HomeMy WebLinkAbout05-28-2013 Council Packet PUBLIC ATTENDANCE
MEETING DATE 'S�� - � �
�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
� _ y � _ _
1 ` - _ - .
. , ',: � �'
� �
� � X ��.,f; � .�.,�j �l ;s��t l% � �i t �
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
'!3.
14.
15.
V:1�LEGAL FORMS)\(FORMS�\PUBLIC ATTENDANCE.DOC
Agenda for Council Meeting Set for *Tuesday, May 28, 2013, 7:00 P.M.
Orono Council Chambers, 2780 Kelley Parkway, Orono, MN 55356
952-249-4600 / www.ci.orono.mn.us
Roll Call
Pledge of Allegiance
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 member 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. Regular Council Meeting of May 13, 2013
Planning Commission Comments – John Thiesse, 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
3. #13-3596 City of Orono – Accessory Uses and Structures – Zoning Ordinance Amendment
4. #13-3601 City of Orono - Wetlands – Zoning Ordinance Amendment
* 5. #13-3602 City of Orono – RS District Hardcover Standards – Zoning Ordinance
Amendment
Public Works Director/City Engineer’s Report
6. 2013 Sanitary Sewer Rehabilitation Project
7. 2012 Orono Street Maintenance Project – Project Closeout
Mayor/Council Report
City Administrator's Report
City Attorney's Report
8. Liquor Violation
9. Licenses & Permits
Garbage Hauler Licenses
* 10. Claims
Adjournment
Agenda for Council Meeting Set for *Tuesday, May 28, 2013, 7:00 P.M.
Orono Council Chambers, 2780 Kelley Parkway, Orono, MN 55356
952-249-4600 / www.ci.orono.mn.us
Sign up for email notifications at www.ci.orono.mn.us – follow links for Stay Connected & Email Notification
Upcoming Events
2013
06/05 – Planning Commission Work Session, Wednesday, 5:30 p.m.
06/10 – Navarre Community Meeting, Monday, 5:00 p.m.
06/10 – Council Meeting, Monday, 7:00 p.m.
06/17 – Planning Commission Meeting, Monday, 6:30 p.m. (Council Liaison – Cynthia Bremer)
06/24 – Council Work Session, Monday, 5:30 p.m.
06/24 – Council Meeting, Monday, 7:00 p.m.
07/04 – Holiday, Fourth of July – Offices Closed
07/08 – Council Meeting, Monday, 7:00 p.m.
07/15 – Planning Commission Meeting, Monday, 6:30 p.m. (Council Liaison – Kristi Anderson)
07/22 – Council Work Session, Monday, 5:30 p.m.
07/22 – Council Meeting, Monday, 7:00 p.m.
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING
Monday, May 13, 2013
7:00 o’clock p.m.
_____________________________________________________________________________________
Page 1 of 26
ROLL CALL
The Orono City Council met on the above-mentioned date with the following members present: Mayor
Lili Tod McMillan, Council Members Cynthia Bremer, Aaron Printup, Lizz Levang, and Kristi Anderson.
Representing Staff were City Administrator Jessica Loftus, Assistant City Administrator for Long-Term
Strategic Planning Michael Gaffron, Planning Coordinator Melanie Curtis, Finance Director Ron Olson,
City Attorney Soren Mattick, Public Works Director/City Engineer Jesse Struve, Consulting City
Engineer David Martini, and Recorder Jackie Young.
Mayor McMillan called the meeting to order at 7:00 o’clock p.m., followed by the Pledge of Allegiance.
APPROVAL OF AGENDA
Item Nos. 10, 11, 13, and 15 through 21 were added to the Consent Agenda.
Anderson moved, Printup seconded, to approve the Consent Agenda as amended. VOTE: Ayes 5,
Nays 0.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
*2. COUNCIL WORK SESSION MEETING OF APRIL 22, 2013
Anderson moved, Printup seconded, to approve the minutes of the Orono City Council work
session of April 22, 2013, as submitted. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0.
*3. REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING OF APRIL 22, 2013
Anderson moved, Printup seconded, to approve the minutes of the Orono City Council meeting of
April 22, 2013, as submitted. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0.
RECOGNITION
4. POLICE OFFICER DAVE McNICHOLS – RESOLUTION NO. 6225
Mayor McMillan presented a plaque to Dave McNichols in recognition of his service to the City of
Orono.
Police Chief Correy Farniok commended Dave McNichols for his work in Spring Park and Orono and
presented him with his badge.
Anderson moved, Printup seconded, to accept Dave McNichols resignation and to adopt
RESOLUTION NO. 6225, a Resolution Recognizing Officer David McNichols for his Twenty Years
of Dedicated Service to the City as a Police Officer. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0.
PLANNING COMMISSION COMMENTS – JON SCHWINGLER, REPRESENTATIVE
None
Item #02 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
Approval of Council Minutes 05/13/2013
[Page 1 of 26]
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING
Monday, May 13, 2013
7:00 o’clock p.m.
_____________________________________________________________________________________
Page 2 of 26
PUBLIC COMMENTS
None
PLANNING DEPARTMENT REPORT
*5. #13-3598 WILLIAM AND CYNTHIA BOWMAN AND MICHAEL SOWADA, OUTLOT
A, WILLOW HILL (2300 WILLOW HILL DRIVE AND 450 WILLOW DRIVE SOUTH) – LOT
LINE REARRANGEMENT – RESOLUTION NO. 6226
Anderson moved, Printup seconded, to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 6226, a Resolution Approving a
Subdivision of a Lot Line Rearrangement for the properties located at 2300 Willow Hill Drive and
450 Willow Drive South. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0.
6a. #13-3599 HOMETIME VIDEO PUBLISHING (DEAN JOHNSON), 80 CREEK RIDGE
PASS – ATF VARIANCE – RESOLUTION NO. 6227
Dean Johnson was present.
Curtis stated in November of 2012, a building permit was issued for the new home at 80 Creek Ridge
Pass. While the builder’s excavator was digging the area for the home’s foundation, they encountered
what appeared to be slowly running/leaking city sanitary sewer line underground that had been previously
been worked on by a different contractor. Upon further investigation, it was determined to be a city
sanitary sewer line that had been crushed prior to the recent construction activity.
The builder then contacted the City on November 29th and Public Works staff visited the site. Upon
inspection, it appeared the sewer line was not centered within the utility easement as had been expected
but appeared to angle off to the south toward the proposed home’s foundation. The apparent location of
the existing sanitary sewer line and the proposed home location would not allow for the required 10-foot
separation between the foundation and the sewer line.
The builder contacted Planning Staff after having a meeting on site and discussions with Public Works
Staff. It was concluded in the field that the pipe was not where it was expected or supposed to be. The
solution posed by the builder was to pivot the home 7.8 feet in the rear to move it ten feet away from the
sewer line rather than revise the house plans or move the sewer line. This pivot would result in a 37.8
foot setback on the northwest side and a 24-foot setback on the southeast side where 30-foot setbacks are
required. The builder is the owner of the subject property and the adjacent property at 90 Creek Ridge
Pass, which is the property affected by the reduced setback.
Planning Staff met to discuss the builder’s options and the next steps that should be taken in order to
provide direction to the builder. The sewer line discovery posed a timing problem for the builder as it
was discovered at the end of November after the building permit had already been issued and excavation
begun. Since there was no Planning Commission meeting in December and insufficient time to publish
for a City Council meeting in December, no formal action was likely to occur until mid-January at the
earliest. The likely six to eight week delay would make excavation and foundation construction more
difficult due to the weather, as well as greatly affect Hometime Video’s production schedule.
Item #02 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
Approval of Council Minutes 05/13/2013
[Page 2 of 26]
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING
Monday, May 13, 2013
7:00 o’clock p.m.
_____________________________________________________________________________________
Page 3 of 26
(6a. #13-3599 HOMETIME VIDEO PUBLISHING (DEAN JOHNSON), 80 CREEK RIDGE
PASS – ATF VARIANCE – RESOLUTION NO. 6227, Continued)
Due to these constraints and the extraordinary circumstances presented by the sewer line location, Staff
concluded it would be unreasonable to hold up this project. Based upon the reasons cited in Staff’s
memorandum, the builder was advised that he could proceed with the project by pivoting the home away
from the sewer line to maintain the necessary 10-foot separation from it but would have to make an after-
the-fact variance application. The variance would be for a minor encroachment of the required 30-foot
setback on the opposite side of the house. Staff’s conclusion was that this was a proper course of action.
The after-the-fact variance application and survey were submitted on May 19th. This after-the-fact
variance is not considered to be a violation unlike other after-the-fact variances, which are considered to
be code violations. Staff did not provide a strict submittal timeline for the builder. This explains why the
variance hearing was not held until the April Planning Commission meeting. The Planning Commission
voted 5 to 0 to recommend approval of the setback variance.
Following the Planning Commission’s review, Staff required the builder to submit a survey showing the
actual location of the sewer line prior to moving the variance forward to the City Council. When the
survey arrived, Staff was surprised that it did not show the expected bend or offset in the sewer line. It
turned out the surveyor merely sighted between manholes and did not re-dig the sewer line to survey it
directly. As a result, Staff does not know the exact as-built location of the sewer line. At this point Staff
has to rely on the verbal/visual reports from Public Works Staff and the builder that the pipe was located
too close to the house.
This situation has brought to Staff’s attention the need to define a more effective process when such
unforeseen predicaments present themselves. Ideally, and in the future, Staff will bring the situation to
Council’s attention immediately and advise them of the decisions being made at a Staff level.
When lines are exposed in the future for repairs, etc., public works plans to utilize our City GPS unit to
get an accurate in the field locate for our utility. In this particular case, it would have been of value to
have the exact location of the pipe verified by the surveyor while the pipe was exposed before the owner
is given a go-ahead in order to confirm the basis for the decision.
Staff recommends approval of the after-the-fact side setback variance allowing the 6-foot encroachment
into the 30-foot side yard.
Levang asked why this did not appear before the Planning Commission sooner since this happened in
November.
Curtis indicated the application was not looked at as a violation and Staff did not put the additional
pressure on the builder as they typically would under different after-the-fact situations. Staff worked with
the builder to make sure they submitted an application for an after-the-fact application and things were
delayed slightly because the builder was out of the country. Once Staff received the as-built survey, the
builder made the application for the after-the-fact permit.
McMillan asked when construction the house started.
Item #02 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
Approval of Council Minutes 05/13/2013
[Page 3 of 26]
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING
Monday, May 13, 2013
7:00 o’clock p.m.
_____________________________________________________________________________________
Page 4 of 26
(6a. #13-3599 HOMETIME VIDEO PUBLISHING (DEAN JOHNSON), 80 CREEK RIDGE
PASS – ATF VARIANCE – RESOLUTION NO. 6227, Continued)
Curtis indicated November was when the excavation started and the problem with the sewer line was
discovered.
Dean Johnson, Applicant, indicated it was somewhere around the end of November, and that due to the
weather, they were under the gun to complete the foundation. The excavator began digging the hole and
discovered some water. It appeared to be a line of gravel that filled up with water. The next day it was
running again and gurgling. The excavator lightly dug the top of the soil away and that is when the
broken line was discovered. Scott Oberainger from Public Works then visited the site and they found that
the sewer line was approximately seven feet from the house and veering toward the back corner of the
house. By pivoting the house, it would be out of the way.
Johnson indicated he also owns the adjacent property and that he does not have a problem with the house
being within the setback. They plan on planting a number of trees between the two lots to help screen the
house. Johnson commented in his view the solution arrived at was a win/win solution for everybody.
Printup asked if there has been another occasion where Staff has allowed building to proceed before
bringing an after-the-fact variance to the City Council.
Curtis indicated not to her knowledge.
McMillan asked who installed the sewer line.
Curtis indicated it was the contractor for the developer.
Gaffron stated back in 2005, the sewer and road construction began for this development. Gaffron
indicated he has looked through the City’s archives but has not been able to find the inspection sheets. At
this time it is Staff’s assumption that it was inspected by either the Public Works Director or Bonestroo.
McMillan asked if the City had GPS at that time.
Gaffron indicated they did not. Gaffron stated that this is one of those situations where Staff felt they
needed to address the problem immediately and arrive at a solution. In hindsight Staff would have let the
Council know about the situation. Gaffron noted the City did not have a Planning Commission meeting
in December and only one City Council meeting in December, which would not have allowed the
appropriate notice to be given. The developer knew from the start that he would need to apply for an
after-the-fact permit. Gaffron acknowledged that notice to the Council was lacking in this case but that in
his view Staff made the right decision at the time.
McMillan commented this is an unusual situation.
Gaffron concurred that this was an unusual situation and not something that Staff had come across before.
Levang stated she has a concern for the adjacent property since the Planning Commission minutes reflect
that Mr. Johnson will probably need a variance on the adjacent property since it is practically unbuildable.
Item #02 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
Approval of Council Minutes 05/13/2013
[Page 4 of 26]
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING
Monday, May 13, 2013
7:00 o’clock p.m.
_____________________________________________________________________________________
Page 5 of 26
(6a. #13-3599 HOMETIME VIDEO PUBLISHING (DEAN JOHNSON), 80 CREEK RIDGE
PASS – ATF VARIANCE – RESOLUTION NO. 6227, Continued)
Curtis displayed the plat map for the two properties. Curtis stated initially the builder presented these
plans for that property, but due to the wetland setbacks and other constraints of the lot, it was difficult to
construct on that lot with those proposed plans.
Johnson noted there is also a creek that runs through the lot and a 45-foot leeway from the creek and a 20-
foot setback from the creek. After 2005, the City passed an additional 20-foot buffer, which has
diminished the ability to construct on the lot. Johnson indicated they then decided to construct on this lot
but that they will likely need a variance to construct on the adjacent lot.
Gaffron pointed out the variance that would be needed for the adjacent lot would not relate to the
application before it tonight. The Planned Residential Development for this site was approved in 2005.
The original property consisted of 20 acres, with 14 acres being dry buildable. The previous developers
were allowed to create a subdivision that has lots with buildable lots of approximately one acre for a total
of seven lots. The homes were clustered together to preserve the wetland and some of the dry buildable
land.
Gaffron indicated there were a number of reasons why these lots were created relatively small for the
two-acre zone but noted the Council still required a 60-foot setback between the houses to maintain the
rural character of the neighborhood. Gaffron stated this anomaly may affect it slightly but the impact
should not be significant.
Johnson concurred that the impact will be minimal since the massing of the house will be on the other
side.
Levang asked how many feet will be between the two houses.
Curtis stated the variance would allow a 24-foot setback on this lot.
Levang noted there would be an impact by pivoting the house.
Gaffron stated if the Council wanted to retain the 60-foot setback between the buildings, there would have
to be some modifications made to the adjacent lot. Gaffron noted they do not have a design yet for the
adjacent property but that there are a number of designs that could be constructed within the building
envelop but the house may not fit in with the rest of the neighborhood.
Johnson stated due to the price range of the homes, it would be difficult to sell if the size of the home is
reduced.
McMillan asked how big this house is.
Johnson indicated it is 3,400 square feet for the top two floors.
McMillan asked what the footprint is.
Item #02 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
Approval of Council Minutes 05/13/2013
[Page 5 of 26]
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING
Monday, May 13, 2013
7:00 o’clock p.m.
_____________________________________________________________________________________
Page 6 of 26
(6a. #13-3599 HOMETIME VIDEO PUBLISHING (DEAN JOHNSON), 80 CREEK RIDGE
PASS – ATF VARIANCE – RESOLUTION NO. 6227, Continued)
Bremer indicated it is 1,700 square feet.
McMillan noted there appears to be quite a bit of bend in this line, and asked if the sewer line has been
televised.
Struve indicated Scott Oberainger was on site and the line was repaired to the City’s satisfaction but the
line was not televised. The line was cleaned and repaired at that time.
McMillan asked what the possible deviation in the line is.
Struve stated any pipe material will allow for some deflection at each joint which can range up to about
three degrees. Over a long period of time, it is not uncommon for there to be swoops in the pipe. Struve
stated it is fairly common to see pipes that wander slightly. When Scott was on site, the pipe was found
to be within ten feet, and normally the City would want a 10-foot separation in the event the pipe would
ever have to be dug up.
McMillan asked if Staff could have brought this before the Council in January.
Gaffron indicated they could have. Gaffron stated in the future Staff will bring similar situations to the
Council’s attention immediately.
Mattick stated the City’s process for a variance is clear and that there is no way to circumvent that. In
some minor situations, Staff can handle some situations administratively, and that in his opinion Staff was
following the correct procedure by requiring the applicant to apply for an after-the-fact variance.
Printup asked what would happen if they denied the after-the-fact variance.
Mattick stated if it is denied, it is denied, but pointed out that this was not an ideal situation and some
decisions had to be made in the field. It was Staff’s opinion that they would support the after-the-fact
variance once it came before the City Council.
Gaffron stated another option could be a lot line rearrangement but that would have an impact on the
adjoining property. Gaffron stated if the intent is to keep the 60-foot separation, if a variance is requested
for the adjacent lot that could be an opportunity for the Council to consider what options they have for
maintaining the 60-foot setback.
Bremer noted this lot is a lot of record and that they have a legal right to construct on the lot.
Anderson indicated she is not comfortable with making the adjacent property make up for the shortfall on
this lot.
Mattick indicated the reason for relocating the house was because it was too close to a utility line and that
the question comes down to whether the house should be further away from the utility line.
Item #02 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
Approval of Council Minutes 05/13/2013
[Page 6 of 26]
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING
Monday, May 13, 2013
7:00 o’clock p.m.
_____________________________________________________________________________________
Page 7 of 26
(6a. #13-3599 HOMETIME VIDEO PUBLISHING (DEAN JOHNSON), 80 CREEK RIDGE
PASS – ATF VARIANCE – RESOLUTION NO. 6227, Continued)
McMillan asked if there has been any discussion about redesigning the house.
Gaffron indicated the reason they switched to constructing on this lot was because the house plans fit this
lot better. Gaffron noted it was a City sewer line that was incorrectly located and that it is unlikely the
City is going to reinstall the sewer line. Redesigning the house would also require additional costs on the
part of the contractor.
Johnson stated six feet may not sound like a lot to take out of a house, but given the number of different
rooms that would be impacted, it would be difficult to do that and it would basically result in redesigning
the entire house. Johnson commented it seemed like this was a win/win solution for everybody at the
time.
McMillan noted this was not the applicant’s fault.
Johnson noted they were not the developer and did not install the sewer line.
Bremer moved, Anderson seconded, to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 6227, a Resolution Granting a
Variance to Municipal Zoning Code Section 78-420, for the property located at 80 Creek Ridge
Pass.
McMillan requested the word minor be removed on Page 2 under Item G and Item H. McMillan
indicated she would also like to remove Item K on Page 2.
Curtis stated she would make those changes.
Bremer amended her motion, Anderson seconded, to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 6227, a Resolution
Granting a Variance to Municipal Zoning Code Section 78-420, for the property located at 80
Creek Ridge Pass, subject to the word minor being removed from Items G and H and Item K being
deleted. VOTE: ayes 5, Nays 0.
6b. #13-3599 HOMETIME VIDEO PUBLISHING (DEAN JOHNSON), 80 CREEK RIGE
PASS – REFUND REQUEST
Bremer stated since the applicant was not at fault in this situation, she would be fine with waiving the fee.
Levang moved, Printup seconded, Application No. 13-3599, Hometime Video Publishing, 80 Creek
Ridge Pass, approval of the waiver of the $700 after-the-fact variance application fee. VOTE:
Ayes 5, Nays 0.
Item #02 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
Approval of Council Minutes 05/13/2013
[Page 7 of 26]
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING
Monday, May 13, 2013
7:00 o’clock p.m.
_____________________________________________________________________________________
Page 8 of 26
*7. 13-3600 ESKUCHE ASSOCIATES ON BEHALF OF KATHRYN KALLAS, 3048 NORTH
SHORE DRIVE – VARIANCE AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT – RESOLUTION NO. 6228
Anderson moved, Printup seconded, to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 6228, a Resolution Granting
Variances to Municipal Zoning Code Section 78-78-1279(6) and 78-330, a Conditional Use Permit
Pursuant to Municipal Zoning Code Section 78-966, for the property located at 3048 North Shore
Drive. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0.
8. #13-3596 CITY OF ORONO, ZONING STUDY – ACCESSORY USES AND
STRUCTURES
Gaffron stated Staff and the Planning Commission have been working on this study for the past four
months. Council has had the past week to review the amendments.
One of the key elements of the zoning study is the addition of a preamble to the permitted conditional and
accessory uses. It is currently proposed as follows: “Within any district, no land or structure shall be
used except for one or more of the following permitted accessory uses. The intent of this language is to
make the list of allowed accessory uses finite and it makes it clear that only the listed uses are allowed.
Because no listing of uses that are “customarily incidental” to a primary use can be exhaustive, an
additional “catchall use” appears at the end of the list for each zoning district. It reads as follows: “Other
uses that are customarily incidental to, and subordinate to, the allowed permitted and conditional uses in
this District.”
As it relates to Section 20 and the height of structures, a fifth option has been added as recommended by
the Planning Commission. The options provide for various levels of regulation for increases in accessory
structure height above the standard limit.
In addition, three new definitions have been added:
No. 1: Structure, accessory, means a building or other structure subordinate to and serving the principal
use or structure on the same lot and exclusively used for purposes customarily incidental to the principal
use or structure.
No. 2: Use, Accessory, means a use subordinate to and serving the principal use or structure on the same
lot and exclusively used for purposes customarily incidental to the principal use or structure.
No. 3: Use, Secondary, means a use of land or a building or a portion which is subordinate to and does
not constitute the primary use of the land or building.
Gaffron noted the definition of Use, Principal, means the main use of land or buildings as distinguished
from subordinate or accessory uses. A principal use may be either permitted or conditional.
If Council chooses any of the options in which the initial extra 50 percent would be allowed without the
need for a conditional use permit or variance, Staff would recommend that Council review the individual
structures in the list and confirm that they would generally be acceptable at a height of 45 feet in a
residential zone.
Item #02 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
Approval of Council Minutes 05/13/2013
[Page 8 of 26]
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING
Monday, May 13, 2013
7:00 o’clock p.m.
_____________________________________________________________________________________
Page 9 of 26
(8. #13-3596 CITY OF ORONO, ZONING STUDY – ACCESSORY USES AND STRUCTURES,
Continued)
The Planning Commission suggested that the accessory use entries for Recreational Facilities should be
split into two categories: those recreational uses that are sporting in nature; i.e., relatively active in nature
and may have relatively greater neighborhood impacts, as opposed to those that tend to be more passive in
nature and may have lesser neighborhood impacts.
The two categories are listed in the draft as follows:
1. Private recreational sporting facilities such as swimming pools, basketball hoops, hockey rinks,
tennis courts and sport courts, trampolines, skateboard ramps, batting cages, etc., and other
recreational sporting facilities which are for the convenience and use of the residents of the
property and their guests.
2. Private recreational and play facilities such as hot tubs and spas, recreational fire rings, patios,
barbecue pits and outdoor kitchens, playhouses and play structures, swing sets, etc., and other
recreational play facilities which are for the convenience and use of the residents of the
property and their guests.
Gaffron noted the City Attorney has suggested that it may be questionable whether there is a significant
difference between the two categories in the context of a general recreational use, but that if the City
wishes to have two categories, the examples of each use should be placed within a definition of the use
and have been revised as follows:
1. Private recreational sporting facilities which are for the convenience and use of the residents of
the property and their guests.
2. Private recreational and play facilities which are for the convenience and use of the residents of
the property and their guests.
New Proposed Definitions:
1. Private recreational sporting facilities means structures and equipment such as swimming pools,
basketball hoops, hockey rinks, tennis courts and sport courts, trampolines, skateboard ramps,
batting cages, etc., which are used generally for active recreation purposes.
2. Private recreational and play facilities means structures and equipment such as hot tubs and
spas, recreational fire rings, patios, barbecue pits and outdoor kitchens, playhouses and play
structures, swing sets, etc., which are used generally for passive recreation purposes.
Staff would note that a potential difference between the two categories would be to establish different
setback requirements. Large pools, tennis courts and sport courts already have a greater setback
requirement than most other recreational facilities. Other sporting facilities that are semi-permanent or
mobile (such as trampolines or skateboard ramps) would potentially not qualify as structures and may
need to be addressed separately if a setback is desired.
Item #02 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
Approval of Council Minutes 05/13/2013
[Page 9 of 26]
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING
Monday, May 13, 2013
7:00 o’clock p.m.
_____________________________________________________________________________________
Page 10 of 26
(8. #13-3596 CITY OF ORONO, ZONING STUDY – ACCESSORY USES AND STRUCTURES,
Continued)
Gaffron indicated those are the key elements to the zoning code text amendment and that he would be
happy to answer any questions the Council may have. Gaffron indicated he does not expect the Council
to take action on this tonight but that he hopes to have it finalized and back before the City Council by the
end of May or early June.
Printup asked if any residents have been hindered by the moratorium.
Curtis indicated there have been several applications that have been impacted.
McMillan suggested the City Council first discuss the customary and incidental language.
Mattick stated it is easy to be definitive with your more intense uses, such as a conditional use permit, but
when you get to accessory structures, there are a large number of things that would qualify as an
accessory structure. It then becomes hard to say to a resident that if it is not on this list, it will not be
allowed. One solution to that is that a resident can come in and apply for a zoning ordinance amendment,
but that would require even the smallest or most insignificant components to require a zoning ordinance
amendment.
Staff has attempted to list as many things as possible, but the fact still remains that you will not be able to
include everything on the list, which leaves the City with one or two options. The first option is the City
can say this list is all-inclusive, and if you want something that is not included on the list, the resident can
come in and apply for a zoning ordinance amendment. The second option is to include the language
customary and incidental to the primary use. Mattick noted that language sometimes causes some
concern since there is some subjectivity to the ordinance. As long as there is a history of the structure and
the Council can find grounds to justify it, it will be allowed. Mattick indicated that language is very
common throughout communities.
McMillan commented that typically with accessory uses, the City does not become aware of something
until there is a complaint.
Gaffron stated a wood pile next to the neighbor’s fence would be an example.
McMillan stated she is wrestling with those types of situations because they happen in everyday life and
tend not to cause problems the vast majority of the time.
Mattick stated he is not sure how the City would regulate some of that.
Printup asked if the City is looking for more regulation with the list.
Mattick indicated the list clarifies what the City allows, and while Staff has added things to the list and it
could appear to be more regulation, it actually allows more things.
Printup asked if Orono is going down the path of creating lists and whether someday they could be tested
by having to define the list.
Item #02 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
Approval of Council Minutes 05/13/2013
[Page 10 of 26]
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING
Monday, May 13, 2013
7:00 o’clock p.m.
_____________________________________________________________________________________
Page 11 of 26
(8. #13-3596 CITY OF ORONO, ZONING STUDY – ACCESSORY USES AND STRUCTURES,
Continued)
Mattick stated it would be hard to say.
Printup stated with a list, the City is creating possible loopholes.
Mattik stated the list, in his opinion, clarifies what is allowed and not designed to create loopholes. One
of the things the Council should pay attention to is, once you start including items, you are better off
defining those uses.
Levang commented a flag pole could be one such item.
Mattick stated the question becomes whether the City should go through the exercise of defining a flag
pole or whether the City should simply say that no structure can exceed a certain height without a
variance. Mattick noted as the City’s code stands now, flag poles are allowed up to a certain height.
Levang commented monuments are another example.
Gaffron stated some of the items that he would suggest be removed would be smokestacks and
mechanical equipment. Smokestacks are typically associated with commercial buildings.
Levang pointed out that the language also does not address items that move.
Gaffron indicated a belfry would have movement and noise. Gaffron noted there were complaints
regarding one of the churches in town because it had bells chiming on Sunday mornings.
Mattick stated there are also a number of things that are similar but the City may not want them, and to
describe them in a definition is difficult. Mattick indicated Staff has spent some time discussing whether
definitions should not be used and simply say that things that take up this much square footage or meet a
certain height restriction would be allowed. Staff elected not to go that route since it requires more staff
time.
Bremer asked what option in Section 20 Staff feels would work best.
Gaffron indicated he likes the idea of a conditional use permit for the first 50 percent increase in height.
Gaffron stated he does not feel it should just be allowed, which would leave out Items C and D and the
first part Item E. For the next increase in height, arguably there should be no difference between that and
the first 50 percent.
McMillan noted some of the sporting structures are also mobile and can be placed in different locations.
McMillan asked whether the City has received complaints regarding play equipment and barbecue pits.
Gaffron stated a hockey rink can be annoying and the question becomes at what point do you say hockey
rinks are not good but tennis courts are. Gaffron indicated it becomes impossible to create a definition for
every possible use. A hockey rink can be permanent or not permanent and an above-ground pool could
also not be permanent. Gaffron concurred that it is impossible to define every possible situation.
Item #02 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
Approval of Council Minutes 05/13/2013
[Page 11 of 26]
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING
Monday, May 13, 2013
7:00 o’clock p.m.
_____________________________________________________________________________________
Page 12 of 26
(8. #13-3596 CITY OF ORONO, ZONING STUDY – ACCESSORY USES AND STRUCTURES,
Continued)
Bremer noted concrete could also be removed and then the structure is no longer permanent. Bremer
stated she would prefer setbacks and the impact that the proposed use could have on the neighbors.
Gaffron suggested the Council discuss setbacks and the use that the structure would be for and the activity
that surrounds it.
Bremer noted there is nothing that prevents someone from standing at their lot line. Bremer stated in her
view the neighbor issues come from activities that are near the property line that are more permanent.
McMillan stated another option would be to keep the setbacks free of accessory uses.
Mattick commented it would be similar to the City’s regulations regarding the 0-75 foot setback.
Printup asked if that would cover wood piles to trampolines and flag poles. Printup commented the
Council may appear to be unpatriotic if someone would like to put up a flag pole and the Council does not
allow it.
Bremer noted a number of people have wood piles alongside of their garage.
McMillan stated that option would also allow you to protect side setbacks.
Gaffron noted some of the items might not appear in the non-encroachment section. Gaffron noted if they
appear in the non-encroachment section that means they are okay in a specific yard. Gaffron stated they
could explore and possibly amend the non-encroachment section by removing certain things that should
meet a setback.
McMillan asked what would happen if someone wanted to install an air conditioning unit in the setback.
Gaffron indicated that would be a non-encroachment. The City has addressed some of those items by
requiring a 5-foot setback from the property line.
McMillan asked if diesel generators are included.
Mattick noted air-conditioning units are called out and that a diesel generator would be considered a
stand-alone structure.
Gaffron indicated Pages 35 sand 36 list all of the non-encroachments. Item 1 covers things that are
attached to the house or parts of the house. Item two covers name plate signs and lights for illumination
and will require a 5-foot separation from the front lot line. Item 3 covers terraces, steps, uncovered
porches and stoops. The City typically does get people that want to construct some sort of platform. The
code has allowed those as close as two feet to a lot line in any yard as long as they meet hardcover
requirements. Staff has added window wells that do not extend more than five feet from the building.
Gaffron indicated sidewalks, driveways and parking are things that you can have essentially in any yard.
Item #02 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
Approval of Council Minutes 05/13/2013
[Page 12 of 26]
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING
Monday, May 13, 2013
7:00 o’clock p.m.
_____________________________________________________________________________________
Page 13 of 26
(8. #13-3596 CITY OF ORONO, ZONING STUDY – ACCESSORY USES AND STRUCTURES,
Continued)
Gaffron noted the term terrace is not used very much anymore and nowadays people tend to have patios
and/or decks. There was a concern raised about how many cantilever sections the City has, which is why
the restriction of 20 square feet aggregate. Gaffron indicated without that language it is conceivable you
could end up with a mushroom style house that has 20-foot sections all around.
Item 5 was added and relates to laundry drying equipment in the back yard, which generally means a
clothesline but could possibly mean other things. Sidewalks are not allowed closer than ten feet. Gaffron
noted it does not address accessory uses within ten feet of the lot line. Item 7 addresses air-conditioning
and heating equipment, which can be located within a required yard but has to be within five feet of the
building.
Bremer asked if the entire thing has to be located within the five feet of the building.
Gaffron stated in his view it would be within five feet. Gaffron noted it also depends on the size of the
lot.
Bremer asked if Mayor McMillan would like to see generators added.
McMillan stated she would.
Levang asked about smokehouses.
Gaffron noted that is not currently on the list.
Mattick stated that is one of the structures that could be defined different ways. An example would be if
you take your typical shed and add a chimney and convert it to a smokehouse or is it considered a storage
shed. The question is whether the City wants to regulate it
Gaffron commented saunas have also not been included on the list.
McMillan and Levang concurred that saunas should be included.
Mattick asked if the fact that it is a structure more important or is the use more important.
Bremer stated in her view it would be both and that the intensity of the use could be different among
residents.
Mattick stated saunas are typically indoors and hot tubs are not but they could have noise issues related to
them.
McMillan stated saunas are associated with possible noise and fire pits relate more to the smoke. The
issue comes down to how someone is using their shed. McMillan stated setbacks seem to be a big issue
as well as what the structure is used for.
Item #02 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
Approval of Council Minutes 05/13/2013
[Page 13 of 26]
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING
Monday, May 13, 2013
7:00 o’clock p.m.
_____________________________________________________________________________________
Page 14 of 26
(8. #13-3596 CITY OF ORONO, ZONING STUDY – ACCESSORY USES AND STRUCTURES,
Continued)
Mattick commented that is where it becomes difficult to define when it gets down to that level of detail.
As it relates to setbacks, it could be similar to the 0-75 foot zone where nothing is allowed, and in other
areas it could be allowed as long as you do not have hardcover issues, height issues, or not closer than 30
feet to the property line.
Gaffron noted the City has numerous 50-foot lots and people will store boats and other items in that
30-foot setback because they have no other place to store them.
Printup stated his concern is that you could leave people that own smaller lots essentially no yard.
Printup commented these are items that are common for Minnesota and that it is difficult to tell people
they cannot have them. Printup stated in his view these are a lot of really good solutions in search of big
problems.
Mattick commented this was a difficult issue to address and that other issues kept coming up as Staff
discussed it. Mattick recommended the City Council take a close look at the amendments and to provide
Staff with their feedback. The goal was to have it done by the end of May, which may not be possible,
but it could possibly be done by June.
Printup asked whether the Council could take action on any items right now given the fact that some
residents are impacted by the moratorium.
Mattick stated in his view it would be difficult to act on only one or two sections since there would be
cross-reference issues.
Gaffron asked whether any of the residents that are affected by the moratorium have an expectation that
the City will have this completed by a certain time.
Curtis indicated Staff has been telling those residents that it is the City’s intent to have something in place
by sometime this summer.
Gaffron asked how many people have submitted applications that are impacted.
Curtis stated there are a number of people that have called and asked questions and there are perhaps a
half dozen that have met with Staff.
McMillan indicated she likes Medina’s code language as it relates to solar and geothermal.
Gaffron stated Staff can add that in if the Council wishes.
Mattick indicated he would also like to see that included.
It was the consensus of the City Council to include Medina’s sections on solar and geothermal.
McMillan asked whether flagpoles should be permitted in the 0-75 foot zone as an allowed use.
Item #02 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
Approval of Council Minutes 05/13/2013
[Page 14 of 26]
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING
Monday, May 13, 2013
7:00 o’clock p.m.
_____________________________________________________________________________________
Page 15 of 26
(8. #13-3596 CITY OF ORONO, ZONING STUDY – ACCESSORY USES AND STRUCTURES,
Continued)
Mattick stated there is a list of allowed uses within the 0-75 foot zone and that can be added.
Gaffron noted that would be contained in a different section of the code than what is being discussed
tonight.
McMillan commented she likes the current height restriction for flag poles, especially in the residential
zones.
Anderson commented location and height are both important.
McMillan stated in her view flag poles should stay out of the side setbacks.
McMillan stated she recalls a house design on Tonkawa that wanted a cupola and the City put a height
restriction on it. Even though it was not going to be an observation room or tower, the Planning
Commission wrestled with granting the variance. McMillan stated she likes how the Planning
Commission recommended it be divided up between architectural features on an existing building and a
free-standing building. McMillan stated you do not want a structure towering over the neighbor’s lot and
that there is something to the use, which is where conditional use permits come into play rather than
granting an automatic 50 percent increase in height.
Levang asked where trash enclosures are included.
Gaffron indicated they are possibly included with compost.
Levang asked what the rationale was for including it in that section.
Gaffron stated they do not appear to be listed but they would be considered customary and incidental.
Gaffron stated a trash enclosure could be a number of different things. The City does not currently have
an ordinance that prevents someone from having their garbage can sitting in front of their house.
Bremer stated given the size of the new recycling containers, there are some people who would prefer to
keep the container closer to the road.
Gaffron indicated he will give some more thought to trash containers.
Mattick pointed out a trash enclosure that is connected to the house is not really an accessory structure.
Levang noted Page 2, Item No. 13, allows one roadside stand offering for sale…
Gaffron stated that has been part of City Code for a number of years and that by state law the City has to
allow residents to sell produce from their property. Gaffron noted 40 years ago this was more of a farm
community and there were a number of people who wanted to have a stand next to the road. The City
required the stand be located 30 feet back from the public right-of-way. Gaffron indicated the standards
are questionable and it is up to the City Council on how they want to deal with it.
Item #02 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
Approval of Council Minutes 05/13/2013
[Page 15 of 26]
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING
Monday, May 13, 2013
7:00 o’clock p.m.
_____________________________________________________________________________________
Page 16 of 26
(8. #13-3596 CITY OF ORONO, ZONING STUDY – ACCESSORY USES AND STRUCTURES,
Continued)
Levang asked whether signage near the road would also be allowed.
Gaffron stated that has probably been in the code since the 1960s and that the signage would likely be
considered temporary.
McMillan requested Staff check on what state law says regarding the sale of produce.
Gaffron indicated Staff will continue to refine the amendments and requested the City Council Members
provide their input via e-mail prior to the next meeting.
Levang commented she likes the clarifications that have been made to date.
The City Council took no formal action on this item.
9. NAVARRE UPDATE
Gaffron noted there was a meeting with the Navarre residents on April 8th and a number of comments
from the residents were provided at that time. In order to maintain forward momentum with regard to
Navarre, a number of items are being prepared for the June 10th Navarre Community Initiative meeting.
One of the items that Staff has requested is that Jim Grube of Hennepin County revisit the crosswalk issue
and address the public’s recommendation for a second island at the western crosswalk location, as well as
possible options for signage and/or signalization for the crosswalks. Staff anticipates receipt of his
comments and potentially a revised plan prior to the June 10th meeting.
Struve reported there are 38 existing streetlights that were installed in 1988. There is no conduit in the
ground and the wire is buried in a small trench, which does pose some issues if you want to replace the
wire. Spring Park’s poles were installed at the same time and have experienced two failures. Barr
Engineering has provided Spring Park with some plans for replacement of the poles. Barr Engineering
has also examined a few of Orono’s streetlights and found that they are in approximately the same
condition, which does present some safety issues.
Struve noted the Council wanted more residential input and have Staff explore additional options but was
directed by Council to not to include the standard MN/DOT street pole as one of the options.
The first option is a nautical type theme. The lighting fixture is similar to what Spring Park is moving
forward with. Pole design or all options are the same as Spring Park.
McMillan suggested the light bulb be removed from the graphic prior to the meeting.
Struve indicated Option 2 is fairly similar to what Spring Park is installing but Spring Park’s option
contains a small scroll brave near the top of the pole and adds a more decorative touch. Option 2 is
similar in appearance to Option 1. Option 3 is also very similar to option 2 and Option 4 is a more
modern looking pole, with a different lighting mount.
Item #02 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
Approval of Council Minutes 05/13/2013
[Page 16 of 26]
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING
Monday, May 13, 2013
7:00 o’clock p.m.
_____________________________________________________________________________________
Page 17 of 26
(9. NAVARRE UPDATE, Continued)
Struve stated if the Council approves moving forward with the new options, they will be presented at the
June 10th Navarre Community Update meeting along with a survey. Staff is still making some revisions
to the survey but some variation of what is included in Council’s packet will be presented to the residents.
Struve indicated you typically allow around 30 days for residential comment. The survey will be placed
on the City’s website and the residents can either submit their comments via the website or mail in their
comments as well.
Struve noted all options shown can be fitted with LED lights. Staff has conducted an analysis between
the different types of lights. The high-pressure sodium light is a cheaper option, but given the long-term
maintenance, the LED has a better long-term payout. Staff is recommending the LED lights.
The wiring is direct buried, which means no conduit was used. The City’s current system has not
experienced any significant problems but it is nearing the end of its useful life. If the Council decides to
move forward with the lighting, there will be additional costs to remove the poles and replace the wiring.
In addition, Staff performed an assessment of the existing sidewalk condition throughout the Navarre
area. All the sidewalks throughout Navarre and along Highway 19 and Highway 15 were examined.
There is approximately 27,000 square feet of sidewalk. The repairs have been broken down into short-
term repairs and long-term repairs. The short-term repairs represent approximately 4.5% of all the
sidewalks in Navarre and the cost is approximately $36,000 to make all the necessary repairs. The long-
term repairs constitute 5.1 percent of all the sidewalks and costs approximately $41,000 to repair.
Struve stated due to the timing of the next Navarre meeting, it will be difficult to have a project started in
2013 and that he anticipates costs will also be higher in 2013 since it is outside the optimum bidding
period and would require a shorter time period to complete the repairs. Struve recommended moving
forward with a combined lighting and sidewalk project in 2014 that follows the schedule that is outlined
in Staff’s memorandum. Starting the project in 2014 would also allow Staff to explore more grants and
funding options and receive more favorable bidding.
Struve requested the Council provide input on which option street pole they prefer as well as what type of
lighting should be utilized.
McMillan indicated she is comfortable with all of Staff’s recommendations. McMillan stated in her view
the wiring system needs some further thought given the expense associated with it.
Levang asked if there are any other options with regard to the wiring.
Struve indicated the City either has to replace it or leave it as is since there is no conduit currently.
Levang asked if the intent is to add the conduit.
Struve indicated it is. If the City holds off with the wiring, there will be additional costs associated with
that work since the poles will need to be removed and reset.
Anderson asked if the wiring will add an additional 20 to 30,000 to the project as proposed.
Item #02 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
Approval of Council Minutes 05/13/2013
[Page 17 of 26]
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING
Monday, May 13, 2013
7:00 o’clock p.m.
_____________________________________________________________________________________
Page 18 of 26
(9. NAVARRE UPDATE, Continued)
Struve stated that is correct. Struve noted Spring Park is not replacing their wiring. If the wiring is not
replaced at the same time as the street poles, there will be an additional cost to remove the poles.
Bremer asked if the sidewalks would also be impacted to some degree if the wiring is replaced at a later
time.
Struve indicated some of the bases might need to be replaced but that it would be difficult to determine
the exact costs.
Loftus asked if the conduit provides any type of weather protection for the wiring.
Struve indicated there may be some insulation on the wire but that the wire would be better protected in
the conduit.
McMillan stated once the City gets a better idea on what the costs will be for Old Highway 12, they can
make a decision on the wiring.
Struve suggested the City explore that option further and that it be included in the bid initially and
removed at a later date if necessary.
Anderson commented she would like those items to be built in when they apply for the grants and that the
City does not need to go forward with them if the funding is not available.
Bremer asked what type of pole accessories Staff is contemplating.
Struve noted the pole accessory prices are for all the poles and not per pole. Struve indicated he would
like some direction on what type of accessories the City is interested in.
Anderson stated when the accessories are retrofitted, they do not quite fit right and that it is something
that probably should be decided in advance.
Printup asked what the difference is between the electrical outlet versus the electrical panel replacement.
Struve indicated spring Park is intermittently replacing existing electrical panels which are tall silver
panels that will house the meters.
Printup asked if those are required.
Struve noted Spring Park is replacing all of their electrical panels but not the wiring underground. The
outlets are specifically little plug-ins for Christmas lights or a lighted banner.
Printup asked if the poles are rated for Minnesota weather.
Struve indicated the poles are stainless steel and have a 50-year life expectancy.
Item #02 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
Approval of Council Minutes 05/13/2013
[Page 18 of 26]
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING
Monday, May 13, 2013
7:00 o’clock p.m.
_____________________________________________________________________________________
Page 19 of 26
(9. NAVARRE UPDATE, Continued)
Loftus asked what the current poles are constructed out of.
Struve indicated the current poles are constructed out of steel and have started to rust.
Levang asked why Spring Park is not replacing their wire.
Struve indicated it was due to the costs.
Levang asked if Spring Park conducted an analysis of their wiring.
Struve indicated they have had some minor electrical issues and the recommendation was to replace the
wiring.
McMillan asked if Struve has checked the area by Calvary Church.
Struve indicated he has not.
McMillan stated she would like to have another meeting set up possibly in September sometime that
could be announced at the June 10th meeting.
Levang asked when the City will have some further information about the turnback.
Struve indicated Jim Grube will be attending the May 28th City Council work session.
Loftus stated September 9th is an option.
Levang asked if the height is correct on the graphic for Option 1.
Struve indicated that might have something to do with the graphic but that the light fixtures would all be
set at 25-foot. The existing pole height is 35 feet. Struve indicated the feedback he has received was to
reduce the lights down to 25 feet and that all the studies they have done indicate there will be adequate
lighting at that height. In addition, all of the lighting fixtures would be set right over the curb line.
Printup asked if the residents have any other options to send in their survey answers outside of mail and
the website.
Struve indicated Staff could explore doing the survey via Survey Monkey.
Bremer noted the residents could also scan their surveys in and send them via e-mail.
Levang asked if the City Council is comfortable with the different accessories.
McMillan stated she likes the breakdown of the costs for the different accessories and that the Council
does not need to make a decision on that at this time.
Item #02 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
Approval of Council Minutes 05/13/2013
[Page 19 of 26]
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING
Monday, May 13, 2013
7:00 o’clock p.m.
_____________________________________________________________________________________
Page 20 of 26
(9. NAVARRE UPDATE, Continued)
Anderson stated that would be a good item to obtain public input on.
The City Council took no formal action on this item.
(A recess was taken from 9:00 p.m. to 9:05 p.m.)
PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR/CITY ENGINEER’S REPORT
*10. SAFE ASSURE COOPERATIVE SAFETY TRAINING
Anderson moved, Printup seconded, to approve the proposal from Safe Assure Consultants, Inc.,
for conducting safety training and preparation of the related written programs and documentation
at an annual cost of $3,998. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0
*11. CHANGE TO 2013 GOLF COURSE FEE SCHEDULE
Anderson moved, Printup seconded, to approve a change to the 2013 fee schedule raising the senior
age limit from 55 years old to 60 years old. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0.
12. WILLOW DRIVE STREET RECONSTRUCTION – BID AWARD
Struve noted at the January 14, 2013, City Council meeting, the Council approved a proposal from Bolton
& Menk for design services associated with the reconstruction of Willow Drive North between Kelley
Parkway and County Road 6, which is on the City’s Municipal State Aid system.
At the January 28, 2013, meeting, Bolton and Menk asked for direction from the Council for a few design
options and the Council approved the preliminary design at the March 11th meeting. Bids were received
on the plans and the low bidder was C.S. McCrossan. Bolton and Menk has submitted a proposal to
provide construction phase services for the Willow Drive Street Reconstruction project.
Staff would recommend awarding this project to C.S. McCrossan in the amount of $803,995.90.
Levang asked why there was a 20 percent difference in the bids.
Struve indicated it is difficult to estimate projects since some of it is done based on last year’s projects
and projecting out.
Levang asked if there were one or two items that consisted of that difference.
Struve indicated the cost of the asphalt was lower than anticipated and was the major item.
Bremer commented the bids were somewhat spread out as well and noted one bid was close to the
estimate.
McMillan asked if Staff is comfortable with this contractor.
Item #02 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
Approval of Council Minutes 05/13/2013
[Page 20 of 26]
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING
Monday, May 13, 2013
7:00 o’clock p.m.
_____________________________________________________________________________________
Page 21 of 26
(12. WILLOW DRIVE STREET RECONSTRUCTION – BID AWARD, Continued)
Struve indicated C.S. McCrossan has done a number of major construction projects throughout the
Twin Cities as well as Orono in the past. McCrossan completed the City’s 2012 pavement management
plan.
McMillan asked if geotech fabric is included in the bid.
Struve indicated it is.
Bremer moved, Printup seconded, to award the Willow Drive Street Reconstruction project to C.S.
McCrossan in the amount of $803,995.90, and the construction phase services to Bolton and Menk
in the amount of $73,950. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0.
PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR/CITY ENGINEER’S REPORT, CONTINUED
Struve noted an open house was held with Medina on Willow Brook Drive. Participation from the
residents was low.
Struve reported the spring cleanup was a good success. This year the City combined the two weekends
into one and had a continuous flow of residents for the majority of the day. Struve stated the weather may
have hampered things a little bit since people may not have gotten outside to clean up their yards.
Struve noted load restrictions have been taken off the roads.
*13. WATER SYSTEM STUDY/WATER SYSTEM MODELING
Anderson moved, Printup seconded, to accept the proposal for a water system study/water system
modeling project from Bolton & Menk in the amount of $38,500. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0.
MAYOR/COUNCIL REPORT
Levang stated she met with the executive director of WeCan. They will be starting an emergency food
support program here in the community. It is not intended to replace the current food shelf located in
Mound but will offer emergency food to local residents and will include food from the donation garden.
WeCan is also going to be opening up a thrift store and the target will be to inventory school clothes.
Levang stated both of those are advantageous resources for the community and are the result of receiving
a substantial grant to expand their facilities.
CITY ADMINISTRATOR’S REPORT
14. LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT (LMCD) 2014 BUDGET
Greg Nybeck, LMCD Executive Director, appeared before the Orono City Council to discuss the budget
process being undertaken by the LMCD for 2014. Nybeck noted the LMCD sent out the first draft of the
LMCD budget and a workshop session was held on April 16, followed by a review of the LMCD Board
on April 24.
Item #02 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
Approval of Council Minutes 05/13/2013
[Page 21 of 26]
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING
Monday, May 13, 2013
7:00 o’clock p.m.
_____________________________________________________________________________________
Page 22 of 26
(14. LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT (LMCD) 2014 BUDGET, Continued)
Nybeck stated he is here tonight to gain the Council’s feedback on the budget, which will then come back
before the LMCD on June 12. There will be an annual city review meeting with city officials, staff
members, as well as council members where everyone will have the ability to come in and speak on the
budget. At the meeting on June 12, there will likely be a conditional approval of the budget and then the
LMCD will vote on the final budget on June 26. Nybeck indicated it is the desire of the LMCD to have
the finalized budget back to the cities by July 1.
The LMCD functions off of a strategic plan, which contains a variety of things dealing with management
and prevention of AIS, ordinances, docks and boats, safety, promoting public access to the lakes, and
other items. Nybeck indicated he will be recommending to the LMCD Board that the plan be reviewed
since it is approximately four years old.
Nybeck noted the LMCD is still actively involved in special event permitting but some of the
responsibilities have been delegated to the Sheriff’s Water Patrol to try to streamline the process.
The LMCD is also involved in proactive code enforcement, which goes back to 2006. The LMCD
receives feedback from the marinas and others as it relates to the competition they face and overall it has
been a very successful project. The goal of the program is to identify problematic sites and provide
education and help bring them into compliance. The LMCD will work with the various city staffs on
those sites to help resolve any issues.
The LMCD conducted a low water shoreline inventory last year. Low water is still an issue but the lake
is approximately nine or ten inches higher this year than last year.
Nybeck stated the Sheriff’s Water Patrol is basically the law enforcement arm of the LMCD. The LMCD
is looking at expansion of the solar light program.
As it relates to the milfoil and curly leaf plan, this is a five-year public/private demonstration project.
Carman’s, Grays, and Phelps Bays were the three bays identified for treatment and large scale treatments
were done. The goals and objectives were spelled out in a DNR document called the Lake Vegetation
Management Plan. The LMCD also has an AIS task force with a variety of professionals who helped
supervise the program. The feedback that the task force provided to the LMCD Board last April was that
the project should not extend treatments after 2012 or should not expand the project to other bays until the
LMCD has developed a comprehensive vegetation management plan for Lake Minnetonka. The Board
concurred with that recommendation
The total cost of the project, including both private and public contributions, is approximately $611,000,
which was spent over five years for three bays. Carman’s Bay did not have a treatment in 2009 since they
fell short on the private fundraising. 2009 was the year this area had high water and it did not lend itself
to treatment. Public sector contributions amounted to approximately 56 percent or $345,000.
Item #02 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
Approval of Council Minutes 05/13/2013
[Page 22 of 26]
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING
Monday, May 13, 2013
7:00 o’clock p.m.
_____________________________________________________________________________________
Page 23 of 26
(14. LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT (LMCD) 2014 BUDGET, Continued)
There were a series of subcommittee meetings last summer to discuss the program. John Barton, Three
Rivers Park District, and representatives from the Watershed District, the LMA, and the DNR were
actively involved in preparing the vegetation plan. The plan was finalized over a few weeks’ time and
then came back to the AIS task force. The plan was presented to the LMCD Board in October. A public
hearing took place in December and the plan was officially adopted by the LMCD Board on March 13th.
Nybeck noted the plan contained references to typical money for harvesting budgets and typical money
that would be probably be needed on an annual basis for equipment replacement and harvesting
equipment, as well as partial funding for herbicide treatment, all of which were removed from the plan.
The recommendation was to obtain feedback from the cities through the budget process for 2014.
Nybeck indicated LMCD receives phone calls on bow fishing on Lake Minnetonka every year and at
times the frequency of the phone calls can be heavy. It is very complicated or hard to respond to the
concerns due to the different jurisdictions and ordinances involved. The LMCD elected to explore a
lake-wide ordinance, which was adopted on April 24 and is now effective. The goal was to improve
communications to the public for those who want to fish as well as the residents. Since there is now a
lake-wide ordinance, the DNR and the Sheriff’s Patrol will do the enforcement of it.
LMCD’s ordinance is similar to what Orono has currently. Nighttime bow fishing will no longer be
allowed on Lake Minnetonka. In the high traffic areas, such as Cruiser’s Cove, restrictions are in place
that only allow bow fishing from a certain time on Friday to a certain time on Saturday from Memorial
Day through Labor Day. The third part of the ordinance is the DNR or local law enforcement has
jurisdiction to act if it is in the best interests of the public peace or safety. The last part of the ordinance
deals with disposal of fish.
As it relates to the budget, Option 1 is a similar budget to what was adopted in 2013. The levy increase is
a 3 percent overall levy increase from 2013 but it will be slightly less than 3 percent for Orono. The levy
varies based off of your percentage of the tax capacity. The 1.3 percent increase in expenditures would
increase it from 581 up to 588. There is a 25,000 transfer from the administrative reserve fund for
equipment replacement fund and a two percent compensation adjustment is factored in for contingency.
Nybeck stated it is important to keep in mind that simply because there is a two percent contingency
budgeted, that does not mean the board is obligated to provide the two percent. In addition, there is also
$30,000 budgeted for unspecified AIS management and prevention programs. Historically the LMCD
has used that for watercraft inspections.
Option 2 includes some recommendations for milfoil, curly leaf and pond weed. The levy increase under
Option 2 would be 16.6 percent rather than 3 percent. There is a nine percent increase in expenditures,
and that is primarily because of the money being included for herbicide treatments. The differences from
Option 1 are the money for unspecified AIS management and prevention would be reduced from $30,000
down to $20,000 and $55,000 is proposed for open air and large scale herbicide treatments, which results
in a net increase of $45,000.
Nybeck stated over the years the LMCD has made a concerted effort to keep the levy flat and there has
not been an increase in the levy from 2009 to 2013. The LMCD has attempted to keep the levy down
because of the economic challenge the cities are facing.
Item #02 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
Approval of Council Minutes 05/13/2013
[Page 23 of 26]
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING
Monday, May 13, 2013
7:00 o’clock p.m.
_____________________________________________________________________________________
Page 24 of 26
(14. LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT (LMCD) 2014 BUDGET, Continued)
As it relates to Orono, for 2013, the City’s total levy is $58,406. Option one would increase it by
approximately $100 and Option 2 would go up an additional $7,700.
Printup commented it is impressive that over the last three or four years the levies have been kept low.
Nybeck requested the City Council indicate which option they would prefer by the end of the month.
Levang asked what would be eliminated as a result of the reduction in AIS management and prevention.
Nybeck indicated that would likely come from a reduction in boat inspections.
Levang asked how many boats would be inspected versus the prior year.
Nybeck stated in 2013 there will be nine accesses that would be covered by watercraft inspectors this
year. The DNR will cover Grays, Maxwell, North Arm and Spring Park. On the weekends during the
peak periods, which are generally later morning through the evening hours, there will be DNR inspectors.
The LMCD inspectors will be covering Halstad’s Bay, Crook’s, Carstons and Wayzata Bay, which are
lower volume public access points. This year the inspectors will basically only be performing Level 1
inspections. Level 2 allows inspectors to go on the boat to check on live wells if needed and
decontaminate boats. The LMCD Board is looking at the idea of purchasing of a decontamination unit at
the local level to have available at some of the public accesses.
McMillan stated she is in favor of Option 1. Option 2 sets a whole new benchmark for levies and that in
her view it is too big of a jump financially for the cities and possibly unsustainable over time.
Levang stated Option 2 is concerning and brings into question how the various cities would be able to
maintain that level of increase over the years.
Nybeck stated it is the LMCD’s intent to get feedback from the cities so the Board can gauge where the
level of support is.
McMillan noted the City’s tax base has declined by 24 percent over the past few years, which has resulted
in a decrease in the levy for the LMCD. McMillan stated if the City’s tax base increases, the City will be
paying more.
Nybeck stated the amount that was being levied over the years versus the maximum level that could be
levied was $200,000. Now it is down to $100,000 and it is due in part to declining taxable market values.
Bremer stated in her view it is the wrong time to propose Option 2 but that philosophically she is not
opposed to it. Bremer commented the minutes from the LMCD Board meeting reflect that they
understand cities are having a harder time financing.
Printup indicated he also is in favor of Option 1 and that it will be interesting to see how it will be
projected out in future years.
Item #02 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
Approval of Council Minutes 05/13/2013
[Page 24 of 26]
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING
Monday, May 13, 2013
7:00 o’clock p.m.
_____________________________________________________________________________________
Page 25 of 26
(14. LAKE MINNETONKA CONSERVATION DISTRICT (LMCD) 2014 BUDGET, Continued)
Nybeck stated opinions vary on where the money should be spent. Minnehaha Watershed Creek District
at the present time is focusing more on AIS prevention.
McMillan stated she personally does not have much information about zebra mussels, and asked if there
is anything the residents should be aware of to help deal with that infestation.
Nybeck stated there are some best management practices that the DNR has adopted that could be
provided to the City. For the sites that have water depth issues, the LMCD did increase the depth
standard from four feet to five feet, with zebra mussels being one of the reasons for that change.
McMillan stated she would like to see the Save the Lake doing the boat safety training again.
Nybeck stated in addition to educating city officials, they are also targeting adults with the education.
McMillan stated she noticed the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District has found that for 9 out of the past
13 summers the creek water level has been low and that they are investigating why that has occurred with
the University of Minnesota.
Nybeck stated last week the water level on Lake Minnetonka was 928.81’ feet and the Board can declare
low water when the level drops down below 928.0’.
Loftus pointed out a three percent expenditure increase has a ripple effect on the various departments of
the City since Staff is expected to hold to a zero percent levy increase. Loftus encouraged Nybeck to
keep in mind the impact the increase would have on the various city departments.
Nybeck stated the expenditure increase was 1.3 percent and the 3 percent increase related to the levy.
Nybeck indicated the LMCD did lose some grant funds from the DNR which resulted in the increase.
The City Council took no formal action on this item.
CITY ADMINISTRATOR’S REPORT
Loftus reported that in spite of the additional snow this year, the City’s street budget is still in good shape
since they had a decent stockpile of salt and sand.
Loftus indicated the space needs study for the police department has commenced and interviews with
staff are being conducted. The City should have a report by July 15.
Loftus noted the City Council’s next meeting is scheduled for Tuesday due to the Memorial Day holiday.
*15. ACCEPT RESIGNATION OF OFFICER DAVID McNICHOLS
Anderson moved, Printup seconded, to accept the resignation of David McNichols effective May 13,
2013. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0.
Item #02 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
Approval of Council Minutes 05/13/2013
[Page 25 of 26]
MINUTES OF THE
ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING
Monday, May 13, 2013
7:00 o’clock p.m.
_____________________________________________________________________________________
Page 26 of 26
*16. REQUEST TO HIRE FULL-TIME POLICE OFFICER
Anderson moved, Printup seconded, to approve the hiring of Jason Barnes as a full-time police
officer at a pay rate of $23.60 per hour with a start date of May 14, 2013. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0.
*17. LIQUIDATION OF FORFEITED VEHICLE
Anderson moved, Printup seconded, to liquidate a forfeited 2003 Chevrolet Tahoe through
Minneapolis Auto Auction or similar business. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0.
*19. JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT – WILLOWBROOK DRIVE
Anderson moved, Printup seconded, to adopt the joint powers agreement between the City of
Orono and the City of Medina for improvements to Willowbrook Drive. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0.
*20. HAZARDOUS BUILDING ACTION AT 2740 SHADYWOOD ROAD – RESOLUTION
NO. 6229
Anderson moved, Printup seconded, to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 6229, a Resolution Ordering
Abatement of a Hazardous Building located at 2740 Shadywood Road. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0.
*21. LICENSES AND PERMITS
None
*22. CLAIMS
Anderson moved, Printup seconded, to approve payment of the All Funds Account. VOTE:
Ayes 5, Nays 0.
22a. CLOSED MEETING FOR ATTORNEY-CLIENT PRIVILEGE
Bremer moved, Anderson seconded, to go into closed session. VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0.
(The City Council went into closed session to discuss Items 22a and 23 from 9:43 p.m. to 11:14 p.m.)
23. CLOSED MEETING – PERFORMANCE EVALUATION
ADJOURNMENT
McMillan moved, Bremer seconded, to adjourn the Orono City Council meeting at 11:14 p.m.
VOTE: Ayes 5, Nays 0.
ATTEST:
______________________________________ _______________________________________
Rachel Dodge, City Clerk Lili Tod McMillan, Mayor
Item #02 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
Approval of Council Minutes 05/13/2013
[Page 26 of 26]
Item #03 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
File #13-3596 [Total Pages 87]
Item #03 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
File #13-3596 [Total Pages 87]
Item #03 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
File #13-3596 [Total Pages 87]
Item #03 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
File #13-3596 [Total Pages 87]
Item #03 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
File #13-3596 [Total Pages 87]
Item #03 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
File #13-3596 [Total Pages 87]
Item #03 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
File #13-3596 [Total Pages 87]
Item #03 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
File #13-3596 [Total Pages 87]
Item #03 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
File #13-3596 [Total Pages 87]
Item #03 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
File #13-3596 [Total Pages 87]
Item #03 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
File #13-3596 [Total Pages 87]
Item #03 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
File #13-3596 [Total Pages 87]
Item #03 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
File #13-3596 [Total Pages 87]
Item #03 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
File #13-3596 [Total Pages 87]
Item #03 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
File #13-3596 [Total Pages 87]
Item #03 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
File #13-3596 [Total Pages 87]
Item #03 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
File #13-3596 [Total Pages 87]
Item #03 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
File #13-3596 [Total Pages 87]
Item #03 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
File #13-3596 [Total Pages 87]
Item #03 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
File #13-3596 [Total Pages 87]
Item #03 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
File #13-3596 [Total Pages 87]
Item #03 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
File #13-3596 [Total Pages 87]
Item #03 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
File #13-3596 [Total Pages 87]
Item #03 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
File #13-3596 [Total Pages 87]
Item #03 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
File #13-3596 [Total Pages 87]
Item #03 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
File #13-3596 [Total Pages 87]
Item #03 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
File #13-3596 [Total Pages 87]
Item #03 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
File #13-3596 [Total Pages 87]
Item #03 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
File #13-3596 [Total Pages 87]
Item #03 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
File #13-3596 [Total Pages 87]
Item #03 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
File #13-3596 [Total Pages 87]
Item #03 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
File #13-3596 [Total Pages 87]
Item #03 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
File #13-3596 [Total Pages 87]
Item #03 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
File #13-3596 [Total Pages 87]
Item #03 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
File #13-3596 [Total Pages 87]
Item #03 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
File #13-3596 [Total Pages 87]
Item #03 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
File #13-3596 [Total Pages 87]
Item #03 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
File #13-3596 [Total Pages 87]
Item #03 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
File #13-3596 [Total Pages 87]
Item #03 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
File #13-3596 [Total Pages 87]
Item #03 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
File #13-3596 [Total Pages 87]
Item #03 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
File #13-3596 [Total Pages 87]
Item #03 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
File #13-3596 [Total Pages 87]
Item #03 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
File #13-3596 [Total Pages 87]
Item #03 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
File #13-3596 [Total Pages 87]
Item #03 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
File #13-3596 [Total Pages 87]
Item #03 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
File #13-3596 [Total Pages 87]
Item #03 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
File #13-3596 [Total Pages 87]
Item #03 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
File #13-3596 [Total Pages 87]
Item #03 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
File #13-3596 [Total Pages 87]
Item #03 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
File #13-3596 [Total Pages 87]
Item #03 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
File #13-3596 [Total Pages 87]
Item #03 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
File #13-3596 [Total Pages 87]
Item #03 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
File #13-3596 [Total Pages 87]
Item #03 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
File #13-3596 [Total Pages 87]
Item #03 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
File #13-3596 [Total Pages 87]
Item #03 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
File #13-3596 [Total Pages 87]
Item #03 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
File #13-3596 [Total Pages 87]
Item #03 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
File #13-3596 [Total Pages 87]
Item #03 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
File #13-3596 [Total Pages 87]
Item #03 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
File #13-3596 [Total Pages 87]
Item #03 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
File #13-3596 [Total Pages 87]
Item #03 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
File #13-3596 [Total Pages 87]
Item #03 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
File #13-3596 [Total Pages 87]
Item #03 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
File #13-3596 [Total Pages 87]
Item #03 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
File #13-3596 [Total Pages 87]
Item #03 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
File #13-3596 [Total Pages 87]
Item #03 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
File #13-3596 [Total Pages 87]
Item #03 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
File #13-3596 [Total Pages 87]
Item #03 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
File #13-3596 [Total Pages 87]
Item #03 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
File #13-3596 [Total Pages 87]
Item #03 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
File #13-3596 [Total Pages 87]
Item #03 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
File #13-3596 [Total Pages 87]
Item #03 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
File #13-3596 [Total Pages 87]
Item #03 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
File #13-3596 [Total Pages 87]
Item #03 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
File #13-3596 [Total Pages 87]
Item #03 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
File #13-3596 [Total Pages 87]
Item #03 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
File #13-3596 [Total Pages 87]
Item #03 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
File #13-3596 [Total Pages 87]
Item #03 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
File #13-3596 [Total Pages 87]
Item #03 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
File #13-3596 [Total Pages 87]
Item #03 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
File #13-3596 [Total Pages 87]
Item #03 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
File #13-3596 [Total Pages 87]
Item #03 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
File #13-3596 [Total Pages 87]
Item #03 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
File #13-3596 [Total Pages 87]
Item #03 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
File #13-3596 [Total Pages 87]
Item #03 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
File #13-3596 [Total Pages 87]
Item #04 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
File #13-3601 [Total Pages 80]
Item #04 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
File #13-3601 [Total Pages 80]
Item #04 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
File #13-3601 [Total Pages 80]
Item #04 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
File #13-3601 [Total Pages 80]
Item #04 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
File #13-3601 [Total Pages 80]
Item #04 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
File #13-3601 [Total Pages 80]
Item #04 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
File #13-3601 [Total Pages 80]
Item #04 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
File #13-3601 [Total Pages 80]
Item #04 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
File #13-3601 [Total Pages 80]
Item #04 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
File #13-3601 [Total Pages 80]
Item #04 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
File #13-3601 [Total Pages 80]
Item #04 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
File #13-3601 [Total Pages 80]
Item #04 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
File #13-3601 [Total Pages 80]
Item #04 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
File #13-3601 [Total Pages 80]
Item #04 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
File #13-3601 [Total Pages 80]
Item #04 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
File #13-3601 [Total Pages 80]
Item #04 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
File #13-3601 [Total Pages 80]
Item #04 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
File #13-3601 [Total Pages 80]
Item #04 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
File #13-3601 [Total Pages 80]
Item #04 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
File #13-3601 [Total Pages 80]
Item #04 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
File #13-3601 [Total Pages 80]
Item #04 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
File #13-3601 [Total Pages 80]
Item #04 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
File #13-3601 [Total Pages 80]
Item #04 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
File #13-3601 [Total Pages 80]
Item #04 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
File #13-3601 [Total Pages 80]
Item #04 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
File #13-3601 [Total Pages 80]
Item #04 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
File #13-3601 [Total Pages 80]
Item #04 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
File #13-3601 [Total Pages 80]
Item #04 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
File #13-3601 [Total Pages 80]
Item #04 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
File #13-3601 [Total Pages 80]
Item #04 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
File #13-3601 [Total Pages 80]
Item #04 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
File #13-3601 [Total Pages 80]
Item #04 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
File #13-3601 [Total Pages 80]
Item #04 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
File #13-3601 [Total Pages 80]
Item #04 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
File #13-3601 [Total Pages 80]
Item #04 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
File #13-3601 [Total Pages 80]
Item #04 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
File #13-3601 [Total Pages 80]
Item #04 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
File #13-3601 [Total Pages 80]
Item #04 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
File #13-3601 [Total Pages 80]
Item #04 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
File #13-3601 [Total Pages 80]
Item #04 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
File #13-3601 [Total Pages 80]
Item #04 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
File #13-3601 [Total Pages 80]
Item #04 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
File #13-3601 [Total Pages 80]
Item #04 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
File #13-3601 [Total Pages 80]
Item #04 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
File #13-3601 [Total Pages 80]
Item #04 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
File #13-3601 [Total Pages 80]
Item #04 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
File #13-3601 [Total Pages 80]
Item #04 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
File #13-3601 [Total Pages 80]
Item #04 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
File #13-3601 [Total Pages 80]
Item #04 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
File #13-3601 [Total Pages 80]
Item #04 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
File #13-3601 [Total Pages 80]
Item #04 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
File #13-3601 [Total Pages 80]
Item #04 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
File #13-3601 [Total Pages 80]
Item #04 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
File #13-3601 [Total Pages 80]
Item #04 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
File #13-3601 [Total Pages 80]
Item #04 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
File #13-3601 [Total Pages 80]
Item #04 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
File #13-3601 [Total Pages 80]
Item #04 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
File #13-3601 [Total Pages 80]
Item #04 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
File #13-3601 [Total Pages 80]
Item #04 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
File #13-3601 [Total Pages 80]
Item #04 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
File #13-3601 [Total Pages 80]
Item #04 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
File #13-3601 [Total Pages 80]
Item #04 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
File #13-3601 [Total Pages 80]
Item #04 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
File #13-3601 [Total Pages 80]
Item #04 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
File #13-3601 [Total Pages 80]
Item #04 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
File #13-3601 [Total Pages 80]
Item #04 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
File #13-3601 [Total Pages 80]
Item #04 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
File #13-3601 [Total Pages 80]
Item #04 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
File #13-3601 [Total Pages 80]
Item #04 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
File #13-3601 [Total Pages 80]
Item #04 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
File #13-3601 [Total Pages 80]
Item #04 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
File #13-3601 [Total Pages 80]
Item #04 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
File #13-3601 [Total Pages 80]
Item #04 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
File #13-3601 [Total Pages 80]
Item #04 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
File #13-3601 [Total Pages 80]
Item #04 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
File #13-3601 [Total Pages 80]
Item #04 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
File #13-3601 [Total Pages 80]
Item #04 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
File #13-3601 [Total Pages 80]
Item #04 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
File #13-3601 [Total Pages 80]
Item #04 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
File #13-3601 [Total Pages 80]
Item #05 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
File #13-3602 [Total Pages 5]
Item #05 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
File #13-3602 [Total Pages 5]
Item #05 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
File #13-3602 [Total Pages 5]
Item #05 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
File #13-3602 [Total Pages 5]
Item #05 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
File #13-3602 [Total Pages 5]
Item #06 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
2013 Sanitary Sewer Rehabilitation Project [Page 1 of 18]
Item #06 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
2013 Sanitary Sewer Rehabilitation Project [Page 2 of 18]
Item #06 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
2013 Sanitary Sewer Rehabilitation Project [Page 3 of 18]
Item #06 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
2013 Sanitary Sewer Rehabilitation Project [Page 4 of 18]
Item #06 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
2013 Sanitary Sewer Rehabilitation Project [Page 5 of 18]
Item #06 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
2013 Sanitary Sewer Rehabilitation Project [Page 6 of 18]
Item #06 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
2013 Sanitary Sewer Rehabilitation Project [Page 7 of 18]
Item #06 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
2013 Sanitary Sewer Rehabilitation Project [Page 8 of 18]
Item #06 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
2013 Sanitary Sewer Rehabilitation Project [Page 9 of 18]
Item #06 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
2013 Sanitary Sewer Rehabilitation Project [Page 10 of 18]
Item #06 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
2013 Sanitary Sewer Rehabilitation Project [Page 11 of 18]
Item #06 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
2013 Sanitary Sewer Rehabilitation Project [Page 12 of 18]
Item #06 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
2013 Sanitary Sewer Rehabilitation Project [Page 13 of 18]
Item #06 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
2013 Sanitary Sewer Rehabilitation Project [Page 14 of 18]
Item #06 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
2013 Sanitary Sewer Rehabilitation Project [Page 15 of 18]
Item #06 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
2013 Sanitary Sewer Rehabilitation Project [Page 16 of 18]
Item #06 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
2013 Sanitary Sewer Rehabilitation Project [Page 17 of 18]
Item #06 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
2013 Sanitary Sewer Rehabilitation Project [Page 18 of 18]
Item #07 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
2012 Orono Street Maintenance Project - Project Closeout
[Page 1 of 6]
Item #07 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
2012 Orono Street Maintenance Project - Project Closeout
[Page 2 of 6]
Item #07 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
2012 Orono Street Maintenance Project - Project Closeout
[Page 3 of 6]
Item #07 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
2012 Orono Street Maintenance Project - Project Closeout
[Page 4 of 6]
Item #07 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
2012 Orono Street Maintenance Project - Project Closeout
[Page 5 of 6]
Item #07 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
2012 Orono Street Maintenance Project - Project Closeout
[Page 6 of 6]
Item #08 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
Liquor Violation [Page 1 of 2]
Item #08 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
Liquor Violation [Page 2 of 2]
Item #09 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
Licenses & Permits [Page 1 of 15]
Item #09 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
Licenses & Permits [Page 2 of 15]
Item #09 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
Licenses & Permits [Page 3 of 15]
Item #09 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
Licenses & Permits [Page 4 of 15]
Item #09 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
Licenses & Permits [Page 5 of 15]
Item #09 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
Licenses & Permits [Page 6 of 15]
Item #09 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
Licenses & Permits [Page 7 of 15]
Item #09 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
Licenses & Permits [Page 8 of 15]
Item #09 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
Licenses & Permits [Page 9 of 15]
Item #09 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
Licenses & Permits [Page 10 of 15]
Item #09 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
Licenses & Permits [Page 11 of 15]
Item #09 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
Licenses & Permits [Page 12 of 15]
Item #09 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
Licenses & Permits [Page 13 of 15]
Item #09 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
Licenses & Permits [Page 14 of 15]
Item #09 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
Licenses & Permits [Page 15 of 15]
Item #10 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
Claims [Page 1 of 9]
Item #10 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
Claims [Page 2 of 9]
Item #10 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
Claims [Page 3 of 9]
Item #10 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
Claims [Page 4 of 9]
Item #10 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
Claims [Page 5 of 9]
Item #10 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
Claims [Page 6 of 9]
Item #10 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
Claims [Page 7 of 9]
Item #10 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
Claims [Page 8 of 9]
Item #10 - CC Agenda - 05/28/2013
Claims [Page 9 of 9]