HomeMy WebLinkAbout11-27-1979 Council Minutes CTTY or oRorlo
Regular *Zeetinc� of the Orono Council , 7 : 0� P.M.
November 27 , 1979
� The Orono Council r►et on the above date ��ith
the following mernbers nresent: P�a��or Van Nest,
Councilmembers Butler and Paurus. Councilmember
I�urr arrived at 9 : 55 P.P4. Councilrleriber Piassengale
absent. Also present: City Planner Olson, City
Attorney P2alkerson, City Engineer Cook, Public
Works Coordinator rerhardson, Planning Comr.iission
i4ember Jabbour, and Cit_y Clerk Strom. Absent:
City Adr.linistrator Benson.
Ma1or Van Pdest announced that nou� `vas the tir.le and PUBLIC uEARING
place for_ the public hearinc� regarding the ar.menciment CDBG
or pro�ects and activities to be �unded under
Title I of the Housing and Cor.u�unity Act of 1974 .
City Clerk Strom presented the Affidavit of Pub-
lication. Larry Blackstad, IiUD Office, had not
arrived. P'[ayor Van Nest continued the public �
hearing until T�ir. Blackstad' s arrival.
At 8: 45 P.P�. , Larry Blackstad arrived at which
time tsayor Van P1est reconvened the nublic hearinq.
!�4r. Blackstad informed the audience of the nurpose
for the use of funds.
Iioward Meagher, 3980 Dahl Road, inc�uired of the
procedures for appl_ying for rehabilitation funds.
Pir. Blackstad expl.ained that the City sets the
lir_Zit on income, �ahich also includes the numher of
nersons in the household, as to who can a��lv for
funds and how to apply.
Discussion also included the �oint corununity
housing pro�ects for the north and west areas
of the lake, sir�ilar t� the south �?iore areas.
tir. Blackstad invited persons interested to the
joint community housinc� project r.leeting to be
held tlovember 2�3 , 1979 at 7: 30 P.ti, at the Orono
Council Chambers.
Arter all persons present had an opportunitv to
be heard, Psayor Van Nest closed the public
hearing at 9 : 02 P.ts.
Mayor Van idest announced that now �•�as the time PUBLIC HEARITIG
and place for the public hearing for the issuance Inc�ustrial Revenue Bonds
of industrial develonnent revenue bonds f_or the rlavarre Bank
First PJational Bank of Navarre. Cit� Clerk Strort
nresented the Affidavit of Publication. i7o �one
�vas Present concerninc� the public hearinq. ltavor
Van 27est continued the hearing until later in the
evening to allow tirie for interested persons to
arrive. '
(Continued)
REGULAR PIEETIi1G OF THE ORONO COUPICIL, r10VF.M13ER 27 , 1979 Page 2
Bruce Malkerson, City Attornev, rec?uested time PUBLIC HEARING
to review the resolution presented to him this Navarre Bank
evening. (Continued)
At 10: 00 P.P�. , P4ayor Van Nest reconvened the
public hearing for the industrial develo�rlent
revenue bonds for the First Plational Bank of
Navarre. No one �aas present concerning the •
public hearing. P4ayor Van Plest closeci the
public hearing at 10 : 05 P.Pi.
Psayor Van Nest r.ioved, Butler seconded, to con- �
cePtually approve the resolution for the
industrial developrient revenue bonds for the
FirSt rlational Bank of Navarre, subject to
review by the City Attorney, with final
ado�tion at the next Council r,leeting. PZotion,
Ayes (�!) - rdays (0) .
7: 05 P.M.
.
Butler moved, Paurus seconded, to approve the COrdSLNT AGENDA*
Consent Agenda* , subject to rer~ioving item �#6 ,
with all staff data and sup�ortive inf_orrT.iati�n
to be included in the r'Iinutes in the sequence
they occur. Psotion, Aye s (3) - rlavs (0) .
Butler r:loved, Paurus seconded, to approve the *4ITIUTES*
P�inutes of the Regular r2eeting of October 30 , Octoher 30 , 1979
1979. P4otion, Ayes (3) - Nays (0) .
Butler r.ioved, Paurus seconded, to apProve the P1IrIUTFS*
PZinutes of the Canvass Board r'Ieeting o� Canvass Board r4eeting
tdover�er 7 , 1979 . P�otion, Ayes (3) - rdays (0) .
Lee Tomlinson, Park Commission Chairrian, was PARK COrL4ISSION COrti�fENTS
present to introduce Deborah Massen_qale to the
City Council as their recor.unendation to fill
the unexpired terrt of Roland Berglund.
Maj�or . Van Nest moved, Butler seconded, to APPOINTP4ENT
a�point Deborah P4assengale to the Park Com- Deborah P'Iassengale
mission to fill the unexpired ter� of Roland
Berglund. TZotion, Ayes (3) - Nays (0) .
Lee Tomlinson, Park Commission Chairr.lan, also PARF: SU�tVEYS
referred to City Adr,iinistrator Benson' s letter
to him regarding a survey bv the Park Commission
of all City existing and proposed parks. The
City Council assured him that expenses for
mailings would he reir.ibursed to the memhers
for their work on the survey.
R�GULAR rSEETING OF THE OROITO COLJNCIL, �IOVEMBFR 27 , 1979 Page 3
Councilrnember Paurus, Orono' s representative to T*1CD P,EPORT
the Lake P4innetonka Conservation District, informed
the City Council that the LP1CD will hold a nublic
hearing at the P�innetonka Center of 11rts and
�ducation in the cafeteria on December 12 , 1979
at 8 : 00 P.r4, concerning regulations o� air traffic
on Lake r4innetonka.
P10 comments from the Planning Cor.�r.iission. PLANNIrI� CO^�IP4ISSION
Butler moved, Paurus seconded, to ap�rove the COP4PREHrP1SIVE PLAN*
Cornprehensive Plan for the City of Index�endence. Indenendence
Motion, Ayes (3) - T1avs (0) .
Alan Olson, Cit_y Planner, informed the CitV COr1nR£HET�SIVE PLAN
Council that Gunnar Isberg, Cit_y Planning Orono
Consultant, presented him with a draft of
Orono' s Comprehensive Plan this afternoon. ,
Mr. Olson stated that he will be forwarding -
it to the City Council.
Pdo cor.unents from the public. PUBLIC COPirqENTS
Alan Olson, Cit_y Planner, entered into the SUBDTVISION*
record the following rec�uest for a subdivision ?_440 Pdorth Shore Drive
of Kathleen Gluek, 2440 2lorth Shore Drive, #474
dated November 20, 1979 , which states: Kathleen �luek
Pirs. �luek has coriplied with all of the rec�uire-
ments allowing final approval o_f her t�ao-lot
plat. The drainfield for the existinq house has
been repaired and approved b1� the septic inspector.
Staff recommends approval suh-ject to the enclosed
final resolution. �
Council P�ieeting - November 27, 1979
Butler rloved, Paurus seconded, to adopt Resolution RESOLU'?'ION #1094*
#1094 , A Resolution Approving The Plat Of ?Cathleen' s FCathleen' s French Lake
French Lake. Motion, Ayes (3) - Nays (0) ,
Butler rloved, Paurus seconded, to adopt Resolution RESOLU"'ION #1095*
#1095, A Resolution Approving Lot Area, Lot Henry Kingman
�aidth And Side Setback Variances But Denying 1185 �'erndale Road West
Lakeshore Setback Or Hardcover �Iariances For #49�
Henry Kingman, 1185 Ferndale Road �+?est. rlotion, .
Ayes (3) - P1ays (0) .
R�GULAR MEETIN� Or THE ORONO COIJNCIL, 2dO�7E14BER 27 , 1979 Page 4
Alan Olson, City Planner, entered into the record CONDITIO?7AL USE P�RMIT &
the conditional use nermit and var_iance request VARIANCE
of Tir.�othy Peterson, 280 Orono Orchard Road, 280 Orono Orchard Road
dated November ?_0, 1979, which states: #500
Timothy Peterson
This application has twice previously been on
the Council agenda and been tabled at the request
of the applicant. It is being placed back on the
agenda because two deadlines for information suh-
mittal have past without complete information
supplied, because the application has not been
amended to con�orm to the City' s performance
standards for height, and because of continuing
work on the tower which resulted in two citations
being issued last c�eek.
^he antenna was originally installed last spring
without any Permits. Upon receipt of complaints,
the building inspector visited the site on P�Iav 31,
1979 and advised P4r. Peterson of the violations
and the need for an application and Council approval
if the tower were to remain. After reneated calls
by staff, an application was made on Jul�� 20 , 1979 .
The original application was for one 35 ft, antenna
(as already built) plus a second 120 ft. antenna
to be used for corunercial and hobbv use. ?'he
Planning Commission recommended denial o� this
application on September 10 , 1979. (The application
had been tabled at the August 13, 1979 meetinc�
because the applicant was not present and had been
reviewed in work session at the August 27, 1979 meeting. ) �
At the Septer.mber 25, 1979 Council meeting, the
application was tabled at the recruest of the applicant
although Council did see the packet and did rec�uest
additional inf_orr_mation as listed in my letter of
September 27 , 1979 . After this letter, I received
a call from the applicant' s attorney who prom?sed
the requested information and who said that the
applica}i_on was to be amended to one 65 ft. antenna,
therefore, removinq any need for a variance. See r.my
letter of October 10 , 1979. ��Tith thi� understandin_q,
and lacking the information, Council again on October 16,
1979 tabled the application until the November 13, 1979
meeting.
The ilovember 5, 1979 , cut-off date for the November 13,
1979 agenda passed with receipt of a letter from
PZr. Newrian amending the application to one hobby
antenna as built, with copies of the FCC amateur radio
license but no other information. lsy letter of *Iovember 8,
1979 set a new final deadline of November 19 , 1979 for
all information requested on September 27, 1979.
(Continued)
REC�ULAR P4EE`^ING OI' TH� ORONO COUPdCT_L, rao��rr���� 27 , 1979 Paqe 5
As of rlovember 20 , 1979 , the CitV has not received COr1DITIONAL USE PERr'[IT &
a list of equipment nor power in use, has not VA_T2TANCE
received an engineering desic�n for the tower 280 Orono Orchard Road
(an undesic�nated catalog is useless) and has not (Continued)
received any offer of lec�al hardship explaining
the need for a 91 ft. antenna.
As the application stands toda_y, ��ith the survev
verification, P4r. Peterson reauests the follo`aing:
l. A conditional us permit for one 1_zobby antenna
2 . A variance to nerrnit keeninq the existinc� 91. 3 ft.
antenna vs. maxirturl 65 ft, per 34. 033
rdote, that the photos enclosed are sorle taYen b��
Tom .7acobs on Septernber 18 , 19 79 , mhe�� show one
horizontal heam on the toP vs. the two in place
after the �oork done on ?lovember 15, 197� . I�lso
t��re is a hole dug for the foundation of the
second antenna near the corner of the house. �
Council rieeting - Tdover.tber 27, 1979
Messrs. 2Jewman and Jaeger, attorneys for Pdr. Peterson,
���ere present. rir. & r'�rs. Edstror.l, 19� nrono Orchard
Road; r1r. & P4rs. Rokke, 180 Orono Orchard Road; and
P4r. [7agener, 1230 j�oodhill Avenue, were �resent in
opposition to the antennas. P�r. Peterson was not
�resent.
rir. Hugh Jae_qer stated that neither he nor P4r.
Peterson had enough notice for tonight' s neeting.
He stated that he had only a short time to prepare
for the meeting, 3nc? that Pir. Peterson did not
have time to make arrangements to attend.
t•Sayor Van Nest: You indicated that you did not
have adequate notice of this meetinc�, �aould vou
like us to table this until the next meeting?
Mr. Jaeger: I1o.
t4avor Van Nest: You made the charge that you did
not get adequate notice for P'ir. Peterson to be
here. i9ould you like us to table this? I want
��ou to have all the tir.me vou need to prepare.
Mr. Jaeger: At this time, we are Prepared. T^le
want to proceed.
The record should show that this iter_1 was before
the Council on September 25, 1979 and was tabled
because the applicant was not present. It was
on the agenda for' October 16 , 1979 and aqain was
tab?ed because the applicant was not present and
had requested additional time to qather information (Continued)
RFGULAR PIEETIPdG OF THE ORONO COUPJCTL, NOVEP4BFR ?.7, 1979 Paqe 6
in support of his application as rec�uested in CONDTmIONAL USE PERPIIT
writing by the City on September 27 , 1979. On VARIArdCE
October 16, 1979 , the Council tabled the iter.l 280 Orono Orchard Road
until the November 13 , 1979 rmeeting (one month (Continued)
delay) and notice was given to Mr. Peterson in
writing. The applicant failed to provide the
information by the agenda deadline and it did
not appear on the November 13, 1979 ac7enda.
On iJovember 8, 1979, a letter was written to P'lr.
Newman (cc: Peterson) stating the new deadline
and that review would be either b� the Planning
Cormmission on November 26 , 1979 or, more likely,
by the Council on Pdovember 27, 1979 . Thus , the
applicant had 19 days notice of the November 27,
1979 Council raeetinq and two month' s tirie to
prepare the requested information and his
presentation.
P�r. Jaeger commented that Mr. Peterson felt that
the City was unfair in issuing caarrents against
�
him. Mr. Jaeger also stated that Mr. Peterson
uses his radio as a hobby and has spent up to
$50, 000 on it and also corununicates world-wide,
that P�Ir. Peterson rents the property with an
option to purchase it, and is out of town on
business and will not be able to attend a Council
meeting until Januar��, 1980.
Councilmember Paurus: "�ahy did thi� st�uctur_e cro un
without a permit?"
rsr. Jaeger: "I don't know. ��Jhat you see is a
temporary structure. "
iir. Jaeger stated that Orono' s statutes were vaque
and unconstitutional and infrinqe on personal
rights of Mr. Peterson. The request for an
inspection of his property is an invasion of
privacy. r4r. Jaeger questioned the �urisdiction
of_ the building code and was advised of the State
code and Orono' s history of code adoption, including
adoption of the current edition.
Mr. Bernard Fdstrom, 190 Orono Orchard Road, stated
that he was concerned about the foundation for the
antenna, if it had been installed properl��,
that there were no guy wires and that if there had
been no �ermit, there were no insnections and no
structural review for strenc�th and overturninq forces.
He was worried about children climbinc� the tower
and falling of�. He had been at the Planning Commission
r.teeting and was concerned that the tower was beinc�
used for business purposes. He c�uestioned �ahether
� a State electrical permit had been obtained for the
wiring done, including the motor he sees on tor� of
the tower. He says the tower failed on�e this
suru*ier, which should be adequate nroof that the
design is �nsurficient. Fie says a P4innesota rnc?ineer
should certify the design. (Continued)
RErULAR PIEETIN� OF THE OROrJO COUNCIL, NOVEr'IF3ER 27 , 1979 Page 7
P4arsha Rokke, 180 Orono Orchard Road, stated that COrdDITIONAL tJSE PERMIT
she is against the antenna and also has inter- VARIANCE
ference on here telephone and television. She 280 Orono Orchard Road
said the antenna has an adverse ef.fect on the (Continued)
value of her property.
Mr. Piaurice ��aac�ener, 1230 Woodhill Avenue, stated
that he wants it to be on record that he is against
the antenna and that it is a nuisance.
tZr. Jaeger said the City had been given engineering
drawings. P4r. Olson said, "No" , the Cit�� h�d heen
given an unmarked catalog which did not even
indicate which parts might have been used. There
was no erection drawing and no certi_fication.
The Council questioned staff if all information
on hand was adequate. P2r. Olson said, "No" , that
�ve need the follo��ing: Certified structural design;
a list of equipment and power demand and an accurate
survey of the actual height. �9e have received a
survey but it was done before the repairs of
November 15, 1979 and before the second top piece
was added; theref_ore, we cannot no�a be certain of
the height. Also, �•�e have never had any written
justi�ication of hardships to justifv grantinc�
a variance despite specifically asking for this
in ��riting on the application form.
Mr. Jaeger said the work done on Plovember 15 , 1979
was only to repair what had fallen down in ,7uly, 1979.
Psr. Jaeger discussed the applicant' s hardships of
the type of use he was making of the antenna. He
referred to some legal cases which would prove his
point. P4r. Malkerson asked to be sent the cases
or at least sent citations so he. could revie�v the
cases. Mr. Jaeger said he r�ould prepare a
memorandum of law.
P'irs. Edstrom said she never saw t�ao horizontal
pieces on top of the antenna before November 15,
1979.
Pir. Van Nest asked Psr. Jaeger for hardships to the
land, the lot, which preclude conforminc7 to the
City' s perforr.iance standards.
Councilmember Paurus inquired of PZr. Jaeger if
Psr. Peterson would be willing to cease and desist
using his radio until this matter has been resolved.
Pir. Jaeger answered that he doubted if P2r. Peterson
would cease and desist.
(Continued)
REGULAR P4EETING OF THE ORONO COUNCIL, PdOVEMBER 27 , 1979 Page 8
Councilmember Butler: I know other amateur radio CONDITIONAL USE PERP�IT
users who have no antenna at all but who use other VARIANCE
means of transmission. ��Thv can't P�r. Peterson do 280 Orono Orchard Road
that? + (Continued)
r1r. Jaeger: Because of the type of uses he has;
because of the places he must call.
Councilr:�ember Butler: Do you r�ean the comr.lercial
uses he applied for?
r�r. Jaeger: No. He travels freauentl_y and wants
to be in contact with his far,lily.
Councilmember Butler: Can he use the telephone?
Councilmember Paurus: If he is gone, why can' t he
sto� using the radio until this is resolved?
Mayor Van Nest: I have seen no demonstrated hard- �
ships. I want staff to talk to the FCC and the Cit��
attorney should review the cases. I want to have
Mr. Peterson before us to state his case and to hear
the concerns of the Council and the neighbors.
PZayor Van Nest moved, Paurus seconded, to table
the rec�uest of P'Ir. Peterson, 280 Orono Orchard
Road, until the Decer�er 11, 1979 Council rleeting,
to present an updated survey, a written statement
as to the hardships necessary f_or a variance,
for P2r. Peterson to be present, and action to be
taken at that meeting. t4otion, Ayes (3) - P1avs (0) .
Staff noted to r'ir. Jaeger that the deadline for
written cor.unents is December 5, 1979,
R�C�ULAR iIEETIrdC� OF '='HE OROi10 COUiJCIL, !IO�IFr�B��2 27, 1979 Page 9
Alan Olson, City Planner, entered into the record PLAN RFVIE?a
the nlan for 3701 Shoreline Drive of_ the Develonment 3701 Shoreline Drive
Group, Inc. dated tlovember ?.0, 1979 , which states: #507
Development �roup, Inc.
Since the last Council meetinc�, the Hennenin Soil
and [��ater Conservation District has met on the
site with the City and Developer and has relocated
the edge of the actual wetlands as shown on the
attached plan revised November 15, 1979.
The access location has been revised t� rlatch with
the new Theater road and an alternate exit arranc�e-
ment is suggested over the ditch to the church lot.
The parking lot is 10 ft. from the road, as before,
and at least 26 ft. .fror.l the edge o� the wetlands
at all locations except that the ���est edG�e is
within about 10 ft, of the ditch under Count�� Road
#15.
A separate merlo adc�resses the zoninc� historyo uf the
area. The apnlicants r.►et with Jeanne Piabusth an�i
I, and have no objection to rezoning of this property
to B-4. I recor►riend that the Citv initiate this
rezoning and that the actual location of the zoning
boundary be determined during that review. It will
take at least 30 da��s to schedule the rezoning
hearing.
Assuriing the property is rezoned to B-4 along some
line to include all of this development, the
following items are noted as part of the plan
review:
Assuming B-4 Zone
Dry ground area - above staked w�tlands 48 , 300 sc�, ft.
Building ground area 3, 600 sq. ft.
Parking and other hardcover area 11, 800 sq. _ft.
Percentage of hardcover 15, 400 sq. ft. = 31. 9%
Building floor area - Gross 7, 200 sq. ft.
- net (assume l00) 6,480 sct. ft.
Parking stalls - required 1/200 33
- provided 31
Loading berth - none provided
Therefore, this �lan would require the followinq zoning
decisions:
l. Variance for the number of parking stalls, now
short two spaces, rlote, this variance could be
eliminated if connection is built to the church
parking lot and those spaces are utilized. On
the other hand, if B-1 zoning were retained, the
parking requirement would increase to one space/
150 sq. ft. or 43 spaces, meaning a 12 space
variance.
(Continued)
R�GULAR r1EETIid� OF ^'H� OROP10 COUidC?L, r10VEr1BER 27, 1979 Page 10
2. Variance - �ront yard setback for narking PLAN REVIET^I
20 ft. required/10 ft. Provided = 50$ hardship 3701 Shoreline Drive
is lot slope and wetlands location. • (Continued)
3. Variance - no loadinq berth �r�videc�. I
recor.u�end that a berth be rec�uired and variance
be denied.
�} . Conditional use perrtit - fillinc�, grading and
encroaching �vithin designated flood plain -
This variance is required if driveway connection
to church is to he installed. '-'his work also
rec�uires review by T'ICT�D and DP1R.
5. Conditional use permit is reRuired for office
use if_ B-1 zoning is retained, plus additional
variances f_or parking stalls , setbacks , use of
residential property, etc. Rezoninc� eliminates
these concerns.
6. Lot combination is required o� two existinc�
parcels in any case.
7. Special assessments - amounts levied include
four commercial water units but no sewer units.
Per MWCC formula, 7200 sq. ft. of�ice building =
three units. Therefore , water is paid but `ae
need three sewer units.
Alan Olson r►emo dated Plovember 21, 1979 , states:
The attached maps graphically explain the zoninq
historv of_ the area south of Countv Road 15 and
west of_ Casco Point Road.
Julv 10, 1950
Town Ordinance adopting first zoning-entire area
included in CASCO POIPIT DISTRICi which was defined
entirelv residential.
Decer,iber 17, 1954
Village Ordinance No. 1 adopts all To�an Ordinances.
P4arch 28, 1955
Ordinance No. 3-Cor�mercial desiqnation on [lest
250 ft. of Lot 7 only
Septerlber 5, 1967
Ordinance No. 93 (1968 Rezoninc�)
Ordinance No. 3 - Conrtercial District changed
to B-1; all residential to R-1D.
(Continued)
R�GULAR P4EE'^ING OF THE ORONO COUNCIL, TIO�IEPIBFR ?_7 , 1979 Paqe 11
Deceriber 19 , 1974 PLAN RFVIEW
Ordinance r1o. 172 (1974 Rezoning) 3701 Shoreline Drive
Adopted official map sho�ving B-1 all the wa�� �Continued)
hetween Casco Point Road and the wetlands.
Legal descriptions drawn but not puhlished
include a rectangular area of Lot 6 .
February 28, 1977
Council was reviewinc� Navarr_e area comrmer_cial
zones after creation of B-5. Conceptual anproval
was given to rezone frorn B-1 to LR-1C, the south
nortion of the North�aestern Bell nroperty on Lot 7,
but no resolution nor ordinance has ever been
adopted to implement this.
"'here has been no other zonina action affectinc�
this or adjoining propertl� in the history oF the
Citv.
Council Meeting - ilovember 27, 1979
I'Ir, r4cnueen, P�r. John rlelson, developer, and
Mr. Louis Oberhauser, attorney, u�ere present. r
Discussion included rezoning, parkinc� area,
and a coru-�on driveway with the church.
PZayor Van P1est moved, Butler seconded, to
conceptually approve the plan before us with
the recomr.►endation of a comrnon drive�aav with
the church, if that is not acceptable with
the church, a variance will be c�ranted
based on the hardship of the narrowness o�
the lot, contincTent on a rezoning application
o� B-4 for the front of the lot and R-1C for
the back of lot, combination of lots, �.
to save as many trees as oossihle, and a 10 '
variance from County Road #k15. Motion,
Ayes (3) - Pdays (0) .
Alan Olson, CitV Planner, entered into the record rIOR'^H SFiORE DRTVE P'IARIrI
the following concerning the 1979 conmercial 1979 License
dock license for the North Shore Drive rlarina,
dated November ?.l, 1979 , which states:
This memo is in resnonse to Psr. Douglas' letter
or Plovember 13, 1979 , delivered at the last
Council rieeting. I respond to his numbered iteris:
1. On June 25, 1979 , i�sr. Douglas delivered to the
Cit�� a copy of a Harold Olson surve�� dated
.� June 5, 1975 as revised April 18 , 1979 .
(Continued)
R��ULAR t�2EETING OF THE OROP10 COUidCIL, T10VEP4BER 27 , 1979 Page 12
This survey clearlv shows the 1979 innlace NORTH SI30RE DRIVE r�IARIN
docks extending 245 feet frorl the 194� shore- (Continued)
line and 284 feet from the tirlber retaining
wall which is the same as the 930. 4 shoreline
on September 11, 1979 (water 12" deep at the
wall that day and, therefore , also ?_84 feet
from the 929.4 shoreline) . It also sho�vs the
docks 270 feet from the April 18 , 1979 shoreline
drawn on the plans. In each case, this extension
is a clear violation of the LMCD and the City
200 ft. limit on docks , no matter how r4r. Hork
wishes to interpret the shoreline location.
Using the well established 929 . 4 elevation, the
docks are 84 ft. bevond the allowable encroachment
at their worst location on the west side of the
property and 15 ft. bevond on the east side.
Douglas' statement that the lake water levels
vary is no excuse for dock length violations
in times of ordinary or hic�li water levels as
has been the case all this year. His survey
clearly shows the docks well be��ond all shoreline
variations so there is no excuse for permanent
dock encroachment. `
In addition, Hork' s seawall (which has been
erected over the years under no permit authoritv
from any agency having jurisdiction) actuallv
acts to stabilize and define the shoreline
location at one point regardless of high �aater
location. As r.leasured by the City and Lr4CD
inspectors, the 929 . 4 elevation is at the base
of the seawall. All dock rleasurerlents should
be taken fror_1 this location; this actually
benefits Hork in years of high water as is the
case this year.
mhe fact is that Douqlas aclmits these are seasonal
docks. Thev could easily be arranged each year
to conform to the varying caater levels. If the
lake level were to recede, the docks could then
follow the interpretation of shoreline. '.I'his
is part of the purPose of the annual license
review, to allow dock extensions in low water
years to be sure the operator has his full 200 ft.
allowable dock use area, yet assuring the public
that these docks are then drawn hack in ordinar_y
or high water vears.
This approach is a common sense one and has been
consistently followed b_y the City and the LNICD.
The City has for years been tellinc� Hork his
docks were too long and exceeded 200 ft. encroach-
ment. Hork has for vears maintained otherwise
which is whv the City has given hirl ever�� op�ortunitv
to present a survey in proof of his contention.
(Continued)
REGULAR MEETING OF THE OROP70 COTJrdCTL, rIO��EP4F3FR 27, 1979 Page 13
G�hen we finally see the survey, it confirms NORTH SHORE DRIVE T'IARIN
the City longstanding r.ieasurements and denies (Continued)
Iiork' s contentions of comnliance. The Cit��
has dela�ed action all year qiving Hork
every opportunity to prove his case. He has
heen unable to do so.
2 . No additional corirnent is necessarv except to
say that two years ago in approval of the dr_y
stacking aqreerlent, Hork a�reed to comply
with Chapter 73 and Chapter 34 Ordinances.
Iie has failed to do so. Also, surve��inc� does
not normally take frorr► Februar_y (when` the
original pror.mise was made bv Douglas) until
August (when the City received the cony) . In
fact, the survey itself is dated April 13 , 1979 ,
Delays frort April (which is prior to the boating
season) until Auqust can onl�� be attributed to
the applicant. As for husiness concerns, there
has been absolutely no showinq that the docks
cannot be rearranqed within the 200 ft. lirnit
as has been done at other P4arinas, expeciallv
considering the dry stacking which is unique
at this marina.
3. The baf_fle weir and berm were to be constructed
by Septerlber 30, 1977, over two ��ears ago per
the terms of the dry stack ac�reement. In fact,
Part of the weir construction �vas actuallv in
place prior to the agreement and without any
plans submitted or approvals given hv the Citv
or [•7atershed District. ^his is a non-excuse
for non-performance.
4. Item 2 of the stipulation references rec�uired
landscaping per Fxhibit B which was siqned by
all parties including Hork and Douglas. Exhibit
B �hot•;s "hec?c?es" anc� "tree�" hut no .fence. Exhibit
B was modified by the City at the rec�ruest of Hork
� to include the "fence" as built and to include
"lilac hedges, " on October 16 , 1977! The fence
was not a part of the original agreer�ent. The
City compromised to allow the fence but Iiork has
never installed the other shrubbery as oriqinallv
aqreed upon or as modified.
5. ^here has been advertising placed on the fence
by Hork making it in ef_fect a giant billboard.
Some panels are loose. Some paint is Peeling.
Again, we have the City compromising from the
well designed wood fence of residential character
imagined by the City Council when the amendment
to Exhibit B was agreed upon, to the industrial
character metal fence actually installed. The
least that could be expected is adequate maintenance
of what is there.
(Continued)
REGULAR P4EETII]G OF '^IiE OROP10 COUi1CIL, NO�ITPIBFR 27 , 1979 Page 14
6. The City staff and the Council have in rmanv NORTH SHORE DRIVE MARIN
meetings with Douglas and Hork always held the (Continued)
same position - namely, that dock use area and
200 ft. dock length requirements r►ust be met
by the marina. This is true for this vear,
last year, and every year. Each year Hork has
submitted an anplication based upon the 1975
survey which showed dock encroachment beyond
200 ft. Each year the City questioned this.
Each year Fiork promised to prove otherwise.
This year, in February, the Citv Council refused
to accept the same survey without such revisions
and proof. Every year, including this �ear,
the City has tried to work with Hork to ensure
the continuation of his business activities while
still protecting the rights and interests of
the public to the full enjoYment and use of Lake
P•linnetonka, and Ynsuring the riqhts and interests
of the abutting residential pr_operty owners
from over-use and encroachment bv the r.larina.
The considerations given Hork b�� the City are
the same, and then some, as given to any other
business by the City.
7. The City has always expeditiously issued annual
dock licenses to marinas in compliance with the
ordinances. In certain cases, including North
Shore Drive P4arina, the marina has asked for
additional tirle to submit materials in support
of their cases, to prove compliance, or to
revise the dock layout to becorme conforming.
The Citv has always granted these delays.
As part of this cooperation, the City has never
tagged nor enjoined marina operation durinc7
these periods despite continuing violations
or lack of compliance. Only when the rtarina
has refused to cooperate; has the Citv been
forced to enf_orce the ordinances. This is
only fair to the majority of marina operators
who do conform to City and LP�CD ordinances.
To do other�aise than to seek equal enforcement
would be to place an unconstitutional burden
on the other operators to the c�.etriment of
fhe public and to the special advantage of Hork.
In response to Douglas' stater_ient as to license
denial, he is well aware that there are proven
on-going violations, that there has been no
attempt by Hork to revise his dock layout within
200 ft. of the shore and that many smaller issues
and rec�uireraents have not been completed as
agreed upon.
(Continued)
REC�ULAR P4EETING OF THE ORONO COUPICTL, P10VEM�3FR 27 , 1979 Paqe 15
In 1970 , the LMCD and then the Cit�� adonted NORTH SHORE DRIVE r�IARIN
the 200 ft. dock use area. Now, nine ��ears (Continued)
later, the City hears the same storv f_rort
North Shore P4arina. Other marinas all
around the Lake have reduced their docks
and cor.lplied with this ordinance. I3ork ' s
refusal to accept the evidence of his own
surveyor sugqests the Cit_y has no alternative.
Council P4eeting - November 27 , 1979
Mr. Steve Emnings, Larry Hork' s attornev, was
present and stated that he had no new information.
After Councilmember Hurr arrived at 9 : 55 P.P�. ,
the following rtotion was passed.
Butler moved, Hurr seconded, to adopt Resolution RESOLU`�'ION �1096
#1096 , A Resolution To Deny The 1979 Commercial North Shore Drive P4arin
Dock License Application Of North Shore Drive License
riarina. 2dotion, Aves (4) - P•Jays (0) .
Alan Olson, City Planner, entered into the record SEL��ER ASSESSMEi1T PIAIVER
the request for sewer assessment waiver of 666 monkawa Road
Donald Lindall, 666 Tonkawa Road, dated November 19 , Donald Lindall
1979 , which states:
In January, 1979 , Psr. Lindall requested waiver of
a sewer assessr.ment on property he was purchasing
along Tonkawa Road. Council conceptuall��
approved waiver of one unit on Februarv 9 , 1979
subject to several conditions, all of_ which have
now been completed.
The propertv consisted of two separate parcels
owned by different people. PIN 0006 had a small
cabin on it; PIN 0007 had a larger house.
Lindall bought both parcels in August, 1979 (after
Council action) and they have been legallv
combined.
A building permit was issued in September, 1978
for addition to the main house. `^he sewer has
been connected to this house. Al1 plur.lbing has
been removed from the cabin makinc� it effectively
an out-building used only for storage. The
coribined lot then contains one house and one
storage building.
24r. Lindall now rec�uests final approval of one
sewer unit waiver. The complication is that he
has Prepaid all assessrlents because of a
refinancing he did earlier this month. (Continued)
R�GULAR PIEETING OF iHE ORONO COUNCIL, P10��EMBER 27, 1979 Page 16
Also, the cabin Parcel 0006 was part of_ the SEt•TER ASSESSMENT ��dAIVER
aPpellant case under the previous owner. See (Continued)
Tom Kuehn' s financial breakdown.
As of this time, it apPears as if the City
o�aes Mr. Lindall $1,253. 36 for overpayment because
of the appeal settlement. This is automatic.
In addition, if the Council desires to waive
the unit on Parcel 0006 , the amount rer.maining is
$1, 820. 70 which would also have to be refunded.
Total ref_und would he �3, 074 . 06.
2dote that the waiver would be onlv that amount
of the unit charge (not lateral) remaininq to be
paid as of the actual request for waiver received
November 6, 1979. This is consistent with past
precedent.
Council Meeting - Pdovember 27 , 1979
Mayor Van Nest moved, Paurus seconded, to aPnrove
the request of Donald Lindall, 666 Tonkawa Road,
_f_or sewer assessment waiver in the amount of
$1, 820. 70. P4otion, Ayes (3) - NaVs (0) .
P�Iichael Gaffron, Septic System Inspector, was T�UNICIPAL NEEDS LIST
present to explain his riemo concerning an
application for placement of unsewered areas on
Pdunicipal Needs List, dated Pdovember 20 , 1979 ,
which states:
In order to be eligible for future Federal and
State funding for municipal sewage treatment
projects (i.e. sewer extensions, corimunity
drainfields, etc. ) , Orono had to first be placed
on the MPCA' s Municipal Needs List (rSNL) . As the
August 13th letter from Perry Beaton explains, we
had to complete a survey form for each area we
wanted placed on the riNL. I completed and returned
surveys to the P�IPCA for the following six areas in
Orono: 1) Minnetonka Bluff_s, 2) West Ferndale/
Shoreline, 3) Crystal Bay, 4) North Shore Drive,
5) Stubbs Bay Northeast, 6) Stubbs Bay Northwest
(See attached letter to PCA dated October 10, 1979
and attached map) .
I recently received a call from P'is. Thurston of
the P7PCA who stated that while the surveys we sent
then were acceptable, they must also be reviewed
by Metro Council and the P��JCC, and would we please
send them copies.
(Continued)
REGULAR I�4EETING OI' "'HE ORONO COUNCIL, P10�1�r�BER 27 , 1979 Page 17
Before we proceed with this step, I must caution P4UNICIPAL NEEDS LIST
the Council that the six areas surveyed are not (Continued)
all included as .future study areas in our existinc�
Comprehensive Sewer Plan. Specificall��, the
Stubbs Bay areas are not part of the most recent
plan. I have not been involved with Orono' s
negotiations with P�[�JCC regarding our Comprehensive
Sewer Plan and the P�USA Line. Staff needs Council
direction for the next step in this sensitive matter.
The possible alternatives are:
l. Send copies of all six surveys to rZetro Council
and MWCC; i.e. proceed as requested.
2. Drop one or more of the studv areas due to conflict
with existing Corlprehensive Sewer Plan, and
send surveys for the remaining areas, mhis
will likely result in local fundinc� of any future
projects in the areas dropped, including alternate
comrmunity drainfields.
3. Drop the whole idea of trying to c�et on the MNT�,
and use local funding for all future projects
as necessary.
4. Other alternatives?
Council rseetinq - rdovermber 27 , 1979
Paurus moved, P4ayor Van Nest seconded, to approve
the above memo from Piichael Gaffron, Septic System
Inspector, concerning �lace-nP.azt of unsewered areas
on the Municipal Needs List. rZotion, Ayes (3) -
Nays (0) .
Michael Gaffron, Septic System Inspector, presented NORTH SHORE DRIVE SE��7F:F
the City Council with a memo regarding holding
a public information meeting to discuss sewer
problems at North Shore Drive area, dated Pdovember 19 ,
1979 , which states:
Based on generally a favorable response both verbally
and through questionnaire returns , I am recommending
that we call a public inforr.mation r.meeting for sometime
in PloverLber or early December to discuss alternative
solutions to the sewer problems on North Shore Drive.
The properties involved are shown on the attached
sheet. Iae would handle this meeting much the same
as the one for Psinnetonka Bluffs/West Ferndale. I
would expect to meet with Glenn Cook prior to this
public information r.meeting to discuss routing alternatives
for extending sewer laterals to serve various parts of
the area.
(Continued)
RrGULAR PIEETING OF THF ORONO COUIJCIL, NOVEMBER 27, 1979 Page 18
Questions we would hope to be able to ans+wer at NORTH SHORE DRIVE SEG9EF
this meeting would include: (Continued)
1. [Jhat is the Prohler.l? iahich specific properties
should be included and why?
2. �Jhat are routing alternatives? ��That is a rouqh
estimated cost for each alternative, including
using septic systems and/or rlethoc�s other than
sewer hookup?
3. ��7ould Metro Council force sewer on us in the
end anyhow?
Attached to this memo, I have included a re�ort on
svstem conditions for each of the �ro�erties
involved, as well as a discussion of possible
alternatives, including a cormmunity septic s_y�tem.
Please note that this is one of the areas which
we have asked to have included on the PZPCA' s P�Sunicipal
Pdeeds List for possible funding of sewaqe treatment
projects.
Council I�ieeting - November ?_7 , 1979
Paurus moved, P4ayor Van Nest seconded, to apnrove
the above memo and instructed staff to set a date
at the next Council meeting for an informational
meeting concerning the sewer probler_ls on North
Shore Drive. P4otion, Aves (3) - Nays (0) .
Alan Olson, City Planner, entered into the record
F'EiJCE ORDI�tANCE
a merio regarding a proposed fence ordinance
dated November 6, 1979 , which states:
The attached draft No. 2 contains several minor
corrections or clarifications of supporting
sections, plus a rewrite of_ Sections 957 & 958,
the "meat" of the regulations.
The sense of direction at the last Council meetinc�
was to allow onl_y 42" high, 200 oPaque fences with
all higher/denser fences and walls beinq variances
(or conditional use permits) .
While I agree that one cannot foresee all situations,
I strongly believe that such a lirmitation would be
overly restrictive. I believe that Council, Planning
Commission and staff have enough collective experience
to write into the code reasonahle situations where
taller or more opac�ue fences, or even masonry walls
are entirely acceptable to Orono' s cor_mr.iunit�� standards,
or even necessary by our lifestyle.
(Continued)
.
RFGULAR PIEETING OF THE ORONO COUTICTL, rdO�TEr1BER 27, 1979 Page 19
Thus , I have added statements of purpose and nolicy FENCE ORDINANCE
to these sections and additional standards or (Continued)
conditions f_or installation of taller fences and/or
walls. On close exar.mination, I think that you will
find these standards tight, yet reasonable. Thev
are workable from an administrative viewpoint.
I welcome discussion about reasons for the standards
as written and/or additional changes to specific
performance standard circurnstances. I flat out
recommend against going the strict variance/
conditional use permit route as beinc� unnecessarV
and wasteful of the tir.le and resources of all of
us .
I currently plan to have the public hearing scheduled
for the Planning Cor.ir_iission' s Decernber 10 , 1979
meeting.
Council Meeting - November 27, 1979
Jabriel Gabbour, Planning Corunission rmertber, �aas
present. He stated that his opinion �aas that
the proposed ordinance was too restrictive.
Alan Olson, Cit�� Planner, entered into the record ACCFSSORY BUILDINGS
the following concerning accessory buildinc�s
dated Plovember 21, 1979 , which states:
After discussion at the Joint Planninq Corlmission/
Council meeting on Plovember 17, 1979 , and several
rerminders from the Council bef_ore that, I believe
that now is the time to make some sir_mple armend-
ments to the accessorv building sections of the
zoning code. A public hearing is scheduled For
the Planning Commission' s Decer.iber 10, 1979
meeting right after the hearing on the fence
ordinance.
Section 31. 300 is quite permissi�Te now with no
restriction on the number of accessorv huildings
(except by hardcover) ; no story restriction on
height; and no area restriction except 1, 000 sc�.
ft. which is equivalent to a 20' X 50 ' buildinc�
or a five-car garage.
I suggest that the intent of the comprehensive
nlan and zoning code can hetter be achievecl if
the size, height, and nurmber of accessorv build-
ings are more closely related to the size of each
lot and the densitv of the neic�hborhood. ��7e
are after all a rural/urban Citv and the need5
of rural residents is far different than the
capacity of urban lots to support nurierous
accessory buildinc�s. (Continued)
RE(�ULAR r4FETING OF TI3E ORONO COUNCIL, rIO��Fr'[BER 27, 1979 Page 20
Experience also suc�c�ests that over-sizeci or multi- ACCF:SSOR� BUILDIN�S
story accessorv buildinc�s too often are used or (Continued)
converted for non-residential or apartment
purPoses in direct conflict with the code.
An actual ordinance draft �aill �e done be�ore the
Decerlber 10 & 11, 1979 meetinc�s , after I receive
feedback .from the following suggestions :
l. Tdumber and size of accessorv t�uildings on
residential lots
a) on lots of 10 , 000 sc�. _ft. or less c�ross
area: no more than one accessory buildinc�,
not to exceed 600 sq. ft, in area (24 � 24.
double garaqe = 576 sc�. �t. )
b) on lots in excess of 10 , 000 sR. ft. but
less than 43,560 sq. ft. gross area: no
more than t�vo accessor_y buildings, not to
exceed l, 000 sc�, ft. in total area
c) on lots in excess of one acre but less
that three acres : no more than two accessory
}�uildinc�s, neither of which shall exceed
l, 000 sc�. ft, in area
d) on lots in exce,s �r �1��-ee ac�es c;ra�s
area (smallest size allowed for horses) : no
more than two accessory buildings neither of •
which shall exceed 1, 000 sq, ft. in area excePt
one accessor�� huilding may exceed l, 0�0 sct. ft.
�ahen it is to be used as a barn or stable.
Additional or larc�er accessor� huildincxs to
be permitted for agricultural nurnoses, c�reen-
houses or recreational purposes �ursuant to
issuance of a conditional use Perrlit.
P) no ?nore than one sin�i�, ��rtab-e wnoc� or
raetal st�ra�e shed not to exceed 100 sc�. ft.
in area riay be placed on any residential lot
in addition to the perr�anent accessor��
buildinc�s as above (i.e. Sears shed, ice
fishing house, etc. )
2. Height and bulk of residential accessory
structures:
a) residential accessory structures to be
one story only except as follows:
1) two stories nerr:litted for storaqe or
garage purposes when both levels are access-
ible in grade
2) storage loft perr.litted in attic snace
3) two story b�� conditional use �ermit
(Continued)
RRC�ULAR MEETING OF "'IiF ORO?JO COU?ZCIL, '�10�TF;PiBER 27 , 1979 Page 21
h) r.laxirmurl heiqht to be 20 �t. , or heiqht ACCESSOR`� BUILDINGS
of principle residential structure, whichever (Continued)
is less, except for barns , stables and c�uest
houses.
3. Crowdinc�: ��hen r:lore than one accessory
structure is to be nlaced on any lot, thev
should be setback at least 10 ft. from each
other or a distance equal to 1/2 the heiqht
of the highest building, whichever is qreater.
4. Location: �arages and other accessor�� build-
ings may be located 10 f_t. f_rom street riqht
of way on lakeshore lots provided all c�arage
doors open into lot and away �rom street and
a turnaround is provided on the lot.
Alan Olson, City Planner, entered into the record DRI���] Ord BOND*
the following letter to Bob Dongoske, 4250 Forest Forest Arms Subdivision
Lak� Drive, dated Noverlber 21, 1979 : �2ohert Donc�oske
�336
"As of today, the work we discussed on rlovember 9
has not been completed. The sewer repairs have
not been started. The drainage ditch, although
grading was �one, is not correctly sloped (it is
more like 1: 3 than the rec�uired 3: 1) , the end is
piled vaith dirt and debris, and no rock or sod
has been placed.
On Tuesday, November 27 , 1979 , I am going to recomr.iend
that the City Council authorize staf_f to draw on
your Contract Perforrmance Bond and to thereafter
cor_►nlete the rec�uired work and repairs at your cost.
As per the terms of the agreerment, the City �aill
not accept nor rlaintain the street, nor issue an��
more building perr.lits until all of this ���ork is
completed. "
End of letter
Butler moved, Paurus seconded, to a��rove drawing
on the Perfornance Bond of Robert nonc�oske, 4250
Forest Lake Drive, to complete re�airs and work
per the above letter dated November 2.1, 1979.
Psotion, Ayes (3) - Nays (0) .
Alan Olson, City Planner, entered into the record ESCR0��7 FUND RELEASE*
the following, dated Pdovember 16, 1979 , which states: 1960 Shoreline Drive
A. J. Tourangeau
All required improven►ents have heen completed at #414
the service station at 1960 Shoreline Drive. I
recommend full release of the �500 escro�a ar.mount
held as securitv bv the Cit��.
(Continued)
RE�ULAR P7EETIPdG OF TIiE OROT10 COU27CTL, PdOVE�4BFR 27 , 1979 Page ?_2
Council P4eetinc� - tdovember 27 , 1979 �SCRO« rUND R�LEASE*
(Continued)
Butler moved, Paurus seconded, to apnrove the
release o� $500 escrow to A. �7. Tourangeau for
1960 Shoreline Drive. P4otion, Ayes (3) -
PJays (0) .
c
Glenn Cook, City Engineer, inforrned the City OROraO-MFDINA SEb'JER
Council that the Or.�no-Ttedina Se�ver Agr_eer�ent AGREF?T4Ei1T
has heen corlpleted and is now in its f_inal
form for review.
A nemo from John (�erhardson, Public ��orks LUCE LTrIE BRIDGE
Coordinator, concerning the Luce Line Bridqe Orono Orchard Road
dated November 14 , 1979 , states:
In P4ay o� 1979 , the Departrment of TJatura?
Resources subnitted a plan to replace the
wooden bridge on Orono Orchard R�ad with a
one hundred foot clear sPan wood and steel
bridc�e. �
Af_ter receiving all Pertinent information,
the new bridge was approved in Jul��, 1979 bv
the Orono Council.
On rdovember 14 , 1979, �4r. Glenn Cook and I met
with rir. Del Barber, Department of *datural
Resources ,to discuss a chanc�e in the oric�inal
plan.
P�Ir. Barber explained that when receiving bids
for the bridge, an alternate bid was received
that would lower the cost of the bridc�e by
approxir_latelv $15,000 to 520 , 000. '"he
difference being that instead of a wood steel
bridge it would be an all steel hridqe �aith a
wood deck.
The specifications of the all steel bridge rteet
or exceed the requirerients, and the t��ne of
steel used takes on a dark brown color after
six months of exposure to the elements , there-
fore, blending into the environr►ent.
Therefore, the Department of Natural Resources
is rec�uesting apnroval from the Cit�� of Orono
to be allowed to construct the all steel bridge
over Orono Orchard Road.
Council Meeting - November 27, 1979
Glenn Cook, City Enc�ineer, explained the
construction of the bridc�e and also stated
that there would be a railinc� 42" high.
(Continued)
REGULAR t�EEmIN� OF mFiE OROI10 COU?JCIL, P10VFr'�3ER 27 , 1979 Page 23
1'iavor Van T•dest rloved, ButJ_er seconded, to annrove LUCF LI�IE BRID�E
the all steel hrid�e for the Luce Line at Orono Orono Orchard Road
Orcllard Road. P4otion, Ayes (4) - Navs (0) . (Continued)
rlenn Cook, City Engineer, informed the Cit_y ORONO O�tCHARD ROAD
Council that Orono Orchard Road has heen
Patched, with the overlay being f_inished in the
s�rinc�.
Glenn Cook, Cit�� Engineer, informed the City RING ROUTE
Council that there �vere a few probleris on
the ring route road that he and �7ohn Gerharc�son,
Public T�orks Coordinator, were checkinq on
tonlorrow.
Safety of the road ��as discussed, through
traffic, stop sic�ns, unfinished work of the
contractor, etc.
Due to the fact that the contractor has not
completed the work,
Mayor Van 27est rloved, Butler seconded, to COrImR7�Cm0'2' S FS�'T*SATE �4
aPprove Contractor' s Estimate #4, contingent Buffalo Biturzinous
upon the contractor comnleting the work that
is necessary to riake this a throuc�h route at
Count�� Road 6 with two stop sic�ns , one at
the ring route on �9atertown Road, and one on
County Road 6 at the ring route, for the east
bound and north bound traffic. This addition
pursuant to the snecifications alread_y in the
contract. PZotion, Ayes (4) - P1ays (0) .
P�ayor Van Nest moved, Butler seconded, to TELEVISTr1� SEWER LINE
approve the low bid of Clear �aater Research Clear ��later Research
in the amount of $1, 950 for cleaning and
$1,950 for television the sewer line from
Highcvay 12 to the Orono School, contingent
on Medina' s approval. PZotion, Ayes (4) -
Na��s (0) .
Butler moved, Paurus seconded, to approve the RI�7� F.OUTE CONSTRUCT?ON
ring route construction f_und status report of FU2ID STATUS REPORT
`^on I:uehn, Finance Director, dated Plovember 1,
1979. Motion, A��es (4) - Na��s (0) .
Chief of Police Kilbo presented the followinq u�Furin*
memo to the Cit�� Council concerning disbursement Horie Tnsurance Comnany
of funds to Horle Insurance Companv, dated 2dov-
ember 20, 1979 , �ahich states:
F�ome Insurance ComPany has paid our loss �ncurred
P4arch 11, 1979 when our squad was stolen.
(Continued)
REC�ULAR i4EETING OF �HE OROIdO COUidCTL, I��OVEi�BER 27 , 1979 Page 24
���e have received one rnoney order �or �10. 00 and P.EFUr�ID*
one check for $34 . 02 from Juvenile authorities Nor�e Insurance Corinanv
as a restitution, t�e have rer.�itted 510. 00 (Continued)
(noney order) directly, but the check for 534. 02
was Put into the General Fund.
I request payment of $34. 02 he made to Hor.le
Insurance Company.
Council P4eeting - Plovember 27, 1979
I3utler moved, Paurus seconded, to aPprove the
�a��nent of $34. �2 to the Hor1e Insurance Comnanv.
Motion, Ayes (3) - I1a1�s (0) .
Chief of Police Kilbo presented the followinq P.EFUPID*
riemo to the Cit�� Council regarding disbursenient "�artin' s 66 Station
of_ funds from the auction to i�artin' s 66 Station,
dated November 20 , 1979, �ahich states:
A public auction was held on Novermber 16 , 1979
on unclaimed autorioh�les and 5185 �aas denosited
in the General Fund. The proceeds, �185 riinus
expenses of $21. 27 be paid to P�artin' s 66 Station
according to ordinance.
Council r2eeting - rlovember 27 , 1979
Butler r.toved, Paurus seconded, to an�ro��e the
Payment of 5163. 73 to i��artin' s 66 Station.
Motion, .Ayes Ayes (3) - Pdays (0) .
Jeanne Mabusth, Zoning Administrator, �resented REFUND*
the City Council with a memo concerning a water [aiclrier Bros.
perriit refund dated TJoveriber 20 , 1979 , which
states:
Mr. [9idrler requests a refund in the ar.mount
of $20. 00 for a water nermit �#5755 taken out
in error on October 3, 1979. Staf_f concurs;
there was no need for a water permit and recorl-
mends the refund.
Council Meeting - Zdovember 27, 1979
Butler moved, Paurus seconded, to annrove a
refund in the ariount of 520. 00 to ��lidmer Bros.
P4otion, Ayes (3) - Plays (0) .
RF;GULAR r2EETING OF ^'HE OROPdO COUTdCIL, ?10���r1BER 27 , 1979 Page 25
Butler r�oved, Paurus seconded, to ap�rove the SUr��RY �LCEIPTS, etc. *
Sumr:�ary of Receipts , Disbursernents & Balances July, 1979
for the month of July, 1979 , r2otion, Aves (3) - ,
P1aj�s (0) ,
Butler moved, Paurus seconded, to approve the SUMs2ARY �ECEIPTS, etc. *
Surir.lary of Receipts , Disbursements & Balances Jan. 1-.7uly 31, 1979
for the seven months ending July 31, 1979.
Motion, Ayes (3) - Nays (0) .
Butler rioved, Paurus seconded, to approve the REVENUF & EXPENDITURE*
Revenue & Expenditure Rer�ort for the f.irst Jan. 1-Sept. 30 , 1979
nine months of 1979 . P4otion, Ayes (3) -
Tdays (0) .
Butler moved, Paurus seconded, to approve one DECFMBER COUNCIL PIEFTIN
Council meeting for the r�onth of Deceriber to December 11 , 1979
be held December 11, 1979. P�otion, Ayes (3) -
Na��s (0) .
Butler moved, Paurus seconded, to approve a JOINT C0�2r4UNITY P4EETIPIG
Joint Cortmunity Housing Project r►eeting with Nover.lher 29 , 1979
Larr�� Blackstad on November 29 , 1979 at 7 : 30 P.r4.
at the Orono Council Char*tbers. Motion, Ayes (3) -
Nays (0) .
Butler moved, Paurus seconded, to approve a COUrdTY ROAD #15 MEETING
meeting at Spring ParY on November 28, 1979 at Tlovember 28, 1979
7: 00 P.P4, regardinc� County Road #15. r4otion,
Al�es (3) - Nays (0) .
Butler moved, Paurus seconded, to ap�rove a SALARY INCREASE*
salarv increase to 5780 per month for Darlene Darlene Jones
Jones, Clerk-Receptionist, effective riovember 26 ,
1979. Motion, Ayes (3) - Nays (0) .
Butler moved, Paurus seconded, to ap�rove APd"'I-RFCESSION AID &
the Anti-Recession Aid & Revenue Sharing tJse REVEr1UE REPORT*
RePort for the ��ear ended Decer.lber 31, 1978,
to be published December 5 , 1979. Motion,
A��es (3) - Nays (0) .
Bruce Malkerson, City AttorneV, stated that ��TINE ORDINANCE
he would prepare an ordinance for ��»ne licenses
��r_ the Council review.
REGULAR i4EETIrdG OF ^HE ORONO COUNCIL, P10�7Er�BER 27, 1979 Page 26
F3utler noved, Paurus seconded, to approve the LICENSE*
following license: Iiotion, Ayes (3) - Nays (0) .
B. & Ii. Service - 1690 Shoreline Drive - ^
Cigarette License
Butler moved, Paurus seconded, that the All BILLS*
Funds Accounts 8242 through 87.81, 10779 through
10781, 4518 through 4599 , 11547 through 1158?_ ,
11402 and Liquor Store Accounts 13356 throuqh
13385, be Paid. Motion, Aves (3) - ilays (0) .
At 10 : 50 P.M. , the City Council began an EXECUmIV� SESSION
executive session.
*�Iayor Van Nest rloved, Butler seconded, that REFUr1DS
the refunds for appellants to 73-1 assessment, 73-1 Appellants
be paid. Motion, Ayes (3) - Pdays (0) .
Councilmember Iiurr abstained.
Ma��or Van P1est moved, Butler seconded, to RECOPJSIDER P40TION
authorize the 27a��or and City Administrator Contractor' s Estimate ��
to pay Buffalo Bituminous Contractor' s Buffalo Bituminous
Estir.tate #4 in the arlount of $97 , 000. 20
by the due date as being in the best interest
of the City. Psotion, Ayes (4) - tlays (�) .
Butler moved, Paurus seconded, that the ADJOURiIMFNT
meeting be adjourned at 11: 15 P.r4, t2otion,
Aves (4) - TJays (0) .
>
/
�� �
T9illiam B. Van r1 st, r4ayor
�°�alter B, riassengale, Actinc� T�avor
Attest: ��
Walter R Benson, City Administrator