Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout08-27-2012 Council Packet PUBLIC ATTENDANCE MEETING DATE � Z7 � �1/ �' 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 � , �. ' � t�� .�._{_'�.-1 �-�---�\�� ,�G �l S j_., Z� ,<,�'-�ti . � ,,�, y �, .� � �' - 2. 1�� I��.r� �,���; �� ��`i�l�; ��-��', ��_ �'���.�.< <a 3. � i �.k.- � !, "`�..,_,� l Y�G..� ��i i.(.�.-L L�' t�� 4. � ���U � � � 5. t � �. �� � I ` �v `���.�: ,���� r'��. i� C� 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. V:\(LEGAL FORMS)\(FORMS)\PUBLIC ATTENDANCE.DOC Agenda for Council Meeting Set for Monday, August 27, 2012, 7:00 P.M. Orono Council Chambers, 2780 Kelley Parkway, Orono, MN 55356 Directions: www.yahoo.com/maps - 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 August 13, 2012 Presentation 3. Police Service Proposal to Mound Planning Commission Comments – Lizz Levang, Representative Public Comments – (Limit 5 Minutes Per Person) This is an opportunity for the public to address matters not on the agenda. The council will not engage in discussion or take action on items presented at this time. However, the council may refer issues to staff for follow up or consideration at a future meeting. Speakers should state their name and home address at the podium before speaking. Planning Department Report * 4. 12-3562 Arthur J. Nelson Estate, 400 Willow Drive South – Final Plat – Resolution * 5. 12-3565 Kathryn Alexander on behalf of Joseph and Gail Teynor, 2789 Pheasant Road – Variance – Resolution 6. 12-3569 Mills Construction, LLC on behalf of Jason Wilsey, 990 North Shore Drive West – Conditional Use Permit – Resolution Public Works Director/City Engineer’s Report 7. Change Order No. 1 – Orono Orchard Road Reconstruction Project 8. Pay Request No. 1 – Orono Orchard Road Reconstruction Project 9. Pay Request No. 2 – Carman Bay Shoreline Restoration Project 10. Navarre Sidewalk Update Mayor/Council Report City Administrator's Report City Attorney's Report Agenda for Council Meeting Set for Monday, August 27, 2012, 7:00 P.M. Orono Council Chambers, 2780 Kelley Parkway, Orono, MN 55356 Directions: www.yahoo.com/maps - 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 Notifications * 11. Licenses & Permits * 12. Bills Adjournment Upcoming Issues and Events 2012 08/27 – Council Work Session, Wednesday, 5:30 p.m. 08/27 – Council Meeting, Monday, 7:00 p.m. 09/03 – HOLIDAY, Labor Day 09/05 – Planning Commission Work Session, Wednesday, 5:30 p.m. 09/10 – Council Meeting, Monday, 7:00 p.m. 09/17 – Planning Commission Meeting, Monday, 6:30 p.m. (Council Liaison – Dave Rahn) 09/21 – Absentee Voting for General Election Begins, Friday 09/24 – Council Work Session, Monday, 5:30 pm 09/24 – Council Meeting, Monday, 7:00 p.m. 10/03 – Planning Commission Work Session, Wednesday, 5:30 p.m. 10/08 – Council Meeting, Monday, 7:00 p.m. 10/15 – Planning Commission Meeting, Monday, 6:30 p.m. (Council Liaison – Doug Franchot) 10/22 – Council Work Session, Monday, 5:30 p.m. 10/22 – Council Meeting, Monday, 7:00 p.m. MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL Monday, August 13, 2012 7:00 o'clock p.m. _____________________________________________________________________________________ Page 1 of 19 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, and David Rahn. Representing Staff were City Administrator Jessica Loftus, City Clerk Lin Vee, Finance Director Ron Olson, Assistant City Administrator of Long-Term Strategic Planning Michael Gaffron, Planning Director Melanie Curtis, City Engineer/Public Works Director Jesse Struve, Consulting Engineer David Martini, City Attorney Soren Mattick, and Recorder Jackie Young. Mayor McMillan called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m., followed by the Pledge of Allegiance. APPROVAL OF AGENDA Item Nos. 9, 10, and 12 were added to the Consent Agenda. Bremer moved, Printup seconded, to approve the Consent Agenda as amended. VOTE: Ayes 4, Nays 0. APPROVAL OF MINUTES *2. COUNCIL WORK SESSION OF JULY 23, 2012 Bremer moved, Printup seconded, to approve the minutes of the Orono City Council work session of July 23, 2012, as submitted. VOTE: Ayes 4, Nays 0. *3. REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING OF JULY 23, 2012 Bremer moved, Printup seconded, to approve the minutes of the Orono City Council meeting of July 23, 2012, as submitted. VOTE: Ayes 4, Nays 0. *4. COUNCIL WORK SESSION OF AUGUST 2, 2012 Bremer moved, Printup seconded, to approve the minutes of the Orono City Council work session of August 2, 2012, as submitted. VOTE: Ayes 4, Nays 0. LMCD REPORT - Andrew McDermott, Representative McDermott reported the LMCD purchased a new milfoil harvester a couple of weeks ago, and due to the improved technology, additional acreage will be able to be harvested. The dam is still open and Lake Minnetonka is currently at an elevation of 928.68'. The Save the Lake Committee received a request six to nine months ago to help with fundraising for a piece of equipment that assists divers to search in deep water. Hennepin County has received a grant for $98,000. The total cost of the Remotely Operated Underwater Vehicle (ROV) is approximately $150,000. The Save the Lake Fund is going to contribute approximately $13,700. Approximately Item #02 - CC Agenda - 08/27/2012 Approval of Council Minutes 08/13/2012 [Page 1 of 19] MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL Monday, August 13, 2012 7:00 o'clock p.m. _____________________________________________________________________________________ Page 2 of 19 (LMCD REPORT - Andrew McDermott, Representative, Continued) $25,000 still needs to be raised and they are currently working on a fundraising campaign with the Friends of the Hennepin County Sheriff's Association. McMillan asked if the LMCD will be discussing the AIS proposal. McDermott indicated it would likely be discussed at the LMCD's upcoming meeting. McMillan commented the meeting was somewhat divisive given the differences between Lake Minnetonka and Christmas Lake. Loftus indicated Mr. Babcock was present at the AIS meeting representing the LMCD and had commented on the fact that the proposal should come back through a more standard process and include the AIS Task Force. McDermott stated the LMCD had raised a number of concerns about the proposal approximately six months ago and had encouraged them to take the proposal through the normal process. PLANNING COMMISSION COMMENTS - KEVIN LANDGRAVER, REPRESENTATIVE Landgraver stated the Planning Commission at its last meeting ran into some issues where applicants are proposing plans under the proposed new hardcover ordinance and that hopefully some good progress is made tonight on the new ordinance. Landgraver noted the Planning Commission will be having a public hearing on raising roosters in the City. PUBLIC COMMENTS Ralph Kempf, 3675 Togo Road, thanked the City Council on behalf of the Navarre Community Initiative for the efforts put forth by the City Administrator and other staff members for conducting a walking tour in Navarre on July 16th. Kempf indicated he found it very helpful to share ideas and problems facing Navarre with City Staff. Kempf noted the City Council should have received some e-mails from the Navarre Community Initiative and Hennepin County regarding a new pedestrian planning committee. Hennepin County has engaged an organization to conduct work sessions for the first ever Hennepin County committee on pedestrian planning and that they are looking for input from the general public. The Navarre Community Initiative has arranged to co-host with the community design group a meeting at the Freshwater Institute on August 28 from 6:00 to 7:30 p.m. Kempf stated he hopes some representatives from the City are able to be present at that meeting. The Navarre Community Initiative has a new e-mail address, which is navarretoday@gmail.com. Kempf stated if anyone is interested in flyers for the upcoming meeting, he would be willing to distribute those. The flyers have been put up in various businesses throughout the Navarre area. Kempf stated the Navarre Community Initiative is hoping to have a strong input into Hennepin County’s pedestrian plan and that Item #02 - CC Agenda - 08/27/2012 Approval of Council Minutes 08/13/2012 [Page 2 of 19] MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL Monday, August 13, 2012 7:00 o'clock p.m. _____________________________________________________________________________________ Page 3 of 19 (PUBLIC COMMENTS, Continued) they are looking to have a strong showing from the Navarre community to show that they are very interested in pedestrian safety PLANNING DEPARTMENT REPORT 5. #10-3491 CITY OF ORONO - HARDCOVER REGULATIONS AMENDMENT Ben Gozola addressed the City Council regarding the proposed new hardcover ordinance. The draft ordinance has been revised in response to the recommendations made by the City Council at its June 26th meeting. The changes include the elimination of the proposed definition for building coverage to remove any possible conflicts with the City's historic term of lot coverage. In addition, swimming pools have been specifically listed as hardcover within the definitions; hardcover exclusions that had been listed within the definition and drew a lot of discussion at the meeting have now been moved out of the definition and have been placed directly in the code in the hardcover exclusions section; and the sections on hardcover encroachments have been clarified to explain how those encroachments would be calculated. Gozola referred to a presentation slide to illustrate how two equally sized lots of 10,000 square feet would be dealt with to calculate hardcover. Lot A has a 1,000 square foot house and Lot B has an identical home but also a shed that encroaches into Lot A’s property. When the owner of Lot A comes forward and requests a permit, the hardcover will be based on the gross acreage of that lot and there would be no penalty to that landowner for the neighbor’s encroaching hardcover. Comparatively, for Lot B, the allowed hardcover would be based on the gross acreage of Lot B, but in this particular case, the hardcover would be based on both the house and the shed as well as the encroaching portion of the shed onto the neighboring property. Under either scenario, Staff would not make any adjustments to the lot area based on the encroaching hardcover. Another change made in the language is that spacing between deck boards is now going to be required in order to be eligible for the 100 square foot credit. Retaining walls under the revised ordinance have been split into two categories. The first category is the group of walls that are deemed necessary by the City Engineer to control erosion as well as other necessary functions. Those retaining walls would be exempt from the hardcover calculation. The second grouping of retaining walls that are built for aesthetic purposes would be counted as hardcover. A specific set of criteria was also devised to determine which parcels within the City would fall within the Stormwater Quality Overlay District and which parcels would be exempt. Gozola indicated he actually built that framework directly into the ordinance so it could be used as subdivisions occur. The next update was the creation of a new map based on the new process to assign stormwater tiers. Gozola stated in his opinion, due to that update, the overlay map is better because of it, and referred to the next slide to illustrate how the map has evolved. Gozola stated he basically started with a blank slate for the entire City of Orono and then analyzed the entire city under Step 1, which identifies all of the parcels that abut a protected lakeshore or stream. All such parcels are the most critical to protect and they need to be in the Protection Tier 1, which is the most restrictive tier. The end result is the map before the City Council tonight. As you look at the map, there Item #02 - CC Agenda - 08/27/2012 Approval of Council Minutes 08/13/2012 [Page 3 of 19] MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL Monday, August 13, 2012 7:00 o'clock p.m. _____________________________________________________________________________________ Page 4 of 19 (5. #10-3491 CITY OF ORONO - HARDCOVER REGULATIONS AMENDMENT, Continued) are a few properties that appear to be right on the lake but are not included in Tier 1 at the present time. That is basically because the areas either have a small stretch of land, a road, or some other feature between that lot and the actual OHW. Those particular areas will be addressed in Step 2 of the analysis. Step two of the process identifies the primary building area on the lot. The primary building area is identified by either the principal structure or existing structure on the lot as well as the setbacks of adjacent structures if you are looking at a vacant parcel. If the primary building area is completely within the 250-foot buffer around a lake, then the parcel, under Step 2, would also be placed into Tier 1. The next part of Step 2 deals with properties whose primary building areas are divided by the 250-foot buffer. In those cases, if the adjacent properties have already been placed into Protection Tier 1, then those parcels would also be placed into Tier 1. If the adjacent properties have not been assigned into a protection tier, further analysis would be done. Gozola stated they then identified the primary building areas on each of the lots. If you overlay the 250-foot buffer on to the map, you can see that three of these building areas are divided by that particular zone. Since all of these parcels are adjacent to Tier 1 properties, they would also be assigned to Tier 1. The parcel that has its primary building area outside of the 250-foot buffer would be examined in subsequent steps. The end result of that analysis shows the changes in the map. Step 3 continues to focus on the primary building area and its distance from the OHWL on the parcels that have yet to be assigned to a protection tier. If any portion of the primary building area is within 300 feet of a protected stream or if it is touching the landward extent of a floodplain from a stream, then it is placed into Tier 2. Likewise, if a portion of a primary building area is between the distance of 250 feet and 500 feet from protected lakeshore, the property is also placed into Tier 2. Finally, parcels, with a primary building area beyond 500 feet from lakes but up to 1,000 feet are placed into Tier 3. All of the remaining unassigned parcels would again be continued to be examined under the subsequent steps. Gozola stated as an example, the property that is bisected by the 500-foot divider and has a portion of its primary building area within that 250-to 500 foot zone would be assigned to Tier 2. Because the other homes are outside of the 500-foot buffer, those would be assigned to Tier 3. Step 4 continues to examine unassigned parcels by looking at the zoning districts for each of those parcels. If the zoning on the parcel happens to be RPUD, then it is placed into Protection Tier 4. Industrial is placed into Protection Tier 5. Unassigned parcels continue to be examined. The final analysis step is designed to fill in gaps within the system. Essentially it includes areas that are surrounded by already regulated parcels that by chance are not being regulated but should be regulated given that they have as much impact on the water quality of the area as the surrounding parcels. Gozola stated there is no magic number to define what the gap is so Staff determined that a reasonable gap would be 20 acres. Gozola indicated under Step 5 he first looked at those parcels individually. If more than half of the parcel's border was being regulated by one or more of the protection tiers, then that parcel was assigned to the tier which abutted it by the greatest percentage. The next step was to look for gaps of 20 acres or less and those were analyzed similar to the other individual parcels. If more than half of the gap's overall border was being regulated by one of the protection tiers, then the entire gap was assigned to the tier which abutted it by the greatest percentage. Parcels that were still unassigned following Step 5 were deemed to be exempt from the stormwater quality overlay district. Item #02 - CC Agenda - 08/27/2012 Approval of Council Minutes 08/13/2012 [Page 4 of 19] MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL Monday, August 13, 2012 7:00 o'clock p.m. _____________________________________________________________________________________ Page 5 of 19 (5. #10-3491 CITY OF ORONO - HARDCOVER REGULATIONS AMENDMENT, Continued) Gozola stated the final result of Step 5 resulted in the final version of the map that is in the City Council's packet. As it concerns the last two updates regulating legal nonconforming hardcover, it was clarified to ensure that only roofed porches are eligible to be converted into year-round living space. A new provision was added to clarify that the variances on parcels within the stormwater overlay district will be subject to conditions requiring mitigation measures to offset any additional hardcover the City Council would authorize. Gozola stated in his view the City Council already has that power but that it has been clarified in the proposed new ordinance. Gozola indicated the feedback he has received on the changes has been positive and that in his view he has addressed all of the City Council’s concerns dating back to June 26th. Gozola noted Staff did receive one e-mail from a resident but that he did not have much time to review it. Copies of the email have been distributed to the City Council. McMillan asked whether Mr. Gozola has received a lot of e-mail from the residents. Gozola indicated he has received a number of calls from residents who are mainly interested in when the new ordinance would be adopted by the City. McMillan asked whether a resident would need to call Staff to find out what tier their house is in. Gozola stated it is likely the map would be posted on the City’s website and the residents could access the information from the website. McMillan asked what would happen if the existing house is torn down and is relocated on the property. Gozola stated he is not sure in how many instances that would occur, but that in his view it would be limited and that the analysis has classified each parcel into its appropriate district. Gozola stated in his view the appropriate due diligence has been done and they have been classified into the correct tier. McMillan asked what the pros and cons are of having the tiers versus the City's current system. Gozola indicated the primary benefit is that the citizens no longer have to have a surveyor do those calculations which cost them additional money. The residents can look at the gross acreage on their lot and then review the map to see which tier they are in and then know how much hardcover they are allowed. McMillan asked whether other cities are operating under the tier system. Gozola stated they have looked at multiple different options and that it was felt this was the best option. The proposed ordinance provides improvements to the existing ordinance that address the main concerns that have been expressed over the last 10 years. Rahn stated in his view the City has come a long way with their hardcover ordinance given the fact that 100 square feet of hardcover is allowed for a deck as well as some permeable pavers and the retaining wall issues. Item #02 - CC Agenda - 08/27/2012 Approval of Council Minutes 08/13/2012 [Page 5 of 19] MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL Monday, August 13, 2012 7:00 o'clock p.m. _____________________________________________________________________________________ Page 6 of 19 (5. #10-3491 CITY OF ORONO - HARDCOVER REGULATIONS AMENDMENT, Continued) Rahn stated the issue that was the most important to him personally with this process was to simplify the regulations. Up until the section dealing with the tiers, Rahn stated in his view everything is fine, but that once you get into the tiers, it becomes a complex system and borders on being somewhat arbitrary. Rahn stated he is not in favor of the tiers and that he would rather go with the current zone system. Rahn stated in his view it is going to be more difficult for Staff. Rahn noted the City currently has three zones based on measurement and that now there are five tiers that are basically based on measurements and some of those have zones within the tiers. Rahn stated he basically was expecting one number, such as lakeshore lots at 25 percent, which is the DNR number, or some other number being assigned. Rahn stated the City Council has asked numerous times to see something that compares it to the DNR method but that they have not seen that to his recollection. Rahn reiterated that his desire with this process was to keep it simple. Instead of three zones, now the City has five tiers and zones within tiers, which is not simple in his opinion. Printup suggested the City Council find some items that everyone agrees on and that they can start with those things and then look at the tier system later. Printup indicated his concern with the tier system is overregulation. Printup questioned whether some of the smaller neighborhoods in Orono that are basically situated in Navarre and Crystal Bay would be overregulated with going with one number. Printup stated he does not want to see additional regulation on those small properties than what currently exists. Printup noted the City has had these discussions for decades regarding hardcover regulations. McMillan stated she has a concern with a property that goes beyond the 250-foot line that would be allowed 30 percent hardcover. Bremer noted it went from being unregulated to the 30 percent. McMillan stated if the 0-75 foot lot area is included in the hardcover calculations, she does not feel they should go to 30 percent beyond the 250-foot zone. McMillan commented it is already a big change to include the 0-75 foot zone in the calculations, and that in her view the City should not go with 30 percent beyond the 250-foot line. McMillan noted the City did not do any case studies on the 500 to 1000 foot lots and how they would compare with the DNR’s 25 percent and whether they would require additional variances. McMillan stated it was her understanding Staff was going to take a look at what would occur if they went with one number. Gozola indicated he did not run that analysis and he does not believe Staff ran that analysis either. The main concern with reducing it from 30 percent down to 25 percent is that there are some smaller lots in those areas that would likely become legal nonconforming. McMillan asked whether the City has any idea how many properties that would affect. Gozola indicated he does not have those numbers. Bremer stated she would like Staff to explain the data contained in the table. Item #02 - CC Agenda - 08/27/2012 Approval of Council Minutes 08/13/2012 [Page 6 of 19] MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL Monday, August 13, 2012 7:00 o'clock p.m. _____________________________________________________________________________________ Page 7 of 19 (5. #10-3491 CITY OF ORONO - HARDCOVER REGULATIONS AMENDMENT, Continued) Gaffron stated the table compiled by Staff shows that over the last 10 to 11 years, if you look at the depth column, there are very few properties in the 500 to 1,000 foot zone. The table contains all the rebuilds that have occurred on the lakeshore. McMillan indicated she was referring to properties that were not on the lakeshore and how they would be impacted by going with the one number. Gaffron stated it would impact those properties that are currently allowed 35 percent. Bremer noted there would be a number of lots affected on Casco Point by the 25 percent. Rahn stated a number of cities regulate their lakeshore lots with one percentage and then non-abutting lots have a different number. Rahn stated you would not hold the nonlakeshore lots to a more rigid standard. Bremer stated it is her understanding that the DNR standard only regulates the lakeshore lots. The philosophy of why the City protected the 0-75 foot zone is that you can have a huge impact in that zone. Properties that are 500 feet back from the lake can still have a pretty big impact. Bremer stated in speaking to some of the residents, it is her understanding that one of the DNR regulations prohibits building within 100 feet of the lakeshore depending on the lake but it does not have an average lakeshore regulation. Bremer stated that can result in a lot of residences at the 100-foot mark. Bremer stated if the City wants to understand the DNR reasoning for the regulations, they would have to look at all the other parts of the regulations to see why they were written that way. By doing it piecemeal, the City might be taking one piece of the regulation that they feel is good but overlooking another important piece that is necessary to work in conjunction with it. Bremer stated she would strongly recommend the City look at the other DNR regulations if they are interested in going with the 25 percent. Bremer stated since the City has typically not allowed construction in the 0-75 foot area, once you go to the 0-100 foot line, you will have a number of properties that are nonconforming. Rahn noted on the 15,000 to 20,000 square foot lots, the City typically issues variances for 35 to 45 percent hardcover. Once you add in the 0-75 foot area, those properties will come pretty close to the 25 percent. Rahn noted he has not seen a diagram analyzing that but that in his view they will be relatively close to the 25 percent. McMillan noted a large majority of the Tier 1 properties abut the lake. Rahn stated he would like to see how the parcels align with one another. Rahn stated he is not sure there is the uniform, symmetrical method that they are used to and that in his opinion people will disagree with what zone they are in. Bremer stated the overhead is a good example of what Council Member Rahn was speaking to and that a lot more nonlakeshore properties are included in the same tier as the lakeshore properties. Bremer stated you have to designate the properties in some way if you want to go with the tier system. Gozola stated the formula is designed to mimic the City’s current zone system. The first three zones mimic the City’s current zones and the other two tiers regulate the industrial and the RPUD lots. Item #02 - CC Agenda - 08/27/2012 Approval of Council Minutes 08/13/2012 [Page 7 of 19] MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL Monday, August 13, 2012 7:00 o'clock p.m. _____________________________________________________________________________________ Page 8 of 19 (5. #10-3491 CITY OF ORONO - HARDCOVER REGULATIONS AMENDMENT, Continued) Rahn stated in his view it is more uniform to have it based on distance if they are going to go with something similar to the zones. Rahn noted the properties will still need some limited survey work but that he is not sure if that benefit overcomes the issue with the uniformity and the proximity to the lake. Bremer noted you would still need a survey to determine how much hardcover is on the lot. Gaffron noted Exhibit E is the table compiled by Staff. If you look from 2003 to 2011 at all of the lakeshore rebuilds that have a 250-500 foot zone, the City had 41 properties within that time period that met that 30 percent criteria. Staff compared the combined total square foot of hardcover that would be allowed under the current code with the total amount of hardcover granted by a variance for the 41 properties. Twelve of those properties required a variance. If you take the total square feet of overall hardcover that would be allowed under the draft ordinance, which is 25 percent in the 0-250 plus 30 percent in the 250-1000, and then change the requirement for the 250-1000 foot zone to meet 25 percent, the City would end up with all of the properties requiring a variance. Under the existing system, only 12 of the 41 properties required a variance. Gaffron stated Staff’s concern has been that if you allow hardcover allotments from those rear zones to be pushed into the 75-250 foot zone, you have the potential to end up with a lot of hardcover right at the 75- foot line and that the City will need some way to mitigate that hardcover. Mayor McMillan opened the public hearing at 7:45 p.m. Mary Drazan, Orono, indicated she served on the hardcover task force. It was her understanding that the direction they got from the City Council was to keep the tiers and that she is now confused given the discussion this evening. Drazan stated the task force went on this path based on what they thought was council direction and that they put a lot of thought and effort into the tier system. McMillan stated the Council wanted to make sure that people who are conforming today are not made nonconforming whether the regulations are governed by tiers or zones. McMillan commented the City Council is open-minded and that no final decision is being made at this point. McMillan stated she would be interested to know if the task force feels strongly about tiers and why. Rahn noted he was the council representative on the task force and that he attended the first three meetings. Rahn stated it took the task force a while to get into the residential side of the regulations but that he does not specifically recall discussing tiers or saying that tiers is the path they should go down. Gozola stated the initial public meetings provided public input and the feedback from those meetings, as well discussion at the joint City Council/Planning Commission meetings, is what was brought forward to Staff to discuss. The task force actually looked at two different paths, the tier system and the performance based option. It was ultimately determined that the performance based option was not the best path. Drazan asked whether Staff feels it will be easier with the tier system. Curtis indicated it results in a map which allows each resident to know which tier they are in and in that respect it is easier. Drazan asked whether it would reduce the number of variances. Item #02 - CC Agenda - 08/27/2012 Approval of Council Minutes 08/13/2012 [Page 8 of 19] MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL Monday, August 13, 2012 7:00 o'clock p.m. _____________________________________________________________________________________ Page 9 of 19 (5. #10-3491 CITY OF ORONO - HARDCOVER REGULATIONS AMENDMENT, Continued) Curtis stated the tier system alone will probably not reduce the number of variances but that the overall ordinance, in her opinion, will reduce the number of variances. Curtis stated in her view the ordinance does make certain things more logical for the residents. McMillan stated if the Council is going to allow the 0-75 foot area to be included in the hardcover calculation, it should reduce the number of variances. Rahn stated allowing the fabric and giving the property owner a credit for 100 square feet of deck will also help reduce the number of variances. Drazan stated as a resident and as a participant on the task force, in her view the new ordinance makes it easier for the average person to understand and that there is less confusion on how to calculate hardcover. Drazan indicated she came to the task force with the point of view as a resident who had built a house and that they tried to make the regulations clearer and easier for people to understand. Drazan commented the people she has forwarded the information to thought this was a good concept and that it is a positive, good step for Orono to take. Bill Koch, Casco Circle, stated he was before the City Council with a variance request approximately six months ago. Koch stated he would like to see a simplistic plan and something that would protect the ground water and surface water. Koch stated he personally prefers the performance standard. Koch stated when you talk about a property abutting the lake, there should also be consideration given to properties that have stormwater runoff that goes into the stormwater sewers and how that is handled. Koch commented that people who live away from the lake tend to forget the impact that their properties have on the lake and they put the burden on the lake front owners. Koch stated he has not seen water rushing off his property into the lake ever and he has not seen the lake rise when there is a rain event simply from his property. Koch stated he has seen, however, thousands of gallons coming out of the storm sewer or a parking lot, which has a bigger negative impact and that he hopes there is an awareness of that. Koch stated he hopes the decision of the City Council will be based on facts and not suppositions. In regards to the DNR regulations, he would suggest the City Council have the City Attorney look at them so they know exactly what is being dealt with in the regulations. McMillan closed the public hearing at 7:53 p.m. Printup asked whether the Council would like to look at the DNR regulations closer. Gozola noted one of the things the task force looked at were the draft ordinances of the DNR that have not yet been adopted. McMillan stated the City Council should look at the current DNR regulations. McMillan indicated she would like the City Council to agree on some items that can be finalized in a couple of weeks. Rahn stated it sounds like there are a number of people who are in favor of the tier system but that he would like to compare a couple of properties under the tier system to the DNR regulations. Rahn stated the whole idea behind the hardcover ordinance is to protect the lake. Item #02 - CC Agenda - 08/27/2012 Approval of Council Minutes 08/13/2012 [Page 9 of 19] MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL Monday, August 13, 2012 7:00 o'clock p.m. _____________________________________________________________________________________ Page 10 of 19 (5. #10-3491 CITY OF ORONO - HARDCOVER REGULATIONS AMENDMENT, Continued) McMillan stated she is undecided about the tier system, but that the tier system does accomplish conforming lakeshore properties beyond the 250-foot zone. McMillan stated they do not know if some cities regulate nonlakeshore within 1,000 feet of the shoreline. If it is nonlakeshore, the question is whether it is regulated by the DNR or other cities. McMillan stated it was her understanding that the DNR did cover anything within 1,000 feet of a lakeshore. Gaffron stated his understanding of the DNR ordinances is that everything within 1,000 feet of shoreline is regulated at 25 percent regardless of whether it is lakeshore. Gaffron stated he does not believe the DNR goes past the 1,000 foot line. Gaffron asked if the City Council is interested in a comparison on a few properties between existing ordinance, the DNR regulations, and the proposed ordinance. Bremer stated the minutes reflect that the City Council has already asked for that and in response to that request they got the packet that is before them tonight. Bremer noted at least two council members have spoken out against the tiers for that very reason. Bremer indicated she was more interested in the analysis that Staff conducted in arriving at the tier system, but that if anyone feels the DNR regulations would be a better way to go, the City should do the comparison. Bremer stated since she does not believe the City will go with the DNR regulations, she personally does not feel the comparison is necessary, but that she is willing to pursue that if the other Council members feel it would be helpful. Bremer recommended the City look at all the DNR regulations rather than simply plucking one piece of their regulations out. Gaffron stated as an example, with a lot that is 600 feet away from the lake consisting of one acre, the property owner would get about 10,000 square feet of hardcover at 25 percent. The City's current code would allow 35 percent or approximately 15,000 square feet of hardcover. Gaffron noted the further you are from the lake, if the City follows the DNR’s 25 percent standard, a number of lots would be allowed less hardcover. McMillan noted the lots near the lake would be allowed more because the 0-75 foot zone would be included. McMillan stated if the DNR 25 percent standard makes a number of nonlakeshore properties nonconforming or you require multiple variances, then the City has shifted the problem to a different area. McMillan stated it may be worthwhile to determine why the DNR chose 1,000 feet from the lakeshore in their regulations. McMillan stated she does have a concern about what it would do further away from the lake and that the City should look at the DNR regulations comprehensively. Rahn noted the majority of the variance requests come from smaller, lakeshore lots. McMillan commented there are not a large number of lots that are 1,000 feet deep. Bremer stated in order to get a deck on her mother’s previous property located on Casco Point, she had to obtain a survey and that her property would have been far in excess of the 25 percent. Bremer commented there are a number of lots on Casco Point that would be much higher than 25 percent. McMillan stated the flip side is that everyone should do their environmental piece even if you are not located on the lake. Bremer stated Orono has a number of small houses on relatively small lots and that a large amount of the hardcover consists of the roads that service the homes. There have also been a number of very good Item #02 - CC Agenda - 08/27/2012 Approval of Council Minutes 08/13/2012 [Page 10 of 19] MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL Monday, August 13, 2012 7:00 o'clock p.m. _____________________________________________________________________________________ Page 11 of 19 (5. #10-3491 CITY OF ORONO - HARDCOVER REGULATIONS AMENDMENT, Continued) conservation efforts undertaken by the residents. Bremer stated the City has a hardcover limit for a reason in that area, but to go to the 25 percent standard on Casco Point would make their properties nonconforming. Bremer stated that is not a reason to not consider it, but the City has to be mindful of the outcome. Bremer stated one of the things she likes about the new ordinance is that the map is visual and people can easily identify which tier they are in. The map also helps to reduce the amount of interaction with Staff. Bremer stated one of her concerns is that the map appears visually to have some inconsistency inherent with the map. Bremer commented no method would be perfect given the different shapes of the lots and that the map is not going to look visually 100 percent like you would expect. Bremer stated she does not know how people will react to that, but that is also not a reason not to go forward since there will be a learning curve with any new system. Gozola stated he also noted which method was used to designate each parcel. Mattick indicated he has not reviewed the proposed ordinance in depth at this point and was waiting until the City Council determined whether they would like to proceed forward with the tier system. Mattick stated if the Council directs him to review the ordinance, he would look at the methodology that was used to create the tiers to help ensure that the rationale used supports the designation. Mattick stated once the Council gets close to the final ordinance language, he will take a look at it more closely. Mattick noted that hardcover is a big issue given the amount of lakeshore in Orono. McMillan asked how much time the City Attorney would need to review the ordinance. Mattick indicated it would depend on what the City Council would like him to review. If the Council would like just a review of the methodology and the language contained in the definitions, he would be able to have that review completed by the next meeting. Mattick stated it has been his experience in working with some of the other city ordinances that it is beneficial to run some real life scenarios. Bremer noted there were some questions raised in the e-mail and that perhaps the City Council could walk through those. As an example, it was requested the City allow 150 square feet of patio versus 100 square feet. Bremer noted there was a concept proposed originally that property owners be allowed 100 square feet plus 50 percent credit for pervious pavers. Bremer stated in her view that could cause some confusion over what is considered pervious versus impervious. Bremer asked how that would affect a property that is already at the maximum hardcover level. Gozola stated every property within this particular overlay district would get credit for either 100 square feet of deck or pervious patio that meets the requirements of the code. If you have an existing deck and an existing hardcover percentage, you would get the same hardcover credit as everyone else, and that 100 square feet would not count against your total hardcover, just like it would not count against the adjoining property if they went ahead and constructed a 100 square foot deck. Gozola indicated it would be a straight credit across the board. Bremer asked whether she would be allowed another 100 square feet if she already has a 100 square foot deck. Gozola indicated she would not and that the credit is limited to 100 square feet of deck or patio. Item #02 - CC Agenda - 08/27/2012 Approval of Council Minutes 08/13/2012 [Page 11 of 19] MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL Monday, August 13, 2012 7:00 o'clock p.m. _____________________________________________________________________________________ Page 12 of 19 (5. #10-3491 CITY OF ORONO - HARDCOVER REGULATIONS AMENDMENT, Continued) McMillan noted that pervious pavers, if not properly maintained, could become impervious. McMillan stated the City Council shied away from the performance standards due to the amount of Staff time that would be required to inspect the properties. McMillan commented a person could also blacktop over pervious pavers at some point in the future and the City could be unaware of that for a number of years. Rahn commented the pervious pavers also have to be installed correctly in order to be pervious. Bremer stated she likes the fact that retaining walls that are deemed to be necessary are not counted as hardcover but that decorative retaining walls would count as hardcover. The e-mail also asks, if the retaining wall is required as part of the building and approved as part of the building, then why would it be necessary for the City Engineer to approve that retaining wall. Bremer stated she was envisioning a situation where the City Engineer would need to determine whether the wall was necessary or decorative if the wall is constructed at some later time. Struve stated the problem with determining whether it is necessary or not is that the yard could be regraded. A 3:1 slope is not a useable slope and would require a retaining wall. The property owner could also regrade the property and not require a retaining wall, which would then make it more decorative. Struve stated he would rather have them all included as hardcover or not included as hardcover. Printup stated there will be property owners who will question the methodology of how the tiers were developed and why they were placed into a particular tier versus a different tier. Looking into that methodology by the City Attorney will be important. Printup stated at this point, given the discussion tonight, he would want to have the higher number to allow people to build what they would like on their property but that they might have more answers after the City Attorney’s review. Mattick noted he will not be creating the methodology but will be reviewing what Mr. Gozola has developed. Mattick suggested the City Council review in more detail the overlay map that has been created prior to the next City Council meeting. McMillan stated she would like to keep the basic ordinance intact but that in her view Tier 1 should be an overall 25 percent. Items A, B, and C on Page 11 could be deleted and it could just have language to the effect that hardcover shall not exceed 25 percent of gross lot area. McMillan stated she would also like Staff to come back with an analysis of the DNR regulations and the methodology of the tiers. McMillan stated she would like to keep the process moving forward. McMillan stated by having Tier 1 properties include the 0-75 foot zone, she would like to limit the overall hardcover to 25 percent. Printup noted construction or hardcover within the 0-75 foot zone would still not be allowed. Bremer stated to take a Tier 1 parcel and make it 25 percent would be inconsistent with the rest of the tiers and make it even more arbitrary for the other lots. Bremer stated in her view it is also important to have the full City Council vote on the new ordinance and that in her opinion Council Member Franchot has been supportive of the ordinance in the past. Bremer stated the next natural step in the process is to have the legal review. Item #02 - CC Agenda - 08/27/2012 Approval of Council Minutes 08/13/2012 [Page 12 of 19] MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL Monday, August 13, 2012 7:00 o'clock p.m. _____________________________________________________________________________________ Page 13 of 19 (5. #10-3491 CITY OF ORONO - HARDCOVER REGULATIONS AMENDMENT, Continued) Bremer asked whether the City Council would still like Planner Gaffron to compare the three different scenarios. Gaffron asked whether the Council would like to go with 25 or 30 percent on the long, deep lakeshore lots. Gaffron noted simply going with 25 percent would create a new zone. Gaffron stated if the City Council would like Staff to analyze all three different scenarios, they might not be able to get it all done in two weeks. Rahn recommended the City Council not rush through this process given the complexity of the issues. Rahn stated it is likely the City will need to make some minor changes to the ordinance in the future but that the Council should take sufficient time now to get it as close to what we want it to be. Mayor McMillan reopened the public hearing at 8:22 p.m. Melissa Musgjerd stated they have recently found a residence in Orono they would like to purchase and that every realtor they have talked to has attempted to convince them not to purchase in Orono given this issue. Musgjerd stated prior to them, four other couples backed out because they did not want to go through the variance process and/or wait for the City Council to act on this ordinance. Musgjerd indicated they will likely be going through the variance process but that this issue is being talked about quite a bit in other communities. There is a lot of negativity towards it to the point where people are saying that you do not want to live in the City of Orono due to these issues. McMillan noted the City of Orono is one of the more restrictive cities on hardcover and that it is the desire of the City to make it easier for residents to construct something on the lake. The variance process will still be in place even if the new ordinance is adopted and there will be uniquely shaped lots that will require variances. Carol Stanberg, 660 Tonkawa, stated when you look at the map, a natural reaction is to say that the red zone is the most restrictive and that there is some inequity. Stanberg stated if you are going to eliminate the tiers, feet would be much more equitable, people with deeper lots would not be penalized, and there would be more flexibility. Rahn commented distance allows more uniformity. Rahn stated the zone system is the way the City currently calculates hardcover and that the City should not make significant changes just to change. Rahn stated in his view the City has made some good changes such as allowing landscape fabric and small decks. Printup moved, Bremer seconded, to table Application #10-3491, City of Orono - Hardcover Regulations Amendment, to the September 10, 2012, City Council meeting. VOTE: Ayes 4, Nays 0. *6. #12-3564 MARTIN WOODY ARCHITECTS ON BEHALF OF DAVE SCOTT, 1905 HERITAGE DRIVE - VARIANCE - RESOLUTION NO. 6159 Bremer moved, Printup seconded, to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 6159, a Resolution Granting a Variance to Orono Municipal Code Section 78-305, for the property located at 1905 Heritage Drive. VOTE: Ayes 4, Nays 0. Item #02 - CC Agenda - 08/27/2012 Approval of Council Minutes 08/13/2012 [Page 13 of 19] MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL Monday, August 13, 2012 7:00 o'clock p.m. _____________________________________________________________________________________ Page 14 of 19 7. #12-3565 KATHRYN ALEXANDER ON BEHALF OF JOSEPH AND GAIL TEYNOR, 2789 PHEASANT ROAD - VARIANCES Kathryn Alexander, Applicant, and Sven Gustafson, Developer, were present. Curtis stated the applicant is proposing to construct a new residence on the subject property and is requesting a lot width variance and a 75-250 foot hardcover variance. A 4,700 square foot home is proposed, including garage, resulting in 38.5 percent hardcover within the 75-250 foot zone where 50.5 percent hardcover currently exists. The applicants are proposing a 4,700 square foot house. As part of the project, the tennis court will be removed and the driveway will be reconfigured resulting in approximately a 7,000 square foot reduction in hardcover. The lot does not meet the required width of 140 or 80 percent of that to be granted administrative approval per City Code. The property currently includes a home, a long driveway, a detached garage and a tennis court. The existing hardcover within the 75-250 foot zone is 50.5 percent. The applicant has proposed 38.5 percent, which would reduce the hardcover by 2,000 square feet. The applicant is also proposing to remove the tennis court from the 250-500 foot zone, which would reduce the hardcover from 50 percent to 16.5 percent. There is a small boathouse that will remain at the lakeshore and comprises 1.7 percent hardcover. Although the applicant’s proposal results in a total reduction of the site's hardcover by 4,600 square feet, the 75-250 foot zone variance is still requested. The proposed home is under the 15 percent structural coverage limit. The hardcover does not appear to alter the essential character of the neighborhood. The Planning Commission at its July meeting voted 6 to 0 on a motion to recommend approval of the lot width variance and denial of the hardcover variance. The Planning Commission discussed the lakeshore rebuild/hardcover tables that have been provided to the City Council. Since the Planning Commission meeting, the table has been updated to 2011. Staff recommends approval of the lot width variance. Staff would also recommend the City Council review the Planning Commission minutes and the hardcover tables. Kathryn Alexander, Applicant, stated this is one of those lots where the new ordinance would make a difference with the hardcover changes but that they are here tonight to be heard under the existing regulations. The lot is long and narrow and requires a lot width variance. Alexander indicated they looked at a number of options for designing the house and garage to work with the land, but short of a detached garage or relocating the house way back on the property, they found there would be no reasonable use with the property without the variance. The amount of current hardcover on the property has been reduced considerably. Gustafson commented the Planning Commission did look at the application before theirs was heard in light of the new hardcover ordinance and decided to table it, but then looked at their application under the City's current regulations. Gustafson noted they have reduced the hardcover on the lot and that they would be below the allowable amount under the proposed draft ordinance. Rahn asked if, under the tier system, they would not be here tonight. Alexander stated they would be at 22.5 percent. Item #02 - CC Agenda - 08/27/2012 Approval of Council Minutes 08/13/2012 [Page 14 of 19] MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL Monday, August 13, 2012 7:00 o'clock p.m. _____________________________________________________________________________________ Page 15 of 19 (7. #12-3565 KATHRYN ALEXANDER ON BEHALF OF JOSEPH AND GAIL TEYNOR, 2789 PHEASANT ROAD, Continued) Gustafson noted they are making a 67 percent reduction in hardcover on the property in the 250 plus zone. The property is going from 50 percent to 16.5 in that zone, with the hardcover comprising the driveway. In the 75-250 zone, there will be a 20 percent reduction. Gustafson noted they are below the amount of allowable hardcover under the proposed ordinance. Gustafson requested the City Council consider their application under the existing regulations to allow the property owners to begin construction. Gustafson noted he did not hear anything tonight in the discussion about the proposed new ordinance that would impact the 25 percent rule that is being contemplated. McMillan asked if the tennis court will be removed. Gustafson indicated it will be and that approximately 8,700 square feet will be removed. McMillan commented it is a good case study and that she was in attendance at the Planning Commission meeting when it was discussed. McMillan noted the long lot required a long driveway if you construct your house close to the average lakeshore setback. Gustafson noted that is all the hardcover in the 250 foot zone. Rahn asked what areas are being eliminated to reduce hardcover. Rahn asked if the driveway is the primary issue relating to the hardcover. Gustafson stated they could flip the house and have the garage doors facing the road and redesign the whole house or pull it significantly behind the other homes, but that would require the removal of a significant number of trees. Rahn asked if the detached garage would be removed. Gustafson indicated it would be removed. Curtis illustrated the 250-foot line. Curtis stated the hardcover in the 250-500 foot zone is at 16.5 percent. McMillan asked if that hardcover consists of all driveway. Curtis indicated it is all driveway. Gustafson noted the hardcover is currently at 50 percent. McMillan commented it does not appear the house is significantly larger than what currently exists. McMillan asked if the applicants would like to proceed forward under the current regulations. Gustafson indicated they would. Alexander stated this application is pretty similar to another variance they were granted on Casco Point. Item #02 - CC Agenda - 08/27/2012 Approval of Council Minutes 08/13/2012 [Page 15 of 19] MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL Monday, August 13, 2012 7:00 o'clock p.m. _____________________________________________________________________________________ Page 16 of 19 (7. #12-3565 KATHRYN ALEXANDER ON BEHALF OF JOSEPH AND GAIL TEYNOR, 2789 PHEASANT ROAD, Continued) Gustafson stated they are actually asking for a little bit less because the tennis court was relocated and made slightly smaller. Bremer stated to her recollection that was a much bigger lot. Gustafson indicated that the other lot was 49,900 square feet and they ended up at 37 percent in the 250 foot zone and 22 percent in the 75-250 foot zone. Rahn asked what the percentage of hardcover is over the entire lot. Gustafson stated the surveyor has it at 22.5 percent. Bremer noted the Council's packet has it at 22.4 percent. Rahn stated he is not sure what other reductions could be made outside of the scale of the entire project. McMillan stated given the shape of the lot and the amount of hardcover required for the driveway, she would view that as a hardship. McMillan noted the property owners are willing to remove the tennis court, which is a good compromise. McMillan indicated she is in favor of the application and that the proposal is reasonable. McMillan stated in her view there is enough hardship to grant the variance. Rahn asked what the 130 square feet consists of in the 0-75 foot zone. Curtis noted there is a boathouse in that area. Printup stated he is comfortable with the application. Printup moved, Rahn seconded, to approve Application #12-3565, Kathryn Alexander on behalf of Joseph and Gail Teynor, 2789 Pheasant Road, and to direct Staff to draft an approval resolution. VOTE: Ayes 3, Nays 1, Bremer Opposed. PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR/CITY ENGINEER'S REPORT 8. 2012 MILL AND OVERLAY/SEAL COAT PROJECT BID AWARD Struve stated at the May 28 meeting, the City Council approved a transfer of approximately $592,000 from the General Fund to the Community Investment Fund. During discussion of the transfer, the Council directed Staff to provide the Council with a list of road projects that needed funding. At the June 21, 2012 meeting, the City Council directed Staff to proceed with producing construction plans and specifications for a street maintenance project and authorized the solicitation of bids. The engineer's estimate for the project was $435,000 for the mill and overlay portion of the project and $100,000 for the crack filled and seal coated for a total of $535,000. These estimates included costs for Bolton & Menk to assist in creating the plans/specifications and project inspection. Item #02 - CC Agenda - 08/27/2012 Approval of Council Minutes 08/13/2012 [Page 16 of 19] MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL Monday, August 13, 2012 7:00 o'clock p.m. _____________________________________________________________________________________ Page 17 of 19 (8. 2012 MILL AND OVERLAY/SEAL COAT PROJECT BID AWARD, Continued) Bids were opened on Tuesday, August 7, and the low bidder was CS McCrossan Construction, Inc., in the amount of $407,742.90. Struve noted there will be some testing of the asphalt and onsite inspection if the project proceeds. If the project is awarded tonight, Staff will mail letters to all affected homeowners. McMillan asked if the City goes forward with the project, when the next anticipated mill and overlay project would be required. Struve stated it would be his recommendation that a yearly mill and overlay or seal coating project be completed. The City has 50 miles worth of roads and every year some of them will need seal coating, some will require mill and overlay, and some will require reconstruction. Struve stated it would be his recommendation to have some projects completed on a yearly basis. McMillan asked if this would ease the pressure on 2013. Struve stated in the grand scheme of things, five miles equates to not quite 10 percent of the City’s roadways. Struve stated while this project does a good job of helping improve the City's roadways, he would still recommend some sort of project next year. Struve stated it is conceivable the City could perhaps go a little less but that he would still recommend some sort of maintenance project for 2013. Bremer moved, Printup seconded, to award the 2012 Mill and Overlay/Seal Coat project contract to CS McCrossan Construction, Inc., in the amount of $407,742.90, and authorize Bolton & Menk to assist in the construction inspection of the project with an hourly not-to-exceed amount of $10,000. VOTE: Ayes 4, Nays 0. Bremer moved, Rahn seconded, to transfer funds in the amount of $417,742.90 from the Community Investment Fund to the Pavement Management Fund. VOTE: Ayes 4, Nays 0. *9. ORONO ORCHARD ROAD PROJECT - CHANGE ORDER NO. 2 Bremer moved, Printup seconded, to direct Staff to authorize the contractor to dispose of the excavated material in an approved MPCA landfill and approve Change Order No. 2. VOTE: Ayes 4, Nays 0. MAYOR/COUNCIL REPORT McMillan noted the City received a thank you from the Tour de Tonka organizers. McMillan reported she attended the Metro Cities Forum with Chair Haag of the Metropolitan Council. There were approximately 20 mayors and city council members in attendance and the purpose of the meeting was just some general brain storming on the various issues facing the cities. There will also be a forum for city staff in September. McMillan indicated she requested the Metropolitan Council look at some changes in their planning approach and to recognize that there are different cities with different needs and that the one size fits all Item #02 - CC Agenda - 08/27/2012 Approval of Council Minutes 08/13/2012 [Page 17 of 19] MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL Monday, August 13, 2012 7:00 o'clock p.m. _____________________________________________________________________________________ Page 18 of 19 (MAYOR/COUNCIL REPORT, Continued) model is not the best approach. McMillan commented the Twin City area thrives because of the number of unique, diverse areas, and that she attempted to stress that. McMillan stated she also mentioned that Orono needs sewer for environmental reasons and not huge developments. McMillan stated she indicated to the Metropolitan Council that Orono appreciates the fact that the Metropolitan Council provides sewer to this area and that Orono understands their low densities are difficult for the Metropolitan Council sometimes to accommodate and that she would encourage them to continue to work with Orono on sewer projects. CITY ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT *10. REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS FOR CITY RECYCLING COLLECTION SERVICES Bremer moved, Printup seconded, to proceed with the Request for Proposal process for city recycling collection services. VOTE: Ayes 4, Nays 0. 11. YEAR-TO-DATE GENERAL FUND BUDGET Olson reported the second quarter budget represents 50 percent of the year. The first quarter is the slower period for revenues and the second quarter provides the first clear indication of revenues. Revenues are at 49.11 percent of budget, with expenditures at 49.40 percent of budget. Property taxes are the primary revenue source for the General Fund. They are currently at 49.47 percent, which is the highest rate in recent years. Based on previous history, it is expected that property tax revenue will be at 100 percent of budget at year end. The only significant revenue source projected to be under budget for the year is the golf course, which is expected to finish the year at 90 percent of its budget. Overall, the General Fund revenue budget is in good shape and is projected to finish the year at 100 percent. The overall expenditure amounts are also on target for the year. At this point in time, the assessing department will be over budget for the year. The overage is due to additional work that was the result of new construction. The other General Fund departments are on track to finish the year at their budgeted levels. Engineering and special services is significantly under budget and is attributable to the hiring of the public works director/city engineer. Olson noted some adjustments have been made for major items like payroll, but not all adjustments and accruals have been made. Jessica Loftus noted that the primary elections are tomorrow and that the polling locations are open tomorrow from 7 a.m. to 8 p.m. Loftus noted August 14 is also the deadline for filing for a position on the City Council. CITY ATTORNEY'S REPORT None Item #02 - CC Agenda - 08/27/2012 Approval of Council Minutes 08/13/2012 [Page 18 of 19] MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL Monday, August 13, 2012 7:00 o'clock p.m. _____________________________________________________________________________________ Page 19 of 19 *12. LICENSES & PERMITS Limited Firearms Use Permit - Annual Club 1. Annual Permit for Trap Shooting Park Gun Club 3660 Sixth Avenue North 2. Limited Use Permit for Game Animals ( Deer Hunt) Three Rivers Park District - Baker Park Reserve November 24-25, 2012 One Day Gambling Permit - Resolution No. 6160 3. Fundraising Bankers Fundraising Event for YMCA - Ridgedale Branch (raffle) Lakeview Golf Course 405 North Arm Drive Friday, September 14, 2012 Residential Kennel Licenses 4. Patty Morris 2697 Kelly Avenue 5. Bev Stellman 2400 Casco Point Road Bremer moved, Printup seconded, to approve the above listed licenses and adopt RESOLUTION NO. 6160, a Resolution Approving a Lawful Gambling Application for Exempt Permit submitted by Fundraising Bankers for a one-day gambling activity. VOTE: Ayes 4, Nays 0. *13. BILLS Bremer moved, Printup seconded, to approve payment of the All Funds Account. VOTE: Ayes 4, Nays 0. ADJOURNMENT Printup moved, Rahn seconded, to adjourn the Orono City Council meeting at 9:02 p.m. VOTE: Ayes 4, Nays 0. ATTEST: ________________________________________ _______________________________________ Linda S. Vee, City Clerk Lili Tod McMillan, Mayor Item #02 - CC Agenda - 08/27/2012 Approval of Council Minutes 08/13/2012 [Page 19 of 19] Item #03 - CC Agenda - 08/27/2012 Police Service Proposal to Mound [Page 1 of 11] Item #03 - CC Agenda - 08/27/2012 Police Service Proposal to Mound [Page 2 of 11] Item #03 - CC Agenda - 08/27/2012 Police Service Proposal to Mound [Page 3 of 11] Item #03 - CC Agenda - 08/27/2012 Police Service Proposal to Mound [Page 4 of 11] Item #03 - CC Agenda - 08/27/2012 Police Service Proposal to Mound [Page 5 of 11] Item #03 - CC Agenda - 08/27/2012 Police Service Proposal to Mound [Page 6 of 11] Item #03 - CC Agenda - 08/27/2012 Police Service Proposal to Mound [Page 7 of 11] Item #03 - CC Agenda - 08/27/2012 Police Service Proposal to Mound [Page 8 of 11] Item #03 - CC Agenda - 08/27/2012 Police Service Proposal to Mound [Page 9 of 11] Item #03 - CC Agenda - 08/27/2012 Police Service Proposal to Mound [Page 10 of 11] Item #03 - CC Agenda - 08/27/2012 Police Service Proposal to Mound [Page 11 of 11] Item #04 - CC Agenda - 08/27/2012 File #12-3562 [Total Pages 39] Item #04 - CC Agenda - 08/27/2012 File #12-3562 [Total Pages 39] Item #04 - CC Agenda - 08/27/2012 File #12-3562 [Total Pages 39] Item #04 - CC Agenda - 08/27/2012 File #12-3562 [Total Pages 39] Item #04 - CC Agenda - 08/27/2012 File #12-3562 [Total Pages 39] Item #04 - CC Agenda - 08/27/2012 File #12-3562 [Total Pages 39] Item #04 - CC Agenda - 08/27/2012 File #12-3562 [Total Pages 39] Item #04 - CC Agenda - 08/27/2012 File #12-3562 [Total Pages 39] Item #04 - CC Agenda - 08/27/2012 File #12-3562 [Total Pages 39] Item #04 - CC Agenda - 08/27/2012 File #12-3562 [Total Pages 39] Item #04 - CC Agenda - 08/27/2012 File #12-3562 [Total Pages 39] Item #04 - CC Agenda - 08/27/2012 File #12-3562 [Total Pages 39] Item #04 - CC Agenda - 08/27/2012 File #12-3562 [Total Pages 39] Item #04 - CC Agenda - 08/27/2012 File #12-3562 [Total Pages 39] Item #04 - CC Agenda - 08/27/2012 File #12-3562 [Total Pages 39] Item #04 - CC Agenda - 08/27/2012 File #12-3562 [Total Pages 39] Item #04 - CC Agenda - 08/27/2012 File #12-3562 [Total Pages 39] Item #04 - CC Agenda - 08/27/2012 File #12-3562 [Total Pages 39] Item #04 - CC Agenda - 08/27/2012 File #12-3562 [Total Pages 39] Item #04 - CC Agenda - 08/27/2012 File #12-3562 [Total Pages 39] Item #04 - CC Agenda - 08/27/2012 File #12-3562 [Total Pages 39] Item #04 - CC Agenda - 08/27/2012 File #12-3562 [Total Pages 39] Item #04 - CC Agenda - 08/27/2012 File #12-3562 [Total Pages 39] Item #04 - CC Agenda - 08/27/2012 File #12-3562 [Total Pages 39] Item #04 - CC Agenda - 08/27/2012 File #12-3562 [Total Pages 39] Item #04 - CC Agenda - 08/27/2012 File #12-3562 [Total Pages 39] Item #04 - CC Agenda - 08/27/2012 File #12-3562 [Total Pages 39] Item #04 - CC Agenda - 08/27/2012 File #12-3562 [Total Pages 39] Item #04 - CC Agenda - 08/27/2012 File #12-3562 [Total Pages 39] Item #04 - CC Agenda - 08/27/2012 File #12-3562 [Total Pages 39] Item #04 - CC Agenda - 08/27/2012 File #12-3562 [Total Pages 39] Item #04 - CC Agenda - 08/27/2012 File #12-3562 [Total Pages 39] Item #04 - CC Agenda - 08/27/2012 File #12-3562 [Total Pages 39] Item #04 - CC Agenda - 08/27/2012 File #12-3562 [Total Pages 39] Item #04 - CC Agenda - 08/27/2012 File #12-3562 [Total Pages 39] Item #04 - CC Agenda - 08/27/2012 File #12-3562 [Total Pages 39] Item #04 - CC Agenda - 08/27/2012 File #12-3562 [Total Pages 39] Item #04 - CC Agenda - 08/27/2012 File #12-3562 [Total Pages 39] Item #04 - CC Agenda - 08/27/2012 File #12-3562 [Total Pages 39] Item #05 - CC Agenda - 08/27/2012 File #12-3565 [Total Pages 61] Item #05 - CC Agenda - 08/27/2012 File #12-3565 [Total Pages 61] Item #05 - CC Agenda - 08/27/2012 File #12-3565 [Total Pages 61] Item #05 - CC Agenda - 08/27/2012 File #12-3565 [Total Pages 61] Item #05 - CC Agenda - 08/27/2012 File #12-3565 [Total Pages 61] Item #05 - CC Agenda - 08/27/2012 File #12-3565 [Total Pages 61] Item #05 - CC Agenda - 08/27/2012 File #12-3565 [Total Pages 61] Item #05 - CC Agenda - 08/27/2012 File #12-3565 [Total Pages 61] Item #05 - CC Agenda - 08/27/2012 File #12-3565 [Total Pages 61] Item #05 - CC Agenda - 08/27/2012 File #12-3565 [Total Pages 61] Item #05 - CC Agenda - 08/27/2012 File #12-3565 [Total Pages 61] Item #05 - CC Agenda - 08/27/2012 File #12-3565 [Total Pages 61] Item #05 - CC Agenda - 08/27/2012 File #12-3565 [Total Pages 61] Item #05 - CC Agenda - 08/27/2012 File #12-3565 [Total Pages 61] Item #05 - CC Agenda - 08/27/2012 File #12-3565 [Total Pages 61] Item #05 - CC Agenda - 08/27/2012 File #12-3565 [Total Pages 61] Item #05 - CC Agenda - 08/27/2012 File #12-3565 [Total Pages 61] Item #05 - CC Agenda - 08/27/2012 File #12-3565 [Total Pages 61] Item #05 - CC Agenda - 08/27/2012 File #12-3565 [Total Pages 61] Item #05 - CC Agenda - 08/27/2012 File #12-3565 [Total Pages 61] Item #05 - CC Agenda - 08/27/2012 File #12-3565 [Total Pages 61] Item #05 - CC Agenda - 08/27/2012 File #12-3565 [Total Pages 61] Item #05 - CC Agenda - 08/27/2012 File #12-3565 [Total Pages 61] Item #05 - CC Agenda - 08/27/2012 File #12-3565 [Total Pages 61] Item #05 - CC Agenda - 08/27/2012 File #12-3565 [Total Pages 61] Item #05 - CC Agenda - 08/27/2012 File #12-3565 [Total Pages 61] Item #05 - CC Agenda - 08/27/2012 File #12-3565 [Total Pages 61] Item #05 - CC Agenda - 08/27/2012 File #12-3565 [Total Pages 61] Item #05 - CC Agenda - 08/27/2012 File #12-3565 [Total Pages 61] Item #05 - CC Agenda - 08/27/2012 File #12-3565 [Total Pages 61] Item #05 - CC Agenda - 08/27/2012 File #12-3565 [Total Pages 61] Item #05 - CC Agenda - 08/27/2012 File #12-3565 [Total Pages 61] Item #05 - CC Agenda - 08/27/2012 File #12-3565 [Total Pages 61] Item #05 - CC Agenda - 08/27/2012 File #12-3565 [Total Pages 61] Item #05 - CC Agenda - 08/27/2012 File #12-3565 [Total Pages 61] Item #05 - CC Agenda - 08/27/2012 File #12-3565 [Total Pages 61] Item #05 - CC Agenda - 08/27/2012 File #12-3565 [Total Pages 61] Item #05 - CC Agenda - 08/27/2012 File #12-3565 [Total Pages 61] Item #05 - CC Agenda - 08/27/2012 File #12-3565 [Total Pages 61] Item #05 - CC Agenda - 08/27/2012 File #12-3565 [Total Pages 61] Item #05 - CC Agenda - 08/27/2012 File #12-3565 [Total Pages 61] Item #05 - CC Agenda - 08/27/2012 File #12-3565 [Total Pages 61] Item #05 - CC Agenda - 08/27/2012 File #12-3565 [Total Pages 61] Item #05 - CC Agenda - 08/27/2012 File #12-3565 [Total Pages 61] Item #05 - CC Agenda - 08/27/2012 File #12-3565 [Total Pages 61] Item #05 - CC Agenda - 08/27/2012 File #12-3565 [Total Pages 61] Item #05 - CC Agenda - 08/27/2012 File #12-3565 [Total Pages 61] Item #05 - CC Agenda - 08/27/2012 File #12-3565 [Total Pages 61] Item #05 - CC Agenda - 08/27/2012 File #12-3565 [Total Pages 61] Item #05 - CC Agenda - 08/27/2012 File #12-3565 [Total Pages 61] Item #05 - CC Agenda - 08/27/2012 File #12-3565 [Total Pages 61] Item #05 - CC Agenda - 08/27/2012 File #12-3565 [Total Pages 61] Item #05 - CC Agenda - 08/27/2012 File #12-3565 [Total Pages 61] Item #05 - CC Agenda - 08/27/2012 File #12-3565 [Total Pages 61] Item #05 - CC Agenda - 08/27/2012 File #12-3565 [Total Pages 61] Item #05 - CC Agenda - 08/27/2012 File #12-3565 [Total Pages 61] Item #05 - CC Agenda - 08/27/2012 File #12-3565 [Total Pages 61] Item #05 - CC Agenda - 08/27/2012 File #12-3565 [Total Pages 61] Item #05 - CC Agenda - 08/27/2012 File #12-3565 [Total Pages 61] Item #05 - CC Agenda - 08/27/2012 File #12-3565 [Total Pages 61] Item #05 - CC Agenda - 08/27/2012 File #12-3565 [Total Pages 61] Item #06 - CC Agenda - 08/27/2012 File #12-3569 [Total Pages 30] Item #06 - CC Agenda - 08/27/2012 File #12-3569 [Total Pages 30] Item #06 - CC Agenda - 08/27/2012 File #12-3569 [Total Pages 30] Item #06 - CC Agenda - 08/27/2012 File #12-3569 [Total Pages 30] Item #06 - CC Agenda - 08/27/2012 File #12-3569 [Total Pages 30] Item #06 - CC Agenda - 08/27/2012 File #12-3569 [Total Pages 30] Item #06 - CC Agenda - 08/27/2012 File #12-3569 [Total Pages 30] Item #06 - CC Agenda - 08/27/2012 File #12-3569 [Total Pages 30] Item #06 - CC Agenda - 08/27/2012 File #12-3569 [Total Pages 30] Item #06 - CC Agenda - 08/27/2012 File #12-3569 [Total Pages 30] Item #06 - CC Agenda - 08/27/2012 File #12-3569 [Total Pages 30] Item #06 - CC Agenda - 08/27/2012 File #12-3569 [Total Pages 30] Item #06 - CC Agenda - 08/27/2012 File #12-3569 [Total Pages 30] Item #06 - CC Agenda - 08/27/2012 File #12-3569 [Total Pages 30] Item #06 - CC Agenda - 08/27/2012 File #12-3569 [Total Pages 30] Item #06 - CC Agenda - 08/27/2012 File #12-3569 [Total Pages 30] Item #06 - CC Agenda - 08/27/2012 File #12-3569 [Total Pages 30] Item #06 - CC Agenda - 08/27/2012 File #12-3569 [Total Pages 30] Item #06 - CC Agenda - 08/27/2012 File #12-3569 [Total Pages 30] Item #06 - CC Agenda - 08/27/2012 File #12-3569 [Total Pages 30] Item #06 - CC Agenda - 08/27/2012 File #12-3569 [Total Pages 30] Item #06 - CC Agenda - 08/27/2012 File #12-3569 [Total Pages 30] Item #06 - CC Agenda - 08/27/2012 File #12-3569 [Total Pages 30] Item #06 - CC Agenda - 08/27/2012 File #12-3569 [Total Pages 30] Item #06 - CC Agenda - 08/27/2012 File #12-3569 [Total Pages 30] Item #06 - CC Agenda - 08/27/2012 File #12-3569 [Total Pages 30] Item #06 - CC Agenda - 08/27/2012 File #12-3569 [Total Pages 30] Item #06 - CC Agenda - 08/27/2012 File #12-3569 [Total Pages 30] Item #06 - CC Agenda - 08/27/2012 File #12-3569 [Total Pages 30] Item #06 - CC Agenda - 08/27/2012 File #12-3569 [Total Pages 30] Item #07 - CC Agenda - 08/27/2012 Change Order No. 1 - Orono Orchard Road Reconstruction Project [Page 1 of 3] Item #07 - CC Agenda - 08/27/2012 Change Order No. 1 - Orono Orchard Road Reconstruction Project [Page 2 of 3] Item #07 - CC Agenda - 08/27/2012 Change Order No. 1 - Orono Orchard Road Reconstruction Project [Page 3 of 3] Item #08 - CC Agenda - 08/27/2012 Pay Request No. 1 - Orono Orchard Road Reconstruction Project [Page 1 of 6] Item #08 - CC Agenda - 08/27/2012 Pay Request No. 1 - Orono Orchard Road Reconstruction Project [Page 2 of 6] Item #08 - CC Agenda - 08/27/2012 Pay Request No. 1 - Orono Orchard Road Reconstruction Project [Page 3 of 6] Item #08 - CC Agenda - 08/27/2012 Pay Request No. 1 - Orono Orchard Road Reconstruction Project [Page 4 of 6] Item #08 - CC Agenda - 08/27/2012 Pay Request No. 1 - Orono Orchard Road Reconstruction Project [Page 5 of 6] Item #08 - CC Agenda - 08/27/2012 Pay Request No. 1 - Orono Orchard Road Reconstruction Project [Page 6 of 6] Item #09 - CC Agenda - 08/27/2012 Pay Request No. 2 - Carmen Bay Shoreline Restoration Project [Page 1 of 5] Item #09 - CC Agenda - 08/27/2012 Pay Request No. 2 - Carmen Bay Shoreline Restoration Project [Page 2 of 5] Item #09 - CC Agenda - 08/27/2012 Pay Request No. 2 - Carmen Bay Shoreline Restoration Project [Page 3 of 5] Item #09 - CC Agenda - 08/27/2012 Pay Request No. 2 - Carmen Bay Shoreline Restoration Project [Page 4 of 5] Item #09 - CC Agenda - 08/27/2012 Pay Request No. 2 - Carmen Bay Shoreline Restoration Project [Page 5 of 5] Item #10 - CC Agenda - 08/27/2012 Navarre Sidewalk Update [Page 1 of 3] Item #10 - CC Agenda - 08/27/2012 Navarre Sidewalk Update [Page 2 of 3] Item #10 - CC Agenda - 08/27/2012 Navarre Sidewalk Update [Page 3 of 3] Item #11 - CC Agenda - 08/27/2012 Licenses & Permits [Page 1 of 1] Item #12 - CC Agenda - 08/27/2012 Bills [Page 1 of 10] Item #12 - CC Agenda - 08/27/2012 Bills [Page 2 of 10] Item #12 - CC Agenda - 08/27/2012 Bills [Page 3 of 10] Item #12 - CC Agenda - 08/27/2012 Bills [Page 4 of 10] Item #12 - CC Agenda - 08/27/2012 Bills [Page 5 of 10] Item #12 - CC Agenda - 08/27/2012 Bills [Page 6 of 10] Item #12 - CC Agenda - 08/27/2012 Bills [Page 7 of 10] Item #12 - CC Agenda - 08/27/2012 Bills [Page 8 of 10] Item #12 - CC Agenda - 08/27/2012 Bills [Page 9 of 10] Item #12 - CC Agenda - 08/27/2012 Bills [Page 10 of 10]