HomeMy WebLinkAbout10-29-1984 Council Minutes • MINUTES Or THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCiL MEETING HELD OCTOBER 29, 1984. PAGE 1
ATTENDANCE 7:00 PM The Orono Council met on tne above date with the following
members present: Mayor Butler , Councilmembers Frahm,
Adams, Hammerel and Grabek. City Administrator
Benson was not present. City Enyineer Cook and City
Attorney Radio were present. Building & Zoning
Administratori�labustn, AssistantZoning Administrator
Gaffron, Public Work Coordinator_ Gerl�ardson, and City
R2cor_d�r Suttor� reor�sent�d t'ne City staff .
ANNOUN�E"iENT OF CRYSTAL
BAY P�JBLIC HEARING
RESCHEDULED FOR NOVEMBER
13, 1984 A'� 7:0a PM i�9ayor Rutler announced i�o tlze �uUiic that t',�e Crystai Bay
public hearing has '�een rescheduled for Nove�nber 13 ,
1984 , at 7 : �� p.m.
CONSENT AGENDA* Councilme:nber Adams moved, Councilmember Hammerel
secon3ed, to anprove the Consent Agenda* , with all
staff re��orts concerning these items to 'oe attached to
an original cu�uy oi t:nese minutes on file in the City
Clerk ' s office. Motion, Ayes (5) , Nays (Q) .
APPROVAL OF MI��ITES* Councilmember Adams moved, Councilmembe.r Hammerel
seconded, to aporove the �ninuL-es of the Council meeting
iieid October 15 , 1984 . Motion, Ayes (5) , Nays (�) .
LAKE MINN�.TONKA CONSERVA'�ION
DISTRICT REPORT Jo Ellen Hurr saas present. Hurr si�ated that ti�e ne�•a
budget was passed by tt1� r�i9CD, Hurr noted tiZat tize cost
of license applications an� soecial use permits that
required extra staff and legal time will now be paid by
th� applicant. Hurr stated that the ordinance
amending the fees would be given to Orono staff . Hurr
state3 that an ordinance was pass2d on changing uses of
dockage on the lake.
PLANNING COMMISSION
COMMENTS There were no Planning Com�n,ission comments .
PUBLIC COMMENTS ih2re vaere no comments from the public present.
#820 LONIE �ISK
493 PARK AVENUE
VARIANCE
7: 30 PM Lonie and Curtis Fisk w�re nresent. Lonie Fisk ' s
attorney, Garth Coller, was also present. Jim
Benschoof , traf f ic exoeri�, was nresent for a traf f ic
report concerning t�ze Fisk application. Ron Batty
represented thefollowing neighbors that were present:
Donald & Catherine Meyer of 485 Park Avenue
Phillip & Renata Bradley of 4775 Oak Street
David & Sherokee Ilse of 41�5 Oak Si�reet
Mike & Rowanne Dombeck of 499 Tonkawa Road
Dave & Debbie Siegel of 4111 Oak Street
Tim Argabright of 4(d85 Oak Street
� MINUTES OE THE REGUfAR OR�NO COUNCIG MEE`PING HELD OCTOB�R 29, 1984 . PA�E ?_
�820 LONIE FISK Other Orono residents th��t wer� present for the Fisk
application were as follows:
David & Phyllis Fritz of 473 Tonkawa Road
Liedeke Larson of 458 Linden Avenue
D�syl P`terson of 4385 Chippewa Lane
Don Meyer passed out an original co�y of nis offer Eor_
the Fisk ' s land to the Council .
Building & Zoning Administrator riabusth stated that
Fisk asks for a lot area and lot width variance.
Ma'ousth scai.ed an area variance of 75 percent� and a
width variance of l�l p�rcent, t�iabusth stated t.zat th�
neighbors in onposition to tnis application �.ver� asked
to seek ingal assistance . Mabusth stated that the
neighbor ' s attorney has �ro3uced negative findings a��d
th� nE=ignbors nave done a survey of vacanL lots in the
LR-1B (oneacre) zoning district. Maous�h stated Lhat
sh2 has do�� a sUrvey of variance applications of lot
area 3nd lot width variance that were d�ilied back to
1977 .
Administrator Mabusth stated �hac according to her
survey of lot area ana lot width variances back to 1977 ,
3 variances were denied and 4b were approved . Mabustn
S�Lc�l' t?C3 that a��proxi,nately 7 or 8 applications were
with:]ra�,an when ii: appeared tnat they were goiny to be
da�lied. ��labustn statea L-hat tnose d-anials w�r�� 'c�ased
on tha following findinys :
l . Restricted building envelope.
2 , Proper_zy never assessed for sewer .
3 . Stu'�s never orovided .
4 . Assess��d ;:�ar'�2t value suggests unbuildable lot .
5. Land lock�d - inability to provide legal access .
6. Snape of lot.
7 . Topography thaL would inhibit construction or sa�e
access to site.
Administrator Mabusth stated that Ron Batty,
neighbor ' s attorney, mentioned in his report of a self-
imposed hardship. Mabusth stated that she has worked
with Mr. Fisk before on another variance application on
Baldur Park Road . Mabustn stated that she is not
suggesting that he knows about the zoning code, but he
did work on a i�azdcover and setback problem application
on Baldur Park ,
, MINU'I'E� OF THE REGULAR URONO COUNCIL MEE'rING HELD OCTOSER 29, 1984 . PAGE 3
#82H LONIE rISK
Adr,�inistrator Mabustn state� that according to the
neighbors ' study of th� vacant lots in the LR-1B zoning
district, 39 percent or 34 of the total 88 fall within
2�J-40 percent of the required area. Mabusth noted
their survey came un with a total of 88 vacant lots in the
LR-1B zoning district. Mabusth stated that the Fisk
lot falls into the ones thaL fell between 2�0-441 percent .
Administrator Mabusth noted tizat at the September 1� ,
1984 meeting , the Mayor asked for stai-f to come uv wiLh
the negative findings of the annlication after heariny
only the ap�roval responses from the annlicant ' s side .
Th�se findings includ� t'ne following:
1 . The oroposal is not consis�enL wit:n current nattert�
of neighborhood development.
2 . Question of apnlicant ' s knowledge of zoning code
and association with Orono staFf as he worked on two
applications wiL'n the Zoning Administrator and
with the Building Denartment on previous
consLruction.
3 . Establish negative precedent--34 of the 88 vacant
lots in tne LR-1B zor�ing district could ask for the
same variances .
4 . Adverse to th� in;�e��t of. the �omprei�ensive Plan and
Zoning Cod?. If wi3� range �roblem, the City
should amend tl�e code and not grant variances .
5. One-half sewPr unit charged against oroperty (1 /4
unit oneachlot) assessm�ntsuggestsoroperty once
part of larger land holding.
b . Lineal footage not assessed against property.
Garth Coller, Lonie Fisk ' s attorn2y, stated t'nat the
most ess�ntial oart of the zoning code is the health,
safety and welfare. Coller stated that as City
Attorney Malkerson mentioned at the last meeting, that
tne courts will use a balancing test. Coller stated
thaL the City has to find some negative findings as to
the imvact on the public health, safety and welfare.
Coller stated i�hat the fact that the sewer has been
assessed for this lot, that shows indication that this
is a buildable lot . Coller stated that no one has made
any acusations as to whether or not this is a non-
buildable lot, in fact there is evidence on the record
that both the City staff and historical precedent that
there was a house on the lot , indicates that this is a
buildable lot. Coller stated that staff has a -
photograp'n of a house that existed on the lot.
M�INUTES OF 'I'tiE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD OCTOBER 29 , 1984 . PAGE4
�82� LONIE FISK Administrator ��Iabusi.h showed the Council some pictures
witi� an exsting 'nouse on tne subject lot .
Garth Co112r stated t.�at in the Planning Commission
memo, the buildability of this lot will reduce the
danger of fire which is always the case with a vacant
lot. Coller stated that there is ;�o oth�r use for the
lot than residential. Coller stated that the City has
granted in the past many variances in excess of the
a:nount granted here, Coller stated that the City i�as
consistently granted variances and on very rare
occasions d�nied variances . Coller stated only three
variances have been denied since 1977 and are �asil;�
distinguishable, Coller stated that thf� first
variance t'nat was denied was rural property. Coller
stated that Council ' s own City st�ff has stated that
rural pronerty is very distinct issue from the F.isk lot
and is muc'n easier to deny a variance in rural property,
Coller stated t��at Home 8uilders was a conceptual
denial arrd in this case there were problems with th�
s'nape of the lot, lakeshore setback problems , and an
unbuildable building envelope and would need
additional setback variances . Coller stated that
t'nat variance is beyond a lot ar2a and lot width
variance. Coller stated that the third variance that
was denied was reflected as a non-buildable lot, had no
se��er unit assessed, unbuildable env�lo�e, and
lakeshore setback proUlems. Coller referred to
Zoning Administrator �Iabusth ' sdenial list as follows :
1. "Restricted building envelope. " Coll�r staced
that this doesn ' t apply in this case.
2. "Property never assessed for sewer . " Coller
stated that this is not the case 'nere.
3 . "Stubs never provided. " Coller stated t'nat stubs
are nrovided.
4 . "As,$essed market value sugg2sts unbuildable lot. "
Coller stated that is not a oroblem here.
5. "��and locked. " Coller stated not a oroblem,
b . "Corner lot . " Coller stated not a problem; it
doesn ' t even need setback variances .
7 . "Shape of lot. " Coller stated not a problem.
8. "Topography that would inhibit construction or
safe access to site. " Coller stated that is not a
problem and that he has expert testimony regarding
i�he traffic.
MINUTES OF T13L: R�GULIIR ORONO COUNCIL MI:E1'ING I31:LD OC'i'OI3ER 29 , 1989 _ P11G� 5
#820 LONIE FISK
Garth Coller stated that there is no adjacent land
available. Coller stated th3t the Planning Commis-
sion recommended approval of this variance that that
they are the experts in this matter . Coller stated
that there is an existing f.oundation, it was not a
lakesnore cabin, but an actual residence. Coller
stated that there is a sewer stub ordy.ided to the
property. Coller stated that it has beer� �assessed for
one-half sewer unit. Coller stated that granting this
variance would increase the health , safety and welfare
of the City by discouraging the continuatioii (or the
future use) of the pronerty as a dump. Coller stai.ed
that the property has a history of being used as a dump.
Coller stated that the property right now is no longer
in that condition, but it is a possibility in the
future . Coller stated that the adjacent property
(Meyer lot) would probably need more variances than
Fisk. Coller noted thatCity Attorney Malkerson noted
at the last meeting that neighborhood opposition is not
a determining factor , anc� that tiZe City must only weigh
� this variance from the health, safety and welfare
factors . Coller staLed that the pronosed site plan
_ satisfies all setback requirements .
Garth Coller cited one recent case "Arnold Palmer vs
City of Plymouth" . Coller read zhe following from t�zal-.
case:
"Under circumstances similar to those which the
�iantiff ' saoplicationwasdenied, tneCity Council has
heretoi-ore g.ranted variances . Most recently invclv-
ing the Troy Ridge project where the comparing
circumsta►�ces were considerably less . The denial
of. . . the petition was the defendent, City Council, was
ar'oitrary, capricious, unreasonable, and invalid and
in violation of his constitutional rights L-or the
following reasons :
1. The land is zoned i-or the intended use.
2 . The land is entirely suitable for the intended use.
3 . The intended use would not be harmful to the health,
morals, safety and the public welfare of the City.
4 . The denial de�rives the plantiff of his
consi�itutional rights , contrary to Section 3P1 ,
, Articlel, TheStateofMinnesotaConstitution, and
contrary to the Fourteenth Amendment of the
Constitution of the United States ,
5. Said City in actual practice, acting administra-
tively and not legislatively has under the
authority granted toitunderzoningordinance over
a neriod of years , granted variance to the City of
Plymouth witn circumstances substantially the
sa�ne as those whos plantiff ' s applicatio❑ was
d2nied. "
MINU'rES OF 'PHE REGUGAR URONU COUNCIL MEE'PING HELD OCTOBER 29 , 1984 . PAGE 6
#820 LONIE FISK Coller stated that granting the variances here woUld
notbearbitraryandcapricous . Collerstated that the
above findings in t'ne case cited above are extremely
importantand relevant to the Fisk case. Coller noted
Lindings that ar� unique to this property whicl� include
the following:
1 . Size and dentn of the property. `�
2. Setback and character of the adjacent i�ome.
3 . Strict ap��lication of the ordinance would not
result in a mare suitable neighbori�ood f-or the
nei�hbors .
��arth Coller stated t'nat the current development in t'ne
immediate area (Elm Street , Oak Street , Park Drive, and
Park Lane) , zero are over the one acre requirement of
t'n� zoc�in�3 district . �,oller noted ti�at zero are over
8�-100 percent, on� is bet°��`en 6Q-8QJ percent, one is 4�-
5c� perceni�, one is between 2�-4� percent . �oller
si�aLe�� tiiat on O3'K Stree� there are o develo�ed units ,
- only one meets code reqilirements . Coller stated one is
b�tween 8�-10�J percent, two arz betwe2n 6�J-3PJ percent,
one is between 4d-5� percent, and one is between 2(�-44�
nercent. Coller stated that on Park Lane there are 16
units �evelooed. �oller staLed that zero are over the
code requiremei�ts , two are between 8�-1C�Q percent, on�
is betwe�n o01-8�d percent, four are between 6�1-8�
nercent, an�� eigl�t are betwe�n 2Q-4�1 �ercent. Coller
stated tnat in t:�e same ^ategory as Fisk ' s lot, t'nere
are 12o units in the LR-1B zoning district in the s;�me
caLegory. Coller noLed ti�ere are 2G1 percent l-.hat are
in the same category or worse �iian the Fisk ap��lication.
Gar_t;� �oller introduced Ja�E�s 3enscnoof , trafLic
analysist, to give expert testimony on the affect of the
trafiic in the neighborhood if this lot was approved .
Jim Benschoof, traffic analysist, stated that he has
conducted a study of the traffic patterns in the
neigh'c�orhood. Benschoof sL-ated that 11 existing
nomes are servzd by Oak Street . Benschoof staLed
approxi„�ately 11� trips per day would be made on Oak
Street. Benschoof stated that the Fisk home would
create about 10 more trips per day on Oak Street.
Benscnoof stated that the intersecLion of Oak Street
and CR 151 has L-',ie capacity to handle the additional
trips of the Fisk lot and any other possible lots as
well. Benschoof stated that they addressed the
conditions on Oak Street where the lot would gain access
as to the ability of that segment of Oak Street and found
that segment of t'ne street will serve the lot
efLectively. Benscnoof stated that there is adequate
siqnt distance where th2 driveway would be locaLed i�o
effectively serve the Fisk lot. Benschoof stated t�Zat
on an overatl basis thai� ti�z existiny str��;�ts can
eL-factiv�ly ac��o�nmod.3te the ac��3itior�al. traff_ ic
-------- - �- - � -- , _ , , � , , _ ,
MINU'r�S OF 'PHE REGUGAR ORONU COUNCIL MEE'rING HELD OCTOBER 29 , 1984 . PAGE �
#820 LONI� FISK
Councilmember Adams asked when Benschoof o�served the
Fisk lot and the neighborhood .
Jim 8enschoof statedlateSaturday morningaround noon.
Benschoof stated that he observed a low volume of
traffic on Oak Street. Benschoof stated that he also
checked the Hennepin County flow map wnicij:.revealed 49P1
vehicles per day. Benschoof stated that ne conducted a
capacity analysis based on th2 exoected oea'r, trafFic
that would be likely to pass through t�e in�ersection.
Ror, Battl, neignbor ' s attorney, wanted i�o noze w'nat is
on trial here. Batty stat�d t;1ai� �hP City ' S
�r_dinance is not on trial . Batty stated that the City
adopted the ordinance some nine years ago. Batty
state� wnat is on trial is the applicant ' s r�quest to
deviate or vary from the ordinance ' s stand�rds by not a
s�all amount but an amount only one-quarter the size it
is supposed to be. Batty stated that the neighbors are
here to support the ordinance that tn� City drafted and
adoote,�.
Ron Battl stated that t.,�ere has b��n concern about tne
City oroving t��at there witl be some c�larnitous result
in grantinc� this variance on tne healtn, safety and
welfare, Batty s�ated the �est answer to the health,
s�fety, and welfare pro:�lem is tn�t wnich is expressed
in the City' s own ordinance. Battl SL�L"E?c� t}�at t:z�
City ' s ordic�ance establishes the type oF development
l-.��at tne City wani�s to see in tilis particular
neigh'oorhood. Batty stated that the Council has
already made the d�termination with regard to the
nealtn, safety, and welfare. Batty stated that the
eroblem with the analysis that BenschooL presented was
Lii�t Zhey are looking at a oarticular case under a
microscohe rather than viewing the larger nictur�.
8atty stated that one more house is not c�oin�� to pr�sent
a terrible trafiic or_oblem.
Ron 8atty stated t11�t the City is noz dealing wit�� a case
where t'ne oroperty owner has owned tne oroperty Urior to
the adaotion of the ordinance or acquir�d it through
inheritence. 3ati.y sL-ated that instead this is a case
where the individual sought out the property and
purchase3 it and then places himself in the position
� where he needs the City ' s assistance to make it a
developable lot. Batty stated that this is
significant because it speaks �o t��e heart of tl�e self
created 'nards'niu issue which courts have consistently
found to be persuasive. Batty stai:ed if an individual
can do t'nis and come to the City and seeks assistance,
this places a great deal of power in the individual
property owrier .
MINU'PES OF 'PHE REGULAR URONU COUNCIL MEE'PING HELD OCTOBER 29 , 1984 . PAGE 8
Batty sLated that Zoning Administrator Mabusth has
#820 LONIE FISK testifir�;j t'nat Mr . Fisk has 'peen involved with the City
before on a zoning application and should have been
cognizant of the zoning ordinance. Batty stated that
there is also two affidavits on file by the Fisks .
Batty stated that Fisk stated that he talked with
someone at City hall who said it would be alright to
build, but Fisk cannot name that person., Batty asked
tneCouncil w'nat a nrudent personwould da�in a case like
this . Batty staced if ne was going to place $7 , 0�(d in
an invest�nent that he would inquire furth�r than to rely
on some unnamed n�rson at Lity Hall .
Roc� 3atty stated that t7��r? ar� other lots thai can b�
develoQed in the City and that this case will set a
precedent for future lots. Batty stated that the
solution to this problem is to have the property sold to
an adjacent pronerty owner. Batty stated that Don
Meyer (adjacent property owner) has offered to buy the
�roperty. Batty stated that the New York courts, when
dealing with the issue of s�lliny property to adjacent
oroperty owners , look az the value of the oroperty
wit��out a variance. Batty stated that in September the
City saw a report which gave three values for the
property. Batty sraied $1 , �G1D if no variances were
granted. Batty stated $12 , ��Q if a variance was
granted and if several improvements were made on the
property (well, secaer connection, etc) . Batty stated
$17 ,4100 after develo�ed with a tiouse on the prouerty.
Batty stated that New York courts would suggest $1 ,�PJP1
would be appropriate exchangefor the property. Batty
stated ti�at courts in Illinois deal witn how much the
individual has invested in the property. Batty stated
that the oroperty was ourchased for $7 , P�G1G1 , and
Illinois courts would suggest that $7 , f��� for the
broperty is a fair price.
Ron Batty stated i:i�at tl�� z�eighbors have made an offer
whici� is a standing, valid offer, which the applicant
has cl�osen to reject the o£fer which betters both of
those Qrices . Batty stated that there is no longer no
alternative use for the pronerty. Batty stated that he
cannot be compelled to sell the land, but if he refuses
to sell the land he snould not be heard to come back to
the City and say the City has to give him the variance.
Desyl Peterson of 4385 Chippewa Lane stated that she
came to the meeting after reading an article in the
paper regarding this application. Peterson asked the
Council to consider the following for basis of denial of
the application:
MINU'PES OF 'PHE RFGULAR ORONO COUNCIG MEE'PING HELD OCTOBER 29, 1984 . PAGE 9
Desyl Peterson stated that courts have basically said
#820 LONIE FISK thatyouare supposed to grant variances to substandard
lots where to do ott�erwise would prohibit any value to
the property. Peterson stated this is generally true .
Peterson stated that this does not apply here because
t�zis is tax forfeit property. Peterson stated the
original owner gave up that right and the original
investment is gone . Peterson stated tha�.this is a n�w
anplicant who bougilt the oroperty as t�x forfeiL- and
assu:r�s tl�e risk that this pronerty is substandard and
cannot be built on. �eterson stated that it is
irrelevant whaz the staff told him. Peterson stated
that this variance is different from all the other
variances because it is tax forfeit.
Desyl Peterson stated it apnears that this property was
in common ownership with the adjacent property.
Peterson stated t'nat the Mv Supreme Court has held that
when two lots are in common ownership, at any point
after t'ne adoption of the zoning ordinance, i�hen tnose
two lots have to 'pe combined to make one loc thai. is
closer if not exceeding tne zoning standards .
�esyl Peterson stated i�hat ti�e Orono zoning code used Lo
say if there was a non-conforming structure and it was
destroyed, then it could not be rebuilt if not more than
the 50 percent of the assessed market value.
7oning Administrator Mabusth stated that we are not
dealing with a non-conforming use or structure in this
case, t'�e code referred to by Peterson is not
anplicable.
Peterson sLat�d no, that a non-conforrning use not only
ap�lies to the use itself but also to setbacks .
Peterson stated t'nat the tax forfeit is important in
this case,
Garth Coller, Fisk ' s attorney, addressed Ron Batty ' s
remarks, Coller stated burden of proof has been met in
this instance as to why the lot conforms . Coller
stated it is not against the health, safety, and
welfare, but helns the nealth, safety, and welfare.
Coller stated the burden of proof, and it is a balancing
test that the courts give, if there is no adverse effect
to the health, safety and welfare and there is some
benefit to the health, safety, and welfare and the
option is to deny the use of residential property for
any use at all, that yes the burden oF proof shifts over .
Coller stated the burden of proof is on the neighbors,
staff, and Council to come up with a negative
declaration that imposes a greater degree of hardship
to tne health, safety and welfare than it would benefit
it.
MINU'rES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD OCTOBER 29 , 1984 . PAGE 10
#82B LONI� FISK
Garth Coller addressed the self-created hardsnip
issue. Coller stated that this was addressed at the
last meeting with City Attorney Malkerson ' s input .
Coller stated that the creation of the hardship is
createc� with lots that w�re originally platted and here
tne zoning code has been changed, Coller stated at
th�t time the hardship is created. -�_`
Garth Coller addressed Desyl Peterson ' s comments .
�ol1eZ explained the difference b�Lween a land owner to
sal�e and land owner to tax forfeit. Coller stated that
this is irrelevant . Coller stated t'nat in Minnesota
this is just not sometning that the courts look to.
Coller stated that here the City has a passing of a 'c�asic
fundamentalconstitutionalrightof apersonto develop
the oroperty. Coller stated t'nat this right doesn ' r.
disap��ear tnrough ti�e t�x to.rFeii�ure �rocess , Cotler
st.�t�i� c��at the courts do not look at it like that in
?�I i nnesota.
Garth �oller stated that it was menLioned t'r�at the lots
. s'nould 'oe combined. �oller staL-ed that here Fisk has
don� t;�is . Coller staLed tnat the lots were in common
ownership when the ordinanc� was passed. Coller
staiced ti�at t�is is the key. Coller staL�:� that those
two lots have '�een combined.
Garth Coller st�Led t'nat tiZe remaLks made about
Benschoof ' s analysis that Benschoof did not look at the
larger picture. Coller stated that this is factually
irlcorrect. Coller stated tizat t,�e traffic study for t.he
neigh'oorhood included tne )_iket1hood of otnAr
buildablelotsinthatarea, Coil�rstated three maybe
four lots could 'pe developed in that area and the
traffic analysis addressed 'cnis too.
Garth Coller address��d 'ci�e ;3iscussion in regard to the
claim of a self-imposed l�ardship. Coller stated that
Fislc indeed engaged in negotiations to sell this lot.
Coller stated that he had an offer of $14 , 41G1G1 for the lot
whici� ne accepted subject to t��e conditions that the
neignbors could obtainfinancing. Coller stated that
applicant waited a long time under the assumption that
ti�is deal was going to go through. Coller stated that
they delayed their nrese�ztation under thaL scenario .
Coller stated that he conducted research on whether o.r
not payments could be taken over based on the payments
that go for the tax forfeit oronerty. Coller stated
that answer_ was yes, and that was nronosed to the
neighbors. Coller stated then at a very late stage in
the contract negotiations , Don Meyer came forth with
his offer. Coller stated that this is an offer that
supnosedly stands today. Coller presented the
original document that was presented to Fisk to the
Council . Coller stated that the o�L-er has words of
negotiaLion, which in a real estate con�ract, make it
nothi.�g more than an entice�iien� to deal . Coller stai.ed
�'�"11 �� lc nnh a � c�rtal ��f=c�r �r�r �r.v r��. .-.�..r-..r-
MINUTES OF Tlli: RLGULJII2 ORONO COUNCII. ML•'L•:1'ING 13I•:LD OC'TOI3ER 2_9 , 1984 . pI�GE 11
�820 LONIE I'ISK
Council�ne:nber �i ra��m ask:�d when Fisk bougi�� �;�e oro��erty
from the �ou;71:y at�d 'now much ne p�ic� for t��e ��r_op�rty.
City Attorney Radio stated August 2"L , 1983 .
Garth Coller stated $7 , 21�1 .
•^ouncilmember Grabe� asked how mucli cagY1 was outl.ayed
for the brop�rty.
Garth �oller staLed $1 ,o��D .
Loni� Fisk stated t'nat he has cnade one payment of $1 , i�4v�
since then.
Councilmemi�er Grabek noted tnat Fisk has spent
approximately $2 , 6(�� on the lot .
�arth �oller stated ti�at t��e �ouncil snould consi:�er
atcor�ey' s fees, aopraisr�r fees , �nd traEfic
consultant fees . Coller stared ti�erefore Li�e $8 , 5��
isn ' t a gr_eat offer .
Mayor Butler si�ace3 chat if r isk hac� askecj Lh�
apnropriate neo�le at City �Iall, he would have saved
nirns��lf all of those fe�s .
��artnColler statec� that since Lhe zoning was changed on
iilis ��rouerty, thai legal rignt siill vests , and
�ahether or not r^is?c wanted to ci�eck into it or no�. is :nore
or l�ss i�r�levant.
David Ilse of 41�5 Oak Street commented in regard to the
offer of $14 , G1��6 . Ilse statzd that after the last
Council meetiny he phoned r^isk reg�rding th� s��le of the
land . Ils� st.�i.�d that Mr . Rradley and iiimseif inet
with Fisk and at no time was there an accPpi�ance oL-
$14 , ��4� .
Garth Coller asked how lony he was disc��ss ir�:� c'�� s,31�
to Fisk and at� th�� price of $14 , �dGl�d .
�avid Ilse si�ated that they nev�r discussed $14 , c�J��d .
Ilsz stated that Fisk ' s appraiser had come un with a
value oL $17 , (D�PJ , and th�t he pointed out to Fisk tnat
the figure as the property stood was $12 , 0�� if it was
approved , $l, �Gl(d if it was denied . Ilse stated that
they asked Fisk if he would be able to find out whether
someone was willing to buy the pro�erty if that person
could assu:ne ti�e money t11at he is currently paying the
County. Ilse stat2d that risk staLed he would check
into th.�t. Ilse stated that he said he would check witn
tiZe people in th� neig.��ori�ood 'co see whet��er_ or no'c
5om�o��e was willing zo buy �l�e oroperty, soecifi.cally
�o�� i•9eyer , since he is adjacent to the pr_o��erty.
MiNUTES OF 1'}3L•: REGUI.I�R ORONO COUNCIL MELTING HI:LD OC'I'OBER 29 , 1984 . P11GE 12
#820 LONIE FISK Ils2 scated ti�aL he brought Fisk �ne offer of Mr. Meyer
for_ $12, dGJ� minus th� sewer , well and other things thai�
his own a�oraiser had mentioned . Ilse stated that when
he handed the letter to Fisk ' s wife, he stated that he
rPatized tnat it was not meeting the $17 , G1G70 which Fisk
'nad initially offered, however , n� was willing to act as
a mediator b�tween Fisk and Meyer to keep t'ne
negotiations going . Ilse stated that he was very clear
when he spoke w i th F i sk ' s w i te tizat ther�:was no other
offer 'out just tn� oEEer t,�at he had delivere<3 , Ilse
asked r^isk ' s wife to hav� Fisit cal_l. i�im within two days
to geL this resolve� as soon as possi'ale . Ilse stated
that Fisk did not ca.l]_ him. iise stated that he called
�isk one we�k later and said r^isk SL�LF'c� that $� , 5�1� was
out, $17 , �J��f or nocning. Ilse stated that the $8 , 5G7�7
offer subject to negotiation was to get negotiations
started.
City Attorney Radio stated that Meyer has submitted a
two page document to the Council to s�e if this was �ver
transmittec3 to c^isk.
Don h]eyer of 485 Par',�c Avenu2 stated r.hat the original
letter was sent to Fisk in order to start negotiations .
� ?•7zyer stated his $3 , 5�101 off��r is still vatid tonight .
1�leyer stac?:� i:izat ne sees this as a solution to the
oroblem bec�use �e c]oesn ' t want a house right� next door
to 'nim and i� i t m�ans that he has to buy a lot he wi 11 .
Councilmember Grabe�c no�e�3 L-or Lf1P record that he
o'ojected to written note �assed by tne i�fayor . Grabek
stated that he read only tnP first nortion which ;aas a
motion to reject the variance. Grabek stated tha� he
is noz influe��c�ed by that note nor did he read the entire
r�ote. Grabek stated that }�e doesn ' t think that tho5e
com�n�nts should be passed to individual Council neo�le,
that they should be 'orougnt out into the open.
Mayor 8u�lar stated l-.,�ai. Ltiey will be broug��t oui� into
the o�en. 3utler stated thaL- size gave it to GraUek so
that he would have some idea as to where s�1e was coming
from. Butler staied that she would rather writ� her
thoughts down orior to speaking zhem.
Mayor Butler moved, Councilmember Adams seconded, to
request staff to draft a resolution denying the request
of Lonie Fisk based on tne following findings:
1. The property can be put to a reasonable allowed use.
� It can be used as a City park, the City could
conceivable acquire the pronerty through the
condemnation procedure or through outright
ourchase. Or ti�e property could be �urci�ased by
t'ne adjacent pronerty owner in order to be combined
with the adjacent oroperty in order to bring the
adjacent property �nore iizto conformance with the
zoning code.
MINUTES OF TIIE REGULIIR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HI:LD OCTOBI;R 29 , 1984 _ P11G� 13
#820 LONIE FISK 2, The use pr000sed is contrary to the letter and
intent of the Orono Comprehensive Plan.
3 . The development and or granting of the variance
would set an adverse �recedent in the City.
4 . The apnlicant/�urcliaser should 'nave had knowledge
of the zoning code requirements priar: �to ourcnase.
Any hardshi� stated here is self-imUosed .
5. On2-half sewer unit was charged against th�
property indicating a question on the part of City
staff at sometime in the Uast ti�at the lot was
suastan�ard . There was no lateral sewer
assessment levied against the �roperty, therefor�
tne question of the buildability of the lot seems to
be open and before us .
5. Th� property falls short of the zoning code to an
extent too great to enable justification of
granzing the variances requested .
Discussion continued before the vote was taken.
Council,member Grab2k stated that �s far as the saf-ety is
concerned, there is no n_roble.m with � house being buil�
on t;�at lot. Grab�k st,�ted ti�at se:a�r is available,
therefore, creaLing no health oro�lems . Grabek
stated that in regard to tne welfar� quesLion, the house
�ddsno�hingbutbeneLittotheneighborhood especially
with tne condition of the lot being used as a dump .
Grabek stated that the lot is in terrible condition.
Grabek stated that granting the variance would not
c'nange ti�e environment, like tearing down trees , or
things like that . �•:�rabe'K stated L-nat the neigi�bors
certainly had an opportunity to ourc.zase the lot and
have i�ad for so;ne�ime. Grabek stated that r^isk ' s
afiidavit noted some "mystery person" who told him that
the lot was buildable, which doesn ' t influence nis
decision. Grabek staced t'nat the Council should look
at tha land as to tne best use o� tnat land and to see that
no harm will come to the enviro��ment, �rabe'� stated
that there is no effect to the environment as a n2altiz
situation because there is sewer.
Councilmember Grabek stated Fisk did impose these
difficulties on himself . Grabek asked City Attorney
Radio wnat right does the City have to protect those .
� small parcels of land against the transfer of vested
rights to build.
City Attorney Radio stated that the neighbors attorney
included cases in N�w York and Illinois that included a
cut off point on tax forfeiture property and the vesting
oi rigi�ts cannot go on forever and be passed to oL-her
land owners . Radio stai:ed that he has been unaul� to
fi���� any s��cific cases in Minnesota adverse to that
point. Radio stated that in Minnesota it is an open
ni�r�oi-i.-.n n.�,� i-'noi- �1-�i c ��co r�nn� � ma��r� n�..� l o�n
MINUTES OF THE REGULI�R ORONO COUNCIL MELTING HELD OCTOBER 29 , 1984 . PAGE 14
#820 LONIE FISK Ra3i:� stated ti�at there may b� :�.�scs w'n�:re tizose vested
rig�ts ar,� interru��t-��d .
Councilmember �ra?z,n staz��d t�at the property has not
been inhabited sinc�� at least 1975 , crah�n si:ated that
th� buildiny no longer exists ocher than the
foun3ation. �� rahm stated t�zat the c�de was adopted
originally to kee�� the density down. Fra+am stai.2d that
s��:ne of tize ].ots were grandfat��ered into"t}�at code and
orote�k�d , however , when ti�at nr_operty is vacant for
almost lvl ye�rs, it is his �ersonal opii.zion that the
grandfathered rig�t nas b�e�� forgiven. r^.r�h.n st�i_ed
ti�at as far as ,�e is concerne�� that orop�rty is not
iJ'�I1 ic��3olP .
City AttornF�y Radio noted tnaz in Section 1�3 . G�8 which
�eals with variances , supdivision l , states:
"variances s;�ould be grante�� where it does not
adv2rsely affect tne uurpo:�e and intent of tne zoning
chaoL_r nor L-1�` heaitn or welfare of tl�e public" .
�ac3io st�i:ed t��at ti�e r_eal_ tesi. the court is going Lo
ap��ly is did tne Co�ancil. ac� rf;asor�ably ii� aciin�� �.�oon
tnis variance.
�layor Biiti�� st.�ced that Meyer couica bay L�z�� pro��er�y
and combine it with his lot, or the :.ity couid buy t�12
uroper�y and usec, Eor park purooses. Butler staf�ed
chat this lot f,3t]_s und��r. tne "niabling syndro�ne" ,
w��er�� i � tnis lot is a�provF�d , th� City �aou:ld have to
approve the next one 'aasecj on the �r_�cedent s�Lting i��
the past. Butler stai:ed �;�at the City may as well thro�a
ouL- tne zoning cod� if tne City doesr� ' t hav� the
autnorii_y to C3f31�y a variance.
Councilmember Grabek stated that� the City has to be
c��reful bacause then it will look liice thn City will
r2solve all zoning disputes by tne City buying it for
park pro�Q�r_ cy .
Councilmember r�rahm stated that wnen the lot wenc t�;c
forfeit, the City had a chance to buy th? p�_operty and
refused, therefore, the :.ity has given u�� its right.
r^_ rahn sLace:3 tizat tize ia�t ti�at ti�is lot is tax for:C�ii
has affected his decision. Frahn si.ace�� t;�at the key
is Fisk bougi�t the lot after the zoning code had
changed.
Councilmember Hammer�l stated that this lot only meets
� 25 nercent of t'ne area require�n�nts. Hammerel stated
that the tax forfeit issue is irnportant . Hammerel
state� that he would vote to deny tne variance.
Councilme�rber Grabek stated that the staff and Council
should look at each individual situation and be able to
come up with a rea5ona'ale approach as to whetner it
shoul� be granted or denied . Grabek stated that it
shouldn' t have a.zything to do wit?� our ordinance
b��:�ause t'nerP ,3re �oir�� to b;� those situations wh�r� the
�ity should �ranc a vzriance . Grabek stai�,�d t��at tize
MINUTES OF THE REGU�AR ORONO COUNCIL MEE'PING E�ELU OCTOBER 29, 1984 . PAGE 15
#820 Fisk (cont) Grabe'r, stated that th2 lot would look beLter with a
house oi� it because of tne dumpy apnearance oF the lot .
Council�nember Grabek asked that Lhe motion be read
again.
Mayor Butler moved , Councilmember Adams"s�<-on�ed , to
request stafi to drait a resolution of deni,�l �:3sec3 upon
the followiny fit�dings:
1 . The prop�.rty can 'pe nut to a reasonable allowed use,
park use or combination with adjacent ;oro�erty.
ih�re is an outstandiny oL-f_er to �ur_chase tne
urooercy.
2 . ihe oropos?d varia�c� is c;�:�L-rary to t'�e letcer an<3
intent of the Orono Comorei�ensiv� ?lan .
3 . The �evelopment and/or granting oi tne variance
would set an adverse p���cedent in the Ci�y .
. 4 . Tne apnlicant/pizrc,laser should 'nav� nad kno�.aledge
of the zoning code r�quir�r�ents ��r_ ior to the
purchase. Any hardshiv would seem to b2 self-
irn��osed.
5 . There is only a 1/2 sewer uni� chargt� against ti�E�
property indic�ting a question on the part of L�1C'
�ity at some ti�ne ti�at tne lot is substandard .
,5 . Th�re is no lat�ral sew�r assessment levied against
the nroperty indicatiny it� suastanaard status .
7 . T'ne prop�rty falls snort of tne zor�ing star�dar��s t�
an Pxte;�t, c{�o gre_�t co enable justi �i��atio» oF
granring th2 variances requeste��.
8 . The property does not conform to t�ne dev�lop,r�nt
patt-ern oi the neighborhood.
t�lore discussion was held before the vote ��aas taken on
the motion.
Councilmember Grabek stated that he didn ' t tlZink that
the finding "t'nat the pronerty could be �ut to another
use" should not concern the Council . Grabek stated
that the purchase of the lot, the Council should not be
involved with or whether or not there is an offer or not.
Grabe'K stated l-.��at this should not be a orecedent issue.
;�7ayor Butler stat�d ti�aL to gra�zL- this variance would
indeed establish a negative preceden�. �olicy w.i�nin the
City. Butler stazed that not just within this
neighbori�ood but witl�in the �ntire City.
MINUTES OE �r►_i�: REGULAt2 ORONO COUNCIT MEE'PING HELD OCTOBER 29, 198� . PAGf� 16
#820 Fisk (cont)
�ouncilme,nber GraUek staL�3 thaL if tlZe City is going to
look at tl�e precedent issue that way and look into the
future, then t)�e City has to pay attention to the
precedents tf�at have already been set. Grabek stated
that the Council should look at all the important
factors of the individual lot and not worry about
se l- �i ny a �rece�7enc�. ..
Council:n��ni�er �-Iam:n��rel sta�ed tn:�t in t��e findings for_
c3enial , t,�� ^ity s��ould not inc)_ude that t�ze i�eighbors
wanted to nurchase the ��ro��er�_y and i�,=�ve made an oCter .
Mayor �utler move:�, Council;ne;nber Adams seconded, to
request sta:Ef to dcai� a .resoluiion of deni��t Lor the
Lorlie Fisk variance aoplication base� on the followiny
ficldinys:
i . The property can be put to a reasonable allowed
use, it can 'ue combined wit'n the adjacent
prouerty, and tnere is an outstarZding offer to
purchase by the adjacent property owner .
2 . Tne inteni of ihe aoplication is contrary to i�he
�et�er and intent of t��� ��rono Co.�npreh�nsiv� Plan.
3 . The develo�:�ent ac�:�/or granti�ly oE t��e varianc�
waul:� s;�c an ;�:lvc�r5e �r�ce:�e��t in t�n �_itl�.
4 . 'r�� auplicant/purc���sE�r slzould 'nave nad
nnowle�g� oi rl�e zoning code requi �c��nen�.� ��rioi >>o
purc�ase. ,'�ny hardsl�i�� see;ns to be self impose<a .
5 . T�is is cax toriait oroperty.
5 . One-hal� s�v�er unit was charged indicatin��
question on ti�e uart of someone tnat tne lot is
subsLac�dard .
7 . ��o lateral sew�r assessment was levied against
this nr_o��rty thereby again raising the question
of tne substandard status of the oroperty.
8 . The property falls short of the zoning standard to
an extent too gr�at to enable justification of
granting of ti�e variances requested .
9. The oroperty does not conform to tne current
development� �atrern of the neighbornood.
Motion, Ay�s (4 ) , Nays (1} , �ouncilme,�'o�r Grabek
votec] nay for reasons noted above.
MINU`PES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD OCTO�ER 29, 1984 . PAGE 17
�811 JOHN ERICSON
1620 SHADYWOOD ROAD
SUBDIVISION & VARIANCE John and Barbara Ericson were present . Bruce
Goldstein, Ericson ' s attorney, was oresant. Zoniny
Administrator ��labusth stated that Ericson seeks tize
divisian of legally combined su'astandard toLs .
�Iabustn stated that L.ot 3 seeks an area variance oL-
2 , ?.B�J st or l� �c�rcent and a widt�� ��atiance oE 35
p�rcent. i•1a'�ustn st�3i.;�d tizai� Lot 4 seeks an ar�a
varianc2 of 7_o percz��L and a width variance of 35
percent.
7,oning administ,=aL-or Mabust�� stated ti�at Planning
Co�n,nission asKed for �ouncil ' s concentual direction on
an il�terpretaLion of tne code. �Iabust� stated that
Council at that time told Planning Commission to treat
the ap�licationasatypicalsubdivisionapplication to
b� reviewe3 �er sl:andards of the subdivision code.
Mabustn no�e�� ti�ac tize City hasn ' t a�proved nc�w
subdivisions with variances , and therefore Planning
Co�;��nissio_� denie� ti�e aaplical.ion.
Rr_uce ��oldstein noted tne .�i �":�r��nc= b��tv�een Ericson ' s
a�����ir_�tio�7 and tne pr_����io��s Lonie Fisic applir_a�io�� :
l , rricson ' s are noi� new T�o t1Z? City, rricso�� ' s ,�ave
lived here for 4CJ y��rs , so th�re isn ' c a stranger
w�o has nicke:l up tax forf��it land.
2 . �.�ot d��aling wit� tax for_feit land, but land thaL 'nas
been in the Ericson family sinc� 194C� .
3 . Noneig'nborhood on�osition. Goldstein noted tnac
a netition has oeen submitted by Ericson ' s
n�ighbors who were in favor of the anplicai�ion.
��oldstein noted that the Council is obligated to hear
testi;��ny upon a request that is t�nic�ue to the
individual o.roperty. Goldstei�� sta�ed L'nat it is
i�iaopronriace to look at tnings in the nast or things
t�?�a� might hapoen i.n tne f_uture, out iook at the unic�ue
ci�in��s oE tize oropeLty. „oldstein stai��d that th�
neighborhood �atl-ern is t'ne same as tilis proposal .
Goldstein stat�d that t'ne Mn Supreme Court have given
some direction on how �ities should look uoon lakeshore
pronerty. Goldstein stated l-hat in Gervin vs LaSeur
County the following was noted:
1. The lot size requirement, when being applied to
lakeshore property, must be applied in a manner
design��d to recognize the use of the properi:y.
2 . When dealingwith lakeshore oroperty, standards oL
the ordinance should be aoplied to avoid absurd
results .
_ MINUTES 0�' 'PH:: REGULAR OI20N0 i:OUNi:if� ��Ih�:`i'ING H�.Gu OC"POSER 29, i��4 • PAGE 18
#811 Ericson 3 . Lakeshore uro�erty is eni�itl��d to spF�cial
t�:�atme��t.
Mayor Butler stated ti�at the City i�as never a�prove:� a
subc3�vision witi� varianc?s . 3utler stated thaL-
lakeshore o:coperty is unique and t'nat is why the City
has str_ ir_c stanc�ards regar:3i��g hardcove� . Butler
not?�� t;�r�t c'�e one lot c�oc�Lor;ns to t�e code now, but if
the City was to a11o�.a the division of th� lor , the �ity
wou1�3 ue making two suas�andara iots which is agai.�st
the City ' s subdivision reyulations .
Councili;�e,nber r rahm noted tizat the biggest detrime��t to
tne Zd'K2 is nar,7cover .
BrucP Goldstei,7 stat�:] t��at tiZes� are two seoarate
lots , so t,�e �ity is not really talking aUout a
subdivision.
,iayor 3utler stated th�t the lots wer� comi�in�d
accordiny to �iennepin County. ��icl�,r SLated 'c,�ai� the
�ricsorl ' s have a��n��Eit��� Ero�n L��e combinacion ir� thaL
tiie tax assessor assesses the value diLEer�ni.ly wl�en
the lotS arr� c��:n:� in:�:� . 3ut1F=r state� th�c ic is loo�ced
uoon as one developed lot.
Bruce Goldsteir� sc,����d tr�ac L'tz? �ricson ' s l�av�� ez��v�r_
c��n�ined the lots . Goidsceirl sl�ated L'[1d1: tne �uun�y
orobably thought it would G�e easier to send out one tax
statc�ment, than t:ao.
John Ericson stated that he has two separate legal
descrioi�ions , but it is on one tax s�atement. Ericson
state=� that he 'nas a :�5 ' lot and a o�J ' lot . Ericson
stated that iz2 i�as paid taxes on Uoth lots thinking Li�`y
were �ui].dable lots . Ericson stated that tl�e g�rage
coul:� 'ae moved, if needed. Ericson stated that when
the sewer went is�, they put in two stubs. Ericson
state� that he only paid for one, because t��e �ity
di��n ' t do t�eir job wh�n they put in the sewer a��d the
stub tnat is tor the �resenz house is way over by
neig;�bor ' s driveway, �ricson stated that at ti�at
t ime, he told the C i ty he would pay f or i t w11en tne C i �y
fixed it.
Mayor Butler stated thaz i� the City approved tnis
subdivision with variances, there are 43 other
properLies ti�az would ask for the same consideration.
Councilme�nUer_ Frahm moved, Councilmember Grabek
se�,onded, to request staff to draft a resolution of
denial based on the following findings made by the
Planning Commission:
. MI�UTES OE 'PHE REGULAR ORONO CUUNCIL MEE'PING HELD OCTOSE� 29, 1984 . PAGE 19
#811 Ericson
l . To a��rove lot area and lot width variances
concurrent with a su'odivision would establish a
negative precedent.
2. The applicant has received tax benefits from the
leg�l combination of Lots 3 and 4 over the years .
3 . The total property has be2n used as one single
residential unit based on location of the garage,
access drive, and sewer line that serves existing
house .
4 . �etweenCoffee and Nendrickson �ridges along Vorth
Shor� Drive and Shadywood Road fronting on Cryscal
Bay, 16 properties tnat are legally combined on
two or more lots could seek the same division caith
vari�nces if this ap�lication is approved,
resulting in 1'o new residences on Crystal Bay.
5 . A vers� prelirnin�ry review of the ownershii parterns
of_ the LR-1�_ district above Navarre area shows 1'0
�ercent of_ 43 prooerti�s oFC�r the potential of
divisions if tnis apnlication is approved.
6 . The property in question has been used as a
residential unit receiving tax benefits f_or a
mini�num of 3t�J years . The undevelop2:-� Lot 3 is
ta�;ed on an increm�nL-al basis, not as a buildable
loc,
7 . The granting oE suc�l V�r1�17r_AS would change tize
ciZaracter oT the immedi�te surrounding neighaor-
hood.
� . ��nro��l oF this variance and subdivision
applicai.ion would be in conflict with tne intent
oE t�e Zoning Code an� Comprehensive Plan of the
Cit�.
Motion, Ayes (5) , Nays (g) .
#814 JOHN ERICSON
3482 LYRIC AVENUE
VARIA�dCE John Ericson was pres�nt . Ericson sLated that this
apnlicacion has been withdrawn.
MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD OCTOBER 29, 1984 . PAGE 20
#840 NED DAYTON
2300 NORTH SHORE DRIVE
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
PRD - FINAL SUBDIVISION
RESOLUTION #1692 Ned Dayton was present. Alex Jentilucci of 1295 Briar
Street was present for this application. Zoning
Administrator Mabusth stated that the c�nly problem is
with the street name because it conflicts with other
road names .
Ned Dayton stated that French Creek seems to fit the
area because of the French Lake. Dayton stated that it
only seems appropriate to name the road name after the
plat name.
Mayor Butler moved , Councilmember Hammerel seconded ,
to approve Resolution �1692 , A Resolution Approving the
Final Plat of French Creek. Motion, Ayes ( 5 ) , Nays
(0 ) .
Alex Jentilucci of 1295 Briar Street presented a letter
stating that he would like the drainageway on Outlot B
� noted on the mylars as an "underground tile 16" wide" .
Zoning Administrator N,abusth stated that the
drainageway is noted on the plat, but that the County
would not allow the designation of "underground tile"
on the mylars .
Councilmember Adams asked who' s job it is to maintain
this underground ti.le if this tile breaks.
Zoning Administrator N,abusth stated that it would be
the developer and/or private property owner.
Alex Jentilucci of 1295 Briar Street stated that it
should be the City that maintainsthe tile. Jentilucci
stated that the City has used this tile for the drainage
for the whole area .
Zoning Administrator Mabusth stated that the City
canno� maintain anything on private property.
Alex Jentilucci of 1295 Briar Street stated that the
City put the tile in on private property so they should
have to maintain it.
Mayor Butler read Jentilucci ' s letter as follows :
"For the purpose of clarity to avoid any possible future
confusion, I feel that the drainage easement located on
the northeast corner of Dayton' s Outlot B
designated. . .must be indicated on the mylar for the
French Creek project as consisting of a ' 15"
underground tile ' . "
. MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD OCTOBER 29, 1984. PAGE 21
�840 NED DAYTON Alex Jentilucci of 1295 Briar Street stated that the
City upgraded the tile that runs across the street.
Jentilucci stated that the City should have to maintain
the tile if they were going to install it.
Councilmember Hammerel asked who put the tile in.
Jentilucci of 1295 Briar Street stated �that the older
folks in the area say that the City put the tile in.
Jentilucci stated that he wasn ' t here so he doesn' t
know.
Councilmember Grabek asked who replaced the culvert.
Public Works Coordinator Gerhardson stated that the
tile is definitely on private property. Gerhardson
stated that the City can' t enter onto private property
to maintain something that is private. Gerhardson
stated that it was repaired or replaced by the City back
in 1970 ' s .
Councilmember Grabek stated that if the City replaced
it, the City should maintain it.
riayor Butler stated that Jentilucci ' s letter should be
filed in the chain of title on Jentilucci ' s property,
the neighbor' s property, and Dayton ' s property,
placing a future owner on notice of the tile.
Councilmember Grabek moved, Mayor Butler seconded, to
direct staff to find a solution how the City can take
care of the culvert that the City put in, to take care of
Jentilucci ' s property so that it doesn ' t back up, and to
ensure that Dayton will maintain his share of drainage
on his property. Motion, Ayes ( 5 ) , Nays ( 0 ) .
#870 GARY VALENTA
1160 TOWNLINE ROAD
VARIANCE
RESOLUTION �1693* Councilmember Adams moved, Councilmember Hammerel
seconded, to approve Resolution #1693 , A Resolution
Approving a Variance to permit the construction of an
attached garage. Motion, Ayes ( 5 ) , Nays ( 0 ) .
PAYMENT #1 - BUFFALO
BITUMINOUS - SEALCOATINGCouncilmember Frahm moved, Councilmember Adams
seconded, to approve Payment #1 to Buffalo Bituminous
in the amount of $59 , 087 . 42 for sealcoating. Motion,
Ayes (5 ) , Nays (0 ) .
CHANGE ORDER #1
B & D CONTRACTING
NAVARRE FORCE MAIN Councilmember Frahm moved, Councilmember Hammerel
seconded, to approve Change Order No 1 in the amount of
$2, 800 for the replacement of a storm sewer on County
Road 19 . Change Order #1 also extends the completion
date of the pro ject f rom November 15 , 19 8 4 , to December
15 , 1984 . rlotion, Ayes ( 5 ) , Nays ( 0 ) .
' MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD OCTOBER 29 , 1984 _ PAGE 22
PAYMENT #1
B & D CONTRACTING
NAVARRE FORCE MAIN Councilmember Hammerel moved, Councilmember Adams
seconded, to approve Payment #1 to B & D Contracting in
the amount of $59 ,576. Motion, Ayes ( 5 ) , Nays (0 ) .
STREET SECTION REVIEW City Engineer Cook reviewed with the Cou2ici 1 an option
for reducing the cost of the Crystal Bay Sewer project
by leaving the size of the existing streets the same
instead of upgrading them to the required code size.
Cook stated that the original estimate for replacing
street sections was $363 , 900 compared with $251 , 400 if
the Council decides to leave the streets at existing
width. Cook noted that this is just another method of
reducing the cost of the sewer project. Cook' s letter
is on file at City hall for review by the public.
COUNTY ROAD 15
PRELIMINARY PLAN
RESOLUTION #1694 Councilmember Adams presented the County Road 15
preliminary plan. Council decided that the shoulders
proposed along County Road 15 should not exceed 8 ' .
Mayor Butler moved, Councilmember Frahm seconded, to
approve Resolution #1694 , A Resolution Approving
Hennepin County Preliminary Plan for County State Aid
Highway 15 and Variance Request as Required by MN
Department of Transportation. Motion, Ayes ( 5 ) , Nays
(0 ) .
INFO LETTER FROM
MET COUNCIL* Councilmember Adams moved, Councilmember Hammerel
seconded, to approve the information letter from the
Met Council regarding the Maple Plain Interceptor.
Motion, Ayes (5 ) , Nays ( 0 ) .
INSURANCE SPECS* Councilmember Adams moved , Councilmember Hammerel
seconded, to approve the Insurance Specs . Motion,
Ayes (5 ) , Nays (0 ) .
RESOLUTION #1695
DELINQUENT 1984 ALARM
USER FEES* Councilmember Adams moved, Councilmember Hammerel
seconded, to approve Resolution #1695 , A Resolution
Providing for the Collection of Delinquent 1984 Alarm
User Fees Charges . Motion, Ayes ( 5 ) , Nays ( 0 ) .
SALARY ADJUSTMENT
LYLE OMAN* Councilmember Adams moved, Councilmember Hammerel
seconded, to approve a salary adjustment for Lyle Oman
from $7 . 25/hr to $7 . 50/hr effective October 22 , 1984 .
Motion, Ayes (5 ) , Nays (0 ) .
� MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD OCTOBER 29, 1984 . PAGE 23
ESTABLISHMENT OF REVENUE
SHARING SECTION 504
GRIEVANCE PROCEDURE* Councilmember Adams moved, Councilmember Hammerel
seconded, to approve the establishment of Revenue
Sharing Section 504 grievance procedure. Motion,
Ayes (5 ) , Nays (0 ) .
SANITARY SEWER CONNECTION
GRANT PROGRAM Public Works Coordinator Gerhardson stated that this
was for Council ' s information only regarding the
Crystal Bay sewer project grant program.
DEFERRED ASSESSMENT
POLICY Public Works Coordinator Gerhardson stated that this
wasforCouncil ' sinformation regarding the Crystal Bay
sewer project deferred assessment policy.
MUSA LINE DESCRIPTION Assistant Zoning Administrator Gaffron noted the MUSA
line and which areas are included in the MUSA line.
Gaffron noted that the Crystal Bay area is not within
� the N,USA line, but the Crystal Bay area is designated in
the Comprehensive Plan as an area where future
installation of municipal sewer is anticipated.
CITY ATTORNEY'S REPORT
PAUL SMITH UPDATE City Attorney Radio stated that the City has provided a
temporary easement to the Powers for their signature.
Radib stated that Smith has offered to pay for that
easement. Radio stated that once the easement is
signed, Smith can proceed to put in the sewer, and then
negotiations can begin regarding the permanent
easement.
WELSH VS CITY OF ORONO City Attorney Radio stated that the City received a
favorable report denying Welsh' s request for a
rehearing on attorney ' s fees . Radio stated that their
only action now is to petition for a certiorari , which
is highly unlikely. Radio stated that it is unlikely
that the Supreme Court would select this case to be
heard.
LICENSES* Councilmember Adams moved, Councilmember Hammerel
seconded, to approve the licenses for the following:
Temporary trailer parking - Navarre Congregation of
Johovahs Witnesses - 11-21-84 - 12-4-84
Setup permit - Art Center of MN - 11-27 , 28 , 29 , 30 & 12-
1-84
Motion, Ayes ( 5 ) , Nays ( 0 ) .
BILLS* Councilmember Adams moved, Councilmember Hammerel
seconded, that the All Funds Accounts and Liquor Store
Accounts be paid. Motion, Ayes ( 5 ) , Nays ( 0 ) .
MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD OCTOBER 29, 1984 _ PAGE 24
ADJOURNMENT 11:06 PM Councilmember Grabek moved, Councilmember Frahm
seconded, to adjourn the regular Council meeting at
11 : 06 p.m. Motion, Ayes ( 5 ) , Nays ( 0 ) .
ATT T:
. �,,�,.� � i __.��
�;.��, C �� .,�_ �_,
rothy Hal in, City Clerk Mary C. �t`\t�tler, Mayor