HomeMy WebLinkAbout02-22-2016 Council Work Session PacketCity Council Work Session
Monday, February 22, 5:00 p.m.
Orono City Council Chambers
AGENDA
1. Comp Plan Timeline
2. Customer Service
3. Planning Commission Appointment
4. Lurton Park Update
5. Future Work Session Topics
Work Session Topics or Requests
Annual:
• Budget and Goals: part of June, all of July, August and October.
• City Administrator & Police Chief update (3 times per year for 15 minutes)
• Joint Planning Commission/Park/Council meeting for check-in/direction (11/9/15)
Additional topics:
• Emerald Ash Borer and presentation from 3 Rivers regarding invasive species (LL)
• Sewer Connection Fees Policy (MG)
• Marina licensing (MG)
• Construction Hours — Truck Traffic (LL)
Council Work Session February 22, 2016
Previous Work Session Topics
January 25, 2016
• Hennepin County Lake Access
• Navarre Trail Connection
• Intersection Improvement Grant for County Road 15/19
• Council Packet Information and Electronic Packets
November 23. 2015
• 2016 Budget
a. Non -Union Compensation
b. Capital Improvement Program (CIP)
c. 2016 Public Works Plan
d. Fee Schedule
• City Administrator Verbal Update
• Future Work Session Topics
October 26, 2015
• Compensation Study Next Steps
• Park Commission Purpose and Guidance
• Order of Reports on City Council Agenda
Council Work Session February 22, 2016
MEMORANDUM
TO: ORONO CITY COUNCIL
FROM: JEREMY BARNHART, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR
SUBJECT: COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
DATE: FEBRUARY 22, 2016
The Metropolitan Council requires all communities within the 7 county metro area, including Orono, to
update their Comprehensive Plan every ten years. These updates must be submitted for review by the
Met Council no later than December 31, 2018. As part of this update, the Met Council publishes a
systems statement, a document that outlines items to be included in a comprehensive plan, and
includes infrastructure assumptions, population projections, and affordable housing goals.
Based on the systems statement, the comp plan must include sections on transportation, infrastructure
(surface water, waste water, and water), housing, and parks and trails, all based on the population
projections, housing goals, and other plans.
As part of this update, the city must also complete a surface water management plan, to be reviewed by
the watershed district, as well as a water supply plan, to be reviewed by the DNR. Staff and the
consulting engineer will complete these plans, due as part of the submission of the city's comprehensive
plan.
In addition to these minimum requirements, staff suggests focused review of a couple key components
of the Comprehensive Plan:
Density. Recent Council comment and decision has supported density at a level less than
prescribed in the 2008 Comp plan (James and Eisinger property, the Long Lake Fire Station area, e.g.)
requiring this density to be replaced elsewhere in the city. The desired location for this density should
be carefully considered, better informing neighborhoods, property owners, and developers as to the
City's plans which will allow for consistent application of these plans.
Navarre. The characteristics of Navarre provide an opportunity to reassess the Council (and
Community's) goals for that area, through the development of a plan that would include land use,
streetscape, and community facility components. This understanding of goals would allow for
applications that more directly fit the Councils vision for the area.
Small lot neighborhoods in large lot zones. These neighborhoods, developed well before zoning,
are inconsistent with the zoning districts, essentially requiring these residential to go through a variance
process for virtually every expansion or improvement.
Housing study. A housing study was completed for the Navarre area in 1997. The Navarre area
represents a large percentage of the city's workforce housing. That study primarily focused on the
perception of the residential properties in Navarre, and to determine if there is a need for housing
rehabilitation related programs (grants) for the area. An update to this study would be advantageous
for several reasons:
Identify current conditions of the residential properties in Navarre
Identify need/ desire of housing rehabilitation programs
The study could be expanded to address one or more of the following goals:
Identify Council's goals with workforce housing community wide
Identify market requirements of the Met Council's goals associated with 'affordable housing'.
This could be key when identifying appropriate locations for this type of housing.
Outreach
An important part of the comprehensive planning process is outreach, the process of gathering
informed comment on aspects of the plan. How would the Council like to see the public outreach
process unfold?
From a review standpoint, I think it is advantageous to break the document into smaller chapters, to be
reviewed as we progress, rather than trying to digest the whole document at the end. It is
recommended than small task forces be formed to analyze a specific issue or area, over a limited time.
A small subcommittee of members of the City Council, Planning Commission, and public would review
the document and make suggestions going forward.
Staff anticipates an 18-20 month process to complete the plan, led by staff, with consultant assistance
on the Navarre, Housing, and small lot plans. Staff anticipates starting in February 2017. Planning staff's
recommended 2017 budget proposal will include appropriate funds to complete the plans, update the
maps, and host community outreach.
A B
C
D
E
F
G
H
I J K
Comprehensive
Plan
Adjusted: Based
on comment
Adjusted: James application
Adj
Adj
Density Net Acres
Units Density
Density
Net Acres
Units
Density
Density Net Acres Units
Area A (Med-High Density)
1 Dumas
7 38.71
271
7
38.71
270.97
7
38.71 270.97
2 James (proposed)
7 14.14
99
3.10
12.57
39
3.10 12.57 39
3 Totals
52.85
370
51.28
309.97
51.28 309.97
Area A (High Density)
Comment 1
4 Eisinger
10 5
50
10
5
27
10
5 50
5 Totals
5
50
5
27
5 50
Area B (High Density)
Comment 2
6 Fire Station
10 9
90
0.5
8
4
10
8 80
7 Totals
9
90
8
4
8 80
Area C (High Density)
8 Trails of Orono
10 5.79
58
Dev. As assisted living
Dev. As assisted living
9 Totals
5.79
58
Areas D, E (Low Density
10 Various locations
123.16
62
123.16 61.58
11
12 Totals
0.5 123.16
62
0.5
123.16
62
0.5
123.16 61.58
13 Area F (Navarre mixed use)
4 27.52
110
4
27.52
110.08
�4
27.52 110.08
27.52
110
27.52
110.08
27.52 110.08
Post 2010 amendments
14 2012- 20 Orono Orchard
Road 0.75
1
15 2015- 480 Russell
1.8
1
16 Totals
2.55
2
2.55
2
2.55 2
New areas
17 TBD
0
18 Totals
225.87
742
217.51
515
217.51 613.63
19 Density ratio
3.28
2.37
2.82
Comment 1:
Council supported Eisinger with 27 units
Comment 2:
Comment: High density not
appropriate
MEMORANDUM
TO: ORONO CITY COUNCIL
FROM: JEREMY BARNHART, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR
SUBJECT: CUSTOMER SERVICE REVIEW
DATE: FEBRUARY 22, 2016
Staff is continually seeking opportunities to improve the customer experience. Generally, customer
service suffers when a person's expectations of a transaction do not match what occurs.
Many things impact this experience including responsiveness and attitude at the counter, as well as how
efficiently and accurately questions are answered (questions both asked and anticipated). It also
includes the time involved in getting a permit or license, and the processes or number of steps for the
customer to receive those permits and licenses.
Over the next several months, staff will be initiating a review of our customer service process by
following certain projects through the process and interviewing permit recipients post process to gain an
understanding of instances where expectations did not match reality, and to identify patterns where
attention should be focused. This review will be conducted using actual applicants where possible, and
may include a pseudo task force of applicants to meet and discuss options and opportunities.
Since the variance process is a significant component to our building permit review process, Staff is also
tracking variances to identify opportunities for code amendments where appropriate to further the
customer service goal.
MEMORANDUM
TO: ORONO CITY COUNCIL
FROM: JEREMY BARNHART, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR
SUBJECT: PLANNING COMMISSION APPOINTMENTS
DATE: FEBRUARY 22, 2016
The terms of three members of the Planning Commission expire at the end of March.
Staff has spoken to the three to gauge their interest in reappointment.
Kevin Landgraver is interested in reappointment, but wants the Council to know he will be absent from
the Commission for 6 months of 2016. He would be interested in being an alternate if the Council
chooses to fill his seat with an individual who could attend more consistently.
Bruce Lemke is interested in reappointment, and knows of no conflicts in 2016.
Christopher McGrann is not interested in reappointment, but would be interested in being an alternate.
Chad Olson is currently an alternate and is interested in being a full member.
The Ordinance section 74-2 establishes the Planning Commission, and its membership:
(a) The planning commission is composed of seven members, who serve staggered three-year terms.
The period of these terms is from April 1 to March 31, and the members shall be appointed by the
second business meeting in March.
(b) It is the policy of the council to appoint persons to the planning commission as follows:
(1) Two of the members shall reside in and be appointed to represent the rural service area of
the city as defined in the comprehensive management plan; two members residing in and
appointed to represent the urban service area, one appointed that resides on Lake Minnetonka
lakeshore property, and two shall be appointed to represent the city at large.
(2) The council by majority vote may deviate from this policy to appoint persons without specific
designation.
(3) The zoning administrator and one councilmember shall be members of the commission ex
officio and without vote.
(4) The council may by majority vote appoint one or more alternate planning commission
members to serve when regular members are absent. Alternate members shall be chosen at
large.
In response to membership in (b)(1) above, The existing membership, exclusive of Chris McGrann
include 1 urban, 5 rural, and 2 Lake Minnetonka lakeshore. Chad Olson resides in the urban area.
If acceptable to the Council, staff will place formal appointments on the March 14 agenda.
MEMORANDUM
TO: CITY COUNCIL
FROM: ADAM T. EDWARDS, PE
SUBJECT: LURTON PARK UPDATE
DATE: FEBRUARY 22, 2016
List of Exhibits:
A. Draft Project Scope and Timeline
B. Draft Master Plan
C. Cost Estimate
D. Parks CIP
1. Purpose. The purpose of this item is to provide the council an update on the planning of Lurton Park
Off Leash Park.
2. Background. Last fall the Mayor was approached by the Ms. Nancy Erickson of the Lurton family
with the idea of exploring possibilities to improve the public's usage of Lurton Park. One of the ideas
was to transition the park into an off leash park. The mayor, I and Ms. Erickson met with Three Rivers
Park District in November of last year to learn from their experts the best practices for establishing off
leash parks. In December 2015, The Mayor, City Administrator, Park Commission Chairman, Ms.
Erickson and I met to establish initial guidance to the transition of the park. Subsequently the Park
commission Off Leash subcommittee has met to walk the site and develop a draft master plan. That plan
was presented and discussed at the last Park Commission Working Session. The Plan is on the schedule
for the March Park Commission meeting for official endorsement to the City Council.
3. Project Scope and Timeline. The draft Project Scope and Timeline are attached at Exhibit A.
4. Project Master Plan. The Draft Master plan Diagram is attached at Exhibit B.
5. Project Cost. The Draft Cost Estimate is attached at Exhibit C. The current funding
assumption is that this project would be funded from the Park Fund. Estimated Fund Balance the
park fund for 2016 is $594,723.00.
Lurton Park -> Lurton Off -Leash Park Plan
Scope: Transition Lurton Park into an off leash (Dog) park in 2016.
Work will include design/ master plan for the park, development of a fee
for use policy/ ordinance, the installation of fencing, and the provision of
latrine and garbage facilities.
Other improvements options include a well, parking lot expansion,
additional picnic tables and benches, shade structure, and interpretive
signage
Timeline:
What
When
Who
Status / Remarks
Guidance Received
Dec 2015
Lurton Family &
Mayor
Complete
Change restrictive covenants
Jan -Feb 2016
Campbell Knutson
Working/ in review
Master Plan Park
Jan -Feb 2016
Park Commission
& PW Dir
Draft Prepared
Fence and trail design details
Feb -Mar 2016
PW Dir
Working
Develop fee policy / ordinance
Jan -May 2016
PW Dir, CD Dir,
Admin
Researching other
organizations' policies
Update Meeting with Donor Family
Mar 2016
Mayor, PW Dir,
Admin, Park Chair
Solicit fence install proposals
Mar 2016
PW Dir/Parks Sup
Council approval for physical design,
fee policy / ordinance and project
funding
Apr 2016
City Council
Publish Fee Policy
May 2016
City Staff
Construction
May -Jun 2016
Contractors
Establish/ Repair and Mark Trails;
Remove Hazards
May -Jun 2016
Public Works /
STS
Grand Re -opening of the Lurton Off
Leash Park.
Jun/July 2016
As of 17 Feb 16
Luton Park Off Leash Cost Estimate
Item
Description
Unit
Qty
Unit Price
Total
1
Perimeter Fence
Lin Ft
4775
$ 10
$47,750
2
Small Dog Fence
Lin Ft
1200
$ 10
$12,000
3 lGate
Area Fence
Lin Ft
600
$ 17
$10,200
4
Pedestrian Gate
ea
5
$ 200
$1,000
5
Vehicular Gate
ea
3
$ 500
$1,500
6
Bench
ea
1
$ 310
$310
7
Picnic Table
ea
2
$ 2,130
$4,260
8
Information Signs
ea
2
$ 770
$1,540
9
Well
lea
1
$ 11,200
$11,200
10
Porta Potty Pad
ea
1
$ 400
$400
11
Dog Waste Station
ea
1
$ 325
$325
12
Shade Sails
ea
3
$ 2,950
$8,850
13
Parking Expansion
(Doubleladdn 390 SY)
ea
1
$ 10,000
$10,000
14
Trail Signs
ca
10
$ 140
$1,400
15
Road Sign
ea
1
1 $ 200
$200
$110,935
As of: 17 Feb 16
Capital Improvement Plan, City of Orono
R Parks CIP
Table A-1
2029 1 2030 2031 2032
300
2033
$0 1 $80,000 j $o j $0 1 $6,300 1 $0
5 -Year CIP
Pianning Period
Project
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
2021
2022
2023
2024
2025
2026
2027
2028
Future Park Expansion
$285,000
Park Equipment (Navarre, Hackberry,
Bederwood, Crystal Bay, Fagerness)
$60,000
$70,000
Dock Replacement (15 year life)
$4,000
$4,250
$4,500
$4,900
$5,400
Dog Park Construction
$50,000
Brown Road Trail (CR6-CR112) Rehab
$61,088
Ferdale Road Trail - Repair and Seal
$21,925
Willow Drive Trail - Rehab
$68,901
CR 6 Trail (OCB - Willow) Rehabilitate
$36,402
Trail Construction
einn nnn
t,nn nnn
t,nn nnn
Table A-1
2029 1 2030 2031 2032
300
2033
$0 1 $80,000 j $o j $0 1 $6,300 1 $0