Laserfiche WebLink
Orono City Council <br /> Committee of the Whole <br /> February 23, 2010,6:30 p.m. <br /> Orono City Council Chambers <br /> Present: Mayor Jim White, Council Members Cynthia Bremer, Doug Franchot, Lili McMillan and Jim Murphy; <br /> Assistant City Administrator for Long-Term Strategy Mike Gaffron, Finance Director Ron Olson, <br /> Planning &Zoning Coordinator Melanie Curtis, Public Works Supervisor Scott Oberaigner, City Engineer <br /> Tom Kellogg and City Clerk Lin Vee <br /> 1. Orono Engineering Costs for 2009 <br /> • The annual review of engineering services provided by Bonestroo was completed earlier this year with <br /> City staff. <br /> • Tom Kellogg reviewed the expenditures from 2009 which fall into three main categories. <br /> o General Engineering- 18%of total costs are related to streets, watermains, sanitary sewer, storm <br /> sewers, planning and public works <br /> o Private -7%of total expenditures are related to pass-through and reimbursable costs <br /> o City Infrastructure Projects-62%of costs were directly related to the Casco Point Reconstruction <br /> project with another 15%of costs related to projects such as Myrtlewood Utilities, Stonebay Wetland <br /> Corrections, etc. <br /> • The 2010 estimated expenditures are less than the previous five years. <br /> 2. Update on Long Lake Sewer System <br /> • Kellogg reviewed the north Orono sewer district. <br /> • Flow to the meter station located behind the golf dome is based on water records that indicate the flow <br /> contribution is 74%from Orono and 26%from Long Lake. <br /> • Per Met Council definition, 90%of flow from a neighboring city would allow Met Council to take over the <br /> interceptor. <br /> • When all potential areas of development that would serve the northern Orono sewer district are included <br /> with the flow contribution calculation, flow percentages would be 94.3%for Orono and 5.7%for Long <br /> La ke. <br /> • According to the policy statement at Met Council, reinstalling the lift station at Brown Road would be a <br /> strong argument for Met Council to take over the sewer line. The city will need to determine Met <br /> Council's position. <br /> 3. Comp Plan Discussion <br /> • Grittman reviewed the proposed changes to the 2030 Future Land Use Map and how to accomplish unit <br /> counts to support adequate densities. <br /> • In addition to the Dumas/James/Eisinger site, 103 units would be needed in mixed use areas developed at <br /> 6 units per acre requiring a minimum of 17 acres. A map identifying potential properties totaling 29.3 <br /> acres for mixed use in the Navarre area was discussed. These properties are currently occupied primarily <br /> by commercial uses. <br /> • Council was in favor of reducing the number of properties identified for mixed uses to approximately 20 <br /> acres, but agreed with Grittman that further discussion with Met Council about the mixed use area was <br /> appropriate prior to submittal of the final plan. <br /> • McMillan asked if parking is an issue for the Navarre mixed use areas. Grittman commented that Met <br /> Council won't be reviewing the Comp Plan update for parking; zoning will have the review authority. <br /> • Murphy inquired if Met Council includes an incremental progress review toward reaching density <br /> requirements through the 20-year period. Grittman responded that Met Council asked for a staging plan <br /> for every 5 years and the real lookback will occur the next time a Comp Plan update is required. <br /> Page 1 of 3 <br />