7FIPORARY NO PE]iMANENT SE'DAElRATION POMDS.AT lDGT10N SFLECIID \� �'� \ �� J � 6 � �i ti�� I I I ��� p� 0��0
BY OIYNER.SiMl1 BE COIISTRUCTED NTI}I THE NNTIAL CRADIWG.7HE � I �
SEDIY0IT IIbT BE ROAOVED fROM TH66 POI�DS.AS NECESSARY.PRIOR . � _ ( v�
TO CONPLE7pN OF TFf PROJECT. `�- I I i I I
14. &0 LD6S SINLL BE NSGLLm AT PWE RLETS MD 01IfLETS IAl11L RPRAP �����
���m. �n i° v
,5. .�,u.�,�����,��►�� o � � � I
�rr n+E nwe oF xo�co►srRucnoN. za�rosr s�.n. \� �. 'g N ___-- � I
sr� �� ��\\�� �" ; / � � ��
\ �AA �.._��A�, �� �
cowc�son�►x ".�����,,�/�� --"� (J � �/ `��� � `�
/ Q1RB k OUIiFR SLT FENCE�� d WMJII DEPIH �� I
J,�R"'- Fl�FABRIC SNALL�PUCm U1DER ROCK 70 � DNECIION OF RUI OFF /� � //� I�I i �
p�1�" O O STOP Ml1D YN:RATON THROUCM ROCK T � v� I
O O O Fl�m t F�e C�s�o T�E W e t E o u w�R�O o d�i L � I n I
o Oo Ooo Ooo Oo p�7p��y{JgT BE MNNTNNm REQILARLY TO �s / � / i 2
O O O � �vEr+r smu�o�TAna�a�rueuc ao�uwArs 2'wi tttrhraU � I
��oO�oO�o O � FROSION GON7R�L WITH ctl�EW�K / � I�
����Oo �7f2 lWIDI�OOD P06f 42'IM. 5 � �I
DO�O�O�O '�, AT 6'1WC SPMJ16(1`fP1f'J� /� / I A� I
Q QOQOQO �/
Roac-e'wWY oErt►� O�O�O�O � I
r000a�rs_is-wwM O o0 00 00 0 ��� � � (
� o��o�o0 00 o Qtosiar coNrno�v+in+our sroEwuK � i ��
oOooOooOooOo d�e t ctmot � � I �
w�sn aax ae �oo�° /
NIOODOIPS PER � 4' T � _ — � v�EX I h'
SPEOFlCATONS / �NP �Q L -- / � _ _-_ — — — — — — RIM#994.1
/ � 1'!'Iwl(IYPIGt� -f < <—<=�_s—_-�NVd9?6.2
/� yct ,. ..au.r inz w.tiw Q eac m...m.�.ieo�. _< < < <—<—<—=_- ,�
te'wa�w cur arF eER��o J : Nau a�mri we a�M mnm�wm�aw�oma a ss� �O-
YNMg RIMOFF FROM 97E s �ri v�w�+mm,a mm�o ar�nr a xaa � ���.J'
ROCK CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE ` �*�°"'"'°"'°'�'°°"°°r°"'' "r"`�°"°�°`°"�°��°"°" � ao o .3o eo so
PREFABRICATED SILT FENCE
PROJECT N0:
N •c"'�E"�'"E=R'"�•'-°"°P'�'""'"� �°Y°�ry�tl'�°�'�'�^��"^ PRELIMINARY STORM WATER 13-037
z �, , �� CAMPION ��h���er�� OLIVER HILL
,��,...���. �m,�.ro.�,���
ENGINEERING P'�'�Z� i�o e„� p�r�,ProNrbnd Enqin�er POLLUTION PREVENTION PLAN
"°P""'°�'•""'�9 m.?' � ,.srac.er w�..ow. THE BROADWAY GROUP, LLC.
►a. DAh o�tvnon � SERVICES, INC. F�°"� �,��u � m/z�/�oi4 �^ '
�-���- ORONO, Mrv SHEET N0. 6 OF 7 SHEETS 10/30/2013
REN9qJ5 E-Yd: mmnPlonO�mWlon�n4com YatM P. lor./-Lla 19901 Datc
�2�^ 2 P
� _ _ _ _ _ �__ _= 4 = � -- 3 -- __ _= 3 =_ --__ _� __ 966 __ __ -- �ss- --��'LANTING NOTES
�I AP RS TH TH 4 lo. �oa�sHui���s.oFE�u.�uN(BSDERCROUN�2 0.
` p , �rraoR ro wsru.unow oF urr Pu►rts oR urmsawE
. i3M 1� 2. ICTUAL IDCAibN OF PLANT NA7QtNL 5 SUBJECT TO FlELD AND SRE
CONDITIOHS.
. ' � ` 3. NO PLANIING WILL BE RISTALLm UNT1L ALL GRADING AND
I • -- -'- .T------, � COt�STRUCl10N HAS B�l COMPLETm IN THE INMmIATE AREA.
�- T- - -- - ,
� ' F -- --� �O 4. ALL SUBSITTUIlONS MUST BE APPRONED BY THE IANDSGPE
i
_� . (p ARCHRECT PWOR TO SUBMISSION OF ANY BID AND/OR�WTE BY 7HE
� --- � � � O � UWDSGPE CONiRACTOR.
� � � � 7
_�� � �---�-----� � . � 5. CONTRAC'TOR SFiALL PROVIDE ONE YEAR GUARANIFE OF ALL PLMIr
�-, R� u��w.s. n� c�ww+r¢ eEaNs orr nie wh oF tHE
` I � . � uwosc��acr+rtocrs oR owr��rs•s wRmo��cc�ru+ce oF n+e
�`p I j �, : � INtTIAL PlAN11NG. REPLACENENT PLANT MATERNL SFNLL HAVE A ONE
--- -- --- �rt ctwUrlr� cor�uaa� u�rwmNc.
� 0� � 8. N.L PlAH15 TO BE SPEqMEN CRADE.M9�lESOTA-CROWN AND/OR
�� � FOLLOIMItdG SfANQARD'S: ADHERE l0. BIJT IS NUT UYRED 8Y,
7 � ETC.PLANiS SFNLL BE FREE FRON WSEASE� PESTS. MIOUNDS� SCARS.
� � _---� , ALL PLANTS SFIALL BE FREE FROM NO7ICEABLE CdPS. HOLES. OR
,-- -c- DffORMR1ES.
��, � �.- �� 6 �u� �w vE�w,��ea�nrx.w°i��r+n�iF�c.
� � ° '� 3 9 COI�MFEROUS 7REES SFIALL W1VE AN ESTABLISHm WJN LEADER AND
, , ,
�O \ ,,- ,, y,,� v A HEIGHf TO WIDTH RA710 OF NO L6S T}iAN 5:3.
tl� -~ $ �-' \ � �T 7. RMRS i0 NEET AMERIGN STANDARD FOR NURSERI'STOCK (M61
Q , � Z60.1-2004 OR MOS7 CURREHT VERSqII) REOURDAENIS FOR SIZE
- ��� � . AND TYPE SPECIFlm.
^ �r�
`�\ .-'"� . ��70 BE R1STMIID AS PQt STANWIRU MISI PL1INTING
,'`-'",, 4 ' '• � -
-` - - ------- -7 9. PLAMS SFMLL BE MMEDMTELY PUNTm UPON ARRNAL AT SRE
- - - - - -
• - ---
--------- --- ------- -- - - --------------
----
OUTLOT A �B I � � PROPERLY FED_-IN NA7ERNLS ff NEC6SARY;IEMPORAItY ONLY.
, - - - -- � �o.a�o�ro Pwrtr+c. Fxin voaFr 1ruT Tr+e rmor cowvt/Rarr r�t
_ _ � - , I I � / / IS LAGiID AT 1HE TOP OF THE BN.LED B BURUP 7REE �n+a �s
4 j �r n�rws� so�swu�ee� oow►i To niE Rarr
�� � � / couus/navr r1�. w►+o+rne ea.i.m e� eursuw� �s vw�rtm.
SW _-1+q r-;� � �� co�u.�/Roor FuuR�ut� EVQ+ oR sucrrtt.Y�ewE
PLANT SCHEDULE 3 �� I I
I � I / � 11.OAQI TOP OF BURLAP ON BB AM7QtNl5: REMONE PO'T ON POTTm
I�Y 07Y. CdMON:BOTAlIIGLL TYPE 9g C011YEN75 P1N115: SPLR AND BRENC APART PEAT POlS.
� �� 12 PRUNE PLANiS AS NECESSNt'f - PER STANMRD NURSER'! PRACi10E
RS 1 FULL GtOYN: 9WYE LEADER: FlRST BRANCH AT 6' 3 ___�\ . '_ __ _ I � � AND TO CORREC�POOR �tAt1CNiNG.
i `
S1N 7 • FULL CROMR7: 9NGLE LEAOER: FlRST BRANp1 AT 6' SS � i �� 2 I � 13.WRAP ALL SNOOTFI-BIUtKED 7REE5 -F�ISiEN TOP AND BO1T'ON.
�a e e . i1 , . • AS. '� / y RDAaWE Br APRI� iST.
`\ ,� 'I
TI 6 FUtl CROWH: FMST�tANCH�T 3' � ^ �`'� � 14.STAKING OF 7REES OPIIONN.: REPOSRION. PWMB AND STAKE IF NOT
� B �` �, �, , ti66 ��� ( PWMB AFiER ONE YEAR.
� s , e CLU,P FORIh 3'IRIM(S WNYMMi AT �� '
SS S SPPoNC 9JOW t�tABAPPLF: NALL15 tLLL CRO�MIk FlRSf BRNICJI A7 . •` �, � ��j�I I I 15.SWL CONDRI(k15 PRIOR�NG. LANDSCME NCWd�RACfOR S�
IID 11 36 SPACE AT OC � I SFMLL NOTFY I.NJD5CJIPE ARCHITEGT FOR 1HE N� OF ANY SOIL
� �� ( r (O I I O A►IET�MElfiS
MN 71 76 SPACE AT OC �� I I O I I I N 16.B(ACKFRL SOIL TO ADHERE TO MN/DOT STANDARD SPEC�IG►TpN 3877
24 SVACE AT 4 OC �� � � I � I �O I �O 0 FREE OF ROOTS, ROC�ICS URGER i}Wl ONE NJCH, SUB9DIL DEBRtS,
SV Y �A aTA 24 SPACE AT 4 OC \� \� � I �1� I I �� p��� 0�0 � � �� � ����
ti
,-� � -'" �� I I I 17.ALL SHRUB PUNIING BEDS (WtMN SODDED ARFAS) SFMLL MAVE 4�
BX ?3 ' 7 9PACE AT OC _,� - ��_�--""� I I p�$�{�pp� �N�OOp B�RI( YULCHµD VALLEY-NEW BLACK
�ov�s�r r�arr�(eorn soEs)-s�w I I I I owawn («e Ea�U Par mciNc. n� eociNc swui ee Pucm
�OU�D 1R�(S70/�0)� 14 � �� I I I I I Yh1ERE POSSIBLERVES. UTI.QE CURBS AND SIDEWALKS FOR EDOING
PLANTING DETA�LS -�'""��� � / � � I I
�� �a�u r�wu� ams�w� oRw�►�orta cruss eEos sw�u wwE s•
\ ' � I I OF SMREDDED HARDWOOD B�RK YULCH AND VALLE`/-VIE1M BLACK
�oaasr�srarr �/""� / / I dAMOND (OR EOUAL) POLY EDqNC. TFff EDCING SHALL BE PLACED
wiar�iw�rv �,�c� � I I WHERE POSSIBLERV�S UTI.RE CURBS AND SIDEWALKS FOR EDpNC
�o,a�n�w��rr.
ri�.wr�ru ei /
M_�""'N°� / � I I I 19.FOUR INCHES OF SHREDDED 1WlDWOOD BARK MULCH SFtALL� USm
! ����� � ' / �i AROUND ALL 7RffS WRNIN iURF AREAS.
� � ;� � I I 40.N1 DISTURBED FROHf YARD AREAS TD BE SODDED TO 7HE FRONT
�i w�Fu/w u�r���a rr s r�err s ti� / � � M1D SIDES OF TF1E Ii01AE (MNAMU4).SOD 7D BE STANd1RD
wr r ne■ isr si�w�i a�� � � � / I I I WNNESOTA GROWN AND W1�iDY BLUEGWlSS MIX. ALL SOD AREIS
we��n is: �sr a
�"1O°� wer tw1s���'s� ra�i d wr��e_ / � / I SFMLL � PREPARED WI1Ti 4'OF T�OF5qL AND RAKm TO RDAWE
s�ws��a[wsr p�swi�s�� / E � I
o.w 4 io n.r r.e. . �..�.. �"�o s■ � / I I 7HE I�MESD TO�BE S�m WRX N�7URF S�AMD(. SOD ON F
aw'aa� witie',or�sas � /
ian e�ra�mr ti r�w w.�ia m � / I I SLOPES OF 3:1 OR OREATER ShlAll BE STAKm.
�arrnsrm
ee�u�isa n�a a
ios o�r�� ea��� �� �!, / � I I Tt.CANIRACIDR SHALL PROVIDE NEC65AtN WAiEPoNG OF PWt�
r.re rr..� I MATERWS UH�IL THE PLANi IS FULLY ESTABlJSFim OR IRRIGA710N
��D'�••n .a,au.ac.�,r
a,�!�.:�",i .c.w. .u�w Mr� � - � I I � SYSTEM IS OPERATqlW_ OWNER NALL NOT PRdVmE WATER FOR
�aw. .�ir w�riiu01�'�ow s - r�a.er r e.m , _ _ I
n.s�rr s�vs _ _ CONIRACIOR.
.Wie"iu wwr��rc'O �r rea. � i�� "�""��ni � /�� _ - _ - - - - I �
is r r w��ra � �w�s-�iu r�art w ur rr - - �Y -----------J 22 REPNR. REPL.ACE. OR PROVDE SOD/SEED AS REQUIRED FOR AN'(
r�..ne.r wr�w r���ra �/----'--- _ � �Y��AFtEIIS AD�IACENT 70 7HE SfiE CCRIRBED
sr o r�wY s ran�d wr��w •'.}.!��� '- �
w s r�r�s.w err�ur ar v ec ��s�as� 2S.REPNR ALL DANACE TO PROPERIY F1i0M PLAIlTWG OPERAl10NS AT NO
r�'ru a� e r�r s��'s COSf TO dWNER.
.�r�r w�a ia rr�ru
�m..a�s� .`...r....�..� .�u.u.r�r..,n �
d�MO�O 1� \d d m/��61Or IW!O�MI 1 f Mf!
M1ML m�[fM MO�O�MYIL ��lOR�L I�S
Ir�fR�1f. MM�[�M 1�R .� O .� QO �
�rc
0�� i T w 1 hwby caWy at MN ylm. OLIVER HILL PROJECT NO:
a npart hw bwn pnpa�d by rm ar PRELIMINARY LANDSCAPE PLAN
na�si«dai,nsin �pR my���y��y� 13-037
��^°�'°�°°''�°°'*Aidio°�'"'d'�� THE BROADWAY GROUP, LLC.
N0. DAIE DES�P11011 .,y,.,,..., th�lawf ot,eM 51pt�yot MYnwota.
��-�"� oRorvo, MN SHEET N0. 7 OF 7 SHEETS DA 10/30/2013
REYL90N5 �••• •..•.""•»•�«"••,•��-"•,.,, -Lk. 22327 Dotr.
��,�_ -
,PR�PaS�� L.cu-�vSrAP��-1C P�.d*�
� � O l_: I��-�R. E-i I L L �
��-LE�( lT �t61�.1"��( � . ..
�ar.avaR� 2e�y ii
i
i
- �/ln pf R�k+.l G/ksA�S� wH�c�+ �A+-� �.+o� - .
' �N 6K+�c T AcuM �� M-+t� W OT ftTR�4 n��R
M�S
� 7v�.Mu..�A�w.�GS� !bW A�SsrT $�'k'�MJ W . .. . .
py�v,sr.� ta.r f�nA 'N i.�v�e.� wu� �Nm Z �cL lN'J
c•��.o �:�:., �A
� wKcA�mt �fs-'YwP� re+c S�v�S y sJ-
• �,� r,.�,,,,�+� �m. sNa,.rss hv.A Pen+.+�+� s I �� 4a�a'
� �`� �
,r�,n wo�, �.,,o „r nu�N4 ks �
� Sc� i�`Ne�P�1 Prt+�Fa-ors, � �i , +.�\ ��/ . ` �� j �
% � t;;� �. � '`.�r �j wr i
! �:r�����"�l- 3'eq' �� y A '� � f
� � �`' / °`�' �,,,�C..g �v H'
,.�,,:',�,,1���J y'"'�� � �,,; ��a ,� ' � �'�, �
%,� ; r/ f •.� a �� ♦.�/ ,
_ �s c�—p, —
,
,.,
� ,; .. �� :...+e.� � 1 y�2At1
, ,,..:._,. ...__�._.
.._,�..__._,. .. .,. ,._.. . ._.._., � '►_ ap /.ric�
.� ��, ..d'.. / j . _� �V �..�.!".r
./� f' ,/�� t . �� _� l�/r ` `.' �y �fL
i . /��� / "'/ :��s;-• � � .,- ,35��,- ' C r�•� s
' !��'�I/ /'//'i�l b�--� `�� � `� '�"! � '// ' ..!'
r ' ✓
_ . , X, � ,. � , � -: . �r Z S�' . � .
«'
i' : �,
---- -� :�- ,w: .- , �� � ,, y
„r� �; .,- �, � ��.; � , ,.....
3 5 .; 3 w ` .- _��' � �.to�� ,�J^`� --
._� ,
� �� -..,�
,�;� --____— r;` I_ « �., :. "
—�---- — -- - --.� ,---- ----- �,. �- s sv
' ,��, ZG ' ,�` �•�t '/��� .�'``"r> ` �
i . . . V. ` \ •n
Y
� • ` LA
� W � �.� .� . . . �/r ,��;u � /� � ` \ �
��! - � � . , � �� � � . ` � .� -
�� I ( , r E r 'X 2 5 L / � '1 \ �,� .
� � � �'' � �?_�+a.�
,
'q �tF � ' �,'Rv' ;� j / �. \
� �_'/ �
j ,,V:� �__.— -
�N� ' .',r, �. ` _ ; ';` ' ' � ._ � � - '': �Ns
i sM // f_.:_.. . . � , . /`��� i ,• h-
- - ` / / ��� �'�a I�D ./' �c" • �'�
r,- !�. � �, �' � �.
� � f'�� �� �'I f �(, ���� .��', k � '� �/�fJ . . .,�f. . `
� . � { 5��. 4c�
�+--_. _.-------"'� ,/ . . �M�F � ��(L . .
,,s
� � ,;,'`'� E r,,.
?i_.a,.�r �sr- • �
��5�" �o- J!�- 3M»FM� N�M�7E �I�.K �.�.- �VV -\V�tiTVJoC�1i V�QuR1.i�M
d� i1- MF-MF'A-�ohl�I�W� i4R'�(TN�P
/'��I Co- �-!A' T►�uR-r.t 1..E�'7 y t4MvTH ot.�,,,� L«.s1 C..
. � Z•1- C.l' GsMMorJ
� � 5" 5M- SvG4iL MA4�.F_ +S'1- Ro- �-t0-T�V�GGGO OoGN��D
----..� . '(� .�/"J P'4 8- WP- Wk�TE P�n.�E �o- AN- /��n�e�cA-..� NALt�.►�tuT
._.._,._"_ _ � dG"� �" tr2- �wr+�vo�n ��t- Sv- n����w�T 5��v�ce�tie�(
n�
� %,' '� 5- LA- LAcacs► e - Nt!- GoMMow� Nt�u�NfaL�s�..
�,-!'".�-�� y�' Ca- SL- S..aoWDlc�Ft GR-A�A-PPLE_- q - rA • krn�u+� �wM
3 NA /�% � �y� �' NoR�rA�( SPGur-F_
� v ' �
�_.,�._.._�.�..,� �'� R� tn�niC.�]rtF_ MASS�i..�C� OF h1A�iV� P��K�..ttC4t,S-
� $kADCT� A¢C�i'
� �i � � . v � BvIfEFF�•�{ Ft..oIVEIL cRROi�.1/��- f�-�+1�'�••
�' � /'� � �a' S�v,a-«n� �n .� �ao�►wce�a
"y NF �, � � �L wE��
�� �_-.--_�._� �,/' �'i': ASTE�+ZS [�e.ve�'� �oot
�'�, � „ I S M� y��-:�� . � . . jr,R.fli�NL`.4� Hb14L9G. ���(6� 9USA�
f
,�'�` Jo� P`S� �N�,� cit� C��M .
, p: - �' ':J ZWf' p2A��lE S�o�cf SvE-rr� H-A4
� �
.' /}*� ` C,c�' �'�/ li A�fa�5
f �
�e�
{/
'�� ' ' �` •3p�--^�� f1�AZiM� sra-n-
� l,� ry, ..� . .
� � . , �.C'1 �
{�.)a"f 'f ikS NO.T�R�tt- A t.00ici.-�C� �.,ierti07��M�
�so � 3 FT�� �,✓';:.i 1: 6�' Sp MY caNc,F-P� �S Tb T2 Tu cCsr_aNc
�S �fg�. . No � 7CANO�w14 h'i+wwb �(3�7 Q.AtNF+K h ��A3A�.-rf n4�r OF
��" G�� -,�, ,j i¢ . :
,
V U ,/ °, �,'s ,`l� . 3,uV"�� cer�5, ��fc�cs5 �� Na�nvE Pcc�'+.-ttnu ��! S�vr�P�..�l, Cmc�i._ Suci+ A
� � �w�� '� R �., J� �I� � . .
1 .'. Q' �, :._ ,r.*.f f�. M�t NouM P�w�qE i'�'s6�-�ST R�QavGl�o�r R+rc S�ASo�. +U SPFtrJ„ �Fv�
� ,:�„ % fi'��� SM PuFs �.,o barBt !�-hG tivu��.n 6euvT �wi R�at��
I�W� (� - p .� ` � ,, j:' p � � �N3rA--'cE, �5-rna�A � CF�P
v Q � r + � ��,'°',!� � � �u.aW� !SY �•�Ai-S�V�PioR+Ju�sS rt,�o PR.��RtE SK�K�. SUMHLNG (?�6PuAYS 6F
5'�� � f co�..n- �-t�4M�r f�F tov�2TbSY OF SwM,.�P Wt�ucwr+Fo, Ff�Ac�• 6KF+o SuS�saC �c>
M 3 w y RD� ,ry�.tc�,z�-t,Y f�W�• P�u- ce�r�v�-( �! ti+atf0 Fi�n- Ast�sS, 'R'R'n"Et4+wTIJ elvn
fV�iac�E pr �tlM t�c�v18ut,.w�v+�n.� HtF�•rvu h+.,0 'StR-v�c�PiPa�`S. Wt�7'14�- 'f�+t�'x�cT
D F�2CtiK'PNS 6F lG+u�t�- k�-�A �u Ct� CN�4F � ��t�SrS O�
A
. . . � P41CiFtf [otME v�R L�iW°" �1� � .. . ..
OA'�<� t(ln�V.bc(� � V1'un W�1cMNRLEa.. W�M�n�. /k�"'-�OS•
� w W t w FF�a� k PhR� vF NFT�R.E�
�. " fio+.��tivi..�--R-t � vu vr�- �+
, 1 . . . . . . . ' _ ' .
� �^
/ '_
FtECEIVED ..Nc �
i
�
JAN 2 4 2013 �
CITY OF ORONO
, . � C�r�
Mike Gaffron � -2'-(- /�'
From: William Abbott[williabbott@gmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, January 23, 2014 7:55 AM
To: Mike Gaffron
Subject: Narratives
Positive Measures
The following positive measures will be taken prior to any grading or tree removal to insure the preservation of
topsoil, vegetation, trees/plants and wetlands. We will periodically through out the grading and road
construction project inspect these measures. If we find repair is necessary we will promptly repair any defects.
We will also review the measures with all parties working on the site to insure there are no misunderstandings
occur.
Silt fences
Tree preservation fences
Grading limits demarcation
Permanent wetland demarcation
If there are any other required measures we will comply with those as well.
Response to neighbor letter
Points 1 and 2 will reduce the build-able area on many lots and thus will reduce the value of the homes,
neighborhood and community. Lots of time went into planning the layout of lots and the road servicing
this neighborhood by city staff, engineers, surveyors, designers, home builders and the developers. We believe
this is the best design we all could come up with that is extremely unique to new development but yet matched
the existing surrounding properties as closely as possible. It serves to help meet the goals of Orono's
Comprehensive Plan and also keeps density consistent with the surrounding community. Reducing lot size or
build-able area will negatively effect neighbors, the Orono community and this project.
Point 3, making a separate outlot of the wetlands is not a good idea. It will require a HOA and create the
opportunity for city owned tax forfeited lands. The wetlands will be adequately protected by an easement that is
recorded with the plat for perpetuity. The wetland will have permanent demarcation signs defining its location.
We believe leaving the wetlands as part of each individual lot that they rest on is the best course of action.
i
� � Council
Exhibit B
Mike Gaffron L'/�2Y1/'U
From: Steve Kelley[kelleyandkelley@gmail.com]
Sent: Friday, January 10, 2014 4:52 PM
To: Lili McMillan; Kristi Anderson; Cynthia Bremer; Lizz Levang (clevang@aol.com); Aaron H.
Printup; Mike Gaffron
Subject: Thoughts on the Oliver Hill development
Attachments: CCE12292013_00000.pdf
As a lifelong resident of Orono and for the past twenty years, with my wife , an owner of property at 2340
Watertown Road adjacent to the proposed Oliver Hill, I've seen Orono's open spaces gradually become living
spaces. Though change is hard to see at times, I think that we've been fortunate that Orono's decision makers
have guided along thoughtful developments, promoting housing that best fits it's surroundings.
With the proposed Oliver Hill, we hope such thoughtfulness will prevail. How can this development ,which
many of us will pass by several times daily, be made an�asset to Orono? First and foremost, the development
must relate well, not only to it's community as a whole, but to it's adjacent neighborhood. That's a tricky
balance, given the need of the developer to attract buyers to a successful project, yet satisfy aesthetic demands
at the same time.
Specifically, we don't think Glendale Cove - sized homes fit the scheme at Oliver Hill. I hope a comment by
staff at one of the recent meetings we attended to the effect that the homes at Glendale Cove ended up being
larger than the city had envisioned doesn't bode ill for Oliver Hill. We favor the examples of modest bungalows
that Mr. Abbott used to illustrate possible designs for homes on Oliver Hill, but wonder what means Orono staff
has to dictate scale.
Aside from scale, our major concern is setback from Willow Drive. We understand that fifty feet is only a
guideline, but we think twenty five feet seems a skimpy compromise. Traveling along Willow Drive, from C.R.
24 in the north to Fox Street in the south, we don't see a concentration of homes so close to Willow as Mr.
Abbott is proposing. Part of what makes that stretch of road such a pleasing drive is the setback of homes and
the buffer of vegetation along the right of way. A twenty five foot setback doesn't seem to allow adequate room
to allow for a buffer planting, especially given the utilities overhead and a possible trail route in the future.
Would a solution to the setback be (as illustrated on the enclosed drawing)to realign the north/south lot lines of
lots one and two in Block one? Seems an easy fix to a problem we feel vexes this development as currently set
out.
Points two and three on the enclosed sketch represent refinements to the plan that we feel would improve the
aesthetics of the project, allow for improved buffering, and assure the sensitive use of the land into the future.
We respectfully hope you will make thoughtful decisions - as always - regarding Oliver Hill, assuring it a proud
place in the community and a proud place in the legacy that you will be leaving for generations of Oronoites to
come.
Sincerely,
Steve Kelley and Arla Carmichiel
i
� ,
PRELIMINARY PLAT 8� RPUD REZONING
OLIVER HILL
ORONO, MN
The following thoughts are made with the intention of improving the proposed
project as presented to the community.
If the premise of having 7 small scale single family homes on this piece of
property is accepted these thoughts are made with the idea of improving the
project and reducing any negative influences on the surrounding properties.
Proposed here are 3 simple suggestions;
1. INCREASE SETBACK FROM WILLOW DRIVE
If the setback fram Willow Drive were to be increased from the proposed
25 feet to 40 feet it would more c4osely meet Orono standards of 50 feet. It
would still give the developer enough width to create good home p{ans.
The north lot (Lot 1, Block 1) is currently 91' in width. It that NIS line would
be moved 5' east giving a lot width of 96' then a set back of 40' from
Willow and a set back of 10 from Lot 2, Block 1..a buildable width of 46' for
Lot 1 would be still adequate for a small house pfan footprint since the lot
depth (N/S) is quite adequate.
For Lot 1, Block 2, which currently has a width of 100 feet a buildable
width of 50 feet, would exist. With the great "length" of the iot, again, a
good plan can be developed.
Therefore an increased set back from Willow will more closely meet Orono
standards while still allowing the developer a good site to develop.
2. MOVE ACCESS ROAD 15 FEET NORTH
If the public access road would be moved 15' north it would allow an
adequate area for screened plantings to protect the properties to the
south. Without such a buffer south properties would be exposed to 5 of the
seven newly created lots with only the road separating the properties.
Without that separation there is no visual protection to the south. Also,
snow plowing would effect the private property to the south. The moving of
the access road would therefore allow year round maintenance of the roan
and still provide protection of iarge lot neighbors to the south with a dense
planting area.
3. CREATE AN OUTLOT OF WETLAND
The wetland to the north side of the property could be made as separate
out lot just as the wetfand of Glendale Cove (to the north) has done with
its wetland.
That would protect all surrounding property owners by insuring that the
wetland would be protected forever. Lots 1-5, Block 1 would all be smaller
in listed areas but visually there would be no changs.
� �
_,.
,
,.--
.— _.� �,�-. ,
..
_______._.... _�.__� _. � __ . _)_ _ �
' . --..__._�_,.._.._._„�.....,.�... f E ! � ,�
� �..,� j ��q ;�.,�� �
� � � J/ � E'wl
1 � � � � �' �
n � } � :
-r _ �; j;' t'. !.
� � � � � �, �"',�`„ J, .�� '�
'� � j, :s� � ��',� �� �a�
� � �i � ; o� ,.t c ,,� �,, `�
� _ ` . '�.s . r'`� ��
�_.__ �._ i .... i. .- �� �
_ . � �� ��y
� ��
. ;.
`' �� �; �1. �! _ . _._....�_..�---"'"
�_.___..._—_____...�..� '' ,�s
. - _..,.. _..... .. _._.___
_�:.
.�.�. ��---'
!:i� `�, �, •�n � : �
� a�,� � � � `"• r''aJ ,'"' � o G�
`'' [' {� � Q � - �
__�, , a fir, c� ,� �
. _
_ �
_..�_ �.....���..�., �__,�. �, .
� a ,
� � 11 i 1 ��r
� tA ��
�" ��,-. n 6 � ti `. � r} �
�l � __ � N i� � '',�'y` �
,�= �_.� '`'" �o a>'-i` 1, i � ; '��
"'�`' ��,�- -_ .--- � � '�,
k '�f '� ^ i, `� ..5,,.., . �1 , .. ,.......
c�!,. �
+yC, .. •,1 ,� � l� 11� �„r" ` ll� ` ..
L�l �1� r �
,9 :�� �, � i-- � -
`�� � " ' � s�" ' �1 —
y `" '� � , �� � �-_ �� L
v `r ° __ '� ?�
_ _._
�, �, �� ��,, ' ___._
' �
-� ,� :
--... �- ';
�, . . .�. , .,�'i �'1 r�l . � � `� °g ,.�
� � ` c.�;�'sh '.b;G , _ i.� � t,' '�' o
-� n �, _ 'c- " , '; ,c� j
� . � ,; J
� a- �, Xr� z4, �_ �} � �`
9 �; ,st �n. m� � 7 3 ��2�C� i,I
_�_.� _ _ _ � r
_. , ,_ __-... . � . � , . _ i
_____.... _._
,--- : �
�"` s
� 1� � � 1
� � � t}�j rF�O�G�G� v• �el� K� 5 1�" C.����.� i
- .. __ _
� j ,._.... .. ,� ----.._.._--_ �
�i �` � . ,. � ,rs„ ��,y I
:� '' � � 3�' �
, - ,
� xgb�i5 �, �' �= ;'= _ss�ii.E.'c.i
� .
s� _ ... _. i �
1 9
� '
; �
I �
1 �
I y
r,yrC �t�e� l.►++�.
i
i 1
i
( -- - �.._.__
�.oS"I ' ��' /
�� l i Pa.�w t .. I.a r 3 /
� , ��� , ;� �p u►�c
� � � i
f � ! �a,4 /� �
I , . ,___�_.� I,csi'4
� � / F,crz.t- I
� i ` �,p`
� o
� �MM� � I'tbBs� ,� �� /� .
{ ( ' � : `C �// �
i /
-�--�--- -- ' i '
1 •N� � i ' -0M / , / / -'_` Q� �/`
; � �, ( � ;x� 'tt.rJO� �"-i ' _' / /
�.� .___ �.---�--- —j ��� j ' r � �"''���-,-
� '�°�� ; � � .�-.--�.. _ � y
� ,
� � � l � / .t —i c�s
� � � � ` � �1�-l
' , � ( � / �� ,
� f � `' \
3 I �
� 1 k 1 �� ^ �� \�
� fr \\
� � ,r �� ,
� � � , --�--' � �� '�..ty�o�
�_ � �J'�' � R�bJt1N'o PX�i�
- , ��
��. � , �� � k
-� � �'
� � � _ -� , �,
; � �
E � � �� �
� , �,��� � � ,�. � t PRELIMARY PLAT 8� RPUD REZONING
� � ► � r� OLIVER HILL
� � I,�� ORON
I � I I O, MN
; I I /
s � i � , .
�,� �,.�u ,�.�.
_ � SCAL , '- 50' • �� �
! wr � �,at' 2
w
-�, p�,a,w y �w Z � `� � �%
--- -- - �
i .
I
33 33 �
S 89 20'34" E 181.O1 � �
j� �� � �� _ ,, {=`,� �p 1" �n,�� '1
: ,� PI'�ELIM/N,4RY PL,4 T i
,, . _ �
;� � I � I ti � PROJECTED EASEMENT LOCATIONS .
� � I I I � Wetland (Flowage & Conservation Easement)
���� .���
M� y"W.
v, ��
Y�
: i �'� � � w �
i o Tree Preservation
� � o
` � I ' � MCWD Wetland Buffer
� o
'�`�+ `� Ma ag� � Wetland ,' � � � � �,.+...,,r� SOWeP
;,y �-- (deline te b Jacobson-��
r� Enviro m �l, PLLC on
�
� ; oy � '20�3) ' � � �_ � Trail .. ..�,.�� . ,
I , I I i � � ..-- - _ _ , i
ri �''�y,�d ` �� � 214.25 — — — — � — — 107.03 -
� � � � — 1 1
� /— �
� I I � ,_ �:._ ,> �
: . —$ • =� -- — — -- � ...... _, �
-� a�,,9, "� �� �..s ^,.
� ,, .�,,�..
� " N �.. . �., � s�y,� c I�� �fl�G Easemen t o
�� � • �4 �'�'�"' '� a`�- �+���r�. . nJ
�, , - 1 � .2 - � � � �' �"-�` y ," -- -- �----�'_"'_"
1Vlaple � �, � � ��� I�� � � _.. . � � �
� �
q o � '�— �'' N EaSP : -J.� � N
Lan e � � I o �,, 1 � � � � �t �,
�� O , � � .�� , � ��
�_ � � , I� I �,• � _ � ��� � . �$� � O
� ` , I ,/'� I �� I� �'�oposed -� �� � ��`` ...,. .� ��y �� ' �1 �
,(� '` N
� ,,,. � Bld9• Si t e � ''ti � � �- _
: o y� �baLk i ' ' L(1�s8rg.f� i�p / ����^�\ `,'o �� I
I v- „rv��ti � � �-� __ / / !y,
,1� �.���.., �-� 1�' � � -� '�a'� �,.'�- a��° �� � '� �� � O
�I � � I / ���osed �\ �p.I� �' ; < t�N �� �> ` y--- � � �
r 0
d. �' I P�oP Sitie � 45 � �rive� / y'��o �' �- '� ,� r 1 = O
� � I ��\ B�d90 sq�ft��l 1 !- 2.,3'S' �_� ��� ` `�9 ��� � \ a; .,� � � O
. �5 �\(��5 � � JI. �- �9. g � �. `�� � i i� h �+„ � . ` O
W 3 I i A �,� o\ ��' � � / o- `� r Z
p O I I � �� � �S R z5��O,. �,,\`c�-o` �� \' � / /�1 � �4\ ` � �m
p 0 �/ f�P � � � 6' ��� / 1 �r=r '�,. ^r,
I I �P , e1 �� /' 6 , tx .: '
0 o I I I r v \ 23 \o• ' � ;v 6i ,n-D�1 �o , � s��
o� O �------i \� i � , �"VJ s � � oP• ��,a�� �s 4. � �ra
� Z I V 0 : S / P f 1 a oA � r`�:'
� Z I �Pro osed� I � � � 56g.50 p0� � s`�r' I ' �. / D/%,c„ o ` "" -.., \ � �
N �5 Bldg Sitej I I \. � p '�i�OpBF, t�ir ���' � .`�o v_��a �� ',ti '.
� (2080 q.ft.)� � �� ; '��'�`� \�:c "�� �' '18"W �\ -" m �� � �
� i �' � � 7 •3� � � ,- � �.�
� I ��o t- J �I $0\ �� _� ,��`L �_��N ���-' .�
: I L I Drri e I � � �� � �� - 69.09 - �-� —��232.19 — — — —v�---- o . I
I "� � �- TS.00�T. i � • p i �� �- �
I � I �=�5.o� � ' ' �,,�3%p'�� ��'' 1 � N89 21'00"W 301.28 ,
i �
� �- � �' Publlc Roa � g0 °'J y;� .�
a
� �- S90'00'00"W - _ L=1 2 1 Z j '✓ '� `so� Lec�end
� 1
� --�25I00�� N I_' � \ y � �� s s�8� • Found lron Monumenf
o `_ �75.OQ _ .25. `,i- �P• �� O O Cast lron Monument
� � �P�op.) � 1 0�'�e � d \�
.c lQrive , , � d,se. � --- I - 15
( �r-- i �'� I � P�°p � ite �\ SCALE
� I I I�-�oposed I � �� g�d9;�g � I eo 0 3o eo �zo
� I �5 � Bldg. Sife � I ��T �2 ft,) � I
' � �1»sa S�.rr.) � � Sn ,,- � �—�__� --
� � � i ��,
✓ I �---J ( I N 1 inch = 60 feet
�I I t�
33 33 � o I Boundary Descrip fion (sup�lied b v clien f)
I Lot 2, Block 1, ULMER ESTArES, and Lof Z, Block 1,
^I � HUNTERS GREEN, Hennepin County, Minnesoto.
I �" I � I Z � -� I � - 15 Subject to any and a/I easements of record.
I o� �,5 I I I u PlD Numbers: 34-118-23-33-0055
�� I� � I O 34-118-23-33-0058
�\ O � I�� � Properfy Address: 2350 Wotertown Road
�� � � _ _ _ _ I _ _ _ � l� Orono, MN
1 ' �1 � 100.00 - y 101.01 � O
i � \ I , „ � O Sformwofer Quality Overlay District:
( ` S 89 20 34 E �81.01 'j �� � � O Tier 4 (limrtotion of 50� hordcover)
; � � O
�y � I I
I i � �I
a 5 - -
r� o _,� �_- o
,�REAS �o , 5 �
Lof Nome rotal Areo Totol Drv Confiouous Dry Hordcover 9'* � p o j � I
6/ock 1: 'a`�,�� - - - 1 - - - J L - - - � - - -
L�t 1 38,235 s.f. 1.3,997 s.f. 13,997 s.f. 79 � �
1_o f 2 34,87,3 s.f. 15,444 s.f. 15,444 s.f. Sq N
L o t 3 23,289 s.f. 19.156 s.f. 13,726 s.f. 109' � � p i �
1.of 4 32,415 s.f. 28,992 s.f. 13,768 s.f. 9� O t � Drainage and Utilify Easements being 10 feet in width
Lot 5 24,627 s.f. 21,951 s.f. 18,343 s.f. 149 � �� cv and adjoining street and reor lot lines, 5 feet in width
Block 2: � O ond adjoining side lot lines o� otherwise as marked.
Lot 1 17,47' s.f. 17,447 s.f. 17,447 s.f. 14� �
!_o t 2 19,971 s.f. 19,971 s.f. 19,971 s.f. 149 � �
Public Rood: 17,88� s.f. Z �, �
Ou tlot A: 5,460 s.f. � � �
'Proposed hordcover colculotions bosed on house and drivewoy only. 1 Q �f �_ __�_ _
� \
- 10 -
T�a ter�own j-�d.\� S8920'34"E
� � 20.oo � ----�o - � — �
D SC.HO�ORG � N � m
�^'- LA D ��EF�VICES � . , .� � �
��
�
Building Setbocks bemg 25 feet in width ond od�oinn '.r n
� �N�j.`, Revision Dote: 10-30-13 front /ot lines ond Willow Drive Norfh, 35 feet in wid (7 -
'�� ond adjoining reor lot lines and 10 feet in width onc
� Beorings based on assumed dotum. odjoining side /ot lines, o� ofherwise as ma�ked. I
�s�s� � � .
INITIAL DRAFT LANGUAGE FOR OLIVER HILL - For Discussion Onlv
Tree, Woodland and Vegetation Preservation Easement. Declarant, its heirs, successors and
assigns, for and in consideration of the sum of One Dollar ($1.00) and other valuable
consideration, does hereby covenant, grant, gift, quit claim and convey to the City of Orono, its
successors and assigns, the right to restrict, and Declarant agrees to limit and preclude the use,
improvement and development, under the conditions and covenants herein contained, on that part
of the Property described as follows:
The "Preservation Easement Area" (see legal description on Exhibit A);
said Preservation Easement Area is referred to as the "Land" and is to be subject to the
conditions, covenants and restrictions hereinafter specified. Declarant hereby covenants and
agrees as follows:
(A) No structures shall be constructed, erected, or placed upon, above, or beneath the Land.
There shall be no fences, play structures, decks, accessory buildings or other temporary
or permanent structures placed on the Land.
(B) No trees, shrubs or other vegetation shall be destroyed, cut or removed from the
Preservation Easement Area' except as authorized by written consent of the City. Such
consent may be granted under the following guidelines:
(1) Removal of trees and understory shall not be allowed except to the extent necessary
to accomplish the objectives of the Conservation Design Master Plan (reference it in
definitions?)
(2) Trimmin� of trees and understory shall be allowed, but such trimming shall not be
so extensive as to jeopardize the vitality of the plant materials.
(C) There shall be no change of the topography of the Land without the written consent of
the City.
(D) Except as herein provided, no use shall be made of the Land except uses, if any, which
will not change or alter the natural condition of the Land, and no use which would tend
to change natural visual characteristics shall be made of the Land.
(E) City may enter upon the Land for the purposes of inspection and enforcement of the
covenants contained herein and to cause to be removed from the Land without any
liability any structures, uses, materials, substances, or unnatural matter inconsistent with
the covenants contained herein and the natural state of the Land.
In addition to any other remedy the City may have, the covenants and restrictions
contained herein may be enforced by injunction.
Declarant does not intend that the public should have any interest in the above Land by
virtue of this Declaration or otherwise, except as hereinabove set forth.
All provisions hereof shall run with the Land for the benefit of the City, the Lots and
Owners, and shall extend to and bind the heirs, successors, representatives, grantees or assigns
of the respective parties hereto.
T,�,� r�� l
INITIAL DRAFT LANGUAGE FOR OLIVER HILL - For Discussion Onlv
Flowage and Conservation Easement. Declarant, for and in consideration of the sum of One
Dollar ($1.00) and other valuable consideration, does hereby covenant, grant, gift, quit claim
and convey to the City the right to restrict and Declarant agrees to limit and preclude the use,
improvement and development, under the conditions and covenants herein contained, that part of
the Property legally described on Exhibit B attached hereto (the "Flowage and Conservation
Easement Area") as follows:
(A) Declarant hereby covenants and agrees:
(1) No structures shall be constructed, erected, or placed upon, above, or
beneath the Flowage and Conservation Easement Area including without limitation,
fences, fireplaces, steps, docks, piers, hardcover or roads of any nature whatsoever, or
any other structure or improvement inconsistent with the natural state of said Flowage
and Conservation Easement Area.
(2) No trees, shrubs or other vegetation shall be destroyed, cut or removed
from the Flowage and Conservation Easement Area except as authorized by written
consent of the City.
(3) No earth, loam, peat, gravel, soil or any other natural material or
substance shall be moved or removed from the Flowage and Conservation Easement
Area and there shall be no dredging or excavation of any nature whatsoever or any
change of the topography of the Flowage and Conservation Easement Area without the
written consent of the City.
(4) No soil, sand, gravel or other substance or material as landfill shall be
placed, dumped or stored upon the Flowage and Conservation Easement Area and no
waste, trash or garbage shall be placed, dumped or stored upon the Flowage and
Conservation Easement Area.
(5) No use shall be made of the Flowage and Conservation Easement Area
except uses, if any, which will not change or alter the natural condition of the Flowage
and Conservation Easement Area, and no use which would tend to change the drainage,
flood control, water conservation, erosion control, soil conservation, fish and wildlife
habitat characteristics shall be made of the Flowage and Conservation Easement Area
or the water situated thereon.
(6) City may enter upon the Flowage and Conservation Easement Area for
the purposes of inspection and enforcement of the covenants contained herein and to
cause to be removed from the Flowage and Conservation Easement Area without any
liability any structures, uses, materials, substances, or unnatural matter inconsistent
with the covenants contained herein and the natural state of the Flowage and
Conservation Easement Area.
(B) Declarant does hereby grant, gift, quit claim and convey to the City, a perpetual
flowage easement and right and privilege to trespass with water over and upon any or
all of the Flowage and Conservation Easement Area.
�'f C � o'E Z-
(C) Declarant does hereby remiss, release, acquit and forever discharge, forever, the City
and any and all of its officers and employees of and from any and all claims, demand
or causes of action of any kind or nature whatsoever which may arise or accrue by
virtue of any flowage or trespass with water within the terms of this Section 13.
In addition to any other remedy the City may have, the covenants and restrictions
contained herein may be enforced by injunction.
Declarant does not intend that the public should have any interest in the Flowage and
Conservation Easement Area by virtue of this Declaration or otherwise, except as hereinabove
set forth.
All provisions hereof shall run with the land and shall extend to and bind the heirs,
successors, representatives, grantees or assigns of the respective parties hereto.
� � �'' ZeF �-
INITIAL DRAFT LANGUAGE FOR OLIVER HILL - For Discussion Onlv
Drainage Easement. Declarant, in consideration of the sum of One Dollar ($1.00) and other
good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency whereof is hereby acknowledged,
does hereby grant, bargain, quitclaim and convey unto the City, forever, the following perpetual
drainage easement over and under and across that part of the Property legally described in
Exhibit C attached hereto (the "Drainage Easement Area").
Said easement includes the free right of the City or its agents to enter upon, under and over
said Drainage Easement Area, to remove trees, brush, grass and dirt and other structures
therefrom and to construct, maintain, repair, reconstruct and use drainageways and other
improvements related thereto, and to enter upon said easement for the purpose of inspecting,
repairing, removing and reconstructing such facilities. The City shall return the area it disturbs
to grade and seed the same and replace the surface soil with the original type material.
Declarant agrees to the following:
(A) No trees, shrubs or other vegetation shall be destroyed, cut or removed from the
Drainage Easement Area except as authorized by written consent of City.
(B) No earth, loam, peat, gravel, soil or any other natural material or substance
shall be moved or removed from the Drainage Easement Area and there shall be no dredging or
excavation of any nature whatsoever or any change of the topography of the Drainage
Easement Area without the written consent of City.
(C) No soil, sand, gravel, or other substance or material as landfill shall be placed,
dumped or stored upon the Drainage Easement Area and no waste, trash or garbage shall be
placed, dumped, or stored upon the Drainage Easement Area.
(D) No use shall be made of the Drainage Easement Area except uses, if any, which
will not change or alter the natural condition of the Drainage Easement Area, and no use which
would tend to change the drainage, flood control, water conservation, erosion control, soil
conservation, fish and wildlife habitat characteristics shall be made of the Drainage Easement
Area or the water situated thereon.
Declarant does hereby remiss, release, acquit and forever discharge, the City and any
and all of its officers and employees of and from any and all claims, demands or causes of action
of any kind or nature whatsoever which may arise or accrue by virtue of any flowage or
trespass with water.
Declarant does not intend that the public should have any interest in the above Drainage
Easement Area by virtue of this Declaration or otherwise, except as hereinabove set forth.
Declarant does covenant that Declarant is in possession of the above described property
and easement and has lawful right and authority to convey and grant the easement herein
granted.
D/��Nq{� j a� /
Council
Exhibit D
CITY OF ORONO ZONING FILE: 13-3637
� �2 yjr�
2750 Kelley Parkway
P.O. Box 66 NOTICE OF COUNCIL ACTION
Crystal Bay, MN 55323
952.249.4600 DATE OF NOTICE: December 11, 2013
TO: Willi Abbott
The Broadway Group, LLC
5375 Moline Road
Independence, MN 55359
COPIES: William & Patricia Martin
2380 Watertown Road
Long Lake, MN 55356
TYPE OF APPLICATION: Preliminary Subdivision
DATE OF MEETING: December 9, 2013
Council voted on a motion to table the preliminary plat and directed staff to bring back a draft
approval resolution for consideration, subject to applicant providing additional information.
VQTE: 5 FOR 0 AGAINST
Council requested the following information be provided by the applicant (this is a brief and
perhaps not complete staff interpretation of the discussion):
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... (staff will draft)
3. Conceptual floor plans and site plans for individual lots indicating how they might or
might not fit a 15% lot coverage limitation (as a percentage of entire lot or just the dry
contiguous area...). Show how the intended 3-car attached garages fit into these sites.
Staff to consider options for defining lot coverage and/or massing limitations, with a goal
of defining standards for all lots rather than for individual lots (example: "lesser of x s.f.
or x %").
4. Plan showing how rain gardens might be located in single lots rather than straddling lot
lines.
5. Plan showing positive measures for protection of wetlands, tree areas, etc. during
development and construction; i.e. barriers, fencing, signage, etc.
This application will be scheduled for further Council review on Monday, January 13,
2014. That meeting is currently scheduled to begin at 7:00 p.m.
Page 1 of 2
If you desire certified copies of the official Council minutes, they are available from the City
Clerk after review and approval by the Council at their next meeting.
If you have questions please contact Mike Gaffron, Assistant City Administrator, at
mqaffron(c�ci.orono.mn.us or 952.249.4622.
Page 2 of 2
' ' Council
Exhibit E
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING ( /2 e.t/��
Monday,December 9,2013 � 6
6:30 dclock p.m.
(8. #I3-3636 LIXIAO W 3059 FARVIEW LANE– VARI S, Continued)
Curtis asked whether the applicant woul agreeable to extension.
Wang indicated he is.
VOTE: Ayes 2,Nays 3,McMil ,Bremer, and Levang o osed. MOTION FAILED.
Levang moved, Bre seconded,to table Application No. 13-363 , 'xiao Wang,3059 Farview
Lane,and to se the application back to the Planning Commission. V : Ayes 4, Nays 1,
Anderson posed.
�— �
9. #13-3637 WILLI ABBOTT ON BEHALF OF THE BROADWAY GROUP,LLC,2350
WATERTOWN ROAD,AND XXX WILLOW DRIVE NORTH–PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION
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. The total site consists of 4.29 acres,of which 1.24 is wetlands.
The area is currently zoned RR-1B,which is a two-acre zone,but is guided in the Comprehensive Plan far
low to medium residential density at two to three units per acre. Similar to what was done with the
Glendale Cove subdivision to the north,the applicant is proposing to do a subdivision that would have an
overall density of 19 units per acre. There is not a zoning district to rezone to other than the RPUD or
residential planned unit development district. In addition,the applicant is requesting rezoning of the site
to Residential Planned Unit Development.
Gaffron noted the Planning Commission at its November meeting voted 5-0 to recommend approval.
The applicant is proposing a subdivision that includes an open parcel adjacent to Willow Drive and then
to the east of that,there is an existing house on a wooded parcel. The wooded parcel has a creek running
through it. The creek comes from the area of the baseball diamond at Hackberry Park and works its way
to the southeast. It eventually ends up down towards Watertown Road.
The applicant is proposing to preserve an area to the northeast of the creek as a tree preservation area.
This is proposed as a public road situation. Due to the density,the lots would be approximately one-third
of an acre each. Similar to what was done with Glendale Cove,there would be city sewer. ln other
similar situations, based on the density,the City has created public roads rather than private.
Gaffron stated the Planning Commission concluded that the RPUD is the right zoning for this parcel. The
Planning Commission also looked at a Conservation Design and Master Plan that was completed for the
site. The overall grading plan, including the proposed public road, development of the home site,
stormwater management systems result in a significant amount of removal of some of the trees on the site.
The tree stand to the north is basically the only stand of trees that would remain. Based on that,the
Planning Commission recommended there be additional landscaping along Willow Drive.
Page 15 of 35
�
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING
Monday,December 9,2013
6:30 o'clock p.m.
(9. #13-3637 WILLI ABBOTT ONBEHALF OF THE BROADWAY GROUP,LLC, 2350
WATERTOWN ROAD,AND�Y WILLOW DRIVE NORTH—PRELIMINARY SUBDNISION,
Continued)
There is a proposed cul-de-sac road that will exit to Willow Drive that accesses directly across from
houses on the west side of Willow Drive in the Hackberry neighborhood. The City does not have much
flexibility with the location of the road exit. The Planning Commission looked at the potential impacts of
traffic in and out of this development on the approximately half a dozen houses that are located across
from this development. One of the options suggested was to reorient the angle or the slope of the road
access on to Willow as well as potentially offer that neighbor some screening. In addition,the Planning
Commission looked at whether the road could be relocated north and south and the conclusion was that it
would be too difficult.
Gaffron noted there is a 20-foot corridor that goes to Watertown Road that is serving today as the
driveway for the house located on the easterly parcel. That house,as part of this project, would be
removed and that driveway would no longer be necessary. The Planning Commission concluded that
rather than attempting to keep that as a trail or some sort of a corridor that serves this development,the
road should be removed and the area returned back to natural vegetation. Since it is an Outlot, it could
potentially be sold to one of the neighbors.
In reviewing the RPUD lot standards, one of the concerns was that because Willow Drive is a collector
road, it would require under the zoning code and the RPUD standards to have a 50-foot side street
setback. Lot 1, Block l, and Lot 1, Block 2,the two lots on either side of the new road, would require a
50-foot setback from Willow Drive. A 25-foot setback is proposed. The Planning Commission
concluded that 25 feet would e comfortable to them as long as there is some additional screening put in
place along those houses on Willow Drive.
The lot width requirements for the RPUD district is a 90-foot standard. Lots 3, 4, and 5 are located on a
cul-de-sac. At the required setback,they do not meet that width. Gaffron indicated it is not uncommon
for the City Council in the past to grant variances to cul-de-sac lots that are pie-shaped and open up
towards the back. The Planning Commission was not opposed to that.
The other item of flexibility with the RPUD standards is the lot area. Lots 1, 3, and 4 contain contiguous
dry buildable area that is slightly less than the required 15,000 square feet or a third of an acre. Gaffron
stated on the basis that the overall density is achieved and is acceptable to the City Council there is
sufficient area within those three lots to allow the homes to be developed.
The Planning Commission also discussed the fact that the applicant is proposing to construct modestly
priced homes and looked at whether the 15 percent structural coverage is appropriate as opposed to the
RPUD standard of a 50 percent floor area ration. The conclusion was that the floor area ratio of 50
percent would allow significantly larger homes to be built on the site, which does not mesh with the lot
size or the applicant's proposed house sizes. The Planning Commission determined the 15 percent limit
would be appropriate and recommended that they did not or the tree preservation areas. Some of this
same type of discussion was had with the Northern Avenue application; which encompasses the wetland
areas as well as the areas to be preserved. In this case the Planning Commission stated they would rather
have individual lots with an easement over it rather than a common outlot.
Page 16 of 35
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING
Monday,December 9,2013
6:30 o'clock p.m.
(9. #13-3637 WILLI ABBOTT ON BEHALF OF THE BROADWAY GROUP,LLC,2350
WATERTOWN ROAD,AND�WILLOW DRI VE NORTH—PRELIMINAR Y SUBDIVISION,
Continued)
Under the RPUD standards,there is a requirement for a 10 percent private recreation area coming out of
the plat. The Planning Commission felt that requirement would be substantially met with the dedication
of the proposed conservation easement over the defined tree preservation area northeast of the creek as
well as dedication of a 20-foot wide trail easement that would be located over the existing sewer easement
and sewer line. Lots 1 and 2,Block 1,have an existing sewer but it is not shown as an easement,which
would need to be created. Gaffron stated he is not sure why the sewer is in place without an easement.
One of the requirements would be to create that extension of the 20-foot sewer easement that goes
east/west across the property. A trail easement would then concurrently be granted over that so people
can access from Willow Drive into the tree preservation area. The Planning Commission felt that that
would suffice for the 10 percent recreation area for the RPUD.
The Planning Commission also noted that this development is right across the street from Hackberry Park
and that the 10 percent recreation area may not be as critical for this type of development as opposed to
the Stone Bay development.
The Planning Commission further recommended that the layout and the site configuration did not justify
the creation of an Outlot to accommodate the wetland or the tree preservation areas. Gaffron noted this
was a similar discussion that was had on the Northern Avenue development. Staff recommended in that
case that there be an outlot that encompasses the wetland areas as well as the areas to be preserved. In
this case the Planning Commission said they would rather have individual lots with their own easements
rather than having an association own an Outlot that everybody would have an interest in.
Gaffron stated as it relates to the grading and landscaping plans,the applicant is proposing five individual
rain gardens. Some of those rain gardens straddle lot lines. The intent would be that there would be
easements not only over the wetland/tree preservation areas but also over the rain gardens. The rain
gardens would need to be maintained as stormwater management facilities.
The developer has confirmed that he will be putting in municipal sewer and private wells rather than city
water. The City of Orono does not have city water available but there is an agreement with the City of
Long Lake that deals with sewer and water systems. The developer should not encounter any issues with
bringing sewer to this site and would connect at a location that is within Orono. The developer would be
required to pay some connection fees to Long Lake for the sewer system.
Under the RPUD zoning, the properties are assigned to the hardcover protection Tier IV which allows 50
percent hardcover on each lot. This subdivision should be able to meet that limit. There will also be the
standard drainage and utility easements around the perimeter of the property. There would also be a
conservation easement that would need to be drafted as well as the standard wetland easements.
(Recess taken from 8:30 p.m.to 8:37 p.m.)
Page 17 of 35
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING
Monday,December 9,2013
6:30 o'clock p.m.
(9. #13-3637 WILLI ABBOTT ONBEHALF OF THE BROADWAY GROUP,LLC, 2350
WATERTOWNROAD,AND�GY WILLOW DRIVE NORTH—PRELIMINARYSUBDIVISION,
Continued)
Gaffron stated in terms of park and trail easements and fees or dedication,the Comprehensive Trail Plan
shows that there was intended and perhaps still is intended a trail segment that follows Willow Drive
down from the new Highway 12 corridor. That trail does not currently exist and whether it ever will is
questionable. With the Glendale Cove subdivision,the City obtained a 10-foot trail easement along the
west side of the property all the way down to where this property begins. Gaffron stated it would make
sense to also obtain a similar 10-foot easement on this property for a possible future trail.
There would also be a park fee based on six lots rather than seven since they would receive credit for the
existing house. The city assessor would need to take a look at the final values,but it would be eight
percent of the total value,which would be somewhere between$19,000 and$33,000 in total park fees.
As it relates to stormwater and drainage improvements,the applicant is proposing a number of rain
gardens. The subject property is also going to be required to pay a stormwater and drainage trunk fee that
would amount to approximately $28,000.
Gaffron stated the applicant is proposing a 50-foot wide corridor for the public road with an expansion to
the property to the southeast. If that property is ever developed,that narrow triangular area would make it
potentially possible. Gaffron indicated he is not sure how that property will be developed but that this
would allow for that possibility. The developer will be constructing the road and sewer lines at his cost
and the costs would not be assessed.
The City Council should consider the following:
1. Should development of this site be as a Residential Planned Unit Development. From Staffls
perspective,there is not another option and it should be rezoned as an RPUD.
2. Does Council have any issue with the flexibility required for certain lots as noted regarding lot
width contiguous buildable area or setbacks.
3. Similar to Glendale Cove, at the proposed urban density,this new cul-de-sac road is intended to
be a public road and the City will ultimately maintain the road and municipal sewer system that
the developer constructs.
4. The Planning Commission has recommended against creation of an outlot for preservation of
the natural amenities of the site,preferring that each lot contain its share of the areas to be
protected via conservation easements.
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-foot sewer easements.
6. Council should discuss the proposed landscaping and confirm that additional trees along
Willow Drive should be added as a buffer to this development.
Page 18 of 35
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING
Monday, December 9,2013
6:30 o'clock p.m.
(9. #13-3637 WILLI ABBOTT ON BEHALF OF THE BROADWAY GROUP,LLC, 2350
WATERTOWNROAD,AND�'Y WILLOW DRIVE NORTH—PRELIMINARYSUBDIVISION,
Continued)
Staff recommends the following:
1. Process the subdivision via rezoning to a 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 noted in regards to the 10-foot trail easement, House No. 1,Block 2, and House No. 1, Block 1,
shows 25 feet.
Gaffron stated they do not have the 50-foot setback that would be required for a collector road side street.
A 10-foot trail easement potentially puts a trail 15 feet from the side of those two homes. Gaffron noted
that if this was zoned RR-1B, which would be similar to the property across the street,the side street
requirement would be 15 feet rather than 25 or 50 feet. Gaffron indicated the homes across the street vary
in their setbacks, with the three homes that are located on Willow being set back 50, 50 and 35 feet. The
house on the corner at an angle is set back approximately 15 feet, and the one at the corner of Willow and
Watertown Road is 25 feet.
Gaffron stated one of the questions that came up earlier today was whether or not this would change the
character of the neighborhood since you would see the side of the homes rather than the front of the
homes.
Anderson asked if there is a walking easement from the treed area.
Gaffron stated the applicant initially proposed a plan that would have connected the cul-de-sac road down
to Watertown Road with a trail corridor as well as an easement along Willow Drive and a connector that
comes in essentially through the wetland to the very north boundary of the property as it goes east. One
of the questions raised at the Planning Commission meeting was regarding the trail. The Planning
Commission noted the City already has a sewer easement and that it is likely that will need to be accessed
at some point. The Planning Commission concluded since it is a 20-foot corridor already,that it could be
used for a trail and would be offset from the neighboring property line by 20 or 30 feet. Gaffron noted
there will be times of the year when the wetland is not walkable.
Gaffron stated the next question that was raised was the rationale for providing access to the back of the
individual properties.
Page 19 of 35
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING
Monday,December 9,2013
6:30 o'clock p.m.
(9. #13-3637 WILLI ABBOTT ON BEHALF OF THE BROADWAY GROUP,LLC,2350
WATERTOWNROAD,AND X�'Y WILLOW DRIVE NORTH—PRELIMINARYSI�BDIVISION,
Continued)
McMillan commented the City needs to be careful about putting trails next to people's back yards if they
do not have any real meaning to them. McMillan noted the City has generally kept the trails close to the
roads and that going down the path of putting little pieces of trails in back yards is not a good idea.
Bremer indicated she is in agreement.
Levang stated it also creates an issue with maintenance.
Printup noted behind the fire department there is a connection to a park in Long Lake and it is a natural
point for the trail to join.
Printup asked when the two units per acre density were designated in the Comprehensive Plan.
Gaffron indicated that initially occurred with the 2000 Comprehensive Plan and was carried through in
the 2008-2030 Comprehensive Plan.
Willi Abbott stated they set out to create an opportunity for people to move into Orono more than to
divide up a bunch of land and build some houses. The goal of this development is to construct obtainable
and affordable development opportunities. Abbott indicated he is passionate about the Orono community
and wanted to provide this availability for small homes on medium sized lots that younger people could
move into. Abbott stated they are attempting to create something that fits within the neighborhood, such
as Hackberry and parts of Long Lake and in his view this proposal fits the Comprehensive Plan and fits a
need for the community.
Abbott stated in his view the trail concept needs a little further definition and noted the proposed trail
would not be for everybody in the community but is designed only for the inhabitants of this development
both in an active and passive way. The Planning Commission thought if the inhabitants of the
neighborhood wanted access to that back eastern triangle,they could with this trail. Abbott stated it
would only be a walking easement and the trail would not be chipped or paved. Abbott stated having a
trail along Willow is a good idea given the amount of traffic on that road.
Abbott stated another opportunity that he is considering is a walking easement through the wetland along
the northern boundary. If people did not want to walk along Willow, there would be an opportunity to put
a crosswalk from that point over to Hackberry Park. Abbott indicated crossing anywhere to the south
would be close to the top of the hill and not very safe.
McMillan asked if there are any other plans for the outlot other than possibly giving it to one of the
neighbors. McMillan noted it is an awkward piece of land.
Page 20 of 35
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING
Monday,December 9,2013
6:30 o'clock p.m.
(9. #13-3637 WILLI ABBOTT ON BEHALF OF THE BROADWAY GROUP,LLC,2350
WATERTOWN ROAD,AND�WILLOW DRIVE NORTH—PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION,
Continued)
Abbott indicated he has already spoken to the Martins and told them they would be given that piece of
property if it was not needed for this development. Abbott stated even if there is a walking easement put
over that property, it would still be given to the Martins, but the Planning Commission felt a trail in that
area would not be needed and he understands why people may not want a walking trail close to their
house.
McMillan noted there is an existing driveway to the house.
Abbott stated the elimination of that driveway would bring added value to the Martins property and the
other adjoining piece of property.
Levang stated typically Orono has developers who want to construct large homes on large lots and that
this proposal is a nice change. Levang asked whether some of the homes will be three stories.
Abbott indicated there would not be any three stories and the homes would be approximately 2,300 to
3,000 square feet on two floors. Abbott indicated they would not say no to a rambler but that the 15
percent limit would limit the number of lots where a rambler could be built. Abbott stated on Lots 1 and
2, Block 2,there might be some ramblers. Lots 1 through 5 would all be walkouts.
Levang asked if he is proposing three stories on the walkouts.
Abbott indicated there would not be three stories.
Bremer asked if he is saying that it would be up to the person who purchased the lot to decide what type
of home to build.
Abbott stated it would be two stories above the walkout.
Bremer noted the City would not allow three stories above the basement.
McMillan noted the basement would have to have at least 50 percent dirt around it not to qualify as a
story.
Gaffron state the majority of the homes that are depicted appear to be a story and a half.
McMillan stated he would be able to do two and a half stories or two stories and a walkout.
Abbott stated their plan at this point is attempting to show more roof detail and that he is attempting to
build the homes a little smaller with more jazzed up rooflines.
Levang asked what the difference between the Glendale Cove development and this development would
be.
Page 21 of 35
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING
Monday,December 9,2013
6:30 o'clock p.m.
(9. #13-3637 WILLI ABBOTT ON BEHALF OF THE BROADWAY GROUP,LLC, 2350
WATERTOWN ROAD,AND�WILLOW DRIVE NORTH—PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION,
Continued)
Abbott stated in his opinion the lots would be bigger with more spacing between them. Abbott noted that
.42 is the smallest lot and .88 is the largest lot.
Levang noted that is counting the wetlands.
Abbott stated the footprint of the homes will also be different. Abbott stated using the 15 percent is a
good idea since it works better with this type of development and will not affect the development. Abbott
indicated varying the setbacks will allow for more control over what gets built.
Levang asked if these will be spec homes.
Abbott stated they will be built with the help of the owner. Abbott indicated they have already seen a lot
of demand for the lots without marketing them and that they are working with a local builder to do the
construction.
Levang noted the layout depicts the home on Lot 5 as having a long driveway and that Lots 3 and 4 have
shorter driveways. Levang stated the homes on Lots 3 and 4 are in a line but the home on Lot 5 is back
further. Levang asked whether the homes on Lots 3 and 4 can be varied a little.
Abbott stated those can be varied and that this layout is not exactly what will be built. Abbott indicated
they do not have an idea exactly what will be built on those lots until what is being proposed for lot shape
is determined will work.
Levang asked if the homes on Lots 3, 4, and 5 will be in a pie shape, with three homes on a cul-de-sac.
Abbot stated they will be,and that the setback and length of the driveway will be varied so the homes are
somewhat different.
Levang asked if every house will be individualized.
Abbott stated it is their hope that will be the case.
Levang asked if Lots 3, 4, and 5 are all under the 34 acre for dry buildable.
Gaffron stated the total dry contiguous for Lot 3 is .44, Lot 4 is .66, and Lot 5 is .51. If all three lots are
combined,they have the most dry buildable. Lot 4 is approximately half of the area of the site. There is a
creek that runs northwest to southeast that limits the contiguous dry buildable in that area. Gaffron
indicated the developer will have some flexibility with Lot 5, a little less flexibility with Lot 4, but not
much with Lot 3.
Levang asked if Lot 3 is 75 feet in width.
Gaffron stated Lots 3,4, and 5 are less than the required width.
Page 22 of 35
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING
Monday,December 9,2013
6:30 o'clock p.m.
(9. #13-3637 WILLI ABBOTT ONBEHALF OF THE BROADWAY GROLIP,LLC,2350
WATERTOWN ROAD,AND X�WILLOW DRIVE NORTH—PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION,
Continued)
Levang asked if there is any way to change that besides decreasing it from three homes to two homes.
Gaffron stated the angle of Lot 2 could be changed so the home more or less is parallel with the lot lines.
Gaffron pointed out if the lot lines are changed between Lots 1 and 2 that would provide additional
flexibiliry. Gaffron noted the wetland has a big impact in this area, particularly on Lot 2,where the house
will be right up next to the wetland.
Levang stated the issue she has with the project are the two properties along Willow with the 25-foot
setback rather than 50 feet. Levang stated with the trail easement,those homes would be 15 feet from the
trail, and would be out of character with everything on that side of Willow.
Abbott stated the house could be 15 feet if it is assumed that someone constructs something on the entire
buildable envelope.
Levang stated those two homes feel out of character with the neighborhood because they seem too close
to the road. Levang stated she understands they will see the garage and not the actual house but that she
still has a problem with how close that is.
Abbott noted there are two homes across the street at 25 feet. Abbott indicated he is not totally in
agreement that it is out of character but that he understands what Council Member Levang is saying.
Levang noted the standard is 50 feet and those lots are being reduced to 25 feet and then the trail
easement would take another 10 feet.
Abbott stated in his view it is a good idea to put the trail in there. Abbott indicated he used to live off of
Watertown Road and they had a trail in their back yard. Abbott commented a number of people used the
trail along Old Crystal Bay road. Abbott noted they are looking at a RPUD and that there are some good
and bad points with the development. Abbott stated they are also trying to create more density, and in
order to do so,there will be some give and take.
Levang concurred the RPUD does provide some flexibility, but noted that because it is a collector road
and there is a significant amount of traffic on the road, it would feel odd to have two homes so close to
the road.
McMillan asked if any floor plans have been submitted.
Abbott stated until he knows what the exact shape of the lots will be,he has not spent a lot of time
creating floor plans. Abbott stated the homes will probably consist of 1,000 to 1,200 square feet on the
first floor.
McMillan asked whether these homes will have two or three-car garages.
Abbott stated they would probably be three car garages.
Page 23 of 35
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING
Monday,December 9,2013
6:30 dclock p.m.
(9. #13-3637 WILLI ABBOTT ONBEHALF OF THE BROADWAY GROUP,LLC,2350
WATERTOWNROAD,AND X�,'Y WILLOW DRIVE NORTH—PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION,
Continued)
McMillan stated one of her concerns with the development is that when they start building the homes,the
houses will get bigger, but that she does like what has been proposed for visuals.
Abbott stated their group is going to sit down and create footprints and basic plans for the homes on these
lots and that there will be very little variance for accommodating people who want to build big homes.
Abbott indicated they want to keep the price down and move the lots.
McMillan stated a three-car garage usually goes with a larger home, which is a concern.
Abbott stated he is not going to do that and that he is agreeable to limiting the size of the homes in a
development agreement.
McMillan stated in her view the layout is awkward and that when you look at the site,the cul-de-sac
looks very big and appears to take up half of the dry buildable. McMillan commented she understands
that he is doing his best to make the property work but that it is not the most aesthetically pleasing.
McMillan indicated she gets concerned with having narrow lots off of a cul-de-sac and that it feels like a
piecemeal design.
Abbott stated he attempted to purchase some land from one of the neighbors but he was not willing to do
that.
McMillan commented she likes a lot of the elements that are being proposed but that she is not sure
whether she can support three homes along the cul-de-sac.
Abbott stated they are also attempting to keep the cost of the lots and homes down, and if the number of
homes is reduced,that will raise the price on the other lots. Abbott indicated the current price of the lots
along Willow is around $500,000 and in the middle sixes on the back lots. Abbott stated if another lot is
taken out,they will be back to constructing bigger homes. Abbott noted the cost to bring water into this
development is astronomical, which is why they are going with private wells.
McMillan commented the cost of the land makes it difficult to do development in general in Orono.
Abbott stated adding a little more density helps keep the costs down. Abbott concurred the cul-de-sac is a
little weird but that they wanted to avoid flag lots. Abbott noted they are also allowing for more parking,
which is another expense. Abbott stated there is not a perfect answer for this development, but based on
the response they have gotten, people are interested in this type of lot.
Anderson stated given what the developer has to work with, it appears he has done a nice job with varying
the setbacks on the homes. Anderson noted this area is guided for two to three homes per acre and that
the developer is proposing 1.9 units, which is somewhat modest.
Anderson asked whether there are other options to deal with the stormwater rather than the rain gardens.
Page 24 of 35
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING
Monday,December 9,2013
6:30 o'clock p.m.
(9. #13-3637 WILLI ABBOTT ON BEHALF OF THE BROADWAY GROUP,LLC,2350
WATERTOWNROAD,AND�WILLOW DRIVE NORTH—PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION,
Continued)
Struve stated it ultimately will be up to the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District on how to handle the
stormwater. Struve indicated there are alternate ways to handle it depending on soil conditions and a rain
garden is one way to do it. Struve stated it would be the homeowner's responsibility to maintain it.
Levang asked Mr. Abbott if he is amenable to whatever the Watershed District requires.
Abbott indicated they are, and in talking with Staff and the engineers for this project, it was mentioned
that the stormwater pond is not required but suggested.
Gaffron indicated the Watershed District has some limitations, and if the hardcover is below their
hardcover percentages for the entire site, stormwater management is not required. The developer's
engineer believes there will not be the need for a single stormwater pond and that the rain gardens would
suffice. Gaffron stated absent the Watershed District's approval,he has to assume at this point that the
rain gardens would be an acceptable means to handle the stormwater. If the homes double in size,the
rain gardens may no longer be sufficient.
Gaffron noted some of the rain gardens straddle the lot lines, and without a homeowners association in
place to maintain those,maintenance will be between two property owners to maintain them. Gaffron
stated some things will have to happen correctly to make them a valuable tool for stormwater
management.
Abbott asked if it is possible to place covenants on each lot so the homeowners and future homeowners
would actually be required to maintain those without a homeowners association.
Mattick indicated those covenants can be put on the development but then it becomes a matter of
enforcing them.
Levang asked if he is opposed to creating a homeowners association.
Abbott stated he is not and that a homeowners association might be a good idea with the rain gardens but
that the Planning Commission was not supportive of it. Abbott indicated he is agreeable to either doing it
with covenants or with a homeowners association.
Abbott asked if there is a difference between the homeowners association not taking care of the rain
gardens versus the individual homeowners.
Mattick stated not particularly. Mattick stated there is no easy fix to it but it is something that will need
to be contemplated. Mattick stated ongoing maintenance tends to become an issue and that the City does
not go around policing these things on a regular basis.
Bremer stated a homeowners association often takes on its own policing
Page 25 of 35
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING
Monday,December 9,2013
6:30 o'clock p.m.
(9. #13-3637 WILLI ABBOTT ON BEHALF OF THE BROADWAY GROUP,LLC,2350
WATERTOWNROAD,AND�Y WILLOW DRIVE NORTH—PRELIMINARYSUBDIVISION,
Continued)
McMillan stated the problem with the rain garden is ten years down the road and that new property
owners may not realize what the purpose of the rain garden is. McMillan suggested instead of having five
little rain gardens, he may want to consider two more substantial ones, and that in her view it is
piecemeal.
Abbott stated they might be able to move each rain garden on to each individual lot given the fact that
they do not have to have X amount of water treated. Abbott stated if the rain gardens are reduced
somewhat, perhaps one rain garden can be placed on each property rather than straddling two properties.
Abbott indicated he would be happy to move them on to one piece of property.
McMillan asked if the 15 percent lot coverage on the dry contiguous for Lots 3,4, and 5 is okay.
Abbott indicated he would need to do that calculation.
McMillan stated she has a concern with the massing on the lots. McMillan noted they will not be able to
use the treed area and that he has to be careful about creating islands of land that cannot be used by the
homeowner.
Gaffron noted there are three lots that have a contiguous dry buildable area of.32 acres, and 15 percent
lot coverage,based on just the contiguous dry area, leaves approximately a 2,100 square footprint for the
house. Gaffron stated the homes that are depicted have 2,080, 1,750, 1,768, and 2,200 square feet, which
means that some of them will be right up to that limit.
Abbott asked whether it would be possible to go to 18 percent.
Gaffron stated the Council has the ability to put whatever number they are comfortable with on this
development. Gaffron indicated the 50 percent floor area ration as well as the 15 percent lot coverage
was originally intended to be based on the entire lot area and was used as a massing tool. Gaffron stated
that restriction functions basically functions here but that 15 percent of the dry buildable for half of the
lots is real tight for what is being shown for house footprints.
Abbott stated a 2,500 square footprint would be more than enough and asked whether that would include
the basement.
Gaffron stated that would include the footprint of the house, the garage, and upper decks. Gaffron
indicated 15 percent is approximately 2,100 square feet and that he is not sure why that would be a
problem. Gaffron noted the plan does not include any outbuildings.
Abbot pointed out it would also not include any stoops and things like that, which would all go into that
calculation. Abbott stated the 18 percent would add a little bit more.
McMillan stated he may have to consider a two-car garage on one of the lots.
Page 26 of 35
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING
Monday,December 9,2013
6:30 o'clock p.m.
(9. #13-3637 WILLI ABBOTT ON BEHALF OF THE BROADWAY GROUP,LLC,2350
WATERTOWN ROAD,AND J�f WILLOW DRIVE NORTH—PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION,
Continued)
Levang noted Lot 5 says 1,768 square feet.
Anderson pointed out that does not include any decks or stoops.
Abbott stated those are merely examples of something that could be built.
Anderson asked what the 15 percent of the wet and dry buildable area would be.
Gaffron stated if the entire lot area is included, 15 percent of Lot S would be 3,700 square feet.
Anderson stated that is much bigger than what is being proposed and that she would not be opposed to
going a little higher on the dry contiguous.
Levang asked how that would impact the smallest lot.
Gaffron stated one of the smallest lots is .53 acres for Lot 3 and that Lots 1 and 2 of Block 2 are smaller
than that. Gaffron stated the smallest lot would be Lot 1 on the south side next to Willow, and at.4 acres,
I S percent would be approximately 2,600 square feet.
Levang asked if he is okay with 2,600 square feet.
Abbott asked if that would apply to all of the lots.
Levang indicated they are just looking at the smallest lot.
Gaffron stated that is with the wet and dry together. Gaffron noted Lot 1 on the north side is .88 but only
.32 of that is buildable.
Anderson noted 18 percent of the dry contiguous on that lot would be approximately 2,500 square feet.
McMillan stated as it relates to Lots 3,4, and 5, in her view the other dry buildable would not be helpful
to the house and that she is attempting to put some constraints on the size of the homes.
Abbott stated he would be happy to agree to the structural coverage on only the dry contiguous if it is
raised to 18 percent.
McMillan stated on Lot 5 there should be a tree buffer and that she has a concern there will not be room
for landscaping if that property is maxed out. McMillan stated there should be some type of buffer along
Willow.
Abbott pointed out Lot 2 of Block 2 has the same issue and that he is warking with the neighbor on the
landscaping in that area.
Levang asked if it is his intent to clear cut the lot.
Page 27 of 35
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING
Monday,December 9,2013
6:30 dclock p.m.
(9. #13-3637 WILLI ABBOTT ON BEHALF OF THE BROADWAY GROUP,LLC,2350
WATERTOWN ROAD,AND X�'Y WILLOW DRIVE NORTH—PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION,
Continued)
Abbott indicated it is not but that there are a fair number of scrub trees that will be removed. Abbott
stated they will also be planting some pine trees. The goal is to have a nice mix of trees with more
substantial trees rather than scrub trees.
McMillan asked if there would be living space above the garages.
Abbott stated that is a possibility.
McMillan stated with a 2,000 square foot perimeter,he would technically have 4,000 square feet above
ground with two stories.
Abbott stated they are not going to do 2,000 square feet on one level.
McMillan commented it would be helpful to see some floor plans and that she would like to make sure
there are some restrictions on the size of the homes on the substandard lots. McMillan stated the Council
could perhaps make that determination once the floor plans are more finalized and the exact lot
configurations are determined.
Levang stated on the larger lots, such as Lot 5,he should be able to adhere to the 15 percent based on the
dry contiguous.
Abbott indicated that would not be a problem.
Levang noted Lot 3 would be the lot most impacted by that and asked whether the Council has the ability
to place different structural limits on each individual lot.
Gaffron stated with an RPUD, there would be more flexibility.
Levang stated she is leaning towards being more specific on whether l 5 or 18 percent is allowed on each
individual lot.
Abbott indicated he is in agreement with that.
McMillan opened the hearing far public comment at 9:38 p.m.
There were no public comments.
McMillan closed the meeting to public comment at 9:38 p.m.
Printup moved to approve Application No. 13-3637,Willi Abbott on behalf of The Broadway
Group, LLC,2350 Watertown Road and XXX Willow Drive North,and to direct Staff to draft a
resolution for preliminary plat approval.
Page 28 of 35
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING
Monday,December 9,2013
6:30 dclock p.m.
(9. #13-3637 WILLI ABBOTT ON BEHALF OF THE BROADWAY GROUP,LLC, 2350
WATERTON'N ROAD,AND�WILLOW DRIVE NORTH—PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION,
Continued)
Anderson asked whether the motion should include the 15 or 18 percent.
Mattick stated due to the number of variables that need to be finalized, he would suggest the City Council
direct Staff to prepare a resolution that ultimately approves it.
Gaffron stated Staff will attempt to match the resolution to tonight's discussion and that Council can
detertnine whether anything should be added or deleted.
Abbott asked if the time limit needs to be extended.
Gaffron stated this will be back before the Council either the first or second meeting of January and that
the time limit does not expire until February 8.
Anderson seconded the motion.
McMillan stated she would also like to see a landscape plan.
Gaffron stated one of the recommendations of the Planning Commission was a beefed up landscaping
plan. Gaffron indicated he is not sure which trees will be removed as part of this development and that a
landscape plan would help illustrate what they are going to do, particularly along Willow.
Mattick stated he understands the desire to treat each lot on its own merits,but that he would encourage
the Council to come up with a number that works for the development as a whole.
Abbott stated they could do the lesser of, such as 2,600 feet or 15 percent. The larger lots would get the
lesser of option and the smaller lots would get the 15 percent or a higher percent.
Mattick stated the Council could take a look at that.
Levang noted the rain gardens and covenants were also items that were discussed.
McMillan stated a more finalized floor plan was also another item. McMillan stated as it relates to the
tree preservation, she would like to minimize the number of conservation areas.
McMillan asked whether Staff is diligent on making sure the appropriate areas are fenced off during
construction.
Page 29 of 35
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING
Monday,December 9,2013
6:30 o'clock p.m.
(9. #13-3637 WILLI ABBOTT ON BEHALF OF THE BROADWAY GROUP,LLC, 2350
WATERTOWN ROAD,AND�WILLOW DRIVE NORTH—PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION,
Continued)
Gaffron indicated Staff is diligent at monitoring septic systems and the Watershed District's review of
erosion control fabric. Gaffron stated the City has not had a lot of subdivisions in the past where there are
certain areas that need to be protected but it is something Staff could be mindful of on this development.
McMillan requested Staff keep an eye on that for this development.
VOTE ON THE ABOVE MOTION: Ayes 5,Nays 0.
*10. #13-3641 ITY L HERAN CHURCH,2060 SIXTH AVENU NORTH,
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RESOLUTION NO. 6354
Levang moved,Anderson seconded, o adopt RESOLUTION NO.635 ,a Resolution Approving a
Conditional Use Permit for a Columb rium Wall, Memorial Lands pe Wall,and Open Gazebo
Structure Pursuant to Orono Code Sec 'on 78-418. VOTE: Ayes ,Nays 0.
*11. COUNCIL LIAISON TO PLAN G COMMISSIO MEETINGS IN 2014
Levang moved,Anderson seconded,to appro e the sched e for Council attendance at Planning
Commission meetings during 2014.
PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTORS/CITY ENGINE 'S REPORT
Struve reported the wood pile will be removed pefully ater this week. Struve stated given the snow
event last week,the road conditions in the Cit are slick in laces. Struve noted cold weather does not
allow the salt to work and that the Public W rks Departmen is doing all they can to get the roads in good
shape. The ice-packed snow on the roads ill be removed on e the weather warms up and that sand is
being used in the meantime to help wit raction.
*12. PAY REQUEST NO. 5— ILLOW DRNE RECONS RUCTION PROJECT
Levang moved,Anderson sec ded,to approve Pay Request No. or the contractor C.S.
McCrossan in the amount o $29,745.66 for the Willow Drive Recon truction Project. VOTE:
Ayes 5,Nays 0.
*13. PAY REQUE NO. 9—ORONO ORCHARD ROAD RECONS RUCTION PROJECT
Levang moved,A erson seconded,to approve Pay Request No. 9 for the contractor Minger
Construction, In ., in the amount of$157,195.75 for the Orono Orchard Road Reconstruction
Project. VOT : Ayes 5,Nays 0.
Page 30 of 35
' ' Council
Date Application Received: 9/18/13 Exhibit F
Date Application Considered as Complete: 11/8/13 / ,
120-Day Review Period Expires: 2/8/14 f/2�f�j�
[
REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION
Date: December 5, 2013
Item No.: �
Department Approval: Administrator Approval: Agenda Section:
Name: Michael P. Gaffron Planning Dept.
Title: Asst. City Admin. -Lo g Term Strategy
Item Description: #13-3637 Willie Abbott o/b/o The Broadway Group, LLC
- 2350 Watertown Rd & xxx Willow Drive North
- Preliminary Plat & RPUD Rezoning
Parcels Involved:
Address & PID Owner of Record
2350 Watertown Road The Broadway Group,LLC 408 Parkers Lake Road#112 Wayzata, MN 55391
34-118-23 33 0058
Address Unassigned William&Patricia Martin 2380 Watertown Road Long Lake,MN 55356
34-118-23 33 0055
Zoning District: RR-1B One Family Rural Residential District (2 acre/200' width)
CMP Land Use Designation: Low-Medium Density Residential, 2-3 Units per Acre
Existing Lot Area: Dry buildable 160,307 s.£ (3.68 acres)
Wetland 53,938 s.£ (1.24 acres)
Total 214,245 s.£ (4.92 acres)
Proposed Overall Density: 7/3.68 = 1.9 units per acre
Summary of Request: Applicant requests preliminary plat approval for a 7-lot single-family
residential subdivision to be known as Oliver Hill; and rezoning to Residential Planned Unit
Development (RPUD).
Planning Commission Recommendation: Planning Commission reviewed the preliminary plat at its
November 18 meeting and on a vote of 5-0 recommended approval subject to a number of conditions.
Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval subject to the Planning Commission
recommendation and additional conditions noted below. Council is requested to review the
subdivision proposal, and direct staff to draft a preliminary plat resolution based on Council's
� , conclusions.
��
List of Exhibits
�\,� l A - Preliminary Plat Drawings
B -Notice of Planning Commission Action 12/5/13
C - Planning Commission Draft Minutes of 11/18/13
�,�� D - Planning Commission emo and Exhibits dated 11/14/13
\�'
�
#13-3637
December 5,2013
Page 2
� Proposed Lot Areas
Wetland Total Dry Contiguous Dry Total Wet+Dry
Proposed Lot Areas (acres) (acres) (acres) (acres)
Block 1 Lot 1 0.56 0.32 0.32 0.88
Lot 2 0.45 0.35 0.35 0.80
Lot 3 0.09 0.44 0.32 0.53
Lot 4 0.08 0.66 0.32 0.74
Lot 5 0.06 0.51 0.42 0.57
Block 2 Lot 1 - 0.40 0.40 0.40
Lot 2 - 0.46 0.46 0.46
Outlot A - 0.13 - 0.13
Proposed Public Road - 0.41 - 0.41
Total Acres 1.24 3.68 - 4.92
Proposed Overall Density: 7/3.68= 1.9 units per acre
Average Dry Acres per Lot: 0.45 acre
Avg. Contiguous Dry Acres per Lot: 037 acre
► Please review Exhibit D, the Planning Commission memo t
and exhibits for a detailed review of this application.
Review Summary
1. Planning Commission concluded and staff agrees that rezoning to Residential Planned
Unit Development (RPUD) is appropriate for development of this site, which is guided
for single-family homes at a density of 2-3 units per acre. This is consistent with the
Glendale Cove RPUD to the immediate north. Planning Commission found that the
adjacency to Glendale Cove and the CMP guided density both justify rezoning to RPUD
even though this property is .08 acre short of the threshold 5 acres required for RPUD
development.
2. Planning Commission reviewed the Conservation Design Report and Master Plan for the
site, and noted that the overall grading plan including the proposed public road, homesite
development and stormwater management systems will result in removal of a majority of
the tree backdrop that separates the easterly and westerly portions of the property, while
the tree stand in the NE corner of the site will be preserved. Planning Commission
recommends that additional landscaping, i.e. additional trees, be planted in Lot 1 Block 1
and Lot Block 2 along Willow Drive to help eliminate the visual impacts of this
development as viewed from offsite.
3. Planning Commission noted that the proposed new cul-de-sac road will exit to Willow
Drive directly across from homes facing Willow Drive, which could become an
annoyance for that homeowner. Noting that the road location is fairly inflexible due to
#13-3637
December 5,2013
Page 3
wetlands and the property configuration, PC suggested that the slope of the new road
might be analyzed to see if it can be angled slightly to change the headlight angle, and
that applicant should consider offering to plant screening at that property.
4. With regards to the proposed narrow 20' outlot corridor leading down to Watertown
Road, Planning Commission recommended that it not become part of a trail system as
that might have negative impacts to the adjacent existing homes on either side. Instead,
PC recommends that the existing driveway in that corridor be removed and reverted to
vegetation.
5. In reviewing the areas where the RPUD lot standards are not being adhered to, Planning
Commission recommended flexibility as follows:
a. Allow the side street setback for the two lots abutting Willow Drive to be 25 feet (as
it would be if Willow Drive was classified as a local street) rather than the 50'
setback required because Willow Drive is a collector road.
b. Allow the substandard lot widths for Lots 3-4-5 which abut the cul-de-sac.
c. Allow Lots 1-3-4 to contain a contiguous dry buildable area slightly less than the
required 15,000 s.£ (0.34 ac.) on the basis that the overall density is acceptable and
that there is sufficient area within the sites to allow homes to be developed.
6. Noting that the developer is planning to build modestly priced and sized homes, Planning
Commission recommended that the 15% lot coverage standard be imposed on this
development rather than the RPUD standard 50% Floor Area Ratio (FAR). The 50%
FAR would likely allow for much larger homes to be constructed if no 15% limit is in
place. The developer has no objection to this limitation.
7. Planning Commission after a significant amount of discussion concluded that the RPUD
10% private recreation area requirement would be substantially met by a combination of
the following: a) dedication of the proposed conservation easement over the defined tree
preservation area to the northeast of the creek; and 2) dedication of a 20' wide trail
easement over and concurrent with the existing 20' sewer line easement in proposed Lots
3-4-5 as well as the proposed sewer easement extension over proposed Lots 1 & 2, Block
1. It was noted that the proximity to Hackberry Park really eliminates the need for a
substantial neighborhood park to be developed just for this subdivision.
8. Planning Commission recommended that the plat layout and the site configuration did not
necessarily justify the creation of an outlot to accommodate the wetland and tree
preservation areas, and that having those site features encumbered by easements over
each individual lot would be acceptable. Easements for the proposed rain gardens within
the individual lots would likewise be sufficient.
9. The developer confirmed that he no longer intends to pursue municipal water from Long
Lake, and will develop with private wells.
#13-3637
December 5,2013
Page 4
Summary of Additional Subdivision Elements
The following topics were addressed in the November Planning Commission memo, and are
summarized here:
Hardcover - Under the RPUD zoning the property is assigned to Hardcover Protection Tier 4,
which allows up to 50% hardcover of the gross lot area. None of the proposed lots will be
anywhere near that limit.
Easements - Standard perimeter draina�e and utility easements around all individual property
boundaries in the plat will be required. The Conservation Design Report recommends
preservation of the northeast tree stand which would be subject to a conservation easement. The
wetland and creek-associated wetland will be subject to the standard wetland easement. The
existing Hackberry sewer line across Lot 1 and 2, Block 1 will be subject to dedication of a
sewer easement.
Park/Trail Easement/Fees or Dedication Needed. The 2008-2030 CMP Comprehensive Trail
System Map (PC Exhibit O) indicates that a future trail is planned to extend down Willow Drive
from Highway 12 to Hackberry Park. The plan terminates this trail at Hackberry Park and ends
just short of the subject property. However, it picks up again further south at the Luce Line with
a future connecting segment to Brown Road and the Dakota Trail. A 10' trail easement was
dedicated along the west boundary of Glendale Cove, to allow for future extension of the City's
public trail system along Willow Drive. The developer was not required to construct this trail
extension. Staff recommends that a 10' trail easement be required along the west side of Oliver
Hill for a possible future trail.
The Park Fee is determined as 8% of the fair market value of the land being subdivided, with a
minimum of$3250 per dwelling unit or a maximum of$5,550 per residential dwelling unit. The
Hennepin County Assessor will be asked to review the land value once a final preliminary plat
layout has been settled on. As there will be six new dwelling sites as currently proposed (the
existing house at 2350 Watertown yields a 1-lot park fee credit), the Park Fee will be between
$19,500 and $33,300.
Stormwater and Draina�e Improvements. The developer is providing stormwater management
facilities on the site consisting of a number of rain garden basins. The City Engineer notes that
the drainage calculations meet City requirements such that proposed runoff rates will be less than
existing runoff rates, but any plan changes will potentially require plan revisions. A final
Stormwater Management Plan will have to be submitted with the Final Construction Plans.
Additionally, the development is subject to the Stormwater and Drainage Trunk Fee, which
should be based on an equivalence to the standard fee for the 1/2-acre zoning district given the
lot sizes proposed. That fee is $5,765 per gross acre, and at 4.92 gross acres (net of Willow
Drive r-o-w) amounts to $28,364.00.
Utilities. The subject property is located within the Metropolitan Urban Service Area (MUSA);
sewer service is available to these properties via the Hackberry system which discharges to the
Long Lake system. Water service is potentially available from the Long Lake system, subject to
#13-3637
December 5,2013
Page 5
Long Lake approval; however, at this time applicant is proposing the use of private wells to
serve each home. Sewer Fees will be due to Long Lake, subject to the provisions of the Glendale
Cove Sewer and Water Agreement of January 2012, which defines the applicant's properties as
Category 3 Properties (see PC Exhibit L).
The developer will be responsible for all utility construction and installation. In similar
subdivisions involving developer-installed utilities, Orono has generally not collected a separate
sewer or water connection charge.
Because there is no easement for the existing municipal sewer in proposed Lots 1 and 2, an
easement for said sewer line will become a plat requirement.
Road Layout and Standards. The applicant is proposing a 50 foot wide corridor to create a new
public road with a 100 foot cul-de-sac corridor which conforms to the requirements within the
Subdivision Ordinance for a local public road. This is proposed as a public road rather than
private primarily because of the density, which was the basis for Glendale Cove being public.
The Code requires a 28 foot paved width for 3 to 10 homes which will have to be met (proposed
plan shows only 25'). The cul-de-sac is proposed to have a 90 foot paved diameter, meeting the
City standard of an 80' paved diameter.
Applicant has expanded the cul-de-sac dedication to provide a platted corridor to the property to
the immediate southeast for potential future road connection to serve that property. This would
allow for a future through road from Willow to Watertown, providing more options for future
development of the property to the southeast, and ultimately make for more efficient road
maintenance.
The developer will pay all costs of road construction and installation. The City Engineer has
provided a number of comments regarding the proposed road and related utility improvements
which the applicant is advised to review and address .
Existing Buildin�s - The developer should be required to remove the existing buildings as a
condition of final plat approval. Removal should occur prior to filing of the plat with Hennepin
County.
Narrow Outlot to Watertown Road. The existing driveway in proposed Outlot A should be
removed, and that area reverted to grass and/or other vegetation. Future acquisition by an
abutting neighbor would not be out of the question.
Conservation Desi�n. The Conservation Design Report and Master Plan are attached as PC
Exhibit C. A summary of the significant findings and recommendations is included in the
November Planning Commission memo. The Conservation Design Master Plan addresses
stormwater management; invasive species removal and management; diseased tree removal
and replacement; protection of the tree stand northeast of the creek; and maintenance of
ecological connections via preservation of wetlands and the northeast tree stand. The
proposed lot layout would not appear to conflict with the Master Plan, as areas to be
protected are not proposed to be developed.
#13-3637
December 5,2013
Page 5
Analysis
In reviewing this application, Council should focus on the following topics:
1) Should development of this site be as a Residential Planned Unit Development (RPUD)?
2) Does Council have any issue with the flexibility required for certain lots as noted
regarding width, contiguous buildable area or setbacks?
- Note that lot width variances are not uncommon under a cul-de-sac configuration; in
this case forcing the developer to meet the width requirement for the cul-de-sac lots
would potentially result in the loss of one lot.
3) Similar to Glendale Cove, at the proposed urban density this new cul-de-sac road is
intended to be a public road, and the City will ultimately maintain the road and municipal
sewer system that the developer constructs.
4) Planning Commission has recommended against creation of an outlot for preservation of
the natural amenities of the site, preferring that each lot contain its share of the areas to be
protected via conservation easements.
5) Is Council in agreement with Planning Commission that the 10% 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' sewer easements?
6) Council should discuss the proposed landscaping and confirm that additional trees along
Willow Drive should be added as a buffer to this development.
7) Any other topics the Council determines should be discussed.
Staff Recommendation
Discussion of the above issues and any conclusions reached by Council should provide applicant
and staff with direction as to whether or how the proposed plat should be revised. Any
remaining topics left unaddressed to date should be brought up for discussion.
Based on the above, staff recommends the following:
1) Process the subdivision via rezoning to RPUD.
2) Approval should be subject to the standard platting requirements establishment of a
developers 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.
COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED
Motion to direct staff to draft a resolution for preliminary plat approval, incorporating the
appropriate findings and conditions based on Council's review of the proposed preliminary plat.
PRELIMINARY PLANS FOR: ,,F,�;,.;N �������-
0 LIVE R H I LL RECEtY�b � oE�o�S u,�� Exhibit A
w DENOlES CURB
OCT 3 1 2d13 � ��SUf1RE HVDRANT
0 R 0 N 0 lYl l`I — � oeHo�s unum eoz
7 CIN OF O{ZONO —DENOiES SANITARY SEKER
—�-�--DENOiES STORN SEMER
PROJECT LOCATION ___ -- ou+o�s werzRuniN
� DFNOiES SANITARY SEMER MANMOLE
'�+ � k-. 1'� �;1 � n. DENOlES UMItt POLE
� �:`� �'� �+ }L wt��� ,�x°F�:_�" r'�`."e'��'�`i„ .�w �m,�i� '+''��.?-�, �1-x I �= �d
�. - a� , s '�� ` - �i� �� � �+ � � �� a• DENOlES iRON YONUMENT FOUND
��. . . � ,.. .
� x , _ DD10tE5 E%iSPNC ELEVA�ON.
'. _� .', �� p �.�r .. :C _� 1 r+,-�' �'_"��r��� '�1T������ � . ��z�oaohs exisnHc mec
�� " ' �.: ,��: - '�.: ��� �� � �"��' � � .�, � .�' ' —�.`
" i � �: .���- X . .,oaohs�isnHc coHlouR
�::, �' �� .; �a __— � -. .�...._... ,u.,t. _.. �r�`' � � -�Ef101E5 OVEftHUO M1RE
�
�
� ' *-� [�
� � r , �
��•�� k _ ��? � — — --- -�� ' ppJO1E5 UNUERGRWND IELEPHONE
� ..�s.+.� ... r .� —` Y l.t� �. �Pd� ef' y � �i —
'I,J # \ .F. '� � .������`� ;,� k;��M��' � �.P ?�' ,� =ti�.,
� ocNoi[s ur+omccou�+o c�s
�p� -'� � .� �.,:. ..'� � -o—ocHorzs�isnwc rcr�cE
� .. �X.,..f�2 , ��• • ... I Y • � ` y y { 'L� - � t_._._�DENOlES CONCfiEiE
r'� � � � � +o � ���T 7 "�� �y%iF+�{ �/�� �� + � DENOlE5B11U�11NW5
._ � �$ ' •: ' ��} � �:c. ��'l 3� ��� �t��K...,�`.�'.�..�, � 1� _ � . �DENOlES GRAV£L
� I
�,� .. � NH'..\. .. -.� � . '{
.:i�. . . . , . e-• - _ 0
n
_ .. . �.,....�:..._.�.=--c�.�,+-;.--4.-��. +�-._ ...- "�:i.m�, .'_�.-•"�„i_� - los=-.�.�^��;:`: . . — .. _. cuoiEs w�tEa u�wHo�c
�_. .. _ - _ ."-__ _... ..'_' _
�r� � .'A'.a`�" .. . �aesr+L.er'aw'»ia� �,..- --��.-e: _�d:..�-�_--�.e-",z.ti....x�a..-,r�rrat�.. -4�� �� _ -'
. i A
<�3':.x- �.. � �.: \ -� - _
I `
�T .. . �. �.�� �
J-�. �§.� .. .�'�,A �.v~� ��T� ?2 Y ��
� . Y�J..S£'�n�> '
�*`� f� �"���j� :� � - �: �r,�'� t.� _�E ;e3 '� ,
.
- ;
. _ . -
�,
i�}., !� �,;.�'�,,y�.' _ a t-�'r`—i�,.'�.'°""y�_�R� �� .: � T�;�-"p��. s....r�,
�+ �� � - � �
'` �w �'` q� _ 9 �� '��'� �°`'.� � q
_ ,� -; , .
� '� 4,y- ' ` , p''g VEftNING SPECIFlCAPONS:
[ }�{
��# : . , A , ' � �s. �; t.t � 1`'� , GO TME AIINNE50iA OEPARIIAENT OF
$ �{'
� w. �1 � � � � � "b{ � .�+ �P�"¢���` ,� TRANSPORiAPON'$iANDARD SPECIFlCAl10NS
' ,� � g �_ .Lr. .�'_ - � ��' fOR CONSIRUC7ION'UTESi EDITION&
"� ' ..� n� �- j � -. .' i. �',�A ��.. . ._ � �� � � �^I� ` _ SUPPIEHEN�S.
�
M � ' ���'� ' �. P �� __ � ' � 2. CITY ENGINEERS ASSOCIAPON OG NINNESOTA
t � � � � ��,'--��"ri �� � ��j[ -�..�^� (CEAM)SiANOA 0 UPLIPES SPEGFICATIONS.
- . : s . .- ., v, .R= .. � - ...1 �• IAiEST EDITON)
_o- .
. . � �� �.. � .. $ . � ` ..�� - " � ' 3. ALL APo�CABLE FEDERAL.STAIE AND LOCAL
��,
� UWS AND OROINANCE NiLL BE COAIPIJED 1N1H
� ;; "�'��� �S -� �' _ IN 11IE CONSiRUCPON Of THIS PROJECT.
I �� ' - � Av �.�. IY .2 ' + .
- ' , -.., .. �� =� � a. r .;i�.
F
� . , �
� T ��`S�''-.�. F. 4 � A�f� _
,_ �. �, � 1 �� r .
. _ -.w. �`� �.
, 'a _ ` ! . . �9"� �,a��,�?�,�-„k'�N�r."' ,�� , ,� '�',� �°„ ` INDEX _- .- _ ._
bn ■ o
3
�..:. ,yr. � ;a' . "Ri F =71'",rc3. ;��E =�q . " " �� _,. .
a
} �j ! r� ",. '' . i ,.� p`. " -�.. • , *�1 CGVER SHEET..
�.- �� ��t �.�.� � " � 'S� '.�''� ����r'�, g �^�� ��� _ } _ EXSPNG CONDIilONS(SCHOBORG UNO SERVICES
y _
.. � '' ' � �i' '�`.xf. ��' ~� PgF IIAINARY PtAT!c MOBORf.L�c[R_ y�C 51
�:.{� t, r` "tz f'�� '.,,{L q � � ��1 "f> 4 PRELIMINARV STR ET 711TY N PR F E
I �
� ��'7- - �' � 1• �' �_�- ' 6 PRELIIAINARY SWP
.=rc `
- x a
� � ' .{',.� ��y �,� + = -. n �y.' � 1ill I . . .�-1 . PRF RY ANI1GfAPF PI�(fN TWf1RKC(1FGf.N
I t a4` o
� # ` J� u
e� - � ��, � ,y` � � _ n���. .: a o���neeon caouv.uc
P#� �r�� _ � � � i000 sourH BROWN ao�o
' � 9 �,'. ,� ;`�. . �`� , ��y, ,- � �� . . � '�� �'� i Eun�,zWMsise onoc�:.aco�:
_ �
.
�'",e ,, . i. _ - i .ss.`
� � � 7.
��: � 'l' ` � � � � � � p' J CAE M�PONftENGINEERING SERVICES.INC.
- L T� �� �. � ( MARiY CANPION
�h� � ♦ ,��. � . � ��y� ' r n� �-1�F / .t` �� 1800 PIONEER CREEK CEMER
g " ��� ",� ..ws. AIPPLE PUiN.NN 55359
1
�
-',y �7�� 1 PH:(76})479-5172
` . y y�.�. ' � . : ..,.: T � �3 � e1,e� E4All MCAIAPIDN9CA�IPIONENSSQAI
� �
,
���d ��.� :.��. . .� . . � ��. � � ' �.. �. ' = _ �no�R$
•- � � �� = s uHo sEmnccs ir�c
e.o,....�.. . . x�: �._..�. �... .�. .. �� .�s. _ ., � KELLY BROUWER
Y:e
�
�,47�.�csF �1..� . ,�{��[9� ;. . ¢�4.. B99]COUNtY ROAD 13 SE
+ . y� . »• �'.^ f;+ '^ ,y'�y, _
' �. 'S-"�f`4` _ �.i F K'� F.... � ¢:� � Y P 1u(63)9]ZS J221
��. � . �+ ...� a �A`^ :��� i .. ' � FNVIIRONIAFMO'SCHOBORCI AUD C04
`��++..�� � �., (4�`�� � � coasu�
�� �` �S -- , :
=�rl � .. f� {� ..y , 0���_ [�. JACOBSON ENVIRONNENTAL
J_ 1��y 7� � .�t� i�e WAYNE JACOBSON
.....9:.:�O�n]9�lve. . ��_e�RR3l�M_.��_�..-a�5�ins�� O L. ��e .. . �� 'X�,". ��_'�..� �xMY��'}. �...n ... {.�-�.�� �1�� PH:�61Z)B02-fi619
� EAUI�_.UCOBSONENVO�QM
__�,__.._-_._.__.__.�.r.. _.._.. ._ �F��13 0
`�' cnNmioN — � � � � � C�LIVER HILL
� ENGINEERING � � i " a, k ,.cv dc,,,ti COVERSHEET _ 3�
Sf'RVICES.INC �-"- " J ;�° '°� THE BROADWAY GROUP,LLC. q E
onrz ocswrnav � -� !'�,,,,`t:; / /���� ORONO,MN SI��ET NU. 1 �� 7 Sf�{EETS 10/302013
r�Ehga�s - i�v.wm ro:/-u�. oo�c
� - �m ans-�ssz.� r I � � �
R;m�99�.0 ��nv�99I.1. \
o� � _ _ � � Certificate of Survey
I / I Frepored lor: BI"OodwOy �i�oUp L�!�
I f � I
� � � �
i ;
99 s S 89 ZO'34" E 181.01 �-.
� / � ` 1 I
lnv�.PVL I \ .
� 9H9.5 �
V /
h I
I N
� \
I � � � � �
i ��
; I o�
' �� i
I � ' � z�
� �. �'—Wet/ond----�_' \ ��..
(delineoted by Jocobson�` ! N8971'00'"W 321.2B li
a�m 9955 � I Environmentol, PCLC on �� �. .
�� Moy 1, 2013f � I 1 �����"v����,,�
�Rim�5�95.1 I �.._' "YO I�
IIn.�9,�8.0 �� T I
I � Rim=99`�0� �� \ — '— —
' In�77T—� —�— S°temenl ___ R;m�991.� II
99 �n�w9910 � —II—�\�� N Inv�9]6� ,
�lei j _ _ \ ; �\ \ - - - - �— - - �� I
'"•"s' � � ` `--�� � 7�eed Areo I
n e � I -�I � � ��_--�-�--_ � I �
�� �
� I i .�5 _ ^ \ � _ >\�
� _ _ � �.o �
� i j \ � �\ ���
� � � 1 � o
�I � � \ �Wetlond Setbac%_� i � i � _. 1\\ I�I ^ III
\ �
�I O �r . / � �, 3
e � � �- - - v � I � ������ � I w '
` �6-�-- -I .-
. Q _______________ 6� I�_\--i L
w � 3 a z .e � � p I
OI•� Q N frisfing Nouee . � I
{ � f� FFE�100i.9
� � GFE�IOOI.O � � � ''.,
2i`� o . � 0.6 ;— Lot 2, Block 1, � °:��o �� � ' �,
� 0 2 + ±HUN TERS GREErJ � �y �� II
'�. � � (2.24 Ac.) � � \ '
� ' L o t 2, BIOCIt �, � � 97,553 S Ft � � I i
ULMER ESTATES ; ' N8971�oo��w so�.za '
� � (2.68 Ac.) � '
� 116,662 Sq Ff � treed Piea
0
� Legend
� �10`` • Found Iron Monument � Cotch Bosin �I
i
� �o � Soil Test (by other) � Monhole �,
� I x 000.0 Existing Elevotion �Q�Power Pole �
I o � �
I o SCALE
Z �. 60 0 30 60 t2G
I
I W
.�
•"� � 1 inch = 60 feet
,m-rorls� �, � � '90. ',
� ��, h
� s` .-� � Boundary Descriotion (suooiied by d�entl I
.� n .� � � r ct Z R!cck 1. LrLM_F,a EST�,7E5, c.ad Lo� ?. Blccl: !, �
� � ` � � HUNTERS CREfN, Hennepin County, Minnesoto. i
� �� - }u Subject to ony ond all eosements o(record.
I \o�a" ` S 8920'34" E 181.O1 � o
3 .... OO PID Numbers: 34-718-23-33-0055
I O N :.. � 34-118-23-33-OOSB .
�
i ' �
p Prooer y Address.� 2350 Wotertown Road ��
N
Z ; 58920�34'"E 20.00 Orono, �.fN
�� ����� � Stormwoter Oualitv Overlov Distr'ct Exempt
NTa(,er(.��{'n Road 6eorings bosed on ossumed dotum.
Job Number: 7523 �,
�CHOBORG � �c �,y�ert,ly f���t tl�r ,li,i��tc „ „s
�� � �rod Ay ie or und iy riirc i s�l.' �nid Book�Poge: LL
tUnl / pin o duly Re7is(areJ Lund Survev�� un,!c; th� —' ,
� �� � �������� lai��. e/ fhc Sfofc�f hfinnesolo Survey Dote: 4�74�IJ 4�J0�13, 5�3�13, 5�8/IJ '�i
/� ),
�p , .�� Drowing Nome: abbotLdwg .
� INC. � — — _
"'' , --{� .'.! , �,� � ',�. � ,-. Drown by KLB �i
�V '��Pnid l� Schubs•�y� �� �� Revisions:
� 763-972-3211 8997 Co. Rd. 73 SE � �
� (',.1��� -. , ' r��_���r�!/ l� .��(Jll[�.:i i�i,:fln
V
www.SchoborgLond.com Delonc, MN 55328 � -�-�� ���" ��
cawcw s �ay;o . •sauq �o� apis bmuroipn wn)op pawnsso uo pasoq s0uuoag �
, puo y�F�M ;, �aa���! Guo saw� 70� ,oa� ouiu�olpo puo
47P.�m m yaal�S£ '47�oN anup mo//rM Puo sauq 7�l luosl £'l—Of—O! :a�op uo,�s�nay '�A/� �
6u�u,io,�po puo yaprM ui aaa/ SZ 6u,�aq s��oqaa5 bwp�rng 1 V
, i S��1/I�I�S 4 b'-1 �'
�
� � ��JO80H�S �
� -- � � 01��_ � — 3.,�rozsss-;,PN uMo�.�a�sM
� - o��- — � � � —
� � � —� �� � � r(�uo.fomanup puo asnoy uo pasoq suoqo�n��o� �ano�p�oy pasodo�d,
�'�''.. �' U �\1 l�s 096"S �Y 7�I7�0
�ii 1 1 1 2 �/�S 688'L! :poo2l �!14�d
� � .`�bl J�s lL6'6! Y�s [L6'6l 7's !L6"6! Z J��
I �pa��ow so asim�ayao �o saui� )o� ap�s 6urwo/po puo O p '-'a'b! 1�5 Lbb"L! 7�5 L66"L! 1�s LL6Yl ! !o�
� U7prM w �aa/ g 'sau,i� �ci �oa� puo )aa��s bwu�o(po puo ti p �Z X�ol9
�, y�F!M u,i aaa� �� 5uiaq s�ua�aso�.f�i�q� puo a6ouio�� v � O b�b� '/�s £bf"8! 7's !S6'lZ 7's LZ9�6Z S l�l
o � � 66 Y�5 89L'£'! �l's Z66'8Z 7�S Slb'Z£' b la7
GOl 7'S 9ZL'£'l !�5 9S!'6l TS 68Z'FZ z l07
I 1 _ � �v 68 7�5 46b'Sl ')�5 bbh'S! Y�S 8L8�6S Z )07
� � GL f'S L66'£'l !�s L66'fl 7�5 S£'Z'8£' ! ]a7
I ———�—— 'v �! �I�alB
1 i� 1 o rv O
o o N ,6� i��.n � �oa 1 �y i ol awoN 7
� s � I � o� SY321 d
� ---� r � m
�, i_- S
�
I � � � �� �
�, I �
(�ano�p�o4 GOS 10 uoqo)iwp) q �ail O 1 � �� l� ����BL .3 ,.�F.�Z68 $ � �
:��u) � /�n q �a MWJO p �' .
O 1— LO'!Ol �— 00'00l ��
� nlr( 'Of/Ol� Il� r� � - �� �\\ / �
�, pooa u.uo��aloM OS£'Z . �p y �a o�d 011 V O ��
�i [n I // 7 �] cn
�I BS00—ff—£'Z—Bll—bf— I I c�
I SS00—Cf—£'Z-8ll—bf :� wnN Id C�ii I� I�I I� �v� oo� I
�.� �p�ooa��o sauaulasoa ��o puo�(uo o� aoalqns I � o
�, �o�osauwyy •.(auno,� uidauuaH 'N33U0 52131Nl1H '� 7 Ip I / I m � �
I l �I��IB Z 707 P�o �S31V1S3 N3W7(1 '! ���IB �Z Jo7 I II C/ ;p I � I I�•
'.. 7u �p q pa� n u qw��sep �opuno9 I �� � Cf' £"£�
m I IV
�
;aa3 09 = 9�ur t .��',I V _
I q �
O1 ��l � I I L___ I
'�, . o�,I �'.bs �\ n, �('!!�bs 89L lT j i i
a7�5 '6PlH � �
�' oi�� os oc o oe I ��'(9ZS�-6P9�,�� I I i pasodo� S� � ^
3'Itl�S \� aVs\ ddd�I ���—� 1 � � _
� Sl — I ---� pa� � � � � �� �,
�
'��. )uawnuoyy uo�� �so� Op � X an!�0 1 _ ��do�dT 1 0
`�� �\ �d°� �� 60�SZ - �O'SL
� )uawnuoyy vo��punoj � ���5'9. I�/ / '� 1 — N 00 SZ�' �
I -��,s , �� � � i �, ob sd �
P�� 'O I 9\�' � �_� M„00,00.065—\` "
'� s'� O! � � n6'lZ gOc� OI[Qnr�.' � �
pl� ��[''�94��a , cn (�o�S�=; I m
�, . + sz�to� M..00,�zseN ' � e`ti' °z r�.� oos� - �'
1 1—L � Y — — — 6l Zf Z�— — � i ' 60 69 — � !/ � i � lo� ' �ani�—j �� n
I� �� ��— � 6S,C\ � \ng�. �do�
, � I � ��:� \ � N�_ L 1', � \,s� I L �
', \ ��� y , � M,.BL�Z�"�'—���\\ �0�'C�q / \ /\ �I I I�7!'bP 080Z� I N
� \� m'N� ) �� / _1 •'�00\.�,�' C)" . :�� � I �alrS 16P/H s� W
��\ I�.\ ii ���d rn��-anii0 ��' I � ��d'S� � 00 p5.695\ \\ \ iPaso�d6dT Z �
�., `n \��. ^ yo\ ��m� .d°�d i/ � / �Sa' M.,��4Z �I/ �� I I �------� I � ��
� �' � O o
�I w II \���d\ nN ��,,,�� �/�y i'C� �o'OS=a �Sl/l\a�oid� �� I � o �o
l` � � "� cc{� o I
\\� � o i / ��^ i" \o�\� a"�•ObZ;d ��� �� I I I�
, o I \�b y v � �`�\ `o. a'so =� �r �� S��)\ sy �` ^�
i � � \ . o� �\:N a�\y � �..Z a 1 `1}bs 6Pig �` I � T rn �
0 =I '� . � �, o��o� �C � � a u0 Sl I1/'�`� a�!5 ddd I ia n
. Q `� i -1 <���'�J ) ��\I�do� s� '�'�Pas�� i i � ia l A
� / �� �� �m �� �'F — ��� � �� � �
1 i � o aM_. i Cn
I "� ;o `� � �o�i Tr ss es<<) I / �_�ooaia Pu ii + +� �
i � _� G � � � I ar�s .6p/8 1 y .�_.��
�� v 1 ��� �_Pasodo� I � I\
!
II O m I � / Oa� L_�_� o, . I / 2 I I�.
� � 3 � —1—�� /6� I � I I � o � I 1 �
�
'� ' I \ ��..�" Jo as� \ I I � o I INI ti I 2CIL'1
q � � \ � \ � —� 2 � A I � I� � � a jd elY
� - - �- - - - - � - -��-� - - - 1 0 �'\/� z � � � b
�� �— — — � _ Juacuaso3/—T7.2q/] _ —� � �
_ \ \�6\._� \ O� � pI I I 1�.i.
� i� - - -}- - � �- - - - — ���o —�;-�'R � � g � � c�o
, ro�oi - � sz r�z —..� � w I i I � I
', � 8Z'lZf' h1„OO.lZ.68N — m � C£'tazLLl !I�ow I
� � \ � � �o �77d '��wuo{inu3 I -. O I
�—uosqo�o� q a�oaui�ap)--_� I �
�I � �- �i�� PuolJaM � �6ouory � � -
O �� � � ��� �
i ��� CInOJ'J �DM/700J8 � �� � � i
� �o} pa�oda�d m �� � � �y w� �
`"o �
(�aaUs LlXll �o} pa��pw�o,—ab'� o s��/ �� � � � ��
� � m
� 1 d�d ,c�dN�wi���d ; !_�- �006 - � � oo�6- -�� ,:���. �
-� �o�a� 3 ,.��,ozs8 s -
��/H ��/1/7� � � � �F �� i
9 �Z_
I 1
� I I,P:GF.;VD
�� sqr I �-�- oo,otEs uisc[u�rvcous unHHo�
�
1�I r __' ,' t --- - -_ -�f� ..
. �n lJ-, - -'-'- _' _.,- ., , ?.'.� --- -__' OENOiFS CURB StOv
_�, , --- � n, oa+oirs unum rac
Maplc'� - �� ~�• � H1; I rR�oros�in�� .,\�___ _;��z•-e*n'_' ,. 'x zs• '• 'r zr 'J m oHohsununeoz��
L,ane � I I� -- ---
I I� � �ra a� \ � -oo�o�s s�wrnxr scv.�R
� I i � YH INl�91B3 �� �` B-� \ � � urot —..--
� DENOlES Si0RA1 SEM£R
- — -� �- l � �DENOIES WAIFRMAIN
..I � 1 // --"- � ��� \� � m DENOIES SANIIARY SEMER YANHOLE
. _
I_ ` ,___ �
� I \� ,� ,s � ' --\, � I ¢a�-r 1011e1 0. OENOiE5111111tt PQE
� •' o ' ,._._ i.•'�, :�. w,w c�mpl � • oworzs mon uaaiucnr rour�o
� i "i--"'�--�✓ - �' ,/a^�T j � �"-,-'I�� �� . u�amrnaz�cox«eh .�a��z ocHotEs cnsnNc[�vnnav.
i i m _ - -� \ I I µ� e�z3 oEdoi[soasnNc mcc
. I /�� �. � P�, ,, '� \ � I.�'. i��'mnn�wous.c.n mrag ,..�oo�arzs uisnHc mwloua
i
i i
i /
� i � _ �i J ..• , 'o .:,. / ;,-'� °o� I \ \ �i� c anss s.c�cwrz� __ __ owotcs o�aHvi,o wac
� � - B ( x cPu ) —DENOiES UNDfRGRWND IELEP E
l
� \ \ NON
p` \ ��I �
I � �:Y ]i� �. -\l-�, \ �n ' � -- OpJOlES VNDERCRWND CAS
� DENOlES EXISTNC fEN(Z
� �
R25'), H- • �_J OENOiES COud2ElE
I I �;���i i _ `\�� li �iw�c�l2Cnw s�ow 5 lnE uiwwu R[SDENiIAL SIPE£f DENOtES BIN41NW5
I � Y
. i_ i ,•, �, -' �'._.--� camo�wr.
{ roxcu4E cunei , ,, --_ __-__A�, [.__�ocuo�s cee��
I -��'�� � - ].TK SIREET Y[np1 YAT�MOtEAYD B�3D W SOL CONq11IX5
� � :� �ENOiES WAl£R YANHIX£
�n�� _ 6 . RE40OlT�L S1REFf YCTo1
� o+ba ��/ ��
� r �� ,
N,,�
I { _-' • � �(iir,c'Ao .onsnHc umm Nraawna ttx sum�cr Px[r.wm ar scxoeortc
I Rmoprc�a r��.. �
ININ.INCE i0 PMI ANM
VNO SL5�1CF�'.MC.AN�CIIY FECORO PVNS.
I ! w��'�G��# �«�. 3.NL SWRMt SEMFA St411 BE B'PrL.SDR JS
� .1 swnwRr s[NFR 5[IMc6 51411 BE�P.0 s�x 18.
� i..L � . 1.E1£VA1bN OF IXIStING IRMIES SH41 BE VERIfEO PRpR i0
1 C0161RlILTON.
� S.10l5 SN.LLL BE SENvID BY PRNAiE wilic
7 "�
I � i ... ���i
�C�M�� 1015 1015
�030 10M
�
I010 1010
i0i5 015
W
� PflOPOSED C[MERl1NE PROfl£ . PROPf6ED VROf%F. . ..
w OtSItNG LFHIFRurt FNOf%E � . .�,......... . ��, ESYa"fIMG PROfAE ._......... . . 1005
imo � �. � mio .. �
<
tsnx B �,. .. . __. ..
� �
\ �� i000 ' -- o00
im5 � - �_�I.9pS �� t065 \
\ �-�
.RW:10o1.12 \
R14:1006.04 \ NW INN9B6.00 �
NE INV�99�.00 \ SW INV:9Bfi.00
995 995
1000 � —� �000 �
- H 3 ... . uM-3 `��
R1Y:tM t.t2 NIMNVOOO.BO 0
:986.00 990 -6SO0
995 SW INV:99600 995 SE INV-985.00.. E](6�11G YH
RIY-993.0
� YN-1 MN�9112
Mu 992]0
� HE MV-9J9.00 � ^'
gg5 5 INV.9]9_00 9fl5 1 Y
990 990
6T ol B'PVC O 1.SOS
t61'ef B'VVC SANRMY SEN£R O�.995 � �
EE DEfNL�
. A� Ia5'ot B'PVC O�.15x 9�
985 � � 9&5 . . ..
� � � 21'el 8'PM O].)1S
. . 9)5 915 � �FRIIGL
9B0 9B0 $ w�n�K scuc w a[*
�$ �e�i m� ^n q� '��1 r� � iqRIIOMK
o� g� 08 �g � aS
___ zaao 3+00
--- — _ w� DETAIL A
.
o.00 ,«oa z.oa a.ao s..no �----- --
__________�
� •a�.�,e�o��FF�.e.� �Aror,..�r� u e•" `"•'h'"°'p"�"Q�a ey m�o�.�u'� PRELIMINARY STREET& PRo�cc.No.
CAMf'ION p�e„,„,G,��,,,, ��W��m� OLIVER HILL
a m,�K�Wo�.,.�ma��� 13-037
ENGiNEERiNc ��„p;a;,}�,...,, ��„a�,�,����.k Ps��,��,uF,�K, UTILITY PLAN&PROFILE
oerz oesawnaw SERVICES.INC. E u��g�������z un°/` o��i� THE BROADWAY GROUP,LLC.
Ne���
�sas � - � �m�>�-�g�� ����-u��isvo� oo�� ORONO,MN SHEET N0. 4 01 7 SHEETS °�10/30/2013
� o 0 0 00 � o 0 0 � I � w��z9en 9'94
. . �_ _ " ..—.�'..__.. �-._.-'_____-___^_'�.__�_.�e���_._��.______�o__"_"N.__._ �--. � _-__-. __- __ __"----__' _- ___ I.I�.(.I�.�D
._ .. -.-.--- --_-,- _ .—___—:-._ . �
. . -�.�� g65 � 666 � � oENo�s uisceunncas unHNo�
�
4I . . _ ca oEr+otcs cuae s�or
---� �o
__. ________ _ __ .-_-'-_ -- --� --- -._.- OF1101¢UTl1ttP0.E
"- -� - - ---- / —_ � DENOlES/iRE MVDR�Ni
. __ . _-- _ _- . _. _._. __.
1� -_ IL DENOlES UPlltt BO%
_ _ _
_ _._ -_ _-- _ - .--
f- -- - '�--� --- - -, r � , `� V - -DENOiES SANIiARV SE'AER
� I I � I -----DENOiES SiOqM SENER
o °
4` __ .__ _ � v� �%i --�--pENOlES WAIERMAIN
rI F 7 4 ;;� I ' Q DFNOlES SANIiARY SEWER NANHOLE
I __ - ' _ _ I I � Qq -, � I �O
I � �_ __ L- - I 1558''� �� 1 O n. OENOlESUPLIiYPq.E
�� DENOIES IRON 401JU1IENT FWII�
I _ 1 �, I I ` �___ ----� k � ti' �� .�o�a ocr+ohs cvisnNc¢Fvenar.
- �-� F��q`-', � �' I ,� I �.�. �.i1] DETlO1E5 E%ISPNC 1REE
q`�` � o Sm6 �'����' o �� _ _-_ ____-_"- II �O �./�DENOtES EXISTNC CONTWR
�.. �
....
I uv" , .1::::.: I.e ".'. 16'M£RANO BUIiFR ` ��� — DaOhS OVERMEA�1NRE
� ` L b . ___ : .:�::::. la� ' ' - - ---_. �__ ,�3.4�ll ---.-DENOlES UNUFRCRWND IEIEPHONE
__I,���- ..00 2_- .. .'�. .. � '�� ' -- - --- - -- ----�- —�- O o Q o ---- __ oo�ohs uxoEncaauHo c�s
- --- - S.. �u n
- --_. 'l . . � y__._ . � _....._ OENOlES ExISTNC fFNCE
-- __^ �
I� . _� - � � `� ��p �_ ,_�DENOlES CONcqEIE
� ocHoics eiiuuwous
� ,._ � oo�. _ � ��+ o
I A�� �.���3��,� ���� � � �SS� �� � o o � � oeNo�s wni[a�u�r�Ha.c
o� . .,?` ��— ^ b�� \ la _
� �� �� ��� rxi u noues eero�dccwc �-�-�'/
� , \$�� y _ �on�x sr.h
I O �`, , , �fi : �___
�'$ TnN Cm'utU�65E-CIS-000z
tr>
I � ' � ` 4N.iIX1 fRFE 1 lOo-352-1166 0
_v __. _ _-__- -__-
��1'Wl'l,ti(-Y Yti -�� � �. �'�' � _ /� A�eo CK 1 ���� nores �
o---
JO 60 90
_ : _� --- -��+ ,_
"' � i. cowsrt�ucnox sruu couair rmm ru wn.rre�cosrnuu+c coors
OUTIEOT A L _ . " rove --�� , _�..•`_ ��_ -{ �� � vnavcarim�eiax swu ru�e�Pacaurr.»u eEe¢svrr io nwio exaa�rc v�ucc ro uwcfl+r
rvewav � _ - -- -- - z
iIES DURINL 1HE CON VL110N vWSFS OG MIS PROJECf.iNE C0111NLIOR WLLL BE Hf1D
.-_ '_--_ __- - -_ 1 I �F��i I / SIXIIT PFSPoK40lE iqt INY�HNGFS i0 IHE MV�4111%tWEFfIES OCCURRING WRIHG 1HE
(p� � �K CONSIRUCipN PH156 OG 11N5 PRQIECi.
� � b ' p 9j ]. ME CQYfR�1DH YUSf CONtACI NL MPflOPRN1F 1111LIiY COYPNL6 Ai IF15f�B HWItS B60RE AN1'
BN�NWRIc j '� ��l J� u8riw �+f� �
u r uor�w1cin sna�r�a rtn��ao' [xuv�noH io rsEourn cr T n¢n ioumH or cc�smm ununcs. n sHu.i ae TMc Raroraiaum
N�RIH OF PRP1E ON 1NLL0'M DRNE R _ \��.t . I i ��� qe Of ME CON ICI�It 10 R60G1E�ll M1111E5 WNICN CONR1Ct WIIH 111E PqOPJSm N%VOVEl1ENR
EIEV�lOt1b I --TOP Of FWNDA110N l. o� " ��(1 I I N F' SHOWI ON iME PW1S.ME LOG11016 OF SLLLL1 UIR1116 SH41 BE OBIMhD Bf 1NE CpflPICfOR BY
VARIES 50' GRAOE II� p � fNLNG GOPMEX SiAIE ONE fNl(1 BW 152 I166).
� �--�--�- ------ -GftA�ING GR "6 / j'�. SVti11'NOiICE ro CONIIUCi0R5�.N IGCORWNCE wI1N GENER,LLLY ACCFPIm CONSIRUC1pN PWLIICES.
�J �l / T1E c01lINLIDR Wlu BE SOIllY�110 cOUPlF1E1r pE5PoN51BlE foq CON0111016 ON iHE.pe snE
r0.5'TOPSq�READ �\ � � ���� /� I f 7 J MCW�m'G Ytfrc oF ul vERSaw^u1D PROaFFn DURNG PfRFORUM'CE Of iNE WORK.iN5
����__ I _ '~"I__ �� ��� �� \ C / Y %� REOU���TMELDM10POt i0e[ON UCI CONSIRUCON�RMEW Of 1�11ENCONIRILiOR'S E Oif1Y Cf
��� p[pFORLL4VCE 6 N0�NRNOf➢LO N WDE RfHfW Of ME ILtOWLY Of ME roHtRItTOR'S S�fEIY
l � �^� � ��` �� � 3 ���- YE1511RF5 W.ON OR NFM IXE COKSIRUCIION SIiE
' 0 5' '0.5 0.5' � � �. `m �Y�
C 5 T1E CONRUfioR SW11 BE RFSPONsOI£fOF PRQNONC AND 1WNIMIMG NL 1RMlC COIffRJL OMCES
0.5 �, '' �r _4. /o F,t>• b /�r0 , N io coNl2a n�E uwtuENl of m,�ilc vmQtE NEc�S1Rr.1P�Silc coNlRa oent6 sx.u1 coMroRu
� /�.y��l::t� .� y �1(� .I.II 10 MPROPRNIE YINN601A�EP/�FIYEM OF iR.WSPORIAl10N SfAN4R�5.
/ , C�k ,W V II , ME COMiUCtOR SW11 R61RIC1 Nt GF,NwG M��CONSRti1C110N KiM11E5 10IAFAS U61CINiF➢ON
O
m
+ 6
1 � /��
(` ` F\ /��
� \�\ � \ .. ��. �$J \ ��� m / I�E RIH4
_.____._.__ -` 1 � � � \ �r' �:•� ��/',�\ ( ��i I >. SOLL IFSfWG SH41 BE COYRFIF➢Bi TIE�WUQt'S SOiLS ENCINEDL lNE CONIRICfOR SW11 fiE
- -�-��-4--1--"_._- __--� `� -!,�� ` r R6PoKSIBIF fCR COOROINAIINC HL PEO�IRm SOIL!L�"16 IN�INSVELTAHS WIM RIE SORS QIGINfFR.
-�-BASEUENT i�10R � \�`•� �1 I�' I �B. iHE SfIF HAS NOi NEC65ARM1T BEEN�ESICNm 10&1.WCE ME ON-SfiE WiFRWS./3IFF iME 5lIE
I a � `` \\\ , " I \�� r t�p I I CPI➢IHC 6 COWIEI[IF E%[65 SOIL WIFRVL EXISR.lNE CONIRMIOR SNLL1 OlSPoSE OG N1
I � '`,\ ' \j 3\ . ;a'" / � I o , ��wrtnw as-srrt ix n uwxrx rtccv��c ro TMc ormrx u.a nrt pccuum�c
- zo'Han oovm Frtou rov or�ouHonnon y \ � � I �o � �o c s_ mc c rsnrvc rovsoa ai rrus s�vnaics w xrM.rt a ns cowinnc.ox's x¢corarernr iwx ru
I ��--� CONTROLLED FlLL(PER FHA/HUD]9C) � � '���� � I /� `(V� I�^ �� �O �� SIIRiKE KGETAl10N AVD IM"lOPSOII OR O1HEF 1005[SOF!OR OINEAWL4 UNSURI�BIF W1ER41 BE
-�TOP OF STABIE SUBSOIL(PER SqL ENGR.) � ' I I��I J 3 � FfuwED fRCY iNE BURDING P�n Mc S PRIOR i0 NcdEM Of utt EY.BwNUENf.
TYPICAL RAMBLER/FULL BASEMENT (FB) - '�- "� � I, ,°.°'a'""°E""'^�R"i"or Pv`E°'"'"E s�"`E'.s�acn R�c'"-°�-w"r oR euiwmc wn�erws
SN41 BE LOUPnCIEO IN ACCOROMICE'MM il!E REOUIREYkMS OG 1HE OUI.IM CONVnCIpN YEIHW AS
', �F�_ \ I I � �� L �nwm iu uH/ooi Zios.�a oa,s wwcnm a��nE mas wciuvn.
n 8 � I I I . GVAiION fOR 1HE PtIRPoSE Oi RF�110V1NC UNSII9LE OR UNSUR�BIE SOM1S S1W1 BE C04PLFfm AS
-SN � ' � II REOUIRED Hi ll�E 50115 FHGINEER.EL9WNYIN!WiEPVl PIACm M ME BUhINNC PID MU SN41 BE
R '` `"u" `" / / � / � iz.oiEaMu+c�rs,�c oieccrtn er n+e was cucwa.e.
, ; � \ ,� .u+us wnicn nac ro REcv.E rovsai�swu ec cwn[o ro rmmm o�o�oor newE oa e¢av mc
S \ / � �'�I � aEowRco�vnnoH,uw�ss owccrzo er rNE cNcw�a.
VARIES 25' Z5� ..-Tpp OF FOUNDATON n . \ ��\/ � -I C.i0P50K SH4L BE cHI➢m i0 PLuS oF uM115 M�NCH OG Tff SFE[iFlm MICNxFSS.
13.I11 OISNRBfD I1N5lIRF,1Cm MfAS�RE i0 111YFDMiE1Y RECENE 51X INCN6 Of IOPSOII,SiID Av0
� r�� - � .'" � I / � � / / I aV I 41RLN/.4D BE MARFED UNI1L A HEALiHV SiM10 Oi SS 6 OBiNNm.
-FlNISHED GRA�E q11 `1 � / / � �II t1.PROPOSm COMOURS ME i0 fwISNF➢SUR�/LE cW.pE OR GUf1ER 11ME 6 CURB.%IN GRME 6 Ta
� 10� � � -p2A�ING GRA�E d a�/ � ' I F11RNm C.W.1GE RDON EI£VAi10N_E%LSIINC CONIO�RS Mf SHOWN Ai]f00i INIEAVNS ALL
I � ,— � � .-0.5 TCPSOIL RESPREA� I ��I�� ! I Z PROPoSm C�Nt0UR5 NtE SHOvm Ai]FWI MiER.'N5.
� ',T o -./ I 0� �/y� \1�� �// I I I 15.CONIRACiQR 5'WL MJU51 AVD/OR CIR IXLSIING PAYDIEN�AS NECESYRY TO/SSURE�SYOOM Flf
� 0.5•0.5�' �% ' � � V�� � ��� , � I � /MD CONII1MI0115 GWDE,LLONG WiLNING PAYEVENI MFAS N!D/OP LIIFBS.
m I / � / / J\� a I AI I e.iNE C�NiRICiOP SI141 ASSURE POSRM ORN�CE�WAT FROY iHE BURDiNfS�dt ALL W.111ML N1D
� '�- , I ' / � I �
// y 1).P i HE�n[M R I L i O p 5 1 W L P R O N O E p E`Y�I E R N G A S R[O I 1 F E D i 0 C O N P L£I£i H E S I I E G W D M C
I � I [ONSIRUC110N OR AS pRECiEll B�iHE SOi15 ENGNEFR.
! g� �p�s�E� II I �BASEAIENT RS / \ D
.-____ � .__ OS 0 .
I c oo _ r _ _ �R I � � . i/ \ \\ � II II i �\ [�
I I � . � � � J J ^vn'NoiE�;
= 50.] ��� D�q1E5 TOP Of GW VAttIN E1fV _ � I I �� i ..� -- � � �� \�--��- � 1ME CGfIRILiGR l5 SPEf.if1f.41T GWIIONm TN�iME L��fI.IION AMO/OR E1F/A1N1N Of IX61MC MLi�6 AS
I�� I 25'HOLD DON1J FR0�1 TOP OF FWNO�iION � � S_ �Ru Ig99fi.i �
LL-9 2� OENOlES LOMER Lfl4 El£Y(&�SE11FM1) I �...._ CONiROLLED FlLL(PER MA/HUD)9C) �7 ��� __�_� lNdul3se _=��r�-� �^ �� � SHOM11 ON�HFSE GWlS 6 B.�SED aN REfAR05 M 1HE VM0115 UIILIIY COYPAN6 MA,WHFRE PoSSiB�E,
i0(/) DENOIES HOuSE iWE(I���CWxs[5) �-�--� iCP OF SiABLE SUBSqL(PER SqL ENGR.) -'<.- __ - --'—"---"- J 1 J-Q����T.utcx N 1HE iiEID.TK INf�OnWIpN 6 NOt f0 BE nELED ON/5 BOxc Wtt at
/
_.___"-_..-. ' _
��-\ ����-�-',�� lnE fANf2`CLpR YU51 roMACf/ll M IPPFOHtN1E II�IlP1'COYPINI6 Ai IFA51 1!HOURS R£ORE INt
---��ke��e=ooiotcs caouwo ntv TYPICAL FULL WALKOUT �WO� 1 '� � C_1 � � excwv�non ro acarsr�rmn iounou a ununrs.n swu ae n+c neseo vaiuir a�
1� CAMRMIpH t0 FE10GiE NL IXLSIINC U�Ilfl16 WHICM CONNC�`�iIN Mf PROPOSm NPRpvp1ENR SN
HOUSE PAD ID DETAI L f iOUSE PAD DETAILS � ��TME�.���^����ununrs swu ec aewHu�ar.Hc cornwc�oa er cuuuc�
COPMF SfAiE OxE Uu Af BCO-]53-t1fi6 OR SSi-45I-OW2.
�ROJECI N(l.
N CAMFION ""�` `""" `� P�°'°°�°��`m;�°'�� OLIVER HILL PRELIMINARYGRADINGPLAN
� iaro r g a<a cm�K a y� � o,,.�,id,a,e�n e 13-037
FNGIN[.-.FRING ,,,,...s, °� , s1e��^dFe� THEBROADWAYGROUP,LLC.
Sf=RVICI:.S.INC � s�:ig:z�i !' onrc
��� �„n�, �Il _,,,, ��: o14oixizo�� ORONO,MN SHE�� NU. 5 OF 7 SIIEE(S 10l30/2013
REN4pIS �V E-uol:m ampMn�a.�plmen4can Mw1M P.Cmn br/-Uc 19901 Oalc
�>n/+w�� w ,,,,,n e�,oyw�n,o�w .0�-3 snosn3a
£lOZ/OE/Oli a S1��HS L jO 9 �ON L��I IS NW"ONO2J0 cmx��acoi`o���-= �'�';�-� z.e�-cu-roc� =oi � rauaux3a �ra a
��ll'd(1021J.lVMOV02i93H1 °��un�^=,�,s•,�";�,�:cr� ���^ w sn�-«.�3�d�,w^ ��NI'S]JIn213S
L£0'£l NVIdNOIlN3�321dN011flllOd ";o„��',�;:,",,,:;;;;;"�w,;,°,d ""'��°a'ad �Niv»Ni�N3 m
2131VMW2JOlSANVNIWI-1321d 11�H�3/1110 �eav��m,aw.a.suwm,w "��ro+�o`»o�maaoai NOI�IWV� �
i�3roaa �m� ��tiw� N
���� 3�N3� 1�IS 431V�R18V�3ad
oc os or o oc �� ,�,a„p„�„,o,a„�,�„ „m„d„m„q,m, n ,oa , 3�NV211N3 NOIl�f1N1SN0� N�021
_ ^;-Y1'V1 _ _ �..�.m,� w ,�,.a., �s now�r�rw�
� - - -�-- r a nx3e�o im N,
Z,��-Q �.-----�.;� _—_-->-- - - __,- ......�w.�ow.�...ma»vnn�.E..�� y nwm.a�
� "�^� ��_�-���� ------� - n..raw�n:v.r�°"�� � ���on�w� � sxo o3es
n�xi� ��� J- °,� uea waoor.
I I ao�ooa a3�a.x.
� �� I �� ,�.� �°�BQ� ';° -
I � 'a ",�� °° """ ����n.9-��a
I � �,� � ����
� � �� S ;�'�:,m,�w� �� o 0
� ��I i �' �,�.a.��a�d��u��ro�,���3� � ���o 0
� I i i �� �°`n s�.���,�a���",xa���na�"�;� 4 oo�c,�on.
I I�� ��� � '�1 �
i ,�a��e���.�m o��,�_ � �,�
-� a / / � a,o ww ` oi noa u3wn avvu 3e nrHs�nar��A �y� �
` � I I¢� � /� waa nruuu iis `mu�o r mru /%��
� i ��WI / � — " �,��� , ,
� II I I / // """_ ' �T:JWII�d5'�9 p 'NOLLJ�EIL.OJ 3nW JO 3nU 3�LL lv
\\^ ��� SY3QYI10 101 bDf mtll(lp3ll 3B llM SM'W IOtlINOJ Nq50lp lVfqWON 'S�
� II�I V� I I� ' � '1 Mtldtl 1I1W1 SI3LI10 OM'S13Y11 3dd 1V QIi1V1ST11 38 TMIS S�OI�OB-1l
II ' /
(, � 1�310lId 3Hl 10 NOLL3NrvOJ 01
� �0 b V �'� �P'i� � � aaaa.ms3oma�muw a��win.�an�a�o�e�rnr�'�s e3�nm°o�ie
rn o�°j �N ��� � y� mu�z��ins�ia a�r+noaensuarc�i nmu��nn a3a ds ie rn�us v.w�c�
I I-�� ��`` (Y �¶' ro�s rmu 3xon aoi 3us�u wo ummw u�wn mw�udN�ois�z�
I I0
� , � •%��a - '03lTd�OJ A�lI�QlJSOI.YI TLL DIN QY�vd 3NV S3J/1alls 9NNvd
\ 1W111 5I3WI llYtl�WS8 HJIVJ iTl Y3^�13Wtl�ONY JNBIJ WN�
I �f � I 3T'id rnm5 tl01JvtLLMO�'mZ!➢4Y15 3tlI SY3Nv mBatllSq Tiv l�lnfl
�1 I I I�/� � l � �/' - t�. / \ �, !R OonMMH ID15 • " TTINT'�1J3Ntld 3NL i�M'Ida OIIIII13tld N�OIN OdI Hl�l M nb015'OM' lt
I�� �' ���, - /���•., --�_i•,a � wau+w rais3n�oa 3e�mmrsd�oau�io�H�asom�ae�si rvo�iu�ioaa 3aois-o�
�{
� � �sea�eans
�'�' � � '-^' . � �� � �, am+3e oi iorv 3w irw srwv rw Hoirn arv,�ir si�oi
�J��Y��/ � /I -� r � ��� /�, rl �iu.an 3us�ndno�sanad nouriwnims.�n aoaw rn Nn�nn�u
I J-�__ � T �'' y xqt�WLwOJ XAtl 3JH31 LlR 3'I 7W�13n rvd50tl33Nh�Ir�T'6
'SOMOd MqlYlM31tlT3S YfMQfR3l O1 if011nN 3JYitlnS 11[3Na
�� �� � � j �; j ��� r �t � oi uuas nams/ss�nws/s3wm nmrraa wmodrt�ia�eusrvoa�i
� ��� / ; A � �.� � 3aiearrva wu.rnnno
� n � � �I 'o� � -/ � unaodrtu rnis+i am m�m r+wvuanims uvaodr�mn�usnw��
biT- �sru�rc�wu�3ioaa nw
. / � I - 1'•� / t- au'3aa�nrs arvv rrourrnisxi waun�Nawe3 f3 w�ra��iwu�i�o�a�d nxi TM�is�xi��
I;(�rvY� 1 � . we 3��.aura
, r s �-�, � rvwYw�va��uoe orrv s3amm�ioa�vo�Hasoa3 rnur+�a
s / �?
\ __ �
,/ � I� II .o �� ,�. � .. c / __ '�'�"�9G waa���s m+�wo oa�is wmdvv�a�rrv�i n mui m�a.�s�arm 6
�_L1� ''� ' ' __ I'__ ._____ �____ ... _�^ _. . ... ._. __ V 1CI1� �(+� a o rm)3a�v�a mwad aa�o nw v iv amaar
}^ r mum 3e
]9 n.us(o�-u-s�)t13ZnuYli 7a>+t�d sr�ol oMt le mm�s AwN.I�
'� ��� . ���� �. A - -- ¢-"n ���� �_� ��� ����.��4.���� �iNmnn Mnus•sHouv�uia3as ioarn�wn.3�rovao�x w a3N�inn
���J�-�� - � _ Th \� o�m�s 3e-rm�s s�w ana�s umwaa�(mmoi u>wad✓:
xu)3x�v/sai w e s�sz rvoua�n�3as ioaHn�uw 3�rrvaao�a�
% A , 6 777,,, ru 3e rnus�ians aviv+a�3us io rau3�ano��a uw c ruHur.
-- ?�� \ ', ,p�� sy,\ �0 -' 1'QO\ y mw�vu�arH mma tiosmi au�rx a nnninn r�wn,maois3e
\ O - O _' ,�'_ 1 ./ 1, I pa I 3a lnus mav on�ane arrr v.vx,v.on���a'srw mearusa rn �e
noHnrn a�rx,s�oN3o � S�� A� ( �uneu rxn�u eo,wraam3a 3w oNaouMon
�,- " i,\ � �p I � anr ww.3xmunw aa�neisnooriu 3e mmrs'wiawn�o�3Hi ��
�. - �• ' ;�-.M 1Y ¢M4tHVLSi 4 ltlnl 3�LL t13L1V NO1TYlMOJ 3kl
l3�Ytl�SLON30 L_.� e i �a� __J s � / ,��� i I ,Q, iH SY3tF/�Mq1qd 31LL 110ll1 QYArt3tl 1115 3NL ONV QYDI3tl 36 TMIS
SfqN1Y1fLL19 SLON30 r' \ V �Y 53JNL ll5 3Hl'MOIJIMIHOJ 31LL 10 3M3d%3 3N1 1V i1V'tLiNMq
\'. 1 �-1�y.-�'"", 3�LL 30 NWT'i5LLY5 3VLL Ol QTN31J SY3N'�3�iV ONV NMtl H�V3
3l3NJNOJ 53LON30�. _� 4 "�\. � 1 r � x�r+avort3a 3e mm+s vnxs w ann ao nis�o orvuiwd3o urv �s
3JN3i'JNLLSU3 SLON30 — � I � .y\ ./ _ � SOd
SY�ONfqlpipUNll 53ION30 - 1` � � a` � ' —1 � ALY3dONd ll31Wd Ol L1 Q31C➢0 SY SWllllll N3N/N M�NOnllItl1NOJ
� �� 1 Z �Q ,�' 3U 1�3E10 NOIIJO i[3H/SlN 1V AM Y3NM0 3Hl llli A�MLSOd30
/ I � 3Hl OM'M050H3 lHN3tld 01 Qktlf103tl SV NJLLY1N3rt31d�OM'
3NOHd3131 ONfqa'JlflONfl 5310N30 -�-- � ` � � \i I / .� , N,'M3p TiV 530�1JW A1f1941pd9M StlOLJMINOJ 3Hl SY3MN.0 3H1
3bN�OY3Nll3�0 531Of130 -�— 1 \ I I____, .}"'^ � 19 MMM 3Hl Xl 3JM'Id3JT'lLLNll 1]3f0.Yd NNl ll10N�f10tlHl 3fIN11NOJ
S l� _ �^� � h p��p�y��,3�n n m m+�s w w�o� o u r i ti s rn�n i n w w u a�
arwieoo oNusuc3 s�oroa� �
�' 3�^- R � �0 uaf urnerswdsia unerw�3nnrn 1nHs x�aa�o�3�u �s
33tLL DNLLSI%3 531ON30 a�� I �� � � / L
tpLLV�3T3'JNLL51X353fON30 z�i�i I r, _____ r____ _ ' _ mNV31J
- ' � . -.-•� _ = SY3W Q31J3S3v ONV NfM NT'3 tl3lSI QYWrt3M 3B Mr15 53n'�v.5
ONIp]1N3YY1NOM NONI 531OM30 • I V � ' f i.. MO 5![3M35 nN015�NIISIq IN tl0'SNi5�8 NOLLYlH3WQ35 lMMOd1131 '
• •� `y _a � • ,__ _ w 11UNnvd'J.vLL9K3 tl0 M3rv rv0 Onn a0 IM f0�1n150d30 urv �
i � �c:u o -f-�� '__ 'NOLLYAfiIfIH
310d l.lflLLfl SLON34 v. � n�'_ � y � ]p SMIpN fL HIHLLM QTiTILSNI 3B 1M�5 YJd1 3HL tl0 llIJ 31LL
� � � / Y3NL3 1H J3N ml[I30 9N�SY311 1WIN0�tbI50Y3 Ml0�10m'
��y" -� � � ,'� 'o5N 'NplYJllLLOnr10 SNf10H K rvMW YJdn 3Nl tl0.WJ 3N1
310HNVn tl3Y.35 AtlV11NY5 5310N30 � �p „_.�
NIVWN3lVM 5310N30'---- � i'--'- �- --'/ —
/ IH mf➢Otl0 9tlfIS311 3`llJ3tlNOJ)IN 11tlOJtl3d TTMS tlO1JItlINOJ JNl "C
N3M35 nN015 531ON30 I a � , \ roNl
tl3M35 AtlV11NV5 SLON30--��-- I �. � � AB 3019V Ol S➢tlT/ONV L�Y3d 4Hl]0 SM1Y3l 3N1 53:Ql1MANMT'
� tlo1JWINOJ LLL'NOW'1fW15NOJ�NiNNl�39 1H '9Nfi5/3�3kt�3MNOJ
%OB A111LLf1 5310N34 Ill ET I M1 � � �\ — / _ __ _ _ TT�JO MOLLV1N31NJW OM'3tl011 L(1 lT'1NfVtl 5'0 U31f1 MIXIJ3ASni
1NVNMH 3tl11 5310N30 � _- / 'SNOIlJ3dSW lOtl1NOJ NOISOH3 Al%I3x 91 QLlllfl lON lliB�ro0lll]Ni
3pd unun sLowa T,. -.— __-_.—_� -- — -_—_ _- � 911W13v nWJntllSrvOJ tla1 unYid P 3smd 534dN VAfn 3N1 la
3�rc.euw nw�naLaa��a ... —�---�..-- s�x�ndno3u ir+uarw�orn Huw.arrunr�3e rn�+s aoimu+o�3�u -c
dois ean�s�or+3a �� �w�3ki
mHrvrn srq�vTnx�n s�on3a c: � g6 � m uwum�3u ai.v lnwvn s3�uma iwrr3�mm u�e s.nos3Hwn
I 9 wr Aww�1un wauro�'aurivs mn weu+m Hoisoen rn
W3')".1'I __-___..—__l_ ��___�_�.._o____N.__-`���'.-��_o__ N . _.—�_. -_ ..�-_.___-_�--_-—__—. lb�a7-HaQ711I5JNrn5uFil
I
r S46-n II O� O O O p O O �s � � p �
--= _ - - ---- - _ - -------- -- �LANTING NOTES
-- -°- -------- -�..._ __ _��-- -- --- -- -- — __--
,�. . . 4 1 3 3 966 �---- � h66 :'.
� AP RS TH TH ��
-- ---.-- � - -- 4 � co�m.c.ow s�u,.coN..�,�or�cn•a�c c�u•m5,-w-om,,.
-$---- ,- - �— --- �--- — -- — � � eao-zs:iiee�.o w+r.ia•na�s ar,ui urornrnouHo ununcs Pmc«
� /�� ---�� ��� � � 10 mStAWiKK1 Of N1T PUN15 qV WlOSCAPE YA1ERUL
AP
--- ---� - ' —
— - --- — -- �-- . -- ---
- --- , � �r —��.. —
. � � - - . � ���� . \ NK LOCATON Of PUNi Y�1FR��5 SUB2Ci 10 fIEID Aw�41f
' � � 1 . COHqTWS
� � ' ' - _�_ r_"._? � i I NAS BLFNn�COYFIkiED�u Mf�iuuuElxA1E REI.IDiNO ANO Ca151RucTON �
' 2
/ J.
1 ,. '.... _. ___ _ �
�
F�__'__i b �. .ul s�arnNnau uu�BF nPPRovED w�wo�E av 1Hc uuosc.wc�
Ii� _-- - �`� �� � Q ON1F�CiptBwSSIIX1 /.NY Bi0�NO
I � � GB S�. ON1R�Ctdt SMul PNONOE WE KwR LUARNIIFF OG Nl RANT
� ` iHE WARu'lEE BEfAuS W 1HE D�IE M'1HE 4N�SCAPE
� � -._-: 5. WIFAlAtS
�-' BH R� crs on ox«ca�s v.a�nw.c�r.�Hcc�irvc e�nu r�.wn�c.
` I I � ' � *pw au�mn�i uui�• c vux cunaui�
�p � � , � � couuw��e u un n.
q .� � � � �o ee srcauor rxeoc Ww�soai u�i«�im eN°/a+tiu+or
a�noc s�..0•onmc ro.eur s x r mc rauowwc
��0A _. - � ��V -� � . � � az ma ma�osus�ress.xouxas scnxs nc.
/ 7 :___ ',�/ � ��� _ wuPc�eo�s m s s�E.�„�au�oncueic uaz�a�s.a+ A
Wv LL BE�FE iAW BNq(Q!OR DfiD BRu10F5
� � ��wµEst�B��n xC AN1EO�lfilNp.
NfllY�i 10 WOM NAl10�Of�NO LEsS TiAN 5. uAN ui
./`0` � ' � ' , " h�. PUHrs io um r,urn¢,w ST�e�onRO fart n�RsnY Simc(u�s
Q / 3 � �pf�. qV u05t CURRENi HR9q1)FEOUiRdFIliS fOR 9R AN�ME
90 I �� a� r a�v / -_.1 ' � r�y�� g PlAN1S i0 BE MStulID�5 PFR SrANOMO Au4 PUHIIHC PNACPttS.
`q`O '�1B �/ -� ��\ .%"�t\\ PLIJI NSx��IUYEp�1E1�PUNIED U�PM�vAt AT 91E PPCPEPtv
\ .�%4 i �,,.� ..._. \\\ � ___•� ' ouhn.i`mi�iaa�a�s um i eu�r L«ux rua
\ \ c
. �__ \ '_/� _. Rp ��1 _ _______ __._.____ .. �1�._L,_. __ _ -1� -�- �, o cnsC san snnu ac xuo.m oow ro n�c xooi rnunMooS�in n•�c
- -__=OUTLOT A ---� �------ ---- �. � � I r n..wvuuoiniti�o°rs"3ia�n.eso�"�m�c�oo�cauninoor
� ' R
- � I I i
.__-.._. __.—.-_'.. /
'� � -�-'-� 6 BuxuP an BB NA1FAi/.LS;RFuaK voi a1 POLIED PUHfi:
_ _ - .._ �-— I � 11.CPO,i0P
�� �/ s_ .�S \ I I I SPui ANO BREVc nPMi PGi P02
4 - �/ � I I / i2 CRuxECPIAN�BR NEp SSAflY-FFR Si�N�NN NURSERv PF�CII��w0 ia
___ SW 1 O�f � IJ I I/ / � BY�nFRILL SUCOMABAPKED 1R¢5-FASiEN LCP u1D BOTfW. REIJOK
rII PUNT SCHEDULE 3 � � I / ��A [poynon aw
I P5 wN Wud�:B U RW TPE ZAEE LOuuEu1S '�. AS �'' -�' ___ � � � [ ' Af�FF QVE 1RQ5 OVnOr1�L R . uB I,NO SiAK�I xOT FW4B
i w YM:3NdE�L,DW,NtsT BR.wM AT e• 3 �\ �2 !��. ! i I I � ,� I T1�ouFFD FCR Sd.TUEw�uEN15 SHALL BC DfiFAwHm UP A2 SqL
C SR�M(rµ I ' / Di�aNE PR�iORi£C fpinME w�Of ANY SpLIrz�CEN04FNi5.�ORY
� r,.0 i o..x� i z wvi ow�:vuae�rworn;rns.enu�o�ni e� SS --_ ` AS .6, "�� �_ � / c � n� �u
- e .us �.� i�c W�us��ca. n�r u w� x. x GB „ \ / /'�" ie.(x.�Eci ro5dvsaroe.waow�TMoxi�E iwsr�w�aovEsa�i�iau'�i vhnma
1 qiM�.i EN Rw5 q,s t iHtn �NLL CROxN:�1 Ai J' I O '�`\ � �'I / / �L(��j I�'I I #ROOUuIE�SFEGi�i�ROmfR Y NGf, l EHRLS.M'0 uRf2
WS Ca aUw ror+u:] K uwiuuu ��/ V I g "�
— mRwN�wnoµa.�.��!�svaive Ew ruu a+owc�w ea wcr.r� �i II ,1 �1� r / ' /I//�.�j� � I I � � vw�m xn�oy000 e�.�uu�c�H n�o vnuM-�e.�auac oiu�axo(ae
— Aamu w�cc �"w000°�w,�ti� aicu ��s•� �ncc.r r oc i 'i i t I ( �o � i o EanU rar mr.Hc. mc mar�c vuu ec cucm wm sloo�n cvx�cs
\', it nmes uio socw.w�s rae muHc vnmc Po�eit
— .a„��,.,6��"a����uu "�•' ��rt n�e� '� - �I I o I I ,'� , .LL P�a����am�.�o���a;�o��m���LL�.,�,•a
fl s��nom��Ro�a�� a�aw�o c�
`�«���a;.,��«�� .� � �' ,� I �o`� � �o� `� �o �W�E�,wa�µo 9�:,.`�,���;�����,�NR�s
-- �� R.:w �<�� � a �.�...� �,/ �� I i ti� � � ,� ��o �,o ,�
e� :s o.� � .�,� � � /`'` --- i 9.�a��w�Es��w�m�a`o�a.A�,�a��u���
roru srt+EEr ixoHncE(eon�sucs)-s>o• • ac � /� � '`,r� � ��,' I i i zo.�morN�nwc(w�uuuj,sco io e[s�oRo nxcso�Tw
reEcu�rem iRLTS(s)o/IoJ-�1� nNo N�Ror e��GIUss u�x_ nu sao u+us sHAu ec rFcv�Rm wTM+'
��NT�N�i �ETf��LS � �, - /� � � � � � or iorsa�uro�a.urn ra rscuo�oeena r.io wwee onewerf.o�
nrtniw��nus�.n�c rocs�or�i E"oa��SurzsEsi�n�u�si�ikm��
-- � I I I 21,COx1HACTOR I9ULL P ONOE NEGESSARY WAIEAING OF ftlHi NAIER��LS i
s �- �/ � / I I uhPL ME PUNO 5ER WLLE�ST`BUY�EDEaR WR�C�11IX1 Si51EY i5
OPFFATq1AL MN o N A�ER GM Cp11R�CLCH.
/� / � I I I u p[p,Wy.R�IACE�W PRON�E SOD/5�AS REWINm fqt ANY ROA�WAT
/^�` BGx£vIRD�REAS�D�ACENT!O 1HE DiSNRBEO WRmG[WSIPUCPOw.
""'�" �0 �.' / '�// I I I 2�.iq�y�Eq AY�GE t0 PROPFFtt fAou PUHiING OPFRAl10115�T x0 COSt
��� �,�� ,�' '"` ��' ,��/"�� � i i .
�..�a �,� .,o,..n T 'w //�j j/��� � i �
�' ,o, m-�� �` ' � � �
�,.m.�..... - v�,..�, � .,.m„m��. -- �'j//--- --- --- ----J.J �
,��o �.�� � ,eo�as -- -� -----_ -J __,>- -` r���L
,.�,,..� � .�...,o.� �,.�e..o � ��
n.e m�c.roa«e�er�m=��°"" OLIVER HILL PH�J����".
n mr a.K��v�••�,�ma mm PRELIMINARY LANDSCAPE PLAN �3-037
OU��, "' '"�_"" maP,��,,,��p��,,.�.�„k� THEBROADWAYGROUP,LLC-
oert oesar�nw -��� � "�'� ORONO,MN SH'�E7 I��. 7 �F 7 Sf-�ECTS ��10/30/2013
uo ��
RE`A9MS ,..•".`___�•.`.`..�••...�.�•.• o ad-�c. v]It ootc
• � Council '
Exhibit D
Date Application Received: 9/18/13
Date Application Considered as Complete: 11/8/13
120-Day Review Period Expires: 2/8/14
To: Chair Leskinen, Planning Commission Members
Jessica Loftus, City Administrator
From: Mike Gaffron, Assistant City Administrator
Date: November 14, 2013
Subject: 13-3637 Willie Abbott o/b/o The Broadway Group, LLC
- 2350 Watertown Rd & xxx Willow Drive North
- Preliminary Plat & RPUD Rezoning - Public Hearing
Summary of Request: Applicant requests preliminary plat approval for a 7-lot single-family
residential subdivision to be known as Oliver Hill; and rezoning to Residential Planned Unit
Development (RPUD).
Parcels Involved:
Address &PID Owner of Record
2350 Watertown Road The Broadway Group, LLC 408 Parkers Lake Road#112 Wayzata,MN 55391
34-118-23 33 0058
Address Unassigned William&Patricia Martin 2380 Watertown Road Long Lake,MN 55356
34-1 18-23 33 0055
Zoning District: RR-1B One Family Rural Residential District(2 acre/200' width)
CMP Land Use Designation: Low-Medium Density Residential, 2-3 Units per Acre
Existing Lot Area: Dry buildable 160,307 s.f. (3.68 acres)
Wetland 53,938 s.f. (1.24 acres�
Total 214,245 s.£ (4.92 acres)
Wetland Total Dry Contiguous Dry Total Wet+Dry
Proposed Lot Areas (acres) (acres) (acres) (acres)
Block 1 Lot 1 0.56 0.32 0.32 0.88
Lot 2 0.45 0.35 0.35 0.80
Lot 3 0.09 0.44 0.32 0.53
Lot 4 0.08 0.66 0.32 0.74
Lot 5 0.06 0.51 0.42 0.57
Block 2 Lot 1 - 0.40 0.40 0.40
Lot 2 - 0.46 0.46 0.46
Outlot A - 0.13 - 0.13
Proposed Public Road - 0.41 - 0.41
Total Acres 1.24 3.68 - 4.92
Proposed Overall Density: 7/3.68= 1.9 units per acre
Average Dry Acres per Lot: 0.45 acre
Avg. Contiguous Dry Acres per Lot: 0.37 acre
13-3637
November 14,2013
Page 2
List of Exhibits
Exhibit A. Application & Applicant's Narrative w/Photos
Exhibit B. Preliminary Plat Drawings
Sheet 1 of 7 - Cover Sheet
Sheet 2 of 7 - Survey- Existing Conditions
Sheet 3 of 7 - Preliminary Plat
Sheet 4 of 7 - Preliminary Street & Utility Plan/Profile
Sheet 5 of 7 - Preliminary Grading Plan
Sheet 6 of 7 - Preliminary Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP)
Sheet 7 of 7 - Preliminary Landscape Plan
Exhibit C. Conservation Design Report
Exhibit D. Wetland Delineation Report(Excerpts) & MCWD Notice of Decision
Exhibit E. Area Utilities Map
Exhibit F. City Engineer Review and Comments
Exhibit G. Aerial Photos
Exhibit H. 2008-2030 CMP Land Use Plan Map - Excerpt
Exhibit I. 2008-2030 CMP Land Use Plan - Text Excerpt
Exhibit J. Sketch Plan Review Memo & Minutes (February 2013)
Exhibit K. RPUD District Standards
Exhibit L. Orono-Long Lake Glendale Cove Sewer & Water Agreement
Exhibit M. Property Owners List
Exhibit N. Plat Map
Exhibit O. Orono Comprehensive Trail Plan Map Excerpt
PRELIMINARY PLAT REVIEW
Conformity with 2008 - 2030 Orono Community Management Plan
The proposed development is within the area between Willow Drive and the westerly border of
the City of Long Lake, north of Watertown Road and south of Glendale Drive. This area was
initially re-guided in the 2000-2020 Comprehensive Plan (and is currently guided in the 2008-
2030 CMP) to allow for single-family homes at a density more consistent with the Hackberry
neighborhood and the adjacent neighborhood in Long Lake, rather than the original RR-1B 2-
acre zoning.
At a net density of 1.9 units per acre and proposed contiguous dry buildable lot sizes averaging
approximately 1/3 acre, the proposed single-family residential subdivision is in conformity with
the Land Use Plan guiding of this area for Low-Medium Density Residential Use at a density of
up to 2-3 units per acre.
Conformity with Zoning District Standards
It has been the City's practice to rezone property in this area at the time an acceptable
development plan is approved, as was the case with the Glendale Cove neighborhood to the
immediate north. Because applicants' property has never been rezoned to match the CMP-
guided density, the current application includes a request for rezoning. Glendale Cove, to the
13-3637
November 14,2013
Page 3
immediate north of this site, was developed under the RPUD standards and rezoned to RPUD.
Glendale Cove is the only RPUD development to date that includes detached single-family
dwellings. Glendale Cove was initially considered for development as a PRD (which has only
minimal performance standards) but it required a rezoning from RR-1B (2-acre Rural
Residential) to a zone that would allow a for density of up to 3 units per acre to conform with the
CMP guiding of this area east of Willow Drive. Such a zoning district did not exist (and still
doesn't) except for RPUD. Since PRD relies on an underlying zoning district for appropriate
development standards, with no such underlying district, RPUD was the default rezoning for
Glendale Cove, and the current proposal for Oliver Hill should follow suit.
The RPUD District contains detailed development standards with regards to lot size and
setbacks; building design; landscaping, screening and buffering; and trails and recreation; all of
which will be addressed in the following pages.
RPUD Acrea�e Rec�uirement. The property is 4.92 acres in total area of which 3.68 acres is dry
buildable. Rezoning to RPUD is technically limited to properties of at least 5 acres in total area
per 78-626(1) unless the council finds the existence of one of the following:
a. Unusual physical features of the properiy itself or of the surrounding neighborhood such that
development as a RPUD will conserve a physical or topographic feature of importance to the
neighborhood or community.
b. The property is directly adjacent to or across a public street from property which has been
developed previously as a RPUD or planned residential development and will be perceived as and
will function as an extension of that previously approved development.
c. The properiy is located in an area where the proposed development provides a transition between
a commercial or industrial area and an existing residential area or on an intermediate or principal
arterial as defined in the comprehensive plan.
d. The property contains steep slopes or a substantial number of significant trees that could be
preserved through the clustering of buildings or other design techniques not generally allowed by
the existing zoning district.
Planning Commission should consider whether one or more of these 4 conditions exist. Staff
would note that the adjacent Glendale Cove neighborhood was developed as RPUD, and to a
great extent the applicant's proposal mirrors Glendale Cove.
Relationship to Surrounding Development
When this area was re-guided, a density of 2-3 units per acre SFR was chosen, i.e. an average lot
size of 14,000-22,000 s.f., the intent being that it would be similar to the surrounding
development. This proposed single-family development for 7 new homes has an average
contiguous dry buildable lot area of slightly over 16,100 s.f., ranging from 13,700 s.f. to just
under 20,000 s.f. This fits into the general range of lot sizes in the surrounding neighborhood.
The Hackberry neighborhood directly to the west in Orono has existing developed SFR lots
13-3637
November 14,2013
Page 4
generally ranging in size from 17,000 s.f, to 22,000 s.f. The Glendale Drive neighborhood in
Long Lake (directly east of the property) has lots in the range of 14,000 s.f. to 20,000 s.f.
It is worth noting that while homes along Willow Drive in the Hackberry neighborhood each
have separate driveway accesses to Willow, the proposed development will have homes oriented
towards an interior road with no individual driveways to Willow Drive. This reflects the current
`collector road' status of Willow Drive as compared to its less trafficked `local street' character
in 1950 when the Hackberry neighborhood was developed.
General Site Characteristics
The site consists of two separate parcels, the westerly of the two being a vacant field abutting
Willow Drive and gently sloping downhill to the north, the easterly being a wooded lot
containing an existing home (to be removed) which accesses currently off Watertown Road via a
long, flag driveway. A creek cuts diagonally through the property from the northwest to the
south east. The northwesterly potion of the site contains a Manage 2/3 wetland with boundaries
delineated by Jacobson Environmental and confirmed by MCWD. The wetland continues in a
narrower linear manner either side of the creek, leaving an area of non-contiguous dry land
northeast of the creek.
Conservation Design
During the sketch plan review in February 2013 the applicant was advised to complete a
Conservation Design Report and Master Plan to determine what natural values of the site should
be preserved or enhanced. The Conservation Design Report and Master Plan are attached as
Exhibit C. Following is a summary of the significant findings and recommendations:
- There are two basic views into the property from offsite:
a. At Willow Drive looking east where a forested area and several trees are seen
across the creek.
b. From Glendale Cove Lane looking south, views of the forested area and several
trees.
- There are two notable corridor enclosures:
a. Along the west side of Glendale Drive on the east side of the property there is
an edged enclosure which shields the property with a solid wall of grassed
vegetation and trees.
b. Along the south side of Glendale Cove Lane there is an open enclosure with
long views beyond the right-of-way yielding positive views.
- The Natural Resource Inventory indicated the following:
a. On the Level 1 and Level 3 MLCCS Inventory the site was classified as planted
or cultivated vegetation. There were no Natural Areas documented on the site by
the MLCCS Inventory.
b. The tree stand northeast of the creek was inventoried for tree species and herb
species composition. Principal tree species found were box elder, basswood,
apple and green ash. Principal herb species found were ground ivy, buckthorn,
stinging nettle and tall goldenrod.
13-3637
November 14,2013
Page 5
c. No rare plant communities were found.
d. A potential need for proactive management of buckthorn was noted.
- The Conservation Design Master Plan contains the following elements:
- Stormwater Master Plan - pending final site layout
- Invasive Species Removal and Management:
- Common Buckthorn to be removed from West and East tree stands
- Reed Canarygrass allowed to remain in wetland areas
- Diseased trees will be cut down and removed from site; replacements trees to be
replanted, including Big Woods types
- The northeast tree stand will be protected; any lost trees to be replanted with
Big Woods types
- Common buckthorn will be removed from northeast tree stand while preserving
as many basswood, sugar maple and apple trees as possible
- Ecological connections will be maintained via preservation of wetlands and the
northeast tree stand.
The proposed lot layout would not appear to conflict with the Master Plan, as areas to be
protected are not proposed to be developed.
Wetlands on Site and/or Impacted
The wetlands delineated on the site are designated on City maps as Management Class 2, which
under MCWD rules would require a 25' buffer. However, Jacobson has completed a MnRAM
assessment that indicates a lower quality classification, and pending confirmation from MCWD
the wetland would be reclassified as Management Class 3, requiring a 16' buffer per MCWD
rules. The final Management Class needs to be confirmed to meet MCWD requirements prior to
final plat approval, but in either case the plat layout indicates a 35' wetland setback for
structures, meeting the Orono wetland setback requirements.
There are no proposed changes to the wetlands. Per the City Engineer, Drainage and Utility
Easements must be placed over the wetland, buffer and all ditching directing runoff, and must be
shown on the Final Plat and final Street, Utility and Grading Plans.
Existing Draina�e Easement. There is an existing drainage easement within the easterly portion
of the property approximately following the creek bed. This was dedicated in the plat of Hunters
Green but does not exactly match the current flow line of the creek. This easement is proposed
to be vacated, and a corrected easement dedicated to replace it.
Stormwater and Drainage Improvements
The developer is providing stormwater management facilities on the site consisting of a number
of rain garden basins. The City Engineer notes that the drainage calculations meet City
requirements such that proposed runoff rates will be less than existing runoff rates, but any plan
changes will potentially require plan revisions. A final Stormwater Management Plan will have
to be submitted with the Final Construction Plans.
13-3637
1Vovember 14,2013
Page 6
Additionally, the development is subject to the Stormwater and Drainage Trunk Fee, which
should be based on an equivalence to the standard fee for the 1/2-acre zoning district given the
lot sizes proposed. That fee is $5,765 per gross acre, and at 4.92 gross acres (net of Willow
Drive r-o-w) amounts to $28,364.00.
Lot Layout and Lot Standards
The property is situated generally along the east side of Willow Drive just north of Watertown
Road. Access to the property will be off of Willow Drive via a short public road with cul-de-sac.
Minimum pertinent lot standards for the RPUD District are as follows:
Minimum lot area: 15,000 s.f.
Minimum lot width: 90'
Minimum lot depth: 125'
Setbacks: Front: 25'
Side local street: 25'
Side collector street: 50'
Side interior to RPUD: 10'
Side abutting non-RPUD land: 15'
Rear: Lesser of 40' or 20% of lot depth
Wetland boundary: 35'
Note that 78-626(16)allows for flexibility in RPUD standards:
(16) Flexibility. The uniqueness of each RPUD requires that specific�tions and standards for
streets, utilit�es,public.facilities and subdivisions may be subject to modification from the
city ordinances ordinarily governing them. The city council may tJzerefore approve
streets, utilities,public facilities and[and subdivisions which are not in compli�nce with
usual specifications or ordinance requirements, if it finds that strict adherence to suclz
standards or requirements is not required to meet the intent of this section or to protect
t/ae/zealth, safety or welfare of the residents of the RPtID, the surrounding area or the
city as a whole.
A review of characteristics of each proposed lot appears below. Issues or inconsistencies with
RPUD code standards are highlighted in bold type:
Lot 1, Block 1 Proposed Lot 1, Block 1 will have 0.32 acres of dry buildable land (13,997
s.f.) for the building site (slightly under the RPUD standard) with 0.56
acres of wetland behind it. This lot will be a corner lot, with the front lot line
being the frontage along the new road. Proposed lot width is 91' meeting the
RPUD standard. Proposed buildable envelope is shown meeting RPUD
setbacks from front, interior side and wetland; however, as Willow Drive is
defined as a collector road in the CMP, the side street setback to Willow
should be 50' but is shown at 25'.
13-3637
November 13,2013
Page 7
Lot 2, Block 1: Proposed Lot 2, Block 1 is proposed with dry buildable area of 0.35 acre
(15,444 s.£) with frontage along the road and cul-de-sac yielding a defined
lot width of approximately 140'. The functional lot width measured
perpendicular to the side lot lines is 90' feet. The suggested home site is set
back the required 25' from the front and 35' from the wetland, but the shape
of the buildable envelope is very restricting due to the lot configuration. A
15' drainage and utility easement along the east boundary will accommodate
tree preservation and drainage. This extra-wide easement extends from the
cul-de-sac to the wetland, and except for the southerly 10' should potentially
exclude utilities to minimize loss of trees (although grading is proposed that
may have a similar detrimental effect).
There is a rain garden proposed between Lots 1 and 2 that is partially in the
proposed road right-of-way and partially within each lot. Maintenance
covenants for this rain garden will have to be established.
Lot 3, Block 1: Proposed Lot 3, Block 1 has a contiguous dry buildable area of 0.32 acres
(13,726 s.f.) with an added 0.12 acres of dry located north of the creek
(which area is proposed to be protected by a Tree Preservation Easement).
The lot fronts on the cul-de-sac, having a defined width at the front
setback line of approximately 75'. The proposed buildable envelope meets
required setbacks and has some flexibility for house placement and
orientation. The lot has wetland and the creek at its rear, and is encumbered
by a utility easement for the existing Hackberry sewer and a drainage
easement for the creek drainageway.
Lot 4, Block 1: Lot 4, Block 1 is proposed to have contiguous dry buildable area of 0.32
acres (13,768 s.f.) with an added 0.34 dry acres northeast of the creek.
(which area is proposed to be protected by a Tree Preservation Easement).
The lot fronts on the cul-de-sac, having a defined width at the front
setback line of approximately 65'. The proposed buildable envelope meets
required setbacks and has some flexibility for house placement and
orientation. The lot has wetland and the creek at its rear, and is encumbered
by a utility easement for the existing Hackberry sewer and a drainage
easement for the creek drainageway.
Lot S, Block 1 Lot 5, Block 1 is proposed to have a contiguous dry buildable area of 0.42
acres (18,343 s.f.) with an additional 0.06 acres of dry land northeast of the
creek (which area is proposed to be protected by a Tree Preservation
Easement). The lot fronts on the cul-de-sac and a triangular extension of
proposed right-of-way, yielding a defined width at the front setback line of
approximately 65'. The proposed buildable envelope meets required
setbacks and has some flexibility for house placement and orientation. The
lot has wetland and the creek at its rear, and is encumbered by a utility
easement for the existing Hackberry sewer and a drainage easement for the
creek drainageway.
13-3637
November 14,2013
Page S
Lot 1, Block 2 Proposed Lot 1, Block 2 will have 0.40 acres (17,447 s.f.) of dry buildable
land and no wetland. This lot will be a corner lot, with the front lot line
being the frontage along the new road. Proposed lot width is 100', meeting
the RPUD standard. Proposed buildable envelope is shown meeting RPUD
setbacks from front, interior side and rear (rear is at 20% of 174' lot depth =
35') and as drawn would appear to have significant flexibility in house
placement; however, as Willow Drive is defined as a collector road in the
CMP, the side street setback to Willow should be 50' but is shown at 25'.
Lot 2, Block 2 Proposed Lot 2, Block 2 will have 0.46 acre (19,971 s.£) of dry buildable
land and no wetland. Defined lot width is 112' and the required RPUD
setbacks are met. The lot has a significant degree of flexibility for house
placement.
Lot Coverage vs. Floor Area Ratio (FAR)
Section 78-1403 (see below), the 15% Lot Coverage limit, states that the 15% limit applies to all
zoning districts; it doesn't make an exception for RPUD. However, the RPUD District does not
specifically establish a `Lot Coverage by Structures' limit. Instead, the RPUD standards limit
individual lots to 50% hardcover and an individual lot Floor Area Ratio (FAR= gross area of all
floors divided by gross lot area) of 0.5. This means a 14,000 s.£ lot is allowed 7,000 s.f. of floor
space. A 2-story 30' x 70' walkout with a basement, two stories, and an attached 3-stall,l-level
24' x 30' garage would yield 7020 s.f. of floor area, as an example.
The 7 proposed home footprints range from 1750 s.f. to 2200 s.f. yielding lot coverages ranging
from 7% to 12%. These were calculated based on using the gross lot area including wetlands.
The gross lot sizes range from 17,000+ s.f. to 38,000+ s.£, which would allow home sizes based
on just the FAR of 9,000 s.f, or greater. Although applicant does not propose to build large
homes, staff believes it would be appropriate to limit home sizes based on the 15% Lot Covera�e
limit, as this will avoid the creation of extremely large homes if just based on the FAR.
Sec. 78-1403. Lot coverage and massing standards.
In all zoning districts other than the I Industrial district, all lots that have a gross acreage of less than
two acres shall comply with the following massing standards for structures:
(a) Maximarm total footprints allowed.
(1) On lots equal to or greater than 10,000 square feet in area, the total combined footprints of all
principal and accessory structures shall not exceed 15 percent of the gross lot area.
(2) On lots of less than 10,000 square feet in area, the total combined footprints of all principal
and accessory structures shall not exceed 1,500 square feet.
(b) Calculation of massing. The following shall be included in the calculation of the total combined
footprints by structures:
(1) All roofed structures more than six feet above grade level.
(2) Tennis courts, patios, decks, and all similar open structures when partially or fully enclosed
by fences, railings or walls which extend more than six feet above grade level (if any portion
of such structures extends more than six feet above grade level, the entire structure shall
co�mt toward lot coverage).
13-3637
November 14,2013
Page 9
Hardcover
By virtue of the RPUD zoning, per 78-1701(4)(a) the property is assigned to Hardcover
Protection Tier 4, which allows up to 50% hardcover of the gross lot area. None of the proposed
lots will be anywhere near that limit.
RPUD Landscaping Requirements
The proposed landscaping plan has not been thoroughly evaluated by staff as to its compliance
with the very detailed RPUD landscaping requirements. This evaluation will proceed upon
confirmation of a final site layout.
10% Recreation Area Requirement
The RPUD standards in Section 78-626(11) require that "each RPUD development shall provide
a minimum of ten percent of the gross project area in private recreational uses for project
residents. Such area shall be for active or passive recreational uses suited to the needs of the
residents of the project, including swimming pools, trails, nature areas,picnic areas, tot lots and
saunas. Private recreational areas requirements are in addition to the standard park dedication
requirements." Therefore, approximately 0.5 acre of the development site must be devoted to
recreation area. This might be accomplished by establishing access easements to a walking trail
to the proposed tree preservation area at the rear of Lots 3-4-5, Block 2. Creation of such an
amenity begs the question as to whether the wetland and tree preservation areas should be
incorporated into a separate Outlot rather than as parts of individual lots...
Utility Assessments or Connection Fees Required
The developer will pay all costs of utility construction and installation. It is expected that Long
Lake will charge unit connection fees for new connections to their system per the Sewer and
Water Agreement. In similar subdivisions involving developer-installed utilities, Orono has
generally not collected a separate sewer or water connection charge.
Road Layout and Standards
The applicant is proposing a 50 foot wide corridor to create a new up blic road with a 100 foot
cul-de-sac which conforms to the requirements within the Subdivision Ordinance for a local
public road. This is proposed as a public road rather than private primarily because of the
density, which was the basis for Glendale Cove being public. The proposed paved width of the
public road is shown as 25 feet where the Code requires 28 feet for 3 to 10 homes. The cul-
de-sac is proposed to have a 90 foot paved diameter, meeting the City standard of an 80' paved
diameter.
Given that 7 homes will be served from the proposed roadway, and given the shortness of the
proposed roadway, parking for guests will be at a premium, and parking on Willow Drive should
be avoided; so the road and cul-de-sac design should not be reduced in size/width from the
current code standards. The cul-de-sac has been extended further into the site than the original
proposal reviewed at the sketch plan stage. This will better facilitate parking and allow additional
options for snow storage.
13-3637
November 14,2013
Page 10
At the request of staff applicant has provided a platted corridor to the property to the immediate
southeast for potential future road connection to serve that property. This would allow for a
future through road from Willow to Watertown. This would provide more options for future
development of the property to the southeast, and ultimately make for more efficient road
maintenance.
The preliminary plat has not yet been forwarded to the Long Lake Fire Chief/Fire Marshal for
review, pending confirmation of a final site layout. The Fire Marshal recently reviewed a
preliminary plat for a different property and provided the following comment: According to
Appendix D of the 2007 Minnesota State Fire Code, regarding Fire Apparatus Access Roads, a
minimum of a 26-foot wide paved road and a 96-foot diameter cul-de-sac is required, or the
homes served must be equipped with fire suppression sprinklers. As these review comments
were based on an entirely different project they are included in this report purely for academic
purposes. The project may require modifications to meet the Fire Marshal's approval.
The developer will pay all costs of road construction and installation. The City Engineer has
provided a number of comments regarding the proposed road and related utility
improvements which the applicant is advised to review and address.
Park/Trail Easement/Fees or Dedication Needed
The 2008-2030 CMP Comprehensive Trail System Map (Exhibit O) indicates that a future trail is
planned to extend down Willow Drive from Highway 12 to Hackberry Park. The plan terminates
this trail at Hackberry Park and ends just short of the subject property. However, it picks up
again further south at the Luce Line with a future connecting segment to Brown Road and the
Dakota Trail. A 10' trail easement was dedicated along the west boundary of Glendale Cove, to
allow for future extension of the City's public trail system along Willow Drive. The developer
was not required to construct this trail extension. Staff recommends that a 10' trail easement be
required along the west side of Oliver Hill for a possible future trail.
The Park Fee is determined as 8% of the fair market value of the land being subdivided, with a
minimum of$3250 per dwelling unit or a maximum of$5,550 per residential dwelling unit. The
Hennepin County Assessor will be asked to review the land value once a final preliminary plat
layout has been settled on. As there will be six new dwelling sites as currently proposed (the
existing house at 2350 Watertown yields a 1-lot park fee credit), the Park Fee will be between
$19,500 and $33,300.
Utility Locations and Availability
The subject property is located within the Metropolitan Urban Service Area (MUSA); sewer
service is available to these properties via the Hackberry system which discharges to the Long
Lake system. Water service is potentially available from the Long Lake system, subject to Long
Lake approval; however, at this time applicant is proposing the use of private wells to serve each
home.. Sewer and Water Fees will be due to Long Lake, subject to the provisions of the
Glendale Cove Sewer and Water Agreement of January 2012, which defines the applicant's
properties as Category 3 Properties (see Exhibit L).
13-3637
November 14,2013
Page 11
The developer will be responsible for installation of sewer (and water?) laterals to serve the
development. Per past City practice there will not be a connection charge to Orono for sewer or
water, but pertinent Long Lake connection charges will apply.
Absent confirmation that there is an easement for the existing municipal sewer in proposed
Lots 1 and 2, an easement for said sewer line will become a plat requirement.
Observations and Issues for Consideration or Discussion
1. Planning Commission should consider whether RPUD is the appropriate rezoning option
for this development. Staff believes RPUD is the only viable available option for
development of this parcel in the manner for which it is guided in the CMP.
2. Based on the overall grading plan, development of this site will result in removal of a
majority of the existing tree backdrop that separates the easterly and westerly portions of
the property. The areas remaining undisturbed will mostly be limited to wetlands and the
treed areas along and past the creek on Lots 3-4-5. A beefed-up landscaping plan may help
to soften the visual impacts that will be created.
3. The proposed road corridor is directly across from existing homes which front on Willow,
and the headlights from cars leaving the subdivision could become an annoyance. There
may not be a solution to this potential problem.
4. Applicants should identify their intent for the remnant corridor extending to Watertown
Road from the easterly parcel.
5. Via the RPUD process, certain defined development standards that are not strictly met can
be allowable through granting `flexibility' rather than via a strict variance proceeding. This
staff report identifies a number of areas where the RPUD requirements are not being
adhered to. Planning Commission should discuss each of these items and determine
whether they should be allowed.
a. Required 50' setback from Willow Drive for Lot 1 Block 1 and Lot 1 Block 2. A
setback of 25' is proposed. Requiring 50' will potentially eliminate one lot overall,
and a re-design of the entire lot layout; allowing 25' will place two homes very near
the road and perhaps only 15' from a future trail... A majority of the homes in the
Hackberry neighborhood across the street along Willow Drive are set back 50', and
only one is less than 35' from the street lot line.
b. The substandard lot widths for Lots 3-4-5 which abut the cul-de-sac should be
considered as to whether they have any negative impacts.
c. Three of the seven lots have contiguous dry buildable areas less than the minimum
15,000 s.f. RPUD standard; four exceed the standard. How does this affect the
development?
13-3637
November 14,2013
Page 12
6. Noting that the developer is planning to build modestly priced and sized homes, does
Planning Commission have any concerns about imposing the 15% lot coverage standard on
this development? The RPUD standard 50% FAR would likely allow for much larger
homes to be constructed if no 15% limit is in place.
7. The developer should define how he plans to meet the 10% recreation area requirement.
8. Similar to the discussion with the recent preliminary plat on Northern Avenue, Planning
Commission should consider whether there is value in placing the wetland and tree
preservation areas within an Outlot rather than within individual properties. Especially if
the tree preservation area becomes the 10% recreation area with a trail system, there need
to be provisions for neighborhood access to it...
9. Developer should advise as to whether he still intends to pursue municipal water from
Long Lake, and advise staff and Planning Commission as to any recent discussions he has
had with Long Lake in regards to this plat proposal.
Staff Recommendation
Discussion of the above issues and any conclusions reached by the Planning Commission should
provide applicant and staff with direction as to whether or how the proposed plat should be
revised. Any remaining topics left unaddressed to date should be brought up for discussion.
Options for action include:
- Table for further revisions and consideration (provide applicant direction).
- Recommend approval or conditional approval for the preliminary plat and rezoning to RPUD.
- Recommend denial, stating reasons.
- Other
Any recommendation for approval should address the issues noted above and be subject the
current and forthcoming comments of the City Engineer and Fire Marshal.
� COUNCIL ME�TING
REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION ��� 2 7 Z014
DATE: January�-7;ZI��ONO
ITEM NO: �;�
Department Approval: Administrator Reviewed: Agenda Section:
Name Jesse Struve Public Works Director/
Title Public Works Director/City Engineer �_ City Engineer's Report
Item Description: North Water Tower Repainting Project
List of Exhibits
A- Proposal for Professional Services from Short Elliot Hendrickson (SEH).
B- Additional local water towers (Hopkins and Cottage Grove)which will be participating in
the service contract program with SEH in 2014.
G Memo from Bolton and Menk
D- Cost Comparison between traditional design / bid / build and maintenance contract
approach—by the City of Cottage Grove.
The existing water tower is a hydropillar-style tank with a flute center column and was originally
erected in 1992. Typical maintenance on a water tower includes inspecting the tank every 1-5 yrs,
cleaning the tank every 5-10 yrs, and repainting every 20 yrs. The tank was inspected in December
2012 (see Exhibit A) by Short Elliot Hendrickson (SEH) and was considered in fair condition. SEH
recommended an overcoat application, rather than a more expensive blasting and repainting.
Based on the existing condition of the water tower and due to budgetary constraints, it was decided to
delay the painting of the water tower from 2012 to 2014. This is two years longer than what is
typically recommended. If this project is delayed, there is a possibility of failure of the existing
coating system. This could lead to metal loss which could cause for far more expensive repairs in the
future, or worse case the loss of the original capital investment.
There are two ways in which the City can proceed with the repainting of the water tower:
1. Traditional Design/Bid/Build Method.
2. Design/Build Method.
Traditionally, the City has always used the traditional design-bid-build method for all projects. This
method involves creating the plans and specifications, posting the project for bidding, and awarding
the contract to the lowest bidder. This process typically has a 1 year warranty period but some cities
have bid out 2 yr and 5 yrs warranties for additional cost. Any repair after the warranty expires is the
City's responsibility.
The design-build approach is a relatively new approach for water towers. In May 2002, MN State
Statue 2000, section 471.345 was amended to allow for municipalities to enter into multiyear
professional service contract for engineering, repair, and maintenance of a water storage tank (see
Exhibit A, page 5). The benefits of this approach are the contractor works with an engineering firm
on the inspection and review of tanks. This allows them to have intimate knowledge of the tank and
allows them to include an aggressive price on the project.
Benefits to the owner are the engineering firm and contractor can put longer warranties on their work
because much of the unknowns are removed from the equation. This also allows the contractor to
secure and schedule work outside of the normal bidding times for the following year. Bid results
have shown the prices received using this method have been comparable (and sometimes less) than
going through the bidding process. Additionally, this process will provide the owner a 10 year
warranty on the work rather than the typical l year warranty. With this method, if there is a
premature failure of the paint, the contractor / engineering firm are responsible for any repairs and
not the owner.
I did have Bolton and Menk review the SEH proposal and offer their opinion on the design-build
method (see Exhibit C). The main concerns from Bolton and Menk include:
• Minimum inspection and oversight by the engineering firm.
• No Engineer to represent the owner with technical issues.
• None or less competitive bidding, resulting in higher compared cost.
The memo from Bolton and Menk does raise concerns about not having an engineer present on the
site full-time, however SEH maintains they will have an inspector on site for all critical aspects of the
rehabilitation process. The inspector will be there full time during the repair and painting phases, but
may be reduced to '/z time when the contractor is mobilizing onto the site and/or transitioning
equipment during the project duration. An inspector will be on site periodically to perform required
tests and inspections and an engineer will also be available at all times if the contractor has questions
regarding the rehabilitation.
SEH is a very reputable company which has been around for over 80 years and has offices in 8 states
and SEH has an exclusive partnership with Classic Protective Coatings. Through SEH DesignBuild
Classic Protective Coatings will be the only contractor used for the work on our North Water Tower
Painting Project. Classic Protective Coatings is one, if not the top water tower painting companies in
the country.
There is a possibility the project could be cheaper utilizing the traditional design-bid-build method
with a 1 year warranty, but the city is not guaranteed the low bidder will be a high quality contractor.
Furthermore, because the costs outlined in the Bolton and Menk memo are engineer's estimates,
there is a potential the cost will actually be higher by bidding out the project.
SEH provided a comparison from the City of Cottage Grove which shows there may be significant
savings by utilizing the design build method (see Exhibit D). In Cottage Grove's comparison, they
were able to look at bids from Arden Hills, St. Paul Park, and Vadnais Heights and compared those
bids to the proposal from the design-build team of SEH / Classic. Cottage Grove found that by using
the design-build method they could realize savings of$80,000-$200,000.
While I tried to do a similar comparison the size of our tank is unique (400,000 gal) and I was not
able to get comparable bids tabs for another similar tower. The more typical size for this type of
tower is 1,000,000 gal rather than 400,000 gal. Therefore, while the Cottage Grove analysis is for a
different size tower, I feel it still provides a reasonable comparison. While our savings may not be as
high because of the size difference, I feel there still may be reasonable savings or it would be cost
neutral by utilizing the design bid method over the design-bid-build method with the benefit of a
longer warranty.
There is one additional item that can be added to this project. This proposal is for the repainting of
the tower the same as it is. If the Council would prefer to add the City logo on the water tower, it
would cost an additional $4,800 per logo. Typically there would be two logos placed on the tower
(one on each side) so the total additional cost to add the logo on the water tower would be $9,600.
It is my recommendation to include the logo on the water tower and to enter into a 10 year design-
build maintenance contract with SEH. The total dollar amount for the 10 year maintenance contract
is $548,800 as outlined on page 19 of Exhibit A, plus the additional $9,600 to add the logo in two
locations. Therefore the total cost of the 10 year maintenance contract is $558,400.
COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED:
Consider a motion to enter into a 10 year Design-Build Maintenance Contract with Short Elliot
Hendrickson in the amount of$558,400.
�x r��.B�r" D
� WEST DR�lW ELEVATED TANK
��EHDesign�Build,Inc. I .0 Ni1LLION GAL�ON HYDROPILLAR
6tEl-lA►BILITATION AND lMA1NT�fI�1�aNCE
���'��
...
� *�:.'�,;" --�,,<:
�C`.j�- . �
� � ` .�� �
�., � �._ .,� �'�ri , �"�'"�, � i�
� �� q� ,� � d
� �_�� ���� � `�
;�:�rR��� i f�4�,�, � , t, i � .�' .���_ •
�vi* y, * " � � t �.. d .�.� _� � S 1 `.�..
R �'�1T.S�� P�:' �. �� t� �` 9 : A•� . V�, I� . . �+:
i ',��� t .y � �;`�'k'+s ='t r'� {�,� <.. ��q�,e r I�. t� . �>.
.:r��� � . .a:;- _ ...y,
��i 1 ii "+"��'' � �,Y;,.. �- �;aw'.; '+:�,, :s
� � � � � �r ��~ � � �`�'�.�'�` �
i'� :�:,� _
�,� �
�y�x � �.
, . , ��� � �� l��x���r�,� ��. }��.
r� '� , � ' � , ��. ` ��^ �
��n�p'.E..{�� $��C f: .. ,� � .. �� �����. ��� ,,� : Y� ,
� � +�` '�� e.� , :y y ,y �a .��'� .� � _ .
k �'�' �``:� � � r��"., ,�
t .
�
a < . y��,_�� ,
' ..�ta`.� R��h.'�nl ' -
+ ...n. ..,.a......i4._�.{ ,. .. . . _. ... . .
Client Features
City of Cottage Grove • Complete interior and exterior coating removal and replacement
• Structural repairs and tank accessory upgrades
Project Location • Contracted by design build delivery method
Cottage Grove, Minn. • Selected as a better value over the traditional bidding method
• Ten-year maintenance agreement
Size
I.0 million gallons SEH Design�Build Services
• Engineering evaluation
Completed • Construction management
May 2014 • Rehabilitation
• Schedule maintenance
Total Ten-Year Eost • Annual condition survey
$793,500
Building a Better World for All of Us�' � sehinc.com ��ESE-0!4-i"Lls
1 INI�ESDALE STAINDPlPE
/�EHDesign�Build,Inc. 3.0 NBILLIOM! GALLON RESERVOIR
J REf-IA�ILITATIOIV �II�lD MAINTEN�►NCE
-� �-
� '' �� ,� ��a
, � ,,
. �.
�1 , " ,� ��;.
�
.'} �g y �� �
. `F xR ;�{"#„4�� ¢ . .� �., :, t .
4�`�" # j �p wF,
��e 4 w `'..
. _ � � � y���€tb� � ��_.. ���y�4'�;�A' .
, �..r^� .. N � � .,�.:To-'�� ��" ,�..
� i, ' Y,•-.,��y,.*
�4 ,-. a �' n �' b '�s! '�'u �
. . �h.,,�. �,> � � ,�+�. ��"� ,t,�.,�t�.'fii. , . ?^:._
`� � s ` ¢ ���� / +►��'t. .J
_ . �, Y m k., . - . ,�'� _
�� p �'�'�''" � !
' =� ' d» � � �d ,� - . - .
�� . : }t. . ..
r � ��� �� *a�' `�
�; r� �,, " _
n.� �..�� , � C� ( �� � ` ' µi.
at s � � ft.� � n ..a .�,� e 'N � E'. y �,' '
;;��k" �S - "�` #� '.��5���r 4 � � �....�, � . +,N�� ,, ti',
,4 �• ��' �'��'�»�, � '��t- �, �i �X � ���' ��-
Y
_ �::
..,y lE ��'� x��...La�aR.
g �.. � ' �� :�> >� �_. .w.,, ":x _ � � .
Ciient Features
City of Cottage Grove • Complete interior and exterior coating removal and replacement
• Structural repairs and tank accessory upgrades
Location • Contracted by design build delivery method
Cottage Grove, Minn. • Selected as a better value over the traditional bidding method
• Ten-year maintenance agreement
Size
3.0 million gallons SEH Design�Build Services
• Engineering evaluation
�omp�eted ' Construction management
May 2015 • Rehabilitation
• Schedule maintenance
TotalTen-Year Cost • Annual condition survey
$936,000
Building a Better World for All of Us° � sehinc.com L�ESI-�20-1213
1 MOLII�E TORO-TANK ANiD STiQ►NDPIPE
`�EHDesign�Build,Inc. 2•0 1"�'LL��1� �.aAL.L�� R���R�/OII�
� ItEF-I�a�ILBTATION A1�D MAl1�T'ENA�lCE
,,� .,,.r
. .. ,_ _ �
` ti - ., _
, �,v
�
i
;
ti
}i �� .
, �
' �� ',��
4
�r; � II�
i.a ., �.���
,._
� ' x� � �
y n � � j�.-
:�.. � � A
+ . � :�.
, a ,. , �
,�� � �� ,�
Client Features
City of Hopkins • Interior coating removal and replacement
• Exterior maintenance repairs and overcoat
�ocation • Structural repairs and tank accessory upgrades
Hopkins, Minn. • Contracted by design build delivery method
• Direct selection by qualification
Size • 14-year maintenance agreement
2.0 million gallons
SEH Design�Build Services
CompVeted • Engineering evaluation
September 2013 ' Construction management
• Rehabilitation
Totai 14-Yeaa- Cost • Scheduled maintenance
$994,200 • Annual condition survey
Building a Better Worid for All of Us� � sehinc.com :�=:5'-Q�-+-I::I�;
JBLAKE LEGG�D TANK
`�EHDesign�Build,Inc. 500,000 GALLON RESERVOIR
J REHABILIT/�TIOM[ AND MAIIVTENANCE
��,. � ._.� � .C•....- _ .`�.^i^"�rA[ rg�',.�'„f. -� ' .A.'
tG. .. `Y , '�1� '
t � ,l-A"..r,e.�..� ��t� �V tr� �.^ ��..
� _�� i.� ' ��,:.
:Z.: •� ( �
� & ���
d` � � �a`i��, �
, ��' �_y6�z '\
+` /' � 6�:., ���,,'`� FM1 S � . . . _
/ f� � �j, � � :' �� :;1^
Y � !�.
. � w ��, ,�„ �; �� r�� �� � ,M
s:% r � � * .�' � "�_�::.
� ���� � rv } � � ; ��..
„t � , ��„ �� � ,
� , i
� i. �' ` �� � � (
r� � r� � _ .•�-��
� $ �t��.�„� L � ��� , �._ �� � �� n .�'� �
d.`d ��1.'� �/ t '� I �
F:" � .";,�.3 f . ��., 1' �ti ,. f ' ��' �.
i
Client Features
City of Hopkins • Interior coating removal and replacement
• Exterior maintenance repairs and overcoat
Location • Structural repairs and tank accessory upgrades
Hopkins, Minn. • Contracted by design build delivery method
• Direct selection by qualification
Size • 14-year maintenance agreement
500,000 gallons
SEH Design�Build Services
Completed • Engineering evaluation
Sept 2013 • Construction management
• Rehabilitation
Total 14-Year Cost • Scheduled maintenance
$535,200 • Annual condition survey
Building a Better World for All of Us� � sehinc.com D�51-02;-!213
G�X�-��ZT- C.�-
• = BO LTON 8� M � N K , I N C�
. Consuiting Engineers & Surveyors
" 2035 County Road D East• Suite B• Maplewood, MN 55109-5314
Phone(651)704-9970• Fax(651)704-9971
www.bolton-menk.com
MEMORANDUM
Date: January 6, 2014
To: Jesse Struve, PE - Orono Public Works Director
From: Douglas Klamerus, PE
CC: Dave Martini, PE; Seth Peterson, PE
Project: North Water Tower Rehabilitation
Re: Alternative Rehabilitation Options
Background
In 2014,the City of Orono is planning for the rehabilitation of the North Water Tower. The existing
tower is a 0.4 MG fluted column tank constructed by Pittsburg-Des Moines in 1992. The existing
coatings are original to the tank. Based on an evaluation conducted by SEH in December 2012,the
following items should be included in the rehabilitation scheduled for 2014:
• Interior Wet Coatings: Complete removal and replacement of the interior wet coating system.
Caulk the roof beams and seams as required.
• Interior Dry Coatings: Spot repair areas of corrosion with either abrasive blasting or power tool
cleaning. Completely remove the coatings on the access tube and bottom of the bowl and replace
with a coating system similar to the interior wet. As shown by the amount of corrosion present in
these two areas, these specific areas are fairly corrosive due to high levels of condensation and
can benefit from a higher level of protection.
• Exterior Coating: Spot repair any areas of corrosion or coatings failures with power tool cleaning
to SSPGSP3 condition. After spot repairs and surface preparation, apply an overcoat system
comprised of one epoxy and one polyurethane coating system.
• New overflow discharge screen
• New frost free vent
• New double LED obstruction light
• Replace logo
There are two common approaches to tower rehabilitation which are outlined below:
Design-Build
With a design-build approach, the owner directly selects a contractor to complete an agreed upon scope of
work for a predetermined fee. Selection is primarily made based on quality of service as the traditional
low bid process is avoided.
The typical owner-engineer-contractor process is also avoided since the engineer in the design-build
method is no longer an independent party, but rather teamed with the contractor. Typically, there is less
inspection oversight in this arrangement since the contractor's workforce performs their own quality
control testing.
G'\Orono\010614 struvememo.dota
DESIGNING FOR A BETTER TOMORROW
Bolton&Menk is an equal opportunity employer
You created this PDF from an application that is not licensed to print to novaPDF printer(http://www.novapdf.com)
. I• Mr. Jesse Struve, PE
. � January 6, 2014
Page 2
The work is completed per the contractor's maintenance agreement, and many times does not specifically
identify details of the work to be performed(structural details, specific paint products, coating thickness,
etc.). Once the wark is completed per the agreement, payments are made annually as scheduled until the
contract term expires.
Work is scheduled by the contractor and coordinated through the owner, but the owner's specific schedule
may not be followed if it is not defined in the term of the agreement.
The extended maintenance agreement provides a quality of work guarantee and can be issued in any
number of scheduled terms. Five(5) and 10 (ten)year maintenance agreements are fairly common.
Normally spot coating repairs, which may or may not be required, are completed every five years.
Design-Bid-Build (DBB)
This is the traditional program of awarding construction/reconstruction contracts. In DBB, an engineer
assembles bidding documents that are publicly advertised and awarded to the lowest qualified bid.
Typically, minimum qualifications are required based on the size of the project and the number of similar
projects done in the past.
While less common, Quality Based Selection(QBS) can also be used to award the contract to a contractor
based on predetermined formula for award which can include history, safety record, quality of work, etc.
An example of using QBS is the City of Eagan where a previous tank rehabilitation contract was awarded
by QBS.
Once the award is made to a contractor, a predetermined schedule is followed to complete the work. The
engineer provides construction observation and testing(such as environmental controls, surface
preparation, dry film thickness and holiday testing)to ensure that the specifications for the work are met.
Once the project is completed, the contractor is paid per the contract. Tank repairs are made prior to the
expiration of a warranty term, commonly one or two years. However, extended warranties(5 years, 10
years, etc.) can be included in bidding documents.
Benefits-Drawbacks of Desi�n Build
Benefits
• Direct selection of contractor
• Hands off approach by owner. Contractor coordinates any work required.
• Tower meets minimum industry standards for term of contract.
• Known schedule of payments
Drawbacks
• None or less competitive bidding resulting in higher compared cost(Example: SEH
D�B - $466,700 for 5 Year Term; $548,800 for 10 Year Term)
• Additional work that may not be needed is included in contract
• Minimum inspection oversight
• No engineer to represent owner with technical issues
G:\Orono\010614 struvememo.dotx
You created this PDF from an application that is not licensed to print to novaPDF printer(http://www.novapdf.com)
. - Mr. Jesse Struve, PE
• � January 6, 2014
� Page 3
• Minimum input on design details and or products used by contractor. (Example:
Two coat epoxy is minimum system allowed by AWWA. For a small increase, a
three coat system can be applied to provide additional protection.)
• Schedule per contractor
• System designed to meet contract life
Benefits-Drawbacks of DesiEn-Bid-Build
Benefits
• Lower compared cost(Example: $407,900 - 5 year cost including 2 year floatdown
inspection, one power wash and cleanout, one visit for spot repairs—likely not
required; $456,400- 10 year cost including two floatdown inspections, two power
wash and cleanout, two visits for spot repairs—likely not required)
• Project schedule predetermined
• Only necessary work is completed
• Specific design details and construction materials are specified so owner knows
exactly what will be provided
• Engineer provides inspection on the work as requested by the owner(Full Time vs.
Part Time inspection)
Drawbacks
• Contractor unknown until after bids are opened
• Owner may be required to contract for future wark(inspections, power washing,
repairs, etc.)
Cost Comparison
Warranty Period SEH�DB Delivery Traditional DBB BMI Projected Savings
Method Delivery Method
5 Year $466,700 $407,900 $58,800
10 Year $548.800 $456,400 �92,400
By using the traditional DBB method, the City can include a higher level of protection with a three coat
epoxy system on the interior wet portion of the tank for cost savings of$58,800 for a 5 year warranty and
$92,400 for a 10 year warranty.
Conclusions and Recommendations
� Based on the two delivery methods, we recommend the City complete the project using the traditional
DBB method for the following reasons:
1. Value. By publicly bidding the work, competitive bidding is increased and the owner is afforded
the market rate for the work. The same contractor that is proposing to do the work by the DB
method can be awarded the work for a lower price because of more bidding competition.
2. Only complete work necessary. Inspections or repairs of the coating system are not needed per
the frequency included in the SEH�DB proposal. Often, inspections are held at the two year
warranty period and then every five years thereafter. Spot repairs can be completed at the five
G:\Orono\010614 struvememo.dotx
You created this PDF from an application that is not licensed to print to novaPDF printer(http://www.novapdf.com)
• - Mr. Jesse Struve, PE
• January 6, 2014
�� � • Page 4
and ten year intervals, but are not typically performed this often, nor required unless severe
localized corrosion is determined.
3. Selection of coating system and design details. A three coat epoxy system is commonly
provided in the design-bid-build industry. In addition, a zinc primer is often used for interiar and
exterior coating systems. On design-bid-build projects, SEH often has recommended a zinc
primer in the interior wet with a two coat epoxy system, but provides a lesser two coat epoxy for
their SEH�DB proposals. Added mil thickness provides additional protection of the steel
substrate for a relatively low cost. This higher level of protection is included in our construction
cost estimate.
4. Known schedule. Owner has control of the schedule.
5. Engineer works for the Owner, not the Contractor.
G:\Orono\010614 struvememo.dotx
You created this PDF from an application that is not licensed to print to novaPDF printer(http://www.novapdf.com)
� . WaterTawerComparisons �
TOWER PROJECTS W/BIDS RECEEVED(DESIGN/BID/BUII,D) PROPOSID TOWER PROlECtS IDESIGN/BID/SUILDj PROPQSED TOWER pR0)ECiS(SEH WTMS)
❑ St Paul Paric 6/20/13 Vadnais Heights 2/1/i2 qrden H((u¢�I6�]3 Cotta e Grove Cotta Grove Cotta e Grove CotCa e Grove
750,000 Galfon Fluted
e ��umn 10 MG Fluted Column 10 MG Fluted Column 1.0 MG Fluted Column 3.0 MG Standpipe 9..0 MG Fluted Column 3.0 MG Standpipe
Everything Induded in the Everything included in the
warra�LY 2 year warranty 2 yearwarrarty 2 year warranty 2 year warrarrty 2 yearwarranty �and 5 yearwarranty t0 and 5 year warranty
S��o p���� bids,palnting,inspecdons, bids,painting,inspections,
specs,plans,engineering specs,plans,engineering
$1546,500 $834500 � ,.�',�,�:::?;�605;000;:•::a?e�,''��i�'r^^��:�7�O;�ODO�z"`{:.
51,�28,500 $1.020 814 , �°
$807,152 $897,000
Bj� $1,138500 $74fi,90o $882,400 10 Year$793,500 10 year$916,000
$1,060,000 5 year$695,500 5 year$809,900
��,�0 $783,250
5898.000 ' $712.200 ,
$876,652
Nat Induded
in Bid-
inspeckions, $100,00p,not induding $80,000,not including $50,000,not induding Need to add bid, Need to add bid,
spea and Gty fees , ��,�� C�,fe� • , inspections,specs,& Inspections,specs,& Included in bid price above I�cluded in bid p�ice above
engineertng engineering costs engineering costs
cost .
TOt2l 76652 792.200 'C ?;';:�L.��^�.{ �.`�n_•.,� �.w�.»r-�r
. ��.3r�+0 �py�D�U+"�F �.. i,. .y�_ . .
.�t..>4:�...:'s;Nra�.�.,.,,�.7,xp 09P�+•r.,:::�:'^. Same as above Same as above
Es0m3ted�o('ist�"r�'dtToi��'S2�"°'�.,.r'"w:: s S
d��°o� $�/Q�' ,
��
. s
. , t--�
. � �
- ��
1,000,000 Gallon Hydropillar Tank ,
20-Year 7otal Cost of Ownership Comparison
Model Azsumptions:
BlastandRe-coatcost: 5783,250 SEHD�BRehabilitationcost: $605,000
ConstructionDocuments/vro�:asx�:l: 5.076 $39,163 FutureOvercoatcost�o,�g;�w.�nemumno,��o:ri�::eiorn�ya�e�o�ro��m.op: 5405,000
Inspections: 10.0% $78,325 Annual Inspection msi: $7,500
Bidding Administration: 1.0% $7.833 Washdown and Touch-up cost: 566,000
5-yearinspection cost: 510,000 Maintenance Contractinterest rate: 6.25%
Maintenance Contractterm(years�: 10
TRADITIONAL APPROACH(D-B-B) MAINTENANCE CONTRACT APPROACH(D-B)
� CONDITION CONDITION �
REHABILITATION ¢ CONDRION CONDITION Q REHABILITATION
WORK DESCRIPTION ¢ COATING INDEX COATING INDEX s WORK DESCRIPTION
COST 3 RATING (CC1� (CC1) RATING 3 COST
Blast and Re-coat $7S3_ ;���s� �9od � 7 '�' QO � "6bOd �� Yb_5 � s:and Re-coat 5605,000
(Specsandlnspect.) 57174. �.Nk ���pd f, ��.�-t y9 ,�r��. 5.9�`. G� V45 �� �uallnspection 57,500
_,_e__ —�-�—
(6iddingAdmin.) 57.s_ -.-ood $5 " �����4)8 � t i'Lad� 'f€.. -wallnspection $7,500 �
.•G c� � �j.7 ���- a °�—+�-�fes� nnuallnspection $7,500 m
�. —�� s
�titfod y;_. ' bt ,� F ` `�}, �?.e �� ,�=ish/Touch-up/Repair 568,000 �
5-year Inspectlon Slo o� �Goad �' ' k_,�,.�_. ��� !�� ��'�'°Q ; ��or __�=.CS nual Inspectlon $7,500 6
Satisfactory ' 87 i ' tJ% , pt) �.Yes� nuallnspection $7,500 �
� Satisfactory 83 � R ,�'��—95��: �:��C°tl__i`�as �-nual Inspection $7,500 "
Satisfactory 75 . °� {� �-�s! ��as nuallnspection 57,500
Falr � 67 lC �e,},` 'GCcc , k$s :Ash/Touch-up/Repair $68,000
.._�.t-...
5-yearinspection $1Q000 Poor 57 1_ '��, � 9 `; .L4���YY. �wallnspection $7,500
t��
Poor 46 12 y�SE_�_ yQ 'CD�f ..�S .��.nual Inspection 57,500 z
13 �� � ��;, �Ci.anC �=YA; ��nual Inspection $7,500 �
14 �& �a�srac �� �
�.,;'hes�.���nuallnspection $7,500
15 �I 83 , Satis`actory �� i��l�ash/Touch-up/Repair 568,000 �
�
5-yearinspection 510,000 16 ��F ��Nnnuallnspection 57,500 '�
ll :�:�nnualinspection 57,500 g
IB ��89 � Satisfac:ory �Annuallnspection $7,500 �
_ � �� ^�Faile.r�t�.�'�;� 19 � 83 Satisfactory ��F.nnual Inspection 57,500
y:
�_,+$,�F�i}��";,n!! ,� ZO 75 Batisfactory ����Annuallnspection $7.500
Blastand Re-coat 5783'�. ��v •� -c�n � 'SOC"��• 27 ����� �'� -IOvercoat 5405,000�.
. . � . . ._._.________ _
TOTAL COST OF TOTAL COST OF
� OWNERSHIP $1,721�820 � A;i ms[s are idenujieu m present-doy(2013)doliars OWNERSHIP 51,334,000
Proposal for Water Tank Maintenance Services -
ProfeSSZon«Ls�Z�es 400,000 Gallon Hydropillar
City of Orono, Minnesota
Au�rest I5, 2013
� �
�
,J�� �
► �
�
����
--- '��
�:�
- s � � � �,,
. � ��
� ::�:.�
- . �-
� �
-,
ri�`� F' �t� .d
,K.. .. 4 E,r
` . � ` �` -f �
�s. ' ��F �J� � '� t
"T�:.A.H��41 ��I ,F�•��. . b:i �..�'i��
t
1', �
,',, ��. " �4 M
. �-, -a .,%�
�
��f �d
'., ,' .. � t ......... g� ,
" t' + � l
, ` '{ _�i�''' r �
I �� � �
' � , �,����''� � �r
a�'�. �,; k' �ti
� SEHDesi n Build
� g �
(
>
£n Z,./
T m
� o
(7 � �
o mm X
o H
� °c 3
o �
N w
� SEI�IDesi n Build
� g �
August 15, 2013 RE: City of Orono, Minnesota
Water Tank Maintenance Service
Mr.Jesse Struve, PE
City Engineer/Director of Public Works
City of Orono
2750 Kelley Park�vay
Orono, MN 55356
Dear Mr. Struee:
SEH Design�Build,Inc. (SEH D�B) is pleased to present �his report and proposal for a multi-year
professional services contract to rehabilitate and maintain your elevated water storage tank. The tank
analyzed in this report is the 400,000 gallmi hydro�iillar tank, located direcdy north of City Hall that was
inspected on December 6`h, 2012.
The initial contract period is proposed for a duration of five years. It may be extended beyond this
contract period to include future work at the City's request. Our unique design-build approach to the
work under this proposal will consist of the engineering, repair, rehabilitation, inspection and
maintenance of the tank and associated appurtenances and will provide the following benefits.
Features and Bene fits o f Design-Build Tank Maintenance
Sole-source responsibility ➢ Work with one comprehensive delivery team
Extended warranty ➢ Routine maintenance and repair services for contract
duration
Direct contractor selection ➢ Eliminates the risk associated with "low bidder" contracting
Reduced overhead costs ➢ Scheduled care will yield lower overall costs
Convenient payment plan ➢ Eases the fiscal demands of up-front rehabilitation costs
Long-term cost predictability ➢ Takes the guesswork out of the annual budgeung process
If you have any questions or requests for additional information, please contactJason Sprague at
612.217.4420 or via e-mail at jsprague@sehinc.com.We look forward to the opportunity of working
with you to provide a comprehensive tank maintenance program for your water storage facility.
Respectfully submitted,
���� �'�+��""�--� �
':�Iike Kraemer, E Jason P. Sprague, PE
SEH Design�Build Business Development Manager
Table of Contents
ProjectUnderstanding................................................................................I
i
TankMaintenance Alternatives................................................................4
RecommendedApproach...........................................................................7
Scope of Services.......................................................................................10
ContractDeliverables...............................................................................lb
PerformanceGuarantees.........................................................................17
Schedule of Payments...............................................................................18
ProjectTeam .............................................................................................21
SEHD�B References..................................................................................22
ClassicProtective Coatings.....................................................................34
Appendix
Inspection Photos and Observations
Resumes for Project Team
2013 Short Elliott Hendrickson Inc.
The in formation contained in this Proposal was prepared specifically for you
and contoins proprietary in formation. We would appreciate your discretion in its
reproduction and distri6ution. This in formation has been tailored to your speci fic
project based on our understanding o f your needs. Its aim is to demonstrate our
ideas and approach to your project compared to our competition. We respect fully
request that distribution be limited to individuals involved in your selection process.
SEH is a registered trademark of Short Elliott Hendrickson Inc.
table of contents
Project Understanding
SEH water tower inspection professionals performed a tank evaluation
on the 400,000 gallon hydropillar tank located directly north of Orono
City Hall, on December 6, 2012.
A cornpilation of the inspection photos has been included in the
Appendix of this proposal for your re��ew.
The tank was erected in 1992 by Pittsburg-Des Moines on a site
adjacent to City Hall and the public works equipment yard (photo 3).
There is no perimeter security fencing, however the tank is secured by
a locked access doors to the center column (photo 12) and is located
in an area frequented by both City police and public works staff.
. ,=�_-- There are two exterior telecommunications buildings/pads located on
, tank site (photos 4-5). From our observations, there are at least nvo
�� � active telecom carriers (Sprint/Nextel) housed within the adjacent
��-��� , <� � � � building/pad,with cabling attached to the tank and antennas on the
� ="' 1 �I'. �-'��
top of the tank.
i A __
�; .+�
�' �• �� ,�. � ' �., The tank is a hydropillar-style tank with a fluted center column. Based
�`���� on our inspection, the supporting foundation of the center fluted
rF��e���severol telecorn ports locoted column was found to be in good condition (photos 7-8). There a few
at the base of c►,e�i�ced�ol��,�. locations with minor grout deterioration and/or corrosion near the
foundation plate, however, the grout is in overall good condition.
The overflow pipe is ten inches in diameter and is in good condition
(photos 8-9). The screen on the overflow has been well-maintained
and does not show signs of dirt and/or debris (photo 9). The
overflow pipe drains onto some rip rap adjacent to the foundation and
flows away from the tank.
Access to the tank is pro��ided through a locked double service door
(photo 12). This access point meets industry standard security
requirements. The bottom of the center fluted column is used for City
storage. The base level of the dry interior presently houses corrugated
piping, buoys, and other miscellaneous items (photos 51-52). There
was no pit piping visible on the tank, however, there was valve and
control equipment present (photos 54-55).
Access to the elevated water tank is provided by a series of ladders
located on the exterior wall within the center column/dry riser
(photo 58). The first of the series of ladders rises from the floor and
proceeds to the cat�valk connected to the center access tube. There is
no catchment device present on the tank. The ladders are staggered
at approximately 20-foot intervals.All of the ladders ascending to the
catwalk have a safety cage,but do not have a fall prevention devices
installed.
project understanding � page I
Ascending the series of ladders to the catwalk, there are several access
platforms that connect to the outer fluted column (photo 61). They
provide access to the interior of the fluted column, as well as the
telecom ports to the exterior antennas. The exterior�vall of the fluted
column has holes in a few locations that previously housed telecom
cabling to exterior antennas (photo 68).
Beneath the tank, there are stiffeners that attach to the walls of the
fluted support column from the center access tube (photo 71). There
are approximately 8-10 turnbuckles located directly below the tank
(photo 73).
„ Directly above the top canvalk, a ladder ascends to the painter's hatch
� ,�� � ::��y�;, _. � (photo 69),providing access to the exterior painter's rail. There is
�� ,;;�,� significant corrosion e��ident on the bottom of the bowl and near the
� •,
� ' �` . _ `����� � weld to the fluted column (photo 70).
�_'� � ` ,-�x-� The center access tube within the tank, connecting the catwalk to the
��� roof of the tank is 48 inches in diameter (photo '79). Several major
telecom cables are located within access tube, on the wall of the tube
, ��. adjacent to the ladder (photo 82). The ladder within the tube also has
� � " ����`�'� a cable-type fall prevention device. As a whole, the access tube and
��'� � �"'��' ladder are in fair condition, but shows signs of coating deterioration
„ j � � and corrosion throughout the access tube (photos 80-84).
�, .��lfl
As a whole,the occess tube and ladder On the roof, the hatch from the dry interior is approximately 30
are��fa�r�o�d�t�o�,e�s snows s�g�s o f inches in diameter. There are multiple telecom cables that exit to the
coating deterioration and rusting, roof adjacent to the hatch, through conduits with flexible membranes
throughout the tube. (p]loto 3rJ�.
The existing tank vent to the wet interior is functional and does not
appear to be a frost-free design (photos 32-33). The hatch to the wet
interior was secured with a lock. Access to the wet interior was
provided by City staff who were with during the inspection.
The handrail located on the roof of the tank is approximately 12-feet
in diameter. It is circular and encompasses all but one of the hatches
to the wet and dry interior, as well as the vent. The existing railings
are OSHA-compliant with a 42-inch height, a midrail, and bottom kick
plate (photos 40-41).
The aviation light was functional at the time of inspection. The light
has nvo incandescent bulbs (photo 37). The Owner should consider
replacing the existing incandescent bulbs with LEDs, as they require
less maintenance and are less costly to operate.
There are two hatches to the wet interior. Both are located on the
roof, one inside the handrail (photo 36), the other is outside the
handrail (photo 43). Inside the wet interior, the roof and supporting
beams show a few signs of corrosion, staining and minor deterioration
(photo 44). There was apparent staining on the outside wall of the
project understanding � page 2
wet interior, although, there were no signs of damage due to ice
movement within the tank (photos 46-48).
According to Ciry records, the coating system was applied with the
original construction of the tank in 1992. Paint records indicate that
there have been no overcoats applied to the tank since the original
construction.
As part of the tank evaluation, SEH inspectors conducted adhesion
tests on the existing exterior coating to determine how well it
presently bonds to the steel surface below. The adhesion tests on the
� exterior of the flute and the roof indicate that the existing coating
system is in fair condition,with satisfactory adhesion to the metal
' surface and can support an overcoat of paint as part of the
y `� � ', rehabilitation procedure (photos 11, 34).
,� Based on the original construction date, the existing coatings were not
�
' tested for the presence of heavy metals. Lead and chromium-based
��� coatings were largely phased out in the early 1980s.
� ,�� � Overall, after 21 years, the exterior coating is in fair condition. It has a
�� �� '� � � fe�v minor coating breaks,in conjuncrion with some slight
;. ,
� �! discoloration caused by rust and corrosion (photo 10). It is slightly
- chalky in appearance with a minor accumulation of mold and mildew
The tank is slightly chalky in oppearance on the side of the tank. The mold and mildew that accumulates on the
with a minor accumulation of mold and tank,while visually unappealing, does not affect the structural integrity
mudew o�tne s�de ofct,e eank. of the�vater tower or the integrity of the tank's protective coating.
project understanding � page 3
Tank Maintenance Alternatives
As you begin to plan for the rehabilitation of y>our water tank,you�vill
find nvo distinct options.
� 1. Design-Bid-Build project delivery
2. Design-Build project delivery
While SEH can assist you with either delivery method, there are
' certain aspects of each approach, of�vhich you should be aware.
Design-Bid-Build Delivery Method
� In the traditional design-bid-build approach to water tank
rehabilitation and maintenance, an engineer (such as SEH) would be
' chosen to assist the o�vner in the preparation of project plans,
� specifications and bidding documents. The owner (typically with
assistance from the engineer) would take those documents and put
the tank maintenance project out for bid.
�1�C
_ ''_�,-.�-� Typically, maintenance projects are awarded to a contractor with the
—� r�-�T/!' lowest responsive bid for the identified scope of work. By openly
� � i � � �� bidding maintenance work, the project otvner then enters into a
, � �� � contract with the lowest cost provider, usually with limited regard to
� ��r�`�==�` ����� �� ( previous work quality or safety concerns.
� � �� �� �
z� �-� Upon the final completion of the tank rehabilitation project, the
-- � owner is expected to pay the contractor in full for the services
� `� � rendered. Projects completed via the design-bid-build process are
work performed by SEH Design�Build. typically provided with a one-year�varranty for the contractor's
workmanship in applying the new coating systems.
After the warranty period After the warranty period expires, any premature deterioration of the
exPires, any premature coating system is the responsibility of the tank owner. The costs for
deterioration of the any/all necessary repairs, cleaning and/or related inspections are
coating system is the incurred by the owner, often leading to more frequent rehabilitation
PespOnsibility of the projects and significantly larger cost over the functional service life of
tank owner. the tank.
Design-Build Delivery Method
With the design-build approach, there is no bidding process with
which to contend. A contracting team is directly selected by the City,
upon reviewing their qualifications and past work history. Thus, there
is less concern of being tied to a low-bid contractor with a questionable
safety and/work record.
Our design-build team, SEH D�B,works directly with our exclusive
partner Classic Protective Coatings, a high-quality tank maintenance
contractor, to provide one seamless project delivery team to the City of
Orono. Both our engineers and field maintenance personnel work
together to provide our customers with a quality project, one that is
warranted for the duration of the maintenance contract.
tank maintenance alternatives � page 4
The City is allowed to a��ert the traditional bidding process in
accordance with Chapter 358 of the Minnesota State StatUtes. An
excerpt of the Minnesota legislation has been included for your
review:
Chapter 358 of the Minnesota CHAPTER358—S.F.No.3168
State Statute al lows An act relating to municipalities;providing for a bidding exception for certain water tank
municipalities to direct-select a service contracts;authorizing an agreement for the city of Waiker to maintain and operate
contr-actor- of their choice for
the state's water tower at Ah-Gwah-Ching;amending Minnesota Statutes 2000,section
471.345,by adding a subdivision.
' maintenance and
BE!T ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF MINNES07A:
� rehabilitation of their water
storage facilities. sectton�.
! Minnesota Statutes 200D,section 471.345,is amended by adding a subdivision to read:
Subd.5b.
[WATER TANK SERVICE CONTRACTS]
A municipality may,by direct negotiation or through the solicitation of requests for
proposals,enter into a multiyear professional service contract for the engineering,
repair,and maintenance of a water storage tank and appurtenant facilities owned,
� controlled,or operated by the municipality,if the contract contains:
(1)a provision that the municipality is not required to make total payments
I in a single year that exceed the water utility charges received by the municipality
tor that year,
(2)a provision requ+ring that the work performed be done under the
review of a professional engineer licensed in the state of Minnesota attesting
that the work will be pertormed in compliance with all applicable codes and
engineering standards;and
"A municipality may, by direct
(3)a provision that if,at the commencement of the contract,the water
negotiation or through the tank or appurtenant facilities requires engineering,repair,or service in order
solicitation of request for to bring the water tank or facilities into compliance with federal,state,or local
. requirements,the party contracting with the municipality is responsible for providing
proposals, enter into a 1'Yl U Itl� the engineering,repair,or service.The costs to bring the water tank or facilities
year professional into compliance must be itemized separately and charged to the municipality
in payments spread over a period ot not less than three years from ihe
serviee eontraet for the commencement of the contract.
engineering, repair, and Section 3.
maintenance of a water storage EFFECTIVE DATE.]
� tanl<..." Seciions 1 and 2 are etfective the day following final enactment.
Presented to the govemor April 30,2002
� Signed by the governor May 1,2002,2:40 p.m.
�
tank maintenance alternatives � page 5
Bene fits to a Design-Build Ap proach
A design-build approach will allow the City to realize the following
benefits when maintaining your critical drinking water storage facility:
• Extended warranty—tank protective coatings and appurtenances
are guaranteed for the life of the maintenance contract
• Long-term cost predictability—know what all of your annual
maintenance costs are, in advance for five or ten years, or more
• Sole-source responsibility—no finger pointing���ith an integrated
delivery team
• Direct contractor selection—no worry over a potentially unqualified
low-bid contractor
• Flexible financing options—spread the overall maintenance costs
over the length of a maintenance contract
• Compliance with AWWA/OSHA standards— annual ins�iections kee�i
you u�to dates and compliant
Classic Protective Coatings Our contracting teaming partner, Classic Protective Coatings, has a
has a demonstrated and demonstrated and pro��en track record for both project safety and job
proven tracl< record for Performance on many similar projects in Minnesota and throughout
the Midwest, as you�vill note in the References section of this
both project safety and proposal.
job performance.
tank maintenance alternatives � page 6
Recommended Approach
Based on the needs of your tank,we recommend a design-build
approach to take the uncertainty out of your rehabilitation and
maintenance program by delivering a comprehensive, turn-key
solution and a customized agreement, tailored to your specific needs.
Protective Coatings
Based on our inspection of your tank,we recommend a specific
protective coating rehabilitation strategy for the exterior,wet interior,
dry interior, and pit piping of your tank.
� . E�terior: Given the age, adhesion, and overall condition of the
existing exterior coating system,we recommend overcoating the
� � exterior surface of the tank.
�`�� � . This process includes preparing any corroded and/or failed
r'•1
� ���V ' coating areas to the equivalent of a SSPGSP3 Power Tool Cleaning
� ^ � condition.
. �. �- ,
Non-corroded areas will be cleaned by pressure washing the tank to
: _i�{�� -
� � �j�� � remove the accumulated dirt, mildew and scale, identifying
� ' ��'�� 14 � locations and performing spot repairs and applying the new coating
. . �
" � . ��� � " � system directly over the existing paint, as opposed to completely
The adhesion of the existing coating removing the entire existing coating paint system prior to painting.
system is su�cient to support an
o�er�oac pro�ed��e. In addition, all of the telecommunication antennas and cabling will
need to be removed from exterior surfaces, prior to the tank
rehabilitation.
The recommended exterior tank surface coating system will again
be comprised of Tnemec products. It will consist of an epoxy
prime coat (where applicable), followed by an aliphatic
polyurethane finish coat Series 1074 U. The 1074 U system has LTV
resistance properties which will help maintain the color of the tank
for a longer period of time.
The existing lettering/logo will be reapplied upon completion of
the overcoat, unless directed othenvise.
��� . Wet Interior:As identified in the inspection, the walls of the wet
interior, as well as the support trusses and roof beams, show signs of
minor deterioration. Based on this condition assessment,we
recommend an abrasive blast cleaning of these areas and the
��� �p�������'��'" � application of a completely new coating system.
This will iilclude complete removal of the existing coating system to
, a SSPC-SP10 near White Blast Cleaning condition with the
Tne�o�drt�o�o fthe Wec��ce��o� '' application of a new coating system. The proposed coating system
warrants the complete removal and Will be a two-Coat epoxy Series N140 that is approved by iVSF
rep�a�erne�t oftne�oac��gsyste�,. International for application in the wet interior of potable drinking
water tanks.
recommended approach � page 7
Upon application of the coating sysCem, the roof beams and seams
will be caulked and the tank interior will be disinfected as per
AWW�C652.
• ll�y Interior: The dry interior is showing signs of minor
� deterioration in several locations.
� ���� The underside of the bowl and some areas within the access tube
r..r
_���` will require a spot abrasive blast clean to a SSPGSP6 `commercial
�'�� ' blast' cleaning condirion. On any other corroded areas within the
,��_
, , .
� dry interior,we recommend preparing the surFace to a SSPC-SP3
� .'���::
- ��.�� ,.'� _� �` �� `power tool cleaning' condition.
�_ ' ;� �,;'
� ' The proposed coating system for the dry interior repairs will be
similar to that proposed for the wet interior and consist of two coats
of epoxy coating to the prepared dry interior surfaces of the tank.
�
� .
By using our recommended coating systems in conjunction with our
ti�
' comprehensive maintenance approach,you can be assured that your
water storage facility will be protected from premature coating failures
. and corrosion of the underlying steel structure. The normal
The underside of the bowl will need to be rehabilitation period for the tanks protected by SEH D�B is 15 to
abrasive blast cleaned to remove 2�}'earS.
corrosion and apply a new coating
System. Our comprehensive maintenance plans extend the period of time
benveen major rehabilitations, allowing our clients to eliminate one or
possibly nvo major tank rehabilitations over the typical i5-year useful
life of a water tank, sa�ing hundreds of thousands of future tank
maintenance dollars.
Other Tank Improvements/Modi f►cations
As identified in our inspection, there are several antennas located on
the tank. These antemias, and the related equipment,will need to be
removed prior to commencement of the rehabilitation activities. Any
painting of antenna components not welded to the structure of the
tank will be the responsibility of the telecom provider. The antennas
can be reinstalled upon completion of the rehabilitation project.
Based on the findings of our tank inspection, the existing manways,
� hatches, and railings have been found to be satisfactory and compliant
with current standards.
A comprehensive listing of all proposed tank improvements and an
implementation timeline is identified in the Scope of Services section
of this proposal.
Our proposed Scope of Services includes the follo���ing:
• Tank rehabilitation
• Safety improvements
• Routine maintenance
• Annual inspections
• Periodic tank wash-outs and exterior power washing
� recommended approach � page 8
The scope can be customized to include additional services at the
discretion of the client. Additional services might include:
• On-call painting services (vandalism,weather-related damage)
• Emergency repair ser��ices
• Telecommunications site consultation and coordination
• Virtual-reality imaging and logo design
recommended approach � page 9
Scope of Services
SEH D�B shall,within the term of this contract,provide services in
accordance with the indicated schedule and specified�vork items and
repairs. These services will be provided at the following tank:
400,000 Gallon Hydropillar Tank
City Hall
• Table A-Schedule of Services
• Table B—Specific Work Items and Repairs
• Contract Deliverables
• Performance Guarantees
• Schedule of Payments
. Work Plan
The Work Plan under this contract will generally consist of four
�� procedures,which are defined as follows:
�� • Rehabilitation: This will include the complete cleaning and
_ � i preparation of the exterior, dry interior,wet interior and pit piping,
,�
� �, and the application of a new coating system. This work may also
include structural modifications to the appurtenances and
�� equipment.
� � `-, , • Visual Siu-��ey: Annual visual inspections of the tank are performed
; �', while the tank remains in service to determine the general
j condition of the coatings and accessories. This work will include a
E report summarizing the results of the inspection.
� • General Maintenance: The wet interior and exterior surfaces will be
washed at scheduled intervals, as well as performing spot coating
repairs to needed areas of the tank. This may also include minor
� modifications to the tank appurtenances and equipment.
• Engineering Evaluation:A detailed inspection of the tank is
performed to determine the specific structural and sanitary
conditions, as well as the condition of coatings systems relative to
accepted industry standards. This work will include the entrance of
Our comprehensive maintenance
� approach includes ongoing maintenance, personnel into the�vater storage areas to inspect all interior
such as periodic washdowns,and will surfaces. The Engineering Evaluation will also include a report that
� keep ihe tank looking good for the describes existing conditions and presents recommendations for
d��ac�o�ofthe�o�cra�t. future maintenance and rehabilitation.
� scope of services � page 10
Table A
Water Tank Maintenance Services
Schedule of Services
0.4 MG HYDROPILLAR-ORONO,MN 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023
REHABII.ITAT�ON
Overcoat System (Exterior) X
New Coating System (Wet Interior) X
Spot Coating Repairs (Dry Interior) X
Accessory Modifications and Repairs �(
�ualRy Assurance Inspechons �(
VISUAL SURVEY
Coating Observation (Exterior) X X X X X X X
(Wet Interior) X X X X X X X
(Dry Interior) �( �( �( X X �( �(
Accessory Observation X X X X X X X
Summary Statement X X X X X X X
GENERAL MAINTENANCE
Pressure Wash (Exterior) X �(
(wet Interlor) �( X
SpotCoatingRepairs (Exterior) X X
(Wet Interior) X X
(Dry Interror) X X
MinorAccessory Repairs X X
Qualdy Assurance InspeMfons X X
ENGINEERING EVALUATION
Coafing Testing (Exterbr) X X X
and Analysis (Wet Interior) X X X
(Dry Interior) X �( X
Five-yea r AWWA I nspection X x X
TankAccessories Inspection X X X
Reportwith Recommendations �( X X
scope of services � page I I
Table B
Water Tank Maintenance Services
Specific Work Items and Repairs
,I,� 400,000 Gallon Hydropillar Tank
Name:
ciry x�
Orono,Minnesota
Year: 2014
SEH D�I3 costs are based on �he assuinption tha�all an�ennas and
1. cables on the tank will be removed by others for the duration of
major rehabilitation wrork and reinstalled by others.
2 Install a new finer mesh screen at the discharge end of the overflo�v
pipe.
Install a new aluminum frost-free roof vent. The new vent will be
3. bolted on the existing flange used for the existing vent The existing
vent will be removed and disposed of by SEH D�B.
The concrete foundation and grout will be coated to help prevent
4' deterioration.
5 Replace all missing, broken or non-working light bulbs, glass globes,
or metal cages in the dry interior.
6 Install locks on the roof hatch to the wet interior. Locks to be
provided by the owner.
7. Install a new LED double aviation light on the roof of the tank.
Exterior:
• Pressure-wash all stn�faces to remove contaminants, mildew and
scale.
• Power tool clean all coating failure and rusted areas on
exterior surfaces to equivalent of SSPGSP3 Power Tool
Cleaning Condition.
8.
• To all power tool cleaned areas, apply epoxy primer coating
system.
• Apply one full coat of urethane with UV protection to the
entire tank.
• Reapply the lettering and logo on the exterior to match the
existing tank lettering and logo.
Wet Interior:
• Gomplete removal of existing coating system on the wet
interior surfaces to equivalent of SSPC-SP10 Near White Blast
Gleaning Condition.
• Provide special hazardous waste considerations if required.
9.
• Apply two coats of epoxy coating that is approved for use in
potable drinking watei-tanks (AWWA Inside Paint System
No. 1).
• Caulk the roof beams and seams.
• Disinfect the tank interior per AWWA G652.
scope of services � page I 2
!
I
,I,� 400,000 Gallon Hydropillar Tank
I Name: City Hall
I Orono,Minnesota
Dry Interior:
( • Pressure-wash all surfaces to remove contaminants, milde�v and
scale.
� • In the access tube and on the bowl, complete removal of
existing coating system on dry interior surfaces to cquivalent of
� SSPC-SP6 Commercial Blast Cleaning Condition.
10. ' To all abrasive blast cleaned areas, apply two full coats of epoxy
� coating (AWWA Inside Paint System No. 1).
• To all surfaces other than in the access tube and on the bowl,
� power tool clean all coating failure and rusted areas on dry
interior surfaces to equivalent of SSPC-SP3 Power Tool
( Cleaning Condition.
• To all power tool cleaned areas, apply two spot coats of epo�cy
� coating (AWWrlInside Paint S��stem No. 1).
� Years: 2015 to 2017
( Yearly Visual Surveys:
1• • Full tank inspection (wet interior does not have to be drained).
� • Summary Keport.
�
Year: 2018
I Exterior:
( • Pressure-wash surfaces to remove contaminants and mildew.
• Power tool clean rusted areas on exterior surfaces to equivalent
1• of SSPGSP 3 Power Tool Cleaning Condition.
I • Apply two coats of epoxy and one coat of urethane with UV
� protection (AWWA Outside Paint System No. 5) to prepared
areas.
� Wet Interior:
• Pressure-wash surfaces to remove contaminants and staining.
I • Power tool clean rusted areas on wet interior surfaces to
2 equivalent of SSPC-SP 11 Power Tool Cleaning to Bare Metal
� Condition.
• Apply two coats of epoxy coating (AWWA Inside Paint System
' No. 1) to prepared areas.
• Disinfect the tank interior er AWWA C652.
I Dry Interior:
• Power tool clean rusted areas on dry interior surfaces to
� 3• equivalent of SSPC-SP3 Power Tool Cleaning Condition.
• Apply two coats of epoxy coating (AWWA Inside Paint System
� No. 1) to re ared areas.
� Engineering Evaluation:
• Inspection of the exterior,wet interior, dry interior and pit
� piping coatings.
4. • Wet interior�vill be drained and coincide with the wet interior
` pressure wash and coating repairs.
• Tank accessories inspection.
� • Report with recommendations.
� scope of services � page I 3
I
,I,� 400,000 Gallon Hydropillar Tank
Name: City Hall
Orono, Minnesota
Years: 2019 to 2022
Yearly Visual Sur��e��s:
�- • Full tauk inspccti��n (�cct intcric�r�loc.ti nc�t I�a��c i�� hc� <lrainc�l).
• Sun>>uar}°Rcport.
Year: 2023
Exterior:
• Yressure �cash surfaces to remo�e contaminan�s and milde�c.
• Po���er tool clean rusted areas on exterior surfaces to
Work items indentified with blue 1.
equi��alent of SSYGSP 3 Po�ver Tool Cleaning Condition.
teXt 3f 2 Off01'2d aS p3Pt Of a . �pply h�-o coats of epoXy and one coat of urethane�viCh LTV
� ���/e1F" fYldl�'1te111r1Ce protection (��1�1'�Outsidc Paint S��stcm No. b) to prep<ircd
contract w�th SEH `"-�aS.
DesignlBuild. �'�'et Interior:
• Yressure�vash stirfaces [o reriio�e containinant�s and st��ini�i�.
• Yo���er tool clean rusted areas on���et intei�ior siirfaces tc�
�� equi��alent of SSPC-SP 11 Yo��-cr Tool Cleaning to I3arc :�-letal
(:ondition.
• ,�pply t���o coats of cpo�y coating (AW4VA Insicic I'aint S��stcin
No. 1) to preparcd arcas.
• Disinfect tl�ie tank intcrior per AWWA C(i�i�.
Dry Interior:
• Power tool clean rustcd areas on dry interior sw�faces �o
�'• cquivalent of SSPC-SP3 Po�cer Tool Cleaning Gondition.
• Apply t�co coats of epo���coatin�; (��ti1'�'�Inside Paint S��stem
No. 1) to prepared areas.
Engineering Evaluation:
• Inspection of the c:�terior,�cet in�crior, diy interior and j�it
piping coatin�s.
4. • Wet interior��111 be drained and coincide tvith thc wet interior
pressure�vash and coating repairs.
• Tank accessories inspection.
• Report���ith recommendations.
The proliosed sco�ie of work and associated costs are based on the assum�itions that
all antennas and cables on th�e tank zuill be removed and reinstalled by others,for the
duralion of major rehabilitation work.
scope of services � page 14
Additional Services
Work that we have not included under this proposal,but can be
performed as additional services by Change Order includes the
following:
• Damage that occurs as a result of vandalism, fire,flood, �vind
damage, or other Acts of God.
• Damage and/or work that results from the proposed or actual
installation of SCADA or cathodic protection equipment.
• Damage and/or work that results from the proposed or actual
installation of telecommunications or other equipment that is
anchored to or otherwise attached to a tank structure or
appurtenance.
As part of this stipulation, the Ciry agrees that SEH D�B will have the
right to review, approve and inspect all proposed equipment
installations on or adjacent to the tank during the term of the
contract.
scope of services � page 15
Contract Deliverables
In addition to providing the owner with a rehabilitated tank and a
newly applied coating system, SEH D�B will pro��ide an annual report
summarizing the performance of the tank's coating system.
Project Inspections and Report Documentation
All work will be regularly inspected by our NACE-certified, tank
inspection professionals. All inspections will be thoroughly
documented in a multi-page report that will include:
• A summary of the work performed to-clate
• Listing of SEH D�B personnel and equipment presently on site
• Site conditions requiring input from the Owner
• Field work testing or sampling performed
• Extensive photographs of the work at the time of the inspection
Our project inspectors will make frequent visits to the site during the
major rehabilitation work in 2014.
SEH D�B strongly believes these inspections are critical for several
reasons:
• Communicating project issues with the City before scheduling, cost
issues or other problems arise
• Documenting current project status to City staff for reporting to City
leaders and residents
• Ensuring and documenting the quality of the work that is
performed for the City.
• Record that all site and project safety procedures are being followed
and a listing of any injuries that have occurred.
Samples of recently completed tank maintenance inspection reports
for SEH D�B projects are available for your review at your request.
contract deliverables � page I 6
Performance Guarantees
Subject to the terms and conditions of the contract documents,
SEH D�B hereby guarantees that, following a complete rehabilitation
procedure, the tanks included under this contract will for the term of
the contract:
1. Be in general compliance regarding safery and access with the
following industry standards:
• American Water Works Association (AWWA) Standards
(D100 & D102)
• Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA)
Article 1910
2. Be maintained to meet or exceed the following industry
performance levels for coating systems:
• For exterior polyurethane systems: SSPC Paint Specification 36
-Performance Level 3.
3. For all other coating systems:
• Rusting:ASTM D-610-Grade 9
• Cracking: None Allowed
• Peeling: None Allo�ved
• Delimitation: None Allowed
• Pitting: None Allowed
All compliance with these specifications will be verified by our certified
coatings inspectors.
Our SEH D�B inspectors are licensed Professional Engineers in the
State of Minnesota, Certified Coating Inspectors through the National
Association of Corrosion Engineers (NACE) and Certified Weld
Inspector (CWI) through the American Welding Society.
�
performance guarantees � page 17
Schedule of Payments
Compensation for the initial rehabilitation and ongoing maintenance
tasks��rill be billed on an annual basis.
The initial annual payment will be invoiced upon completion of the
2014 work plan. The subsequent annual fees will be invoiced on the
anniversary date of the contract, starting in the j�ear 2015.
Payment Plan Options
We have provided rivo alternative fi��e-year and ten-year payment plans
for our proposed tank maintenance services.
The first alternative is a variable payment plan,which essentially
invoices the rehabilitation and maintenance costs as incurred by
SEH D�B and our tank maintenance partner Classic Protective
Coatings.
The second alternative sums the total cost of the proposed
rehabilitation and maintenance costs, and amortizes them into equal
annual payments (including a nominal interest charge) for each year
� of the service contract.
If desired, the annual amounts can be broken down into equal
monthly payments.
Option I —Variable Payment Plan
In the Variable Payinent Plan (pay as you go), the Owner shall pay
SEH D�B for the work provided in the Scope of Services in accordance
with the following schedule:
Year Payment
2014 $389,500
2015 $4,900
2016 $4,900
2017 $4,900
2018 $62,500
Total $466,700
As identified in the above table, contract payments will be variable by
year. Payments in year one will largely cover the costs associated with
the initial rehabilitation and recoating of the storage tank. Payments
in years two through five will cover the costs of ongoing maintenance,
inspections and reporting of the tank conditions. The year five
payment will include the cost of pressure-wash cleaning of the exterior
and wet interior surfaces of the tank.
schedule of payments � page 18
Project Team
The SEH D�B delivery team brings several advantages to your project,
including extensive water tank inspection, repair, rehabilitation,
coatings, and telecommunications experience on similar projects
throughout the Midwest.
In addition, our team includes inspectors who are certified by the
National�ssociation of Corrosion Engineers (NACE), the Society for
Protective Coatings (SPC), and the American Welding Society (AWS).
Key project personnel qualifications are summarized in the following
descriptions.
Your primary contacts for this project will be:
- Mr.Jason Sprague, PE
Project Engineer
612.217.4420 � Direct
ispraguc�r schinc.a�m
Mr. Dan Zienty, PE, NACE, SSPC
Coatings Inspector and Telecom Specialist
651.490.2160 � Direct
612.280.3450 � Gell
dzient���i�schinc.com
Ms.Jana Nyhagen, PE
Operations Manager
715.861.4869 � Direct
715.781.4567 � Cell
jnvhagenCsehinc.com
project team � page 21
SEH D�B References
This section includes reference contacts for other municipal clients
who have used SEH D�B to rehabilitate and maintain their water
storage facilities. Each of these clients have requested multi-year
professional service contracts to maintain their tank(s). Their
respective contract terms are idenrified below.
In each case, Classic Protective Coatings completed all of the
rehabilitation tasks for the eleven projects referenced. Three of the
� tanks in Oconomowoc, tl�e two tanks in West Allis, and the tank in
Lakeville necessitated the use of a containment curtain on the project.
We have included data sheets for many of the following tank
rehabilitation projects for your re��ie�ti�. They begin on page 20.
City of Lakeland, Minnesota
�� �,��VQ Mr. MattKline
, ,; � C.- Director of Public Works
�. -- ����a;,�.;��i
690 Quinnell Avenue North
Lakeland, MN 55043-9643
Phone � 651.436.8044
5 Year Tank Maintenance Contract
Two o f the four tanks under an SEH • 300,000 Gallon Standpipe Storage Tank
Design�Build maintenance contract in
the City of Oconomowoc,w► City of Oeonomowoe,Wiseonsin
Mr. Scott Osborn
Superintendent of Water Operations
808 South Worthington Street
Oconomowoc,WI 53066
''� Phone � 262.569.6421
���N����w�C
10-Year Tank Maintenance Contract including:
• 500,000 Gallon Olympia Spheroid Tank
• 500,000 Gallon West Standpipe Tank
• 500,000 Gallon East Standpipe Tank
• 500,000 Gallon North Spheroid Tank
�.. � �� �':E,
.�
'�^•� ` \ ' , City of West Allis,Wisconsin
�_ _ ,- _. _. _
� Mr. Dan Schwebke
�- TM�'� Water Division Superintendent
m� r.�l I f 6300 West McGeoch Ave
West Allis,WI 53219
Phone � 414.302.8378
5-Year Tank Maintenance Contract including:
• 1.5 MG Torospheroid Tank
• 1.5 MG Spheroid Tank
seh d�b references � page 22
�
City of Chetel<, Wisconsin
� � Mr. Dan Knapp
� Director of Public Works
1125 Railroad A��enue
- � n � �4 Chetek,WI 54728
. �`� -- __
--,,!� ►T .� ,-._ _ Phone � 715.924.4236
! �
F - '`�ti-�__ -
� 5-Year Tank Maintenance Contract
- �-� ��
� �
. • 500,000 Gallon Standpipe Tank
�
a���� ��_ ' City of Eagle River, Wisconsin
Eagle River, WI spheroid tank during i�T'. Pat WebeT'
the rehabilitation process Ut111Ly sUp21'1riC2riC12Tlt
525 E. Maple Street
Y� �.�
� ������ Eagle River,WI 54521
`�°�-� r������,� ,��;r� � z�, ,�i;£r�
�j � ' � ��' ' Phone � 715.479.8121
10-Year Tank:�laintenance Contract
�� • 300,000 Gallon Spheroid Tank
:-------..
,(IY.,E RIVEj; City of Berlin, Wisconsin
Mr. Richard Keller
Superintendent
�r'�a. '�� !I 108 N. Capron Street
� ' i Berlin,WI 54923
{ `- � ''� Phone � 920.361.5404
�-, �!
� 5-Year Tank Maintenance Contract
�� • 550,000 Gallon Ground Storage Tank
���
.
� Eagle kive, �rri:ar,u rro:eciea witn a ����
10 year tank maintenance contract
' seh d�b references � page 23
J/ SEHDesign�Build,Inc. 0.3 MILLION GALLON STANDPIPE
/� REHABILITATION AND MAINTENANCE
ye , ,... „� �
;�n� >��.,,;s .�n,, ;�� r .
�I ° � �
�� II I � '
� �e ,
. M..��s. .�_ ... ea,�,� .. _ ., .
,�� �,
r. ..- . �.... :.... ... .� . . �� r ,,
. �.. d � i
__ ���—�, —�_;��,, ..,
�� �� ��.... —�„ �..�- ���
� T �;,�..� � ��r�� . :
�; ,., •� �� .. _ _ ■ 1 - � ----_
� �_ � ,
� '��� � — <,.. ___
� • ,� _
� =� �c..,-� :_;��:. -.� r� r� _ _
i � �� �i � .�' �
.
—
� . �, �
. �.. . � .1 � ,
Location/Owner � Lakeland,Minnesota
Features
• Complete interior and exterior coating removal and replacement
• Structural repairs and tank accessory upgrades
• Direct selection by qualifications
i
• Contracted by Design�Build delivery method
• 5-year maintenance agreement
SEH Design�Build Services
• Engineering evaluation
• Surface preparation,coating and repairs
• Construction management
• Scheduled maintenance
• Annual condition survey
Rehabilitation Completed � July 2010
Total 5-year program Cost � $288,800
multidisciplined.single source. � wwwsehinc.com LcSI C!7
� WEST STANDPIPE
SEHDesign�Build,Inc. 0.5 MILLION GALLON STANDPIPE
� REHABILITATION AND MAINTENANCE
,► ��
� ��������� � ��•�
� rti,,���
� � J `�� �� ���
� �j ��� , \ �
# ;
� 14 �`� `
- �,�.w;���
�;.�-�,-`_:;;;...�
I� . .. %k� � 'e�,�.—^� �
;.
- �_�J..�q. ,. � ! �j i
. n
� n ,> .,
. ! , � �~, .,. .�, �
�-- , , - ----- .. . _r... ��,
.
e . .. _
. - . _ , , _
� __ ��
.
� �. :a�.r . ; i
,
� �„ ' ' �,
.
r � / , �„ .
Location/Owner � Oconomowoc,Wisconsin
Features
• Complete interior and exterior coating removal and replacement
• Structural repairs and tank accessory upgrades
• Direct selection by qualifications
• Contracted by Design�Build delivery method
• 10-year maintenance agreement
SEH Design�Buiid Services
• Engineering evaluation
• Surface preparation,coating and repairs
� • Construction management
• Scheduled maintenance
• Annual condition survey
Rehabilitation Completed � October 2008
Total 10-year program Cost � $394,000
, .
multidisciplined.single source. � www.sehinc.com C��I 015
JOLYMPIA ELEVATED WATERTANK
SEHDesign�Build,Inc. 0.5 MILLION GALLON SPHEROID
� REHABILITATION AND MAINTENANCE
:
�a���. � �� � ����' �
Y!�� - ' �r'. ((�1(4���!j/1��� -
,� ��� • ;,'; F�;,,+� �
k` +��.i-�-�
, �
,: :. .� .
�
�� a`��°�" �� ` +�
.;��
_ .,. ��,� _
,��. �:�. � � � �'�
x � �
=���.:. — .a�_ .
"" �`�,,' � �'�
, , �
: j �
�� y,
° �� � �� �f � � � � �
�� .� �• t:���. �Y I# � 1.��
a. ; . �� . _. r � � i ' � i `,
, � �
�_ ,
.. t._ , . „ a
___ - �-.- �. ..,�.,.-1� .._� .-..<'�:�
Location/Owner � Oconomowoc,Wisconsin
Features
• Complete interior and exterior coating removal and replacement
• Structural repairs and tank accessory upgrades
• Direct selection by qualifications
• Contracted by Design�Build delivery method
• 10-year maintenance agreement
SEH Design�Build Services
• Engineering evaluation
• Surface preparation,coating and repairs
• Construction management
• Scheduled maintenance
• Annual condition survey
Rehabilitation Completed � September 2008
Total I 0-year program Cost � $49 I,000
multidisciplined.single source. � wwwsehinc.com CE�! 015
J84TH AND NATIONALAVENUE WATERTANK
SEHDesign�Build,Inc. I .5 MILLION GALLON SPHEROID
� REHABILITATION AND MAINTENANCE
� - - � _�.
_ . ; . . ,
;, - .�rEST q
,`, ��;- � L
_ a �� `�5
. �
� �:t�°�"`� , , � � ; ;"� �,..:� �
r�. � }:�� ;� w� �
: � �
�__._ � ; �
'`����
.,
�.� —�-a
„ �s
,
M �,
. a�. �� - _ .
�. _ , -,:._ ,� _ _
� �� _.� � �
� ,
� � � ::
. _ _
,- . � .__
� .�� .
,
�� � ���� � � ��� ��. , .�
�� ��` �
�� � �� �
Location/Owner �WestAllis,Wisconsin
Features
• Complete interior and exterior coating removal and replacement
• Structural repairs and tank accessory upgrades
• Direct selection by qualifications
• Contracted by Design�Build delivery method
• 5-year maintenance agreement
SEH Design�Build Services
• Engineering evaluation
• Surface preparation,coating and repairs
• Construction management
• Telecommunications site management
• Scheduled maintenance
• Annual condition survey
Rehabilitation Completed � July 2008
Total 5-year program Cost � $852,800
multidisciplined.single source. � www.sehinc.com DESI 01 2
JI I6TH STREET WATERTANK
SEHDesign�Build,Inc. I .5 MILLION GALLON TORO-PILLAR
� REHABILITATION AND MAINTENANCE
y ,,,,�. T�
,
� � � ""'' �1�
..��.� ,
���� �'� '' , �'�, � `,
,
�
����� � �� ����� � �., , ' '
�� ,F� �5-[" q , �� � , ��, �q, ��. ;
\ � r` � � t�� �, ry �� i 1
� ,,���°�,.`e'��'�".^ � I � � 4�
,1 ,,�;�y _ �"�t,��'�r��,+ 'S� ~a,' u� -1 :�+� r �, c..
��a :q ���_ -�;.' ��� 1 � ' ��;� �������4�
� ,,, .� � ��,
���,� � �" � �,`�� �3 , >
^ ��
�' � �` �`�`�~ �=
,� �
� � T �} �
� t ti!'x,.,R
J.: 1 ''�}�,�f.x' r
� .
T: _ 'K �
� � � �. � /�� Ay£
� ��` # f.
��� . .n.� ����� Y�. t'✓ ���`:
ii,
Location/Owner �WestAllis,Wisconsin
Features
• Complete interior and exterior coating removal and replacement
• Structural repairs and tank accessory upgrades
• Contracted by Design�Build method
• Selected as a better value over traditional bidding method
• 5-year maintenance agreement
SEH Design�Build Services
• Engineering evaluation
• Surface preparation,coating and repairs
• Construction management
• Scheduled maintenance
• Annual condition survey
Rehabilitation Completed � September 2007
Total 5-year program Cost � $I,I 07,325
multidisciplined.single source. � www.sehinc.com CESI C I i
�J SEHDesign�Build,lnc. 550,000 GALLON RESERVOIR
� REHABILITATION AND MAINTENANCE
�, ;�� � � l I �� � �
� 'j �_
: �. � � �.
s _ ___ �
�{t� ` �_ �� � ���� '
�. _ _---�—�� — —��.�
. , . .
�
_
,� _ �
.
� — ,� -,�c ,/� . ��� ( —�" _,.�
r . ....j i , �t ,=" � �,;:,s
. � �
;
' .. � r
.;,
,- .-
.r,
�� � jx' � J � � � �
;
, . .
�#" „ ;1 F f i
/ \
� i�r i i , � � � �
4 5
t f i '� �' �� �!; �` ���'R �
°�•,t- , . ` , � }
� �E� t
���y ,l���r i4� r,,�
� a�Ai��i ii � fr����,a;:
i�� �§
, � ,� .,
NG' Fy�g�t � �vd'"" �`��� ,�f
t��'r�T`? �,, " � t �;
�.tri.ii:1. '.r. �+��:. .�.r . .. -:�'a:�x
Location � Berlin,Wisconsin
Owner � Berlin,Wisconsin
Features
• Interior coating removal replacement
• Exterior maintenance repairs and overcoat
• Structural repairs
• Tank accessory upgrades
• Design/build delivery method
• Direct selection by qualification
• Five-year maintenance agreement
SEH Design�Build Services
• Engineering evaluation
• Construction management
• Rehabilitation
• Scheduled maintenance
• Annual condition survey
Size � 550,000 gallon
Completed �August 2006
Total Five-year Cost � $I 87,I 00
multidisciplined.single source. � www.sehinc.com DESI 008
�J SEHDesign�Build,Inc. 300,000 GALLON ELEVATED TANK
� REHABILITATION AND MAINTENANCE
,- - � �
.-. I �..����' �.�s�,.�-
.�LE RIVE / { �.� � --
� ,� 1: �
� � � .f�1 �:..-.:
�, i' � ��. :...�,� -
`` / _ .
z. _ - � '� ' � � - - -
. c' +'� r
�y_
• �\ �\` _ —,� "
, _�. , _ � �_
.
` �� �;, ^�, � _ _
�, � _..-�- �.
���
��a;��:. ,
�: ',..
>��.
a'1 t}4'� ,,
r � � 1
.
.
� � ,
�^�''- . ,r+�*r,- „�:�'� -
�.:�:�� ,�: ,� ��,..:�� �� _ :__ f :
Location � Eagle River,Wisconsin
Owner � Eagle River Light and Water Utility
Features
• Interior wet coating removal and replacement
• Interior dry maintenance repairs
• Exterior maintenance repairs
• Structural repairs
• Design/build delivery methods
• Direct selection by qualifications
• 10-year maintenance agreement
SEH Design�Build Services
• Engineering evaluation
• Construction management
• Rehabilitation
• Scheduled maintenance
• Annual condition survey
• Telecommunications site maintenance
Size � 300,000 gallon
Completed � June 2006
Total 10-Year Cost � 264,700
multidisciplined.single source. � www.sehinc.com DeSI 090
�J SEHDesign�Build,Inc. 500,000 GALLON STANDPIPE
� REHABILITATION AND MAINTENANCE
.� . �
��HE_, i � °@ '�� ��
�JLLp�k �� �t
o�� � , .�{�
� �
� -`"" , � � ���'"%
� ',%1 ,�'�
v ^\ �y��•.�i'i ��'i } � � �h� �.
� K/
r [
� � I 9 �
I� � � ,p1
fi � _ F
.e �
.. ; � � J/��S , ��*s,��
, , , r ,�`,A �tr.� � �.��. � . � � ��, �
�,�:,�'� j �� ' �►w,�.�". ..-�'� ���; `� �;
� � 1 I / �.p�,Y` �.
1 1.. \ \,/ _�` � r - � t ,. ;
, , � � r \-'`�` , �� ;�� � : �, .
� �i t� �+�� � t' >,°f � � ``��
� �' �� ,�, � ?.
,, �
. ; �
�
.F -
. �/ ) �4����q � � `
� �°� _1 .������ _ ___. � �
Location/Client � Chetek,Wisconsin
Features
• Interior and exterior coating removal and replacement
• Exterior removal by vacuum-blasting method
• Structural repairs
• Design/build delivery method
• Direct selection by qualification
• Five-year maintenance agreement
SEH Design�Build Services
• Construction management
• Rehabilitation
• Engineering evaluation
• Scheduled maintenance
• Annual condition survey
Size � 500,000 gallon
Completed � May 2006
Total Five-year Cost � $279,300
multidisciplined.single source. � wwwsehinc.com DESI 010
JNORTH PARK WATER STORAGE TANK
SEHDesign�Build,Inc. I .0 MG PEDESTAL SPHERE
� REHABILITATION AND MAINTENANCE
;
�;; ;
� :� �
��
� i
�.. �� � ' ;
r... �_, � ., � ��
� .a.. .
: :
�,
�
.. ��,,y ��,
� ��f�ti�� �
�°��`� �
J,�;_. :� �" .,. . ..
�«.. ,: -.� ,�
�� ' � i
..« .�y. � ,� -� ,
s+, ����f ,� �- r�
— +�,f•�5 ':i:: .. ,.. _ e _��
�r a
F �
� � �;� �
�`�„�..��%tq,g� i ���' .
r � :� �� ��
���� ��
� � � � � # x
�
� -F � � 1 I �� � �
��� ���RF�r - k[ '���kYY ��
+���*'��i_ �rt'.• __-_' .._ I��. .�.� '.��:.. � _..:.. �, ��;.
Location/Owner � Lakeville,Minnesota
Features
° Interior and exterior coating removal/replacement
° Tank assessory upgrades
• Design/build delivery method
• Direct selection by qualifications
• 5-Year maintenance agreement under Minnesota Statutes Chapter 358
SEH Design�Build Services
• Engineering evaluation
• Construction management
• Rehabilitation
• Scheduled maintenance
• Annual condition survey
Completed � May 2006
Rehabilitation Cost � $361,400
multidisciplined.single source. � wwwsehinc.com L��I C;C;7
J/ SEHDesign�Build,Inc. 2•5 MG GROUND STORAGE
//► RESERVOIR REHABILITATION
�` ��l
,
:��i
.�.�, ...� �.;�:� ti
� ��....
� _�-
� �
_,
7 �:�
I ' -
T
.
� d�.. �
.r. . _
n
t n ' �
� ', � `I"�..__:
' ' �-�
�-'�, ,'Y�
.
�
_ � � - �
_ � _
, �
Location �Austin,Minnesota
Owner � Austin Utilities
Features
• Interior and exterior coating removal/replacement
• Exterior removal by vacuum-blasting method
• Structural repairs
• Tank assessory upgrades
• Design/build delivery method
• Direct selection by qualifications
• 5-Year maintenance agreement under Minnesota Statutes Chapter 358
SEH Design�Build Services
• Engineering evaluation
• Construction management
• Rehabilitation
• General maintenance
• Annual condition survey
Completed � October 2005
Cost � $332,037
multidisciplined.single source. � wwwsehinc.com ��SI CC5
Classic Protective Coatings
Classic Protective Coatings is a partner of SEH D�B as the contractor
who performs the field rehabilitation�vork on the water tanks. Classic
Protective Coatings is based out of Menomonie,�1�isconsin, and has
completed numerous traditional design-bid-build projects throughout
the United States. References for a small sampling of projects follow.
City of Owatonna, Minnesota
Myron Volker,Public Utilities Director
��-��° , �;,a.�? 208 South Walnut
vo�,
Owatonna, MN 55060
Phone � 507.451.2480
• 1,000,000 Gallon Ground Storage Tank
� 'E • '750,000 Gallon Elevated Tank
_ _ _ ; x
City of Alexandria, Minnesota
:� � Scott Dietz, Public Utiliries Director
" 316 Fillmore Street
�± Alexandria, MN 56308
Phone � 320.763.6501
� � _�.�j� • 400,000 Gallon Elevated Tank
,�'°�,`:�� � .�.�
e"' � �� " ` '��!` City of Wauwatosa, Wisconsin
. _��_ _a.�,� Joseph F Kroll, Project Engineer
500,000 Gallon Elevated 7ank 7725 W NOT'tl1�Ve.
Wauwatosa,WI 53213
Hobbs,NM phone � 414.479.8934
• 2,500,000 Gallon Elevated Tank
City of Chippewa Falls, Wisconsin
Rory Olson, Public Utilities Director
30 West Central Street
Chippewa Falls,WI 54729
Phone � 715.720.6914
• 750,000 Gallon Elevated Tank
• 1,000,000 Gallon Elevated Tai�k
City of San Antonio, Texas
Joe Isbell
2800 US Hwy 281 North
San Antonio,TX 78212
Phone � 210233.3613
• 1,500,000 Gallon Elevated Tank
City of Hobbs, New Mexico
Charles Rothwell
300 N. Turner
Hobbs,NM 88240
Phone � 505.397.9315
t • 500,000 Gallon Elevated Tank (see photo)
!�
SE H classic protective coatings � page 34
City of Temple, Texas
�.;_, Mr. Anthony Daniels
2 North Main
Temple, TX 76501
�� Phone � 254.298.5621
�1G - _ .
`�� • 1,000,000 Gallon Elevated Tank
City of Norman, Oklahoma
� �� �� Chris Mattingly
���� : PO Box 370
�, ...
a�:� � ��'"��""�� Norman, OK 730'70
Phone � 405.321.2182
• 1,500,000 Gallon Storage Tank
City of Pensacola, Florida
��>¢ Tom Dawson
*��" � � �� � 9255 Sturdevant Street
Pensacola, FL 32514
�r �T � �. Phone � 850.476.5110
"'��;� _ � � `'�� `'" • 100,000 Gallon Elevated Tank (see photo)
l, ,
�
_ i
City of Canton, Georgia
i�u,vvJ C�ollon Pedestal lonl< DOIl HaI11aI1tCee
Pe�sa�o�a,F� 391 West Main Street
Canton, GA 30114
Phone � 770.479.1813
• 1,000,000 Gallon Elevated Tank (see photo)
City of Syracuse, New Yorl<
���-{��-�+► Nick Kochan
-- 200 Northern Concourse
� Syracuse, NY 13211
Phone � 315.455.7061 ext 3130
t :� • 1,500,000 Gallon Elevated Tank
� � • 1,500,000 Gallon Ground Storage Tank
+�
� - City of Bastrop, Louisiana
� Sherlock S. Gillet Jr.
� 217 North Liberty Street
Bastrop, LA 71221-00 i0
'��-` Phone � 312281.2160
• 600,000 Gallon Elevated Tank
I.0 MG Elevated Tank
Canton,GA
��
SE N classic protective coatings � page 35
Machinery and Equipment Listing
In the execution of this project, SEH D�B and our contracting partner,
Classic Protective Coatings, may utilize some or all of the following
machinery and equipment:
� � �'�," �., �� • 53 foot equipment trailer complete with three-room
� r
�:� � � , � decontamination unit.
� �,..
� • Late model Ingersol/Rand 150 psi high pressure air compressors.
�� �i. .„�
��J� �
� ���� ,, ""r' ���;�,�^���►� • 53-foot blast trailer with self-contained, high-production blasting
�d��� ,� ���'t " '����,��� machines, eight blast nozzle capabilities complete with 2500 cfm air
� � �� , � drying unit (for clean dry blasting air).
•� r
'� • Testex surface preparation profile depth measuring equipment.
.���
r'°�;r�'"`'';�"':' ;-�� '��.';, _ • Fruehauf 1525 cf pneumatic dry bulk trailers for onsite additional
clean abrasive media storage.
Typical CPC eight-nozzle setup for hand-
held blasting operations • Case 588G forklift or Case 95XT skid steer for material handling.
• Miller full body safety harnesses, Miller shock absorbing lanyards,
Miller�/" rope grabs,�/�" poly safety lines.
I • Bullard 88 series sandblast hoods���ith 1000-to-1 safety protection
f 'I
factor for fresh air breathing.
� �� �,,,, '� • Bullard CO2 monitor, for monitoring fresh breathing air.
- �� �' • Sensidyne personal air sampling pumps for monitoring employee
a
�;
- exposure.
' � '�, • Tisch environmental high volume TSP (total suspended particulate)
���� and PM10 (particulate matter) neighboring property monitoring
_ equipment.
CPC owns and operates the largest sand • 3M 6000 series HEPA (High Efficiency Particulate Air filter)
blasting pois used in the United States. reSplTatOT'S, 3M 6000 series charcoal and organic vapor respirators.
• Lumidor Four Gas monitor, to ensure confined space entry safety.
°r� � • Bullard Hardhats, Uvek eye protection and Classic ear protection.
� � ', - • Swing stages with sky climber po�a�er units,with sky locks for
....., . � -
1 �.� � � , additional safety.
� - �
� '�`�`��` .� � • Sky climber baskets for additional staging with sky locks for
-- �� ���� additional safety.
� � • Lincoln Electric Vantage 500 amp diesel engine driven industrial
r , y. �a�
welders/generators.
• 40,000 cfm HEPA dust collection systems.
CPC setup dries 2,500-cfm of air during
• High volume 5600 Hg (inches of inercury) industrial vacuum unit
abrasive blasi cleaning
for removing and handling spent abrasives.
• Extreme duty containment systems with 2 foot overlapping sidewalls
as defined by SSPC (Society for Protective Coatings).
• Extreme duty containment bonnets with airlock door entry system
for lead or chromium removal projects.
• Ingersol/Rand pneumatic winches rated at 20,000 pounds for
raising containment side walls,winching equipment and supplies to
� the top of the tanks safely.
�
5 E H classic protective coatings � page 36
• Graco 56:1 industrial painting equipmcnt 7000 psi capable of
atomizing all industrial coatings to meet the most stringent
specifications.
�� • Defelsko Positector 6000 film thickness measuring equipment, to
_ �":
' � ��-. ensure uniform film thicknesses.
�,�.'�' ,j�, ._---!
�t;; � • TQC Dew Check ambient air temperature, surface temperature and
. .
`� �} � x dew point monitoring equipment.
T Y ' ..' .,. � �....r'!
'.�
�'�� . ' • Off-site, complete structural fabrication shop for bending, rolling
.'.`�y� - � ` '�. j
� � " �` and welding metal parts to repair or upgrade any size tank
� . renovation project.
40,000-cfm dust-collecior to be used under
exterior containment to produce negative-air
conditions.
��
SE H classic protective coatings � page 37
_ � SEHDesign�Build
�i�.�,
, 0�0
R
:`R' .�.
.. . � �l . - �s
� �; .
� - .� ,��..�. �.�-�._���.�
��.. ..... �., ..,.. . .. ... ,�� . "
.+��...`�' ,,"-,
`� --�.:� _ — ' � -�\-
� ,
�
�-
� �'�'-� s-�
� -� ^
., �. -.< .,r
_ -_ n `'��
� ` �. � _ .�
� ��� 5��� 7�}'t �j,,y \,^ '� ,� �,, �'.
i�r 6.. � � �.:. � ; � -
� a�� � � ;� � �'� ; �-
.,�k��. � ���:> r . � ' ,,- �� � =��`
:�,- �` � : ,}�.�
, \� }°':� .� =,
,, ;�_
• j�, -
`� �
! `
; . t
� `` ya�`,�' '�� ���`�°'� ��
. ,., � �� ���
� �0.�� � • ��� <.
4 eI� ' �F A 9r� t z Af t �+
r� � � � s
y,�Y�n!``�tri�� � s `#(+�,�«+ '4.h <,n ` � t ��' `�,�� � �4
� ��'��° `�f�,��f��` j �'e � K.' :� ' � :�� �t'i�:� � �'f� �'4�'v 5����t�+�, �1
r
> /`� ��r ,. '��.d � � ' �� �* t.* ,� .
�� ��"! #'��5 t1 f .��'� ,��� i� r� �, .�� ' � � �� � '� 3Y� 5-
r� t �g 4 ,r � �f. �. . d�i�'�f'�� `i M. �� �yi� �. �y* _�.
.�,,�Ld5 y ��i. � �N�'�� � .:J' '4 � x�..
� "iq�,�.�l�.3.�'f� � �r� ',t'' ,�� '. � ''�4� �v� Y,� � � � � 'r � "� {.� ..
� G �,� � Ir,,� . ✓ t'7�
a f � � �'w � � � � � ��..�,
� ;��"�' P� r��� . ���� ;�`� ' �i�c __ `�!���';�a�� *
it ♦ cy e
�s � %1 I "f' 4. �y� t, \_2. 'd 1,3r � .-fi'i
PIlOtO 1
Water Tank Evaluation Hydropillar Tank
' December 6,2012 Orono,Minnesota
�/ SEHDesign�Build
�
...t. .
.. J.
, '..1f i . . � • �,
. . .. . � ....�. ..<..... .� . �_. _i
PI�`T-D�S MO(NES, ([�C.
BU(LT UNQER�f�E OR ft�ORE a�THE
FOLLOWING PR.TE��ETS
�
� �- <—< �—� �-----� �
� .
.
_ . m e� �_�, .
.
��r � . - :, .
� . ,
... , , , � . _ , . � ,. . _.
Photo 2
��'�� ;�,- �.�.�� ..$, , "s, �� .; �g
� r , �i;�, ' fi µ,�i- $°c.,� . `�� ¢t ,�f
^� `� : d
�. ;��,`'� , � fft �'�' � �i',•
� , . ��
.3 � + � {k� Y
. �.:� ,����;� � �. .'' ,�'�
. }r `,�. �'r� ;` �`�� �� ��
� ,r ��� �� � . ;��..�. - �:'�"
�.� � � �°� � �_ �: � , �`�
, "A *_ .�, r. � - � . � ,� �. � ,� �'
;� �-_ - ,:��'. - •. ,;„K � ���,
� t w r Y � Y� LR ��n ���d� �'�f"" "4,!.
, ��S�{y�;.�� �4�'� �y.4 �' ���t .� � .� �'» .
�� � � � � �LL ��' � ' ��4 �,�+'�i
Ip�. +���� �r'�1 � ' ' ,sfi� � , � 4 .���4c
t . �}. � $ �,+'L," ' �_ y��� ¢ ::
I'� - , .i . :'M��''� w � .: � � ' �� � i 1'�:e:t
� � Jr ��� #�. � �� �� ��u t��;
�, . . � ``� xi � ., re�, . . �. j��f��s:l�.
a A,�„" � � ,
� .+�''+'� �`i � .�, ��� � `� '� «��, . . s ��t�"":., t� 4�r ,.;�
� �'f1�:,�'�i��'��� +a�� t ��., ��`:�''•!�' + '�
i'. �*L�-� �, ^ '�� �s^"# ,�'x., ,� �..
r, `1� i�.' ' � `.:�ti _ :. . ` �`,,
Photo 3
Water Tank Evaluation Hydropillar Tank
December 6,2012 Orono,Minnesota
J SEHDesign�Build
�..�
6 ( . { J
�.. 1��y�flK. j �:.��� ` /�/
W� ; t � �:
;�r�r�y�r �;.� • `qq� y
t y 1 ('$ �j.���.. � ���j�`r �.
i , �,y i
rt �„' �.. � $i�� ;-.
na,� }�{ifi " _ �''���',��/ ,
�'� {�(�l .' ,� ��� '�b�
1t � p h �
�! 1��� ��� '�� � + � �.
1� � "� �'+.� o; <. � �%
�� p ?}J`�� '� ��' �'���' �+ ; ; �r k
� �' 1�% ��j?: , �, �,' �' �
" �;,3 � t , " �"'� '/' f f
--
, , .
.. �:. _ , , ,. ,,
.
�, _ �.
--�� -.� ,,, �
. t y� . �. - R".'
��'�°f� � � Is. ��;� '
.� ���.. ..� �� ' �:f" r.
� {; �
, �
: .. . �''D, . � � „ �^ ; Z 9 w
p�.'
t�' i��La�.
„ AY ;� •,<�,, .,�r "�` .,,;�"
*r,
i �r���` i�'"WUP R,�a' ��, .� ��.
� �- � � �,��� `�'��'�
������� � ��,�t �
�`� .' � �� `�, ,,, �i i�
� �
�"��- +�`,� �'
x
K -+��,, -`"` $ .�'-�ai
Photo 4
,, � �
�, , ,
� ,
�� . �� � 71�'� �� l� t ��� .
��y•� �Ji'.' I��.
� � 1 1 �( �� �G � 1� )'\
'� y� � �� `,,i ��yf� \�' \ k�f� �' � ,#� .
��e�� }t ��`�� ��^! Y ��il"p�' �� `'��1��'.�F � .
a���td:� � , ,�7y�}.._�s+� . ...{ �� ..��� y t���� � _ �
+� 4� ,� � ' �� »i �� t z r h`�6 ���
� I���� �j�� ` �i � 1 �
f � ,� ��"� �ix, t j�` � ���u�.�k'•
- "'- � ` ' � R "_ -r
,:s`r �.� : _c= a.:°
'°� �-�: k �'� r i
�� ��a�� `� � �!��
� ��,:,.. =� .
j `{ ' � '� ��fi� �?;g,.•_ .
I . _ - - .► + ��° � � 3 � y ��"9'�
r
! ^' ' �{_�.
� �_ ' � 4 ��,^'���.���]:e
�' � - �
wr°'`. 1. ' - - . ��� ���
�„ _ �$
_ �. .: -, ,
;$^ " ,�'_ '�` � � � �—
». ✓ �
:r-
�l�t `r ..,e
'v :# T�'
PIlOtO S
Water Tank Evaluation Hydropillar Tank
' December 6,2012 Orono,Minnesota
�J SEHDesign�Build
�
.� .
��
,
. , �
. r . � r ��� ��
� �� �ti �t
___--- ��� �,.
i ��' Y��.
L' ,m��,y��� ; { ..�' V�Z ._ ,�.. „ . :�.
"'- �: '� . _ n...�
_ �,y
. ��Y' y b,, �
. �� � ��. �
. -'� ,� �.+� '�ne.�f. �,,�`
K-
K�'���` x.
� � + �� . ��;
t�� 4j�1� �+��` �M
PIlOYO C)
.i,
.,
•��:
�G , . �`
�t $;,"?
a �'�'�i
,� ��� ;.
,: , ,;�,�,A ,,��
� x d� ,
�"'�'^-�� �.W�_� ;.
j .':..-- r ,��"D�";r. � ,s
�� .• �� �y'� � 4'��
' � x,s �
y ,�� �}.'
7
\\..; { ��� -��3�� §�e�
� \` J��a.��, `�.neir,.v� .��.�..�„� � a �.-erC��
� �./_ . , ti , ,,.�a' �.. v '��`�'La��'RA� �'e ���`'���=
,�, v.�fi �;,,x��t*r:q a- ., :'6e� ���
- ' a�. 4 " �'�""`�� s f% �.��Ge
- � ,�/� ♦ ji� � +rt $�1 �, ..y
�.�p /'r fi E �-� �� .. 9�����<
`�1 - �9'� 3M1��T¢ �'��.�v'arvts, � u � tat fi-:
/''�"�� ��� i "`R y.. y t� q.� '���i���t,'����` � �
..A.' .. . ... ,. '�; �` �� ..'t'`�e9��'�-« �� � -44a ����� J ���`.
.y, „�v��'y� '�s•
. . `,� '.�! �.111���„ - �� �b 4�)���i'��z�5�1Y�
. ��'�.�_�� �r,����9�.i�'' �E�i� ��r�!`� ��$���°a I
$�" �<►C�',_j� � ����'JY.� �a*�`-�. ��a^t*!"J���•� i`s.��t �*p� �
yr,� .� 4� � L' �'i�" ` �' p '�+er �.� „i ��� -w
�ip y°`�S�;T� s`�y�e �f�r�+,�� �h�,��d� ��R��� ,*.K�.qg•<7- t �-�,�3 a�u.
�. � r 1~�'��� ��f�V,/� rg+�e„ .h q•�,`"'�'+�^-.r; R.,� '� lhrA.,�,��a.,f� �
beP'�, a � a- t
�'��,� ��''Y`%'���°+�'�'',�i'a� �.'����'�z�t�;�¢ e, :'�,� � �•� �-� ,
��?.;Il�����.'�f.. F r � t���`!� � „: �����+t��s�. ''-,;`. r ti �b�.
/�'�s��'%����,,y.,�..�k;�P,'r� ,s'�'�i'�, f a� :."'�°n �t��' �;.
PIlOtO 7
�
v
Water Tank Evaluation Hydropillar Tank
December 6, 2012 Orono,Minnesota
� SEHDesign�Build
�.,i
t
, �'�:
� , � �,.
!�� �<,�
. ,
� jj;� ,,i� "��� ����r
,,j��( ✓<R {�
. � f i t p�Y.� .
� � �/''�; y,r _
-'<` t�%I�1 2"�� �,.-
`' S�'�; ,�� r l�e� �,
"�i� �r
-�� � �r . \ � ._ _
!� '.
Pr,JC
� ..... . . . A_Kq�` �. - r .. Y t" /� /a' r�;.
...:�. �`� .�4/ f� �� ..rk���/� � � :
��K - �7��fj J r3:r .'
��.� ni� '.�r, m � ¢Y3� '�'. - �k o.'
s ra��'�;-'��.".� a �kFt�',�c ' a" :-_, ,,,,i 'N >:
t '�.:- 1 � a�_
�;k�,t���,���ki,' ��.r� � 4� ,,,� '� v„
� „'� ; � _ .� : ' � 3z
* P'y! .. s� �. { R_ �1 �� 3�} ' �'�= -,. -+I w '"`N S 5
.: fi ."s ,_,S,Fa �. ��j ��s 1 '� � , ..-e--'�+
�' s .�.�� N,�• ; �.��y v. , _ `��y ��.� y �za
�,�'�.ei ,�� l.�� +�� }' ro .M V`i�°�t �f- � `j.�
ffi �Y..,i� �����:� 'M''�y"��r.��+� �,�,��;a� . .�����3 . . tc.
�,��� ,�i+.r il;.� �"` � d } ti'��S+�,s��'�t �� r .�� ��i»� . ay
� "��.�a � � 5 � .��t�rs � �+"fi'� � �'k '� s :
� '` �t. e•"tr d'� a� lz�.a$`� `��r'"��'�� $� �2 ti. k 4!_
t i y
,�,j, ��''r�:, `E`� i..�yy�� �.�S�l'! Y +(Nr4� . ��t� l� � ���.`i�ae �
+`�'g�•x,-ti„c �°'.a i� 'r•,.y�+ :������Rc�'�vE�.���� - ` . .��'�� �:?�w3l.
:��` ��t: � r,.� ,�ti�". �.":Ya:._ `3'ff.� .`�'�..M3.yi �l'f���',��:�~ .P7a� .
PhOtO H
i�'�� �
%�s�.� �"+
M;�p/t��• ' .E/'i
/S•
c�di.���'i�'/�i
v+�i�i+ �` r<����'.,.�,.s����
',�� .=N���.- 3-�:
_ 1��1�1�1� ti Z .'-�:,'`-����.w
D�JVJ q �;y� �a��� ���,�p��
� ,:/r� '`d�r�!i"''�,�.!��r"[.'
�. ��j/�� ,�c�r * �'.,,, � l�d-y
.� k9 s��jl� �r �,�a ��*r�� _ . �•i
A :'�s�. ^,NrY,,a'' :.,» :,,,
� � � j''+� +���►
�:�jGj�*'' `fs 9t. `.�Sss, ,�' �
�� . ;�� .�. r���i� .��������`���
tZ
r . '������\� � .#► 4.,�,� ;���1 !.
��- a;e� -
"t*!r 's'` � \\� •�, s.+��.} �I �4A � �
���� �`��D \��� � Iy '� s9�,��s`� �
.Q ��\ Lf ` . �a RSYi'•+rr�-r .�7
,�� C"I�'`�
�>,,,syr��"'.\\ :�\�•\ ,<Y ' 3cs. �. �,.'�.:'';:���.�
�f � . \ ` � -��4' 1�� '*�, ��..--,
`'�e :�`.� 4\�°� ���sr,��'�= ''�'�,-r-�' <�"�►���
./ ��` ���iy Y�i''i��lr � ,y""�',�-- "�a'.�'?�. v�.-�..,��.�-
,i' ,'�\�:'�c '! ,wy.;-��,���' rt.* �•` SI
PIIOYO I
Water Tank Evaluation Hydropillar Tank
December 6,2012 Orono,Minnesota
�J SEHDesign�Build
�
.�_.
,
_ ;�, �
.r=" �.
�
•
i�`= `
�r�,,, `_s`
�`,
��c �.
���'�^t
� �
PIlOtO IO
�
r y,
t
Photo 11
Water Tank Evaluation Hydropillar Tank
December 6, 2012 Orono, Minnesota
, � SEHDesign�Build
��
�
: ,..
- i �:;
, � � �4�
��� �
_ ,_�
�... . � ,� .:.�;
=--=_---- ,
_ ; _
' § r
,� .,
t t �sir
��'r�t�� '`��
����������Y k
i '° E � f;� {1
� � {:
F � �x
��
^�- ...��:.c� ,y� �-_.:-_ �;�, _.<
... —.._�.w.i����'�� .r ... _.. � �. � '.
, ..�� ,�,...�::.�,.. . .
,.:. .� _. , ... '�_�—..�---- _:�'�',, ^TM..�... ...,:
�— �r
� � „►f
, {;�,,;f,'t- - � . <s
PIlOtO IZ
�
� i�
�� r� ,�w
..:�k$��;v
,�����
�
� n
v� � �
' ��'
�s? �'�
�:;
g ..
.
�,:,
ir �:
����.� �.���,� �� �� � k .
PIlOtO 13
Water Tank Evaluation Hydropillar Tank
December 6,2012 Orono,Minnesota
/J SEHDesign�Build
�
� Photo 14
;��::�
:,*
�� ��, � ;
�� m�� �� �
�.�.: �
. ��;� �, �
, ,,,�,,`��,�.
. € � ���� 9 ���
' — ..i!..��K�, � �! �.�� a:
!"� �\ �t{��
�y � '±• 9 �.�:
y� � � �,
,.�''✓,s ,��R �rf�a ,� �?`�
��s�� �`• �+��'`��,
���� !g-, s
�g��' A ��
� ,, � �, '� ��:
_ �� � � ���
:���a � :e�.: .a'- r� p�!�
', +`. '����� ��4. ��2 s ,^��
-- ' �� „�' •.:`�, ,�' ` .,;'� -;��
� � h �{����,���
<.
� t.., :�L, i,4{.;��C-_ . �!:� ...+"` �».�_.1�t�'
- � -- '" :. ,-.=:v. � ..
,�.-�4;,,^ P Il Ot0 1 S
y
.y
��_ , '��
R
�� a *
�ti
�i �
� .. ..,-.���- ..
� �
., �11`.�.";a.a.z. � ._...�.w.
. ��
�
4°,�, �,
PIlOtO 16
. � ,
i > ,
. � � �� .
��`. ;;,;.; A�"
� � �
R
� �
`"�: "'��
. , �,
`� ;kr
�,-..�. _ - ,�
`«f ��,,,.«� `. �:q
:� N� �_ ___ �� _�.
Water Tank Evaluation Hydropillar Tank
December 6, 2012 Orono,Minnesota
� SEHDesign�Build
�.,�
Photo 17
� ��.
.�,
� _��-_
�. 'F i
~ �; '� ; �
�_' �,
:� ` ',���J�
��, � .���,
{ �
� � ,�.. _ �
x' � aX�
..�i . ...�' ; n I f.,-�.'
i4.e�'.
��. g w,�'�' :.3
. ' ..��z ..r ...... _<.���:'.=::
' :'� - a ���' .. ...._�_;4::
�I �_ � � ��r� P}lOtO 1 g
j �
, � ��
�,+ ' ',� i
�
1 1
� s
� �`
a ��:
�"��i.�. � . \ .dx`-'� � 'a
't -.a�"�,t.f* i
i�, . � �a
�
� ��`�'
--r; �; ,
� ,� '
� �q �
Photo 19
.
=-� _
,� ..
. �«� .
�
.�► .
�
.
.
Water Tank Evaluation Hydropillar Tank
December 6,2012 Orono,Minnesota
�J SEHDesign�Build
�
rnoto Zo
_
= _,,
�� �.� �
�
,�`�, �;�x �£ - ��' ,� ��:; �� ,,s
}, �_` � �:
";a,? A34 " -r4 �! � "�"' -, a. ""� P�lOtO 21
U. h p �
�;'� "[ '� t+���''�� � . �', �� >..+.s++i
��%� �+'S'.�l pc4�' 1 R'" Zq a � ,(n p`n •,"�'� � 3t �F z.:d
..�1L � M C: � t._ � �� �
xt,.`:. „y,.
.���ti �` �'' � ; / ..,....;a-�'
�i�
? Xk�.� '.i� +� ' i �.� �J�'i� .._s.F ��:,
r c�.. .� �-. � 4, r .x a,n � ,.s
,�.n'Ae-
� . t �
���J $��� '�'��~} � ., ��' 4 � �� � y�J
I +}�, y ��>J � � .� � �" r �.,�_ iC � -.�
S. ! ��,*s x� ' .�a , ��a�` T.� 1 �, � -�,.�a,�
���# �" LL � {� �, �-��. '��� "�
�. �. �"` , n. '" ,
++..'14�� 4��,J �r� '��'�,��' �,'� � - � � A: .
.
., �� ,�n �.':� , _.
' �� �R {3 a�.+��,'.
y,�� � ,�< �: s�'�
�� �et � p ?�y�`�„
�.;x'„
PhOtO 22
�k;
"'�
f
Water Tank Evaluation Hydropillar Tank
December 6, 2012 Orono,Minnesota
�/ SEHDesign�8uild
�
Photo 23
��O
2
�
. ���.
_-__,
- , _
-�_.
, ` ��--�
�.
�.,_. _
�_ ,
Photo 24
1 ��
r
..,���
_ �. ,,.
�
� �..�
�
Photo 25
.,._ � .� . .
� ".
�.sst .°n�;,
`�'
��Y$�,^4/�`" �—z�
��
:�: ��
_
,.
��•
Water Tank Evaluation Hydropillar Tank
December 6,2012 Orono, Minnesota
�� SEHDesign�Build
�
Photo 26 ���� r_
�.
. ���� ���� �. ���
�,�`��'` � �'�'z
4:
.. ��s'�� .:.� ��,. ��i
�� ��� ���"����E �
��" k����'� :��H
¢v.
� _- PIlOtO 27
. .. .. .'� ..P):�.- .
ik
��«r{..!9y`_1 .
P�lOtO 2g �. 'qt�
�� ' ,�'�'` `�,",
�r
�� ,�„ .,.
�.
��"; aa
`g ,p
Water Tank Evaluation Hydropillar Tank
December 6, 2012 Orono,Minnesota
J SEHDesign�Build
�i►
Photo 29
��.{
t: �r.
.l ,
4
:� . ���.....
_ i
I; . - . .. ' � �
§... i Na L.` _ \
Photo 30
a � /;-I
% f
� . �
�� ' �"� � ��
,� ,
,
1
;
Photo 31
`���� ���:�
��� , _
1
•�s �
,�y { s +
!
Il� �i
,f
,,�^'�,
_�II � . .� '
—�--�- '�
Water Tank Evaluation Hydropillar Tank
December 6,2012 Orono,Minnesota
�
� �` SEHDesign�Build
/i►
�
� Photo 32 . �
�
( ' �
I �" ,;�- �/_�.-
I � " ��'
.�.
1 � �
� ��
,�� ���,� ��� �� �,;�;
� �: �.
�
�
�' � Photo 33
� � � . ,_
�
� ��
� { • < s#�L ,� � � ,
` � , a t�1;
.: ic�� �
��,f�p � .._ � ..Z� yai''�a.
� ��� t'g'- ���...;�qr.�.... . �+^�;Z'y''�:
JC .�.r s . '.S"s"' ._:.:� �
:
6�`'� ,fi ' . -� - ' � . `� '
.-Grx ,... ` 1
' f, -�'�� � «+s��� .I-;, ,�, V.� � r a".�x� � �S�'�
! .��" ��,.� ��:�..w « .«, ` *` . ` � : . �.��5�
�.a_r t ♦;� �,"` „ ,� � F � ,���'"'y+.�.. Y ' �, yl$
����� �,4�� ;�",�,u b . � ' �,4 kp � „P. r '..'��
1 1 �".� � '�� � w 4 �l
' ' � �� 1 .,�,+�;� � �'��
� � �t�
1
� Photo 34
�
' t
� -
,;. • -
' ;� .. . t .
�
��� . .
� �� . � ;
� � �.
�,� .
�
� �
� -
�
' Water Tank Evaluation Hydropillar Tank
December 6,2012 Orono,Minnesota
�
� SEHDesign�Build
_../�
Photo 35 �.;r �. � ��ir�-���� �"�
<<,, �, �
4
�• 1
\ �
� /
1 • �
/
�j�f�. x ';
.d' '/ �
,:: � :� . .:.. ,�. � � t...
� \',�
� �I � ��_: �s � � i 'v
fJ �'''` r. � '�
� �� /I
��. r ,� ��—� - �.:
��� ' r
;�
:�; Photo 36
� _
�
W�,
. ;
. �� -
I �
_�- ���
,,� .
'�
�
Photo 37
� � .,.. ..
� _ -:� �:
� � �, f
��:
�,. �f�,"`, ,
� �:
"�'
�
i
� �
4
� �'.��
� r
Water Tank Evaluation Hydropillar Tank
December 6, 2012 Orono,Minnesota
JSEHDesign�Build
_./_.,..
Pnoto 3s r .e , _��.�x � �
.�, � ,�
µ
� ..5
�:�, �'�=_.._.
4?,^— - "`�'`' �a.� N ,.:s.
�y��:; � � __
° t
, 1�� � � 'c�v ' .-:q /y �.:
� 1' '�" -
.�.,i
`� �'i
, �
:a
�
�t' ''
%
- — _ . _ _"'�
> : � ,,
,x y Photo 39
`'Vii�. /^ .
��
�
�'
���"
• ��I /
1'.
�i�t''.. [,.
l
� .�' �. V6� .
^����`"'�: '`��,;,.�. se"8e
�w
���� �
-v F �t��£
��>� �.
Photo 40 . � >pr=�, � � ,�: �
. _ �,F���ga
e
rrrpl �
�� ��
( �_
t�/ �
9 — � .
-�-��.�.--__�- +,/� i'�,.��"
_ �
� � • �
� �
�_ � ���
�
- �
- ` �
� \
f �
yz-.
�.F . + }� � a 'i�@�;
Water Tank Evaluation Hydropillar Tank
December 6, 2012 Orono, Minnesota
J SEHDesign�Build
_.•f..
Photo 41 = :
_ C � _ -•
_�
_ �
.-r 4'
�'�� `'"--+�
>
,/ �
=�,,..
� ��
t �
s
� �
f
-.r �
_�;����. . �
r . � '�'
y �
� - + ;
;�� -�,a ,, .. r . v � `-,
� , ' ���-, wr.�r, .. . . 1L' . • . + e.- •'!''..
..''�,r ':� .it �+t, . �' ����.'
Photo 42
, :, ., ._�.,
i
` r';�
_ 1�
Photo 43
:��:
� �b4
� �f
�_`�
�''
�
�
�� ��
t
Water Tank Evaluation Hydropillar Tank
December 6, 2012 Orono,Minnesota
J SEHDesign�Build
_./�
, Photo 44 '"
`,� �.."""�_ �„��„„
�
. - �.
O
� n�
�
��
��
Photo 45
/ _
t _� a �
�� �
:
� ,.
.
T
�F •
��
; , -'�
,,,R; � � ���r�
��, .��
,,
Photo 46 ��� � �
- ---�—______ -:�
� �� �<
Watcr Tank Evaluation Hydropillar Tank
December 6, 2012 Orono,Minnesota
l SEHDesign�Build
�.i
Photo 47 � �_ � "
s
�Y
�;
��`�`- � ���� � Photo 48
p� %°"£f
a.�_ � � .- ,
. . � � ; 5��r�;,;_ i
- i a
�
Photo 49
Water Tank Evaluation Hydropillar Tank
December 6, 2012 Orono,Minnesota
J SEHDesign�Build
'_�i.
,. �...�, ..
Photo 50 ''�' � �
�
:�..
i,eea ess+aoo��••ry '
. � ,
�
�i',�
� �
' _ � i•
v �
Photo 51
`. ,
*�
S; �
_ ..'."�'. �'- �' �y�� �I '
e
� i��q�� � ir��r
�h�' �
� �_ �
i �� i.
A,�z
",�?
��.�
.�..,�
���
.
w..
1���, .
Photo 52 � _.�� ��'"
� ��� �I �
6 ��; ,
� �' �
�i I `� -��
f
� 'M� �� ` _ ; � ��
�
�� a � �� ' - �� I 1� :
� � �; �
��� � �
�:,�, _ � � ? � ,��
3��
, �....."• �
� �,::::.
Water Tank Evaluation Hydropillar Tank
December 6,2012 Orono,Minnesota
�J SEHDesign�Build
�
r. _ _ --
Photo 53 '�' -
E
�
{ �
�\.�
�
� ia ' �
� �t
�,. J ` �
„�rl�:� � �. �,
, '�:�;
,
� � _
■ ��� �
;�; �
� Photo 54
�� ,� � a�
I���
�
�j #
�
�� ,
f
„ �
,
, � �
_---- �, ,
�:� � '
'
��u:, � .
�>���
Photo 55
__--_---______
� _________
, _._,�
� :
e �� ��� � �� �
jg�� �
■ a .. � ... ..i 1.,. , . 5
� � �t�:
� t
� � �' t�
y-,:u::..:.,,,'.
{ �
� Water Tank Evaluation Hydropillar Tank
December 6, 2012 Orono,Minnesota
�J SEHDesign�Build
�
Photo 56
. _�:,:
� , ��. .
� rr^\`�
�. �,,.✓ .�,
�' . �� �.
, ���:.
: � ;� � ��� ''�,
. � �
� � Pnoto s�
,;� s
i
- � �
� �� a: ,�
�
! ? • �".�'./'� a ta� i `
� • ���� �'rt • i V i
. �` . ..._.�' � _ �
. .
.�.� ..���_ _ _ .�
_ ,.
�� , ; � --
�' ��.'.� '�"' � '� Y,V�"�+� T`a-.
�e"`'S �XI �`;�y".Y��`:�.,w—�.. �a �,.p` �.
'I g�R{ . . 1 �T`x,.�r�'� ��. +
Y
' #��,x� � , �°'�g3`� .,
.
. ; . .v .-. �-.
.
�.^...
.. _ .�..=�� —_"" _._. ..._
Photo 58
� � � �
_._
,r„ _..
'�;
� � �
�
, �
.�, .
Water Tank Evaluation Hydropillar Tank
December 6,2012 Orono,Minnesota
J SEHDesign�Build
�,/�
Photo s9 `�� �. .
�
� .:,
<t � ��n
� � �� #
__ i
.x,-:i,t
-� , ' . .' �-.d 'w'2,..
'-`�� ... � ;i...�.
�
`�V
� � .
r. � qa_
�
%' PIlOtO 6O
�� _,_
_�--�
`� v$ � �'
3.�� � ,� �� �
�►, ��, �
�'� � #
� r,� ~ .�t�'` '
i �� � { � ��°
,! � �*`� � �� �� '
. �,�, f
`�/
/
�
�
Photo 61 _
_ �,����
��
�. ;..
�;;� r �4 � „�
,`�\•�A � �
,
s
� �'• . �Y ` ' •
a ��
�4..�` �� c �h7c ;J �
. �- � '� �
�S.
c:>t wr yx ��` ..&�,:. e��.
�.�,
�
r f ��.x ;�� .
� �_
�r�� � ��� � . ��
Water Tank Evaluation Hydropillar Tank
December 6,2012 Orono,Minnesota
J SEHDesign�Build
�__�
�,��
Photo 62 f . �,,�� �,�
' �. �
�� ! E�- � �, �
M,
� �'
� ` 1'.
�`"wa. .:�t �,k � \�
,�;,�� ��
�
' �
�`` ..� �'� ��
� M�
� Photo 63
�.;
N �
� j
' � �,�
� ��
}; � � ,
;� ,.
��.,.,..�-,..,-,-_-._ . � _
. '
Photo 64 � ----- - - .
' � ,�' �
sY�
�;
�.
`�,, _ �
� T
i��� _
�_.-�.�.,.,,,e,= '
� �
� �
I
Water Tank Evaluation Hydropillar Tank
December 6,2012 Orono, Minnesota
�� SEHDesign�Build
J
Photo 65 ' �
��; �j
�' . � �' -
�
_
>'�. �. � ��
� � rt
�. ��;; . �
. ,��
�;:. :,
�Y � .�
�`- . - . � _„�� a ��:r.� �sg=
��� � ' ��
...r � . -. . . .
�`"�, _ - � .. .':fi,
r��: , .T 8
.:.*.^� .. . .
� � Photo 66
�: .
,�_
;�� �
�
�,�"
��
�
.: � � � ����
. �
■ �
�!�
�
Photo 67
�,���F.
� a �h
,�,
�t'� �`
Water Tank Evaluation Hydropillar Tank
December 6, 2012 Orono, Minnesota
�J SEHDesign�Build
�
Photo 68
�.,
..�'.
S
�
a
, ',
�
� '� , Photo 69
t V:
� � �
�yi
� \
�
---_-----.--�..--._ f�'.� _�
:, ,
„
�� _ x x � �<
`� _ - ` � � �,
:, �
:.. � ,
. ,�
� _ T�� ��.
��
'� � � ,��_ �
. :,�
Pnoto 70
{ ,
�:;
�►; .:..< ���;
�b>,
", .r'`.'. .
�
r•
��'
�s�;;� ,T�
�
j
�
��:
Water Tank Evaluation Hydropillar Tank
December 6,2012 Orono,Minnesota
�J SEHDesign�Build
�
Photo �i �� �'
�,
�, $ _
� � � �
.,� --- �
, .
� _� ��
� "4� *�.
�, � � :��
`a�
��� �''f �� '
i' ,
� � �j y �.. ��
///`` .. �`� %:,
�/ l� ,
J
.' / :d
� '
.� __ � .._..., .. x ._ _ ..
r , P�lOtO 72
. ,,;,.
��
��G:
�
�` � *,;
� :� �:
����
,�,,
�,
, �
' � �, '
�„ywe�
�� I
PhOtO 73 ��
�'',,t
� ' �
<
�.
�' ` h
k
;�,\\� `��,, �§ •
�� ��b
t
� � ,waF�".�'�.
� �s t� y}
� d�n0��2 ���:} �4 '
`< _,
d°`' . �'j �, ,�:
:-� ��'1',1
� . '�. .-4���� . ,.
Water Tank Evaluation Hydropillar Tank
December 6,20l 2 Orono,Minnesota
�J SEHDesign�Build
�
Photo 74
�'
:�� ., =. ��„
���
��� �: � �
E m. �
.�
,;, "` „I � .�,,���yqi'° �a�
�i
� -
. �
``�.� . ,., / �:;�.
� i
n.` _ —___ --f >:..
� Photo 75
.��� �y'
�-
.��
,�
�:�
i
'y���>= _ �. � ..
��
.:.4 _. , '-3'� �;..:. .
kr (
F��� S _
Photo 76 � ,�,y
� -
:
I
� a �. '�
■ 1:
�i.
�'��^£Y���:.�' S�",`., .
k h'.3vn
;�
, .
-.2�A � 4�
,
/ a.< �
✓
� ��.��� �
�w ;
-,� ���
, ; a:..:
� Water Tank Evaluation Hydropillar Tank
December 6, 2012 Orono,Minnesota
/ SEHDesign�Build
��i►
Photo 77 �'�� '
�
��
. �
�
� . �
��, �ir ,-,�,. �
,r, .
� -,�l���- �'� �
� � �, d;�f , ' �,;:;
.s���. _ ��
ri > '`
,,.
- ° .�
.
_ � �} ��
: � � �; %'�
�,.,,.n � :.�
� �� "��� � � � �� � , :� �1 Photo 78 Cut out for cables is 24 in.
1
���,, ���� �� °�, by 24 in.
�� .� �
__�
r j ne:j g ,P�..
�
��r
� � V ..��_.4��
�,�"r«`' " �y ¢��t 4!"$i
...��.,mH+,�d:5&��uh1Y i i
� ���
h .
� �
♦ '
Photo 79 Access tube diameter is � �
48 in. � �°
� �
� ��ti
� � ���\ .��;�
�q ' "\�A'"'�
2y
�Q
v'a
� \\
� � �
0
� C
bq.
%R.
Water Tank Evaluarion Hydropillar Tank
December 6,2012 Orono,Minnesota
�J SEHDesign�Build
�
__ _ ---
rnoto go ��
<= �
�.a
�
�" a'.��i'� f�-�' '
W ,,.,r�. "Y. 04- ..
N h4
G��
:.. � .....e.. .,��. ... � 4� .
��✓ r �r �
i� �_. '
r �� �� S�_
f���
���, . . .��� .; .
�i,
� , ( ...
6 , . *� �
��
l
�M;F
f T
Photo 81
� X
`�2 , ��t1��� ' ����F�� &'
.i . . . . . ....��.,.� R. �
F�
� ,...$�kLe .� � ' ��
� �-
..`� �§ ��� .
� ��i �
� I ��1
'.,�'. '' �
Photo 82 � # ,
� � ,�".
�
,
_ r.-
,� �: .-��
■ � ' ,..+;,�+
�" *y �
.��. �{' ��tR . �, .
��� �'�� - � - �. .
,e.e4 4 ^.��"r' _� F_.. .._. '� ... _
'�s�' 'y ` � �� +� I�
" � ..y
t� :�:� � -
1� � `� ,��,
� �' f��` y��
� � `
�
,
Water Tank Evaluation Hydropillar Tank
December 6,2012 Orono,Minnesota
�� SEHDesign�Builtl
�
Photo 83 - ` ,/
, � ��r � .
�� .,rw..�` � �
s' p �y�` �,.-
:` -�. .y � j.
".,�`., . � ,�.� ,
.�
��,.yw�...,.1,�....,, � � ,
ni.. � i' r ,_
,
l � �
, _..
,
. .,,,
1i➢�� �r+�o :, t� . _�.
�
�� '� '
F��,�� .
�
'� �_ �P
` �
���� �� � � Photo 84
�;.
��I! ��'�,�,
$ , .r
�. .
. � � , �.
� i H��,,�� :�
_ ,,, �-
�� ��� � � ��
��� . ` '��� = ,`,�"''�
�� � ��f� �
;bw� i ,� �,, :.,a+
�-r e�
6 ~�, \
�� ¢.at ` '� �n
/ � �.
. �-. � � r,\ �-`1��•
.� •.�a�'�• ��5
� � �x_ �
$�
PhOtO HS A I '�tl: „�
�,�,.; .. s ��
��� ��
� ,�:`�� ��w
::�' �`
�,
� ��
� i
� �PI '
... � �
K,.�.
k,;.-
Water Tank Evaluation Hydropillar Tank
December 6,2012 Orono,Minnesota
i
� � SEHDesign�Build
�_�
�
� Photo 86 Sprint and Nextel are both = �"'` ,
on tank. They are going to ,, ; ����j � °
� combine into the control ° ' �
i
building to the west of the � ��7Q[1 �tiWjtCh OI' C�jl �r�� �'���-�,, �
� tank since they are the same � ;;. ,;'���z`�� $upp '
�'; C1Cf
I company. ���''� C�11 , Oi' �I7l+�l'��1�t:'T��'
Ple� 1
��� a�e TollI='r�:��:
«�"'m,. �`"a�['10�l�� ���r��10 '
� �., , ns C.Qrn�;rc�� �'������,� �.;
f� F�a (�oc�c��
'},SAO�(?.��1..y SpR7NTPCc -�-^a1
� `�ft� ...." l��f{� �- -ess-ta.
y � f)�j'Sl�IE��� � _._
� ?�s^. , �.,
, 377 ��
I f .
; ' � �"�
; :�
_
� j
�, r T
�
Photo 87 Sprint and Nextel are both
� � � � on tank. They are going to
� ������ combine into the control
building to the west of the
I tank since they are the same
RF Controlled Area Beyond This Point company.
� Radio frequency ("HF") emissions may exceed FCC
Standards for general public exposure. Only authorized
workers are permitted to enter.
IFor your safety:
►Obey all posted signs.
I ►Main[ain minimum distance of 7 feet from all antennas.
►Do not stop in front of antennas.
I For further ioformation,please call 1-888-563-9835 and reference
Site Number
.on w� e fCC�u ra in mi«i ns 4)CFP 1 t3t11 ILI
I
� Photo 88 Sprint and Nextel are both
� on tank. They are going to
combine into the control
I building to the west of the
tank since they are the same
` company. �
i `�
s�
I IN CASE OF EMERGENCY C :
888-563-9835
` MN 0064
� ., _ —
(
(
�
` Water Tank Evaluation Hydropillar Tank
December 6, 2012 Orono,Minnesota
�
Jana Nyhagen, PE
Professional Engineer
SEH Office Location Ms. Nyhagen is a Project Manager/Engineer with ll years of
New Richmond, w�S. en��ronmental related experience including; modeling, design,
construction, surveying, staking,inspection and technical report
Education vvriting.Jana is responsible for design, reports, permitting, and
sa�he►or of sC1e�Ce environmental documents for water projects, as well as project
Environmental Engineering
University o f Wisconsin-Platteville management.Jana is proficient in MS Word, Excel, PowerPoint,
Platteville, w�s. (�ooz) AutoCAD, Haestad Methods WaterCrlD, NIWHSoft H��O Map and
M��I ISoft Infowater.
Professional
Registration/Licenses Jana has spent the last several years taking water projects from
p�o fess�o�a�E�g�neer�� inception to completion in various roles, including design engineer,
Wisconsin (#39065, �oo�) construction engineer, and project manager.Jana has also completed
several water system studies. She works closely�vith the Wisconsin
Professional Organization Department of Natural Resources (DNR) and Public Service
Affiliations
Wisconsin Water Associotion
Commission (PSC) to obtain approvals for various projects.
(WWA) Newsletter Committee
cno��(1oo9-p�ese�t) Jana has lead and assisted on various facets of water engineering
�o���a�co-Ed�so�(zoo9-p�ese�c) projects including studies for water systems and well siting; design of
wells,�vell houses,booster stations,water treatment facilities, and water
towers. She also works with well abandonment procedures,wellhead
protection plans,water distribution system computer modeling,
permit applications, specifications, shop drawing review, and project
proposals. Recent communities Jana has worked with include
Abbotsford, Barron, Balsam Lake, Chippewa Falls, Ellsworth,
New Richmond, Osceola, and River Falls, Wisconsin.
Jana strives to make at least one presentation a year, typically at an
annual conference, and has presented on various technical training
topics at trade conferences.
Experience
Water Modeling/Water System Studies
Water Modeling—Various Communities. Project Manager for various
on water modeling projects.Jana's responsibilities vary from water
main extension modeling to meet Department of Natural Resources
requirements, to water main and service sizing, to water quality
modeling, to fire flow, unidirectional flushing, and other analyses.
Communities include Danbury, Howard, Lake Hallie, Red Cliff,
Whitehall, Monona, Roberts, River Falls,New Richmond, Thorp,
Hixton, and Mondovi,Wisconsin, and Hurley, South Dakota, as�vell as
several communities listed below.
Engineering Report and Well Siting Study—City of Stanley,Wis.
' Project Engineer for an engineering report and well siting study
including two new wells, a reverse osmosis softening addition, chlorine
contact tank, clear well tank,waste handling, and backwash water
/
J
SE H Jana Nyhagen,PE � Professional Engineer � page I
reclamation.Jana worked�vith the DNR, Rural Development, and the
Public Service Commission.
Engineering Report—City of Abbotsford,Wis. Project Engineer for an
, engineering report comparing several options for additional supply
for the City.Jana completed the report showing options that included
surface�vater, groundwater under the influence of surface water, and a
32-mile pipeline.
Water System Study—Village of Balsam Lake,Wis. Project Manager
for the�vater system study.Jana was responsible for water modeling
and projecting future water system needs, and follow-up work
including an in-depth water storage study and lifecycle analysis of
options.
Water Rate Study—Village of Frederic,Wis.Project Engineer for the
PSC water rate increase worksheets for the Village.Jana coordinated
bet�veen the PSC and Village Staff.
Water System Study—Westboro,Wis. Project Engineer for a water
model and system study for the sanitary district to address poor water
quality concerns, as well as high water loss. Several recommendations
�vere made. SEH assisted Westboro in obtaining fiznding for the
projects.
Water System Study—City of Barron,Wis. Project Engineer for the
water system study.Jana performed�vater modeling and a study which
analyzed storage capacity, supply capacity, and the overall condition of
the system, and made recommendations for improvements.
Water Rate Study—City of New Richxnond,Wis. Project Engineer for a
rate study to evaluate alternative rate structures.Jana worked with the
Public Service Commission to lay out alternarives for the city's water
rates.
Sanitary Sewer and Water System Needs Analysis—City of
New Richmond,Wis. Project Engineer for a planning study for water
and sewer system planning.Jana analyzed existing system information
as well as projected growth to recommend improvements and timing.
She also updated the water model and analyzed the existing and
future system.
Comprehensive Water Study Plan—River Falls Municipal Utilities,
Wis. Project Engineer for the planning study as part of the capital
improvement plan for the Utility.Jana updated the existing water
study plan as�vell as the water model,working with the utility staff, city
staff, and local de��elopers to assess water needs over the next several
years.
J Water System Needs Analysis—River Falls Municipal Utilities,Wis.
� Project Engineer for a planning study completed for the River Falls
�
SEHJana Nyhagen,PE � Professional Engineer � page 2
Municipal Utilities water system planning.Jana prioritized projects
and provided cost estimates for developing impact fees. She is
currently updating the Needs Analysis every two years for the Utility.
Capital Improvement Planning—River Falls Municipal Utilities,Wis.
Water Engineer for the Capital Improvement Plan.Jana�vorked to
determine water faciliry needs based on 20 year population
projections. Cost estimates were pro��ided for projects needed within
five years, and triggers�vere identified for all projects needed within
nvenry years.
Water and Wastewater Rate Studies—City of Chippewa Falls,Wis.
Project Engineer for rate studies for the water and wastewater
departments.Jana worked with the finance and engineering
departments to complete the studies. The water study followed Public
Service Commission standards.
Engineering Report—City of Chippewa Falls,Wis. Project Engineer
for the Engineering Report investigates alternatives for serving
residents and businesses in on the east side of the City.Jana completed
a engineering report for a water treatment plant for the West
Wellfield. Several options were evaluated for to�ver locations and
booster station improvements. Safe Drinking Water funding was
secured for this project.
Engineering Report—Village of Osceola,Wis. Project Engineer for an
engineering report in which a second�vater source was needed.Jana
helped identify alternatives, and assisted in securing Safe Drinking
Water funding for reconstruction of Well No. 3 to eliminate the
arsenic in the water. The well was successfully reconstructed�vithin the
existing well house.
Water System Facilities Improvements—City of Thorp,Wis. Project
Engineer for report and design of a water system facilities
improvements.Jana worked on the engineering report and design of
this project which included research and design of two�vells, a ground
storage tank, a booster station, a uranium blending/radon removal
treatment plant for tl�ree existing wells, abandonment of nvo wells and
reconstruction of two well houses.
Water Treatment Plant
Northwest Water Treatment Plant Addition and Central Water
Treatment Plant Modificafions—City of Stanley,Wis. Project Manager
on the two water treatment plant additions, two wells and well houses,
connecting utilities, and water treatment residuals handling.Jana
designed an addition to the facilities to provide membrane softening
and maYimize water recycling, minimizing water wasted to the waste
water treatment plant, as well as modifications to the Central Water
Treatment Plant for backwash water reuse and brine storage.
_ /
�
SE H Jana Nyhagen,PE � Professional Engineer � page 3
Professional Associations Daniel J. Zienty, NACE CIP, SSPC PCS
American Concrete Institute Associate � Senior Project Design Leader
(A CI)
Nationa�,4ssociation of Mr. Zienty has served as a Protective Coatings Specialist at SEH for more
Corrosion Engineers (NACE) than 15 ears. Dan has a Bachelor of Science de ee in Construction
International y �
American warer works Technology from Purdue University and holds several certifications
Association (AwwA) including National Association of Corrosion Engineers International
Society for Protective Coatings (NACE) Coatings Inspector, Society far Protective Coatings (SSPC)
(ssPC), Past Chairman, Norrh protective Coatings Specialist,and Supervisor far Deleading Industrial
Central Region Chapter
Minnesota state wireiess Structures. He has received numerous Engineering Excellence Awards from
,4ssociation (n�NswA) the Consulting Engineers Council of Minnesota for his work on water tower
restorations, and has authored and presented related articles on protective
coatings maintenance. Dan is an active member of SSPC, and past Chairman
of the Narth Central Region Chapter of SSPC.
Dan also has extensive experience in the development and management of
telecommunication sites at municipal facilities. Project expertise includes
conceptual and final plan review,tenant/landlord facilitation, maintenance
coordination, and construction inspection services. Additional experience
includes tenant mapping/inventory,lease reviews, and project coordination
as related to the reconditioning of water storage tanks. Dan has also authored
and presented numerous articles related to site construction and
coordination.
Water Tower Reconditioning
Inspector on numerous water tower reconditioning projects throughout the
Midwest. Dan was responsible far plan and specification development for
maintenance and or reconditioning,including provisions specific to the
abatement of hazardous materials and the reduction of fugitive dust. He
managed structural modifications to comply with current American Water
Works Association(AWWA) and or Occupational Safety&Health
Administrarion(OSHA) guidelines, and coordinated field inspection
services.
Minnesota
• Tank Reconditioning(400,000 gallon)—Anoka
• Brisbin Tank Reconditioning(400,000 gallon)—Anoka
• 2001 Water Tower Waterspheroid Reconditioning(500,000 gallon)—
Aurora
• Ground Reservoir Reconditioning, Design Build(3 MG)—Austin
• Concrete Ground Storage Reservoir(2 MG)—Brooklyn Park
• Boone Avenue Tank Reconditioning(1 MG)—Brooklyn Park
• Water Tower(150,000 gallon)—Brownton
• Buck Hill Tank Reconditioning(1 MG)—Burnsville
• Grange Tank Reconditioning—Cottage Grove
• Safari Reservoir(4 MG)—Eagan
• Yankee Doodle Ground Storage Reservoir(5 MG)—Eagan
• Lexington-Diffley and Safari Tank Reconditioning—Eagan
• Ground Storage Reservoir(100,000 gallon)—Hill City
/
�
SEH Daniel J.Zienty, NACE CIP,SSPC PCS � Associate�Senior Project Design Leader �
page 1
• Moline Toro-Standpipe Rehabilitation and Recoating(2.1 MG)and Blake
Double Ellipsoidal Rehabilitation and Recoating(500,000 gallon)—
Hopkins
• Water Tower Reconditioning—Isle
• Tank Reconditioning, Design Build(1.5 MG)—Lakeville
• Reconditioning Tank No. 2 (1 MG)—Lino Lakes
• Double Ellipsoidal Tank(250,000 gallon)—Camp Ripley, Little Falls
(Minnesota Army National Guard)
• Balcerzak Toropillar(1.5 MG)—Mankato
• Tonkawood(500,000 gallon) and Woodland Hills (1 MG)Elevated Water
Towers—Minnetonka
• Double Ellipsoidal (500,000 gallon)—New Hope
• Ground Storage Reservoir(300,000 gallon)—Paynesville
• Standpipe Reconditioning(1 MG)—Plyinouth
• Double Ellipsoidal (150,000 gallon)—Sandstone
• Tank Rehabilitation(750,000 gallon)—Sauk Rapids
• St. Joseph Tower Hydropillar(l.5 MG)—St. Cloud
• Watersphere(150,000 gallon)—University of Minnesota, St.Paul
Campus
• Water Tank Reconditioning—South St. Paul
� • Commerce Court Tank Rehabilitation(1 MG)—Vadnais Heights
• Hydropillar(1 MG)—Vadnais Heights
• Tank Reconditioning(500,000 gallon)—Waite Park
• Elevated Water Storage Tank(50,000 gallon)—Waverly
� • Double Ellipsoidal Water Storage Tank Rehabilitarion(500,000 gallon)—
W ayzata
Wisconsin
• Tank Reconditioning(500,000 gallon)—Altoona
• Ground Storage Reservoir Recondirioning,Design-Build—Berlin
• Pedisphere(250,000 gallon)—Black River Falls
' • Standpipe Reconditioning, Design-Build—Chetek
• Pedestal Reconditioning, Design-Build—Eagle River
• Ground Reservoir(3 MG)—Eau Claire
• Waterspheroid(150,000 gallon)—Grantsburg
' • Wisconsin Street Elevated Tank(150,000 gallon)—Hudson
• Ground Storage Tank(1 MG)—Hudson
• Ground Storage Reservoir(750,000 gallon)—Mondovi
• Tank Reconditioning(250,000 gallon)—Monona
• Elevated Tank(250,000 gallon)—New Richmond
Tank Reconditioning(400,000 gallon)—City of Anoka, Minn. Project
Manager on a 400,000 gallon tank reconditioning. Dan was responsible for
development of plans and specifications, construction administration, and
coordination of inspection services. This project provided a case study,
evaluating standard interior two-coat epoxy, epoxy zinc, and single-coat zinc
systems in service as part of a complete tank reconditioning.Recipient of an
Honor Award, 2006 Engineering Excellence Award—Special Projects
Category, Consulting Engineers Council of Minnesota.
/
1
SEH Daniel J.Zienty, NACE CIP,SSPC PCS � Associate�Senior Project Design Leader �
page 2
Plymouth Road Waterspheroid Tank Reconditioning—City of
Minnetonka,Minn. Project Manager/Inspector on the 300,000 gallon
waterspheriod tank reconditioning. This project used UHP water jetting for
the removal of the exteriar paint system to reduce spent waste and worker
exposure. Recipient of an Honor Award, 2001 Engineerir�g Excellertce
Award—Environrnental Projects Category, Consulting Engineers Council of
Minnesota.
Colonial Hills Tank Reconditioning—City of Burnsville, Minn. Project
Manager on the reconditioning of the City's 1 MG standpipe. Dan provided
preparation and/or review of plans and specifications, and construction
administration. In addition, Dan provided daily inspection of the surface
preparation and recoat process including necessary field testing.Recipierrt of
an Honor Award, 1998 Engineering Excellence Award—Environmerrtal
category, Consulting Engineers Courrcil of Minnesota.
Heather Hills Water Tower Reconditioning—City of Burnsville, Minn.
Project Manager/Inspector on the 7 MG water tower reconditioning project.
Dan directed the comprehensive field analysis of proposed coatings systems,
preparation ofplans and specifications, detailed cost estimates,project
administration. Dan provided daily inspection services as a NACE
(International Association of Corrosion Engineers)and SSPC(Steel
Structures Paining Council)trained inspector. He also provided daily visual
monitaring for compliance to environmental regulations. The project scope
involved full removal of both interior and exterior existing coating systems,
and subsequent replacement with an epoxy/epoxy polyurethane coating
systeili. Minor structural modifications were also made including the
addition of roof manways for compliance to current Occupational Safety&
Health Administration(OSHA) Standards. Presented a Grand Award, 1996
Engirreer•ing Excellence Award, Consulting Engirreers Council of Minnesota.
Tank Reconditioning Projects—City of South St. Paul, Minn.Inspector
on the City's tank reconditioning projects. Dan developed and/or reviewed
plans and specifications and assisted with construction management for the
City's 400,000 gallon elevated tank, 1 MG ground storage reservoir, and
750,000 gallon hydropillar. Reconditioning specifications were based in part
on previously completed evaluation report. Projects included complete
' interior/exteriar coating removal utilizing containment(400,000 gallon and
1 MG tanks) and spot removal with complete exterior topcoat(750,000
gallon tank), along with applicable structural modifications.
��
SEH Daniel J.Zienty, NACE CIP,SSPC PCS � Associate� Senior Project Design Leader �
page 3
•
Classlc
Protective Coatings
Wisconsin � Texas ( Florida
Ray L. Witke
Obiective
Complete tank renovation on a national basis, profession, high quality projects, supervising multiple superior-
trained employees. Operating in the safest possible manner with no exceptions.
Experience
Classic Protective Coatings, Inc. 1996�urrent
• Specialized in containment, lead, and chromium abatement.
• Completed over 350– 100,000 to 5 million gallon elevated and ground storage water tanks.
1 missile crane for NASA located in Cape Canaveral.
• Supervising over 40 employees on a daily basis.
TMI Coatings, Inc. 1991-1996
• Completed renovation of a 7.5 million gallon storage tank, .5 million to 2 million elevated water
tanks, 700 ft. smoke stack.
Williams Power Cooperation 1986-1991
• Completed over 90 million dollars in maintenance contract for Florida Power and Light.
OB Cannon, Inc. 1976-1986
• Accomplished 200 million dollars in renovation for International Paper.
• Fulfilled 2 million dollars of renovation for Gardenier (Cargill).
Education
• Certified in Industrial Staging from Sky Climber, Inc.
• Certified Dike containment lining, boiler, and Turbine blasting for FL. Power and Light.
• Completed Supervision Training and GS Competent Person Training.
• Certified in lead removal.
• Certified in nuclear coatings and surface preparation.
• Completed training in back safety, confined space entry, hazard communication, lead safety, personal fall
protection, personal protection equipment, and respirator protection.
References
• Available upon request.
N7670 State �Iigh�vay 2� � 1VIenomonie Wisconsin �-t7�1-�928
SSPC Telephone 715-233-6267 � Facsimile 71�-233-62G8 SSPC
QPI • QP2 •
w�vw.classicprotectivecoatings.com
�
;�,'
•
Classtc
Protective Coatings
Wisconsin � Texas � Floricia
Eulo�io Valdelamar
Objective
Complete tank renovation on a national basis, profession, high quality projects, supervising multiple superior-
trained employees. Operating in the safest possible manner with no exceptions.
Experience
Classic Protective Coatings, Inc. 1996—Current
• Specialized in containment, lead, and chroinium abatement.
• Completed over 250— 100,000 to 2 million gallon elevated and ground storage water tanks.
1 missile crane for NASA located in Cape Canaveral.
• Supervising over 40 employees on a daily basis.
JR Stelzer 1996-1988
• Renovated multiple elevated and ground water storage tanks.
Education
• Certified in Industrial Staging from Sky Climber, Inc.
• Completed training in back safety, confined space entry, hazard communication, lead safety, personal fall
protection, personal protection equipment, respirator protection and C-3 competent person.
• Completed training on SSPC application coatings, SSPC coatings technology, SSPC quality control, SSPC
surface preparation.
References
• Myron Volker , Director of Public Works for the City of Owatonna, MN Phone: 507-451-2480
• Scott Dietz, Public Utilities Director for the City of Alexandria, MN Phone: 320-763-6501
Langua�es
Fluent in both English and Spanish.
N7670 State Highway 25 ( Menomonie Wisconsin �-�7�1-�928
SSPC Telephone 715-233-6267 � Facsimile 715-233-6268 S�
QP1 QP2 �
www.classicprotectivecoatings.com
�
COUNCIl�M�'�TING
REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION �'AN 2 7 20��
DATE: January 2����0
ITEM NO: �
Department Approval: Administrator Reviewed: Agenda Section:
Name Jesse Struve Public Works Director/
Title Public Works Director/City Engineer City Engineer's Report
Item Description: Fuel Sales Agreement
List of Exhibits
A- Yocum Oil Company Price program Sales Agreement—Gasoline
B- Yocum Oil Company Price Program Sales Agreement-Diesel Fuel
Historically fuel (gas and diesel) have been purchased on an as-needed basis. Using this method,the
price of fuel varies throughout the year. This methodology can lead to large swings in fuel prices
throughout any given year. In 2013 the price to purchase gasoline ranged from $2.63 - $3.90. The
attached agreements will lock in a quantity of gasoline at approximately $2.65 per gallon and the
diesel at approximately $3.13 /$3.25 (summer/winter blends).
On average, the City paid $3.05 per gallon for gasoline in 2013. If 2014 has the same average price
per gallon as 2013 the agreement would save the City approximately $13,000. Unfortunately, the
cost savings is difficult to forecast since it depends on future gas prices. There is risk involved
should the price of gas drop below $2.65 per gallon because then the contract will ultimately cost
more than purchasing fuel on an on-going basis.
The agreements will require the City to purchase at a minimum of 33,600 gallons ($89,040) of
gasoline and 8,400 gallons of diesel fuel. This represents approximately 85-90% of our yearly totals.
The remaining 10-15%will be purchased at the going rate at the time of purchase.
It is my recommendation to accept the two price program sales agreements for gasoline and diesel
fuel from Yocum Oil.
COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED:
Consider a motion to enter into the price program sales agreement for gasoline and diesel fuel with
Yocum Oil.
.
r
� YOCUM OIL COMPANY PRICE PROGRAM SALES AGREEMENT
Yocum 4il
EXCELLENCE IN ENERGY MANAGEMENT SOLU710NS
YOCUM CONTRACT NO.: CITYOFORONOGAS14 FIXED PRICE AGREEMENT
DATED: January 27�h, 2014
SELLER: Yocum Oil Company, Inc. BUYER: City of Orono
2719 Stillwater Road PO BOX 66
St. Paul, MN 55119 Crystal Bay, MN 55323
PRODUCT: Gasoline 87 10% Ethanol
QUANTITY: 33,600 Gallons
RATABLE TAKES REQUIRED:
X YES ❑ NO If"Yes" see below;
RATEABLE: Buyer shall take delivery of 1/3 of the Quantity each 10 day period of the contract month. If the Buyer
does not take delivery of the required Quantity in accordance to Rateable clause, Seiler may in its sole
discretion charge the Buyer a"Non-Rateable"fee equal to the non-rateable portion of the Quantity
multiplied by$0.0300. If multiple contracts within the same delivery month exist, ratability will be
enforced over the total gallon sum of the aggregated contracts for that delivery month.
FIXED PRICE: Invoiced upon delivery excluding all other applicable taxes, duties, and fees.
The following products may be delivered with this contract at price and volume indicated below.
Differentials for various products including but not limited to dye, biodiesel, ethanol, or performance
products may be fixed for each delivery month on the 1S`business day of each delivery month.
Applicable delivery differentiais may be invoiced as agreed upon by Seller and Buyer. Transport
deliveries will be invoiced upon delivery at fixed contract prices plus freight differentials by location.
Tankwagon metered deliveries may be invoiced at market rates and reconciled with contracted fixed
prices at end of each delivery month.
Product—Deliverv Month Quantitv Price/Gallon
Gasoline 87 10% Ethanol Feb 2014 2,700 Gallons See Addendum A
Gasoline 87 10% Ethanol Mar 2014 2,700 Gallons See Addendum A
Gasoline 87 10% Ethanol Apr 2014 2,700 Gallons See Addendum A
Gasoline 87 10% Ethanol May 2014 2,700 Gallons See Addendum A
Gasoline 87 10% Ethanol Jun 2014 2,700 Gallons See Addendum A
Gasoline 87 10% Ethanol July 2014 2,700 Gallons See Addendum A
Gasoline 87 10% Ethanol Aug 2014 2,700 Gallons See Addendum A
Gasoline 87 10% Ethanol Sep 2014 2,700 Gallons See Addendum A
Gasoline 87 10°/o Ethanol Oct 2014 2,700 Gallons See Addendum A
Gasoline 87 10% Ethanol Nov 2014 2,700 Gallons See Addendum A
Gasoline 87 10% Ethanol Dec 2014 2,700 Gallons See Addendum A
Gasoline 87 10% Ethanol Jan 2015 2,700 Gallons See Addendum A
EARNEST MONEY DEPOSIT-DOWN PAYMENT: "Vliaived"
� �
� o
Page 1 of 3 Rev 3/09/O1
�
♦
YOCUM OIL COMPANY PRICE PROGRAM SALES AGREEMENT
.,,, �„+o�+ti...,«tio�� . .
tl��-$ . .,,.+., o +tio Q „ �?ti.�i��he-�ell�-th�'„�-��.,.��ao�e+lG��� +��f+ti,�,w��o
DEFICIENCY PAYMENTS:
If, during the delivery period, the Buyer does not take the Quantity, Seller may, in its sole discretion,
charge the Buyer a "non-compliance" fee equal to the difference between the open market price
(average posted prices at the contract terminal(s) during the delivery period) and the contract Fixed
Price on the"non-compliance"volume. Note: A"non-compliance fee"will only be imposed on the Buyer
when the Fixed Price is greater than the open market price. If the market price is greater, then no fee
shall be incurred by either party. If the total delivered quantity during the month exceeds the contract
Quantity, Seller's applicable market pricing will apply to such excess volume.
PAYMENT TERMS: All payments will be made via Seller initiated Electronic Funds Transfer(EF� Net 10 days from Invoice
Date. Buyer agrees that payments not received by Seller or still owing more than ten (10) days past the
due date,will bear interest at the lesser of eighteen (18%) percent per annum or the maximum lawful
rate per annum. If Buyer's ability to pay or creditworthiness shall deteriorate in Seller's sole judgment,
Seller may,without prejudice to any remedy reserved in this Agreement or other lawful remedy, defer
shipment until payment is made, demand cash payment, or terminate this Agreement pursuant to
Termination clause. Buyer acknowledges that Seller's withholding or terminating of credit privileges does
not constitute a constructive termination of this Agreement, nor does it relieve either party of any duties
or obligations under this Agreement. Buyer will pay all costs, including attorneys'fees, incurred by Seller
in collecting amounts owed under this Agreement.
DELIVERY PERIOD: During months as outlined above.
F.O.B.: Orono, MN
TERMINATION BY SELLER:
Seller reserves the right to terminate this Agreement immediately if Buyer fails to comply with any of the
terms of this Agreement, its Addenda(if any), or any other Agreement between the parties. Any
outstanding obligations of Buyer remain in effect if the Agreement is terminated.
FACILITATORS: Tony Yocum V/Nate Kovacevich 651-739-9141 (SELLER) Don Debaere (BUYER)
CREDIT: Credit shall be arranged with Seller's Credit Department(651-739-9141).
SPECIFICATION CHANGES:
The above prices are based on current federal, state and local product specifications in force for the
given market on the date of this agreement. Notwithstanding any adjustments described above, if
specifications change during the Delivery Period, Seller may deliver product that meets the
specifications in effect at time of delivery and may adjust prices to reflect the fair market value of any
changes in specifications. (Includes Ethanol, Bio-diesel and Ultra Low Sulfur Diesel as mandated).
LIMITATION OF LIABILITY/DISCLAIMER OF WARRANTIES:
Buyer shall indemnify and defend Seller from and against any liability arising from any breach of this
contract by Buyer and from and against any liability, of whatever nature or kind,to which Seller might
become subject resulting from Buyer's handling, storage, sales,transportation, use, misuse or disposal
of product purchased hereunder, including but not limited to, liability for environmental violations and
employee or consumer health or safety. Buyer agrees without limitation to promptly and properly
provide its employees, customer and community representatives,as appropriate, any information
provided by Seller relating to hazards, human health, or human or environmental safety on product sold
Page 2 of 3 Rev 3/09/O1
, YOCUM OIL COMPANY PRICE PROGRAM SALES AGREEMENT
hereunder. In addition, in the event Buyer believes or has reason to believe the information provided to
Buyer by Seller is inaccurate or in any way insufficient for any given purpose, Buyer agrees to
immediately inform Seller of same, and provide Seller a reasonable opportunity to supplement or correct
the information.
FORCE MAJEURE: Unless otherwise expressly provided for in this Agreement,failure(in whole or in part)or delay on the
part of the Seller in the performance of any of the obligations imposed upon the Seller under this
Agreement shall be excused and the Seller shall not be liable for damages or otherwise,when such
failure or delay is the direct or indirect result of any of the following causes,whether or not existing or
reasonably within the contemplation of the parties on the Effective Date, namely: acts of God,
earthquakes,fire,flood, or the elements, malicious mischief, insurrection, riot, strikes, lockouts,
boycotts, picketing, labor disturbances, public enemy,war(declared or undeclared), compliance with
any federal, state, or local law, or with any regulation, order, rule, recommendation, request or
suggestion (including, but not limited to, priority, rationing or allocation orders or regulations)of
governmental agencies, or authorities or representatives of any government(foreign or domestic) acting
under claim or color of authority,total or partial failure or loss or shortage of all or any part of
transportation facilities ordinarily available to and used by a party in the performance of the obligations
imposed by this Agreement,whether such facilities are the Seller's own or those of others; and if failure
or delay be that of Seller,total or partial loss or shortage of raw or component materials or products
ordinarily required by Seller, uncertainties in the supply/demand situation (which may include a decision
by Seller that the costs of some crude oil and petroleum products which might be available are
unreasonable).
LAW AND JURISDICTION:
This Agreement shall be governed by the laws of the State of Minnesota, excluding rules of conflict of
law, and by applicable United States federal law.
WAIVER: No waiver by either party hereto of a breach of an obligation owed hereunder by the other party shall be
construed as a waiver of any other breach,whether of the same or a different nature. No delay or failure
on either party's part to enforce any right or claim which it may have hereunder shall constitute a waiver
on the respective parties' part of such right or claim.
AMENDMENT: This Agreement shall not be modified or amended except by written instrument duly executed by officers
of other duly authorized representatives of the respective parties.
ENTIRE AGREEMENT: This Agreement contains the entire Agreement between the Seller and Buyer with respect to the subject
matter hereof and there are no other promises, representations, or warranties affecting it. Only written
statements or agreements hereto executed by both parties shall vary or modify the terms hereof.
Accepted and confirmed:
Yocum Oil Company, Inc.
(Seller)
By: Printed Name:
Title:
Date:
City of Orono
(Buyer)
By: Printed Name:
Title:
Date:
Page 3 of 3 Rev 3/09/Ol
�
Yocum Oil-Contract 72333 2014-2015 FIXED PRICE PROGRAM -CONTRACT PRICES Effective February 1,2014
"FIXED" PRICE FUEL CONTRACT PRIGE SCMiEDULE A
BIO-DlESEL-DYEQ-SUMMER BLEND�S-PER SPECIF'ICATIONS
� BASED ON 1,985,212 GALLON COMMITMENT
Estimated "F/XED "FJXED "FlXED "FIXE'D "FIXED "FIXED 'FfXED PRlCE"7000-
purchase PRlCE"500- PRfCE"1000- PRICE"Z000• PRICE"3000- PRICE'4000- PRlCE"5000- PRlCE"B000- 7500
amount at total 999 Geflons t999 Gallons Y999 Gallons 3999 Gallons 4999 Gallons 5999 Gaflons 6999 Gallons TANKER
PRODUCT commitmenL De!lvered Defivered Delivered Delivered Detrvered Delivared De(ivered Delivered
BS 48% $3.1412 $3.0983 $3.D823 a3.0755 a3.0717 $3.0692 $3.0651 �3.0629
810 9% $3.1312 $3.0883 $3.0723 $3.0655 a3.0617 �3.0592 a3.0551 �3.0529
g�$ �% $3.1262 $3.0833 53.0673 $3.0605 53.0567 $3.0542 $3.0501 $3.0479
620 17% $3.1212 a3.0783 $3.0623 $3.0555 $3.d517 $3.0492 b3.0451 $3.0429
Premium 25% $3.1412 $3.0983 $3.0823 $3.0755 53.0717 $3.0692 $3.0651 $3.0629
_ _
_
BIO-D;IESEL-DYED-WINTER BLENDS-PER SPECIFICATIONS
�9./V�"�'ACE���IlCE'" BASED ON 2,438,200 GALLON COMMITMENT
Estimeted "F1XED "FIXED "F1XFD 'FfXED "FlXED "FIXED "F1XED PRICE"7000-
purchase PR10E"500- PR10E"1000• PRICE"2000- PRICE"3000- PRICE"4000- PRICE"5000- PRfCE"6000- 7500
amount of total 999 Gallons 1999 Gallons 2999 Gallons 3999 Oallons 4999 Gallons 5999 Gallons 6999 Gallons TANKER
PRODUCT comm/Unenk Delivered Delive�ed Delivered DeJ(vered Dellvered Delivered Delivered Delivered
65 80% 53.2162 $3.1733 $3.1573 $3.1505 �3.1467 $3.1442 $3.1401 $3.1379
g1D 7% �3.2362 $3.1933 53.1773 $3.1705 '�3.1667 53.1642 $3.1601 S3�1579
B15 0% �3.2462 a3.2033 �3.1873 �3.1805 '�3.1767 ;3.1742 53.1701 ;3.1fi79
g2p 2"/, $3.2562 53.2133 $3.1973 �3,1905 $3.1867 53.1842 53.1601 53.1779
Premium 11% 53.2162 53.1733 $3.1573 $3.1505 $3,1467 $3.1442 53.1401 53.'1379
GASOLINE-87 OCTANE
D�'tJV�'"F�P'�'�" BASED ON 4,475,485 GALLONS COMMITMENT
PRlCE" PRlCE"
"FIXED PRlCE" "FIXED Constant "F1XED "FIXED "FIXED "FlXED 8000+
l000-1999 PRICE"2000- 3000-3999 PRICE"4000- PRICE"5000- PRlCE"6000- PRfCE"7000- Gallons
"FIXED PRtCE" 500- Gallons 2999 GalJons Gallons 4999 Galfons 5999 Gallons 6999 Gallons 7999 Gallons Tanker
999 Gaflons Delivered Defivered Del/vered Delivered Aellvered Delivered Delivered Dellvered pe/lvered
$2.7073 �2.6B44 $2.8484 $2.6418 $2.6377 $2.6353 52.6312 $2.6289 $2.6272
GASOLINE -E-85
�lJME� � �GE" BASED ON 210,500 GALLONS COMMITMENT
PR10E" PRICE"
"FlXED PRlCE" "FlXED Constant "F1XED "FlXED "FIXED "FfXED 8000+
1000-1899 PRlCF"2000- 3000-3988 PRlCE"4000- PRlCE"5000. PRICE"6000- PRlCE"7000. Gallons
"FIXED PRICE" 500. Gallons 2998 Gallons Gallons 4999 Gallons 5988 Gallons 6989 Gallons 7899 Ga!lons 7anker
999 Gallons Delivered Dellvered Delivered Deliverad Delivered Delivered Delivered De/ivered Dellvered
$1.9573 $1.9144 $1.6984 $1.8916 $1.8877 $1.8853 $1.8612 $1.8789 $1.8772
Qfl applicable tax credits will be deducted from the final fixed price.
The deduction (credit)will be shown as a separate line item on the invoice.
D�ROP Ck1ARGE TO MULTIPLE LOCATIONS AFTER INITIAL DELIVERY-$15.00/PER DROP
2014-2015 SPOT PRICE PROGRAM - PRICE SCHEDULE B
EFFECTIVE FEBRUARY 1,2014
Yocum Oil -Contract 72333
SPOT PRICE PROGRAM FOR ALL F1XED FUEL
PROGRAM PARTICIPANTS ONLY
DELIVERED "SPOT" PRICE FUEL CONTRACT IPRICE SCHEDU'LE 8�
PRICE FORMULA: Total Bid Constant{TBC)-(Bid Constant+Delivery Cost)
+Daily Contract Average Rack Price(FUEL INDEX) per Gallon
x Number of Galions Delive�ed
Total Delivered Price
/���C���!�'�i MI����i�f10�l11��8��O�Tfl/tP�C@,
s �` ; ` f� �' �1�"�►� �E�i°1���1��°�+��I����.+��,(��'�h�,. .�.�.
��?���'7 i,�.�•�- r'4 _w a '1 �,yt,y-±µ�,i'�,� .. .' .� �
r.�..'��,�� �-� ,i�� ��� +�e�•� ,�y,C,`��4'. e � r ,`��We�'gv�� ..j ...v.. .»..,e..,. �.w w �,.�. '�� .�. .
,.... , .� �. �.. ,y,....at„i..s...�.:..,....r.w.,,..r�,eM�
DESIGNATED TERMINAL: MINNEAPOLIS
500-999 Gallons 1000- 1999 Gallons
TBC= $0.1565 TBC= $0.0833
20Q0-2999 Gallons 3000-3999 Ga/lons
TBC= $0.0540 TBC= $0.0414
400U-4999 Ga/ons 5000-5999 Gal/ons
TBC= 0.0340 BG= 0.0300
6000+Gallons
TBC= (50.0455)
AIPI a�p9"�1�� �aoa c��+uv�l be adr��d�a Itne item(��Mo irrvah:r.
COUNCIL MEETING
JaN 2 7 20�4
REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION
DATE: Januar�27;�I4�
ITEM NO: �
Department Approval: Administrator Reviewed: Agenda Section:
Name Jessica Loftus City Administrator's Report
Title City Administrator
Item Description: Joint Meeting with L g Lake City Council
The City of Long Lake has requested a joint council workshop with the City of Orono on March
24th at 5 p.m. The intent of this meeting would be to consider a Slow/No Wake ordinance for
high water. The residents who live on Long Lake would be invited to the meeting and the
Minnehaha Creek Watershed District would also be asked to present information about their cost
share grant program for residents that wish to restore their shoreline erosion.
COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED:
Consider a motion to schedule a joint meeting with the Long Lake City Council on March 24th at
5 p.m.
� COUNCIL M��T'i1VG
�a� 2 7 �a��
REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION
DATE: January 27,`20 4����
ITEM NO: Ca
`"I
Department Approval: Administrator Reviewed: Agenda Section:
Name Jessica Loftus '�, City Administrator's Report
Title City Administrator
Item Description: Police Officers a or greement for 2014-2016
The labor agreement for police officers expired on December 31 St, 2013. The bargaining
committee (City Attorney Mattick, Councilmember Printup and Administrator Loftus) has met
with the police officers union (Law Enforcement Labor Services (LELS Local No. 40)) to
negotiate a new labor agreement.
There was considerable negotiation time spent on wages and insurance. Highlights of the new
agreement include:
• Three year contract duration: 2014, 2015 and 2016
• W�a es
2% in 2014
2.5% in 2015
2.75% in 2016
• Insurance contribution
$915 for singles and $1,090 for family in 2014
$915 for singles and $1,090 plus 50% of any increase to the family premium in 2015
$915 for singles and 2015 family amount plus 50% of any increase to family premium
There were also many requests from the union including increases to compensatory time,
vacation, and a physical fitness incentive, which did not make it into the contract after the
negotiation sessions. No substantive language changes to benefits were agreed upon except to
increase to the number of holidays to include Christmas Eve based upon market data.
Council Action Requested:
Consider a motion to approve the attached "Labor Agreement Between the City of Orono and
Law Enforcement Labor Services (Local No. 40) —Patrol Officers 2014-2016".
LABOR AGREEMENT
BETWEEN
THE CITY OF ORONO
AND
LAW ENFORCEMENT LABOR SERVICES, INC.
LOCAL NO. 40
PATROL OFFICERS
JANUARY 1, 2014 THROUGH DECEMBER 31, 2016
TABLE OF CONTENTS
ARTICLE I PURPOSE OF AGREEMENT.................................................................. 1
ARTICLEII RECOGNITION......................................................................................... 1
ARTICLEIII DEFINITIONS............................................................................................2
ARTICLE IV EMPLOYER SECURITY..........................................................................2
ARTICLE V EMPLOYER AUTHORITY......................................................................3
ARTICLE VI UNION SECURITY....................................................................................3
ARTICLE VII EMPLOYEE RIGHTS - GRIEVANCE PROCEDURE.........................3
ARTICLE VIII SAVINGS CLAUSE.................................................................................... 7
ARTICLEIX SENIORITY................................................................................................ 7
ARTICLEX DISCIPLINE...............................................................................................8
ARTICLE XI WORK SCHEDULES................................................................................ 8
ARTICLEXII OVERTIME ................................................................................................ 9
ARTICLE XIII COMPENSATORY TIME ........................................................................ 9
ARTICLE XIV CALL BACK TIME................................................................................. 10
ARTICLE XV COURT STANDBY TIME...................................................................... 10
ARTICLEXVI UNIFORMS............................................................................................... 10
ARTICLEXVII INJURY ON DUTY.................................................................................. 11
ARTICLEXVIII WAGES...................................................................................................... 11
ARTICLEXIX INSURANCE............................................................................................. 12
ARTICLE XX PART-TIME EMPLOYEE PAY AND BENEFITS.............................. 14
ARTICLEXXI VACATIONS............................................................................................. 14
ARTICLEXXII HOLIDAYS............................................................................................... 14
ARTICLEXXIII SICK LEAVE............................................................................................ 15
i
ARTICLE XXIV SEVERANCE PAY................................................................................... 15
ARTICLE XXV POST EMPLOYMENT HEALTH CARE SAVINGS ACCOUNT..... 16
ARTICLE XXVI POST LICENSE/TRAINING................................................................. 16
ARTICLE XXVII DAYLIGHT SAVINGS............................................................................ 16
ARTICLE XXVIII EYEWEAR REPLACEMENT................................................................ 16
ARTICLEXXVIV DURATION............................................................................................... 16
ii
LABOR AGREEMENT
BETWEEN
THE CITY OF ORONO
AND
LAW ENFORCEMENT LABOR SERVICES, INC.
ARTICLE I PURPOSE OF AGREEMENT
This AGREEMENT is entered into as of ,20 ,between the CITY OF
ORONO, hereinafter called the EMPLOYER, and LAW ENFORCEMENT LABOR SERVICES
INC., hereinafter called LELS.
It is the intent and purpose of this AGREEMENT to;
1.1 Establish procedures for the resolution of disputes concerning this AGREEMENT'S
interpretation and/or application; and
1.2 Place in written form the parties'AGREEMENT upon terms and conditions of employment
for the duration of this AGREEMENT.
ARTICLE II RECOGNITION
2.1 The EMPLOYER recognizes LELS as the exclusive representative under Minnesota Statutes
Section 179A.03, Subdivision 7,for all police personnel in the following job classification:
Police Officers
2.2 In the event the EMPLOYER and LELS are unable to agree as to the inclusion or exclusion
of a new or modified job class, the issue shall be submitted to the Bureau of Mediation
Services for determination.
1
ARTICLE III DEFINITIONS
3.1 LJNION: Law Enforcement Labor Services, Inc.
3.2 LJNION MEMBER: A member of Law Enforcement Labor Services, Inc.
3.3 EMPLOYEE: A member of the exclusively recognized bargaining unit.
3.4 DEPARTMENT: The City of Orono Police Department.
3.5 EMPLOYER: The City of Orono.
3.6 CHIEF: The Chief of the City of Orono Police Department.
3.7 UNION OFFICER: Officer elected or appointed by Law Enforcement Labor Services,Inc.
3.8 OVERTIME: Work performed at the express authorization of the EMPLOYER in excess of
the employee's scheduled shift.
3.9 SCHEDULED SHIFT: A consecutive work period including rest breaks and a lunch break.
3.10 REST BREAKS: Periods during the SCHEDULED SHIFT during which the employee
remains on continual duty and is responsible for assigned duties.
3.11 LiTNCH BREAKS: A period during the SCHEDULED SHIFT during which the employee
remains on continual duty and is responsible for assigned duties.
3.12 RESIGNATION: Resignation with two (2) weeks advance notice.
3.13 PART-TIME EMPLOYEE: An employee who works a regular schedule of fourteen(14)or
more hours per week,but less than thirty-five(3 5)hours per week. The determination of the
regular schedule will be made on a quarterly basis. If an employee works more than 182
hours in a quarter,the employee will be considered to be a part-time employee until the next
quarterly determination.
ARTICLE IV EMPLOYER SECURITY
LELS agrees that during the life of this AGREEMENT that LELS will not cause, encourage,
participate in or support any strike,slowdown or other interruption of or interference with the normal
functions of the EMPLOYER.
2
ARTICLE V EMPLOYER AUTHORITY
5.1 The EMPLOYER retains the full and unrestricted right to operate and manage all manpower,
facilities, and equipment; to establish functions and programs;to set and amend budgets;to
determine the utilization of technology;to establish and modify the organizational structure;
to select,direct,and determine the number of personnel;to establish work schedules, and to
perform any inherent managerial function not specifically limited by this AGREEMENT.
5.2 Any term and condition of employment not specifically established or modified by this
AGREEMENT shall remain solely within the discretion of the EMPLOYER to modify,
establish, or eliminate.
ARTICLE VI UNION SECURITY
6.1 The EMPLOYER shall deduct from the wages of employees who authorize such a deduction
in writing an amount necessary to cover monthly union dues. Such monies shall be remitted
as directed by LELS.
6.2 LELS may designate employees from the bargaining unit to act as a steward and an alternate
and shall inform the EMPLOYER in writing of such choice and changes in the position of
steward and/or alternate.
6.3 The EMPLOYER shall make space available on the employee bulletin board for posting
LELS notice(s) and announcements(s).
6.4 LELS agrees to indemnify and hold the EMPLOYER harmless against any and all claims,
suits, orders, or judgments brought or issued against the EMPLOYER as a result of any
action taken or not taken by the EMPLOYER under the provisions of this Article.
ARTICLE VII EMPLOYEE RIGHTS - GRIEVANCE PROCEDURE
7.1 DEFINITION OF A GRIEVANCE
A grievance is defined as a dispute or disagreement as to the interpretation or application of
the specific terms and conditions of this AGREEMENT.
3
7.2 LINION REPRESENTATIVES
The EMPLOYER will recognize REPRESENTATIVES designated by LELS as the
grievance representatives of the bargaining unit having the duties and responsibilities
established by this Article. LELS shall notify the EMPLOYER in writing of the names of
such LJNION REPRESENTATIVES and of their successors when so designated as provided
by 6.2 of this AGREEMENT.
7.3 PROCESSING OF A GRIEVANCE
It is recognized and accepted by LELS and the EMPLOYER that the processing of
grievances as hereinafter provided is limited by the job duties and responsibilities of the
employees and shall therefore be accomplished during normal working hours only when
consistent with such employee duties and responsibilities. The aggrieved employee and a
ITNION REPRESENTATIVE shall be allowed a reasonable amount of time without loss in
pay when a grievance is investigated and presented to the EMPLOYER during normal work
hours provided that the employee and the UNION REPRESENTATIVE have notified and
received the approval of the designated supervisor who has determined that such absence is
reasonable and would not be detrimental to the work programs of the EMPLOYER.
7.4 PROCEDURE
Grievances, as defined by Section 7.1, shall be resolved in conformance with the following
procedure:
Step 1• An employee claiming a violation concerning the interpretation or application of this
AGREEMENT shall, within twenty-one(21) calendar days after such alleged violation has
occurred, present such grievance to the employee's supervisor as designated by the
EMPLOYER. The EMPLOYER-designated representative will discuss and give an answer
to such Step 1 grievance within ten(10)calendar days after receipt. A grievance not resolved
in Step 1 and appealed to Step 2 shall be placed in writing setting forth the nature of the
grievance, the facts on which it is based, the provision or provisions of the AGREEMENT
allegedly violated, the remedy requested, and shall be appealed to Step 2 within ten (10)
calendar days after the EMPLOYER-designated representative's final answer in Step 1. Any
grievance not appealed in writing to Step 2 by LELS within ten(10) calendar days shall be
considered waived.
4
Step 2• If appealed,the written grievance shall be presented by LELS and discussed with the
EMPLOYER-designated Step 2 representative. The EMPLOYER-designated representative
shall give LELS the EMPLOYER'S Step 2 answer in writing within ten(10) calendar days
after receipt of such Step 2 grievance. A grievance not resolved in Step 2 may be appealed to
Step 3 within ten(10)calendar days following the EMPLOYER-designated representative's
final Step 2 answer. Any grievance not appealed in writing to Step 3 by LELS within ten
(10) calendar days shall be considered waived.
Step 3• If appealed,the written grievance shall be presented by LELS and discussed with the
EMPLOYER-designated Step 3 representative. The EMPLOYER-designated representative
shall give LELS the EMPLOYER'S answer in writing within ten (10) calendar days after
receipt of such Step 3 grievance. A grievance not resolved in Step 3 may be appealed to Step
4 within ten(10)calendar days following the EMPLOYER-designated representative's final
answer in Step 3. Any grievance not appealed in writing to Step 4 by LELS within ten(10)
calendar days shall be considered waived.
Step 4• A grievance unresolved in Step 3 and appealed to Step 4 by LELS shall be submitted
to arbitration subject to the provisions of the Public Employment Labor Relations Act of
1971, as amended. The selection of an arbitrator shall be made in accordance with the
'Rules Governing the Arbitration of Grievances" as established by the Public Employment
Relations Board.
7.5 ARBITRATOR'S AUTHORITY
A. The arbitrator shall have no right to amend, modify, nullify, ignore, add to, or
subtract from the terms and conditions of this AGREEMENT. The arbitrator shall
consider and decide only the specific issue(s) submitted in writing by the
EMPLOYER and LELS,and shall have no authority to make a decision on any other
issue not so submitted.
B. The arbitrator shall be without power to make decisions contrary to, or inconsistent
with,or modifying or varying in any way the application of laws,rules,or regulations
having the force and effect of law. The arbitrator's decision shall be submitted in
writing within thirty (30) days following close of the hearing or the submission of
briefs by the parties,whichever be later,unless the parties agree to an extension. The
5
decision shall be binding on both the EMPLOYER and LELS and shall be based
solely on the arbitrator's interpretation or application of the express terms of this
AGREEMENT and to the facts of the grievance presented.
C. The fees and expenses for the arbitrator's services and proceedings shall be borne
equally by the EMPLOYER and LELS provided that each party shall be responsible
for compensating its own representatives and witnesses. If either party desires a
verbatim record of the proceedings,it may cause such a record to be made,providing
it pays for the record. If both parties desire a verbatim record of the proceedings the
cost shall be shared equally.
7.6 WAIVER
If a grievance is not presented within the time limits set forth above, it shall be considered
"waived." If a grievance is not appealed to the next step within the specified time limit or
any agreed extension thereof,it shall be considered settled on the basis of the EMPLOYER'S
last answer. If the EMPLOYER does not answer a grievance or an appeal thereof within the
specified time limits, LELS may elect to treat the grievance as denied at that step and
immediately appeal the grievance to the next step. The time limit in each step may be
extended by mutual written agreement of the EMPLOYER and LELS in each step.
7.7 CHOICE OF REMEDY
If, as a result of the written EMPLOYER response in Step 3, the grievance remains
unresolved, and if the grievance involves the suspension, demotion, or discharge of an
employee who has completed the required probationary period, the grievance may be
appealed either to Step 4 of Article VII or a procedure such as: Civil Service, Veteran's
Preference, or Fair Employment. If appealed to any procedure other than Step 4 of Article
VII the grievance is not subject to the arbitration procedure as provided in Step 4 of Article
VII. The aggrieved employee shall indicate in writing which procedure is to be utilized--Step
4 of Article VII or another appeal procedure--and shall sign a statement to the effect that the
choice of any other hearing precludes the aggrieved employee from making a subsequent
appeal through Step 4 of Article VII. Except that with respect to statutes under the
jurisdiction of the United States Equal Employment Opportunity Commission,an employee
6
pursuing a statutory remedy is not precluded from also pursuing an appeal under this
grievance procedure.
ARTICLE VIII SAVINGS CLAUSE
This AGREEMENT is subject to the laws of the United States,the State of Minnesota and the City
of Orono. In the event any provision of this AGREEMENT shall be held to be contrary to law by a
court of competent jurisdiction from whose final judgment or decree no appeal has been taken within
the time provided, such provisions shall be voided. All other provisions of this AGREEMENT shall
continue in full force and effect. The voided provisions may be renegotiated at the written request of
either party.
ARTICLE IX SENIORITY
9.1 Seniority shall be determined by the employee's length of continuous employment with the
Police Department and posted in an appropriate location. Seniority rosters may be
maintained by the Chief on the basis of time in grade and time within specific classifications.
9.2 During the probationary period a newly hired or rehired employee may be discharged at the
sole discretion of the EMPLOYER. During the probationary period a promoted or
reassigned employee may be replaced in his previous position at the sole discretion of the
EMPLOYER.
9.3 A reduction of work force will be accomplished on the basis of seniority. Employees shall
be recalled from layoff on the basis of seniority. An employee on layoff shall have an
opportunity to return to work within two years of the time of layoff before any new employee
is hired.
9.4 Senior employees will be given preference with regard to changes in job classification
through transfer,assignment or promotion when the job relevant qualifications of employees
are equal.
9.5 Senior qualified employees shall be given shift assignment preference after eighteen (18)
months of continuous full-time employment.
7
9.6 One continuous vacation period shall be selected on the basis of seniority until March 15 of
each calendar year.
ARTICLE X DISCIPLINE
10.1 The EMPLOYER will discipline employees for just cause only. Discipline will be in one or
more of the following forms:
a) oral reprimand;
b) written reprimand;
c) suspension;
d) demotion; or
e) discharge.
10.2 Suspensions, demotions and discharges will be in written form.
10.3 Written reprimands,notices of suspension,and notices of discharge which are to become part
of an employee's personnel file shall be read and acknowledged by signature of the employee.
Employees will receive a copy of such reprimands and/or notices.
10.4 Employees may examine their own individual personnel files at reasonable times under the
direct supervision of the EMPLOYER.
10.5 Employees will not be questioned concerning an investigation of disciplinary action unless
the employee has been given an opportunity to have a UNION representative present at such
questioning.
10.6 Grievances relating to this ARTICLE shall be initiated by the UNION in Step 3 of the
grievance procedure under ARTICLE VII.
ARTICLE XI WORK SCHEDULES
11.1 The normal work year is two thousand and eighty hours(2,080)to be accounted for by each
employee through:
a) hours worked on assigned shifts;
b) holidays;
8
c) assigned training;
d) authorized leave time.
11.2 Holidays and authorized leave time is to be calculated on the basis of the actual length of
time of the assigned shifts.
11.3 Nothing contained in this or any other Article shall be interpreted to be a guarantee of a
minimum or maximum number of hours the EMPLOYER may assign employees.
ARTICLE XII OVERTIME
12.1 Employees will be compensated at one and one-half(1-1/2) times the employee's regular
base pay rate for hours worked in excess of the employee's regularly scheduled shift.
Changes of shifts do not qualify an employee for overtime under this Article.
12.2 Overtime will be distributed as equally as practicable.
12.3 Overtime refused by employees will for record purposes under Article 12.2 be considered as
unpaid overtime worked.
12.4 For the purpose of computing overtime compensation overtime hours worked shall not be
pyramided, compounded or paid twice for the same hours worked.
12.5 Overtime will be calculated to the nearest fifteen (15) minutes.
12.6 Employees have the obligation to work overtime or call backs if requested by the
EMPLOYER unless unusual circumstances prevent the employee from so working.
ARTICLE XIII COMPENSATORY TIME
13.1 As an alternative to payment of overtime compensation,the employee may receive one and
one-half(1 '/z)hours of compensatory time for each hour worked for time worked as follows:
a) All hours worked in excess of the employee's regularly scheduled shift.
b) Recalls to fill in shifts, including but not limited to filling in shifts for vacation, sick
leave, holidays.
13.2 For other hours not covered in 13.1,the employee by mutual agreement may receive in lieu
of overtime payment in cash, one hour of compensatory time for each hour worked.
9
13.3 The employee may accrue up to 40 hours in a compensatory bank to be used within the
compensatory policy of the City.
13.4 Prior to December 31 st of each year, an employee must cash out all but 20 hours of
compensatory time and those remaining hours not cashed remain available for use in the
following year.
ARTICLE XIV CALL BACK TIME
An employee who is called to duty during his scheduled off-duty time shall receive a minimum of
two (2) hours pay at one and one-half(1-1/2)times the employee's base pay rate. An extension or
early report to a regularly scheduled shift for duty does not qualify the employee for the two(2)hour
minimum.
ARTICLE XV COURT STANDBY TIME
If an officer is placed on standby for court during the officer's scheduled off-duty time, and if the
court appearance is cancelled the day of the court date, the officer will receive standby pay in the
amount of two (2) hours of pay at the officer's regular pay rate. If the employee owes time to the
City the straight time standby will be subtracted from the balance owed. If the employee does not
owe the City time, the employee will receive two (2) hours of pay at the regular rate. As an
alternative,upon mutual agreement and if within the compensatory time accumulation maximum,the
employee may receive two (2) hours of compensatory time at the straight time rate.
ARTICLE XVI UNIFORMS
The EMPLOYER will provide all City-required uniform articles and equipment.
10
ARTICLE XVII INJURY ON DUTY
Employees injured during the performance of their duties for the EMPLOYER and thereby rendered
unable to wark for the EMPLOYER will be paid the difference between the employee's regular pay
and Worker's Compensation insurance payments for a period not to exceed ninety(90)warking days
per injury, not charged to the employee's vacation, sick leave, or other accumulated leave, or other
accumulated paid benefits, after a three(3)working day initial waiting period per injury. The three
(3) day working day waiting period shall be charged to the employee's sick leave account less
Worker's Compensation insurance.
ARTICLE XVIII WAGES
18.1 PLACEMENT INTO PAY SCHEDULE
The Employer has the discretion to place a new employee into the pay schedule at a step
other than the start step as the Employer deems appropriate.
18.2 2014 WAGES
The following wage schedule shall be in effect for the period January 1, 2014 through
December 31, 2014:
W� Per Hour
Start(75%of"after 3rd year"rate) $24.07
After six months (80°�0 of"after 3rd year"rate) $25.68
After 1 st year (85%of"after 3rd year"rate) $2729
After 2nd year(90%of"after 3rd year"rate) $28.89
After 3rd year $32.10
18.3 2015 WAGES
The following wage schedule shall be in effect for the period January 1, 2015 through
December 31, 2015:
Wages Per Hour
Start (75%of"after 3rd year"rate) $24.67
After six months (80%of"after 3rd year"rate) $26.32
11
After 1 st year (85%of"after 3rd year" rate) $27.97
After 2nd year (90%of"after 3rd year"rate) $29.61
After 3rd year $32.90
18.4 2016 WAGES
The following wage schedule shall be in effect for the period January 1, 2016 through
December 31, 2016:
Wages Per Hour
Start (75%of"after 3rd year"rate) �25.35
After six months (80%of"after 3rd year"rate) $27.04
After 1 st year (85%of"after 3rd year"rate) $28.74
After 2nd year (90°�0 of"after 3rd year"rate) $30.42
After 3rd year $33.80
For 2013, if any City Employee receives a wage increase greater than 1.0% (not including
step increases), the Employees covered by this Agreement shall receive the same increase.
18.5 LONGEVITY
A. After 4 years 3% additional to base rate
After 6 years 5% additional to base rate
After 10 years 7% additional to base rate
After 14 years 9% additional to base rate
ARTICLE XIX INSURANCE
19.1 Effective January 1, 2014, the EMPLOYER's contribution per employee receiving single
health insurance coverage is Nine Hundred Fifteen and no/100ths ($915.00) Dollars per
month toward a cafeteria benefit plan that offers group health, life, long-term disability and
dental insurance, subject to the health insurance opt-out provisions set out in Paragraph 19.4.
The EMPLOYER's contribution per employee receiving family health insurance coverage is
One Thousand Ninety and no/100ths ($1,090.00) Dollars per month, toward a cafeteria
benefit plan that offers group health,life,long-term disability and dental insurance,subject to
the health insurance opt-out provisions set out in Paragraph 19.4.
12
19.2 Effective January 1, 2015, the EMPLOYER's contribution per employee receiving single
health insurance coverage is Nine Hundred Fifteen and no/100ths ($915.00) Dollars per
month toward a cafeteria benefit plan that offers group health, life, long-term disability and
dental insurance,subject to the health insurance opt-out provisions set out in Paragraph 19.4.
The EMPLOYER's contribution per employee receiving family health insurance coverage is
One Thousand Ninety and no/l 00ths($1,090.00)Dollars per month,plus fifty(50%)percent
of any increase in the family health insurance premium, toward a cafeteria benefit plan that
offers group health, life, long-term disability and dental insurance, subject to the health
insurance opt-out provisions set out in Paragraph 19.4.
19.3 Effective January 1, 2016, the EMPLOYER's contribution per employee receiving single
health insurance coverage is Nine Hundred Fifteen and no/100ths ($915.00) Dollars per
month, (however, at no time shall the Employer contribution be less than 100% of the
premium cost for single coverage of the highest option health plan available), toward a
cafeteria benefit plan that offers group health, life,long-term disability and dental insurance,
subject to the health insurance opt-out provisions set out in Paragraph 19.4. The
EMPLOYER's contribution per employee receiving family health insurance coverage is the
amount established in 2015, plus fifty (50%) percent of any increase in the family health
insurance premium,toward a cafeteria benefit plan that offers group health, life, long-term
disability and dental insurance, subject to the health insurance opt-out provisions set out in
Paragraph 19.4.
19.4 HEALTH INSURANCE OPT-OUT OPTION
If a health insurance opt-out option is available with the City's group health insurance plan,
an employee who has health insurance through a group-sponsored plan elsewhere may elect
to waive health insurance coverage. An employee who waives health insurance coverage
will receive, as the City's insurance contribution, the difference between the lowest cost
single coverage health insurance plan and the City's single insurance contribution,as set out
in Paragraphs 19.1, 19.2 and 19.3, as an opt-out credit to use through the City's cafeteria
benefit plan.
13
ARTICLE XX PART-TIME EMPLOYEE PAY AND BENEFITS
20.1 Part-time Police Officers will be placed into the same pay schedule as the Police Officers.
The Employer has the discretion to place a new employee into the pay schedule at a step
other than the start step as the Employer deems appropriate.
Part-time officers are not eligible for longevity pay.
20.2 MOVEMENT THROUGH PAY RANGE
A part-time officer will move through the steps of the pay schedule based on each two
thousand eighty (2,080) hours worked.
20.3 PART-TIME EMPLOYEE BENEFITS
Employees regularly scheduled to work 20 hours or more per week shall be eligible for
prorated benefits,except health insurance. The determination of the regular schedule will be
made on a quarterly basis. Health insurance eligibility will be determined by the City's
agreement with its insurance carriers.
ARTICLE XXI VACATIONS
Employees will accumulate vacation leave according to the following schedule:
0 through 5 years continuous service 10 days ( 80 hours)
6 through 10 years continuous service 15 days (120 hours)
11 through 15 years continuous service 18 days (144 hours)
16 years continuous service 19 days (152 hours)
17 years continuous service 20 days (160 hours)
18 years continuous service 21 days (168 hours)
19 years continuous service 22 days (176 hours)
20 years and over continuous service 23 days (184 hours)
The maximum accumulation of accrued vacation is 240 hours.
ARTICLE XXII HOLIDAYS
22.1 Each employee shall receive 12(96 hours)floating holidays accrued on a prorated basis each
year to be used in the same manner as vacations. For each holiday hour not used each
14
employee shall receive an hour of pay up to 96 hours per year. Payment is to be made on the
first day in December of each calendar year.
22.2 Employees who are scheduled to work on New Year's Day, Martin Luther King Jr. Day,
Presidents' Day, Memorial Day, Independence Day, Labor Day, Veterans' Day,
Thanksgiving Day,Friday after Thanksgiving,Christmas Eve or Christmas Day shall receive
an additional one-half hour of pay for each hour worked on each of these ten holidays.
22.3 Holiday hours commence at 0000 hours and end at 2359 hours on the actual day of the
holiday for employees warking shifts. Employees working a Monday through Friday
schedule shall observe the holidays on the same days as the other City Employees.
ARTICLE XXIII SICK LEAVE
A. Each employee shall earn eight (8) hours of sick leave per month.
B. Each employee shall be allowed to accumulate sick leave up to the m�imum amount
of nine hundred sixty (960) hours.
C. In addition any hours over 960 hours accrued shall go into a catastrophic sick leave
bank which may be used any time the person is sick for more than 30 consecutive
calendar days. The maximum accrued in this bank is 320 hours and is not useable for
severance purposes under Article XXII.
ARTICLE XXIV SEVERANCE PAY
Each employee with at least three (3)years, but not less than twelve (12)years, of service with the
EMPLOYER will receive, upon honorable termination of employment, one-third (1/3) of the
employee's accumulated sick leave as severance pay. Each employee with twelve(12)years or more
of service with the Employer will receive,upon honorable termination of employment,one-half(1/2)
of the employee's accumulated sick leave as severance pay. These funds shall be deposited into a
designated Post-Employment Health Care Savings Plan.
15
ARTICLE XXV POST EMPLOYMENT HEALTH CARE SAVINGS ACCOUNT
Each employee shall participate in the Minnesota Post Employment Health Care Savings Plan
(HCSP)established under Minnesota Statues section 352.98.All funds collected by the employer on
behalf on the employees shall be deposited into the HCSP. Commencing January 1, 2008, each
employee shall contribute 2%of salary to the HCSP. The employer shall deduct this amount from
each payroll check. Upon termination of employment 100%of severance pay,as that term is defined
in this Labor Agreement, shall be deposited into the HCSP.
ARTICLE XXVI POST LICENSE/TRAINING
26.1 The EMPLOYER shall pay the cost of the employee's POST license fees.
26.2 The EMPLOYER will pay for and provide the required training for POST board licensing
upon the employee receiving prior written approval from the EMPLOYER to attend such
training.
ARTICLE XXVII DAYLIGHT SAVINGS
Patrol Officers working shifts during daylight savings will only be paid for the actual hours worked.
ARTICLE XXVIII EYEWEAR REPLACEMENT
Prescription eyewear damaged in the line of duty will be replaced at a cost not to exceed Two
Hundred Fifty and no/100ths ($250.00) Dollars.
ARTICLE XXVIV DURATION
This AGREEMENT shall be effective as of the first (1 st) day of January, 2014 and remain in full
force and effect until the thirty-first (31 st) day of December, 2016.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this AGREEMENT on
, 20
16
FOR THE CITY OF ORONO: FOR LAW ENFORCEMENT LABOR
SERVICES, INC.:
17
♦
f
COUNCIL MEETING
REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION JAN 2 7 2014
DATE: Janua 27, 2014
ITEM NO: _��OF ORONO
Department Approval: Administrator Reviewed: Agenda Section:
Name Jessica Loftus City Administrator's Report
Title City Administrator
Item Description: Memorial for Willie ibbs
Our co-worker Willie Gibbs passed away suddenly on December 7`h, 2013 at the young age of
49. Willie served the City of Orono for more than eight (8) years as the Building Inspector.
Staff gathered together to discuss ways to remember and honor our friend Willie. A few internal
gestures have already taken place by donating some proceeds from our Holiday Auction to a
food shelf in this honor, also staff purchasing an engraved cribbage board for the break room and
celebrating Willie's love to gather people with food by vowing to continue his Cinco de Mayo
tradition.
In addition, we also discussed ways the City of Orono could remember Willie in a meaningful
and public way. The group thought planting a tree with a plaque and/or installing a bench with
plaque would be appropriate. Below are cost estimates for your consideration:
• Option 1:
� o Bench - $400 —Made of stone with labor donated by staff.
o Pla ue - $100 —marble with etching.
• Option 2:
o Tree— Staff talked with Norlings and he recommended either a River Birch (2-
2.5") $200 or a swamp white oak $300 (2-2.5"). George did say he would donate
a River Birch if we wanted to go that route. These prices would require us to
plant the tree and Jesse Struve has offered the labor.
o Plaque - $100—black marble with etching.
Council Action Requested:
Consider a motion to approve purchases in memory of Willie Gibbs.
r
!
�V@NI@W
The river birch is a fast-growing, water-loving, deciduous tree, native to much of the
United States. Its scientific name is Betula nigra. Unlike other birches that have white
barks, the river birch's bark is reddish brown and curls and peels naturally, adding visual
interest to the plant. River birch is also more pest-resistant than other birches, making it
a popular�� and relatively care-free choice for landscaping.
Description
River birch are tall, graceful-looking trees. They have cinnamon-colored bark that peels
from the trunk. The leaves are oval, around 1-1/2 to 3 inches long, and 1 to 2 inches
wide with slightly serrated margins and are shiny and medium green in color. The tiny
flowers are green or brown and are unimpressive and inconspicuous. The fruit forms as
3-inch long clusters of seeds called catkins.
This is a fast-growing and hardy tree, often putting on more than 2 feet of growth per
year. They are at their best in hardiness zones 4 through 7, but will grow to zone 9,
based on the United States Agricultural Department Hardiness Zone map. The plant is
relatively short-lived, lasting only 30 to 40 years in urban environments. The tree thrives
in moist conditions, hence the name river birch. The branches of the tree tend to droop.
River birches often produce multiple leader trunks from the same plant.
Form
River birch grow to between 40 and 70 feet tall, and typically spread to 40 to 60 feet
wide. Though river birch grows quite tall, the trunk of the tree usually remains relatively
thin. The canopy of the tree is somewhat oval shaped and fairly dense.
Culture
River birches grow well in full sun, however, they may tolerate partial shade. While they
can handle some drought conditions, river birches prefer wetter soils and will grow
better if irrigated regularly. The soil should not be too alkaline and can range from sandy
loam to clay. Because of the vertical nature of this tree, it can be planted closer to
houses�than other trees. Young trees will require pruning of the lower branches to
prevent them from drooping to the ground.
Uses
The river birch is a popular landscape tree and is often used as a centerpiece in the
yard. Its distinctive bark and graceful appearance make it a desirable addition to the
landscape. Because it is the most resistant of the birches to boring insects, particularly
the bronze birch borer, it is often chosen over other birch species. As it appreciates wet
conditions, it can also be used to control erosion along riverbanks.
�
_ � � i r -. � ��� - p,+ �.
� �9 - t�.`��`��'4-{� ��'i `: � + ��
�� q r r °
� 7 ti�_ �� '�`�C`��,��"`r,r.,R �5 �.
., , '�a a � A
� •W . ' � :;�a � '�- �
�� � �
. ������"�'�'� ' v �' ` { � '' �' —
� . . ", . P � � � . �_ , -
,.. �
,
�i } ,_ ��"
,�''���'� +:�y A'"��. rX 4� y,�� "��+�,
� � �� r �^
- � �r 1 ... r. � 4 qyY
"ti` •� r�� ���{ � .� + ' ,�u�' � `_
�
' .� �� �� ..� r� ,
�., ,r
L � � �i, �-.4�`"�^ ' .
�i�:. " # • �' �:�� , 7�-�'_,� � �, � r�" e �_y.�
�} �, r c r"y+" ,� , �`�` �''
� '. : � z .;
:� „�_ . .
.�Q �����' Y �t-�' �, .. . '> � ` �� f�"�� . ��� .
�i . �� t'*� }.� ....- �j _F . , 1 .� � r�
:
'ti. � � i ��. `�'`' i� y'�P`�.�,�r
�"-: #,� �;. _,� i ;. J , f t ` �
a� i.Y'; ��� -.. 'a��'yj�
. �"i: ���4r i'�i,��� r�;•,. . ! �`�s�� '�d �,..� } ��4 � �k
�! � s� � ...���L .�,; .�.T?. f° _ � � ,,� r j- � �, ' +.
�'.. ���� s�,.� ,� .� ..f ,t^� . '�.
� • ,� F�- t������' '�`- �,
: ��� �,�. ,� _.���, ,�.�^,
;,
# 4 -,_����, �� .. , �',�
� � �����'� ��'��r��y : .;�F;�.._#..
/
The Attractive Swamp White Oak Tree
The Swamp White Oak Tree has as its binomial name, Quercus bicolor. The two names say a lot about
the tree. Native to the mid-west, especially in the Ohio area, the Swamp White Oak tree is happiest
when growing in moist soil. It is a tree that can stand to get its feet wet from time to time, though the
soil it grows in needs to be relatively well drained. The "white" and "bicolor" designations refer to the
leaves, which are green on the top side and white on the underside. The bark is not white but is a
light gray color.
The Swamp White Oak tree is a relatively fast growing tree, and is ideally suited for urban conditions.
It will grow about 2 feet a year until it reaches full maturity, attaining a height of about 50 feet.
Initially the Swamp White Oak tree has an oval-shaped and rather narrow spread, but branches out
more as it approaches its maximum height. Its spread can eventually reach 50 feet. The tree displays
pollen-bearing catkins in the spring. The pollen fertilizes the tiny flowers which appear at the same
time, the oak being self- fertilizing.
The Swamp White oak tree prefers an acid soil, but unlike some other members of the White oak
family, can tolerate soils that are somewhat on the alkaline side. The tree will also thrive in compacted
soil, making it valuable as an urban landscaping tree, and although it is a moisture lover, is
surprisingly drought tolerant. This is a long-lived tree, one that commonly attains an age of 300 years
or more. Although basically a sun lover, it can be planted in an area where it receives partial shade, at
least while it is still a young tree.
When grown in a somewhat isolated location, the Swamp White oak tree generally does not require
pruning. In heavily trafFicked areas however, the lower branches will usually need to be pruned back
to allow clearance for pedestrians or vehicles. The tree can be easily damaged when encountering
mechanical objects, and if planted along streets needs to be put in a location where contact with an
automobile or even a car door is not too apt to occur. Surface roots are usually not a problem with
this tree, and the tree is not considered to be invasive, making it ideal for urban settings.
Pests And Diseases - Like many hardwoods, the Swamp White Oak is susceptible to infestations of
powdery mildew, especially in the late summer and early fall. This can give the upper surfaces of the
leaves a grayish tinge, but is not in anyway harmful to the tree. The oak occasionally will exhibit leaf
spot problems, but such diseases generally do the tree little harm. If leaf biister is present however, a
dormant spray may need to be applied to prevent future outbreaks, which could eventually lead to
severe defoliation. The bulletgali wasp is one of the pests affecting the tree, chewing on twigs and
branches. As long as the infestation is not heavier than normai, no long term damage to the tree will
result. Caterpillars can be a problem although only if the infestation is unusually heavy. The insect
most apt to be a cause of significant or permanent damage is the Gypsy moth. By and large however,
the Swamp White Oak Tree is a healthy tree, one that is easy to maintain and care for.
The Root System - One of the more unusual features of this oak tree lies in its dual root system. The
Swamp White oak tree has a set of upper layer roots which are put to use during moist conditions,
such as in the spring, and a lower level root system the tree relies upon during the hot and dry
summer. This helps to explain why a moisture loving tree can seemingly do as well as it does under
drought-like conditions.
�
a � � �
-.���� w •� ! •
'r�
�, �� � . :,� .. ...... . .:.. ..• �.
y� ����:.
' ��..
+�,,�. ���� ���'�'`.
+^�f/�`� e�'..
��"` ' �
,���`. .. .�j
� � �rt r
;-��,+�+ �`�� �r'
`i��! .`� �'Y y...Sl!..
���, ss1i,�'� `� J:.
�,_a�` t��'z 7� "r�st�' ���.� � 'd
r�� �'�r,a t ��� ,#t •;°;� ��;�
r . k�'�'.. � ��
'"�` - r}�. �•''��" . . . �y, � � "' ..,Jd�
'� � � ....Sf' ��� Ay M� �
�i �'`r"4'tW�� . . �•r�,� �� ��..�� �•� !� �i'"
f }�
� .'�e`y�^. 1n r,'y�..� wJ+ ,�,h. �, 'i� � 1. ; �;� . 'r° J°'P"
r. ����� ,fi;r. "�1��.��»+ �t t �L� �.
t ;;,-.�: ;�:�� �� .�'�'�•�
�t w • ,��..,�k,�, •�` �'t � -� �'' �� �+��.r
I �" l�'�y ..Er. �y y- �. � 4 ��ii"-r+i�' � ''�.
i 1✓ �i�'� ,,,�i},�' � '1e"'"t�. �� �y�,. i,,,�i� 1�
�r`.r `,�,����e��.' �' .� *�. �,.,,qy�'
"�y •.r` ','�+'r°�,.,,.
�,�,, •�:.;'L � Y.,�, ,
e, ��
-a'�`'� .� . ? �'
;f{'"�.►'. ���� •:� ��.,F iK,. ���4,�� `
. '"'" ' ��.-t °
,�r 7 "� 1 b� 4„��7� � .
't�� ��T' � .. � . a�,r„ „�'.* �6 !i rR '
1',�!.�*� "+:a+—�,vr.� � x „:. �.•'
� � w.
. " .:� '�' �.+� � e, ��,f'
. e�e k `�47' ;'' �' X �'''�.�., n+ � n �e.
�� . r � � ��� ��`�� � aw`�^ f.
� � ��.
��,y,..j " ���. •,rx ' � _.y._�t. �
� �` .�- "''�'�t.�-'r�y,�' g,.Y � r
.d '.'a..�� .n Pr . -�� f
•�f�c.-.' .� �i.,� . ` r >sc-,:'
... ..- .' _ *�"F „`� Y{...` ... , } �,, a .
, #e �.:1,.,... �._.�ii�'� Y
•�� ��� �
...�. `� . '.,
}
����i r
s� _> 4.
.�-`� t �. �s�� . . ��` �+h, 3 .
,e.
. _ .
�3�'dt . ��+1Yx ry :°''7'�',�.�,.,�y, ,,,�n� w.n t :!t� �eSe F„T�`�� .
���,.,3�`A"� * '� '�'�a� +w" � 9���" �'4 � t��tr`�j_ n..:�,p ";�t'�' . z
fz, _.,��'.
�'�' �'" f}{. d �.;� ��a�'� .�i� '� '�+ d��s<
� . . �
�,� � � s � '� ,��:p`.,.
';qs �A k }�, �+s y� � , 3,1
�'n��� jk� �!n� SYa$ F' i�4 t yiy, Yi y� y s� �,.,/�{ , �'a, 1� ,�, T �i
a
�'
Ty,
s �tf ; �, � � ��. "k s^7�^a t ��fi F �ne�' � ���iy,��"'G��+� �IY�1�'.
�',,�A rt3f w s x �'�e�$ �a,�i' y�' ��X�P, 7��U��'be *^e * �,� ��¢�'���"s3 +. ' �u,�p�1�,�,�� w
��anzc���x� '���� � ti,�""���,,� ����P,'�8 y�> ,. �.� � `��� '� � Trees�retbe',� Yi�e
� .. f'+,� '2 . � �;�,t k . 1 -A g'�'� '�,L s
,.:r� �� -�` '�'�. �,�o�� ,a., ''.;ar f Y�.:: r„�, �
• • � � • • " �. • � " � � �
COUNCIL MEETING
JAN 2 7 2014
REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION
DATE: January 27C, 2014���
ITEM NO: I �
Department Approval: Administrator Reviewed: Agenda Section:
Name Rachei Dodge � ` Licenses
Title City Clerk
Item Description:
List of Licenses for Council Approval
There are no licenses.
� COUNCi��E�rNG
���J � 7 2014
REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION CITY
��ROMO
Date: January 27, 2014
Item No. ��
Department Approval: Administrator pproval: Agenda Section:
Name: Ron Olson � City Administrator's
Title: Finance Directo Report
Item Description: Claims/Bills
The attached claims for payment have been received by the City. Staff has reviewed the claims and is
recommending approval of the listing for payment. The claims will be paid by checks 99787 to
99854, totaling $1,273,065.23.
COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED
Motion to approve payment of the claims list as presented.
City of Orono Check Register-COUNCIL REPORT Page 1
Check Issue Dates:1/14/2014-1/27/2014 Jan 23,2014 03 37PM
Check Check Invoice invoice GL Account Description Department Invoice
Payee Issue Date Number Number Amount
ACCURINT 01/27/2014 99787 1297291-201 101-42110-311 Dec contract fee Police Department 115.00
Total 99787: 115_00
ADVANCED IMAGING SOLUTIO 01127/2014 99788 24523447 101-41900-413 copier lease 1/15 to 2/15 Central Services 1,512.15
Total 99788: �,512.15
ALPINE CAPITAL LLC 01/27/2014 99789 12714 101-22205 Escrow refund 2385 Glandale Cove 2,500 00
Total 99789: 2.500 AD
APACHE GROUP 01/27/2014 99790 148573 101-41900-223 paper towels,trash bags,bath tissue Central Services $�� 85
Total 99790: S 11.85
ASSOC OF METRO MUNICIPALI 01/27/2014 99791 56-2014 101-41110-433 2014 membership dues Mayor&Council 3,169.00
Total 99791 3,169.00
ASSOCIATION OF MN EMERGE 01/27/2014 99�92 2014 101-42110-433 2014 membership C.Farniok Police Department 100 00
Total 99792: 100 00
BATTERIES PLUS 01/27/2014 99793 21-288760 601-49400-227 batteries Water 15 95
Total 99793- 15.95
BOND TRUST SERVICES CORP 01/27/20�4 99794 21271 321-47000-601 GO Series 2010A 505,000 00
BOND TRUST SERVICES CORP 01/27l2014 99794 21271 321-47000-611 GO Series 2010A 54,071.88
Total 99794 559,071.88
CAMPBELL KNUTSON 01/27l2014 99795 2717-OOOG9 101-41600-307 Gen Legal/Review/Staff Law/Legal Services 2,247 58
CAMPBELL KNUTSON 01/27/2014 99795 2717-OOOG9 101-42110-307 labor contracts Police Department 188.50
CAMPBELL KNUTSON 01/27I2014 99795 2717-OOOG9 101-41600-307 Alness Law/Legal Services 217 50
CAMPBELL KNUTSON 01/27/2014 99795 2717-OOOG9 101-42400-307 staff meetings 12/13 Building&Zoning 1,203 50
CAMPBELL KNUTSON 01/27/2014 99795 2717-0OOG9 101-41600-307 Council meetings Law/Legal Servfces 884 50
CAMPBELL KNUTSON 01/27/2014 99795 2717-OOOG9 101-41600-307 Wilcox Law/Legal Services 116 00
CAMPBELL KNUTSON 01l27/2014 99795 27�7-004G8 101-42110-307 Police matters Police DepaRment 667 00
City of Orono Check Register-COUNCIL REPORT Page: 2
Check Issue Dates 1/14/2014-1/27/2014 Jan 23,2014 0337PM
Check Check Invoice Invoice GL Account Description Department Irnoice
Payee Issue Date Number Number Amount
CAMPBELL KNUTSON 01/27/2014 99795 2717-115G4 101-41600-308 Code enforcemenUordinance violations Law/Legal Services 261 00
CAMPBELL KNUTSON Otl27/2014 99795 2717-150G3 101�3290-800 litigation Special Projects-Contingencies 53.90
CAMPBELL KNUTSON 01/27/2014 99795 2717-201G2 101-41600-307 misc recordings Law/Legal Services 345.30
CAMPBELL KNUTSON 01/27/2014 99795 2717-236G1 406-48706-307 3320 Navarre Ln hazardous bldg 30.90
CAMPBELL KNUTSON 01/27/2014 99795 2717-238G9 406-48706-307 2740 Shadywood hazardous bldg 637J6
CAMPBELL KNUTSON OV27/2014 99795 2717-26�G3 101-43280-307 13-3637 2350 Watertown Rd Special Services 67_50
CAMPBELL KNUTSON 01/27/2014 99795 2717-271G2 101-43280-307 13-3638 405 North Arm Subd Special Services 450 00
CAMPBELL KNUTSON 01/27/2014 99795 2717-272G2 101-43280-307 13-3615 3384&3386 Shoreline Special Services 90.00
CAMPBELL KNUTSON 01/27/2014 99795 2717-275G1 101-43280-307 13-3636 3059 Farview Ln Special Services 67.50
CAMPBELL KNUTSON 01/27/2014 99795 2717-276G1 101-43280-307 13-341 2060 6th Ave Special Services 90.00
CAMPBELL KNUTSON 01/27/2014 99795 2717-277G1 101�3280-307 3208-1 Orono Mini Storage Special Services 478.14
CAMPBELL KNUTSON 01/27/2014 99795 2717-279G1 �01-43280307 3208-3 Pine Corner Special Services 501.32
Total 99795: 8,597.90
CARDMEMBER SERVICE 01/27/2014 99796 CF11014 101-42110-402 car wash Buff n Glo Police Department 7 00
CARDMEMBER SERVICE 01/27/2014 99796 CF11414 101-42110-201 frames for resolutions CVS Police Department 14.94
CARDMEMBER SERVICE 01/27/2014 99796 CF1�514 101-42110-439 meals for interview panel EI Parian Police Department 97.48
CARDMEMBER SERVICE 01/27/20�4 99796 CF120�4 101-42110-226 rifle case H&H sports Police Department 53.43
CARDMEMBER SERVICE 01127/2014 99796 CF12214 101�2110-221 oxygen regulators EMS Store Police Department 256.95
CARDMEMBER SERVICE 01I27J2014 99796 JL11514 101-41300-439 meai for meeting Harvest Moon Administration 4.59
CARDMEMBER SERVICE 01/27/2014 99796 R010314 101-42110-221 laptop battery BattDepot Police Department 52.99
CARDMEMBER SERVICE 01/27/2014 99796 R011514 101-42400-437 ICC training L Oman Building&Zoning 665.00
Total 99796 1,152 38
CHUNKS LAKESHORE AUTO 01l27/2014 99797 11239 101-42110-402 #845 heater repair Police Department 255.93
CHUNKS LAKESHORE AUTO 0�127/2014 99797 11240 101�2110-402 #847 oil change,battery service Police Department 65.81
CHUNKS LAKESHORE AUTO 01/27/2014 99797 11278 101-42110-402 #224 repairs Police Department 82.35
Total 99797: 404 09
CITY OF MINNETONKA BEACH 01/27/2014 99798 10814 602-49450-387 4th qtr service Sewer 116.00
Total 99798: 116.00
City of Orono Utilities 01/27l2014 99799 10814 101-41900-382 PW 4th Qtr UB Central Services 19572
City of Orono Utilities 01/27/2014 99799 10814 601-49400-382 Water Plant 4th Qtr UB Water 244.96
City of Orono Utilities 01/27/2014 99799 10814 101-41900382 Post Office 4th Qtr UB Central Services 135 44
City of Orono Utilities 01/27/2014 99799 10814 101-41900-382 City Hall 4th Qtr UB Central Services Z81.��
City of Orono Check Register-COUNCIL REPORT Page: 3
Check Issue Dates:1/14/2014-1/27I2014 Jan 23,2014 03 37PM
Check Check Invoice Irnoice GL Account Description Department Invoice
Payee Issue Date Number Number Amount
City of Orono Utilities 01/27/2014 99799 10814 101-42110-382 PD 4th Qtr UB Police Department 28171
Total 99799: 1,�39.54
CITY OF WAYZATA 01/27/2014 99800 11614 602�9450-387 4th Quarter sewer Sewer $,49��$
CITY OF WAYZATA 01/27/2014 99800 11614 601-49400-387 4th Quarterwater Water 3,804.11
Total 99800: 12,301.89
CITYVIEW PLUMBING &HEATIN 01/27/2014 99801 40970 101-45210-404 furnace repair Golf Course Golf Course 584.68
CITYVIEW PLUMBING &HEATIN 01/27/2014 99801 40988 601-49400-404 water plant furnace repair Water 789.34
Total 99801: 1,374.02
CIVIC SYSTEMS LLC 01/27l20�4 99802 CVC11393 101-4190D-401 software support 01-14 to 06-14 Central Services 1,000.00
CIVIC SYSTEMS lLC 01/27/2014 99802 CVC1�393 601119400-401 software support 01-14 to 06-14 Water 750-00
CIVIC SYSTEMS LLC 01/27/2014 99802 CVC11393 602-49450-401 software support 01-14 to 06-14 Sewer 1,000-00
CIVIC SYSTEMS LLC 01/27/2014 99802 CVC11393 603-49500-401 software support 01-14 to 06-14 750.00
CIVIC SYSTEMS LLC 01/27/2014 99802 CVC1�393 651-49910-401 software support 01-14 to 06-14 Storm Water 671 00
Total 99802: 4,171.00
CNA LTC 01/27/2014 99803 1348690 101-21715 Long term care 2/14 6870
Total 99803: 68.70
CORNERSTONE 01/27/2014 99804 106�4 101-42110-437 training T.Sonnek Police Department 179.00
Total 99804: 179.00
CORPORATE CONNECTION 01/27/2014 99805 8809 602-49450-226 safety clothing/supplies Sewer 372.03
Totai 99805: 372.03
CROSSROADS ANIMAL SHELT 01/27/2014 99806 121113 101-42110-317 animal control Police Department 84_81
Total 998D6 $4_81
DELANEY,JANIE 01/14/2014 99705 11314 101-22205 Escrow refund 2013-01095 1101 Willowbrook Dr 700 00-
City of Orono Check Register-COUNCIL REPORT Page: 4
Check Issue Dates:1/14/2014-1/27/2014 Jan 23,2014 03:37PM
Check Check Invoice Invoice GL Account Description Department Invoice
Payee Issue Date Number Number Amount
Total 99705 700.00-
DELANEY,LUCIA 01/27/2014 99807 11314 101-22205 Escrow refund 1101 Willowbrook Dr 700.00
Total 99807: 700 Do
DELTA DENTAL 01l27/2014 99808 5378898 101-21709 003722072 Feb Dental 2,011.60
DELTA DENTAL 01/27l2014 99808 5378898 101-15998 003722072 Feb Cobra 599.90
Total 99808: 2,61 L50
ECM PUBLISHERS INC 01/27/2014 99809 65463 101-41900-352 legal ads Central Services 278,88
Totai 99809: 27S 88
FIRST LAB 01/27/2014 99810 731067 101-41900-489 DOT random drug screen Ce�tral Services 39.95
Total 99810 39.95
G&K SERVICES 01/27/2014 99811 �006107410 101-41900-404 mats Central Services 25.30
G&K SERVICES 01/27/2014 99811 1006107410 101-43000-226 u�iforms Public Works Department 22.01
G&K SERVICES 01/27I2014 99811 1006107410 601-49400-226 uniforms Water 11.01
G&K SERVICES 01/27/2014 99811 1006107410 602-49450-226 uniforms Sewer 11.00
Total 99811: 69.32
GENUINE PARTS COMPANY/NA 01/27/2014 99812 210966 101-45210-221 spark plug Golf Course 4 85
GENUINE PARTS COMPANYINA 01/27/2014 99812 211658 101-43000-222 supplies Public Works Department 1479
GENUINE PARTS COMPANYINA 01/27/2014 99812 211721 101-43000-221 floor dry Public Works Department 31.96
GENUINE PARTS COMPANY/NA 01/27/20�4 99812 212277 101�3000-240 mirror Public Works Department 22.40
Total 99812: 74.00
GOPHER STATE ONE CALL 01l27/2014 99813 90909 601�9400-489 locates Water 50 00
GOPHER STATE ONE CALL 01l27I2014 99813 90909 602�9450-489 locates Sewer 50 00
Total 99813: 100 AO
GRANICUSINC O1/27/2014 99814 51364 614-16500 videoequipment 4,934.65
City of Orono Check Register-COUNCIL REPORT Page: 5
Check Issue Dates:1/14/2014-�/27I2014 Jan 23,2014 03:37PM
Check Check Invoice Invoice GL Account Description Department Invoice
Payee Issue Date Number Number Amount
GRANICUS INC 01/27/2014 99814 5�377 614-49840-329 web service Cable N 557 86
Total 99814 5,492.51
H&L MESABI O1/27/2014 99815 89586 10��3000-221 carbide blade Public Works Department 1,651.32
Total 99815 1,651 32
HENNEPIN COUNTY INFOR TE 01/27/2014 99816 131238073 602-49450-321 radio admin fee Sewer 4770
Total 99816: 4770
HENNEPIN COUNTY INFOR TE 01/27/2014 99817 131238035 101-42110-414 radio lease and MDC billing Police Department 2,046.64
Total 99817: 2,046.64
HENNEPIN COUNTY TREASUR 01/27/2014 99818 38-2014-1 235-45690-352 TIF adm costs 586.10
Total 99818. 586.10
JAMES GREGORY 01/27/2014 99819 12114 101-43000-226 reimb shoes Public Works Department 125.00
Total 99819: 125.00
JEM TECHNICAL O1l27/2014 99820 12714 �01-22205 Escrow refund 550 Old Crystal Bay Rd 5,000 00
Total 99820 5,000-00
KENNETH N POTTS PA 01/27J2014 99821 10914 231-45650-307 Forfeit 1990 Honda 150-00
KENNETH N POTTS PA O1/27/2014 99821 10914 231-45650-307 Forteit 1995 Chev 150 00
Total 99821 300 00
LOGIS 01/27/2014 99822 37761 101-42110-310 police records Police Department 4,793 00
LOGIS 01/27/2014 99822 37761 101-42110-329 internet Police Department 377 00
LOGIS 01/27/2014 99822 37761 101-41900-329 intemet Central Services 377 00
Total 99822: 5,547 00
LONG LAKE TRUE VALUE 01/27/2014 99823 6172192 101-43000-221 supplies Public Works Department 10 98
City of Orono Check Register-COUNCIL REPORT Page: 6
Check Issue Dates 1/14/2014-1/27/2014 Jan 23,2014 03-37PM
Check Check Invoice Invoice Gl Account Description Department Invoice
Payee Issue Date Number Number Amount
LONG LAKE TRUE VALUE 01/27/2014 99823 B172897 101-41900-223 supplies Central Services 2.80
Total 99823: 13.78
LUNDS 01/27/2014 99824 904194 101-45210-201 supplies GolfCourse �0.46
LUNDS 01/27/2014 99824 904�95 101-42110-439 food for meeting Police Department 26.96
Total 99824: 37.42
MADISON NATIONAL LIFE 01/27/2014 99825 1118065 101-21713 Feb LTD 1,484.93
Total 99825: 1,484.93
Menards HSBC Business Solution 01/27/2014 99826 3282015140 101-41900-22� furnace repair parts Central Services 50.31
Total 99826: 50.31
MILLS CONSTRUCTION LLC 01/27/2014 99827 127�4 101-22205 Escrow refund 990 North Shore Dr 2,500 00
Total 99827: 2,500.00
MINNCOR INDUSTRIES 01/22/2014 99737 20388 101-43000-224 ice melt Public Works Department 48576-
Total 99737: 48576-
MINNEAPOLIS OXYGEN COMP 01/27/2014 99828 171064177 601-49400-415 acetylene,oxygen Water 27.17
MINNEAPOLIS OXYGEN COMP 01/27/2014 99828 171084178 101-42110-221 oxygen Police Department 35.01
MINNEAPOLIS OXYGEN COMP 01/27/2014 99828 171084179 101-42110-221 oxygen Police Department 8.61
MINNEAPOLIS OXYGEN COMP 01/27/2014 99828 171084�80 101-42110-221 oxygen Police Department 8.06
Total 99828: 78.85
MN DEPT OF PUBLIC SAFETY 01/27/2014 99829 2717000032 601-49400-489 hazardous chemical inventory fee 2014 North water Water �00.00
MN DEPT OF PUBLIC SAFETY 01/27/2014 99829 2717000042 601-49400-489 hazardous chemical inventory fee 2014 Navarre wat Water 100.00
MN DEPT OF PUB�IC SAFETY 01/27/2014 99829 2717000062 101-43000-404 hazardous chemical inventory fee 2014 PW garage Public Works Department 25.00
Total 99829: 225.00
MN DEPT OF REVENUE-WIRE 01/27/2014 99830 12114 �01-34210 Dec sales tax 3 00
MN DEPT OF REVENUE-WIRE 01/27/2014 99830 12114 101-34650 Dec sales tax 3.00
City of Orono Check Register-COUNCI�REPORT Page: 7
Check Issue Dates 1/14/2014-1/27/2014 Jan 23,2014 03 37PM
Check Check Invoice invoice GL Account Description Department Invoice
Payee Issue Date Number Number Amount
MN DEPT OF REVENUE-WIRE 01/27/2014 99830 12114 601-20806 Dec sales tax 5 00
Total 99830 11.00
MN LAW ENFORCEMENT EXPL 01/27/2014 99831 3762 101-42110-229 2014 POST dues Police Department 75.00
Total 99831: 75 00
MN RURAL WATER ASSOCIATI 01/27/2014 99832 2014 601-49400�33 membership Feb 14 to Feb 15 Water 225.00
Total 99832: 225.00
MTI DIST CO 01/27/2014 99833 938593 101-45210-221 credit memo Golf Course 152.73-
MTI DIST CO 01/27/2014 99833 940939 101-45210-221 filter Golf Course 154.51
MTI DIST CO 01/27/2014 99833 941065 101-45210-221 credit memo Golf Course 46.97-
MTI DIST CO 01/27/2014 99833 941066 101-45210-221 supplies Golf Course 278 09
Total 99833 232.90
MUNICIPALS 01/2712014 99834 2014 101-41300�33 2014 membership Administration 25.00
Total 99834: 25.00
NAVARRE HARDWARE 01/27/2014 99835 271284 101-43000-224 supplies Public Works Department 5.97
NAVARRE HARDWARE 01/27/2014 99835 27�374 601�9400-227 supplies Water 2�.48
NAVARRE HARDWARE 01/27/2014 99835 271378 601-49400-240 supplies Water 51.48
Total 99835: 84 93
NORTHERN STAR COUNCIL 01/27J2014 99836 2014 101-42110-229 2014 Post 3776 dues Police Department 393 50
Total 99836: 393 50
O SULLIVANS HOLIDAY 546 01/27l2014 99837 1231�3 101-42�10-402 car wash Police Department �� 8�
Total 99837: 11.80
O SULLIVANS HOLIDAY 547 Ot/27/2014 99838 123�13 101-421�0-402 car washes Police Department 127 50
City of Orono Check Register-COUNCIL REPORT Page: 8
Check Issue Dates:1/�4/20�4-1/27/2014 Jan 23,2014 03.37PM
Check Check Invoice Invoice GL Account Description Department Invoice
Payee fssue Date Number Number Amount
Total 99838 127.50
OFFICE DEPOT 01/27/2014 99839 6864511130 101-4�90o-20t office supplies Central Services 171.45
OFFICE DEPOT 01/27/2014 99839 6864511130 101�2110-201 offce supplies Police Department 171.44
OFFICE DEPOT OV27/2014 99839 6864512450 101-4�900-201 offce suppiies Central Services 15.90
OFFICE DEPOT 01/27/2014 99839 6864512450 101-42110-201 office supplies Police Department 15 90
OFFICE DEPOT 0�/27/2014 99839 6864512460 101-41900-201 office supplies Central Services 134.91
OFfICE DEPOT 01/27/2014 99839 6864512460 101-42110-20� office supplies Police Department 134.91
Total 99839: 644 5�
PERMITWORKS LLC 01/27/2014 99840 2014-0032 101-41900-401 PermitWorks software support Central Services 4,485.00
Total 99840: 4,485.00
PERRYS TRUCK REPAIR 01/27/2014 99841 42825 101-43000-222 hand held controller Public Works Department 338.79
Total 99841: 338.79
SCHARBER&SONS 01/27/2014 99842 �5121 101-45210-221 filters Golf Course 138 30
SCHARBER&SONS 01127/2014 99842 15123 101-45210-221 supplies Golf Course 36.16
Total 99842 174.46
SELECTACCOUNT 01/27/2014 99843 11614 101-21719 1/16114 FLEX 30.00
Total 99843: 30.00
STANTEC CONSULTING SVCS I 01/27/2014 99844 756968 435-48549-590 Orono Orchard Road Imp 1,175.00
STANTEC CONSULTING SVCS I 01127i2014 99844 756969 435-13204 Orchard Rd MCES Design&Const 600.00
Total 99844: 1,775.00
STREICHERS POUCE EQUIP 01/27l2014 99845 1059771 101-421�0-226 uniforms Hooper Police Department 389 99
STREICHERS POLICE EQUIP 01/27/2014 99845 1059772 101-42110-226 unifiorms Needham Police Department 845.00
STREICHERS POLICE EQUIP 01/27/2014 99845 1060101 �0��2110-226 uniforms McCoy Police Department 14427
STREICHERS POLICE EQUIP 01l27/2014 99845 1060411 101-42110-226 badges Police Department 405.91
STRE�CHERS POLICE EQUIP 01l27/2014 99845 1062020 101-42110-226 uniforms White Police Department 149 98
STREICHERS POLICE EQUIP 01/27/2014 99845 1062704 101-42110-226 uniforms reserves Police Department 79.99
City of Orono Check Register-COUNCIL REPORT Page: 9
Check Issue Dates 1/14/2014-1/27/2014 Jan 23,2014 03 37PM
Check Check Imoice Invoice GL Account Description Department Invoice
Payee Issue Date Number Number Amount
STREICHERS POLICE EQUIP 01/27/2014 99845 1062705 101-42110-226 uniforms White Police Department Z9 99
STREICHERS POLICE EQUIP 01/27/2014 99845 1062848 101-42110-228 supplies Police Department 119 66
STREICHERS POLICE EQUIP 01/27/2014 99845 1063124 101-42110-226 Vest and vest accessories Tomcheck Police DepaRment 1,139.99
STREICHERS POLICE EQUIP 01/27/2014 99845 1063623 101�2110-226 Vest and vest accessories Sonnek Police Department 845.00
STREICHERS POLICE EQUIP 01/27/20�4 99545 1063781 101-42110-226 supplies Police Department 13.88
STREICHERS POLICE EQUIP 01/27/2014 99845 �063819 101-42110-550 squad setup Police Department �,173 49
STREfCHERS POLICE EQUIP 01/27/2014 99845 1064833 101�2110-226 uniforms reserves Police DepaRment 321
STREICHERS POLICE EQUIP 01/27l2014 99845 �064921 101-42110-226 uniforms Wittke Police Department 210.33
STREICHERS POLICE EQUIP 01/27/2014 99845 1064925 101-42110-226 uniforms Schultz Police Department 59 9g
STREICHERS POLICE EQUIP 01/27/20�4 99845 1065129 101-42110-226 uniforms Spencer Police Department 204.98
STREICHERS POLICE EQUIP 01/27/2014 99845 1065983 101-42110-226 uniforms Siltala Police Department �82.94
STREICHERS POLICE EQUIP 01/27/2014 99845 1066029 101-42110-226 uniforms Sonnek Police Department 80.00
STREICHERS POLICE EQUIP 01/27/2014 99845 1066030 101-42110-226 uniforms Vargas Police Department 80.00
STREICHERS POLICE EQUiP 01/27/2014 99845 1066206 101-42110-201 battery Police Department z9 99
STREICHERS POLICE EQUIP 01/27/2014 99845 1066884 101-42110-226 handcuffs Police Department 44 99
STREICHERS POLICE EQUIP 01/27/2014 99845 1067036 101-42110-226 uniforms Sturm Police Department �3 99
STREICHERS POLICE EQUIP 01/27/2014 99845 1067039 101-42110-226 uniforms Sturm Police Department 54.99
Total 99845: 6,302.56
TASC OU27/2014 99846 245273 101�1900-489 COBRA admin fee Central Services 50 00
50.00
Total 99846
THE HARTFORD 01/27/2014 99847 6622957-6 101-15998 Cobra 2/14 Z925
THE HARTFORD 01/27/2014 99847 6622957-6 101-21710 Life insurance 2/14 705 65
Total 99847: 734.90
THREE RIVERS PARK DISTRIC 01/27/2014 99848 35945 101�2110-439 room rental Police Department 300.00
Total 99848 300.00
US BANK WIRE 01/27/2014 99849 12514 318-47000-601 HRA Bond Series 2005A 195,000.00
US BANK WIRE 01/27J2014 99849 12514 318-47000-61� HRA Bond Series 2005A 20,606.25
Total 99849 215,606.25
US BANK WIRE 01/27/2014 99850 20114 319�7000-611 GO Street Recon Series 2008A 66,782.50
US BANK WIRE 01/27/2014 99850 20114 319�7000-601 GO Street Recon Series 2008A 165,000.00
City of Orono Check Register-COUNCIL REPORT Page: 10
Check Issue Dates 1/14/2014-1/27/2014 Jan 23,2014 03:37PM
Check Check Invoice Invoice GL Account Description Department Invoice
Payee Issue Date Number Number Amount
Total 99850 231,782.50
US BANK WIRE 01/27/2014 99851 20114B 320-47000-611 GO�mp Refund Bond 2009A 5,500 00
US BANK WIRE 01/27/2014 99851 20114B 320-47000-601 GO Imp Refund Bond 2009A 175,000 00
Total 99851: t 80,500 AO
VERIZON WIRELESS 01/27l2014 99852 9717886459 101-42110-321 1/07 to 2/06 Police Department 1,592 51
VERIZON WIRELESS 01/27/2014 99852 9717886459 101-41900-321 1I07 to 2/06 Central Services 114 67
VERIZON WIRELESS 01/27/2014 99852 9717886459 101-45210-321 1/07 to 2l06 Golf Course 30.15
VERIZON WIRELESS 01/27/20�4 99852 9717886459 601-49400-321 1/07 to 2/06 Water 64.41
VERIZON WIRELESS 01127/2014 99852 9717886459 602-49450-321 1/07 to 2/06 Sewer 64 41
VERIZONWIRELESS O1/27/2014 99552 9717886459 101-42110-321 equipmentcredit PoliceDepartment 20047-
1,665.68
Total 99852:
WESTSIDE WHOLESALE TIRE 01/27/2014 99853 717166 101-43000-221 #430 repairs Public Works Department 2,205.07
Total 99953: 2,205.07
WRIGHT HENNEPIN ELECTRIC 01/27I2014 99854 10914 602�9450-381 12/01 to 1/01 Sewer 48.83
WRIGHT HENNEPIN ELECTRIC 01/27/2014 99854 10914 101-43000-381 12/01 to 1/01 Public Works Department 103 41
Total 99854: 15224
Grand Totals: 1,273,065 23
.
�DUNCIL ME�'T�NG
�AN 2 7 2014
REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION ��y���0
DATE: January 27, 2014
ITEM NO: I �
Department Approval: Administrator Reviewed: Agenda Section:
Name Jessica Loftus � Closed Meeting
Title City Administrator
Item Description: Closed Meeting (§13D.05.3) for Attorney-Client Privilege (Wilcox
v.Orono)
Pursuant to Minn.Stat. 13D.05 Subd. 3 the City of Orono is closing the meeting to the
public to discuss ongoing litigation (Wilcox v. Orono). George Hoff from Hoff, Barry &
Kozar will be attending to present information to the City Council. The meeting does not
need to be tape recorded and no further City Council business will be conducted after
the closed meeting other than to adjourn.
COUNCIL 1�EETING
REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION JAN 2 7 2U14
DATE: J�a�i�14
ITEM NO: / `�
Department Approval: Administrator Reviewed: Agenda Section:
Name Jessica Loftus Closed Meeting
Title City Administrator
Item Description: Closed Meeting for Labor Negotiation (§13D.03)
Pursuant to Minn.Stat. 13D.03 the City of Orono is closing the meeting to the public to
discuss labor negotiation strategies with LELS Sergeants. The meeting does need to
be tape recorded and no further City Council business will be conducted after the closed
meeting other than to adjourn.
1 i ,
�
Two Sto �
rY
� 2439 Total Squa�e Feet
1170 S uare Feet Main Floor
q
12i69 S uare Feet U � er Floor
q pp
.._,
wi .� ;�, r. ,.
� . � �� ��K�'� C'�t17.. � � i �t Ci '� : ..
� � t� }'1. �. + ,., � ' .
��.1 �! .�•i'Wn��•�;�;��ifi �`�' F ..ttl ti���� � t i -'y7' ^� �� �,'
„_K(1'GHEN q�1 i� ���. y r �i��i �'�I l�� 7 .• i 1 � ';'� r+;i� dt
�. ':p•.i:i:�nYi. � �� 1� '�� . j ;i. I liT _ �f� , i -.f��1Mbs�
^ • , '/` �. ��..� '• 1, LG)'�
r� �l �f �s� BRFJUCFAST i � i ,
� j�i�� .., 1 r a ` , ' �� • ` _' � , '.
� . '��1 ; ?J .y (11 y �)+7 / I�Cy� 1 � � . �f�'..�' . . . '
� i :� � � �r } �. ���.�a I i',i �t� r � .l �FAMILY r. �i:.
r
i { � � i I.�� �t�,rj� �.� v� 70'l.1i10'-0'�t
r 4 %I��� 1 � it� e + , � ����.� � � �.y i t� / � f
� j .�,��{:1 , � 7� t . , �.t.l� 1�,r, ; V
L !� �� �y.f'77�.��. .s ' � t�l � �1 a1� 7 ���f J 1 �
� r �.. �. f.. � �.'�
� 3'`��`,1 r..�, , y'�'� � , ; Qr�
, ',,».....
,
•, Lk' ,� . �j.���
. � � r �„ �� , ; � i � ;,
� � � �
. � ��1 i:l!"�� (rr� ; ��i i � n�' � ��''
• � : , �n , , .
J DINIHG b�����f���!'�*} �I" � }+����
�� .r , t,x�z-� ,. ,, , � t p"i F i�i c �".J�'
' t r 1 , .� � ,�I(•`f ���1� l iciy� �•l��N r�"�^y�ll..
` M�•.� r i I�� �; / �pyyp •'� 7{1 17,� �1�>.,,r�+� .
. y F� 1 rL�.�Il .� L � � ��r
, .;.r_ 'j j k'.,1{.�� —. ,�Lt!::. r•,-r,', �,.'I���i.u.i
l�� .y
..�� ri�
�CiOVERm i' •
PORCN. , �.; � ,
.. .' , .. . . . i�. r
� �. ...�.�.�. . . � �.. • �' ..
'� . .;. ' � �,+, ���.
. :'�i .f�. 1
.�' , .y.,:.i
_ •�:�
r �t' GAR/lGE ,
28'+1'x21 10' ''�; t �
,l.l�� � `�". ' `�.
�� `��'_. ---- ,
r /
� ' �
r' �
1 �A�.
�� I .
�'`�lkllJ
:� i � �,�� ��;3
` , � ` '���
:.� , , i .- ' �: :
. . ' :' , . .f 1:; 11 f '
BEOROOM 3�. '' BEOROOM 4` Q l;! f,'`��
� tt-1 x 1]'. I; 1Q 1'x 1�'� �-.yllqTER r
;; O 'a"n!� �
� � O �'` rf , .'R 1.
2O! .� ei►n� ,' ', s> �
/ _�,,, ' �'�` r � l
O !' r�J• ' ` , RM' ,'�.
. , . ,
� , r' `.'/BEDRWM� J..
� ,� t 10'1 x 15-0'
} , ,���, r
-' .. j.n , '4 a�i h � /�� .� � ��7
�i �rv�TpN��I':1�� � 14 �y �M�,
BEQROOM 2` ,.
11'�c9'1C r ' BECOW "�ri ' � '• �
��;,,, ,
�..� ink� !�::!i�.:l. .,_ ♦.w.�,:., -t'^,� ��r� '.
.��,�.���.
�� (
Vl�� .
� L���� �
Two Story .
� 3550 Total Square Feet
1450 Square Feet Main Flo�or
2100 Square Feet Upper Fl�or
,, , , ,� r�i,r i y ' .�1 �"�7:
yJ +ri {.�:i �a't 1 �� ��w E� ��
�:.;d'},i., ,�� , .�..�..L�.,�.i-.7 _Y�t'�:(��
�i��!a:.r.:�'.,,;i;MORNINGrM1��,�;�:� '; '.
�' � �� �ROOMr y,,. ,��;
t���)�.t ��16 x�8'�8�"�� �tia d�j�Hr;
;r'H�1 t � � 1.{'si.t�a:' i,r. .1 y,`�w 1
}���. �'I�j 7.: ':;�,�^,.�.�`•!,�.�.r, 1�...,�..ij:.
;-'��i�'. '�t ���a 7 ,I�l:'IF��:
�jl�� .��,��r��"x���3�P7r','�� ��- /-`
K
,�'1�'t�y°i�iw.t�'n nR i,q _ � r �,✓ s z-,�
�a�a�+�"x�a r�S � z� ' �� �;
.f
T �.tw�s�,'h r�� �tadrJ ir . � �z i ��. Jr�
t� � � �t �` . �, �f�I.� ,F �1.f�����r�"'��KITCfiEK1�xT l�� r .,+ ti .,,:,Yti;
F'' � s � � ,,e ���y�Frt�.f�x"y�Ylr,�a�31�� GUEST�ROOM
.,S � , ;«.rl �ti.r�� � i. .�.�.. F�, 7 't O �J ti '12=1-k 10 9"�c !�
�,,`� `� �.�1� ��+� f�t�; ;�I�I� 'r IYn��J 4���JS � -_ ,J I� �' hR ,/.1
�, ��, �.1 i� �i t aF� t , � E ?
: r�, �r�� � �� �: M z� � ���
� i u, �• � ���t���],„ kr)��)ri�;��,}Ji�K.u�(�ril�r'1i��i,j��' ,c �'
rc �a �y ��3 � r � r �, t,�.t i �+t r,�-'L'+'{N}+, � ., , ,�
`�, , I � ,7BREAKFAST{,,�`�� ;.�+,� r a? ��',' f��' � , � :c
' �� L.f' � '.�f.w� � 1� ��. Ir'��.� �1.('�7'' T 7�}'�i��l���.��y i ��r ��'1
.r . . ��� i �•,r ita� 1 1�`„ (,�ir �� �Fay r r '.
` FAMILY
� � �, t i {. � t f
. l Po� � Sr � 1 1-�i y�� �
�� y �, s� e�,GC��y�.N�i��'�1}y�r��''� tl'� .r,�t� �lC'7�i i�
(ti94 fi��.ra 4p �� Y°v �13ATH,�ti. ;!v.�
.,,,r+,; � q r:..T ����'{�9.;.�irr�W�, ^Nq y{� �C;.L.� � t; >5 y
� � '� j� " ) �'� `� ,�T�
' ' , �il �r?;�. �� �e`ie�,r-
. � _r,:li
/� I�} y� � ' l .
i�y ��r �� i�.
i�1 ! � ��. i' t.
iai� �('1 t�4' 1 :�a '��i� � . �l i�i �l,� � _ ��. i .
��R;r.;. ` ,.,7J..J��.� �I' 1 19��,�:� �'� 2�; s � '.��� ) 1 �t .'i� ""'""
,Gi li�,r : i . :� y ��rr
� 1.} �i I,� '.
/�'.� ;
�trti�.�FOYER' ��� �" �
,
' .. , -� �` :1� ��''� ------'
� � �;
� �t � �11 � w.s ' Qoor
� � �' ,i a � i`" r � � �r �.f :r :' .
� ,
\ o,;. W�� '.;';�� � .GARAGE:• �
�„�r, , ^ �
�.' ���'�Dooa F rTt Pia �,�;.1, /�_ '�� �
.. <FLEX 1 ;� U/�C.�.'S,��c t
,
_ ,. , . �,
,.. . . ; .;. �, � , , �.� .;
�,
PORCH
s
- _ ---- , r � .
- - -- - S ,
I''l/�1/�
L . - ,��s, t ` ��`�rr� +
> � �j , k , ti.'-,„ '� � � ;wr�°aa'o�.
� �' r'••V O� ,; � 1' '` :. ` � � T ,.
I � �
DJ.•k•::.�:. f � '�. � { S `-I� i, } .
•{{;f`. � 1 . .
�':� � �� ����� �. :. � t ,�,'�P �.��: � 1 r i 4 ' .�. � .
� ���f,r' �i��� � � MASTER � f;� a �` BEDR�OOM3��r<
' ���� '!7 �' Y x / � ' :BEDROOM '' �r 12 10 x12'-8 ,
� �wu►srErt� � �J, � , , �, r u�� ; : ,F.�� �
� ,! '7, BATH°'�t� .�•rK , ' 18 X.15 1 � __.__ 4 � . �
:. � ��.r {i i ��i ::OP4�rdyCafkr�pi...�'i .� '�t" r � � ,��.i', � :. �� ti�!
j,l J ��.�.� t��lll �� + . i L", 1� �.�' . / -.: 1 �� �
t�' �.t 1 � w � ..� � .`. J�� Q�
2:1 �1 : I y, S , t .
.,� r � �� � � , �� � �r - � ,
{ �..LYqll. � ` ,. z �.. ir�Fj'���. � I Y r����� \
� 3
� J t� t,. r{.t, 3 � r���� .n �1��n.�Yw��' �� i,��'C(�.7 �+:?k�
Z f. -L'Li �( . ��� ,� r•�i�
I � ' \a. !� i �
� �• < • � ,,�-ir�� ,BATH
� � � _ t ', .c qUTmC� �Q �i`f`�'��'
�� i 4 .. ' f . � '{4 - �� � '� Nii ly
} �i' ����t��r
� �T � ,'• . {� ,1.f S ��I M���P F�..�,
' , �
... � I I � I` �� . .
t � � �. 1 , Y .�� l ! �. ' '.
. •� 4 � , t ,tr {< 4 .�'.. n�.rr�- r +�.�.' , ,:
i�.' t :.f f� i r i f �'r ' i
WirMWow� �� i O i ! ' �Yy iL i r? .� � 5t�� r� c t � ��h r:
i,� z �i � i:'. � 7 .- � �,,t. �.^
� {BATNI�^'�,�,i r ..4 ` � � "u� -�� tit� �r. .� �.}.
r hr.�i:.i��� � }�� `�t �,� � �r 1 �, �; ��. BEDi�00M 4�'
�BEDROOM 2 � '�'
u t� ,�80NUS ROOM? �. " ," �r� x�s r
,
�� 12$•X'13 11 � _ ti 1 � i 15'-0 X.73-4 ' ,h`�t `�<:6 }+:- �r �'� `
; g � . i 1��1. d. �� i i i% r�4t��n-µ r i Ml j.`c�. f �' i
�': �'�.� � . t .• , C� < ��t�'lt . - f`t � .� � 47
+ � � i �.t
' •1 i .- a ; ,(.� .4i� .': Ay!'V i . .tA ` '} H(}'1 tt
��. -:� ,, ,r .' .. ..;,y� f 1 -I �x� .7. �
! r,1� �.
. i . ..�1...J-,
I
��/ ' �
I�PP�(Z .
� i _ n i
l -ov
, � �
� • .
. Rambler
2218 Square Feet Ma�in Floor
� . � . wt. «, ��. � � , ,� ;. � .• .:f.
., . � �i ��4� .� a�l;� � � ���� ��N �..l�j i � ' � � . . `p�,.�`.:::.`:•
� i 1 �.I . '� ,I l� ��I � 4'h�1�� � � ��• �i �� ��`��,
.1 ; ,.1 .��.ri i i �r �iJ�t ' l � ll '� �i�i �2� ti . j . � �.. 1`
., , � , � �a� , , , } , . .
� .. i ..� O � .. _n f t .E'�. �r' `': ti i�� � � f , � �- ��`
� �� � ,�. �C •�1 :,�� ! ,, '{I �1 1 .' � 1 � t �r :� t
' r ' .� ' . � DINING G7� r,�'� � �a �. � � , �
y� . r r i:�f i� �f � �� ' >� '� � � ��i i
�1'.' i 'MASTER S �� ,O� .r n i 11�'a 13 1 i i�� � � �,FAMILY� ' �
� � � � MASTER �.. 1 i �ti� a � � i . � �� �
�r � �.' � ��EDROOM � . h iBATH� � L "G+l�� ; y "'i i r l i -' plol,JoYCao4q � :: `
� .`'15$'x16'-4 �:� un ��.� . li i,�' jn ( 'j ;� � 'I �-1' Oot
' �` �...qy�,�Y�O ...; Gn �,ij i� l��i� i � eT .'�1• t� �..,, i �,fi t i .-, ,�•.�L�' µUep„a
";� � . y .,.� r� ..1 rIu +hen�r �. ��t i . �� . � ;.1+�
� �: r '.�,� p �"� � .��� 1 ;7.�, ��,�:,V�a'�" � � 'x
� � . �. � Xr• � � . ;i
i
i '� _�t '�v ir1 i0�r}+ ��F<� �i .' �' �
. � '' i.� .ct �7 7 }�,Hi-�' ��- . .
' t� . . � t.!, . �-. � *1'�""�7�.{��"1�I�(FI`ty��ny't6'Y�y'"�'L�l�,� !, s - .. .t ,� '.
���� I�� i������ �� �y��1�j�`4'��,�y�r�ii��o+.���1y 't'�'^*,F'r�.�
� �,�'!� `{� j•a h '�t' -- � `���{ y'�n ii� ti..�.f�J FYYDR;.
_ ' �i'� I . �' it" li nY'���x���34r t, !- :r.
�.', _ '�L 6'.1 �.�'f � �?''���I rh t ,'G�I. 4' �C' o'
��� . � . . .. . ��i{i �1 1.i �:,i'� �X•'ly,l �..I�} Kwl r." t r^ 4�' _
i 1 � iyr� L • �kll .�.�.. ... �.
� t �^,�, �,� "� ,t` `a ' , �- �-- ,�a�:I�;;'��Js,{ ' yw�k{`: ,.. , ,
� ��'7 ,.• .�, ���f� t}�.�• �i+� . f.� ����. .t^' � . , �'v.�1 f��`Y t ii ���r ���•I 7•F^r•q' ..
�' �, � ��t�� 1 i � . „� r Y ,�i �, ! �.1, ? ��
, BEDROOM2 . Y�:i ' !�i +t r,� �rKITCHEN h� ' {,�,�<r:r j F P .c
� � 11-6 x 71$ � ° 1 st .'Yli �1 ,�'4 `i J .��, } t . r �iy f3.4�-� �"�'� •.�i
� � UTII.lTY� 1 t { i i 1� �� � r `�hl:�tti f��I�i�� J { � r�j�+MUD R0041 {
� .�. . t.j r1 I �'� 1 �� I 1�1 �li �����. 'tl�lY...�'� ��� � �� .f�i . �� 'k
�_
I:r,.i� . NMa�� �� �.jf1„�S 'PanhY . � r��l.¢�'$��i: �,���.
__ i ';1� i .�,..�. "��:. ' ____���
�.� .�q� • i .,ji� ;i'� �:� i
i � i ij ,��� I � , : ;
�
� , i� .
.� . 1 . ., ' . � :�
� �.I�,"� � 4 i y . � � py� _�_�'�
��"� �;Door.
4 BATH '
r � �
, i
i
. �'' 1,,.�,:' . +�,. ,�, '' � '-
'� r FOYER Y` ` � GARAGE
� 'I 29 2'X 22'-2
. . . ,�; � �' r��'���;;��fi
� ..p.
- �BEDFtOOM 3
17'�'x 1i'-4'. CpVERED'
PORCH r.i
__ _ --_— �1'i .
� � . ,. . ..— �� . . .. ..ir
FIRST FLOOR � �
�� �
;:�
� N - ,., . �,'( 'VI I.
' . '�-0NFMISHED�� ,�
`: . r
.. _ • �j"'.`
� - ".. . . .. - _ - , ._ . • �
1
. o . �
_ .�:�. �
�'UNFIMSNED• . �
� '.
i.
, , r .
:r',
� :r:
;;�
1,
� t �_'�
, y.
�'�� -
�
't
c
�`�ID r .
�