Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout12-10-1975 Council Minutes Special Meeting , f a a CITY OF ORONJ, MINNESOTA SPECIAL COUNCIL P�IEETING HELD DECII+�ER 10, 1975 � AZayor Robert L. Searles called to order a Special P�Ieeting ATTENDANCE - 7:35 P.A�. � f the Orono City Council on the above date with the fol- ORUNO CITY HALL �owing members present: Councilmembers Massengale, Butler, • Paurus and Welsh. City Attorney, Bruce Malkerson and � Clerk/Administrator, Walter R. Benson. (Cowlcilmembers Butler and Welsh left early) All members of the Planning Comnission, � Park Commission and I-�.unan Rights Carimission had been notified to attend including persons who were lmown to have an interest r in the proceedings. The official City newspapers were also notified of this 5pecial Council P�beeting. • i Mayor Searles addressed those in attendance rec�uesting their ORONO-LONG LAKE . guidance and co�mnents concerning the Orano-Long Lake Sewer INTERCEFTOR Interceptor proposal of the A4etropolitan Waste Control Com- � mission. He explained that the proposal was for a gravity interceptor draining the Orono and Long Lake Treatment Plar�ts, r going through wetlands or arotmd the perimeter of the w�etlands, into tVayzata. The A4ayor called attention to the report en- � titled "Environmen�al Assess�nt-Orono-Long Lake Interceptor", dated February 1974, by the Natianal Biocentric, Inc. The City came into receipt of this report in November 1975, and � although it's contents would not be part of the evenings dis- cussians, the Cauncil had transmitted to the Metropolitan � ti�laste Control Comanission 115 objection or changes (attached herein) for incorporation into the transcript of the Public 'Tearing held December 4, 1975. The Council explained their �rplexity due to late receipt of the Report and because anly • tonight, at 7:30 P.M. , just prior to the meeting, had the � City received the Final Plans an the project. The project would have many implications, one of which was disrupting � swamps that we have been protecting with Ordinance No. 125. There are alternatives to the present plan, such as a pres- � sure interceptor going alang Fox Street or Orono Orchard Road. The City would have to find it in the public interest • to grant a variance to the Wetlands Ordinance. The Mayor • noted that the Environmental R�port fla�ged the enviranmental hazards of the project and Massengale emphasized that the risks involved are irreversible. The Mayor introduced Gene � Hickok, Hydrologist, of Hickok � Associates who had came to the meet�g in an advisory capacity at the request of the Council. Mr. Hickok agreed with the Cotmcil's statement read at the Ra�1.ic Hearing tha.t stated the basic policy of Orono and lead.er's in protecting ma.rsh areas. He had not yet seen • the Final Plan but had a sketch of the project. To him it � looked like about 3 1/2 miles of pipe either in the flood plain or close to it. 3 1/Z miles is a major concern and � alternate routes were not very detailed. The A�ayor noted within the next cauple weeks 90% of the available Federal � Funds would have to be put together, if the project was to get tuiderway. Hickok felt the Pollution Control Agency �ould possibly lay over fimds for another year. Searles felt iting another year would not be out of line considering the �''�=pes would be in the ground 50 to 100 years. Hickok went on �o describe a portion of the project noting that the chosen � route made provision for ditch dams every 500 feet. One � potential was in the excavation of the line thru r�arsh soil which could open up clay seals of permeable materials. Water • • � MINUTES OF A SPECIAL COtJNCIL N�ETING HELD DECII�3ER 10, 1975 - PAGE 2 � could then infiltrate the trench and go down. The disadvan- ORONO-LONG LAKE � tage was the possible draining of some of the ma.rsh areas. INTERCEP'POR, cont. �etro recognizes the problem and so is planning about thirty ,� ditch dams, which would be about 500 feet in length, although the length would more probably be determined during canstructian. � That could also pose a concern to the City. Another problem is the enormous amoimt of water to be used during the construction, • where dewatering is necessary. Searles stated that the Lake l��iinnetonka Conservation District approval was conditional upon r their inspectio� of the Fina.l Plans for the project but so far � had not received any such plans. Searles felt it was vexy dif- ficult to make decisions o� such a big issue without the proper investigation. Massengale felt the problem indicates that Orono has strang interests but we ha.v�e not aclmowledged our control � over these conclitions or interests. Searles felt Ordinance No. • 125 would be a protective rn�easure. Hickok felt that no single project in Orono would have a more potential effect than this � project an the Wetlands Ordinance. Searles noted that the jvatershed District wants all sewer plants taken off Lake Minne- � tonka. Hickok indicated that if, in fact, the new zaning maps were taken into consideration ma.ybe it would be foLuid that we � don't need the sewer. Brad Van Nest noted that that would be an the basic assu�nption that Metro would agree we c.an grow with a mininnnn lot size of two acres in unsewered areas. V4n. Nest felt we could design and regulate septic systems adec{uately, - ��ickok felt the shoreline for some distance should be sewered � �nd possibly other areas having soils creating great difficulty, xch as clay hills. Searles noted that in addition to zaning regulations, building peYmits were not just issued but condi- tions must meet certified engineering design standards. Hickok • felt that the area needed a better handle on haw we are effected • by marshes, such as hrnv much ma.rsh area do you need to success- fully treat storni water. Searles pointed out that the Environ- mental Assessment Report was actually prepared in 1971-72 and had missed this concern completely. Hickok said his impression � on review of the question was that the majority of ma.rshes needed, under present density, was at 100� right now. He noted that some • areas ha.ve surplus lowlands but not many. When asked wha.t this had to do with upland storage of water, Hickolc answered that they � did not want water to raise over six inches and it was preferable that there was not too much flexuation for a variety of reasons. Another reason why the present wetlands became more valuable was because so�ne municipalities had filled in their marshlands. Hickok was asked to project the level of urbanization possible � with existing swaaq�s. He felt that they would get so valua.ble that developer's �uld treat their storm water rather than expend • it and cited the Ridgedale Shopping Center as a present day ex- ample. Van Nest asked what the disadvantages were of a pressure main along roadways. Hickok felt prima.rily the cost of operating * lift stations because they are an on-going expense. Hick.ok was asked about effects on the Long Lake Creek on which the Long Lake '�reatment Plant was Iocated and stated he felt it would be very y. Concern was expressed as to the Long Lake and Orono Treat- ! �l�ent Plants if the project should fall thru. It was felt that Orono would be alright but that Long Lake was known to run at * twice capacity on bad days. It was �greed by all that there was not enough time to make a decisian. tiVhen asked why the Cotmcil � had not laoked into the alternates, they replied that the gravity line was the only one with an enviro�unental assessment an it. • � f � P�IIMITES OF A SPECIAL COUNCIL MEETING HELD DECEMBER 10, 1975 - PAGE 3 Van Nest felt that there wauld be few construction problems OROI�-LONG LAKE • with Alternate No. 6. Butler asked Mr. Hickok, as to the case INTERCEPTOR, cont . of the seal in the manhes being broken, whether this could create a gain in water in other areas - possibly flooding of residential properties. Hickok replied it could happene Gloria M�Donald �1�� wanted to lrnow if the marsh could be entirely � lost if the seal were broken. Hickok replied, "Yes, it could happen". Massengale asked, "Are these valid concerns?" Hickok � replied "Yes, especially with 3 1/2 miles of ���'��`:' Searles noted that the pipe would be set very deep and could walk around S on the marsh and break. bla.ssengale expressed his feelings that our marshes would always be imder threat with ma.intenance pro- � blems, Van Nest noted that the cost of the initial installation � of Alternate 1 was 1/3 more than the pressure system but was justified because it wwld cost a million and a half less for � Orono to hook up trwzks and laterals but felt this was bad logic because we don't want to hook-in as it is not consistent with • our Compre hensive Plan. It was also pointed out that our north rural area was considered by Metro policies as an urban- � ized area and it was felt that from an environmental standpoint it would have a bad effect an the Lake. Hickok related that h�avy residential areas create storm water in which pollutants � could not be controlled. The City Administrator presented a R�solutian that had been drafted because of the immediate need • to respond on the project. Ma.yor Searles read the Resolution a.n no one voiced objections or disagreement with it's content. n"assengale moved, Butler seconded, that the Cotmcil adopt RESOLUTION N0. 653 � Resolution No. 653 entitled, "Resolution Rec{uesting Sixty ORONO-LONG LAKE D�y Extension From the Pollution Control Agency (PCA) To INi'ERCEPTOR - REQUEST � Al1ow the City of Or�o an Opportunity for a Detailed Ana.- TO POLLUTION CANTROL �ysis of the Proposed Orono-Long Lake Interceptor" and having A(�1CY FOR TII�� EX- the following content: TENSION � tVhereas, the City of Orono first received the environmental , assessment concerning the proposed Orono-Long Lake interceptor (hereinafter interceptor) on November 14, 1975, and � t'dhereas, the City of Orono ha.s not had adec{ua.te time to review the em�ronmental assess�nt prior to the December 4, • 1975 public hearing on the proposed interceptor, and Whereas, the City of Orono still has not received the final � plans and specifications for the interceptor, and � �ahereas, the City of Orono is very concerned about the pos- sible adverse environmental effects of the proposed interceptor; � Now, Therefore, Be It Resolved: 1. The City Coi,mcil, Planning Comanission and staff ha.ve not S had adequa.te time ta review the environmental assessment sub- mitted concerning the interceptor and have not yet seen the final • plans and specifications for proposal Number 1 of the interceptor. • 2. There has been no application by the P•9WCC or any other agency for a variance Lmder our Ordinance No. 125, to allow for � the construction of the interceptor within 26 feet of or within the wetlands and marshes in the City of Orono. Such an appli- � cation from the Metropolitan �Vaste Control Com�iissioai (herein- after Mt�C) mur� be made, reviewed and approved prior to any • construction. s � ' MINUTES OF A SPECIAL Nl�ETING HELD DECE1�iSER 10, 1975 - PAGE 4 3. There may be irreparable damage to the wetlands and RESOLUTION M0. 653 marshes of Orono unless there is first an additional study cont. � of t'�e possible adverse effects of the interceptor. 4. The interceptor as understood presently by the City is contrary to the land use policies of the City. 5. The City must be granted a sixty day extension of time • to allow for a detailed analysis of the i.nterceptor, which analysis addresses itself to the concerns raised herein and � set forth in the letters of December 4 and November 26, 1975, attached hereto. E. The City still approv�es of the concept of removing ef- s fluent from Lake D4innetonka but must have additional tirrue to rVview the final plans and specifications once they are filed � and the proposed amendments to the environment assess�nt to c_�termine if the interceptor is environmentally acceptable � to the City. � 7. The City of Orono appreciates the recent staff assis- tance provided by the M6�ICC and the PCA and hopes that through � ?*rm�d.iate review and reaction by their staffs and the City s:;aff and City Council that the questions which have been a raised concerning this project may be answered satisfactorily and thvt the project or a project similar in nature may be � implernented in the calendar year of 1976. 8. If there is any possibility of applying for federal fi��:ds and holding those funds for the interceptor for at � l:;asl ninety days until additional analysis and input can be ccr.ipleted by the City, that the PCA take those steps necessary to realize those goals. 9. '.�e City asks that the PCA or other agencies charged with the responsibility of abating and preventing pollution �+� ��_e Lake A�innetonka area take those steps necessary to � ot�taan fimds to finance a co�mplete study to be �.de by the T��I�nnehaha Creek tivatershed District concerning the effect of L_rbanization on Lake Minnetonka and the surroundi.ng water- � sl�ed. �,lotion, Ayes (S) - Nays (0) . s Searles moved, Paurus seconded, that the following cover LETTER TO METI�?POLITAN • �e�ter to the Metropolitan Waste Control Corranission regarding WASTE CONTROL C�'IISSION the Orono-Long Lake Interceptor, as drafted by the City At- -CITY C�1TS ON Tf-iE '� torn�y, be approved and submitted. Motion, Ayes (5) Nays (0) . PUBLIC HEARING - ORONO- LONG LAKE INTER(�PTOR To Mr. Stephen Allbee, Planning Coordinator; A4etropolitan � Was-�e Control Commission; Seventh and Robert Street; St. Pau1, n�i_iszn�sota, 55101. • It is my understanding pursuant ta our telephone conversation of today, that the City of Orono will be able to submit com- ma���s to be entered into the record �or your review as late as �ecember 11, 1975. Enclosed please find: � (1) A Resolution rec�uesting a sixty day extension from the Pe?lution Control Agency to allow the City of Orano an oppor- � tt�.ity for a detailed analysis of the proposed Orono-Long Lake In'cerceptor; S (2) A copy of our letters of December 4 and Noverr�er 26, � 1975, to the A�C concerning this matter; (3) A copy of the amendments which the representative of � BioCentrics and the representatives of the City of Orono re- vie�aed, which amendments should be incorporated where applicable J MINUTES OF A SPECIAL MEETING HELD DEC�IBER 10, 1975 - PA� S � into the environmental assessment previously filed so that the LETTER TO POLLUTION environmental assessment submitted to the Federal Government CONT�L A(�NCY, cont. � �.s so amended.; (4) A copy of our wetlands ordinance, Ordinance No. 125, the provisions of which must be met by any agency prior to construc- tion of any project in Orono; (5) A copy of our comprehensive land use plan which clea�'ly S shows this area as a rural residential area not to be developed into lots of less than two a�res; (6) A copy of the Orono zoning cocle map, w�ich clearly s�ows the area through which this interceptor is proposed to be cor�- i structed as ttvo acre rural residential. '� As noted in the enclosed docwnents, the City of Orono has been � very concerned in the past and is presently concerned about any developtnents in the City whiCh ddes not meet the rec{uir�- � ments of th� land use policies of the City of Orono. The City is unable ta reaCh any meaningful �onclt�sions cancerning the proposed interceptor because of the lack o� information supplied to the City by the MtNCC and because of the short time allowed • the City for review of that information which has 1�een recently submitted to the City. A project of this magnitud.e will ha.ve ' both short term and long term impact of great magnitude on the City and it is the City's responsibility to tmderstand completely from a complete analysis of the proposed project what the con- sec{uences and impact might be; for the reasons set forth herein, the City has not been able to undertake such an analysis and �bviously must be able to do so. If you have any questions concerning this matter, please feel � free to contact the undersigned. Signed Br�.��e :�. Malkerson, Orono City Attorney. The Council again requested input from everyone concerning 1�AJLTIPLE DWELLING CODE the proposed Multiple Dwelling Ordinance. ThP procedure was • that the Mayor read the Ordinance, segment by s�gment, and discussion followed each portion. The follo;�ir.g are pro- posed changes or areas where decisions would have to be made: + (1) Under M-6 Purpose: An inclusion to d�si�ate that land area planning would be "exclusive of ivetlands". (2) The portion concerning Permitted Uses in 1�1-6 Area al lowing any permitted use as regulated in the R-1B District: This was an area of contention due to objections to the pos- siblity of six single family units to an acre and the other view, that if in a relatively large area, it would permit flexibility o£ design. Fears were expressed that this pro- vision could lead to having a large area of single family row houses and it was felt this feature was more in line with a high density ordinance. An opinion was expressed that S the code should include a provision that if a developer was to construct single-family residential homes, the tract / �culd revert to the original zoning. It was iLlt by some � nat the PRD provisians of the Zoning Cod.e U,Tr�ld ^''_o�v for clustered single-family residential units and for greater � controls by the City and that the purpose of th� proposed code was regulation of attached multiple dwellings. How- ever, several felt that a mi.�c of housing types weuld be desirable and allow a developer flexibility to plan aestetic h1II�JTES OF A SPECIAL A�ETING HELD DECEMf3ER 10, 1975 - PAGE 6 � properties. Consideratian was given to contract zoning, wi�hin NIJLTIPLE DWELLING CODE, the realm of the Comprehensive Plan if concept approval was given, cont. � so that a dev�eloper would not back out of a plan or zone to in- crease land value. The City Attorney disagreed. wi.th the concept due to previous court findings and because it was relatively un- tried in the court systems. The Attorney suggested that the dis- � trict allaw a "floating zone" with a perniitted use of single- family on i/2 acre sites and multiple dw�llings as a conditional use. (3) M-6 Density: Suggested for possible inclusion in the defining of a "gross acre" was the term "exclusive of w+etlands". It was also suggested "must be atta�hed wiits" or "a minimum of two Lmits per dwelling" be attached in the sentence concerning the maximum dwelling units per building. (4) M-6 Height: It was suggested that developers be allawed grEater height than 2 1/2 stories although same felt the appea- rance of a 2 1/2 story dwelling was better. It was suggested that the ordinance use no "story" designatian but change it to � a specific height allowance. Some felt this would lead to skimpy roof lines and bad design in the dwellings. (5) M-6 Hardcover: There see�d to be general agreement that, instead of 20�, a 30� hardcover be the allowance. It was felt that the height limitation would have to be increased if � only 20� were allaaed. It was noted that the Department of Natural Resources recommend 30� (6) M-6 Property Ownership: The City Attorney felt tha.t the Council should decide whether all tmits on a tract be held in a Homeowner's Association or whether they cauld be held in private ownership. Due to zmsettled questians relating to the • proposed code, the Council directed that another joint meeti.ng be held on December 16, 1975, at 7:30 P.M. in the Orono City Hall. S Cotmcilwanen Butler left at 9:45 P.M. The �yor explained that the current Village basis for collection PARK DEDICATION FEE of Park Dedicatian Fees were leading to counter productive aspects AMENI�MENT' a and for this reason a more desirable method was needed. The , Zoning Administrator's proposal consisted of assessing the fee on a greater or lesser percentage or raw land value to the extent of a each subdivisions density in relatian to the zoning code. Lou Oberha.user felt land v�lue should be a basis for the fee but a maxinaun fee limit per lot should be set. A1 Whitman felt that everyone should contribute to parks and costs should be included in the ad valorem tax for general City distribution. The City , Attorney cited the State Statutes that collection of Park Dedi- cation Fees could be mad.e only at the time of subdivision. An- other suggested by Mayor Searles was a fee per building lot. Brad Van Nest proposed that zones be forgotten and on a ba§is of ten acres divided by 10 for density the following percent of raw land value could be set with a maxir►nAn payment of $300 to $S00 per tmit: 0 to 1 at 2.5�; 1 to 2 at 5g; Z to 4 at 10�; � 4 to 6 at 12�; 6 to 8 at 14�; 8 and up add 1 1/2$ per unit. The percent amoi.mt could either be expressed in land or cash � Jalue. The Van Nest proposal seemed agreeable to the ma.jority of those present. Massengale moved, Paurus seconded, that far purposes of holding a Public Hearing the Couazcil direct the City Attorney to prepare a draft for amendment of the portion S of Ordinance No. 180, relating to the Park Dedication Fee to reflect the Fee Schedule resented by Brad Van Nest with the maxim�un fee to be set at $�500 per lot. Motian, Ayes (4) -Nays (0) . � � � ' MINtTTES OF A SPECIAL COUNCIL N�ETING HELD DEC.EMBER 10, 1975 - PAGE 7. . The Cowncil went on to discuss the need for an updated Com- COMPREI-IENSNE SEWER prehensive Sewer Plan with an effective way to control rural PLAN - UPDATE � characteristics and the possible z�ing of potential problem areas at higher than a twn acre d�ensity requirement. (Coi.mcil- S man Welsh left at 10:10 P.M.) Searles moved, Massengale seconded, that RAsalie DeGrauwe be APPOINTI►�NT - TEb�ORARY appointed to the temporary position of Assistant Zoning Admin- ASSISTANT ZONING istrator and salary adjustments be set at the next Co�mcil ADMINISTRATOR Meeting. Motion, Ayes (3) - Nays (0) . Councilman Paurus called attention to the follow:ing Memorandtan COUNI'Y ROAD N0. 15 � dated 8 December 1975 to Phembers of the Com�amity Advisory C�n- HE1�lEPIN C�JNTY mittee of Sub-Area 3 fro�n Craig Spencer af the Hennepin Cowrty CLASSIFICATI4N Public Works Depa.rtment: At the last CAC �eti.ng it will be recalled that the repressnt- ative from Orono desired to review the proposed functional classification of Cotmty Road 15 with the Orono City Council prior to printing the draft final report. The current (1975) fimctional classification is minor arterial and the proposed (2000) fluictional classification is minor arterial. It was also agreed that the projected traffic volumes for year 2000 would not warrant upgrading of County Road 15 to four lanes. The Orono City Coimcil has met and wants th,e road classified as a scenic parkway. "Scenic parkway" as a set of words to clescri- 7 be the fwiction of County Road 15 represents a proble�n because S the words describe a design type not the fimction. A simi.lar situatian would be to call the road "tw�o land roadway". It is possible for a minor arterial to be designed as a scenic park- way. Also discussed at our meeting was the possibility of f classifying the facility as a collector and the implicatians of such action. With this situation three alternatives exist: a Continue to functionally classify the road as a minor arterial. Under this case a special note could be add.ed to the map noting th,e Cowlty Road 15 is to be two la�e and � landscaped. Create a special classification called scenic parkway and classify the mad as such. F�lanctianally classify the road as a collector and change the jurisdiction to local control. Piease check off the pre£erred alternative and mail to me before December 12, 1975. � Paurus moved, Massengale seconded, that the City adclress a letter to the Ni�mbers of the Hennepin County Transportation Study Committee stating the Village concerns and reco�enda- tions re�ard.ing Co�ty Road No. 15 and that the County create a special classification called "Scenic Parkway" and classify �he r�oad as such. Motion, Ayes (3) - Nays (0) . The Council instructed the City Attorney to inforn� Lee SKI TONKA, INC, '� Primus, owner of 5ki Tanka, Inc., that he is in v}��ation of Ordinance No. 154. ti ; � MINUTES OF A SPECIAL COUNCIL MEETING HELD DECIIyBER 10, 1975 - PAGE 8. � Searles moved, Paunas secoaded, that the Council instruct the ROBERT ECKERT PROPEFiY City Attorney �o settle t�e Robe�t Eckert property law suit in the kay suggested by the City Attorney, Motion, Ayes (3) - Nays (0) . Massengale moved, Paurus seconded, that the r�eting be adjourned ADJOURI�A�NT at 11:30 P.M. t J/ _7 , � � �_ •=�,"•� � • �"� 'c�. z .��� yor rt , ar es - , � . i Attest: � �������� �C�? �'t —� ler istrator, ter , nson � � � � ► � �